indifferent

You were probably joking here, but that's what I would do. No standing O or other craziness. It's not the time for booing. Whatever he did with steroids, he was a huge part of Busch stadium and that's what the last weekend at Busch is, celebrating Busch Stadium. I respect him for having the guts to come back. If he were still playing and at bat, similar to Palmeiro after just getting busted, I'd boo. JMO

Are all Cardinal fans this big homers? Good Lord. Eckstein is better than Nomar when healthy? Yadier Molina's defense makes up for the massive difference in offense (30 VORP for Barrett versus 8 for Molina)? Grudz is better than Todd Walker? So Taguchi and a bunch of bench guys are better than Burnitz? 2 Cy Young winners? Hey, the Cubs have one in Greg Maddux... yee haw. Mulder may have a Cy Young award but he clearly isn't pitching that way the last two years. Jocketty has proven that he might be the best in MLB? John Schuerholtz has proven that by putting a team on the field that has won their division 12 years in a row. Jocketty has proven that he's good, but come on. It's good that you support your team, but it doesn't make you any less of a fan to see things in an objective manner. The only thing I'd agree with on Wizard's list is that I'd rather have Molina than Barrett. Barrett has been better than Molina by far offensively this year (although citing VORPs doesn't take into account the time Molina missed). I'll take Molina long term; he's a better catcher and he will be better offensively. On the GM front, I think it's safe to say Jocketty was better this year. I didn't like Schuerholz' move to start the year with Mondesi and Jordan in the outfield and the Capellan for Kolb trade was a disaster. His decision to let Drew go obviously turned out to be a good one in hindsight, but they gave up quite a bit to get him for one year. He did rob Beane in the Hudson trade though.

I don't really agree that he's better than those guys... Renteria is better than Eckstein, unless you ignore the rest of their careers and focus on this year only. Cabrera's numbers are very close to Eckstein's, which makes the contract that Cabrera got from the Angels even more stunning. What a brutal move by the Angels, in all honesty. Not every player has... but many have. Womack last year, Nunez this year, Carpenter, Tavarez, there has been luck involved. But I think Jocketty has been very good at finding players (mainly veterans) who are undervalued in the free agent market. Sanders at $3M per year was a bargain. So was Grudz at $1M this year, and Suppan at around $3M, and even Eckstein at $3M is a bargain when you consider that other FA shortstops like Renteria and Cabrera got 3 times as much money. I've been saying this all along... the Cards' domination of the NL Central the last 2 years has been a combination of good management and good luck People just forget that I acknowledge the first part of that. There is a facet of the game were one cannot deny the Cards have been extremely fortunate the last two seasons - SP, their top three SP have missed how many regular season starts as compared to the Cubs? Regarding these pitchers, here's an excerpt from BP: St. Louis Cardinals: Flourish: At press time the Cardinals' magic number was 11, but according to Clay Davenport's Playoff Odds Report they "statistically clinched" a playoff spot days ago. Davenport has written a couple of articles explaining his methodology, but for now we might simply say that the Postseason Odds Report shows the results of 1,000,000 simulations of the rest of the season. According to Clay's simulations of the rest of the 2005 season there is literally not a single chance in a million that the Cardinals do not make the playoffs. The Cardinals statistically clinched a playoff spot with their 87th win of the season on Sunday against the Houston Astros. Pitching Values: At press time, 137 of the Cardinals' 139 starts (98.6%) had come from their five-man rotation of Chris Carpenter, Mark Mulder, Jeff Suppan, Matt Morris and Jason Marquis. Anyone can take a quick look at BP's new sortable stats to see how these pitchers stack of against each other or against the rest of the National League. We thought we would do one better at the BP Notebook and run the Cardinals' rotation through Nate Silver's new marginal gain calculations. Name MarginalSalary* WARP MarketValue NetValue --------------------------------------------------------------------- Chris Carpenter $2,183,000 7.3 $15,622,000 $13,439,000 Mark Mulder $5,683,000 4.3 $ 9,202,000 $ 3,519,000 Jeff Suppan $3,683,000 2.6 $ 5,564,000 $ 1,881,000 Matt Morris $2,933,000 1.8 $ 3,852,000 $ 919,000 Jason Marquis $2,733,000 3.2 $ 6,848,000 $ 4,115,000 *Included are incentives that player is on pace to receive. Marginal salary is simply salary minus the league minimum. WARP is in the glossary and quantifies the wins a player adds above a replacement-level player. Market Value is simply WARP*$2,140,000, which is roughly how much a win seems to be worth according to the most recent free agent season (though Nate Silver's newest research indicates that wins are valued differently by different teams depending on how close they are to the playoffs). Net Value is Market Value minus Marginal Salary. First of all, Carpenter. Chris Carpenter is worth an astounding $13,439,000 more than he's being paid. He could earn a few more bonuses for post-season awards but by that point he will probably off-set any additional income with his rest-of-season production. $50,000 for the Cy Young Award seems like a bargain for the Cardinals (that's a race, by the way, which Carpenter is currently winning according to Bill James and Rob Neyer's Cy Young Predictor). The second curious figure is Marquis' WARP and Net Value. Let's try another chart. Name BRAR FRAR PRAR ---------------------------------------- Carpenter -13 2 81 Mulder -7 4 49 Suppan -4 2 32 Morris -8 1 30 Marquis +5 1 28 BRAR is Batting Runs Above Replacement, FRAR is Fielding Runs Above Replacement, and PRAR is Pitching Runs Above Replacement. Roughly speaking, WARP-1, which we used above, is derived from the combination of these three metrics. Marquis may come in last in the pitching metric, but he is a full nine runs better than the 2nd best hitting pitcher in this group, and a full 18 runs better Chris Carpenter. Marquis' .342/.350/.513 line in 80 PAs makes him the best-hitting pitcher in the National League, and it's not even close. The third interesting note, and perhaps most surprising, is that each one of those pitcher contracts is a deal for the Cardinals. Even Matt Morris (3.97 ERA in 165 1/3 IP) is worth more than what the Cardinals are paying him. Not a single member of the Cardinals Opening Day five-man rotation is being overpaid in 2005 either because of injury or under-performance.

Who have we signed in the last two years that has underperformed for us? OK, I just remembered Cedeno, but he doesn't count because he was good for us last year and we cut him this year as soon as we wised up to his horrid performance. I already qualified Eckstein's season by specifying this year. When those guys, especially Renteria, perform as they're capable next year and Eckstein is his career average self I will keep reminding myself what a deal he was this year. I am not enamored with our players, I'm just trying to figure out how it happened.

Eckstein isn't great, but Stark was way off in that. Paying $3M per year for a shortstop who can get on base 34% of the time is not a bad investment. If you really want a bad SS signing, how about Cristian Guzman and his .303 OBP coming into this season for $4M per year? Guzman is the least productive player in the majors save one guy since 1900 per Hardball Times. Eckstein has been better than Renteria and Cabrera this year with money taken completely out of the equation. Not only is Eck better, but he is better suited for the Cards in need of a lead off batter. People look at his short stature = smaller range and rainbow arm, but it hasn't perpetuated itself in results this year. Sure the plays are closer at first this year, but he still gets the outs. He seems to have an uncanny knack for timing; he know his arm. I will give you that he doesn't get to some balls in the hole that some SS get to, but he is also more reliable than the "thoroughbred" SS most regard highly. Truffle, I'm glad you responded as you are always noting how lucky the Cards are. What can we attribute to this luck considering it's now been two years and every player we've signed from other teams has outperformed?

This guy was dubbed the worst free agent signing by Stark in the offseason. Stats be damned (although they're very good). And all midget jokes aside. This guy is 3rd on our team in RBIs from the leadoff position. He hits .350 with RISP. He hustles on every play, he's the 2nd hardest guy to strike out in the majors, he's out there every day, he very rarely muffs routine play (see Edgar Renteria, 27 errors leading the majors). He belongs on the Cards and is thriving here. Not to mention he is 6.5 mil cheaper than Renteria and 3.5 mil cheaper than O. Cabrera. I'll take Eck all day long.

Not to mention he won't get the win. He could be on the hook for the loss if another run scores this inning.

Does anyone know anything about Furmaniak of PIT? Apparently he's making his major league debut against us at 2nd. I recall reading that he was a high prospect for them?

Man, Cardinal fans get so sensitive. The small market insecurity shows up again. It's part of the territory. Most media dogs out other teams' park. Where is the criticism when that idiot Hrabosky moans about the small visiting clubhouse at Wrigley? Or when he calls Shea Stadium a dump. Or when McLaughlin speaks of the "quirkiness" of Dolphin Stadium, or when Buck talks about the small clubhouse at Fenway. I'm sure Bernie Miklasz has been critical of ballparks, too. You give Sullivan too much credit by getting upset at things that others admit are true. I guess I still don't understand the correlation to small market insecurity. A Chicago writer wrote it and a Cubs fan posted it. I didn't read a whole lot into the article. The irrelevance of some of the points he made, like the butts on the ground, and the fact that we'll have a new one next season, sounded like sour grapes to me.

The bathrooms have issues, but when I go to a game at Wrigley I'm not going to look at the bathrooms. I'm going to the restroom to take a piss. I really don't care what it's like in there. I've peed on trees before, so I don't get concerned about the restroom. Why is it that everyone who wants to criticize Wrigley brings up the bathrooms? :roll: I thought only women got that worked up over where they have to take a piss. Save the trees!

I don't understand how one can be a proud of a team whose sum of its parts has played far below its potential. It's like your kid brings home a C, but the kid is brilliant. You still love that kid, but you're not proud of that accomplishment.

We have mentally challenged individual running this ballclub. There's simply no other explanation. Cards have a mentally challenged relief pitcher. Tavarez comes in and leaves a runner on 1st and 3rd with no outs. King comes in and gets an easy grounder to him and he throws it to first for the out. The tying run scores easily. He doesn't go to home and he doesn't even look the runner back at 3rd. All in all, he got 3 outs with 4 pitches, but his gaffe cost Mulder the win (and possibly the Cards the game).

Funniest post I've seen in awhile from the ESPN MLB board: I hearby dub the Andruw Jones for mvp argument, the 'Goldilocks' argument. it goes like this: Derek Lee, team is too bad. Albert Pujols, team is too good. Andruw Jones, team is juuuuussssst right! What a stupid argument.

I know this won't be everyone's cup of tea, but I know UK's commented before on what he would do if he were LaRussa/Duncan. How would you slate the Cards rotation in the playoffs? We go Carp, Mulder, and then who? LaRussa's stating he's not waivering from starting Morris 3rd which I think is a big mistake. Here's Morris and Suppan's numbers for the year and post all star break. Throughout the year G GS W L Sv Hld IP H ER HR BB SO K/9 P/GS WHIP ERA 29 29 14 10 0 0 173.1 190 71 22 58 94 4.88 94.3 1.43 3.69 Suppan 27 27 14 8 0 0 171.2 188 77 17 30 104 5.45 93.4 1.27 4.04 MM After the break... G GS W LSvHld IP H ER HR BB SO K/9 P/GS WHIP ERA 11 11 5 3 0 0 66.1 65 21 8 24 38 5.16 248.5 1.34 2.85 Suppan 11 11 4 6 0 0 67.0 92 41 11 14 31 4.16 229.4 1.58 5.51 MM Also, Marquis has put together some impressive starts since his low point. During his severe rough spell, he had several great outings where given even normal MLB run support he would have won. Any thoughts? My vote's for Suppan. I also think Marquis is best suited out of the pen because he's mental and does better with short notice, he's a sinker baller, and we could use him as a pinch hitter. Morris is number 4.

I popped in on the Cards board last night and was following Uncle Buck's/All American's thread. I couldn't believe the luck of his scrub pitchers, but in the end on the Cleveland/Minnesota game, it was crazy! He needed Sizemore and Lecroy to score three runs between them and to have Silva not get one K. So Silva, who's been a good pitcher all year, gets shelled and taken out after the first inning (with no Ks) and Juan Rincon didn't even come into the game with the merry go round of pitchers they were throwing out there! I've never seen anyone have that kind of luck!

In your opinion, who's got the best shot? Who's the front runner? I definitely want to play next year if possible. Good luck all!

It's comments like this that crack me up Truffle. Career norms have been killing you this year. Maybe try trends?

The guy wasn't a stiff last year.

At the risk of banging the drum too much, I found this exchange compelling on the ESPN boards: Re: Should Carpenter's Cy Young come with an asterisk? yankinmass Posted: Sep 08, 2005 02:55 PM Quote Posts: 77 in the last 60 days Now, looking solely at things the pitcher controls, the numbers were: IP: Johnson 245.2, Clemens 214.1 ERA: Johnson 2.60, Clemens 2.98 SO: Johnson 290, Clemens 218 BAA: Johnson .197, Clemens .217 WHIP: Johnson 0.90, Clemens 1.16 When I hear Clemens fans demand that he hand over his 2004 NL Cy Young to Randy Johnson, then their impassioned arguments about W/L not mattering might hold water. Here's how I look at CYA. 3 things matter: 1. Amount of work done - IP 2. ERA 3. W/L record I value the first 2 a bit more than the others because they are more or less completely under the pitcher's control. The last factor is much less under his control. I throw things like SO, WHIP, etc. out the window as they are a sub-metric of ERA in my opinion. A guy who gives up a hit and a walk and gets out of a jam unscathed has done as good a job as a guy that strikes out the side. The only difference is the number of grey hairs on the manager's head. Re: Should Carpenter's Cy Young come with an asterisk? jjennings72 Posted: Sep 08, 2005 03:13 PM Quote Posts: 20 in the last 60 days Now, looking solely at things the pitcher controls, the numbers were: IP: Johnson 245.2, Clemens 214.1 ERA: Johnson 2.60, Clemens 2.98 SO: Johnson 290, Clemens 218 BAA: Johnson .197, Clemens .217 WHIP: Johnson 0.90, Clemens 1.16 When I hear Clemens fans demand that he hand over his 2004 NL Cy Young to Randy Johnson, then their impassioned arguments about W/L not mattering might hold water. Here's how I look at CYA. 3 things matter: 1. Amount of work done - IP 2. ERA 3. W/L record I value the first 2 a bit more than the others because they are more or less completely under the pitcher's control. The last factor is much less under his control. I throw things like SO, WHIP, etc. out the window as they are a sub-metric of ERA in my opinion. A guy who gives up a hit and a walk and gets out of a jam unscathed has done as good a job as a guy that strikes out the side. The only difference is the number of grey hairs on the manager's head. Excellent post, yim. The ironic thing is it's the same guy benefitting from both arguments! While I agree ERA is the most important stat to look at, you still look at the whole picture. 1st in wins, 1st in IP, and 2nd IP tell me it's Carpenter. And Carpenter's ERA is nothing to sneeze at. It's similar to voting for the MVP, a candidate in the top 1-3 in every category is likely to win. On a side note to all of those who choose to embrace sabermetrics this year and disdain wins, why now? We knew about all of these things last year and Clemens still won with a higher ERA and a closer W-L differential. Be consistent please.

If he's so sabermetric, why did he write a piece promoting Jones for MVP? I suggest you email him and ask him. Good idea...you don't by chance have his e-mail in your contacts, do you? :)

If he's so sabermetric, why did he write a piece promoting Jones for MVP?

K-Town, I agree with you here. ESPN does a lot of spotlight "fluff" pieces on players which is fine, but not in the midst of a CY Young/MVP race. If they're going to do that, they need to have their other columnists who are voting for Carp do a piece on him which presents a completely one sided perspective (he mentioned as an aside the categories where Carp is ahead of Clemens). Sort of like the way they preview divisions. The next day should be Willis and they should do an MVP piece on Lee, Pujols, and Cabrera, not just Jones.

Pilfered this from another board, pretty funny. Maybe you'll reexamine your take on Edmonds? http://www.czabe.com/backup/2002_week8/myteam_yourteam.htm

Imagine that, without anyone even stumping for him!

I think he should be considered for the award based on his stats. But the fact that he's behind Clemens and Carp in almost everything puts him behind them at the moment. He is within striking distance though. I agree here. If I were ranking them, it would be 1. Clemens, 2. Carpenter, 3. Willis. Willis is close enough to put himself in there, but it's going to take some great performances and probably at least one bad performance out of Clemens and Carpenter. What a reach considering Willis is 2nd to Carp in every category! While I still remain undecided, they ought to just give the Cy to the lowest ERA and be done with it. Why the voting process?