Cardinal Pitching, Defense - Good Enough to win the NL?

In our last post, we looked at the Cardinal offense as compared to the rest of the NL playoff teams, and the last few NL champs, to see how they stacked up.

The results were not encouraging.

However, unlike rec softball, playoff baseball is not just about scoring runs. It's also about preventing runs from being scored by your opponent. OK, that's true in rec softball too, but its not as critical (You can win a softball game 35-29. Don't know if any playoff game has featured a score that ridiculous). So let's look at Cardinal pitching and defense.

Team Pitching

It's a well-documented fact the Big 3 (Carpenter, Wainwright, Pineiro) fueled the Cardinals' August surge to the NL Central pennant. They won't throw all the innings in the playoffs, however, so this will be a team comparison. I looked at ERA for the casual fan, and BABIP and FIP for the more statistically-inclined (and by way of explanation, BABIP is Batting Average for Balls In Play, which does have a defensive component, and Fielding Independent Percentage, which tries to take the defensive effect on ERA out). All stats are from the Fangraphs database.

Number in parens is the team's NL rank.

BABIP: LA - .283 (1), STL - .297 (5), PHI - .303 (8), COL - .306 (11).
ERA: LA - 3.45 (1), STL - 3.62 (4), PHI - 4.14 (6), COL - 4.23 (8).
FIP: STL - 3.80 (2), LA - 3.81 (3), COL - 3.98 (5), PHI - 4.38 (11).

If sports reporting is to believed, Los Angeles' starting pitching at the moment is in disarray (less Randy Wolf), but the body of their work doesn't support that. Based on their ERA and BABIP numbers their pitchers have benefited from good defense behind them, but their FIP says the pitching's been good too (for what it's worth, ATL leads the league in FIP at 3.65). St Louis' pitching has benefited slightly from their defense, but their pitching as we've seen has been outstanding.

The interesting thing to me is Colorado's staff has pitched better than ERA would imply. Philadelphia's staff has been worse than their ERA indicates, despite the addition of Cliff Lee, and Joe Blanton being one of the best pitchers in the NL since 1 June.

Looks like the Cardinals/Dodgers series will be a low-scoring one, and the Colorado/Philadelphia might be a high scoring affair.

Comparing the last 5 NL Champions in these categories, here's what we find:

All these teams were in the top 5 of National League teams in BABIP; only LA and STL rank in that range with 3 to play. Everyone's in the top 8 in ERA (all of the 2009 teams are too), with 3 of the 5 winners in the top 4 (again only STL and LA). There's a lot of variation in the FIP numbers, driven by the 2006 and 2007 champs; the other teams are top 5, and in 2009 that's Colorado, Saint Louis, and LA.

If any conclusion can be drawn from this small sample, it would indicate St Louis and Los Angeles most closely fit the profiles of most of the previous NL Champs, so they would have a leg up. Of course, this year's Phillie pitching staff looks a lot like the 2006 Cardinal staff, although that Cardinal team hit better than this year's Phillie team based on the stats I'm using in these posts.

BABIP indicates that good defense is a factor too (duh, right?). Let's look.

Team Fielding

Fangraphs defensive data is a bit limited, so I've looked at UZR. Their UZR/150 data was +/- 1 place of the UZR data.

UZR: PHI - 4, LA - 7, STL - 8, COL - 9.

As expected, UZR data tracks with the difference between ERA and FIP discussed above. PHI is a lot better defensively based on UZR than I thought prior to looking at the data.

Looking at past Champs:

2008 - PHI #1 in NL
2007 - COL #6
2006 - STL #5
2005 - HOU #5, STL #6
2004 - STL #4

Small sample size conclusion: Teams winning the league were ranked no lower than 6th in the NL in team defense (as evaluated by UZR). That would suggest only Philadelphia has the defensive chops to win the NL this year.

Conclusions

Cardinal Pitching is definitely good enough to win the NL. Their defense is decidedly average, and might not be good enough.

To summarize these 2 posts:

1. Need to be in the top 3 in wOBA. All playoff teams but STL meet that requirement.
2. Need to be top 5 in BABIP. LA and STL meet that requirement.
3. Need to be in top 6 in UZR. Only Philadelphia meets that metric.
4. Small sample size makes these conclusions suspect.

What we can say is, going into next week, the Phillies, Rockies, and Dodgers have better offensive numbers than St Louis, and only Los Angeles' pitching staff is comparable to St Louis'. And although Philadelphia has the best defensive numbers of the four, that advantage is offset by their overall below-average pitching. And it gives some credence to the belief the playoffs under the current format are ultimately a crapshoot; the team that just barely qualifies has just as good a shot at winning the whole thing as the team that's played .600 ball all year.

If good pitching stops good hitting, then LA or STL will win the league. If good hitting is more important, then Colorado is the team to beat.

Let's start already.

Cardinal Offense - Good Enough to win the NL?

While I was working on my preview for the Cardinals/Rockies series, I compared a couple of statistical metrics to see how the teams stacked up against each other, specifically UZR (defense), FIP (pitching), and wOBA (hitting). The Cardinals came up as solidly middle of the pack defensively (expected), top 15% in pitching (also expected), and lower half offensively (19th in MLB).

What? A Cardinal team featuring Albert Pujols and adding Matt Holliday couldn’t be in the bottom half of MLB offensively, could it? Had to be a mistake.

SO I looked a little deeper. For the 2009 season, and looking just at the NL this time, the Cardinals rank 8th in wOBA, 10th in OBP, and 5th in ISO. How does that stack up against the other potential playoff teams in the NL?

wOBA: 1st – PHI, 2nd – COL, 3rd – LA, 6th – ATL, 8th – STL.
OBP: 1st – LA, 2nd – COL, 5th – ATL, 8th – PHI, 10th – STL.
ISO: 1st – PHI, 2nd – COL, 5th – STL, 10th – ATL, 11th – LA.

Most Cardinal followers have spent a little time talking about the pitching dominance, but a lot of time talking about how much the lineup has improved since Holliday joined the club (and to a lesser extent, Lugo; DeRosa hasn’t hit well since coming over). But by the numbers, the Cardinals haven’t really improved since adding Holliday to the lineup:

Cardinals in June (pre-Holliday):
10th in wOBA (COL -1, PHI – 6, ATL – 12, LA – 13)
10th in OBP (COL – 1, PHI – 9, ATL – 11, LA – 13)
4th in ISO (COL – 1, PHI – 3, ATL – 9, LA – 12)

Cardinals in August (only complete Holliday month with data):
10th in wOBA (COL – 3, ATL – 5, PHI – 6, LA – 12)
9th in OBP (COL – 3, ATL – 4, LA – 10, PHI – 13)
12th in ISO (PHI – 1, COL – 2, LA – 9, ATL – 11)

The biggest surprise here is how Holliday has had minimal impact on the team’s overall success getting guys on base, and how his addition has not enhanced the lineup's isolated power numbers (given the big drop in ISO statistically), although granted that may be a reflection of Ludwick’s power outage and Albert’s cooling off period.

But what it does show is a season-long issue with getting guys on and hitting for extra bases. This team’s offense is spectacularly average in the NL, even as currently constructed. We’ve recently been reminded of that, given how they’ve struggled to win against quality pitching. So that offense ranked 19th in MLB I discovered in the preview post wasn’t an error – they struggle with the bat in their hands.

What does this imply for the playoffs?

Looking at the last 4 NL Champs, here’s how their numbers stacked up in each category.

2008 (PHI) – 3rd in wOBA, 7th in OBP, 1st in ISO.
2007 (COL) – 2nd in wOBA, 1st in OBP, 8th in ISO
2006 (STL) – 1st in wOBA, 4th in OBP, 2nd in ISO
2005 (HOU) – 11th in wOBA, 13th in OBP, 9th in ISO (by comparison, the 05 Cardinals ranked 4th, tied for 2nd, and 8th, respectively)

Three of the last 4 NL Champs led the league in one of these 3 categories, and those years each pennant-winner was in the top 3 in wOBA. What happened in 2005? Houston arguably had better pitching, and pitched better in the NLCS than St Louis did (read: Roy Oswalt).

However, based solely on the ability to put guys on and drive the ball throughout the lineup, the best bets on winning the NL appear to be Colorado, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and St Louis, in that order. Should they make the playoffs, Atlanta would be ranked between LA and STL.

We’ll take a look at Cardinal pitching versus all these staffs, to see if their pitching can mitigate this disadvantage, tomorrow.

What About a Four Man Rotation?

Brad Thompson getting suspended, while Guillermo Mota walks free, is an absolute farce. Hitting a guy up by 13 to protect your hitter is OK, but buzzing a guy up by 7 to protect your hitter isn't? Mota threw with intent, Thompson didn't.

Anyway, on one of the recent United Cardinal Bloggers Radio Hour shows, Pip from Fungoes raised the question of LaRussa going with a 4-man rotation. After all, Todd Wellemeyer, Brad Thompson, and Mitchell Boggs haven't exactly lit up the scoreboard. Well they have lit it up, just the wrong way - 10-15, 5+ ERA. Why not just skip that spot in the rotation?

This idea intrigued me.

Starting tomorrow, the Cardinals have 59 games left. With a 5-man rotation, that's 12 starts each for the first 4, and 11 for the #5 slot. With a 4-man rotation, that's 15 starts each for Carpenter, Wainwright, and Piniero, and 14 for Lohse.

There are a number of off-days between now and the end of the season - 6 to be exact. If they line up right, then the Cardinals could skip 6 starts by the #5 guy. This is good, right?

Well, it's not that good. The off days don't line up exactly like one would want:

6 Aug - Off day
6 games
13 Aug - Off day
10 games
24 Aug - Off day
6 games
31 Aug - Off day
9 games
10 Sept - Off day
6 games
17 Sept - Off day
6 games
24 Sept - Off day
10 games
End regular season.

CC Sabathia threw his last 4 games in 2008 on 3-days rest. Not everyone is CC Sabathia. I definitely don't think the Cardinals will try and pitch Carpenter on 3 days rest, given his medical history. I doubt they'll take that chance/accept that risk with Wainwright or Piniero.

So, if they try to keep them all on 4 days rest, the off-days don't help, and they'll have to use a #5 starter 9 times.

So LaRussa would save himself two starts from Wellemeyer's replacement.

Doesn't sound like its worth it. I like the idea of going with a rotation of Carpenter, Wainwright, Piniero, and Lohse, but it won't work in practice. Sorry, Pip.

Mulder not coming back

Derrick Gould reported yesterday the Cardinals have not picked up Mark Mulder's option for the 2009 season, instead bought out his contract for $1.5 mil. I don't think this comes as surprise to anyone, including Mark Mulder. The article stated Mark's still working out at his home trying to rehabilitate his arm, but I don't think anyone's going to come calling.

We also found out yesterday that the Cardinals probably aren't really in the Jake Peavy sweepstakes, based on Bernie Micklasz's article (which referenced a SD Union Tribune article by Tim Sullivan). That, I think, is unfortunate, but in some ways understandable. If they really, really believe that Colby Rasmus will be the franchise's CF for the next 15 years, then trading him to San Diego for 5 years of Jake Peavy might not be worth it. And if the Padres won't even start negotiations if the proposal doesn't include Rasmus, then perhaps it's DOA. But boy wouldn't a rotation of Peavy/Carpenter/Wainwright/Lohse/Wellemeyer be fun?


Some belated comments/thoughts about Game 7 of the ALCS:

- You realize no Florida-based ML team has ever lost a post-season series?
- The Jon Lester that pitched the first 3 innings of Game 7 is the Lester I thought would show up for Game 3.
- I knew Matt Garza was good, but I didn't think he was good enough to 2-hit the Red Sox for 7 innings.
- In the crazy eighth, Pedroia JUST MISSED hitting a 3-run HR. And he knew it, judging from his reaction in the dugout after the at bat.
- This is the first time a Wild Card winner won't be in the world series since the Mets/Yankees series (as we mentioned before).

Of course, the 'this sucks, no one's going to watch this series' articles have started appearing (here's one on sportsline.com). No big media market involved. No 'As The World Turns' drama with Manny. No end the curse stuff with the Cubs. Boo frigging hoo.

I'm sure the fans in Philadelphia and Tampa will be respectfully apologetic they're in the WS. If asked, I'll bet the teams will defer to Chicago and Boston to give Fox the matchup they really wanted.

Yeah right.

What you will get, however, is some excellent baseball. Lots of young pitchers, good hitters, and solid defense in this series. For the baseball fan, this will be a great series. In fact, I don't think the Rays are that overwhelming a team when compared to the Phillies. I think this series will be competitive and a lot better than expected. I also think it will be the first series since 2003 to see a Game 6 at least.

Should be fun.

One more interesting little tidbit. Jimmy Rollins recently said he wanted to change the culture of losing in Philadelphia when he got there. The Phillies have been around for 126 years. If he'd played during the first 98 years, there'd have been a culture of losing needing fixing; after all, the Phillies won exactly 2 NL championships in those 98 years (1915 and 1950). However, starting in 1980, guess who the teams are to have appeared in the World Series more than twice?

AL - NY Yankees (7 - 1981, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003), Boston (3 - 1986, 2004, 2007)

NL - St Louis (5 - 1982, 1985, 1987, 2004, 2006), Atlanta (5 - 1991, 1992, 1995, 1996, 1999), Philadelphia (4 - 1980, 1983, 1993, 2008).

The Phillies have been to twice as many World Series in the last 28 years than in the first 98. I think the culture has already changed, and that change started with Michael Jack Schmidt and those great Philly teams in the 1970s. For what it's worth.

RIP, Bing Devine

Vaughan P. "Bing" Devine, the General Manager who built the Cardinal World Series teams of the 1960s, died today in St. Louis. He was 90.

Best known for his fleecing of the Cubs with the Broglio for Brock trade, he also signed such notables as Bob Gibson (he was pretty good), Curt Flood (good), and Julian Javier (named his son 'Stan' after the patron of this blog).

I can't really be sad for anyone who dies at the ripe old age of 90. He had a full, rich life and did what he loved - worked in baseball. With any luck, we all should live that long.

Rest your oars, Bing. You earned it.

"...and no man is worth more than $12.50."

That's a fraction of a quote I attribute to the late Dan Quisenberry - one of the more cerebral pitchers of recent times (see quotes at the bottom of the link). More on that later.

My wife bought me a new DeMarini F3 for Christmas - nnniiiiiccccccceeeeeeeee. I'll be terrorizing slo pitch leagues in 2007 with that monster. If you want a lightly used, well-loved 2004 F2 let me know. It can be had for the price is right.

Suppan is on the Brewers - 4 years, $42 Mil. Good for him. But I thought he was holding out to see what Zito got? Didn't I read that in the Post-Dispatch earlier this month?

You think he wishes he'd held out now? $10.5M a year is great, but it's not $18M.

$18 MILLION DOLLARS!
Yes, Barry Zito has reportedly signed with the SF Giants for 7 years, $126M. That's $18M PER YEAR. It's the richest contract ever given a pitcher.

Let's break it down, shall we?

Zito's averaged 35 starts and 223 innings a season since 2001. Let's assume that for 2007 he meets those averages. Let's further assume he throws 100 pitches per outing (why? because I'm lazy and it makes the math easy, that's why).

That's $514,285.71 per start.
That's $80,717.49 per inning.
That's $5,142.86 per pitch.

If he throws eight innings, then goes on the DL for the rest of the year with a blown up elbow, then has his contract voided, he will still make more money than I will see the next decade. Listen to your Little League Coaches, kids.

Good for him, right?

Of course, where do you suppose all this scratch will come from? TV, right? TV pays the major sports leagues exorbitant fees based on what they think they can sell advertising time for. Advertisers buy space to push products so Blue Collar Joe will buy them. Oh, I guess I'm paying his salary.

Ticket prices? We pay for tickets.

Concessions? We pay for hot dogs and beer.

Parking? Duh.

Hence the title of this post. No one is worth $18M, least of all a curveball pitcher who's been barely over .500 3 of the last 4 seasons. You'd think the Giants would have enough declining curveballers with Matty Mo on the roster.

I hope Zito enjoys spending my money. Maybe he'll let me stop by and say hello to it every now and then.

The Curse of Lou Brock?

For years, we were forced to listen to angst-ridden BoSox fans moan about the 'Curse Of The Bambino'. You know the drill: 5 world series victories with Ruth, 86-year drought without him, and the team he went to won 26 in the interim. So when the Red Sox swept my Cardinals 2 years ago there was a catharsis of emotion poured out from all over New England - and beyond. And a proliferation around this sleepy West Coast town of Red Sox hats, shirts, shorts, bumper stickers, license plate holders, sex toys, beer bongs, whatever could hold a logo. Effin bandwagoners.

But it did create some speculation on why the Redbirds had not won a World Series since the Darrell Porter-led team in 1982. Some popular opinion has lain this drought at the feet (or in the coke straw) of Keith Hernandez. Nay, nay, moosebreath. This curse goes all the way back to 1968.


For the record, Lou Brock was my favorite Cardinal as a kid (recently replaced by So Taguchi. It's not just a name, it's a chant! It's a question! It's a game winning HR!). However, getting thrown out at the plate during Game 5 of the 1968 World Series is a defining moment in the history of the Cardinals. Statistics to back this up:

Cardinals post-season results up to 1968:
World Series Champions (8): 1926, 1931, 1934, 1942, 1944, 1946, 1964, 1967
National League Champs (3): 1928, 1930, 1943

Cardinals post-season results since 1968:
World Series Champions (1): 1982
National League Champs (4): 1968, 1985, 1987, 2004

An interesting fact is that, in terms of overall World Series won/loss record, going into game 5 of the 1968 World Series the franchise was only 34-33. It's pretty amazing, then, that they had won 8 of the 11 World Series they appeared in. They remain the only team in the NL that has won more World Series than they have lost against the vaunted Yankees (3 of 5), and have played them more than once (so stuff it Marlins and D'Backs fans).

But since that play, the Redbirds are only 10-18 in World Series Play, and have lost 4 of their last 5 appearances.

Luckily there is a cure: to reverse the 'curse' you must defeat those who have tortured you the most. Boston turned this trick by beating the Yanks in the 04 ALCS, then the Cardinals in the World Series (they were 0-2 against STL, losing in 1946 and 1964). The Cardinals must reverse this trend by beating Detroit in a World Series.

There's no time like the present.

Balk!

Two quick items on the weekend's baseball events:

Not bad for a no-hit shortstop, eh?

1. TREVOR TIME. Congratulations to Trevor Hoffman, now sole owner of the career saves record. Trevor set the ML record against the Pirates today, closing them out 2-1 to keep the Padres 1.5 games ahead of the Dodgers in the NL West. On the 'venerated Padres' scale, only Tony Gwynn and Randy Jones might, MIGHT be more beloved than Trevor. We here at the Stance tip our cap.

2. I SMELL FEET. Or the rapidly decomposing carcass that is the Cardinals. Yes, the boys in red are reeling having been swept right of Houston. Making the departure even more painful, the first 3 losses occurred in the ninth inning when STL either had the lead or was tied. Now back to neo-Busch, to play the hottest team in the league - those same Padres - who they might get in the first round if LA catches Ryan Howard.

I sense a collapse of biblical proportions playing out this week. Think Houston can't catch them for the NL Central? Think again. If they were a horse we'd have shot them by now.

Footsteps? Nah, I don't hear footsteps. Why?

Do More Research

An open letter to Matt Vasgersian, my favorite Padres announcer:

Dear Matt,

Do a little research. OR re-awaken those brain cells you used as a kid, the ones that may remember the NL as a 12-team league. OR just keep your mouth shut when a 'usless information' fact is displayed on the screen.

TO WIT: Yesterday marked the 13th time this season that San Diego has beaten the Dodgers. That's a franchise record. During tonight's game some enterprising, overworked, starving intern created a graphic to celebrate this fact. Turns out, the Padres had beaten the Dodgers 12 times in a season 4 times (1976, 1983, 1986, 1989). Note that I have instant recall of this graphic which I've only seen once. Why? Because I'm a stastical dork, that's why. Just shoot me.

Anyway, Professor Vasgersian mentioned that the reason the Padres had won more games from the Dodgers this season than in past seasons was due to the unbalanced schedule. Ah, actually, no.

You see, from 1969-1992 the NL comprised 12 teams, playing in 2 6-team divisions. Under that format, teams played the other 5 teams in their division 18 times, and the 6 teams in the other division 12 times.

That means in 1976, 1983, 1986, and 1989 the Padres went 12-6 against the Dodgers.

This year (as they've lost tonight, on a Nomar 2-R HR. What a crazy game), the Padres went 13-5 against LA. Hey, check that out - it's 18 games!

Do a little research, Matt, before you open your big mouth.

Sincerely,
The Intelligent Baseball Fans of San Diego.