Two Wrongs Don't Make a Right (Fielder).

 

"You know what? I'd rather have two or three guys that are unhappy on the bench that are talented and I know I can go to them and help me win, than to have three guys who are happy but who aren't talented."
(Manny Acta, via Nationals dot com, 4/3/2009)

You know what?

Manny is asking for trouble.

In other words: Manny Acta thinks it's better to have the most promising (and volatile, Scott Olsen aside) young player on the roster pissed off and riding the pine while the mediocre veteran starts. And that's to say nothing about Josh Willingham. Manny is a Kearns guy. It doesn't compute.

Meanwhile, there's something oddly fitting about the AP Photo above, taken last July 5th - there's Austin Kearns standing around watching Elijah Dukes being carted off the field in obvious pain.

(AP Photo)

Comments

[Anonymous]

You seem to be missing a BASIC fact, this is a 162 game season. There will be plenty of ABs to go around for Kearns, Dukes, and Willingham. The person given the starting job to start the season barely matters. And you're forgetting one of them will be traded most likely anyway, which takes care of part of the so-called problem.

[guuguu]

Possible photo caption:
"And don't come back. This is MY HOUSE."

[Will]

This is all so backwards, I don't even know where to begin. If Elijah Dukes starts the season on the bench, I'll be seriously disillusioned with the Nats management. We're comprehensively fucked from Manny up to Ted Lerner. I've been holding out hope that Acta has just been hamstrung by Bowden's idiocy, because I've been mildly disappointed with how he's handled the job. But Bowden was always there to take the blame (and I do think it was mostly Bowden to blame for stupid decisions. But what was Acta doing while Kearns, Zimmerman and others were clearly struggling on-field with injuries?) But now, if Acta royally screws this up, then who in Nats management is left? We're all aware of the Lerner's deficiencies. Now that Kasten's lost his foil, he's coming across as a condescending jerk unwilling to make any concessions (see his rant about Strasburg's contract), the recent development that it was he who refused to raise their offer to Crow, and his severe mistrust of Rizzo's competency at GM. Rizzo just released a seemingly healthy Shawn Hill, who's now the Padre's 5th starter. Where was the logic there?! And his inability to deal Kearns or Willingham has put Manny in a situation where he has the opportunity to not start Dukes.

I hope we're both reading too much into the Dukes issue, but I'm not very optimistic (as if you couldn't tell).
The next four months are going to be pivotal for the Nats future. If Acta screws up the lineups, his flaws will be apparent. And if the FO manages to not sign Strasburg, it will prove their inadequacies too.

Just two more days....

[The Nationals Enquirer]

Will - we held a staff meeting tonight to address your comment. First - we want to say up front that we appreciate that you've taken the time to vent here. Your voice is heard.

Second: Holy crap are you disillusioned - even more than we are half the time!

You've touched on some really interesting questions to keep tabs on, like:

Acta: Start of year 3, and does anyone have a good feel for what he is as a manager? Good? Bad? In between? Better suited as a third base coach?

Kasten: We don't read his not-so-ringing endorsement of Rizzo as mistrust in Rizzo's ability to do the job. When the proverbial shit hit the fan this winter, Stan was forced to do a complete power-grab. And you know what? He was able to right the ship. And we have no complaints about the ensuing touch choices he made, including his decision not to give Mike Rizzo the official title of GM.

Strasburg: Regarding Stan's comments on the demands Strasburg would be making in June...we don't see him as being a "condescending jerk unwilling to make any concessions". He's about to go toe-to-toe with as tough a negotiator as there is in the business. His public comments have to be measured and unflinching. But we hear you - to strike out on Strasburg a year removed from striking out on Crow (regardless of who was responsible for that) would be another major set back for the organization.

On Kearns, Dukes, and Willingham...yeah, someone obviously needs to get moved. But I wouldn't hold it against Rizzo that nobody's been dealt yet...maybe a good deal just hasn't presented itself yet -Which isn't to say we wouldn't endorse a trade involving Kearns and a bag of baseballd immediately.

Look - we appreciate your concerns, Will - there's lots to be concerned about. But like you said: Just two days left.

It's been a long winter - we're ready to take a couple of deep breaths and enjoy it.

[AD]

Last year, "superstar" Dukes had five more hits than "trashcan" Kearns. Also, I doubt that Kearns has ever gotten into a shouting match with the manager. If we get the 2008 version of Kearns, we dump him, make roster room, and eat the 9 mil. If we get the 2007 version, both Dukes and Millage are trade bait. It's a win-win.

[Will]

Haha, sorry, I didn't mean to come off so pessimistic. It's just difficult to take when I've been holding out hope, especially with regards to Acta, with the mindset of "Just wait until Bowden is gone." Now that he is gone, I'm dismayed to see Manny make just about the worst decision possible. Priority #1 must be: Play the youngsters.
This season is already wasted. We won't win the division or even challenge for the wild card. But if there's one thing we have going for us, it's our youth. Milledge, Dukes, Zimmerman, Zimmermann, Martis, Lannan, etc are all very promising and under 25. So it's imperative that we give these guys the greatest chance to improve so we can compete in the future, which is putting the utmost confidence in their ability to become good players (see: the Rays in 2007). To give Austin Kearns, a player with no future with the team beyond this year, is absolutely asinine, in the worst sort of way. We're preventing the development of our future so Austin Kearns can get a couple more games? Seriously, in the best case scenario, how many wins will Kearns bring? 4, maybe 5? That won't make any difference. And it's stupid decisions like starting Kearns before Dukes that will cause serious repercussions in the future.

I guess I did go overboard in criticizing the FO, but it's so frustrating to see this team not just fail to get better each year, but manage to get worse. I'm interested to see how they'll manage to do so this year, considering they're already by far the worst.