- This topic has 87 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 2 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Other teams poached our quality analytics team members that were innovative, and we were left with the average ones.
Were they poached or did the organization not value their contributions and show them the door?
It could be interpreted as though there was an internal power struggle between analytics and the “same way we’ve always done things” and the analytics team lost.
How advanced the anaytic is, and the philosophy as to how analytics is used, are two separate things.
Agreed. It could just be that the Cardinals are terrible at interpreting data, while other organizations have figured out how to use it for competitive advantage.
the quantity and quality of people leaving the organization in such a short period of time should have set off alarm bells in the owner’s suite.
Given Mr. DeWitt’s tenure and experience in the business world, and the baseball world, it would be absurd to think that the alarm bells didn’t go off, or that he didn’t hear them. He would be well aware of what brain drain is. Maybe the soothing and confident voice of Our Mo reassured him that the organization was in good hands and all was well. Hold out your hand. Take these beans. They’re magic. The analytics guy that BDW hired, Luhnow, and the experts he brought in, were replaced by guys that Mo hired. Fast forward to now.
It could be interpreted as though there was an internal power struggle between analytics and the “same way we’ve always done things” and the analytics team lost.
Brian has already explained that it happened the other way around. Analytics won, Jockety was out, Mo was in.
LACF asked:
Were they poached or did the organization not value their contributions and show them the door?
It could be interpreted as though there was an internal power struggle between analytics and the “same way we’ve always done things” and the analytics team lost.
I don’t believe it happened that way. Again, the Walt-led “same way as the past” group left in 2007. Luhnow left after the 2011 season and a lot of people followed him, in and out of uniform. The Cardinals were concerned, but did not keep people from leaving for a promotion.
As some may remember, one of those not chosen to move to Houston, Chris Correa, was revengeful about that despite having received a major promotion with the Cardinals. His “rougish” actions which were also illegal while serving as scouting director further set the organization back.
Bling said:
How advanced the anaytic is, and the philosophy as to how analytics is used, are two separate things. I am not sure why that point keeps being obscured.
It is being obscured because there is nothing to back it up. The Reddit post I shared was very clear that the Cards aren’t using analytics to the extent of just about any other organization. It didn’t say they are being misused. It said they’re not being used much at all.
You are implying that Maddux (not Albert as you said) left because Texas’ use of analytics is superior to the Cardinals. Based on what information was that part of his decision making process?
Here is an article from Goold quoting Maddux directly. He says he retired (to his home in TEXAS) but was soon convinced to join the Rangers because they had big plans to add multiple free agent pitchers and make a run for the title, which they soon accomplished. (As we know, the Cardinals were (both then and now) just hoping to just make the post-season somehow.)
That increased chance to win a title while living at home instead of hundreds of miles away as reason to delay his retirement is infinitely more credible than some imagined tussle over analytics.
To continue the analogy, when you swing a hammer wildly, everything looks like a nail.
A smoking gun is the need to go with an organization guy rather than a proven manager who brings something to the table. A religion doesn’t need or want anybody bringing something to the table because everything that is wanted on the table is already there. There is also a lot of smokiness in abruptly firing Shildt during a successful run, which seems more like a panicky response to heresy than a thoughtful response to pushback.
Bloom is an intriguing sub plot. Brought in directly by BDW as was Luhnow all those years ago. But Bloom has been invisible, to us at least. I wonder how invisible to others.
I do remember the Correa issues.
It just seems so odd that the architects for building the analytics departments in Houston & Baltimore came from the Cardinals organization, and now the Cardinals seem to be at the bottom of MLB in terms of analytics. Even if a few people leave, it should not cause your analytics department to collapse the way it has.
It seems like there is a storyline we are missing…
It seems like there is a storyline we are missing…
Mo was in charge when they left, and when their replacements were hired. My theory is he fancied himself an expert and turned the FO into amateur hour, all the while convincing BDW that he had things in hand. I am sure we will hear the competing theory some day. The one where the organization’s woes are nobody’s fault.
KCB wrote:
I’m curious why many people have the assumption that the Cardinals are in fact heavily driven by anylitics? Is the anonymous information accurate? Maybe Brian could share some light.
Brian wrote:
KCB, those who theorize that the Cards are (too) heavily driven by analytics will need to answer your question. I have already asked similar questions and got nothing substantive back. I have made it clear I do not agree with them and provided examples from outsiders that conflict with their position.
On a somewhat related issue I would like to know why the Cardinals have refused to hire a manager with MLB managerial experince since 2011? Is it possible that a more experienced manager would be less inclinced to go along with a top down analytic driven approach or is it just a coincidence?
Probably because they felt somewhat intimidated with the presence of TLR and resolved to never again come close to risking a similar arrangement.
It seems like there is a storyline we are missing…
Well, one important piece of the story is that Luhnow was primarily responsible for hiring most of the people who fairly could have been grouped under “analytics.” Many of those people followed him to Houston.
But I think it is entirely fair to wonder 1) why ownership and the FO didn’t aggressively “re-recruit” some of those people and try harder to retain them by giving them the kind of promotions they got in Houston (at the time, I remember thinking the Cardinals seemed far too passive/accepting of what was a pretty massive raid of their personnel); and 2) whether the organization aggressively sought outside talent to “re-stock” the FO with people with new/fresh ideas and continue to evolve (which is what the Cardinals did in bringing in Luhnow, et al, in the first place).
Perhaps Brian can fill in some more names, but in terms of visible senior analytics-oriented execs, I don’t get the impression there was a significant re-stocking. Basically, Girsch, Kantrovitz (re-hired in 2012, departed in 2014 for Oakland), and Flores are the names I can think of off the top of my head. Jeff Albert was hired to revamp hitting instruction for the entire organization using advanced analytics (similar to what he’s doing for the Mets, only without the MLB hitting coach responsibilities), but of course he departed in 2022 after a fairly short tenure. I’m sure I’m missing some names, but it doesn’t seem like the organization kept pushing the envelope after the Houston exodus.
it doesn’t seem like the organization kept pushing the envelope after the Houston exodus.
It doesn’t make sense that they would back off the move into analytics at that point. It seems more likely that it was thought the people who remained and those subsequently brought in were adequate.
I’m sure they did believe what they had was adequate, but in their business, standing still is falling behind. The notion isn’t that they “backed off,” but rather that they didn’t keep advancing and challenging the status quo in the same way they had in the past. It’s worth noting that over that same post-2011 time period, several large(r) market teams like the Dodgers, Red Sox, Phillies, Cubs, Giants, etc. were ramping up their commitment of resources to data analysis, engineering, etc. The market was moving rapidly, especially as the larger market teams started staffing up and bidding more aggressively for talent. It’s hard to stay ahead of the curve when you’re frequently poached, but rarely the poacher.
It’s hard to stay ahead of the curve when you’re frequently poached, but rarely the poacher.
Yes, the Cardinals should be raiding the scouting / player development departments of teams like the Guardians, Rays and Brewers as often as possible.
Vs. MLB managers most likely to be fired (per @BetOnline_ag), the #stlcards are 11-11.
Mgr, odds to be fired, W/L vs. StL
Black COL 3/2, 2-2
Schneider TOR 4/1, 0-0
Kotsay OAK 5/1, 1-2
Grifol CHW 6/1, 2-1
Schumaker MIA 6/1, 3-3
Marmol STL 10/1, n/a
Hinch DET 11/1, 2-1
Bell CIN…— Brian Walton (@B_Walton) June 20, 2024
Read an articl a few weeks ago talking about Ollie being a strong candidate to be fired. The article said something like “….the Cardinals have been mistagged for awhile.”
The comment was just thrown out there, with no examples of mismanagement.
But you watch this club and you see it. We lose two 1 run games to lowly Miami, one in extras and one in the ninth, and Helsley does not even make an appearance.
I understand him not used in game one, which we won anyway. But game two he should have been in there instead of Roycroft. And if not, in game three he could have taken the ninth.
Yeah, of course. It stands to reason that you always place the assortment of players on to the field that give you the best chance to win the game that you’re playing during the here and now. Worry about tomorrow if you make it to tomorrow because it may never come. Or it could rain…Haha!
Yep – when you have a chance to win today you take it. You don’t “save” that chance for tomorrow, as 1TD and the Beatles said, “tomorrow may rain”.
That second game you could have kept King out there, or the best option was Helsley. Roycroft was coming off an appearance where he walked the bases loaded, and has appeared in only a few big league games. Just egregiously bad managing in that one. Using Helsley would have meant he was unavailable for the series finale, but again, you don’t worry about what might happen. You do your best with what is happening.
Do you really think Helsley was available and not used? I find that hard to believe. I’m assuming he wasn’t available or he would have been used. I’m thinking he’s dealing with something, which is why he’s been not used.
Contrary to popular belief but Helsley, Jo Jo, and Kitty can’t be used every game. Sometimes a manager does have to think to the next game and go with who he has available today. If we had an offense that could consistently put some runs on the board the bullpen wouldn’t be such a tightrope walk.
So, maybe Helsley is dealing with some sort of infirmity and the Cardinals are keeping his mysterious and unannounced malady from being disclosed to the press and public as though it were a closely guarded state secret? Hmmm…That’s right in line with how they typically operate.
Interesting to see people talking about (and drawing conclusions about) people they don’t know and have never met in person.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.