whew
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 9:54 AM EDT
in News
153 comments
thank goodness that's over with.
i could recount all the hardships and bitter blows the cards and their fans had to suffer this season, but what would be the point. . . . . we all get an extra month off this year, and we need it. hell, we need a stinkin' day off; this is the first day since august 27 that the cardinals aren't playing baseball. in their deadly closing stretch of 35 games / 34 days, they went 15-20 --- the same record they opened the season with.
if that was la russa's last game for the franchise, he certainly went out on his own terms. 9 pitching changes on the final day of the season, in a game that meant nothing; 24 players into the fray. jim tracy nearly kept pace, with 7 pitching changes; the two skippers, anyway, were in no hurry for the season to end. it's often the case that season finales are over in 1:50 or thereabouts; this one lasted 3:11.
wrapping up a few odds n ends:
- of the cardinals' last 5 pennant-winning teams (2006, 2004, 1987, 1985, 1982), 4 came back the following year to finish below .500, with between 76 and 79 wins. only the 2004 team managed to finish above .500.
- the cardinals avoided breaking the franchise record for runs allowed. they finished at 829, the 3d-highest total in franchise history and 2d-highest total of the last 95 years.
- they also avoided leading the league in negative run differential. that honor went to the team they swept this weekend, the pirates, who finished at minus 122. the cards finished 2d in the nl in that category, at minus 104; the marlins were minus 101, the nats minus 100.
- the -104 run differential was 1 run worse than the 1955 team's, meaning the 2007 cards had the franchise's worst run differential in 91 years --- worst since the 1916 team, which came in at -153.
- the cards finished 11th in the league in scoring (worst since 1997) and 11th in earned-run average (worst since 2003). they were 2d in unearned runs allowed, at 88 (the marlins led with 98).
- st louis finished 30-19 against the three bottom teams in the nl central (pirates, reds, and astros); vs all other comers they were 48-65, a .425 winning percentage.
look out, ted williams.
* * * * * * * * * * *
joe strauss's article yesterday contained a fairly remarkable quote about the tensions in the front office:i will say that it's striking to note how many of this year's playoff teams have been built via player development. the rockies (not a playoff team just yet, but hopefully after tonight) are almost entirely homegrown, and the indians, angels, and dbacks mostly so; the phillies' 4 best hitters, rotation ace, and closer all came up through the system. even the yankees, lords of the checkbook, have a homegrown ace and closer, and their starters at all 4 up-the-middle positions were developed in-house. that's to say nothing of the teams that barely missed the playoffs --- brewers, braves, and dodgers drew most of their talent from within. that's why the approach bernie proposes this morning --- dewitt must open dewallet --- seems misguided to me. dewallet cannot fix what's broken with this team; sign a bunch of f.a.'s this year, and 2 or 3 years from now those acquisitions are apt to be as old and broken-down and useless as edmonds and rolen and mulder were this season. this organization's already too top-heavy; their overriding imperative is to get younger, a need they've had since 2005. they've made some progress in that regard (duncan, wainwright, hopefully ankiel and/or ryan), but they need to push it further. jumping whole-hog into the free-agent market won't get them there. only patience will.
that's not to say i think they shouldn't sign any free agents. they're gonna have to sign some; too many holes on the roster. but they need to be smart about it. i think they were extremely smart last year to stay out of the crazy free-agent market. it's a fair critique to say that the ownership has occasionally cheaped out and allowed good free agents to get away --- particularly aj burnett, who was the best free-agent pitcher on the market two years ago and wanted to play in st louis. but in the vast majority of cases the team's valuation has been accurate and their refusal to overpay has been vindicated. i don't like greedy rich guys any more than bernie does, but i don't think dewitt's tight dewallet has been the main problem with the team --- and i'm absolutely certain that raising payroll isn't the main solution going forward. it's much simpler, and more complicated, than that: they need to do a better job of evaluating talent and developing players.
* * * * * * * * * * *
once the rockies and pads settle the wild-card question, i'll post a poll to determine the community's official playoff endorsement. i'll also be soliciting your predictions for the postseason tournament. we'll have game threads here throughout the playoffs, and i'll have one tonight for the one-game playoff (technically a regular season game); during the nlds round, when there will be multiple games on most days, i'll just put up one generic thread covering all that day's contests. and while this is all going on, there's bound to be lots of news regarding our favorite team --- beginning with the official word regarding the status of our favorite manager.let's go rockies.
0 recs |
153 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Game thread
by Zubin on Oct 1, 2007 9:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Ug... nevermind
by Zubin on Oct 1, 2007 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lots of time going forward
But, the criticism of Bernie's point is right on. Sure, there have been times in recent years when opening up the pocketbook to make sure the Cardinals sign an impact player would have been wise, AJ Burnett being the obvious answer.
That said, in most cases I would rather have the Cards dump the additional dough for free agent acquisitions into player development, taking risks on top dollar draft choices rather than going for slot guys. Better to pony up $2 million for Kyle Russel than 7 or 8 million for someone like Juan E.
by JMedwick on Oct 1, 2007 9:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the problem the Cardinals face is
However, they will need to sign a few FA's or a better idea, trade for guys with 2 years left on contracts to fill the gaps. A power bat from the OF to replace Edmonds/Encarnacion and bridge the gap to Rasmus.
The farm system has produced Molina, Pujols, Ryan, Ankiel, Duncan but it has also produced middling guys like Cavazos, Skippy, Reyes, Thompson, Jiminez, etc. The Cardinals wouldn't be in near the shape they are now if the AAA roster could have given them a legit #3 starter to step in when Carpenter was injured.
Instead, they'll find stopgaps. They'll trade for Matt Morris, sign Pineiro for 2 years, take a flyer on an aging OF, maybe trade for Renteria. They'll improve the team for 2008, which won't need much with how terrible the NL Central is and probably will be.
I think if LaRussa stays, which seems likely now, he'll turn to the front office and say "Stop giving me guys like Reyes, Jiminez and Cavazos". Unlike in New York where Joba and Melky forced Torre's hand to have to listen to Cashman about who and how to use, the failure of many of the youngsters plays to LaRussa's advantage.
by Hardcore Legend on Oct 1, 2007 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have to Agree
Signing Pineiro for 2 years would not be the end of the world, but I don't see much point in trading for Renteria (he'll cost young talent we cannot afford to lose) and hosting a Matt Morris reunion. I think Walt is smarter than that, but Tony's influence could be pivotal. After all, he brought us Mark Mulder for Dan Haren.
by Hungry Jack on Oct 1, 2007 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
^Which is
by JMedwick on Oct 1, 2007 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you wanted to win NOW
1B - Albert Pujols
2B - Jeff Kent
SS - Omar Vizquel
3B - Scott Rolen
LF - Barry Bonds
CF - Aaron Rowand
RF - Jim Edmonds
C - Yadier Molina
SP - Adam Wainwright
SP - Curt Schilling
SP - Livan Hernandez
SP - Bartolo Colon
SP - Joel Pineiro
Jeff Kent, Barry Bonds, Omar Vizquel will only look for 2 year contracts at most.
Likewise for Schilling and Pineiro. Colon and Hernandez would both probably want 4 year deals, although Colon may look for something shorter to re-establish himself.
That roster change would cost you about $160 M in payroll over the next 2 years, but for next year, you'd have a team that would be old, slow but score a lot of runs and eat some innings. And talent wise, it'd be better than anything the Cardinals could patch together through the farm system over the next 2 years.
Then in 2009-2010, you begin the 'correction' replacing that OF with Rasmus and the rotation with Walters, etc.
I don't condone making any of those moves, really but a team CAN be fixed quickly through spending money. Just ask the Cubs. Add Soriano, Lilly, Marquis, Floyd, Kendall, along with a healthy All-Star firstbasemen and 3rd baseman and you have a division winner.
by Hardcore Legend on Oct 1, 2007 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the problem with this theory
to me, this roster illustrates how you can spend a ton of money and make the team worse, rather than than better.
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rolen declined because of injury
Think of the number of good pitchers there were this year who were older. In fact, if we looked at the effective older pitchers, they probably faired much better as a group than the '06 FA signings.
I think the problem is that '07-'08 simply doesn't have good FA pitchers available. '08-09 looks much better. Perhaps we should wait on someone from this list or try to trade for them now and then work on extension into their contract.
Here's the '08-09 list of FA pitchers:
Kris Bensen BAL
A.J. Burnett TOR (may opt out)
Paul Byrd CLE
Jon Garland CWS
Tom Glavine NYM
Mike Hampton ATL
Rich Harden OAK
Orlando Hernandez NYM
Jason Jennings HOU
Randy Johnson ARZ
John Lackey LAA
Esteban Loaiza OAK
Braden Looper STL
Derek Lowe LAD
Pedro Martinez NYM
Matt Morris PIT
Mike Mussina NYY
Jamie Moyer PHI
Mark Mulder STL
Carl Pavano NYY
Jake Peavy SD
Brad Penny LAD
Odalis Perez KC
Oliver Perez NYM
Andy Pettitte NYY
Mark Prior CHC
Horatio Ramirez SEA
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the names on the proposed roster weren't 30 to 32
i wouldn't categorically exclude 30 to 32 year olds from consideration just because of rolen's injury. but i would be leery of players that age because it's been well proven that most position players decline after 30. if you're signing a 31-year-old to a 5-year deal, you run a high risk of having that player decline and/or break down. it has nothing to do with rolen's baserunning collision. it has to do with what happens when players get older.
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't sign a 31 year old to a 5 year deal
It is interesting that a number of older pitchers this year have done well and have helped their teams to be in a playoff position.
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pitching doesn't follow the age curve
Quick, Name any pitcher that has gotten a 5+ year contract and lived up to the terms.
Sign position players to big deals, draft pitchers and roll the dice.
by DriverZn on Oct 1, 2007 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
looks like a long list
by SleepyCA on Oct 1, 2007 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The list was a toss together
If I were to spend money freely, without any restriction on spending, I'd put together a lineup of:
[code]
SS - Brendan Ryan
RF - Bobby Abreu
1B - Albert Pujols
CF - Andruw Jones
3B - Scott Rolen
LF - Jim Edmonds
C - Yadier Molina
P - Pitcher
2B - Adam Kennedy
SP - Adam Wainwright
SP - Curt Schilling
SP - Greg Maddux
SP - Braden Looper
SP - Joel Pineiro
[/code]
Is that how I'd fix/build the team? No. But a team with no real payroll restrictions can go out and overpay for 2 OF bats who did not play to their talent level in 07 and can patch together a starting rotation with two old pitchers on short term deals. Even if Schilling and Maddux have their arms fall off, you need them for however long it takes to get Carpenter back into the rotation (August?).
That's patching together a team that could a) win the NL Central and b) if the arms DON'T fall off, probably wins a 5 game series.
I don't believe in just throwing money away and ignoring the farm system and player development. However, for the Cardinals, the pitching isn't going to get much better unless they a) sacrafice the farm system in trades b) overspend for some short term fixes.
So with the pitching not really going to be spectacular, you are going to have to outslug teams (Philadelphia Phillies). I don't know if a guy like Bobby Abreu is really the player he was in 07 or if he (at 34) is still an OBP guy of .400+. I know for the last 2 years, I'd have loved to have Abreu in the #2 hole ahead of Pujols, getting on base and getting knocked in.
Overspending for fixes doesn't damage the farm system, just DeWitt's wallet.
by Hardcore Legend on Oct 1, 2007 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well your quote about LaRussa remindes me
As for how this ties into payroll, while I understand that if LaRussa returns, he will be reluctant to he his "retooling" money spent on draft picks what won't be up before 2010 or 2011 or so, I also don't think the Cards, as Bernie seems to suggest, should be throwing top dollar at middle of the order hitters. I don't mind adding veteran players who can add some value to the team (think signing someone like Shannon Stewart or trading for the likes of Burnett, Renteria or Coco Crisp) the Cards should not be bidding on top dollar free agents at this point, regardless of what LaRussa says.
by JMedwick on Oct 1, 2007 10:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They will bid
We will then trade for Julio Lugo who AROD just put out of a job and sign Matt Clement and re-sign Piniero. The payroll will go up by $8,000,000 and we will be told that we "just missed" on several big name guys.
by Elvis on Oct 1, 2007 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that the Cards should
by ridgesee on Oct 1, 2007 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
NLDS
I can't wait to see everyone's predictions compared to the "experts"
by StLHugo on Oct 1, 2007 9:56 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
So many things about this
by MdRedbirdFreak on Oct 1, 2007 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah,
Don't be jealous that those guys get paid to watch sports all day.
by Jhusk on Oct 1, 2007 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can't help it
by liam on Oct 1, 2007 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Last year was the suprise
This year I heard many have the Indians, Phillies, and the rest as expected to contend. The Rockies are the only shocker in my opinion.
by enoscountry on Oct 1, 2007 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly
Only low budget teams like A's and Marlins fail to do so. This consequently shrinks the free agent market, increases FA cost, and makes the free agency approach less beneficial.
Speaking of, I think we need to do so with Yadi. I think he showed he can hit this year despite our terrible lineup.
by enoscountry on Oct 1, 2007 10:01 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I usually don't mind Bernie
Who exactly does he think is out there that is worth opening DeWallet for? Given this year's FA crop, such thinking will lead us to handcuff ourselves for the future. This is one year that stopgaps may actually make sense -- in 2009, we will (i) have a lot more money to spend, as Izzy/Mulder/Edmonds/Enc/Looper all come off the books, (ii) hopefully have league-minimum guys like Rasmus and Perez ready to make substantial contributions, and (iii) be considering a more attractive group of FAs. Spending now may just prevent us from taking advantage of that opportunity . . . .
by tdawg on Oct 1, 2007 10:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
by lightbulb on Oct 1, 2007 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Support
by templetown on Oct 1, 2007 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No one will argue agains spending money
i.e. Replacing Reyes with Colon (both 6+ ERA) doesn't help.
by DriverZn on Oct 1, 2007 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the thing is
It's not like they're saying...well, instead of spending 16 mil on a 10 game win player we'll spend 8 mil on two 5 game win players. As fans we shouldn't care about his bottom line, at all.
by rocKStark5 on Oct 1, 2007 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I second that emotion
But there's no way anyone could read your list of odds n ends (actually there's no way anyone could read your blog all season) and come to the conclusion that this is a fixable team in the near future. We are broken on offense, defense, and pitching. In fact, while I'm genuinely pleased that we won our last 5 games and came in with a disappointing-but-far-from-embarrassing 78-84 record, this is NOT a 78-84 team at its root. It's more like a 90-loss team.
Now obviously 90-loss teams can turn around in one year and win the NL Central with a few free agent signings (just look at the Cubs)... but ONLY only if the core of the team is fundamentally sound. Outside of Pujols I would not say that of this Cardinals team.
by briangunn on Oct 1, 2007 11:05 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Bernie
If he wanted to complain about the reluctance for ownership to spend money, he should have done it with the last draft, when most of the picks were overdrafts compared to the consensus. The cardinals left players, that even by their own organization, were regarded as better talent than what was taken in particular rounds due to signability.
Management stated that the money saved by not signing free agents would be redirected to the draft, and it wasn't.
by Some witty name on Oct 1, 2007 11:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Dunno about obsessed
by sdrone on Oct 1, 2007 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. Too much time
by MdRedbirdFreak on Oct 1, 2007 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Opening DeWallet for DeDraft
Tim Purpura went the opposite route with the Astros, and drafted the best talent available in each of the first four rounds, only to find out that Drayton McLain was also playing by Selig's book, and wouldn't pony up to sign ANY of them. Hence, Purpura, whose specialty was player development (he drafted and brought up Berkman, Lidge, Ensberg, Everett, et. al.), lost an entire top shelf draft. And was fired.
If Bernie is going to call out DeWitt to draw a line in the sand, it should be here. Just say no to slotting. Say yes to paying market value for the talent you need, come draft time.
by taiko on Oct 1, 2007 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This also effects Luhnow
by taiko on Oct 1, 2007 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i had the impression
which is yet another reason why it would be stupid for the cards to buy a bunch of expensive talent this winter.
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Looking it up now...
They also failed to receive any compensatoin picks for their departing free agents (Clemens, Pettite, etc.), because none were offered arbitration.
Then, they failed to come to terms with both of their picks in the third and fourth rounds. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/5057770.html
Disastruous.
by taiko on Oct 1, 2007 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Richard Justice's take
http://blogs.chron.com/sportsjustice/archives/2007/08/are_the_astros.html
"The excessive draft spending did not please Commissioner Bud Selig, who delivered a stern lecture to the owners at their quarterly meeting Thursday. Some who attended the meeting had the impression that Selig believed the recommended bonuses for each slot of the first five rounds was a hard slotting system, akin to the N.B.A.'s.
It is not a fixed system, however, because the union wouldn't agree to it in the negotiations for the current collective bargaining agreement."
by taiko on Oct 1, 2007 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It seems apparent
I don't believe that the cardinals adherence to Selig's bonus recommendations can be held responsible for their draft picks. If that was the case would they have taken Russell as low as they did. Anybody could tell that Russell wouldn't sign for slot money, and obviously they took him knowing they would have to break Selig's recommendations.
Management had to realize the system was exploitable and they could have added several impact players with one draft, something their system lacks. However, rather than do that they reached on all of their early picks and took low ceiling picks. With as much credit the farm system gets, it's still in the lower half in talent and needs to supplement an aging roster sooner than later
by Some witty name on Oct 1, 2007 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the astros draft
Kevin Goldstein has a better recap but the Astros realy blundered this year specifically.
by azruavatar on Oct 1, 2007 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rockies?
stlfan
by stlfan on Oct 1, 2007 11:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Opening up dewallet
by cardsrul on Oct 1, 2007 11:32 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
An Attack of October Phillie-itis
Deja Vu Department: It wouldn't be October if we didn't read yet another account of how JASON MARQUIS IS IN DANGER OF BEING LEFT OFF THE POST SEASON ROSTER, because, you know, he's got this bothersome habit of pitching worse and worse as the campaign winds down.
by Urban Pawnee on Oct 1, 2007 11:44 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
just like jason marquis
the phils have a solid top 3 in the 'pen (myers, gordon, romero) and an ace in hamels with serviceable guys lohse, moyer, and kendrick to round out the rotation. the problem for that staff arises when the underbelly of their bullpen is exposed, i.e. mesa, alfonseca, geary, etc. you'll notice that sunday, despite moyer only pitching 5 1/3 innings, that none of these guys were used. with the off days in the playoffs, the phils might be able to get by relying on only their horses.
the rox look like the better team and could very well beat the phillies at their own game, but i can't see the padres doing it - pitching and a big park is nice, but chris young has struggled mightily down the stretch and peavy will only go once in the series thanks to the playoff. a pitching-heavy team going into citizens bank band box (which should be a HUGE home field advantage, judging by the atmosphere there sunday) doesn't seem to bode well.
by moboiler on Oct 1, 2007 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
PS
by Urban Pawnee on Oct 1, 2007 11:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Man, I can't get away with anything here!
Oscar Minaya? Must have been a futility infielder in the Twins organization back in the 70s.
by Urban Pawnee on Oct 1, 2007 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Mets
by player2bnamedl8r on Oct 1, 2007 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought the same thing
TSF
by TedSimmonsFan on Oct 1, 2007 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plus -
by Urban Pawnee on Oct 1, 2007 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Could we get him
If so, I'm all in.
by player2bnamedl8r on Oct 1, 2007 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think we could do a lot with Jose Reyes
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It will be interesting to see . . .
One question is will the "new ballpark" fans, paying the 3rd highest average ticket prices in the country, still come out to the ballpark in comparable numbers to recent seasons to essentially watch a stopgap 2008 team, and, if they don't, what effect will that have on ownerships' willingness to spend in 2009 and beyond?
by bailorg on Oct 1, 2007 11:51 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The stadium
by cardsrul on Oct 1, 2007 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm going to go out on a limb here
by stl tyler on Oct 1, 2007 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The leadoff man?
Do we need to consider Skip? He's got great outfield defense, great arm, and can play all 3 positions.
If we do, whom are our 3 regular outfielders? I assume we'd need to get rid of Duncan or Ankiel.
by sdrone on Oct 1, 2007 12:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
the concern about schumaker
i'm not trying to denigrate his achievements this year, but i wouldn't count on him replicating those numbers next season.
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
BABIP question
by cdb on Oct 1, 2007 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
empirically that's not true
BABIP is highly influenced by luck. if you have a high line-drive rate, then maybe the BABIP reflects a higher-than-usual degree of skill --- but schumaker's line-drive rate was 19.1 percent, which is about league average.
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
more on BABIP
http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/story/2006/1/17/92555/6441
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
skeptically sold....
I am a beleiver in numbers, and the numbers do support your point, so I am sold. However, I will remain optimistic that the number are lying - just this once.
by cdb on Oct 1, 2007 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ha
by liam on Oct 1, 2007 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'd rather classify this one
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But..
Just for fun, I checked Ichiro's BABIP, and it was in the .400s. Curtis Granderson's was .465. Barry Bonds' was .255.
by Valatan on Oct 1, 2007 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
btw, I'm not saying that Skip can sustain
by Valatan on Oct 1, 2007 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i've got granderson at .360 in BABIP this year
ichiro has a career BABIP of .357, and close to .400 this year.
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 6:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, there's another interesting stat today
by sdrone on Oct 1, 2007 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
THAT is VERY interesting..
by Mr Clean on Oct 1, 2007 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
True that
Skip's LD% is .191, so his Q&D expected BABIP would be .311...
by liam on Oct 1, 2007 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Skip
But I paid close attention to his pitch-by-pitch plate appearances during 2006 (didn't keep the data) and he seemed to strike out on a lot of full counts. He's got great hand-eye coordination—he can get the bat on the ball fine—but he doesn't seem to have good strike zone recognition. He doesn't walk enough, and he strikes out too much trying to walk—at least as a minor leaguer. Tony and Hal have been trying to get him to take aggressive at-bats.
I still think he's got it in him to develop into a Brian Giles-lite type, but at his age, he's going to need to figure out which pitches to take, which to foul off, and which to smite.
by liam on Oct 1, 2007 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder how his 2006 performance
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know, but his approach is getting results
The team would rather him swing the bat than draw a walk at this point in his career, and that's probably smart in the role he plays and the type of gap-power hitter he is. If he can establish himself as a dangerous hitter and get his confidence high, ideally he'll start walking more as a side effect.
by liam on Oct 1, 2007 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's very helpful
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He started hitting and getting on base...
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but the point is
my suspicion is that schumaker's results reflect luck more so than skill, and the clue is his unsustainably high BABIP. not even albert pujols gets a hit on 36 percent of his balls in play; his career BABIP is .320, and nobody hits it consistently harder than albert does.
if schumaker's BABIP falls to .320 or below, he's no longer a .330 hitter; he's a .290 hitter who doesn't walk or hit for power. ie, a decent 4th outfielder, but not a guy i want batting leadoff every day.
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I had similar discussions on this site
If we put Skip in the leadoff position, that's not set in stone. We can always remove him if it doesn't work. If his performance this year is based on skill and not luck, then we have a geat leadoff man.
So since we don't know with certainty whether its luck or skill (just as people didn't know that about Wainwright), what is the loss in determining that through performance? And we don't have other good options at this point if Eckstein leaves and if Ryan isn't an everyday player.
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Problem is, if you give a guy a trial
That's assuming that we get a SS and play Skip. If we play Ryan, there's a fallback too.
by sdrone on Oct 1, 2007 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
nycardfan, i remember that conversation
even when his stats looked awful, BABIP told us that he actually was pitching with a fair degree of skill and his stats would probably self-correct. the same is true, in reverse, with schumaker --- BABIP suggests that he was hitting with less skill than suggested by his batting average.
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The discussion
I don't think you (lboros) were involved in that discussion. So that example was not addressed to you.
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Luck vs. skill
I've seen your posts on here and they are articulate and well-thought out. But I can't help but notice that you are not a SABR fan.
BABIP is a legit metric, and Larry makes good use of it in his arguments. LD% is also very useful, although I wonder how many of Pujols' HR's are classified as line drives. Seems to me that half of his homers are laser shots. The numbers do show that Skippy McSingles has been quite lucky - and I trust those numbers more than I trust your gut.
by silent_bob on Oct 1, 2007 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I find SABR interesting and useful
In that way, it reminds me of the movie "Gattica" and how genetic determinism can lead to misguided conclusions about complex capabilities that develop in complex environments. I am concerned about a kind of "statistical determinism" that can block out opportunities of young players.
I am not going on "my gut" in saying that Skip should be given an extra look. That sounds as if I just like the guy and there is no evidence for his success. The evidence for his success this year are in his major league stats.
So I do find predictive numbers important and often right. But I also want to leave room for players who have performed well at the major league level to prove themselves.
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't see your post before I wrote
What if Duncan became a fourth or fifth outfielder and was used for pinch hitting? Because of Ankiel's arm, I'd rather focus on developing him as an everyday player in right field. We know what Duncan can do in the outfield and he has a rotten throwing arm. Ankiel could keep a lot of runners on first base who would otherwise get to second.
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Duncan is an Everyday Player
The Cards would have no business using Duncan as a 4th OF. If that is the case he should be dealt to the AL for a starting pitcher. We have enough OF depth with the development of Ludwick, Ankiel and The Cobbler that Duncan is expendable and valuable enough (with some prospects) to fetch a decent starter in return.
by Hungry Jack on Oct 1, 2007 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you make a good case
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reconciling Bernie
I don't have any idea how viable this would be, but something along the lines of trading Duncan for Pat the Bat and two or three prospects. Pat's owed $14M next year, then his contract runs out and he'll be a Type-A free agent right when our new crop of outfielders is expected to hit the scene. We'd essentially be trading several years of Duncan and $13,000,000 for one year of a right-handed version of Duncan and four or five prospects.
Duncan wouldn't be a defensive liability in Phillie, where he could practically touch the outfield fence while holding hands with Wes Helms.
Just a thought.
by liam on Oct 1, 2007 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pat the Bat is a very streaky hitter, and
by jillsinmo on Oct 1, 2007 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't realize...
Even if this isn't the right trade specifically, I like the idea of trading from a surplus to pick up a pricey, one-year rental veteran and restock the farm a bit.
by liam on Oct 1, 2007 9:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Skip
by chuckb on Oct 1, 2007 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Skip vs. Rollins as leadoff hitters
Rollins: 716 AB, 212 H, 49 BB, .296 avg, .344 OBP, .531 SLG
Skip compares favorably with Jimmy Rollins in certain categories. Rollins is an aggressive hitter, making his hit and walk ratios similar to Skips. In his limited experience in the big leagues, Skip has a better batting average and on base percentage than Rollins does (and this is probably even more accentuated if we look at the last half of the season when Skip seemed finally to adjust to being in the big leagues).
Power is an undeniable plus for Rollins, but we can get power further down the line. Our recent leadoff men have not had power. They've gotten on base consistently. And of course Skip is nowhere near as speedy as Rollins. But he's faster than Eckstein and is probably as fast or faster than most people on our team (except for Ryan). And besides Ryan, who on our team steals? So there's not much of a loss there.
I'm not saying Skip is close to Rollins in terms of talent. But he has a lot to offer.
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Skip = 4th/5th OF
Sorry, but putting Skip Schumaker and Jimmy Rollins in the same paragraph is like comparing Winston Churchill and George Bush.
by Hungry Jack on Oct 1, 2007 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I understand the sentiment in your last sentence
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wait a minute
And the fact that Rollins has power and speed and Skip doesn't is very relevant. Since Skip has neither, and doesn't walk (he would walk about 28 times given a full season of AB's), his OBP is almost completely driven by his BA. It was pointed out above that Skip's line drive % is about league average. Therefore, why should we think that Skip can get on base enough to justify hitting in the leadoff spot.
If we absolutely had to use Skip every day, he should bat in the 9 hole, not the 1 hole but the truth of the matter is that he doesn't offer enough offense to justify an every day position, particularly in the OF.
by chuckb on Oct 1, 2007 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right
One thing I'd like to know is, given our players, who would you put in the leadoff position? And why do you think they would perform better, looking at their major league stats compared to Skip's major league stats?
I guess a basic difference in our presuppositions in analyzing Skip's potential is that I think players can develop signficant skills in the major leagues, just as they develop in the minors. Because of that, I take advances in their major league stats as indicating serious possibilities (talents that will not necessarily fade). They might be transitory, but they also might point to lasting skills.
Let me go back to Jimmy Rollins again as an example. He looks like a different hitter in his earlier years in the majors compared to his post 2004 years.
Rollins' 2002 numbers are .245 avg/.306 obp/.380 slg
Rollins' 2003 numbers are .263/.320/.387
Rollins' 2004 numbers are .289/.348/.455
Rollins' 2005 numbers are .290/338/.431
Rollins' 2006 numbers are .277/.334/.478
Rollins' 2007 numbers are .296/.344/.531
Rollin's has clearly developed over a number of years in the major leagues as a hitter. In fact his early stats fall short of Skip's this year (.333/.358/.458).
Again, I'm not putting Skip into the same skill level as Rollins (not at all). But I also don't want to write off Skip as being just lucky this year and miss trying out a decent leadoff batter. As to speed, I'm not sure who is faster on our team besides Ryan. Ankiel will not be put into the number 1 spot (TLR has said this recently).
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yet more reason
A high walk rate projects out, NYCard...High BABIP doesn't.
by silent_bob on Oct 1, 2007 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not going to argue...
by cardzfanbub on Oct 1, 2007 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
You do realize that with this old and slow team, that statement means almost nothing, right? <grin>
Based upon nothing but my keen observational skills (cough), I would, at best, peg Skip's speed as somewhere roughly between a 6 and a 7 on a 10 point speed scale (e.g., slightly above average). But on this team, even being average makes someone seem like a speedster...
by Mr Clean on Oct 1, 2007 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
stuff
6th highest payroll & 3rd highest ticket price should equal at least 7th highest payroll. I am for spending money the right way. It takes a balance of spending on the right free agent and the right draft pick. There is a balance, you can't spend all your money on draft picks and you can't spend it all on FA.
TLR will play young players. The thing is he is not going to continue to play young players who do not produce! end of story, we are not the Florida Marlins organization. If you want to see 5 to 6 young guys playing go watch a Marlins game.
As posted earlier look at all the young guys TLR has played that stepped up and performed well.
Reyes has has plenty of chances. He just stunk it up. Ryan played 67 games which he showed some things. I personally view Ryan being a Ryan Theriot type player. Which means he will not be a difference maker offensively but he will be solid.
by ICbirdfan on Oct 1, 2007 12:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Skip is much better defensively
Given the fact that we don't have a natural leadoff man if/when Eckstein leaves, I wouldn't mind having Skip fill that position. He has been consistently getting on base with his .330 average, is fast, and could learn to steal (I'm assuming Ryan will not be an everyday player right now).
With this scenario, we would have to add an impact bat in the infield to make up for the loss of power in the outfield. Of course, this won't happen since there seems to be an unwritten law that power has to come from the outfield and leadoff men with high batting averages from the infield.
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Skip is much better defensively
by chuckb on Oct 1, 2007 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with your points that player development
TLR has talked about adding one impact bat and one or perhaps two pitchers (I doubt they have the resources now for two). That does not sound radical. I'm not sure why we couldn't make those changes to keep the team competitive, while we wait for players in AA and AAA to mature.
Our high draft (#13) pick next year will hopefully help our pitching situation, especially since there are a couple of promising local pitchers who will be high draft picks and could be cultivated given their MO connections. The Braves have been able to get numerous outstanding players by cultivating athletes from Georgia. This might be a good avenue to pursue.
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 12:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i have zilch optimism
by erik on Oct 1, 2007 2:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't quite agree with you
by stl tyler on Oct 1, 2007 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree that it
mostly, i was talking about 2008. 2009 could be better, at least i hope so.
by erik on Oct 1, 2007 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
just for a point of ref
and i'll have this at FR later and a lot of it could be subject to change, here is a quick spreadsheet i have of they system
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pso2_n7qLlVpw5AJotXLmEw
like i said, there are some decent prospects there, but in terms of impact a lot of them are aways away and have some question marks.
by erik on Oct 1, 2007 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and martinez
by erik on Oct 1, 2007 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ankiel
by StLHugo on Oct 1, 2007 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'm not a stone
by erik on Oct 1, 2007 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ding! Ding! Ding!
by jillsinmo on Oct 1, 2007 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Looking at the team more long term
Only 5 NL starters(Derek Lowe, Ian Snell, Matt Cain, Chris Young) to post a sub 4.00 ERA and have a below .550 winning percentage.
When you look back at who Wainwright was locked up with the list goes: Gorzelanny(x2), Zambrano(x2), Webb, Penny, Oswalt. 7 of his 32 starts went against the other teams ace. His record in those games was 1-5 with 1 ND.
This doesn't even include the games he went against Lowe, Lilly, etc.
The point of this is, those are games that Carpenter would have more than likely started. The games against the likes of Lilly and Lowe are what Wainwright SHOULD have been facing all season. As the teams #2 starter, he more than likely would have faired better in the win/loss column.
Now, who is to say that Carpenter doesn't have an awful season anyways and goes 0-7 in all those games. But I can't help but wonder what Wainwright's record could have been if not locked up against other team's aces? Would those games have made a difference in the standings? Would they have taken a burden off the rest of the pitching staff (Looper shifted down to #3, Wells to #4, Reyes/Thompson #5) and then given the team more of a chance to dump Reyes/Wells?
We can't really expect anything out of Carpenter/Mulder until August of next year if ever again. However, with further health problems aside, having Carpenter and Wainwright at the top of the roation will make a HUGE difference, in my mind, as to what this team can do in 2009 and forward. Having 2 'Aces' at the top makes the whole rotation look better. 5 game losing streaks don't happen.
by Hardcore Legend on Oct 1, 2007 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
by stl tyler on Oct 1, 2007 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
According to WPA
Anywho, here are the marks for the Redbird hurlers (starts only):
- Wainwright: 18-10 w/4 no decisions
- Looper: 15-11, 4 ND
- Wellemeyer: 4-4, 3 ND
- Piniero: 3-3, 4 ND
- Percival: 0-0, 1 ND
- Thompson: 5-6, 6 ND
- Wells: 5-15, 6 ND
- Reyes: 3-12, 5 ND
- Maroth: 1-6, 0 ND
- Keisler: 0-2, 1 ND
- Carpenter: 0-1, 0 ND
- Mulder: 0-3, 0 ND
So your estimate of 18 wins does sem to jive with his performances according to WPA. As for next year, I could see an additional 3 wins pulled from his losses this year (21-7 by WPA, 17-9 actual).
by Solanus on Oct 1, 2007 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And this goes along with the idea
It's the old argument, do you use your ace against their's or do you throw him against someone else for the more likely win.
Even if Carpenter was a .500 pitcher, I have to believe it would have improved this team by 4 wins or so.
by Hardcore Legend on Oct 1, 2007 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure Carpenter would have had a better
Against Oswalt: Waino allowed 1 ER
Against Penny: Waino allowed 2 ER in complete game (0 ER until 9th inning)
Against Webb: Waino allowed 2 ER
Against Zambrano (last game): Waino allowed 2 ER
Against Gorzelanny: Waino allowed 2 ER in one, 3 ER in the other
Also, in most of those pitching matchups, Wainwright outlasted the Ace from the other side.
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
by StLHugo on Oct 1, 2007 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its not the pitchers fault that our hitters failed
Kennedy's .572 ops
Miles .674 ops (414 ABs, 3rd most on team)
Rolen's .729
Edmonds .728
When you have a manager giving Miles that many at bats and 2 of your 4 big guns failing to fire. You are not going to score runs.
I said last offseason pitching wasn't our biggest need. Ok so the pitching failed, but the offsense failed also.
by DriverZn on Oct 1, 2007 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't say the offense wasn't to fault
by StLHugo on Oct 1, 2007 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, I did not realize
by MdRedbirdFreak on Oct 1, 2007 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hardball Times Article
by stl tyler on Oct 1, 2007 2:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Pitching triple crown
by StLHugo on Oct 1, 2007 3:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
My only concern with Peavy
by nycardfan on Oct 1, 2007 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
IP/G
that is from 217IP in 33G this season.
If you look over his game log though (http://mlb.mlb.com/stats/individual_player_gamebygamelog.jsp?c_id=mlb&playerID=408241&statTy pe=2)
it appears he has gone 7 innings in most starts but he has had his share of not so great games in 4.0, 5.0 and 5.1 IP games. I think a lot of this may have to do with the fact that the Padres have zilch offense so when you have a chance to pull the starter for a pinch hitter and you have Hoffman to back up your starter then you really have to go with that pinch hitter.
by StLHugo on Oct 1, 2007 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They also have a very good bullpen--they may have
by jillsinmo on Oct 1, 2007 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
To SparksofDementia
I've read your blog on occasion and the emotional ups-and-downs your Rockies have caused for you even exceed what most of us have dealt with watching the Cardinals this year.
I'll be watching the Play-in game tonight and hopefully see a still-surging Rockies team continue to do in October what they did in September. Good luck to you and yours.
by TheDuke32 on Oct 1, 2007 3:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Thank you very much
by Scarlet the Cardinal on Oct 1, 2007 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cardinal milestones
Pujols: 300 2Bs and 300 HRs (needs 2 and 18 respectively)
Rolen: 400 2Bs and 1000 Rs (needs 20 and 46)
Edmonds: 400 2Bs and 1200 Rs (needs 5 and 46)
Spiezio: 1000 H (needs 4)
Kennedy: 200 2Bs (needs 5)
Encarnacion: 50 3Bs (needs 4)
Isringhausen: 300 SVs (needs 19 would tie Sutter who is currently 21st overall, with a great year from the club he could pass Percival's current total of 324)
That is some fairly impressive feats it would be cool to see APs 300th HR and he could enter the top 100 list for HRs as well next season. I have enough reason right there to be excited for next season, now it is Walts turn to give me even more reasons.
by StLHugo on Oct 1, 2007 3:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
All first round games are on TBS
by sdrone on Oct 1, 2007 3:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What system do you have?
by Hardcore Legend on Oct 1, 2007 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting
by sdrone on Oct 1, 2007 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
all's not well how wells ends
"PITTSBURGH -- With three shutout innings in relief Sunday, Kip Wells got the victory but fell seven outs shy of triggering a $500,000 bonus. The one-year, $4 million contract the righthander signed with the Cardinals last November featured several incentives, including a half-million-dollar bonus for throwing 165 innings. Wells threw three innings Sunday, striking out four Pirates.
Wells was lifted for Braden Looper to start the fifth inning. Looper was lifted after allowing the tying run to reach base. Wells finished with 162 2?3 innings, a rising ERA for the fourth consecutive full season (stopping at 5.70) and a 7-17 record.
General manager Walt Jocketty fiercely rejected any inference that the Cardinals were counting innings.
"You saw what you saw," said Wells, a pending free agent, after the game. He declined to say anything else, acknowledging the irony in getting the win in the season finale.
"I think it's more than coincidental that I'm not throwing all that much in the last 12 days," Wells said. "But it's one of those you-make-your-bed, you-have-to-lie-in-it situations. You haven't pitched well, so you don't really deserve to throw." "
by thatsawinner on Oct 1, 2007 3:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Boo hoo
by stl tyler on Oct 1, 2007 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
source
by thatsawinner on Oct 1, 2007 4:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
About that pesky 100th run scored...
Far be it for me to criticize one of the best hitters out there, because, let's face it, if I take that stance in an argument -- I lose. But despite Albert's 100+ RBIs, he really wasn't raking 'em in when given the opportunity. In former years there was dissent because there wasn't a consistent OBP in front of Albert. This year, while it wasn't great, you could count on production when the right folk played (like Skippy, yesterday).
Listening to all those comments from Al and Dan, everytime Pujols was up yesterday, about needing one more run, one more walk, etc, I realized Albert has, seemingly, under-performed with runners on this year. And a couple of times I caught myself hoping Skip would actually get out, so Albert could lead off the next inning without a soul on base, so he COULD get that 100th run. Anyone else doing the same? But whether Albert was pushing too hard or was too hindered by his injuries, he just wasn't getting it done.
My other comment about the runs is that, if you take into account all the times he ran himself into outs on the basepath when safe running would have been the best strategy, it shouldn't have come down to the last day to try and get that 100th run scored. I guess what I'm doing is scolding one of the greatest players out there -- past or present. Again, not smart.
by TheDuke32 on Oct 1, 2007 4:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
it's really amazing
Anyway, with men on base this year albert's BA/OBP/SLG line was:
Men on: .312 .418 .510 (.928 OPS)
RISP: .331 .480 .556 (1.036 OPS)
2-out RISP: .265 .537 .529 (1.066 OPS)
Close/late: .403 .565 .790 (1.355 OPS)
Hell of an off-year ;)
by SleepyCA on Oct 1, 2007 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
2 out RISP
by BigMOman on Oct 1, 2007 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yup, that's right
by SleepyCA on Oct 1, 2007 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
math skills notwithstanding..
by BigMOman on Oct 1, 2007 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
*was not producing
by BigMOman on Oct 1, 2007 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
not to sound like a broken record here
I realize there's a "fundamentalist" camp that says it's never right to give away an out. I understand the reasoning behind sacrifice bunts, especially with the pitcher batting, but I don't understand sacrificing yourself on the basepaths to score a run unless it is the tying run or the run that breaks the tie, and if that's the case, it better be the 8th or 9th inning. Otherwise, you're giving away an out that could be used later to score another run (sac fly, for example).
Prince Albert did that sacrificing himself act during a Sunday game in July or August, don't remember which. I was watching it with my dad, who basically scolded me for scolding Albert, since it did the intended job of scoring the run. I just hate to see him give away outs like that. Doesn't who's batting next deserve a chance to bat with Albert on second?
My $0.02,
TSF
by TedSimmonsFan on Oct 1, 2007 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Albert thinks he is Lou Brock
by Hardcore Legend on Oct 1, 2007 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I admit it -- I am a horse's ass
Though it is nice to know that even when I think he's doing poorly he's still doing significantly better than most.
I am glad to see my other point -- about the baserunning -- appears to have merit. Albert, it's alright most of the time to stay at first on a throw home from the outfield. The run will probably score anyway and you getting hung up between first and second isn't going to change that a great deal either way. Let the boys behind you play some sacrifice-sacrifice if nothing else.
by TheDuke32 on Oct 1, 2007 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rookie of the year
http://www.stltoday.com/blogs/sports-bird-land/2007/10/quite-a-rook-brauny-or-tulo/
by StLHugo on Oct 1, 2007 4:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Another post from me today
Anyway, ESPN has their 2007 in review, for the most part I could give a rats ass about it but I loved some of their picks.
NL LVP: Michael Barrett
NL Cy Yuk: Kip Wells (honorable mention to Adam Eaton and Anthony Reyes)
Special interleague Cy Yuk: Mike Maroth
Mystery Pitcher Division: Aaron Miles
Mathematical impossibility division: Kiko Calero 2/3 IP, 1 H, 0 R, 0 ER, 0 BB, 0 K, 1 pitch (they explain it)
Find it all hear with fun commentary: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=3041066
by StLHugo on Oct 1, 2007 5:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Based on VORP...
NL anti-MVP: Adam Kennedy, SLN, -13.2 VORP, 306 PAs, .219/.282/.290
NL anti-Cy Young: Mike Maroth, SLN, -31.0 VORP, 38 IPs, 10.66 ERA, 2.32 WHIP (!!!)
Hell of a year.
by Alxfritz on Oct 1, 2007 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't understand what's wrong with BM's column
The Cardinals are raking in money, but not spending it. That was simply the gist of the column. I know BernieM is hated here, but he spoke the truth, IMHO.
There are two ways to get talented players. Either develop them or sign them as free agents. Both cost money. Dewitt doesn't want to seem to do either, passing up guys who would cost a lot to draft (Porcello) or wasting picks drafting them, and not signing them (Russell). That whole slot system blame game is a cop out, the Cardinals are just cheap.
by DiscoJer on Oct 1, 2007 5:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
which free-agents should the cards have spent
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In fairness to Bernie
by bailorg on Oct 1, 2007 6:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
nobody's against adding payroll
if they have a chance to add a high-priced talent, then payroll should not be an obstacle --- we all agree on that. but there are differing views about whether focusing on high-priced players is the best way to bring talent into the organization.
by lboros on Oct 1, 2007 6:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't buy for a minute...
In addition, the cash cost of servicing the debt used to finance the new stadium is significant. According to Forbes, the team has roughly $245M in debt (this is consistent with published reports about how the stadium was financed). A generous estimate of 6% interest yields roughly $15M in annual interest expense. Factor in principal payments on the debt and the DeWitt & Co are probably paying $25M in annual debt service. This is a conservative estimate, as money is no longer cheap like it was during the post-9/11 period.
by Hungry Jack on Oct 1, 2007 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Albert
I'm happy that his numbers were posted above. If you go to Baseball Prospectus, you will also see that he was 5th in the league in VORP.
However, what is most striking about Albert's season is how truly awful the Cardinal lineup above and behind him was. The team finished dead last in OPS for 4th and 5th place hitters. See Stl.Today-I forget--one of Goold, Strauss or Miklasz I think.
The fact that Albert, admittedly only 65% or 70% healthy much of the year could do what he did on one of the worst Cardinals' teams in 100 years is amazing. In that regard, this could have been his best year ever notwithstanding that statistically it was his worst or almost worst.
Thanks for affording the opportunity to defend the guy against criticism for running into outs. Just who was going to drive him in. If Albert had gone to the plate like Bonds this year, he would have walked 300 hundred times. That is why his start was so bad; I watched most of his at bats and he consistently swung at balls out of the strike zone. To think that had nothing to do with the collection of DFA's and broken down veterans that LaRussa insists upon having and using is simply burying your head in the sand.
Long live Albert. Long live the king.
by MortLA on Oct 1, 2007 6:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
