Cards Sign Juan Encarnacion

[imb]

Cardinal infighting on a Cub board, what is the world coming to

[K-Town]

I have three things to say and three things only (4 if you count the previous statement).

 

1 - Juan Encarnacion is not very good. It was, in my eyes, a bad signing. As bad of a signing as JJ for the Cubs.

 

2 - Junior Spivey is not as good as Castillo. His career year was better than what Castillo can do, but I have no reason to believe he'll repeat it ever again. I'd love it if he did.

 

3 - I am 99.9% sure PieOnMyHands is K-Town.

 

Interesting, because I was just reading this thread, and thinking "wow.........PieOnMyHands makes a strong case..... probably even stronger than I could....... I really like the way this guy thinks!".

 

PieOnMyHands...... I've never been accused of being a "troll" here...... I just tend to be somewhat argumentative and resilient in what I believe.

 

For the record, Pie and I are NOT the same poster. Today is the first time I've seen him post.

[K-Town]

Spivey is INCONSISTENT. His career OPS is .790, but how many seasons did he have where his OPS was within .005 or better than that? One. One good season out of 5. Castillo's career OPS is .726, and how many seasons was he within .005 of that , or better? Six, and all but one season since he became a regular. Subtract Spivey's best year, and his totals go in the crapper. Subtract Castillo's, and you barely notice.

 

So his career OPS is below 2B average, but that's OK 'cause he does it consistently?

 

As for Lee, his career OPS is .864. His OPS' since he became a regular? .875, .820, .872, .860, .887 and 1.080.

 

Your comparisons are skewed and inapplicable. Comparing Spivey to Castillo is just silly.

 

So what you're telling me is that besides last year's anamoly (since good players stay very consistent to their "normal" self), Derrek Lee is only a slightly above-average offensive 1st baseman?

 

Or does the Lee season count, but the Spivey season not?

 

Let me quote myself in this topic:

 

In 2004, his OPS was .780. Higher than the .752 OPS that NL 2nd basemen averaged in 2005.

In 2003, his OPS was .759. Higher than the .752 OPS that NL 2nd basemen averaged in 2005.

In 2002, his OPS was .865. Higher than the .752 OPS that NL 2nd basemen averaged in 2005.

In 2001, his OPS was .777. Higher than the .752 OPS that NL 2nd basemen averaged in 2005.

 

Let's check out some signings this offseason:

- Neifi Perez (.681 career OPS) gets $2.5 million per year

- Abraham Nunez (.640 career OPS) gets $1.7 million per year

- Mark Grudzielanek (.721 career OPS) gets $4 million per year

 

Directly refute Junior Spivey signing for $1.5 million team that had a huge question mark at 2nd base, given the market and his history.

 

A big difference with Lee and Spivey has to do with their most recent performance.

 

Spivey's most recent performance is atrocious. Lee's most recent performance isn't. I think what a player did last season is more relevant than what they did in 2002.

 

But since career numbers are most important, I guess you're expecting Sosa to have a rebound year as well....or would that only happen if he signed with the Cards?

 

Geeze!

 

I'm sure it wasn't intentional, but you just made a case for the Encanacion signing being "not so bad".

 

For the record, I think that it WAS a bad signing. The other Cardinal signings and trades so far this off-season........ I'm fine with them. It's typical Jocketty (low-risk, high-reward), only a larger dose of it. I agree with an earlier poster who basically said that at least one or two of the low-dollar signings will turn to gold, and make all of the others pretty much irrelevant.

[UK1679666180]

So if obesity and pitching abillity are separate from one another, why did you bring up weight in the first place?

 

Well, they're not separate from other. Some are better equiped to handle extra weight (Wells) and some are not (Quevado/Ponson).

 

Wells would have a better pitcher throughout his career if he was overweight, but he has the talent to overcome it.

 

The same can't be said for Ponson. He's sucked the last few years for no apparent reason than not wanting to work.

 

Jocketty is not the type of GM that makes stupid moves (OK, he did sign Tino Martinez...). Ponson must have done a good acting job if he hasn't turned around his act. I'm not saying that Walt can't make bad moves, but it's extremely hard to believe they he would give Ponson $1 million if he was still the man he was in 2004 and 2005. I could be wrong. I hope I'm not, but yes... I could be wrong.

 

Ponson did get a DUI, and as a result, he entered drug rehab. He now sees a therapist once a week. He's supposedly cut down his weight. That's the latest information I've heard about it, and until I hear otherwise, the news is more good than bad.

 

Cardinal management was clearly convinced that he's content on turning it around. Otherwise, it's not likely they would take a flyer on him.

 

You know when his first DUI was? 1996'. His recent DUI problems aren't just some recnt event about a player gone astray. He's battled weight problems, drinking too much, no work ethic, and a poor mental approach his entire career. His arm was able to overcome it, but as he gets older that luxury disappears. The concept of trying to spin it into a recent problem is amusing.

 

It wasn't fine what they did to Haren, he should've been starting the entire season, STL would've rec'd more value out of Haren if they had started him the entire season.

[K-Town]

UK - It's only a million bucks, for Ponson. Also, I haven't seen the stipulations of the contract, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's a weight claus, or a stipulation that the contract is voided if he drinks. Maybe not, but it would seen like a good idea to have something like that included. Maybe the Player's Union wouldn't allow it....... I'm not sure.

 

Still seems like a pretty low risk for a guy who's only being counted on the be a 5th-starter type of guy.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

 

I'm sure it wasn't intentional, but you just made a case for the Encanacion signing being "not so bad".

 

For the record, I think that it WAS a bad signing. The other Cardinal signings and trades so far this off-season........ I'm fine with them. It's typical Jocketty (low-risk, high-reward), only a larger dose of it.

 

You're right. Recent history makes the Encarnacion signing look a little better. And I'd put a higher liklihood of Encarnacion performing near his 2005 levels than I would that Ponson or Spivey become anything useful.

 

 

I agree with an earlier poster who basically said that at least one or two of the low-dollar signings will turn to gold, and make all of the others pretty much irrelevant.

 

And it may happen tha one of these signings will turn to gold, but it's more likely they'll all be pretty crappy. It's not like it "all adds up." Each one is a crappy odds in its own right.

 

Just because I play the slots a bunch with crappy odds by playing one line doesn't mean I'll eventually jack pot if I keep throwing money in the machine.

Edited December 28, 2005 by vance_the_cubs_fan

[K-Town]

Vance - But the Cards are basically in a situation and a market where they HAVE to find the diamonds in the rough. What are their options? Basically, they've thrived on exactly that, for the last several years. It's enough to drive Cardinal fans nuts, but we inevitably end up eating our words when an Eckstein, a Womack, a Tavarez, an Al Reyes, or whomever............. ends up performing well. I'm guessing (hoping?) that a Bigbie or a Spivey will pay dividends. If it doesn't happen, then you're not out much.

 

The Encarnacion thing is an entirely different matter. The 3 years seems like a mistake to me. Not a crippling mistake on the Tino Martinez level, but a mistake, nontheless.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

 

I'm sure it wasn't intentional, but you just made a case for the Encanacion signing being "not so bad".

 

For the record, I think that it WAS a bad signing. The other Cardinal signings and trades so far this off-season........ I'm fine with them. It's typical Jocketty (low-risk, high-reward), only a larger dose of it.

 

You're right. Recent history makes the Encarnacion signing look a little better. And I'd put a higher liklihood of Encarnacion performing near his 2005 levels than I would that Ponson or Spivey become anything useful.

 

 

I agree with an earlier poster who basically said that at least one or two of the low-dollar signings will turn to gold, and make all of the others pretty much irrelevant.

 

And it may happen tha one of these signings will turn to gold, but it's more likely they'll all be pretty crappy. It's not like it "all adds up." Each one is a crappy odds in its own right.

 

Just because I play the slots a bunch with crappy odds by playing one line doesn't mean I'll eventually jack pot if I keep throwing money in the machine.

 

I don't think these are slot machine type moves, they are calculated risks based on scouting and contract size. Yeah, on the surface they look weak but given the Cards track record I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Vance - But the Cards are basically in a situation and a market where they HAVE to find the diamonds in the rough. What are their options? Basically, they've thrived on exactly that, for the last several years. It's enough to drive Cardinal fans nuts, but we inevitably end up eating our words when an Eckstein, a Womack, a Tavarez, an Al Reyes, or whomever............. ends up performing well. I'm guessing (hoping?) that a Bigbie or a Spivey will pay dividends. If it doesn't happen, then you're not out much.

 

The Encarnacion thing is an entirely different matter. The 3 years seems like a mistake to me. Not a crippling mistake on the Tino Martinez level, but a mistake, nontheless.

 

I understand being in that position, but to expect any of those options to work out is ludicrous. The fact that Womack or Tavarez did has no bearing on whether Bigbie or Spivey or Tub-o-Ponson will.

 

Back to my gambling analogy. If I go to the slots every week and after blowing 50-100 bucks, I hit a jackpot that pays...it doesn't mean that I'm going to hit that every time.

 

In fact, that becomes the gambler's fallacy. That the odds will pan out in the end. In fact, the casinos are hoping I buy into it, because sooner rather than later, I'm going to get burned.

 

The odds are that the Cardinals will have a decent pitching staff in Carpeneter, Mulder, Marquis, Suppan, and Reyes...that Ponson will bust and that outside of Pujols, Rolen, and Edmonds the offense will be average to pretty craptastic.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

Vance - But the Cards are basically in a situation and a market where they HAVE to find the diamonds in the rough. What are their options? Basically, they've thrived on exactly that, for the last several years. It's enough to drive Cardinal fans nuts, but we inevitably end up eating our words when an Eckstein, a Womack, a Tavarez, an Al Reyes, or whomever............. ends up performing well. I'm guessing (hoping?) that a Bigbie or a Spivey will pay dividends. If it doesn't happen, then you're not out much.

 

The Encarnacion thing is an entirely different matter. The 3 years seems like a mistake to me. Not a crippling mistake on the Tino Martinez level, but a mistake, nontheless.

 

I understand being in that position, but to expect any of those options to work out is ludicrous. The fact that Womack or Tavarez did has no bearing on whether Bigbie or Spivey or Tub-o-Ponson will.

 

Back to my gambling analogy. If I go to the slots every week and after blowing 50-100 bucks, I hit a jackpot that pays...it doesn't mean that I'm going to hit that every time.

 

In fact, that becomes the gambler's fallacy. That the odds will pan out in the end. In fact, the casinos are hoping I buy into it, because sooner rather than later, I'm going to get burned.

 

The odds are that the Cardinals will have a decent pitching staff in Carpeneter, Mulder, Marquis, Suppan, and Reyes...that Ponson will bust and that outside of Pujols, Rolen, and Edmonds the offense will be average to pretty craptastic.

 

I don't expect all these moves to work out however given the Walts track record I'd be willing to bet at least one of them does. Again, this isn't gambling, it's calculated risks based on scouting and cost.

[K-Town]

Vance - But the Cards are basically in a situation and a market where they HAVE to find the diamonds in the rough. What are their options? Basically, they've thrived on exactly that, for the last several years. It's enough to drive Cardinal fans nuts, but we inevitably end up eating our words when an Eckstein, a Womack, a Tavarez, an Al Reyes, or whomever............. ends up performing well. I'm guessing (hoping?) that a Bigbie or a Spivey will pay dividends. If it doesn't happen, then you're not out much.

 

The Encarnacion thing is an entirely different matter. The 3 years seems like a mistake to me. Not a crippling mistake on the Tino Martinez level, but a mistake, nontheless.

 

I understand being in that position, but to expect any of those options to work out is ludicrous. The fact that Womack or Tavarez did has no bearing on whether Bigbie or Spivey or Tub-o-Ponson will.

 

Back to my gambling analogy. If I go to the slots every week and after blowing 50-100 bucks, I hit a jackpot that pays...it doesn't mean that I'm going to hit that every time.

 

In fact, that becomes the gambler's fallacy. That the odds will pan out in the end. In fact, the casinos are hoping I buy into it, because sooner rather than later, I'm going to get burned.

 

The odds are that the Cardinals will have a decent pitching staff in Carpeneter, Mulder, Marquis, Suppan, and Reyes...that Ponson will bust and that outside of Pujols, Rolen, and Edmonds the offense will be average to pretty craptastic.

 

Slot machines are 100% random, though....... and often times you put your money in, and get NOTHING out of them. The Cards have put money in Spivey, Ponson, Bigbie, etc., and will likely get SOMETHING out of them.

 

The randomness of gambling doesn't necessarily exist in baseball transactions. Duncan may see something in Ponson that he likes (he's done well with journeymen veterans before). Spivey has some tools, and has had a moderate amount of success....... and will likely be nothing worse than an average second-baseman, for a below-average price. Bigbie costs less than a million bucks. I'll be surprised if he doesn't earn that money, at least.

 

As for the Cards' offense, they were 2nd in the NL last year. They have Rolen replacing Nunez. Spivey won't be worse than Grudz, offensively, in my opinion....... especially hitting around guys like Pujols, Edmonds, Rolen. Cardinal right-fielders had a .795 OPS last year. It's not out of the question that Encarnacion can do that. Cardinal left-fielders had an OPS of .834 last year. That feat, with some sort of Taguchi/Bigbie combination, may be a bit difficult to live up to. On the other hand, I won't be shocked if Molina continues to improve. It's hard to say. Regardless, I don't expect a MAJOR drop-off, offensively.

[UK1679666180]

UK - It's only a million bucks, for Ponson. Also, I haven't seen the stipulations of the contract, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's a weight claus, or a stipulation that the contract is voided if he drinks. Maybe not, but it would seen like a good idea to have something like that included. Maybe the Player's Union wouldn't allow it....... I'm not sure.

 

It's only a million dollars is a horrible justification for the signing. Macias made less than 1 mil. last year, can I justify Hendry making the dumb as "oh well, it's only 1mil".

 

There can't be anything like a weight clause, but they do have conduct clauses as Neagle had.

 

Hell, this money could be allocated towards Byrnes or someone useful.

[K-Town]

UK - It's only a million bucks, for Ponson. Also, I haven't seen the stipulations of the contract, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's a weight claus, or a stipulation that the contract is voided if he drinks. Maybe not, but it would seen like a good idea to have something like that included. Maybe the Player's Union wouldn't allow it....... I'm not sure.

 

It's only a million dollars is a horrible justification for the signing. Macias made less than 1 mil. last year, can I justify Hendry making the dumb as "oh well, it's only 1mil".

 

There can't be anything like a weight clause, but they do have conduct clauses as Neagle had.

 

Hell, this money could be allocated towards Byrnes or someone useful.

 

Well, Macias has ZERO upside. I'm not sure that the same can be said of Ponson. You seem convinced of it. Obviously, I hope you're wrong. We shall see.

[UK1679666180]

I have my doubts of someone who has been getting DUIs for the last 9 years as far as well battling weight problems his entire career that quickly. His body just doesn't has the ability to produce with those restrictions of having no work ethic as well as being baseball dumb. Losing 15-20 pounds isn't likely to do much. If he loses any more than that this off-season, he's probably on something that he shouldn't be, especially coming from the O's.

[K-Town]

I have my doubts of someone who has been getting DUIs for the last 9 years as far as well battling weight problems his entire career that quickly. His body just doesn't has the ability to produce with those restrictions of having no work ethic as well as being baseball dumb. Losing 15-20 pounds isn't likely to do much. If he loses any more than that this off-season, he's probably on something that he shouldn't be, especially coming from the O's.

 

Touche'! :lol:

 

What are you trying to say, UK?? :wink:

[UK1679666180]

I wasn't trying to be funny, a body can't handle massive amounts of weight loss in a short period of time. To do that, either you're starving yourself or you're using a weight-loss substance. Steve Bechler is a tragic example of this.

[K-Town]

I wasn't trying to be funny, a body can't handle massive amounts of weight loss in a short period of time. To do that, either you're starving yourself or you're using a weight-loss substance. Steve Bechler is a tragic example of this.

 

I was just wondering about the "O's" reference.

[wolf stansson]

I have three things to say and three things only (4 if you count the previous statement).

 

1 - Juan Encarnacion is not very good. It was, in my eyes, a bad signing. As bad of a signing as JJ for the Cubs.

 

2 - Junior Spivey is not as good as Castillo. His career year was better than what Castillo can do, but I have no reason to believe he'll repeat it ever again. I'd love it if he did.

 

3 - I am 99.9% sure PieOnMyHands is K-Town.

 

Interesting, because I was just reading this thread, and thinking "wow.........PieOnMyHands makes a strong case..... probably even stronger than I could....... I really like the way this guy thinks!".

 

PieOnMyHands...... I've never been accused of being a "troll" here...... I just tend to be somewhat argumentative and resilient in what I believe.

 

For the record, Pie and I are NOT the same poster. Today is the first time I've seen him post.

I like how you put that K. "Resilient." That about sums it up, yeah.

 

I don't think K-Town is a troll. He argues stuff he believes, not just arguing for the sake of it. I just figured that since you appeared at roughly the same time he stopped posting as much it would make sense for him to get a new identity. He alienated himself a little bit because he does what you do: Says something disagreeable then turns a thread into an endless back and forth between him and a dozen or so detractors.

[K-Town]

I have three things to say and three things only (4 if you count the previous statement).

 

1 - Juan Encarnacion is not very good. It was, in my eyes, a bad signing. As bad of a signing as JJ for the Cubs.

 

2 - Junior Spivey is not as good as Castillo. His career year was better than what Castillo can do, but I have no reason to believe he'll repeat it ever again. I'd love it if he did.

 

3 - I am 99.9% sure PieOnMyHands is K-Town.

 

Interesting, because I was just reading this thread, and thinking "wow.........PieOnMyHands makes a strong case..... probably even stronger than I could....... I really like the way this guy thinks!".

 

PieOnMyHands...... I've never been accused of being a "troll" here...... I just tend to be somewhat argumentative and resilient in what I believe.

 

For the record, Pie and I are NOT the same poster. Today is the first time I've seen him post.

I like how you put that K. "Resilient." That about sums it up, yeah.

 

I don't think K-Town is a troll. He argues stuff he believes, not just arguing for the sake of it. I just figured that since you appeared at roughly the same time he stopped posting as much it would make sense for him to get a new identity. He alienated himself a little bit because he does what you do: Says something disagreeable then turns a thread into an endless back and forth between him and a dozen or so detractors.

 

Well, honestly............ when you're a Cardinal fan, debating a Cardinal point on this board, you're going to be a minority, and will likely have AT LEAST a dozen detractors. That doesn't mean that he's wrong, and the rest are right. It probably just means that he's preaching to the wrong congregation.

[Laura]

3 - I am 99.9% sure PieOnMyHands is K-Town.

 

No indication of that being the case.

[PieOnMyHands]

I understand being in that position, but to expect any of those options to work out is ludicrous. The fact that Womack or Tavarez did has no bearing on whether Bigbie or Spivey or Tub-o-Ponson will.

 

Back to my gambling analogy. If I go to the slots every week and after blowing 50-100 bucks, I hit a jackpot that pays...it doesn't mean that I'm going to hit that every time.

 

In fact, that becomes the gambler's fallacy. That the odds will pan out in the end. In fact, the casinos are hoping I buy into it, because sooner rather than later, I'm going to get burned.

 

No, because MLB free agency is not a giant slot machine. That's not the way it works. It's not about "odds" or "luck," it's about doing your research and taking risks you feel have a potential pay-off.

 

If I put my money in a slot machine, there is a designated set of chances I have to win. It's not the same for baseball. By your analogy, Junior Spivey and Ricky Henderson both have equal potential to have success in the league. A slot machine does not take past history into consideration. It does not take somebody's life into consideration. It does not take a person's phsyical tools into consideration.

 

Have you noticed something else about these signings? They're almost always one-year deals. If you sign a cheap contract, you want to play harder than you ever have before so that you can cash in.

 

 

It's only a million dollars is a horrible justification for the signing. Macias made less than 1 mil. last year, can I justify Hendry making the dumb as "oh well, it's only 1mil".

 

His highest OPS in a single season is .723. What "upside" does he have? He strikes out far more often than he walks, he never has had a remotely decent season, he's 33 and isn't entering his prime, or anything... You could make a case for him being a platoon player, because he hit lefties better last year, but based on his 3-year splits -- .653 OPS vs. lefties, .616 OPS vs. righties -- last year seemed more like an anomaly than anything else.

 

 

Hell, this money could be allocated towards Byrnes or someone useful.

 

Well... that's true. However, you have to factor in a number of things:

- Does Byrnes want to start? He got a contract from Arizona, $1 year, $2.2 million, I think. But did they tell him he'd be starting? I can assure you, if he came here, he would play only in a platoon...

- Do we have room? After Encarnacion (you could argue we shoulda got Encarnacion instead of Byrnes...), we have how many outfielders, now? Taguchi, Edmonds, J-Rod, Bigbie, Encarnacion... I really can't see us adding another outfielder. La Russa has been notorious, in recent years, for playing utility infielders in the outfield, so if needed, someone like Luna would play out there. The outfield is full, now.

 

 

I have my doubts of someone who has been getting DUIs for the last 9 years as far as well battling weight problems his entire career that quickly. His body just doesn't has the ability to produce with those restrictions of having no work ethic as well as being baseball dumb. Losing 15-20 pounds isn't likely to do much. If he loses any more than that this off-season, he's probably on something that he shouldn't be, especially coming from the O's.

 

See, I really get frustrated when you argue this point.

 

Hypothetical situation: Sidney Ponson, Walt Jocketty and Tony La Russa have a meeting, about Ponson potentially becoming a Card. You make it sound like Ponson drove there drunk, and then crashed his car into the restaurant they were meeting in; Ponson then required a friend to push him in on a wheelchair, due to his morbid obesity leaving him all-but-immobile. Ponson, penny-less at the time, passes on dinner and instead eats an entire box of Krispy Kreme doughnuts which were expired and were obtained from a random dumpster down the street from the cardbox box he lives in.

 

If Ponson is such a slob, why would they have signed him? Clearly, he convinced them that he has turned his life around. And yeah, you're probably going to counter-argue that he's just throwing up a smokescreen to get another contract... and maybe that's possible? But is Jocketty dumb enough to fall for that, if it were the case? If a fat Sidney Ponson who's battling alcohol problems can post a better ERA than Eric Milton last year, what does that say?

 

 

This situation isn't unprecedented, either:

http://stlcardinals.scout.com/2/481241.html

 

 

The following was a quote from the Post-Dispatch:

"Absolutely," Jocketty said when I asked if the Cardinals considered Little's history when contemplating the hiring of Ponson. "We did a thorough background check, and we feel confident that Sidney has worked very hard to overcome (his problems). Everyone deserves a second chance, and we are here to provide it. That said, we will watch it and stay on top of it. Obviously we're very aware that this is a very sensitive issue."

 

Ponson seems to be making an earnest effort to reverse his life. He stopped drinking. He voluntarily submitted to an alcohol-treatment program and still goes for therapy once a week. Overweight in Baltimore, he's shed pounds this winter. During a conference call Wednesday, Ponson was straightforward about his past and seemed sincere when he discussed his regrets over causing his mother so much pain.

 

And bear in mind this is coming from a Post-Dispatch article entitled, "Signing Ponson seems desperate." Again, take the quotes for what they're worth. Obviously Jocketty isn't going to say, "Yeah, it's a really risky signing. We're only signing him based on upside, there's a good chance he's just going to suck." But it bothers me that you seem to portray St. Louis management as uneducated and oblivious to his past problems...

 

 

Oh, and again... signings are all relative to the market!

 

Scott Elarton is going to make $4 million a year through 2007. His career ERA is 5.10. His best season's ERA is 3.48, which came in limited duty in 1999. His next-best season since then was in 2004, when he had a 4.53 ERA.

 

Jason Johnson also will make $4 million this year. His career ERA is 4.88. His best season's ERA was 4.09, in 2001.

 

Brett Tomko is making $4+ million over the next two years. Career ERA of 4.52. His best season's ERA was eight years ago, when he posted an ERA of 3.43 in 126 IP. Since then, his lowest ERA was 4.04.

 

How much will Scott Elarton make if he sucks? $4 million. How much will Jason Johnson make if he sucks? $4 million. How much will Brett Tomko make if he sucks? $4+ million. How does Ponson compare to these? He's -much- cheaper, any way you spin it. $1 million if he sucks. If Ponson reaches his potential and pitches like he did in 2002 and 2003, he'll make $2.5 million.

 

I don't mind Ponson for a reason: there's a precedent for him being very good (a 3.75 ERA is very good, compared to the 4.29 league average ERA). If the Sidney Ponson signing was as horrible as you make it sound, then how do you classify the Jason Johnson signing? The Scott Elarton one? How 'bout Brett Tomko's contract?

 

 

I'm sure it wasn't intentional, but you just made a case for the Encanacion signing being "not so bad".

 

For the record, I think that it WAS a bad signing. The other Cardinal signings and trades so far this off-season........ I'm fine with them. It's typical Jocketty (low-risk, high-reward), only a larger dose of it. I agree with an earlier poster who basically said that at least one or two of the low-dollar signings will turn to gold, and make all of the others pretty much irrelevant.

 

Ah, very good point. I'm not just agreeing with you 'cause we're the same person, either. [Edit: the last statement was expected to be taken with a bucket of salt.]

 

I think you saw a mistake in the Encarnacion signing.... we gave him three years based on one previously good season. You know how that reminds me of? Mr. AJ Burnett. Fortunately, this is three years... not five. But still, it's the same premise.

 

His OPS was nearly 100 points higher in 2005 than it was in 04; his 2003 was right on par with his career average. His .756 career OPS is not worth $5 million a year..

[UK1679666180]

I'll end my end of the discussion on this note, this is just wasting our time.

 

If Ponson is such a slob, why would they have signed him? Clearly, he convinced them that he has turned his life around. And yeah, you're probably going to counter-argue that he's just throwing up a smokescreen to get another contract... and maybe that's possible? But is Jocketty dumb enough to fall for that, if it were the case? If a fat Sidney Ponson who's battling alcohol problems can post a better ERA than Eric Milton last year, what does that say?

 

They signed him b/c hoping for a miracle, hoping that he develops a work ethic that being described as anything but lazy. He has an arm, hasn't been able to use it recently, b/c he prefers sitting a table or a bar.

 

Milton was terrible, he could do better than me as well, what does that say? It means that I would suck on the mound.

 

 

Well... that's true. However, you have to factor in a number of things:

- Does Byrnes want to start? He got a contract from Arizona, $1 year, $2.2 million, I think. But did they tell him he'd be starting? I can assure you, if he came here, he would play only in a platoon...

 

He's going to platoon in AZ. They have Green, Gonzalez,a nd one of the best OF prospects out there, he'll be a platoon/4th OF'er. He'd also be the 3rd best option out there. Byrnes is better than Taguchi, Rodriguez, and Bigbie.

 

Hypothetical situation: Sidney Ponson, Walt Jocketty and Tony La Russa have a meeting, about Ponson potentially becoming a Card. You make it sound like Ponson drove there drunk, and then crashed his car into the restaurant they were meeting in; Ponson then required a friend to push him in on a wheelchair, due to his morbid obesity leaving him all-but-immobile. Ponson, penny-less at the time, passes on dinner and instead eats an entire box of Krispy Kreme doughnuts which were expired and were obtained from a random dumpster down the street from the cardbox box he lives in.

 

I said he has been fat, lazy, drinks too much, and dumb.

 

Let's see...

 

He's trying to lose weight this off-season, been constantly known for having a poor work ethic and he's gone into rehab. Where am I wrong? Sorry, I don't coddle him.

 

Also, quit trying to shade the stats to favor your argument. Mentioning career numbers and avoiding what matters most. Why not mention the last two years? Listing the career ERAs of Johnson, Tomko, Elarton, what did they do during the last years and what did Ponson do? What are the criminal records like? What are their work ethics like?

 

His highest OPS in a single season is .723. What "upside" does he have? He strikes out far more often than he walks, he never has had a remotely decent season, he's 33 and isn't entering his prime, or anything... You could make a case for him being a platoon player, because he hit lefties better last year, but based on his 3-year splits -- .653 OPS vs. lefties, .616 OPS vs. righties -- last year seemed more like an anomaly than anything else.

 

You missed my point, he justified it solely based on dollar amount, which is a poor way to justify any signing.

[PieOnMyHands]

They signed him b/c hoping for a miracle, hoping that he develops a work ethic that being described as anything but lazy. He has an arm, hasn't been able to use it recently, b/c he prefers sitting a table or a bar.

 

Milton was terrible, he could do better than me as well, what does that say? It means that I would suck on the mound.

 

But it also says that Ponson will get $1 million to suck, and Milton will get $7 million to suck.

 

Yep, hoping for a miracle. That's how baseball works. Try your hand in a table of roulette and hope that you picked the right number. That's just silly to say that they're going to make a signing hoping their crossed fingers come through for them.

 

Maybe that's why Cubs fans are so surprised every year at the moves Jocketty makes? While luck may be involved, it's hardly the defining factor in the ultimate outcome of these signings.

 

 

He's going to platoon in AZ. They have Green, Gonzalez,a nd one of the best OF prospects out there, he'll be a platoon/4th OF'er. He'd also be the 3rd best option out there. Byrnes is better than Taguchi, Rodriguez, and Bigbie.

 

First of all, Byrnes would only be valuable in a platoon. A .704 OPS versus righties the last three years. It's pointless to compare him to the other guys, because he wouldn't be competing against them... he would be sharing time with them.

 

And how are you so sure they'll be keeping all of those outfielders? Rumors earlier in the season suggested that Gonzalez is possibly being shopped.

 

 

I said he has been fat, lazy, drinks too much, and dumb.

 

Let's see...

 

He's trying to lose weight this off-season, been constantly known for having a poor work ethic and he's gone into rehab. Where am I wrong? Sorry, I don't coddle him.

 

And Walt and Co. feel that he is no longer fat, no longer lazy, no longer a drunk and no longer dumb. It's as simple as that.

 

 

Also, quit trying to shade the stats to favor your argument. Mentioning career numbers and avoiding what matters most. Why not mention the last two years? Listing the career ERAs of Johnson, Tomko, Elarton, what did they do during the last years and what did Ponson do? What are the criminal records like? What are their work ethics like?

 

Jason Johnson:

2004: 5.13 ERA

2005: 4.54 ERA

 

Brett Tomko:

2004: 4.04 ERA

2005: 4.48 ERA

 

Scott Elarton:

2004: 5.90 ERA

2005: 4.61 ERA

 

 

I'm not shading the numbers. They've sucked recently, and they've sucked throughout their careers. Those are below-average pitchers getting $4 million (+) a year. They also have no precedent of being good (sans limited duty).

 

Has Ponson had sucess in multiple seasons? Yes, he has. Tomko has not. Johnson has not. Elarton has not.

Are there apparent reasons for Ponson slipping so much the last couple of years? Yes, problems with weight and alcohol, that he has since (seemingly) corrected. Any glaring issues for Johnson? As far as I know, no. Tomko? Ditto. Elarton? Same.

 

 

You missed my point, he justified it solely based on dollar amount, which is a poor way to justify any signing.

 

Then if I missed your point, you missed his:

 

Well, Macias has ZERO upside. I'm not sure that the same can be said of Ponson. You seem convinced of it. Obviously, I hope you're wrong. We shall see.

 

$1 million for a guy with a lot of upside is not a dumb risk to take. That's what he's arguing. If you say he's not, then you're just arguing semantics.