The official James Bowden thread

[wilkerson_rulz-06]

Well, since we're all shocked and appalled by his recent senseless moves, I suggest we start a thread where we can express how much we dislike this nutcracker of a GM.

[538280]

You know, you all are completely ungrateful to Bowden. Not to say he's the best GM in baseball, but he hasn't done anything really wrong with this club. Some people don't like the Soriano deal, some people do. Fine. I don't see how it's an "appalling" move either way.

Why don't you focus on what he's actually done so far. What has he done? He took control of our team, which had won 67 games the previous year and made them a .500 team who was in the playoff hunt until the very end.

What appalling moves has he made? Sammy Sosa? He's hardly offering him any money. Doesn't seem too bad to offer a former great player a minor league contract in hopes he'll be good again. Vinny Castilla? He wasn't any good last year. Giving him away for an innings eating pitcher was a very good move. Jamey Caroll? You're mad about the trading of a utility infielder with a 79 OPS+ and a range factor 19% worse than leauge average? I like him too. He's real hard working. But, he is a horrible player, in the field and the batter's box. Get over your subjective feelings and look at the team objectively.

[Bob Hannah]

Bowden ain't the brightest and the best at GM, but neither am I. And Jim is probably much better at it I would ever be.

With Guzman, he paid too, too much and Guz responded with the antithesis of a career year. Guzman isn't as bad as he was in 2005. But he isn't, or hasn't shown himself, worth the contract Bowden gave him.

When Castilla was signed no one knew how the stadium would play and that affected Vinny's hitting stats. To the point it played with Vinny's head. Vinny was hurt a lot last year and that too affected his performance.

With Soriano things would go much easier if the Nationals had the foresight to communicate with Alphonso about their outfield plans for him.

In all fairness to Bowden, he does the best he can with the payroll he works with. The Nationals can't get top tier FAs with the money they have to offer. Most of us are familiar with the pattern- get a bunch of toolsy guys who never quite cut it and hope a couple of them gel during the same year.

I do think Bowden is gone when ownership is named. No surprise here. The boss will want to hire his own man.

Side note on Guzman. I understand he had laser surgery on his eyes this off season. It will be interesting to see the results of this.

[KingJ]

Originally Posted by Bob Hannah

I understand he had laser surgery on his eyes this off season.

Even if he goes blind, there is still a 45% chance he hits better than last season.

[wilkerson_rulz-06]

Originally Posted by 538280

You know, you all are completely ungrateful to Bowden. Not to say he's the best GM in baseball, but he hasn't done anything really wrong with this club. Some people don't like the Soriano deal, some people do. Fine. I don't see how it's an "appalling" move either way.

Why don't you focus on what he's actually done so far. What has he done? He took control of our team, which had won 67 games the previous year and made them a .500 team who was in the playoff hunt until the very end.

What appalling moves has he made? Sammy Sosa? He's hardly offering him any money. Doesn't seem too bad to offer a former great player a minor league contract in hopes he'll be good again. Vinny Castilla? He wasn't any good last year. Giving him away for an innings eating pitcher was a very good move. Jamey Caroll? You're mad about the trading of a utility infielder with a 79 OPS+ and a range factor 19% worse than leauge average? I like him too. He's real hard working. But, he is a horrible player, in the field and the batter's box. Get over your subjective feelings and look at the team objectively.

Chris, I admire you but I think you're wrong.
1)Bowden did not make the Nats a .500 club, being in D.C. made them that.
Montreal drove away the Expos, no one went to see them, no fans cheering.
2)Castilla+Guzman <<<<<<<Batista+Gonzalez.
3)Preston Wilson acquired for Zach Day, was A HORRIBLE MOVE.
Wilson struck out a ton, just as much as Wilky, he stunk in the OF and there was no clutch at all. You give away a....I wouldn't say "promising", young pitcher for a guy who thinks he's worth 12.5 million is completely senseless move.
4)

But, he is a horrible player, in the field and the batter's box.

I disagree, he is average with the bat, before Vidro's injury he had a very healthy bavg

[538280]

Originally Posted by wilkerson_rulz

Chris, I admire you but I think you're wrong.
1)Bowden did not make the Nats a .500 club, being in D.C. made them that.
Montreal drove away the Expos, no one went to see them, no fans cheering.

I am currently reading a book by Craig Wright entitled The Diamond Appraised by Craig Wright. It's kind of a sabermetrics/research book in which Wright makes many interesting studies on baseball theories. One study he does is whether or not crowd size really effects a team's performance. His result was basically it has had little to no correlation with team success. Larger crowds do not make a team perform better.

Anyway, the 2004 Expos did 12% better at home than on the road. This is higher than the normal performance increase at home.

2)Castilla+Guzman <<<<<<<Batista+Gonzalez.

This is not really true. It may look that way looking at raw numbers, but that is a park illusion. Castilla last year had a 94 OPS+, Batista in 2004 was at 88. As horrible as Guzman was last year, Gonzalez was even worse. Gonzalez's OPS+ was 62, Guzman's 55. But, Guzman was a much better fielder. Guzman was better IMO.

3)Preston Wilson acquired for Zach Day, was A HORRIBLE MOVE.
Wilson struck out a ton, just as much as Wilky, he stunk in the OF and there was no clutch at all. You give away a....I wouldn't say "promising", young pitcher for a guy who thinks he's worth 12.5 million is completely senseless move.

Preston Wilson was an okay OFer for the Nats. He did what was expected of him, and really hit even better at RFK than at Coors (park illusions again). Day was a horrible pitcher. Not a great trade, but doesn't help or hurt really.

4)
I disagree, he is average with the bat, before Vidro's injury he had a very healthy bavg

There is nothing average about him with the bat. His BA was "healthy". Yeah, whatever. It was still 9 points below league average. His SLG was 130 points lower! His range factor was 47 points lower! His OBP was okay I guess, three points higher. Big deal. He is a player who can't hit or field.

[wilkerson_rulz-06]

Originally Posted by 538280

I am currently reading a book by Craig Wright entitled The Diamond Appraised by Craig Wright. It's kind of a sabermetrics/research book in which Wright makes many interesting studies on baseball theories. One study he does is whether or not crowd size really effects a team's performance. His result was basically it has had little to no correlation with team success. Larger crowds do not make a team perform better.

Anyway, the 2004 Expos did 12% better at home than on the road. This is higher than the normal performance increase at home.



This is not really true. It may look that way looking at raw numbers, but that is a park illusion. Castilla last year had a 94 OPS+, Batista in 2004 was at 88. As horrible as Guzman was last year, Gonzalez was even worse. Gonzalez's OPS+ was 62, Guzman's 55. But, Guzman was a much better fielder. Guzman was better IMO.



Preston Wilson was an okay OFer for the Nats. He did what was expected of him, and really hit even better at RFK than at Coors (park illusions again). Day was a horrible pitcher. Not a great trade, but doesn't help or hurt really.



There is nothing average about him with the bat. His BA was "healthy". Yeah, whatever. It was still 9 points below league average. His SLG was 130 points lower! His range factor was 47 points lower! His OBP was okay I guess, three points higher. Big deal. He is a player who can't hit or field.

I should learn to shut my mouth when I'm discussing with you.