ITT, list crappy players who were good while Cardinals

[nolanwood]

For the record, I think it's more TLR and Duncan than luck, though. They have a magical way of getting players to perform above their potential. It's pretty remarkable.

[jersey cubs fan]

For the record, I think it's more TLR and Duncan than luck, though. They have a magical way of getting players to perform above their potential. It's pretty remarkable.

 

Of perform to their potential? Duncan has shown time and time again he can get the most out of questionable veteran starters. I don't think it has anything to do with magic or luck, he just knows how to get the job done.

[nolanwood]

For the record, I think it's more TLR and Duncan than luck, though. They have a magical way of getting players to perform above their potential. It's pretty remarkable.

 

Of perform to their potential? Duncan has shown time and time again he can get the most out of questionable veteran starters. I don't think it has anything to do with magic or luck, he just knows how to get the job done.

 

I think both above their potential and to their potential. Duncan is a stellar pitching coach, no doubt. I'm more amazed at the production they get out of their bats, though.

[Derwood]

This is a sad, sad thread.

It's sad to us because it's so ridiculous how this keeps happening. You can feel free to come up with counter-examples from our own team though. :wink:

Matt Clement, Joe Borowski, Sammy Sosa, Jon Lieber, Mark Bellhorn, Ryan Dempster, Michael Barrett, and I'm sure many, many more.

 

kevin tapani?

 

of course, we were the place where closers came to die for awhile (Jones, Rojas, Alfonseca, Aguilera, etc.)

[KyHen]

Adam Kennedy - lowest OPS+ in the NL, second to only Nick Punto in major league baseball.

 

Sidney Ponson - 84 ERA+, DFA'd.

 

Junior Spivey - Didn't sniff the majors. $1.5 million down the drain; .698 OPS in Memphis (AAA).

 

Anthony Reyes - Minor league [super]star. 87 ERA+ in 2006, 76 ERA+ in 2007. 2-12 record.

 

Kip Wells - 82 ERA+; 6-13 record.

 

Mark Grudzielanek - Lower OPS+ (92) than he had the year before with the Cubs (96) and the year before that, too, (105 -- also with Cubs).

 

Jason Marquis - Finishes 2006 with a 73 ERA+ -- worst among qualifying NL starters; goes on to post 5.5 months of 106 ERA+ ball with Cubs. By comparison, a 106 ERA+ is just behind Adam Wainwright's Cardinal-rotation-leading 107 ERA+.

 

Mark Mulder - 62 ERA+ in 2006. Misses [virtually all of] 2007.

 

Dan Haren - AL-leading 170 ERA+.

 

 

Now to critcize things have posted so far in this topic:

"Bo Hart for a half a year" -- Laughable; Ryan Theriot, 134 ERA+ in 2006.

 

"Matt Morris" -- [Laughed out loud] If you think the 2004 / 2005 STL Matt Morris was the same one as was with the Cardinals all along you clearly were not watching baseball during that time. That, or you can't accurately judge a pitcher's effectiveness.

 

"Albert Pujols" -- Laughable; I won't even respond to this because I'll assume it's a joke.

 

"Adam Kennedy" -- [Laughed out loud] Adam Kennedy? See above list. I doubt you'll take the time to look, so I'll spell it out for you: NL-worst OPS+. Second worst in majors to Nick Punto.

 

"Mike Timlin" -- 100 ERA+ during the time he pitched in Philly (the year he was traded from St. Louis). 5-straight 106 (or higher) ERA+ seasons for Boston since 2003, including this year; career-high 197 ERA+ for the Red Sox in 2005.

 

"David Eckstein" -- Career OPS+: 88. Average OPS+ in St. Louis: 87.666. Rounding up: 88. O WOW HOW LUCKY!

 

 

One thing that bothers me about the whole notion about the Cardinals being lucky is the fact that the organization's staff is always ignored.

 

Are you factoring in that they have one of the best managers in major league history that meticulously studies the game, allowing part-time players to have the most favorable match-ups humanly possible? No, you're probably not. If you did, it probably wouldn't be such a surprise to see limited-duty players (Spiezio, Nunez, Luna, etc) have success... Maybe aforementioned manager and said favorable match-ups have something to do with their increased production? Probably not, it's not as tangible as raw stats are, lets just ignore it and attribute it to luck.

 

Are you factoring in that Dave Duncan is one of the best pitching coaches in major league baseball? When you follow the NFL, do you cry and moan every time you see a running back go to Denver and have success? Are the Broncos lucky? Maybe it's their system. Probably not, systems aren't as tangible as flat-out production so lets factor it out and completely and attribute it to luck.

 

 

In summary:

- Pitching coaches have no influence on player production.

- Managers have no influence on player production.

- Any and all success surrounding the St. Louis organization can (and should) be attributed to luck.

- A personification of the St. Louis organization exists. His name is Midas, and his hand transforms things into gold.

- Aberrations which are incriminating against the "luck/Midas Touch" theory shall be erased from the brain by means of selective amnesia.

Edited August 21, 2007 by KyHen

[Lockes Eye Scar]

This is a sad, sad thread.

It's sad to us because it's so ridiculous how this keeps happening. You can feel free to come up with counter-examples from our own team though. :wink:

Matt Clement, Joe Borowski, Sammy Sosa, Jon Lieber, Mark Bellhorn, Ryan Dempster, Michael Barrett, and I'm sure many, many more.

 

don't forget aramis ramirez

 

ARam had already put up a .300/.350/.536/.886 line in Pittsburgh at the age of 23 and came to the Cubs at 25. Bad example.

 

It's not much worse an example as some the other names in this thread. He had one good year before coming to the Cubs.

[soccer10k]

Jason Marquis - Finishes 2006 with a 73 ERA+ -- worst among qualifying NL starters; goes on to post 5.5 months of 106 ERA+ ball with Cubs. By comparison, a 106 ERA+ is just behind Adam Wainwright's Cardinal-rotation-leading 107 ERA+.

 

Like I posted before, Marquis was even better with the Cardinals his first two years that what he has been with the Cubs this year.

[KyHen]

Jason Marquis - Finishes 2006 with a 73 ERA+ -- worst among qualifying NL starters; goes on to post 5.5 months of 106 ERA+ ball with Cubs. By comparison, a 106 ERA+ is just behind Adam Wainwright's Cardinal-rotation-leading 107 ERA+.

 

Like I posted before, Marquis was even better with the Cardinals his first two years that what he has been with the Cubs this year.

 

The Cardinals are too lucky to have him struggle that badly for a year with them, though. There would have been some sort of divine intervention that helped him right his path.

[soccer10k]

Jason Marquis - Finishes 2006 with a 73 ERA+ -- worst among qualifying NL starters; goes on to post 5.5 months of 106 ERA+ ball with Cubs. By comparison, a 106 ERA+ is just behind Adam Wainwright's Cardinal-rotation-leading 107 ERA+.

 

Like I posted before, Marquis was even better with the Cardinals his first two years that what he has been with the Cubs this year.

 

The Cardinals are too lucky to have him struggle that badly for a year with them, though. There would have been some sort of divine intervention that helped him right his path.

 

They already had turned him around. He posted ERA+ of 82 and 75 in his final two years with the Braves.

[KyHen]

Jason Marquis - Finishes 2006 with a 73 ERA+ -- worst among qualifying NL starters; goes on to post 5.5 months of 106 ERA+ ball with Cubs. By comparison, a 106 ERA+ is just behind Adam Wainwright's Cardinal-rotation-leading 107 ERA+.

 

Like I posted before, Marquis was even better with the Cardinals his first two years that what he has been with the Cubs this year.

 

The Cardinals are too lucky to have him struggle that badly for a year with them, though. There would have been some sort of divine intervention that helped him right his path.

 

They already had turned him around. He posted ERA+ of 82 and 75 in his final two years with the Braves.

 

2004 and 2005 have nothing to do with it. Marquis having a down year in 2006? Possible. But being the worst starter in the NL? Very unlikely. And for the Cardinals, no less? Inexplicable. I think you're missing the point, man: the Cards are protected by a magical aura that prevents them from suffering from the problems and distractions that normal, mortal teams are exposed to. Marquis 2006 season defies logic. Is this even debatable?

[Derwood]

Jason Marquis - Finishes 2006 with a 73 ERA+ -- worst among qualifying NL starters; goes on to post 5.5 months of 106 ERA+ ball with Cubs. By comparison, a 106 ERA+ is just behind Adam Wainwright's Cardinal-rotation-leading 107 ERA+.

 

Like I posted before, Marquis was even better with the Cardinals his first two years that what he has been with the Cubs this year.

 

The Cardinals are too lucky to have him struggle that badly for a year with them, though. There would have been some sort of divine intervention that helped him right his path.

 

They already had turned him around. He posted ERA+ of 82 and 75 in his final two years with the Braves.

 

2004 and 2005 have nothing to do with it. Marquis having a down year in 2006? Possible. But being the worst starter in the NL? Very unlikely. And for the Cardinals, no less? Inexplicable. I think you're missing the point, man: the Cards are protected by a magical aura that prevents them from suffering from the problems and distractions that normal, mortal teams are exposed to. Marquis 2006 season defies logic. Is this even debatable?

 

how about winning the World Series despite having the worst starter in the NL on the team? Oh wait, they didn't put him on the playoff roster in favor of another starter who is nearly as bad but suddently was cy young inthe playoffs

[KyHen]

Oh wait, they didn't put him on the playoff roster in favor of another starter who is nearly as bad but suddently was cy young inthe playoffs

 

How could I have forgot that? It marked the first time in MLB postseason history that a starter went on an improbable run.

[soccer10k]

Jason Marquis - Finishes 2006 with a 73 ERA+ -- worst among qualifying NL starters; goes on to post 5.5 months of 106 ERA+ ball with Cubs. By comparison, a 106 ERA+ is just behind Adam Wainwright's Cardinal-rotation-leading 107 ERA+.

 

Like I posted before, Marquis was even better with the Cardinals his first two years that what he has been with the Cubs this year.

 

The Cardinals are too lucky to have him struggle that badly for a year with them, though. There would have been some sort of divine intervention that helped him right his path.

 

They already had turned him around. He posted ERA+ of 82 and 75 in his final two years with the Braves.

 

2004 and 2005 have nothing to do with it. Marquis having a down year in 2006? Possible. But being the worst starter in the NL? Very unlikely. And for the Cardinals, no less? Inexplicable. I think you're missing the point, man: the Cards are protected by a magical aura that prevents them from suffering from the problems and distractions that normal, mortal teams are exposed to. Marquis 2006 season defies logic. Is this even debatable?

 

Why do 04 and 05 have nothing to do with it? The Cardinals took a well below average pitcher and turned him into an above average pitcher for two seasons.

[KyHen]

Jason Marquis - Finishes 2006 with a 73 ERA+ -- worst among qualifying NL starters; goes on to post 5.5 months of 106 ERA+ ball with Cubs. By comparison, a 106 ERA+ is just behind Adam Wainwright's Cardinal-rotation-leading 107 ERA+.

 

Like I posted before, Marquis was even better with the Cardinals his first two years that what he has been with the Cubs this year.

 

The Cardinals are too lucky to have him struggle that badly for a year with them, though. There would have been some sort of divine intervention that helped him right his path.

 

They already had turned him around. He posted ERA+ of 82 and 75 in his final two years with the Braves.

 

2004 and 2005 have nothing to do with it. Marquis having a down year in 2006? Possible. But being the worst starter in the NL? Very unlikely. And for the Cardinals, no less? Inexplicable. I think you're missing the point, man: the Cards are protected by a magical aura that prevents them from suffering from the problems and distractions that normal, mortal teams are exposed to. Marquis 2006 season defies logic. Is this even debatable?

 

Why do 04 and 05 have nothing to do with it? The Cardinals took a well below average pitcher and turned him into an above average pitcher for two seasons.

 

Why do they have nothing to do with it? Because I can ignore it. I can be delusional. Similar to the way that people can ignore common sense and non-tangible factors and attribute everything to luck. Or in other words, similar to the delusional premise (luck) that this topic is based on.

[BDWeav71]

Yep, Bo Hart for a half a year. I'll stand by it.

 

He disappeared. Theriot continues to thrive at the major league level, the comparison doesn't fit.

[KyHen]

Yep, Bo Hart for a half a year. I'll stand by it.

 

He disappeared. Theriot continues to thrive at the major league level, the comparison doesn't fit.

 

Implying that an 88 OPS+ is "thriving" borders on a hyperbole.

 

His production is significantly down from his time with Chicago last year.

 

I'm not saying he sucks -- it's acceptable from a versatile middle infielder. But much like Bo Hart a few years ago, Theriot was playing way over his head in 2006.

[nolanwood]

His production is significantly down from his time with Chicago last year.

 

I'm not saying he sucks -- it's acceptable from a versatile middle infielder. But much like Bo Hart a few years ago, Theriot was playing way over his head in 2006.

 

Actually nothing like Bo Hart. Bo Hart saw more than twice as many AB's in his fluke season - Theriot's #s last year could be attributed to a small sample size. Also, Bo Hart's #'s the following year were not even in the same ballpark as Theriot has been this year.

[CubColtPacer]

His production is significantly down from his time with Chicago last year.

 

I'm not saying he sucks -- it's acceptable from a versatile middle infielder. But much like Bo Hart a few years ago, Theriot was playing way over his head in 2006.

 

Actually nothing like Bo Hart. Bo Hart saw more than twice as many AB's in his fluke season - Theriot's #s last year could be attributed to a small sample size. Also, Bo Hart's #'s the following year were not even in the same ballpark as Theriot has been this year.

 

To be fair, yes Bo Hart's at-bats were twice as much as Theriot's last year, but they weren't nearly as good. He had a .277/.317/.395 line for the season in 2003-he was good for a month or two, but then he was awful after that.

 

Also, the next year, Hart only had 13 AB's in the major leagues.

 

Now there is one thing to consider-getting lucky with Hart for a month or two was big for the Cardinals because it helped them remain in contention in 2003 until late September. For the Cubs, Theriot's huge first 130 at-bats came at a time when they were hopelessly out of the race.

[KyHen]

His production is significantly down from his time with Chicago last year.

 

I'm not saying he sucks -- it's acceptable from a versatile middle infielder. But much like Bo Hart a few years ago, Theriot was playing way over his head in 2006.

 

Actually nothing like Bo Hart. Bo Hart saw more than twice as many AB's in his fluke season - Theriot's #s last year could be attributed to a small sample size. Also, Bo Hart's #'s the following year were not even in the same ballpark as Theriot has been this year.

I'll concede this. I was actually considering including the sample size argument when I first posted it. I was not trying to imply that Ryan Theriot was a Bo Hart-caliber player.

[Faceman]

some of the answers in this thread are quite hilarious - Kennedy tops that list. Just awful. Crap look at Darryl Ward's weekend. . . it happens to everyone. Big Papi had next to no takers when he was a FA coming from Minnesota. This stuff happens.

 

The way some of the Cub fans talk, you would think the Cards dominate the head to head series. I think the Cubs lead that.

[Soul]

It's pretty funny to watch the Cardinals fans crawl out of the woodwork on this thread.

[Faceman]

It's pretty funny to watch the Cardinals fans crawl out of the woodwork on this thread.

 

Cards only have 1 run at home vs Florida tonight - need to come to NSBB for some entertainment.

[KyHen]

It's pretty funny to watch the Cardinals fans crawl out of the woodwork on this thread.

 

Before the 15th of July I couldn't post here unless I was under a proxy (a huge pain). I'll leave it at that.

[Faceman]

It's pretty funny to watch the Cardinals fans crawl out of the woodwork on this thread.

 

Cards only have 1 run at home vs Florida tonight - need to come to NSBB for some entertainment.

 

a 4 run 8th - right on cue - capped off by a Ludwick homer.

 

*grin*

[abuck1220]

It's pretty funny to watch the Cardinals fans crawl out of the woodwork on this thread.

 

it's pretty sad to watch the cub fans and their typical woe is me crap.