End of the World (Not)

Posted by Mike Henderson on Nov. 13, 2008 at 8:30 PM
There is 1 comment | Add yours

The Nationals' front office, faced with sore arms here, injured fielders there, and angst everywhere, had to scramble mightily during the 2008 season just to put together a 59-win team.

At the end of the season, it was hard not to see that there wasn't much of a rotation beyond John Lannan, as well as that there was a void at first base that wasn't (and I don't think could fully have been) foreseen.

So going into the offseason, the FO immediately let it be known that, at the very least, a starting arm and a first-base bat would be needed to start to fill in the gaps in the roster.

Sure, they could've implemented a purely home-grown strategy by promoting, say, Ross Detwiler and Bill Rhinehart. But no matter how those players project, are they the guys you want to build a team around now?

The Nats seem to think not, and I agree.  As I've been saying for a while, now is the time at the major-league level to build a core of relatively young veterans that can be complemented by prospects as they are ready to be promoted.

And that's what the FO appears to be doing by picking up Scott Olsen and Josh Willingham. A healthy Olsen should fit right into the rotation, while Willingham adds outfield depth that allows the Nats to make future moves from a position of relative strength.

Not everyone in the bleachers is thrilled about this deal, on either side.  A particularly interesting, if somewhat Delphic, analysis is offered by the estimable Christina Kahrl ($) at Baseball Prospectus.

I'll grant that the trade's not a cure-all -- although, to be fair, it couldn't have been intended to be.  To start with, Willingham likely won't draw much 1B duty; for this reason and others, the Nats remain in the market for Mark Teixeira, as well as for Adam Dunn.

In any event, dealing for a couple of arbitration-eligible guys -- one of them pushing 30 -- jettisoned by a tight-fisted and (lately) perpetually rebuilding non-contender will not transform the Nats into the Rays or the Phillies.  But Olsen and Willingham will improve the Nats' major-league roster.

What about the prospects the Nats gave up?  Yes, they have value: you don't get something for nothing.  Nonetheless, in letting go of Emilio Bonifacio, P. J. Dean and Jake Smolinski, have the Nats stripped the cupboard bare?

Of course not. What they have done is to make a move toward building the veteran core from which a contender can grow as the minor-league up-and-comers -- of whom there are more, and more hopeful ones, than at this time three or four years ago -- mature.

That said, it is essential to continue the good work by dealing current veterans appropriately for more prospects. Start with Austin Kearns and Wily Mo Pena. If either Nick Johnson or Dmitri Young gets healthy, they should be in the trade picture too.

The success or failure of that part of the Plan (forgive me, Mr. Kasten) strikes me as a better long-term indicator of the future than the addition or subtraction of one major-leaguer or another. Fans of veteran acquisitions rather than of system-building as a strategic cornerstone should turn their rooting interests in the direction of the Dodgers, as they could have to the Orioles before Andy MacPhail came along.

As we ponder the near-term implications of this trade, many would damn Olsen for his past anger and irresponsibility. That kind of reaction is understandable, but still -- especially given Olsen's youth -- seems reflexive and thoughtless to me.

If you're looking for something to criticize, dig into his numbers, as Steven -- no Olsen fan -- has done. Then try to integrate the quantitative analysis into a dispassionate assessment of how you think Olsen will fit onto this evolving team. (Which the Olsen-damners, in my opinion, have not done convincingly, and which would be difficult anyhow without a crystal ball.)

Speculation is fun and sometimes cathartic.  (Who doesn't like Around the Horn?  Well, OK...) But between episodes of number-crunching, wishcasting, knee-jerking, and fulminating, it'd be a good idea to take a deep breath and remember that the 2009 season is a long way off, and that the offseason is far from over.

And that what we think we know about any particular player -- especially one like Olsen, who has, Lord willing, a lot of future in front of him -- will never quite be the whole story.