Down On Half Street: Let us now dispense forever with the tiresome: “Houston you have a problem” signs and simply note that while the cynics say that it was only a matter of time before the Nats’ bats were loosed against the likes of the lowly Astros, it was damned good to see. From where I sat, the first Belliard home run looked like it was going foul, so the explosion of fandom was all that much sweeter.

It was good to see Kentucky’s bat come to life and you have to feel good for Tim Redding, who finally notched a win after throwing his standard very good game for six innings. But while we’re focused on the bats and Timmy, let’s note that reliever Steven Shell looks like the (proverbial) real deal. Note to Jim Bowden: perhaps you should trade Shell to another team for some prospects! Oh wait, Shell is a prospect. Hey, I have an idea, let’s keep him.

Me Droogs: In an unprecedented show of friendship, the three writers of this blog met for an evening of baseball. We actually sat together during the Nats loss to the Tracy’s — an 11 inning 7-5 affair that the Nats should have won, and would have won, were it not for (in my humble opinion) a late game non-interference call by umpire Angel Hernandez. Every umpire misses a call, but Hernandez’s missed calls are famous — as are his temper tantrums. In 2001 he threw football player Steve McMichael out of Wrigley Field after McMichael (who sang “Take Me Out to the Ballgame), had the temerity of questioning his competence. In another incident, Hernandez threw Dodger first base coach Mariano Duncan’s hat into the stands after Duncan threw it to the ground in arguing a call.

No kidding.

In any event, it was great to see the Droogs who, in the midst of the Thursday night loss, received news that Ryan Langerhans was being called up from Columbus and would soon be rejoining the club. We were thrilled. 

Buyer’s Remorse: The first assessment is in on who got the better of the Rich Harden to Chicago for Sean Gallagher, Matt Murton, Eric Patterson and Double-A catcher Josh Donaldson trade– and the nod goes to Billy Beane and the A’s. The common notion is that Gallagher was the key to the trade for Oakland, with early reports suggesting that outfielder Matt Murton would head to Sacramento, Oakland’s triple-A affiliate. But Murton has always been underestimated and it’s no secret that Lou Piniella never really took to him. So when Murton arrived in Oakland, they told him he would start in left field. A very smart decision. I always thought Murton would look good in a Nats uniform: he has a career .294 batting average, a .362 OBP and .448 slugging.

Yesterday, both Gallagher and Murton shined in the Connie Mack’s 9-2 drubbing of the Angels and over at Thunder Matt’s Saloon (named for the now-departed), fans of the Baby Bears were suffering buyer’s remorse. They weren’t the only ones: the Trib’s Fred Mitchell noted that 44 years ago the Cubs made a transaction that sent future Hall of Famer Lou Brock to St. Louis – a trade against which ”all other major Cubs transactions are measured.”  And just who did the Cubs get for Brock? This guy:

The Nation: Everything seems to be clicking in Boston, where Dustin Pedroia’s bat has come to life. The second sacker (and starting All Star) is hitting .311 and sending the Bosox faithful into paragons of ecstacy. There’s no question about it. He’s simply the best baseball player who ever lived. (And he will be …  until, that is, the day that the Evil Empire signs him for $140 million.) I know — let’s talk about Duston Pedroia on Baseball Tonight!

The Bosox are now the class of the AL, and godonlyknows just how good they can be when the get a little from the bullpen. Even so, I can’t help noting that “Red Sox Nation” has been notably silent on the one transaction they once trumpeted — the signing of this guy to a “no lose” minor league deal:

We here at the Dogz have recently learned that Bartolo is either on the DL or that he is the unknown in that song about “the man who never returned.” My bet? He is lost forever ‘neath the streets of Boston.

Put Up Your Dukes: Our friends at Federal Baseball weigh in on the Elijah Dukes-Manny Acta dust-up on Tuesday night, even going so far as to show a clip of Tony Kornheiser and Michael Wilbon agreeing that now is the time for Dukes to go. What? Already? Listen, the Boston Red Sox are having fistfights in their dugouts for God’s sake and the World Champion Yanks of Billy Martin’s years couldn’t stand each other. So who the hell cares? Maybe a little dust-up will do these guys some good.

MLB.com, meanwhile, puts all of this down to “dugout miscommunication.” Of course, that explains everything — and nothing. Every baseball tiff (and every war, come to think of it), is about miscommunication. Still, there’s a story here somewhere, so here’s the scoop so far. Apparently (although this is just one version of the story), Dukes thought that Acta had not properly congratulated him on his double against the Pirates in the top of the ninth (followed by the Lastings Milledge home run). He was miffed. Others, unreported others, believed that Acta was angry with Dukes for overly celebrating after Milledge and Dukes had crossed home plate. This would not be the first time — or so the story goes — and Acta lost his temper, confronted Dukes in the dugout and read him out.

Dukes does not take these things lightly, of course, so after the game, he refused to high-five Acta during the traditional on-the-mound handshake. Acta gave a sly and cynical smile to this and kept on walking, but this was an act that was not bound to please. After the game there was a closed-door meeting between Dukes, Acta and GM Jim Bowden to clear that air. We can only imagine.

So what happened? The Washington Post blog on the Nationals had this exchange between Acta and reporters:

Q: Can you expand at all on what happened in the dugout yesterday?

MA: No, that’s yesterday’s news, and I don’t read yesterday’s paper. It’s over with. What happens in Pittsburgh stays in Pittsburgh. We talked it out after the game, and we’re cool, we’re fine.

Q: So does the decision to have Elijah back in the lineup emphasize what you’re talking about - that it’s over?

A: That had nothing to do. I’m never going to do something against my club because of whatever happens on the field. That had nothing to do whatever happened yesterday. He’s our right fielder.

So there you have it. Now you know as much as we do. Which is exactly nothing.

Complete Games: I watched the Nats lose to the Bucs tonight in Pittsburgh, then switched over to watch Ryan Dempster pitch the Cubs’ first complete game of the season, against the Braves. The Nats have not had one yet, but have come close. I thought that John Lannan had pitched one, but stats don’t lie — he went 7.1 against the O’s in a gem, while the up-and-down Jason Bergman went a full 8 against the Diamondbacks.

I only mention this because the other night I was checking some stats on the Baseball Reference and was curious about Sandy Koufax’s pitching record. I was always confused about the way sportwriter’s viewed Koufax. There was no question that he was a dominant pitcher, but he was not dominant over an extended period of time — like, say, Walter Johnson (21 years, 417 wins), or Christy Mathewson (17 years, 373 wins) or even Bob Gibson (17 years, 251 wins). Koufax, in comparison, pitched for only eleven years and had just 165 wins.

But here’s the difference. For a short time in those eleven years, Koufax absolutely defined pitching. The Cubs got their first complete game tonight. In 1965, Koufax threw  27 complete games. He did it again the next year, in 1966. Twenty-seven complete games. Koufax was brilliant but, in my opinion, Bob Gibson was better.

In 1968, when Gibson went 22-9 for the Cardinals, he pitched 28 complete games. The other great pitcher on the staff was Nelson Briles. The number three starter was Steve Carlton, who would later be traded to the Phillies for Rick Wise. Gibson’s ERA in 1968 was 1.12. He threw 304 innings, and gave up 62 walks. He allowed 38 earned runs during the entire season. In his World Series career, Gibson won seven games and lost two. Backed by Gibson’s pitching, the Cards won the Series in ‘64 and again in ‘67.

But here’s the thing that gets me, and that no stats book will show. In 1968, Gibson’s manager never made a visit to the mound to talk to Gibson — or to bring in a reliever. The pitching coach did, but never to take him out.

The difference between winning and losing to Milwaukee on Monday afternoon (the Nats lost 4-3 in 11 innings) was the inordinate number of strike outs chalked up by the Brewer’s pitching staff. Fifteen times the Nats batters trudged back to the dugout after having whiffed. With a total of 41 at-bats the entire day, the home town team k’d more than a third of the time. Not a stat to be proud of to be sure and one that shows how little help the pitching staff received on the day. Milwaukee wasn’t much better — 12 stike outs in 39 at-bats — but they won.

Both the guys swinging the bat well and those who aren’t all contributed to the high K total today. Harris, Boone, Dukes, Flores, Bergman and Langerhans all had two apiece. And in a key two-inning stretch with the momentum going the Nats way after they tied the score in the bottom of the eighth, Milwaukee reliever Carlos Villanueva recorded five strike outs in his two innings of work. You can’t do much with that.

Another problem with Washington was it’s seeming inability to work the count. For instance, in his two innings of work Viallanueva only threw 27 pitches - 19 for strikes. Thirteen pitches per inning may seem high, but it’s not when you consider the five strike outs. I should also mention that Villanueva had a 6.30 ERA going into today’s game. The Nats made him look like he was a contender for the Cy Young. Milwaukee starter Ben Sheets had an equally easy day. Eighty-six pitches (61 for strikes!) over six innings including six strike outs. I wish I’d counted how many first-pitch swings the Nats had throughout the day. Whatever it was it was too many.

The theme for the day should have been: Take A Pitch!

Diamond Nuggets

Ah, the joys of the conession stand at Nationals Park continue. In the top the of the second inning today I had to get a large-sized drink for my pint-sized daughter because the medium-sized cups didn’t have any lids. Plenty of medium-sized cups. Just no medium-sized lids. Wouldn’t you think you’d order one with the other? How does that happen?

At least a few times at the park today it was announced on the video screen that during the game on June 4 against St. Louis, the Nats will do a cross-promotion to advertise the Discovery Channel’s newest offering, the PlanetGreen channel. A well-placed source tells me the first pitch will feature a green ball and bat. Presumably the team, which has made quite an effort to make the ballpark “green” sees this as a great way to further its reputation in that area. But a green ball and bat?! Maybe I misunderstood and it’ll be a ceremonial first pitch. Stay tuned.

There is nothing quite like Opening Day, particularly when Ryan Zimmerman can hit a walk-off home run. But like most fans, I spent much of my time oggling the new stadium, checking out the concessions, and attempting to determine just how the field would “play.” It’s an all-important question, of course, because you build a team to fit a field — and not the other way around. Even so, the assumption here is that National’s Park will be a hitter’s park: primarily because it’s not RFK. I noticed this on opening day: the place looked positively small. The fences seemed on top of the field, just right there.

But honestly? The fences are not in all that much. And from where I sat on Opening Day (just up the third base line beyond the dugout and twenty rows back) it seemed to me that National’s Park looks small only because the fans seem on top of the field, though they are most decidedly not. It’s the same for the players, who commented on this in the wake of the exhibition game versus the Orioles. So my guess is the field will play “long” — that it will be a slight pitcher’s park except in the alleys, where the ball will travel 370 in right-center and 377 in left center (it was 380 at old RFK). That’s a ways to go for someone like Wily Mo. Here tis:

A pitcher’s park? You mean like PETCO? My comment is based on observation, on what I saw: I could be wrong. There’s no question that Zim’s walk off would have been a long out at RFK, but that does not disprove my point: while the actual dimensions of National’s Park are nothing compared to cavernous PETCO Park in San Diego (an astounding 402 feet in the alleys), they are hardly the bandbox dimensions of Wrigley, Houston’s Minute Maid and the positively claustrophobic Great American Ballpark in Cincinnati. So what’s the best comparison?

St. Louis’ new Busch Stadium is 375 in left-center and right-center — presumably reachable distances and very much like Nats Park — and 400 in straightaway center. The dimensions in DC and St. Louis are almost exactly the same down the lines. In fact, Busch II (as they call it) is close enough to National’s Park to be almost a replica, and no one (no one) views it as a hitter’s park. Guys like Albert Pujols are easily strong enough to hit the long ball at Busch, but that’s not the point: last year Pujols hit more home runs in Pittsburgh, Houston and Chicago than he did in St. Louis — where he plays half his games. Not scientific enough? The Cardinals ranked 25th in homers last year and while it’s true their line-up is not stacked with big boppers, total home run production at Busch (or Busch II, which opened in April 2006) actually dropped 27 percent last year. That’s for everyone, not just the Cards.

At the end of the year we’ll look back and say “wow” — look what National’s Park did for the team’s hitters compared to RFK. And while that’s a true comparison, the Nats aren’t playing other teams at RFK, they’re playing them in San Diego and San Francisco (where the distance in the gaps is a breathtaking 421 feet), in St. Louis and now in Busch II’s replica stadium along the beautiful Anacostia.

The question is not whether Ryan Zimmerman and Austin Kearns and Dimitri Young will hit more home runs in Nats Park than they did at RFK (they will), the question is whether that means the “Learners” (as Tom would, appropriately, spell them) should start drafting clones of Dave Kingman.

The answer is obvious. This is a game of pitching and so the Nationals should build the team by building their pitching. But my bet is that that is as true for the Nats now as it might have been had they stayed at RFK (God forbid). It might not yet be totally clear, but it appears the Nats are playing in a stadium that will favor strong arms and quick outfielders.

Fine by me.