Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: Myers, Phillies Top Dodgers Bar-right-arrows



stay the course

remind me never to make a connection through o’hare again. stacked-up air traffic caused us to miss our flight home saturday night, resulting in an unscheduled stay at the airport hilton; got home yesterday weary, dirty, and disorganized. and it’s not as if this hasn’t happened to me before . . . . . i have nothing against the chicago baseball team(s), but the chicago airport really ticks me off. in part because of the travel troubles, the post this morning is a bit of a hash. let’s dive right in:

should the cards sell? with the cards faltering and the nonwaiver deadline just three days away, derrick goold pops the question in the p-d this morning. mo answers emphatically no, specifically w/ respect to kyle lohse --- he won’t be going anywhere. the cards’ decisionmakers think wainwright and carpenter still give them a chance to make this year’s playoffs, and they’re still within striking distance so they’re going for it. while i can see the case for selling off lohse and others to position the team for 2009 and beyond, i think there’s a defensible, rational case to try to have it both ways ---- try to compete this year and build for the future. that’s what they set out to do last off-season, and so far it seems to be working; if not for the unforeseen implosion of the bullpen, the cards would be in first place. as it is, they still have a realistic shot to get in --- not a good shot, necessarily, but probably on the order of 1 in 5. you rarely see teams in that position playing for next year, and with good reason --- every year at this time, there are about 5 big-league teams with a 1 in 5 chance to get into the playoffs, and at least one of them usually makes it. in 2007 it was the phillies, who as of this date last year were barely over .500, 4 games out in their division and 5th in the wild-card race. the rockies were substantially worse off than that; they made the playoffs, too. in 2006 it was the dodgers; in ’04 and ’05, the astros.

while the cardinals appear to be falling apart everywhere ---- not just the bullpen but also the rotation and the lineup --- the effect is exaggerated by the two late-inning collapses vs milwaukee. if they’d simply held the leads in games 2 and 4 of that series, the cards would be 12-10 this month --- hardly a team in eclipse --- and 2 games back of the cubs, a game back of the crew. they’d be 13 games over .500, close to their high-water mark for the year, with carpenter and wainwright about to come back. if those were the standings, not very many people would be asking if the cards ought to sell.

now, those aren’t the standings --- i realize that. they did blow the two games late, and the damage was done. but are those two losses sufficient to move the cards from a buy (or stand-pat) footing onto a play-for-next-year footing? i think that would be an overreaction. the cards did the same thing last year in the opposite direction: they changed from sellers to buyers after winning the last three of a four-game set vs the brewers in late july, with two of the wins coming in their last at-bat vs a terrible bullpen. those two late-game decisions altered the cards’ thinking. instead of trading veterans for prospects, as they had been thinking of doing, they decided to make a run at it ---picked up joel pineiro, miguel cairo, and russell branyan down the stretch. just as last year’s team wasn’t really as good as those two late-inning wins made it seem, this year’s team isn’t as bad as the late-inning defeats make it appear. as frustrating as this month has been, they still have the 3rd-best record in the league. they’re still viable --- not favorites, but not lost causes either. their situation doesn’t look very good at the moment, but it’s not hopeless enough to precipitate a sell-off.

i wonder how albert’s not-too-distant free agency plays into the cardinals’ thinking. he’s the consummate competitor ---- never gives up, never gives in. he’s spent the last two years playing through pain to prop up a sagging roster; he more than anyone has helped the team remain presentable. albert and his teammates have done exactly what was asked of them in 2008 --- stay close until carpenter returns, then try to make a late charge. that has been the explicit plan all along, and the players have executed it; you could argue they’ve earned the chance to see it through to the end. if the front office blows up the team instead and denies those guys the chance to finish what they started, albert won’t forget it when the time comes to start negotiating a new deal.

now let’s look at the other side of the question: should they buy? gammons hints that they’re making a serious run at brian fuentes; i’ve been down on the idea, and i would still hate it if the cards had to give up meaningful players in such a deal. but they are just about out of other options at this point; if the cards were to get him, what price could i live with?

i can imagine the rockies being interested in either / both of skip schumaker and john jay --- the gm out here loves speedy, slappy guys in the leadoff hole, and willy taveras just ain’t the answer. they’d also want at least one pitcher back --- as long as it’s not jaime garcia, i can probably wrap myself around the idea. chris perez might have to be part of the package; one wonders if luis perdomo, the flame-throwing righty the cards got back for a reyes, was acquired with an eye toward freeing up perez. (perdomo debuted w/ springfield last night, threw a scoreless inning.) so let’s say the cards have to give up jay, perez, and clay mortensen for two months of fuentes --- two #1 draft picks and a #2. i don’t know that the rox can do a whole lot better than that. if they’d give you fuentes for that package, would you take it?

as much as i hate the idea of that type of deal, i wouldn’t dismiss it out of hand. it’d give the cards a pretty good chance, and they could probably afford that price. they’d go down the stretch with a rotation of wainwright, carp, lohse, wellemeyer, and looper / pineiro; assuming fuentes restores order to the late innings, that team would have a chance to make a run. and nobody would take them for granted in the playoffs. such a trade would do damage to the farm system, but it certainly wouldn’t cripple it --- the cards’ outfield picture already is too crowded for jay, and even if they lose mortensen they still have several viable rhsp prospects in the high minors (todd, ottavino, boggs, herron, parisi) to go along with jaime garcia. plus, they still have kyle mcclellan as a rotation candidate. for that matter, mcclellan might be a candidate to close next year.

and so you ask: well hell, why not just make mcclellan the closer this year, and save all the prospects for some other trade? maybe that’s the way to go. mcclellan has hardly been perfect --- he’s been right in the middle of some of the bullpen’s worst choke jobs --- but he has been the most consistent of the cards’ relief pitchers. he pitches well out of the stretch (.599 opponent ops with runners on base, and .536 with risp), and he bounces back well on short rest. of the internal options, he appears to be the best at this point --- a far better one than wainwright, who (as houstoncardinal argued yesterday) is needed in the rotation and would be underutilized in a relief role. mcclellan would be a big gamble --- he might fail, and the cardinals might miss the playoffs for lack of a competent closer. but he’s the best fit for the cards’ self-defined model of internal development. the guy has had a successful, if short, apprenticeship; there’s a need, and he’s a candidate to fill it. the cards have had pretty good success this year giving opportunities to homegrown players, rather than dealing for or re-signing veterans; seems like they ought to just stay the course.

Poll
Buy? Sell?
  • Buy
  • Sell
  • Stand pat

  1252 votes | Results

0 recs | Comment 368 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

From the STL P-D

Lohse:

“I’m not going to even say I threw good pitches, because I didn’t make too many good pitches,” he said. “And they made me pay for it.”
“It was one of those days where you have a hard time getting in a groove, and you’re going to have them like this, where you have to battle through,” Lohse said. “I wasn’t able to get through.”

I have a great deal of respect for players that are able to simply own up to their mistakes. Able to avoid the cliche (and usually false) answers of making good pitches (except for 1 or 2) or whatever BS deflects from what is a poor performance. Lohse didn’t have it yesterday—that’s going to happen on occasion. props to him for being straight about it.

re: Fuentes
Trading for a reliever just doesn’t make sense to me when the Cardinals are going to have so many needs in the near future. Especially swapping Fuentes for a package that includes Perez. You get a closer for the next two months but trade a pitcher that could have been your closer for the next 6 years—color me confused at that type of a move.

Personally, I’ve become more amicable to a trade for Holliday because I think the Cardinals offense is still a little lacking. Ideally, an upgrade would be somewhere in the middle infield (Orlando Hudson would be a great acquisition for this team during the offseason) but that’s much harder to come by than an upgrade over Schumaker in LF. That said, I worry about what an outfield acquisition would mean for Colby Rasmus. If he was disappointed at not making the team this year imagine his discomfort with the organization if he doesn’t make it next year. The Cardinals have a surplus of these marginal outfielders (Skip, Mather, Barton, Stavinoha, Duncan) that still hasn’t been addressed in any reasonable way.

FWIW, I think the Cardinals are doing a much better job of developing pitchers in the minor league system than they are hitters. They have a lot of RH options for both the bullpen and the middle/back of the rotation. Moving some of those types of prospects would concern me a lot less than moving position prospects (of whom the Cardinals don’t have a great deal, imo).

by azruavatar on Jul 28, 2008 8:56 AM EDT   0 recs

Holliday

I still don’t think that he’s going anywhere, even with all the reports that he’s being shopped. The Rockies are only 6 games out in a division that they nearly won last year in the month of September, and they haven’t been healthy all season. Nobody seems to want to take charge of that division and there really isn’t a team there that you could say is way ahead of the Rockies in terms of talent. The D-Backs have better pitching overall, but they can’t score runs to save their lives, so unless they go on a tear like they had at the beginning of the season, I can’t see them running away with it. The Dodgers have the same problem.

FWIW, getting Holliday in a year where the Rockies were cellar-dwellers would be one thing, but prying him away from a team that could compete next season with him and is currently not sitting very many games back in the division would be much tougher and would come with a higher pricetag.

Fuentes is expendable for them because they have a number of good, young bullpen arms and a guy like Corpas, who closed down the stretch for them last year. He also isn’t under contract next year, so unless they’re planning on re-signing him, he isn’t a factor in that respect. Better yet, they could deal him to a team for prospects and then bring him back as a free-agent and get the best of both worlds.

"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jul 28, 2008 9:38 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

That's just Manny being... a Cardinal?

Long shot, to be sure. But IF the Red Sox were going to trade him soon, he would be the bat TLR wants. He could be a rental player, and then the Cardinals would get draft picks for him. The cost may be high in terms of prospects, but Manny hitting behind Albert… Hmm.

OK, time for my morning medication so I can cease these hallucinations.

Honi soit qui mal y pense.

by palampe on Jul 28, 2008 10:47 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Interesting

If it was a straight “Make Manny happy/salary dump” for this season I think it’d be a good deal. The Red Sox reportedly want a player to fill his shoes in LF that’s a similar type bat, though, which rules out a trade to St. Louis, since, outsided of Albert, we don’t have a player like that to trade.

Also, I doubt he’s going to be a rental - if he’s traded I’d be shocked if he didn’t ask a team to pick up at least one and possibly both option years remaining on his contract - at $20M per season. Ouch. Gammons reported last night that he might want to be a free-agent at the end of the year and go looking for a 4 year $100 million dollar deal somewhere. Considering that limits his options to about 4 teams in baseball—and two of them (Red Sox, Yankees) won’t want anything to do with him, I have a hard time believing he’ll get that kind of money. He’d be much better off taking his two option years and then seeing where the market is at that point. But we are talking about Manny here….

"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jul 28, 2008 11:25 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

He has told baaaaaaston

That he does NOT want his option picked up or he wants to be traded. I can’t see theo dealing him. So he’ll be lookin for someone to give him 25 mil per

"Textbooks are Soviet propaganda" - Rev. Jerry Falwell

by elirock83 on Jul 28, 2008 11:37 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

$25 mil per year just isn't happening

Manny will find that one out the hard way. This is his age 36 season. Nobody is going to make him the second-highest paid player in baseball to regress for four years. Not to mention, as someone mentioned, only a few teams can even afford that, and two of them probably want nothing to do with him.

Then again, who knows. The market is crazy and the Angels always seem ready to throw a bajillion dollars at bad free agent investments in the OF.

Personally, I think Manny is amusing, but I don’t want him in Cardinal red. His idiocy sat well enough with the Boston fans and media (if not the front office), but it probably wouldn’t sit well in St. Louis…and less so if he started to drop off in terms of production.

by mojowo11 on Jul 28, 2008 12:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

TLR would flip a shit if Brendan Ryan started talking on his cell phone in the middle of a game, or if Rick Ankiel gave a fan a high five in the middle of a play.

"I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to go chase it."- Rogers Hornsby

by redbirds8233 on Jul 28, 2008 12:44 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

High 5 Play

You gotta admit, that play is a delight to watch on the highlight reel… But I don’t think there is any MOmentum to get a trade like this done. And I think the Red Sox see Manny as being too valuable for them to win this season. Now, where is that Barry Bonds guy, anyway?

Honi soit qui mal y pense.

by palampe on Jul 28, 2008 3:59 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Manny is an Angel

not the heavenly kind. I see him with the halos either later this week and/or next April.

Manny as a Redbird? hmmm. Considering our needs seem to be 1) a closer; 2) a MI with some pop; 3) a cavalry on the way SP… the idea is dubious at any cost. Another factor is that Skip is NOT the reason we are not in first place.

However it might make Albert very happy. And if the Sawwx would swap him straight up for Anderson… why not?

by the Tewk on Jul 28, 2008 5:03 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

What are the.....

“so many needs” that the Cardinals will have in the near future?

Rotation has some talent in Carp/Waino/Welly…..we might resign Lohse, and then we have plenty of young arms like Garcia, Todd, etc. Also have JP signed for next year, and he’s fine as a #5 guy.

Bullpen has plenty of “promise”, so who knows if that’ll be a huge need. I agree that we need a couple of arms that will need to come from outside the organization though.

OF is young. While I’d like to upgrade it, that probably isn’t our biggest need. Glaus is around for another season, then we can either resign him or promote from within. Pujols isn’t going anywhere. We are set at catcher. Now, the MI needs help, and this is probably the biggest area of need. It is also going to be the hardest to fill, IMO.

I don’t see a ton of glaring holes. That is why I’m not against moving some of our prospects that haven’t established themselves at can’t miss. Guys like Todd, Motte, etc.

by SoonerfanTU on Jul 28, 2008 9:52 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Middle infield, to name 2

Glaus will be 33 and a free agent after next year. The bullpen needs work, of course, and Ankiel will be a free agent after next year as well (and 30). That’s not nothing. Middle infield, in particular, is very difficult to come by, as we’ve seen. As for Wellemeyer, I’m hardly sold on his being a continuning member of the rotation beyond this year and Carpenter’s coming off TJ surgery and isn’t getting any younger.

There is help on the way in the rotation and w/ Rasmus and at C if needed but this team is hardly a finished product.

by houstoncardinal on Jul 28, 2008 10:16 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Looking ahead

Rotation has 3 guys who have been injured in the past 6 months and a bunch of back end pitchers. The young kids aren’t ready to step into much more than a back end role despite their potential down the road. There’s depth there but if Carp or (less likely) Wainwright stumble we’re in some deep crap.

Bullpen does have a lot of potential. It also has an ineffective Izzy & Franklin, old and fragile Springer, old FA Villone and now the frightening duo of Jimenez and Flores. Sorry, that doesn’t strike me as a great bullpen heading into next year. Especially with TLR’s reluctance to give important roles to younger relievers (and please don’t cite the Wainwright arg. That’s a tired response with Perez in the minors.)

OF isn’t really young. Ludwick is having a career year at age 30. I’d like to believe this is his true talent level but you can point to a ton of single year peaks in the majors by players. Ankiel is only under team control 1 more year and LF has been a revolving platoon.

I’m enumerating a worst case scenario but when you’ve essentially punted two positions of offense, you can’t afford to lose any others. This team has the potential (imo) to get old really quick. Especially the offense which seems to be Albert Pujols and a streaky supporting cast.

by azruavatar on Jul 28, 2008 10:18 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Wainright still a relevant argument

Wainwright, at the time, had a repertoire of big league pitches at the time. Most here seem to agree that Perez needed to work on pitches other than his fastball, and they sent him down with those instructions. If you want to try to make the point otherwise, fine, but I don’t think that the Perez comparison makes as much sense.

by saladdays on Jul 28, 2008 10:23 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It's not relevant because TLR would rather have

Jimenez and Flores on the roster than Perez. To act like Wainwright had nothing to work on when he came up strikes me as naive. TLR called Perez up to put him in the 6th and 7th innings. That’s a lack of trust.

by azruavatar on Jul 28, 2008 10:37 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Of course Wainwright wasn't perfect

But, as I said, most people here talked about how Perez wasn’t quite ready for the majors (or so I seem to recall). I don’t remember anything like that about Wainwright in 2006.

by saladdays on Jul 28, 2008 10:42 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

2006

I though Wainwright was added to the roster because he blew away the competition in spring training that season and won a spot, similar to McClellan this season. At the time, Reyes was touted as the far more finished and ML ready product than Wainwright.

by JMedwick on Jul 28, 2008 10:45 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Yes, I can

He loaded the bases twice vs. the Mets the other night, walking 4 or 5 guys in the process. I can find plenty to argue with there. He mostly got lucky to wriggle out of that jam, which was almost entirely of his own doing.

"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.

by redbirdnation8206 on Jul 28, 2008 11:13 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

He's been rocky to say the least.

Results based analysis won’t show that but watching the games he hasn’t been lights out or anything.

Also, after watching him blow up again and again for 40 innings last year, I’m going to be extremely skeptical about him suddenly becoming a major league reliever.

by azruavatar on Jul 28, 2008 11:20 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Perez is to Anthony Reyes as...

...does anyone else see parallels? Flores and Jimenez over Perez at this point is absolutely crazy. You could also add Izzy to that list, but it saddens me to see this once-nails reliever in his current state. Sort of like watching the end of Jimmy Edmonds as a Cardinal…

by bgh on Jul 28, 2008 11:29 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Okay. Now that made me laugh.

Thank you.

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

by jillsinmo on Jul 28, 2008 12:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

heh. welcome.

i actually don’t mind jimmy as a cub as much as i thought i would. i thought he was pretty much done and was embarrassing himself in san diego, so part of me is happy for him, while another part of me feels the whole thing is blasphemy.

by mattybobo on Jul 28, 2008 1:02 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I disagree about Perez

He was up for a while. And he was thrown in some big situations. He was also sent down with instructions on what to work on. He wasn’t just sent down to remove him from the 25 man.

by Evilfrog on Jul 28, 2008 12:12 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

perez is down working on his slider

they told him to throw a slider one in every 4-5 pitches or something and to not worry about the results.

he is down there so he can work on that and it wont screw the big club.

they are just working on the big picture with him.

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

Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jul 28, 2008 2:47 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

So Kelvin gets to work on his pitches

and screw with the big league club but Perez doesn’t? Wonder why that is. . .

At the end of the day, the Cardinals opted for the inferior pitcher on their roster.

by azruavatar on Jul 28, 2008 3:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Maybe its because they Perez is working on something completely different

than Jimenez?

They apparantly don’t want Perez thinking about anything except learing how to throw his slider. What Jimenez does is completely different. He’s not working on a specific pitch, he’s working on getting out major league hitters. He was pitching really well at AAA and the only way to get better at getting out MLB hitters is to actually be on the big club.

Perez simply needs to work on his slider. I don’t think they have any doubt that he can get out MLB hitters, its just that he really needs to develop a second pitch. So much that they want him to focus on it. And once he develops a slider that he can count on and be consistant with, he’ll be back with St. Louis.

Would you rather him be with the Cardinals with other teams knowing 1) that he doesn’t have faith in his slider and 2) he’s specifically tring to learn how to pitch with it to the point that he doesn’t care what happens when he throws it? Seriously?

Comparing the two situations is a waste of time. They’re working on two different sets of goals.

by Tackle Box on Jul 28, 2008 4:18 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

To answer your questions

Yes, I would because he’s still a better pitcher than Kelvin Jimenez.

You can argue that Kelvin has to work on something different but the Cardinals have again chose lesser pitchers over their rookies. Other teams seem to let their rookies work on things in the majors—the Cardinals (notably the coaches) seem awfully adverse to that.

by azruavatar on Jul 28, 2008 4:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Really?

Who takes a rookie pitcher and tells them to work on their slider and to not be worried about the results at the major league level when they are in July in a penant race?

by Tackle Box on Jul 28, 2008 5:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

How about this --

don’t announce to the league that he has to throw the slider every 3rd pitch. As for rookies in pennant races—how about Edwar Ramirez of the Yankees.

I didn’t think Perez was ready to be called up. I don’t think he’s ready now. But this continued commitment to pitchers like Flores and Jimenez is astonishing.

by azruavatar on Jul 28, 2008 5:30 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

he isn't slowing the slider every third pitch

at least not at the major league level. And they don’t want him to throw it every third pitch when he gets up here. The told him to throw it every third pitch down in AAA to work on it.

by Evilfrog on Jul 28, 2008 5:38 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Jimenez

I agree you might as well let Perez learn on the job. However do you think Jimenez is seen as a guy they like to have around to pitch in blow-outs/long relief when you need to avoid getting blown out depending on Brad Thompson’s status..

I don’t know I guess Jimenez has pitched well in AAA so it’s not like he was bad there and then gets promoted despite being bad at AAA. Maybe he just can’t make that jump like some other pitches STL has had.

Perez….. He definitely needs a 2nd pitch at this point. I was not that impressed with his stuff the first time up. Maybe he was overhyped, but like I have said before yes he has a nice arm but his fastball is not off the charts and his slider was not that nasty. He looked like a lot of teams relievers who throw hard…

by ICbirdfan on Jul 28, 2008 5:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Perez

I think we’ve probably learned that performance slips pretty fast if you try to push him past 1 inning. I thought he looked pretty good, for the most part. Seems to fatigue fast though. I was at a game vs. Philadelphia, where he was left in for over 40 pitches. He looked sharp in the first inning of work, but by the second he was clearly laboring – was working right around 90 according to the stadium gun.

by Merry CRasmus on Jul 28, 2008 5:54 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Very true

It’s not like we’re dealing w/ a guy who was even mediocre in his previous ML stints. This guy was one of the worst pitchers in all of baseball last year in his limited number of innings. Hardly a ringing endorsement there.

"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.

by redbirdnation8206 on Jul 28, 2008 11:56 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

+1

Yes, Perez needs to work on his slider to maximize his big-league potential. However, the fact that TLR would rather have Jimenez then Perez says a lot about his point of view on this one. He’d rather have vets, or in this case more polished, pitchers than more unknown quantities. No matter if the vets are not good, or the more polished kids stink…

"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.

by redbirdnation8206 on Jul 28, 2008 11:11 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It's not a Jimenez vs. Perez argument.

Perez is going to be a stud MLB pitcher. He may even be that this year. The point is that he was getting hit pretty hard lately, so Mo sent him down to work on his slider. He had to be replaced with SOMEBODY, so Jimenez gets the call. Hopefully, Perez will refine his slider and be up for a late-season run at the penant, but he simply was not helping the team at the time of his demotion.

Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.

by Eckstreem on Jul 28, 2008 12:35 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The Wainwright argument

Wainwright was put in the closer’s role b/c Tony was out of options. He didn’t do it b/c he though Wainwright would be the best closer. He, simply, had no one else to turn to. Is that true today? No. He can keep running Franklin out there or hope Izzy turns it around. If Franklin was out for the year, it might be the same situation b/c then, maybe, Tony would be forced to stick McClellan back there. But he’s not going to give McClellan a chance as long as Franklin saves 2 out of every 3 or so.

by houstoncardinal on Jul 28, 2008 10:38 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

No he wasn't

He could have put Looper into that role again.

by saladdays on Jul 28, 2008 10:43 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

he tried looper first

after izzy was shut down, looper inherited the role and promptly lost two games, on september 18 and september 22. wainwright only became the closer after that — he saved one game down the stretch, on september 27.

he became closer with about 7 games left on the schedule. that’s about as last-resort as you can get

by lboros on Jul 28, 2008 11:13 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But another option did exist

Kind of like this year, although the job isn’t getting done

by saladdays on Jul 28, 2008 11:25 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

you can’t really make an argument like “TLR hates young relievers” and then preclude anyone from making the wainwright argument just because you think it’s “tired.”

ice cream does not come in any pretty colors. and please don’t talk to me about strawberry – that’s a tired response.

by baw on Jul 28, 2008 12:00 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'd argue it's preculded and tired

because it’s the (rare) exception, not the rule.

by azruavatar on Jul 28, 2008 12:17 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Moot point

TLR continues his irrational devotion to Franklin:

“When Franklin is fresh, he’s going to get the ninth inning. He’s the best guy we have for that role.”

Um, what about McClellan and/or Springer. If fresh, they are better than Franklin. His peripherals are evening out after an unsustainable 2007. Wake up and read your own binder, Tony. Sheesh.

by bgh on Jul 28, 2008 12:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

i agree

that is an insipid thing for TLR to say

by baw on Jul 28, 2008 12:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Maybe it's because

he wants to save McClellan and Springer to be able to insert them into a situation that is much more dire than simply starting the 9th with no men on base?

by Tackle Box on Jul 28, 2008 4:22 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Old Fast...

Az-

Of course you are right that the team has the potential to age quickly. But if Rasmus and Wallace can establish themselves, the team has the ability to start looking younger rather quickly. You could say that I am jumping the gun on Wallace, but nothing we have seen thusfar indicates that this guy is anything but a pure bat.

PF Depth isn’t something that I am very worried about. It just seems like we are developing a lot of servicable hitters in the minors that can handle the OF—probably no stars though…

Middle infielders on the other hand are the issue. We have to stop punting these positions…

BJM

by BigJawnMize on Jul 28, 2008 12:06 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I agree completely, Jawn

But, when we drafted the best MIF available last year (kozma), the fanbase went nuts about it.

Baseball's only fun if you're playing it, watching it, or thinking about it.

by Eckstreem on Jul 28, 2008 12:37 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

yeah, O'Hare can be a real bitch...

I try to use Midway whenever possibly, but it has really grown in the past 7-8 years, so that’s no piece of cake anymore…plus if you get stuck at Midway, the neighborhood isn’t the greatest.

It’s being with kids that does it…I forget how old yours are, but having irritable, whining, bickering children in tow when something like this happens magnifies the situation 10 fold…if it was just me or me and the wife, I could deal…but with kids…YIKES!!

by tbell61 on Jul 28, 2008 9:11 AM EDT   0 recs

O'Hare is a nightmare

People in my office have started connecting through Detroit when possible. Every time someone goes through O’Hare, and I mean every single time, there is a problem.

by Youneverknow on Jul 28, 2008 11:51 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Sell, Sell, Sell

You make some great points, but…

I guess to me, the Cardinals really are not as good as their record indicates. If they are really a ”.500” team who have played over their heads and due for a correction, you probably can’t add enough talent to get them in it.

Over the next two months, it is reasonable to expect many players’ overall stat lines to go down, including Schumaker, Molina, Miles, Lohse, Looper, Wellemeyer, and McClellan. And I doubt Ankiel is a .280 hitter. To contend, you have to have some of those players not decline, have other players on the roster improve significantly, and add talent. And have either the Brewers or Cubbies falter. A lot has to go right.

Let’s put it this way, the Cubs are on pace for 94 wins. The Brewers are on pace for 92-93 wins.

To get to 93 wins, the Cardinals, currently with a .542 winning percentage, have to play .636 ball the rest of the way. Possible, but not likely. I don’t mind some moves, but I don’t want to give up much on the assumption the Cardinals will suddenly turn into a .630 team.

by tarakas on Jul 28, 2008 9:39 AM EDT   0 recs

Wow

You don’t have much faith in our players. Skip should be able to keep hitting .290 or so against righties, and I think Molina is for real. I also think Miles will, for the most part, keep hitting. At a clip of .320? Maybe not, but he’ll keep hitting. Welly depends on his health, and none of us know that. McClellan has just been overused.

But you say “sell, sell, sell”.....exactly who? Lohse is really the only guy we can sell. Sure, we could move an OF or two, but I bet we’ve already been trying to do that, and I wouldn’t exactly consider that selling. Iz and Franklin have no value. I doubt Looper has much, not to mention, we can’t start moving SP’s without having replacements.

by SoonerfanTU on Jul 28, 2008 9:47 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I have faith in our players

I just don’t have much faith a .540 team is going to suddenly become a .630 team. And, for the sake of argument, let’s say all of the players I Iisted don’t decline, and that they hit like they have been and continue to exceed their previously established level of performance. All that got us so far is a .540 team. What will make them turn into a .630 team? Miles hitting .360 with Ludwick adding yet another 100 points of OPS while Lohse shaves another run off his ERA?

Barring that, we have to add talent, and Brian Fuentes is not going to add 90 points of winning perentage. Neither is Mat Holiday.

My point is, what has to take place for this team to end up in the post season? Do those events seem likely? Possible?

Anyway, I hope I’m wrong. I’ll be at the Phillies series this weekend cheering the team on.

by tarakas on Jul 28, 2008 2:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

"All that got us so far is a .540 team. What will make them turn into a .630 team?"

Theoretically, the addition of Carpenter and Wainwright down the stretch, and the trickle-down effect that would have on the staff. Lohse looks a lot sexier as a #3 instead of a #1…

I’m not saying these guys are a guarantee, but you asked what could turn this team into a .630 team if all else holds as is, and that seems to be the variable you’re looking for.

by mojowo11 on Jul 28, 2008 2:43 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Agreed.

And while tarakas states that Fuentes wouldn’t add 90 points, I disagree. If we save half the games we’ve blown, or heck, 5 of them or so, we’re in 1st place.

by SoonerfanTU on Jul 28, 2008 3:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Fuentes and a Time Machine...

If Fuentes came with a time machine, yeah, he’d be worth it. But we can’t get those lost wins back.

There is no reason to believe he’ll be worth that number of games over 2 months.

by tarakas on Jul 28, 2008 7:23 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

But What Versions of Carpenter and Wainwright Are Coming Back?

Carpenter and Wainwright at the top of their games are worth a lot. After 18 months of rehab, though, I doubt Carpenter starts out at the top of his game. Reports are he is having trouble cracking 90 on a radar gun with less than stellar command.

Yes, the Cardinals front office is talking them up. Just like they talked up Carpenter last year when he tried to come back, and just like they talked up Mulder.

According to Baseball Prospectus, in his last two healthy seasons, Carpenter was worth about 68 runs versus a replacement pitcher, or about a win a month. Wainwright last year was 40 runs better, or about half a win a month. Thus a fully healthy Wainwright and Carpenter pitching at top form are worth maybe 3 wins over then next two months. That’s a start.

by tarakas on Jul 28, 2008 7:33 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I voted "stand pat"

but I would be in favor of any forward-thinking deal. If there is a 2009 or 2010 component then I would consider it, but I don’t think much of rentals. I certainly couldn’t back Jay, Perez, and Mortensen for two months of Fuentes. Maybe Jay and one or two of the lesser pitchers, but it is way to early to give up on Perez and we don’t really know what Mortensen can do yet.

On the other hand, I would be willing to move a player or two in the “sell” mode if we could fill a need (read offensive MI). I think your 1 in 5 odds are about right, so it doesn’t make sense to bleed off talent on a 20% gamble.

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

by giveml on Jul 28, 2008 9:46 AM EDT   0 recs

This is pretty well where I stand...

I voted buy, but only for guys that don’t cost players we are leaning on for 2008-2010. I’d like to see us target Rhodes in Seattle…if someone like Robinson or Jay maybe Boggs or Parisi could get him…these guys are redundant in our system IMO. At this point there’s at least six guys I don’t want to see moved unless they bring back somebody who is signed or under club control through at least next year preferrably 2010…probably closer to 10 or 12 guys.

With Carp coming back this week and WW getting close I’d like to move Lohse or Looper…Piniero, too if he’s worth anything.

by cardzfanbub on Jul 28, 2008 10:20 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

As one who has seen Rhodes

blow up countless times in important games-especially against the Yankees-I say emphatically no to him. He can look good when the pressure is minimal, but he is likely to wilt when it really matters.

by Mike G on Jul 28, 2008 11:44 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm not looking at Rhodes...

as a closer (though he has significant experience there). He’s more of a lefty specialist that can face a righty if needed…something this team doesn’t have. He might make a great set-up guy to complement Springer. With Rhodes maybe we could consider trying K-Mac in the closer’s role.