Kearns Unlikely To Be Dealt

True, gota love Manny Acta, guy is the man. I started wondering in hindsight last year if the Mets made a mistake letting this guy walk to the Nats. Should have let them have Willie Randolph. I dont even wana get myself worked up over Willie, but the way I feel about baseball managers is that they are pretty much useless on the field. They dont help you win, they dont help you lose. Occasionally will make an important call in the game. With Willie, it is almost like he makes it easier for them to lose with some of his madness. Anyway, I think Acta could have won the NLMoY last year. I was one of those people that expected the Nats to lose 120 and thought they were the worstly assembled baseball team I had ever seen.I think Acta's players really love the guy also. I never heard or saw a quote saying this, but with the mets he seemed like a good friend to the team and all the players seemed to like him.

This is awesome news! I wouldn't be surprised to seem him starting in RF come opening day, and finishing the season there too...I've said it a couple of times, but I'll say it again:
RF- Kearns
CF - Milledge
LF - Pena

Dukes fills in for injuries/rest/suspensions...

Now if only we could fix our problems at C, SS, and 2B...

It's posturing.

If they get the right value, they'll move him. They're just making sure other teams realize/think they are willing to hold him.

Does Kearns really have any value? A sub 800 OPS for a corner outfielder is awful. This will be especially true in 09 when his salary nearly doubles.

If you don't move Kearns this year I doubt you will be able to find a taker next year without eating a portion of the contract.

I just don't understand why people are enamored with the guy. He isn't a prospect now and his production has never been impressive.

Kearns is a product of "he hit 'x' homeruns in 200 ab's - because of that I can project that he will hit 'y' homeruns over the course of a season" mentality.

Take away his 370ab's during his rookie season in 2002 and you have a guy that would be fighting for a position on any team, lucky to be making league minimum. Everyone is waiting for him to capture that magic again. Unfortunately for Kearns - it isn't going to happen.

Kearns has never recovered from the serious shoulder injury he got running into Ray King as a Red.

Even though we got the shaft on Majewski, I'm glad we don't have to deal with Kearns under-achievement and Lopez's horrendous defense. Glad to have Arroyo for Pena too. Wish Bowden would go ahead and take Dunn back too.

Kearns does have value as an excellent fielder as well. He only has a sub .800 OPS because he played in RFK. In an off-year, he hit .272/.364/.438 on the road (.802 OPS isn't great, but I'll take that from a superb defensive outfielder any year). He also hit .285/.390/.461 after the ASG, so he showed improvement toward the end of the year.

Wouldn't the defensive outfield be better suited with Kearns in RF and Pena in LF? From what I remember from his time in Boston, Pena was a pretty horrible fielder. I don't see how Kearns can be any worse, unless he has a Pierre-type arm.

Why does it show BLANK every now and then when people post? That's weird.

Cause typekey is poopie.

Wow I'm blind BIGNatsFAN. I thought you suggested Pena in RF. I retract my statement, now that I realized we agree.

Could Dukes be stashed away in AAA to start the season? That would make some sense, if possible, seeing as he's neer had a single AB at that level before and the Nats could field a decent OF without him in Washington. I'm sure the kid is pretty much ML-ready, but it couldn't hurt to keep him at AAA if he's likely to be riding the pine with the big league club. Just a thought...

Still not buying the argument that Kearns is good.

2003 ... 264/364/455
2004 ... 230/321/419
2005 ... 240/333/452
2006 ... 274/351/492 (Cinci)
2006 ... 250/381/429 (Wash)
2007 ... 266/355/411
Career . 265/359/450

The guy is relatively consistent right around the 800ops mark. Good fielder - sure. Loves to take walks - you bet. But that's all he brings to the table.

Call me crazy, but I am looking for a little more out my corner outfielder than just a good glove and the ability to walk. He needs to either hit for power, a high average, or be able to run.

At $5m is he worth it? Maybe, if you don't have better options. But at $9m he is just awful.

As a Nats fan, I appreciate the compliment.

There are quite a few (including Nats fans, and, occasionally, Washington Post columnists) who complain that the Nats have been unwilling to sign big-name free agents while 'rebuilding'.

Well, we have a good test because while the Nats are eschewing expensive free agents, the Royals are getting whatever they can--Meche, Jose Guillen, maybe Rowand. Let's see where these two teams are in three-four years or so.

Thing is, if Meche or Guillen or Rowand crash and burn, the Royals are on the hook for years, big time. If Dukes or Clippard crash and burn, the Nats shrug their shoulders and go on to the next guy.

The Nats are the New A's! lol

I guess since Nick Johnson isn't a lock to stay healthy, '07 All-Star Dmitri Young is your 5th OF'er/backup 1B'man. Wonder how many AB's he gets and if he'll be happy with that.

"The guy is relatively consistent right around the 800ops mark. Good fielder - sure. Loves to take walks - you bet. But that's all he brings to the table.

Call me crazy, but I am looking for a little more out my corner outfielder than just a good glove and the ability to walk. He needs to either hit for power, a high average, or be able to run."

We'll see. I think you'll see his power production increase a bunch in the new stadium this year. Plus, if you look at the second half of his season, that was where most of his HR's came from. He hasn't been able to hit his stride yet, true, but I think there's still time. I agree that it's running out on him though. For now, however, it is VERY good idea for the Nats to keep him. He might not have become hugely successful yet, but he hasn't been a bust either, and one of Milledge, Dukes and Pena could easily fall apart. Without Kearns in that picture, what would the outfield look like? Logan or Langerhans instead? God, please, no.

bsox21: I really hope it's not just posturing. To lose Kearns at this current junction would suck very much for the Nats. Let's be honest, it's not like we could get a Bedard or Santana or Haren for Lopez/Kearns. Unless that's the kind of trade he's moved in, he won't be moved.

For starters, Austin Kearns is not going to like being one of 4 outfielders along with Wily Mo. When he had that situation with the Reds in 2005, he reacted so badly that he ended up in AAA for a month.

As part of being an excellent defensive oufielder, he has a strong and consistently accurate throwing arm.

Kearns was not a 200 at bat wonder, more of a promising career derailed by injury. In his rookie year in 2002 he hit 315/407/500 and would easily have been Rookie of the Year but had a mid-August season ending hamstring injury. In the first 40 games of 2003, he hit 13 home runs and drove in 39 runs, at the very top of the NL, while hitting over .300 and drawing a lot of walks. His OPS had to be close to 1.000. Soon came the shoulder injury with King, he tried to play thru it for about 6 weeks but couldn't hit. Other injuries plagued him the next 2 years and he was never the same.

The Nats aren't the new A's, they're literally the old Reds, but with better pitching. Good luck to them.

Am I the only one who disagrees with the premise right from the start? No, I don't have to like the Nats just because they're willing to take problem children. Why reward players with issues? Not only that, but how do you say Elijah Dukes has "supposed attitude issues"? SUPPOSED? For crying out loud, the Tampa Bay AA and AAA affiliates told the major league club that he was NOT welcome back, which was why they put him on the restricted list. He had nowhere to go. It's ridiculous to make excuses for a guy like that and pretend his attitude issues are "supposed" or make believe. He has problems in his personal and professional life. That's the reason you don't trade your "fourth" outfielder; Dukes can not be relied upon.

I agree that a willingness to take players with attitude problems is not necessarily a good thing. Actually it's part of Jim Bowden's MO, due presumably to his need to be "creative" with the Marge Schott/Williams Reds and now the Nationals. Which reminds me, there is something not to like about the Nationals: Jim Bowden, known in Cincy as Leatherpants.

PS I put up the 2:07 PM post about Austin Kearns.