The Philadelphia Phillies-San Francisco Giants NLCS is now a nasty confrontation — as an angry and glaring Roy Halladay and an equally irritated Pat “the Bat” Burrell exchanged looks and words in the first inning of Game Five. Halladay stared in at umpire Jeff Nelson and Burrell noticed: “What are you looking at?” he yelled. The Halladay-Burrell mini-confrontation is symbolic of how these two teams feel about each other, as was apparent even in Game One, when Halladay tossed Cody Ross’s broken bat to the ground instead of handing it to him. Such simple discourtesies are noticed in baseball: the NLCS isn’t your back yard. For Halladay, the winner of the tilt’s fifth game in San Francisco on Thursday (and for Burrell as well) such exchanges are all about “the competition,” but we might expect more of the same at Citizens Bank Park on Saturday: “the competition” is becoming heated, the games more intense, the reward a spot in the World Series against the AL champ.

“This sounds like a non-story,” one Phillies fan reflected. “Burrell has struck out so many times in his career that he should know the drill by now — go sit down and shut up.” But in the pages of the Philadelphia Daily News (that model of journalistic excellence), Phillies’ fans are gearing up to give Burrell a typical Philadelphia welcome when the series resumes on Saturday. “In explicit, vulgar terms, with a reference to Halladay’s possible Oedipal issues, Burrell rhetorically asked Halladay what he was looking at.” Halladay was less confrontational: “You understand,” he said, “there’s a lot of emotions obviously at this point in this season. He’s a competitior and these things happen.” Well, okay. But “these things” are happening with some regularity now, as Tim Lincecum channeled Burrell in the 7th, staring down Jimmy Rollins at third as he stalked from the mound: “You stay there,” he yelled. “You stay there.” Lincecum’s words weren’t enough to keep Philadelphia from a must-win in the fifth game — and now the series returns to Philadelphia, where the Giants will send Jonathan Sanchez to the mound against Roy Oswalt. Phillies’ fans will be ready.

The arm of Roy Oswalt and the bat of Jimmy Rollins gave the Philadelphia Phillies a 6-1 win at Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia, knotting the NLCS at one game apiece. Oswalt’s performance was just what Philadelphia needed, after the Giants defeated the Phillies in the NLCS opener on Saturday. The former Houston righty dominated the Giants’ line-up, giving up only three hits in eight innings while striking out nine. The game also marked a sweet retribution, of sorts, for struggling Phillies’ shortstop Jimmy Rollins, whose 7th inning double off the right field wall plated three and gave Rollins four RBIs for the night. Rollins — who has been fighting injuries — had trouble throughout the 2010 campaign, hitting just .243 while missing over 70 regular season games. The series now heads to San Francisco, where Philadelphia and San Francisco’s third set of starters (Matt Cain and Cole Hamels) will face off on Tuesday.

Those Are The Details, Now For The Headlines: We belatedly note that the Internet Baseball Writers Association (Washington, D.C. Chapter) has published their 2010 Player Acheivement Awards. As voters in this polling, CFG notes with pride that Ryan Zimmerman was named the winner of the Goose Goselin Award for Most Valuable Player, Livan Hernandez won the Walter Johnson Starting Pitcher of the Year Award and Adam Dunn won the Frank Howard Slugger of the Year Award. Arguably, Adam Dunn could have easily outpolled Ryan Zimmerman for the Goselin Award. He was our choice . . . Our thanks for the Association for its continued good work and to Dave Nichols for organizing this . . .there’s a lot of chatter in the “Natsmosphere” about whether the Nats might be contenders in the Cliff Lee sweepstakes. Lee would give the Nationals something they’ve never had: a front line strikeout pitcher who could give the team a once-every-four-days outing that would make the team an automatic .500 contender in the soft N.L. East. But is it possible . . . ?

Our bet here is that Mike Rizzo will use a gaggle of prospects to land a middle-of-the-pack starter, eschewing an expensive arm like Lee. Still, such a trade could yield a surprise — the landing of a former front line pitcher (Gil Meche, for instance — though he’s still owed $11 million) who needs a change of scene. There are no easy pickins: Zack Greinke is said to be available, but you can bet he’ll be expensive and, like Meche, he’s owed a sack of money ($27 million over the next two years). Or the Nats could fish for someone who’s worn out their home welcome, but could be straightened out. Someone like A.J. Burnett, who’s at the end of the line in New York, but still has the stuff necessary to be a front-of-the-rotation guy. Working through the possibilities shows you just how limited Rizzo’s options actually are. Take Burnett. He’s aging, very expensive and can block any proposed trade. And if the Nats came up in any discussions we assume he would . . .

We’re still partial to Jon Garland. Garland wouldn’t cost an all-in; the problem is that he wants to stay on the left coast and he’s been a good addition in San Diego. So if what’s available in terms of pitching is just too expensive and you have a bit of money, what would you do? Our guess is that if you were to play the odds, you might want to bet that Mike Rizzo would find the possibility of signing someone like Carl Crawford, a free agent sparkplug who would fit in nicely in D.C., very tempting. Signing Crawford would make a player like Josh Willingham available on the market, in exchange for a solid arm or top prospect. Then too, Crawford is a star: aggressive, fast and dedicated, a player who could be a centerpiece in the outfield. Given the dirth of attractive free agent starting pitchers, bidding for Crawford makes sense; there’s little doubt that Crawford would put people in the seats.  Then too — and given that the Nationals probably will not sign Adam Dunn — the front office would have the money to land the soon-to-be former Ray, whose arrival would compensate for the loss of one of the team’s most popular players . . .Zimmerman and Crawford and Strasburg, oh my . . .

Nationals fans will be forgiven if they now view Pittsburgh as part of the Washington franchise feeder system — a kind of waiting room for Nats-to-be. With the signing of reliever Matt Capps on early Thursday morning, Nationals’ GM Mike Rizzo has added a third Ahoy to the rebuilding Nats: a trio that also includes fleet centerfielder Nyjer Morgan and lefty set-up whiz Sean Burnett. The new Nats relief corps is also expected to include aging former star Eddie “Everyday Eddie” Guardado, who once notched 45 saves with the always surprising Twinkies. While the Guardado signing is not final, it is expected soon. Capps, team officials say, is expected to compete for the job of closer with Bruney in Spring Training.

With the signing of Capps, Nats fans will go into the Christmas holidays knowing that (while everything else might collapse), the ballclub’s end-of-game options will include a set of potential closers that includes a young Yankee, a steady Bucco and (perhaps) an ageless wonder. Coupled with Burnett and Clippard, the Nats’ bullpen seems stronger now than it has since the departure of sore-armed closer Chad Cordero, felled by a labrum tear back in 2007. The signing of Capps probably ends Mike Rizzo’s off-season efforts to shore-up the Nats bullpen (barring a bit of tweaking here and there), leaving the Anacostia Nine with several more holes to plug: the addition of a middle-of-the-infield glove (the Nats are still interested in signing second sacker Orlando Hudson), an add-on in the starting rotation (Jon Garland is still an option — albeit one that seems to be fading) and (as we hope) the signing of a versatile bat-and-glove man that could play second, left, short and (under a worst case scenario) third. The Nats could (could!) go into Spring Training with a rotation of Jason Marquis, Jon Garland, John Lannan and Craig Stammen (or maybe what’s-his-name) and an infield that includes Mark DeRosa or Orlando Hudson — and (will wonders never cease) two steady catchers. It’s certainly not out of the question that the signing of either Hudson or DeRosa would include a trade (and salary dump) of Cristian Guzman, who has been making noises about not wanting to switch to second.

Don’t Let It Go To Your Head: Remember all the yacking about how this year’s free agent class was weak with few marquee (ahem) players? Well, maybe. But don’t tell the Phillies — who have solidified their reputation as the Yankees of the National League. While Mike Rizzo has been busy deftly filling holes in the bullpen, starting rotation and behind the plate (and others have been sucking their thumbs about the eventual destination of Jason Bay and Matt Holliday), the Ashburns have been busy getting stronger — adding Placido Polanco as their new third baseman and engineering a blockbuster trade for Roy Halladay. While a gaggle of analysts say that the Mariners were “the big winners” in the Halladay sweepstakes (nailing down Cliff Lee), that’s not the way it looks from our perch outside a snowed-in Nats Park, where the spectre of a Halladay-Hamels-Happ-Blanton front four makes the Phillies (with a Polanco-Rollins-Utley-Howard infield) the class of the National League. And the Phuzzies aren’t done . . .

But The Mets Might Be: Whatever happened to the Mets front office? While the silence in New York has Mets fans upset, our friends over at TRDMB cite Newsday reporter David Lennon’s claim that Mets’ fans should learn to appreciate Omar Minaya’s patience in going after the likes of Bay and Holliday. After all, Omar says, the Mets are not as attractive a destination as Philadelphia and these things take time. “It’s not that they [free agents] don’t want to come here,” Omar says, it’s that the timing didn’t work out. As for Halladay and Lackey — well, the Mets were never really in the running on Halladay and Lackey – and Lackey “blindsided” the Mets when he signed with the Red Sox. That son-of-a-bitch, what was he thinking? Don’t worry, Omar says. All of this can be explained, Omar says. “Players like going to situations where they can win,” Omar says. Never fear, Omar says, the Mets have a plan. “I like our plan,” Omar says.

Yikes.

It’s not often you see a walk off grand slam in person — so it’s easy to get giddy. And that’s exactly what happened here in Washington. During Wednesday night’s post game radio gabfest (which followed the Nats’ dramatic grand slam walk off over the loathed Mets), callers predicted “big things” for the Anacostia Nine: ”With these young guys, we should be in the wild card hunt next year,” one said. Another chirped in: “We’re only a couple of pieces away.” That last little phrase bears reflection, especially since we’ve heard it alot lately. In fact, we’ve even heard from team officials. “We are tremendously excited. The next big step is right there to be taken,” Stan Kasten told Thomas Boswell in today’s Washington Post. “This is not a great year if you want a Sabathia or Mark Teizeira. But the players who are available are just what we need: a veteran starter in the rotation, two more arms in the bullpen and a middle infielder who helps our defense.”

Well, Stan oughta know. Right? But you have to wonder, honestly, if what he (or some of our giddy fans) think is really true. Are the Nats really only one or two players away from contending? Or even three or four?

Just as Justin “Walk Off” Maxwell was crossing home plate in Washington on Wednesday night, up the road in Philadelphia, the Phuzzies were putting ten runs on the board to capture their third consecutive N.L. East Division Championship. While the Phillies clinched (and fairly easily, at that), no one in Philadelphia thinks they’re a shoo-in to capture their second World Series. There’s good reason for the skepticism. The Phillies can’t find a dependable back-of-the-bullpen guy (Brad Lidge has blown eleven save opportunities), they strike out too much in key situations (Ryan Howard hits ‘em long, or not at all) and one of their most dependable starters, Jamie Moyer, is finished for the post-season. Of course, Nats’ fans can be forgiven for taking this amiss: the Phillies are in the playoffs, and for the long-suffering D.C. red-and-blues that ought to be enough. Philadelphia should just stop whining and play the game.

But here’s the deal: while hobbled and uncertain and filled with angst (and now not picked to take it all), the Phillies are a tough, smart, experienced and deep team. They’re the kind of team that regularly gets in the playoffs. What will it take for the Nats to do the same? What would it take for Rizzo’s Nine to become Ruben’s Nine?  The one piece of good news is that the Nats have a head start: we have hitters — and they compare well with the biggest boppers in the Phillies’ line-up. Or do they? The Nats have two guys (Zimmerman and Dunn) with over thirty home runs this year. The Phillies have four: Ryan Howard, Chase Utley, Jayson Werth and Raul Ibanez. Their shortstop, Jimmie Rollins, has had an off year: he’s hit only 21. So Phillies fans (awake at night; worried – tossing and turning) keep asking: what is it that we have to do to get Jimmy Rollins back on track? Here’s an idea: trade him to the Nats. We’ll take 21 homers from a shortstop, or fifteen. Hell, we’d take ten. And we wouldn’t call it a slump.

Then there’s the pitching. The Nats are only a couple of pitchers away from contending. That isn’t bad really. I mean, think of all we’ve developed so far. Why, there’s John Lannan and there’s . . . ah, John Lannan . . . and there’s . . . well, there’s Stephen Strasburg (maybe) and Jordan Zimmermann (when — and if – he gets healthy), and there’s Craig Stammen and J.D. Martin and Ross Detwiler. So it’s true: if all works out as planned, the Nats will have a steady starting staff. But let’s not kid ourselves: even if all goes as planned it won’t happen next year, and maybe not the year after. Right now, the Nats have John Lannan, who’s good enough to go 17-9 on a good ball club. But that’s it. John Lannan (I’m with ya John, I’m all for ya), is – - what — we — have. What do the Phillies have?

They have a pretty decent starting staff, despite the problems they’ve had with it this year: Cole Hamels and J.A. Happ and Joe Blanton are all top of the rotation guys and any Nats fan would love to have any of them. But Philadelphia (just for the record) wasn’t satisfied with just those guys: so in mid-season they signed up future hall of famer Pedro Martinez and traded for Cleveland ace Cliff Lee. And it’s a good thing they did, because their innings eating get-em-on-the-outside corner bioman (Jamie Moyer) went down with a lower abdominal strain. That’s alright: the Phillies starting staff is so deep they actually might not need J.A. Happ in the starting rotation for the playoffs. He’s not good enough. Can you imagine? He’s not good enough – and he could be the N.L Rookie of the year.

Then there’s the bullpen. The Phillies are worried about their bullpen and they should be. Brad Lidge is suffering, Ryan Madson doesn’t seem cut out for the closer’s job and the rest of them (the tough middle of the game guys) are good, certainly better than average — but you wouldn’t want them closing games. So the bullpen is a mess: but it’s better than Washington’s — and not by a little bit. Park and Romero and Walker and Meyers (Meyers!) and all of those guys who come in and pitch and pitch and pitch: there are teams in this league who would kill to have them, any of them. Including the Nats. 

So here’s the arithmetic, though admittedly it’s very unscientific. For the Nats to be the Phillies (that is, not to just contend, but to have a shot at winning the N.L. Least — perhaps the least competitive division in baseball), they (we!) need two more 30-plus home run hitters, a shortstop  in a slump (who only hits 20), three more starters (and maybe more, if one goes down — as happened to the Phuzzies) and a bullpen where there are two closers (or more) and two set-up men who can carry the team through the eighth inning, plus a lot of moving pieces — including a guy who can hit a home run in the playoffs to win a game and (oh yeah), a catcher who stays healthy. And the Nats need team defense and speed and (on top of everything else) they need to have a mix of veterans and youngsters.

But don’t get me wrong: I am all for getting the “couple of pieces” that will make the Nats better. I will be there, at Nationals Park, next year, re-upped, for twenty-plus games to see the Nats carry on. And I’ll be there whether they win or lose. But that’s because I’m a fan of the Washington Nationals: not the Washington Dreamers. We’re a couple of pieces away, alright – a couple of pieces away from maybe (maybe) being a .500 ball club. Maybe.