Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: RSL Soapbox for Real Salt Lake Fans!

friday odds and ends

in no paricular order:

here's some info from bernie miklasz, posted last night (thanks play a hard 9 for the link): "If Ponson has a good spring, then he's in the rotation and young Reyes is in the pen (if he pitches OK)."

nothing really new there, except seeing it in black and white kinda irks me. (it irks diaspora, too.) does any other organization mollycoddle its young pitchers the way this one does? it's particularly aggravating for those of us who remember the way whitey herzog used to challenge young pitchers. i ran a chart last year comparing herzog's use of young hurlers to tlr/dunc's:

ROTATION STARTERS BY AGE
21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40
Herzog 81-90 20 14 13 3
La Russa 96-05 9 25 12 4

each starter-season counts separately in this table -- for example, dave lapoint accounts for 3 of the 20 seasons in herzog's 21-25 cell, because whitey sent him out there at ages 22, 23, and 24. likewise, matt morris accounts for 5 of the 25 seasons in la russa's 26-30 cell.

you might think that herzog simply had better prospects to work with than tlr, but it's the other way around. in the 1980s the farm system only hatched one mound prospect in the class of morris, ankiel, haren, and reyes -- joe magrane, who came up in 1987 at age 22 after two years and 280 innings in the minors (about what reyes has logged to date). whitey put him straight into the rotation; magrane made 26 starts and led the pennant-winning cardinals in era that year, then started games 1 and 7 of the world series. the very next year he led the national league in era.

magrane aside, herzog had pretty lackluster material at his disposal. as i wrote last year: "not a single one of the guys he broke in -- lapoint, stuper, greg mathews, cox, kepshire -- was worth a damn when he left the cardinals. . . . i think herzog made a difference, by giving those kid pitchers the guts to throw their unimposing stuff over the plate. he knew the ballpark and the defense would take care of the rest, as long as his pitchers would throw strikes. he made them seem better than they really were; whitey spoiled us that way."

i still have to think reyes will eventually find his way into the rotation, subbing in for an injured or traded veteran. and given his history of injuries, maybe that's the prudent course -- keep the kid's innings down so he'll still having functioning parts down the stretch and (knock on wood) in the playoffs. but then, you get the feeling that tony/dunc wouldn't entrust a postseason start to this guy unless he's 15-0 or something in the regular season. . . . .

also from bernie: "They have, for at least the time being, backed off F. Rodriguez. They've been talking to Jeff Nelson (don't know the latest)." i believe that to be payroll driven; just a guess. if they think they might have an opportunity down the road to trade for some high-impact player, then it would make sense to stow f-rod's $2m (or whatever) salary away for now. whatever the case, f-rod isn't worth getting all worked up about one way or the other; would been a cheap spare part with a limited role, lotta other guys who could do about the same.

over at bronx banter, alex belth muses today about the virtues of throwing soft stuff vs hard stuff -- a lively subject of discussion on this blog and elsewhere in cardinalland. "Vulnerability is often the greatest sign of strength, the most powerful tool," he writes, and he makes a good case. the unstated key to his argument, though, is that soft stuff gets its strength by playing off of hard stuff -- it works because hitters are all geeked up for high heat. and the flaw with the cardinals' current rotation (my opinion only) is that there's not enough hard stuff for the soft stuff to play off of -- too much emphasis on the sinker, not enough on high heat. one more hard thrower in the rotation (cough anthony cough reyes cough aj cough burnett) would go a long way toward balancing out the scales. "One of the most compelling aspects of baseball is the balance it requires of its participants," belth notes -- bingo.

the concept of balance also surfaces over at cardnilly. while identifying himself as more of a stathead than a seamhead, scott says: "I don't buy into the One True Path vibe that's sometimes an undercurrent running through their [ie, statheads'] writings." in other words: use sabrmetrics, trust sabrmetrics, but balance it out with other forms of input. cardnilly just observed its one-year anniversary (congratulations scott); if you're a regular reader (as you should be), you'll get a kick out of learning where the blog's name came from, how the waste-of-flesh concept was born, what intro music scott would have on the p.a. for his at-bats.

finally, the cardinals won the 2004 Fake World Series in six games at 26th Man -- matt morris finally got the better of curt schilling in a postseason game, outdueling him in the clincher at fenway. woulda coulda shoulda . . . . . .

0 recs  |  Comment 56 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Yeah...
TLR could definately use a little infusion of White Rat. Do you think his hesitation to trust the youngsters is based on some kinda "system" or just more inscrutable TLR weirdness?

by rockin redbird on Jan 13, 2006 12:33 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Herzog
My question is - did pitchers "after Herzog" do worse because they didn't have Whitey, or because their careers were done from being used too much too young?  (Honest question, I don't know the answer and haven't looked into it.)

On Reyes and his use - I personally like the idea of putting a pitcher in the bullpen for his first year to both season him to the big leagues and keep his workload low.  I think it's the best of both worlds, personally.  He can always - as you said - get spot starts anyway.  I don't have a wealth of information at my disposal to prove my point, but I will say this:  Bob Gibson spent his first 2 seasons (age 23 adn 24) as a reliever/starter, never exceeding 87 innings in an MLB season.  He was 25 before he was logging 30+ starts and 200+ innings.

by Robb on Jan 13, 2006 12:47 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

but
there are ways to do the same thing as working in the pen its called a pitch count say either 90 to 100 pitches or 6 inning which ever comes first yank him we do have a good pen.I think the whole baby his arm just hurts over the long run pitching in the show requires arm strenght and stamina the only way to get that is throw.He's a starter not a reliever you need to train the arm ond other muscles to hold up to get stronger not weaker late in games.but i'm not TRL or Whitey so...love this thread

by sportsmanspark78 on Jan 13, 2006 12:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Sure
Pitch counts are one way, sure.  But what about my Bob Gibson example?  He pitched 150 total innings over his age 23 and 24 seasons before pitching to the age of 39, logging almost 4000 innings.  

In the case of a guy like Reyes with an injury history, what's to lose from letting him pitch 70 or 80 innings over 40 or 50 games, with 5 or 6 starts thrown in?  I would think that that would do more for his long-term health, not less.

(Not that I know.  It's just a theory.)

by Robb on Jan 13, 2006 1:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

old pitch counts
Players like Gibby could pitch that much in the old days because they threw more at a much younger age.  from stick ball on they were throwing the ball.  now days, most high school programs have the kids resting some -- and worse for the young pitchers, kids aren't playing pick up games where the best pitchers are building arm strength.  comparing players of Gibson's era to players now doesn't work and can be misleading.

by Westy on Jan 13, 2006 3:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

6 innings
Even 5 innings 30 starts is still 150 innings.

I wouldn't put it past TLR to go through some crazy platoon rotation scheme where Reyes & Ponson split every 5th start and get bullpen work in between.

I'd actually be comfortable with Reyes pitching in the bullpen to start the season and moving into the rotation by the All-Star break or when/if a trade is made.  I would think he would be as well.  He's still only pitched, what, maybe 25 innings in the bigs?

by STLEdge on Jan 13, 2006 1:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Dyar
From a VEB exchange with Dyar Miller last year:

VEB:  danny haren pitched very well for the cardinals in relief during the postseason last year. can you envision a similar role for anthony reyes?

DM:  i wouldn't think so. he's a starter, and i don't think they would want to make any moves with that.

It makes me hate the idea that the 5th starting job is Ponson's to lose a little bit more.

by mikeoat on Jan 13, 2006 1:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

funny you bring that up
the time to use reyes in the bullpen was last year, not this. they could have pitched him out of the pen the last six weeks of the year (as many of us hoped they would) and kept him on the playoff roster as a 95 mph secret weapon.

and then he'd have 25 innings or so of big-league experience, which might quell some of the doubts about his readiness

by lboros on Jan 13, 2006 2:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Reyes
Anthony Reyes should have been on the playoff roster and available for long relief, hands down.  Why they kept him off and added King (or Morris) was mind boggling.

by Robb on Jan 13, 2006 3:23 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Pirates
i heard that they were trying a scheme in their minor leauge system where, in order to prevent injuries, they had their prospect starters team up in pairs, and alternate between throwing 5 and 3 innings every fifth start.  I guess we'll see in two or three years whether it's a good approach.

But I wouldn't mind seeing Reyes/Ponson doing something similar, at least to start the season.

by Valatan on Jan 13, 2006 2:02 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

maybe
but he trusted ankiel and looked how that turned out.They never really have had a good record with young pitchers one off the top of my head :Todd Van Poppel what ever happend to him.I think thought at this point u have to give Reyes a shot this year we need a power pitcher other than Carp.I just don't get it they rant say they need a power type and then run from the table on one AJ i know the money was sick but hell we have a winning team and a good defense and offense.I'm just ready to win it all.And after i see the fake 04 Series replayed it makes me sick that they can't drop some coin or give the kid a shot.what do we have to loose?

by sportsmanspark78 on Jan 13, 2006 12:48 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

One word...
"commas"

by flynn on Jan 13, 2006 1:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

blow me
two words

by sportsmanspark78 on Jan 13, 2006 3:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

A worthy
retort to my smart-assedness.  Cheers.  

by flynn on Jan 13, 2006 4:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

this isn't
the stltoday forum. A litle decorum, please...

by cardsrul on Jan 13, 2006 4:52 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree.
That's why I was hoping to defuse the situation/apologize for what I thought would be a lighthearted jab that was apparently not taken so well.

by flynn on Jan 13, 2006 5:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

this is not junior high school
so please knock off the posturing and name-calling. nobody comes here to read that crap

by lboros on Jan 13, 2006 7:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Not sure what names were being called
but that crap was knocked off, peacefully, at 4:08 PM CDT according to the time stamp.        

by flynn on Jan 13, 2006 9:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I guess
the Ankiel debacle kinda answers my question. That precedent probably has a lot to do with TLR's reluctance. Once bitten twice shy...

by rockin redbird on Jan 13, 2006 1:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Why
is this an issue?

Is it just some sort of need to see a young guy on the mound?  To see him "challenged"?  I'm not knocking those who take that view, I just don't get it.  

Perhaps a counter-study of older guys who rejuvenated their careers under LaRussa might illuminate the "flip-side" of this issue.  Of course, I'm way too lazy to do anything like that....

by flynn on Jan 13, 2006 1:54 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

It's an issue to me
because from what I've seen Reyes is a better pitcher right now than four of our projected five starters.

by salvomania on Jan 13, 2006 2:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Based on...
Minor league stats vs. major league stats?  One start in Milwaukee?  Mop-up work in September?

I'll go with "higher ceiling" or "better potential" but "better pitcher" implies, at least to me, that he's accomplished something already.  Semantics, maybe.

Believe me, I would love Reyes to go Dontrelle on the NL this year but simply handing him a spot seems like a move the team doesn't NEED to make.  And, to be fair, I don't want to see Ponson simply handed a spot either because he's older.  If that is the underlying argument here, then I confess to have not been able to find it until now.    

by flynn on Jan 13, 2006 2:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

it's also an issue because
reyes makes $330,000 this year. best use of the payroll is to get 30 starts for the $330K, instead of paying another guy $4.5m to make those starts --- and possibly pitch less effectively.

give reyes the ball, and allocate the $4.5m to some other area of weakness.

by lboros on Jan 13, 2006 2:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Based on...
Well, yeah, based on the Milwaukee start (6.1 ip, 3 baserunners, 5 k). Yeah, based on the mop-up work (6 ip, 7 baserunners, 7 k). Five other pitchers (including two "veterans"), given similar opportunities last year with the Cardinals, weren't able to succeed. Just luck that Reyes did, or something more?

And yeah, based on his minor league stats: 9.5 K per 9ip in AAA translates to something in MLB a lot better than we're getting from "Muldy and the Soft-Tossers" in front of him. A WHIP of 1.08 in AAA is good.

Yes, he's inexperienced. So was every great pitcher in major league history before they were given a chance. The kid throws 95 mph, has a curve and a change-up, and also has a bad-ass mound demeanor.

The Birds need a hard thrower in the rotation, and the kid has the arm, the control, and the repetoire.

by salvomania on Jan 13, 2006 5:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree with you 100%.
Although that was a watered-down Brewer lineup.  I just can't bring myself to call him a "better pitcher" than guys who have established themselves at the major league level.  Granted, they've established themselves as #3-4 starters, but right now, that's more than what Reyes has done.

That does not mean I'm against giving him every chance in the world.  Just that "better pitcher" is a label I'm uncomfortable with right now.  (And I realize this is a ridiculous speil about semantics.  I totally realize that!)   Fair enough?

by flynn on Jan 13, 2006 5:45 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

is he ready?
So do you think reyes is ready?

by sportsmanspark78 on Jan 13, 2006 3:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Reyes has thrown
what, a grand total of 8 or 9 innings in the bigs? Forgive me, but I don't see how that qualifies him as a bonafide starter on the big club. Should he get a chance? Sure, but the spot shouldn't automatically be his. Yes, TLR has mollycoddled his young pitchers, but it's been his m.o. since coming to the Cards. I'm sure the Ankiel thing has a lot to do with it, too.

by cardsrul on Jan 13, 2006 2:26 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

dontrelle willis
zach duke, mark prior, noah lowry . . . . . that's four guys right off the top o me head, all within the last 2-3 years, who got thrown into big-league rotations with 0 big-league experience and were successful immediately. there are surely many more examples

a bullpen apprenticeship prob'y doesn't hurt, but it is far from necessary

by lboros on Jan 13, 2006 2:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

On mollycoddling
First, Ankiel is in TLR's mind.  

Second - Mark Prior?  Good point.  'Cause when it comes to messing up pitchers, the first things that pop into my mind when it comes to coaches and young pitchers (I live in Chicagoland) are Mark Prior and Kerry Wood.

There's a distinct feeling around here that Wood may be permanently hurt by the way coaches have handled him.  Many also wonder if Prior isn't starting to show similar problems.  

Young pitchers are a crapshoot, and they're a crapshoot you have to tiptoe around.   We pretty much have to have an extra starting pitcher this year, IMO, if we expect to start Reyes in the rotation.

by sdrone on Jan 13, 2006 2:37 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Young pitchers are a crapshoot...
...but practically every hard-throwing pitcher with control who's amounted to anything in the big leagues has been up and at 'em by age 22 or 23.

A hard thrower with control of three pitches at age 22 or 23 is READY for the big leagues. That doesn't mean you leave him out there for 130 pitches (like Dusty has with Wood/Prior) or leave him out there in the 9th inning when he's ahead 7-0 (like Dusty has with Wood/Prior), but it DOES mean that you put him in there as your fifth starter. If he struggles, then send him down. The upside is HUGE---you've got a power pitcher in October.

Reyes turns 25 in October next year---he's no baby. Put him in.

by salvomania on Jan 13, 2006 5:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Does (read: should) this not sound more like...
"If Ponson has a good spring, then he's in the rotation and young Reyes is in the pen (if he pitches OK) [until we trade Marquis or Suppan to plug our other holes]."

Why have six starters?  Jocketty has said in the past they felt they may have had too much depth in the rotation--5 starters--unneeded depth in terms of the playoffs.  Ponson really sounds more like a ploy for a trade now if he can actually pitch at the ML level.

A diamond is just a lump of coal that performed well under pressure

by joker24 on Jan 13, 2006 3:00 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Yep.
and if Reyes is up with the big club, woking with Duncan, seeing ML Ab's up close, but working in the bullpen and minimizing his arm strain, UNTIL a trade for some big bopper in the OF, all of the sudden, he is up in the rotation for the 2nd half, and teams have minimal amouts of time to scout him before the playoffs.

by Valatan on Jan 13, 2006 3:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Nice.
I like the way you're thinking on this...

by flynn on Jan 13, 2006 3:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

ok...another rumor
Aubrey Huff to stros..mlbtraderumors.com  I hope not i think hes solid...i havent really checked his numbers last year..this means someone else on the stros might be moved...taveras(would they give up on him that early)they got a fe OF/1b already..we'll see

by punchinjudy on Jan 13, 2006 3:19 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

tampa
wants the world for any of there talent.I'm al for huff before the Jenc deal unless they'll take juan in return for huff.He's the guy who should hit behind eck.

by sportsmanspark78 on Jan 13, 2006 3:45 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

or bigbie
gitting behind eck.That is my choice for the two hole.

by sportsmanspark78 on Jan 13, 2006 3:46 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

He hits the other way
so it kinda eliminates a lot of a lefty's advantage in the two-spot.

by Zubin on Jan 14, 2006 2:10 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i
edited my post earlier on my blog about liking the idea of reyes working out of the pen. i'll explain a tad here-

i may be in the minority, but i think the cards know what they are doing in this instance, though i may overly optimistic.

i just feel confident they will find a spot for him sometime in the season, but i understand why they are being cautious.

they guy has had issues with his elbow and shoulder thoughout his pitching career.

sure he's got a ton of talent, but i'd rather them work him in a little more slowly given those issues.

Ponson is the lesser talent, but he's been a workhorse his entire career.

by erik on Jan 13, 2006 9:32 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

OT: Russel Branyan
BtB wonders why no team picked him up.
matty fred is a web log.

by matty fred on Jan 13, 2006 9:34 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Regarding TLR vs Herzog's use of youth...
During Herzog's reign our payroll was around 12-14 million and fairly on par with the rest of the league.  Free agency wasn't exactly new, but really hadn't gotten rolling.  Veteran pitchers just didn't switch teams like they do now.  I'm not sure Herzog's use of youth was any sort of preference, or just driven by the times and availability.  These days, with a payroll of $92 million (tops in the NL Central and near the top of the NL in general), combined with the results of Curt Flood and Messersmith's actions...we can go out and get a lot of the guys we want.  

by RedbirdRay on Jan 14, 2006 12:23 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

LaRussa and young pitchers...
I know I've posted this before, but I think it bears repeating, LaRussa has a GREAT record with rookie pitchers as a Cardinal.  Saying that Whitey had a better record with rookies is just not true:  LaRussa's rookie pitchers:

Rick Ankiel:  3.50 ERA, 11-7, 175.0 IP, 90 BB, 194 K

Matt Morris:  3.19 ERA, 12-9, 217.0 IP, 69 BB, 149 K

Alan Benes:  2.89 ERA, 9-9, 161.7 IP, 68 BB, 160 K

Bud Smith:  3.83 ERA, 6-3, 84.7 IP, 24 BB,  59 K

 Danny Haren:  5.08 ERA (one horrible start) 3-7, 72.7 IP, 22 BB, 43 K

You also have B. Thompson, and Jason Simontachi who weren't to shabby either.  If you say "Yeah, but look what LaRussa did to them after their rookie years!" then you can't say he's "coddling them."  

I think the Cardinals know what they are doing with Reyes.  It would be one thing if this guy came blazing through the organization without injuries, but I think he's been hurt every year since he's been in college.  Notice Bernie said "if Reyes did OK, he'd be in the bullpen" and not "even if Reyes pitches lights out, he'll be in the bullpen."

"It takes pitching, hitting and defense. Any two can win. All three make you unbeatable". Joe Garagiola

by MRCARD on Jan 14, 2006 12:43 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

LaRussa & Young Pitchers
I think the point was, more so that Whitey was very good with young pitcher or exhibited much more confidence in his young guys.

by Zubin on Jan 14, 2006 2:12 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

herzog's record w rookie starters
was better than tony's

1982:
dave lapoint, 9-3, 3.42 era
john stuper, 9-7, 3.36 era

1983:
danny cox, 3-6, 3.25 era

1984:
kurt kepshire, 6-5, 3.30 era
rickey horton, 9-4, 3.44 era

1986:
greg mathews, 11-8, 3.65 era

1987:
joe magrane, 9-7, 3.54 era

1989:
ken hill, 7-15, 3.80 era

also, you're misstating alan benes' rookie record: he came up in 1996 and was 13-10 with a 4.90 era. but you know what, at least tony stayed with the kid through 32 starts and let him pitch through his mistakes. i don't think tony/dunc would do that anymore.

the other point here is that alan benes was ranked the #5 prospect in all of baseball as a rookie. rick ankiel was ranked #1. morris was #25. reyes will prob'y be about #30 or so. they pitch well because they're outstanding prospects. herzog's guys were not nearly as highly regarded, but they pitched well for him because he demanded that they pitch aggressively.

by lboros on Jan 14, 2006 7:29 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

one other thought
when herzog developed a pitcher, he tended to stay in the rotation. danny cox gave the cardinals nearly 150 starts over his career (5 to 6 seasons' worth); joe magrane, ~135 (4+ season). dave lapoint, greg mathews, and ken hill all made about 80 starts for the cards (3 seasons' worth).

la russa / dunc have only developed one starting pitcher who gave the cardinals as many as three seasons' worth of starts --- matt morris, who started 206 games. their second-highest total was alan benes, at 55 starts. rick ankiel made only 41 starts for the cards, only 6 after his rookie year. bud smith started 24 times for the cards. dan haren started 19.

they're not developing arms for the organization. which is why we as fans have to freak out about whether or not the cards can land an aj burnett or a javy vazquez, or whether mark mulder is as good as advertised. we're entirely dependent on other organizations' pitchers, which is a very expensive and uncertain way to go.

by lboros on Jan 14, 2006 8:35 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Good points, lboras...
I don't mean to disparage Whitey or your article (I always love your info and unfortunately only seem to post when I see an argument).  I grew up in the 80's and Whiteyball is some of the most exciting baseball I've ever seen.  (In-VINCEABLE!)  I'm a big fan of Whitey AND LaRussa (Sometimes I think Mike Shannon and I are the only ones :).  

I'm not going to argue with how prospects have turned out after their rookie year with LaRussa/Dunc.  That wasn't my argument.  All I'm saying is that rookie pitchers usually do pretty well with them.  Regardless of how they were ranked, Most pitchers ranked well in baseball DON'T turn out to have good/great rookie seasons.  Most don't even pan out.  LaRussa's/Dunc's HAVE.

When you adjust Whitey's players for that era, I think the PERFORMANCE was about even.  (I'm not saying Whitey had as much to work with, because clearly he did not (great numbers to back up your argument), but adjust those 80's ERAs and I think you'll find LaRussa's rookies to be at least comparable.  You've got to give me that.  If they are Comparable, then you can't say Whitey did a great job with rookies and LaRussa did not (again, I'm not saying Whitey didn't get more out of them AFTER their rookie years or that Whitey didn't spit shine turds into gold).  

Saying all of this, I agree with your other point.  The LaRussa regime hasn't developed a pitcher for the long haul.  I'm worried about that too.  I don't think all is lost though.  LaRussa and Dunc are to good with the retreads to not figure out how to work with a young pitcher past his rookie season.  We're not talking about Dusty "Meatgrinder" Baker.  The problem is, people argue both sides of the point with LaRussa.  Either LaRussa/ Duncan are coddling their pitchers OR they are to hard on them (and that's why these highly ranked players have washed away with injury).  People just throw it out as fact that LaRussa has NEVER BEEN GOOD WITH ROOKIE PITCHERS IN THEIR ROOKIE SEASON.  You and I both know that's not true.

"It takes pitching, hitting and defense. Any two can win. All three make you unbeatable". Joe Garagiola

by MRCARD on Jan 14, 2006 11:53 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

fair enough mr card
i think we're finding the common ground in our points of view. and i have no problem at all w you posting when you see an argument --- go for it, that's an i important part of what this site exists for.

as much as anything we're talking about style here. whitey projected confidence; la russa projects anxiety. and they both were extremely successful. i still think whitey got more out his clubs --- had less talent to work with than tony, and tougher competition --- but that's a matter of opinion.

i think they're being overly cautious with reyes, but i admit there is a case to be made for their approach and it may work out just fine. i hope it does.

anyway keep posting mr card --- agree, disagree, whatever. i prob'y sounded terse in my response to your post, but i was just in a hurry, trying to dash something off on a saturday.

by lboros on Jan 15, 2006 11:59 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Now starting for the Cardinals: Travis Smith
One more point.  The Cardinals have been AMAZINGLY lucky with how durable their starters have been over the past few years.  5 players with 31 starts or more last year, 4 the year before that (with one at 28).  Even 2003 wasn't bad (4 pitchers with 27 starts or more, 2 others combining for 30) Doesn't everyone remember the parade of 14 starters from 2002?  We had 9 players who started 10 or more games!  Travis Smith had 10 starts and a 7.17 ERA!  Yes, we've got a monopoly on durable starters, but freak injuries happen.  Having 6 starters will be nice WHEN somebody breaks down this year.  (Pleasedon'tbeCarpenterpleasedon'tbeCarpenter...)
"It takes pitching, hitting and defense. Any two can win. All three make you unbeatable". Joe Garagiola

by MRCARD on Jan 14, 2006 12:49 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Maybe not so much luck...
I think it may have to do with the Cards philosophy of using soft-tossing high gb/fly pitchers.  

by Zubin on Jan 14, 2006 2:14 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

the cardinals won the division
by 13 games that year . . . . . and finished 4th in the league in era

by lboros on Jan 14, 2006 8:38 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Whitey Herzog
LB:

I hope this piece and Sutter being voted into the HoF reminds us how much we appreciated Whitey Ball.  To me Herzog will always be the firey genius of St Louis baseball.

by Zubin on Jan 14, 2006 2:31 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

whitey was a risk taker
and that's what made it so much fun to watch his teams. i also appreciate what the current regime has accomplished, but in my opinion whitey did more amazing things. he went toe-to-toe with the gooden-strawberry mets and beat them two of three years. this regime hasn't had nearly the same competition.

that's not to denigrate what they've done. i just think whitey was better

by lboros on Jan 14, 2006 8:44 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

....whitey ball
15 years from now we'll say the same about tony & duncan. pujols/rolen/edmonds will be HoF and I'll still be posting to this site.
Leo Durocher called Reiser the only ballplayer he ever saw who was better than Willie Mays. from NICE GUYS FINISH LAST

by pistolpetereiser on Jan 14, 2006 5:08 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

No, there is a difference.
Whitey completely changed the game.  He used speed like it was never used before and won three pennants in a era where slugging was relatively in vogue.  Man that guy better get into the HoF.

As LB pointed out look at the teams Whitey beat in the 80s.  The Mets were on paper they a much better team than the Cards were from '85-'87.  Yet Whitey beat them two out of three years.

Jock/Tony/Dunc have built an admirable team (dynasty?), but they have with little doubt had the best talent in their division since '99 or so.  I hope you are right and Pujols, Rolen and Edmonds are all headed to the Hall of Fame.  But that would only prove our point.

One interesting thing, IMO, is the Cards as they are now are exactly the type of team that Whitey was able to beat with speed, defense and tenacious, if not good, pitching.

 

by Zubin on Jan 14, 2006 3:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The mets may have been better on paper,
unless you write down the clear fact that they were pond scum on that paper.

It's a shame I can never hate a team that much again.

by Valatan on Jan 15, 2006 4:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Where you are wrong.
It is not a foregone conclusion that the Cardinals have the best team in the league.  frankly, I am getting sick of people using this claim against LaRussa and Duc.  2 years ago, the Cardinals were picked to finish 3rd in the division.  The fact that they won so many games does not mean they had the best players, it is because LaRussa got so much out of the players he had.  Look at the success of guys that moved on (Womack, Renteria, etc...).  Those guys did nothing.  How great were they really, and how much of it was the way LaRussa used them.

Look at last year.  Rolen was out most of the season, and LaRussa filled in with Nunez.  Walker was out and LaRussa filled in with So and J-Rod.  None of these guys are can't-miss world beaters.  They had good seasons b/c of the way they were handled.  Eckstein???  He had a career year.  You don't think Tony might have had something to do with that.

These examples don't even list the pitchers that have come to the Cardinals as over-the-hill bums that Duc and Tony have somehow turned into cy young candidates and 15+ game winners.  What happened to Woody Williams before and after he was here?  Not much.

Tony has even changed around guys during the season.  Look at the way Molina came on at the end.  Don't tell me most other managers could have gotten that out of him.  That was in large part due to moves Tony made from the beginning of the season that built Yaddie's confidence.  Leaving him in for key at bats, even when he was struggling.  Things like that.

Your statement is revisionist, based solely on how the team ends up.  What would Tony have to do to prove to you that he was a good manager?  Win with bad players?  How would you know?  If he does his job right, the players will win and look like good players.  I think the fact that we weren't picked to do well, and players' play drops off considerably after they leave the Cardinals, shows that LaRussa is doing something right.  Why not give him credit for it?

by Westy on Jan 16, 2006 1:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Why we are right.
I didn't say he had the best team in the League, I said division.  No one said TLR and Dunc haven't done a good job, just that the white rat did more with less.

by Zubin on Jan 16, 2006 11:03 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the Internet's #1 St. Louis Cardinals blog.
Start posting about the Cardinals »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Avatar_small
How to EASILY make tables for Fanposts
1753738656_110919ebe9_o_small
2010 Hot Stove Post #1: CHONE hitter projections

Recent FanPosts

Arch_small
Number 15
Small
Some thoughts on Holliday (and potential replacements)
Small
Ok let me try this again...
Knights-09_small
Disenchanted Blue Jays Fan Looking For A New Team
Painterlance_small
The Holliday Dilemma (Rocks Fan Perpsective)
375830-r1-025-11_011_small
Anybody read Bob Gibson's new book yet?
Flanders_small
Yadi2first
Small
40 Man Question..

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Jack_benny_small DanUpBaby

Editors

Bender1_small azruavatar

Adam1_small chuckb

Kid-a-bear_small the red baron