Considering the factors on Nats' negotiations with starters

SAN DIEGO - Day One of the Winter Meetings is under way (what exactly was I doing standing around in the lobby most of the day yesterday, if this thing didn't start until today?), and all is pretty quiet at the Manchester Grand Hyatt. They just now announced that the Hall of Fame Golden Era Committee did not vote to induct any members to the Baseball Hall of Fame this year. So yes, I reiterate - it's a quiet day here so far. Both Dick Allen and Tony Oliva fell one vote short of the 12 votes needed from the Golden Era Committee for election. Jim Kaat was two votes short. There was an audible sigh in the media room when it was announced how close Allen and Oliva were to induction. A good bit of disappointment for those two. As I wrote yesterday, the Nationals are planning to take another shot at a long-term deal with Jordan Zimmermann, and should meet with his representatives out here in San Diego at some point this week. There also are a number of people within the industry who see the Nats as a player in the Max Scherzer sweepstakes, which I also wrote yesterday. When it comes to Zimmermann and Scherzer, however, if the Nats are to ink one of those two to a long-term deal, they'll almost certainly need to go to at least a six-year contract to get it done. Average annual value isn't the only factor in making a contract happen here; the length of the contract is also important. And when you look at all the top-line starters available in free agency or close to getting there - Zimmermann, Scherzer, Jon Lester - the market has set six- or seven-year deals as the norm. The Nationals have shied away from giving out big-money, long-term deals to starting pitchers in the past, and there are those who I've talked to who doubt if general manager Mike Rizzo will be willing to reverse course on that topic. Some organizations are OK with giving a starter a six- or seven-year commitment if it brings them one of the top arms in the game. The Yankees have done it. The Dodgers have done it. A handful of big-market teams have. Other teams are not as willing to guarantee that much money and that long of a deal to a starter, given the injuries that many pitchers end up dealing with. The Nationals have enough starting depth in their organization that they don't have to throw obscene amounts of money at Zimmermann if they don't want to. Blake Treinen looked good in his first taste of the big leagues this season. A.J. Cole is closing in on being major-league ready. Lucas Giolito still needs some seasoning, but has boatloads of talent and has dominated in the low levels of the minors. I'm obviously not comparing any of those three to Zimmermann in terms of experience or proven big league ability. But my point is that the Nats aren't starved for starting pitching talent within their organization to the point that they will feel forced to hand Zimmermann a blank check. The Nationals clearly want to keep Zimmermann around past the 2015 season. They value him, and feel he's one of the best right-handed starters out there in the game today, and they're going to sit down with his representatives to see if they can hammer out a deal that works for both sides. But if the Nats are to keep Zimmermann, they'll almost certainly have to go to at least six years, and possibly seven. And I'm not sure if that's something Rizzo wants to do.