Spring training thread

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

Steak Snabler said:
This doesn't sound like encouraging news for Ryan Howard:

“He has an open wound that isn’t healing the way we want it to,” Scott Sheridan, the team’s head athletic trainer, said Sunday at Phillies camp. “It needs to be evaluated.”

...

Sheridan said the open wound was “a delayed reaction to a suture” that was used in the surgery. He added that the skin in the Achilles area was “notorious for not healing well.”

http://www.csnphilly.com/blog/phillies-talk/post/Phils-trainer-updates-Howards-condition?blockID=658440&feedID=704

Howard could be displaying early signals of diabetes.
 
outofplace said:
Given the trouble Zimmerman has had staying healthy, put me in the camp that thinks they overpaid, too.

157 games in 2006.
162 games in 2007.
106 games in 2008.
157 games in 2009.
142 games in 2010.
101 games in 2011.

Is that really "trouble staying healthy"?
 
Justin_Rice said:
outofplace said:
Given the trouble Zimmerman has had staying healthy, put me in the camp that thinks they overpaid, too.

157 games in 2006.
162 games in 2007.
106 games in 2008.
157 games in 2009.
142 games in 2010.
101 games in 2011.

Is that really "trouble staying healthy"?

In the past four years, he has missed a third of the season twice and missed 20 games once. That looks a bit like trouble staying healthy.

Another way of thinking about it: Since the start of the 2008 season he has missed a total of 142 games, almost a full season's worth.
 
LongTimeListener said:
Justin_Rice said:
outofplace said:
Given the trouble Zimmerman has had staying healthy, put me in the camp that thinks they overpaid, too.

157 games in 2006.
162 games in 2007.
106 games in 2008.
157 games in 2009.
142 games in 2010.
101 games in 2011.

Is that really "trouble staying healthy"?

In the past four years, he has missed a third of the season twice and missed 20 games once. That looks a bit like trouble staying healthy.

Another way of thinking about it: Since the start of the 2008 season he has missed a total of 142 games, almost a full season's worth.

Exactly, and he has played through some injuries as well.
 
Extended production into his mid-30s, as in many bad contracts, is assumed.

Also, Zimmerman's defensive production (if you care about those kind of metrics) fell for the first time last year.

Look at it another way: The Nationals now have two triple-digit contacts on the payroll.
 
I suspect there are few people who watch Zimmerman play every day who think this was a massive overpay.
 
Justin_Rice said:
I suspect there are few people who watch Zimmerman play every day who think this was a massive overpay.

I don't think people who see Zimmerman play on a limited basis realize how unbelievable a defensive third baseman he is. He's done things that just aren't done.
 
Herbert Anchovy said:
What's going to happen when their young stars need to get their big payday?


The Lerners will simply dip a bucket into their Scrooge McDuck vault, filled to the top with the spoils from a World Series win - paying Strasburg and the others won't be a problem.

/natsfanboi
 
Herbert Anchovy said:
Ask the Mets how that worked out. They're still paying Bobby Bonilla.

They figured with inflation that the money wouldn't be worth as much and that they could afford it with ease. Of course, they didn't plan on Bernie Madoff being a crook.
 
They spent and extended like drunken sailors for 20 years. They wrote the book. Some of the real **** contracts nobody even talks about anymore (Bernard Gilkey) because there are so many over the last six or seven years to pick over.
 
Justin_Rice said:
I suspect there are few people who watch Zimmerman play every day who think this was a massive overpay.

Really? I mean overpay is one thing. But "massive"?

This Zimmerman deal goes beyond money.
 
JackReacher said:
Justin_Rice said:
I suspect there are few people who watch Zimmerman play every day who think this was a massive overpay.

Really? I mean overpay is one thing. But "massive"?

This Zimmerman deal goes beyond money.

Most times that you start hearing that a deal goes "beyond money," that is not a good sign. Teams should be trying to get value in a deal, not make a statement.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
outofplace said:
JackReacher said:
Justin_Rice said:
I suspect there are few people who watch Zimmerman play every day who think this was a massive overpay.

Really? I mean overpay is one thing. But "massive"?

This Zimmerman deal goes beyond money.

Most times that you start hearing that a deal goes "beyond money," that is not a good sign. Teams should be trying to get value in a deal, not make a statement.

Not always. Hell, I'd rather them give Zimmerman a few more bucks now than see him in a Yankees uniform a few years from now. Also sends a message that the Nats will take care of their homegrown guys. That kinda means something for the Nats since most of their homegrown talent is pretty damn good.

No Nats fan that I've talked to has one problem with the Zimmerman deal. He's the face of the franchise. Oh, and he's a pretty good baseball player, too. Whether he's worth an 6-100 or 6-90. Doesn't matter. With the way Rizzo has done business the last two years, saying Zimmerman got too much is nothing more than picking nits. The ONLY questionable thing he's done thus far is the Werth deal, and we're only in year two of that.

Let's not start acting like the Nats are just throwing around money willy nilly. OHHH. TWO 100 MILLION CONTRACTS!!!! They passed on Tex. They passed on Fielder. They've made great business decisions under Rizzo. The Zimmerman contract is one of those.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MisterCreosote said:
I looked it up, and was surprised the Nats have to re-up Strasburg after next season. Didn't think it was that soon. This could hurt, especially when they're drawing 5,000 per night (except when the Phils are in town ;D).

I'm not sure that's correct. Not sure it isn't, either, but I don't think so. Where did you see that.

Werth? Overpaid.
Zimmerman? Good, fair deal for both sides.
 
Depends on what you call a "re-up" for Strasburg. His original deal ends there, but he's under team control until like 2015 or something. That said, I'm sure they'll work something out by the time the 2013 season ends either way.
 
JackReacher said:
outofplace said:
JackReacher said:
Justin_Rice said:
I suspect there are few people who watch Zimmerman play every day who think this was a massive overpay.

Really? I mean overpay is one thing. But "massive"?

This Zimmerman deal goes beyond money.

Most times that you start hearing that a deal goes "beyond money," that is not a good sign. Teams should be trying to get value in a deal, not make a statement.

Not always. Hell, I'd rather them give Zimmerman a few more bucks now than see him in a Yankees uniform a few years from now. Also sends a message that the Nats will take care of their homegrown guys. That kinda means something for the Nats since most of their homegrown talent is pretty damn good.

No Nats fan that I've talked to has one problem with the Zimmerman deal. He's the face of the franchise. Oh, and he's a pretty good baseball player, too. Whether he's worth an 6-100 or 6-90. Doesn't matter. With the way Rizzo has done business the last two years, saying Zimmerman got too much is nothing more than picking nits. The ONLY questionable thing he's done thus far is the Werth deal, and we're only in year two of that.

Let's not start acting like the Nats are just throwing around money willy nilly. OHHH. TWO 100 MILLION CONTRACTS!!!! They passed on Tex. They passed on Fielder. They've made great business decisions under Rizzo. The Zimmerman contract is one of those.

Let's see those business decisions work before we call them great.

I didn't say it is always bad, but it is usually trouble when a team is trying to send a message rather than just trying to make the best deal it can for itself. I get that Nats fans like it and that most of you understand that Zimmerman has to stay healthier than he has the last four years. Definitely better to see a team spend money than not.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest posts

Back
Top