Time Capsule: Dear Jason - Sorry!

(Editor's note: this is the final in a series of three articles I wrote last week and didn't post until now. I look forward to forgetting to update for a month.)

I was wrong. Totally, entirely, completely wrong.

After Jason Bergmann walked half the RFK concession staff in his first start of the season, I figured he was going to be embarrassing. Not just bad - completely inept. His next couple of starts weren't as jaw-droppingly bad - the control was better, and he was turning some of those walks into Ks.

His next few starts after those were better; however, I still had his first start seared into my brain and I chalked up this success to dumb luck - he's missing bats now, but that's just because everyone is willing to swing at the slop he's throwing. That won't last through the next game. Or the one after that. If not then, it'll be over next week. Meanwhile, we moved past the small sample size part of the season - he was still dealing.

By now, I had started to figure that he'd be okay in the middle of the rotation; the threat to blow up is there, but it's not as likely as I thought. (And really, who isn't a threat to blow up in the Nats' 2007 rotation?) And then .... Monday night. You've probably (edit: ...by now, definitely. From everyone else) read about it already - 7 innings of no-hit ball. I was already starting to believ, but now? He's the staff ace.

(edit: the following paragraph is hilarious in retrospective; Bergmann went on the DL on the 18th, retroactive to the 15th)

Of course, that's not entirely his doing; with both Hill and the Delicate Flower on the DL, he's as much the de facto ace as he is the de jure ace. Were they both healthy, he'd probably be the #2 guy behind Hill. I wouldn't complain if he was the ace, though.

Question for discussion: let's say both Patterson and Hill come back healthy and dealing. How do they get ordered in the rotation - and more importantly, does the Nats' staff start to sniff league average? My heart quickens at the prospect.

--------------------------------

Postscript: of course, most of this is kind of irrelevant now, thanks to Bergmann's DL stint. Unfortunately, that also means the Nats' first three starters are on the DL, which: good times. Still, there's more here than I thought there was going to be at first. Right now? I'll take that.

Time Capsule: Everybody Line up to Jump over the Cliff

(Editor's note: this is the second of a series of three articles I wrote last week and didn't post until now. Still, since I put forth the effort I didn't want to have them go to waste.)

The previous post was silver lining; now it's back to the dark cloud. The good news is that in Shawn Hill's last start, he threw 5 innings of no-hit ball. The bad news is that he had to leave the game early due to elbow trouble - and a few days later he landed on the DL. Oddly enough, he went on the DL officially for a torn labrum in his non-pitching shoulder.

------------------------------------------

I'm reminded of a Dilbert cartoon. In it, Dilbert asks Wally why he hasn't responded to Dilbert's inquiry (we don't know what he asked about; it's not really relevant); was it just a simple oversight or something more sinister? Wally answers that it's the sinister reason; he's withholding information in an attempt to inflate his own value. (The strip's last panel shows Alice stealing Wally's computer tower behind his back, which is funny but not really important to the point at hand.)

I can't help but feel this is the case here; when it's been fairly obvious for a while now that Hill's elbow was troubling him, why is he on the DL due to labrum issues? Are the Nats hiding something hideous? It would suck if a MRI of Hill's elbow revealed the internal equivalent of Shredded Wheat - but if it does, shouldn't we know? It's not going to kill all hope for the season if that's the case. (You can't kill something that's already dead! Especially if you're not in a zombie movie.) What would suck is hearing that it's a different injury entirely at first - and then having his elbow knock him out for the season.

To be fair, I could be overreacting. Maybe it is his labrum that's really the problem. If it is, great; while he's resting that it'll give his elbow time to recover as well. At the very least it won't hurt any more than it currently does - and that's a good thing (edit: Captain Obvious to the rescue; I need to edit my work better). I'm just afraid we'll get the "there's been setbacks" articles soon. If he's done, he's done - but if he's done when you say he's not, that kills.

(Postscript: news from May 19 says Hill feels fine.)

Time Capsule: On Winning Steaks and Sweeps

(Editor's note: this is the first of a series of three articles I wrote last week and didn't post until now. Still, since I put forth the effort I didn't want to have them go to waste.)

Winning fixes a lot of problems. Actually, "fix" is probably too strong a word - "glosses over" would be a better phrase. The Nats' recent 4-game winning streak (edit: May 11-14) sure didn't fix much - but it self pretty good. There's still plenty of dark cloud to this silver lining (is at a good sign you need to go on a run to break the .333 mark?), but they'll be plenty of time to talk about that dark cloud this season. Let's focus on some positives:

- Starting pitching. Jason Bergmann and Shawn Hill had two outstanding starts - and not just in the "oh, he got us into the 7th down by 1" way; they threw a combined 12 innings of no-hit ball. Heck, even Jason Simontacchi picked up his first win in 4 yeras. Matt Chico managed to not look totally lost out there, too. I wouldn't expect this every time out, but stringing together four decent starts in a row? I'll take it.

- Good bullpen work. Absent a true closer for most of the weekend, the Nats didn't do too bad without one. Yeah, they'll have bad weeks (too much use will cause everyone to implode at some point), but when they're on they seem to do well as a group. There's enough skill and - dare I say - talent to not be completely incendiary most of the time. This weekend, they weren't.

- Clutch hitting. Where has this been all year? I can't recall actually being confident that a runner on third with less than two outs will score until this weekend. To be fair, the Nats were bound to improve to the mean eventually; it was nice to see that happen in conjunction with good pitching. (Also, I dont know if an inside-the-park HR counts as clutch, but it was still a lot of fun!)

Of course, no team is as good as they are when they're winning, and I'm not so optimistic as to think they've turned some mythical corner and will proceed to challenge .400 (or - god forbid - .500). Still, it's fun to see everything mesh together neatly every once in a while. Probably more importantly, it's good to see that this team's individual components can be better than what we've seen before - and especially what we saw from them during the last road trip (edit: April 30 - May 9). It's not perfect, but you know what? I'll take it.

Quick Hit

Can't post very long, but I'm wondering if Scott Olsen's healthy. It seems surprising that a guy who's as good a pitcher as he is isn't doing better this season. I'm doubly surprised that the not-very-good-against-lefites Nats offense was able to put 10 hits on him in 5 innings.

Kudos to the bullpen, although I'm also a little concerned about the extra-innings workload. There's not a ton of talent there - we know that - but again, there's not a ton of talent in the rotation either, and there's no guarantee that the rotation will pitch a ton of 6-7 inning starts. At least Shawn Hill had his second quality start this season; I'm ready to anoint him the staff ace, if nobody else is. Oddly, this time the breakdown in the bullpen was due to Rauch and Cordero; we've seen this before from Cordero, but Rauch ...well, that's a little odd. My guess / hope is it's just a momentary blip.

Still, we got our win; if we can get another one in the next two games, that's just gravy at this point.

White Rabbit Alert

So - yeah, once again I'm late, once again I missed yesterday's game. Fortunately, it would seem yesterday's starter - the one, the only John Patterson - missed it too. Presumably his eyelids were stopped up. Either way, he was good for 4 innings and 80 pitches of suspect ball with suspect movement, and ...eh, I'll write more about him later. For now, this sums up my feelings on it.

Anyway, we're facing the Marlins this weekend - not the first time either. We all remember the "performance" in the first series of the season, as much as we'd rather not. Blame the craptastic performances across the board - bad pitching, bad hitting, bad injuries, you name it. The series was bailed out from total uselessness thanks to Jorge Julio, who's since on gone on the DL with acute suckitis. Now the Nats travel to Florida - why should it be any better?

For starters, the team is better; the pitching can pass for mediocre on a good day, and the hitting is starting to show signs of life. True, Zimmerman has yet to really come to life, but that won't last. Lopez is starting to hit, and Snelling is fine as an 8 hitter in a full-time role.

Hill's the Nats' best starter and he's in the series. Chico and Williams are both works in progress at this point, but Chico has at least faced the Marlins this season. He actually didn't do badly; blame the defense. It'll be interesting to see if he does any better this time around, especially given his recent struggles.

Honestly, I'm not expecting much. There's a reason for the Nats to win each game (Hill on Friday, Chico's defense waking up, Mitre kind of sucks), but 1-2 may be the best we can hope for. I hope I'm wrong, and not in an "hey, we were outscored 123-0" kind of way.