As the Ryan Dempster sweepstakes drags on, I can’t help but wonder if the Dodgers are dragging their feet given the mini-resurgence of Chad Billingsley and the prospect of Ted Lilly returning to the rotation soon. The last thing I’ve seen says that “[t]he Cubs are trying to bend over backwards to get Dempster to the Dodgers.” That’s an awful lot of leverage to have. I guess I’m glad my team is on the correct side of it.
Can I take this opportunity to complain about the generic and boring name “Nationals”? Why couldn’t they come up with something with some personality?
Like “Expos”? 
And Dempster isn’t really that good. I would much rather see the team spend top prospects on another bat (though I would prefer the bat to not be Soriano or Victorino, but even they would be upgrades) rather than Dempster.
Last I heard, Hunter Pence was still an option, as well. I wouldn’t mind having another starter, depending on what he costs. My understanding was that the Dodgers were in on James Shields, too, but I’m not sure if that’s still true.
At this point I’d want the Dodgers to say “OK. We’ll take him. What will you pay us to do so?” 
The dude’s what, 36?
But if the price is right, I can see him fitting right into the rotation.
It sucks but it’s at least better than “Nationals.” Although I never really understood what it meant. “Expositions”? Why would you name a team that? (Yeah, I know, Expo '67, but whatever.)
If the price is right I would be thrilled to take Dempster, but the last offer that LA was rumored to reject had the systems #2 pitching prospect in the package. That’s not a good value.
I would love to see Pence come to LA, but it seems like the rumors about him have slowed down.
The Red Sox are publicly denying that they’re trying to dump Beckett. Which is what they’d have to say whether they were or not, of course.
And the Montreal team should have been the Voyageurs. Maybe “Expos” was the only name they could come up with that sucked equally in both English and French.
The latest: “Dodgers pitching prospects Zach Lee, Allen Webster, and Chris Reed are all off the table in Dempster talks, tweets Kevin Goldstein of Baseball Prospectus.” Maybe we can con the Cubs into swapping Dempster for Juan Uribe. :rolleyes:
Oooh, I hope they deal him just for the vicious, anonymously sourced backstabbing that always follows a Red Sox trade. I expect to hear about keggars between innings and gluttonous, Roman-style feasts in the clubhouse, with prostitutes and puke buckets.
“Voyageurs” would at least have possibly led to a less horrible cap logo.
Actually that would have been a pretty cool name. Voyageurs were extremely badass dudes, and the word is well known in English Canada.
You may, but at least in my case, it will fall on deaf ears.
The moniker ‘Nationals’ and its abbreviation ‘Nats’ have a long association with Washington major league baseball. Different 19th century DC clubs were officially called the Nationals, and even the various incarnations of the Washington Senators were informally known as the Nationals or Nats. I’m not old enough to recall the Senators team that moved to Minnesota, but longtime Washington Post sports columnist Shirley Povich referred to the 1961-71 incarnation as “Our Wondrous Nats,” and the sports section was never without a box reporting the “Nats’ Averages” during baseball season.
No matter what official name the current team had taken on, they would have been informally known as the Nats anyway. I think they made the right decision to go with the flow and call themselves the Nationals.
Close, but no cigar. Their third and final WS appearance as the Senators was in 1933. They lost in 5 games to the New York Giants.
None of that matters to me. The name sucks balls the same today as it did a century or more ago. Of course it was even more stupid to call an American League team the Nationals so at least it doesn’t bear that burden.
But hey you like the name. There’s no arguing with that.
In the other hand I don’t but the last part of it. People would have called it by the name that was chosen. It’s long past the era when fans cling to names that have been officially rejected. I heard a lot of similar sentimental declarations when the local NBA team chose a new, unpopular name, but the fervent vows to keep calling them the Bullets and to ignore the new name Wizards are long since forgotten.
NM. Me no read good.
The Angels got off to a bad start, then turned it around. Next, the A’s started slow, but then they got hot. Could the M’s be better than people think too? They’ve won five in a row. Sure, the first four were against the Royals, but M’s rookie Hisashi Iwakuma just threw a gem against the Jays: 8IP, 4H, 3BB, 1ER, 13K, 109 pitches. This was at home too, where they’ve struggled this year.
The Dodgers just picked up reliever Brandon League (3.63 ERA with 5.4 K/9 and 3.8 BB/9 in 44 2/3 innings) from the Mariners in exchange for a single A center fielder and a Double A pitcher.
Not that bullpen help would have saved them from being thrashed by the D-Backs tonight. Harang wasn’t sharp, and the Dodgers let a lot of scoring opportunities get away.
Is that where he went? Tom Wilhelmson took over League’s role as closer earlier this season. Wilhelmson wasn’t available to pitch the ninth of Iwakuma’s gem because of the impending birth of his first child. I was wondering why they didn’t use League in his old role. The M’s actually used two pitchers in the ninth, either of whom could have picked up their first career save.
Short answer: No.
Slightly longer answer: No way.