Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: Rickey Henderson Coming Back to A's? Bar-right-arrows



whew

thank goodness that's over with.

i could recount all the hardships and bitter blows the cards and their fans had to suffer this season, but what would be the point. . . . . we all get an extra month off this year, and we need it. hell, we need a stinkin' day off; this is the first day since august 27 that the cardinals aren't playing baseball. in their deadly closing stretch of 35 games / 34 days, they went 15-20 --- the same record they opened the season with.

if that was la russa's last game for the franchise, he certainly went out on his own terms. 9 pitching changes on the final day of the season, in a game that meant nothing; 24 players into the fray. jim tracy nearly kept pace, with 7 pitching changes; the two skippers, anyway, were in no hurry for the season to end. it's often the case that season finales are over in 1:50 or thereabouts; this one lasted 3:11.

wrapping up a few odds n ends:

  1. of the cardinals' last 5 pennant-winning teams (2006, 2004, 1987, 1985, 1982), 4 came back the following year to finish below .500, with between 76 and 79 wins. only the 2004 team managed to finish above .500.
  2. the cardinals avoided breaking the franchise record for runs allowed. they finished at 829, the 3d-highest total in franchise history and 2d-highest total of the last 95 years.
  3. they also avoided leading the league in negative run differential. that honor went to the team they swept this weekend, the pirates, who finished at minus 122. the cards finished 2d in the nl in that category, at minus 104; the marlins were minus 101, the nats minus 100.
  4. the -104 run differential was 1 run worse than the 1955 team's, meaning the 2007 cards had the franchise's worst run differential in 91 years --- worst since the 1916 team, which came in at -153.
  5. the cards finished 11th in the league in scoring (worst since 1997) and 11th in earned-run average (worst since 2003). they were 2d in unearned runs allowed, at 88 (the marlins led with 98).
  6. st louis finished 30-19 against the three bottom teams in the nl central (pirates, reds, and astros); vs all other comers they were 48-65, a .425 winning percentage.
one last item --- skip schumaker's 5-for-5 finale, coupled with pujols's 0-for-5, created a significant first for the franchise player, if not for the franchise itself: for the first time ever, albert got outhit by a teammate who had more than 100 at-bats. schumaker finished at .333, beating albert by 6 points. the last cardinal not named pujols to post a batting avg that high in 100 at-bats or more was will clark, who finished at .345 in 2000. schumaker fell just short of batting .400 over the last 3 months of the year; from july 1 forward he went 48 for 121, a .397 clip.

look out, ted williams.

* * * * * * * * * * *

joe strauss's article yesterday contained a fairly remarkable quote about the tensions in the front office:
"It's not a healthy environment when you're worried about who you're seen speaking to. If you speak to someone, you risk making someone else in the front office mad. If you don't speak, you alienate the person in front of you. It's tough when you're caught in the middle of something like that."
this was attributed to an unnamed farm-system employee. bill dewitt himself acknowledged that a rift exists in the front office, although he downplayed its significance. but if things are really as bad as described in that quote, the organization is in trouble. healthy, creative tension is one thing; a circular firing squad is another. i've been in work situations where people have to be careful about whom they share information with; in my experience, such an environment never lends itself to good performance.

i will say that it's striking to note how many of this year's playoff teams have been built via player development. the rockies (not a playoff team just yet, but hopefully after tonight) are almost entirely homegrown, and the indians, angels, and dbacks mostly so; the phillies' 4 best hitters, rotation ace, and closer all came up through the system. even the yankees, lords of the checkbook, have a homegrown ace and closer, and their starters at all 4 up-the-middle positions were developed in-house. that's to say nothing of the teams that barely missed the playoffs --- brewers, braves, and dodgers drew most of their talent from within. that's why the approach bernie proposes this morning --- dewitt must open dewallet --- seems misguided to me. dewallet cannot fix what's broken with this team; sign a bunch of f.a.'s this year, and 2 or 3 years from now those acquisitions are apt to be as old and broken-down and useless as edmonds and rolen and mulder were this season. this organization's already too top-heavy; their overriding imperative is to get younger, a need they've had since 2005. they've made some progress in that regard (duncan, wainwright, hopefully ankiel and/or ryan), but they need to push it further. jumping whole-hog into the free-agent market won't get them there. only patience will.

that's not to say i think they shouldn't sign any free agents. they're gonna have to sign some; too many holes on the roster. but they need to be smart about it. i think they were extremely smart last year to stay out of the crazy free-agent market. it's a fair critique to say that the ownership has occasionally cheaped out and allowed good free agents to get away --- particularly aj burnett, who was the best free-agent pitcher on the market two years ago and wanted to play in st louis. but in the vast majority of cases the team's valuation has been accurate and their refusal to overpay has been vindicated. i don't like greedy rich guys any more than bernie does, but i don't think dewitt's tight dewallet has been the main problem with the team --- and i'm absolutely certain that raising payroll isn't the main solution going forward. it's much simpler, and more complicated, than that: they need to do a better job of evaluating talent and developing players.

* * * * * * * * * * *

once the rockies and pads settle the wild-card question, i'll post a poll to determine the community's official playoff endorsement. i'll also be soliciting your predictions for the postseason tournament. we'll have game threads here throughout the playoffs, and i'll have one tonight for the one-game playoff (technically a regular season game); during the nlds round, when there will be multiple games on most days, i'll just put up one generic thread covering all that day's contests. and while this is all going on, there's bound to be lots of news regarding our favorite team --- beginning with the official word regarding the status of our favorite manager.

let's go rockies.

0 recs | Comment 153 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

Game thread
Any chance we will have a game thread for the Padres at the Rox?
The St. Louis Cardinals- 11 time World Champions!

by Zubin on Oct 1, 2007 9:50 AM EDT   0 recs

Ug... nevermind
don't know how I missed it.
The St. Louis Cardinals- 11 time World Champions!

by Zubin on Oct 1, 2007 9:51 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Lots of time going forward
To hash out who should stay, who should go, and who should be traded to and fro

But, the criticism of Bernie's point is right on. Sure, there have been times in recent years when opening up the pocketbook to make sure the Cardinals sign an impact player would have been wise, AJ Burnett being the obvious answer.

That said, in most cases I would rather have the Cards dump the additional dough for free agent acquisitions into player development, taking risks on top dollar draft choices rather than going for slot guys. Better to pony up $2 million for Kyle Russel than 7 or 8 million for someone like Juan E.

by JMedwick on Oct 1, 2007 9:50 AM EDT   0 recs

I think the problem the Cardinals face is
that their player development is still atleast 2 years away.  There may be a few players that if pushed, could start the season (or atleast May) with the Big League club from Springfield.

However, they will need to sign a few FA's or a better idea, trade for guys with 2 years left on contracts to fill the gaps.  A power bat from the OF to replace Edmonds/Encarnacion and bridge the gap to Rasmus.

The farm system has produced Molina, Pujols, Ryan, Ankiel, Duncan but it has also produced middling guys like Cavazos, Skippy, Reyes, Thompson, Jiminez, etc.  The Cardinals wouldn't be in near the shape they are now if the AAA roster could have given them a legit #3 starter to step in when Carpenter was injured.

Instead, they'll find stopgaps.  They'll trade for Matt Morris, sign Pineiro for 2 years, take a flyer on an aging OF, maybe trade for Renteria.  They'll improve the team for 2008, which won't need much with how terrible the NL Central is and probably will be.

I think if LaRussa stays, which seems likely now, he'll turn to the front office and say "Stop giving me guys like Reyes, Jiminez and Cavazos".  Unlike in New York where Joba and Melky forced Torre's hand to have to listen to Cashman about who and how to use, the failure of many of the youngsters plays to LaRussa's advantage.

Call up PJ Walters!

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 1, 2007 10:01 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Have to Agree
2008 does not look too appetizing: a rotation full of holes, no imminent help on the farm, and a lousy time to go shopping for a FA starter. My biggest concern is that we overpay (dollars and years) for middling/declining talent and hamstring ourselves for a few more years.

Signing Pineiro for 2 years would not be the end of the world, but I don't see much point in trading for Renteria (he'll cost young talent we cannot afford to lose) and hosting a Matt Morris reunion. I think Walt is smarter than that, but Tony's influence could be pivotal. After all, he brought us Mark Mulder for Dan Haren.

by Hungry Jack on Oct 1, 2007 10:14 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

^Which is
exactly why the Cards should be be blowing out the payroll big in 2008. Save up those dollars, invest them in player development, but don't waste them on what is a poor FA crop.

by JMedwick on Oct 1, 2007 10:33 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If you wanted to win NOW
you could easily build an older, but more talented team through FA:

1B - Albert Pujols
2B - Jeff Kent
SS - Omar Vizquel
3B - Scott Rolen
LF - Barry Bonds
CF - Aaron Rowand
RF - Jim Edmonds
C - Yadier Molina

SP - Adam Wainwright
SP - Curt Schilling
SP - Livan Hernandez
SP - Bartolo Colon
SP - Joel Pineiro

Jeff Kent, Barry Bonds, Omar Vizquel will only look for 2 year contracts at most.

Likewise for Schilling and Pineiro.  Colon and Hernandez would both probably want 4 year deals, although Colon may look for something shorter to re-establish himself.

That roster change would cost you about $160 M in payroll over the next 2 years, but for next year, you'd have a team that would be old, slow but score a lot of runs and eat some innings.  And talent wise, it'd be better than anything the Cardinals could patch together through the farm system over the next 2 years.

Then in 2009-2010, you begin the 'correction' replacing that OF with Rasmus and the rotation with Walters, etc.

I don't condone making any of those moves, really but a team CAN be fixed quickly through spending money.  Just ask the Cubs.  Add Soriano, Lilly, Marquis, Floyd, Kendall, along with a healthy All-Star firstbasemen and 3rd baseman and you have a division winner.

Call up PJ Walters!

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 1, 2007 11:57 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

the problem with this theory
is that, just as edmonds/rolen declined through age and became below-average players, a certain number of the players on the list above are bound to be below-average players next season. some of them already are below average --- bartolo colon, for example, who had a 6.34 era this year. omar vizquel had an ops of .621, much worse than aaron miles. livan hernandez had an era of 4.93 and a whip of 1.565, which puts his performance in the same range as brad thompson's and slightly worse than braden looper's. and jeff kent flat-out cannot play 2d base anymore --- as long as he slugs .500 he's still above average, but if he slugs .450 he's a bad player.

to me, this roster illustrates how you can spend a ton of money and make the team worse, rather than than better.

by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 12:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Rolen declined because of injury
and it wasn't age related.  I wouldn't want to be excluding 30-32 year olds from consideration because Rolen had a horrible base running collision.

Think of the number of good pitchers there were this year who were older.  In fact, if we looked at the effective older pitchers, they probably faired much better as a group than the '06 FA signings.

I think the problem is that '07-'08 simply doesn't have good FA pitchers available.  '08-09 looks much better.  Perhaps we should wait on someone from this list or try to trade for them now and then work on extension into their contract.

Here's the '08-09 list of FA pitchers:

Kris Bensen BAL
A.J. Burnett TOR (may opt out)
Paul Byrd CLE
Jon Garland CWS
Tom Glavine NYM
Mike Hampton  ATL
Rich Harden  OAK
Orlando Hernandez NYM
Jason Jennings HOU
Randy Johnson ARZ
John Lackey  LAA
Esteban Loaiza OAK
Braden Looper STL
Derek Lowe LAD
Pedro Martinez NYM
Matt Morris  PIT
Mike Mussina NYY
Jamie Moyer PHI
Mark Mulder  STL
Carl Pavano NYY
Jake Peavy  SD
Brad Penny  LAD
Odalis Perez KC
Oliver Perez NYM
Andy Pettitte NYY
Mark Prior CHC
Horatio Ramirez SEA

by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 1:16 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

the names on the proposed roster weren't 30 to 32
kent vizquel bonds and schiling are all 40 or older.

i wouldn't categorically exclude 30 to 32 year olds from consideration just because of rolen's injury. but i would be leery of players that age because it's been well proven that most position players decline after 30. if you're signing a 31-year-old to a 5-year deal, you run a high risk of having that player decline and/or break down. it has nothing to do with rolen's baserunning collision. it has to do with what happens when players get older.

by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 1:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I wouldn't sign a 31 year old to a 5 year deal
but I agree that 30-32 year olds should not be excluded from consideration.

It is interesting that a number of older pitchers this year have done well and have helped their teams to be in a playoff position.  

by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 2:50 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Pitching doesn't follow the age curve
the same way position players do.  Pitchers have much, much more random variation in their performance.  Put another way, they tend to be unpredictable.

Quick, Name any pitcher that has gotten a 5+ year contract and lived up to the terms.

Sign position players to big deals, draft pitchers and roll the dice.

by DriverZn on Oct 1, 2007 3:39 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

looks like a long list
but i bet it gets real short once the best pitchers are resigned to long-term deals.
"but the rain is so real, lord; and the rainbows pretend..."

by SleepyCA on Oct 1, 2007 3:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The list was a toss together
not how I would build a lineup.  But it was an example of how you could improve a team's offense overnight.  We'd have less production out of SS (with better defense) but increased production in LF, CF, 2B.  They could all fall apart and spend a combined 372 games on the DL.  Then you have players like Kennedy, Ryan, Duncan, Ankiel coming off the bench.

If I were to spend money freely, without any restriction on spending, I'd put together a lineup of:
[code]
SS - Brendan Ryan
RF - Bobby Abreu
1B - Albert Pujols
CF - Andruw Jones
3B - Scott Rolen
LF - Jim Edmonds
C  - Yadier Molina
P  - Pitcher
2B - Adam Kennedy

SP - Adam Wainwright
SP - Curt Schilling
SP - Greg Maddux
SP - Braden Looper
SP - Joel Pineiro
[/code]

Is that how I'd fix/build the team?  No.  But a team with no real payroll restrictions can go out and overpay for 2 OF bats who did not play to their talent level in 07 and can patch together a starting rotation with two old pitchers on short term deals.  Even if Schilling and Maddux have their arms fall off, you need them for however long it takes to get Carpenter back into the rotation (August?).

That's patching together a team that could a) win the NL Central and b) if the arms DON'T fall off, probably wins a 5 game series.

I don't believe in just throwing money away and ignoring the farm system and player development.  However, for the Cardinals, the pitching isn't going to get much better unless they a) sacrafice the farm system in trades b) overspend for some short term fixes.

So with the pitching not really going to be spectacular, you are going to have to outslug teams (Philadelphia Phillies).  I don't know if a guy like Bobby Abreu is really the player he was in 07 or if he (at 34) is still an OBP guy of .400+.  I know for the last 2 years, I'd have loved to have Abreu in the #2 hole ahead of Pujols, getting on base and getting knocked in.

Overspending for fixes doesn't damage the farm system, just DeWitt's wallet.

Call up PJ Walters!

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 1, 2007 2:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Well your quote about LaRussa remindes me
That for all the complaints about him being reluctant to give youngsters playing time, when he has received top tier talent that can contribute right away to the big league club, LaRussa has usually found space for that player (Alan Benens, Matt Morris, Pujols, Ankiel, Bud Smith, Wainwright, Duncan, and Molina). The reluctance to see what he can get out of the likes of Reyes and others may more accurately be a description of what LaRussa thinks of the "talent" produced by the organization than what he thinks young players (in general) can accomplish. The truth is that between 2002 and 2007, the Cards haven't had much top talent to add to the team.

As for how this ties into payroll, while I understand that if LaRussa returns, he will be reluctant to he his "retooling" money spent on draft picks what won't be up before 2010 or 2011 or so, I also don't think the Cards, as Bernie seems to suggest, should be throwing top dollar at middle of the order hitters. I don't mind adding veteran players who can add some value to the team (think signing someone like Shannon Stewart or trading for the likes of Burnett, Renteria or Coco Crisp) the Cards should not be bidding on top dollar free agents at this point, regardless of what LaRussa says.

by JMedwick on Oct 1, 2007 10:32 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

They will bid
They will offer him a contract that pays him, on average for 6 years, $14MM. Of course the first couple of years they will only pay him $4MM per year and there will be two club option years at the end for $20MM per season. Then the Red Sox will offer him $250MM over 8 years...and we will hear how we put in a "competitive offer"

We will then trade for Julio Lugo who AROD just put out of a job and sign Matt Clement and re-sign Piniero. The payroll will go up by $8,000,000 and we will be told that we "just missed" on several big name guys.

How about handin' me another helpin' of those mashed taters...thank you very much!

by Elvis on Oct 1, 2007 6:21 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think that the Cards should
concentrate only going the trade route for the bare necessities: a shortstop and a good #2 starter(wainright, I think will prove to be a #1). You get burned all too often in trades. Jack Wilson and Dan Haren being examples. Now the greatest need is what has been plundered away. The Cards would have won in 05 with Haren and certainly 06. and Jack Wilson should have been with this club for the last 5 years. The Kennedy move was the dumbest of all( a three year contract, WHY, was anybody else even after him. Eckstein should have been on 2nd base for the last 2 years. Develop players, even if you have to wait a couple years to compete. It is the only thing that makes sense, the Cards are not going to be able to compete with the big spending franchises. Who wants to pay to see a bunch overpaid free agent veterans like the Mets fold.

by ridgesee on Oct 1, 2007 4:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

NLDS
I hope the Rockies win for more reasons then one, but one of them is so we have 7/8 teams new this post season over last that to me is a very interesting occurrence in baseball, even 6/8 wouldn't be bad though.
I can't wait to see everyone's predictions compared to the "experts"

by StLHugo on Oct 1, 2007 9:56 AM EDT   0 recs

So many things about this
year are different from last year.  But one principle that will almost certainly reassert itself in 2007 is that "The Experts are [Still] Idiots."
"We're sniffing the winning situation."

by MdRedbirdFreak on Oct 1, 2007 10:01 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yeah,
like any of us around here could do a better job.

Don't be jealous that those guys get paid to watch sports all day.

by Jhusk on Oct 1, 2007 5:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Can't help it
That would be such a sweet gig!

by liam on Oct 1, 2007 7:10 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Last year was the suprise
No one had the Twins, Tigers, A's, and Mets playing like they did last year.

This year I heard many have the Indians, Phillies, and the rest as expected to contend.  The Rockies are the only shocker in my opinion.

by enoscountry on Oct 1, 2007 10:12 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

exactly
the continuing trend in baseball is to develop talent and then lock them in early to long term contracts.  Most are pulling it off successfully - although Howard and the Phils couldn't agree this preseason (I bet he gets locked in now).  

Only low budget teams like A's and Marlins fail to do so. This consequently shrinks the free agent market, increases FA cost, and makes the free agency approach less beneficial.

Speaking of, I think we need to do so with Yadi.  I think he showed he can hit this year despite our terrible lineup.

by enoscountry on Oct 1, 2007 10:01 AM EDT   0 recs

I usually don't mind Bernie
But I think his article today was a little silly.

Who exactly does he think is out there that is worth opening DeWallet for?  Given this year's FA crop, such thinking will lead us to handcuff ourselves for the future.  This is one year that stopgaps may actually make sense -- in 2009, we will (i) have a lot more money to spend, as Izzy/Mulder/Edmonds/Enc/Looper all come off the books, (ii) hopefully have league-minimum guys like Rasmus and Perez ready to make substantial contributions, and (iii) be considering a more attractive group of FAs.  Spending now may just prevent us from taking advantage of that opportunity  . . . .

by tdawg on Oct 1, 2007 10:12 AM EDT   0 recs

Agreed
It's funny how Bernie and others simply say, "They have to spend money," as if just spending on anything is the answer.  You don't just buy to buy.
"Well, no one's perfect. Only one guy was ever perfect, Jack, and they nailed him to a tree!"

by lightbulb on Oct 1, 2007 10:34 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Support
I agree that simply spending money isn't the answer. But I think his point is that DeWitt should consider how fans are supporting this club. Fans spending that much money deserve committed ownership if you think baseball is, in any way, a public trust. DeWitt, therefore, should spend more if the right people are available. I think players like Abreu, Andruw Jones and Schilling might put us right back at the top of the division. So, why not?

by templetown on Oct 1, 2007 3:09 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

No one will argue agains spending money
If it helps the team.  But simply replacing a cheap player with an expensive one doesn't help unless it improves performance.

i.e.  Replacing Reyes with Colon (both 6+ ERA) doesn't help.

by DriverZn on Oct 1, 2007 3:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

the thing is
people are acting like if they don't spend money "wisely" it's going to prevent them from spending money elsewhere....when it all just goes to DeWitt's bottom line.  

It's not like they're saying...well, instead of spending 16 mil on a 10 game win player we'll spend 8 mil on two 5 game win players.  As fans we shouldn't care about his bottom line, at all.  

by rocKStark5 on Oct 1, 2007 10:51 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I second that emotion
Larry, I know you weren't specifically making the connection, but the first half of your post perfectly justifies the argument you make in the second half.  That is, if the Cards were a team (like the 2003 squad) that had a strong foundation but a few obvious but fixable holes, then it would make sense to "open up DeWallet" and plug the gaps with free agent signings.  

But there's no way anyone could read your list of odds n ends (actually there's no way anyone could read your blog all season) and come to the conclusion that this is a fixable team in the near future.  We are broken on offense, defense, and pitching.  In fact, while I'm genuinely pleased that we won our last 5 games and came in with a disappointing-but-far-from-embarrassing 78-84 record, this is NOT a 78-84 team at its root.  It's more like a 90-loss team.  

Now obviously 90-loss teams can turn around in one year and win the NL Central with a few free agent signings (just look at the Cubs)... but ONLY only if the core of the team is fundamentally sound.  Outside of Pujols I would not say that of this Cardinals team.

Brian Gunn

by briangunn on Oct 1, 2007 11:05 AM EDT   0 recs

Bernie
seems like he is influenced by his forum press box and the multitude of young irrational posters that drop by to complain about the cardinals.  

If he wanted to complain about the reluctance for ownership to spend money, he should have done it with the last draft, when most of the picks were overdrafts compared to the consensus.   The cardinals left players, that even by their own organization, were regarded as better talent than what was taken in particular rounds due to signability.  

Management stated that the money saved by not signing free agents would be redirected to the draft, and it wasn't.

 

I love lamp

by Some witty name on Oct 1, 2007 11:14 AM EDT   0 recs

Dunno about obsessed
but I think he's just taking the side of, dunno what to call it, ticket pricing or something.  He recognizes that DeWitt is squeezing everything he can out of the franchise, and expects him to pour resources back into the franchise.

by sdrone on Oct 1, 2007 11:20 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Agreed. Too much time
spent hanging out at the Pressbox forum seems to have affected his thinking.  There are a lot of voices over there for whom winning the WS every year is merely a matter of have the will to "get" whatever players we need to win.

by MdRedbirdFreak on Oct 1, 2007 11:36 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Opening DeWallet for DeDraft
The big probelm with the Cardinals' draft is that they played by Bud Selig's book on "slotting" - essentially, a league-wide mandate to assign salary to a player according to what pick/round he was drafted at. It's an ass-backwards attempt to fix the signability problems that cause players like Rick Porcello and Kyle Russell to slip down the draft board, and an attempt to take leverage away from agents at this early stage. However, it ignores the league-wide trend toward free-agent madness, and postpones the path to rebuilding for many teams like the Cards who are maxed out on free agent dollars.

Tim Purpura went the opposite route with the Astros, and drafted the best talent available in each of the first four rounds, only to find out that Drayton McLain was also playing by Selig's book, and wouldn't pony up to sign ANY of them. Hence, Purpura, whose specialty was player development (he drafted and brought up Berkman, Lidge, Ensberg, Everett, et. al.), lost an entire top shelf draft. And was fired.

If Bernie is going to call out DeWitt to draw a line in the sand, it should be here. Just say no to slotting. Say yes to paying market value for the talent you need, come draft time.

by taiko on Oct 1, 2007 12:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

This also effects Luhnow
If Luhnow is lobbying so hard for the GM post, he should take a minute first and decide if DeWitt is going to give him rein to acquire the best talent available. This last draft was unpleasant ... a repeat of the Astros' draft would be disastruous.

by taiko on Oct 1, 2007 12:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

i had the impression
that what sunk the astros' draft was free-agent signings. i thought they lost all their picks in rounds 1 through 3 for the privilege of signing carlos lee, woody williams, and mark loretta.

which is yet another reason why it would be stupid for the cards to buy a bunch of expensive talent this winter.

by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 12:31 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Looking it up now...
And it's a combination of both. They lost a first-round pick to the Rangers for Carlos Lee, and a "sandwich pick" - 40th overall - to San Diego for the right to sign Woody Williams (!). They didn't have a pick in the 2nd round for an unspecified reason - perhaps due to an earlier signing or trade.

They also failed to receive any compensatoin picks for their departing free agents (Clemens, Pettite, etc.), because none were offered arbitration.

Then, they failed to come to terms with both of their picks in the third and fourth rounds. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/5057770.html

Disastruous.

by taiko on Oct 1, 2007 12:46 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Richard Justice's take
The columnist for the Houston Chronicle has a very good blog post about their failed draft, that also links to a blurb in the NY Times about Selig and "slotting."

http://blogs.chron.com/sportsjustice/archives/2007/08/are_the_astros.html

"The excessive draft spending did not please Commissioner Bud Selig, who delivered a stern lecture to the owners at their quarterly meeting Thursday. Some who attended the meeting had the impression that Selig believed the recommended bonuses for each slot of the first five rounds was a hard slotting system, akin to the N.B.A.'s.

It is not a fixed system, however, because the union wouldn't agree to it in the negotiations for the current collective bargaining agreement."

by taiko on Oct 1, 2007 12:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It seems apparent
that the only fix for the draft is a hard slotting system, it just makes so much sense from a teams perspective.

I don't believe that the cardinals  adherence to Selig's bonus recommendations can be held responsible for their draft picks.  If that was the case would they have taken Russell as low as they did.   Anybody could tell that Russell wouldn't sign for slot money, and obviously they took him knowing they would have to break Selig's recommendations.  

Management had to realize the system was exploitable and they could have added several impact players with one draft, something their system lacks.   However, rather than do that they reached on all of their early picks and took low ceiling picks.   With as much credit the farm system gets, it's still in the lower half in talent and needs to supplement an aging roster sooner than later  

I love lamp

by Some witty name on Oct 1, 2007 1:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

the astros draft
was heavy on signability.  It was monumentally awful.

Kevin Goldstein has a better recap but the Astros realy blundered this year specifically.

by azruavatar on Oct 1, 2007 1:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Rockies?
I'll oppose that and say let's go Padres.

stlfan

by stlfan on Oct 1, 2007 11:29 AM EDT   0 recs

Opening up dewallet
is all well and good, but if no one wants to play in St. Louis, it won't matter. That "I'll sign for less because it's the Cardinals" line doesn't hold water anymore, and hasn't for years.

by cardsrul on Oct 1, 2007 11:32 AM EDT   0 recs

An Attack of October Phillie-itis
If there's a team that has an abundance of power/speed and pure mojo going into the playoffs, it's those red hot Phils. If they get ANY pitching, they'll steamroll the first two rounds.

Deja Vu Department: It wouldn't be October if we didn't read yet another account of how JASON MARQUIS IS IN DANGER OF BEING LEFT OFF THE POST SEASON ROSTER, because, you know, he's got this bothersome habit of pitching worse and worse as the campaign winds down.

by Urban Pawnee on Oct 1, 2007 11:44 AM EDT   0 recs

just like jason marquis
if charlie manuel has any sense, adam eaton will not see a non-bullpen mound in the postseason.  that's addition by subtraction.

the phils have a solid top 3 in the 'pen (myers, gordon, romero) and an ace in hamels with serviceable guys lohse, moyer, and kendrick to round out the rotation.  the problem for that staff arises when the underbelly of their bullpen is exposed, i.e. mesa, alfonseca, geary, etc.  you'll notice that sunday, despite moyer only pitching 5 1/3 innings, that none of these guys were used.  with the off days in the playoffs, the phils might be able to get by relying on only their horses.

the rox look like the better team and could very well beat the phillies at their own game, but i can't see the padres doing it - pitching and a big park is nice, but chris young has struggled mightily down the stretch and peavy will only go once in the series thanks to the playoff.  a pitching-heavy team going into citizens bank band box (which should be a HUGE home field advantage, judging by the atmosphere there sunday) doesn't seem to bode well.

by moboiler on Oct 1, 2007 12:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

PS
This would be a great time to talk to Oscar Minaya about a certain devalued shortstop on his roster.

by Urban Pawnee on Oct 1, 2007 11:49 AM EDT   0 recs

Omar?
Call up PJ Walters!

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 1, 2007 11:59 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Man, I can't get away with anything here!
Give me a C- in my Met franchise acumen.

Oscar Minaya?  Must have been a futility infielder in the Twins organization back in the 70s.

by Urban Pawnee on Oct 1, 2007 12:12 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The Mets
have a shortstop named Omar? =)
Call up Jarrett Hoffpauir!

by player2bnamedl8r on Oct 1, 2007 12:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I thought the same thing
We'd take 5 months of what Jose Reyes did in NY this year and find a way to work around his .197 September.  Mets fans don't want ya, Jose?  Have we got a deal for you . . . come play with Albert hittin' behind ya . . .

TSF

by TedSimmonsFan on Oct 1, 2007 12:19 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Plus -
he's the most exciting player in the game!

by Urban Pawnee on Oct 1, 2007 12:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Could we get him
without the Jose! Jose! Jose! Jose! chant?

If so, I'm all in.

Call up Jarrett Hoffpauir!

by player2bnamedl8r on Oct 1, 2007 4:47 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think we could do a lot with Jose Reyes
He really does not seem to do well with the Mets' crowds (in fact the team as a whole has a horrible home record).  I can't imagine that they would let him go.  But he may want to leave eventually since he's constantly booed and has been identified as "the reason" the Mets season fell apart by a lot of the NY press.  He would certainly need veteran leadership to make him better focused and more professional, but I do think that could be done in our clubhouse.

by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 5:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It will be interesting to see . . .
what effect the Cards' high ticket prices will have on the 2008 season.

One question is will the "new ballpark" fans, paying the 3rd highest average ticket prices in the country, still come out to the ballpark in comparable numbers to recent seasons to essentially watch a stopgap 2008 team, and, if they don't, what effect will that have on ownerships' willingness to spend in 2009 and beyond?

by bailorg on Oct 1, 2007 11:51 AM EDT   0 recs

The stadium
will still have that "new car smell" for at least another year or two, and DeWitt knows it. Plus he still has the Ballpark Village thing to hang over fans' heads, which will keep them coming to games.

by cardsrul on Oct 1, 2007 12:04 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm going to go out on a limb here
And say that there won't be a significant drop in attendance next year, regardless of how the club performs.  Another losing year and we might be looking at a lousy 09 attendance, but I think it's going to take more than one bad year to stop Cards fans from coming out to the ballpark.

by stl tyler on Oct 1, 2007 12:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I agree
and one of the reasons I do is because even when the team was in that dreadful losing streak, they still had healthy attendance.  Also, I was amazed at how long the crowd stayed even when they were playing poorly.

by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 12:59 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The leadoff man?
Lboros' stats on Skip are interesting.   When Eck leaves, we'll need a good leadoff guy. I had thought maybe Ryan deserved a chance at that.

Do we need to consider Skip?  He's got great outfield defense, great arm, and can play all 3 positions.

If we do, whom are our 3 regular outfielders?  I assume we'd need to get rid of Duncan or Ankiel.

by sdrone on Oct 1, 2007 12:10 PM EDT   0 recs

the concern about schumaker
is that his BABIP was .363, which is ridiculously high. if it comes down to, say, .320 next year --- which would still be well above average --- then his batting avg ends up in the .290 range, and his obp is only .325ish, which isn't very good. and if schumaker's BABIP comes down to league average, then he's a .275 hitter with a .310 obp.

i'm not trying to denigrate his achievements this year, but i wouldn't count on him replicating those numbers next season.

by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 12:17 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

BABIP question
Not a stat-head here (yet) and am still trying to makes sense of these metrics.  But it seems to my logic that a good hitter can target the ball well enough to hit it away from defenders on purpose (a line drive rather than a ground ball, a gap rather than at the left fielder, ....).  That is - a good hitter SHOULD have a higher BABIP than a mediocre hitter.  Not saying that Skip is an above average hitter, but I am wondering whether this metric can really be used to argue that this is a fluke year.  

by cdb on Oct 1, 2007 1:46 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

empirically that's not true
the cards' position players this year had BABIPS in a very narrow range --- all but a few players had BABIPs between about .285 and .315, and that's true throughout MLB. but their overall batting averages ranged from .240 to .330.

BABIP is highly influenced by luck. if you have a high line-drive rate, then maybe the BABIP reflects a higher-than-usual degree of skill --- but schumaker's line-drive rate was 19.1 percent, which is about league average.

by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 1:58 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

skeptically sold....
Well,

I am a beleiver in numbers, and the numbers do support your point, so I am sold.  However, I will remain optimistic that the number are lying - just this once.

by cdb on Oct 1, 2007 2:19 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Ha
It appears that we disagree to disagree. Or something.

by liam on Oct 1, 2007 2:03 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

i'd rather classify this one
as a "great minds" phenomenon. . . .

by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 2:17 PM EDT to parent up