Well, actually, Harper, Boswell and I have encouraged the comparis...
Kasten, I wish you could just shut your big yapper!
(thanks SNL transcripts!)
Dempster outpitched Atilano, Bruney tried really hard to lose it, but the Nats still won another close game. That's 8 of 12 wins decided by 2 runs or less. Reminds me of simpler times when velour tracksuits hung in the GM office and the manager drifted off to sleep sometime before the end of the national anthem.
Given the Nats are more a 8-14 team than a 12-10 team pretty soon we're going to get into that territory where the "Why can't the gritty Nats bear down their red-asses and keep grittily winning in a never-say-die, gritty, old-school, dirty, hard-nosed kind of way........Gritty!" fans start to clash with the "Well, 95 times out of 100 this type of team will begin to play at a level commensurate with their ability" kids. This was what June-August 2005 was all about.
Ah, those were good times. I like being right.
This team isn't the 2005 Nats because they have good players coming (Strasburg and Storen) rather than the Junior Spiveys and Preston Wilsons of old, so the longer they keep this up the less precipitous will likely be the fall back. But still the main difference between that team and this one is that this team could be legitimately good in 2-3 years, while that one was a one year wonder with no future. That's what makes 2010 so exciting, not a run at the playoffs. (and trust me that talk will come if they keep winning)