Thom Loverro covers the Washington Nationals for the Washington Times. You can view his personal website here: www.thomloverro.com. Make sure to look at the picture of Thom in the Oval Office, I think it’s supposed to give him credibility. I’m generally a fan of cities having multiple news papers: for example in Minnesota I read both the Star Tribune and the Pioneer Press, each of which gives a different perspective on Twin Cities1 news.
Likewise, here in Washington I read both the Washington Post, and the Washington Times. Both DC papers have their strengths and their weaknesses, but one thing really bothers me about the Washington Times: their coverage of the Nationals is terrible2. Thom Loverro happens to cover the Nationals for the Washington Times, which is unfortunate for both the readers and the Times itself. For example take Thom Loverro’s latest story:
Washington Times – Thom Loverro: Lerners shouldn’t lure free agents this winter
Loverro argues that the Nats should not sign any free agents this winter. He has iron clad information to back up his claims:
1. Top tier free agents like CC Sabathia, Manny, Adam Dunn, and Mark Teixeira cost more than the Nationals can afford.
2. Even if the Nationals could somehow scrounge up the money required to sign one of the top free agents these players won’t sign with the Nationals, because the Nationals are a joke.
3. The market is weak in the Nationals’ areas of need: first base and outfield.
4. Austin Kearns and Dmitri Young are earning more money than they are worth.
5. The Nationals just released Paul Lo Duca and Felipe Lopez. That money was wasted.
I think Loverro’s line of logic is flawed. While I would agree that some top free agents are out of the Nationals’ pay range, that doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t sign any free agents. That is just stupid. I also disagree that the Nationals main needs are a first baseman and a power hitting corner outfielder.
Loverro lists the Nats possible starting position players for next year, and while they are not great, they also are adequate. The real problem facing the Nationals is their lack of pitching. Without starting pitching to keep games close, and reliable relievers to keep the Nats in the lead, it won’t matter who is playing the other positions or how many runs the Nats score. The Nats should make strides to improve their pitching, through the various drafts and certainly through free agency. (Of course the easiest way to start would be to sign Aaron Crow) While Loverro is correct that Sabathia will not sign with the Nationals, Sabathia will not be the only free agent pitcher, a fact that Loverro completely ignores.
Finally just because certain free agent deal or extensions haven’t worked out great for the Nationals3 that doesn’t mean you stop trying to improve your team. Most deals don’t perform at their greatest potential, the Nationals have run into some bad luck lately. When the deals don’t work out at all, you bite the bullet, jettison the contracts, and try again in the off-season. Thats just the way baseball works.
Loverro, also includes several errors in the article. He cites that Dunn is asking for a contract in the range of 100-120 million dollar. The source of that number was Bronson Arroyo, and Dunn has already responded to Arroyo’s rumor mongering. Dunn responded:
That [number] makes me look like a jackass. You never hear players talking about money. I don’t think about the offseason [sic]. Me and my agent don’t even talk about numbers.
Loverro also advises that the Nats shouldn’t sign Jason Giambi because he is apparently the “famine” to Manny’s “feast.” Good metaphor . . . Oh by the way, Giambi’s .398 OBP ranks 7th in the AL, and would certainly be an upgrade for the Nationals. To top it all off: he misspells Emilio Bonifacio’s name.
The bottom line is, if the Nationals want to make money, they will have to become more competitive through both free agency and the draft, in order to fill the seats in Nationals Park.
The Washington Times should also not rule out finding an upgrade on the free agent market.