What Would Orlando Hudson Do for the Nats?

Posted by Jeff Bergin on Jan. 27, 2010 at 1:00 PM
There are 5 comments | Add yours | Retweet This

I like Orlando Hudson. I really do. I like his attitude, his hustle, like watching his defensive play, and I like the thought of he and Morgan at the top of the Nats lineup.  The speed is reminiscient of the Marlins with Juan Pierre and Luis Castillo in 2003.

I know the detractors when it comes to analyzing Orlando Hudson.  His range factor is not great thus making his gold glove repuation a little suspect.  His average and runs scored are not near what you would think for a player who many talk about as a key addition to a team.  Yes, when you remove the names, the differences between he and Adam Kennedy might not be that markedly different, on paper, but...

With a team like the Nationals, so much of where they need to be is about character, leadership and a winning attitude.  You cannot build a team with a whole bunch of paper tigers, you need glue guys who can rally and inspire a team, and from what everyone says about Hudson, he is a great clubhouse guy.  He fits the mold of the type of player Rizzo covets, like Morgan.  People forget, on paper, Nyjer Morgan was not really much of an addition, but his style of play and his demeanor transformed the way this team attacked.  I think Hudson can do the same.

I am predicting seeing him in the fold very soon, and then the Nats may do a platoon between Guzman and Desmond.  Who knows, thoughts?

     

Nationals Acquire More Depth, Still Missing Key Pieces

Posted by Jeff Bergin on Jan. 26, 2010 at 8:06 AM
There are 6 comments | Add yours | Retweet This

As Hendo pointed out yesterday, the Nationals added some depth their squad with the recent signings Tyler Walker, Chris Duncan and Chuck James.  While the names may ring a bell, none of these signings really moves the Nationals forward on a starting nine basis.  These moves were about depth and flexibility, especially with the Chris Duncan signing.  With a proven MLB outfielder in the fold (sorry Justin Maxwell and Roger Bernadina) the Nationals can have a backup plan if/when Dukes collapses or if they decide to move Josh Willingham.  If neither of those happen, well then they have a smart ball player off the bench.

With Chuck James, I hope that he is going to AAA and that this is not an option for the major-league rotation.  Yes, James was a good pitcher a couple of years ago, and even one that I thought they should sign on the cheap, but with some healthy 200+ inning names still on the market (Jarrod Washburn, Jon Garland), the Nationals should be looking to someone of their caliber instead for the starting rotation.

I have faith still that Rizzo and Co. are working all the angles to get Hudson in town as well adding that second pitcher, and if so, these depth moves will look great come mid-season. 

     

Success vs. Efficiency

Posted by Jeff Bergin on Jan. 22, 2010 at 8:15 AM
Be the first to comment on this post | Retweet This

With the ink barely dry on a 100-loss season and the confetti still being cleaned up from the Canyon of Heroes, baseball executives went to work doing what they do best: assessing the massive heap of baseball players and begin moving the chess pieces around to make their team better, and perhaps win a World Series in the upcoming season. 

As fans, it can be a maddening, yet rewarding process on paper, as free agents and arbitration-eligible players engage in a reality-TV like process to winnow down their options and finally settle on a place they will call home for a short time. No matter who is signed or who is let go, fans begin the process by saying, “I think we have a shot this year.”

But what is the “the shot” they are looking for? Is it a .500 record to a 100-loss team? Is it a repeat division champion and possible pennant for mid-market upstart? Is it a another 100-win season and a parade for the boys from the Bronx? What really is the benchmark of “success” for each team?  Is it being an efficient organization that can get the most out of its players payroll? Is it stretching a dollar? Tom Verducci at SI.com seems to think so, in his new piece where he analyzes the best bang for the buck over the last decade.

To accomplish this, Verducci simply identified the “cost per win” by adding up the team’s total wins and dividing by their payroll. To try and get at the disparity between big/small market teams, he added in a section identified as “Achievement Points”. As Verducci states, “one point for being in a pennant race, two points for making the playoffs, three for winning each postseason series, four for winning a pennant, and five for winning a World Series. A team could accrue a maximum of 21 points for a world championship season.” To arrive at his final “efficiency rating” Verducci took the cost per win and subtracted the achievement points. Sounds simple enough. Here is the problem. 

The Nationals, over the decade as Expos/Nationals, ranked #27 in payroll and #26 in wins. Their achievement point total of 0 ranks them dead last with the Royals, Orioles and Pirates. YET, Verducci claims they are the 20^th most efficient team in getting bang for their buck. Wait, what? So, if you are scoring at home, #27 in payroll, #26 in wins, #32 in achievement points, but #20 in being an efficient organization. So my question is: For whom? Who is this team “efficient” for? What does an “efficient” team look like? 

The Top Five Teams? Marlins, Cardinals, Athletics, Twins and Rays. When thinking of the teams in MLB who have gotten the most out of the least payroll, these teams definitely come to mind, so his analysis is not completely faulty, but most of these teams have come so close to see the core piecees of their teams tore apart and sold off to the highest bidder, much to the distress of the fan. So it raises questions as to whom does success and efficiency matter to?  

Success matters to the fan.  The ability for a team to be competitive year after year and to allow the fan to be a part of that process is a main part of keeping their interest. One could suggest that being efficient helps keep ticket prices down so that a family can be part of the tradition, but that is not totally the case as prices for tickets, souveneirs, and concessions have exploded over the years. So as a fan, what matters is those “achievement points”.

Efficiency matters to the owner. The ability to get more out of less and have the financial flexibility to make other moves, or to plan for new stadium, or to expand scouting is what keeps the management team in the game. All of those things matter and can trickle down to the fan, but it is not readily transparent, and I would argue less important to the casual fan. 

Cost per win is a nice study, but give me the wins first before you call my team “efficient”

     

Wrap Up from the Winter Meetings

Posted by Jeff Bergin on Dec. 10, 2009 at 11:56 AM
There are 2 comments | Add yours | Retweet This

Well, the winter meetings are drawing to a close, but that does not mean the Hot Stove is closing...quite the contrary.  The Nationals were active and made some moves off their shopping list, but still have a ways to go.  Below is a recap of all that happened this week at the Winter Meetings:

• Nats sign Pudge Rodriguez to 2 year $6M deal
• Nats sign Jerry Owens to a minor league contract
• Nats trade the first pick in the Rule 5 Draft to the Yankees for relief pitcher, Brian Bruney.  That pick became Jamie Hoffman
• The Nationals are still very involved in the Jason Marquis sweepstakes
• Mike Rizzo expressed interest in starting pitcher John Garland
• Some talk about Livo coming back
• Nats may non-tender Mike McDougal
• Former minor league pitcher of the year, Zech Zincola, was claimed in the Rule 5 draft.
• Rizzo and company expressed their reluctance in trading Josh "The Hammer" Willingham
  

I think Rizzo and company did a good job establishing their credibility and not coming off desperate.  Rizzo has a vision for this team, and he is working the phones and the agents to try and see that happen.  Did we overpay for Pudge? Yes, but can that HOF catcher be a help to a young pitching staff? Absolutely.  So what is next?

• Shore up middle infield - Do not be surprised to see Rizzo take a hard look at second base
• Starting Pitching - the big area.  I fully expect two starting pitchers and neither of them being Livo.  I am expecting Garland and Marquis in uniform  next year with an off chance of Smoltz. 
• Relief help - Bruney is a start, but I would like one more arm.  The bullpen looked stronger with Sean Burnett and Tyler Clippard in the second half, and adding Bruney is great, just think we are one more situational arm away from having a decent bullpen.

We shall see what happens next....

     

Assessing the Landscape for 2010

Posted by Jeff Bergin on Nov. 18, 2009 at 3:04 PM
Be the first to comment on this post | Retweet This

Free Agency looms large for the Nationals in 2010, not just because of another 100 loss season, rather because the team is at a crossroads of identifying what type of organization they would like to going forward.  Many teams run out for the best player, or the flashiest splash, only to realize later on that the huge investment did not help their team.  It is more important for a team to take stock of their strengths and weaknesses and use free agency as a means to make changes.

So, before we dive into to suggest who the Nats should sign and what their lineup should look like, let's tackle this offseason as if we were members of the front office. To do this, let us look at the Nationals ranking in Offensive VORP, Pitching VORP and Defensive Efficiency, as ranked by Baseball Prospectus. 

The reason for these statistics is that when evaluating the leaders for all three categories, the teams that rise to the top are playoff teams (Dodgers, Phillies, Cardinals) while the top 6 all represent teams that vied for the wild card (Cubs, Giants, Rockies).  This goes to show that the stastical value of Hitting and Pitching VORP as well as Defensive Efficiency has some correlation to the Win-Loss record of a team.  Below are scores for each team and their subsequent ranking in each area:

As you can see, the Nationals as a team are tied for last in total ranking in all three areas, and the Nationals ranking in Pitching and Defense tells the story of why this team struggled so mightily in 2009.

So in looking at this, where should the Nats focus their attention? On adding Dan Uggla to the team (good god no)? Trying to get a ground ball pitcher like Chien Ming Wang (maybe) without bolstering the defense (good god no)?  These numbers indicate that the Nationals need to upgrade the team defense while also adding some reliable arms to the starting rotation as well as to the bullpen as the top priority. The Nationals -17 VORP rating for pitchers informs you that this staff performed WORSE than a team full of replacements.  So, when you hear the names Doug Davis, Jon Garland and Randy Wolf, do not be dissappointed, as they are all ABOVE the caliber of replacement players, and that is what this team needs to turn the corner.

In the coming weeks, I aim to tackle each free agent idea out there for the Nationals and look at what their VORP looks like for the next few years, and how their performance can help improve this team in all three areas.   Tentative List:

Week of November 16th - Orlando Hudson, Adam Everett

Week of November 23rd - John Lackey, Mike Gonzalez

Week of November 30th - Jarrod Washburn, Rich Harden, Billy Wagner

     

Riggleman To Be Part of Re-Building Effort; Not Part of the Championship

Posted by Jeff Bergin on Nov. 12, 2009 at 11:40 PM
Be the first to comment on this post | Retweet This

As noted across the spectrum, Riggleman has been named manager of the Nats.  In Mike's piece, I think he hit the nail right on the head by saying the Nats played it safe, but I want to point out why that is not a bad move.  Very rarely do rebuilding teams look to proven winners early in their building process.  As noted in my piece on the Phillies, growing teams can go through many iterations before they get it right, and no team in the last 15 years has personified this more than the Detroit Tigers. 

Detroit Tigers: 1995-2006.  Managers: Sparky Anderson, Buddy Bell, Phil Garner, Alan Trammell, Jim Leyland

At the end of the Sparky Anderson era, the Tigers were abyssmal, finishing with a .461 and a .417 winning percentage each year.  As Sparky moved on, the Tigers brought in Buddy Bell in 1996. Buddy at the time was a 45 year old former player and this was his first managing gig (Acta anyone), and after two and a half horrific seasons, the Tigers and Bell parted ways with Bell's record at 184-277 for a winning percentage of .399.  In the interim, the Tigers brought in Larry Parrish to finish out the season and then Larry got the vote of confidence for the following year after righting the ship over the last 25 games with a 13-12 record.  Larry's first season turned out to be his only in Detroit as the team's 69-92 record got him the ax (Riggleman?).

The Tigers choice of Phil Garner as next manager was odd and typical of a bad team not wanting to spend money on a manager.  Garner had one winning season in 8 years as the Brewers manager, and came to Detroit hamstrung by the same challenges he had in Milwaukee (low payroll, marginal talent).  The result? A .439 winning percentage and the saddling of a 100 loss season to his repalcement Luis Pujols. 

When the Tigers decided to move on, they made a very smart move as an organization, and brought Dave Dombrowski in as the new architect of the rebuild efforts.  Dombrowski became permanent GM in 2003, and brought in one of their own--one of their legends, Alan Trammell. The result in year one could not have been worse.  119 losses, 43 wins, and one of the worst seasons ever put together by a team in baseball history.  However, Dombrowski's efforts rebuilding the team and shedding bad contracts/talent had an immediate impact.  The next few years would be different.

The Tigers were able to bring in a collection of free agents (Kenny Rogers, Troy Percival, Pudge Rodriguez, Carlos Guillen), bolster the team through the draft (Justin Verlander, Cameron Maybin, Curtis Granderson, Andrew Miller) and give their young players a competitive environment to grow.  WIth all of this the Tigers went 70-92, 71-91 in 2004 and 2005, and then realized as a team they were ready.  The result: Jim Leyland. Leyland, a winner and great manager, gelled that team and got them to the World Series with a 95-67 record.  We should be so lucky .

The Nationals

The paralells to the Tigers are strong and its hard to identify where along the line Riggleman fits in.  Is he a Garner or a Larry Parrish, or an Alan Trammell?  Either way, Riggleman is NOT a Jim Leyland.  While building a competitive team is a complete group effort (front office, managers, players), it takes a special manager to have a competitive team grind out those tough wins and go from a .500 team to one that can compete for the division. 

As has been stated a lot this year, the Nats appear to be back to the "plan".   With the selection of some franchise arms (Jordan Zimmermann, Stephen Strasburg, Drew Storen), a permanent GM, and now a manager, the Nats have pulled off, as Mark calls it, the Triple Play.  This has put them closer to being competitive than all those false starts the Tigers endured in the late 90's and early 00's. 

So Nats fans, as you reflect on the Riggleman hire, take it fo what it is.  The Riggleman hire is a good and cautious move for an organization that still needs to move forward.

     

The Phillies Success Blueprint Offers Hope for Nationals

Posted by Jeff Bergin on Nov. 5, 2009 at 7:27 PM
Be the first to comment on this post | Retweet This

In the history of baseball, there has been no team that has emodied failure and ridicule as much as the Philadelphia Phillies, as evidenced by their historic 10,000th loss a couple of years back.  As much as they are trashed, cajoled and mocked, they have become a symbol of success in the National League, as well as in all of baseball.  As a resident of the Washington DC area, I am left to ponder, "If they can do it, why not the Nats?"  So how did they do it?

The Phillies success did not happen overnight, and it would be too simplistic to just say, "Howard, Utley, Rollins, Hamels".  The Phillies have won 80+ games EVERY year sine 2001, and have won less than 86 games only once, yet in that same time period have had 3 managers (Francona, Bowa, Charlie Manuel) and 3 GM's (Ed Wade, Pat Gillick, Ruben Amaro, Jr.).  What is more telling, and eye opening for Nationals fans, is how a move towards championship first starts with respectability before it can become the team you see today.  In order to build, there are three key pieces a team must focus on:

1. The Draft
2. Player Development
3. Team Identity

The Draft

While much has been made (book, movie) about Billy Beane's draft strategy, no one has pointed out that the Phillies have probably had the best return on investment of any team in the draft. In order to build that impressive team, the following shows the Phillies successful picks for a straight decade:

• 1993: Scott Rolen, 2nd round
• 1994: nothing good
• 1995: Marlon Anderson, 2nd round; Dave Coggin, 1st round
• 1996: Jimmy Rollins, 2nd round
• 1997: JD Drew (didnt sign, more on that); Randy Wolf
• 1998: Pat Burrell, #1 overall; Jason Michaels, 4th round, Ryan Madson, 9th round; Geoff Geary, 15th round
• 1999: Brett Myers, 1st round; Marlon Byrd, 10th round
• 2000: Chase Utley, 1st round
• 2001: Gavin Floyd, 1st round; Ryan Howard, 5th round
• 2002: Cole Hamels, 1st round
• 2003: Michael Bourn; Kyle Kendrick...Bourn became Brad Lidge in a 2007 trade
• 2004: JA Happ, 3rd round 

That return on invesment is amazing.  Think, when you watch the Phillies tonight, 7 of these players may have played (Rollins, Myers, Madson, Utley, Howard, Hamels, Kendrick, Happ) with another player (Lidge) having come to this team via a draft pick (Bourn).  While the Phillies have shown an unreal eye for talent, the key to getting them to the field is player development, and the Phillies are equally impressive there. 

Player Development

What is missing from this list of draftees are the marginal prospects the Phillies got from other teams that have become contributing players.  Rule 5 picks like Shane Victorino or former prospects bordering on washout status like Jayson Werth have solidified this team and filled the gaps where the Phillies need help. In those 8 years of drafting and building the franchise, it is the player development that served as the mortar to this foundation. 

Player Development is a critical component of a budding franchise, and one that requires the long view of the organization's future as well as extreme patience.  It is in the area of player development where so many struggling teams fail, due to a myriad of issues such as flagging attendance, waning interest, and lack of supporting talent on the major league roster.  

It is this lesson that the Nationals need to take to heart the most. With top picks like Zimmerman, Detwiler, Zimmermann, Marerro, Strasburg, Storen, Ian Desmond and Derek Norris, the Nationals NEED to have an infrastructure at every level of the organization where these kids are taught the fundamentals of the game, and move on with improved performance.   It is through this rigorous process that the team will truly equip these players with the skills and maturity they need in high-pressure situations. 

Team Identity

As the Nationals move into the Mike Rizzo era and the search for a manager intensifies, the Nationals have an opportunity to define what type of team they want to be.  While this may sound academic, it is a critical component in building a competitive, respectable team. 

The Phillies lack of mental errors (they are one of the best defensive teams in baseball) is not something they acquired via the draft.  While players like Chase Utley, Jimmy Rollins and Ryan Howard were immense talents, it was the dedication to fundamental baseball throughout the organization and a commitment that they would be a grinding, defensively-minded team that allows them to focus on those tenets at all level. On offense, their ability to grind out at-bats and see multiple pitches per at bat is something that is taught and reinforced by the Phillies coaching staff.

This last piece is something that has evaded the Nationals since their move to DC, and I would argue is just as important as the other 2 components.  When the A's were competing in the AL West for the last decade, Billy Beane used to demand that all his players in all levels of the organization had to see multiple pitches per at bat.  The idea of OBP was central to their identity.  While you can argue that hinders a player, the A's had an organizational identity that was modeled at alll levels of the organization, and the result was a decade of respectability.

The Nationals have a long way to go to gain that competitive respectability, and the sad reality is that some of our current stars may not be here to enjoy the fruits of that dedication.  Just like Scott Rolen in Philly, Ryan Zimmerman may miss out on the Nationals Renaissance, and while that would be disappointing, his role on this team will be central to this team advancing towards respectability. 

So as you begin to assess this franchise, and where they should be in regards to the players, it is essential to take the long view, and see how they Nationals are building their minor league operations, assess how their prospects are maturing (are they developing skill sets beyond what they were touted for), and have patience in how long those players spend in the minors.  The reality is that is the only way for us to get better.

So, here is to 2015 and the first of many NL East championships!

     

A Season of Disaster, with some statistical gems

Posted by Jeff Bergin on Oct. 6, 2009 at 8:26 AM
There are 3 comments | Add yours | Retweet This

103 Losses.  That is worse than last year by one game.  That is worse than the season that appeared to be the pinnacle of failure.  The Nationals have now lost 100+ games for two seasons in a row, which by my cursory analysis has not happened AT ALL in the last 20 years. More on that later...

So in a season of disaster, was there any glimmers? Anything that can be built upon for next year? Well in that vein, of course.   There really were some nice statistical standouts in 2009 that should bode well for the upcoming season:

• Ryan Zimmerman: .292, 33 HR, 106 RBI, 178 hits, 110 runs.  OBP of .364, slugging of .565 - nice.
• Adam Dunn: a whopping .928 OPS with 38 HR, 105 RBI, a .268 BA, and a .398 OBP. 
• Josh Willingham: 24 HR in 427 AB's
• Nyjer Morgan: before the injury, .351 Batting Average, 24 Stolen bases
• John Lannan:  3.88 ERA and almost just as important 206 innings pitched
• Tyler Clippard: 41 appearances, 2.69 ERA in relief, and a 9.99 K/9 ratio
• Sean Burnett: 33 apearances and a 3.20 ERA

Those were silver linings, and thats a lot more silver linings than a 103 loss team should have.  Having a starter throw 200 innings with a sub 4.00 ERA and still go 9-13 is indicative of larger problems, but this team has some pieces to cobble together for next year.

The shopping list is always the same.  Pitching, middle infield.  With Livan wanting to come back, the Nats have an easy win to give them some innings, and can hopefully find one more veteran starter, like a Randy Wolf-type pitcher (Jon Garland, Doug Davis) to fill in for a year, and then can hopefully figure out the mess in the infield.

While Guzman puts up nice numbers, there is something there that appears to rub Rizzo and Co. the wrong way.  He looks apathetic, and I always feel like his numbers are hollow.  Is Ian Desmond the answer at this stage in his young career?  Who knows.  Is it worth Orlando Hudson who was benched in favor of our own Ronnie Belliard in LA?  Not sure.  But some stability needs to show up defensively. 

More updates soon

     

The Murky waters of "Next Year"

Posted by Jeff Bergin on Sep. 27, 2009 at 8:15 PM
There are 2 comments | Add yours | Retweet This

Okay, the season has been over for awhile, and it seems that the audition for 2010 began in July, but unfortunately, after a half of season of auditions, the picture for 2010 is still murky.  Whether it be through injury (Zimmermann, Stammen, Flores) performance (Detwiler, Martis, Dukes) or organizational questions (um, Manager?) the Nationals do not go into the 2010 season feeling any sense of confidence in their direction.  Let's take a cloer look at where things stand right now:

1. The Corners are Set, but the middle is iffy: Dunn and Zimmerman are as locked as you can get, but questions are emerging over the role of Christian Guzman and the emergence of youngster Ian Desmond.  Desmond, a 3rd round pick in 2004, has finally put it together and is showing some of those flashes that Bowden promised.  The problem is that neither Guz or Desmond is a natural second basemen--Question #1: Do the Nationals look into acquiring Orlando Hudson?
2. Outfield: The Centerfield position has been set for the first time in Nationals history with Nyjer Morgan playing great defense and also being a sparkplug at the leadoff spot. Josh Willingham has secured a spot in left, yet the question remains regarding right field.  Elijah Dukes has tantalized personnel for years with his talent and frustrated with his antics, so as you try to put a consistent team on the field, is he your right fielder?  The Nationals have some depth with Justin Maxwell (crappy) and Roger Bernadina (I am a big fan actually), and with the eventual release of Austin Kearns, they can move past that experiment at least. Question #2: Do the Nationals turn to free agency or give the kids a shot in right field?
3. Catcher: Holy Moley.  So Jesus Flores may not be ready for spring training, Josh Bard stinks, Wil Nieves (Who?, Wil Nieves) is a career backup, and Derek Norris is still in Low A ball (though he is awesome).  The signing of Jamie Burke gives them a body, but the reality is this is a wait and see with Flores.  Question 3: Will Flores be ready?
4. Bullpen - it will be better, and Rizzo will make sure of it.  With guys like Burnett and Clippard, Rizzo has the foundation of two good bullpen arms.  Couple that with a permanent role for Jason Bergmann and the development of Drew Storen and Clint Everts , and I firmly believe this bullpen will be strong in 2010.  If only we had a closer.
5. Starting Pitching:  Ah, the crux of the discussion. This team will always struggle if this remains a question, and unfortunately for the Nats, injuries really robbed this team of progress in this area, notably the surgery to Jordan Zimmermann.  Zimmermann's peripherals were the strongest of any rookie pitcher, and could have seen progression similar to top young pichers (Matt Cain, for example) in 2010.  Coupled with Lannan and Strasburg, this would have been a nice top 3.  Now, with JZ out, more pressure falls on the young kid, something the Nats will not want to be the gameplan.  So what does 2010 look like on pitching

• Free Agent #1 - The Nats could go after a cheap option via free agency, but that will not mean someone like Harden or Lackey, but more like Garland or Doug Davis.
• Livan or Staying? - Livan is auditioning for a spot on the team, and while he has had struggles, his ability to eat 200 innings is awesome for a team with young arms.
• Lannan - another good season with a losing record.  With an ERA right around 4.00, Lannan gives the Nats a chance every time he is on the mound
• Strasburg - he will get every chance to succeed, though there is fear of giving him those opportunities.
• Ross Detwiler - Its time.  He has got to put it together.  He again will be given every chance to succeed.
• Craig Stammen  - he looked good in bunches this year, and i think another shot is what he needs.

The waters that are murky in 2010 are due to inexperience.  2009 was suposed to be the year that a 100+ loss season was coupled with young pitchers throwing 150 meaningful innings and clearing the confusion about what to expect in 2010.  Instead, what we have is a copycat of 2008, just with better people vying for spots that are up in the air. 

While I think it is on he way to getting better, this confusion needs to go away and be replaced by a sense of clarity. Since that does not seem to be on the menu, where can we pencil in Bryce Harper?

     

Without Morgan, the Nationals Go Nowhere

Posted by Jeff Bergin on Sep. 3, 2009 at 9:05 AM
There is 1 comment | Add yours | Retweet This

This season has been marked by events rather than by wins, whether it be Zimmerman's 30 game hit streak, the signing of Stephen Strasburg, the hiring of Mike Rizzo (and firing of Jim Bowden, Manny Acta), or the trade for Nyjer Morgan.  On the last piece, Morgan, that event was a sparkplug that got this team going, however since his broken hand, this team has been listless and unable to compete on a nightly basis.

Here is a breakdown of this team when Morgan plays

• With Morgan 22-26
• Without Morgan 24-62

In the month of July, the Nationals as a team hit .278, were 5th in the league in runs, and surprisingly, 4th in the league in stolen bases with 19, which is more than they had in May and June combined. 

In August, the Nationals were second in the league with 19 stolen bases, and despite a .266 average, they were 5th in the NL in runs with 144. 

Nyjer Morgan went down with an injury on August 27th (and only had 1 plate appearance so we will count that game), and while some of those stats are in August, its important to look at how this team has fared with him out of the lineup:

• 1-6 record
• 14 total runs in 7 games (second to last in all of baseball)
• .194 batting average - second to last in ALL of baseball
• 3 stolen bases - 20th in ALL of baseball

While I dont see Morgan as the next coming of Willie Mays, his style fits well on this team as does his personality.  He is an aggressive player whose ability to get on base set the tone for the other solid hitters in this lineup.  Without him, the Nationals lose that table setter, and as a result, their offense has looked listless and lost ever since.  While this has been a bad break for 2009, fans can now look forward to the type of player who will be at the top of the lineup for all of 2010.  Lets hope Morgan picks up where he left off.