Do The Washington Nationals Deserve To Lose For Sitting Stephen Strasburg? [POLL]
The Washington Nationals came into the Major League Baseball postseason with the best record in the league, posting an impressive 98 wins in the regular season. They sported the league's highest run differential, the best team ERA in the Majors, and a better opponent batting average than anyone in the game.
However, they find themselves down 2-1 in their best of five National League Division Series matchup with the St. Louis Cardinals, having given up 20 runs in their last two games, only putting up four in the defeats.
The most obvious reason for the drop off in pitching: the loss of Stephen Strasburg to his now infamous innings limit, in which the team decided to shut him down despite him not being injured to avoid straining his arm at such an early stage in his career.
This begs the question: do the Nationals deserve to lose for willingly shutting down one of the aces of their staff despite there not being one thing wrong with him at the time? In my opinion, the answer is invariably yes.
Given how much the Nationals have struggled since moving to Washington (this is their first playoff appearance since moving from Montreal), you would think that they would have done everything they could to ensure their contention for a championship right away. By not doing so, they intentionally put a worse product than they could have on the field with Strasburg for their fans, who don't exactly get into Nationals Park for free.
In fact, any time a franchise deliberately puts a worse product on the field while their fans continue throwing money at the team should be banned from postseason play for a century. That's just a slimy, reprehensible thing to do. I would expect this from Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder, but not the Nationals.
What do you think: do the Nats deserve to lose for pulling the plug on Strasburg? Take our poll and explain your logic in the comments section below.