K-Town

The "cool quirks" that Busch will have that other new stadiums don't have is a highly competetive team and a die-hard fan following. It's being promoted as an extremely comfortable stadium....... a great place to watch baseball. I wouldn't want anything more or anything less, really.

It's not based on "career" in my opinion. It's based on who you'd want as your first baseman RIGHT NOW. Given the choice of picking Lee or Pujols, I think everybody outside of Chicago would take Pujols. Heck, even if you base it on last season, you'd probably want Pujols (based on Win Shares). No, if you base it on last season, I'd want Lee who was better offensively and defensively. Pujols actually had slightly higher Win Shares, which takes defense into account. You can use other measures that favor Lee, but there was no clear-cut favorite, in my opinion.

It's not based on "career" in my opinion. It's based on who you'd want as your first baseman RIGHT NOW. Given the choice of picking Lee or Pujols, I think everybody outside of Chicago would take Pujols. Heck, even if you base it on last season, you'd probably want Pujols (based on Win Shares).

I think it depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Are you trying to put together a predicted 2006 NL-C all star team by the position they are going to play this year? Or are you trying to put together the best possible team using players form the NL-C at positions where they are capable of playing? Both are valid questions. When you vote for "All Stars", you vote for the best at each position, don't you? Based on that, it HAS to be Pujols at first base. Depends on if I go by career or last season's numbers. Based on last season, Lee has just as much claim to firstbase as Pujols on this list. I think I'd vote for the best player at that position. I'm not sure you can make a solid case that Lee is the better player.

I think it depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Are you trying to put together a predicted 2006 NL-C all star team by the position they are going to play this year? Or are you trying to put together the best possible team using players form the NL-C at positions where they are capable of playing? Both are valid questions. When you vote for "All Stars", you vote for the best at each position, don't you? Based on that, it HAS to be Pujols at first base.

You wouldn't be reading about it if they hadn't left the cardboard out, would you? Pretty clever, actually.

That's archaic thinking, you're talking about Ponson, he's definitely not the definition of someone I'd think of as far as being proven at this stage. He's a project. Not giving a younger pitcher a chance is the reason why STL gave up too much to get Mulder. I think that's a good post, UK. I pretty much agree with you.

I would assume that the people around Reyes believe that there's something he can work on at AAA. Maybe he's not "perfect" yet. I doubt if they're just going to send him to AAA because they don't like him. That would be stupid. I would assume that they would have a reason. It's hard for me to argue with the way they've handled the pitching staff over the last couple of years. I trust them.

Do you not remember what Marquis said about not being in the post-season rotation? The comment he made about it were extremely selfish and he is prone to big innings. Like Simontacchi of a couple years ago, he got by on smoke and mirrors last year. Look at his DIPS era and you'll see what I mean. His numbers were not impressive to me, just fortunate the Cards have a very good infield defense rather than his actual pitching abilities. You didn't mention Marquis, I did. My point is simply this: If Reyes is pitching at AAA, then it's ONLY because the other 5 starters are healthy, and pitching well. How could that POSSIBLY be a "bad" thing?

It depends on pitching "well" and your definition of it. Is he pitching well enough to keep Reyes in the minors or is he pitching well enough to put Marquis in the pen? He and Marquis would have to pitch extremely well to waste a year of Reyes at AAA. He'd have to pitch better than Marquis to merit pitching in the rotation? Btw, when did Marquis become the Gotti of the Cards' rotation? What has done to become a fixture in the rotation over Reyes? He's a selfish player who has had trouble focusing during points in many games he pitched in last year. You don't give up all those big innings w/out losing focus. If Ponson defeated the odds and pitched well enough to make the rotation, I would rather see Reyes in the rotation over Marquis. Of course, I;d still rather see Reyes over Ponson. You don't think Reyes could surpass the numbers of Marquis last year? If Ponson duplicated the numbers of Marquis, would that be considered a good season? What's your problem with Marquis? He's given the Cards over 200 innings each of the last 2 years, and posted ERA+'s of 113 and 103. Besides that, I didn't even mention Marquis in my post.

Meh, Reyes is overrated. Let the best pitcher win the 5th spot, if that is Ponson than so be it. If Reyes is outpitched by Ponson, some stars will have aligned in a form I have never seen before. At this stage, it's all spec. but I can't see Ponson even coming close to outpitching Reyes. I agree, Reyes should win. However, I refuse to be close minded about Ponson. CFICT, I hope to give you the respect your posting here deserves. But I refuse to buy into this Ponson hype that is accorded to everyone that dons a Cardinal uniform, after the initial dismay. Ponson never was an elite pitcher and although his numerous alcohol-related arrests points to a reason, I'm shying away from this feel good story. The fact that he's even considered as competition for a starting spot and spring training will be the "showdown" is insulting to me and it should be insulting to Anthony Reyes. Hopefully that will prove motivating to Reyes and not de-motivating. As Wolf has said before, you can't teach healthy. That being said I'm not going to boo him on the mound if he happens to win the job over Reyes. I'm just going to wait for the other shoe to drop and lament Reyes' dwindling chances to prove himself while still with the Cards. I don't think there's any "hype". If Ponson is pitching, and Reyes is at AAA, then it means only ONE thing. Ponson must be pitching relatively well. I'm not sure how that can be construed as a BAD thing, quite frankly. If Ponson is pitching well, and then hits a wall, the Reyes is there to save the day. We're not talking about dumping Reyes in order to give Ponson a job. We're talking about an ideal situation in which the Cards would have a little depth. Anybody who can create a scenario in which Ponson pitching well is a BAD thing isn't thinking the situation through very deeply. I'm not saying that Ponson WILL pitch well. I'm just playing along with a "what if" scenario that someone else created.

Reyes pitching 150 innings at AAA this year would probably the best thing that could happen for the Cards. Basically, it would mean that Ponson is being effective enough to hold a job while being on a short leash. If that's the case, then Marquis becomes solid trade bait at the deadline.

How accurate was ZIPS in projecting the two, last year?

What did PECOTA predict for each of them last year?

If you consider that to be a problem, then I think you're misrepresenting it as a baseball problem. It's as much a problem with society as it is with baseball.

Hitting a 2-run shot when down 1 in the bottom of the 9th is one thing. Hitting a solo shot when up 7 in the 4th is another. You don't want the guy to showboat? Then get him out in the 4th inning. I think people exaggerate about players showboating today. It's blown out of proportion, in my opinion. Most players are classy. There are a few idiots in every crowd, just like there have always been.

This IS a game, folks. It's supposed to be fun. I don't have a problem with a guy being happy about hitting a home run.

I disagree. I think that players have show-boated since the game began. You just see it more now, because of ESPN.

I love the way that the game used to be played in an unselfish manner. Is that so bad? I'm not a racist, and I know about the doping problems within the sport. Too many times I watch the game today, and see a chance to win the game, but the hitter swings for a 600 ft. homer, rather than just attempt to make contact. Remember when players showed class when hitting a homerun, and didn't stand around to watch, taunt, and talk smack the entire time their running the bases(or their held to a single while admiring their shot)? That happened sometimes, but everyone is more concerned now about bringing down an opponent instead of respecting them. Sure there are positives and negatives about each generation of baseball, but everyone is going to enjoy their generation more. "Unselfish manner"? How is it "unselfish" to disallow blacks from playing? That's about as selfish as you can get. As far as hot-dogging around the bases, I'm not sure which era your referring to, specifically. I remember Jeffrey Leonard show-boating around the bases against the Cardinals in the playoffs, in 1987. I remember Jack Clark watching some of his home runs. Hell, Babe Ruth alledgedly pointing to the centerfield bleachers could be considered "showboating", but most people consider that to be "cool". That aspect of the game hasn't changed much, in my opinion. We just see it more now, because of ESPN. Alot of people are just looking for a reason to bag on players today, but they're really no different than players of other eras.

What "purists"? The ones that didn't allow blacks to play until the 1950's? The ones that ignored amphetamines in the 70's? The ones that ignored cocaine in the 80's? Come on. Pretending that this generation of ball players is any more tainted than any other isn't fair. Each generation uses whatever they can to gain an advantage. If steroids had been easily accesilble in the 1970's, then you'd probably be talking about George Foster, Hank Aaron, Dave Parker, and Andre Dawson "ruining the game". "Purists" only means that they haven't figured out a way to to it better yet.

The Cards must've been using the invisible-man-on-base rule. I used to hit pretty well in front of myself during our summer Wiffle ball seasons back in the day. Ahhh......... those were the days, weren't they?? :)

That is a good question. If you break it down to "who is the better hitter," I believe it is a no-brainer - Albert Pujols. I really can't think of a better overall hitter in the game than Pujols. Challenges welcome. Despite the fact that Pujols is a pretty good fielding 1st baseman, with the ability to play other positions - I would say that Derrek Lee is the better overall player of the two. Lee has good wheels, an incredible glove, and the jury is out concerning if he can continue to destroy inside pitching (the main reason he broke out in 2005). It is true that Pujols can steal a base, but Lee has superior speed, a better glove/reach, and a comparable bat (but not a better bat). In addition, I think it is fair to guess that DLee is going to drive in many more runs and score more runs than he did in 2005 - all because of the acquisition of Juan Pierre. Wow!!! :shock:

I just want to jump on and add to this. I do believe Sammy was juiced, but I also believe the corking was a complete accident. Not only did they check all those bats and find nothing, but Sammy was trying to get press conferences going immediately after it happened. He was being interviewed on ESPN by (I think) Gary Miller by the 7th inning. He was sincere in his apologies, and I honestly believe it was nothing more than a big mistake. Edit: During these in-game apologies, that's exactly what was coming out of his mouth -- apologies. Never excuses for what happened. He owned up to the mistake. Believe what you want to. The fact that the rest of his bats were clean means nothing. Why would he need more than one with cork? He's obviously not stupid enough to have a whole rack full of corked bats. Do you honestly believe that he had dozens of clean bats, but just happened to pick up the ONE bat with cork in it, by chance? I don't buy it...... sorry. To me, it doesn't matter. The cork wasn't going to help him. I've already said that I'd like to see both him AND McGwire in the HOF. I'm not holding one of them to any higher standard than the other.

First of all, I don't want to leave the impression that I'm ripping Sosa. I don't hate Sosa. I believe that he AND McGwire were instrumental in reviving baseball in the late 90's, and I'd like to see BOTH of them in the HOF. However, the fact remains that Sosa was caught cheating (the bat was illegal, whether he meant to do it or not........ it's akin to players saying that they didn't "intentionally" use steroids). McGwire was NOT caught cheating. I understand the McGwire's silence will be interpreted by many (including sportswriters) as an admission of guilt. In reality though, there is no admission of guilt. If writers want to use their imagination or their own method of connecting dots in order to keep McGwire out of the HOF, that's up to them........ it's their vote. However, it still remains unfair, until every player from the "steroid era" has been scrutinized in the exact same way. McGwire admitted to using andro. I'm not sure why the sportswriters can't leave it at that. I think the reason is because that story has already been written, and won't sell newspapers, so they want to invent "new" material.

After this year w/ expensive club option for 07. Mulder's just going to cost too much in free agency next year and it's not the Cards style to overpay like that. His peripherals are declining and he's not a power pitcher. The Mulder trade was a bad deal, but it still doesn't make sense to overpay for his performance. We'll see how he does this year, I guess. I think there's no chance Mulder doesn't test the market. The Edmonds option for '07 isn't bad. In fact, he'll go from $12 mil in '06 to $10 mil in '07. The buy-out is $3 mil, so they'd be much better off paying the extra $7 mil to keep him. At $10 mil, he'll be a bargain. Mulder will be over-valued, in my opinion, and the Cards should go a different route. It sounds like Marquis will be in the plans, along with Reyes and Carpenter. Wainwright COULD earn a spot by '07, but I'd hate to count on him, at this point. Suppan might get an extension, at some point. Otherwise, you use the $11 mil that you're paying Suppan and Mulder in '06, and head to the free agent market.