weekend discussion: what if . . . . .
by lboros on Dec 29, 2007 9:31 AM EST
in St. Louis Cardinals News
Email
Printi've been asked to write a guest column for Ball Hype's "alternate history" series. you take one event from the last 25 years of your favorite team's history, change the outcome, and then speculate about how all the subsequent years would have unfolded differently. the general idea is to pick a loss and flip it to a victory, then describe the subsequent years of happily-ever-after.
i've already got a good idea about where i'd like to go with this article, but thought it might be a fun question to throw out to the community for discussion. if you could alter one cardinals-related event --- a single play, the outcome of a game, a trade, whatever --- what would it be? and how would subsequent events have unfolded more favorably?
111 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The Carlton trade
I second this one.
Although, a very easy argument could be made for Dekinger as well...or the Mulder trade, or even what would have happened if the Cards had prevailed in that NLDS in 2001. Or if the Yankees had finished out their sweep of the Red Sox in 2004 and faced the Cards in the WS.
by matt reeder on Dec 29, 2007 9:55 AM EST up reply actions
On the Mulder trade,
Not to be a wet blanket
Lots of other good ideas, including most of the ones I'd thought of. A few others:
- Keith Hernandez comes clean and goes super-straight regarding cocaine use, so that Herzog doesn't move him
- TLR realizes early that pitchers' arms are fragile and doesn't burn Alan Benes out young
- Ozzie Smith's homer off Niedenfuer in the 1985 playoffs hooks foul -- not every alternative history has to be for the better...
- McGwire pulls a hammy while stuck on 60 HRs and goes on the DL for the rest of the year -- ditto, although I'm not convinced that that would really be for the worse, all things considered
by StanTheManFan on Dec 29, 2007 11:42 AM EST up reply actions
Sorry to follow myself up, but one more:
by StanTheManFan on Dec 29, 2007 11:44 AM EST up reply actions
without a doubt
The Carlton Trade
In 1972, Bob Gibson's last as a truly dominant pitcher, he won 19 games and struck out 208 posting a 2.48 ERA. Carlton win 27, struck out 310 and posted an ERA of 1.97. The Cardinals finished 21.5 games back of the Pirates that year. Could Carlton have made the difference? I don't know. But I do know that he on his own won 11 more games than any other Cardinals pitcher in that rotation (besides Gibson).
In 73 and 74, the finished 1.5 games out of the playoffs each year. I'd be foolish not to think that Carlton (with McCarver still catching his games) could have made a 1.5 game difference on that team.
The Cardinals went 5 years after the Carlton trade without a 20 game winner. That one season in 1977 was the only one in which they had a pitcher win 20 games out of the next 12. During that same span, Carlton won 20 or more games 5 times.
Yes, it was the best trade the Phillies ever made. For the Cardinals, it erased the hope that they'd be able to replace the most dominant pitcher of the 1960s with the best pitcher of the 1970s.
Just for comparision:
Carlton (1972) 27 - 10 30 CG 8 SHO 310 Ks 1.97 ERA
Gibson (1968) 22 - 9 28 CG 13 SHO 268 Ks 1.12 ERA
What Gibson did was more impressive, merely because of the things that didn't show up in the record books (not being lifted during an inning the entire season...etc), but WOW.
by Hardcore Legend on Dec 29, 2007 12:05 PM EST up reply actions
If we had not traded Curt Flood,
No doubt...
I certainly feel it was the most
lboros......
This is the one that I wonder
Would they have been so quick to blow up the team in 1969?
Would Ceppy have still been traded for Joe Torre?
If Torre hadn't been traded for, would the Cardinals hire him as manager in the future?
Would the Cardinals have still traded for Dick Allen?
Would they have actually held on to Dick Allen?
I could go on and on.
by Hardcore Legend on Dec 29, 2007 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
Speaking of Dick Allen
by Hardcore Legend on Dec 29, 2007 3:50 PM EST up reply actions
...hmmmm...
The real reason has it that Devine was worried about Allen coming unglued during the offseason over his contract etc etc and becoming untradeable at any point in the future. Allen had been "too good to be true"! Turned in a good year with no bad press and Devine acted while he thought the iron was hot.
by cardschinmusic on Dec 31, 2007 9:01 AM EST up reply actions
Bokonon....
My thoughts, in order of my interest....
- What would have happened if Sam Breadon hadn't run Branch Rickey out of town?
- What would have happened if in the 1937 World Series, Dizzy Dean didn't take one of his toe?
- What would have happened if the Cards would have upped their offer to Curt Flood?
- What would have happened if the Cards wouldn't have traded Gary Templeton for Ozzie Smith?
- What would have happened if the Cards upped their offer and re-signed Jack Clark?
- What would have happened if the Cards didn't trade for Mark Mulder?
How about (ignoring 25 year limit again...)
Jack Clark's signing with New York
The team spent much of the next decade flailing about in search of a slugging first baseman to fill the Clark void. In the years immediately following the Clark departure, there was the ill-fated Bob Horner experiment, the Tudor-for Guerrero trade and the disastrous Andres Gallaraga season. Clark, meanwhile, continued to be a force for the next four seasons (OPS+ of 130, 148, 167 and 127) before sharply declining in 1992.
While I'm in the 80s, we'd all love to see the Denkinger call reversed, but, beyond speculating about whether the Cardinals could have hung on to win the series, I'm not sure how much fodder that'd provide you.
Clark leaving
If Clark returns, the Cards:
- Don't sign Bob Horner.
- Don't trade Tommy Herr for Tom Brunansky.
- Don't trade Tudor for Guerrero.
- Horner was a bust. So keeping Clark is a positive here.
- This was a good trade because Herr was beginning a steady decline that would have him out of baseball by the end of 1991. He bounced around from the Twins to Philly to the Mets (horrors!) to the Giants in 3+ seasons after the trade.
3. Tudor was having a solid year in 1988 (6-5, 2.29 ERA) when he was dealt to LA. He would have been in double figures in the win column were it not for the Cards' putrid offense that year. Of course, that also lead to his trade for Pedro's bat.
Guerrero, while aging at the time, was a solid bat for the Cards from 1988-90 before his decline. He drove in 117 runs in 1989. His OPS+ numbers were 125 in '88, 145 in '89 and 108 in '90.
Would Clark have provided the same? Likely. But when you combine Pedro and Bruno, as opposed to Clark and, say, Curt Ford or Jim Lindeman in RF, I'll take Pedro and Bruno.
The difference lies in Tudor, who hurt his arm after the trade to LA. Would the arm injury had occurred here? Hard to say, but it's likely. That would have left the Cards with the same patchwork pitching in 1989, Clark at first base batting cleanup, a slowing Herr at second base, but without Bruno and Guerrero.
So I'm not sure the Clark move was what ultimately crippled the franchise for the next eight years.
by 10worldchamps on Dec 29, 2007 10:45 AM EST up reply actions
remind me
offense
by 10worldchamps on Dec 29, 2007 12:49 PM EST up reply actions
Alicia
anyway, he was no tommy
by mattyfrommo on Dec 29, 2007 12:54 PM EST up reply actions
Point granted
by 10worldchamps on Dec 29, 2007 1:04 PM EST up reply actions
In defense of the
Defense?
It was
My point was that, to replace Clark, the team had to give up one of the game's elite pitchers.
Denkinger
Not quite
by StanTheManFan on Dec 29, 2007 3:01 PM EST up reply actions
3 ideas for "what ifs"
- What would have happened if the Cardinals would have signed another manager instead of TLR?
- What would have happened if someone would have found Darryl Kile in time? (I understand how this could be a touchy one)
3. What would have happened if the "wild card" system had never been implemented? For sure Boston wouldn't have won the 2004 World Series. In fact several of the recent champions would have been different.
I nominate
Addendum
without the wild card
boston in '04
Haren doesn't get traded, we re-sign Renteria, and then 4-peat in '07.
The lockout season 1981
The Haren for Mulder trade bugs me too. What if Haren and Barton were still in St. Louis? We'd have made the playoffs last year with Haren in the rotation (even with the Carpenter injury).
Yeah, Denkinger is the immediate reversal
What if
the tarp doesn't get Coleman?
Half the team isn't hurt in '87?
Half the team wasn't hurt in '96?
Andy Benes is used more sparenly?
Matt Morris is used more sparenly?
Mac get's a perscription for andro?
Matheny get's a scope for his birthday?
Ankiel doesn't freak out?
Drew gets the day off against the lefty Wells?
Kile has a more indepth physical?
All the Diamondbacks know you can't run into a fielder?
Carpenter doesn't get his elbow thing at the end of '04?
Drew
by mattyfrommo on Dec 29, 2007 12:59 PM EST up reply actions
"Ankiel doesn't freak out?"
But then again, we would have had polanco at 2B when he turned into a star, instead of vina/hart/grudz/belly/kennedy.
But THAT leads to- if Belly hadn't made that amazing bases-loaded diving stop in the 2006 playoffs against the padres, they might have come back and won the series... no way anyone but belly makes that play, because of his unique play-2b-from-the-outfield alignment.
Also, would we have gambled on Carpenter if Ankiel was healthy?
Ankiel
interesting stuff...
Rob Neyer, in his Big Book of Baseball Blunders, continually sizes up blunders in terms of pennants won or lost. So let's assume Ankiel keeps it together and becomes, say, Roy Oswalt. And he sticks with the Cards from 2000-2005 before bolting for free agency (as Elvis surmises). In terms of titles, I think our alternate history would look like this:
- No different. The Cards almost definitely lost one game (Game 2 of the NLCS) b/c Ankiel wasn't right. And we also rushed Kile on three days rest in Game 4 and lost b/c of it (despite 6 runs from the Cards). Nonetheless, we only won 1 game that series. I think it's fair to give us an extra win with a sound Ankiel, but not 3 more.
- No different. We lost to the Dbacks that year b/c we couldn't hit Schilling in Game 5, not b/c of lack of pitching. (Although maybe Ank would've helped us at the plate too!)
- Here's where it gets interesting. Do we trade for Finley if we have Ankiel in our rotation? Does that mean we have Coco Crisp on our team? Do we win Game 1 vs. the Giants? All interesting, and yet, like 2000, we only won 1 game in the series. Very doubtful Rick would've been enough to give us a series win.
- We finished only 3 games out of first b/c of terrible pitching. Granted it was more our bullpen than our rotation, but I think it's fair to say the absence of Ankiel might've cost us a division title. And who knows -- maybe Ankiel would've played the role of Josh Beckett from that year.
- I'll say no difference. We got swept in the W.S.
- Again, very interesting. I doubt we would've traded for Mulder if we already had a great lefty in our rotation. But by and large we lost the '05 NLCS b/c we couldn't hit. In the four games we lost we scored 1, 3, 1, and 1 runs. Doubtful a great pitcher could've helped us much.
Are you taking into account playoff matchups?
Also, against the Giants in 2002, another win gets us back to St. Louis down 3-2. While that's not a sure thing by any stretch, it at least gives us more of a shot.
Yeah, I don't see 2003 and 2004 being any different and 2005 is just a crapshoot at that point. Ankiel could even be traded at that point for Mulder instead of Haren, which would most definitely be interesting.
coco crisp...
Not sure I agree about 2000 though. Of course it's all guessing, but Ankiel gave up 2 runs in the first inning of game 2 and we lost it by one run, and he only got 2 outs, forcing the bullpen to get 25 outs that game and forcing the team to deal with the psychological consequences of having the pitcher pulled that early. That's never easy.
We won game 3, and then scored 6 runs in game 4, so there's a very good chance that we could have been up 3-1 going into game 5 if Kile had waited until game 5 to pitch. He still would have lost to Hampton's gem, assuming that still happened, though it may not have if our spirits hadn't been crushed by the pummeling from the day before. Healthy Ankiel clinches the series in game 6 imho.
great points
Ankiel/Smith
If Ankiel's OK in 2002, then the Cardinals might've kept Coco Crisp.
by Rob H on Dec 29, 2007 3:16 PM EST up reply actions
A specific thing involving Bud Smith
If he didn't have that no-no on his dossier (but had an intact arm), the Phillies might have been unwilling to settle for him in the Rolen trade, and might have insisted on something more promising ... like, say, the immortal Justin Pope. Or Chris Narveson. Or even both.
by StanTheManFan on Dec 29, 2007 3:54 PM EST up reply actions
Rolen.
and
by 10worldchamps on Dec 29, 2007 10:54 AM EST up reply actions
Thats a BIG ONE
by That's a Winner on Dec 29, 2007 2:30 PM EST up reply actions
NLCS 05
For starters, I would never take back game 5, with Pujol's devastation of Lidge. But if Eck could've just gotten a ninth inning hit in Game 3 to tie the score with Mabry at 2nd, it might have turned positive.
But please, never put "he who shall not be named" on the mound for the 7th inning of game 4. Two walks and an error E-1 to load them up, and tlr leaves him in to give up a go ahead sac fly. Stop, stop, I can't stand to recount the disaster. Make it go away please.
by Birds on the Bat on Dec 29, 2007 10:43 AM EST reply actions
This game
by cardsgirl95 on Dec 29, 2007 12:45 PM EST up reply actions
"he who shall not be named"
Phantom Tag
by yer dog first on Dec 29, 2007 5:41 PM EST up reply actions
Dekinger...
Not at all
- Cards win in 6, so there is no seventh game. That's more of a success than most teams will experience in the next 25 years all by itself, but even more importantly:
- Tudor doesn't screw up his hand punching the fan after he's yanked from the seventh game;
- Andujar doesn't make a complete fool of himself in the seventh game and become persona non grata -- yet.
- Consequently (and now the speculation begins), the Cards are a much more competitive team in 1986, even though they can't overtake the Mets. They can, however, flip the increasingly erratic Andujar to a contender as the trading deadline approaches -- say, to San Diego (a marginal contender in the NL West in 1986) for prospects nobody has heard of, including one ... Benito Santiago.
- Furthermore, Tudor (who didn't have to waste time in the off season getting his hand healed) is even better in 1986 than in 1985. It's not enough for the Cards to win, but his Cy Young in '86 produces a rotation juggle at the start of the '87 season, so that he's not in the dugout when Barry Lyons falls in. Lyons instead lands on bench-warming John Morris, who's out for the rest of the year, but nobody even notices (except Morris).
- Tudor goes on to the finest year of his late-blooming Hall of Fame career, going 20-4 with a 1.89 ERA (remember, he went 10-2 with the injury) and winning the decisive 7th game of the World Series in the Dome. In that game he's pitching to Rookie of the Year Santiago, who's promoted in May after incinerating the minors, in turn allowing a controversial trade of Tony Pena -- his .214/.281/.307 real-life 1987 suggests this would have been a good idea -- for a flame-throwing but wild Montreal minor-leaguer named Randy Johnson, among others ... and a dynasty is born.
by StanTheManFan on Dec 30, 2007 10:48 AM EST up reply actions
now I like that
by mattyfrommo on Dec 30, 2007 12:40 PM EST up reply actions
Recent history
by Whynot on Dec 29, 2007 11:00 AM EST reply actions
Dammit
- Vince Coleman, drawing on his plus-plus speed, outruns the tarp. (This is what you were training for all those years, Vince!).
- Jack Clark is re-signed.
But that's probably not where you need to go with this one, Larry, and I'm not even sure it changed the course of the franchise that much - just cost the WS, maybe.
Nobody gives me any credit
by vince eating tarp on Dec 29, 2007 5:11 PM EST up reply actions
i second the denkinger idea
by stlcardinalsfang on Dec 29, 2007 11:34 AM EST reply actions
Forgive me if i missed something
Negatives
We never got lucky drafting Pujols in the late rounds.
We didn't get lucky taking a flyer on an injured pitcher with good stuff who hadn't ever really put it all together then became Cy Young (Carpentter)
What if the Busch family held on to the team.
This one is interesting
"It was July 2000 and Kevin Towers [Padres GM] was talking to one of his closest friends in the game, Cardinals GM Walt Jocketty, about a deadline deal. The Cards settled on getting catcher Carlos Hernandez and infielder Nate Tebbs. The Padres would take Heathcliff Slocumb in the deal, plus a minor leaguer. Towers asked for one of two low-minors hitters: Ben Johnson ... or Albert Pujols. Jockety thought it over, then said he'd rather keep Pujols. The rest is history."
As I said earlier, not every alternative history is an improvement! :-)
by StanTheManFan on Dec 29, 2007 11:55 AM EST up reply actions
Elimination of the Wild Card
But just going back a step to previous divisions and applying future season records won't be good enough since the schedule balance was changed at the same time. The hard work would be to try and adjust the season records by appropriately pro-rating each season series for the corrected number of games between each team. That might only change over-all records by a couple of wins, but could be enough to re-order the rankings.
You could then use a simulator to play-out the championship games.
It would be a whole lot more work than idle speculation of other "what if" scenarios, but much more entertaining, and requires a sabermetric response to the question posed. If the system restored the precedent tradition, that only season champions play in the WS, and not a second place team on a hot streak, it could also be pointed out how many great players that never got WS ring, might have. I'd love to see such a list.
by Birds on the Bat on Dec 29, 2007 11:41 AM EST reply actions
Wild Card idea...
East - ATL, CIN, FLA, MIL (once they became NL), MTL/WASH, NYM, PHI, PIT
West - ARIZ (once created), CHI, COL, HOU, LAD, SD, SF, STL
Here is the NL scenario:
1994 - Montreal vs. Houston
1995 - Atlanta vs. Los Angeles
1996 - Atlanta vs. San Diego
1997 - Atlanta vs. San Francisco
1998 - Atlanta vs. Houston
1999 - Atlanta vs. Arizona
2000 - Atlanta vs. San Francisco
2001 - Atlanta vs. St. Louis/Houston (1 game playoff)
2002 - Atlanta vs. Arizona
2003 - Atlanta vs. San Francisco
2004 - Atlanta vs. St. Louis
2005 - Atlanta vs. St. Louis
2006 - New York vs. Los Angeles/San Diego (1 game playoff)
2007 - Philadelphia vs. Arizona/Colorado (1 game playoff)
That is how it would have turned out in the National League.
So, the Cardinals have a shot in only 2004 and 2005. No chance at all in 1996, 2000, 2001, or 2002.
stlfan
*AL is still to come
stlfan
Realignment
East: CHI,FLA,MIL,MTL/WAS,NYM,PHI,PIT,STL
West: ARZ,ATL,CIN,COL,HOU,LAD,SDP,SFG
I started to write the NLCS matchups based on actual win-loss records, but '95 and '98 were just broken because Atlanta and some other "west" team dominated their NLCentral or NLWest division. No realignment would need some serious projection calculations.
by ColinMacLeod on Dec 29, 2007 2:07 PM EST up reply actions
AL now
East - BAL, BOS, CLE, DET, NYY, TOR, and Milwaukee/Tampa Bay
West - ANA, CHI, KC, MIN, OAK, SEA, TEX
Here is the aL scenario:
1994 - New York vs. Chicago
1995 - Cleveland vs. Seattle
1996 - Cleveland vs. Texas
1997 - Baltimore vs. Seattle
1998 - New York vs. Texas
1999 - New York vs. Texas
2000 - Cleveland vs. Chicago
2001 - New York vs. Seattle
2002 - New York vs. Oakland
2003 - New York vs. Oakland
2004 - New York vs. Minnesota/Anaheim (one game playoff)
2005 - New York/Boston (one game playoff) vs. Chicago
2006 - New York vs. Minnesota
2007 - Boston/Cleveland (one game playoff) vs. Anaheim
That is how it would have turned out in the American League.
stlfan
Playoffs
In 1995, the Atlanta Braves beat the Cleveland Indians in real life. Interestingly enough, those two teams would have still made the playoffs in this version, as well.
In 1996, the New York Yankees beat the Atlanta Braves in real life. The Yankees would not have made the playoffs in this version because Cleveland beat them out in the AL East. So, Cleveland would have played Texas for the right to go to the World Series against the (assumed) Braves.
In 1997, the Florida Marlins beat the Cleveland Indians. This gets VERY interesting. Neither team would have made the playoffs. The Braves or Giants would have come from the NL and the O's or M's would have come from the AL.
In 1998, the the New York Yankees beat the San Diego Padres (who would not have made the playoffs in 1998 under this version.) The Yankees still would have made the WS, but they would have been up against the Braves or the Astros.
In 1999, the Yankees beat the Braves and that still could have happened under this version.
In 2000, the Yankees beat the Mets in the Subway Series. This is my favorite one, I think. I had not a care in the world about this one...and NEITHER team would have made it. (woohoo!) The Braves and Giants would have battled it in the NL and the Indians (who missed out in 1997) would have played against the White Sox.
In 2001, Arizona beat the Yankees in a thrilling World Series. Instead, we have our first one game playoff to get into the NLCS. St. Louis and Houston tied atop the NL West and would have a one game playoff to decide who played the Braves. The D'Backs are nowhere to be found. However, the Yankees still get Seattle and probably go to the WS. (P.S. - I lied earlier. The Cardinals still had a shot in '01. Oops!)
In 2002, Anaheim beat the Giants in the WS. Once again, a decent series...NEITHER team makes it. Oakland tries to get by New York (for the first of two straight seasons) and the Braves play the D'Backs instead of the Giants. Completely different.
In 2003, Florida beat the Yankees in a GREAT series that went 6 games and had Beckett beating the Yanks on their own turf to win it all. The Yanks might have gotten there, playing Oakland again...however, Florida doesn't beat Atlanta for the division title; so it is the Braves or the Giants playing the Yanks instead.
In 2004, St. Louis could still have a shot, playing the Braves in the NLCS. They would not face Boston (to lose the World Series), but instead (if they beat the Brvaes) would get the winner of the ALCS. The Yankees would play whoever won the one game playoff between Minnesota and Anaheim.
In 2005, again, the Cardinals play the Braves to possibly advance to the WS. This time, it is the Yankees battling in a one game playoff against Boston while Chicago (the eventual champion over the Astros in real life) waits to beat up on either of them.
In 2006, neither the Cardinals or Tigers advance to the World Series. (Granted the Cardinals could have had championship #s 10 and 11 by this time, but they would not have had a chance in '06.) Instead, it would have been Minnesota playing the Yankees to go to the WS in the AL. In the NL, first a one game playoff would decide if LA or San Diego was in. The winner would attempt to beat the Mets (who would not have to face Dream Weaver, Yadi Molina, Adam Wainwright, So Taguchi and the rest of the Cardinals.)
Lastly, in 2007, Boston beat Colorado in real life. That could have happened in our little game. Colorado would have had a one game playoff against Arizona (sounds sort of familiar...but instead they played the Padres). The winner of that game would have gotten the Phillies. Boston would have also had a one game playoff to get to the real playoffs. It would have been agianst Cleveland. Then, Anaheim would have been awaiting them.
So there you go. History revised.
stlfan
Great History re-write Stlfan
by Birds on the Bat on Dec 29, 2007 1:20 PM EST up reply actions
I did not dare...
stlfan
Interesting
BTW, ESPN.com published a very interesting article about the Braves/Giants pennant race in 93 a few months back. Those kind of divisional races just don't happen anymore, and its sad because that was some kind of season. The Giants were amazing that season, but the Bravos were just a little better.
by redbirdnation8206 on Dec 29, 2007 5:31 PM EST up reply actions
wait a minue
by mattyfrommo on Dec 30, 2007 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
What if Bud Selig had never been hired
What if the Cardinals had home field advantage in '87 against the Twins?
What if the Cardinals had won any one of the last three games in the '96 NLCS?
What if Harry Caray had never left?
What if Rick Ankiel had been a hitter right out of high school?
what if the cardinals
by PGeorge @ Viva El Birdos on Dec 29, 2007 12:23 PM EST reply actions
Two from recent times:
- Matheny injury/Ankiel breakdown - Would Ankiel have avoided his mental breakdown, as TLR believes, if Matheny had been in the game at the time? How different would that postseason have turned out? What would our pitching staff look like today?
- Rolen avoids one or more of his shoulder busting collisions - would we have won some more championships? How much better would our offense have been in subsequent years? Would we still be discussing a TLR/Rolen rift?
Matheny's injury
2000 draft
So how about if we get a do-over on the 2000 draft, and take Chase Utley with the 13th overall pick, instead of Shaun Boyd? (The Phils took Utley with the 15th pick.)
Do we win the pennant in 2005 with Utley's bat in our lineup? Grudz had a total of 7 hits in 9 postseason games in '05, with zero XBHs and zero walks. (He did have one HBP in the WS.)
Even if we hadn't won the pennant in '05 with Utley instead of Grudz, we'd certainly be a better team going forward with that one alt.history move in the '00 draft.
Ankiel - would have made a good movie
draft
Kile
Carp
What if Dave Roberts had been thrown out?
Tons of possibilities....
- The Cardinals and Yanks play a "normal" WS without all the curse implications, and possibly we beat them, a team that I thought we matched up better with than the red hot Red Sox. COuld we have another title?
- The Yanks win that title and A-Rod is given the opportunity to excel on that stage. He gets his first ring. Jeter gets his fifth, joining some pretty elite company. Joe Torre almost certainly is still managing there.
- The Red Sox dissolve. After incredibly disappointing losses to the Yankees in the ALCS in 2003 (Aaron Boone) and 2004 (embarrassing sweep) the Red Sox attempt to switch gears, releasing Theo Epstein and breaking apart the 2004 team, attempting to find the magic formula to get past the Yankees.
A few ideas:
- Whitey manages to trade Hernandez for more than a bag of balls. If I recall the Mets had a decent prospect named Gooden at the time...
- Don Denkinger doesn't blow "the call." Cardinals win the 1985 series.
- Cardinals don't trade VanSlyke and Lavarie for Pena. With the added bats in the line-up they easily win the '87 Series and go to the series again in '89.
- Scott Rolen doesn't get injured in Sepetember '04. Cardinals go on to win the '04 Series. Jocketty trades Emonds in the subsequent post-season and isn't pushed into the Mulder trade.
Last 25 years?
At the meetings, they then began to discuss that it would be implemented in the 1982 season, which would give the MLBPA plenty of time to discuss and adopt it. However, the Phillies owner had gone on a fishing trip during those meetings and was out in the middle of an ocean. The representative couldn't get ahold of him, so he decided to just abstain from voting.
However, he didn't know that the Pirates, who were in the pennant race with the Phillies at the time had been instructed to 'vote as the Phillies vote' as to not allow them to get an edge. So that is what they did. They abstained as well, which made the 'majority' vote almost impossible.
Thus, the DH never came to the National League.
So, if the DH had been implemented: Mark McGwire and Will Clark could have saved wear and tear and stayed on as DHs for the Cardinals. Chris Duncan could be the DH now and the OF would be better defensively.
Also, if it had been voted on in December of 1980, then Whitey might have held on to Ted Simmons and moved him to DH. Thus, the Cardinals wouldn't have acquired Sixto Lezcano for the Ozzie Smith trade, David Green and Dave LaPoint for the Jack Clark trade, Lary Sorensen for the Lonnie Smith trade.
by Hardcore Legend on Dec 29, 2007 2:32 PM EST reply actions
If they hadn't traded Drew
exactly
How about
We like to bash DeWitt but without the sale no renovation to the old bush, no new bush. Would WJ be the GM. If not just start going down that what if. No TLR, Eck, Izzy, or any of the other A's WJ brought with him. No Carp, Rolen, JEd. Granted no Mulder but Walt did alot turning the team around when he got here.
Carlton still a good one but without the sale the last 10 yrs I think would have been worse than the 70's.
by That's a Winner on Dec 29, 2007 2:49 PM EST reply actions
man all the good ones are taken
only thing i have now is oswalt not pitching in 05 after Albert ruined lidge's career. or what if IZZY refused to shut it down in 06? any one thing they even make the playoffs with him as the closer? they sure dont win it all even if they did.
here's one more. what would baseball be like today if no MLB player ever tried steroids or any kind of PED?
Pujols was the mouse that roared
Outside of Renteria and the occasional healthy at-bat from Drew, the 2001 team was mostly past their peak. Edmonds was the only real blue-chipper on the field. Then comes this out-of-nowhere 21-year-old who leads the team in everything and costs all of $200,000. Would we have traded for Rolen the next season without Albert? Maybe, but he looks a lot different as the offensive centerpiece than as a complement to Mr. Pujols.
There were some quality players on those teams, and Walt made some fine moves, but I don't see the same string of success without Albert Pujols. We acquired quite possibly the greatest player of the modern era without spending free agent $$$, a high draft choice or signing bonus.
No Pena trade.
Whitey doesn't make the Tony Pena for Andy Van Slyke, Mike LaValliere, and Mike Dunne. Pena April 1987.
Van Slyke settles in as the everyday RF and Willie stays in center. Cardinals have one of the fastest and best defensive OF of all time in '87.
With the added pitching of Mike Dunne and hitting of LaValliere and Van Slyke Cardinals win the '87 series (or maybe w/o Pena they don't make it past the Giants in the playoffs).
The Cardinals return to the series in 1989. As an underdog they take the series to 7 games, but lose to LaRussa's A's.
The 1990 team isn't bad enough to make Whitey quit. He even captures another pennant in 1993, this time losing to the Blue Jays in 7.
Whitey retires in 1995 after the Brewery anounces plans to sell the team.
Torre stays in the anouncer booth and never manages the Cardinals nor the Yankees.
I'll accept
So my alternate universe instead involves trading LaValliere and Dunne for the unknown minor leaguer with the big fast ball and longg frame, one R. Johnson. Not bad -- we'd get to keep a useful Van Slyke in the deal...
by StanTheManFan on Dec 30, 2007 1:05 PM EST up reply actions
Um they had Pagnozzi
Pags came up in '87
by BeanedByGibson on Dec 30, 2007 9:33 PM EST up reply actions
Some Favorites
- Denkinger doesn't blow the call?
- Sosa beats McGuire in the HR chase?
- Ankiel never melts down?
- Kile doesn't die?
- Carpenter never injures his elbow in '04?
- Cards win GM 1 of the '04 series?
- The Cards never made the Mulder trade?
- Edgar Renteria was resigned?
- Scott Rolen never blows out his shoulder?
- The Cards never drafted Colby Rasmus?
- The Cards take Rick Porcello in the draft?
- David Eckstein was re-signed and moved to 2B?
- Oquendo was given the Manager position?
Here's one
Post Season in 1981?
- It's no fun to write about down-side what-ifs. While it's certainly true Cardinal history looks much different if they don't draft Albert, but that's not much fun for LB to write about.
- The impact has to be fairly concrete. So for example asking what if Oquendo becomes the manager leaves too much room for alternative outcomes.
- While drama says you have to choose a singular event (rather than a broad set of events), I think the most dramatic singular events don't necessarily make for the best story. I agree with a poster above that the Dekinger call, while absolutely crushing, could be argued to have affected only that WS outcome, not future Cardinal history. We were still pennant champs that year (and WS champs 3 years earlier), and I'm not sure what subsequent moves would/would not have been made just because we won that series.
- I like the Carlton idea, and similarly the Ankiel idea: one leaves a HOF lefty on our roster for 5-8 years, the other leaves a predicted HOF lefty for same. (And let me state my POV clearly: a healthy Ankiel without the head case was HOF bound).
The 1981 season was 26 years ago
what if 94 doesn't count
by mattyfrommo on Dec 30, 2007 12:45 PM EST up reply actions
More Denkinger
by StanTheManFan on Dec 30, 2007 1:11 PM EST up reply actions
How about this one...
What if a salary cap were instituted after the last strike (1994) and the last 12 seasons had been played with a cap of, say, (currently) $100 million?
stlfan
what if . . .
Sorry, but I can't remember who else we were considering (I was a tad bit young at the time). Otherwise, I'd make a more thoughtful analysis.
My son's idea, and a good one
- In 2001, instead of Justin "Who?" Pope, they could have had Noah Lowry (who, among other things, could have made the Mulder trade unnecessary, since he's a lefty) or even, gulp, David Wright.
- 2002 was never going to be a good draft year, since their first choice wasn't until the third round, but Rich Hill was still out there when they wasted a pick on Calvin Hayes.
- Can't complain about Daric Barton in 2003 (although they didn't get good value when they traded him), but in 2004, SURELY there were better choices available than Chris Lambert -- Phil Hughes, to name incredibly conspicuous one, and Huston Street, Dustin Pedroia and Hunter Pence were still there when Lambert was taken.
Great discussion topic, btw.
The Don
When I think back to October 26, 1985, I have to wonder what would have happened had Denkinger made the right call. We Cards fans often forget that the baserunner, Jorge Orta, never scored. He was eventually thrown out at third base on the Sundberg sac bunt attempt. Still, the complexion of the inning would have been different with one out and no one on. Perhaps Worrell would have allowed a walk and a homer, all with two outs. It happened to Eck in '88.
We have to look at how things collapsed in that frame. Jack Clark failed to catch a popup in front of the dugout. He and Porter watched it drop between them, but that was Clark's ball as he had the better angle. Didn't Whitey have a defensive replacement for him? Or did he think the Royals could force extras and Clark should stay in the lineup? Later, Porter allowed the passed ball which forced the intentional walk to load the bases. These two guys simply crumbled defensively. And then our old friend Dane Iorg delivered the winning hit. What a shame considering that it was the bottom of the order.
Let's step back to '82. What if the Brewers had Rollie Fingers on the roster? Does he prevent the Cardinals from coming back in Game 7?
I guess my message is that when we consider the misfortunes that have cost us a championship or two, we should also look at how misfortunes of other teams have helped us win one or more of our ten championships.
by BeanedByGibson on Dec 30, 2007 3:43 PM EST up reply actions
What if... we didn't trade Rolen.
by kyle on Jan 2, 2008 3:36 PM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
