Tales of a first-time Hall voter

The envelope arrived in the mail in early December. I immediately knew what was inside. The return address (Baseball Writers' Association of America) gave it away.

I was more than a little surprised and underwhelmed, though, when I tore the thing open and for the first time in my life held a Hall of Fame ballot in my hands. Wait, this is it? A photocopied, 8½ x 11-inch sheet of paper with 33 names and boxes next to each one to be checked? If you saw it from a distance, you might have mistaken it for a fourth grade math quiz.

The form itself may have been underwhelming; the task of filling it out was anything but. As I scanned through the names of the retired players eligible for election to Cooperstown, two thoughts came to mind:

1) This is the coolest thing ever.

2) This is the most terrifying thing ever.

Since joining the BBWAA a decade ago, I'd anticipated this moment — you must be a member for 10 consecutive years before becoming a Hall of Fame voter — but I didn't fully appreciate just how daunting the responsibility is until it was finally thrust upon me. Seriously, who am I to judge how these ballplayers will be remembered for all eternity?

And that's how I'd feel if I was judging them strictly on their performance between the lines. That, of course, isn't the case. Voters are instructed to consider six criteria when evaluating a player's candidacy: his playing record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character and contributions to the team(s) on which he

LaRoche signs 2-year deal

Updated at 10:38 p.m.

The Nationals' longstanding vacancy at first base has been filled at last. Free agent Adam LaRoche agreed to a two-year, $16 million contract this evening, club sources confirmed.

The deal won't become official until LaRoche passes a physical, which is due to take place Thursday in Washington. Contract terms stipulate that LaRoche will make $7 million in 2011 and $8 million in 2012, with a $10 million mutual option for 2013 that the Nationals can buy out for $1 million.

The 31-year-old has been on the Nationals' radar for nearly a month, ever since the club found itself in need of a new first baseman after Adam Dunn signed a four-year, $56 million contract with the White Sox. General manager Mike Rizzo also pursued fellow free agents Carlos Pena and Derrek Lee, but each veteran signed elsewhere (Pena with the Cubs, Lee with the Orioles).

That left LaRoche as the lone remaining free agent first baseman of significance, and the Nationals as the lone remaining team still in the market for such a player.

LaRoche is a career .271 hitter over seven big-league seasons with the Braves, Pirates, Red Sox and Diamondbacks. He has hit exactly 25 home runs each of the last three years and set a career high with 100 RBI last season with Arizona (though his .261 batting average, .320

Looking at lineups

Photo by Mark Zuckerman / NATS INSIDER

Danny Espinosa would benefit from not hitting eighth on a regular basis.

We've got a pretty clear picture now who will comprise the Nationals' 2011 starting lineup. Jayson Werth is in right field, with Nyjer Morgan in center and some combination of Roger Bernadina, Michael Morse and Rick Ankiel in left. Ryan Zimmerman is at third base, with Ian Desmond at shortstop and Danny Espinosa at second. Ivan Rodriguez will share catching duties with either Wilson Ramos or Jesus Flores.

The only position still unfilled, of course, is first base. But I fully expect the Nats and Adam LaRoche to come to terms on a two-year contract in the very near future, perhaps before the end of the day. Simply put, the two sides need each other right now, and there's no sense dragging this out much longer.

So we pretty much know who will be in the Nationals' Opening Day lineup. What we don't know is where they will be in the Nationals' Opening Day lineup.

Who hits leadoff? Who bats cleanup? Does Jim Riggleman try to break up his left-handed and right-handed hitters, or does he just go with the best lineup 1 through 8, regardless of what side of the plate each

News and notes

Hope everyone had a happy and safe New Year's. Let's start 2011 off with some quick-hit news and notes for your perusal...

-- Even though he was traded to the Brewers two weeks ago, Zack Greinke's name keeps popping up in relation to the Nationals. SI.com's Jon Heyman wrote on Twitter last night that the Nats offered Greinke a "big extension" to try to convince the right-hander to agree to a trade to D.C. Greinke, who as we now know exercised his no-trade clause to block a deal to the Nationals, wasn't interested in the contract offer. After seven seasons languishing in Kansas City, Greinke wanted to play for a team that had a chance to win now. He didn't see that in Washington, so that's why he's now in Milwaukee.

There's really no reason to agonize over this any more. The Nationals did everything they could to try to acquire Greinke, and the fact they offered him an extension is no surprise. He's only signed through 2012, so they would have been incredibly foolish to trade away half their roster for this guy and then not lock him up long-term. And it's not all that surprising Greinke turned the Nats down. Look, as much as the organization has improved over the last 18 months, it's still perceived around baseball as an afterthought. Even those who believe the Nationals are on the right track admit they're not ready to win in 2011. Should we be all that surprised Greinke nixed the trade so he could instead go to Milwaukee, where the Brewers are geared up to make a legitimate run at the NL Central title this year?

The Nats can fork over $126 million to Jayson Werth. They can pay record signing bonuses to Stephen Strasburg and Bryce Harper. Until they actually do something positive on the field against major-league

Catching up with the ex-Times

New Year's is a time of celebration, of new beginnings, new endeavors and renewed hope.

One year ago, though, it marked the end of an era. On January 1, 2010, The Washington Times published its final sports section, a development that left myself and about two dozen colleagues unemployed, and left D.C. sports fans with one less outlet from which to get their news.

Twelve months later, we've all moved on. Several former Times staffers have gotten jobs at other newspapers. Several have been hired by websites. Some have used the layoff as an opportunity to shift into new professions. A few, unfortunately, are still seeking full-time employment.

Overall, though, I think it's impressive that so many ex-Times folks have gone on to bigger and better things, especially in the current economic (and journalistic) climate. If nothing else, it confirms to me just how talented our staff was, and how short-sighted the Times was in eliminating the entire department. (The paper, by the way, recently announced intentions to re-install a sports section, perhaps finally seeing the error of its ways.)

On this, the one-year anniversary of our final sports section at The Washington Times, I wanted to provide an update of the staff's current whereabouts. We may no longer work together as a team, but