Center Field Gate

The Washington Nationals finished the 2009 season on a high note, winning their seventh in a row, 2-1, in fifteen innings in Atlanta. The game winning RBI was plated on a line drive by Alberto Gonzalez , whose single in the 15th inning drove in Elijah Dukes with what turned out to be the winning run. The win could not save the Nats from the worst record in franchise history — as well as the worst record in baseball for the 2009 season: 59-103. Gonzalez was 2-6 in his last outing, raising his BA for the season to .265. Logan Kensing, who pitched two innings of three hit ball in relief, got the win. Starter J.D. Martin pitched six solid innings of six hit baseball, giving up a single earned run. But the pitching of the bullpen was the key story in the team’s last game of 2009 — Tyler Clippard, Ron Villone, Jason Bergmann, Saul Rivera and Kensing pitched nine innings in relief, giving up no runs.

While the Nats left Atlanta with their seventh consecutive win, the front office isn’t underestimating the work that needs to be done in the off season — the naming of a manager, the acquistion of two veteran pitchers, a reconstruction of the league’s worst bullpen and moves that will solidify the defense, especially up the middle. If there was a highpoint in the season (at least according to the Nats’ front office) it was the acquisition of centerfielder Nyjer Morgan and lefty reliever Sean Burnett from Pittsburgh. “I’m not saying we are where we want to be, certainly not,” Nats’ GM Mike Rizzo said after the Atlanta win. “We know the targets we have to hit.” But many of the positive moves were actually negatives — additions by subtraction: the cutting of failed starter Daniel Cabrera, the exile of outfielder Lastings Milledge and the abandonment of the Joel Hanrahan experiment . . .

But the real high point of the season occurred before it even began — with the firing of Jim Bowden. The move was long overdue. The appointment of Mike Rizzo to take his place, first as “acting G.M” and then permanently, reshuffled the weak front office. Rizzo recast the Nats’ development program in the Dominican Republic, engineered the Milledge-Morgan swap, signed pitching phenom and first overall pick Stephen Strasburg, and rejiggered an embarrassing bullpen. His May signing of Mike MacDougal to a minor league deal — often overlooked — provided Washington with a closer. Rizzo’s mid-summer moves stabilized the franchise and gave the Nats immediate credibility. In a otherwise lost season, Rizzo’s promotion provided the one key bright spot  . . .

It’s not clear whether interim manager Jim Riggleman will return, though there’s no doubt that his handling of the club after the firing of Manny Acta focused the defense and provided needed wins. The club was sluggish under Acta and played with more intensity under Riggleman. ”I think Riggleman really did a good job handling the ballclub after the All-Star break,” Rizzo said after the end of the season. “I think he put us on pace to really focus and bear down on the fundamentals of the game — to play cleaner and more efficient ballgames. He had the players playing at a high level. I think he has done the best job he could with the ability level that he has.” It’s clear that many Nats’ players would like to see Riggleman return . . .

The Nats-Mets match-up has sparked another friendly exchange of questions from “N.L. Least” bloggers. This time the N.L. East Chatter community and the guys from The Real Dirty Mets Blog (TRDMB) and Phillies Phandom provided  questions for Centerfield Gate (CFG) on the state of the Nats. Some of these questions go a little farther afield than our normal — “what are you going to do for pitching” — entries: as both teams are struggling just to finish the season with some amount of dignity intact. As it turns out, and as our readers will note, some of our blog entries have sparked a little concern among Mets fans: particularly our claim that our very own Anacostia Boys will finish ahead of the Chokes in 2010. We’re asked to explain ourselves and defend our opinions — and then to weigh in on our very own on-air personality, Rob Dibble.

TRDMB: Most likely you guys will have the first pick in the draft again. Since you drafted a phenom of a pitcher last year, what position do you think they will use their #1 pick on?

CFG:  We would love to see them draft a middle infielder – unless there’s a Babe Ruth on the board. But what I want and what will happen are two different things. This is Stan Kasten’s team and his philosophy is unyielding: draft pitchers, pay for players. So that seems to indicate that it’s likely that we’ll draft and sign a big lefty or some big righty (out of some college is my bet) and draft a middle infielder in about the third round. That’s the typical thing for Kasten. The next draft is filled with power arms, so that seems to tilt it in favor of pitching. But there is one guy who could change all of this. Bryce Harper is the newest can’t miss player: a high school catcher who is considering enrolling in community college just to be eligible for the draft. If Harper is there, we would grab him.

TRDMB: Do you think the National will add payroll for next years roster? There were rumors about the money you were willing to drop on Texieira…any chance the Nationals use that cash to bring in some FA talent?

CFG:  . . . the front office has been wiggling all year to cut here and there to have some money in the bank at the end of the season: they reportedly have about $20 million they can spread around and that’s what we expect them to do. I don’t think they’ll offer a blockbuster deal to anyone like they did with Tex: we wouldn’t expect, for instance, that they would bring in a John Lackey. Instead, we think they’ll try to land two or three guys that will bolster the overall team: a reliever, a middle infielder and a second tier starter. We would like to see them dangle some money to Orlando Hudson and John Garland – and re-up Livan Hernandez and then go for a high end middle innings guy, like Oakland did with Mike Wuertz. Of course, he won’t be around, but someone like him would really go a long ways to fixing some sadly broken things. You know: we bet we’ll will be writing the same damn thing next year.

TRDMB: How has attendance been this year at Nats park? From a fan perspective, are they optimistic of the future right now? The off-field stories like Strasburg have to be a nice plus, but on the field, there is no consistency.

CFG: There must be a way to assess attendance as a function of projected and real team finishes. It’s probably already being done, but if not we’ll take full credit for the idea. For instance, we need to assess whether (as the worst team in baseball) the Nats could have been expected to draw better than the A’s, Marlins, Pirates, Indians, Reds and Royals — which they have the answer would be “no.” Which leads us to conclude that the front office got a gift: the fans did all the heavy lifting. Everyone else in major league baseball has a better record and yet the Nats are 24th in attendance and not all that far behind the O’s, Blue Jays and Padres. That’s pretty strong stuff. The really weak team in that list — as a measure of fans against production — are the Marlins, who are contending for the wild card but playing in a mausoleum. You could pass gas in Land Shark stadium without anyone hearing it. No. No. You’re exactly right. And there’s no getting around it. This is a terrible team. But the fans keep coming. You know, it’s weird in D.C. If you show up in the first inning, before the first pitch (a matter of principle for real fans), there’s no one there. And you think: oh, oh. But then you look up in the second inning and people are streaming in. And by the third the stadium is half full — or almost so. And then they announce attendance, and it’s always between 20-24 thousand. Which isn’t bad at all. If this city had any kind of team at all we’d be in the top 10 in attendance. Which is a great thing, really, when you think about it. Because the slam against the city is that it is a football town. And it is: but the Nats, just in virtue of what they’ve drawn this year, are here to stay. They are going to draw 1.8 million for the worst team in baseball. Not bad.

Matt R(NLEC): You wrote in one of your blogs lately that you think the Nats will finish ahead of the Mets next year (I think). How do you come to this conclusion?

CFG: Because next year the Nats will have a better team. Well, okay. We’ll explain, and we’re not saying this to bait Mets fans or because we’re Nats fans. We actually believe that all of the evidence points to it. Most of all, we point to the differences in the front office. Our sense is that the Mets front office knows their team had a terrible year and that it has to be improved. But for them it’s: ‘well, we can do this. We’re not that far away: a little dit here and a little dat there, and bingo, we have a contending club.’ And then they think: ‘and if Reyes comes back and Beltran is healthy and Johan is Johan,’ … well you know — there they are. Atop the NL Least. Winner winner chicken dininer. The Nats have no such illusion. The front office knows this is disaster and they have been working all year to get it better and to clear things out for the off-season. It’s not a little dit here and a little dat there, it’s a reset, a makeover. They don’t need to start the makeover in the offseason, they started in July. Then too, the Nats have more at stake. If the Mets fail, well you’re in New York and there’s all that TV money and the payroll is above $100 million and sooner or later they’ll get it right and they have a history — and the Miracle Mets and Casey and Tom Terrific. There’s history there. Not so with the Nats. They need to get it right now. They’ve got $80 million and that’s it. And in DC, everything is at stake. Even the future of the franchise. At the end of the day, it doesn’t come down to Wright or Zimmerman, or Dunn or Murphy or any of that. The strength of a team starts in the front office. And right now, amazingly, the Nats front office is just better. Something happened in New York. And it wasn’t on the field — and it wasn’t good. And it hasn’t been repaired. That’s not true for the Nats.

Matt S(PP): Rob Dibble is a blabbering idiot. Did you enjoy his color commentary and should he return to the booth next season?

CFG: Yeah, Rob Dibble is a blabbering idiot, but he’s our blabbering idiot. Thankfully, he’s married to a schoolteacher, so at least she’s in her element. That poor woman, we’ll bet he’s a handful. We look at it this way: if you think Dibble is bad, you oughta get a load of what we had before him. We once had Ron Darling in the booth and he was as soft as a pillow. He used to hang around media conventions looking for a job. He was desperate. It was pathetic too. So he ended up on Nats’ broadcasts for about a year. We remember he once said, as the Nats took the field: “Wow, those are sharp looking uniforms.” Sharp looking uniforms? The guy was total Brooks Brothers. If you go down there now in Manhattan and wait a while he’ll show up. Then we got Don Sutton. This guy spent his time in front of the mirror practicing his salute and telling us how great Austin Kearns was because he was just such a solid citizen. I mean, who cares? We would sign Stalin if he could hit the ball. And Sutton had this habit of talking, unintentional we’re sure, that signaled all the wrong things: like how he was giving us these really inside little gems that were big secrets. So now it’s Dibble, and he’s a child – but he can be fairly entertaining and when he actually talks about the game (which isn’t all that often) he can sometimes actually be right. Thing is, he’s often as wrong. He and his sidekick (Bob Carpenter, who really is very good) loved Ronnie Belliard, for instance – going on and on about what a good hitter this guy was. Ronnie was hitting about .183 at the time. And they play favorites. They don’t like Alberto Gonzalez (not the attorney general, the second baseman), who’s actually a good, young, up-side guy. But they’re down on him. Thing is, when he started to break out of his slump last week the damage was done. So they treated everything he did as a fluke. You know, we have to say something good about Dibble, just to kind of even it up. So here it is: back when the Nats were really suffering (back in April and May) he just let them have it. He was unrelenting. It was ruthless, ugly, articulate, and right on. So let’s give him that. He’s not a homer. There are long silences during some of these games, in the middle of a sixth inning collapse, and you can actually hear him breathing. And then he’ll say: “Long inning.” Great stuff, really. The really good news is the in-studio guy is Ray Knight, and he’s terrific. A great grasp of the game, a way of putting the viewer at ease, and he can be very outspoken. Everyone likes him: he cares about the team, the fans, the viewers. Just an all around nice guy who is always prepared.

The Washington Nationals walked into a buzzsaw on Tuesday, losing the first in a three game series against the Colorado Rockies, 4-3. The buzzsaw was Rockies’ starter Ubaldo Jimenez, who pitched eight strong innings for Colorado and appeared to gain strength with each Washington batter. The 25-year-old gave up seven hits in eight innings, raising his record to 11-9 and lowering his ERA to 3.41. Jimenez, signed as an amateur free agent by the Rockies in 2001, is one of the best bargains in baseball — he throws a wicked four seam fastball from 94-97 mph, offsetting it with an effective slider (at about 83-83 mph) and off-speed change-up that tails down and in to a righthanded batter. A product of the Dominican Republic, Jimenez signed a four year $10 million contract with the Rockies in 2008;  he mixed his pitches well against the Nats on Tuesday, throwing 108 pitches, 72 for strikes. Rockies’  closer Huston Street gave up a single run in the ninth, but ended the game after getting Ryan Zimmerman to fly out to left.

For a time on Tuesday, it appeared that the Nats might be able to continue the modest three game winning streak that they had started in Cincinnati. But in the eighth inning, lefthander Sean Burnett (Washington’s second relief pitcher of the night) gave up a home run to Colorado outfielder Carlos Gonzalez. Gonzalez laid into the first offering from Burnett, which bounced off the back wall of the Nats’ bullpen in right field. The usually effective Burnett took the loss. While the Nats rapped out ten hits against the Rockies, Jimenez was effective in shutting down the worst threats: he struck out a modest five, but walked only one. Nyjer Morgan, meanwhile, added to his growing reputation as a one man wrecking crew at the top of the order, going three for four and adding a stolen base. Morgan is now hitting .310. Alberto Gonzalez rapped out two hits of his own, both line drives, as he battles a hitting slump that has seen him loft fly ball after fly ball. It could be that Tuesday was a break-out night for the young infielder, who scorched the ball nearly every time at bat.

Jimenez might be one of the NL’s most underrated hurlers — a judgment belied by his near .500 record in each of his last three seasons. He is capable of throwing his fastball up in the zone at 97 mph. Jimenez is a veteran of the legendary Tigres del Licey Santo Domingo team that has been a MLB nursery for great Latin players who have been recruited by U.S. teams. Established in 1907, Licey has won 20 Domincan titles and been managed by some of the best baseball minds in the world (and in America), including Dodger great Tommy Lasorda, former MLB manager Buck Rogers and 1950s Milwaukee Braves all star Del Crandell. Manny Acta managed the team in 2003-2004.

Down On Half Street: There was near unanimous acclaim for the successful signing of Nats draft pick Stephen Strasburg among Nats players. “To get better, you have to sign your top picks. It’s nice to get it done. Hopefully, he will be all everyone thinks that he is,” Nats all star Ryan Zimmerman said. . . . The Nats plan to introduce Strasburg to their fans and the press at Nationals Park on Friday . . . Baseball Boston Red Sox Tonight Sunday night game will feature the Sawx against the Evil Empire in a match-up of peaking and fading teams. We are counting the days . . . no really, we are . . . but we’ll only watch if Baseball Tonight promises that analyst Steve Phillips will be the on air guy . . .

Giants’ ace Tim Lincecum was in line to take the loss Tuesday against the Reds in Cincinnati, but late-inning heroics by recently acquired former Indians bopper Ryan Garko (who drove in four runs), saved the day. The Giants beat the Reds with two runs in the 10th inning. The Reds, after dropping the last three to the Nats, are sinking like a stone . . .  The Florida Marlins are on fire. The Phish have now gone fourteen straight games with at least ten hits. The Marlins schooled the Astros on Tuesday, 6-2. The ‘Stros look done — they traded future hall of famer Ivan Rodriguez to the Texas Rangers on Tuesday for a minor leaguer and a player to be named . . .

Rockies beat reporter Thomas Harding notes that Troy Tulowitzki is hitting .324 in the clean-up spot. This is no secret: as “Tulo” goes, so go the Rockies. In Tulo’s rookie year, in 2007, they made their extraordinary run to the series. Last year, with Tulo injured, they looked like the pre-Tulowitzki Rockies of 2006, when they were fourth in the NL West at 76-86. The adage holds for in-season stats as well: earlier this year Tulowitzki couldn’t hit water falling out of a boat and the Rockies looked like a last place team. Now, no one can get him out, and the Rockies are leading the Wild Card race in the National League . . . in addition to Jimenez, the Rockies have front-line starter Aaron Cook. The Giants have the best post-season one-two punch in the NL with Lincecum and Matt Cain, but Cook-Jimenez has to be a close second. Actually, Cook-Jimenez might not be Colorado’s one-two punch. In the post-season the Rockies would almost certainly pitch Aaron Cook and Jason Marquis. If Jeff Francis returns from the DL for the 2010 season, the Rockies could have the best five-man rotation in baseball: Cook, Marquis, Jimenez, Francis and Jason Hammels . . . I swear, they would eat the NL West . . .

The details of the Strasburg signing are now becoming known. The San Diego State righthander has signed a four year contract for a total $15.1 million guaranteed, with a $7.5 million bonus and $7.6 million in salary. The contract includes a number of unreported incentives. There are unconfirmed reports that the Nationals had weighed in with an offer somewhere in the range of $12.5 million, before upping the total in the waning hours of Monday, just before the trading deadline. This would contradict reports that the Nats had put an offer of between fourteen and sixteen million dollars to Strasburg agent Scott Boras this past weekend. Team officials met with Strasburg several weeks ago and were impressed with him. The Nationals front office is touting the deal — it is the lead story on both the MLB and the Washington Nationals’ team website. With the signing the Nats have completed their most successful draft: signing 13 of their first fifteen picks.

Speaking by telephone to Washington, D.C. sports radio 106.7, a Baseball America reporter said that he had talked to Strasburg, “who seemed out of breath but clearly pleased” that the signing had been completed. The reporter said that Strasburg told him that agreement with the Nationals was reached at 11:58 pm on Monday, just two minutes before the signing deadline. Nationals Journal reports: “For weeks, the pitcher and the organization had been locked into the highest-stakes contract negotiations in amateur history, and the 11th-hour deal left both sides on edge as the midnight deadline approached. Deal done, Strasburg will begin his professional career, and the Nationals will enter an era very much tied to the career of their newest, richest player.”

Despite the recent Nationals team success — a record of 21-20 since July 4 — the signing of Strasburg was seen by many baseball commentators as a litmus test for the struggling franchise, particularly after the Nats failed to sign last year’s top draft pick, pitcher Aaron Crow. As late as Saturday, Nats President Stan Kasten was expressing doubts that the deal would get done. ”With 48 hours to go, I simply have no idea whether we’re going to be able to reach a deal,” Kasten said in an interview with the Associated Press. The signing of Strasburg has given the franchise and its owners reason to celebrate: the team has made a huge, but not bank-busting commitment to the team’s future. There was no question the pressure was on the Nats: NBC Washington was breathless in its use of adjectives: “By midnight tonight, Nats fans will know whether the team they follow will have squandered away a second consecutive first-round draft pick.” Squandered? Well, maybe. But maybe not. The question for the Lerners is whether the calculation they made will be worth it: should Strasburg not pan out or get injured, the Nats ownership may feel that the only thing squandered was the money they spent for no return. 

Strasburg may well be a once-in-a-generation talent — a pitcher who can immediately jump from college ball to “the show” (a Ryan Zimmerman of pitchers) — or he could be like those other pitchers drafted with the first overall picks who made their way to the big leagues in their first year: David Clyde (drafted in 1973) and Ben MacDonald, drafted in 1989. We won’t know until we see him pitch for the first time at Nationals Park, and we won’t know even then. But this we do know: owners that want their teams to compete in the majors pony up. The Lerners had to show that they knew this and were willing to spend the money to play with the big boys in New York, Boston, Philly, L.A. and Chicago. Nats fans should be overjoyed. After months of saying they were committed to putting a better team on the field, and spending the money to do it — the Lerners showed they meant it.  

Mark Lerner Congratulates Stan Kasten on Strasburg Pick

The Nats got their man with the first pick in the MLB Draft last night — but can they sign him? It is a “possible landmark case,” writes The Washington Post’s Dave Sheinin, “bringing together baseball’s most notorious agent, a pitcher who has been called the best prospect in history and the worst franchise in the game—all within a draft system that has been criticized as unmanageable and unfair.” The case is a “landmark” because Strasburg agent Scott Boras believes the San Diego State phenom should command the same amount of money as Daisuke Matsuzaka, who signed a $52 million deal with the Red Sox two years ago.

The Nats have until August 17 to sign Strasburg and Nats officials are making positive noises that a deal can get done. Former GM Jim Bowden recently told an XM radio interviewer that Strasburg would be signed at the last minute and that he would sign for somewhere around $15 million. Bowden may be right, but the money for Strasburg may go much higher — because Boras might be calculating that he has the Nats where he wants them. They need to sign Strasburg after failing to sign Aaron Crow last year, and the team’s poor play this season has put pressure on the Lerners to show that they are willing to spend money to build a contender.

Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig was all smiles during the draft last night, but he’s watching the negotiations closely. Major League Baseball does not have a salary cap like other professional sports, but Selig has been trying to hold down signing bonuses, confidentially assigning each team a suggested bonus and salary level for a team’s “slot.” Selig’s suggestions are just that and many teams ignore them. Even so, Selig’s strategy is transparent: he wants to establish major league baseball’s position on compensation for first year players prior to the opening of negotiations on the collective bargaining agreement in 2011. Selig has toughened baseball’s position on the issue; the Commissioner has reportedly recommended that teams cut their cap by ten percent because of the economy. If the Nats sign Strasburg for close to what Boras wants it would drive up signing bonuses and salaries for future draft picks, which could put Selig and baseball in a tough spot in 2011. “Privately, baseball has already said the draft is a major priority in the next collective bargaining. Signing bonuses have gotten out of hand,” an MLB executive told the Toronto Star.

That may be true, but MLB executives who’s job it is to watch their team’s pocketbooks had to be pleased that the bottom fell out on Aaron Crow, who the Nats picked at #9 last year. But the Nats could not sign Crow and the former Mizzou righthander has been pitching for the Independent League Fort Worth Cats. Crow fell to the Kansas City Royals at #12 this year — and will  command a lot less money than he would have gotten from the Nats in 2008. Drafting an unsigned player from a previous draft is a Royals habit — they did that with right-hander Luke Hochevar in ‘06, after he failed to sign with the Dodgers in 2005. It’s a clever strategy; it saves money and it dampens first year bonuses: while Strasburg has leverage on the Nats, the Royals have leverage on Crow. ”What’s he going to do, go back and pitch for Ft. Worth?” a commentator on MLB Network asked.

Less than 24 hours from now, the Washington Nationals will take Stephen Strasburg with the number one pick in the MLB draft. But dissenting voices are being heard. Nick Cafardo at The Boston Globe quoted one former baseball scouting director’s cautionary note: “If I were the Nationals I’d think long and hard about taking him,” this former scouting director said. ”I’ve seen the kid pitch and he’s the real deal, but he’s throwing against who he’s throwing against. This idea of having him go right to the majors could really set a poor example. It wouldn’t be a great situation for all of their other young pitchers the Nationals have up there now who have to do their time in the minors. The Nats have no reason to rush this kid to the big leagues other than public relations, exciting the fans and putting people in the seats. Those are all the wrong reasons for doing it.”

Yeah, that’s right. The Nats have no reason to do it other than PR, exciting the fans, and putting people in the seats. I know: let’s do it. Let’s do it now.

I don’t quite understand the reasoning here: the Nats haven’t made their young pitchers “do their time in the minors” because it’s some kind of rite-of-passage, but because they’re not ready for the majors. Who are we kidding? The Nats would pitch a nine-year-old if he was 6-4, threw 100 mph and had a killer hook. If Strasburg is ready now (as any number of scouts have said) what would be the possible reason for keeping him out of the Nats line-up? I can just hear the manager of the Syracuse Chiefs: “You know, Stevie-boy, you’re ready for the big time, but we’ve got to keep you down here because everyone has to pay their dues — you, Sandy Koufax, Logan Kensing, everyone.” 

Last week, Buck Showalter said that he wouldn’t take Strasburg, for the simple reason that he would cost too much money. Think what you could do with $50 million in Latin America or the Caribbean, Showalter said, and the kind of player development program you could establish. Tim Kurkjian added that the addition of Strasburg to the draft and the amount of money being discussed meant that the baseball draft would be changed forever. What did he mean? One of the ideas being batted around (so to speak) was the creation of a “medical combine” where teams could pool their resources to determine the physical quality of draft picks. The idea surfaced in the pages of the Cleveland Plain-Dealer, where Brad Grant, the Indians’ director of amateur scouting, noted that MLB is “the only sport right now that doesn’t have one.” He added: ”It’s something that we feel we need. Especially, because right now the College World Series is going on. All these players have played; there’s been recent injuries that you don’t have time to assess.”  

Keith Law over at ESPN weighed in on Strasburg, saying that he believes the Nats will make him an immediate offer, sign him close to the signing deadline and then bring him up from the minors to pitch with the big club in September, perhaps as a reliever. Law says Strasburg will cost the Nats anywhere from 18 to 25 million dollars. The number two pick, Law speculates, will be Dustin Ackley, a centerfielder at UNC and the best hitter and position player in the draft. Ackley will go to Seattle. But word from the Mariners is that, while Ackley is “major league ready” they will keep him in the minors because they don’t want to hurt the feelings of their other great hitters, including Ronny Cedeno (.154). What about Icharo? Did he spend any time in the minors? “We’d rather follow the advice of that moron quoted in the Boston Globe,” a Seattle official told CFG.

For their second pick (number 10 overall), the Nats apparently have their eye on Drew Storen, who worked out for the team two weeks ago, and is one of the draft’s best relievers. While MLB’s mock draft has him going to Seattle lower in the first round (at 27), the Nats liked what they saw. Storen is a 6-2, 185 pound closer with a “devastating slider” and a low-90s fastball. What attracts the Nats is that Storen throws strikes and isn’t afraid to throw his off-speed pitch on high-ball counts. The Baseball Analysts sing Storen’s praises and quote him as saying that he believes the strikeout-to-walk stat is the best measure of his success. “I attack guys a lot,” Storen says. “I throw a hard fastball and two different types of breaking balls. One is what I call a power slurve. It doesn’t have a 12-6 break. It’s more a 2-7:30 break if you’re looking at a clock. It’s 81-83. Then I throw a true slider that’s 87-89. I throw a change, but not in a relief role. I throw a lot of strikes . . . My fastball is in the zone even when I get hit. That’s what happens when you throw strikes. I’m not one of those guys who’s going to be effectively wild. I don’t walk guys. I leave the ball up in the zone sometimes and pay for it. But I always try to jump ahead of guys and make them bite on a ball out of the zone when I get ahead.”

If the Nats take Storen, it would come as a surprise: most mock drafts have the Nats taking Kennesaw State starter Chad Jenkins with the tenth pick. Still, it would make sense, particularly with the way that the Nats have been burned by their bullpen this year. But Jenkins is not Strasburg — he’s likely to spend a couple of years in the minors.

The Natmosphere: kudos to Federal Baseball for their discovery of the Twitter dust-up between MASN commentator Rob Dibble and ESPN senior writer Rob Neyer. The two have been going at it over “Dribs” complaint over a called third strike on Adam Dunn during Randy Johnson’s 300th. Neyer takes on Dibble’s complaint about the call, but for the wrong reason. Which he readily admits: “Really, I just wanted an excuse to write about Rob Dibble. For years, I was less than a fan of his work at various networks. So you can imagine my shock, when I realized that I sort of like him in his current role with the Nationals. Yes, he’s still a blowhard who believes that if you didn’t play the game, you don’t know anything about it. But he’s got a good voice, he’s quite a bit smarter than you probably think, and he’s not been pulling his punches while the Nationals have become the biggest joke in the game” . . .

You know, I hate that kind of crap. If the Nats are “the biggest joke in the game,” it’s only because the commissioner’s office made them that way — by forcing them to sell-off or trade their best players. But I’ll just bet Rob Neyer wouldn’t call Bud Selig “the biggest joke in the game.” What do you think? Do you think Neyer has the spheres to do it? Or do you think he hopes to climb whatever ladder he thinks counts by greasing up to the powerful and well-known. Here’s a clue about Neyer: he’s a name-dropper, a baseball Zelig – an insecure man who will do anything to fit in. His ESPN bio says that he went to school and “fell in love almost immediately” (This is why I live: to know that Rob Neyer is in love) and that “he began his career with the legendary baseball author . . . Bill James.” Pull that bucket over here: time for the five minute vomit. The bio (it’s obviously written by this self-referencing little twit) then notes, proudly: “He attended the University of Kansas the same four years as Danny Manning.”

No. Really? Danny Manning. The Danny Manning? Oh wow.

John Lannan’s four hit nine-inning complete game provided a needed lift to the limping Nationals — and their fans. And it heightened expectations that the team is (in Tim Kurkjian’s phrase) “just a player or two away” from being a force in the NL East. “Baseball Tonight’s” late-night crew even opined that the Nats might catch the Marlins: “Don’t put it past ‘em.” That seems more than unlikely: the team would settle for a lot less, including a few more outings like Lannan’s. The three-year semi-veteran never pitched as well as he did last night against the Mets: his final line was nine innings, four hits, one run and one error with two strikeouts. Lannan was helped by a team-record five double plays, including an oddity in the fourth inning that was scored as a fielder’s choice double play and included a called out when the hitter passed the runner on first.

With talk of Tuesday’s baseball draft heating up, it’s of interest to note that Lannan was an 11th round pick of the Nats in the 2005 draft – now considered one of the best in baseball history. In 2005, the Nats drafted Ryan Zimmerman with the fourth overall pick, behind Justin Upton (the Diamondbacks), Alex Gordon (the Royals) and Jeff Clement (the Mariners), but ahead of Ryan Braun, who went to the Brewers. Of those five, only Clement hasn’t panned out, at least not yet. Upton, Zimmerman and Gordon are among the best young players in the game, though Gordon has been hit by injuries. The rest of the first round was as good, and included Troy Tulowitzki, Mike Pelfrey, Cameron Maybin, Andrew McCutchen (last week the Pirates traded Nat McLouth to, in part, make room for him in centerfield), Jay Bruce, Lance Broadway, Chris Volstad, Jacoby Ellsbury and Colby Rasmus. That’s a stunning amount of talent: no other draft has yielded as many front-line players.

Lannan was an afterthought: the Nats were high on left-hander Scott Barnes, righty Marco Estrada and Texas lefty Robert Leonhardt. None of the three have been able to make it to the majors (Estrada has had a cup of coffee and a donut in DC), though Barnes still has the most raw potential. But he’s not a Nat. Barnes decided to play college ball (at St. Johns) and was drafted by the Giants in the eighth round of the 2008 draft. He is considered a top prospect in their organization and is currently 5-3 at San Jose. Still, he’s no John Lannan. That the Nats would be able to transform an 11th round pick into a steady lefty starter is a plus for the organization. And he’s not the only pitcher with real value picked by the Nats in 2005: in the twelfth round, with the 354th pick, the Nats selected University of Dayton righthander Craig Stammen. He’ll throw today, against Livan Hernandez.

There is little remaining doubt: that the Nats will take Stephen Strasburg with their number one pick in the amateur draft, but then what? There was early speculation that Washington would take another shot at drafting (and, more importantly) signing Aaron Crow, but it seems likely the righthander will go either third or fourth in the draft, ending up in San Diego or Pittsburgh. When Jonathan Mayo at MLB.com rubbed his crystal ball, he projected Crow as the fourth overall pick, going to the Bucs. I wonder: Crow is a little expensive for the Bucs, though he’s as close to a sure-thing as you can get if you’re name’s not Strasburg. It’s no secret, the Pirates are looking for some quick infield help and are traditionally worried about money — and they’re high on USC shortstop Grant Green. But . . .  but if Crow goes to the Friars and if the Bucs want the best pitcher in the draft regardless of money, then expect the Ahoys to pluck Zach Wheeler (there’s a good video of Wheeler on the link) away from the Birds, who reportedly love him.

Mayo has Washington picking Chad Jenkins, a Kennesaw State righthander at number 10. It’s all speculation of course, but there isn’t really any doubt what the Nats would really like: after Strasburg they’d like to draft Ryan Zimmerman — that is to say, they would love to find a high-impact college player that can help them at shortstop, second, or centerfield. And who can come to D.C. right away, or as close to right away as they can get. RZ did that at third, spending an eye-blink in the minors before reporting to the big club; he has people in the seats at both RFK and Nationals Park and become the face of the franchise. Outside of Bobby Borchering (at 3B) there’s only one guy close to that in the entire draft, and it’s Grant Green.

Green is 6-3, 180 (smaller than Zim) but he’s fast, a crackerjack fielder and hits for power. The pick would make sense: the Nats have focused on pitching (a Stan Kasten obsession, and justifiably so), but you’d have to think that with Strasburg, Lannen, Zimmermann, Stemmen, Martis, Clippard, Detwiler and Mock they might be ready to think about building a team that includes some strength up the middle. They could keep Guzman at shortstop another year and give Green a good look at Harrisburg or Syracuse, just to see what they have.

There are only two problems with this scenario: Green is a Scott Boras client (which means the Nats are going to have to put out some money — in addition to the premium bucks they will spend on Strasburg) and someone else might get him first. I wouldn’t be surprised.