Don't you do it bowden ! ! !

[Arctic Blast]

Standing pat is certainly not going to put butts in the seats either...
I don't get it. it's not as though the Nats would be giving anything up really. Is there an obviously better place to spend the $50-$70 million over 2 years that I'm not seeing here?

This all sounds like some sort of sour grapes.

My way of looking at free agency in sports, though, is this...you don't make a move for the big name, big gun type player if it isn't going to create a singificant improvement for your club. Is Manny's presence going to put the Nationals in the playoffs? No. Is he going to help elevate them by 15-20 wins next year? Not likely. Are they still looking like a 5th or 6th place team with him on the roster? Probably.

So why get him? The only other reason I could come up with is ticket sales...however, IS Manny a guy who moves tickets?

[ohms_law]

Sure, of course he would be a better fit on a team on the edge. That doesn't mean that he would be useless to a team on the bottom, though.

I just find all of this to be curious is all. Obviously he isn't going to put the Nats solidly into contention this year, but if you wait to support a move that will do that then you'll be waiting for a long time. Those sorts of single moves happen once a decade...

Everything else revolves around speculation about his personality and speculation about the team's finances. Has anyone here actually scouted him? Is anyone here actually privy to team finances? Even if there are news reports about those items that you can point to, I'd be interested in seeing them.
The naysayers here apparently don't like Manny personally, which is fine. Is that really something to make a business decision on, though?

[HoustonGM]

For what it's worth, I have no problem with Manny, personally. I just don't think he'd be a wise investment for the Nationals.

[Arctic Blast]

For what it's worth, I have no problem with Manny, personally. I just don't think he'd be a wise investment for the Nationals.

Exactly how I feel.

[ohms_law]

Based on what, though? That's all that I'm asking about.

[cartman00000001]

does it need to be spelled out??? There are more to a player than his statistics!!! They can affect more than when they are up at the plate.

[HoustonGM]

I've laid out plenty of reasons, but I'll go through them again quickly.

1) They're a poor (quality, not money) team. They should be focusing on the future. Spending a good chunk of money on a player that will not be around when they're competitive isn't a good investment. If this was a 30 year old Manny Ramirez, it's a different story. Bad teams shouldn't be looking to add on guys nearing the end of their careers unless the move will help put them in competition soon, unless said player comes with a cheap, short contract, which doesn't apply to Manny.

2) They should save the money and invest it in amateur talent, via the draft and international free agents.

3) They have a huge glut of major league quality outfielders as is.

[etothep]

I see Bowden as the anti-Beane, in that whatever move he makes, I assume it's going to end up being the wrong one

[BINGLEBOP]

I don't see why they would end up signing Manny unless they already have a deal (or deals) in the works to trade some of their surplus outfielders. And if that's the case, it wouldn't make much sense to trade their younger outfielders for two years of Manny.

[ohms_law]

unless said player comes with a cheap, short contract, which doesn't apply to Manny.

2 years, $50-$100 million total? For likely a ~.300/.350/.475, 37 - 38 year old hitter (if not better)?
Seems reasonable to me...

They're a poor (quality, not money) team. They should be focusing on the future.

2) They should save the money and invest it in amateur talent, via the draft and international free agents.

Again though, what does it cost them? Some money?
As I said above, based on their current behavior it appears to me that they have some money set aside for a marquee player. They pursued Tex, but lost out on him. CC is gone as well. Who else is left?
Do you know of any IFA's or draft picks that are unsigned that they could persue in place of a marquee player?

Most importantly though, it is vital to build of the future. However, there has to be some reason to come to the park this year as well. If there's no hope at all...

3) They have a huge glut of major league quality outfielders as is.

Trade bait. It never hurts to sign a player like Manny...
Thre seems to be a glut of outfield talent in general though. In my opinion this seems to be more of a perception issue then reality.

[etothep]

sorry ohms, 2 years/$100M doesn't sound reasonable to me

[ohms_law]

What does, then?!?

[BINGLEBOP]

I don't think any team was discussing Manny at that price (2 years at $50 million per season).

[HoustonGM]

2 years, $50-$100 million total? For likely a ~.300/.350/.475, 37 - 38 year old hitter (if not better)?
Seems reasonable to me...

With terrible defense. That's not a reasonable contract.

Again though, what does it cost them? Some money?
As I said above, based on their current behavior it appears to me that they have some money set aside for a marquee player. They pursued Tex, but lost out on him. CC is gone as well. Who else is left?

Tex and C.C. are both very different than Manny. Like I said, if Manny was 30, it's a different story. He's not, though. And just because the money is set aside for such a thing doesn't mean that, if the best options fail, they should settle for something less.

Do you know of any IFA's or draft picks that are unsigned that they could persue in place of a marquee player?

Stephen Strasburg, who they should take #1 in the June draft. As for IFA's, no, I don't know, but I'm not a scout. They should invest the money on launching scouting expeditions into Latin American countries, and setting up training camps there, like other teams have done.

Most importantly though, it is vital to build of the future. However, there has to be some reason to come to the park this year as well. If there's no hope at all...

There's no hope at all for 2009 with or without Manny. And is Manny really a guy that's going to attract fans to the park, moreso than they already go just because they like the team? I could see that, but I can also see them signing Manny and enraging the fan base (as a Nats fan here has shown) and staying AWAY from the park.

Trade bait. It never hurts to sign a player like Manny...

Yes, it certainly can hurt, because of the money. And the PR headache.

Thre seems to be a glut of outfield talent in general though. In my opinion this seems to be more of a perception issue then reality.

The Nationals have Lastings Milledge, Elijah Dukes, Austin Kearns, Wily Mo Pena, Josh Willingham, Willie Harris...This isn't an issue of perception. Milledge and Dukes are both supreme talents (although Dukes has off-field issues worse than any other player in the game). Kearns and Pena had terrible years but are certainly young enough and have the pedigree to bounce back. Willingham is an incredibly solid player worthy of a starting job. Harris had an excellent season in 2008, will likely regress some, and is probably better suited for the bench. That's still a huge amount of outfielders, and, outside of Milledge, none of them have much trade value...and Milledge is the one guy that they absolutely should not trade.

[cartman00000001]

sorry ohms, 2 years/$100M doesn't sound reasonable to me

wow...OK time to remove my subscription to this thread. That's just craziness. Give that money to ANY 38 year old is nuts. Too much Sports Mogul playing, not enough reality.