Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: The Record of Wrongs: Vanderbilt Commodores

Q+A with dyar miller

last month the cardinals named dyar miller, the pitching coach at memphis for the last 7 years, to replace mark riggins as the cardinals' minor-league pitching coordinator. that was hardly an insignificant move; riggins had held the post for 13 years. to put that into perspective, riggins was the pitching coordinator when matt morris got drafted . . . . . he was there a long time. riggins was offered miller's old job as the memphis pitching coach, but he opted to leave the organization (where he spent the last 29 years); a couple weeks ago the cubs named him their new minor-league coordinator.

miller worked under riggins as the assistant coordinator from 1997 through 2000 and has been a frequent guest here at VEB; see my first interview with him for a brief bio (as well as some comments about wainwright and haren that are kind of interesting to look back on). my thanks to the coach for taking the time to chat; best of luck to him in his new job.

How did the change in assignment come about? Was it something you were seeking? Where did the impetus come from?
Well, I don't know. I think Jeff [Luhnow] initiated it. He wanted to change a few things. He's been around for a couple of years and made some observations, and he wanted to make some changes. And I was open to it because, to be quite honest, I've been in Memphis for 7 years --- longest place I've ever been --- and I was ready for a change. Change is good. I've never officially been a pitching coordinator, but I was Riggie's assistant for 4 years, from '97 through 2000. I covered the lower levels. And at that time I thought we were doing some pretty good things. [Ankiel, Looper, and Bud Smith were among the pitchers in the system at that time.] And Jeff has brought in Brent Strom to help me out with some things, so I think that'll be great.

Brent Strom, the former San Diego pitcher, is going to be your assistant coordinator?
He's gonna be in charge of mechanics. Well, to be truthful, a lot of things are open now. We're gonna have some meetings here in the next couple of weeks, and we'll get some more stuff nailed down. But I've been with Brent to the Domincan already last week and we had a great time, we hit it off ok. He's got some great things going, and I think he'll be alright. I don't know if our roles are really set in stone yet or not. It's just something we've gotta sit down and talk over in the next couple of weeks.

Describe what a minor-league coordinator does on a day-to-day basis. What's a typical work day like?
First of all, it's a 367-day-a-year job. It's year-round. It slices up into different areas, different times of the year. Probably one of our busiest times is spring training. You coordinate the pitching every day. You meet with all your pitchers in the morning. All your pitching coaches have a daily schedule, you get your pitchers on a program. Getting everybody in shape for the season doesn't just happen. You do some instructing, but when you've got 90 pitchers running around you're really just trying to keep everything organized and get everybody in shape.

Once the season starts, it's actually a lot simpler. What you do is you rove around --- 5 days with one team, 5 days with another one, then come home for 3 or 4 days, and then go back out for another 10 days. We've got 9 minor-league teams, including the Domincan and Venezuelan rookie teams, so that'll keep me pretty busy. We've got a nice program going down in the Dominican. Jose Oquendo and I went down there in 2000; that's the last time I'd been. Things have improved immensely down there. They've got some nice arms down there, and the conditions are a lot better. Jeff's done a great job with that down there. We're gonna get some players out of that thing.

You mentioned that you'll do a little bit of hands-on instruction during spring training and ---
I'll do a little bit during spring training, but it can be a touchy issue. Instruction in spring training is a Catch 22. You've got guys trying to make teams. If you throw a lot of instruction at a guy, changing mechanics and so forth, and this guy's fighting to make a team and then he doesn't make it, it puts you in a bad light [in the player's mind]. When you're making changes with a guy, it usually takes a few weeks to show the benefits of it. It may take longer than that. You don't just correct it overnight. You might show him a new grip or something like that, but I don't think it's a good place to make major changes --- unless you've got a younger pitcher who knows where he's gonna be, he's gonna be on a certain team regardless. So instruction in spring training is a little bit different. We'll probably just hand-pick a few guys who we want to zero in on --- Brent will hammer those guys, I'll work with them a little bit. We want to make sure everybody's on the same page --- all the instructors, all the coaches. Basically what we want to do --- and I don't want to get too involved in it, because we're about to have all these meetings --- is work on mechanics at a little younger age. Stress that a little bit more when they first come into the organization. And perhaps --- I don't want to get out of line here, but focus on a certain type of mechanics in the draft a little more too. I might be speaking out of turn.

What's the type you'd like the team to focus on?
What we're gonna try to teach is natural mechanics --- classic mechanics where you're using your body properly. It's kind of like a kid when he first learns to play baseball --- his first throw is the purest one he'll ever make.

I'm not sure I know what "natural mechanics" refers to. Is there a pitcher out there who exemplifies what you're talking about?
It's about rotation, turning your hips, using your body to get behind the pitch. I concentrate on the core area of the body --- a lot of those good pitchers have big cores. The hips --- that's where a lot of your power comes from, your legs. We try to get them to use those properly, try to get guys moving down the hill, and rotating the hips and the shoulders correctly. That'll give you a little more power, and it'll keep you injury free. And hopefully it'll give you some better control. I like angles and planes as well. And I like deception, I think that's a big part of it --- you try to stay closed as long as you can. You try to release the ball as close to home plate as you can without sacrificing your power. Some people teach getting as quick as you can and rotating like a merry-go-round; we're not advocating that type of thing.

Who are a few pitchers who have the type of mechanics that you prefer?
Clemens is one. Schilling's got them.

So when I picture those guys, I think of pitchers who stay very compact in their delivery and then explode toward the plate at the last instant.
Now you're talking. That's what we're trying to do. And we're not trying to clone everyone. If we tried to teach that to Mark Worrell, we'd be peeing into the wind. And again that's where the draft comes in, and hopefully we can draft guys who fit this mold. But we've got some nice young arms in the lower levels from what I understand. That's what I'm gonna need to do is learn some of the players. Spring training's gonna be a learning experience for me. I'm just gonna be doing a lot of observation, getting to know some of these guys.

You've mentioned the draft a couple of times --- will you have a role in the draft? Will you see the scouting reports and the video, and have the chance to offer an opinion? Sure. Mark used to see the scouting reports, and I saw them and read them when I was his assistant. I was the first one to meet them after we signed them. I think Mark sat in on the draft last year. We've got video now, you know. Video's getting really big. Strommie uses it a lot, and Mark used it quite a bit. We get video of these guys, and we analyze that before that draft. I think video's very important. From a personal point of view, I never saw video of myself until later in my career, and I couldn't believe it. It was 1979 the first time that I saw it, and I'd been pitching for 11 years. I couldn't recognize those terrible mechanics that I had. It wasn't too pretty. But it got the job done.

And in terms of the draft, when you talk about drafting a certain type of pitcher --- are you referring at all to the 2-seam / 4-seam issue that's been talked about so much? Is it about drafting guys who throw the sinker or keep the ball down?
No. All I'm talking about is drafting athletic, preferably big guys with strong arms. You know, they don't have to have size but I prefer them if they're a little bit bigger. If you start from there, you can make some adjustments.

So it sounds like a prototype might be a pitcher like Mitch Boggs --- he's 6'5" or so, can get it into the mid-90s ---
Yeah. He throws good. I like him. I've seen him throw in spring training. He looks good.

Have you had a chance to watch PJ Walters, who does not necessarily fit that profile you're describing?
Haven't seen him.

What about Ottavino?
I like him. He throws it pretty good.

I wanted to ask you about a couple of guys you worked with at Memphis last year. One of them is Blake Hawksworth. He had that great year in 2006 and got off to a very good start last year; for the first couple of months he pitched very well. There was even some discussion of calling him up. And then it just kind of fell apart for him over the last 3 months. What did you observe in terms of the cause of that? Did his shoulder start to wear down? Did the league just catch up to him?
I think he was a little tender most of the year. What we did early is we got him to establish his fastball. And I think by the end of May he was about 6th or 7th in the league in ERA. [Through May 31 --- 10 starts, 57.1 innings --- Hawksworth had an ERA of 2.98.] He was throwing a lot of sinkers and getting quick outs, his pitch counts were low. And then I don't know if batters got onto him, but they started waiting him out; they stopped swinging at first pitches.

Was he getting beat on mistakes, or were they hitting his best stuff?
I think he started to get some pitches up, and maybe his pitch selection was a little off. They were looking for his sinker, and they hammered some of those. He pitched in some bad luck, too. He almost overanalyzes. He wants to be too fine, kind of like throwing darts. I tried to get him to just let the ball go. I just think he needs to get a little momentum going and not worry so much about being perfect. He's got a pretty decent curve, his changeup's one of his best pitches, and his fastball's getting a little better. It's starting to come back. There were a couple games toward the end of the year where it averaged 92, which is pretty good. My hope is that he'll be 100 percent healthy this year. He can pitch in the big leagues.

Really when you think about it, since he came back from his shoulder surgery he's had a year and two months of good pitching, and then 2 or 3 months where he struggled --- but that bad stretch knocked him completely off the radar. He never gets mentioned anymore as one of the team's better pitching prospects.
Sometimes it's better to be off the radar. He might surprise you.

The other guy I wanted to ask you about has been under the radar pretty much ever since he joined the organization, and that's Mike Parisi. I've read that he has some supporters within the organization. What's your opinion of him? Does he have enough weapons to pitch in the majors?
I'm one of his supporters. He's got 3 pitches that are average to above-average major-league pitches. His curveball's definitely an out pitch, his changeup is solid, and his fastball is average --- and I think it can get better. His command needs to get better with his fastball, his location. That's what we worked on most of the year. We made some mechanical adjustments on him, too.

What changes did you make?
Without getting too technical, he was one-sided --- he was only throwing to one side of the plate. Now he's getting the ball inside to lefties. His command of his fastball's not quite there yet, but he's made some great progress. He's just like Hawkie --- works hard and likes to compete. I'll tell you what, those two kids --- they were awesome about doing their work and paying attention to detail. They've got that makeup that you look for in big-league pitchers. They want to come to spring training and battle. I told them to go up there and battle for that #5 spot in the rotation. Of course, it's up to Tony and Dunc whether they make it or not. But they're hungry, and that's what we like to see.

Will you be involved in handing out assignments, as far as which guy begins the season at which level?
That'll be a group decision between Jeff and me and all the coaches. Dunc may get involved in some of that too. He should. It's important to have continuity from Tony and Dunc all the way on through. They're the top dogs; they gotta tell us what to do, in a way.

What's your opinion of the 8-man rotation that was used at Quad Cities last year?
It's ok. I think it's better at the lower levels. But here's what I'd like to see. I'm not saying we baby guys, but I'd like to see pitchers go through the 7th and 8th inning more often. When they get into trouble, leave them in there to fight through it. Because that's what they're gonna have to do in the big leagues. I'm more for that at double A and triple A --- let them fight through some of those jams. Let them throw 120 pitches a couple of times in a row. Let relief pitchers throw 2 or 3 innings at a time instead of 1 inning here and 1 inning there. That's something we need to talk about as an organization; I'm just giving my opinion. But it's a lot tougher to pitch in the big leagues, so you gotta be tough. Make pitching down here a little more like it's gonna be up in the big leagues; don't make it so easy on them. I know we're overprotective because we don't want to get them hurt, but I think if we straighten out their mechanics they can pitch better and more.

Baseball's changing. There's more emphasis on the minor leagues now, player development. We've gotta keep up with the times and be on the cutting edge on some things.

0 recs  |  Comment 116 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

wow.
That was a fantastic interview, Lb.  I'm really intrigued by a lot of this; I particularly find it interesting that the two pitchers Miller keyed in on as having good mechanics- Clemens and Schilling- are both of the old school, 'drop and drive' mode of delivery, whereas recently the preference for the organisation has been for the guys who stay taller and more passive in their deliveries, throwing on more of a downhill plane.  It's no coincidence that both of those pitchers are also high strikeout pitchers who have always elevated their fastballs effectively.  

Curiouser and curiouser.  

You bring home the turkey and I'll bring home the bacon.

by the red baron on Nov 19, 2007 9:19 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Great quote
I love this quote:
"Baseball's changing. There's more emphasis on the minor leagues now, player development. We've gotta keep up with the times and be on the cutting edge on some things."

Another superlative interview LB!

The St. Louis Cardinals- 11 time World Champions!

by Zubin on Nov 19, 2007 9:24 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Great Interview
Awesome interview lb. I think most casual observers concluded that Miller was being fired b/c of his opinions regarding one A. Reyes, when the organization changed his job title. The reality seems to be that his role w/ the organization is expanding and becoming more important. I really like Miller. He's certainly a straight shooter and I think his comments about organizational philosophy shed some light on the future direction of this organization.

by indakind on Nov 19, 2007 9:39 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

good stuff
like to hear that about parisi and hawksworth. hawk has dropped of my radar, so to speak due to his poor performance. but it sounds like the stuff is still mostly there, just overcoming the mental side. great info, stuff you wouldn't be able to know from stat pages.

by erik on Nov 19, 2007 9:55 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Excellent Interview
Really well done, LB. Thanks.

I found the comments on Hawksworth and Parisi very intriguing and encouraging. It is easy to forget that Hawksworth is only 1.5 seasons removed from major shoulder surgery. This is a huge year for him. Hopefully he can find "it" and be a contributor to the big club in 2009, or sooner.

Parisi sounds like a diamond in the rough. A good curve plus a decent change against a fastball that you can reliably spot is a great recipe for success.

by Hungry Jack on Nov 19, 2007 9:55 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Core Mechanic
Music to my ears.

I am a little concerned with him describing a "quick/merry-go-round" type of thing.  What he described in the first part of the answer about using the core is not in opposition to having a quick arm.  Basically what should happen is that the legs and core should be moving as quick as possible to build momentum with the shoulders staying closed as long as possible.  This basically loads yours abs and core with a lot of stored energy, like winding a spring up.  When the arm and shoulders finally start to move it uncoils the core and speeds up the arm.  Arm speed equals velocity.

That is a lot harder than it sounds and take a incredible athelete to pull off.  It typically is the reason that I think when you draft two-way type of players (Tommy Pham) the team needs to analyze the atheletic ability of the player. If they are off the charts atheletes, they should be pushed toward pitching...

by BigJawnMize on Nov 19, 2007 10:08 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Great Interview
That was a great interview.

I'm really glad to hear that Brent Strom is being brought in to help Dyar out. As I have said before, I think Dyar could use help on the analysis/mechanics side, and I know that Brent is a sharp guy who knows how to use technology well.

Also, I am big fan of focusing on throwing with the core and not just the arm. I have talked at length about the importance of hip/shoulder separation in my web site and have some great examples of guys like Tim Lincecum doing this...

- http://www.chrisoleary.com/projects/Baseball/Pitching/Examples/HipsRotatingBeforeShoulders.html

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 10:17 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Pain
I want to know your thought on what the abs do in the motion.  I tend to teach kids to stretch there abs when they separate the hand and gloves.  It trys to build a little tension in the muscles so they can feel them activate/squeeze when they drive towards home.  It is an attempt to develop a precusor to finishing with a flat back.  The problem I find is when they do this is that their shoulders rock behind what should be a verticle plane of the body and they start using more momentum and get a little slingy with there arms.

by BigJawnMize on Nov 19, 2007 10:41 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Abs
What I focus on is teaching pitchers to keep their shoulders closed while their hips open up underneath them into foot plant. One way to do this is to teach them to point the glove slightly up the 3B line.

By doing this you stretch the muscles of the core when enables them to powerfully pull the hips around (due to something called the Stretch-Shortening Cycle).

Some people try to achieve this by reverse-rotating the shoulders, but I don't like this because...

  1. It's not what pitchers like Maddux and Clemens do. They tend to break their hands back toward 2B.
  2. It will tend to lower the arm slot.

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 3:23 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Front arm
We are basically on the same page.  I hadn't thought about telling kids to point the glove up the third baseline.  I usually just tell them to keep the glove slightly behind the front shoulder.  They basically end up with the glove in the same position you described.  

I don't mind the idea of reverse rotating so much as long as the shoulders don't get ahead of the arm as they come around.  If the arm is laggin behind, that is a shoulder injury waiting to happen. Andy Benes comes to mind when I see this.  

by BigJawnMize on Nov 19, 2007 3:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Arm Lag
To a degree, EVERY pitcher's arm (and especially their upper arm) will lag behind their shoulders. The key variable is the height of the elbow relative to the level of the shoulders as the forearm passes through the vertical, high-cocked position. In most cases, the elbow above the level of the shoulders (ala Mark Prior) is bad and the elbow below the level of shoulders (ala Greg Maddux and Randy Johnson) is good.

See this piece about leading with the elbow...

- http://www.chrisoleary.com/projects/Baseball/Pitching/Examples/LeadingWithTheElbow.html

...and this piece about Scapular Loading...

- http://www.chrisoleary.com/projects/Baseball/Pitching/Examples/ScapularLoading.html

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 3:42 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Wrong term
What I don't want to see is the front shoulder opening.  I want the shoulders to be acting in unison.  I think that pitchers have a tendency when they reverse rotate to start there shoulder rotation with the glove leading and open up.

by BigJawnMize on Nov 19, 2007 4:20 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

What To Look For
A better thing to look for/way to think about this is...
  1. Whether the hips are rotating ahead of the shoulders. In the case of kids with weak arms, the problem is often that their shoulders are rotating ahead of their hips, which means they are throwing (pretty much) all arm.
  2. Assuming the hips are rotating ahead of the shoulders, the thing to measure is the degree to which this is happening. 30 degrees is decent, especially at the youth level. 90 degrees is exceptional (e.g. top 1%). 90 degrees for a RHP means the hips are completely open (belly button and belt buckle facing home plate) while the shoulders are still completely closed (e.g. facing 3B). I have seen it in Tim Lincecum, Nolan Ryan, Cliff Politte and just a few others.

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 5:22 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

No questions about Anthony Reyes?
Dyar seems to preach good, core mechanics. Yet, Anthony Reyes major flaw last year were that his mechanics were flat out terrible.  Some say it is a case of too many cooks.  Who knows.

But, I'd have been interested to see what Dyar had to say about it.  He was mostly responsible for bring Anthony along the last 3 years.  I wonder what he sees as 'what went wrong'?

"Well, you wait for a strike. Then you knock the shit out of it. - Musial to Flood on how to hit a curveball

by Hardcore Legend on Nov 19, 2007 11:04 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

i asked about anthony
and the answer was off the record.

miller did not say anything we haven't heard before. but he has already said too much on this subject and didn't want to be quoted.

by lboros on Nov 19, 2007 11:17 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Interesting
I find it very interesting that even though there are differing philosophies surrounding Reyes and Miller is wary of espousing his, he still was essentially promoted.

by indakind on Nov 19, 2007 11:22 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Reyes and Miller
I don't blame Miller (or Dunc) for Reyes' problems. There's only so much a PC can do.

Reyes' problems are much more fundamental and the root cause of the problem needs to be dealt with during the process of drafting pitchers.

I will say that the Cardinals do seem to be getting better at this. David Kopp was my favorite guy in the draft and I also liked Jess Todd. Mortensen also looks like a nice pick, although I didn't see him.

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 3:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

no offense,
but that's not sayin' much.  I think that we've heard 2 million reasons why he hasn't worked out.  Too bad he wouldn't give us an "inside" opinion of why Anthony hasn't succeeded.

by eglasier on Nov 19, 2007 12:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

like i said,
there was more to his answer. it was off the record.

by lboros on Nov 19, 2007 2:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Can you answer me this?
Did he convey that it will be a top priority this off-season to fix Anthony's mechanics?

I mean, I can't imagine there is anyone else in the organization that needs more attention to that matter than ole iron bill.

Of course, I guess you couldn't answer that if he said "Anthony's getting traded".

Hmmm...

"Well, you wait for a strike. Then you knock the shit out of it. - Musial to Flood on how to hit a curveball

by Hardcore Legend on Nov 19, 2007 2:13 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Reyes
I assume/hope this means the Cards are looking to trade Reyes with the hope of giving him a fresh start.

The more Dyar (and everyone) talks about Reyes' issues the more you drive down Reyes' perceived value.

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 3:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I was more wondering
about Miller's promotion considering his views on Reyes.  Is that a harbinger of changing ideas within the organization.  Based on some of what Miller says, "looking for big guys who throw hard", "not focusing on 2-seamer vs. 4-seamer stuff", maybe it is.

Another outstanding interview, LB -- maybe one of the best.  Miller sure seems to be high on a lot of the pitching we have in the minors -- that's good to see.  I'd sure like Hawksworth and/or Parisi to become major-league starters and he provides reason to think it might happen.

by chuckb on Nov 19, 2007 11:23 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Outstanding!
That was a great interview. I'm surprised nobody else has voiced any concern over the bit where he mentions letting minor league pitchers throw 120 pitches two starts in a row...I'm curious to hear what y'all think of that.

by matt reeder on Nov 19, 2007 11:30 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Not at all crazy about it
I'd rather see them pitch more frequently -- every 4 days rather than 5 -- than pitch when they're tired -- 120+ pitches.  And twice in a row?  It's a recipe for disaster, in my opinion -- and in the opinion of the available evidence.  I'd call that statement alarming.

The other thing that bothered me a little is that he seemed unsure about the problems Hawksworth had last year.  "I think" this.  "I don't know if batters got onto him."  Maybe I'm making too much of it; maybe he was kind of caught off-guard and was going strictly from memory but, as his pitching coach last year, I would have thought he'd be more certain about what Hawksworth's problems were.

by chuckb on Nov 19, 2007 12:00 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Counterpoint
There's a school of thought that pitchers nowadays are excessively coddled in the minor leagues and they arrive at the majors underconditioned for the rigors of throwing a full load of MLB quality pitches on turn, and that leads to more injuries, and more severe injuries, in the long run.

At the risk of taking liberties with Miller's words, it sounds like they're going to be implementing a system-wide emphasis on conditioning and mechanics, from draft to call-up. That's a good thing, even if they don't follow through with the 120 pitches in consecutive starts thing. If you make that as the goal, it might help to make the pitchers take their long-toss and other conditioning drills more seriously and may speed up the thrower-to-pitcher learning curve, as the pitchers will have to plan on going deeper into games—they'll need to work harder on preparation and getting quick outs.

That may be coupled with a de-emphasis of individual stats—another way of not coddling pitchers by leaving them in situations where they may struggle to succeed. If you ask a guy to take something off his fastball so he can go deeper, you can't hold back his advancement if he allows more hits as a consequence. I could see it working out if they preach it early and often to the pitchers and work hard to keep their spirits up when their stat lines don't look pretty.

by liam on Nov 19, 2007 12:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I like Dyar
and he seems to be a respectable coach but that quote made my stomach do a flip.  A bunch of young 20-somethings throwing 120 pitches is not a good idea.

by azruavatar on Nov 19, 2007 12:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

pitch count
Young pitchers need to throw more often.  I don't think the Cards will do something stupid but honestly pitchers need to throw more often to strengthen their arm.

The great ones pitched a lot in the minors.  I thnk teams should be looking at upping pitch count and innings in the minors.

by ICbirdfan on Nov 19, 2007 1:18 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes and no
Throwing more does strengthen the arm.  I teach high school kids mechanics and there are times when I have them trow over 200 pitches in a controlled setting.  The key here is that they are not throwing at max effort.  Pitching in a game setting involves a lot more max effort situations. These types of situations put a lot of stress on the arm.  It is a  lot different to throw 120 pitch complete game with 15 Ks because no one can touch your stuff than throwing 120 pitches through five because you are getting nailed.  

On a side note, many people point to the Braves as the example for throwing more.  They have two between start throwing sessions compared with one session that most teams have.  They try to control these sessions where the pitcher is tossing at about 80%.

by BigJawnMize on Nov 19, 2007 1:49 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The Braves
are an excellent example. As you point out, they throw more than most organizations' pitchers do. But they're not throwing when tired. They simply throw more often.

by chuckb on Nov 19, 2007 5:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Throw more -- yes
but not throw when tired. We now know that pitchers are more likely to get hurt when they throw when tired. Throwing more frequently isn't more likely to induce injury, but throwing more than 120 pitches repeatedly is. Therefore, having them throw every 4th day instead of every 5th is a good plan, it seems. Having them throw 120+ pitches w/ regularity isn't.

by chuckb on Nov 19, 2007 5:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

yeah
didn't like seeing that either. i like the idea of getting him in on the drafts, and taking bigger, stronger arm pitchers then taking some of these pitchers based on their college numbers. I think it's something they are doing now, to an extent. but it's certainly an area that could stand some improvement.

by erik on Nov 19, 2007 2:56 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

is it possible
that Coach Miller was trying to make a point about working harder and getting out of jams? Is it possible that is comment about 120 pitches was a exaggeration to emphasize this, and should not be taken literally?

by nybirdfan on Nov 19, 2007 10:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

120 Pitches?
While I generally agree with your concern, I don't think pitch counts are as powerful as people think they are.

The key variable is mechanics.

That's why different people respond differently to what PAP and PAP3 label as abuse (as is why I don't find PAP3 that compelling). Randy Johnson and Roger Clemens have been able to stand up to abuse due to their superior mechanics. Mark Prior and Kerry Wood did not due to their inferior mechanics.

That's why I don't buy the whole Butcher Baker thing.

Of course, if you abuse a pitcher with poor mechanics, you're only going to hasten his demise.

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 3:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

ESPN Reports
That the Angels traded Orlando Cabrera to the White Sox for Jon Garland.

by OCCardsFan on Nov 19, 2007 12:43 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Good deal for both teams
I'm not privy to who the Angels will replace Cabrera with, but the White Sox can move Uribe to 2B or 3B now.

by silent_bob on Nov 19, 2007 12:51 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Is that all Garland ended up costing?
The shortstop the Cardinals SHOULD have signed?
"Well, you wait for a strike. Then you knock the shit out of it. - Musial to Flood on how to hit a curveball

by Hardcore Legend on Nov 19, 2007 1:32 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

SS
Too bad STL did not have a SS to offer!

ECK, Barden, Ryan, Miles, Kennedy, Hoffpauir....

Those guys just did not sound quite as good as Orlando.

I think the sox may put Uribe at 2B or just trade him.  They signed him for a low amount and would not mind moving him.

by ICbirdfan on Nov 19, 2007 1:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Garland is vastly overrated.....
I'd rather have Orlando Cabrera. White Sox won that trade.
Miller sucks.

by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Nov 19, 2007 1:49 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh hell yeah....
AND?...the Angels sent MONEY along in the deal...wow...I'm guessing that Angel fans are going to be wondering if "Do nothing" Stoneman was such a bad GM afterall!

by Timbo02 on Nov 19, 2007 2:11 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Really?
Cabrera is a career .273 .321 .403 hitter (albeit with very good defense) projected by ZiPS for .274 .328 .364 which is fairly significantly below average for a SS.

Garland is an above average to well above average starter who has 200+ innings in 4 straight years (190+ in 6 straight).  The declining peripherals make you worry, but he'd have to significantly underperform what he's done the last 3 years to equal Cabrera.  

Cheeseburger in paradise.

by joker24 on Nov 19, 2007 2:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Pitching is worth more
and add to this that the angels have 4 players who can replace Cabrera at league min pricing in Izturis, Figgins, Aybar and Wood

by FunkeeC on Nov 19, 2007 2:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

all I can tell you....
Is I live in SoCal...and ALL my Angel fan friends are FREAKING OUT over this trade so far...Cabrera was a VERY popular player here..

by Timbo02 on Nov 19, 2007 2:39 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I too live in Orange County
so I do realize that he was popular. So is/was David Eckstein. Just cause people are freaking doesn't mean its a bad baseball move.

by FunkeeC on Nov 19, 2007 4:46 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Time will tell that...
not you or I my friend.... my opinion that the trade favors the White Sox at this point is just that....my opinion, nothing more.....you don't agree?...fine. But that sure as hell doesn't make your view of this the right one.

by Timbo02 on Nov 19, 2007 5:46 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes but
Cabrera is more easily replaceable by the Angels than Garland is by the Sox. And the Angels now really have a surplus of pitching to deal from. Cabrera's a solid ballplayer and I'm not a huge Garland fan, particularly w/ that price tag, but it does help the Angels. BTW, now that they have another SS, who's going to replace Garland in the Sox' rotation?

by chuckb on Nov 19, 2007 5:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

If Eckstein signs elsewhere,
all three of the SS from that 2004 FA class will have moved on. There's no reason to think it wouldn't have been different if the Cards had signed either Renteria or Cabrera. Hindsight is 20-20...

by cardsrul on Nov 19, 2007 3:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Since Cabrera and Renteria
both are still under contracts, so it could have been different.
"Well, you wait for a strike. Then you knock the shit out of it. - Musial to Flood on how to hit a curveball

by Hardcore Legend on Nov 19, 2007 3:32 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm guessing...
Brandon Wood will take over at SS for the Angels....or perhaps they have another move in mind?.

by Timbo02 on Nov 19, 2007 1:46 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

LOL....sure!!!!
After all he's only looking for " Julio Lugo type of money".....yikes!!!!  is he nuts?

by Timbo02 on Nov 19, 2007 1:56 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Only STL
only STL is stupid enough to bring back players who are in decline mode...... ala Adam Kennedy.

by ICbirdfan on Nov 19, 2007 3:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

...It is.
Yes, and will hopefully put an end to the "pitch to contact" threads that have eaten bandwidth here in the past. I never bought into that as a paradigm for the organization's pitching present or future.

"No. All I'm talking about is drafting athletic, preferably big guys with strong arms." "Natural mechanics etc..." "yada etc."

It all sounds good until we start talking about young pitchers throwing 120+ pitches and back to back games. Hopefully, thats just a way of exaggerating the fact that minor pitchers will be throwing more often to develope strength. Can see that pitching your way out of jams in the minors is the place to start, but not to the extremes Millers talking here.

Sounds like he has faith in the need for several fundamental changes in the orgs. future as well as in some of the kids we have now.

Great stuff on a major subject of interest...!!

Improve the Cardinals team spirit, integrity and positive public image...sign Bonds for 08'!

by cardschinmusic on Nov 20, 2007 5:46 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

angels could
play figgins at short and this cold make santana trade bait for cabera or rolen// ha ha

by cm1000 on Nov 19, 2007 1:58 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Lowell signs with RedSox
For Rolen-like money.  Not sure they got a good deal, but they can afford it.

Methinks that Rolen is staying.  What other teams need a 3rd basemen?

there is no secret weapon...there is only Oquendo.

by bukowski on Nov 19, 2007 2:53 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Who Needs a 3B?
Not saying these teams would be interested in Rolen, but some teams that might by shopping:

Dodgers - No more Nomar, Furcal for Rolen?
Twins - Punto doesn't cut it, now they to replace Hunter's bat
Angels - This lineup needs a bigger bat, Figgins might be expendable
Jays - some rumours about Glaus, but he's signed thru 2008 with a player option for 2009
White Sox - Some rumors of Fields going to LF, Crede is FA
Rangers - Blalock probably belongs at DH

by Hungry Jack on Nov 19, 2007 3:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

3 years, $37.5 M
when there was talk of 4 and 60? It's a great deal for the Red Sox. Will he be worth it? Who knows, but they managed to get their 3B for the 3 years they wanted, and pay considerably less than he would have received from another team.

by chuckb on Nov 19, 2007 5:44 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Dyar's Good and Bad
Just to be clear, I think that Dyar Miller is great when it comes to things like one's approach (e.g. what to throw when and where) and developing different pitches. I don't think he's as strong when it comes to mechanics, since he doesn't seem to use high speed video.

Of course, you could argue that that's a moot point because it's INCREDIBLY hard to change a guy's mechanics by the time he reaches the big leagues (and you may end up ruining him).

If you're worried about a guy's mechanics, you should have weeded him out during the draft process. That's what the team I'm working with is trying to do; to see if I can help them find the Greg Maddux's and stay away from the Mark Prior's.

Of course, this isn't foolproof. Every once in a while you'll come across a Kip Wells. A guy with solid mechanics and stuff who seems to have a problem with the yips.

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 3:30 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

high speed video
Sorry to bug you, just good to have someone to talk mechanics with.  

You might not want to answer this, but I was thinking that with the development of the pitch FX system at the major league level, teams would begin to be able to determine an actual break per speed ratio that would be considered plus stuff.  Even fastballs will have a certain movement per mph ratio that we would consider lively.

It seemed to me that if a team could obtain these ratios they could set up portable systems to measure actual pitch movement of amatuer pitchers.  It could be a more reliable way to identify which ones have major league ready pitches.  

Are ther any teams doing stuff like this.  I have an outline that has some of the equipment and software that would be needed identified.  I just haven't developed it because I had no idea who to send it to.

by BigJawnMize on Nov 19, 2007 3:58 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Great Thought, But No
This is a great thought, but it's not practical at the moment. So no, nobody's doing it right now.

First, I'm not totally confident in the accuracy of the Pitch/FX system. I have seen it give some good info and some crazy info.

Second, especially when you are scouting at the HS level, there's no way of getting a consistent vantage point. This might work in a college setting or in a try-out/showcase type setting, but even then I'd question the data.

Third, a critical factor isn't the AMOUNT of break, it's WHEN and WHERE the break occurs (and the orientation of the break). A good, plus Curve Ball (CB) will often break as much as a bad CB. The difference is that a good, plus CB breaks much LATER than does a bad CB. The later the break occurs, the harder it is for the hitter to react. In fact, in many cases a pitch with less, later break will be better (e.g. harder to hit) than a pitch with more, earlier break.

Now, all of that is theoretically measurable if you had the right vantage point, but the Pitch/FX system isn't up to the task. Basically, it's just a gimmick. Yes, a cool gimmick, but a gimmick nonetheless.

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 5:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Not really...
Assuming the same amount of total break, it's physically impossible for a 75 mph curveball to break earlier or later than another 75 mph curveball.  That's not how aerodynamics works.
Cheeseburger in paradise.

by joker24 on Nov 19, 2007 11:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Break
You're ignoring the issue of the spin rate (e.g. RPM), which is a very important variable.

by thepainguy on Nov 20, 2007 8:38 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

RPM
That's what causes the identical break length.  
Cheeseburger in paradise.

by joker24 on Nov 20, 2007 4:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Screw Pitch FX
I have been screwing around with this idea well before MLB debuted it.

You are right about late movement, but if it is accurately deployed everything you mentioned is measurable with just high speed photography.  Ballistic companies have been tracking thing much faster than a baseball for a large amount of time.

Second, isn't there a large portion of scouting that uses the showcase.  I am personally thinking that this would be deployable in a Latin America camp type environment.  If you could develop a large enough base of MLB pitchers throwing using the same system, just by using the players on ones own team, then you could compare the amateur talent to that.  Consistent vantage points are not necessary.  What is necessary is multiple view points synced correctly.

by BigJawnMize on Nov 20, 2007 6:34 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Tall and Fall vs. Drop and Drive
I kind of wish we would move past these terms because in my mind they don't really mean much.  There are good arm actions(ones that should prevent injuries) and there are bad arm actions(ones that cause injuries).  There are also powerful, efficient mechanics and weak, inefficient mechanics.  Generally the second in each classification come together (bad w/ weak).  Really if you look at all very good pitchers they do what are considered tall and fall things and they do drop and drive things.  That isn't the issue...the issue is do they have a clean arm action and do they have a powerful lower half that generates momentum and energy.  

Its my opinion that the best way to prevent arm injuries is through these two things.  Look at a guy like Mark Prior.  People claimed he had perfect mechanics while he was coming up...but by the time he hit the majors he was unaggressive with his legs, his arm circle was long and loopy, and he didn't finish his pitches.  No part of his delivery, no matter how pretty, was perfect.  

by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 19, 2007 3:38 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Terms
First, "Drive & Drop" is a better description of what most ML pitchers do. They push off the rubber to get their hips moving sideways toward home plate near the top of their leg lift. Their back foot is then PULLED off the rubber (rather than PUSHING off the rubber as "Drop & Drive" implies).

Second, as I have documented on my site, Mark Prior's mechanics DID NOT change from college to the pros. If you compare video of him pitching in 2003-2005 with video of him pitching in 2002 at USC, you will see the same thing. See...

- http://www.chrisoleary.com/projects/Baseball/Pitching/RethinkingPitching/Essays/MarkPriorPitchingMec hanics.html

Third, the guy who said Mark Prior's mechanics were perfect was a guy named Tom House. Tom House also happened to be Mark Prior's pitching coach and designed Mark Prior's mechanics. So Tom House is not exactly an impartial, objective observer. Will Carroll and Tom House also happen to be friends (they met during the writing of Will's book "Saving The Pitcher", which holds up Mark Prior as an example of perfection), so you have to take what Will says about Mark Prior with a grain of salt.

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 5:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

In these videos
Prior's arm action is longer, his arm slot is lower, and his finish is less aggressive.  And where did I say that I, as in ME, thought his mechanics were at any point good?  They were certainly better at USC, but the warning signs were there in college to anyone who bothered to look carefully.    

Prior Videos

Looking at these videos, which have been synched from leg lift, I can't see how you can possibly say that his mechanics weren't different from USC...And once again, not good at USC, just better.  He went from having C- mechs (due to the spot his foot lands and his painfully slow lower half, despite his tree trunk legs) to having D- mechanics.  Whether this was due to injury or coaching, I have no idea.  This guy was injury waiting to happen out of USC, and got even worse, not better.  

Looking at the last series of videos, the thing that I see immediately is his upper body by 07 is horribly weak.  He's not aggressive at all, and it looks like he pulls open too early.  His chest finishes high, not driving towards the plate, but just sort of spinning around for the ride.  That's a horrible position to finish in.  

The major difference between '01 Prior and the '04 Prior is his pace.  He's got himself beat by a couple frames in 01, with a later hand break and shorter, quicker arm circle.  In 04 he was getting long with a VERY early hand break.  In both, his arm action was still unnatural in that his back elbow is too high (something you point out rather eloquently on your site BTW, and something I'm in total agreement with you in that its a bad thing to be doing).  That would concern the hell out of me if I were looking at drafting a guy like Prior.  

I think basically you and I are both in agreement that he was not exactly good in the first place though.  My point is that somewhere along the line he went from a ticking bomb to a holy-shit-bring-in-the-bombsquad-and-pick-the-right-wire bomb.  
 

by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 19, 2007 6:09 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Prior
With respect to this clip...

- http://www.pitchingclips.com/clips/mark_prior2.gif

  1. I use a 2 to 8 scale when grading the pitchers I see. A Mark Prior clone is a 2. A Greg Maddux clone is an 8. Fortunately, of the guys I saw in the 2007 draft, I didn't give out any 2s or 3s, so the world might be getting better.
  2. The arm action is identical between the clips, which is the most important thing. The only difference is the pacing.
  3. Pacing isn't as important as some people (e.g. Carlos Gomez) say it is. What's more important is timing (the angle of the PAS forearm at the moment the shoulders start to turn), and Prior's timing has always been terrible. He's got a terrible problem with rushing, which is the root cause of his Labrum problems.
  4. When looking at the 2007 video, you have to keep in mind that this is a guy dealing with a serious shoulder problem, and he is probably compensating for things (which will make his mechanics even worse).
  5. Mark Prior was certainly taught to do what he does. Anthony Reyes was taught to do the same things (as was Ian Kennedy to a lesser degree). Tom House got the idea of the Inverted W from a guy named Paul Nyman.
  6. Many pitchers (e.g. Greg Maddux) keep their torsos more upright than people like Tom House advocate. You're trading off the height of the release point and the closeness of the release to the plate. The angle of the torso has nothing to do with one's velocity.

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 7:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Also
They also signed two pitchers (Dewon Brazelton and John Wasdin) to minor league deals.

Both are righties

by StLHugo on Nov 19, 2007 4:42 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Minor league reclamation projects??
The two pitchers - both former first rounders that haven't panned out.  More reclamation work in store for Cardinals system pitching coaches?  Can you teach a 35 year old pitcher new tricks?

by cdb on Nov 19, 2007 4:52 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Brazelton
Some of the commenters in the minor league ball "Case Study: Dewan Brazelton" post say some things that mesh pretty well with the things Miller says in the interview today that make it seem like this might be a really nice gamble.

Hark:

What I don't understand [is] ... the Rays kept messing with him. They changed his windup, they kept changing his secondary pitches (from curve, to slider, to cutter, back to curve).
...
Who knows if this is the reason he went downhill, but much was made of the roving pitching instructor making his delivery more fluid when he was in AA.  IMHO, that's part of what screwed him up.  His stuff was never really the same after that.
...
The Rays changed his mechanics after the his first exposure to the big leagues.  He fell apart, lost velocity and was sent to A ball.  When he got there, they let him go back to the mechanics he had in college, but he never regained his velocity.  I don't know where he is today, but as of 2006, he sat at 87-89 touching 92.  He hasn't hit 95 in years.

Then there's Dyar Miller's comment:
What we're gonna try to teach is natural mechanics—classic mechanics where you're using your body properly. It's kind of like a kid when he first learns to play baseball—his first throw is the purest one he'll ever make.

While it'd be nice if the coaches could teach him to re-learn his natural mechanics, it's hard to look at Brazelton—a can't-miss prospect with a hard fastball and a plus-plus changeup but lousy breaking pitches—and see a bit of the VeB equivalent of the filioque clause.

by liam on Nov 19, 2007 8:04 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

And two minor leaguers
One of whom tossed a perfect game in AAA some time ago. Interesting.

Superficially, I like the LaRue signing. But am curious about the terms. (I don't see the price listed anywhere yet.) I'd rather shore up our holes in the starting rotation first, so hopefully it's a cheap contract.

Still, this seems like a good move. He won't improve our batting average at catcher this season, but he might add some poop off the bench once a week and he's got a good arm (according to the St. Louis Press machine, anyway). Works for me.

I can't think of a good offseason signature.

by effin fisk on Nov 19, 2007 4:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Ewwww
that could make for a messy, stinky bench.
"Well, you wait for a strike. Then you knock the shit out of it. - Musial to Flood on how to hit a curveball

by Hardcore Legend on Nov 19, 2007 4:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Per Cardinals Site
We just signed Jason Larue as our backup catcher and Dewon Brazelton and John Wasdin to minor league deals.

I've gotta say, I'm actually a fan of these signings. You can do a lot worse than Larue for a back-up. The guy has a studly arm, and definitely has a better bat than what we're used to in terms of back-ups. No word on the money yet.

On with the youth movement!

by aet15 on Nov 19, 2007 4:41 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Wasdin is awful
Don't know why they even tried there.  
"Well, you wait for a strike. Then you knock the shit out of it. - Musial to Flood on how to hit a curveball

by Hardcore Legend on Nov 19, 2007 4:53 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

LaRue better bat?
I assume you think he can return to 2005-form?  Cause he's hit below .200 each of the last two years.  
"Well, you wait for a strike. Then you knock the shit out of it. - Musial to Flood on how to hit a curveball

by Hardcore Legend on Nov 19, 2007 4:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

His avg is crappy
But he might have a little pop left in that bat.

Why do I always get so optimistic during this part of the offseason every year? I guess I'm just starving for something new to happen after a week or so of silence on the Cardinals front.

I can't think of a good offseason signature.

by effin fisk on Nov 19, 2007 4:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

His contracts
2005 - $3 M
2006 - $3.9 M
2007 - $5.2 M

I really hope this FO didn't just spend $3M on a backup catcher.

"Well, you wait for a strike. Then you knock the shit out of it. - Musial to Flood on how to hit a curveball

by Hardcore Legend on Nov 19, 2007 4:59 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

1M
If it is more then 1M I would have rather had Bennett's option picked up.  I like LaRue as long as we didn't over spend for a backup.  Maybe he signed for a major discount in hopes that he could rehab his knee some if he isn't a starter.

by StLHugo on Nov 19, 2007 5:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

2006-2007, though
That was a two-year deal, some of which was paid by the Reds. Two bad, bad years, too.

If it's more than $2M or so, I'm really unimpressed.

If Yadi ever wants a gold glove, he's going to have to start 140+ games. Why the hell would you pay good money for a limp bat on the bench and maybe 20 or so starts?

Prove me wrong, LaRue.

At least the running game won't be night and day when Yadi sits.

by liam on Nov 19, 2007 5:14 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

33 years old
and he had knee surgery before 2006 season. not good for a catcher.  the two seasons since he's been pitiful with the bat.   any reason to hope for a bounce back?  

by birdsonthebat on Nov 19, 2007 5:04 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Pitiful
As opposed to Gary Bennett and Kelly Stinnett's overwhelming brilliance.  A backup catcher is there to catch 25 games or so a year and not be awful when he's in there (defensively anyway).  Bennett couldn't hit, outside of that Cubs series last year, and only threw out one or two guys all season.  If this dude can be quasiokay than its fine with me.  

by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 19, 2007 5:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

agreed
i like that he can actually throw out runners, but i really hope, like mentioned above, that we're not paying him much, because he only offers defense right now for 25+ games.  that was my point.  i wasn't trying to say a backup catcher should post his 2005 ~.800 ops.  he wouldn't be a backup if he did.

by birdsonthebat on Nov 19, 2007 5:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Ah
True, very true.  They probably did overpay the dude knowing the FO's habit of overpaying crappy players and underpaying (underoffering perhaps?) good ones.  

by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 19, 2007 5:44 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

actually
$850,000 is really not that bad. Same price as Bennett would've been.
On with the youth movement!

by aet15 on Nov 19, 2007 5:53 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Well,
I was comparing him to Bennett, so yes, I do believe that LaRue has more pop in his bat. Better average? Definitely not. Better pop? Yes.

Plus, I feel like contributing some of that .148 avg. to being on the Royals.

On with the youth movement!

by aet15 on Nov 19, 2007 5:52 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

ARod named MVP
I say good for him.  I hate to say this, but I really am hoping he can shut up those stupid ass New Yorkers who want to crucify him based on 55 random ass AB's over his career.  As great as Jose Alberto is, ARod is in another league.

As for his contract, well, it really isn't his fault that Tom Hicks is a doofus and offered him 10 years, 252 million buckaroos.  And now that he's had that kind of deal, what is he supposed to do, take a league-minimum deal?

Anyway...good for ARod.  I just can't figure how 2 people voted Mags first, even with his monster year.  ARod was the best player in the game by quite a bit this season.  

by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 19, 2007 5:48 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

A-Rod in "another league" than Pujols?
I don't buy that.  If you want to say he's better that's one thing.  Another league?  No.

by saladdays on Nov 19, 2007 6:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah ok
Thanks for reigning me in.  I got a wee carried away I suppose.  I guess it should be ARod and Albert's league!  After all, when these two guys have their best seasons their only competition is themselves, and I guess that one guy from the Giants who is ok (at least from 00-04).  

by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 19, 2007 6:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

he might be in another league
Say what you want about AP, but he is a team guy. I dont knwo about Arod but a guy that signs with a team that has Chan ho as your ace from a good seattle team doesnt seem like a team player...he might be im making my assumptions...AP(even though dubbed surly) tries to ignite his team(see overblown Glavine comments) and the fact hes played hurt several times because the team was "still in it"

Arod great player yes, MVP you bet, classy not sure..but they dont pay them for class but to hit the ball(in case thats mentioned). His boras stunt during the world series was low of low bad advice or not the guy can think for himself right?

my 2 cents

I can't believe i gave up a homerun to that punchinjudy hitter-major league 2

by punchinjudy on Nov 19, 2007 6:19 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

They offered him
252 MILLION dollars.  Can you honestly say that you'd pass up the largest contract ever to stay in another place for considerably less?  If the Yanks offer Pujols 310 million here in a few years and he takes it, is he a greedy, anti-team bastard too?  I think not.

That last paragraph makes no sense btw...

by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 19, 2007 7:45 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

blame him for taking it no
but it doesnt change the fact that winning is not his top priotity..I know with most guys its not. My last paragraph was stating what i thought people would argue, that they dont pay them to be nice but to play well etc...

It's a good discussion, and heres another question when AP signed his deal, could he have gotten more elswhere?

I can't believe i gave up a homerun to that punchinjudy hitter-major league 2

by punchinjudy on Nov 19, 2007 8:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Another League?
He sure is in another league, the American League

<cymbal crash>

Seriously though they are very similar at the same ages, two of the best to ever play imo.

by StLHugo on Nov 19, 2007 6:22 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

there is a
ba da dump da befor the cymbals no?
I can't believe i gave up a homerun to that punchinjudy hitter-major league 2

by punchinjudy on Nov 19, 2007 6:37 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Pujols is a much
better player than Arod. This nonsense has to stop. And on a Cardinals site, no less.

by plh903 on Nov 19, 2007 6:44 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

How do you figure that?
A-Rod plays a tougher defensive position and is capable of playing shortstop, which he would if not for the Yankees/ Jeter's ego, IMHO.  A-Rod plays in a tougher league/ division and has posted and average OPS+ of 161 (177, 134 and 173) over the past three years.

Albert is the best 1st baseman in the league, no doubt, but his injuries/ cronic pains (no disrespect intended) limit him to basically 1st base.  Albert has posted an average OPS+ of 167 in the past three years (157, 178, 168).

Given A-Rod's defensive versitility I'd give him an edge.  Then again one could argue Pujol's age (27 vs. 31 for A-Rod) and his defensive prowess at first more than offset this.

In short, I could go either way on this arguement, but I can't see either is "much better" than the other.  

The St. Louis Cardinals- 11 time World Champions!

by Zubin on Nov 19, 2007 10:45 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

A-Rod + Postseason =
Crap...

The guy is fantastic for 150 games a year but if you can't get it done in the postseason what is the point?

by FutureMan on Nov 19, 2007 7:39 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Wow...
So let me guess, the Yankees would be better off with Scott Brosius than ARod, because Brosius got it done in the playoffs one time, right?

During the 2004 postseason ARod had a 1.014 OPS and hit 3 home runs.  They probably wouldn't have gotten up 3-0 on the Red Sox in the first place without him.  

05 and 06 were awful for him, obviously, but it was a whopping 29, as in TWO NINE, at-bats between the two series.  And for the record, he did a better job not-getting-out than Cpt. Clutch in 05 (435 OBP in 15 AB).  

This was a pretty mediocre postseason too...but he outhit Cpt. Clutch this time around.  

BTW...Albert Pujols's BA in the 06 WS was a whopping .200.  In the 02 Playoffs his OPS was only 880...Hardly Albert Pujols territory.  

God I can't believe I'm defending ARod...But the sample sizes of the playoffs are so damn small that to say he CAN'T get it done in the playoffs is a factually incorrect statement, considering the guy has had both success and failure in the playoffs in randomly selected series...Just like Albert Pujols.  Once again...I'm throwing up in my mouth right now defending a freaking Yankee.  Ooo...I had rice soup for lunch...gross.  

by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 19, 2007 7:59 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

dyar miller
I thougth the most interesting thing was looking at a couple Q & A's back in 2005.

Basically what was said about Reyes back then really showed up this year.

  1. he worked up in the zone way too much
  2. he seems to get under the ball.
I thought it was very interesting when he was saying Wainer was ahead of Reyes for these reasons.
  1. more inning in the minors
  2. knows how to pitch
  3. mentally tougher
  4. battles
  5. works down in the zone better
I did not know Reyes had arm problems back in 05.  I thought this year was the first incident.

I think obviously when players get to AA ball they all have the talent to pitch at the MLB level.  It's not like pitcher have better stuff in the majors.  I think the key is learning how to pitch, and I don't know if Anthony is ever going to learn how to pitch.  He has talent but he seems to be missing some things that make guys MLB caliber pitchers.

by ICbirdfan on Nov 19, 2007 8:38 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Reyes
I think Reyes is dealing with a worsening shoulder problem and his elbow is starting to loosen up. That may explain his relatively recent decline (e.g. control problems) and why he isn't able to do what he used to be able to do.

We need to dump him before Spring Training.

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 8:42 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

agree
I agree with you.  He has has plenty of opportunity and just has not shown to be consistent at all.  Some people will point to..
  1. WS game 1 start
  2. one hitter vs. white sox
Well as someone else said Bud Smith threw a no hitter and pitched another good game.  

Reyes may be injured and just has not shown the upside everyone has envisioned.  It may be time to trade him and get something good in return.  The problem is with all the times the Cards marched him out to the mound he lost a lot of vale as a lot of MLB people saw how poorly he preformed.  STL may have lost a chance to get a good trade.

by ICbirdfan on Nov 19, 2007 8:51 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree
we should try to trade him, but is he seriously hurt?

 In 38 innings in AAA he pitched far superior then his 100 inning with the big club. Is it more a mental thing with him rather than physical?

by nybirdfan on Nov 19, 2007 11:54 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Pujols vs. Rodriguez
Well, the mode comp for Pujols (by age) on Baseball Reference is Joe Dimaggio. The mode comp for Rodriguez is Ken Griffey, though MIckey Mantle is second. IIRC, Jimmy Foxx is listed once for both.

by Red in Chicago on Nov 19, 2007 8:58 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Parsing Words
I had a chance to read the interview in depth and came across some additional details, most of which are good (and encouraging).

"And perhaps --- I don't want to get out of line here, but focus on a certain type of mechanics in the draft a little more too. I might be speaking out of turn."

This is good. It's a recognition that there's only so much you can do to fix a guy's mechanics at the big league level. This suggests that they've learned their lesson with Reyes.

"What we're gonna try to teach is natural mechanics --- classic mechanics where you're using your body properly. It's kind of like a kid when he first learns to play baseball --- his first throw is the purest one he'll ever make."

This is an excellent point.

I have had the same thought. More often than not, a guy's default mechanics are usually pretty good. Often, it's their youth or HS pitching coaches who screw them up. That's why often the best pitchers are converted OFers.

They are un-fooled-around-with.

"Some people teach getting as quick as you can and rotating like a merry-go-round; we're not advocating that type of thing."

This is a dig at Paul Nyman. I'm glad they aren't going in this direction.

by thepainguy on Nov 19, 2007 9:36 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

The one thing I noticed
is he mentioned that Parisi and Hawksworth will be competing for the 5th spot at this ST.

"They want to come to spring training and battle. I told them to go up there and battle for that #5 spot in the rotation. Of course, it's up to Tony and Dunc whether they make it or not. But they're hungry, and that's what we like to see."

The word that Mulder will be throwing after the first of the year, and be ready for ST does that mean we are looking at roataion something like this?

Mulder
Wainman
Pinhead
Loopy
Hawk/Parisi

No trade or FA signing? If we can move Reyes he gets traded for a minor leaguer?

by nybirdfan on Nov 20, 2007 12:10 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

I don't
think that necessarily means that they won't sign anyone.  They might sign someone - but who is good enough that you pencil in?  Silva is supposedly the best - but Carlos Silva isn't even that good.  Lohse isn't that good.  If the Cards bring someone in it is to compete for a spot against whoever they have on the team.  

I wish Carp was going to be ready at the start of the season.  Carp and Wainwright up top is formidable.  

by Toddius396 on Nov 20, 2007 1:10 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Itd be foolish
to count on mulder for the start of the year. I would think they'll still pick someone up and if mulder works out, they'll have an insurance policy at the start of the season and the type of problem you want to have when it gets close to the trading deadline (6+ pitchers - 2 of which can be turned into half-season rentals for prospects and 1 that'll have 1.5 seaons).

by Birds on the Matt on Nov 20, 2007 9:41 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah
I wasn't counting on Mulder until I read that he could be ready by ST. Up until then I had Welley starting in Mulder's spot until June.

 Now that there is talk of picking up Elbert in a Rolen trade I would expect he would be looked at for that 5th spot as well.

 If the medical report on Mulder is a no bullshit assessment then I wouldn't buy another pitcher. Not at this market rate.

by nybirdfan on Nov 20, 2007 10:51 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the Internet's #1 St. Louis Cardinals blog.
Start posting about the Cardinals »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Img_0981_small
Put Some Hot Sauce On My Burrito (It's OT, Yadi2.)
God_small
Albertofstan fact sheet
Gawstab_small
Offensive Ability Rating Rankings for 2009
Royconrad_fullthrottle_small
25 players : 25 seasons, 1910-1934

Recent FanPosts

4849_buschstadium_small
My Hall of Fame Induction Speech
Mightymouse_small
Schumaker Gets New Contract
39135485-59af19dbb26654095f910f34176af094_4ae8a81e-scaled_small
Predictions Group
The_i
VEB Day 2010 v2.0
Small
Spring Training Split Squad?
Cardwash_small
Chris Duncan signs minor league contract with Nats, also a great pic of him

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Jack_benny_small DanUpBaby

Editors

Bender1_small azruavatar

Le-samourai_small the red baron

Adam1_small chuckb