<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Learning More About Edwin Jackson</title>
	<atom:link href="http://districtondeck.com/2012/02/04/learning-more-about-edwin-jackson/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://districtondeck.com/2012/02/04/learning-more-about-edwin-jackson/</link>
	<description>A Washington Nationals Fan Site - News, Blogs, Opinion and More</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 15 Jul 2012 19:15:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: alexhmason</title>
		<link>http://districtondeck.com/2012/02/04/learning-more-about-edwin-jackson/comment-page-1/#comment-1368599</link>
		<dc:creator>alexhmason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 01:35:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://districtondeck.com/?p=2894#comment-1368599</guid>
		<description>I have to assume that signing Jackson means that John Lannan will have to spend a good chunk of 2012 in AAA. He is the only one of the three candidates for the 5th rotation spot with any options remaining and Detwiler would certainly be claimed by someone if he had to pass through waivers. I don&#039;t really understand the merits of signing him to a one year deal, while I would agree that he is a slightly undervalued asset and is worth taking a shot on; I don&#039;t think he is the difference between making the playoffs or not (especially in the NL East). I would rather see the Nats take the view that competing in 2013 (and beyond) is more important than winning a few extra games in 2012. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to assume that signing Jackson means that John Lannan will have to spend a good chunk of 2012 in AAA. He is the only one of the three candidates for the 5th rotation spot with any options remaining and Detwiler would certainly be claimed by someone if he had to pass through waivers. I don&#8217;t really understand the merits of signing him to a one year deal, while I would agree that he is a slightly undervalued asset and is worth taking a shot on; I don&#8217;t think he is the difference between making the playoffs or not (especially in the NL East). I would rather see the Nats take the view that competing in 2013 (and beyond) is more important than winning a few extra games in 2012. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: alexhmason</title>
		<link>http://districtondeck.com/2012/02/04/learning-more-about-edwin-jackson/comment-page-1/#comment-857</link>
		<dc:creator>alexhmason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 00:35:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://districtondeck.com/?p=2894#comment-857</guid>
		<description>I have to assume that signing Jackson means that John Lannan will have to spend a good chunk of 2012 in AAA. He is the only one of the three candidates for the 5th rotation spot with any options remaining and Detwiler would certainly be claimed by someone if he had to pass through waivers. I don&#039;t really understand the merits of signing him to a one year deal, while I would agree that he is a slightly undervalued asset and is worth taking a shot on; I don&#039;t think he is the difference between making the playoffs or not (especially in the NL East). I would rather see the Nats take the view that competing in 2013 (and beyond) is more important than winning a few extra games in 2012.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to assume that signing Jackson means that John Lannan will have to spend a good chunk of 2012 in AAA. He is the only one of the three candidates for the 5th rotation spot with any options remaining and Detwiler would certainly be claimed by someone if he had to pass through waivers. I don&#8217;t really understand the merits of signing him to a one year deal, while I would agree that he is a slightly undervalued asset and is worth taking a shot on; I don&#8217;t think he is the difference between making the playoffs or not (especially in the NL East). I would rather see the Nats take the view that competing in 2013 (and beyond) is more important than winning a few extra games in 2012.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DoD Content Recap: January 29 - February 4 - District on Deck - A Washington Nationals Fan Site - News, Blogs, Opinion and More</title>
		<link>http://districtondeck.com/2012/02/04/learning-more-about-edwin-jackson/comment-page-1/#comment-855</link>
		<dc:creator>DoD Content Recap: January 29 - February 4 - District on Deck - A Washington Nationals Fan Site - News, Blogs, Opinion and More</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 16:21:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://districtondeck.com/?p=2894#comment-855</guid>
		<description>[...] Learning More About Edwin Jackson (Michael) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Learning More About Edwin Jackson (Michael) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Database Caching 6/13 queries in 0.038 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 309/313 objects using apc
Content Delivery Network via cdn.fansided.com

 Served from: districtondeck.com @ 2013-05-25 06:02:45 by W3 Total Cache -->