Maybe Kevin Towers Wasn't So Dumb

So I come back from a weekend of playing Abraham Lincoln - chopping down trees with an ax, "bucking them" and splitting some old logs - to find out that the Nats lost Brian Lawrence to a torn labrum. Estimates are that he is out at least until the All-Star Break and possibly the whole year.

When I heard that the Nats lost Lawrence (from our anonymous poster), it was a real bummer. The guy who would be our fifth third starter being out for four months is bad in its own right. But oh, no! Not the dreaded torn labrum.

As a cradle White Sox fan, I know a bit about torn labrums - the Sox suffered a rash of them in the 2000/01 time period. In fact, the Sox's most painful torn labrum was suffered by one of our Nats - Jon Rauch.

It is inestimable what his torn labrum did to Jon Rauch's career. He was the 2000 Minor League Pitcher of the Year after putting up a 16-4 record with 187 strikeouts in 166 innings between the Carolina League (high-A) and the Southern League (AA). He walked only 49 against those 187 strikeouts and looked like a top, top prospect.

Then he was found to have a torn labrum in 2001 (an injury also suffered by Jim Parque), and did not pitch at all. He was a shell of his former self in Charlotte in 2002 and 2003, putting up ERA's of over 4.00 and his strikeout rate declined from 10 per 9 innings to less than 8 per 9 innings. He gave up a lot of hits and a lot of homers.

Now, at 28, Jon Rauch is something of a journeyman looking for, at best, a swing-man spot on a last-place team's roster. His luster has faded, and, what could have been his free-agent season in a lucrative career, is just another season of hanging around the bigs.

Will Carroll has written some excellent stuff on the torn labrum, including this piece in Slate from 2004, subtitled "Why the torn labrum is baseball's most fearsome injury." Here's the most ominous part:

But if pitchers with torn labrums were horses, they'd be destroyed. Of the 36 major-league hurlers diagnosed with labrum tears in the last five years, only midlevel reliever Rocky Biddle has returned to his previous level. Think about that when your favorite pitcher comes down with labrum trouble: He has a 3 percent chance of becoming Rocky Biddle. More likely, he'll turn into Mike Harkey, Robert Person, or Jim Parque, pitchers who lost stamina and velocity—and a major-league career—when their labrums began to fray.

Yeah, yikes. Mind you, Rocky Biddle's "prior form" that was regained was a high-walk-rate, high-homer-rate, borderline pitcher (who, by the way, was Les Expos
closer in 2003. I shudder to think and thank heavens for the Chief).

So things do not look good for Brian Lawrence. One wonders whether Lawrence's injury was known or could have been known to Kevin Towers before he made the trade for Vinny Castilla. One thing is for sure - that trade is not looking as lopsided as it once did.

Sportstalk with Little DM

Here's today's pre-preschool conversation:

Little DM: Dad, how many baseball teams would there be if you took two away?
DM: 28. Why?
Little DM: Then I want 28 baseball caps.
DM: Which two teams don't you want?
Little DM: Pirates and Rangers.
DM: You know who's on the Rangers now?
Little DM: Who?
DM: Brad Wilkerson.
Little DM: I like him a little bit. But I wish he would switch back to the Nationals.
DM: Me too. But we now have Alfonso Soriano.
Little DM: I don't really like him. I only like Chad Cordero, because he's a rookie!
DM: Well, he's not a rookie anymore. After your first year is over, you can't be a rookie.
Little DM: But if he switches to football, he would be a rookie, right?
DM: Umm ... yes.
Little DM: When I grow up, I'm going to play for the Dodgers, then the Marlins, then the Ravens and then the Seahawks.

What We Are Missing

Here's what teams with real owners and real TV deals do: the Yankees' YES cable network will offer interactive content to viewers in July. Among the new features is a "StarCam" that "zeroes in on a particular Yankee player each inning."

If the Nats were a real organization, we'd be enjoying StarCam footage like that -- close-ups of Soriano stewing in left field, Guillen mumbling incoherently to himself after a strikeout, Guzman getting a late jump on a grounder, Robert Fick tripping a baserunner -- and interactive stats like "Innings since last Nats homer in RFK: 46.1" and "AL Notes: Brad Wilkerson has just hit his 29th home run -- most for a Ranger before the All-Star Break." I can't wait!

Why They Play The Game

In my last post I questioned what exactly as fans we were seeking to receive from all the time and attention we spend on the Nationals. Marginal Revolution has a good post on a related topic: how would would financial incentives tied to wins affect players in the NBA? It is good food for thought on the question of what teams, players, fans and others are trying to get out of each game.

Voting With Your Wallet

Earlier this week, over at that other triumverate Nats blog, Nats Triple Play, Dave dropped a bomb that exploded into 32 little comment pieces. The catalyst of the incendiary device was that Dave thinks people who are chucking their season ticket plans in protest of Jim Bowden, Bud Selig, the non-existent owner and the fiasco that is Nats' front office situation are whiners who are ultimately hurting the team. He is committed to some pretty expensive seats for 81 games (as we are) and he thinks he's investing for the long-term, which is what he thinks real Nats fans should be doing as well. Somewhat inconsistently, though, he also argues that chucking your 20-game plan is also futile because MLB teams don't really care about individual ticket-holders because the real money comes to them from the big boys like advertisers, broadcasters, luxury box holders, sponsors etc.

I think Dave is wrong, in two fundamental ways. First, each and every one of the real "revenue drivers" he mentions depend heavily on the public's attention on the Nats, which largely consists of, and is almost universally measured by, game attendance. If the crowds are small, everything he cites is less valuable -- advertisers seek lower prices or more ads per buy, broadcasters aren't willing to pay as much to show a quiet, empty stadium, Johnny Jaguar is less likely to bring Senator Schmooze to an empty house. So if disgruntled fans stop showing up, it will hit the team bottom line eventually.

Second, and more important, his focus on the "season ticket buy" and its effect on the value of the team is too narrow. Although tickets sold is a significant way that fans convey a benefit to the Nats, it is not the only way, and fans can provide benefit in addition to or in lieu of plunking down dollars for a ticket package. Obvious examples of other such benefits include concession purchases at the game, buying a hat or other licensed merchandise, and watching televised games and patronizing advertisers. Another important and often overlooked item is generating and maintaining buzz about the team. A good example of this comes from that season-ticket chucking, commie-agitator Yuda, who most forcefully objected to Dave's post. Though he has declined his season tickets this year, he still hosts a blog on the Nats farm prospects and chat area where many of us waste time and attention on the local nine. I've written before how things like that and other blogs have increased my enjoyment of the Nats and therefore made me more likely to go to games. Indeed, Gameday chat has been instrumental in getting people to use our seats that would otherwise go unused.

In other words, each Nats fan can offer of package of benefits to the ballclub, of which ticket purchase is only one part. Mine is pretty extensive, as it consists of a 1/4 share of expensive 81-game season tickets, 12 games attended (parking, concessions, etc.), XM radio subscription, DirecTV subscription, MLB.com subscription, watching/listening to games, this blog, and some merchandise. The important thing is that our most effective way to communicate to the Nats about our satisfaction with the product they provide is to adjust this package of benefits. Most of us offer an extensive package like this -- we have pretty high demand for baseball, probably in the 90th percentile. If they piss me off too much, I'll stop blogging (lord knows I can do that easily), go to fewer games, cut back one of my subscriptions, etc. It is the only voice we have, really, and it is the kind of reciprocity that makes any marketplace work.

It makes sense that people like Dave and me, who have made the decision to support the club with a lot of money and time, also want others to do the same. We've bought in and need to make the best of it. But any good investor should diversify, so that we don't lose all leverage relative to the club -- otherwise our voice can be ignored more easily. It's a true paradox -- we should both support the team but remain wary, and drive a hard bargain at all times. Trust but verify, in a sense.

How much influence we might have, if any, is an open question. Ironically today I also ran across this quote, which is apt:

Most of the vocal people on the mail lists, blogs and wikis are more fans
than creators. It’s as if we confused baseball players with people who sit in
the stands watching a baseball game. Sure, both wear caps and want their team to
win, but one actually does something about it, while the others expresses an
opinion. There are a lot of fans, but relatively few people who actually do
anything.

We are probably delusional to think any of this matters much. And Dave's post raises interesting questions about what we actually expect to receive in trade for all these benefits we give to the Nats -- I don't think it is simply a winning team. Or, more accurately, I think the trade may be very fair even if the Nats don't come close to winning. But that's a post for another day.

More Thoughts From My Head

The Post has a bunch of notes up about the Nats' spring training, and I thought I would download some of my own thoughts on the upcoming March to 2006 Glory.

1. If you are going down to Florida to watch the Nats in Space Coast Stadium, for goodness sake, have a meal at Conchy Joe's. Try the fried alligator, it's scrump-diddly-icious.
(Conchy Joe's Seafood Restaurant, (321) 253-3131, 1477 Pineapple Ave Melbourne, FL 32935)

2. The Fielding Dutchman, Ryan Zimmerman, has a PECOTA projection of .289/.334/.462, with 13 homers and 37 doubles. That's a very promising start in its own right. I have a sneaky suspicion that Dutch with have a bit more OBP than that. His 28.3 projected VORP is second only to Soriano's 31.5. Of course, Soriano's .271/.321/.504 line creates that VORP because he's projected as a second baseman. By the way, are we still calling him Dutch?

3. OK, so who is on the Nationals this year? What have we lost from the 2005 season, and what have we gained?

Lost: Esteban Loaiza (A's), Hector Carrasco (Angels), Vinny Castilla (Padres), Jamey Carroll (Rockies), Brad Wilkerson (Rangers), Terrmel Sledge (Rangers), Preston Wilson (Astros), Junior Spivey (Cards), Gary Bennett (Cards), Wil Cordero (out of baseball), Jeffrey Hammonds (out of baseball), Rick Short (Japan), Endy Chavez (Mets), Keith Osik (unknown), Matt Cepicky (Marlins)

oh good grief....

Tomo Okha (Brewers), Zach Day (Rockies), John Halama (Orioles), Sun Woo Kim (Rockies), Claudio Vargas (D'Backs), Matt White (Phillies)

Obviously, some of these guys were traded or released mid-2005, but that just shows you the turn over from one season to the next.

Found: Brian Lawrence (Padres), Marlon Anderson (Mets), Ramon Ortiz (Angels), Felix Rodriguez (Giants), Bob Fick (Padres), Bernie Castro (Orioles), Damian Jackson (Padres), Matt LeCroy (Twins), Alfonso Soriano (Rangers), Michael Tucker (Phillies).

Anything you notice here? The Nationals seem to be some sort of repository for fringe major league talent? Has beens? Never weres? The amount of roster movement is extraordinary for a .500 team that is, for all intents and purposes, not going to go places with a little extra depth. It looks like a lot of roster movement for roster movement's sake. I can only think of one reason why. (By the way, have at Trader Jim's wiki page on baseball-reference.com).

4. Is it just me or is the schedule funny this year? You know, funny. The Nats seem to have a bunch of good games against quality teams on the weekend, while leaving the weekdays with some dreck. It's just me, isn't it? OK, just drop it.

5. If I were the new owner of the Nationals, I would ditch DC and get a stadium built by Tim Kaine in Northern Virginia. They are pretty much crazy in the DC City Council. I don't blame Bob DuPuy at all for not wanting MLB to do business with these folks. Just my opinion, folks, you can have yours, too.

6. The outfield is a mess. I mean, an utter disaster. It's a shame, because Church-Wilkerson-Guillen wasn't half bad, when it was healthy.

7. A year later, the Nationals logo and jersey isn't getting any better. I just can't keep getting the fact that it's a throwback to the early 1980's out of my head. What's next, Asia concerts on non-game days? Joe Theismann back in the spotlight?

It's just me, isn't it. OK, just drop it.

Carroll for Cash, and Two Guzmans

Bill Ladson let us know yesterday that Jamey Carroll, 32, had been traded to the Colorado Rockies for $300,000 in cash. Prior to the 2005 season, we at Nats Blog were enthusiastic about having Jamey Carroll on our home town resident team. After all, he was someone who had posted a .378 OBP in 2004.

I think we learned a little about Jamey Carroll in 2005. We learned that, when asked to play on a more frequent basis, he doesn't hit as well. I'm sure it is because he is exposed to better pitching, more right-handers, or some other reason, but he just does not produce as an everyday player. His defense at shortstop was passable - he even was perfect in 21 starts at the position in 2005, but was -1 runs saved above average - but he was not going to be a solution at any position.

What we learned most is how far we will go to embrace a player who is Not Cristian Guzman (NCG). Any NCG player is going to be loved and respected while manning the shortstop position and putting up replacement-level production offensively. Royce Clayton, added about a week ago, is the next player who will likely take advantage of being NCG.

My assumption is that I'm going to like Royce Clayton, but only because of the NCG status. I hated Clayton during his two years with the Chicago White Sox, in which he managed to alienate fans with his indifferent attitude, while putting up lines of .263/.315/.393 and .251/.295/.365 on offense. Sound like anyone you know?

Oddly enough, here are your competing 2006 PECOTA projections for Messers Clayton and Guzman:

Clayton (as a D'Back) - .256/.319/.359
Guzman - .245/.290/.324

Adjust Clayton's numbers for RFK and the NL East and, boom:

The Nationals have two Cristian Guzmans.

How to Win at "Buck Says"

Read Dan Agonistes.