weaver wire

by lboros on Oct 31, 2006 9:56 AM EST in St. Louis Cardinals News

to understand how the cardinals in october sliced 2 full runs off their regular-season era, we need look no further than jeff weaver. duh. after posting a 5.76 era in the regular season --- a 5.18 era as a cardinal --- weaver led the team in postseason era at 2.43. i started digging around to see how often pitchers as bad as jeff turn in postseasons this good.

the answer: never. he has just set new records for starts (5) and innings pitched (29.2) in a single posteason by a pitcher with a 5.00+ regular-season era, while tying the record for wins (3). the 3 wins, in fact, tie the st louis franchise record for wins in a single postseason. carpenter tied the same mark this year; the pair of them join tudor, andujar, gibson, and harry brecheen as the only cardinals ever to do it. yeah, it took them an extra round (or two) and all that; it's still a rare feat.

more to the point, it's rare for a pitcher as bad as jeff weaver to pitch in october, period. in the 25 postseasons leading up to this one (ie, 1981-2005), only 13 pitchers with regular-season eras over 5.00 made a single start in the LCS or world series. if we include chad ogea (who made 4 postseason starts in 1997 with a 4.99 regular-season era), the list expands to 14 guys. only 5 of them (including ogea) started games in the world series. 5 guys in 25 years, making 6 total starts; --- and then in one world series the cardinals start two 5.00+ pitchers (weaver and reyes) and get 3 good starts out of them. that in itself shows how extraordinary weaver's postseason was: guys like him just don't get the opportunity to pitch in october. and you can understand why: most teams that get to the postseason and go deep in it have good pitchers; guys with 5.00+ eras pitch for 3d-, 4th- and 5th-place teams. . . . maybe for teams that won 83 or so games. the cardinals tied a record of sorts by assigning 7 starts in a single postseason to pitchers with 5.00+ eras --- 5 to weaver, 2 to reyes. the only other team to do so was the 1996 orioles --- and they only had 9 postseason games total that year, so almost every start came from a guy with a black-eye era.

now here's the flip side of the argument: although guys like jeff weaver don't often get a chance to pitch in october, when they do get the chance they don't pitch half-badly. the 14 pitchers (including ogea) with 5.00+ eras who've pitched in the LCS or world series since 1981 compiled a cumulative postseason era of 4.00 in 198 innings. that's incredibly good, when you consider that these bums posted that mark against playoff-caliber lineups. here are the best performances:

	gs	ip	w-l	era	reg era
weaver	5	29.2	3-2	2.43	5.18
lowe 04	3	19.1	3-0	1.86	5.24
ogea 97	4	30.1	2-2	2.30	4.99
nagy 98	3	17.2	1-1	2.60	5.22
erickson 96	3	18.0	0-1	3.00	5.02

what jumps out at you is the fact that these are all pretty good pitchers. derek lowe in 2004 was a two-time all-star, two years removed from a 21-8 season in which he finished 3d in the cy young award voting. charles nagy in 1998 had made two all-star teams and notched three top-10 cy young finishes in the previous six years. erickson was a former staff ace (2d place in the cy in 1991) who was just regaining his stride (he would go 47-32, 4.17 in the three seasons after 1996). weaver fits solidly into that mold --- a pretty good pitcher having an off-year. reyes likely does as well --- his 5.06 era this year probably (hopefully) will seem anomalous when we look back on it a few years hence. so that may be one explanation for high-era pitchers' good october performance --- the ones who get the ball have better abilities than the typical high-era pitcher.

the other explanation is just a guess --- i have no data to back it up. the explanation is this: it's flat-out hard to hit in october, no matter who's pitching. in the postseason pressure-cooker, there's an inherent advantage simply in having the ball in your hands --- initiating the action, rather than having to react to it. jason isringhausen told all those young relievers before the playoffs began: don't rush yourselves. you've got the power to dictate the pace; set one that's comfortable for you. hitters never have that luxury; they're constantly on the defensive, apt to be lured or forced into bad decisions. it even happened to pujols this past month; he clearly was pressing, swinging at bad pitches and taking hittable ones throughout the lcs and world series. any pitcher --- jeff weaver, oliver perez, anthony reyes, josh kinney, tyler johnson --- can exploit that inherent advantage simply by staying aggressive.

that's what so impressed me about suppan and wainwright in the crucial at-bats of game 7 vs the mets; they went right after guys. it seems ridiculously simple, but i think it's one of the major differences between the cardinals' performance this year, vs their disappointments of years past. the pitchers didn't nibble, didn't try to make perfect pitches; they stayed in attack mode all month. if there's anything at all to be learned from jeff weaver's success this october, maybe that's it: just throw strikes, dammit.

read elsewhere:

the 3 Nights in August movie production is gearing up
the kansas city star's joe posnaski on the education of tony la russa
the new york sun and
new york times are impressed with the cardinals.

i'm now told there will be a hardcover edition of the commemorative book "Diehard Cards" (i wrote the foreword); 128 pages, full color. click here to order either paper or hardbound.

Tweet Comment 115 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I think Weaver

Threw his way into St Louis lore this October. I'm not sure that the Cards should press their luck on a season long, repeat performance from him, though. Might come up "Whammy."

Cheers

by Alxfritz on Oct 31, 2006 10:06 AM EST reply actions

Agreed. But what if he can go .500? heh

n/t

by sdrone on Oct 31, 2006 10:17 AM EST up reply actions

He certainly

has the stuff to be a .500 pitcher. And I would love to see it (as I continue on with my theme of relating everything to game shows this morning)if the price is right.

Cheers

by Alxfritz on Oct 31, 2006 10:29 AM EST up reply actions

Marquis...

...had the stuff to be a .500 pitcher. The question is does jeffy have the stuff to be a sub 4.00 era pitcher.

by BigJawnMize on Oct 31, 2006 1:35 PM EST up reply actions

How about sub 1.5 whip?

by Zubin on Oct 31, 2006 2:04 PM EST up reply actions

Might come up

big money, too.

Or even, big money + free spin!

by Valatan on Oct 31, 2006 11:46 AM EST up reply actions

I think Weaver was just having an off year

He had ridiculous movement on his fastballs and he can change arm slots for a different look too. He really seemed like a different pitcher in the post-season (as if Duncan finally got him patched together) culminating in the 9k performance to win it.

Acquire Jason Schmidt!

by azruavatar on Oct 31, 2006 1:07 PM EST up reply actions

Yeah and for an inning eater he sure throws hard..

by Zubin on Oct 31, 2006 2:05 PM EST up reply actions

yeah i think he was

most projections like PECOTA say that he was way below what he should have been this year. he may not be as good as he was in the playoffs, but he probably isn't nearly as bad as he was during the season, especially the first half.

by jojo5492 on Oct 31, 2006 6:20 PM EST up reply actions

Mike and MIke in the morning on ESPN radio

must have interviewed Tony right before I started listening. I had to laugh - they were complaing that Tony needed to actually take a few days off and enjoy the World Series victory.

I really hope that Tony actually did take some time and enjoy this; they were saying it's pretty common these days for coaches not to every relax and enjoy stuff. I know just in the last 2 years Jockety has cut deals while on family vacation in Hawaii and while on a vacation with another GM or 2 in Europe.

by sdrone on Oct 31, 2006 10:21 AM EST reply actions

I think,

based on comments he made to the P-D, Tony has enjoyed this championship. I believe he thoroughly enjoyed the parade and rally on Sunday.

You see, his Oakland A's World Champions didn't get a parade in the aftermath of the "Earthquake World Series." Folks felt (rightly, IMO) that a parade would be inappropriate, since the Bay Area was still "digging out" from the damage and deaths of the quake. TLR mentioned, "I've never had a parade... I always wanted a parade." (That quote is indirect... but that's the gist from the newspaper story, as I recall.)

And, who knows? Maybe, at 62, Tony's "mellowing" a bit. I know I'm more able to shrug off losses at 52 than I was at 22... and the wins seem to be just as sweet!

Tony may never receive the kind of fan-love Red and Whitey enjoyed, but I think he's enjoying the satisfaction of this "unlikely" championship.

"A man should live forever, or die trying." -- Mike Callahan

by The Ol Goaler on Oct 31, 2006 10:35 AM EST up reply actions

Greeny's comments

were in response to Tony saying that they already had their organizational meetings yesterday. He couldn't understand why they weren't taking a few days to bask.

by cardsrul on Oct 31, 2006 10:49 AM EST up reply actions

5.00+ ERA pitchers

Great research on the Weaver/Reyes performances. It really does highlight how awesome their "rising to the occasion" was. As I was thinking about your comments, lboros, I wonder how much this plays into the numbers:

During the season, you take starters as deep into the games as you can for a host of obvious reasons. In many cases, those elevated ERA's are from runs scored in the 6th/7th/8th innings as they go through the lineup for the 3rd or 4th time and get roughed up. (Except for Jason Marquis, who gave up a boatload of early inning runs this year!). In the postseason, big innings are rare - they are on a short leash if they show any signs of difficulty, which limits the damage to any one pitcher's ERA.

Clearly, the guys in your table above performed admirably in the postseasn - roughly 6 innings per start or more in the postseason. Maybe the thought expressed here doesn't hold water, but it's a possibility. Weaver may be an exception to the theory, as well - LaRuncan clearly limited his innings in August/September, maybe to help him build confidence?

I'm encouraged by the thesis that these are generally talented pitchers who had off years, and showed their real stuff in the postseason. If Weaver and Reyes are able to do what they did in the postseason as their best, and something between that and what they did in 2006 as average - there's some talent there. Just so we don't overpay for a Weaver - personally I'd love to have him stick around (for the right price).

by wildman on Oct 31, 2006 10:58 AM EST reply actions

10 of Weaver's last 11 starts...

...were good to outstanding and if I did my math right, throw out the one bad game and his Sept ERA was 3.39 and 2.43 in October.

The Cards won 7 of these 11 games and scored a total of 1 run in 3 of the losses (0-1;0-2;1-3).

The longer this guy hung around Duncan the better he got.

I would absolutely make every attempt to sign him and think he will have a very good 2007 with Duncan and the Cards.

by Ignatius J Reilly on Oct 31, 2006 11:20 AM EST reply actions

Hitting in October

LB:

Perhaps its harder to hit in October because

There is better or more intense scouting. That is durig the regular season scouting efforts focus on at least 4-5 division foes, but in the post season all scouts are focused on 1-2 teams.
Pitchers attack a hitters's weakness at EVERY at bat. When I was young(er), I recall Bob Gibson commenting that if an opposing batter had a weakness he didn't want to exploit it at every at bat, just the critical ones. The explanation was, of course, if he always tried to exploit the weaknesses of hitters they would adjust and improve. But in October, every bat is critical, so the Cardinal pitchers went right after the oposition's weakness.

-------------------------------------------------

One of the biggest differences I saw with the Cardinals this October was that TLR and Duncan seemed more adaptive in their pitching and hitting strategy. Instead of sticking to what they did all year, they were willing to change things up. I also I wonder in general if that it the problem with being the best regular season team in October. When one is the favorite, there may be a tendency to think to stick to the same formula that worked for 162 games. When one is the under-dog, there may be more rationale to change things up and keep the oposition on their toes so to speak.

any thoughts?

by Zubin on Oct 31, 2006 11:25 AM EST reply actions

both excellent points

scouting --- no doubt the hitters are more intensively scouted, and weaknesses are attacked mercilessly. i think your second point is even more on point: teams that excelled during the regular year (including the cards in '04 / '05) may be loathe to abandon a formula that worked for them during the regular season, even if adjustments are in order vs a particular foe. that issue was clearly a big part of the cards' success, viz. this quote from a joe strauss article in the october 10 p-d: "Facing an allegedly superior opponent, La Russa is liberated to 'push.' He no longer feels constrained by 'the book,' he says, 'because the book says you're going to lose.'"

the experimentation we saw this postseason might never have been attempted if the cards were, say, a 92-win team with a "legitimate shot." we might then have seen the hypercautious approach that seems to have betrayed stl in past octobers . . . .

by lboros on Oct 31, 2006 11:47 AM EST up reply actions

That quote

interesting, I had that exact same quote in mind. i just didn't have access to teh exact quote at the time.

by Zubin on Oct 31, 2006 11:56 AM EST up reply actions

October Hitting

I firmly believe that another reason that pitching is better in October (or hitting is worse - choose your wording) is because the ball doesn't fly as far in colder air. Some home runs become warning track outs, etc.

It might be a small factor, but it has an impact.

by Robb on Oct 31, 2006 12:04 PM EST up reply actions

Yes, but isn't the effect of the cold on pitchers

greater? That is in the cold or wet, pitcher have a tougher time griping (and controling) the ball?

There is also the effect of viscosity. Cold air is less viscous than warm air and so breaking balls don't move quite as much.

I think both these effects overpower any effect cold has on a hit ball. (MHO)

by Zubin on Oct 31, 2006 12:44 PM EST up reply actions

I agree

it may be a little harder on pitchers but they can blow on their hands to keep warm and they don't have to deal w/ the rattle of a bat that just struck a ball on the fist or then ends in 40 degree temps. But the ball doesn't fly as far, so would-be homers turn into outs.

One other thing, and I have no stats to back this up but this postseason, every team played, to some degree in a pitcher's park. Yes, Yankee Stadium does have a right-field porch but left-center is also 398 and most hitters hit right-handed. I tend to think that teams in hitters parks are less likely to make the postseason than teams in pitchers' parks. Think Busch was a hitter's park? Park factors indicate it was more a pitcher's park than Petco was.

When playing in smaller parks, w/ colder temps and better pitching and more stressful situations that favor the pitcher, it will be very hard to hit in October.

by chuckb on Oct 31, 2006 12:55 PM EST up reply actions

Pitchers Parks better to get a Team to October

HC, I'd love to see a tudy on this. I have always suspected the same. I am reminded of an explanation of Whitey Ball. It goes something like this: That basically in a very big park (and presumably with speed in the outfeild) homeruns and extrabase hits are taken away from the opposition. It that setting, the team with the better atheletes will win.

by Zubin on Oct 31, 2006 2:01 PM EST up reply actions

You have to build a team to a park

that's been the big problem that colordado, and to a lesser extent, Arizona and Texas have had--finding a way to build a team that is capable of being effective in an environment like that.

As far as I can tell, if you're in a hitters park, or in an environment where the ball carries, you have to sign a bunch of hard throwers (or Brandon Webb-style extreme groundballers), and build an offense around straight-up slugging, and hope for the best.

Those types of players don't age so well, however.

by Valatan on Oct 31, 2006 3:13 PM EST up reply actions

I think my (and HC's) point goes beyond that.

What I am getting it is that "small" parks not only to teams score more runs, but the variation in scoring is higher. This means the outcomes are less predictable and the better teams wins less often. The effect is small, but over the course of a 81 game (home) schedule, it can have a significant impact.

---------------------------------------------

I am familiar with problems in CO, and to a lesser extent TX, but what is the issue in AZ?

by Zubin on Oct 31, 2006 3:26 PM EST up reply actions

The same thing

hot air makes the ball carry very well. They masked it a lot by having Johnson/Schilling through a large chunk of the franchise's existence (though that year, there was a funny split showing the performance of the team pitching by the 3-5 starters those years).

But there have been a lot of HR given up at BOB

by Valatan on Oct 31, 2006 3:36 PM EST up reply actions

study on air temp. effects

hardballtimes.com posted a study of the effects of air tempurature on various pitching and batting statistics in the last week or two. It concluded that there was a significant increase in walks and HBP in colder weather (presumably due to the ball getting hard and "slippery"). But these effects were more than outweighed by an increase in Ks and a decrease in the number of batted balls that fall in for hits.

by Leo on Oct 31, 2006 4:58 PM EST up reply actions

i totally agree

it really did feel like the Cards knew the Tigers so well for only having played a 3 game series. they knew how to attack polanco inside, how to give granderson a steady diet of curveballs, etc. the scouts should get major bonuses for this thing. best of all, the pitchers executed. the all were hitting their spots the majority of the time. it was a thing of beauty

"Go Crazy, Folks! Go Crazy!"

by erik on Oct 31, 2006 6:17 PM EST up reply actions

MVP

My choice for MVP of the Series would have been Yadi, precisely because the pitching came through so well. He settled Reyes down, he worked with the other rookies, and he did a superb job with Carpenter and Suppan. He was also on the bases ALL the time!

by hawaiifan on Oct 31, 2006 11:57 AM EST reply actions

I agree

Debated between Yadi and Rolen for a while, then settled on Yadi. He didn't have as many RBI's as Eckstein, but he always managed to take good cracks on the ball and get on base, and he had intangible positive impact on the pitchers. Every time he went out to the mound, something good happened.

by bostoncardsfan on Oct 31, 2006 1:12 PM EST up reply actions

A little LaDuncan ju-jitsu was involved too

Like having Reyes throw fastballs instead of the expected change-ups. I do think Tony got inside Leyland's head a bit--and Randolph's too, for that matter.

by Red in Chicago on Oct 31, 2006 11:59 AM EST reply actions

3 facts

Duncan is a mammal
Duncan coaches pitchers ALL the time.
Duncan's job is to totally flip out and kill hitters.

by sdrone on Oct 31, 2006 12:20 PM EST up reply actions

yes

While Oquendo may be the Secret Weapon, Duncan truly is the Real Ultimate Power.

by dontEATnachos on Oct 31, 2006 12:32 PM EST up reply actions

Duncan's a ninja?

Really?

Obsessions of a Cardinal Fan
Redbirds Fun

by Quietude on Oct 31, 2006 2:34 PM EST up reply actions

Great Ninja Reference

If you don't believe that Duncan has REAL Ultimate Power you better get a life right now or he will chop your head off!!! It's an easy choice, if you ask me.

by Schnake on Oct 31, 2006 3:57 PM EST up reply actions

Post WS Victory Culling

I saw an interesting comment at CardNilly where a guy was saying amongst other things, that since we've won the World Series now, he doesn't have a problem with us having a couple losing seasons.

Basically saying that by making the post-season all the time we've become blasé to the whole process (like the Braves or Yankees).

We need some tough years to cull the herd back so it's not the 5+ years of fairweather fans that we've slowly been accumulating. This would probably make going to the ballpark more enjoyable again. Plus, those years of not being that good make you appreciate the post-season more.

I can understand the desire to make going to the stadium/cheaper and more fun (and having it filled with more knowledgeable or die hard fans may do that) I certainly don't want to be non-competitive or continually on the cusp for several years like the Brewers.

Still, I think it's an interesting position to take.

You can read the comment here.

by dontEATnachos on Oct 31, 2006 12:16 PM EST reply actions

For all my issues with Tony

Thank goodness that anything other than winning is the LAST thing on his mind. If there's some fans that don't respond well to sustained success, I'm willing to accept that as part of the cost. I live in Atlanta, and there are definitely a lot of fans here that were spoiled - but there are also a lot of great fans here who really appreciated the amazing run they had, and are sad to see it end.

When you look at the core of our team and only Edmonds being close to the end of his career, we have a shot at a great extended run if the rest of the parts fit right.

I am tickled to see a lot of people not expecting much out of us next year. That gives Tony "something to prove" and some good motivation for the team. Kind of like things felt before the 2004 season started (expectations for 3rd in the division behind Astros and Cubs) or this year's postseason (don't belong there - we'll get pummelled). Here's to Walt having a great offseason!

by wildman on Oct 31, 2006 12:30 PM EST up reply actions

I might agree if ticket prices weren't so high

Considering that we have the 3rd highest ticket prices in the league, I think we at least deserve a competitive team.

Sadly at this point lower ticket prices are about as unrealistic a possibility as the Cards owners increasing payroll to a Yankee-esque $200 million.

Dealing with fairweather fans is a price I'm more than willing to deal with if I get to see the Cards win.

I don't expect to win the division every year or even to make the playoffs. I just expect that the Cards, barring catastrophic injuries, will remain competitive throughout the year.

by bailorg on Oct 31, 2006 12:40 PM EST up reply actions

Yeah

One of the flaws in that line of thinking is then when do we want winning years again? Winning and losing seasons aren't like flipping a switch--"okay, now we've decided to win again." We should all hope and be thrilled if Tony can keep getting us to playoffs year in and year out. Ya can't win if ya don't play (has that ever been more true for us than this season). I think what was meant was that the pressure is off and if the next couple years aren't so hot, well, we've got a WS Championship to keep us warm for quite awhile. That is true, and I agree. I won't be nearly as upset with a couple bad seasons now as I would have been without this year's trophy. But trying to weed out bandwagon fans or bring down prices with a stretch of bad seasons would be completely ridiculous. It hasn't worked at all for the Cubs in nearly 100 years of bad baseball :-)

by rockin redbird on Oct 31, 2006 1:32 PM EST up reply actions

Don't be so sure

Duncan is a mammal.

Have you ever seen him sun himself on a rock?

by Red in Chicago on Oct 31, 2006 12:41 PM EST reply actions

PhotoShow

Here is the link to a photoshow that I created honoring the team's playoff ride. Let me know what you all think:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4137808806883772817&hl=en

by Matty I on Oct 31, 2006 12:54 PM EST reply actions

issues

i was anxious to see the photoshow, but i couldn't get the link to work. takes you to a google page that says that the video wasn't available.

by busch league on Oct 31, 2006 2:53 PM EST up reply actions

i started this post this morning and didn't finnis

I hate to seem like I can't wait take luster off of a beautiful moment for St. Louis baseball. I still think that baseball is a beautiful, gestalt game. I think that is more than any quantifiable sum of its parts (eat your heart out, VORP)

Jeff Weaver was simply brilliant this October, and could've easily had a 4th win with his 6IP/2ER performance in NLCS game 1.

But I am curious as to what really happened here.

Weaver tossed 64% of his pitches for strikes this postseason. Seems to be a good number, except for that during his relatively dismal 2006 regular season he threw 63.5% for strikes. Not much of a difference, really.

His strikeout rate increased only from 5.60 to 5.76. Once again...

His walks increased and his homeruns allowed decreased, a push.

He got a lot more ground balls and had a lot lower BABIP.

Somehow it adds up to more than this, though. A more-than-the-sum-of-its-parts brilliant performance from long-blonde haired castaway. A St. Louis baseball champion.

o8o88o888o

by ilillillli on Oct 31, 2006 12:58 PM EST reply actions

check...

If you can find it check the percantage of first pitch strikes. I suspect that is where the major improvement from weaver is hidden.

by BigJawnMize on Oct 31, 2006 1:47 PM EST up reply actions

Weaver

has a history of getting too enamored with control and giving up a ton of homers, so his walks increasing and his homers going down is probably a good thing.

At his peak, when he just had startling movement on his fastball with the tigers, he thrived thanks to a ridiculously low home run rate. He had one year like that with the Dodgers, and then a year of fine-tuned/homer prone ball in 2005.

by DanUpBaby on Oct 31, 2006 4:58 PM EST up reply actions

Three Nights in August

I still need to read this book but it should be on my bookcase by now. I'm guessing Dusty will be played by Morgan Freeman or Danny Glover.

My question is: will they digitally recreate old Busch or film it at another cookie-cutter stadium?

Redbirds Fun
The Kentucky Democrat
Win it for JB and DK57

by cardsfan84 on Oct 31, 2006 12:59 PM EST reply actions

I wish they wouldn't make a movie

It's not a great book, and I'm guessing it'll be a very mediocre movie at best.

by sdrone on Oct 31, 2006 1:11 PM EST up reply actions

agreed

I've never followed offseason moves too closely in the past, so a discussion about a movie allows me to chime in. I have trouble seeing this as a good movie.

by effin fisk on Oct 31, 2006 4:22 PM EST up reply actions

mlbtraderumors.com

he said we should trade duncan for mike gonzalez.

by tnek5 on Oct 31, 2006 1:26 PM EST reply actions

the New York Post

reports the Yankees might sign Jeff Suppan. Who's more important for the Cardinals to re-sign, Weaver or Suppan?

Check out my blog: Yankee Mania

by ZacharyA on Oct 31, 2006 1:28 PM EST reply actions

what?!?

I can't believe that. I'd like him back as a Card.

Anyone see Carp's comments in Leach's article? He said he'd like to have all of them back as a Card.

Redbirds Fun
The Kentucky Democrat
Win it for JB and DK57

by cardsfan84 on Oct 31, 2006 1:42 PM EST up reply actions

Depends on the price

If the Yankees are enamored with Suppan's postseason performances and are willing to give him Yankee money, he's a goner. We could never afford what they'd be willing to pay if they really want him.

All other things equal, I'd be tempted to pick Suppan over Weaver (steady performance, been a Cardinal 3 years, etc.). But Weaver has way better stuff and, properly aligned between the ears, has the potential to be a better pitcher (caution: see Marquis, Jason regarding potential). Given his past we should be able to sign him for a decent amount, especially if we can work the incentives right.

You also have to factor Mulder into the thinking here. If he's willing to sign an incentive-heavy deal, a-la-Morris, that would be attractive to me.

by wildman on Oct 31, 2006 2:13 PM EST up reply actions

I'm OK

w/ either one or both. If we lose one, he's replaceable w/ some of the other pitchers out there. The key will be to find a closer who can allow Wainwright to move to the rotation. I was a big proponent of signing Suppan and have really enjoyed his time as a Cardinal, but if the Yanks decide they really want him, we won't be able to compete and that's fine with me.

He's been very good but he's not a $9 or 10 million pitcher.

by chuckb on Oct 31, 2006 9:17 PM EST up reply actions

Carp on 5 days rest

In all the speculation on using Carp on short rest during the playoffs, there were a couple of eye-opening posts about how well he pitches on 5 days rest. Something like 8 or 9 innings every start and an ERA well below 1.00. I wish I could find the post - absolutely amazing. If I remember correctly, Valatan commented that we should think about that in setting the rotation for a season.

Out of curiousity I took the 2006 schedule and assigned starters to games as follows:

Carp on opening day and every 6 days (except when that fell on an off day - in that case I moved him up to the more conventional 5th day)
Starter #2 in game 2 and every 5 days after that (unless it fell on a Carp start, in which case he'd start the next game)
Starters #3-5 same pattern as #2
Remaining games were filled in as a bullpen game

It worked out with the following starts:

Carp 32
#2 31
#3 31
#4 30
#5 28
Bullpen 10

It's awkward enough and goes against convention, so it's not likely to happen. But it's interesting to think about it for the Cards. It puts Carp to his highest and best use, and given his history I think he could still log over 200 innings and get 20 wins, with less wear and tear. We could also slot Reyes and his tender arm into the 28 or 30 start slot and not wear him out in his first full year in the majors. The only problem is 10 bullpen starts - that's a lot.

If this was an appealing idea, you could also go with a modified version of it to reduce the bullpen starts, work Carp a few more times on 4 days rest, and get the other 4 guys another start or two.

Fun hot stove thinking.....

by wildman on Oct 31, 2006 2:08 PM EST reply actions

Here's the data

Per toris34's research, here are the eight starts Carp made this year on at least 5 days' rest.

date inn H BB R K ERA WHIP W-L
4/14 8.00 4 3 1 6 1.13 0.875 L
6/13 7.00 3 3 0 13 0.00 0.857 W
7/25 7.33 7 3 0 4 0.00 1.364 W
8/15 9.00 4 6 0 6 0.00 1.111 W
8/26 8.00 2 1 1 5 1.13 0.375 ND
9/1 9.00 3 0 1 8 1.00 0.333 W
10/3 6.33 5 1 1 7 1.42 0.947 W
10/26 8.00 3 0 0 6 0.00 0.375 W
ave 7.83 3.9 2.1 0.5 6.9 0.600 0.780 6-1

It's powerful stuff, but I for one would like to see some numbers from previous years. And, Wildman, those are a lot of bullpen starts. One possibility might be a modified version: Give Carp an extra day's rest except when it would mean a bullpen start.

by DCGreg on Oct 31, 2006 2:38 PM EST up reply actions

Thanks, DCGreg

Agreed on the bullpen starts. I don't think we'd want to contemplate more than a few. But it is compelling to try to give Carp a few more opportunities at an extra day of rest, rather than pitching him as often as possible.

by wildman on Oct 31, 2006 2:43 PM EST up reply actions

also...

... i think AnReyes will get some of those extra days off. he doesn't have a long track record of pitching a lot of innings without injury, and his swoon in Aug/Sept may have been partially due to a higher workload.

when he got a lot of rest in the postseason, he did very well. i think he'll get a lot of the extra days in '07. maybe Wainwright, too, if he looks like he's tiring (and if he's a starter).

by kindred on Oct 31, 2006 5:40 PM EST up reply actions

Another question

How many pitches did he throw in the previous start?

I remember reading something with respect to 3 days rest starts, and it was rather clear that for most pitchers, it's not the 3 days rest itself, but the three days rest after a full workload in the previous game (100+ pitches) that signaled disaster.

by SirVLCIV on Oct 31, 2006 2:44 PM EST up reply actions

The All-Star break gives a chance to move

the rotation up and skip one of those bullpen games.

Also, I wouldn't mind seeing Narveson or one of those guys called up from Memphis to start every once in a while.

I think I have noticed in the past, however, that Marquis did better on short rest. So there might be other pitchers that would be hurt by a plan like this. But it's an interesting thing to think about.

And I wouldn't mind giving up thirty innings from Carp if it would turn him into 1968 Gibson, as the splits would seem to indicate.

by Valatan on Oct 31, 2006 3:23 PM EST up reply actions

Narvie?

Haven't heard much about Narveson amid all the free agent and resign Soup/weaver talks. any chance he hangs with the big boys right out of spring training next year?

by effin fisk on Oct 31, 2006 4:25 PM EST up reply actions

I would like to see him do

the same sort of thing that Reyes did this year--start a bit to give the big club some rest, and then go back down to Memphis a bit to work on things, and then come up to the big club a bit, etc...

If he wants to pitch so well that the fifth starter is kicked out of the rotation, however, he should feel free to do that.

by Valatan on Oct 31, 2006 7:38 PM EST up reply actions

Glad to see the numbers...

for that variation. Agreed, 10 PLANNED bullpen starts is probably too much. But, after seeing the orginal analysis that started this discussion (i.e. Carp on "extra rest") I have always wondered why TLR continually pushed Carp into "regular" rest even when the schedule allowed an extra day. Many times over the past two seasons Carp has been moved up in the rotation (mostly during Aug/Sept.) to stay on every fifth day. If they had just let everyone stay on rotation, Carp would have gotten 3-4 more starts on extra rest each of the last two years (no, I didn't go back and check, this is just from memory).

It looks to me like they should quit moving him up when the regular rotation would give him an extra day.

by ArkansasTravs on Oct 31, 2006 5:13 PM EST up reply actions

He's dominant

but i'm not sure we would gain enough from it to offset the loss we would have by having Carp make 6 or 8 fewer starts throughout the course of the year. You also have to factor in extra fatigue that the bullpen would incur as a result of having "bullpen games". Plus, would we have to include an extra pitcher on the staff to compensate for that? If so, what do we lose by having fewer pinch-hitters and defensive replacements? What do we do when players are day-to-day and our roster's a little short anyway and we have an extra pitcher in the 'pen?

I'd be interested in seeing projections but my hunch is that we're better off w/ Carp going every 5th day rather than every 6th day, even though he is dominant after that extra day's rest.

by chuckb on Oct 31, 2006 9:22 PM EST up reply actions

More Weaver

As an idication that Duncan was good for him:

He became a cardinal at the beginning of July, and check this out:

Month ERA Starts IP BB K
July 6.46 3 15.3 4 4
Aug 5.67 6 33.3 13 20
Sept. 4.15 6 34.7 9 21
Oct 2.43 5 29.7 9 19

He just improved steadily every month that the team threw him out there. I think it is pretty clear evidence that Duncan's reconstruction of his pitching motion and his scouting and appraoch to the game was key to bringing Weaver back. I really think he has a decent chance of being really good for StL next year. Problably not at the level of his postseason performance, but I woudn't be suprised to see a whole season roughly equal to that September split.

by Valatan on Oct 31, 2006 3:33 PM EST reply actions

Elias rankings

Apparently the Elias rankings that determine draft pick compensation for free agents were announced today but I can't find a full list anywhere. Anybody know what Cardinal free agents are Type A's and Type B's?

by mikedallas23 @ Viva El Birdos on Oct 31, 2006 3:43 PM EST reply actions

here they are for the NL

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2006-10-31-elias-rankings.htm#nl

by mikeoat on Oct 31, 2006 5:29 PM EST up reply actions

Thanks!

by liam on Oct 31, 2006 5:32 PM EST up reply actions

How is Eckstein an A

and Rolen a B? Injury and age, I guess. I still say that's completely insane.

Mulder and Marquis managed to stay at B, though. That's good.

by Valatan on Oct 31, 2006 7:44 PM EST up reply actions

They're determined over a 3-yr span

So I guess Rolen's 20005 really dragged him down. That is surprising, though.

by liam on Oct 31, 2006 8:47 PM EST up reply actions

does this mean

2 compensatory draft picks for each one or one "sandwich pick" for each?

by chuckb on Oct 31, 2006 9:23 PM EST up reply actions

New comp rules

You get a 1st or 2nd round pick and a pick in the sammich round between 1 & 2 for a Type A FA (top 20 percentile in his position) and just a sandwich round pick for Type B FA (21-40 percentile). That according to this, barring me reading stupid.

by liam on Oct 31, 2006 9:30 PM EST up reply actions

Although we're looking at 2005 #'s

The reason Eckstein would be listed A & Rolen B is that Eckstein is compared against other shortstops & Rolen against other third sackers. Too many good players at 3B, not enough at SS.

Oh, the burden of stupid people.

by Solanus on Nov 1, 2006 9:51 AM EST up reply actions

Not sure how Carp got a higher rating

than Santana:

2005-2006
Carpenter
397k 463.1 ip 152 ER 36W 13L

Santana
483k 465.1 ip 146 ER 35W 13L

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 31, 2006 8:33 PM EST up reply actions

Ugh!

Sorry guys, those are last year's rankings. I saw the date in the URL (10/31/06) and assumed that it was it.

That would explain why they gave several players C rankings, which were eliminated in the new CBA. Or why Rolen got a B.

I'll keep fishing for the link....

by mikeoat on Oct 31, 2006 10:10 PM EST up reply actions

or not

never mind.

I think I should just sleep until spring training.

by mikeoat on Oct 31, 2006 10:19 PM EST up reply actions

They cranked this out

in a hurry, didn't they?

Is there anyway to get that Cards SI package without actually getting SI? :-)

"We came, we saw, WE KICKED IT'S ASS!!"

by iron duke75 on Oct 31, 2006 4:42 PM EST reply actions

It was out the night

of the World Series clincher.

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 31, 2006 4:47 PM EST up reply actions

I'm wondering

Is it strictly the unedited games, or are there more features...like maybe a documentary or something?

"We came, we saw, WE KICKED IT'S ASS!!"

by iron duke75 on Oct 31, 2006 4:54 PM EST up reply actions

On A&E

it has a full listing. It will only be the 5 games, though...instead of including the clinching games in the other playoff series. Kind of a bummer there, since they had done that for the last 2 sets, not to mention the Mets '86 set.

What I'm still hoping for it the 1968 Series to be released next year. It hasn't been announced, but often times they use the previous seasons WS to make decisions about the next year.

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 31, 2006 8:31 PM EST up reply actions

man.....I miss the season...

just was sitting here at work and by habit had to check in at VEB....what the hell am I going to do all winter without constant input from all of the characters here? No grammer or spelling corrections....Marquis bashing...line-ups for that nights games...enough stat's to choke a horse... and even a good argument or two.. damn...I can't wait for Spring Training. LOL

by Timbo02 on Oct 31, 2006 6:16 PM EST reply actions

hmm

didn't you mean grammar?

Sorry. Could. Not. Resist.

by dontEATnachos on Oct 31, 2006 6:25 PM EST up reply actions

LOL...

touche'...

by Timbo02 on Oct 31, 2006 6:37 PM EST up reply actions

Mark Buehrle in a Cardinals hat.

Game 3.

o8o88o888o

by ilillillli on Oct 31, 2006 8:17 PM EST reply actions

he'll be on in due time

Redbirds Fun
The Kentucky Democrat
Win it for JB and DK57

by cardsfan84 on Oct 31, 2006 8:47 PM EST up reply actions

Taken in the Red Bird suite

The Sox have already exercised his 2007 $9.5m option.

by sdrone on Oct 31, 2006 9:51 PM EST up reply actions

Carl Crawford to Atlanta

Looks like he is going to be going to Atlanta for 2 pitchers.

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 31, 2006 8:31 PM EST reply actions

link?

Redbirds Fun
The Kentucky Democrat
Win it for JB and DK57

by cardsfan84 on Oct 31, 2006 8:46 PM EST up reply actions

HR fights back

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20061031&content_id=1728584&vkey=news_mlb &fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Kenny is a "dirt" bag?

by punchinjudy on Oct 31, 2006 9:08 PM EST reply actions

Heck yeah!!!!

Bring back Harold....dismiss Phillips and Brantley please!

It happened on a Sunday afternoon, August 22, 1982.

by Glenn Brummer stole home on Oct 31, 2006 9:28 PM EST up reply actions

and kruk

by stlcardinalsfang on Oct 31, 2006 10:07 PM EST up reply actions

Brantley's finished

You can hear him for the next four years on WLW with Marty/Thom.

I don't mind Kruk but I prefer HR.

Redbirds Fun
The Kentucky Democrat
Win it for JB and DK57

by cardsfan84 on Oct 31, 2006 10:14 PM EST up reply actions

Jeff Bagwell should be prosecuted

for grand larceny. That man took $17 million last year to rehab, and just got a $7 million buyout. Can't say that I would have done any different, but I don't think he won any friends in the front office, especially after the insurance flap last offseason.

by MichiganBird on Oct 31, 2006 9:11 PM EST reply actions

are you serious?

Houston signed him to a back-loaded contract so that they could save money early on. He would have probably rather had the money 3 or 4 years ago but put it off for the sake of the team. Why do the Astros deserve some sympathy for signing him to a bad contract but the Rangers deserve scorn and mockery for doing the same w/ A-rod? Or the Rockies w/ Mike Hampton?

Bagwell gave everything to that team. If he didn't win any friends in the front office, it's Drayton McLane's fault (the owner) for offering and signing the contract in the 1st place. As for the insurance flap, McLane wanted to ban Bagwell from showing up to spring training b/c everyone knew that if he took the field, McLane would be on the hook. Remember also, he was on the World Series roster the year before w/ his bad shoulder. He started games 1 and 2 at DH. If the Astros really were concerned that he wasn't healthy, would they have done that?

Maybe Drayton McLane should be committed to a mental institution for signing the contract but Bagwell was underpaid much of the 1st years of his contract and the Astros should have known the gamble they were taking when they signed the contract in the 1st place. McLane is a meddlesome owner who got bitten by this contract. Screw him!

by chuckb on Oct 31, 2006 9:31 PM EST up reply actions

Because Bagwell scraps!

and A-Rod is an effete choker!

<small>and because A-Rod is better than Bagwell</small>

by Valatan on Oct 31, 2006 10:06 PM EST up reply actions

Bags

He's a HOF in my mind. Is he finished or will he make a comeback?

Redbirds Fun
The Kentucky Democrat
Win it for JB and DK57

by cardsfan84 on Oct 31, 2006 10:13 PM EST up reply actions

I can see someone in the AL

giving him a one year deal as a DH

And yes, he is a HOF. A-Rod is just so absurd, especially for a SS.

by Valatan on Oct 31, 2006 10:16 PM EST up reply actions

Be thankful he was on the DL

Imagine Berkman and Bagwell together for '06. So much for the Cardinals 1.5 game margin.

by Zubin on Nov 1, 2006 1:59 AM EST up reply actions

i'm thinking the white sox

only picked up buehrle's option so they could trade him to the cardinals and get something out of him.

by tnek5 on Oct 31, 2006 10:41 PM EST reply actions

they'll trade a pitcher

but not to us. I'm not sure that Vazquez or Garcia isn't more highly valued than Buehrle b/c of Buehrle's peripherals. In any case, I think we can fill our holes in the rotation through free agency and I don't think we have a lot to offer in the way of trades.

by chuckb on Oct 31, 2006 11:31 PM EST up reply actions

anyone know where i can find

the yadi lantern

Kenny is a "dirt" bag?

by punchinjudy on Oct 31, 2006 10:43 PM EST reply actions

ebay?

by stlcardinalsfang on Oct 31, 2006 10:48 PM EST up reply actions

the yadi jack olantern

someomne posted a pic a while back

Kenny is a "dirt" bag?

by punchinjudy on Oct 31, 2006 10:51 PM EST reply actions

Yadi-Lantern

It's in this thread.

by liam on Oct 31, 2006 11:30 PM EST up reply actions

The Cardinals Are Irresistable

If you were in the majors, wouldn't you find it difficult not to be a Cards fan? The Cards aren't a team, they are the identity of St. Louis, they are the culture of the city. I live in Florida, I was born here and lived in Missouri when I was a kid. My entire extended family lives in Missouri, however and my older siblings grew up there. The Cards are the memories I have never forgotten, Busch Stadium, the Stan Musial statue, the replica baseball cards of Cardinals of the past hanging in the breezeways and the beer vendor yelling BUDWEIZA HEEA. Willie Mcgee effortlessly running down balls in center, Ozzie doing things every game that noone had ever done before, Coleman stealing second every time he got on base and Tudor stoically crafting gems like it was his job. Seeing my friend Timmy Siegus and his dad walking around, us only reaching our Dad's waists. The plastic Cardinals gloves we got in '87 for being the first so-many thousand fans at Busch. This trip I make every year from Florida to St. Louis is not a choice. It is a necessity, my pilgrimage, St. Louis is my Mecca and the Cardinals are one with the city. I've heard many ask how we stay so loyal to sports teams in the times of free-agency. No core stays together very long, every year it is a new team, yada yada yada. It isn't the uniform, or the stadium or the players. It is us. We stay the same every year. Buehrle wearing a Card's cap isn't that surprising when Jered Weaver, who didn't grow up here, is decked out in full Cards regalia, and he plays for the Anaheim Angels! We want to be with each other because we all love the same thing deeply. The Cardinals.

A walk is a waste of three pitches-Bob Gibson

by orlando card on Oct 31, 2006 10:52 PM EST reply actions

anyone think

brendan ryan would be able to move to the majors?

by tnek5 on Oct 31, 2006 11:14 PM EST reply actions

Not me

He missed most of the year. He's hitting the ball pretty well in the AFL but missing it too much, too. I imagine they have a full year of AAA planned for him next season.

by liam on Oct 31, 2006 11:48 PM EST up reply actions

Scouting Reports on Narveson

If we need Narveson to fill in for a while next year as a spot starter, how likely is he to succeed? I know he has a low 90's fastball and a curve and change, but how would you rate those pitches? Does anyone have a small book on him??

MY GOD!! THAT's ADAM WAINWRIGHT'S MUSIC!!!

by Rob Rabies on Nov 1, 2006 12:33 AM EST reply actions

Narv

His start he had towards the end of the season was pretty good. :p

by lynx on Nov 1, 2006 12:41 AM EST up reply actions

i want narv to take thompsons place

by tnek5 on Nov 1, 2006 12:50 AM EST up reply actions

he's still coming back from TJ surgery

if i remember correctly.

Acquire Jason Schmidt!

by azruavatar on Nov 1, 2006 1:07 AM EST up reply actions

Narvie

Take this with a good-sized chunk of salt, but my impression of Narveson is that he's got good command and an aggressive approach—he's not afraid to throw strikes. He's got a fastball that I saw being thrown in the high 80s (and that he can locate well) and a flat curveball. Like Azruavatar mentioned, 2006 was his first year back from Tommy John surgery, so he should show improvement from his already respectable numbers next year. In a worst-case scenario, where the Cardinals fail to return any of their FA pitchers (aside from Marquis—a yet-worse case scenario) and pick up whatever scrapheap LAIM they find as a #4 pitcher, Chris Narveson opening the season in the rotation wouldn't worry me a bit as long as we signed an insurance starter like Jamey Wright to a minor-league contract in case Narveson has serious issues that need to be worked out in Memphis for a spell. Just as an aside, I've never been able to figure out why Wright's not a better pitcher than he's proven to be. I'll call him the crafty GM's Kevin Jarvis.

by liam on Nov 1, 2006 3:58 AM EST up reply actions