Birds on the Bat.

The Skinny on Phat Albert!

2011-12-12T01:22:00.000-08:00

In the aftermath of Albertgeddon fans have been reacting with all the emotional aplomb that one would expect when a team loses an icon. There hasn't been much in way of logical thinking. Sadly, the reaction from the blogosphere from guys that are supposed to more objective has been just as reactionary. People are all bitter anger right now. Mostly they are saying he is a sellout and that he just ran for the money, or, they just respond with a "we didn't need him anyway." The truth is most of the people that are judging him have not been following the behind the scenes machinations that led to this situation. This was not something that came about his recently, its been two years in the making, and honestly, all signs pointed to Albert leaving.

Firstly, to clear up a few things, Albert is a bit surly. A very good human being that is incredibly selfless in a lot of ways, a great cheerleader for his team, a great family man, and really, a decent human being. There aren't many people that can say that, but the fact is he is really just sort of a reserved introverted personality type off the baseball field. He has had a tumultuous time with the media in St. Louis, bu frankly, he has handled the somewhat antagonistic media in St. Louis (i.e. Joe Strauss, Bernie Miklasz) much better than I ever would. None of this should detract from the fact he does more humanitarian actions a year than most players do in a career. All of that being said, that means his interactions with people have not been all sugar and spice. Particularly, his relationship with the front office, particularly with Mozeliak, (Mo) has been degrading at a steady pace. Mo is also kind of a jerk, actually, he is a complete jerk, and he has been trying to increase his day to day control over the team. That was mitigated by the fact that Tony Larussa was the manager and nobody meddles with him without getting an earful. But Tony retired, and Mo got to handpick his staff. This would give him much more control over day to day baseball operations. I think this factored heavily into Albert's decision to move on.

Secondly, Albert was hurt, and I really do mean hurt, (Joe Strauss mentioned that it seemed truly genuine. As he is a hardass cynic, it means a lot coming from him) by the offer the Cardinals made before the season. There is no question that that offer was not remotely a fair offer. It wasn't even a fair offer with him giving the hometown discount. It was, frankly, a bit of a slap in the face to him. A credit to Pujols is that where as a lot of players would have let this bother him, he just shut up and played.

Thirdly, Pujols (and Deidre, she had a lot of influence on his decision) Pujols wanted ten years on the contract more than he wanted the money. That was something he just really cared about, as well as a no-trade clause. Also, he wanted a personal service contract on top of it. Mo refused to bend on any of this. They could have resigned him. Honestly, the could have easily resigned him. I cannot be convinced that a personal service contract with a team icon is an onerous demand. My conclusion from all of the evidence is this. The Cardinals DID NOT WANT PUJOLS BACK.

I am sure some of you are saying, "Why Justin, why would you say a thing like that?" Well, since you asked, I will tell you why. There are several factors that kept the Cardinals from getting him. The first of these is that they don't need to pay a contract in any where near the range Pujols DESERVED. Those type of contracts, for any player, really on belong on teams that can field upwards of a 150 mil payroll. The Cardinals, as of yet, cannot field a payroll that high. It would hamstring financial to the point where it would be hard for them to be competitive at times. And here are some more harsh facts. Albert is looking like he is an old 31. No, I am not saying he is older than 31, just that his body has been through a lot. The past 4 seasons he has looked like he is walking on glass. His legs aren't healthy, and that is not likely to change over a ten year contract. Its a miracle that his right elbow hasn't already blown out as the ligament there is as thin as my savings account. He has played 11 seasons and rarely missed any games. That is a lot of wear and tear on his body. I thoroughly believe that a body has an odometer, and it can only play so many games, regardless of their age and he has not only played a lot games, and a ton more playoff games, but he runs the bases like his hair is on fire and plays hard everyday. He plays through all of this injuries, and in the long run, I think that will shorten his career. Over ten years, he will break down, and there is absolutely no chance that he will be the same player he is now over the last 4 seasons of that contract. The Cardinals new, and the Angels know, they are getting probably six good seasons out of Pujols, anything over than that is a bonus. The Cardinals just weren't willing to do that.

Of course this is mostly speculation, but logically that is how it will go. Maybe Pujols will have a career in Anaheim to match that in St. Louis, MVP's, batting titles, gold gloves, and multiple world series appearances, but betting on that is an enormous gamble, the Cardinals just weren't willing to make that gamble. And that was the right call.

This was a situation where Albert both absolutely deserves to get paid, and it was absolutely a bad idea to do it. I for one, wish the best to Albert, it has been a pleasure to watch him play this years. But now I am excited to see in what direction the Cardinals are going. It is not like they have a bad team, Albert actually was their third best offensive player last season, and they are going to be just fine. In fact, I think they will win the division, and have a better chance of winning than they did in 2011.

On a side note, I have no problem with players getting paid. They earn it. They work hard. They work harder than anybody not a ball player could possibly imagine. They work harder in one year than I have worked in grad school plus law school. They earn there money and pay for it the rest of their lives with pain. If someone is offering the money its ridiculous to ridicule the player for taking it. And those of you who say the old days were different, then I want to know which era you are talking about. Read the biographies, the players going back to 1900 have always been concerned with their earnings, as they should be. Its a business, it always has been. We love capitalism, but if you are ballplayer, suddenly we don't love it. I don't begrudge then. Albert gets more money for his charities, and more money to secure his children and grand children are taken care of. I can't fault anyone, particularly a someone who gives back, for that.

Tony Larussa's Baseball Obituary Part 1

2011-11-03T10:41:00.003-07:00

I had been working on a big long blog post during the entirety of the playoffs and had planned on posting it after the World Series. However, the retiring of Tony LaRussa kind of made my finishing remarks on that flit right out of my mind and instead here I am writing a post about him and his retirement. Honestly, his retirement should not come as any surprise really. He has been waffling on the edge of retirement since the 2006 championship. I think each year it just seemed like a year that he didn't want to end on since then. 2007 was a year with a subpar team and a non-playoff finish. 2008 was a frustrating year where they finished outside the playoffs and he spent the last part of the year pressing for improvement to the bullpen, Mo held part and Tony saw lots of cheap relievers trade teams, any one of which literally might have got them in the playoffs. 2009 was a year Mo made big moves, yet they flopped in the first round of the playoffs while being a favorite. 2010 was a disappointing year, finishing five back from the Reds, while Tony spent all year trying to jumpstart an anemic offense and piece together a rotation that was really only 2.5 pitchers deep. But 2011, that is a different story altogether. 2011 was a year any manager in baseball history could retire after and be proud. Truthfully it appears TLR has been telling management this could be it since August, but frankly, I don't know how much that means. He is apparently been doing the same thing each August for the last few years. It just so happens that this time he meant it. It, however, should have been obvious that this might have been the year for him to call it quits from the way he managed the games. I had commented several times through the last month of the season and on into the post-season that TLR was managing a bit different than he normally does. He, as I like to use this as a metaphor quite often, was managing ball games like his hair was on fire. More aptly, he was managing every game like it was his last. This all makes sense now, he was managing every game like it was the last season he was ever going to manage.

While I am sitting here it occurs to me that the things I am going to write seem more like I am writing an obituary than anything else. I guess that is somewhat true, its the end of a Hall of Fame career, and a Hall of Fame career that has changed the very fabric of how baseball is played more than any other manager since John McGraw, and perhaps ever. This is not hyperbole, this is just simple baseball fact, just most don't realize it. TLR has always been different from other baseball people. He has a degree in Industrial Engineering. He also has a law degree from Florida State University and in fact he took and passed the BAR in the state of Florida. Which leads to a great quote from Dick Williams. When hearing that TLR had passed the BAR he responded, "unlike Larussa, I would never pass a bar." TLR is also a vegetarian, and spends most of his free time working with he charity, ARF. (Animal Rescue Foundation) He is just not like most old school baseball men. Can you imagine many ball players touting their vegetarian nature? Prince Fielder notwithstanding anyway, I have my doubts about the validity of that. The point of all this is that Larussa is a thinker, and has always been a thinker. He thinks about baseball the way academics obsess over their respective fields. That is not to say he is always right, he wasn't, but he was always, always thinking.

What most people don't realize about Larussa is how much he changed that game, and not for the better in some peoples estimation. Before Larussa, there was really no such thing as a one inning "closer." He took an older somewhat washed up starter named Dennis Eckersley and proclaimed that he would pitch only one inning at a time and only the 9th inning when his team had the lead. This was pretty crazy thinking at the time. There were closers or "stoppers" at the time, but they were used very differently. They were often used to close out all close games, and even a lot of games that weren't close. They were also used for two innings pretty often. The idea of setting aside a reliever purely for this specific purpose was pretty extreme. Of course, Eck went on to win a Cy Young and MVP award and now pretty much every team in baseball uses a closer in that fashion. Perhaps a bit ironically, St. Louis did not use a closer in this manner for the bulk of 2011. Larussa went on to expand on this concept. He began keeping a lefty specialist in his bullpen. A left hander that only pitched to the opposing teams best left handers late in the game. He used this to great effect with guys such as Rick Honeycutt and Tony Fossas. He then started using guys that tended to pitch only to righthanders. He is, for better or worse, the man who started the trend for games to last 3 and a half hours nightly. He began playing the matchups in an obsessive desire to always get the right pitcher facing the right hitter and he didn't care if he got the last six outs while using six different pitchers. Once again, for better or worse, this habits, although not to his extreme generally, permeated the way baseball operated in the late innings.

Mid-Season Review: Part 1 Injuries, Injuries, Injuries...What we're tied for first?

2011-07-11T16:12:00.000-07:00

I thought I would throw a little hodpodge blog together reviewing the Cardinal's season so far since we have reached the All-Star break. A bit of a mid-season report card.

The Swapping of the Ryan's
Most of you that follow the Cardinal's realize that the Cardinals traded Brendan Ryan away and traded for Ryan Theriot over the offseason. There were many reasons for this move, which I will get to in a second, but first an assessment on whether it was an improvement purely on the stat sheet. Basically, what you get with the Ryan for Theriot swap is you trade out Ryan's fantastic defense for an upgrade with Theriot's offense. The problem is its a HUGE difference defensively and only a minor upgrade offensively. On defense, according to fangraphs.com UZR/150 stat (by far my favorite defensive metric) Theriot is pretty terrible. This of course is not a surprise. He has made quite a few big errors, and just watching the guy with the naked eye its pretty obvious he just isn't that good with the glove. He UZR/150 is -9.1. On the other side you have Brendan Ryan who is just as much positive as Theriot is negative with a +9.2. That's actually a little less than what he normally puts up, but still proves that Ryan really is a top notch defensive shortstop. All in all, Theriot is only barely showing up with 0.3 WAR (wins above replacement player) while Brendan Ryan is rocking a WAR of 1.5. This is a pretty definitive metric for this sort of comparison. Brendan Ryan is clearly a better player on the field than Ryan Theriot this year, and from a stats sheet point of view its been a bit of a failure. But is it really a failure? Brendan Ryan, to put it bluntly, was traded because he is a jerk. Not really a Barry Bonds/Manny Ramirez jerk, just a guy that never really aged past 14 kind of jerk. He was incredibly hyper, flighty, and generally grated on the nerves of all of his pitchers, and more importantly the manager and coaching staff. Essentially he was really bad for the clubhouse, so they decided to move him on, despite being a tremendous defensive talent. Theriot on the other hand, is loved in the clubhouse. He is funny, and although a scrappy player, helps keep it loose. A problem the stoic, businesslike Cardinals of last year had a problem with. Overall, despite the differences on the stats, the Cardinals are still doing better at short this year compared to last. They can always bring in Punto as a defensive replacement. That guy can really pick it.

The Puma Prance
There were a lot of questions about whether the Cardinals signing of Lance Berkman would work out for them. Now the only bad thing is they only signed him for one year. Berkman was voted an All-Star starter this year and in some weeks of the young season he alone kept the Cardinals offense afloat. He is having a pretty monster campaign so far. .290 .404 .602 gets the job done for any team in baseball and the Cardinals are lucky to have him. His decision to sign with the Cardinals hasn't been without controversy on his part as well. The Houston fans were not particularly gracious about the fact he signed with their biggest rival. (To Houston fans minds anyway, although Cardinals fans generally don't share that sentiment) And Bitter Milo Hamilton stirred up a pot of ill will when Berkman made his first appearance at Minute Maid this year. (Bitter should officially become a part of his name) Through it all Berkman held himself as a classy professional and the Cardinals are lucky to have Berkman this year, not only on the field, but in the clubhouse as well.

That big hole in the lineup where ever Rasmus is Batting
Rasmus has been terrible this year at the plate. Oh, his number look average, but that is only because he got off to a hot start. In his last 200 bats he has been putrid, smelly, foul, an easy out, lost at the plate, and a complete waste of carbon. Not only that, he is STILL playing a terrible centerfield. His uzr/150 is a -10, plus just watching him play, he just isn't a good fielder. He makes a lot of simple mistakes, and never learns from them. I won't beat around the bush, I am NOT a fan of Colby Rasmus. I thought they should have traded him during the offseason when he had his maximum trade value before it started to diminish. The problem with Rasmus is probably mostly in his head. He has the tools to be a great player, the question is does he have the brain. Right now, even with the immense potential he just isn't worth the trouble. He is dependent on his father, Tony Rasmus, to be his "hitting coach" and he has caused a lot of trouble with the team by bad mouthing and saying stuff to the media that he shouldn't. At the end of the day you have a grown man that is apparently not a hard worker, not mature, dependent on his father, and honestly, just not a very bright person. If Rasmus wants to succeed for the Cardinals its time for him to grow up and cut the training wheels off, or its time to send him down or trade him, and let John Jay have a chance. (Although despite what a lot of fans think, he is not a significantly better hitter or fielder)

The End of the Brendan Ryan Era.

2010-12-15T13:04:00.000-08:00

The biggest concern after the 2010 season was discovering why the Cardinals underperformed for the talent level. They have a history of getting the most out of players, not of having seasons where their record is lower than the what the sum of their parts says it should be. It seems that the front office decided that a big part of it was clubhouse chemistry, and I tend to agree. The Cardinals are, for lack of a better word, a very business like team. They are very intense. They don't have many guys that bring levity to the season. They are all very stoic, workmanlike and just go about their business. Brendan Ryan was just not good in the clubhouse. He just never really grew up. He routinely made mental mistakes, and his personality is the type that just grates on the nerves. The organization gave him a chance, and I am sure, given that it was talked about in the media, was made aware that he needed to calm down. It was just time for him to move on and he might very well thrive with a new team, but St. Louis was not the place for him. He is a top flight defensive shortstop. One of the best, if not THE best in baseball. This should give some idea of how much of a distraction he was in the clubhouse if a team that values defense the way the Cardinals do were willing to move him for next to nothing. The signings and trades they have made this offseason show that the clubhouse chemistry was an issue. They go out and make a trade for Ryan Theriot, who is a definite downgrade defensively at short, but is known as being a great clubhouse guy. Then they sign Lance Berkman, even though he really wasn't a great fit, and lo and behold, he is another that is known as a great clubhouse guy. The kind of guy that can keep a team loose in August. This also of course, seems to create an issue in the outfield. The Cardinals seemed to be pretty sure they were willing to give Jon Jay a shot in the outfield. This seems to make him the 4th outfielder. Maybe the Berkman signing was a indicator that maybe the Cardinals other biggest clubhouse issue with be traded as well, Colby Rasmus. Good Luck to Brendan Ryan, I hope this situation will be a wake up call that will allow you to make the changes you need to, to become an everyday shortstop in the Major Leagues.

Good Riddance Joe Morgan

2010-11-09T11:54:00.000-08:00

So many people that are fans of baseball are jumping for joy at the moment. Sunday Night Baseball on ESPN potentially will no longer be unwatchable, rather, unlistenable. Joe Morgan and Jon Miller will no longer be doing the broadcasts. This is sad in one respect because Miller is truly a fantastic announcer. I love listening to his radio broadcasts. However, if you combine all the Hall of Fame goodness of all the Hall of Fame announcers you still couldn't counteract Joe Morgan. Honestly, I have never understood why he had a job in the first place. I have never known an announcer that was so universally hated by his viewing audience. In fact, I don't know of a single knowledgeable baseball fan that could tolerate 5 minutes of listening to that man. Why is Morgan so frustrating? Well, for a variety of reasons, but mostly because he is a pompous prig. Joe Morgan is giving a lot of credit nowadays as possibly being the greatest second basemen of all time. He is at least in most people top 5 easily. Why is this? Because he is one of the better percentage players of all time. He was always considered a good player, and a Hall of Famer, but nobody was ever saying he belonged anywhere in the same conversation with Lajoie, Hornsby, Gehringer, Collins, or heck, even maybe guys like Joe Gordon. But thanks, largely impart to Bill James and his sabermetrics, ok almost SOLELY because of Bill James and his sabermetrics, Joe Morgan is recognized as one of the greatest of all time. What makes this frustrating is Morgan is so disdainful of stats PERIOD, that it makes me want to slap him upside the head. He hates sabermetrics, becoming antagonistic anytime anybody tries to use them to determine the quality of a player. This was a conversation that happened once while I was watching. A guest was in the booth with them (I forget whom) and he used a state to show that a player was lacking some particular ability. And Morgan responded, “I don't need the stats, I don't need the stats to show me that he is a good player. I played the game and I can tell from watching that he is a good player, because I played the game. Did you play the game?” This is a typical response from Morgan, when anybody implies that he might now something about the game he just tells them over and over that “I played the game.” He basically acts like that because he played that means whatever he says is ALWAYS right over someone who didn't play the game. Even though he benefited greatly from Bill James he adamantly spoke out against the book in a very derogatory manner. “Why would I wanna read the book? All I'm saying is, I see a game every day. I watch baseball every day. I have a better understanding about why things happen than the computer.” A very typical Joe Morgan quote. Bill James perhaps knew how big a jerk Morgan would be about the book, which is why he included that rather hilarious letter to him in it. All I can say Joe, is that Bill James pegged you right on, and frankly the baseball world is much happier that your ego will no longer be stroked as a broadcaster, giving you the facade that people actually want to hear what you have to say. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.

And the 2010 NL MVP is.....

2010-09-27T17:35:00.000-07:00

I am not going to say I know who the National League MVP should be, but I know who it shouldn't be, Carlos Gonzalez. We have seen this type of thing before, most recently in 2007 when Matt Holliday and Jimmy Rollins were the frontrunners for the MVP. That year Holliday was hurt tremendously by the huge difference in his home/away splits. This is a big deal when you play your home games in Coors field.

Gonzalez is a fine player, but when you look at his splits it just kind of stuns the mind. Carlos Gonzalez isn't anything more than an average player on the road. His percentage numbers are:

.293 BA .327 OBP and a .459 SLG, that rounds out to a very mediocre .786 OPS.

A serviceable player no doubt, but nothing that even comes close to making you think MVP. His numbers at home are something completely different, something of Ruthian proportions. His percentage numbers at home are :

.388 BA. .434 OBP and a .752 SLG for a 1.186 OPS.

Those numbers are ridiculous, steroid era type numbers. Voters look at this, they understand that parks play a huge part in stats now, and Coors is public enemy number one for that. When the split difference is that large, it really hurts the player because his stats basically say that he only crushes the ball in the thin air, anywhere else and he is just average. This is different than when Larry Walker was around. Larry Walker had a big split as well, but he was generally All-Star caliber even with his road numbers. Carlos Gonzalez is not, he isn't even good.

He also gets some pub as a good defensive player, and its true he has made some great catches. But great catches do not make a great defensive player. (cough, cough Gary Mathews Jr.) He posts a negative UZR at both Centerfield and Right Field. He is really just an average outfielder.

Carlos Gonzalez is a good player, and probably will be good for many years, BUT he is not an MVP type player, he is just elevating the ball and riding the Coors affect.

Do the Cardinals want to win? Of course they do.

2010-08-30T17:51:00.000-07:00

I saw a journalist today entitling an article "Do the Cardinals want to win?" Immediately I was struck by how dumb a question this is. With few exceptions people with a enough drive and determination to go through what it takes to make the Major Leagues are never going to give up if have a chance to make it to the playoffs. Yes, there are some exceptions to this. Those guys that are so amazingly gifted that they never have to work and are handed everything on a silver platter. But generally, even guys that are selfish players generally want to win if put in a position to be in the playoffs. There are exceptions to the rule of course, but nary enough of them to merit asking the question if an entire team wants to win. The Cardinals problems are not because they don't want to win. They are an intense to with an intense manager, a lack of desire to win is just not the problem. However, there are a few things that ARE a problem.

First lets actually consider the issue of talent. Perhaps its best to look at this in a position by position break down.

Catcher
STL- Yadier Molina
CIN- Ryan Hannigan, Ramon Hernandez

WIN- CINCY

Yadier is unquestionably the best and toughest defensive catcher around. He can absolutely control the running game, but he is having a terrible year at the plate. Hannigan can also really throw, but this duo is also knocking the ball already quite successfully. If this was last year, Yadier wins this, but as much as I respect Yadier, he is just to banged up and tired to be much of a hitter.

First Base
Stl- Albert the Great
Cincy- Joey Votto

WIN- STL

Albert is going to win this, no matter who is going against him. But frankly, at this point your basically comparing the two best hitters in the National League, and it says a lot about Votto that this is a close match. You gotta be proud of yourself when your numbers are just as good as Alberts.

Second Base
Stl- Skippy Schumaker
Cincy- Brandon Phillips

WIN- CINCY

This isn't really even close. Brandon Phillips is clearly a better player than Skippy, even though he is a jerk, and bad in the clubhouse. Phillips is an excellent defender and has an .801 OPS compared to Skippy's .680 OPS and suspect D.

Shortstop
Stl- Brendan Ryan
Cincy- Orlando Cabrera

WIN-TIE

This one really is a toss up. Brendan Ryan is a terrible hitter right now, but Orlando Cabrera is really just a ton better. He is better, but he is still pretty bad overall. However, they are both good defensive shortstops, although I suspect Cabrera's resurgence in the numbers is somewhat due to Rolen being next to him. Even with that resurgence, Cabrera's UZR is an 8 and Ryan's is a 15. Ryan is truly an elite defensive shortstop, even though he is kind of annoying twit. His defensive value is enough that it makes it at least a tie.

Third Base

STL- Pedro Feliz, I guess.
Cincy- Scott Rolen

WIN- CINCY

Scott Rolen hands down. One of the greatest defensive third basemen of all time and he is having a good year with the stick as well, where as the Cardinals are so weak at third that they improved at the position by trading for the worst regular position player in the National League.

Rightfield
Stl- John Jay
Cincy-Jay Bruce

WIN-Cincy

Jay Bruce is not my kind of player, but he has big time power and a silly good arm. But honestly, if John Jay had more at bats, he would actually win this category. He just has a limited sample, and more than likely pitchers are going to figure him out a bit. However, he is a smart kid that is willing to adjust to what is needed in the game. Frankly, I like him better than Colby Rasmus.

Centerfielder
Stl- Colby Rasmus
Cincy- Drew Stubbs

WIN-STL

I don't really like either of these players. Both are high draft picks, both are incredibly questionable defensively in center field, a both are playing beneath what they were projected to. Both make lots of rookie mistakes and come up empty against good pitching more often than not. However, Colby Rasmus is having a better year than Stubbs, therefore he wins this category.

Leftfield
STL- Matt Holliday
Cincy-Johnny Gomes

WIN- STL

Gomes can absolutely crush a fastball as hard and as fast as anybody in baseball. Of course he doesn't do so well with breaking balls, so of course he doesn't get many of those fastballs to crush. Holliday is an all-star type hitter and he wins this category pretty handedly.

Starting Pitching
STL- Waino, Carp, Garcia, Westbrook, and Lohse.
Cincy-Arroyo, Harang, Leake, Cueto

WIN- STL

The Cardinals legitimately have one of the best starting staffs in baseball, top 4 at the very least. That’s even with throwing a bag of peanuts every fifth day. Cincy has some serviceable guys, but they just don’t have the same kind of shutdownness. Of course that doesn't matter if your offense doesn't score any runs.

Bullpen

Win-CINCY

The numbers show that the Cardinals bullpen is better than Cincy, but I am picking Cincy because their bullpen is pitching much better than the Cards RIGHT NOW. And at this stage of the season, in a close race numbers don't mean anything. Which team is getting the outs is what matter.

Total Score
Cincy-5
Stl- 4

That’s the bottom line folks. Cincy right now just has a few better supporting pieces to aid their mashers. When it comes to offense the Cardinals really only have Pujols and Holliday and some gritty guys that play the game right (mostly) but really don't have much in the way of good offensive production. Cincy trots out more guys that can make a difference in the game, and its showing in the Win-loss record.

Also, lets be honest about the Cardinals club house. They have some issues right now. Brendan Ryan is not meshing well with the team all the time, and this time of year is when his made for TV goofiness really begins to grate. Also, Colby Rasmus and his attitude also strains the situation, especially when his dad is involved. Its not that the Cardinals don't want to win, its just that they have a pretty damn good team to go up against.

Ranking the Cardinals in a fight.

2010-08-14T14:32:00.000-07:00

After all of the fireworks this week I decided that I would write a little ranking of the Cardinals you really wouldn't want to mess with in a fight.

8. Matt Holliday- Holliday doesn't really look like a guy who would be that tough in a fight, but according to the Cardinals strength coach he is the strongest Cardinal, particularly in the lower body. He wouldn't really be a stand up puncher, and he seems to have a long fuse. But when you finally go over the top he will just charge you and use his legs to pile drive you into the ground until you throw up.

7. Jason Larue- Larue is a catcher, and catcher automatically get extra tough points just for breathing. Larue would rank higher, but like Samson and his hair, Larue lost quite a bit of his strength whenever he cut of his menacing facial hair. For most of his career his walk up song was "County boy can survive" which makes me think that he wouldn't punch you out, he would just wage a guerrilla war of attrition against you. He is the guy I want on my side in a "Red Dawn" type situation.

6. Dennys Reyes- I don't know how many of you have heard of the Marvel villain "The Blob" but Reyes has the same power set. The blob is a really large man that just absorbs whatever punches are thrown at him in his blob like gut. If you hit Reyes with a couple of body shots you will just feel the blows absorbed through out his torso then he will bite your ear off.

5. Skippy Schumaker- Its always the quite ones. Skip doesn't make much noise. Never really draws attention to himself. One second your running your mouth the next your picking your teeth up off the dirt.... silent but violent.

4. Yadier Molina- Tough as nails catcher who would love to catch every day. Would be ranked higher but as long as you are capable of a slow jog then you can run away from him. But if he catches you....

3. Aaron Miles- This guy is someone you REALLY don't want to mess with. His dad was a boxer and I get the feeling he imparted quite a bit of knowledge to him. Secondly, many people haven't realized this about him, but he fought with a guy who had a gun to his head during a hostage situation. Some dude had a gun to his head for about 20 minutes and he said "screw this" and decided to take matters into his own hands. He wrestled the guy all the time having to hold the guys gun hand away from him, and bit a huge plug out of his arm, then the cops came in and had to shoot the guy four times while Miles had him in the grapple. Miles then jumped out the window, and he wasn't on the first floor. Don't mess with this guy.

2. Chris Carpenter- Sometimes it doesn't matter how scary or imposing the guy looks. Sometimes its something else that makes the guy a complete and utter bad ass, like say Hannibal Lector. Carp has something going for him like that. HE IS FREAKING INSANE. Don't mess with him.

1. Albert Pujols- Albert is like the Mighty Thor. The only reason he isn't knocking people out by accident with his shear presence is because he is always consciously putting limiters on his omnipotence. In Cincy he didn't start yelling at people because he knew that the sound of him yelling might make ears bleed. If he had wanted to he could have just Hulk clapped and knocked everyone on their butts. Its the cyborg parts that make it possible.

The Aftermath

2010-08-12T11:21:00.000-07:00

The suspensions have come down from Major League Baseball. Both Dusty Baker and Tony LaRussa were suspended for two games and Johnny "dancing feet" Cueto was handed a 7 game suspension. Carpenter, Molina, and Phillips were both fined. I am not really sure I agree with the way the suspensions came down. I thought it was curious when TLR and Dusty were the only ejections, and I am not really sure that their actions merited a suspension. The only thing I can figure is the were punished for either A. not controlling their players or B. Escalating the situation. Rolen didn't receive a fine, and Carp did which I don't understand in the slightest. Yes, Carp dropped the F-Bomb to Dusty, but Rolen is the one that charged Carp after that which actually set off all the more physical activities. Cueto deserved every bit of his seven game suspension and probably deserved more.

Brandon Phillips helping the Cardinals win the division.

2010-08-11T01:51:00.000-07:00

It is a true thing that I am a bit of what is known as a red ass when its comes to sports competition, but I fall squarely on the side of Molina in this situation with Brandon Phillips and the brawl. Nobody really looks good after a brawl, but Brandon Phillips and Johnny Cueto come out of this looking like complete idiots. Cueto for certain came out as a coward. If Cueto was a Cardinal and he had done that kicking BS he did I would never root for him again, and he would get booed relentlessly every time I was at the game. In fact, I would bet money that he would get boo's from lots of fans everytime he played a home game. I actually bet my bottom dollar that even a couple of his own teammates had some words for him after that little act of pure cowardice.

As for Brandon Phillips, I like the old school mentality. When Joey Votto said what he said about Marlon Byrd I thought it was pretty damned cool that somebody was channeling some inner Bob Gibson. But when Votto did it he didn't say the Cubs suck, or that he hated the Cubs because of any particular trait they had, he just wasn't going to be friendly. In fact he didn't do anything at all to personalize other than to say hey, I am a hard nosed ballplayer and I am not going to be friendly with the opposition when I am in a pennant race. That, to me is a good quality. Phillips on the other had just wanted his quote to make the press, wanted to call out the Cardinals. And you know what? I don't care that he did that either, thats his priority. I don't give a damn what some player thinks about another team personally, and I don't really think any other players care either. But he didn't stop there. Molina had it right when he said (a bit of a paraphrase) you don't tell me you hate me one day and then say hi like nothing happened the next. Which is exactly what Brandon Phillips did with his little bat tap to the shin guard. That a friendly gesture towards other players. In this situation, I don't think anybody with half a brain cell thought for a second that Brandon Phillips wasn't making a calculated gesture to mock the Cardinals at the very least and perhaps Molina on a personal level. Frankly, I would have reacted the same way. Actually, to be perfectly honest Molina probably acted with more restraint than I would have.

Now as for the play by play of the fight, there were some interesting things that happened in in other than Cueto acting like Brandon Phillips proverbial "little bitch." The most interesting of which is Scott Rolen tearing after Carp after what originally looked like a peace mission towards Yadi. (it looked like from what I could read of his lips that he actually kind of agreed with Yadi) I watched this about thirty times from various angles, just trying to piece together exactly what happened. Basically what happened was there was the initial altercation, then Dusty and Tony were having there dust up. There is actually a brief moment where Edmonds actually had a sentence or two of harsh words for his on manager Dusty Baker. (pretty sure all those bush league moves he made versus the Cardinals and Edmonds. Keep in mind Cubs fans, I am saying Dusty Baker was bush league, not your team, well, not your team except for Big Z.) Then Carp says something, and the umpire says something to Carp, then Carp says something very heated to Dusty Baker. At this point Rolen comes after Carp. However, although Rolen charged after Carp, it doesn't appear that he was actually going to get physical other than maybe get in his face and yell, but as soon as Rolen did that the Red's players scrummed in pushing the pile back. As soon as the full weight of the pile started pushing back towards the backstop, Rolen immediately switched from aggressor to trying to hold Carpenter up, and started trying to pull him out of the pile. He was also trying to pull him away from that little girl Cueto who was kicking at whatever moved like a Can-Can dancer. At the end of it Rolen had his hand on Carps back and it looked like what it was. Two old very intense teammates that had let their emotions get the better of it and felt a little ashamed of it. This was nothing, and nothing that is worth talking about really. Rolen's actions showed that he did not want to harm Carp, and they seemed to work out their issues right there. Cueto and Phillips are the Belles of this Ball.

So what does Brandon Phillips comments and actions really mean in the whole long mess of a major league season? Maybe nothing. But, maybe, just maybe it means something. Don't get me wrong, this team cares about winning, and they play hard, but for most of the season passionless is a way to describe how they go about their game. Maybe business like is a better way of putting it. In fact, in July Mo said that perhaps they were going to go after a fiery personality or a joker clubhouse presence just because he really thought that was what his team needed. Something to break that stoic presence of the team. Actually, personally, I thought Carpenter being more fiery in the last three weeks might actually have been an effort to try and flame a little passion. Particularly in younger guys like Rasmus and Ryan who really do seem to play like they don't care sometimes. But ladies and gentlemen. They have a challenge now. They looked like a different team tonight. They weren't a better team, or a more skilled team tonight. But you could see it in them mannerisms, in their eyes. There body language said they were pissed and that there was no way they were going to let any team led by a Cub reject manager beat them. I have said the last few years that I think the Cardinals are a better team when the Cubs are at least competitive. It gives them some fire. Well, they haven't had any fire this year. But now, maybe, thanks to Phillips, they will. If he had just made his comments and that was it, it might have faded. But he didn't. He actually took the insult to them in person and tried to show them up on the field. They won't forget that and Brandon Phillips might have just given them the fire they didn't have and given them what they needed to win the Central crown. Regardless, I bet money that if Ex-Cards GM Walt Jocketty (good friend of TLR, and oh yea, the man who built those Cardinals teams) is still the Reds GM then I bet Brandon Phillips won't be a Red next year. Particularly if they don't make the playoffs.

Carpenter, Ryan, and Brandon Phillips

2010-08-10T13:11:00.000-07:00

On Monday night Chris Carpenter wasn't all that happy with Brendan Ryan. This particular encounter got a lot of publicity because Carp was obviously irritated at the start of the game and the camera caught him chewing Ryan out in the dugout. Despite what a lot of people are saying, Brendan Ryan deserved it, and all the embarrassment it gave him. Firstly, Chris Carpenter is intense. He is Bob Gibson level intense. He gets dialed up (as most pitchers do) and did not want a delay in him starting the game. Brendan Ryan was in the clubhouse taking swings, and completely missed that he was supposed to be on the field. Then he ran on the field with the wrong glove, just making his situation worse. This isn't the kind of thing you do when you are young, and frankly not contributing much to the team other than using that said glove well, MOST of the time. Ryan deserved a butt chewing for this, and he got it. End of story. The second situation was based on Carp's judging his defensive positioning to be wrong. This may seem minor as it happens all the time, but the problem was this was more the straw that broke the camels back. In the past Ryan has had trouble with positioning and ignoring when people try to position him. I have seen people in the dugout exasperated with it and most importantly I remember Carpenter being exasperated with it in the past. One incident in particular last year had Carp looking in the dugout and motioning Ryan into the hole. So did Skip and second. Ryan ignored both of them and stayed close to the bag. Carp glared at him, pitched, then glared again. The next pitch resulted in a seeing eye single right through where Ryan was SUPPOSED to be playing. Carp visibly rolled his eyes. This was not the only time this has happened, although it was the most overt showing of it. For Carpenter this was not just the reaction to a single incident of Ryan, but the cumulative effort of lots of idiocy by Ryan. Thirdly, if the camera hadn't showed all of this, no one would have noticed this. Yes, Carp motioned for him to follow him in front of other players, but jeez they all knew what was coming anyway and were all probably equally peeved, but he didn't yell at him in plain view, he pulled him into the tunnel and spent about 15 seconds saying what he wanted to be said and that was that. Ryan deserved his buttchewing and maybe this incident will actually get his head in the game. Frankly, the Cardinals would be better off without him. His personality is well known for rubbing players wrong in the clubhouse. His mind is not in the game all the time and it results in lots of situations like this. Sometimes Ryan is so flaky and weird it almost seems like he is doing it on purpose. Regardless, he needs to get his act together.

Brandon Phillips

Brandon Phillips needs to keep his mouth shut. His comments were calculated and idiotic, and called out about 4 of his teammates and his GM. Mostly it seems with his comparing the Cardinals to the Cubs that he was posturing trying to get attention in relation to Joey Votto and his All-Star game comments. This was the same guy who said he was a better player than Chase Utley, which is a laughable delusion. Not only that he has oh, say 4 Ex-Cardinals on his team. Two of which being Scott Rolen and Jim Edmonds. Those two were the face of the Cardinals along with Pujols, and Brandon Phillips comments about the Cardinals includes them. Oh yea, your GM is Walk Jockety, isn't like he put those Cardinals teams together that you are bagging on, oh yea, plus he is good friends with the manager of that team. Also, not like you want to give the Cardinals more bulletin board material in one of the biggest series of the year. I bet that Phillips receives a very frosty reception in his own clubhouse the next few days, not to mention the reception he is going to get from the Cardinals. What an idiot.

Ozzie Guillen and his crazy antics.

2010-08-02T12:50:00.000-07:00

To be honest I watched the interview where Guillen made his comments about translators and how Asians are treated better than Latin players, and I am really not quite sure what his point was. He started out talking about a Korean player in minors that had a translator and there were 17 Latin players on the team and only 1 translator. But then he followed that with Japanese players are treated better. So, honestly, I don't really know if he meant that he was upset at their treatment in the minors or in the Major Leagues. His beef with Japanese players can't be at the minor league level because they are always signed to Major League contracts and don't go through the minor league system. As usual with Ozzie, he likes to shoot of his mouth without knowing what the heck he is talking about.

Contract information is pretty easy to come across. Cot's Contract is a comprehensive site of Major League contracts. If you go there and look at the contracts that Major League Japanese players have signed then you will see that this is not any sort of alienation of Latin players. The Japanese players negotiation for the perks they get and have them put into their contracts. For example Dice-K, when he signed his contract, had it implemented that he gets an interpreter, trainer, massage therapist, housing allowance, transportation when he was state side, and several round trip tickets back to Japan. Oh yea, and the number 18 is always his, its right there in his contract. Fukodome's contract in Chicago is almost identical, of course with the number 18. Ichigo's doesn't have all of that stuff, but it still has a requirement for an interpreter, housing allowance, and tickets home. Kuroda in L.A. has a contractually obligated translator for him plus another separate one for his family. Plus English lessons for everyone. Take a look at the other Asian contracts its pretty similar.

The point is, Ozzie is accusing people of favoritism towards Asians, when in reality these Japanese players are just requiring these kinds of services being written into the contracts if the team wants to hire there services. Perhaps Ozzie, its just you who doesn't get shown respect, because you have't earned any.

The Seventies.

2009-08-27T18:13:00.001-07:00

Welcome to Part 4 of the Hall of Fame blog. In this section we will be covering a lot of the worst selections ever to the Hall, mostly due to the Veterans committee that was headed by Frankie Frisch and was made up of his old cronies. They were mostly old Cardinals and Giants beat writers who really were only interested in electing a lot of the players they were friends with through the years, which meant a lot of Cardinals and Giants players that were no where near Hall of Fame caliber.

1979- Hack Wilson, Willie Mays

Hack Wilson- No- Hack Wilson only collected 1461 hits in his career. I am not a huge fan of basing things on cumulative stats alone, but that total is just too tiny. He was a quality player, but not that great of one. His .940 OPS is impressive, but when you look at the time period he played its not nearly that impressive. His best years came at a time when nearly every team in baseball batted .300 as a team. A time period that even dwarfed the Nineties and early 2000’s in its offensive ridiculousness. In fact it wasn’t that uncommon for a team to have a couple of players batting in the .380 range. He is a much less quality Hall of Fame pick than guys like Moises Alou and Jim Edmonds, and that’s not even taking into account Edmonds defense, purely based on his offense. His greatest year came in 1930 when he knocked in 191, but this is probably the single greatest offensive year in baseball history. His entire teams batting average was .309 with a .378 OBP and .481 slugging. That’s just silly high for team numbers. He finished tenth in the batting race that year, and he batted .356. All in all, with his numbers actually being inflated in value, and his lack of career totals Hack Wilson only belongs in the Cubs Hall of Fame.

Willie Mays- Yes- Nothing to say here, anybody that questions his being place amongst the greatest of all time knows nothing about the game.

1978-Eddie Matthews, Addie Joss

Eddie Matthews-Yes- Maybe not the greatest defensive third basemen of all time, but he was definitely serviceable, and his offensive value puts him amongst the greatest all time at his position. His .885 OPS might be a tad lower than you would expect, but he played in an offensively repressed time period.

Addie Joss-Yes- His career was short, and tragically cut short by a fatal duel with tuberculosis, but he was brilliantly great in his ten years. A career .623 winning percentage is impressive, and even more so because it was so much greater than his teams won loss percentage. Every years of his career he was one of the two or three best pitchers in baseball and his career 1.89 ERA is phenomenal even by the standards of his time.

1977-Joe Sewell, Amos Rusie, Ernie Banks

Joe Sewell-Yes- This guy could play. Good defensive shortstop with a career .312 average. He threw in a career OBP of .391 and a slugging of .413 just for good measure. The slugging isn’t anything to write home about really, but the .391 OBP is excellent. Sewell of course is a man who was very hard to strike out, so hard that he only struck out 114 in his career. He had a few seasons where he struck out as few as 3 or 4 times with nearly 700 plate appearances. This is ridiculously impressive. 112 times in his career, and by today’s standards that many times in a season wouldn’t be that many.

Amos Rusie- Who knows- Frankly I just don’t know enough about pre-1900’s baseball to decide who should or should not be in from that time period, and I am not really sure anybody does. At first glance his 3.09 ERA seems high, but I just don’t really know. He did pitch over 500 innings in a season twice, which seems ridiculous. He led the league in losses as many times as he did in wins.

Ernie Banks- Yes- Ernie Banks was not a great player and his value as a shortstop is overstated. He actually played more games at first base (1259) than he did at shortstop. (1125) And when he did play short he was average at best. Actually he gets a ton of press as the only member of the 500 club who is a shortstop, when in reality, I don’t even know why he is listed as a shortstop in the Hall of Fame, as generally they go by what position you played the most games at. In actuality he was done as a shortstop before he was even 30. I guess he is listed at that position because he played there when he was a back-to-back MVP. But in actuality he should have never have won either award. In 1958 Willie Mays was clearly the better player and in 1959 Hank Aaron was even more clearly the better player. His career OPS is low at .830. The only reason I am including him is he was a great player for a few years, probably top 5 in the league, and he cranked out a lot of offensive production and homers when that was very difficult to do, and in a park that made it even more difficult. Wrigley played very pitcher friendly until the late sixties.

1976-Robin Roberts, Freddie Lindstrom, Bob Lemon, Roger Connor.

Robin Roberts-No- He wasn’t really that good. He did win 20 games six times, which is actually one of my milestone type numbers. But he was actually really bad in some years, posting ERA’s over 4.00 in years that were actually very weak offensive years. His winning percentage wasn’t that great, and he also missed 3000 k’s so he doesn’t have that milestone going for him. He also missed 300 wins, although not by much, but with as many decisions as he had it’s a mark he should have hit honestly.

Freddie Lindstrom- No- Mister Lindstrom was pretty good, but he only got in because of Frisch. He was reputed as a good defender, but that doesn’t really seem to be the case and he only had 9 years as a regular player, which were played in the high octane twenties and thirties, so his .311 BA is overinflated and his .351 OBP less than impressive. 1747 career hits, 103 career homeruns, no MVP awards, less than 1000 RBI’s and runs. He only finished in the top ten in the MVP voting twice, so all in all it looks like he is a stretch as a Hall of Famer.

Bob Lemon- No - I am frankly amazed that Bob Lemon got into the Hall of Fame via the vote. His career record is 207-128 for a .618 winning percentage. This is deceptively good. He played on a lot of REALLY good Cleveland Indians teams, and if you go year by year his winning percentage was often below that of his team, and when it wasn’t’ it only met the teams, or was marginally better. True its hard to be significantly better than your teams WP when it’s a good team, but you never want to be below it. His career era was 3.23, which is a bit high. He did do very well in the MVP voting, but I think his reputation is greater than the sum of his parts. He was a very good hitter for a pitcher. He gave up a large number of walks and hits, which tells me he was a very hittable pitcher who played for a very good team.

Roger Connor-I guess- Pre 1900 first basemen. His OPS was .883, which seems high, but frankly pre-1900 baseball just isn’t my think. My knowledge starts at 1900.

1975- Ralph Kiner, Billy Herman, Earl Averill

Ralph Kiner- Yes- There is a balance between having a long career and putting up cumulative numbers. I am not a big fan of the average player who played for 18 seasons while never being great and puts up 3001 hits and gets into the Hall of Fame. However, there is a balance, if a player only plays 10-12 years and hasn’t put up anywhere close to any good cumulative totals it makes it equally hard to include him. To get into the Hall of Fame with a short career you have to have exhibited greatness. Ralph Kiner was great, he led the league in homers his first seven year in the league, so that means in his ten year career he was the home run leader 7 times. Nice ratio. He also put up a nice career .946 OPS. His OBP was nearly .400 at .398 and I am a sucker for guys with a .400 career OBP. He definitely displayed greatness in his time in the big leagues.

Billy Herman- Yes- Slow as snot, but a great defender, and without a question the greatest hit and run man of all time. This guy could find a way to hit a pitch 15 feet over his head through the hole. The OPS was a little low at .774, but he hit .304 and he was legitimately a good hitter who is one of better defenders historically at his position. Given his defensive prowess he makes it in, although he is not one of the strongest candidates.

Earl Averill- Yes- Played during a high octane time period, but he was still exceptional even when the offense slowed down. He played with a chip on his shoulder, always feeling like he never got the credit he deserved, and by many accounts he wasn’t that pleasant of a teammate. But he could hit, he could get on base, and he could slug. And he was a great defensive centerfielder, which is what really seals the deal for his inclusion. His career OPS was .928. And although he didn’t reach 3000 hits, he was at least over 2000.

1974- Sam Thompson, Mickey Mantle, Whitey Ford, Jim Bottomley,

Sam Thompson –Meh- I really need to do some research in regards to Pre-1900 players. I need a pre-1900 baseball scholar.

Mickey Mantle- Yes- It’s the Mick; of course he is a Hall of Famer. There is no question that he was one of the elite to play the game, what is just scary is what this guys potential was. His basically played hobbled his entire career, having a serious knee injury his first year. Apparently this robbed him of some speed early on, but he was still blazing fast. What could this guy have done if he was healthy even for half his career? I mean seriously look what he did with two bad legs.

Whitey Ford- Yes- I should leave him out on principle, as he was just as big a cheater as Gaylord Perry. However, unlike Gaylord he has never flaunted the fact he was successful because of doctoring the ball, so I guess I will just do like most of baseball historians do and ignore it. Whitey Ford did the most important thing a pitcher can do, he just won ball games. At an amazing clip, even counting how good his teams were. He posted a 236-106 record for an astounding .690 winning percentage. You could count on him to win ballgames for you. More so than any pitcher of his time.

Jim Bottomley-No – I be over critical of Cardinals players because I don’t want to show a bias, but Sunny Jim was another one of Frisch’s veterans committee picks. He had some really great years with the Cardinals in the first few years of his career, but he shut it down in the second half of his career. The problem was for about 9 years he put up decent looking percentage numbers, but unfortunately it was during the late 20’s through the 30’s. His percentage numbers, although they look impressive, were actually only average for the time, or even a little below average. For example he hit .304, .368, .493 in 1930. This looks like a pretty decent, even good line. However, the team as a whole hit .314, .372, .471. Except for the slugging, he was actually below average for his team on the other two numbers. There are more years like this as well.

1973-Mickey Welch, Warren Spahn, George Kelly, Monte Irvin, Roberto Clemente.

Mickey Welch-Meh- See other pre-1900 entries.

Warren Spahn- Yes- 8 time 20 game winner. 3 time ERA champ, and 4-time strikeout leader. He won 363 games while putting up a .597 winning percentage. There isn’t much to argue with on Spahn’s resume, although I do find those that consider him to be the best lefty of all time to be a bit laughable.

George Kelly-No- Oh look at this, it’s amazing its another marginable Giant picked by the Frankie Frisch and Friends Veterans Committee. Decent OPS but he only played 8 seasons as a regular, and those were most definitely not great seasons. Under 2000 hits for his career, very limited amount of games played, and he failed to display greatness in any single season.

I am skipping Monte Irvin because he got in based at least half on his Negro league career. He was a Giant as well though.

Roberto Clemente-Yes- Remembered in death as a much nicer person than he was in real life by all accounts. A good person yes, but a prickly one all the same. I think I would feel bad if I didn’t take him. He was a great player.

1972- Ross Youngs, Early Wynn, Sandy Koufax, Lefty Gomez, Yogi Berra.

Ross Youngs-No- What do you know, another career Giant voted in by the Frisch Veterans Committee, and another one at that with essentially an 8 year career. This isn’t even funny anymore. He was a much better player than Kelly. I guess, kind of hard to tell with a guy who didn’t even make it to 1500 hits an whose career was over before 30. I am voting no out of principle.

Early Wynn-I don’t know- I don’t really think he is a hall of famer. He had a career 3.54 ERA, which is pretty high. He hit 300 wins, but with 244 losses, and he played for some pretty good teams. If you want to take him just because he got 300 wins then I guess you can, but other than that he was an alright pitcher who was kind of a jerk and was never really great.

Sandy Koufax- Wow- Ok, this one is tough. There comes to a debate. Is a player has five great, truly great, compared to any time of history kind of great years is that worthy of being in the Hall of Fame? What if they were the only five good years the player had period? This is what makes Sandy Koufax so tough to gauge. The last five years of his career were ridiculous. He led the league in ERA all five years, he lead in strikeouts three of those years, and in wins three of those years. He won three Cy Young Awards, an MVP, and three pitching triple crowns. He tossed up some ridiculous won loss records, such as 25-5, 26-8, 27-9. Career he is 165-87, for a very stellar .655. The problem is other than those fives years he was average for one year, and then actually quite poor for five years. ERA’s of 3.91, 4.05, 4.48, 3.88, and 4.91. Nothing to write home about, and actually quite the opposite. So if you answer that yes, five great years makes you a hall of famer, regardless of the quality of the other years then he is a Hall of Famer, if you answer no that a player needs to demonstrate quality in more than just five great years, then Koufax does not deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. It an argument that can be made since he essentially balanced five great years with five very poor years.

Yogi Berra –Yes- He screwed Minnie Minoso out of an MVP twice, and Al Kaline out of one once. He only possibly deserved one of the 3 MVP awards he won, with his last being an outright travesty. As it is I have always felt that Yogi was an overrated player who has more mythos around him than fact. People like to put him in the greatest catcher ever debate, and I don’t even think he is the greatest catcher to wear a Yankee uniform. That being said he was still a great player, although his loveable nature is a modern construct, he was actually quite grumpy and contrary as a player. He is a St. Louis boy, and the Cardinals decided to go with Joe Garagiola instead. That worked out great for them. Yogi’s spot as a Hall of Famer is pretty much beyond contestation; only his debate as to where he stands amongst the greats is in debate.

1971-Rube Marquard, Joe Kelley, Harry Hooper, Chick Hafey, Jake Beckley, Dave Bancroft.

Rube Marquard-No- Oh look, something we haven’t seen before, a marginal ex-Giant player elected in via the Frankie Frisch Veterans Committee. Marquard was a career 201-177, with 1593 career K’s. He had a career 3.08 ERA, and he never led the league in ERA. Nothing at all that really hints and a career that would merit being inducted into the Hall of Fame.

Joe Kelley- This guy seemed like he could really hit, but all his good years were pre-1900 so, as with the others I am not really passing judgment.

Harry Hooper- Yes – I have had the luck to have read two books about Hooper, and I have discovered a lot of interesting things about it. However, the most important to the cause here is the fact that year in and year out he was considered one of the best defensive outfielders in the game, one of the smartest players, one of the fastest, and best base runners, and one of the strongest armed as well. He hit .281 for his career with a .368 OBP and he collected 2466 hits. He was an excellent postseason performer with a career .806 OPS in 4 different World Series appearances.

Chick Hafey-No- The Frankie Frisch Veterans Committee strikes again, this time with a Cardinal instead of a Giant. Same principle though. Hafey was a good hitter, although his .898 OPS are greatly inflated by the era. He was a terrible defender though, and I mean Dave Kingman bad. Not only that he really only had two seasons in his career where he played in more than 140 games, and he barely got to that mark. It was due to injuries, but still he was essentially a career part time player. He only gathered 1466 career hits.

Jack Beckley- Bah all of these damn pre-1900 players. Baseball shouldn’t count before 1900.

Dave Bancroft-No – Who is keeping count? Here is another Giant brought in by the Veteran’s committee. Bancroft was a decent but unremarkable player who put up a .714 OPS while suffering from the same problem as Hafey; Most of his career was spent in 100-120 game seasons. An unremarkable player undeserving of the Hall of Fame.

1970-Jesse Haines, Earle Combs, Lou Boudreau

Jesse Haines-No- Once again a Cardinal instead of a Giant brought in by Frisch. There is not one single reason that Haines should have been picked other than he was a friend of Frisch. His career ERA was 3.64. He had 210 wins to 158 losses, which is ok, but not stellar considering the really high ERA. Only had 981 career strike outs, never lead the league in wins, or ERA or anything really. Was completely average except for the fact he pitched 17 seasons with the Cardinals. That I respect, but it is not reason enough to be a Hall of Famer. It should be telling that he was a career Cardinal, and he had a number, yet it is not retired. Ken Boyer’s number is, and he isn’t a Hall of Famer, but Haines isn’t. Why? Because he was that valuable to the Cardinals.

Earle Combs-No- Basically just repeating all the stuff I have said many time in this decade for Veterans Committee picks. Combs could really hit, but his career was really short, just like all the other Vet picks. If he could have sustained it for five more years he would be a Hall of Famer, but unfortunately he got a late start.

Lou Boudreau-Yes- I am making a border line pick based on personal reasons. I had a Lou Boudreau card as a kid and I though he had the coolest name and I wished my name was Lou Boudreau. I thought it would have been cool if my Dad had named me Boudreau after him rather than Ryan after Nolan Ryan. Actually I think Boudreau did a lot more for his teams to help them with than Nolan Ryan did. He was a good shortstop, not great but he could hit. Career percentage numbers of .295, .380, .415.

Draft Pick Salary Demands

2009-08-23T18:29:00.003-07:00

I thought about this for a while this morning. Most people are quick to say that baseball draft picks should shut up and take very little, and not demand a lot of money since, unlike the NFL and NBA they will not be contributing on the field for their team for at least a year or two. I decided to think about it by putting myself in their shoes and try to come up with what I would do if faced with the same decisions they were. First of all, I was as big a fan of baseball when I was playing high school ball as I am now, and I am sure some of the players drafted are the same. I was a student of the history of the game, and I had allegiances and ideas about teams. I would find it impossible to just go where I was drafted and not say anything, or not to tell certain teams that frankly I am just not playing for your club. I am honestly amazed there is not more of this. If I were good enough to be drafted in the first round I would have had teams that I would play for, and teams that I would not play for. If I were going to drafted out of high school by say the Cubs, Yankees, Giants, or Braves, then they would have very limited options. They would either have to make me the highest paid draft pick ever, or I would be going to college, or playing in the frontier league for a year. But I would be honest with their scouts before the draft, so as not to surprise them, I would just have to say, I hate your team, I have always hated your team, and I can't really be honest with myself and say I want to take your money. Secondly, I can't fall these guys for trying to get as much as they can in their first contract. Many of them are foregoing college, and this might be the only big contract that get. Its got to last for a while, and give them something to fall back on if say, they have a catastrophic injury, or can't hit a professional slider.

Sammy Sosa and Steroids!!!

2009-08-23T18:29:00.001-07:00

BREAKING NEWS: SAMMY SOSA TESTED POSITIVE FOR A PED IN 2003. Ok, so its true that apparently Sosa did test positive for a performance enhancing drug and it made headlines in the sports world yesterday. But lets be honest about this, is anybody actually surprised anymore when a name like Sosa's pops up testing positive? I for one am not shocked by any name that comes up from the late 90's and early 2000's anymore. And frankly did we need confirmation to know that Sosa was on them? Anybody that watched him play had to have him on their top 2 or 3 list of players most likely to be taking a shot in the butt. My top 4 list was Big Mac, Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, and Roger Clemens. I have been screaming for a while now that Roger Clemens was the one pitcher I was certain of to hitting the juice, and truthfully he is the only player other than Bonds that I have felt a certain vindication and satisfaction in seeing the news come out. The question though that I feel needs to be asked is was it worth what Big Mac and Sosa did to themselves and the game? I would have to say yes. Those of you who know me well know that I am a rules nazi. I am fair to the rules to a fault, when I play softball I have actually called myself out when an umpire was umping that didn't know all the rules. I hate it when my team gets the benefit of a bad call and I tell an umpire when I think he missed a call, even if it is one that helped my team. But at the same time, 1998 was a magical season for baseball fans. Outside of hard core baseball fans, baseball was not doing well after the 1994 strike and 1995 lock out ( I do believe the owners were more at fault than the players, and they get a bum rap on this, but thats a blog for another day) and he game was struggling mightily to get butts in the seats. Sosa and McGwire's home run chase changed that. It created interest in the game on a national level that baseball had not enjoyed in a long time. That interest did not go away, it maintained through the 2000's and even though baseball can't compete with football for television ratings (this mostly has to do with the number of games) people were going to game at a great rate in most cities, Florida and Montreal of course were exceptions. Montreal baseball was destroyed by the strike, and never recovered. They had a hell of a team in 1994 and had real chances of going places that year, and their fans got their hearts ripped out. But for most teams 1998 was magical. Not only was it home runs in numbers never seen before, but it was a rivalry between two players in the same division, and each on teams that historically have one of the best rivalries in baseball. Everbody was watching, everybody wanted to know what was going to happen next, and everybody was enchanted by the fact Sosa and McGwire were pushing each other to play better via encouragment rather than animosity. Sure the steriods make the season seem a bit hollow now, but you can't take away what it did for baseball, even now baseball is doing all right and its in part due to that season. And you can take away some of the gloss on what they accomplished on the field with their numbers, but you can't take away the grace they handled themselves with during that chase and embracing what they were to baseball. And lets keep in mind that in 1998 they weren't technically even breaking any baseball rules, which means that perhaps baseball administration is far more on the hook for steroids than the individual players are. Was it worth it, yea, it probably was, without 1998 contraction was a very real and ugly possiblity, and the face of baseball could have been drastically different. Would baseball have been better if the owners and administration had been more responsible in their drug testing? Absolutely, but us and the players have to play with the hand they were dealt, and we still have to look for a silver lining in a cloudy sky.

Batting Average versus OBP.

2009-08-23T18:28:00.001-07:00

This is an always interesting debate and one that in the last ten or fifteen years has made a tremendious shift. Of course the discussion goes hand to hand with the one on the value of the RBI and the Run Scores. For years the stats that were most valued by GM's, Managers, and most everybody in baseball were these three categories. Within the last few years however, sabermetricians have been preaching loudly that all three of these catergories were being over valued. Batting average was considered by these people unimportant compared to the more all encompassing On Base Percentage. RBI's and Run scored were considered poor measures of evaluation because they are so contingent on who is in the lineup around the specific player. There are, however, some hangers on to the older ways of thinkg. One of which is Analyst and Hall of Famer Joe Morgan. He complete disregards stats like OBP, and I find it hilarious. He may be the single player in history that has benefited the most from sabermetric stats.

The question in regards to batting average is this. Based on this lines which player is more valuable. Player A who hit (keep in mind I am leaving SLG out, and these stats are real lines, not made up speculative stats) .341 with a .375 OBP. Or Player B who hit .293 with a .411 OBP. Now there is a lot of things that go into the value of this players, such as slugging, speed, and yes, even runs and RBI's. But this isn't in itself comparing two complete players, but rather comparing the value of the the statistical catergories themselves. The problem with analyzing this players value also has to do with the team they are on. Sometimes a team doesn't need another OBP guy and they really do need a guy who can drive in the runs, and sometimes what a team truly needs is players that can get on base. However, its best in the long haul to evaluate a players ability looking purely at the stats as if he was not on a particular team. Teams are fluid they change over the years, so its hard to compare one players career to another based on team needs.

With little exception I fall on the side that says the OBP is possibly the one most valuable stat in determining a players worth. Of course truthfully the holy grail of determination is the OPS. This is as most of you who read this know, a combination of OBP and SLGing. This is without a doubt the most important measure of a players offensive value. Far supassing cumulative number counts. Of course with any statistical measure there are always anomalies (Adam Dunn for one, his OPS is way higher that his actual offensive value in a run producing spot in the order) but this is the best that we have, and is the most efficient way of comparing players quickly and accurately.

Broglio for Brock.

2009-08-23T18:27:00.003-07:00

Back in 1964 there was a trade between the Chicago Cubs and the St. Louis Cardinals. Lou Brock was trade for a pitcher named Ernie Broglio. There were some other players in the trade, they were inconsequential, then and inconsequential now. This trade comes up fairly often in blogs, lists, and books listing the worst trades ever. Ernie Broglio was pitcher that injured his arm and never really amounted to much and Lou Brock went on a tear, helped the Cardinals win the pennant (took a collapse by the Phils, but thats a blog for a different day) and helped them beat the Yanks in the World Series. He then went on to set the record for stolen bases (since broken by Rickey Henderson) and to collect 3000 hits. However is it really fair to call this a historically bad trade? The answer is no. When looking at trades to determine if they are really bad you have to look at what the GM was looking at during that season. At the time Broglio was a young pitcher who had already won 20 games. He by all account had good stuff, and looked like he would be a good pitcher. Brock on the other hand had never really been much of a hitter. On top of that he wasn't much of a fielder. Actually he didn't really have a position. At the time, weak slugging speedy guys were expected to play center. He didn't have the arm to play right field, and left field really needed to be reserved for guys that could slug the ball, but were weak defensively. Brock was considered expendible by the Cubs and given the sample so far, although he had hit the ball in the minors, that probably was not a bad call. The Cardinals already had Curt Flood in Center, so they didn't mind playing another speedy guy in Left, and in fact were just looking for someone to steal some bags. At the times in truthfully looked like a win, win situation for both teams with maybe even the Cubs making out better. No one could predict that Broglio would have arm issues and lose his stuff. Its not fair to judge trades with hindsight. Sometimes a deal just doesn't work out, its not the GM's fault and the Cardinals didn't have some magic 8 ball. Sometimes trades are just stupid and people get fleeced, and those deals deserve to be torched. But deals like this, which weren't really bad at all given the scenario do not deserve to be remembered in infamy.

Cubs and Cardinals, Franchise History.

2009-08-23T18:27:00.001-07:00

I have been very active in this baseball game called APBA for say 15 years or so. My cousin Joey approached me when I was about 14 with the idea of purchasing this game via mail order. It is an in depth statistical replay game, with different variables and numbers applied to just about every aspect of historical replay. It is VERY accurate in regards to replaying seasons from the past. It is different from video games that are out there, which use stats to form ratings for how that player WILL perform in the next season. Instead it uses its ratings so that players will perform close to the stats that they had in any given season. It works very well, and its very fun to take a team and see if you can improve their records via better bullpen usage, lineups, or by hitting and running more or stealing more bags. My cousin and I have decided to replay 108 seasons so far, with each new season of course added to that with I taking the St. Louis Cardinals and he taking the Chicago Cubs. We are playing the seasons at random, with a number generator, and so far we have completed 1951, 1989, 2003, 1993, 1995 and 2001. Currently we are playing 1907, 2008, and we soon get 1986 underway. So far I have managed to improve on the Cardinals records and won the world series in 1989 when I shouldn't have made the playoffs, made the playoffs in 1993, won the world series in 2001, and made it to the World Series in 2003. I have improved my record in 1995, and so far in 1907 with some really bad teams. In 1951 I managed to improve from third place to second place. Its proved to be very entertaining, but it will likely take us several years to get caught up to where we only have to play the new seasons when they come out.

John Lackey 1, 2, Ejected!!!

2009-08-23T18:25:00.001-07:00

When it comes to officiating, the umpires of Major League Baseball are about the best there are. When compared to the officiating of the NBA they are better, and when compared to the pathetic excuse for officiating that operate in the NFL they come out far superior. However, that does not mean they don't have their issues. When it comes to umpires their problems are with their memories, vindictiveness, and their requirement for numerous subjective calls with every outing that they make. Saturday Umpire Bob Davidson made one of these interesting and rarely precedented subjective calls. John Lackey made his season debut last night, fresh off of the disabled list. This was the first time he had pitched in six weeks, the last time being in spring training. His first pitch was over the head of Ian Kinsler, the second one plunked him. Immediately, no warning given, no conversation whatsoever, Mr. Davidson ejected John Lackey after two pitches. Lackey seemed to be shocked by the occurence and had this to say about it:

"I haven't pitched in six weeks, and I was amped up. I was trying to come in on him, but there was no intention at all to hit him or throw behind him."

Now there are a lot of things going on here. The Rangers and Angels have a history, lots of beanings and lots of retaliations. I am sure that Bob Davidson saw that this had the chance to be an escalating situation , and here was his oppurtunity to keep the chaos in check. However, their are some problems with this sort of pre-emptive attack. The warning rule was initiated to try and prevent escalating situations like this. You throw out the warning, and the next time a batter is hit in even remotely questionable circumstances and BAM both the pitcher and the manager are ejected from the game. Its a pretty good deterrent usually. Why then did Davidson decide to eject Lackey after two pitches without a warning? Good question, he must have felt that Lackey unquestionably was throwing with purpose, and he very well could have been. It was wrong though to eject, because there is this thing called reasonable doubht, and there was plenty in this case with him not being on the mound in so long. The warning rule was designed for this very situation, one in which the umpire is pretty sure he did it on purpose, but their are some questions about whether or not he can say that with 100% certainty. In this case Bob Davidson should have shown more restraint. This sort of thing has a lot of ramifications for the Angels. Firstly, Lackey could be suspended for this, which he probably wouldn't have been without the ejection. Secondly, Major League teams are not designed to have their starter knocked out while facing only one batter. This sort of thing exhausts the bullpen and keeps them from being at their best for several games. It was an interesting situation thats for sure.

If you want to check it out for yourself here is the link from the MLB network.

http://losangeles.angels.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=4597465&c_id=ana