- This topic has 2,485 replies, 69 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’d like Monty back as the #2. I’m not sure Gray is the #1 we need, but he’s an upgrade over our 2023 rotation for sure. Would it make more sense to spend on the bullpen? Maybe. I do think there’s reason to believe that the defense will be a bit better in 2024 vs 2023, but the bullpen is a work in progress.
Truly the Cards need Graceffo, Hence…someone…to be the next #1 from within. We haven’t developed a long term top of rotation starter (that we had for 5+ years) probably since Lance Lynn, if you even call him that. It’s been year to year types since then and supplementing with free agents or trades. We’ve traded multiple TOR guys away, which hurts.
4/2: GmSc 45, 9 RS — lineup win
4/8: GmSc 78, 6 RS — SP / lineup win
4-13: GmSc 56, 0 RS — lineup loss
4/18: GmSc 16, 7 RS — SP loss (exited behind 7-2 after 4 IP)
4/24: GmSc 65, 0 RS — bullpen / lineup loss (exited tied 0-0 after 6 IP, ND) (4 RA pen / 0 RS lineup)
4/29: GmSc 47, 0 RS — lineup loss (exited behind 1-0 after 6.2 IP)
5/5: GmSc 57, 4 RS — bullpen loss (exited ahead 3-2 after 6 IP, ND) BS
5/10: GmSc 29, 4 RS — SP loss (exited behind 6-3 after 5 IP)
5/16: GmSc 46, 2 RS — lineup loss (exited behind 3-2 after 5.1 IP)
5/22: GmSc 33, 5 RS — bullpen loss (exited tied 4-4 after 5, ND) BS
5/28: GmSc 47, 3 RS — bullpen loss (exited ahead 3-2 after 5, ND) BS
6/3: GmSc 55, 3 RS — D/SP loss (tied 1-1 after 5, 3 un-ER)
6/9: GmSc 71, 7 RS — SP/lineup win
6/14: GmSc 52, 5 RS — bullpen loss (exited ahead 5-3 after 6.1 IP, ND) BS
6/20: GmSc 70, 7 RS — SP/lineup win
6/27: GmSc 61, 4 RS — SP win
7/2: GmSc 71, 5 RS — SP win (exited ahead 2-1 after 6.2 IP)
7/7: GmSc 57, 5 RS — bullpen loss (exited ahead 5-1 after 4.1 IP, ND) BS (2)
7/18: GmSc 59, 5 RS — lineup win (exited tied 1-1 after 6 IP, ND) Arenado, 3 run walk-off HR
7/23: GmSc 38, 2 RS — SP loss (exited behind 7-0 after 3 IP)
7/28: GmSc 49, 2 RS — lineup loss (exited behind 3-2 after 6 IP)
——-
Don’t dally with the tally….Lineup: -1.0
SP: 0.0
Pen: -5.5
D: -0.5The -7.0 additional loss shares, of Monty’s 7-14 W/L (2023 stl),imo
Some think that the pen as it is right now is inferior to last year’s pen. I think that is a conclusion reached with one’s nose stuck in a spreadsheet, crunching numbers. I contend that the opposite is the case, and have made the point several times. With a competent (if unexciting) rotation is place, the pen will be substantially beter than last year, apart from any personnel changes. A better performance from the pen will help the starters fare better.
None of that means Mo shouldn’t be trying to upgrade the pen, and I think he will. Mo has brought in a bunch of new MiLB pitchers and I don’t think he plans on keeping all the ones he already had. Its not even January yet.
bling said:
Some think that the pen as it is right now is inferior to last year’s pen. I think that is a conclusion reached with one’s nose stuck in a spreadsheet, crunching numbers. I contend that the opposite is the case, and have made the point several times.
As one who asserted that, I find your comment rather insulting. Even if data is distasteful, it could help the discussion advance beyond repeating opinion. If you did and I missed it, please re-share.
Additional data: The 2023 Cardinals already threw the 11th fewest bullpen innings of the 30 MLB teams at 579 2/3 and were well under the MLB average. So they probably couldn’t drop much lower in 2024 innings pitched even with the new/old starters hoped to go deeper into games.
However, the 2023 Cardinals’ pen ERA was just 23rd at 4.47. Seems to me the best way to lower that is to get better relievers or one has to hope the returnees improve.
I guess one could argue that if there were more dependable options in the 2024 pen, the same guys wouldn’t be used (and perhaps overused) as much, but again, two of the better relievers in 2023 were traded away and haven’t been replaced to date. (I pointed out earlier that Hicks and Stratton provided 1.9 WAR before they left.)
Thanks for the game log data, jj. Facts are facts, but I disagree with your labeling. For example, blaming the pen for a 0-0 game that they turned into a 1-0 loss is technically accurate, but IMO, it really was the offense’s fault. If you don’t score, you aren’t going to win no matter how good your pitching is…
P.S. I am sorry I sent you down that rabbit hole. 😉
The only fix for this team is to win some games. I happen to believe they’ll lose more games than they’ll win until they find a manager who possesses some practical experience in the areas of placing players in the best position to be successful and then motivating them to excel for the purpose of winning baseball games. Right now, it seems as though the current Redbird manager’s practical experience is limited to pointing fingers and placing blame for the failures of this team on anyone besides himself. It’s my view that nothing will fix this team other than a change in leadership and I expect the W/L record under the current Cardinal manager to get worse. Hopefully they won’t allow things to get out of hand like they did in ’23 and they’ll pull the pin on this guy before the entire ’24 season’s in the fire.
I agree BW, 4/29 should be a shared loss.
Adjusted: pen -5.0, lineup -1.5
——
The other 5 bullpen losses we scored 3, 4, 5, 5 and 5.I agree the pen is currently weaker than last season.
The concerns of Monty’s 7-14 W/L still exist, however a fan chooses to view it.
I think I should attempt to make my point another way.
My position is if the season commenced right now with present personnel, the pen would perform better than last year. Therefore it is better than last year.
Hope was the theme to last seasons pitching staff. The FO has shifted to proven and reliable with their additions this winter. I hope that applies to the pen also, with future additions.
I think the pen as currently constructed would perform a little better this year than last year because the starters will provide more innings.
I also think a couple more bullpen arms are going to be added but we will have to see who they are.
I do not think this (current) team wins the division and will be pecking around the edges of the playoffs all year. I don’t expect another hideous start like 2023 that had us 14 games under in May at what 10-24 wasn’t it?
To me, this looks like a 78-83 win team without further additions or a couple of prospects busting onto the ML scene a year ahead of schedule.
ZTR said:
I think the pen as currently constructed would perform a little better this year than last year because the starters will provide more innings.
This assumes either the pen was overworked in 2023 or the guys who remain will improve in 2024. No one is explaining which of these they believe and why.
As pointed out, the Cards had the 11th fewest pen innings in MLB last season, which indicates as a group they were not overworked. In terms of improving YTY, they have traded away two of their better relievers of 2023 in Hicks and Stratton and have not replaced them.
To me, that does not add up that they will be better without more help from the outside.
the Cards had the 11th fewest pen innings in MLB last season, which indicates as a group they were not overworked. In
This assumes that 30 groups of relievers have the exact same work load tolerance or capacity. How many total innings somebody else’s pen threw is irrelevant. What matters is that our pen won’t be coming into the game early so much, which means the end of their bench won’t be out there as much. Late innings guys won’t get stretched beyond an inning as much. More quality starts will allow the pen run smooth and function better.
I disagree with throwing out the comparison point. Looking at other teams indicates how many innings the pens backing up MLB’s best staffs are expected to throw. The Cards relievers of 2023 were below average in innings thrown but also way below average in results. Both matter.
This improvement theory for 2024 assumes that the two 36-year-olds and one 34-year-old added to the rotation (and the 35-year-old and 33-year-old guys back) will actually be able to throw more innings than the 2023 rotation, which was 14th, about the middle of MLB in innings pitched.
Among the teams whose starters pitched FEWER innings than the Cardinals in 2023 were Arizona, the Yankees, the Rays and the Dodger$.
What I am most focused on in the bigger picture is that the narrative that the 2023 starters didn’t go deep enough and the pen was overworked, so the new guys will improve both the 2024 rotation and a pen that currently has fewer weapons than before is very questionable to me for multiple reasons.
We won’t know the answer until next fall…
Well reiterating an opinion over n over doesn’t make it fact. Usually facts n numbers tell the story. The fact is this bullpen on paper is weaker than last year’s. Could those things change,yea if we get some decent arms to change. Getting no one or some low hanging fruit more than likely won’t do it. There is no guarantee that this rotation gives us any more innings than last year’s. In fact history would suggest they will pitch less innings. I doubt the returning bullpen guys will improve that much, in fact they may regress. Yea I guess you can hope they do better and if they manage too, one can pounce upon that as having some great knowledge but saying that would be just as wrong as saying MO is a genius when one of his low hanging fruit guys does good. Baseball is a numbers and statistics game. Sure there are a few intangibles that you can’t really measure by numbers but most of the time, history n numbers don’t lie.
The Cardinals ranked 24th in quality starts last year. I still think that takes a toll on a bullpen. It takes a toll on the offense also. It takes a toll on everything. If we can get more quality starts in 2024 you have to think that the rising tide will lift all boats.
The Cardinals ranked 24th in quality starts last year. I still think that takes a toll on a bullpen. It takes a toll on the offense also. It takes a toll on everything. If we can get more quality starts in 2024 you have to think that the rising tide will lift all boats.
This is exactly the point gscottar. And I think this is what motivated Mo to say he was going after innings depth. It is really the key factor. Some look at various pitching stats and metrics and say Lynn and Gibson are not good and don’t make the rotation better. That is absolutely wrong. What matters is the ability to turn in quality starts, and they are a huge improvement in that area.
On the 2024 rotation thread, I had previously compared Lynn and Gibson to the starters they theoretically replace, which is everybody who started other than Montgomery, Mikolas and Matz. Montgomery is replaced by Gray, the other two are still here.
Lynn and Gibson replace:
Wainwright 21 starts, 4 quality starts,
Flaherty 20 starts, 6 quality starts,
Hudson 12 starts, 4 quality starts,
Liberatore 11 starts,2 quality starts,
Thompson 9 starts,1 quality starts,
Woodford 8 starts, 0 quality starts,
Rom 8 starts, 0 quality starts,Those guys handled the 4 and 5 rotation slots and also injury fill ins for Matz and whoever else.
89 starts, 17 quality starts. 19%
Gibson 33 starts 17 quality starts
Lynn 32 starts, 13 quality starts.Combined 65 starts, 30 quality starts. 46%
So the 2023 guys turned in a quality start 19% of the time. They are replaced by Lynn and Gibson, who turned in a quality start 46% of the time. That is a massive improvement over last year, and as gscotar has said, it will make the pen better, and everything else better.
All that looks good on paper but doesn’t support historical facts that players skills diminish as they age particularly moreso after 30. Also those said relievers weren’t always that great when they were fresh. Again just seems like a lot of wishing and hoping. You know what would help the bullpen more than all that. One or two actual quality arms in the bullpen.
willie, I agree we will have to wait and see if it works out, and I admit it might not. I think it was a smart way to address the problem with minimal risk.
Its obviously a short term fix, even if whatever options for a follow on year are picked up. The whole rotation doesn’t have much shelf life. So the question is, then what? Is Bill supposed to keep paying cash for starters?
Welcome to the rebuild of our pitching staff. Again, this “fix” won’t happen in one season.
The options on Gibson and Lynn for 2025, give us the flexibility to see what blocking our SP prospects this season, produces for 2025.
Every rotation member has club control for at least two seasons at locked in rates. The FO has this and next offseason, and two trade deadlines, to rebuild the staff well enough to avoid buying innings eaters annually.
It’s a necessary, disguised rebuild, with Sonny Gray as the marketing tool, and no guarantee the overall staff improves. TBD.
Welcome to the rebuild.
Is it just a coincidence that, besides Gray, none of the rotation commitments run longer that Mo’s contract, which runs through 2025?
Well Bling, winning and risk go hand in hand. I take people at their word. They said they were going to fix the issues and were willing to spend to do it. Outside of gray they have really done nothing different. Gray I feel they overpaid for and I don’t like it back ended so much but I understand it so it’s ok but still will hurt us down the line. It seems like a win now move. Well if you are going to do that move, you have to follow it up with more actual moves that follow the win now idea. Keeping the money in the vault does nothing for that. We aren’t the dodgers I understand but they made a great back ended move followed up by a great move, followed by more. Why can’t the Cardinals be that inventive. There is no guarantee it works for the dodgers but I give them an A fir effort. While the Cardinals aren’t in that kind of position, they are in a good enough position by their standards to do something while not equal to those the dodgers did but by the Cardinals usual way of doing things just as equally enticing for its fan.
Yes, it is a coincidence. DeWitt isn’t going to replace himself, and even if he did, the franchise would continue on its conservative path.
jj hit the nail on the head, IMO. The benefit of a rebuild of the pitching on the fly from their perspective is to remain competitive enough to keep fans interested. I feel for Goldy and Arenado who aren’t going to get to play on a championship caliber team. By the time the pitching transitions in the best case, they will be at or near their end.
They aren’t going to trade the two marquee hitters because they are key to remaining respectable and keeping the revenue flowing in the interim.
Regarding improving, they were so bad last year that the improvement would have to be huge to matter. Based on last year’s standings, they could improve a whopping 12 wins over 2023 and still miss the playoffs. It would take 22 more to win the division outright.
Honestly, does anyone see +12 wins in the projections of the 2024 staff vs. the 2023 staff? I sure don’t. And that is the point. Even becoming marginally better than a terrible team isn’t going to be enough to matter if playing in October is the goal.
But if the goal is to be competitive, that is a much lower bar. Despite what they say, which will be the same as always (to get in the playoffs and see what happens), their actions tell me the real aim may be lower in 2024. Buy time until the pitching can be retooled.
Summary: Debating whether the 2024 rotation and the pen are slightly better than 2023 probably isn’t going to matter in the big picture.
I agree rebuilding from last year is daunting. But bringing in 60% of a rotation from outside is a huge influx. That is not to say it is enough, but it is a substantial contribution to a rebuild.
Is it too much to expect the player development system to also contribute? Or is it 100% on ownership to just write checks to buy a team?
So my question is: What is the system’s contribution to the rebuild going to consist of when the opening day roster rolls out?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.