fsogol

Soriano and Armas gone thru free agency
Vidro traded to the Giants to play 1b (and becomes the youngest guy on
the Giants) for prospects


LF Ryan Church
CF Nook Logan
RF Austin Kearns
1b Nick Johnson
2b Felipe Lopez (lead off hitter)
3b Ryan Zimmerman
SS Cristan Guzman
C Brian Schneider

Rotation

Patterson
Ortiz
Beltran Perez
O'Connor

Bullpen

Rauch
Bergmann
Traber
Stanton (he'll be back)
Rivera
Cordero

Pretty scary, huh? Except for the fact that Bowden is our GM and the
team will look 100% different next season due to all of his
sensational/inexplicable trades. Warm up the MRI machines.

(and please try to resign Soriano)


--
FSogol

rast

In article <451a8c9a$0$10302$815e3792@news.qwest.net>,
FSogol@nospamplease.org says...


They'd do better to eat his contract and put a good prospect at SS.
Unless they can find a team dumb enough to take Guzman, the money wasted
on him is gone for good. So the choice is:
A. Guzman at SS for free.
B. Rookie at SS for the minimum.

B is clearly better.

--
"It's only possible to betray where loyalty is due," said Sandy.
"Well, wasn't it due to Miss Brodie?"
"Only up to a point," said Sandy.
- Muriel Spark

fsogol

I don't think he can be traded, unless Bowden can tack him on to another
deal and ship him out. He can't be released since they have a lot of
$$$ remaining on his contract. The only hope is that he lights up
Spring Training and generates some interest. I think he ends up as the
starting SS next season. I'd rather see Lopez at SS and give Castro a
shot at 2B.

--
FSogol

topo gigio

Ahh, yes, the perennial battle cry; Wait until next year.

rast

In article <451ab186$0$3578$815e3792@news.qwest.net>,
FSogol@nospamplease.org says...

Right. They will have to pay him the remainder of his contract.
Consider the money already gone. But they don't have to play him.

Again, a rookie at the minimum is better than Guzman for free.


--
"It's only possible to betray where loyalty is due," said Sandy.
"Well, wasn't it due to Miss Brodie?"
"Only up to a point," said Sandy.
- Muriel Spark

fsogol

"Bzl." <bzlrbi@nelsoncable.com>Sputtered:

Escobar is a true M*A*S*H*inal. Not sure he could play an entire
season.


Lawrence only had a one year deal. He's gone.

--
FSogol

pat farrell

And they should not play him, or even have him dress in uniforms.

Anybody know the rules, they have a contract to pay him, but do they have to
waste a 25 man or 40 man roster spot on him?


--
Pat

fsogol

Pat Farrell <none@nospam.info>Sputtered:

Why? Revenge? So, the guy had a bad season, its not his fault he was
grossly overpaid. Bring him into Spring Training and work his ass off.

--
FSogol

pat farrell

Ok, there is a tiny tiny chance that he will not be a 200 hitting, no glove
SS. That is enough to bring him to Spring Training.

But the money is over the dam, no point in keeping him on the bench just
because the prior management screwed up.

there are tons of cheap 240 hitting good glove SS out there, there is no
reason to have the 2005 vintage Guzman on the roster.

--
Pat

dan szymborski

In article <gj9tu3-9ta.ln1@m64.pfarrell.com>, none@nospam.info
says...

Nope. Guzman's a sunk cost.

There are additional nice side effects of simply releasing
Guzman. Not only do they prevent Guzman from eating more than
his fair share of the 4000 outs or so teams get every season,
there's a chance that another team would sign him. If that
happens, the Nats save 350K and, even more importantly, probably
get to play *against* the team with Guzman, which is a more
tempting situation that being the team with Guzman.

--
Dan Szymborski
dan@baseballprimerREMOVE.com

"A critic who refuses to attack what is bad is not
a whole-hearted supporter of what is good."

-Robert Schumann