Game 93 Open Thread: July 20, 2007

i don't know what's gone wrong

with that picture of chuck james . . . . he's so widdle.

by lboros on Jul 20, 2007 6:02 PM EDT reply actions

Maybe

He's just standing further back.

(If that's the worst joke I make all day, it'll be a good day.)

by liam on Jul 20, 2007 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions

Heads up about lboros' saturday post

....if you want a more substantive debate of these issues, look below for other posters comments who address and disagree about the technical side of this issue. You'll have to scroll way down!

by nycardfan on Jul 21, 2007 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions

that is, scroll down beyond

the back and forth involving my posts to see a more focused debate on statistics by other posters.

by nycardfan on Jul 21, 2007 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions

I didn't really follow his minor league stats but

Didn't we expect higher strikeout rates from Wainwright? I'm not really disappointed with his overall production, but I thought he would be a bit more able to get a k to get out of an inning when needed.

by OCCardsFan on Jul 20, 2007 6:04 PM EDT reply actions

I find this alarming also.

His K rate has dropped into the danger zone. He will have a hard time maintaining a sub 4 era with that k/bb and k/9 rate.

by DriverZn on Jul 20, 2007 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions

But he's been able to get deeper into

games partly because of better endurance but also partly because he's gotten more skillful with keeping his pitch count down by being a good groundball pitcher. He's great at getting double plays and he shrugs off singles when he's interviewed--he thinks if he keeps hitters to singles, they will likely not win (as long as the defense holds--a big if in some of our games). Luckily, he's had pretty good defense when he pitches.

I think the greatest risk for Wainwright is endurance and getting too high in the pitch counts, not how many strikes he gets or doesn't get. Also, as he has admitted, sometimes he tries to play "too fine" with nasty pitches on the edges of the strike zone and gets bad calls or straight out balls. If he could cut down on all the balls he's been throwing lately, his pitch count would really come down.

by nycardfan on Jul 20, 2007 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions

A false argument

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/the-kazmir-conundrum/

There isn't a conection between strikeouts and pitchcount.

What takes more pitches a few extra Ks a game or having to face a few extra batters because some singles leaked through the defense?

Its not as simple as the "ground ball theory" guys claim.

by DriverZn on Jul 20, 2007 6:32 PM EDT up reply actions

I'm not talking about a particular theory

I'm talking about a particular guy and how his strategy has been working in particular games. He and Yadi keep saying they have a plan to keep everything down (along with shuffling his pitching patterns) and they think they've being pretty successful lately carrying out their gameplan.

by nycardfan on Jul 20, 2007 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions

So Wainwright is a statistical outlier

and we should ignore studies that look at far larger spans of time and pitch counts and innings looking for trends. Your argument runs against what the study shows. Where's the proof that Wainwright is an outlier?

Future Redbirds

by azruavatar on Jul 20, 2007 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions

I think Yadi and Wainwright know more about

successful pitching plans than I do and I think they're doing a good job. So I'll leave the theorizing to you and I'll trust their judgment as to how best to win their games. I do think they are tremendously smart, both analytically in pregame preparation and strategically during the game.

by nycardfan on Jul 20, 2007 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions

Thanks for totally not addressing my question

You do theorize by saying that Wainwright and Yadi are doing something to strategically lower his pitch count and that it is to "be a good groundball pitcher" and that it doesn't worry you "how many strikes he gets or doesn't get". I'm saying that's a wrong theory.

This is the problem with results based analysis. You look at the results, take anecdotal remarks and attribute the success to a reason that may or may not have any correlation to the real reason. The THT study shows that a reduction in strikeouts does not in any way reduce pitch count.

Why is it so hard to say "I've never read that study." There's no shame in that (goodness knows there is tons of research I haven't read). Wainwright's been getting luck on balls in play. If more balls go for hits rather than outs, he'll have to throw more pitches. That's why his pitch count has been down. "He's great at getting double plays and he shrugs off singles" is something that is 100% subjective with no verifiability. Someone shows you a study based on evidence and you respond with "I'm not talking about a particular theory".

Future Redbirds

by azruavatar on Jul 21, 2007 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions

nycardfan, since you're an academic

i'm rather shocked by your hostility to these opinions about pitching. they are rooted in a large body of rigorous analysis, evaluation, and debate. there's a 20-year body of literature establishing a high correlation between strikeout rates and pitching effectiveness. as an academic, i would expect you to be open to these theories, which evolved out of an acadmic process of discovery / investigation / analysis.

instead you dismiss them as flimsy "crystal ball" theories --- in spite of the fact that you obviously haven't read any of those studies. since you are a very busy person (as you've mentioned to us several times), it may be that you don't have the time or interest to read them. but until you do read them and educate yourself, i suggest that you stop making ill-informed statements and smug, condescending insults to people who have read the material. those people know more about the subject than you do. rather than hiding behind taunts such as "i'd like to see you take it up with wainwright," be open to learning something when you come here. educate yourself.

that's what i would expect an academic to do, rather than attempting to belittle people who disagree with you.

by lboros on Jul 21, 2007 8:42 AM EDT up reply actions

why is it that you take offense at my comments

about what I consider an overly deterministic school of thought and my characterization of its absolutist aspirations as "crystal ball" analysis but you say nothing about the "blind faith" accusation tossed out below by someone who agrees with you on this issue. I thought another poster responded to that kind of dismissive statement of his or her rationality well by saying "veiled insults like 'blind faith in bob' stink. I'm just saying that the 'paper' you linked to is not technically sound. There are serious flaws; it therefore does not prove it's thesis. That thesis might still be valid, but that particular study does not prove it and should not be used as a sabermetric club to end arguments." I thought others were making strong arguments and didn't need my neophyte input, and besides, I wanted to watch baseball.

If you really want to get into this, our differences are much more fundamental than you make them out to be. They stem from the fact that we live and work in very different conceptual worlds. My work is in philosophy, applied social theory, and political and public policy. I am much more suspicious about the ability of human beings to exhautively grasp and project reality (even the reality of baseball). And I'm more wary of the dangers of making absolutist claims that one person or school of thought or scientific theory possesses the indisputable truth--whether that be about baseball or a politcal theory or an ideological stand. From a historical (and philosophical) perspective, I'm trained to see science as offering different paradigms that have changed over time; I expect there to be competing views and not one "proof" that explains any one area of study.

As I said clearly, I think statistics offer interesting pictures of reality but they aren't reality itself. There are too many concrete variables involved and creative or spontaneous possibilities in particular situations to be so certain about things. Just because I'm an academic doesn't mean I'm open to, interested in deeply investigating, or will agree with a given theory simply because its twenty years old. I'm sure there are competing theories that are not being presented by you. (And besides, since we do work from different conceptual presuppositions, our arguments would be like ships passing in the night. I simply don't believe you can prove the future success of pitchers so definitively.) That doesn't mean I don't find it interesting to think through the possibilities. I just don't have the same faith as you in such "certitude".

My comments about Wainwright were meant to be funny but they were also true: from what I've read--and I've followed him since he came to the cards--he's a very "results" oriented strategic thinker. And he has a bold sense of confidence that if he focuses and believes he will get a certain result, he will get that result. But its not just belief; that belief motivates him to find a way to make it true.

I really would like to see a debate with him about groundball pitching and wheher he can win without lots of strikes and whether he agrees with you about his "luck". That would be interesting to watch--theory meeting practice. And as I said, I'm keeping my bets with him as to who, out of all of us, knows how best to play baseball and make "true" his own individual reality.

by nycardfan on Jul 21, 2007 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions

to repeat what i said earlier

you haven't actually read any of the studies on which i and others base our position. yet you still pretend to know more about it than we do.

not what i'd expect from an academic. i'd expect you to have more respect for knowledge than that.

by lboros on Jul 21, 2007 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions

as for you "different conceptual world"

very handy. you're losing the argument on the merits, so you claim to be skeptical of humans' ability to grasp any reality at all.

no wonder you never admit to being wrong about anything. there's no "right" nor "wrong" in your world.

by lboros on Jul 21, 2007 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions

Hello.... I just said I was a neophyte

in this area and have never said I was an expert. I said Waino and Yadi knew more about successful game panning and pitching than I do and that I trusted their judgments over theories. I left the technical arguments to others.

I'm not a relatavist as you imply. I'm a critical but not a naive realist. That means I believe theories and methods of analysis can illuminate reality. But no single one can claim to provide an exhaustive account of it. That's why competing ideas are so important like those voiced on this site.

I would be grateful if you'd stop reading imaginary intentions into my postings.

Thank you

by nycardfan on Jul 21, 2007 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions

competing ideas are welcome

but when there are no facts to support a given idea, should it be given the same weight as a theory that has many facts behind it?

waino and yadi may attribute his success to an increased emphasis on groundballs, and you might take their word for it --- but the facts show otherwise. they're not getting more groundballs.

do the data i presented this morning about wainwright's groundball tendencies change your thinking at all on this subject? nothing theoretical about the presentation, just raw empirical data. do you doubt it?

by lboros on Jul 21, 2007 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions

oh, i forgot to add something

i've never discussed these matters with wainwright, but i've discussed them at length with adam's former pitching coach, dyar miller. he's pretty familiar with sabermetric ideas about pitching, and while he doesn't swallow them whole cloth he is open to learning from them.

if i ever had the chance to discuss these matters with wainwright, i wouldn't approach it as an adversarial conversation; interesting that you imagine it that way. i'd be open to learning from him, and i'd share my frank opinion with him and be interested in his reaction. what a great opportunity it would be; i would welcome it.

by lboros on Jul 21, 2007 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions

That kind of discussion

is exactly why I thought it would be interesting.

by nycardfan on Jul 21, 2007 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions

bullshit

when you introduced the idea above, it was in a vindictive spirit:

"I'm pretty sure [Wainwright] could out strategize you when it comes to baseball and wouldn't give a hoot about your claims to have access to an absolute crystal ball and your disdain for 'results' based analysis."

by lboros on Jul 21, 2007 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions

I said that to someone else I believe

not you and it was addressed to the assertion that Wainwright was depending on a lot of "luck." I thought he'd disagree with that point of view. And I thought I'd agree with Waino over the poster.

I'm stopping this conversation. It's unravelling into baseless accusations and senseless back and forth.

Back to baseball.

by nycardfan on Jul 21, 2007 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions

stick to facts

when you post here please. it's not a "critical realist" site. it's for plain old boring realists.

by lboros on Jul 21, 2007 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions

I've learned something very important here today

Love means never having to say you're sorry, but
a philosophy degree means never having to say you're wrong.

There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

by Mr Clean on Jul 21, 2007 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions

To get back to substance I suggest people

look below to other people's arguments which counter the ones expressed here by lboros and pals. I did not get involved in the technical debates in this thread.

I've admitted I'm not an expert and that I simply have faith in Waino's strategic capabilities, whether he fits into your models or not. Yes, that's a subjective judgment. There is nothing "wrong" about a fan putting more trust into Wainos' and Yadi's strategic capabilities and game plans.

by nycardfan on Jul 21, 2007 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions

Whether or not he agrees

with this "luck theory" as you call it, is wholly irrelevant. Mounds of research have indicated that differences in BABIP from the norm largely result from luck. In Wainwright's case earlier in the year, he was experiencing bad luck. Now, his luck has gotten better. Whether he agrees with that or not doesn't make it any less true.

by chuckb on Jul 21, 2007 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions

You missed the whole BABIP thing

That is the source of his change in success and mostly corrolates with luck and not skill.

A low 4ish era is what you get from a groundball pitcher with an average defense behind them. Thats not bad, but its not the same level of success that pitchers with a greater K level can achieve.

Or put another way, don't expect him to post a sub 4 era with that K rate and our current defense for a full season

by DriverZn on Jul 20, 2007 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions

Well it will be interesting to see where

he goes then. I do believe he has been winning out over your theory lately... we'll just have to wait for reality to unfold to tell whether he is just a lucky pitcher or a really smart and strategically skilled pitcher.

by nycardfan on Jul 20, 2007 6:51 PM EDT up reply actions

Really?

I just pulled the list of all pitchers this year with >50ip as starters and sorted it by K/9

Top 5, Johnson, Bedard, Burnett, Lincecum, and Peavy averaged 16,16,16,17,16 pitches per IP

Bottom 5, Sowers, Cook, Bacsik, Trachsel, Duke averaged 16,15,16,17,16 pitches per IP.

Now of course in terms of runs alowed they were not even close. RA for group 1, 4.13, 3.36, 4.5, 4.6, 2.45. RA for group 2, 7.07, 4.95, 5.61, 5.05, 6.36.

See why I don't want our pitchers trending from group 1 to group 2?

by DriverZn on Jul 20, 2007 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions

Comparing K pitchers to GB pitchers, though

The top five pitchers in GO/AO with 60 IP use [14.1, 15.2, 15.6, 14.9, 14.1] pitches per plate appearance.

The extreme groundball pitchers are throwing fewer than the extreme strikeout pitchers.

I don't think anybody's arguing the Cardinals should encourage their pitchers to avoid striking batters out or seek out pitchers that are lousy at getting strikeouts—I hope nobody's saying that.

That being said, I'm as surprised as the next guy that Wainwright hasn't been getting more strikeouts.

by liam on Jul 20, 2007 7:36 PM EDT up reply actions

I wasn't arguing that...everyone wants K's

I was saying that Wainwright has said that he wants to keep pitches down (in a groundball style of pitching) so any mistake ends up being a single and he's said he's not all that upset when singles get hit. When I heard him interviewed, the important point he stressed was what kind of contact is made if the ball is hit. Mental focus, location and pitching patterns are his main concerns--if he gets K's, wonderful; if he gets singles and double plays, fine. And because location is his goal, a low pitch count helps him maintain greater control. What may be unusual about him (and why he isn't that obsessed with K's) is he doesn't expect to be perfect and that makes him relaxed; he plans for mistakes. It's one reason why I think he's so strategically smart and why he's hard to place into a narrow theoretical category. I've heard him say that he doesn't need to pile up K's to win even if he likes to get them. But then agin, he seems like he has nerves of steel so maybe he is a kind of anomaly. Perhaps he can win either way.

by nycardfan on Jul 20, 2007 11:03 PM EDT up reply actions

some glaring flaws in his method

At a first glance:

-he assumes zero double plays. AW gets lots of double plays. That one fact changes the whole system significantly.

-he doesn't say specifically which "rates" he is talking about, but assuming he assumes BB/K rates stay constant for pitchers who strike out more people, I'm not sure you can do that. It seems like guys who strike out a lot of people walk more people too. (I admit to having done no research on this, just a gut feel)

-the data that he uses to "validate" his theory is flawed. Pitchers don't have a 25% decrease in their K rate for no reason. Usually a change like that means loss of velocity or "stuff" due to age, injury, etc, which means it is no more statistically correct to compare the ERA of pitcher "a" to himself than it would be to compare pitcher "a" to a random pitcher "b". He needs to select for pitchers who consciously CHOSE to pitch to bad contact rather than pitchers who kept trying to strike people out but stopped being able to.

Being that he did not actually publish the equations that he used to make the chart, even if the concerns I raised above are not correct, I would still have a really hard time considering this article to be "proof" or "disproof" of anything.

Panic!!!

by SleepyCA on Jul 20, 2007 7:05 PM EDT up reply actions

when I try to reproduce his method

using the words in his text, this is what I come up with:



P/game  K's

138.78    1

144.78    5

152.28    10

159.78    15

167.28    20

177.78    27

obviously there is something I missed.

Panic!!!

by SleepyCA on Jul 20, 2007 7:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Look at my data above

For real pitchers from this season.

The extra pitches from the increase K appear to be offset by fewer baserunners and the associated extra batters faced.

If Randy Johnson isn't running up a higher pitch count per IP than the junkballers like Looper this theory is pretty much shot.

Johnson ~11.9k/9, GB% 43 15.9 pitches per IP
Looper ~4.1k/9, GB% 49 15.6 pitches per IP
Burnett ~10.2k/9 GB% 53 16.4 pitches per ip
Santana ~9.3k/9 GB% 38 14.8 pitches per ip
Thompson ~3.6k/9 GB% 52 20 pitches per ip
Suppan ~4.8k/9 GB% 48 16.1 pitchesr per ip

Now looking at that example what I see is the best pitcher is throwing the fewest pitcher while getting a lot of Ks and the FEWEST ground balls.

At the same time our Looper and Thompson are not throwing fewer pitchers than the high K guys despite their GB rates.

by DriverZn on Jul 20, 2007 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions

That's fine

But you're comparing apples to oranges. Looper, Thompson and Suppan are not the same quality of pitcher that Burnett or Santana is. If Looper tried to strike out 10 people in a game, he'd require many more pitches to do it that Burnett. The ability level is just not there. Yet, Looper can give himself value with less ability by getting ground ball outs.

Likewise, if Santana focused on ground ball outs, he could potentially reduce HIS number of P/IP. He's the best pitcher on earth, and Looper is able to almost match his P/IP despite being inferior in every way? If that is how we are evaluating pitchers, I'd say it makes a strong case for pitching to bad contact.

Panic!!!

by SleepyCA on Jul 20, 2007 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions

Here is where we disagree

Blind faith in Duncan that if a pitcher would just change his way he could be even better. There is zip, zero, nada evidence to support your view.

I am still waiting for a list of dominate "pitch to contact" guys. By which I mean low k/9 rates and high GB% rates.

by DriverZn on Jul 20, 2007 8:21 PM EDT up reply actions

Here's three

Derek Lowe, Tim Hudson, and Roy Halladay.

Halladay's not having a great season, but I'd love to have any three of those pitchers in the rotation.

by liam on Jul 20, 2007 8:32 PM EDT up reply actions

Here is the data

Halladay 5.65k/9, GB 56%, 15.3 P/IP
Lowel 6.5k/9, GB 66%, 15.2 P/IP
Hudson 5.4k/9, GB 64%, 14.2 P/IP

Strikeout rates that high are unheard of on our staff. Those are all higher than Looper, Wainwright, and Thompson.

Also note that with one exception they are all within 1 P/IP of the big strikeout guys. Hudson and Lowel are not exactly models of consistency either. They have up and down years.

The averate P/IP for the top 70 pitchers in K/9 is 16.5. For the bottom 70 is 16.2

In exchange for that .3 P/IP (or about 2 pitches per start) they allow far more runs 5.1 RA vs 4.5 RA.

Yikes, aparently good pitchers strike people out and don't really only need about 2 more pitches to do it. Not bad for allowing more than a half run less per start.

by DriverZn on Jul 20, 2007 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions

Dude

You asked for a list of "dominate" low K/9 pitchers with high groundball rates. You didn't ask me to disprove McCracken.

by liam on Jul 20, 2007 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions

None of them were low k/9 rates

Thats all I was saying. They were not high either.

Anyway I am bored at work so I keep typing.

by DriverZn on Jul 20, 2007 9:09 PM EDT up reply actions

chien mien wang

is a dominant ~3.5 K/9 pitcher who I would love to have in my rotation. He's an outlier, of course.

Anyway you are misrepresenting my position; I am not suggesting that the pitchers not strike anyone out, and veiled insults like "blind faith in bob" stink. I'm just saying that the "paper" you linked to is not technically sound. There are serious flaws; it therefore does not prove it's thesis. That thesis might still be valid, but that particular study does not prove it and should not be used as a sabermetric club to end arguments.

I guess the real point I've meant to get at is that we don't necessarily have to be concerned about AW because his K/9 isn't what it was expected to be; good pitchers don't HAVE to strike people out to be good pitchers.

Panic!!!

by SleepyCA on Jul 20, 2007 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions

Amen

(to SleepyCA's post). I don't think any of us who argue that ground balls are good are saying strikeouts are bad. That's crazy. And I'm not a blind follower of Duncan, but I will readily admit that he knows more about pitching than I do or anyone else on this board, or we wouldn't be on this board.

Nice 8th inning rally here! And another potential GW RBI for Juan if we can hold on.

by willievinceterry on Jul 20, 2007 9:45 PM EDT up reply actions

Heads up....if you want a more

substantive debate of these issues, look below for other posters comments who address and disagree about the technical side of this issue. You'll have to scroll way down!

by nycardfan on Jul 21, 2007 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions

One last thing about his ERA

its been dropping as he's improved his groundball skills so I don't think there is a concrete correlation in his particular situation that not gettinng strikeouts is harming his ability to drop his era to where he wants it to go. He seems to be moving in he right direction (knock on wood) with his current strategies.

by nycardfan on Jul 20, 2007 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions

I'll side with nycardfan here...

I read the article about the supposed non-correlation between strikeouts and pitch counts. I haven't sat down and analyzed it (and don't plan to), but it seems to be based on some pretty sketchy assumptions. As someone else here mentioned, the idea of observing a pitcher over two years in which he's experienced a significant drop in strikeouts hardly constitutes a controlled "experiment." A lot of people seem to be trying to treat baseball like it's hard science -- as if there are "laws" that are supported by bona fide "data." It's physics envy.

There is data and there are numbers and correlations and probabilities, but there are also way too many variables at play to think that taking a few "groundball pitchers" and a few "flyball pitchers" (as if these were absolute, mutually exclusive categories) and comparing them is not going to lead to some deep, fundamental truth about the laws of baseball.

I enjoy the statistical stuff in moderate doses, but take it with a grain of NaCl.

by willievinceterry on Jul 20, 2007 9:42 PM EDT up reply actions

I wanted to say something like that earlier

but couldn't put it together as well as you have. I had to trash my response. Thanks for saying that so coherently.

Statistics provide interesting pictures of reality, but they are not reality itself. The philosopher Whitehead calls the failure to realize this "the fallacy of misplaced concreteness".

Well it still sounds like babble. You were much clearer.

by nycardfan on Jul 20, 2007 11:24 PM EDT up reply actions

I refuse to get into the middle

of the technical argument here, but I would suggest that AW is still not fully formed as a ML starting pitcher yet. Let's hold off on the panic about K/9 rates until the kid has another 25 starts under his belt.

by MdRedbirdFreak on Jul 21, 2007 12:38 AM EDT up reply actions

Trip to Tacoma

Since it's a new game thread, I wanted to hype up my potential trip to Tacoma to watch the Memphis Redbirds at the beginning of August. If you want to join me or have tips, tricks, and things to watch for, please post in my diary linked in my comment.

Our AAA squad seems to be more important to next year (or '09) every day.

Join me in Tacoma in early August to cheer on our Memphis Redbirds

by ColinMacLeod on Jul 20, 2007 6:21 PM EDT reply actions

That's not good...

Because Memphis is the worst team in the PCL. For the second year in a row.

Springfield is the team worth watching right now -- I think I'm going over there "on the way" to St. Louis in a couple of weeks.

by whopperman on Jul 20, 2007 9:11 PM EDT up reply actions

why do the braves feel the need to

start the games at 6:35?

VEB Fantasy Football League!

by stlcardinalsfang on Jul 20, 2007 6:30 PM EDT reply actions

Ever been in rush hour traffic in Atlanta?

30 minutes can break up rush hour traffic from Braves traffic.

Join me in Tacoma in early August to cheer on our Memphis Redbirds

by ColinMacLeod on Jul 20, 2007 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions

so there's a big difference

between 7:00 and 7:30? i think not.

plus, no one in atlanta goes to the games.

VEB Fantasy Football League!

by stlcardinalsfang on Jul 20, 2007 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions

There's a break?

by whopperman on Jul 20, 2007 9:12 PM EDT up reply actions

TBS

That's tbs's doing.

by 3rdgencardsfan on Jul 20, 2007 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions

I wish it was TBS

FSN is covering tonight's game.

Were it TBS, I'd have a chance of watching tonight.

Join me in Tacoma in early August to cheer on our Memphis Redbirds

by ColinMacLeod on Jul 20, 2007 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah instead I get..

Everyone loves Raymond reruns.

by 3rdgencardsfan on Jul 20, 2007 7:43 PM EDT up reply actions

Why not?

Is there anything inherently better about 7:10? 7:05? 7:15?

by bailorg on Jul 20, 2007 6:57 PM EDT up reply actions

lineups

atl

harris lf
renteria ss
c jones 3b
most overrated CF ever cf
mccann c
francoeur rf
johnson 2b
franco 1b
james p

cards

eck ss
edwards cf
AP 1b
instant breakfast rf
ludwick lf
molina c
evil eck 2b
ryan 3b
wagonmaker p

VEB Fantasy Football League!

by stlcardinalsfang on Jul 20, 2007 6:36 PM EDT reply actions

edwards?

by supernova on Jul 20, 2007 6:46 PM EDT up reply actions

Inside joke

I'm too lazy and apathetic to look for the thread. Maybe someone else can...

"It's always about money; anyone who says it's not is lying."- Gene Simmons

by cardsrul on Jul 20, 2007 7:19 PM EDT up reply actions

It was funny at the time. Really.

http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/story/2006/10/19/8832/1142

by DCGreg on Jul 20, 2007 7:31 PM EDT up reply actions

Edwards in the 2 spot

As much as he doesn't like it, it sounds pretty good. Let's get some runs.

by OCCardsFan on Jul 20, 2007 7:03 PM EDT up reply actions

He's pretty much

in "04 Larry Walker" mode right now. The 2 spot is a good fit for him. (immature chuckle.)

Now if we can just find "04 Jim Edmonds" and "04 Scott Rolen", the offense would be alllll set.

Boooo-urns.

by Alxfritz on Jul 21, 2007 2:49 AM EDT up reply actions

Heh.

See what a strikeout will do for you!?!???

by liam on Jul 20, 2007 7:41 PM EDT reply actions

I'm not laughing now

Wow, Brendan's got a strong arm, though.

by liam on Jul 20, 2007 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions

That should have been a dominant inning

Strikeout swinging, groundout, single, strikeout swinging.

Thanks to those wild pitches/passed balls a run scores and Wagonmaker has to get the fourth out on a pop-up.

by liam on Jul 20, 2007 7:49 PM EDT reply actions

Speak of the Rooster...

Just as MLB.com flashed up a quote saying" trying to sneak a fastball past Hank Aaron is like trying to sneak a sunrise past a rooster" El Hombre smacks a homerun.

The Red Blazer

by Red Blazer on Jul 20, 2007 8:22 PM EDT reply actions

PUJOLS!

one thing we can always count on is Big Al lever giving up. the rest of the team needs to watch and learn.

poor YADDA. should be 1-0 Cards.

Wagonmaker is dealing tonight. get him some more runs gents.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 8:24 PM EDT reply actions

Big Strikeout

Man on third 1 out, great curve there, Wagonmaker.

by liam on Jul 20, 2007 8:35 PM EDT reply actions

i love that curve so much that

i want to take it out to dinner,

and then take it out behind the gym and get it preggers.

keep dealin Wagonmaker.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 8:36 PM EDT reply actions

nice AB, evil eck.

VEB Fantasy Football League!

by stlcardinalsfang on Jul 20, 2007 8:43 PM EDT reply actions

Shelly Duncan

just crushed a ball of the upper deck in left in the bronx...foul...then struck out

by nybirdfan on Jul 20, 2007 8:43 PM EDT reply actions

good time for a bunt.

git er done, wagonmaker.

VEB Fantasy Football League!

by stlcardinalsfang on Jul 20, 2007 8:44 PM EDT reply actions

Score should be 2-0

This team can't afford those mistakes.

by liam on Jul 20, 2007 8:46 PM EDT reply actions

Dammit, Miles....

by BTown Birds fan on Jul 20, 2007 8:46 PM EDT reply actions

2nd and 3rd, 1 out

and they don't get a run home? story of the year.

VEB Fantasy Football League!

by stlcardinalsfang on Jul 20, 2007 8:47 PM EDT reply actions

three years ago

Jimmy hits that out to left.

really could have used those runs boys. Wagonmaker's dealing. dont let him down.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 8:48 PM EDT reply actions

Horrible

How do you screw that up?

by bgh on Jul 20, 2007 8:49 PM EDT reply actions

why is edmonds starting?

I usually give LaRussa the benefit of the doubt on hunches and such - but does anybody have a clue why Edmonds is starting tonight when he has been terrible against lefties and we have Taguchi on the bench, who has a good OBP against lefties this year?

While on the subject, are Encarnacion and Ludwick the guys who should be playing? Both are righthanded hitters, but strangely neither of them has hit a lick against lefties this year...

by mattlo on Jul 20, 2007 8:53 PM EDT reply actions

who is supposed to play the outfield then?

no edmonds, no ludwick, on juan -- that leaves taguchi, schumaker, and duncan. i am pretty sure juan led the team in RBIs against lefties last year.

by willievinceterry on Jul 20, 2007 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions

i miss

renteria

Future Redbirds

by erik on Jul 20, 2007 8:54 PM EDT reply actions

ryan

please let him be our new 2B

by tomsteele on Jul 20, 2007 9:20 PM EDT reply actions

better yet

eck at 2B, ryan at SS?

by tomsteele on Jul 20, 2007 9:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Wha?

The Braves' broadcast, which I'm stuck with because FSN South thinks Memphis is an Atlanta market more than a St. Louis one, is calling Brendan Ryan "Boog".

Hurry up and win this so I can quit listening to these idiots.

by whopperman on Jul 20, 2007 9:20 PM EDT reply actions

This is a bit late...

but "Boog" is BRyans nickname.

by ArkansasTravs on Jul 21, 2007 1:06 AM EDT up reply actions

When did that happen?

As much as one of Memphis's radio guys likes to lean on nicknames, I never heard that one used.

by whopperman on Jul 22, 2007 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions

come on Jimmy

don't let us down again dude.

get Wagonmake a win right here.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 9:22 PM EDT reply actions

crap

once again, the Jimmy of 04 hit's that out to left.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 9:24 PM EDT reply actions

they never learn

THOU SHALT NOT RUN ON YADDA

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 9:29 PM EDT reply actions

i know, but

that was on the tablet moses dropped.

by tomsteele on Jul 20, 2007 9:30 PM EDT up reply actions

Let there be Pu!!!

by BTown Birds fan on Jul 20, 2007 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Wagonmaker is dealing

come on gents, get him a win!

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 9:31 PM EDT reply actions

albie

is trying to

by tomsteele on Jul 20, 2007 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions

way to pick him up Juan

nice running Albert.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 9:37 PM EDT reply actions

Hooray, Juancar!

Boo, Atlanta!

by whopperman on Jul 20, 2007 9:37 PM EDT reply actions

Wow - was that aggressive, intelligent

base-running all the way around?

by BTown Birds fan on Jul 20, 2007 9:37 PM EDT reply actions

full credit:

encarnacion hustled his arse off on that play, gettiong to third on a shallow single + play at the plate + error. Well done.

Panic!!!

by SleepyCA on Jul 20, 2007 9:38 PM EDT reply actions

DUNK!

see you don't have to hit bombs every time up to get some RBI's kid? nice hit.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 9:40 PM EDT reply actions

Nice Game Dunc!

by Big Red on Jul 20, 2007 9:40 PM EDT reply actions

keep JaunE

by nybirdfan on Jul 20, 2007 9:40 PM EDT reply actions

gameday is no help

should taguchi have scored? i'm guessing the answer is no, what with francoeur's arm.

by tomsteele on Jul 20, 2007 9:43 PM EDT reply actions

no

by Big Red on Jul 20, 2007 9:47 PM EDT up reply actions

Miles is hurting lately

After an excellent June, he's hitting .128 with a .391 OPS (sic) in July. Ouch.

That could have been a much bigger inning.

by willievinceterry on Jul 20, 2007 9:47 PM EDT reply actions

Please tell me Duncan isn't hurt...

Is Taguchi that much faster than him to be inserted as a pinch runner...when we have a short bench already?

by willievinceterry on Jul 20, 2007 9:47 PM EDT reply actions

Probably defense

by whopperman on Jul 20, 2007 9:48 PM EDT up reply actions

Hold 'em for two innings and get Wainer the win

by BTown Birds fan on Jul 20, 2007 9:47 PM EDT reply actions

that was a ugly run down

SO should have never taken off unless he KNEW he would score. can't fault the hustle, just poor excutation.

was pretty great SO took out the ump on his roll.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 9:50 PM EDT reply actions

JIMMY

oh how we've missed you.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 9:50 PM EDT reply actions

There's not another CF in the organization

who makes that catch.

by Big Red on Jul 20, 2007 9:51 PM EDT reply actions

shelly duncan

just grounded out 6-3.. he is 0-3 with 2 so's

by nybirdfan on Jul 20, 2007 9:51 PM EDT reply actions

Shelley

by Big Red on Jul 20, 2007 9:53 PM EDT up reply actions

ooops

by nybirdfan on Jul 20, 2007 10:00 PM EDT up reply actions

that game's score is ugly

if your a Yankee fan.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 9:54 PM EDT up reply actions

but

for those of us who don't work for espn, it is a thing of beauty

by tomsteele on Jul 20, 2007 9:57 PM EDT up reply actions

to be fair

the WWL's fave team is the red sox. the Yanks are their second fave. they really should change their name to NESN2.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 10:01 PM EDT up reply actions

Wagonmaker gets shafted

Last outing wainright went 119 pitches. This time he gives up no runs and does not get the chance to win the game after being "on". How come he doesn't get a chance in the 8th inning. He deserves the win and does not deserve to be sitting. At least give him one batter so he can get credit for the win. I am in shock that he got treated that way. I love Tony but sometimes I wonder if he is going senile.

The Red Blazer

by Red Blazer on Jul 20, 2007 9:53 PM EDT reply actions

He is in line for the win.

He finished the bottom of the 7th and the scored in the top of the 8th.

by BTown Birds fan on Jul 20, 2007 9:56 PM EDT up reply actions

yep, he's in line for the win

he was the last one who pitched before they took the lead. someone else could have come in to start the 8th and pitched two scoreless innings (or merely preserved the lead) and AW would still get the win, while the reliever would get the save.

by willievinceterry on Jul 20, 2007 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions

I have had a hair trigger lately..

Whoops. I called it wrong. My passion for the game got the best of me. I still would have liked to see him go for the complete game.

The Red Blazer

by Red Blazer on Jul 20, 2007 10:23 PM EDT up reply actions

It warms my heart to see

that Wainwright came up with a strong outing to brighten a gloomy day (Carp getting Tommy John, not that I'm surprised) and against his favorite childhood team, who will probably unfortunately pursue him aggressively (and vice versa) once he hits free agency.

Sparks of Dementia Still Demented.

by Scarlet the Cardinal on Jul 20, 2007 9:59 PM EDT reply actions

i agree

except the Cards will never let him reach free agency. at least his first time he's up for it.

at least i hope they don't. they better not if they know what's good for them.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions

BOOOO

chicken.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 10:01 PM EDT reply actions

another RBI for Juan

he's adding to his legend of being a clutch hitter.

sorry, i just couldnt resist.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 10:03 PM EDT up reply actions

get out the rolaids people

IZZY's taking us for another ride.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 10:09 PM EDT reply actions

c'mon izzy

by Big Red on Jul 20, 2007 10:12 PM EDT reply actions

perfect dp ball

by Big Red on Jul 20, 2007 10:13 PM EDT reply actions

the cardiac cards

thanks izzy

by nybirdfan on Jul 20, 2007 10:13 PM EDT reply actions

And That's A Winner!!

great game Wagonmake! GREAT GAME.

the O game through when they had too, unlike last night. lead of course by Albert The Great.

and IZZY was IZZY. he always makes us sweat.

good game gents. now go get another win tomorrow night.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jul 20, 2007 10:17 PM EDT reply actions

cards

one day they get trounced the next the play a good 9...tommorrow get beat by 7 sunday win by 4?

I thought 06 was up and down...but they are far out so well see...if they can take 3 of 4 here and make a good show next week...who knows

07 Cards more drama than a daytime soap

by punchinjudy on Jul 20, 2007 10:21 PM EDT reply actions

We need some help too

The Cubs have been red hot for weeks now, but they have played a bunch of home games recently, so maybe they will cool off on the road. I think the Brew Crew is due for a bad stretch of games soon as well.

But if we have any hope we are going to have to pretty much sweep both Cubs & Brewers series at home. It can be done, but it will be real tough for this year's team I'm afraid. Winning both series is a MUST. But we need to get out of Atlanta with a few more wins first though.

by KYCards on Jul 20, 2007 10:30 PM EDT up reply actions

It pains me to say this,

but the Cubs have been playing terrific; when the pitching falters, the batters pick them up; when the batters falter, the pitchers pick them up. If Zambrano keeps pitching likes he's pitching, they will not get into any long losing streaks, and Carlos will get some Cy Young consideration........I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade, but look at their record over the last 20 games or so, wow. they'll cool off some....maybe we can have a hand in it...

by jillsinmo on Jul 20, 2007 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions

All things considered, a 6-4 road trip would

be pretty damn groovy. I wouldn't complain about 5-5 either. The pitching match-ups don't look too bad for the next couple games; we could have some decent momentum coming back to STL.

by BTown Birds fan on Jul 20, 2007 10:22 PM EDT reply actions

3 run 7th

6-4 Gmen

07 Cards more drama than a daytime soap

by punchinjudy on Jul 20, 2007 10:33 PM EDT reply actions

Shelley

Just got his first major league hit. on a 3-1 count singled to center and drove in a run... the ball was tossed to the dugout... that one will be under glass!

by nybirdfan on Jul 20, 2007 10:35 PM EDT reply actions

11-5

The playoffs, the Cardinals went 11-5.

What does 11-5 mean to the Cardinals right now?

3 vs Braves (starting tonight)
3 vs Cubs
4 vs Brewers
3 vs Pirates
3 vs Nationals

11-5 would put the Cardinals right back in the NL Central race, especially if 6 of those 11 came against the Cubs and Brewers.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jul 21, 2007 4:35 AM EDT reply actions

Did Mark Mulder fall off the planet?

He threw 60 pitches on Monday, 70 pitches on Tuesday, was in the dugout for the entire Florida series but the Cardinals never really announced what the next step was. He was supposed to be traveling with the team so that they could setup a schedule for him (mixing in breaking pitches, facing batters, etc) yet nothing was said.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jul 21, 2007 4:52 AM EDT reply actions