Discussion: Do The Nats Have To Sign Strasburg?
Tracy Ringolsby of FOX Sports suggests the Nationals have "absolutely nothing to lose with this draft," and says they win whether they sign Stephen Strasburg or get the second pick in next year's draft for failing to do so. They've already agreed to sign Drew Storen, the 10th overall selection, and they're early favorites for next year's first overall pick, with an MLB-worst 15-42 record. They could have the first two picks in next year's draft if they don't sign Strasburg.
However, SI.com's Jon Heyman
argued yesterday that the Nationals can't afford not to come to an agreement with their pick. Strasburg is a unique talent and Heyman doesn't think the Nats can keep putting things off, even if they could potentially pick first and second in the 2010 draft.
So do you agree with Ringolsby and the San Francisco Chronicle's John Shea
that the Nats win whether they sign Strasburg or not? Or do you agree with Heyman that the Nationals should take advantage of an opporunity to acquire a special talent now instead of delaying for a year?