Viva El Birdos: FanPosts

Number 15

2009-11-18T15:44:23Z

OK so I may be jumping the gun here a bit... but it seems that Matt Holiday is heading to the East coast for a big payday. Saddened as I may be by the gaping hole this leaves in left feild I can't help but think about the other number 15. Jim Edmonds. If Holiday leaves it is time to retire that number. Jimmy ballgame deserves this honor. Lets just glance at some of his stats.

Gold Gloves 8 Six with St. Louis.

382 Career home runs. 241 with St. Louis.

1176 Career RBI 713 with the Cardinals.

A career 988 fielding percentage.

Of course some of you wonderful stat heads out there may be able to futher elaborate on his stats. These stats however do not come close to describing what it was like to watch him play. The acrobatics in the outfield. That beautiful swing. And of course that all around swagger. I mean seriously just look at the picture above. He deserves this.

2010 Hot Stove Post #1: CHONE hitter projections

2009-11-15T21:44:36Z

The CHONE projection system, created by Sean Smith of THT, FanGraphs and Anaheim Angels all the Way, we're recently released to the public. They are generally considered the best system out there, and has been the most accurate since 2005 in terms of projection team performance.

You can go to his website Baseball Projection, to view the projections for each player (it's organized by team):

http://www.baseballprojection.com/

Here is the link for the Cardinals projections. The key number to look at is R/150, which is how many runs above average each player projects to be per 150 games.

Pujols looks amazing of course, and Ludwick's is not bad either. Allen Craig actually projects to be the third best hitter, but he's right about average along with Rasmus, Freese, Mather, Skip and Yadi.

You can also view a list of all of the free agents here. Matt Holliday projects to be the best hitter, at +27 runs, which isn't surprising, with Jason Bay right behind him. Mike Cameron projects to be surprisingly low, at -4 runs. Johnny Damon actually projects pretty well though.

This will be the first official Hot Stove Post for 2010, and at the risk of sounding authoritative, it would nice if you guys put all your offseason thoughts in this post, so we don't have like 10 different FanPosts about the same thing. I will update this thread once the pitcher and defensive projections are released.

H/T, the fantastic Tommy Bennent.

Some thoughts on Holliday (and potential replacements)

2009-11-11T16:50:37Z

I just want to start by saying that I think Bryan Burwell had it right in his article yesterday about the Holliday situation. DeWitt knew this was coming. He knew that Holliday was a Boras client and would test the market. If DeWitt was not willing to open up DeWallet and doll out the dollars to keep Holliday in red then he shouldn't have approved the trade. We all know that Pujols needs to be extended. We all know that we have other holes to fill. And we know that Holliday is going to make a boat load of money. But so did DeWitt. So, if he is/was unwilling to raise payroll by adding Holliday while accommodating our other needs he should not have approved the trade in the first place.

Furthermore, we were the third highest in the NL in attendance at 3.34 million and are in the top third in revenues in MLB. In other words, there is room to expand payroll. But isn't that what DeWitt has been saying all along? Has he not promised for the last 4-5 off-seasons that there is flexibility to add payroll past the 100 million dollar mark if an elite player comes along worth the investment? Well Matt Holliday is that player and it is time for DeWitt to put up or shut up.

That being said, I still feel fairly optimistic about the chances of re-signing Holliday despite the fact that the media has all but counted us out. However, if DeWitt proves to be the frugal SOB that we all think he is I think there are some interesting options that have not been discussed in these neck of the woods quite yet.

My first thought is this: Holliday is a type A free agent. This was nearly a forgone conclusion when we traded for him earlier this year. So, if we don't re-sign Holliday it transforms the trade from Holliday for Wallace, Mortenson, and Peterson to Holliday, 1st round pick for Wallace, Mortenson, and Peterson. I think this is an important distinction since the A's certainly would not have re-signed Holliday had they not traded him and would have cashed in on those extra draft picks. In other words, Holliday being a type A free agent is another valuable commodity. Think of it this way: we either traded the farm for Matt Holliday long term or we traded the farm for three months of Holliday and Colby Rasmus. Now, I know no first round pick is a guarantee and it is less likely that they will turn out like Colby has but the thought is (at least) somewhat comforting.

Now, what happens if we lose Holliday? Besides the sky falling I mean. Sure we could go after Bay, but from what I have been reading it sounds more like we would try to make smaller upgrades at multiple positions. One obvious place to add some power and upgrade would be second base. I know Skip made some progress defensively at 2nd last year, but he was still a below average defender. His outfield defense is average to above average making him more valuable in the OF. So, if the Card elected to move Skip to LF there are several ways we could improve at 2nd while potentially adding a bit more pop to the lineup.

1. Brandon Phillips - I know this is unlikely since it would require an in-division trade but MLBTradeRumors is reporting that the Reds are looking to shed payroll and Phillips is one of the main candidates to go. Getting Phillips would presumably cost less in terms of prospects if we are willing to take on his salary. He has been one of the best power hitting second basemen in the NL the last several years (He went for .276/.329/.447 last year and has averaged 22 HRs over the last four years) and according to FanGraphs had a WAR of 3.2 last year.That made him worth 14.6 million last year at an actual salary of a little more than 5 million. Pretty good deal. (For comparison sake, Skippy had a WAR of 1.2 last year).

2. Chone Figgins - Sure he doesn't have the pop we are looking for but he has been a really good player. Problem is, he is also a type A free agent and is getting up there in years (he is now 31). But Figgins has good versatility, mad on base skills and had a WAR of over 6 last year. Thou, at 31 I find it hard to believe that Figgins will be able to repeat his 2009 season. Correct me if I am wrong but it seems like scrappy slap hitters like Figgins decline rapidly. David Eckstein anyone?

3. Dan Uggla - Uggla is pretty much Brandon Phillips with worse defense and speed. He getson base and slugs better than Phillips (.243/.354/.459) but his WAR this year was just behind Phillips at 2.9 (defense being the main reason). He hasn't hit less than 27 HRs in any season and has had an OPS over .800 for his career. I know that Uggla's fielding is terrible, but according to FanGraphs he was better than Skip last year (-10 to -12) and would actually be a defensive upgrade at 2nd. Uggla is on the block and could be a nice fit in the lineup to help build some "depth protection" for Pujols.

4. Orlando Hudson - It was rumored that we were looking at O-Dawg last off-season and would seem to still be a decent fit. Hudson doesn't have the pop of a Uggla or Phillips but he is still a good hitter (.281/357/.417). I know he got replaced by Ronnie Belliard at the end of the season in LA but Hudson is still a starting 2nd basemen in this league with a slick glove.

5. Placido Polanco - this is sort of a homer pick but I would love to see Polanco back in Saint Louis. He is probably on the downside of his career but he can play 2nd and 3rd and and would a solid utility type. He had a decent season last year but I'm not sure that he is a starter anymore. Regardless, Polanco would be a big upgrade to the bench and has the added benefit of being one of Pujols' best friends (hey, whatever it takes right?).

Anyway, those are my thoughts for now. I didn't really have the time to look into potential SP, RP, or 3rd upgrades so if you have any other ideas please feel free to discuss.

Ok let me try this again...

2009-11-10T03:54:59Z

This was originally mean to be an open forum for people to state their opinions on some potential FA's that haven't gotten a lot of consideration from what I've seen.

What's the aversion to Jermaine Dye being a short-term, incentive-laden option should the primary options (Holliday, Bay) not pan out? Wasn't he generally pretty productive this year in a similar manner to Ludwick? I don't think he'd be any worse as our LF than Derosa from a production standpoint.

Also, let me know what you guys think about these players as potential fits for this team?

Josh Willingham- seems to me like an ideal fit with decent plate discipline and good power. I think of a higher end projection of what Allen Craig might one day be with Willingham.

Xavier Nady- Always seemed to do a number on the Cards. Plenty of pop when healthy.

Jermaine Dye- maybe on an incentive-laden deal could be useful on the lower end of the spectrum

Austin Kearns- would probably rather see Craig than Kearns.

Mike Cameron- don't think we'll be able to get him to play LF, but you never know.

Jose Contreras- he was throwing gas when the Cards saw him last year. He's kind of a head case, but to me he's a better option for a potential starter/setup guy than Smoltz

Kiko Calero- his numbers from last year were very encouraging. I had lost tabs on him out of spite for the Muldie trade. He's an intriguing option for a dependable strikeout setup guy.

What do you guys think??

Disenchanted Blue Jays Fan Looking For A New Team

2009-11-09T17:30:58Z

I'm a disenchanted Toronto Blue Jays Fan, looking for a new team. Ownership decisions and a general aimlessness in the direction of the team has caused me to consider abandoning the Jays after 25 years of cheering for them.

My search has narrowed to the Detroit Tigers, Los Angeles Dodgers, Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, and your St. Louis Cardinals.

I am looking for a MLB team that has ownership committed to winning, a group of players worth cheering for, and a reasonable shot at competing for the playoffs sometime in the next 10 years.

Convince me (with defensible reasons) why I should join you. Go!

The Holliday Dilemma (Rocks Fan Perpsective)

2009-11-09T15:52:55Z

To preface my remarks, I am a Rockies Fan that used to be a Card fan. Grew up following the Cards of the 60s,70s,80s and moved to Denver in the lkate 80's and started rooting for the Rocks upon their inception. I root for the Cards in a secondary fashion. As a Rockies fan I was troubled by the loot St. Louis gave to get him last summer. As a Rocks fan I was aware of the Holliday fielding defiencies, and inability to hit middle-in pitches consistently. The bigger issue was his hiring of Scott Boras in 2006. A clear sign he intended to test the market in 2009. Rocks gave him a raise to buy out his remaining arbitration years at a premium following 2007. But it was obvious he was going to market. They dealt him and got some pretty good MLB ready guys who helped in 2009. CarGo will likely surpass Holliday as he is a legit 5 tool kid poised for stardom. You may want to nab him for your fantasy leagues next year. The A's got Holliday basically to try to turn him for some good talent. They figured someone would be ready to bite in mid season. Billy Beane is many things and among them an opportunist. The Cards unloaded some significant jack for a three month player. The Yankees, Mets, Dodgers and a few other teams can afford to do this, the Cards cannot. Now you are stuck looking for the same thing you were three months ago (Albert protection with production). Holliday turned down 4 years and 80M from the Rocks. Do you think he will settle for less? Not under Boras' watch. He wants a shot at the Red Sox and the Yanks figuring that each may have LF holes where Holliday will fit the bill. I read in the STL Today site where many Card fans want to focus on rebuilding from within. Given a mid market status, it basically the only way you can go. I used to pound Dan O'Dowd for his moves where they all seemed like salary dumps (see 2000-2005). A couple of years ago (2006) I began to see his logic and he has made the Rocks into an NL version of the Twins. As a kid growing up the Cardinals always focused their energies on their player development with a few deals splashed in for good measure. I think they have sort of lost that feeling but it is never too late to get it back. Having two large salaries can hamstring you for years to come. Look at Houston, the Cubs, etc. My only sadness is the three prospects that got away for the failed experiement. A few years ago the Rockies management had a press conference where they profoundly declared that "we know what we are" we will manage our team with that in mind. This offseason they will deal Brad Hawpe, non-tender Garrett Atkins, let Torrealba go, resign some bullpen help and be in a better position to contend in 2010. I am thinking the Cards need to do some of their own internal mirror obeservation. You can no longer afford to dump prospects on short term fliers.

Anybody read Bob Gibson's new book yet?

2009-11-09T03:41:01Z

It's entitled "Sixty Feet, Six Inches," written with Reggie Jackson (ghost written by Lonnie Wheeler, who I believe wrote Gibby's last book). I've viewed a couple of the videos on Amazon.com, and, as always, love listening to my favorite player and Cardinal of all time. I can pass on Mr. October, although he's knowledgable about the game. However, I haven't ordered the book yet - may ask for it for Christmas present. Anybody read it so far? Thoughts or critiques?

Yadi2first

2009-07-17T01:55:56Z

In a recent post by chuckb, a certain (and my favorite) facet of Yadier Molina's game sparked some conversation and much love. Of course, I am talking about Yadi's infamous pick-off plays. So I decided to do a little digging on MLB.com to find the videos. I wasn't expecting to find all of them, but in the end was still rather disappointed in their collection. Anyway, I give you (*drumroll) the only 14 13 pickoffs of Yadi's that I can find. Enjoy.

6/28/05 vs. Cincinnati Reds - I would like to apologize for MLB.com. They really suck.

5/2/06 vs. Cincinnati Reds

5/8/06 vs. Colorado Rockies

5/27/06 vs. San Diego Padres - My favorite, rivaled only by the Theriot PO.

7/4/06 vs. Atlanta Braves - Not really a pick-off, but we'll call it a POVTE (Picked Off Vicariously Through Eckstein).

7/29/06 vs. Chicago Cubs - The real reason Zambrano punched him.

10/7/06 vs. San Diego Padres - We should have known "it was meant to be" as soon as he pulled this off with runners on 1st and 3rd.

According to MLB.com there was a black hole for Molina, in terms of pick-offs, from October '06 to July '08. I really hate MLB.com.

7/23/08 vs. Milwaukee Brewers

4/27/09 vs. Atlanta Braves

6/3/09 vs. Cincinnati Reds

7/11/09 vs. Chicago Cubs - undoubtedly, in my mind, the most impressive of them all.

7/17/09 vs. Arizona Diamondbacks - scoot along 40 seconds into the video to get to Yadi introducing a 4th true outcome to Mark Reynolds.

8/15/09 vs San Diego Padres - rediculous. With an "e".

10/1/09 vs. Cincinnati Reds

For all those interested, this is from Yadi's B-R page:

Yadi PO

'04 1

'05 9

'06 8

'07 2

'08 7

'09 8

40 Man Question..

2009-11-06T13:53:07Z

I'm currently researching something I've been wondering for a while, and I've came across a question that I can't readily find an answer to.

When reading about the Rule 5 draft it states

Players are eligible for selection in the Rule 5 draft who are not on their major league organization's forty man roster and:

- were signed at age 19 or older and have been in the organization for four years; or

- were signed at age 18 or younger and have been in the organization for five years.

Now I fully get what that says, I just don't get how it's calculated. Service time is easy, and well covered - this.. I'm not finding much.

For example:

If a player is drafted and signs quick and then goes and plays short season ball (or A, AA). Is his "years been in the organization" starting the day he signed? What about the draft picks that don't start until the next year? Or the ones that pitch a couple of games (IIRC, like Lynn) and get shut down for the season.

I guess I'm just trying to see what exactly constitutes a year in MLB eyes. Service time is very precise on how it's calculated, but I'm not sure *when* teams are required to use the 40 man. If I can define what they mean by "years", it should be easier to find out, but the CBA doesn't have anything that I can see.

Any idea?

The current Busine$$ of Baseball...how long can it last?

2009-11-06T10:35:59Z

Right off the bat I want to say I thank the heavens that I am a Cardinals fan and the success this franchise has had over the past 13 years! We have been really lucky and in the current system we should be able to compete...BUT...

If your a fan of an American League team that's not the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels and you haven't given up on baseball you are a true die hard fan. I say that as a joke but it's not really a laughing matter anymore. And this isn't to put down the Yankees and their 27th Championship because believe it or not deep down I really respect their history and a lot of their true die-hard fans. This isn't about the Yankees...this is about the current system that baseball has that a team like the Yankees can thrive on. Yeah some can say that is a good thing but the fact is almost half of the teams in baseball don't have a year to year glimmer of hope to win it all like the Orioles, Blue Jays, Royals, A's, ect. because of the way the business of baseball has become over the past 12-14 years. Like it or not the sport has become somewhat of a sport of the haves and the have nots. The large market teams are thriving right now and are playoff bound almost every season in the current system...for better or worse. But it's not a suprise because baseball like everything else in entertainment has become about ratings, big coorporations, big dollar sponsorships and high dollar TV contracts. And in this era of big time money the small market teams just can't compete with the big boys when it comes to paying these free agent contracts. This is where the problem is. Is it a problem? Probably depends on what part of the country you live in but for some....yeah it's a problem.

Right now MLB is in a big money making boom (the sport as a whole). But it will change at some point. It may take another 10-15 years or so but this current system will crash on MLB and things will have to change. It could be that some teams will have to fold because fans in the small markets will just finally give up on the sport (and this is starting to happen to many of the small market teams now) or maybe a new system will have to be established but the boom won't last forever and if baseball is to survive.. changes will have to be made. If not then at some point Major League Baseball is going to become just a large market sport when every team will be located in just the large markets and markets where baseball is king (St. Louis) and the league could be shaved to where there will only be about 20-22 teams in baseball. I know that sounds drastic but the small markets are slowly being killed off from the sport and if the fans give up and don't show up anymore and buy tickets and they start to lose local sponsorships then several of these teams (Pirates, Reds, Royals, Marlins, Rays, A's ect.) will go bankrupt....maybe not the owners of the teams per say but the franchise in that city will go bankrupt. I know that sounds crazy but when you really look at the current structure of MLB is it really? And maybe that might not be a bad thing...maybe MLB needs to contract 4-6 teams in the future.

In most of these small markets in recent years they have got by the problems by building fancy new stadiums (some by using the tax payer's money) to try and lure in the fans and it has worked to some degree but that is starting to wear off. So here soon if they don't have a team they can get behind and want to spend money on, these teams can't sell just a new stadium forever and they are going to be in big trouble and getting the luxury tax checks from MLB won't be enough to survive. If things don't change in the next 10 years or so there might not be any turning back. There are no easy answers and yeah there are some teams where the owners are greedy and won't put money back in the teams for a real chance to contend. That is a huge problem that is eating away some of these small markets as well. But the deal is.... at some point MLB has to forget about the media pointing at steroids as baseball's biggest problem and ignore the calls for big ratings from the networks for a little while and find a way to work with the owners and player's union to somehow fix the problems that has become the ugly business of baseball.....for the good of the game...as a whole..

VEB CheBird T-Shirt for Sale - Red or Powder Blue, CLEARANCE

2009-08-21T17:18:28Z

Now I have a bunch of extra shirts I want to get rid of. I am not sure if I am going to make any more this season after I am done with this batch. . This is what I currently have in stock and after that I am done. I am lowering my prices just to get rid of everything. Shipping is $4.95 for Domestic and $10.00 for International.

T-shirt - Black Ink on Red T-Shirt - $10

S -2
M - 0
L -0
XL - 0

T-Shirt - Red Ink on Blue T-Shirt - $10

S -0
M - 0
L - 0
XL -0

T-Shirt - Black Ink on Blue T-Shirt - $10

XL - 1

Long Sleeve - Black Ink on Red - $12.50

XL - 2

Hoodies - Black Ink on Red - $20

XL - 2

Hoodies - Red Ink on Blue - $27.50

L - 2
XL - 1

Polo's - Red Ink on Blue - $10

XL - 1

Polo's - Black Ink on Red - $10

M - 1

XL - 2

I also have 3 shirts that were messed up for $5 each. They are Black on Red M and Red on Blue XL. I have pics of them if you want to see what they look like.

I accept Paypal and you can E-Mail me at FlimtotheFlam@gmail.com. I will send you a Paypal invoice. You can also take a look at the clothes on my Flickr site including the current clearance rack

Here is a couple pics of the shirts I have made so far.

You can e-mail me at FlimtotheFlam@gmail.com with any questions than I will send you an invoice with Paypal if you are interested.

Jeff Pearlman Thinks Of Hair Clumps When He Thinks Of The Thief McGwire

2009-11-03T21:25:24Z

Jeff Pearlman offers we the lifeblood of sport his "Pearls of Wisdom" on SI.com. Last week's "pearl" was more a bullet of sanctimonious outrage aimed at the heart of the Cardinals' new hitting coach.

When most people think of Mark McGwire, one of three things enters their minds:

• Monstrous blasts that cleared the highest of walls and the most distant of gaps.

• Pathetic congressional testimony.

• Arms the size of refrigerators.

Allow me to take a moment to lament the overuse of bullet points by sportswriters in this day and age. Now, if you please, an additional moment to lament the use of bullet points when letters reminscent of a multiple choice problem would have been more appropriate. The new question: "What do most people think of when they think of Mark McGwire?" The answer: "'d.' None of the above."

Seriously. I don't think of monstrous blasts. In fact, I remember two McGwire homers. First and foremost, I think of Number 62, which barely scraped over Busch II's left field wall. Secondly, I think of the 500-and-some-odd-foot shot through the roof of the Kingdome off of The Big Unit. I suppose the second one is monstrous, but that was no gap shot. He pulled into the uber-upper deck. I don't think of his congressional testimony. Probably because he did not lie like the finger-wagging Raffy or the translated Sosa. I also don't think his arms are the size of refrigerators. Maybe portable coolers, but not 'friges, because that's just silly. "Popeye Arms," yes. "Refrigerator arms," no.

I consider myself "most people" and I think of: (1) The single season home run record of 70; and (2) Steroids. Then, I say to myself:

"Self, why should I waste my time wondering if Mark McGwire used steroids over ten years ago? He isn't even the single season home run champion any longer. The majority of the pitchers he faced were likely using PEDs of some sort, whether it be amphetamines like the great Willie Mays, steroids like the great Barry Bonds, or HGH like True Yankee Andy Pettite. I think I'll go read about the 2009 World Series since I love baseball and am looking forward to (hopefully, fingers crossed) another dramatic game featuring multiple Chase Utley L.A. Looks-fueled homers sailing through the November sky. [Brings up Shysterball.] Oh that Craig Calcaterra is so amusing. I love non-sancitimonious baseball commentary, especially when it also happens to be funny."

Jeff Pearlman is not "most people." He is an author, educated in the history of baseball, and his cranium chooses "None of the Above," as well, but for an educated reason.

When I think of Mark McGwire, the first image to cross through my cranium is that of hair. Clumps upon clumps upon clumps of hair.

(As an aside, along with bullet points, I don't really understand why columnist go out of their way to drop a multiple-syllable word unnecessarily. Sure, cranium is only three syllables and the name of a once-popular board game. But, doesn't that make it all the more annoying? I mean, at least George Will makes you dig out your dictionary.)

Clumps of hair? If you are thinking that this is some sort of dadaist exercise, you will be disappointed.

Back in 1961, when a relatively obscure New York Yankee outfielder named Roger Maris was chasing Babe Ruth's single-season home run mark, the pressure was unbearable. Commissioner Ford Frick desperately wanted the Bambino's record to stand. Yankee fans hoped Mickey Mantle, their beloved homegrown star, would set the new standard. The New York media did its all to paint Maris as an ungrateful outsider -- sullen and surly and ultimately unworthy.

As the summer heated up and 60 came closer into view, Maris began to fall apart. He chain-smoked one cigarette after another. He stopped speaking to the press.

He lost his hair.

In clumps.

Large, brown clumps.

According to his Wikipedia page, Mr. Pearlman got his first job in journalism in 1989. Assuming he got this job fresh out of college, that would put him in mid-40s. Judging by his picture, he looks about that old. That is to say, not old enough to have, ya know, actually witnessed firsthand Roger Maris losing clumps of hair. I, too, have seen Billy Crystal's well-done "61*" and that was a very memorable part of the movie. I agree that it was very unfortunate the way that the media, baseball establishment, and sportswriters treated Maris. (Crystal's movie was made after the '98 home run chase, by the way, and probably would not have been made without that memorable chase bringing this record to the fore.) "61*" told a story a lot of us did not know and, I believe, permanently changed the public's perception of Roger Maris. I know that it molded mine, as a college freshman, even if I already had a positive impression of the former Cardinal. Roger Maris deserved the treatment Crystal gave him and the rewriting of history for which the 1998 home run chase provided an impetus.

As I sit here at my computer, dumbfounded by the St. Louis Cardinals' numbingly inane decision to hire McGwire as the team's new hitting coach, I think back to Maris. Actually, I really think back to September 8, 1998, when McGwire hit his 62nd home run of the season at Busch Stadium, then immediately walked toward the stands to engulf Maris' family in an enormous bear hug. Later, with tears streaming down his cheeks, McGwire told the media how, earlier in the day, he had held the bat Maris used when he set the old mark. "I touched it with my heart," McGwire said. "When I did that, I knew tonight was going to be the night. I can say my bat will lie next to his, and I'm damn proud of it."

Sniff, sniff.

"Inane?" Is it really nonsensical? After all, Milt Thompson is a big-league hitting coach and his resume is significantly thinner than McGwire's. What's that? Oh, Thompson couldn't possibly have used 'roids? That's the difference? To that I say, to know hitting is to know hitting and if you can teach what you know, then coach away.

The scent of hypocrisy rises from this attack. In one paragraph, Pearlman bemoans the treatment of Maris that resulted in Maris chain-smoking and losing hair; in the next, he sarcastically attacks McGwire for honoring Maris in a way that few associated with the game--sportswriters, baseball insiders, players--had done before 1998. It is inconsistent and disingenuous. But, I suppose, only by undermining the genuine honoring of Roger Maris can Pearlman attack McGwire's character for allegedly using steroids...

As we all now know (Admittedly, I'm technically supposed to include the word "allegedly" in here somewhere. But I can't. And won't. Because, without question, McGwire used performance-enhancers.) McGwire was a fraud. His amazing feat wasn't nearly so amazing. His courage and strength were mirages. His greatness, well, very artificial.

The juvenile "[s]niff, sniff" seems like it should be beneath someone writing for Sports Illustrated, but this whole column does, too, so I'll just chalk it up to Pearlman Being Pearlman. (He's like Manny that way.) Pearlman then goes on to label McGwire a fraud. And maybe he was, if using steroids--assuming, as Pearlman states outright, that McGwire did--makes one a "fraud." But, what Pearlman cannot outright assert, even as he goes to great column-structuring lengths to infer, is that McGwire's sentiment toward Roger Maris was fraudulent. For those of us who watched the events unfold, this inference rings hollow. Unfortunately, Pearlman is not even close to done with his rant.

Worst of all, however, McGwire was a baseball thief. At the very moment his 341-foot home run landed behind the outfield fence, he robbed Roger Maris of the most important record in professional sports...

Even assuming this is a crime, as dastardly in nature as Pearlman's childlike psyche feels it to be, to assert that Mark McGwire is some lone figure in the shadows, slinking into the record books to singlehandedly steal professional sports' greatest record, is just silly. It is nowhere near as cleancut as Pearlman, in his sophomoric column, would have us believe. The list of accomplices to this "crime" is a mile long. The owners, the non-using players who turned a blind eye, the training staffs, the front office management, the Players' Association, and the sportswriters...Yes, that's right. The sportswriters. Jeff Pearlman helped Mark McGwire steal Maris' record. So did Murray Chass and countless others who had eyes, ears, common sense, and access. Any man or woman with that basic set of traits, and who turned a blind eye, is an accomplice to this historical "theft." Rather than worshipping these cardboard gods like a schoolboy, put on your Lois Lane cap and do some investigative journalism. It is a basic tenant of journalism. The industry gives out awards for it, even. Each and every sportswriter who missed this story, the baseball story of an era, should be denied Hall of Fame access. If Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds are denied plaques because of the BBWAA's sanctimony, then so should the BBWAA members who missed this story. They failed show even the most basic level of competence, let alone greatness, and none of those who cast stones out of their glass houses should be memoralized alongside the greats of baseball journalism.

Pearlman goes on with his scarlet "R" sewing.

...He robbed the Maris family of future income from 61-related merchandising and events. He robbed the Hall of Fame -- which swooped up McGwire memorabilia as if it were free Twinkies -- of its credibility, he robbed those fans who spent hundreds of dollars for a ticket in order to witness history and he robbed thousands upon thousands of kids of a seemingly genuine role model.

I'm pretty sure that the Maris family received income from 61*-related merchandising, events, and probably will get more from Blu-Ray sales (when HBO releases 61* in blu-way, which I will be sure to purchase).

Not only should the Hall of Fame have McGwire memorabilia, but it should also have his plaque, and Bonds', and Clemens', and Sosa's, because their performances are an inextricable part of baseball history, just like segregation-era greats Ruth, Honrsby, and Dean, as well as amphetamines-era players Mays, Mantle, Robinson, Ripken, and Smith. (And, I might add, an institution that cancels an event to commemorate one of the sport's greatest films because of two of the stars' statements in opposition to a war already has some credibility problems.)

Thank you for carrying the torch of outrage for the Cardinal faithful that filled Busch II during that historic 1998 season, Jeff. I don't know how many of the millions asked you to do so, but consider me someone who does not feel cheated in any way, shape, or form. It was an amazing experience that produced many an indelible memory. That chase brought many back to the game of baseball and hooked many more for life. We came for Big Mac, but stayed for the game of baseball.

If the baseball record book is the sport's Holy Bible, then McGwire is a 3-year old armed with a permanent marker. The damage is not merely done -- it is un-erasable. (Of course, along the same analogous measures, Barry Bonds is a 3-year-old with a permanent marker, a torch and a vat of gasoline.)

The damage is "un-erasable" (because it was done with a permanent marker!). Again, if Pearlman, protector of the sanctity of baseball after-the-fact, had been paying attention before the 1998 home run chase, like in 1996 when he was hired by Sports Illustrated to write about baseball, the 3-year old would not have gotten even remotely close to the HolyBibleRecordBook. Sure, those numbers will be there, but every person who cares enough to open that record book will know of the accusations leveled against McGwire and Bonds. (For example, I was going to buy tickets for the final Cards/Brew Crew series if it looked like Pujols would be approaching 61.) If that's not enough, we could put a double-asterisk in the HolyBibleRecordBook, to denote "Steroids Era," but that seems childish, doesn't it? Kind of like putting an asterisk next to a record to denote a different season length.

And now, because Cardinals manager Tony LaRussa (whose steroid-loaded A's teams of the 1980s and early-'90s went down as an embarrassment to the sport)...

As with most everything in this "Pearl of Wisom," this is an unnecessary pot shot. How are Tony LaRussa's Athletics clubs any more of an embarassment than any other club--say, the Rangers? Yankees? Red Sox?--that employed PED users during this time in baseball history? Tell me and I'll join the stone-casting.

...has a soft spot for a former player who shed 70 pounds as soon as he retired, McGwire is back in the baseball fold; back to teach today's ballplayers how to (egad) succeed the same way he did; back to offer wisdom.

Is Pearlman really inferring that Big Mac is going to teach steroids use? Or, is he inferring that because McGwire might have used steroids, that he knows nothing about hitting a baseball? Where was this sanctimony when the Cardinals signed, re-signed, and extended known PED user Ryan Franklin? After all, that cheater was and will continue to actually play the game...

I, for one, am angry. In the course of researching and writing two books that dealt with steroids, I heard from angry fans, from angry writers, from angry coaches and baseball retires. Within the game, however, McGwire is still lauded as an all-time great. He is to be admired and worshiped and embraced.

Yes, Pearlman has written two books--one on Bonds that was overshadowed by "Game of Shadows" and one on Clemens that was overshadowed by Clemens' lawsuits--after the steroids story broke. He was a day late and a dollar short. If he'd have written one column in 1996, he could have saved Roger Maris and the sanctity of the HolyBibleRecordBook from un-erasable harm. He heared from angry fans (because angry people are the ones who make a point of being heard from) and angry writers (who were doubtlessly angry at themselves for not being more like Lois Lane and getting to the bottom of the 500-foot homers, 50-HR season, and bulgingly muscular bodies of the 1990s adn 2000s players) and angry coaches (who had NO IDEA! HONESTLY! that PEDs were being used) as well as angry former players (who think that greenies are fine but steroids are an outrage).

Mark McGwire is a baseball golden calf who is worshipped by PED sinners, apparently. I do my worshipping on Sundays, and not of athletes. Whether or not you want to admire a man who went out of his way to share the spotlight with Roger Maris and his family, who did some great charity work to help abused kids and may have used steroids is your business. I, for one, will be embracing Mark McGwire, the hitting coach, because the Cardinals could use a more patient approach at the plate and I am hoping McGwire can help them to achieve it. The other reason is that--aside of Ozzie Smith, of course--I don't worship ballplayers. I know that some are racist, some gamble, some hit women, some do drugs, and some womanize. All of them happen to be incredibly physically gifted. Being a grown-up, I can separate the awe of a 12-to-6 curveball, or, a 450-foot moonshot, from what makes someone admirable, their character. That is why I'll tell my kids about the steroids era, and why players did what they did at that time, just like I'll tell them about the Black Sox, Pete Rose, greenies, and segregation--but only when they are older and only after they have heard stories of Stan Musial and how, no matter the degree of physical talent, the true measure of a human being is how that person treats others.

Losing my religion (w/ baseball)

2009-10-27T20:11:52Z

I was listening to the local ESPN Radio (101.1 in STL) this afternoon, and Miklasz had a caller that wanted to discuss how steroids have destroyed the soul of baseball. Miklasz and Strauss both had the same response, in that they both believe that the romanticism of baseball is dead. Furthermore, Randy Karraker and Bob Ramsey discussed it again later, and they seem to have come to the same conclusion.

The consensus is that the amount of information available, along with the removal of the gentleman's agreement with reporters to not report the unflattering, extraneous news, has killed the sense of romanticism. It also seems to be the general feeling that this is not an issue, and that those who still want to connect to that romanticism with the game are simply naive.

This got me to questioning what makes watching sports as a form of entertainment unique to all others for me. My feeling has always been that I watch sports for the unpredictability and competition. As a regrettably nonathletic person myself, I have always been amazed and impressed by the physical and mental acumen of professional athletes. In addition, the nostalgic remembrance of watching players excel in the most difficult of circumstances provides a sense of commaraderie between fans that very seldom occurs around typical life events. Sports have always provided me with inspiration of what the human spirit can achieve when talent and effort meet in the beautiful synergy that is provided by a 17 K effort in the World Series or hitting an improbable HR to extend a series.

However, if it has all become a sham, if the efforts provided on the field of play are artificial, is there any reason to be impressed? I am a fervent believer in doing all things honorably, even when I can't live up to such an impossible standard. I have to accept my failures while continuing to strive to be perfect in that arena. I don't fault players that have failed to live up to such a standard, but I'm not sure that there is a purpose in supporting a system that accepts, and sometimes even incentivizes, lying and cheating as a culture.

My question to you all is:

Why should we continue to devote so much time, energy, and emotion to a sport if we accept that unfair play is the rule?

October Lore: One In A Million

2009-10-26T22:19:00Z

For baseball, October is the month of eternity. While a plate appearance in June will often become swallowed up in and forgotten amongst the thousands of other batter-vs.-pitcher confrontations over the course of the marathon 162-game regular season, each postseason pitch offers those involved a chance at heroism and at infamy. For every Kirk Gibson, there is a Carlos Beltran. For every Jim Edmonds, there is a Bill Buckner. For every Mariano Rivera (pick one), there is a Mariano Rivera (blown save and loss in Game 7 of the '01 World Series).

The game of baseball, more than any other sport, places individual players on an island, which shines a spotlight on their individual successes and failures. This unique stage enshrines in our collective consciousness heroes and goats as each October triumph and heartbreak for a team and its fans is the product of players coming through or failing, largely while acting alone, right before our very eyes.

These successes and failures are made all the more memorable by their improbability. It adds to both their enjoyment and anguish. As we all know, the best hitter in a given season, on average, will make an out at least sixty-five out of every one hundred times he digs into the box. This means that, in those most hand-wringing of situations, even the greatest hitters have the odds that they will come through stacked against them.

Now let us move to Cardinal October Lore, and the improbable feats that gave birth to a Cardinal hero and a Cardinal goat.

"GO CRAZY, FOLKS! GO CRAZY!"

Ozzie Smith will never be known first for his bat. Even if his offensive skill is underrated, he is known as "The Wizard" because of otherworldly skill as a defensive shortstop. For his career, Ozzie hit .262/.337/.328 for an OPS of .666 overall. He managed only 28 home runs in 10,778 PAs. That is one homer per every 384.9 PAs. Think about that for a moment; in let it sink. Now introduce these figures to your doubtlessly already-blown mind. Ozzie hit 23 of his 28 homers from the righthanded batter's box, only hitting 5 dingers (to use the new hitting coach's term of choice) in his 7,183 PAs from the lefthanded side of the plate. That is one homer for every 1,436 PAs.

In 1985,the Cardinals squared off against the Los Angeles Dodgers in the NLCS. The clubs split the first four games, making the series knotted up at 2 games each, and setting the stage for a dramatic and pivotal Game 5 in the astroturfed Busch Stadium. The Cardinals struck first, plating 2 runs in the bottom of the first when Tommy Herr's double plated Willie McGee and the Wizard. In the top of the fourth, the Dodgers tied the game on a Madlock homer. The series, and the game, would remain deadlocked at two into the ninth inning.

Right Dodger reliever Tom Niedenfuer took the ball for the visitors. That season, he had amassed 104 strikeouts to just 24 walks while earning 19 saves and posting a 2.61 ERA. The hulking righty stood at 6'5" and retired Willie McGee on a pop out to third base. In stepped Ozzie Smith, batting left-handed, something during which he had never, up to that point in his MLB career, hit a home run while doing. Niedenfuer, who had allowed 6 home runs in 106.1 IP, worked ahead in the count to the Wizard, 1-2. The mustachioed righty went down and in with a fastball and Ozzie swung his way into eternity, yanking the heater just barely over the right field wall. Over the joyous explosion of the Cardinal faithful, Jack Buck lent his legendary call.

"I LOST IT IN THE LIGHTS"

Matt Holliday was the apple of TLR's eye, the Proven Veteran who could actually protect Albert Pujols such that opposing pitchers would be forced to pitch the National League's perennial MVP. At the trading deadline, Cardinal GM John Mozeliak made TLR's dream a reality and traded a handful of prospects, including the Cardinals' top hitting prospect, for the now-Oakland A's left fielder. Holliday took the National League by storm upon re-joining it and contributed to the Cardinals' runaway division title.

Matt Holliday has played left field throughout most of his time in the big leagues. He has established himself as an above-average defenderat the the position, posting a UZR/150 of 6.2 for his career. In 6 seasons, Holliday has been given 31 errors in 7,267.1 innings. Of those 31 errors, 24 occurred on a fielding opportunity. A runner reached base due to one of Holliday's errors on 6 occasions. So, a runner reached base because of a Holliday error once every 1,211 innings Holliday plays in the field.

There were two outs in the pivotal Game 2 of the NLDS versus the Los Angeles Dodgers. Chris Carpenter was less than stellar in his opening game loss and Adam Wainwright was magnificent in Game 2, handing over a 2-1 lead in the ninth to closer Ryan Franklin. After record two outs, Franklin gave up a fly-ball to left field, which Holliday seemed to track, only to misplay the flyball as it fell toward the outfield grass, deflecting off his body. The Dodgers would go on to score two runs in the inning, both unearned, and take a commanding 2-0 series lead before completing the sweep in St. Louis two days later. Over the bitter gasps and moans of Cardinal fans, Mike Shannon and Vin Scully called the play (and both can be heard on the MLB.com link above).

OCTOBER HISTORY

Whether it was the jubilation felt upon Ozzie's homer or the stomach-punch of Holliday's blunder, is it any wonder that ballplayers and coaches often talk of the Gods of Baseball? How is it that such long-shot occurrences take place at moments when seasons hang in the balance, where a home run or a dropped fly-ball mean exponentially more to a team's fortunes than they would on a cold April evening or a sweltering July afternoon? Of course, we will never know. But, for me, it shows that the postseason hinges on luck as much as skill and only cements my habit, since childhood, of wearing my "lucky" Cardinal gear in the month of October, when the games mean so much more and the fate of our Cardinals, as players and as a team, will be sealed in the annals of baseball history and remembered forever in the tales of October lore.

A Team of Free Agents

2009-10-25T17:12:40Z

Currently is that time in the off-season in which I am still interested in what is going on. Not in the playing baseball sense of the word, I could(n't) care less who wins between New York and Philadelphia. Now, if the Angels pull it off, I might root for them, but then I probably would not watch 4/7 of the games because of them being west coast 9:00 PMers. I am, instead, talking about what the home town Birds on the Bat will be doing in the off-season. Since so many people have already chimed in on what they would like the Cardinals to do with what money is perceived to be available, I decided to take a different route and look at what a team of free agents would look like.

I decided, that to make this more real, I would not include anyone that has an option, whether it is a team or player option. That way, everyone chosen is truly, at this moment, a free agent. I am also assuming 700 AB at each position, and an NL club, thus no woosy DH position. Lastly, I am assuming a one-year deal for everyone and no limit on payroll; I'm pretty much trying to see how much I could win right now with who's available in free agency. In essence, I gave Mark Cuban an expansion team and one season.

Catcher:

At the back end of the battery position, after much serious thought, I am going to go with Benjie Molina and Greg Zaun.

Benjie - $5 million - 500 AB, .280/.300/.440/.740

Zaun - $2.5 million - 200 AB, .250/.340/.410/.750

Catcher total - 700 AB, .311 OBP/ .431 SLG

1st Base:

At first base, it came down to Adam LaRoche and Nick Johnson for me. I also looked at the aging, injury-prone Carlos Delgado and Aubrey Huff, but decided quickly that AL and NJ would both be better choices. After looking at what I would project the two at, I went with Nick Johnson.

Johnson - $6 million - 500 AB, .290/.420/.465/.885

First Base total - 700 AB, .390 OBP, .459 SLG

2nd Base:

I looked extensively at Placido Polanco and Orlando Hudson. The way I figure it, I want 3 MI anyway, so I'm going with both. Polanco can fill in at SS in a pinch, or at 3B.

Hudson - $5 million - 500 AB, .285/.360/.440/.800

Polanco - $4 million - 200 AB (2nd), 100 AB (SS), .300/.350/.410/.760

Second Base total - 700 AB, .357 OBP, .431 SLG

Shortstop:

This one comes down to Marco Scutaro or Orlando Cabrera. Cabrera is a sure-fielding .720 OPS guy at SS. Not a bad guy to have as long as you have some hitters. Scutaro is an average-fielding .720 OPS guy for his career...then comes his outlandish .790 OPS of this past season. If you're a believer in Brady Anderson and other one year wonders...then this is the guy for you.

Orlando Cabrera - $6 million - 500 AB - .285/.330/.390/.720

Shortstop total - 700 AB, .341 OBP, .392 SLG

3rd Base:

Mark Derosa we all know (and some of us love) here at VeB. Mark DeRosa is a highly probably .800 OPS player at 4, positions, (2B, 3B, LF, RF) none of which he plays very well defensively. Chone Figgins is a .750-.770 OPS guy who has serious speed and a decent glove at 3B. While he's been a 3B for the last 3 years, he has logged 800-4500 innings in the field at 3B, 2B, CF, OF in his career. Adrian Beltre, the non-steroid era version, is a .760 OPS hitter with a great glove at 3B. He is the only true 3B in the group above. I want two of these guys.

Beltre - $8 million - 350 AB (3B), 200AB (1B) - .265/.315/.445/.760

Figgins - $5 million - 350 AB (3B),100 AB (SS) - .300/.385/.385/.770

Third Base total - 700 AB, .350 OBP, .415 SLG

Outfield:

Matt Holliday, Jason Bay, Bobby Abreu, and Johnny Damon are all type A left fielders who rock in one sense of the word, or more. Vladdy Guerrero is another type A free agent outfielder. Dave Roberts, Randy Winn, Reed Johnson, and Mike Cameron look like the best true free agents who can play CF. Out of all of those players, I need to come up with 5 of them to play the outfield on a regular basis.

Cameron - $5 million - 500 AB (CF) - .250/.340/.460/.800

Johnson - $1 million - 200 AB (CF) - .280/.350/.410/.760

Abreu - $12 million - 350 AB (RF) - .290/.380/.450/.830

Holliday - $16 million - 250 AB (LF), 350 AB (RF) -.325/.400/.560/.960

Bay - $10 million - 450 AB (LF) - .280/.380/.515/.895

Left Field total - 700 AB, .387 OBP, .531 SLG

Center Field total - 700 AB, .343 OBP, .446 SLG

Right Field total - 700 AB, .390 OBP, .505 SLG

Team total (minus pitchers) - 5600 AB, .359 OBP, .451 SLG = .810 OPS as a team

That is $85.5 million wrapped up in the offensive side of the ball. I said I was going to have unlimited payroll.

Obviously the outfield defense leaves plenty to be desired (even with Cameron in CF for most of the innings) and the infield defense isn't the best, but isn't horrible. The left side should be good, whereas the right side shouldn't. Any Molina behind the plate defensively is good.

Starting Pitching

Looking at the Type B free agent starters that are truly availble, I only see: Erik Bedard, Doug Davis, Rich Harden, Randy Johnson, Jason Marquis, Carl Pavano, Andy Pettitte, and Joel Pineiro. Randy Wolf and John Lackey are obvious signings, IMO. Justin Duchscherer was also there, but his high in IP is 141. No thanks as a starter. I'm also of the opinion that Rich Harden should be moved to the closer role (as has been thrown around here a bit.)

Lackey - $10 million - 200 IP, 163 K, 47 BB, 3.56 FIP

Wolf - $7 million - 200 IP, 158 K, 67 BB, 4.02 FIP

Bedard - $5 million - 160 IP, 160 K, 62 BB, 3.72 FIP

Pineiro - $7 million - 190 IP, 95 K, 38 BB, 3.83 FIP

Pettitte - $8 million - 205 IP, 141 K, 66 BB, 3.92 FIP

The starters' averages would be: 191 IP @ 3.81 FIP

That only adds up to 955 IP out of my starting rotation, and typically staffs throw around 1450 per season. My bullpen will have to work 500 IP or so. Therefore:

Bullpen:

I will start out with Justin Duchscherer because he can be a workhorse out of the pen, I would assume, based on him throwing 140+ innings this past season, and him having worked out of the pen before. He would also fill my "Brad Thompson" role of spot starter when someone goes down with an injury. Rich Harden would be my closer. I think he'd be a rock in that role, assuming he could stay healthier with it. Other than that, I go with all the Type A's...and for a reason after looking at stats.

Spot Starter/Long Relief

Duchscherer - $4 million - 100 IP - 83 K, 22 BB, 3.76 FIP

Middle Relief

Darren Oliver - $2 million - 75 IP - 58 K, 23 BB, 4.18 FIP (L)

Kevin Gregg - $3 million - 75 IP - 75 K, 33 BB, 4.39 FIP

Jose Valverde - $4 million - 70 IP - 78 K, 26 BB, 4.01 FIP

Setup Men

Mike Gonzalez - $4 million - 60 IP - 73 K, 27 BB, 3.48 FIP (L)

Rafael Soriano - $4 million - 60 IP - 77 K, 20 BB, 3.52 FIP

Closer

Rich Harden - $5 million - 60 IP - 73 K, 23 BB, 3.53 FIP

The relievers' averages would be: 71 IP @ 3.86 FIP

The pitching staff's totals: 1450 IP @ 3.84 FIP

$63 million was spent on my pitching staff. It has a lot of power arms, which would help out the defense incredibly, with 6 players (5 in the pen) with a K/inn or more. In 1450 innings, the defense would only have to make 3,115 outs (out of 4,350).

My total salary ends up being $148.5 million for the season, but I think we put together a pretty decent team. I wouldn't know how to go about figuring out what each player's WAR or how many wins this team should get next year, (so if anyone wants to do that (hint, hint) please go ahead) but I would be willing to wager that if everyone were to stay healthy playing at this level, the team should do more than just "alright."

To bring this full circle:

There are some pretty decent options out there this season on the free agent market. Obviously, the Cardinals have a salary cap put into place by Bill Dewitt and the other owners. Obviously, the conjecture around here is $90-100 million will be that cap. We cannot be sure. There are many options listed above and many possible ways to put these pieces together with what the Cards already have. I am not going to project, here, what we are going to put together in St. Louis; however, there are quite a few options out there.

Report: LaRussa Will Return

2009-10-25T06:28:45Z

According to this ESPN article (which states PD sources that I cannot find), Tony LaRussa will return to manage the Cards in '10. I know many of you are not fans of his, but let me say I am excited that he and Duncan appear to be coming back. You can't argue with eight division titles, two pennants, and one world series championship in 14 years. I look forward to both coming back.

More information will come later today, I would think. Have at it.

Skip's Lament: The Curse of Too Many Decent Players

2009-10-23T20:42:18Z

While I was reading this piece comparing the Cardinals to the Phillies, I was remembering the old Bill James comment that one challenge of improving a team is not that of fixing obvious problems (like the Cardinals currently have in LF), but of how one handles the need to improve overall where there aren't positions that are obvious problems.

For the last few years, the Cardinals have an offense that is increasingly built around Albert Pujols, which limits their ability to have big innings and can make the offense easy to negate. As the linked piece points out, the Phillies have more hitters who are dangerous than the Cardinals do. The Cardinals need a sequence like they had a few years ago: Walker, Pujols, Edmonds, Rolen.

The problem is not that the current Cardinals have a lot of bad position players:

Skip is a nice little hitter at second
Ryan, if he can keep up his current level of hitting, has a glove that carries his bat
Molina has a decent OBP and a great glove
Rasums, while he did not hit particularly well in 2009, needs to play to grow into a good hitter
Ludwick (2009 version) was OK
Freese could hit at above replacement level

And so on. It's not like it's obvious that any of these players in particular needs to be replaced.

The problem is that none of these players are currently a strong offensive player. Skip, Ryan, or Molina, if they are the worst hitter in your lineup, aren't going to hurt you. But when they are amongst the best hitters in your lineup, you have a problem.

This would seem like a difficult problem to solve. Plugging Freese into third doesn't solve this problem, and none of the free agent third basemen do, either. Putting Holliday in LF is a step in the right direction, but it doesn't solve the problem alone

The mistake is that the team reviews things position by position--the problem with Skip isn't that he is bad, it's that the team needs some great hitters someplace other than 1B, and Ludwick, Skip, etc., aren't helping. We've got to get some great hitting at three positions from among LF, CF, SS, 2B, RF, 3B, and C. In short, some decent players need to be replaced, not because they are bad, but because they aren't great.

Closer Fail

2009-10-21T17:04:21Z

It seems that the closers this postseason are sucking pretty bad, so I got curious and looked at their numbers. Obviously, the Franklin meltdown isn't reflected very well in this table, but only Rivera really stands out this year as an outstanding shutdown closer, though Lidge, in a relatively small sample, has held it together. Interesting that it's looking like the two remaining closers who have not allowed an earned run will be headed to the WS, while the unexpected meltdown guys are gonna be packing their bags soon, or have already done so.

I also thought the 30% inherited runners scoring was a pretty ugly number.

PITCHER	G	W	L	ERA	SV	IP	H	R	ER	BB	SO	IR	IS
Franklin	2	0	1	0.00	0	1.1	3	2	0	2	1	0	0
Lidge	4	1	0	0.00	1	3	1	0	0	3	3	3	0
Broxton	3	0	1	4.05	2	6.2	6	3	3	1	5	4	1
Rivera	6	0	0	0.00	2	8	5	0	0	3	10	6	1
Nathan	2	0	0	9.00	0	2	5	2	2	1	2	3	2
Street	3	0	2	13.48	1	2.2	6	4	4	3	1	0	0
Fuentes	4	0	0	2.45	2	3.2	1	1	1	4	4	1	0
Papelbon	2	0	1	13.50	0	2	4	3	3	2	1	3	2
CUMULATIVE	26	1	5	4.17	8	28	31	15	13	19	27	20	6

October 21st: Anthony Reyes Day

2009-10-20T18:45:21Z

Anthony Reyes presumably throws a four-seam fastball up in the zone against a Detroit Tiger batsman on October 21, 2006 (via newyork.yankees.mlb.com ).

It was late October in the year 2006 and the "Tigers-in-Three" conventional wisdom had reached a fever pitch amongst the baseball commentariat that had already confidentally, knowingly picked the Padres in two and the Metropolitans in three in the weeks prior. Nonetheless, it was the 83-win Cardinals who emerged as champions of the National League, escapees of one of the most dramatic National League Championship Series of our lifetimes, which featured a Game 7 for the ages that still causes Carlos Beltran to wake up at night in a cold sweat, having dreamt of an Adam Wainwright curveball coming right at him, only to break seemingly against the laws of physics, over the plate, through the strikezone, for a called "Strike Three!" After that knock-down, drag-out heavyweight fight, the Cardinals trudged onward and northward to the city of Detroit.

A seven-game series inevitably throws a club's pitching rotation and staff into disarray, as the field manager is thrust into a win-at-all-costs mentality and consequently leaves no arrows in his pitching quiver for the World Series that is to follow. And so the Cardinals were left with an up-and-comer, or, down-and-outer--depending on where you, as a Cardinal fan, came down on the dramatically polarizing Anthony Reyes debate--for the pivotal (and what World Series game is not pivotal?) Game 1.

Tyler Kepner, of the New York Times (newspaper of the once-again free archives), offers a wonderful setting of the stage in his game story:

Anthony Reyes made his first start this season at a place called Bricktown Ballpark in Oklahoma City, against a team called the RedHawks. He gave up nine hits and his team lost.

Reyes was not the preferred choice for the St. Louis Cardinals in Game 1 of the World Series on Saturday. He had not won in 47 days, and his five regular-season victories were the fewest for a Game 1 starter in 77 years.

But Reyes was rested, unlike the other Cardinals starters, so there he was on the mound at Comerica Park...

Loathe as I am to measure a pitcher's individual pitching performance with "Wins" and "Losses." There are other stats which demonstrate the improbability of Reyes being tapped by TLR and Dave Duncan to start the first game of the World Series. That year, Reyes started 17 games for St. Louis, throwing 85.1 big-league innings. He struck out 7.59 and walked 3.59 per 9 innings. Reyes also gave up many a homer, 1.79 per 9 innings, in fact. All of this amounted to a 5.49 FIP, or, a 5.06 ERA, if you are so inclined. Furthermore, his groundball percentage was a mere 34.5 percent.

His manager had turned to Reyes in Game 4 of the NLCS, with St. Louis leading the series two games to one, and Reyes had neither dominated nor flopped, lasting only 4 innings while surrendering only two runs despite issuing four walks and giving up two home runs. (He left the game to WonderBrad Thompson tied at two, and Thompson wasted little time allowing the Mets to take a 5-2 lead. Thompson was the losing pitcher in a 12-5 thumping that tied the series. This is part of the postseason experience Thompson possesses and that Straussie seemed to so covet in the days between season's end and playoffs' start.) The walks and homers surrendered to the Mets left no reason for the Cardinal faithful to anticipate anything but more of the same from Reyes: walks, strikeouts, and homers.

To make matters worse, the Wild Card Tigers had ripped through Billy Beane's Athletics, sweeping Oakland in the ALCS, which afforded Jim Leyland the luxury of having his pitching staff perfectly alligned for a three-game World Series sweep. For Game 1, that meant Rookie of the Year Justin Verlander, he of the high-90s (and sometimes 100) fastball which was complimented by a deceitful change-up. Verlander's 3.63 ERA somewhat masked a 4.35 FIP, but Verlander was democratically only striking out 6 batters per 9 innings while inducing grounders about 42 percent of the time (compared to the fascist K and GB rates of Reyes). Verlander was also walking 2.99 per nine innings. The peripheral stats made a David-vs-Goliath ERA mismatch something less biblical in nature, even if it was, perhaps even justifiably, Exhibt A in the case for the Tigers-in-Three.

The temperature was a cool, but comfortable, 54 degrees in Detroit that evening, and Verlander cooled the Cardinal bats in the first, inducing two groundouts before striking out The Great Pujols, to end a 1-2-3 visitors' half of the first. Reyes then took the mound. After retiring Granderson on a grounder to Pujols, Reyes surrendered a double to Craig Monroe, induced a popout by former Cardinal Placido Polanco, walked Magglio Ordonez, and gave up an RBI single to Carlos Guillen, which gave Detroit a 1-0 lead, before Ivan Rodriguez fortuitously lined out to second base to bring the first inning to a close.

In the top of the second, Scott Rolen tied the game with a home run off of Verlander and Reyes made quick work of the bottom third of the Tiger order, 1-2-3. In the third, the Cardinal bats opened up the game. Yadier Molina led things off with a single and advanced to second base by starting left fielder, So Taguchi. After David Eckstein struck out looking, Chris Duncan doubled home Molina, for a 2-1 Cardinal lead. Then, The Great Pujols launched a ball deep into the Motor City night, expanding the Cardinal lead to three runs, 4-1. That would be all Reyes would need.

Beginning in the second, Reyes retired 17 consecutive Tigers, a streak that was broken by a seventh inning Carlos Guillen single. By that time, however, an error-filled sixth had doubled the St. Louis lead to 7-1. Reyes retired four consecutive Tigers after the Guillen single and entered the bottom of the ninth still ahead 7-1, having not allowed a Tiger past first base since the first inning. Naturally, Reyes regressed to his mean and gave up a solo home run to Craig Monroe, making the score 7-2, and was pulled by Tony La Russa for Braden Looper, who finished out the Cardinal victory. Reyes threw 91 pitches that evening, 67 for strikes. He collected only 5 democratic outs via groundball and 19 by the flyball. He struck out only four Detroit batsmen, but walked merely one. The Tigers mustered only four hits on the rookie, in an offensive effort that was diagnosed as rust-induced, due to the long layoff between ALCS Game 4 and World Series Game1.

Timesman Kepner writes:

[T]he Tigers could not explain how Reyes, without an overpowering fastball, handled them so easily. Reyes threw almost all fastballs after the first inning, taking a suggestion from the pitching coach Dave Duncan, and he rarely missed a spot.

He was a marvel of efficiency, throwing only 90 pitches and allowing four hits and a walk with four strikeouts. From the last out of the first inning to the first out of the seventh, he retired 17 Tigers in a row. It was the longest such streak in the World Series since Cincinnati's José Rijo set down 20 Oakland hitters in 1990.

Tom Goldman, of NPR, colorfully describes how Reyes tamed the Tigers:

Here's a World Series math puzzler. When is five greater than 40,000? Answer: when Anthony Reyes is pitching. Before last night's game, five was the number most associated with the Cardinals' rookie right-hander. It was the woeful amount of wins he had during the regular season, the fewest of any Game 1 starting pitcher in World Series history.

But by the end of the game, the roughly 40,000 Detroit fans at Comerica Park were left shell-shocked by what Reyes did to their Tigers. He defanged them, de-clawed them, turning them into pussycats who only got four hits and two runs. With his Cardinal-red socks pulled up high the old fashioned way, and wearing his cap with the most unfashionable flat brim, Reyes at one point retired seventeen straight Detroit batters.

And so the Tigers-in-Three movement was stopped dead in its tracks with an unlikely gem by a former top prospect. As Thomas Harding wrote for stlcardinals.com, "Thanks to outstanding pitching by Cardinals righty Anthony Reyes, the coronation of the Tigers is not such a foregone conclusion now, is it?" Sportswriters, fans, and players alike were astounded to learn that the Tigers now had to win four games out of a maximum of six remaining games to clinch the title.

Reyes' was a classic performance, but, sadly, not one that was a harbinger of future success for the young four-seamer in the birds-on-the bat. He would appear in 22 games for the Cardinals during the 2007 season and perform poorly, with a FIP of 5.25 and an ERA over six. In 2008, he was traded to the Indians for Luis Perdomo, a young fireballer out of the bullpen who the organization would not even protect from the Rule V Draft. Reyes pitched well for Cleveland in '08, but was lit up in 2009 and now faces a murky future.

The fate of Anthony Reyes was unsurprising. His most important game, even if it was not his best performance, collected a game score of 69, consisted of ~~one less~~ 4 strikeouts and 3 groundouts to go with ~~nearly 20~~ 15 flyball outs.* Anthony Reyes on the LaDunc St. Louis Cardinals was a mixing of oil and water, a flyball/strikeout pitcher known for firing his four-seamer high in the zone for swings-and-misses installed into a system founded on the philosophy of pitching to contact, throwing sinking two-seamers down in the zone. Despite a relationship that was, in retrospect, doomed from its inception, Reyes turned in a pivotal performance on the sport's greatest stage, helping the National League's greatest franchise capture the tenth World Series championship in its long and storied history. Every October, I think of that unlikely band of Cardinals, and give them the appreciation I feel they deserve for that magical run. The day of October 21st goes to Anthony Reyes.

*Hat tip to Solanus for correcting the out breakdown via Retrosheet.

Holliday and Craig or DeRosa and Ludwick

2009-10-20T18:27:41Z

Here are the WPA numbers for Teixeira and Holliday from Fangraphs.

Teixeira

2006 1.14

2007 2.36

2008 5.87

2009 3.58

Holliday

2006 2.37

2007 4.64

2008 4.87

2009 3.51

Boras said Holliday is this year's Teixeira. Looking at the numbers, I might have to agree with him although I think Teixeira is the more valuable player. Mark Teixeira got $180 mill over 8 years ($22.5 million per season). It's a different economy out there and the Yankees may be the only team able to shell out that kind of money for a player like Teixeira. Let's say Holliday and Teixeira are really 3.5 WPA players as opposed 5 WPA players and that the Yankees overpaid. They always do.

All that said, one has to assume that Boras will find some GM to offer 6 years, $120 mill for Holliday. If that's what Holliday is worth, what will Pujols get? Let's put Pujols aside and focus on the Holliday issue in the short term. If our current payroll sits at $70 mill and we add Holliday, that's $90 mill. We still need 1 starting pitcher. Assume we go bargain basement for $5 mill plus incentives on Smoltz. Even if Dewitt is willing to swallow that $95 mill plus pill for 2010, how will he feel in 2011 when (with raises and arbitration) it swells to $100 mill? Then we have to find money thereafter to resign Albert Pujols? Even in the short term it gets troublesome. No dry powder to pickup even a midlevel player at the deadline to give the team a boost for the stretch.

One way to easy the payroll pressure from signing Holliday would be in RF. Trade Luddy and turn RF over to Craig / Mather / Jay. You save $5 mill and now have wiggle room with payroll down the stretch. If we don't sign Holliday, then one would assume they resign DeRosa and place him in LF as a stop gap. I think arguments can be made on both sides of the issue. Who would you rather have in the starting outfield: Holliday and Craig or DeRosa and Ludwick?

p.s. If option 1 is selected, the failsafe position (should the rookie platoon fail in RF) would be move Skip to right and plug Lugo in at 2B.