the question to the answer

by lboros on Jun 18, 2007 9:30 AM EDT in News Comment 193 comments

carpenter threw off a mound. film at 11.

re yesterday's game, we now know for sure that the offense is fully repaired: it produced runs even with anthony reyes on the mound. in their first 33 games (ie, through may 11), the cardinals were dead last in the nl in runs scored (105); in the 33 games since, they rank 1st in the league (181).

yesterday, for the first time all season, they scored enough runs to get reyes off the hook for a loss. the kid surely didn't win over any skeptics with his performance. indeed, the argument over him remains as unsettled as --- well, as unsettled as a young major-league pitcher. those who never saw anything all that special about him will look at the loud line score and the high pitch count and remain unimpressed; those of us who still believe he has potential will point to the four scoreless innings and say he held 'em close, gave the cards a chance to get back into the game.

in my opinion, the never-ending debate about him is really just a proxy debate about the future of the organization. as a general rule (and i realize there are individual exceptions here), those of us who urge patience with reyes tend to think that players like him --- young, cheap, and homegrown --- represent the key to the cardinals' future and therefore are too valuable to give up on. and those who are ready to give up on him tend to believe (again, generalizing very liberally) that the cards should just stick with formula that produced 6 division winners in 7 years: bring in competent veterans who know how to play the game and let tony and dave get the most out of 'em. the argument over reyes could also be construed as a proxy for the luhnow v jocketty argument (which rages daily on the p-d boards and the talk-radio airwaves), which in turn is a proxy for the ever-popular stathead v seamhead dispute. for those of us who place a certain amount of credence in stats, reyes' minor-league numbers are too good to ignore --- they bear too many hallmarks of eventual major-league success. so we have faith that he'll eventually get it figured out and become a decent pitcher; we interpret his current problems as a mere learning phase. those who don't buy into the stathead perspective just see another pitcher who isn't performing and is no more likely to turn it around than anybody else.

reyes may or may not be a cardinal for the long haul; he might stick, he might get traded, he might pitch himself out of the big leagues. but even after his fate is settled, the argument over him won't be; it'll just shift to another point of focus, to jaime garcia or adam ottavino or eddie degerman.

one might even relate the argument over reyes to the argument over the ownership --- ie, are they cheap or merely prudent? that subject came up again over the weekend in bernie's sunday column about the dynamics of the cardinal clubhouse:

The players see what's going on: Here's a franchise that won the World Series, draws more than 3 million fans a summer and pulls in piles of cash on sales of merchandise and anything else that can be bartered to the Redbirds-loving public -- and the best rotation it comes up with is Wells, Todd Wellemeyer and converted relievers?

this debate, too, seemingly will never be settled. i still haven't been shown any convincing evidence that the cardinals would be significantly better off if they'd just thrown more money at a free-agent pitcher. jason schmidt is 1-4 with a 6.31 era and has made only 6 starts all year (and only 1 longer than 5 innings). he's owed $34m over the next two seasons; the cardinals will find a better use for that money. jeff suppan gave up 9 runs in 4 and 2/3 innings yesterday, ballooning his 2007 era to 4.69. since throwing a complete game vs the cardinals the day after josh hancock died, supps has a 6.37 era in 9 starts; only 1 quality start in that span, and just 6 q.s. in 15 outings for the season. compare his stats to looper's:

	w-l	era	whip	q.s.
suppan	7-7	4.69	1.458	6
looper	6-6	4.66	1.410	9

supps hasn't been a whit better than looper, but he puts a much bigger dent in the payroll; rather than paying him $30m over the next 3 seasons, the cardinals will have that sum to put toward a player who's actually good. check out the stats of vicente padilla (3-8, 6.57), adam eaton (7-4, 5.33), miguel batista (7-5, 5.10), jeff weaver (0-6, 10.97) --- where is this difference-maker who could have turned the season around, if not for the owners' penurious ways? the cards' $1m rent-a-wreck, ryan franklin, could provide the same innings and the same results as those guys. the option's there, waiting. . . .

when the owners fail to shell out the bucks for a real difference-maker, then i'll join the chorus of criticism. i did just that when they failed to pony up for a.j. burnett, because i thought burnett was such a player (that question is as unsettled as the one about reyes; burnett is 15-14 with a 3.99 era a year and a half into the five-year deal). but refusing to overpay for so-so players isn't cheap; it's smart. . . . .

. . . . blah, blah, blah. these debates will not end soon, i'm afraid.

0 recs | Comment 193 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Reyes Being Scouted?

The P-Dispatch mentioned that Reyes pitched "with about a dozen scouts looking on".

This sure makes it sound like the Cardinals are shopping him around.

So says, The Dude

by Titus Pullo on Jun 18, 2007 9:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

sigh

i hope not, if only because they're selling low given his recent struggles.

by azruavatar on Jun 18, 2007 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Would you be willing to give up

Reyes for Buehrle? Obviously, not 'straight up' however as part of a package that doesn't include Rasmus?

I think Reyes is the centerpiece to the Cardinals getting a starting pitcher, more than likely Buehrle as his team is about a week away from folding up camp.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

no and here's why

Reyes is cheap. and if we are being honest with ourselves the Cardinals don't have a very good team this year. I'd rather keep Reyes at bargain basement prices and see if he can straighten things out that watch us mortgage the future for a pitcher that we have a good shot at signing offseason anyway. I'm still concerned about Buerhle as an injury risk after last year too (although he seems to have rebounded).

Getting back Carpenter will be a big step in 'righting' this team (as much as that is possible) but I'm just not willing to trade off what was considered, as recently as last year, top farm talent.

by azruavatar on Jun 18, 2007 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not straight up

While I'm skeptical that Reyes will ever become a frontline pitcher under Dave Duncan, I wouldn't give up 5 cheap years of even a back-of-the-rotation starter for an impending free agent this season. '07 is a lost season for us. Even if we do somehow manage an 81-81 record and a division title by playing as well from here on out as we did in our better years (Itself an enormous longshot), I really don't think heading into the postseason with maybe a 3-5% chance at winning a World Series is worth it.

We want Buehrle because he has given us reason to think he wants to come here. If he isn't willing to hold off on an extension and hit the free agent market to talk with us, clearly he doesn't want to come here as much as people believe.

by cpebbles on Jun 18, 2007 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The easiest way to get him

to sign here is to trade for him and sign an extension:

See Mark McGwire, Jim Edmonds, Scott Rolen, etc.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm well aware

The appeal of Buehrle is that he already wants to come to this team. Giving up talent just to get him here two months early makes no sense once you accept that the Cardinals are not contenders in 2007. If he isn't willing to pitch the remainder of the season without a contract extension in order to get a chance to come here, he likely isn't willing to take a significantly below-market contract either.

by cpebbles on Jun 18, 2007 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think it is more to do with 'getting him here'

it gives the Cardinals a bit more leverage in signing him. For starters, he would get them a supplemental pick in the 1st round if he left.

Second, there is more pressure on Buerhle to sign the extension before the season is over rather than being allowed the excuse in the off-season that the Cardinals 'never made a competitive offer'.

Being here and then leaving does serious damage to a players claim that 'they never showed me the money, I really wanted to play there.'

It forces Buehrle's hand.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

any idea

what teams were looking at him?

by nybirdfan on Jun 18, 2007 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

while i'm encouraged by the recent

offensive outbursts, rolen and edmonds still both are slugging under .400.

Future Redbirds

by erik on Jun 18, 2007 9:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I saw the game yesterday...

and Reyes was not comfortable on the mound. It was more a mental think, ha was not comfortable even before throwing the first pitch, regardless of number of seams and location. Really from the second inning, he pitched using wisely what was funcioning, a totally different mental approach.

Befor this start, It was not clear to me what exactly Duncan wanted from Reyes, now it's much more clear: be confindent in what is working, be smart and try to minimize damage. If Anthony has learnt the lesson, I wouldn'e exclude a positive streak of starts coming.

GO CARDS!!

by SuperSeve on Jun 18, 2007 9:41 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

what reyes learned

>>Befor this start, It was not clear to me what exactly Duncan wanted from Reyes, now it's much more clear: be confindent in what is working, be smart and try to minimize damage. If Anthony has learnt the lesson, I wouldn'e exclude a positive streak of starts coming.<<

My take (admittedly I'm anti-Dunc when it comes to Reyes) is that Duncan got inside Anthony's head and rattled him before the start. Whatever game plan Dunc had laid out, Reyes threw away after the first inning and went back to what was working for him in Memphis: his 4 seamer down in the zone plus the changeup. The key was getting the change over for strikes. Once men were on base, I saw he threw some 2 seamers (probably at the insistence of Dunc with hope to get a groundball DP).

The truth is probably somewhere between our two perspectives.

by jjray on Jun 18, 2007 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm for the benefit of doubt...

... but this 2 vs 4 seamer talk was, IMHO, a lot of noise respect to what really is going between Duncan & Reyes. Looking to Anthony's AAA stats from his last brief stint, he had roughly 1:1 FO:GO ratio, a sign that he can get the flyouts with his signature pitching (high heater + changeup), but that when needed, he can induce a ground ball (2 seamer or curve). I am really confident that this is the way Duncan wants him to pitch, but for some mysterious reaon (maybe Duncan's wrong approach), sometimes Anthony deviates from this, and things can only go bad. To me, it seems that they are not that far now, I hope the fine tuning will not take too long, and that Anthony could enjoy a very successfull 2-nd half.

GO CARDS!!!

by SuperSeve on Jun 18, 2007 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

True

None of the pitchers you mentioned would have made the Cards better this year and most were expensive. But I'm glad they passed on Burnett. I don't think the results he has produced (w/ the Jays) warrant the salary (and years) he was given. But as crazy as the market for starting pitching was last off-season and may be this year, A.J. may turn out to be a great bargain.

by cardsgirl95 on Jun 18, 2007 9:44 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

the thing that is most encouraging

lately, is that the offense has been attacking some decent starters lately. It seems like they have faced quite a few guys lately with really low ERA's in the few starts prior, not to metion some of them lefties, and have jumped on them early. Even in the haydays of 04 and 05 it seemed like when they would face a really hot pitcher, they would get blanked for a while, grind it out until they got into the bullpen, and scratch out a win. It could just be hot streak and with the Cardinals starters in turmoil, it doesn't really translate, but if they could just settle down a little bit and start pitching just average, they could get something going.

Hope springs eternal I guess

"The good Lord was good to me. He gave me a strong body, a good right arm, and a weak mind." -Dizzy Dean

by vince eating tarp on Jun 18, 2007 9:48 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Pitching returns

I read the update on Carpenter today but has there been any word on Mulder's status? I didn't realize that we are #1 in offense the past 33 games, that stat really snuck up on me. My point being, with the return of our top two, this is a completely different team. I keep telling myself sell, sell, sell but in this division (and with us swinging the bats) I don't see how we could ever fall all the way out of this race. and to lboros, you really know how to make me feel better about our offseason posting those starters' numbers like that. Thanks.

I wasn't a religious man before but Albert Pujols confirms the truth that is Jesus H. Christ of Nazareth.

by 636thestruggle on Jun 18, 2007 10:03 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Terrible outing...

but LaRussa seems positive and Reyes showed a little humility and contrition. I suppose they finally understand they're all stuck with one another, so might as well play nice. It's a step...

by guayzimi on Jun 18, 2007 10:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Gamble on Pitching, Pay for Hitting

I think I remember this discussion here last year (or at least the off-season), in that you spend your long-term dollars on hitting as you'll get more consistent performance vs. pitching. Seems to me that the Looper experiment justifies this.

Assuming you have one to two good/great starting pitchers with a solid bullpen, experimenting on the back-end of the rotation with a very good offense will put you into contention year after year. I can't argue with that approach on a semi-limited budget.

by jimstllax on Jun 18, 2007 10:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

almost all of the true goat deals seem to have been for pitchers. Except for the Mo Vaughn deal. Oh, god, that Mo Vaughn deal.

by Valatan on Jun 18, 2007 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Totally agree

Hitters are pretty predictible and relativily low injury risks. This season if I had to overpay for someone it would have been soriano.

by DriverZn on Jun 18, 2007 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Burnett

is also going BACK onto the DL.

Injuries and FA pitchers - happens too often. I tend to agree with Will Carroll's thesis that you never sign SP's, FA or otherwise, to long-term deals.

by silent_bob on Jun 18, 2007 10:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Eyes Open

It can make sense if you go int a long-term deal eyes-open. If you are making the deal with the assumption that a pitcher is going to make 35 starts and throw 220+ innings every year over the five years, you're a fool. You have to anticipate some down time. You hope that it's not Tommy John surgery or massive shoulder trauma.

You also hope that, at least once during the five years, (almost) everything else on the team comes together perfectly too and you make a deep postseason run. If Barry Zito ends up winning two games in the WS and gets the Giants a ring, few will criticize the team for the signing if he gets hurt the following year.

by blove121 on Jun 18, 2007 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jason Schmidt

also BACK ON THE DL.

I will not call this team cheap unless they fail to sign a marquee FA next offseason.

Who, really, could they have signed that would be helping them win right now?

by silent_bob on Jun 18, 2007 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Saving money for someone actually good...

I keep hearing this argument, but I don't see the money being spent on ANYBODY; it's just put back in the coffers in case someone good comes along.

I agree that A.J. Burnett was that kind of difference maker. And certainly Renteria was. We could at the very least have picked up Renteria when the Red Sox were paying his salary.

by Fred McTaggart on Jun 18, 2007 10:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Renteria

I would have loved to see Edgar return. Two issues there:

While the Red Sox agreed to eat salary they wanted wanted something in return, in this case a highly touted prospect (Marte). Our farm system didn't have the talent to offer at the time.
What to do with Eckstein? Not necessarily a huge problem, but we'd have to figure that one out as well.

I don't think we had a shot there - Atlanta was in a much better position to snag him. And they were more in need having lost Furcal to free agency.

This is another example of why a healthy farm system is high on my personal list of priorities for the Cardinals. Not just to develop our own players, but to have chips to use if an attractive opportunity for a proven veteran arises.

by wildman on Jun 18, 2007 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Renteria never should have got away

They should have signed him to an extension during the season and not allowed him to slink off for more money in Boston.

Then, they wouldn't have had to worry about devoting the first month of the off-season to solely focusing on Edgar.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

I agree completely. Tony said Edgar was an essential part of the team, and he was. Even later, he probably could have signed him if we had offered a decent contract. (I would love to hear Renteria's side of the story).

by Fred McTaggart on Jun 18, 2007 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I am old and grey

but my recollection is the Cards offer to Renteria was a few million shy. The big problem was that the Cards wanted to defer money as well, and Boston didn't. With that said the Cards felt they had something to work with.

Then Edgar stopped the contract talks and signed with Boston. I blamed him at the time.

The respect thing. Renteria felt dissed I guess.

by nybirdfan on Jun 18, 2007 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Excellent point

Could we have re-signed him for meaningfully less than what Boston ended up paying? I don't recall his or his agent's stance on an extension.

by wildman on Jun 18, 2007 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Going from my flawed memory

I remember that as a negotition that where the cardinals came too late with too little. I think they were 4-5 million short of Boston over the duration of the contract. Also the back-loaded thing was a problem for Edgar. The redbirds should have never let him reach free-agency.

by gonzostl on Jun 18, 2007 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

the deal with Boston

was 4 years for 40 million. i remember STL offering 4 for 36 with deferments (like Edmonds has been doing for years). memory may not be right, but i recall Renteria's agent saying that 4 for 40 with some deferred payments would have kept him in STL.

but agents can lie.

by TMiles on Jun 18, 2007 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ok

So are memories are simular. I the piont I failed to make is we should have never lost him. He is worth 10 mill and year.

by nybirdfan on Jun 18, 2007 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would pay that

Not that I have that kind of money, but I think that 4 years 40 million does not sound that bad now.

by gonzostl on Jun 18, 2007 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

Edgar is worth every penny of $10 million a year. They were either nickel and diming when they failed to get him or they never really intended to spend on him in the first place.

As I remember, they got Eckstein for half that much and said they would spend the money elsewhere. I don't remember that money ever being spent.

Similar situation with Morris. Rather than pay Morris what he was asking, we said we'd go after A.J. Burnett for about the same price. We didn't get either of them. But where did the money go that we were willing to pay for a pitcher? I guess we got Mulder but again it was for about half what we presumably were willing to pay for Burnett/Morris.

Last year, we said we wanted two of the three pitchers--preferably Suppan and Weaver. When we didn't get Suppan, we paid half the money we were going to spend on Wells. How about the rest of it? And the money we were allocating for Weaver?

There are many other examples--Larry Walker's money being trickled down to Juan Encarnacion's; Grudz to Spivey. I keep hearing the payroll is remaining about the same, but it seems to me like we're always trading down. If we keep winning championships, I won't complain. But if this kind of cost-cutting were going into the production of my car, I wouldn't buy it.

by Fred McTaggart on Jun 18, 2007 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I dont like Bernie

He`s always negative and he hates tonys guts for that new conference fight.He`s just all negative when we have a very good chance of winning our division.I mean I heard a stat that said we had the most wins in NL Central since May something.

by Calhoun on Jun 18, 2007 10:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

He's very clever at how he criticizes TLR

he throws in a smattering of compliments ("He's won a lot of games") then rails on him for his approach to the team, handling players or general character things.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Newspaper columnists

are a dime a dozen, and rarely say anything worth reading, so what's the point in getting all worked up?

by cardsrul on Jun 18, 2007 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

concur

he's sort of smarmy...his columns don't impress me, and I feel kind of blechh after reading them...

Good pitching will beat good hitting any time, and vice versa. ~Bob Veale, 1966

by bukowski on Jun 18, 2007 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

As for pitchers who signed elsewhere

I don't think you can look at what they've done or the injuries they've had somewhere else and say the same would have happened with the Cardinals. Every situation is unique; if you're going to be a stathead, you'd better be sure your scientific logic is sound as well.

And if injuries are going to be part of the equation, they have to be figured in with "young potential" as well as older ones. Moreso, because an older pitcher has already established an injury record.

by Fred McTaggart on Jun 18, 2007 10:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Re: Reyes

Did anybody see radar-gun readings on him yesterday? As far as I could tell, FSN Midwest either didn't have a radar gun, or it wasn't working... I didn't see "speeds" no matter which pitcher was in the game.

IF Reyes was hitting 93-95 with his fastball at Memphis AND he carries that "heat" back into The Show, he'll get some swings-and-misses with that pitch "above the letters"... and if he can throw his fastball down around the knees, he'll get ground-outs, no matter whether he's throwing the 4-seamer or the 2-seamer.

Pitches between the belt and the "letters" usually get crushed in MLB... no matter who is the pitcher; no matter what the pitch!

"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra

by The Ol Goaler on Jun 18, 2007 10:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Don't know

if it's accurate, but Shannon and Rooney were mentioning speeds of 90-94 often.

by rockin redbird on Jun 18, 2007 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i watched the Fox Bay Area feed on mlb.tv

he topped out at 95 (swing/miss by jack cust), got to 94 several other times, was consistently 92-93 with the 4-seamer.

his problem yesterday was command. he couldn't locate either fastball particularly well (viz the two hbps). the homer to cust came off a changeup that might as well have been placed on a tee. the subsequent double by cust was a 93 mph fastball right over the middle, belt high.

his stuff is good enough, but he's still making too many mistakes.

by lboros on Jun 18, 2007 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

interesting

the enhanced gameday had him topping out at 91 sitting in the 88-89 range.

by azruavatar on Jun 18, 2007 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That certainly colors

Wellemeyer's start on Saturday night. The FSN Midwest broadcast didn't show gun readings all night, so I had to stick with the Gameday data. According to that, he didn't top 90 mph all night, which doesn't make a lot of sense. Dan & Al were saying that Todd was touching 97 as a reliever earlier this year.

Everywhere is within walking distance if you have the time.

by Solanus on Jun 18, 2007 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gameday

I would trust gameday over a house gun. They use high-speed timed cameras to calculate the velocity of the ball and it should be much more accurate than a doppler gun. Also, house guns are notorious for inflating pitch speeds.

by ZiggyG on Jun 18, 2007 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's all relative though

While I agree that the gameday pitch should be more accurate, when people talk about pitch speeds they are generally referring to the speed reported by the house radar guns, no?

If that's true, then Joel Zumaya doesn't really pitch 102mph -- maybe 98.

So, according to this logic, then Reyes has always been an 88-91 and not a 92-95 pitcher. But then that means that 92-95mph pitchers you see, reported by house radar guns, are also 88-91mph pitchers, right?

To quote Austin Powers, "oh no, I've gone cross-eyed."

Free Anthony Reyes!

by sgfcards on Jun 18, 2007 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Consistency

The problem is that house guns are all different, so you aren't getting a good relative values from one stadium to another.

Speaking of Joel Zumaya Hardball Times had a good article on him and radar guns. The article also has some interesting info about the inherent inaccuracy of radar guns. According to the article Zumaya has topped out at 103 or 104 on gameday.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/zoooomaya-and-speed-guns/

by ZiggyG on Jun 18, 2007 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He hit 95 once or twice

started the game in the 92-93 range, was getting smacked around, then dialed it down with the 2 seamer to 88-91.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It wasn't 93-95 in Memphis

It was 91-93 on a gun that is a touch slow if anything...probably no higher than 92-94 on a truly accurate gun with him.

by whopperman on Jun 18, 2007 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you ignore one FA pitcher

who I argued for long and loud in the offseason, and who has done pretty well for himself: TED LILLY. 14 starts, 3.69 ERA, 7.6 K/9, 4.3 K/BB, 1.05 WHIP.

I understand he's a FB pitcher, which probably wouldn't have meshed well with LaDunc. Still: 14 starts, 3.69 ERA, 7.6 K/9, 4.3 K/BB, 1.05 WHIP.

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on Jun 18, 2007 11:26 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

And Randy Wolf and Gil Meche haven't been horrible

But these guys and Kip Wells really don't strike me as being all that different--a bunch of journeymen with varying levels of success, and flashes of being really good.

by Valatan on Jun 18, 2007 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i liked lilly too, birdo

see this post. he's got the profile i (and most statty types) tend to like --- healthy strikeout rate, tolerable rates of hrs and bbs.

i left him off the list because i never read anywhere that the cardinals were interested in him; like you, i assume la duncan weighed in negatively on this pitcher, due to his fb tendencies.

by lboros on Jun 18, 2007 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wait before you say that

Lilly is starting to get smacked around.

Could be just the last couple of games.

I'd point out that, by your reasoning (stats so far this year), we should have signed Marquis! Heh.

by sdrone on Jun 18, 2007 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

what stats?

if you're just looking at wins and era, sure, marquis looks good so far this year. but those aren't the whole story, which is why i went beyond them in my support of lilly, and didn't even include wins.

marquis' era so far is 3.14, but here's the rest: 4.99 K/9, 1.5 K/BB, 1.19 WHIP. other than the WHIP, nowhere near as good as lilly.

the reason marquis' era is as low as it is right now is because his BABIP, which is typically not within the pitcher's control (or at least not much of it), has been very, very low: .237, as opposed to the typical league-average BABIP of about .300. in fairness, lilly's is also a bit low, at .269. but the cubs' defense isn't exactly spectacular, and it would take a spectacular defense to get an average pitcher's babip down even to lilly's current level.

marquis' babip will almost certainly go up from here (it's actually higher now than it was earlier in the year), and when it does, his fairly weak peripherals won't support his low era, and his low era will become a not-low era.

so. i would say the stats DON'T support signing marquis, even though they DO support signing lilly. you just have to look at the right stats.

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on Jun 18, 2007 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Duncan point of view

Watching last night's game (tho admitedly not all of it), I am coming around to Duncan's philosphy and I think I understand Bernie's comments of Reyes' pitching IQ.

I think Duncan point is if you go for the strikeout everytime you are in trouble, your going to throw a lot of pitches and the batter will get a better read of your pitches. Eventually they are likely to find one they can drive. By PTC you let the batter hit a pitchers pitch, most likely producing a ground ball. The ball may go through, but the worst that is likely to happen is a first and third situation. On the other hand, the best thing, a double play, is actually better than the strike out (at least early in the game).

by Zubin on Jun 18, 2007 11:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

it's a good strategy for some pitchers

for others, it's not so good. jake peavy doesn't pitch to contact . . . . .

by lboros on Jun 18, 2007 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And you sir,

are correct. I do have a question, though. When you talk about fly ball pitchers, does it not include all fly balls? I mean, harmless foul pop ups and lazy fly balls to the outfielders are fly balls, no? Homeruns and screaming line drives? Do they ever break that down? My son is a ground ball pitcher, and he got taken out of a game once because his infielders made three consecutive errors on easy ground balls. He was replaced with the strike-out/high fly ball rate guy. I'm all for having different pitchers with different looks. We might do better at taking series than we have been if that were the case. And I'm still not ready to give up on Reyes.

by jillsinmo on Jun 18, 2007 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmmm

a linedrive pitcher. That's a scary thought.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're talking about Kip Wells, right?

by Valatan on Jun 18, 2007 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

haha

i laughed. the sad part is that if he starts on wednesday, i will have to soak it in. (tickets)

by stlcardinalsfang on Jun 18, 2007 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Please, I want an

answer. When they count fly balls, don't they count the easy pop to the infield, the lazy fly balls hit to the outfielders, as well as the line drives and the warning track flies that are caught with heroics by the outfielders? I guess what I'm trying to say is are all fly balls created equal- are they all considered equally bad?

by jillsinmo on Jun 18, 2007 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, I think...

Traditionally, it's basically groundout/air out ratio, as best I know.

I know it's eventually going to be "upgraded" to grounder, liner, fly, whether out or not, but I don't think that's especially commonly used yet.

by whopperman on Jun 18, 2007 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

a foul out to the catcher counts the same as a 400 flyout to centerfield, or a line drive that rolen makes a diving catch on. they're all "air outs."

by lboros on Jun 18, 2007 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

In additions

Fly balls that leave the park are still considered "fly balls."

I think that Albert Pujols' homers should be the exception to this rule.

by silent_bob on Jun 18, 2007 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think so...

I think GB% is based on outs, not balls in play.

by whopperman on Jun 18, 2007 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So,

my point is that all fly balls are not created equal. Some of them are as harmless as a ground ball to the first baseman. I'd like to see it broken down as easy outs/fly balls and your damn lucky it didn't go out of the park/fly balls

by jillsinmo on Jun 18, 2007 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't know of a MLB resource for that

Jeff Sackmann's Minor League Splits has complete ball-in-play data. Here's the page for Anthony Reyes for his brief stint with Memphis.

Hardball Times gives a percentage of line drives and ground balls that a pitcher allows in play. Those are complete balls-in-play percentages, not just balls in play recorded as outs like you find at MLB.com or the other usual places. I guess they include pop-outs as non-linedrive flyballs, so that's as good as I know of.

Baseball Prospectus might have something more detailed, but I don't know of it.

David Pinto could provide the most detailed breakdown of pitchers' balls-in-play tendencies using the data he generates his PMR defensive statistics from. In his system, every ball in play is characterized as one of five or so types of balls in play (watch the video in the link there for Pinto's explanation). You could distinguish pop-flies from outfield flies by looking at whether it was fielded by an outfielder or infielder. Here's hoping he does that for the 2006 data at some point. It would be interesting.

by liam on Jun 18, 2007 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I should say...

Regarding BP, I'm not a subscriber, so I don't know what sorts of wonders they have behind the pay wall.

by liam on Jun 18, 2007 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i am.

there's nothing like this back there. plenty of other stuff that make the $5/month well worth it, tho.

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on Jun 18, 2007 7:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That reminds me.

No one will have noticed this, but I have to ask.

Sports Illustrated. NOt the current issue, but I THINK the issue before that. Feature article on Jake Peavy and how wonderful awesome he is.

The article has a full page pic of an overhead view of his windup.

His grip is like a fastball grip with both fingers together instead of apart. Isn't that a 2 seamer/sinker grip?

by sdrone on Jun 18, 2007 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

How are the seams aligned?

by Valatan on Jun 18, 2007 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Like a fastball

n/t

by sdrone on Jun 18, 2007 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

There are two different alignments

are they aligned like a 2 seamer

or a four seamer?

by Valatan on Jun 18, 2007 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I realized I should have said 4 seamer

And your pic in the only one I have found on the web showing the fingers together.

by sdrone on Jun 18, 2007 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Disembodied hands

Where can I get some more of those? It'd be nice to know what I'm actually throwing when I'm screwing around in the backyard.

Everywhere is within walking distance if you have the time.

by Solanus on Jun 18, 2007 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Most Pitchers

throw all fastballs with their fingers close together. This allows the ball to be farther from the palm, and more looseness in the hand, which give the pitch superior velocity.

The 2 seamer and 4 seamer are different ways of aligning the fingers on the ball. A 2 seamer is held with the fingers running down the end of the horseshoes on the seams while the 4 seamer is held across the broades part of the horseshoe.

When a 2 seamer is coming toward you you can count two verticle seams on the ball. With a four seamer the seams will appear to be horizontal and one at a time.

by ZiggyG on Jun 18, 2007 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Really?

Are you sure? I mean, I know crap about pitching, but I've never seen that. A quick google search on "what is a fastball grip" turns up articles that all show the same thing, such as:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/baseball/pdf/pitchingpage.pdf

Peavey was holding the fastball as shown on that page (4 seam fastball) but his fingers were centered and together.

by sdrone on Jun 18, 2007 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Does Peavy throw a cutter?

That grip often looks like a 4-seamer with the fingers closer together and slightly off-center.

by wildman on Jun 18, 2007 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

But Reyes is clearly no Jake Peavy

Cardinals' record when Wells or Reyes start: 2-21. Record for all other starters: 27-15.

by willievinceterry on Jun 18, 2007 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

neither was jake peavy

when he was first breaking in. his era over the first 30 starts of his career was 4.50; reyes' is 5.32.

since then, peavy has an era under 3.00. maybe reyes can put up an era under 4.00 over the next few years.

by lboros on Jun 18, 2007 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Senator, I served with Jake Peavy;

I knew Jake Peavy; Jake Peavy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jake Peavy.

by wildman on Jun 18, 2007 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Would you want Matt Morris back?

The Giants are more than likely going to begin unloading older 'parts' within the next 3 weeks as they slip further and further out of contention.

One of those 'parts' is more than likely Matt Morris.

Morris contract stacks up as follows:
07:$9.5M
08:$9.5M
09:$9M club option ($1M buyout)

Morris, after having a rocky start in 2006, he seems to be getting his peripherals back to career norms. Above all, he'd automatically be the rotation's 2nd or 3rd best starter. In this climate, he'd be making less (or equal) to what Ted Lilly will be making with the Cubs...and I think he can be a better pitcher than Lilly.

Anyways, just an idea I wanted to float out there.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 12:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

What would the Giants want in return?

It would be nice to add some stability to the rotation. I think he got knocked around by the Red Sox yesterday, didn't he? But there are no teams like the Red Sox in the NL Central.

I'd be willing to do it if it could be done without giving up anyone valuable, but what are the chances of that? In my opinion, it's not a good idea to mortgage the future.

by sgfcards on Jun 18, 2007 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A tough

question, though my final answer would be no. I loved MattyMo for a long time, and continue to dig him as a personality, but lost all trust in him as a pitcher his last couple years as a Bird. Remember '05? He pitched out of the gate like a true ace, had everybody calling him the "comeback story of the year." But then he completely folded after the ASB. Still won 14 games I believe, but his second half was excrutiating. What makes the question tough is that, for this year's team, a 14 game winner, excrutiating or not, would still be a boon. What it comes down to is that I just don't trust his present success will last. If he could be had cheap, I guess it'd be worth a try, but at full price...nope.

by rockin redbird on Jun 18, 2007 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hey

I was a GREAT line-drive pitcher in HS! I didn't watch the game yesterday, but was there anyway that Reyes, after getting smacked around in the 1st, said "Screw you Dave!" and did things his way the rest of the game?

I'm a man, a manly, manly, man. Unknown

by Eckstreem on Jun 18, 2007 12:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Why is it never Reyes' fault...

...when he pitches poorly?

Cardinals' record when Wells or Reyes start: 3-21. Record for all other starters: 27-15.

by willievinceterry on Jun 18, 2007 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The odds are greater...

that Anthony was pitching his own way in the first inning, and Dave's way the other 4 innings.

Miller sucks.

by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Jun 18, 2007 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

based on what

i could just as easily say the opposite -- what makes you say that probability is against Reyes and for Dave Duncan?

by azruavatar on Jun 18, 2007 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The high frequency of the 4-seamer

and pitching up in the zone.

Duncan came out to talk to him, Reyes started throwing more 2-seamers and breaking pitches lower in the zone and was decent the rest of the game. Retired 5 in a row, if I remember correctly.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

disagree w/ you hardcore

i watched the first 3 innings and didn't see any evidence that reyes suddenly started to throw 2-seamers. he did the opposite to pitch out of that sacks-jammed, one-out situation in the 3d inning. he got kendall on a pop-up --- belt-high pitch --- and struck out travis buck on a 90-mph heater at the hips.

insofar as he got only 2 groundball outs after the 1st inning --- vs 8 air outs and 2 strikeouts --- it would seem that he didn't heed duncan's command to the keep the ball low in the zone.

by lboros on Jun 18, 2007 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

90 mph heater

is the 2-seamer, imho.

The increase in breaking pitches being thrown was a stark contrast to the way he started the game. He was throwing almost exclusively the changeup and 4-seamer in the 1st.

After Duncan talked to him, there was a visable difference in the pitching philosophy.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Did the low pitches move?

the 2-seamer should ride and dip. I don't think you can judge the pitch on the velocity, as Reyes has never established a consistent speed on his 4-seamer.

by silent_bob on Jun 18, 2007 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i didn't see it that way

i think his command / location improved after the first inning, and that made the difference.

re the pitch to buck: a 90 mph, hip-high pitch isn't a two-seamer --- at least, it's not a successful one. the point of the 2-seamer is to get groundballs, no? a successful 2-seamer would have crossed the plate a foot lower, at the top of the kneecap.

agree to disagree on this one.

by lboros on Jun 18, 2007 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

it is very hard to tell if he is just losing velocity on his fastball or if it is indeed the 2-seamer.

That is also part of the problem. Is that 90 mph pitch a bad 2-seamer or a slow 4-seamer? He got the ground out in the 2nd using an 88 mph 2-seamer, that much I am clear of.

Maybe he just decided to take a little off of his fastball and that is what made him effective.

It appeared that the 1-pitch out to Ellis to lead off the 2nd was a poorly thrown 2-seamer that got lifted down the LF line. If not, throwing from the windup he should not have lost that much velocity.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

pitch count

Regardless of why he pitched better in innings 2-5, I think it's important to note that he was not very economical with his pitches. Even supposing you throw out the 1st inning as an abberation (i.e. wrong pitching style), he threw 67 pitches over the next 4 innings. That's an average of 16.75 per inning, or enough that he'd have to top 100 pitches to get through 6 innings.

There has been some debate lately as to what it is exactly that TLR/Duncan want out of Reyes, but I think the end goal is to make him not only effective but able to go deeper into games. Seems to me that even when he's pitching well, he's often doing it by using too many pitches.

by john vb on Jun 18, 2007 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, if he'd stop throwing that

76 mph curveball/change/junk thingy in the dirt off the plate 1st pitch, he might last longer. :D

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

BTW

I don't do this often, but I have to give TLR credit for a great pre-game tension diffuser. He said that the losses were starting to worry Anthony, so they sent him down to get some confidence back. Now I don't believe that any more than the man in the moon, but I thought it was a great way to spin it.

I'm a man, a manly, manly, man. Unknown

by Eckstreem on Jun 18, 2007 12:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

stop calling wainwright a 'converted reliever'

when bernie wrote "the best rotation it comes up with is Wells, Todd Wellemeyer and converted relievers?" he was careful to quickly account for carpenter's injury, so that his statement wouldn't sound completely absurd. but he didn't bother to say anything specific about wainwright. and that seems disingenuous when you're talking about the cards' rotation these days.

bernie's not the only one who does this, but he has no excuse. wainwright is not a 'converted reliever' just because he spent a season in the bullpen. does anybody call matt morris a converted reliever? not that i know of. it annoys me when bernie and others use that label to lump wainwright in with looper in an attempt to make the current rotation sound like a bunch of garbage pail kids.

i don't advocate blind loyalty to the cards' ownership, but don't try to mislead people about what they're doing. calling wainwright a 'converted reliever' is misleading in this context.

...

bernie also added to his hyperbole by calling this "probably the worst starting rotation in more than 100 years of Cardinals baseball." he should think for a minute before he says things like that. even ignoring the ponson/marquis/mulder debacles of 2006, think back to '99 (real converted relievers like the kents, mercker and bottenfield) or '94 (only one starter under 5.00 era) and this rotation doesn't sound so bad.

by mattlo on Jun 18, 2007 12:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I guess in his mind

Dan Haren and Steve Carlton were converted relievers as well.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and john smoltz.

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on Jun 18, 2007 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Uh...

I think the Wainwright, Looper, Wellemeyer, Thompson, Wells group was clearly worse than Bottenfield, Oliver, Jimenez, Mercker, Stephenson, Acevedo, etc. one. That bunch had three guys with ERA+ better than 100. As of now, the Cards have four pitchers with an ERA+ better than 100 this season: Isringhausen is at 247, Springer 141, Franklin 244, and Hancock 116.

The starters are Wainwright (89), Looper (88), Wellemeyer (85), Thompson (78), Reyes (65), and Wells (60).

You have to go back to 1994 to find a Cardinals rotation without a 100 or better ERA+. That rotation was about as bad as this one...I'm back to 1950 and haven't found another one that's in the same level of bad.

by whopperman on Jun 18, 2007 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think azruavatar said this a long time ago

that bernie likes to talk out of his ass from time to time. espcially with his monday "stream of consciousness" columns.

by stlcardinalsfang on Jun 18, 2007 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Either bring up Ankeil or trade him...

If the Cardinals do not want to bring up Ankiel b/c he would be out of options and have to remain with the big league club all year, then that tells me that he is not in their long-term plans.

His stock will never be higher than it is right now with 19 HR and 50+ RBIs. No team would give up anything huge for him, but he could be part of a package to bring in a pitcher that someone is selling soon.

Just a thought, as I am really sick and tired of hearing about how great he is doing and then how no move is expected.

by pitchout487 on Jun 18, 2007 12:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

There's no point in bringing him up until he's

ready to be an everyday player. He's doing very well, but still has some roughness that needs to be worn out.

by Valatan on Jun 18, 2007 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

More to the point

That is one guy whose head you don't want to mess with. If he comes up and bombs in the utility outfielder role, I wouldn't put it against him to just lose it. If he keeps mashing like he has been, then he'll make it happen, but this is one guy you CAN'T rush.

Pujols currently < Career godliness.

by joker24 on Jun 18, 2007 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

reyes

in my opinion, i felt we saw more out of reyes in that third inning than we have before, yes he was in trouble of his own making, but he got out of it

before he was sent down, i am sure they would have scored some runs there as well, now he just needs to figure out some way to have early success

Pujols is the greatest Cardinal in my lifetime.

by bigcardsfan5 on Jun 18, 2007 12:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree Reyes

made and cleaned up his own mess in that third inning. That's got to count for something. I'm still not ready to give up on him; and I think after the team saw how Anthony gutted it out that they decided then and there that there was no way they were going to lose that game. I'm glad that it was the new players leading the charge. And Juan has quietly continued to hit in games-17 game hitting streak. Everyone leave Juan alone.

by jillsinmo on Jun 18, 2007 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

tomo ohka

anybody else think we should try to get ohka? toronto designated him for assignment on june 7, so we should have a chance if we want him...

he's been league average or better most of his career. got off to a poor start this season but that was against a tough schedule. i think he could do a decent job back in the national league.

by mattlo on Jun 18, 2007 12:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Why not!

Get him...we are throwing out Todd Freaking Wellermeyer, Kip Wells, Brad Thompson, etc...why not get Ohka...what do we have to lose. Wasn't Duncan "intrigued" by him in the past...miss on Wells, maybe hit on this guy?

by pitchout487 on Jun 18, 2007 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

BT

Is Brad Thompson still in the starting rotation? The reason I asked is because I saw he threw some relief Saturday, so I was just curious if we now have starters-ish that throw late innings as well...

by billyhoyel on Jun 18, 2007 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

yes

ESPN and mlb.com both list Thompson as the projected starter for Tuesday against KC.

Over the next 5 games ESPN has:
Wainwright
Thompson
Wells
Wellemeyer
Reyes

mlb.com only goes 3 days out, but it concurs that far.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/schedule?team=stl

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/probable_pitchers.jsp?c_id=mlb&ymd=20070619

by john vb on Jun 18, 2007 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Per Goold

Monday 7:10 P.M. FSN Midwest
A. Wainwright - RHP
Record -- 5-5 ERA -- 4.66
vs
Odalis Perez LHP
Record -- 3-7 ERA -- 6.19

Tuesday 7:10 P.M. FSN Midwest
B. Thompson RHP
Record -- 4-2 ERA -- 5.28
vs
Scott Elarton RHP
Record -- 2-2 ERA -- 8.54

Wenesday 7:10 P.M. FSN Midwest
Kip Wells RHP
Record -- 2-11 ERA -- 6.93
vs
Gil Meche RHP
Record -- 4-6 ERA -- 3.08

Looks like Ole Kipper gets another start.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think

someone picked him up...

by longhornscardinals on Jun 18, 2007 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

his player page on

mlb.com shows that he isn't signed with anyone right now. I also couldn't find any recent news articles stating that he'd been picked up.
From the most recent article:
The Blue Jays have until Monday to make a move involving right-hander Tomo Ohka, who was designated for assignment on June 8.

For the Cards, I think he is worth a flyer, but I also noticed that since his rotator cuff problems last year, he has been mostly ineffective. He chose to rehab the injury sans surgery and is probably in the same state Mulder was last year...denial. I expect Ohka will continue to be a sub-par starter.

"Left-hander, right-hander, soft thrower, power guy, fastballs away, fastballs in-- [Albert Pujols] doesn't have any holes." - Tino Martinez

by _pistol_ on Jun 18, 2007 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

sub-par sounds like an upgrade

on this team.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

released

mlb.com says ohka was released today: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/transactions/index.jsp

by mattlo on Jun 18, 2007 4:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh, I hate to see them take on

yet another reclamation project. If it cost us nothing to try, well that's been their philosophy, so I imagine when you pick up your paper tomorrow, we'll find he's been signed.

by jillsinmo on Jun 18, 2007 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Ankiel

I think people need to ease up on the bring Ankiel up hoopla. Yes, he crushes the ball, but he still has a LOT of things to work on. His OBP isn't good, he strikes out a TON, and he's simply not ready to be a full-time major league outfielder. If you bring him up, he won't get the at-bats that he needs to fully develop.

If someone in the majors comes down with a serious injury, then sure, give him a shot. But otherwise, let him finish refining his game at least until September. He's already done remarkably well.

by longhornscardinals on Jun 18, 2007 1:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

agreed

ankiel has made incredible strides over the past year, and that's what's exciting people, me included. but he needs to raise his obp if he's going to be useful. and that's plate discipline and just learning to be a hitter - things that should be done in the minor leagues. he'll have his shot at the roster in 2008.

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on Jun 18, 2007 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

hawksworth

is something wrong w. him? today... 1 2/3 IP, 9 hits, 8 ER, 3 HR.

by longhornscardinals on Jun 18, 2007 2:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Sounds like a case of the sucks

probably will lead to leaving the game with 'bruised ego'. Listed as day-to-day.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

no worries, he's off the hook

as Neal Cotts got lit up for 8 runs capped off with a Tagg Bozied HR.

by azruavatar on Jun 18, 2007 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

When they announced that Ankiel

had 3 homers on Saturday night, a part of me felt really sad. As I was watching our rotation continue to disinegrate, the best pitcher we have in AAA is now an outfielder. After thinking about it a while longer, I thought just how amazing it would be if Ankiel can make it all the way back to the big leagues and have a couple of decent seasons as an outfielder. Good for him.

by lefty fan on Jun 18, 2007 2:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Tomo Ohka and DFA-ing

If I remember correctly, once a guy's DFA'd, his team has 10 days to trade him, etc., or he becomes a free agent. Given that Ohka was DFA'd on June 7, it would make sense that if the Cards were going to go after him, they'd wait til the 10 days were up, so as not to have to give up a Terry Evans for him.

I'm not 100% sure on the 10-day rule, and it may be 10 business days. But if that's the case, then Ohka becomes a free agent today (or maybe yesterday). Does anyone know more about the DFA process?

by CardFaninVA on Jun 18, 2007 2:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Terry Evans

by the way, the Angels called him up to the majors on Sunday.

How about handin' me another helpin' of those mashed taters...thank you very much!

by Elvis on Jun 18, 2007 6:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

not so sure, lb,

that the offense is repaired, but we now have evidence that the Redbirds' sunday mojo is more powerful than the reyes curse.

by TMiles on Jun 18, 2007 2:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

In their last 10 games

the are averaging 6.3 runs per game.

In the 15 games this month, they are averaging 6.13 runs per game.

If that ain't fixed, I don't ever want to be right...er, something like that.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"...the offense is fully repaired"

While the facts clearly support the statement, lboros, I cringe when you say that.....

On June 7 you said "i hereby declare the offense repaired" in this post: http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/story/2007/6/7/93157/59769

We proceeded to get shut down that night by none other that the dominating Kyle Lohse: http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/news/wrap.jsp?ymd=20070607&content_id=2012836&vkey=wrapup20 05&fext=.jsp&team=home

Interesting in that Wainwright started that game and that he pitches again tonight. If Perez shuts us down tonight, the lboros curse is alive and well!

by wildman on Jun 18, 2007 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

don't tell la russa about this . . . .

but for the record --- and it's not like i'm defensive about this or anything --- since my june 7 declaration the cards have averaged 6.3 runs a game and batted .295 / .352 / .466.

by lboros on Jun 18, 2007 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Kudos for taking a stand

and for being right. Sorry to rib you about their performance the night of your first declaration, but it was just sitting out there like a fat pitch waiting to be smacked. Here's to more fireworks tonight against our favorite starter.

by wildman on Jun 18, 2007 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bo Hart almost pinch-hit

against the Redbirds last inning.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 2:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Schumaker and Cate called up

Per DGoold. Hasn't announced the corresponding moves yet. My guess would be Looper going to the DL, and maybe Edmonds is hurt?

Miller sucks.

by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Jun 18, 2007 3:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Any chance

that Cate gets the start Wed? I know he hasn't been that good starting in AAA, but I'd still much rather him start than Wells.

by CardFaninVA on Jun 18, 2007 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think Edmonds is hurt

I mean, it is possible, however I would have thought someone would have dropped a hint somewhere before today.

Perhaps a trade involving Encarnacion?

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Must be Edmonds

Goold in his blog dropped the hint that Edmonds has been dealing with soreness in his leg.

Sore enough for him to miss 13 more games?

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The other night in KC,

it looked like he might have tweaked something when he came to an abrupt stop rounding third.

by cardsrul on Jun 18, 2007 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I remember that

however he told LaRussa he was fine and LaRussa threw a big fit because Edmonds didn't score on that play.

He played on Friday and seemed fine, didn't he?

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Edmonds is being DL'd and per a P-D

poster's comments, Edmonds said on the radio that he doesn't know why he isn't playing again.

He is also not listed as 'availible' for today.

If Edmonds is hurt, that is the end of the story. If he says he is not hurt, could TLR be punishing him?

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

punish him for what?

not scoring from second last week? how many times in the past two season has juan not hustled running the bases or in the outfield? if any one needs to be sat down for not giving their all it's Juan. what else has he done? saying loudly that the team never has closed door meetings?

tony & jimmy have been taking shots at each other for two years now. this has got to stop. thier macho head games with each other is doing no one any good. this is worse then when scotty and tony were not talking because both have made it public and keep taking "shots" at each other in the press.

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

by gdm426 on Jun 18, 2007 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

lbros

hey great read on a tough subject. I ride the fence on "the kid" I don't want them to give up on him, but think way too many people drank his cool aid too fast...I'm gonna throw out some young pitchers names who were probably not as good as him talent wise but had their own flashes at times...

this is not a talent comparison just "flash" of goodness...Rene Arocha,D.Osborne,Allen Watson, Alan Benes...if anyone can remeber that i was young so maybe i had higher expectations of them when they looked good...

I agree though they need to let young guys take their licks and id hate to be the guy who has to say enough is enough..and then he finally blooms...Evaluating and making best of a persons talent is a tough job..

Kelly Stinnett the new power to the cards lineup.

by punchinjudy on Jun 18, 2007 3:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Good MiLB historical stat site?

Does anyone know of a good site to find minor league statistical information from years past? Something that could be used to compare Alan Benes' minor league numbers to Anthony Reyes'? Preferably even earlier.

Everywhere is within walking distance if you have the time.

by Solanus on Jun 18, 2007 3:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

baseball cube

http://www.thebaseballcube.com

you can search by player name, by minor-league team, by organization . . . . .

by lboros on Jun 18, 2007 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Here is his page

try to decipher it if you can:

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/B/Alan-Benes.shtml

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks to you both

My brother actually got interested in baseball by looking at the minor league stats on the back of baseball cards and extrapolating it out to a full season. I know, kinda geeky, but you gotta start somewhere, especially when you don't see your first MLB game until a year out of high school.

Everywhere is within walking distance if you have the time.

by Solanus on Jun 18, 2007 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just to dampen the day a little more

Terry Evans who we gave up for Jeff Weaver last year is still tearing it up this year in AAA and has now been called up to play for the Angels. Scouts say he is a 5 tool player.

by RB on Jun 18, 2007 3:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

No regrets

We got the bling.

youneverknow

by meat on Jun 18, 2007 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ryan ludwick is just as good

by lboros on Jun 18, 2007 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ha ha..

No way of really knowing that yet but Ludwick doesnt have nearly as much upside as Evans and no where near the speed or throwing arm. Im a big Evans fan because I had the luxury of watching him play here in Springfield so my opinion may be somewhat biased but I see no comparison as to where Ludwick could be as good as Evans.

by RB on Jun 18, 2007 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Rick Ankiel

Has a better BB:K than Evans Jr..

Glad to see he's getting a shot. He's come a long, long way since the end of the 2005 season.

by liam on Jun 18, 2007 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Except things like statistics

Minor League stats this year:

Ludwick
29 Games
106 ABs
27 Runs
8 2B
8 HR
36 RBI
.340 BA
1.022 OPS

Evans
36 Games
257 ABs
35 Runs
23 2B
3 3B
19 HR
45 RBI
.327 BA
.908 OPS

If you combine Ludwick's MLB and MiLB stats:
Ludwick
60 Games
181 ABs
36 Runs
12 2B
11 HR
49 RBI
.304 BA

I wish Evan's all the best, he is 4 years younger than Ryan. However, I doubt very much Evans will be anything more than a AAAA outfielder.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Evans has played in 64 games

my typo.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

My point exactly

Look at the difference in power numbers, Evans has ludwick beat in Hr and doubles by a large margin therefore his slugging% will be drastically better meanwhile I would venture to bet that evans has ludwick beat handily in the stolen base category as well. This virtually makes many of evans singles as valuable as doubles. Im not saying that ludwick is a bad player but there is no contest in the least between the two when it comes to who is better right now and who has more upside.

by RB on Jun 18, 2007 11:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not to mention

that Terry plays a prime defensive posistion (center field) very well as opposed to ludwick a corner outfielder.

by RB on Jun 18, 2007 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Amen...

Comment of the Day

by guayzimi on Jun 18, 2007 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i'm in the pro Anthony group

it's become too expensive to buy free agent pitching. besides there's always the chance they could get hurt. just like Jason who's now on the Dodger's DL. if the Cards are going to continue to be contenders, they need cheap, home grown starting pitching. it's just become too expensive and too risky to buy pitching on the free market.

the Cards and the Yankees are in a very similar situation. both have for the past 10 years traded away young talent to get vets to help them win now. and it's worked. but look at each of their farm systems. they took major hits, and are just now getting back up to par with the other teams systems. the one big differance between the Cards and Yanks of course is money. the Yanks have it, while the Cards keep saying they don't.

while there were only a couple good free agent pitchers last winter, the Cards would have had to over pay to get them. and they are not willing to do that. so that's why we are stuck with Wagonmaker, Anthony and the alsorans in the starting rotation. they put too much faith in Mulder's ability to relearn his delivery in a few short months. and they never planned on Carp or another starter getting hurt, or getting shelled like Wells is. they put too much faith in Wells imho. he was never a good pitcher, and he probably never will be. there are some guys who even the great and powerful Dave Duncan can't even fix. he's not GOD you know DeWitt.

there are only two pitchers i'd trade Anthony for. Big Z, and Dontrell. and that's only if both agree to extentions before the trade is done. there is no way you trade a young pitcher for a pitcher who's about to hit free agency without having him locked up for a few years.

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

by gdm426 on Jun 18, 2007 4:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

i assume you mean...

"pitchers we might be able to get for a reyes + package."

because i'd certainly trade reyes for, e.g., phil hughes.

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on Jun 18, 2007 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, and I believe

the Yankees would trade Jeter before they'd trade Hughes. The pitchers who come up usually take a year or two before you know if you've got something......unless your name is Verlander. Detroit's other young stud, Andrew Miller hasn't look real good yet, and no way you throw in the towel on him.....

by jillsinmo on Jun 18, 2007 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hitless inning for Percival today.

How many good outings do you think he's going to need to have before he's up with the big club.

by Valatan on Jun 18, 2007 4:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

He didn't pitch today

He pitched yesterday.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

they could have used him today

the bullpen gave up 6 in the bottom of the 8th to throw away a 3 run lead - including Lambert coughing up a grand slam

by wildman on Jun 18, 2007 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

it'd be nice

to see him pitch two days in a row before being called up. That being said, I think it's in his contract that he can go elsewhere if he's not called up after two weeks at Memphis, so it won't be long.

by DCGreg on Jun 18, 2007 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Edmonds & Looper to the DL

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/cardinals/story/23C5731800DC11EA862572FE00736948 ?OpenDocument

by wildman on Jun 18, 2007 5:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I have there is more than meets the eye

with the Edmonds injury. I honestly don't believe that his leg is injured to the point that he needs to take 2 weeks off.

I can't help but speculate that this is another instance of 'whose clubhouse is this, anyways' between him and LaRussa.

Above all, losing Edmonds HRs from the lineup means Rolen better get his swing straight and start driving the ball again.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not just his knee

They said his shoulder too....that is not good to hear...and thus might be why the DL...

by Timbo02 on Jun 18, 2007 5:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Who said his shoulder?

Word from some of Bernie's devoted faithful is that Edmonds said earlier in the day that he didn't know why he wasn't in the lineup again today.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It WAS on STL.com

But when I just went back to copy and paste it here for you...it was changed..so perhaps it was a misprint but I SWEAR to you it said that.

by Timbo02 on Jun 18, 2007 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe

You got the descriptions of the two injuries confused. It talks about Looper having a shoulder injury and Jimmy having sore legs.

by liam on Jun 18, 2007 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

sure is possible..

but they switched the article from the time I first looked at it and then when I went back and I remember thinking oh oh..not his shoulder...but yeah...god knows I could have read it wrong...sorry folks!

by Timbo02 on Jun 18, 2007 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i agree

tony & jimmy for some reason have been butting heads now for over two seasons.

1380 espn in the stl is reporting jimmy told jim hayes of fsn midwest that edmonds asked for an mri on his lower back because edmonds thinks he's been over compensating for his injuries to his toe and shoulder, and edmonds thought he hurt his back. so APPARENTLY jimmy got a mri today, and the Cards told no one. listening live online right now to bernie's afternoon show, and pat paris from fsn is setting in. pat says jim will have a interview with edmonds on the pre game show tonghit on fsn.

edmonds thought all weekend he could go on the DL, just not today. that's why he said eariler in the day he had no idea what was going on. but he had a meeting with Tony & Walt according to jim hayes and they talked everything out. and jimmy is now OK with going on the DL, because HE asked for the mri.

this is messed up.

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

by gdm426 on Jun 18, 2007 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

funny

look at my post below where Bernie said it was Jed's BAT that got the MRI.

Yours at least is a halfway-coherent explanation. Better than complete clubhouse dysfunction.

by DCGreg on Jun 18, 2007 5:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm so confused

Edmonds back is hurting him, he went and had an MRI without telling the team and then told them to put him on the DL?

He asked to be put on the DL as of Saturday?

Whaaaa?

I don't understand any of this.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 5:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bernie's take

on his forum, first he said this:

edmonds didn't know he was going on the DL...

this could be interesting...

Then this:

Now Edmonds is saying (to Jim Hayes of FSN)
that he understands why he went on the DL...
because he asked for an MRI on his bat.

I know I'm confused.

by DCGreg on Jun 18, 2007 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Lineups

Does this mean Speezer is at 2B?

Taguchi
Spiezio
Pujols
Encarnacion
Rolen
Ludwick
Miles
Bennett
Wainwright

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 5:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Looks to be so..

.. that is unless So is going to come in and play the infield, a posistion that he hasnt played an many years.

by RB on Jun 18, 2007 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Man....

Do you think this says something about Kennedy's position with Tony?... to put Speez out there at 2nd and not him?

by Timbo02 on Jun 18, 2007 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Spiezio is probably 1 for 2 against Perez

Or some crap like that. But really that is just a reason for Brendan to not play short (he has no history against Perez, therefore can't be any good).

He doesn't have Kennedy in the lineup just out of principle.

Everywhere is within walking distance if you have the time.

by Solanus on Jun 18, 2007 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Heh

Four for nine, actually. I hope that's just a mistake on Bernie's part.

If not, I imagine the Royals will all be looking to hit it at Spiezio.

by liam on Jun 18, 2007 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

spiezio

is 4 for 9, actually. Miles is 3 for 11.

And Pujols is 13 for 19 with 5 HR.

by DCGreg on Jun 18, 2007 5:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just kidding, kinda

I figured that it was something like that, some not-particularly-predictive sample that detailed Spiezio's "ownership" of Perez. (The Imperial has been hitting well lately and it's a little tougher to keep his bat in the lineup without the DH.)

In reality, I'm more concerned with Brendan Ryan's absence from the lineup than Kennedy's. I know that Kennedy sucks vs LHP's and that he has demonstrated major suckitude all year. I just thought it might be nice to get Brendan some quality time in the starting lineup, especially with the platoon advantage present tonight. Maybe LaRussa figures that we'll knock Perez out quickly and they'll bring in righties the rest of the way, negating Brendan's edge (hell, I don't know).

Everywhere is within walking distance if you have the time.

by Solanus on Jun 18, 2007 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Speez

has played 312 games at 2B in his career, for what it's worth.

by DCGreg on Jun 18, 2007 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you are most likely right...

plus I forgot that Perez is a lefty isn't he?...god Kennedy is death against lefties...

by Timbo02 on Jun 18, 2007 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If either he or So are playing ahead of Kennedy

It is ridiculous. Can't we just let Kennedy play for a couple of weeks and see what he can or can't do? Kennedy hasn't played since Friday. I know he hasn't looked that great, but given the options I feel like he should get more of an opportunity.

by OCCardsFan on Jun 18, 2007 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

especially....

since we are paying him 3 million a year and I don't remember him sitting against lefties in Anehiem all those years... but then again after his performance last Friday?....I can't blame them for letting him ride the pine some..

by Timbo02 on Jun 18, 2007 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

jesus

that is an ugly lineup.

by longhornscardinals on Jun 18, 2007 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

it's alright ...

they're facing perez tonight. Over/under on pujols RBIs is 7.

Call up Ankiel!!

by jeff abs on Jun 18, 2007 5:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

listening live to espn 1380 in STL

Bernie just got a text message from edmonds saying he's OK with going on the DL because the Cards will be facing a lot of lefty pitching in the next two weeks. So Edmonds says he was not going to start a lot, and he's OK with going on DL because of this, and he requested a MRI on his lower back because he thought he hurt it over compseating for his toe and shoulder injuries.

bernie and pat paris obviously think there is more to the story. jim hayes still trying to get a interview with Edmonds for the pre game show on FSN.

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

by gdm426 on Jun 18, 2007 5:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think this is taking

' a case of the "lefties" ' a bit too far, don't you?

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

no kidding

pat paris thinks Wal is trying to package Skippy in a trade with the white sox for everyone's fave home town lefty. white sox were some of the teams checking out Anthony yesterday. all unconfirmed of course. but pat heard it today at busch, so who knows.

edmonds thought there was a good posibility he could be DL'd because of his back, the Cards had him get a MRI this morning. no results on that yet. and also his legs. because of his toe, his legs aren't in shape yet. but he was surprised it happened today, until he talked to Tony & Walt. and it's that meeting that pat paris thinks Walt told him he needs SKIPPY to face some MLB pitching so the white sox will take him. and of course jimmy is now OK with it.

this mark buehrle trade talk just won't die.

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

by gdm426 on Jun 18, 2007 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bernie

The soap opera off the field sells more newspapers than pure baseball stories, I guess.

La Russa was pretty ticked off at "members of the media" who he accused of being out to make up BS about problems between Reyes and Duncan to push their own agendas. TLR wasn't talking about Ricky Horton. Good of Edmonds to try to nip this thing in the bud and keep some melodramatic storyline from unfolding on the radio.

by liam on Jun 18, 2007 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree

saying 'we are going to face a lot of lefties in the next 2 weeks' is one of the silliest reasons to put someone on the DL I've ever heard of.

Against the Mets, Phillies and Reds, I'd rather have Jim Edmonds coming off the bench than Skippy.

Tony is saying that he would love to see Ankiel up with the big league club, but can't do it because of his options.

Interested in pre-1990 Cardinals games on tape

by Hardcore Legend on Jun 18, 2007 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm cross-posting this from a diary

Edmunds disabled
A perfect opportunity to give Ankiel his shot, but instead we are getting another chance to be unimpressed by Schumacher, just because he has an option remaining. Schmacher isn't even a short-term answer. A typically uninspired response by an increasingly uninspiring organization!

by MikeG on Jun 18, 2007 6:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs