Can The Washington Nationals be Historically Bad?

The Washington Nationals have been forecast to be bad. Really bad. But historically bad?

With the start of baseball season just 10 days away, talk has turned to the Washington Nationals, a team that some have predicted will be "historically bad" in 2007. Estimated losses from these "experts" have the Nationals pegged for 110, 120 or even 130 losses this year. The modern day record for losses in a season belongs to the 2003 Detroit Tigers, who finished 43-119.

On a side note: what exactly is the definition of "modern day"? I'm a young guy but even I know that 1962 isn't that long ago, and the expansion Mets lost 120 games that season, one more than the Tigers. Was that ancient history? Did they play baseball with rocks back then?

(Excuse me while I get down off of my soapbox.)

First-year Washington manager Manny Acta has read the articles. In fact, he was holding a copy of one at his desk at Space Coast Stadium on Wednesday. "It really doesn't bother me, that's why I moved over here -- freedom of speech," Acta said. "Everybody has a right to their opinion and we have to respect them.

See, C-SPAN, you can put Manny Acta on your network. He knows his constitutional rights.

Yeah, the Nationals are going to be bad. But 130 losses bad? I have a hard time swallowing that one. There are too many mediocre teams in the National League for the Nats to keep close with and win on the strength of Ryan Zimmerman and Chad Cordero. It sounds like these "experts" want to put things in historical perspective before history actually happens.

(Although Dmitri Young was with those '03 Tigers. Just sayin'.)

Previously on The Fanhouse:
Nationals Overflow on C-SPAN2
Dmitri Young looks to Stick with Nationals