other people's money

by lboros on May 11, 2007 7:57 AM EDT in News Comment 89 comments

in the wake of josh hancock's death, teams around the big leagues are banning alcohol from the home clubhouse; a meaningless gesture and (as kevin hench observes) a hypocritical one. brian burwell aptly stated last week that this isn't really about the players; it's about the culture, the society. what, if anything, can the cardinals do about that? what are they obligated to do about it? if i were their pr consultant (which, for the purposes of this blog post, i hereby appoint myself), i'd advise the team to cut a deal with one or two of stl's big cab companies to this effect: the cardinals pick up the fare (up to $25) for any passenger who presents the driver with a ticket stub from that night's ballgame.

i propose the idea in part because pat shannon offered to call a cab for hancock on the night he died; in calling taxis for their patrons, the cardinals would be evoking josh's memory and his tragic mistake. how many fares do you think the team would be on the hook for? i bet it'd be manageable --- only be a few hundred a night. sure, some jerks would be inclined to abuse the policy and hail a taxi while perfectly sober, just to avoid the crush at the metrolink station; the solution to that is to activate the policy at 11:00 pm or midnight, long after the game ends on most nights. that would make sense anyway, because then you're targeting those fans who stay downtown and have a few drinks after the game --- as josh hancock did.

let's assume they average 500 fares a game, and every one of those fares hits the $25 maximum --- that's $12,500 a night. multiply that by the 63 home dates remaining on the cardinals' schedule, and the tab comes to $787,000 --- a little less than twice what hancock's salary was. the policy draws tons of national attention; at the end of the season, the cardinals announce: "we took more than 30,000 drunk drivers off metro-area highways in 2007." add the tax writeoff to the value of all the free and favorable publicity the policy generates, and the team probably comes out ahead on the deal --- while actually doing something meaningful to curtail drunk driving. on any given night, they might save a life; what's that worth? it'd be a fitting tribute to the player they lost --- unlike the clubhouse booze ban, which is a mere CYA move and more than vaguely paternalistic. i daresay the ballplayers themselves might share the expense of all those free cab rides. how much do you think you'd collect for such a fund if you passed the hat around that clubhouse?

i offer the suggestion for free. wait, i take it back --- if the cardinals do take my advice, i'm gonna hit 'em up for a cab ride as compensation.

* * * * * * * * * * *

the subject of the cardinals' spending habits was much-discussed yesterday in the more usual context --- payroll and player procurement. ken rosenthal cited "questions about the commitment of ownership" in his article yesterday; an even more strident critique appeared at si.com, where jon heyman wrote: "[T]he Cardinals' problems go right to the top, to the owner, Bill DeWitt Jr., a rich guy determined to hold on to his money."

that might be an accurate portryal of the st louis ownership, but it's not sound analysis of the cardinals' current woes. the cards are losing because three high-priced veterans --- carpenter, rolen, and edmonds --- are contributing nothing and a fourth (pujols) is well off his game. i've asked before, and i'll ask again: who could, and should, the cardinals have spent their money on who'd be making a difference right now? anybody checked to see how the top free-agent pitchers are doing?

	w-l	era	salary
batista	3-2	5.70	3 yr / $25m
eaton	3-3	7.43	3 yr / $25m
padilla	1-4	4.93	3 yr / $34m
schmidt	1-2	7.36	3 yr / $47m
weaver	0-6	14.32	1 yr / $8.3m
williams	1-5	5.10	2 yr / $12.5m
wolf	3-3	4.61	1 yr / $7.5m

the owners could've opened the purse strings for any of these players, but none would have changed the cardinals' lot today. braden looper --- whom heyman cites as a symbol of the owners' penury --- is outpitching every one of them by a long shot, and reyes and wainwright are pitching no worse. there are some free-agent pitchers who are off to good starts, but most either were out of the cards' price range (zito), got large-dollar contracts that were widely ridiculed (meche, marquis), or never would have considered signing with st louis in the first place (maddux). the exceptions are ted lilly and jeff suppan. suppy's contract looks great after 1 month, but it runs for another 3 years and 5 months; i gotta wait for that deal to run its course before i determine that the cards sold him short.

i think they missed the boat on lilly.

as far as the lineup goes, the only big-ticket free agents who might have helped are soriano and lee --- and they both got contracts that were widely derided, so it's a bit disingenuous to accuse the cardinals of underbidding. another consideration: money tied up in good-not-great 30somethings like soriano and lee would be unavailable to put toward the 20something powerhouses who are due to hit the free-agent market over the next few years. jake peavy, johan santana, and ben sheets will be available after 2008; dontrelle willis, miguel cabrera, matt holliday, and brett myers will be out there after 2009. the cards already have three eight-figure salaries (pujols rolen and carp) on the books for those seasons; add in a $16 million commitment to lee or soriano, and the team might not be in the running for any of those other players.

before you accuse me of being a blind apologist for the franchise, recall that i was harshly critical of it last summer (see this post and this post). but circumstances have changed since last summer. then they were an aging juggernaut with a rapidly closing window of opportunity to win a championship; now they're an aging .500ish team that needs to rebuild --- and has its championship (however flukey) in hand. furthermore, my critique last season wasn't purely based on dollars and cents. i did criticize the owners for cheaping out on aj burnett (whose contract now seems like a bargain), but i was even more critical of the team's reluctance to commit to its young (and cheap) players. getting younger has been an overriding objective since the 2005 nlcs, when the all-geezer outfield of walker, sanders, and edmonds ran outta gas against the astros. two years later, the cards are finally starting to address that issue --- duncan is laying claim to left field, two pre-arbitration pitchers are getting established in the rotation, and a third (thompson) is serving as a stopgap. if the cardinals blew it this off-season, their error lay in insufficiently stocking the outfield bench --- but even there, it might be argued that the failure is one of talent deployment rather than talent acquisition. the cardinals could have signed luis gonzalez, as derrick goold suggested the other day at Bird Land --- but why pay $7.5 million for a 39-year-old left-handed-hitting outfielder when there's a 29-year-old already in the system (john rodriguez) who's about as productive? gonzalez is slugging .405 this year; rodriguez is slugging .481 at triple A . . . . .

the cardinals' problem is really quite simple. albert pujols is creating only 5.5 runs per 27 outs this year, just over half of his career rate (9.7 rc/27); if he were matching his career average this year, the cardinals would have about 15 more runs on the board in 2007. rolen created 6.8 runs per 27 last season, almost exactly his career average; this year he's producing 2.5 runs per 27, and that decrease has cost the cardinals 13 runs. edmonds created 5.8 runs / 27 last year, well below his career mark but still much better than the 2.3 runs / 27 he's creating this season; if he were simply matching last year's diminished production, the cards would have another 10 or so runs. taken together, those three players' slumps have cost the cards about 38 runs this year --- about 4 wins in the standings. that, plus carpenter's injury, explains why the cardinals are struggling.

and no amount of spending can fix it.

0 recs | Comment 89 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

the cab idea

I like the game ticket-cab idea on several levels. It's great PR for the team, would not cost that much money for drunks only, and might actually get people to start thinking more seriously about catching a cab when drunk. I'd be much more apt to have my wife drop me off at the ballpark for a game with the guys than to drive myself if I knew there was a free cab waiting. Thinking this through though ... the largess might get abused ... whether drunk or not it would be cool to catch a free cab home from the game. They should give this thing a try like on the one month anniversary of Josh Hancock's death and see how much it costs.

by jjray on May 11, 2007 8:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

it should also be mentioned

that it would be a lot less expensive to the Cards than banning beer sales or even limiting them. Now that would cost some serious coin!

by chuckb on May 11, 2007 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If I lived within cab range of STL

I'd be tempted to drink an extra beer or three if I knew I had a free ride home... such a thing might end up making them money, esp when you consider that a lot of people would share cabs and drink.

Lutvig walks amongst us!!! (now to free j-rod...)

by SleepyCA on May 11, 2007 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Chris Dimino had this fool Heyman

on the radio. He was a poorly researched hack who just jumped on the "bash the defending World Champions" bandwagon. He really could not back up his arguments.

That article is a complete joke; you don't have to be an apologist to realize it, either.

BTW, Ankiel hit another homer last night. Memphis lost 7-3, but Slick Rick is hitting .281/9/31/.579/.897. Who woulda thunk it?

by silent_bob on May 11, 2007 8:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

edit:

Memphis lost 11-3. Tough nite for Parisi.

by silent_bob on May 11, 2007 8:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hey Bob

Any thoughts on Encarnacion's wrist? Is this a normal timetable for a rehab? Is he going to have proper strength, or is this going to continue to be a problem, like Derek Lee's was last year?

Personally, I'm hoping for him to come back strong, and Ryan Ludwick to keep producing. That way, Juan can be traded, and he may bring a decent return.

Acquire Rocco Baldelli!

by the red baron on May 11, 2007 8:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll look up some stuff today...

Not even sure when his surgery was - but he's had some setbacks. Hitting and wrist injuries do not go well together. D. Lee still doesn't have his power all the way back. But boy can that guy hit.

I think we can expect similar things from Juan E - fine in the field - home runs and doubles will be down until later in the year.

by silent_bob on May 11, 2007 8:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks, Man.

Sorry to lean on you all the time for the medical knowledge, but my base doesn't really much of that. If mid century design elements, de stijl, or architecture of the past 300 years ever come up in a thread here, feel free to cash in on me.

His surgery was in December, btw. I know because several times I've heard radio types and whatnot comment on how foolish it was to wait two months after the season to have the surgery. Of course, if they were paying attention, they would know that's just modus operandi for the Cardinal organization.

Acquire Rocco Baldelli!

by the red baron on May 11, 2007 8:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

For hitting and wrist injuries:

Look under file: Maris, Roger - Cardinals

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 11, 2007 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Does Lee "not have his power"

or is he simply regressing to his non-2005 average?

by sdrone on May 11, 2007 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

My guess -

it's the wrist. Probably doesn't have full strength back yet.

by silent_bob on May 11, 2007 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and Lee is still

having an incredible year- I'd take .389/.467/.565 a year after surgery any day.

Lutvig walks amongst us!!! (now to free j-rod...)

by SleepyCA on May 11, 2007 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Article

See firejoemorgan.com for their typically brutal rebuttal of that article.

by tinstl on May 11, 2007 9:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice Post

this morning Larry. I really like your taxi cab idea. It seems like a perfect way to actually do something meaningful to honor a player's memory and help in the community. I don't think it will happen, though.

You're also absolutely on target re the offensive problems. You can complain about the supporting cast, but the real issue is that the core guys aren't offering anywhere near what you expect. Of course, the question of whether or not the Cardinals should have seen it coming is a valid one, I think.

Also, I'm taking your Ted Lilly comment as personal vindication for my winter campaign.

Acquire Rocco Baldelli!

by the red baron on May 11, 2007 8:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Best last round draft pick....

Took Teddy in all three of my fantasy leagues. I honestly don't think he can continue the current rate. History shows a .5 drop in ERA in a move from the AL to NL. (I think that's right.) I'm probably guessing more along the lines of .6 because A) he was pitching in the AL East, a big scoring division and B) the NL Central is pretty anemic this year.

I do worry about the HR rate in Wrigley though.

by Brock20 on May 11, 2007 9:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Cabs in St Louis

are nearly impossible to get. Between that and the fact that most people have to drive to a metro station just to catch a train, the culture of drunk driving thrives in this town. I'd love to see something change -- ie. more cabs, more metro stops -- but it is what it is and have been for some time.

I would like to see the Cards take partner with the drivers seat, an innovative non-profit quasi-taxi designated driver program.

Everybody off the bandwagon!

by Alxfritz on May 11, 2007 8:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Driver's Seat

That sounds like an awesome idea. If that group is non-profit, Cards ownership could at least puchase some of the scooters they use in Josh's memory and score a tax write-off as well as favorable publicity. And, far more importantly, lives could be saved. Sounds like a win-win all the way around.

by cardsgirl95 on May 11, 2007 8:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

University of Wisconsin...

Does it, or something similar. Each student gets three free cabs home at any point. The University contracts with one of the companies in town and then distributes the number far and wide for the students to know and call. (Side note: you can get them when you're drunk or you just don't feel safe walking home.)
I'd put a couple of cost saving measures in place, borrowed from the UW, that may prevent some of the abuse you mention.
First, you don't get your own cab. If I call from Morgan Street Brewery on the Landing, and Larry calls from the stadium, and we both want to go to the Delmar MetroLink station, then the cab picks me up and then picks Larry up and we share the cab. (So, you can end up riding with strangers, no big deal really.)
The way around this, and to actually encourage car pooling and ride share, is to have your whole group call together. So, using my above example again, say four of us are having a VEB meetup at Morgan Street and its time to go home, we call together and the cab take all of us. (There are limits on distance, so its not going to drop me on the East Side, you in Clayton, and a third guy in St. Charles.)
I'm sure the bulk purchase discounts the fares considerably and its also a great marketing tool for the cab company.
On an unrelated note to all of our out town friends, if you haven't used MetroLink, by all means do! It's very easy to use, it's clean, and it's safe as heck. Oh and it's cheap.

by Brock20 on May 11, 2007 9:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

cabs in STL

>>Cabs in St Louis are nearly impossible to get.<<

Would disagree for the city and downtown in particular. All major downtown hotels have cabs out front. The Adams Mark and the Renaissance Grand have a perpetual line of cabs out front every evening. If you call for a cab in the city, it comes quite quick.

by jjray on May 11, 2007 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

so true

there's 85,000 haitian cabbies hanging around lambert in an idle line...and zero cabs downtown.

It happened on a Sunday afternoon, August 22, 1982.

by Glenn Brummer stole home on May 11, 2007 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And if the Birds institute this policy,

you'll see more cabbies showing up downtown. Supply and demand!

by MdRedbirdFreak on May 11, 2007 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

By the way ,

I read Jon Heyman's SI article. Does he have a clue what he is talking about? It didn't seem like it. The whole thing appeared to be a "take a poke at the slumping Cards" diatribe. Your question (and analysis) was much more valuable. What could/should management have done to prevent this slump? Throwing money at a problem doesn't solve it, it just creates the illusion that "something is being done".

by cardsgirl95 on May 11, 2007 8:56 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Not any different from any other big company

As much as most of us try to deny it, the Cardinals are a business and will be ran as such. While Josh Hancock's accident got them to institute the ban on alcohol, the Cardinals banned the booze to keep lawsuits from coming back to them in the future. If Hancock would have gotten in the accident leaving directly from the clubhouse instead of a bar, I guarantee we'd be seeing a lawsuit. The team was closing off that possibility altogether. But if the team was really committed to preventing drinking and driving, they'd have the beer vendors keep a better eye on amounts served. But that'll never happen when people are willing to get hammered off $9 beers.

by JShell73 on May 11, 2007 9:33 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Regarding...

offseason non-moves, the big misses were on Suppan and Weaver.

Suppan, dating back to last year's all-star break, has managed a sub-2.5 era covering 26 starts. At some point the conventional wisdom of him being at heart a crappy pitcher who'll eventually come back to earth doesn't hold anymore.

Who knows how Weaver would've done had he remained a Card (maybe we'll find out!)... I don't think he would have blown out like he has, but a sub-5.00 era might not be such a great bet either. The point is these signings would have made Reyes expendable. Yes we like young talent, but Reyes presumably could have been packaged for a one of those young Devil Ray outfielders or some other twentysomething with two or three years of experience.

As far as worrying about a Suppan signing taking us out of the running for Sheets/Santana/Peavy, ownership has stated repeatedly that payroll isn't fixed, and for the right player it can go up. I think there's a fairly large payroll range (say $85-$110 million for 2007) they're willing to operate in, and I for one think the team would be better if we stayed closer to the top end.

by guayzimi on May 11, 2007 9:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Weaver

It looks like we can have him if we really want to.

Everybody off the bandwagon!

by Alxfritz on May 11, 2007 10:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

if they will eat all or most of his contract

i don't see why we wouldn't do this. they wouldn't expect much, if anything, back in return

by tdawg on May 11, 2007 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

stay tuned boys

something might be afoot.

by lboros on May 11, 2007 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

P-D

In the Post-Dispatch (STLtoday.com) this morning, Jeff Gordon's column hinted at the possibility that the M's are ready to let Weaver go. Could he right himself with Duncan's help yet again?

by cardsgirl95 on May 11, 2007 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Suppan

I never thought this possible, but I'm wondering if Jeff Suppan is hitting a Greg Maddux-like stride in his early 30's. Maybe he's just putting it all together and will be an ace for the next few years.

Scary thought for the Birds if that's the case, 'cause we'll see a lot of him.

by raisin on May 11, 2007 9:53 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

stikeouts

He is not striking people out enough. Maddux had pretty good K rates in his prime.

by BigJawnMize on May 11, 2007 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Strikeouts

don't necessarily gauge a pitcher's proficiency. Look at Bob Tewksbury or John Tudor; they were never big strikeout pitchers, while being quite successful.

by cardsrul on May 11, 2007 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

true but...

to show real improvement that isn't flukish a pitcher usually has to do one of three things: increase strikeouts, decrease walks, or decrease homeruns allowed.

by BigJawnMize on May 11, 2007 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Miscellaneous

Cab thing: In principle, sounds great. In practice, there are a lot of variables that could go wrong. Imagine people who go there expecting one of these free cabs...maybe they can't get one or maybe it encourages certain individuals to binge. (knowing they don't have to drive.)

Offseason: I was somewhat disappointed in the Cards' offseason, but I wanted Weaver back, and that doesn't seem like such a bargain now. The fact is that this offseason was very weak for free agent talent and I can't fault the Cards too much for not overpaying. (I can fault them for not extending Suppan before he became a FA.)The fact remains, they could have signed Zito, Lee, Soriano, and Schmidt and they would still be only around .500 up to this point with a 150MM+ payroll. Their problem is simple, their stars are all collectively slumping. We are seeing the exact opposite of 2004 when Edmonds, Rolen, and Pujols tore the league apart.

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

by Elvis on May 11, 2007 10:13 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Heyman Knows Zero

With regards to Heyman's fallacious and shallow column, you nailed it Larry. Nice work. It irks me to no end when writers pen simplistic garbage like this. It's an insult to fans here and everywhere. I ranted on this ad nauseum at GRB, so I'll stop myself here.

Think for a moment how life was before blogs, sabermetrics, and the Internet. I biggest exposure to sports was pubs like SI and ESPN. It's like we have emerged from a communist dictatorship where there were no phones, no independent papers, and only one tv channel and one radio station. God it's great to be free.

by Hungry Jack on May 11, 2007 10:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

on FA pitchers

lboros, you seem to dismiss meche based on the contract, but IIRC the contract wasn't derided simply because of the numbers; it was specifically because it was the royals spending the money. gil meche and that $55 million isn't going to make the royals a contender. but if another team had spent it, that contract probably looks a lot better. and gil meche looks good right now.

so does ted lilly. i was a big proponent of his in the offseason. but you know what? the way things have worked out with looper, i'm not sure i was right. i guess you could have signed lilly instead of wells. that would have been nice. but i wouldn't take lilly and his contract instead of reyes and ww right now.

folks, do not worry so much about jeff suppan. or jason marquis. their peripherals are ridiculous right now and over the course of the season they will even out to the mediocre pitchers we know they are.

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on May 11, 2007 10:24 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

no, the meche deal was panned on the merits

not just because it was the royals. he got more years, and more dollars per year, than more accomplished pitchers like lilly and suppan. this is a guy who hasn't beat the league average in era since 2000.

moreover, it's a five-year contract, and five-year contracts for good pitchers draw criticism; the cards' extension for carpenter was panned in some quarters (BP, for example) because of its length.

by lboros on May 11, 2007 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

FJM.com

Did a pretty good job of harpooning that heyman article.

The cardinals actually had a great plan this offseason, pursuing power-pitching for the first time in a long time, and offering contracts equal or better contracts than the ones the players (Schmidt, Pettitte, Wolf) signed. Just had a weird offseason, with plan a, b, and c all falling through.

by Jonathan23 on May 11, 2007 10:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

VEB out in front

Great post yesterday on JJ, and picking apart Rosenthal. With a lot of great follow-on posts, it makes off-days interesting, and continually demonstrates why coming to veb is more informative and entertaining than anything the pro writers are putting out.

Today's suggestion is another good one for the cause. The Driver's Seat approach is a great one, although it does require that you have a car.

While visiting a friend in Florida recently that wasn't up to drivng me back to my hotel, he pulled out a card for the same type service and gave them a call. Since I didn't have a car they said they don't just give free rides, and we should call a taxi. My friend scrolled down the yellow pages a little too far, and when he asked if they would come to the house to pick up my friend, the guy laughed and said, "I'm a Taxidermist." After we stopped laughing, I just borrowed his car and drove myself.

Don't know how to keep a system from being abused, but we can't keep a culture of letting drunks drive.

Fan for Life. Go Cards.

by Birds on the Bat on May 11, 2007 10:41 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

alternative to the cab idea....

stop selling beer at the ball games. or at the very least, stop selling it after the 5th inning.

this would truly fix the problem rather than offering everyone a free bandaid.

and that's not even mentioning the other issues this would alleviate, i.e. fights (although there aren't THAT many at a cards game), drunken swearing 2 rows from the 7 year-old kid, etc., etc.

by busch league on May 11, 2007 10:43 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Boooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!

Everybody off the bandwagon!

by Alxfritz on May 11, 2007 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

re: alternative to the cab idea

While this is great in theory,

Guys will just start stockpiling beers earlier.
Ticket and merchandise prices in general will go through the roof without beer sales.

I know it's sad, but true.

by JShell73 on May 11, 2007 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

BOOOOOOOOO!!!

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on May 11, 2007 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Stop selling Beer?

I think the most over-looked aspect of this is "personal responsibility". I should be up to the individual to police him/herself.

And talk about a loss of revenue. I don't have any facts but back it up, but I think it is reasonable to believe that the largest chunk of money that all MLB teams recieve from consession is from beer.

by gonzostl on May 11, 2007 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

personal responsibility is the real issue here. if it were exercised, then it would be a moot issue.

however, we all know that, if given the opportunity, people will knock back a couple of beers (or more) and drive home.

it's obvious that the "no alcohol" policy will never be instituted. my only point was that if the powers that be were REALLY concerned about stopping drinking and driving from the ballpark, then the ONLY way to fix it would be to stop selling it. the fact is though, that there are other variables in play, the biggest of which is revenue.

by busch league on May 11, 2007 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

stop selling beer....

in BUSCH stadium???

by rvacardsfan4ever on May 11, 2007 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i was saying boo-urns...

i would have to respectfully disagree. as this is an issue that tends to get me excited, i'll try to be brief.

i am in complete agreement with the linked article which states that american driving culture is more the problem than drinking. drinking and driving is wrong, stupid, and dangerous, but that doesn't mean that we should regulate one part of that dangerous combo more than the other. sober drivers kill more people each year than non-driving drinkers, so it's obvious which half of the equation is the more dangerous. as stated in earlier comments, st louis has a drinking and driving culture, so any change will be difficult, but just cutting off the flow of beer isn't the answer (yes, there are relatively few fights and other disturbances now...).

there are plenty of people out there who need a lesson in self regulation, but it isn't up to the cardinals to regulate for them. (the socialist in me is arguing that this sounds like a great argument in favor of corporate greed, but i'm just ignoring that right now.)

larry, i applaud your cab idea, as well as the scooter/lift thing, which i think is a fantastic concept. we aren't trying to keep people from raising one (or four), just to keep them from getting behind the wheel afterwards.

Rabid Redbird

by gthedamned on May 11, 2007 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with

the general idea that it would be too difficult to cut out beer altogether but this statement,

"...sober drivers kill more people each year than non-driving drinkers, so it's obvious which half of the equation is the more dangerous."

That is a ridiculous statement. I think people agree that driving in and of itself can be dangerous. It is also more dangerous when people are distracted by doing things such as talking on cell phones, drinking coffee, shaving, and DRINKING, among other things.

But drinking DOES affect the way you drive. Maybe if half of all drivers were drunk and half were sober you would have an argument. Otherwise your statement is preposterous.

by eglasier on May 11, 2007 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ditto

"...sober drivers kill more people each year than non-driving drinkers, so it's obvious which half of the equation is the more dangerous."

Here's a few other pieces of wisdom built on the same logic....

People are more likely to be injured at home than away from home, so, don't go home.

People are more likely to be in a car accident within a few miles of their house than far away, so, don't drive anywhere near your house.

People are more likely to die in bed than in a parachute accident, so, don't go to bed.

In psychology and statistics, this is known as neglecting the base rate. Since well more than half the drivers at any one time are sober--let's hope--they have more opportunities than the drunk do for being in an accident. The key is that, conditional on being drunk, the rate of injury/accident/death is higher than the rate for those who are sober.

by ncgostl on May 11, 2007 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

at no point

did i state that drinking and driving was not dangerous. i'm only saying that the thousand pound/sixty-mile-an-hour missle is more dangerous than one drunk guy on the street. in combination, obviously, the two are insanely dangerous, but when we separate the parts of the equation, one element is primarily dangerous to one's self, while the other is potentially dangerous to everyone.

Rabid Redbird

by gthedamned on May 11, 2007 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Seriously?

Call up Ankiel!!

by jeff abs on May 11, 2007 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

NO MORE HOT DOGS EITHER

people are getting too fat!!

It happened on a Sunday afternoon, August 22, 1982.

by Glenn Brummer stole home on May 11, 2007 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

funny, but.....

i can't recall the last time someone ate a hot dog and then got on the road and killed someone (because of eating the hot dog).

personally, i couldn't care less of people drink. hell...take a bath in it if you want to for all i care. it's irrelevant to me. it only becomes an issue for me if you drink and then get behind the wheel of a car and drive on the same roads that my pregnant wife drives with our 7 year old son.

by busch league on May 11, 2007 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

uh-oh...bad grammar

i didn't mean to use the word "you" in there. i wasn't directing that post at any one person. just those that drink and drive, in general.

my apologies for my idiocy.

by busch league on May 11, 2007 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think that taxi idea

is a great idea...even if you raise ticket prices just 50 cents to $1, and put that towards this service, then you will be able to raise more than enough money to counter those who want to take advantage of the system

by MarcGldstn on May 11, 2007 11:08 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

agreed

$0.50 x 3,000,000 tickets sold = $1,500,000. More than covers the cost in Larry's example, plus it's a great PR move and example for the sport.

by effin fisk on May 11, 2007 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

hitting lefties and outfield depth

Great analysis on the offseason spending and offensive woes. You can pick at the edges of this roster all you want, but if Carpenter, Pujols, Rolen, and Edmonds are bad then nothing else matters. If the Cardinals have a flaw in their offseason/free agent plans, it's that they are too stubborn with their "priorities". This winter they waited and waited on pitching while missing out on outfield depth. They also did not address their weakness in hitting left-handed pitching. In fact, they made it worse by signing Kennedy while guys like Ted Lilly and Rich Hill moved into the Cubs rotation. I think the Cards are on the right track in improving their minor league system, but it could be a couple of bumpy years before Walt has the chess pieces he needs.

by lefty fan on May 11, 2007 11:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

great post

i was fairly skeptical of the 'team picks up the tab' idea until i started thinking about it -- what if, with some sort of financial backing, every major league team provided its fans with some sort of incentive not to drive drunk? whether it's via some sort of stipend or discount, i think it is a great idea and wonderful opportunity for the league to preemptively rectify future wrongs related to drinking and driving. from a marketing standpoint, couldn't teams -- or the league for that matter -- offset some of the costs with additional support from the alcohol sponsorships?

another thought: wouldn't it be an excellent way for mlb to actually hedge against any steroid related backlash? i know it's somewhat of a stretch, but from a social perspective, if it started with a program like this, the league would have more credibility when addressing the steroid issue. i know i'm speaking from a vastly idealistic point of view; however, we could do something -- given that we are fairly ardent supporters of the game -- by expressing our support for the idea. all things considered, the cardinals and the league have the opportunity to serve as the catalysts for a movement that would publicly attempt to take a major social stand. if you genuinely examine the issue, you will grasp the magnitude of the potential opportunity.

as for the second part of the blog post, i completely agree that, given last year's free agent class, it doesn't seem likely that any of those guys would have really helped the cards' cause. my feeling is that the organization is suffering the after-effects of a systemic problem: the inability to develop talent. teams lock up their top young guys in their arbitration years, and subsequently the free agent market has developed into a place where players go who are not worth -- by a seemingly large margin -- what they are asking for. whether that's because their production can be replaced fairly easily or because the teams and player cannot agree on an appropriate value, free agents are going to be extremely expensive (alfonso soriano). if the cardinals want to sign a big name free agent, they are going to have to overspend, which obviously won't happen given our most recent history. the only alternative i can see is to have the team stay patient until the farm system begins to develop.

by ambajwa on May 11, 2007 11:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

drinking and driving

larry, great effort to put forward a realistic solution to some small part of the drunk driving problem that we have in this country. i applaud you for challenging the club to step up and take some real responsibility. however, i don't think that solutions of this nature will ever catch on. (and believe me, i wish that they would! i lost a sister to a drunk driver; nobody should have to go through that.) although i haven't researched the issue, i think that there is at least a possibility that a team which adopted this tactic would open itself up to litigation should drunk fans face some obstacle to using the service, such as not being able to find a taxi, and then get into accidents. by offering rides, the team would at least giving the appearance of accepting responsibility for the welfare of those patrons of busch stadium who choose to imbibe to excess while watching a game. i don't know that there is precedent on this issue, but some creative plaintiff's lawyer might find a way to make it stick. sad that this type of consideration might stop the implementation of an otherwise good program.

by ChiTown CardFan on May 11, 2007 12:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

burwell's article

as i read that article, it made me increasingly furious.

here's his irrational steps in 'logic'...

he saw drunk people at the stadium... this implies these people are not only unaffected and disrespectful towards the hancock incident, but obviously driving drunk and precipitously adding to the problem.
then let's add some sappy unrelated story of albert's hard-drinking father - in order to further color the 'drinkers' as evil menaces to society.

i agree, people are idiots. many fans are irresponsible drinkers. i love having a few at the cardinals game. but if i'm drinving, i don't. but to assume that anyone who gets a bit tipsy at the game is akin to being a drunk-driving alcoholic - that's bullshit.

"Left-hander, right-hander, soft thrower, power guy, fastballs away, fastballs in-- [Albert Pujols] doesn't have any holes." - Tino Martinez

by _pistol_ on May 11, 2007 1:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I can't stand Burwell

He adds absolutely nothing to baseball. The only time he writes an article is when something un-baseball related happens to give his useless 2 cents. I won't read anything with his name on it because I know it's just a waste of time, horrible writer.

by Carps on May 11, 2007 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Amen

I could not agree more.

by Robb on May 11, 2007 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

wow.

i think everyone would agree that, every time we see a new article by him, we immediately acknowledge that it's going to be terrible.

i don't think he knows much about baseball; and he never really says anything of consequence.

by ambajwa on May 11, 2007 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I Cant stand Burwell

I always forget that he exists until I read a terrible article and then see his name at the top of it.

2006 Cardinals- An underdog story

by Born in 82 on May 11, 2007 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is why I read this blog

Larry, thanks for a thoughtful and constructive discussion. I trust the Cards are reading.

And as a former St. Louisan now living in the Northwest, I'm glad to have the team back in my time zone the coming week, even though it means some tough pitching awaits.

All you know about pitching is that you can't hit it.

by hoot on May 11, 2007 1:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

In the NW too

I'm going to LA this weekend for a cruise. Unfortunately, I don't have enough time to swing to San Diego and the Cards are out of California by the time I return to shore. Such is life.

by ColinMacLeod on May 11, 2007 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Games in Los Angeles next week

Are any other Southern California VEBers going to the Cardinals/Dodgers game on Tuesday night? I have one available ticket (it cost me about $60.00 - and I will pass it on to you for the same). The seats are awesome, loge level, first base side, close enough to hear Brad Penny cursing when he gets tossed from a game (as I observed last year).

I know that there are a few other Californians in here - please let me know by sending an e-mail to lawman3842@gmail.com.

The Cardinal Curmudgeon

by lawman3842 on May 11, 2007 1:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

i wish

I'm going tonight (if I can get off work in time to drive to SD) and tomorrow and then hopefully monday, but have to fly to tucson tuesday morning :(

Lutvig walks amongst us!!! (now to free j-rod...)

by SleepyCA on May 11, 2007 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

SD

I just got tix for wifey and I to drive down on Sunday and watch the game. I am tempted to take you up on that offer, however

by FunkeeC on May 11, 2007 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

We'll be there sunday too

Happy Mother's Day :)

by OCCardsFan on May 11, 2007 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

BTW

Awesome post, as always, Larry.

The Cardinal Curmudgeon

by lawman3842 on May 11, 2007 1:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Spending Dewitt's Money

Walt, Tony, and Dunc have done a great job for several years now in identifying bargains and fixing up retreads.

Here is the problem. The other teams have taken notice and are copying their philosophy. Also, the league has tons of cash, even the poor teams have money to spend.

Results: It's tough to get bargains in terms of money because now there is bidding for the retreads. Also, the have-nots are not so cash-strapped any more, so they can hold onto their higher priced players or hold out for better players in return. Also, Jocketty has such a reputation for spotting bargains that teams that have them are reluctant to deal and anyone knowing a Jocketty target will likely put in a bid also.

How would you spend it?

I would start by identifying the best scouts in the game. (take a look around the Marlin's, Angels, A's, and other organizations) Find the best ones and double their salaries to join the Cards.

Next, find the best minor league instructors and coaches in all of baseball and double their salaries to get them into the Cards' system.

Next, step up their international scouting and baseball academies. (they are already doing this)

These 3 steps would cost less than 1 Mid-Level free agent signing and provide a pipeline of players to use and trade for proven major league talent. (It would take a few years)

In the meantime, Walt can keep digging through the bargain barrel.

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

by Elvis on May 11, 2007 1:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

you're comment on

other GM's imitating Jock got me thinking...
If Seattle were to give up and DFA Weaver during the season, would there be teams other than STL willing to view him as a reclamation project? That is, assuming the cards will sport any interest.

"Left-hander, right-hander, soft thrower, power guy, fastballs away, fastballs in-- [Albert Pujols] doesn't have any holes." - Tino Martinez

by _pistol_ on May 11, 2007 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe

If the M's are willing to eat most of that contract, the Orioles and Nationals come to mind as a couple who might have interest.

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

by Elvis on May 11, 2007 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Suppan

I've always contended that Suppan was the best pitcher available on the market.

I'd love to have him as a solid starter, be debating on whether to ship Wainright to the bullpen to fix his problems or Wells.

At the start of spring training: Edmonds is like 40 years old with 2 offseason surgeries. Juan had wrist surgery. Duncan was a very risk position (at the start of spring training). Kennedy was going downhill before this season started. Molina behind the plate has and continues to be an offensive question mark.

I would have loved to see a blockbuster trade to put a powerhouse into the outfield. aka Carlos Lee.

Yet this is another post of "which pitcher should we have picked up".

Here's the bottom line, we had a choice between Jeff Suppan and Kip Wells. We picked Wells.

by redbird2006in on May 11, 2007 1:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Apples To Oranges

Wells was WAYYY cheaper than Suppan.

A walk is a waste of three pitches-Bob Gibson

by orlando card on May 11, 2007 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, you're right

Comparing Soup to Wells is comparing apples to oranges.

Our team is an orange evidently.

And the brewers are in first place.

by redbird2006in on May 11, 2007 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

the brewers are NOT

in first place in whole, or in large part, because of jeff suppan. and by the end of the season, suppan will be what he has always been - a middle-rotation innings-eater with an era in the 4s.

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on May 11, 2007 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Waaaaay off

Wells got a 1 year 4 million contract. Suppan got a 4 years 42 million contract. I don't see how those two are equal and the Cardinals picked Wells instead of Suppan. I much rather take a chance on Wells (who could still work out) and then have the financial ability to go after Peavy or Sheets after 2008 instead of still having Suppan under contract for two more years and 20 mil. plus.

by stl3bagger on May 11, 2007 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Can't Judge...

You can't judge a deal by the first 7 starts. Suppan earned a chance at big money and got it from a team willing to spend it. We weren't willing to so we went a different route. Good for Suppan I wish him well.

I completely agree that taking a 1 year risk on Wells was worth it and again, 7 starts does not make a season. Just like Marquis, Suppan will level out a little bit and won't have that 5+ run support per game all year.

Having that money not tied up in long term contracts with pitchers will allow us to be in the running on the young guns coming into their free agency in the next few years. How about Berhle?

by Mrthe2th on May 11, 2007 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

cab idea

would be a nice gesture and a good way to remeber josh. However it does kind of remove personal responsibility. I'm not a drinker anymore but have DD many a time. It's sad that people get in accidents but it's even sadder when you examine their frame of thought.

I grew up in a small town and heard this term alot" he or she or I'm a great driver when I'm drunk" now often people would say this when they were sober to justify driving. Josh turned down a cab that was his choice and a poor one. I know people can get impaired but I also know that this mindset plays a factor. My friends when we went out always took good care of me cause I was taking em home, Even if they had one or two theyd have me drive.

Sometimes I guess the person can be so sloshed maybe the cab idea works there a few friends get the cab toss their buddy in and wah lah...

I just hated when The birds got hit with a lot of bad wrap for Joshs decisions. If people were trying to get him help and he refused what can you do? There always has to be someone to blame and the clubhouse thing or and oragnization is easier to blame than the person who made the bad decision.

I guess it can go both ways i dunno thats my 2 cents

now not only a clever saying, but a team that plays in STL

by punchinjudy on May 11, 2007 2:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

John Gall

If you didn't hear yet, everyone's favorite AAAA player John Gall was called up by the Marlins today.

by stl3bagger on May 11, 2007 4:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

This whole

"post-apocalyptic" knee jerk reaction attitude people exhibit in cases like this irritates me, because if it's such a big deal, why weren't any actions taken beforehand? I've been hearing the same shit here in Virginia since the VA Tech shootings. Why do people always wait until after a tragedy to express their concern and anger? If it bothers you that much, be proactive for Christ's sake.

by cardsrul on May 11, 2007 4:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Knee Jerk and Same Old Shit

is why we don't get traffic lights until three die at the intersection, and we all now how it goes. It is also why we continue playing veterans until it is obvious that they can't. Many here thought we might have been "proactive" by not picking up jed's option, but then many more thought that getting two more years was a better bargain than just picking up the option for one last year on the downside of a great career. We can debate this again now because of unnaceptable performance, and it's knee jerk and same old shit, but so what.

So here's another idea:

If the Cards printed the phone number for The Drivers Seat on the back of every ticket it could help a few. If the ticket was given to the volunteer driver, on any occasion not just after games, and the volunteer driver turned it in for a $10 tip paid by a fund supported by the club, it might help even more. If the Cards along with the other sports franchises in town all chipped in this way, it could help even more.

Knee jerk can work.

Fan for Life. Go Cards.

by Birds on the Bat on May 11, 2007 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Cabs

Best idea I've heard in a long time. The team/Busch family is making enough money on beer sales, might as well spring for a cab.

by Chez Vick on May 11, 2007 4:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Good luck

finding anyone at AB or in the Cardinals organization who says, "We're making enough money..."

Anyone with any organization, really.

by effin fisk on May 11, 2007 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and that's why VEB is the king

dead on post as usual. if you don't get paid for this, you should. you set the bar high for the rest of us scrubs who try our hand at this blogging thing.

cab idea is great. i also like the idea mentioned above about cutting off beer sales. but i'd wait till after the 7th. i think some teams to that. i'm also for limiting beer sales to about 5 per person per game. i've seen far too many guys down 12+ beers per game and then go drive to a bar after the game, then drive home. of course i'm not a beer drinker so it does not affect me. but a drunk driver can still kill me on the road.

beer and baseball go hand in hand with a lot of people. not selling it at all would kill attendance. you can't just not sell beer at a ball park. but some day a drunk driving home from a game will kill some one, and their family will sue a team. it will happen. it's only a matter of time. teams should do everything they can to protect themselves, and if cutting off sales after so many innings and limiting how much a person can buy during a game will do that, and in the process save a life or two, i'm all for it. now how they would limit the sales i have no idea. that's for smarter men than i to figure out.

there was no position player that got big money i'd want to see in a Cardinals uniform that was a free agent last year. they all got too much, and in the end, none of them will be worth half of the money they signed for. sure the Cards owners are cheap. but this past winter i can't fault them one bit for passing on all the high end free agents.

i also don't want Dream Weaver back. he bashed the Cards for not giving him $10+ million per year. and now he might lose his job. what we need is more guys like Lubwick who can mash the ball. I'm totally convinced if our line up started putting up more runs a game, that the pitchers would relax and not try to be too perfect with their control like they are now. and then they would pitch better, and the team would score more runs. and the team would win more. this road trip will show what the Cards are going to be like for the rest of the year. this ain't the stro's and rocks. it's 2 of the better NL west teams, and the tigers who will want to show the world they are the better team and should have won the WS last year. they will try to score 20 runs per game aginst the Cards. and they might do it too if scotty, jimmy, eck, and albert don't get their acts together and start scoring some runs and take the preasure off the pitching staff.

if the Cards can just go .500 for this road trip, they might, MIGHT have a shot at the wild card. if they don't. then, i'm afraid the season is probably over.

The 2006 St.Louis Cardinals. WORLD CHAMPIONS OF THE WORLD. And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on May 11, 2007 6:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Terry Evans watch

We gave the Angels Terry Evans for Jeff Weaver, so I check on him every once in a while. He's not too shabby in the PCL this year:

BA .311 OBP .341 SLG .525 OPS .866
HR 4 SB/CS 10/2

For comparison purposes, Rick Ankiel also seems to be doing OK:
BA .281 OBP .318 SLG .579 OPS .897
HR 9 SB/CS 1/2

by madridbend on May 11, 2007 6:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

yeah

and Evans has been playing hurt; he's better than those numbers. Kicked our butts last night in SLC.

Lutvig walks amongst us!!! (now to free j-rod...)

by SleepyCA on May 11, 2007 6:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know that you can say Evans is better

than those numbers. Based on the last 8 months of gameplay, maybe. However, he has played these last few months WAY over his head in comparision to the rest of his career.

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 11, 2007 7:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs