Are The Washington Nationals Trying To Trade Lastings Milledge?
I noticed some traffic coming my way from MLBTradeRumors.com this afternoon, and when I looked I saw that MLBTR.com writer Cork Gaines had linked to my interview with Sports Illustrated writer Lee Jenkins.
While lurking around MLBTR.com, I came across a link in MLBTR writer Ben Nicholson-Smith's post entitled, "Heyman on Penny, Ackley, Milledge", which led to SI.com writer Jon Heyman's article entitled, "Surprise Performances (cont.)" in which Mr. Heyman writes, (please note, w/out quoting a source), that:
"Word is there's some trade talk going on involving Lastings Milledge. So if he goes, he'll have two organizations he can rip."
5 months ago
Ed Chigliak
5 comments
0 recs |
Comments
please, please, please
I’ll even go to church Sunday…
by flippin1166 on Jun 12, 2009 4:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'll be Dukes' friend if its true
I dont even care who we get back…
"Baseball is like church. Many attend; few understand."
by Mezza on Jun 12, 2009 7:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Could be a good thing
That trade with the Mets for Milledge hasn’t turned out so well. Ryan Church and Brian Schneider are doing about as much for the Mets as they were with the Nats while Milledge is on the DL — in the minors. He’s still young but this spring was a big setback.
In his defense, Milledge is not a natural CF. He was put there largely because there is no one else to play that position on the big-league team. Dukes is not a natural CF either and Justin Maxwell is not quite ready to play in the major leagues yet.
Other teams may see that the Nats forced Milledge into CF and put him into the leadoff spot prematurely. They may understand that Milledge still has a great deal of potential. If they play him in LF or RF, he could have fewer defense problems. A different spot in the batting order might also help. He could be much better in the no. 3, 4 or 5 spots.
Do the Nats need him for the future? It depends. Austin Kearns will not be around for long. He has shown that he simply can’t hit the ball. He’s had a 2 or 3-year “slump” now. Dukes and Dunn will be around next year but Dukes seems to be injury prone. Dunn has his defensive issues but his batting power and high OBP help to make up for that. Can Maxwell be ready for the 2010 season? If so, then the Nats would be better off trading Milledge. Josh Willingham could hang around and provide competition for Dukes and maybe Maxwell. Dukes will probably miss some games because of injury so Willingham could fill in. At other times, Dukes could play some games at CF to give Maxwell a breather and Willingham could play RF at that time. Willie Harris could continue to fill his role as a versatile utility player and occasional starter.
The Nats’ pitching staff looks to have a lot of promise for 2010 and 2011 if the young guys continue to make progress. John Lannan is already showing that he is becoming a quality major-league starter, one who could contribute for a decade or more. If a couple of the other guys develop at the same pace, then the rotation could be quite good by the end of this year or by next year. Drew Storen could take on the closer’s role in 2010. Hanrahan could win the job back or develop into a dominant set-up man. If so, the bullpen should be decent. The big problem for the team is the 2B and SS positions down the road. Is Anderson Hernandez the answer? Possibly. What about SS? Guzman is not the defensive player he once was and at some point his batting average might start to dip. If the Nats can get a quality middle IF for Milledge, then a deal might make a lot of sense.
-------------------------------------------------
Washington, first in war, first in peace, last in the NL East :(
by Potomac Fan on Jun 13, 2009 5:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Agree with most of what you say...
Milledge, “…could be much better in the no. 3, 4 or 5 spots.” – I haven’t seen the kind of power out of him, especially this season, to warrant a middle of the order spot…right now 5 would be a stretch…
Aside from that my only objection is to Hammer in right, though I’m sure with practice he’d be adequate…
Vivian Jaffe: "Have you ever transcended space and time?"
Albert Markovski: "Yes. No. Uh, time, not space... No, I don't know what you're talking about."
by Ed Chigliak on Jun 13, 2009 5:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs



















