When are we going to stop talking about luck re: the Cards?

[indifferent]

Luck to me implies randomness. When it continues to happen, doesn't it cease being luck and start becoming a product of a good system? How many Cards players have Cubs fans complained about as overproducing their career norms? There has to be more to it. Personally, I credit the coaching and LaRussa is at the top of the list.

[wolf stansson]

They will probably stop as soon as the Cardinals suck.

 

 

May have something to do with the fact that they don't like the Cardinals. I could be wrong of course, but I doubt it.

[sandberg23]

They will probably stop as soon as the Cardinals suck.

 

 

May have something to do with the fact that they don't like the Cardinals. I could be wrong of course, but I doubt it.

 

Haha...I bet you're right.

[TruffleShuffle]

And a team can't get lucky for two years in a row? If you're talking about the Braves, then you can't talk about luck because they have been so good for so long. But the Cardinals? Different situation. Who knows, maybe the hitting coach is so good that he turns Tony Womack into a better player at age 34, and teaches Abraham Nunez how to be good and not awful at the plate. But if that's the case, why sign Pujols, Rolen and Edmonds to long-term deals? Why not just sign a whole team of Tony Womacks and Abraham Nunez's and turn them into good players?

 

All I know is that the Cubs lineup these days, on paper, should be a lot better than the Cards:

 

Lee < Pujols

Walker > Grudz

Nomar > Eckstein

ARam > Nunez

Barrett > Diaz/Mahoney

Lawton > John Rodriguez

Hairston/Macias < Edmonds

Burnitz > Mabry/Taguchi

 

 

The Cubs SHOULD be scoring a lot more than the Cardinals, but somehow it's the Cardinals who are scoring runs by the boatload despite all their injuries. I can buy that Eckstein and whoever are hitting #2 should be overperforming due to having great hitters protecting them, but what the hell is with a 5-8 of Grudz/Nunez/Taguchi/Mahoney lighting it up? There isn't a good hitter in that lot.

 

Maybe it's just amazing coaching, but I for one refuse to believe that the Cardinals figured something out in Abraham Nunez that 10 previous years of coaching couldn't figure out - i.e., how to be a better-than-bad hitter. And how does Julian Tavarez stay a decent pitcher for 10+ years and numerous organizations, and then get better all of a sudden in St. Louis. Does Dave Duncan know something that nobody else knows? If so, the Cards should just pay their coaches $60M a year and have all their players be guys making the major league minimum.

[Chris]

:lol: at the Titanic sig!

[reggiemiller rules]

And a team can't get lucky for two years in a row? If you're talking about the Braves, then you can't talk about luck because they have been so good for so long. But the Cardinals? Different situation. Who knows, maybe the hitting coach is so good that he turns Tony Womack into a better player at age 34, and teaches Abraham Nunez how to be good and not awful at the plate. But if that's the case, why sign Pujols, Rolen and Edmonds to long-term deals? Why not just sign a whole team of Tony Womacks and Abraham Nunez's and turn them into good players?

 

All I know is that the Cubs lineup these days, on paper, should be a lot better than the Cards:

 

Lee < Pujols

Walker > Grudz

Nomar > Eckstein

ARam > Nunez

Barrett > Diaz/Mahoney

Lawton > John Rodriguez

Hairston/Macias < Edmonds

Burnitz > Mabry/Taguchi

 

 

The Cubs SHOULD be scoring a lot more than the Cardinals, but somehow it's the Cardinals who are scoring runs by the boatload despite all their injuries. I can buy that Eckstein and whoever are hitting #2 should be overperforming due to having great hitters protecting them, but what the hell is with a 5-8 of Grudz/Nunez/Taguchi/Mahoney lighting it up? There isn't a good hitter in that lot.

 

Maybe it's just amazing coaching, but I for one refuse to believe that the Cardinals figured something out in Abraham Nunez that 10 previous years of coaching couldn't figure out - i.e., how to be a better-than-bad hitter. And how does Julian Tavarez stay a decent pitcher for 10+ years and numerous organizations, and then get better all of a sudden in St. Louis. Does Dave Duncan know something that nobody else knows? If so, the Cards should just pay their coaches $60M a year and have all their players be guys making the major league minimum.

 

 

Im not saying that the Cards are or are not overachieving, but the Cards score more runs because they play good fundamental baseball. The reason the cubs dont score as many runs is they have no plate discipline, they dont move runners as long that well, and they dont run the bases well. The question of scoring more runs than the Cardinals has nothing to do with over or underachieving and more to do with the fact the Cardinals are a good fundamental team and the Cubs are not.

[wolf stansson]

:lol: at the Titanic sig!

Funniest sig ever.

[indifferent]

And a team can't get lucky for two years in a row? If you're talking about the Braves, then you can't talk about luck because they have been so good for so long. But the Cardinals? Different situation. Who knows, maybe the hitting coach is so good that he turns Tony Womack into a better player at age 34, and teaches Abraham Nunez how to be good and not awful at the plate. But if that's the case, why sign Pujols, Rolen and Edmonds to long-term deals? Why not just sign a whole team of Tony Womacks and Abraham Nunez's and turn them into good players?

 

All I know is that the Cubs lineup these days, on paper, should be a lot better than the Cards:

 

Lee < Pujols

Walker > Grudz

Nomar > Eckstein

ARam > Nunez

Barrett > Diaz/Mahoney

Lawton > John Rodriguez

Hairston/Macias < Edmonds

Burnitz > Mabry/Taguchi

 

 

The Cubs SHOULD be scoring a lot more than the Cardinals, but somehow it's the Cardinals who are scoring runs by the boatload despite all their injuries. I can buy that Eckstein and whoever are hitting #2 should be overperforming due to having great hitters protecting them, but what the hell is with a 5-8 of Grudz/Nunez/Taguchi/Mahoney lighting it up? There isn't a good hitter in that lot.

 

Maybe it's just amazing coaching, but I for one refuse to believe that the Cardinals figured something out in Abraham Nunez that 10 previous years of coaching couldn't figure out - i.e., how to be a better-than-bad hitter. And how does Julian Tavarez stay a decent pitcher for 10+ years and numerous organizations, and then get better all of a sudden in St. Louis. Does Dave Duncan know something that nobody else knows? If so, the Cards should just pay their coaches $60M a year and have all their players be guys making the major league minimum.

 

But therein lies the catch and it's also why the pundits have been so bullish on the Cubs the last couple of years. On paper, they should be a great team. Needs no explanation as Cubs fans have already figured it out; the Cubs are crippled by Baker.

 

Might not make sense to true statheads, but TLR does a good job of playing players in positions where they'll succeed (i.e. no Macias in CF), reinforces fundamentals like backing up first base, taking walks. He also does NOT make excuses for his players, injuries, etc. He expects his subs due to injury to perform as their predecessors would or at least give an all out effort.

 

This is also why Cubs fans continue to diminish the extent of our injuries (Molina's sub-whatever OPS, etc.). Bottom line is a lot of teams would have lost some serious ground with the injuries the Cards have sustained.

[JGalt73]

Some of this was posted elsewhere in looking at the Cubs futility, but it fits here as well, so...

 

BP (and other sites, but in this case BP) looks at how many runs a team "should" score given the same offensive outputs (hits, doubles, SB, etc.). In looking at the NL, the Cubs have scored 22 runs fewer than would be expected and the Cards have scored 55 more than expected.

 

Looking at the NL Central offenses and runs expected vs. actual:

 

Cubs -22

Cards +53

Astros +25

Brewers -1

Reds +2

Pirates +8

 

There is also a similar way look at what opposing teams have done against a pitching staff and what number of runs that would be expected. The Cardinals are about on target on the defensive end.

 

Using these 2 methods, the luckiest team in the NL is...the Cardinals, at 7 games better than expected followed closely by the 'amazing' Nationals.

 

Now there will be outcries that fundamental teams are better at scoring runs. Walks are the key? The Red Sox are about equal to what their peripheral stats would suggest. Small ball? When analyzed, its been no more likely to add runs. (Though the luckiest team in the league - the Good Guys, have scored 29 runs more than expected - even when accounting for the speedy Scott P). The Cards were similarly advantaged last year. That's baseball.

[reggiemiller rules]

I think it comes down to the old adage the good teams find ways to win games. The Cards seem to find ways to win alot more then teams do against them. Weither it is a squeeze to win or a grand slam, they always seem to show up big in the late innings and win the games. I think alot of that goes back to the coaches. Dusty does not seem to be a great game coach. Sure Larussa over manages alot, but he seems to be a good game coach. Also Larussas teams always seems to have a good bench even going back to the A's teams he had. He seems to have a knack of getting guys in the game in situations they will be more likely to succeed.

[rocket]

the cardinals ARE lucky but it doesn't matter because take away their luck and they're still miles ahead of the cubs

[1908]

When are we going to stop talking about luck re: the Cards?

Why do you care? If our roles were reversed, I'd be enjoying the Cubs success instead of trying to extract some praise from a bunch of Cardinal fans.

[gus_dog]

When are we going to stop talking about luck re: the Cards?

Why do you care? If our roles were reversed, I'd be enjoying the Cubs success instead of trying to extract some praise from a bunch of Cardinal fans.

 

:lol:

[Tracer Bullet]

I think it comes down to the old adage the good teams find ways to win games.

 

No offense, but imo that is one of the dumbest sayings in all of sport (along with a team "knowing how to win"). Teams win b/c they are better and/or luckier than their opponents. The Cards happen to be both this year, most of the time.

 

The Cards are 30 games over .500 right now because they played better or were luckier than the team they opposed in 71 of their games. Not because they "found a way to win" those games. I don't even know what that means.

[indifferent]

When are we going to stop talking about luck re: the Cards?

Why do you care? If our roles were reversed, I'd be enjoying the Cubs success instead of trying to extract some praise from a bunch of Cardinal fans.

 

I could have replied to Truffle's post about Cards scrubs and how lucky we are to magically transform these has beens into good players, but I feared I would have been accused of changing the subject. It's apparent that some on this board care, as evidenced by the constant references to our unbelievably good fortune. And it's not two years, it's 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004, and 2005 (2003 being a near miss).

 

Obviously to amass as many wins as the Cards did last year and so far this year (like the White Sox), a team has to have a certain amount of "luck" to outperform its projected runs. It just strikes me as strange that those who discount "good teams find a way to win" are the same people who believe in luck. I tend to look more dispassionately at things like the most runs scored in the NL or the best ERA in the majors.

[treebird]

Obviously to amass as many wins as the Cards did last year and so far this year (like the White Sox), a team has to have a certain amount of "luck" to outperform its projected runs. It just strikes me as strange that those who discount "good teams find a way to win" are the same people who believe in luck. I tend to look more dispassionately at things like the most runs scored in the NL or the best ERA in the majors.

 

What do you mean believe in luck? Nobody's saying that the Cardinals did something special (catch a leprechaun) to get this luck, just that things have happened to go their way in such a manner that they have score more runs that would have been expected to score.

[1908]

When are we going to stop talking about luck re: the Cards?

Why do you care? If our roles were reversed, I'd be enjoying the Cubs success instead of trying to extract some praise from a bunch of Cardinal fans.

It's apparent that some on this board care...

Perhaps, but why do you? Your reply didn't address my question at all.

[wolf stansson]

Nobody's saying that the Cardinals did something special (catch a leprechaun) to get this luck

I'm saying it.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y274/krkhinrich/lucky-leprechaun.jpg

Lucky Charms indeed.

[genghiskhan]

The reason the Cardinals have been winning over the past few years and the Cubs (2003 excepted) have not is that the Cardinals are a better team, and they're a better run team. Our GM is better than the Cubs GM--look at all the trades Jocketty has made, then look at the deals Chicago has made, and tell me who is better. Our manager is better. Given the "Fire Dusty!" vitriol I see regularly on the front page of the main forum, I doubt too many readers here would dispute that. And obviously our team is better. Last year the Cardinals sailed through the regular season, and the Cubs were wracked with injuries, and we heard all about how the Cardinals were winning only b/c so many Cubs were hurt. Now the Cardinals have been absolutely savaged with injuries, with four players from the opening day roster out and two (Rolen and Walker) looking unlikely to return in a meaningful way in 2005. And the Cardinals are sailing to another division title. The Cubs? Well, they lost Nomar, but Nomar was playing terribly even before his injury, and he's not what he used to be anyway.

 

If Chicago hopes to establish itself as a regular presence atop the NL Central standings, a whole lot is going to have to change. Probably have to clean house completely, tear down and rebuild. And stop relying on Kerry Wood to be an anchor in your rotation.

[indifferent]

When are we going to stop talking about luck re: the Cards?

Why do you care? If our roles were reversed, I'd be enjoying the Cubs success instead of trying to extract some praise from a bunch of Cardinal fans.

It's apparent that some on this board care...

Perhaps, but why do you? Your reply didn't address my question at all.

 

I care because I've frequented this board since Feb. pretty regularly. I respect many posters on this board. So when I see a comment posted more than one time that I don't agree with, I'm posting about it. Pretty much why anyone posts anything on these boards; they have an opinion on a certain topic. Just because I'm a Cards fan shouldn't make a difference.

[1908]

I care because I've frequented this board since Feb. pretty regularly. I respect many posters on this board. So when I see a comment posted more than one time that I don't agree with, I'm posting about it. Pretty much why anyone posts anything on these boards; they have an opinion on a certain topic. Just because I'm a Cards fan shouldn't make a difference.

I never said you couldn't try to get Cubs fans to praise the Cardinals. I just think it's silly to ignore your audience.

[TruffleShuffle]

Might not make sense to true statheads, but TLR does a good job of playing players in positions where they'll succeed (i.e. no Macias in CF), reinforces fundamentals like backing up first base, taking walks. He also does NOT make excuses for his players, injuries, etc. He expects his subs due to injury to perform as their predecessors would or at least give an all out effort.

 

Here's my problem with this argument, and I have tried to poke holes in it before... but repeat myself. A guy like Ray King, who has been used as a LOOGY very effectively by LaRussa, I can buy that he is being used in a position where he will succeed. But here's a list of guys who are playing the same role they played through most, if not all, of their major league careers:

 

-Womack (last year)

-Edmonds (since he signed with the Cards)

-Tavarez (both years)

-Nunez

-Carpenter

-Al Reyes

-Flores

-This John Rodriguez clown

 

 

And that's why I can at least see the point of better coaches making a difference. These are all guys who are established major league players who are being used in their natural roles with the Cardinals, and improving significantly off their career norms or in most cases, their career bests.

 

Macias has only played a couple of games in CF, but in general there's no way to put him in a position to succeed because he's a terrible player. In the case of Nunez, sending him up to home plate with a bat in his hand was, up until this year, setting him up to fail. Abraham Nunez was a worse career hitter than Jose Macias before this season. Yet somehow at age 29 he's gone from atrocious to above-average? I'm sorry, there's a large element of unforeseeable luck in there.

 

And this isn't to say that I don't respect the Cardinals' team. I said before the season that I thought they were clearly the best club in the division and would win it by at least 5 games. What I didn't expect was that they'd be this good this season, or that scrubs like Nunez and Al Reyes would prove to be integral parts to the team's success. It's possible for a team to be lucky and good, and the Cards are both of those things. In order for the Cubs to catch the Cards in future seasons, the Cubs will need to construct a better team with a better coaching staff, and hope that the Cardinals are not as fortunate as they've been over the past 1.5+ seasons. Otherwise, the Cards will win the division every year.

[wolf stansson]

-Womack (last year)

-Nunez

-This John Rodriguez clown

Flukes. Will regress to the mean.

-Al Reyes

-Flores

-Tavarez (both years)

Talented. May regress to mean, but I wouldn't be surprised if Dave Duncan was the difference.

-Edmonds (since he signed with the Cards)

-Carpenter

Bad examples just because before coming to the Cards they were both considered to be monstrous talents that underachieved. For whatever reason, the change of scenery just took them to the next step. For Jim I think it was getting into a situation where he was more loved by the fans and that pandered to his pride which made him feel more relaxed. With Carp I think it had everything to do with him not responding to coaching as well with the Blue Jays. Once his career was taken from him and he thought he would never pitch again, he was motivated to do whatever it took to succeed.

[imb]

There isnt a Cardinal forum available for this circle jerk?

[ltb]

Our GM is better than the Cubs GM--look at all the trades Jocketty has made, then look at the deals Chicago has made, and tell me who is better.

 

if you're basing how good a GM is only on trades, your boy doesn't exactly have an advantage.