Washington Nationals: Roy Oswalt Chatter.
By now you've all heard this and taken a shot at his personal life, (shame on you), but...
According to SI.com's Hot Clicks writer Jimmy Traina (@JimmyTraina), in a Tweet posted Monday afternoon, former New York Mets' GM Steve Phillips, "...told [660 WFAN radio host] Mike Francesa if he was Wash[ington], he'd trade Stephen Strasburg for Roy Oswalt." Seriously, Steve? A few hours after Mr. Phillips offered that unsolicited advice, FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal was writing, in an article entitled, "Rosenthal: Imagining the Oswalt market", about a hypothetical scenario in which Astros' General Manager Ed Wade talks to Houston owner Drayton McLane about what other teams are offering for 'Stros right-hander Roy Oswalt, who has reportedly asked for a trade in light of the franchise's inability to field a competitive team. Here's how Mr. Rosenthal's imagined conversation begins:
"Astros general manager Ed Wade walks into owner Drayton McLane’s office, armed with a trade proposal from the Nationals for right-hander Roy Oswalt.
"Who are we getting?" McLane asks excitedly. "Strasburg?"
Wade stiffens.
"No, sir. The Nationals are offering lesser prospects, but three guys we think can play and maybe make an impact."
Both MLB.com's Bill Ladson, in an article entitled, "Nationals express interest in Oswalt" this past Sunday, and Washington Post writer Adam Kilgore, in an article entitled, "Nationals GM Mike Rizzo is mum on Roy Oswalt report", examined the Oswalt to DC rumors, with Mr. Ladson confirming the Nats' interest in the 32-year-old right-hander via an unnamed "baseball source", while Mr. Kilgore writes that the DC GM Mike Rizzo:
"...did not confirm or deny the interest, he intimated the Nationals have been active in pursuing players and praised Oswalt."
Mr. Rosenthal's colleague at FOXSports.com, Jon Paul Morosi, lists the Nationals as one of ten teams interested in Oswalt in an article today entitled, "Potential destinations for Roy Oswalt", wherein Mr. Morosi writes that the Nationals, "...possess a winning record and expect to contend – satisfying key criteria for Oswalt as he considers the destinations for which he would waive his no-trade clause."
The Nationals are not going to offer Stephen Strasburg for Oswalt, and I'll assume that if Mr. Phillips was asked to explain his opinion he'd say that Oswalt is a proven commodity while Strasburg's yet to throw a major league pitch, but it's hard to take the talk seriously as Mr. Rosenthal subtly hints in his parody. Oswalt's made it clear he'd like to pitch for a contender, if he leaves, but in spite of the Nationals' early success, I don't think they fit the definition of a team in contention just yet, but it's clear that the Nationals are always looking at the possibilities that are out there, especially with the injuries that have hit their starting rotation already this season.
13 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
They aren’t a contender now, but with Oswalt and Strasburg they might be. It would really depend on what the Astros want and the willingness of the Lerners to shell out the cash.
Aim for the head baby Jesus
Oswalt making $15M this year, $16M next year...
…and then $16M in twenty-twelve w/ a $2M buyout…
So that’s some serious cash to shell out…
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 Patrick Reddington on May 25, 2010 3:47 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I agree, I’d be much happier with settling for seventy something wins this year and spending that $16 in better ways for next year.
Aim for the head baby Jesus
Oswalt is overpaid now, and will be even more overpaid next year, a run this year would be fun, but they could get so much more value out of that $16 million next year if the Nationals spent it elsewhere. Here’s hoping they do spend that money somewhere though.
Aim for the head baby Jesus
Agreed.
Save the dough for long-term development… though I don’t think the Lerner family necessarily thinks about money that way.
It's a lot of money,
But they can afford it. The team is in a position this year to draw instant fan interest with the right star power, and to even stay competitive for the remainder of the season if they can shore up their rotation. Oswalt does both quite nicely.
I know, there are some important items that the Nats will have to spend money on. The biggest piece will be Harper’s signing bonus, but Willingham will get a few million additional next year, and so will Dunn. On the other hand, they will be free from Guzman’s contract.
Can the Lerners afford a $85M salary next year? Of course they can. Will Oswalt be worth $500K per start next year? Of course he will.
It’s not my money, so I can feel free to spend it as I see fit.
Rob
"Winfield goes back to the wall. He hits his head on the wall and it rolls off! It's rolling all the way back to second base! This is a terrible thing for the Padres!" -- Jerry Coleman
The frustrating thing about this is...
…if we hadn’t spent the money on Marquis I’d have said do it. But that money is sunk cost and I’d like to see the return on the investment first. We’re not going to spend for the sake of improving.
Until we show some creativity and aggression in international signings, it will be very hard for me to endorse trying to find the magic free agent or expensive trade to solve our woes.
Ian Desmond...because the future starts now for the Washington Nationals.
+1
and you wonder who else is going to be available come the deadline.
(I hate to say that because Oswalt is my favorite pitcher)
Some of the names tossed around are...
…Cliff Lee, Kevin Millwood and others. Shoot we could even take a run at Pedro in an effort to give him an ongoing tour of the NL East (kidding people, kidding).
Ian Desmond...because the future starts now for the Washington Nationals.
I plopped this in the Strasburg Fanpost...but more eyes may see it here.
Strasburg will receive a $7.5 million signing bonus with $2.5 million paid 15 days after approval of the contract, $2.5 million paid in January 2010 and another $2.5 million paid in January 2011.
He is scheduled to receive a $400,000 salary in 2009, but that is prorated to approximately $100,000. He then will get a $2 million salary in 2010, $2.5 million in 2011 and $3 million in 2012.
(Info above is from Jayson Stark in 2009)

by 


















