Batter's Box Interactive Magazine - Bowden Leaves Nationals

The Washington Nationals will be looking for a new general manager. The Associated Press says Jim Bowden has stepped down as federal investigators are looking into the club's alleged skimming of signing bonuses given to Latin American prospects.

Bowden has presided over the Nats for the first four years of their existence since leaving Montreal. They finished right at .500 in their first year in D.C. but have endured three straight losing seasons since. That includes the Nationals finishing with baseball's worst record last season in which they finished with just 59 wins. (Everytime I see 59, I always think of the Jays brutal 1978 season and that was the first season I got into baseball. Oy vey!) The good news for the Nationals is they will have a chance to select San Diego State phenom righty Stephen Strasburg in this year's amateur draft.

As you can tell from the picture on the right, the odd Nats fan might be happy about this development. They're probably feeling the same euphoria that Cincinnati fans experienced when Bowden was the longtime GM of the Reds. His wikipedia article highlights a number of controversies during his time with the Big Red Machine.

Now the question is, will team president Stan Kasten jump ship as well? He has been rumoured to take over as Jays president but perhaps this recent controversy could throw a wrench into those plans.

Feel free to share your thoughts here and if you like, give us a funny caption for Bowden's picture above. Remember, keep it clean. This is a family site!

Posted by #2JBrumfield on Sunday, March 01 2009 @ 10:32 AM EST.

Bowden Leaves Nationals | 14 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

TimberLee - Sunday, March 01 2009 @ 11:20 AM EST (#196934) #

"Well, when it got piled up to here, and I couldn't see over it any more, I figured it was time to leave."

Chuck - Sunday, March 01 2009 @ 11:41 AM EST (#196935) #

Jim Bowden, raises his arm en route to touching his fingers to his nose, to prove his sobriety and refute the notion that his years at the Nationals' helm have been the efforts of someone under the influence, his track record notwithstanding.

Wayne H. - Sunday, March 01 2009 @ 06:51 PM EST (#196947) #

"I was just this close to getting away with everything"

Mike Green - Sunday, March 01 2009 @ 07:08 PM EST (#196948) #

"You've had it up to there, you say? That's not bad for a Nats' fan."

Doom Service - Sunday, March 01 2009 @ 08:54 PM EST (#196951) #

Blue Jays ass't GM Tony LaCava was considered a frontrunner to take the job just a few days ago.

Pistol - Monday, March 02 2009 @ 09:40 AM EST (#196958) #

I suspect LaCava still is the frontrunner as he has a relationship with Kasten and is seemingly qualified.

Olney wrote that the Nats will still have to go through the standard interview process (that is, they'll have to interview a minority candidate). At one point the talk was that they could just skip that under the circumstances and hire LaCava directly.

John Northey - Monday, March 02 2009 @ 11:12 AM EST (#196962) #

Phew, Ryan pulls out of the World Baseball Classic. One less way for him to get injured.

Mike Green - Monday, March 02 2009 @ 12:08 PM EST (#196965) #

A review of payroll efficiency 2006-08 is found in today's Baseball Analyst. Toronto comes third behind Minnesota and Cleveland. Churlishly, I divide the credit for this between Ash's drafts and Ricciardi's acquisitions.

TamRa - Monday, March 02 2009 @ 08:26 PM EST (#196983) #

Churlishly, I divide the credit for this between Ash's drafts and Ricciardi's acquisitions.

Given this quote:

The correlation coefficient works out to 0.64. The coefficient of determination (or R-squared) is 0.41, which means payroll explains 41 percent of a team's win total. A large portion of the balance is determined by the impact of "cost-controlled" players (i.e., minimum or close to minimum in years one through three and roughly 40-60-80 percent of free agent market values in years four through six, respectively)

I'd say any contribution by Ash is incidental.

Further, since the teams over those three years feature only three important players drafted by Ash, and one of those missing significant production due to injury, one can only assume dividing credit is (a) sarcasm; or (b) illogical.

But then, I guess being churlish is by definition illogical, eh?

;)

Mike Green - Monday, March 02 2009 @ 08:44 PM EST (#196985) #

Halladay, Wells, Rios, League and McGowan directly, and several others indirectly, may be put in the Ash column. Not that Gord would have hung on to all the right guys if he'd hung around longer!

zeppelinkm - Tuesday, March 03 2009 @ 07:37 AM EST (#196991) #

Yep. Ash drafted them and Riccardi signed each of those players to good contracts. Halladay was under market value, Wells certainly was for 2006 and 2008, Rios as well.

It's one thing to say "just 3 players", but it's being deceptive when you fail to mention that those 3 players are without question the 3 best players on your ball club, and one of them is the premier starting pitcher in the whole entire world.

But give credit to Riccardi - buying out Wells arb years was a good move. As was his contract to Rios, and his contract with Doc. Although it would hard to overpay for Doc given his character and talent (would you feel ripped off if Doc was making %25M a year? I doubt it!). Those 3 players contributed a large percentage to the Jays wins (Wells not so much in 2007 though) over this time span.

John Northey - Tuesday, March 03 2009 @ 12:20 PM EST (#196996) #

All teams except expansion teams have some fingerprints of past GM's on them. For example, Dustin McGowan was drafted due to the loss of Graeme Lloyd as a free agent, Lloyd was traded to the Blue Jays as part of the Roger Clemens deal, thus McGowan is related to Beeston's first term as president since Clemens was a Beeston deal (without Beeston it wouldn't have happened).

A better example is Adam Lind. He was drafted by JP thanks to a pick gained when Escobar left as a free agent. Escobar was signed in 1992 when Pat Gillick ran the team. Thus Lind would not be here without Gillick signing Escobar all those years ago. A future example is Trystan Magnuson who was drafted with the pick gained by the loss of Ted Lilly who came via a trade for Bobby Kielty who came via a trade for Shannon Stewart who was drafted in 1992 thanks to an extra pick gained by the loss of Tom Candiotti who came here via trade for Boucher/Hill/Whiten all drafted (Boucher was an amateur free agent) in the early/mid 80's by Gillick.

Interesting that players in the Jays minors would not be there today without Gillick's influence eh? After all, break one link in that chain and the current player might not be here today.

TamRa - Tuesday, March 03 2009 @ 01:43 PM EST (#197002) #

Halladay, Wells, Rios, League and McGowan directly, and several others indirectly, may be put in the Ash column. Not that Gord would have hung on to all the right guys if he'd hung around longer!

League and McGowan - over the three years combined - have been much more marginal contributors than the big three though - especially League.

given our bullpen depth the last couple of years, League - and i love Brandon League - wouldn't have hurt the team's results if he had never been here.

I can't argue that the team was more successful with those five players in tow, but you also have to ask - how many contriburs to the success of Minnesota, for instance, came from the actions of previous GMs?

The good run that Terry Ryan often gets credit for got major contributions from the players brought in by his predecessor.

I don't think you can ever say anything about any franchise who's GM has been on the job less than 10 years if you insist on such distinctions.

TamRa - Tuesday, March 03 2009 @ 01:47 PM EST (#197003) #

also, while it's true a lot of our effecincy was due to the big three, lets say you take away both their contributions and their contracts...we may not have still been #3 but we might have been what, #10? Still better than a lot of the detractors would have said.

Also, if you don't have those players and you have the money they cost to spend, who's to say whom else you would have spent that money on and what contributions they would have made.

I just think such a seperation is artificial. What we do know is that it is perfectly possible to have inherited those three and STILL have built a very inefficent team and paid way too much for too few wins. And we didn't.

Bowden Leaves Nationals | 14 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.