odds n sods
sifting through some numbers coming out of the off day ----
- for all their struggles with the stick, the cardinals have been consistent in one regard --- they nearly always score at least 3 runs. in their first 52 games they’ve scored 2 runs or fewer only 8 times, which is the 2nd lowest figure in the league; the cubs have only 7 low-output games. why is this important? because big-league teams this year have a .123 winning percentage when scoring 2 runs or fewer; once you get to 3 runs, you start to have a reasonable chance to win the game. the breakdown is:
0 runs .000 1 runs .079 2 runs .209 3 runs .360 4 runs .490 5 runs .667 6 runs .775 it so happens that the cardinals are woefully bad when scoring 3 runs; they’re only 2-10 in those games, mainly because the bullpen’s failures (by sheer coincidence) have often occurred in games when the offense provided 3 runs. but when scoring at least 4 runs, the cardinals are 27-3.
- a while ago i noted that the cards have an inordinately high batting average on groundballs; they have since regressed toward the mean, although they remain well above average in this category. through their first 31 games they were hitting .276 on grounders, nearly 50 points above the league average; since then (21 games) they’ve hit .246 on grounders. they’re now at .263 for the season, which is still the highest figure in the league and 32 points above the norm --- still probably not sustainable. i’d expect them to end up no higher than .250 when all is said and done.
- also due for a comedown in this category, btw: the cubs. they’re 2nd in the league in avg on grounders, 3 points behind the cardinals at .260.
- as long as we’re parsing batted balls, the cardinals and cubs also rank 1-2 in the national league in line drives. st. louis is averaging just over 6 line drives a game, nearly one a game above the norm. that probably is sustainable --- last season the cardinals ranked 2d in the league in line drives, hitting 5.75 a game; in 2006 they ranked 1st and hit with 5.83 ld/g. i’d imagine albert pujols accounts for the bulk of the cardinals’ prowess in this regard . . . . .
- st. louis is the only national league without a bunt hit this year.
- can anybody make sense of this table for me:
R/G avg obp slg 2008 cards home 4.44 .286 .374 .420 2008 cards away 4.76 .270 .356 .402 they’re hitting significantly better at home, yet scoring significantly fewer runs; any guesses? it’s gotta be an RISP/LOB problem. they have identical totals of doubles (47) and homers (22) home and away, and they draw more walks at home. . . .
- Baseball Prospectus has started running its playoff odds report; the cards are currently given a 27 percent shot at winning the division (the cubs are at 52 percent) and a 15 percent shot at winning the wild card. their overall playoff odds of 42 percent are 4th best in the nl, behind arizona, chicago, and atlanta.
- last week the guys at the WSJ’s Daily Fix posted the first in-season update to the baseball contest. my picks are already looking ragged. i picked the tigers and (on a lark) reds to win the wild cards, and they’re both in last place; i guessed that grady sizemore would break out and win the al mvp, and he’s hitting .254; i picked felix hernandez for the al cy young award, and he’s 2-5; i picked daric barton to win the al rookie of the year award, and he’s hitting .211 with no power. i pretty much suck at the baseball contest. . . .
- also, if you haven’t checked out the red baron’s stuff over at RFT’s The Rundown, you ought to start doing so. he’s posting there pretty much daily.
- i hadn’t noticed this, but the memphis redbirds are in first place in the pcl north division . . . .
0 recs |
117 comments
Comments
That table
does defy explanation. My first guess was that the infield at Busch may be maintained so as to allow more double-play groundballs. Nope, we’ve grounded into fewer at home than on the road, in spite of presumably more opportunities at home with the higher on-base average. Our stealing efficiency is better at home.
All I see to explain it are the five extra hit batsmen and five extra batters reaching on error on the road in 9 fewer games. Not enough to explain the difference. I’ll chalk it up to timely hitting—specifically that from Troy Glaus’ bat that’s been so much better on the road than at home for the first quarter of the season and that looked to be evening out in the last homestand, especially against Pittsburgh.
by liam on May 27, 2008 9:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Number of Innings?
Without actually looking at the numbers, is it possible that the number of innings played has some impact on the runs per game? Since home wins (generally) only require 8 offensive innings, it is possible that the cards have scored fewer runs at home simply because there are fewer offensive innings per game?
Just a thought.
by dgraham007 on May 27, 2008 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Those aren't significant differences
in any conventional sense according to my calculations (90% ci).
Even with 900 ABs on the road/home each the percentage differences are small enough that you can’t reject sampling error as the cause.
by enoscountry on May 27, 2008 9:29 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
when you say "not significant"
i assume you mean that the anomaly isn’t statistically significant — and that may well be true. you’re basically saying that random chance explains the anomaly, which makes perfect sense to me. but when i say the differences are “significant,” i’m saying that the raw difference in scoring —.32 runs per game -—is very significant in determining wins and losses. in that sense, a team that scores .3 runs per game more than another team is scoring significantly more runs.
by lboros on May 27, 2008 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I should have clarified
you are totally correct that even random differences (i.e. good luck) are important to explaining success. I didn’t mean to imply you were saying anything else.
My point was that the greater runs scored and the lower OBP/SLG numbers are counterintuitive at first glance but very probable to observe if you assume them to be two random samples from the same constant underlying “parameters.” (4.6 R/G, .278 AVG, ...)
by enoscountry on May 27, 2008 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Still not sure everyone's on the same page
Randomly caused or not, those differences in hitting should lead to more runs at home and fewer on the road.
With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch
by joker24 on May 27, 2008 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Holy crap!
I took the weekend off from the internet, and today I got to work, cleaned up my desk, and went to check up on the weekend threads from the ‘ole VEB. WOW is all I have to say there. I found the thread regarding the proper use of the phrase “couldn’t care less”, and I was horrified, riveted, and shamefully entertained. It was a bit like driving by a car accident where you can see all the people standing by their cars pleading their case to the police officer. Only in this case it involved 4 or 5 people flexing their grammitical “muscle”. As a person that is pretty relaxed in my interpretation of grammar (isn’t the point of communication simply to get your point across?), I found myself absolutely riveted by the conversation. The Coup de Grace, however was the comment “This is the stupidest thread in the history of this blog.” had me laughing out loud. The word “stupidest” doesn’t even exist!
Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.
by Eckstreem on May 27, 2008 9:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
irregardless, I could care less
n/m
"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 27, 2008 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Grammar nazis on a blogsite
remind me of grade school snitches. Hell, it’s a baseball blog, who cares about such things except for english professors on the board. Anyone ever met an english professor that could explain the infield fly rule in 40 words or less?
Steriods is...is bad.
by Handsome Jimmy on May 27, 2008 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
And that’s “forty words or fewer.”
by random on May 27, 2008 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My mother was an english teacher
I’m getting painful childhood flashbacks with these discussions. I don’t think I could go a week without this one happening.
“Mom, me and Jon are going out back”
“No, that should be Jon and I are going out back”
I’m sure anyone who had read my posts can tell, as good of a teacher as she was, very little of her correcting stuck. Hell, I had to have my screen name changed because I forgot the apostrophe when I first signed up to this site.
"Do what you want to the women and children but leave me alone"- George Carlin
by That's a Winner on May 27, 2008 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hole point is mute anywho.
::whistle::
by Evilfrog on May 27, 2008 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mr. Evilfrog, yer baaaad.......
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on May 27, 2008 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
By the way...
...I am an English professor. My opinion: I’d rather have the infield fly rule decribed in 40 words or more than have Tim McCarver read it from the official rule book several times during a broadcast. Relax about the grammar critiques. We criticize because we care. And yes, Jimmy, steroids are bad.
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
by palampe on May 27, 2008 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm soooo glad
someone got that.
"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 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
in retrospect
i should have said, “most stupidest”
"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 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I also found the couldn't care less conversation
strangely compelling. especially since it was on a baseball blog. and it sort of ended in a stalemate. it also strangely parallels an infatuation with statistics imho
Ankiel is Jesus!
by Cards Fan in Chitown on May 27, 2008 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Memphis in first place!!!
I truly do not remember the last time the Cards’ Triple A affiliate did well in a season…even with the usual collection of AAAA castoffs with a handful of prospects, they usually sucked. This feels like a different kind of team, though.
by tbell61 on May 27, 2008 10:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Doesn't this bring up a really nice problem?
What do we do with Mather and Anderson?
Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.
by Eckstreem on May 27, 2008 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope they don't do anything with either one of them just yet.
Mr. Anderson is progressing nicely; Mather is either a late bloomer or a flash in the pan. Let them both continue to play regularly, and let’s see what we have here.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on May 27, 2008 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.....
Anderson is hitting well, but is still young, and JUST got promoted to AAA. I’m sure there is plenty for him to work on there. As for Mather, I suspect he’s a career ML backup at best. Why rush him? Be nice if we had a spot for him, but right now, we don’t. It isn’t “hurting” him to stay in AAA for now.
by SoonerfanTU on May 27, 2008 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know why everyone is sweating Mather at this point... Let him play every day at AAA
by ICbirdfan on May 27, 2008 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because he is putting up
Pujolsian numbers.
by Hardcore Legend on May 27, 2008 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ankiel and Ludwick need to play every day.
So you have Barton, Skippy, and Dunc fighting for LF duties. If Mather is up you just have another guy fighting it out. If you move an OF you still have 3 guys fighting for PT.
I think Barton, Dunc, and Mather are not good at getting spotty AB’s. I think Skippy seems to handle it fairly well.
by ICbirdfan on May 27, 2008 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Pujolsian" - Now THAT'S a word that belongs in the dictionary!
Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.
by Eckstreem on May 27, 2008 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't JRod do that for awhile a couple years ago?
by MdRedbirdFreak on May 27, 2008 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And he was productive at the major league level when he actually got to play...
With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch
by joker24 on May 27, 2008 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes he did
when he first arrived at Memphis, and he came up and mashed the ball when he got playing time. He was called up and posted a 114 OPS+. Something like that would be 4th on this team and an improvement over Skippy, Duncan and Barton.
by Hardcore Legend on May 27, 2008 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree
I would hate to see Mather or Anderson brought up and miss regiluar ABs at this point. With how good our outfield has been I dont see Mather helping to much as a platoon player. (His power off the bench would help. But I think getting him regiluar ABs out weigh that right now.) And pretty much the same with Anderson. Let them wait until the call ups.
by Evilfrog on May 27, 2008 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ultimately...
what do we do with Anderson? Even next year I don’t think it’s a good idea for him to play only a couple of times a week. There is not really a place for him AND Yadi on this team. I guess as of right now he’s only continuing to raise his trade value…but, we have to move him by the end of next season IMHO.
by cardzfanbub on May 27, 2008 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bargaining chip
Anderson is really only a bargaining chip. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was gone by the deadline, but I do think he may not be gone until the offseason.
by saladdays on May 27, 2008 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Our minor league system is thin on catching prospects.
I know Molina is signed long term and is young himself, but catchers take a beating and Yadi has seen significant DL time in his career with a broken bone and a broken knee. Who is going to catch if he goes down? I don’t agree that Anderson should just be a bargaining chip. We might need him for our team….
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on May 27, 2008 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
See how he does next year
if he’s still hitting in July the way he is right now (and the Memphis coaching staff seems happy with his defense at catcher), then call him up and let him understudy Yadi for the rest of the season, the way that Yadi understudied Matheny. Then you decide which one of the two to trade in the 2009 offseason.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on May 27, 2008 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought he was still considered a defensive liability
To the point where he isn’t really under consideration for the big club. At least not yet.
Still, I would love to see him instead of can’t-hit-his-weight LaRue.
by Red in Chicago on May 27, 2008 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Which is why I thought of him as a bargaining chip. If I’m wrong, then I can see how we could keep him like some on here have suggested.
by saladdays on May 27, 2008 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i dont know whats the real deal about his defense
but in spring there was a story about how Matheny took interest in him and was working with him and how well he was doing and how much he had improved…ect.
could just be a typical spring story though
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 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose I mostly agree with this assessment...
but what about bringing him up as an understudy late this season…end of July or so. He is certainly an offensive upgrade over Larue, and perhaps Yadi. It just doesn’t make sense to me for the kid to spend much time as a back-up catcher…or much more than the rest of this season at AAA (provided he keeps hitting there).
Also I don’t really agree with the DL issue…broken bones are not chronic injuries and in no way predict future time on the DL. I realize catchers take a beating and all, but I don’t think we can hold the kid back too long based on the potential for injury to Yadi.
by cardzfanbub on May 27, 2008 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
why not let
him and Molina share time for a year and see what happens after that.
in theory you would either have a stud defensive catcher with a rocket arm and pretty good hitting
or a great hitting catcher with pretty good D ;-)
why not a 60-40 split or so for a year or some time just to see who is better or if Anderson can do it at the big league level.
Personally I would love to see the guy on the team, afterall he would be faster, and hit better than molina. It would all depend on how he handles the pitchers and D.
He is younger and should be cheaper longer.
Of course we will probably end up trading him wo him getting a real chance because Molina is our guy. (which isnt the worst thing in the world)
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 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
TLR platoons everybody else. Why not see what a Yadi/Anderson duo could do??
by gocards62 on May 27, 2008 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lefty/righty
Anderson is a lefty.
Molina is a righty.
Brilliant!
Brilliant!
/guiness
by Glowsticks on May 27, 2008 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent idea
So why won’t TLR go for it?
Pros:
1. Understudy potential to improve defense.
2. Great offensive contribution versus LaRue.
3. Left-handed bat for a catcher (pretty unusual, no?)
4. Young, cost-controlled.
Cons:
1. May give up a few stolen bases.
2. May pass a few balls.
3. Anderson won’t get daily work.
I think the last one is the real reason. Anderson won’t get enough chances to play in order to be a true understudy, perhaps. But wasn’t Molina in exactly the same boat?
by Red in Chicago on May 27, 2008 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But platoon extends both careers
cuts down on wear/tear. Yadi can still get majority of games if you’re worried about defense.
by gocards62 on May 27, 2008 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One problem I can think of right off
The pitching staff would potentially have a hard time getting any (caution: Joe Morgan word ahead) consistency with their catchers. I know that with some pitchers it’s not an issue, but with some it’s a big issue. I feel like last year and the year before we had some pitchers that fared much better with Bennett behind the plate (of course, in a small sample), so it would be hard to establish any sort of steadiness.
Wow that really was a Joe-esque answer
Cardinal fan in the heart of Braves country
Track 'em Tigers - An SB Nation Blog for Auburn Tigers fans
by Mr Redbird on May 27, 2008 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
fremp
just love that, fremp
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 8:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
High OBP leads to high batting average on ground balls?
I posted this the previous time you made this comment about the high average on ground balls. It makes sense to me that a high OBP will lead to a high average on ground balls due to the increase in the number of times the infield will be playing at double play depth. With the infield pulled in, more balls make it through the holes. What is difficult to understand is how much the affect is because these two statistics would seem to feed off each other. High OBP leads to higher average on ground balls, but high average on ground balls also leads to higher OBP (obviously). So, in some sense, I think walks have an added benefit of leading to more hits on later ground balls (further raising OBP).
As some anecdotal evidence, if I recall correctly, the Cardinals and Cubs are 1st and 2nd in OBP and also 1st and 2nd in batting average on ground balls. What does the rest of the league look like in these two categories and are there any other numbers that would seem to prove/disprove this association between OBP and batting average on ground balls?
by rthorat on May 27, 2008 12:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It may lead to more hits...
but the double-play depth should also lead to more outs… otherwise why would anyone really play for the double-play
by duncans_army on May 27, 2008 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but...
It will lead to more outs, but the extra out from the double play does not show up in OBP or batting average. It’s clearly beneficial to go for the double play, but doing so will also increase the offense’s chances of getting another hit. The calculus is that you gain back more than you lose. But statistically, the part the defense gains back does not show up in OBP or BA – it is a “free” out.
by rthorat on May 27, 2008 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
off topic i know
but what would you think of trading with Detroit for Renteria. Then Trade or designate Kennedy and move Edgar over to 2nd. I know it’s unorthodox to do so (with a player of Edgar’s status and tenure), but it’s a move I feel Edgar could make. The question is whether or not he would be willing to make it. It would be adding some power and pop to our infield and I don’t imagine it hurting the defense, as well the fact that it would make it harder for TLR to constantly throw miles out there with izturis. Plus in a pinch I think Edgar could play some games at third if needed. Now the question is what would Detroit be looking for in return?
by streamman on May 27, 2008 12:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well......
1) why move him, and I doubt he’d move
2) who are you going to send to Detroit? Someone who can add to their hitting problems?
by sdrone on May 27, 2008 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really doubt he would move as well, and alluded to just as much. I think with the defensive production we have been getting a short makes it hard to just slump iz2 out. I know Edgar is more than a capable defensive short stop. But we need a MI infield bat. I really could care less about moving him just thinking that 2nd is where our biggest hole is currently.
start discussions with them at reyes and/or thompson, and duncan… negotiations could include the possibility of jon jay, cody hearther, nick stavinoha. we have depth in the outfield and need to try to redirect that depth to a hole. you could also try negotiating for Polanco as instead if you are looking for more of a true 2nd baseman. It just seems that Renteria is more the obvious trade target there as it stands. And no I’m not really trying to bring back old cardinals, they just bot seem like viable options.
by streamman on May 27, 2008 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've wanted Polanco...
back since he left. For some reason the guy is a personal favorite of mine…
by cardzfanbub on May 27, 2008 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with that sentiment
and I really do think that he is the better fit for what we need of the two. The problem though is that I don’t see where Detroit has any real incentive to trade Polanco. If I remember correctly He has at least another year left on his deal if not more and has been really had some of his best years playing for Detroit, other than possibly trying to maximize trade value. Where as Renteria seems like he would be the piece to move for them, as his contract expires at year’s end. However, I do think I remember hearing The tigers mentioned in having watched Reyes, and perhaps they would be willing to take a flier on Duncan, as well. They’ve obviously seen in person about the maximum of Anthony’s cieling. lol
by streamman on May 27, 2008 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Tigers actually drafted Reyes in 2002. He opted to go back to school.
It’s quite possible they have maintained interest in him. I have not read or heard any rumors about Detroit scouting him, but it seems plausible.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on May 27, 2008 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Polanco...
looks like he has whatever is left of a $4.6mil deal for this year and next year at $4.6mil as well. It seems to me that Detroit could use a little help at the DH spot where Sheffield has lost his powerstroke. (.213/.344/.331). I would wet myself for sure if we could manage to swap Duncan or ARey for Polanco.
by cardzfanbub on May 27, 2008 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I actually think Detroit likes Polanco too. They will probably keep him, at least
for this year.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on May 27, 2008 6:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They are in win now mode
if they can upgrade their current roster, perhaps by replacing Sheffield, they will. But I doubt they are going to give up their MLBers. And I think they would want pitching that can help their rotation NOW, more than they would want anything else.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on May 27, 2008 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
Polanco has always been a favorite of mine too. he just always exceeds expectations (except maybe so far this year)
Ankiel is Jesus!
by Cards Fan in Chitown on May 27, 2008 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
why not just
let renteria play ss and sign Hudson?
Or just sign Furcal and stick with a schlub at 2b
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 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Renteria....ummmm..no
Polanco…interesting
by ridgesee on May 27, 2008 1:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It bothers me that
the Cards front office appear to have a “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mentality. I’m not saying it’s broken, but feel that there are some chinks that need addressing.
Outfielders: One lefthanded bat too many. Duncan needs to start producing or get moved.
Middle Infielders: Where is the power? Extra base hits are too rare.
Bench: alas, no power there too.
I just don’t want “status quo” to rule. Have to keep Barton, so Duncan, Ankiel, Kennedy are my choices to get moved. I would add Miles to that list, but coach/players don’t get DFA….. they just become blogging fodder.
by OKCARDSFAN_411 on May 27, 2008 2:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
and since Duncan is outproducing Skip
I guess that means we are TWO left-handed outfield bats too many, eh?
Agree that Kennedy needs to go away. Brendan Ryan should play every day at second.
"the hardest decision to make is to do nothing; there is a terrible temptation to interfere." -gen patton
by SleepyCA on May 27, 2008 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where is Duncan outproducing Skip?
I see Skip as a decent leadoff hitter and clutch hitter as well.
by OKCARDSFAN_411 on May 27, 2008 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Duncan has a higher OBP than Skip and better OPS as well
about to leave for lunch, cant look up the exact numbers,
by FunkeeC on May 27, 2008 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Duncan is better than Skip on pure upside...........Skip is redundant as stated before
Skip
.363 OBP/ .392 SLG/ .755 OPS/ 2 HR/ 15 RBI
Duncan (Slumping)
.366 OBP/ .400 SLG/ .766 OPS/ 4 HR/ 14 RBI
I am not saying I love Duncan, I wish he could be traded for a middle infielder with upside if the Cards chose to trade him.
I am not going to say that Skip is better then Duncan though.
by ICbirdfan on May 27, 2008 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So Dunc is slightly better at the plate
but I think anyone would agree that Skip is better in the field. I think they are a wash, except that Duncan has the potential for more power.
by Ray Lankford on May 27, 2008 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, they wouldn't...
I actually don’t think Skip is that great in the field, he misses a lot of balls and it gets blamed on bad positioning.
Start Ludwick
by DiscoJer on May 27, 2008 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Skip is much better than Duncan in the field
Duncan’s got to outhit Skip by more than 11 pts. in OPS to overcome the defensive differences. Skip may not be great but Duncan’s downright awful.
by chuckb on May 27, 2008 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What is going on with Ankiel's contract?
I know he’s a Boras client and think he is eligible for free agency at the end of this season. If he continues to produce, he is likely to go elsewhere and follow the money, much like every other Boras client. I would like to keep Ankiel in a Cardinal uniform, but if this season is his last at Busch, the outfield situation (too crowded) may be on its way to fixing itself at the end of 2008.
That said, I think Duncan should be traded anywhere at this point for parts. His defensive skills in the outfield give me the willies.
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
by palampe on May 27, 2008 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mo was asked this question in a recent chat at the P-D.
He’s eligible for arbitration this year, and won’t be a free agent until the end of next season.
"the hardest decision to make is to do nothing; there is a terrible temptation to interfere." -gen patton
by SleepyCA on May 27, 2008 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know if he'll actually go elsewhere
Pressure wise he is generally accepted with little critique here. It’s becoming more and more clear (even last year showed it) that when he’s a focus of something in a negative light, he tends to down spiral. I forsee the Cards rewarding him with a decent contract and Ank taking it.
At the end of the day, there is the money issue I’ll agree to. However, there’s also an emotional one.
Which weighs more? We’ll see.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on May 27, 2008 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If we are going to bring anyone back
Bring Grudz back. He is a Gold Glover that can still hit. That is a deal I could actually see happening since the Royals have a 2B in AAA tearing the cover off the ball.
by FlimtotheFlam on May 27, 2008 2:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Bring Grudz back.
he’s 38 years old and has a .332 career obp with little power.
by astrostl on May 27, 2008 2:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I still think Walt didn't re-sign Grudz
because of his awful post season in 2005. He was really struggling in that Houston series and I think that clinched him not getting re-signed. But I do think he SHOULD have been re-signed then, but that was for the 2006-2007 seasons..not for this season though.
by KYCards on May 27, 2008 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually I think he's 39, going on 40
He did show some flashes of power that summer in St. Louis, but he is probably done. Also, he was treated pretty shabbily by management at the end of the season, with all that “hard cap” of $1 million B.S.
by Red in Chicago on May 27, 2008 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Keppinger?
How much would it cost to get him? Is he blocking anyone in the Reds organization?
by duncans_army on May 27, 2008 4:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
darn it
I knew he was on the DL, but I didn’t realize he was out for at least 60 days. What a shame.
Still, he’s only 28 (not 29) and should be cost controlled for the next 3-4 years…
"the hardest decision to make is to do nothing; there is a terrible temptation to interfere." -gen patton
by SleepyCA on May 27, 2008 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
While he is better than Izturis
is he really where the Cardinals should go for SS help?
by Hardcore Legend on May 27, 2008 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which leads us full-circle.
As much as we complain about Is2 at ss, could we really have done any better in the market last off-season?
Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.
by Eckstreem on May 27, 2008 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There really are not that many great hitting SS power rise any more.....
Tulow
Hanley Ramirez
Peralta
Who else? This is just off the top of my head….. All three are young
by ICbirdfan on May 27, 2008 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, A-Rod, obviously
Though I guess he technically still is a 3B
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on May 27, 2008 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um, lets not forget Miguel Tejada. The one that everyone said
couldn’t play shortstop. He sure looks fine to me out there…...of course, Houston will not be letting him go anytime soon.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on May 27, 2008 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i dunno
hram
tulo
furcal
tejada
rollins
peralta
reyes
young
renteria
ocab
are all pretty good hitters
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 8:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh, powerwise
still any of those guys would be clear upgrades
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 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, not now.
He’d be too expensive to acquire; the time to pick him up was 2007, or spring ‘08 before Gonzalez got hurt. OTOH, if he were cut loose due to injury or was available on the minor league free agent market in the off season? Absolutely.
After all, the guy has a career .313/.368/.441 (107 OPS+), is cost-controlled, and was acquired for next to nothing. Questionable defense, of course.
"the hardest decision to make is to do nothing; there is a terrible temptation to interfere." -gen patton
by SleepyCA on May 27, 2008 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
tejada
perhaps
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 4:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Oops....I didn't see that you had already posted about Mr. Tejada.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on May 27, 2008 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
eh, its no big deal
I didnt see i had already posted about Tejada either ;-)
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 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Houston series blacked out
According to the list that was posted here a while back, the next three games are blacked out for many of us with out-of-town FSN-Midwest. That list has been accurate so far, although I imagine I will turn on the TV and check. Just in case. At least I have been warned. Last year I drove the local cable company nuts trying to figure out why certain games weren’t on.
by Youneverknow on May 27, 2008 4:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
lineup per bernie; no ludwick
Schumaker 9
Duncan 7
Pujols
Ankiel 8
Glaus
Kennedy
Molina
Looper
Izturis
-B
by DCGreg on May 27, 2008 6:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
*screams*
Really, really wish we would trade Skippy away to keep him out of Tony’s clutches. (See also: Miles)
by DriverZn on May 27, 2008 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Miles I could live with
A lineup of:
miles
ducan
pujols
luddy
ankiel
glaus
yadi
looper
izturis
Is probably a 50 run improvement over the year. Actually, using a .900 OPS for luddy, david pinto’s lineup generator actually says playing skip and AK over miles and luddy (given year-to-date performances except for adjusting luddy down to earth) could cost as much as 106 runs over the season.
Holy cow. That’s what, 11.8 games? Of course Miles isn’t quite as good as he’s looked, but AK and Skip might actually be worse…
the above lineup and today’s lineup.
"the hardest decision to make is to do nothing; there is a terrible temptation to interfere." -gen patton
by SleepyCA on May 27, 2008 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That doesn't factor in the massive difference between Duncan and Skip defensively
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on May 27, 2008 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
even adam dunn is only worth -20 runs
and duncan is much, much better than dunn, probably a net positive this year even if he isn’t as good as the metrics say. And I’m not at all convinced Skip is a plus defender; people just seem to “not notice” when he doesn’t catch a ball that he should have caught (as he did twice in the dodgers series).
Remember, the only reason we were even playing in extra innings on sunday was because skip didn’t catch a catchable fly ball, letting a run score.
"the hardest decision to make is to do nothing; there is a terrible temptation to interfere." -gen patton
by SleepyCA on May 27, 2008 6:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree
skip looks like he has taken a step back this year in the field.
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 8:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Adam Kennedy
back in the lineup where he belongs, keeping the basepaths clear.
by Hardcore Legend on May 27, 2008 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
can we refer to him as
GIDP from now on?? it almost sounds like kennedy.
It could be worse, you could be on fire.
by themanthemyth on May 27, 2008 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's a positive spin to put on it
The more AK plays —> the more 0fers he has --> the sooner he gets DFAd
Proud President of the Unofficial Skip Schumaker Fan Club!
I don't care about your fantasy team.
by stltrav09 on May 27, 2008 6:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Can anyone
give me a good reason why ludwick is not in the lineup. What does this guy have to do to earn a full time spot
Losing is a disease
by ANDYAK47 on May 27, 2008 6:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
tony being tony
thats all there is to it.
How depressing is it being you? Is it closer to being a lifelong cubs fan or being born without lips? - Janitor
by themanthemyth on May 27, 2008 6:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do not understand that at all. He struck out 4 times on Sunday, maybe that's why.
Except the whole team struck out a lot on Sunday. When Mr. Saito got Albert on called 3rd strike I cringed for a moment. It was the only time I could remember Albert looking awestruck by a pitch.
Good pitching from a 38 year old man…...
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on May 27, 2008 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ludwick will do that
he has at least two games this year where he has kd three times and hit a bomb in the same game
Losing is a disease
by ANDYAK47 on May 27, 2008 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
strike zone
wasn’t exactly constant late in the game, though.
How depressing is it being you? Is it closer to being a lifelong cubs fan or being born without lips? - Janitor
by themanthemyth on May 27, 2008 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cant take these shananagans much longer
Losing is a disease
by ANDYAK47 on May 27, 2008 6:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hey what's that place you like with all the goofy shit on the wall?
With no evidence to the contrary, Colby Rasmus is clutch
by joker24 on May 27, 2008 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs



















