Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Decided to break it up into two posts, so the thing didn’t time-out on me. Well, I wouldn’t be paranoid if the computers weren’t all out to get me. Continuing:
11) Bobby Bradley .557
12) Kyle Tucker .544
13) Elehuris Montero .541
14) Wander Franco .539
15) Nate Lowe .539
16) Alex Kirillof .537
17) Bo Bichette .536
18) Leandro Cedeno .531
19) Christin Stewart .529
20) Mark Vientos .528
21) Yordan Alvarez .525
22) Isaac Paredes .523
23) Victor Robles .522
24) Nolan Jones .521
25) Brandon Lowe .519
26) Antonio Cabello .516
27) Jo Adell .515
28) Darick Hall .515
29) Royce Lewis .514
30) Carter Kieboom .511
31) Joerlin De Los Santos .511
32) Bryce Bush .508
33) Dylan Carlson .503
34) Danny Jansen .501
35) Carlos Rincon .501By team: StL 8, Tampa and Toronto 3, Mets, Astros, White Sox, Indians, Twins, Tigers, Nationals 2, and one each for the Reds, Pads, Braves, Angels, Phils, Dodgers, and Yankees. Fun fact: the five teams most disliked by Cardinal fans combined for zero uber-elite hitters: Cubs, Brewers, Red Sox, Royals, and Giants.
Near misses (.480-.499): Brendan Rodgers, Keibert Ruiz, Joey Bart, Tristen Lutz, and Jesus Sanchez.
Nearly near misses (.475-.479): Yunior Severino, Yusniel Diaz, and Ronaldo Hernandez.
Others of note: Keston Hiura .466, Taylor Trammell .444, Luis Urias .470, Ke’Bryan Hayes .442.
EDIT: Now, even as I type this, I see that I failed to integrate half a dozen hitters onto the list. Apologies for my sloppiness. The original 35 should have been 41, and included:
Nick Egnatuk .542, Grant Lavigne .537, Jordan Groshans .534, Sherten Apostel .531 (I swear I am not making these names up), Kristian Robinson .516, and catcher Alejandro Kirk .509.Egnatuk is a Brewer, so there goes that shutout, darn it. The other five include two more Blue Jays, plus a Ranger, Rocky, and Diamondback.
So the Cards are still the clear number one, and Toronto an equally clear number two. I look forward to your responses, folks!
“Is it better to be a bigger strikeout guy, or continue to get grounders with that heavy 95mph sinker, and keep the pitch count down?”
Start every AB by going for the groundout — as you say, cranny, it gets quick outs, keeps the pitch count down. But once you get to 0-2 or 1-2, 80-90% of the time you go for the whiff with the high cheese. If it’s 2-2, sometimes go high heat, sometimes the sinker/slider for a groundball.
At least, I’d say that’s the way to do it if you have a 97 MPH fourseamer. If you get way ahead in the count, and then just pound the bottom of the strikezone like it’s the start of the at-bat, you’re letting the hitter off the hook.
I think Hudson can be a solid #3/4 starter for the Cards doing exactly what he’s been doing, that’s how good he already is. But with either improved command or a meaningful increase in high fourseamers, he can be a #1/2 kind of guy. I know some people have misgivings about his delivery, his ability to stay off the disabled* list, but he’s been healthy & durable for three years running, so I think he’s 100% starter until proven otherwise.
* I’m insensitive, so I’m going to keep saying this for a few years. I despise outrage culture and hate language fascism. I’m so mean, I know.
“I don’t why some people choose to ignore the possibility that 2018 was indeed an accident. But what gets me the most is being told this: ‘It was a signing nobody should be faulting, in my opinion.’ Well I beg to differ.”
That was my quote about the Mikolas signing, of course. And that’s why I try and add tiny softening caveats to my strongest baseball opinions, NJ. Things like “in my opinion” or “for me.” Feels less like intellectual internet bullying that way.
I mean, I don’t ever want anyone to dread exchanging ideas with me online for fear that I’ll ridicule their views. I would hate that. Instead, I want my ridicule to always be a horrible and emotionally crippling surprise.
“The Allen Craig trade was a great trade for the Cardinals but it was still a bad extension. We should make that distinction.”
I still need persuading, on that last point. Based on what the Cardinal brass knew at the time Allen received the extension, it was a good extension as I recall. (Did anyone publicly criticize it at the time? It felt a lot like the one that Carp got a few years back. Some risk, but potential reward.) And the final outcome for the Cards and Allen Craig, his being traded to Boston for John Lackey, was also a good outcome for St. Louis. (More like a great outcome, as it wound up. We got a lot from Lackey, then got a high draft pick as well, I think, when he left. Although I could be mistaken about the latter.)
Or I should probably put it this way: For me, the mere fact that the Red Sox were willing to take Allen and his contract — and give something of real value in return — is the strongest possible evidence that Allen’s was not an onerous contract at all. In this case perception = reality. If the BoSox perceived Craig’s contract as okay, then be definition it was okay.
“The attempt to give Heyward a huge contract was a bad attempt. He didn’t want our money. Again, sometimes it is better to be lucky than good.”
Lucky is better, I agree. But bear in mind that the Cards could always have come over the top in their bidding for Heyward — like the Red Sox did against the Redbirds, when the Cards wanted to pay David Price nearly $200M for 7 years, or like the Cards themselves did with Dexter Fowler (blechh). But the Cards showed enough discipline to back away from Heyward, just as they did with Price. And Pujols for that matter. I’m disinclined to criticize a team very much for a contract never signed. Maybe a bit, but not much.
“As for Ben Cherington he did win a World Series in 2013 unfortunately so his tenure in Boston wasn’t all bad for them.”
Nope, not all bad. He was terrible, though. The conspicuous success the Carmines enjoyed in the years immediately before his arrival, and immediately after his departure, tells us all we need to know. To me there’s a healthy chunk of luck involved in a playoff run. But there’s no randomness involved when finishing last 3 of 4 years after inheriting a bloated budget and all-star roster. Just a bad GM, and he brought in two bad managers, and made bad signings. Good thing for him the club didn’t release David Ortiz before he returned to the illegal PED’s. That age 34-40 Ted Williams/Stan Musial impersonation really came in handy.
Not that I’m bitter.
Thanks for the feedback, cranny and dac.
“Or are you suggesting that as the pitching coach, Mike Maddux should have made that suggestion (Dakota Hudson throwing fourseam fastballs up in the zone periodically) by now?”
Absolutely, dac. And more broadly, not just Maddux but the entire organization from the day Hudson was drafted. It makes perfect sense to avoid the top of the zone if you’re a soft-tossing sinkerballer like Seth Maness, or even a mid-velocity Matt Bowman. But with Hudson’s blistering heater, it’s a clear waste of talent to keep the ball exclusively down, down, and down some more. And if they won’t work on an occasional fourseamer up above the hands now, in Spring Training, then when?
Hudson could eventually be that rare pitcher who combines very high groundball totals with good strikeout rates. As you said, cranny, it would be devastating. (It would be prime Arrieta — the pitcher Hudson was coincidentally likened to by Rob Ozga before Dakota was drafted.) But…well dac summed it all up very effectively in the comments re Hudson, Hicks, and Jack Flaherty.
Avoiding the top 1/4 of the zone (and above) means pitching scared. And to paraphrase a poker axiom, scared pitchers don’t win.
I can understand why you guys would be leery of large Cardinal contracts, given recent history. I’m always a bit skeptical of lengthy or pricey pitcher contracts. But a detailed side-by-side comparison of two MLB starters should show why in this particular instance I’m real happy with the Mikolas deal for the Birds.
Pitcher A threw 200 innings in 2018 with an ERA of 3.15, which was a ballpark-adjusted ERA+ of 137.
Pitcher B threw 200 innings in 2018 with an ERA of 2.83, which coincidentally was also an ERA+ of 137.Pitcher A turned 29 last summer, and Pitcher B turned 30. Pitcher A has a solid average fastball and an elite slider. And so does Pitcher B. Pitcher A has a career ERA+ of 109, and Pitcher B has a 108.
Pitcher A threw 189 innings in 2017, and Pitcher B threw 188. Both pitchers are sturdy and rather tall, but not too tall, at 6’3″ for A and 6’5″ for B.
So to this point we have two starting pitchers with astonishingly similar, in fact virtually identical track records and personal profiles for all intents and purposes. But let’s see how they project, going forward.
If we average together the four publicly available 2019 projections for the two pitchers — ZiPS, Steamer, Clay Davenport, and the Marcels forecast at Baseball-Reference — we get 181 innings with a 3.64 ERA for Pitcher A, and 175 innings and a 3.66 ERA for Pitcher B. Again, very nearly identical.
Pitcher A just signed a 6-year and $140M in free agency. (As you’ve probably guessed, Patrick Corbin.)
Pitcher B, well you already know about Pitcher B because he’s Miles Mikolas.Am I arguing that Mikolas would have gotten $140M or six years on the open market? Naaah. But he would have gotten much more than what he got from the Cards, I have zero doubt of that. All in all, it’s a good contract for the Lizard King, and a superb one for the Cards. In my opinion.
Good baseball players are expensive, and every contract is a gamble, but according to the available information the Birds got an excellent pitcher for the price of a merely very good one. In fact, Miles Mikolas at $17M per year? At that rate I kinda wish they’d signed him for another season. Or maybe even two. The price is that nice.
“I was listening to the Front Office show on MLB radio today and Jim Bowden trashed the Cardinals pretty good for the Mikolas extension.”
Did he think Mikolas might sign with someone for fewer years? Because I disagree with that. Or did he just want the Cards to wait until the All-Star break? I’m quite curious as to what — specifically — he thought the Redbird front office should have done differently.
“He also cited the Cards as being pretty bad at long term extensions as he mentioned Fowler, Wong, Craig, and the offer to Heyward. The only long term deal he liked was Holliday.”
Well, we could go right down the line. First off, Fowler was dumb at the time, and the Cards are reaping what the stupidly sowed. But that of course was not an extension, it was a misguided free agent inking. The Wong extension has been fine. Neither good nor bad so far, all things considered. Allen Craig got a weird injury, and the Cards dumped that salary anyway! If there’s an organization to criticize for mis-valuing Allen Craig it’s the Red Sox and their incompetent then-GM, Ben Cherington. (Three last place finishes in four years, folks.)
Heyward? As with Allen Craig, the Cards are not the team to criticize. That would be the Cubs, when it comes to Heyward.
The Cards also signed a few other guys to extensions over the past several years. Matt carpenter has worked out spectacularly well. And has Mr. Bowden checked Paul DeJong’s deal? Over the next five seasons Paul will make less than $23M total. (Per Fangraphs he was worth $26M in 2018, and $24M in 2017.) Oh, and then there are also two cheap club options at the end. So the Cards have control through his age 31 season. It’s almost certainly one of the best 4 or 5 deals in baseball, if he continues as is.
“I generally like Jim Bowden although I know some on here do not. I usually find him insightful and entertaining but I think he is off base on Mikolas. Sure there is some risk involved but if Mikolas had another good season in 2019 he would have cost much more than $68M to bring back.”
I agree, gscott, in large part. I don’t think too terribly much of Bowden’s baseball acumen, but I don’t generally dislike him. (He should know the Cards are not interested in a massive reliever contract like Kimbrel will receive. Besides, Kimbrel was very shaky in October. Could be tipping, could be health, could just be getting older.)
The Mikolas signing was smart and timely. The rotation is fairly well set for 3-4 years into the future, with decent health. The following 6 guys are under team control through the 2022 season: Mikolas, Flaherty, Martinez, Reyes, Hudson, and Gant. And that’s a solid foundation, with Lizard King as the veteran leader of the group. It was a signing nobody should be faulting, in my opinion.
“Gallegos didn’t help his case today.”
Yeah, I’m generally skeptical of castoffs from smart organizations like the Yankees. Better probably to poach from the stupid franchises that can’t identify talent as well. Like when the Cards got Kiko Calero from K.C. years ago, or Mujica from the Marlins, etc..
For me Gallegos wasn’t the most frustrating guy, though. That title goes to Dakota Hudson, clear cut. Two out, two strikes, nobody on base. And five minutes later 2 runs were in and Hudson was knocked out of the game, with 2 runners still on board after 4 straight singles. Yes, two hits never left the infield. But that’s not really the point.
Here’s a hint, Mr. Maddux. When Dakota Hudson has two strikes on a batter, for the love of common sense let him throw some 97 MPH high heat once in a while. When the opposing batter knows for a fact that every single pitch is going to be in the bottom half of the zone or below — regardless of the count, regardless of whether a grounder is needed or not — it makes his very difficult job sooo much easier.
I understand the groundball preoccupation. Quick outs. Double plays when necessary. But when you’ve got a hitter in the hole, and the bases are empty, what on earth is the catcher doing setting up the same target, the same darn bottom-of-the-zone, middle-of-the-plate target that he does on a 2-1 count with a man on first and one out?
Don’t listen to Kevin Costner. Strikeouts are good. And Hudson’s refusal to use the top of the zone (and above) to overpower hitters bit him twice today on 2-strike base hits. Yeesh, if only because of game theory, it’s a smart idea to at least present the possibility that a Dakota Hudson pitch might be thrown at the top of the zone once a month.
Before going outside to yell at a cloud, I’ll end my rant with a quote from Dakota Hudson’s Brooks Baseball page:
“His fourseam fastball (take this with a grain of salt because he’s only thrown 10 of them in 2018) generates an extremely high number of swings & misses compared to other pitchers’ fourseamers, is an extreme flyball pitch compared to other pitchers’ fourseamers, is blazing fast (98 MPH), has less armside movement than typical and has some natural sinking action.”
Sounds pretty good to me. How about using it, Mr. Maddux?
Here’s an overview of Paul DeJong’s injury track record, going back to his sophomore year at Illinois State:
2014 college…perfect health (played all 54 games)
2015 college…perfect health (51 of 54)
2015 pro…perfect health
2016…perfect health
2017…perfect health
2018…missed 7 weeks with fractured hand after being hit by a pitch. Besides that, perfect health.I’m not always an optimist about such things, but I wouldn’t worry one bit about DeJong’s backup. It would shock me if he has to miss significant playing time in 2019. As we can see, he’s been exceptionally durable for five years running, barring unavoidable traumatic injury.
For me the chief Cardinal concern is the same now as it was when the offseason started. The bullpen is possibly terrible, in there is no chance on earth that it will be an asset. In fact right now it looks potentially worse than last year, if such a thing is possible.
But! But there’s still three-weeks-plus before opening Day. Maybe the Birds will take my advice and leverage some of their fallow extra money, turning it into an excellent reliever (or two) like Joe Jimenez or Mychal Givens by accepting bad contracts from the Tigers and Orioles. Exchanging a pair of bad relievers for very good ones could add 3-5 wins to this year’s Redbird victory total. But it will take meaningful money, and probably a couple of mid-level prospects.
Roughly 40% of Cardinal innings will go to relievers this year, and the relief corps is frankly a mess. Not as atrocious as they looked today, but not good at all. Why the front office thought that ONE addition would fix the problem is beyond me. A band-aid for a bullet hole is bad enough, but a single band-aid for 4 or 5 bullet holes is pretty much inexcusable.
Bright side, that Tyler O’Neill kid is something special, huh?! Can’t wait to see the speedy slugger make those 150 starts in right field this year….
“…they must convince the Goldschmidts to stay,” writes Ben Fred.
This BenFred premise is worth pondering, I think.
So the Cardinals must convince 31-year-old superstar first baseman Paul Goldschmidt to stay? We can test that theory pretty easily, because some folks (myself included) thought they had to convince 31-year-old superstar first baseman Albert Pujols to stay, after the 2011 season.
But Pujols of course wanted too much money for too many years, and painful as it was, the Cards parted company with the future 1st ballot Hall Of Famer. In general we all of course know what’s happened after Albert was NOT signed by the Birds. But let’s check the particulars, both before and after Albert’s departure.
Cards with reputed lunkhead Matheny and no Pujols: 7 seasons, averaged 90 wins, 3rd best in MLB.
Cards with certain Hall Of Famers LaRussa & Pujols: 11 seasons, averaged 90 wins, also 3rd best in MLB.So I’d say we are forced to conclude that there is no such thing as a player who MUST be signed. Period.
If Goldy’s very gentle decline of the past few years continues in 2019, and he wants more than 5 years or more than $30M per year, then the Cards probably need to let him go. Because there would be better ways to invest the club’s dough over the long haul — just as there were when Pujols painfully left.
“There seem to be plenty of guys who could be future first basemen, if you believe all the prospect gurus.”
Yes, there are indeed big bats in the minors, some arriving in the next 2-3 years. There very likely aren’t any future 5-WAR first basemen…but then, Goldy probably isn’t a 5-WAR first baseman either in another year or two. Maybe not even in 2019. (But I sure hope so.)
“Having never made a typo ever, I can wonder how much Martinez has to sing to get a quarter of a million dollars.”
Not too much, as long as he’s better than Ditka, Roseanne, and Cuba Gooding, Jr..
Also, you know how the g and the t are adjacent on the keyboard? Well, never sign a letter “Best Retards.”
Worst. Typo. Ever.“From 2014 – 2017, Dex had 15.0 oWAR total. For comparison,Christian Yelich had 16.6 oWAR.
Cardinal Nation is delusional when it comes to Dexter Fowler.
2014: 3.9 oWAR
2015: 3.7
2016: 4.0
2017: 3.4
Dex has the same career oWAR as Matt Carpenter (27) and has far more value defensively.”Belated welcome, Squishy. Sorry I didn’t notice your post until today.
I don’t know whether oWAR numbers alone make a very persuasive argument that Dexter Fowler is as good or better than Matt Carpenter, all things considered. To see how Fowler and Carpenter compare, let’s take a look at the three publicly available systems of player valuation.Bearing in mind that Fowler has 10 full years in the majors and Carpenter just under 7, here are the career WAR numbers — hitting, baserunning, defense all included of course — at Baseball Prospectus, Baseball-Reference, and Fangraphs.
BPro…Fowler 14.0 WAR and Carpenter 23.5 WAR
B-Ref…Fowler 17.9 and Carpenter 25.9
Fangraphs…Fowler 19.6 and Carpenter 28.6So we see that roughly speaking, Dexter Fowler has averaged between 1 1/2 and 2 WAR per season, and Matt Carpenter has averaged between 3.5 and 4 WAR per MLB campaign. Clearly they have not been remotely comparable.
In fact, according to Fangraphs over the past 7 seasons Matt Carpenter has been approximately as valuable as Bryce Harper and Manny Machado, while Dexter Fowler during the past decade has been about as valuable as Colby Rasmus and Yunel Escobar. (No offense, Colby, but you ain’t Bryce Harper.)
But that’s all in the past. So how do the two 33-year-olds project, going forward? The ZiPS forecast for 2019, prorated to 550 at-bats, has Carpenter worth a terrific 4.6 WAR, and Fowler a fairly dismal 1.6 WAR. In other words, according to ZiPS one player is a star and the other belongs on the bench. No real reason to look further than that, I don’t think.
One thing we can agree upon 100%, Squishy. When it comes to Dexter Fowler, there is certainly some delusional thought going around. As for Fowler’s contract, I suppose the readers can decide for themselves what a 33-year-old good bench player with a narcissism problem is worth on the open market.
“…I lost as much respect of them as a result of their ‘statement’ as I did in the irresponsible words they put in print in the first place.
Short and sweet, ‘We screwed up,’ should have been the path taken. They could have saved 997 words of nothingness.”Seconded. Very weak tea from BPro. When you know you’ve done wrong, just say it and be done. Don’t take an hour to do the minute waltz.
“Bob, could Luken Baker be added to this list? Dude looks like a Luke Voit clone. Must be the first name.”
Fair question, gscott. If we swap out Urias for Baker, the HR average would indeed go up. But the trouble is, I don’t consider Baker to be a real prospect, having seen him play for Peoria last year. (And when I say “play” I mean stand around and be huge.) So I admit I didn’t give him much of a thought. Perhaps I’m pessimistic but he’s not in my top 40 Redbird prospects, and I wanted the six to all be among the better StL minor leaguers. Many guys on the Cardinal farm could have raised the overall HR average if I’d traded out Ramon Urias.
“Aren’t Gorman and Baker the only serious power threats at this time? Maybe Thomas too now after last season. I guess several others could develop it as they mature and get stronger.”
The mountainous Baker projects by Clay Davenport’s system as a 20-25 HR guy in his prime, cranny. Not one of the best in the Redbird system. On the other hand, Jhon Torres received the same Game Power grade at Fangraphs as Nolan Gorman. And in his Cardinal prospect chat, Baseball America’s Kyke Glaser said of Leandro Cedeno: “…he has as much raw power as anyone in the system, Gorman included.” When you have two other players in your system whose power is considered comparable in any way to Nolan Gorman’s, you’ve got something to look forward to.
And both Dylan Carlson and Elehuris Montero are projected by Clay Davenport as 25-30 homer talents in their primes. We could quibble over terminology, but I consider 25+ homers to be a serious power threat. Also, you were right to mention Lane Thomas, as he projects to be a 25-homer bat at his best. (Very interesting guy, Lane Thomas. I look at him much like I looked at Tommy Pham 5 or 6 years ago. Clear talent, both at bat and afield, but can he stay healthy enough to self-actualize?)
“Bob, your interest in Cedeno is encouraging. #15 is aggressive for him… but he has yet to show his best. I’d like to see a list of your prospect ranking. I might learn a thing or two.”
Your wish, my command, Ny. (Approximate overall ranking in parentheses.)
1) Reyes…(35)
2) Montero…(40)
3) Hudson…(50)
4) Gorman…(55)
5) Knizner…(65)
6) Carlson…(90)
7) Urias…(100)
8) Nunez…(100)
9) Helsley…(130)
10) Herrera…(140)
11) Lane Thomas…(210)
12) Edmundo Sosa…(220)
13) Arozarena…(230)
14) Jhon Torres…(240)
15) Leandro Cedeno…(250)
16) Joerlin De Los Santos…(280)After that I have 28 other guys who matter, at this point. Those do not include either X-Large Luken Baker or Steven Gingery, due to injury. Bearing in mind that I only saw Baker one time, to me he didn’t move as well as Matt Adams either in the field or on the bases.
Now maybe Baker’s a real hitter, but right now he looks to me like a guy who’ll need to be a REAL hitter — because at the MLB level even the bench bats usually need to offer some kind of defensive value. And REAL hitters, like Jose Martinez for instance, are few & far between.
“I don’t like to rain on the parade, as I ranked Cedeno as a prospect this year, too. However, he is not invited to STEP Camp, which I do not consider a good sign. The reason that matters is that he is going to be Rule 5 eligible this coming winter. I don’t think he can move fast enough to make it before either being lost in the minor league Rule 5 draft or leaving via free agency.”
Yeah, I can’t disagree, Brian. Leandro Cedeno losing his age 18 season to injury may have thrown off his timetable too much to be kept long term. It’s a risk incurred by signing those international kids at 16. If they move a little slowly through the system, they can get caught in a numbers crunch.
But his bat forces me to rate him pretty highly within the organization. I really believe that in a different season, any teenager — who already has a track record of hitting success — batting .336 with a 1.001 OPS would have been much more highly publicized. (As opposed to not publicized one scintilla, ever, all year, by anyone, anywhere.) But the Birds had Gorman, and Nunez, and so many other interesting bats in 2018, esp. at the lower levels, that Cedeno went unnoticed.
As a first basemen only in all probability, there’s no real defensive or baserunning value to speak of; but the publicly available metrics at Baseball Prospectus imply that he’s not some hulking oaf either. Anyway he’ll really need to hit…but that’s exactly what he’s done so far in his career. And he’ll need to regularly overcome a rather shaky BB/K combo…but that’s exactly what he’s also done so far.
If he kicks Peoria’s butt at age 20 this year, I think the club finds a way to keep him. If on the other hand he’s merely a good-to-very-good hitter in Low-A, then the Cards likely lose Cedeno. Anyhoo, I look forward to watching him once or twice in 2019. Go Chiefs!
“I don’t have any personal issues with JL. She seemed professional in her time with us.”
I agree 100%, booyah. She’s covered the Cards very well for years, and I was ungallant at best in my comments. In truth there was really no reason for me to mention the author by name at all. It’s a mindset, not any individual writer, that I just cannot stomach for the life of me. This selling of Fowler we’ve all endured since October when he went public with his finger-pointing at Matheny — that’s the sin. The selling is the sin.
And as they say: hate the sin, love the sinner.
“…it’s early but Fowler still looks horrible either at the plate or in the field.”
Well you must be mistaken, willie. Didn’t you read the postgame from Jen Langosch? Jen had nothing remotely negative at all to say about today’s Dexter debacle.
Here are the quotes from and referring to Fowler:
“Fowler saw six pitches in one at-bat, five in another, reflecting the sort of patience he can show when things are going well.”
“Though Matt Carpenter, Dexter Fowler and Goldschmidt (in that order) combined to go 0-for-5 with a walk and two strikeouts in Sunday’s 12-2 loss to the Nationals, the trio offered a glimpse of what could be the top of St. Louis’ lineup in the regular season.”
“The three combined to see 11 pitches from Nationals starter Erick Fedde on Sunday.
‘That’s three tough at-bats,‘ Fowler said. ‘Any time you can wear down a pitcher like that whether you’re getting hits or not, it’s going to help.’ ”So what we have here is: Dexter Fowler thinks he’s a success even when he fails about as badly as a hitter can. Even when he goes 0-2 with a whiff and popup, as he did today, in his mind he’s actually succeeded. Isn’t he amazing?! He “helps” while fanning and popping up, because he made the pitcher throw an extra pitch or two. Yay for you, Dex!
And for those who didn’t see the game (Most fans didn’t. It’s an exhibition game after all.) not only did Jen avoid telling the readers that Fowler had two at-bats with the worst possible results. She also said nothing about Fowler’s costly misplay in the outfield. (Standard Fowler defense. Bad read, bad jump, bad result. Or maybe I’m just not “giving him the benefit of the doubt.”)
This isn’t reporting from Ms. Langosch. It’s a nauseating salespitch for Fowler — and worse than that it’s a salespitch for Fowler batting second in the lineup. The spot where a terrific hitter should be batting. Like Bader or Martinez when a lefty is on the mound, for instance. Since they both destroy southpaws. Shame on Ms. Langosch for misleading her readers and joining the Fowler P.R. campaign. She’s better than that. Or used to be, anyway.
Is it really too much to ask that Dexter Fowler be treated like everyone else? When he’s good, say that he’s good. And when he is terrible, just say nothing. Don’t quote his nonsense or pretend that he was “helpful.”
“Brian, but shouldn’t a system wide ranking include both quantity and quality?”
Quite so, CC. The Angels have enjoyed seven years of the greatest ballplayer since Mantle & Mays, and what has it gotten them? Four sub-.500 seasons and one playoff series, wherein they were swept.
Why? Because basically their farm has failed to give them enough good cheap depth. If their farm system could have simply filled in around Mike Trout, just routinely added league average or slightly above average hitters and pitchers, they’d at least have made the wildcard almost every year.
This should go without saying, but it’s a good idea for prospect rankers to not just glance at, but to look closely at every single member of every team’s farm system. And that’s obviously a lot of work — if you can call it “work” to do anything related to baseball research. Anyway, 12 months ago I examined over 1,000 minor league position players and checked the Davenport Translations for each, to see if there were some well-projected but obscure prospects I’d never heard of.
I won’t bore you with the methodology right here, but in total 157 players projected as useful big leaguers, guys who might be starters for a year or two but would more likely be solid bench pieces at their peaks. Another 63 projected as everyday regulars, and 24 as stars and superstars in their primes.
So across all of baseball that was 244 total “meaningful” position player prospects. Therefore, with 30 MLB franchises the average organization would have about 8 such guys. Well, the Cards led with 20, Tampa was second with 16, then the Yanks with 14 and Phils with 13. But that’s the quantity argument of things. Let’s look at quality.
Of the 87 regulars-or-better as projected by Davenport’s computer model, the Cards had 8 and Tampa and the Phillies had 7 apiece. Those were the three best totals in baseball. And which two teams in 2018 led their leagues in rookie position player WAR? That’s right, the Redbirds and Rays.
Brian’s right that the national voices overly focus, even fixate on the shiniest toys. They get hypnotized by top talent and forget that depth is not just a good thing, not just a cute convenience. It’s often a great thing — in part because you need depth guys to fill in around your stars…but also because if you have half a dozen prospects who project to be 2-WAR regulars, the odds say that one or two will bust, but also that one or two will actually be better than projected. You might even get a 4-5 WAR star out of the group, as the Cards got from Matt Carpenter and may get from DeJong, Bader, or both. Not infrequently, the weed of quantity bears sweet quality.
Sorry, forgot to mention the final rookie WAR tally, top 5 from 2016-2018, all of MLB, per Fangraphs.
1) Dodgers 25.7 WAR
2) Yankees 24.7
3) CARDS 23.2
4) Tampa 17.4
5) Rockies 15.7Even though Milwaukee would have been next on the list with an excellent 15.5 WAR, the Brewers plus the Cubs, Bucs, and Reds combined for just 24.7 WAR over the three seasons. As for the Cards, elite results can’t come from middle of the pack farm systems, folks. And 3rd-best in baseball looks pretty elite to me.
“History is cool, but the present situation is really what matters most. The Cards appear to be a middle of the pack system again, still.”
If you want to discard the overlooked players from 12 or 15 or 20 years back, Brian, I won’t put up an argument. Guys like Crisp and Pujols and Haren and Molina are admittedly really only an indictment of Baseball America, since the other national voices didn’t truly exist until more recently.
But speaking of recently, I believe that very recent history solidly supports my contention that St. Louis prospects remain almost annually underrated — and sometimes radically so. It’s all a matter of reputation versus reality.
If the reality is that the Cards have actually been a middle-of-the-pack system, every year, year after year, for the past 5 years, then we would expect rather middling results from our rookies at the MLB level.
Per Fangraphs, these were the top 5 N.L. teams for rookie position player WAR in 2018:
1) CARDS 4.1 WAR
T1) Braves 4.1
3) Nationals 3.7
4) Phils 1.8
5) Padres 1.7And now the top 5 for rookie pitching WAR in 2018:
1) CARDS 4.5 WAR
2) Braves 4.2
3) Padres 4.1
4) Giants 3.8
5) Dodgers 3.7So we see that rather than middle of the pack, those supposedly so-so St. Louis prospects led in overall rookie WAR, nudging out the Braves 8.6 WAR to 8.3 WAR. Then there was a gap to the Padres at #3, then another gap to the Dodgers at #4.
With their 8.6 rookie WAR, the Cards totaled more than twice as much rookie WAR as the Cubs, Reds, Pirates, and Brewers put together (4.1 WAR total). A middling farm system cannot do that.
If we go back a year to 2017, the Cards were 2nd in the N.L. in rookie position player WAR. Go back yet another year, and they were 3rd in the N.L.. So three straight years at or near the top. They are the only team to be top 3 in each of the past three seasons. That’s the reality, regardless of reputation.
As for pitchers, in 2017 the rookie Birds were only 9th in WAR — but they were 1st in ERA.
In 2016 the Redbird rookie hurlers were 4th in WAR, but led in FIP. So for three straight years, both pitchers and hitters have produced quality, quantity, or both. The Cardinal draft & development people are doing a bangup job, no matter what Law or Mayo or Callis or some poor misguided fool at Baseball Prospectus or Fangraphs has to say about the matter. The numbers tell the tale.Now, I hasten to add that three years ago I agreed with the national consensus. I did, and said so! The Cards really did have a middling farm system. Everyone said they were ranked between 14th and 19th or so, and I concurred. But then 2016 happened. In 2016 (1)the Cards drafted very well, (2)many players and pitchers already in the system had impressive breakthroughs, (3)the pitchers stayed uniformly healthy (or nearly so anyway), (4)the organization graduated very little talent to the majors, and finally (5)the Cards invested internationally like they’d never done before.
In reality, this vaulted the team into the 5-7 range among all farm systems. And how could it not? Why the national voices curled up into a fetal ball of denial at the time is beyond me. Of the above five points, only the first could be disputed at all, back then. The rest are and were straightforward statements of fact.
And in reality that’s where they’ve remained ever since, among the top 15-25% of farm systems. Which is of course why they’ve had such impressive results from their rookies over the past three seasons, and particularly in 2018.
“While I agree that the current situation matters the most, perhaps it’s either a flaw in the way raters project the Cardinal prospects or something in the Cards’ development program that causes them to consistently produce better results than expected. It’s ok to discuss that, and Bob made a good list of players that possibly make the points above.”
The Cardinals have consistently produced major league results that aligned with their minor league performances. That’s all. Nothing fancy. But their minor league performances have frequently been discounted or dismissed outright by the national prospect raters, considerably more so than similar hitters and pitchers from other organizations. I’m not a licensed psychiatrist, so I can’t tell you what pesky mental block is happening at Fangraphs or Baseball Prospectus or MLB Pipeline or anywhere else. But minor league performance is now, has always been, and will always be the single best predictor of major league performance — once the entirety of the performance is taken into consideration and analyzed dispassionately. That’s the reality, regardless of reputations.
So when a Redbird performs spectacularly well in the minors but is dismissed by the national voices, believe in the player and performance not the pundit. Only one of them is full of crap.
“But even then, there are certain organizations that tend to outperform consensus projections on their prospects pretty routinely, the Cardinals being one of them. So while the consensus says that the Cardinals system is middle of the pack, I expect we will actually realize better mlb production from our system than the organizations we are grouped with due to our track record of doing just that.”
Exactly. But with one tiny tweak. I would modify “track record” to “20-year track record.”
Never a top 100 prospect: Coco Crisp, Yadi Molina, Jack Wilson, Dan Haren, David Freese, Allen Craig, Lance Lynn, Jon Jay, Tommy Pham, Matt Carpenter, Paul DeJong, Aledmys Diaz, Jordan Hicks, Randal Grichuk, and Harrison Bader. Dakota Hudson made Baseball America’s top 100, but no one else’s.
And the thing is, that laundry list of overlooked guys still doesn’t nearly tell the entire story. It’s the degree to which most of them were underrated — that’s what stands out. Solid regulars who were barely supposed to play in the majors; stars who weren’t supposed to start. And then there’s Albert Pujols, who should have been an easy top 10-12 overall prospect based on his one supremely dominant minor league season (at the plate and in the field, by the way). But he couldn’t scratch the top 40.
So anyway. The Cardinals actually have the 6th-best collection of minor league talent right now.
1) San Diego
2) Twins
3) Tampa
4) Atlanta
5) Toronto
6) Cards
7) Reds
8) White Sox
9) & 10) Astros and Dodgers in some order, what do we care, we’re Cardinal fansThe Birds are top 3 in position players and perhaps 15-18 in pitching. Maybe lower. Probably more like 18th to 20th come to think of it. Other than Reyes and Hudson, there may not be another minor league arm who’s ever more than a setup man or 5th starter. And we all know how risky Reyes is.
But now the good news. Across all of pro baseball there are 29 current minor league position players who posted at least a 150 wRC+ in 2018 while young for their level of competition. The Cards have seven and no other organization can claim more than two. Moreover, beyond that magnificent seven the Cards saw Leandro Cedeno log a 1.000 OPS as a teenager in the Appy League, Adanson Cruz post a 145 wRC+ in the DSL, and Tyler O’Neill blister AAA with a wRC+ of 170 at age 22/23. (I mention O’Neill since some folks do consider him still a prospect.)
And then there’s Ramon Urias and Andrew Knizner, who according to the ZiPS computer model are both already MLB league-average regulars, if given the opportunity. So let’s just say there’s a wealth of position player talent. Upper and lower minors.
As Brian Walton and others have quite rightly pointed out before, the pitching is fairly troubling below Triple-A, however. I hate to see any baseball team “draft for need” — at least in the first 4-6 rounds — but the Birds should find some way to replenish the pitching at the lower levels, and fast. Maybe draft, maybe trade, but some way.
“The hint was some kind of hybrid or changing role as relievers do not throw 100 innings. They want to be careful with him but also not leave unused innings short of what they think he is capable of.”
I’d love to see Alex kept on a starter’s schedule of rest, but pitch exclusively from the bullpen for at least the first five months. He could gradually escalate the pitch count from 40 in April & May, up to 85-90 by Labor Day and beyond. This would get him the 100-110 or so innings desired by the club — and also have him prepped for 5-6 innings as a playoff starter if needed.
Yes, the bullpen would lose some flexibility, having Reyes available only once every 5-6 days. But he’d also be eating far, far more innings than current conventional relievers, so I’d say that his value would be roughly the same as if he were used for 60-65 high-leverage innings. And I have to believe that the lengthy regular rest would be more likely to keep him healthy.
Actually, now that I think on it, I really don’t see any other possible way to accomplish all of the stated 2019 Reyes goals. So let’s see how bold and analytical and forward-thinking the front office and new manager really are. Let’s see if they’ll try something that nobody else is doing.
“What would suggest to you that a thirty-three-year-old, mediocre player will make up 74 points in average against Braun?”
I’m not Pugs of course, but I believe that Fowler will unquestionably hit much better than last year, now that John Mabry’s gone. Not good enough to justify a starting lineup slot, but still far better than 2018.
To estimate how much better Dex will hit, let’s average the 2018 post-Mabry hitting improvements of Grichuk, Wong, Pham, Ozuna, Voit, Piscotty, and Aledmys Diaz. Some of those batters will of course be compared to their 2017 St. Louis performances, and some to their 2018 half-seasons with Mabry.
Voit improved by 151 points of batting average (or 93 points above his career Cardinal number)
Wong improved by 104 points
Pham by 95 points
Ozuna +31
Piscotty +32
Diaz +4
Grichuk +7So let’s see. That’s 424 points of batting average, divided by 7, or just over 60 points apiece. An improvement of 60 points for Fowler would leave him with a 2019 batting average of .240 (the Marcels forecast says .236). In 2018 Ryan Braun hit .254, worst of his career. So it’s tough to imagine Fowler catching him. But here’s hoping.
(Sorry for usurping, Pugs. Also, thanks for the kind comments of a few weeks back on another thread. I was out of town, incommunicado for a protracted spell. Thanks also to gscott, Euro, Pads, and muddy for their generous remarks back then. Please forgive the extreme tardiness of my response, gents.)
“It would be a good move to get Lodolo if he is still available at #19.”
I confess my ignorance of college baseball, Ny. What makes you like Lodolo so? (To me all of the numbers just look kinda okay, at a glance. Strikeouts, walks, homers, ERA, all good not great.) Thanks for any insights!
“Different people have different egos and approaches toward their jobs, but that is their business, IMO. All I really care about regarding Dexter Fowler is how he performs on the field. Skip all the talk and play ball!”
Well we can certainly agree about the above, Brian. Bring on the games! (And I did enjoy our debate. Thanks for all of the responses.)
“We all understand what is happening. Word play will not change it. Fowler will be the regular right fielder in 2019 until he proves he shouldn’t be.”
Since all I’ve read is Goold’s second-hand words, and nothing from Shildt or Mo or Fowler himself, I have to gently disagree and say that No, I don’t think that “we all know what is happening.” But I do understand that you are retracting your statement about Fowler “re-earning” anything. Fowler already has it. No earning necessary. Fine & dandy. Then in my opinion perhaps you should not have said it in the first place — giving suckers like me a scrap of false hope — if you meant something else. So let’s edit.
“He will be given
a shot in spring training to re-earnthe starting RF job.”On a remarkably similar note, just yesterday….
“I’ve got to go out there and earn my spot,” Adam Wainwright said after the team wrapped up its rain-shortened workout on Wednesday. “When you pitch like I’ve pitched the last year and a half when I’ve hardly pitched, you haven’t earned anything. I have to come in here and earn my spot.”
And then Jen Langosch, b’gosh, commented: The Cardinals intend to give Wainwright every chance to break camp as a starter. But his fit isn’t a guarantee.
Wow. Wouldn’t it be nice, in fact wouldn’t it be absolutely amazing if Dexter Fowler said something like what Wainwright said?! A mature, humble, practical, professional approach to his job?
Something like: “I was bad, but I’ve been good for a long time. I’m going to try like **** to be better this year, and I am going to earn my spot in the starting lineup. This isn’t Christmas and I’m not asking for a present from anyone. I want to earn it! And I’m going to earn it!”
And wouldn’t it be nice, in fact wouldn’t it be absolutely astonishing, wonderful, and wacky to read a quote from someone, anyone, any journalist or member of the Cardinal braintrust, that Fowler would be “given every chance to break camp as a starter, but his starting role is not guaranteed“?
Gifting Fowler a starting role regardless of Spring Training events is money-driven madness, and I’ll keep railing against it. If I’m wasting my breath, that’s okay. I got lots of breath. Every instinct I possess, and every publicly available computer model, says that Fowler is NOT one of the three best outfielders in the organization right now. Probably not top four. So make him earn it back.
“Of course, some fans wanted Fowler thrown over the side months ago. But that is not happening. He will be given a shot in spring training to re-earn the starting RF job.”
Aaaah, but that’s exactly the words I want to see, Brian, from the mouths of Shildt, Fowler, and Mo. An honest competition for the Opening Day assignment — or even one that’s slightly slanted toward Fowler, due to seniority. Even that would be wonderful! A competition, with no concern whatsoever for anyone’s feelings! Sports is supposed to be about competition, not group therapy. If I want to see group therapy I’ll watch a Bob Newhart rerun.
Sports exists for the competition. Competition between teams, and within teams. But re Fowler I have yet to see the word competition anywhere. Maybe I’ve missed it, I have yet to see anyone within the St. Louis organization directly or indirectly say that Fowler will be “given a shot to re-earn the starting job.”
Instead what I’ve read — primarily if not exclusively from Mr. Goold, is that as of today the Cards are “committed to Fowler” as their starting right fielder, or that currently it is Fowler’s starting job to lose. Big difference.
“Generic comments like Vasgersian’s are nothing more than that – generic. Being specific matters. So lets discuss how long Fowler’s rope should be and how to measure it.”
Okay. Last year at the moment that Fowler was benched on June 12th, the Cards had 5 other outfielders with an OPS at least 160 points above Fowler. And of course, except for Jose Martinez they were all better defenders than Fowler as well. (Which is why Fowler in mid-May should have been demoted to AAA to figure out what was wrong, or simply released if he refused the assignment. Because he was blocking clearly superior players, and the Cards needed every win.)
This year, if Fowler wins the starting job in Spring Training, he should keep it until there is someone clearly better — beginning at any point after May 1st. If after May 1st there is another outfielder with an OPS at least 100 points above Fowler’s, then you bench Dexter. (Obviously this rule wouldn’t apply if Fowler has, say, an .800 OPS and Jose Martinez has a .900 OPS in limited duty. If Fowler is playing well, he keeps his job. Conversely, if Fowler starts the year in an 0-40 slump, you bench him of course.)
What you absolutely don’t do, is repeat the destructive stubbornness of 2018, and allow Fowler to keep the job into June if he’s terrible. Matheny generously stayed with him 3-5 weeks too long. And then Shildt behaved like an insane person by re-installing him into the starting lineup, dislodging Bader, the team’s finest outfielder at the time. No more of that crap, please.
“Are you assuming he did ok in spring training? I wonder if he ended camp batting just .235 if the pressure would not be on to replace him already – especially if Martinez and/or O’Neill have a big camp.”
Whoooah. Hold the phone. A minute ago, Brian, you said that Spring Training was a competition. You very specifically said that Fowler would get “a shot” to “re-earn” the starting job. Now you certainly seem to be saying that it’s Fowler’s starting job to lose. And you’re questioning whether it’s fair to “replace him” if he has a poor spring and bats just .235 for example. If it’s a real competition, then no one is being “replaced.”
So which is it, good sir? Is Dexter Fowler an honest competitor alongside his fellow professional outfielders, or an incumbent to be gifted the benefit of the manager’s faith & patience? Is this a fair fight between challengers, or is Fowler the champ who must be knocked out? I don’t think I’m splitting hairs here. I believe this is an important distinction.
“Of course, if the team is winning in spite of Fowler, that would help to buy more time. But if the team is not winning at a high enough rate, there will understandably be pressure to act sooner.”
If Fowler is terrible and the team is on pace to win 110 games, he should be replaced with exactly the alacrity as if the team were on 65-win pace. Not just Fowler. Any truly terrible hitter or pitcher. Manage by math, not emotion. No reason to “buy more time” for any failing player, not if there’s a superior talent to take his place. Play your best team. That’s the rule. Whatever your record, play your best team. Always play your best team — with one eye toward the future, of course.
I’m honestly curious about one thing. Where do people get the idea that the Cards “owe” something to Dexter Fowler? Goold has said it, and Bernie Miklasz as well. That the Birds need to “do right by Fowler.” As if Fowler’s been a big part of franchise history or something. As if for some reason the Cards should bend over backwards to give Fowler chance after chance to prove himself. It’s unfathomable to me, this mindset. They owe him his paycheck, and that’s all they owe him. This isn’t Molina, this isn’t Wainwright.
