COVERITLIVE.COM

11:19

What's up everyone, welcome to day three of the draft.

11:20

Let's start this one off with a question that's being discussed in one of this morning's threads ... would the Nats have been better off taking all the money they're going to give to Strasburg, and instead taking Scheppers and Matzek at 1 and 10?

11:21

Me, I think Strasburg is so far ahead of everyone else in the class that you can't pass him up. As good as Scheppers and Matzek are, their returns would nat be immediate. Plus the buzz Strasburg wil bring the organization can not be discounted.

11:22

[Comment From Pablo Zevallos]
No. There was no guarantee that Matzek would be there at 10, and Scheppers likely dropped because his medicals were eh.

11:22

[Comment From pat]
Hell nah, a superstud in the hand is worth two in the bush. They should have spent the extra 100 or 200 grand last year and signed Crow.

11:23

[Comment From ColoYank]
Agreed. It seems like picking Strasburg is as no-brainer-ish as it gets.

11:23

[Comment From Ray]
At this point the Nats need as much Pub. as they can get. No one watches their games

11:23

[Comment From Stryker]
that's a great question.strasburg is so much better than everyone else they could have had/do have that i think the Nats as an organization would get absolutely GRILLED had they not taken him. they need to start building themselves a better reputation and taking him will garner a ton of buzz.

11:23

[Comment From A.D.]
Strasburg is too good, an they may be able to force that price down

11:23

[Comment From JohnnyC]
In terms of bang for their buck, yes. But, PR-wise, the hit they'd take from the media and fans would be lethal. Strasburg will goose their attendance in the short-term and, big if, if he's close to the hype, could be a long-term attraction. Hey, it's about dollars.

Page 1 Next >