Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: The USA TODAY/Bloody Elbow Top 50 MMA Fights Ever, I


Lowe down dirty mean

Boy, there sure is a lot of vitriol being tossed around toward Mozeliak and DeWitt regarding their lack of any "major" acquisitions so far this offseason. The thing is, that quote from September about "being aggressive" and "having a chunk of money coming off the books" – referring to the $30 M that last year was allocated to the likes of Mulder, Izzy, Encarnacion, etc – was from Joe Strauss and Derrick Goold. Nowhere do they quote anyone from the team that said they intend to spend $30 M in the offseason. But we’ve known for some time (link to updated roster matrix) that a bunch of those younger players (Ankiel, Ludwick, Wainwright, Molina, etc.) were due for big raises in ’09 and that the team wouldn’t have as much to spend as Strauss and Goold seemed to suggest.

After the team traded for Greene and signed Trever Miller, we estimated that the team had $10 – 15 M left to spend and now every Cards’ fan is calling Mo and DeWitt liars. You may have been misled, but it was by the people at the p-d IMO, not by Mo and DeWitt. And even if you do feel that Mo and Bill led you astray, I’m proud to say that we’ve been pretty close here at VEB. One caveat is that the "updated" roster matrix hasn’t been completely updated. It doesn’t include the Royce Ring signing ($475 K) and it also predated the Hamlet-esque "to be (a Cardinal) or not to be (a Cardinal)" that led to Miller’s guaranteed salary falling from $2 M to $500K. So let’s make that $11 – 16 M left to spend.

The bottom line is that it would have been extremely tough for the Cards to acquire any starting pitching – their biggest area of need, IMO – had they signed Brian Fuentes. I’m not here to rehash that debate, but the dilemma now, as it has been all along, is to spend the $ on a starter OR a reliever, and not both. Sure, if we add a starter we can probably spend $2 – 3 M on a setup man/middle relief type, but we could never have gotten a good starter if we had dished out $9 M to Fuentes.

So, w/ $10 – 15 M (pardon me, $11 – 16 M) to spend, how can we best spend that money? There’s one guy out there on the market who has flown somewhat under the radar this offseason and who, if acquired, would be a significant shot in the arm for the Cards. I’m speaking of Derek Lowe. Yes, I realize that Lowe conjures up some bitter memories for many of us, but he is quite possibly the best free agent starter still on the market. I realize, of course, that Ben Sheets has outstanding stuff but there are also legitimate concerns about his ability to stay healthy. There are no such concerns re: Lowe.

Early on, I never really considered Lowe a viable option. He is 35, after all, and the rumors had him wanting something like a 5 year, $90 M contract or even a 6 year contract. It should be clear now, however, that there is a pretty strong buyer’s market and, while Lowe (and Scott Boras) may have scoffed at the Mets’ 3 year, $36 M offer, I haven’t heard of Lowe being linked to anyone else.

What’s Lowe worth, then? Yes, he is older than the average bear but this guy has thrown 1456 innings over the previous 7 seasons (208 per year) w/ a low of 182.2. Joe Sheehan calls Lowe "the best pitching bargain in this market" here and here. Sky Kalkman said that Lowe deserves all the articles declaring him as the most underrated free agent pitcher. I defy you to find one person in the know who doesn’t think Derek Lowe is a pretty solid bet going forward. I just never thought the market might bring him back into our price range.

If 3 years is the market we’re dealing with, then, is there any doubt that Derek Lowe will make 75 starts over the next 3 years? I’d say that’s the minimum. He’s averaged about 6.1 innings per start over the 135 starts he’s made in the NL. So, that’s 472.1 innings or so over the next 3 seasons. Let’s be conservative and say that Lowe’s ERA will be 4.00 over those 472 innings. Mind you, his ERA’s never been above 3.88 since coming to the NL but he is getting older so we’ll go w/ 4.00. So, compared to a replacement level pitcher:

IP ERA ER
Lowe 472.1 4.00 210
Replacement level 472.1 5.50 288.6

Derek Lowe, over 3 years, saves the team 78.6 runs above a replacement level pitcher – if the stipulations are that he starts just 75 games and averages a 4.00 ERA. These are extremely conservative assumptions. Those 78.6 runs above replacement translate to 7.86 WAR over 3 years and if we assume that 1 WAR = $4.8 M on the free agent market (and that there’s no salary inflation over 3 years), Lowe is worth $37.7 M over 3 years.

How realistic is that? As I said, it’s probably being extremely conservative w/ his value. Last year, Justin Inaz had Lowe worth roughly 5.2 WAR. Over at statcorner, they estimate that Lowe was worth 3.8, 4.7, 4.0, and 5.9 WAR over the last 4 seasons. Even if we take that lowest number, 3.8, and assume it for 2009 and say he gets .5 WAR worse each of the next 2 years, he ends up being worth 9.9 WAR over the 3 year contract. Again, we’ll assume no salary escalation to be conservative and now Lowe’s worth $47.5 over 3 years – about the $16 M he wanted. FWIW, Sky (in the BtB article linked above) estimated Lowe’s worth at $19 M next year (he only evaluated 1 year based on next year’s Marcel projections) and fangraphs has him worth about $45 M over 3 years. Mo’s got a phone call to make.

The truth is, as we all know it, the Mets can outbid the Cards if they want to, but that doesn’t mean the phone call’s not worth making. If all we end up doing is forcing the Mets to increase the amount of money they pay Lowe, does that hurt us? In fact, given these numbers, I see no reason not to offer a fourth year or at least a 4th year option. What about an option that vests automatically based on the number of starts Lowe makes over the next 3 seasons? He doesn’t make 75 starts and we’re free of him after 3. It’ll probably take that 4th year, or at least an option w/ a pretty good buyout, in order to get him to St. Louis but, w/ our infield defense and our desperate need for a good starting pitcher, he seems to be a great fit. And, he’d fit just barely in the top end of our available salary range.

Is there anyone else on the market who makes us 4-5 wins better next year? Right now he replaces Boggs in the rotation or, if Carp is healthy, Pineiro. It’s at least a 3 win upgrade and probably 1 or 2 more and makes us a legitimate contender, now and down the road, in ways that Brian Fuentes or Kenshin Kawakami could not. It would also get some of those fans (and Tony) off of Mo’s back!

1 recs | Comment 341 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Sore elbow

I was wondering if the Red Baron’s elbow troubles were accompanied by poor vision or hairy palms.

by bigmotors on Jan 8, 2009 7:25 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

so classy

My first memory of Cardinals baseball is seeing Darrell Porter jump into Bruce Sutter's arms on October 20, 1982!

by 82Special on Jan 8, 2009 10:24 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Lowe

Good read Chuckb. I’m wondering if Mo had expected to make a trade of Ankiel or Skip or possibly others to reduce the # of salary arbitration cases. Thus leaving more spending loot for the Cards. Since that hasn’t happened Mo went cheap signing Ring instead of more expensive pitchers. I believe that Mo will make a move before opening day. Possibly trading an outfielder or two and maybe a third baseman. The hay isn’t in the barn yet.

by bigmotors on Jan 8, 2009 7:37 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I Know...

…and I’m hungry!
:=8O

by The MooCow on Jan 8, 2009 10:52 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm not quite

sure that it’s all that conservative. It probably is, but he should be entering a pretty steep curve. Maybe not, but I think you’ve got the over/under about right and you’ve absolutely nailed his Chone projection down to the innings and WAR.

And of course those wins could be worth quite a bit to the Cardinals this year. I keep hearing that geography is a factor, but hopefully they’ve already made a call or two.

by haltz on Jan 8, 2009 8:02 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Sold!

Ill take one in every color, please…Lowe is who I thought the Cards should go after at the beginning of the offseason but when I heard what he was wanting I backed off of that…now that the market has played out he should definitely be back on our radar…

"Baseball is dull only to dull minds." - Red Barber

by nomar34 on Jan 8, 2009 8:22 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

+1

"A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein." - Joe Theismann

by TurdFerguson on Jan 8, 2009 10:38 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

the lowe market

is about to take off. the cardinals will be priced out within the week. mlbtraderumors has at least the mets, braves, and nats all in on him, and they each have A LOT more spare cash around than the cards.

by spencegrif on Jan 8, 2009 11:26 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

well

then let’s at least make them spend more of it by offering what we think we should for his services, right?

"Baseball is dull only to dull minds." - Red Barber

by nomar34 on Jan 8, 2009 12:32 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Until now...

I hadn’t really considered Lowe an option. It’s not that he’s not worth $12mil/year, just that I didn’t feel the Cards could spend that on their rotation…when they already have inked Lohse, Wainwright, and Carp through these same three or four years – thus leaving little room for extending Welley, or bringing up anyone from the farm. I still think the lack of available rotation spots could be more of a concern than the money. A lot of this depends on what Carp can contribute in the future, and if Lohse puts up a couple more seasons like 2008 he might be moveable after 2010.

I’m not sure how coherent that was…bottom line I’m not sure this team should be committing to another starter for more than two years right now. I just don’t like the lack of flexibility that leaves us with down the road. Maybe it’s best to sure up the rotation now, and let the chips fall where they may next offseason and after 2010.

Sometimes I wonder,
"Why is that frisbee getting bigger?"

...and then it hits me!!

by cardzfanbub on Jan 8, 2009 8:25 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I count 3 guaranteed rotation spots

Wainwright, Lohse, Wellemeyer. Carpenter is hurt, Pineiro is not very good and the kids aren’t ready. If you sign Lowe for three years you could let Pineiro and Wellemeyer walk and insert 1 kid and 1 free agent scrap heaper and still muddle through a season without extending Welly.

by azruavatar on Jan 8, 2009 8:46 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Agreed. Paying Welly’s arb this year is an automatic. Next year we should look at the farm and see how it compares to what Welly offers.

By all accounts Welly will be cheap this year even with arb and we’d get to see if he can be durable enough to even be considered in the ’10 campaign.

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 8:57 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If Wellemeyer has last year again this year

the whole thing gets a bit more complicated. I wonder if it’d be worth it to throw a Wainwright-style extension offer at him.

They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...

by Valatan on Jan 8, 2009 1:50 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Stupid for him

He could be one of the top pitching options next year. That is how poor next years FA Class really is. That is why it makes sense to spend money this offseason and just back load it for 2010.

Stat Whore

by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 8, 2009 2:17 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

It’s his last arb year isn’t it? I’d just pay the arb and ride hoping on durability. Extending now with questions on his elbow around probably isn’t a wise idea.

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 2:20 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That'd be a nice extension

Wainwright is only getting paid $2.5M this season. The two club options at the end are a nice touch, as well. Essentially, a four-year deal that could be six if the Cards so choose. Very club friendly.

"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."

--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS

by bgh on Jan 8, 2009 2:20 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Verducci effect

Thanks for posting. Never heard of it but makes tons of sense. I assume there is research to back the theory up.

by jjray on Jan 8, 2009 2:53 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

not really

unless someone’s done a study on it. he just looked at young pitchers that pitched a ton of innings and how they did the year after. Wait for it… some of these guys that were pitching well enough to get innings at a young age regressed to the mean and some got hurt, like all pitchers.

It’s intuitive enough: more pitches lead to more stress on the arm, but it’s all very arbitrary (unless I’ve missed something on the subject).

by haltz on Jan 8, 2009 3:16 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

veducci effect was postulated for guys under 25

once you pass out of the dangerous age range, it matters less, according to the “theory”.

That said, Welley has always seemed like a dangerous guy to rely on, and that bit of elbow trouble or whatever it was last year makes me very hesitant to consider him for a long-term deal.

still cannot accept that Rachael was Chani.

by SleepyCA on Jan 8, 2009 7:54 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I would actually hope to have 2 kids ready in 2010

I don’t think that it’s a complete stretch to say that 2 of Boggs, Garcia, or Todd won’t be ready to take a rotation spot in 2010. Obviously Garcia will be about 18 months from Tommy John when spring training opens up that year, so he’s a toss up. If Boggs isn’t ready, I’m not sure what we do with him at that point — he either becomes a bullpen guy or we have to deal him. I have the most faith in Todd, because he’s a sinkerballer with a low rate of home runs against, and I think he should be ready to see some big league innings at that point.

With those options, it would make sense for them to sign a starter like Lowe right now.

"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 Jan 8, 2009 9:29 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

i think todd will go to the bullpen before being given a rotation spot, or might not even see the rotation at all.

"I'm as nauseous as I've ever been. I have a terrible headache. My head is pounding. I feel like throwing up and I'm having trouble swallowing. And the beauty of it is, you want to feel like this every day." - Tony LaRussa

by adiueordie on Jan 8, 2009 4:48 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

or KMC.

Still, a guy like Lowe would make a nice piece of trade bait if he was available on a below-market deal for 2 years or so. Assuming we have a guy ready to replace him.

still cannot accept that Rachael was Chani.

by SleepyCA on Jan 8, 2009 8:06 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Dont forget that

Lowe would still cost us a first-round draft choice next year (like Ben Sheets). Given the current economic climate, that’s not a factor I would ignore.

Also, we should factor into our thinking whether Lowe would want to play here. He has always pitched on either the east or west coasts. Will he move family and come to the heartland for a few?

by JWO on Jan 8, 2009 8:35 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Lowe gives us a great shot to win the division and the NL next season

I would have no problems trading the #19 pick in the 2009 draft for a chance to get to the World Series next year. At some point, you have to go for it…

"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 Jan 8, 2009 9:31 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

imo

lowe is the type of pitcher we would sign had we made the playoffs last year. saying that he gives us a shot at the world series next is a stretch i think. i think if we had a playoff team he would be the type to get us to the world series. at the moment we are not a playoff team.

lowe adds 5 wins at the most and we ended up 11 out from the cubbies who are at least as good if not better than last year. i just don’t see where the other wins are coming from.

i just don’t think i’m ready to give another 15 mid thirties pitcher (despite his track record) for 3+ years and give up our first round draft pick.

"Sorry about him, he's dealing with being an inker. " - Chasing Amy

by FutureMan on Jan 8, 2009 2:00 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Some potentially new or “new” win sources: Carpenter (healthy or closing), Wainwright (healthy), Greene (rebound), Rasmus (with a presumed Ankiel and Ludwick corner OF), name-that-LOOGY.

by astrostl on Jan 8, 2009 2:10 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Great point on "new" win sources for next season

Imagine adding a better pitcher to the rotation that pushes El Pineiro out of the rotation. We’d be in a very strong position. I’ve been a fan of Lowe primarily because he is in the mold that LaDunc like—nasty sinkerballer who pitches to contact. He would not at all need recreate himself under Duncan.

The compensation pick is interesting. Olney had a post today on players in “compensation pick purgatory.” (I like that phrase a lot.) His list included Sheets, Varitek, Cabrera, Ben Sheets, and Juan Cruz. I doubt any of them will get a contract on the free agent market comparable to what they’d have gotten in arbitration.

"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."

--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS

by bgh on Jan 8, 2009 2:28 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Don't forget, though

Teams in the bottom half of the league don’t give up their draft picks. These guys’ll make good money next year (maybe not Tek), they’ll just make it with lousy teams.

by liam on Jan 8, 2009 9:52 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Don't they just give up their

2nd round picks instead?

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

by giveml on Jan 8, 2009 10:48 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah but a 2nd round pick

Especially pushed all the way down with the comp round isn’t that big of a deal.

Not afraid to nitpick

by joker24 on Jan 8, 2009 10:54 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

IF IF IF

if we get Carp back and starting sometime this season (I dont know if he can or if he will be a pen guy this year) and IF someone picks up the slack in the pen his year and IF we sign Lowe I could see us in the playoffs I could see us up there with the Cubs

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jan 8, 2009 7:41 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

i guess that is my point

we again have to have quite a few things fall into place and the cubbies have to have a lot of things go wrong.

"Sorry about him, he's dealing with being an inker. " - Chasing Amy

by FutureMan on Jan 9, 2009 12:29 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

agree

And signing Lowe alone is probably not the right move. I would rather either sign Lowe AND Cruz, or Lowe AND Sheets, or not sign anyone. Take advantage of the flawed CBA, bring as much talent into the org as possible, and then move some of it during the year for more talent in other places.

still cannot accept that Rachael was Chani.

by SleepyCA on Jan 8, 2009 8:10 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Collective Bargaining Agreement

A teenage boy with a sprit inside
Of a Samurai warrior who long ago died.
Now he's O....O....O....O Oshikuru!
O....O....O....O Oshikuru!
My oh My he's a demon Samurai
Who's the guy who had to die.......Oshikuru!

by Tackle Box on Jan 8, 2009 10:05 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

It’d hurt to have our first pick in the third round of next year’s draft, but I’m on board for signing both Cruz and Sheets.

by liam on Jan 8, 2009 9:53 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Closer experience

This is the mystery starter with closer experience TLR was talking about. Lowe was a closer 1999-2001 with Boston including 42 saves in 2000.

“You still want to improve your bullpen,” La Russa said. “We still want to try. I know we talked about it. The optimum thing is not to ask Chris or Jason to close in ‘09. Let them grow into the role when they’re ready to take it. So who else is out there? One of the things you look at is … a starter that’s a veteran [who has] pitched in the ninth inning with a one-run lead before.”

Just kidding on this suggestion.

imo, geography is probably the biggest hurdle to overcome, but I can’t find any info on where his family lives. He has a college aged son and two elementary school aged children. He grew up in Michigan, drafted by Seattle, played in Boston and LA. That comment really clears things up.

by ubeddie on Jan 8, 2009 8:44 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I've thought for a while that...

Lowe is every thing this team is looking for. The fact that we haven’t been interested signaled to me 3-4 weeks ago that this team wasn’t going to meet a 100+M payroll that so many have talked about. We will quite simply get a reduction (thats right, prices go up, payroll goes down…and Dewitt doesn’t understand how that gets to fans?). Quite simply, there isn’t a player/players outside of Lowe that gets us close to our previous payroll that the Cards would even be remotely interested in. We’re not going to sign an injury plagued SP, have really no “needs” at any everyday positions, and our bullpen is pretty much better than anything we’ll find on the FA market (save for the 2 terrible LHP we decided to sign, when plenty of better arms were available).

Its frustrating to be a fan of this team right now, and I’ve never said that before. I honestly thought that we spent next to nothing LAST offseason to save payroll for a run at some quality players this year…FOOLISH.

by CrimsonBirdFan on Jan 8, 2009 8:48 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

keep in mind that those two “terrible” (Miller was bad? really?) lefties at the price that they are is the only reason we can even talk about Lowe.

Add 4-6m and the whole Lowe discussion turns moot before it starts.

Never have understood why anyone would want to spend for a specialist role.

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 8:53 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Let's not forget that...

there are still a few lefty specialists unsigned starting with Biemel. I think the Cards may still grab one of those still available.

Sometimes I wonder,
"Why is that frisbee getting bigger?"

...and then it hits me!!

by cardzfanbub on Jan 8, 2009 9:21 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah...

But the issue is that the team isn’t actually considering Lowe at all. Their considering a 4th-5th starter type player. If we have 11-16 M to spend (plus add a million for Royce and Miller), then we should easily be able to sign at least 1 lefty that actually gets lefties out on top of a starter and a sucky left.

8 M for 4-5 starter
3-4 M for decent/good LHP
.5 M for token sucky lefty

Thats 12.5 M. Well within the budget of 11-16 M.

Now if we were going after Lowe, then you have a point.

14 M for Lowe
3-4 M for good lefty
.5 for Mr. Flores half cousin

Thats 17.5 M, over the budget of 16 M.

And its not that Miller was THAT bad. Its that he has a torn labrum. Its a ginormous risk to sign when there are more talented options available. I don’t expect him to perform as well as he did last year…

by CrimsonBirdFan on Jan 8, 2009 12:46 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Publicly not considering Lowe

Mo appears to like to keep things quiet and has a relationship with Boras, from the Lohse extension, that may be allowing him to negotiate outside of the media. Mo got pretty upset when Colorado leaked word of the Ludwick-Holliday negotiations.

by ubeddie on Jan 8, 2009 12:52 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Who knows what they’re considering, what I’m saying that by your wants we would limit what we would be able to consider. Paying out the nose for a specialist isn’t a good idea, I don’t believe. I don’t see how you can spin it any other way.

For the record, Miller was pretty damn good last year. Unless you think he happened to tear his labrum playing golf just after the World Series, I don’t see what the risk is.

You sign a guy for 500k, he’s had surgery on the area years before and claims no pain at all. The stats back him up. He got better as the season wore on, not worse. So obviously it wasn’t an issue last year.

You’re wanting 4m for a specialist, I’d say take the small risk and run with someone for 500k who quite clearly could not have any issues of the labrum that could have been there for years.

If you scan most pitchers shoulders you’re not going to like what you see. This one got us a 75% +1 year discount. What risk?

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 12:57 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I never stated...

that its a good idea to sign a specialist for 3-4 (although a good “specialist” could be used in situations other than lefty lefty matchups). I’m saying that if you’ve got some cash to spend, wouldn’t you spend it on the player that gives you the best chance to win? My point is that if this team was planning on using 11-16 M, they would have either made a strong pitch for Lowe OR gone after a solid lefty reliever. They have done neither, which should lead anyone to believe that they don’t intend on spending that money.

“For the record, Miller was pretty damn good last year. Unless you think he happened to tear his labrum playing golf just after the World Series, I don’t see what the risk is.”

4.15 ERA for a specialist is NOT good. A lefty who faces primarily lefties should easily have an ERA below 3.50

“the stats back him up. He got better as the season wore on, not worse.”

Your didn’t look at the stats. Pre all-star ERA/WHIP 3.28/1.26
Post all-star break ERA/WHIP 5.30/1.50

Is that better?

There is a reason he got an incentive laden deal, and thats because he couldn’t get anything close to 2 M from any other team in the league with a torn labrum. Thats a very very significant injury for a pitcher.

by CrimsonBirdFan on Jan 8, 2009 2:52 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Obviously it’s not better, allow me.

It’s been stated from the start that the lefties that we’re getting will be specialists, since we have RH glut to use otherwise. So this isn’t about getting a good lefty, it’s about getting a good LOOGY.

4.15 ERA for a specialist is NOT good. A lefty who faces primarily lefties should easily have an ERA below 3.50

You can’t quote 4.15 ERA of all stats and then follow it up with a “lefty who faces primarily lefties”. 44% of the batters he faced last year were righties.

.209/.305/.308/.612 is the line he had against lefties. Important considering that’s the job he was hired for.

Your didn’t look at the stats. Pre all-star ERA/WHIP 3.28/1.26
Post all-star break ERA/WHIP 5.30/1.50

Actually I have looked at the stats. 6 of his runs and 5 of his walks in that latter half happened in the first three games after the All-Star break. 50% of the batters he faced in those three games were right handed. Looks more like rust after the All-Star break than an injury as you shape it.

Especially after those three games. .225/.295 /.338 /.633 against all batters faced (ERA 2.45 ) for the rest of the year. He had 4 walks , 5 runs. Again, as the season wore on he was fine.

I’m aware how he signed and what the physical found. However a couple of points.
There wasn’t a discussion on where else he could go, he took a reduced rate and came here.
You can have a torn labrum and be pain free. He had surgery there years ago. He could have had that tear for years for all we know, which is why I pointed out the stats therein. It wasn’t like he imploded because he was hurt.

Again, in my opinion, considering cost and upside there is no risk

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 3:34 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Trever's a box of chocolates

I agree that considering the cost, signing Trever involves little risk. And I really do hope he fills the role that Villone (at least for much of the year) and Flores failed to.

BUT….I live in Houston and watch a lot of Astros games. I have not looked at the stats (so perhaps it was not as bad as I remember) but Trever was downright awful his last year in H-town. Awwwwfulllll. I like the Astros in sort of an “adopted hometown” sort of way so I would just laugh when he trotted out from the bullpen. If he pitches like that for the Cards, I’ll cry (or break my TV).

by Willie McGee's Twin on Jan 8, 2009 5:33 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Miller's last year in Houston

I remember the same thing. His 2006 had been excellent, but in 2007 he nibbled & walked more batters. It was often hard to watch…even for a Cardinals fan.

by random on Jan 8, 2009 10:11 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I think the risk is

counting on this guy and having him turn out to be a pumpkin then having no good lefty to fall back on…
then we are in the same position as last year

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jan 8, 2009 7:46 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

^ instead of a monitary risk

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jan 8, 2009 7:47 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If Lowe signs elsewhere

as he likely will, that doesn’t necessarily mean the team is cheap. This is not a dichotomous scenario where either they spend as much money as we want them to spend, or they’re cheap. There is some grey area. I think some fans would be happy if we spent that money even if it was spent on someone like Oliver Perez or Jon Garland. I’ll be happy w/ a $95 M payroll as long as neither of them (or Randy Wolf) is in the rotation (unless on a 1 year deal for Wolf or Perez).

by chuckb on Jan 8, 2009 8:53 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

+1

The Cards offered Fuentes more annually than the Angels did, and he still signed with them…why? B/C HE WANTED TO YOU DAMN P-D BOARD POSTERS!

I think some fans would be happy if we spent that money even if it was spent on someone like Oliver Perez or Jon Garland.

Sadly, I think you are spot-on.

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

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 8, 2009 10:38 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yay.

Any day I get to read the word "dichotomous"is a good day.

BTW – good job calling out the PD for creating payroll controversy when, in fact, the Cardinals did no such thing.

by Hal Lanier's Pants on Jan 8, 2009 10:47 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'll give you that...

I’m saying the team is cheap, your saying their just stupid (if their not cheap and don’t want to offer Lowe a slightly better deal than the Mets, then they must be stupid).

I’m still sticking with cheap though. I can’t think of another explanation of not offering Looper arbitration, when your looking for a SP of roughly the same amount of talent. The only explanation is that they didn’t necessarily want the draft pick and have to spend 1/2 M + to sign the player. He would have been affordable, even in arbitration. Plus it would have only been a year deal, which is essentially what we’re looking for.

I HIGHLY doubt that Perez would come on a 1 year deal. Maybe Garland or Wolf ala Lohse last season. But it that really going to significantly improve our team?

by CrimsonBirdFan on Jan 8, 2009 12:41 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The only other scenario is

that the team is expecting a payroll increase by trading an OFer for a SP or closer. Very possible, but we still wouldn’t acquire anyone close to the talent of Lowe for 1 year of Ankiel or a couple of Shumaker.

by CrimsonBirdFan on Jan 8, 2009 12:50 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

+1

they say their are bargains to be had in SP and closer this year, but OF is just as deep.

so why would anyone trade a young starting pitcher for one year of ANkiel when Burrell just got the deal he did?

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jan 8, 2009 7:50 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You seem to be assuming

at least I hope you are, that Lowe will end up signing for 3 years and $36 M. What if the price goes up to 4 and $55? Are we still cheap or stupid? What if we offer 4 years and $54 M and lose? That’s a good offer. What if we offer the same amount (or more) and he just feels like the Mets are closer to winning and chooses them for that reason? My point is that the guy who seemed out of reach 2 months ago doesn’t seem out of reach right now. That may change and if we lose him, maybe we were cheap, maybe we were stupid, or maybe we just lost out.

by chuckb on Jan 8, 2009 2:53 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   1 recs

Your the one making the assumption...

that he is much more affordable now. Clearly thats a good assumption, because he is. Yet the Cards still are showing no interest, which signals to me that they had no intent on spending the money in the first place.

The man is affordable and solves a glut of rotation wholes (innings eater, #2 quality starter, etc…).

I’m not assuming at all that we would get him for 3/36, but as you said in your original post, what does it hurt to offer 3/39 and see if he bites? Nothing, except they’d be spending money they have no intent on spending…

by CrimsonBirdFan on Jan 8, 2009 3:15 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Alternative explanation for not offering Looper arbitration

How about smart? He probably would have gotten around $10M in arb. Do you think he is the best $10M pitcher available on the market?

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

by giveml on Jan 8, 2009 4:09 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If he had taken the arbitration

2 months ago no one seemed to know that this market was going to be this averse to signing arbitration offered guys.

by Hardcore Legend on Jan 8, 2009 4:41 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

actually a bunch of teams seemed to have been clued into this

only the players that were shoe ins for long term contracts were offered arb. it wasnt just the cards making this bet but much of baseball

by FunkeeC on Jan 8, 2009 5:09 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

it was called by a few bloggers, some of us here as well.

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 5:40 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I highly doubt...

"How about smart? He probably would have gotten around $10M in arb. "

Probably 7-8 M in arbitration. He was a league average pitcher last year. The Silva deal aside, thats about the going rate…

by CrimsonBirdFan on Jan 8, 2009 7:03 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Guess we'll never know

but I have seem some pretty compelling cases that indicate $10M was a legitimate fear.

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

by giveml on Jan 8, 2009 8:33 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Unless you have access...

to Boras’ or Mo’s email account and cell phone, how do you know that the Cards “still are showing no interest”? This is what bothered me about the whole Randy Johnson thing. People would say the Cards aren’t “interested” but no one actually knew (most especially when every bit of anecdotal evidence showed that Old Pitcher was not interested).

How do we know the Cards have not offered 3/39? Because the P-D hasn’t reported it yet?

Even if Mo was interested, why on earth would he broadcast such a thing? Moreover, does anyone think that Lowe will sign a contract with another team without Boras calling Mo (and other teams’ GMs with SP needs) to see if the Cards want to go higher?

Let’s just wait and see how it plays out. Maybe Lowe will be a Card, maybe not. If Lowe signs a 3yr/36MM contract and everyone agrees that Mo should have offered a 3/39 but didn’t and Lowe was therefore lost, then, by all means, let’s call DeWitt cheap and Mo stupid.

by Willie McGee's Twin on Jan 8, 2009 5:49 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   1 recs

yeah

it’s funny how people take all this stuff at face value… perhaps they’ll sign more people, perhaps not. we shall see…..

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 8, 2009 6:24 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Mo’s very tight about his interactions. Pattern seems if it comes out, the deal is already dead.

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 6:26 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Do you really

think that if the Cards had made an offer to Lowe, that Mo would be doing all the PR about being content with the current roster and back lashing at those who complain about payroll?

“Even if Mo was interested, why on earth would he broadcast such a thing?”

Why wouldn’t he. It would keep fans content and opposing teams are going to know about the offer in 1 hour when Scott Boras sends them an email stating the Mets offer has been topped. Seriously, no advantage to withholding information…

by CrimsonBirdFan on Jan 8, 2009 7:01 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

"Why wouldn't he?" Because...

Mo’s negotiating with millions of dollars at stake. Why would he want to give Boras the leverage of knowing that he “must” make a deal to keep the fans happy? Or that the fans expect him to make a deal so that he’s in a corner? Other teams may know about the current offer but not how high Mo will go, which is the important part from the agent’s perspective.

Winning keeps the fans happy. Managing the business keeps the owners happy. Blathering to the media about how you need to be aggressive, how much you need X player, or how much more you have to spend on payroll is d-u-m-b.

by Willie McGee's Twin on Jan 8, 2009 9:53 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Not necessarily

He would say a team has offered 3/39, not necessarily the Cardinals. It works to his advantage to keep whoever else is bidding against them a secret unless it’s a division rival.

Not afraid to nitpick

by joker24 on Jan 9, 2009 1:30 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The point is

it wouldn’t be a secret that such a deal is out there. It never is with Boras clients. Hell, he makes up offers (see: ARod v Texas) from time to time but keeping things quite isn’t his M.O.

by Hardcore Legend on Jan 9, 2009 1:32 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Again...

the current offer is irrelevant. Boras already knows the team will go as high as the current offer.

The key point is not to create the perception that you’re willing to go higher, or even more importantly, that you MUST go higher to placate the fans/media. Then the agent has leverage over you.

by Willie McGee's Twin on Jan 9, 2009 10:53 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

title

+1000000, I agree. I want this team to spend money, but not if they are just going to spend it on crap. Whats the point then?

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jan 8, 2009 7:48 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

ive been a fool severial times over for this team

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jan 8, 2009 7:43 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I doubt they sign any free agents of note
So let’s make that $11 – 16 M left to spend.

I wish they’d spend it on a SP, but I really doubt it.

Mo’ was on 550 last night with Clairborne and Rooney and basically said they’re done. He went on and on about how this team is improved versus last year. He said they might make a move via trade, but really didn’t expect to move anymore in the FA market.

Maybe he should just quit talking for a while, ever day it’s something new and the vitriol continues.

by felone on Jan 8, 2009 8:53 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

He’s right about how we’ve improved. I’ll back him on that any day.

Addition via substraction on the pen (Villone, Flores, Izzy), new depth in the LHP relief department, a SS that has the potential to swing a bat without costing a plethora of runs in the defense department, an addition of a plus defender in CF.

I’d rather him keep talking, fans need to get clued in.

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 9:03 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm glad he's

talking, too. It causes some confusion, but when Mo talks, you get to hear more about where the team is really going. LaRussa’s insights typically do not seem to be in line with front office management. LaRussa is begging for some specific equipment to do his job the way he believes it should be done. The ballclub sees things differently.

If I’m reading this right (based only on media reports and quotes), then I think maybe it’s time for LaRussa to move on after this season. In a lot of ways he’s been a great manager. He’s steered the Cards through a great era in their history and has contributed to it. He’s stubborn, he does things his own way, but it’s usually a way that outperforms expectations. That said, maybe they need to bring in a company man that’s on board with the boys upstairs to help steer us into the future. I don’t know.

Maybe the team of rivals concept is good in some arenas, but I would think with a baseball team, being on the same page is vital. If Mo acquires a guy thinking he should be used in a certain way, and the manager doesn’t even want that guy, then that’s a problem. If the GM (and owner) wants a guy to close, and the manager doesn’t see him in that role, then I think that’s a problem. Ideally I think they would want the a lot of the same guys or be able to come to an agreement as to their value. Maybe I’m wrong. It’s possible that I’m reading the entire situation completely wrong.

by Toddius on Jan 8, 2009 10:00 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I like the fact that we don’t have a coach that is a yes man. I think a young GM should be challenged and then back up his thoughts and actions. It’s quite reasonable for Tony to want something done, it’s on Mo to decide if that’s a good or bad thing.

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 10:11 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That's definitely

the other side of the coin. I think too much happens behind closed doors to get a good feel for what’s better (as a fan).

by Toddius on Jan 8, 2009 11:02 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

He’s right about how we’ve improved. I’ll back him on that any day.

The team has improved. But I still count 4 SP’s and one of them in Pineiro. The off-season talking is making matters worse with the fans:
“We’ll be aggressive "
"Low Hanging Fruit”
“The economy is bad and and we can’t count on 3.2 Million fans…”

There are perceived contradictions in the talk this offseason, and after losing out of Fuentes and then decided to stand-pat (or at least stating they are going to) it’s making people more upset. If Mo never said aggressive then the expectation’s aren’t as high.

And isn’t blaming the economy long before any season tickets are sold setting a self-fulfilling prophesy?

I’m glad they didn’t get Fuentes. But I’d feel better if they made a move for a SP.

by felone on Jan 8, 2009 3:07 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Did you by chance read chuckb’s article above? Aggressive isn’t the FO’s term, never has been. It was the paper’s. You can’t have a contradiction if you can’t claim the original phrase.

I agree on the SP, but that didn’t have a basis on what I was replying to, we have improved and it’s dead obvious.

Everyone except the Yankees and Mets have been talking about rev numbers going down, it’s not just the Cardinals

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 3:39 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

in this scenario Pineiro becomes our 5th and Byrd becomes our 4th.

by felone on Jan 8, 2009 3:27 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

and Duncan was on 101.1 two days ago

and said they still need one more starting pitcher. so who knows.

he also pretty much said he doesn’t want perez/motte/kinney closing, but if it comes down to that, it will be a closer-by-committee between the three.

"I'm as nauseous as I've ever been. I have a terrible headache. My head is pounding. I feel like throwing up and I'm having trouble swallowing. And the beauty of it is, you want to feel like this every day." - Tony LaRussa

by adiueordie on Jan 8, 2009 4:54 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

This goes right along with Bernie M's column in the PD today.

He’s insistent that DeWitt needs to throw some money at someone, just to placate the talk radio types. Doesn’t really seem very smart, does it?

by Archaeopteryx on Jan 8, 2009 8:59 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The only thing I liked about Bernie's column today

Was this…

A year ago at this time, the Cardinals had yet to trade for third baseman Troy Glaus, sign reliever Ron Villone, or sign Lohse.

I think people need to take this in to major consideration.

The boys are all here for ya...we'll back you up...we'll be there...cause, Billy, we don't stink right now. We're the best team in baseball right now...right this minute...because of you. You're the reason. We're not gonna screw that up, we're gonna be awesome for you right now. Just throw.

by Tackle Box on Jan 8, 2009 9:33 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   3 recs

+2

If (when?) the Cards get a couple of good bargains, then Bernie and all other panic-stricken fans will talk about how brilliant Mo was for waiting.

"A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein." - Joe Theismann

by TurdFerguson on Jan 8, 2009 10:45 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Benefits of waiting...a little while

For sure, great point by Bernie, great use of the blockquote by you.

Teams like the Rays who got Burrell for $8 million and the As who got Giambi for $5 million did well by waiting a little while to make their move. Phillies at $10 million for Ibanez early in the game….not such good value.

So maybe we can’t necessarily compete with the Mets on Lowe, but I really think we should be able to put forward a more competitive offer for a guy like Ben Sheets.

by lightbulb on Jan 8, 2009 9:44 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Here, here!

that was a great use of the blockquote…

"Baseball is dull only to dull minds." - Red Barber

by nomar34 on Jan 8, 2009 10:01 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I pride myself on my "blockquote" skillz.

The boys are all here for ya...we'll back you up...we'll be there...cause, Billy, we don't stink right now. We're the best team in baseball right now...right this minute...because of you. You're the reason. We're not gonna screw that up, we're gonna be awesome for you right now. Just throw.

by Tackle Box on Jan 8, 2009 10:51 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   1 recs

+1 for the "z"

In addition to skillz, you got street cred!

by Ray Lankford on Jan 8, 2009 11:05 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

A first

Think that’s the first time I’ve said ‘Great point by Bernie.’ Whoops.

by lightbulb on Jan 8, 2009 8:26 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I actually emailed Bernie about that article, and mentioned that line in particular

To me, it seemed like he undermined the entire premise of his article by acknowledging that it is still early in the offseason and that we made several late deals last year. On the one hand he says that DeWitt should do more for the fans, but on the other he acknowledges that last year they did fine by waiting.

The article seems premature, to me. Either wait until they don’t make a move, or write the article today, but try to educate the CardsTalk fans and calm their irrational fears instead of fanning the flames.

by Ray Lankford on Jan 8, 2009 10:01 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

It's a bullshit

self-fulfilling prophecy (sort of). He’ll get his lunatic fringe forumers riled up with this rhetoric (I follow this stuff religiously and I’ve never read the word boycott until today), and they’ll go nuts, and the type of people that call sports radio shows will call him, he’ll see that he was “right” and the Cardinals will take a slight hit in ticket sales due to the economy.

by haltz on Jan 8, 2009 9:47 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Did Bernie wax eloquent in his own special way...

… about “DeWitt opening DeWallet”? Because I can’t stand it when Bernie does stuff like that. I used to kinda like Bernie, but more and more I find him not very insightful.

by mattybobo on Jan 8, 2009 10:40 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

i guess im an idiot

because I can think of one major sports writer or personality thats better than Bernie in this town.

I loke Gould though, too

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jan 8, 2009 7:57 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

it wasn't up when I posted

I prepare it the night before and set it to post at 6 am or I would have linked to that one also.

by chuckb on Jan 8, 2009 2:55 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Hey, chuck...

…stop with that damn logic! Don’t you know the best way to run a team is to throw wads of cash at every player early on!

All kidding aside…if the FO is indeed done, I’ll be a little bit upset. I’ll confess that I don’t believe the rotation as currently constructed is good enough to get the team into the playoffs unless several things all happen together:

*Carpenter pitches a 180+ inning season—this is highly doubtful. I see Carpenter as a $20 bill you find in your pocket on the way to the grocery store. It’s neat when you find it, but you better not plan your grocery-store trip around finding it in your pocket.

  • Wellemeyer improves from last season—I think his decreased walk rate is sustainable, however now he needs to stay healthy all season and go a hair deeper into games throughout the entire season. With Welle I just don’t know. He’s definitely got plus stuff, but his high FIP and low BABIP make me nervous, all combined with a really inconsistent changeup. I could see him going either way.
    *Lohse has to pitch well. He’s a league average pitcher from where I sit. He doesn’t strike out many guys, doesn’t really have a plus pitch, and is coming off of a career season. He makes me nervous too.
    *Pinata has to not suck—highly unlikely.

That leaves the rotation with four…count ‘em…four question marks that seem more likely to go in the wrong direction than in the right one. With Lowe’s price appareantly lower than it seemed it would be at the beginning of the season, the FO HAS TO kick the tires. Absolutely has to. As you said, chuckb, the worst that could happen is that it drives up the price for the Mets. If the guy doesn’t want to come here, than he doesn’t want to come here…but they’ll never know unless they try.

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

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 8, 2009 10:00 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

In fairness

if they’re done, I’ll be upset as well. I’d like them to trade Ankiel for a young pitcher. I’m beginning to doubt that it’ll happen. I wouldn’t mind bringing a low-level starter back (like Looper) on a 1 year deal if we can’t get Lowe, Sheets, or Pettitte. I wouldn’t mind the team signing Ohman, Springer, or Brandon Lyon. (I’m lukewarm on Juan Cruz b/c of the type A). I just don’t think they’re done and I think Cards’ fans who believe they’re done really need to check their meds. That’s offensive, and I apologize, but they’re overreacting if they think the front office is done. There is one more, if not major then important and significant, acquisition before spring training begins.

by chuckb on Jan 8, 2009 3:02 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Absolutely right

I applaud the front office’s tactics thus far and it is foolish of us to think they are going to share their strategy candidly with the public. Just because a possible deal isn’t reported doesn’t mean it isn’t being worked.

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

by giveml on Jan 8, 2009 4:12 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

agreed

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 4:32 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'd be shocked if they were done...as in set

But I guess I could see a scenario where they are…I can see that argument I guess, but I have more faith in Mozeliak than that. Let’s hope that our faith is not misplaced.

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

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 8, 2009 5:59 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

i really hope there is a move

I just hope its not a waste or a marginal gain for a Garland type guy.

Thats all I ask at his point, if it comes down to it, use it at the deadline or just keep the money and pay off the stadium slightly faster, just dont waste it on crap.

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jan 8, 2009 8:05 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

although

the way the market is going, signing garland to a 1 year/5 mil deal a la lohse doesn’t sound so bad. i would take garland over pinero any day.

"Sorry about him, he's dealing with being an inker. " - Chasing Amy

by FutureMan on Jan 9, 2009 12:52 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

but

if Carp’s not healthy, it’s Garland over Boggs and we’re not getting rid of Pineiro’s salary even if he were dumped into the pen.

by chuckb on Jan 9, 2009 7:49 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

*Carpenter pitches a 180+ inning season—this is highly doubtful. I see Carpenter as a $20 bill you find in your pocket on the way to the grocery store. It’s neat when you find it, but you better not plan your grocery-store trip around finding it in your pocket.

I absolutely effing love this analogy.
To me is so spot on.

I also call this the Lohse bargain analogy.
That just because we got lucky with Lohse last year doesnt mean that such a good value on such a good player may be available this year (or any given year).

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jan 8, 2009 8:00 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

that is a good point

i can’t remember a deal like that happening before and getting such good results. that was a very unlikely deal to happen. that being said, with the way the market is going those deals might be plentiful this year.

"Sorry about him, he's dealing with being an inker. " - Chasing Amy

by FutureMan on Jan 9, 2009 12:54 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Wow ugly post...

…it wasn’t supposed to look quite like that…but I think the point still gets across.

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

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 8, 2009 10:01 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Can Pettite be an option?

I’d love to see Lowe, but I my two biggest concerns or doubts, if i may, that Derek will be in Jupiter, FL in March are: 1) He now has the Mets and Braves vying for services, both of which are capable of outbidding us, and are located on the East Coast, (his stated preference), and 2) He wants a 3+ year deal. Mo has consistently stated that he’s apprehensive of a 3 year deal for an SP with his current roster commitments. This is another reason why I’m skeptical Kenshin Kawakami is a legitimate option.

I think Ben Sheets and Andy Pettite’s respective markets are the only pitchers who have enough upside, proven track record, and overall pitching ability to warrant 10+ million a year that would consider a 2-year deal. I think Mo wants to take this route and getting either of these at 2 for 20-24 million with some additional incentives, could benefit this team largely, and allow for maleability come 2010. Both would also be great trade-chips in 2010 should our fate not yield the rosy results we desire.

I’d love Mo to make three phone calls. First, Call Lowe and tell him you’d do 3 years, 14million and that’s the cieling. When he declines or doesn’t respond like Fuentes, call Sheets and Pettite in succession and offer them the same deal and tell them that the first one to take it has a deal.

Signed,
The Eternally Optimistic

Stupid Sexy Flanders!!!

by timmycardinals on Jan 8, 2009 10:10 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

No!

No Pettitte!
:=8O

No moore steroid suckers…or at least the ones who got caught. Its never an issue unless you get caught.
:=8/

by The MooCow on Jan 8, 2009 11:03 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

awesome

the guy who pretends to be a cow is vehemently against growth hormones.

by haltz on Jan 8, 2009 11:25 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   4 recs

No BGH Fer Me!!!

I’m an ALL-Natural 100% Holstein!
:=8P

“The sneaky users are the only ones we tolerate” – my point exactly.

And who’s pretending??
;=8)

by The MooCow on Jan 8, 2009 1:30 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   1 recs

So are you an actual female

or are you a cross-dressing bovine?

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

by giveml on Jan 8, 2009 4:14 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Why the

assumption that he’s a woman? He said Holstein, not heifer.

by spants on Jan 8, 2009 5:44 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

lol!

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 6:25 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

right

i am not from the farm, but I am pretty sure there is no such thing as a male cow.

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

by giveml on Jan 8, 2009 8:36 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm

pretty sure this cow is a dude. He can correct me if I’m wrong.

by spants on Jan 8, 2009 10:58 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Actually

She would correct you if you were wrong.

A teenage boy with a sprit inside
Of a Samurai warrior who long ago died.
Now he's O....O....O....O Oshikuru!
O....O....O....O Oshikuru!
My oh My he's a demon Samurai
Who's the guy who had to die.......Oshikuru!

by Tackle Box on Jan 8, 2009 11:33 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   1 recs

the guy who pretends to be a cow is vehemently against growth hormones.

rec’d. many lulz.

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die.

by lunchboxbomb on Jan 8, 2009 6:07 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

BABAR!

Best Avatar ever!

hecanthithecanthithecanthithecanthit

by Alxfritz on Jan 8, 2009 7:34 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

winner!

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jan 8, 2009 8:07 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'd be interested in Pettitte

though I think there’s next to no chance he comes to St. Louis. I was going to include him, but in honesty, it’s worth a full day’s thread on its own — not as second fiddle to a Derek Lowe thread.

by chuckb on Jan 8, 2009 3:03 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I kind of assumed that might have been the case.

I also don’t think there’s that great a chance, but my optimism says the Houston can’t pay him and NY won’t pay him. Where does that leave him. I had a gut-feel two weeks ago that he’d go to BOS just to do so, but w/ Smoltz and Penny, they won’t go there. Cubbies would probably be interested. Could they do 2-years?

I have faith in Mo, and it’s all conjecture, but if I heard he never called to see what it’d take, then I’d be upset. A starter like that would be nearly as good as Lowe, IMO.

Stupid Sexy Flanders!!!

by timmycardinals on Jan 8, 2009 5:25 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

didnt we make an offer for him last year (or two)

and he basically had no interest, it was either Houston or NYY

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jan 8, 2009 8:09 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

+1000

people will say that just because it happened to the mariners it won’t happen to us, but i’d rather not tempt fate

by VolsnCards5 on Jan 8, 2009 10:50 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

rec’d

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 10:52 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

ditto

The boys are all here for ya...we'll back you up...we'll be there...cause, Billy, we don't stink right now. We're the best team in baseball right now...right this minute...because of you. You're the reason. We're not gonna screw that up, we're gonna be awesome for you right now. Just throw.

by Tackle Box on Jan 8, 2009 1:17 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

+1

I posted as much yesterday, but Mo’s “aggressive” move—signing Lohse to a 4-year, $40M+ deal—has been his worst as a GM. Had he offered Lohse arbitration, Lohse would now be sitting in compensation-pick purgatory, waiting for someone to call. It could have been us on the other line, offering 3 years at twenty-some million.

"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."

--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS

by bgh on Jan 8, 2009 2:39 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

except Lohse

wasn’t a Type A

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

by giveml on Jan 8, 2009 4:18 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Rec'd

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Jan 8, 2009 3:25 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Right?

That was supposed to be a question.

by azruavatar on Jan 8, 2009 3:43 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   1 recs

but then how will the OP know

who his secret admirer is?

still cannot accept that Rachael was Chani.

by SleepyCA on Jan 8, 2009 8:39 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

hmmm

for mods you can see who has rec’d who. do they not have anything like that on a regular member profile?

by azruavatar on Jan 8, 2009 9:17 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

As far as I know, no. Is yours exposed on an admin-only panel?

by astrostl on Jan 8, 2009 9:27 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I say it because if you leave the page open and let it self update (read: no refresh) it doesn’t show anything in regards to rec. I can’t speak for others, but I’d like to see rec used more often, i enjoy the highlighted areas when skimming.

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 3:44 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I think if it were more prominent – say a thumbs up/thumbs down button – it would get used more often. SB Nation platform feature request, not necessarily VEB. Going to a text “actions” to reveal a text “rec” is pretty discouraging for most users IMO.

by astrostl on Jan 8, 2009 3:47 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   1 recs

I enjoy the reddit interface and wouldn’t mind seeing similar here, agreed on the two step process being annoying.

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 3:51 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

i for one LOVE how VEB works

I dont know if this is the proper place to say it, but I love the “Z” mark and scroll.
I dont know how its done but its awesome

www.GriffinandtheGargoyles.com or www.myspace.com/GriffinandtheGargoyles
Dont take me seriously :-D

by jealousblues on Jan 8, 2009 8:12 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

plus

you have the option of indicating if you rec’d or not, just by typing!

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Jan 8, 2009 3:58 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

"I'm as nauseous as I've ever been. I have a terrible headache. My head is pounding. I feel like throwing up and I'm having trouble swallowing. And the beauty of it is, you want to feel like this every day." - Tony LaRussa

by adiueordie on Jan 8, 2009 10:36 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah

I can stop if it bugs you. But unless it get’s 5 recs, I won’t usually notice that the comment has any. Plus I’d like the author to know that I’m the one that rec’d it.

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Jan 8, 2009 5:50 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

A list of those who recommended a given post would be another great thing IMO. I find it frustrating that I can see the recs I give in my user section but givers to me seem to be effectively anonymous unless they comment about it as well.

by astrostl on Jan 8, 2009 6:05 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I would suggest that those of you who want to see this

send an e-mail to the SBN staff. That would be a nice upgrade for member profiles. Mods can see it in the background (I assumed everyone could).

by azruavatar on Jan 8, 2009 9:18 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Will do on both counts.

by astrostl on Jan 8, 2009 9:27 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

How does it show up?

I know there was an issue a long time ago about mods not being notified of Flags but could see them if they went to the user’s profile who was flagged. But that causes a problem because why would mods/editors/etc. just randomly be checking profiles for flags? Is it the same way with recs that you (someone with administrator privileges) has to view the person’s profile?

That, IMO, (the flag thing) is a bigger issue. If someone gets flagged, it should automatically get emailed to the blog administrator.

A teenage boy with a sprit inside
Of a Samurai warrior who long ago died.
Now he's O....O....O....O Oshikuru!
O....O....O....O Oshikuru!
My oh My he's a demon Samurai
Who's the guy who had to die.......Oshikuru!

by Tackle Box on Jan 8, 2009 10:13 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The flags tally up on a dashboard.

So they’re very prominent and evident to mods — no worries there. The recs are buried. If a mod looks at a commenter, they can see how many recs and flags they’ve been given or given to others. You can click on the total to see each one called out individually.

So if I wanted to see who was rec’ing me, I’d have to go to my profile and look look at all the recs. It’s not a great system in truth, which may be why it isn’t rolled out to members.

by azruavatar on Jan 8, 2009 11:07 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Nah.

Expecting my new 2009 Flags shipment to show up mid-February.

A teenage boy with a sprit inside
Of a Samurai warrior who long ago died.
Now he's O....O....O....O Oshikuru!
O....O....O....O Oshikuru!
My oh My he's a demon Samurai
Who's the guy who had to die.......Oshikuru!

by Tackle Box on Jan 8, 2009 11:34 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

PFLAG…I’m beginning to like the sound of that!

by astrostl on Jan 8, 2009 11:52 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

they

are a great organization

They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...

by Valatan on Jan 9, 2009 5:52 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I was somehow struck to remember the line from Reality Bites:

Vicky:: Oh… Oh, PFLAG. I’m beginning to like the sound of that.

by astrostl on Jan 9, 2009 6:12 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Okay.

At least now I understand what you were talking about.

A teenage boy with a sprit inside
Of a Samurai warrior who long ago died.
Now he's O....O....O....O Oshikuru!
O....O....O....O Oshikuru!
My oh My he's a demon Samurai
Who's the guy who had to die.......Oshikuru!

by Tackle Box on Jan 11, 2009 1:39 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Bernie

I’ve been holding off on typing this, and maybe I should have kept holding off on it, but I think Bernie takes pride in being the guy who calls out the STL teams. So much so, in fact, that he does it for the sake of doing it. It’s like he’s saying “Hey, look at me! I’m not afraid to speak my mind!” That’s just the vibe I’ve been getting from him for awhile now.

Oh, and I’ve vowed to commit seppuku if I ever read Don Tony again.

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

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 8, 2009 10:49 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Nicely done

I got to read a comment and learn about a way samurais would kill themselves. That’s what I call a twofer.

by mtalken on Jan 8, 2009 11:28 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I see your point

but Bernie’s job is that of columnist. He is supposed to comment on the town’s teams. If all he fed us was the company line, his column would suck. I definitely agree with your point that Bernie enjoys being the man in black calling out the sports powers that be … but I’m cool with it. This is all theatre, is it not? It’s not journalism. PTI, Rome, sports talk radio, it all really entertainment from where I sit. So I don’t take offense when Bernie hyperventilates. That’s what they pay him for.

by jjray on Jan 8, 2009 11:42 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yep, and he does have his own

forum over there, which he has an obligation to participate in. I think the constant pounding of his more delusional posters eventually leads him to making rash demands of his own. If he hung out at VEB I’ll bet things would be different.

by MdRedbirdFreak on Jan 8, 2009 11:44 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Bernie jumped the shark

He is getting redundant and reading his column rarely is anything but a waste of time. Another thing, in addition to the very poignant critiques you folks have offered, that annoys me is his use of statistics. Sometimes he will use them well and make a good argument, but most of the time, when he bothers using them, he’ll use stats that are cherrypicked and not representative of a player’s actual skill or performance.

"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."

--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS

by bgh on Jan 8, 2009 2:46 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

+1

I agree with that wholeheartedly. He’s not terribly consistent…he just likes his constant stream of criticism too much I think.

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

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 8, 2009 6:18 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm torn.

I like Lowe. In front of our defense I think he’d be a good fit. I think the market has crushed his absurd end of season wants. I think he’s durable and has every chance of staying that way while being effective.

I don’t think he was under the radar, I just think the market was waiting on a price setter. Now that the Mets have set a price I expect the fervor to pick up. If the Braves really get involved and if the Mets price isn’t final, he could be quickly priced right back out of our range.

I don’t mind losing a draft pick, but on a 4 year deal that will send him right at 40, we may never recoup it.

Sheets I like. Yes, he is an injury risk, but to me that’s something that helps us when it comes to price and length. He has a vested interest into protecting himself health wise and to reestablish his value for his next contract.

I know Sheets has a preference for a Texas team. However, I don’t see Sheets really wanting to go to the AL and pitch for the Rangers. Bandboxes tend to not create value. Houston is handicapped when it comes to payroll so adding Sheets and his risk doesn’t make sense for them at all. So maybe Texas is out of the equation.

I think pitching for us has a lot of value to Sheets. He’ll get to pitch against a division that he’s had success against during his career during a year that the division as a whole could regress. He’ll get to pitch in front of a defense that should protect him on a team that can generate runs. He’ll be on a 86 win team that on paper looks to be able to be competitive.

I wouldn’t mind giving Sheets a 2/18 with incentives that could baloon it to 24-28 and add in a vesting 3rd year based on games or innings. Throw any reasonable number on that vesting option and I’m still ok with it.

On a traditional backloaded contract he’ll fit in quite easily. Joel and Troy’s cost will be gone next year so money will be freed up.

I still like Sheets, but I wouldn’t complain if we got in and wrangled for Lowe.

One Century down, next on its way. Cardinals '09 : Preserving the Cubs tradition.

by AdjustedExpectations on Jan 8, 2009 10:51 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Great article! Didn’t know that StatCorner had added pitching WAR. Your link to that goes back to VEB so I think some quotes are missed there. I think the only SPs I ever found both realistic and exciting for us in 2009 were Johnson, Lowe, and Sheets. I haven’t really considered Pettite, but I should.

I think another angle to look at is that Derek Lowe had the 2nd-best qualified starting pitcher GB% last year, the only guy other than Webb to go over 60%. I think Pujols for sure and perhaps Kennedy can anchor our infield defense. Glaus has been plus defense for two years. Greene is somewhat of a concern per UZR, but seems to be treated favorably by other metrics (+5 runs per CHONE 2009 projections for example). As we know, Duncan also seems to love groundballers.

I started looking at park factors for Dodger Stadium. Wow! Higher is a hitter’s park, lower is a pitcher’s park 2008: 29/30. 2007: 9/32. 2006:1/32 (by a RIDICULOUS margin). 2005: 24/32. Huh.

by astrostl on Jan 8, 2009 10:57 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Whoops, should just say 1 = hitter’s, 32 = pitcher’s on the scale.

by astrostl on Jan 8, 2009 11:05 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I Still...

….don’t like WAR. I don’t buy it. 10 runs does not necessarily mean a win. I like Lowe, I think he’s a good, steady pitcher – but he’s no ace. I say wait and see how low we can go. If the Mets are dumb enough to sign Perez or Garland, that would clear Lowe of any major offers (theoretically) – maybe we can get him for even less. Getting the best talent for the lowest moolah is still the best way to do this.
:=8)

by The MooCow on Jan 8, 2009 11:07 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   1 recs

Here’s a recent explanation on ~10 runs being a win:

TangoTiger says:
December 10, 2008 at 11:33 am
10 runs is a win: why?

The basic idea is that if you look at all teams in baseball history that have scored 1 more run than they allowed, per game (+/- 0.1, to increase the sample size), you will find that they have a .600 win. And similarly if they allowed one more run than they score, they will have a .400 win. That means each additional run leads to 0.100 additional wins, above the .500 mark. And 1 divided by .1 is 10.

The lower the run environment, the more impact each run has. And the higher the run environment, the less impact each run has. So, the 10/1 ratio is not fixed, but dependent on the run environment.

Here is a chart that shows the various win%, for various run environments, at various run differentials: http://www.tangotiger.net/winactuals.html

by astrostl on Jan 8, 2009 11:18 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   1 recs

I have been using a different formula for WAR

I use twice the League Average of Runs scored.

Stat Whore

by FlimtotheFlam on Jan 8, 2009 12:09 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

ALL the Teams in History...

…even the teams in the Dead Ball era? Even the 19th century games? They’re not really like modern games, wouldn’t that skew the results? Just wonderin’…
:=8)

by The MooCow on Jan 8, 2009 1:34 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Umm
The lower the run environment, the more impact each run has. And the higher the run environment, the less impact each run has. So, the 10/1 ratio is not fixed, but dependent on the run environment.

Not afraid to nitpick

by joker24 on Jan 8, 2009 4:29 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I Dunno....

…I guess its like transubstantiation – you either buy the magical transmogrification or you don’t.
:=8/

by The MooCow on Jan 9, 2009 9:19 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'd still rather have Sheets...

…not merely because Sheets is a better pitcher than Lowe and I wonder how well Lowe will do out of Dodger’s park, but the nice thing about signing Sheets is that he adds to us while subtracting from the Brew-Crew, a team that finished ahead of us in the Central last season. D.GOOCH

-- GOOCH

by GOOCH24 on Jan 8, 2009 11:05 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I think there’s a likelihood of returning to a former team, but Sheets is a free agent – not a Brewer.

by astrostl on Jan 8, 2009 11:06 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Park effect

I think it’s likely more of a concern for a pitcher who does not have an absurd GB%. Lowe gets so many groundballs, it is absurd.

"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."

--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS

by bgh on Jan 8, 2009 2:51 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Plus

Chavez Ravine has only qualified as a pitchers’ park one out of the last three years. Crazy as it sounds, it was the most hitter friendly park in MLB in 2006 although the numbers do look a little fishy. All data from espn.

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

by giveml on Jan 8, 2009 4:26 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

how much do those #'s take into account darkness & temp?

because when it’s cool & dark, that place is a big time pitcher’s park.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!

by gdm426 on Jan 9, 2009 3:45 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I doubt

they take conditions into account at all. I don’t know of any way to do a compound split (e.g. home and night) for Lowe, but his daytime numbers are definitely not as good as night time. I expect that is probably true for most pitchers.

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

by giveml on Jan 9, 2009 9:44 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Talking arbitration...

Reading Mo’s comments about arb jumps and the budget, and then reading This post on mlbtr, help me to fully wrap my head around something I’ve been considering for quite sometime. That is of course the decisions to not offer arbitration, to several of our free agants.

And I think this makes a good case for Mo, being smarter than many have (Especially Bernie) given him credit for. Like it or not this team is a transitional team. They must find a way to stay competitive paying homage to the tradition of the franchise and paying their due to the fans. They also really need to keep this in mind with a very large impending pay day looming out there for EL HOMBRE. They need to keep the team competitive to maintain an atmosphere he wants to stay in yet they have to retain flexibility to keep him as the cornerstone of the franchise. They need to do this by creating beneficial opportunities for the youth of the team. I think if you consider that along with the impending pay raises our arb eligible players are due, you see a picture start to emerge. Consider if you will the bullpen (Selected roles are hypothetical):

CL – Perez
SU – Kinney
7th – Motte
Fireman – Franklin
Fireman – McClellan
LS – Ring
LS – MIller

That still leaves you without a swing man (unless you care to carry an 8 man pen and a short bench) and these guys to find spots for in AAA and/or in the Bullpen: Thompson, Boggs, and hopefully Piniero.

IF you offered Springer arbitration he likely accepts and pushes your payroll up considerably. Reducing your ability to create opportunities for the youth. There is one person on that list I would rather have Springer over, and that is possibly Franklin. Certainly one of Boggs or Thompson will start the year in the rotation along with Piniero. But call me crazy, I don’t think MO is done working on the rotation, and not offering Looper / Springer arbitration has allowed him to have the flexibility to have open roster spots and free money.

And yes, I will have more of that KoolAid.

1 – Rasmus
2 – Ankiel
3 – Pujols
4 – Ludwick
5 – Glaus
6 – Greene
7 – Molina
8 – Kennedy
9 – Larue
10 – Greene / Ryan / Hoffpauir
11 – Mather
12 – Duncan / Schu
13 – Barden / Freese
14 – Wainwright
15 – Lohse
16 – Wellemeyer
17 – Piniero hopefully replaced by an acquisition
18 – Carp / Boggs / Thompson
CL – Perez
SU – Kinney
7th – Motte
Fireman – Franklin
Fireman – McClellan
LS – Ring
LS – MIller

by streamman on Jan 8, 2009 11:18 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I don't understand how
Like it or not this team is a transitional team.

I didn’t think transitional teams won 86 games. This team has a core of elite players along with a steady stream of minor league players on the way. It’s not like we are waiting for 2010 for all of our prospects to be ready all of a sudden. Last offseason everyone was talking about how 2008 was going to be a transitional year, that the Cardinals would be back in full force in 2009. Every year can’t be a transitional year. When you have Pujols in his prime, you have to go for it. There will always be players on the team that are lost to free agency and players from the minors who move up. This means that there will always be some “transition.” It is ridiculous to call the year a transition and accept that the front office only wants to get bargain type players. It’s a buyers market. If we aren’t going for big name players now when they are cheap, when are we ever? The opportunity is now.

streamman – that wasn’t all directed at you, sorry for the rant

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Jan 8, 2009 11:42 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I think it's a transitional team in that...

The front office is still in flux… You are right they won 86 games last year, fighting through substantial injuries to the core… Wainwright, Molina, Pujols, Ankiel, etc. I think that just further illustrates the point, that MO is working carefully to transition the team. He and the Front Office know they have a rare commodity in their hands. They are also on a fixed budget. They need to remain competitive, but shift their approach. It was bound to happen. Walker, Sanders, Edmonds, Rolen, Mattheny were all huge parts of the core. circa 04/05, but they were old and aging and making a lot of money… IF you can replace them with cost controlled options… you can afford to re-up your youngers core players, and then find the necessary pieces to make them a strong competitive club. Remember 06… you just need to get into the playoffs. Jocketty’s approach was a very successful and strong approach but it only lasts so long. This team is transitional, it is transitioning from the guidance of Jocketty to the guidance of MO/Lunhow. Youth infusion is becoming a cornerstone of what will make this club competitive. My point was just that I believe Mo has made some decision which has left him the flexibility to pursue some options, if he chooses. In my opinion this team is better than, the team fielded in 08, and it is not yet finished. I understand your frustration… I REALLY like Penny at 1 yr 5 million. I would really like to have Sheets or Lowe. The fact is we have the flexibility to get one player like that… MO is just doing his job. pitching needs to be the priority, I don’t think he is quite done yet. But all that said, this is a business, business is winning, but you also want to be able to be sure you can afford 7-8 years at 30 million a year.

by streamman on Jan 8, 2009 12:18 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Still not seeing it

The front office is set. There may be divisions between the front office and TLR, but just because the front office is fairly new doesn’t mean it’s in flux. I also doubt what you refer to as “substantial injuries.” Carp is out, but Pujols, Wainwright, Molina, and Ankiel all appear like they will be ready for opening day. Walker, Sanders, Edmonds, and Matheny are long gone now. They have been replaced. I don’t know what we need to wait for here. As for the youth infusion…yes, it’s becoming a bigger part of the club’s operations. How many years are we supposed to wait for our “youth to infuse” before we can sign some useful FAs? I’m just trying to point out that this year shouldn’t be viewed as a transiton. Last year, sure. But this year we have payroll flexability cobined with the fact that this team won 86 last year. If the front office neglects to realize that this team is not a finished product, it will have some serious problems.

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Jan 8, 2009 1:27 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

sanders?

he was part of the core? walker? he was in the org for less than a year. He was important, but not part of the “core” around which you “build the team”. i think an organization has to have a player for more than a few months to do that.

by spencegrif on Jan 8, 2009 4:26 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

walker

was on the team from august of 2004 through the 2005 season. over a year.

"I'm as nauseous as I've ever been. I have a terrible headache. My head is pounding. I feel like throwing up and I'm having trouble swallowing. And the beauty of it is, you want to feel like this every day." - Tony LaRussa

by adiueordie on Jan 8, 2009 5:30 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I didn't say they were

part of the core. That was streamman. He said:

Walker, Sanders, Edmonds, Rolen, Mattheny were all huge parts of the core. circa 04/05

Not me. I was arguing against him if you re-read my comments.

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Jan 8, 2009 5:53 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You're right...

Walker and Sanders are poor representations of what I was talking about in that post.

However, I think you’ve missed the point I was trying to make with my OP. It could be fairly said that I poorly drew out the point I had intended to make. I never meant to insinuate by my statements that “the team is a team in transition”, that they were in self destruct and rebuild mode, nor should they be. I was simply trying to point out that I felt Mo isn’t getting the benefit of the doubt I feel that he deserves. I think he made some tough, but necessary and smart decisions in not offering arb to anyone. Thereby allowing opportunities for some of our young players, who deserve a shot to make the team to get that chance. By doing that he has maintained some roster flexibility and has some wiggle room with the payroll to sign some an impact type pitcher. I think had he offered arb to springer and looper, and they accepted, we would be done right now. That is not to say that I think we should be done now… I think we need to find a + pitcher.

My point about arb decisions has been discussed elsewhere in this thread, and in the daily post by chuck b on Sunday (1-11). Now if you want to take issue with my statement that I think the team is a team in transition then fine. By that I meant that they are continually making efforts to shift more and more to a youth driven franchise. But if that is all that you keyed into from my op, then I suppose I either did a pretty poor job in making my point or you just are really frustrated with the team and looking for an argument. Either way, I am still happy with the direction the team is going in, in the long-term, and think I will be fairly happy in the short, provided they find some pitching help. I meant to agree with your point that the team is on the edge of the playoffs having won 86 games last year. having done that even in the face of significant injuries last year to players like: Pujols, Molina, Wainwright. I did not mean to imply that they were major question marks for this year. I think you read quickly through my post and reply and didn’t pay much attention to the points I was trying to make. No matter, I wrote both in a total of 5 minutes at work.

by streamman on Jan 11, 2009 12:52 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I have a brilliant idea!

Rick Ankiel can pitch! YES! Im sure he can do better than pineiro,

Ok, im kidding, but I don’t think that we want Lowe, not because he’s a bad pitcher, but because Lohse, imo, is very similar to him. Sheets, is probably the antithesis of Lowe. I think that we should wait a little while for the prices to go down on these pitchers, and then sign a lefty specialist, and I’ll be happy with that.

by Taskmaster on Jan 8, 2009 11:29 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

How do you find Lohse and Lowe to be similar? Some of the more stark differences (Lohse, Lowe):

Age: 30 vs 35
FIP: 4.54 vs 3.76
HR/9: 1.15 vs 0.72
GB: 38.2 vs 64.4
FB: 37.5 vs 19.4

They’re pretty close on both K/9 and BB/9 but I think Lowe’s groundballs leave Lohse in his dust despite the age disadvantage. That’s what causes the differences in FIP and HR/9 too, with HRs as fly balls.

by astrostl on Jan 8, 2009 11:46 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

and even if they are close

Lowe is, by far, superior so we should sign Lowe and extricate Lohse, not the other way around.

by chuckb on Jan 8, 2009 3:09 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I have no problem

with signing Lowe as long as we don’t go over 3 years. I think anything more than that is playing with fire. Also, does anyone think Mo may be exploring some trade opportunities for some younger pitchers, say maybe Sanchez from the Giants?

by stl522 on Jan 8, 2009 11:38 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Why doesn't Mozeliak try to move Pineiro?

Is there really no team that will take him for $2.5 M? We’d have to eat $5 M of his contract to watch him pitch somewhere else but it’d be very, very worth it.

As far as Lowe vs Sheets. I’d be more inclined to believe Sheets makes 60 starts over the next two years than Lowe makes 75 over the next 3.

by Hardcore Legend on Jan 8, 2009 11:46 AM EST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Lowe

has made over 30 starts a year every year that he hasn’t been a reliever (since 2002). The only time Sheets put up consecutive 30 start seasons was 2002-2004.

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Jan 8, 2009 11:52 AM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

True

but other than his age there is nothing that suggests that he won’t continue to make starts at the rate he has in the past. He may not make 75 starts, but I certainly wouldn’t put it past him. Ben Sheets, on the other hand, is held together with super glue. The odds of him starting 60 games in the next two years are almost zero, if only for the fact that managers will skip his turn in the rotation from time to time (like Harden) just to prevent injury.

Not saying I wouldn’t be happy if we signed Sheets later this afternoon…

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Jan 8, 2009 1:31 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

There are quite a few pitchers that his age or older

who still don’t have a significant injury history.

Jamie Moyer, Andy Pettitte, hell, Randy Johnson was still a dominant starting pitcher at age 35.

I would definitely take that bet with you, and if they both make each goal, we’ll call it a draw…

"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 Jan 8, 2009 3:20 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

All those pitchers you mentioned have faced

injury problems. Similiarly, you named a HOF pitcher (which Derek Lowe never had the talent of) and a decent comparable (who did miss time with injury).

All of Derek Lowe’s comparables on BR.com were either out of baseball at age 35 or converted to relievers. Does that mean that Lowe will turn into a pumpkin sometime around April? No.

by Hardcore Legend on Jan 8, 2009 3:27 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Moyer

Missed all of 6 starts in his age 37 season but he made 30 or more starts every year except that from age 35 to age 43. He dealt with more serious injuries before age 34. Lowe’s comparables on BR, at a glance, don’t look like the best durability comparisons to me. Many of them had significant injury histories. I’m not about to bet against Lowe getting 75 starts in the next 3 years. I’d almost bet that he’ll start as many or more games as Lohse in the next 3 years.

The Godfather himself has decided to grace us with his presence. This is his damn house. He sleeps 20 feet away.

by thegodfather on Jan 8, 2009 3:39 PM EST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That's because it's

90% counting stats and Lowe was primarily a reliever until age 29. His top 5 PECOTA includes Gaylord Perry and Mark Gubicza…

Anyway, Sheets was hurt at the end of last year, so that’s a huge point in Lowe’s favor if this is about which is a better bet just between the two.

by haltz on Jan 8, 2009 3:52 PM EST to parent up