Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:





setting records straight

the 2008 baseball season is underway: oakland vs boston, playing in tokyo at 5 in the bleepin' morning stateside. athletics lead it 2-0. mlb’s marketing department triumphs again: opening day. woo-hoo. . . . . .

i admire the heck out of rick hummel; to cardinal fans of my generation, he’s been the equivalent of bob broeg. but his article today is so misleading i can’t let it pass without comment. he writes: "The Cardinals were 21-7 in games started last season by Brad Thompson and Todd Wellemeyer and 57-77 when the two converted relievers didn't start." that’s in the lead graph. another 600 words ensue, yet The Commish never mentions the glaring disparity in run support --- the cardinal offense averaged 5.82 runs a game in thompson / wellemeyer’s 28 starts, vs only 4.19 runs/game in the other 134 games. that explains the disparity in won-loss record far more than thompson and wellemeyer’s pitching. the won-loss record is particularly skewed in wellemeyer’s case. in his 11 starts, the bullpen threw more innings (49.2) than wellemeyer did (49.1) and allowed fewer runs (20, vs wellemeyer’s 26). only 2 of his 11 outings earned the "quality start" seal of approval (ie, 6 or more innings / 3 or fewer runs). yes, the cards went 10-1 when wellemeyer started --- but the offense and the bullpen deserve most of the credit.

i’m not pulling any stat-dork gimmicks here; i’m not citing SLNVAR or VORP or FIP or any such like. just looking at plain ol’ runs and innings pitched. the idea that run support can distort a pitcher’s won-loss record has been around for 30 years; bill james starting tracking that back in the late 1970s, before tony la russa had managed his first big-league game. and it’s tony’s neglect of these concepts --- not hummel’s --- that concerns me. hummel’s article quotes both tony and dave:

Pitching coach Dave Duncan said that what last year's results told him is that, "On the days that [Thompson and Wellemeyer] pitch, they've given you a chance to win the game." . . . .

Manager Tony La Russa takes the same approach in assessing the importance of the club's record in Wellemeyer-Thompson games last season. "That shows what happens when they pitch effectively," La Russa said. "I like the fact they work quickly and go after hitters.

"But," he said, "that was last year."

exactly --- that was last year. and run support doesn’t carry over from year to year; pitching ability does. judged purely by that standard, thompson and wellemeyer were passable in 2007; i wouldn’t expect them to be much better than passable in 2008. i’ll put a poll at the end of his post --- will the cardinals be over .500 or under it in thompson / welle’s starts this year?

 

* * * * * * * * * * *

as for anthony reyes, maybe he’ll end up with the mets; they’re looking for a 5th starter. reyes might be a decent fit in shea, which suppresses home runs and (due to poor batter visibility) elevates strikeouts. i have no idea who the mets would send back; they’re disenchanted with mike pelfrey, who’s their version of reyes (struggling high-profile prospect), but i don’t see that guy being a fit in st louis any more than reyes is. reyes pitched against the mets at least once this spring; i gotta believe there’ll be a new york scout in the stands for his start today (gameday link here.

other logical fits: the phillies (long rumored to have interest), the orioles, the marlins, the nats. texas traded for a similar pitcher last year (brandon mccarthy) and got decent results; they can always use another arm. oakland is stockpiling young players; maybe billy beane’ll take another prospect off our hands. oh wait, they’ve already finalized their 25-man roster.

opening-day update: athletics 4, red sox 3 . . . . .

 

* * * * * * * * * * *

now here’s a brilliant post. SBN brother site The Good Phight likens each big-league team to a rock n roll band. these guys obviously are decrepit old fools like me, because i’ve actually heard of most of the bands they cite. here’s the entry for the cardinals:

St. Louis Cardinals are The Beach Boys: The wholesome, family-friendly exterior conceals a deviant, tragic core (substance abuse, performance enhancing and otherwise; tragic deaths of key performers). Led by an authoritarian egomaniac (Tony LaRussa; Murry Wilson). One brilliant member surrounded by a rotating cast of a couple solid supporting players and a bunch of scrubs (Albert Pujols; Brian Wilson). Shocking, inexplicable late-career resurgence (2006 postseason; "Kokomo").

can’t argue with a word of that. the entry for the cubs is equally spot-on:

Chicago Cubs are Jimmy Buffett: Millions of people like them for some reason, despite having done nothing worthwhile for a full century. The culture of drinking surrounding each probably explains this tolerance for failure. The fans are generally affable and friendly, but are single-mindedly dedicated to their hero(es). Fans will travel thousands of miles to see them play.

* * * * * * * * * * *

for those of you who are following the sim tournament: i'm doing my best to keep up, but my current travel / work schedule's brutal. writing summaries is not near the top of my agenda. i think there'll be an update this afternoon . . . .

Poll
Will the Cardinals break even in Wellemeyer / Thompson's starts this year?
  • .500 or better
  • Under .500

  762 votes | Results

1 recs | Comment 219 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

Thanks for the link to the rock and roll

Funny (and painfully accurate) stuff.

"Slide DiMaggio, slide!" "Hey, my name isn't DiMaggio, my name is mm..mmmm...mmm....mud."

by cmat on Mar 25, 2008 8:35 AM EDT   0 recs

Surfer Culture

Last year the Surfer Culture that the Beach Boys represent was VERY accurate. Edmonds and Speizio both show it. I wonder what they would call the Cards after this season though.

by StLHugo on Mar 25, 2008 9:06 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

This same discussion about wins

happened yesterday when my mother called and in the course of the discussion said the Cardinals won something like 14 out of the 17 games Thompson started last year. I replied, "Yes, true. But you have to remember that 365 days last year, the sun came out. Also, in those same 365 days last year, the United States was at war in Iraq. There are lots of things that seem related but really aren't."

She found that quite amusing.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on Mar 25, 2008 9:03 AM EDT   0 recs

The one difference ...

between Wellemeyer and Thompson is that he had significantly more quality starts. I'm not implying that the run support he experienced vs. the run support Reyes received didn't play a large part in the disparity of the two records. Sometimes run support goes beyond just straight stats. If the runs you give up are typically in bunches early in the game (ala Reyes), than despite that "hard nine" mantra it can cause the offense to press. Thompson seemed to hold off his runs until a little later in the outing, which gives the offense a little more time to get comfortable. I personally believe Wellemeyer just got lucky last year, and he wore out the bullpen in the process. I'm hoping he is the first one to exit the rotation when the other guys start to come back.

by etp_stl on Mar 25, 2008 12:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

.500

Can you split the .500 and above out to two sections? I know there are already 24 votes so it might not be fair but I wanted to vote for exactly .500, that is what I see both of them as. Somebody that gives you no extra or less chance to win. Just Meh players. Reyes over a good season at least gives you an extra chance to win every so often.

by StLHugo on Mar 25, 2008 9:04 AM EDT   0 recs

Also, will the Cardinals trade Reyes?

Despite all of us thinking he was out of options, he apparently has 1 left and thus will pitch in AAA. Maybe they will leave him there as an insurance policy should Looper, Wellemeyer, and Thompson turn into pumpkins while Mulder and Pineiro returns and Clement shows he has nothing left.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on Mar 25, 2008 9:05 AM EDT   0 recs

I wasn't sure

I wasn't sure on his options but I thought he might have one left. If he does go back to AAA though the Memphis team will have to be a favorite for the first half title.

by StLHugo on Mar 25, 2008 9:07 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

AAA

I didn't think AAA played halves. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Memphis just has one full season.

by arch support on Mar 25, 2008 9:51 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

maybe

I know little about how they do AAA so I am probably wrong.

by StLHugo on Mar 25, 2008 9:56 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't really know either

I'm basing that off of the way the minor leagues are set up for MLB '07 The Show for PS2. Not exactly a source to be proud of.

by arch support on Mar 25, 2008 2:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

reyes and options

apparently he is in a loophole situation; normally a guy can only be optioned for three seasons, not any particular number of times, but three full seasons of yo-yo-ing

in reyes' case, because this is only his fifth year in the organization, he can be optioned for a 4th year; had this been year six, he would have to clear waivers

Pujols is the greatest Cardinal in my lifetime.

by bigcardsfan5 on Mar 25, 2008 10:08 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Opening day update

Tied 4-4 bottom 9

by StLHugo on Mar 25, 2008 9:10 AM EDT   0 recs

Now 6-4

6-4 Boston 2 outs top 9th

by StLHugo on Mar 25, 2008 9:28 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Barton's line so far

0-2 3BBs 1R 1SO Interesting line, has he always had a "good eye".

by StLHugo on Mar 25, 2008 9:42 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes.

Career minor league OBP of .414. The question'll be if he ever hits for power. If he develops a power stroke, he's going to be a monster.

by svengali on Mar 25, 2008 10:08 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

New Pitch...Blah Blah Blah...Off Season Fitness Program

The article about the team's record with Wellemyer and Thompson...it just sounds like typical beginning of the year, need to write an article, nothing much happening, let's throw this positive spin on something not too positive, article. This time on the hideous rotation. They always have these stories, about Joe Shumblock has a new splitter that will make him great this year, Bill Shmecki worked out with the Olympic ping pong team and will have really great hands. Mark Magrunski hit .408 in his cup of coffee, and boy are we excited to see what this guy (with a lifetime .256 average in the minors) can do given a full season. Laser eye surgery!

The point is this bag of beans really is cool.

What is he supposed to write? "Wellemyer and Thompson were pretty bad last year, and I expect the same this year. Don't bother to come out to park on those days unless you want to root for the other team."

What was Duncan supposed to say? "Boy, last year they threw meatball after meatball up there. Not only were we lucky to win those games, we were lucky someone in the stands didn't get killed by a hard hit ball. It's too bad the front office can't get us some decent pitchers. Yup. There's gonna be some long innings when those guys pitch this year. I hope Tony retires soon. I can't take this any more. I'm afraid they're going to try to bring Dave Lapoint back and put him in the rotation. This is no longer a job--it's torture. If Wainwright gets hurt, Kyle Loshe is my ace. Please, just shoot me. Someone, please."

by tarakas on Mar 25, 2008 9:29 AM EDT   0 recs

Nice Rant.

Typical St. Louis fan base pessimism, but at least you do it with FLAIR!

by etp_stl on Mar 25, 2008 12:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Our Lineup today Per Bird Land

1. Skip Schumaker, RF
2. Brian Barton, LF
3. Albert Pujols, 1B
4. Troy Glaus, 3B
5. Rick Ankiel, CF
6. Jason LaRue, C
7. Aaron Miles, 2B
8. Anthony Reyes, RHP
9. Cesar Izturis, SS

Lets hope Reyes can prove something today that he hasn't yet. If he goes late into this game with very few runs I don't know how they can just ignore that.

by StLHugo on Mar 25, 2008 9:35 AM EDT   0 recs

Have you ever seen the 3 Monkeys? Hands over ears, eyes, and mouth?

That's how.

Reyes would have to throw a perfect game today to get into the rotation and even then, they'd say he wasn't very efficient in doing it.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on Mar 25, 2008 9:36 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Ill be pulling for Reyes today...

I havent been his biggest supporter in the past but i hope he pitches a gem today and can find his way to our rotation very soon...good luck AR!

"Back in the day when I played, a pitcher had 3 pitches: a fastball, a curveball, a slider, a changeup and a good sinker pitch." - Mike Shannon

by nomar34 on Mar 25, 2008 10:27 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Who Cares?

I don't care if its "basic" stats or not...I'm tired of hearing the run support "excuse".

There is "something" about Reyes that is negative. I've seen it coaching baseball. The guy isn't excitable, isn't a leader.

People pay too much attention to stats sometimes and forget about personalities.

For whatever unmeasurable reason, Wellemeyer and Thompson get Cardinal hitters excited.

It's not a "fluke stat" when they consistently get run support and Reyes does not.

Furthermore, even if its frustrating that their games might technically be considered bullpen games, would you rather have a bullpen game with a good chance to win, or throw in someone like Mark Redman or another warm body, cheap FA that was available?

by jeffrw on Mar 25, 2008 10:14 AM EDT   0 recs

Leader?

If every player were a leader, who would follow?

In a season where we certainly won't contend, who cares about some replacement level pitcher giving us an occasional chance to win? We should be evaluating what we have for the future.

Run support is fluke stat. It isn't repeatable year to year and many huge name pitchers have had seasons where they got almost none. Pithers like Roger Clemens, Randy Johnson and others have been screwed on Cy Young awards due to run support. Are you saying they had years where they weren't leaders?

by RedbirdRay on Mar 25, 2008 10:44 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Furthermore

Are you suggesting that pitchers have an influence on how many runs are scored behind him outside of their own plate appearances? You can think that, but it is just wrong. Not subjective opinion wrong, but statistically and factually incorrect.

"I believe he’s been reincarnated, that he played before, in the twenties and thirties, and he’s back to prove something." - Former teammate Mark McGwire about Albert Pujols

by cardzfan24 on Mar 25, 2008 11:22 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Absolutely they do!

With all do respect, quit making excuses for Reyes.

Explain "statistically" why we can't score for Reyes, but we can for Wellemyer/Thompson.

Do you believe its just "bad luck"? Did one of our Latin players teach Todd and Brad some voodoo?

It's consistent! If it happens every freakin' time, then YES! there is something to my, or anyone else's theory, that Reyes puts the Cardinals batting order on edge, makes them maybe try too hard or just outright depresses them. Players are not machines. When they know they have a stud pitching, they can mentally relax a bit, not worry about trying so hard. Then there is just that confidence. You just feel good in your head when you have someone like Carpenter (for example) on the mound. You are psyched up. Do you think Reyes gets players psyched up? They idea you believe that psychology plays no part is pretty wild!

Explain to me how "run support" is the only reason a pitcher with that high of an ERA looses games.

Clemens, Johnson and any other pitcher you mentioned weren't allowing every runner on base to score. They didn't have ERA's north of 5 or 6.

Reyes is a bad major league pitcher.

by jeffrw on Mar 25, 2008 12:10 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Huh?

I don't really know how to respond to this.

First of all, it looks like you are responding to two different posts, but referring to us as a singular "you".

Secondly, you've put a whole lot of words into both of our mouths. Neither of us made a single excuse for Reyes or even brought him up. Yet, you tell us to stop making excuses for him. I took exception with your "theory" that run support is a result of a pitcher's leadership skills.

Cardzfan cited similar problems with your statement.

Also, neither of us stated anything about "psychology", yet you say "the idea you believe that psychology plays no part is pretty wild!". That's pretty far out...inserting words and telling us what we believe to try to prove your arguement.

I'm not even going to keep debating with you.

by RedbirdRay on Mar 25, 2008 12:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I do apologize for combining the two posts.

I questioned in my original post the ability of Reyes to be a leader on the mound and get his team excited.

The "psychology" part was directed more at cardzfan24 than you. What else would I mean by making your team "excited"? His thinking is based too much in linear statistics and individual performances and essentially taking the stance that there are no mental or "clubhouse factors" that contribute to team morale or performance. He claims I am wrong and that I can't prove it "factually" or "statistically". I never said it was the only factor, or even a huge one. But it plays a role. I don't need to prove it. Anyone who has ever played sports or coached knows about how your mental state effects your game. And worrying about a guy, alone on a mound, who the game hinges on, is a legit argument.

However, in regards to being a leader...your comments...you give examples of rare exceptional pitchers who are very much aces and pitch like it. There lack of run support was CLEARLY from poor offensive teams. Those pitches pitched quality games worthy of Cy Young's. How many Cy Young-esque games did Reyes pitch last year?

Look, I apologize for seeming crass. I'm simply tired of this argument for Reyes being on our team. Bad blog today, imo. I can't complain too much, because I could never write such a wonderful blog. I just think today is a miss, not a hit. It's just a silly argument to me. He's had two bad seasons and hasn't really shown any improvement.

Run support DOES NOT MATTER when comparing Reyes to Wellemeyer/Thompson...just look at their ERA's. Basic pitching stat. Reyes allows a bunch of runs, the others do not. Looking at run support for Reyes isn't looking at the real problem...when Reyes has 3.00 ERA and is loosing, then we can look at run support.

by jeffrw on Mar 25, 2008 1:03 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

You can not like Reyes

and that is fine. I am starting to get annoyed with the whole process of seeing if he can contribute anything as well

But my point remains, luck has a much larger role than psychology when it comes to run support. These guys are professional baseball players who have a job to play the game, score runs, and play defense. The vast majority of them play their best all the time, regardless of the pitcher or situation. Assuming otherwise is fine, but you have to prove it is true in spite of evidence to the contrary.

The blog post today was in reference to W/L records while the respective pitchers were on the mound. You CANNOT discuss those records without mentioning run support. It just is not possible. Run support has nothing to do with the skill of the pitchers, that is certainly true. It is misleading to simply cite won/loss stats without mentioning that Todd and Brad got a considerable higher number of runs scored for them than Reyes.

And feel free to hook your wagon to the Welly/Wonderbrad rotation. It is going to be a disaster. You might beg for Reyes to start when this crap starts hitting the fan.

"I believe he’s been reincarnated, that he played before, in the twenties and thirties, and he’s back to prove something." - Former teammate Mark McGwire about Albert Pujols

by cardzfan24 on Mar 25, 2008 1:21 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Reyes had bad luck, but he was still really, really bad.

According to B-P, his "expected support-neutral W-L percentage" was the 7th worst among starting pitchers w/100 IP last year, with only Kip Wells, Scott Olsen, Vicente Padilla, Buddy Carlyle, Adam Eaton and Josh Towers being worse. Sorting by "expected support neutral team win percentage" in his starts, only Kip Wells and Scott Olsen were worse (Eaton tied).

The thing is, Reyes is probably better than any of the numbers he put up; most likely the psychological effects of losing game after game and the effects of being shuttled to Memphis hurt him badly. But there's no way to know. What we do know for sure is that run support alone did not make Reyes a bad pitcher in 2006-2007.

Well the girls would turn the color of the avocado when he'd drive down the street in his El Dorado

by SleepyCA on Mar 25, 2008 2:11 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Good post.

You might want to add the psychological effects of telling a guy that his pitching approach is all wrong, and that he needs to completely change what type of pitcher he is.

by etp_stl on Mar 25, 2008 2:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Isn't that how they help YOUNG pitchers?

By teaching them what works best? Pitch to contact. Get the groundballs. So a 24 year old knows better? Who else on the Cardinals pitch anyway they want? As far as I can tell, all of the pitchers "pitch to contact", why shouldn't Reyes?

by OKCARDSFAN_411 on Mar 25, 2008 3:03 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Your evidence that ...

they help YOUNG pitchers is? They have typically been poor at that facet, and frankly if you fit their mold you do well. Pitching to contact is a valuable skill, admittedly. Apparently, they don't teach or identify that type of thing in the minor league system. Why were they so high on this guy until last year? Suddenly, the best arm in the system doesn't have an "out pitch." His mechanics were destroyed last year, so his velocity was significantly reduced and his curve became "loopy". This was a result of making him question his entire delivery and approach. You don't do that in a guy's first year in the league.

by etp_stl on Mar 25, 2008 4:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

well, lets see whom they helped...

Matt Morris, Rick Ankiel (unless you blame his wildness on LaRussa), Bud Smith, Danny Haren, Adam Wainwright and Brad Thompson. If you want to blame LaRussa for the woes of the farm system, then there is no way I can argue against that logic.

by OKCARDSFAN_411 on Mar 25, 2008 5:28 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Uh, no credit for Haren...

He didn't succeed until he was away from LaDuncan.

And Wainwright is iffy too, I think, since he was from Atlanta.

So basically just Matt Morris. One pitcher in 12 years un LaDuncan.

by DiscoJer on Mar 25, 2008 6:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The Braves ...

were not convinced Wainwright was going to develop the mentality to be a starter. Putting him in the bullpen with Isringhausen, and later in the rotation with Carpenter, had a pronounced effect on his development. I will give the Cards (as a whole) credit for Wainwright.

by etp_stl on Mar 25, 2008 6:56 PM EDT to parent up   1 recs

A little misleading...

in that Bud Smith was a flame-out (hence why he was gone so fast). Dan Haren was not given an opportunity to succeed with the Cards (and it was widely accepted that he would top out at a #4 starter). Rick Ankiel was affected by Duncan changing his mechanics during his innaugural season (oh my god, a LHP that throws across his body, crazy). Brad Thompson is a sinker-baller that requires a Duncan-style of approach to be successful (remember this blog was about Thompson's success being misleading). Matt Morris was a sinker-baller, who clearly had ace stuff before injuries slowed him down (I still contend that Darryl Kile was really his pitching coach). Adam Wainwright also fits the Duncan-style pitcher (and it has been well documented that Carpenter and Isringhausen have had a lot to do with his success). Regardless, I'll grant you 2 1/2 quality starters out of your list. In 12 years, that's quite a record.

I will argue that LaRussa's veterans-first approach had a great deal to do with emptying out the farm system. He also has a great deal to do with setting the tone of what types of players are required for the major league team. That wasn't my point by referencing the minors before, anyway. I was identifying an inconsistency in the statements of the organization about this kid that seemed to arise only once he started struggling in the major leagues. The kid was around the major league ball club several years. Why did they authorize him coming up if he didn't have major league stuff?

by etp_stl on Mar 25, 2008 6:43 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Bud Smith was traded for Rolen

he flamed out with the Phillies, but we don't know what he would have done in StL in a more pitcher friendly park.

"You say the world has lost it's love. I say embrace what it's made of" - Dar Williams

by Valatan on Mar 25, 2008 10:46 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Bud was ...

actually already starting to flame out here (6.94 ERA over 10 starts in '02), and he actually never played in the majors for the Phillies. Ballpark statement doesn't apply. Sorry.

by etp_stl on Mar 25, 2008 11:03 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If pitchers were able to get teams "excited"

there should be statistical trends of some pitchers consistently (meaning more than 12-15 starts). Those don't exist. They've been proven not to exist. So no, a pitcher does not have an influence on how many runs their team scores with them on the mound.

by azruavatar on Mar 25, 2008 1:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

one thing an NL pitcher does have control over:

his own hitting performance. And Reyes can't hit a lick, nor can he bunt. In an NL lineup that is a bad thing.

His failure to get the bunt down in the fifth inning today inspired me to look up how bad he's been in that area; in his three years in the majors, he's had 8 successful sacrifice bunts, 9 unsuccessful sacrifice attempts and 2 bunt hits.

Two of his 5 hits in the last three years have been on failed bunt attempts! That is insane.

Well the girls would turn the color of the avocado when he'd drive down the street in his El Dorado

by SleepyCA on Mar 25, 2008 2:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Now we eval pitchers on their hitting?

Really?

Yes it would be nice if they all hit like Adam and Rick, but in this real world thats not going to happen.

by DriverZn on Mar 25, 2008 3:19 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

not "evaluating him" on it

but it's important to recognize that "hitting like rick and adam" and "failing to execute a simple sacrifice bunt more than 50% of the time" are two different things, and tangible. They affect run scoring.

I'm just saying that Reyes bears some of the responsibility for his lack of run support. I don't think that is even arguable, and it's not something I've seen mentioned before. I'm not saying it is THE reason, but it's at least a contributing factor.

Well the girls would turn the color of the avocado when he'd drive down the street in his El Dorado

by SleepyCA on Mar 25, 2008 3:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Are you John Kruk?

Has he been known to troll around on blogs?

by arch support on Mar 25, 2008 2:07 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

how about turning it around

How do you think a rookie pitcher is going to perform when he goes out there knowing he'll be lucky to get a run or two while he's still out there on the mound?

by TICY on Mar 25, 2008 2:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

That MLB/Rock and Roll Band

write-up was pretty spot-on. After seeing that the Phillies' site hasn't received the up-grade yet, I can say that I don't miss the old look at all. Got used to the new ways pretty fast.

I also found Tony and Dunc's comments in the P-D this morning somewhat disconcerting. But, like Hugo, I wish that right at .500 was an option for the poll.

by cardsgirl95 on Mar 25, 2008 10:16 AM EDT   0 recs

I don't miss the old look either.

Because I tend to be rather anal about these things, I have been following the upgrades on SBN, and the following teams have come over to the new look thus far:
A's
Giants
Rockies
Angels
Orioles
Cubs
White Sox
Astros

there may be one or two others, but so far, it seems like the new format is catching on

by tbell61 on Mar 25, 2008 11:14 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Reyes lack of run support

May be related to the fact that Reyes was so bad in the first couple of innings, giving up runs before the hitters even get up to bat and this sets the mood for every game he pitched. I don't have the stats but maybe someone can post when Wellemeyer/Thompson gave up most of thier runs (I'm guessing the 4th and 5th inning) where as Reyes worse innings were the 1st and 2nd.

by OKCARDSFAN_411 on Mar 25, 2008 10:26 AM EDT   0 recs

gamelog

i dont have the stat your looking for, but i just perused welly's gamelog on yahoo. there were a couple well pitched games, but the rest he was clearly the benefactor of the offense. sometimes he was spotted runs before taking the mound and promptly gave them back up. sometimes he gave up runs, the offense would fight back, he would give them up again, and the offense would let him off the hook after he lasted less than 4 innings. last year was an illusion of sorts. if he hasnt improved the results will show it this year. i hope he has improved.

i dont think there is anything to the theory that wellemeyer put up a couple zeros in the first few innings which allowed the offense to relax and score runs.

by dmb60614 on Mar 25, 2008 11:42 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

the reyes/wells aspect

I want to make a counter point in regard to this post. I think that Thompson and Wellmeyer actually had something to do with the win loss records. Consider the following: Reyes and Wells combined to start 56 games last year and had a combined record of 9 - 31. That allows for 16 no decisions and I'm at work so I can't research what happened in those no decisions, but even if the cards won them all, that's still only 25 - 31. Now what was the problem that plagued Wells and Reyes? The big Inning. Reyes and Wells didn't keep the cards in the game. While Thompson and Wellmeyer weren't great, and by some standards weren't even good, what they did do was not put the team in an early hole. Maybe that allowed for the hitters to not press, and approach at-bats differently. Now, I know they are not the solution, however, I do think they can do a very capable job of holding over the rotation until the injured 4 some returns. I know I have no evidence to suport this, but in games not started by Wells and Reyes last year the cardinals were actually a pretty good team, and if you replaced their starts by a 500 pitcher they would have been contenders.

by stickman179 on Mar 25, 2008 10:27 AM EDT   0 recs

You can't tell me that finding

your team down by 4 runs in the first or second inning is not a buzzkill for hitters, especially hitters on a team that is not an established offensive monster. So there is something to be said for this. I think this effect was especially true for the 2006-7 Cardinals, since we would fairly often see 3 consecutive games in which the starters coughed up bushels of early runs. But I'd be very wary about accepting this as the whole explanation for this question. Has any statistical analysis been done on the effect of early deficits?

by MdRedbirdFreak on Mar 25, 2008 10:40 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

quick and dirty

Well I did a fast count. Earned Runs per Inning on games started only in 2007.

Reyes (20 starts)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
24 9 18 9 6 4 1 0 0

Wellemeyer/Thompson (26 Starts)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
14 11 15 5 7 10 3 0 0

Found out that Wellemeyer/Thompson gave up only 5 big innings (3 or more runs)
Reyes gave up 12 with 9 of those in the first three innings.

by OKCARDSFAN_411 on Mar 25, 2008 11:43 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

sweet, what about kip wells?

Maybe there is validity to this thompson/wellmeyer winning thing. Granted they do strain the bullpen, but a 4th or 5th starter isn't expected to throw late into ballgames. They are simply suppose to keep you in it with 5 or 6 decent innings. By avoiding the big inning these guys do that. Kip wells and Reyes did not. That was the struggle last year. This year the staff has the ability to stay out of the big inning. Hope springs eternal.

by stickman179 on Mar 25, 2008 11:55 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Didn't do Wells

Sorry, but being he's not part of the team this year, I didn't look at him. But I bet he was about like Reyes.

by OKCARDSFAN_411 on Mar 25, 2008 12:04 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

that's cool

I would have to agree with that assessment. So, here's my main point. Last year the Cardinals were 78 - 84. Take out the games that Reyes and Wells got decisions and the team is 69 - 53. WOW! That is one hell of a different team. I think that makes quite the statement for staying out of the big inning and how it can effect the offense as well. If you want to pin the failures of last year, look no further than Reyes and Wells. If you want to look for signs of hope for this year, I believe the offense is improved, and by subtracting those 2 from the rotation, and replacing them with guys who aren't great, but don't give up the big inning and I think this team has a good chance to surprise some people.

by stickman179 on Mar 25, 2008 12:10 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Strain on the bullpen ...

needs to be clarified. You need to split up Thompson and Wellemeyer when you say that. I don't remember the exact numbers, but Thompson had something like 11 or 12 "quality starts" out of his 17 starts. That is better than you got out of Wells, Reyes, or Wellemeyer by a long shot.

by etp_stl on Mar 25, 2008 1:15 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think Tony is just being polite to Hummel

Those quotes seem like Hummel asked him about those stats and Duncan and Tony just gave him one of those "sure I'll agree with you" comments.

I wouldn't get too heated up about it.

I still agree with others, psychologically I always felt like we're going to lose when Reyes/Wells blew up early in the game.

you can't sneak the sun past the rooster

by enoscountry on Mar 25, 2008 10:42 AM EDT   0 recs

And "misleading" is less than polite to the HOF commish

Wish that kind of lboros scrutiny of a Hummel column would occasionally be applied to the king of "misleading" in STL--Miklasz. A disappointing cacophony, indeed.

watching from Belgium

by waffle on Mar 25, 2008 11:03 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Boo DirectTV!

An hour+ after the opening game of the season ends, DirectTV finally gets ESPN2 back on the air.

A couple of the Nic channels were out too. My kids weren't impressed either.

by RedbirdRay on Mar 25, 2008 10:48 AM EDT   0 recs

dish

didnt have any problems with dishnet, they went straight to mike & mike after the game

Pujols is the greatest Cardinal in my lifetime.

by bigcardsfan5 on Mar 25, 2008 12:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

one more reason I got rid of directtv

and switched to comcast... directtv adds new level of suckitude to the term "bad service"...

When cheese gets its picture taken, what does it say?

by RosevilleRedbird on Mar 25, 2008 12:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Maybe I missed it

But has anyone written about or discussed which pitchers the Cards were facing when Wellemeyer, Thompson, and Reyes started? I seem to remember Reyes getting some bad draws.

Seems like a good place to start looking for cause/effect.

youneverknow

by meat on Mar 25, 2008 10:49 AM EDT   0 recs

How about this: Reyes sucks.

Look at his numbers comparing 2006 to 2007. He remarkably consistent.

2006: 17 starts
2007: 20 starts

2006: 2.11 SO to BB
2007: 1.73 SO to BB

WHIP and HR allowed is pretty much identical in both years.

2006: 1.77 earned run for each inning pitched.
2007: 1.5 earned run for each inning pitched.

He can't get anyone out. If they get on base, they score. He's like Randy Flores, only a starter.

You take out, what? 3 good games and he hasn't done anything on a major league level.

by jeffrw on Mar 25, 2008 11:16 AM EDT   0 recs

Some pitchers start slow.

Would you give up on one that in his 4th year put up a 6.26 ERA and a 113:83 SO/bb ratio. ?

by DriverZn on Mar 25, 2008 12:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Oh please.

Carpenter had already proven he could pitch on the major league level. He already had two slightly better than league average ERA winning seasons. And in the AL East.

I'm surprised you didn't bring up Bonderman, that's usually who Reyes defenders bring up.

by jeffrw on Mar 25, 2008 12:18 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

jeff, the post wasn't about reyes

you're the one who brought him up.

you seem to be positing a cause/effect relationship between a pitcher's leadership qualities (and/or his performance) and the number of runs scored behind him. but i don't see any facts to back those opinions up. until i do, i can't take them seriously.

by lboros on Mar 25, 2008 1:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Well maybe I jumped the gun on it with Reyes. It usually seems when people make the case against Thompson or Wellemeyer, its because they are advocating for Reyes.

I just happen to believe that a pitcher and his personality can effect other players. I don't believe its the only thing, just a contributing factor. Why else would a team excel with one and shutdown with another?

You are smarter than me, especially when it comes to statistics. And I agree that run support cannot be carried over from year to year. However, WHY would run support consistently be higher for two pitchers and consistently lower for another? How can "luck" (good or bad) happen all the time? Shouldn't luck be random?

by jeffrw on Mar 25, 2008 2:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Luck is random

but in given sample sizes, you should always expect a run of consistency every now and then.

Humans lack the capacity to intuitively understand "random". For example, flip a coin 1,000 times and you'll get approximately 50% heads and 50% tails. But, if you look through the log of flips, you'll notice runs of 8, 12, 15, 24, or even more heads in a row....and likewise for tails. Randomness does not discount runs. In fact, runs are a feature of randomness when you look at small enough samples. They are common in a large sample.

The human fallacy is seeing runs in small sample size and applying me