- This topic has 75 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 3 months, 2 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I don’t think Stanek has much trade value …his Era has not been below 4 since 2022, the first game he gave up 3 walks and game 2 he gives up 3 hits and the lead.
I think with this bullpen right now Romero has to be the closer, though I think Leahy could do it as well but they have him starting for now.
Pages throwing out DeLuca to end the top of the 10th was pivotal. I guess he was D replacement for Ivan earlier?
21 batters to get 18 outs, nice job McG.
The boys are finding a way.The manager was apparently bewitched by Stanek’s five good innings in Spring Training.
Bob, the output of the analytics dept informs management decisions. You need to march on over to Busch, go down to the sub-basement, kick aside the old pizza boxes and give those wonks a talking to. Avoid loud noises and sudden movements.
I would probably have O’Brien in the ninth, but he can lose the plate at times as well (as well as Svanson and Stanek that is).
Some luck in winning this two, but the Rays had some luck as well with topping balls the dribbled and still reached base.
Walker’s mechanics still look bad to me, although we are only two games in. He does seem to be more selective, so that’s a start.
JJ has a very quick bat. I can see the potential there.
How about that. Two in a row. That’s called a winning streak. It has known to be contagious. They have happened before. See you tomorrow Cardinals fans.
San Francisco finally scored a run this year.
It took them 21 innings to do it.
Off to the races now……
On the Rays runner that scored from 1st I didn’t really see that much of a misplay by anyone, walkers throw to Winn was lower than you’d like at the shins….credit to the Tampa runner for good base running and being fast
Well i didnt get to watch cause i had my own baseball praxtice but good to see them win even if our bullpen still isnt good. I dont consider the rays a good team so its hard to judge here. They will probably finish behind last in the american league east. But still some good here.
Mcgreevy threw a great game it seems. Didnt get the win but he did his job. Weatherholt a walk off winner is great. I think we may have a young star even if i still dont think they should have him leading off but hes getting the job done in spite of that.
I don’t think I would have had Wetherholt lead off his first MLB game, but to me he is the ideal lead off hitter.
Willie would you rather have someone else there or just think it is too early for him?
Albert, i just dont think its a pressure you should put on a young kid. Now its kind of a imagined pressure cause in general you are only leading off once, usually after that its random. But i look at it like being the closer. Its just 3 outs like any other but mentally it is a little different. Its early but so far hes responded, you cant argue right now but its still a debate if he starts struggling. Personally i see weatherholt as a perfect 2 hole hitter, i would have scott lead off with his speed. Weatherholt tends to like to see pitches so it would give scott time to steal. Then if teams start trying to get ahead of weatherholt to counter it, you can do nore hit n runs. Gives you options.
Plus i like weatherholts ability to move runners over, a lost art in todays game. Say scott gets on, steals second. I think weatherholt will def almost always try to move him up with less than 2 outs at the worst. I think the kid is awesome. Get a couple more like him and a couple great pitchers, we can get back to being the cardinals for a new generation.
I disagree wholeheartedly Willie. The problem is you’re now giving 100-150 more at bats a season to your worst (or 2nd worst) hitter who rarely gets on base. You don’t want an automatic out to incur prior to Wetherholt hitting. Sure, when he does get on base, it’s great. But he rarely does so that’s a big problem. Most of the time you’re killing your offense. You’re starting with an out in front of the big hitters.
On the other hand, Wetherholt is a perfect leadoff hitter because he hits well and walks a ton. Plus he has good speed. We just need more guys like Burleson to hit behind him who can move him over or hit him in. The team desperately needs Walker and Gorman to get to the next level (or someone good to replace them).
I also agree that Wetherholt would be a great 2-spot hitter for the reasons you mentioned. But we don’t have anyone else who gets on base enough to go in the 1-spot besides Burleson and that clogs up the basepaths.
Scott is different now, so is Church, from last season. Three positive choices and I’d like to see all 3 at leadoff this season.
Welljnevel, i didnt watch much last year so i dont really know scotts hitting ability. I was just going off what ive seen so far.so ill give you that if it turns out true. Just mind you ozzie smith was once on of the worst hitters in the league so things can change, in a quick turnaround sometimes. So take scott out of the equarion and you are prob right. There isnt too many other options and management is to blame for that. Traditional leadoff guys are fairly easy to find though in todays game they arent valued enough. Far as stealing bases, weatherholt doesnt appear to be super fast though maybe im wrong. I still wouldnt havr batted him leadoff for my main reason even if hes the best option just because i dont believe in possibly hurting a young player to cover for mismanagement. You could have anothet walker on your hands though hopefully not with weatherholt. I remember walker doing pretty good when he was first given a chance. Far as out being on the boatd when the big guys come up, thats typically the case. Lots of damage gets done with one outs or even two outs on the board. Though to say our guys really match up with the big guys metaphor could be a stretch but who knows.
Also to point out, in our lineup, i would say weatherholt is the big guy, potentially wise anyway. I know other teams bat their best hitters leafoff, im just not a fan. Im old school. I just believe in role players and i thinks its even more important in a age of haves and have nots when it comes to the have nots being able to challenge the haves.
Agreed with Jnevel. Being fast doesn’t mean a player is a good lead off hitter. OBP and just being a good hitter who deserves more PA are my criteria. Scott’s speed doesn’t really matter if he isn’t getting on base and I would rather have OBP and doubles power there.
jj…. that was the Sept. 16th game won by the Cards 3-0. McG threw 7.0 scoreless frames. That start followed his 62 GS t Sea on the 10th.He pitched 6.0 innings and 1 ER…. a game the Cards BP would lose 4-2. There were some signs back in ’25 that McG could be a #2.
I dont get where i said anything that said being fast makes you a good lead off hitter. I did state that basically because you are once a bad hitter doesnt mean u always will be. Which is true. Its also a fact that being fast helps you steal more bases. Its not always the only factor but it def helps.
Mcgreevy i think is our best pitcher. Libby is ok but i dont think hes number 1. Have to wait n see on maye.
McGreevey is a very Mozeliak-like old school Cardinal. He’s what good looks like when everything comes together. I think Chaim’s team deserves some credit as well for helping to finish him off as a prospect. I believe Liberatore will be the better pitcher this season, but that it might be very close. I very much like our rotation this season (including the 3 depth options of Fitts, Matthews, and Dobbins. It will be nice to have mostly consistent, competitive starts. Last season, you never knew what you were going to get from start to start.
I think hitters acclimated to mid-upper 90s and triple digits are thrown off by McGreevy who lives 90-92 playing off slower stuff down to low 80s. Meanwhile, we see relievers throwing upper 90s can’t throw strikes much less hit the black. They get it over and catch too much plate. Hitters have no trouble catching up to the heat. A pitcher can’t come to the MLB table with nothing but heat.
I believe Stanek as closer is a business move – not necessarily a manager move. If the team is going to sell him at the deadline anyway, they want to market him as having closer experience because it raises his value. If he continues to struggle though, he will either be released or relegated to unimportant innings. While it may be Ollie’s ultimate decision to pitch Stanek, my guess is there is/was strong encouragement to get him closer experience.
I predicted a step back from the bullpen. Like I said Thursday, 3-4 of these guys in the pen now are simply placeholders until our next men up are fully ready.
I agree with you regarding Stanek. The front office invested $3.5M in him and expect an ROI. My question is why they signed him in the first place?
I also agree with the the 3 or 4 bullpen pieces who may not be around much longer. My question is why one of them could haven’t been cut loose earlier in order to give Velazquez a 40 man roster spot?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.