[August 3rd] -- First, the good news. I got an 87% on my biology class and I'm done for the summer. Yay! I now have two weeks of rest and relaxation before doing it all over again this fall.

Okay, on to the "Soriano" situation.

It would seem that the great majority of Nationals' fans are quite angry at Jim Bowden, saying he "painted himself into a corner" or "expected more than he could get" or "he's backtracking in order to save face" or a thousand other variations and permutations therein. A few others are very happy that Soriano stayed; in fact some even demanded it. But the consensus, I think, especially when you read the blogs and websites, is that Bowden allowed his ego to get in the way of getting this deal done.

I don't know -- Maybe. That could be a part of it, that's true. But that's not the reason that this all went down the way it did. It happened this way because it had to.

Jim Bowden has said since the day he traded for Soriano that he wouldn't move him unless he got in return what he believed to be fair value. So, when the trading frenzy began, Bowden asked for what he said he always would: two or three of that team's top prospects. Now, it became apparent very soon that players like Howie Kendrick weren't coming to Washington in any straight-up trade for Soriano. He is a rent-a-player, after all. But I don't think Bowden ever intended to go after the Kendricks of the world; I think he was after the players just beneath the studs. If Bowden, for example, was going to trade Soriano to the Nationals, he probably would have expected in return Billy Bray, Kory Casto and one of Potomac troika, Everts, Hinkley or Balestar. Those type of prospects in return for a star, albeit a two month star, would have made both teams happy were the Nats in contention. The problem was, he couldn't even get that level of player(s). Now, I've heard reports of trades that Bowden didn't make (I'm not even sure if they are true) that involved names I liked, but I have to assume that in this situation, that Bowden and Davey Johnson and Jose Rijo and Bob Boone know more about baseball than I do. If they all agreed not to "pull the trigger," then I assume they knew what they were doing.

So, Bowden kept Soriano and everyone is mad. Okay, "riddle me this?" What if, fearful that the Nationals' nation would have risen up and overthrown him, he made one of these unpalatable trades, say for three prospects, that he really didn't want. That would have placated the masses to the point that there would have been no need for cauldrons of boiling oil on the the roof at RFK. But would it have helped the team? I'm guessing that Stan Kasten reminded Bowden of a trade that his GM at Atlanta, John Sheurholtz, made at the trade deadline in 1994. The Padres, ridding themselves of star players with short-term contracts, traded Fred McGriff to the Braves for Donnie Elliot, Vince Moore and Mel Nieves. The Padres' GM got the trade done, got three prospects from a very bountiful Braves farm system, and the Padres' fans said at the time, "Well, they look like solid prospects -- if they all pan out, this will have been a good trade." Of course, none of them panned out. Nieves had a couple of borderline years at the major league level, but all three are today considered busts.

If Jim Bowden believed that the best he could get for Soriano was the 2006 version of Nieves, Elliot and Moore, then why make the deal? Soriano said that he'll give the Nats "first priority" to re-sign him if stays in Washington, and that he'd never sign here in D.C. if he was traded. Sure, it's going to be tough to re-sign him, but I believe that Soriano is an honest man, and that he will give Washington the "right-of-first-refusal," perhaps even with a bit of a home-town discount. If he doesn't re-sign, if he does sign with the Yankees or Angels or who ever, the team will then reap the benefit of a scenario where they have three first round draft picks in 2007. Let's see, two first round picks in '06 and three in '07. Why, I believe that makes a total of five first round picks over a two year period! Isn't that the right way to stock the farm system?

So who do you think would give the Nationals a stronger future in the coming years, three mid-level prospects or two first round draft picks, or perhaps even Alfonso Soriano himself? I would have loved the Nationals to have gotten a handful of "can't miss" prospects for Alfie, but it just couldn't be done; the market wasn't there. Now, we have Soriano in the outfield for the remainder of the year, which will keep the attendance high and the "natives" happy. Keeping him also sends a message to the community: "We're going to try to keep our best players."

The most important message Bowden is sending us is this: "We have a vision of where we're going from here, and making deals for the making deals isn't part of it. We don't need minor league fodder, we need major league talent. We still have Soriano, and he's as "major league" as it gets."

I'm going to give the Nationals the opportunity to do what they think best without a lot of griping. Jim Bowden bought a lot of my "good will" with that Kearns / Lopez trade. Personally, I'm happy Soriano is still here, and that the modern day version of Mel Nieves, Donnie Elliot and Vince Moore are not. I could be wrong though, we'll just have to wait and see.

But I am willing to wait.