Hey Now, You're An All Star... Voter

Nationals fans can be forgiven for thinking that MLB All-Stars are token players chosen to round out the roster and ensure that every team has representation. That's the kind of mindset that comes from having luminaries like Dmitri Young (2007) and Cristian Guzman (2008) represent Washington, DC in the mid-summer classic. Last year, Ryan Zimmerman (winner of the Gold Glove and Silver Slugger, perhaps you've heard of him?) only made it on as a reserve. So yeah, voting for the MLB All-Star Game is not especially merit-based.

In any other town this might be a problem, but this is Washington, DC. No city in the world boasts more collective knowledge about voter manipulation, log-rolling and bloc voting. The 2010 Nationals have at least two guys who are legitimately worthy of starting for the National League All-Star team, but there's just no way Zimmerman and Josh Willingham both make the cut. It's time to unite behind Ryan and start cutting some deals. If you need some number to back that up, they're all here.

Here's the current breakdown of NL All-Star candidates, by position. The first thing you'll notice is that the RZA isn't even in the Top 5 at third base. This is frankly embarrassing and an indictment of Nationals fans. So before you finishing reading this post, before you do anything else:

GO VOTE. Vote 25 times. Don't worry, it's kosher. The All-Star Game is a Chicago-style election campaign. Vote early, vote often vote Nats.

Once that's done it should put Ryan in the Top 5. If we can't find 23,000 people in DC who think that Zimmerman is the best third baseman in the National League, it's time to pack up the tent and go home. After that it's time to start horse-trading.

First, the low-hanging fruit; fans of American League teams. They get 25 votes for the NL All-Stars just like you get 25 votes for the AL team. Promise them anything. The Yankees fan on your softball team wants to see an all-New Yawk lineup? In exchange for 25 votes for Zimm you'll hold your nose and pull the lever for Posada over Mauer. The Angels fan who's trying to mount a Kendry Morales sympathy vote? Hey, nobody backs lost causes like a Nats fan. Don't be greedy. It's tempting to try to score some votes for Willingham, Adam Dunn, maybe even Pudge Rodriguez, but stay focused. Also, trust but verify. You're going to want to see those votes.

The next step is trickier. We're talking vote-swapping with our National League rivals. The key here is swapping votes wisely. For example, I love Ian Desmond, but he's no All-Star. So here's an open offer to all the Marlins fans out there. You vote Zimmerman, I vote Hanley Ramirez and keep Jimmy Rollins out of the top spot. It's a win-win. Likewise, Dodgers fans, I can totally get behind Andre Ethier, especially if it keeps Jayson Werth out of the top three.

I think you see how the game is played. Now go forth and barter. Zimmerman 2010!

Remember to do your part: VOTE NOW.

Not All Motion Is Progress

Mike Rizzo is (allegedly) not Jim Bowden. This offseason has been marked by a refreshing lack of impolitic outbursts, leather pants and dumpster-diving for toolsy outfielders. Until today you could also have said that Rizzo displayed a distinctly un-Trader Jim knack for not overvaluing replacement level relief pitching. Until today.

Let's be clear up front: Rizzo "overpaid" by sending the top pick in the Rule 5 draft to New York for reliever Brian Bruney. Bruney has a track record, and there's some value to that. Any baseball geek worth his Bill James Abstract will tell you that relief pitching is the most unstable, readily replaceable component of a major league roster. Any Nats fan that lived through last April, May and June will reply that yes, you can cobble together a relief corps from rookies, retreads and failed prospects, but it can take a grueling half season or more to get the mix right.

What worries me is Rizzo's increasingly evident preference for the known quantity over the raw talent. Think Nyjer Morgan for Lastings Milledge. The Nats got the better player, but the Pirates got the talent. Hiring a manager like Jim Riggleman is a textbook case for valuing track record over potential. In terms of today's deal, ex-Diamondback Brian Bruney's an established, hard-throwing, middle-inning reliever with undistinguished peripheral numbers. You don't have to uncover the Rule 5 draft's next Johan Santana, or even the next Joakim Soria, to get a younger, better player who'll be under club control for longer than Bruney. The next Luis Ayala would be a fine return for that number one pick.

As hot stove kickoffs go this deal was a resounding "Meh." It's tough to get either enthused or outraged about a 28-year old middle reliever, especially when he might not be any better than the guy who was cut to make room for him. On the other hand, I share FJB's hope that we're not merely in the beginning phase of replacing Bowden's CinciNationals with Rizzo's DiamondNats.

Speaking of which, doesn't signing a well-past-his prime Pudge Rodriguez to a TWO YEAR deal seem, well... Bowdenesque?

Did The Best 'man Win?

This has been a good news/bad news week on the Nats front. Ryan Zimmerman raking in the overdue hardware: good news. Jim Riggleman losing his interim tag: bad news. The Nats looking to upgrade the middle infield: good news. Moving Guz to second and calling that an upgrade: bad news.

In the warm immediate afterglow of Zimmerman's Silver & Gold tour I'm willing to overlook the fact that the Gold Glove is a fatally flawed award too often given to a well-known offensive talent from a medium-to-large market who's not a total butcher with the leather. I'd prefer a genuine acknowledgement that Zimm is a unique defensive talent, but that's the way the game is played. The Silver Slugger? Well, Soriano got one for his 40-40-40 season in 2006, so it must be some measure of offensive prowess. Good on Ryan for coupling his usual defensive brilliance with a bounce-back offensive campaign.

Now, about Riggleman. I said in the last post that I was prepared to rescind my positive commentary on the nascent Kasten-Rizzo regime if Interim Jim got the full-time gig. Upon reflection I'm not prepared to go quite that far... yet, but I'm not happy about the managerial pick. Others have spilled many bytes comparing Jim Riggleman to Bobby Valentine and ultimately coming to a "six of one/half dozen of the other" conclusion. I won't dispute that. My gripe is almost entirely with the selection process. I can't shake the feeling that the dice were loaded for Riggleman from the day he took over as Manny Acta's bench coach.

In my mind the search for a new manager should start with a clean slate. The goal should be to find the best person to manage the 2010 Washington Nationals. In-house candidates are fine, but if you want me to believe that the best man to take the helm is the guy who was second in command of the previous shipwreck you're going to need some pretty substantial supporting evidence. Jim Riggleman's key qualifications seem to be that he's managed before, he knows the personnel and he's willing to work for what the Lerners are willing to pay.

I'll grant that there's something to the prior manager experience argument, just as there is a benefit to knowing the ropes of any job. But managing before isn't synonymous with managing well, or you probably wouldn't be in the market for a new position. Just recycling the same 30 -35 guys over and over more or less guarantees you're never going to uncover new talent.

Knowing the personnel is definitely a plus; Riggleman's already had his learning curve. But again, if that's a major qualification you're pretty much limiting your applicant pool to the bench coach, the field coaches and one or two minor league skippers. Learning new players is something every manager has to do, sometimes on the fly in the heat of a late season pennant race. Don't you want some evidence that your guy has that skill too?

Finally, the $64,000 question. Is Jim Riggleman getting paid more than $64,000 to manage the Nats this year? We'll never know. Both he and his agent, the excellently monikered Burton Rocks, have been sworn to secrecy. C'mon Jim, D.C.'s a company town, everybody knows what everybody makes, so let's have it. We're you really the best man for the job, or just the most readily available?

I suppose it's possible that Steve Jobs' executive assistant is in the best position to take over Apple when he retires. I'll even allow for the slight possibility that Joe Biden is the second most qualified person in the United States to be President. But the idea that the best manager for the 2010 Washington Nationals, better than Bobby V, Eric Wedge, Bob Melvin, Tim Foli and an unknown cast of dozens, just happened to be riding shotgun for Manny Acta the whole time? Sorry, I don't buy it.

Object Lesson for the Day

When you do something just for the sake of doing something, you end up with Jeff Francoeur or Yuniesky Betancourt. Change does not equal Progress.

(For an example that hits a little closer to home for Nats fans, see Preston Wilson.)

Flirting with the Enemy

The pitching sucks, the defense is non-existent, the manager is over matched and now the President/GM is actively courting the most heinous fanbase on the planet.

"No, we want to play you, we want to see you here, and we would WELCOME your fans here. And I've got to tell you, I have gone to enough games in three different sports in Philly to tell you that I haven't always felt welcome in your parks, ok? But you can root for whoever you want, you will be welcome when you come to Nationals Park."

That's how long it takes to scrub the smell out of the stadium.

Thanks bunches, Stan. Don't think we'll need to break out the translator for this one. On the heels of last night's embarrassment, did you really need to make the home opener less palatable for Nationals fans?

You remember Nats fans, right Stan? The dedicated thousands who are actually trying, in spite of all obstacles, to root for your team. Jim Bowden may have been an insufferable d-bag, but at least he never openly advocated turning every Nats game into an away game.

I understand Kasten has an ownership stake, so every empty seat really does hit him in the wallet, so here's a suggestion. It's true that Washington is a front-running town, but we're suprisingly supportive of consistent mediocrity too. Put a g--d--- watchable product on the field and you won't have to beg every bottom feeder from Flushing to Miami to make a summer time road trip to D.C.

P.T. Bowden's Parting Gift

Gone, but not forgotten, Trader Jim manages to roger the Nats one last time on his way out the door. From Nationals Journal:

The Nationals intend to add Dmitri Young to the 40-man roster before Opening Day because of a handshake agreement that was made this winter between Young and then-General Manager Jim Bowden. Though Bowden resigned in February and Young, because of back problems, has not participated in an exhibition game since March 1, the Nationals will honor the deal, two sources said.

D'oh! You can call JimBo lots of things (and folks haven't been shy about doing so), but he's clearly loyal to a fault. What exactly DaMeat Hook has done to warrant such devotion is an open question. Nevertheless, I'm not as ticked off by this as I probably should be for two reasons:

1. Organizations need to honor their commitments, ill-conceived though they may be. One of the main knocks on Bowden was that he could be duplicitous with players, agents and fellow GMs. If the Nats want to shake that label, this probably had to happen.

2. Young's contract virtually guarantees that he could be dropped from the 40-man and pass through waivers at any time should the need arise. ::coughZimmermanncough::

That said, WTF was Jim Bowden thinking?! This is the first time in 5 years when the Nats (arguably) won't be carrying worthless dreck on the 40-man. Giving Dmitri a spot won't cost us Zimmerman, Dukes, Johnson, Lannan, Martis or Hanrahan, but it could well mean the axe for Kory Casto, Steven Shell or Irish Mike O'Connor. Not a fatal blow, certainly, but you don't want to cast off younger guys with even a little bit of promise to provide a spot for a 35 year old DH with a spotty health record.

Maybe Dmitri is just keeping a 40-man spot warm for Jordan Zimmermann's June debut. In that case I suppose it's a wash, allowing the team to keep its "promise" to Young without causing long-term damage to the club. In any other scenario, this can only be viewed as P.T. Bowden's revenge. Any chance they can make JimBo's resignation retroactive to last November?

The New Coke of Mascots

Full disclosure: I did not hate Screech v. 1.0. Either of them. Yes, he (or, I suppose, she) did look quite a bit more like a big chicken than a bird of prey. Yes, the signature pelvic thrust move was a little odd for a kid-magnet. But all-in-all, Screech was friendly, non-threatening and mildly entertaining. Very much like the 2005-2008 Washington Nationals.

I'll stipulate that I don't know much about mascot design and construction. But I know what I don't like, and I don't like this:

The team has replaced our dingy, roly-poly, hip thrusting, creepy-cute chicken with this vacant, gangly refugee from eagle fat camp.

Suffice it to say, this foolishness would not have been allowed on a Jim Bowden team. (Be forewarned, I plan on running that "joke" into the ground.) I have vague recollections that Screech was meant to grow up over the course of his time with the team. If that's true, and the original model was "Lil' Screech", this must be "Teenage Eating Disorder Screech."

In case I look forward to "Post-College Back in His Parents' Nest Screech", "Mid-Life Crisis Screech (w/ new chick)", and "Grandpa Screech" feebly flapping around trying to keep those dang kids off his lawn, by cracky.

Photo of New Screech courtesy of WaPo's DC Sports Bog and Dan Steinberg, who but for the vegetarianism and baldness, is the guy all DC sports bloggers secretly aspire to be.