Molina out 4-6 weeks

[E.J.]

ESPN[/url]"]ST. LOUIS -- St. Louis Cardinals catcher Yadier Molina will be sidelined four to six weeks with a fractured left wrist.

 

The Cardinals placed Molina on the 15-day disabled list Wednesday and purchased the contract of catcher Brian Esposito from Triple-A Memphis. Esposito, 28, will be making his major-league debut.

 

The team's medical staff described the injury as a non-displaced fracture that will be splinted and immobilized. Molina left Tuesday's game against the Rockies in Denver in the fourth inning after being hit by a foul tip an inning earlier.

[Lockes Eye Scar]

and he had his ops+ up all the way to 84 this year. Poor guy

[Pushfrog98]

I understand that Molina is going to be the Cardinals long-term catcher, but do the cardinals not have anybody better in the minors than Esposito? I don't know how he is defensively, but I think he swings one of those yellow whiffle ball bats.

[sunnydoo]

Larussa has always put defense behind the plate over offense, as most rational people would. Steinbach in his day, was fair with the bat, but was counted on more to be solid behind the plate.

 

I think this has just filtered down throughout the Cards organization. Molina will never be a good hitter. Anything he provides will just be an extra that wasnt counted on before.

 

Old school baseball managers think the C, SS, 2b, and CF should be able to provide solid defense and range above all else. The New school from Moneyball thinks you should throw all that out the window and go for Ripken types at all positions, which is why Izturis catches so much flack around here. And then there are some of us who mix and match, playing both sides against the middle.

 

Who is to say who is right and who is wrong? Larussa won a championship last but that doesnt necessarily make the moneyball arguement less valid.

 

Two interesting philosophys both with their valid and invalid points, both struggling for overall acceptance. Makes for lively debate and good commentary.

[jersey cubs fan]

The New school from Moneyball thinks you should throw all that out the window and go for Ripken types at all positions,

 

Huh?

[sunnydoo]

Huh?

 

lol, thought you would appreciate that. :wink:

 

like shooting fish in a barrell.

[Chocolate Milk]

Probably a good thing for the Cards. It's hard to imagine anyone could be worse than Molina.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Probably a good thing for the Cards. It's hard to imagine anyone could be worse than Molina.

 

Shocking as it sounds, Molina was 4th on the Cards in OBP, and 5th in OPS.

[Chocolate Milk]

Probably a good thing for the Cards. It's hard to imagine anyone could be worse than Molina.

 

Shocking as it sounds, Molina was 4th on the Cards in OBP, and 5th in OPS.

 

That's scary.

[TruffleShuffle]

Huh?

 

lol, thought you would appreciate that. :wink:

 

like shooting fish in a barrell.

 

you're showing a fine understanding of what moneyball was all about

[sunnydoo]

you're showing a fine understanding of what moneyball was all about

 

like i said, i appreciate aspects of both philosophys. While i understand the OPs approach used by moneyball enthusiasts in looking at talent, I dont think that everyone under 750 OPs should be sent to the minor leagues and that in certain positions (from the old school) defense is more important than offensive production. Moneyball people are just trying to avoid offensive outs, and i dont think they are necessarily concerned with defensive production.

 

I think there is still something to be said for team defense but there really has been no substantial quantitative strides yet in the area. There are some stats like range factor and some others, but they appear to be flawed to some extent and based on perception in others.

 

But it is an ongoing effort and i would imagine that someone will come up with a definitive tool that can be put in historical context soon enough.

[B]

Huh?

 

lol, thought you would appreciate that. :wink:

 

like shooting fish in a barrell.

 

Sean Salisbury, is that you?

[biittner77]

you're showing a fine understanding of what moneyball was all about

 

like i said, i appreciate aspects of both philosophys. While i understand the OPs approach used by moneyball enthusiasts in looking at talent, I dont think that everyone under 750 OPs should be sent to the minor leagues and that in certain positions (from the old school) defense is more important than offensive production. .

 

Has it ever occured to you that maybe the reason teams go with defense over offense at C and SS is because its really hard to find C and SS that can hit?

 

Can you think of a really good/ great team that didn't have either a good hitting SS or an offensive catcher? The Yankees of the late 90s had Jeter and Posada, the Big Red Machine had Johnny Bench, etc.

[SouthSideRyan]

you're showing a fine understanding of what moneyball was all about

 

like i said, i appreciate aspects of both philosophys. While i understand the OPs approach used by moneyball enthusiasts in looking at talent, I dont think that everyone under 750 OPs should be sent to the minor leagues and that in certain positions (from the old school) defense is more important than offensive production. .

 

Has it ever occured to you that maybe the reason teams go with defense over offense at C and SS is because its really hard to find C and SS that can hit?

 

Can you think of a really good/ great team that didn't have either a good hitting SS or an offensive catcher? The Yankees of the late 90s had Jeter and Posada, the Big Red Machine had Johnny Bench, etc.

 

And just for an added challenge the Yanks had terrible defense at both positions.

[sunnydoo]

Has it ever occured to you that maybe the reason teams go with defense over offense at C and SS is because its really hard to find C and SS that can hit?

 

No. Think it is pretty much the 2 philosophies at work: the old school wanting strength up the middle at the 4 spots, and the new school wanting to max out OPS. Third school developing taking philosophys from both.

 

Can you think of a really good/ great team that didn't have either a good hitting SS or an offensive catcher? The Yankees of the late 90s had Jeter and Posada, the Big Red Machine had Johnny Bench, etc.

 

Easy one as i lived near there at the time. 1987 Twins- Tim Laudner was the catcher (Ops=631) and Greg Gagne at SS (Ops=740).

 

Edit for More:

1981 Dodgers: Scioscia 686 Russell 576.

1984 Cardinals: Porter 749 Smith 653.

1985 Royals: Sundberg 689 Concepcion 490.

1988 Dodgers: Scioscia 642 Griffin 512.

1989 A's: Steinbach 671 Gallego 655.

1992 Blue Jays: Borders 675 Lee 659.

2005 WhiteSux: AJidiot 728 Uribe 713.

2006 Cardinals: Molina 595 Eckstein 694.

Edited May 31, 2007 by sunnydoo

[sunnydoo]

And just for an added challenge the Yanks had terrible defense at both positions.

 

Laughable.

 

Girardi was an excellent catcher. Posada isnt that bad. And Jeter is pretty good (although not great at SS).

[TruffleShuffle]

And just for an added challenge the Yanks had terrible defense at both positions.

 

And Jeter is pretty good (although not great at SS).

 

Laughable.

 

Every defensive metric said that Jeter was consistently one of the worst SS in baseball.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

And just for an added challenge the Yanks had terrible defense at both positions.

 

And Jeter is pretty good (although not great at SS).

 

Laughable.

 

Every defensive metric said that Jeter was consistently one of the worst SS in baseball.

 

but he dove into the bleachers

[TruffleShuffle]

And just for an added challenge the Yanks had terrible defense at both positions.

 

And Jeter is pretty good (although not great at SS).

 

Laughable.

 

Every defensive metric said that Jeter was consistently one of the worst SS in baseball.

 

but he dove into the bleachers

 

oh yeah... headfirst too! well in that case he's better defensively than ozzie smith

[XZero771679666304]

And just for an added challenge the Yanks had terrible defense at both positions.

 

And Jeter is pretty good (although not great at SS).

 

Laughable.

 

Every defensive metric said that Jeter was consistently one of the worst SS in baseball.

 

You're right. Jeter's defense may be the most overrated thing in the sports world today. It's not just that he's not as good as his reputation, but he's actually not good at all. A few flashy plays have overshadowed reality.

[sunnydoo]

Laughable.

 

Every defensive metric said that Jeter was consistently one of the worst SS in baseball.

 

He has had some bad years (like last year) and then he has some good years like 2004/2005.

 

Average or slightly below avg. range does not equal terrible.

[XZero771679666304]

Laughable.

 

Every defensive metric said that Jeter was consistently one of the worst SS in baseball.

 

He has had some bad years (like last year) and then he has some good years like 2004/2005.

 

Average or slightly below avg. range does not equal terrible.

 

IIRC, in a few seasons his RF was the worst among all everyday SS.

[sunnydoo]

IIRC, in a few seasons his RF was the worst among all everyday SS.

 

RF is not a stand alone stat. Makes many assumptions that may or may not be accurate.

[XZero771679666304]

IIRC, in a few seasons his RF was the worst among all everyday SS.

 

RF is not a stand alone stat. Makes many assumptions that may or may not be accurate.

 

Still, I remember researching defense, and seeing that Jeter's RF was so much worse than other SS that there had to be something to it.

 

I have yet to see a defensive metric that I like, but I am willing to bet that others here can produce a myriad of them that support what Jeter's RF implies. Even watching him, you can see that he lacks range. He makes all the plays in his zone, but his zone is freaking tiny.

 

I still find the fact the Yanks kept Derek at SS and put ARod at third to be laughable.

[jjgman21]

Has it ever occured to you that maybe the reason teams go with defense over offense at C and SS is because its really hard to find C and SS that can hit?

 

No. Think it is pretty much the 2 philosophies at work: the old school wanting strength up the middle at the 4 spots, and the new school wanting to max out OPS. Third school developing taking philosophys from both.

 

Can you think of a really good/ great team that didn't have either a good hitting SS or an offensive catcher? The Yankees of the late 90s had Jeter and Posada, the Big Red Machine had Johnny Bench, etc.

 

Easy one as i lived near there at the time. 1987 Twins- Tim Laudner was the catcher (Ops=631) and Greg Gagne at SS (Ops=740).

 

Edit for More:

1981 Dodgers: Scioscia 686 Russell 576.

1984 Cardinals: Porter 749 Smith 653.

1985 Royals: Sundberg 689 Concepcion 490.

1988 Dodgers: Scioscia 642 Griffin 512.

1989 A's: Steinbach 671 Gallego 655.

1992 Blue Jays: Borders 675 Lee 659.

2005 WhiteSux: AJidiot 728 Uribe 713.

2006 Cardinals: Molina 595 Eckstein 694.

 

some 'dynasties'

 

91-96, 99-02 Braves

Cardinals of early-mid 80's

All the good Astros teams of the past decade

late 80's A's

most good Dodger teams from mid 70's- mid 80's