Earlier this season, after discussing Manny's experience with the New York Metropolitans, I wrote:

I honestly think Manny could be a terrific manager for a veteran team.  A team that's more like...the Mets!  That's where Manny picked up these habits of letting veteran players do whatever they feel is best to prepare for game days.  After all, who's gonna question Carlos Delgado or Pedro Martinez?  But when you have young players, it's simply essential to take a heavier hand and run a tighter ship.

I still basically feel the same way.  Manny just never quite got control of this team, and left to control themselves, they...didn't.  There are times when a firing is not necessarily due to a manager's "fault", in the per se sense of that term, but more because of the manager having lost the team in some vague but comprehensive way.  Manny lost this team some time ago.

To fire him now says one thing: he didn't pan out for the Austin Kearns and Adam Dunns of the team, but we have to prevent the Craig Stammens and Jordan Zimmermans from being impacted in quite the same way.  Getting someone new in there allows the team to grow in a different and better direction.

Ultimately, I think we'll look back on this decision in five years and think, "The team was lackadaisical, inconsistent, and uninspired on Manny's watch.  But now things are better.

Focus on that last part.  When we look back...things will be better.

      

My distinguished colleague Mr. Hornbaker recently wrote about how painful it is, as a fan, to witness this failure night after night.  But at what point will the Nats themselves actually forego the rest of the year, and which veterans will be traded when they do?

The funny thing is, the Nationals actually have several individual players who might be of use to other clubs.  They aren't losing because they lack individual talent; it's because they're not playing well enough as a team.  Take a look at last night's lineup, for example.  Theoretically, Guzman, Johnson, Dunn, Dukes, and even Kearns (think on base percentage) could at least be somewhat desirable to other teams for one reason or another.  That's basically 62.5% of the lineup, if you don't count the pitcher's spot (5 players out of 8).  Obviously Zimmerman is staying put, as are Flores and probably Hernandez.

The starting pitching  probably needs to stay relatively intact, mostly because of their youth, while the relief corps probably needs to be placed in a time capsule so future generations can learn from how horrible they were.

Other notes:

--Speaking of the starting pitching, there's something about John Lannan that no one (to my knowledge) has mentioned.  When you're the #1 pitcher in a rotation, isn't it difficult to go out there against the Cole Hamels of the world and feel like you've got no chance unless you're almost perfect?  There must be a psychological burden that accompanies such a status, a burden that is not conferred upon third and fourth pitchers in a rotation.  I hope Lannan doesn't cave in mentally and doubt his own abilities; just seeing that zero in your personal win column can do things to a man. 

--I hope someone throws something very loud and heavy in the Washington clubhouse this weekend.  There's only so much of this "compete for eight innings but have one horrible inning in there somewhere" stuff that anyone should be expected to take.  Just destroy the living hell out of the place and get it out of your system.  Then go out and win 7 out of 10.  It's kind of like fighting and then having make up sex, but not really.

--18,007 last night.  As I scanned the crowd, there were lots of Cardinals supporters...maybe even 4,000-5,000 altogether.  That means only 14,000 of "us" at most.  Just saying.

      

Actually, there are no pictures.  Hit up Ian's site if you want photographic evidence; I was just looking for an excuse to work a little Mussorgsky or Emerson Lake and Palmer in there.  But I do have some random and largely ridiculous thoughts, as always.

--All those rumors about Dunn being a poor first basemen are true.  If I may borrow a quote from the great Herb Brooks, he looks like a monkey humpin' a football out there.  Good outfielder, pounds the living heck out of the ball...cannot play first base.

--Willingham played like a man who is angry with his plight and wants to prove his detractors wrong.  That grand slam was really crushed, and he made a remarkable diving catch that guys rarely bother to even attempt in spring training (which is what last night's game really was).  He carried himself like...well, a man who was promised a starting job by a bombastic bloviating windbag who was later fired, which meant the promise vanished along with the man who tendered it.

--I sat in our season ticket seats alongside Hendo, and I kept hoping he would spontaneoously sing the song "Easy Lover" by Phil Collins.  I don't like that song and I don't believe Hendo does either, but I had this vision of him randomly busting it out.  Maybe next game.

--I was struck by an Austin Kearns-related inspiration: a t-shirt that says "Kearnsian Economics" on the front and "Maximize Inefficiencies" on the back.  I designed it online and ordered it this morning.  If you see a guy wearing such a t-shirt at Nationals Park, I'd say it's incredibly safe to assume that person is me.  So feel free to walk up and say something rude or question my lineage or buy me a beer or whatever.

--The fact that we played Baltimore meant that we heard shouts of "Ohhhhh!!!!" during that one part of the national anthem.  I'm among those who tried to stamp out such wretched filth from Washington as early as 2005, and I sincerely hope it doesn't start back up again.  (Overused postmodern complaints upcoming) EPIC FAIL.  DO NOT WANT.

--Finally, the Red Porch area looks really good.  There's now way more room for college guys with $5 seats to get drunk hanging out with your friends while you occasionaly glance at the game.  The food options are greatly expanded throughout the park and they've covered some of the embarrassing green spaces on the parking garages with ads for themselves.  (Apparently selling that space is still an insurmountable hurdle.  I know the economy's bad, but c'mon...no one wants a piece of that?  No companies at all?)

All in all, it was great to be back at the stadium.  I missed the team while they were gone for several months (awwww) and it just felt good to be there.  Just having our boys back means it's gonna be a great year, even if it's not gonna be that great a year.

      

A certain blogger, who shall remain unnamed, recently suggested that Adam Dunn should play first base.  For the Washington Nationals.  In a Major League baseball game that counts in the standings.

After seeing bits of the World Baseball Classic, I now say: perish the thought.  If you happened to catch any of Dunn's general awkwardness, try to think of it like a felonious assault that was committed against your eyes and perhaps your soul.  If you didn't see Dunn's play around the bag...let's just put it this way: you'd rather watch me cross-dress and sing "The Girl from Ipanema" than see Dunn perform that way for the Nats.  And trust me, you have no interest in seeing me wear a skirt OR sing a classic bossa nova.

So let's nix the whole Dunn on first concept.  Left field it is, big man!  Apparently, they're sticking with Milledge in center (although I still harbor doubts about his Nook Logan-esque jumps on the ball).  Now it's right field where the competition lies.

Clearly, they don't need all these outfielders.  But it's just as evident that other teams know they don't need (or want) all those outfielders.  So someone's got to go.

Will it be J-Will?  Or will Kearnsian Economics be implemented in another team's administration?  Does someone see the eternal promise Elijah presents?

At this point, I don't even care; I just want the season to start!  If I may quote the poet Rolfe Humphries, "Time is of the essence.  The crowd and players/ are the same age always, but the man in the crowd/ Is older every season.  Come on.  Play ball!"

      

As we all know, the Nats have quite an embarrassment of riches in the outfield, although some would say “riches” is too strong a word and “embarrassment” isn’t strong enough.   And yes, I constructed this entire paragraph around my desire to use the priceless image found in that first hotlink.

But seriously, which three guys should the team put out there, and in what alignment? Unfortunately, the rules of baseball say that they aren’t allowed to do this. So only three gentlemen can be out there, and someone has to play…first base.

What about this guy, you say? When Nick is healthy, there’s hardly a swing in the land that’s any prettier. Even though Johnson is struggling with some of Rick Eckstein’s recommended adjustments, it’s tough to believe that he won’t pull out of it fairly soon. But only if he looks like this, rather than this…and I don’t mean the moustache. 

So what should they do? I prefer LF: Willingham, CF: Dukes, RF: Milledge. I realize this is debatable, but I think Dukes gets a much better read on the ball off the bat than Milledge, whose center field play gives me flashbacks. But Lastings probably has the arm for right, and Willingham gives them solid veteran leadership out there. Pena isn’t consistent enough to warrant an every day spot.

What about Dunn? Well, guess where the club lists him on the 40 man roster? That’s right; officially, they don’t even see him as an outfielder. 

So who does that leave out? You’ll never guess.

      

Have you ever noticed that even on teams you love, there's almost always one guy who, for some reason, becomes your pet peeve?  A player whose performance annoys you so much that he's really the bane of your fanhood?

Well, I have such a player: Austin Kearns.  Don't get me wrong; he's clearly a terrific guy and a player who has always given his all.  This is in no way a personal attack against Kearns or his level of effort.  But for me he's just...that pet peeve guy.

I developed a theory last season that I think encapsulates Kearns' performance: Kearnsian Economics.  Unlike its near namesake, Kearnsian Economics addresses the inefficiencies of a player who, say...fans on 2-0 curveball that's low and outside.  It's like he insists on a pitcher's count at all times, even if the hurler is trying to pitch around him.  That's how one hits .217 with hardly any power, and how one's career trajectory gets compared to those of Dick Gernert and Jim Greengrass.  Remember those dudes?  I thought not.

There are times when Kearns seems to maximize, rather than minimize, these inefficiencies.  When I see him get a fastball right down South Capitol Street, I wonder what the opposing battery is thinking.  Setting up the ol' dirt-bound Uncle Charlie, no doubt.  You can usually get him on something he shouldn't be swinging at, anyway.

Is there a saving grace?  Perhaps.  Mr. Kearns has altered his batting stance, and Mr. Eckstein can only be pleased with the initial results.  I won't get too excited, since nothing is worse than a Mr. March who hits the skids once the club comes north.  But I'm willing to admit that this could be the start of a whole new "run supply side" theory!  (Sorry.  Can you guess that I'm not a marketing professional?)

So who knows?  By the time the 2009 season is finished, we could be seeing a lot more of this than ever before.  And then my only pet peeve will be the fact that I wrote this column.

God willing.