"Oh, Rob!"  And then the eye roll of disdain.  That's what Laura Petrie used to say and do when hubby Rob had done something pretty dumb.  Somehow that image comes to mind when pondering MASN broadcaster Rob Dibble.  Oh, Rob, you didn't really say that, did you?  

Dibble's recent trevails have been well chronicled (here and here).  And there's been no shortage of judgment to said actions (here, here and here, among others).  Many want the Nats to fire Dibble for recent comments that, among others, questioned Stephen Strasburg's toughness.  With Strasburg now sidelined for at least a year due to arm injury, Dibble's comments look even more crass.  But do they warrant his firing? 

As with all people, Dibble has his strengths and he has his weaknesses.  Among Dibble's strengths: a real passion for all things baseball.  He loves talking baseball, and isn't shy about his opinions.  Among his weaknesses:  he tends to talk before his thoughts are fully formed.  If you listen to his radio show, you might catch Dibble drifting from one topic to another and, in some cases, contradicting an opinion he had stated just minutes before.  In other words, he lacks an internal modulator.  (If you had asked Dibble about his Strasburg comments an hour or so after the game, my guess is that he would have felt badly about making them.) 

In contrast, as I write this blog, I go back and forth, change it a bit, and later see the main point I'm heading to.  Before I hit the "publish" button, I get comfortable with the logic flow of the piece.  In talk radio, Dibble has none of these benefits.  

You might think that the lack of such a safety net would make a talk-show host a bit more modest and couched in his or her views.  Well, that's not our Rob.  In many ways, he reminds me more of a football commentator, sharp elbows and all, than one who works in the milder sport of baseball.  

In my car on the way to work, I don't mind Dibble's style so much.  When I get home and turn on the baseball game, though, that's another matter.  There, I am putting the broadcasters in my family room almost every night for six straight months.  Sometimes I watch the game solo.  Sometimes with my wife or kids.  Sometimes the game is background noise while we do something else.  

But to leave the game on, I need to feel comfortable that those doing the talking won't rub us the wrong way, such as offensive comments about women, picking a verbal spat with a colleague, and questioning the manhood of a player whose arm just totally collapsed.  In others words, my litmus test is: would I enjoy having the person sit in my family room?  Sharp-elbowed talk show hosts seldom qualify.  

But of course the Nats knew all this when they hired Dibble.  They knew that Dibble would bring his radio persona to TV and they didn't seem to care that it might rub some fans the wrong way.  The family room test was not on their mind.  So wouldn't be it a tad hypocritical for the team to throw Dibble under the bus now?  The image of the corrupt cop in the movie Casablanca -- "I'm shocked, shocked, that there's gambling going on in this establishment" -- comes to mind.  

So as the Nats and Dibble discuss their respective futures, here are a couple thoughts to keep in mind.  First, Dibble.  Many of the great baseball broadcasters worked well into their senior years, and refined their styles along the way.  If he wants to broadcast 162 games every year, is he willing to change and adapt his style?  Is he willing to drop the sharp elbows?  After all, he is still a young man.  Since I don't know Dibble personally, I have no idea whether he wants to change, or even sees the need to.  But it does seem that he has better sides to him, such as a deep affection for those who serve in the military.  Maybe that's a start.  

As for the Nats, they have to decide what kind of brand they want their franchise to represent.  Do they see Washington baseball like Washington politics, with an emphasis on sharp elbows and the pursuit of power?  Or do they see baseball as something better that transcends all that and builds loyalty among a fan base?  Frankly, this is an issue that this franchise has struggled with for a while now.  But like Dibble, maybe they can change, too.  

Maybe the change involves asking Dibble to stay with the broadcast team.  Maybe it involves a parting of ways.  But for both Rob Dibble and the Nats, let's hope things work a bit differently from here on.

      

Starting to get the feeling that this franchise is cursed?  

We're originally given a team whose minor-league system had been gutted.  Then we have to endure the drama days of a certain GM.  A number one pick doesn't sign.  Future of the franchise-catcher goes down with mysterious shoulder injury from which he has yet to return.  Future of the franchise-pitcher 1 loses a year to Tommy John surgery.  And just when he gets backs on the mound, future of the franchise-pitcher 2 is similarly lost. 

There is one serious bummer.  

As Hendo reported earlier today, Stephen Strasburg won't be seen in DC until, most likely, the 2012 season.  Suddenly gone is the vision of two elite power pitchers, Strasburg and Jordan Zimmerman, leading the rotation next year and for many more to come.  

And 2011 doesn't look very pretty.  Normally reliable starters, John Lannan and Jason Marquis, have struggled mightily this season.  Scott Olsen has a ways to go to get back to form, which was only mediocre.  Craig Stammen has shown flashes of emerging, but has yet to find the consistency needed to break through.  The others have too many question marks to go through one by one.  Only Livan Herandez -- yes, Livan -- has been dependably good.  Wow.

Strasburg's exit from the rotation also complicates the rest of the line-up, which is mostly filled with older veterans whose clocks or contracts are ticking.  Will Adam Dunn still be a Nat when Strasburg returns in 2012?  If so, will he, Josh Willingham and Nyjer Morgan be performing at a high level?  Will Ryan Zimmerman, with one year left on his contract by then, decide not to extend and instead pursue free agency?  These are pretty big questions.  

Over the next few days, NDN will dig a bit deeper into these and other implications of the Strasburg situation.  For now, just feel bummed.  We do.  

      

Now it gets interesting. In another season of forgettable moments, Jordan Zimmermann's arrival is something to pay attention to. He makes his return from Tommy John surgery Thursday, when he takes the mound against Albert Pujols and the Cardinals. (Jeez, at least Strasburg got to start his season against the Pirates.)

If you follow NDN or the Nats closely, you know why J-Zim's return is huge. Simply stated, he's the best starting pitcher the Nats have not named Strasburg. Unlike most others who have started for the Nats, J-Zim has demonstrated the ability to miss a ton of bats. Last year, in a shortened season, his K/BB ratio was 3.17. Only Strasburg (5.41) has better stats. JD Martin and Scott Olsen come in distant thirds. And does anyone really think that their futures are in Washington?

J-Zim, however, has the potential to slot in as a #2 to Strasburg's #1. That would give the Nats two dominant starting pitchers. And two shut-down pitchers are what it takes now to compete for the playoffs. Just look at the Cardinals (Carpenter, Wainwright) or Phillies (Halladay, Oswalt), and you get the idea.

So let's see how J-Zim does tonight and the rest of the season. A lot is riding on his performance.

      

For Ryan Zimmerman, Multiple Sclerosis reminds him of his mom.  For me, it makes me think about my dad.

My dad is a World War II veteran and physician who worked his entire career in the Veterans Administration hospital system and Naval Reserve.  In other words, he spent much of his life helping those who fought for this country.  But he did something else.  As a neurologist, he conducted decades of extensive research that have helped identify the causes and appropriate treatments of MS.  

At his retirement party a while back, one of my dad's colleagues talked about the significance of the Kurtzke Disability Scale.  Gee, I thought, my dad had come up with a way to measure the relative dysfunctionality of his eight children and, perhaps, appropriate punishment for transgressions. Well, not really. Instead, the scale identifies the stages in which MS progresses -- and it is a progressive disease -- and, as such, provides guideposts to evaluate the effectiveness of medical treatments during any one stage.  Over the years, this scale and variations on it have become a standard that is used worldwide.  

What causes MS? As with many diseases, some people are genetically predisposed. But my dad's research suggests that the underlying infection might be communicable through a virus. Match that virus with genetic vulnerabilities, and MS can be the result. In the medical community, this has been a controversial finding.  

Such debates are important to developing long-term solutions for the disease.  But for patients that already have MS -- like Ryan's mom, Cheryl, or my next-door neighbor, Margaret -- the daily priority is to enhance the quality and longevity of life.  And that's where the ziMS Foundation plays a role.  The foundation raises and distributes money to organizations that provide a wide range of care and direct assistance to MS patients. 

"My mother was diagnosed 15 years ago when I was 11," Ryan said Monday. "I never really thought about it until I got a little bit older and realized that if I ever had a chance, [I would] do something to give back, not just for my family but for everyone who knows what it takes to go through daily life with MS.  When I got to play baseball at this level, I had the platform to run with it and do something."

Keith Zimmerman, Ryan's dad, said it took three years for the ziMS Foundation to raise enough money to start making grants.  The foundation's approach? "Cheryl and I are hands-on," he said Monday.  "We have never given money to anyone who we haven't gone and met, talked with face-to-face, asked what they're going to do with the money, and toured their facility (if it's a facility).  We feel like we've chosen some very gratifying organizations.  It's nice to see the smile on their face."

The importance of MS is also underscored in Ryan's contract with the Nationals.  It contains a clause where the foundation can use Nationals Park at least once a year.  That's how the ballpark became the backdrop for a fundraiser Monday night, featuring an auction and intimate concert in the seating area behind home plate.  "We started in Virginia Beach," Ryan said, "and [Washington] has been my home for the last five years. Ultimately we want to make the foundation bigger and better, and the next step was to bring it to a bigger city. There's not a bigger or better city in the world to do it than D.C."

Among those attending the event were teammates Adam Dunn, Tyler Clippard, Drew Storen, Ivan Rodriguez, Sean Burnett, Craig Stammen, Willie Harris, Ross Detwiler, and John Lannan.  "Not only do we play baseball together but we're a pretty close group, and this proves how close we are," Ryan said. 

At least for one night, Ryan and his family succeeded in making MS top of mind for a lot of people.

As for my dad, MS is rarely out of his mind.  He's in his mid-80s now and, besides driving my mom crazy, still actively researching MS.  I visited him last week in Falls Church.  He was right where you'd expect to find him: at his office desk, eyeglasses attached to a necklace, working on yet another presentation on MS for yet another medical conference (this one in Canada).  So I asked him a couple questions.

Ryan Zimmerman?  Hadn't heard of him, but he sounds like a nice fellow.  ziMS Foundation?  Hadn't heard of that either, but it sounds like a great idea.  Nice fellow and great idea they are.  And so is my dad.

(Ian Koski contributed to this report.)

      

At 4 PM Saturday, my wife asked me, "So, did they keep him or trade him?"  She was inquiring about Adam Dunn, of course.  And when I told her that he was staying, she was relieved, to put it mildly.  Dunn's HRs have become a staple of many of the games we have attended this year.  And the soaring nature of his HRs is a big reason why attending a game is so much better than watching one on TV.  You can see the balls in full flight.  

Stephen Strasburg is another reason to attend games.  The buzz and energy in the ballpark when he pitches creates a very different atmosphere than your normal run-of-the-mill games.  And his first start might well have been the best sporting event I've attended. 

But Saturday night's game was a reality check.  Ryan Zimmerman is still very much the face of this franchise.  And for good reason.  Not only does he hit for power and average, and otherwise get on base a ton.  He has a knack for walk-offs, as he did once again last night.  He's also the best defensive 3B I have seen in a long, long time.  

In fact, much like Dunn's HRs, Zim's defense is best appreciated by watching the game in the ballpark.  Unlike TV, you get to see the quick dives on line-drives, the swopping angles on bunts, and the near-instant delivery of his throws.  (And you also appreciate the wide wing span of Dunn, who catches many a Zimm throw that otherwise might go awry.)

When I think of why I spend money to buy season tickets, Zim remains at the top of my list.  He is simply worth the price of admission.

      

With the trades involving Matt Caps and Cristian Guzman, the direction of the Nats is becoming a bit more clear.

Conclusion 1 -- The club does not see Jesus Flores as the long-term catcher

Conclusion 2 -- The revolving door approach at 2B has proved to be a disaster

When he joined the Nats in 2007, Flores surprised a number of people.  Rather than being a typical Rule 5 draftee to be hidden on the bench, Flores rather quickly supplanted Brian Schneider as the Nats starting catcher.  He impressed with the glove, arm and bat.  But he couldn't shake ongoing injuries that have left him inactive for more than a year now.  The Nats' conclusion:  it's time to move on.  See Jeff's blog to find out more about Pudge's likely successor, Wilson Ramos. 

As for Guzman, whose contract expires at the end of the season, it had become clear that the Nats were not likely to keep him for 2011.  In press interviews Friday, Mike Rizzo was especially critical of the Nats' poor defensive play, an implicit criticism of Guzman.  But poor defense at 2B (12 errors so far this year) also might have resulted from players being shuttled in and out, without the ability to gain any consistency.  Same could be said about batting.  

After all, is Adam Kennedy really as bad as we have seen so far this year?  Well, we're about to find out, with Kennedy likely getting more consistent playing time.  He certainly made a statement in Friday's game, going 4-5 at the plate (ok, one of the hits obviously was a sacrifice, not a hit) and a clean game in the field.

And then there's Adam Dunn.  One way or another, his future with the Nats will become more clear by 4 PM today.  As Bob Carpenter would say, we'll about to found out in "just a little while."  

      

With all the should-they-or-shouldn't-they talk, baseball pundits seem to skip over a rather obvious question: if the Nationals trade Adam Dunn, who would replace him at 1B?  The Nats have a lot of gaps -- starting pitching, middle infield defense, long-term catcher, to name a few.  So we can't be sure which needs Mike Rizzo might fill through a prospective Dunn trade.  Which means it might be best to assume that the Nats would backfill Dunn from within the current roster.  And Mike Morse is the most likely candidate.  

He has the power numbers of a 1B: a .619 slugging percentage and a HR every 14 at bats this year.  He has height (6'5") and range that approach Dunn.  And the Nats have been looking for ways to get Morse more playing time.  

The downsides?  Morse has logged just 28 innings at 1B this year and thus might be a defensive project initially.  By removing Morse from his current platoon role in RF, the Nats would be depending on Roger Bernadina to be more consistent with the bat (the glove seems to be coming around).  As a full-time starter, Morse would have to face more right-handed pitching.  And, let's face it, even Morse at his best wouldn't match Dunn's offensive numbers.  

That said, these trade-offs might be acceptable if Adam Dunn is no longer a National after July 31.  With Morse and Bernadina in place as regulars, Rizzo would have plenty of performance to judge whether one or both fit the longer-term plan.  And identifying more of those pieces and plugging oh-so-visible gaps are pretty much what the second half of the season has come down to.  

      

The Nats head up I-95 to play the Orioles this weekend.  And there's something to be learned up there.  Namely, the limits of a youth movement.  It's become standard operating practice in baseball to rebuild from within and later add a few high-end free agents "once we're ready to win."  During the past few years, the O's GM, Andy MacPhail, has implemented such a plan.  He traded away a few high-profile veterans for lots of prospects.  Drafts seemingly went well.  And core players were identified.  

Results were not expected to be immediate, and that's a good thing since the O's finished 2009 with the third-worst record in baseball.  (You remember who had the worst, don't you?) Still, heading into this year, there was a fair amount of optimism in Baltimore.  But then the bottom dropped out: just 20 wins in three months, a managerial change, and the worst ERA and most blown saves in the AL.  

What happened?  Well, injuries to key players (Brian Roberts) account for some of this.  Add to that filler veterans who underperformed (Garrett Atkins, among others).  But most of all, the young core simply has disappointed.  Adam Jones too often looks like Lastings Milledge in CF.  Matt Wieters has struggled at the bat.  Brian Matusz has not been the Strasburg-like pitcher that some had expected.  Other young pitchers (Chris Tillman, Brad Bergesen) have looked overwhelmed by major league hitters.  Nolan Reimold was sent back to the minors.  And Nick Markakis, who remains the stud of this team, has been so exasperated that he called out his teammates and begged the owner for help.  

In other words, this is a team that has relied on several young players to step up their performance, and do it all at the same time.  Instead, many players got worse.  Therein lies the lesson: young players can regress as well as progress.  And you're gambling a lot by relying on so many of them at once. 

In contrast, the Nats seem to favor a more balanced approach.  Sure, they are feeling the pain of putting prospects (Bernadina, Desmond) into the starting line-up.  But the Nats rely more on proven veterans (Zimmerman, Dunn, Willingham) who still have productive years ahead of them.  In some ways, the biggest change from Bowden to Rizzo has been a shift in emphasis from youthful potential to proven veterans even if those veterans (Morgan) have more limited upsides.  To this core of veterans are added young players (Strasburg) instead of veterans being added to a young core (Orioles).  

So as this series kicks off tonight, it'll be interesting to see how the differing approaches of both teams affects the win-loss record over the next few days.  I'll be heading up to Camden Yards for the Sunday game.  Looks like a great weekend for baseball.  

      

Folks, take a deep breath.  When I read talk of disloyalty and tough guys gone amuck, I'm thinking we must be referring to the rogue general who stabbed the President of the United States in the back.  Actually, it describes a baseball pitcher.  A nice pitcher, even a darn decent one.  But a pitcher nonetheless who needs some help.  And unlike the general who is about to get his comeuppance, John Lannan will get another chance. 

As I wrote just a few days ago, Lannan will be a determining factor in the Nats' long-term rotation.  If he's there pitching like we have seen the past few years, then the Nats will be well positioned.  If he isn't because he cannot, then things get complicated.  That's why the decision to send him down to AA now is a good one.  For the better part of this season, he just hasn't been pitching like the Lannan we have grown accustomed to.  So why not take a step back, get out of the limelight, and work on some mechanics?  If things go well, we'll see a reset Lannan after the All-Star Break.  If not, then it means there's something more problematic that needs attending to.  Either way, the correct move.  

Now, what does this move say about the new sheriff in Nats Town?  It's become obvious to anyone that being a starter doesn't necessarily secure you a spot in Mike Rizzo's game book.  Milledge, sent down and then traded.  Dukes, sent down and later released.  And now John Lannan.  You and I know that Lannan should not be grouped with those other two. After all, Lannan has a track record of proven results and seems like a terrific guy to boot.  But there's no escaping the fact that, by sending him down, the Nats have put Lannan one step closer to the fate shared by the other two.  And you gotta wonder how all this will test Lannan's confidence.  This is the risk that the Nats now must manage. 

That's why, over the next few weeks, I'll be watching at how the Nats treat Lannan.  Like a disposable part they viewed Milledge and Dukes?  Or like a classy veteran they want to see back again?  We're about to find out.  

      

As John Lannan takes the mound Sunday, he will try to end a five-game losing streak for the Nationals.  But he also might be pitching for something else:  his future as a Nat.  Not in any immediate sense, but as a longer-term piece in the starting rotation.

I've written before that 2010 is pretty much a transition year for the rotation.  That's why we've seen Stephen Strasburg held back in the minors to save money adjust to professional baseball.  Stop gaps are a plenty (Livo, Olsen).  Young guys are coming and going without much notice.  (Does anyone care whether Atilano is better than Stammen?)  And the disabled list is filled with starters who have excelled in the past but God only knows whether they will in the future (Wang, Marquis).

But throughout the morass, you could always point to 2011 and actually be optimistic.  Strasburg and Jordan Zimmermann figure to be as good a 1-2 as you will find in the National League East and probably beyond.  Why?  They miss a lot of bats.  Add Lannan as a solid number three with experience and guile.  With those three spots locked down, you wouldn't need to obsess about the remaining two.  Assume one emerges from the current MASH unit (Detwiler, anyone?).  And then maybe the last slot is a revolving door of system guys.  Put it altogether, and that's not a bad plan.

Trouble is, the reliable veteran has been anything but.  Lannan's woes have been widely chronicled.  The Cliff Notes version: he has been walking too many batters, forcing him to come into the zone more often, where his sinker has not been sinking, more balls have been put in play, where the defense has been kicking around more balls than a World Cup team.  Why has all this been happening?  Everyone's got a theory.  A hangover from arm injury?  A mechanical flaw?  Batters have finally figured him out?  A crappy defense?  Sure, there's probably an element of truth in all these.  All I know is that the results have been very un-Lannanlike.  

Even more problematic, the 2011 plan is becoming more iffy.  Remember how I said that, with Stras, J-Zimm and Lannan in place, you could fill out the other two without much effort?  Take Lannan out of the equation, and now you'd be looking for three.  And that becomes a much bigger deal.  The situation changes from being able to pick and choose from recovering and emerging pitchers to, instead, absolutely needing solid performance from that same group.

All this is the backstory right now with Lannan.  Let's see if he can turn it around.  Things will be so much better if he can.