Spinning With Boz

OMG does the heavy lifting, taking apart Tom Boswell's latest efforts to spin all things Nats in the most positive light.

The basic crux of Boz' argument is that the Nats are in a good position now because with a low payroll, there's more room to add players -- one a year, he suggests -- to help build to something better. Fair enough I guess.

Read Boz' piece then Harper's analysis. Here's one of OMG's key points:

And do you think the other teams are simply going to stand pat? Are they going to mope like Eeyore, “Oh darn. We spent 90 million this year and didn’t win and now we can’t add anyone else. Guess we’ll just pack it in.” Teams are always adding to payroll, or working around ending existing contracts to figure out ways to get the guys they want. That’s the way it works in every sport. The Nats small payroll is an advantage, but not a large one.

A poster at Baseball Primer pretty much sums up my reaction:

Am I missing something here? The Nationals are about to get a new stadium, but within the same division, so are the Mets (and possibly the Marlins). The Nationals are in a sizeable market (which they share with the Orioles), but the Mets are in a bigger market, and the Braves, Phillies and Marlins all play in sizeable markets without any other MLB teams. The Mets, Phillies and Braves all control their own regional sports networks, while the one that carries the Nationals games (MASN) is controlled by Angelos. I fail to see an 800-pound gorilla in the making. If the Nationals becomes competitive, the franchise could transform itself into a force to be reckoned with, but so could every other team in the division (including their fellow have-not the Marlins, who unlike the Nationals, moved into the rebuilding phase with a solid farm system).

So where's the advantage?