Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I’m not worried, Brian. Oh, maybe a 2.5 on the 1-10 WorryScale.
But maybe I’m too blasé about the whole thing. Let’s do a direct comparison of Joey Gallo & Tyler O’Neill, with a wide angle lens, and see what we find.
Seems that Gallo’s ugly MLB strikeout rates are simply a continuation of his minor league numbers.
Low-A at 19, 37% whiff rate
Double-A at 21, 34%
Triple-A at 22, 35%And now Tyler O’Neill.
Low-A at 18, 32% K rate
Double-A at 20, 26%
Triple-A at 22, 25%As we can see, O’Neill’s professional track record bears only the slightest passing resemblance to Gallo’s, when it comes to contact conflicts. Not only that, but Tyler’s whiff rate was trending downward, from the lower to upper levels of pro ball. So I would opine that based on the entirety of Tyler’s past, there’s just no reason to think that his strikeout rate will remain remotely as bloated as it was in his brief MLB debut.
More likely it regresses downward toward 30% or so, and soon. And I’m not alone in this belief. In point of fact, if we average the five publicly available forecasts (Steamer, ZiPS, Clay Davenport, ATC, and THE BAT) we find that Tyler O’Neill’s strikeout rate is indeed predicted to plummet all the way to a mildly irksome but acceptable 30.4% in 2019.
So fret not, fellow fan!
“Hicks really should be plying his trade as a starter in the minors, but because we are desperate at the top level he has had to adjust.”
I could not agree more, BikeMike. To recap, Hicks started his professional career at age 18, same as Waino, Reyes, and Carlos Martinez. The latter three pitchers logged an average of roughly 500 pro innings cultivating their stamina and skillset before making their MLB debuts. Hicks got just 166 before being shoved to the majors.
Martinez, Reyes, and Wainwright got an average 220+ innings at Double-A/Triple-A to truly hone their craft. Hicks of course got zero.
“I think Wong will take a big step and become an all-star this year.”
Well there’s no disputing he was certainly much better off without John Mabry.
2018, with Mabry: .213/.304/.361 with a 7% walk rate and 16% strikeouts.
2018, post-Mabry: .317/.384/.439 with a 9% walk rate and 12% strikeouts.As you can see, he actually had a distinctly higher isolated slugging with Mabry (7 homers, to just 2 over the second half) but everything else was worse with Mabry. Quite a bit worse. Then, once Mabry was mercifully jettisoned, Kolten got some good coaching for the first time in his MLB career, and…well I’ll let Mark Saxon of The Athletic tell the rest.
Mark Saxon
Aug 17, 4:23pm
@Luke M. I did a story recently highlighting his (Wong’s) relationship with hitting coach Mark Budaska. Last month, Budaska advised him to forget about launch angle and concentrate on getting on base, hitting line drives into the gaps, and running. Since then, Kolten is batting .321 with one home run, five doubles and an .851 OPS. Maybe I’m wrong, but that relationship seems to be a pretty good working theory.An additional curiosity: Wong was hit by pitch 13 times during the first half of the season, and just once after the managerial/hitting coach changes. Might be nothing, or might be that over the season’s second half he wasn’t crowding the plate so much, trying to pull the ball almost every time. I don’t know the underlying mechanics of it, but the results from July-September speak for themselves. Kolten clearly traded away the occasional homer to be better at everything else. More consistent sharp contact, more walks, fewer whiffs.
“While I would like to think Jeff Albert as hitting coach will improve things history doesn’t let me put too much faith in coaching changes.”
As crushingly terrible as Mabry was for young Redbird hitters, I agree with you in general, CC. I do not expect Albert to turn Bader or O’Neill or anyone else into something they aren’t. And in the cases of Harry & Tyler I really pray that he doesn’t try. The best to realistically hope for from Bader is an average around .280, and O’Neill maybe 20 points less. But with the glove and running advantages of Bader, and the extreme power of Tyler, they can still be outstanding 4 WAR players even with those batting averages. I just hope that Albert’s approach doesn’t result in sacrificing power in order to minimize strikeouts. Kolten Wong’s game is high average, with gap power. That’s not Bader and Tiny Kingman.
Let’s think about it for a sec, about Tyler O’Neill’s power. Triple-A baseball has existed since 1946, and Tyler O’Neill just posted the second-highest isolated slugging in the history of Triple-A competition, at .382. Only Willie McCovey at .387 back in 1959 was ever better. In 73 seasons, across three different AAA leagues, Tyler O’Neill was one bloop double away from the highest isolated slugging ever recorded (min. 200 PA’s, age 23-and-under).
By the way, based on Baseball America’s own publicly available scouting grades, Tyler should be every bit as good a major leaguer as BA’s #3 overall prospect Eloy Jimenez. I won’t bore you with the granular grade details, but in effect they have Eloy 60 points of OPS better as a batter, but Tyler counterbalancing that (and perhaps even surpassing it) through his substantial edge in both baserunning and defense.
Again, not my grades, not contrived biased hyperbole. Baseball America’s grades, as displayed during their MLB Network program of a few days ago. If Eloy is #3, then based on their own grades Tyler should surely be in BA’s top 6 or 7, rather than down at #36. (Personally I’d have Jimenez in the 8-10 range and O’Neill in 14-17 territory. For me Eloy’s lower K rate makes him a safer pick, hence the higher slot. The upsides are more or less identical: slugging stardom.)
“Shouldn’t we be pretty optimistic about 2019?”
Absolutely, cranny! After the midseason purge, the club went 41-28 despite playing 50 of 69 games against winning teams. (First half only 43 of 93 games versus winning teams.) Moreover, they played at 100-win pace after Fowler finally left the lineup for good. And there’s this:
In the seven seasons since LaRussa retired the Cards have beaten the Vegas number by an average of 4 wins per year, the Baseball Prospectus PECOTA total by 6 wins per year, and Clay Davenport’s computer model by 5 victories per season. So if we “translate” this year’s over/under predictions, we get:
Vegas 88.5 = 92.5 wins
PECOTA 86 = 92
Davenport 85 = 90So I expect somewhere from 90-93 wins this year.
“Shouldn’t the rotation be better?”
Not realistic, I don’t think. Mayyybe as good, but not better. The starters were 5th in the majors in ERA, and not in a flukey way; numerically they were closer to 3rd than 7th. I’d say 10% chance to get better, 50% chance to stay roughly the same, and 40% to be worse.
“The bullpen better?”
Yes, for sure. It would almost have to be, because last year was the worst in modern Redbird history. But will it be better than merely below average? Much will depend on rookie and second-year arms. I hope they protect Reyes by having him pitch every 5-6 days, 2-3 innings at a time, then gradually stretch him out in August/September, so that he could throw 5-6 innings in a playoff start if necessary. This would obviously limit bullpen flexibility — but it would also mean Reyes logging more innings than any other reliever in the sport, perhaps as many as 110 in the regular season, but with lots of rest between appearances, a starter’s rest, and never throwing more than 75-80 pitches. So I think it’s worth the tradeoff.
“The starting 8 better?”
Including offense, defense, and baserunning, if generally healthy it should be the best Senior Circuit everyday eight this side of the Dodgers. If Fowler runs away to be a pro golfer or something, they could perhaps be even better than the Dodgers. Here are the ZiPS projections, per 550 at-bats:
Carp 4.6 WAR
Goldy 4.4
Wong 3.0
Yadi 2.8
Ozuna 2.8
DeJong 2.7
Bader 2.7
Fowler 1.6“The bench better?”
The bench was great in 2018, and should remain so. More ZiPS projections, per 550 AB’s:
Gyorko 3.1 WAR
O’Neill 2.6
Jose Martinez 2.3
Knizner 2.0
Ramon Urias 2.0OK, I gratuitously added that last one just to illustrate how good Ramon might already be; I do not really expect him to play in the majors this year. At least not until September. As for the others, a strict RF platoon of Martinez/O’Neill would probably generate something like 5 WAR if Jose continues to mash LHP’s at a .968 OPS rate. But that would make Dexter Fowler sad. I mean, depressed. I mean, he would likely suffer from depression. (I believe the very latest re-write of reality, via Fowler and his unofficial mouthpiece, Mr. Goold.) And above all else, Cardinal fans, Mike Shildt must NOT make Dexter Fowler suffer. He must compose and conduct a symphony of sympathy for Dex, whatever the on-field results. So that platonic ideal platoon ain’t happening.
“A better hitting coach?”What? There’s a new hitting coach?
Great post Bob.
Gorman doesn’t look like a moving-off-third candidate. He just recently shifted off of shortstop. Look at a couple of tidbits that were included in his prospect write-up, for instance:“In my opinion, I think he is going to be a solid-average to plus third baseman….. He was for us for the 18U Team last year. He was an exceptional defender at third base.”
– Former Cardinals area scout and now 18U National Team Director for USA Baseball, Matt Blood.Thanks for the generous words, Pads. I know my posts often go on too long and can degenerate into tedium, but I’m trying like the dickens to be thorough.
And thanks also for the insightful quote from Mr. Blood. I’m not worried about Gorman’s defense, not since he started his pro career by amazingly turning 20 double plays in approximately his first 50 games. And then I saw him in Peoria and he looked comfortable & confident at the position, charging a slow roller with aplomb and firing to first in plenty of time. Just one instance, but he displayed the “actions” for a third baseman, no doubt. Footwork, balance, composure, timing.
It’s just kind of a shame that two guys from among Montero, Gorman, and Nunez will have to find a new defensive home. Or all three of them if the Cards can get Nolan Arenado somehow. Either way, I think a Nolan at third base is the future of the Redbirds.
“…how many teenagers put up a 150 wRC+ or better in A ball and were buried outside of top 100 lists? I’d bet there are almost none…”
And you’d be correct, sc25.
Unfortunately I don’t have any Sally League numbers. But I do have some info on prolific young Midwest League hitters of recent vintage. In addition to Elehuris Montero in 2018, here are all the MWL teenagers to post a 150 wRC+ this decade (min. 200 PA’s):
Bo Bichette, Fernando Tatis Jr., and Vlad Guerrero Jr. in 2017. Eloy Jimenez the year before that. And prior to him, Bobby Bradley, Corey Seager, Byron Buxton, Javy Baez, Oscar Taveras, Wil Myers, and some guy named Trout. That’s the entire list, just 11 other guys besides Montero.And following their Midwest League seasons, all 11 of them were top 100 per Baseball America. Average rank, 24th. Toss the highest and lowest ranks Olympic-style, and the average improves to 19th. Of course, in smaller samples averages can be easily distorted, so how about the median? If we include all 11 again, the median is 14th.
Now, Elehuris Montero isn’t really their precise peer, as 4 of the 11 were already considered at least somewhat elite before their dominant MWL performances. Therefore Montero would best be compared to the guys who, like himself, were NOT already top 100 prospects prior to their full-season debuts. Those 7 players were Bichette, Bradley, Tatis, Taveras, Seager, Myers, and Eloy. Their average rank following the massive Midwest League breakout was 35th. Not 24th, but still pretty terrific. The median ranking on the other hand remains an uber-elite 14th. And I rank Montero roughly 40th. (As opposed to 340th at Fangraphs.)
“…perhaps it indicates some anti-Cardinals bias on prospect analysts’ part.”
A conscious anti-Cardinal bias? Naaah, I truly doubt it. Or at least very, very rarely. But every outlet, every national voice (individual or collective) has prospect biases. Maybe it’s for power hitters, or college shortstops, or speed guys, or changeup artistes, or triple-digit fastballers with faulty command.
And the single most sweeping bias, the one persistent and pernicious phenomenon is the Sweetheart Organization. If you’re a Sweetheart Organization, places like Baseball America & Fangraphs & Baseball Prospectus tend to lean more favorably for almost ALL of your prospects — at least for that one season of rankings. (To his credit, ESPN’s Keith Law does NOT fall into this trap very often, if ever. He has his foibles, but when it comes to baseball he usually possesses a rigorous enough mind to dodge commonplace intellectual errors. He sees racists in his soup, but that’s a whole other type of intellectual error.)
Every winter when prospect rankings come out, there are perhaps 3 or 4 such organizations. Usually the same 3 or 4 at each outlet. Right now, Tampa is one of Fangraphs’ Sweetheart Organizations, so the Devil Rays have between 21 and 26 prospects rated above Elehuris Montero for example. Which, relative to player evaluations, is pretty much clinically insane. (If it feels like I’m picking on Fangraphs, well they are supposed to be a leader in the field of baseball analysis. If not THE leader. I’m not punching down a weight class, at some poor slob managing an obscure blog. Fangraphs should be better than they are.)
The Cards on the other hand have only been an S.O. once in my memory, six years back when they had power arms Miller, Martinez, Wacha, and Rosie. The high-octane numbers were too big to ignore. And for bats, there was Taveras at the top, with Wong, Adams, Pham, Carson Kelly, and Piscotty for flavor. Just boatloads of talent there.
The corollary to the S.O. is unsurprisingly the anti-S.O.. And last year and this, the Birds are clearly an anti-S.O. for Fangraphs, if not THE anti-S.O.. And they’ve quite frequently been an anti-S.O. for Jim Callis wherever he goes, and John Manuel as well. (Manuel’s bizarre and inadvertently hilarious rationalization for excluding Jack Flaherty from the top 20 Midwest League prospects a few years back remains one of the best examples of bad baseball analysis available anywhere. It should be cited in Logic 101 classes, for how not to use your brain.) Hence the years of dismissiveness by Baseball America, and now MLB Pipeline. For the anti-S.O.’s the (mostly if not entirely subconscious) principle is simple: when in doubt, downgrade the prospect. Sometimes massively.
“Our best bet to get the elite talent is through the international program, particularly since there is a firm cap on what teams may spend.
Gorman could turn out to be elite but he has to get the K’s under control.”Agreed all around, Sooner. And I do expect Gorman to limit the strikeouts enough to keep his average over .260 during his prime 5-7 years. Probably struggle until age 23 or 24, though. Now that I think of it, that sounds like a Matt Williams career, if Gorman’s glove is as good as I anticipate. And I’d take a left-handed Matt Williams any day.
“I see it with my own eyes. There is POTENTIAL for top end talent, but a number of the names you cite are not there yet.”
I suspect we’re mostly just tussling over terminology, Brian. Forgive me for speaking for you, but when you say “top end talent” you seem be talking about the top 20 or 30 or 40 overall prospects. Something of that nature? And when I say “top end talent” I’m talking about any hitter of the right age who does something spectacular in the minors, at any level. (In some cases this might include simply performing very well at a very young age for his league — like if Dylan Carlson should post, say, a 125 or 130 wRC+ in Double-A at age 20.)
Here’s a convenient example of a player who showed his extraordinary talent at a very young age, but was ignored anyway: Cleveland superstar Jose Ramirez came up in Kiley McDaniels’ Wednesday Fangraphs chat.
Jeff: Franco and Brujal sound amazing. At this stage how much better are these two than Lindor and Ramirez?
12:33
Kiley McDaniel: Ramirez wasn’t really a prospect when in Double-A, so most guys we talk about were ahead of him at that stage. Lindor was a top-10 pick at the age Franco is now a top-5 prospect in the game, so Franco seems ahead.Right on cue, this is exactly the brand of Fangraphs intellectual dishonesty described earlier in this very thread. With his Ramirez remarks McDaniel is actively misleading his readers, because Jose Ramirez was in fact a absolutely tremendous ballplayer as a teenager in full season Low-A ball. In fact, as a funny coincidence Ramirez posted a 145 wRC+, which is precisely the same as Drew Waters did in 2018 as a teen in Low-A. You remember Waters. He’s the one who Fangraphs nearly drowned in praise:
“(Waters’) full season debut in 2018 was a smashing success; he demolished the Low-A Sally League…”
Yes, Waters had a great 2018. But not quite as great as Ramirez was in 2012, because not only did Jose Ramirez hit exactly as well as Waters at the same age and same level, the future superstar Ramirez did so while striking out less than half as often as Waters. This made him much more of a sure thing than Waters is now. But Ramirez was short, so the scouty types belittled him — when they weren’t ignoring him altogether. One person who scouts the stat lines noticed him, though.
“Anyway, the Most-Overlooked Award shouldn’t go to Garcia, but to Jose Ramirez. The little switch-hitting keystoner got overshadowed by Lindor, but Jose hit lefties and righties, hit at home and away, stole some bases, and committed just two miscues in more than 60 games afield. As a teen in the MWL. Darn impressive, even if you are 5’ 9″ and limited to second base.”
commented on BA’s Top 20 Midwest League Prospects from Minor League Ball, Oct 2, 2012, 2:48pm PDT
Sometimes it’s honestly just not that hard to evaluate prospects. About 80-90% of the time the good ones will let you know. You simply need to be attentive and reasonably intelligent. McDaniel regularly appears to be neither, or he’s just a liar. Jose Ramirez quite clearly showed his top-end talent at age 19 in the Low-A Midwest League. He was spectacular but the scouts incorrectly ignored him then, and guys like Kiley McDaniel continue to, well, lie about it to this day. Bizarre, the allergy to admitting mistakes that some “scouty” types have.
But enough negativity. This is the internet, Home Of Good Cheer. And in keeping with the thread title, I have one fun fact.
Harrison Bader, career minor league line versus southpaws: .387/.441/.798 in 272 plate appearances.
And he’s been great in the majors, too. Though obviously not THAT great. In any case, there is no way that Bader should ever hit lower than cleanup when the opposition starts a lefty. Never, ever lower than cleanup. Best choice: second or third, with Goldschmidt taking the other.“Bob, where would you estimate you would rank Herrera nationàlly if he puts up a 150 wRC+ in 2019 across SC and Peoria? What if it dips to 120 (still excellent for his age)?”
Quite the question, CC! Herrera will still be just 18 for the first half of the 2019 season — nine months younger than Eleh Montero was when he played for Peoria as a teenager in 2018 — so I’m not even sure the organization will place Herrera above the Appy League. I don’t think I would.
But let’s see. I have him roughly 140th right now. So if he were to keep killing the ball at a 150 wRC+ clip while moving up three levels to the Midwest League at age 18/19, I’d say he’d be top 20-30 overall, depending on defense. He’d immediately be one of baseball’s best 15-20 hitting prospects, and a plausible future catcher to boot. (But believe me, Ivan isn’t going to post a 150 wRC+ in the MWL. Not in 2019.)
For context, fellow catcher Miguel Amaya was a few months older when he played in the Midwest League in 2018, and posted a 114 wRC+. That quite rightly made him a consensus top 100 overall prospect. Amaya’s defensive numbers mirror Herrera’s in both caught stealing and errors, with Amaya holding the edge in passed balls. So I’d say that to rank where Amaya ranks now, top 60-80, Ivan would need a 120-125 wRC+ for Peoria while looking viable as a long term backstop.
What I expect though is that Herrera will go to the Appy League and mash in much the same way he always has. That would make him a top 100 possibility for me. Again, depending on defense.
“There aren’t many prospects out there I would choose over Reyes, Hudson, Gorman, Montero, Nunez, and Knizner. There just aren’t.”
Agreed, gscott. Cards are in an unusual spot, since so many high-upside guys are also high risk, e.g., Reyes, Gorman, Nunez, and all of the kid position players who have yet to taste full season ball. Plus the Card farm is overloaded with position players — worst imbalance in memory. But also most teenage talent.
The Twins, Rays, and Pads are almost surely the strongest systems, with Toronto up there as well, led of course by the two Legacy Guys. Birds are in a tier with the Reds, Braves, and a few others. Maybe the White Sox, though their depth stinks. St. Louis looks to be somewhere in the 5-10 range. But that’s rather vague, so I’ll opine 6th-8th. (I do not include O’Neill, as MLB officially excludes him from R.O.Y. eligibility due to days on the 25-man roster.)
I say 6th-8th, having not carefully examined every single team yet. But after doing this sort of thing for 15-20 years or more, a person develops a sense of what an average farm, a top 10, or a top 5 look like. Cards are top 10 for sure, but NOT top 5 right now. Redbird hitters are like Padre pitchers — lotsa guys with lotsa high ceilings. Could be fun to watch them grow over the next 4-6 years. (Both teams, I mean.)
“…the Cards score well for depth, but lower on top-end talent.”
Ivan Herrera is the only minor leaguer at his position to post at least a 150 wRC+ in both 2017 and 2018.
Nolan Gorman was the youngest Cardinal to play in the Midwest League in 50 years.
Malcom Nunez was easily the best hitter in the DSL for as far as the records go back.
Elehuris Montero when he was promoted was on pace to be the first teenager in Midwest League history (founded 1963) to win the batting title while leading the league in extra base hits.
Tyler O’Neill was the first AAA batter (23 or younger) since Willie McCovey 59 years ago to post an isolated slugging of .380 or better — despite playing more than half his games in pitcher’s parks. (He homered 8 times in the only 10 games he played in PCL hitter’s parks.)
And Joey De Los Santos was the only minor leaguer at any level to hit at least .310 while stealing lots of bases and walking more than he whiffed. No one else did so in 2017, either.
So whatever you may read, there is LOTS of top-end talent. The question is, how much of it will self-actualize.
“Our enthusiasm may cause us to overrate all the Cardinal prospects when they are compared with prospects on other teams.”
Well said, Ny. This is indeed the permanent danger. Our biases may color our comparisons.
Which is why I use 80-90% on-field performance when evaluating any prospect from any team. The same yardstick for Cardinals as for prospects from every other organization. Generally makes things very simple, objective, and fair.It’s obviously quite a bit harder to do with pitchers, since the “stat line” omits so many details of velocity, movement, mental toughness, etc.. Pitchers require more research, to be sure. But position players aren’t so tough, not really. I’ll show you what I mean.
As a prospect, Yadi Molina was never on a top 100 list. Neither were Paul Goldschmidt or Jose Altuve or Harrison Bader or Jose Ramirez. Also Matt Carpenter, Justin Turner, Robby Cano, A.J. Pollock, Kyle Seager, Lorenzo Cain, Matt Holliday, Kevin Kiermaier, Paul DeJong, Brett Gardner, Russell Martin, Brian Dozier, and Ben Zobrist. Never top 75 for anyone: Chase Utley, Ian Kinsler, and Dustin Pedroia. Never top 60: Mookie Betts, Andrelton Simmons, Chuck Knoblauch. And never top 40, Albert Pujols.
That’s 25 stars and superstars, maybe a half dozen Hall Of Famers, all radically underrated as prospects. Not underrated by a notch or two. Waaay off. Just goes to show how incredibly difficult it is to properly grade baseball prospects, right?
Not on your life. Of the 25, all but 3 or 4 could easily have been evaluated much more accurately, if only their publicly available track records of hitting & defense had been shrewdly scrutinized and given proper weight. In short, if only the stat lines had been fully scouted.
So that’s what I do, with Redbirds and everyone else.Scout the stat lines, both hitting and defense. Then after that, fold in the other lesser factors. (And those “other factors” do NOT include signing bonuses or draft slots. Those are little more than distractions, lazy comfortable data points that people inadvertently use to play tricks on themselves, to talk themselves into untrue things. To lobby for example for allegedly self-evident future MLB star Ian Happ over the supposedly inferior future bench player, Harrison Bader.)
“Bob, I wouldn’t worry too much about Fangraphs. They also predict the Brewers to finish last in the NLC. In my opinion they have very little credibility.”
Well, gscott, like every other source, they certainly have their (intellectual) virtues and vices. To be fair, the “standings” that show the Brewers behind the Reds & Pirates are generated by computer models, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of individual Fangraphs writers. But I agree, any computer model that shows the Brewers in last, needs to be re-evaluated. Just like several seasons ago the ZiPS model was annually too low on the Cardinals, year after year, because St. Louis had a team of actual high BABIP hitters and the ZiPS model invariably over-regressed for that.
But I think it’s important to discredit intellectually dishonest and incompetent evaluators, which in the context of St. Louis prospects described Baseball America for 15-20 years, and now describes Fangraphs to a T.
I want Cardinal fans to be better informed. And I want them to feel good about good prospects, great about great ones, and bad about the distorted, dismissive and in my opinion dishonest work by McDaniel and Longenhagen at Fangraphs. The rankings are not only third rate, but they’re riddled with omissions and nonsense. Think I exaggerate? Okay, here’s one quick example.
In 2018 Atlanta outfielder Drew Waters and Cardinal third baseman Elehuris Montero each played in Low-A ball at age 19. Drew Waters posted a terrific 145 wRC+ and Montero was even better at 157. Very exciting season for each player.
About Waters, Fangraphs said:
“His full season debut in 2018 was a smashing success; he demolished the Low-A Sally League and posted a 98 wRC+ in High-A as a teenager.”As for Montero:
“Montero’s strong initial foray into full-season ball — .322/.381/.529 with 46 extra-base hits in 103 games — was his second straight year of on-paper success…”So Waters was a smashing success who demolished his league. Montero, however, was merely strong. On paper. Whatever that’s supposed to mean. I thought on-paper success was for potty-training your puppy. So that’s what I mean by “nonsense.” (Small matter, but note also that they mention Waters’ solid High-A performance. Nothing about Montero’s 110 wRC+ in his High-A time, however.)
Fangraphs went on to cite Montero’s “approach” as a potential problem, even though Waters actually walked less and struck out more than Montero in Low-A. Thus, more nonsense.
One other not entirely meaningless nitpick: when a player wins his league batting title and his league MVP, those achievements should be mentioned in any review of his season, in my opinion. That’s what I mean by “omissions.” Casual fans of the minor leagues might not know that Montero had done those things, and that knowledge helps to paint a richer more complete picture of his season. It gives an idea of what he accomplished, and maybe more importantly how he was perceived by MVP voters — which I believe was the league managers, but I don’t know for sure.
And it’s not just 6 or 8 or 12 guys. There were roughly 20-25 such weird examples of misleading writing within their Cardinal capsules. It was like a concerted relentless salespitch for a very specific idea. And that idea is “St. Louis’ prospects, almost to a man, are not nearly as good as they played on the field in 2018.”
Thanks, Brian, for posting these interviews. I still have a lot left to listen to, but what I’ve heard has been informative and even entertaining at times. Thanks again.
“If I were managing the Cardinals, I would want all of the players to be well versed on the history of the storied rivalry with the cubs.”
Agreed, Pugs. And you know what’s funny? I initially read “storied rivalry” remark as “steroid rivalry.” As in, a rivalry on steroids. (Which it is, since the cubs finished tanking.) Or maybe a jab at the PED-tainted McGwire/Sosa battle of 1998.
“…one would think the City of Brotherly Love’s baseball team would have at least one heated rivalry brewing.”
I think the overheated rivalry in Philly is between the team and their own fans, Pugs. Or between the fans and Santa, not sure which.
“Cub lover” – the ultimate insult!
You got it, CC! So much worse than even the hurtful “cub fan.”
Anyway, regarding the business of a cubbienetwork in the near future…I’m not concerned. With the MLB luxury tax thresholds being relatively low, and the punishments now including draft pick penalties, the $$ playing field (relative to revenues only) is probably more level than it’s ever been. The Dodgers and Red Sox and cubs have been winning lately because they got smart guys Friedman and Dombrowski and Epstein, moreso than their fat wallets. Smart guys hire smart underlings, and more importantly they hire smart managers for the dugout.
We see the tiny-market Brewers with a player payroll at 70% of the first tax penalty level, and also see multiple high revenue teams apparently unwilling to even enter the bidding for Harper/Machado. With this new network the Ricketts family will make more money than ever, but I don’t expect it to influence the cub player payroll much, if at all — and thus it should have miniscule bearing on cubbie team quality going forward.
First, thanks so much for the gracious words, Pugs! I’m twice as happy as I deserve to be, probably. Family and friends are in good health, and pitchers & catchers are less than a month away. It’s frozen outside but I’m warm and dry. So what else is there to wish for?
“I guess that one could blame anything on Mabry because there is no way of telling.”
It’s true that there is no way of telling, Ny. But it’s imcumbent on us to use our common sense.
It is absolutely true that there can never be definitive cause-and-effect proof that any hitting coach ever helped or hindered any player. And for the longest time the tobacco companies claimed there was no cause-and-effect proof that cigarettes gave you cancer. But again, common sense.I cited seven anti-Mabry examples. I could go into granular specifics yet again about how at-bats were routinely given away on a nightly basis by the terrible overaggressive & counterproductive plate approach that was instilled in developing Cardinal hitters over the past 4-5 years by the Mabry-led MLB staff — but I’ve done that on multiple occasions before, so I won’t. Simply put, it’s just a real bad track record, and it’s a pretty lengthy one, at 6 1/2 years. If anyone wants to believe that it’s all a big coincidence, that’s their choice.
I can think of only two hitters who looked better after Mabry got them (Gyorko) or worse after leaving (Heyward). With Mabry around, veteran batters went into unusually deep horrific slumps for many weeks (Moss, Peralta) or even months on end (Fowler) while younger Cards regularly failed to develop, and not infrequently literally got worse the longer Mabry was around them (Grichuk, Diaz, Piscotty). Hitters are supposed to be improving in their mid-twenties, not annually declining.
But hey, young hitters fail all the time. Some succeed, some do not. So we should put Mabry’s record into an appropriate context. Under Mabry’s immediate predecessors, there were five Cardinal minor league hitters with a decent chance to contribute at the MLB level (Freese, Jay, Craig, Carpenter, Rasmus). All but one reached at least his projected 50th percentile outcome at the plate, and a couple were substantially better. On the other hand, under Mabry the majority of young Redbird batters had to be traded away due to poor performance.
If anyone wants to defend Mabry, that’s obviously their prerogative. But I’ve said all I’m going to on the subject. So forgive me for bowing out of any future debate. At least within this thread.
“Bob, I think everyone was thinking along these lines as the offseason began, including the FO. Apparently these AL teams in question don’t think as highly of JMart as we do so a deal hasn’t been consummated and there doesn’t appear to be one on the horizon either. I think the FO is being smart this time by not giving away a .300 hitter making the minimum. He should only be traded for an impact reliever, not a prospect we hope develops in a few years.”
I think you’ve summarized things pretty perfectly, gscott. What I’ve found frustrating over the winter, is that we don’t have any inkling of what specific trade offers have been made and turned down for Jose. But I agree wholeheartedly that the Birds should NOT trade Martinez for prospects. Only current help, and only impact help, will do.
“I think that some clubs look at Martinez and realize we got him off the junk heap and they don’t want to overpay for a bargain player. After saying that, I want JoMartinez on the team… but preferably off the field. I love watching his at-bats, the glove part… not so much.”
Agreed 100%, Ny. MLB-wide perception has probably still not caught up with reality, when it comes to Jose’s outstanding hitting skills. I’d rather have an excellent cost-controlled reliever, but barring that, I’m happy to have an excellent bench bat and DH for interleague tilts.
“Bob,
Doesn’t your sureness that Fowler will fail, be a reason to keep (rather than trade) Jose?
I understand that you want the trade so that O’Neill will be the ‘Next Man Up’ in RF. But if it is inevitable that Fowler will fail then Jose will inevitably be needed as the fourth outfielder.
I know you have confidence in the minor leaguers, but you have to agree that as least for the first half of 2019, Jose would be a much better option as the fourth outfielder.”Thanks for the kind words, Ny, and for the response, Mr. O!
I’m not sure of Fowler’s failure, but I am 90% sure he’ll get hurt. Dexter has been in the majors for a decade and played 145 games once. He misses 35 games a year, and has averaged just 104 games since coming to St. Louis. And like the rest of us, he’s older every year. He’ll get hurt. But when he’s playing, Fowler will unquestionably hit much better than last year, now that John Mabry’s gone.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 333 points of OPS
Pham by 291 points
Ozuna +164
Wong +158
Piscotty +113
Diaz +74
Grichuk +45So let’s see. That’s 1,178 points of OPS, divided by 7. That’d be a boost of 168 on average. So add 168 to Dexter’s .576 and you get .744. Sounds about right to me. With good baserunning and bad defense, that would be roughly a replacement level right fielder, I believe. In other words not nearly good enough to stay in the lineup more than 6 or 7 weeks for a contending team with multiple distinctly better alternatives.
As for Jose Martinez, I’m not determined to get him off the team, nothing like that. But the club still needs a very good relief pitcher (if not two) and Martinez is the most logical and theoretically valuable trade chip if we’re dealing with an A.L. team. And Jose’s value will only decline year-to-year from here on out, as he makes more dough and gets fewer plate appearances. The outfield is deep, Tyler O’Neil has to get every possible at-bat, and Goldy’s at first base: that combo makes it unlikely that Jose will ever get more than 200-250 AB’s in a Redbird uni again.
Maybe I’m guilty of fixating a bit on Tyler O’Neill, but to me Tyler O’Neill is a lot like Dakota Hudson. They’ve both enjoyed tremendous minor league success, and in the pressure of a playoff race they both succeeded in their initial MLB foray. But I believe we are in an age of overthinking things sometimes, of occasionally being preoccupied with “process” and therefore staring far too microscopically at some selected peripherals of Hudson and O’Neill, while excessively downplaying the actual outcomes, which have been nothing but excellent.
O’Neill is not a bench player and Hudson is not a future reliever. In fact they could both be stars by 2021 if not much sooner, that’s the upside — fully supported by their professional track records. So I can’t agree that Jose is the better option for 4th outfielder. O’Neill’s defense + baserunning counterbalance Jose’s current edge with the bat. And Tyler, many years the younger player, may be a huge part of the club’s future, and for me that breaks all ties. Tiny Kingman has got to get maximum playing time, and he obviously has nothing to learn in Triple-A where he batted .310 and slugged .693 last year.
I wish the poll would’ve allowed us to place the analysts in order, 1-5. But you can’t have everything. At least they’re finally putting Al into situations more aligned with his skillset. He’s an almost ideal team ambassador. Personable and amiable and enthusiastic guy, but not efficient enough at verbalizing his observations for impromptu in-game analysis.
McCarver and Danny Mac have an easy and entertaining rapport that can’t be faked. Perhaps I’d get tired of them if they worked together for 100+ games a year, but I don’t think so. Edmonds and Horton are very good, while Brad Thompson needs to let the game tell the story once in a while. Two times too chatty for television.
Maybe I’m overly nostalgic, but I still feel that the Buck & Shannon radio team was the best. Well, them or Vin Scully alone. (I lived in LA for the end of Scully’s career and he was STILL great at the job. Not great for his age. Just plain great. The worst? Ed Farmer & Anyone. Farmer exudes all the joy of a man waiting for a tooth extraction while being audited. A pox on the Sox for his continued employment.)
Irrelevant sidebar. I wish the radio/TV coverage could have incorporated more of the stars from the championship 60’s and 80’s teams over the past few decades. Would have liked to hear more from Brock or Gibson or the speedsters of the Herzog years. If not regularly, at least with more frequent guest spots. But again, you can’t have everything.
“I recalled reading a BA story about this, which I liked because it had a formula behind it. The story, which just ran in November, ranked active GMs using a scoring system tied to World Series, League titles, Division wins, wild cards, 100-win seasons and total regular season wins.”
Thanks for being patient Brian, while I’ve been lazy for the past couple of days. I like the idea of a systematic numerical analysis like Baseball America’s, but I see a few flaws with BA’s rankings.
1) They don’t include a GM’s financial resources
2) They don’t give any weight to what talent a GM inherited
3) They don’t consider what that GM left behind
4) They probably give too much weight to the playoffs, which involve a LOT more luck than the regular season, and in my opinion reflect managerial wisdom more than GM acumen“Either you are going back 20 years or you are not. Arbitrarily leaving Schuerholz off is ignoring the fact the Braves were in the playoffs every year from 1995 through 2005, winning more than 100 games five different seasons, all while he was GM. Even if you start with 1999 and end after 2007 when he moved up, he is unquestionably among the best of the last 20 years.”
Fair criticism. More than fair, in fact. I should have thought it through better and made fully explicit the parameters. Let’s say that my list only includes individuals who’ve been active within the last 5 years in a GM or GM-like capacity. That way Walt Jocketty is of course still included, but guys who retired a decade ago, or were promoted beyond conventional GM responsibilities, would be excluded.
The logic is, if I were to include Gillick and Schu (easy Hall Of Famers both), then I’d be comparing them to guys like Antonetti and Luhnow, against whom they never competed head-to-head as GM’s. Instead, I want peers v peers.
“For example, Theo has three rings, including in two places that had gone 100 years without titles. The guy has his warts, but seventh in the last 20 years? How? Why?
Friedman second with zero World Series wins? Beane third despite never having got past the first round? etc…”Okay, we get to the meat & potatoes of it.
Theo Epstein did not break any curses. Or maybe I should say that I don’t believe in curses — so no bonus there, not for me. Theo won World Series rings with huge player payrolls, for two of the top four revenue franchises in the sport. The Red Sox and Cubs are penthouse teams, not outhouse.Then and now, as a reflection of general manager skill, winning a World Series in Boston or Chicago is less impressive to me than winning a pennant in Tampa Bay. Speaking of which, during Theo’s 9 years in Boston, his Red Sox won fewer division titles than the Devil Rays. And that’s even though Tampa stunk during Theo’s first 5 Beantown seasons.
Now let’s see what Epstein inherited from his Carmines predecessor when he took over following the 2002 season. The 2002 BoSox were a juggernaut, outscoring their opponents by nearly 200 runs, and featuring a 6-man core, all 30 or younger, that averaged more than 6 WAR apiece. (Pedro Martinez, Manny Ramirez, Johnny Damon, Derek Lowe, Nomar Garciaparra, and Trot Nixon.) In Theo’s first season they averaged 5.5 WAR each.
With massive team revenues/payrolls and a core like that, how could things be any better? Here’s how. In the minors Epstein also inherited future stars Hanley Ramirez, Kevin Youkilis, and Jon Lester. Between the majors and minors that’s A LOT of talent. I would argue without fear of contradiction that Theo Epstein inherited the best starting position of any first time GM in modern major league history. Maybe of any GM at any time in MLB history. (Unless one believes in curses, which I don’t.)
He inherited all that, and won one division title in nine years. He left the team with bloated contracts and mediocre prospects. They finished last in 3 of the next 4 seasons after he left. Much of that was due to Theo protegee Ben Cherington, but some was surely on Theo as well. Howard Bryant at ESPN summed it up well when he described the historic 2011 Red Sox collapse. Bryant anticipated the last place finishes to come, with his critique of Epstein’s generally dismal free agent signings. https://www.espn.com/espn/commentary/story/_/page/bryant-111005/theo-epstein-held-accountable-red-sox-collapse
As for his next stop, Epstein in Chicago inherited in Chicago a situation almost identical to what Mozeliak inherited in St. Louis. In both cases: old team, mediocre farm system, losing record, and a crappy run differential around -100. Remarkably, Mozeliak’s first team finished 10 games over .500, and not by luck. They improved their run differential by over 150 in one year. And they kept on improving from there, making the playoffs the following season. (And of course they’ve only had winning seasons since.)
Next to Mozeliak, what Epstein did was comparatively easy: gutting a team for three straight years in order to accrue top draft picks (and the high draft budgets that accompany them) and also bloated int’l spending budgets, and accumulate the dirt cheap high end talent that results from them.
Overall, Epstein’s cubs have averaged 84 wins a year. They have two division titles, one pennant, one Series. Mozeliak’s Cards have averaged 90 wins a year, won four division titles, two pennants, and also one Series. Theo’s only had 7 years and Mozeliak 11, but then Theo’s team has the sport’s 4th-most resources and right now the 2nd-highest player payroll. If Theo didn’t have his Boston years, then for me Mo would rank ahead of him.
I think that the Epstein essay pretty much explains the relative placements of Friedman and Beane also. Friedman inherited nothing in Tampa, had few financial resources throughout his tenure, yet won the division more often than Theo Epstein, hired goofy iconoclast Joe Maddon, and won an A.L. pennant. Now that he has resources, Friedman wins his division every single year, and has two more pennants for his office wall. And his team looks very well positioned for the future. Markedly better than the cubs, in my opinion.
Billy Beane you already know plenty about, likely more than I do. And he’s easily the toughest guy to grade, because of the extraordinary record of playoff futility. How much should he be punished for that? I have no idea whatsoever. His regular season record is very good, and very lengthy, and hindered by payroll constraints that haven’t handcuffed the others on the list. (At least not since Friedman left Florida.)
Again, these GM’s are so tightly bunched that if you want to drop Beane from 3rd to 7th or 8th or even lower, I might not bother with rebutting. They’re all so darn close together. All ten guys would grade somewhere between a straight B and an A- for me. In fact, Antonetti might be the only B grade. Everyone else could receive B+ and A-, and next year Antonetti or Luhnow could be top 3, if their team wins 100 games and the World Series.
RF: This is one of the more subtle reasons why I want Jose Martinez traded for relief pitching. With Martinez gone, Mike Shildt would effectively be forced to play Tyler O’Neill when Fowler gets injured or simply doesn’t hit. (And that IS a when, not an if.)
1B: I go with the latter option, CC. Gyorko would upgrade the hot corner defense, and his bat has consistently been above average since joining the Cards. I don’t dislike Jose Martinez, honestly. I would play Jose at first base if Goldy got hurt, if the alternative were weaker than Jedd for third base.
CF: Tyler O’Neill is fast. Faster than you think. Fast enough for centerfield with room to spare. According to the statcast numbers, out of 549 major leaguers in 2018, O’Neill was 20th fastest. Link: https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/sprint_speed_leaderboard
No way in the world would I ever play Dexter Fowler in center field again.LF: O’Neill should simply be getting maximum playing time, however possible. He’s nearly a decade younger than Jose Martinez, and even though Jose is the better bat right now, O’Neill is the better ballplayer once defense and baserunning are included. Short term and long, O’Neill makes more sense.
C: If Yadi goes down in April or early May, perhaps you go with Pena for awhile. Francisco’s been an average hitter in AAA for 3 or 4 years, so he really shouldn’t be nearly as terrible in the majors as he showed last year. By June, assuming he’s playing well for Memphis, Knizner gets the call.
2B and 3B: Agreed, absolutely. Gyorko would be a Steady Eddie at either spot.
SS: Ride a hot hand. If Munoz is on the 25-man and hitting distinctly better than Gyorko at the time, you go with Yairo. Last year’s plethora of errors at the MLB level were not consistent with Munoz’ more solid minor league track record, so I think he’d be fine. Anyway, DeJong is going to play 154 games so don’t even THINK about it, CC.
I love the Redbird position players. The starters, the depth, and the minors. If they play their best players, they make the playoffs no doubt. (But don’t play any geriatrics for 27 games in a row, Skip. In the immortal words of the bard Big Boi, act like you got some sense.)
Thanks for the heads-up, Ny. I think I’ll look into this.
Obsessive about accuracy, that’s me all over!On the other hand, I don’t really possess any social media savvy whatsoever. I’m not particularly open to direction or feedback from others. I don’t know anything about baseball’s lighter side, and I couldn’t care less about casual fans. Who needs casual fans? I can’t relate to casual fans.
I’m also no good at reacting quickly, objectively self-editing, working on deadline for demanding bosses, or juggling numerous responsibilities like so many chainsaws. And I won’t work weekends or nights.
Maybe I’m not the best choice.
“…if a guy admits he does not want to hustle right before becoming a free agent and then tries multiple times to injure opponents in the post-season, I don’t want him on my team, especially for the next 7-10 years. There is more to the game than just good stats and a nice contract, IMO.”
I am forced to concur with the above quote from Mr. Walton, Pads.
Machado’s October antics went way beyond poor sportsmanship. Relative to the standards of his sport, he frankly behaved like a lunatic — in the playoffs, on national television, several times. In my opinion there’s something fundamentally wrong with him, as a human being. Maybe morally, maybe ethically, maybe emotionally or psychologically. But something ain’t right.
For me the most interesting questions about Machado do not center around “Who will sign him, and for how much?” The real question is, has he been behaving like this throughout his career, kicking, grabbing, stepping on people? If he has, then how has it been kept such a secret? And if not, then why on Earth did he choose the highest possible profile setting to display his bizarrely dangerous behavior? Either way, something ain’t right.
In awfulness, Jose beats Skates hands down, Wiley. Lonnie Smith was only 31 runs below average for his career per Fangraphs. And rather stunningly just minus 23 at Baseball-Reference.
Lonnie was a pretty idiosyncratic defender. Lots of errors, but lots of assists. And he covered quite a bit of ground when he wasn’t slipping. I guess (for the non-AARP members reading this) you could liken him to Vlad Guerrero, at least the young version of Vlad — although I’d wager Vlad’s miscues were mostly of the throwing variety. Not what you’d call good glovemen, but certainly entertaining!
And CC, I’d say that Brian summed it up well. According to the B-Ref site, it goes like this:
1882 St. Louis Brown Stockings
1883-1898 Browns
1899 Perfectos
1900-infinity CardinalsBob Caruthers led the franchise with three straight double-digit WAR seasons (1885-87), before Silver King’s big year of course.
I will mentally strike Tartabull from the list, Pugs. Partly for you, partly for the sake of his Seinfeld legacy. Thanks to George Costanza, I smile when I hear Tartabull’s name, deadbeat or not.
Since you asked, Pugs, I checked the defensive numbers at Fangraphs (because they’re so easily sortable).
There are 177 players in MLB history with a negative 100 runs or worse, per F-G metrics. Ranking them by negative runs per 600 plate appearances, The clear worst two are Brad Hawpe at -22 runs/600, and Danny Tartabull at -21. Third worst ever is Hidecki Matsui at -18.
Before you bring him up, Pugs, Dr. Strangeglove Dick Stuart averaged a -16. Stuart was atrocious, yes. But not the worst, apparently.
Jose Martinez has thus far averaged -14 runs per 600 PA’s — but then, he still has his age-related decline phase to come. We know you can do it, Jose! Catch some of those guys!
But let’s move on to a happier subject.
As for batting, Jose currently sports a terrific career 130 wRC+, a number he shares with such notables as Tim Salmon, Bucketfoot Al Simmons, Toy Cannon Jimmy Wynn, Carl Yastrzemski, Pete Reiser, Christian Yelich, and the great Parisian Bob Caruthers, the ancient Cardinal who was baseball’s best pitcher at age 21 and best hitter at age 22.Good for her, she’ll be missed. She offered informed and highly readable reportage throughout her tenure, by gosh.
Maybe I’m about to oversimplify the situation, but here goes.
Since Bud Selig took over in 1992, MLB revenues have risen by an average of just over 5% per year.
But over the past 8 years the luxury tax threshold has increased by roughly 2% per year, and will increase even less than that over the next 2 years (just a paltry 1% a year.) It’s the players’ fault for agreeing to this in the previous CBA’s.
The tax threshold was $174M from 2011-2013. If the tax threshold had kept pace with revenues, the threshold for 2019-2021 would be about $260M instead of $206-$211M. And it would be $283M for 2022-2024 based on the $189 tax threshold of 2014-2016. Believe you me, it ain’t gonna be $283M.
The players negotiated poorly, and now the free agents are paying the price — and thus the “rising tide” of free agent contracts isn’t rising at all, isn’t lifting any other boats. So salaries have stagnated. And will continue to do so until the next CBA is negotiated better by the boys we pay to see.
“Of course, during our vote, both Urias and Edman received some top 10 votes. Edman, Urias, Schrock, Sosa, and Young got some votes in the #11-15 phase. They all wound up in that 20-26 range. It’s not all that clear. Young only had 150 PAs at the AA level and will be 25 during the 2019 season. I don’t like his ML chances nearly as much as the other 4.”
Agreed, Pads, re Andy Young. I can’t see any way to rate him above Tommy Edman or Edmundo Sosa — and especially not above Ramon Urias. What Young did in Arizona may have made him more marketable, but it didn’t change his profile one jot.
The funny thing is that every year without fail, just before the Arizona Fall League commences, numerous national prospect-ranking voices (the scouty types, I mean) admonish us, their reading public, not to change our opinions of players based on events of the AFL. And then, every year without fail, they do that very thing themselves.
“Oh, I didn’t change my previous opinion. My previous opinion was correct. The player had changed, when I saw him!” is their standard rationalization. Kiley McDaniel in particular indulges in that one a lot.
Anyway, a quick comparison illustrates the multiple advantages Urias has over Young. (The head-to-head is very convenient, since they played on the same AA team at the same age within a handful of weeks.)
In Springfield, Urias walked twice as often as Young. That’s huge of course, as walk rate gets more and more predictive for prospects the closer you get to the majors. And Urias also struck out less often than Young, posted a slightly better batting average and higher isolated slugging than Young, and showed better overall glovework than Young, with some ability to play shortstop in a pinch, as well.
I’m not suggesting that Andy Young is negligible. But I believe that among position players Urias is the most underrated Redbird, and one of the 15 or 20 most underrated guys in all the minors, a plausible cusp-of-the-top 100 type. I expect him to rip through Triple-A in 2019.
“This baby just may rival “War & Peace” in longevity before the last post is one day finally submitted on this controversial yet meaningful thread.”
More like War & War for me, Mr. Addams. This thread really brings out my pugnacity.
“His (Derrick Goold’s) chat sessions are almost unbearable for me because of all of his condescending replies. It seems to really trouble him to have to spend time trying enlighten all of the rubes out there in Cardinal land.”
I almost feel a little sorry for him sometimes, gscott. Goold does seem to having less fun than he used to. But then, three years without the playoffs has somewhat soured the entire St. Louis baseball community, as it were. (It doesn’t help that the Rams left town and almost immediately became great.)
The thing about Goold, I used to hold him in very high esteem. Good wordsmith, rigorous mind, patient with fans. But it looks like he’s been absorbed over the past couple of years by the Twitter sensibility, i.e., preferring feelings to facts. In a bizarre microcosm of his generalized decline, Goold refuses now to use classic vivid imagery to describe an outfielder’s powerful throwing arm. Won’t say “howitzer” or “cannon” or “rifle.” Might somehow hurt someone’s feelings by obliquely evoking notions of violence and militarism. Or some such blather. (Pointless aside: this reminds me of Keith Law saying he’ll never watch The Godfather because it depicts Italian Americans in an unfavorable light. Deep thinker, that guy. Mustn’t participate in anything that might have hurt anybody’s feelings, at any time.)
But I do not respect the way that Derrick has tried to sell us Dexter — both as a ballplayer and as a suddenly sympathetic depressive. (Not clinically depressed, mind you. I mean, maybe clinically, but maybe not. The P-D writers & Fowler are conveniently playing that one both ways. But the important thing is that we should be sad, that Dexter is sad. Or was sad. And therefore we need to help make him un-sad. Because Dexter’s feelings are of course more important than all of his teammates put together. Dexter must be prioritized. And how do we make Dexter un-sad? We give him whatever he wants, like a screaming 3-year-old. We play him every day! Probably need to bat him near the top of the lineup, also. You know, for protection. (Not that the protection did him any good in 2018.)
Goold wants us to believe Dexter was turning things around under Shildt, even as he admits there is scant evidence. Feelings over facts. Goold has contempt for everyone who wants Carpenter to hit leadoff — even though there is no evidence yet that he can hit anywhere else. Again, it isn’t the disagreement that is off-putting. It’s his unshakeable disdain, his CERTAINTY that he’s right and you’re wrong, even though every bit of objective evidence is in YOUR favor, not his. Feelings over facts.
(It reminds me of when during a Q & A chat someone showed Ben Fredrickson the outstanding Redbird bullpen numbers during the six years under Derek Lilliquist. BenFred’s response was: “I don’t care about the numbers. I know the bullpen management was bad.” Again, feelings over facts.)
Goold gives of his time. His chats are epic in length, and I applaud him — and Keith Law for that matter, and BenFred, for the identical reason. But God bless them all, I wish they’d all get off of Twitter and go pick up a copy of The Art Of Clear Thinking by Rudolf Flesch. And binge watch about 40 episodes of South Park, because that show has the best BS detector in TV history. And it does not truck with ideologues.
“Bob, if the data is easy for you access, it would help to see the at-bats or plate appearances of the various outfielders during the key periods of time you mention – up to June 12 and then the next month until Matheny was fired. OPS is one view, but since the primary point is about playing time, that data would be important. Thanks.”
I guess I’m a bit dense. I’m not sure precisely what you’re looking for, Brian. But anyway, I’ve bloviated and researched so much during the past 24 hours, I’m disinclined to say or do much more right now. Could you clarify, though? Gracias, Sir.
Wow. If you include the surplus value of a 3rd round draft pick, it works out to be more like $20M for one year. These are not your father’s Brewers.
Grandal’s thinking, I guess, is that he goes to Wisconsin, eats a variety of delicious cheeses*, has a good season, and during next winter’s free agency he doesn’t have a Qualifying Offer draft pick penalty to contend with.
Milwaukee is now a tri-favorite for the division, in my mind. Strong division, the Central. It won’t be 2015 redux or anything, but I could see the Cards, cubs, and Brew Crew each winning 91-93 games.
I only hope this motivates the Cards to make at least one more substantive upgrade to their team — preferably the bullpen. Have I mentioned that I think they should upgrade the bullpen?
*If the shoppe carries his brand.
“10 or 20 yrs ago a consistent ‘opener’ would have been laughable. No telling where the game is going but I dont see stat sheet guys creating the mess.”
I don’t have a canine in this skirmish, but I do wonder about the “opener” philosophy in general. It seems to me that the opener should be a very good reliever, because you’re asking him to face the top of the opposition order. And yet, your best 3 or 4 relievers should of course be saved for the higher leverage situations. And the first inning — even against the top of the order — would ordinarily be among the lowest leverage situations in a game. Wouldn’t it? So I guess I’m a bit baffled by the whole thing. And obviously too lazy to research it.
Maybe someone here could clarify the underlying thought process. Thanks in advance.
