Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

**USCTrojan83** · 07-28-2005, 11:57 AM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

You're giving up that easily. If you find a way to get Vinny back and Guzman out of that lineup (Larkin Returning?) then you might be able to take a run at the Braves...

**ILLCHILL** · 07-28-2005, 12:02 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

In my opinion, being in the same division as the Braves has you in second place all the way until the Braves are eliminated. Now the standings just show it. They still have a shot, and an even better one at making the wildcard.

**DGetz** · 07-28-2005, 01:03 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

Originally posted by USCTrojan83

You're giving up that easily. If you find a way to get Vinny back and Guzman out of that lineup (Larkin Returning?) then you might be able to take a run at the Braves...

Not to mention they're still in first for the NL wildcard...also the 'Skins were terrible last year and don't look any better...

**westwood** · 07-28-2005, 01:07 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

the nats dont have the pitching to compete with teams like houston for the wild card, throw in the fact their offesne is a joke and they are really in a bind. gotta give it to them though, made a hell of a run. but the NL east lead is back where it belongs

.

**USCTrojan83** · 07-28-2005, 01:19 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

Looks like ATL will win todays game with a nice 4-0 cushion...The NATS were a good story, but unless they get Vinny and get rid of the horrid Christian Guzman, theyre chance of staying in playoff contention is fading VERY quickly...

Bobby Cox = Best Manager Past/Present/Future!!!

**ILLCHILL** · 07-28-2005, 01:35 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

Originally posted by USCTrojan83

Bobby Cox = Best Manager Past/Present/Future!!!

**Pared** · 07-28-2005, 01:53 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

LMAO I'm enjoying this fall from grace immensely.

When I went to the only game the Mets lost at Washington, I warned all the fans there that the Nats will drop patheticly after the ASBreak.

Oh, how the "mighty" have fallen. They don't even deserve to be up there on the Wild card.

Let's Go Mets!

**poster** · 07-28-2005, 03:33 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

I think this was due. Their pitching is a joke besides Livan. Great story though. If the Cubs get their act together today which is bleak they could be 2 out. Still very bunched up though and I dont even want to think wild card until they are 10 over .500

**dieselboy** · 07-28-2005, 04:00 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

Originally posted by USCTrojan83

You're giving up that easily. If you find a way to get Vinny back and Guzman out of that lineup (Larkin Returning?) then you might be able to take a run at the Braves...

They should of just made better signings for the left side of the infield.

**DuffysCliff** · 07-28-2005, 04:05 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

Originally posted by poster

I think this was due. Their pitching is a joke besides Livan. Great story though. If the Cubs get their act together today which is bleak they could be 2 out. Still very bunched up though and I dont even want to think wild card until they are 10 over .500

Livan Hernandez hasn't even been that good. His 3.32 ERA is pretty deceiving as he's allowed 161 hits over 157 1/3 innings, his K/9 is only 5.43 with his K/BB ratio of 1.73. Much like the Nationals, Livan has been pretty lucky.

On the other hand, John Patterson has been pretty darn good. Opponents are batting .218 against him, with a OPS of only .591. K/9 is 8.52, K/BB ratio being 2.97. Figures that his record is only 4-2 though.

**dieselboy** · 07-28-2005, 04:17 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

Originally posted by DuffysCliff

Livan Hernandez hasn't even been that good. His 3.32 ERA is pretty deceiving as he's allowed 161 hits over 157 1/3 innings, his K/9 is only 5.43 with his K/BB ratio of 1.73. Much like the Nationals, Livan has been pretty lucky.

On the other hand, John Patterson has been pretty darn good. Opponents are batting .218 against him, with a OPS of only .591. K/9 is 8.52, K/BB ratio being 2.97. Figures that his record is only 4-2 though.

Livan hasn't been that good? He has been very good. Yes, batters are hitting .272 against him, and yes his WHIP is only 1.37, but you have to remember this guy tied for 2nd in the league in innings pitched per start. John Patterson, for example, is averaging a full inning less than Livan. While it doesn't seem like much, when Livan pitches, the Nationals don't have to use three or for relievers to shut the door. While he only has one complete game, he has numerous starts where he lasts until the ninth, and they bring in Cordero to pad his saves stats. A 3.32 is really solid if you are pitching as many innings as he has been.

Now, he isn't going to get any Cy Young consideration with numbers like that, but his pitching does a lot for the whole team that can't be seen in the box score.

**DuffysCliff** · 07-28-2005, 04:53 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

Originally posted by dieselboy

Livan hasn't been that good? He has been very good. Yes, batters are hitting .272 against him, and yes his WHIP is only 1.37, but you have to remember this guy tied for 2nd in the league in innings pitched per start. John Patterson, for example, is averaging a full inning less than Livan. While it doesn't seem like much, when Livan pitches, the Nationals don't have to use three or for relievers to shut the door. While he only has one complete game, he has numerous starts where he lasts until the ninth, and they bring in Cordero to pad his saves stats. A 3.32 is really solid if you are pitching as many innings as he has been.

Now, he isn't going to get any Cy Young consideration with numbers like that, but his pitching does a lot for the whole team that can't be seen in the box score.

When I was saying Livan hasn't even been that good, I meant he's not the ace of the staff, and John Patterson has been better. Livan's been good in that he gives the team a lot of quality innings. He hasn't been very good because he seems to be getting lucky. He's not a strikeout pitcher, nor a groundball pitcher, so how he gets himself out all of the jams to keep his ERA at 3.32 is pretty amazing. It's not going to last though. Though even if Livan gives up 4 or 5 runs over 9 runs, he's still helping his team out. Patterson helps his team out more by giving up 2 runs over 7 innings though.

**remix** · 07-28-2005, 05:01 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

You can't exactly compare Livan and Patterson's stats fairly. Livan is left into the game late and often scored upon in the 8th or 9th innings. He's not like other pitchers in the league, he's still out there in the 8th or 9th not neccessarily because he has his stuff, it's all about stepping up and trying to win the game. In my eyes, Livan sets the table and is the staff ace. Patterson has been good this year, but not comparable to Livan.

**HitDoctor** · 07-28-2005, 05:09 PM

Re: Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

Originally posted by remix

You can't exactly compare Livan and Patterson's stats fairly. Livan is left into the game late and often scored upon in the 8th or 9th innings. He's not like other pitchers in the league, he's still out there in the 8th or 9th not neccessarily because he has his stuff, it's all about stepping up and trying to win the game. In my eyes, Livan sets the table and is the staff ace. Patterson has been good this year, but not comparable to Livan.

The nats don't score for anyone and particularly, Patterson.

Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

Recommended Videos

Well, it was fun while it lasted. (Nats)

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment