Nationals Interested In Pedro?...Martinez?...Really?

A Yankee-fan friend of mine texted me with these ominous words:

"Nats get Pedro..."

To which I responded incredulously, "Where'd you hear that?"

"Speculation on SI website..."

"Send me a link," I said, and he did...and he should have included a ? in his original text, as in "Nats get Pedro?"...

Ben Reiter, SI.com columnist, has a post entitled, "Ranking the top 50 free agents", where, in a chart listing the top fifty available players and the team with which they'd be the "Best Fit", he gets to #44 overall, the 13th starting pitcher on the list, Pedro Martinez, and Mr. Reiter writes that the best fit for Pedro would be the Nationals...:

"Many thought the Mets would get two good years out of his four-year deal; they got one, his first. His next contract could yield fewer than that, and as such will likely be largely incentive-based. Jim Bowden's Nats always willing to gamble, even if success rate is low."

Even if Pedro was healthy, I can't see this making sense, any more than signing Lo Duca did last season...but I'm sure Manny Acta knows what he's like in the locker room from their time together in NY...Does anyone believe this? The only positive I can see is giving one of Scott Boras' clients, like Pedro, a deal to start the year off on a good note so negotiations with Stephen Strasburg are easier...Just thinking ahead...

over 3 years ago Patrick Reddington 2 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

No Fair

First let me apologize, as per your terms of use, because I am a Mets fan.
You can’t compare signing Pedro to LoDuca. LoDuca had no skills left when the Nats signed him. Pedro still demonstrated a decent enough K Rate to be considered on any team as a 5th starter, and he has upside as a third. I see him having a decent year, and if the Nats want to play .500 ball or better, Pedro would be a good piece (at least for depth). Outside of that, he could be a good teacher for young pitchers.

On the other hand, he would probably draw money away from more important things, and I wouldn’t fault the Nats for focusing on getting younger not older.

by Sam Page on Nov 2, 2008 1:07 AM EDT reply actions

You're right, I should have been clearer...

I thought it was a good/alright idea to sign Lo Duca until he showed up on the Mitchell Report a day after signing, got injured before the season, and then proceeded to alienate everyone in DC before he was finally released…in theory signing a veteran catcher who could still hit, even if he was horrible defensively, wasn’t a bad move with all the young pitchers DC had, but it didn’t work out well…

So the comparison I meant was signing an injured Pedro and an injured Lo Duca, Pedro could be invaluable to the young Nationals’ staff, but what he can add on the field is questionable since he hasn’t pitched a complete season since ’05…

Once Pedro warmed up last season he was okay…from like the 3rd on…

Sorry, I forgot about the terms of use, I hadn’t read those since I originally wrote them last August, glad it didn’t stop you…

"Nothin' wrong with my leg, I'm just B-boy limpin'" - MCA

by Patrick Reddington on Nov 2, 2008 1:28 AM EDT up reply actions