I'd like to add that Zimmerman broke his hamate bone in Oct/Nov. While he'll be healthy, breaking the hamate bone is notorious for hampering power.

Thanks a lot. I just cringed in pain like five times.

It's always a pleasure to read a well-written piece on teams that get little attention from the media.

Good report. I was dead wrong on Washington. Was one of those who thought the Nats would lose 100 games last season. Bowden and Acta deserve credit for getting the most out of the talent, especially considering the injuries to Johnson and Patterson.

At the risk of being wrong two years in a row, I'm still not that impressed with this club. They outperformed their Pythagorean record by three wins, and I don't see too many players on that roster who are taking the elevator ride "up."

Zimmerman is the best player on the team. He is young and still has some upside. I like Milledge but am unsure he can replace Church's production this coming season. Young, Pena, and Guzman are unlikely to post an OPS+ of 120 or better like last year. If WMP pulls it off, I bet it's because he gets platooned and plays mostly against LHP.

The starting rotation looks like it got the job done with electrical tape plus some smoke and mirrors. Only one pitcher (Chico) hurled more than 120 innings, and I'm highly skeptical of him based on his strikeout and groundball rates, much less his stuff and command (or lack thereof).

I see WAS winning somewhere between 65 and 75 games and finishing in fourth place, closer to dead last than third. But, hey, what do I know? The Nats proved me wrong last season and may do so again next.

Good article. I have been very impressed by Acta, not just for the success of the team relative to expectations but to his public statements about his approach to winning. I was among those convinced that Washington was doomed not just to 100 losses but to making a run at the worst record in modern history. Instead they were respectable. Acta got my vote-irrelevant since I have no standing anywhere-for manager of the year.

Bowden's doing a decent job with this offense, building a bit of a core around some decent young players. I think resigning Young for 2 (two!!!) years was worth a laugh last season, as if he'll earn what he's making.

Especially if Johnson comes back ready. Or whoever else is in the running for the 1B job. What I could see happening is a decent 1st half from Young, then Johnson returns/they come up with something else, and then make a trade with the Pirates or Giants or something to unload Dmitri.

Their pitching staff is still just a huge AUGH though, with no effort to improve it thus far. Seriously, I remember when they went into ST with competition for like 4 spots last season. Is it looking any different for 2008?

Their bullpen looks like Rauch/Cordero again, which isn't bad except that they really do need more innings from their SP.

Who needs a starting rotation? I say Rauch and cordero throw a combined 250 innings next year. That is the only way this team will be well below average. If they do not pitch much, they will be atrocious.

I agree that Bowden is doing a much better job than I anticipated and maybe this club has a little more hope than i thought (at least it looks a lot better now than the last few years in Montreal eeek) he needs to pry some interesting pitching projects away from other teams though that would be a nice start. they don't really have any decent pitchers comming up anytime soon.

This team looks to have an excellent young core and a surplus of outfielders whom could be some real trade chips in a year or two if the Nationals decide to be a small market spender.

That said, I think Bowden would be wise to trade Young while his value is high. Bowden can remind GMs that Young had a decent track record prior to the 2006 season. I think a team like the Angels, Diamondbacks or Twins could utilize his services more so then the Nationals, and all have young bottom of the rotation major league ready prospects whom they may be willing to give up for Meat Hook.