Pitch counts and stranded runners
There’s been some discussion, and for the life of me I can’t find it, about Wainwright’s workload so far this year. I know that on at least 1 occasion, I’ve expressed some concern about the number of pitches that Tony’s having the kid throw. He’s thrown 5 starts and has thrown more than 100 pitches in the 3 of the 5 – not , in and of itself, horrendous. However, against Milwaukee 10 days ago he threw 115 pitches and yesterday against the Astros he threw 126. Just for reference, those 126 pitches were more than any other pitcher in the majors has thrown in a game so far this year. It’s also Wainwright’s career high in pitches.
In my view, we’re starting to see a pattern w/ LaRussa. Wainwright has emerged as the de facto ace of the staff and Tony’s going to ride his horse as much as possible. Because Wellemeyer, Looper, Pineiro and Lohse are basically 6 inning pitchers max, he’s concerned (rightfully so) about the load he’s placing on the bullpen. AZ and I had a pretty good back and forth on McClellan’s and Izzy’s workload just a couple of days ago. Therefore, Wainwright becomes the ace that Tony’s going to get as many innings as possible from. The fact is that he trusts Wainer probably more than any other pitcher on the staff, Izzy included, at this point and, regardless of Wainer’s pitch count, Tony wants him in the game.
Yesterday, Tony left the wagonmaker in to pitch the 9th inning of a tie game despite the fact that he had already thrown 102 pitches entering the inning. AW was due to hit 2nd in the bottom half of the ninth. It’s reasonable to have Wainer start that inning. 102 pitches is not an outrageous number. However, as the inning drew on, it became pretty obvious that Wainer was just going on guts and fumes as he tried to get the Astros’ middle of the order out. That point is important – AW wasn’t facing Loretta, Ausmus, and the pitcher’s spot. It was Matsui, Tejada, and Berkman, the last of whom had already hit 2 bombs off Wainer.
He got the first 2 out and faced Berkman having thrown 110 pitches. It was clear that he didn’t have his best stuff and this was definitely a tough PA for Adam. He pitched carefully to Berkman and faced Carlos Lee w/ Berkman on first, having thrown 115 pitches. Franklin was just now getting warm in the pen. I would argue that at this point Franklin, Izzy or McClellan should’ve been in the game. I understand trying to get your starter through the inning when he’s due up in the next half inning if it’s the 6th. In the 9th, it makes no sense whatsoever. You’re not likely to need a lot of innings out of your relievers at this point in the game – it’s not like you need Franklin to pitch 2-3 innings – he’s going 1 inning max. Have him get the 3rd out and pinch-hit or, if you just have to now keep him in the game, double-switch Miles into the game. Kennedy was the final out in the bottom of the 8th.
Wainwright is our best pitcher, but is he better on his 116th pitch (or his 120th which began the Pence PA) than Franklin is on his first? The difference is probably negligible at best but even if Wainer is slightly better, I DON’T CARE!!! What’s most important is the health of our 26 year old ace. Franklin should have been in the game to pitch to Lee or, at least, Hunter Pence w/ 2 on and 2 out. AW gutted out that PA by throwing slider after slider – 7 in a row – and finally getting him to chase a third one out of the zone for the K.
Here’s what we know, definitively, about pitching injuries: there’s no correlation between pitching often and the likelihood of injury but there is a correlation between pitching when tired and the likelihood of injury. Wainer was tired in the 9th. This is indisputable. Does that mean that he’s definitely headed for arm surgery? Of course not and, as many will point out, Nolan Ryan and Roger Clemens threw a lot of pitches and never had major arm surgery. These patterns are not guarantees but the correlation is nevertheless significant and one that is worth paying attention to. We know now that Ryan and Clemens were freaks who could throw it 120 to 130 times or more in the mid-90’s and not get hurt. Maybe we’ll look back in 10 years and say that Wainer was a freak as well but we don’t know that today. One 126 pitch start isn’t going to kill the kid (probably) but there is a trend developing. Two of his 5 starts this year would go down as 2 of the 3 longest of his career and as long as this trend continues, Tony’s playing with fire.
Baseball Prospectus calculates a stat called pitcher abuse points as a way of measuring which pitchers are throwing when tired. Any start less than 100 pitches receives 0 points but the "abuse" a pitcher suffers from increases exponentially with every pitch thrown above 100 in a start. It’s not a big deal to throw 105 pitches. 115 is getting up there but AW was at 126 yesterday. As I said earlier, it is the most pitches thrown by any pitcher in baseball so far this year. He received 17,576 pitcher abuse points yesterday bringing his season total to 21294 – the most in baseball so far this year. Only 3 pitchers in baseball – Cliff Lee, Jake Peavy, and (gasp!) Yovani Gallardo – are averaging more pitches per start than Wainwright so far this year. Message to Tony: the marginal cost of having Wainwright, as opposed to Franklin, pitch to Lee and Pence is MUCH GREATER than the marginal benefit that was gained. If there was any benefit whatsoever, it was negligible, but Wainer will have to be THE MAN for the next 6 years – not just for those 2 PA’s.
I also wanted to piggy-back on Red Baron’s thread from yesterday about the number of runners the Cards are leaving on base. When it first came up a few days ago, I didn’t think much about it but, again, a trend seems to be emerging. It’s still a little early but I was curious about why it’s occurring and wanted to see if we could see if it was as bad as it seems and if it is likely to continue. The Cards stranded another 8 baserunners in yesterday’s game.
First of all, you’d think that team LOB stats would be pretty easy to find, but they’re not. I think I was able to figure out a way to calculate it but I really thought I’d just be able to pull up a site and it would be there. Alas, it was not to be. First of all, would you believe that, prior to yesterday’s game, the Cards were 2nd to Boston in number of times on base so far this season yet we’re only 11th in runs scored. Still, I’ll bet that most of us didn’t know we were in the top half in baseball in runs scored.
In our 24 games, prior to yesterday, we had had 240 (10 per game) runners reach base who failed to score – by far the most in the big leagues. Only 10 others have had more than 200 baserunners fail to score this year. The good news, of course, is that we’re getting a lot of runners on base. Our OBP is surprisingly the highest in the NL. One would think that if we continue getting runners on base we’ll eventually be able to push them across, right? Maybe, maybe not.
At first I thought the problem was poor performance w/ runners on base. Nope. Our BA w/ runners in scoring position is .257 – not tremendous but it’s above the league average. Our OBP w/ RISP is a whopping .376. That’s pretty damned good! Our slash stats are .284/.390/.403 w/ runners on base. W/ 2 outs and RISP, they’re .252/.383/.374. The BA and OBP numbers are ok but I think we’re starting to get to the crux of the problem.
The Cards are 22nd in baseball in homers and haven’t hit one in their last 8 games. The Cards last homered more than a week ago, on Friday, April, 18 against the Giants when both Duncan and Pujols went deep. The Cards are 14th in slugging and 19th in ISO. As you can see from the numbers above (thanks to AZ for helping us easily calculate and understand the significance of ISO) the Cards ISO w/ 2 outs and RISP is .122 – not good. W/ RISP regardless of the number of outs their ISO is .114. W/ runners on base, regardless of the base/out situation, their ISO is .119. A season ISO of .119 would put the Cards among the bottom 7 or 8 teams in baseball. The problem isn’t that the Cards are having trouble getting runners on base or even that they’re performing particularly poorly w/ runners on base. The problem is that the Cards are having a hard time leaving runners on base b/c their lack of speed and power is forcing them into playing station-to-station baseball. We need 3 hits in an inning to score and it’s tough to score a lot of runs that way.
We saw this pattern emerge yesterday. The Cards were getting runners on base but having a tough time pushing them across yet the Astros were able to tie the game despite the fact that Wainwright was mowing them down most of the game. 3 swings of the bat negated all the work the Cards were doing on the offensive end. Fortunately, the Cards were able to get the 2 hits and a walk we needed in the 9th to win the game but, as long as the Cards are unable to get the ball out of the yard, we’re going to continue to leave runners on base.
Again, the good news is that it should get a little better. Ankiel’s in a slump. If we’ve learned anything about Ankiel as a hitter it’s that he’s streaky as hell. He’ll be back and pounding homers at some point. Ludwick’s cooled off. Glaus is hitting the ball OK – he leads the majors w/ 11 doubles but has no homers. Still, he’s gotta be good for 25-30, right? Duncan has plenty of power and seems to be seeing the ball well. He’ll hit 25-30 if he’s healthy for the entire season and, God knows, Pujols will hit his share.
Still, it cannot go unnoticed that 4 of the 9 spots in the order, the Cards have basically 0 power. Kennedy/Miles, Izturis/Ryan, Skip, and the pitchers spot will probably COMBINE for about 10-12 homers all year long. That puts a pretty heavy burden on the others to produce. Another spot – Yadi’s – has only a little more than the others. Yadi can hit the ball into the bleachers but he has only 23 homers FOR HIS CAREER – in more than 1500 PA’s. Don’t expect him to be the savior. The bottom line is that this LOB problem may persist.
There is one lineup change I’d like to see. It may help to alleviate the power burden somewhat. It’s a lineup that we’ve seen just once this year -- an OF of Duncan, Ankiel, and Ludwick. I know that lots of us have been clamoring for more of Barton and I also know that Skip has an OBP of .406, a SLG of .446 and an ISO of .133. Still, he has 4 career homers and putting Ludwick in there in Skip’s place might help bring across a few more runs. The big problem with this approach would be that Tony would then be tempted to put Ryan, Izturis, Miles or Kennedy in the leadoff spot despite the fact that they all belong in either the 7 or 9 hole.
He’d never do this, but he could try Ludwick or Duncan in the leadoff spot. Ludwick has a .419 OBP this year (though it’s just .327 for his career) and Duncan’s OBP’s are .406 and .360 respectively. Their power makes them unconventional leadoff hitters. Skippy fits the profile better, ironically, b/c he lacks power but it makes no sense to play Skip over Ludwick b/c you want someone WITHOUT POWER in the leadoff spot! Run that notion through your brain one more time. Go with the guy w/ less power and put the guy w/ more power on the bench b/c the guy with less power is a better fit to the conventional wisdom of what a leadoff hitter should look like. The bottom line is that Tony needs to get the best hitters in the lineup and Ludwick, despite Skip’s hot start, is a better hitter than Skip. Our lineup would look strange and those who insist on doing things the way they’ve always been done just b/c that’s the way they’ve always been done will ask questions, scratch their heads and criticize but so what? We’re already batting the pitcher 8th! Why not stick our best hitters in the lineup and put the best OBP guys at the top of the lineup. Hell, put Glaus in the leadoff spot if you’re afraid of too many solo homers in the top of the 1st!
Anyway, back to reality. It’s the rubber game of the series – Lohse v. Backe. I absolutely detest that guy – Backe. Houstonians love him. You know why? B/c he’s short and spunky/scrappy and from the Houston area (Galveston). He’s the David Eckstein of hometown pitchers. He blows but those Astros’ fans just love him – one more reason to hate those guys (and I do!!!!!!). The good news is that Backe’s road ERA, in more than 190 career IP is 5.54. Though he’s only yielded 2 ER in 6 IP in new Busch, he gave up 28 H and 15 ER in 14.1 IP in old Busch. Let’s hope we can break that homerless streak and send him to an early shower. Isn’t it about time we brought back 10-run Sundays?
0 recs |
121
comments
| Add your comment
Comments
Huzzah!! for 10 run Sundays
And you wrote a tome, HC… well done
When cheese gets its picture taken, what does it say?
by RosevilleRedbird on
Apr 27, 2008 12:50 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
I agree with the Wainer point about being tired. I have never really been a big “pitch count” guy because what’s the diff between 95 and 105 pitches? depending when the extra ten take place it really does not matter. I guess when it comes down to it you have to rely on the pitching coach/catcher to know the pitcher well enough to see when his laboring. Sometimes it is obvious in how pitchers tend to slow their pace down as they tire later in game action.
I guess it’s always a tough call, it could be good to puch Wainer to help develope him. You can’t baby guys all the time sometimes they need to be pushed a bit. At the same time all of these pitchers are such big investments it’s scary to abuse them and run them into the ground.
Funny thing about the bull pen is that they are not in the top 6 in terms of innings pitched. During the Cubs game they showed a stat which showed the top 6 bull pens in terms of usage. The Cubs were on the list. I can’t remember the other teams but STL was not on the list in terms of bull pen innings pitched this year.
I like that suggested line up, it would be interesting but I would like to see it.
by ICbirdfan on
Apr 27, 2008 12:55 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
Well yeah
But what’s the difference between 105 and 106? 106 and 107? 107 and 108? Etc. At some point you have to draw a line. But really 126 pitches isn’t that big of a deal provided you play it smart the next start and probably the one after that. If he goes more than 100 next game I’d be very concerned. Ideally you go less than 95 next start…and if we’ve got a big lead he’s gotta get the early hook…and then around 100 for the next.
With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch
by joker24 on
Apr 27, 2008 9:34 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
the 126 does matter
taking it easy the next start doesn’t undo the damage from a 126 pitch start. The correlation isn’t between total number of pitches thrown and the likelihood of being hurt. If it was, you could just dial him back to 90 or so the next start and everything would be OK. The correlation, a strong and statistically significant one, btw, is between pitching WHEN TIRED and the likelihood of injury. When he threw 126 pitches, he was throwing when tired. The difference between 90 and 100 next time out won’t matter b/c he won’t be tired. What matters is when the extra pitches are thrown and the fact that he threw so many in one game matters.
by houstoncardinal on
Apr 27, 2008 10:38 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Kerry Wood, Mark Prior?
TLR,
Please stop imitating Dusty Baker. Short term gain is not worth it. Wainer is going to be matched up with others’ staffs’ aces all season long and be involved in close games. Please stop it. Now.
born Dodger blue, now dyed Cardinals red
by totalloser on
Apr 27, 2008 12:09 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
I'm almost positive there hasn't been a study on this other than the "next start effect of sucking"
But if you throw 126 that implies you are going to be more tired than usual the next start. More tired than usual: more damage from less number of pitches. Limiting the number of pitches in the next couple limits fatigue for this season and chance of injury. I bet Prior could’ve handled 130 pitches in ‘03 once or even twice really. He couldn’t handle 131-129-110-124-131-133-133-116-119 consecutively.
I didn’t say 126 was nothing, but it is manageable if you play it smart.
With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch
by joker24 on
Apr 27, 2008 12:21 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
I have been a cardinal fan since the days of bob gibson when he and tom seaver and mickey lolich and gaylord perry etc. used to routinely pitch 300 innings every year and never worry about pitch counts….and you know what?these guys hardly ever got hurt and spend almost no time on the DL…coincidence?..i dont think so…since we have gone to 5 man rotations and strict pitch counts half the pitchers in baseball seem to be hurt and on the disabled list….i thin it is about time that we stop worrying about pitch counts and let pitchers who make 15 million dollars a year pitch more than 6 innings….if somebody can explain to me how the guys in the 60s and 70s were able to throw 300 innings and complete 25-30 games a year without geting hurt while these guys today pitch 150-200 and spend all their time hurt then i would appreciate it….something here makes no sense
by jlbrach on
Apr 27, 2008 10:45 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Simple explanation
I think there is a fairly simple explanation of why pitchers in the past used to pitch so much more than now. Teams could afford to take the risk. There were only 16 teams in the majors back then so all organizations had much more depth. If a pitcher got hurt (and they did just as often as now) then the team would just reach into their well-stocked minor league systems and replace the injured pitcher. In other words, the attrition rate for pitchers was just as high but there were more good pitchers to step in and take their place.
by indakind on
Apr 27, 2008 11:13 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
plain silly
the great pitchers like gibson and seaver and marichual and perry and lolich and carlton etc. could not be replaced anymore than todays aces can be replaced..the difference is these guys routinely pitched hundreds of innings more than todays pitchers year after year …..without getting hurt…these guys pitched more and got hurt far less….
by jlbrach on
Apr 27, 2008 7:42 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
for what it is worth there were dozens of pitchers who threw 300 innings routinely…and even average pitchers threw more innings than todays ace pitchers….something is wrong with a situation where people pitch 100 fewer innings with all kinds of pitch counts and get hurt far more often
by jlbrach on
Apr 27, 2008 7:46 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Yes, you've heard about the ones that COULD do it
Now how many couldn’t? I mean, you named 4 pitchers who could pitch 300/year. There are probably 4 pitchers in the league now who could do it.
30 years from now, we may talk about Carpenter’s Cy Young year but we probably won’t talk about how hosed Mulder’s arm and shoulder were.
by sdrone on
Apr 27, 2008 11:46 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Since we don’t really have a lead-off man… Since we don’t really have a shortstop… We should have kept Eckstein and then had more room in the outfield. Outfield is too competitive to have Skip there.
by da mang on
Apr 27, 2008 1:31 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
Yeah, uh
no. I prefer my ShortStops to have a little errors as possible. Eck has 5 errors in as many chances as Ryan/Iz while they have 1 between them. No thanks. I’d like the younger pitchers to actually have confidence in the guys behind them for once.
by AdjustedExpectations on
Apr 27, 2008 5:30 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
what more does skip have to do?
Why does it seem like every post on this site has a new idea on why skip shouldn’t be in the line up? I don’t understand this. At the time of writing this comment is hitting 310 with an OBP of over 400. That is better production than we ever got from Eckstein in the leadoff spot(Ecksteins highest OBP as a cardinal was 363). He is also slugging 437, which is currently higher than Duncan, Glaus, and Molina and a mere 10 points lower than Ankiel. He is leading the team with 3 steals without being caught. He plays strong defense and has a great arm, plus has the ability and flexiblity to play all three outfield spots. Of the 41 times he has been on base this year he has scored 20 times, this leads me to think he is a good baserunner. If in spring training someone told you the Cardinals leadoff hitter was hitting over 300, was second on the team in walks behind Pujols, had an OBP over 400, lead the team in steals, and scored half the time he reached base, would you complain that he shouldn’t be starting? Oh, and he had the walk off hit today. Really, aside from changing his name what else does skip have to do to get some respect around here. People are clamoring for Barton, a raw yet talented player. That’s fine, I’m big fan of his as well, but why are we so hard on a guy that has always played hard and paid his dues through the organization?
by stickman179 on
Apr 27, 2008 2:11 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
The question isn't what Skip has done in 20-odd games this season
it’s what should we expect him to do moving forward. The latter is what should determine his spot in the lineup and on the team. He’s not likely to maintain that OBP moving forward.
by azruavatar on
Apr 27, 2008 9:38 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Ludwick
is just as likely to simmer down with his stats with more PA as Skip is likely to lose some points off his OBP.
You can’t look forward on one and allow the stats of the other to stand alone.
by AdjustedExpectations on
Apr 27, 2008 10:38 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
in addition...
You also comment on Ludwick being a better hitter than Skip “despite skip’s hot start.” He started the season 0-16. How exactly is that a hot start. Why not refer to Ludwick’s start as a hot start. Before this season he has never hit higher than .267 and never had an OBP higher than .339. So is Ludwick really the better hitter, or is he a hitter with power off to a hot start?
by stickman179 on
Apr 27, 2008 2:19 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
he's better b/c he has more power
basically the same career OBP + more power = better hitter.
by houstoncardinal on
Apr 27, 2008 10:39 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
You're a Dolt!
“Ludwick, despite Skip’s hot start, is a better hitter than Skip” You’re whole post is idiotic and off base. The premise of your rant is how Ludwick is a better hitter than Skip after a game where he hit the game winning RBI. First of all, Skip’s start was not “hot” it was an ugly 1 for 20 and he is still batting .310. Skip will be a starting outfielder in the big leagues for the next 10 yrs so get used to it. Sweet idea Ludwick at leadoff with his 17 strikouts in 58 at bats.
by birdman3000 on
Apr 27, 2008 2:22 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
check the community guidelines out. Besides being just rude, it doesn’t help prove your point when you childishly call names.
by azruavatar on
Apr 27, 2008 9:41 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Unnecessary Rudeness
Don’t insult someone for a post that raises and explains a point of view. Personally, I think Skip has done what he needed to do and deserves a chance to continue, but I doubt that he’ll be as effective for the rest of the season, and he’s not likely to be a 10 year man (nor is Ludwick). But that doesn’t justify personal attack to a veteran poster who expressed a reasonable position.
by madridbend on
Apr 27, 2008 9:48 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Wow!
just wow! You’re right. We should base all of our decisions for the next 10 years on 1 PA. Shoulda thought of that. thanks.
by houstoncardinal on
Apr 27, 2008 10:40 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Of course you shouldn't...
base 10 years off 1 PA, I just thought it was an odd time to post an anti-skip rant. And I am sure you’re not a dolt, I just think it’s a funny word and deserves more usage these days., but no more name calling from this guy. However I do think you will be eating your words about Skip. He is coming into his own and will be a productive starting outfielder for years to come.
by birdman3000 on
Apr 27, 2008 11:24 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
it wasn't anywhere near an anti-Skip "rant"
if the word “dolt” is underused, the word “rant” must be overused if you think it applies here.
by houstoncardinal on
Apr 27, 2008 1:06 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Maybe he meant
Defender
Of
Ludwick’s
Talent
:-)
"A hot dog at the ball game beats roast beef at the Ritz."- Humphrey Bogart
by iron duke75 on
Apr 27, 2008 2:06 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
LOUD NOISES!!!!
How dare you disparage Skip’s good name!
Aaanyways, I got a nice chuckle when you linked to that lineup from that Houston game, as we only managed 6 hits and 3 runs in that game.
I prefer this lineup:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SFN/SFN200804110.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/MIL/MIL200804220.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PIT/PIT200804240.shtml
Don’t ask me why it works, it just seems to. Well, other than that game against Sanchez.
Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS
by Hardcore Legend on
Apr 27, 2008 2:30 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
was thinking the same thing
as far as OF goes. I’d still like to see the Ryan/Kennedy dynamic for a while and see how it could pan out.
by AdjustedExpectations on
Apr 27, 2008 5:37 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
I liked that lineup also
or the lineup we ran out a few times with Barton leading off and Ankiel hitting second. Seemed like instant offense but Ankiel was hot at the time.
by gossard56 on
Apr 27, 2008 10:21 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
and that’s the crux of the issue a #2 that represents something other than strikeouts and/or double plays.
by AdjustedExpectations on
Apr 27, 2008 10:23 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing HL
Not only did the team manage only 6 hits and 3 runs, but the OF had 1 hit in 11 abs.
:) I see the point, though, and thus wasn’t going to say anything about it at first. I just had to piggyback, though.
by stlfan on
Apr 27, 2008 11:07 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Random notes
Had dinner at one of my favorite restaurants, “pomme” in Clayton. TLR and Barry Weinberg and a couple of friends stopped by for a drink. We shared waiters so I am sharing an anecdote. Tony ordered a shirley temple, and after a brief pause said, “but she’s all grown up now and wants a grey goose martini”. I love that guy. There’s no one on the current cardinal team sans wagonmaker who I’d rather have a conversation with.
by The Butcher on
Apr 27, 2008 2:54 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
Nice post, Houston.
And I’ll second your contention that it’s damned near impossible to find LOB numbers. I tried yesterday morning, but didn’t have the time, (more specifically, to be honest, the patience) to track them down by your indirect method. I just assumed it would be on Baseball-Reference.com or something, but apparently not.
I’m going to agree also that the lack of power from several spots in the lineup is the single biggest culprit in the Cards’ difficulties bringing home runners this year. The hitters are all being extremely patient, and that’s fantastic, but it seems as if a pitcher can just get past the #6 hitter in the lineup, he’s pretty much home free. How many times this year have we seen opposing pitchers throw ball after ball after ball to the likes of Albert and Duncan and Ankiel, and to a lesser extent Pink Eye, and then set down Molina, the pitcher, and Cesar to get out of the inning. Once the Cardinals get one or two players from the top of the lineup on, pitchers just pitch around the next couple of guys, walking one and getting one out, say, then buckle down and finish off 6-9 hitters. It seems as if most of the scoring the Cards have done this year is largely predicated on the bottom of the order leading off an inning, getting on base, and forcing pitchers to try and get out the middle of the order. We seem to put up some nice crooked numbers when Adam Kennedy leads off an inning with a base hit, but not so much when Skippy does it. It’s very strange.
I do have to disagree with you regarding Skip, though. I’m not a huge Skip supporter, and I want to see more Barton on the field, but I don’t think that Skip is the problem at all. He’s doing everything you could possibly ask of him; the problem is that there are a bunch of black holes in the lineup that make Skip’s lack of home run power look very glaring, because no one else is stepping up and knocking in runs.
I think that Tony may need to try a different lineup strategy, because this one, while having some good points, isn’t working all that well. I’m going to reiterate a point I made a few weeks ago; I think you may need to try spreading out the lineup a bit more, inserting weaker hitters purposefully in between stronger hitters. I don’t really like that strategy even as I type it, but when you have four nearly automatic outs in a row, you may need to try and split that run up a bit. Like I said, I don’t really like the idea, but I would be interested to see how it would work, at least on a trial basis. Also, I believe we really need to see an end to the practice of putting one of your most powerful bats, whether it’s Duncan or Ankiel, in the two hole. To me, that’s never the way I would set up a lineup, but especially the way this one is constituted, I think it’s really a waste.
One last thing: what you said about there being a pattern with the way Tony is using Wainwright? You were right, but wrong when you said the pattern was “developing.” The pattern is already there, and has been for quite a while. Don’t believe me? Go look at the way he used Matt Morris from 2001-2003. Luckily, Buzz Bissinger already did some of the legwork for us, in “3 Nights in August.” It’s pretty much the exact same situation you’re talking about here.
All your failures are just training grounds.
by the red baron on
Apr 27, 2008 3:22 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
Matt Morris
I was afraid to bring that comparison up.
Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS
by Hardcore Legend on
Apr 27, 2008 3:25 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Wainwright should be out of the high risk age.
Still abuse is abuse. There was no good reason for yesterdays useage. This is one of those areas where Tony’s eyes failed him.
by DriverZn on
Apr 27, 2008 4:22 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
The handling of Wainer
seems eerily similar to the way Alan Benes was ridden early in his career. That didn’t turn out so well…
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on
Apr 27, 2008 10:02 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
To say they are "automatic outs" is a bit harsh...
I’ll give you Izturis (.186/.333/.237), but at least he helps counter a horrible bat with a good glove. Eckstein currently has a line of .246/.343/.330, which isn’t much better than Cesar Salad’s, and his field range is nowhere near what The Salad has. So if you make me choose between Eck and Izturis, I’ll take Cesar. Kennedy and Molina aren’t that terrible. Kennedy is .306/.353.339 and Molina is .278/.338/.375. Kennedy’s job isn’t to produce runs, it’s to get on base, which he’s doing…much better this year than last year. If you told me in 2006 that Molina would someday be close to a .280 hitter with 10-15 home runs and 50 rbi’s, I’d take that in a heartbeat. His value to this team is on defense and handling a pitching staff, and there’s no one better in the league at doing that, IMO.
Absolutely agree on riding AW, though. Hope Tony eases off.
"Is this Heaven?"
"No, it;s Iowa."
"I could've sworn it was Heaven."
by MilCardFan on
Apr 27, 2008 9:40 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Lineup adjustment
I think it’s their complete lack of power at the bottom that’s hurting. They’re not automatic outs, but if they do get a hit, it’s only going to be a slappy single – and scoring from second isn’t guaranteed on a slappy single. I think we need to drop the Power 2 position and put a second guy on that’s likely to get on in front of Pujols and drop Ank or Dunc down to six or seven in order to break up our hitters that can do something to a ball.
by birdo rojo on
Apr 27, 2008 10:30 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
The bottom
is putting up better numbers (#7) than the two mainstay guys in the fourth spot are. Two of those mainstay guys are.. Ank and Dunc.
7 overall has solid numbers
8 isn’t going to be perfect due to who’s batting there, but has really impressive RISP numbers.
9 I’ll fully agree is really looking a little scary as of late.
by AdjustedExpectations on
Apr 27, 2008 10:34 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
people are misunderstanding my point about Skip
it’s not that he’s been a problem. In fact, he’s played quite well. My point is that since power is our biggest problem, the way to get more power in the lineup is to put Ludwick in. Skip lacks power so it seems logical to replace Skip w/ Ludwick—not b/c he’s playing poorly but b/c he simply lacks speed and power. He’s a singles hitter…period.
by houstoncardinal on
Apr 27, 2008 10:42 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
but
potential power still requires making contact on the ball.
To remove one guy who represents 1/6th of your total runs coming across the plate in hopes of gaining a few runs is a risky scenario.
Right now Rick may represent power in what he can do, but he isn’t doing it at the plate. Skip’s at least getting on, which negates the lack of power argument.
Ludwick should be platooning Rick from the #2 hole at least till Rick gets his stroke back.
Side note: If Rick was hitting and effectively representing the power he’s getting represented on this topic, I’d entertain the idea of Ludwick coming in for Skip. But he’s not. And having two guys who.. historically.. represent a fair share of strikeouts and 0-4 type days doesn’t bode well in a line up who, as I’ll agree lacks some strength for run production.
Luddy needs to be in there, but not at the expense of a great showing of Skip. He needs to be in there to relieve the hole that Rick is starting to build.
by AdjustedExpectations on
Apr 27, 2008 10:50 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
power
The power will come. I think we just need to be a little patient. Dunc, Ank, Pujols, and Glaus will probably hit 110+ this year between them. I think that Skips is filling his role nicely. No, he has little power, but Tony is using the entire outfield (except for maybe Ank) situationally, and it is working pretty well. The lack of power comes from Yadi and our MI. That will not be fixed soon.
by cdb on
Apr 27, 2008 12:26 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
bad luck
our number four hitters have consisted mainly of Ank, Dunc, and Glaus, with a little Lud thrown in.
when batting fourth, the babip for each
Ank – 0.226
Glaus – 0.227
Dunc – 0.125
Lud – 0.400
Team – 0.250.
The four spot will heat up and start knocking in those 1-3 hitters. I think we need to be patient here….
by cdb on
Apr 27, 2008 12:46 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
+1
must agree on skip. viewed outside of our lineup, one would be very satisfied with his performance at #1. the problem is that we do need more power and the outfield is the only place to get it. it’s not skippy, its how underpowered we are in the MI and catcher. where’s julian javier when you need him?
If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, perhaps you haven't grasped the situation!
by sportsman on
Apr 27, 2008 10:46 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
and that MI
has one of the better fielding percentages in the league as of now. and generally get on base at a reasonable clip.
They may not be giving a lot of power, but considering the massive amount of groundballs we produce they’re saving runs. And considering how much they’re getting on base, they’re crossing the plate quite reasonably.
It may not be power, but considering what we have to deal with. That’s not a bad scenario to look at.
by AdjustedExpectations on
Apr 27, 2008 11:04 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Baron's post...
got me to thinking. I have 2 “out of the box” suggestions. They are probably nothing that would work consistently or anything, but they are “out of the box” so ha!
1st suggestion
Is this the year where you have to balance the lineup with your best hitters hitting 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9 or something.
Skip – good at getting on base
Kennedy/Iz2 – bunt him over or try to get on in front of Albert
Pujols – if he’s not walked, he gets to crush it…
Ankiel – if they walk Pujols, or he can get on anyway
Kennedy/Iz2 – bunt him over or try to get on…
Glaus – drive whomever on home
Other outfielder – Barton to get on base and run like crazy or Ludwick/Duncan to drive in whomever is on
Pitcher – Tony loves him here
Yadi – try to drive people around?
At least it would space out Kennedy/Iz2/pitcher’s spot. You could almost argue that the bottom 3 should be P/Yadi/other OF when Waino is in the lineup…
Just a suggestion, tell me why I’m wrong, but if you’re looking for a couple runs a game, then maybe this would work.
2nd suggestion
If you are trying to simply get your best hitters into the lineup, I think it would be imperative to get Skip and Barton playing 2nd base.
In Day Games
Skip 2B
Ankiel CF
Pujols 1B
Glaus 3B
Duncan LF
Ludwick RF
Yadi C
P
Iz2/Ryan/Miles SS
Night games
Barton 3B
Skip 2B
Pujols 1B
Ankiel CF
Ludwick RF
Duncan LF
Yadi C
P
Iz2/Ryan/Miles SS
of course, this second option will not work because of that pesky “defense” thing, but…it would get the best hitters in the lineup…
Anyway, just my random thoughts on a Sunday morning
by stlfan on
Apr 27, 2008 11:18 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Here's what I was thinking
Vs LHP
Skip
Barton
Pujos
Ank
Troy
Yadi
Ryan
P
Kennedy
- Reasonably one of our better defenses.
- Two occasional pop but generally on base a lot players starting off.
- Risk in Rick and Glaus to perform ok.
- Players in their splits, 4-5 of which have decent eyes and should help drive up pitch counts.
- Off the bench you have
- a pinch runner in Iz and a solid defensive replacement
- Miles in utility should you need to move Ryan to third for Glaus for something
- Two strong bats in Duncan and Luddy should you get a RHP out of the bullpen late.
vs RHP
Skip
Dunc
Pujos
Ludwick
Troy
Ryan
Molina
P
Kennedy
- a very patient offense that should drive up pitch counts
- more power and corresponding splits
- a very strong showing OBP and a very reasonable looking SLG
- OBP in 1 and 9, Some speed ahead of instead of behind Yadi
On the bench you have
- Ank for power or defensive replacement.
- Barton for taking a walk or reasonable pop in PH
- Miles in utility
- A solid pinch runner
Dunc’s an automatic should Pujos need a day off, which platoons another OF in.
LaRue is an automatic should Yadi need a day off, same batting order.
If Rick gets hot and you’re giving a day off to skip, ludwick comes in.
In both I don’t see an overwhelming possibility of 1-2-3 innings, and in both we have great match ups when we drive them into the bullpen.
by AdjustedExpectations on
Apr 27, 2008 11:47 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
As far as your lineup is concerned...
I have no interest in seeing the Cardinals lead the league in K’s.
by TheBirds on
Apr 27, 2008 4:14 AM EDT
reply
0 recs
Why do strikeouts bother people?
I don’t care how many times the batters strike out, as long as they produce runs. If I could put up a lineup of 8 Adam Dunn’s I would do it without a second thought. Sure it would set an all time record for strikeouts, but it would probably also lead the league in runs scored.
Dave Duncan should be all for it since he views it as a sign the opossing pitcher isn’t getting his job done.
by DriverZn on
Apr 27, 2008 4:24 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Hahahaha
+1
"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
Apr 27, 2008 8:24 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
DriverZn.....yer baaaadddd........
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on
Apr 27, 2008 11:08 AM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
BABIP
Personally, I associate SO with an inability to make contact and put the ball in play. I was once a BABIP skeptic, but have come to appreciate it value. What is tells me is that if you make contact on a pitch, you have a 30% chance of getting on base. If you strike out you have a minimal chance (wild pitch on third strike). That is why I, at least, detest the strike out. You do not advance the runner, you do not get on base, you have no opportunity to score runs on strike outs.
by cdb on
Apr 27, 2008 12:02 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
true
can’t argue that. GIDPs have been too frequent. Always will be.
by cdb on
Apr 27, 2008 12:50 PM EDT
up
reply
0 recs
Who won that game yesterday?
Having a team that happens to hit homeruns in sacrificing runners on the bases isn’t a guarantee for wins.
Having a team that has more strikeouts to gain a few percentage points in SLG doesn’t guarantee more runs, and/or more wins.
Yes, we have a home run drought. But have you actually looked at the SP that we’ve been batting against and see if the league as a whole is having issues hitting HRs off them so far this year? Because they are. Since our last home run we’re facing pitchers who give up a homerun every 17.2 innings.
Lincecum 0 HR in 29.3 innings
Chacon 2 HR in 33 innings
Gorzel 2 HR in 22.3 innings
Sneel 1 HR in 30 innings
Para 1 HR in 18 innings
Vill 3 HR in 23 (but we nailed three 2b off him).
So we’re going to punish our guys for not hitting homeruns when no one else has done it either?
I would much rather have a double with two on base than have a home run with one or no one on base. Anyday.
I’ve been against Skip in the one hole before his numbers made me eat my words. And I’ll gladly do so. Skip is everything I’ve personally wanted right where he is. The only thing I dislike about Skip is his tendency to roll over the ball and get into double play scenarios. He’ll get better with that with more PA. If that’s his only true fault, then frankly I can handle it. Hell, over the past ten games he has more XBH than Rick does, and there’s no comparison on the OBP. Considering he’s arguably our second best defensive outfielder. The

