The Macq Experience

The Cards Over The Last 32 Seasons - Catchers

2012-02-12T12:31:00.003-12:00

Well, I have to do something to fill time. The basic idea is the St. Louis Cardinals have had 3 managers for any extended period of time since 1980: Whitey Herzog, Joe Torre, Tony LaRussa. There have been others who managed parts of seasons after Herzog resigned and Torre was fired, but those are the only ones with at least one full season. Which isn't too shabby. So I thought I'd look at who were the best and worst starters at each position for each manager. Starter is defined by any player who had the plurality of innings at a given position in a given season.

As to determining best and worst, performance is an issue, but so is longevity, and to the extent I know anything about it, how representative of the manager's philosophy a given player is. In cases where the manager was only there part of the year, I went the lazy route and multiplied the player's stats by the percent of the season the manager was there. Stats are given as a 162 game average for their stint as starter. When I refer to Wins Above Replacement (WAR), I'm using the Baseball-Reference version. You prefer Fangraphs or whomever, use it for your own study. With all that out of the way, let's look at Catchers.

Herzog Era: 6 catchers.

Best: Darrell Porter (1981-1984). Strictly speaking, Ted Simmons had the best single season in 1980, when he was worth 6 WAR over 162 games. An .881 OPS out of a catcher will do that for you. But that was the only season Simmons was the starter for Herzog, who felt he wasn't defensively adequate enough and traded him to make room for Porter, acquired as a free agent. Porter was the starter the next 4 years, and platooned with Tom Nieto in '85, though Nieto logged more innings, so he's the catcher of record here.

So Porter has longevity, as the only other catcher to log more than 1 year as starter is Tony Pena (1987-1989). He also was the defensively top-notch (or believed to be top-notch) catcher Herzog wanted, which gives him a bonus in that vague "philosophy" category. But he also has some impressive statistics. Over his 4 years as starter, Porter had only a .240 batting average, but since he drew walks at a rate of 83 per 162 games, his OBP was .349, and with a pace of 24 doubles, 5 triples, and 16 home runs, his SLG was an even .400. All that plus his defense made him worth 3.3 WAR per 162 games (I know I'm mentioning 162 games a lot, I just want to make sure that point is sticking with you. I'll try to stop that henceforth). Simmons has better numbers, but not the years (though he'd headline any list of All-Time Cardinals' Catchers). Pena's stats don't come close to stacking up (0.6 WAR, dragged down by an injury plagued first season), and none of the others have the years or the numbers.

Worst: Tom Nieto (1985). I'm not sure why Herzog platooned this guy with Porter. He must have either been trying to save Porter's energy for the postseason, or he thought his defense had really slipped. Nieto's '85 would have been worth a -1.4 WAR for an entire season, as there's probably never been a catcher so good defensively they could compensate for a .586 OPS (Porter posted a .747 that year, good for a 108 OPS+). One could argue Nieto was only a starter for a half-season, but all the other guys are so far ahead of him, it doesn't help much. Even Mike LaValliere was worth 1.8 WAR in 1986, though that was a down year for offense. Pena did struggle his first year, but the other two at least partially compensated.

Torre Era: 1

Best: Tom Pagnozzi. Todd Zeile played the most innings at catcher in '90, but when Torre became manager, he gave Pagnozzi more starts behind the plate, and used Zeile more at 3rd (though Terry Pendleton still had more starts there). After that, there were no serious challengers to Pagnozzi. The backups changed, from Rich Gedman to Erik Pappas, to Terry McGriff, and Danny Sheaffer, but other than Sheaffer, none of them managed more than about half Pags' innings in a given season. Pagnozzi is the weakest of the three catchers who'll be selected, but he was still worth 2.0 WAR/162 from '90-'95. His biggest issues were an inability to stay healthy, and an inability to draw walks. His batting average is .258, but his OBP was only .303.

LaRussa Era: 5

Best: Yadier Molina (2005-2011). Molina has the years, he has the numbers, and he clearly offered what TLR wanted from a catcher. They let Mike Matheny walk and gave Molina the starting job, then stuck with him even after a 2006 where his OPS+ was an abysmal 57 (worse than Brendan Ryan's 2010). Molina's offense has picked up since then, to the point his OPS over this span is .708, and he's worth an average of 2.5 WAR. Pagnozzi's '96 comes close to that, but it's only one year. Matheny (2000-2004) was the starter for 5 years, but with a .643 OPS, he was only worth around 0.9 WAR. Bit too large of a gap there. The only offensive category I looked at where he beat Yadi was the gap between batting average and OBP. Matheny's was 59 points, Molina's was only 53. Of course, the difference in batting average means Molina's OBP still beats Matheny's by 22 points.

Worst: It's a two-horse race, Mike Difelice (1997) or Eli Marrero (98-99). On the one hand, Difelice's WAR is worse, -0.5 to 0.0. But that means Marrero was exactly replacement level for two years as a starter, which is possibly worse than being sub-replacement level for one. Plus, Difelice wasn't supposed to be the starter, but was pressed into the role because of Pags' injuries, and because TLR didn't trust Tom Lampkin to start (never mind Lampkin could actually hit a little. . .) But Marrero had to deal with a serious illness, which killed his '99. His '98 was actually not bad, over a whole season he'd have been worth about 1.5 WAR. But his next year was as bad as that was good and here we are. Based on that, I'm gonna have to give the nod to Mike Difelice.

That takes care of the catchers. Next time, whenever that is, we'll move over to first base. It'll be a little tricky in the Herzog Era, not so much for the others, on the "best" lists, at least.

Week 17 Ends On A High Note

2012-01-05T15:11:00.002-12:00

Arizona finished the season at .500, beating the Seahawks 23-20. In overtime, naturally. That makes 4 OT victories in the last 9 games of the season. The Cardinals got 93 yards rushing from LaRod Stephens-Howling, in place of Beanie Wells, who didn't play for some reason. Which means Wells joins the ranks of Cards' running backs since '93 who topped 1,000 yards, but couldn't reach 1,100 (Ron Moore in '93, Garrison Hearst in '95, Adrian Murrell in '98).

The Seahawks had a better day rushing, getting a combined 154 yards on 26 carries from Marshawn Lynch and Leon Washington, with Washington having a 48 yard rushing TD. But the Cards sacked Tavaris Jackson 4 times, and picked him off once, and Skelton only threw one INT. And for once, the Cardinals didn't make a 4th quarter comeback, as they actually had a 10 point lead, and still had to win in OT.

I suppose losing would have helped the Cards' draft position, but I've seen them whiff on so many Top 10 picks that it doesn't bother me any. I'd rather have the win. For next year, offensive line would seem to be a major area of concern, and linebacker could probably use some more beefing up. They're starting to get some good players there, but they need more.

They'll have to figure out the QB thing as well. Skelton did improve on his completion percentage from last year, but only from 47 to 55 percent. He also was intercepted on over 5% of his pass attempts. On the other hand, Kolb gets sacked on over 10% of his dropbacks, and hasn't demonstrated he can stay upright for an entire season. It isn't as though his 9 TD - 8 INT, with a 58% completion percentage is the stuff legends are made of. At the end of the day though, he has the big contract, and the team can argue he didn't have much time to learn the offense last year, so I imagine the job is his to lose.

The person who really impresses me is Larry Fitzgerald. With the mediocre QBs he had to work with, he still had over 1,400 yards receiving. That's almost a third of the team's total passing yards. And only one drop in 150 targets, too. I bet one of the reasons for the few drops is that many of the ones that failed to be caught were too badly overthrown for even Fitzgerald to try and get a hand on them. Skelton does have a tendency to overthrow badly.

Back To The Other Cardinals

2011-12-25T12:36:00.002-12:00

Since the last time I discussed the St. Louis Cardinals, they signed J.C. Romero and, more impressively, Carlos Beltran.

Romero might be OK, as long as they keep him away from right-handed batters. His career OPS against righties is .812, and it's been getting worse as his career progresses. Something I didn't know is that Kyle McClellan is also much more effective against lefties. Their career OPS is .629, versus righties .749. His splits also appear to be growing more pronounced. Last year lefties were .638, righties .827.

With Beltran, I'm curious whether he can still play a competent centerfield. In the short term, that isn't hugely critical, since Allen Craig isn't going to be ready to go until probably at least May, and it's doubtful he'll come out of the gate firing on all cylinders. That'll leave Beltran plenty of opportunities to play in right. But in theory, Craig will eventually be ready to play regularly. Now, he could spell Holliday in left and Berkman at first, in addition to playing right field. I doubt they'll use him at second; it just seems like too much stress on a surgically repaired knee. It would help if Beltran can spell Jay in center without it being too much of a defensive disaster. Holliday and Craig are both average or better in the corner spots, but it'd be best if Beltran isn't the equivalent of Right Fielder Lance Berkman in center. Beltran didn't play in center at all last year, and he's a year older, but he's also another year removed from knee surgery, so maybe those things offset. He doesn't have to be peak Jim Edmonds; roughly average would more than suffice, assuming his hitting holds up.

At any rate, the Cardinals seem to have mostly filled their roster, barring trading some projected starters away.

Rotation - Carpenter, Garcia, Lohse, Wainwright, Westbrook
Bullpen - McClellan, Motte, Romero, Rzepczynski, Salas
Catcher - Molina
Infield - Berkman, Descalso, Freese, Furcal, Schumaker
Outfield - Beltran, Craig, Holliday, Jay, Komatsu

That's 21, which leaves 4 spots. I figure the last two bullpen spots will go to some combo of Boggs, Lynn, and Sanchez. I'm partial to Boggs and Sanchez, not because of anything against Lynn. I'd prefer him in the AAA rotation as insurance against the inevitable injury.

Back-up catcher seems like it'll come down to either Tony Cruz or Bryan Anderson. They have roughly equivalent major league experience (slight edge to Cruz), and Cruz was clearly preferred by LaRussa, who is gone, so fuck his preferences. Anderson has worked with Matheny to improve his defense, so maybe that gives him an in with the new coach. Plus he's a lefty, so maybe that offers some platoon split opportunities.

That leaves a spot for a utility infielder. Tyler Greene might have the edge since he can play second or short, or theoretically third base. But a bench of Greene, Cruz/Anderson, Schumaker, Komatsu, and Craig is pretty lacking in power. And Craig won't be ready at season's start. They could add Matt Carpenter until Craig is ready. He's an actual 3rd baseman, rather than a middle infielder playing there, and he has a little power. Not as much as Craig, but more than any of those other guys. He's insurance against what's likely to be an inevitable Freese injury.

I don't quite follow the reason for having Skip and Komatsu. Offensively they're fairly similar, with not much power or ability to draw walks. I suppose they're still thinking of using Skip at second. Ugh. I'd rather have Punto. He even signed with Boston for the same contract Skip got. Oh well, too late now.

Week 16 Marks The End Of The Dream

2011-12-24T09:33:00.002-12:00

Arizona lost to the Bengals 23-16, which officially ends the Cards' chances of making the playoffs. Sure, they were a long shot to begin with, but it would have been cool if they could make it in after their horrible start.

The Cardinals followed their recent strategy of doing very little offensively the first 3 quarters, then trying to come back in the fourth. Problem being they fell behind 23-0 to a team that's a little too good to blow that big a lead. Skelton didn't help matters by throwing 3 INTs before rallying with 2 TDs in the 4th. He once again got no help from the running game, as Wells had only 53 yards on 14 carries. The Bengals meanwhile, had 165 yards on 34 carries as a team.

There's not a lot else to say. The Cards did have a chance to tie or win (if they went for 2), but Early Doucet fell down for some reason, so the pass went incomplete.

I'm curious now whether the Cardinals will start Kolb against Seattle in Week 17. On the one hand, the Cards will be playing for nothing more than pride and a chance to finish .500. That would suggest there's no reason to risk Kolb getting another concussion. At the same time, Kolb still needs to prove something. Yes, Skelton has largely failed to demonstrate he should be the longterm starter. He has 10 TDs and 13 INTs, which is only acceptable if you're the Raiders and you really like Carson Palmer. But he has showed some skill at the end of games, and unlike Kolb, he actually makes it through games without getting injured. It doesn't much matter if Kolb is better if he can't stay on the field. And Kolb hasn't been all that great himself. So coming back and leading the team to a .500 record at home to close out the season wouldn't hurt his standing with the fans.

Week 15 Keeps The Playoff Dream Alive

2011-12-18T13:33:00.003-12:00

With another narrow victory naturally. Arizona triumphed over Cleveland 20-17 in overtime. John Skelton lead his fourth 4th quarter comeback of the season, throwing for over 300 yards and a TD. He was also intercepted once, and sacked 4 times, but take the bad with the good.

The sacks might be on the offensive line, since the running game failed to engage for the second consecutive week. Beanie Wells had 51 yards on 15 carries, and the team as a whole had just 74 yards, at 3.1 ypc. For the Browns, Peyton Hillis ran for 91 yards, and they averaged 4.1 ypc. However, O'Brien Schofield had sacks on consecutive plays, and thanks to a Whisenhunt challenge, the second one produced a fumble the Cards recovered and turned into the tying points. Let's hear it for the young linebacking corps! Whoo! This 3-4 defense thing might not be such a stupid idea after all, now that they have personnel fit to run it.

I suppose I shouldn't be so excited about a narrow victory over a team that's now 4-10. But it was so easy to see Arizona losing this game. They're on a bit of a roll. Analysts are praising their defense, they're in the wild card hunt, and they just beat the big, bad division leader. And here come the suckass Browns into town, with their backup QB under center. That's a game ripe for the Cards to blow, and they nearly did. They had to overcome a 10-point deficit in the 4th quarter, after all. But overcome it they did.

I can't quite figure this team out. Their defense is good. Not great, and it has its bad moments, but those are to be expected with the number of young guys they're starting. Their offense shows flashes, mostly with Kolb as QB, but the pass blocking and run blocking are so spotty. Sometimes they're good, frequently (especially the pass blocking) they aren't. I don't know if that's a talent issue, or a coaching one. The complaints I see online about Levi Brown suggest he, at least, is a talent issue, but who knows.

A Series Of Lukewarm Moves

2011-12-13T12:32:00.003-12:00

In the absence of Albert Pujols, the Cardinals have gone on trying to put together their team. First they resigned Rafael Furcal at 14 million over 2 seasons. That's OK, I suppose. Furcal's probably the best value left at SS after Reyes signed with the Marlins. Jimmy Rollins is better, younger, and has fewer chronic injury problems. But he also wants a 4 year contract, at likely more than 7 million a year, and I'm not keen on being locked in with a SS until he's 37.

Still, I find myself less than excited with Furcal. I guess I doubt he'll stay healthy, and I'm not convinced about his defense, which is something I prize in a SS. I hope he rediscovers his speed; it'd be nice to have a leadoff man who can steal some bases. While I was intrigued by the prospect of Tyler Greene getting the starting job and unleashing his full potential in a devastating display speed and power, Furcal's a much safer bet.

On the negative side of ledger, they're bringing back Schumaker on a two-year contract as well. It only pays something like 3 million total, but cripes, what do they need him for? His offense is declining steadily, with less power and a lowering walk rate, and his defense isn't strong enough to compensate for that. He's a lousy second baseman, and since he's a lefthanded hitter, he can't even be a centerfield platoon with Jay, who is also a lefty.

They also tendered a deal to Kyle McClellan, which I don't really see the need for. One thing the Cardinals don't lack for is righthanded relief pitching. I guess Kyle could serve as the stopgap starter when one of the rotation guys gets hurts, but I'd rather see Lynn, Dickson, or Broderick from AAA. At the end of the day, he and Schumaker aren't big investments for the team, certainly nothing that should keep them from making a deal for Carlos Beltran, but they just don't seem like they're worth it. I do hope the Schumaker signing isn't going to mean farewell to Punto. I'd rather have a utility infielder who is actually a good infielder. I don't expect he'll maintain the offensive production we saw this year, but he does draw walks, and if he can hit for a decent average he'll be good for getting on base.

Week 14 Brings Victory Over a Good Team

2011-12-12T08:10:00.002-12:00

Considering how badly Dallas lost last night against the Giants, I'm not sure they qualify. But the 49ers, for all their recent struggles, are still 10-3, thanks to Arizona beating them 21-19.

The Cardinals won despite Kolb getting a concussion from an inadverdent knee to the head on the first drive. Despite Skelton coming in and throwing two picks, plus losing a fumble on a scramble. Despite forcing no turnovers of their own. Despite Beanie Well gaining only 27 yards on 15 carries. Despite losing time of possession in the first half 22 minutes to 8, which put them on pace for a near repeat of the last go-round, when the Niners held the ball over 44 minutes.

The Cardinals won because Skelton did manage to complete 19 of 28 passes for about 280 yards and 3 TDs. His receivers did a lot of the work after the catch, with Early Doucet getting a 60-yard reception, and Fitzgerald a 49-yarder, as part of his 7 catches, 149 yards. Skelton also managed 25 yards on 6 carries, easily the most productive Cards' runner. The defense may not have gotten any takeaways, but they did sack Alex Smith 5 times, and he completed less than half of his passes. The Cardinals also got lucky by calling a challenge right before the Niners ran a fake punt that looked like it would produce a huge gain, possibly a TD. The challenge never got going, because the replay equipment was messed up, but it killed the Niners element of surprise, and lead them to try a 50-yard field goal instead. The defense also held the Niners to field goals on three separate occasions when they were inside the 10, though to be fair,, san Fran has had that problem all season.

They also had some help from some curious Niners' play calling. San Francisco hasn't been as run heavy as the tebow-lead Broncos, but they do tend to minimize Smith's pass attempts. Yesterday he threw 37 times (completing 18), and Frank gore ran only 10 times, despite getting 72 yards and a TD on those carries. Well, having seen the Cardinals shoot themselves in the foot for not running enough when they're having success, I'm glad to see another team make the same mistake.

Now there are people discussing playoff scenarios for Arizona, which, let's not go nuts here. They'd have to get in as a wildcard, and currently Atlanta, Detroit, Chicago, the Giants, and Dallas are all ahead of them, and Seattle will be if it beats the Rams tonight. I'm just enjoying the victories and the fact that in his fifth season, Whisenhunt might finally have put together a defense.

Albert Pujols Is Now A California Angel

2011-12-09T11:42:00.003-12:00

That's what they were called when I started watching baseball, and it takes less space to type than the nonsense name they have now. They offered 10 years and $254 million, Albert accepted, legions of Cardinals fans went online to disavow ever liking Albert Pujols, ever being glad he was a Cardinal, to hope for his career to go into immediate decline, for him to be busted for PED use, to suffer a career-ending injury, or to demand to know how he could leave, so on and so forth. In other words, lose their shit.

Frankly, I'd like to meet all these Cardinals fans who are apparently so wealthy they could turn up their nose at an extra $34 million over ten years. They could loan me some money. I wouldn't ask for anywhere near that much, so clearly they'd never miss such an inconsequential sum.

Look, I'm probably the last person who should be telling people to calm the fuck down. I have railed against LaRussa and the Cardinals for trading Brendan Ryan and trying to feed us a line of bullshit about Ryan Theriot being a shortstop for about a year now. That being said, people need to calm the fuck down*.

Albert Pujols doesn't owe the Cardinals or the fans shit. Whatever he might have owed from them drafting him in the 13th round, or for giving him a spot on the Opening Day roster in 2001, or for his recently expired 8 year, $111 million contract, he more than repaid. They won 2 World Series titles with him, and wouldn't have won either without him. They went to another World Series. True, I'd just as soon forget that one ever happened, but it did and he was a major part of it. They had one losing season in his 11 years with the team**. The Cardinals may have given Albert the opportunity, but he's the one who made something of it.

By that same token, the Cardinals owe Albert nothing. They paid him in accordance with a contract he agreed to. Was that contract well below value for the production he offered? Hell yes, and maybe that's why he went for the biggest money contract this time. Imagine if he'd played through his 3 arbitration years (2004-2006) on one year contracts, then gone on the free agent market in an offseason when he was turning 27***, and had just won a World Series. Holy crap. The fact remains, he took the contract and as far as I know, the Cardinals didn't stiff him on a dime. Once the contract ended, they were under no obligation to offer him any more than they felt comfortable with. That comfort level apparently ended at 10 years and $220 million, which was insufficient for Albert.

So here we are. I'm in a middle ground. I don't blame either side for their decision. I would have liked for Albert to be a Cardinal his entire career, to chase Stan Musial for the franchise record in all sorts of offensive categories. I would not have liked for the Cardinals to be paying him $25 (or 22 for that matter) million a year for the next decade. Though I suppose that kind of payroll commitment would force them to build from within, as it would kind of limit their opportunities to chase free agents. At least, free agents that could have a large impact. I would have enjoyed that.

The years were really the hang up for me. Had it been my call, I'd have given him 25 million per for 7 years in a heartbeat, or even 30 million per for 5. But a 10-year contract? A bridge too far, but one Albert really wanted, and someone else was willing to give. It's disappointing, but the team will go on. My Cardinals fandom survived the strike, LaRussa alienating Ozzie, J.D. Drew's oft-injured presence, Ankiel's pitching flameout, losing to the Mets in the 2000 NLCS, the '04 World Series sweep, Anthony Reyes never putting it together (even on another team where he could spite LaRussa and Duncan), the presence of lousy veterans like Miles, Suppan, MacDougal, Feliz, and Winn on the 2010 team, the trade of Brendan Ryan, the presence of Ryan Theriot, all the stupid crap LaRussa did over the years.

I'm not going to wish Albert ill. I expect his numbers will decline, because age always wins, but I hope he can maintain a high level for some time for the Angels. Maybe break some records. Sure, it'll be with the Angels, but he'll have started with the Cardinals, and that's not nothing. I'd like for him to be popular in Anaheim. Maybe he won't be for them what he could have been for St. Louis, but I don't buy some of this stuff I see about how he could have been a Musial-like figure for the franchise had he stayed. Fans today have short memories. The first time he really struggled, say lost a season to injury, or just had a bad year, there'd be fans who would turn on him. Fans are frequently "What have you done for me in the last five seconds?" Because we're lunatic assholes. I'm not going to boo him when the Cardinals play the Angels. I reserve my booing for players who sucked while they were Cardinals, like Jeff Brantley. I'm not saying I want the Angels to win 10 World Series with Albert. I'd rather the Cards win the next 10, or failing that, whatever team Brendan Ryan's playing for that year, since he missed out on this one. But if those options are a no-go, I wouldn't object to the Angels getting another championship.

I'm going to try and remember the good stuff about his eleven years here. The great spring training that got him on the Opening day roster his rookie year. The 3-HR game against the Cubs in '04. The 2004 NLCS, when he matched Beltran big hit for big hit. Crushing that Brad Lidge pitch in the '05 NLCS. Hitting a game-winning double off Lidge the next year (though I mostly remember Lidge dejectedly walking back to his dugout). His insane April and May in 2006. Scoring from second on a grounder to second against the Rockies. Being worth 25 runs above average at first in '07. Running with that gimpy stride, but trying to take the extra base like he was Vince Coleman. Coming back from a fractured wrist in less than 3 weeks. Playing with an elbow that needs Tommy John surgery for what, five years at least? The 3-HR game in the World Series. Playing second base in '08 because the team needed him to, or going back to third this year for the same reason.

People are saying his signing for the most money with the Angels proves he doesn't care about winning like he said. Bullshit. I don't believe for a second a guy who plays at positions more likely to cause him injury because it let the team put their best lineup out there doesn't care about winning. Maybe he did that for individual acclaim, but it helped the team, so it all leads to the same place. He was the best player the Cardinals have had in my lifetime. Even if he wasn't my favorite player ever, I'm still glad I got to see him play for the Cardinals for 11 years. if other people want to focus on the negative, that's their choice. I'm not going the bitter route, if for no other reason than I refuse to give the gloating fans of other teams the satisfaction.

* I don't think it's quite the same thing since in that case, Brendan still wanted to be here, and was traded due to some guys on the team being uptight jackasses, and then the team tried to sell us the notion they were better off with a clearly inferior ballplayer. In this case, Albert was free to go where he liked, the team made an offer, the Angels made one he liked better, and he went. Nobody was forced to leave.

** That was 2007, the year Carpenter's season ended on Opening Day, leaving Kip Wells as the No. 1 starter. The Cardinals had 3 relief pitchers who didn't suck (Izzy, Franklin, Russ Springer). Chris Duncan was the only guy to hit over 15 HRs besides Albert, and he didn't play the last month of the season. Scott Rolen slugged below .400. Juan Encarnacion's career was ended by a line drive to the face. Adam Kennedy was, before his season ending knee surgery, the worst starting 2nd baseman the team has had in my life. And still they won 78 games, in no small part because of Albert.

*** I know there's still rumors he's older than he says he is. Until someone shows me proof, I'll take him at his word. And no, Keith Law, Rob Neyer, and Dan LeBatard, "front office people around baseball believe it" isn't proof. Front office people can be dumbasses. If they weren't we wouldn't have nearly as many jokes about Barry Zito and Vernon Wells' ridiculous contracts.

It's Hall Of Fame Voting Time

2011-12-07T04:44:00.003-12:00

Not that I have a ballot, but let's pretend I did. Who am I voting for? Starting with returning candidates.

Barry Larkin: Yes. I'm always going to believe Ozzie was better, because even though Larkin was a much better hitter, Ozzie was so phenomenal at a critical defensive position that amplifies his value. But just because I don't think Larkin was as good as Ozzie Smith, doesn't mean Larkin shouldn't be in the Hall.

Jack Morris: I said No last year, with the understanding I wouldn't be angry if he was elected, as long as Blyleven got in first. Well, Blyleven's in, so if they want to vote Morris in that's fine.

Lee Smith: Still No.

Jeff Bagwell: I said Yes last year, I'm sticking with that.

Tim Raines: Yes.

Edgar Martinez: Yes.

Alan Trammell: Yes. Seems like Trammell's campaign gained a little steam last year. Is the backlash against suspected PED users funneling more votes to players believed to be clean? Unfortunately, I think it may be happening a little late. Trammell's got a lot of ground to make up, and only a few years left to do it in.

Larry Walker: I'm a little shaky on this with the Coors-inflated stats, but Yes.

Mark McGwire: A conditional Yes. If I end up with too many options, I'm shuffling him off.

Fred McGriff: No.

Don Mattingly: No.

Dale Murphy: No.

Rafael Palmerio: Like McGwire, a conditional Yes. I want to see what happens to his vote percentage this year. McGwire's has declined slowly. Will Palmiero's do the same?

Juan Gonzalez: No.

Man, the crop of new players sucks.

Bernie Williams: I don't think his offensive statistics are that superb. Admittedly, he's a CFer, and like SS, I'll cut them some slack with the bat if they're great with the glove. Unfortunately for Bernie, Baseball-reference has him as -12 wins below average defensively for his career. That's only about a -0.75 per season, but that's definitely not "great". No.

Vinny Castilla: No, his stats are Coors inflated like Walker's, but the results aren't nearly as good.

Javy Lopez: No.

Ruben Sierra: No.

Jeff Nelson: Um, hang on, who? *looks up player page* OK, I vaguely remember him. No.

Jeromy Burnitz: That's a joke, right? No.

Tim Salmon: Angels Hall of Fame? Sure. MLB Hall of Fame? No.

Mike Matheny: A guy worth 2.6 WAR for his entire career? No.

Edgardo Alfonzo: No, sorry.

OK, shit, this is taking too long. Why the hell did they nominate so many new, mediocre players? Let's do this:

Danny Graves, Scott Erickson, Tony Womack, Jeff Fassero, Phil Nevin, Carl Everett, Eric Young, Tim Worrell, Bill Mueller, Joe Randa, Jose Lima, Matt Lawton, Terry Mulholland, Rick Helling, Mike Remlinger, Felix Rodriguez? No.

I have a certain soft spot for Brad Radke, and especially Brian Jordan, so if I had some open spots, I'd vote for them, just so they each got at least one vote, and I only voted for eight guys, so. Yes!

Week 13 Is The Return Of The Kolb

2011-12-04T13:41:00.002-12:00

I hadn't really thought of it a few minutes ago, but Arizona's now won 4 of their last 5, after beating the Dallas Cowboys 19-13 in overtime today. It doesn't make up for the 1-6 start, but it's a better stretch than I might have expected. There was some luck involved, since Dallas' kicker missed two field goals, when he'd hit 25 in a row or something. But they were like 53 and 49 yard tries, which are hardly chip shots. Of course, he hit the 49 yarder at the end of regulation to win it, but it wound up not counting because his own head coach called a time out. Then he missed the next try, allowing the game to go into overtime. Ha! I love that. Dallas shot itself in the foot. If I can't have Arizona whupping their asses, I'll take Dallas beating itself.

Patrick Peterson did not return a punt for a TD this week. He did get matched up against Dex Bryant, with mixed results. Bryant didn't have a big game, but he did have 86 yards on 8 receptions, with one TD. The Cardinals didn't force any turnovers, but neither did the Cowboys, which is a nice change of pace for the Cardinals offense. The Cardinals actually outrushed their opponents, getting over 100 yards, at a 4.1 ypc clip. The Cowboys mustered only 75 yards on the ground, at 3.8 ypc. Felix Jones had some good results, but the Cards' defense largely corraled recent rushing beast DeMarco Murray.

Kevin Kolb was back in the lineup, and he had a quietly effective game, kind of like the one Sam Bradford had against Arizona last week. 16 of 25 for 247 yards, with 1 TD. 52 of the yards came on the game-winning screen pass, so perhaps more credit there should go to LaRod Stephens-Howling and his legion of blockers on the play. Still, the QB has to get the ball there.

Both defenses collected 5 sacks. I'm not too surprised Kolb was sacked that often, since the Cowboys have a good pass rush (it's their secondary that blows), but I thought the Cowboys did a better job protecting Romo than that. So, credit to Arizona's pass rush.

Next up for the Cardinals are, aw crap. The 49ers?! Well, I guess this'll be a chance for Kolb to really prove something. Yeah, I know I pointed out the lack of turnovers, and Arizona won and all, but their offense is still hardly clicking on all cylinders. At least, I hope it isn't. 19 points would be a pretty lousy peak offensive performance. The Niners ate Skelton for lunch two games ago, so let's see what Kolb can manage against them. I certainly hope he can do better.

Week 12 Brings Another Win Over A Crappy Team

2011-11-27T14:25:00.000-12:00

But hey, at least Arizona's occasionally beating crappy teams. I couldn't always count on them to do that even on those occasions when they were good, let alone when they were lousy, as they are now. Yes, Arizona beat the Rams 23-20. Didn't even need a 99-yard punt return TD in OT to do it. They did need an 80-yard punt return TD in the 3rd quarter, but baby steps.

Let's look at the good. Arizona had another punt return TD from Patrick Peterson, his 4th of the year, two of them against the Rams. His cornerbacking is still a work in progress, but he's got this punt return thing down.

Arizona forced two turnovers. While they didn't intercept Bradford (who had a quietly decent game, but nothing spectacular), they did recover two fumbles, one by Paris Lenon, the other by Sam Acho. Hey, maybe they're going to have enough good linebackers that running a 3-4 defense isn't an idiotic decision! Acho also sacked Bradford twice.

Beanie Wells! Franchise record 228 yards, breaking the mark set by LeShon Johnson against the Saints back in '96. Geez, I remember that game. Some of us fans wondered if LeShon could be a franchise back. Considering that was in Week 4, and Johnson still finished the year with less the 650 yards rushing, I think we should have known the answer was a resounding "No". Apparently the Cardinals did, since they drafted Leeland McElroy. So they identified the problem, but their response wasn't quite correct.

As for Wells, he did have a 71-yard carry, which certainly didn't hurt his yards per carry, but 8.4 ypc is good however you get it. What I also like is the team committed to the run. 38 rushes total, though the rest of the team had a less impressive 40 yards on 11 carries. But the team wisely stuck with it, even when they were losing, and kept feeding the hot hand (Wells). I don't know if this meant his knee has healed up, of if the Rams' run defense just went down the toilet. He wasn't able to do this 4 weeks ago against them, and I can't imagine the Rams were stacking the box, daring Skelton to pass any less than they did last time. Maybe the offensive line found its run blocking groove. I don't know.

The Cardinals won the time of possession battle. Woo! That never seems to happen!

The run defense showed up. Like I said above, Bradford had an alright day. Certainly better than Skelton, but not superb. Then again, his receiving corps is still mostly ass, so what should we expect? Last time they played, Stephen Jackson went for 130 yards on 29 carries. Today, they were able to limit him to 64 yards on 17 carries. And again, the Rams either lead, or were close through almost the entire game, so it isn't as though they had to abandon the run game. That's not a bad follow-up to limiting the Niners to 3.3 yards per carry last week (albeit over 49 carries, so the yards still piled up).

The bad would seem to be John Skelton. Maybe the offensive line's pass blocking, since the Rams recorded 3 sacks, but maybe those are Skelton's fault, too. He did throw 2 INTs. He did complete just 12 of his 23 passes, for only 114 yards. Still, his 30 QB rating is better than last week's 10.5, right? Ugh, it's still terrible.

I don't know. Skelton's 5-3 and as starter, but his numbers don't suggest he's the key to victory. He once again failed to stake some sort of claim to the starting QB job, this time against a much weaker opponent than the one he faced last week. At the same time, Kolb can't seem to get healthy enough to get back on the field, and like I've said before, he wasn't setting the world on fire when he was playing. Hopefully he'll be back in time to take his turn against San Francisco (at home), and prove he can do better than Skelton did. Shouldn't be hard.

Week 11 Douses The QB Controversy

2011-11-21T05:33:00.003-12:00

People are bailing off the John Skelton bandwagon like it's on fire and headed for a tanker truck. And he did play like shit yesterday in Arizona's 23-7 loss to the 49ers. Skelton's QB rating was 10.5, and he threw 3 INTs. Ouch. Whether it was an injury or ineffectiveness, I'm not sure, but he was replaced in the 2nd half by Rich Bartel, who managed to throw a TD pass to Fitzgerald in the 4th quarter. watch as fans now load onto the "Rich Bartel should start!" bandwagon.

The Cardinals' running game didn't do much, though it seems to be a lack of opportunities. Even if you set aside Chester Taylor's lone carry, which went for 34 yards, Beanie Wells averaged 4.1 yards per carry. As that was only 8 carries, it only totaled 33 yards. Why didn't they run more? They were only down 9-0 at the half, and the 49ers didn't score a TD until halfway through the 3rd quarter. I do not understand why they won't run more on those occasions when it's actually working. If they're worried about Beanie's health, then use Taylor more. The guy has a career 4.1 yards per carry average! And he's a receiving threat out of the backfield! He might not know all the plays, but he ought to know enough of them! Give him the damn ball! I mean, cripes, they lost the time of possession battle nearly 3-1! The offense had the ball for less than 16 minutes! The Cardinals defense is playing better, but you can't put that kind of pressure on them and expect it to end well!

Look at the 49ers. They only average 3.3 yards per carry, but they still ran it 49 times. Even if they weren't having big success, they kept at it. The defense didn't do so well at containing Michael Crabtree, but they at least gave it a good shot on run defense. And the special teams blocked two field goals, so credit to them.

In theory, Kolb will be back for the upcoming game with the Rams. Now that the clamor for Skelton has cooled, it'd be a good time for Kolb to win some games. Maybe try throwing more TDs than INTs. Skelton certainly blew this opportunity to show he's the QB the franchise should throw their weight behind, but that doesn't mean Kolb has demonstrated he's that guy, either. All he has going for him is the team gave him a big contract after trading specifically for him. Whoopededoo.

Season In Review - Bench Players

2011-11-15T05:57:00.003-12:00

I'm starting to regret this. It's been more work than I expected. So let's wrap things up.

Colby Rasmus: Rasmus was traded a few weeks into July. He already seemed in danger of losing his starting job, as he'd been struggling and LaRussa was giving Jay more run in center. All told, he was worth 1.1 WAR for StL, which is pretty close to Jay's 1.3. Rasmus had a poor defensive showing, which is disappointing. Maybe he'll find success next season with Toronto, but it didn't happen this year.

Ryan Theriot: Theriot led the team in innings at SS for the season, and his 0.0 WAR (or 0.7 if you prefer Fangraphs) makes him the Cardinals' worst starting shortstop since Tripp Cromer in 1995. And keep in mind, Theriot elevated his value by playing a halfway decent second base. He was 3 runs above average in 190 innings there, which somewhat offsets his -8 in 755 innings at SS. Looking strictly at his performance there, he's worse than Cromer.

For the record, Brendan Ryan was worth 2.7 WAR for the Mariners this season. Great move, Cardinals! The good news is they show no sign of planning to bring Tally Ho back next season. He's like Schumaker: defensively inept, with no power or ability to draw walks. On top of that, he's a lousy baserunner. Truly a waste of a roster spot.

Daniel Descalso: Descalso played allover the infield, though judging by B-R's numbers, not very well anywhere. He's slightly below average in 80 innings at 2nd, a -5 in 666 innings at 3rd, and slightly above in 97 innings at short. The good news is, he was only 24, so he still hasn't reached his prime. He should get better, and he's already more useful than the chump I discussed right before him (1.2 WAR). He doesn't hit for a lot of power (his ISO was .089), but he can draw some walks (benefiting from hitting 8th), and like I said, he can still improve. I'd be fine with platooning him at 2nd next year with Punto, since the free agent market looks pretty lousy.

Allen Craig: Craig missed a couple of months with I believe a fractured kneecap. Even so, he was almost a 3 win player (2.9 WAR), and some of that was even defensive value (0.8 dWAR), which surprises me. Sure, I knew he was an improvement over Berkman in right, but I'm not sure Mickey Mantle's corpse wouldn't show more range than Berkman. But he was average in an extremely limited (4 innings) stint at first, and ditto at 2nd (41 innings). He didn't do so hot at 3rd, but we're talking 11 innings. All told, he was 8 runs above average in about 300 innings in the corner outfield spots. Matheny shouldn't try using him in center, though.

Craig had a .917 OPS, with a .555 slugging. he might want to show a little more patience (15 walks in 219 PAs), but he's no worse off than Freese or Jay in that regard, and he's a better hitter than those two. Heck, he was even a perfect 5 for 5 stealing bases. I'm not sure where he'll get time next season if the Cards resign Pujols, barring injury. Albert, Holliday, and Berkman will have his spots covered, and I can't argue for benching one of them regularly for Craig. If they can't resign Albert, shift Berk to first and put Craig in right. It's still an overall offensive downgrade, but maybe the defensive upgrade in right can compensate. Plus, the money not spent on Albert might net them an awesome SS upgrade.

Nick Punto: Too bad Punto couldn't stay healthy. This was far and away the best offensive showing of his career. His previous best OPS in a season where he had at least 100 PAs was .726 (with a 96 OPS+) in 2008. He had an .809 and 127 this year. It's doubtful he can replicate it next year, but I'd still like to have him back for his defensive versatility, and he knows how to take a walk, which doesn't hurt. I mean, he was worth 1.5 WAR in a year where he collected less than 170 PAs.

Tyler Greene: Greene was the biggest loser from the Cardinals' late season charge. It was the perfect excuse for LaRussa to give him no playing time. Which is why, after his September callup, he got only 2 plate appearances, plus a few pinch running opportunities. To his credit, he got hits both times he came to bat, which got his average over .200. He also led the team in stolen bases, going a perfect 11-for-11.

I'd be fine giving Greene a crack at the starting SS job next season, but Mozeliak's likely negotiating tactics aside, I doubt it's going to happen.

Gerald Laird: Laird did OK. Not great, but for a Cardinals backup catcher, a .660 OPS is pretty good. Certainly a step up for the Gary Bennett/Einar Diaz days. I'm pretty indifferent to the idea of bringing him back. Though you never know, Matheny might prize rest for his starting catcher more than LaRussa did. The issue would be getting Molina to go along with it.

Tony Cruz: Cruz didn't get much play once Laird came back, only 12 PAs after the end of July. Still, he did post a .672 OPS in the 72 PAs he got this year. His walk rate is about the same as Laird's (they each average 1 walk every 12 PAs), but Laird showed much more power, with an ISO of .126 vs. Cruz' .076. Defensively, the samples are too small to draw much of a conclusion. Laird seems slightly better, but Cruz has a better percentage of base stealers thrown out. Keep in mind, we're talking 2 out of 4, versus 4 out of 20. Very limited samples.

Corey Patterson: Ugh, do I have to? His OPS was .424. He posted a -0.4 WAR, though his dWAR was +0.1. He struck out 12 times in 56 PAs, with only 2 walks. He hopefully will never play for the Cardinals again.

Mark Hamilton: Hamilton had a little play in July (11 PAs). It was his best month, with 3 hits, including a double. I don't see that the Cards have a place for him, with or without Albert. He can really only competently play first, and even if you remove Albert and Berkman, there's still Craig. Not to mention Matt Adams down in AA.

Shane Robinson: He was called up late in the year. He had 8 PAs, and got on base once, with a walk. I think he was mostly a defensive replacement.

Adron Chambers: Chambers was used even more frequently as a defensive replacement, seeing as he was in 18 games, but only received 8 PAs. He did manage 3 hits, including a triple. He also got some use in the postseason, again, mostly as a defensive replacement for Berkman, but he did get 5 chances at-bat. I wouldn't mind seeing him as the other back-up outfielder alongside Craig next year (assuming they resign Albert, otherwise it'll be Chambers and someone else, since Craig'll be starting in RF).

OK, that's it. Now I have to figure what to move on to next.

Season In Review - Starting Position Players

2011-11-14T12:22:00.002-12:00

So the Cardinals named Matheny their new manager. We'll see how that goes. At least Mozeliak knows he has the power now. Before, LaRussa held the whip hand, since DeWitt basically said LaRussa couldn't/wouldn't be fired. Now, if Mozeliak brings somebody up from the minors to see what he can do, said player might actually get some playing time. Anyway, today is the 8 starting position players.

Yadier Molina: I noted halfway that Molina was hitting for far more power than usual. He not only maintained that in the second half, he improved upon it. His previous best isolated power had been .106 in '05. At the end of June, it was .133. He ended the season at .160. Supposedly he was hitting more fly balls, which would lead to more extra base hits than ground balls, but didn't hurt his average as I would expect (as fly balls rarely turn into hits). Though Molina wouldn't get as many hits off ground balls as the average player, given how slow he is. Anyway, he set a career high for OPS, at .814, the highest mark since Ted Simmons in 1980. So in terms of WAR, this was far and away his best season. Most of his 3.9 WAR is offense, but he did generate 0.7 with his glove, and catcher defense is still tricky. He did only throw out 29% of baserunners, but I don't know whether that's on him, or if it's that pitchers not named Carp and Lohse were lousy at holding runners.

In the postseason his power slumped a bit, but he maintained a .360 OBP, so I'm not going to complain about that.

Albert Pujols: Albert came back from that injured wrist in a little over 2 weeks, and proceeded to hit like he pretty much always has. Really, he did that from the end of May on until the end. He did hit into a lot of double plays, but so did everyone else on the team. I'm not too concerned about his .299 batting average, but the .366 OBP worries me. His walk rate's been dropping, and it seems to be because he's grown more impatient. In 2010, the gap between AVG and OBP was .102, this year, only .067. The two years before that it was .105 and .116, so 2011 is more out of line with past performance than 2010.

So this was his worst year ever, and he was still a 5.4 win player, and 0.9 of that was defense. I'm always happy when he has good defensive stats, because I like him more as a player when he seems like more of a complete player. I'm not a big fan of guys who can only hit home runs, and do nothing else, and fortunately, that isn't Albert. He didn't lead the team in stolen bases this year, but he was 9 out of 10 on his attempts. He's almost certainly too aggressive for how slow he is, and the team probably shouldn't be letting him decide when to take extra bases, in terms of having the best chance to win, but I do like the aggressiveness, from a strict enjoyment standpoint. Too bad the team doesn't have more fast players with that style.

The postseason was very similar to the regular season, though Albert posted an 1.155 OPS in the playoffs. But he seemed very feast or famine. Either he's killing the Brewers and Rangers single-handed, or he's doing nothing whatsoever. He did draw 12 walks in about 70 plate appearances, so that's good, even if several of them were intentional.

Skip Schumaker: Sigh. Skip is now one of only two players to be the starting 2nd baseman for 3 years during LaRussa's tenure with the Cards. The other was Fernando Vina. Sadly, Skip isn't anywhere near as good as Vina was. He did improve on last season, as he was worth 0.6 WAR, up from 0.1 a year ago. Hmm, they must have reevaluated his defense, as it used to be 0.4. Anyway, that's still shitty return for an $2 million+ investment by the team. But supposedly the team loves him, so they still might bring him back this offseason. Crap. They don't need him. There's nothing he does they can't get out of Descalso, Punto, or Adron Chambers, for less money. His power's evaporating, as are his walks, and he's not a good enough defensive player anywhere to make up for that.

Rafael Furcal: Furcal showed up in late July, when the team finally realized (or admitted) Theriot was not the answer. In about 2 months, he was worth 1.4 WAR, and was by some measure slightly above average defensively. By others, not so much. His OBP is a bit lower than I'd like to see in a leadoff hitter, but supposedly some of that was bad luck on balls in play, and if he was hitting better than .255, his OBP would be higher than .315. I was hoping for more of a speed threat, but the 7 HRs were an unexpected bonus.

He really struggled in the postseason, with a .244 OBP and a .325 SLG. Not sure what to attribute that to. Bad luck? Being overwhelmed by the quality of the pitchers? Well, that would only explain struggling against the Phillies. I'm deeply ambivalent about bringing Furcal back. If he wants a two-year contract, pass. He's moving into his mid-30s, and he hasn't shown any consistent ability to stay healthy. I'd rather take my chances with Clint Barmes, or Tyler Greene. Mozeliak's said much the same thing about Greene, though that could just be contract negotiation posturing to try and drive Furcal's demands down.

David Freese: Freese narrowly edged out Descalso as starting 3rd baseman, 674 innings to 666. Which is fine, as Freese rates slightly better than Descalso at third, being about 2 runs better than average, versus Descalso's -5. Course, third is not Descalso's natural position. Even missing 1/3 of the season, Freese was worth 1.8 WAR. Then he stepped it up in the playoffs, hitting .397, with 7 HRs, a slugging of almost .800, and even drawing 7 walks. He only drew 24 the entire regular season, or 1 less than Punto did in 200 fewer PAs.

If he's actually developing some patience, that'd be good, because thus far his OBP has been heavily leaning on his batting average, which has been heavily reliant on good results on balls in play, which might not last. All his power seems to be opposite field, which is odd, but if he can make it work for him, then I guess it's OK. Truthfully, I wouldn't mind trading Freese for a young 2nd baseman or center fielder, because I'd like to see Matt Carpenter and his +.400 AAA OBP in the starting lineup, but I doubt it'll happen. Freese is the playoff hero, and as old as he is, with his injury history, I doubt anyone would sacrifice anything good for him. If only Al Davis were alive, and running a baseball team. You could always count on Al to overpay for guys who had one good game in the Super Bowl. Maybe he'd do the same in baseball.

Matt Holliday: Holliday's string of injuries continued into the second half of the season. Only instead of appendectomies, he was injuring his wrist on practice swings, and having insects get stuck in his ear. As a result, this year wasn't quite as productive as last year, but Holliday was the 3rd most valuable position player, with a 4.1 WAR, and rated as exactly average defensively. He drew a decent number of walks (his gap between OBP and AVG was .092), but struggled a bit when he played in the postseason. His OBP is great (.419), but the power wasn't there (.412 SLG), much like Molina. Except it wasn't that much of a surprise with Yadi, since he'd demonstrated unusual power this season. Holliday's lack of oomph was concerning, but it's probably just the wrist thing, and now he has all offseason to heal up. And since he no longer has an appendix, he won't have to worry about it causing problems. Might want to keep an eye on his gall bladder, though.

Jon Jay: Jay became the starter after Rasmus was traded, though Colby still lead the team in innings in center at the end of the year. Jay had a couple of productive games in the postseason, but overall had an OPS below .500. Ouch. For the season as a whole, he posted a .768 OPS, which is down a little from last year's .780, but still surprisingly close to his AAA .781 OPS. And he really didn't fall off after becoming the starter. He had a poor August (.661 OPS), but no worse than his June (.651), and not too far behind April (.691). he had a .759 in July, and a .793 in September.

He could stand to walk more. In 503 PAs, he collected 28 walks, which is one less than Theriot in 20 more PAs (though Theriot undoubtedly earned some of his from hitting in front of the pitcher). Jay also needs to either improve his base stealing, or stop it entirely. He was only 6 out of 13, this year. Interestingly, he rated below average on defense in both corner spots, but not in center, where he was just barely above average. And center was his primary position, so to the extent the numbers tell us anything, those would be most representative. Not sure what to make of that. At any rate, I haven't heard anything suggesting the Cardinals are against going into next season with Jay in center. I might like someone a little more defensively excellent, preferably with some speed, to offset what looks to be another season of Berkman in right, but I'm not dead set against Jay. If he can keep producing as he has so far, he's an acceptable option, provided the rest of the team does their job. He's not really a difference maker.

Lance Berkman: Well, Berkman sure showed me. I figured last year was the beginning of the end, turns out it was just a injury thing. He was second on the team in WAR with 5.2, and that's with his defense costing him 0.7 WAR. Which isn't ideal, but the Cardinals knew what they were getting into when they put him in right field, and if he produces offensively like he did, it's worth it. He was second on the team amongst qualifiers in batting average, first in on-base percentage, first in slugging, and thus first in OPS. He hit into a third the double plays of Yadi or Holliday (7 vs. 21), and a quarter of the number Albert did. The only thing he didn't do well was steal bases (2 out of 8), and honestly, what the heck are they thinking having Berkman try and steal bases?

He didn't do quite as well in the playoffs. The average went up 12 points, and the OBP held essentially steady, but the slugging fell to .438, an almost 110 point drop. Was he getting tired after a season of roaming the outfield, was it the pitchers, or was it just because it got cold? The ball typically doesn't fly as far in the cold, since it's thicker than it is in hot weather, and it was getting kind of chilly by the end of October in St. Louis. That wouldn't explain the games in Texas or Milwaukee's dome, though, and it wasn't cold every day in St. Louis. Course, we're also talking a very small sample, 18 games and about 70 at-bats, so perhaps just a bad stretch. It was still an awesome season, and like with Yadi and Holliday, I can't complain about the OBP.

Sometime coming up, the bench position players. There's a few guys who didn't play after June, but there are plenty of others to contend with.

Has Week 10 Ignited A QB Controversy?

2011-11-13T11:27:00.002-12:00

The Arizona Cardinals beat the Eagles, 21-17. Yeah, the Eagles were without DeSean Jackson, but that's their own damn fault. They benched him for completely missing the Saturday meeting. So maybe it's Jackson's own damn fault. At any rate, Vick went 16-34, with 2 INTs, and had at least one other interception nullified by a ticky-tack penalty.

On the Cards' side, John Skelton had some good and some bad. On the good side, he avoided some sacks, threw for 315 yards and 3 TDs, and lead a game-tying 4th quarter drive, and then the game winning 4th quarter drive. On the bad side, he was still sacked 4 times, completed barely more than 50% of his passes (21 of 40), and threw 2 INTs in his half of the field, one of which was returned for a touchdown. He also had a couple of passes to Fitzgerald tipped, which Fitzgerald managed to come down with, despite the Eagles all around.

So it isn't as though Skelton's playing like Kurt Warner, or even Good Jake Plummer. And the Eagles are a massively disappointing team, though I did not know before today there defensive coordinator was formerly their offensive line coach. What the hell was Andy Reid thinking with that one? Still, the Cardinals didn't run the ball terribly well for the second consecutive game. They did at least keep trying, at 29 carries for 88 yards, though it drop to 25 and 73 if you take Skelton's scrambles out. But I appreciate the commitment to the run as an attempt to take some pressure off Skelton. Also, Feely missed two field goals which could have made things easier for Arizona. The indisputable fact is the Cardinals are 2-0 this year when Skelton starts, 4-2 for his entire career.

Certainly that isn't all him. The defense did well against the Eagles air attack today (though not their running game, as the Eagles averaged almost 7 yards a carry on 24 carries, and yeah, Vick's responsible for 8 carries and 79 yards, but that still leaves 16 carries and 87 yards for Lesean McCoy and Co.), and it was defense and special teams that won the day last week. And of course there was Jay Feely's 22 consecutive points game against Denver last year. Whether it's the level of competition, or the rest of the team rising to the occasion, they do manage to pull out some victories when Skelton's under center.

So, is there an issue at QB? I doubt the Cardinals are ready to take the starting job away from a healthy Kolb, though some of the fans certainly are. I figure his job's safe if only because the Cardinals made a point to trade for him, then give him a fat contract. It would look pretty silly to do that, then hand the job to a guy they already had on the roster. Money talks. I'm still OK with that. Whisenhunt said when they drafted Skelton that they saw him as a project. Someone with all the physical tools, but who would need a couple of years to adjust to the level of play in the NFL, compared to what he faced at Fordham. Kolb isn't quite that raw, but his starting NFL experience is pretty limited, 14 starts thus far, 7 before this season. So really, as long as one of them is getting some experience, I'm OK with that. Given the amount they sunk into Kolb, I'd prefer they start him if only so they can more quickly figure out whether he was a mistake. So if he's healthy, let him play. If he's not, then keep Skelton in there. See if he can cut down on the mistakes, improve the completion percentage, or both.

Season In Review - Relief Pitchers

2011-11-11T03:21:00.003-12:00

Credit to the bullpen. If they hadn't stopped blowing ass, the Cardinals wouldn't have made the playoffs. And if they hadn't largely maintained that level of non-ass blowing, the Cardinals wouldn't have won the World Series. Because Carpenter sure as hell couldn't win four games out of seven on his own.

Fernando Salas - I said at the halfway point that Salas might not be the closer of the future, and that appears to be the case. LaRussa turned to Motte as his closer starting around September, and Salas' role shifted. Initially he seemed to be more of a set-up guy, but in the postseason, he became the guy LaRussa went to first. Salas would typically try to get through 2 innings, usually after the starter had failed to pitch more than 4. Up until the World Series that was working pretty well. In the first 2 rounds, he threw 9.7 innings, and surrendered 2 runs. In the Series, it was 5 runs (3 earned) in 3.7 innings. Maybe he was getting tired. He was approaching 90 innings by the end.

Salas maintained a WHIP below 1 for the season, 2nd best amongst Cards' relievers (and the best mark is Dotel's, who threw less than a third the innings Salas did). His HR rate's a little higher than some of the others, but he averaged a K per inning, and a 3.57/1 K/BB ratio. I imagine he can close if needed, but I'd like to see him used in whatever role is most useful on a given day next year, though I doubt the new manager will be that flexible.

Jason Motte - Motte took over the closer role from Salas late in the year. Prior to that, his role had shifted over the season, but just before he'd become more of a traditional "fireman", brought in whenever LaRussa absolutely needed a rally squashed, regardless of inning. Guess being able to throw in the high-90s has its advantages. It's interesting that his K rate is lower than Salas' (8.3 vs. 9.0), though K/BB ratio is better (3.94 vs. 3.57). Going by B-R's WAR, Salas was the 3rd most valuable pitcher (after Carp and Lohse), and Motte the 4th. I believe Fangraphs has it differently, in part because they like Garcia a lot more (I believe they have him as a 3 win pitcher, and Carp at 5 WAR). At any rate, Motte and Salas were the two key performers in the 'pen this season, as they were pretty much the only relievers on the major league roster all season (though Salas didn't arrive until mid-April).

I do wonder if Motte's 0.3/9 IP HR rate is sustainable, and if not, how much that will affect his value next season.

Mitch Boggs - Boggs never did seem to regain TLR's trust. Then again, his performance didn't really merit it. In the first three months, his K/BB ratio was 3.3. In the last three months, 1.36. That's Westbrookian. It seemed as though he was struggling with some injuries during the season, and I don't know if that robbed him of velocity, control, both, or neither. He's always had some control problems, at least as a starter, so it isn't entirely surprising that would persist into his career as a closer, but I'm not sure why it seems to have flared up so severely in the latter half of the season. Though we are dealing with small sample sizes, and some of his misfortune may have been bad luck. His babip for July was .343, and it was .354 in August, though without looking at how many line drives he was surrendering, I can't say if that's a fluke or not. I'd still like to have him around next season, as a cheap mop-up guy with the stuff to be more useful if he can harness it.

Trever Miller - Miller went to Toronto in the Rasmus trade, then wound up in Boston at some point, though eh threw less than 10 innings overall in the AL. In those last weeks before his trade, he continued to be generally ineffective. 6 appearances, 1.3 innings, 6 hits, 1 walk, 2 Ks, 1 run allowed. Or he was charged with one run anyway. In three of the appearances, he retired no batters, which suggests he was brought in to get out a lefty, and failed. A 50% failure rate is no good for a LOOGY. I'm not sure why he went downhill so abruptly, but he was addition by subtraction.

Lance Lynn - Lynn was in the bullpen from late June to early August. Then he hurt an oblique and missed the remainder of the regular season. Fortunately, he was ready in time for the playoffs. He pitched well (or had some good fortune) in the NLCS, but was smacked around a little by the Rangers. Which is nothing to be ashamed of, so were most of the pitchers on the staff.

As a reliever, he threw 24.3 innings, posted a WHIP below 1, with almost 12 Ks per 9 IP, and K/BB ratio of 4 to 1. Even so, I still wouldn't mind seeing him in the AAA rotation next year. He may be more likely to have value as a reliever, but he has greater potential value as a starter. Plus, I figure someone in that rotation is going to get hurt at some point, with Wainwright returning from Tommy John, and Carpenter and Garcia having both just set career highs in innings.

Eduardo Sanchez - Sanchez was on the DL at the halfway point, and came back in September. he pitched in one game, the second to last game of the year, when Westbrook crapped his pants, and LaRussa had to haul out anyone he could to get through the game. Which included Edwin Jackson, and also Sanchez, who threw 1.3 innings, struck out 2, and allowed no baserunners.

Sanchez is really exciting. He still has control issues (4.8 BB/9 IP), but he allowed fewer hits than walks, and K'd 10.5 batters per 9 innings pitched. He might have the best raw stuff of any of the young righties, if, like Boggs, he can just control it more effectively. I'm looking forward to his presence in the bullpen next season.

Octavio Dotel - Like I mentioned above, Dotel lead the relievers in WHIP, with a 0.851 in the 24.7 innings he threw for St. Louis, after being acquired in the Rasmus trade. he did continue to demonstrate that he should not face left-handed batters. Against righties, he allowed an OPS of .410, but lefties racked up an .845. Those numbers are for the entire season, not just his StL stint, but TLR seemed to get smarter about not using him against lefties as time went on. In the postseason, he pitched fairly well, allowing 4 runs in 10.3 innings, but with a 7 to 1 K/BB ratio, even better than his regular season 6.4/1 mark.

All that being said, I'd prefer the team not offer him arbitration (they already declined his option). He's Type A, so any team that signs him surrenders 2 draft picks. I can't see any team (maybe Houston, Ed Wade seems pretty stupid), doing that, so I imagine Dotel would accept arbitration. He can't make less than 80% of what he made this year, so it'd be at least 2, 2.25 million for essentially a ROOGY. And one thing the Cards don't lack is power righthanded relief arms.

Marc Rzepczynski - Also acquired in the Rasmus trade. Scrabble didn't pitch as well as Dotel, with a WHIP over 1.45 in his 22 innings. His K rate was close to Dotel's (11.1/9), but he walked almost a batter every other inning, so his K/BB ratio is only 2.55. There are rumors he was getting to wound up, to the point team officials were starting to worry about him, and maybe that was a problem. I suppose he'd never been in a playoff hunt in Toronto, or maybe it's hard going from the Blue Jays' clubhouse to the Cardinals (Note: I have no idea what Toronto's clubhouse is like, or the Cardinals' for that matter). He did alright in the postseason; nothing great, but he recorded some key outs. I'm fine with him being in the 'pen next year, though it looks like he's the only long-term return the team will get for Rasmus, at least until the arbitration thing plays out, and we see if they get some picks. Well, it was a shirt-term deal, anyway.

Brian Tallet - Also traded to Toronto, pitched once there, with poor results. The Cards used him just once in July. He recorded two outs, but allowed two hits and a walk, and two runs were charged to him. Not sorry to see him go.

Arthur Rhodes - Rhodes was claimed off waivers in August, after the Rangers dumped him, for generally being terrible. He was a mixed bag for the Cardinals. In 19 appearances, he threw less than 9 innings, which isn't surprising, since he's a LOOGY. But like Miller, he occasionally failed to get that one guy out. 4 times in 19 appearances to be exact. Which is better than Miller's July ratio, to be sure, but still a little irritating.

True to regular season form, he threw 2.7 postseason innings, but spread it out across 8 games. He didn't allow any runs, though, and only one baserunner total, so I can't complain about the results.

Brandon Dickson - Dickson made two relief appearances in July, and another in September. All told, they encompassed 5 innings, and he allowed 3 hits, 2 walks, and K'd 3. He also made 1 start, against Milwaukee, on short rest (?!), and didn't make it out of the 4th. So perhaps it was a glorified bullpen start. Dickson spent most of the year in the AAA rotation, and as he didn't particularly distinguish himself, I figure that's where he should start next year as well. Maybe he can be the first option if Lynn is a reliever next year.

Raul Valdes - Valdes pitched once for StL just before the halfway mark, then 6 more times in July. In September, he was a Yankee, so who knows. In his 6 July appearances, he threw 4.3 innings, allowed 5 hits, 4 walks, 4 Ks, and 2 runs. So nothing special. He got in trouble, but either worked through it, or was bailed out by subsequent relievers.

Maikel Cleto - Cleto pitched once in the second half of the season, throwing a scoreless inning. Other than that, he spent most of the second half at AAA, as a starter. Mixed results, with his 4.29 ERA, and 5.4 BB/9, but before this year he'd never pitched above high A. This season he pitched there, at AA, AAA, and in the majors. I guess we'll see if it's something he can build on.

P.J. Walters - Walters pitched 4 times for StL in July, before heading to Toronto. He had one bad appearance, but it was pretty bad. 3 hits, 1 walk, 4 runs (on a grand slam, I believe), while recording only one out. Too bad. Before that he'd thrown 3 innings, and allowed only 1 walk, while striking out 3. Toronto used him once, to throw a scoreless inning against Baltimore. Other than that, he spent the season in both teams' AAA affiliates as a starter. It didn't go all that well in Memphis, it went horribly in Vegas.

Pitchers, complete! Sometime soon, position players! Maybe just starters, then bench guys. I don't know.

Season In Review - Starting Pitchers

2011-11-10T04:41:00.004-12:00

As promised, finally getting around to review the St. Louis Cardinals players, like I did at the halfway point. Since I did that halfway review, I'm going to focus primarily on what each player did since then. To the extent I'll discuss the postseason, I'll mention those numbers separately from the regular season statistics.

Anyway, the Cardinals finished with 90, which is 4 wins better than their halfway mark pace. They made the postseason (with help from Atlanta), and went on to win the World Series. Now LaRussa's retired, and the Cardinals have to find his replacement, and at least make an attempt to resign Albert Pujols. But that's for later.

Chris Carpenter - At the halfway point, Carp was struggling, with an ERA+ of 90. At the time, it seemed the culprit was more hits, as his HR, BB, and K rates were all roughly the same as 2010's. By the end of the season, Carp had lowered the HR and BB rates, and upped the K rate. He managed to lower the hit rate a little bit, and all that combined to give him an ERA+ of 105 for the season. Looking at his season overall, he was really hampered by an unlucky May. In just under 39 innings, he allowed only 2 HRs, and had a 3.56/1 K/BB ratio. Yet his ERA was 5.12 because he somehow surrendered 56 hits that month, and his ERA could have been worse, since 4 runs that scored were counted as unearned. Opponents had an .840 OPS against him, but a lot of that is a .340 batting average, and the isolated power was only .104, which suggests death by a thousand paper cuts. He didn't have more than 1 unearned run in any other month, and his ERA was only above 4 in August (4.08).

At any rate, Carpenter ended posting the second highest innings total of his career in the regular season, behind only 2005's 241.7 innings. If you add in the postseason, however, 2011 is the highest total of his career, at 273.3 (his '05 total was 270 even). I wouldn't say Carpenter was spectacular in the postseason, but he was the steadiest presence the team had, allowing 13 runs in 36 innings, going on short rest twice (once with good results, once with bad), and pitching a heck of a closeout to the NLDS, when matched up against Roy Halladay.

Kyle Lohse - Lohse was the Cards' best pitcher in the first half, worth 3.1 wins according to Baseball-Reference. He fell off in the second half, as he was only worth 2.6 for the season, surrendering the team lead amongst pitchers to Carp, who finished with 3.7. His WHIP increased to 1.168, for the 1.027 it was at the midpoint, while his walks increased slightly (to 2/9 IP), and his HR rate remained static. He wasn't quite as reliable in the second half, which is why he finished 4th on the team in starts, with 30, though he did finish third in innings, ahead of Westbrook. He struggled a bit in the second half, posting ERAs over 5 in both July and August, before putting up a 1.37 in 4 September starts. The difference seems valid, as he K'd 7.5/9 IP (versus 5.3 for the season overall), with a K/BB of 4.4, whereas his ratios in July and August were between 1.8 and 1.9.

In the playoffs, Lohse seemed to get passed over. He made only 3 starts, less than Garcia (5), Jackson (4), and Carpenter (6). Allowing 21 baserunners and 12 runs in 12.7 innings probably had something to do with that. That doesn't change the fact he had a season that was a heck of a lot better than I expected from him, or had even hoped for, really. If he didn't pitch like a #1 starter all season, he was at least a good #2, or an excellent #3.

Jaime Garcia - Baseball-Reference doesn't care much for Jaime, as their WAR statistic says he was only worth 0.9. Which seems low for a guy with a 102 ERA+ who threw 194.7 innings. It is worth noting, though, that Garcia surrendered a lot of runs that were counted as unearned. Add those in, and his runs average would be 4.63, rather than the 3.56 ERA he posted. How many of those unearned runs should be on him, and how many are on the defense, I don't know, but that might explain some of it (Lohse only had 9 unearned runs, which is the difference between a 3.39 ERA and a 3.82 RA). Garcia has a WHIP of 1.32, mostly because he has a slightly higher hits allowed rate than Carpenter or Lohse, and a higher walk rate as well. His K rate is even with Carp's. His HR rate rose slightly, from 0.5 at the midway, to 0.7, but that just puts him in between Carp and Lohse.

Garcia had two problems I saw at the midway point. One was a difficulty holding runners. Runners had stolen successfully 9 out of 10 times by then. By the end of the season, it was 15 out of 18. Consider that only 3 people tried to steal on Lohse all year, and of the 11 who tried on Carp, 6 were thrown out. Jackson had his struggles (5 success, no caught stealings), and only 24% of the 17 guys trying to steal on Westbrook were caught, so it isn't strictly Jaime, but it's something he might want to work on before next year. The other concern was he wasn't working deep into games. In 10 of his 16 starts, he hadn't recorded even 1 out in the 7th inning. This was not a trend that reversed itself in the second half, as he made it to 6.3 innings only 5 times in 16 starts. So he was a 6 innings or less pitcher in 21 of his 32 starts. In 13 of those, he went less than 6 innings, though he only went less than 5 twice. Of course, one of those two was his lousy start in the last series of the year against Houston, when the Cardinals were fighting to get in. Poor timing, to say the least.

In the postseason, Garcia was inconsistent. He had a good start against Texas, but was hammered the next time. He cruised at times against Philly and Milwaukee, but would hit a bump and fall apart. Overall, he allowed 35 baserunners in 25.7 innings, but he did strike out 21, which isn't shabby. Besides, by the end of the postseason he was at 220 innings, so about 55 innings above his previous career high. It was a good second season for Garcia, and if he can start working deeper into games more consistently, he could really be a top-notch starter.

Jake Westbrook - At the midpoint, I was waiting for Westbrook to get his ERA under 5. He did manage it later in the season, but only as far as 4.66, which is an 83 ERA+. Also, like Garcia, he crapped the bed in his final regular season start against Houston, forcing the bullpen and offense to bail him out. B-R rates him as exactly replacement level, which is a great return on the 8 million the team sank into him this year. I'm pretty sure P.J. Walters or Lance Lynn could have managed that. In the second half, he managed to raise his K rate a little (to 5.1, from 4.7), and cut his walk rate slightly (from 3.8 to 3.6), but his K/BB is still only 1.42, and his WHIP was over 1.53. Even for a 5th starter, that's a poor showing.

Since Westie is a groundball pitcher, there's a chance poor infield defense is to blame. Which would point a finger at management for hamstringing their groundball staff with shitty infielders, but I imagine a decent portion of it was simply Westbrook not being good. He did manage two scoreless innings in two postseason appearance, even picking up the win in a World Series game, so that's something.

Edwin Jackson - Jackson was brought in to shore up the rotation, which he did, I suppose. He got McClellan out of there, anyway. He averaged around 6.3 innings a start, and had an ERA+ of 102. It would have been better, but he had that one game against the Brewers were he was left in for 7 innings so TLR could spare the bullpen. He also pitched once in relief during the Houston series, as Garcia and Westie had their dud starts back-to-back. What strikes me as strange is Jackson pitched worse for St. Louis than he did for the White Sox, even though he was in the easier league. His WHIP rose for 1.422 to 1.462. His HR rate rose, from 0.6 to 0.9, and his K rate fell, from 7.2 to 5.9. That last one's not a huge surprise, considering Duncan's philosophy, though I can't figure how Garcia and Carp could have similar K rates to AL-Edwin, but NL-Edwin couldn't.

Some of it is that Brewers' start. Take that out, and his WHIP as a Cardinal is about 1.396. His HR rate would drop to 0.5. Doesn't explain the strikeout rate, but that's probably attributable to Duncan, as I said above. Anyway, Jackson didn't fare well in the postseason, allowing 28 baserunners and 11 runs in 17.7 innings, in 4 starts. That's less than 5 innings as start. Then again, why should he be any different from any of the other non-Carpenter starting pitchers? I think it was mostly Milwaukee that did him in again, as they clubbed him in two starts, while he mostly got through his Philadelphia start OK. At this point it seems unlikely, he'll be back, as the Cards already have 5 starting pitchers under contract for next year. He'll likely be offered arbitration, decline (because he will get a better multi-year deal, count on it), and the Cards will get a draft pick. Works for me.

Kyle McClellan - The arrival of Edwin Jackson signaled McClellan's return to the 'pen. Before that happened, he made a few more starts. The results weren't too terrible. 4 starts, 25.7 innings, 26 hits, 14 runs, 6 walks, 12 Ks. Not much worse than one might get from Westbrook.

Oddly enough, once he returned to a relief role, he actually pitched worse. Opponents batting average was 12 points higher, OBP 36 points higher, slugging 71 points higher. His babip was only 5 points higher, and at .272 still well below league average. So even with good luck, he didn't pitch well. I don't know what to make of that, unless he was just gassed. He finished the year at 141 innings, which is well above anything he'd done at the major league level previously. In the playoffs, he pitched once, allowing a run in one-third of an inning. So even LaRussa didn't have much confidence in him by the end. I'm hoping he'll be let go this offseason, as the team has any number of better right-handed relief options that will cost less.

I didn't originally plan it this way, but things are taking so long, I'm going to split it into starters and relievers, so we'll hit the pen tomorrow. I'm not discussing any players that didn't pitch for the team in the second half. So no Bryan Augenstein, Miguel Batista, or Ryan Franklin. Which still leaves 14 pitchers. This could take awhile.

What?! Happiness For Week 9?!

2011-11-07T05:27:00.004-12:00

Arizona won! Holy cow!

OK, fine, it was the Rams. OK, fine, it took a 98-yard punt return in overtime. Yes, John Skelton was hit with two safeties in the third quarter, while also leading the team in rushing (38 yards).

You know what? Who cares? They won. First rule of Arizona Cardinals' fandom: All victories are good. Actually, that may be the second rule, with the first rule being "Never underestimate the Cardinals' ability to lose." Whatever, there is a rule that says enjoy any victory.

Besides, it keeps them out of sole control of the NFC West cellar for another week.

There is some discussion online as to whether the Cardinals have themselves a quarterback controversy, seeing as Skelton has in one try, won as many games as Kolb managed in 7 tries. The official word is "No." Which is fine. It's not like Skelton lit the world on fire yesterday. One of the safeties was his crap O-line's fault, but in the other, they had the ball at the nine, and Skelton backpedaled all the way to the end zone, then got called for intentional grounding. That's not as bad as Dan Orlovsky getting called for a safety when he ran out the back of the end zone while scrambling, but it's not good.

On the other hand, he did show some pocket awareness, the ability to scramble successfully, and he actually completed more than 50% of his passes, which was not something he did consistently last season. Then again, it wasn't something Max Hall or Derek Anderson could do consistently, either. He didn't get sacked much, didn't throw picks, didn't lose his one fumble, on a day when the Cardinals had no running game, except for Skelton. So he wasn't the biggest reason they won (as Skelton stated after the game, giving credit to the defense and special teams for bailing him out), but he didn't cost them the game, either. And it isn't as though Kolb's been Kurt Warner circa 2009. His completion percentage is about 57%, he has 8 TDs and 8 INTs, he gets sacked on a little under 10% of his dropbacks, I'm not sure the difference between Kolb and Skelton is all that much right now.

Arizona's issue is this isn't a case of veteran QB and young QB. Given the team has no realistic shot at the postseason, with San Francisco already 5 games ahead of them, that would make a good case to give Skelton some run, let him gain some experience. But Kolb isn't much of a seasoned hand, either, so he needs the experience as well.

Ultimately, it probably doesn't matter much. Like I said, I don't believe the gap between the two is large enough to make much difference in the team's fortunes this season. Since they traded so much to get Kolb, I guess it makes sense to give him as many chances as possible, but I don't think they should hesitate to call Skelton in the from the 'pen in the event Kolb stinks up the joint.

Who Cares About Week 8?

2011-11-02T01:51:00.003-12:00

Arizona avoided being destroyed by the Ravens. They still lost, mind you, and blew a 4th quarter lead in the process, but I never expected them to lead at all, so I can hardly complain.

In other news, the St. Louis Cardinals won the World Series! That's nice, though I must confess to feeling a bit of distance from the team. Maybe because I didn't listen to any of the games, or see them. Part of it is there are some guys I wish could have been involved (Brendan Ryan, Adam Wainwright), and some guys I wish weren't (THERIOT!). I'd be concerned about how much leeway this would give LaRussa, but he's retired now, so it hardly matters.

I'm not sure what to think about TLR being gone. For all that he frustrated me, he was a pretty good manager. I think I can safely say that the next guy won't be a) here as long, b) as successful, but c) will be immenently frustrating in his own way. I do expect that way to be more mundane, like an inability to use his bullpen properly, or correctly perform a double-switch. With LaRussa, the frutsrations came from things like his insistence anyone can play second, using infielders in the outfield, feuding with useful young players while seemingly loving crap veterans like AAAron Miles. At the very least, LaRussa's decision gave me something to talk about.

I want to wrap up this post giving props to Chris Carpenter, who set a new career high for innings this year (if you include the postseason), at the age of 36, and was pretty much the only reliable starter the team had in the playoffs (Garcia's periodic bouts of excellence being far too infrequent). He struggled to start Game 7, but unlike Game 2 of the NLDS, he was able to right himself after the first, and give the team some quality innings.

Sometimes in probably the next week or so, I'll be doing my player recaps. Right now, I plan to focus on the regular season, but I might discuss the postseason performance as well.

Week 7 And Nearing The End

2011-10-24T15:59:00.002-12:00

Arizona was defeated by the Steelers easily. The Cards did cut it to 17-14 at some point, but Pittsburgh went on a 15-6 run the rest of the way. Arizona will also be destroyed by the Ravens this weekend. Big surprise, who cares, moving on.

The St. Louis Cardinals just lost Game 5 to the Rangers, which puts Texas up 3-2. That's two games in a row the bullpen and the offense has conspired to screw the pooch. I guess it's revenge for how the starting pitching made them carry the water in the NLCS.

I told myself I wasn't going to get excited until the Cardinals had won 3 games. By the same token, I refused to get worried until the Rangers had won 3. Time to get worried, I guess. If the Cardinals lose the Series, I won't have their success to carry me through the Arizona Cardinals' death march of a season. Well, the Rangers still have to win one more, so it's not over yet.

Week 6 And The World Series

2011-10-18T06:10:00.002-12:00

The Arizona Cardinals avoided extending their losing streak to five games last weekend. Who cares if it was a bye week? At least they didn't lose. Considering Pittsburgh and Baltimore are next up on the docket, it's the last time we'll be able to say that for a couple of weeks.

In more positive news, St. Louis crushed the Brewers 12-6 to reach the World Series, where they face Texas. The Rangers did outscore the Cardinals this season, but that was with a DH, and playing half their games in a hitters' park. Busch Stadium III seems to be a pitcher's park, and the Cardinals have home field advantage, so we'll see how that works out.

Hopefully the starting pitching is more productive than it was in the NLCS, seeing as the bullpen threw over 28 innings in 6 games, compared to the starters' 24. I think it'd be dangerous to count on such favorable outcomes for a second consecutive series. But the weather will be cool in St. Louis, so perhaps that will help. Course, it helps the Rangers' pitchers as well.

Week 5 And Halfway Thru The NLCS

2011-10-14T02:44:00.002-12:00

The Vikings finally found a team they couldn't blow a multiple touchdown halftime lead to, as they curbstomped Arizona 34-10. Yeesh. The Arizona Cardinals aren't even worth paying attention to these days.

As to the baseball Cardinals, they lost to the brewers last night 4-2. It figures the first starter of the Brewers to actually shut the Cardinals down would be Randy Wolf. Actually, no, it doesn't figure at all. Not that Wolf's a bad pitcher, but his track record doesn't exactly stack up to Grienke or Gallardo's. Nice as it might have been for the Cards to take care of business in St. Louis, I can't say I'm surprised. Even if the brewers were under .500 on the road this year, they'd still have a decent chance to win 1 out of 3 in the StL. Besides, the Cardinals haven't done anything the easy way the entire postseason, why start now?

It'd certainly be nice for Garcia to have a good start. The Cardinals have really only gotten one good postseason start, and that was Carpenter's NLDS Game 5 start. Jackson got results in NLDS Game 4, but it was a tightrope, and Garcia did alright in Game until he gave up that home run, but by and large, Cardinals starters are getting hammered early and often. Which will happen to average pitchers, but they should also luck into a good start every once in awhile. If nothing else, the bullpen could probably use some rest. They've done pretty well so far, but best not to push it.

Garcia's had better results at home this year than on the road, but I wonder about fatigue. He's already about 40 innings beyond what he threw last year, and that was a career high. This is uncharted territory for him. Still, I'd rather take my chances with a potentially gassed Jaime Garcia than Jake Westbrook.

On To The NLCS

2011-10-08T05:23:00.004-12:00

I held off until the NLDS wrapped up because I wanted to see whether I should start my regular season wrap-up posts. The Cardinals triumphed over the Phillies, so I get to wait at least another week.

I don't know whether to credit the Phillies' poor offensive showing (outside of Game 1) to the Cards' pitchers, or as a minus againt Philly's hitters. Little of both I imagine, but it was one of those things I mentioned, that the Phillies were middle of the pack offensively, while the Cards were best in the National League*. The Phillies pitchers were undeniably better, but they were also facing an undeniably better lineup than the Cardinals were.

At any rate, now the Cardinals have to face the Brewers, who beat the Cardinals by six games for the NL Central crown. The season series is an even 9-9, though, for what that's worth. The Brewers have home field, which is exactly what they wanted, as they were 57-24 there in the regular season, and 3-0 so far in the postseason. Contrast that to their 0-2 road record in the playoffs thus far, and their 39-42 road record during the regular season. I have no idea what makes them so good at Miller Park, but it's certainly bad news for the Cardinals that 4 of these games will be in Milwaukee. Assuming the series lasts long enough.

Once again, the Cardinals have the offensive advantage, though not by quite as much as they had over Philadelphia. The Cardinals had scored 49 more runs than the Phillies, but only 41 more than Milwaukee. Either way, it isn't a particularly large advantage. And once again the Cardinals appear to be operating at a disadvantage in run prevention, though also not as severe. The Phillies had allowed 163 fewer runs than St. Louis in the regular season. The Brewers have allowed 54 fewer runs than the Redbirds.

Of course, the Cardinals aren't the same team as they were at the beginning of the season. As I mentioned last time, the bullpen is very different from the Opening Day configuration, and they shouldn't find themselves relying on Jake Westbrook to win any games for them in the playoffs. If they have, things have gone very badly awry. I'm sure the Brewers gain some similar benefits, but I would imagine they have fewer of those sorts of holes to begin with, and so don't derive as much advantage from it.

Whether that's enough to balance things out, or tip them in the Cardinals favor, I don't know. Assuming LaRussa has finally learned his lesson about starting pitchers on short rest, the Cardinals can't use Carpenter until Game 3. Which means Lohse and most likely Garcia for the first two. Lohse of course is always a few bad bounces from trouble, and Garcia hasn't had particularly good success on the road this year. Some of that seems to be poor luck on batted balls, as his K/BB ratio is actually better on the road than at home, but I can't say it isn't concerning, especially against the Brewers, who have some pretty thunderous bats.

There's some discussion the Cardinals may be without Skip Schumaker for this series, as he left Game 5 with an oblique injury. If he's out, would LaRussa use Tyler Greene? Or would he decide to add another pitcher? Or would he keep Skip on the roster in the hopes his condition improved to where he could be used before it ended?

Oh, and in football news, the Arizona Cardinals fell to 1-3 after blowing a 4th quarter lead at home against the Giants. Color me unsurprised by the Arizona's incompetence.

* Which is kind of surprising considering the following: Pujols had the worst 2-month stretch of his career, then missed 14 games with a wrist injury. Schumaker missed time, Punto missed about 60% of the year, Freese missed two months, as did Craig, and Holliday missed over 30 games with various ailments.

The Season Ends Well

2011-09-29T07:17:00.004-12:00

And the Cardinals make the playoffs. Credit to the Phillies, who made more of a game effort than they really had to. I suppose the franchise record for wins in a single season was at stake, and perhaps the Phillies would much rather face the Cards than the Diamondbacks. It would make sense, the D'Backs do have a better record, though I'm not sure how much difference there is between 90 and 94 win teams, when they're playing a 102 win team in a best of five series. At any rate, the Phils went all out, and they prevailed.

It at least assured the Cardinals of a chance for a play-in game against Atlanta, but the offense jumped on Brett Myers for five runs in the first. Not that Carpenter needed more than one. The part about that I love the most is Carpenter told Mike Shannon and John Rooney, the radio crew, that it didn't matter how much the bullpen had been used the first two games in Houston (12 and two-thirds innings). They wouldn't be needed Wednesday night. Sure enough, 9 innings, 2 hits, 1 walk, 11 strikeouts, no runs, on 105 pitches. Aces, Carp.

I'm still a little surprised the Cardinals rebounded from that loss to the Mets as well as they did. It seemed like such a perfect cap to their season, a loss brought about by a bullpen failure, aided by poor defense. The Cards lost five games because of the 'pen in April alone, and they made their feelings about the importance of defense pretty clear in the off-season. Putting Berkman in right, keeping Skip at second, replacing Brendan Ryan with Theriot at short (the move that worked so well, the Cardinals had to trade for another shortstop mid-season!). But it didn't happen, with a little help from Carlos Marmol's spotty control.

When September started, I was looking forward to seeing some of the younger players get a chance. More Chambers and Greene, less Patterson and Theriot. Maybe Matt Carpenter could get some play at third, perhaps alternate with Freese. That didn't happen, and I was annoyed. I didn't believe they were in contention, even after they swept Atlanta, because they followed that up with a loss to Pittsburgh. That seemed like the Cardinals: good one moment, a disaster the next.

By the time the Mets came to town, I had to admit they were in contention, but I still wasn't sure they had a chance. It was more Atlanta still had a 2.5 game lead. If the Cards went 6-3 (which is what they wound up doing), the Braves couldn't go any better than 4-4 over their last 8 games for the Cards to have a chance for that 163rd game. I kept figuring the Braves were too good, that they'd pull out of the tailspin in time. 5 of their final 8 games were against Florida and Washington, not exactly Milwaukee and San Francisco. But they weren't able to go .500. They went 3-5 instead, and that was just poor enough a showing for the Cardinals to get in clean. No risky extra game needed.

As for the postseason, I have no idea what's going to happen. The Cardinals have the best offense in the league, while the Phillies are middle of the road. But the gap between the Cards and Phillies runs allowed is larger than the runs scored gap. The Cards bullpen is stronger than it was at times in the season, with no Franklin, Batista, Miller, or Tallet around, but it's hardly a lockdown group. And the Phils have a huge edge in starting pitching. Lohse, Jackson, and Garcia are all capable of good to great starts. Heck, Lohse out-pitched Halladay just a few weeks ago. But they're all also capable of laying total stink bombs. Garcia had one in the opener of the Astro series. Carpenter's the only on I'd trust, and he won't be able to go more than once in 5 games. Given the choice, I'd use him in Game 3 if the Cards were able to either sweep, or else were trying to avoid being swept. If the series is even when it reaches St. Louis, I'd save Carp for Game 4, when he can again either close things out or extend them.

I am a little worried about Matt Holliday and Rafael Furcal. Holliday left after one at-bat Tuesday, and didn't play Wednesday, Furcal's been out since partway through Monday's game with a hamstring issue. Will either be ready to go? No clue. If Furcal can't go, hopefully Punto plays SS. Craig should replace Holliday in left, if needed, but one can never tell with LaRussa.

Week 3 And Later September Baseball

2011-09-26T06:25:00.004-12:00

Arizona lost again this weekend. To the Seattle Seahawks. Good to know Arizona's wasting no time making me aware of their ineptitude. I know, it's early, but the Seahawks are freaking terrible, and the Cardinals can't even beat them? What do you expect me to say? "La, la, it's great, everything is sunshine and chocolate bars!"

At this point, I'd say the NFC West is San Francisco's to lose. Which is nice. The Niners have been running their mouths for three seasons about how they were really the best team in the division. Never mind the fact they didn't actually win the division in any of those seasons. Last year, all they had to do was start the season 2-3 and the division would have been theirs. But they went 0-5 instead. That's on them. Well now they've been handed a division so shitty it doesn't appear there's anyway they can't win it. Put up or shut up time Niners.

In baseball, we're entering the final three games of the season. The Braves maintain a 1 game lead over St. Louis, but it's surprising the Cardinals are even still in it. They took the first two from the Mets, but then they had a complete meltdown in the third game. Up 6-2 in the 9th, they lost 8-6 behind a total failure on Motte's part to throw strikes, aided by Furcal botching what would have been a double play ball. Subsequent attempts by Scrabble and Salas to hold the lead were ineffective.

It's sometimes said "Momentum is the next day's starting pitcher." Since the Cards would send out Carpenter for the first game of the Cubs series, they seemed to have their best chance of getting back on the winning track. Carp went 7 strong innings, but McClellan blew up in the 8th, and the Cards lost 4-1. Obviously the offense did the team no favors, either. Or perhaps I should say LaRussa did the team no favors. With Holliday still unavailable to start with a wrist injury, LaRussa opted to put Schumaker and Theriot in the lineup together, while leaving Allen Craig (who is the 3rd best available hitter with Holliday hurt) on the bench.

Still, the team managed to turn it around and win the next two against Chicago, though the offense has doze to slumber, managing only 5 runs in those two games. The first of those games was won in the 9th when Tyler Greene was walked in, then Adron Chambers scored on a wild pitch. The second game turned on a piar of solo shots in the 7th and 8th innings by Molina and Furcal, respectively. So a little longball, and a little smallball/luck. Whatever works, I suppose.

The Cardinals are about to face Houston, while Atlanta travels to Philly. I'd typically feel that favors the Cardinals, but the Phils had been on an 8-game losing streak until they won yesterday against the Mets. One can only hope they'll go out and drub the Braves to try and get themselves right for the postseason.

Week 2 And Late September Baseball

2011-09-20T04:33:00.004-12:00

The Arizona Cardinals didn't fare as well last weekend, losing to the Redskins 22-21. It's a fairly typical loss for them. They had the lead then failed to add to it, or at least run off clock, and the other team came back and won. A bit like the loss to Minnesota last year. I'm not sure whether losing to Rex Grossman is more or less embarrassing than losing to what was left of Favre last season.

What's odd is, unlike that Vikings' game, the Cardinals ran the ball fairly effectively. Beanie Wells had 93 yards of 14 carries, so basically 7 yards per carry. Despite that, when having the ball at the 5 minutes remaining mark, the Cardinals eschewed the run and only managed to burn 40 seconds. Whisenhunt really confuses me some times. He talks about wanting to establish the run, but when they're actually having success, he abandons it at the most critical moments. Even if they ran on only first and second down, either the Redskins burn two timeouts, or the Cardinals run off close to a minute and a half. That's without taking into account a possible third down run, if it seems likely to make the first. Or there's always a chance Wells gets a first down on one of those two carries, which keeps the drive going, and eats more clock.

In other news, the St. Louis Cardinals have won 5 out of 6 since I chastised them for losing to the Pirates last week. Combined with the Brewers scuffling a bit, and the Braves disintegrating, the Cardinals are still in the running for both the division and the Wild Card. Admittedly, the Brewers lead over the Cards is larger than their magic number (5.5 vs. 4), so the odds of claiming the Central crown are pretty narrow. But it's only 2.5 game lead for the Braves in the Wild Card. Which means they still have the advantage obviously, but it gives the Cardinals some reason to hope.

Of course, while the Cardinals get to play the mediocre-to-lousy Mets and Cubs in StL, before finishing up on the road against abysmal Houston, the Braves continue a series against Florida, to be followed by 3 against the Nationals, and close the season against the Phillies. Phillies' manager Charlie Manuel said he wouldn't be trotting out the B-team (excepting injuries) against Atlanta or St. Louis, since they're both in a playoff race, and he thinks it would go against the competitive nature of things. Which is pretty cool, though I wouldn't fault Phils' fans for preferring Manuel worry about keeping his team rested and ready. Of course, it may be in the Phillies' best interests to play the starters regularly right to the end, so they don't lose their rhythm. That seems to be one of those debates that comes up every year, with the postseason results being the referendum, and those varying from one team to the next.

There's also the Giants to contend with, as they're on an even better tear lately than the Cardinals. They do still have some games left against the division leading Diamondbacks, but the D'Backs may have clinched by then, so who knows what their concern will be. The Giants also contend with the Dodgers, who aren't very good, but are a rival franchise, and will be sending out Clayton Kershaw, who is meriting serious Cy Young consideration.

Who knows how things are gonna go. The Cards are 1-2 against the Mets this year, but there's been talk the Mets' players have thrown in the towel recently. Which didn't stop them from giving Atlanta trouble, so take it for what it's worth. StL is 8-4 against both Houston and Chicago North this season, which is encouraging. The Cardinals inability to beat the weaker teams in the Central last year was their undoing (the Cards went 18-27 against MIL, HOU, and CHC, the 3-5 teams in the division, while the Reds went 33-12 against those same teams). While the Cardinals are 6-9 against the Reds this year (after going 12-6 against them last year, go figure), they have managed a 25-15 record thus far against the Cubs, Astros, and Pirates. Of course, anything can happen in a 3-game series, so there's no telling if any of that means anything.

Weekend Sports Action

2011-09-13T10:30:00.005-12:00

Sunday the Arizona Cardinals won their first game of the regular season, while the St. Louis Cardinals swept the Braves to reach a 5-game winning streak.

Of course, the AzCards won while letting Cam Newton throw for 422 yards, and 2 touchdowns Plus he ran, well dived, another one in. Near as I can tell, the Cardinals opted to use their "Don't cover Steve Smith" defense, and he took advantage. I don't know why they keep using that strategy, but it at least it didn't cost them the game for once. This is kind of what I worried about when they trade Rodgers-Cromartie as part of the deal to get Kolb. Then again, their defense was pretty abysmal last year, excluding that game where it pretty much beat the Saints single-handed*, so I guess it couldn't be much worse. Also, it isn't as though any team in the NFC West has the vertical passing game to really take advantage. Either their QBs are weak (49ers, Seahawks), or their receivers are (Rams). Which takes care of 6 games, at least. I hope.

As for the StLCards, they proceeded to use all that momentum from winning their last 2 against Milwaukee and three against Atlanta, to promptly lose to the Pittsburgh Pirates. What a surprise. They're completely incapable of getting any sort of serious run going. OK, that's being too strong. They had been on a good run prior to that game, and they might win tonight. But it's a little irritating they waited until they were so far out of the playoff hunt that they'd need to recreate the Brewers' 26-6 stretch from July 26-August 26 to make the postseason. Plus, they'd need a complete Atlanta collapse, or it still wouldn't be enough.

The truly irritating thing about this is, their improved play seems to be just the excuse LaRussa needs to not give Tyler Greene a chance to show he belongs in the majors. The Cards can claim they're still in it, so they can't give people chances to audition for next year. Greene's been on the major league roster for a week and a half, he hasn't had one single plate appearance. Zero. None. He's been a pinch-runner, near as I can tell, nothing more. Corey Patterson, who has no business on a major league roster, has 5 plate appearances in that same stretch. He's 0-for-5, and has struck out 3 times. Ryan Theriot, who I would truly hope the Cardinals have a) realized is terrible at shortstop, and therefore, b) are not even remotely considering bringing back next year, has 9 PAs this month. He's 0-for-9, though he did draw a walk.

It's not as though either of those two are getting lots of playing time. But every opportunity they receive is one Tyler Green or Adron Chambers (he has 1 PA since being called up) doesn't. Theriot and Patterson bring nothing useful to the team, and bar the path of players who are probably at least as good as them, if not significantly better. If the younger players aren't, well, it'd be nice to see them play so that could be determined now. But as long as the team can claim to be in contention, well, LaRussa isn't going to set lineups with an eye towards next year.

Unfortunately, at this rate the Cards won't fall out of the running soon enough to do any good.

* Not to be confused with the game where Jay Feely beat the Broncos single-handed.

Here Comes Arthur Rhodes

2011-08-13T05:57:00.002-12:00

The Cardinals picked up Arthur Rhodes after he'd been released by the Rangers. I don't feel surprised by the move. LaRussa like to have two useful lefthanders in his bullpen. Scrabble makes one, and that's it. At least it's one more than he had most of the season. If Arthur Rhodes can pitch well, he'd make two.

The question is whether he can pitch well. His WHIP this season is 1.479, he's allowing more than 2 HRs for every 9 innings and his K rate is 5.5/9 IP. His walk rate is 3/9, but that's not too different from last year. The drop in K rate (almost 3 fewer K/9) combined with the threefold increase in home run is the issue.

The good news is he's only thrown 24 innings this season, so there's a chance this is a fluke. The last three years he had been worth 1.3, 1.3, and 1.6 WAR, so there's reason to hope he can rebound. Especially since he's moved to the less offensively potent league. Then again, it isn't as if the AL West is filled with teams that could rake. The Angels aren't bad, but the A's and Mariners are pretty anemic.

At any rate, Rhodes is historically Octavio Dotel's mirror image. Good against LHs (.604 OPS), weaker against righthanded hitters (.733 OPS). If he limits Rhodes to facing lefties, it should be OK. Of course, LaRussa hasn't shown any inclination to keep Dotel away from lefties, letting him face Braun and Prince Fielder (both lefties) in a crucial inning during the Cards' recent series with the Brewers. This when Scrabble was sitting in the pen, presumably awaiting some moment when tough lefthanded hitters would need to be retired. Hopefully with two lefties in the 'pen, Tony will leave the lefthanders to them, and limit Dotel to facing righties.

Cardinals Trade For Rafael Furcal

2011-07-31T12:21:00.003-12:00

And all they surrendered was Alex Castellanos and some cash. So not a costly trade, seeing as Castellanos was a 24-year old outfielder still in AA. He was having a good year offensively, but most players do, since the Cardinals' Springfield affiliate's stadium is a real hitters park. Besides, he doesn't walk much, and he strikes out a ton.

So Furcal. Well, I complained that the trade that sent Rasmus to Toronto did nothing to improve the Cardinals' most glaring weakness, the middle infield. This should take care of that, in theory. Furcal hasn't been healthy for much of the year, and hasn't hit well when he has played, but if there's anything of the player he was last year left, he should be a considerable upgrade on Tally Ho. If nothing else, his acquisition - along with the minutes Descalso logged at SS recently - means the team finally recognized Theriot isn't a major league quality SS. It only took them 8 months longer than it took me, but it's isn't as though it's part of their job to evaluate players or anything.

Oh, right.

There is the question of whether Furcal can regain last year's form. Looking over past 4 seasons, he the reverse of Reggie Sanders' odd year, even year thing. In 2007, his OPS+ was 78 (642 PAs). Next year, 168 (164 PAs). In 2009, a 91 (680 PAs). Last year, 128 (428 PAs). So far this year he has a 50 in 152 plate appearances. That's really low, even for Furcal, and he's been hitting better recently (though it'd be hard to hit worse), but there's still the question of how much he can turn it around.

On the positive side, he's only a -0.1 in defensive WAR, compared to Theriot's -1.1, though Furcal's logged only half the innings Theriot has. Still, even a SS who is "slightly below average" defensively is an upgrade over Tally Ho, who's defensive skills would be best described as "staggeringly inept".

In theory, the Cards can now use Theriot as a platoon with Schumaker, since Theriot is somewhat effective against LHP. At least until Punto is actually healthy, at which point I'd dump Theriot entirely, myself. Punto's actually having a good offensive season, and he's a better fielder than either of the other 2. If Punto's truly healthy, then his arm will hold up on the left side of the infield (which is the Cardinals' current concern with him).

If Punto can't handle it, there's still Descalso, who the Cardinals at least trust at SS more than Theriot, or there's always Tyler Greene, who actually is a SS. I'm not sure that would be the best thing for him, as being a sporadically used bench player doesn't seem to lead to the best performances from him. Maybe if Furcal gets injured and the Cards just let Greene be the starter for a few weeks he'd do better. Fat chance of that happening, though.

Furcal isn't a perfect solution, but he's a good one for what the team gave up. Though it is a little funny. The Cardinals gave up on waiting for Rasmus to fulfill his potential, but they're picking up Furcal based on what he can do, if he's healthy, and if he hasn't lost his skills. In other words, they're banking on potential production.

Guess we'll see how it goes.

Cardinals Trade Colby Rasmus

2011-07-28T05:46:00.002-12:00

Because hell, it's been 8 months since the last time the Cards traded a relatively young player because he didn't fit into their clubhouse. How's that swap of Brendan Ryan for Theriot working out? I'll answer for you, it's sucked.

Anyway, Rasmus is a Blue Jay now. The Blue Jays had acquired Edwin Jackson from the ChiSox, then flipped him to StL along with Marc Rzepczynski, Octavio Dotel, and Corey Patterson from Toronto. Corey Patterson? Don't they have enough terrible ex-Cubs on this fucking roster already? One is bad enough. The Cardinals also sent along Trver Miller, Brian Tallet, and P.J. Walters. Depending on how some of the players acquired perform, the Cards may receive up to 3 minor leaguers from the Jays.

So overall, how did St. Louis do?

They upgraded their rotation for the remainder of the season, but not dramatically so. Jackson won't be more than the #3 starter behind Carpenter and Garcia. In other words, Jackson will be what Jake Westbrook was supposed to have been, if he hadn't been terrible this year. Jackson's been alright for Chicago. Has an ERA+ of 104, but his WHIP is over 1.4. He does have a solid K/BB ratio of 2.49, and K's over 7/9. In theory, all those numbers should improve with the move to the NL and its easier lineups. Potential downside: Jackson's a free agent, so either they'll give him a big, potentially disastrous contract next year, or the Cardinals gave up Rasmus for a 2-month rental and the draft pick they'll get when Jackson leaves in the offseason. Still, it is an undeniable upgrade for the rotation.

With the addition of Dotel, Scrabble, and McClellan moving back to the 'pen now that Jackson's here the relief corps should be improved. Dotel's been pretty solid in about 29 innings. He's surrendering about 2 hits every 3 innings, 1.5 HRs/9, and striking out a batter an inning. And he's not walking too many guys. Rzep's apparently the only trusted lefty in the Jays' pen, as he's logged almost 40 innings this year, albeit in 43 appearances. He'll fit right in with LaRussa's bullpen methods. He allows one HR every 18 innings, has a K/BB ratio of 2.2, and like Dotel, his WHIP is just under 1.1. Not too shabby. Plus, the trade got rid of Miller and Tallet, so addition by addition and addition by subtraction. Dotel's a free agent at the end of the year as well, but he's pitched well enough the Cards could get a draft pick if he goes elsewhere. Then again, they might not want him to go. With Batista and Franklin gone, TLR might feel the 'pen is dangerously low on veteranosity. Or Dotel might retire. Who knows? Scrabble's under team control for another 3 or 4 years, though, so that's good.

Interestingly, Rzep was a starter the previous two seasons, with mixed results. He was OK in 11 '09 starts, but struggled in 12 starts last year, as his WHIP jumped from 1.3 to 1.6, and his hit rate with from 7.5/9 to 10.2/9. It's odd, his K rate is actually lower in the bullpen than it was as a starter, when he was over 8 K/9 both years. Most pitchers K more guys as relievers, since they'll throw fewer pitches and can throw harder. Anyway, I wonder if the Cards will continue shifting him back to starting next year. If he can be even average, he'll be a lot more valuable than as a LOOGY. And other than Garcia, the Cards don't have a lot of LH starting pitching. Haven't really had a lot of it since the early '90s, actually, and most of those guys didn't pan out (Allen Watson and Tom Urbani especially, Rheal Cormier and Donovan Osborne to lesser extents), so more is better.

So the pitching staff should be stronger. Great, because they didn't help the outfield any. Before they could trot out Holliday/Rasmus/Berkman, and Jay could sub anywhere. Now Jay has to start in center, unless LaRussa thinks Patterson can do that. Patterson's been the Jay's starting LF this year, but he was the Cubs starting CF for about 4 years, then two with Baltimore and 1 in Cincy. The numbers vary. Sometimes he's good (he was worth 1.1 wins defensively alone in '06), and sometimes bad (and worth -0.5 the next year). All his value this year is with the glove, but again, that's in LF. Considering TLR was willing to bench Rasmus in favor of Jay, I don't see Jay losing the starting job to Patterson. After all, the Cardinals ought to have seen enough of him to know his limitations (poor plate discipline chief among them).

Then again, they had years to watch Theriot play SS, and still thought he could handle it, so maybe they're blind. Or idiots. I'll have to hope Craig hurries and finishes his rehab stint, then picks up where he left off. At least then they'll have an offensively comptent backup to compliment their apparently defensively comptent new arrival. What it boils down to is, Rasmus being swapped out for Patterson is not an improvment. So that's a minus.

The big issue for me is this does nothing to address the Cards' most glaring hole, the middle infield. Descalso's getting some opportunities at SS, with Greene still in AAA and Punto apparently unable to hold up if he plays short. Descalso's an improvement over Theriot (though I think my dead grandmother would be an upgrade over Tally Ho), but combined with Skip, it still isn't an ideal situation for a pitching staff that relies heavily on groundballs. I don't know whether the team doesn't consider it an issue, or if there's simply nothing out there worth getting, without selling the farm. Then again, the team seems committed to win now, so what do they care about selling the farm?

Short-term, I think this trade improves the team, though not as much as they need. Long-term, I think it's a crap move. The potential draft picks and players to be named later don't impress me because wht are the odds any of them will be the player Rasmus is? Pretty small, I'd bet.

Hitters At The Halfway Point

2011-07-05T10:44:00.002-12:00

OK, I didn't manage to post it the following day. Life intrudes.

Yadier Molina - He's on pace for the best offensive season of his career, barely ahead of 2009 in OPS, though well ahead in OPS+. It's more slugging percentage heavy than is normal. His isolated power is .133, where his previous high was .106 in 2005. Seems strange in such an offense poor year, but it isn't as though the Cards can't use the offense. Most of his value seems to be offense, though catcher defense is always tricky. His throwing out an unusually low 29% of would-be basestealers. Not sure what the issue is there, except perhaps his pitchers are poor at holding runners on (Jaime Garcia's been stolen on 9 out of 10 tries).

Albert Pujols - Slow start, was turning it around, wrist collides with baserunner, supposed to be out until August, possibly coming back tonight. The impressive thing is, as poorly as he's hit by his standards, Albert's OPS+ is still 140, and he's generated 2 WAR with his bat (plus another 0.4 with the glove). He's also been successful on all 5 of his stolen base attempts, a total that ties him for 2nd with Rasmus and Jon Jay. I'm tired of the Cardinals never stealing bases.

Skip Schumaker - Skip spent some time on the DL. Hasn't really helped him. He's not hitting any better than he did last year, in fact, he's even worse. His batting average isn't quite as empty as an Aaron Miles special, but it's getting there. And his defense isn't noticeably better, either. Glad they held onto him and his -0.3 WAR.

Daniel Descalso - Thrust into the starting role thanks to Freese and Punto's injuries. Descalso's OPS has resolutely stuck in the .660s for awhile now, which actually qualifies as value this year somehow. His defense hasn't been as good as you'd hope for from someone moving from second base, but maybe it won't be an issue now that the other two are back.

Ryan Theriot - There is a level of production the Cardinals could receive from their shortstop that would get me to accept trading Brendan Ryan. Theriot's not capable of producing it, but it exists. However, I'd like to point out that at the 81-game mark, Theriot's WAR was -0.2, and Brendan Ryan's was 1.5. Ryan's is now 1.7, and Tally Ho's is still -0.2. Whatever value he generates with his bat is wiped out by his awful fielding. Not that Brendan is tearing the cover off the ball, but he's hitting as well as Skip and fielding a damn sight better than Schumaker or Theriot. Great upgrade there, LaRussa and Mozeliak!

Matt Holliday - Holliday's been on the DL twice, but at least he's come off hitting well both times. I still expect the Cardinals will end up regretting Matt's contract the way the Cubs do Alfonso Soriano's, but so far, it's worked out pretty well.

Colby Rasmus - Rasmus started hot, then went into a prolonged slump he's only recently shown signs of emerging from. He's not helping anything by playing an apparently poor centerfield (-1.0 WAR defensively, which subtracts from the 1.9 offensive WAR). There's talk of trading him, talk that he doesn't play hard enough, that he can't cut it here. I think trading him would be a mistake, but then I don't think Jon Jay is a long-term answer at centerfield. Or at least not one superior to Colby.

Lance Berkman - I have no idea how Berkman's doing this. He's stayed mostly healthy, which is no minor feat on this team this year, and he's been crushing the ball. His defense, well, did I mention he's been crushing the ball? Look, even with a dWAR of -0.8, he's still been worth almost 3 wins already, which, if you can hit that well, I will overlook the defensive shortcomings. It isn't as though they're a surprise anyway.

Jon Jay - Jay is pretty much the only bench player who has been a) healthy, and b) productive. Everyone else fails one of the two criteria. dWAR doesn't care for his defense (though they like it more than Colby's), though some numbers like him in center, but not the corners. Which seems backwards, but he's played a lot more innings in the corners, so that may be more indicative of his real ability. For a bench player he's doing alright. It's funny that people want Jay in CF instead of Colby and complain about Colby's Ks, because Jay's striking out quite a bit (about 1 in 6 PAs) for a guy with a .300 average. Though it's possible the people who complain about Rasmus' strikeouts aren't the ones clamoring for Jay. or not for that reason anyway.

Allen Craig - With Holliday being on and off the DL, plus LaRussa's perhaps not so surprising decision to play Craig at 2nd in Skip's absence, Craig was actually getting quite a bit of playing time. Now he's been hurt for around a month, which is tough, since he was the consistent power bat off the bench. The only position players with a higher WAR than Craig are Albert, Holliday, and Berkman, and strangely enough, the defensive stats generally like Craig. He has a 0.3 dWAR overall, which is great compared to a lot of his teammates. He has positive or neutral rtot at 1st, 2nd, LF, and RF. It's worth noting LF is the only position he's played more than 100 innings at, though. But hey, he's fulfilling the Scott Speizio "I play all corner positions and second because Tony figures anyone can play there" roster role.

David Freese - Missed time with an injury. What a surprise. Next you'll tell me Kerry Wood spent time on the DL. Freese, when he plays, has done what he did last year when he played. Hit for a high average, a little power, and hasn't walked much while striking out about once a game. I wonder if he'd develop more patience if he could stay in the lineup?

Tyler Greene - Greene's the first bench player to succeed at staying healthy, but fail to produce. He did run the bases well (8-for-8 on SBs), but that's about all he did well. Honestly, if he could make contact a little more often, he'd be OK. He's drawing walks, hit for a little (stress: little) power, though his defense has been poor at second, and about average at SS.

Nick Punto - Too bad Punto can't stay healthy. He's actually hitting this year, an event that only occurs every 4 years or so. If nothing else, his presence might spare us from some Schumaker at 2nd, which would be fine with me. At least Punto can play the position competently.

Gerald Laird - It was nice to see LaRussa actually use his backup catcher this year. He'd started 10 games in less than 2 months, where LaRue started 15 in over 4 last year. Then Laird got hurt. Too bad, his average was awful, but like Greene, he was drawing walks, and (unlike Greene) hitting for good power (isolated slugging of .167).

Mark Hamilton - He's been up-and-down with the injuries to various power hitters like Holliday, Craig, and Albert. Unfortunately, he hasn't hit and they aren't using him for his defense. Maybe more playing time would help, but he can really only play first, and Tony would rather use Berkman there and play Holliday, Rasmus, and Jay in the outfield. As well he should.

Tony Cruz - Cruz was called up to replace Laird, which is probably the death knell for Bryan Anderson, since he was sitting there in AAA, with major league experience already. LaRussa hasn't used Cruz much, and he's played him 20 innings combined at first and third, versus just 58 at catcher, which doesn't make sense, but it hasn't been a disaster so far. And Cruz has even hit some.

Andrew Brown - Brown was called up briefly for some reason and promptly looked over-matched. He's back in the minors now.

Pete Kozma - Kozma hasn't really shown anything in the minors to suggest he was ready for this, but Tony wanted/needed another middle infielder, so there he was. He didn't do terribly well, but honestly, in the absence of Punto, I'd rather see Kozma at 2nd than Schumaker (and Greene at SS over Theriot). I don't think either is cut out for starting in the majors, but I know that already about Skip and Tally Ho. Might as well find out about the younger guys one way or the other.

Matt Carpenter - I was actually excited about Carpenter's call-up. The solid contact, good on-base percentage, limited power description appealed to me. Results were less than optimal. He did draw some walks, but 1 hit in 19 plate appearances isn't going to cut it. I don't know whether he wasn't aggressive enough, or just not ready for the majors, or if it was bad luck in a small sample. His babip was .091, which suggests horrendous luck, but that doesn't tell whether he was hitting weak grounders, or hard line drives that found gloves. Baseball-Reference says he had 5 ground balls and 5 fly balls, all of which turned into outs, but his 1 line drive was a hit. So perhaps not bad luck.

At The Halfway Mark

2011-06-30T07:25:00.003-12:00

The St. Louis Cardinals have played half their games now. They're 43-38, so on pace for 86 wins, same as last year. The injury issues seem to have struck especially hard this year, with Wainwright falling before the season started, then McClellan, Sanchez, Laird, Schumaker, Craig, Holliday, Punto, Freese, and now Albert Pujols all missing time. Some of those hurt more than others, some were more of a surprise than others, but regardless, the team is struggling to get by lately. The lineup looks thin, the bullpen stinks, even with 8 relievers, and the starting pitching seems to be wearing down. Let's take a look at each player. Pitchers today, hitters tomorrow, hopefully.

Chris Carpenter - Carp's not really pitching that much worse than he did last year. His HR rate is the same (0.8/9 IP), walks are down, Ks are up. He is allowing an extra 1.6 hits per 9 innings, which seems to be the difference between having an ERA+ of 119 (last year), and one of 90 (this year). His babip is .322, but whether that's a question of luck or lousy defense I don't know. The results have started to turn around, though I doubt it's a coincidence he's going deeper into games as well, rather than rely on the bullpen. I do question the wisdom of his recent pitch counts. Sure, let the 36-year-old with a history of elbow and shoulder troubles throw 130+ pitches! Why not?

Kyle Lohse - In the offseason, I hoped Lohse could be a passable fifth starter. When Wainwright was hurt, I hoped Lohse could be a 4th starter So far he's done a fair impression of a #1 starter. He's far and away the best pitcher they have, worth 3.1 wins above replacement, almost 2 wins more than any other pitcher. His WHIP is 1.027, he walks 1.6/9, his HR rate is the same as Carpenter's. The K rate is low enough he probably can't keep it up, but if he can match his 2008 season it'll be a smashing success.

Jaime Garcia - The good is Garcia's thrown 2 complete games, kept his ERA around 3, and he's allowing 1 HR every 18 innings. He's also cut his walks to 2.3/9 vs. 3.5 last year, and his K rate is up slightly. However, he's had some trouble getting deep into games. In starts 2-6, he couldn't record a single out in the 7th. Ditto for starts 10, 11, and 13-15. That's 10 of 16 starts, which is a problem with the Cards' bullpen woes, plus the struggles of both Carpenter and Westbrook. Garcia's been the team's second-best starter this year, which means increased pressure, which means he needs to work deeper into games more consistently. At least until the bullpen sorts itself out, or the underachieving veterans get their acts together.

Jake Westbrook - Did someone say underachieving veteran? I've been waiting all year for Jake to get his ERA under 5, and he still hasn't managed it. That would be bad enough if he were the 5th starter on a late-90s Cardinals team. For this team, where he was probably the #2 (#3 at worst) at the season's start, it's ugly. His K rate (4.7/9) is the same as Lohse's, but his walk rate is almost 3 times higher (3.8). That's Jeff Suppan in 2010. I would expect Westbrook to surrender hits. He's a groundball pitcher, the Cardinals' infield mostly sucks at actually fielding, but the walks are an unwelcome surprise.

Kyle McClellan - McClellan started the season well, then went on the DL, and has been somewhat less impressive since. He Ks even fewer hitters than the other Kyle, and has been prone to the longball, but for a 5th starter, he's done well. So far.

Bryan Augenstein - He's been hurt practically the entire year, but he didn't pitch well in the 5+ innings he did throw, so it's hard to figure the team is suffering for his absence.

Miguel Batista - Batista was released a few weeks ago, which is fine. He was being used in situations he had no business pitching in given he was walking almost 6 batters per 9 innings. I'd rather LaRussa had used any of the young guys, but Batista was a Proven Veteran, so he kept pitching in important moments, and screwing them up, mostly. He's gone now, so he can't hurt us anymore.

Mitch Boggs - Boggs was the first guy to get a crack at the closer job after Ryan Franklin was removed from it. He was allowed to fail exactly once before being removed, compared to Franklin who was allowed to shoot the team in the foot multiple times before LaRussa removed his head from his ass. Boggs had some bad luck with balls in play after that, then got sent to the minors to be stretched out, presumably to start in the event a member of the rotation got hurt. Or maybe not, because that wasn't the role he took when McClellan was hurt. Since his return, Boggs has been successful, if not trusted with too much responsibility. Too bad, he's pitched well. He's keeping the home runs and walks low, striking guys out. Hopefully his role will increase going forward as the Cardinals seem to be removing wastes of roster spots.

Maikel Cleto - The player picked up in the Brendan Ryan trade. He's done well in the minors, where his fastball can easily overpower hitters. he wasn't nearly as successful in his brief major league stint, but there's no denying he has the physical ability to pitch in the bigs, so hopefully it was a useful learning experience somehow.

Ryan Franklin - Franklin was always playing with fire as a closer. He's not a strikeout pitcher, so he had to keep the walks down and hope the balls found his teammates gloves. That didn't happen this year, though Franklin didn't help by allowing about 1 HR every 3 innings. Eventually the Cardinals stopped using him in close games. Then they stopped using him in St. Louis, then they finally released him, which is just as well. They're using 13 roster spots on pitchers, they can't afford to waste one of those spots on a guy they won't use with anything smaller than a 6-run gap, especially if he can't actually retire any hitters.

Lance Lynn - Lynn was used in the rotation during McClellan's DL stint, and now he's in the bullpen, which seems to be working out so far. I don't quite understand it myself. McClellan's been a key bullpen guy for the last 3 years, Lynn's been a starter regularly in the minors for the last few years. His arm should be better built up for extended stretches in the rotation, so why not switch them? I'm not adverse to Lynn as a reliever, supposedly he has some good stuff, but given how much LaRussa seemed to trust K-Mac in the 'pen, I'm surprised he wouldn't take the opportunity to move him back.

Trever Miller - Miller has one job on this team: get left-handed batters out. He's done better than I expected, as lefties have a .614 OPS against him. The question is why he's pitching to any right-handers, since they've posted a 1.076 OPS. I can only assume TLR felt he had no other option, or was hoping Miller could deal with the righty so he could stay in to face another lefty. It appears Tony should abandon that hope. Like Batista, he's walking almost 6 guys per 9 innings, which is more than he's striking out. At least he hasn't allowed a HR, that's good, right?

Jason Motte - Motte's stats look good. He's not allowing HRs, his K rate and walk rate are good, his ERA is fine, but fan confidence in him in close situations is low. His quest for a consistent second pitch continues, which may be part of the problem. His fastball is all he can rely on, which isn't enough at the majors, and he knows it, but his other pitches aren't really good enough to trust in crucial situations. Still, with some of the veteran detritus being cleared away, it would be a good idea for Motte to make the most of the opportunity, since the team has numerous other young relievers that may leapfrog him if he's not careful.

Fernando Salas - Salas currently holds the closer role. It's a bit of a mixed blessing, since he's one of the few relievers able to go multiple innings at a time, but LaRussa closers will never pitch more than one inning a pop. He's struggled a bit lately, which is to be expected as the league gains familiarity and makes adjustments. Salas doesn't have the stuff of Boggs, Motte, or Sanchez (get to him in a minute), but he seems to have better command, at least in terms of minimizing walks while also getting Ks. His strikeout rate is better than Motte or Boggs, the walk rate better than Motte and Sanchez. His HR rate isn't quite as good, though. He may not be the closer of the future, but he should have a regular role in the bullpen if he can continue to get people out.

Eduardo Sanchez - Sanchez probably has the most electric over all stuff of the Young Relievers. Unfortunately, he has the lack of control one might expect pf a young pitcher with great stuff. Which is how he ends up averaging 5 BB/9, but only 4.4 hits/9. I'm not ecstatic about the walks, but combined with over 10 K/9, and that hit rate, I'll take it. As long as he can avoid walking too many batter in a row, it shouldn't be a huge issue. He is on the DL right now with shoulder problems, which hopefully aren't going to get botched by the training staff, which has a bit of a mixed record when it comes to this stuff.

Brian Tallet - Tallet has the same job as Miller. He hasn't done it at all (.979 OPS against). He hasn't done much better against right-handers (1.023 OPS). The righties do have a .393 babip, so perhaps they're getting lucky, but the lefties aren't. Their babip is .200, but when they make contact, they crush the ball (.619 slugging). OK, all this is extremely small sample sizes, even by relief pitcher standards, but the fact remains that in the opportunities Tallet's had to do his job this year, he's failed a lot.

Raul Valdes - Which is where this fellow came in. He was doing well in AAA, and when neither of your lefty relievers are doing their jobs well, it gives another guy a chance. Valdes has only pitched one inning so far, but at least he only surrendered one hit and no runs. Better than most of the guys can say.

Looking it over, the Cardinals have released 2 relief pitchers, called up 5 guys from the minors, had to place 3 pitchers on the DL, and the 'pen's generally been a mess. Lohse is far and away the most valuable starter (3.1 WAR), basically equal to Carp, Garcia, and McClellan combined (3.0). Westbrook's been a disaster (-0.6). In the bullpen, the worst of them (Franklin, Batista, combined -1.9 WAR) are both gone, and Sanchez and Salas are the best (2.2 combined). Pity Sanchez is on the DL. Those two have the highest leverage indexes on the team, as befits your two best relievers. Boggs, strangely enough, has a 0.8 average leverage index, which means he's being used in low pressure situations. Miguel Batista had a 1.3, which is also higher than Motte's, which is just ridiculous, and probably explains a lot about the Cardinals' struggles.

Position Players tomorrow! Or later today!

They'll Have To wait Another Year To Start That Eight Championship Run

2011-06-13T14:26:00.002-12:00

So the Mavericks won the NBA Finals. Good for them. When I had the opportunity to watch them, I really enjoyed their offense. The ball was always moving, whether it was somebody driving to the basket, or using a screen to get free, or passing out of the double-team to an open shooter. A lot of fun to watch.

It's still hard for me to believe Jason Kidd is actually a good shooter now. I remember when he was leading the Nets to the Finals (where they'd get swept) and teams would play off him to try and force him to shoot jumpers. He was that lousy of a shooter. Now he's some kind of deadeye from 3-point range. Let's hear it for working hard.

I really expected LeBron to have a huge game 6. After all the questions about his performances, and the way he's responded at times to all the crap and the questions that have been thrown at him, I thought for sure he was going to dismantle Dallas single-handed. Or come real close, anyway. I figured the Mavericks could still win if he had a huge game (I was thinking like 37 points, 8 boards, 13 assists, roughly), but it'd be tough. Dirk would have to come up huge, and Wade and Bosh would have to be relatively quiet. I figured that was entirely possible for Bosh, but probably not for Wade, so yeah, I expected it to be a struggle for Dallas.

And I suppose it was at times. They were behind early, then built a large lead, only to watch it slip away. Nowitzki shot poorly most of the game, but they pulled it off.

I'm not sorry the Heat fell short. I hope they continue to fall short, though I don't expect they will. I imagine they'll find a way to build a better roster, even if the new CBA lowers the salary cap. I guess my issue was for the better part of a decade we've been told LeBron is the chosen one (he even has it tattooed on his back), that he's King James, and we are all witnesses. This wasn't just p.r. people, this was something he actively encouraged as his image. Then he essentially said, "You know what? I'm really not that great. I can't win here, so I'm going to team up with a couple of friends, one who already got himself a ring." He wrote a check his talent couldn't cash. So even though it really was a decent bit of self-awareness to recognize he did need more help than he received in Cleveland, he still feels like a bit of a fraud.

But honestly, I'm surprised that even if he wasn't scoring, he wasn't setting up his teammates. He seems like such a good passer, and he draws so much attention if he goes towards the basket, I'd think he'd be spoiled for options to pass it to. That's one of the things I like about his game, that he seemed willing to get his teammates involved, if the opportunity was there. He took some flack for it at times, like that Pistons series where he was criticized for passing to an open teammate (Donyell Marshall?) who clanked a potential game-winning 3. So the next game he scored something like the Cavs last 26 points.

But is that really his game, the scoring fiend act? If not, I can't hate a guy for wanting to keep his teammates involved, even if they stink. It was one of the things I liked about Kevin Garnett in Minnesota. He wasn't going to ball-hog just because his teammates were lousy. If he drew a double-team, he was going to find an open man, and trust they'd come through. It wasn't his fault Kevin McHale couldn't consistently surround him with players who could come through. I don't know why he didn't go that route. Even if he didn't want to shoot, all he has to do is drive. it's not as though Dallas could take a chance he won't shoot and leave him unguarded. Someone would be open to pass to.

As The Second Round Wraps Up

2011-05-15T05:22:00.002-12:00

I thought I'd look at the NBA Playoffs again.

I wouldn't have expected the Hawks to put up more of a fight than the Lakers. I was going to say "the Lakers and the Celtics", but looking at how the Hawks had their doors blown off by Chicago those last two games, I'm not sure Atlanta really did show more fight than Boston did, even if the Hawks won more games in the series.

I've been thinking about who the Mavericks might rather face between the Thunder and the Grizzlies. My feeling is Memphis. I know they won the season series against Dallas, and they have Zach Randolph and Marc Gasol down low, which is the kind of imposing size the Lakers were supposed to use to crush Dallas. Unlike L.A., the Grizzlies seem more committed to keeping those guys involved, possibly because Memphis doesn't have a wing scorer of Kobe's pedigree. If Kobe starts shooting too much, it's hard to reign him in, with the rings and past success and all. Memphis' perimeter guys tend to be more spot-up shooters, or guys who are less resistant to making sure the big guys get their touches.

The thing I think might help Dallas is Memphis' defense seems based on forcing turnovers, leaping into the passing lanes, taking chances. Which is great when it works, but when they gamble and lose, it leaves their defense momentarily short-handed. The Mavericks' offense is a lot about motion and quick passing, Nowitzki driving and either shooting or finding the open guy. All the passing could leave the Mavs especially vulnerable, but I have this sense that Dirk and Jason Kidd are such good passers that they'll exploit that aggressive, get Memphis defenders out position, then find the open guy. Then it's just a matter of hitting the shots. I don't expect the Mavs to shoot the way they did in the closeout game of the Lakers series, but if they can get those open shots, they'll hit them eventually. If the Grizzlies aren't forcing turnovers, I think that's going to dull them a little, because they feed off forcing those turnovers and getting easy buckets, or the frustration it generates among the opponents.

Checking In On The NBA Playoffs

2011-04-27T14:36:00.002-12:00

I didn't mean to go almost a month without posting here. Doesn't seem like it was that long, honestly.

When Boston swept the Knicks, I saw Jim Rome saying that no, this didn't mean the Celtics were back, or that they had to be taken seriously as contenders. His argument was that beating a Knicks team that was thin to begin with, then lost Billups after game 1, and had an Amare hobbled with back problems was a team the Celtics should sweep, so no credit for doing so. I agree that the Celtics should sweep a team like that, but I think they do deserve credit for doing so.

After all, no other team in the postseason has managed it so far. The Bulls could have lost any of the first 3 games of their series with Indiana, did lose Game 4, and finally unleashed the dominant performance in Game 5 I'd been expecting from them the entire series. I'm glad the Pacers made it at least a little interesting, but they were a sub-.500 team, playing the squad with the best record in the NBA, and the guy who'll probably be awarded the MVP. If you're going to say the Celtics should drub the Knicks, that should apply equally to Chicago.

Then there's Miami. They finished off the Sixers earlier tonight, but like the Bulls had a chance to end things in 4 and didn't get it done. I can't decide whether it's more surprising in their case than Chicago's or less. The Heat had generally demonstrated just how much better they were than Philly, especially in Game 2 (or in the 2nd quarter of Game 1, when they went from a double-digit deficit to having the lead at the half), but they also seem like more of a work in progress than the Bulls. Still, Miami had generally shown that weak teams were no problem for them this year (it was the good teams that gave them trouble), so the fact they couldn't put the 76ers away in 4 was a bit of a disappointment.

The Spurs are about to be eliminated by the Grizzlies, if it hasn't happened already. The Thunder had the chance to sweep the Nuggets, and they couldn't manage it either. Which isn't so surprising. The Thunder don't have the playoff experience of the Celtics, or even that of the Heat (looking at individual players, not the Heat squad as a whole). Plus, the Nuggets are a lot better than any of the lower East seeds. The Mavericks are locked in a dogfight that surprised no one, while the Lakers are in a series that's a lot tougher that most anyone expected. Of course, the Lakers are a bit like the Heat: When they put their minds to it, they demonstrate pretty easily the gap between them and the Hornets, just as the Heat have at time with the 76ers. The Lakers just don't do it consistently.

Yeah, the Knicks weren't at their best, and their best currently isn't all that great to begin with, but one of the things a good team has to do is beat the teams it's supposed to. It's one of the things the Arizona Cardinals frequently don't do that drives me nuts. They play bad teams, or, in the bad years, teams even lousier than they are, and find ways to lose. Those two good years with Warner they started to reverse that trend. Even if it wasn't always pretty (the Monday night game against the 49ers where Mike Martz of all people called for a fullback dive at the goal line and got stuffed), but they were holding on. So that's where the Celtics were at. The Knicks could have won the first 2 games, but didn't. They made a comeback from 23 down in Game 4, but the Celtics made a run at the end of the game to put them away. That's what good teams do: beat the inferior ones.

Now the question is whether they can handle a good team.

Revisiting An Old Project

2011-03-29T12:16:00.003-12:00

Two and a half years ago (september 2008), I wrote up a post detailing the St. Louis Cardinals' stability (or lack thereof) since the start of the 1982 season at each position on the field. For comparison's sake, I lumped the Herzog and Torre years together, since they were roughly equivalent to the LaRussa tenure. I thought I'd revisit it, in a somewhat more thought out approach. Looking back, it was kind of stupid to cut it off partway through Herzog's tenure, so this time I went all the way back to the 1980 season. Plus, I have two more years of LaRussa to factor in now. I went ahead and split Torre and Herzog into separate groupings, since they were different managers after all.

Like last time, I considered a starter to be the player who logged the most innings at a position for a season. As far as partial seasons (since Herzog and Torre both had their tenures start and end midway through seasons) I pulled up the box scores and counted starts, rather than innings. I figured it would be close enough.

Herzog (11 seasons): 6 catchers, 6 first basemen, 4 second basemen, 3 third basemen, 2 shortstops, 4 leftfielders, 4 centerfielders, 7 right fielders.

One note about center field. In 1981, George Hendrick logged the most innings on the team in center and right field. Baseball-Reference lists him as the starter in right, and Tony Scott in center. Likely because Hendrick did play more in right (472 innings to 433.2), and Scott played more in center (374.1 innings) than Sixto Lezcano (268), the #2 guy in right.

Other things of note: Herzog took over the 1980 Cards in June, and managed them for about 45% of the season, until he was promoted to GM and Red Schoendienst took over as manager. His 1980 preferred outfield is completely different from the overall season. Overall, the starters from left to right were Bobby Bonds, Tony Scott, and George Hendrick. For Herzog, it was Terry Kennedy (the backup catcher), Hendrick, and Leon Durham. He'd use Bonds and Scott, but also go several days without starting either, especially Bonds. I don't know if that was injury-related, or if Herzog just didn't like Bonds.

Keith Hernandez was the starter at 1st every year from 1976 through 1982, and probably would have been the starter in 1983 if they hadn't traded him midway through the season. His being traded started a sequence where the team couldn't find a long-term first baseman. 3 years was the max tenure for anyone throughout the remainder of Herzog's run. And Torre's, and the first few LaRussa years.

Right field was pretty unsettled, as Hendrick was the only one with more than two years as the starter. That's another trend that will continue beyond Herzog.

Shortstop's obviously the most settled, but second base (Tom Herr from 81-87), third base (Terry Pendleton from 84-90), and center field (Willie McGee, 82-88 and 90) were all manned by one player for several years.

The most starter turnover from one year to the next was from '80 to '81, with six different starters (catcher, second, third, and all three outfield spots). Some of the same players were involved (Ken Oberkfell moved from 2nd to 3rd, Hendrick from center to right), but at different positions.

The least turnover was from '85 to '86, when the only difference was catcher (Mike LaValliere instead of Tom Nieto).

Torre (6 seasons): 1 catcher, 4 first basemen, 3 second basemen, 3 third basemen, 2 shortstops, 2 leftfielders, 1 centerfielder, 3 rightfielders.

Torre took over late in '90, after Herzog quit at the halfway mark, and Schoendienst managed for 24 games. Then he got fired about two months into the '95 season. In both cases he was the manager for about 1/3 of the season. So his preferred lineups in both those seasons differ a bit from the overall season.

In '90, he preferred Tom Pagnozzi at catcher, and started using Todd Zeile (the overall starter) at 3rd, though Pendleton still started slightly more for Torre that year. Torre started Ray Lankford in center, and Felix Jose in right, rather than Willie McGee and Milt Thompson, but Willie had been traded to acquire Jose at the end of July, so one guy had just left, and the other had just arrived. Milt had been starting mostly due to lack of better options after Tom Brunanksy was traded for Lee Smith in April (a trade the Cardinals won)

In '95, the only major difference was Torre used Zeile as his primary 1st baseman, while Jorgenson (who took over after Torre was fired) used John Mabry. But Zeile was traded (for Mike Morgan) at the same time Torre was fired, so that likely explains that, since Zeile was a superior player and would probably have continued to start if he'd been there.

Beyond that, the instability at first continues. Pedro Guerrero managed three years (starting in Herzog's run), Andres Galarraga just one, Gregg Jefferies two, then Zeile for the Torre portion of 1995. Right field didn't fare much better. Felix Jose for two years (traded to acquire Jefferies), then Mark Whiten for two, then the start of the Brian Jordan era (which would actually reach three seasons, albeit non-consecutively)

Second base continued a game of hot potato that started when Tom Herr was traded in 1988. Luis Alicea had taken the job that year and been overhwlemed. So Jose Oquendo won it by the end of the year, and kept it from 1989-1991. Injuries hobbled him the next three years, and Alicea platooned with Geronimo Pena, Alicea logging more innings in '92 and '93, Pena getting the nod in '94. They traded Alicea after '94, but Pena was hurt in '95, so it fell to Oquendo again.

For Torre, the greatest amount of turnover came from '94 to '95, as five spots were manned by different players, some due to player movement, some to injury (like Tripp Cromer manning SS in place of Ozzie). From '93 to '94, the only difference was Geronimo Pena at second instead of Alicea, and that was hardly a change since they were still platooning as they had the previous two seasons.

LaRussa (15 seasons, so far): 5 catchers, 5 first basemen, 10 second basemen, 8 third basemen, 5 shortstops, 8 leftfielders, 5 centerfielders, 8 rightfielders.

Obviously, this isn't complete since LaRussa is still going, but it's as up-to-date as it can be. We see there are 4 positions that have been the most stable, all of which had one guy who has held down the fort for several years. Yadier Molina at catcher (though Mike Matheny helped), Albert Pujols at first, Jim Edmonds in center, and Edgar Renteria at short.

Shortstop has been less stable the last few years. With Brendan Ryan being traded, the Cardinals are guaranteed of their 4th different starting SS in the seven seasons since Renteria left.

McGwire was the player to break the 3 year barrier at first, as he was the starter from '98-'01. Really, he was the starter as soon as he showed up in '97, but Dmitri Young still had more innings overall that season. The advantage of being starter for four months compared to two.

J.D. Drew of all players broke the three-year mark in right field, holding the spot from 2000-2003, though he only played about half the possible innings in right over that stretch.

Second base has been a mess, as Fernando Vina is the only player to hold the job more than two years, though Schumaker can join him if he plays the most innings there this year. Which is so depressing I want to cry. Skip Schumaker is the second baseman LaRussa and Mozeliak decide they should hold on to? Second went through a six-year stretch ('02-'07) where the starter was a different player every year. Vina, Bo Hart, Tony Womack, Mark Grudzielanek, Aaron Miles, Adam Kennedy.

Left field had an even longer run from '03-'09. Pujols, Lankford, Reggie Sanders, So Taguchi, Chris Duncan, Schumaker, Matt Holliday (who barely edged out Duncan).

There have been two occasions were six positions were manned by a different player than the year before. Once was from '98 to '99, when catcher, third, shortstop, and all three outfield spots changed hands. The other was from '04 to '05, with catcher, second, third, shortstop, and left and right field. In the latter case, injuries (such as scott Rolen getting hurt, forcing Abraham Nunez into the starting lineup) dictated some of the changes.

The least amount of turnover was from 2000 to 2001, when the only shift was from Fernando Tatis at 3rd to Placido Polanco. Also between 2009 and 2010, when the only difference was David Freese instead of Mark DeRosa, also at 3rd, strangely enough.

I might mess around with this a little more later. Maybe trying to pick the best players at each position for each manager, or maybe the best at each position overall. Some positions would be pretty easy, others could be a real pain (right field in the Torre era, for example).

Checking In

2011-03-19T09:01:00.002-12:00

It's been over a month since my last post here, but I haven't felt particularly inspired. Looking at my last post, I guess I should mention discussion of Albert Pujols' contract situation has mostly subsided. At least it's not being brought up on the Cardinals' websites I read. That was a pleasant surprise.

Wainwright's gotten hurt since my last post, and Kyle McClellan seems poised to be the new #5 starter, which I'm cautiously optimistic about. If Braden Looper could manage two marginally effective seasons as a starter for the Cards, why not McClellan? Injuries are a concern, but they're a concern for everyone else in the rotation, so he'll fit right in.

Nick Punto's also hurt, and won't be back until May, at least. Which has opened the door for either Daniel Descalso or Matt Carpenter to make the team. While I'm intrigued by Carpenter (a supposedly average 3rd baseman with limited home run power but excellent plate discipline), I think Descalso's the choice. He has a little major league experience already, while I don't believe Carpenter's even played about AA, and Descalso's more defensively versatile. He can play 3rd like Carpenter, but also 2nd. If he were to somehow get the majority of the playing time away from Schumaker, I wouldn't mind it a bit. Not that I think Descalso's a worldbeater, just an upgrade on Skip. Anyway, let Carpenter get some time in AAA, Freese, Craig, Descalso (and Punto when he gets off the DL, I guess) can handle the hot corner for now.

Sign Him, Don't Sign Him, Just Stop Yammering About It

2011-02-17T08:51:00.003-12:00

Even as a St. Louis Cardinals fan, I'm sick of hearing about Albert Pujols' contract negotiations. Unfortunately, I highly doubt that just because he's through discussing it with the Cardinals until after the season, the media will stop discussing it. Really, I think it's the fact the talking heads keep blathering on when either they know nothing, or else there's nothing to know that bothers me. Let me know when the sides reach an agreement, whether it's a new contract, or a decision to part company. So naturally, I'm going to post about him now. Makes perfect sense.

At this stage, I don't even know if I want Albert to come back after this year. Yes, he's really good. Yes, he's probably going to start to decline, which means he'll be so good it can barely be comprehended by mortal minds, rather than being beyond comprehension. I'd rather have him on the team than not, but what worries me is what the rest of the team will look like around him. The Cardinals have a budget that they probably won't be too willing to increase. So if Albert's making 30 million a year, and the team's payroll sits at 120 million, that kind of limits their options.

If they were to fill in the roster with more young players (and if I thought they had viable options in the farm system), I'd be fine with that. I like watching young players, since they tend to have more enthusiasm, they're more unpredictable (for good and ill), and I can excuse their mistakes as growing pains. I'm not confident they'd take that approach. I'm not sure Albert would go for it. He seems pretty serious, and the young players might be unable to match his intensity. He's criticized Colby Rasmus, and may have been one of the veterans annoyed with Brendan Ryan. Then there's LaRussa to consider. I don't know how long he'll stick around, though Albert's presence would probably convince him to stay. Tony's certainly not adverse to using younger players, but his preference seems to be for the known quantity, even if the known quantity is terrible.

If they let Albert walk, can they replace his production? And what would be the best approach? Try to find a first baseman almost as good? Or accept that the new first baseman will be a major downgrade (but also much cheaper), and look for considerable (and probably costly) upgrades at other positions (second base, shortstop) to make up the difference? Money not spent on Albert is, in theory, money to spend elsewhere on the roster. Of course, having money doesn't mean it'll be spent wisely. Look at the Mets. or the Kyle Lohse contract. I can't believe I was reasonably satisfied with that contract.

The team could always pocket the money, go with a highly-reduced payroll, though combining that with letting Albert go would seem like a recipe for fan backlash. There are still plenty of Cardinals' fans ready to call Bill DeWitt cheap, though there's every chance the team would use local media to paint Albert as the bad guy, and the fans would eat it up. As I've said before, I'm consistently bothered by how LaRussa seems to emerge from every conflict he has with a player largely unscathed, with the player usually labeled as a problem or malcontent. Either he's a master media manipulator, or just very careful about which battles he chooses, selecting players to squabble with he's confident he can turn fans against.

Cardinals Sign Nick Punto

2011-01-25T10:25:00.002-12:00

My hope when I heard this was that it means they won't bother with Aaron Miles because Punto could do everything Miles could, only better. Having since actually looked at their stats, I guess I'm getting my wish, though Punto hasn't been as good as I'd imagined.

Over the last 3 years (per Baseball-Reference), Punto's been worth 3.4 wins above replacement, but only 1.3 the last 2 years. Aaron Miles has been worth 0.3 WAR the last 3 seasons, and -1.5 the last 2 (most of the negative value was his disastrous 2009). Punto has higher value both defensively and offensively, though again, not by the margin I'd hoped for. Then again, if he was as good as I'd hoped, he probably wouldn't have been available for less than a million dollars.

Miles seems better able to hit for contact, Punto a little better at drawing walks. Neither has much power. They both play multiple positions, but Punto seems more adept. Punto's a year younger, but also seems more injury-prone (or unlucky). It's doubtful he'll be starting, so maybe that isn't a concern. What does concern me is the idea I've seen bandied about online that if David Freese isn't ready to go at the start of the season, Punto could be the starting 3rd basemen until Freese is ready.

Please no. Punto as an occasional sub for Theriot, or a defensive replacement (or platoon partner) for Schumaker, sure. The offensive drop won't be horribly severe, and might even be made up for by the defensive upgrade. But assuming Freese's early 2010 results weren't a complete mirage, the drop from him to Punto at the plate is concerning. I'd much rather they take their chances with Allen Craig at 3rd, and perhaps let Punto sub for him late, rather than make Punto the starter.

Hopefully, that's a non-issue, either because Freese will be ready to go when the season starts, or because LaRussa doesn't see Punto as anything more than a super utility, occasional starter at 3rd base.

They're Older, I'm Not Sure They're Better

2011-01-18T13:37:00.004-12:00

At this point, the St. Louis Cardinals seem content to sign free agents to minor league contracts. Hopefully they won't need Ian Snell or Miguel Batista this year, or if they do, they opt for P.J. Walters, Lance Lynn, or one of their minor leaguers who might actually have a major league future. Considering their manager, there's little chance they'll go that way, but I can hope.

Looking over the moves they've made this off-season, it's hard for me to believe they've improved. Jake Westbrook for an entire year should be an improvement over what they trotted out as the 4th starter in between Brad Penny's injury and Westbrook's arrival. It has the added bonus of relegating Kyle Lohse to 5th starter, which means the bar for him to be acceptable got just a little lower. The bar for him to be worth the contract the team gave him is still high, and based on his last 2 seasons, far beyond his reach. What worries me is the Cardinals may have to rely on him more this season. Westbrook, Carpenter, and Garcia have all had Tommy John surgeries in the last few years. Carpenter threw the second-highest regular season innings total of his career at age 35. Garcia threw more innings than he has in any season since he was drafted, and topped 150 innings for the first time since 2006. Still, if people stay healthy, the rotation should be solid, maybe even better than last year's, depending on how Carpenter ages, and how well Garcia adjusts to the league making adjustments to him.

The bullpen shouldn't be too different, though I'm not sure who the Cardinals have decided on as the 2nd LOOGY LaRussa will just have to have, now that Denny Reyes is in Philly. If they can avoid wasting innings on the likes of Mike MacDougal the right side should be OK, with Franklin, Boggs, McClellan, Motte, and hopefully Salas. Not great, but OK.

I've already said a lot about the acquisition of Theriot, and subsequent trade of Brendan Ryan. Quickly recapping, the loss of Hawksworth to acquire Tally Ho is no big loss. If Tally Ho were going to be used as a platoon partner for Skip, someone to face the lefthanders Schumaker is helpless against, it'd be tolerable. But to downgrade from Brendan's defense to Theriot's at SS is imbecilic, especially considering Duncan's insistent on getting groundballs. Right now, other than Albert at 1st, the infield defense looks like shit, and I don't buy that Theriot will hit well enough to compensate.

They added Lance Berkman to play right field. I don't know whether it's a good signing or not. Berkman says he's lost a lot of weight so he can move better. That's good. He still hasn't played outfield regularly in 3 or 4 years. That's bad. I don't doubt that even now, he could outhit a Jon Jay/Allen Craig platoon, which is what the Cards were looking at in right prior to Fat Elvis' arrival. That's largely because I'd fully expect LaRussa to favor Jay over Craig for playing time, and I don't expect Jay to replicate last year's offensive production. His defense would almost surely be better than Craig or Berkman's, but not by so much it would make the difference. Now those two should be the backup outfielders, though Tony will probably give Jay far too many starts in center over Colby. I hate LaRussa these days. I keep waiting for one of his feuds with players to get his ass booted, and it never happens.

Hopefully LaRussa will let Craig play 3rd, whether he's spelling Freese, or taking over for him if Freese can't stay healthy, or Freese's first 2 months were a fluke. Craig was able to stick at 3rd up to AAA, until the Cardinals moved him to the outfield to make room for Brett Wallace, who hasn't been tried much a 3rd by any of the team's that have had him since. This can mean Craig is truly horrible at 3rd, worse than a guy everyone else sees as a 1st baseman/DH. Or it means the Cardinals can't evaluate third base defense for shit. Or they didn't see a pressing need to get Craig time at 3rd. He can't be worse than the Aaron Miles/Felipe Lopez combo of last year. Or the Joe Thurston Experience of 2009.

Signing Gerald Laird for backup catcher frustrates me. He hit worse last year than Jason LaRue, which gives Tony absolutely no incentive to play him, which means he'll overuse Molina - again. They could have just used Bryan Anderson. I have no doubt he can outhit Laird, and he's a lefty, which offers some matchup possibilities, which LaRussa ought to love. Except TLR doesn't like his defense, supposedly, even though Anderson has apparently busted his butt trying to improve under Mike Matheny's tutelage. Also, there are rumors one of the Cardinals' starters doesn't like pitching to Anderson, who knows why. My money's on Carpenter, personally, because he seems like kind of an overly intense asshole, and there are only a couple of pitchers on the staff with the cachet for it to matter if they don't like a catcher. It's pretty much him or Wainwright, and I don't see it being Wagonmaker.

As I recall, there were rumors some of the veterans didn't like Brendan Ryan either, and that may have expedited his exit. My thought is this: these guys aren't playing on the sandlots with neighborhood kids. They're being paid to play baseball, so they are professionals. Part of being a professional is accepting they don't get to pick their coworkers. If they want that power, they can go start their own team. Until they do that, they can suck it up, do their best, and trust their teammates are doing so as well. They don't have to like their teammates, they just have to work with them.

I'm Stumped And Lazy

2011-01-11T11:14:00.006-12:00

I'm not entirely sure what to post about here. Both the Cardinals teams I follow are done for the season. I could (and probably will) take a look at what St. Louis has done this offseason (besides trading Brendan Ryan, which I've said my piece on). I've been considering trying to figure out if this year's Cardinals' quarterbacking was the worst I've seen, or if that title still belongs to the 1999 team, and this was merely the 2nd worst.

I don't have a lot to say about the NFL playoffs. Arizona's not involved, and the only team remotely in my area was Kansas City, was unceremoniously booted from the playoffs by Baltimore. Also, if there's no team I hold allegiance to, I prefer the playoffs to have lots of new blood. The NFC's providing some, since Seattle, Chicago, and and Atlanta weren't in last year.

The AFC is the usual suspects, with New England, Pittsburgh, the Jets, and the aforementioned Ravens. I don't have any confidence the Jets can back up the trash their coach talks, and defensive struggles don't interest me, so I doubt Ravens/Steelers will hold much interest. Plus, I still hate the Steelers for beating Arizona in the Super Bowl two years, and I imagine Roethlisberger is much more likely to have a good game than Flacco. Though Flacco did manage his first competent playoff performance last week. Only took him six games.

Another Year, Another Hall Of Fame Ballot Post

2010-12-22T07:43:00.004-12:00

Anything to delay discussing either of the current Cardinals teams right now. Like last year, I'll start with the returning candidates, and then look at the newbies.

Roberto Alomar: Yes. Did everything you could ask of a second baseman.

Harold Baines: My distaste for DHs means he's still a No.

Bert Blyleven: Yes. I voted for him last year, he still has over 5,000 innings and 3700 Ks. Still was worth 87.6 wins above replacement.

Barry Larkin: Still Yes. I'm not sure if he was as good a SS as Alomar was a 2nd baseman (he does have a higher WAR than Alomar, higher than any returning candidate except Blyleven actually), but he was more than good enough to be inducted.

Edgar Martinez: I'm not sure it's fair that I supported Edgar last year, but not Baines. They're both basically DHs, and neither was particularly good when they did play in the field. Edgar wins in the rate stats (.933 OPS to Baines' .820), while Baines has the counting stats (HRs, RBIs, hits), and played a lot longer (800 more games). But Edgar was a really top notch hitter while he played.

Don Mattingly: Still not impressed. No.

Fred McGriff: He's never been linked to steroids, if you care about that. Was a pretty good hitter, but I don't think of the Hall of Fame in conjunction with him. No.

Mark McGwire: Yes. Still feel like for his impact on the game alone, he needs to be in. By all means slap a mention of his PED use on his plaque if you want to.

Jack Morris: I still say No. Jon Heyman would argue I can't just look at his stats, but Heyman also used the "Morris pitched to the scoreboard" argument to try and excuse some of Morris' less than impressive numbers, which I think Posnanski already debunked as garbage. I wouldn't be ticked if Morris got in, but Bert should go first.

Dale Murphy: Well, I was in support of him and Andre Dawson last year. Dawson's in, so Yes to Murphy.

Dave Parker: He has Dale Murphy's offensive numbers, but not the defensive ones. I don't the hitting stats alone are enough. No.

Tim Raines: I feel like the Hall, these days anyway, doesn't appreciate the guys who changed games with their speed enough. Yes.

Lee Smith: He was good for awhile, but I feel like closers, considering how few innings they pitch, need to be really outstanding to be elected. Good for a long time doesn't work. No.

Alan Trammell: Still think his numbers on the whole are good enough. Yes.

OK, that covers 7 so far. I may have to go back and change some votes if there are more deserving candidates in the new crop.

Carlos Baerga: Um, No. He had a few good seasons early, then his numbers fell off a cliff.

Jeff Bagwell: Put up better rate stats than Palmerio, playing in the Astrodome for part of his career. Had some speed, generally underrated player. Not hugely underrated, but a least a little. Yes.

Bret Boone: No.

Kevin Brown: He was really good when he was healthy, but I don't think he was healthy enough. No.

John Franco: He's uin the same boat as Lee Smith, good, not great closer. No.

Juan Gonzalez: No. Injured too much, not much of a fielder, played in Arlington, which didn't hurt his offensive numbers any, I'm sure.

Marquis Grissom: His numbers are better than I'd have expected, though he did play forever. Considering that, they really aren't as good as they need to be. No.

Lenny Harris: I don't believe I'll be voting for a guy with a negative career WAR (-0.9). No.

Bobby Higginson: No.

Charles Johnson: I'll get to Benito Santiago farther down, but Charles Johnson has the rate stat and defensive numbers over Benito, but not the counting stats. That's because Charles' career ended abruptly in his early 30s, while Benito was able to hold on to 40. I don't think Charles has the numbers. No.

Al Leiter: No.

Tino Martinez: I'm sure there'll be some Yankee-loving types who'll try to argue for him because of his "clutch" postseason contributions or some such bullcrap. But if I'm not voting for Mattingly (and Im not) I'm definitely not voting for Tino. No.

Raul Mondesi: No.

John Olerud: I liked Olerud as a player, but No.

Rafael Palmerio: Hmm, over 3,000 hits and 500 HRs. Good hitter, decent first baseman, but spent a lot of time at DH, too. I'm going to say No, for now at least.

Kirk Reuter: Killed the Cardinals with his junkballing lefthandedness, but No.

Benito Santiago: He has the counting stats edge over Charles Johnson, but the numbers don't add up to a vote. No.

B.J. Surhoff: No. Hey, it's an honor just to be nominated, right? Probably should have used that line on Higginson.

Larry Walker: I honestly don't know how to weigh his playing a lot of games in the Coors Field launching pad. His numbers look good, both with the bat and the glove, but I don't know. I'll say Yes, because I wound up with fewer viable candidates than I expected.

I thought there would be more new nominees I'd want to vote for than that, but it's just Bagwell and Walker to go with my 7 selections from the returning options.

Arizona Wins Football Game, Arizona Fan Is Surprised

2010-12-14T07:20:00.003-12:00

Yep, Arizona defeated Denver because Jay Feely decided to be awesome. And because the Broncos suck. And because John Skelton did not shoot the team in the foot with stupid turnovers. Which is sort of an improvement over Anderson, and definitely an step up from Max Hall.

For some reason, Arizona still chose to pass more than they threw, even with a rookie QB they had declared a couple of seasons away from being ready to start at the beginning of this season. Which is a strategic decision that doesn't make any sense, but it's the Arizona Cardinals, so I'm fairly accustomed to that. Hightower even had a good day running the ball, except that he lost another fumble. Good thing for him Beanie Wells can't stay healthy, or he'd be out of a job.

It's a little maddening, because the Cardinals are actually running successfully this year (games against the Vikings and 49ers notwithstanding). . . when they remember to run. The team is averaging 4.5 yards per carry. Hightower is at 5.2 yards per carry, but the team is 28th in the NFL in rushing yards because they either fall behind too much, or they refuse to run the ball when they can.

The upshot is the remainder of the schedule isn't terrible. They have to go to Carolina, host Dallas, then travel to San Francisco. Considering how Cowboy fans usually fill the stadium, they don't really have a home game left. Fortunately, they don't have a game against a team with a winning record left, either. So hopefully they can stay in the games, run it well, and maybe Skelton can make a few plays.

Cardinals Trade Brendan Ryan

2010-12-13T07:45:00.002-12:00

I'm in a strange headspace over this Brendan Ryan trade. Intellectually, I know that starting Ryan Theriot at shortstop over Ryan probably doesn't make much difference in how the Cardinals finish. Yeah, Theriot's a worse player. In 2009, Brendan was wroth 3.4 wins above replacement, while Theriot was worth 1. Last year, Boog was worth 0.9, while Tally Ho* was worth -0.8 WAR. That suggests 1.5-2.5 wins difference. The Cardinals already finished 5 games behind the Reds last year, so who cares if they finish 6 or 7 games back this year?

So that's intellectually. Emotionally, I liked Brendan Ryan. He seemed to be having fun, not taking things overly seriously. He was quirky, in a way that didn't seem detrimental to the team from my perspective. It wasn't like he was Milton Bradley, flipping out and attacking fans or umpires. And he was the best defensive shortstop the Cardinals have had since Ozzie. He made the team more entertaining, so his departure makes them less so. That it happened, not because the Cards thought they could get something to improve the team, but because Tony LaRussa is a humorless jackass, makes it worse. And they're replacing with a clearly worse defensive player, so it's a good thing they don't have a pitching coach who preaches getting groundball outs. Oh wait, that's exactly what they have, so this'll be swell.

And don't try and sell me on the idea that Maikel Cleto is some great haul. The guy has been in A-ball for three years. There's at least 6 or 7 righthanded relief pitchers ahead of him in the Cardinals' farm system alone, to say nothing of the three in the major league bullpen (Motte, Boggs, McClellan). I have zero confidence he will ever be of any use to the major league squad whatsoever.

So I've been deprived of watching a player I enjoy play for a team I root for because of LaRussa. Because Bill DeWitt has basically said the managerial job is Tony's for as long as he wants it, which leaves the GM in a situation where Tony clearly seems to have more clout. Certainly, DeWitt hasn't made any similar statements about Mozeliak's job security. Nor should he, since I can't say I love the job he's done. But I think it's stolen any spine he might have had to look at Tony and say "No, I will not trade this player. He's better than the guys you want, so he stays. Period." Tony might not like that, but he's a big boy, so he ought to be able to work with it. I have this vision now of the Cardinals clubhouse as a Dickensian orphanage, or an Industrial Revolution-era coal mine. Gray, glum, bleak, joyless. Anyone who exhibits a spark of cheerful personality must be banished, in favor of raging assholes like Chris Carpenter. Hey, I'm glad Carp's a good pitcher, but he still behaves like an asshole on the field screaming at his temamates, the other team, so on and so on.

Here's the options I'm weighing right now. One, the Cardinals resign Aaron Miles, because Tony must have 3 undersized, scrappy white middle infielders, none of which will have any actual skill. At that point, I renounce the St. Louis Cardinals as my team, at least until Tony LaRussa is gone. I can become a baseball vagabond, in the same way I am with the NBA. Second possible outcome: The Cardinals stink up the joint like it's 2007. They're so bad it drives Tony away. Where he goes, I don't care. Could be back to Oakland, to Baltimore, Acapulco, Luxembourg. Hell would be fine, just so long as he's gone.

Now, the team crashing and burning, and TLR leaving probably also signals the end of Albert Pujols' days with the team. But you know what, in my current mindset, I don't give a shit. They probably can't afford to resign him anyway, and if they do, it's gonna cripple the team's payroll more than likely, and guarantee LaRussa's continued presence. Which would mean the Cardinals would constantly be scraping the bottom of the free agent barrel to fill the roster, since Tony would want his veterans, rather than rely on prospects, and they won't have any money for good free agents. And the whole thing will be a joyless and miserable experience for a fan, so who wants to go through that? So screw it. Let them stink, part of me says, drive the manager and Hall of Fame first basemen and off, and start over.

At this point, I have no excitement for this team. I don't think they'll be fun to watch, whether they win or lose. I'm sick of Tony. I'm sick of his stupid sunglasses, of his bullpen manipulations, of his aversion to younger players in favor of shitty veterans. I'm sick of his crap about keeping things in house, except when it suits him to blast them publicly, thus turning public opinion against them and in his favor. I'm sick of his personality clashes that always end with the player losing. By my count, he's feuded with Ozzie Smith, Ron Gant, Garrett Stephenson, J.D. Drew, Steve Kline, Scott Rolen, Anthony Reyes, Jim Edmonds, Colby Rasmus, and Brendan Ryan. Those are just the ones I know of. These are widely disparate players, and all they have in common - besides bilateral symmetry - is they fought with Tony LaRussa, or were the subject of his ire. Yet he remains, and they go, Colby being the exception. Thus far, and that may only be due to his trying to become a Skip Schumaker-like slap hitter. I hope that's a joke, because if the Cardinals are really trying to make their third best hitter (.859 OPS) hit more like Skip Schumaker (.667 OPS), I may not wait for the Miles' signing to say "Fuck it".

In conclusion, I hate this trade, I'll miss Brendan Ryan, I think Mozeliak's a gutless worm, and I despise Tony LaRussa more than I have since the '96 season when he was at odds with Ozzie. Perhaps he'll be pulled over for another driving while intoxicated, and that can be used as pretext to fire him. It won't work that way, I know; Tony's job would survive it, unfortunately.

* I've been thinking about why the nickname works for me. The British believed their intangibles would carry the day. The spirit, or love for the Queen and the Empire would overcome the fact they were a bunch of dudes on horses charging entrenched Maxim guns emplacements. And the Cardinals somehow believe Theriot's intangibles will overcome the fact he is not a good professional baseball player.

Ryan Theriot? Sheesh

2010-12-01T05:47:00.004-12:00

The St. Louis Cardinals traded Blake Hawksworth to the Dodgers for Ryan Theriot. Which perhaps means they won't be bringing Aaron Miles back, now that they have a younger, equally lousy version of him.

I'm not happy about the trade, though. Not because Hawksworth is gone, more because the Cardinals apparently envision Theriot as a shortstop. If not the starter, then someone to challenge Brendan Ryan for the position. Which sucks, because it means I once again have to realize that I root for a team that doesn't value the same things I do in players.

I agree with the Cardinals that upgrading the middle infield is a good idea. I just think they should be doing it at second base (where they have Skip Schumaker), not shortstop. And if they're going to upgrade, Theriot isn't it. I was looking at the three players' value over the last two years, since that's how long Ryan and Skip have been starters for the team at those spots. In 2009, by Baseball Reference, Theriot was worth 1 WAR (win above replacement), Skip 1.5, and Ryan 3.4. To break it down further, Theriot was +0.9 offensively, +0.1 with the glove (netirely at SS). Skip was +2.5 with the bat, -1.0 with the glove (which is ugly, a win worse than a replacement level - not average, replacement level - 2nd baseman). Brendan was 1.6 hitting, 1.8 fielding.

In 2010, Theriot played for both the Cubs and the Dodgers. With Chicago, he was -0.7 (-0.4 hitting, -0.3 fielding). In L.A., it was -0.1 WAR (-0.1 hitting, exactly replacement level fielding). Schumaker was +0.4 (+0.6 hitting, -0.2 fielding). Ryan was worth 0.9 (1.6 fielding, -0.7 hitting). So even in a year where his offense was abominable, Brendan Ryan was still a more useful player than either of the other two. But I don't know, Ryan's kind of silly, and Carp yelled at him once, and LaRussa seems to barely tolerate him, while Tony loves Skip, I assume because Skip was willing to try a different position, so he's a gritty gamer. Of course he tried another position, it gave him a shot to extend his career, and Skip Schumaker is hardly a big enough name to refuse to do so.

I get that Ryan looked helpless offensively last year. A .573 OPS is bad (the year before it was .740). But it was only his second year as starter. In Yadier Molina's second year as starting catcher (2006), he put up a .595 OPS*. He was actually worth -0.2 WAR that year (-1.6 bat, +1.4 glove), and the Cards didn't go shopping for a new catcher in the offseason. Gary Bennett was their weak hitting backup catcher in '06, and he held the same roster spot in 2007. Ryan plays the only other position on the field where defense is as valuable as it is at catcher, so why is he in danger of losing his job? Especially to Ryan Theriot? I would hope the Cardinals noticed that Theriot was less of a disaster in Los Angeles, where he exclusively played second base (small samples warnings apply, of course). Theriot's already 30, same as Skip. Depending on whose conventional wisdom you subscribe to, they've either just ended their prime (if you think that's 26-30), or they have a couple years left (if you think it's 28-32). Brendan Ryan's 2 years younger than both of them, so however you slice it, he has more of his peak years left.

At this point, I don't believe Schumaker can improve much. He has to hit a lot, probably more than he's able, to provide serious value because of his defense. Ryan just has to hit a little to make himself valuable, because he's already a top notch gloveman. It's not like the Cardinals haven't had weak hitting, slick fielding shortstops before. Ryan's not in Ozzie Smith's class, offensively or defensively**, but they got by with Cesar Izturis for a year, and his 2008 wasn't anything spectacular. He was worth +0.6 with the bat, and +0.9 with the glove (which is less than I expected, honestly). The trick is to find good hitters for the rest of the positions to compensate, then hope Ryan can rebound some. If he could post a .657 OPS, which is about halfway between his 2009 and 2010 numbers, and keep making plays in the field, he should be fine. The question is whether he'll get the chance.

Personally, I'd like to see the Cards go for Adam Dunn. I know he's a butcher in left field (and Holliday said he'd move to RF if it'll help), but the guy can hit, and again, Cardinals can lived through Chris Duncan lumbering around in left like a drunk hippo with a bad foot, I think we could live with Dunn and his 35+ home runs. As it stands, I guess they're banking on Craig and Jay being a productive platoon, and Freese actually staying healthy, which would help considerably, assuming his first two months this year weren't a mirage.

About Theriot, since he's a Cardinal now. When he was good, some Cubs' fans nicknamed him The Riot. I suppose I could change it The (Laugh) Riot, as in "it's a laugh riot they think he can play shortstop!", but considering his name is pronounced "Tarry O", I'm considering calling him "Tally Ho!" It brings to mind, for me, some British officer from the 19th Century, blindly leading his men in a doomed cavalry charge in some faraway land, because he thinks it will be ever so much fun, eh, old chap?

* Because it was a more offense heavy year, that translates to a 53 OPS+, while Brendan's 2010 was a 57. So Boog was slightly closer to league average than Yadi.

** From 1982 thru 1994, the 13 seasons Ozzie was the Cards' starting SS, his lowest WAR (by Baseball-Reference at least) was 1.9, in 1994. His highest was 6.3 in 1989, when he was worth 3,1 wins by glove alone. In those 13 seasons, he had 9 seasons with a WAR better than Ryan's 2009 total, including in his age-36 and 37 seasons.

The Downward Spiral Continues

2010-11-30T11:53:00.002-12:00

Arizona's losing streak is up to 6 games. As I feared, they pretty much laid down against San Francisco on Monday Night Football. Nothing like having the nation's football-loving members undivided attention to demonstrate how lousy they are beyond a shadow of a doubt.

That the Cards lost is bad enough. That it helped the 49ers continue to claw their way back into the division hunt is worse. I hate teams that play like it doesn't matter for awhile, then flip the switch and make it work out. The Chargers, the San Antonio Spurs, I really don't want the 49ers to be able to overcome starting 0-5.

Derek Anderson flipped out when asked after the game why he was seen laughing on the sideline while the team was being defeated. My thought it he's laughing that some team actually pays him for his quarterbacking, or whatever you call what he does out there. It kills me that he has Fitzgerald and Steve Breaston and looks like shit, but Sam Bradford has a bunch of no-name wideouts, and can consistently play solid football, and occasionally spectacular football. If Bradford had Arizona's receivers, the Rams would be running away with the division. But they don't, and those receivers go to waste in their current locale.

I don't know if there's any part of the team that's working right now. The running game was moderately productive against KC, but vanished against SF. The passing game is lousy (not the worst I've seen from a Cardinals team, but in the running for second worst). The defense seems to have thrown in the towel so hard I imagine it burned up before touching the ground. Whisenhunt is sticking with Anderson at QB, saying he gives them the best chance to win, which speaks poorly of their backups, which speaks poorly of their ability to construct a roster. I think he might be better off seeing if any other players on the team have QB experience, be it college or high school, and giving them a turn. The team's already getting blown out every week. How much worse could things be?

Damn It Arizona

2010-11-07T10:12:00.003-12:00

With 5 minutes left, Arizona had a 14 point lead on the Vikings. The Vikings won in overtime.

It'd be false to say I'm surprised. The Cardinals winning surprises me. Losing I'm accustomed to, and the details are irrelevant. I am glad they don't play Buffalo this year, because I could easily see the Bills rolling Arizona on the way to their only victory of the season.

Just because I'm not surprised, doesn't mean I'm not disappointed, or aggravated. I was happy when they had the lead late, and hoped that if they held on, it could propel the team forward. That it did kind of bums me out.

What aggravates me is that 3.5 years in, I'm still not seeing the Cardinals becoming the Steelers West as Whisenhunt supposedly envisioned. He used to explain that they didn't run the football as much as he wanted because Warner was the QB and he liked to throw, he was good at it, and it was working out. Apparently their quarterback was too good for them to run successfully. Well, Warner's retired and they still can't run. They might try more often but the results are for shit. Wells can't stay healthy, Hightower can't hold onto the ball, and either way they averaged 2 yards per carry today. So what, now the QB is too lousy for them to run?

And where is the tough defense? Warner being QB shouldn't have hindered that development, but it's no more present than the running game! Two TDs in less than 5 minutes! To a broken down, egomaniac, piece of shit geezer QB! When the Vikings received the ball in OT (after Arizona's possession ended in failure, naturally) I was completely unsurprised that they immediately marched down the field and kicked the field goal.

Arizona defeats used to mostly depress me, with some anger thrown in, depending on circumstance. Now it's mostly anger. I think I don't want to believe that all their success hinged on Warner, and that without him they're the same old Cardinals I watched for a decade and a half.

Things Are Trending Down

2010-11-03T12:07:00.003-12:00

Since I last posted, Arizona has lost two in a row. They went to Seattle and lost a game where the Seahawks had 7 red zone possessions, but scored only 1 touchdown. They lost because their offense was inept. Max Hall was terrible, and Tim Hightower ruined his consistent large rushing gains by fumbling, costing himself the starting job in the process.

Last week they lost to Tampa, in what's probably the offense's best showing to date. They even threw 2 touchdown passes! Unfortunately, their QBs also threw 4 INTs, and the Bucs scored 38 points, and that's how a team loses a game.

Now Whisenhunt has named Derek Anderson as starting QB again, after 3 mostly poor starts by Max Hall. I don't know whether Hall isn't cut out to be a starter in the NFL, or if he simply isn't ready right now. He's only had 3 starts, it's hard to say, though the negatives seem to outweigh the positives. The only thing he seems to have in his favor are the intangibles, since those are what his teammates and coaches keep praising him on, rather than any particular skill like accuracy, or decision-making.

At any rate, it's rearranging chairs on the Titanic. Anderson has shown flashes of effectiveness when called on to relieve Hall, but he's also shown at least as much of the same poor aim and lousy reads of the defense that got him benched in the first place. There's no indication Anderson has somehow become a better QB over the last month. He's still an inconsistent, mostly terrible player.

The argument among the fans (besides the one about whether Warner was responsible for all Whisenhunt's success) is that the Cardinals should be running the ball more. Which sounds swell, except teams are loading up in the box expecting them to do that (especially when Beanie Wells is in there, since apparently his pass catching and blocking are a work in progress), daring the Cardinals to beat them through the air. It doesn't help matters that in most of their losses, the Cards have fallen behind by a lot. Against the Falcons, Arizona was losing by 17 at the half. Against the Chargers, it was a 21-point deficit at halftime. Seattle was up 16-0 in the 3rd quarter before Arizona put points on the board, and Tampa lead 31-14 in the 3rd before the Gridbirds mounted a comeback. Hard to run much when you need to score quickly.

I imagine the reasoning behind starting Anderson is that he's shown more flashes of competence than Hall, and the division is right there for the taking. Arizona is 3-4, Seattle is 4-3 (with a victory over Arizona in Seattle). I'm guessing they figure if the passing game can just move the chains and stop shooting the team in the foot, they can make the postseason, and Anderson provides a better chance of that. I'm not sure I buy it. I think the Rams, even without any top-flight receivers for their #1 draft pick QB to throw to, have a much better chance than Arizona doe. In which case the only reasons to not start Hall is injury concerns, or because they're worried his poor performance will destroy his confidence. Though if the latter were a concern (and from what I've read of Max Hall, I doubt it is), then he probably can't be the guy for them anyway.

That's One Way To Win

2010-10-13T14:56:00.002-12:00

So Arizona did beat the Saints. I'm not sure their methods are repeatable, though. One touchdown off an interception, another off a fumble recovery by the defense, the third off a fumble by the QB that was recovered by an offensive lineman. The running game struggled (1.7 yards per carry), though they at least kept trying. They racked up less than 200 yards of offense, and fumbled four times without the Saints recovering a single one.

But, they won, so it's all good. Even though his numbers don't reflect it, Max Hall's teammates all insist he provided a boost, I assume with his attitude and toughness. I'd prefer he provide a boost by throwing some touchdowns, or at least not fumble so much, but whatever works. Now he has two weeks to prepare for Seattle, and try and work on his problem areas. His gonna need to, since the Seahawks have been good at home so far this year, and their crowd is notorious for being a presence.

It'll help if the defense can build off this last game, and continue to improve going forward. They might have Gerald Hayes ready to go, which should bolster the linebacking corps. Also, they hope to have Steve Breaston and Early Doucet back, which would give Hall his #2 and #3 receivers, to go along with Larry Fitzgerald. That would be an improvement over the "Fitzgerald and the rookies" act they had last week.

That Other Cardinals Team I Follow

2010-10-08T04:22:00.003-12:00

The Arizona Cardinals are a quarter of the way through their season and they're 2-2. Which isn't too bad; I'm used to them being 1-3. But they've been more lucky than good, and more terrible than lucky. Their two wins were by a combined 4 points (and they only beat Oakland because Janikowski missed 3 field goals, when even 1 would have brought victory), while their losses were by 65 points. Ugh.

The team has multiple problems. The defense has been poor against the run and the pass. Some of that seems attributable to the defensive coordinator, Bill Davis. He seems to blitz too often, leaving opposing receivers in single coverage. Antonio Gates destroyed Arizona last week, though the Cardinals have had problems with TEs for years. Part of the struggle might be the switch to a 3-4 defense. It's a curious choice considering linebacker is the position the Cardinals are thinnest at, while they're supposed to have considerable depth on the defensive line.

The offensive line hasn't been anything to write home about, either. Their run blocking has been fair, but that's not much help when the team is losing by 3 touchdowns before halftime. That's when it's time to throw and unfortunately, this line couldn't form a stable pocket around their QB if they were being rushed by an old ladies' bridge club. I'm not certain what the answer to that problem is, beyond "Don't fall behind so much".

The quarterback position itself hasn't been worth a damn so far. Derek Anderson had one decent game against St. Louis in Week 1. Since then had had two consecutive games completing fewer than 50% of his passes, and last week, his QB rating was 22 before he was benched. Admittedly, he's taking a beating behind that line, but it doesn't help his accuracy is for shit. Larry Fitzgerald has been the target 46 times this season, and only 19 times has the pass been completed. Given Fitzgerald's size, speed, jumping ability, hands, and flexibility, that's pathetic. Anderson might do better if he was blindfolded and spun around three times before throwing. He couldn't do much worse.

It's a moot point for now, though. He's been benched in favor of rookie Max Hall. If it were me, I'd have given Anderson one more chance, rather than throw Hall in against the Saints' defense, which has been pretty solid. If Anderson crashed and burned again, then Hall has two weeks to get ready for Seattle, since Week 6 is the Cards' bye week. It could be though that Whisenhunt doesn't want to lose the fans' support by keeping Anderson starting, or that he figures it's better to let Hall make his first at home, rather than in Seattle, where the Seahawks have been tough this year.

That's Another Season Over

2010-10-04T10:28:00.002-12:00

Well, the St. Louis Cardinals' 2010 season is over. At least they managed a winning record. I wasn't sure they'd pull that off, and I wasn't looking forward to fitting them into my "Worst Cards Team" list.

From a certain perspective, it's staggering the Cards were this bad. They had Albert Pujols, Adam Wainwright, and Matt Holliday performing at a MVP or Cy Young level. Chris Carpenter, Jaime Garcia, and Colby Rasmus also played well, potentially up to All-Star level. Yet they missed the playoffs. It seems that outside of those 6, there weren't any other difference makers, and too many lousy players, especially on offense. Says something about the value of depth.

The other problem, and I don't know how to explain this, was how much they struggled against mediocre teams. You'd think with those six talented players, the lousy teams would be easier to handle than the better, presumably more talent-laden teams, but no. The Cardinals were 12-6 against NL Central winner Cincinnati, and 21-15 against the other winning clubs in the NL (Philly, Atlanta, San Diego, San Fran, and Colorado). The Reds were 11-21 against those same 5 teams. The difference was, the Reds took care of business against the dregs. The Brewers, Astros, and Cubs finished with 77, 76, and 75 wins, respectively. Cincy was 33-12 against them. St. Louis was 18-27. 9 games under .500 against teams that finished 10 games behind them in the standings. All the Cards had to do was be 23-22 against them, just barely a winning record against three sub-.500 teams, and the division is theirs. But they failed, and the Reds didn't, and here we are.

This season was a disappointment. Yeah, the Cardinals had injury problems. David Freese missed the last 3+ months, Brad Penny hit a grand slam in May and was never heard from again. Ludwick was hurt before he was traded, Franklin and Motte missed some time, Jason LaRue's career was ended by Johnny Cueto's flying feet of death, blah, blah. It happens, and the Cardinals have dealt with injury problems before and come through unscathed. LaRussa seemed to grow more crotchety and feuded with his potential All-Star CF, to the point the kid was supposedly requesting a trade. If LaRussa's jackassery had run Colby Rasmus off, that could have been the last straw for me with Tony, combined with the other disturbing trend this year.

What really bothered me this season was the Cardinals tendency to turn to proven veterans to fill gaps. It's not so much that the known quantity is always a bad thing, just that it seems like a mistake when they should know the known quantity sucks. When Freese was pronounced gone for the season, and it became clear Felipe Lopez wasn't getting it done, why trade for Pedro Feliz? Really, why trade for one of the few only position players in the NL who was a worse hitter than Brendan Ryan? Yes, Feliz was hitting worse than he previously had, but he hadn't been even an average hitter since 2004. Why bring up Mike MacDougal - who has already crapped out with the Royals, ChiSox and Nationals - before giving Fernado Salas a chance? Why Randy Winn? They had Jon Jay up, he does everything Winn does at least as well. You certainly don't need an old and new version of Randy Winn, so why not give Allan Craig more playing time? Before his concussion, LaRue had only started 15 games in over 4 months. If they aren't going to use him, what was the point of having a veteran backup catcher. Matt Pagnozzi could have sat on the bench being useless just as easily. And why the hell did they bring back Aaron Miles?

The Cards did give several younger guys some run this last month, and it didn't turn out too poorly, especially against the Pirates (who are practically a minor league team themselves) and the Rockies (who had folded their tents for the season). But I don't think they've learned much about most of those players. Can Tyler Greene be the utility infield guy next year, or maybe even take SS from Ryan? What about Daniel Descalso? Can either of them being the third basemen if Freese gets hurt or struggles again? For that matter, why not give Craig a little play at 3rd? Unlike Descalso, it's a position he played regularly in the minors until the team shifted him to the outfield. It couldn't hurt to see if he could at least stopgap there, perhaps turn himself into a Scott Spiezio "I play all the corner positions" guy. I tend to think Pagnozzi's numbers at the majors are a mirage, since his OPS there is over 200 points above his AAA numbers, but we didn't see enough of him to know for sure.

P.J. Walters supposedly doesn't have the stuff to get out major league hitters consistently. Well, neither does Jeff Suppan, but that didn't stop the team from giving him 13 starts. They can't think Suppan is a part of the team's future, so why not give some of this starts to Walters? Find out if he can get the job done or not. As it stands, P.J. had an OK start, then a bad one, was immediately bounced from the rotation, subsequently proved he's not cut out for mop-up reliever, then ended the year with a very good start against the Pirates. As far as whether he's a viable starting pitcher, we have no idea, because he didn't get the chance, because they were too busy throwing starts away on Suppan and Kyle Lohse. I get that they want to salvage something from the big contract they gave Lohse, but he's not good.

I'd say the Cards can have some confidence Freese can be their third baseman, if he can stay healthy. Also, Jay could be a useful reserve outfielder and Salas an aid in the bullpen. Other than that, the young guys are all still question marks. They didn't get sufficient run, and it's because the team insisted on playing washed-up guys who were definitely no better, and probably worse than the kids they were blocking. Hopefully that's an issue that'll be rectified next year. LaRue's retiring, and I'm hoping to never see Suppan, Miles, Feliz, or Winn in a Cardinals jersey again. Lopez pretty much guaranteed that when he played poorly enough they dumped him with two weeks to go in the season.

Looking For My Worst Cardinals Team - Part 8

2010-09-12T11:29:00.003-12:00

It's time for the last team, barring a complete collapse by the current squad. As opposed to the half-assed collapse they've been engaged in for the last month.

2007

Record: 78-84 (.481), outscored 829-725, -104 run differential
Pythagorean Record: 71-91 (.438)

Offensive Notes: Scored 725 runs (11th out of 16); 5 players (2 starters, 3 reserves) with OPS+ > 100.

This team was marginally good at getting hits. They were 7th in hits, and 5th in batting average and on-base percentage. That last one was in spite of being 13th in walks. Unfortunately, they didn't hit for any power. 14th in doubles and slugging, 16th in triples, 13th in home runs. They did have the 3rd fewest strikeouts, but more than offset this by grounding into the most double plays in the league. They were also 15th in the NL in stolen bases.

The two starters were Albert Pujols, who with a .997 OPS (157 OPS+) had his second worst season up to that point, and Chris Duncan (.834, 114), whose season ended early. David Eckstein outhit Scott Rolen and Jim Edmonds, which would have been great if David put up a .900 OPS, but he didn't reach .750. Adam Kennedy had a miserable year (.575, 50). Amongst the reserves, the good hitters were the guys taking over in the outfield by the end of the season: Skip Schumaker (.816, 111), Rick Ankiel (.863, 119), and Ryan Ludwick (.818, 110). They all had weaknesses, especially patience, as none of them walked all that much, and Skip wasn't much of a power hitter, but they were an improvement on the starters, as a whole.

Molina had a positive year in the sense he posted his best OPS up to that point, .708. Brendan Ryan hit better than his minor league numbers suggested he would, though Scott Spiezio was a bit of a disappointment. Aaron Miles had what was probably a good year for him, but not a particularly useful one for the team. As a whole, the Cardinals had 5 players in double digit home runs, though only two of those (Duncan and Pujols) reached 20. Eckstein was the only one to steal 10 bases.

Pitching Notes: 829 runs allowed (13th of 16); 11 pitchers (3 starters, 8 relievers) with ERA+ > than 100.

Not much good to say here, either. They allowed the 5th fewest walks, they were in the middle of the pack in HRs. But they were 11th in hits allowed, and 15th in strikeouts. No surprise there.

Of the relievers, Josh Hancock threw 13 innings before his passing, Troy Cate 16, of which he was probably lucky to have a 3.38 ERA, considering his 1.688 WHIP. Randy Flores and Tyler Johnson both posted ERA+ better than 100, but their ERAs were still above 4.00, which isn't great for a reliever. Flores was probably lucky, considering his 1.564 WHIP, compared to Tyler's 1.237. The Cards did have 4 legitimately good relievers: Isringhausen, Ryan Franklin, Russ Springer, and Troy Percival. All of them had an ERA+ of at least 145, and no ERA was higher than Franklin's 3.04. Izzy had the worst WHIP, at 1.071, and Springer (0.909) and Percival (0.850) were both fantastic. Izzy struggled a bit with walks (3.9/9 IP), but still K'd over 7/9. Percival was over 8 K/9, and Springer was a 9 K/9. Two of the good starters were Pineiro and Todd Wellenmeyer. Pineiro surrendered 1.6 HR/9, and Wellenmeyer averaged less than 5 innings when he actually started, while walking over 4/9. Wainwright was the closest thing to an actual good starting pitcher, throwing 202 innings with a 3.70 ERA (119 ERA+).

Unfortunately, the team had its share of duds. Mike Maroth had a good first start, then was battered for the next six starts, and 7 relief appearances. Anthony Reyes struggled with runners on base, with his mechanics, with the pitches they wanted him to throw, with lack of run support when he pitched well. Kip Wells sucked. Mulder was still not ready. Kelvim Jimenez (7.50 ERA) mostly held the role of "pitcher LaRussa uses when he's throwing in the towel", though Andy Cavazos, Brian Falkenborg, and Dennis Dove also took turns.

Defensive Notes: The Cardinals were actually good at some positions. Unfortunately, like the '99 team, they were equally terrible at others, mostly in the outfield. Molina was 12 runs above average behind the plate, Albert +25 at first, Rolen partially made up for his lousy offensive season by being +14 at 3rd. The bad news was the Cards were -5 at 2nd, and -9 at SS, thanks to a -15 in 1245 innings of Aaron Miles and Eckstein. The outfield was a disaster. Chris Duncan and So Taguchi were a -22 in 960 innings, though Ludwick and Schumaker were good enough that the team was only -13 overall. Their CFs were average, but Juan Encarnacion was -16 in RF, and the team was -24 as a whole. Overall, the Cardinals were only +8, despite being a combined +59 at C, first, and third.

Other Notes: The Cardinals somehow managed a winning record (43-38) at home, despite being outscored by 20 runs. That they were 35-46 on the road, where they were outscored by 84, made more sense. The team had two good months, July and August, where they managed to climb into the divisional race, thanks to a 30-23 record and a terrible division. Not surprisingly for a team with such poor starters, the team was 25-38 in blowouts. Also not surprisingly for a bad team with a relatively good bullpen, they were 16-20 in one-run games. They owned the Pirates (12-6), but were destroyed by the eventual division winning Cubs, losing 11 of 16. Though only managed 1 win in 6 games against the Nationals, and 1 in 5 against the Giants.

Final Thoughts: This probably shouldn't have been a surprise, considering how the 2006 team played during the regular season. Going into a season with a rotation of Chris Carpenter, Kip Wells, Braden Looper, Wainwright, and Reyes, only to see Carpenter lost for the season in the opener, should have been another clue. Very little seemed to go right. The offense was completely non-existent (even from Pujols) for the first six weeks, and then, just as the team started to hit a little, the rotation fell completely apart. Reyes mostly stopped pitching well and getting screwed by lack of run support, and just pitched poorly. Kip remembered he was Kip Wells. Wainwright started to turn things around by the end of May, but by then Looper was reaching career highs in innings, and wearing down, though I was still impressed by how well he held up.

Mulder tried to come back, and failed. Maroth was not a successful reclamation project, and in that season, Wellenmeyer would be stretching the definition of "successful". Preston Wilson tried to play hurt because the team needed him, and fared poorly. Encarnacion came back from injury mid-season, then had his career ended by a foul ball off Miles' bat. Adam Kennedy played horribly, then was shut down with a knee injury. Duncan struggled after July, until he was shut down in early September with a hernia. I was watching the game against the Diamondback when they shut him down. Watching Albert run the bases that season had been ugly, as you could tell he was running so as to avoid injuring his hamstrings and heel any worse. Watching Duncan leg out a triple that night, you could tell he was in even more pain.

The only things that slightly mitigated the pain of such a lousy season were that they won the World Series the year before (big help), and the NL Central was so lousy they weren't eliminated until an 8 game losing streak in early September.

This is the team. There's really nothing they do well. They aren't a decent offensive team like the '94 squad. They aren't a good run prevention team like the '95, '97, or '86 teams. The '88 and '90 teams could each at least run a lot to compensate for their lack of hitting, and both those teams had better rotations than the '07 team, if not better bullpens. The '99 team is probably close to as bad, but they were a better offensive team, able to hit for more power, and demonstrate more speed on the bases. The '99 team's rotation was better too, even if their bullpen was also much worse. They aren't a good defensive team overall, either. Better than the '99 and '88 groups, but only by 10 runs. +8 is better than -2, no doubt, but it doesn't hold a candle to +35 (1990 and 1994), and certainly not +94 (1986). Really, a good bullpen (excluding all the lousy relievers, anyway) is all this team has going for it, besides Albert Pujols, and I don't think that's enough to elevate them above the other teams.

From worst to best, I'd go 2007, 1999, 1988, 1990, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1986.

Cardinals Release Leinart

2010-09-04T10:07:00.003-12:00

Yes, it's a post about something other than baseball.

The Arizona Cardinals cut Matt Leinart. I'm a bit surprised by that. I wasn't surprised that Whisenhunt would make Leinart earn the starting job. After all, he didn't draft Matt, Denny Green did, and Leinart hasn't impressed in the occasional playing opportunities he had the last two years. I hadn't heard much good about Leinart's performance in the preseason, but I wasn't hearing good things about much of anything on the team. The running game hadn't materialized, the offensive line was struggling, the defense was a huge question mark if only because of how poorly they played the end of last year, when Green Bay ran up the points in consecutive weeks, then new Orleans torched them.

But I don't play too close attention to the preseason. The results don't mean anything. The Rams beat the Patriots a couple weeks ago. Are the Rams better than New England? I highly doubt it. The Colts have gone 0-4 in the preseason in the last couple years. Doesn't seem to hamper them from winning double-digit games once the competitions count for something. So I was trying to remain positive, figuring it was an adjustment period, the team would get things sorted by Week 1, and if not, they play in the NFC West. The 49ers concerned me a bit, but I wasn't quaking at the sight of Pete Carroll coaching the Seahawks, and I wanted to see the Rams win more than 3 games in a season before I worried about them.

But apparently Leinart's been so bad Whisenhunt would rather take his chances with Derek Anderson and two rookies? Derek Anderson, the guy who couldn't hold off Brady Quinn to keep his starting job. I know Anderson has one more Pro Bowl selection than Leinart, but I keep coming back to Anderson playing so poorly, the Browns decided they were better off with Brady Quinn, who was terrible for them. At least Leinart originally lost his starting job to Kurt Warner, a quarterback who was actually good.

I read an idea that Arizona really wanted to trade Leinart, rather than release him, because if they had to cut him, he'd probably go straight to Seattle and Pete Carroll. I have no idea if that was any concern of the Arizona staff, it was something I read on a blog, probably just them spitballing. If it has some grain of truth, I'd hope it was one of those situations where they don't want him giving away all their plays to Seattle. Because if it was worry that he might play well and burn them, then why cut him in the first place? If it's possible for Pete Carroll to make Leinart a successful starting QB, it ought to be possible for Whisenhunt and his bunch.

Anyway, at this point, I'd rather the Cardinals looked into bringing back Josh McCown to be QB, than go with Anderson. Hell, I'd rather they tried to talk Jake Plummer out of retirement. Oh well, Anderson probably isn't the worst starting QB they've had since I've been a fan. That was probably Kent Graham in '97. Or maybe 800-year old Boomer Esiason the year before. Or 900-year old Dave Kreig the year before that.

The Cardinals also traded one of their starting guards, Reggie Wells, to Philly for a draft pick. I'm going to hope that was because Arizona feels they have astounding depth on their O-line. Astounding depth that is good. No doubt the Cardinals have had deep offensive lines consisting of mostly terrible players before, but that's not something to be excited about.

I used to read all the NFL preview mags I could get my hands on. SI, ESPN, Sporting News, two or three others. I'd read them, and especially in the first few Plummer years, and later, the Denny Green years, I'd get excited afterward. It sounded like the Cardinals were loaded, and they'd make a move. Outside of 1998, that never happened. Eventually, I started ignoring all of that. Now I've paid just enough attention to be worried before the season even starts. I'm not sure whether it's better to go in worried, or go in excited and then be crushed by reality. I guess I'll know by then end of the season. Really hoping the Cardinals figured something out to turn Anderson around.

Looking For My Worst Cardinals Team - Part 7

2010-08-30T12:33:00.002-12:00

As we move into the home stretch, I'm returning to the LaRussa era for these last two teams. Today it's the last bad team before the Cardinals kicked off a decade of being good almost every year.

1999

Record: 75-86 (.466), outscored 838-809, -29 run differential
Pythagorean Record: 78-83 (.485)

Offensive Notes: Scored 809 runs (10th out of 16), 6 players (3 starters, 3 reserves) with OPS+ > 100.

The team's runs scored total was fairly accurate considering their rank in other offensive categories. It might even have been better than one might expect. They were 13th in hits and batting average, 12th in doubles, 11th in OBP, 10th in triples and OPS, 9th in SLG and 8th in stolen bases. They did manage to finish 7th in walks, 5th in HRs, and lead the league in strikeouts.

The team's lineup was top-heavy, or thin depending on how you'd prefer to describe it. The starting lineup had Mark McGwire (1.120 OPS and 176 OPS+) with his 65 HRs, and Fernando Tatis (.957, 139). Ray Lankford (.873, 118) rounded out the positive offensive performances. The rest of the lineup consisted of hitters with mid-80s OPS+ (Joe McEwing, Edgar Renteria), or low-90s (J.D. Drew, Eric Davis, when they were healthy, as Drew and Lankford were the only outfielders on the team to top 400 plate appearances). The millstone in the lineup was Eli Marrero, recovering from a serious illness and posting a .533 OPS (that's a 33 OPS+) in 343 PAs. That was bad enough to make his backup, Alberto Castillo's .667 look almost good. Of the 3 above average offensive reserves, two were Eduardo Perez and Marcus Jensen, who combined for 81 PAs. The third was Craig Paquette posting a slugging heavy (OBP of .309) .825 OPS. Unfortunately, Paquette was 6th amongst reserves in PAs, and of the top 5, only Thomas Howard (.789, 98), and Darren Bragg (.746, 89) had an OPS+ better than 80.

The Cardinals had only two players with more than 20 HRs (McGwire and Tatis), though there were 4 others with at least 10. They did have 2 players (Renteria and Tatis, though Tatis's 21 successes in 30 attempts didn't merit so many green lights) steal more than 20 bases, and three others (including Marrero) who stole at least 10 bases, but in each case, the drop off from those few productive players to the rest of the team was severe.

Pitching Notes: Allowed 838 runs (10th out of 16), 8 pitchers (5 starters, 3 relievers) with ERA+ > 100.

The Cardinals' pitching staff was pretty uniformly bad. They were 13th in complete games, 12th in hits allowed, 13th in Ks, and 15th in walks, which had been at least one thing the bad teams of the Herzog era had avoided. Apparently this Cardinals pitching staff couldn't help making things harder on themselves. They did have one thing working for them, that they allowed the 5th fewest HRs in the NL, but with as many other hits and walks as they surrendered, it didn't help much.

A primary culprit was the bullpen. Of the three relievers that managed better than average ERAs, the caveats abound. Rich Croushore's 112 is for a 4.14 ERA, which probably should be worse considering his 1.549 WHIP, and more than 5 BB/9 IP (he did average 11.1 K/9, best on the team). Heathcliff Slocumb somehow posted a 2.36 ERA in 53.3 innings, despite a 1.481 WHIP, and more than 5 BB/9 himself. Mike Mohler posted a 4.38 (106) in 49.3 innings with a 1.419 WHIP. He at least kept his walk rate down to 4.2/9. And these were the good relievers. Ricky Bottalico posted and ERA of 4.91, which was lucky considering his WHIP of 1.8, and 6 BB/9. Juan Acevedo (working as both a starter and reliever) post an ERA of almost 6.00 in over 100 innings, and allowed 1.5 HRs/9 innings pitched. The rest wasn't much better.

Not that the starters were blameless. Jose Jimenez posted a 5.85 ERA (79 ERA+) in 163 innings, and that includes his two shutouts of the Diamondbacks (which came within two weeks of each other). Kent Mercker posted a +5.00 ERA in over 100 innings, with a WHIP of almost 1.7. The ace of the staff was either Kent Bottenfield (3.97, 116) or Darren Oliver (4.26, 108). Bottenfield has the better ERA and record (18-7 versus 9-9), but Oliver posted a better WHIP (1.38 vs. 1.50), and a better strikeout-to-walk ratio (1.61 vs. 1.39), and threw more innings (196 vs. 190). Either way, if those are the two best starters a team has, they're in trouble. The Cardinals picked up 12 starts from Garrett Stephenson (4.22, 110, in 85.3 innings), as well as 5 starts from Mark Thompson (2.76, 169, 29 innings) and Rick Ankiel (3.27, 142, 33 innings, including 4 relief appearances). Ankiel's was more accurate, considering his WHIP of 1.212, vs. Thompson's 1.466 (and more than 5 BB/9).

Defensive Notes: As a whole, the Cardinals were about 2 runs below average defensively. With the exception of 2nd base (basically average) and RF (-5), they were either excellent or abysmal at each position. Marrero and Castillo were each +8 behind the plate, but McGwire's -9 at 1st base, and Renteria's -8 at SS sort of cancel that out. Tatis was an awful -22 at 3rd. It takes the combined efforts of Lankford in LF (+15), and J.D. Drew in CF (+11) to nullify that. Oddly, Willie McGee was -4 in LF, -8 in RF, but +1 CF, the most difficult outfield position. The problem here is the Cardinals were good at some critical positions (catcher, CF), but lousy at others (3rd, SS), so you can't even say they had good defensive players at the places those matter the most, because it would only be partially true.

Other Notes: Like their Pythagorean Record and run differential suggest, this team ought to have been a few wins better than it was, and it's backed up in some of the odd records you see for them. They were 38-42 at home, 37-44 on the road. But they were outscored by 50 runs at home, while outscoring their opponents by 21 on the road. Going by that, they ought to have been even worse at home, and a winning team on the road. Through July, they were 52-52, despite being -23 in runs. The remainder of the season they went 23-34, despite being +4. Contrary to what I would have expected with their bullpen, the team was 9-8 in extra innings games, and only one game below .500 in one-run games. They had a winning record in blowouts. They dominated the southern California teams, going 13-5 against the Padres and Dodgers. The only team they were exceptionally poor against was Atlanta (1-8), though the Reds (4-8) and Mets (2-5) both did well against them.

Final Thoughts: This was the third disappointing year in a row for the Cardinals, after going to the postseason the first year of the LaRussa era. It was, perhaps not coincidentally, the third year in a row their starting rotation had trouble staying healthy all year. And the pitchers who did stay healthy, as well as those who replaced the injured, weren't very good. Matt Morris blew out his elbow in Spring Training, gone for the year. Donovan Osborne struggled the first month, then retired for a few years. Jimenez had two good starts at the beginning of the year, then the two good starts against the D'Backs in June, and otherwise, was consistently hammered. Mercker was hurt for awhile, then traded. Acevedo, who had been good when available the year before, in both the rotation and the pen, was good in neither this year. LaRussa tried moving Lance Painter to the rotation, he got hurt. Bottalico was not a noticeable improvement on Jeff Brantley.

Joe McEwing started well, then his numbers declined as the league figured him out. Willie McGee's skills seemed completely gone. None of the outfielders could seem to stay healthy, which may not be much of a surprise considering the three primary starters for the year wound up being Ray Lankford, J.D. Drew, and Eric Davis. Renteria may have been an improvement on the traded Royce Clayton offensively, but not so much defensively, and Tatis was giving way quite a few of the runs he was generating offensively.

I know much of the fan excitement that year wound up revolving around McGwire, though for me it was the late season call-up of Rick Ankiel. Pitching had been the Cardinals' problem, in my opinion the previous year and this one, and it sure would be swell if Ankiel could be as good as people said he was. He actually was about as good as I could have hoped, considering the Cardinals consistently didn't score any damn runs for him when he started. They could score enough to get Bottenfield 18 damns wins, but they couldn't net Ankiel any?

I went to one game with my dad that year, Late June, Cards vs. Astros. The game seemed to drag, and I had to be up for work at 6 the next morning, so we left in the 6th inning. What cinched us leaving was Juan Acevedo, who was starting, walked Shane Reynolds, the opposing pitcher. That's when you know it isn't a good night. The Cards did score a couple of runs after we left, but it didn't make any difference to the result. That was the last game I went to until the series against Pittsburgh late last month. Not out of any disgust stemming from Acevedo walking a pitcher, though that earned him plenty of scorn from me, the opportunities just didn't come up. As to whether this could be the worst team, I believe they're more mediocre than anything else. They're 10th in runs scored and runs allowed, which isn't terrible, but isn't good in either category. So not bad enough, I think.

Talking About The Current Cardinals

2010-08-14T12:20:00.003-12:00

I haven't done any posting about the 2010 Cardinals this year. There are a couple of reasons, both relating to me not feeling a connection with the team.

The first is because until the end of June, there was no TV where I was living, so watching games was out, and I've never been much of a fan of listening to games on the radio. More of a visual learner. Since the start of July, I've had access to TV, but I've fallen out of the habit, so I still haven't been watching. Really, I haven't been watching any TV, an hour a day, tops. So my investment's been limited to reading about the team on the Internet, which can be informative, but it doesn't convey any emotional connection to the team for me.

The second reason is, I was kind of disappointed in the Matt Holliday signing. For starters, I thought the contract was too large, as I wouldn't have gone higher than 6 years, $96 million (and I would have started at 5/$80). It's not my money being spent, but the owner will factor that contract into how much they can spend to plug other holes as needed, be it rotation, or perhaps finding a real second baseman (as Schumaker, Felipe Lopez, and Aaron Miles don't qualify). That's provided there isn't anyone in the system that could step in (and as far as 2nd base goes, I don't think there is anyone close). I tend to prefer when the Cardinals are more reliant on players they developed, as opposed to big name free agents. If the Cardinals had let Holliday walk and given the left field job to Allen Craig, I'd certainly have been intrigued. It would have made it tougher, but that would have been more interesting, and it would have been a deviation from what I tend to expect of LaRussa teams.

They didn't go that route (and as far as team performance this year, it's almost certainly been to their benefit), and they've seemingly been trying all season to be less reliant on younger players. Bringing Aaron Miles, Jeff Suppan, Mike MacDougal, Jake Westbrook, Randy Winn. Westbrook's been useful, though I'm really not sure he was worth trading Ryan Ludwick to a potential playoff foe (assuming the Cardinals make the playoffs). So that's put me off a bit as well.

Still, I was entertained by the recent series with the Reds. I don't know how concerned Cincinnati should be, considering how many games are left and the Cardinals hit the Reds with what have been their 3 best starters up to this point (Westbrook may surpass Garcia soon). Still, it had to be a little frustrating for them, with Brandon Phillips talking trash, then they get swept, thoroughly failing to back up his talk. I can't understand the suspensions the league handed down. I assume Cueto was suspended because one of his kicks allegedly gave LaRue a concussion, but I can't see how Phillips, Rolen, Carpenter, and especially Molina didn't get tagged. Yeah, Phillips shouldn't have tried tapping the shin guards in a "We cool?" moment after his comments, but that doesn't mean Yadier had to get in his face and start jawing. I really don't understand singling Cueto amongst the players.

I am impressed that when Carpenter and Rolen went at it, they didn't end up injuring themselves. I wouldn't have been surprised to see Carp come up holding his elbow, and Rolen his shoulder, and then each of them is out for the season. I'm not sure which team would have been hurt worse. Losing Carpenter would weaken the rotation, and the bullpen would likely have to increase its workload, but Rolen's an everyday player for the Reds, and I'm not sure they have a 3rd baseman available who could approximate his performance. Guess it's fortunate for both teams it didn't happen.

Looking For My Worst Cardinals Team - Part 6

2010-07-27T10:01:00.002-12:00

Today I'm looking at the team that signaled the true end of the Herzog era. Like the 1988 team, this squad couldn't hit, but unlike the 1988 team, they can't blame so much of that on a leaguewide downturn in offense.

1990

Record: 70-92 (.432), outscored 698-599, -99 run differential
Pythagorean Record: 70-92 (.432)

Offensive Notes: Scored 599 runs (11th out 12), 4 players (4 starters, 4 reserves) with OPS+ > 100.

As you might expect, this team was bad at a lot of aspects of hitting. They were dead last in HRs, unsurprisingly, 11th in slugging and OPS, 8th in hits and on-base percentage, and 7th in walks and batting average. They were 5th in doubles, 3rd in triples, and 2nd in stolen bases, struck out the fewest times in the league, but that's about as far as the positives go.

You might expect, with that many above average hitters, that they'd fare a little better, but in most cases, the reserves are replacing some of the starters. Vince Coleman (.741 OPS, 104 OPS+) was suspended for 7 games at one point, and didn't play for 2 weeks in September, replaced largely by Bernard Gilkey (.859, 135 in 72 PAs). Willie McGee (.819, 126, won the NL batting title with a .335 BA) was the best hitting starter on the team, but he was traded to Oakland in July, replaced by Ray Lankford (.805, 121 in 139 PAs). McGee did net the Cardinals Felix Jose (.780, 113, in 93 PAs0, and he replaced Milt Thompson (.620, 71, .290 OBP) in RF. Todd Zeile was barely above average (.731, 101 OPS+). The upside (offensively) was by the end of the year, Zeile had taken over 3rd base from Terry Pendleton (.601, 65), and Tom Pagnozzi (.693, 91, in 237 PAs) had become starting catcher, which meant a net upgrade. Pedro Guerrero was slightly above-average as well. The problem had been the middle infield of Ozzie Smith and Jose Oquendo (77 and 85 OPS+es, respectively), combined with Thompson and Pendleton's ineptitude, and the lack of any decent bench bats besides early-season trade acquisition Rex Hudler (.770, 110 in 235 PAs). Tim Jones, Denny Walling, Craig Wilson, Geronimo Pena, players who might have taken at-bats from the weak-hitting starters in the infield, all had an OPS+ below 70, not an improvement.

The team had just two starters (Oquendo and McGee) with OBPs of .350 or better (and McGee's .385 was heavily batting average influenced). Coleman was next at .340. Lankford, Gilkey, and Dave Collins were all above .350, but combined for roughly 280 PAs. Guerrero, Coleman, and McGee were the only starters slugging above .400 (and Coleman's was exactly .400). Hudler, Lankford, Gilkey, and Jose were the sole bench players in that category. Zeile led the team with 15 HRs, and Pedro and McGee were the only Cardinals with more than 30 doubles. Pendleton, Ozzie and Zeile each managed at least 20, for what that's worth. 1990 was Ozzie's worst offensive season since 1981, when he was still a Padre.

Pitching Notes: Allowed 698 runs (8th out of 12), 8 pitchers (4 starters, 4 relievers) with ERA+ > 100.

The 1990 Cardinals pitching staff excelled at two things: The allowed the fewest HRs in the league, and the 3rd fewest walks. Normally, few walks and few home runs would be a recipe for success, even finishing 11th in strikeouts, but it didn't work here. While the paltry offense doesn't help, I don't believe the bullpen was much good, either. There was only one pitcher anywhere close to overpowering (judging by K/BB), and that was the closer. Considering the Cardinals finished last in complete games, they needed more from the guys bridging the gap, and they didn't get it.

Not that the starters were blameless. Magrane slumped from the year before, his ERA increasing by over three-quarters of a run (ERA+ still 106), and his innings dropping by 30. Jose DeLeon regressed, his ERA climbing from 3.05 to 4.43 (86), and his innings dropping by over 60. He was the only starter to average more than 7 Ks/9 innings (8.1). Bryn Smith didn't work out as a free agent pick-up, totaling less than 150 innings, with a 4.27 ERA himself. Ken Hill only made 14 starts (plus 3 relief appearances), and spent the rest of the year in the minors, probably due to his 5.49 ERA and 1.424 WHIP. On a positive note, he did lower his walk rate, and raise his K rate, so his K/BB went from 1.13 to 1.76. Greg Matthews made 10 lousy starts.

The bright points in the rotation came down a Herzog reclamation project, an old ace coming home, and a rookie making a late season call-up. Bob Tewksbury made 20 starts and 8 relief appearances, totaling 145 innings. He posted a 3.47 ERA (110 ERA+), with 3 complete games, 2 of which were shutouts, 1 save, a WHIP of only 1.142 (Magrane's for example, was 1.293, and the other starters mentioned above were considerably worse than him), and walked 0.9 batters per 9 innings, which is how he had a 3.33 K/BB while striking out only 3.1/9. John Tudor had missed most of 1989 with a shoulder surgery, the Cardinals took a chance on him, and it paid off. Tudor made 22 starts, plus 3 relief appearances, and in 145 innings posted a 2.40 ERA (159), with a complete game, a 2.10 K/BB, , a 1.025 WHIP, and allowed only 7.4 hits per 9 innings. Omar Olivares came along late to make 6 starts and 3 relief appearances, and in just under 50 innings, posted a 2.92 ERA. His 1.18 K/BB ratio was troubling, but he was able to get away with it.

But if you only have a handful of reliable starters, you need a lot of good relievers, and the Cardinals didn't have them. Of the relievers with an ERA+ better than 100, one was Stan Clarke, who pitched 3.1 innings. Another was Tom Niedenfuer (3.46, 110), but he went 0-6, had a WHIP of 1.4, and a K/BB of only 1.28 (4.4 K/9, 3.5 BB/9). Ken Dayley was still there, but his 3.56 ERA (107), wasn't terribly encouraging. He did however, keep hitters to less than 8 hits/9 innings, and posted a somewhat more acceptable 1.70 K/BB. Lee Smith, acquired in April from Boston for Tom Brunansky (why Milt Thompson was starting in RF), was the best they had. He saved 27 games, had an ERA+ of 182, a WHIP of 1.136 (not overpowering, but good), 9.2 K/9, and a K/BB of 3.5.

There wasn't much else to be happy about in the 'pen. Scott Terry, demoted from the rotation (where he made 24 starts in 1989), posted a 4,75 ERA. Frank DiPino had a 4.56, plus a WHIP over 1.50. Ricky Horton pitched 42 innings with an ERA of 4.93 and a WHIP over 1.7. Mike Perez had a mildly encouraging 13 innings at the end of the year, but the low strikeout rate (3.3/9), without a Tewksburian walk rate (Perez walked 2/9), was not great.

Defensive Notes: The '90 squad wasn't the defensive whiz the '86 team had been, but they also weren't the mediocrity the '88 squad had been either. Pagnozzi was a +10 in roughly 500 innings (compared to Zeile's -1 in close to 900). Oquendo was a +2 (little disappointing for him, actually), Pendleton a +10, Ozzie a +14. Coleman managed a +7, and Thompson a +8. Guerrero was a problem at 1st, and Zeile was slightly below average at 3rd as well. Gilkey was solid in LF, while Lankford (starting the trend early) was slightly below average in CF. Felix Jose was a downgrade defensively from both Thompson and Rex Hudler, with the caveat he only played 170 innings in RF that year (and Gilkey only logged 144 in LF). As a whole, the team was a +35.

Other Notes: The team had one winnings month (July, 15-13), even though they were outscored by 10 runs, and one .500 month, August, even though they outscored their opponents by 22. Their worst month was September (10-18, outscored by 41). The month they scored the most runs in was June (124), but it was also the month they allowed the most runs (148), so they wound up 11-17. They were 21-24 in one-run games, which was better than their 17-25 record in blowouts. Not too surprising with their offense, it would be hard to score enough runs to blow another team out. They did manage a 7-6 record in extra innings.

The team hit basically the same against righties (.680) or lefties (.673), but their right-handed hitters were better than the lefties (.692 vs. 661). Their left-handed and right-handed pitchers had the same OPS against, .701, but as a team, lefthanders did much better against them (.729 vs. 678). The Cardinals had their best OPS in August, even though June was their highest scoring month (June was their second highest OPS). July was their second worst hitting month (better only than May). As you might expect, the pitchers did their worst in June, and their best came in July, though August wasn't bad either. Those were the only two months the Cardinals' pitchers kept the opponents' OPS below .700 (.632 in July, .649 in August).

Final Thoughts: Like the 1986 team, the Cardinals were as good as their run differential said they were. Unfortunately, that wasn't very good. As typical for bad Cardinals teams, they had no power, and they didn't get on base enough for their speed to make up the difference. The starting pitching was shaky, as the two guys who had anchored the rotation the year before (Magrane and DeLeon) declined severely. If they could have pitched closer to their 1989 selves, combined with Tudor and Tewksbury, maybe the Cardinals could have reached .500. It didn't work out like that, though. Between this and the 1988 team, I have a hard time deciding who's worse. The '88 team scored fewer runs, but it was a down year for offense all around, and the allowed a lot fewer runs as well. The '90 team was slightly better pitching team, especially considering it wasn't a down year offensively, and about 3 wins better on defense, even with a full year of Pedro Guerrero at first.

This was the year where the Herzog championship team pretty much were done. A lot of that was Herzog quitting partway through the season, but most of the guys who were left were gone by the end of the year as well. This was Rickey Horton and John Tudor's last season. Greg Matthews had to go elsewhere for employment, as did Ken Dayley. Danny Cox had been out of commission since June of 1988. Todd Worrell had hurt his elbow September of 1989, he wouldn't return to the mound until 1992. Joe Magrane was still there, but he'd miss all of 1991 with elbow surgery, and make only 5 starts in 1992, then 20 more in 1993 before being traded to the Angels.

Tony Pena, had left before the 1990. Jack Clark and Tom Herr were long gone. The Cardinals traded McGee during the '90 season, and benched Pendleton and Coleman for long stretches because they didn't intend to resign them anyway. In 1991, pretty much the only active player who had a big role on the World Series teams was Ozzie, still the starting shortstop, and Oquendo who collected 312 PAs as a utility guy in '87, and was now the starting second baseman. It probably needed to be done. The '90 Cardinals were lousy, and it couldn't hurt to try some new, young players. However, there was a perception that the team was being run by suits not interested in winning, only in profit. To that end, it was felt they'd decided it would be more profitable to have a cheap, young team that didn't win as much, rather than a more expensive, older team. The fans would still show up in sufficient numbers for it to work out financially.

I don't doubt making a profit was in the minds of the brewery folks running the team. For myself though, I enjoyed the young teams the Cardinals trotted out in the early nineties. I'd enjoy them a lot more if they'd won a World Series, or at least made the playoffs, but they were posting winning records for a few years there at the start, which provided hope.

Looking For My Worst Cardinals Team - Part 5

2010-06-27T14:12:00.003-12:00

Up to this point, the Cardinals' teams we've looked at have been good enough at some aspect of the game I've been inclined to count them out of the running. These last four teams, however, were in the bottom half of the league in both runs scored and runs prevented, so I imagine their cases will be a lot stronger.

1988

Record: 76-86 (.469), outscored 633-578, -55 run differential
Pythagorean Record: 74-88 (.457)

Offensive Notes: Scored 578 runs (11th out of 12), 9 players (3 starters, 6 reserves) with OPS+ > 100.

This Cardinals team wasn't completely terrible at hitting. They were 4th in hits and batting average (though the team average was .249, 1988 was a pitchers' year), 6th in triples and OBP (again, just .309), 1st in stolen bases (234). The problem was a lack of power. When the Herzog Cardinals were good, they usually had at least one real power bat, say Jack Clark or George Hendrick, maybe Keith Hernandez. The latter two were long gone, and the ownership dithered around on making Clark a fair offer so long, he eventually signed elsewhere. The team was 11th in doubles, and 12th in HRs. They were dead last in slugging (.337). Even when they could get guys on base - which at a .309 clip, wasn't that often - they couldn't drive them in.

A word about all the above-average hitters. Most of them were non-factors. John Morris and Rod Booker had 39 plate appearances (PAs) apiece. Steve Lake had just 59 as the 3rd catcher. Tom Herr was traded midway through April for Tom Brunansky. Bob Horner (.703, 102 in 247 PAs) was the starting first baseman into early June, when he hurt his shoulder and missed the remainder of the year. Pedro Guerrero (.787, 125 in 176 Pas), his replacement, didn't arrive until a mid-August trade. That leaves Willie McGee (.701, 101), Brunansky (.773, 121), and Jose Oquendo (.700, 102), as the only three above average hitters who were available the majority of the season.

There were some semi-useful hitters. Ozzie Smith had a .686 OPS (98), and Tony Pena a .680 (94) behind the plate. But Terry Pendleton, Vince Coleman, and Tom Pagnozzi (second on the team in PAs among non-starters) were all below .655 in OPS. Guerrero and Brunansky were the only hitters with a slugging above .400, and Pedro, Ozzie, and Oquendo the only ones with an OBP of .350 or better (Brunansky had a .345, and Horner a .348 before his injury). The Cardinals simply couldn't muster enough good bats to fill a lineup, or even half a lineup, on most days.

Pitching Notes: Allowed 633 runs (9th out of 12), 7 pitchers (3 starters, 4 relievers) with ERA+ > 100.

The Cardinals pitching staff wasn't good at much that year. 9th in complete games, 8th in ERA, walked the 5th most batters, struck out the 8th most, allowed the 5th most hits in the league. The only thing they did well was avoid home runs, as they allowed the 3rd fewest (91). That was still 20 more than their team hit, but that's not really the pitchers' fault. Todd Worrell and Jose DeLeon were the only pitchers to average more than 7 K/9 (excluding Scott Arnold, who threw 6 innings that year). Among 5 of the pitchers with the most starts (DeLeon, Joe Magrane, John Tudor, Danny Cox, and Greg Mathews), none allowed more than 0.6 HR/9 innings, and Tudor and Magrane were at 0.3/9.

I included Scott Terry with the starters in the above listing. He only started 11 games, versus 40 relief appearances, but 75 of his 129.3 innings came as a starter, and he pitched quite well in that opportunity. His ERA was 2.40, his WHIP was 1.093, his K/BB was 2.53. And he was still no better than the 3rd best starter the Cardinals employed that year, 1 and 2 being Magrane and Tudor. Magrane won the ERA title with a 2.18 (161 ERA+), though he barely reached the innings requirement (165.3). Tudor posted a 2.29 (153) in 21 starts before being traded to the Dodgers for Pedro Guerrero. Despite that, their combined record was 11-14, with Magrane going 5-9, even with 3 shutouts. In one of those odd quirks, DeLeon had a rare (for him) winning season, going 13-10 in 225.3 innings, even though his 3.67 ERA was below average (95).

The rotation was a bit of a mess, as 8 pitchers logged at least 10 starts that season. DeLeon was the only one to reach 30 starts. Magrane made 24 starts before being sent to AAA for some reason. To preserve his confidence or his ERA lead, I don't know. It shouldn't have been the workload, as he threw more innings the year before. Tudor was traded to the Dodgers, Bob Forsch (12 starts, 18 relief appearances) was swapped to Houston for utiltyman Denny Walling. Cox (13 starts) suffered a shoulder injury that ended his career as a starter. Mathews (13 starts) wasn't good, and Larry McWilliams (17 starts, 25 relief appearances) bounced from rotation to bullpen all year.

With the rotation in flux, it took its toll on the 'pen. Ken Dayley (2.77, 127) wasn't too bad, though his 2-7 record suggests troubles. Todd Worrell threw 90 innings of 3.00 ERA ball, saved 32 games. John Costello put in 49.3 innings with a 1.81 ERA. But Dan Quisenberry put up an ERA over 6.00 in 38 innings, and Steve Peters did the same in 45.

Defensive Notes: Sometimes a poor hitting or pitching team can be mitigated by an excellent fielding team. The '88 Cardinals couldn't pull that off. As a team, they were -2 runs defensively, compared to the '86 squad that was +94.

They had their strong points. Ozzie was +18 at SS, and Pendleton +11 at 3rd. Oquendo's +8 in 500+ innings at 2nd offset Luis Alicea's -5 in over 700 innings. Tony Pena was +3 behind the plate. Unfortunately, Horner was a -3 at 1st (though Pedro was +1 in 300 innings), and the outfielders were atrocious at worst, unimpressive at best. Coleman -2, McGee -7, Brunansky -10 from left to right. None of their backups played much, and most weren't very good, though Curt Ford managed a +1 in 112 innings in LF, and a +2 in 69 innings in RF.

Other Notes: The team had three winning months: May (18-10), August (17-12), and September (14-13). The month that killed them was July, when they went 8-19, and were outscored 119-76. They were slightly above .500 at home, and 5 games below in both blowouts and one-run games. They did well against the Phillies and Cubs (combined 23-13), but were hammered by Montreal and the Mets (9-27).

They hit considerably better against lefties (.700 OPS) than righties (.621). Unsurprisingly, May (.686) was their best hitting month by 13 points, and July (.561) was their worst by almost 80. Not reflected in the 8-14 record, but April was their 2nd best month. Their pitchers were better against righties than lefties, and better at home than on the road. Interestingly, both their strikeout and walk rates were higher on the road, though unfortunately, the walk rate increased more. Their best performance was August (.623) by 30 points, their worst, no surprise, July (.727), by 17 points.

Final Thoughts: There's not much impressive about this team other than their ability to steal bases and avoid home runs. Admittedly, offense was down across the league that year, but the Cards were bad even compared to the others. I can't say they're the frontrunners, since I know who the remaining 3 squads are, but they deserve consideration.

Looking For My Worst Cardinals Team - Part 4

2010-05-22T13:48:00.004-12:00

Today I'm going to look at the earliest occurring of the possibilities, the 1986 squad.

1986

Record: 79-82 (.491), outscored 611-601, -10 run differential
Pythagorean Record: 79-82 (.491)

Offensive Notes: Scored 601 runs (12th out of 12), 3 players (2 starters, 1 reserve) with OPS+ > 100.

1986's Cardinals' lineup was pretty hopeless. In addition to being last in runs, they were also last in hits, doubles, home runs, batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage (by over 40 points in that last category). They were second in triples, fifth in walks, first in stolen bases (262), and struck out the second fewest times in the league, for what that's worth.

There are a couple of culprits. One, Jack Clark had a torn ligament in his thumb, limiting him to 279 PAs, and only a .784 OPS (116 OPS+). In 1985, he produced an .895 (149 OPS+), and in 1987 it would be 1.055 (176). Without him, the Cardinals had a lightweight lineup, and pitchers could afford to be more careful, since there was no longer a dangerous slugger to drive in any runners they might let on base.

The other problem was several Cardinals had excellent years in 1985, and they came back to Earth. Part of that is likely due to many of the hitters being extremely dependent on batting average, as they didn't hit for much power or walk much. If the hits weren't falling, they weren't productive. Willie McGee (.676, 86, and missing time with leg injuries) and Vince Coleman (.581, 62) being a couple of prime examples. Terry Pendleton didn't hit, but he hadn't hit in 1985 either, so that wasn't a change. Tom Herr's numbers suffered from a 50 point drop in BA, and Mike LaValliere, though an improvement over Mike Heath (who he shared catching duties with until Heath was traded to Detroit in August), was no comparison to Darrell Porter who had half the catching duties in 1985. Ozzie Smith (.709, 98) had a 28 point drop in his slugging, but partially compensated with a 21 point rise in OBP (to a team-leading .376). Andy van Slyke (.795, 118) hit slightly better than he had the year before.

Only two of their reserves were of much use offensively: Jose Oquendo, who produced a .359 OBP in 158 PAs, and Mike Laga, who slugged .500 in 52 PAs. Unfortunately, Oquendo had no power (.341 SLG), and Laga didn't get on base (.308 OBP). None of the others could do better than Curt Ford's .682 OPS (88 OPS+), and most were well below it.

Pitching Notes: Allowed 611 runs (3rd out of 12), 9 pitchers (4 starters, 5 relievers) with ERA+ > 100.

Fortunately the pitching corps was able to partially stem the tide, impressive considering the problems it faced. Danny Cox missed time after he broke his leg jumping off a seawall, but still finished with a 2.90 ERA (127 ERA+) and 8 complete games. John Tudor was shut down in September with a tired shoulder, but in 217 innings he did throw, posted a 2.92 (127 ERA+). Bob Forsch led the team with 230 innings, and a 3.25 ERA (114). The innings total was the most for Forsch since 1982. Greg Mathews was called up partway through the season, and in 22 starts was basically league average (101 ERA+). None of them were overpowering, all striking out less than one batter every two innings, but none of them allowed more than 8.6 hits/9 innings, 2.7 BB/9, or more than 0.9 HRs/9. Tim Conroy was the strikeout pitcher of the rotation (6.2 K/9), but also the worst of the bunch by far (5.23 ERA, 71 ERA+, over 4 walks, 9 hits, and 1 HR/9).

The bullpen lost the primary closer of the previous year, Jeff Lahti, after only 2 innings, but Todd Worrell stepped in and did fairly well, saving 36 games (though he was tagged with the loss 10 times). Even as the supposed fireball closer, he struck out only 6.3 batters per 9 innings. The strikeout guy in the bullpen was actually Ken Dayley (7.7 K/9). It was lower than the previous year though, and combined with a rise in his WHIP, from 1.27 to 1.37, his ERA climbed to 3.26 (114). Rickey Horton had an excellent year doing whatever was required, starting 9 games (throwing 1 complete game), finishing 12 games (collecting 3 saves), and throwing over 100 innings (Worrell did this as well, tossing over 103 innings).

It's interesting their pitching staff was so effective at not allowing runs, considering they weren't overpowering. They struck out over 100 fewer batters than the team with the next fewest Ks. However, they walked the fewest batters, which probably helped, even though they allowed the fifth most home runs, suggesting a lot of those were solo shots. That's supported by the fact they allowed the 5th fewest hits. Opponents didn't make successful contact often, but when they did, they tended to hit it out of the park.

Defensive Notes: One thing that surprises me looking at the numbers is the Cardinals don't seem to be extraordinarily good defenders. I figured with so few strikeouts, that would be the key to their success at run prevention. Maybe it was, as every starter was at least 1 run above average, but I expected more high totals like Ozzie and Pendleton's. Ozzie was 16 runs above average at SS, Pendleton 18 at third. Andy van Slyke (in 600 innings) and Tito Landrum (in 400) were both +10 in RF. Some of the backups were below average (such as Oquendo at SS and second base, van Slyke in CF), but not by very much. I guess they add up, because when I total across all positions, they defense comes out +94, which would be worth 9 wins. Looks more impressive that way.

Other Notes: The team had a winning record from June through September, 62-51. It was just at the beginning and ends of the season they struggled (17-27 through the end of May, 0-4 in October). They even managed to outscore their opponents in August and September, in August by increasing their scoring (it's the only month they managed more than 110 runs), in September by limiting their opponents (96 runs allowed in 27 games). They were 4 games under .500 in both 1-run games (28-32), and blowouts (15-19).

They were a better hitting and pitching team at home, though they weren't that good of a hitting team at home (.678 OPS). It's interesting their best hitter OPS came in May, and their pitching OPS that month was average for them (worse than April and June, better than all the other months), yet they had their worst winning percentage (9-17). What's stranger, they did that while being outscored by just one run the entire month.

Final Thoughts: I don't have any particular memories of this team. It's honestly stretching it to include them as part of my time as a fan, as I was pretty young back then. Not that it matters, this team was far too good at defensive and pitching to be the worst. Of the 8 teams I'm considering, they have the best record, and their Pythagorean Record suggests that wasn't a fluke (compared to say, the 1994 team which was 4 games better than they ought to have been).

I do have a fondness for the concept of this team. The focus on pitching, defense, and most of all speed. I know the math says a base stealer needs to be successful at least 70% (and it may be 75%) of the time for it to be worthwhile, and so most teams are better off not running, but I love that aggressive style of play. Try and steal bases, try and stretch that double into a triple, put pressure on the other team to throw them out. Of course, when only one player on the team reaches double digits in home runs (van Slyke, 13) what other choice do they have? When the hits aren't falling (and with a team batting average of .236, they weren't), it's going to be rough. Still, there wasn't another team in the league quite like it, and I think that's pretty cool.

Looking For My Worst Cardinals Team - Part 3

2010-05-08T08:43:00.003-12:00

Sorry it's been over a month. I keep getting pulled away from home on my time off. Anyway, today I'm looking at the 1997 team, which marks the arrival of Mark McGwire in St. Louis.

1997

Record: 73-89 (.451); outscored 708-689, -16 run differential
Pythagorean Record: 79-83 (.488)

Offensive Notes: Scored 689 runs (11th out of 14); 6 players (2 starters, 4 reserves) with OPS+ > 100.

As the run total might suggest, the Cardinals were not an impressive offensive team. 12th in hits and batting average, 10th in slugging and OBP, 8th in doubles, walks, and HRs. They did manage to place 4th in triples, and 3rd in stolen bases, but their highest rank came from striking out more than any other team. Hooray, he said flatly.

In terms of lineup construction, the Cardinals of '97 were similar to the 2009 squad. For 4 months, one dangerous hitter (Ray Lankford/Albert Pujols), a couple of somewhat above average hitters (DeLino DeShields and Willie McGee/Skip Schumaker and Ryan Ludwick), and a host of below average hitters. Both teams even added a really good hitter in July (McGwire/Matt Holliday).

Of course, Lankford isn't Pujols' equal as a hitter, but he did throw up a .996 OPS (159 OPS+). He could play Holliday to McGwire's Albert, though. McGwire posted a 1.095 OPS (182 OPS+) in 224 plate appearance, ranking second on the team in HRs with 24 (to Lankford's 31). McGwire is listed as a reserve though, since Dmitri Young actually played the majority of the innings at first for StL that year. The other starter was DeShields, who posted an .804 OPS (111 OPS+), with 26 doubles, 14 triples, 11 HRs, and 55 SBs, rebounding from a disastrous 1996 with the Dodgers (OPS+ of 60 that year). Unfortunately, most of the other starters were below average, or in the case of Mike DeFelice (.628, 65 OPS+), lousy. Of the other 5 starters, Dmitri Young and Ron Gant each posted .698 OPSes, John Mabry (taking over in RF for the mostly injured Brian Jordan) had a .723, and Gary Gaetti and Royce Clayton sat in between. While none of the five had an OPS+ below 83, Mabry's was the best at 91. The common thread was poor batting averages, and an inability to draw walks, leading to low OBP (Clayton, Gaetti and Gant were all at .310 OBPs or lower), and relatively low SLGs (Gaetti being tops there with .404), at least in part because their batting averages were so low. Gant, for example, had an isolated power of .159, which isn't bad, but when his average is only .229, it means his slugging is only .388.

Among the reserves, Micah Franklin's 129 OPS+ was 37 PAs, Phil Plantier's 107 consisted of 129 PAs he made after being traded to St. Louis as part of a swap of broken-down left-handed pitchers (San Diego received Danny Jackson, StL Fernando Valenzuela). Willie McGee was the only above-average bench player to receive significant time, posting a .767 (101 OPS+) in 300 PAs as the 4th outfielder. Though below average, Tom Lampkin's .715 (88) was a significant improvement at the catching position over DiFelice.

Pitching Notes: Allowed 708 runs (5th out of 14), 10 pitchers (4, starters, 6 relievers) with ERA+ > 100.

The Cardinals pitching was their saving grace. They allowed the second-fewest HRs, and the 4th-fewest BBs, which offsets being 8th in Ks. They might have finished even better, but injuries struck the rotation throughout the season. Donovan Osborne made only 14 starts, and struggled, posting a 4.93 ERA (85 ERA+). His WHIP (1.332) suggests it probably shouldn't have been that high, but he did allow 1.1 HRs/9 innings, which may explain it. Manny Aybar made 12 starts, posting a 4.24 (99 ERA+) in 68 innings. However, his WHIP (1.397) was higher than Osborne's, and his K/BB ratio (2.22. vs 1.41) worse, suggesting he was lucky.

The front four of the rotation were the key. Alan Benes posted a 2.89 (144) in 162 innings before he needed surgery in late July. He was never an effective starter again. His older brother Andy made 26 starts, covering 177 innings, with a 3.10 ERA (135) He lead the starters in both WHIP (1.186) and K/BB (2.87/1). He missed time with knee and back ailments. Todd Stottlemyre posted a 3.88 (108) in 181 innings, but was shut down in September with a tired arm. Only Matt Morris, originally called up to replace an injured Osborne, lasted the season, throwing 217 innings, with a 3.19 ERA (131 ERA+).

The relief core was lead by Dennis Eckersley, though he posted only a 109 ERA+, and lost 5 games. He was prone to the longball, allowing 9 in only 53 innings. The best reliever was likely T.J. Mathews, who had a 195 ERA+ in 46 innings before being traded to Oakland as part of the McGwire deal. His WHIP is 1.283, not great, but better than most of the other commonly used relievers, as was his 2.56/1 K/BB ratio. Case in point, key lefty Tony Fossas. While he had a 107 ERA+, his WHIP was over 1.7, he allowed 1.2 HRs/9 IP, and he walked a batter every other inning. So the ERA doesn't tell the whole story (though the 7 losses help fill in the gaps).

Defensive Notes: The mitigating factor for all those sub-average hitters is they were all at least a little better than average with the glove. Admittedly, DiFelice was only +1 run, the same as Lampkin, but it's something. Gaetti (+14.6) and Clayton (+15) in particular distinguished themselves. Gant, Mabry, and Dmitri Young also did well (all at least +6), though McGwire posted a -2.4 after joining the team. Willie McGee was a strange case, perhaps owing to sample sizes. In RF, where he logged 298 innings, he was average. In CF (122 innings), he was +2.6, but in LF (92), he was -1.7. Overall, the team was spectacular at 2 positions, solidly better than average at 3 others until a) Mabry was injured and replaced by McGee (though Mabry himself was a downgrade from Jordan, who was +11.5 in 210 innings), and b) Young was replaced by McGwire. To be fair, McGwire's offensive numbers (once he got going) probably more than made up for his shortcomings with the glove, while Young's fielding stats probably can't compensate for his poor hitting. As a whole, the 1997 Cardinals were 58 runs better than average defensively.

Other Points: The team had one winning month (June), and one other month where they outscored their opponents (May, went 13-14). While McGwire may have helped the offense, the team's performance didn't improve. They went from 100 runs in July, to 109 in August, to 132 in September. The problem was, they allowed, 113-132-150 over the same span and their record went from 12-15, 12-17, 10-16. This likely relates to the injuries of the Benes brothers and Stottlemyre, and possibly the weakening of the bullpen with the removal of Mathews. The team was also terrible in 1-run games, with a 20-33 record.

Interestingly, even with McGwire in place of Young, the Cards were a worse hitting team in the 2nd half of the season (.708 vs. .731 OPS). Their pitchers were quite good at home (opponents posted a .671 OPS), but not nearly as good on the road (.748). They were also better in the first half (.687) of the season than the second (.733), probably again owing to injuries in the rotation. The staff's best month was March/April (.661), which unfortunately was also the offense's worst month.

Final Thoughts: This team's too good at run prevention to be the worst. Period. That out of the way, I'm having a hard time recollecting precise thoughts of this team. It's blurred together with the 1998 and 1999 teams as ones that didn't win much, and had a constant shuffle of pitchers in the rotation, though '97 had nothing on the other two seasons when it came to that. The Cardinals making the playoffs in '96 had gotten my attention after the strike, and Ozzie was retired, so I couldn't be furious at LaRussa for not using him more, as I had been in '96.

I know I was frustrated at a game when Alan Benes took a no-hitter into the 9th against Milwaukee and wound up losing due to offensive ineptitude. My clearest memory is from early July, when the Cardinals played the Twins, and Willie McGee hit a game-winning homer in the 10th. That was the first and only time all seasons the Cardinals were at .500 (they started the year with a 6-game losing streak). Naturally, they followed it up by getting swept by the Pirates, and went right back in the tank. Still, I remember watching the game, then getting up the next morning to see the highlights on Sportscenter. I enjoyed it so much, I would watch, then ride my bike for an hour, get back just in time to see it again, then ride for an hour, watch it again, and so on. All morning.

Looking For My Worst Cardinals Team - Part 2

2010-04-03T13:56:00.003-12:00

For part 2, I'm going to look at the 1995 squad, another team I think was a little too good in one area to be the worst of the last 25 years. They were pretty bad offensively though, so they have to be considered.

1995

Actual record: 62-81 (.434); equals 70-92; outscored 658-563, -86 run differential
Pythagorean Record: 61-82 (.427); equals 69-93

Offensive Notes: Scored 563 runs (14th out of 14 teams); 4 players (3 starters, 1 "reserve") with OPS+ > 100.

The 1995 Cardinals were a pitiful offensive team. They were last in the National League in hits, runs, batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging. They were 13th in HRs and walks, 11th in SBs, but they did have the 5th fewest walks. Only 3 players on the team managed more than 5 home runs or 10 stolen bases, so they lacked speed and power.

The 4 above-average hitters. I listed one as a reserve, and that was Todd Zeile, who wasn't really a reserve. He was the starting first baseman until his trade to the Cubs in June. But the trade means he didn't log the most innings at any position for the team. In 148 PAs, he put up an .835 OPS, or 121 OPS+. The three starters were the outfielders; Bernard Gilkey (.848, 123), Ray Lankford (.873, 129), and Brian Jordan (.827, 116). They all hit between 17 and 25 HRs, stole either 12 or 24 bases, and hit between .275 and .300.

They were the lone bright spots offensively. Tom Pagnozzi had a .569 OPS (50 OPS+), when he wasn't injured. Jose Oquendo (.616, 65) was the starting second baseman. Ozzie Smith missed three months (and didn't hit when he did play - .526 OPS, 41 OPS+ in 182 PAs), so Tripp Cromer (.586, 54) was the starting SS. Scott Cooper was the big free agent signing, but contributed a .634 OPS, which is a 69 OPS+. The only other starter remotely competent with the bat was Zeile's replacement, John Mabry (.752, 99). None of the bench players were any help at scoring runs, either. Danny Sheaffer had a 76 OPS+ backing up Pagnozzi, Darnell Coles (.657, 75) and Allen Battle (.672, 81) were the backup outfielders. Geronimo Pena was almost average with a 98 OPS+ in 124 PAs, but was on the DL 3 times that year.

Pitching Notes: Allowed 658 runs (6th in the NL), 11 pitchers (4 starters, 7 relievers) with an ERA+ >100.

This was the moderate saving grace for the team, they had a good bullpen, and a few decent starters. It's a bit surprising, because they weren't a terribly great in the peripheral stats. The team was 6th in the league in runs and ERA, but 13th in complete games and strikeouts. They allowed the 6th most home runs (though they were below league average), but the 5th fewest walks.

None of their starters were superb, but they were good enough. Mark Petkovsek (4.00, 105 ERA+) lead the team in starts and innings (21, 137.3), though his ERA as a starter was somewhat higher (4.16 in 125.3 innings). Donovan Osborne was probably the best starter (3.81, 110), along with Mike Morgan (3.88, 108), who was acquired from the Cubs for Zeile. Tom Urbani put up a 3.70 ERA (113 ERA+) overall, but only a 4.02 in 13 starts. Still significantly better than Allen Watson (4.96, 85, though his ERA in his 19 starts was 5.45) or Danny Jackson (5.90, 71, though Jackson spent time injured and learned he had thyroid cancer, so understandable, if frustrating for the fans). Morgan and Ken Hill (5.06, 83, traded to Cleveland in July) were the only two starters to average more than 6 innings per start. Osborne and Petkovsek were the only 2 with WHIPs below 1.30, and the highest strikeout rate was Osborne's 6.5/9 IP. He also had the best K/BB at 2.41, Petkovsek and Urbani were the only others with ratios better than 2 to 1, and only barely.

Fortunately, the Cardinals 'pen was good enough the starters didn't need to work deep into games. Tom Henke (1.82, 231) had an extraordinary final season, allowing only 2 home runs in 54.3 innings. Rich DeLucia, Jeff Parrett, and Rene Arocha all had ERA+ between 105 and 130, and Tony Fossas had a 287 ERA+. Add to that John Habyan (2.88, 147 in 40.7 innings) and T.J. Mathews (1.52, 270 in 29.7 innings), and it seems the Cardinals were quite good at protecting leads, if they could score enough to get one. Arocha's WHIP was 1.47, so he was probably lucky, but the others all had WHIPs below 1.30, and Henke, Fossas, Habyan, and Mathews were all below 1.2 (DeLucia wasn't far from that, 1.202).

Defensive Notes: The Cardinals defense was probably what helped their pitching be better than it was. It wasn't enough to make up for the offensive shortcomings, but it kept things close. Every single starting position player was at least average. Sometimes not by much, as Cromer was 1 run above average, and Gilkey was basically average. Other players were much better. Pagnozzi was +5 at catcher in 518.7 innings, and Oquendo was +4 at 2nd (417 innings), and +5.6 at SS (161.3 innings). The real star was Brian Jordan, who in 977.7 innings, was rated as being 20 runs better than average. Ray Lankford again demonstrated an odd split, as he was +6.7 on the road, but -4.5 at home. At least this year he was above average, rather than below. Largely because of Jordan, the team was +42 defensively.

Other Points: The team didn't have a winning record in any month. The closest they came was 13-13 in September. They were outscored in every month, the closest margin being 3 runs (111-108) in September. They were 39-33 at home, but 23-48 on the road. This is probably explained by the team's .719 OPS at home, vs. their .657 on the road (the pitchers allowed a .720 in StL, and .782 on the road). The pitchers seemed to get stronger as the season wore on, as opponents' OPS dropped each month. Or perhaps the team gradually eliminated the weak links. Danny Jackson spent some time on the DL, Ken Hill was traded, several young guys the league hadn't seen had a chance.

Final Thoughts: I have no attachment to this team, not even any memories of it, really. The strike had soured me on baseball, so I paid little attention when the labor strife was sorted out and baseball with non-replacement players resumed. I didn't even realize Ozzie was shelved for much of the season with a surgery. If I had watched, I don't know if this season would have bothered me more or less than the previous one. In '94 the team had to score a ton because they couldn't pitch, and this team had to keep the scores down because runs weren't coming easily. On most nights, there were five guys in the lineup hitting like a pitcher, and only one of them was actually a pitcher.

In general, this team was so good defensively, and good enough at pitching (especially the bullpen) they can't be worst. I mean the offense is bad, no question, but it's not the worst ranking they've had offensively in the last 25 years (I'll get to the owner of that dubious title, and why they aren't the worst either, in a couple of posts).

Looking For My Worst Cardinals Team - Part 1

2010-03-08T06:49:00.004-12:00

It's my last day off before 10 straight days of work, so as good a time as any to start. First up 1994! One quick note: I'm going to give the actual record and winning percentage, but I'm also going to post what their record would have been with that winning percentage over 162 games, so it's somewhat more comparable to the other squads. Ditto for 1995, when I get to it.

1994

Actual record: 53-61 (.465); equals 75-87 record; outscored 621-535, -86 run differential
Pythagorean Record: 49-65 (.430); equals 70-92 record

Offensive Notes: Scored 535 runs (6th out of 14 teams); had 9 players (5 starters, 4 reserves) with an OPS+ of 100 (league average) or better.

A couple of things. Their rank in runs scored is why I think they're out of the running. I figure if a team's in the top half of the league, they probably aren't the worst. This squad was 3rd in the NL in doubles, and first in walks. That explains their ranking 4th in on-base percentage and 6th in slugging, despite being 9th in batting average. However, they were 9th in HRs, 7 in stolen bases, and struck out more than any other team in the league.

About the 9 better-than average hitters. Two of them accumulated fewer than 50 plate appearances a piece (John Mabry 25, Gerald Young 44), so their offensive impact was limited. Gerald Perry had only 92 PAs (.967 OPS, OPS+ of 153), but his role was almost exclusively pinch-hitter, so I suppose that was by design. The other bench player was Luis Alicea (.832, 118), who was almost a starter himself, as he was platooning at 2nd base with Geronimo Pena. Pena (.823, 114) was one of the five above-average starters, along with Gregg Jefferies (.880, 130) at first, Todd Zeile (.818, 113) at 3rd, Ray Lankford (.847, 121) in CF, and Mark Whiten (.849, 121) in RF.

The remaining starters were Tom Pagnozzi, who threw up a .743 OPS, good for a 94, Bernard Gilkey (.700, 85), and Ozzie Smith (.675, 78). The one thing these three players have in common is they were all better than average defensively for their positions (C, LF, SS, respectively). Among significant reserves, Brian Jordan put up a .730 (91) playing all 3 OF positions, Jose Oquendo (.674, 80) put up his usual OBP-heavy (.364) OPS while backing up the middle infield, and Terry McGriff (.580, 55) back up Pagnozzi.

Pitching Notes: Allowed 621 runs (13th in the NL); 5 pitchers (5 relievers, 0 starters) with ERA+ of 100 or better.

The Cardinals pitching staff was dreadful. They were better than only the Rockies in both runs allowed and ERA, and this was when the league was still starting to realize what a launching pad the Rockies played in. They were second worst in HRs allowed (134), and dead last in Ks. On the positive side, they walked the 5th fewest batters in the NL.

About the above-average pitchers. One of them did make some starts, Rene Arocha. For the season, he pitched 83 innings, with an ERA of 4.01 (ERA+ of 104). In his 7 starts, totaling 33.3 innings, he had an ERA of 6.48, and a WHIP (walks + hits/innings pitched) of 1.74. As a reliever, he pitched in 38 games, or 49.7 innings, with an ERA of 2.36, 11 saves, and a WHIP of 1.148. I figured since the majority of his innings (and his success) came as a reliever, that's what he would be considered (Baseball-Reference groups him with the relief pitchers on the 1994 team page).

Of the other 4, Gary Buckels compiled his 2.25 ERA (186 ERA+) over just 12 innings, so like Mabry and Young, his impact was fairly low (he accounts for 1.2% of the team's innings). The other 3 are John Rodriguez (60.3 IP, 4.03 ERA, 104), and Rob Murphy (40.3, 3.79, 110), the team's two lefties, as well as righty John Habyan (47.1, 3.23, 129).

That's the extent of the good news for the Cardinals: By the end of the (strike-shortened) season, they had four good relievers. Unfortunately, they had no good starters. Bob Tewksbury wasn't able to get by striking out only 4.6 batters per 9 IP. His home run rate rose to 1.3/9, the only time in six seasons as a Cardinals it exceeded 1/9. Not surprisingly, it's also his worst season, by far, with an ERA of 5.32 (ERA+ 0f 79). Allen Watson (ERA 5.52, 76) averaged just 5.3 innings a start, with a WHIP of 1.582, and more than 4 walks/9. In 12 starts, Omar Olivares averaged almost 6 innings, but had an ERA of 5.80, and walked 36, to only 25 Ks. Rick Sutcliffe was even worse. In his final season, he made 14 starts, averaged 4.7 innings a start, walked 30 to only 24 Ks, and posted an ERA of 6.78. The closest thing to a bright spot in the rotation was Vicente Palacios. In 17 starts, totaling 97.3 innings, he posted a 4.44 ERA, a 78K/31BB ratio, and a 1.202 WHIP.

Defensive Notes: When I saw how lousy their pitching was, I figured defense was the culprit. It's a problem the LaRussa Cardinals have. Because he and Dave Duncan stress getting groundballs, the pitchers who follow that strategy make themselves more dependent on their defense. Beyond the problems that come from random luck with BABIP, if the defense behind them is bad, they're going to struggle more than pitchers who can strike people out readily. Since the 1994 team had very few strikeout pitchers (Palacios and Habyan are the only two who exceeded 7K/9, which is not that impressive of a strikeout rate), they would be heavily dependent on their defense.

Looking it over, it wasn't as bad as I feared. There were weak points, and the sample sizes are small enough that they can certainly be questioned, but what we have suggests the Cardinals were solid at several positions. Tom Pagnozzi was 7 runs above average in about 600 innings, while McGriff was average in half that. In 481 innings, Geronimo was 2.3 runs above average, while in 412.3 innings, Alicea was that much below average. Oquendo was +3.6 runs in 124 innings at 2nd, and +2.6 runs in 118 innings at SS. Ozzie Smith was +11.8 in 822 innings. In 850 innings, Bernard Gilkey was +5.1, and Mark Whiten was +11.4 in 780 innings (his arm was +3 on its own). Brian Jordan was +2 in 135 LF innings, +2.7 in 69 CF innings, and +3.4 in 180 RF innings.

There were some weak spots. Alicea I already mentioned. In 902 innings, Ray Lankford was a -2.8, though he was +3.3 on the road, and -8.1 at home (his arm was +2). Zeile logged 960 innings at 3rd, and scored a -2.8. The weakest spot was first base, as Gregg Jefferies put up a -5.6 over 865.3 innings. Oddly, he was Lankford's opposite, scoring +0.4 at home, but -6.0 on the road. That might explain the pitchers' struggles, since the first basemen is involved in more plays than anyone (Jefferies logged twice as many chances as any other Cardinal). If your weakest defender is also the one with the most opportunities, that's going to increase the chances there will be mistakes. Still, while Jefferies was below average, his numbers don't suggest someone so bad that he single-handedly torpedoed the entire pitching staff. As a whole, the team was 35 runs better than average defensively, so they were actually helping the pitchers be better than they were. Frightening.

Most likely, Tewksbury was due to have more bad luck (or lose the precise control a pitcher with his limited stuff has to have), Allen Watson was never any good, Sutcliffe retired after this season for a reason, and the Cardinals were missing healthy contributions from some pitchers who could have helped a little (Rheal Cormier and Donovan Osborne. The former struggled, and the latter missed the entire year).

Other Points: The team's record grew worse as the season progressed. They were 12-9 in April, 27-27 in May and June, then fell apart in July (8-20). The reason isn't readily apparent. The team posted a .755 OPS in April, and a .756 in July. Their pitchers allowed a .796 in April, and an .824 in July, which is worse, but not that much worse. The pitchers were worse in May (.852), and so were the hitters (.742), but they managed a 14-14 record. Considering they were outscored by 33 runs in May, they were probably a bit lucky. The team seems to have been good (or lucky) in close game, going 21-13 in 1-run contests, in contrast to their 13-23 record in games decided by 5+ runs. The other strange thing is the team was 30-28 on the road, but 23-35 at home. This despite the fact their OPS is basically the same (.754 home, .752 road), and so was their opponents (.818 home, .822 road).

Final Thoughts: This was a rough year as a fan. Not just because of the strike, since it probably spared me from watching this team stumble through the last month and a half. The previous three years the Cardinals had won 84, 83, and 87 games. They had a lot of young guys, either from their farm systems or ones they had traded guys from their '80s championship teams to get. This was the season things were hopefully going to come together, and they'd challenge for a playoff spot, especially since they were out of the East, where they'd been stuck behind Montreal and one of the two Pennsylvania teams the past few seasons. Obviously, things did not work out. It was the Reds who took advantage of the new division.

I went to two games with my dad. A double-header against Atlanta on the 22nd of July. It's the only time I can remember sitting in outfield seats, left field in this case. The Cards were making up several games against the Braves, because they played a double-header against them the night before as well. They split that one, but won both this time. Tom Urbani threw 8.3 shutout innings in the first game, which probably explains why I always wanted him to get more opportunities to start while he was a Cardinal. He could never seem to break into the rotation consistently though, which hardly seems fair considering the number of chances Allen Watson had. The main thing I remember from the second game was it was delayed for a long time in the first inning, as Tony Tarasco hurt himself stealing second. Rick Sutcliffe pitched well-enough (made it into the 6th! Whoo!), and Rene Arocha struck out Fred McGriff to end the game (I think Arocha got a favorable call on strike two, because I remember McGriff being annoyed by the call). So that was a good night, even if we didn't make it home until after 2 AM. Of course, the Cardinals seized upon the momentum of the two victories and promptly lost 10 of their next 11 games. Over the course of those 11 games, they held their opponents to less than 4 runs once (a game they lost 3-2), but allowed 7 or more 9 times (including their lone win, 10-7).

This team was bad, no doubt, and worse than their record suggests. Still, they were an average offensive team, making up for a lack of power and surprising lack of speed with a patient lineup, and were not the defensive disasters I expected them to be. Their pitching is lousy, but I don't think horrific pitching alone can make a team the worst I've seen.

For My Next Series Of Time-Wasting Posts

2010-03-06T07:32:00.003-12:00

I'm going to try and determine which is the worst St. Louis Cardinals team of my fandom, so from 1985 to now. I started thinking about this sometime last fall, while reading one of Joe Posnanski's posts on the Royals. He said he thought the 2009 Royals might be the worst version he had covered.

It wasn't as simple as them having the worst record, which they didn't. It was more the fact that they were terrible in all facets. Even with Zack Grienke, who would end up winning the Cy Young, their rotation was not very good. Even Joakim Soria, an excellent young closer, their bullpen was lousy. They had Billy Butler, who hit more than 20 HRs and 50 doubles at the age of 23, something only done by 7 hitters before him, all Hall of Famers or potential future Hall of Famers, yet they weren't good at hitting for average, or hitting for power, or drawing walks. They weren't a speed team, nor were they a good defensive team. Actually, they were the worst fielding team in the league, according to some statistics. Even the front office was doing poorly, giving Kyle Farnsworth multi-year contracts, and trading for Yuni Betancourt, who the Mariners couldn't wait to rid themselves of. Even with some very good players, they were simply a disaster.

So I want to do the same with the Cardinals. Fortunately, they've been good enough over the last 25 years, I don't have too many teams to sift through. Sticking solely to teams with losing records, I have the following years: 1986, 1988, 1990, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1999, and 2007. So over the next, however long this takes me, I'm going to go through each year, discuss them a bit, based on what I remember or can look up, and eventually, I'll try and settle on the worst team. I've already essentially weeded four teams out on contention, on the grounds they were a little too good at either scoring runs, or run prevention, but I still want to discuss them, as taking a more in-depth look may change my mind. Anyway, that's what I have planned, in addition to any other posts I happen to feel like putting up.

I'd Still Like To Talk About The Hall of Fame

2010-02-21T09:26:00.002-12:00

I know it's been five weeks since I said I was going to to do this, and the results had already been released then, but I'd still like to throw my opinion out there, for the hell of it if nothing else.

I'm going to start with the returning choices, and then touch on the new options.

Harold Baines: Still has those fine hitting stats, still was primarily a DH. No.

Dale Murphy: His counting and rate stats are roughly similar to Baines, except in areas like hits (Edge to Baines) and stolen bases (Advantage, Murphy). Murphy was supposed to be a fine centerfielder in his heyday, though Baseball-Reference's numbers aren't so high on his skill in CF. They do say he was pretty good in RF into his early-30s. Like I say below, I can't see that Dawson's numbers are much better than Murphy's and I'm absolutely voting for the Hawk, so Yes.

Dave Parker: He's in the same general statistical range as Murphy (though Parker hit for higher average, and Murphy drew a lot more walks), but without the defensive skill Murphy had. So, No.

Don Mattingly: His stats don't look that much better than the first three, and he plays a less challenging position, so No.

Alan Trammell: Like I said last year, he's not quite the hitter Ripken was, and he's not the gloveman Ozzie was, but I think his overall numbers are good enough for inclusion. Yes.

Mark McGwire: Really good at drawing walks and crushing home runs, when healthy. For better or worse, played a part in something that helped baseball's popularity. If the Hall's going to be about the history of the game, you can't exclude him. Yes.

Tim Raines: Speed, patience, a decent amount of power, a funny anecdote connected to him. Yes.

Lee Smith: Apparently never seen as dominating, but he seemed that way to me when he was in St. Louis in the early 90s. His ERA+ is good, but not great, and his WHIP is even less inspiring. No.

Jack Morris: ERA+ and WHIP are decidedly underwhelming. Stats in general don't stack up well to Bert Blyleven. Does have a memorable quote, and a memorable postseason start. I'm less certain this year than I was last year that's enough. No.

Bert Blyleven: I have a hard time arguing with almost 5000 innings, and over 3700 strikeouts. Plus all the complete games and shutouts. He certainly merits inclusion ahead of Morris. Yes.

Andre Dawson: It's harder for me to ignore how lousy that on-base percentage is, but I still love the power-speed combination and his defensive prowess. Logically, there probably isn't anyway I can justify voting for Dawson, but not Murphy and Parker. Certainly not Murphy (Parker's lesser defensive ability might undercut his argument). Still, I'm going to, for now. Yes.

OK, that's the 11 returning nominees, and 5 spots on my ballot are taken. On to the 14 newbies.

Todd Zeile: *Laughs hysterically* No. Maybe if he put up the offensive numbers he did while being the franchise catcher the Cardinals hoped he was, rather than being a guy who couldn't throw the ball to second to save his life? if you're going to catch like that, you better hit like Piazza, and he didn't.

Ray Lankford: I'd like to give Ray a vote, just so he could have one, and if I wind up with a spare spot, I just might. Still, I pretend he's good enough for inclusion into the Hall of Fame. I do think Cardinals' fans undervalue him, because many of the teams he played on at his peak were lousy. Not his fault, but Cardinals' fans don't remember the pre-McGwire 90s fondly. Screw it, Yes.

Shane Reynolds: ERA+ of 103, WHIP over 1.3, 1400 Ks? No.

David Segui: I'm inclined to give him a vote just for being defiant about his steroid use. He was honest about the fact he took it because he wanted to hit more home runs and make more money, and fuck yeah, he'd do it again. Refreshing candor. Still, No.

Kevin Apper: I'd imagine his numbers would be better if he hadn't wasted his best years in Kansas City. 'You could probably say the same for both Dawson and Raines, though, since they say the turf in Montreal did no favors to Dawson's knees. Appier has a better argument than Reynolds, but No.

Pat Hentgen: His numbers are in the same ball park as Reynolds, but generally worse, so No.

Ellis Burks: Ellis has some pretty fair offensive numbers, kind of an upgraded version of Dawson, but with less longevity. Playing in Coors in the mid-90s probably didn't hurt his numbers any. Burks always struck me as one of those players who would have been better remembered if he could only stay healthy. No.

Eric Karros: His numbers aren't up to Lankford's level, and Karros only played first, so No.

Robin Ventura: If his numbers were a bit better, I'd couple those with his whupping at the hands of Nolan Ryan and give him the vote. They aren't quite there. No.

Andres Galarraga: Like Burks, moving to Coors in the mid-90s helped his numbers out considerably. He was supposed to be pretty smooth with the glove, but my memory is the Cars traded Ken Hill for him, and Andres was so bad, the team released him mid-season, preferring to take their chances with Gerald Perry and Rod Brewer at first. No.

Fred McGriff: Hell, I don't know. His numbers aren't anything spectacular, but he was consistently good for a pretty decent stretch. There's no evidence he was juicing, if that's relevant to you. It isn't really to me. No.

Edgar Martinez: Great, another DH. From what I remember, Martinez is a DH in the same mold as Molitor: a good defensive player who just couldn't stay healthy, rather than a stone-handed butcher in the field. Those are some mighty fine rate stats (.312 average, .418 OBP, .515. SLG), but I really don't like DHs. They're part of the game, but I really wish they weren't. Still, I would have voted for Molitor, so Yes.

Barry Larkin: Larkin's numbers are as good or better than Trammell's, so Yes. I wasn't particularly fond of him when I was younger, because you'd hear people insisting he was better than Ozzie, and no way I was accepting that statement, but his numbers are really good.

Roberto Alomar: He'll probably get in next year, but he ought to have gotten in this year. I don't know whether it was this recent stuff with an old flame claiming he gave her AIDS, or the spitting on the ump incident, or just a "He doesn't feel like a first-ballot Hall of Famer" bullshit argument that kept him out. Either way, he should be in. 2700 hits 200 HRs and over 400 SBs from a second baseman? Won a ton of fielding awards, hit for average, hit for power, drew some walks, what's not to like? I can't even hold the fact he was a Met against him. Yes.

Saints Win Super Bowl

2010-02-07T15:49:00.002-12:00

Well, that's nice.

I wouldn't say this was a great game, strictly from the play on the field, but it had its moments. The Saints defense managed to hold their ground just often enough, and they forced one of those turnovers they're so good at getting. They seemed to adjust on offense after the first quarter. Brees seemed to more readily find the underneath receiver, since the Colts were doing their best to prevent any deep throws. Except a team can have a pretty decent offense just throwing short passes on target and letting big receivers run with it.

The Colts ran it better than I expected, maybe better than New Orleans expected as well. I'm a little curious about the playcalling by Indy on that last drive, once they were inside the 10. OK, so pass interference pushes them back on 1st down, they get some of it back on 2nd, then they try a run. I know they'd had success running inside in the game, but it isn't their strength, and if they fail, they either have to burn their second time out, or run a quick 4th down play, which is the option they chose. Perhaps they thought by calling the play quickly the Saints would be confused. I could see that being the reason. The run still surprises me.

I wonder how this performance will effect Peyton Manning's image. There was at least one fellow (Ross Tucker) who said that if Peyton won, he'd would consider him the best QB of the last 30 years, and there were some similar sentiments elsewhere that when it came strictly to passing, Peyton was as good as there's ever been. Still, he's never been that superb of a postseason performer. In the Colts' prior Super Bowl run, he threw more INTs than TDs, which is hardly the stuff of legends. He's still a really good QB, but I think he's going to need to do more in the postseason to be considered an all-time great.

Barely Coherent Thoughts On Last Weekend's Games

2010-01-18T09:03:00.003-12:00

It's a good thing I'm not a gambler, huh? Those were some poor picks on my part.

I'm most disappointed by Arizona's loss, as you might expect. I really thought they could do better, but half their defense seemed to be injured, and the other half wasn't nearly good enough to stop the Saints. Not sure why they didn't try to run more, especially as the defense fell apart. Keeps Brees off the field, tones down the number of hits Warner takes. Oh well, something for them to keep in mind for next season.

As for the rest, the Jets defense must be even better than I thought. I guess I'll root for them next week. Not that I'm a Jets fan or anything, I'm mostly annoyed with the Colts and their unwillingness to go for the perfect season. I understand they want to keep their best guys healthy, but this is football, a guy can get knocked out at any moment. Remember when the Bengals made the playoffs a few years ago, and Carson Palmer's knee got blown out on his first pass of their first playoff game? The Bengals had managed to keep him upright all season and just like that, he's gone. You can try to protect guys as much as you want, but you never know. Heck, peyton Manning might doze off in a recliner this week, wake up to get a snack, forget to set aside a blanket he's sleeping under, only to trip over it and fracture his pelvis.

OK, that was my grandmother that happened to, and Peyton's hopefully more aware of his surroundings than she is, but there's no telling, so trying to protect them could all be for naught. I think a perfect season is so rare, and so impressive, that if you have the chance, you have to go for it. Then again, I don't have to answer to anyone if that blows up in the team's face.

As for Saints/Vikings, on the one hand, I don't want to root for the Saints, because they knocked Arizona out emphatically, and I tend to hold grudges. On the other hand, you Favre, and I'm not sure I could deal with the hosannas that would be sung for him if he leads this team to a Super Bowl. Certainly Jason Whitlock would never shut up about, and probably use it to call the Packers' GM Ted Thompson a moron for the next 7 years or so. Or until Thompson is shown to have made the right decision, at which point Whitlock will reverse course and pretend he knew Thompson was right all along*. Where was I? Oh yeah, Favre. That's not Favre's fault, but it's still not something I'd be looking forward to having to avoid for several months.

Although, if New Orleans wins, then you have the inevitable stories about the Saints saving New Orleans or something to that effect. I guess I'll root for a Saints/Jets Super Bowl. The Saints, when they're on, are the best offense in the league, and the Jets are the best defense. Immovable object versus irresistible force and all that. Plus, neither of those teams has experienced real playoff success in a long time (or ever, in the Saints' case). I know the Vikings haven't been to a Super Bowl since the 1970s, but that's still better than New Orleans.

* When he still wrote for ESPN, Whitlock penned a column blasting Doug Flutie** and Marty Schottenheimer when they were both in San Diego. He went after Marty for starting Flutie over Brees, and talked about how Marty had made a similar mistake in choosing his QB when he picked Elvis Grbac and let Rich Gannon walk after the '98 season. Except, Whitlock didn't have a problem with that choice back then, going so far as to describe Grbac as a bigger, younger, stronger, faster version of Gannon after the first time Gannon's Raiders played Grbac's Chiefs. But then, five years later, Whitlock's hammering Marty for it, without admitting he was wrong as well? I call bullshit.

** Whitlock's shot at Flutie was that he submarined Rob Johnson's career in Buffalo. See, I thought it was Johnson's inability to stay healthy for more than five minutes that cost him his job. Rob Johnson was the J.D. Drew of NFL QBs. he could be real good when he was on the field, he was just never on the field. Also, if Flutie was the problem in Buffalo, what happened to Rob Johnson in Tampa Bay? Flutie was thousands of miles away, and Jon Gruden was trying to hand the starting job to anyone that wasn't Brad Johnson***, and Rob couldn't even beat out Shaun King. Is that Flutie's fault too, Whitlock?

*** When all Johnson did was QB the team to a Super Bowl. Yeah, their defense deserves most credit, but the run game was 27th in the league, while the passing game was 15th, so the offense fell to Johnson's arm, and all he did was stand in there until the last second, before completing passes and getting leveled.

Looking Ahead To This Weekend's Playoff Games

2010-01-14T11:12:00.004-12:00

We can only hope they're more competitive than last week's selection. Well, I'd prefer Arizona win in a blowout, but I'm willing to accept any victory, no matter how narrow. Now, for your amusement, my predictions for the weekend.

I know the Jets are a good running team, and a very good defensive team, while the Chargers are average on defense (and weaker against the run), and more pass-oriented offensively (they run the ball about as well as last year's Cardinals team). I'm going to take the Chargers. I think they can score a couple times early, and while the Jets running attack will control the clock, it won't net enough points, so they'll have to rely more on Mark Sanchez, and I don't think that's a winning formula. Chargers 27, Jets 13.

So the Colts are dead last in rushing the ball, but first in passing. If last week was any indication, the Ravens are good at pressuring the QB and hitting the receivers hard. I think Peyton has more weapons at his disposal than Brady, though. I wonder if Joe Flacco can do anything useful this week. OK, last week he did complete that one 17-yard pass to make a first down, but can he do that more than once? Upside, the Colts are 24th against the run, but if they can jump out to a big lead that won't matter much. More upside for Baltimore: Manning seemed to have a lot of multiple pick games, especially around and after that New England game. That could be the inexperienced receivers he has this year, but it's something the Ravens ought to be able to exploit. If they can stop the Colts early, they can keep pounding the ball, and so what the heck, Ravens 23, Colts 20.

OK, I'm back. Cowboys and Vikings. The Cowboys have looked good the last three weeks of the regular season, and in last week's beating of Philly. The Vikings struggled for a few weeks, starting with stomping Arizona handed them, but seemed to maybe pull themselves together against the Giants. Assuming the Giants didn't just roll over, that is. The Cowboys defense is playing well, but I'd think the Vikings can challenge them a bit more in the run game than the Eagles did. If they're smart, that's what they'll do. It reduces the pressure on Favre, which seemed to work pretty well for Minnesota the first couple months of the season. Other bit of good news for Minnesota is they ranked second on defense against the run. Seeing as the Cowboys have that three-headed monster of Barber, Jones, and Choice, it'd be helpful if the Vikes' D can play up to that ranking. I don't know who I want to win here. I hate Dallas, but I'm not sure I want the Vikings advancing, since that means more talking about Favre. Of course, if the Vikings lose, the talk will be about whether Favre is finally going to retire for real, so maybe it's better to have it be about his actual play on the field. Vikings 30, Cowboys 17.

I want the Cardinals to beat New Orleans. Nothing against the Saints, but the Cardinals are my team. I always want them to win. And I think they can. Won't be easy, but they can do it. New Orleans' defense actually ranks below Arizona's in both run and pass defense, though they're better at forcing turnovers. The Saints are also 6th in rushing offense, which surprised me. I was under the impression their run game was week. So much for that. The good news is, Arizona does have a running game, if they opt to use it. And while Collinsworth told Jim Rome that Warner loves passing against the blitz, and Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams loves to blitz, I think Arizona ought to consider lots of Beanie Wells. Drew Brees can't score if he can't get on the field. I don't expect this to be as high-scoring as last week's game. I know Arizona's defense can play better than that, and Arizona as a whole seems to play better when they can be the underdog, " we get no respect" team, which I think they can do this week. I'm not saying the Saints are overwhelming favorites, but the general consensus seems to be that if Aaron Rodgers could torch Arizona like that on the road, what will Brees do playing at home? Tha being said, I still expect this to be the highest scoring game of the week, and for both QBs to put up good numbers. Cardinals 34, Saints 30.

Now we sit back and see how badly I whiffed on these.

McGwire-Related Blogging

2010-01-12T08:22:00.003-12:00

I probably shouldn't, but I need to get back into the swing of things somehow.

OK, Mark McGwire admitted he used steroids and HGH for about a decade, including the year he hit 70 home runs, which was at the time a major league record. I have a hard time believing anyone is surprised by this, as most people seemed to assume he was guilty and just wanted him to cop to it. 'Course, now that he's done that, many of those folks are jumping all over him, because his apology wasn't contrite enough, didn't go far enough, he raped their childhood, he disrespected the game, and so on. Spare me.

It's been my feeling for the last couple of years that I don't care if players use performance enhancers or not. They want to endanger their health to make themselves more money now, then it's their choice. I'm not assuming every player uses, as I want to give everyone the benefit of the doubt until they either fail a drug test, or admit it themselves, but there's no one in the majors who it would surprise me to learn used PEDs*.

As for the stuff about respecting the game and its fans, is it only steroid use that disrespects the fans? Or did Hank Aaron and Mike Schmidt (and a whole bunch of other players) disrepect the game by taking greenies? Did Gaylord Perry and Whitey Ford disrespect the game by scuffing and otherwise doctoring baseballs? Did the Powers That Be disrespect baseball by not allowing non-whites to play in the majors for decades? If the asnwer is no, then what's so special about steroids that they're the only thing that disrespects the game and its fans. If yes, then has the game ever been respected, at least since the early 1900s? It all starts to sound like those folks who look wistfully back to the 1950s as the good old days, when everything was better, ignoring all the things that were wrong back then.

As for respecting the fans, it's the ballplayer's job to entertain us, correct? To go out there, play hard, and give us a good time. So McGwire takes steroids, he's able to work out more in the offseason, and build up more muscle so that when he hits the ball, he can make it travel farther. And he takes HGH to help himself stay healthy so he can actually be on the field. Isn't that helping him to do a better job entertaining the fans? Is it disrespect because he didn't come out and say back then that hell yeah he was taking steroids so he could get out on the field and hit some dingers?

Dan Shanoff said he was still mad after the admission because back in '98, McGwire demanded our admiration, which is a crock. Wasn't McGwire the one uncomfortable in the spotlight, and it took Sosa's supposed joy to bring Mac out of his shell and get into the spirit of the chase? If you admired McGwire, that was your choice, so go be pissed off at yourself. Seriously, go look at yourself in the mirror, ask yourself why you got suckered in, and if you're still ticked, slap yourself.

I can't remember exactly how I felt back in 1998. There's no denying I felt some excitement about the Chase, since it looked as though I'd get to see a St. Louis Cardinal break baseball's supposedly most hallowed record. Still, that was offset by the fact the team wasn't very good. They won 83 games, but that was largely because their schedule in September pitted them almost entirely against lousy teams like the Expos and Reds. Their rotation was a shambles (Todd Stottlemyre basically carried it on his back up to the All-Star Break), and the bullpen was an even bigger disaster, especially the first four months when Jeff Brantley was closer. The lineup was entirely too focused on power, to the exclusion of speed, for my tastes, as it seemed like everyone was trying to hit home runs like McGwire. The Chase was nice, but it couldn't make up for the Cardinals being bad**.

My dad and I went to one game that year, against the Marlins. We got lucky, as Stottlemyre, the one useful starting pitcher they had at that point, went up against Livan Hernandez, the one useful starting pitcher the Marlins had (this was the year after their first World Series, and subsequent fire sale of all veteran talent). Plus, it's one of the few games Mike Piazza played for Florida, as he was in the process of being traded from the Dodgers to the Mets. It was a game where McGwire hit an estimated 545-foot home run, but more importantly, the Cardinals won behind a complete game from Stottlemyre. I remember my dad and I both being ticked the fans in fron of us were doing the Wave in the 9th, as Stott tried to finish the job, which he did.

That I know for a fact that McGwire was on steroids doesn't take away from the fact I had fun going to the game with my dad, or how hard I rooted for Stottlemyre, or the fact it's the only game I went to that Mike Piazza played in (in one of his 5 games as a Marlin, no less). It's still a good memory. If other people want to destroy their pleasant memories because of what a player did, well that's their call.

I'm sure McGwire confessed now because of his new job as hitting coach for the Cardinals. Does doing it now stave off a media circus at Spring Training, or during the season? Probably not. I imagine sportswriters (annoying wankers) and opposing fans (it's what opposing fans do) will be lining up to take their shots. Does getting this off his chest help McGwire be a better hitting coach? Hell if I know. It might, if only because it won't be weighing on his mind now, and he'll be able to focus on the job at hand.

Should the Cardinals have hired him? I don't know, but I don't have any objections, beyond concerns this will be a distraction for the players. If the team thinks he can help their approach at the plate, and there weren't any better candidates available, then I guess so. It seems wrong to try and turn a blind eye to the whole Steroid Era and its players, like that'll make it go away. It happened, those players are out there, and jsut because they took PEDs doesn't mean they have no insight into the game. Mostly I'm OK with it because I see it as an attempt by LaRussa to rehab the image of an old player of his that he liked. One thing I tend to respect is people who stick by their friends through thick and thin, and I think that's what LaRussa's doing here. That can come back to bite you, and it probably will bite LaRussa, at the very least in terms of his public image, since it'll strengthen the arguments of those who call him a PED enabler, but he seems prepared to take that bullet. Or he thinks he can prove it false with this somehow.

And heck, they (I'm assuming "they" means Catholics) say confession is good for the soul, so if this helps McGwire move forward with his life in general, then great. It would have been better to confess years ago, so it wouldn't have hung over him all this time. Or not do PEDs at all, if using them was going to bother him so much***. But that's how people are. We do things we regret afterwards, but were able to rationalize at the time. I have regrets, you probably do too. Whether they're as important as what McGwire's apparently**** were likely depends on your perspective.

OK, hopefully I've gotten this out of my system, and I'll start talking about the NFL playoffs later in the week. Maybe discuss the Hall of Fame ballot. I know the results came out already, but I mean to go over the ballot and just dicked around too long.

* I used to say there was no one except Jamie Moyer that would surprise me, but thinking about it, PEDs might explain how he's managed to hold together and keep pitching into his mid-40s. Note that I'm not saying he actually does, just that I've reassessed and concluded he wouldn't surprise me, either.

** Which is why I bristled all through that season whenever Sportscenter anchors would imply that while Cub fans were concerned primarily with their team winning, with Sosa's home run totals coming in second, whether the Cards won or not was secondary to the fans, compared to whether Big Mac smashed another one over the fence. I hated that blanket statement, all the more because I probably knew that for some fans, it was true.

*** Like I said, I don't care if the players use PEDs, but they ought to accept the consequences of doing so. I'm thinking more of health concerns, but in this case it also means having scorn heaped upon them by sportswriters and fans. If they don't want to risk dealing with any of that, then they shouldn't take them, and they can risk their performance dipping to the point they lose their job. Which is a lousy way for things to go, but every action produces results, good and bad.

**** I say apparently because you could always argue he doesn't actually regret what he did. I don't have the patience to watch the interview, so I'm not going to judge his sincerity.

http://lifeisntshortenough.wordpress.com/

2010-01-11T06:40:00.000-12:00

http://lifeisntshortenough.wordpress.com/

Always Frustrating, Arizona Is

2009-12-15T09:24:00.002-12:00

Last night's loss to the 49ers is the kind of thing that makes it hard to trust that these Cardinals aren't like all the crappy Cardinals teams I watched in the past. They have games they should win, and they blow them, and thus they can't be an elite team.

I think that's what bothered me the most about the Titans' loss. They had a chance to make a statement, and they failed. The Titans were on a 5-game winning streak, halfway to fulfilling Chris Johnson's promise that they'd run the table, and Arizona had them - Until they let Vince Young march 99 yards to a game-winning touchdown. Contrast that with what the Colts did the next weekend against the Titans. They took a lead early, and after Nate Washington dropped a sure touchdown pass, took control. They squashed the Titans, as they should, because they're the better team. I'm fully believe they would have done the same to the 49ers had they played them on Monday night.

OK, so the Cardinals aren't in the Colts' league. But still, they're better than the 49ers, or they ought to be, and they didn't show it. The 49ers kicked their asses. The Cardinals had another chance to make a statement, to assert their dominance over the NFC West, and the blew it. Badly. The Cardinals seem to play well when people doubt them, like the game against the Vikings, or in last season's playoffs. When they can't draw on that, because they're favored, they crash. It makes me wonder if I shouldn't root for Green Bay to stomp them the last week of the season, in the hopes it causes people to write them off going into the postseason. They might play with that anger again, and hopefully they'd make it through Round 1. After that, they won't be favored against anyone they're like to play, so they'll still have the "disrespect" card at their disposal.

'Course, they have to take care of business against Detroit and St. Louis, so as to get in the postseason first, for any of that to matter. Maybe I should just be concened with that instead.

Well Shut My Mouth

2009-12-07T05:32:00.003-12:00

Arizona made me look pretty stupid, didn't they? Even the part of me that believed they could win* expected a shootout, something akin to the 4th quarter of the Raiders/Steelers game. Favre and Warner marching their teams down the field, trading the lead back and forth, last team with the ball wins.

I suppose the last part of that did come true. Arizona had the ball last, they took a couple of knees, and they won. One thing about that I found interesting was the Vikings had one timeout left at that point, and they didn't call it. Granted, the only purpose it would have served was making Arizona take three knees instead of two, but that's one more chance for something to go your way. It's fine with me that Minnesota opted not to go that way, perhaps deciding it'd be better to just end the game and get out of Dodge, I just thought it was a little unusual.

I just wanted to cop to the fact Arizona really showed me something. At this point in the season, that would have to be their signature win. Hopefully, they've a few more of those planned. Unleashing one on the 49ers next week, wrapping up the division while getting a little payback for the Week 1 loss, would be nice.

* There was a part of me that believed that, there always is, it just isn't always louder than the part that fears they'll lose.

Sometimes It's How They Lose That's The Worst

2009-12-02T07:18:00.002-12:00

If Arizona had lost to the Titans because Chris Johnson ran them off the field, I wouldn't have been happy, but it would have been tolerable. Chris Johnson's run over pretty much everyone this year, why would the Cardinals be any different? To lose because Vince Young torched you for almost 400 yards? The same Vince Young who threw for less than 150 yards the week before against the Texans? That hurts.

That the game was lost as Young marched the Titans down the field in the last few minutes, after the Cardinals had seemed to have things in their favor, makes it even worse. It's like the Super Bowl all over again. Or any of the other numerous losses I've seen Arizona absorb from allowing last minute touchdown drives spanning the length of the field*.

Now it's the Vikings coming to town, and they don't know whether Warner will be able to play. Swell. I'm not sure he should play, even if he can. While I think Warner can lead the Cardinals to some touchdowns against the Vikes' defense, I don't have much confidence the Arizona D can even slow the Adrian Peterson/Favre/Sidney Rice/Percy Harvin/Visanthe Shiancoe/Whoever the hell else I've forgotten Show. If Arizona falls behind, the Vikes will be free to unleash their rushers on Warner**, and he may get even more battered. Might be better to save him for that 49ers rematch the following week.

* The Mike Martz Rams seemed good for one of these a season, usually the game in Arizona, since they seemed to blow the doors off the Cards when they played in St. Louis.

** I'm making the assumption that for as long as the game stays close, Beanie Wells and Tim Hightower can rush effectively enough to keep Minnesota honest.

Baseball Cardinals Offseason Ramblings

2009-11-13T13:51:00.002-12:00

I've been meaning to do this for a month, but I've been too lazy, and it's not as though anyone's clamoring for it. The Cardinals have a bunch of free agents, and a considerable amount of payroll space. Problem is, there's not a lot of players out there that appear to be worth spending money. For now, I'm gonna look solely at the Cardinals free agents.

Three of the starting pitchers are available to be re-signed: Pineiro, Wellenmeyer, and Smoltz. They already have a lot of money invested in Carpenter and Lohse, and Wainwright's going to make something like 6 or 7 million next year as well. There are a few guys that could be called up to fill a spot, including Blake Hawksworth, Mitch Boggs, Jaime Garcia, PJ Walters, and perhaps Kyle McClellan (though considering Kyle walks too many guys for a reliever, making him a starter seems ill-advised).

First off, tell Wellenmeyer "Thanks for the surprisingly good 2008, now get lost". Whatever he did to stop walking people that year, he couldn't do this season, and I wouldn't count on him figuring it out again. I'd like to see them offer Smoltz a one-year contract, and he might go for it. He said he liked the atmosphere playing in St. Louis more than he ever did in Atlanta*, which might make him receptive to that. Added bonus is that if Smoltz can't hold up in the rotation, you can easily shift him back to the bullpen. He could even take over for Franklin as closer if that fellow continues the regression we saw the last couple months of the season.

As for Joel, I wouldn't offer him more than arbitration. Given the weak free agent class, he'll probably get better offers than that, but this season is pretty far out of line from his career norms. He had his success by pitching like someone out of the Dead Ball Era**, and the other players in the last 80 years to pitch that way a whole year, were only able to do it for season. Keeping the BB and HR rates that low, while striking no one out is just too tricky these days. So I expect serious regression. If he accepts arbitration, hopefully he can at least pitch better than he did in 2008. If not, well at least it's only a 1-year deal. If he doesn't accept arbitration, sweet, draft pick!

So for me, I'd like to slot Smoltz in the #4 spot, and Garcia in the #5 spot, get that draft pick for Joel, and forget about Wellenmeyer.

No free agents from the 'pen, since everyone's either already re-signed, or still under team control. Amongst the position players, there's LaRue, Khalil Greene, DeRosa, Glaus, Holliday, and Ankiel. First things first, Greene and Ankiel can take a hike. I'm ambivalent at LaRue. If the Cardinals think either Bryan Anderson or Matt Pagnozzi can be roughly as good as LaRue, then let him walk, and let one of those guys try. If Yadier's healthy, then the backup catcher's hardly going to play anyway, and if Yadi's hurt, the Cardinals are in trouble whether LaRue or one of the newbies is the backup. Hardly matters.

Between DeRosa and Glaus, I don't know. Glaus is still going to be recovering from that shoulder surgery. DeRosa has, I believe, already had his wrist surgery, but he's still going to be recovering from that. DeRosa's a couple years older. Glaus has a more extensive injury history. DeRosa has greater versatility, but Glaus is the better 3rd baseman, and the better all around player if healthy. Crap, I dunno. I'd like to see David Freese get a shot at 3rd, although Chone Figgins is appealing*** . I really don't want DeRosa to be starting at 3rd. If there's a set of figures that would be appropriate for a "super-sub" (2 years, 14 million? I have no idea, I'm just guessing), I'd be open to giving DeRosa that, let him get some time all over the diamond. As for Glaus, arbitration, since they can get a draft pick for him too if he leaves.

As for Holliday, I don't think he's coming back. Scott Boras doesn't believe in "hometown discounts", and he's definitely not buying into any talk of St. Louis being a small or mid-market team. Which means the Cards would have to match the likely ludicrous offers Holliday's going to wrangle from the Mets, Yanks, Red Sox, whoever. I do not want them to do that, so to hell with him. Offer arbitration, when he declines, move on. Look into Mike Cameron. He plays an excellent CF, so LF ought to be a snap. Plus, he can hit lefties, so if you want to platoon someone with Colby Rasmus, there's your guy (I wouldn't go for that myself. If Rasmus is going to be your franchise centerfielder, then he's gonna have to learn to hit lefties). Beyond that, I was thinking of a few other possibilities, maybe Reed Johnson. He platooned with Edmonds, and can also play center. Admittedly, not much power, but if we had say, a healthy Glaus, and Ludwick, and Rasmus can improve, that might be enough power around Pujols.

* Which, hey I appreciate hearing the fans made a good impression, but that has to hurt if you're a Braves fan. Admittedly, the fans don't help by being so indifferent to their team's success, but there were surely some good fans that were consistently supportive, and that kind of spits in their face. Probably not his intent, but I could see that hurting some feelings.

** Really, unsustainably low strikeout, walk, and HR totals.

*** His high on-base percentage and Schumaker's at the front of the lineup and Albert might have some people to drive in. Of course, Albert might get walked 150 times depending on who's behind him, but hopefully other managers would nut up a bit.

Arizona Keeps Things Interesting

2009-11-09T11:04:00.002-12:00

Last year they couldn't win on the road. Now they can't win at home. They can go to Jersey and beat a Giants team that looked at least decent, and figured to be pissed off after the Saints rolled over them. Then they make fools out of themselves against the Panthers. They couldn't even intercept Jake Delhomme. If that guy tried to pass on a cold it'd be intercepted.

Wait, does that make any sense?

Then they travel to Chicago and curbstomp the Bears. Whisenhunt even makes an amusing Dennis Green reference* afterward. Admittedly, the Bears aren't an elite team, and they lost Tommie Harris about one minute into the game, but the Cardinals' offense made it look easy. They even ran the ball successfully! It's troubled me that the running game has been even weaker this year than it was last year, which is saying something, but maybe it's starting to wake up. I don't watch college football, so I know little about Chris "Beanie" Wells, but I like him. I'm hoping he'll be a running back the Cardinals draft that actually works out for them**.

I just can't figure out this team. Losing to the Colts, sure I can understand that, the Colts are really good (and the Cardinals seemed to have a poor gameplan. Why throw a lot against a team with really good pass-rushing ends?) Losing to the 49ers in Arizona, that one I couldn't figure. It wasn't as though Frank Gore tore them up, they just couldn't get the job done. So at this point, I'm definitely concerned about this game against Seattle. The Cardinals dominated the Seahawks a few weeks ago in Seattle, and I have to figure the Seahawks will be looking to repay the favor. And they wouldn't be the Arizona Cardinals if they didn't periodically blow games they ought to win.

On the upside, in the old days they alternated losing games they shouldn't with almost, but not actually, winning games they had no business winning. Now they actually win those games. Sometimes. Progress.

I'm being too negative, I know. I ought to be happy, and I am, really. Any time the Arizona Cardinals win it makes me happy, especially when it's a convincing win, though I'll take any kind of victory. Still it's hard for me to shake those fears that anytime now, they're going to go in the toilet, the way they used to whenever they showed promise. Warner will get hurt, or this Boldin*** situation will actually start to disrupt things, or the pass defense will completely disintegrate, and the next thing you know, six-game losing streak. I think they're too good for that to happen (plus they have several games left against lousy divisional opponents), but I still worry.

* Bill Plaschke thinks it was in poor taste. Of course he does. I can't say I was eager to be reminded of that Monday Night Football debacle, but since it was bound to happen anyway, given it was Cardinals/Bears, and the Bears tried to mount a comeback, I'm glad I could get a laugh out of it. Plaschke, lighten up. Or alternatively, go away. You contribute nothing useful to any dialogue.

** As opposed to the ones that go somewhere else to succeed, like Thomas Jones or Garrison Hearst. or Michael Pittman. Or the ones that just don't work out, like Leeland McElroy or J.J. Arrington.

*** I appreciate how badly Boldin wants to play, but I wish he wouldn't air this stuff so publicly. Honestly, I don't believe he's a malcontent, or trying to cause trouble. I think he just believes in speaking plainly. You ask how he feels about not playing, he tells you outright it wasn't his call, and he didn't like it. I can respect that, but it bothers me that he seems to be getting a bad reputation with the sportswriters around the league, all of them painting him as a "me first, I want my stats" troublemaker type, when I think he just really wants to play. Maybe they're right, but I hope Boldin proves them wrong. The man came back from a busted face in two weeks. They had to insert metal plates in his face under the skin and he came back that fast. I have a hard time believing that guy is a cancer.

They Have Successfully Lowered My Expectations

2009-10-07T11:11:00.002-12:00

So perhaps one good thing came out of the Cardinals stinking up the joint the last three weeks of the regular season. And if that was their goal, they were certainly diligent at achieving it. They lost series to good teams (Rockies, Braves, Marlins), and lousy teams (Reds, freaking swept by the Brewers). They lost by short-circuited offense, defensive buffoonery, games where their good starters got hammered*, and a pile of bullpen failures, by just about everyone available.

So you could say I'm concerned. Concerned to the point I really just want them to win one game. Avoid the sweep, and I'll, well, I won't be happy, but I won't be embarrassed. It's the same attitude I took to the 2006 postseason, where my idea was that after the Cardinals won NLDS Game 1 against San Diego, everything else was cake.

The trick, is, as much as I want to not let my hopes rise, I know they will. They did in '06. Even after they'd won that one game, even after they made it to the NLCS, I found myself troubled by the idea the Cards might get bounced by the fucking Mets. To hell with my promise to myself to be satisfied with whatever happened, they can't lose to the Mets! If the Cardinals win Game 1 tonight against the Dodgers, I'm going to find myself thinking bigger. Not about the World Series, or even winning the NLCS, but I'm sure it'll produce some subtle shift in me to where I'll be disappointed if they didn't end up moving on in the playoffs. That's the struggle of a fan, I suppose, between my wild-eyes hopes and dreams (2 World Series championships in 4 years?! Team of the Decade**!) and my more realistic expectations (The Dodgers' bullpen is much stronger than the Cardinals', the Cards' lineup has lots of holes, Molina's banged up. . .)

* See Carpenter's start versus Atlanta, and yeah, everybody's entitled to a bad start now and then, but it would have been nice to say "With all the other crap, at least Carp's holding steady".

** And if (IF) the Cardinals could pull that off, I'd call them Team of the Decade, and Rob Neyer can fuck off with his "National league Team of the Decade" crap. Goddamn Royals' fan.

Two Concerns As The Cardinals Approach The Playoffs

2009-09-24T10:31:00.002-12:00

The end of the season is nearly upon us, and barring an absolutely ridiculous collapse, the St. Louis Cardinals are in the postseason. Who they'll play to start off is up in the air. I'd like to avoid the Phillies for as long as possible, and hope for one of the other teams to take them out, which would seem to leave either the Dodgers or the Rockies. Regardless, there are a couple of things about the team that worry me as they move forward.

First, the righthanded relief pitching, because they don't have any I feel confident in. Franklin's regressing to his career norms. McClellan walks a batter every other innings, and doesn't strike out nearly enough to make up for that. Motte has only one reliable pitch, and yeah, it's a really nice fastball, but eventually, good major league hitters (like the one faced in the postseason) are going to time that fastball and send it flying. Brad Thompson's a mop-up duty pitcher. Mitch Boggs' control is too shaky. Supposedly, Smoltz will wind up in the 'pen in the playoffs (assuming Lohse can demonstrate sufficient competence to stick as the #4 starter), but I'm concerned about betting the farm on him, what with the age, and various repairs he's had on that arm over the years.

Then there's the streaky offense. Certainly the additions of Holliday, Lugo and DeRosa have helped. The upgrade from the Duncan/Ankiel debacle to Holliday is massive, and unlike Schumaker, Lugo can hit lefties a little, and DeRosa, well, he's better than Joe Thurston at least. Still, the lineup's not exactly fearsome. Amongst starters, they have one phenomenal hitter (Albert Pujols), one very good/great hitter (Holliday, cooling off from his torrid start), two slightly better than average hitters (Schumaker, Ludwick), and everyone else (DeRosa, Ryan, Rasmus, Molina) is slightly below average. They don't draw many walks, evidenced by their being 9th in OBP even though they're 5th in batting average. They don't have much speed, and power is restricted to a few hitters: Pujols, Holliday, maybe Ludwick, plus Rasmus and DeRosa if the last two can make contact.

Even with all the additions, the Cards have been shutout 5 times in the 55 games since Holliday arrived (they were only shutout 5 times in the first 98 games). They've scored one run twice in that span (and actually won one of those games). They've scored only two runs 6 times (and managed to win half of those). So even with an improved lineup, they've been held to fewer than 3 runs about every five games. For the record, they're 8-5 in that span when they score just 3 runs. So in 55 games, that's 26 where they couldn't plate four runs. Yes, during that time they've played two series against the Dodgers, they've played the Phillies, Braves, and Marlins, and those teams are all at least winning clubs. But they've also played plenty of games against poor teams like their NL Central rivals, and even those squads have been able to shut them down occasionally. I worry that the offense is too sporadic, and it's going to place too much pressure on the pitchers to be perfect.

But maybe the offense will go on an extended scoring binge once the playoffs start. Or maybe the starting pitching will be perfect, or nearly so. That'd be nice.

John Smoltz? Eh, Why Not

2009-08-20T12:45:00.003-12:00

So now the Cardinals went and signed John Smoltz, and they're even going to put him in the rotation, rather than in the bullpen. I suppose financially there's no real risk, and the team seems to have a sufficient lead to hold onto the division, and even if Smoltz bombs in his starts, the front of the rotation (Carpenter, Wainwright, Pineiro) ought to be able to keep the team from going into any extended losing streaks.

Of course, Smoltz has been really lousy this year. The upshots are a) his lousiness only covers 40 innings, so maybe it's just a small sample size and he'll straighten things out, and b) he was in the American League East, facing much tougher offensive opposition than he will now. His first three starts for the Cardinals are against the Padres, Nationals, and Pirates. Two of those teams are in the bottom 4 in runs per game in the NL, so about the only way Smoltz could have it easier was if he faced San Francisco. Or the Reds.

Let's see, other positives. Smoltz has been pretty solid against right handed hitters (.649 OPS), though that's only 85 PAs. Unfortunately, lefties are killing him (1.248 OPS), though that's only 101 PAs. So in one case I have to hope the small sample means something, and with the other I have to hope it doesn't.

One positive for Smoltz is that the bar he has to hurdle as the #5 starter is pretty damn low.

Todd Wellenmeyer made 20 starts, totaling 110 innings (5.5 innings/start), surrendered 71 earned runs (5.81 ERA), 47 walks, and only 71 Ks.

Brad Thompson made 8 starts, totaling 43 innings (5.375 innings/start), surrendered 28 earned runs (5.86 ERA), walked 15, struck out 16.

Mitch Boggs made 7 starts, totaling 35.1 innings (5.047 innings/start), surrendered 18 earned runs (4.58 ERA), walked 22, K'd 31.

So all Smoltz has to do is be less terrible than those three, and he's doing fine. And in theory, I believe the Cardinals plan on making him a setup guy if/when the playoffs roll around, and so this will serve more to help him get in sync, and maybe help him figure out how to retire hitters from either side of the plate. Ultimately, the Cardinals can probably afford to give him a few starts now if it helps convince him to shore up their bullpen later. If they can make that happen.

Team-Building Exercise, Take 2

2009-08-14T07:36:00.004-12:00

Back in April and May I did that 4-post series where I tried to compile a top-notch St. Louis Cardinals team while taking one player from each season. As I was going through it, I started to get the impression I probably could have put a better group together, so I fiddled around with it a bit over the summer and came up with this second group. So I'm going to compare them more or less side-by-side, using WARP3 as a comparative stat. As I understand it, WARP3 is adjusted so you can compare players from different eras, stadiums, leagues, etc.

Rotation:

Version 1 - John Tudor (1985 - 8), Chris Carpenter (2005 - 6.6), Bob Tewksbury (1992 - 5.7), Darryl Kile (2001 - 5.2), Joe Magrane (1989 - 4.8) = 30.3 WAR

Version 2 - Tudor (1985 - 8), Chris Carpenter (2005 - 6.6), Bob Tewksbury (1992 - 5.7), Darryl Kile (2001 - 5.2), Matt Morris (1997 - 4.8) = 30.3 WAR

Comments - It's a draw, but I felt pretty good about the rotation, so I didn't see much reason to screw around with it.

Bullpen:

Version 1 -Rickey Horton (1986 - 3.5), Ken Dayley (1990 - 1.5), Mike Perez (1993 - 3), Rob Murphy (1994 - 2), Tom Henke (1995 - 6.3), Rich Croushore (1999 - ?), Dave Veres (2002 - 1.4) = 17.7

Version 2 - Horton (1986 - 3.5), Dayley (1987 - 1.7), Perez (1993 - 3), Henke (1995 - 6.3), Croushore (1999 - ?), Veres (2002 - 1.4) = 15.9

Comments - Cost myself 1.8 wins, but that's mostly because I cut the bullpen down to 6 guys instead of 7, which let me add a sixth player to the bench. Yeah, I still don't know how much Croushore would be worth, but since he's on both teams, it doesn't really matter. Did get a slightly better version of Ken Dayley, so on average, each reliever is worth slightly more than they were in the first go-round.

Bench:

Version 1 - Jose Oquendo (1988 - 2.9), Eduardo Perez (2000 - 0.5), Yadier Molina (2004 - 0.9), Ryan Ludwick (2007 - 1.6), Brian Barton (2008 - 0.8) = 6.7

Version 2 - Rex Hudler (1990 - 1.9), Gerald Perry (1994 - 1.3), Tom Lampkin (1998 - 0.4), Perez (2003 - 1.3), Scott Spiezio (2006 - 2.6), Barton (2008 - 0.8) = 8.3

Comments - Lots of changes here, which reflect a change in my strategy. Namely, get the best seasons you can for your starters (while making allowances for my biases), and fill in the bench with the best you can find from what's left. At any rate, I gained 1.6 wins. The average bench guy on Version 2 is worth 1.38 WARs, while on Version 1 it was 1.34. So it's not a big difference, and it doesn't even make up for what I lost in the 'pen, but it'll show dividends in the starting lineup.

Starting Lineup:

Version 1 - Tom Pagnozzi (1991 - 4.8), Albert Pujols (2006 - 9.3), Delino DeShields (1997 - 3.3), Scott Rolen (2003 - 8.5), Ozzie Smith (1987 - 8), Ron Gant (1996 - 3.8), Willie McGee (1984 - 4.3), Brian Jordan (1998 - 4.7) = 46.7

Version 2 - Tony Pena (1988 - 4.7), Albert Pujols (2007 - 11.5), Jose Oquendo (1989 - 6.2), Scott Rolen (2004 - 11.6), Ozzie Smith (1991 - 8.5), Ray Lankford (2000 - 2), Willie McGee (1984 - 4.3) Brian Jordan (1996 - 5.7) = 54.5

Comments - There's the payoff. I ended up a little weaker at left field, but I picked up at least 2 wins at first, second, and third base, and another win in right field.

All told, Version 1 was worth 101.4 WAR, and Version 2, 109, so if I was trying to build a better team, mission accomplished. I'm sure it's not the best team possible. That would probably require '98-'99 McGwire at first, '02-'03 Albert in LF, '08 Ludwick in RF, '00-'04 Edmonds (maybe '92-'98 Lankford) in CF, and possibly '03 Renteria at SS, but this is my team, so none of those things are terribly likely to happen.

A Melancholy Post

2009-07-28T14:09:00.003-12:00

My father called me today to let me know that one of his colleagues at the high school, Mr. Morris, had passed away suddenly.

Though it was shocking, and certainly bad news, I can't say I was deeply saddened. Even though Mr. Morris was one of my favorite teachers in high school, I hadn't thought much about him in the last several years. I had seen him a few times since graduation, because I would visit the high school to say hello to my dad, or during the summer, to help Dad inventory textbooks and get them stored safely beyond the reach of the summer school kids. I'd see Mr. Morris, we'd say hello to each other, he might ask what I was up to, I'd do the same, and that was it. Still, his passing has had me thinking about a few things.

My own mortality for one, though I find myself thinking about that more all the time. usually though it's because I'm getting older, and I still haven't locked down a permanent job in my field, and so I feel like a bum. Now I'm thinking about how the way I've lived my life over the years may be starting to add up, and what could be going on inside. There's also my dad to consider. He's older than Mr. Morris, and Mr. Morris passed away of a heart attack, so it makes me worry for my dad. He's had health issues in the past, though they've mostly been back-related, but the family does have history of circulatory issues. My grandfather died of a stroke, I believe, or a heart attack, and my uncle had two aneurysms, the second having killed him. I think my father's taken better care of himself than those two, certainly smoked and drank less, but the concern is still there for me.

The other thing I've been trying to do is remember some good memories with Mr. Morris. I remember than in 10th grade, he was a student teacher in my biology class, and taught the organismal and ecological biology sections of the class. I know I considered him a godsend compared to the regular teacher, who could be friendly before class, but was very unpleasant once the bell rang. His more pleasant demeanor, combined with his teaching parts of biology I was actual interested in, is probably what kept me from losing interest in biology.

The next year he was a full-fledged teacher, and he even had his own class, Astronomy/Earth Processes, and I was part of his first class. It was the only science class I took in high school I actually enjoyed. Mr. Morris didn't try and be the cool teacher, but he wasn't a hardass when it wasn't required. He seemed to know how to strike that balance between being understanding when it was called for, and not putting up with malarkey when people screwing around.

You could tell he was still learning, though. The class was supposed to be split evenly between Astronomy and Earth Processes, but we didn't wrap up astronomy until late in the 3rd quarter, at the earliest. Also, since he was teaching the astronomy section in the school's planetarium, he wanted to take advantage of the resource. So the big project was to work in pairs and create a presentation which would tell a myth surrounding some constellations, but also describe some astronomical features (so my partner Gavin and I covered Scorpio and Orion, and nebulae and globular clusters, since those were present in the two constellations). You had to decide on the topics, seek out the slides that would go in the projector, and program the computer so that the slides would appear in the proper order, and for the proper amount of time. I know ours was a struggle because Gavin was MIA for weeks at a time, and it took me a long time to figure out how to set up the program (I had always thought Gavin was really sick, but in talking to him during a chance meeting years later, he told me he had just been skipping school and getting drunk. Huh.)

The problem was (in addition to probably giving us too much time, so students tended to dick around and chat, waiting until the last minute), Morris let the students grade each other, in addition to grading them himself. As far as I know, all the students gave each other "A"s. It was probably done at least partially so the we'd have to pay attention during the shows, but it wasn't really effective for helping to evaluate the presentations. Still, he was learning, and the desire was there, and I looked forward to that class more than any other I had that year. Maybe more than any class I had any year of high school.

Betting It All On This Season

2009-07-24T09:02:00.003-12:00

Remember how yesterday I said I'd take advantage of the trade for Lugo to shift Schumaker back to LF? Well, scratch that I guess, now that the Cardinals have traded three prospects of varying quality for Matt Holliday, plus $1.5 million in cash. I read that Holliday is still owed $6 million for the remainder of the season, so I guess that means the Cardinals will pay him $4.5 mil.

Before we advance, I have to admit a bias. I'm of the opinion that no team should ever trade with Billy Beane. A lot of that is the way the Mulder for Haren/Daric Barton/Kiko Calero trade turned out, what with Haren becoming one of the best pitchers in the league, while Mulder's shoulder was busy disintegrating. Even so, it seemed like for a while there, any team that traded with Beane got the short end of the stick. The player they wanted either broke down or wasn't as good as they appeared, while Beane seemed to always pick players who flourished in Oakland. I'm sure that's a gross oversimplification, but it's how I feel, and so on that basis alone, I wouldn't have made this deal, simply because I wouldn't be able to shake the feeling Billy Beane was pulling the wool over my eyes.

So what to make of the trade? Well, it seems to be a sign of the Cards making a clear declaration that they want to win this year. Between this and the DeRosa and Lugo trades, they Cardinals have surrendered 7 players (two of which are yet to be determined), for three veterans, two of which (DeRosa and Holliday) are free agents after the season. Holliday seems especially unlikely to resign, considering he's a Boras client, who will surely try to start a bidding war for Holliday, and it's unlikely the Cardinals would win that bidding war, and I think he'll either land with a team with a large payroll, or a bad team with a small payroll trying to make that one big signing that shows their fans how hard they're trying. I don't think the Cardinals fit either description, so I think Holliday's stay in St. Louis will be about two months. Three, if they make it to the World Series.

What of Holliday the player? He seems to be strictly a leftfielder, which is fine, that's what the Cardinals need. Even though his numbers this year are down from his production during his Colorado years, they're still easily superior to the Duncan/Ankiel combo the team had been trotting out there. Essentially, the team seems to have have added another Ryan Ludwick to the lineup. Maybe a little better offensively, but with less defensive versatility, though Holliday is apparently quite a good leftfielder, which is nice. While his years in the National league always showed a significant home/road split, with Holliday unsurprisingly hitting better at Coors Field, he did improve his road OPS every year of his stint there, from .654 in 2004, up to .892 in 2008. So he's not wholly a product of the Coors Effect, he really is a good, sometimes very good hitter. The Cardinals' lineup can certainly use more of those.

So figure Holliday in LF, with Ankiel as the 4th outfielder (hopefully LaRussa won't do something stupid like start playing Ankiel ahead of Rasmus), and Lugo as a utility infielder, who maybe starts at SS against LHP, with Ryan playing 2B and Schumaker sitting out. Everyone else remains in the positions I described yesterday.

Of course, we still have to consider what StL gave up. Petersen seemed to be a fringe outfielder, maybe a 4th outfielder, though he was demonstrating some ability to get on-base, but the farm system does not seem to have shortage of backup outfield types (it's finding starters that seems to be the trick). Mortensen projects to a mid-to-back of the rotation guy, at best, the sort of groundball reliant pitcher LaRussa and Duncan are so fond of. Not hugely important, but if he could have reached that potential, a cheap #3 starter is useful, if for no other reason that he frees up money to sign a more expensive front of the rotation guy.

Then there's Brett Wallace. He hasn't exactly lit it up at AAA this year, but he's still only 22 (that's young for a prospective 3rd baseman, right?), and he's shown some power and some ability to draw walks (though it seems to have declined as he's moved up the system, but it's still there a little). The major concern is whether he can actually play third, and the jury is out on that score. There are worries that he's kind of fat, but that may be something more intensive weight training in the off-season could alleviate. If he could man third for years to come, this is probably a very bad trade, since 3rd is going to be a point of concern for the Cards in the future. Glaus is a free agent at the end of the season, and given his injury history I'm not chomping at the bit to bring him back (certainly not for anything near the $12 mil head made this year). I'm not enamored with the idea of DeRosa being resigned as the starting 3B either. Super-utility guy, like an Oquendo with (much) more power? Sure, but not as a starting 3B.

The upside is the Cards have two other potential options in the minors, David Freese and Allan Craig. Freese has been hurt most of the season, so the jury is out on him as well, and Craig, who has hit roughly a little better at AAA than Wallace (though Craig is two years older), has spent more time at 1B and LF than 3B. Whether that was so the organization could see if Wallace could hack it there, or is some indictment of Craig's defense, I don't know.

Ultimately, it's probably not a bad trade for the A's. They can surely get some use out of at least one of the three players they received, and I'd imagine they were less likely to resign Holliday than I imagine the Cardinals to be. As for the Cardinals, this is one of those clasic "mortgaging the future" trades, so the Cardinals better make sure it's worth it. Now for me, I can tolerate watching a losing team for a few years*, but it helps if it's an interesting team, say one with a lot of young guys trying to figure things out, but showing glimpses of the future**. Watching a bunch of old, overpaid guys wither away in front of my eyes, is not nearly as easy to handle***. If I'm going to sit through that, I need something pleasant to hold onto as a reminder it's worth it. With the 2007 Cardinals, there was the memory of the '06 World Series. So basically, what I'm saying is, if the Cardinals don't win the Series this year, I'll consider the trade a failure****.

* Arizona Cardinals fan remember? I've developed a bit of a resistance to endless losing. Not I said only a bit of resistance. It still isn't a pleasant experience.

** Kind of what the early 90s Cardinals were.

*** That's more similar to the 2007 Cardinals, though it was a little better later in the year when guys like Ludwick and Ryan started getting opportunities. They weren't kids, but they were pretty new to the majors, and fighting for jobs, so it helped.

**** Caveat: If they buck my expectations and retain Holliday, then win a World Series in subsequent years, the trade will also be OK.

Addition By Subtraction, I'd Say

2009-07-23T05:16:00.003-12:00

The Cardinals make another move, trading Chris Duncan (and a Player To Be Named Later) to Boston for Julio Lugo. Even better, the Red Sox agreed to pay pretty much all of the $13 million Lugo makes this year and the next.

Like the title suggests, I'm inclined to think this improves the Cardinals simply by removing Duncan from the equation. For some reason, LaRussa insisted on playing Duncan nearly every day, even though, at the time of the trade, Chris was in a 1 for 31 slump, with 16 strikeouts over that stretch. Yet, Tony eagerly talks about how it makes him want to vomit how much the fans dump on Duncan. Even better, in that same interview, while explaining why he pinch-hit Duncan for Brendan Ryan, LaRussa turned around and dissed Ryan, describing his at-bats in the game up to then as 'futile'. No Tony, that line I mentioned of Duncan's up above, the 1-for-31, that's futile. Actually, it's beyond futile, it's hopelessly, dumbfoundingly inept.

Here's something else:

Chris Duncan's stat line this season, in 304 PAs: .227/.329/.358 (that's an OPS of .687).
Brendan Ryan's stat line, in 234 PAs: .278/.313/.370 (an OPS of .683). Yep, Duncan was certainly a vast improvement on Ryan in that situation.

And Duncan's stats are inflated by the .934 OPS he had in April, since then, he's been terrible, a worse hitter than Ryan across the board. The one and only thing Duncan still does well is draw walks, which is staggering because I can't figure how pitchers can be afraid of him. He can't make contact, and on the rare occasions he does, he doesn't have any power. He can't hurt you. Furthermore, he's a below-average leftfielder, while Brendan Ryan has been one of the best shortstops in the league this year (defensively). One can make arguments for why Ryan should play, while about the only one you could make for Duncan is there are no better options, and I think the Cardinals could find someone in AAA who can match Duncan's "production".

So, this kind of stuff from LaRussa just lends credence to the people who claim Duncan owes his career to nepotism, namely that LaRussa plays him because his dad is Tony's pitching coach. Certainly, Duncan hasn't done anything the last two years to validate receiving this much playing time. He's never hit lefties worth a damn, and now he can't even hit righties, he's no defensive whiz, so what good is he?

So that's what the Cardinals gave up (ignoring the currently unknown PTBNL). So what did they receive? Well, Lugo's a shortstop, but not a very good one, not defensively anyway. It seems as though, he could be described as marginally below average, at best. However, Lugo does seem to be a better hitter than Ryan. Going back to 2004 his on-base percentages have been .338, .362, .341 (played for both Tampa and L.A. that year), .294 (first year in Boston, not sure what happened there), .355, and .352 this year, albeit in only 123 PAs. His career average is .271 (.268 and .284 the last two seasons), so he shows a greater ability to draw walks than Ryan, which is certainly useful, as the Cardinals have distinct lack of good OBP guys in the lineup. He doesn't seem to hit for much more power than Ryan, but hopefully between Albert, Ludwick, DeRosa, and Rasmus (and maybe Ankiel, or Glaus, fingers crossed) they'd have enough power to score some runs, provided some more people can get on base.

That being said, I'd like Ryan to remain the starting SS. I know LaRussa's said that Lugo will be a utility guy until he gets a feel for him, but Tony's rarely seemed high on Ryan, so I'm worried it won't take much in terms of a slump by Ryan, or a surge by Lugo, to switch those roles. I think given the Cardinals's pitchers tendency towards groundballs, you'd want the best infield defense you could muster. Problem being, I'm not sure how good Lugo would be at 2B, as he hasn't played any significant innings there in years (you have to go back to his Houston days, and the numbers aren't pretty). So maybe the best overall would be Lugo at SS and Ryan at 2B. I would definitely take this opportunity to make Schumaker the everyday LF again, seeing as he'll be an offensive and defensive upgrade over Duncan (and Ankiel, for that matter). Use DeRosa at 3B, Albert at 1B, Yadi a C, Rasmus in CF, and Ludwick in RF, and there you go.

On the whole, I think this trade works for the Cardinals, at least in the short term. They get a fellow with a decent OBP and the ability to play middle infield, and they got rid of a major dead weight in their lineup. The possible downside is if this has soured LaRussa and Dave Duncan on working with the organization, leading to their departure this offseason, and whether that's a downside really depends on a) how high your opinion was of them, and b) who the Cardinals would replace them with, and how those folks fared.