- This topic has 305 replies, 30 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
“this is all made up speculation to try and find a reason he is not being utilized.”
Woodford sits right between McFarland and VerHagen in reliever IP, and I’ve seen way too much of those two. I’m going to disagree “he is not being utilized.”
If the issue is he should be active and used more, then I agree, but it is not like he has spent the season in AAA. The narrative is getting a little overboard, imo.
Yep, I think you nailed it bling. The organization has a metric about Woodford that concludes “If we use this guy as a starter or in high leverage relief situations he will fail.” So they use guys that more closely fit the profile of a success in those situations, despite the fact that in past trials Woody has over-achieved (per the club’s metric) and these other guys have under-achieved.
The metric they are using is a cold, calculated decision with no room for creativity or common sense. It’s like management is saying, “Yeah, he has had some success, but we know that the next time we use him we are going to blow a game, and we cannot afford that.” This despite the fact that they are blowing games anyway, but at least they are giving them away within the framework of their metric.
It’s like management is saying, “Yeah, he has had some success, but we know that the next time we use him we are going to blow a game, and we cannot afford that.”
Not to split hairs, but I think the thought process goes into creating and implementing the metric rather than convincing themselves that they are right to abide by the result. The result is not to be questioned, much less overridden. Sort of a believe the science even if, intuitively, it doesn’t seem right approach. I think Schildt misunderstood that philosophy.
To set the record straight, I know and speak with Woodford regularly. I have asked the question about any issues with MO or OM and he has none. There have not been any altercations between them: this is all made up speculation to try and find a reason he is not being utilized. As much as I would like him it St. Louis, I hope he goes to another team so he can play the game he loves.
Thanks for the update 333.
If the issue is he should be active and used more, then I agree, but it is not like he has spent the season in AAA. The narrative is getting a little overboard, imo.
Agreed jj.
The metric they are using is a cold, calculated decision with no room for creativity or common sense.
Agreed mike. It must be the same metric that thought signing McFarland, Verhagen, Wittgren, Naughton, and Brooks was a good idea. Mo’s algorithm needs an update.
I think Schildt misunderstood that philosophy
Exactly bling, which is why I don’t think we will probably ever see a highly experienced veteran manager hired by Mo. The organization prefers minimal pushback.
Do metrics measure fire in the belly? Whether a player has some injury issues? His mental state? (Maybe he has family issues).
Etc. Etc. Etc.This poor old dead horse is still snorting like crazy.
Bottom line is he has performed not just better but way better than the bargain bin boys. He has value no doubt. Use him, trade him for someone that fits your plan, or release him so that he can play elsewhere.
Do metrics measure fire in the belly?
How would an intangible like that be measured and quantified? I have seen stats called ‘late and close’ or the like, which might be an attempt to put a number on ‘clutch’. I’ve seen a numerical entry or letter grade in scouting profiles labeled ‘makeup’. Any observation-based reality has to be input as a number and its relevance described as a formula.
Bill James has a bio on Yogi Berra and basically said the Cardinals did not want to give Berra what they gave Garagiola because Berra just did not look like a baseball player. He was sort of funny looking – squat and a bit dumpy. What they missed was someone who was acute enough to watch those wrists when he hit. Yogi had tremendous wrists, and would generate a lot of power by snapping those wrists. A bit like Hank Aaron, but Hank was graceful doing it, while Yog looked like a beer keg.
He was rough as a catcher, but the Yankees had a Hall of Fame coach named Bill Dickey who “learned” Yogi all his skills.
The point is, not every successful ball player fits the mold of what you expect a good player to be. These days the metrics play a big part on what a successful player should look like. It seems Jake is not within the standard, so despite his success management seems to think they dodged a bullet when he was being used on a more regular basis.
Again, metrics don’t tell the whole story. What about a guy who’s in a slump and trying to figure out what the problem is? The mental wear and tear the slump is having on him.
How do analytics wonks measure that?All this is hogwash. Bottom line is Woodford has performed better the few times he has been used than most of the other guys they have used. A guy shouldn’t have to keep proving himself when you got guys that haven’t proven themselves at all. Like I’ve said before, don’t want to treat him fair and give him his due, then release him or trade him so him and the Cardinals can move on. But mainly just so that he will get a fair shot at staying in the majors where I feel he has done enough to do already.
Another “just one of those days” for Hudson. This is happening too often with him, better out of the pen. This would be a great time to give Woodford a couple starts… surely won’t be any worse than Hudson or Libby! If he is, then fine the metrics are right; but if he does well, which I think he will, then the metrics dont mean a thing.
But, but, but his spin rate isn’t high enough and his slider doesn’t have the proper arc. Plus he only tops out at 94 mph. Lol. All stuff that’s just on the computer and on paper.
But, but, but Woody’s spin rate isn’t high enough and his slider doesn’t have the proper arc. Plus he only tops out at 94 mph. Lol. All stuff that’s just on the computer and on paper.
Not true, actually his last 1 innng outing he hit 95 three times… I know your being sarcastic, but just pointing it out.
Right, Cardsfan333. He stuff looked great lasting. Fastball located w/velocity and good breaking pitches.
The issue is when they send him down they intend to stretch him out as a starter. Someone gets hurt and they throw him back in the pen in St. Louis. That’s not helping things.
Let’s put this slider bs to rest.
Quick ref guide for the rankings of slider pitches. via Statcast. as of July 7 2022.
Rank Pitcher MPH Vert. Movement Horiz. Movement
1 Pallante 86.6 38.6 5.8
2 McFarland 79.7 46.4 5.0
3 VerHagen 81.2 44.7 16.5
4 Hicks 83.8 41 12.1
5 Woodford 82.1 42.7 13.6
6 Gallegos 85.3 36.9 0.5
7 Naughton 79.7 44.2 3.7
8 Helsley 88.4 32.4 4.5
9 Oviedo 84.8 35.8 5.8
10 Mikolas 87.6 31 4.3
11 Hudson 89.3 27.9 .6
12 Fernandez 88.6 27.4 .4More stats to make you scratch your head.
Cardinals Pitching Stats —-As of July 7th
Rnk Name ERA WHIP AVG
01 Helsley 0.83 0.64 .093
02 Cabrera 2.27 1.04 .184
03 Thompson 2.70 1.00 .194
04 Mikolas 2.72 0.99 .212
05 Gallegos 2.90 1.03 .204
06 Pallante 3.03 1.40 .266
07 Woodford 3.05 1.26 .250 –> sent to AAA..?
08 Wainwright 3.26 1.27 .261
09 Oviedo 3.32 1.32 .267
10 Naughton 4.19 1.19 .253
11 Hudson 4.29 1.43 .266
12 Hicks 4.79 1.38 .204
13 Liberatore 5.66 1.79 .310
14 Matz 6.03 1.39 .284–IL
15 VerHagen 6.30 1.80 .284–IL
16 McFarland 7.43 1.76 .358–IL
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.