make 'em sweat
one other since-june-1 factoid, by the way, before we leave that trope behind: since that date, the cardinals have scored the most runs (388) of any national league team. (the brewers are second at 382, cubs third at 381.) for the season as a whole, the cards now rank second in the league not only in runs scored (which position they occupied about a week ago) but also in average runs per game, 4.90. at their current pace they’ll finish with 794 runs, or 69 more than last year.
wainwright starts on wednesday, and they’re saying carpenter may be back out there by september 7 or so. HC mentioned the possibility that those two could constitute half of a 4-man rotation down the stretch, with the cards’ numerous open dates being used to keep them on regular rest. i see the merits of that idea and have toyed with it myself, but on further reflection i’ve decided i don’t like it. two reasons: first, with both guys coming off injuries, i think the team might be just as well served to use those open dates to give them both an extra day of rest --- especially carpenter. second --- and this is the big one for me --- winnowing down to a 4-man rotation would require the cards to dump either lohse or looper from the rotation, and i don’t think that would be right. those two guys propped up the rotation all summer, while wainwright and carp were absent and wellemeyer and pineiro were laboring. without them, this team wouldn’t have even a flicker of hope. they’re both pitching reasonably well --- well, no, looper’s pitching great, and lohse is hanging in there --- but in any case, they’ve both earned the right to pitch in important september games, win or lose (there’s that phrase again . . . ). if we pencil in carpenter to return on september 9 vs the cubs and assume a five-man rotation the rest of the way (skipping pineiro’s turn in the current cycle thanks to the off dates), they’d only need to use pineiro one time in the last 30 games; all the rest of their starts will be taken by above-average pitchers. i’ll take my chances w/ that.
odds and ends:
- pujols-for-mvp watch: he now leads the league in batting (tied), obp, and slugging; he’s first in mlb in VORP, second in win shares, and 3d in WPA.
- if / when ryan ludwick passes the 100-rbi threshold, he’ll be the first cardinal other than pujols to do so since 2004. he’s already the first card (non-pujols) since that date to hit 30 homers.
- anthony reyes made another strong start last night, 7 inn 1 run against texas, the highest-scoring team in baseball. he now sports a 2.22 era in 4 starts for cleveland. i’d be slightly, um, annoyed if we find out the kid can really pitch and we gave him away for nothing . . . .
- brian barton’s injury is a tough break for him, and for the cards --- they could have used him on wednesday night vs left-handed starter manny parra, who eats lh batters alive but is somewhat vulnerable vs right-handers (.283 avg). assuming barton hits the dl, the leading candidate to take his roster spot is probably stavinoha. i’d kinda like to see them give a shot either to david freese (who hit his 25th homer last night) or josh phelps. neither one is on the 40-man, but the cards have some players they can safely remove (rico washington, anyone?) to create a spot for one of them.
- brett wallace hit two homers for springfield last night, including a walkoff. he is 9 for his first 20 vs double A pitching with 2 doubles, 3 homers, and one strikeout. daryl jones homered too, and is now batting .333 vs double A pitching (in 96 ab) with a 1.050 ops. springfield is striving for a playoff slot, tied for first place w/ 7 games to go.
- josh kinney pitched an inning in that springfield game, by the way, his first appearance in a professional baseball match since this one. he threw a perfect inning, struck out one guy; don’t know anything about his velocity, etc. the cardinals can always use another decent relief pitcher . . . .
- tom tango has begun his annual scouting report by the fans, a great wisdom-of-crowds exercise. participation is encouraged.
0 recs |
330 comments
Comments
"lost their best hitter for two weeks"?
When was Pujols out?
Lou Brock loves Lamp.
by birdjam on
Aug 25, 2008 8:49 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Got hurt
during the series in Washington on the first week of June. Was on the 15 day for a pulled calf muscle.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 9:10 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I don't think so
I’m pretty sure it was in Washington, because that was the first time that Mather got called up and he hit a homer the next night.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 9:26 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
nope
Mather got called up when Duncan went down. HL is right. Pujols went out in Cincy.
by Hal Lanier's Pants on
Aug 25, 2008 9:38 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
No
Pujols injured himself in the Washington series.
by stl522 on
Aug 25, 2008 8:17 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yes, I think he did
but he didn’t go on the dl until he really injured it against Cincinnati.
In the world I see--you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Tower. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying strips of venison on the empty carpool lane of some abandoned superhighway.
by Tackle Box on
Aug 25, 2008 8:30 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Did he really miss two weeks?
If so, I have completely blocked that from my memory for some reason…
Lou Brock loves Lamp.
by birdjam on
Aug 25, 2008 9:33 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Pujols, Molina, and Wainwright
All went down for a period of time within a few days of each other.
by Evilfrog on
Aug 25, 2008 10:12 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Within a few days of RB saying they'd be guys we couldn't afford to lose
Cardinal fan in the heart of Braves country
DFA Adam Kennedy and Randy Flores!
"Just because nobody understands you doesn't make you an artist."
by Mr Redbird on
Aug 25, 2008 11:42 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
oh yeah
he was out. it was a nerve wracking time since Wainwright and Wellemeyer were also out, among other things
it's time to bring the rock!!!!!!!
by Cards Fan in Chitown on
Aug 25, 2008 12:42 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It was really scary.....
He ran out of the box and it looked like he tore something and had to get helped off the field……..I almost had a heart attack when that happened……..
"Even when the rain falls, Even when the flood starts rising, Even when the storm comes, I am washed by the water!" -NeedToBreathe
by Calhoun on
Aug 25, 2008 12:46 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I hate to be my usual cynical pessimist....
…but you know Reyes is gonna be at least a decent serviceable pitcher for the Indians, right?
by sdrone on
Aug 25, 2008 8:59 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm rooting for him, but...
He’s been very lucky so far. K rate with the indians has gone down, walk rate has gone up, and he’s been really lucky on fly balls and actually on all balls in play. His HR/9 rate is currently half of what it was in his best AAA year; that will not last, especially in the AL central.
Of course he had such bad luck for a while there that he was bound to have a period of good luck… ;) lets just hope he doesn’t use it all up too fast.
"..and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped." -Sir Belvedere
by SleepyCA on
Aug 25, 2008 12:47 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
How does the Cleveland stadium play?
Is it pitcher friendly?
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 12:53 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
good point- something I didn't think about
it is second only to petco in terms of HR suppression…
"..and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped." -Sir Belvedere
by SleepyCA on
Aug 25, 2008 1:04 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm glad the Milwaukee series is two games, not three
It’s hard to sweep a three-game series against a good team. It’s tough enough to sweep a struggling team, as we saw this weekend. (And, no, I haven’t forgotten the Brewers’ four-game sweep in StL. I wish I could.)
A two-of-three series nets only one game in the standings. Winning two of two not only seems doable, it’s a two-game gain in the standings.
“the cardinals may not be a playoff team. they still have my admiration.”
Well said. I agree completely.
by Youneverknow on
Aug 25, 2008 9:06 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
If Ankiel can play with a gut wound
Barton can play with a side injury.
by Hardcore Legend on
Aug 25, 2008 9:10 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I think it is questionable that Ankiel can play with a gut wound
and I wish they would just let him heal. TLR doesn’t seem to think he can/should play CF and his .675 OPS over the last month isn’t helping the team. It seems to be some sort of badge of honor for this team to attempt to play hurt and performance is somewhat secondary. Izzy, Duncan, now Ank. It seems obvious the only Cardinal who is god-like enough to do play effectively hurt is #5.
I guess I probably missed the sarcasm, didn’t I?
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on
Aug 25, 2008 9:26 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
oh, sarcasm, the fickle internet mistress.
on a serious note, did barton hurt his oblique muscle? isn’t that the same injury that took out albert for a while in ’06 when he had the near-godlike start to the season?
by mattybobo on
Aug 25, 2008 9:41 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Barton hurt his "side"...
according to Rick Hummel’s game story…
In his exuberance, after he dashed across the bag in beating out his bunt, Barton had to come out of the game with a strained right side, aggravating a previous condition. This is the type of injury that could keep him out until sometime in September, if he comes back then.
Head athletic trainer Barry Weinberg said he wanted to treat Barton on today’s off-day before offering up any idea how long the healing process might be.
Given the Birds’ injury mojo this season, Barton will probably be back later than sooner; it’s a darn shame, because he’s really the best leadoff option against LHP the Birds have. (I’ll freely admit TLR putting him in the “second leadoff” nine-hole worked beautifully yesterday!)
"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra
by The Ol Goaler on
Aug 25, 2008 11:03 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
When did Barton get hurt??????????/
"Even when the rain falls, Even when the flood starts rising, Even when the storm comes, I am washed by the water!" -NeedToBreathe
by Calhoun on
Aug 25, 2008 12:52 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Never mind could have scrolled down and saw.
"Even when the rain falls, Even when the flood starts rising, Even when the storm comes, I am washed by the water!" -NeedToBreathe
by Calhoun on
Aug 25, 2008 12:53 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Reyes
Wouldn’t say “nothing.” Perdomo has good stuff. His stats aren’t fantastic, but he can strike guys out.
Probably not even trade, but hopefully not a giveaway.
"I don't believe what I just saw!" ~ Jack Buck
by itsalemmon1019 on
Aug 25, 2008 9:10 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Considering our glut...
of RHRPing…I consider it pretty much a for nothing deal. He’s also not too young if memory serves me. I sure bet MO wishes he would have cut bait with him earlier this season…I’m sure he could have acquired something better than middle/late relief fodder.
by cardzfanbub on
Aug 25, 2008 9:19 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
They should have
cut bait with him in the offseason, but then Thompson started the season in the rotation too, so it was hard to see how the rotation was going to work out before that.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 9:27 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Being a literalist
I guess I don’t consider a marginally talented pitcher you might be able to add to a package “nothing”. Hell, you could plug Perdomo in for Franklin right now and probably improve your ball club. (I’m kidding. I think.)
If we wind up cutting Perdomo, of course it was a for nothing deal.
"I don't believe what I just saw!" ~ Jack Buck
by itsalemmon1019 on
Aug 25, 2008 12:50 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
value = some
Generally it is a good idea to try to find cheap relievers, as their performance tends not to carry over year-to-year, and they just don’t pitch that many innings. So hopefully Perdomo will keep the Cards from over-paying for middle relief at some point in the future. That said, if Reyes becomes a serviceable starter then it would be hard for Perdomo to do enough to make the trade come out even, and Perdomo’s way behind where Reyes was at the same age.
by apack on
Aug 25, 2008 1:13 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
As for Pujols for MVP
it has been interesting to read some other sites, particularly blogs, and see how clueless some people are. The Cult of the RBI lives on…
by StanTheManFan on
Aug 25, 2008 9:11 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I was encouraged
that the Fox broadcast team on Saturday showed El Hombre a lot of love. Said he was the MVP and the best hitter in the game today, plus a gold glover.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on
Aug 25, 2008 9:27 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
now if he only played on the coast
then he’d have ESPN locked up too :)
"How depressing is it being you? Would you equate it to being a lifelong Cubs fan?"
by rocKStark5 on
Aug 25, 2008 12:04 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Good post
I always enjoy the bullet points at the end of your posts, lb, it’s a quick way to get an idea of the BOB headlines each morning.
Wallace is beginning to look like the real deal — I thought the org was crazy for taking another third baseman (who might end up at first base) with the first pick, but he’s looking like a steal at this point. Which brings up the discussion of what to do with Freese and Allen Craig, who both look to be displaced in the organization quickly. With all of the tradable assets in the minor leagues right now, most of which have no place with the current club, the front office needs to make some moves this offseason to bolster the middle infield or trade for a starter. They could even possibly take on some salary to do so, which opens up a lot of options in terms of salary dumps. Unfortunately, Anthony Reyes is looking like that guy, and we gave him up for next to nothing. I guess the Indians owed us that one for trading them Hector Luna in 2006 and then winning the World Series.
I’ve been following Josh Kinney’s rehab pretty steadily, but I can’t find any info on how his velocity and location was last night either. If he’s capable of pulling an Eldred, that really frees up McClellan to start next season, and strengthens the bullpen considerably this season. With Kinney in the fold, I’d think that Franklin would go back to long relief where he belongs, with Josh and Russ taking the ball alternatively in the 7th inning or in a high leverage situation prior to the 9th. Let’s hope he can be the pitcher that he was prior to the injury.
The Cubs and Brewers are the only two teams better than the Cardinals in the National League, neither of them has an MVP candidate on their squad really, and Pujols still won’t win it, even though he’ll probably end up 1st or second in BA, OBP, SLG, EqA, and VORP. It’s ludicrous….
"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
Aug 25, 2008 9:25 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Well...(for Pujols' MVP candidacy's sake)
I hate even saying it…I feel like barfing…but if, by chance, the Cards get swept by Milwaukee and go 5.5 out, then Pujols may get a lot more pitches to hit with RISP because the Cards would not have nearly the shot they had before the 2 game set. After that, the Cardinals play HOU (not in the race), ARIZ for 3 (in race, but have good pitching, they might pitch to him), FLA (in race), CHC (running away with it, I think), PIT (not in race), CIN (not in race), CHC (see above), ARIZ again, CIN (again)
He could very well see a bunch of pitches down the stretch. If players can just get on for him, then drive him in, he could put up 100 runs, 35 homers, 115 rbi. Add those to the BA, OBP, SLG, EqA, and VORP where he’ll probably end up top 2…and he might actually win it.
by stlfan on
Aug 25, 2008 9:51 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I don't buy this at all. Why would
teams suddenly start pitching to Albert just because the Cards aren’t playoff contenders? First, opponents that are contenders wouldn’t be throwing meatballs up there, and even the bad teams don’t want to lose games. A little wishful thinking, I believe.
by MdRedbirdFreak on
Aug 25, 2008 11:06 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Definitely is wishful thinking...
but it may not be all that wildly conceived either. The six opponents remaining (some twice) are below, with additional info.
HOU – we have been in the playoff hunt every time we have faced HOU this year. Albert’s been walked once per game. That leaves him 3 at bats a game, if they keep up the walk rate.
ARIZ – haven’t faced.
FLA – walked him 2 times in 4 games. Granted, Albert was playing badly that series. (2-15)
CHC – 7 walks in 9 games is all. Lou pitches to him and challenges him.
PIT – 14 games, 8 walks. No matter how hard Pujols crushes them (1.177 OPS this year, his 3rd most devastated opponent)
CIN – 7 games, 5 walks. Dusty pitches to him and challenges him.
Lately, in the last 3 game series v. CIN, Pujols walked once (officially not an intentional walk); PIT did not walk him in the last 2 game series between the teams and walked him once in the series right before the All-Star Break; CHC walked him 3 times (once intentionally) in the last 3 game series in Chicago.
Having not played ARIZ this year, who knows. Albert has only been intentionally passed 6 times in 45 games, career, vs. ARIZ, though. They haven’t intentionally walked Albert in the last 2 years, though.
Historically, once the Cardinals were eliminated from playoff contention in ’98, McGwire was intentionally walked much less (162 bb, 28 ibb for the year – 19 bb, 1 ibb in Sept.) and hit 15 homers in 25 games.
On the other hand, Bonds in 2001, walked 177 times (35 times intentionally). The Giants were in playoff contention, though, and thus, Bonds walked 38 times (8 intentionally) in the last 27 games (Sept. and Oct.). Oh yeah…he still hit 16 homers in those games.
by stlfan on
Aug 25, 2008 11:32 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Don't you think that some of that is due to the teams McGwire and Bonds played against?
I haven’t looked at this, but intuitively I think it makes sense: If the teams they were playing against were out of contention, then they wouldn’t mind pitching to the sluggers. What do they have to lose? Let the Setember call-ups challenge the best and see what they do. I don’t think it has much (if any) bearing on what the Cards do.
by Ray Lankford on
Aug 25, 2008 11:47 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Well look at Atlanta
They aren’t going anywhere and Bobby Cox still walked Albert over half the time. I think everyone wants to win—except for Washington, who wants the No. 1 draft pick.
by Red in Chicago on
Aug 25, 2008 11:58 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Not worried about Kinney's velocity
What made him a total stud was that absolutely ridiculous slider he was throwing in the ‘06 playoff run. Batters looked completely helpless against it. As long as he can throw that filth and locate it, it’s an exciting prospect to have him back in the pen.. especially with the questionable nature of the Cardinals current relief corps.
by cloistermaximus on
Aug 25, 2008 10:10 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
His slider is his best pitch
but he’s got to be able to throw the fastball by people and locate it in order for the slider to be effective. If he can’t throw strikes with the fastball, the slider is less effective because he can’t use it as an out pitch.
Considering his injury, it’s also important that he can still throw the same slider from the same arm angle as he did before, which was part of the reason it was so effective: it looked like the fastball and broke late.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 11:44 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Kinney's first pitch
was a fastball that read 88. I didn’t see any other reading (he threw 7 pitches). I have heard that the Springfield radar gun registers a little lower than reality. I thought his velocity looked fine.
"There is one word in America that says it all, and that one word is, 'You never know.'" Joaquin Andujar
by Big Mike on
Aug 25, 2008 2:44 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
tempered enthusiasm
Kinney has 25 MLB innings plus 6 playoff innings. They were a great 31 innings.
He is could be a valuable pitcher, but I’m not counting on him being brilliant next season.
by andujar on
Aug 25, 2008 4:46 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It should be Brian Gunn
credited for that THT article, not me. Thanks, though.
by chuckb on
Aug 25, 2008 10:09 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
A couple other things:
Pujols is separating himself from the pack in the MVP race. If it were decided today, it shouldn’t be close. I don’t think he’ll win it if we don’t make the playoffs, but it would be a travesty.
Also, on Reyes, it appears we did give him away for nothing. And, though it’s just been a few starts, it appears he really can pitch. I’m happy for him though a little surprised at how quickly he’s become a solid starter.
by chuckb on
Aug 25, 2008 10:12 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
You would think so
But doesn’t it seem like the MVP award just goes to whoever has the gaudiest HR totals, forgoing OBP and number of K’s (Howard)? I don’t like that trend at all. Home runs are boring. I want my MVP to be a total package—OBP, Slugging, Defense, Amazing Baseball Instincts. You know.. The “Intangibles”.
They might as well change the name of the MVP award to Most Valuable Home Run Hitter if this trend continues.
by cloistermaximus on
Aug 25, 2008 10:15 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It's a moving target...
… they change the criteria every year, just like the Heisman.
Lou Brock loves Lamp.
by birdjam on
Aug 25, 2008 10:18 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
exactly. jimmy rollins was sort of an "eclectic grab-bag clubhouse leader daring pre-season prediction" choice
justin morneau was, i guess, an all-around, “nothing really wrong with him but didn’t lead the pack in any one thing” choice. ryan howard was definitely the “homers and rbi bias” choice but he did get his BA over 300 by getting hot down the stretch (i think?) so that convinced a lot of voters he was more well-rounded. the mvp vote is so arbitrary, but it’s a different kind of arbitrary every year. very frustrating.
as for reyes, i’d be very happy for him if he continues to succeed in cleveland. i’m way past the point of caring too much that he couldn’t seem to make it with us—it just wasn’t going to happen and as annoying as it was i’d much rather see him do well, especially for an AL team that won’t matter too much for us.
by mattybobo on
Aug 25, 2008 10:26 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
So your comments made me go back and look at the MVP that year
And to my surprise, Mike Cameron got 2 points in the voting that year. He hit .268 with over 20 hr and exactly 25 steals. Hmmm. Never woulda thunk it.
by stlfan on
Aug 25, 2008 10:37 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
huh. i had no idea.
reminds me of how one voter in 2006 put pujols in third behind howard and beltran. i think it was the only ballot that didn’t have pujols at 1 or 2.
by mattybobo on
Aug 25, 2008 10:40 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
the defining criteria for MVP has always been leading RBI man for a winner
Pujols’ MVP bid has received some help and hinderance in this regard. His main competition in my mind is Wright and Braun and to a lesser extent Hanley Ramirez. Hanley won’t win because of his age and the Marlins’ swoon. Utley and Berkman have dropped off and there is no pitcher with a fluky K-Rod type season to contend with. The Cubs don’t have a viable option and all of these things are good for Pujols. However, Ludwick hitting like Joe D and the impossibly high bar he has set are working against him. That said he’s basically tied in RBI’s with Braun and only a dozen behind Wright with 80 fewer AB’s. Therefore I think his biggest hurdle is Wright. If the Mets collapse again and Pujols can have a strong month I think its his to lose.
by rlgosnell on
Aug 25, 2008 3:40 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
leading RBI man for a winner?
the last 4 years:
2007 – Rollins – 94 RBI – 43 off the league lead – 3rd best team in the league – first round playoff exit
2006 – Howard – 149 RBI – lead league – 4th best team in the league – no playoffs
2005 – Pujols – 117 RBI – 11 off the league lead – best team in the league – NLCS playoff exit
2004 – Bonds – 101 RBI – 30 off the league lead – 5th best team in the league – no playoffs
I’ll stop there because in 2003, Bonds just simply had a special season.
by stlfan on
Aug 25, 2008 5:43 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I think they should give out a Most Outstanding Player (MOP)
And an MVP. The distinction being the MOP is for the Howard types, while the MVP is for the Pujols types. Maybe its a distinction without a difference, but I think of Pujolsian performance as more valuable because it affects so many areas of the game — defense, OBP, AVG., SLG., etc. Howard performances are outstanding – they really are. 50 HRs? That’s outstanding. Not as valuable, however, when you couple it with a poor average, poor defense, and a hundred and a half strikeouts.
by Ray Lankford on
Aug 25, 2008 11:53 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm interested to see how ARey...
progresses. I believe the most he has struck out in any of his starts with the Indians is four. He’s allowed 10 BB’s in 24.1 innings against 11 strikeouts. Right now it appears he’s just keeping the ball in the yard. I’m rooting/pulling hard for the guy, but his periphs don’t lineup real well with his ERA.
by cardzfanbub on
Aug 25, 2008 10:23 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
+1
Except for the rooting for him part. I’m not rooting against him, but he did nothing in STL to cause me to be a “fan” of his.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 10:28 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He did something in Detroit I was a big fan of.
by Hal Lanier's Pants on
Aug 25, 2008 1:23 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
True
But if I became a fan of every player that had one memorable game for the Cards, no matter how big that game was, I’d be supporting alot of ex-players.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 1:38 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
i'm rooting for him
He one a world series game. not many other one hit wonders did that with the birds on the bat
"Textbooks are Soviet propaganda" - Rev. Jerry Falwell
by elirock83 on
Aug 25, 2008 1:52 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Then that means your rooting for Jeff Weaver too, right?
gotta stay consistent.
In the world I see--you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Tower. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying strips of venison on the empty carpool lane of some abandoned superhighway.
by Tackle Box on
Aug 25, 2008 1:55 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah, I don't care about either one of 'em.
In the world I see--you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Tower. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying strips of venison on the empty carpool lane of some abandoned superhighway.
by Tackle Box on
Aug 25, 2008 4:40 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Was the one hit wonder...
thing intentional or no? You know, the one-hit loss to the White Sox…
by cardzfanbub on
Aug 25, 2008 3:29 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Fernando Tatis
Hit 2 grandslams in one inning no one else in history has done that, are you rooting for him too?
Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious
by showmejoe on
Aug 25, 2008 6:36 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm the same way
I couldn’t care less about the guy.
In the world I see--you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Tower. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying strips of venison on the empty carpool lane of some abandoned superhighway.
by Tackle Box on
Aug 25, 2008 1:53 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Reyes's performance
Well, his WHIP is basically in line with what he put up as a starter in STL, but his ERA is less than half what it was here. So no one should get too excited about this one way or the other yet…we’ll have to see how it plays out over the longer term. But count me in the group of people happy that he’s getting a chance to start, and also sad that the organization let the thing drag out until he had almost no trade value.
by apack on
Aug 25, 2008 1:19 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He has pitched out of jams, he has pitched around his elevated walk rate,
and he has avoided the big inning. Those things he couldn’t do last year. He’s doing them this year. His peripherals didn’t match up last year; they don’t match up this year. Maybe you all should consider that he learned something from what he experienced last year, and now knows more about pitching. It is possible, you know. Dare I say likely…..
Whatever. He still isn’t throwing a sinker, he is getting guys out, and his new team seems to have had a real lift since he’s joined them. He was the starting pitcher at the beginning of 2 winning streaks they went on. However it all unfolds for him, I’m really happy for him to have at least this bit of success. I will forever be critical of the organization for handling him in the most unprofessional way imaginable.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on
Aug 25, 2008 5:07 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He had success here too.....
He just couldn’t sustain it, or build on it. I haven’t looked, but I bet I can find 3-4 stretches where he pitched 2-3 good games in a row.
I just don’t think it’ll last.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 9:00 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
wait...
So Mo wasn’t a coward for holding on to him trying to get top dollar?
by Evilfrog on
Aug 25, 2008 10:24 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I have called Mo a coward for not trading him out of spring training.
That, IMO, was the last chance to get a reasonable trade. Once the baseball world knew he was forced on the roster over the objections of LaRussa and Duncan and over their desire to have Kelvin Jimenez in his place, he permanently went into buy low catagory. Badly mishandled, from start to finish, and Mo only made it worse.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.
by jillsinmo on
Aug 25, 2008 5:57 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
1 recs
That doesn't make sense.....
How was Mo a coward? He was scared to trade him?
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 9:01 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Do you have some inside information?
Was there a willing buyer during spring training that would have given up something more than what we got. I don’t mean any disrespect, but how do you know Mo didn’t try to trade him then.
by gonzostl on
Aug 26, 2008 3:22 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Anything
I mean, anything at all, in the past make you think that he cannot win it if we don’t make the playoffs?
by stlfan on
Aug 25, 2008 10:33 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah...
2004, where Bonds didn’t make the playoffs and Adrian Freakin’ Beltre (!!!) got six first-place votes! Pujols, Rolen, and Edmonds finished 3-4-5, with Pujols and Rolen each getting one first-place vote.
2006, when Ryan Howard’s Phillies didn’t make the playoffs and Albert’s 1.102 OPS was trumped by Howard’s 58 home runs.
Barry Bonds’ 2001-2004 run of MVPs came when he was putting up insane numbers against the rest of the field (’roids-aided or not), so those votes are at least defensible.
Currently, Albert is tops among “qualified” NL hitters with a 1.106 OPS… the guys currently trailing him are all on teams that likely won’t make the playoffs… Lance Berkman at 1.032, Chipper Jones at 1.027, and Matt Holliday at 1.020.
Albert is (barely) second in the league in BA, leads the league in slugging and on-base percentage, trails Pat Burrell by three walks (and has better than twice as many intentional walks than anybody), is tied for seventh in home runs and doubles and stands ninth in RBI… He is the best hitter in the league, and provides Gold Glove-caliber defense.
But predicting who the writers will actually vote for is an exercise in futility….
"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra
by The Ol Goaler on
Aug 25, 2008 12:03 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Exactly my point
The original poster wrote “I don’t think he’ll win it if we don’t make the playoffs, but it would be a travesty.”
Just what I was thinking.
by stlfan on
Aug 25, 2008 2:29 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
With all the MVP talk lately...
What about Francisco Rodriguez in the AL? He is currently on pace for 63 saves (shattering the record), and 78 Ks in 69+ innings.
In games in which K-Rod has gotten a save this year, his line is:
50 Games, 50 saves, 46 2/3 IP, 53 K, 23 BB, 24 H, 1.007 WHIP, 2.3 K:BB, 10.22 K/9, 0.77 ERA.
Wow. He could end up leading the MAJORS by 15-20 saves over the next best.
To put this perspective, in 2003 Eric Gagne saved 10 more than the next best (Smoltz). Gagne finished 6th in the voting to 3 guys having MVP years, plus Pujols and Bonds. That’s the closest anyone has gotten to doing what K-Rod has this year since the strike shortened season of 1994 (at least…as far back as I checked).
Even Thigpen, in his record setting season, only won his league by 9 saves over Dennis Eckersley. Speaking of Eck, he is the last (and only?) closer to ever win the MVP. In 1992, he saved 51 games for the Oakland Atheletics in an incredible season that K-Rod has not touched peripherally. Eck had 8 more saves than the next player on the list (our own Lee Smith with 43.) That year in the AL, however, only 3 players had OPS over .900 (currently only one over 1.000 in the AL), only two players had over 35 homers that year, nobody was even stealing 80, 90, 130 bases that year (as they had in recent years). Let’s say that the time was ripe for it to happen. Could it be again? Let’s look at some competition.
WIth no player on the offensive side of the ball having an incredible year for them (minus Teixeira, who won’t qualify for the mVP in the voter’s minds (my theory)), and the pitching staff having no other obvious stars (setting themselves apart from the others), he seems to be the logical choice from their team.
Tampa Bay is, currently, the other team with 79 wins in the AL. Evan Longoria just got injured for the stretch run, but before that he was their best offensive force. He probably would not win it as a rookie, anyway (once again, my theory). As for their pitching staff, nobody really shines above anyone else. Peripherally, Kazmir is probably having the best year out of them, but has the least wins. Sonnanstine is having the best year by wins, but peripherally is the worst of the starters.
If Carlos Quentin (with his 36 homers, leading both leagues) were the only one on the White Sox with more than 25 homers or so at this point, you might look at him, but he’s surrounded in the order by Dye (31 homers) and Thome (27 homers).
Other candidates:
Will the voters really vote on a guy like Milton Bradley for MVP? He’s the only AL player eligible with an OPS over 1.000. Hamilton is a great story, but RBI is a misleading statistic.
Will the voters really vote on a guy like Cliff Lee? For Cy Young, yes…quite possibly. Either he or K-Rod. For MVP, no way. Not when his team will finish 15+ back of their division leader and fight with the Royals for the bottom spot in the AL Central.
If he saves 62-65 games this year and keeps (or betters) his peripherals…I think it’s his to lose.
by stlfan on
Aug 25, 2008 11:09 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
American... League?
What is this “American League” you speak of?
Lou Brock loves Lamp.
by birdjam on
Aug 25, 2008 11:20 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Closers almost never get the MVP
They always get a few votes, but it’s just a tease.
by Red in Chicago on
Aug 25, 2008 11:31 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
K-Rod isn't even the best closer in the AL
I’d take Joe Nathan or Mariano Rivera over him any day. Just because his counting stats on the best team in baseball are skyrocketing doesn’t make him God’s gift to the closer position.
Cardinal fan in the heart of Braves country
DFA Adam Kennedy and Randy Flores!
"Just because nobody understands you doesn't make you an artist."
by Mr Redbird on
Aug 25, 2008 11:47 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He's as good
as either of those guys — and you can put Soria on that list as well, he’s been nails for a really crappy Royals team. You can take Nathan or Rivera over him, that’s your opinion, but to say that they are both significantly better than K-Rod is incorrect. He’s been as good as those guys since he entered the league, and he’s significantly cheaper than both of them.
He’s certainly not an MVP though and Eck’s MVP in 1992 was a reward for his dominance in the three previous seasons more than it was for his performance that particular season. He wasn’t even the most valuable guy on his own team, that would have been McGwire, who finished 4th in the voting despite hitting 42 homers in only 139 games.
The only season where a closer deserved to be MVP would have been Eckersley’s 1990 season, probably the finest season by a reliever ever. He saved 48 games, struck out a batter an inning while walking four, count them four, batters for the whole season, and one of those was intentional!!! He allowed only 5 earned runs on the year and posted a ridiculous 606 ERA+ that season.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 12:03 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I never said "they are both significantly better than K-Rod"
And I would agree with you that is incorrect. A more apt comparison would be “they are both significantly better than Ryan Franklin.” I still say they are better, even if it’s not head-and-shoulders. I just think that K-Rod’s save numbers have inflated his value past what it actually is.
Cardinal fan in the heart of Braves country
DFA Adam Kennedy and Randy Flores!
"Just because nobody understands you doesn't make you an artist."
by Mr Redbird on
Aug 25, 2008 12:21 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
rodriguez has a long way to go before he’s “as good as” mariano rivera, who has been putting up better numbers for twice as long.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 12:57 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
We're speaking
in the context of this season, since we’re talking about the MVP race. K-Rod has been right on par with Rivera, Nathan, and Soria this year in terms of closing out games. He’s had far more chances than the other two, but part of that is the fact that the Angels bullpen is quite a bit better than the Twins and Yankees bullpens, and so is their pitching staff. They win a lot of close ballgames and don’t blow a lot of teams out, so he gets more opportunities.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 1:48 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
agreed on the bullpen/pitching staff thing. the angels’ bullpen has not pitched nearly so many innings as the twins’ or yankees’.
speaking of bullpens, strange fact: although MIN has the closer with an ERA under 1, the team’s ERA in save situations is a shocking 4.37. LA’s is 2.67; NY’s is 2.34.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 3:25 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
put soria on what list?
the list of closers who are as good as mariano rivera?
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 1:05 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
In terms of this year
he’s actually been better per WXRL…and he was awfully good for them last year setting up and then closing after Dotel got traded.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 1:49 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
In fact,
it’s just his saves — a contrived stat, at best — that makes him seem better than people like Nathan. Nathan’s having a better year than him — he just lacks the saves. K-Rod, regardless of his save total, should be — at best — the 4th pitcher in the AL considered for the MVP — behind Cliff Lee, Halladay, and Nathan.
While he’ll probably finish in the top 3-4, he probably deserves to finish around 8 or 9.
by chuckb on
Aug 25, 2008 12:19 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
yeah, joe nathan
has an ERA+ of 420! yikes! speaking of 420, i’ll take whatever fourstick’s smokin.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 1:00 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'd like to take a spin around your universe...
Apparently there you can just assume that someone says things that they haven’t. I never said Nathan wasn’t having a better season, and I never said K-Rod deserved the MVP — in fact, I said the opposite. But just because Nathan is having a better season this year doesn’t mean that it’s silly to say that Nathan is a better pitcher than K-Rod or Rivera. Their peripherals are nearly the same since 2004.
Nathan probably is the better guy this year, but K-Rod has been tops in the AL in WXRL twice since 2004. In that time, he’s been ahead of Rivera in that category every single year, Nathan is the only man ahead of him this year. The only other guys to be in the top ten every year since 2004 are Rivera and Nathan. I think it’s safe to say that nearly all of those guys are on par with one another year to year, and that none of them are just heads and shoulders better than the other two.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 2:05 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
But just because Nathan is having a better season this year doesn’t mean that it’s silly to say that Nathan is a better pitcher than K-Rod or Rivera.
what are you saying in this sentence? that’s it’s not silly to say nathan is better than k-rod? good, because that’s my point. and in the beginning of this whole thing, you said:
You can take Nathan or Rivera over [K-Rod], that’s your opinion, but to say that they are both significantly better than K-Rod is incorrect
you’re the one who started the “head and shoulders” talk. here’s the thing: if you’re looking at just this year, nathan is so good at his job it’s all but impossible to compete with him. if you’re looking at this year + an illustrious body of work (a la eckersley, as you described the reasons behind his MVP), then no one can really top rivera.
i know you said rodriguez is not the mvp. but he really should be farther down the list, IMO, even if we use easy counting stats:
k-rod: 55 IP, 41 H, 29 BB,16 ER (2.60 ERA)
rivera: 58 IP, 36 H, 6 BB, 10 ER (1.53 ERA)
nathan: 55 IP, 36 H, 13 BB, 6 ER (0.98 ERA)
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 3:14 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Context is important
I’d take Joe Nathan or Mariano Rivera over him any day. Just because his counting stats on the best team in baseball are skyrocketing doesn’t make him God’s gift to the closer position. — Mr. Redbird
This was the original quote that I was responding to, long before you got involved in the thread. Saying that you’d take Nathan and Rivera over him any day clearly states that the author thinks they are much better than Rodriguez, when looking at any stat or measure would show that he’s just as good as those two guys from year to year. The three of them are the most consistent closers year in and year out, so I put them on the same level. They are all very effective at their jobs, and all are near the top five in WXRL since 2004. They are 1a, 1b, 1c — you get little benefit, if any at all, from having any of those three on your team over the other two. That’s my point.
Nathan is better this year, but K-Rod was tops in WXRL two years in a row and is the only guy to be there twice since 2004 which was his first year closing. Also, you can’t use Rivera’s entire career to compare to K-Rod — if he pitches into his late 30’s and is on a competitive team he could well put up numbers very similar to Rivera. In fact, his first five years are actually better than Rivera’s first five years closing, but Rivera does it in New York and was on 4 championship teams in 5 years, so he gets a little more press.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 3:41 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
that, and he's the greatest closer of all time
but sure, k-rod has as good a chance as anyone to match him… someday, maybe. a lot of ifs there.
this year, they are not 1a, 1b and 1c.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 3:55 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That. Is. Your. Opinion.
How many saves has Joe Nathan blown? 3 in 38 attempts. 1 per 12 attempts.
Late and Close OPS against = .483
How many saves has K-Rod blown? 5 in 55 attempts. 1 per 11 attempts.
Late and Close OPS against = .551
How many saves has Rivera blown? 1 in 31 attempts. 1 per 31 attempts. Late and Close OPS against = .473
By those numbers it looks like Rivera’s the best. You could choose other statistics and make Nathan or K-Rod look better.
The bottom line is: You are better off with these three guys than anyone else is baseball in the 9th inning. It really doesn’t matter which one you choose, you’re getting nearly the same production out of each of them. Which has been my point all along. Which you keep coming back and throwing your opinion around at me about how they aren’t within half a win of being the exact same pitcher. Which they are.
Fine, you take Nathan, I’ll take K-Rod. End of discussion.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 4:13 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
i cited several stats that are better than ratio of blown saves. of course it’s my opinion… what the hell do you expect?
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 4:23 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Their job is to close games
blown saves are games that aren’t closed. The fewer blown saves you have, the better you are at your job.
The point was to show you how little difference there are between these three guys, which you clearly don’t understand. You could ask 32 different managers which guy they would want and probably get one of those three guys each time, and probably nearly an equal amount of times. They’re all great closers, but I’d take K-Rod simply because he’s the youngest of the three and I’d have him the longest amount of time at his best. Hell, he hasn’t even entered his prime yet.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 4:30 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
now you’re talking about k-rod’s age and “entering his prime,” but earlier you said:
We’re speaking in the context of this season, since we’re talking about the MVP race.
so which is it?
anyway, saves (and blown saves) are not the only stats at your disposal when comparing pitchers. k-rod is having a very good year, but he is not pitching as well as nathan, whose ERA is nearly A THIRD of k-rod’s. i realize ERA is not an awesome stat to use, either, but give me a break.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 4:33 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
you've gone completely out of the context of the conversation
I’m just trying to follow suit….
"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
Aug 25, 2008 4:35 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
funny that you mention surveying managers.
from an article posted yesterday:
In an informal survey of five scouts and one coach who have all seen Rodriguez recently, three expressed serious doubts about how good the 26-year-old Angel will be two or three years down the line, and one even wondered whether he’ll be as good as expected in this year’s playoffs.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 6:56 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
link
http://www.sportsline.com/mlb/story/10946092/
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 6:57 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
dude!
of course it’s my opinion… what the hell do you expect?
Who the hell do you think you are? Been staring at the Busch III lighting stanchions for too long, causing you to forget the proper rules of etiquette for this forum? This is no place for stating your opinions and using facts to back them up!
by jdub176 on
Aug 25, 2008 5:45 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
ok...I guess its just time to be a dick
At that point there’s no point in trying to have a civil conversation…it’s about who has the coolest insults. Great way to end a good debate and discussion.
I’m simply stating that I can use facts and figures to make K-Rod look as good or better than Rivera and Nathan as well. The difference between them is so slight that it’s not even worth debating.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 8:21 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
the difference is not slight this year, and you have been using stats like “saves” and “blown saves” while we have been citing ERA, WHIP, hits, walks… you know… meaningful statistics.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 8:24 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
ah yes
The difference between them is so slight that it’s not even worth debating.
But that’s just your opinion!
And this year, not one that has a strong factual foundation.
by jdub176 on
Aug 25, 2008 8:28 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
really?
Then why is he third in WXRL in the major leagues? He must really suck to not be comparable by any stretch of the imagination.
You’ve gone off the tip of iceberg….
"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
Aug 25, 2008 8:42 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
HE'S BEHIND JOE NATHAN, FOR GOD'S SAKE
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 8:49 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
AND AHEAD OF RIVERA, IN ALL CAPS
"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
Aug 25, 2008 8:50 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
short-term memory loss
do you remember me saying this?:
if you’re looking at just this year, nathan is so good at his job it’s all but impossible to compete with him. if you’re looking at this year + an illustrious body of work (a la eckersley, as you described the reasons behind his MVP), then no one can really top rivera.
if you want to use conventional stats like ERA, WHIP, etc., joe nathan is much better than francisco rodriguez. if you want to use WXRL, which you keep citing… joe nathan is still better, and not “barely.” by nearly a full win. how do you figure this helps your argument?
joe nathan is having a significantly better year than k-rod, except in the all-important arbitrary category of “saves.” why do you refuse to accept this?
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 8:55 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You're refusing to accept
that I said this earlier:
Nathan probably is the better guy this year,
but that I prefaced that by stating that I don’t see a whole lot of difference between any of these guys overall. They’re all great closers. They all add value at the back end of the bullpen. You just seem to think that you’d be better off with one or the other — I disagree with that.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 9:06 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
head in the sand
if you want, you can ignore the clear differences between nathan and rodriguez this year. obviously i can’t stop you. you see no difference between:
k-rod: 2.60 ERA, 1.27 WHIP [55 IP, 16 ER, 41 H, 29 BB]
and
nathan: 0.98 ERA, 0.89 WHIP [55 IP, 6 ER, 36 H, 13 BB]
and as if that weren’t blatant enough, you bring up a statistic (WXRL) that rates nathan almost a full win higher than k-rod… which is on the same page as several other metrics that rate nathan even MORE favorably!
did you invest in enron in late 2001, too?
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 9:22 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Why do you guys always fight each other?
Why can’t we all just get along?
Cardinal fan in the heart of Braves country
DFA Adam Kennedy and Randy Flores!
"Just because nobody understands you doesn't make you an artist."
by Mr Redbird on
Aug 25, 2008 11:38 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
because some jerk of a computer program
gave us two off days in the same week, and it’s slowly driving us crazy.
How do we survive the off-season?
"..and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped." -Sir Belvedere
by SleepyCA on
Aug 26, 2008 12:04 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
How do we survive the off-season?
Roster matrices.
by liam on
Aug 26, 2008 12:08 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
And community projections
Cardinal fan in the heart of Braves country
DFA Adam Kennedy and Randy Flores!
"Just because nobody understands you doesn't make you an artist."
by Mr Redbird on
Aug 26, 2008 8:47 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
No one said he sucked
I’m just saying Nathan and Rivera have been better this year. K-Rod’s been great, but not as great as them.
Meanwhile, you’ve melted the iceberg with all your hot air.
by jdub176 on
Aug 25, 2008 11:25 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I take issue with this line
It really doesn’t matter which one you choose, you’re getting nearly the same production out of each of them.
Not this year. Look at their WHIP.
Nathan: 0.891
Rivera: 0.716
Rodriguez: 1.265
I see a teensy bit of a difference there.
by jdub176 on
Aug 25, 2008 5:53 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Answer this then
If Nathan was going to cost you $20Mm Rivera was going to cost you $15M, and K-Rod was going to cost $10M, would you spend the extra $5-$10M or would you take K-Rod and use the savings to help your ballclub?
If they are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much better than he is, wouldn’t they be worth so much more?
"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
Aug 25, 2008 8:41 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
great argument.
you’re really grasping at straws with this. k-rod is going to be looking for a contract just like rivera’s. hell, francisco CORDERO got 4/46.
salaries in baseball depend on a fluctuating market and its often dunderheaded GMs. performance numbers are not always predictive, as age and injury become factors. how much is barry zito worth, fourstick? can’t we use his salary to judge his value?
to sort of answer your weird-ass question, i’d put my best guy in the most high-leverage situations, let the saves fall where they may and save the $10M per that i would’ve otherwise spent on a guy piling up meaningless counting stats.
however, if i were choosing which closer had performed the best in 2008, i would look at the numbers and use those to judge each pitcher’s performance. novel idea, i know.
but then, when i came to a conclusion, i’d bury my head in my ass and pretend not to recognize it.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 9:54 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Exactly -- Thank you -- You finally get it! Congrats!
to sort of answer your weird-ass question, i’d put my best guy in the most high-leverage situations, let the saves fall where they may and save the $10M per that i would’ve otherwise spent on a guy piling up meaningless counting stats.
phew…all that for you to just agree with me all along. Amazing! That’s how this thread started, as to which guy was more valuable to his team. My point was that they’re all valuable, and no matter the statistical analysis, since they’re all really good, none is more valuable than the other since they all shutdown opposing teams at the end of games.
"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
Aug 26, 2008 10:20 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
??
no. this thread started as an MVP discussion.
i don’t agree with you. you think k-rod and joe nathan are having nearly identical seasons. they’re not.
just because i can tell the difference between 2.60 and 0.98 doesn’t mean i want to pay $15M for a closer. i think you can get by just fine without a big name in the ninth inning. however, of the big names out there in the AL, joe nathan is having a significantly better year than francisco rodriguez. if any closer deserves MVP consideration, it’s nathan.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 26, 2008 11:52 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Rivera is the greatest closer of all time?
That’s debatable, but since you only worry about what’s in your head and how you feel about things I won’t even debate it with you. I don’t have patience to debate someone that doesn’t see things except in his own color…
"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
Aug 25, 2008 4:14 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
here we go
let the seething begin. i would like to hear your argument that rivera is not the penultimate closer.
rivera, career as reliever: 2.12 ERA (961 IP), 474 saves, 63-46 W-L, 886 K.
eckersley, same: 2.85 ERA (807 IP), 390 saves, 48-41 W-L, 792 K.
what other colors do you have?
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 4:30 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
and by "penultimate..."
i mean best. i don’t think that’s what that word means, but it seems like it should.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 4:37 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
"next to last"
You’re not predicting the Yankees fall victim to league contraction, are you?
by liam on
Aug 25, 2008 6:08 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
sounds like he is proposing
that rivera be moved to setup man?
Not a bad idea, if you think about it. There’s no reason for a team like the yankees, with infinite resources, not to have a closer and a penultimate closer both. One just closes the 8th inning.
(Makes more sense than having the best pitcher come in to pitch one inning in a 3-run ball game…)
"..and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped." -Sir Belvedere
by SleepyCA on
Aug 25, 2008 6:17 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Remember the Rivera-Wetteland 1-2 punch?
That was nasty. Rivera pitched 107 innings that season (1996); he’s never pitched more than 81 in any other season. What a monster to have in the bullpen.
by jdub176 on
Aug 25, 2008 6:30 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
heh
in no way did i mean to use penultimate in the way it’s supposed to be used. i prefer my definition, where it means “even more ultimate than regular-ultimate”
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 6:42 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
nice...
Let’s compare a guy who started closing at age 32 to a guy who’s done nothing but set-up and close his entire career. Eckersley was a two time all-star and above league average starting pitcher until he came to Oakland in 1987. He then became a dominant closer for the next 5 years and a servicable one into his 40’s.
Eckersley’s best seasons are on par with Rivera’s best seasons, and he had the best season by any reliever every, imo, in 1990. Now, if you put Eck in the pen in his third full season, as Rivera was, he closes all the way through his prime pitching years and puts up a ridiculous amount of numbers that few pitchers would have a chance to match. The closer position as it exists today, ninth inning guy, was created by Tony LaRussa and Eckersley in the late 1980’s and didn’t exist prior to that. Eck was a valued starting pitcher for most of the 1980’s so he never would have been moved to the bullpen.
If you were able to compare them from ages 27-38 as closers, I have a feeling those numbers would be a lot closer than they currently are, and Eck would have a much lower ERA, since most of his really poor years came after age 38. Prior to that he was pretty dominant in the 9th inning.
Because of the difference in eras, however, you can’t do that, which is unfortunate. I also think that guys like Sutter and Gossage belong in the conversation simply because they were able to come in and go 2-3 innings each time out and usually arrived on the mound in a high leverage situation.
If we’re talking about who’s the better pitcher, I pick Eckersley because he was a better than average starting pitcher for 12 years before entering the bullpen.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 4:58 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
i didn’t say mo is the greatest pitcher. i said he is the greatest closer, and he is.
eck probably would’ve been better if he’d started earlier, but he didn’t. “I have a feeling those numbers would be a lot closer than they currently are” is not the greatest argument when comparing players (see jim rice)
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 5:04 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
nice opinion
I like mine too.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 5:07 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
speaking of opinions
here’s another.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 6:54 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
great quote from above article:
While it’s hard to believe that Rodriguez will fall off that quickly, one scout said the loss of velocity is a big concern.
“When you look at the best closers, that doesn’t happen,” he said. “Look at Mariano Rivera. His velocity hasn’t varied. It’s pretty much the same today as it was 10 years ago.”
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 7:09 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
what about hoffman
he began as a fireballer, (mid-90s, iirc) and now his fastball sits at around 85
Pujols is the greatest Cardinal in my lifetime.
by bigcardsfan5 on
Aug 25, 2008 8:09 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
and now he kind of sucks.
i’d be interested to see how quickly his velocity declined, though. i do remember hearing about how learning a good changeup saved his career.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 8:21 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Hoffman
has always had a good changeup. That’s been his bread and butter for years. He’s also always struggled against really good hitters. Moving him to the bullpen saved his career because you can’t fastball/change your way through lineups as a starting pitcher.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 8:24 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
no
he learned the changeup after he came into MLB. that’s the legend, anyway.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 8:26 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
yes
but since he started his dominant run as closer he’s featured a good fastball and a great changeup. It’s what changed him as a pitcher. He still threw in the mid-90’s — he just had the great change to keep hitters off balance. He didn’t blow guys away with a 100 mph heater and then learn the change when he couldn’t throw 100 mph anymore.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 8:28 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
ok
so i guess the original question was: if great closers don’t lose velocity, then what about hoffman (who has lost velocity)?
and i guess the answer is that hoffman is no longer a great closer… but his initial drop in velocity came along with a great changeup, which worked for many years after that.
anyway, it’s too bad that the career saves leader never really factors into the greatest closer discussion.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 8:37 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
just curious
but who would you put into that discussion?
Pujols is the greatest Cardinal in my lifetime.
by bigcardsfan5 on
Aug 25, 2008 8:46 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
well, i will answer my own question
my top 5:
5. hoffman
4. eck
3. gossage
2. fingers
1. rivera
Pujols is the greatest Cardinal in my lifetime.
by bigcardsfan5 on
Aug 25, 2008 9:13 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
i'm no expert,
but i would probably rank them
5. lee smith
4. hoffman
3. fingers
2. eckersley
1. rivera
i left out the goose just because my list looked too much like yours.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 9:33 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
not bad
my reasoning for gossage over smith was postseason
Pujols is the greatest Cardinal in my lifetime.
by bigcardsfan5 on
Aug 25, 2008 9:50 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
who said he didn't belong in the discussion?
oh yah…you just did, lol.
He hasn’t been as good as Rivera in nearly the same era, and saves are what you call a “counting stat”, and just aren’t very important in “real statistical analysis”. Just using your own statements 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
Aug 25, 2008 8:49 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Engine number 42
at the top of the list!
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on
Aug 26, 2008 10:14 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Johan Santana would disagree
"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
Aug 25, 2008 11:18 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
you are correct
the changeup saved him when he lost the fire on the fastball
from what i recall, he lost the zip quickly
Pujols is the greatest Cardinal in my lifetime.
by bigcardsfan5 on
Aug 25, 2008 8:25 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Better? Valuable?
I’m not going to enter the K-Rod/Nathan debate, but I will throw this out there – as far as being "valuable: – what if the Cardinals had K-Rod instead of Izzy? how much value would he add, assuming everything else about this year’s team was the same?
Anyone doubt that the Cards would be right there with the Cubs if that replacement was made?
by Hal Lanier's Pants on
Aug 25, 2008 1:28 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
hmmm, sure
[insert any MLB closer’s name here] > izzy/franklin of 2008
so what? how much better would the cards be if they had an even BETTER closer than k-rod?
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 1:34 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That's not Hal's point, I don't think
The point is that the marginal utility to the Cardinals of having a really good closer the whole season could be very high—high enough even to justify $10-15 million in salary. Just forget about Young Pitcher for a moment. If the team didn’t have him available at the beginning of the season, and knew how many games Izzy/Franklin would blow this year, they might have made a bold move last offseason. Well, the probably wouldn’t have…but still.
by Red in Chicago on
Aug 25, 2008 1:56 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yes, yes, yes
Thanks for stating that better than I did.
As for Young Pitcher, he apppears to be the answer right now. Just think if he could have performed as well the first time he came up…. I dare say they’d be at least tied with Milwaukee, if not ahead.
by Hal Lanier's Pants on
Aug 25, 2008 2:39 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
i think i understand his point:
it’s good to have an awesome closer. does that sum it up?
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 2:45 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That does not sum it up, but thanks for condescending.
The Royals have an awesome closer but his “value” to them is not as high as the “value” of an effective closer would be to the Cardinals. Red in Chicago did a much better job stating this than I did originally.
Think about this:
The Cardinals have had 62 save opportunties this year (#1 in NL). The Angels have had 67 (#1 in AL.) The Cardinals have had a nightmare of a bullpen. The Angels have K-Rod.
The Cardinals have won 73 games. The Angels have won 79 games.
I know it ‘s not as simple as all that, and that some of those save opps. come about as a result of the way TLR uses his pen. I’m just pointing out that an elite closer would have more value to the Cardinals this year than to just about any other team.
by Hal Lanier's Pants on
Aug 25, 2008 3:09 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
i agree
even a mediocre closer would have been valuable. i don’t think you’ll find anyone to disagree with you.
if k-rod were on the cardinals, who would be the team mvp? him or pujols?
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 3:17 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Pu
have to get to a save situation first.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on
Aug 25, 2008 3:18 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
agreed.
now, i’d posit that you’d have a narrower vote if it was nathan instead of k-rod. there really is quite a difference between them this year.
"so if you can’t understand what someone else is saying why don’t you just shut up about it instead of being a jerk-off?"
wordiness is next to godliness
by baw on
Aug 25, 2008 3:51 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
However, you just made my point
The Cardinals wouldn’t be that much better off with Nathan over K-Rod. They’ve converted around an equal percentage of save chances, they both only pitch to 3 or 4 batters every night, and the improvement that one gives over the other is marginal at best, since their role is so minimal and only comes into play when the team is ahead or tied. They aren’t going to win a game for you, but they’re not going to let a win slip away very often either.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 2:07 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I get your argument
and I know it’s about MVP voting and perception, but I would bet if both were FAs this winter K-Rod would get a bigger contract. And not because he had more saves, but because he’s almost 8 years younger than Nathan.
by Hal Lanier's Pants on
Aug 25, 2008 2:44 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Might not even be the best reliever in the AL
Going by WXRL, Joe Nathan has been almost a full game more valuable than Fran-Rod.
Of course, doesn’t mean anything when it comes to MVP voting as gaudy save numbers are what get attention.
by lightbulb on
Aug 25, 2008 11:47 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
al mvp closers
rollie fingers, 1981
willie hernandez, 1984
eck, 1992
Pujols is the greatest Cardinal in my lifetime.
by bigcardsfan5 on
Aug 25, 2008 12:22 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Go figure
K-Rod has more saves than anyone else because he has more save opportunities. 17 more than anyone else.
Kosuke Fukudome: $55 million .264 .364 .384
Skip Schumaker: $Free .311 .372 .426
by joker24 on
Aug 25, 2008 1:38 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Not just a reply to joker24, but to all of you in the above argument as well
Saying K-Rod has more saves because of more chances…or saying that others have better peripherals (Nathan) or better pasts (Rivera) is like saying that a contrived stat of RBI will not win you an MVP (errr…see Ryan Howard) or good average and steals won’t win you an MVP (errr…see Jimmy Rollins). I think that voters are looking for all different kinds of crap each year and that if K-Rod breaks the record, especially if he breaks it by 10% or so, he has a great shot at winning the MVP.
by stlfan on
Aug 25, 2008 2:33 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree with all that you said
but that don’t make it right… :-D
"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
Aug 25, 2008 2:36 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
i agree with both of you
but with the offense the angels have, k-rod is as good a candidate for them as anyone
the other contenders dont really have great candidates either, though there are a few
for the white sox, quentin may be a good choice
rays-none, red sox-none, twins-mauer and morneau, but their cases are pretty weak
the only really good possibility for non-contenders is josh hamilton (rbis again)
so, yeah, if k-rod can rack up 60 or more, i would say he has a shot
Pujols is the greatest Cardinal in my lifetime.
by bigcardsfan5 on
Aug 25, 2008 6:47 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Reyes
Even if he turns into an ace for Cleveland and Perdomo doesn’t do anything for us, I’d still say it wouldn’t be a trade we should regret making. His feud with Duncan would have prevented him from reaching his full potential here as long as DD was here, so trading the 5+ ERA Reyes was a good baseball move, even if he turns into a sub-3 ERA Reyes.
Cardinal fan in the heart of Braves country
DFA Adam Kennedy and Randy Flores!
"Just because nobody understands you doesn't make you an artist."
by Mr Redbird on
Aug 25, 2008 11:48 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Absolutely
and he’s one guy every Cardinal fan should root for for his own sake. He just arrived in St. Louis during the wrong regime.
by Red in Chicago on
Aug 25, 2008 11:55 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I will root for Reyes, I have no reason not to root against the guy....
By all accounts he is not pitching differently velocity wise? I would be worried as to where his velocity went. I thought the theory around here was he was not allowed to use his 4 seam 96 MPH fastball up in the zone? From people who post he has not been throwing hard at all. I think being in the AL helps him right now because it’s a new league. I don’t know how long he will have before there is more of a book on him.
I think Boggs has more potential than Reyes at this point anyway, not that I think Reyes staying a Cardinal was going to block Boggs. Boggs has a better FB with better movement than Reyes.
by ICbirdfan on
Aug 25, 2008 12:04 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
i dont really think his velocity is GONE...
he was touching 94 fairly consistently when he was with us this year, and sometimes hitting 95.
by longhornscardinals on
Aug 25, 2008 12:32 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
2007 he was at 90, this year he's at 93
http://baseball.bornbybits.com/2008/Anthony_Reyes.html
"How depressing is it being you? Would you equate it to being a lifelong Cubs fan?"
by rocKStark5 on
Aug 25, 2008 1:07 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
thanks for that...
remember though, thats the average. his four-seamer probably sits 93-95, while his two seamer is closer to 90-93.
by longhornscardinals on
Aug 25, 2008 1:14 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
what Cards' fans should regret
is the feud that led to his poor performance and subsequent trade. At least good, young, cheap pitchers are easy to find!
by chuckb on
Aug 25, 2008 12:21 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
How did the feud lead to his poor performance?
Considering the feud is/was a relatively new thing, yet his below average pitching has been around since his first big league innings?
Lets see how he does once he’s been around the AL a few times.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 12:28 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
the feud began in 2006
and it has everything to do with the poor results he got, insofar as the “feud” was about reyes’ pitching style. he wasn’t the type of pitcher tony / dave wanted, so they tried to make him a different type of pitcher; when reyes resisted, he wound up in their doghouse.
by lboros on
Aug 25, 2008 12:33 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
So.....
The first time Duncan tries to TEACH Reyes something, it is a feud?
Not how it works. My guess is that it didn’t become a problem until Reyes started pushing back and doing his own thing, and Duncan got fed up, which is to be expected. Duncan doesn’t make EVERY SINGLE pitcher in the organization pitch the same way. Evidently he thought Reyes needed to change some things to be successful in the long haul. Reyes either didn’t agree with that, didn’t want to change for another reason, or didn’t want to put in the work that changing would have required. Could Duncan be wrong, and might Reyes be able to be successful pitching his old way? Maybe. But even then, you could argue that he could have been BETTER had he made the changes.
We all know that there is a fairly large contingent of fans that love blaming TLR and Duncan for nearly everything. I’m not in that crowd.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 12:41 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Couple thoughts
Anthony’s arm slot really wasn’t built for the two-seamer. He would’ve had more success attempting to develop a cutter, or even a slider. By the time these options were on the table (or at least the cutter) the relationship had deteriorated.
Also, Dyar Miller seemed to understand where Anthony was coming from:
“Some organizations try to clone people to their way of thinking. Others try to get the best out of the individual. I think in Anthony’s case, you’ve got to work with him the way he throws. I just don’t think he’s going to be able to throw that two-seamer. He doesn’t work that way.”
“I just think he can give you five, six or seven innings throwing four-seam fastballs with enough change of speeds,” Miller said. “I would say he might need to pitch inside more and locate better. Try it and see what happens. I don’t think it’s going to work the other way.”
Don’t have a link for that. You’ll have to trust me. Came from last June. Pretty strong stuff from the pitching coach who’s grooming your arms for you at AAA. To be clear: I’m not insinuating that Anthony is blameless here. But the dude tried it their way and got his head bashed in. Also, to his credit, he’s never whined about any of this stuff. He never went public the way his manager and pitching coach did. He just put his head down and kept working.
Just like the Rolen rift, both sides bear blame here. Most of it resides with the braintrust, imo.
by meat on
Aug 25, 2008 1:01 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
But the dude tried it their way and got his head bashed in.
That is the think I disagree with, and why I think Duncan and TLR got so upset with Anthony. I’ve always gotten the feeling from watching, and from hearing Dunc/TLR, that they didn’t think Anthony really, truly tried to pitch they way they wanted him to. I think Anthony went out there, half-heartedly threw the pitches Duncan wanted him to throw, got hit hard, and had the “see, now let me do it my way” attitude after that.
Nobody said the change was going to come overnight. Anthony was going to have to work at it, and I get the feeling he never did. To me, THAT, the lack of work ethic, is what probably got under the skin of TLR/Duncan. And rightfully so, IMO. Those two have earned the right to be trusted (initially). They are the coaches, if they want you to do things a certain way, you, as a young player, owe it to them to give it your all. If it doesn’t work, I’m sure they’d be the first ones to try something else. But I don’t think Anthony really ever gave it a shot, and then it was too late.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 1:13 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I would say you're being...
awfully subjective in your stance. We know for sure that ARey did at least throw the two-seamer as requested/instructed…to say you “think” he didn’t try to be successful with it makes little sense to me – I’m not saying you’re wrong. The few games that Anthony was successful he was pitching his way, I assume he is doing the same now in Cleveland.
by cardzfanbub on
Aug 25, 2008 1:17 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
where do you get
that there was a “lack of work ethic?” You just made that up, didn’t you? There’s never been anything documented that I know of to support that.
So your claim is that Reyes just flipped up the 2-seamers half-heartedly and then, b/c he was proved right that he failed (even though it was due to his “lack of effort”), he went back to pitching the way he wanted to pitch and said, “To hell w/ Duncan! I’m gonna do whatever I want!” That’s your claim?
Duncan failed w/ Reyes. He tried to turn him into a 2-seamer, sinkerball pitcher and failed. I don’t know to what degree Reyes deserves blame in this but, this I do know: No one has ever documented that his work ethic was lacking in any way. Never. He tried to do it. Maybe he couldn’t keep his arm slot where Duncan wanted it or whatever but it wasn’t, or there’s no evidence to support your claim that there was a lack of trying. He tried. The other thing I know is that Duncan failed and the people who give Duncan credit for the myriad pitchers he has single-handedly turned around should at least acknowledge the pitchers with whom he has failed.
by chuckb on
Aug 25, 2008 1:21 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
1 recs
The list of Duncan's successes is pretty long.
The list of his failures is pretty short.
by Red in Chicago on
Aug 25, 2008 1:57 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
actually
one of the front page bloggers did some digging about that last year and it turns out to be pretty even. People seem to disregard his failed projects like BiPolar Betty, Sidney Ponson, etc.
"How depressing is it being you? Would you equate it to being a lifelong Cubs fan?"
by rocKStark5 on
Aug 25, 2008 2:04 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Marquis sucks for the Cubs......
Marquis sucked for the Braves…..
I don’t get how he even counts to be honest.
by ICbirdfan on
Aug 25, 2008 2:06 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I thought that was the whole "dave duncan" thing?
Turning shitty pitchers into good ones?
"How depressing is it being you? Would you equate it to being a lifelong Cubs fan?"
by rocKStark5 on
Aug 25, 2008 2:11 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He isn't 100%
Just MUCH better than any other pitching coach.
The way to measure his success isn’t how many fixes vs how many he couldn’t, it’s how often he fixes vs other pitching coaches and how often they fix.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 3:01 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I would assume
what measures a good pitching coach is the marginal wins they squeeze out. I’m not saying duncan had a negative effect, however, just as an example, say Weaver was +2 (imaginary) but kip wells -2 brings you back to 0.
To me it is about what was fixed and what failed because your failures cost wins just as much as your successes adds wins.
"How depressing is it being you? Would you equate it to being a lifelong Cubs fan?"
by rocKStark5 on
Aug 25, 2008 3:17 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm not even sure about Marquis
Marquis was really pretty good for us in 2004 and got progressively worse. The problem is that we assign Duncan too much credit for the “successes” and, IMO, not the same amount of “blame” for the failures. In this context, Marquis may actually go down as a success (for 2004) and a failure (for 05-06). The truth, IMO, is that the “success” or “failure” truly belongs to Marquis and not to Duncan at all. I simply have a problem w/ giving credit to Duncan w/o assigning him the corresponding blame.
by chuckb on
Aug 25, 2008 3:47 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
or
with the org for bringing in shit pitchers with confidence that duncan will turn their careers around. i wonder how much the cards have spent on POS pitchers that failed that could have gone to a single decent one. I imagine the economics still slant in favor of the scrap heap since they usually (jooooeeelll whyyyyyy joeeelll) don’t sign for multiple years and are pretty cheap.
by spencegrif on
Aug 25, 2008 4:13 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I don't want to replicate
that analysis, but Duncan’s ability to reclaim lost talent is what sets him apart from other pitching coaches. Doing what he did for Carpenter, Weaver and Wellemeyer is nothing short of extraordinary. It’s also been the engine of the Cardinals’ recent success insofar as it has allowed them to get by with lower pitching payrolls than they otherwise would have, thus freeing up money for other positions.
by Red in Chicago on
Aug 25, 2008 2:07 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
DD's successes
For the most part, his successes have come with veteran pitchers who need to add a pitch or are really good at following Dunc’s expansive gameplanning to get hitters out. Think about his greatest successes: Dave Stewart, Bob Welch, Chris Carpenter, Woody Williams, Jeff Suppan, etc. All of those guys were talented pitchers who needed to add a pitch or were willing to follow a gameplan put together by Duncan through experience and advanced scouting. The ones that fail generally just aren’t very good pitchers or are guys who want to do things their own way all the time, even if it means they’ll be less successful.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 2:12 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
And add the focus, 'stick
Stottlemeyer, Wellemeyer (I think I’m seeing a pattern developing) and Weaver were all guys that were/are intense competitors, whose lack of focus sometimes derailed them. I think part of Duncan’s message is: look, I know you want to win—you don’t have to be demonstrative for me—or the fans—to know that. So drop the ‘angry’ or the ‘mopey’ and focus pitch-to-pitch. This works because the preparation he does allows his pitchers to feel more prepared, more capable, more confident. Frequently, this translates to better performance.
BTW, Anthony should’ve just changed his name to Reyesmeyer. Presto! #2 starter.
by meat on
Aug 25, 2008 2:23 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Anyone know what's actually in those white binders?
Seriously. Is it a bunch of statistics, anecdotal hitter tendencies, a Ted-Williams style “hot zone” analysis, or what?
by Red in Chicago on
Aug 25, 2008 3:17 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
my guess
would be Batter Cards just like the ones bornbybits has via Pitch F/X
"How depressing is it being you? Would you equate it to being a lifelong Cubs fan?"
by rocKStark5 on
Aug 25, 2008 3:19 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
it's mentioned in passing
in the books Men at Work and Three Nights in August. It sounds to me like they have player cards for each batter that breaks them down against certain pitchers, how they do situationally, what pitches they handle best and what they try to do in certain situations.
"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
Aug 25, 2008 3:45 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
why does he get the credit
rather than those players, though? Carp was a supremely talented pitcher w/ tremendous stuff who was young and hadn’t harnessed it yet, and injured. He gets the credit for turning Carp into a great pitcher? I have a huge problem w/ that.
Weaver, all in all, wasn’t very good for us. He had 2-3 good starts down the stretch and in the playoffs, but if you look at his numbers as a whole, not very good. Wellemeyer — another guy w/ great stuff who seems to have grown up. Why does Duncan, and not Wellemeyer, get the credit for that? And if he does, why doesn’t he get the blame for Kip Wells, who had really good stuff but never could get it together? If he gets credit for Wellemeyer, he should get blame for Wells. I’ll ascribe him neither.
by chuckb on
Aug 25, 2008 3:51 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
There's a lot of credit to spread around
Dunc, Tony et all for developing a pitch to contact system and fielding above average defenses to protect it. Duncan for communicating the system, and the pitchers who follow and work well within it.
The issue is that when a pitcher doesn’t have success we try and team it up to a Duncan failure just like when we describe successes as a Duncan success. When, frankly, there’s a lot more cogs at work.
It’s clear, however, that if there is a communication breakdown, that system fails. As we’ve seen in some of the struggles of the system.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on
Aug 25, 2008 3:55 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
My problem is not that I don't agree w/ you
except on the point of where the “blame” is distributed. Duncan is never blamed for “failures.” He gets tons of credit from the fanbase for the successes, but does not get the blame for the failures. Jason Marquis is referred to as “Bipolar Betty” — rather than “Duncan screwed up a good thing.” Do I think the blame belongs to Duncan? No but it’s is intellectually dishonest to give the credit for Todd Wellemeyer to Duncan (rather than to Wellemeyer himself) and NOT to give the blame to him for Marquis, Wells, Ponson or whoever.
If the pitching coach is responsible for pitchers’ successes and failures, be honest about it. That’s all I ask. If you’re going to tell us (not you, specifically but the collective "you") how great Duncan is b/c of all the wonderful pitchers he’s “fixed”, at least be honest enough to subscribe him the blame for the people he didn’t fix or who got worse under his tutelage. It’s intellectually dishonest. That’s the problem I have in the debate. It’s not that Duncan doesn’t deserve any credit. He clearly does. But he then also deserves some — but not all and probably not even most — blame when things go wrong.
Intellectual dishonesty .
by chuckb on
Aug 25, 2008 4:02 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
yeah, I’m aware you’re not talking to me directly. just thought I’d sideline along.
I don’t think there should be any blame associated, I don’t see the reasoning or rationale.
The system that the Cards have put together is no different than the “box and 1” nba system, or the “3-4” in the nfl. It’s just a system, and requires a lot of pieces to work.
I think they held on too long, allowed walls to come up and prevent proper communication, and there was a loss of faith in each side. Nothing to blame anyone on, it’s going to happen.
As far as successes, I, personally have never given Duncan credit for it. It’s the scouts who see what they see out there, the org for getting the player, duncan and tony for communicating the message, and the defense giving them a fighting chance.
too many men in baseball to assign success/failure to one man, even if that one man is a highly decorated pitching coach that is part of a long time combo.
I use statistics much as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – as support rather than illumination. - Andrew Lang
by AdjustedExpectations on
Aug 25, 2008 4:28 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm having trouble with the term "failure"
Why should he be blamed if a bad pitcher stays bad? I don’t think he’s ever publicly stated he can fix any and all pitchers. That’s the media.
If you want to blame him for a good pitchers turning bad, then fine. He works with what he has. Some get better, some don’t.
I just don’t understand labeling him a failure because Kip Wells, Jeff Weaver, Jason Marquis, Mike Maroth, or anyone else fits this category are all still bad.
In the world I see--you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Tower. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying strips of venison on the empty carpool lane of some abandoned superhighway.
by Tackle Box on
Aug 25, 2008 5:00 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm mostly in agreement with you...
I haven’t seen where these “failures” have went on to have success elsewhere…though I do think ARey may be the exception.
by cardzfanbub on
Aug 25, 2008 6:31 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That was the point I was having trouble.....
grasping as well.
A failure would be a pitcher getting worse after coming to STL, not a bad pitcher staying bad.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 9:03 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Why should he get the blame for Wells and Marquis?
They were bad before they got here and bad after they left. Fstick is right. The ones that succeed want to succeed. The rest don’t seem to have the mental makeup. Wells, Marquis and Reyes all fit that category. No proof that Anthony didn’t really try but all the outward indications (they never talk to me— they didn’t tell me what to work on) seem to show that they had given up on communicating with him. You can either blame DD for being an idiot and wasting a talent or Anthony for not listening/trying. I’ll take the second.
by The Duke on
Aug 25, 2008 8:07 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Duncan
He is a very very good pitching coach… Anyone who trys to argue against that must have a personal problem with Dunc..
However I think it’s really hard to say what pitchers he “failed” and “succeeded” with as there are lots of factors which play into the discuession. I think there are lots of things we do not know as well.
I can say Dunc does well at times and does not do well at time and I don’t know how much is his fault or the pitchers fault. It’s baseball things don’t work all the time even if it appears they should.
by ICbirdfan on
Aug 25, 2008 2:04 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'll agree and disagree
I believe Duncan is a good pitching coach, but I think it is pretty absurd to say that, “anyone who trys [sic] to argue against that must have a personal problem with Dunc.”
He does have his limitations along with his strengths. He is the ultimate game plan guy, but that is not the only thing a coach does. He also should bear some responsibility for not percolating his philosophy down through the system. He has been here 13 years and we are still talking about him having a different idea about pitching philosophy than the player development organization.
Now, he is certainly not the only one to blame for that situation, but asking a guy to change at the major league level, particularly a guy who wasn’t even given a chance to fail, is just bad coaching.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on
Aug 25, 2008 9:06 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Really think that's overblown
The whole disjoint between pitching philosophies between player development and the big league staff, that is.
The player development people need to continue to maximize the strengths of prospects whether they fit with the Cardinals’ way or not (whatever you believe that to be). Reyes should have been traded away after the 2006 season (I would’ve thrown a minor fit at the time, but we would’ve gotten more out of him than Perdomo). His skills were developed finenot adding a splitter asidehe was a valuable asset to the organization who didn’t have a future with it.
The front office just needs to better identify the players who will fit in with the ML club and which ones have more value as trade chips than in future contributions to big league winsthat’s a communications issue that I think Mo’s got a much better handle on than Walt did. Can’t blame him (or accuse him of cowardice) for trying to pump up Reyes’ value a bit after last year’s disastrous results before trading him away.
by liam on
Aug 25, 2008 9:26 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree with that
But I don’t understand why some can’t concede that occasionally it could be true that Duncan isn’t the best fit for a particular pitcher.
I think he’s a good pitching coach, but I also believe he isn’t the guy that is going to be able to get the best out of Reyes. It happens. Seems like the snap response is always to put the stubborn label on any pitchers that don’t work out. It’s quite possible that Duncan can be pretty damn good at his job, and still not be the best for every pitcher that comes along the way. Stating every case that fails happens because they don’t listen, suggests a belief that Duncan is darn near perfect. That isn’t a standard anyone could live up to.
by Merry CRasmus on
Aug 25, 2008 2:19 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree....
I think Dunc has been doing “his thing” so long that he is probably a bit set in his ways… I can totally see him butting heads with young guys who just need a bit more patience/different perspective.
I just don’t think Dunc and Reyes were a fit for some reason and none of us will ever know the who reason why. I don’t know how great Reyes will ever be but it would have been nice for him to be a cheap #4 or #5 option for a couple years and when he gets expensive the Cards could have gotten rid of him and filled his role with a minor league option who is a cheap #4 or #5.
I think Reyes had such high expectations people get more emotional when he did not dominate. Maybe Reyes was never going to be a #1, #2, or #3 type starter… I don’t know but I think he is talked about more due to what whe was supposed to be.
by ICbirdfan on
Aug 25, 2008 2:40 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
it just sounds like you have a dislike for the guy
rather than having anything to back it up
it's time to bring the rock!!!!!!!
by Cards Fan in Chitown on
Aug 25, 2008 1:27 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Why is it that
every time someone pitches well under Duncan, Duncan gets the credit for his miraculous turnaround — Wellemeyer, Pineiro (yeah, right!), etc. but when a pitcher gets worse under Duncan, as Reyes unquestionably did, it’s b/c of Reyes “pushing back and doing his own thing” rather than b/c of Duncan. Duncan gets absolved of any culpability when a pitcher fails under his tutelage but gets all the credit when a pitcher succeeds in the same situation.
Also, the claim that Reyes “did his own thing” flies in the face of everything we know about the situation. Reyes tried to become the 2-seam, sinker pitcher that Duncan wanted him to be. We witnessed this last year and, correspondingly, witnessed his decreasing velocity and increasing ineffectiveness. Reyes absolutely did not “push back and do his own thing.” Duncan tried to turn him into something other than what he was, and Reyes tried to go along w/ it. The bottom line is that it didn’t work out. Why that’s all Reyes’ fault and no culpability falls in Duncan’s lap is beyond me.
by chuckb on
Aug 25, 2008 1:16 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Just curious.....
If at this time next year, Reyes’ numbers are in line with his career in STL, what will you be saying?
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 1:41 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
right back at ya
"How depressing is it being you? Would you equate it to being a lifelong Cubs fan?"
by rocKStark5 on
Aug 25, 2008 1:51 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'd say Duncan was right.....
in “trying” to change him. IMO, that will mean that Reyes, throwing the way HE wants to throw, isn’t a very good ML pitcher.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 3:02 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
If I can find it
I’ll probably post a link to the above post. Reyes’ failure won’t change anything I typed. What if Wellemeyer reverts to the pitcher he was w/ KC and in his prior stints? What will you say?
by chuckb on
Aug 25, 2008 3:54 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'd say that Duncan.....
probably didn’t “fix” him, and that the last year or two was a bit of a mirage.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 9:04 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
it's an organizational failing
I think it isn’t really necessary or helpful to try to assign blame to individuals here. To me, the key organizational failing was simply not realizing that he wouldn’t work out here because his pitching philosophy was so different than what the big league coaching staff wanted. There are benefits and negatives to every approach, but you’ll see that the good organizations match their player acquisition to their overall philosophy. The NE Patriots are widely acknowledged as the best example of that.
So, really, the only error I see here is not trading Reyes earlier, as soon as the “feud” was identified, and when he was still viewed as a top pitching prospect. Remember that Baseball America had Reyes as the top prospect in the organization just three years ago, in 2005!?
by apack on
Aug 25, 2008 1:25 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
False: below average pitching has been around
around since his first big league innings?
2005: 12:4 K:BB w/2.70 ERA in 13.3 innings
2006: First two spot starts: 8:2 K:BB w/2.25 ERA in 12 innings
Recalled first 5 starts: 23:11 K:BB w/4.50 ERA in 28 innings
He was recalled twice more in 2006, dominated the Pirates and then dominated Milwaukee and San Diego on the second recall.
Everytime Anthony Reyes would come up, he’d get 1 or 2 brilliant starts and then his velocity would drop and his K:BB ratio would go up. Also, during that stretch, the amount of 2-seamers down in the zone and lack of the changeup would increase.
He tried it ‘their way’ all throughout 2007 until finally getting demoted in July. He went down to Memphis, retooled himself back to what the type of pitcher he had always been. He came back at the start of August, pitched exceptional again. He had a bad inning in Cincinnati and they sent him to the bullpen.
They never wanted him in St. Louis. He was a different type ‘cat’ to them. He didn’t pitch in the manner they thought he should. He wore his hat funny, he wore his socks high. He trained with SWAT teams in the off-season. He preferred listening to Dyar Miller than Dave Duncan. He was being ‘handed too much’, something ‘young pitchers’ simply can’t have done.
When he wouldn’t conform (well, actually he did conform and got his brain beat in for it) they said they didn’t want him around. Mozeliak put him on the roster, so they sent him to the bullpen.
by Hardcore Legend on
Aug 25, 2008 2:51 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
LOL
Way to pick around the stats to prove your point.
He’s doing the same thing in Cleveland that he did in STL. His first few starts, his first time through the league, he’ll be pretty solid. For someone that yells “small sample size” as much as you do, it’s funny that periods you chose for Reyes above.
There will be no way to measure Reyes, or this trade, until the end of next season at the earliest. I happen to think he’ll regress from what he is doing in Cleveland, especially if you factor in the parks he played in. My guess is he’ll pitch a little better at home in Cleveland, b/c he can give up the deep fly ball outs. Couldn’t do that in STL. But I think his road numbers next year will be on pace with what we saw here. I haven’t seen any reason to think that they won’t.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 3:14 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I have no problem with him.....
But much like alot of folks “don’t like Izzy”, my problems with Reyes are that he isn’t a very good pitcher.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 9:05 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I didn't just randomly pick statistics to show only Anthony
Reyes good games v his bad games. For a guy who says that the coaches were trying to get him to do things he simply could not do, it is telling that the games when he returned from exile away from the pitching coach that was trying to change him would have excellent results in-line with his ‘prospect’ status and as the amount of time the two were together increased, Reyes control and velocity decreased. Not his actual results, two physical signals decreased.
It could be purely random chance that every time Anthony Reyes returned from not having to see Dave Duncan he would pitch very well. That’s a distinct possibility. There is also the distinct possibility that the changes Dave wanted to make to Anthony caused him not only to have bad results but negatively effected the mechanics that had gotten him into professional baseball and labeled as an elite prospect.
And, again, to shoot holes in your subjective logic…why would he not be able to give up long fly balls at Busch Stadium? In 2007, Busch was ranked #28 in baseball for HRs. Progressive Field was ranked #12. This year, Busch is ranked #21, Progressive Field 29. 2006, Busch Stadium was ranked #19, Progressive Field #22. It isn’t like he went from Arlington to Yellowstone.
by Hardcore Legend on
Aug 25, 2008 3:36 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Doesn't that just support my statement?
If Reyes was suppose to be working on pitching the way Duncan wanted him to when sent to the minors, yet he came back up throwing the way he (Reyes) wanted to, I think that is a problem.
Perez was told to go to the minors and work on his slider. He was recalled, and I could tell he had worked on it. I never could tell that with Reyes, and the fact that you say he would come back up throwing his old stuff supports that. No wonder Duncan was pissed off at him, I would have been too.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 9:07 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The slider you labeled as garbage?
It wasn’t any better when he came back, they simply finally started calling for it when he came back. Everything was fastball, fastball, fastball before.
Remember, at one time they wanted him to dump the slider and start throwing a curveball instead (during the spring).
Reyes played it Dave’s way all off-season 2007 and in ST 2007. He promptly got his skull beat in. Finally, he gave up on it, went back to Memphis, reclaimed his style of pitching and was very good for the Cardinals. Then he had 1 bad inning in Cincy and was demoted to the pen.
by Hardcore Legend on
Aug 25, 2008 9:12 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I don't recall calling it garbage.....
And I disagree with you on Reyes. As long as you believe that to be your opinion on what happened, and not some kind of fact, we’ll just agree to disagree.
Like I said, the easy thing to do here is wait one season. What Reyes is doing this time next year will speak volumes about this argument. Until then, we’re all just voicing something that can’t be supported with facts either way.
by SoonerfanTU on
Aug 25, 2008 9:16 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Except
we are providing facts about past history (v. Reyes success/failure, Dave Duncan’s attitude towards him). A year from now, those facts won’t change.
by Hardcore Legend on
Aug 25, 2008 10:28 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
all he did
was respond to your post. You said he sucked since his first big league start and when he proved that wasn’t the case, you claim “small sample size.” Huh?
by chuckb on
Aug 25, 2008 3:56 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Then what did you say?
Considering the feud is/was a relatively new thing, yet his below average pitching has been around since his first big league innings?
Which, I used the stats above to disprove that myth.
So, then what were you saying?

