Kuzul

The Washington Nationals had quite the successful season in 2012, making the postseason for the first time since they were the Montreal Expos back in 1981.

They didn’t get past the first round, but they’ll be back—probably again and again and again.

For the time being, the Nats are in the same boat as every team in that they’re still well south of being perfect. There are areas they need to address in order to get better.

Like, for example, center field. The Nationals are in the market for a free-agent center fielder, and the latest word from Jon Heyman of CBS Sports is that they may have their eyes on the best of the bunch:

Michael Bourn.

Heyman notes that officials from around the league see the Nats as the favorite to sign Bourn, who they have “long had an interest” in.

It won’t be cheap for the Nats to sign Bourn, and that’s a not-insignificant concern seeing as how their payroll is already at an all-time high. If the Nats are going to escalate their payroll even higher to squeeze Bourn into the equation, he had better be worth it.

But fret not, Nats fans. Here’s why Bourn would be worth it.

First of All, Here’s Why This Makes Sense

This is going to sound a little weird, but the Nats need a new center fielder because the really good center fielder they have really shouldn’t be a center fielder.

The Nats didn’t have a reliable center fielder early on in the 2012 season, and that gave Bryce Harper a chance to assume the job pretty much by default when he came up in late April.

He eventually did take over in center a few weeks down the line, and to his credit, he played the position very well. Harper ended the season with a 17.6 UZR/150 and a Defensive Runs Saved of plus-13, according to FanGraphs.

However, Harper profiles better as a corner outfielder moving forward. His strong arm would play better in left or right field, and having to cover less ground would mean less wear and tear on his legs.

But the Nats obviously can’t move Harper until they have a viable option in center. That’s where Bourn enters the equation.

Harper was very good in center field in 2012, but he’s not in Bourn’s class defensively. Bourn is arguably the best defensive center fielder in baseball, combining both great speed and underrated instincts to turn a lot of would-be hits into outs.

Bourn also happens to be a great leadoff man, and the Nats could use one of those these days (more on this in a moment).

As for what it would take to sign Bourn, Heyman says that it could take something in the neighborhood of a five-year contract worth $80 million. That’s an annual average of $16 million, which would make Bourn the second-most expensive player on the Nationals behind Jayson Werth.

However, even $80 million might not be enough to sign Bourn. Jim Salisbury of CSNPhilly.com has reported that Bourn is looking for a contract worth as much as $100 million. That makes sense seeing as how his agent is none other than Scott Boras.

The Nationals aren’t exactly poor, and they certainly have an excited fanbase that will keep the revenue flowing for now, but that’s a lot of money for them to take on. It doesn’t help that they already have two players in Werth and Ryan Zimmerman who have $100 million contracts. Adding a third would be a bit much.

But if the Nats can get Bourn for five years and $80 million, they could make it work. Their steadily increasing attendance will help them afford a deal like that, as will the new national TV money that the Nats will soon be receiving from MLB‘s new deals with ESPN and with FOX and Turner Sports.

As for what the Nats would be getting for their millions…

What Bourn Would Bring to the Table

Bourn does two things a lot better than most: He plays defense, and he creates runs with his legs.

Defense is the better of Bourn’s two main talents. He’s a two-time Gold Glove winner, and he would have won his third this season if the voters had any idea what the heck they were doing.

Statistically, Bourn was the best defensive center fielder in baseball in 2012. Per FanGraphs, he ended up leading all everyday center fielders in both UZR at 22.4 and in Defensive Runs Saved at plus-24. The only two players to come close to Bourn in either category were Mike Trout and Denard Span.

Andrew McCutchen, meanwhile, posted a minus-6.9 UZR and a minus-five Defensive Runs Saved. How he won the Gold Glove over Bourn is something you’ll have to ask the voters.

In addition to being an excellent defensive center fielder, Bourn is one of the top stolen base artists in the game. He’s stolen at least 40 bases every year since 2008, and he leads all other major league players by a mile with 257 stolen bases since the start of the ’08 season.

Bourn’s ability to get on base could be better, but it’s good enough compared to most leadoff men. He’s posted OBPs of better than .340 in each of the last four seasons, and this past year, he managed a career-high OPS of .737. That’s due to the extra power he showed at the plate, as he set a new career high with nine home runs.

All of this should appeal to the Nationals. They got some decent power out of the leadoff spot in their lineup in 2012, but getting on base and stealing bases was something their leadoff men didn’t do so well. Combined, Nats leadoff hitters managed just a .325 OBP and 20 stolen bases. 

If the Nats sign Bourn, they’ll thus be adding an extra wrinkle to their offense in the form of a traditional leadoff man with speed, solid on-base abilities and a little bit of power. They’ll also be adding an excellent defensive player who would give their overall outfield defense a huge boost.

Where things get tricky is how the rest of Davey Johnson’s lineup would form up behind Bourn.

How He Would Impact the Lineup

By the end of the 2012 season, the first six spots in Washington’s batting order were set in stone. Jayson Werth hit leadoff, Bryce Harper hit second, Ryan Zimmerman hit third, Adam LaRoche hit fourth, Michael Morse hit fifth and Ian Desmond hit sixth.

It was this arrangement that helped the Nats finish second in the NL in runs scored in September and October behind the Milwaukee Brewers. Presumably, they wouldn’t mind it if they didn’t have to change a thing in 2013.

If Bourn is inserted into the equation, however, much would have to change.

The only place Bourn is going to hit is in the leadoff spot. Batting him second is a possibility, but Bourn is a leadoff man by trade, and the simple fact of the matter is that he’s better suited for the role than anybody the Nats currently have on their roster.

This includes Werth. He did pretty well when he hit leadoff in 2012, posting an .838 OPS and scoring 25 runs in 38 games, but he’ll be better off either in the No. 2 hole or more towards the back end of the lineup. 

Batting him second behind Bourn would seem to be the smartest play, as hitting him there would allow Johnson to follow up a lefty with a righty who happened to post a career-low strikeout rate in 2012.  

Werth somehow morphed into more of a contact hitter in 2012, and the Nats will be able to take advantage of that transformation in a variety of different ways if he’s hitting behind the speedy Bourn in the lineup.

If Werth were to move down to the No. 2 spot, Harper could find himself in the No. 3 hole if Johnson wants to keep a left-right pattern intact. It’s either that, or Zimmerman could stay in the No. 3 hole with Harper batting cleanup.

Keeping Zimmerman in the No. 3 hole would make sense seeing as how he’s spent far more time there in his career than any other spot in the lineup. He’s handled it well, posting an .829 OPS over 3,658 plate appearances. He managed an .824 OPS hitting out of the No. 3 hole in 2012.

If Harper were to bat cleanup, Morse could stick in the No. 5 hole if the Nats decide not to re-sign LaRoche. If LaRoche is re-signed, then Morse is likely to be traded so as to avoid having a logjam in the outfield. If so, the No. 5 spot would likely be all Harper’s. He didn’t do so well in limited action in the No. 5 hole in 2012, but it’s still a good fit for him given his immense raw power.

Regardless of who’s in play, I’d expect Desmond to stay locked into the No. 6 hole. It’s a spot Desmond took to very well once he was demoted as the club’s primary leadoff man, posting an .894 OPS with 12 home runs in the 66 games he appeared in the No. 6 spot.

As you can tell, filling out a lineup card on a daily basis would be pretty tough for Johnson if the Nats go out and sign Bourn. Johnson’s dilemma, however, wouldn’t be a lack of good hitters. It would be an overabundance of good hitters.

Many other managers would kill to have that “problem.”

How He Would Impact the Nationals’ Standing in the NL East

If the Nationals sign Bourn, they’ll be killing two birds with one stone.

One: They’ll be signing a player who can help both their lineup and their outfield defense.

Two: They’ll be signing a star player away from a key division rival.

Without Bourn, the Atlanta Braves will have to add center field to an offseason shopping list that already has plenty of items on it. Filling Chipper Jones’ spot in the lineup will be hard enough. Filling both Jones’ spot and Bourn’s spot would be even harder.

The Braves will be competitive in 2013 regardless of what happens. They always are, Nonetheless, it’s hard to see them having as much talent next season as they did in 2012 if Bourn leaves. It would be fair to expect them to win 90 games rather than 95, and 90 wins won’t be good enough to overcome the Nats, so long as they stay healthy in 2013.

It’s just as hard to see the Philadelphia Phillies winning as many as 95 games in 2013. They’ll have a very strong starting pitching staff if Roy Halladay, Cliff Lee and Cole Hamels all stay healthy, but their offense is only going to be capable of doing so much damage as long as Ryan Howard and Chase Utley are smack in the middle of it.

Both of them are past their primes, and it’s going to be hard for the Phillies to add some quality depth around them and Jimmy Rollins with their payroll already weighed down with heavy salaries.

As for the other two teams in the division, the Miami Marlins and New York Mets are both wild cards for 2013. The Marlins are in a rebuilding phase, and the Mets may have shown their true colors when they followed up a 46-40 showing in the first half of 2012 with a 28-48 showing in the second half.

Given the state of the division, the Nats don’t necessarily have to sign Bourn in order to ensure that they’ll be the favorite to win the NL East again in 2013. They already have the talent to do what they did in 2012 all over again.

But if they do sign Bourn, they’ll go from being a strong team to being an even stronger team. They’re set to return many key members of a pitching staff that tied for the NL lead in ERA, and they’ll be adding Bourn to a lineup that was already strong.

If this is what the Nats are dealing with come Opening Day, it wouldn’t be hard to imagine them going wire to wire in the NL East just like the Phillies did in 2011. 

How His Contract Would Impact Payroll and Future Spending

The Nationals are already on a path toward becoming one of MLB’s most expensive teams. Their payroll rose by over $20 million between 2011 and 2012, and it’s likely to rise once again this offseason to over $100 million.

If the Nats sign Bourn, their payroll will almost certainly cross the $100 million plateau, and they’ll suddenly have three players making at least $14 million per season.

As such, we could see Mike Rizzo ease off the gas a little bit and cut down on the spending for the rest of the offseason. That could mean that a contract for Bourn would mean no new contract for LaRoche, who declined a $10 million option to become a free agent.

Because the Nats can move Michael Morse to first base on a full-time basis with Bourn in center field and Jayson Werth and Bryce Harper flanking him, they can afford to lose LaRoche. They’ll miss having his powerful left-handed bat in the middle of their lineup, but they’ll have more than enough offense to make up for his absence if he isn’t retained.

However, the LaRoche situation won’t be the only thing impacted if the Nats choose to sign Bourn to a contract. Things could get a little dicey in regards to their payroll in the future.

The Nats have Werth, Zimmerman and Gio Gonzalez locked up in long-term contracts, and at some point, they’re going to have to consider contract extensions for Stephen Strasburg, Ian Desmond and Jordan Zimmermann. Strasburg is set to become a free agent following the 2016 season. Desmond and Zimmermann are set to become free agents after the 2015 season.

If the Nats sign Bourn to a five- or maybe a six-year deal, he’ll still be under contract when it comes time for the Nats to start thinking seriously about giving Strasburg and Desmond new deals. This is to say nothing of players like Morse, John Lannan and others who are going to need attention a lot sooner.

The Nats play in a media market big enough to support a high payroll, so they won’t necessarily be overstepping their boundaries if their payroll keeps creeping further and further past the $100 million mark. It’s a direction they’re already headed in, and the fact that they covet Bourn says a lot about how far they may be willing to push their payroll.

And hey, if you ask me, there’s no time like the present for the Nationals to go all-out, both in terms of acquiring talented players and in terms of expanding their payroll. They have a core in place that’s plenty strong enough to compete for championships not just in 2013 but in the years immediately after as well.

If they sign Bourn, you’d have to like their chances even more.

Note: Stats courtesy of Baseball-Reference.com unless otherwise noted. Salary figures courtesy of Cot’s Baseball Contracts.

If you want to talk baseball, hit me up on Twitter.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

The Washington Nationals had a historic season in 2012.  

The Nats made the playoffs for the first time since moving to Washington in 2005.  

It was the first playoff appearance for the Nationals/Expos franchise since 1981.  

And it was the first playoff appearance for a Washington baseball team since the Senators lost the World Series in 1933.  

But if the Nationals’ dream season had gone according to plan, then Washington would have won the first World Series in the city’s history since 1924. 

Now, as the current World Series is being played, let’s take a look back into baseball lore and revisit the 1924 World Series.  

The 1924 Washington Senators were managed by player-manager Bucky Harris, and finished with a 92-62 record.  They won the American League pennant by 2.0 games over the New York Yankees.  The Senators faced off with the New York Giants, who were managed by one of the masters of his profession, Hall of Famer John McGraw.  The Giants won the National League pennant with a 93-60 record, finishing 1.5 games better than the Brooklyn Dodgers.  

Game 1 was held at Griffith Stadium in Washington, DC on October 4, 1924.  Washington’s ace and eventual Hall of Fame inductee Walter “The Big Train” Johnson took the mound against New York’s Art Nehf, and both hurlers threw complete games, even though the game went 12 innings.  But Johnson’s 14 hits and six walks surrendered were the difference as the Giants won 4-3.  

The Senators evened the series with a Game 2 win of the exact same score.  After the Senators’ Goose Goslin and Bucky Harris hit early home runs off of Giants’ starter Jack Bentley, the Giants came back to tie the game late with two runs in the top of the ninth, thanks to RBI singles by High Pockets Kelly and Hack Wilson.  But Washington was rescued by Roger Peckinpaugh, whose walk-off double with one out in the bottom of the ninth knotted the teams at one game apiece as the World Series moved to New York.  

Game 3 was played at the hallowed Polo Grounds, and the Giants won 6-4 to take a 2-1 series lead.  It was a sloppy affair, as the Senators had two errorsand half of the runs they surrendered were unearned.  New York Giants pitcher Rosy Ryan was the unsung hero of the game.  Despite recording neither the win nor the save, Ryan pitched 4.2 innings of relief after coming into the game with two outs in the top of the fourth to relieve starter Hugh McQuillan.  Ryan gave up only two earned runs while striking out two and walking three.  He also led the team with two RBI, which came on a solo home run and an RBI ground-out.  

The Senators tied the series once again by winning Game 4, this time at two games apiece with a 7-4 win.  Goose Goslin drove in four of those Senators’ runs by himself, going 2-4 with a three-run home run.  Firpo Marberry earned a five-out save, his second of the series.  

But with the series tied 2-2, Washington’s baseball hero almost became a World Series goat.  Walter Johnson turned in his second straight lackluster performance in Game 5, giving up 13 hits and four earned runs, despite pitching another complete game.  New York Giants third baseman Freddie Lindstrom went 4-5 with two RBI and starting pitcher Jack Bentley went 2-3 with two RBI of his own, to go along with 7.1 innings pitched and only two earned runs surrendered.  The Giants won 6-2, and were only one win away from their third World Series title in four straight appearances.  

The Senators were on the brink as they hosted Game 6 back at Griffith Stadium, but Tom Zachary came to the rescue yet again.  The hero of Game 2 was the pitching star when it mattered most, giving up seven hits but only one earned run as he threw a complete game, striking out three and walking none.  He surrendered no runs and only five hits after the first inning of the game.  Washington second baseman Bucky Harris came through at the plate, hitting a two-run single in the fifth.  That was all Washington needed to win the game and force a deciding Game 7.  

So the stage was set for a memorable ending to a closely-fought series, and these two combatants did not disappoint.  The Senators had to go to their bullpen immediately, and that would actually be the story of the game.  Starting pitcher Curly Ogden faced only two batters and retired one before he was removed in favor of George Mogridge.  Mogridge pitched 4.2 innings and gave up only one earned run, which scored on a sacrifice fly after he was removed in the top of the sixth.  

But then the shaky Washington defense let down another of their pitchers, as the Giants scored two unearned runs against newly inserted Firpo Marberry, on consecutive errors by first basemen Joe Judge and short stop Ossie Bluege.  Marberry righted the ship, however, retiring the next two batters to end the inning, and then pitching a scoreless seventh and eighth.  He was relieved to start the ninth inning.  

Meanwhile, the visiting Giants got a solid pitching performance from starter Virgil Barnes, who lasted 7.2 innings.  In fact, Barnes had trouble with just two things in Game 7: Bucky Harris and the eighth inning.  Before the eighth, Barnes surrendered only three hits and one run, but Harris accounted for two of the hits and the only run, as the player-manager hit a solo homer in the fourth and a single in the seventh, which was erased by a double play.  

Barnes entered the bottom of the frame with his Giants leading 3-1 and only six outs away from reclaiming the World Championship.  But after getting the lead-off hitter to pop out in foul territory, New York’s starting pitcher quickly lost control of the inning and the game.  Barnes promptly surrendered a double to pinch hitter Nemo Leibold and a single to catcher Muddy Ruel.  Pitcher Firpo Marberry was pinch-hit for by Bennie Tate, who was walked to load the bases.  Barnes then retired the next batter.  

This set up a bases loaded, two-out duel between Barnes and his nemesis, Bucky Harris.  As he had twice done earlier in the game against Barnes, Harris put the ball in play.  But this time, Harris got a lot of help from a bad hop, as Game 5 hitting hero Freddie Lindstrom could not field the seemingly routine ground ball.  Two runs scored to tie the game.  

To the ninth inning the two teams went, tied at three.  Pitching in relief for the Senators was none other than Walter Johnson.  Washington’s ace had toiled for 18 years before he had his first shot at the postseason, racking up Hall of Fame numbers while playing for losing teams.  But once he finally appeared in the World Series, he had pitched below his standard.  

The Big Train was given a chance to redeem himself, and he did just that.  Johnson worked out of a one-out jam in the top of the ninth after Frankie Frisch hit a triple.  Johnson stranded him, and held the Giants scoreless in the 10th, 11th and 12th innings as well.  He finished with no earned runs in 4.0 innings of relief, giving up only three hits and three walks (two intentional) while striking out five.  

Johnson got his teammates into the bottom of the 12th still tied, and they would take care of the rest, with a little more help from The Big Train.  The Giants’ Game 5 winner Jack Bentley was pitching in relief, and retired the first batter.  He then got Muddy Ruel to pop a foul ball to fellow catcher Hank Gowdy—who proceeded to step on his own catcher’s mask and drop the ball.  Given second life, Ruel would hit a double.  

The next batter was the Big Train himself, left in the game by player-manager Harris, who was running out of pinch hitters as well as pitchers.  Johnson put the ball in play, and just like Harris in the eighth inning, benefited from some good fortune at third base as Freddie Lindstrom could not handle the ground ball after yet another bad hop, allowing Johnson to reach as Ruel stayed at second.  

But not for long.  Next up was center fielder Earl McNeely, who hit what at first looked like a harmless ground ball through the left side of the infield, plating Ruel for the game-winning, series-winning run.  Jack Bentley, the pitcher of record for the New York Giants, had this to say about the fateful 12th inning of Game 7 of the 1924 World Series: 

That was one of the strangest games I ever played in.  With one out, catcher [Hank]Gowdy did a sun dance on Ruel’s pop foul and stepped into his mask and dropped the ball. Ruel doubled and then there was an error at short, then McNeely hit that grounder. That was a hell’uva way to lose a World Series.  

And on the other side of the box score, Walter Johnson himself was the pitcher of record for the World Champion Washington Senators.  Ironically, the work horse of the Washington rotation had to change his role from starter to reliever to change his World Series legacy from goat to hero.  

All told, the 1924 World Series between the Washington Senators and the New York Giants was a classic.  Four game were decided by one run, two games went to 12 innings, and two games were won by a walk-off.  One of those walk-offs occurred in Game 7, making this one of only five World Series in which the final play was recorded via walk-off hit in the seventh and final game.  And it is one of only four World Series in which the seventh game was won in extra innings.  

To celebrate the World Series 100th Anniversary, ESPN ranked the 100 World Series played to date, from best (No. 1) to worst (No. 100).  The 1924 World Series was ranked sixth.  It is still the only World Series title in Washington’s history.  

Be patient, Washington Nationals fans.  One day, the Nationals will indeed win the World Series and return the title to the city of Washington.  By doing so, these Nats will write themselves into the annals of baseball’s championship teams, joining the unforgettable names of Bucky, Muddy, and The Big Train.  

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

The Washington Nationals’ magical 2012 run officially came to an end last week, and now general manager Mike Rizzo has no choice but to look ahead to next season.

The only major deals Rizzo must choose if he wants to work out are Edwin Jackson and Adam LaRoche. Jackson seems like a sure-fire bet to come back if Rizzo offers him a fair deal, but LaRoche is a different story.

LaRoche had a breakout season in 2012. He hit a career-high 33 home runs and drove in a career-high-tying 100 runs. He did this while sporting a line of .271/.343/.510 and playing great defense at first base (just seven errors on the season).

The Nationals do hold on option on him for 2013, but they have a few options to explore before picking it up. Allow me to explain.

Washington has been linked to center fielders for years now. With both B.J. Upton and Michael Bourn available this offseason, there’s no doubt Rizzo will be very interested.

Currently, the outfield is comprised of Michael Morse in left field, Bryce Harper in center field and Jayson Werth in right field. This is not at all a bad defensive outfield, but it does lack some serious speed.

Upton or Bourn could easily provide that speed in center field.

Should either of them be signed, Morse could slide to first base. If LaRoche is retained and Upton or Bourn is signed, Morse becomes expendable.

The question essentially becomes this—Upton/Bourn and Morse, Upton/Bourn and LaRoche or simply Morse and LaRoche?

Werth was the leadoff man for Davey Johnson after he returned from injury, but it’s easy to see he’s not a prototypical No. 1 hitter. His power and run production are too valuable to leave in the top spot for a full season.

That being said, I think it’s wise to make a push for either Upton or Bourn. Of the two, Bourn is probably the best option. Upton strikes out way too much for a leadoff man, and Bourn is capable of stealing 50-plus bases per season.

With Bourn patrolling center field, Rizzo now needs to make a decision about first base.

LaRoche will be 33 by the time next season starts, while Morse will be 31 by Opening Day. Age clearly shouldn’t be an issue in this decision.

I think the decision should come down to consistency. LaRoche and Morse have both been injured for extended periods of time while with the Nationals, but LaRoche has been the far more consistent player in his career.

He has driven in 80-plus runs six times, while Morse has only done so once. Of those six times, two of them were seasons in which LaRoche racked up 100 RBI. Morse’s career-high is just 95.

Defensively, Morse isn’t terrible. He has made just six errors in 964 chances in his career at first base. Fielding percentage may not be the best judge of defensive talent, but Morse’s numbers are good enough for a .994 fielding percentage.

LaRoche has played significantly more time at first and has compiled over 10,000 chances. He owns a fielding percentage of .995. He’s the better option defensively.

Morse’s ability to play outfield along with first base definitely makes him an attractive option, but I think LaRoche is the best bet in the end. He’s too consistent to pass over.

Morse could also fetch a nice return in a potential trade, so Rizzo could look to add to his already strong bullpen in a deal.

The Nationals are in a good spot this offseason, as there are plenty of options to consider. Rizzo should be excited for the offseason about to unfold.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

It’s one of the most sensitive topics in Washington, D.C., these days. Did the Nationals make the right decision in sitting fireballer Stephen Strasburg during the playoffs?

Could Strasburg have helped the Nats sweep or just simply beat the St Louis Cardinals? Did general manager Mike Rizzo make a calculated decision that ultimately backfired and cost the team an opportunity at a World Series title?

Those are kinds of questions people are asking. The Nats’ collapse of epic proportions will be debated in baseball circles for years to come. They blew a 6-0 lead in Game 5 of their NLDS series against the San Francisco Giants and their season ended.

Every time I saw Strasburg on television during the game, he had a blank look on his face. I’m not sure if he was disillusioned about not pitching in the hottest sporting event in D.C. in many years, or if he was tired of the camera being shoved in his face hoping for a reaction.

GM Rizzo decided long ago that Strasburg would be shut down after 160 or so innings. He was true to his word when he benched the superstar after 159+ innings. The official reason: The Nationals were trying to protect Strasburg’s arm. They were looking out for his future.

Rizzo got a lot of props for making such a bold move, but he was also raked over the coals by others. What a gutsy move. Rizzo knew if the Nats were eliminated, he’d face the critics once again.

I’m trying to figure out the logic behind this decision, and for the life of me, I can’t come to terms with it. Strasburg’s arms had recovered. Most major league pitchers who have Tommy John surgery make a comeback.

It’s a very successful procedure that has worked for the majority of pitchers who had it. Strasburg was the latest, and he looked damn good this season. Yeah, his last couple of starts in the regular season were rough, but, geez, it’s a long season. All of the players are tired, even the ones who didn’t have the Tommy John operation.

If Strasburg is on the roster, the Nats are a much better team,. With him and Gio Gonzalez anchoring the pitching staff, they’re among the strongest in the league. That’s a lot for the Cards to deal with, especially if they have to face Strasburg twice in a five-game series.

I think Strasburg would have won both his starts, with Gio winning the other, and the Nats would have advanced to the National League Championship series. From there, I had them beating the San Francisco Giants and moving on to the World Series against the New York Yankees.

I wonder how Strasburg felt. He kept giving us the “company line” when asked about being benched. But this town was crazy. There’s nothing like playoff fever for a city craving a championship, especially for a team that hasn’t seen baseball playoffs since, well, you get the idea. It’s been a long time. Strasburg deserved to pitch. He deserved the opportunity to share in the jubilation and excitement.

Heck, he’s one of the main reasons the Nats made it to the playoffs. Instead he was sitting in the dugout watching like all of us at home. It wasn’t fair to the young man and I give him major credit for not trashing the team and saying all the right things. He’s impressive off and on the mound. But he deserved better.

Lets talk about the surgery. He had completely recovered. Anyone who saw him pitch during the regular season knew that. His fastball was untouchable. He had complete command and control. He wasn’t lacking anywhere.

He was clearly one of the best pitchers in baseball. Some would argue he was the best. He is without a doubt in the same class as Justin Verlander and CC Sabathia.

By all accounts, Strasburg’s arm was fine. So what are you protecting him from? Why not let him pitch in a series he’s been dreaming about since he was a little kid? Why not give your team a better chance at winning the division series and hopefully a world championship? If Strasburg has been cleared by medical experts to pitch, why not let him pitch?

I often wonder what manager Davey Johnson “really” thought about sitting down his best player for the playoffs. There were reports of internal strife between Johnson and Rizzo during the season. Both downplayed the tension, but it raised a lot of questions about their ability to co-exist.

Was Johnson voicing his displeasure at Rizzo’s decision to de-activate Strasburg? Was Johnson telling Rizzo he was making a big mistake?

Let me just say I’m a Johnson fan. I thought he got the job under shady circumstances when former manager Jim Riggleman “resigned.” But that wasn’t Johnson’s fault. It was an ownership and Rizzo debacle. If anybody knows baseball,  it’s Johnson. He’s been there and done that. In previous columns,  I’ve sung his praises.

He was a great player for the Baltimore Orioles and a winning manager just about everywhere he’s been. Just ask the Orioles. Before this season, the O’s were mired in ruins. The last manager to take them to the playoffs? Johnson. But he had some issues with owner Peter Angelos, and vice versa, and they parted ways shortly after Johnson took Baltimore to the 1997 playoffs.

Johnson is invaluable to any major league baseball franchise. He’s tough, outspoken and opinionated. Any general manager or owner who hires him must know that before offering him the contract. Johnson’s worth it. All you have to do is look at his record.

The decision to bench Strasburg and lose a series in such disappointing fashion at home after having such a large lead will reverberate throughout the clubhouse and executive offices for a while. Trust me. This won’t blow over.

I find it hard to believe that Johnson said, “Sure, de-activate my best player.” I’ve followed him long enough to say he probably had some strong discussions with Rizzo about this controversial call. I know Johnson wants to win. He knows he has the team to do it, but in order for him to achieve that goal, people have to get out of the way and let him do his job.

I’ll give Rizzo credit for putting together a playoff team in a short period of time. He deserves accolades for that and he deserves them. Ian Desmond, Bryce Harper and Ryan Zimmerman are some of the best young baseball players in the game. If they keep this team together, they’ll be contenders for years to come.

But upper management decisions will have to be monitored more closely. Ted Lerner and the top brass need to closely study what happened to the Nats this year. They deserve more answers and perhaps a clearer explanation about why one of the game’s top pitchers wasn’t allowed to pitch. At the very least, the fans deserve that.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

How do you think it felt to be Stephen Strasburg, sitting in Nationals Park last night, knowing he could do nothing to help?

To see a team one strike away (twice) from advancing to the NLCS denied by a St. Louis Cardinals team that refuses to die?

To watch a starting pitching staff that was one of baseball’s best all season implode in the playoffs? Sure, Ross Detwiler, who took Strasburg‘s spot in the rotation, did his job in Game 4, throwing six solid innings and only allowing three hits and one earned run.

That performance is all the more impressive given that it was an elimination game and the whispers of Strasburg‘s name were hanging all over the media, the fans and likely the team itself.

But other than Detwiler, simply put, the rest of the Nationals’ rotation wasn’t ready for primetime. Even Gio Gonzalez, who left with a lead last night, produced a pedestrian 4.50 ERA in his two starts. 

Jordan Zimmerman was shellacked in three innings in his lone start, giving up five earned runs and seven hits. That was good for an inflated 11.25 ERA in the series.

Edwin Jackson was likewise unimpressive, lasting only five innings in his start and surrendering four earned runs. In relief last night, he walked two and gave up a crucial run in the seventh inning during the Cardinals’ comeback. His ERA for the series was a less than sterling 7.20.

Simply put, the Nationals’ starting pitching was not up to snuff in this series. You can argue all you want that Strasburg was not the ace of the staff, but now that the team has been eliminated, you have to wonder if things would’ve been different had he been available, even in a relief role.

The decision to sit Strasburg after some sort of arbitrary team-devised innings limit was controversial from the start. General manager Mike Rizzo defended the decision, and in the process, angered many opposing GM’s with his logic.

“We’ll be back and doing this a couple more times,” Rizzo said in defense of the decision. (via USA Today)

To many other teams, some of which have spent years without a winning season, much less a playoff appearance, this comes off as the height of hubris. After all, the Nationals franchise has been known in the past for many things, winning not being one of them.

To make an assumption like Rizzo has—and one which he continues to defend today—is a dangerous business in baseball. Success is fleeting, teams rise and fall faster than the stock market, and a playoff appearance one year is not a guarantee of anything beyond that one season.

Sports history is riddled with teams that were built for the long-haul and had one great season, never to be heard from again. 

Baseball is a finicky game. Players get hurt, production from key guys drops, other teams improve, a bloop single this year is a pop fly next year, you lose a few one-run games that you won the year before, and suddenly you go from 98 wins and a division title to 88 wins and find yourself on the outside looking in.

In all sports, general managers need to try and strike a delicate balance between going all-in for a championship, and building for the future. Rizzo says his team is positioned well going forward and will make more, and presumably better, playoff runs in the future. 

But that loses sight of the fact that the 2012 Nationals were not a team that surprised a lot of people by becoming overnight contenders. They weren’t a Cinderella story like the Oakland Athletics, who came out of absolutely nowhere to contend and stunningly win their division.

The Oakland A’s get credit for being there. The Washington Nationals won 98 regular season baseball games this year. Between that and their playoff series with the Cardinals, they walked off the field 100 times in victory this year. This wasn’t a team lucky to be there. 

This was a team that legitimately could take the field and have a real chance to win the World Series in 2012. 

The fact that Rizzo can stand up there today given this reality, and the reality that his team should be making NLCS plans today instead of packing their stuff, is simply mind-blowing.

Rizzo today told Adam Kilgore of The Washington Post:

We had a plan in mind. It was something we had from the beginning. I stand by my decision. We’ll take the criticism as it comes. We have to do what’s best for the Washington Nationals, and we think we did.

What is best for the Washington Nationals organization would be playing tomorrow night against the San Francisco Giants in the NLCS. It’s not filling a fanbase up with vague promises of continued postseason glory, at the expense of sacrificing a real, tangible chance at this year’s World Series.

Do we know for a fact that Stephen Strasburg would’ve made the difference in the series had he pitched? Of course not. But we do know that you want to win and lose games with your best possible team on the field. And Mike Rizzo robbed his fans of that chance.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

The Washington Nationals were defeated in a soul crushing Game 5 of the 2012 MLB National League East Division Series by the deceptively invincible defending World Champions St. Louis Cardinals.

And as yet another starting pitcher, Gio Gonzalez, had a poor outing, one question hung over the entire series: Where was Stephen Strasburg?

There is going to be a tremendous amount of bitterness directed towards Nationals General Manager Mike Rizzo over the decision not to pitch one of his best pitchers in the postseason. It is one thing to come up a strike short with your best team. It is quite another to lose by the tightest of margins with a weapon that was never taken out of the holster.

Oddly, there are some people, like CBS Sports insider John Heyman, who tried to brush aside any connection with the loss and Strasburg not being used. He wrote on his Twitter feed, “#nats defeat had nothing to do with strasburg. so let’s stop talking about it like it did.”

How can anyone say that with a straight face?

The Nationals starting pitching posted a 5.25 ERA, and that includes Ross Detwiler’s wonderful outing in Game 4. Washington’s bats scored enough to win Games 2 and 5 with a decent start.

Instead, they got two subpar outings from Gio Gonzalez and horrible starts from Jordan Zimmermann and Edwin Jackson.

So pointing out that an All-Star pitcher with electric stuff could have been used in one of those games and given the Nationals a better chance to win is out of line?

According to Amanda Comak of the Washington Times, Rizzo responded to the Strasburg question after the collapse Friday night by saying, “I’m not going to think about it.”

Well, it is nice to see that someone is not going to think about it. But that will be Rizzo’s legacy.

The Nationals, a franchise that had not played in a postseason series since Prince Charles and Princess Diana were newlyweds and in a city hosting its first baseball October since FDR’s first year in office, played their hearts out all year.

And Rizzo chose to not put the best team on the field because he wanted to win later.

With the disastrous performance by the Strasburg-less rotation and an overworked bullpen that did not get it done, the level of success that the Nationals will have to reach to justify the decision is sky high.

Nothing less than a World Series title in the very near future will be acceptable to put the debacle of the 2012 postseason behind Rizzo.

In the same Washington Times article, pitcher Tyler Clippard toed the company line and had an interesting quote:

And we showed to everyone that we had the personnel without Stephen in the playoffs to get it done. At the end of the day, it didn’t happen, but we showed we were good enough.

Actually, Tyler Clippard, you showed you were not good enough to get it done without Stephen Strasburg in the playoffs. And that is the point.

Had the Cardinals defeated Strasburg the way they defeated Roy Halladay and Cliff Lee last October, you could tip your cap and say, “They defeated our best.”

When they win a series like this, the lingering reality that they did not defeat your best is fair game to point out.

Mike Rizzo might not want to think about it, but he will be reminded every day until Washington, D.C. celebrates its first title since 1924.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

In Game 1 of the NLDS, fans saw a competitive contest. In Game 2, fans witnessed a different outcome as the St. Louis Cardinals put on a slaughtering over the Washington Nationals.

With the series tied 1-1 between the Cards and the Nats, the newbies to playoff baseball are looking to take that series lead as they play at home for Game 3 on Wednesday afternoon.

However, there are two vital components necessary for Washington to be victorious and remain hopeful with their eyes on the prize for that World Series championship title.

Begin Slideshow

By all accounts, Bryce Harper should be raking against the St. Louis Cardinals. The stage seemed set for a dynamic postseason debut by the 19-year-old, as he entered the series with a career 1.234 OPS against the Cardinals over seven games this year. Similarly, the he saw the ball well at Busch Stadium this year with six hits in 11 at-bats.

However, Harper had an ominous start to the postseason, going 1-for-10 with six strikeouts over two games. But as I noted yesterday, his performance isn’t as poor as it may seem. Through those 10 at-bats, the left-handed hitter is averaging five pitches per at-bat, though his swing as been inconsistent.

But now, as the best-of-five Division Series heads home to Washington, Harper is poised to finally break out at the plate.

Scheduled to face right-hander Chris Carpenter on Wednesday afternoon (1 p.m. ET start time), Harper has thrived against pitchers of a similar ilk. According to BaseballReference.com, he’s posted an .838 OPS with 21 extra-base hits against pitchers who combine a power and finesse approach.

However, still recovering from surgery for thoracic outlet syndrome, Carpenter doesn’t possess the same velocity or effectiveness that he did in 2011.

Although it’s a small sample, the right-hander’s velocity is lower across the board this season (understandably), with every offering down 1-to-3 mph against left-handed hitting relative to the previous year, according to Baseball Prospectus and Brooks Baseball. Harper will also have the advantage of hitting in his home ballpark, where his OPS was exactly .30 higher during the regular season.

Combine all of those factors and there’s reason to believe that Harper’s postseason is just beginning, as he hopes to jump-start the Nats’ offense in Game 3 on Wednesday afternoon.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

There has never been a Washington baseball team that played in a major league that won 100 games.

The current Washington Nationals franchise never won more than 81 games before the current squad tallied 95 with five to play this year.

No other team reached that level, either. The two other 20th century franchises could not pass the century mark.

The original Senators won 99 games in 1933, the last pennant winner in DC. The franchise would pass 100 wins in 1965, but by then they had moved and become the Minnesota Twins.

The second Senators team won 86 games in 1969. Now the Texas Rangers, they won 96 games last year, the high-water mark for the franchise.

A few 19th century teams played in Washington. But neither the Washington Statesmen of the American Association, the Washington Senators or Washington Nationals of the National League nor the Washington Nationals of the Union Association ever cracked 100 wins in a season.

And when the current Nationals team existed as the Montreal Expos, they never won more than 95 games a year.

So this Nationals team stands with five to play with a shot to achieve what the franchise and city never saw: 100 games.

They need to go 5-0. Jordan Zimmermann has to defeat St. Louis pitcher Kyle Lohse today. Zimmermann has been outstanding, but as John Heyman of CBS Sports pointed out, Lohse has been a sleeper Cy Young contender in the National League.

The Nationals would have to see Ross Detwiler defeat Lance Lynn on Sunday.

Then the Nationals would have to sweep the Phillies at home to finish the season.

Granted, the need to win 100 games is not as pressing as winning the division and the World Series.

But even having the chance at 100 wins after losing 103 as recently as 2009 is quite a deal for a Washington franchise.

The 1884 Washington Statesmen would be proud.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com

Former Montreal Expo Ross Grimsley has company.

Gio González became the second 20-game winner in franchise history as the Washington Nationals inched a little closer to the National League East title.

He looked like an ace out there today. He pitched against a red-hot Milwaukee Brewers team and shut them down.

He pitched seven innings with no earned runs, three hits and a single walk. His ERA dropped to 2.84 and he remains in the Cy Young race.

So the Nationals will have a No. 1 starter going into the postseason, and it’s a fair bet that Nationals General Manager Mike Rizzo is breathing a sigh of relief with Gonzalez’s performance.

Rizzo got a lot of grief for how he shut down All Star starter Stephen Strasburg for the season. LaVar and Dukes from CBS DC questioned the move before Strasburg was even officially shutdown.

And, as reported by Mark Zuckerman from CSNWashington.com, manager Davey Johnson blamed the media hype partially for Strasburg‘s subpar final few games.

Because, of course, the media put an innings limit on Strasburg and announced it in spring training.

Still, the franchise is in the playoffs for the first time since 1981, and the city of Washington is going to get their first taste of the post season since 1933.

A perfect storm of events—including the rapid maturation of key players and the decline of the Phillies and the Marlins—puts the Nats in this pleasantly unexpected place.

And Rizzo was removing a key arm.

If Gonzalez pitches like he did today and like he has all year, the Strasburg decision will be forgotten quicker. Most teams would be just fine having Jordan Zimmermann, Ross Detwiler and Edwin Jackson as their second, third and fourth pitchers.

Then again, having Gio and Strasburg going 1-2 in a short series would make it almost a lock for Washington.

Well, it seems like a gamble Mike Rizzo is willing to take.

Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com