The Team Stripped Bare By its Suitors, Even
Well, seeing as how the World Series remains in a complete holding pattern, locked in the sixth inning of game 5, I'm freed up to do something I was going to hold off on until the real baseball was over.
See, last week, I put up the second part of my look around at what trading chips the Cards have. I covered the minor leagues last week; I did the majors the week before, if you're interested.
Anyhow, the reason I bring this up is that, as I was reading over the comments section later on, I was fascinated by all the different interesting trading scenarios that various posters had. Not necessarily the deals themselves, but the overall philosophies that they implied. There was mention, as there pretty much always is when the subject of roster construction is discussed nowadays, of the work that Billy Beane has done in building a ball club that is competitive nearly every year, while sporting one of the lowest payrolls in all of baseball.
What I found most interesting of all, in fact, was that there were some individuals who seemed interested in moving players that I look at as absolute cornerstones, guys like Troy Glaus and the like. Well, that got me to thinking: if one were to look at the Cardinals from a purely value-oriented standpoint, and attempt to fill up your roster with the lowest cost players possible, what would that end up looking like?
Now, please don't think that I'm advocating for this approach, or saying that I think this would be any kind of good idea. I'm simply interested in seeing what would happen if the Cardinals were to suddenly go all Florida Marlins on everybody and just trade off all the pieces they could and go bare bones.
Okay, so let's say that the Cardinals decided tomorrow that they wanted to cut payroll to the absolute bare minimum. They could couch this as a simply payroll based move, or they could present it to everyone as some sort of experimental efficiency idea. I don't particularly care why they're doing it, just say that they are.
So anyway, let's put together a starting roster of players that fit this profile. Players who make either the league minimum or damn near it, players with virtually no service time. We'll go position by position. I'm going to use the ZiPS projections that Dan Szymborski does over at Baseball Think Factory, both because they just came out and also because they're significantly more pessimistic than the Bill James numbers. I don't want to look at some numbers that may be too rosy; on the contrary, if I'm going to err, I want to err on the down side. I was also tempted to drag up some MLE's for some of these guys, but I decided instead to just use one projection method across the board, rather than picking and choosing whichever one I like best.
Note: I'm not doing pitchers, only position players. I may try the pitchers down the road somewhere, during a slow news week, but for now I'm just going to leave that whole thing alone.
Anyway, beginning with catcher. The Cardinals trade away Yadier Molina and hand the 2009 starting job to Bryan Anderson. Anderson makes league minimum, of course, as a first year player.
At first base, you move Brett Wallace over from third base to first and bring him up. He's nearly a finished product already; he's just going to have to finish a bit quicker than expected. Of course, this means that you get to trade Albert Pujols. Think you can get a good return for him?
Second base is a tough one. The Cards really sort of lack a good option at this spot, but going by the ZiPS projections (which I'll be using later), you probably go with Jarret Hoffpauir. He projects to hit better than Brendan Ryan, and his glove projects to be pretty average for a second sacker. Guys like Aaron Miles are okay, and project to hit better, but Miles, Kennedy, and Lopez are all just too damned expensive for our Second Depression ready Redbirds. Kennedy will be moved, Miles gets his walking papers.
Third base is actually one of the simpler spots on the diamond. You move Glaus and just drop David Freese right in. Now that Jim Edmonds deal really means something, eh? The interesting thing is that Freese, while certainly not a highly touted prospect, looks like he could very well play a pretty league average third base next year, and of course, he's damn near free. Awesome.
Note on third base: Allen Craig also projects well at third, and actually looks like he could be a slightly better hitter. However, Freese played at a higher level last season, and possesses a better glove by most accounts. Believe it or not, I am actually trying to keep this as realistic as possible, so I have to go with the advantages that Freese offers.
Oy. I'm not going to lie; it's ugly at shortstop. Of course, we all knew that coming in; the Cards' farm system is glaringly empty in the middle infield. The best of a bad bunch appears to be Brian Barden. Personally, I've been a big fan of Barden as a utility type player since the Cards picked him up on waivers; in this scenario, though, he becomes our starting shortstop. It isn't an ideal situation, obviously, but hey, he's cheap, I hear mostly positive reviews of his glovework, and his glove is significantly better than that of Brendan Ryan, who would appear to be the next best option.
To be honest, I think that Tyler Greene would at least warrant some consideration here, but I'm just going by the numbers. If I were to do this based on what I personally think would be best, I would probably stick Barden at second and Greene at short, but hey, I'm going by the numbers here, and the numbers say Barden and Hoffpauir.
Brendan Ryan, based on his ability to play multiple positions at least fairly well defensively and nothing else, becomes your utility infielder. Greene could probably get some consideration here as well, but Ryan has been at the major league level already, so I think he's probably the best choice for the job.
I have to say, the outfield looks much, much more promising. In fact, it's downright easy to project an outfield composed entirely of league minimum players that could, in fact, turn in a pretty respectable performance, I think.
In left, I would go with Brian Barton. He makes no money, has less than a year of service time, and could probably give you production pretty close to what you would expect to get from Skip Schumaker. Maybe a little less on the batting average, but more speed, a little bit better plate discipline, and maybe a hair more power. Maybe not on the power; Barton didn't hit for a whole lot of power last season, but I think there should be more in there than what we've seen so far. I also personally think Barton has better range in the outfield, but Skip has a better arm. All in all, I would call it about a wash.
In center, it's easy. Just plug in Rasmus. He projects to be pretty much a league average player already with the bat; the BA is low, but the rest of his line looks very appealing. Add in the glove, and Colby could be a real asset to the team, even before you consider that he'll make literally no money.
Right field goes to Joe Mather. You know, the more I look at Joey Bombs, and the more I look at what some of the projection systems have to say about him, the more I like the idea of him starting for El Birdos in 2009, even if they don't do anything crazy like what I'm talking about here. Anyway, Mr. Bombs falls into the 'fair' category in the ZiPS system, which isn't bad at all considering the fact that he only has around a third of a season worth of ML at bats. Add in the fact that ZiPS likes him to have above average range in right field, and I think Mather makes a really nice choice here.
All three of the 2008 primary outfield starters get dealt in this scenario, leaving three players who will all make league minimum salary. To be fair, Schumaker, Ludwick, and Ankiel actually all represent pretty exceptional bang for the buck. However, the Cards could get even younger and even more efficient in '09, and probably do so with less of a dropoff in performance than you might think.
So anyway, this gives us a lineup that probably looks something like this:
- Brian Barton, LF
- Jarret Hoffpauir, 2B
- Brett Wallace, 1B
- David Freese, 3B
- Colby Rasmus, CF
- Joe Mather, RF
- Bryan Anderson, C
- Pitcher
- Brian Barden, SS
Now, I'm sure you could move that lineup around in some various ways, but that's a fair stab at it.
So, just what kind of production could one expect to get from such an offense? Well, using the ZiPS projections that I mentioned earlier, and the oh-so-simple lineup tool over at Baseball Musings, I can answer that for you. (Note: for the pitcher's spot, I simply put in an OBP of .200 and a SLG of .300. Close enough for our purposes here, I think.)
According to the lineup tool, this offense would score 4.087 runs as it's currently constituted. The optimal arrangement would net us 4.125. Interestingly- to me, anyway- every single lineup on the 'good' list had Brian Barton in the leadoff spot. Maybe you don't think that's any kind of intriguing, but I sure do.
If we take just the 4.087 that I got with my lineup above, the 2009 Cardinals, playing with all league minimum players, would score 662 runs. (662.094, to be exact.) For context, this year's team scored 779 runs. That 662 number would have placed the Cardinals fourth worst in the NL this year, immediately behind the Dodgers, who scored 700 runs, and ahead of the Nationals, Giants, and Padres. Clearly, this would not be an offensive juggernaut.
Unfortunately, I also think most of the projections are pretty believable on these players, too. I would quibble a bit with Colby's projection; the .237/.314/.401 line that ZiPS pegs him for seems a little low to me. The power seems fairly accurate, but I think Rasmus, given the solid batting eye we've seen from him in the minors and in (admittedly limited), spring training action, would probably put up a better batting average and, thus, a higher on base percentage. I think Mather is a little bit better than his projection, but then again, maybe not. Still, though, I really can't quibble a whole lot with many of the numbers.
Of course, while it wouldn't be a powerhouse, it would be cheap. The above lineup would cost somewhere in the range of right about four million dollars, total. More importantly, it would also net the Cardinals a trading surplus that would look something like this:
- Albert Pujols
- Yadier Molina
- Troy Glaus
- Adam Kennedy
- Ryan Ludwick
- Rick Ankiel
- Skip Schumaker
I don't know exactly what kind of a return you could get for that list of players, but I have to admit to being mighty curious.
As I said before, I'm not advocating this. But when we're talking about the whole paradigm of trading players with high price tags in favour of players who are going to be much more cost-efficient, it's certainly worthwhile to look at this sort of idea.
So, if the Cards were to just blow it up utterly and move everyone making more than, say, half a million dollars, they would rank around fourth worst in the league in scoring and have have the above seven players to trade for young talent.
I have to ask, if you were to start with this team, and move Albert and Yadi and Luddy and the rest, do you think you could build a better team than the one we saw on the field this year?
Be honest. You probably could.
Is it crazy? Yes. Will it happen? No. Is there a method to the madness? Absolutely.
0 recs |
355 comments
Comments
Yep, it's mad.
I wouldn’t mind seeing more of a “St. Louis Depression” scenario, where you keep Pujols and, say, Ludwick and move everyone else. Instead of cutting payroll to zero, you kind of just cut the “fat” and leave a smidgen of bone. If you carry the exercise through on a 5-year scale, maybe there are cost-controlled players you can net. Then again, the problem with this is that a lot of other teams have a desire for cheap talent, even the Yankees. If everyone took the Marlins’ approach, no one could. Some teams have to pay up.
P.S. I think you have to assume Chris Duncan plays first, bad back or no.
by Red in Chicago on Oct 29, 2008 9:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I was thinking the same thing...
…I wouldn’t mind if all those guys besides AP were traded. I bet you could easily fill out a better roster than the one we have with a $70M or less payroll.
by BigJawnMize on Oct 29, 2008 9:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it's a pretty interesting thought...
I don’t see how you can move Molina right now. No way Anderson is ready. I think you keep Skip (he’ll make the minimum, too) and rotate him with Barton and Mather. That really only leaves Glaus and Ankiel as players moved that have value…hopefully we could get a couple of good middle IFers for ’em.
by cardzfanbub on Oct 29, 2008 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ank’s value is questionable considering injury history and unknowns (how he’ll handle a different market given his history), Glaus’ no trade clause I believe is still in effect even though he’s here.
And while Yadi isn’t cheap by the standards defined, his contract isn’t restrictive at all
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wasn't...
implying Yadi was immovable – as in not teams would be interested, rather we have no replacement for him. I believe you are correct about the no-trade clause, but this excercise (I believe) ignores such stipulations. Truly the only position players we could let go of that make more than the minimum and have value are Ludwick and Ankiel…and in that order…Pujols and Molina both have value, but are irreplacable from within the system.
by cardzfanbub on Oct 29, 2008 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well,
since according to the rules of this game, Albert must go, I say we just get the Rays to give us their entire team straight up for Pujols!
Seriously, my first thought was to go after Evan Longoria, but the Rays already signed him long term. Does that make him too expensive for this exercise? Same with Mr. Douche Bag, Ryan Braun. Tulo was locked up after a year as well. It’s like Red in Chicago said, if everyone was trying to go Marlins-style, no one could. Someone has to buy the new cars so that there will be used cars on the market later.
by cardsgirl95 on Oct 29, 2008 9:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Rays: still more where they came from in the minors
Under the cowbells.
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 10:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Therein lies the problem
Or the point of the exercise, actually: Cost-controlled young players who are very good are extremely valuable. In some cases, more valuable than superstars who aren’t cost-controlled. (No, I don’t mean Pujols. But Longoria for, say, Alex Rodriquez? Hmmmmm?)
by Red in Chicago on Oct 29, 2008 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ryan Braun = Mr. Douche Bag
That’s almost as funny as chuckb’s line about “the bridge to Aaron Miles.”
Nice one cardsgirl.
"Cross a lawyer with the Godfather, make you an offer you can't understand" - Don Henley
by TurdFerguson on Oct 29, 2008 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
why the hatred for Braun?
other than the beating he’s given STL pitching and the obvious shirt untucking ritual …
but sheesh, half the team did that crap.
I'd rather my sister be a prostitute than my brother a Cub fan.
by _pistol_ on Oct 29, 2008 1:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
he has fish eyes
for gosh sake…HE. HAS. FISH. EYES!!!
"Baseball is like church. Many attend, but few understand." -Wes Westrum
by nomar34 on Oct 29, 2008 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the term comes from the fact he has a penchant for...
showing up the Cards and their fans when he hits a homerun at Busch. Not quite as bad as the the “one flap” Jeffrey Leonard circa ’87, but well up there.
mattnj
by mattnj on Oct 29, 2008 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
he just has a douchey look to me,
unshaven, yet not masculine. Fish eyed, always surprised looking. Just not a good looking guy.
Space.
It's a problem we face.
So we never go anywhere.
We just stay in one place.
by hazel on Oct 29, 2008 6:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Douche Bag?
Cardsgirl, I’m shocked at your language, where have all my heros gone.
by ridgesee on Oct 29, 2008 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cardsgirl has been throwin' around "douche bag" quite liberally here for the past month or so.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ehhh imagining cardsgirl throwing around a douche bag that is a month old
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You had to take it there, didn't you....
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
heh
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
haha
what’s funny is that this kind of somewhat crass wordplay is about as vulgar as it ever gets around here. i observed a couple draysbay game threads this offseason… good lord the tone is completely different. it was like SBN merged with 4chan. but it had this kind of passionate, school-boy, “clever asshole” charm. it was actually great fun just to watch.
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are oh-so-right about the tone at drays bay.
by cardsgirl95 on Oct 29, 2008 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
glad to know somebody agrees with me. i thought it was hilarious
it reminds me of my all-boys highschool days. not always high-brow humor, but very very funny if the audience is into that sort of thing.
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it is a guy thing
because it was more shocking than amusing to me.
by cardsgirl95 on Oct 29, 2008 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Says the author of the "Levels of Douch Bag-dom"
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you were once in the running...
with the cubs fans
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 5:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
THAT'S RIGHT!!!
Dooood. I almost forgot about that.
And somehow Hardcore got replaced in the final version of the brackets.
That douche bag that created that thing tried to write up this big thing trying to get me to influence people to vote for me but I still got blown out.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah that was pretty silly
what you been readin?
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
nothing lately
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 7:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I had to... My funny receptors gave me no other choice
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have to say it sortof crossed my mind as I typed it
but you took it higher and farther than I thought possible.
And it took you all of 2 minutes……..
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hahaha
eww…
Very nice, FlimtotheFlam
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know about Braun
but I’d certainly give Papelpon the Mr. Douche Bag title. If I think of something better for Braun I’ll let you know…
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He certainly has the smallest lips in the world
Gotta count for something
Kosuke Fukudome: $48 million .257 .359 .379
Skip Schumaker: $Free .302 .359 .406
Skippy needs a new publicist, but I heart Ben Zobrist
by joker24 on Oct 29, 2008 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, just wow!
I go away to class for a couple of hours and come home and I see how people talk about me while I am gone. I see how it is! J/K! A literal douche bag? Euuu!!!
Oh, and for the record, there is a douche bag hierarchy – Papelbon (uber-douchy), Ted Lilly (very douchy) and then Ryan Braun (regular douchy). Feel free to add your own suggestions.
by cardsgirl95 on Oct 29, 2008 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
That hierarchy
Is just perfect. hahaha +10000
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
very nice!
although I’d say Braun is above average douchy; regular douche would be like a-rod
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
brandon backe?
"I'm as nauseous as I've ever been. I have a terrible headache. My head is pounding. I feel like throwing up and I'm having trouble swallowing. And the beauty of it is, you want to feel like this every day." - Tony LaRussa
by adiueordie on Oct 29, 2008 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How could I forget him?
He is probably Seriously Douchy (between Papelbon and Lilly on my scale).
by cardsgirl95 on Oct 29, 2008 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and Zambrano?
Heck, I think we may need a list ranking maybe the top 1-20 douchy players in the MLB. hahaha just kidding
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Zambrano's in his a different category

Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
there's douchey and there's unstable
If anyone asks, I didn’t say that. I like my water cooler collection.
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
he’s not so much douchey as bipolar or something like that
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm a bit confused
as to what constitutes douchey-ness.
Is it based on actions or general apppearance? Is douchery solely the domain of white dudes? or can i add ManRam to the list?
I'd rather my sister be a prostitute than my brother a Cub fan.
by _pistol_ on Oct 29, 2008 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
barry bonds is very douchey. but he isn't currently playing.
i wouldn’t say manram is douchey. he’s just being manram, man.
"I'm as nauseous as I've ever been. I have a terrible headache. My head is pounding. I feel like throwing up and I'm having trouble swallowing. And the beauty of it is, you want to feel like this every day." - Tony LaRussa
by adiueordie on Oct 29, 2008 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the dreads just aren't that douchey
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
if they maintain an aura of righteousness
have a big ego, and maintain that true douche image, then they are douchey
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
examples
This is Regular Douche
(though personally I’d upgrade his doucheyness)
Pop quiz, WS edition: Douchey or Not?
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
(that last was apparently Scott Eyre, btw)
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It can be both.
I have been told (by a reliable source – the fifteen-year old at my house) that spiked hair and popping your collar are very high on the douchy scale. So shirt un-tucking definitely qualifies. So does wearing a black lace see-through shirt in public (see Papelbon, Jonathon).
Mostly it is actions – general smugness (see Lilly, Ted), calling out players over stuff that isn’t even your business (see Backe, Brandon). You get the idea.
by cardsgirl95 on Oct 29, 2008 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
slightly OT, but Isiah is an excellent example
Back in the day, perhaps “holier-than-thou”.
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow
what a dumbass!
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 7:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
definitely
popping up the collar and spiking the hair are at the heights of douchiness
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This guy has douchy all figured out:
by cardsgirl95 on Oct 29, 2008 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Douchiness is so amazing
No one can really define what to be a douche really is, but you just know the actions of a douche when you see them. I guess doucheativity is like love?
Kosuke Fukudome: $48 million .257 .359 .379
Skip Schumaker: $Free .302 .359 .406
Skippy needs a new publicist, but I heart Ben Zobrist
by joker24 on Oct 29, 2008 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
a good point is that they don’t usually know how douchey they are… it’s an important part of douchebaggery.
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that is the Platonic form of Douchbaggery itself.
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nah not quite
He’s totally missing 2 wristbands, a Cubs hat, aviators either being worn at night, a smartphone placed conveniently in full view, and a shitty mixed drink (gatorade?) made with Goose.
Kosuke Fukudome: $48 million .257 .359 .379
Skip Schumaker: $Free .302 .359 .406
Skippy needs a new publicist, but I heart Ben Zobrist
by joker24 on Oct 29, 2008 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
zima
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think I heard Zima is going out of production soon.
Not really pertinent to the conversation…..just a nugget.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
VEB is where I come to learn stuff
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love Google
Had to check on it and it’s true .
Actually, it’s out of production now as of Oct. 10. Btw, there were numerous articles, but I chose the one from the Washington Post because I felt it gave the story credibility.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wasting good liquor in weakly poured ghetto drinks is way more douchey
It displays a propensity to waste money, a flaunting of that fact—-while simultaneously showing a distinct, inferior taste towards drinks that actually do cost that much coin and overall a deeper level of douchiness than simply liking something that isn’t good.
Kosuke Fukudome: $48 million .257 .359 .379
Skip Schumaker: $Free .302 .359 .406
Skippy needs a new publicist, but I heart Ben Zobrist
by joker24 on Oct 29, 2008 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about...
Jeff Kent? Where is he on the d-bag scale? I think he’s got to be way up there, considering that he’s been quoted as saying he wanted to leave baseball with no friends…
"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.
by redbirdnation8206 on Oct 29, 2008 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
At least
Very Douchey, probably Seriously Douchey. He displays a rather inflated view of self and yet is unaware of its existence. If he pops his collar, then he might be Uber-Douchey.
by cardsgirl95 on Oct 29, 2008 6:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i feel i should remind you
i dubbed Braun, El Douchey months ago.
thats all. carry on.
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Oct 29, 2008 11:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
it’s no secret that he’s douchey
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 30, 2008 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i am really curious about these trades
I really like exercises like this and wonder, since it was decided that no one traded would be traded for an non-pitcher, what kind of pitching we could get in return.
AP to the giants for Lincecum and Cain
Ankiel, Santa, and Yadi to the Jays for Doc Halladay
Ludwick, AK, schumakerfor Cole Hamels
New Rotation
Halladay
Lincecum
Hamels
AW
Cain
(spot starter: Carp)
Exactly how many runs would be given up by this pitching staff in 2009 and when would the bullpen ever pitch?
At least he's better than Esteban Yan.
by jacksonian on Oct 29, 2008 9:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think we're getting the raw end of the deal in all of those trades...
except that Toronto probably doesn’t want Troy back. AP could surely bring back more than two young pitchers (even if one is an absolute stud)…we’re talking about the BEST player in the game who is signed way below market value for three more seasons. By himself he could probably bring back the equivalent of all of those players (no I’m not exagerating). The other two deals aren’t really that bad…could you trade Ludwick for Hamels straight up?…probably not, but I don’t think you have to include Skip – maybe that’s your way of getting rid of Kennedy’s salary. Don’t know what to say about the Halladay deal – mainly there’s no way they want Glaus back and certainly no way he waives his no-trade to go back.
by cardzfanbub on Oct 29, 2008 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i thought about taking
SF’s best pitching prospect too, Bumgarner (sp), and B. Wilson wouldnt be bad either (but not necessarily good). but thats why pujols just cannot be traded. He is just way to good to even get close to equal value unless we take someones entire team and are allowed to play with more than 3 outs on offense and less than 3 when pitching.
I agree that Glaus and toronto would not be a good match. just trying to match up the talent. To me, Kennedy does have trade value as a defensive specialist at the keystone, but his offense is pathetic. plus the Phils would have the least possible interest in AK as they have that Chase Utley guy.
At least he's better than Esteban Yan.
by jacksonian on Oct 29, 2008 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anderson, Schumaker and Ludwick...
to the Orioles for Matt Wieter. Yadi, Ankiel and Glaus to the Angels for B Wood and S Rodriguez.
C Wieter 1Barton
1B Pujols 2Rasmus
2B Rodriguez 3Wieter
SS Wood 4Pujols
3B Freese/Wallace 5Wood
LF Barton 6Mather
CF Rasmus 7Freese/Wallace
RF Mather 8Pitcher
9Rodriguez
We’d be young with questionable D, but the offense would be scary good. Plus we free up all the $ we would need to go sign Fuentes and another mid level starter. Any projections on the numbers that lineup could, potentially, put up?
by BustaCard on Oct 29, 2008 10:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
With a rotation like that
I think 662 runs would be plenty of offensive production from a young group of fielders….Hamels as a 3! WW as a 4! That would be insane!!!
Ryan Howard: one of the most Statistically Outstanding players of all time
by RunninRedbird on Oct 29, 2008 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What do you mean?
“use reply button…please”
I did. I was responding to jacksonian’s forementioned comment. I don’t see what you are pointing out here…is it obvious and I’m just missing it?
Ryan Howard: one of the most Statistically Outstanding players of all time
by RunninRedbird on Oct 29, 2008 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Confused I am
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
just say
"Use the up button to make sure the post wasn’t replied to another post’
all in jest
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 5:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alrighty...
I’m the dummy. My bad. Thought you were left justified…and was (obviously) getting lost for a second there.
by stlfan on Oct 29, 2008 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
try Pujols for Halladay and prospect or three
Ludwick, Ank, and AK for Lincecum
Glaus, Yadi, and Carp for Hamels?
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok ok
we’d probably have to send more than just Lud and Ank for Linc
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like Pu for Doc
Pujols for Doc, Ryan, Downs, and Snider?
by mojowo11 on Oct 29, 2008 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Young OFers are worth a shot...
I’m not sure if I would advocate this approach either, certainly not when it comes to unloading AP. But, it’s an intriguing way to think about how to deal with our OF surplus. So far I’ve seen ideas about trading Ankiel, Rasmus, Schumaker, Jay, Barton, and Mather. Would the Cards be better served in trying to fill holes by trading Ludwick? I brought this up before, to bitter resentment from other VEB posters, and deservedly so… maybe. But I just can’t escape the idea that Barton, Rasmus and Mather might be a great (and really, really fast) outfield.
Of course the argument for keeping Luddy is that he tore up the league last year, is realtively cost controlled for a few years, plays decent D, etc… but isn’t that also the reason to trade him (high value=high return), especially to address pitching concerns, or even to load up even more on young prospects?
If the Cards go into next season with Ludwick in the outfield, I’m happy. But given the outfield depth, the potential of players behind Ryan, the obvious need in the bullpen and ?starting rotation?, the need for MIs in the majors and minors, and the relatively high value of Ludwick right now, Mozeliak shouldn’t (and I’m hoping isn’t) ruling out a deal (this goes with anyone on the roster save Wainwright and Pujols, in my opinion)
by BustaCard on Oct 29, 2008 10:03 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not totally against it...
but if we move Ludwick we better make sure to win that trade…I’m thinking a #1-2 SP and a stud SS still not arb eligible…like Brandon Wood and Ervin Santana or Joe Saunders (I think both of these pitchers are arb eligible, though).
by cardzfanbub on Oct 29, 2008 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you may get one or the other
but not both with Luddy, he still carries a lot of doubts on year in and year out production
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You may be right...
but I don’t think I make that deal. Maybe one of those pitchers plus Aybar or Izturus instead of Wood? I thought they were wanting rid of BW…
by cardzfanbub on Oct 29, 2008 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
there may be doubts on ludwicks year in and year out production,
but any doubts of him declining are also equaled by signs he may continue improving.
his stats are on the rise. he hasn’t platued as far as we can see in mlb. he may have a better year yet :)
i wouldn’t bet the farm on even more production from him, but i won’t rule it out.
he’s does have a good hammer hand (r/barrell) showing up in his slg% / iso, but he also has his throwing hand on the bottom.
not many hitters have a bottom hand as good as a throwing side hand.
that pitch he takes for strike three on the outer edge, shows alot of plate discipline. he’ll get better at taking that to rf. there’s room for more there.
bit of a freak. guy has 2 dominant hands / sides. really shows up in his 2 handed catches. bounty on ludwick should be real large.
by ball in play on Oct 29, 2008 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's an interesting way to look at it
I’ve wondered in the past if his bat R/throw L explained part of his reverse splits, but never figured out any reason why it would. Hmm.
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Oct 29, 2008 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
if lack of opp field skills better explains his reverse splits,
is his bottom hand the cause?
if he’s going to hit lefties like AP and yadi, he’s will need to go to rf like AP/ yadi. it’s the correct approach vs lhps.
ludwicks zone seems weakest outside anyway. same stance swung to rcf, one click off timing, puts the ball deeper for rcf. he’s got the top hand to do it.
i could see where it’s timing related, the lh causing “early” easier than “late”, and that does hinder opp field skills.
he could completly relax that hand in situations where he needs to provide a ball in play, to the right.
shoulda, woulda, coulda…..he knows…..we speculate :)
by ball in play on Oct 29, 2008 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unlike cardzfanbub, I am totally against it
I took up the issue of trading Luddy in this post over in the mo/riccardi thread.
Bottom line: Ludwick is cheap, he’s more productive than most people seem to realize (6th best OPS in baseball last year), and he’s not too old. I simply don’t advocate trading him for anything other than a huge haul—I used the comparison of Berkman, who was about the same hitter last year. What do the Astros get for Berkman? What about a Berkman who’s two years younger and $14 million cheaper? Because that’s what we should be asking. I frankly don’t think we’d get it, as AdjustedExpectations said above. Therefore, we shouldn’t be trading Luddy.
Just because Ludwick’s value might be at its highest doesn’t mean he’s not going to be an insanely good hitter again next year for next to nothing in cost. Do you really think anyone is going to give us value equal with Luddy’s 2008 statistical output given that a) it’s been his only full year and b) his injury history? I don’t. Keep him. Even if his OPS drops 70 points, you’re still talking about a cheap outfielder with a .900 OPS and plus defense. Those don’t come around all that often and, if I recall the long-term strategy correctly, we are getting toward that point where we’re trying to win NOW.
by mojowo11 on Oct 29, 2008 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
his cost/risk(production) is what excites me.
Even if he does 70% of what he did this year, he’s paid for it salary wise. teams aren’t going to give that haul, so we should just ride him out while he is, in fact, cheap.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
majority of replies agreed w/keeping ludwick
the next 3 yrs, of team control.
he’s a “not right now, maybe later”, on that thread.
when he and AP become for FA eligible for 2012, ludwick is 33. maybe then.
by ball in play on Oct 29, 2008 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you here...
Mojo…just want to be clear that his “next to nothing” salary will probably be $3-5 million – he is arb eligible.
by cardzfanbub on Oct 29, 2008 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
nice
but if we don’t think about pitching, then I would think by trading people like Pujols, you could get some cost controlled major league ready guys. For example, Elvis Andrus could be had to play SS. If Pujols was offered to the Rangers we could probably get Saltalamacchia, Andrus, and reclamation Brandon McCarthy. That moves Barden to 2B, insert Andrus at SS, insert Salty at C and keep Anderson in the minors or include him in the trade to the Rangers and get a better P than McCarthy. I would like to see that lineup ran through the simulator.
by t7rick on Oct 29, 2008 10:05 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Like I said above...
Pujols would bring back the biggest return EVER in a trade, IMO. He is signed for three more years at about half of his market value. I for one would throw a HUGE fit if all we got back was a young SS, C and reclamation pitcher. I know Andrus and Salty should be good…but this is Albert Freaking Pujols!!! Teams would fall over themselves making offers for him.
by cardzfanbub on Oct 29, 2008 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
albert goes to HOF as a cardinal
trading off high impact players today, for young cost controlled players, is the correct approach to insuring AP wears the birds on the bat at his induction. same approach many mlb teams are now endorsing.
doesn’t have to be done on a full blown marlins scale. identify the depth by position. trade high value guys from the depth, who will be getting expensive at a time when AP needs resigned, for high upside prospects. believe in our prospects and those acquired, play em.
there’s a happy medium there, even if the expensive vets are in the roster minority.
by ball in play on Oct 29, 2008 10:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
veteran core players / develop from within
both :)
i like mozeliaks approach so far. bet he will be good at blending it.
budget $ available to him, sets a ceiling on his core player count. here’s an opportunity to show he can fill his next level needs through trades.
“creative” wasn’t it? lol………sho-me
by ball in play on Oct 29, 2008 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
found it--bernie quotes mozeliak as going to be "aggressive and creative" this offseason.
by ball in play on Oct 29, 2008 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Aggressive and Creative
Some of our players will start with combat 1 promotion? Extra culture at the ballpark? Please tell me I am not the only Cards fan/gamer that made the connection.
by Choix003 on Oct 29, 2008 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What civilization is that?
I am trying to think off the top of my head what civilization has those traits. I’ll have to wait until I get home to find out. I was actually playing the Fall From Heaven mod last night.
That said, the Cubs do deserve my pity, but never my support.
by Solanus on Oct 29, 2008 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh wow. that's hilarious.
Choix003’s comment originally looked like gibberish to me… and I usually pride myself in catching geeky references.
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes
I wasn’t paying much attention in the period just before Albert came up (to see if there was a change from then), but I think that is the not-so-secret actual strategy.
Also I don’t think it works if the fanbase weren’t so very … us. Not only do the sell-outs and season tickets give them more room to move, it influences the players when it comes to closing the deal. (See: Lohse apparently deciding well before the end of the season.) It will be interesting and probably rather painful to see what happens if local economy deflates to the point where it ripples into the attendance figures.
In other words, I don’t see Phillies fans helping their team get leverage for hometown discounts. We may have one of the few teams that can play that card.
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've been on this rant for a while
and pretty much agree with what you’ve said.
Invest high and long term in your impact players at key positions. Gives your fan base something to attach to, a foundation in the club house, and help when it comes to season ticket sales. (Albert, Yadi, Adam)
Approach the rest from a peak value standpoint. When the value of a player exceeds the production on the field compared to your farm system, start working on moving that asset. That way you’re always on the upslope or benefiting from the peak. Getting trapped into downslopes (age, production, etc) is what will kill ya. (Luddy and Skip can be considered near peak)
Sign around the margins where you have needs.
Draft aggressively early, more conservative late or conservative early, aggressive late (can see rationale in both sides) to keep the farm churning with what your peak assets brought in. Promote aggressively then have them prove in the top two tiers (AA and AAA). It may create bottlenecks in the farm system, but it allows you to keep the cream up top while developing the late bloomers in the lower ranks.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
high level--core plyrs
middle level—pack with high upside “developed from within” youth and affordability.
trade down with current core players the budget prevents from extending, and acquire as much highend prospects as possible, in the minimum of roster spots . create a bottleneck in mid level players from acquisition and development. one large enough to fill bench needs with mid level overflow.
bench level—sign around the margians.
draft level—spend more on one SP per year from the draft.
the resupplying of a top of the rotation SP prospect from within, has not started.
put some “dewallet” in the draft :) the demand for middle level talent exceeds the supply.
by ball in play on Oct 29, 2008 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fun Little Exercise
I think that that team wouldn’t end up being too bad really, when you consider the kind of haul that Albert Pujols could get. You could virtually peddle him for whichever AAA team you wanted. I’m sure that some team would be willing to swing that deal…
"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.
by redbirdnation8206 on Oct 29, 2008 10:48 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Stop and think about that for a minute
Wouldn’t it make more sense than paying $1 million for some hack bench player/reliever/washup, to go out and spend $1 million on the best scout in baseball (whoever that may be)? In three or four years of drafts, he will assemble a farm team worth Albert Pujols, or something…
by Red in Chicago on Oct 29, 2008 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a highly optimistic outlook
considering the fizzle out rate for top prospects — especially pitchers.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Oct 29, 2008 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh I like that
We’re setting up in the Caribbean… let’s put some guys in Japan! One guy for every farm system! Set up someone with an anthology of 20th century philosophy and put a mole in the Rays! Or how about a Cardinals Nation password-only website so fans can upload their videos and diaries. If you spot the next Albert, you get a cut. Or: “will scout for season tickets”.
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The "get a cut" part
would work wonders. Money = motivation.
by Red in Chicago on Oct 29, 2008 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's a motivated fan base
The bounties would be relatively less than a full-time scout’s salary, right? Hey, you could strip down the scouting system too.
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
if you had a system
where you would pay for season tickets for 1 or 2 seats in each MILB ballpark you could build a scouting system on the cheap I reckon.
Allow fans to sign up on days they’d like to show up on, they can pick up their ticket at the counter if picked. They use a camera to record, write down notes and upload to a youtube like site.
Then you could cut, tag by player name, show pitching angles and approaches and the like, and have a reasonable system we all could use. All it would cost is the hosting/bandwidth (which would be large hosting that much video) and tickets.
As a fan I’d do it.
Then expand it for international and highschool coverage.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
high schools, amen
More hometown prospects = more fan attendance and interest. Imagine if we’d put our hooks in Ryan Howard and kept him on the cheap.
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, what I’m thinking of is capturing in video by the fans for the fans players as they develop. I don’t know about everyone else, but I’m sick of reading scouting reports, I’d rather sit back and watch some videos of the player in question myself.
It wouldn’t take the job from the scouts, but it would allow us to start seeing more of the overall system.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
this whole thread cracks me up
Not only would we be everywhere, we could be reporting back to the collective…
In the hypothetical vein of the post — why not hold conventions for basic tips and what to watch for. To screen out opposing fans, charge a fee that goes to charity. An already educated fan-base becomes over-educated… if we made the playoffs, and there were 8-10 teams making a run for it in September, we could have detailed reports on all of them and not be spread thin or caught flat-footed.
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
First Rule of Scout Club...
Don’t talk about scout club. What a great idea! And we could target opposing teams scouts, one fan to scout each game, three as the goon squad. No official ties to the Cards, only ‘random’ attacks on Cubs scouts. And when we reach the zenith of our power… bam! Bye-bye New Yankee stadium.
by BustaCard on Oct 29, 2008 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be neat to see
a projection of runs if you add back various combinations of players who aren’t cheap. If I recall Glaus has a no trade carried over so add him back in, Albert as well and there’s 27 more million between the two. However, it would be interesting to see how the runs pick up. Add in Luddy and possibly Rick and where would the runs sit then?
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 11:09 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Locked in the 6th Inning..
Something tells me the 7th inning stretch is going to be awkward.
by outraged on Oct 29, 2008 11:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
How is working for fans?
Do fans get in if they had a ticket before? What about those that can’t make the game now? How do they go about filling up the stadium?
by saladdays on Oct 29, 2008 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Fox mentioned that there was a rain stub attached to the ticket
So if you got in before, you still have your ticket to get in. For those that can’t make it, I’m not sure if they are offering refunds. But I don’t think anyone would want one, they could sell their ticket for far more than they paid for it. I don’t think filling the stadium will be an issue.
by outraged on Oct 29, 2008 11:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
oops.. that was supposed to be a reply to saladdays
We really need an edit and delete button!
by outraged on Oct 29, 2008 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My Question
Who manages this AAA squad? Tony and Dunc make way too much and don’t like to play the kids to boot. Time to save mo money and go old school. I’m going with Player/Manager Brian Barton. At least then we know he’ll get playing time.
"Do what you want to the women and children but leave me alone"- George Carlin
by That's a Winner on Oct 29, 2008 11:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I wonder what LaDunc's
trade value might be?
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Oct 29, 2008 7:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mo has a chat with P-D at noon
Any VEB’ers send a question that way?
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 11:59 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah I sent one about looking for Undervalue-assets
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
mine was..
more or less about why not sign towards division weaknesses rather than org’s “needs”. especially in pitching.
If I was anyone in the central, I’d consider a soft tossing lefty at least for the pen, if not a starter. Because you’re going to have several games against the Cards and frankly, by the past few years we’ve shown we struggle against them.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He seems to be talking in rather vague terms
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
can't be specific now anyways
it’s not even winter meetings time yet, i mean it’s almost as bad as SEC rules and company finances, you lose leverage being public on specifics this early in the process.
that’s probably why the vagueness on some of the questions
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I asked him a question about
If he could even answer a question now about Free Agents or would it be tampering
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
was that one yours?
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Naw, Mine are under Flim to the Flam
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't know what mine are under
Robby I think, it’s autofilled in, I don’t even pay attention to it just put in the letters, then type what i wanna say and go
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I asked Mo about Adam Kennedy
…Does he need to move that contract before he can sign someone else for second base?
He probably won’t answer that…
by salukihoops on Oct 29, 2008 12:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
and if he made a run
at Jayson Nix? i would have hoped he at least made a call to his agent.
"Sorry about him, he's dealing with being an inker. " - Chasing Amy
by FutureMan on Oct 29, 2008 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's not going to talk about specific players
that would get into tampering territory. Even players who are going to be free agents. They’re still under contract until after the WS.
Also, he shouldn’t talk about specific players. The more he talks about specifics, the harder it makes his job. Gives his competition an idea of exactly what he’s planning.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was a Minor League Free Agent
So no tampering there. He already signed with the White Sox
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think he just answered your question.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
he kind-of answered my question
Don Ford: Adam Kennedy requested a trade last season. Do you need to move his contract before you can pursue other options at second base?
John Mozeliak: Adam has requested we explore a trade and I will look into it. But at this time it would be difficult, this one may take some time.
by salukihoops on Oct 29, 2008 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think Kennedy
is at the top or in between or at the bottom of any GM’s Christmas wish list. So this won’t be an easy task for Mo to unload him without paying for basically all the money left on his contract.
We’ve got a long way to go and a short time to get there.
by KYCards on Oct 29, 2008 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, it's nice that he's being openly realistic
unfortunately this strikes a blow to many of our trade wish-lists…
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can actually see many GMs at the winter meeting
flat out laughing at Mo if he tries to get much for Kennedy. Unless a team gets really desperate I think they will just have to DFA him and eat up the rest of his contract and move on.
We’ve got a long way to go and a short time to get there.
by KYCards on Oct 29, 2008 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
He is no where as bad as we think he is. Too bad Ellis just absolutely shoot down the 2B market. He signed such a team friendly contract.
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just don't see any team taking him
unless the Cards eats up most of his contract. Believe me I hope I’m wrong.
We’ve got a long way to go and a short time to get there.
by KYCards on Oct 29, 2008 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That may be true
but that might also be the way to get something back that has some sort of value for him. I’d rather eat some or all of his contract (which isn’t all that high in the first place) if we can get something back.
But, ultimately, I’m not convinced trading him is the best move for the Cardinals.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would think
that AK would be a good 2B for us next year. So, I agree, trading him isn’t really good for us. Before I am figuratively crucified… I mean he would be good as a defense-only player. So we keep him instead of resigning iz2. Then we can trade for or sign an offense type player for SS. I think that most here would agree that having 1 of the 2 MIFs be defense only is an acceptable way to go.
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
as I've said before
I wouldn’t mind kennedy being our starting 2B, if we get a decent hitting shortstop
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
we’d need a badass defensive 2nd baseman if Edgar was our SS. I know his stats are decent in the NL but have you seen him play this year? His range isn’t close to what it used to be.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe if he
“regresses” to his NL numbers… but I wouldn’t put my money on it. I’d take him, but it would be risky.
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
with edgar it's hard to say
if it’s issues with the AL/Tigers or if it’s age catching up. That’s what is scary to me.
Sadly, I’d rather have Furcal/Lopez then I would Edgar/Kennedy.
Which we had a real MI in the farm system.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
wish* even
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
Furcal/Lopez beats Edgar/Kennedy. I just figure if we’re gonna go with a defense only MIF, it may as well be the one we’re already paying.
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
indeed
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah except
Furcal is sooooooo over rated it is unbelievable. He is probably going to cost twice as much as Renteria. While with Renteria we can buy low on a shorter contract. If we could sign him to a one year contract and he has a decent season. We could offer him arbitration and he would likely still be a Type A free agent netting us two draft picks.
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he has a decent season.
I love the idea of getting Renteria… I’m just not sold that it isn’t his age catching up to him, like AdjustedExpectations was saying. If it is, then we are SOL. Furcal will be pricey though, so Renteria may just be a gamble the cards end up taking.
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's my worry
I think Edgar is too old
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
he's 32
the complete cliche package when it comes to historically great, so worth risk.
do you really think he’ll come here for a single year contract? That’s my hangup, I think we’re in for more than a year with Edgar, I’d rather take the hype over that risk anyday.
I’d rather have Hanley or even Uggla since we’re keeping score, but I suspect Furcal is a lot more attainable.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is not that bad
His range is great to the left but worst to the right. We have Glaus over there though to compensate.
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I get what you’re saying about his left, but I’ll contend that when I seen him play (only 7 games), he caters to the left (read: plays closer to 2nd). I think positioning helps his range.
Just one guy’s opinion though.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Should of posted this before
Here is CHONE’s defensive metrics
http://lanaheimangelfan.blogspot.com/2008/10/defensive-projections.html
"They are projections. What that means is that they are good indications of a player’s true talent, and therefore what players will do in the future. While the stats that I release with the total value stuff tend to be a good indication of what players have done in the past year, they are not necessarily good indications of what players will do in future seasons.
Chone’s defensive ratings, on the other hand, are a combination of multi-year ratings for TotalZone, ZR, and RZR. And on top of that, Chone regresses these ratings to the Fans’ Scouting Report ratings. So if someone plays a lot, their ratings are largely based on the fielding stats. But if someone hasn’t played much (e.g. Paul Janish), their ratings are largely based on the Fan Scouting Report numbers. I’m a big fan of that methodology.
So, as far as I’m concerned, these are the best publicly-available defensive ratings you will find. I’d trust them more than UZR, more than PMR, and more than Dewan’s +/-, at least when looking at those statistics in isolation. Ideally, we’d use PMR or +/- instead of RZR, and use UZR instead of ZR. But there are usually minimal differences between those choices, at least compared to the differences between the statistics from Baseball Info Solutions (RZR, PMR, and +/-) and Stats Inc (ZR and UZR)."
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Flim,
Just so I’m reading this right, Iz is projected to be +15 and Edgar is projected to be -6? Do I combine or pick position to play?
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just pick a position
Iz2 is projected to be a +8 if he played 3B and +7 if he played short. Since he will be a SS he projects to be a +7
While I am at
Renteria -6 at SS
Lopez -7 at 2B -7 at 3B -15 at SS
Miles -5 at 2B -5 at 3B -11 at SS
Kennedy +6 at 2B
Iz2 +7 at SS +8 at SS
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok
so edgar and kennedy essentially cancel each other out.
furcal and lopez would be a -5
so it would depend on the offensive side and contract length (for furcal, lopez and edgar)
lopez could be had for a year, I’d bet on it. too much history.
edgar I’d say the market may give him at least 2, possibly with an option year of a third.
furcal is going to get at least three.
the free agent market just sucks shit, in my opinion.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Those numbers
Are all based off of an average pitching staff’s batted ball types. A groundballing few strikeouts staff is going to increase the magnitude of those numbers I’d have to imagine.
Kosuke Fukudome: $48 million .257 .359 .379
Skip Schumaker: $Free .302 .359 .406
Skippy needs a new publicist, but I heart Ben Zobrist
by joker24 on Oct 29, 2008 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So Aaron Miles
is the defensive equivalent at SS to Hanley Ramirez? Seems a bit odd to me.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Oct 29, 2008 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hanley has all the tools
Doesn’t quite put it together. At risk of being racially cliche, he seems to be lazy sometimes in his actions i.e. not getting down on the ball and sidearming the ball to 1b.
Kosuke Fukudome: $48 million .257 .359 .379
Skip Schumaker: $Free .302 .359 .406
Skippy needs a new publicist, but I heart Ben Zobrist
by joker24 on Oct 29, 2008 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok
we need a good hitting SS, not just decent
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No offense but
after two poor years what else will convince you that Kennedy shouldn’t be on this team? I think Adam is really lucky he has been playing for the Cards because he would have been a DFA casuality on most other MLB teams. If he is on the opening day roster for the Cards it will show that the Cardinals are the most loyal team in baseball….not the smartest.. but loyal.
We’ve got a long way to go and a short time to get there.
by KYCards on Oct 29, 2008 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
he’s lucky because we don’t have real depth. (Miles doesn’t count). and if you don’t beat him down for his injury laden ‘07, he’s doing decent when it comes to his numbers, it just happens that he sucked before he was signed too.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, it all depends on what the rest of the roster looks like
If he’s the one offensive “black hole” or weak link then I think you could live with him just fine. Lets say the everyday starters are (not in a batting order):
Molina, Pujols, Kennedy, Furcal, Glaus, Rick, Rasmus, Ludwick
then I think Kennedy’s defense would be a major plus to the team.
Now, I’m not saying the whole thing hinges on signing Furcal. I just used his name because it was convenient. Insert your own offensive SS who can be acquired. But therein lies the problem. Who is realistically available? Well, I’m not sure.
Of course, if the team is forced to go with Izruris for another season, then you need to do something else with 2nd.
And as far as Kennedy sucking, well he’s one of the best defensive 2nd sackers in the league. And his hitting is not as bad (especially in combination with his defense) than many want to believe. The biggest problem with him is he has absolutely no power. If he put up his exact numbers from last year, but instead hit the ball out of the park 10-13 times (like he did in ‘03-’04) no one would have a problem with him playing 2nd. Then again, he did slug .372 this year which was up 82 points from the previous year and down 14 points from his last year with the Angels. If he could somehow find a happy medium between his ‘05 and ’06 seasons with his defense, then I think he’d be just fine playing 2nd……….once again, this all depends on what happens with SS.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"well he’s one of the best defensive 2nd sackers in the league."
Not going to argue this because there is a lot of truth to it.
Wouldn’t this alone make him a good trading chip? I think Mo needs to take a few of you guys to the winter meetings so he can get something for Adam. You guys can point out that he is a big asset for any team on defense. That should be worth a decent prospect and for the Cards not having to pay the rest of his salary…right?? There has to be some GMs that can be talked into the value of Kennedy’s defense.
We’ve got a long way to go and a short time to get there.
by KYCards on Oct 29, 2008 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the problem is
he’s not worth the $ if he’s just a defensive replacement
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 7:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kennedy's skills and value
My read of it is like this:
Kennedy is quite good for a backup 2B. He would be great as a utility infielder if he can play SS and 3B. However, he is a really poor value for what we’re paying him. I think people take a particularly negative view of Kennedy here because of the contract. Unfortunately the contract can’t be undone — it’s a sunk cost, and we have to live with it. But it’s best not to let our view of his contract cloud our judgment regarding his abilities. Overall he is not bad — just overpaid.
So, if Mo can “undo” the contract by trading him for a box of baseballs, then fine. But if we have to eat most of the contract to trade him, then I would just keep him and put him in the MI mix. We should not DFA him, as he does have real baseball value and we really don’t have other good options at the position.
I like Lopez too, but as more of the Spezio bat off the bench type. He strikes me as the kind of guy that you won’ t find starting on a good team, but can be a valuable contributor as a backup. However, probably it doesn’t make sense to pay him starter-type money. If he’ll come cheap then something like Furcal (or some equivalent option we get in trade) / Kennedy / Lopez would be fine for MI. That would provide reasonable production and a lot of flexibility.
by apack on Oct 29, 2008 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You say that like it's irrelevant....
The fewest games he played with the Angels was 129. He was a full-time starter with the Angels for 7 years, and the last 5 years with Anaheim, he posted OPS’s that were all higher than either of the years he’s been with St. Louis.
When we signed him, he came in as a 31-year-old player. There was no real reason why we shouldn’t have expected him continue to produce.
With that in mind, you’re right, he’d be a fine backup guy, but when you sign someone with the expectation that they’ll be a starter and you got a decent bench guy, then of course it’s going to look bad. And the other thing is, while on a PlayStation roster, having him as a backup might seem like a good idea, on a real roster, we have an Adam Kennedy who was so pissed he asked for a trade when he was informed he was a bench player for the rest of the season.
With that in mind, I’d HATE to see Kennedy back, because I DON’T want him as our starter, and I don’t think he’ll be a good clubhouse prescence as a bench player.
DFA him, trade him, buy him out. I don’t care, but I hope he’s off the roster.
by mtalken on Oct 29, 2008 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe he can get Walt to take him
since Walt thought he was such a great deal in 2007.
We’ve got a long way to go and a short time to get there.
by KYCards on Oct 29, 2008 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's possible
considering that his OPS+ was only 4 points lower this year compared ’06 with the Angels.
/sarcasm
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
Why does it take time to move a player for a bag of baseballs? Is Mo pursuing a random field maintenance tool TBNL as part of the deal? Would he like to include a package of gift cards to the Chili’s in Scranton, PA or something?
**Of course, this post was written in complete sarcasm. No “The Office” fans or grounds crew members were injured in the posting of this post.
"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.
by redbirdnation8206 on Oct 29, 2008 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's very cool that he responded
But… I asked if we had to move him before we got a replacement and he didn’t address that in his response. I’ll go ahead and guess the answer is “no” since he said it might take awhile.
by salukihoops on Oct 29, 2008 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The answer is more than likely "maybe".
But what if he said “Yes! Any improvement made at second base would first require us trading Adam Kennedy.” Well, guess what……the price other teams would be willing to give up for Kennedy just hit the floor.
Plus, he’ll have to wait to see how the 2nd base market develops. No one is targeting Kennedy, but after the chips have fallen, someone might be desperate enough to give us something.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You've got to think..
well, I think anyways that a team that has a pretty stout lineup could afford the idea of taking Kennedy on as a one year stop gap. I could spend all day giving him a hard time, but his glove is solid.
And as far as his offensive production goes, it sucks as a whole, but he did rebound from the injury laden ’07 campaign and put up decent (for him) numbers.
Since he’s openly said he doesn’t want to be a platoon, our leverage isn’t that great, but he’s still worth something. Just not in a MI that has two weak ass hitters.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Depending on what happens with a SS upgrade
that “stout lineup” you speak of might just be the Cardinals.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
I think there’s a few things hinging on if it’s a good idea.
1.) defensive quality of the SS. If we happen to get someone with less than optimal defense at SS it may be worth keeping a solid defensive 2b.
2.) offensive quality of the SS. Sacrificing 2b power is ok if the SS is above average.
3.) offers, we shouldn’t pay all of his contract, but I could imagine an edmonds like setup coming. an high potential/low result prospect and a couple of million off of it.
but then you’d have to consider who’d replace at 2nd, and unless it comes from the market, it may be worthless to trade considering we’re stuck with kennedy for this last year.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't understand this line of thinking
why is it ok to have a bad ss and a good defensive 2b, etc? 1 and 2 above are stated without proof. What is the goal? Scoring runs, and keeping runs off the board.
The proper line of thinking should be “acquire a shortstop and/or 2B whose offense + defense is better than what we have now, or don’t make a move”. If we can’t improve significantly over kennedy, when risk, cost, and offensive + defensive performance is considered, then we should put our budget surplus into another area.
I’ve shown elsewhere that to replace the defensive production we got out of Kennedy at 2B, if he puts up an 80ish OPS+ in ‘09, we’d have to have a league-average 2B with a .860ish OPS. I don’t think one of those is going to be available.
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Oct 29, 2008 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
could it be...
that it’s just hard to convince people that it makes sense to put defensive value (run prevention) at the same level of importance as offensive (run production)?
i think the “gut” feeling is that good defense is handicapped by bad offense rather than the other way of looking at it—that bad offense can be made up for by good defense. or something…
i guess i’m trying to say that it’s really surprising to see your calculation of what kind of offense, paired with league-average defense, would be necessary to match kennedy’s value. it’s just not very obvious.
kudos, by the way, for approaching this topic so critically.
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
alright, here’s what I’m looking at (i understand what you’re saying about the list).
You would have those numbers for about half of the season as Kennedy is for sure to be platooned next year should he stay here. You have to consider it’s entirely possible he may not just be at 2nd base as well – which turns him from a plus defender to a liability. If Sept has any meaning in ’09.
So you would have to add the cost of his platoon and the performance of his platoon to get a more accurate 2nd base production.
On top of that, what my list was trying to say is that we’ve been in a position where we’ve had two defensive players who have essentially been black holes when it comes to offense. One of which has been very loud in expressing his desire to leave, which may have a whole set of impacts on its own.
being better than Ryan (looking at last year) seems like it’s going to be quite easy. That’s what we have now. Should we look at each position independently? Sure we can. I’ve agreed all along that Kennedy shouldn’t be just dumped aside, but at the same time, a solid SS can help a bad 2nd baseman when it comes to defense and vise versa. Just like an offensive 2nd baseman can give luxury to a lackluster SS bat.
and just to give context, I have argued that he is worth something, to us or another team, and wouldn’t be a contract eat. he should give us a prospect, even if it’s edmonds-like and comes with some salary reduction. i’ve also said that there needs to be consideration on who would replace (thus, your risk)
So while I agree based on his contract and his total offense + defense he’s going to be harder to match, he’s also going to cost at least another roster spot, and wear the liability of someone else’s defense (miles/lopez this year) in that spot as well. That’s if you consider his replacement to play the majority of games the following year.
In short, I’d take Iz and Uggla, Hanley and Miles over Kennedy and Iz anyday.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but uggla and ramirez aren't available.
And if they are, you have to weigh the cost (3-4 top prospects) with the benefit (not as much as you’d guess, because Kennedy’s glove was really that good). Uggla’s .874 OPS would be just barely breaking even.
How about Orlando Hudson at 3/30M? Yikes. We’d be a win or two worse as a team and we’d pay dearly for the privelidge. Lopez would be even worse than that, unless he hits like he did in September all year long.
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Oct 29, 2008 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
see below Sleepy.
I wasn’t using them as to get examples, just weighing offense + defense contributions compared to Iz/Kennedy.
I’d rather have the two below than anyone FA
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and for the record
Who would I replace him with?
Sean Rodriguez of LAA. Awesome in the minors, has all of the stats of a rookie pressing in the ML. (K rate balooned). In a position they have depth. Great power.
If the Dodgers resign Furcal (which is possible).
Chin Lung Hu of LAD
has faded enough off of the radar that he may be easier to get. Has solid power that can still develop. I think he’s a great find with a change in scenery. Would be blocked by Furcal.
What would it take? No clue off hand. But I’d take those two with all of their ups and downs and have Ryan as a backup in a heartbeat.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and both would be cheap for a considerable amt of time, and who would they block on opp. costs? Niko? anyone else?
Screw the FA when it comes to MI, let’s go diving in others prospect list.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok
now here you’ve picked two solid defenders (well, Hu is a great defender, not sure about S-rod) with potentially great bats. I’d be on board with either of these. While they may or may not actually improve the team for 09, they would have enough upside to be worthwhile.
It’s the O. hudson type acquisitions, paying big money to a player just to get offense while ignoring defense, that are scary. Mo has the potential to make a huge mistake there.
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Oct 29, 2008 6:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it wouldn’t take much for Hu to better the team for ‘09. Shouldn’t lose on glovework and the bat has every signs it could be better. He’d be the easier to get should furcal resign.
Sean I think will be harder, and I’m not even sure what the Angels need or would want, but it could be costly I’d imagine. But they have massive depth in the MI area and if we could fit a few peices between us it could be possible.
would rather dig in AAA with dismal ML campaigns then I would sign someone like well.. hudson is a good example that you brought up.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 6:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent post red baron
I really like this idea, and the discussion it brings. I think that the ideal thing for the ‘birds to do, which has been mentioned already, is to sell high on non-franchise players and then keep the cornerstones. I also think it would be wise to lock up good pitching in general. Here’s an ideal scenario (trades are relatively un-thought out, as a forewarning, feel free to tear them apart) with two trade packages, each designed to land an (1) ace starter. I’m thinking Hamels, Lincecum, Halladay…
Ludwick, Boggs
Ankiel, Anderson, Freese
To each of those deals you could add in Schumaker or any combination of AA/AAA players, avoiding any more big names. Ludwick has a ton of value so he should stand well on his own, and each of the three Ankiel, Anderson, and Freese either are or will be major league starters. This would give you a rotation of, say Halladay, Hamels, Wainwright, Welleymeyer, Lohse with Carpenter as a wild card.
The offense would be admittedly weaker, but not that much. You would have Mather to likely cancel out the loss of Ankiel, and Rasmus would contribute, albeit not to Ludwick’s standard, at least at first. This also doesn’t solve the MIF issue, but these deals would still leave pieces left to trade. The question is, is the loss sustained on the offensive side made up for in the gains in pitching? I say definitely yes.
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 12:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Rasmus/Ludwick
Ludwick just had the year that we are hoping to get from oft-injured Rasmus. I would like to see what we can get for him. His value in the trade market is probably higher than Ludwick’s and Ludwick was pretty hyped coming up too.
by Yadi on Oct 29, 2008 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A couple of quibbles
Rasmus doesn’t have the injury history that Ludwick does, and since Raz was hurt this year and Luddy was a monster, I’d say Ludwick has more value in terms of when well get the most for him (sell high).
Also, Ludwick will get expensive sooner, so Rasmus’ price helps to offset the cost of signing those pitchers long term.
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ugh
Well = we’ll
Typing on an iphone…
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rasmus
I dont think you can call him oft-injured just yet, it was only one season. Also, it is true his trade value is higher and that is why we need him in St. Louis. He plays a defensive position that is more valuable and most likely will be better in CF than Lud is in RF. Also, Ludwick will be arb eligible soon (maybe end of next year) and is 30 whereas Rasmus is 22. Ludwick is also hardly proven with only one real good year under his belt and he is actually oft-injured if you look at his career. 5-6 years of cost controlled Rasmus (even less offensively productive years) is better than 2 of Ludwick (that is assuming he can replicate last years performance).
by t7rick on Oct 29, 2008 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ludwick value > Raz value (today)
If Rasmus doesn’t get hurt and puts up a solid year in AAA in 08 I could definitley see him having higher trade value than Ludwick. But at this point in time, Luddy is a top 10 hitter in all of baseball. While I don’t see him putting up another year like he did in 08, the type of offensive production he could give a team over the next say two years is going to be much greater than what Rasmus could give a team in his first few seasons in the bigs. So I say at this point in time, Ludwick gets the edge in trade value.
Ryan Howard: one of the most Statistically Outstanding players of all time
by RunninRedbird on Oct 29, 2008 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Birds on the Bat
This is why I’m not a Florida Marlins fan.
by Yadi on Oct 29, 2008 12:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
actually go me thinking
Ludwick has like 2.1 years of major league experience. If he is in the top 17% will he be a super 2 and thus arb eligible this off-season or will it only be after he reaches 3 years service time, in which case he would be elligible after 2009 season?
by t7rick on Oct 29, 2008 1:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The 2.1 was the Begining of the 08 Season
He is over 3 years now and eligible for his first year of Arbitration
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
cool exercise
the most interesting thing is, that it pretty much backs up Barton leading off, if he gets more playing time. he’s definitely our best option for leading off, but how do you play him everyday, without going to extremes like in this exercise? an outfield of Barton, Mather, and Rasmus is nothing to scoff at. the only problem being is you need a significant upgrade in the middle infield hitting dept.
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 1:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
heh
“John Mozeliak: Fact, if he shows up in shape and has a strong spring, then you will watch him wearing a St. Louis Cardinals uniform.” – regarding Colby.
Puts to bed all of the “Colby is in the doghouse, is going to be gone, exiled by the org” comments. Thank goodness.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 1:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
WTF is up with all these STLToday Forum Fan's asking all the questions?
These questions are mostly from rude and unintelligent fans. Just personal shots against John. I don’t understand why he is even answering them.
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
he should just let us ask the questions
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
no doubt
i thought him & Jeff loved this place? why go play in the mud when this nice clean sand box is right here just begging to be played in?
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Oct 29, 2008 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i wonder if the editors have ever thought of asking them to spend an hour doing a VEB interview/chat/comment session?
maybe the audience isn’t large enough to be worth it. but it would probably be a lot more enjoyable for them as the level of discourse would be both more intellectual and more civilized.
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe they don't want to field hot one-hoppers and line drives.
could be a weak grounder to ss, is all they want.
by ball in play on Oct 29, 2008 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't they want to learn?
i think we’d make excellent coaches, right? cause we’re so smart and all. ok, not me, but other people…
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and besides, there's be a lot less booing from us on principle (principal?)
maybe even some cheering for effort!
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
principle
a “principal” is the head of your school and is your “pal”.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
give only two days' notice, then
Length of time before new account activation.
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Oct 29, 2008 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've mentioned that
several times. Beane is approachable from AthleticsNation and does an interview once a year on average. I’d love to solicit questions and approach an interview with Mo’. Looked for a while on email contact info, may just have to contact front office.
The bashing he’s taking from those twits is borderline offensive to me.
I send a comment in regarding it, though it probably won’t get any attention from there, i’ll post it here anyways
Wow John,
Seems you’re taking a beating from the “greatest fans in baseball”.
Allow me to give you props for quite a few things I’ve agreed with, and the fans should to.
1.) Freese for an ailing Edmonds ended up being a master stroke. Even with Wallace now in the system.
2.) Glaus not only found new life here, but his numbers had actually suffered due to allergies – reason to believe that 09 could be even better. His defense was a lot better than advertised. Not often can we lose a guy like Rolen and get an upgrade on defense this year.
3.) Keeping Motte. Secondary pitches or not, it’s clear and was clearly shown that holding pat when it came to the deadline deals revolving around Motte was a great idea.
4.) Lohse signing, a once a decade find and great approach to the signing. Can you explain the rationale about allowing him a no trade clause on all 4 years however?
5.) Further development on all of our players without costing us anything.
6.) Cutting ties and buying out Mulder’s option (though may be considered a no brainer)
This Cardinal fan is actually looking forward to your next two years.
Note to those that scorn, we beat all expectations even with a 4th place finish, we had significant injuries throughout the year, and frankly we’ve had over a decade of great baseball, don’t use these chances to play the spoilt child card, thanks.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
no doubt
there are some seriously rude, very personal attacks. kudos to Mo for having the fortitude to post and answer the questions.
I'd rather my sister be a prostitute than my brother a Cub fan.
by _pistol_ on Oct 29, 2008 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No kidding.
He’s handling those questions much better than I would have.
But, this is what you get when an anonymous person gets to show how smart they are. You know they’d never talk to him like that in person.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
not often I get pissed on what’s said on the ’net.
But I would seriously go all “Jay and Silent Bob Strikes Back” and whoop some ass on those guys.
Almost embarrassed to be a Cards fan when you read that shit.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
what are some of the things they are saying to him?
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You haven’t made a gut trade since taking the job of GM, have you ever made a move without the written consent of DeTwitt? Or do you just use one of those magic 8-balls? Anyone can sign their own free-agents, do you plan on actually doing any work this winter that a MLB General Mgr would do? Or, just like at last year’s trade deadline, do you plan on lying to the fans and doing nothing?
is one of a few
as of now the chat is live, you can click here to watch it play out
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow
retards. why must we be surrounded by imbecilic twits?
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that reminds me of this guy
who was bitching about Mozeliak on the stlcardinals.com mailbag feature. his main area of dispute was Brian Barton; he said that he should never play here again. could it be that he is a racist? it’s not like the guy stole a lot of playing time…
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's well known that outfielders with dredlocks are trouble
or something. i was hoping there’d be a barton question in the chat, but alas. i’m way more interested in barton’s possible “dog-house” scenario than colby’s illusory one.
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
what about outfielders
who have* aerospace engineering degrees?
*Can’t remember if he has it or is like a semester away or something
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think he has a year left but not much
by StLHugo on Oct 29, 2008 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
see, those guys are smart *and* trouble!
you can’t trust ‘em! i’ll be he ain’t even old timey
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
...hey I was going to post that....
Oh well I will still post it since mine has his response. ;)
Steven M.: You haven’t made a gut trade since taking the job of GM, have you ever made a move without the written consent of DeTwitt? Or do you just use one of those magic 8-balls? Anyone can sign their own free-agents, do you plan on actually doing any work this winter that a MLB General Mgr would do? Or, just like at last year’s trade deadline, do you plan on lying to the fans and doing nothing?
John Mozeliak: Magic 8-ball, if were that easy.
No credit for Lohse…I see how you play. Just take your ball and go home.
by StLHugo on Oct 29, 2008 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
touche
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really did..
I really did already have everything pasted into the comment and was cleaning it up when your comment showed up.
by StLHugo on Oct 29, 2008 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh, i'm sure
i shoulda’ put the response in as well, it was a nice come back.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
pathetic show by Cards fans
And the really sad thing is that he had to spend time answering those questions rather than meaningful ones about the Cards. Seriously, who picked those questions out of the list to have him answer?
by apack on Oct 29, 2008 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Post did
and ya know it.
Joe and Co have been touting ever since the All-Star break that fans are displeased and have reason to vent. That’s fueled in the forums on stltoday.com.
So it came out in force, and you know they pushed that shit to the top.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i have to say, the chat started out pretty respectful
a lot of the questions were ho-hum and not all that interesting, but many of the posters made a point to thank him in advance for making himself available and kept their question free of snark and vitriol. so lots of the people were keeping it classy (until it started getting ugly of course).
also, i’m very impressed with MO for how he handled it. i guess that’s a common theme today.
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shouldn't that be on Joe
Who was going through the questions? I know I sent quite a few respectful and intelligent questions that were not answered. Seems like Joe was just pushing his agenda cause I see no need to send such rude questions to Mo
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
good point.
i guess logically it would be silly to take that chat as representative of the whole of cards fans or something. and i’m sure there was “agenda-ing” influencing the question choices.
by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's probably covering his ass with the "public"
Now he can say the chat was legit since some of the retards were able to ask questions. If he’d had omitted those questions, they would have screamed that he’s a shill of MO and Cards management and that he protected MO from the “tough” questions while only allowing the soft ball questions through.
I’m not saying I agree with it, but I guaran-f’n-tee that’s why those “questions” got through.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
alas, this phenomenon is well documented...

by mattybobo on Oct 29, 2008 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
hahaha
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Total
IDIOTS. Never seen a more uninformed group of baseball “fans.”
by Red in Chicago on Oct 29, 2008 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Per Mike Smith on Bernie's forum
Clarification of a point raised earlier: Strauss helped Mo sort through the questions, mainly because there were so many (600) of them. Mo told him, don’t just give me the softballs, so Joe picked out a few from some of our more contentious guests.
by StLHugo on Oct 29, 2008 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Strauss was just trying to play
the sympathy card with Mo. “See what us poor reporters have to put up with?”
by Red in Chicago on Oct 29, 2008 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
or
see what we fuel in the forums? ha!
most of that shit is what is almost encouraged in the forums. sad actually
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If so, I would really have rather seen somebody throw a solid fastball at him,
not just spitters. Like, " hey, you didn’t trade for a solid reliever at the deadline and we blew X saves after the deadline, when we could have acquired Mr. Y or Mr. Z. Team A got Mr. Y for these prospects, when we had comparable ones. What gives?" Or, “what were people asking for Mr. Y and Mr. Z that we couldn’t pick them up?”
Not, “You didn’t get any relievers at the deadline, you suck.”
by tom s. on Oct 30, 2008 2:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey wasn't that your question about Kennedy?
by FlimtotheFlam on Oct 29, 2008 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it was salukihoops'
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Oct 29, 2008 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
nup
mine was basing decisions based on division rosters
at least one veb question got in though.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seems Wallace is going to get a ST
“looksee” – per that chat.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 2:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That just means the same thing it meant for Colby
which means nothing.
by Hardcore Legend on Oct 29, 2008 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
sigh
it follows up and says he’s going to AA. I just like the idea he’s getting a showing at ST. Never implied it meant anything.
Colby didn’t get the shaft in ’08 either, imo.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on Oct 29, 2008 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or it means the same thing it meant for Kyle McClellan.
Which was something.
by Red in Chicago on Oct 29, 2008 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The only difference being
that McClellan at least spent time in the system. I don’t think there’s any chance (outside of a Glaus injury) that Wallace makes the team out of ST. Not saying that’s bad though.
Is it fraud when Cubs ownership says "this year is our year?" Can somebody sue for that?
by thegodfather on Oct 29, 2008 6:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
there’s no reason to rush him to the majors, especially when we still have Glaus
go rays
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Oct 29, 2008 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be nice
to have a serviceable backup for Glaus, though, when the inevitable happens and he goes down with an injury. I wonder if the Walrus can play first, too. If Duncan is traded and Mather, for whatever reason, isn’t on the team, we will definitely need someone to spell Albert on occasion.

by 

