Fouled-Off Bunts: Vidro For Sale Edition
Tom Boswell says that trading Jose Vidro might be the best option:
Leaving aside the questionable nature of the last sentence, this contradicts what Dave Sheinin reports:
Coincidently, or not-so coincidently, Jose Vidro pulled out of the World Baseball Classic. Jim Bowden was already trying to get Vidro and Luis Ayala removed because of injury concerns (knee and elbow respectively). It's obvious that the team wanted him around, and I wonder if they threw seeds of doubt in his mind about his status with respect to playing second and Soriano's presence. Sheinin reports that Vidro was "stern-faced" after a meeting discussing the Soriano clusterfark. How much of it was his decision?
Regardless, Soriano is off for most of the spring to play second for the Dominican team. As Boswell points out, this just delays the decision a month, which, he says might not be a bad thing. If there are still questions about Vidro's knee -- which there certainly are -- then this gives the Nats a month to evaluate it. If he's hurt still, Soriano could step into second. If he's healthy, Boswell says they could pursue a trade. The Mets were always interested.
I've argued many times before for a Vidro trade. It's not that I don't like the guy or think he's any good. It's just that after this season, he still has two years and $16 million on his contract. Do you think that he's going to be worth $8 million in 2008?
It's certainly interesting, and Boswell's article raises some interesting points for debate.
MLB.com reports that the Nats initial meeting with Soriano was a dud:
Nationals Journal has video of today's non-newsy press conference. If you do watch it, take a look at the interaction between Frank and Soriano. It's clear that Frank's working hard to make it work.
MLB.com has a nice look at left-handed pitcher, Mike Hinckley. Hinckley had an outside chance of making the roster out of spring training last year. This year, he has zero chance, and has probably been passed by Bill Bray on the lefty-depth chart. (Stats)
Proving the complete stupidity of most international drug testing programs, Chad Cordero, an asthmatic, is prevented from using his inhaler. Not only can he not use it during the competition, he hasn't been able to use it for the last two months. Ridiculous.
Frank threw out (hopefully literally) the possibility of Cristian Guzman at leadoff. I'm quite sure he didn't mean it literally. (At least my sanity is hoping!) Regardless, Sheinin breaks out the stats, and shows how stupid an idea that would be.
We (Nats bloggers) praise Barry Svrluga a lot, and it'd probably heresy to say it, but I think I might actually prefer Sheinin. He's much more stat-friendly, and still a very good writer. (I'll still take Barry's chat sessions, though!)
Actually, the Nats know that one of four scenarios will eventually play out. None is terrible. Most are good. Soriano can agree to play left field so Vidro can play second. This is the Nats' fantasy. Believe it when you see it. Or Soriano can play second and Vidro, if he demonstrates over the next four-to-eight weeks that his knee is healthy, can be traded. This is a high-probability outcome. Or Vidro, if healthy, can play second and Soriano can be traded. This is less likely. Soriano, with 35-homer, 30-steal skills, is a better fit for the Nationals' desperate offensive needs than the more subtle Vidro.
Leaving aside the questionable nature of the last sentence, this contradicts what Dave Sheinin reports:
Team officials ruled out moving Vidro, who is considered a far better defensive player than Soriano, to another position.
The Nationals ultimately could trade Soriano, who reaches free agency after this season, although thus far the team has found his trade market less robust than it had hoped. Vidro, too, could be traded if he proves his knee is healthy. Bowden, however, said he hopes to avoid solving the problem through a trade.
"I'd like to keep them both," he said, "because if we have them both we're a much better team."
Coincidently, or not-so coincidently, Jose Vidro pulled out of the World Baseball Classic. Jim Bowden was already trying to get Vidro and Luis Ayala removed because of injury concerns (knee and elbow respectively). It's obvious that the team wanted him around, and I wonder if they threw seeds of doubt in his mind about his status with respect to playing second and Soriano's presence. Sheinin reports that Vidro was "stern-faced" after a meeting discussing the Soriano clusterfark. How much of it was his decision?
Regardless, Soriano is off for most of the spring to play second for the Dominican team. As Boswell points out, this just delays the decision a month, which, he says might not be a bad thing. If there are still questions about Vidro's knee -- which there certainly are -- then this gives the Nats a month to evaluate it. If he's hurt still, Soriano could step into second. If he's healthy, Boswell says they could pursue a trade. The Mets were always interested.
I've argued many times before for a Vidro trade. It's not that I don't like the guy or think he's any good. It's just that after this season, he still has two years and $16 million on his contract. Do you think that he's going to be worth $8 million in 2008?
It's certainly interesting, and Boswell's article raises some interesting points for debate.
According to a source familiar with the meeting, the think tank -- which included Bowden, Robinson, and assistant general managers Bob Boone and Tony Siegle -- spent that time trying to convince Soriano to make the switch. They mentioned that great players like Chipper Jones and Alex Rodriguez made position switches for the good of their teams. Bowden did most of the talking. After the team made its pitch, Soriano remained adamant that he was not going to play the outfield.
We (Nats bloggers) praise Barry Svrluga a lot, and it'd probably heresy to say it, but I think I might actually prefer Sheinin. He's much more stat-friendly, and still a very good writer. (I'll still take Barry's chat sessions, though!)
6 Comments:
I agree...Sheinin is solid and I'd like to see him featured more prominently in the Post. It just goes to show how non-seriously the Post takes baseball in general, and the Nationals in particular that they sent the team's beat writer to goddamn Italy to cover the Snooze-lympics. Can you imagine them sending Redskin reporters off like that during NFL camp?
Also, I hope we will soon no longer be forced to suffer the immature and uninformative coverage supplied by Jose Arangure, Jr. That guy is an ass.
By Brandon, at 2/24/2006 12:45 AM
Svrluga did crunch Castilla's Colorado numbers and place them in context last spring. That might not sound like much, but it's more than the writers at the Times did.
By Anonymous, at 2/24/2006 12:48 AM
You're certainly right on the Vinny thing. I think that that day was when I started gravitating towards Svrluga ,in terms of analysis, over what the Times was getting. (Though, at least when Eric Fisher was there, the Times stadium/business stories kicked the crap out of the Post's)
Brandon,
I'm not sure it's fair to say that the Post doesn't take baseball seriously. Svrluga is one of their up-and-comers, and he has experience covering a ton of different sports. He's only going to miss the first week or so of camp -- all the boring time before the games are actually played. It's nothing that critical.
But to the other point, they have a bunch of writers, including Les Carpenter, whose profiles and extended pieces were quite interesting, but very infrequent. Even Howard Bryant, whom they brought in to cover the Skins, has extensive baseball experience (I'm in the middle of his book, Juicing The Game), and has written a piece or two on it.
The Nationals/Orioles in the area have led the Post to more coverage of basebll.
Other than not having a Sunday notes column, which, I think was lacking bc they didn't have the sources/league contacts, is a blemish on the Post's coverage
By Chris Needham, at 2/24/2006 8:29 AM
Sheinin's been red hot in ST so far. I'll still take Svrluga, but my opinion of Sheinin is increasing. I'm sure he totally cares, too.
By Ryan, at 2/24/2006 9:32 AM
Wasn't Sheinin the reporter that got Ripken to say he was retiring?
By WFY, at 2/24/2006 9:43 AM
I'm pretty sure you're right.
I remember that the Baltimore media was upset because it wasn't one of them.
Although I'm thinking it might've been someone else, too. I'll see what I can dig up.
By Chris Needham, at 2/24/2006 9:51 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home