How else of a start would you expect playing the Braves and the Marlins?They don't like me to participate in "Signature Sundays" because the crush of autograph hounds is a public safety hazard, but sometimes I'll wander over to the 1B side when I'm getting loose for a long day of watching painful Jayson Werth ABs.
Not a bad start to the season. 3-1 with four at home vs Atlanta coming next with Scherzer-Gio-Strasburg lined up gives us a chance to build a little early season cushion. Also the new eCash line at the expanded Shake Shack is the best thing to happen to the ballclub since the 2014 NL East title.
1. That's not really how baseball works, my friend. It's not basketball or football, you don't just roll to an .833 win percentage if you're playing lesser teams. The Mets went just 11-8 against both teams during the regular season last year and were good enough to win the pennant.How else of a start would you expect playing the Braves and the Marlins?
What does the Mets have to do with the Nationals being 4-0 against the winless Braves?TobiasFunke said:1. That's not really how baseball works, my friend. It's not basketball or football, you don't just roll to an .833 win percentage if you're playing lesser teams. The Mets went just 11-8 against both teams during the regular season last year and were good enough to win the pennant.
2. The Marlins are a decent club this year as long as Stanton is healthy, so I'm not sure why you included them anyway. I bet they compete for the wild card if Stanton plays 140+ games.
3. Is this the new posty alias?
4-0 against anybody is nothing to be bitter about
No, the Braves are that bad this year. They should easily lose 95+ game this season.I think my favorite part of the whole thing (and posty's not the only one to point it out) is that a large part of the reason the Braves are 0-7 is that they've played the Nationals 5 times and haven't beaten them yet. Maybe they're actually not that bad and they've just had the misfortune of running into a buzzsaw in the early season.
That said, the Braves do look pretty awful this year. However I think the Phils might be surprisingly non-disastrous, maybe 70-75 wins. I'll start getting unreasonably excited if we leave Philly 9-2 on Sunday afternoon. And I kinda like that Marlins team if they stay healthy. I'd put the top half of their lineup up against anyone in the NL.
Agree with this. Marlins are going to be ok IMO, but the Phils and Braves are really bad teams that should struggle to get close to 70 wins. I think it's a must to make the playoffs, as a lot of contracts are expiring in the next couple of years. Win now, buy a veteran or two, ride the very good farm system, and save up to offer Harper whatever he wants.Phils and Marlins are going to be tough soon if their front offices don't blow it.. Braves are a little farther behind.. this would probably be a good year for the Nats to not gag away the season
Trea Turner with a .960 OPS through 19 games at AAA and the Nats still running Espinosa out there every day. Turner's clock has already started, and we know what Espinosa is and is going to be. I really don't see any reason at all Turner is not playing every day in DC.
Danny Espinosa went 0-for-3 with a strikeout in Thursday’s loss to the Phillies.
Espinosa is now batting .172/.310/.190 overall. Meanwhile, top prospect shortstop Trea Turner entered Thursday’s action with a .357/.430/.529 batting line over 18 games with Triple-A Syracuse. Just saying.
For purposes of player control the clock doesn't start and run once you appear in an MLB game- it runs any time you're on a major league roster during the season. So that stupid move of calling him up to ride the pine last year when the meltdown was already well underway means that they have to keep him in the minors that much longer if they want to retain that extra year of player control. That was when the mistake was made; they're paying the price for it now.Trea Turner with a .960 OPS through 19 games at AAA and the Nats still running Espinosa out there every day. Turner's clock has already started, and we know what Espinosa is and is going to be. I really don't see any reason at all Turner is not playing every day in DC.
Is there an actual date for this?For purposes of player control the clock doesn't start and run once you appear in an MLB game- it runs any time you're on a major league roster during the season. So that stupid move of calling him up to ride the pine last year when the meltdown was already well underway means that they have to keep him in the minors that much longer if they want to retain that extra year of player control. That was when the mistake was made; they're paying the price for it now.
That said, if I ran the team I'd go ahead and call him up now anyway. The value of controlling Turner in the 2023 season is IMO signficantly outweighed by the cost of crapping away Strasburg's final season in DC and potentially one of Harper's final three seasons by running Espinosa out there every day. He's awful, and you can't even point to his defense this year to justify his role because that's been mediocre.
I'm not too worried yet- this offense will look a lot better once you swap Ramos back in for Lobaton, Turner for Espinosa and Revere for Taylor/Werth. Rendon should get much better- his peripheral stats suggest he's just getting unlucky since his batted ball profile is the same as its always been and his K/BB rates are actually better than normal. So that should make up for the inevitable Murphy correction. But the lack of depth looks like a HUGE problem considering what we've seen from guys like Lobaton, Espinosa, Robinson, Taylor and Drew so far.
He was up for 45 days last season. 172 days constitutes a full service year, so 172-45=127. That means if they want that extra year they can't call him up until there's less than 127 days left in the season. I'm too lazy to count back but this beat writer put the date at around June 1. If things continue along this path for Espi I suspect they'll call him up on the first day they possibly can, like the Cubs did with Bryant last year (assuming they don't come around to my view and sacrifice 2023 control so they don't end up sacrificing the 2016 season).Is there an actual date for this?
Yeah but that's after six games with the Braves, six with the (suprisingly frisky) Phils, six with the Marlins and three with the Twins. Starting today they play seven against the Cardinals, six against the Mets, and a combined ten against Royals/Cubs/Tigers. If they're still seven games over .500 a month from now I'd be delighted.They are still 14 and 7. That's a 108 win pace.
Exactly as you remember him. Adequate on the bases, cringe-worthy in the field.Mets fan coming in peace. Know Murphy has been killing it with the bat, but how has he looked in the field and on the bases so far?
I am no expert on the details of how these contracts work, but there is also Super 2 status if he plays so much his first year. So for many star players, they wait until mid or late May before bringing them up for good their first year. If the Nats do that, Turner's call up date could be delayed another 45 to 60 days.He was up for 45 days last season. 172 days constitutes a full service year, so 172-45=127. That means if they want that extra year they can't call him up until there's less than 127 days left in the season. I'm too lazy to count back but this beat writer put the date at around June 1. If things continue along this path for Espi I suspect they'll call him up on the first day they possibly can, like the Cubs did with Bryant last year (assuming they don't come around to my view and sacrifice 2023 control so they don't end up sacrificing the 2016 season).
Yup, the article I linked talks about that a bit. But I can't imagine they'd hold out for that unless 2016 Danny Espinosa suddenly turns into 2012 Danny Espinosa, which seems unlikely.I am no expert on the details of how these contracts work, but there is also Super 2 status if he plays so much his first year. So for many star players, they wait until mid or late May before bringing them up for good their first year. If the Nats do that, Turner's call up date could be delayed another 45 to 60 days.
Super Two is determined a couple of years down the line. For players with between 2 and 3 years of service in MLB, the top 22% by service time are eligible for arbitration.I am no expert on the details of how these contracts work, but there is also Super 2 status if he plays so much his first year. So for many star players, they wait until mid or late May before bringing them up for good their first year. If the Nats do that, Turner's call up date could be delayed another 45 to 60 days.
When it comes to starting pitching, the matchup gods appear to be on the Nationals' side. In St. Louis, they're scheduled to miss Adam Wainwright and Michael Wacha. In Kansas City, they avoid Yordano Ventura and Ian Kennedy. And in the four-game set in Chicago, they're slated to miss Jon Lester. That's pretty good livin' right there.
Thanks. I think in a few more months you may be begging for "adequate". It's entertaining at least.Exactly as you remember him. Adequate on the bases, cringe-worthy in the field.
He's got a positive baserunning runs above average for his career according to fangraphs. Was a bit on the negative side last year, maybe he just had a few more brain farts than usual.Thanks. I think in a few more months you may be begging for "adequate". It's entertaining at least.
Swing 51 said:
I'm a Roark skeptic but there's reason to think this might be somewhat sustainable. His K numbers are way up from 2015 when he was a reliever but he hated pitching in relief, his career numbers are closer to his current number. And while he'd due for a massive correction on his HR rate and to a lesser degree his BABIP, he might be able to compensate by bringing his BB numbers more in line with his career average (he's at 3.52/9 this year, career number is 2.04). In other words he's due to give up some dingers but hopefully they'll be solo ones.fred_1_15301 said:What's the scoop on Roark? Can he continue to be a quality fantasy starter? Other than that 15 k game, he hasn't had high strikeouts but he's been consistently good. Are these early starts just outliers and should I expect regression in the future?
I'm kinda down on Werth too, but a month in I think it's fairly clear who Revere should be replacing today and it ain't Werth. Not if this club plans to push it chips in this year, anyway. Taylor's been a pretty big disappointment at the plate but also hasn't been all that great in the field (last night included), which has been the bigger bummer.Nice catch Werth you POS.