bearing the cost
i’m getting really tired of writing about injuries.
under other circumstances i might get out the ol' calculator and try to estimate, down to the run, the cost of albert’s absence; that’s the exercise i ran through back in 2006 when he hit the dl. but i’m not gonna bother this time. as i learned in 2006, such estimates mean nothing when applied to a short sample of games. during albert’s 15-game absence that season, the cardinal offense inexplicably caught fire --- a team batting line of .304 / .354 / .467 and a scoring average of 5.7 runs a game, all figures well above their season averages. no reason for it, really; just good timing on the part of the other hitters. i wouldn’t bet on that happening again during 2008 --- even having watched them plate 10 last night --- but if it does, it wouldn’t be the strangest thing in the world. so far, june has been the cards’ best-hitting month of 2008 (7.1 runs a game through 10 games), and not because of albert --- he has only started 6 of the team’s 10 games this month, posting a .167 / .355 / 458 line. we have to expect pujols’ absence to catch up to them at some point --- if they don’t miss him, then why the hell are they paying him $16m a year? --- but the cost may only be a win or 2 over the term of his disablement. if that’s the cost, they can bear it.
i’m not particularly concerned about the offense anyway. to me, it’s still about run prevention. the cardinals are winning this year for 3 reasons: they play superior defense; they don’t issue walks; and they don't give up home runs. st louis ranks among the league’s top 3 teams in all those categories; they don't do anything else particularly well except hit singles and draw walks. but if they can continue to play D, throw strikes, and keep the ball in the yard while pujols is gone, they’ll probably hang in there in the standings. again, albert’s 2006 disablement is instructive: even though the cardinals kept scoring runs, they started losing games because his absence coincided with a collapse of the pitching staff, which in turn was occasioned by mark mulder’s injury. st louis posted a 5.09 era for the first 13 games of albert’s dl stint, and then yielded 33 runs during the last 2 games to push their non-albert era to 6.73; if anything remotely similar happens this year, the cards will likely fall out of contention. and we can’t rule out that possibility --- not with wainwright disabled. also, let’s not forget that pujols is a big part of the st louis defense; he’s one of the game’s most impactful glovemen at any position. they might miss his defense nearly as much as they miss his bat.
but the formula i offered on tuesday vis-vis wainwright’s absence --- try to stay within striking distance, then close strong when the team gets healthy --- still applies. i fully expect the cardinals to sink in the standings (duh) while their best starting pitcher and best hitter are on the shelf, but as long as the pitching doesn’t implode they probably won’t fall way off the pace. if albert misses 30 games and the team wins 13 of them, they’ll have plenty of time to turn things back around once he returns --- and 13 wins should be easy if they pitch and play defense. but if the pitching falters and they only win 9 or 10 out of the 30, it might be a different story.
the 1987 team offers another precedent that’s worth looking at. those cardinals lost jack clark to an oblique strain at the most critical point in the season --- september 10, with st louis clinging to a 1.5-game lead over the mets. clark was every bit the offensive centerpiece that albert pujols is --- he was the only cardinal with more than 12 homers that year, the only one with a slugging average higher than .434, and one of only 3 with an ops+ higher than 100. ozzie and pendleton had 105 and 103 ops+s, respectively; everybody else was below average with the bat. clark was truly the only dangerous hitter in that lineup; there was no ludwick, glaus, ankiel or duncan on hand to pick up the slack. after he went out the offense crumbled: st louis hit .217 / .281 / .307 over the last 24 games of the year and scored just 87 runs, or 3.6 per game (vs an average of 5.2 per game and a .271 / .349 / .390 line before clark got hurt). but the cardinals went 14-10 down the stretch and won the division anyway because they pitched. the staff era was 3.11 over the last 24 games (vs 4.06 in the first 138 games), and that includes two lickings on the last two days of the season, after the title was already clinched; remove those games (which were largely pitched by scrubs) and the staff had a 2.61 era over 22 games after clark left the lineup. st louis went 14-8 in those games even though they couldn’t score. they won 3 games by a 3-2 score, another by 3-1; they also swept a doubleheader against the expos despite scoring only 4 runs in the two games combined, winning 3-0 and 1-0. as always, it’s about the pitching.
from that standpoint, looper’s performance last night was extremely heartening. prior to that he had only thrown one quality start since april, and only 4 on the season. he is capable of running off a string of effective starts, and now would be the perfect time for him to exhibit that ability. the cards are also preparing to welcome isringhausen back to the staff, though (thankfully) not as the closer. i’m skeptical that he can contribute, but i’m rooting for the guy to prove me wrong. if he can start getting guys out, it’ll ease the load on the starting pitchers; not many teams can throw somebody like izzy or mcclellan or perez out there in the 6th inning.
nice to hear, by the way, that matt morris showed up at izzy’s first rehab start down in florida; way to go, matty mo.
mike parisi threw a complete-game 4-hitter in his first game back down at memphis, throwing 73 strikes in 103 pitches; maybe we haven’t seen the last of that guy. and jess todd followed isringhausen to the mound at springfield and dominated, throwing the last 7.1 innings of the game and allowing just 1 run (unearned) while getting 14 groundouts. he has been a professional player for less than a year but already is banging on the door of the big leagues, thanks in large part (as derrick goold writes at Bird Land) to the emergence of his cut fastball. in 70 innings this year he has allowed just 1 homer and is holding opposing batters to a .178 average. the guy just turned 22 years old, but the organization apparently is watching. . . . .
0 recs |
195
comments
Read Related
Comments
The standings sure are encouraging
I’m not sure I see the Cubs offense letting up, but if we can bide our time and get healthy the wild card is certainly within reach.
by sdrone on Jun 12, 2008 9:01 AM EDT 0 recs
Soriano is out
with a broken bone in his hand. Hate to see anybody get hurt but this can’t do anything but hurt thier offense.
by DJ4508 on
Jun 12, 2008 9:50 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Was just about to say the same thing
I hate to see any player on any team get hurt, but I won’t lie that seeing the Cubs best hitter go down at the same time (and perhaps longer than) as Pujols makes it a little easier to swallow. We just need to stay within 5 games or so til the All Star break….
by joecardsfan on
Jun 12, 2008 9:53 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Cubs have less holes in the lineup
D-Lee has, surprisingly, slumped during the Cubs’ amazing run over the last 20 games or so…
by silent_bob on
Jun 12, 2008 10:10 AM EDT
up
0 recs
The cubs' achilles heel is pitching as much as ours is, if not moreso
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on
Jun 12, 2008 11:29 AM EDT
up
0 recs
But at least...
they’ve got Zambrano healthy. If they lose him, they’ll be where we are.
by guayzimi on
Jun 12, 2008 11:38 AM EDT
up
0 recs
their pitching staff looks awfully good to me
first in the league in ERA, second in strikeouts, 2nd in hits per inning . . . . . i don’t see it as a weakness.
check out their team stats - http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/2008.shtml
by lboros on
Jun 12, 2008 11:42 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Only weakness
Is a goat or something. Im just so happy this is a rebuilding year for us.
by Evilfrog on
Jun 12, 2008 11:44 AM EDT
up
0 recs
If this is rebuilding I can't wait to see what happens next.
"Why does he keep saying that?"
by Red Blazer on
Jun 12, 2008 12:18 PM EDT
up
0 recs
It has been fantastic...
but I think people are expecting Dempster to revert, Lilly to prove that he’s lost it, Rich Hill to be a permanent bust, Wood to reinjure himself etc… Of course, one can do this with any staff.
I don’t think it much matters. The staff could melt down and they would still win >95 games on their offense alone.
by guayzimi on
Jun 12, 2008 11:52 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Kudos
Hate to see anyone go down with an injury. That was the sentiment at BCB regarding Pujols’ injury.
"What a great call! Your doing a fantastic job, but people expect me to come out here and be upset. So I'm gonna kick some dirt, you understand?" - Lou Pinella
by Lou In Blue on
Jun 12, 2008 11:21 AM EDT
up
0 recs
That's right.
It’s bad karma to do anything but feel bad for the injured guy, and the team. Because don’t we know how it feels to have a player go down…....
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on
Jun 12, 2008 2:19 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Last time Soriano was out
a month or so ago, their winning percentage improved.
by sdrone on
Jun 12, 2008 1:48 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Loosing Soriano is bad but...
I doubt it will do much to slow down the Cubs. Now if they were to loose Derek Lee and or Zambrano that would be a big blow. The thing about this Cubs team is and it’s been mentioned above is that they really have no holes right now. They have two starters (Big Z & Dempster) pitching great, they are getting huge production from their entire line-up and scoring a lot of runs at Wrigley and their bullpen has been real steady for the most part. Plus they have a lot of confidence when they play at home as their home record shows. I don’t think loosing Soriano will hurt them that much as long as Lee, Theriot, DeRosa, and and Fukudome contine to rake the ball at Wrigley. The only thing that can slow the Cubs down is if they were to go on a long road trip against some tough teams.
by KYCards on
Jun 12, 2008 2:38 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Keep your dobber up, Larry!
Times like these make being a Cardinal fan fun. Because we’ve had a lot of success we need not succumb to existential despair as though we were Cincy or Pittsburgh fans. And this is the best kind of drama because no one - no screenwriter, no producer - actually knows what the outcome of this passion play will be. I’m determined not to get too grim about a season that few of us had many expectations for in the first place. Now is the time for the unexpected—and I’m expecting it. We’ll hold our own and it should be a fun ride. And even in the worst of cases we’ll gather new information that will help us down the road.
by MdRedbirdFreak on Jun 12, 2008 9:06 AM EDT 0 recs
I can't believe I the second half of that game.
I had to leave after the 5th inning. I’d figured we’d hold on to the 6 run lead at that point. But I expected Looper to throw a complete game shutout with only 3 hits and no walks about as much as I would expect LaRue to hit a 2 run homer.
I really do love this team. Ankiel, Glaus, Ludwick just need to step up a little bit. Or just take turns stepping up a lot. Each of these players can carry a team for a week. And we’ve seen it from each of them this year.
by Evilfrog on Jun 12, 2008 9:19 AM EDT 0 recs
Can't tell if you are kidding about Ludwick stepping it up
but if he steps any higher he’s gonna hit the stratosphere! Dude’s line is .321 / .393 / .684 with 16 bombs and 52 RBIs!
Without a doubt, he’s been the most suprising addition to this year’s club. At least for me. If, at the beginning of the year, showed me that stat line and asked me “who’s line is that as of June 12?” I would have definitely said “Pujols.” It wouldn’t even be a question, really. Pujols may be the mang, but Ludwick is the man.
I totally agree about Ankiel and Glaus stepping it up. Imagine if Glaus started producing on pace with his career numbers and Ankiel raises his BA about 10 – 15 points and gets his slugging up into the low .500s. We’d have a pretty fierce lineup.
by Ray Lankford on
Jun 12, 2008 10:25 AM EDT
up
0 recs
glaus is getting awfully close
112 OPS+ in 2008 as of this moment, 120 for his career. the power’s still not quite there but recent signs have been very encouraging – the 5 HR in 8 games recently was nice.
go cards, o's, and phillies.
...boiler up.
by moboiler on
Jun 12, 2008 11:52 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Stan
Stan IS the Man.
Lud is a Stud!
C'mon you Redbirds, lets prove em' wrong, again!
by yer dog first on
Jun 12, 2008 12:06 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Looper mentioned that Dave Duncan &
Marty Mason recognizing that he was rushing his motion and pitches during his scuffling and suggested for him to slow things down a bit. Huh, maybe that was the difference.
The two also suggested to Izzy to do the oppisite of Looper and more or less quit dawlding on the mound, but rather to get into a groove and just throw the damn ball.
Sould be interesting to see, but I agree with Larry, I am not at all excited to see Izzy back with the big team. Too many recent bad memories that tends to make fuzzy the good memories.
Steriods is...is bad.
by Handsome Jimmy on Jun 12, 2008 9:52 AM EDT 0 recs
One of Izzy's strengths...
...is a bad memory! (No, I’m not kidding.) He’s been able to faggettaboud bad outings, and toe the rubber the next time with the same confidence that he’ll get those so-and-so’s out. Other closers (Lidge, et. al.) have had problems carrying one bad outing into the next.
No, I’m not suggesting Izzy be “given” the ninth inning right away; but if he’s corrected his mechanical problems, and is effective whenever he does pitch, I’ll be happy to see him back in his familiar role, closing.
"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra
by The Ol Goaler on
Jun 12, 2008 10:51 AM EDT
up
0 recs
if the cutter's working, then he should be fine
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on
Jun 12, 2008 11:31 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I agree that Izzy has always had a bad memory
but that is what scares me about Izzy this time. His statements before hitting the DL sounded like he was remembering a lot. Maybe he has put it behind him, we’ll find out soon enough. He just sounded like he was broken last time we saw him.
by MotherTruckinSteve on
Jun 12, 2008 11:34 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Izzy Was Just Fatigued
Too many close games; too many outings.
I suspect that the answer will be to use Franklin occasionally as the closer to keep Izzy rested, but that we will end up reserving Izzy for crucial games. I think he needs just a few extra days off, and he’ll be regular old, unhittable Izzy. Like he was at the beginning of the season.
My prediction: Izzy will be closing games again within two weeks.
So says, Titus Pullo (formerly The Dude)
by Titus Pullo on
Jun 12, 2008 11:04 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Closer rotation?
I totally agree on the fatigue and hope the Cardinals don’t over work him. I also wish they’d go for a closer rotation, if Izzy performs well. I don’t know how much it works beyond recollections of the 1990 Reds, and I also don’t know if this goes against Tony’s ideas at all.
Izzy and Franklin are all big boys and I would think no egos would come into play. It should help Izzy too, his age and hip condition aren’t helping his stamina any. Plus it might be a good way to work Perez/Kmac in some 8 inning high leverage situations.
by enoscountry on
Jun 12, 2008 11:08 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Yeah. He did see a lot of work early on and he did help us get a great start. Maybe less work for
him will help. They should play him like you would a starting catcher with a go to guy for back to back nights.
You could have Franky back him up but I would like to see the Birds break the seal on Perez in the 9th.
"Why does he keep saying that?"
by Red Blazer on
Jun 12, 2008 12:21 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Izzy
not many teams can throw somebody like izzy or mcclellan or perez out there in the 6th inning.
Yeah, but Ryan Franklin is still toting the rubber in the 9th inning of close games (sigh)...
by silent_bob on Jun 12, 2008 10:08 AM EDT 0 recs
gulp
"Cross a lawyer with the Godfather, make you an offer you can't understand" - Don Henley
by cardsfanindenver on
Jun 12, 2008 10:09 AM EDT
up
0 recs
So you're saying you're comfortable
with him holding a 2-run lead in the ninth?
Strong stomach you have there.
by silent_bob on
Jun 12, 2008 10:12 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I'm not anymore,
I was very comfortable with his WXRL, however, as someone pointed out his peripherals made him a ticking time bomb and we’re starting to see it.
"How depressing is it being you? Would you equate it to being a lifelong Cubs fan?"
by rocKStark5 on
Jun 12, 2008 4:40 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I can handle Franklin untill he puts a horrible string together...........
As a closer it does not matter how you get outs, it’s all about getting outs and closing the game…. I think you follow STL too closely because if you look around MLB there is not more than one closer a year who just flat out dominates….....
Hell Joe Borowski had 45 saves and 8 blown saves last year! Heck he could have easily blown about 20 saves last year…...
So as a closer it’s about results, it’s not a beauty contenst.
by ICbirdfan on
Jun 12, 2008 10:31 AM EDT
up
0 recs
That's like the CDC saying
I can handle the bird flu until it’s an epidemic.
If a player doesn’t project well in a role, why keep him there until the actual implosion. The team should be proactive in addressing those types of situations.
by azruavatar on
Jun 12, 2008 10:34 AM EDT
up
0 recs
so...
...who would you have closing right now? Perez?
by sbentley on
Jun 12, 2008 10:39 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I'm not necessarily advocating a change
I’m disagreeing with the logic that we should wait until things fall apart to address a potential problem.
by azruavatar on
Jun 12, 2008 10:50 AM EDT
up
0 recs
But, this might oddly work out just like we need it to.
We had a really good discussion this winter about how a great bullpen should be arranged. I believe that all of us generally agreed that the best reliever(s) should be used in the highest leveraged situation in the game, which is NOT necessarily the 9th inning. I.E., your closer shouldn’t always be your best reliever. That role should be for a “fireman”. Izzy, KMac, and Perez all will make GREAT firemen. Would you rather see Franklin come in with 1 out and the sacks jammed in the 7th, or would you rather see him pitch with nobody on and a 2-run lead in the 9th?
Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.
by Eckstreem on
Jun 12, 2008 11:46 AM EDT
up
0 recs
how do you know the highest leverage situation
Until the game is over, you don’t know when the highest leverage will occur. So, it’s reasonable to save your best for the last inning. Burning through your best high leverage relievers in the 7th and 8th could leave you exposed in the 9th and force you to throw someone completely unable to handle that situation
by MotherTruckinSteve on
Jun 12, 2008 12:32 PM EDT
up
0 recs
But if you don't get out of the jam in the 7th, then there is NO leverage in the 8th or 9th.
Help me with this LB. You had a lengthy post about how the greatest bullpens in recent memory had 2 good relievers, and the best one wasn’t necessarily the closer. I know the Cubs come to mind right now. Marmol is their best arm, but he is not the closer. Detroit was closing with Todd Jones, but was using Zumaya and Rodney in high-leverage situations. Both of those guys were better pitchers than Jones.
Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.
by Eckstreem on
Jun 12, 2008 1:48 PM EDT
up
0 recs
You do know when the other team's 3-4-5 are up
with runners on. That will probably be the highest leverage situation. if those guys are up in the eighth, why wait ‘till the ninth to use your best bullpen guy against the other team’s scrubs. That’s more the key to this leverage argument than anything else.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on
Jun 12, 2008 1:56 PM EDT
up
0 recs
well stated valatan
eckstreem, to answer your question - i don’t specifically recall the post you are referring to. but i agree w/ your basic point, which is that leverage, and not inning, should determine when you use your best reliever(s). the best reliever on the staff (currently perez, in my opinion) should be available for use any time from the 7th inning on when the opposing team’s best hitters are up with a chance to put their team into the lead. that’s not how tony (like most managers) decides when to use a guy; he decides based on the inning, as opposd to the degree of danger.
by lboros on
Jun 12, 2008 2:06 PM EDT
up
0 recs
couldn't agree more
he may be young, but no one else on the staff has anywhere near the stuff that Perez has. He also has the closers mentality, which seems kinda important.
I think from here on out I am going to chart which batters in the order Perez faces. It might just be fun.
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
by mattyfrommo on
Jun 12, 2008 5:22 PM EDT
up
0 recs
fair enough
but leverage could return in the 8th or 9th with help from your teams bats. I certainly think it is reasonable to throw your best reliever into a 7th inning situation where 3-4-5 are coming up. It’s reasonable to assume that will be the highest leverage situation seen in a game. I just think that the ninth is different from all other innings, at least on the road, because your offense has no chance to respond. This has to increase the pressure to get outs. As such a game should be manages such that you have a high quality reliever to take the mound in the ninth. This doesn’t have to be your absolute best arm, but I like the idea of designating a single person to that role.
by MotherTruckinSteve on
Jun 12, 2008 3:23 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I agree and disagree
Obviously I don’t like using a guy who does not fit/make sense in a certain role…....
I think Perez would be best but I guess he still needs some “seasoning”, I don’t really agree with that but I guess TLR does…....
At this point Franklin is doing good enough. If he shows signs of sucking I am confident that Perez will take over.
by ICbirdfan on
Jun 12, 2008 10:49 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Because I don't care nearly enough about projects as I do resaults.
Snice franklin has arrived in St. Louis he has been great for the team.
Last year:
He pitched 80 innings with a 1.01 WHIP with 44Ks vs 11BBs
This year:
He has pitched 29.1 innings with an alarming 1.30 WHIP with 13Ks vs 20 BB.
He hasn’t been as good as he was last year. But snice coming to St. Louis I haven’t seen anything that would make me worried everytime he took the mound.
If he can handle a 2 run lead in the 8th he can handle a 2 run lead in the 9th
by Evilfrog on
Jun 12, 2008 11:06 AM EDT
up
0 recs
That's how teams make bad deals
because they simply look at results. That’s a short-sighted and frankly limited way to look at things. I’d even go so far as to say that it’s wrong. The only real use for “results” is to use them to project the future. What Ryan Franklin did for us yesterday means nothing if we know he can’t do it tomorrow.
You can quibble about how much results matter but your flat out wrong if you don’t look at what a player should do in the future.
I’m using absolutist statements for effect not because they are reality.
by azruavatar on
Jun 12, 2008 12:29 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Agree to a point
But you have to be very careful about disregarding results and banking only on indicators.
Going back to your bird flu mention earlier – the flu had indicators that it could be a global pandemic, but no proof that it could migrate yet. Would you have been in favor of shutting down air travel into and out of Asia because there were indicators that it could spread?
I think the best use of indicators is to highlight areas where you need to pay attention – not base decisions on them. Decisions have to be made based on a mix of results and indicators.
by birdo rojo on
Jun 12, 2008 12:36 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Over the last two years I have seen nothing
To convince me that Franklin can’t do this job. Except to be concerned when he gets closer to 70 IPs. He isn’t the youngest buck on the team.
But snice stepping into our bullpen he has been fantastic. And has shown no indications that he would slop.
Come to think of it. Why doesn’t he project as a closer exactly?
by Evilfrog on
Jun 12, 2008 12:41 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Too many walks,
too many fly balls, too few strikeouts to get out of jams. This stuff isn’t rocket science…
by guayzimi on
Jun 12, 2008 12:45 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Not to doubt you but… has it ever been proven that you need those qualities to be successful as a closer or is it more of a common sense deduction?
by birdo rojo on
Jun 12, 2008 1:04 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Well...
I think it’s been proven that you need those qualities to be a good pitcher in any capacity.
There have been elite closers that walk more than they should (Francisco Rodriguez, Billy Wagner, Joe Nathan) or that have a low groundball % (Hoffman, Papelbon, Lidge pre-collapse). They make up for it by relying on an overpowering specialty pitch and racking up strike outs.
Never has there been an effective closer over the long-term with Franklin’s numbers.
by guayzimi on
Jun 12, 2008 1:30 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Your use of never is a bit generous
since the closer as we know it has only existed for a few years.
Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.
by Eckstreem on
Jun 12, 2008 1:50 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I seem to remember...
a guy named Sutter heading out for one-inning stints… I wish that were only a few years ago. Maybe Franklin can become another Todd Jones, but why settle for that when Chris Perez is on the roster?
by guayzimi on
Jun 12, 2008 2:47 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Because
I’d rather see Perez strike out the #4 man in the 8th with one out and 2 men on than see him throw against the bottom of the order in the 9th to preserve a 3-run lead.
Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.
by Eckstreem on
Jun 12, 2008 3:32 PM EDT
up
0 recs
a guy named Sutter
headed out for a whole hell of a lot than just one inning stints.
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
by mattyfrommo on
Jun 12, 2008 5:25 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I can't think of any good/great closer
that hasn’t had at least one devastating out pitch. I just don’t see Franklin having one of those. If I am wrong I will be happy to eat crow.
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
by mattyfrommo on
Jun 12, 2008 5:27 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Please let me know of a closer that would make you comfortable
- Kerry Wood – please
- Brad Lidge – we know what can happen to him if he loses confidence
- Jose Valverde – he’s blown 3 already, so that’s 1 blown for every 6 saves. Worse ratio than Franklin
- Brian Wilson – leads the NL with saves but has an ERA over 4
- Rivera – just gave up a walk off HR to the ROYALS
- Putz -just went down with elbow soreness
The only guys I may feel “comfortable” with are Francisco Rodriguez and Pappelbon. Other than that pretty much everyone else would make me just as nervous as Franklin.
I’m not saying Franklin is the second coming, but let’s give him some credit for getting the job done so far.
by birdo rojo on
Jun 12, 2008 10:44 AM EDT
up
0 recs
ALL closers fail...
...at one point or another. All ballplayers “fail” from time to time; it’s just more glaring when “the closer” fails. Wilson (18 saves, 2 blown) and Matt Capps (16 saves, 1 blown) are pitching for non-contenders San Francisco and Pittsburgh; it’s my contention that there’s less pressure on those guys.
Heck, K-Rod has a WHIP of 1.200, and Papelbon’s 2-2… nobody’s perfect!
"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra
by The Ol Goaler on
Jun 12, 2008 11:06 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I wonder if the G-men would give up Wilson, say, for a left-handed first baseman.
Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.
by Eckstreem on
Jun 12, 2008 11:47 AM EDT
up
0 recs
George Sherill
What do you all think of this guy? He has 21 saves in 23 opportunities, averages a K per inning and has been pretty solid since the beginning of May. While is walks are a bit troublesome (15 in 28.2 innings), I think once the O’s fall out of contention he could be had. I don’t know if we have anything that the O’s would be interested in (Reyes, Duncan, etc), but I think it might be worth looking into. He’s no spring chicken, but I don’t think we’d necessarily need/want him beyond this year, so that is good that he is signed for one year at under 1 mil. So depending on what the O’s would want for him, I’d look at it as giving up a player or two for a closer for the stretch run.
Yes, I know he isn’t proven (this is his first year closing), yes, I know we have other guys who could close (Perez, Izzy, Franklin, McClellan), and yes, I know it might be a bit much to give up Duncan or Reyes for a rental. However, he has been solid, he’s playing for a team who is not as good defensively as the Cardinals, and I think he’d be a LaRussa guy.
I think we should keep an eye on him and see what happens. It is at least worth feeling the O’s out come the trade deadline if they are no longer in contention and Franklin et al, falter.
by joecardsfan on
Jun 12, 2008 11:09 AM EDT
up
0 recs
The closer solution is internal
If Mo goes outside for an addition, it’s going to be a second baseman or a significant upgrade in the outfield. If Duncan can’t find a closer with what he has, then our problems are too great to contend this year.
by Red in Chicago on
Jun 12, 2008 11:18 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Not sure on Sherill
Personally – I think our bullpen situation is OK and wouldn’t be my primary area for improvement. I’d prefer to give up Reyes or Duncan for an improvement in the middle infield or a decent prospect or two that could help us in the future.
I think the group we have currently, or is available the minors is more than adequate.
by birdo rojo on
Jun 12, 2008 11:18 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Maybe
again, depending on what the O’s are looking to get back in return, we could get Sherill and Brian Roberts. I figure they would probably ask for the moon (Rasmus) with Roberts, but it could be worth looking into. It would help us in two areas of need.
by joecardsfan on
Jun 12, 2008 3:52 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I'd take Sherill
In a heartbeat over Flores and/or Villone. He would really strengthen the left side of the Cards pen.
by indakind on
Jun 12, 2008 11:42 AM EDT
up
0 recs
But that doesn't make him
a closer. It just makes him another short man who throws left.
by Red in Chicago on
Jun 12, 2008 11:55 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I don't really want him as a closer
I just want him in the bullpen. LH reliever is one of the definite weak spots on this team and Sherill would fill that hole very well. The reality is that Flores flat out stinks and Villone is okay. An upgrade in this area would really solidify the bullpen overall.
by indakind on
Jun 12, 2008 2:14 PM EDT
up
0 recs

