Washington Nationals manager Jim Riggleman reports that catcher Ivan Rodriguez is still feeling the effects of the back soreness that led to his exit after the third inning of Saturday's game at Nationals Park.

"He's tender. He's sore today," Riggleman said of Rodriguez, while indicating that Rodriguez' back trouble "has been ongoing."

"I don't know that any of it's related . . . but earlier in the year he was uncomfortable with his back from different [hotel] beds he slept on," Riggleman told reporters during Sunday's pregame press conference.  "Coming from Spring Training, coming up here, he just wasn't comfortable. That dragged on for a while; we thought we were past that [but] lately [there's been] some more aggravation. Yesterday he became very uncomfortable [so] we got him out of there, and he's uncomfortable today. So we'll definitely have him out of there for a few days."

Asked if he was concerned that Rodriguez might have to be placed on the disabled list, Riggleman didn't rule out the possibility.

"As a manager you're always concerned about everything, but I'm not ready to say that [Rodriguez is headed to the DL] yet. I know that I'm not counting on catching him for a few days."

Riggleman acknowledged that Rodriguez' back pain might well have been compounded by a hard third-inning swing on Saturday afternoon. At the same time, Riggleman acknowledged that Rodriguez has been reluctant to be held out of games even though his back has been aching for a while.

"Over the period of the last week, every day he's said . . . 'I don't know what's going on here -- it doesn't feel good but I'm good to go,'" Riggleman said. "I talked to him before every series and said, 'which one of these days do you want to take off?' He said, 'Let me go till Sunday. I'll take Sunday off, and then we have Monday off' . . . So I kind of let him make his schedule."

While Rodriguez' back gets a rest, Wil Nieves will assume the primary catching duties. Riggleman said Sunday that Michael Morse would serve as Nieves' backup, and that Adam Kennedy and Alberto Gonzalez have offered to step up if needed.

What about Josh Willingham, who was on the short list for backup duty when Nieves went down with a hamstring injury last September?

"I would try to stay away from Willingham," Riggleman said. "Although he's got the most experience as a catcher, he's had some back issues through his career."

UPDATE Sunday 23-May-2010 6:35 pm: MLB.com's Bill Ladson tweets that Rodriguez will miss at least the San Francisco leg of the Nats' upcoming roadtrip, and that a trip to the DL is not out of the question…

      

The fact of the matter is that if Nyjer Morgan had stopped at second base in the sixth inning of Saturday afternoon's contest at Nationals Park, good-hitting pitcher Craig Stammen -- who had just produced a two-out single up the middle that plated Alberto Gonzalez for the game-tying tally -- would have been credited with the go-ahead run as he crossed the plate.  That would have put the Nats up by a run, after which they'd have had a chance to pad their lead with the second and succeeding spots in the order due up.

That, of course, is not what happened.  Morgan went on to third and was nailed for the inning's final out, erasing Stammen's run and setting the table for what worked out to be a 13-inning 4-3 loss to the visiting Los Angeles Dodgers.

Did Morgan make a mistake?  Perhaps, in retrospect, he and third-base coach Pat Listach think so, but Washington manager Jim Riggleman saw it differently.

"I know what [Morgan] was thinking was that they had a play on [Stammen]," Riggleman said in the postgame press conference.  "[Morgan] would rather have them make a play on him than at home.  I don't know if they could've got [Stammen] or not.

"If it was a mistake, it was a mistake of aggression," Riggleman concluded.  "We can live with that."

Timely aggression might have helped at other junctures in Saturday's four-hour, twenty-minute affair. While scoring just three runs, the Nats left 15 men on base all told.

Riggleman didn't even allude to that unsightly total, though.  What was he focusing on?

"I thought we played some real good baseball," Riggleman said after the game.  "It was a pitching and defense game."

All those LOBs aside, it's hard to ignore Riggleman's point.

You might have expected that a 13-inning game would burn up a team's bullpen.  Not the Nats', though, as Stammen made it through seven frames and only three relievers -- Brian Bruney, Matt Capps and Miguel Batista -- had to be called on over the remaining six innings.

As we'd hoped for when he was signed, Capps was able to give a two-inning effort in which he allowed just two hits and no runs.  The man whose 2009 earned run average of 5.80 presaged the end of his five-year run in Pittsburgh is, as of the conclusion of Saturday's action, sporting a 2010 ERA of 0.87.  (Meanwhile, Bruney brought his ERA down three-quarters of a point to 5.40, while Batista trimmed his to 5.87.)

Capps also seems to have a bit of a fan club going.  Chants of "LET'S GO CAPPS!" were clearly audible from the crowd during the top half of the ninth and tenth innings.

One wonders if we might expect to see the Horn Guy and his confreres at Nats Park after the conclusion of the Washington hockey club's postseason.

As for the defense side of that "pitching and defense" game, the positive contrast with 2009 has continued to develop.  The Nats entered the weekend having committed a league-average 12 errors over 17 games, to which they added none on Saturday.  Their Defensive Efficiency as of Saturday morning was an above-average .694, tied for sixth best among those of the 16 National League clubs.  (Check out this diving catch by Willie Harris that shows where a good bit of that defense comes from.)

      

The eyes of Nationals Nation will be focused on second base and shortstop in 2010.  Fifty errors, many costly, were committed at the middle infield positions during the '09 campaign, and one would think the team would like to avoid similarly unsightly results in the upcoming season.

How does the NL East rate at second base going into the beginning of the year?  From finest to most dismal, here's how this Hutch ranks the teams.

• The good news for the Phillies is that they enjoy the services of All-Star Chase Utley.  The other good news is that Utley's backup is Placido Polanco.  However, since Polanco is likely to draw most of the duty at third base in 2010, the team will be rooting for Utley not to need much time off lest Polanco have to yield the hot corner to the much less exciting Greg Dobbs.
• You'll most likely see Martin Prado at the keystone for the majority of Atlanta's 2010 games.  Omar Infante will be an acceptable if unexciting backup.
• Dan Uggla will be a familiar face at second for Florida.  Good thing for them, as ex-Nat Emilio Bonifacio, on the days he mans the position, will not occasion Washington any regrets for having let him go.
• The Mets are stuck with Luis Castillo, whom they could (and may well often) swap with Alex Cora when they pencil the second-base position into the lineup.  Neither is apt to provide highlight-reel defense or plate performance.
• Washington's weakness at second isn't going away any time soon. Orlando Hudson, a free-agent target over the winter, ended up bidding farewell to the National League in the offseason.  If you wonder why the Nats thereupon settled for Adam Kennedy, remember that there weren't a lot of alternatives out there on the free-agent or trade markets.  Underwhelming Alberto Gonzalez and all-purpose Willie Harris will likely draw some duty at second in 2010.

      

I'm usually one of the more forgiving online commentators, but I'm going to divert from my usual kindly self and echo the call I know others have put out - it's time for Cristian Guzman to go, or at least not be the starting shortstop anymore.

I know, Guzman is only 31.  I know, he had 151 hits last season for a .284 BA, which was 4th best on the team behind Nyjer Morgan, Nick Johnson, and Ryan Zimmerman.

I also know that he's showing diminished range at SS, and that many of his hits were singles.  He only managed to bat in 52 runs, and had the same number of sacrfices (6) as home runs.  In other words, he's average at best, and his impact is statistically inflated by his lack of extra base hits.

There's been a lot of discussion this offseason about a proposed move to 2B, and to let Ian Desmond play SS, but only if the Nats don't sign another 2B, like Adam Kennedy or Orlando Hudson.

It's my opinion that we move on from the Guzman era in DC, and embrace the infielding future.  Let's do both - sign a Hudson or Kennedy, start Desmond at SS, and trade Guzman.  We've got Eric Bruntlett to play utility infielder, so we have some depth in case of injury.

When you look at the numbers (Thanks, Chico/Nats Journal), you see that "Bill James predicts for Hudson this upcoming season: 550 AB, .280 AVG, .353 OBP, .409 SLG, 10 HR, 61 RBI, 96 Ks, 7 SBs."  Hudson looks like a better defending Guzman, right?  "James predicts for Desmond: 518 AB, .282 AVG, .338 OBP, .432 SLG, 13 HR, 52 RBI, 102 Ks, 25 SBs."  Basically a young clone of the above, but with better speed on the basepaths.

Look - the Nats are not going to make the postseason this year.  2010 is all about finding the parts that work and running with them for 2011, while playing better than 2009.  So why are they starting someone who won't be here in 2011?  Sure, you may get more errors out of SS than Guzman (debatable), but same as with Ryan Zimmerman at 3B, you accept a few more errors so that you can get the more spectacular plays and improved range.

Some "contender" (cough, Mets, cough) is going to be looking for a middle infielder this spring, or someone is going to get injured, so why not open up Guzman to the market for a A or AA level prospect?  They should not be looking for the next Derek Jeter or Hanley Ramirez, more like a younger Alberto Gonzalez (who should be a solid bench guy this season).

Make sense to you?  Am I nuts?  Comment up below.

      

From the perspective of the people responsible for improving the Washington Nationals, it's hard to deny that the past two months have been productive ones, particularly with respect to the upgrades they've made to the pitching staff.

The back end of the bullpen has been bolstered with Brian Bruney and Matt Capps.  When considered alongside the acquisitions of left-handed relievers Doug Slaten and Eddie Guardado and front-line starter Jason Marquis, as well as the re-signing of starter Scott Olsen, pitching coach Steve McCatty should have fewer worries come Opening Day 2010 than his predecessor Randy St. Claire had at the beginning of 2009.

But the Nats shouldn't be thinking that the work is all done.  A strong case can be made that the team should try to solidify the 2010 rotation even further by bringing either Jon Garland or Joel Pineiro into the fold.  Both are available via free agency and either could help to provide something the Nationals have never possessed during their time in Washington:  a rotation containing three members (the other two being Marquis and John Lannan) each capable of producing 200 innings of work, and work of reasonable quality at that.

Before we get all excited, though, it's important to consider that not every weakness on the team has been addressed to everyone's complete satisfaction.

While we'd like to think that the catching situation isn't in as much turmoil as it appeared to be this past September when Jesus Flores and Wil Nieves were lost for the year, it's far from worry-free.  True, Ivan Rodriguez brings the team both veteran experience and a measure of cachet.  But nothing short of the return of Flores to complete health will really convince either the Nationals or their fans that the team has matters anywhere near settled behind the plate.

Meanwhile, the middle infield remains an issue.  Spring Training 2010 will be far advanced before it's known whether the team's defensive woes can really be mitigated by deploying Ian Desmond at shortstop and repositioning Cristian Guzman at second base.  Unless the Nats can bring an effective free-agent infielder on board, they may find themselves juggling combinations involving guys like Alberto Gonzalez, Willie Harris and Pete Orr and hoping for the best.

So should the Nationals put additional pitching improvements on hold until matters are settled up the middle?  Not unless they want to risk making it look as if they're ready to write off the 2010 season before it even starts.

Just as in past years it's been possible to be too optimistic, it's also always possible to be too gloomy -- and to allow that gloom to justify needless inertia.

To be sure, the envisioned middle infield of Desmond and Guzman will have a hard time trying to match the defensive prowess of, say, Jimmy Rollins and Chase Utley.  But, as mentioned above, alternatives -- whether or not of All-Star caliber -- do exist on the present 40-man roster.

And the infield challenges needn't last forever.  If Danny Espinosa can continue to clean up his glove work, he may earn some time at shortstop at Nats Park in 2011.  Likewise, Steve Lombardozzi appears to be on track to challenge for the keystone position in 2012 -- which, if all proceeds on course, should also be about the time the Nationals are ready to give his teammate Derek Norris a major-league audition at catcher.

All that said, the Nats should continue to do everything they can to build league-contending rotations both for 2010 and for future seasons.

Imagine a starting five in 2010 that looks something like Pineiro, Marquis, Lannan, Olsen and Craig Stammen.

Now add Stephen Strasburg and Jordan Zimmermann, and maybe Brad Meyers or Erik Arnesen, in 2011.  (Not to mention guys like Collin Balester and Ross Detwiler if they reach the next level.)  You could be looking at some of the deepest starting pitching in the majors, as opposed to the patchwork rotations of the past few seasons.

That can be the basis for a team that contends -- not just for NL East pennants in the future, but for legitimacy and fan dollars today.

Which is the real point.  The novelty of both the Nationals and of Nats Park has worn off.  After five seasons of never seeing the Nats finish above .500, even die-hard fans are weary of the prospect of trooping to the ball park to witness yet another campaign that's practically over by the end of May.

And they shouldn't have to.  For about another $10 million per annum -- what Garland or Pineiro would likely fetch on a two- or three-year deal -- the starting pitcher that the Nats need in order to end their days as yet another joke of a Washington baseball team may be within their grasp.

It's none too soon for the Nats to show this town and its fans that they're ready to look like a winner.

      

Well, one thing is certain.  The September call-ups are making several veterans feel a bit anxious about job security in 2010.  

Once again, Justin Maxwell hit a HR, this time in the 11th inning, that sealed a victory.  Once again, Ian Desmond flashed both his glove (2 nice catches) and bat (1 HR) to solidify a starting role.  Once again, Ross Detwiler pitched impressively (5 innings, no runs) before leaving due to a blister.  He finished September and October with an ERA around 2.  

So if you are Scott Olsen, Cristian Guzman, Alberto Gonzalez, Willie Harris and perhaps Elijah Dukes, you ought to be looking over your shoulders.  Because the efforts by the call-ups, plus another great game by Ryan Zimmerman (3-5, 1 RBI), helped the Nats beat the Braves, 6-4, and notch their 6th consecutive win. 

Read the gamers in the Post, Times, MLB, AP and Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  

At a minimum, the performances by Detwiler, Desmond and Maxwell give Mike Rizzo more options on how to upgrade next year's team.  Maybe they'll stay and become starters.  Maybe they'll be traded for better starters.  Maybe the veterans will be traded for said better starters.  However this plays out, the off season wheeling and dealing is about to begin.

And that means my in-season blog is at an end.  This was my first year with Nationals Pride.  It's been a lot of fun.  Ian has run the most comprehensive web site on the Nats.  Mike, Jeff, Mark and the other bloggers have produced a steady stream of terrific insights.  All this has made it easy for me to drop in my thoughts here and there.  So thanks to everyone for a great ride.

Now, this doesn't mean that I'm folding up tent until next April.  There's still a bunch of stuff to get to on team direction, composition, fan interest, etc.  In fact, several weeks ago, Mike and I joined other Internet writers for a day with Nats' management, coaches and players, peppering them with all kinds of questions. In the weeks ahead, we'll be sharing with you what we heard...and a few thoughts of our own, no doubt.

For now, though, it's a wrap. 

      

Although Cristian Guzman figured largely in the outcome of Wednesday evening's Nationals victory against the visiting Dodgers at Nats Park, it was probably not entirely as he might have liked to.

The top half of the ninth inning saw Guzman commit a pair of errors, one of which -- a wide throw toward home on an infield grounder with the bases loaded -- erased the Nats' one-run lead, which had been achieved on a Ryan Zimmerman three-run homer in the sixth, spoiling Dodgers starter Chad Billingsley's try for a no-hitter, and an RBI groundout by Elijah Dukes that had scored Guzman in the eighth.  Guzman nonetheless managed to arrest further damage, first with an infield assist -- this time successful -- that forced Juan Castro at the plate, and then with an inning-ending catch of a Matt Kemp line drive.

With the game tied 4-4 in the bottom of the inning, Justin Maxwell singled, went to second on a sacrifice bunt by Alberto Gonzalez and promptly stole third, finally scoring the Nats' winning run on a fly ball (ruled a sacrifice fly in the official scoring) by pinch hitter Pete Orr on which the speedy Maxwell might or might not have reached home safely if the ball hadn't been mishandled by Dodgers right fielder Andre Ethier (who was charged with an error on the play).

Here's coverage at the Washington Post, Washington Times, Los Angeles Times, MLB.com and AP.

      

Here are two points on which many Washington Nationals fans and observers would agree:

1. The Nats' defense has been wretched this season.
2. Cristian Guzman has contributed significantly to that wretchedness.

Those are understandable snap assessments, but one of them is more correct than the other, due in no small part to how each assessment is done.

Despite improved play since the accession of interim manager Jim Riggleman, the Nats remain at the bottom of the league defensively, whether you reckon by errors or by our preferred measure of Defensive Efficiency.

But regarding Guzman, the answer's not so easy:

• For one thing, he's been cast as a suspicious character almost from the moment he arrived at RFK and proceeded -- due, as it turned out, to a bum shoulder and poor eyesight -- to rack up a batting line in 2005 of .219 / .314 / .405, which was never as good as those numbers make it look.  (Once the shoulder and eyes got fixed, Guzman's performance picked up considerably.  That hasn't all that much to do with defense, but offense always seeps into fans' thinking about defense.)
• For another thing, the man now has bunions, which is no joke.  If Guzman's feet are not responsive to orthotic treatment -- and we're not just talking Air-Pillo® Insoles here -- he will have to undergo surgery that will take a couple months to recover from.  (The good news, of course, is that his recovery would take place in the offseason.)
• For another, he never takes a base on balls. (Well, hardly ever.  Not that that has anything to do with defense either.)
• Finally, he's going on 32, an age that, while hardly bordering on senescence, is nonetheless one at which one's employers may be expected to start holding auditions for one's replacement, or at least one's understudy. (Hello, Ian Desmond.)

All that said, there are reasons why Jim Bowden and company chose to re-sign Guzman a year ago, as well as why Mike Rizzo and company didn't deal him to the Red Sox -- or anybody else -- in August, and in fact might well choose to hang on to him at least until the end of his current contract a year from now.

Defensively, Guzman is an average major-league shortstop:  he has average range and commits errors at an average rate.  His raw error total for 2009 -- 18 errors through September 12 -- looks high, and is, because shortstops who make that many errors don't tend to get as much playing time as Guzman does unless they hit like Guzman.  (There's no accounting for Rafael Furcal.)

Offensively, Guzman is a run producer despite his startling lack of plate discipline.  The latter will become a more obvious liability on the day he stops reaching base on singles, because that will be the day he stops reaching base, period.  But that day is not today.

Let's thus grant -- if but for the sake of argument -- that Guzman is an OK guy to have at shortstop. (If you hesitate, stop and consider whether you want Alberto Gonzalez there for 162 games a season.  Hint:  You do not.)  So why do the Nats want Guzman to move to second base all of a sudden?

Well, now, hang on a minute; nothing's set in stone yet. But the idea must be broached, for Ronnie Belliard's departure has left something of a gap at second.

Not to hate on Gonzalez, but he is not Joe Morgan and he never will be. And the Nats don't seem inclined to relieve either Willie Harris or Pete Orr of a utility role in order to turn one of them into a full-time second baseman.

Nor are they apt to find a solution in the farm system any time soon, as the pickings there are slim for now.  Ever mindful of our readers' sensibilities, we will skip most of the gory details and simply point out that there is no serviceable long-term option at second base until you get to 20-year-old Steve Lombardozzi -- who had a good year at bat, hitting .296 / .375 / .395, as well as in the field where he committed only eight errors in 127 games.  We must nonetheless remind ourselves that Lombardozzi, the Nats' 19th-round selection in the 2008 First-Year Player Draft, did all this at low-A Hagerstown, and that we thus won't see him at Nats Park until 2011 at the very earliest.

The Nats' system is almost as far from major-league readiness at shortstop.  With the exception of 2008 third-round draft pick Danny Espinosa at high-A Potomac, there's no one in the minors whose error rate isn't at least double what anyone could consider to be acceptable, which we suspect has a lot to do with former player-development director Bobby Williams' getting the gate last month.  It's possible that the Nats will make a wish on Desmond and hope that his defense improves next season as his bat did this season, but we suspect they'll be unafraid to shuttle Desmond across the keystone -- or out the door -- if his play at SS hasn't shown a significant upgrade by the end of 2010.

In any event, we're expecting the Nats to look into the free-agent market for the short term and to make a run at Orlando Hudson, Akinori Iwamura (assuming he doesn't re-up with Tampa Bay) or Juan Uribe to man second base for a year or so -- or maybe Uribe to patrol shortstop, or Jack Wilson if he's available -- and to be pinning their hopes on Desmond, Espinosa and Lombardozzi for the long term.  (Zuckerman at the Times provides more comprehensive lists of whom he sees as potential middle-infielder and pitching pickups.)

As for Guzman, our bet is that he'll be sporting the curly W someplace on the field at both the beginning and end of the Nats' 2010 season.  Beyond that we wouldn't bet on anything.

      

The Nationals pounded out 14 hits last night, cruising to a 10-6 win over the Reds.  Leading the offensive charge:  Elijah Dukes (2-4) and Alberto Gonzalez (2-5), each of whom drove in 3 RBIs with a bases-clearing hit.  Toss in Adam Dunns' 31st HR and even 2 hits by J.D. Martin, and you get a sense of the offensive explosion.  

On the mound, Martin (2-2, 4.61 ERA) delivered a quality start, going 6 innings and giving up 6 hits but no earned runs.  He left the game when the Nats were ahead, 10-1.  The bullpen made things interesting -- that's you, Logan Kensing (4 runs, 2/3 innings) -- but the outcome was never really in doubt.

The win lifts the Nats record since the All-Star break to 16-14.  Today, they go for the series win against the Reds.

Read the gamers in the Post, Times, MLB, AP and Dayton Daily News.

      

With the trade deadline quickly approaching, we see a lot of speculation in the media about deals and hear a lot of fans (professional and otherwise) give their thoughts on who should be traded, where they should go, and who can replace them.  Here's mine:

• Nick Johnson (.295, 6HRs, .812 OPS) should go to Texas, since the 1Bs have been terrible this season, with a combined On Base Percentage nearly .100 points below Nick's. Brad Eldred (AAA, .279, 14 HRs, .848 OPS) could be a decent replacement, and is deserving of a shot.  He's not a defensive whiz, but he's better than Kory Casto.


• Josh Willingham (.298, 16HRs, 1.006 OPS) should go to Philly, since they lack a right-handed hitter on the bench and have a deep group of prospects to give, even if they deal for Roy Halladay.  Elijah Dukes (.244, 6 HRs, .780 OPS AAA) is deserving of one more shot before either being given a chance or being cut loose.  If the Nats are going to trade him away, he needs another MLB showcase.


• Adam Dunn (.278, 26HRs, .959 OPS) would be a surprisingly good fit in Boston, where David Ortiz is hitting .230 and seems to lack the ability to get on base.  Remember, this is a franchise that has dumped team leaders/fan favorites Pedro Martinez, Nomar Garciaparra, and Johnny Damon before, so it's not out of the realm of possibility for them to turn Big Papi into a bench player and DH Dunn, who has the power to a deep right at Fenway and the bat control to flip it over the Monster in left. Austin Kearns would be the likely fill in, since it doesn't look like he'll get Designated For Assignment and 8 million is too much money to leave on the bench.


• Joe Biemel (3.43 ERA, 10 H, 1 S) should get his wish and go back to the Dodgers, who don't seem to need much and could use him in the playoffs.  He'd also be relatively cheap.  Saul Rivera (2.95 ERA in AAA) is a good candidate to come back, since it appears he may have gotten his issues sorted out.  The fact that he isn't back already, however, is a concern - he may have played himself out of favor with the current regime.


• Willie Harris (utility play, attitude) would be a good fit for a contender like Detroit, either Chicago team, or either LA franchise.  In addition, he deserves a shot at a title run, even if he just comes back to the Nats later on.  Mike Morse (AAA, .352, 2hrs, .947 OPS) was not acquired from Seattle to play only at AAA, he'll be a bench player for the Nats in the future.


• Christian Guzman (.299 4HRs .717 OPS) is a plus bat with minus defense that could go to a contender who needs offensive help from the SS position.  Detroit, Minnesota, or the Cubs all look like they could use him, and he may be wearing out his welcome in DC with his lackluster defense.  Maybe a pennant race would wake him up.  Ian Desmond (AAA .325, 3 SBs, .826 OPS in only 12 games) looks to have adjusted to AAA very quickly and would be a prime candidate to play SS the rest of the season, allowing Anderson Hernandez and Alberto Gonzalez to split duties at 2B.

Notably absent from this discussion?  Mike MacDougal, Ron Villone, and Ronnie Belliard.  I don't see Macdougal being worth much, and maybe he can ressurect his career here.  In addition, who else would close?  Drew Storen is, at best, a September call-up this season.  Villone could be had for a song, and maybe someone will be desperate enough come August, and the Nats can slip him through waivers.  Belliard's time here has ended, he should be DFA'd - something that is nearly a month overdue.

Questions, Comments, Hate Messages?  Please comment below.