Nationals Arm Race

Why leave your best reliever in a game you're winning by 5 runs?

I promise this is not “hindsight is 20-20” analysis; had you been in my basement watching last night’s game with me, you would have heard me yelling all the things I’m about to say.

I have a real problem with Riggleman’s bullpen management last night.  Now, perhaps the off-day on Monday 4/11 enabled all the relievers to get enough rest to enable what we saw last night.

Here’s the sequence of events i’ll be commenting on:

• Livan Hernandez starts the 7th with a 4 run lead and having only thrown about 75 pitches at the time, but is facing the top of the Phillies order.
• We see Brian Broderick warming up.  (see comment #1)
• Suddenly Livan gets into trouble.  We see Tyler Clippard jump up and start throwing.
• Livan loads the bases, looking as if he had run out of gas.  Clippard comes in and gets out of a bases-loaded jam.
• We look back and Todd Coffey is warming up.  (see comment #2)
• To start the 8th (by which point the Nats have scored again, giving the team a FIVE run lead), Clippard comes back out!  (see comment #3)
• He can’t get out of the inning though, so Riggleman brings in his closer Sean Burnett to get out of an 8th inning jam.  The score is now 6-3 though.
• The Nats score another run in the bottom of the 8th to make it 7-3.  That’s a 4 run cushion going into the 9th inning.
• Riggleman leaves Burnett in!  (see comment #4).   Burnett gives up another run but finishes the game, getting a save for his troubles. (see comment #5).

Comments in order:

1. Ok, I was happy to see Broderick warming up.  This was the perfect game to bring him in; a 4 run lead on a colder night when the Nats seemed frisky.  Unfortunately, Livan got into trouble so quickly that Clippard had to be pushed into service.
2. Why did Coffey warm up?  He clearly wasn’t going to come into the game, since the dangerous hitter in the Phillies lineup is Ryan Howard, and Slaten is the loogy.
3. Why did Clippard return for the 8th inning??  Coffey had warmed up, as had Broderick.  You have a 4 run lead.  I suppose the reasoning was because the meat of the Phillies order was coming up.  But its a 4 run lead with 2 innings to play; the odds of a team coming back from that deficit are relatively small (remember, teams score 0 or 1 runs in an inning and no more a very large percentage of the time; 86% per this 2007 study).
4. See point #3: why bring back your closer, who you’re going to need for the next 6 days, with a 4 run lead in the 9th inning??
5. General point about the uselessness of the save situation: Burnett came into the game in the bottom of the 8th inning and allowed 2 of the 3 base-runners he inherited to score.  That’s the definition of a failure as a reliever.  Then, given a 4 run lead in the 9th he allows another run but eventually closes out the 9th and gets a save.  Yes, by virtue of the bases being loaded with a 5 run lead, the tying run was on deck therefore it was a save situation by definition.  But how exactly was his performance on the night worthy of any “positive” statistic whatsoever?  I have a post coming up about the use of relievers in general where I touch on the definition of the Save, and this game highlights everything I can’t stand about the stat.

In summary, in a game where the Nats held the lead by 4-5 runs most of the night, we pitched 2 of our 3 best relievers, both throwing more than an inning.  Burnett threw 28 pitches, enough for 2 innings.  We also warmed up Coffey and Broderick (which may not show up in the box score but they certainly were throwing).  We never bothered to use our LOOGY against one of the most susceptable lefty-lefty matchup hitters in the league (Ryan Howard).  We have two more games against the Phillies, games in which we face their two aces and certainly would expect the games to be closer.  Does this mean that Clippard and/or Burnett won’t be available later this week because they pitched on tuesday?  Wouldn’t you want to save these guys for better opportunities?

Marquis puts in his 2nd good outing in a row

We’re two turns through the rotation now and the team sits at 4-5.  Here’s some rundowns on how the pitching is trending.

Good

• Half the Bullpen.  2010 holdovers Clippard, Storen, and Burnett are pitching lights out to open the season.  Now if only the Nats still had the other half of the 2010 bullpen still here… (see the “bad” section).
• Jordan Zimmermann‘s 2nd start on 4/8 (blog/gamer/box) went decently.  5 1/3, 6 hits, 2 runs 0 walks and 4 ks.  He left the game with the lead and Goessling notes that he looked sharp early (the 4Ks were in the first two innings).  He got yanked in the 6th on 99 pitches all in all, in favor of Slaten to do a lefty-lefty matchup.  Some commenters note the early hook as over-managing perhaps; I don’t have that big a problem with early hooks early in the season, especially for someone on a known innings limit for the season.  Remember, we have a bullpen full of guys who need work and havn’t thrown in a few days (Gaudin, Slaten and Broderick in particular).  Zimmermann’s control was good (68 of 99 for strikes) and his fastball was strong (avg of 92, max 94.8).
• Jason Marquis.  I’m writing this at the end of the 6th of his 4/10 start (gamer/box) assuming that Marquis is coming out of the game.  His line: 6ip, 7hits, 2 BBs, 9ks and 3 earned runs.  Without context, this line looks mediocre.  However, by watching the game you get a different feel.  3 of those 7 hits were infield hits, another a broken bat RBI single.  Only two halfway-decently hit balls all day (one was a really nice piece of hitting by David Wright to knock in the first run).  Marquis seemed to work around difficulties with his fastball all day, and got 9Ks by virtue of some great off speed stuff.  Of the three runs scored, one was only in scoring position thanks to a passed ball on a 3rd strike.  The umpires blatantly missed three pretty obvious calls in the field, extending Marquis’ outing.  He was in position for the loss (since Chris Wright is pitching a one-hitter through 7 innings despite a fastball that is only in the 85-86mph range) until the Nats got to Carrasco in the 8th to tie the game.  I’d rate his outing as a success and something to build on.

Bad

• Livan Hernandez‘s 4/6/11 start (gamer/box) was not nearly as good as his opening day start.  He labored in Florida, taking nearly 100 pitches to get through 5 innings.  6 hits, 5 walks and 4 runs.  He really struggled in the first inning, only throwing 8 of 24 pitches for strikes.  He blew the 4-run lead his team had staked him and the bullpen did the rest.  I wonder if this is the year that Livan finally gets yanked out of the rotation (he basically hasn’t missed a start in his career, despite a fastball that’s only averaging 83-84mph).
• The other Half of the bullpen: Gaudin and Coffey continue to be very poor replacements for last year’s highly effective duo of Bautista and Peralta.  An offensively-challenged team like the Nats needs to keep every lead it gets; this is one of the main reasons we lost 100+ games two years running.  Last year we had a good bullpen thing going, but management failed to keep two of the key members and rolled the dice with two new guys plus a rule5 acquisition.  I see this experiment going badly, soon.
• Brian Broderick: the whole Broderick situation is looking worse and worse.  After giving up a few more runs on 4/9, he’s got an era in the 20s.  Riggelman had said before he plans on only using him in no-pressure situations (read: complete blowouts), which reduces the bullpen by one.  Except that on 4/9, when most of his bullpen needed a night off, he was forced to use Broderick in a close situation.  So he comes in and lets the game get out of hand.  This was one of the main reasons I advocated AGAINST a team like the Nats keeping a rule5 guy (as discussed in this March 16th post).  I would like to see the Nats negotiate a trade with the Cardinals so we can stash him in AAA and bring up Balester.

Not good or bad necessarily.

• John Lannan‘s 4/6 start (running thread/gamer/box) didn’t look that great (5ip, 7hits, 3ER) as he demonstrated the danger of leadoff hits or walks.  Three straight baserunners to start the game lead to two runs and it could have been worse had he not embarassed Logan Morrison on three straight curveballs to get out of an easy sac fly situation for a 3rd run.  Lannan’s showing more velocity than I remember, 90-91mph but acting like a sinkerballer (cool stat heard on TV; Lannan ranks 4th in the majors over the past few years in ground-ball percentage).  I put Lannan closer to the “good” category because his BABIP is .333 and his xFIP ranks him best among the starters so far.
• Tom Gorzelanny‘s season debut 4/9 (gamer/box) had some good (he retired 8 straight after giving up 2 first inning runs and he had 8 Ks in 5 1/3 innings), and some bad (two homers plus a long fly-ball that almost was a third homer to Carlos Beltran, needing 26 pitches to get out of the first inning and throwing 98 to complete just 5 1/3 innings).  Hi start may have gone completely differently had he gotten a borderline strike-3 call the pitch prior to Beltran’s first inning homer.  I like WHIP as a better rough indicator than ERA for starters; and Gorzelanny may have given up 6 runs (5 earned) in less than 6 innings, but he only put 6 baserunners on in those 5 1/3 innings.  Most of the time, a whip around 1 per inning gets absorbed by double plays and stranded base runners; today they all scored.

Quick Thoughts on the offense

• The words “Partially torn labrum” are not a good thing for Adam LaRoche, and I’m afraid we’re about to lose him for a very long time.  Like perhaps the season.  To make matters worse he hurt his leg sliding on Sunday and was taken out of the game (putting Pudge at 1B for the first time in years).  Ironically, Michael Morse playing first base was a very early-into-the-offseason suggestion; keep Josh Willingham in left and play Morse at first.  Of course, now we’re potentially looking at the worst possible situation; we blow FA dollars on a 2nd tier first-baseman, trade away Willingham for assets that are either hurt or in the minors, and then watch our first baseman go down with injury the first week of the season.  Not good news.
• Wilson Ramos‘s excellent start is quickly answering two questions for the Nats; who is the catcher of the (immediate) future?  And, how will Ivan Rodriguez be used this year?  Well the answer to the second question is quickly becoming “once a week backup,” as Pudge is looking incredibly over-matched at the plate.  It may be a sad ending for Pudge; despite still being excellent defensively, if he can’t hit .200 he may be forced into retirement after this season.
• I like what Danny Espinosa is doing thus far; if he can force himself into the upper-end of this lineup, the team will be better for it.  Especially as a switch hitter; he could allow us to return Werth to a more natural batting position (like 5th).

Overall Summary

Despite not getting nearly as good a set of starts as the first turn through, the team takes 2 of 3 in NY and salvages a .500 road trip.  Can’t ask for much more than that.  I’m going the Wednesday game and can’t wait to see Roy Halladay vs Lannan.  Should be good.

Lannan has the only W for the rotation thus far. Photo: blog.prorumors.com

A major league team’s rotation cycles somewhere between 33-34 times a year.  As I did with the Spring training games, I will try to do a good/bad/indifferent each time through for the pitching staff.  I’ll focus more on the starters but will mention the relievers as is merited.

Good

• Livan Hernandez‘s opening day start (running blog/gamer/box score) may have gone down as a loss, but it was a pretty nifty gem.  He gave up two runs on four hits with no walks in 6 1/3 on only 77 pitches.  He retired 15 in a row after a 2nd inning homer given up to Jason Heyward.  He may have gotten the loss but it was a quality start for sure and he probably pitches a complete game if the Nats could score.
• John Lannan goes 5 complete for the win in the 2nd game of the season (blog/gamer/box score).  Its amazing what a little run support will do for a guy.  I do agree though with Steven from FJB, who criticizes the decision to bring Lannan back after an hour’s rain delay just so he can pitch the 5th and get the W.  Why would he have possibly had Lannan return after an hour’s delay?  That’s why you have long men in the bullpen.  That should have been Broderick or Gaudin in to re-start the game.
• Jordan Zimmermann‘s first start of the season (running blog/gamer/box score) was promising: 2er in 6ip and finishing those 6 innings in just 84 pitches.  Not very many Ks though (only two through six) for a strike out pitcher.  Perhaps he was pitching to contact.
• Sean Burnett: apparently our new “closer” for now.  He’s pitched pretty effectively in limited opportunities.
• Jason Marquis: his 4/5 start (gamer and box)was the first game that I have gotten to see.  And I thought he looked pretty good.  He went 6 1/3, gave up 6 hits and 0 walks and was efficient all night (he was only at 78 pitches when he got removed).  He only had 2 ks but was throwing lots of strikes.   His fastball showed around 90 with great movement and he got lots of groundballs (11 grounders and 5 fly balls).  The middle of the Marlins order had his number but he controlled the rest of the squad.

Bad

• Doug Slaten: three games and three failures in the Loogy role to start the season.  Gotta do better.  Your job is to get the lefties out.  He may not have given up an earned run yet but his whip is a nifty 12.00 through three games.
• The Bullpen on 4/3/11.  Broderick, Gaudin, and Coffey‘s 4/3/11 performances.  Not.  Good.  Notice that these three guys are all brand new to a very good bullpen last year.  I’m not panicking, but i am saying.  Balester may have his ears burning if (especially) Gaudin can’t get it done.

Possibly Concerning

• Storen seems to be getting his confidence back.  But he cannot be giving up two hits and a walk in the 9th inning of a tied game (as he did on 4/5).  He’s not getting any Ks either, and we need his k/9 ratio to be up in the 8.5-9.0 range.

Pitching Summary:

We’ve had four starts and gotten 3 “real” quality starts (plus Lannan on his way to a 4th when a rain delay caused his night to be shortened).  You cannot ask for much more out of your starting rotation.  Last year our first four starts went like this:

• Lannan; 3 2/3ip, 7 hits, 3bbs and 5 runs.
• Marquis: 4ip, 8 hits, 3 bbs and 6 runs.
• Stammen: 5ip, 9 hits, 4 runs.
• Mock: 3 1/3ip, 4hits but FIVE walks and 2 runs.

For the record, that was 17 runs in 16 innings over 4 days.  Our first four starts in 2011 elicited 23 2/3ip and just 7 earned runs.  Quite the turn around.  Too bad the team couldn’t score any runs and went 1-3.

Thoughts on the offense

We’re getting great production out of our stars (Zimmerman has a 1.406 ops through 4 games and Werth is at .945).  Ramos is mashing the ball and Espinosa is 4/10 so far.  The rest of the team?  Bad.  Until last night the lead off  hitters were 0-for-the-season and Riggleman is already swapping players around to put Espinosa at leadoff (a pretty good decision if he can handle it).  Ankiel is 1/12 (but that “one” is a mashed homer, which St. Louis fans are probably cackling about, since they continually warn Nats fans that this is exactly what Ankiel does).  They’ve only scored 10 runs in 4 games (6 of them in their sole win) and definitely need to show better run support.

Summary

Great starting pitching to go with little run support.  I hope this isn’t the story of the season.

Week 4 is “moving week.”  Management will soon need to make all the decisions on who makes this team, and the candidates need to make statements in their appearances this week.  Bullpen members, Center Field, backup outfielders and backup infielders seem to be the four competitions yet to really be decided upon.

As with the previous 3 weeks, here’s links to Kilgore’s running game-day blogs (when he does them), Bill Ladson’s game wrap-ups and the official box score on mlb.com.

• 3/20: vs Tigers (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/21: at Cardinals (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/22: vs Astros (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/23: off day
• 3/24: at Tigers (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/25: vs Cardinals (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/26: at Astros (running blog/gamer/box score)

The Good

• Tom Gorzelanny: Pitched effectively on 3/20, 5 IP, 2 ER, 4 H, 2 BB, 3 K, 84 pitches, 47 strikes.  The 2 runs were on a wind-aided homer that wasn’t that bad of a pitch.  Gorzelanny needed 84 pitches to complete 5 innings but he threw a LOT of balls.  He was getting squeezed (on one of the BBs he clearly had him for strike 3) by the umpire and he was more effective than his line shows.  One area of concern though is velocity; the MASN broadcast only had him in the upper 80s on his fastballs.  He followed this up with a similarly good 3/25 performance vs the Cards: 6ip with only 77 pitches, 4 hits and a walk, getting 5Ks.  Perhaps my earlier concerns about him will be proven unfounded.
• Brian Broderick: seems to have effectively won his spot in the bullpen by continuing his nearly scoreless spring training.  He could be a major find for this team.  The more interesting question becomes this, “who makes way?”  Because we’re also hearing that Chad Gaudin is making this team too, meaning that TWO guys who were favorites to make this team at the beginning of spring training are heading to Syracuse.
• John Lannan: a great start on 3/22 (albeit against the weak Astros) puts him in line to be our #2 starter when camp breaks.  Final line: 6IP, 2 H, 1 ER, 1 BB, 3 K’s, 66 pitches, 42 for strikes.  66 pitches for 6 complete innings is fantastic, even against the awful Astros.  Lets hope we’re getting the post-minor league banishment version of Lannan (6-3 record with a 3.42 era and 1.24 whip in his 10 games after returning) versus his first 14 games of 2010 (2-5, 5.76 era and 1.85 whip).
• Colin Balester continues to prove he belongs by throwing great middle relief.  He may lose out in the options dance come April 1st, but he should force his way back to Washington.  Kilgore described his curves as “untouchable” on 3/22 and says he’s easily one of the 7 best relievers in camp.
• Jordan Zimmermann: his 3/24 start was pretty good; 5 scoreless innings, giving up 5 hits and a walk, striking out 6.  He only needed 90 pitches through 5 and his fastball was sitting 94, reaching 96 (despite what the stadium radar gun was showing on TV…).  He looks like he’s slotting into the #3 starter role.

The Bad

• Stammen: optioned on 3/25 as expected.  I say this is “bad” because I feel Stammen is better than he’s shown.  His fip and xfip last year were 2nd best on the team to Strasburg (whose advanced numbers, by the way, were the best in the league by a fair margin for starters).  I think he can still be an effective back-of-the-rotation starter in the majors.  Now it seems he’s being converted to middle-relief and will enter a very jumbled mix of players in the AAA bullpen competition.  He may very well be out of a job before we know it.

The Concerning

• Most of the Bullpen: As Zuckerman notes here on NatsInsider, our supposed strength is turning into a scary liability.  Clippard, Coffey, and Storen all pitched 3/20, all three looked less than stellar and all three now have spring ERAs that would not merit their 25-man roster spots.  Storen picked in up on 3/22 with a nice 1-2-3 9th and followed it up with a really nice 1-2-3 9th on 3/25.  Clippard rebounded on 3/24 but Coffey did not.  Perhaps Coffey will be our 2011 version of Brian Bruney, a veteran reliever on a reasonable contract who gets cut very quickly into the season.  We’ll see.
• Livan Hernandez: 5 ip, 6 h, 2 er, 3 bb, 1 k, 83 pitches, 50 strikes outing on 3/21 against the STL varsity.  Zuckerman described it as a solid outing and that Livan faded a bit late.  He only threw 5 innings and he was fading!?  I know that this is what we get out of Livan generally; lots of baserunners and him pitching out of jams based on guile and experience.  But I’d like to see a bit more competence from our opening day starter.  He threw again on 3/26 and was efficient in 4 innings but left due to a neck issue (from sleeping on it wrong).

A "neck spasm" is sending Rodriguez to the DL. Photo: prosportsblogging.com

A few days ago I was kvetching about the Henry Rodriguez situation in this space.  One sentence summary; he was “stuck” on the 25-man b/e he had no options yet was being held out of games to work on his mechanics.

Now, it appears the Nats decision makers has been given a lucky parachute out of this debacle, with rumors now swirling that Rodriguez will start the season on the DL.  Kilgore reports that he was experiencing soreness in his shoulder while Ladson said he saw a doctor for some neck stiffness.  Yesterday morning Comak reported he experienced a “neck spasm.”  I’ll bet $100 someone took him aside and basically told him to claim some sort of soft-tissue, difficult to diagnose injury in order to enable a disabled trip visit.

Either way, stashing Rodriguez on the DL is the best way to resolve this situation.  It may be slightly unethical in terms of player movement, but it certainly happens all the time.

Rodriguez’s DL trip means the bullpen and player retention issues that were plaguing the Nats resolve themselves for the most part.  Here’s how the bullpen almost certainly shakes out now:

• closer: Storen (despite his troubles, he’ll be given every opportunity to keep the spot)
• setup: Clippard, Coffey and Burnett.  Coffey may be on thin ice though.
• loogy: Slaten.  The Lee Hyde waiver pickup (and to a lesser extent Villone) provides Slaten insurance.
• long-men: Broderick and Gaudin: Rule5 draftee makes the team and could be a steal.  Gaudin earns his way back onto a major league roster.

The Gaudin retention means we need another 40-man spot; my guess is that Chien-Ming Wang goes on the 60-day dl.

Balester loses out despite pitching very well; clearly an options move.  When most of your bullpen options have little to no roster flexibility, you put yourself into a situation where you send down better guys in lieu of keeping lesser guys.  I’m sure Balester understands this and hopefully he gets another shot to come up soon.  If Coffey continues to struggle we should see a Brian Bruney-esque release and a quick callup for Balester.

Perez's down and out of NY; can he come back with the Nats? Photo: metzilla.com/baseballlatinamerica.com

Word came down on March 21st that the New York Mets had finally given up on Oliver Perez turning his career around and flat out released him.  He had a great 2007 season, going 15-10 in a full season starting for a nifty 121 era+.  Despite coming back down to earth in 2008, the Mets signed him to a 3yr/$36M contract for 2009-11.  He got hurt in 2009, was grossly ineffective in 2010, and now the Mets have decided to eat his entire $12m salary just to be rid of him in 2011.  He was reportedly only throwing in the mid 80s and the Mets were looking at him as a Loogy, not a starter or even a long reliever.

Two days later, Nats fans hear that he’s signed a minor league deal with Washington.  Beat reporters Goessling and Zuckerman nicely summed up similar thoughts to me with respect to this move and what it may mean for the AAA rotation.  But here’s some questions and answers about the move.

Q: Why didn’t the Mets try to trade him? The answer is probably along the lines of, who would want to assume $12M of salary?  Perhaps if the deal was Perez plus $11M for a prospect.  But Perez has looked so bad, his velocity so far below where it used to be, that the Mets probably figured no team would trade anything of value for him.

Q: Why didn’t the Mets just assign him to AAA to keep him? Perez has enough MLB service that he could refuse the assignment and become a free agent, essentially putting him in the exact same spot he is now by virtue of his unconditional release.

Q: Why would the Nats possibly want him? This is a very low risk, low cost move.  Even if he makes the majors we’re not paying anything more than the MLB minimum salary for him (somewhere in the $450k range).  He has already agreed to go to AAA, where he could NOT go for New York.  He can go to AAA, work on his mechanics in a low-stress, low-visibility environment and try to regain what once made him a great prospect.

Q: Is the displacement of other AAA pitchers worth the risk?  Assuming that Perez is treated like a starter, we’re probably now looking at this for the AAA rotation:

• Locks: Maya and Detwiler.  These guys are options 1A and 1B for rising to the majors, and if it were not for option statuses or contracts of the 5 guys who ARE starting in the bigs at least Detwiler may have been up there.
• 40-man guys being given shots: Mock.  For unknown reasons Mock continues to be viewed as part of the future for this team.  But if he’s still being considered a starter, he will be in the AAA rotation.  This list also possibly includes Stammen if the team values him more as a starter than a long-reliever.  We’ll see.  They seem to have him converted to a reliever at this point.
• Rising AA guys/prospects: Arneson, Tatusko, Milone: Arneson was in AAA last year but is not on the 40-man and has lived through two rule5 drafts.  He didn’t pitch badly in 2010 but not flashy enough to warrant a look at the MLB level.  Tatusko put up great AA numbers and deserves a shot in AAA.  Milone (and to a lesser extent perhaps even Meyers or Roark) also pitched well enough in AA to be thinking about a move to AAA.
• Non 40-man Vets hanging on: Chico, Martin, Martis, Atilano.   And now add Perez to this list.

So what happens?  I think your AAA rotation will be Maya, Detwiler, Mock, Perez and Tatusko.  Arneson gets bumped to long relief, as does Stammen, Chico, and Martis.  Martin and Atilano may be out of a job.  Milone, Meyers and Roark start in AA with a mindset of rising quickly to replace a promoted starter, or to replace Perez if we give up on him.

Is signing Perez worth delaying the AAA promotion of Milone?  Probably not.  But I agree with putting Perez into the rotation at the expense of any one of Chico, Martin, Martis or Atilano.  I think these latter four guys basically need to be released to make room for the next wave of guys.  If all four passed through waivers and came back to Washington, then there seems to be little chance they will be making it as professionals much longer.

Conclusions: I don’t HATE this move for the Nats.  It is low cost and low risk.  Lets just hope it does not retard the growth of our slew of good-looking AA pitchers.

Rodriguez's tenure as a Nat has been so rough so far, I can't even find a picture wearing our uniform. Photo: Ezra Shaw/Getty Images via bleacherreport.com

When the Nationals traded Josh Willingham for power arm Henry Rodriguez and minor league outfielder Corey Brown in December, the team and its fans thought we were getting a good outfielder prospect plus a valuable power arm, back of the bullpen type in exchange for a defensively challenged left fielder who couldn’t stay healthy (that is certainly the glass-is-half-empty analysis of Willingham’s contributions to this team, but so be it).

Brown was always set to repeat AAA, having struggled there last year after dominating lower levels of the minors.  He still may feature in our outfield at some point if our slew of LF/CF options fail us and he plays well to start the season.  His ankle injury certainly is not helping him prepare for 2011, but he’s not the real prize of the Willingham trade.

Rodriguez, after showing up for spring training 2 weeks late and not getting into a game for another week, is now “being shelved” to work on his mechanics.  A week before opening day.  Here’s his stats for the spring thus far: 2 1/3 innings, 7.71 era, 3 hits, 3 walks and only about half the pitches he’s thrown being in the strike zone.  The coaching staff report that his mechanics are out of whack, that he cannot repeat his delivery and he’s been doing nothing but bullpen work for the past 5 days.

Great.

Rodriguez has no minor league options.  The Athletics knew this and the Nationals knew this upon trading their starting left fielder, #5 hitter and top OPS producer from 2010.  Now this roster inflexibility is set to cause a serious issue for this team.  We can’t just “invent” an injury for Rodriguez to store him on the DL; last time I checked my orthopaedic surgeon didn’t treat “mechanical flaw” as an injury.  So, instead of leaving someone deserving on the opening day roster (say, Collin Balester or even Drew Storen, not that he’s been 100% deserving based on his spring performance but remember he did appear in 50+ games last year rather effectively, especially for a rookie), we’re going to probably lug him around for a while and look for incredibly low-priority outings for him to “remember” how to pitch again.

I know all of Willingham’s faults.  He’s injury prone, he was arbitration eligible and his salary was escalating, he hasn’t ever played a full season without time off for injuries.  More importantly to Rizzo, he was a severe defensive liability, even in a position that traditionally can “hide” poor defenders.  And Rizzo from the onset has seemed dead set on fielding a team of track stars, no matter what the cost.

But none of those reasons factor in the most important point; Willingham can mash the ball.  In two seasons in Washington he had OPS+ figures of 129 and 127 (which would have ranked him about 20th in the NL had he qualified each year) and hit in the 5th hole protecting Adam Dunn admirably.  You don’t just give up that much offense unless you KNOW you’re getting something of equal value in return.

Right now, we’re not getting anything close to equal value for him.  And it may have larger ramifications for the team that breaks camp in a week or so.

There is always a risk of over-emphasizing early spring training statistics.  But as an analyst or even a fan of a team, you’re in a catch 22.  There are players out there clearly pitching to make the team and thus their statistics and results are important.  Meanwhile, you have to keep in mind that for every homer Mike Morse hits off a legitimate major league starter, he’s hitting another one off a guy who is a non-40 man minor league filler player who is pitching that game just to fill out the innings.  So, when looking at these results we try to put the performance into context.  If a pitcher is going against a split squad and is facing 3 regulars and 6 minor leaguers, his performance obviously has a caveat.

In the 3rd week of spring training though, starters are getting “stretched out” and the teams are starting to look more like what they will in the regular season.  So the good/bad/inconclusive starts to be more important.  The Nats also managed to lose 6 of these 7 games, a troubling sign for the beginning of our season.

Here’s links to Week 1 and Week 2‘s Good/Bad/Inconclusive posts.  And below are the links to running commentaries (when available), wrap-ups from beat reporters and box scores (if I can find them):

• 3/13: at Marlins (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/14: vs Tigers (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/15: at Mets (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/16: at Astros (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/17: at Braves (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/18: vs Cardinals (running blog/gamer/box score)
• 3/19: at Mets (ss) (running blog/gamer/box score)

The Good

• Doug Slaten: he had nice rebound appearance against the Tigers on 3/14.  If he mis-fires, we always have Ron Villone (kidding. Maybe.)
• Tom Gorzelanny: looked significantly improved on 3/15 over his first appearance.  Final line; 4 IP, 2 H, 1 R, 3 BB, 4 K, 65 pitches, 36 strikes.  He clearly tired in the last inning, issuing two of the three walks and the run.  No radar gun readings to be found but the observers say he looked like a completely different pitcher.  Good.
• Brian Broderick: two quick, easy outings later in the week gives him only 1 earned run in 10 2/3 innings this spring.  He’s looking like a steal of a rule5 pick and may just make this team as the long-man.  Or perhaps at the expense of Drew Storen (see further down).

The Bad

• Elvin Ramirez: this rule-5 acquisition has yet to appear in a game and now has a sore-shoulder that may necessitate his starting the season on the DL.  I know that Rule-5 draft picks are low-risk and low-cost, but on a team like the Nationals they don’t make a lot of sense.  We’re not deep enough so that we can “hide” a guy all year (as we did with Tony Blanco back in 2005), and there are more deserving pitchers on this team for the few spots that aren’t guaranteed.  Perhaps we can negotiate a trade with the Mets to keep him if the team really likes him.  More likely he starts the year on the DL and gets returned if we cannot negotiate a deal.
• Craig Stammen‘s 3/15 outing was probably enough to guarantee his trip to Syracuse.  He gave up 3 runs on 4 hits and a walk against a decent Mets lineup.  He’s looking like 4th best out of 4 for the last bullpen spot.
• Tyler Clippard: His 3/16 outing was seriously disturbing.  1ip, gave up 4  hits (3 for extra bases), 2 walks, 5 runs … a disaster.  He was quoted as saying that he “lost his concentration” but one would have to think that after perhaps the third or fourth baserunner he’d get it back in a hurry.  He wasn’t exactly facing the elite of the league either in the 9th inning against (possibly) the worst team in the majors.
• Drew Storen: after a bounce back performance earlier in the week, Storen gets absolutely hammered by a bunch of Cardinals scrubs you’ve never heard of on 3/18.  Not good.  I’m beginning to wonder if he even makes the team at this rate.

The Inconclusive/Worrisome/Concerning

• Henry Rodriguez: On March 13th our possible-closer-acquisition pitcher was FINALLY set to appear in a game.  He promptly lays an egg; 1/3 of an inning, 3 walks and a hit.  Clocked at 97 though, so there’s that.  Management has to be irritated with this situation; the guy has no minor league options and is basically guaranteed to be on the team, yet misses weeks of camp and shows up not in full throwing shape.  If this guy bombs out (as the centerpiece of the Josh Willingham deal), we’ll have given up an awful lot of offense for next to nothing.  In his next appearance on 3/17, he looked remarkably better; got his fastball up to 99, threw a couple wild pitches but got some Ks on a great 90mph change-up.  Most described him as “effectively wild.”  Which is the real Rodriguez?
• Colin Balester: Why has Balester only gotten 5 innings in 2 weeks?  His role on this team (presumably to me) is to be the long-man out of the bullpen, the Miguel Batista role from last year.  He’s being treated more like an 7th/8th inning guy.  Is this indicative of his lowered chances of making this team?  Perhaps the plan is to have option-less Gorzelanny in that role with Balester back in AAA (he has one option left).  He did pitch 2 scoreless on 3/19 to finish up the week but seems destined for AAA to start the year.
• Ross Detwiler took a step back from his spring performances on 3/16 with this line: 3 IP, 4 H, 3 R, 2 ER, 2 BB, 71p, 43 strikes.  He gave up 4 consecutive base-runners, struggled with a basic sacrifice attempt from the opposing pitcher, and reportedly wasn’t as crisp with his fastball velocity as in days past.  Perhaps just an off day.
• Yunesky Maya: He showed nearly the velocity we want out of him on 3/17 against a strong Braves lineup (peaking at 92, sitting between 88-91 mostly).  Not quite the 93 we were told he was hitting in the DWL but perhaps he was on a fast gun.  He fell victim to that which plagued him last year; the big inning.  He needs to find a way to mitigate the damage if he gets down in an inning.
• Jordan Zimmermann: 5 scoreless innings on 3/13 to run his spring training streak to 11.  Good velocity, good movement on his curve.  His 3/18 Outing was not as nice: 4 ip, 6 runs, 8 hits, 2 walks, 0 strikeouts, 2 wp, 69 pitches and 44 strikes.  He was reportedly very wild and very hittable.
• Jason Marquis: He continued his great spring, goes 5 IP, 1 ER, 3 H, 2 BB, 4 K, 53 pitches, 38 strikes against the tigers on 3/14.  And then he got absolutely hammered on 3/19, giving up 9 hits and 3 walks in less than 4 innings (3.2 IP, 6 ER, 9 H, 3 BB, 1 K, 1 WP, 79 pitches, 45 strikes).  The first inning of 3/19 seemed to be part bad defense, part unlucky grounder locations, but he did have trouble locating his pitches all game.

Lots of “inconclusive” this week, as guys who looked good before put in bad performances.  Lots of pitchers complain about a “dead arm” period late in spring training and perhaps that’s what we’re seeing overall.  Next week’s games will be revealing.

Brian Broderick on Media Day. Photo by Al Bello/Getty Images North America/zimbio.com

Commenter Mark L asked whether or not I was “ignoring” rule-5 draftee Brian Broderick‘s performance thus far when considering the bullpen competition in response to a post previewing the Nats 3/15/11 game against the Mets.

I don’t know if i’m “ignoring” Broderick’s performances thus far … I just have a reaaaaaaly hard time believing he’ll be on the 25-man roster based on the inflexibility of keeping a rule5 guy, given the roster inflexibilities we already have with several other players.  Here’s my reasoning:

• We have 3 guys who already essentially HAVE to stay on the 25-man roster because of a lack of options: Clippard, Burnett, and Henry Rodriguez.  Two of these guys are bullpen mainstays and would have been there anyway, but the acquisition of Rodriguez has complicated matters for the team.  As mentioned before, he showed up late for spring training and has not necessarily looked fantastic so far.  If we could possibly find a way to DL him if he’s not ready to go on April 2nd (“tired arm?”) , a lot of problems would be avoided.
• We have a 4th guy in Coffey who signed a major league deal and has enough service time that he could (and probably would) refuse a AAA assignment, so he either stays on the 25-man roster or we light his $1.35M on fire.
• We have to have a loogy; Slaten seems almost certain to be that guy.  I guess you could argue that we really don’t need a loogy, that Burnett could be that guy or even Gorzelanny if he gets bumped out of the rotation.  But Burnett’s value is not as a one-out guy and Gorzelanny is a starter.
• Storen is supposed to be “the closer.” He may be struggling this spring but there’s nothing about his 2010 performance that says he does NOT deserve to be in that position for this team. Admittedly he does have options and can be sent down but i’d be awfully mad if we sent a first round draft pick down so we could keep some untested minor leaguer on the active roster.

So, if we keep Broderick, he’s the 7th guy in the pen and has to stay there all season.

That’s your 7 spots essentially wrapped up. So now here’s the rest of the picture and why this could become rather complicated for the team:

• If Gorzelanny struggles in the starter’s role, he has no options and would have to go to the bullpen. Who makes way?  We can’t really cut Gorzelanny out right without admitting that the move backfired greatly for the team, having given up 3 decent prospects just a few months ago.
• If we want to use Gaudin, who has looked great so far in spring training, he’d have to be first added to 40-man (and then we’d have to drop someone else or move them to 60-day dl). And then he’s more or less stuck on the roster too; he’s got 5+ years of service time, no options and can reject an assignment back to AAA. Based on the fact that he signed a minor league deal with us, one could assume that he is ok with starting the season in AAA, but other teams have scouts too and might be taking notice of his achievements so far.  However again, if Gaudin is the 7th guy who makes way for him?
• Balester: he certainly performed well last year; 28ks in 21 ip in the same role we’re talking about here.  Before the rule5 draft I had him locked into that long-man role. Has he done anything this spring to cost him this spot?  No but he has one more minor league option and may lose out nonetheless.
• Stammen; he clearly can give you innings since he’s always been a starter, and his advanced stats last year were not THAT bad. But he too has options and seems to be pitching his way to AAA this spring.

Honestly, I think what the Nats need to do is make a deal with StL, trade them someone for Broderick and then stash him at AAA til you need him. Return him to the starters role where he was 11-2 last year in AA and maybe we’ve found a real cheap 5th starter for the future.

Per new Washington Times beat reporter Amanda Comak’s post this morning, here’s today’s pitching lineup:

SP – Tom Gorzelanny – 1 start, 2.1 innings, 5 H, 3 R (2 ER), 3 BB, 1 K, 7.71 ERA
RHP Craig Stammen – 6 IP, 5 H, 1 R (1ER), 2 BB, 5 K, 1.50 ERA
RHP Henry Rodriguez – 0.1 IP, 1 H, 1 R (1ER), 3 BB, 27.00 ERA (keep in mind he’s only made one appearance)
RHP Brian Broderick – 7.2 IP, 4 H, 1 R (1ER), 0 BB, 1 K, 1.17 ERA
RHP Collin Balester – 5 IP, 5 H, 3 R (2ER), 2 BB, 4 K, 3.60 ERA
RHP Cole Kimball – 6 IP, 4 H, 1 R (1ER), 1 HB, 1 BB, 5 K, 1.50 ERA

Nearly every guy on this list has some serious question marks in terms of performance thus far in the Spring.  Gorzelanny almost certainly has a rotation spot guaranteed but has not shown us nearly the capabilities he was known for pre-trade.  Stammen‘s role with this team and his future with the organization is cloudy; clearly he’s not being considered as a starter any more but there’s way too many guys for a bullpen role.  Rodriguez showed up late, has no options and is pretty much guaranteed a bullpen spot … so he better be worth it.  Broderick is a rule5 guy on a team that absolutely cannot afford to keep a rule5 guy (making you wonder why bother to pick them up?), but he’s looked good this spring and you have to wonder if he’s going to be acquired or kept at this point. Balester (like Stammen) seems to be falling behind in the race for the long-man out of the bullpen competition, which is odd considering his very good 2010 numbers.

Only Kimball seems destined to know his fate already; he’s bound for the AAA closer role, having performed admirably at both high-A and AA last year.  It is only a matter of time before he gets called up and slots into the back of our bullpen.

Can’t wait to hit refresh on that #Nats twitter tag!