Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Most Dangerous Division in Sports

Rotation depth

With the news yesterday that Izzy signed w/ the Rays so ends Izzy’s Cardinal career. By and large, it was a good one. For several years, Izzy was one of the better closers in the game. He certainly wasn’t among the elite closers in the game – Rivera, Wagner, Nathan, etc – but he was just a notch below. He took far too much abuse in St. Louis for not being Billy Wagner or one of the elite closers. While Cards’ fans are generally pretty knowledgeable and, if anything, overly homer-ous, I think that Izzy has been largely underappreciated while in St. Louis. He loved the team, loved the town and the fans and deserves to be remembered for his career w/ the team and not for what he did last year.

That said, it was time for him to depart. I don’t really blame those who thought he ought to return just to add a little depth. If Carp falters (or Tony kills Pineiro) and McClellan assumes a starting role, we might need a little more depth. But not Izzy. It’s not like I don’t think there’s any way he might truly be healthy and able to be a decent pitcher. I just think it’s time to move on and the temptation to restore him to the closer’s role as soon as Perez has a 9th inning meltdown will be too strong. Perez will fail sometimes (or Motte, whoever). They’ll blow a save, sometimes in epically disastrous fashion. That’s part of it. It may happen against the Cubs in the rubber game of a weekend series in June or something on Sunday Night Baseball. Oh well. It happens. It’s time to turn the page. I wish Izzy the best of luck and hope that he can become a solid reliever and maybe solidify the closers role in Tampa. FWIW, the guys at draysbay aren’t particularly sanguine.

The other news is that Orlando Hudson signed a 1 year deal w/ the Dodgers. He’s going to get just $3.4 M this season – less than Kennedy will make from the Cards to play for the Rays AAA team – plus $4.6 M in incentives for playing well. This is a ridiculously good contract for the Dodgers. I realize he’ll also cost them their 1st round pick and that’s the only thing that really casts a shadow on this deal. I’m not sure giving up a 1st round pick, particularly one in the middle of the first, is worth a 1 year deal for anyone. Wouldn’t you have to get more than 1 year out of Hudson in order to justify this? He’s probably a $10-12 M player in ’09 that they’ll pay $8. The difference is probably right in the range of the value of a 1st round pick. Still, I’d rather have done the 2 year, $14 M deal I suggested last week than a 1 year, $8 M deal if I’m giving up a mid 1st round pick.

I’m not exactly sure what to make of all this Colby in the 9 spot stuff. First of all, I’m on record many times as saying that batting order, though it matters a little, doesn’t really make that much difference. Still, we ought to make the most of it and get every run we can out of the batting order. That’s why I like the idea of hitting the pitcher 8th and Pujols 2nd. But we know that Pujols is never going to hit anything but 3rd as long as he’s the best hitter in the game and yet, 3rd is probably the worst spot, of the first 4 spots in the order, for him. Whatever.

So, if Rasmus hits 9th, that means Skip is batting 1st. I guess Ankiel is hitting 2nd – despite a .337 OBP in 2008. This is a little mystifying to me. Chone has Rasmus and Skip pegged for nearly identical .330 and .328 wOBAs (respectively) and Rasmus’ upside is greater than Skip’s. I guess if Rasmus performs better than expected Tony could always switch the order and maybe it makes more sense to have Rasmus’ speed in the 9 hole – further from Pujols – than in the 1 hole. From the article, doesn’t it sound as though Tony’s made up his mind as to who the 2nd baseman’s going to be? It even sounds like, if Skip can’t play 2nd, he’s going to play the OF ahead of Rasmus which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If Colby hits well this spring, he’s a better player than Skip and deserves to play the OF. Skip needs to win the 2B job which, considering his competition, may not be that difficult. Maybe this is a good place to start after all.

Finally, Dan’s post yesterday got me thinking about what we can expect from our rotation and, maybe more importantly, what we should expect from the likes of McClellan, Boggs, Todd, Hawksworth, et al in filling in for injured/ineffective starters. Below is a table comparing the Cards to the other teams in the NL in terms of number of games started by their top 5 starters (as measured by # of starts), their starters’ IP for the season and the # of IP by their relievers.

Starts Starters IP Relief IP
SF 147 954.2 487.1
NY 145 971 493.1
Phi 145 966.2 483
StL 143 955 499
Ari 141 978.2 456
Cin 140 917.1 525
Mil 137 983.1 472.1
Chi 137 955 495.2
LA 135 927.2 519.2
Wash 131 880.2 553.1
Hou 129 908.1 517
Col 126 910.1 535.2
Pit 125 887.1 567.2
Fla 118 916 519.1
Atl 115 886.1 554.1
SD 112 912.2 545.2

So, with Wainwright on the shelf for nearly half a season, and with us getting next to nothing from Carpenter, the Cards’ top 5 made the 4th most starts in the league. Considering the fact that the plan is to replace Looper’s 33 starts w/ Carpenter's ????? starts, that worries me a little. Of course, if Looper’s 33 starts are replaced by Wainwright’s 33 starts and Wainwright’s 20 starts are replaced by Carp’s 20 starts, we’re probably better off, right? That’s what I’ll keep telling myself.

In any case, we’re looking at 20 starts, minimum, from the likes of McClellan, Boggs, Todd, and whoever we can pull off the scrap heap. If we can’t get more than 12-15 starts from Carp, and no more than 25 or so from Wainwright, then we’re looking at needing 33-35 starts from those guys – basically a full season from a replacement level starter. Adding 15 starts at a 5.50 era (up from 3.75) at 6 innings per start adds about 1.17 runs per starts for a total of 17.5 runs. That’s nearly a 2 win difference in the standings assuming it has no detrimental impact on our bullpen. With any luck McClellan, Boggs, and Todd would be slightly better than replacement level but it would still probably cost us a win and a half over the course of the season. Ask San Diego how important it is for their starters to stay healthy.

Comment 159 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Tom Verducci at SI

makes the point that the health of your rotation is the key to reaching postseason (and postseason success).

Pitchers staying healthy is the second-biggest “crapshoot” in baseball; second only to the playoffs themselves! The Cards are banking on Carp actually being healthy for a full season, while Waino has found a new use for uncooked rice that may help prevent a recurrence of his finger injury.

I’m of the opinion that Carp will either be healthy for the entire season, or he’ll get hurt early. (No, I don’t have any statistical evidence to back this up; it’s just an opinion from “the gut”.)

IF the current starting five stay healthy, the Cards will be in good shape; if not, look out below! Piñeiro could be replaced by K-Mac, Boggs, the Hawkster, or Todd if he’s ineffective. Lohse seems to have found a comfort zone working with Dunc, as has The Colonel; I expect both to pitch well this season.

Yeah, I’m an optimist… but what the heck, it ain’t even March yet!

"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra

by The Ol Goaler on Feb 21, 2009 10:51 AM EST reply actions  

the rice actually does work very well to strengthen hand musculature

nice low risk resistance exercise for those tiny muscles

i really hope it works, because if waino’s curveball is not sharp, then he probably becomes an average pitcher

by VolsnCards5 on Feb 21, 2009 12:06 PM EST up reply actions  

"Adam Wainwright says finger feel fine"

headline of the article was funny, heh. Thanks for the link, good to hear more about the conditioning and preventing of another injury. initially, I had the same thought, that everyone is projecting Carp for a medium number of starts, when I think he’ll either get injured early, or make a lot of starts… but I guess, it’s impossible to tell when any pitcher will get hurt really.

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Feb 21, 2009 4:12 PM EST up reply actions  

Colby in the 9th spot

If Colby makes the team out of ST batting 9th for the month of April is probably a good way to ease him into the majors. Batting 9th means he his first AB is in the 2nd probably 3rd inning. Tony’s just trying to put Colby in a position to succeed. The theory seemed to work well for this guy.

As we all know, Tony will tinker with the lineup throughout the year and Colby batting 9th is not a season long objective. Come May, Colby will be moved up in the lineup eventually ending up at the 2nd spot for the majority of the season. He even might end up in the 4th spot moving Ludwick to the 2nd spot to break up the L & R. Ank could then move down to the 6th spot.

by ubeddie on Feb 21, 2009 11:22 AM EST reply actions   1 recs

Nice catch

on the Sizemore reference for lineup position!

by MRCARD on Feb 21, 2009 4:52 PM EST up reply actions  

"Wild Thing" Wainwright

Now has a Devastator or a pitch-to-be-named when someone gets a piece of it. I hope it works better than it did for Vaughn.

by WyoCardsFan on Feb 21, 2009 11:33 AM EST reply actions  

nice

now that sounds like an interesting pitch. I hope Wainwright has an amazing season as a rebound to last season.

I find these quotes a little troublesome:

La Russa on Brendan Ryan and his chances of turning heads and winning playing time at either of the open positions in the infield: "He could play no second all spring long and play second on Opening Day."

La Russa on Skip Schumaker and finding a place in the lineup for him: "He’s our leadoff hitter. That’s one of the reasons he’s so important to us."

first one isn’t that bad, just typical LaRussa stuff. The second one is more worrisome, why should Skip already be considered the leadoff hitter? shouldn’t Barton get a shot at the leadoff spot, or at least get to platoon? My opinion is that I think skip is going to pull off the 2B thing, but I realize that’s probably not that likely to happen.

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Feb 21, 2009 4:26 PM EST up reply actions  

I assume Skips less likely to be a platoon if he's playing 2nd

where Barton would be in and out of the lineup because of all the guys we have.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 5:03 PM EST up reply actions  

Many

feel that Skip should be the one platooned since he can’t hit lefties.

by spants on Feb 21, 2009 5:06 PM EST up reply actions  

Okay. let's platoon him with that great right-handed hitting 2nd baseman we have on the roster

as opposed to platooning Barton with Rasmus.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 5:07 PM EST up reply actions  

Besides, it probably doesn't matter what people here think.

The question was why would LaRussa say that, and I think the answer I gave was pretty spot on.

Don’t shoot the messenger, I’m just sayin’ what we should all know has the better chance of happening. In order to explain a statement by LaRussa, you have to answer it the way LaRussa would answer it.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 5:11 PM EST up reply actions  

Well, the more I look at it.

Ryan’s probably gonna make the roster. So, maybe he will.

I don’t know. How many times do you face lefties anyway? Other than Chicago, I can’t think of any other lefty starters in our division (which we face the most by a long shot). And I’m sorta going off the top of my head so I’m sure there’s someone (Pittsburgh?) but the point is, we will probably face lefties only about 30% of the time so I guess it’s safe to say Skip’s the leadoff man.

Does that make sense? I’m not sure it made sense to me, but it sorta does in my mind. Then again, I could be totally wrong about the number of times we face lefties.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 5:19 PM EST up reply actions  

Definitely Pittsburgh

I can think of 4 lefties there (Duke, Dumatrait, Gorzelanny, Maholm).

by TNTinCO on Feb 21, 2009 5:30 PM EST up reply actions  

Well, as long as they're still bottom feeders

I won’t worry too much about constructing my lineup to beat the Pirates. Then again we couldn’t beat them last year, so……….

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 5:31 PM EST up reply actions  

Good point

Maybe cause they threw so many damn lefties at us?

Nonetheless, I totally agree with you about not constructing the roster to compete with the Pirates.

by TNTinCO on Feb 21, 2009 5:33 PM EST up reply actions  

I love misplaced questions

Let’s go down the thread a bit and I’ll answer you………..

;-)

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 5:35 PM EST up reply actions  

I don't see Barton

as part of the team that goes to St. Louis. 5 OFs mean Ankiel, Ludwick, Rasmus, Mather and Duncan. It’s possible that Duncan’s hurt or ineffective and Barton makes the squad but I’d put his odds of making the roster at probably 25% or less.

by chuckb on Feb 21, 2009 5:52 PM EST up reply actions  

I figure the bench will be

LaRue, Mather, Ryan, Duncan, ??? (Barden/Thurston?)

I did kinda forget about Duncan in my lineup. But I’m having a hard time figuring out our backup infielders. Once Glaus comes back, I figure Freese will stay (sending the Barden/Thruston thing down) and will split time with Glaus while he gets up to speed especially if Freese is hitting well.

Right now, it’s really difficult to figure out who’s going to be where.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 6:02 PM EST up reply actions  

I would be stunned if Duncan

wasn’t the starting LF. Not saying he should be, but I don’t think there is much chance Rasmus makes the team unless somebody in the OF is hurt/traded. I will be curious to see what happens with the OF if Skip can’t hack 2B.

If Skip get the opportunity to put up another 133 PAs of .168/.238/.185/.423 vs. LHPs this year then they need to take the lineup pencil away from TLR. Hell, Red could put up better numbers against lefties than that.

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

by giveml on Feb 21, 2009 6:52 PM EST up reply actions  

We are very fortunate

to have dodged the O-Dog bullet. Paying $8M plus a first round pick for a 31 year old 2B who is largely a figment of his home ballpark is silly. During his time in AZ, Hudson’s cumulative road slashes were .274/.343/.392/.736 which looks a lot like Rickie Weeks, Felipe Lopez, Akinori Iwamura, and Robinson Cano. It is also pretty similar to the numbers he put up in Toronto back when he could actually play plus defense. He has been a below average defender over the last three years.

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

by giveml on Feb 21, 2009 12:10 PM EST reply actions  

Those aren't bad road stats at all, for a second baseman.

The real question with Hudson is whether his Gold Glove defense is a thing of the past. It it is, he was a fool not to accept arbitration, and the Dodgers were fools to sign him. If he comes back from the defensive decline, the price tag for one year of it isn’t awful, particularly since the Dodgers have shown some aptitude for getting value out of non-first-round draft picks.

I’m not sure whether I wish the Cardinals could have signed him to that deal or not. The comment about lower draft choices also applies to this team (and speaks well for the Luhnow/Mozeliak approach to scouting and drafting). However, for the deal to make sense for this team, three conditions must be satisfied. The “incentive” part of the contract must favor the team; Hudson must get back to his brilliant defense (without that, we certainly don’t want him); AND Schumaker must prove incapable of adapting to 2B, which IMO would be much preferred over signing Hudson or any other free agent/trade. I don’t expect all of those conditions to be met, so the Dodgers are welcome to him.

by StanTheManFan on Feb 21, 2009 1:22 PM EST up reply actions  

Those may not be bad numbers

for a 2B, but those are pretty horrible numbers for an $8M player, especially one in a defensive decline.

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

by giveml on Feb 21, 2009 1:37 PM EST up reply actions  

some points re Hudson to LA

of minor interest here is that the Dodgers also recently signed/acquired Juan Castro… makes you say, ‘so what?’
I’ve always been of the opinion that the aging no-hit Juan C has been the best (and versatile) infielder in baseball. I saw him often during his tenures with the Reds. Anyway, it might be a hedge against the fear that Hudson’s defense is indeed a thing of the past. Castro is one of the few players who has built a fairly lengthy career based mostly on being a late-inning defensive specialist.
Hudson’s signing may also mean that the Dodgers’ FO is fearful that they will NOT be able to come to terms with Manny (thus they want the pop hoped for that Hudson might bring)
Lastly, I wonder how tight Blake DeWitt’s jaws have become. Jeff (Let’s play the game right) Kent’s retirement was supposed to hand the 2b job to DeWitt… now what? Is he supposed to compete with the other Blake, Casey Blake, for the hot corner spot?

by the Tewk on Feb 21, 2009 6:47 PM EST up reply actions  

I like DeWitt

I wonder what it would take to pry him away from LA. Considering Casey Blake is their starting 3B and that Hudson’s on a 1 year deal, I’d think it would be rather difficult.

by chuckb on Feb 22, 2009 12:55 AM EST up reply actions  

Comments about batting order

are very interesting. Schumaker is the leadoff hitter no matter what. Rasmus in the 9th spot if he makes the team, and don’t forget the early Duncan praise and all the talk about how he has been successful in the #2 spot prior to the injury.

This all makes perfect sense with a line-up of Schumaker, Duncan, Pujols, Ludwick, Glauss, Molina, Greene, Pitcher, Rasmus. Not bad. Only problem is that there is no Ankiel. Put this with all of the trade talk revolving around Ankiel and it makes me wonder if he is going to be moved. He is in the last year of his relatively cheap contract and it is not like they don’t have someone to take his place. He has also had injury problems. Makes me wonder!

I realize that Ankiel and Rasmus could be in the line-up together and that someone else could hit in the all important #2 spot in front of Pujols and maybe that ends up being Ankiel but all of the talk seems to indicate different.

Maybe it is just talk and nothing more than motivation for competition. However, one has to wonder given the Cards recent refusal to spend money and their committment to youth.

by Warcard on Feb 21, 2009 1:21 PM EST reply actions  

Refusal to spend money isn't the issue with introducing Raz.

Inability to make a trade to leverage all the surplus outfield talent is.

Actually, I wonder if all this talking-up of Li’l Dunc is a prelude to dealing him to some AL team as a DH.

by StanTheManFan on Feb 21, 2009 1:26 PM EST up reply actions  

Lets hope so!

I like Chris but he would fit much better on another (AL) team. I prefer to be more reserved in what I expect from Rasmus. But even if Rasmus never becomes what people think he’s gonna be, there is still impressive depth for the Cards in the Outfield. I for one think Joe Mather could be a 30hr 100RBI guy if given the at bats at the big league level. Maybe Chris will start a lot before the trade deadline with Colby coming in for defense late. If Chris performs like his late ‘06 early ’07 seasons this spring then you’d think a nice deal could be had.

by Walking Underwear on Feb 21, 2009 2:25 PM EST up reply actions  

+1

on joe “the beav” mather

"No matter where you go, there you are" Buckeroo Bonzai Across the 8th Dimension

by sportsman on Feb 21, 2009 9:56 PM EST up reply actions  

ap=4

i agree batting order is important, especially the top end because there is such a greater likelihood of winning a game if your team scores first. we need to either get higher obp in front of albert or move him to 4th with the pitcher ninth. albert comes up with 2 outs and no body on way too often with the strikeout kings batting second. after the first inning, batting order becomes less important and it doesn’t matter where albert bats as long as you maximize the number of times he bats with men on, not how many times he bats overall. the ap 4th gets you either ap batting with men on in the 1st or your highest obp guy leading off the second. either way, it seems the best way to score first. as for rasmus at 9, two left handed leadoff batters in a row doesn’t seem like that good an idea.

"No matter where you go, there you are" Buckeroo Bonzai Across the 8th Dimension

by sportsman on Feb 21, 2009 2:32 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Amen

brother. It will never happen while TLR is here, but AP batting 4th would be better for the team and for Albert.

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

by giveml on Feb 21, 2009 2:42 PM EST up reply actions  

I'd think

The 10-15 games that’d end with Albert on deck would outweigh any of that.

Not afraid to nitpick

by joker24 on Feb 21, 2009 2:50 PM EST up reply actions  

Well

let’s see. If 15 games ended with Albert on deck we would probably be winning at least eight of those and far enough behind in half of the remaining seven that it wouldn’t matter. I don’t think Albert missing out on 3-4 meaningful ABs per season outweighs the 53 times in 2008 he batted in the first with two outs and nobody on.

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

by giveml on Feb 21, 2009 4:14 PM EST up reply actions  

53 ?? !!!

that is stunningly awful.
Can most of this be laid on a poor overall on-base percentage by our leadoff people… or… is some of it due to LaRussa’s insane mania for putting a power hitter in the 2 hole ?

by the Tewk on Feb 21, 2009 6:52 PM EST up reply actions  

Actually

it is not that atypical for a third spot hitter. Our lead-off spot had a .345 OBP (largely due to Izturis vs. LHPs) and the two spot was .371. It is just the nature of batting 3rd to get a lot of empty ABs in the first inning.

I guess the theory, if there is one, is to make sure Albert has a chance to hit a bomb in the 1st inning. However, he has his lowest HR/AB ratio in the first inning. If you were the pitcher and you were facing Albert with two outs and nobody on, would you give him anything to hit?

I think it is just a status thing to hit 3rd based on tradition. It is a waste of his talents.

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

by giveml on Feb 21, 2009 7:01 PM EST up reply actions  

another piece of this

(as I have posted before)… Albert ends up the 3 hole hitter because we have not had an outstanding prototypical alternative for most of Pujols’ tenure.
Imagine a Keith Hernandez (especially the 1979 version) in the line-up; even LaRussa isn’t that crazy.

by the Tewk on Feb 21, 2009 7:07 PM EST up reply actions  

raz

bats 3rd?

"No matter where you go, there you are" Buckeroo Bonzai Across the 8th Dimension

by sportsman on Feb 21, 2009 9:59 PM EST up reply actions  

even if skip wins the job...

i doubt he’ll be starting against lefties…seems like that would be ryan or thurston or whatever righthanded hitting middle infielder makes the roster…

by LukeMP1186 on Feb 21, 2009 4:59 PM EST up reply actions  

thurston's a lefty.

odds are that if thurston or skip wins the main job at 2b, either ryan or barden (both righties) will come along as a utility man/platoon partner.

by tom s. on Feb 21, 2009 5:05 PM EST up reply actions  

my bad...

but yeah i’d agree, i’d still say it’s doubtful skip starts against lefties…

by LukeMP1186 on Feb 21, 2009 5:07 PM EST up reply actions  

are we sure?

Adam Kennedy had 22 % of his ABs versus lefties last year… same percentage as Skip. Of course AK managed to hit .270 (over 74 AB) whereas Skip hit a woeful .168 over 119 AB.
Assuming Schumaker is adequate defensively at 2b, is LaRussa MORE likely to replace him against lefties than if Skip was an outfielder still?

by the Tewk on Feb 21, 2009 7:31 PM EST up reply actions  

Rotation *potential*

I’ll go a step further; if the Cards get 145-150 starts from their “big five”, I’d say the rotation will be among the top 5 in baseball—maybe the best. (Don’t forget, other than when his elbow flared up in June/July, Wellemeyer had an ERA around 3.00.)

Pair that rotation with what looks to be an above-average bullpen (LOOGY shortcomings notwithstanding) and the staff as a whole could put up an ERA+ in the 110-115 range (last year was 101, I believe).

Speaaking of the bullpen, am I crazy or with 34 games in 35 days to begin the season—and starting pitchers not expected to go so deep into games for the first few weeks—wouldn’t an 8-man bullpen be wise for the first 1 month-plus?

by Mekonsrock on Feb 21, 2009 1:53 PM EST reply actions  

Dave Duncan "tickled pink" by Chris Carpenter’s Live BP

Derrick Goold just reported that Dave Duncan was effusive in his assessment of Carpenter’s latest session. Duncan is not a hype kinda guy. It looks more and more as if Carp is back to normal. Goold called Carp’s stuff “electric”. LaRussa called today a “big day” for the Cardinals. I agree that if Carp truly is back to full health, the Cardinals could have the best rotation in the NL. And their offense should be better than last year, with Chris Duncan evidently healthy, Rasmus waiting in the wings, Greene in place of Izturis, Freese likely to fill in nicely for Glaus the first six weeks or so. The closer’s performance should be improved, too, with Isringhausen gone. Lefthanded relief should be better, as well. All of these improvements are good bets. With a healthy Carpenter, it is conceivable the Cards could win more than 90 games. Just winning half of their one-run games last year (reducing blown save to a league average rate) would have boosted the team’s win total to 90 or more.

by CardsWin on Feb 21, 2009 2:56 PM EST reply actions  

Still not convinced

This ain’t my first rodeo. I’m allowed to be skeptical.

The artist formerly known as...
Mr Redbird @ Viva El Birdos
PowerOfDixieland @ Track Em Tigers, other SEC blogs

by jd is legend on Feb 21, 2009 3:41 PM EST up reply actions  

if barry zito can find his mojo

a rotation of lincecum, cain, zito, johnson and sanchez will be easily the best in the national league, probably all of baseball.

by adiueordie on Feb 21, 2009 3:55 PM EST up reply actions  

Ugh.

But, I’m glad they’re not in our division.

by spants on Feb 21, 2009 5:12 PM EST up reply actions  

cubs rotation is still potentially pretty scary

unless they all regress, but that’s the same worry we have for welley and lohse I guess

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Feb 21, 2009 5:20 PM EST up reply actions  

barry zito has had a lost and found message for his mojo on the bay area craigslist for the last

three years. no sign of it yet. but i hear he’s got the reward up to $200 or a crate full of old jazz LPs.

by tom s. on Feb 21, 2009 5:23 PM EST up reply actions  

they're better than us

even if Zito is their Pineiro. As long as Lincecum stays healthy, that staff is considerably better than ours.

by chuckb on Feb 21, 2009 5:54 PM EST up reply actions  

I'd take the D-Backs over that still

Webb, Haren, Scherzer is a nuts top 3 and Davis/Garland are averageish back enders.

Not afraid to nitpick

by joker24 on Feb 21, 2009 7:43 PM EST up reply actions  

isn't he post going to run out of hyperbolic descriptions of dave duncan's sentiments for cards

pitchers soon?

I see that D-Dunc is “tickled pink” and “practically giddy” about carp’s performance. he says ottavino is the best he’s ever seen him. he says hawksworth is the best he’s ever seen him.

 i keep expecting to open the p-d page and find “when asked about jess todd’s performance, dave duncan began to skip and twirl about chanting "todd! todd!” for ten full minutes." and “when asked about whether jason motte had developed major league-worthy secondary pitches, Dave Duncan fell to the floor in a rapturous ecstasy and began speaking in tongues.”

by tom s. on Feb 21, 2009 5:03 PM EST up reply actions   5 recs

Rec

Not afraid to nitpick

by joker24 on Feb 21, 2009 5:06 PM EST up reply actions  

i'd pay good money to see that

BEN MOTHERHUSHYOURMOUTH SHEETS

ManRam

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

by gdm426 on Feb 21, 2009 6:50 PM EST up reply actions  

dark horse

Anybody pick this guy

to be the unexpected hype guy this year? It would be a huge plus if he gets things going in the right direction.

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

by FutureMan on Feb 21, 2009 4:27 PM EST reply actions  

Rasmus

Great article, but I don’t understand how the following two statements can be stated in the same paragraph.

Chone has Rasmus and Skip pegged for nearly identical .330 and .328 wOBAs (respectively
If Colby hits well this spring, he’s a better player than Skip and deserves to play the OF.

Aren’t they saying the opposite things? I know that Colby WILL be a better player in the future, but it seems like they are roughly the same in 2009, and there are many reasons to keep Colby in the minors for a little while longer. If the two players are roughly the same, why would you bring up the prospect and accelerate his arbirtration and free agency clocks?

I understand that Colby has more upside, but you also have to admit that he has more downside (for 2009 only). You know roughly what you are getting out of Skip this year. Letting Colby dominate Triple A for a couple of months doesn’t really have much downside to me, unless you believe he is going to go “Pujols” on everyone from the beginning of his major league career or if you feel Skip is going to regress quite a bit from last year.

by MRCARD on Feb 21, 2009 5:06 PM EST reply actions  

I think that Chuck means

that Rasmus has a better chance of being better that his projection that Skip does, and I have to agree with him. Plus, the difference in defense between the two players is probably close to 1.5 wins. It is almost a no-brainer to start Rasmus instead of Skip. Skip at second on the other hand…

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions  

Rasmus vs. Schumaker

Is it a no brainer? You have a good point about the defense, but is 1.5 wins going to get us in the playoffs? Rasmus could be called up mid-season and not burn up a year of arbitration. Now we are down to .75 wins, is that good enough? If you follow the link above, you will see some very real costs to bringing him up at the start of the year. To me, that’s not enough. (Though I respect your opinion if you think the Cardinals are a win away from the playoffs).

As far as being better than the projections, you are right. He’s also got a better chance to be worse than the projections. That’s why they even out to what they do. You can’t site projections and then say you don’t believe in them. What makes you not believe in them?

by MRCARD on Feb 21, 2009 9:30 PM EST up reply actions  

I read the article

The author said:

"We keep Rasmus in the minors until he has shown to be better than the player(s) he is replacing".

I do believe in the projections. Shu and Rasmus are probably going to have similar offensive seasons, however Rasmus will almost certainly be much better due to his defense. I don’t think that the Cards are a win away from the playoffs, but neither were the Reds when the brought up Jay Bruce. The Rays didn’t think that they were close to the playoffs when the brought up Evan Longoria. The point is that you can’t know how well you play in a season. The only thing that you have to do is put the best players out there. In the case of the Cardinals that would be starting Rasmus in center and playing Skip at second.

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 9:47 PM EST up reply actions  

longoria is a bad example

the rays did just what MRCARD is suggestig with longoria. By starting him in AAA, they gained massive negotiation leverage. longoria signed a very team-friendly deal to buy out 3 free agent years before he ever saw the major leagues, or else he’d have been stuck in AAA most of the season.

"If I'm right, it was a brilliant move, if I'm wrong, it was a crazy idea". -Mo

by SleepyCA on Feb 21, 2009 10:56 PM EST up reply actions  

He was in AAA for less than a month

I wouldn’t mind doing that with Rasmus. What MRCARD is saying (or at least linking to) is that we should keep Razums in AAA for the entire year.

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 11:06 PM EST up reply actions  

"Rasmus could be called up mid-season...

… and not burn up a year of arbitration." -MRCARD

I think you are misreading him ;)

"If I'm right, it was a brilliant move, if I'm wrong, it was a crazy idea". -Mo

by SleepyCA on Feb 21, 2009 11:08 PM EST up reply actions  

Ah

Then I am not arguing with MRCARD. I am trying to say that Rasmus will be a better player than Skip next year and thus he should play. But say we start him in AAA for a month then bring him up, does the arby rule still apply? If it does, than that is obviously the right course of action.

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 11:16 PM EST up reply actions  

and jay bruce is also a bad example

he should NOT have been brought up in 2008. He wasn’t ready, and burned a cost-controlled future star year on a 0.6 WAR performance from a 21yo just about any minor league corner infielder could have provided. Bringing him up was the type of mistake that a small-er market team like the Reds (or the cardinals) cannot afford to make.

"If I'm right, it was a brilliant move, if I'm wrong, it was a crazy idea". -Mo

by SleepyCA on Feb 21, 2009 11:05 PM EST up reply actions  

You're right

Jay Bruce was a bad example. Bruce hit his CHONE projection almost exactly last year in terms of rate stats. Like Bruce, CHONE projects Rasmus to be a league average offensive player. However, Rasmus can be expected to play excellent defense at center which would give him +5 – +10 runs. Bruce on the other hand, spent most of his time in right and was terrible there leading to -7.7 runs on defense.

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 11:29 PM EST up reply actions  

i got bruce and Votto mixed up, as far as position.

but Votto is an example of “player development done right”. OTOH, he was 24 before he was ready for a starting job at the MLB level, but once he was ready, he excelled.

"If I'm right, it was a brilliant move, if I'm wrong, it was a crazy idea". -Mo

by SleepyCA on Feb 22, 2009 8:39 PM EST up reply actions  

1 statement

is about who hits leadoff. The other is about playing the OF. They’re not at all contradictory.

by chuckb on Feb 21, 2009 5:55 PM EST up reply actions  

Leadoff...

If it’s about who hits leadoff, your statement is more confusing. You are using CHONE who projects Rasmus’s OBP to be .335 and Skip’s to be .341. Since you referenced CHONE, I figured that is what you are going by with projections. Wouldn’t you want the higher OBP guy in the leadoff spot?

I’m sorry I’m nitpicking. I just like to challenge the conventional norm that promoting Rasmus is a no brainer. You may not agree with the conclusion that Rasmus should start the seaon in the minors, but the issue is not black and white.

Say Rasmus is worth the same amount of wins as Schumacher with the bat but worth 1.5 wins on defense (over a full season). Now say that you promote Rasmus halfway through the season. Will that .75 Win push this team into the playoffs? If not, wouldn’t you rather have Rasmus playing with us before free agency at age 28? What if those 2 months allows us to trade another outfielder who has now accumulated more value?

Again, I’m sorry about the nitpick, it was a great article.

by MRCARD on Feb 21, 2009 9:20 PM EST up reply actions  

That be the cold, calculated approach

But we want to see Rasmus PLAY!!! If he shows that he is better than Skip and has a good attitude than we can’t just stick in the minors to save some money.

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 9:30 PM EST up reply actions  

Just see him play approach...

I totally understand this point of thinking. I want to see him play too! I just think the Cardinals are better off by starting him in the minors. If we are going to take a rational approach to this utilizing the numbers (and not just be fans), I just don’t see how this shouldn’t be a valid argument.

by MRCARD on Feb 21, 2009 9:32 PM EST up reply actions  

It is and you are right

I just can’t picture the OF with Rasmus. He seems like such a perfect fit.

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 9:35 PM EST up reply actions  

with Chone

I didn’t use OBP, I used wOBA — a better indicator of offensive production than OBP is b/c it accounts for power. Skip’s a singles hitter and Rasmus has more extra base power — thus the higher wOBA.

Additionally, I’m not quite sure I agree with the justification of putting the better player in the minors for a couple of months just to gain an arbitration advantage. I understand the advantage to the team 6 years from now, but is that worth the cost to the team the first 3 months of this year, plus the cost to the team in terms of its reputation w/ agents and players around the league who see us as capricious b/c we refuse to promote even our best prospects as a way of gaining a slight financial advantage. If Rasmus is better, he should play.

by chuckb on Feb 22, 2009 1:01 AM EST up reply actions  

Is he better?

I was using OBP because we were talking about the better leadoff hitter, but you are correct that wOBA is a better indicator of offensive production in total. Still, we’re talking a 2 point advantage in wOBA. Offensively CHONE predicts them to be roughly even with the bat and they project pretty close with the glove. It’s not like we are talking about the difference between Pujols and Brendan Ryan here.

Obviously the Cardinals wouldn’t frame it as they are gaining an arbitration advantage. Everyone in the league knows we have a logjam in the outfield. It’s not like we are choosing between two players who will perform significantly different (unless you don’t believe in the CHONE projections). We’re also talking about Rasmus replacing a player that did pretty well last year. You say you don’t agree with the justification of keeping the “better” player in the minors, no matter what. I get and respect that. My point is that they aren’t much different in 2009 and the projection statistics back that up.

Aside from the slightly better player argument, I don’t see another reason. I find it illogical to say that agents will hold it against the Cardinals and that this will give them a bad reputation. We’re not exactly signing a lot of players to hometown discounts anymore. This is a business and players and teams both approach it that way. This is precisely why holding Rasmus another year before free agency is a good idea.

by MRCARD on Feb 22, 2009 1:27 AM EST up reply actions  

One more thing...

SleepyCA had another great point about Longoria. and how he signed a team friendly contract. It was said that Longoria was mad at the organization for keeping him in the minors longer when they didn’t call him up right away, yet the team just signed him to a nice deal and he seems happy now. I don’t think the Rays were hurt by this and now free agents want to sign with the Rays (because they are winning).

Plus, keeping Rasmus in the minors, away from the pressure, could actually help him. Nobody talks about this but AAA could actually be good for him to regain some confidence. Remember, he had a down year, was beset with injuries and didn’t play winter ball. A few more at bats might be nice for him in the development process.

by MRCARD on Feb 22, 2009 1:37 AM EST up reply actions  

The thing is that the defense is a big difference.

Shumaker’s career UZR/150 in CF is -10.0. He is probably not that bad. Looking at his defense in the minors with Total Zone Rating per 150 (similar to UZR/150), he has been a + 8 defender a -2 defender and a -7 defender over the last 3 years. However that +8 score was in 2005 when he was 25 which is the age when defense usually peaks. Since than he has steadily regressed to where the point he is probably close to a -5 defender in center.

Rasmus on the other hand has been an excellent defender. Using his TTR/150 data, his defensive ratings have been +27, -2, +12 and 15 over the last 4 years. In a comment on another post, I compared Rasmus to Adam Jones. Jones had put of eerily similar TTR/150 scores in his last 2 season in the minors as Rasmus did and then became a +10 defender in the majors. It is easy to imagine that Rasmus will do the same.

So if you think that Rasmus is a +10 defender whereas Skip is a -5 defender, the difference is 15 runs or 1.5 wins. As you said there are about the same with the bat, so Rasmus is probably 1.5 wins better than Schu. That is too much of a difference to ignore, and it is too hard to justify sending down Rasmus.

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 22, 2009 2:43 AM EST up reply actions  

What would be everyone's preferred batting order?

Take for example: Skip at 2B, Freese at 3B, Rasmus and Ankiel in the OF, Duncan on the bench…what do you want the order to look like? Construct your lineups…

by LukeMP1186 on Feb 21, 2009 5:06 PM EST reply actions  

Also...

Assume Albert is hitting 3rd and the pitcher is hitting 8th, because no matter how much you don’t like it, it isn’t changing…

by LukeMP1186 on Feb 21, 2009 5:09 PM EST up reply actions  

I'll go first...

I don’t mind Rasmus hitting 9th, because like some others have pointed out, it’s not the worst place to get comfortable as a rookie. Personally, I would rather have Skip leading off to start the year. I like Rasmus in the 2 hole, but who does that leave to hit 9th? Greene? His OBP doesn’t seem ideal for a spot that’s intended to get guys on in front of Albert, no matter how gimmicky it seems. Mine would look something like this…

Schumaker
Freese
Pujols
Ludwick
Ankiel
Molina
Greene
Pitcher
Rasmus

I like Freese in the 2 hole better than Ankiel, because otherwise you’re looking at 5 straight righthanded bats from 3 through 7 in the order.

by LukeMP1186 on Feb 21, 2009 5:18 PM EST up reply actions  

well, I'm going to run with this

I’d have 7 outfielders, 2 of which can play the infield (skip and mather, humor me). Duncan and Barton are also on the team (Dunc can pinch hit and give Pujols a day off every once in a while too).

how does this sound:

skip/barton
molina
pujols/duncan
ludwick
freese/mather
greene
ankiel
pitcher
?

I’m terrible at constructing lineups

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Feb 21, 2009 5:29 PM EST up reply actions  

You would platoon Pujols and Duncan?

If so, I agree with the last thing you wrote………;-)

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 5:33 PM EST up reply actions  

nope

I just wouldn’t play duncan very often at all, more of a power pinch hitter

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Feb 21, 2009 6:14 PM EST up reply actions  

Do you think...

Barton even makes the roster? I was operating under the assumption that Duncan and Mather would be the only outfielders on the bench, but you could be right…

by LukeMP1186 on Feb 21, 2009 5:35 PM EST up reply actions  

Nevermind...

I only looked at the lineup and didn’t ready what you wrote above it. I’m an idiot.

by LukeMP1186 on Feb 21, 2009 5:36 PM EST up reply actions  

I'd bat Molina 9th.

I think i said it last year (well, I thought it) that he’s better off batting 9th than 7th. He screws up the whole pitcher bunting him over since he’s so damn slow plus all the dp’s.

I’m starting to come around on the Pujols not batting 3rd thing, but I’m not sure I’m completely sold (I’m a baseball coach and too damn old school, I suppose).

vs Righties:

Skip
Ankiel
Pujols
Ludwick
Freese
Rasmus
Greene
Pitcher
Molina

vs Lefties:

Barton
Ankiel
Pujols
Ludwick
Freese
Greene
Ryan
Pitcher
Molina

I’d probably start the season like this and see how Rasmus does. If he’s tearing the cover off the ball, Barton’s gonna have to lose playing time which would probably force me to hit Ryan leadoff for the time being. I don’t necessarily like Freese that high, but what are you gonna do. Obviously once Glaus is healthy he fits in there nicely in the same spot.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 5:46 PM EST up reply actions  

my lineup

2b-Schumaker
CF-Rasmus
1b-Pujols
RF-Ludwick
LF-Ankiel
SS-Greene
3b-Freese
p-Pitcher
C Molina

I really like Yadi in the 9 spot to be the first of the double leadoff, assuming his OBP remains where it was last year. Plus he won’t ground into nearly as many DPs and I dont think speed is as important as the ability to get on base at that spot. re Rasmus, i like him in the 2 spot, if he can handle it, as he would always get pitches to hit. The other variation of the lineup with Rasmus that could work is Lud at 2, Colby at 6, and Ank and Greene get bumped up to 4 and 5. This lineup does not put as much pressure on Rasmus, but it doesnt look as balanced to me.

"Statistics mean nothing to the individual"
"You are what you eat and you clearly went out and devoured a big fat guy"

by jacksonian on Feb 21, 2009 5:47 PM EST up reply actions  

The trouble with Yadi batting 9th...

is Skip batting 1st. I think he hit more ground balls to 2B than any other player in baseball, with Yadi on first that’s an easy DP

Felipe Lopez - next year's Joel Pineiro (on another team, thank you Mo!)

by DiscoJer on Feb 21, 2009 7:00 PM EST up reply actions  

it's an easy DP with ANYONE on first.

but that’s a good point.

"If I'm right, it was a brilliant move, if I'm wrong, it was a crazy idea". -Mo

by SleepyCA on Feb 21, 2009 7:21 PM EST up reply actions  

Lineup

An interesting article by Brew Crew Ball details the proper way to construct a lineup:

# Of your best five hitters, your first batter should be the one with the least amount of power and the most walks. Preferably, the player here has a large split in batting average and on-base percentage because the value of a hit is similar to the value of a walk due to the fewer amount of runners on base in this spot.
# Next, you should decide who your two best overall hitters are, excluding your leadoff man. These players should always bat in the second and fourth spots in the lineup— not the third, as is usually assumed. The reason is that the third spot in the lineup comes has the highest likelihood of coming up with 2 outs, and commonly comes up with 2 outs and no runners on, mainly because of the freqent occurence of the first two batters making outs in the first inning. The second spot comes up about 30 more times per year than the fourth spot, and the fourth spot comes up with more runners on base. These factors balance out almost equally. You would prefer the second hitter to have the advantage of more walks and the fourth hitter to have the advantage of more power to fully optimize your two best hitters.
# After the three top hitters are taken, you should look at the next two best hitters on the team. The third and fifth spots balance out almost the same way the second and fourth ones do. The fifth spot has an advantage for every event except a home run— which makes sense, because a single with two outs has little impact, while a home run always scores, and we have already established that the third hitter comes up frequently with two out. If the hitters under consideration are relatively equal in skill, hit the one with more home runs third and the one with more singles and doubles fifth. Overall, the fifth hitter should be better than the third hitter.
# The quality of hitter should generally decrease through the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth spots in the order. There is one notable exception, though.
# In almost all situations, a pitcher should bat eighth in a National League lineup. The difference in plate appearances between the eighth and ninth hitters over the course of the year is about 15 plate appearances. This can be reduced to about 10 when pinch-hitters are introduced. Those 10 plate appearances are more than made up for by increasing the amount of runners on base for the top of the lineup. The overall impact of hitting the pitcher eighth would only add a few runs in a year, but that is no excuse to ignore it.

Apply this to the Cardinals, you get a lineup like this:

Schumaker
Pujols
Glaus
Ludwick
Ankiel
Rasmus
Greene
Pitcher
Yada

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 5:21 PM EST reply actions   1 recs

I forgot about Freese

The lineup with Freese should look like this:

Schumaker
Pujols
Rasmus
Ludwick
Ankiel
Freese
Greene
Pitcher
Yada

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 5:23 PM EST up reply actions  

I like his bat there...

But his speed would seem to be a problem if the goal is to have a 2nd leadoff hitter. Hate to see Yadi clogging up the bases in front of Skip and the guys that can run a little bit…

by LukeMP1186 on Feb 21, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions  

The only spot that makes sense for Yadi is 9th

He doesn’t walk enough or have enough power to hit anywhere else in the lineup. His lack of strikeouts would become a problem anywhere else in the lineup because he would hit into a lot of double plays.

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 5:42 PM EST up reply actions  

Like I said...

I like his bat there. It’s just the speed thing that gets me, but I guess it wouldn’t be any worse than the average pitcher that would normally be hitting there…

by LukeMP1186 on Feb 21, 2009 5:48 PM EST up reply actions  

That's exaclty why hitting behind the pitcher makes sense.

If the 7th hitter gets on, the pitcher bunts him over eliminating the DP. If the 7th doesn’t get on, the pitcher still probably makes an out and the DP isn’t an issue anyway.

There really is no other spot in the lineup for him and he could actually be an asset as a 9th place hitter.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 5:50 PM EST up reply actions  

this is dead on

and why I like Pujols in the 2 hole. The 4 hole is good as well but the 2 hole gets him more PAs for the season and allows him to definitely hit in the 1st inning. I’d have Ankiel 3rd and the 3rd baseman 5th until Glaus is healthy unless Rasmus bats 5th w/ Freese, Craig, or Wallace 6th. The other option is putting Rasmus in the 1 hole w/ Pujols, then Ankiel, Ludwick and the 3rd baseman.

by chuckb on Feb 21, 2009 5:58 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah I didn't really know where to put Rasmus

He has the walks and the baserunning to hit leadoff, but he also has enormous power potential. I figured that Rasmus would be better than Skip hitting 6th, so I put him there.

I think that Glaus makes more sense hitting third because he gets on base more. Whereas Ankiel has more power which would be better suited for the 5th hole where there will be more guys on base.

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 6:03 PM EST up reply actions  

I guess if were going to make everyone question us about the pitcher hitting 8th

might as well hit Pujols 2nd and completely turn the baseball world on it’s side, right?

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 6:04 PM EST up reply actions  

Well

Tony was the one in the ASG a couple of years ago to bat Barry Bonds second

The artist formerly known as...
Mr Redbird @ Viva El Birdos
PowerOfDixieland @ Track Em Tigers, other SEC blogs

by jd is legend on Feb 21, 2009 6:22 PM EST up reply actions  

how about this

skip/barton
pujols
ankiel
ludwick
freese
greene
rasmus/?
pitcher
yadi

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Feb 21, 2009 6:22 PM EST up reply actions  

I'd move Rasums up a spot.

I think batting in front of the pitcher is tough since the pitcher you’re facing sees no point in giving you anything good to hit.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 6:40 PM EST up reply actions  

I love Barton!!!

That is an excellent lineup, except that Barton could be a platoon partner with Skip because he doesn’t play second.

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 6:55 PM EST up reply actions  

yeah

the lineup would change quite a bit between the skip leadoff lineup and the barton leadoff lineup

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Feb 21, 2009 8:45 PM EST up reply actions  

of course

it also depends on if skip is only playing 2B or not

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Feb 21, 2009 8:46 PM EST up reply actions  

bingo

also, speed is most important in the #5 and #6 spots. So, I’d go with:

Skip2B
APu
Ankiel
Luddy
Rasmus
Greene
Freese
P
Yadi

"If I'm right, it was a brilliant move, if I'm wrong, it was a crazy idea". -Mo

by SleepyCA on Feb 21, 2009 7:26 PM EST up reply actions  

I love this one, but Tony won’t. so we’ll probably see something like..

Skip
Ank, Duncan, Other
Pu
Luddy
Freese/Greene
Yadi
Freese/Greene
Pitcher
Colby

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

by AdjustedExpectations on Feb 21, 2009 8:21 PM EST up reply actions  

Either way

lineup construction doesn’t make that much of a difference. The difference between the best possible lineup and the one you just mentioned is less than 10 runs. It is still important to do, but nothing to pull your hair out over.

vivaelbeñsheets

by vivaelpujols on Feb 21, 2009 8:25 PM EST up reply actions  

As long as Tony doesn’t handicap us when we have the series won (ala last year with some of those lineups) then I could care less what he does.

The lineup he put out there for the series sweep vs the Giants still makes my blood boil.

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

by AdjustedExpectations on Feb 21, 2009 8:30 PM EST up reply actions  

latest ST update

boggs and scherer back in the swing — boggs on a mound today, scherer to pitch off a mound in coming days.

ivan maldonado, oquendo’s closer for puerto rico, got a tryout.

MLB.com’s Matthew Leach presented a question on if Schumaker could get work in B-Games, or minor-league games. La Russa raised an eyebrow as if to wonder why he would do that. Someone asked: "You are going to want to see other people at second base, right?"

"I am?" La Russa responded.

sounds like that 2b competition just keeps heating up.

linkification.

by tom s. on Feb 21, 2009 6:32 PM EST reply actions  

or LaRussa's screwing around with Leech?

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 21, 2009 6:41 PM EST up reply actions  

he's so happy to have AK gone he doesn't know what to do with himself

BEN MOTHERHUSHYOURMOUTH SHEETS

ManRam

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

by gdm426 on Feb 21, 2009 6:54 PM EST up reply actions  

so am I. I could never bring myself to look forward to a regressed defensive glove knowing full well there’s not a bat on the opposite side of the inning worth watching.

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

by AdjustedExpectations on Feb 21, 2009 8:14 PM EST up reply actions  

how about this

since skip has outfield speed, will he have more range to catch up to hits that are hit in between the infield and the outfield? would this partially make up for his inexperience in the infield?

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Feb 21, 2009 9:03 PM EST reply actions  

it might.

That’s always been a big part of orlando hudson’s game, as well. It’s also the only part of his game that didn’t fall off a cliff in 2008…

"If I'm right, it was a brilliant move, if I'm wrong, it was a crazy idea". -Mo

by SleepyCA on Feb 21, 2009 9:37 PM EST up reply actions  

If I was Luddy

I would ask for a re-shoot

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

by nomar34 on Feb 22, 2009 1:20 AM EST reply actions  

I enjoy looking at ST pics a little too much...

How many other GM can pull off the popped collar look?

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

by nomar34 on Feb 22, 2009 1:48 AM EST up reply actions  

based exclusively on that photo . . .

i don’t think ANY Gm’s can pull off the popped collar look.

by tom s. on Feb 22, 2009 2:04 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Well played

rec.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 22, 2009 2:46 AM EST up reply actions  

I had no idea MO was a duechebag.

Where’s the Hott?

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 22, 2009 2:46 AM EST up reply actions  

That's probably about as good looking as he's going to get.

He’s not exactly camera friendly. If Razzums makes the team, I’m not sure who the odder looking person on the team will be.

They both kinda make Khalil look normal.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 22, 2009 2:45 AM EST up reply actions  

No one

makes Khalil look normal. (Just one girl’s opinion.)

Personally, I thought that was a good picture of Luddy because, like you said, he’s not exactly camera friendly.

by cardsgirl95 on Feb 22, 2009 7:53 AM EST up reply actions  

I agree

the razzums photo was not a good shot! larue lookin crazy too

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Feb 22, 2009 6:15 PM EST up reply actions  

I don't like this caption

“Cardinals’ Tony La Russa poses for a mugshot during Cardinals spring training”

Hope we don’t see that kind of re-shoot

by random on Feb 22, 2009 12:50 PM EST up reply actions  

That's kinda underhanded, don't you think?

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 22, 2009 1:00 PM EST up reply actions  

i would say that but

it says the same thing under all 65 players and coaches

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

by nomar34 on Feb 22, 2009 1:20 PM EST up reply actions  

Hmm. I didn't notice that.

Either way, I think I could have come up with a better term to use.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 22, 2009 1:31 PM EST up reply actions  

Yadi hitting 9th?

Yadi 9th v. righties, yes. But v. southpaws I’d love to see him in the 7th, or maybe even 6th spot.

Last year against lefties: .323/.390/.469 (career his OPS is exactly 100 points better than v. RHP.)

And we all know how much Yadi prefers to hit with men on base:

Career, bases empty .615 OPS
With men on base .753

Or my favorite—Career, 2 outs & RISP .833

Yeah, the more I think about it Yadi should probably hit 6th v. lefties, and K. Greene 7th. (Helps to dodge the tricky “bunting Yadi over” problem, too.)

by Mekonsrock on Feb 22, 2009 2:34 PM EST reply actions  

if only we had a left-handed hitting catching prospect

we could platoon him with, every other day or so vs RHP.

"If I'm right, it was a brilliant move, if I'm wrong, it was a crazy idea". -Mo

by SleepyCA on Feb 22, 2009 7:54 PM EST up reply actions  

sure would be nice. hmm.

a young one, under club control, so he wouldn’t cost a lot.

oh well. have to keep dreaming.

by tom s. on Feb 22, 2009 8:24 PM EST up reply actions  

We do have a young catcher, under club control.

His name is Yadier Molina.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 22, 2009 8:44 PM EST up reply actions  

i, and i'm pretty sure Sleepy, were being sarcastic.

we do have a lefty-hitting catcher — his name is bryan anderson.

by tom s. on Feb 22, 2009 9:09 PM EST up reply actions  

Now that I re-read it.

I see you were being sarcastic, but I’m not sure Sleepy was.

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 22, 2009 9:15 PM EST up reply actions  

yes, i was.

"i have a feeling the answers are bigger than the questions" -Dr Heyward Floyd

by SleepyCA on Feb 23, 2009 1:49 PM EST up reply actions  

then I freely admit.

I have no idea what’s going on……

Meeting is adjourned. Oh I am sorry sir, I didn't mean to overstep my bounds. You say that.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

No, you say that, Governor.

What?

Meeting is adjourned.

It is?

by Tackle Box on Feb 23, 2009 1:54 PM EST up reply actions  

BOOOOOO!!!!!

hecanthithecanthithecanthithecanthit

by Alxfritz on Feb 23, 2009 9:46 PM EST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The Internet's #1 St. Louis Cardinals blog.
Yahoo_full_count

Managers

Jack_benny__1__small DanUpBaby

Editors

Bendermad_small azruavatar

Trigun_001_small the red baron

Images_small tom s.

Authors

1989_bgh_cropped_small bgh

Valverde_medium_small vivaelpujols