Boswell talks U.S. Open, Baseball

Washington Post sports columnist Thomas Boswell was online Friday, June 13 at 3 p.m. ET, live from the course at Torrey Pines, site of this year's U.S. Open. He'll talk about golf, baseball and his latest columns.

The transcript follows.

Discussion Archives

____________________

Woodley Park, D.C.: Thanks for the great column on the state of the Nats. I don't think the Lerners should throw away money, but I also don't think that starving baseball fans of any talented players is a good idea. There is, ultimately, one legit MLBer on this team -- Ryan Zimmerman -- and then a collection of leftovers. Hardly a good use of my money to spend it on a bunch of has-beens and AAA players.

My concern is this: at a certain point, you can't just win with prospects or young guys from the system. That is in part because only a minute number of minor leaguers actually can succeed on the MLB level consistently. You need free agents and successful veterans, because they know how to win, have the experience to carry younger players, provide depth and in some cases give you that star-power talent to carry a team.

Do you get any sense that the Lerners understand that just pouring money into the farm system won't create a great team, that they also need to be prepared to sign those young kids for the long-term with market-value contracts and must make free agent acquisitions and trades to fill holes? I'm worried that they will approach this like a shopping mall -- and you can't nickel and dime the same way.

Sorry for the long question. Would appreciate your thoughts.

washingtonpost.com: Column: The Nationals May Need A Plan B (Post, June 11)

Tom Boswell: I think the Lerners are still learning the game, don't want to be seen within the sport as big spenders and are, by business inclination, frugal. So, feel free to worry. I do.

Kasten really runs the show and felt they made an adequate offer to Soriano and once mentioned that Ted Lerner volunteered that he thought Ichiro's most recent contract was a priced he'd have been willing to pay in a similar situation. So, that's mildly hopeful. But, as I've now written at least three times, I firmly disagree with the theory of free agents as only "the last piece of the puzzle." FA's are one of the legs of the stool, along with drafted players and trades.

On Opening Night, Ted Lerner asked me, in light of the supposed New Stadium Honeymoon effect, "How long do we have to win?" I said, "I think you get a free ride until about the seventh inning tonight."

That's still how I feel. The ONLY current positive is that you get a complete look now at Dukes, Pena, Boone, Young, Lopez and others about whom variuous decisions have to be made.

But this town waited a LONG time. The city deserves a real MLB team ASAP. No, not a 90+-win team. But a 75-to-85 win team is not too much to ask for $611 million.

_______________________

Washington DC: Has there been any thought to reducing Nats ticket prices to match the minor league team on the field? I went to 10 Nats games a year at RFK as the price fit the team. I have yet and don't plan to attend a game this year just to see a stadium. I can stay home and watch loss after loss. If they had just fielded any kind of ML team I was there. Didn't have to be a winner, just competitive with real major leaguers.

Tom Boswell: Here's a compromise. Sit in the upper deck, which is as good as any upper deck in baseball, but has a top ticket price of $24 with the rest at $10 and $18. A FAR better value than similar seats at RFK. Also, the new park has concourses as good as any in baseball __one of the top two or three for roaming the park, so buy a $10 ticket and stand "on the rails" behind the $67 or $33 seats in the lower bowl or mezz. The Nats encourage this 'railbird approach.'

The product right now is minor league. The ballpark is exceptional. So, maybe you shouldn't cut off your nose to spite your face. I went to San Diego's much-praised Petco Park on Weds nite. It's very, very nice. But it's nowhere close to Natioanls Park. After SF, Pittsburgh and Camden Yards, the Nats can compete with any new park, including Safeco in Seattle which is exceptional.

_______________________

Crownsville, Md.: Why doesn't the USGA take Nicklaus's suggestion to roll the golf ball back seriously? We now have to have 7600 yard US Opens? I don't see a downside, frankly. If I lose 10-20 yards off the tee (in other words, I'll hit it the same distance I did ten years ago), I'll move up to a different set of tee markers and still have fun.

Tom Boswell: Most people are not as noble as you. I swore I wouldn't switch to the current ludicrous generation of drivers with club heads the size of toasters. But two years ago, I did. When I was in my 30's and a decent hacker, I never hit a 300-yard drive in my life. 240 was good. This spring, I've had a few (supposed) 300-yard drives. It's an addiction to cheap thrills that's hard to break.

And "club improvements, like the damn utility clubs __yes, I finally got one last season, are the economic lifeline of golf club manufacturers who are enormously powerful in golf politics.

_______________________

Ellicott City, Md.: Mr. Boswell,

Enjoyed your article Wednesday, is there not a fundamental conflict between what most Washington baseball fans want -- a competitive team that can play .500 ball and contend for the wild card in the NL -- and what Stan Kasten wants -- a team that contends for the World Series every year?

My issue is that Mr. Kasten is playing a game of "shoot the moon" - he will either succeed or fail in spectacular fashion.

I think most D.C. baseball fans would like him to hedge his bets a bit and try to sign two free agents next year -- Hudson at 2B and Sabathia would be nice additions.

Where do you stand on this?

Tom Boswell: I have had this exact "discussion" with Kasten __whom I consider excellent__ since the first day he arrived with the team. I make it very clear that I understand his motives. He wants to TOP what he did in Atlanta __build the perfect team in the perfect way and make the Nats a monument to his methods. So, he is trying to "shoot the moon." I have been very blunt and said, "This team is not your experimentral toy. It's of enormous importance to Washington. This team can provide enormous pleasure to people and economic benefits to the city EVEN IF IT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING to enhance Stan Kasten's Hall of Fame plaque."

He knows more about team building. Few know more.

I tell him I know more about Washington __a lot more__ and he should "have a care." He gets it. A couple of weeks ago we were looking at the white boards full of all the team's internal depth charts and projections. He said, "I wish we were one year further along. But in a year, we will be."

Bowden would like to move faster and, I suspect, thinks some spending should have been done already. Once you get a quality player at the MLB level, you can still TRADE him as the needs of the ballclub change over the years. Of course, all GM's want to see fast progress __in part because their job security depends on it.

However, to be fair, if the Nats had a fairly benign injury season this year and were now a couple of games under .500, I suspect every "question" on this chat would be a glowing endorsement of the wisdom of the Plan with comments about how much fun it was to see the plucky 32-35 Nats in the new park. The difference in public perception of a team __based on plus-or-minus 5 wins in the first half of a season can be large.

But, I repeat, WHY CUT IT THIS CLOSE? I hate to be an "I told you so," but I've been nagging about this since Soriano left. They survived, sort of, with thier "120-loss team" last year. Last off-xseason, they counted on the stadium buzz too completely. And put more than $40 million into the park.

This is going to take several years to play out. But we are currently seeing the worst of the dark side to the Lerner-Kasten approach.

_______________________

Innings Eaters: What galls me about the Nationals, is that it seems like there were a lot of very moderately priced inning eaters out there (think Livan) that could have gone a long way toward making the team respectable. Not the type of player that will take you to 95 wins, but can help you at least be .500 or better.

I looked back at the 2005 Nats, and while their offense was truly offensive (U-G-L-Y) they managed an 81-81 record because they had 2 pitchers log over 200 innings (Livan and Loiza) and Patterson actually got to 193. Livan and Loiza weren't spectacular, but they kept you in most games and relieved pressure on the bullpen. I've always thought that rebuilding teams should look more to getting inning eaters to do just those things. When you add in the loss of Cordero and the consequent shifting of all the bullpen roles, it just gets worse. Every game it seems like Ayala, Rivera, and Hanrahan pitch. And one of them is going to have a bad night.

Your thoughts?

Tom Boswell: Every team overvalues their own prospects. Partly it is natural human self-delusion. Partly it is driving up the trade value of your minor-league "inventory." The Nats are very good at convincing themselves that everybody they draft is hot stuff. The statistical FACTS don't agree, at the moment. The minor league numbers of true future STARS usually jump off the page at you at the AA level. (Ignore lower levels.) LOTS of current Nats farm hands project as MLBers. But I can't find one who __just on the numbers__ looks like the next Zimmerman.

The rationization for not signing Livan, who wanted to come back, was that Mock, Clippard and Balester would be ready as the season progressed and L.H. might block their progress. I'm not impressed with Mock. Granted, only one start. Acta is impressed and can see him in the rotation someday. Manny presumably knows more. But I don't think his stuff __fastball tops at 90 and no knee-buckling off-speed pitch__ is as good as Redding, Hill or Bergmann. Clippard has a weird deliverey and fine changeup. But, again, with hindsight, I'd rather have seen Livan back. And you'll notice how perfect hindsight alwaysw is. I've only seen Balester briefly once. He didn't knock my socks off.

Oh, on your final point, I'll be amazed if the Nats don't damage more relievers with overwork. I was glad to see Rauch end up as the closer because they won't be ahead in enough games to burn him up. May be lucky he survived the hard use the4 last two years. Don't mean to be TOO critical, but part of the problem is that they have no relievers at AAA who can actually help. Manning and Sanches look like classic Four-A (AAAA) players.

_______________________

Who Wins?: Ok Tom, who you got to win the Open?

Tom Boswell: I've watched every one of Mickelson's Open disasters from point-blank range. I was a few feet off the green when he missed the crucial 4-footer at Shinnecock Hills on the 71st and was beside him on every shot of the last four hoiles in '06. It was awful to watch. The Open pressure took him over its knee and snapped him in half. So, for this week, I'd truly like to see Phil win. This is his home town. Tiger is gimpy. Nobody else truly "deserves" to win. Phil has paid his misery dues. And, with three majors, including two Masters, "should" be an Open winner.

But I was with him almost every step yesterday __and will be back out with him after this chat__ and he looked alarmingly like the usual easily flummoxed Phil.

If everyone here seems obsessed with the 1-2-3 pairing in the first two rounds, try to look at it in historical perspective. If this were 1968 or 1948, wouldn't we all be following Palmer, Nicklaus and Player or Hogan, Snead and Nelson? Yup, there's only one place to be, even though quite a few other players have the tools to win here.

_______________________

Must Be Hard: Tom,

Do you thank God everyday you are an experienced, sage columnist and not the Nats beat reporter? Must be hell to have to report on the Nats every game right now. Whew!

Tom Boswell: I was the beat writer on the Orioles, as well as national baseball, for many years. I always found every team fascinating in its own way, including the bad ones. BUT I certainly enjoyed covering the '79, '80 and '83 O's more than the losing ones. You actually have to give the players more distance and not be in their face grilling them every day. When they're losing, familiarity __with you__ really does breed contempt. Also, with bad teams there is much more time to wrfite about people and general trends in the game. You're not tid to 'will they win tonight' and 'how many games are they out of 1st place.'

I'm sure Chico Harlan is in heaven, even though you might not think it. He gets to know them when they stunk and, presumably, will get to 'grow up with the team.' Journalists who see themselves alm ost exclussively as "reporters" hate bad teams. What is there to report? (These bums are still bad.) "Writers" don't mind. There's always plenty of material. Heck, I covered high sdchools for six years and I always thought it was a gold mine of material. And some of the nicest people.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: RIP to a familiar face at Nats and Wizards games, Tim Russert.

Tom Boswell: Just saw it. So sorry. In my limited (baseabll) exposure to him, he seemed just as nice a man as he came across on TV.

Think I better "block out" this news from my mind until I finish this chat. There is so much bad news in the world in any 24-hour period, but this one really hits you in the gut.

_______________________

Jim Zorn: Tom, a Redskin Q. Sorry. I know this is a baseball and golf chat, but had to ask. How's it going to go for our rookie coach this coming season? Is his West Coast offense going to return the Skins to the playoffs?

Tom Boswell: I walked the Open here for about an hour yesterday with Dave Craig, the old Seattle Seahawks quarterback. First thing he said was, "How's Zorn doing?...(pause...laugh)...I beat him out."

Craig was as stunned as everybody else at such a huge jump up the NFL ladder for somebody in his 50's __from QB coach to head coach. Craig likes Zorn personally but said, "Do you think he's in over his head?" I won't go into the rest, but you can sure get useful "background" info in some strange places. USGA officials eventually spotted that Craig didn't have any credentials and had just bluffed his way inside the ropes witgh the media. So, they made him go back into the crowd. Fun guy. Big on deer hunting with bow-and-arrow. But his general curiosity about Zorn underlined to me the ENORMOUS number of people with decades of football experience and success who have to wonder "Why Jim Zorn?" And there's probably plenty who are jealous.

_______________________

Washington, DC: Hi, Bos. I'm glad you've got the U.S. Open to district you from the Nats!

I'm about your age and, like you, was almost tearfully happy to see baseball return to D.C. Plus, I can walk to a Green Line Metro station. How great is that?

Now, however, I'm most often near tears over the sorry state of the team. I love baseball and like the new Stadium. The $10 seats are a great bargain, though I wish they would let you bring in food. But the team is just so dreadful! I get so frustrated by their being so awful that my wife, a less serious fan, fears for my health.

So, good luck in trying to talk the powers that be into at least trying to field a competive team while waiting for the youngsters to arrive. We diehards will probably always come 'round, but if this sort of thing continues they risk alienating the younger fans they should be most trying to recruit.

Tom Boswell: Well put.

However, the Nats on-line site claims you CAN bring food into the park if it is in a 16" x 16" x 8" container. Also, one bottle of water. If true, better than a sharp stick in the eye.

_______________________

Section 303: After six games in the new park, I've reluctantly concluded that I preferred RFK. My seats are higher, so the game unfolds below me - tough angles. Seats are less comfortable, surprisingly, and with the rake or angle of the section top to bottom, the cupholder is useless. Easier to put my drink on the floor. I intensely dislike not being able to watch the game while walking around the stadium, and it takes too long to walk down from the upper level.

Earlier BP is good, no, great, but stuff costs too much. I do like the scoreboard, and would like to see more replays.

Winning would ease this a lot, but not end it. I will probably not renew the season tickets I've had since they came to town, and just buy gameday seats next year. What a disappointment.

Hearing this from any others?

Tom Boswell: I sat in the upper deck last week in the gallery and my cup holder worked fine! Alsdo, the ramps take a long time and, after dark, provide nice views, but USE THE ELEVATORS down from the upper deck. One in LF, one behind HP and at least one in RF. As for closeness, all seats inNats park are closer than the comparables, usually by a lot. And I often wandered out of the press box at RFK and sat everywhere, especially the upper deck. Nats Park is vastly better, IMO.

As for walking around the park and stiull seeing the game, that's one of the new park's main features that gives it an edge over almost all other new parks. Yes, you could walk around inside RFK, but as soon as you left for food, etc., on the concourses, you were out of touch with the game. Also, RFK didn't have all the railings and "perches" where you can stop and watch for a while. If you tried to walk around RFK, you got rousted by ushers (correctly) or fans for blocking their view.

You're right, they need to show more replays. I don't get why they aren't. And the seats WERE bigger in RFK.

"Hearing this from others?" No, you're the first!

_______________________

Parkersburg, W.V.: Do you know what started the shouting match between Manny Acta and Elijah Dukes the other night in Pittsburgh? Also, has there been any repercussion to Dukes for snubbing his manager after the game?

Tom Boswell: I've watched it a few times. Very interesting. Acta approaches Dukes within seconds of Milledge's game-winning homer, gets right in his face, screams at him, gestures with two fingers __like "you've done that twice" maybe__ and then points to rightfield. Acta turns and starts to leave. Dukes starts to yell back at him. Acta spins, gets right back in is face and Dukes is silent as he walks away.

Nice mystery.

99% have assumed Dukes and His Next Manager would have to have a showdown because anger amnagement has always been a Dukes issue with authority figures. The hope has been that Dukes would keep some of his fire, but not let it rule him or damage his career. IOW, could he tolerate being chewed out, even in public, and cope witgh it, live with it, or would he come to another suspension-worthy confrontation with another manager/teammate.

I thought Acta's explosion __which I bet wasn't entirely spontaneous after the way Dukes showed up the HP ump after his homer a week earlier__ was worthy of Chuck Tanner, Dick Williams, Ralph Houk. It was old school. Acta is almost as physically intimidating as Dukes, though he never uses it. But it's there. Manny had a big temper in his early years as a manager.

I don't know how to express it exactly, but I think this had to happen. Can Dukes cope with genuine discipline? If he can, he has a career. If he can't, he'll be an ex-Nat fairly soon and, perhaps, an ex-professional athlete not long after.

I mentioned to Dukes the other day that I enjoyed watching him in the outfield. "That's my pride and joy," he said. I find myself pulling for this guy, though I know that a quick "google" would give me the chills again. If they can 'save his soul,' they may have quite a ballpalyer in a couple of years. But the Nats may think that his past history is so extreme that he has to accept an extremnely high level of discipline.

Time for the 1-2-3 tee time, folks. Out of here. See you in two weeks.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.