22ND ROUND PICK DANIEL ROSENBAUM IMPRESSING IN HAGERSTOWN

Since the first day that they arrived in town, the Washington Nationals promised that fixing the depleted farm system would be priority-one.

And since that first draft, the team has been stocking their farm system with talented young pitchers. Then general manager Jim Bowden said that was the way to do it. "You draft as many pitchers as you can get," he said, "and then trade the excess for position players."

And for the most part, it has worked. Two members of the Nationals' current starting rotation--John Lannan and Craig Stammen--arrived that very first amateur draft in 2005.

But we've stopped watching for the quantity and are transfixed on the quality, last year's first rounders Stephen Strasburg and Drew Storen. Because of them, we've stopped looking for the next Lannan or the next Stammen.

But they are there. And though it's important when the can't miss prospects suceed, it is far more fun when the late-rounders come out of nowhere and help solidify the team.

Like Daniel Rosenbaum.

Rosenbaum was drafted in the 22nd round of last year's amateur draft, an afterthought pick if ever there was one. He had a good-enough career at Xavier, but certainly nothing special. If he wasn't a left-hander, I doubt he would have even been drafted.

As a 21-year-old, Rosenbaum dominated his Gulf Coast League competition. He started 11 games, crafting a fine record of 4-1, 1.95. allowing just 7.1 hits and 2.2 walks per nine-innings while striking out 9.2.

That said, Rosenbaum was pitching against 18-year-olds. The Nationals would need to wait until this season when, playing for Class-A Hagerstown, he would compete against players of similar age and experience.

Turns out he's pitching even better.

In 28 innings, Rosenbaum is 1-0, 1.57, allowing 6.9 hits and 1.6 walks per nine-innings while striking out nearly eight per game.

So while it's fun to watch guys like Strasburg and Storen inch their way towards the major leagues, it is players like Daniel Rosenbaum--players who came out of nowhere--who can make a good team great.

WILL DREW STOREN MAKE BRIAN BRUNEY THE NEXT WALLY PIPP?

When the Nationals traded their Rule V pick last winter to the Yankees for reliever Brian Bruney, many thought it to be a solid addition to a woeful bullpen.

The 28-year-old veteran had a career record of 17-10, 4.31 and he seemed like a logical option to either be the team’s eighth-inning set-up man or perhaps even their closer.

But buried deep within his otherwise solid statistics is one glaring red-flag: Brian Bruney has trouble throwing strikes.

In 230 career innings, Bruney has averaged just 7.5 hits per nine-innings allowed but has walked an astonishing 6.3 batters per nine. For his career, he has struck out 1.3 batters for every walk.

Not very good.

Heading into Monday night’s game against the Chicago Cubs, Bruney had not had much success with his new team. He had walked nine in 8.1 innings while striking out just six.

So what happened last night against Chicago wasn’t a total surprise.

After Ryan Theriot opened the inning with a single, Bruney induced Jeff Baker to strikeout.

Then it became classic Bruney.

He walked Derrek Lee on four pitches and then allowed another single to former National Marlon Byrd.

The bases were loaded with just one out. Up stepped Aramis Ramirez.

Bruney threw four straight balls and the game was over.

Just like that.

Bruney has now pitched 9.2 innings in 2010 and has walked 12 batters.

The Nationals could have excused this type of pitching last year, perhaps even lived with it.

But not this year.

There are two many signals that the team is ready to make a run towards respectability to lose games this year like they did last year.

Now, I’m not blaming Brian Bruney. He has a career history of walking far too many batters. There is no reason to believe that he should suddenly find his control.

It’s not time to give up on Brian Bruney. But there will come a time when Mike Rizzo and Jim Riggleman will have to decide if the Nationals can be a .500 team—perhaps better—with Bruney walking a batter an inning.

Very soon, Drew Storen will be called up. He might replace Miguel Batista or Tyler Walker, neither whom are pitching particularly well.

But Storen is a one-inning guy, just like Bruney. My guess is, unless something changes quickly, Brian Bruney will be the odd-man out.

TOM MILONE COULD BE NATIONALS' NEXT JOHN LANNAN

I know, I know. You’ve never heard of Tom Milone. He’s just another no-name pitcher toiling somewhere within the deep recesses of the Nationals’ minor league system.

You’ve seen the various top-20 prospect lists for 2010 and he’s nowhere to be found.

*Yawn*

“Wake me when we get to the all-star break," you might be thinking.

Okay, you’ve never heard of Tom Milone; I got that. But I’m very sure that prior to his call-up in mid 2007, you had never heard of John Lannan either.

Trust me, here. You really need to know more about this 22-year-old from USC.

I have enjoyed watching Lannan pitch the last couple of years, partly because he’s good, but partly because I love it when underdogs succeed at the major league level.

An 11th-round pick in 2005 out of Siena College (17-5, 3.86), he was considered to be no more than another organizational arm who might one day become a lefty specialist out of the pen.

And in his first two seasons (Vermont and Low-A Savannah), that’s how he pitched. In 35 starts, Lannan was just 9-13, with a 4.89 ERA. In 2007, however, he blossomed. He cut his hits per nine-innings in half. He began hitting his spots.

In the span of just a couple of months, he was promoted to Double-A Harrisburg, then Triple-A Columbus, and finally to the major leagues where he started six games for Washington. He finished the season with a line of 12-3, 2.31, 6.6/3.0/5.3 (hits/walks/strikeouts per nine-innings).

Lannan’s 20-30, 3.89 career record with the Nationals is deceiving. Cy Young Award winner Tim Lincecum had 26 quality starts last season and former Cy Young Award winner Cliff Lee had 23.

Lannan had 21.

In other words, he’s still young, still learning, and when he doesn’t spot his pitches well, he still gets clobbered.

With a bit more luck and a little more offensive support, Lannan should win a dozen or so games each year for the next decade. He’s an ideal No. 3 starter.

Milone, like Lannan, is a lanky lefty who must pitch to spots to be successful. He is eighth all-time in games started for Southern Cal. In 2007, he was named Pitcher of the Year in the prestigious Cape Cod League with a record of 6-1 and a 2.92 ERA. He struck out 46 and walked just seven in 52 innings.

His next summer was spent in Wenatchee, Washington pitching in a West Coast summer league. In 51 innings, Milone went 6-1 with a 2.61 ERA.

Against some of the best college hitters, Milone combined to go 12-2 (2.81 ERA) while striking out 101 in 103 innings. He walked just 13.

But a lack of a dominating fastball, and a so-so 16-17 career record with a 4.78 ERA at Southern Cal relegated Milone to a 10th-round afterthought in last year’s amateur draft.

Though major league scouts didn’t think much of his ability, Milone was confident that he would succeed.

Pitching for Vermont and Hagerstown, Milone crafted a record of 1-6 but with a solid 3.51 ERA. He allowed 10.3 hits per nine-innings but just 1.3 walks.

Nationals’ scouts saw enough to promote him to High-A Potomac for the 2009 season. And just like Lannan two seasons earlier, Milone blossomed.

After watching him pitch in a bullpen session early in the year, Potomac pitching coach Paul Menhart approached Milone about adding a cut fastball to his repertoire. Pitching to contact is fine, he said, but disguising his 87 mph fastball would help him greatly.

Milone’s cutter looks like his fastball but dives at the last second. Against right-handers, it first dives in, then away as it crosses the plate.

His ERA was 3.89 when he began to throw his new pitch in early July. By the end of the year, it had dropped to 2.91, best on the team. His batting average-against, .275 the season before, was just .252 with Potomac.

Milone’s fastball tops out at 87 mph but is usually in the 84-86 mph range. His curve is sharp and about 10 mph slower than his fastball, providing good separation. His change, though, is by far his best pitch, one he can throw wherever he wants and at any point in the count.

His control is remarkable. Over his minor league career, Milone has walked just 45 while striking out 155, more than a 3:1 strikeout to walk ratio.

Milone has trouble when he’s not hitting his spots. When facing a walk, he tends to throw his fastball down the middle of the plate, a bad place for a slow fastball. But that is a peril that all contact pitchers face. If you don’t have an “out” pitch, there just aren’t many safe pitches to throw.

Overall, Milone’s minor league numbers are very similar to those of John Lannan:

Record:
Lannan: 21-16 (.567)
Milone: 13-11 (.541)

ERA:
Lannan: 3.92
Milone: 3.08

Opponent’s Batting Average:
Lannan: .258
Milone: .261

Hits/Walks/Strikeouts Per Nine-Innings
Lannan: 8.7/3.5/6.3
Milone: 8.9/1.9/6.6

John Lannan and Tom Milone are very similar pitchers. One would think that Milone might have a major league career similar to Lannan, that of a mid-to-back of the rotation starter who can be counted to win 12-14 games a year.

Sure, Milone is not on any watch list and isn’t considered much of a prospect. But John Lannan didn’t show up as a true prospect until the 2008 season, after he had already pitched in the major leagues.

Milone has a prospect grade of “C” and is lumped together with a bevy of other non-prospect types like Taylor Jordan, Nathan Karns, and Pat Lehman.

I am in no way suggesting that Milone is going to repeat the success of John Lannan. But he has similar tools, has even better control, and at 22 was one of the younger pitchers in the Carolina League last year.

Lannan was also 22 when he pitched for Potomac.

Milone is currently pitching for Double-A Harrisburg, but another solid season there will probably pique the interest of Mike Rizzo and his minions.

Yes, it seems unlikely that a 10th-rounder will eventually make the Nationals’ starting rotation. But isn’t that the same thing we all said about John Lannan, the eleventh-round selection from Siena College?

Keep an eye on him in 2010. You just never know.

SCOTT OLSEN DAZZLES RED SOX, MAY HAVE REGAINED STARTING SPOT

When he reported to spring training, Garrett Mock was in a three-way battle along with J.D. Martin and Scott Olsen to secure the fifth and final spot in the Washington Nationals rotation.

A couple of weeks ago, he had outperformed both of them and the job was his for the taking. All he had to do was to not screw it up.

Since then, Mock has pretty much screwed it up while Scott Olsen has pitched brilliantly his last two starts.

If manager Jim Riggleman makes his choice based on pitching and not politics, then Scott Olsen will come north as part of the rotation.

In his last two outings, Mock has a 7.82 ERA, allowing eight runs in 9.2 innings, walking five and striking out three.

In his last two outings, Scott Olsen's ERA is just 1.78, allowing 12 hits in 10.1 innings, walking one while striking out 11.

Riggleman made it clear this morning that Mock could win the job even if Olsen pitched well against Boston, but it would be very difficult to send Olsen to Triple-A Syracuse while making $1 million this year while Garrett Mock has yet to have a successful stint as a major leaguer.

Perhaps Olsen was still not over his elbow surgery earlier this spring and perhaps he finally feels healthy and strong.

Perhaps Olsen will again become a 200+ inning pitcher like he was for the Marlins from 2006 through 2008.

Or perhaps he just happened to have two good games at the end of spring.

An effective Scott Olsen could make the Nationals a .500 team in 2010.

TEST OF A NEW STORY

This is a new story.

With Opening Day about two weeks away, I thought now was a good time to cover all of those stories that are important but couldn't find a way to work into a full column.

Steven Strasburg:
Wow.

After dominating all of college baseball last year, he's gotten even better in 2009. In 34 innings, Strasburg has struck out 74 while walking just seven and has a 1.54 ERA.

ESPN's Peter Gammons reported on Saturday that Strasburg's agent Scott Boras may ask for as much as 6 years/$50 million while Buster Olney reported that Strasburg may double the highest bonus ever paid for a top prospect and receive as much as $20 million just to sign his contract.

Let me be clear about this: acting general manager Mike Rizzo and team president Stan Kasten need to sit down with Boras on draft day, with the Lerner's checkbook open and pen poised and simply say, "how much?"

No matter what happens, the Nationals will overpay for the 22-year-old who is still months away from throwing his first professional pitch. Whatever he ends up getting, he's not worth it.

But they have to sign him for a couple of reasons. First, after not signing last year's first round pick, Aaron Crow, the team would be eviscerated if they lose Strasburg. I don't believe a team has ever not signed their top pick two seasons in a row.

Second, Strasburg is a very special pitcher who is as close to a can't-miss prospect as was ever created. Buster Olney said that a senior major league scout recently told him that Strasburg is the best amateur pitcher ever.

Olney called him the "LeBron James of baseball." That means that the stadium will fill with peripheral baseball fans every time he pitches. That means that he will (almost) earn every penny of that bonus.

If Strasburg was asking for all that money from the Nationals and the Nationals were a real 59-win team, that is, a team that was devoid of talent instead of leading the major leagues in lost player days due to injury, I'd say no, don't draft him. He's not worth it.

But the Nationals are a young and maturing team. Signing Strasburg might be that final piece of the puzzle that transforms a pretender into a contender.

And quickly.

Nick Johnson:
I still don't get why Manny Acta and Mike Rizzo think that having Nick Johnson at first in 2009 will make them a much better team.

Granted, Nick has shown that he is a very solid first baseman, but the only thing he does extraordinarily well is get on base. His power numbers, especially his home runs, is sub par. Johnson's career high is just 23 and he's averaged just 21 in a 162 game season.

And while his defense has been very good, he committed 15 errors in his last full season (2006), and his .988 fielding percent was a full eight points below the league average.

And don't forget that he's been available for just under 54% of his team's games since he joined the Yankees in 2001.

And don't forget that he's in the last year of a four-year contract, and regardless of how well he might do in 2009, there is no way that the Nationals are going to resign him given his history.

And don't forget that Johnson batted just .220 last year and is currently at .182 (6-33) with a .341 on-base percentage. Eventually, all those missed at-bats are going to take a permanent toll. Maybe we're beginning to see that now.

And Josh Willingham, the man who would be pushed to the bench if Johnson plays first, is beginning to warm up with the bat. Willingham, a notoriously slow starter, began the spring hitting 1-18, but since has gone .500 (6-12) with two homers and has a fine .378 OBP.

The only way any of this makes sense is that this is all a reuse. The Nationals have no desire to keep Johnson, and are trying to increase his value by telling anyone who will listen that he is their first baseman, period.

I hope so. Josh Willingham is capable of hitting .260-25-85 and playing solid defense. He needs to be the team's left fielder.

Alex Cintron:
Cintron, signed to a minor league contract last winter, is playing well this spring, batting .320 with an .887 OPS. And the 31-year-old has hit nearly that well throughout his career. Cintron batted .286 for the Orioles last season and has a career .277 batting average. In 2003, he hit .317-13-51 for the Diamondbacks. That year, he made just eight errors at short.

He seems to be a Royce Clayton but with a little more pop in his bat.

It's been a long time since the Washington Nationals have been shown any real respect by the media, though to be fair, they really haven't deserved any. Half way through the team's inaugural season in Washington, the Nationals were atop the National League East with a 50-31 record.

Since then, the Nationals have gone 233-333, winning just under 41% of their games.

And the post-2008 chatter has been particularly difficult to listen to, as the mocking is no longer limited to the quality of the team on the field. Smiley-gate destroyed the team's Dominican program and led to Jim Bowden's forced resignation.

Some reporters have found it difficult to discuss the Washington Nationals without shaking their heads and chuckling under their breath.

But quietly and cautiously, and well under most reporter's radar, the outlook for the Washington Nationals is beginning to change.

Really.

In the last week, there have been many stories written about the team, and while they remain generally cynical and mostly negative, buried deep within the prose are sentences that infer a sense of hope.

One reporter said that the team's offense was not nearly as bad as he thought, saying that "Bowden's desperate moves over the past three years may begin to pay dividends in 2009. A 25 game improvement-to 84 wins-isn't out of the realm of possibility."

Another, who had derided the Nationals' organization just a year ago, told his readers that "Amazingly, the Nationals could field an offense that includes a 40-homer guy (Dunn), two 30-homer men (Zimmerman, Dukes) and two more (Willingham, Milledge) with more than 20 home runs. Throw in Ronnie Belliard and Jesus Flores, each capable of hitting 15 homers, and the Nationals could easily go from the worst offensive in the National League to one of the more solid in 2009."

Are the Nationals that much better than they have been? Let's take at the National League East position players and see how the Beltway Boys compare. The rankings by position are subjective but I think they are very accurate:

First Base

1. Ryan Howard
2. Adam Dunn

3. Carlos Delgado

4. Casey Kotchman

5. Gaby Sanchez

Dunn is clearly the class of every first baseman not named Ryan Howard. Delgado has had a brilliant career but he's 37 and time is slowly catching up with him. Casey Kotchman is what he is, a serviceable first baseman who's not going to get any better. And Gaby Sanchez, though impressive as a minor leaguer, has just eight major league at-bats.

Second Base

1. Chase Utley

2. Dan Uggla

3. Kelly Johnson

4. Ronnie Belliard

5. Luis Castillo

There aren't any better second baseman in the National League than Utley and Uggla. Kelly Johnson, just 26, has averaged .265-16-75 in his young career. Luis Castillo, though a career .292 hitter, has gotten old quickly and at 32, is pretty much an afterthought. Ronnie Belliard is a solid-hitting, slightly above average second baseman, and I'm glad to have him.

Shortstop

1. Hanley Ramirez

2. Jimmy Rollins

3. Jose Reyes

4. Yunel Escobar

5. Cristian Guzman

Wow. Christian Guzman hit .316 last year and he's the worst shortstop in the division. Above him are three superstars and a guy who one day may become a superstar.

Third Base

1. David Wright

2. Ryan Zimmerman

3. Chipper Jones

4. Jorge Cantu

5. Pedro Feliz

Though I believe that Ryan Zimmerman will be better than David Wright one day, he's not there yet, and Chipper's age, and poor defense, makes him a distant third on the list. Jorge Cantu has hit at least 28 homers twice in his career and he's just 26. Feliz isn't much of a third baseman.

Catcher

1. Brian McCann

2. Jesus Flores

3. Brian Schneider

4. John Baker

5. Carlos Ruiz

Brian McCann is one of the best catchers in the game and is light-years ahead of Jesus Flores, who has the talent to become an occasional National League All-Star. Brian Schneider's once shining star has faded in the last two years. Baker is untested and Ruiz is holding the position only until someone else comes along.

Left Field

1. Raul Ibanez

2. Garrett Anderson

3. Josh Willingham

4. Jeremy Hermida

5. Daniel Murphy

Though Ibanez and Anderson are both 37, they still outperform the Nationals' Josh Willingham. Jermey Hermida might be best of the lot one day, and Daniel Murphy hadn't been tested enough at the major league level to be listed any higher than 5th.

Center Field

1. Carlos Beltran

2. Lastings Milledge

3. Shane Victorino

4. Cameron Maybin

5. Josh Anderson

Because it's been a decade since Carlos Beltran first hit 20 homers and drove in 100 runs, we think of him as being on the downside of his career, but he's just 31. Victorino and Anderson are serviceable but not great players. Lastings Milledge might one day be a .285-25-100, 30 steals kind of player, a Carlos Beltran lite if you will.

Right Field

1. Elijah Dukes

2. Jason Werth

3. Cody Ross

4. Ryan Church
5. Jeff Francoeur

Prior to last year, I'd have listed Jeff Francoeur at the best right fielder in the division, but his horrid 2009 makes me wonder if he'll ever rebound. It's very hard, after all, to hit .239 with a .294 on-base percentage. Ross is a high strikeout, low OBP guy, and Werth is a decent complimentary player. I've always been a Ryan Church fan, and still believe he could end up hitting .280-25-90 one day, but it's time for him to do it.

The Nationals compare favorably to the bullies in the National League East. No, they are not the Phillies or the Mets, but they are close to being the equal of the Braves and they are certainly better than the once-again stripped down Florida Marlins.

How might the Nationals' offense produce in 2009? Here is my early prediction:

1B: Adam Dunn - .250-40-100

2B: Ronnnie Belliard - .275-15-60

SS: Cristian Guzman - .280-8-51

3B: Ryan Zimmerman - .290-28-110

LF: Josh Willingham - .265-24-80

CF: Lastings Milledge - .280-24-85, 30 steals

RF: Elijah Dukes - .290-32-105, 30 steals

C: Jesus Flores - .260-13-60

If the Nationals' pitching, particularly the middle relief, can be just major league average, the Nationals could conceivably win 80-85 wins. If Daniel Cabrera pitches up to his talent level (something he's never done), and Jordan Zimmermann pitches like a Rookie of the Year candidate, the Nationals could finish-and this is difficult to wrap my mind around-3rd in the division, ahead of both the Braves and Marlins.

I'm not saying, mind you. I'm just sayin' ......

Josh Willingham A Reserve? Not Hardly

When the Nationals traded Emilio Bonifacio, P. J. Dean and Jake Smolinski to the Florida Marlins last winter for Scott Olsen and Josh Willingham, a couple of things seemed certain.

First, Olsen would become the Nationals number-two pitcher and second, Josh Willingham would become a sorely needed offensive weapon for the team, likely in left field.

Over his career, after all, the 30-year-old has been a solid hitter. Since joining the Marlins in 2004, Willingham has averaged .266-25-85 over a 162 game season.

For a team that was just about dead-last in every significant offensive category last year, Willingham was a major upgrade.

But now it looks like he's not going to be a starter, at least so says Nationals.com beat writer Bill Ladson.

Even Willingham himself acknowledges that - for the moment anyway - he may not have a position to play.

"If you look at our outfield, you have me, Adam Dunn, Lastings Milledge, Elijah Dukes and Austin Kearns. Those are five guys who haven't sat on the bench during their careers," Willingham said. "Somebody is going to be sitting on the bench. It's going to happen unless [the Nationals] make a move. I never sat on the bench ever [for a full season]."

Though I'm surprised that this uncertainty remains this late into Spring Training, I understand it, though I really don't believe it.

So who starts and who sits (and more importantly, who gets traded)?

Adam Dunn has ten-million reasons to start for the Nationals in 2009, and though Elijah Dukes doesn't have the career bona fides of Dunn, he is most likely the better player. And Lastings Milledge, who cost the Nationals two starting players (Ryan Church & Brian Schneider), has too much talent and too much upside not start.

But that's not surprising.

Most of us assumed that Adam Dunn would start at first base, and not left field, allowing Josh Willingham the chance to play left.

None of us - well, almost none - thought that there would be a scenario in which Nick Johnson would be the team's starting first baseman in 2009.

And as good as he can be, he shouldn't be given that opportunity.

Forget for a moment that Nick Johnson has never played a major league season without ending up on the disabled list. Since he joined the Yankees in 2002, Johnson has been on the roster - and off the disabled list - for just 54% of his team's games.

Why would Mike Rizzo and Manny Acta think that 2009 would be any different?

But let's forget his injury prone nature for just a moment and consider his long-term value to the team.

Or lack thereof.

Desperately seeking stability for a highly unstable organization, then general manager Jim Bowden signed Johnson to a three-year, $16.5 million-dollar contract in the spring of 2006.

Thus far, Johnson has earned $11 million dollars of that contract while playing in just 38 games, earning $434,000 per game.

Nick Johnson is in the final year of that contract. Regardless of how well he plays, no matter if he stays off of the disabled list the entire season, the Nationals are not going to attempt to re-sign him.

So why play him every day and bench Willingham, a player who is under team control through the 2011 season?

The answer is simple: it's not going to happen.

Though Nick is hitting just .158 this spring, his power numbers (2 homers, 4 RBI) and his on-base percentage (.360) look just fine. It makes sense, then, to trade him before he either gets hurt or begins to look lost at the plate.

And it makes no sense that Willingham will be one of the Nationals' two reserve outfielders either.

Willie Harris has signed a new contract with the team and has secured one of those roster spots. Austin Kearns, in part because of his $8 million dollar contract and in part due to his injury last season and overall poor performance since coming to Washington, isn't tradeable, which means he will likely be the other reserve outfielder.

But Mike Rizzo knows all this. He understands that Willingham needs to start and that the team doesn't really have a place for him as a reserve.

He's just trying to create additional value for Johnson.

If Rizzo were to say that Josh Willingham was a starter coming out of Spring Training, other general managers would know that Nick Johnson wasn't part of the team's plans and his value would be even lower than it is now.

How low? My guess is that the best the Nationals can hope to get for Nick is an above-average middle reliever (something they desperately need).

In his two full major league seasons, Josh Willingham has a .271 batting average, 30 doubles, 3 triples, 24 homers, 81 RBI and a .360 on-base percentage. Injuries limited him to just 102 games last year, but had he played a full season, he would batted .254 with 31 doubles, 8 triples, 23 homers, 77 RBI and a .364 RBI.

In other words, Willingham is consistently above-average.

Nick Johnson might start the season at first, but it won't be long before he's traded, freeing Adam Dunn to play first and returning Josh Willingham to left.

It's going to happen. It has to happen.

And Lord help the Nationals if it doesn't.

Starting Pitching Looking Good For Now

It's been more than a month since the Nationals signed Adam Dunn, a move that has changed the conversation about baseball in Washington.

It's been almost a month since the gates of the Carl Barger Baseball Complex opened its doors to the first wave of Nationals' players.

Enough time has passed, and enough change has occurred, to take a look and see how the Nationals are doing in 2009.

Overall Performance: Everyone says that wins don't matter in Spring Training games but the only teams that say that are the ones that are either winning or have a history of winning.

Teams like the Nationals need wins in Florida to gain confidence.

But since moving to Washington in 2005, the Nationals have never had a winning record in spring training. Their best record came in that first year when they went 14-16. Since then, however, the Nationals have a combined record of just 32-58.

Yes, records are important.

This year, the Nationals are playing right at .500, typically winning when their starters are playing and losing when they aren't.

And I think that number, more or less, areindicative of the coming season.

The starting pitching is looking at worst acceptable, at best intriguing. John Lannan and Jordan Zimmermann look to anchor the rotation, while Daniel Cabrera and Scott Olsen look like pitchers who could win, or lose, on any given night.

The problem lies in the 5th spot in the rotation, where Colin Balester and the rest just haven't looked very good. And while Shairon Martis has pitched well, I don't think he's really being considered for a starting job, at least for now.

The interesting thing is that the pitcher most likely to fill the 5-spot isn't even the property of the Nationals. Steven Strasburg, who will likely be the number one pick in this June's amateur draft, is 3-0 for the San Diego State Aztecs this spring with 45 strikeouts and just 4 walks in 20 innings.

If all goes well, he'll likely be the Nationals' 5th starter by September.

Those five pitchers - Lannan, Cabrera, Olsen, Zimmermann and Strasburg - are all young, talented, and capable of cementing their place in the rotation for the next decade.

But wait, there's more.

The Nationals have a fine group of young pitchers still developing but who - maybe this year, maybe next - will be able to step into the starting rotation if injuries, trades or poor play require it.

Martis, Balester, Ross Detwiler, Jack McGeary, Josh Smoker and Colton Willems is a solid group from which one or two will emerge and become competent major league pitchers.

So the Nationals seem to be in good shape in terms of starters, both at the major league and minor league levels.

NATS SIGN ADAM DUNN!

Here is the single paragraph just posted on the Washington Post's Nationals Journal page:

"The Washington Nationals have agreed to a preliminary deal with 29-year-old free agent Adam Dunn, a signing that would fulfill their off-season long search for a left-handed power hitter. Two independent sources have told the Post that Dunn will sign a two-year deal, possibly announced as early as tomorrow."

It makes perfect sense, and I don't doubt it. There have been very few free-agent signings over the years where the reporter got it wrong, especially with two sources.

The Nationals have been pummeled by beat writers and peripheral fans since they failed to sign uber-star Mark Teixiera, who ultimately signed with the New York Yankees.

The crowd noise got so loud for team GM Jim Bowden to sign somebody, anybody, that I worried the team would make a quick (read: poor) signing to placate the yellers and the screamers.

Looks like that didn't happen.

Dunn is 29 years old (still young), bats lefty (a real boon to the Nationals' mostly right-handed lineup) and is consistently consistent.

How consistent? Here are his home run totals over the last four years: 2005:40, 2006:40, 2007:40, 2008:40.

Oh, yeah; he's consistent.

His lifetime average over a full season:

Ave:.247 -- 2B:29 -- 3B:1 -- HR:40 -- RBI:96

Granted, that batting average doesn't look all that impressive (and really it isn't), but his career on-base percentage is .381, which means a great many singles are hiding in his stats as walks.

Walk? Single? They are about the same in the long run. The only difference is that he has fewer opportunties to drive in runs.

That's why a career average of 40 homers has driven in just (and I used that term loosely) 96 runs.

How do I describe his defense?

Hmm. Well, for those of you older than 45, think Frank Howard. He catches what he can get to in the outfield, but I think, at least defensively, we'd rather have Alfonso Soriano back in left.

At first, he's okay.

But his defense is one of the reason's he's not going to get Teixiera-type money.

And that's why the Nationals will be able to afford him.

Where will Adam Dunn play?

If he goes to the outfield-which is his wish-the Nationals will now have 5 starting outfielders. Who will be traded?

My guess is that he will play first and Nick Johnson, once he proves he's healthy in Spring Training, will be traded.

But don't think for a moment that the Nationals were Dunn's first-or even second-choice. He has been sitting on an offer from Washington for a long time now.

He made it clear that the Dodgers were his first choice.

But with the Los Angeles Angels, another option for Dunn, signing Bobby Abreu this morning, and will the Dodgers seemingly nearing a deal with Manny Ramirez (and Houston, who had some interest saying they were out over the weekend), Dunn didn't have any real viable option left other than the 102 loss Nationals.

In two years, when the contract runs out, the team can re-sign him (a good possibility considering they should be very competitive by then) or offer arbitration and let Adam Dunn leave, garnering the team another first round draft pick.

And don't forget, because the Diamondbacks didn't offer Dunn arbitration, his signing will not cost the team a draft pick of their own.

Nada.

Wow.

FOLLOWING THOM LOVERRO'S "DO SOMETHING, ANYTHING" SCREED, NATS SIGN DR. PHIL

Well, of course the Nationals didn't really sign Dr. Phil.

But he'd sure help Elijah Dukes, though, wouldn't he?

But this is just the type of signing that all of those nattering naybobs are calling for. Reporters covering the Nationals are demanding a high profile signing as a signal that the Nationals are on the path to a champion season.

It doesn't matter who, they say. Somebody.

Anybody.

They need a sign.

I guess Thom Loverro of the Washington Times thinks he is King Leonidas of Sparta and Jim Bowden is the Oracle of Delphi.

Zuckerman awaits, fingers on the keyboard, looking for a sign.

True, Leonidas got his sign from the Oracle. And instead of marching his entire army north to stop the Persians, he took only his crack body guards and eventually got killed.

Not just him. All 300.

Great call, oracle.

And so these reporters wait and they watch. They look for a sign, well a signing, as proof that the Nationals will begin the 2009 season as an improved team.

Note to furry-browed reporters: Jim Bowden is not an oracle, and no one thing he does-or doesn't do-has any long-term strategic significance for the Washington Nationals.

And where do these guys get off saying the team isn't improved from last season anyway?

Josh Willingham and Scott Olsen make the Nationals a better team.

Daniel Cabrera replacing Tim Redding can make the Nationals better (certainly not worse). Jordan Zimmermann being major league ready makes the Nationals better. Signing Steven Strasburg in the amateur draft this June, and putting him in the rotation by September, makes the Nationals better.

And having the Nationals not lead the major leagues in player-days lost to injury for the second year in a row will make the Nationals better.

Much better.

True, the Nationals haven't done very much since that Olsen-Willingham trade, but that certainly isn't their fault.

They tried to sign Mark Texeira. They tried to sign Milton Bradley. They continue to try and sign Orlando Hudson and Adam Dunn.

The Nationals are making legitimate, big-dollar offers. They just keep coming in second.

These big-name free agents simply don't want to play for a 102 loss team. And who blames them? If they did take the Nationals' offer, these reporters would say that they care only about the money, that winning means nothing.

It's a lose-lose situation to sign with a loser like the Nationals.

And yet writers like John Dugan of the Washington National Examiner write headlines like this:

"Nationals getting proficient at doing nothing"

He thinks that doing nothing is bad.

Well, my dog thinks that If I don't kick him every day, that's a good thing.

Sometimes, doing nothing is better than doing something.

Like signing Manny Ramirez.

Seriously.

Dugan wrote that the Nationals should take some of that money "saved" by not signing Texeira and signing Manny Ramirez to a 3-year deal. Well, he didn't say it, but he agreed with ESPN's Bill Simmons, who did say it.

Same thing.

Both men think that a Ramirez signing would be a great story and give the team some badly needed national publicity.

Who here thinks that adding Manny Ramirez to the Nationals' roster would somehow help the team's national reputation?

Let's see a show of hands.

Thought so.

There would be cackles and guffaws from Orno to San Diego.

I mean, do you really want all those fuzzy-cheeked kids to look up to and learn from .... Manny Ramirez?

Thom Loverro of the Washington Times thinks that the Nationals' faithful agree with his "sign everyone and anyone" demands. "Fans are clearly calling for some kind of sign from the Lerners that they recognize people need a reason to come to Nationals Park other than the racing presidents."

Not true. Not even close.

Peripheral fans, those who climb on the bandwagon when a team is doing well but jump off before things even get the slightest bit hinky, need signs. They need reasons.

But knowledgable baseball fans don't. Those of us who understand the game, especially those of us who were around in the era of the Washington Senators, have a pretty good idea how to put together a competitive baseball team.

And signing a player for the sake of the signing just doesn't work.

I mean, how'd that $252 million dollar Alex Rodriguez contract work out for the Texas Rangers?

They traded him to the Yankees for Alfonso Soriano, who was traded to the Nationals for Brad Wilkerson and a couple of minor leaguers.

In essesence, they have nothing to show for the Rodriguez signing except a hole in their pocket book.

If the Nationals make no more deals (something I highly doubt), they can put together a lineup that features a competent major leaguer at every position. Take a look at this lineup (and my projections for them) and tell me this is a bad offense:

1B: Nick Johnson

and/or Dmitri Young .270-18-80

2B: Ron Belliard .275-15-65

SS: Cristian Guzman .280- 5-55

3B: Ryan Zimmerman .285-27-110

LF: Josh Willingham .270-24-78

CF: Lastings Milledge .275-23-80

RF: Elijah Dukes .285-30-100

C: Jesus Flores .255-12-50

This is not a championship offense, but neither is it a last-placed lineup. If the starters remain healthy, if the youngsters continue to progress, they could be even better in 2009 than I'm projecting.

And just how would replacing any of those outfielders with Manny Ramirez help the team in the long term?

And the pitching, while not great, ain't bad (again, with my predictions):

John Lannan: 13-11, 3.59

Scott Olsen: 14-12, 3.87

Daniel Cabrera: 11-11, 4.50

Odalis Perez: 10-12, 4.30

Jordan Zimmermann: 8-10, 4.20

That's 56 wins from the starting rotation. A typical major league bullpen wins 20-25 over the course of a season.

Using those numbers, then, the Nationals are on course to finish somewhere near .500.

At least, they could finish somewhere near .500.

Does that type of record demand that Jim Bowden start signing as many of the 100 remaining free agents on the market today as he can?

No.

It seems that all of these nay-saying writers have a common belief, that the Nationals need to do something to show the fans they are trying to get better.

Notice that actually getting better seems secondary to the act of trying?

I think that it just might make sense for the Nationals to sit back, cross their fingers, and watch what happens.

The Nationals lost 102 games in 2008 and couldn't sign anyone of consequence. They even tried to overpay.

No luck.

The Nationals, as currently constituted, have probably added 3-5 wins through the Willingham-Olsen trade, and will probably add 10-15 wins by just staying healthy and allowing their 25 best players to stay on the field.

Again, they would be nearing that magical .500 plateau.

So let's fast forward to December 2009.

The Nationals finished the season 79-83, and suddenly, all of the sportswriters are predicting big things for the team after their 20-win improvement.

Lastings Milledge and Josh Willingham stayed healthy. John Lannan continued to get better. Ryan Zimmerman blossomed into a star. Jordan Zimmermann showed great promise.

Elijah Dukes stayed out of jail.

And Steven Strasburg showed enough of that 99 mph fastball and knee-buckling curve that being the team's opening day starter next season doesn't seem all that far fetched.

I wonder how some of those high-priced free agents might feel about joining a young, talented team with a new ballpark and a rosy future?

Now, allow a veteran baseball fan to digress for a moment.

From 1964-1967, the Kansas City Royals averaged just 62 wins. Then, in 1968, young prospects began to populate the roster. Guys like Dave Duncan, Sal Bando, Joe Rudi, Rick Monday, Reggie Jackson, Catfish Hunter, Blue Moon Odom and Jumbo Jim Nash guided the team to an 82-80 record.

For the next eight seasons, the Athletics were the class of the American League West.

Well, in 2009, young prospects like Jesus Flores, Anderson Hernandez, Ryan Zimmerman, Lastings Milledge, Elijah Dukes, John Lannan, Jordan Zimmerman, Colin Balester and Steven Strasburg just might do the same thing.

Now, these kids are too young to tell what the future will hold for them, and the team, this year.

But by this time next year, we should be able to discern the prospects from the pretenders.

Then Jim Bowden will add a bat or an arm, point the team in the general direction of opening day 2010 and see what happens.

And with all due respect to these beat reporters who sees the team's future as "half-empty," I think that come next season, they will be talking, well writing, as if they saw the turnaround coming for years.

Yeah, right.

Strasburg Ready For the Major Leagues & Nationals Know It

Steven Strasburg was just a month into his sophomore season at San Diego State University. Though he had a superb freshman year with the Aztecs, Strasburg had been the team’s closer and wasn’t generally well known around the baseball world.

But now he was a starter, and was no longer cloaked in baseball invisibility.

A week earlier, the 19-year-old took a perfect game into the 7th inning against TCU before settling on a one-hitter while striking out 13.

Two weeks earlier, Strasburg struck out 23 Utah Utes while facing the minimum 27 batters, again giving up just one lonely hit.

And now thousands of fans had packed San Diego’s Tony Gwynn Stadium, but they weren’t there to watch the Aztecs play another little known Mountain West Conference foe.

They were there to watch Steven Strasburg.

Behind him was a young fan taping a giant “K” to the outfield fence each time Strasburg fanned a batter. In front of him was a buxom co-ed, sitting behind home plate, rocking side to side, holding a large white sign above her head.

“Yo mama let u date?”

No longer was Steven Strasburg just a tall, gangly kid from suburban San Diego who was playing his favorite sport solely for the love of the game.

He was now a hot commodity, someone who would likely be worth in upwards of $10 million dollars within a year, and certainly a major league pitcher by the time he was 21.

His buddies and girl friends were now being pushed aside by financial advisers, investment counselors, and hangers-on.

The sophomore had a posse.

And Scott Boras' claws were already deep into the young pitcher's future.

“With the first pick in the 2009 Major League Baseball amateur draft, the Washington Nationals select San Diego State University pitcher Steven Strasburg.”

Forget about it. It’s a done deal.

Well, of course there is a small chance that something will happen and Strasburg won’t be the Nationals’ pick, but it would have to involve things like prison or space aliens.

Steven Strasburg is that good.

There was never a question that Strasburg was going to be a special ball player.

He had a 1.68 ERA in his senior year of high school, striking out 74 batters in 62 innings. He threw seven complete games in his senior year alone, an unheard of number for a high school player.

He could have played college ball anywhere he wanted. His arm was recruited by most schools in the west and his mind was recruited by Stanford and the Ivy League schools in the east.

But in the end, he chose San Diego State, his hometown school and his parent's alma mater.

And having the chance to be coached by Tony Gwynn certainly helped.

A starter in high school, Strasburg was converted into the Aztec’s closer his freshman year.

He was solid in that role but was short of dominant, going 1-3, 2.43 in 25 appearances. He allowed just four hits per nine innings, struck out 11 per nine and allowed less than one base runner per inning. His batting-average-against was a minuscule .143.

The only real chink in Strasburg’s armor in 2007 was his control; he allowed almost four walks per nine innings.

Strasburg was named the Mountain West Conference Freshman of the Year.

He was moved into the starting rotation prior to the start of 2008, and the rest, as they say, is history.

Strasburg went 8-3, 1.57 as a sophomore. He allowed just five hits per nine innings (6th best in the nation), upped his strikeouts to 12 per nine and lowered his walks to just one per nine.

His batting-average-against was .136, one of the very best in America.

He was named the Mountain West Conference pitcher of the week seven times, including five weeks in a row.

In two seasons, pitching against major college competition, Strasburg gave up just one home run.

Wow.

And then he got even better.

He pitched in an exhibition against Team USA and allowed no hits while striking out seven in three innings.

Playing for Team USA, Strasburgwent 4-0, 0.88, striking out 62 and walking seven in 47 innings. He pitched in the Olympics and finished with a 2.45 ERA, pitching against both the Chinese and the Cubans.

He was the only amateur on a team full of professionals.

Do I need to go on?

Yes, I believe I do.

Lincoln Hamilton, a writer for projectprospect.com, listed Seven Strasburg as the best college pitcher in more than a decade.

Well, Strasburg or Mark Prior. He just can't decide which is the more complete package.

Either way, he's in elite company. He includes Strasburg in a select group that includes Tampa's David Price, San Francisco's Tim Lincecum, Los Angeles' Jared Weaver, Cleveland's Kerry Wood and Prior.

When compared to the top college pitchers of all time (per Hamilton), Strasburg has the lowest WHIP, the lowest home runs allowed per nine innings, the third best strikeouts per nine and the second lowest walks per nine within the group.

So why is Steven Strasburg so good?

Because he can make a baseball dance.

His fastball touches 99 mph and cruises at 96-97 mph during a game. But that’s not his strikeout pitch. His slider looks just like his fastball but dies late and ends up in the catcher’s mitt before the batter realizes what he saw.

Strasburg’s best pitch (how can a 99 mph fastball not be his best pitch?) is “plus-plus” breaking ball that has a two plane break.

Bats just can’t seem to find it.

Thebaseballcube.com has a unique scouting system that places a hard number on predetermined statistical categories. For pitchers, they use control, strikeouts and efficiency.

Johan Santana, perhaps the best pitcher in the major leagues since 2003, has the following scouting numbers (based on a 1-100 scale): control: 85, strikeouts: 95, efficiency: 98.

Take a look at Strasburg's numbers: control: 96, strikeouts: 100, efficiency: 100.

Hmmmm.

Now, I'm not saying Strasburg will be as successful as Santana at the major league level. I am saying, though, that Strasburg has the talent to be even better than Santana.

But there has to be drawbacks, right? I mean, all pitchers have drawbacks.

Well, no. Not really. But there might be.

His mechanics are a concern.

His elbow is positioned farther back then one would like during the “scap-load” phase of his delivery. This places too much stress on his arm and could lead to the same type of troubles that Kerry Wood and Mark Prior have had.

There is also too much recoil in his follow through and he completes his delivery standing up.

This may indicate that Strasburg, like Kerry Wood and Mark Prior before him, may have problems keeping his arm sound and strong.

The problem is that no one dares tinker with the premier pitcher in college today. Nationals' fans know that Ross Detwiler's troubles this past year were a direct result of the team changing his mechanics, hoping to prevent him from damaging his arm early in his career.

Would the Nationals retard Strasburg's growth in the short term for his long term success?

I don't know. I hope not.

Those questions not withstanding, pitchers like Steven Strasburg come along once every decade or so. There is a chance that he’ll develop arm trouble later in his career, but it’s a chance the Nationals must take.

And let’s not forget that the chance of the team holding on to Strasburg once he is a free agenct is almost zero.

Scott Boras is his agent, after all.

Memo to Washington Nationals: Draft Strasburg with your number one pick in June and then hand a blank check to Scott Boras and bend over.

Having not signed Aaron Crow last year, Boras knows that it would be a public relations nightmare for the team not to sign Strasburg and sign him quickly.

From a dollars perspective, it's going to get ugly.

Once signed, give Strasburg a plane ticket to Washington and put him in the starting rotation.

Forget about his delivery. Forget about the future. Wind him up and point him towards the mound and watch the wins pile up.

With Steven Strasburg, the Washington Nationals could actually have one of the strongest rotations in the National League in just a year or so.

Scott Olsen and John Lannanhave already had success at the major league level and both will be just 25 during the 2009 season. Jordan Zimmermann has the chance to be a true No. 1 starter, and Strasburg is a No. 1 starter.

That leaves one spot in the rotation, and the Nationals have several young pitchers able to fill it. Whether it's Shairon Martis , Collin Balester, Colton Willems, Ross Detwiler, Josh Smoker, Matt Chico, or Tyler Clippard filling that spot, the Nationals will have five special arms in the rotation for the first time.

Ever.

"The Plan" is less than a year away from finally leaving the station, and Steven Strasburg will be the engineer driving that train.

And watch out: Strasburg won't be stopping for disbelievers.

McGeary Leaves Stanford, Becomes Full Time Prospect

He was ranked as the 17th best player in the 2007 Major League amateur draft, and most every scouting magazine and website listed him as a sure first-round pick. He had prepped at the exclusive Roxbury Latin High School in Newton, Mass., indicating he was as intelligent as he was athletic.

And he's a very good looking guy to boot. He looks like a star pitcher.

In his senior year, he struck out 80 in just 40 innings and crafted a misprint-like 0.88 ERA.

He was named the Massachusetts Gatorade player of the year.

He spent his off-seasons playing in all-star leagues in Georgia and Arkansas and Florida and wowed the major league scouts with pinpoint control and three "plus" pitches, very unusual for a 17-year-old high school pitcher.

He had a fastball that topped out at 91 mph and a solid change as well. But it was his curveball that made scouts drool.

Knees buckled all across the state of Massachusetts when he took the mound.

During an All-Star game in Georgia, a major league scout was asked by a Sports Illustrated reporter if the kid reminded him of any major league pitchers he had seen play.

The scout leaned up against the batting cage and began to tap his chin with his finger, trying to think of an answer.

He finally nodded his head and said, sure, "Andy Pettitte, Mark Buehrle, and Tom Glavine."

That's very good company.

Another scout said this about the young pitcher: "This kid is very poised, polished and advanced for his age. Many young prospects have good arms but are still just young kids.

"He is a young man who shows command of not only pitches but of himself. He is an excellent representation of his family, his school, his team and his community. He will be a success in more than just baseball. He is a true leader. It will be fun to follow his progress in either college or pro ball."

And with that, Jack McGeary was selected in the 6th round of the 2007 Major League draft.

The 190th player taken.

How could that happen?

Because Jack McGeary was too smart and too good and too honest.

Throughout his senior year, the 6'3", 200 pound lefty warned every major league team that he was almost certain that he would be attending Stanford that fall.

"I want to go to Stanford, that's my first choice," said McGeary. "I'm willing to sign a major league contract, but the team is going to have to make it worth my while."

Unlike many high school players with tiny GPA's and big egos who might have a hard time getting into junior college, McGeary was an Ivy League candidate.

It wasn't a bargaining chip. He wanted to go to Stanford.

Well, it was a bargaining chip, but one that teams had to take seriously.

Round after round, all 30 teams passed up Jack McGeary. After the fifth round, Nationals' general manager Jim Bowden, who knew he had already amassed quite a haul in the draft, decided to take a chance and drafted the Massachusetts native with his 6th round pick.

The prospect of losing that sixth-round pick didn't worry Bowden very much. The chance of finding a player that would help the Nationals that low in the draft was minimal.

From 1995 through 2004, just 60 of the 300 players selected in the sixth round made it to the Major Leagues, and just five (Tim Hudson, Bill Hall, J.J. Putz, Shane Victorino and Scott Olsen) have had any real impact at the major league level.

Bowden didn't think there was much hope in signing McGeary. He had tried the same approach with pitcher Sean Black in the previous year's draft and came away empty-handed.

"Look, he's probably going to Stanford," Bowden told Nationals.com reporter Bill Ladson on the day of the draft. "We know that. But you never know in this game. We didn't do this except for one pick in this draft. Strategically, we thought it was the right thing to do. We drafted him just in case."

When Bowden contacted the family, they indicated two things. First, McGeary would be willing to sign with the Nationals. Second, it would have to be first-round money for it to happen.

That's not how things work in Major League Baseball.

Each round has a predetermined bonus amount that teams are bullied into staying within. To be sure, some teams don't, but most teams do.

The Lerner family was still feeling their way as the new owners of the Washington Nationals, and likely didn't want to risk angering Commissioner Bud Selig so early in their tenure.

And the McGeary family knew it.

"We were all set for him to go to Stanford," Rita McGeary said by phone. "We weren't even thinking about the Nationals. We just thought, 'They're not going to pay him. It wasn't so much what Jack was worth. It's really what Stanford was worth."

And said McGeary, "The Nationals still took me and still believe that hopefully, we can work something out. If we can, that would be great and I welcome the opportunity to do that. If not, I'll end up in Stanford. Obviously. I was surprised that I was taken as high as sixth. I thought I would be falling in the teens or 20s."

And so for the remainder of the summer, nothing happened.

Nothing.

Until 48 hours before the Aug. 15 signing deadline, that is. Bowden called the family and told them he had a plan. They arrived from Newton the next day and met with the Nationals' general manager in a steak house in the city.

While Bowden was laying out his proposal to the McGeary family, team president Stan Kasten flew to the owners meeting in Toronto to get the Lerners' approval.

It was ingenious.

The Nationals would sign McGeary and give him $1.8 million, close enough to first round money to make the family happy but well above the $123,000 recommended by Major League Baseball for the sixth round. The Nationals would also pay for his expenses at Stanford and would agree to allow him to pitch only when his schooling would allow.

That meant he would only be available from June through the end of the season. He would lose four months each year.

The McGearys were impressed and agreed. The Lerners were impressed and they also agreed.

And with 15 minutes to spare, Jack McGeary became a Washington National.

He pitched only two innings in 2007 for the Vermont Lake Monsters of the New York-Penn League before beginning his academic career at Stanford.

He pitched most of 2008 for the Gulf Coast Nationals, a "low-A" league that more resembles a baseball academy than a professional league. He started off slowly, and by mid-season, it was beginning to look like the experiment wasn't going to work.

Then all of a sudden, McGeary figured it out.

He ended the year with a record of 2-2, 4.07, but those numbers don't tell the real story. He led the league in games started. He led the league in strikeouts. He struck out nearly 10 per 9 innings while walking just two, amazing numbers for that level of play.

He consistently painted the black with his fastball and buckled the batters knees time and time again with his major-league-ready curve.

He looked promising. Very promising.

And he did this without the benefit of any Spring Training in 2008.

And then he went back to Stanford for his sophomore season.

Baseball America ranked McGeary as the Nationals' fifth-best prospect heading into 2009, but he would no doubt have been much higher had he pitched a full season in 2007 and 2008.

But how long could Jack McGeary be both a full-time college student and a full-time baseball player and still keep his wits about him?

Turns out, about two years.

Nationals' GM Jim Bowden announced on Saturday that Jack McGeary's agent told the team that he was forgoing the remainder of his college career (at least for now) and will concentrate on baseball full-time.

Boo-yah!

This will most certainly accelerate his progression through the Nationals' farm system. When asked how long it would take to reach the major leagues when he originally signed with the Nationals, McGeary replied that he thought it would take five years.

He might be able to shave a year off of that prediction now, maybe more.

The kid has the same arrows in his quiver that Tom Glavine did when he was a Massachusetts high schooler 20 years earlier.

Only McGeary's curve is a little better.

That doesn't mean he'll be the next Tom Glavine. It just means he has the chance to be a very good major league pitcher in the mold of Tom Glavine.

And he would never have been a Washington National if Jim Bowden had not been the general manager of the Washington Nationals.

I wrote an article a few days ago blaming Omar Minaya for the current state of the team. Many readers left comments questioning this premise.

Some called Bowden as the worst general manager in the major leagues today.

Hmmm.

Well, Brian Cashman, Theo Epstein, Andy McPhail, Andrew Friedman, J.P. Riccardi, Frank Wren, Mike Hill, Ruben Amaro Jr., Kenny Williams, Mark Shapiro, Dave Dombrowski, Dayton Moore, Bill Smith, Jim Hendry, Walt Jockety, Ed Wade, Doug Melvin, Neal Huntington, John Mozeliak, Tony Reigans, Billy Beane, Jack Zduriencik, Jon Daniels, Josh Byrnes, Dan O'Dowd, Ned Colletti, Kevin Towers and Brian Sabean (or their predecessors) had the opportunity to take Jack McGeary in a later round and become a hero to their fans. They didn't.

Jim Bowden did.

Jim Bowden stole a first-round pick in 2007, taking a very mature, very intelligent, very promising pitcher that the team really had no hope of drafting, little alone signing.

Jim Bowden didn't sign Aaron Crow, a very immature pitcher who in an interview this past summer with Kansas City Star reporter Bill Reiter said that he was spending his days sleeping in and drinking beer. He worked out in between.

Contrast that with Jack McGeary who studied when he wasn't working out and worked out when he wasn't studying.

Jack McGeary accepted $1.8 million to sign with the Nationals, calling it first-round money. Aaron Crow turned down twice that amount, calling it an affront to his ability.

So why are so many Nationals' fans pummeling Jim Bowden for not signing Aaron Crow but nary a word comes from their lips about one of the real steals in the amateur draft in the last decade?

I'm sure someone will try to explain it to me.

Again.

Until then, however, the Nationals' future just got a little brighter.

And we can thank Jim Bowden, "the worst general manager in baseball," for it