|
|
PennSkinsFan 05-15-2009, 10:02 AM Cast your vote at DC Pro Sports Report.
http://dcprosportsreport.com/2009/05/should-the-nats-take-strasburg-at-1.html (http://dcprosportsreport.com/2009/05/should-the-nats-take-strasburg-at-1.html)
Courtesy of their 102 losses last season, the Washington Nationals will have the first overall pick in the 2009 MLB Draft, which takes place in June. The consensus #1 pick is pitcher Stephen Strasburg of San Diego State. Stasburg's numbers are ridiculous and some scouts are already saying he is as good or better as some of the best pitchers in the Majors right now. So, the Nats should take Strasburg, right? If only it were that simple.
Spence 05-15-2009, 10:11 AM I voted to take Strasburg first overall. Boswell's arguments are very compelling and impossible to dispute. I just have a feeling that Strasburg could be really special if he stays healthy -- which is the caveat you must attach to all pitchers.
dmek25 05-15-2009, 10:17 AM dude is a flat out baller, that's going to want ridiculous money. pay him and get it over with
Schneed10 05-15-2009, 10:18 AM It's not even a discussion, you take him, and you pay him whatever Boras wants. This guy is already better (by FAR) than any pitcher the Nationals have on their roster. He's as good as Cole Hamels right now, with a much higher ceiling.
It should not be understated how good this dude is. He could one day be the best pitcher baseball has EVER seen. At worst, he develops into Johan Santana. If you pass him up you're a fool.
Cost is not an issue. Besides, if it turns out you can't financially afford him, then trade him for an absurd number of prospects/players. The guy represents a chance to change the fortunes of the frachise.
dmek25 05-15-2009, 10:26 AM It's not even a discussion, you take him, and you pay him whatever Boras wants. This guy is already better (by FAR) than any pitcher the Nationals have on their roster. He's as good as Cole Hamels right now, with a much higher ceiling.
It should not be understated how good this dude is. He could one day be the best pitcher baseball has EVER seen. At worst, he develops into Johan Santana. If you pass him up you're a fool.
Cost is not an issue. Besides, if it turns out you can't financially afford him, then trade him for an absurd number of prospects/players. The guy represents a chance to change the fortunes of the frachise.
schneed, come on. the guy has great POTENTIAL. that we agree on. but don't forget, he hasn't faced ONE major league hitter yet. but i do agree he already would be the Nat's best pitcher. what a sorry staff
Redskins_P 05-15-2009, 11:20 AM schneed, come on. the guy has great POTENTIAL. that we agree on. but don't forget, he hasn't faced ONE major league hitter yet. but i do agree he already would be the Nat's best pitcher. what a sorry staff
The starters aren't that bad (Daniel Cabrera being the exception, he sucks). They have some pretty decent young arms in Lannan, Zimmermann, Martis, and Scott Olsen to a certain extent. The problem with the Nationals is the bullpen. Its by far the worst in Baseball and it doesn't look like its going to get any better.
Its too bad because the offense is ranked pretty high in the NL in many categories (AVG, OBP, HRs). If the Nationals had, at the minimum, a mediocre bullpen, they would be playing .500 ball.
By adding Strasburg, I think the Nats would have one the brightest young pitching staffs....maybe even the best as far as potential goes.
Schneed10 05-15-2009, 01:19 PM schneed, come on. the guy has great POTENTIAL. that we agree on. but don't forget, he hasn't faced ONE major league hitter yet. but i do agree he already would be the Nat's best pitcher. what a sorry staff
No it's not just potential, the guy is already a legit major league pitcher. Take a look at the article, there are scouts saying he's already better than AJ Burnett.
He regularly throws 100mph, topping out at 103. His pitches have wicked movement, and he can pull the string with a changeup at least as well as Hamels can. And it's not like he's wild, the guy has a K rate of more than 2 per inning for a reason, he gets the ball over the plate.
He'll come right in and light the league up. There's never been more of a sure thing for baseball's #1 pick, at least not in my memory.
over the mountain 05-15-2009, 02:24 PM ive been reading up on this guy for a year now, real good SI article on him a few months ago. top end velocity (triple digits) with command, has movement on his pitches, change up looks mechanically like his fastballs, plus pretty young unused arm as he didnt really become a pitching stud until last year. he just started to take this thing serious a few a few years ago, went from flab to muscle in a short period of time which could be attributed to finally living healthy or it could be b/c of you know what . . .
nats should get him, give them some legit buzz about a player not named zimmerman.
go skins!!
GTripp0012 05-15-2009, 02:27 PM Strasburg = Reggie Bush
Except with the potential to rewrite history instead of totally ruining it.
I would take him first overall, because he could be in triple A by the end of his rookie season. I mean, unless someone argues that Price was a bad pick by the Rays, I don't see how the Nats could go wrong here.
SmootSmack 05-20-2009, 05:32 PM The starters aren't that bad (Daniel Cabrera being the exception, he sucks). They have some pretty decent young arms in Lannan, Zimmermann, Martis, and Scott Olsen to a certain extent. The problem with the Nationals is the bullpen. Its by far the worst in Baseball and it doesn't look like its going to get any better.
Its too bad because the offense is ranked pretty high in the NL in many categories (AVG, OBP, HRs). If the Nationals had, at the minimum, a mediocre bullpen, they would be playing .500 ball.
By adding Strasburg, I think the Nats would have one the brightest young pitching staffs....maybe even the best as far as potential goes.
If only we were average (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/nationalsjournal/2009/05/with_average_pitching_would_na.html)
|