rookie closers

by lboros on May 26, 2008 8:47 AM EDT Comment 153 comments

i can’t believe any team has a day off on memorial day. only with bud selig in charge . . . .

can’t complain about that road trip, despite the loss yesterday. they only scored more than 4 runs twice on the trip, yet they won both series. they come home well positioned to post a winning record for the month, and if they achieve that the cardinals will essentially have gone a full season --- 6 months --- with only 1 losing month:

june 2007	13-13
july 2007	15-11
august 2007	15-13
sept 2007	13-18
april 2008	19-11
may 2008	12-11

they’ve got 86 wins in their last 163 games. can this team win 90 in 2008? doesn’t seem nearly as far-fetched today as it did on april 1.

mike parisi’s loss yesterday was the bullpen’s first blemish since izzy went onto the DL. in the 9 games since then (including yesterday’s), the pen has thrown 24.1 innings and allowed just 6 runs (a 2.22 era) while recording 50 percent more strikeouts (26) than hits allowed (17). granted, they haven’t faced the world’s most potent offenses in those 9 games; they’re still damn impressive numbers. chris perez has made an immediate impact, retiring 14 of his first 17 big-league batters (and one of the 3 who got on base reached via an error). the kid looks dominant so far, but don’t look for him in the closer’s role any time soon. here’s la russa on perez:

Chris Perez is not ready to close on a daily basis. That would not be good for him and it would not be good for us. He needs to grow into his responsibilities here. I don't even worry about how that sounds, because clearly from the way he's being used, there's a confidence factor there.

before you go crazy on tony here, realize that rookie closers are extremely rare. take a guess --- how many guys in the history of baseball have ever saved more than 20 games during their first year in the big leagues? the answer is 9 --- and one of them pitched for la russa, salome barojas (who saved 21 games for tlr’s white sox back in 1982 as a 21-year-old rookie). moreover, 2 of the 9 guy closers weren’t really rookies, but rather 30something veterans of the japanese leagues (kaz sasaki and takashi saito, yesterday’s winning pitcher) who were in the first season of u.s. baseball. to see the 200 highest single-season save totals for first-year players, click here. tony’s being conservative with perez, but no more so than most other managers would.

here’s another way to look at it: let’s take the all-time career leaders in saves and see how many years they’d been in the league when they took over the closer’s role on a full-time basis.

	year	age
t hoffman	2d	26
l smith	3d	24
m rivera	3d	27
j franco	3d	25
d eckersley	13th	32
b wagner	2d	25
j reardon	4th	26
r myers	2d	25
t hoffman	2d	26
r fingers	4th	25
t percival	2d	26

wagner was sharing the closer’s role with xavier hernandez by the end of his first season, but he only registered 9 saves in his 37 games as a rookie; he ranked 3d on the team in games finished, behind hernandez and todd jones. aside from him, every one of these guys served at least a full season in some other role --- setup man, mopup man, starter, whatever. i'll grant that none of them had to understudy behind a pitcher as unremarkable as ryan franklin, but franklin does have a 1.50 era. managers are a conservative bunch; i doubt many would handle this situation any differently from how tony is handling it.

now, if i were in charge i'd make perez the closer; i think he's got the best stuff and puts opposing hitters in the most distress, and by all accounts he's hard-headed enough to deal with the growing pains that may occur. but the vast majority of managers would play it exactly as tony is playing it. by the end of this year we may very well see perez in the closer’s role, but for now he’s gotta go through the same getting-feet-wet period that even the best closers in history went through.

nothing more for today --- this is no day to be sitting in front of a computer. enjoy the holiday.

0 recs | Comment 153 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

use of Perez

I’ve been a charter member of the anti-TLR faction for some time but have no bitch about his use of Perez (at present). Chris had to know as all of us fans should have also that Tony would break in his new stallion slowly. Gradually increase the pressure. That said, it’s May. Chris is not and has never been a long reliever. CP is already one of the main setup arms (Springer and McClellan, another rookie, as the others). Springer is fading in 2008. CP should pass him soon. Before the all-star break, I expect CP to be used in save situations where Franklin is not available. Then it is just a matter of waiting to see if Franklin falters (which is going to happen, too many hard hit balls fly off of Franklin pitches).

I was already shocked with the quick canning of Izzy. Who knows? Maybe TLR will arrive at the proper roll for CP all on his in due course this season. There’s been really little for us Cards fans to bitch about in 2008. All the breaks have been trending our way so far. TLR has done little to obstruct the develop of the young players.

by jjray on May 26, 2008 9:37 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

At least

anything that gets hit off Franklin doesn’t fly out of the park, since it’s not all that fast. plus, after seeing perez, his pitches will seem in slow motion and may throw off some hitters

Ankiel is Jesus!

by Cards Fan in Chitown on May 27, 2008 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not convinced that Izzy is done...

assuming his problems are mechanical in nature, and not the result of his hip “breaking down,” I expect him to come off the disabled list and rejoin the Cardinals at some point. Once he does, it’ll be interesting to see if TLR puts him right back on the firing line. All closers “fail” at some point; the Cards are prudent to try to keep Perez’ confidence level high by using him in non-closer situations.

Izzy’s been among the best at “bouncing back” from poor outings… I think once he’s able to make the ball do what he wants it to again, he’ll regain his confidence. When will that happen? Only The Shadow knows!

This year’s schedule is horrible… in addition to the Cards, Cincinnati, Houston, Pittsburgh, San Diego, and San Francisco aren’t playing in the NL, while Oakland and Minnesota are off in the AL. I thought Memorial Day was supposed to be a high-sales day for MLB! Oh, well…

"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra

by The Ol Goaler on May 26, 2008 10:26 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

and no nationally televised games either

This might be the first time I have never been able to watch at least a little baseball on Memorial Day.

* sarcasm might be involved in this comment

by mattyfrommo on May 26, 2008 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I remember Todd Worrell coming in as a rookie and dominating in 1985….but it was late in the season. Whitey Herzog had brilliantly juggled Ken Dayley, Jeff Lahti, Ricky Horton, and Bill Campbell in his “closer by committee” approach. And as I’ve mentioned here once before, I think that if Ken Dayley had been left in to finish the 9th inning in Game 6 vs. Kansas City, the Denkinger episode never would have happened….Dayley was big-time nasty when he was on, and he was unhittable in the 8th inning of that game.

by Iowa on May 26, 2008 10:59 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

man

I forgot about Ken Daley and how awesome he was…

Ankiel is Jesus!

by Cards Fan in Chitown on May 27, 2008 12:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Question.

I have to question your analysis above. How did you identify “first year” for these guys? I was surprised looking through the B-R link to not find Worrell on the list. Then, when I looked up Worrell, he came up as a late season call-up. He immediately was closing (as his first game was a Blown Save), and he save 5 games in 17 appearances. The next year (I would have to identify as his first REAL season) he saved 36 games. How does this fit into your analysis?

I didn’t do any additional checking, so how many of the others came up as early as May of their first seasons?

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 11:02 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

worrell came up on august 31

and got 5 saves down the stretch, but most of them were pretty cheap — he got one save in a 9-3 win, another in an 8-4 win, and two saves that were of the 1-out variety. during that same span, jeff lahti was the cards main late-inning reliever —he got 3 saves and 3 wins in september 1985 -- and ken dayley also got two save opportunities that month (one of which he blew). so at best, worrell was a member of the committee.

that continued in the postseason. ken dayley got the only two saves of the nlcs - worrell was brought into the 7th inning of games 3, 5, and 6, with dayley closing (and saving) two of those games, and lahti closing the other one. worrell did save game 1 of the world series, but lahti saved game 2. and in game 6, ken dayley came out to pitch the fateful 9th, but when the royals announced darryl motley (a right-handed batter) as a pinch-hitter for pat sheridan, whitey played the percentages and called in worrell.

i can easily imagine perez working himself into a role of this type, ie a time-share closer. maybe he’ll even become “the” closer, as wainwright did in the last week or two of the season (and the postseason). but worrell didn’t become “The Man” until 1986.

by lboros on May 26, 2008 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

a follow-up thought

you are correct that herzog was more willing than la russa is to throw his rookie closer directly into the fire - i wish la russa would do the same with perez. but even herzog hedged his bets.

by lboros on May 26, 2008 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wasn't doing a Whitey vs Tony comparison.

I used Worrell because he was the first one that came to mind as a possible exception to the analysis. The question it presented was how you were identifying when the player actually took over the role. I was concerned more with the first look you took, where you were using save totals in the first year of service. I think it would be better served to identify % of appearances that were save opportunities. Your point about closer by committee situations should also be identified.

It just seemed a little incomplete, at first reading. If you were taking those things into account, then I was wrong.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Shouldn't Bobby Jenks

be included in the list of rookies who closed? I know he shared the role for a while, but he was definitely the closer by the end of the season (2005).

by Red in Chicago on May 26, 2008 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

jenks got 6 saves as a rookie

and chris perez may well have 6 saves by the end of this year. but like jenks, he’s going to go through a breaking-in period. jenks didn’t get his first save until his 14th appearance; after 29 appearances and 3 months on the roster, he had 3 saves. that was on september 28th. and then he got saves in his last 3 games of the year (sep 29 thru oct 1).

by late september, we might very well see perez in the closer role. but the fact that he’s not in there now is consistent with the way jenks was eased into the role, and wagner, and worrell, and nearly everybody else. again, i’m not saying i agree with this usage; it’s just the way the wise men of baseball do things.

by lboros on May 26, 2008 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Also a fairly analogous situation with Dustin Hermanson closing with smoke and mirrors

I’m not sure if Perez is ready to be a closer every day, but give me a fresh Perez over Franklin on back-to-back-days 100 times out of a 100. We shouldn’t have a designated closer, and shouldn’t it be just fine for Franklin/Perez to not “know their roles” as is always the counter-argument considering Franklin isn’t a true closer and Perez is probably just happy to be in the bigs?

With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch

by joker24 on May 26, 2008 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

plus

if the bases are loaded in the 8th, wouldn’t you rather have perez come in?

Ankiel is Jesus!

by Cards Fan in Chitown on May 27, 2008 12:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not on subject

but a question. Why is Brad Thompson on the DL.

by ridgesee on May 26, 2008 11:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

sore elbow

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on May 26, 2008 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

or so they say.

by stlcardinalsfang on May 26, 2008 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Who didn't see this coming?

Jimmy’s days as a cubbie may be over soon. Thank god, let this unholy union end and let us never speak of it again. I think they figured out that whole secret agent thing, crap that means no more espionage. Hopefully they only release the guy and spare him from the firing squad.

"Do what you want to the women and children but leave me alone"- George Carlin

by That's a Winner on May 26, 2008 11:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Threre is no way Perez will be considered to be the closer

until it is more clear whether Izzy will be able to return to effectiveness. TLR is fiercely loyal, especially to his favorites. Probably not a bad decision, depending on Izzy’s ulitmate timetable.

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on May 26, 2008 11:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Question

Do we really want Perez to be the closer? People always talk about how the ninth inning isn’t always the highest leverage situation that a reliever will face. Isn’t Perez ,who has some of the best stuff in the Pen, better used to get the 3-4-5 in the 7th or 8th and let Franklin be the true closer and only face the high leverage situation when it happens in the 9th, which should be a more rare event then being able to choose when to put Perez in?

New Member of the Skip Schumaker Fan Club

by cyko42 on May 26, 2008 11:54 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree

The important thing is to use your best reliever in the highest leverage situations. Sometimes that’s the 9th, sometimes that’s the 8th, sometimes that’s the 7th. Now, I don’t like the idea of excluding Perez from high-leverage save situations in the 9th, but I also think at the end of the day he might end up pitching in more high-leverage situations than Franklin.

Brian Gunn

by briangunn on May 26, 2008 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Yeah, Perez has been pined for the whole closer role. We’re all aware. Izzy will most likely come back at some point, we know that too. I love the idea of having Perez back up here, and I think he should stay. But with our setup I have to go with the Bill James adage here.

If we need to win a game in the 7th, then that’s what we need to do. We now have two very good throwers in Perez and K-Mac that can come in when we get in trouble with a starter, or a reliever. Let’s use them to shut down the other team when they’re threatening for now. If Franklin is unavail then we can put Perez in that role, I’m ok with that.

But I could care less, and would be willing to argue against putting him closing now. I want to see him have a game or two where he struggles a bit, and grinds it out. I want to see how he bounces back. I want him to gain traction in high leverage situations instead of starting innings with clean bags. I want him to be in a hold position with a one run lead and take care of business.

I don’t want him in a situation where he’s essentially gifted the role, then it yanked from him when Izzy returns later in the year (and it’s a very, very likely situation). I don’t think it’s fair to have that approach, nor it is fair to give him that emotional rollercoaster.

When he’s vetted into the job, he gets it. He keeps it and he’s the core of the pen. Until then, tread lightly and patiently.

I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang

by AdjustedExpectations on May 26, 2008 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Grammar police

It’s ‘couldn’t care less’. “I could care less” makes no sense.

With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch

by joker24 on May 26, 2008 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's right.....

Keep everyone in line….

She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on May 26, 2008 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That one I will haha

“I could care less” is literally the opposite of what people are trying to say…

With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch

by joker24 on May 26, 2008 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"I could care less"

As Steven Pinker says, that phrase isn’t illogical—it’s sarcastic. Plus its meaning is abundantly clear to anyone who hears it. In other words, “I could care less” is perfectly acceptable.

Brian Gunn

by briangunn on May 26, 2008 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

False.

“I could care less” is a lazy colloquialism adopted by those who didn’t know any better. It is in the same league with the term “irregardless,” which would indicate “without a lack of regard for.” The phrase “I couldn’t care less” happens to convey the sentiment that the author/orator is trying to accomplish.

In my experience, “I could care less” is not used to be ironic or sarcastic. It is always used to convey that the author/orator gives no credence to the argument being presented to him/her. This requires the literal translation of the phrase “I couldn’t care less.”

With all due respect to Mr. Pinker, he is rationalizing a colloquialism. That is fine if there is a reason for it, but don’t try to convince me that it is correct grammar.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

+1

by cardsgirl95 on May 26, 2008 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

at the risking of tedium...

Rationalizing a colloquialism IS grammar. ALL grammar began as common, everyday speech and only afterwards became codified into something called “grammar rules.” These rules are made, broken, and remade all the time. If the point of language is to communicate, and AdjustedExpectations communicated his/her meaning perfectly by saying “I could care less,” then what’s the problem? I mean, yes, I know “irregardless” isn’t in the dictionary, and I never use the word myself, but I’d also never correct someone who did use that word, unless of course I was trying to flaunt my education or something obnoxious like that. (And for the record, I didn’t say “I could care less” was correct grammar—I said it was perfectly acceptable, in the exact same way Larry’s all-lowercase lettering is “incorrect” but perfectly acceptable, esp given the context of this blog.)

Brian Gunn

by briangunn on May 26, 2008 9:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

But,

grammar rules necessarily take into account the actual meaning of the words in use. The literal definition of the phrase contradicts the sentiment that was to be conveyed by the use of the phrase. The fact that we have all learned to understand the repeated use of broken grammar does not make it correct. Grammar rules are defined to avoid confusion between multiple individuals attempting to use the same language to convey ideas. The question is, would an individual learning the language be able to understand the thought that is being communicated by the phrase “I could care less” correctly? Would a child learning the language understand the meaning? The answer is no, because the phrase would be interpreted literally, and thus incorrectly.

To say that the use of a phrase is “perfectly acceptable” without additional qualification is implying that the grammar is correct. In addition, you attempted to back the statement by referencing a quote from an Harvard linguistics professional. The only reason for doing that is in an attempt to persuade others that this is correct grammar in the eyes of that linguistics professional; therefore, those of us who disagree must be incorrect.

Your qualification in this post about lboros’ stylistic choice is not an accurate correlation. This is not a matter of style that is being discussed, but an individual choice of phrasing that is incorrect.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

hmm...

I did not invoke Pinker to prove that “I could care less” was grammatically correct, primarily b/c Pinker himself does not consider that phrase grammatically correct. I brought him up b/c the idea I mentioned was originally his, not mine.

My basic feeling is that there are several acceptable grammars depending on context. What passes for acceptable grammar in, say, a text message might not be so advisable when, say, writing a thank-you letter to a potential employer. And as far as I’m concerned, “I could care less” is perfectly fine, especially when the forum is a comments train on a blog and the readers are most certainly not your hypothetical child learning the language for the first time. What’s more, I would say that the breach in decorum occurred not with the person who used the phrase “I could care less,” but rather with the person who saw fit to rap his knuckles for it.

Brian Gunn

by briangunn on May 26, 2008 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I addressed that topic below.

I commented to joker24 that one seldom makes friends by criticizing someone’s grammar in typical conversation, so I don’t disagree with your finishing statement. We all violate grammatical rules frequently here, and it is not necessary to have a 9th-grade English teacher here to police us. If your point is not understood, then one of us will ask.

That said, when you referenced a quote in your rebuttal, you are inferring that the quote supports the theme of your rebuttal. If it did not, then it was an incorrect choice of quote.

There is such a separation of communication, in that we often use what is defined as conversational speech. This is often filled with colloquialisms, and true grammar rules need not apply. As you stated, we know our audience and choose to bypass certain rules. This is not a new set of grammar rules, but simply an agreement that they are not strictly enforced.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Open Ears

Oddly, perhaps, I found this exchange to be fairly riveting.

by mcurryatl on May 27, 2008 12:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

...

“That said, when you referenced a quote in your rebuttal, you are inferring that the quote supports the theme of your rebuttal. If it did not, then it was an incorrect choice of quote.”

What does that mean? I don’t ask that rhetorically - I’m asking honestly. B/c I still completely support Pinker’s notion that “I could care less” is sarcastic. But that’s different from saying “I could care less” conforms to proper grammar rules. Because neither I nor Pinker ever claimed that “I could care less” was “correct” - merely that it was acceptable. (In the same way that, say, “If anyone calls, tell them I’m not home” or “Who are you talking to?” are grammatically incorrect, but completely clear, logical, and acceptable in both spoken and written English.)

Brian Gunn

by briangunn on May 27, 2008 2:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by the way

there’s an incredible essay by David Foster Wallace called “Authority and American Usage” that’s more or less about this argument. Wallace wouldn’t necessarily agree with everything I say here, so I’m not using him to score points. I just think it’s one of the most fascinating things I’ve ever read, and if you’re into grammar and stuff you might want to pick it up. (It’s long, though—over 60 pages.)

Brian Gunn

by briangunn on May 27, 2008 2:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This probably carried on WAAAYY too long.

I’m sorry I took so much umbrage to your first post, but since you asked a question I’ll answer that question.

You asked what I meant. I stated above that your initial post indicated that this statement was “perfectly acceptable” without additional qualification. Consequently, since the post to which you were responding was challenging the grammatical value of the statement, then you were implying that you believed this was correct. You used Mr. Pinker to support your assertion. If Mr. Pinker’s assertion did not define the statement as grammatically correct, then his was the wrong quote to invoke in your rebuttal.

I would challenge Mr. Pinker’s assertion that “I could care less” is sarcastic, as I have never experienced it being used in that manner.

BTW, we were all completely wrong by defining this as a grammatical inaccuracy, anyway. There is nothing grammatically wrong with the statement, as all of the rules have been followed. The question is more of a literal nature. Did the statement convey what the author was trying to accomplish? If you believe it to be a sarcastic statement, then the answer is an emphatic yes. If you believe as I do, that it is not, then the answer is no.

I’m sorry to anyone we may have BORED during this exchange. As I stated elsewhere, I don’t think it is necessary to police grammar within polite conversational exchanges. It certainly won’t make friends, and often it turns the other party off from listening to anything you have to say.

Brian, I enjoyed it because I’m like that. Thanks for introducing me to Mr. Pinker and Mr. Wallace. I will try to check them out.

by etp_stl on May 27, 2008 8:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sounds good

And yes, fun exchange. Hope all is well. Go Cards…

Brian Gunn

by briangunn on May 27, 2008 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's meaning has become clear to anyone who hears it

Because kids couldn’t hear it right when they were young and its idiocy has been perpetuated to the point where people just don’t pay attention to just how stupid it is. You’re right it isn’t illogical: it’s wrong. It’s backwards and dumb…again it’s the literal opposite of what someone is trying to say.

With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch

by joker24 on May 26, 2008 6:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

BTW, ...

in my experience, you seldom make friends correcting their grammar. Especially in a forum such as this, when so many statements are made quickly. You are absolutely right in your assessment of the phrase, but does it really matter here. I cringe every time I read that phrase, when someone writes “should of” instead of “should’ve” or “should have,” or when someone uses less when describing a quantifiable number of items instead of fewer. However, I am not interested in alienating those members for the sake of proving a point.

Now, when I hear a professional journalist or author make the same mistakes, I tend to go ballistic.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 6:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1000

Nitpicking grammer doesn’t impress me either. If we were all employeed as journalists paid to write for the forum or in an english class then go ahead.

by birdo rojo on May 26, 2008 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Point taken yeah

But I’ve been around here for awhile, it’s not as though I’m making too many posts about grammar here…

With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch

by joker24 on May 26, 2008 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

True.

I’ve noticed a couple of “grammar” posts lately. I don’t generally have a problem with it, I was just pointing out that it is a sure way to devolve into an argument. As I said, you were correct in your assessment; but it seemed as though you were starting to get irritated with the rebuttals.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 8:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry, not necessarily from you on the grammar posts.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I could care less, if only I had not already hit the bottom of the great jump of not caring.

Ankiel is Jesus!

by Cards Fan in Chitown on May 27, 2008 1:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This

is the stupidest thread in the history of this blog.

"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 May 27, 2008 1:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Someone always told me...

that it is “I couldn’t care less” because if you could care less, then care less. Stating that you could not care any less for the subject matter shows no importance to you which is what you are trying to say when you say “I could care less.”

by Jumsy on May 27, 2008 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

My take

I actually use the phrase, slightly modified, in a sarcastic way. “I could care less, but it would require too much effort on my part.”

That said, the Cubs do deserve my pity, but never my support.

by Solanus on May 27, 2008 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, because

he isn’t the bullpen ‘ace’. Is he one of the best we’ve got out there? Certainly. But for high leverage situations elsewhere in the game, I’d rather have K-Mac. He’s got 4 pitches, is very good at changing speed and seems to have the same bulldog attitude that Perez has.

Don’t get me wrong, I want Perez as the Closer. But I also believe that in most high leverage situations, I want K-Mac out there.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on May 26, 2008 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i seem to be in the vast minority

that doesn’t have a problem with the current setup. i like perez’s stuff and everything and think he’s going to be a dominant closer one day, but why mess with what’s working? franklin’s had a damn good year so far and has yet to do anything that would warrant him being pulled from the position. i know we’re all excited about perez’s future, but franklin should get a fair evaluation first.

by stlcardinalsfang on May 26, 2008 12:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I can agree

I got a little down on Franklin latter part of last year, but his stuff has looked better this so far this year with better movement on his pitches. He could be a better closer than setup man.

by ridgesee on May 26, 2008 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Also, I would like to see

the Cardinals make a decision on Barton soon. He is not going to be of great value to the team this year i the role he is in and I do not see the necessity to keep him as some here do. If he was younger..yes, but he turned 26 in April and that is old for someone with no experience above AAA. Stavanaha, Mather and Hearther are all younger and more experienced (not to mention Rasmus) To me, Barton doesn’t look like a power hitter, but show good speed on the bases and in time might hit for a decent average.
I know Stavanha, Mather, or Hearther are not noted glove men, but neither is Barton and I would about as soon go with them as to give up a young prospect, or prospects for Barton. If you cna get him reasonable from Cleveland, good, if not send him back. One way or the other he should be in AAA getting playing time.

by ridgesee on May 26, 2008 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1 on barton

i know everyone around here likes him and blames his numbers on lack of ABs, but he seems to have no role with club, present or future. the cards should either make a reasonable offer to cleveland to get his rights (seems unlikely), or give him back to the indians. either way, it has to be done soon.

plus, getting him off the roster opens up a spot for a guy who seems to be mashing the crap out of the ball in AAA lately.

by stlcardinalsfang on May 26, 2008 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If we are getting rid of an OF

how about we get rid of the one who can be replaced fairly simply by Joe Mather? That would be Chris Duncan. Mather is a better defender than Duncan (that’s not saying much) and is absolutely raking right now.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on May 26, 2008 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

but where are we going to put duncan?

he can’t exactly be sent down to AAA and no one really seems interested in trading for him at the moment.

plus, do you think tony would do something with a coach’s son? i would like to see duncan gone too, but you have to think realistically.

by stlcardinalsfang on May 26, 2008 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why can't Chris be sent down to AAA?

He has options.

No, he wouldn’t do something to his godson. Which only gives credence to all those people that claimed he was playing because of nepotism. He’s a talented player who has value. I hope the organization doesn’t make personel decisions based on family connections.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on May 26, 2008 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

but you know they will.

so duncan is here to stay.

by stlcardinalsfang on May 26, 2008 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

barton goes ??

according to mo, cleveland is not willing to let us swap for barton on terms acceptable to mo, so i think leverage for maximizing his value is to package him in a deal with an other team. as this became known it would pressure cleveland to either be more “reasonable” , lose him to the royals or some other team that would keep him, or start all over dealing with some other team. right now i feel his value to others exceeds his value to us or cleveland and we should take advantage of that. we seem to have plenty in the pipeline of equivalent or better outfield talent. it would be particularly helpful to have a roster that does not have 5 players who are basically outfield only players.

If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, perhaps you haven't grasped the situation!

by sportsman on May 26, 2008 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

But what makes Barton less valuable to us

than Duncan or Skippy?

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on May 26, 2008 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

value

the reason to package barton (+/- skippy or dunc) is that he is least developed. potential always seems to intrigue suitors more than accomplishment. i am assuming neither skippy or dunc is viewed as having great upside, so teams will “pay” less. plus, at his age (and theirs), he needs to play. also, i’m not opposed to moving dunc down and letting him play. in both cases i expect the player’s value would increase. we need to change the structure of the roster by finding someone who is not limited to infield only or outfield only (aka spiezio, marrero, inge, etc.). if we are going to make a real run this year, we need more flexibility (and performance).

If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, perhaps you haven't grasped the situation!

by sportsman on May 26, 2008 6:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I dunno

I think he still has some upside, and could even be a passable Willie McGee type player. Then again, it sure has been looking lately like he’s a fluke. then again, we need a bigger sample size, which is the argument of not having ABs

Ankiel is Jesus!

by Cards Fan in Chitown on May 27, 2008 1:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He's 6 for 20 as a pinch hitter

he’s got great speed and is a better defender than Duncan. He’s a cheap version of So Taguchi with a much higher upside.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on May 26, 2008 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

All good arguments hardcore...however

You make it seem like a family argument about who sits where at thanksgiving dinner.
I’m not feeling so many warm fuzzy feeling about our outfield. Ludwick looks like a keeper. Ankiel has serious holes in his swing… I know that opposing scouts and teams have noticed. He needs work…...Skippy seems game although I don’t see him making any other teams starting outfield….. His big up side is that he is a lead off style hitter on a team that has no other choice save Miles….... I look forward to Mather and Rasmus showing up. This team sucks for situational hitters. Get a back up catch that can hit…...get a back up corner infielder that is first off the bench as a pinch hitter…......

Westcoastbirdwatcher

by westcoastbirdwatcher on May 26, 2008 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

I don’t see him (Schumaker) making any other teams starting outfield…

He could start at center for the Cubs right now.

by Red in Chicago on May 26, 2008 7:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Think they'll send us DeRosa?

I’d make that deal tomorrow.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No

But isn’t there someone else in the league who can play second and hit with some authority that might be available?

by Red in Chicago on May 26, 2008 7:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe Orlando Hudson?

I think Arizona has some other options, he’s at the end of his contract, and he currently has an OPS of .840. He’s 30, so he probably doesn’t have too many years left in him. If you could trade for him this year, then you could look at whether or not Hoffpauir is the solution. Otherwise, you could resign him for say 2 years at a modest veterans salary.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nah

At the major league level that team really doesn’t have any needs, and I’m not sure they’d want to deal part of their current team for future help.

With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch

by joker24 on May 26, 2008 7:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe in the offseason?

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 8:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

are you sure

they gave up a lot for haren, maybe they would consider hudson, or the A’s with ellis.

If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, perhaps you haven't grasped the situation!

by sportsman on May 27, 2008 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They gave up a lot of their future for Haren

No one in the present (of course Smith/Eveland have been good but Haren presumably will be better). Hudson is thoroughly part of their present and they don’t have any easy replacements. They’re in win-now mode. Of course they’re all so young win-now will last at least three years…

With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch

by joker24 on May 27, 2008 2:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think so...

Skip is not a very good defensive centerfielder. Heck, I don’t think he’s even that great an outfielder, period. Sure, he makes a gem from time to time, but then he misses a lot of balls he should catch. But somehow it’s just he’s playing out of position.

Start Ludwick

by DiscoJer on May 26, 2008 7:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He could definitely start in Chicago, right now.

Chicago options:

Reed Johnson .261/.345/.359
Jim Edmonds .118/.167/.118
Felix Pie .222/.286/.286

Skip Schumaker .293/.363/.392

Skip is clearly the hands-down winner in all categories offensively, and your assessment of his defense is not particularly accurate. While he may not be a Gold Glove caliber CF, he is above average.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 8:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

consistent consistency

i believe skip and all other outfielders would benefit form playing only one spot (or at least primarily in one spot). seems this is important to tlr for pitchers, ie, to know their roles, and it seems likely to me that anyone who plays all 3 outfield positions will not be getting as good a jump on the ball as one who plays in one place consistently. balls look much different leaving the bat from left field than right field.
p.s., ankiel needs to go to curve ball school!

If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, perhaps you haven't grasped the situation!

by sportsman on May 27, 2008 12:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

he'd actually be an offensive improvement

in the outfield of almost every AL team, right now, crazy as that sounds.

"the hardest decision to make is to do nothing; there is a terrible temptation to interfere." -gen patton

by SleepyCA on May 26, 2008 7:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's these high-powered NL offenses

With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch

by joker24 on May 26, 2008 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The thing with Ankiel...

is that he’s a centerfielder. Even if he has holes in his swings, simply because he’s a centerfielder with a lot of power, he has a lot of value

Look at how he compares to the other CFers in the league

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting?split=0&league=nl&season=2008&seasonType=2&sort=OPS&type=reg&ageMin=17&ageMax=51&state=0&college=0&country=0&hand=a&pos=cf&startDate=null&endDate=null&minpa=0

Start Ludwick

by DiscoJer on May 26, 2008 7:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Love Ankiel

He can become a bona fide super star…...He needs less responsibility and more work. He doesn’t need to to be batting forth. When Tony tweaks his lineup to include duncan batting 2nd…......people just pitch around Albert…......thats the real crime in taking Ludwick out. When Luddie got hot, Albert got pitches…......love to watch him play when teams pitch to him…............. I don’t want to hear, “lefty match ups” against Penny …..bull….. Ludwick earned the look…...Albert deserved the protection…......Lohse deserved the support. Tony is just trying to avoid the obvious question…....” if I don’t use Duncan now, then when”? They are justifying using Duncan at the expense of the team and its starting to get to Chris Duncan, because he knows it….....

I personally think I’m getting out of line a bit here…..... maybe it works out Tony’s way, maybe Duncan gets hot…........... maybe this teams doesn’t get to the play offs because they tried Tony’s way is my guess. 5 strike outs for the over compensating Ludwick on Sunday sucked….....

Westcoastbirdwatcher

by westcoastbirdwatcher on May 26, 2008 8:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

over managing

if you are suggesting that tony “over-manages” his position players, i agree wholeheartedly. all these guys are striving to be “starters” in the bigs, if lud hasn’t earned that, then who has? if not, how do they do it? lud, like rick, is a strikeout machine, but he can drive the ball and that is what opponents fear. they pitch around our singles hitters like crazy. who cares if he walks barton and then has to pitch to iz2? (hint: no one) i truly believe this is a big part of our high walk rate.

If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, perhaps you haven't grasped the situation!

by sportsman on May 27, 2008 12:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

he can work on his swing

he’s still learning as a hitter. project in development

Ankiel is Jesus!

by Cards Fan in Chitown on May 27, 2008 1:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It seems to me like there's a transition going on that begins in the draft

Years ago, how many players were drafted out of college where they had been exclusively closers? Chris Perez has been groomed for this for the last 5-6 years. That (seemed) to be the explicit purpose of drafting him was to see him step in after Izzy. This almost feels painful to argue since I’d rather he simply be used in the highest leverage innings but I think that the comments about easing him in are silly. The last 5 years have been easing him in. Just let him pitch in the slot he was drafted for.

by azruavatar on May 26, 2008 12:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

And happy Memorial Day everyone

I hope the weather is better than it is at my place wherever you are at!

by azruavatar on May 26, 2008 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

eh

it pretty much rained all day yesterday in south st. louis county. it’s nice and sunny right now, but who knows what the afternoon brings? they’re saying more severe storms today. what a treat.

by stlcardinalsfang on May 26, 2008 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i agree that the talk of easing him in is silly

but again, why mess with what’s working? franklin (so far) has done a solid job of closing games out and hasn’t done anything to warrant being taken out of the closer role. would i like to see perez in more high pressure situations (like yesterday instead of parisi)? yes, but he doesn’t need to be closing games for the time being.

by stlcardinalsfang on May 26, 2008 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Has anyone else noticed

how infrequently Pujols has been walking lately? Through the team’s first 42 games, he walked 41 times, struck out 15 times. Through the last 10 games he’s walked twice, struck out 5 times. Probably just a random blip, or perhaps a consequence of our opposing pitchers. But it also makes me wonder if Ludwick’s rep around the league is causing pitchers to finally challenge Albert.

Brian Gunn

by briangunn on May 26, 2008 12:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

i doubt the rest of the league knows a whole lot about ludwick

to be overly concerned about him. with that being said, i have noticed the dropoff in walks too. i think it may just be a random blip, but probaly more due to the fact that pitchers are challenging him more. i’ve seen more good pitches thrown to albert in the past week than all season it seems. he has whiffed on his fair share, but he also has hit more homers this week than any other week so far this year.

by stlcardinalsfang on May 26, 2008 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

I think that there was a “don’t pitch to Albert” approach to the start of the year. When we played three or for games without the “pop in second”, but with a OBP “scrappy” player in the 2 hole, Albert was in a position where he had to be pitched to, and was generally beaten.

In another words I think that the approach with Albert now is challenge him till he shows that he can punish you for it. He seems as of late to get better contact on the ball as he sees better pitches. Give him a couple of games/a series where he’s having out of mind games and teams will go back to the IBB/UIBB approach all over again.

I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang

by AdjustedExpectations on May 26, 2008 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Anyone in need of a baseball fix

Memphis vs Nashville today, Walters vs Dreamweaver.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on May 26, 2008 1:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Drats....

Rain delay.

by OKCARDSFAN_411 on May 26, 2008 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's up

For a guy that skipped AA, Freese is coming on strong

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on May 26, 2008 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mather bunts for basehit

you’d never see Duncan do that.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on May 26, 2008 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rasmus takes Weaver deep

good to see that.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on May 26, 2008 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Homeruns haven't been the problem so much this year...

With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch

by joker24 on May 26, 2008 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why did somebody not tell me?

I did not know this. You can watch minor league telecast for free once they are archived. Just watched yesterday’s Memphis, Nashville game. Some observations: Reyes looked fine, just a little rusty on control maybe. Not as worried about Rasmus after seeing him and Mather looks awsome and locked in. He is one big dude.

by ridgesee on May 26, 2008 4:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

that's so cool! I didn't know that either

by hannah_in_va on May 26, 2008 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Me either! I just looked in a bit...really enjoyed watching the home run Reyes hit.

He absolutely crushed that ball…and he acted like he’d been there before, all steely and cool.. I’m going to miss this young man when he’s gone…...

She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on May 26, 2008 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah jills,

Reyes hit that ball into the big trees in center. Quire a poke.

by ridgesee on May 26, 2008 10:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

it's high time

that Kerry Wood blew another save. right?

I have a love/hate relationship with the Cardinals' middle relief corps.

by madding on May 26, 2008 5:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

well he just blew one on saturday

but sure! why not?

by stlcardinalsfang on May 26, 2008 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

nope

sets ‘em down rather quietly. cubs win.

by stlcardinalsfang on May 26, 2008 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and are now 1/2 a game up on the cards

damn.

by stlcardinalsfang on May 26, 2008 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hate that stupid song they play

at the end of games when they win. it sounds like a joke.

I have a love/hate relationship with the Cardinals' middle relief corps.

by madding on May 26, 2008 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

i also hate the crowd mikes on WGN. make it sound like it’s really, really loud at wrigley when it’s really not.

by stlcardinalsfang on May 26, 2008 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

it sounds like a really lame jam band

playing at some kids school with them all singing along

Ankiel is Jesus!

by Cards Fan in Chitown on May 27, 2008 1:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tony has a Platoon Fetish

He has cause now to run the bullpen like he wants. He won’t give it up. Which may be the best thing anyway. .................... The emotion on Tony’s face when he went to get Izzy for the last time was unmistakable. Izzy should retire. If he doesn’t, if he thinks can still pitch. Springer will be the odd man out and Izzy will be part of a mix of guys who might match up in the ninth….....he will never be declared the CLOSER again…........ I wouldn’t call Perez the closer as a technicality, but 95 at the knees sure looks good from here….............. the Duncan debacle shows me that this teams relationship to the coaching is a huge weakness…. the GM really needs to show some balls and resolve some of the conflict…...

Westcoastbirdwatcher

by westcoastbirdwatcher on May 26, 2008 5:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Perez

In 1961, I attended the commencement ceremonies at Yale University at which JFK received an honorary degree, and made a speech. At the outset he said his mother told him he now had the best of all possible worlds: a Harvard education and a Yale degree.

I am reminded of JfK’s situation in that I now have the best of all possible worlds: consumate professionals (TLR and DD) deciding on the use of Perez, and a bunch of knowledgable and spirited amateurs to provide interesting comments..

by Jay S on May 26, 2008 6:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Just who are you calling "spirited"

HHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Westcoastbirdwatcher

by westcoastbirdwatcher on May 26, 2008 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

consummate, it should have 2 m's

by ridgesee on May 26, 2008 10:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That Son of a Duncan Must Go

I don’t care what we do with him. But he must go. He cannot play his position, pure and simple. I know high school outfielders who are better, and he is costing us games. Enough already. Mather will give you the same stats from the right side this year, but he will Just Catch the Ball.

by JustCatch the Ball on May 26, 2008 7:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Both Bill James and Hardball Times (RZR) disagree.

Dunc isn’t graceful, but he is at least an average LF.

by OBPplusSLG on May 26, 2008 9:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

For two years running the top play by play defensive metrics

(UZR, PMR and Dewan’s +/-) all showed that Duncan was woefully below average to the tune of 15-16 runs. That data is far more trustworthy than less than a half season’s worth of defensive data. Duncan just isn’t a good left fielder.

by azruavatar on May 26, 2008 10:32 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

but..

Wouldn’t you say that Rick Ankiel is an excellent CF? And that is based on the same amount of data. Dunc’s improvement could be a blip, or it could be real. We don’t know, and won’t find out for another month or so, but wouldn’t you hate to get rid of him if it was real?

"Give a man a fire, and he’ll be warm for a night. Set him on fire and he’ll be warm for the rest of his life."

by BigMOman on May 26, 2008 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm just curious,

do you believe it is possible for a player to improve? It seems like all of your points lead to a player “regressing to the mean” despite the sample size. If a player has been learning to play a new position for only three years, then the information collected from the third year is more important when measuring his capabilities than data collected from his first year. This is not rocket science.

The question is, have his numbers been improving. Is the data from this year outside of a typical improvement progression for a player? Has anyone looked to identify a typical improvement progression for a player when dealing with defensive capabilities? It is often commented that defensive metrics are far less credible than offensive metrics, so how could this be identified?

Duncan is not a great LF, but he is not “woefully below average” in his play. His range is better than many. His arm is nothing exciting, he looks awful catching routine balls, and he delivers errors in bunches. He still accomplishes what he needs to do most of the time, and he does not cost us as much in the field as many people imply.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Reds are calling up Jay Bruce tomorrow.

The future is now! If the Reds are getting ready for a fire sale, who do we want? Would they go ahead and deal with us? Personally, I’d take Adam Dunn, Brandon Phillips, and Edwin Encarnancion. Oh, throw in reliever Bill Bray too…...
Seems like Corey Patterson is the odd man out…....and no, I don’t want him.

She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on May 26, 2008 8:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Keppinger.

Freel maybe, if Farney would let him play second base.

Of the ones mentioned, though, Dunn is the only one who’d be for sale, and not to us.

"the hardest decision to make is to do nothing; there is a terrible temptation to interfere." -gen patton

by SleepyCA on May 26, 2008 9:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Freel is a little loco......he's had a concussion along the way too.

Farney is just too weird for me.

I don’t even know if they are getting ready to tear the team apart. I was just being flip about what players I would like to have from their team.

She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on May 26, 2008 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No chance

Dunn is just a hot version of Duncan…...and he rarely is…......Phillips is a franchise player….....don’t get me started on Edwin….......he is great in the vacuum surrounding the other shlubs…......Bray is fantastic when he is not hurt from throwing that nice slider…...which is never….....

Westcoastbirdwatcher

by westcoastbirdwatcher on May 26, 2008 9:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dunn is just a hot version of Duncan……and he rarely is……...

2004: 568AB .266/.388/.569 46HR
2005: 543AB .247/.387/.540 40HR
2006: 561AB .234/.365/.490 40HR
2007: 522AB .264/.386/.554 40HR

by astrostl on May 26, 2008 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Reds..... Losers every year

No team can overcome the black hole of those strikeouts. You could say its not his fault, and I would say “not”............The Reds would have traded him for a hand full of beans. They will trade him before the deadline this year. If he is hot, then they may get two hand fulls. They no better than to pay for those home runs now.

Westcoastbirdwatcher

by westcoastbirdwatcher on May 27, 2008 1:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

reds problem has been pitching

2004 Allowed 907 runs
2005 Allowed 889 runsz
2006 Allowed 801 runs
2007 Allowed 853 runs

Now, you can attribute some of that to Dunn’s defense if you want, and I won’t argue (he’s actually worse than duncan is perceived to be), but his strikeouts are not the reason their pitching has been completely atrocious.

"the hardest decision to make is to do nothing; there is a terrible temptation to interfere." -gen patton

by SleepyCA on May 27, 2008 2:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You are all right in your observations

and assumptions. Here in lies the problem. Dunn and Duncan are both unattached from team chemistry and competitive momentum. Their ineptness as situational hitters boggles the mind. It effects the teams self image which can be very deflating. When I watch them hit, both will strike out on almost the same exact sequence of pitches every time. How is that possible you ask? Especially considering Dave Duncan’s reputation for charting? I couldn’t begin to tell you…........ its almost like they’re not even in the competition. Dunces!
The Reds have to solid young pitchers. Has it changed anything? Now that Harrang isn’t the “Ace” he isn’t preforming at the same level. Arroyo, who really is an eccentric, is like Gump, you never know what you’re going to get…..........Don’t get me started on Griffey, who is easily the greatest “dead weight” in sports.
About the walks. The effect of Pujols on the lineup creates a lot of walks. In Dunn’s case, something similar. They bat him 5 of 6, which leaves allot of bases open behind doubles with Phillips. Teams will also pitch around to get at 7 and 8…....why not bat him 4th? He kills a rally just like Ankiel is doing. Folks aren’t pitching around Ankiel. they go right after him…...on the hands …low and away…... then high fastball…...gets him 70% of the time.

Westcoastbirdwatcher

by westcoastbirdwatcher on May 27, 2008 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dunn and Duncan are both unattached from team chemistry and competitive momentum. Their ineptness as situational hitters boggles the mind. It effects the teams self image which can be very deflating.

i care about results, not intangibles. dunn has great results.

by astrostl on May 27, 2008 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That sure sounds good.........

no correlation at all between winning and losing. Dunn has been on the trading block for three years…...........No one will trade anything of value for the 40 hrs. At times they couldn’t find a taker for his contract…...... The fair people of Cincinnati come to the ball park on occasion, enjoy a hot dog, and ou and ah over a farm boy home run. They will give him up to the AL soon enough….....and then his new handlers will have to worry about his production. ................. Dunn’s numbers are a product of his environment…...tape measure side show…....... Barnum and Bailey baseball…..

Westcoastbirdwatcher

by westcoastbirdwatcher on May 27, 2008 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

no correlation at all between winning and losing

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/the-one-about-win-probability

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=319&position=OF

by astrostl on May 27, 2008 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No team can overcome the black hole of those strikeouts. You could say its not his fault

i’d say strikeouts don’t matter. he reaches base 38% of the time and hits for extreme power.

by astrostl on May 27, 2008 2:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dunn is certainly different than most other players with his skill set......

he also walks over 100 times a year; unusual for such a free swinger. He’s a three true outcomes kind of guy…...

She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on May 27, 2008 8:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Brandon Phillips?

Would they really get rid of him? That seems like the biggest miss that Jockety made at the end. The guy was available for very little, and we didn’t go get him. Instead, we ended up with Aaron Miles, Junior Spivey, Hector Luna, Jose Vizcaino, and Ronnie Belliard for the year. Think about it. That decision brought us the great Aaron Miles.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 9:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

though im sure almost every tea;m passed

seeing that post almost makes you cry huh?

;-)

If you are in St. Louis check out my band, Griffin and the Gargoyles
(formerly Gargoyle Reign, Gargoyle Lounge)

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com
www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles

:-D

by jealousblues on May 27, 2008 1:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

the man

phillips is the man who could change our team from competitive to the one to beat. surely they’d love to take kennedy!!

If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, perhaps you haven't grasped the situation!

by sportsman on May 27, 2008 12:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Memorial Day

Today is Memorial Day. Please take a moment and reflect on what you have, what you enjoy, and the good things in life and send a thought to the thousands of families who have lost loved ones or have loved ones away from home.

What does this have to do with baseball? A lot. The men and women over there follow baseball – be it on TV in the DFAC, the box scores 3 days late in Stars and Stripes, or on the internet. Fantasy baseball is a big thing, and the last thing I threw in one of my bags when I went was my glove. Many a night we tossed the ball around, and the difference between baseball and cricket always made for interesting conversations with our Iraqi counterparts. Hell, the last thing we did before leaving Ft. Carson was go to a Rockies game, and I remember vividly staying up until 4am to see Everett miss the tag on Molina in the 05NLCS with about 20 other people. Still pisses me off to this day.

God Bless Baseball, God Bless our soliders, and God Bless the USA.

Thank you for this brief interruption. We now resume normal programming.

I have discovered in twenty years of moving around a ball park, that the knowledge of the game is usually in inverse proportion to the price of the seats. ~Bill Veeck

by bukowski on May 26, 2008 9:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Thank you for sharing that.

by cardsgirl95 on May 26, 2008 9:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

RE: Memorial Day

It is of my opinion that there shouldnt be any games played, anywhere. Instead, use this day to reflect and remember those that have gone before us, as well as, those that will go on ahead in the future.

To me, again, in my opinion, Memorial Day has turned into a marketing device for corporate America. It seems to have gotten too far from what it was declared it should be.

Let us always remember the Brave Men, and Women, of our country’s armed forces for all of the sacrifices that they have made, and will make in the future. God, bless the all.

AMT2 Frank Miller
U.S. Coast Guard (Active Duty)

C'mon you Redbirds, lets prove em' wrong, again!

by yer dog first on May 26, 2008 9:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I understand the sentiment, but ...

since baseball is an happy diversion for many of our troops, wouldn’t prohibiting games be the wrong way to approach that? IMO, I remember those that have gone before us when doing things that I enjoyed sharing with those people. I honor those that will go before us by enjoying the time I spend with them. That may include watching a ball game. I don’t know that Memorial Day is as big of a marketing device as many of our holidays, but I do think that most people just see it as a much needed day off at the beginning of the year.

Celebrations before games tend to be the best reminder of the day for many of us.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 9:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and

it’s not like they ignore the holiday when the baseball games are playing.

Ankiel is Jesus!

by Cards Fan in Chitown on May 27, 2008 1:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe we should petition Selig to initiate a real Memorial Day celebration for next year.

Say, $5 admission to all MLB games for vets and servicemembers on Memorial Day. Direct satellite feeds to Iraq and Afghanistan of all the Memorial Day games.

by tom s. on May 26, 2008 10:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Didn't the Cards do that a year or two ago?

I seem to remember the Cards broadcasting a game to Iraq on one of the holidays. Was it Memorial Day, July 4th, or Labor Day? Does anybody remember? I’m a big fan of those types of things, as I think our veterans have more than earned such things.

by etp_stl on May 26, 2008 10:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That is a great idea

maybe free refreshments also for vets. I would like for soldiers in uniform and ID be admitted free anytime. They are not so many that we cannot provide that.

by ridgesee on May 26, 2008 10:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

most ballparks

that I have been to in the last couple of years do have a military discount. For instance, the dodger’s ticket discount is $20 tickets (upper deck) for $5. Sometimes they give a flat x% off the top (Arizona and SD).

"the hardest decision to make is to do nothing; there is a terrible temptation to interfere." -gen patton

by SleepyCA on May 26, 2008 10:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Busch III

From what I understand, at Busch III, an Active Duty/Reserve/Retired military member can walk up to the ticket window at the park, present his or her military i.d. and get in for free.

I know for sure that all military members get half off every Sunday home game, anywhere in the park that they have seats for you. As far as I know, there isnt a limit on the number of tix you can buy. I personally have purchased up to six before.

C'mon you Redbirds, lets prove em' wrong, again!

by yer dog first on May 27, 2008 1:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Should the Cardinals consider DL'ing Pineiro?

If they did it, retroactively, he’d be able to come off the DL on June 4th (I believe). That would force him to miss his start on Saturday against the Pirates, but it would also allow the Cardinals to use the situation for extra depth on the bench/bullpen.

They could call up Mather to give them extra pop off the bench and to get see if he can translate to the show, or they could call up Worrell to give them extra help in the bullpen. These are just guys on the 40-man. They could easily drop a guy like Rico Washington or move Carp/TJ to the 60-day DL to bring up a guy like Barden or Boggs for a spot start (as the Red Sox love to do).

They could make a flurry of moves to help themselves in this situation and even if they called up a position player, they could let Parisi be the spot starter on Saturday.

Of course, they won’t do any of this. I don’t even know why I mentioned it.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on May 27, 2008 12:53 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Thats deep Hardcore

Sound thinking…............But why would they bring up Mather who could only further aggravate the “dump Duncan movement.”

Westcoastbirdwatcher

by westcoastbirdwatcher on May 27, 2008 1:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They could call up Mather to give them extra pop off the bench and to get see if he can translate to the show

using a four (4) game sample size?

by astrostl on May 27, 2008 2:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for picking that gem

out of the entire post and ignoring the general point.

Give me a break.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on May 27, 2008 2:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ahhhh...

Did’nt you pick one single WORD out of a lengthy post re: signing free agents not long ago and ditch the rest to make a point….having some of you back at you, no fun? Give us a break!

You actually make a good point about making roster changes while still following the rules that regulate transactions. There are a few teams that have started using the DL as a “taxi squad” of sorts. If the rules allow it, why not?

Your last point is vaild, it probably wont happen with this group. I always keep an eye out for the Royals transactions, creative roster juggling seems to be one thing they do well. Along with the Red Sawks, the Braves, Mets, A’s and Yankees the Indians are making moves almost daily. Royals have been fairly quiet lately.

Something needs to be done in advance to Mathers coming up to ensure more ABs or he turns into Barton from lack of quality playing time.

by cardschinmusic on May 27, 2008 4:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

well, it was the first suggestion you made in your main paragraph. it stood out to me because you also said “He’s 6 for 20 as a pinch hitter” about barton in this thread, perhaps further indicating an amount of faith in quantities that i don’t share. if it would be your hope that he supplants another one of our outfielders in the guise of a test, that’s another thing.

it sure does seem like “everybody else is doing it” with regard to (ab)using the dl. i’d like to make use of whatever advantages we can, but isn’t it kinda scary to think about a crackdown? one thinks of isringhausen’s allegedly tv-damaged hand, for example.

by astrostl on May 27, 2008 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mather...

I’m not sure what they are waiting for. As you said, now is a prime opportunity to sneak him in for several games. As for Duncan…they really need to get rid of him quick before the rest of the league finds out that he’s just a left handed Kevin Mench. I think that is actually the move that needs to be made. I’d still be in favor of DL-ing Pineiro since that would give an opportunity to Mitchell Boggs or Mark Worrell. I’d include Motte in that also, but from what I’ve seen in the boxscores, he’s been getting roughed up lately.

5 MOVES THAT MUST HAPPEN:

1. Trade Anthony Reyes
2. Trade Chris Duncan
3. Call up Joe Mather
4. Find a way to dump Adam Kennedy and replace him with someone not currently on the 40 man roster
5. Make Chris Perez the closer

These are your priorities, Mo. Don’t let Tony and Dave stray you off the course of success with their old man stubborness.

Also,

- No more Isringhausen.

- No more “days off” for ludwick every week…or every month for that matter. This man is your cleanup hitter and is outperforming nearly every outfielder in baseball. Until that isn’t the case anymore let him play.

- No more phone calls to players saying “nevermind, you will not be joining the big club for the first time”

- No more “half starts” for Barton. If he’s not good enough to be on the roster, trade for him or send him back to Cleveland.

- No more statements such as “we expect Mulder to be back soon and be a solid contributor”. He’s finished. If we fans know it, why don’t you guys? No more updates on Mulder or Clement for that matter. Send them home and let them get ready for either next season or retirement.

- No more of Adam Kennedy or Ryan Ludwick batting leadoff. Or Aaron Miles or Brendan Ryan or Cesar Izturis. Skip’s the only guy on the team qualified for the job and he’s done a damn good job of it so let it be.

- No more Jason Larue batting 6th….in fact, no more Jason LaRue!

Hmmm…I sure do bitch a lot about a team thats only a 1/2 game out of 1st place. The funny thing is they are all valid bitches. I just think that this team could/should be a lot better than what it has been if you didn’t have Duncan taking AB’s away from the leadoff hitter AND the clean-up hitter. I’d be okay with Mather taking AB’s away from Skip, but that would leave us with one of the above mentioned to bat leadoff (or the new 2B..coughBrianRobertscough). The Isringhausen madness should have been stopped before it got to the point that it did…that cost the Cards a couple of extra games.

"Ding-dong the wicked witch is dead!" - Wayne Hagin after the cardinals snapped a losing streak

by The Ghost of Todd Burns on May 27, 2008 5:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You make a lot of good points.

1. Reyes should have been traded at the end of spring training. He hasn’t pitched all that well here; it is known by EVERYBODY in St. Louis media, and the baseball world that Mr. Duncan and Mr. LaRussa don’t like him and don’t want him on the team. How Mr. Mozeliak thinks he can ask for a prospect and another piece to me is hysterical. I know he has said he doesn’t want to just give him away, so he’s content to let him rot in the minors.

2. Chris Duncan will never be traded. Period.

3. Joe Mather will be called up sometime this year.

4. Agree that Adam Kennedy needs to be replaced. I can only hope that Mr. Mozeliak is better at picking his replacement than Mr. Jocketty was…..2nd base has been a black hole for years now.

5. Agree that Perez will be closer before year is out.

Yep. Put Mulder and Clement out of your mind.

Just go ahead and return Barton to Cleveland. The way he’s being used is harmful to his development IMO.

I completely agree about the phone calls and the neverminds following it. It’s just isn’t a smart way to handle a human being.

On LaRue-isn’t there better options somewhere? The man simply can’t hit….

Oh, and am I reading between the lines that Joel Piniero is in Mr. LaRussa’s doghouse? He’s been critical of him in the press, (please stop it!), and now he’s been skipped from his next start with a groin injury. Brad Thompson seems to be in some sort of place not here or there….his 15 day DL is surely up by now, no?

She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on May 27, 2008 7:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

On LaRue-isn’t there better options somewhere? The man simply can’t hit….

pitches per plate appearance are way down. i don’t know how much i believe in “pressing”, but if it exists that might be a good case study. his BA is very poor in his small sample size, but i’m not giving up on him just yet. he’s still got a .314 obp.

by astrostl on May 27, 2008 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, if he's been pressing, he's been pressing for two plus years......

He hit .148 last year and .194 the year before that. I’ll stick with my opinion that he simply can’t hit. Good thing he’ll take a walk, because that’s the only way he’s getting on these days.

She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on May 27, 2008 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i can tolerate a .194 avg from a backup catcher if good defense and a .317 obp come along with it (2006 results). his p/pa was way higher last year than this one, thus the pressing question. he also appeared to hit into really bad luck per ebabip but that hasn’t converged since he last saw lots of plate appearances in 2005.

by astrostl on May 27, 2008 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No more of Adam Kennedy or Ryan Ludwick batting leadoff. Or Aaron Miles or Brendan Ryan or Cesar Izturis. Skip’s the only guy on the team qualified for the job and he’s done a damn good job of it so let it be.

if we use skip’s 2008 .363 obp and .99 isolated power as a cardinal leadoff reference point, some interesting names do appear. yadier is at .357/.78, but is a noted concern on the basepaths. cesar blows away his career .299 obp with .362/.62, but i think it’s promising that his pitches per plate appearance are way up over recent years. he’s also getting unlucky on hits per eBABIP and even due to increase his ld%. miles is at .360/.30 but seems likely to regress. p/pa is slightly down, ld% is unsustainably high. the only other close match, funny enough compared to your post, is chris duncan at .366/.142 but his lefty struggles continue. i’m surprised and pleased to say that izturis seems the most promising of that lot.

by astrostl on May 27, 2008 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs