Tell me more about this kid in the minors. Intriguing...
Good morning, one and all. Let's get started.
You see improvement since last year, and that's a good thing for the Nats. Maybe I'm too negative, but I thought I'd see a little more so far than I'm seeing. Marquis in particular is puzzling. But the play in the field is better, that's true.
I don't think so, no. I think he's having a cold April. But he's got to heat it up quick. Thank goodness for Willingham.
If I'm Rizzo, I'm still looking for an everyday right fielder. Hard. I really like Willie Harris and so does everyone in the organization, and if he could be an everyday RF it would be a great thing. But I'm not seeing it and apparently they're not either.
Given the low threshold for moving forward, I'd say the Nats probably did make enough moves in the offseason. The right field situation is pretty bad though. It is too early to draw conclusions, especially since the Nats have played four of seven against an offensive juggernaut. Right now, the offseason move that many of us saw as inevitable and not necessary thrilling, is the one that has worked out the best -- ¡LIVAN!
So true. You gotta love the 0.00 ERA. Yes, it's only one start, but ...
I didn't say not improved, I am merely wondering if there was enough of an improvement made in the offseason to make people feel like there's a light at the end of this tunnel. You obviously think so.
The 3-4 record is really not bad considering four games against the Phillies, I agree. And yes, better times are coming in June. Or at least they should be. Expecting Strasburg to singlehandedly right this ship could be fatal, to Strasburg, anyway. Yes, Wang'll be there, and hopefully Storen. That's two rookies and a guy coming off the 60-day DL, though. I'm not trying to be pessimistic, just realistic. Maybe I'm both.
The "overhaul" of the ballclub wasn't complete enough to make anyone (except maybe Boz) think this club was going to compete overnight, especially not in the same division with the two-time NL champs and the resurgent Braves.
It's going to take time for those youngsters to develop, and history shows that not all youngsters develop anyway. And Marquis isn't a 20-3 type pitcher, even on a good club; if he wins 14 games, he's going to lose 14 as well.
Starting 3-4 is a 70-win pace, which is better than last year's 60-win pace. They went 1-2 against the Phils and 2-1 against the Mets; if the league as a whole is between those extremes, then the Nats could even be an 80-win club. It's way too soon to snuff out the hope.
Keep hope alive! Wait, where have I heard that before?
Well, no one thought they would compete in the division this year. (Okay, except maybe Boz.) I know Marquis isn't Santana, but a 12.96 ERA? Is that just the Philly Phactor? Maybe.
I said 75 wins before the season and I'll stick by that.
That's true; they need to take a real look at a lot of guys. It's a fine line to walk -- bringing along youngsters while trying to win enough games to keep people buying tickets. I don't envy them the task.
Is there a line in the sand for the Nats, do you think? Is it 2011? If they are still last in the division, do they kill any chances of building a strong fan base? The Caps will tell you, all you have to do to get fans is win.
You know, it seems like a no-brainer, like Strasburg was a no-brainer. I think the question in part will be, is he the kind of kid they want as a building block? Strasburg, despite his shyness, is. I would be surprised if they didn't, though.
As I said earlier, I think Marquis is worrisome, but it's two starts. As someone pointed out, he's a .500 pitcher at best so we'll see if he gets there.
I think Capps has been solid. Three saves in three chances -- I'll take that. Bruney's given up four walks and four hits in 2 2/3 innings, so thus far I'd say the jury is out on him. Same with English. Tough starting the year against the Phillies, no doubt, and it's early, and it's been cool and windy, and etc. etc.
Everyone is eager for Strasburg, and it'll be great, but Storen is just as important to the team's future, in my opinion. They could use the relief.
This is true, and if an NFL player experienced it 50 weeks a year until 65, it would be different as well. Of course the NFL is more violent; that's why they get paid more than an office worker. I was trying to keep the money out of it.
Also, they do not face violent play six days a week, or rather five (two days off during the season). There is not a lot of hitting during practice once the season starts. For some players, there is no hitting between Sundays. I'm not saying they don't have violent jobs, but really, Sundays are the exception, not the rule.
This seems to be the general feeling about the Nats. I hope it's not true. I do wonder how much Jermaine Dye was asking. I know they don't want to "rent" players for a season, preferring to build, but he might have given them a little pop. But they also know more about his physical condition than I do.
Sure hope Detwiler comes back as strong as before. I know they are very, very high on him. You are right about the errors, and the Desmond experiment is working.
We'll wrap up with the Caps, because, why not?
I'd be worried about Ryan Miller, too, after seeing him in the Olympics.
I'll be honest, Boudreau is a crack-up. I love all his head games and such. He's so genuine and completely not like the stiff you see in all those awful commercials. He's kickin' it old school, not giving the Habs any reason to think the Caps are coming in with big heads. Just sit back and enjoy whatever he throws out.
And on that note I'd better scoot. Thanks for joining me today; sorry I didn't get to everyone but there's always tomorrow!
Thoughts, comments, suggestions or criticisms about The Post's Live Q&As? Send us an e-mail.
Become a fan of Post Live on Facebook.
Follow @WashingtonPost on Twitter.
