Divorce Proceedings

I watched the Clemens interview with Mike Wallace on 60 minutes. I missed his news conference this afternoon, but what I've heard reported about it doesn't change my impression of what's going on.

That interview was spin in its purest form. It included ad hominem attacks on his accuser, the advancement of another theory (Vioxx) to explain possible future debilitation, and whines about how he gets 'no respect'. My wife, who watched his body language rather intently, is convinced he lied through his teeth (head movements, paper/pencil he was holding giving the appearance it was staged, etc).

For me, this has now disintegrated into a divorce proceeding. He said/she said. Who's to blame, who's wrong. And I don't care.

I couldn't figure out why he would call a news conference the day after his "interview" aired; it certainly wasn't to make himself more accessible to the media (who he blew off for a month). No - it was to announce his suit of McNamee and to play a recorded conversation with McNamee. Clemens called him Friday so the conversation could be recorded and used against him.

Whatever. If McNamee countersues as promised this will drag on for years. That will keep Clemens' name linked to steroid use in the public eye and permanently damage Clemens' reputation, as well as probably ruin his chances of getting into the Hall.

Actually being named in the report probably ruins his chances of getting into the Hall. I'm sure the BBWAA voters will apply the same strict standards they're using on McGwire, against whom there is also no hard proof, when they consider Clemens' candidacy.

Of course, I still believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy too.

If you didn't see it, take a look at yesterday's post. Again, all reasonable questions will be accepted and posed to Mr. DePodesta.

Ever want to ask a GM a question?

No news on the Cardinals since Miles was re-signed. I'm recording 60 minutes tonight, so I haven't seen Clemens' interview; that discussion will have to wait until another time.

I wanted to pass along to everyone some info you might find interesting.

The Society for American Baseball Research (SABR) is an organization for anyone who likes reading/talking about/arguing over baseball history and baseball-related topics. There are chapters across the country, including the Bob Broeg Chapter in St Louis and the Ted Williams Chapter here in San Diego, to which I belong.

Yes, it is a good fit for me.

We have 2-3 meetings a year, and our first meeting for 2008 is coming up at the end of January. Although not officially announced yet, I can say on good authority that Paul DePodesta, late the GM of the Dodgers and currently a Special Assistant for Baseball Operations for the Padres, will be a keynote speaker. Which brings me back to the title of this post.

We (the paying public) rarely get to speak directly with someone in a baseball front office. Here's your chance, loyal reader, to do so. If you have a burning question (of a general nature; remember, he works for the Padres, not the Cardinals) that you've always wanted to ask a GM, email it to me at theangryrant@gmail.com between now and 21 January. All reasonable questions will be accepted and I will attempt to get Mr. DePodesta to answer as many as I can. I can't guarantee that he'll field all the questions, but I can guarantee I'll ask as many as I can get away with.

I will post the results of the meeting and the answers to questions I was able to ask and get answers to here after the meeting.

Once the Ted Williams website is updated with the agenda for the meeting I will post a link on this site so you can check it out for yourself, if desired.

Remember: Can't be Cardinal-specific, and must be reasonable (I would think asking him why in the Name of God he signed JD Drew falls under unreasonable).

Finally if you saw the San Diego/Tennessee game you know the recent SoCal storm wasn't the armageddon it was predicted to be. We did get quite a bit of rain, but overall it wasn't that bad.

The Prevent Offense

Just finished watching the Steelers/Jaguars game. Which was eerily like the Seahawks/Redskins game at the crucial point of the game.

Remember the prevent defense? The alignment where, to prevent a team from throwing the ball downfield, the defense goes with something like 3 down lineman and 8 drop back into coverage? Usually the quarterback, given lots of time to survey the field, picks the defense apart and moves his team to a score.

Many times this prevent defense is 180 degrees out from the defense the team played to get them the lead (4 linemen rushing, blitz packages, etc).

Well tonight we saw a classic example of the prevent offense.

Let's start with the Redskins. Couldn't do a thing offensively for most of the game. Then late in the third quarter they figure out how to move the ball through the air. 85 yard drive for a touchdown. The defense picks off a Hasselback pass. Collins hits Moss for a touchdown. Suddenly it's 14-13 Washington. The ensuing kickoff takes a crazy hop, and Washington recovers it on the 15 yard line.

Now, Gibbs has his foot on Seattle's throat. Punch this ball in and the game may be over; Hasselback could make more bad decisions, no more running game, etc. Instead, he gets all conservative - tries to run the ball. Can't get a first down. Missed field goal. Momentum swung.

True, they did pick off a pass, forestalling their doom, but again, couldn't get a first down. Seattle takes the ball (following the punt) and scores a touchdown. Collins, forced to throw deeper than he'd like (due to their being less than 7 min to play), has two picked off and returned for a touchdown.

Done in by the prevent offense.

Pittsburgh does the same thing. They're getting killed, although not because Jacksonville's offensive is that good - kickoff return to the 4 and 2 picks returned for touchdowns have given J'ville a 28-10 lead. Pittsburgh can't run the ball at all. So, Big Ben starts throwing to Miller and Hines. A lot.

Next thing you know, they're up 29-28, and have the ball in their own territory with under 3 minutes to play. Two first downs and the game is over. Remember, the passing game is what got them back into the lead. What do they do? Run the ball 3 times. No first down.

They punt, Jacksonville calls a great play on 4th and 2, and kicks the winning field goal. See you next season. Pittsburgh done in by the prevent offense.

Coaches constantly do this. Why go away from something that's working just because now you've got the lead? The something got you the lead, and the other team has no answer for it. To me, you keep doing it. Why change it? They all do it, and they all lose close games, and they all wonder why. The only coach in recent memory who didn't go into a shell with the game on the line was Ron Zook and the Illini against Ohio State this season. He went for the critical first down, won the game as a result. These guys are more concerned with taking time off the clock and trying to outlast the other team instead of grabbing the win outright.

Gibbs is a HOF coach who was undermanned and whose team played its guts out. Better playcalling would have helped them advance to Dallas. Pittsburgh's coach had the presence of mind to scrap the running game down by 18 in the third quarter. Why he went back to the run at the end is a decision he can ponder between now and mini-camp.

Cardinals re-sign Miles

Figures. I pay Mozeliak a compliment yesterday, today he re-signs Miles.

It makes me wonder if the plan had been to re-sign Eckstein and then sign Izturis to fill the slot Miles had previously. When they didn't/couldn't get together with Eckstein they had no back-up plan, but knew they didn't want to pay Miles close to a million dollars for 2008 (why he was non-tendered).

I haven't been paying that much attention to the free agent pool. Is SS and 2B so thin this year bringing Miles back was the best option?

Also a small programming alert: you've probably heard there are large storms headed towards SoCal (so far 1 million Californians are without power, all flights out of the bay area were cancelled, etc). Although I haven't taken the drastic step of building an ark, there may be a 'break in service' depending on how bad this really is. Please be patient.

[Update 1/4/08 2357]: Miles signed for $1.4M. Last year's base salary was $1.0M. We signed him for MORE?!?! Yeeech.

Cardinals Sign Matt Clement

Joe Strauss reported earlier today the Cardinals signed Matt Clement to a one-year deal with a club option for 2009. I had hoped Cot's would have more data on the deal, but they don't as of the writing of this post.

Clement last toiled for the Boston Red Sox, going 13-6 in 2005 and 5-5 in 2006. He noticeably lost velocity in 2006 and was shut down in August, undergoing surgery to repair what's been called 'extensive' damage to his right shoulder.

Clement becomes the latest rehab project to join the staff. Since he spent the last 4 years in the Red Sox organization, I'm fairly confident his rehabilitation was done correctly; there was no need for Boston to rush him back to service, and they currently epitomize a first-class operation in taking care of their people, so the Cardinals get a guy on the plus side of his rehab.

Clement came up with the Padres, and I had a chance to see him pitch a couple of times. He had good velocity on his fastball, and I thought if he could ever fix his control problems (he walked an awful lot of people) he'd be pretty good. San Diego traded him to Florida and got Mark Kotsay in 2000; Florida traded him to the Cubs in the deal that sent Dontrelle Willis to Miami. I remember thinking the Cubs had done very well in landing Clement because he had lots of potential.

If he's actually available Opening Day, as the Cardinals have been reported as expecting, he will be a big up-check in their patchwork rotation. Right now I'd rate Clement as a #3 starter, with the potential to be a #2 or #1 depending on his control and how well he works with Dave Duncan.

Yep, it's safe to say I like this deal pending the contract Clement got.

Suddenly we've got 4 reasonable starters for next year in Wainwright, Looper, Piniero, and Clement. Assuming Wainwright continues to pitch like he did in the second half of the season, Looper continues to progress (and can go deeper than 6 innings), and knowing Piniero and Clement are obvious improvements over Wells, Maroth, Reyes, Thompson, Wellemeyer, a guy from section 447, a pitching machine, or whoever the team was running out there last season, our starters should keep the team afloat (preferably over .500) until reinforcements arrive after the All-Star break. And, now instead of Reyes/Thompson/Wellemeyer taking two starter slots, they will only fill one - and that's a significant improvement.

There are still a lot of if's with this club. The rotation, though improved, is still a wild card other than Wainwright and Looper. Will Rolen return to some semblance of his 2004 form. How will Rasmus and Izturis hit. And so on. But to me this group suddenly looks capable of a .500 or better campaign.

If Carpenter and Mulder are able to return around the All-Star break and pitch effectively, 2008 may not be a rebuilding year after all.

I'm thinking Mozeliak knows what he's doing.

We take time out to discuss the Rose Bowl

It's the Grandaddy Of Them All - the Rose Bowl. Although I could plant myself in front of the TV on New Year's Day and watch football all day (and when the first game was the Florida Citrus Bowl and the last the Orange, I did), the only game I really watch from start to finish is this one.

This year the Big Ten offered up Illinois at the altar of Pac-10 dominance. USC 49, Illinois 17. Check. And it wasn't even that close.

Recently, Sports Illustrated ran an article bemoaning the state of the BCS and advocating some sort of playoff. It alleged the biggest stumbling block was the Rose Bowl, who resolutely and stubbornly stick to their Big-10/Pac-10 matchup (which they have featured since 1947, except for recently - 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006). Which got me thinking: WHY does the Rose Bowl Committee insist on inviting the Big-10? Seems to me the Big-10 gets clobbered every year.

Was that an impression, or is it really true?

My family moved to the left coast in 1977, so let's look at the results since 1978. There have been 4 games that did not involve a Big-10 and a Pac-10 team; in 3 of those games one or the other conference was represented, but we've eliminated them from consideration anyway. For the remaining 27 games, the Pac-10 leads 17-10.

Not as bad a rout as I expected.

More data:

1. The Big-1o hasn't won the game since 2000 (Wisconsin).
2. From 1978-1987 (the year I left home), the Pac-10 went 9-1. This explains why I thought the Big-10 came out here every year to get clobbered.
3. USC just won back-to-back Rose Bowls, marking the sixth time a Pac-10 school has done that. Wisconsin is the only Big-10 school to accomplish the feat (1999/2000). Even STANFORD has won this bowl in consecutive years!
4. The Big-10 won 12 of the first 13 games. Since then the Pac-10 has gone 29-16 (again, games against the two conferences). Apparently sometime in the 1960s kids figured out they'd rather go to school in the sunshine than in the snow.

I see why the Rose Bowl likes the matchup. Big-10 teams travel well, and its usually a competitive game. The series (30-28 Pac-10) is essentially even.

I guess I'm just bummed my Bruins suck and the Trojans rolled.

Again.

Top 5 Cardinal Stories of 2007 (and 5 things to watch for 2008)

Dan over at C70 at the bat came up with the good idea for some of us Cardinals bloggers to list what we thought were the biggest stories of 2007. The idea was to post the list today and he'd link to all the lists in his blog.

Well, with perfect intentions, this post should have appeared this morning. However, Indy/Tennessee was a bit too enthralling (I wanted to know who the Chargers would be playing this weekend), and then the Sound of Music came on (can't miss in my book)... well what do you know it's New Year's Eve.

As a west-coast blogger, well, I get to post on Monday nights after most of the world has gone to bed - or in the case of today, gone to the Champagne bottle. So I missed the boat. But, since I gave my word I'd do a post on my thoughts regarding the top 5 Cardinal stories of 2007, here's my short list.

5. Josh Hancock dies. Really only memorable because a professional athlete died in the middle of the season. It did mentally affect the team's performance for a time, and it did serve as something of a marshalling point; however it didn't galvanize the team like Darryl Kile's death in 2002 did (or the way Sean Taylor's death has for the Washington Redskins)

For me, this was memorable because ol' Josh's father decided to sue the world over his death - the restaurant, the bartender, the tow truck driver, yada yada yada - which led to this post. It wasn't something I enjoyed writing, but it needed to be said.

4. Walt Jocketty, Cardinals part ways. After 14 years, a World Series Championship, and the contract extension he had signed through 2009, you'd think this event would be higher on the list. Fact was, rumors of discord in the Cardinal front office had circulated all year, including the widely reported "story" that Walt was considering taking over the GM job with Cincinnati. His ultimate departure from the organization wasn't that big of a surprise; it was, frankly, one of the worst-kept secrets of the year.

3. AP left on bench; NL loses All-Star game. A big story because of the magnitude of Pujols' star power, the fact that his manager was the one running the NL side (and the one who decided to stay with Aaron Rowland against K-Rod), and the fact that the NL had the bases loaded with 2 out and down by 1. A hit would have won the game. Why would you leave the NL's most feared hitter on the bench in that spot? The story quickly diffused into explanations from LaRussa and Pujols about why and that it wasn't that big a deal, but it once again IMHO displayed why playing the All-Star game for home field advantage in the World Series is a terrible idea.

2. Edmonds traded to Padres for Minor Leaguer. Signifying the end of the Edmonds era in St Louis and the start of the MV3 break-up. Most had expected Rolen to be the first to go given his ongoing friction with LaRussa (which has been true for 3 years, so doesn't make the top 5 this year). It also formally and blatantly signalled a change of course for the franchise; a conscious decision to dump payroll in the form of stars no longer producing; a significant effort to upgrade the team's farm system and build a winner from within (in the fine tradition of Branch Rickey). Lots of us greeted this news with shock and dismay, me among them.

1. Carpenter has surgery, done for the year. The biggest story of the year. Chris was the lynchpin of our hopes for a title defense; everyone knew with Mulder on the shelf until after the All-Star break, a reclamation project (Wells), a cross-your-fingers-project (Looper), a head case (Reyes), and the 'rookie' starter (Wainwright), Carpenter had to produce. He went down in early April, and we all hoped he could come back. He tried and couldn't. Cardinal playoff hopes went down the tubes the day the club reported he was having surgery and was done for the year. What a huge pyschological blow for the team and their fan base!

So that's it. As I search my 'wine cellar' (read: second fridge) for any bubbly to ring in the new year, here's 5 stories to keep your eyes on for 2008:

- Will the Cardinals sign a free agent pitcher (God help me if it's Kyle Lohse)?
- How many votes will McGwire get for the HOF this time around?
- Will Mulder and Carpenter regain some semblance of their old command when they return?
- Will Colby Rasmus be as good as he's projected to be?
- Will Rolen stay a Cardinal for all of 2008?

Cheers, Happy New Year, and please - if you're partying on the town, don't drive.

Politte and Resolutions

Hopefully you all had a joyous Christmas, spent with loved ones. I assume Santa brought you what you wanted, or at least surprised you with unexpectedly good gifts (I was, more on that later this week); if not, well, splurge a little on yourself. I'm sure you've earned it, and if not, make something up.

While we were on hiatus, the Cardinals signed Cliff Politte to a minor league contract. Politte was a large part of the White Sox bullpen success in 2005 (68 appearances, 67 1/3 innings, ERA 2.00), but only threw 30 innings in 2006 and then went down to shoulder surgery, from which he spent all of 2007 recovering. I'm assuming he'll be a non-roster invitee to spring training, and will probably start the season at AAA.

Politte joins Johnson, Carpenter, and Mulder in the pitcher's section of the team rehab clinic.

So Taguchi has latched on with another team, signing with Philadelphia. Taguchi will get $1 Million in 2008 and has an option for 2009. Now, having gone to college in the Philadelphia area, I will admit to having the slightest bit of affection for the Phillies, although to be honest it's more because their fans crack me up than because I like the baseball they play. At any rate, I'm glad So's found work, and as before wish him well.

While I was poking through my archives looking for my Christmas post from last year, I stumbled across my New Year's Eve post. Apparently the Egg Nog was especially spiked last year, for I made some Resolutions, which I promptly forgot about. Whether or not I'm foolish enough to do this again next week only time will tell. But if I do come up with some resolutions for 2008, I ought to at least look at how I did on those I had for 2007. So here goes:

1. Hit .600 in 2007 - Due to many things, but mainly to a growing family, I only played 41 games this year, which translated into 146 at bats - less than 50% of the at bats I had in 2006. This probably helped the average; I hit .589 this year. Close, but no banana.

Yes, I keep statistics on myself. Playing rec/beer league softball. Insert OCD joke here.

2. I will learn to dive for sinking line drives - Nope, still haven't done that. I did decide that sliding was a better plan than diving. Less risk of injury. However, the old man still has some giddy-up in his stride, and I was able to get to most line drives hit in front of me. The other ones either I played on a hop..... or chased after they skipped by me. Swing and a miss.

3. I will learn to drive to the hospital with a concussion after attempting to dive for a sinking line drive - rendered moot by my good sense in not diving at my advanced age. Call it a tie.

4. I will run for more than 4 minutes (blah blah blah) - We'll just stop there. I didn't run for 4 minutes continuously at any point last year. Fitness test for the USN? I swim it, vice running it. I did determine that if I do a set where I run for 2 min, walk for 2 min, and repeat that cycle 5 times, my back locks up. I don't do that anymore. Seemed practical. Swing and a miss.

5. I will pleasure my wife whenever she wants me to - I did this so well, in September my second son was born. Needless to say now my wife won't let me anywhere near her. I'm lucky I'm still allowed to live in the same house. Success!

6. I will lose 11 pounds - Actually gained 5. When I recently had blood work to determine my triglyceride level, the counter read "TILT" and then shut down for 2 weeks. Dietary changes are a-coming. I might have more luck with this one in 2008. Swing and a miss.

7. I will swim 450m in under 7 minutes - We do 2 Physical Readiness Tests a year. May 2007 - 8 min, 30 seconds. Dec 07 - 9 min, 45 seconds. Yes, the trend is the wrong way. Yes, it was nowhere near 7 minutes. I hate getting old. Swing and a miss.

8. I will broaden my topics beyond the St Louis Cardinals - I did the Villanova preview on Deadspin for the 2007 NCAA tournament, which was the big success. There are some VU, Charger, and Ram posts sprinkled throughout the year here, but otherwise it's all Cardinals, all the time. Swing and a miss.

So the final tally - 1 Success, 5 swings and misses, 2 ties/close calls. Wow. Pretty dismal, eh?

Merry Christmas Wishes

Christmas sure was a lot more fun when I was the child vice the adult. Sooo much easier to go to sleep and wake up with presents under the tree. Sooo much harder to put tree up, decorate it, wrap presents, arrange them, clean house for family coming over tomorrow, prep food... and we're still not done. I'm exhausted. I don't know how my parents did it.

There has been some movement by the Cardinals in recent days, but we'll hold off the discussion on all that until after the Holiday. Instead, I'm re-posting something I did last year for Christmas, because it succinctly reminds us of what this day commemorates.

"Today I want to tell you the story of an empty stocking.

Once upon a midnight clear, there was a child's cry. A blazing star hung over a stable and wise men came with birthday gifts. We haven't forgotten that night down the centuries; we celebrate it with stars on Christmas trees, the sound of bells, and gifts.

But especially with gifts. You give me a book; I give you a tie. Aunt Martha has always wanted an orange squeezer, and Uncle Henry could do with a new pipe. We forget nobody, adult or child. All the stockings are filled...

all, that is, except one. And we have even forgotten to hang it up.

The stocking for the Child born in a manger.

It's His birthday we are celebrating. Don't ever let us forget that. Let us ask ourselves what He would wish for most and then let each put in his share: loving kindness, warm hearts, and the stretched-out hand of tolerance; all the shining gifts that make peace on Earth.

- Re-printed w/o permission from the movie "The Bishop's Wife" (1947)

Compliments of the season to you.

Like Watching Chrome Rust

There really isn't much that happens in the off-season. Moves by the Cardinals are few and far between. When they do happen, as in the Edmonds trade, they provide a couple of days discussion; but eventually every angle has been covered and it's time to move on.

Pondering what to write about is like watching chrome rust - you waste a lot of time, and not much happens. That's one of the reasons why I shifted to a two post per week schedule last winter - I ran out of things to say. Which, for anyone who knows me, is almost unbelievable.

One of the sites I peruse (as you can see from the right margin) is C70 at the bat. At the tail end of the Edmonds discussions, commentors started discussing retired numbers, or more specifically, numbers that have been 'unofficially' retired. This caught my interest.

So let's talk about Cardinal Retired Numbers.

For those of you unsure which players have had their numbers retired, here they are:

1 - Ozzie Smith (HOF)
2 - Red Schoendienst (HOF)
6 - Stan Musial (HOF)
9 - Enos Slaughter (HOF)
14 - Ken Boyer
17 - Dizzy Dean (HOF)
20 - Lou Brock (HOF)
42 - Jackie Robinson (HOF)
42 - Bruce Sutter (HOF)
45 - Bob Gibson (HOF)
85 - August A 'Gussie' Busch (Owner)

Yep - all but Ken Boyer are in Cooperstown, making this a hard group to join. I think Busch is also in the hall, but I can't prove it from the HOF website.

So of the unofficial retired number list, who should we consider to join this group? (Note: I selected what I consider representative statistics for this analysis.)

1. Jim Edmonds (#15)? Played for the Cardinals 2000-2007. 3-time All-Star. Top 5 twice in MVP voting (4th in 2000 and 5th in 2004). Six Gold Gloves (2000-2005). Sliver Slugger (2004). Top 15 on team's all-time list in HR (4th), RBI (12th), and walks (7th). Reasonable case for the Hall.
Projection: Probable. As a Cardinal, he is one of the greats in the history of the club.

2. Willie McGee (#51)? Played for the Cardinals 1982-1990, 1996-1999. 1985 NL MVP. Two time batting champion (1985, 1990). 4-time All Star. Silver Slugger (1985). Three Gold Gloves (1983, 1985, 1986). Top 15 on team's all-time list in RBI (14th), Hits (11th), Total Bases (14th), and Stolen Bases (4th). Got 5% of HOF vote in 2005, 2.3% in 2006, so won't be going to the Hall unless the veteran's committee picks him up.
Projection: Possible. One of the most beloved Cardinals of the past 20 years. Other than Ozzie, the best position player on Herzog's teams in the 1980s. Had a petition drive started in his name; I think it got over 10,000 signatures, but not sure what happened to it. I have a nice T-Shirt commemorating the petition effort, though.

3. Whitey Herzog (#24)? Managed the Cardinals 1980-1990. Three NL East Division Titles, 3 NL Pennants (1982, 1985, 1987). One World Series (1982). NL Manager of the Year in 1985. 822-728 as Cardinals Manager.
Projection: Very Probable. Herzog missed getting into the Hall this year by one vote (Veteran's Committee), so he may make it in 2009. Once he's in, I imagine the team will retire his number much like Bruce Sutter's in 2006.

It's interesting that only one Cardinal manager's had his number retired (Schoendienst), and that was for his exploits as a player. Now that Billy Southworth is in the Hall, that should change.

4. Darryl Kile (#57)? Pitched for the Cardinals 2000-2002, compiling 41-24 mark. All-Star in 2000. Died tragically from a blocked artery in 2002; found in his Chicago hotel room the morning he was to start against the Cubs, June 22, 2002.
Projection: Not Likely. By all accounts he was a good man and excellent teammate, but his number would be retired more because of his tragic death and the way that galvanized the team in 2002 then for his on-field exploits as a Cardinal. Did not receive a vote for HOF in 2007.

5. Josh Hancock (#32)? Pitched for Cardinals 2006-07. 3-4 record, 1 save - your typical middle reliever. Killed in a collision on a St Louis highway April 29, 2007; was later found to be legally drunk at the time of the crash.
Projection: Not in this lifetime. An appropriate period of not issuing 32 to another player is warranted. I'd be a little bit surprised to see #32 on a Cardinal before the 2009 season. After that, someone else should wear the number. His death was untimely; but I don't think a guy who was so self-destructive in life is someone we should lionize in death by retiring his number.

Anyone else we should consider? Make your pitch in the comments.

Some Follow-up

Since the Edmonds trade story broke, it's been comparatively slow on the Cardinals news front. Especially if you choose to ignore the story on Fernando Vina (which I do).

But it gave me a chance to peruse some of the Cardinal Blogdome reaction to the trade. And as always, Viva El Birdos is the site I visited first. To quote some snippets from the article:

the news that jim edmonds asked for this trade has done little to stop the angry recriminations over it. there are still plenty of people out there --- including a few who e-mailed me yesterday --- who insist that thte [sic] deal was born of dewitt's money-grubbing and/or mozeliak's stupidity.

and

however the cardinals spend the $6m, that return will get added to the value the cards have already received in exchange for edmonds, david freese. frustrated jed fans are dismissing this guy as a piece-a-shit prospect, which isn't fair; he'll never be a star, but he has a decent chance of delivering a few seasons of league-average offense.

I assume that, although Larry could have just checked the diaries at SportsNation to gauge reactions to the trade, he surfed the web to a few other sites. Which got me thinking: I know he's read this site in the past; I don't know how often he reads it since I came back here from mvn.com. Was my post one of the ones 'dismissing this guy as a piece-of-shit prospect'?

Yeah, it could be interpreted that way.

In hindsight, in the paragraph above the second Edmonds photo, I should have inserted the word 'apparently' between "because they" and "got so". That more accurately describes how I feel about the trade. The rest of the post is as neutral as I wanted it to be. Freese didn't appear on any Padre top 10 prospect list I could find, but I didn't want to dismiss him as a player of the caliber of Pete Rose, Jr, so I tried to portray some of his successes as well. Let's face it: guys named MVP of their league are pretty good regardless of which league they play for.

In all honesty, we won't know if this trade is a good one or a bad one for at least two more years. We'll have to wait and see how Freese progresses in the Cardinal system. Or, if he gets packaged into a deal for another player, we'll evaluate that player's performance to see if it was worth having the rights to Freese at all.

Josh over at mvn.com? That guy's downright hysterical about this trade. Which I have to say I found somewhat amusing.

I understand the long-term vision behind the trade, though I still think the Cardinals didn't get much in return; but I'm willing to wait and see how Freese pans out before I start organizing a 'pitchfork and torch' march through downtown St Louis.

Edmonds returns to SOCAL

This weekend is the last weekend of my academic quarter, and as such, I am knee-deep in preparations for finals. I have 2 classes - one called Cost Estimating, the other Naval Operations Analysis. They can be as dry as they sound. The Naval Operations Analysis class does look at, among other things, probabilities for blowing stuff up, which is pretty cool.

I took my Cost final today (3 hours), and have the NOA final tomorrow. It's take-home, and we have 8 hours to complete it.

Needless to say I'm not exactly in touch with the larger world right now.

So I finish my final, and flip over to stltoday.com, to find this.

One of the greatest catches you'll ever see.

My feelings about this are decidedly mixed. On the one hand, I've been reading/listening to the chatter in various places (Viva El Birdos, for example) that the Cardinals need to get younger, that their farm system is dry, that they have too much money tied up in too few players. Of course, this prevailing opinion was counter-punched recently in this article by Jeff Gordon.

I'd gotten to the point that I understood the release of Bennett, Eckstein, and Miles in the name of fiscal responsibility and because they all allegedly had significant weaknesses in their game.

But trading Edmonds? What a message.

Baseball these days is a business. The men who own major league franchises didn't get to the point where they could own a major league franchise without being sound businessmen. And they don't make investments lightly. They jealously guard their capital, and they aggressively pursue high returns for their money. You can't get too sentimental over your investments these days. Emotional attachment to something, be it a stock, house, or player, leads to bad fiscal decisions and a loss of opportunity.

That the DeWitt's treat the club as a business they're trying to make a profit from has never been clearer to me than right now. I'm sure they want to win championships; I'm sure based on the trades they allowed Jocketty to make during his tenure as GM, the salary they tied up in big-name players, the fact that this team has had one of its most successful runs in its history since 2000. But they're also in this for the money: new stadium, jettisoning KMOX as the Cardinals' flagship station being two examples. And approving today's trade.

Edmonds was the longest-tenured Cardinal. A three-time All Star, multiple gold glove winner, and cause of many, many big plays with his bat and glove. But he had suffered through two injury-plagued seasons, and it was becoming increasingly obvious he couldn't hit left handers anymore.

The Cardinals let him go in exchange for David Freese, a ninth-round selection in 2006, a prospect who played last year in High Class A and a man who doesn't appear on anyone's 'Top 10 Padre prospect' list. He was the Sun Belt Conference player of the year in 2006 (South Alabama).

The Cardinals reportedly freed up $7 million in salary with the trade.

I guess the club is thinking this could be the guy that eventually replaces Scott Rolen at third, which is forward-thinking. I'm not sure if my shock is because they traded Edmonds away, or because they got so little in return for him.


In any case, thanks for the memories, Jim. Good luck in San Diego.

I guess we'll find out how good Colby Rasmus really is now.

The Mitchell Report - small print, no pictures....

Before we get to the meat of tonight's discussion, some points of order:

1. I've added a link to Sports News Connection. Check it out. It's a one-stop website with links to articles from around the country, for example ESPN.com, MLB.com, SI.com, the Sporting News, and local paper reporting. Towards the bottom of the page is the 'Sports Blog Connection' section, and The Stance is listed as the Cardinals blog. More exposure never hurts. Welcome, Curt, to our margin.

2. Dustin over at Whiteyball.com introduced me to the Baseball University website. Yes, there is actually a BASEBALL UNIVERSITY. Would that I had found that out before deciding to slug through a statistics-based Masters program. All kinds of cool courses (hitting fundamentals, scout like a pro) are offered, as well as classes designed to make you a better youth coach. You need to know these things; there's so much to learn about the great game. Check it out.

-----------------------------------

Today brought the release of the Mitchell Report. I'm not going to go into great detail here, because the report (and subsequent 80+ player list) is being dissected on sports sites (and newspapers and blogs) across the world. But I did have interest in one specific question:

Does the report identify Mark McGwire as a steroids user?

The report is 406 pages long. Small print, no pictures. Dry. Since I don't have the time (right now, maybe later) or the patience (ever?) to read the entire thing, I did the next best thing:

I searched the pdf file for the word 'McGwire'.

McGwire does appear rather prominently in the report. By my count, his name appears 46 times (37 in the body of the report, and nine more times either via footnote or bibliography). The report basically re-hashes all the public events in McGwire's baseball life since that day in 1998 they found andro in his locker. After wallowing around without a point for 132 pages, we finally come to the crux of the issue, on page 133:

"During the course of the investigation, we interviewed a number of coaches, club personnel, former teammates, and other persons who know McGwire. Only Canseco, who repeated the allegations from his memoir, said he had knowledge of McGwire's alleged use of steroids (emphasis mine). Through his personal lawyer, I asked McGwire to meet with me for an interview about these issues, but he declined to do so."

Hmmm.

You would think, based on how discredited McGwire currently is, that if there was dirt to be had on him it would be easy to bring to light. Most people have difficulty not kicking someone when they're down; that person's an easy target and probably won't fight back. So why did no one come forward to say they had seen McGwire using?

There are several possibilities. Mitchell didn't interview players (or had little luck getting them to talk; he reported sending letters to Bonds, Palmerio, and Sheffield, among others, and got no answers from them either), so the guys with the real dirt remain silent. Perhaps Canseco had an ulterior motive for accusing McGwire in his book. I don't know.

The one thing that works against the Canseco ulterior motive theory is that McGwire never forcefully (to my knowledge) denied the report.

Whatever the reason, these facts remain, and are not in dispute: The ONLY proof we have that McGwire used steroids is the testimony of one man. No one has come forward claiming to have sold McGwire steroids (a la Victor Conte with Bonds). No former training partner of McGwire's has come forward either to back up Canseco's story. There is no corroborating evidence to prove McGwire used steroids. I expected this report to include his name. It doesn't; yet it does include other former players among those named.

I hope the entire BBWAA took notice. Stop treating McGwire like an ex-girlfriend you believe betrayed you. Vote the man into the Hall.

76.5% of the voters did not vote for McGwire last year, and in their arrogance and adolescent pique, probably won't this year. They won't let facts get in the way of a good emotional argument.

I have two words for them.

Makes A Great Gift!

Ok, now for the update on Cardinals goings-on:

1. Rolen and LaRussa still hate each other.....check.
2. Cardinals haven't signed a free agent starting pitcher yet......check.
3. Mo can't find a suitor that wants Duncan or Ankiel in exchange for pitching help.....check.

Looks like the status quo is still in place. So, I thought I'd take time out to describe a recent birthday gift I received.

**EDITORS WARNING**
The following description should not be taken to mean that I did not like any other birthday gifts I may have recently received, or that I am not grateful to have received said items. I simply wanted to talk about this one during a slow week.

Just in case members of my family read this site (and I know who you are...)
;)
**END WARNING**

I recently had a birthday. How old am I? 'As old as my tongue and a little older than my teeth.' Name the movie that comes from and I'll think of something cool to acknowledge your acumen with. Anyway, a couple of days passed, and a package arrives from amazon.com. Seems my younger brother had sent me something (I can't call him my little brother, as he is 3 inches taller and 30+ lbs heavier. Pretty close to how much bigger my dad was than I. Yes, I'M the runt).

So I open it. And it's this:

Now, I'd seen this DVD set advertised on-line (and in TV commercials) before, and thought it might be cool; but never thought to buy it. Let me tell you: It's pretty cool.

The set includes 6 disks, of the following games at Busch:

- 1968 World Series, Game 1 (Gibson strikes out 17)
- 1982 World Series, Game 7 (WE WIN - on the scoreboard after the game ended)
- 1985 NLCS, Game 5 (Herzog out-manages Lasorda; the 'Go Crazy, Folks!' game)
- 1987 World Series, Game 3 (I'll have to watch it to see why this one made the cut)
- 8 Sept 1998 game vs Cubs (McGwire's 62nd HR)
- 2004 NLCS, Game 7 (Clemens, afraid of Rolen, pitches to AP with the tying run on third; AP doubles, Rolen HR on next pitch, World Series bound!)

Each DVD jacket includes interesting facts. For example, the 2004 jacket states: AP hit .500 against the Astros in that series. It also includes the attendance, how many hitters STL pitchers struck out, men LOB by each team, and the box score on the back. The inside of the case includes a summary of each inning's events (ex: 2004 bottom of 6: Cedeno bats for Suppan; Cedeno singles to center; Renteria sacrifice bunts, grounds out to pitcher [Cedeno to second]; and so on), which makes it easy for you to find the event you're looking for.

The DVD itself allows you to watch the whole game, or select what half inning you want to skip to or start viewing from.

Naturally I watched all of 2004 Game 7 again. One of my favorite Cardinals games ever. But not before I discovered that this particular disk has some extras included on it.

Like Edmonds' HR the night before that forced Game 7.

I did not see that event live. I was at work all that day. I was on the Submarine Squadron staff in 2004, and although the OPCON (Operational Control room) had recently restored its cable connection to the TV in there - ostensibly to watch the news for major world events - I hadn't been able to camp in that space to watch the game. I was, of course, monitoring the game via the internet. As I was getting ready to head home I stopped by to see the ninth. I saw Izzy blow the 4-2 lead. I listened in the car as the Cardinals swung feebly at Lidge, and Tavarez pulled his head out of his ass long enough to retire 6 straight Astros.

I was almost home when Pujols reached. I heard Rolen make his out while sitting in my driveway. I had the radio turned up so I could hear it, and started taking stuff out of the trunk of my car; when I heard the distinct sound of static from my radio. When I fixed it, all I heard was bedlam.

You see clips of the HR but it doesn't do it justice. Seeing Edmonds foul off the first pitch, then send the second one soaring into the Cardinals bullpen gave me goosebumps. A smile appeared on my face without me thinking about smiling.

I haven't watched the rest of the set yet (I didn't see the 1982 Game 7 either, I listened to it on the radio while I did homework), but I will. It (other than Gibby's game) will be a walk down a pleasant memory lane for me.

I highly recommend this set for the Cardinal fan near you.

Younger bro: Thanks.

A Date Which Will Live In Infamy

Flags all across the country are at half mast today.

I've gotten several questions from civilian co-workers, 'Why are the flags at half mast? Who died?'

Today is December 7th. Here's who died:

Today is the 66th anniversary of the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, which formally and finally got the United States into the shooting war now known as World War II.

It also led to one of the best speeches FDR ever gave. If you've never heard the speech, other than the famous first line, here it is:

"Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941 - a date which will live in infamy - the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with the government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.

Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in Oahu, the Japanese ambassador to the United States and his colleagues delivered to the Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. While this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or armed attack.

It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time, the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. Very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.

Yesterday, the Japanese government also launched an attack against Malaya.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked Guam.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.

Last night, the Japanese attacked Wake Island.

This morning, the Japanese attacked Midway Island.

Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.

Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us.

No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.

I believe I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces - with the unbounding determination of our people - we will gain the inevitable triumph - so help us God.

I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, Dec. 7, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire."

If you know a veteran of the Second World War, call him. Visit his or her grave today if they are no longer with us.

And remember those who perished on that Sunday morning so long ago.

Victoria, Cesar, and SCOTT

I meant to blog last night, however, a little thing known as the Victoria's Secret fashion show was on. So I was unable to type, as my blogging hand was busy.

WITH THE REMOTE. Get your mind out of the gutter.

Things I learned from watching that boob-and-ass-fest:

- Brazil could become a creditor country to the world if they bottled Amazon River water and sold it under the byline "drink this and look like a lingerie model!" You gonna tell me the 'fat' lady in the green muumuu down at the trailer park wouldn't guzzle that stuff by the gallon?

- I'll bet the after-walk spread was a bowl of tic tacs and some fortified water. That's a lot of bony women. Beautiful faces, but not much meat.

- 'Dream Angel Heavenly' Fragrance? Come on. They ought to name that shit 'Spilled Semen', to memorialize the 10 million adolescent boys who use those catalogs for other than their intended purpose.

And now, back to baseball.

I've got some catching up to do from my last post, so here it is in a nutshell: Cardinals signed Cesar Izturis to a 1 year, $2.85M deal. Stltoday.com reported the contract included incentives that, if met, could make it worth $3.5M. There's no option for 2009, so this is a one year rental.

Here's a comparison of what Izturis and Eckstein did over the past 3 years in some categories I selected. These are their averages from 2005-2007:

Izturis: 90 Games, 317 AB, 31 R, 81 H, 14 2B, 3 3B, 1 HR, 22 RBI, 4 SB, 5 CS (nice), 19 Walks, 28 K, .255 AVG, .298 OBP.

Eckstein: 133 Games, 521 AB, 72 R, 155 H, 22 2B, 3 3B, 4 HR, 38 RBI, 9 SB, 5 CS, 38 W, 36 K, .297 AVG, .356 OBP.

To be fair, Eckstein lead off for the Cardinals all 3 years, while Izturis hit all over the batting order; and Izturis was relegated to the bench the last 2 years as a Dodger, Cub, and Pirate.

For a fielding comparison, I just looked at fielding percentage and errors:

Izturis: Average .975 fielding pct, 7 errors (I just looked at his stats playing short)
Eckstein: .976 fielding pct, 14 errors.

So it's a wash there; Izturis made fewer errors on average, but he also had fewer chances to make a play than Eckstein.

Frankly I don't see how the club improved with this signing. Izturis is a weaker bat who hasn't played short full time since 2005. Basically the organization has decided to tread water this year under the assumption that Brendan Ryan, who isn't ready for prime time full time (which most prognosticators agree is true), will take over at short full time in 2009.

Not to mention the Cardinals parted ways with one of La Russa's favorite players; the 'toughest man I've ever had play for me,' I believe was the sound bite.

Which brings us nicely to one of La Russa's least favorite players: Scott Rolen.

Not sure when this article went up, but it's scathing. As far as La Russa's comments on the organization's best interests, I completely agree. Rolen, when healthy, makes this club infinitely better. The last time the club dumped a veteran on a snap decision was the shipping of Keith Hernandez to the Mets; worked out pretty well for Keith, and the Mets (we got Jack Clark to replace him, so I can't really complain about the consequences to the Cardinals).

In all seriousness, what did the Cardinals expect to get offered for Rolen? Other teams are dealing from a position of strength. They know Rolen is unhappy in St Louis, and they know the Cardinals are trying to move him. They also know he's had the three shoulder surgeries in the last two years, and they've seen his power numbers decline steadily since the collision with Hee Sop Choi in 2005. If St Louis was trying to deal him in 2004, at the peak of his powers, they could have held out for a king's ransom; but now, other GM's are like sharks circling for the kill.

Additionally, I think now, based on how this situation has blown up in St Louis, and the ugly way Rolen left Philadelphia in 2002, that Scott can justifiably be classified a clubhouse cancer; and what contender wants to insert a malcontent into the mix in the locker room? Rolen was golden in Philadelphia initially, and then went to play for the team he idolized as a kid (and admitted was perfect for him), yet both periods of employment ended (or are going to end) very badly.

Who would willingly want to deal with that nonsense?

The Cardinals have also been rumored to be shopping Jim Edmonds and Anthony Reyes. The Padres are rumored to be interested in both (at least according to the Channel 8 sports guy on the 11 o'clock news out here). St Louis can lose Rolen or Edmonds, but not both; AP got very little to hit last year, can you imagine what he'll see pitch-wise this season if his protection is Duncan or Ankiel? For Reyes: I'll say it publicly now: unloading Anthony Reyes would be a mistake the Cardinals rue for years to come. His stuff is too good. Quit treating him like a yo-yo and let the man pitch.

Book Review: Best St Louis Sports Arguments

On or about 2 November, I was minding my own business when I received an email about Bryan Burwell's book, The Best St Louis Sports Arguments: The 100 Most Controversial, Debatable Questions For Die-Hard Fans. The publisher (Sourcebooks, Inc) was asking if I 'would be willing to review this book for your blog'.

Gotta be a joke, I thought.

Well: Sourcebooks, Inc actually exists - it's an independent publishing company based out of Illinois. When I called the number, a person answered - and the name she gave matched that on the email I received. They were serious. So I told them sure I'd read and review it. They asked that the review come out the week of 26 Nov; so it follows below.

Here's a photo of the book cover:

Now a disclaimer: I haven't written a book report since high school, so if you're expecting this to read like a New York Times book section review, you're going to be SORELY disappointed. Of course, if you think the writing on this blog approximates the New York Times writing style, either I'm in the wrong line of work or you should stop drinking. Immediately.

Bottom Line Up Front: If you're tired of slogging through the Confessions of St Augustine and want an intellectually non-threatening book to read for that 3-hour flight anywhere, this book is for you. However, I was disappointed with the book, mostly because the amount of facts used to back up any of the opinions expressed inside it are scarce to say the least, and there are no references given for the reader to review to see the veracity of his arguments.

It lists for $14.95, which I think is a bit much for 265 pages of Bryan Burwell's opinion.

Having said that, I've been kicking around how I was going to write-up this review, and all my rough drafts focused on what I thought was wrong with some of Mr. Burwell's arguments, which means he succeeded in what he was trying to do, namely, present a position as a jumping off point for you to say, 'yep, that's right' or ' that's BULLSHIT! And here's why.' So although I was disappointed in the book overall, I must admit, in all fairness, many of the positions presented got me thinking, which again, is the intent of the book.

Some specific constructive comments:

- There is one outright error, on page 95: Chris Pronger has only won 1 Stanley Cup as of the printing of the book, vice the two quoted, and that was with Anaheim in 2007. He has been to the Finals twice (last year and 2006 with Edmonton); perhaps that's what Burwell meant.

- Burwell's picks in just about every category lean heavily and almost exclusively to players and teams he watched personally or that played during his lifetime. This is understandable when you realize....

- Burwell appears to have done very little research other than talk to some sportswriting cronies and do one interview with Jim Hanifan. It's hard to say for sure, since there are no footnotes included in the discussion, no references cited, and virtually no hard facts quoted throughout the book.

- His statement that Don Denkinger can't be blamed for the 1985 World Series loss to KC is valid, but his argument is so weak that it almost forces the conclusion that Denkinger WAS to blame (pg 117).

- Same can be said about his argument for who the greatest Cardinal manager of all time is. I would have used a different metric than longevity and division titles, since the men he's trying to compare (Southworth, Herzog, and LaRussa) managed the game under different rules and in a different league (8 teams, 1 division vs 12 teams, 2 divisions vs 16 teams, 3 divisions and a wild card). Perhaps wins per year? NL titles (although a difficulty factor would have to be added - it was easier to win a league title before one or two tiers of playoffs were invented)? WS titles (which, after all, is the goal of every baseball team)?

- I think he's arguing that St Louis isn't the great baseball town its reputation says it is (pg 201-205), but his argument is a little convoluted and I couldn't tell what he was arguing for when it was over.

- Curt Flood's challenging the Reserve Clause is a significant moment in baseball history, but the most significant moment in St Louis sports history (pg 49)? I don't think so. The most significant moment in St Louis sports history is signing Branch Rickey to be team president and manager of the Cardinals in 1919. The Cardinals we all know now as the NL's marquee franchise (in terms of World Series titles)? Didn't exist until Rickey invented the farm system. Those 9 NL titles and 6 World Series titles from 1926-1946 don't happen without Rickey. He laid the foundation for success that continues to the present. If that's too esoteric, I would suggest four others that deserve mention: trading for Lou Brock (led to the El Birdos 3 WS appearances and 2 titles), trading for Mark McGwire (led to a revival of interest in Cardinal baseball and the long term signing of Jim Edmonds, a key member of 2 WS teams), trading for Brett Hull (which revived Blues hockey, not to mention bringing the Greatest Blue of them all to St Louis), or Trent Green's blown knee (letting Kurt Warner get a shot and 2 Super Bowl appearances).

Some general comments about content:

- I completely agree with his position on whether Cardinals/Cubs is a great rivalry (pg 100), on whether the Rams should bring the throw-back unis back (like the Chargers do with the powder blues - one home game a year) on page 152, and the things he says about kid and high school sports on page 263-64.

- I continue to find it amusing that a man who was an unrepentant apologist for Barry Bonds for years, and manages to include Leonard Little on his 'All St Louis Football Team' (pg. 177) without mentioning the fact that Little killed a woman with his car while driving drunk, never misses a chance to savage Mark McGwire by talking about his alleged steroid use. There is no discussion about McGwire's performance on the field, just page after page screaming "HE CHEATED!" Bryan: (a) Andro was legal when McGwire was taking it; (b) McGwire, although not as forthcoming as many sportswriters would have liked at the Senate hearings, at least was honest (unlike Palmerio); (c) McGwire has never been found to have failed a drug test or been indicted by the Feds for perjury and obstruction of justice (although if his name appears in the Mitchell report, I may have to rewrite this paragraph).

- I found one passage on page 71 to be patently offensive: "With the early 1940s National League watered-down because of both the war and the lack of black players in the majors..." (emphasis mine). Why did he feel the need to throw the second part of that comment in? Would he say the early 1940s Negro Leagues were watered-down because of both the war and the lack of white players? Saying the league was at less than it's best because of all the players in the service during the war would have been enough. But no, we've got to bring race into it, which weakens the argument, insults the reader, and discredits the author.

- I can't believe he didn't find room for Marty Marion at SS for the all-time Cardinals team (3 WS titles, 8-time All Star, NL MVP in 1944).

- I can't believe Orlando Pace continues to get the props he does even though he breaks down with injury virtually every single season.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY STAN!

He's 87 years young today. SO, in the spirit of the occasion:

Here's some cake:

Please pardon the right-handed batter. But the stance is about right, isn't it?

St Louis Post Dispatch's site has two articles on Stan today, and they are linked here and here.

A day late and a dollar short.

Yes, I've been busy (aren't we all). No, it's not going to slack off until mid-December (midterms, finals, and my regular job). This is a quickie to let everyone know that I'm still.....alive.

Today it was announced that the Cardinals signed Jason LaRue (late of the KC Royals, formerly of the Cincinnati Reds) as Yadi's back-up. They also signed a Dewon Brazelton (also late of the KC Royals), and John Wasdin (most recently a Pirate and Ranger), both pitchers, to minor-league deals.

Let's see...

The aforelinked (I just made that word up, go me) article used such superlatives to describe LaRue as "..we also want to get him back with Hal [McRae, hitting instructor] and get him back to where he's more comfortable at the plate," and "He carries a career .235 mark depressed by a combined .170 mark the past two seasons." Not to mention the fact he couldn't cut it with the Royals. So we have a no-hit backup we're paying $50K less than our previous no-hit backup (Bennett). I don't know, maybe someone in the organization needed that $50K to pay for Christmas.

Brazelton's been cut by both the Royals and the Pirates, two of the pitching-richest franchises in the league.

Wasdin has appeared in 21 major league games TOTAL the past two seasons.

Memo to Mozeliak: Sign me! I'm left handed, and have good control. I can get one lefty out a game. I'm sure I'll work well with Dunc and Tony.

Because it seems you're the big boss man guy picking up illegals, er, MIGRANTS, on weekday mornings, who are looking for work at Sawtelle and Olympic.

----------------------------------------

One programming note: I've added a new Cardinals blog in the list - C70 at the bat. Another regular Joe [not his actual name] who follows the Cardinals; also he's commented repeatedly on this site, meaning he's either one of the brightest CPAs in the land or really, really bored.

Bill Simmons doesn't know Jack about bad calls

Bill Simmons spent several thousand words on Friday whining about how the Patriots got homered last week in Indianapolis. Even though they won the game.

That's OK; it's what we expect from the Mass-hole contingent.

I hope he watched tonight's Colts/Chargers game. You want to see a team get homered by bad calls? Try these on:

1. First Quarter: LB Session makes a tremendous 'alert' play to catch a bouncing ball in the end zone. He then returns it to the San Diego 6. BUT WAIT! There's an inadvertent whistle! Apparently, the referee standing in the back of the end zone can't follow the bouncing football. Indy is at least awarded the ball, but on their own 20. Manning subesquently throws his 4th pick, leading to San Diego's only offensive TD.

2. Fourth Quarter: Third and 8, 7:35 to play. Peyton throws a deep ball towards Moorehead. Ball goes through his arms; he protests for a flag. There isn't one. Replay shows the Charger DB grab his arm just before the ball arrives - clear PI. The referee, STANDING LESS THAN 3 feet away, makes no call at all. Indy forced to punt.

AND THE PIECE DE RESISTANCE:

3. Fourth Quarter: Fourth and 1, 1:36 to play. Indy in a run formation. Center Saturday looks up, 3 Indy players shift....and the back judge calls a false start on Utecht. Al Michaels and John Madden are left wondering, 'where was the penalty?' as they peer at the replay.

I've been watching football for over 30 years, and I'm having a hard time remembering when an officiating crew was that bad. Including last week's Colts/Patriots game.

Yes, two special teams lapses in the first quarter really crippled the Colts. Yes, Peyton threw 6 picks (although the last one is a whatever pick). Yes, Vinateri missed 2 chip shots at the end of each half. Despite that, the referees played a DECISIVE role in determining the outcome of this game.

Ya think Simmons will mention this travesty in his next article? Or will the big cloud of smug over the Simmons house at another Colts loss preclude his judgment?

Lidge to Phillies; Pujols shakes head sadly

The GM Barbeque meetings in Orlando concluded today. I don't know what else to call this precursor to the winter meetings; why do they need a pre-meeting a month to 6 weeks before having the actual meetings? This is one of the worst practices corporate America has foisted on the working man: the pre-meeting meeting. "We're going to have a meeting to discuss what we'll discuss at the next meeting." Why not just have the next meeting now and dispense with this waste of time?

Of course, if they do it as a way to get away from their wives, drink some beer and go to the Orlando area strip clubs (which, I hear, rock), then good on them.

This week the meetings concluded with some big news (drawn up on a cocktail napkin? On Bambi's equipment? Is that taking the joke too far?), namely, that Houston had shipped Brad Lidge and parts to Philadelphia for Michael Bourn and some other names.

Looks like a really good move for the Phillies. They solve their closer problem and move one of their better pitcher (Brett Myers) back into the rotation, where in 2005-06 he was 25-12 with an ERA of about 3.8.

Houston gets a legitimate CF in Michael Bourn to fill that hole. Not sure who will close for them next year (Chad Qualls? someone else?), but they have picked up a great prospect in Bourn. Someone who's been bandied about on some Cardinals blogs as worth getting to play in St Louis.

Which begs the question: given our fiscal woes for the 2008 roster, did the Cardinal hierarchy consider shopping Isringhausen or Pervical to Philadelphia to get Bourn?

Granted, Izzy is 35 (and Percival 38) while Lidge is 31, but who was the better closer last year? Who has been the more consistent closer over his career - Izzy or Lidge? It's Izzy by a lot. I know hindsight is 20-20, but we could have shopped Izzy to Philly and, if we were able to broker a deal for similar pieces that Houston got, gotten a ML ready CF to step in for Edmonds (letting Ankiel stay in RF), and shaved about $7M off the payroll for next year. Sign Percival to a $1M deal that's incentive laden to be worth more, and wha-la! more wiggle room to sign those starting pitchers we so desperately need. We certainly could have thrown in a used piece (like Brunlett) - perhaps John Rodriguez or someone of similar ilk.

Are there any other clubs out there looking for closer help?

Say It Ain't So, So

I don't blog much from work; there never seems to be enough time, and, since my monitor faces the passageway, it's fraught with danger. However, I was remiss in my post yesterday in that I didn't mention Gary Bennett's contract was bought out, meaning the Cardinals are in the market for a back-up catcher.

And then today is the report they've bought out So Taguchi's contract.

Based on the payroll the team has already allocated for next year (upwards of $95M), the holes they still have to fill, and the glut of young outfielders they have on the 40-man roster, this move was inevitable. John Mozeliak wouldn't slam the door on Taguchi, saying there was a chance he could come back; but at 38, that's not likely (for the aforementioned reasons). I'm a bit glum about this; I'm going to miss So.

So's loudest hit - HR off Wagner, Game 2 2006 NLCS. Courtesy ESPN.com

Why do I like So Taguchi so much? He played the game right.

So played 10 years in Japan for the Orix Blue Wave. Yes, the same team Ichiro played for before he joined the Mariners. Imagine the OF where Ichiro played RF because So was a better CF! A 4-time All-Star (1995, 1996, 1997, 2001), his teams won 2 Pacific League Championships (1995, 1996) and the Japan League Championship in 1996. He wasn't the first Japanese player to win a Japan League title and a World Series title (Tadahito Iguchi has also done it, at a minimum), but he's a member of that very select group.

All that's great; but then, following the 2001 season, he headed for the states to play Major League baseball. Didn't speak a lick of English; he learned that on the fly and from his wife. He struggled mightily to hit Major League pitching, but he wanted to play at the ML level so HE WENT TO THE MINORS AND STARTED FROM SCRATCH WITH HIS SWING. I play a little bit of softball now and then, and I have a swing honed from 30 years of swinging a bat; it's not great, but it's good. I can't even imagine a successful baseball player willing to start over from scratch learning how to hit. Can you see any successful American player being told, 'yeah, you need to start over or you might as well quit' and then the same player willingly and without complaint doing the work needed to fix it?

So eventually made it back to the majors, and you know the rest. He carried the Cardinals during the summer of 2005, when Edmonds was down with an assortment of nagging injuries, batting .379 in July at the top of the order - easily the brightest he shone until that great HR off Wagner last fall.

He was also an excellent defensive outfielder. I haven't been able to find any Gold Glove statistics for him in Japan (or if they even give out a similar award over there), but So could play the OF. However, the thing that sticks with me about him defensively happened in the 2006 NLCS as well. He mis-judged a fly ball to CF that hit the wall behind him, and then caromed away. Of course, the bases were loaded, and the hit cleared the bases. Not good.

So went out to CF with a coach the next day and practiced taking balls off the OF wall so he wouldn't make the same mistake.

Which is exactly what I would have done had I been burned like that.

I'm glad I was able to get a hold of a 'Taguchi 99' shirt last season. I seem to play better defense with it on.

So a toast - to the great So Taguchi. You will be missed in this corner of Red Bird Nation.

Not Enough Hours In The Day

Small children have a tendency to monopolize your time. That isn't a regret for having children; it's a fact. They also like to derail plans. For instance, I had/have a research project in mind that I'm going to finish and publish results here. My intentions were to do it over the weekend and have it up for Monday morning. My boys essentially said, 'Nice idea, Pops, but we're taking over your weekend and you'll LIKE IT!'

It's amazing that they can get their point across when neither one of them has uttered a word, much less a complete sentence.

So I'll keep plugging away and try to get my project out to you by the end of the week. In the meantime, the biggest news of the past week is Mozeliak being named GM (vice filling in as interim GM) and the reported overtures the Cardinals made to Curt Schilling.

Mozeliak getting the job does a lot for continuity in the office; he knows the playing field and the players, which is a plus, and he had a chance to learn from Walt Jocketty. It remains to be seen where his priorities lie in rebuilding the club. I don't think a high-profile free agent signing will fix what made the 2007 Cardinals a sub-.500 team, but with that said, they have holes they need to fill, and the cupboard within the organization is pretty bare. I have some thoughts on which way they should go, but that's a later post.

The Curt Schilling thing - he's an attractive name, in all likelihood a first ballot Hall of Famer when he comes eligible for enshrinement - but he's 40 now. As has been pointed out elsewhere, (and because I kept pretty close tabs on the Red Sox this season thanks both to my wife's affinity for the franchise and the sheer number of Boston players I had on my fantasy roster), he wasn't the same pitcher who won 20 games in 2003. He would certainly be a large upgrade over KFW or Reyes, but I'm not sure he'd be worth the price he'll probably command for one year. Late breaking tonight is the Red Sox appear close to a deal with him, so it all may be speculation washed down the drain by mid-week; even if that deal falls through, I think I would look somewhere else for starting pitching help.

Well that's it. The GM's are meeting in Orlando this week; if anything interesting comes out of it, we'll discuss it.

No Soup Today

Hi All. No post today, however, I am working on something and intend to have it up Monday. Please check back! Cheers!

The King Is Dead; Long Live The King.

And with Jonathan Paplebon's strikeout of Seth Smith, the Cardinals reign as World Champions officially came to a close.

Congratulations to the 2007 Boston Red Sox.

Isn't it interesting how the worm has turned? The Yankee mystique began to crack in Game 7 of the 2001 Series, took another hit while losing the 2003 Series, and officially turned south with Dave Roberts' stolen base in 2004 ALCS Game 4. Oh how the mighty have fallen. Look at your modern Red Sox - they really have become that which they despised most, the Yankees. And they broke their streak of appearing in one World Series every even numbered decade.

Of course, Boston won 5 of the first 15 World Series contested, so we'll have to see if this is the dawning of Red Sox Century or proof they're like the city Brigadoon - allowed to appear as a power for 15 years out of 100, then they disappear for the rest of the century.

I don't have much to say about the last two games. I thought Game 4 was the best game of the set; it certainly (to my mind) was the best played game. I must admit to being slightly off on a few things. Game Three (Dice vs. Fogg) did NOT favor the Rockies. I thought Fogg would acquit himself well - 10 hits, 6ER in 2 and 2/3 isn't a very good effort. Some prognosticated he would get torched:

"...the long layoff seems to have hurt colorado (although their lack of offense in game 1 is probably josh beckett's fault); their pitchers aren't sharp, and they've made mental errors in the field and on the bases. i haven't counted them out just yet, but in the next two games they will start josh fogg --- a finesse pitcher who the patient red sox hitters ought to slaughter ---"

and they were right. I also thought Dice K would pitch poorly (wrong), and that Francona was silly not to start Beckett in Game 4 (wrong) because the extra day off between Games 4 and 5 (wrong, no day off) would allow him to pitch on normal rest (not needed).

This is why I don't play the lottery on a regular basis.

This is also symptomatic of why I no longer blog at mvn.com - I'm not paying as close attention as I have in the recent past to what goes on in sports (general themes yes, minutae no). Speaking in broad brushes is, to my mind, OK on a personal blog; not so much when you're more mainstream.

A couple of quick thoughts on some recent events in Cardinal-land:

1. Cardinals released Mike Maroth. With the way he got lit up in the NL this season post-trade, and the low 80s hop on his fastball, he's probably finished in baseball. Mike's a high character guy the likes of which the world needs more of, not just baseball. Here's hoping he'll latch on somewhere else; if he doesn't, Major League Baseball is poorer for his release.

2. It appears almost a formality that Chris Antonetti will become Walt Jocketty's replacement as GM. Sites that I frequent - www.ussmariner.com and the aforequoted Viva El Birdos - both have high praise for him. I certainly don't always agree with the opinions expressed at these sites, however in this case I have no reason to quibble with them. Chris is 33 years old, and about to become the General Manager for my favorite team. It is an opportunity I would jump at if I had the chance. I'm not that much older than him (37); anyone out there got some advice on how to get a job in a Major League front office?

One thing: It appears Chris will not be allowed to pick his own staff; he will work with those already in place (Mozeliak, LaRussa, Ludnow, et al). Coming in as the boss and working with an established core of professionals can certainly be done - it's how the USN works on board ship for COs, XOs and Department Heads - but it's got to be a little disconcerting for Antonetti. Whatever the bag is, he's just been handed it. With all the inherited internal politics, hidden agendas, strong personalities, and the like. Again, it can be done; but it will take a tactful man to turn the trick, something I'm not sure I could have done as a 33 year old (and to hear my wife tell it, probably not something I can do now).

To Chris: Good Luck; be patient; keep your wits about you.

3. A-Rod opted out of his contract. That'll save the Yankees about $70M in salary and the Rangers about $22M. This is better news for Texas than New York. It also leaves a huge hole in the Yankee infield and batting order. Some thoughts on this:

- I wonder if the Steinbrenners did a 'worst case' analysis when they decided to low ball Joe Torre. Did A-Rod leaving figure into their decision?
- How many other Yankees will follow him out the door?
- Will this mean New York is planning on backing a dump truck full of money up to Mike Lowell's house in an attempt to woo him from Boston?
- A-Rod and Scott Boras don't make this kind of financial decision without a lot of prior research and some assurance they can get what they're asking for (reputably in the $27 to $30 million per season range). If that's true, there are only really 5 places he can go: Mets, Red Sox, Dodgers, Angels, and Cubs.

I don't see him remaining in New York to play for the Mets.
I believe the history between he and Boston precludes him playing for the Red Sox.
Arte Moreno reportedly has said he won't pay what Boras is seeking for A-Rod's services.
The Dodgers are an option, especially if they fire Grady Little and hire Torre (more speculation).

However, my money says he'll sign with and play for Piniella's Cubs. Now, I have a source in the Cub organization that says it won't happen due to the impending sale of the team; the Tribune Company hasn't finished enumerating all their assets, and MLB won't allow them to take on the kind of financial burden A-Rod's signing would require before the team is sold. But I still think that's the most likely place he'll end up. If he does, Chicago immediately becomes the team to beat in the NL - they would have the most feared lineup in the league, and their pitching is good enough.

Besides, I've been wrong about so much over the past 2 weeks, I'm sure to be right about this thing...

Who's The Hobo?

Tough loss for the Rockies in Game 2 - certainly a winnable game for them. Long day at work for me (got home after 1830, which is about 2 hours later than normal), so I didn't hear the Rockies score their lone run. I also started doing homework after the seventh inning stretch, and didn't tune back in until the top of 9.

Some random thoughts on Game 2:

- Jimenez's fastball is legit. He generates a lot of power from that skinny frame of his - a la a young Pedro. This isn't to imply he's going to be as good as Pedro, but that he has easy gas - 97 mph.

- With that weapon, why oh why did Torrealba mess around with his other pitches? And why did he insist on flipping junk up there when behind in the count and with runners on in scoring position? I agree with what Joe Morgan said on the radio - quit messing around and throw the heater (that's a paraphrase). Lowell was sitting on a breaking ball when he lined the ball into left for the go-ahead run in the 5th.

- Based on Schilling's hat tip while exiting the game in the sixth, you get the feeling he won't be back next year and he knows it?

- Are we sure that's Eric Byrnes in the Fox pre and post-game shows, not some Hobo they pulled out of the Cask and Flagon? Dude, showing up on TV with a severe case of bed head is bad enough, but do you have to dress like you slept in a trash can?

- Boyz II Men had 4 members in their heyday. They sung God Bless America with 3. Apparently, the guy with scoliosis was the one that could carry a tune.

- I think the Fox contract with MLB includes the following two caveats: (a) Boston is not allowed to be retired in order at home during the World Series; (b) A random draw is held before the series and that player is not allowed to be retired from an 0-2 count (Youkilis right now, Manny in the ALCS). How else to explain why the 0-2 and 1-2 pitches to Youkilis have been nowhere near in this series?

Colorado really needed this game. They can still win the series, but now two things are assured: They will have to win it at Fenway, and they will have to beat Beckett at least once. Dice K against Fogg is a favorable matchup (in my opinion) for them in Game 3. They need to do something to rattle Beckett early in Game 4, like bunt for hits, be real aggressive on the basepaths, step out a lot, something. Hopefully the series will be 2-1 at that point, but the way their bats have cooled off (again, nice 8 day layoff, Bud) they may be in a 3-0 hole instead.

Steal A Base....Steal A Taco

It's hot, my head hurts (as it normally does when the Santa Ana winds start a-blowin'), the entire eastern county is on fire, I haven't been to work since Monday, and we're all out of coffee.

OK, I made the last thing up.

And, the World Series got underway today.

The game is still in progress, but it's been over since the bottom of the fifth. 13-1 Red Sox. Yikes. Colorado gave up 8 runs total to Arizona in four games. Some instant observations from Game 1:

- Beckett is really good.

- Eight days off will kill a pitching staff (way to go, MLB and FOX!). Denver's a hockey town, rumor has it the Nordiques play there. Sometimes, during the Stanley Cup Playoffs, when one team has survived a grueling 7 game series and their opponent won in 4 or 5 games to earn some days off, you hear the 7-game survivors say, we'll give a good effort, but we really don't expect to win this game. Think Clint Hurdle told that to his guys before Game 1?

- When Drew scored the 12th Red Sox run, Joe Buck intoned, 'That breaks the team record for runs in a World Series game.' The previous record? 11. As in 11-9, Boston, Game 1 in 2004. Thanks for the reminder, Joe. A small part of my mind secretly hopes Boston wins this series; maybe then we'll stop seeing ads of the team celebrating as Cardinal players exit the field from 2004.

- I don't think I can sneak Pedroia by everyone next season in my fantasy league. Probably not going to get Ellsbury, either.

- A lot of air has been heated comparing the Red Sox's 30-5 blitzing of Cleveland to Atlanta's 32-1 blitzing of St Louis in 1996. Note to all overconfident Red Sox fans: In 1996, Atlanta blasted the Yankees 12-1 in Game 1 and 4-0 in Game 2. They then lost 4 straight. Stay tuned.

- One more thing about that comparison: 30-5 doesn't do justice to the Indians. They trailed 4-1 in Game 5 when Boston scored 3 runs on 1 hit (and 2 balls hit out of the infield; both were sac flies) in the seventh. They trailed 3-2 in Game 7 until Pedroia's HR in the seventh, then got blown out in the eighth because Wedge stayed with Betancourt about 4 hitters too long. Cleveland lost the series because Carmona and Sabathia went 0-3, and their bullpen finally turned mortal. St Louis lost to Atlanta because Atlanta was better; it just took Atlanta until Games 5-7 to show it.

- The best part of this game was Clayton's conversation with Coco Crisp about the Taco Bell promotion. No wonder baseball can't attract new fans.

Two More Years for LaRussa

As reported in the Post-Dispatch today, Tony LaRussa agreed to terms with the club and will return to manage the Cardinals through the 2009 season. Specifics of the deal were not released.

So that's settled. Now all we need do is find a GM.

And a shortstop.

And two starting pitchers.

And a bench.

And select who will play in the outfield.

I'm ambivalent about Tony's return. There is no question he's one of the great managers in the history of the game. But I think he was driven to experiment this season with players and line-ups based on the number of injuries and because he'd run out of traditional ways to motivate the team. Based on how ungracefully some of the veterans have aged, he needs to continue to give the younger members on the roster playing time, and not just platooning. Or every 5th day. Playing the kids over veterans hasn't exactly been LaRussa's mantra in the past, and I think to be successful next season he's going to have to change his stripes, as it were.

When he's had roster questions that he would fill from within the 40-man roster, like he will with the outfield, Tony's gone about it two ways. The first was to declare an open competition for the spot (a la Royce Clayton and Ozzie Smith). That backfired on him so badly that Ozzie won't speak to him to this day, and doesn't attend Cardinals functions that Tony's at (which, frankly Ozzie, get over it - it was 12 years ago. What are you, 6?). The other was to declare a player had the spot and that was the end of it (a la Braden Looper as a starter last season). That worked out much better.

Unfortunately, the OF situation is sufficiently muddled that declaring who will man each position at this point is probably counter-productive. Tell Edmonds he's the everyday CF? Jimmy hasn't played 150 games since 2005; his hitting is clearly declining, although he's still above average defensively. Will Duncan's defense improve sufficiently to justify leaving him in left, especially with Ludwick and Schumaker proving they can hit at the major league level last season (and both are significant upgrades defensively)? And we haven't mentioned Ankiel yet.

Viva El Birdos (as usual) does a superlative job laying out the players and the options for the 2008 outfield; so what does La Russa do?

(Footnote: I was wrong about Game 7 - Dice K did start, and pitched well for 3 innings. Given his history over the last 3 months, that was a ballsy decision by Francona. And Dice did rise to the occasion, for 9 hitters.)