BREAK UP THE F-ING NATIONALS

Didn't quite make your projections did he? .236/21hr/66rbi last year.

Think he'll get 30 rbi this year?

snailhook wrote:
espinosa's numbers are actually really impressive for a rookie.  he's brought his average up to .237 from about .200 a month ago.  if he ends up the year hitting .270 with 25 homers and 90 rbis, that's exceptional for a rookie in a pitching-dominated year.  also, his defense has been great and he's a hustler.  the nats needed someone exactly like espy to come along to build the franchise around.  with ramos still developing, stras coming back in september (hopefully), and bryce harper coming upo next year (probably), the nats have a solid nucleus of youth to build around.  they're finally turning a corner.

If you're going to dig up a thread, this is the thread to dig up:

Baltimore Orioles from April 2007 where Smackie, Pollard and Med took issue with Hoya's defense of Boswell saying that the O's were going to be good in 2009-2010.

HoyaSaxa03 wrote:
 

Originally posted by med:
I wouldn't look for the Nats to be competitive for at least 6-7 years.

i don't have a crystal ball, but i think i'll take boswell's word over your finely-honed analysis, it really seems like you're on top of things here

3 game sweep of the sox. 

2nd best record in the mlb.

only problem? what a fucking brutal schedule they have.  al east for interleague play, and the nl east is stacked.  both divisions only have one team each below .500, and that's the red sox and the phillies.

SO happy the team got their first win in Fenway, won the series, and fucking swept them at home. So beautiful. Got to watch the game on Saturday, Ian Desmond is hands down my favorite player on the team. His hitting is absolutely on fire right now and LaRoche, Zim, and Bryce put some fucking weight into that line up. Real happy to see where they go this week with the Yanks comin into town this weekend.

stevewizzle wrote:
only problem? what a fucking brutal schedule they have.

must suck for the teams that have to play the nats

Not to toot my own horn, but I knew that when they signed him last year, LaRoche was going to be huge for the team. That is, if he can stay healthy and not start the season traditionally cold at the plate. Dude has just been sick, sick, sick. Add Desmond, Bryce Harpy and Morse back, we got Murderers Row back in DC.

BEEEE-LEEEVE IT!

Those four are hitting  a combined .263 with 24 home runs in 620 at-bats. Murderers fow indeed!

Thousand wrote:
Not to toot my own horn, but I knew that when they signed him last year, LaRoche was going to be huge for the team. That is, if he can stay healthy and not start the season traditionally cold at the plate. Dude has just been sick, sick, sick. Add Desmond, Bryce Harpy and Morse back, we got Murderers Row back in DC.

BEEEE-LEEEVE IT!

It's still early. Right O's fans?

stevewizzle wrote:
3 game sweep of the sox. 

2nd best record in the mlb.

only problem? what a fucking brutal schedule they have.  al east for interleague play, and the nl east is stacked.  both divisions only have one team each below .500, and that's the red sox and the phillies.

Yeah.  Good thing they're not actually IN the AL East.  Phew.

Thousand wrote:
It's still early. Right O's fans?

lol

Thousand wrote:
It's still early. Right O's fans?

"It sure is!" says the Angels fan.

And I'm just going to say this because I know none of you stay up late enough to see it for yourselves:

Mike Trout>Bryce Harper

I'm referring to all 5 tools, plus he's better looking and has better hair.

vansmack wrote:
And I'm just going to say this because I know none of you stay up late enough to see it for yourselves:

Mike Trout>Bryce Harper

I'm referring to all 5 tools, plus he's better looking and has better hair.

haven't seen it first hand.  can't argue with the stats.  decent article on grantland today comparing there career paths to this point (tl;dr trout wasn't doing what harper was doing at the same age).

stevewizzle wrote:

vansmack wrote:
And I'm just going to say this because I know none of you stay up late enough to see it for yourselves:

Mike Trout>Bryce Harper

I'm referring to all 5 tools, plus he's better looking and has better hair.

haven't seen it first hand.  can't argue with the stats.  decent article on grantland today comparing there career paths to this point (tl;dr trout wasn't doing what harper was doing at the same age).

but harper is like 20 or 19?

harper is great. .hit a huge home run today and legged out a fielder's choice…so far..

holy shit trout is 20..

ok i don't know what to say. i will take a look at him.

stevewizzle wrote:
trout wasn't doing what harper was doing at the same age.

You mean going to high school?

I didn't see an article comparing the two.  All I saw was the piece on Harper.

One other thing: Trout is not represented by Scott Boras.  Have fun!

vansmack wrote:

stevewizzle wrote:
trout wasn't doing what harper was doing at the same age.

You mean going to high school?

I didn't see an article comparing the two.  All I saw was the piece on Harper.

One other thing: Trout is not represented by Scott Boras.  Have fun!

right now he's not, but just wait!  being lifelong sox fan… there aren't many people that make me cringe more than scott boras.

it's just a peice on harper, but it compares him and trout indirectly.

trout was called up last year, and didn't excel (limited time, i know).  historically speaking, HOF-to be rookies like Arod, KGJr, etc. have had respectable first years but nothing eye-popping like Harper's thus far.  Trout has had the luxury of gaining some experience in the big leagues, where Harper has not; and the stats tend to suggest that's a huge deal.

vansmack wrote:
And I'm just going to say this because I know none of you stay up late enough to see it for yourselves:

Mike Trout>Bryce Harper

I'm referring to all 5 tools, plus he's better looking and has better hair.

We'll see what Harper is doing when he's 20 too ;)

Stras on the mound tonight? I hope he smokes the Jays.

Isn't Harper batting 300?

I think he's exceeding expectations so far

And i had not realized he was as quick as he is…

So you're basically saying that rather than being the next A-rod, Harper is the next Fred Lynn?

stevewizzle wrote:

vansmack wrote:

stevewizzle wrote:
trout wasn't doing what harper was doing at the same age.

You mean going to high school?

I didn't see an article comparing the two.  All I saw was the piece on Harper.

One other thing: Trout is not represented by Scott Boras.  Have fun!

right now he's not, but just wait!  being lifelong sox fan… there aren't many people that make me cringe more than scott boras.

it's just a peice on harper, but it compares him and trout indirectly.

trout was called up last year, and didn't excel (limited time, i know).  historically speaking, HOF-to be rookies like Arod, KGJr, etc. have had respectable first years but nothing eye-popping like Harper's thus far.  Trout has had the luxury of gaining some experience in the big leagues, where Harper has not; and the stats tend to suggest that's a huge deal.

Granted, Trout is ripping it up for a 20 year old and comparing them today they're pretty much dead even.  Trout does have the edge by a good amount in AVG .345 vs. .307 and has more stolen bases (15 vs. 4).  Everything else is for the most part the same thus far this season.

That being said, Harper just played his 40th game in the majors and comparing his first 40 games in the majors to Trouts debut season in the majors (last year, and coincidentally 40 games while he was 19), there's no comparison.

Trout went .220/.281/.390 over his first 40
Harper went .307/.390/.553 over his first 40