Skip to content

Nats agree to deal with Jackson (updated)

Feb 2, 2012, 7:06 PM EDT

US Presswire photo
Edwin Jackson went 12-9 with a 3.79 ERA in 32 games last season.

Updated at 5:18 p.m.

The Nationals already had a five-man starting rotation. Actually, they had a seven-man rotation before adding Edwin Jackson to the puzzle today.

So why give Jackson a one-year, $10 million contract and create an even bigger pitching logjam?

"We saw an opportunity here to acquire a young, hard-throwing, power-pitching, innings-eating-type of starting pitcher, and we thought it was a good value at a good term," general manager Mike Rizzo said in announcing the deal. "You can never have enough good, quality starting pitching, and we felt it was a good enough value to make him a National."

Expected to command a much-larger deal when the offseason began — perhaps getting as many as five guaranteed years — Jackson instead saw his price come down, especially over the last two weeks when heRead more ยป

140 Comments (Feed for Comments)
  1. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:07 PM

    I see a trade in future…..

  2. Water23 - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:07 PM

    Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com, who first reported the news (Twitter links), says the deal between the Nationals and the Scott Boras client is pending a physical. It's a one-year agreement that's believed to be in the $8-12MM range.

  3. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:08 PM

    Nice grab on a 1 year deal. Lannan may be moving in a package. This could be a big couple of days for the 2012 Nats. dfh21

  4. MicheleS - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:11 PM

    How about Lannan/Dyskstra to Boston for Ellsbury. I can dream can't I?

  5. Will - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:12 PM

    If this happens, the Nats have a serious case for having one of the top 5 rotations in the game!It's about time that giving all this money to Boras clients pays off!I love this signing.

  6. josh f - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:13 PM

    WOW. Total surprise. Can we get a quality CF for Lannan?

  7. MicheleS - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:13 PM

    I would love to see Steve McCatty's Face right now. He must be hyperventilating with excitement (and trying to figure out how to get them to cut down on their walks!)

  8. Mark'd - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:13 PM

    HOLY S

  9. MicheleS - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:14 PM

    NatsJack… Does this qualify as "Didn't see this one coming?"

  10. blovy8 - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:14 PM

    Yeah, Lannan on his own at 5 mil wouldn't seem to get you much, unless it's part of a bigger deal. It's tough to see why Lannan on his own wouldn't have been traded before now if some team really wanted him – they could make the same case in arbitration the Nats did, and maybe have signed him to an extension.

  11. Constant Reader - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:15 PM

    I am so confused.Please help me make this make sense. Instead of six starters, we now have seven. Yes, I get that a Lannan trade may be imminent, but then we still have the Detwiler problem. And our leverage in seeking a trade of anyone is GONE with Jackson signed. I am so confused.

  12. Will - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:15 PM

    Seriously….StrasburgZimmermannGonzalezJacksonWang/Detwiler/LannanThat's really friggin strong. That leaves maybe the Phillies (Halladay, Lee, Hamels, Worley), Angels (Weaver, Haren, Wilson, Santana), the Rays (Price, Shields, Moore, Hellickson, Niemann, Davis), and maybe the Giants (Lincecum, Cain, Bumgarner, Vogelsong) as probably the only better rotations….Give the Nats 2 more years, and we could be the best!

  13. Water23 - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:16 PM

    Maybe the move is not Lannan a lefty but CMW. Granted, you will get a lot less but it makes a little more sense.Maybe LA or Seattle would be a good fit.

  14. Just sayin' - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:16 PM

    Josf f,No. But that doesn't mean Lannan won't be part of a package to get another quality bat (whether CF or not).

  15. NatsLady - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:16 PM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

  16. DHamm - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:17 PM

    Yeah baby! Our rotation is looking pretty good about right now! Nice job Rizzo!

  17. NatsLady - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:19 PM

    Nice– you get some good deals by waiting, Lidge and Jackson both on 1-year contracts. Same might be true with regard the bench that you all are so worried about. The FA market may be thin, but you can bet there are some teams out there that would throw a couple bench players into a trade.

  18. blovy8 - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:19 PM

    Maybe Cleveland for Carrera and a lesser SP with options?

  19. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:21 PM

    Awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  20. JaneB - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:21 PM

    Wow! I saw he was signed but it never occurred to me it was by US! I feel completely inadequate to understanding what this means, except it sure feels like they mean to go into the season with a rotation to seriously challenge the Phils. And I think we do better than Lee, Hamels and Worley. Can't wait to see Nats Talk Live, whenever the heck that happens. Obviously, the first question is WHAT THE HECK…?

  21. Big Cat - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:21 PM

    Hmmmmmmmmmmm….

  22. Dawn - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:22 PM

    Verrry Interrresting…..the only thing that I wonder about, why the rolling stone? Being a fan of the Tigers too, watched him, liked him, yet he wasn't there long. In this instance with a one year deal up front, doesn't matter of course.

  23. Nattydread - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:23 PM

    Wow. Lannan isn't having a good day. First beaten in the court of arbitration, then placed squarely on the trading block.

  24. Will - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:23 PM

    Constant Reader,Jackson is much better than Lannan or Wang have ever been. And he's at arguably his peak physical shape (age 28). He's signed from around $8-12mil. That's a bargain, considering he's been worth 3.6, 3.8 and 3.8 WAR in each of the last 3 years (more than any current Nats SP has ever posted in any one season).Lannan will become a FA next year, and will cost probably not much less than Jackson. Wang is still a huge question mark. Detwiler has never proved much of anything as a SP in the majors.This is a great move, that costs little money, with no risk and will put the Nats into pretty serious contention in 2012. Right now. Much less 2013.

  25. Unkyd - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:24 PM

    Does anybody want Wang? Are we going with 4 RHers, innthis division? My head is spinning…. I think NatJack's moment is about to be revealed to us….

  26. HHover - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:24 PM

    If they can deal another SP and plug the hole in CF/lead-off hitter, then I'm impressed. Otherwise, this just seems kinda meh–Jackson really isn't that much better a pitcher than Lannan. And if it's at the higher end of that $8-12M, it's not exactly a steal.

  27. sm13 - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:25 PM

    Our 4th and 5th starters must now be considered the best in baseball. Combine that with the best, youngest 1-2-3 and we are on our way to a long run of contending. Wilson better get some extra padding for his catchers mitt – these guys throw HARD!Go Nats! Go Rizzo!

  28. upperdeck4 - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:25 PM

    Jackson, like Gio, is an innings eater who goes deeper into games than Lannan. His K/BB ratio is over 2 while Lannan's is well under 2. These new starters should take some of the burden off the bullpen.

  29. jd - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:28 PM

    HHover,Jackson is 2 games a year better than Lannan; that's huge.

  30. Don - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:29 PM

    I'm curious why everyone thinks Lannan will be the one going. Whether you like him or not he is a known entity and he has been improving year over year.Detwiler on the other hand isn't known. Will we see the Detwiler we had in September or the one we had all the other times. After all, there is a reason he's out of options.I would think a Det trade is more likely than Lannan.

  31. jd - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:30 PM

    JaneB, You kind of forgot Doc Halladay. No I don't think our rotation is better than the Phills but much younger and if they lose Hammels next year then you really have something.

  32. NatsJack in Florida - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:30 PM

    This means two proposed starters on one and done guys unless an extension happens. Probably means the club is banking on Purke and/ot Solis for next season.And apparently, an outfit called Movinet has provided Venezuela their batting helmets.And MicheleS, well, I sure didn't.

  33. blovy8 - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:30 PM

    That's a good point, earlier in the off-season that Wang contract was held out as a good value deal. It seems more likely some team will look back at the couple of 18 win seasons and think they can get that level again for 4 million, and have the first chance to re-sign him if he is all the way back.

  34. Just wonderin - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:30 PM

    Just wonderin' if the real story isn't that they're shopping Lannan, Wang, or Detwiller to see which one generates the best offer in return? Cause they really don't have to dump Lannan's salary, right? Or do they?Captcha was "throw," which seems appropriate.

  35. Tcostant - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:31 PM

    The Nationals will not put Lannan in AAA at $5M. They will try to trade him, if no takers, they will bring him to spring training and let him try to win the 5th starter job or hope a another major league has an injury where they could trade him. If by the end of spring, neither happen; they will cut him and just pay the estimated $1.25M termination pay and be done with it. MLB teams don't do this offen, but it does happen, here is a example:http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=mlb&id=2813691

  36. HHover - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:32 PM

    jd – I posted on another thread why the WAR calculations are misleading in this case–it's based on FIP, which Lannan consistently outperforms (and Jackson consistently underperforms).Upperdeck4 – Jackson does average about 2/3 IP more per start than Lannan–that's one clear advantage. Is it worth $5M+? I'm not sure.

  37. Mark Zuckerman - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:32 PM

    Hey everyone, please note that we'll now be doing our live Beltway Baseball show at 3 p.m. And obviously we'll be leading off with the Jackson news. So be sure to load up the other thread for the show at the top of the hour to watch.

  38. Rabbit - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:32 PM

    Get Rid of Lannan!!!!!

  39. blovy8 - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:33 PM

    In theory, Jackson is two games better, but in actual performance, he's not.

  40. Feel Wood - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:33 PM

    With strikeout/walkmeisters Gonzalez and Jackson in the rotation and Rodriguez in the bullpen, gonna be some long games at Nationals Park this summer. All I can say is they better win a lot of them.

  41. natsfan1a - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:39 PM

    Didn't see that one coming. Will be interesting to see what else develops.

  42. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:40 PM

    Remeber gang, Lannan has a option left. I would send his hinepots to TripleA, and call him up when Stras reaches his innings limit.Lipty,

  43. Constant Reader - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:42 PM

    I hear you Will, except Lannan is under control through 2013. We are now going to have two holes in the rotation going into next off season with CMW and Jackson becoming FAs. Lannan and Detwiler would still be under control. I see you keeping Detwiler as a middle reliever while he remains our 'break glass' option in case we have a problem with the starting five. I am so conditioned to see us as making moves for 2013 and beyond, I looked right over the part where this is solely a 2012 move. This is a move that says we plan on competing after Labor Day. Maybe we get something worthwhile for Lannan since he is controllable for two years.

  44. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:44 PM

    Jackson only walked 2.7BB/9inn last year and is entering his prime seasons now.I think you package Bernadina/Lannan and $2million and send it to Detroit for Andy Dirks and a PTBNL. Dirks could play CF, he isn't a hot hot prospect so this might actually get it done. He hits LH and was worth 1.4 WAR in about half a season last year. That could be a valuable guy to have around.I say PTBNL because I know very little about the Tigers.Or possibly flip Lannan to the Sox and eat half the contract and take Ryan Sweeney off their hands. Only hitch there is the Sox are short handed on OFers to start the year. Again you could throw in Bernadina.

  45. Unkyd - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:46 PM

    Tcostant said…The Nationals will not put Lannan in AAA at $5M. They will try to trade him, if no takers, they will bring him to spring training and let him try to win the 5th starter job or hope a another major league has an injury where they could trade him. If by the end of spring, neither happen; they will cut him and just pay the estimated $1.25M termination pay and be done with it. MLB teams don't do this offen, but it does happen, here is a example:—————————I cannot get my head around this… Too many agree with this sentiment, for ne to dismiss it, but why wouldn't we be THRILLED to have a legitimate 4-5 starter on tap, JUST IN CASE?! And what's $5 mil, to a club with our payroll? I don't think LannEn-grade pitchers are typically available with an option, are they? Isn't it a rare privilege to be able to stash one away? Cut hI'm…? Really?

  46. Will - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:48 PM

    Feel Wood,Jackson has a walk rate of 3.08 batters per 9 innings over the past two seasons.Lannan has a walk rate of 3.43 batter per 9 inning over the same period.I think you'll find the games going by a little bit quicker without Lannan.

  47. NatsLady - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:50 PM

    Do we have enough yet for McCutcheon?

  48. Bowdenball - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:54 PM

    For all the media fawning over Scott Boras, someone needs to point out that this is several of his clients whose value he apparently overestimated and who were subsequently forced to take one-year deals. Anyone can get a ton of money for the Prince Fielders of the world. But his frequently aggressive positions don't work as well for the Ryan Madsons and Edwin Jacksons of the world.

  49. Water23 - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:55 PM

    I like your thinking NatsLady!!!!!

  50. jd - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:56 PM

    Hhover, I don't buy it. When you allow as many balls in play and as many walks as Lannan gives up you are playing with fire. I think Lannan is a perfectly reasonable option as a #4 or #5 I just think that Jackson is better. I can't get over the fact that people are already worried about the 1 year contracts vis a vis 2013. Please relax. Many things can come into play between now and then including the possibilities of contract extensions, trades and unexpected performances by our youngsters.

  51. jd - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:57 PM

    NatsLady, No !!

  52. Will - Feb 2, 2012 at 7:58 PM

    Constant Reader,You're right. I thought Lannan was in his last year of arbitration. He still has one more. However, next year, he'll cost probably somewhere from $7-8mil, which isn't much less than what Jackson will be getting this year, even though Jackson is a far superior pitcher. Jackson was looking for a 4 year deal, so maybe the Nats extend him another 3 if they like what they see. He'd end up being no more expensive than Lannan over that same period of time.There's also a handful of good FA SPs in 2013. Cain, Hamels, Grienke, Guthrie, Lowe, Marcum, Brandon McCarthy, Anibal Sanchez would all make great #3s much less a #5. So I'm not sure it would be too hard to plug one of those rotation holes.Also, this doesn't necessarily spell the end of Lannan. He still has an option, and would serve as a great #6 moving between AAA and Washington. I think he'd still collect around 15 big league starts between injuries and Strasburg getting shut down in September, after things are all said and done.

  53. Constant Reader - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:02 PM

    Will,Agreed looking at next years FAs. This is an interesting move which will only really come clear with our next move.

  54. NatinBeantown - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:05 PM

    Even though the Rangers have a full rotation, they seem to keep kicking the tires on SPs (Jackson, Oswalt). Would Lannan for Borbon be possible?

  55. HHover - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:10 PM

    jdFair enough–what I don't buy are those inflated FIP #s for Jackson over the last 2 seasons, which claim that he's a much better pitcher than his actual performance has shown him to be. Lannan walks the tightrope and sometimes falls off; I have no illusions that he's anything more than a reliable back-end starter. Fact is, tho, Lannan's been able to do it over 800+IP, or the equivalent of 4 full seasons. At this point, it's not some crazy single-year anomaly–it's who he is.Jackson over his career really hasn't been much better than Lannan. He has shown some improvement over the last 2 years on his BB rate, but at the expense of his K rate, so his WHIP is still about the same as Lannan's. Maybe Jackson has a higher ceiling than Lannan. But on a one-year deal, the Nats aren't in the position to get the long-term benefit of that. And tho I'd love to be wrong, I really don't think they're going to be contending this year.

  56. Harper_ROY_2012 - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:12 PM

    WOW! First time perhaps in franchise history that the Nats enter Spring Training with 4 legit major league starters. Kudos to the front office for pulling the trigger. I have to believe that once camp starts they will be eyeing injuries or deficiencies in other organizations and try to trade one or more pitchers (and maybe a position player) for a leadoff man and/or a center fielder. I have to believe Lannan, CMW, Detweiler, Gorzellany and Stammen are only some of the names in play (especially if the front office believes it is getting Brad Meyers back from the Yankees). GREAT news on Groundhog day!

  57. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:14 PM

    Is it worth asking whether Jackson is an upgrade from Lannan?

  58. BullpenCatcher - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:16 PM

    Has this franchise in any of it iterations, Nationals, Senators, Senators, Expos, Nationals ever had 4 LEGIT major league starters!? I do not even think the 94 Expos had a deep a rotation! The East has just gotten interesting. Cespedes, next!? F'YA glad I picked up my flex plan yesterday!

  59. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:16 PM

    I would take Jackson pitching with his left arm over Lannan on his best day!

  60. Jamos - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:17 PM

    Lots of fireballers in there with Strasburg, Zimmermann, Gio Gonzalez, and Edwin Jackson. Check out the K/9:Strasburg: 9.0 K/9Gio: 8.8 K/9 (11th in MLB among qualifiers)Zimmermann: 6.9 K/9Edwin Jackson: 6.7 K/9The average K/9 rate among starting pitchers last year was 6.8.For further reference:Detwiler: 5.6 K/9Lannan: 5.2 K/9Wang: 3.6 K/9Got to think that Lannan will be traded. Hate to see him go. But if you don't trade Lannan and both he and Detwiler end up in the bullpen as "starter-in-waiting" for Strasburg's innings limit or an injury to someone else, can Lannan or Detwiler make the adjustment to reliever and then back to starter–and, more importantly, does that hurt the bullpen while they're going through the process?Of course, if you could package Lannan and some other parts for a starting CF who can leadoff…

  61. NatinBeantown - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:19 PM

    SABR heavy, but Dave Cameron just wrote a brief comparison of Jackson with Lannan.http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/nationals-trying-to-trade-john-lannan/Short answer: He thinks Jackson's better in results thus far, and potentially much better if Lannan falls off the tightrope like he did in 2010.Captcha: rally (!)

  62. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:24 PM

    Anyone thought of the possibility of packaging LaRoche and Lannan for a CF? Then you move Werth to left and still let Harper play. If we get a CF but don't move Laroche, I don't see Harper getting a chance to play…

  63. Diz - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:26 PM

    Even without an option, Amanda indicated that Det could start the year in Syracuse.Don't know if that's true or not, but if it is, it's certainly a possibility.Plus, if we aren't contending, Edwin is going to get us a lot at the trade deadline. Capps got us Ramos…just think what Edwin can get us if he's having a good year.

  64. Unkyd - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:26 PM

    Right. Well, let's go ahead and signOswalt. And trade for Upton and Shields. It's a bold move, but who says you can't go withan 8 man rotation? ;-)

  65. Unkyd - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:29 PM

    Did Amanda just hatch an option for Det?

  66. Diz - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:30 PM

    On the possibility of a trade, Rizzo should just wait until ST now. Someone in a contending role will have a SP go down in ST. It happens almost every year.Find a team that's desperate a week or two before the regular season starts and then move him when we have a little leverage.The Nats have none right now.

  67. NatinBeantown - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:34 PM

    Diz is right. Colby Rasmus is our new outfielder come July…

  68. Diz - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:34 PM

    Unkyd,In the Beltway Baseball segment, Amanda said that Det could start the season in Syracuse even without an option.I don't know if that is the case, but if it were, it would be a no-brainer in my book.

  69. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:35 PM

    I wish I could have as bad a day as Lannan…lock in to a $5 million one-year contract for being an average (at best) major league pitcher.

  70. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:37 PM

    The biggest question for the Nationals this season is who will occupy Nationals Park when the Phillies come to town?

  71. Wally - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:41 PM

    Like the move by the Nats, capitalizing on a market opportunity by putting some money to work. EJax is easily better than Lannan/Det/Wang, in my view. Maybe Lannan brings back something useful, but I am skeptical. Ideally, they can get Byrd, or maybe Span, if Minny is worried about his recovery (I would certainly do the Span deal, and probably the Byrd one). Possibly Torii Hunter if LAA makes the money neutral?But if they can't get a good prospect for him, I would either keep everyone and bite the financial bullet, or if we have to dump someone to free up $$, I would dump Wang and keep Lannan. Only $1m difference (and maybe goes the other way if Wang hits his incentives), and I think Lannan is better and controllable for an extra year.

  72. Unkyd - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:41 PM

    Diz… I think anyone can, technically, go down to AAA. You just have to get them to agree to it….. Anybody? (

  73. Feel Wood - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:44 PM

    Even without an option, Amanda indicated that Det could start the year in Syracuse.Sure, if he clears waivers first. If they do it late enough in spring training that could happen, because any team that claims him would have to immediately put him on their 25 man roster since he's out of options.

  74. Wally - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:45 PM

    Unkyd said… Diz… I think anyone can, technically, go down to AAA. You just have to get them to agree to it….. Anybody? ( February 02, 2012 3:41 PM No, if you do it in three seasons, then the player has to pass through waivers first, meaning any team could claim him. At some point, a player's service time also let's him refuse to go.

  75. Wally - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:48 PM

    But here is a question: can't a team withdraw their arbitration offer, even after it has been determined (like Lannan). The pitcher would be a free agent at that point, but the team would no longer be on the hook for the salary. I think that they did this to Shawn Hill a few years ago. I am not recommending them to do this, just saying I think that they can get out of his salary if they want.

  76. NatsJack in Florida - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:48 PM

    Wally….Nobody "dumps" starting pitchers, especially guys who are good for 200 innings.

  77. Just sayin' - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:50 PM

    Signing Jackson and Lidge to one-year deals is a clear, unequivocal statement that you're trying to contend for a playoff spot in 2012. There's no other way to interpret it; neither signing makes any real sense otherwise (and certainly not in tandem with the other).But the Nats are not seriously contending for a playoff spot without another run-generating hitter. If I were Mittens and had a spare $10k to bet, I'd wager that (and more) that the Nats acquire that an above-average CF (at least in terms of offense) via a trade by opening day.

  78. CN - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:54 PM

    I don't see how Detweiler will be pitching in Syracuse, unless he's on a rehab assignment. Since he's out of option, wouldn't the team technically have to DFA him? If so, I believe he can choose to report to Syracuse or become a free agent…

  79. Unkyd - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:56 PM

    Thank you, NatsJack….(seriously, my eyes are crossing)…. We're gonna trade two pitchers (prolly). Hey, if Det makes the rotation, is there a harder-throwing group in the Bigs?

  80. Water23 - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:57 PM

    CN, I agree and one would think that the Astros or Cubs could find a spot on their 25 man roster for a hard throwing lefty who would be under control for a number of years.

  81. NatsJack in Florida - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:57 PM

    I can see Peter Bourjos in some sort of 3 team trade by the end of STOr quite possibly Upton in a less convoluted scenario.

  82. Gonat - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:57 PM

    NatsJack in Florida said… Wally….Nobody "dumps" starting pitchers, especially guys who are good for 200 innings. February 02, 2012 3:48 PM _______________________________-…..and 2 years of team control. The Nats will be trading Wang, Detwiler or Lannan.

  83. LoveDemNats - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:59 PM

    Don't know who will be where in the rotation this year. Very confusing. But one thing I do know: The Washington Nationals Baseball Club Inc. will be in the playoffs in 2012 GO NATS!!!

  84. Gonat - Feb 2, 2012 at 8:59 PM

    SteveM, you mentioned before that Tampa needs to dump some payroll. It doesn't seem they would be in the market for any more starting pitching but hows about a 3 team trade where they get a middle infielder, reliever and catcher.

  85. Wally - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:01 PM

    NatsJack in Florida said…Wally….Nobody "dumps" starting pitchers, especially guys who are good for 200 innings.(1) By dump, I meant a trade where the Nats primary motivation is salary relief, so they accept lesser prospects back. Although not a SP, the Scutaro trade is an example of what I meant. (2) I assume that you mean Lannan is good for 200 innings? I never said to "dump" Lannan. I said that they should keep him, and if the Nats felt like they needed the salary relief, I would trade Wang for the lesser prospects.

  86. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:01 PM

    so our playoff rotation concerns have been answered. gio, zimm, ejax.maybe ejax becomes Type A. offer arbitration which he will surely turn down. then we sign greinke and have an answer for the lost draft pick. good move all around i think.-longterm

  87. Anonymous8 - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:05 PM

    Remember July of 2010 when the White Sox wanted Adam Dunn and were offering up Edwin Jackson without Gordon Beckham?Nats got Alex Meyer and Brian Goodwin for Dunn and finally get Edwin Jackson.

  88. BallstonNat - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:08 PM

    Hopefully Edwin works his tail off to get the multi-year deal and we reap those benefits this year. If the team isn't in a contending place by the deadline, you have a great trade chip (as Diz just mentioned). Win all the way around. This is a great time to sell high on Lannan. It does seem that he has a great deal of value in the clubhouse. Mark or anyone else know where he stands a clubhouse leader and if a trade would affect clubhouse chemistry?

  89. upperdeck4 - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:13 PM

    I think that one consideration with respect to this deal is that we are in the division with the Phillies and will be (I hope) competing with them for a playoff spot. Unfortunately, Lannan just stinks against the Phils. Even if one argues that Jackson is roughly the equivalent of Lannan (and I think that Jackson is better) he can't be as bad as Lannan is against Philadelphia.

  90. NatsJack on Florida - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:14 PM

    Heh "8"…..I was thinking the same thing. Betcha Ken Williams is steamin. It'll be a cold day in hell before he does any deals with Rizzo.

  91. N. Cognito - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:16 PM

    If it's possible, I'd really like to see the Nats acquire a CF for the leadoff spot. If/when Harper comes up, the Nats can figure out what to do with LaRoche then – a bench role wouldn't be bad.

  92. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:19 PM

    Uh why are you all so confused? Its exactly what I expected. And no pay-to-play we are not "Lannan haters" we just know how to read stats and compare to what we see with our eyes? And no, I don't use xFIP, FIP, or BAPIP so much … I tend to see the use of xIP, tRA, and pRAA which are defense and park neutral stats which seem to do a fairly good job of approximating the performance of a pitcher when compared to what I deem is a fairly lenient average performance? Lannan was the worst of all starters. Worse than Livo, worse than Maya … he is lucky not with BAPIP but with politics. People like Zuckerman and MASN types like Goessling really like him. His bullpen must love him given how many times he was rescued while others weren't under the same conditions. Yeah, it can work that way or didn't you know? If you compare the much younger, left-handed Lannan to Livo (only making 1 million) across 3 years he actually looks a lot worst. Of course they are going to trade Lannan. Of course he was angry about the Arbitration thing? He sucks, yet thinks he deserves to be the highest paid pitcher? WRONG. And you know I'm not even sure Jackson deserves that honor but he is younger than Oswalt and he still has all the requisite tools. Perhaps McCatty and company can do something with them?As far as the rotation actually there are now about eight to eleven starters as there should be. In fact more if Meyers is returned. The difference is most now must be in the majors and can't start in AAA to hot spares.RH starters:StrasburgZimmermann (overall best starter last year)JacksonMeyers AAA (if he is returnedStammen AAAMaya AAA LH starters:Gio Gonzalez DetwilerGorzelannySolis/and or/ Purke (both have injury issues) MINORSLooks like a pretty solid rotation to me. Young, talented, a little short on veteran experience as that now must be provided by Gio and Jackson. But this probably isn't the year and the Nats FO continues to ramp up to create a consistent winner year-in and year-out. They are very, very close to that now. Very close but not yet there as they would have if they had signed Fielder.As for Lannan for a CF? People YOU ALL rate and rank the value of Lannan way too high. As he does himself. They might get a good veteran utility guy … (something they might need). Probably have to package Lannan with someone else to get a CF. And in that package Lannan wouldn't be the key piece. There aren't many teams that will want to pay John Lannan 5 million dollars. Unless they are desperate for starting pitching. Perhaps Houston? Maybe the Cubs? Most will see Lannan as veteran backup in AAA until needed.

  93. Gonat - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:19 PM

    Wally said… I said that they should keep him, and if the Nats felt like they needed the salary relief, I would trade Wang for the lesser prospects. February 02, 2012 4:01 PM _______________________________That's where I think the Nats should look. Trade Wang for prospects. A rotation of: Stras, JZim, Gio, Lannan, EJaxI positioned those in order of ERA. Everyone in that rotation are 3.79 and under in ERA and you keep the 3 RH and 2 LH and to Edwin Jackson's credit he got much better when he was traded to St. Louis in July last year where he went to a 3.58 ERA

  94. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:23 PM

    you mentioned before that Tampa needs to dump some payroll.If there is one team that absolutely WILL NOT pay John Lannan 5 million to start its Tampa Bay …but ya know the Orioles might if Angelos were willing to deal with the Nats. I could see Lannan fitting in on a 100 loss team.

  95. N. Cognito - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:24 PM

    Wally said… "By dump, I meant a trade where the Nats primary motivation is salary relief, so they accept lesser prospects back."Salary relief is not an issue/problem for the Nats.

  96. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:25 PM

    They aren't going to trade Wang. He like Jackson are one year rentals. The FO wants to see what they can do. Lannan? They already know what he can do.Lannan trade in the offing.

  97. greg - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:27 PM

    wally, there's no reason for the nats to "dump salary." what the nats have is an excess of 4th/5th starters. they have value, but not tremendous value. we'll just have to see what another team will offer for one of those guys. but i don't think the team is looking to dump anyone to save money, only to ease the logjam at the 5th spot in the rotation.now what *could* be interesting is to see them do something similar to what they did will ballester. trade lannan for a less established starting pitcher with another option who could be stashed in AAA to come up in case of injury/strasburg innings limit.

  98. sjm308 - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:31 PM

    I really like this deal!I have never disliked Lannan and can't imagine them just dumping him. Like others I can't understand what the big deal is about using his last option (if he is not our #5 pitcher coming out of spring training) and starting him in the minors. He has been in Syracuse before and handled that ok. His salary has nothing to do with how the club is helped and it would be helped by having him ready in AAA.This would probably mean Wang is our #5 guy with Detwiler starting off in the bullpen. It has been mentioned several times that we won't get through the year with just 5 starters so I really don't see what all the angst is about. I do understand that we still need a CF and our bench can be upgraded but its obvious that Rizzo is not just sitting around here. Have to wonder what O's fans think about all these additions to our club while they sit around and do very little. Mark: who do you consider the #1 CF candidate out there?go nats!!

  99. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:31 PM

    now what *could* be interesting is to see them do something similar to what they did will ballester. trade lannan for a less established starting pitcher with another option who could be stashed in AAA to come up in case of injury/strasburg innings limit. Now, this makes sense. However, I think you value Lannan way too high. Either they get a position player [UTL] more than a bit long in the tooth or a too young AA or below starter just for Lannan. Again, that team would have to be willing to pay Lannan 5 million. I don't see many that will. John Lannan is in for a very rude awakening. Not what one would want for the guy given that he just got married and seems nice enough … but … he is just not that good? What does it take to convince you? Johnson took one look at Lannan and brought Detwiler up from AAA.

  100. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:34 PM

    His salary has nothing to do with how the club is helped and it would be helped by having him ready in AAA.Read between the lines: Lannan was approached about the idea of starting off in AAA as the "hot spare" and he would have to know, he would eventually get major league starts. He couldn't accept it. And so Lannan is now being aggressively shopped league wide.

  101. Anonymous8 - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:34 PM

    Unless Rizzo can get #3 starter trade compensation for Lannan, definitely trade Wang who will only fetch bench type players or Minor Leaguers.Rizzo has to make a trade from a position of strength.

  102. sjm308 - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:39 PM

    Peric:just wondering how you know so much?Also, I would love to give you credit as anon 4:19 for it being "exactly what I expected" but since its an anon comment, I guess the other 43 anons will also have to share in that correctness (is that even a word??)

  103. NatsLady - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:42 PM

    Anon@4:25– took the words right out of my fingers. They are not going to trade Wang. Wang is going to stay with McCatty and prove to the world (and the Yankees) what he can do.

  104. sjm308 - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:45 PM

    Or, Peric could be posting 43 times. Never thought of that.I do get it though, in your opinion we over value Lannan and god forbid someone goes against your opinion. Nice for him he got that 5 million before you got to the arbitration panel. He would have ended up with about a dollar fifty. I do know that he seems to be a nice enough kid, has taken the ball when they give it to him and has been with the club longer than any other starter. Again, I am ok with him not being our #5 guy and think that very well may happen. I just like that we have what appears to be good if not very good depth even after trading all those prospects.

  105. sjm308 - Feb 2, 2012 at 9:47 PM

    NatsLady: I agree with you and if you think about it, we have two pitchers on one year deals that will benefit greatly from having solid seasons. That can only help. Its actually what Werth did with the Phillies. I think he was around .270 for most of his career and entering his contract season he jacked it up to over .290. If Wang and Jackson can show people they are the real deal, we benefit from this in a huge way.

  106. greg - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:02 PM

    i'm not sure what they could get for lannan in terms of SPs with some options left, and they may have to throw in another player to go with him (and/or some cash), but i think you have to look at the potential trades with a little creativity.

  107. Gonat - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:02 PM

    MLB Network said EJax got $10 mill

  108. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:08 PM

    What do you folks think about Lannan, Detwiler, Bernadina and Lombardozzi for McCutchen?

  109. JaneB - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:09 PM

    jd, I didn't forget Doc. Just, now, only Verlander is better than he is. I couldn't say our guys are better than Doc — SO FAR — because they ain't. Yet.;-)

  110. greg - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:12 PM

    anon, if you want to trade for mccutchen, you'll need to offer them a star player. a big pile of mediocre doesn't equal a star. and it really doesn't matter much how big the pile of mediocre is.

  111. Sunderland - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:16 PM

    greg, right on. Pirates. McCutchen has 4 years of team control remaining. That's huge.

  112. M Rizzo - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:20 PM

    I'm sending Lannan and Henry Rodriguez up to New York for Gardner and he'll be the CF and bat second. Desmond, Moore and Flores are going down to Tampa for Zobrist and he'll be the LF. LaRoche and Wang are being sent up the B-W Parkway for Roberts and he will be our 2B and lead-off. We'll sign Pudge Rodriguez to back up Ramos at catcher. Got that?Our line-up: 1) Roberts 2B 2) Gardner CF 3) Zimmerman 3B 4) Morse 1B 5) Zobrist LF 6) Werth RF 7) Espinosa SS 8) Ramos C. Harper's not coming up until September.

  113. Donny Samson - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:22 PM

    My unofficial tally at how many more wins this years staff should produceLast years games startedLannan 33 Livan 29J Zimm 26Marquis 20Gorzy 15Wang 11Detwiler 10Maya 5Millone 5Stras 5Peacock 2This years projected starters are first…second is the starts that they are replacing from the year beforeJZimm 33 JZimm 26 Peacock 2 Maya 5 2 more winsGio 33 Livan 29, Millone 5 6 more winsE. Jackson 33 Lannan 33 2 more winsStras 26 Stras 5, Marquis 20 5 more winsWang 26 Wang 11 Gorzy 15 1 more winDetwiler 10 Detwiler 10 sameSo 16 more wins if those 6 pitchers make all of our starts this year…It's presuming Lannan's gone but if you give him Detwiler's 10 it's the same thing.80 plus 16 equals 96 wins!!!I don't believe we are winning 96 games but I also don't think any of the upgrades and the guesses are crazy either.

  114. MicheleS - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:22 PM

    On Mid Atlantic sports… Mel dropped a Lannan to the O's for Adam Jones deal….

  115. Gonat - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:29 PM

    Anonymous said… What do you folks think about Lannan, Detwiler, Bernadina and Lombardozzi for McCutchen? February 02, 2012 5:08 PM ____________________________Just a waste of time putting together names for a teams best player who really isn't up for trade now. Next year when McCutcheon goes to arbitration and starts costing the Pirates a little more money, they may start listening.

  116. Pitchers Bat - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:29 PM

    Can Jackson hit ?

  117. Sunderland - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:30 PM

    Donny, that's an interesting way to look at it. Unlikely we get to 96, yeah, but I like the way you laid that out.

  118. Gonat - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:32 PM

    MicheleS said… On Mid Atlantic sports… Mel dropped a Lannan to the O's for Adam Jones deal…. February 02, 2012 5:22 PM ____________________________Again, old news. Read old posts 2 months ago from NatsEnquirer.com While I think the O's would trade AJones for a nice package, they may not want to send him to Washington because of the uproar it may cause.

  119. Anonymous8 - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:33 PM

    Clubhouse Confidential saying Edwin Jackson will add 3 W's to the Nats puting them in the thick of the playoff hunt.

  120. NatsJack in Florida - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:43 PM

    Somebody actually thinks Brett Gardner can play centerfield? He's a weak armed leftfielder at best.

  121. greg - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:43 PM

    not only that, gonat, lannan's not going to get you adam jones (there was speculation that they turned down juerjens for jones last fall).some speculation on ESPN for possible trade partners.=====Blue Jays: Toronto currently has Brett Cecil, Henderson Alvarez and Dustin McGowan in its rotation. The Jays have an Eric Thames/Ben Francisco platoon in left. The Nats could go after Thames (a left-handed bat they could use) or maybe former top prospect Travis Snider.Royals: Maybe the $5 million is too steep for the Royals, but let's face it: If they want to consider themselves sleeper playoff contenders this year, they need to upgrade the rotation. Jarrod Dyson is an all-speed, no-power center fielder who may be a slight upgrade over Roger Bernadina if he can get on base enough.Tigers: Detroit may want to keep top prospect Jacob Turner in Triple-A, but it lacks a lefty in the rotation. Lannan for Delmon Young or Andy Dirks?Red Sox: Boston could certainly use another arm, but not sure there's a good fit here.Cubs: Marlon Byrd is a free agent after the season and would be a nice one-year fill-in for the Nats in center. Not sure Lannan is Theo's type of pitcher, however.

  122. N. Cognito - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:45 PM

    Could Oswalt be next?

  123. ExposedinDC - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:47 PM

    Nice pick up, now if only that cf falls into our laps

  124. Anonymous8 - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:48 PM

    Rizzo is on MLB Network

  125. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:49 PM

    NatsJack in Florida said… Somebody actually thinks Brett Gardner can play centerfield? He's a weak armed leftfielder at best. February 02, 2012 5:43 PM Still better than Nyjer Morgan's best days.

  126. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 10:50 PM

    "We did not acquire Edwin Jackson to trade another starting pitcher," Rizzo said.Uhhhm, yeah you did.Lannan's gotta get traded now. I guess that it could be Wang, but Lannan has much more value to other clubs and not much of a future with the Nats compared to other guys in tow. Detwiler could be moved also, but the upside for him is higher and the performance right now return another club can expect from him is lower than Lannan, so he's a hard guy to move for value. Lannan's got to look good for Detroit, Seattle, Boston or even Toronto. The Nats will have to take something less than super shiny given the situation. Good problem to have for the Nats, all things considered.dfh21

  127. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 11:10 PM

    Jackson is a great value. Worth a read:http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/joe_sheehan/12/09/edwin.jackson/index.html

  128. Anonymous - Feb 2, 2012 at 11:23 PM

    Does Toronto still have Raj Davis? He can hit leadoff and steal a bunch of bases.

  129. Sunderland - Feb 2, 2012 at 11:36 PM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

  130. greg - Feb 2, 2012 at 11:57 PM

    i don't know if he's still with toronto, but rajai davis' OBP last year was 279. meh.

  131. Sunshine_Bobby_Carpenter_Is_Too_Pessimistic_For_Me - Feb 2, 2012 at 11:59 PM

    Anonymous said… What do you folks think about Lannan, Detwiler, Bernadina and Lombardozzi for McCutchen? February 02, 2012 5:08 PM In a heartbeat. In an absolute heartbeat. And that is exactly the type of deal the Pirates have made for the last, oh, 25 years. Giving up on a young star for a stable of cheap labor that never seems to pan out. Do it, Mike, do it.

  132. Will - Feb 3, 2012 at 12:00 AM

    Rajai Davis is a terrible baseball player.He batted .238 with a .273 OBP! His injuries hampered his speed, as he only stole 34 bases, but was thrown out 11 times, negating much of that value. He's also a pretty awful CF. His UZR has been in double digit negatives each of the past two seasons.The Jays couldn't pay us to take him, much less think we should swap him for Lannan.

  133. Wally - Feb 3, 2012 at 12:10 AM

    Indians, Royals, Twins, maybe Rockies could have some interest in Lannan, I think. We would probably have to kick in some cash too. Too bad the Rockies traded Seth Smith, there might have been something there. Maybe Ben Revere? But this signing makes me question the bench strategy even more. Clearly we are upping the chances for success this year, but is this a bench for a successful team? Especially with a lineup that is so thin in the OF, and a 1B coming off a major injury? My guess is Lannan gets traded but isn't enough for a CF, and gets converted into 1 or 2 quality bench guys.

  134. lesatcsc - Feb 3, 2012 at 12:31 AM

    I find it interesting how little respect Lannan gets. Only 86 other pitchers won 10 games in the big leagues last year, only 67 pitched more innings and only 51 had a better ERA. If every team had 5 starters, and most don't, by definition he`s better than half of them. He doesn't ring up fancy K numbers, but he just keeps getting the job done. I think you can get plenty for him, especially from a team that loses a SP to injury in ST and thinks they have a chance to contend. He`s also cheap at $5M and he`s under team control for another year.That said, I think Det is the one they'll trade. Teams will view his potential upside, live arm and the glimpse he gave last year of what he might become as having a higher ceiling.One thing is for sure, the Nats won't let either of them leave for nothing.It will be interesting to see it play out.

  135. NatsLady - Feb 3, 2012 at 12:38 AM

    Wally, I think you need to have patience on the bench issue. Wait until teams have sorted out what they want and need, or have injuries in Spring Training. We got lucky last year with Nix, but remember he was not even on the roster, he was just a ST invitee. Some pitcher will get injured and a team will trade us their WHOLE bench for Lannan and throw in some prospects…

  136. Wally - Feb 3, 2012 at 1:31 AM

    NatsLady – ok, fair enough. I think my frustration is because I hoped for a better starting 3rd OF than we have, and when that failed, watched some relatively cheap OFs come off the board (like Cody Ross, or De Jesus) who could also have slid into back up roles once Harper was ready.Just makes me a little concerned that Rizzo doesn't place too high a value on it, and wants to go extra cheap here, which could hurt the 2012 team. But I'll stand down.By the way, re Lannan, my first comment was that they should keep him. I think he is the best option for 2012 of the three, but I don't think Rizzo sees him that way, which is why I have suggested some trade options.

  137. greg - Feb 3, 2012 at 1:34 AM

    wally, he may have been having trouble convincing some of those guys because they all knew they'd be bumped to the bench as soon as harper comes up. and there's a chance he'll start the season in DC, which means they'd be on the bench all season.

  138. Wally - Feb 3, 2012 at 1:54 AM

    Greg – maybe, but it seems more likely that Rizzo didn't really want them. I mean, neither of those guys mentioned went to a guaranteed starting spot either. Ross, for instance, has Ellsbury and Crawford as guaranteed starters when healthy, and at best he splits time with Kalish in a platoon. Here, as you correctly point out, he also has competition but (a) he is probably the best defensive CF on the team (although he isn't great there), (b) Werth, the only other guy who could play it , has limited experience and is older, and (c) Morse might be needed at 1b if Laroche isn't fully healthy, opening up a spot. Plus, if we beat his best offer by $500k, doesn't that probably make a difference to him? But I do take NatsLady's point that there is still time, and I feel like I keep harping on this one so I will do my best to stop. Would just be disappointed, after all these good moves, to see Cameron and Bernie soak up 600 ABs. That would be a real whole in a lineup that is already counting on improvement from a number of guys.

  139. Wally - Feb 3, 2012 at 2:02 AM

    'hole'. Fat fingers be damned.

  140. Anonymous - Feb 3, 2012 at 2:28 AM

    I don't know if its possible… but I would like to see the Nats try to put a package together for Dexter Fowler from the Rockies.He is a big, young, athletic CF'er with upside. His defense has not come around as much as I would like (still negative UZR), but his 3yr batting is over .260, and is OBP is .360, that is good enough to leadoff in my book.Anyone think we could snag him away for one of Lannan/Wang/Det + another player?

Archives

NL EAST STANDINGS

W L GB
WASHINGTON 58 47 --
ATLANTA 58 50 1.5
MIAMI 53 54 6.0
NEW YORK 52 56 7.5
PHILADELPHIA 47 61 12.5
Through Wednesday's games

UPCOMING SCHEDULE
THU: Phillies at Nats, 7:05 p.m.
FRI: Phillies at Nats, 7:05 p.m.
SAT: Phillies at Nats, 7:05 p.m.
SUN: Phillies at Nats, 1:35 p.m.
MON: Orioles at Nats, 7:05 p.m.
TUE: Mets at Nats, 7:05 p.m.
WED: Mets at Nats, 7:05 p.m.
Full season schedule

Mark joins Rob Carlin and Joe Orsulak every Thursday at 4 p.m. on Comcast SportsNet for a half-hour show on the Nats, Orioles and rest of MLB. Re-airs Thursdays at 11:30 p.m., Saturdays at 9 a.m. and Sundays at 11:30 a.m.

ON THE RADIO

As ESPN-980 AM's Nats Insider, Mark makes daily appearances on the station's various shows. Here's the 2014 schedule (subject to change)...

MON: 12:45 p.m.
TUE: 2:30 p.m.
WED: 4:30 p.m.
THU: 2:30 p.m.
FRI: 1:30 p.m., 5:30 p.m.
SAT: 10:30 a.m.

*All times Eastern. You can also listen to the station on 94.3 FM, 92.7 FM and online at ESPN980.com. Click here for past audio clips.

Follow us on Twitter