The San Diego SABR Meeting - Part 2

First, the answers to the trivia questions from the meeting.

1. Tony LaRussa (I got this one on an educated guess; I remember Art Howe was the manager that replaced Tony.)
2. Milt Pappas (I guessed Ferguson Jenkins; he never threw a no-no, as it turns out.)
3. John Sturm (Guessed Mel Zed; yeah, had no clue.)
4. Phil Nevin (guessed Todd Walker. He played for Chicago in 2005 and SD in 2006. Close.)
5. Mark McGwire (got this one)
6. Gene Tenance (guessed Jason Kendall)
7. Dennis Eckersley (guessed 'Davis'; again, no clue)
8. Sammy Sosa (got this one)
9. Yankees and Pirates (guessed Yankees and Cubs, so 1/2 credit)
10. Bob Welch (guessed Ron Darling)
11. Tim Hudson (got this one)
12. Ryne Sandberg (got this one)
13. Dave Stewart (got this one, although pulled the answer straight out of my ass)
14. Derreck Lee (guessed Mark Grace)

The rest of this post will be a summary of Paul DePodesta's remarks and the question/answer period. Mrs. Rant did record the entire session (1 hr 4 min long), save a couple of minutes at the beginning. I have it as a reference for this post, but I'm not going to post it.

Remarks: Started as a van driver at spring training for the Cleveland Indians (had played ball in college). Charted pitches as his first real baseball job for the Indians. Became interested in the process by which players were evaluated. Remembers quite clearly discussions about Jeff Kent - namely that one of the senior baseball men in the Indians organization referred to Kent (and he quoted) as "Jeff Kent has the weakest frigging hack I have ever seen." - which led to his trade to San Francisco (although the Indians got Matt Williams, so it wasn't a total loss). Now he didn't mean to imply the scouts had no clue - they were a very dedicated group that knew their jobs - but it was a process issue. And as he watched Kent become possibly the greatest offensive second baseman in ML history, he had an epiphany about process vs outcome. Baseball industry is focused on outcome; he would focus on process.

The Padres are finely tuned on process. He discussed process vs outcome on a good/bad scale (ex: Good process, bad outcome). The Padres constantly evaluate their process to ensure it's sound, and change it as necessary.

End Remarks.

Question (Q): Could the Padres process be compared to industry standards like ISO 9000?
Paul D (PD): Not really, although it is similar.

Q: Is Kevin Towers as old school as he projects, or does he use the process?
PD: KT is very focused on the process, although he looks at intangibles too. He's realistic. You're never going to be right on every player. Past performance is not indicative of future effort. Need to look at how a player conducts themselves during adverse times; it may be he has good process but is just suffering under bad circumstances (bad outcomes). Cited Heath Bell as an example of a guy thriving in the right circumstance because his process (how he conducted his day-to-day business) was sound.

Q: Game 163 (playoff at Colorado). The last play. WTF? (liberal paraphrase of the question there)
PD: "Umpire?" (laughter). He didn't really know either. Michael Barrett adamant that Holloway didn't touch the plate at all (although Barrett didn't tag him, either). PD did mention the HR San Diego got credit for earlier in the game that actually hit the top of the fence and bounced back, so I guess it all evens out.

Q: Have teams become more homogenous in their evaluations, or is there still a lot of scattered philosophies?
PD: There's no one good way to evaluate players. Lots of teams do it lots of different ways. He gave kudos to the Braves - whose 14 straight division championships is a feat that hasn't gotten the recognition it should based on its difficulty - for doing a great job during those years drafting high school players who eventually made it to the majors. Related an anecdote about Billy Beane, basically that Beane had over 20 years experience in baseball as a player, scout, coach, and GM, but he couldn't walk into a HS game, point to a player and say 'that guy's a future major leaguer'. Oakland found another way to draft quality talent beyond picking high schoolers.

Q: Is Boston really that good?
PD: The do a great job. They are very process oriented. The difference is they have resources most other teams don't. Epstein (who cut his teeth with the Padres) has done a great job. Also Brian Cashman with the Yankees has done superior work over the past few years.

Q: Can you take us through the anamoty of a trade?
PD: Kevin Towers' charisma, relationships with other GMs helps. Most teams are willing to deal with you based on personal relationships between GMs and if they don't feel they've been screwed in the past. For instance, Texas has basically told the Padres they won't trade with them anymore (and since the Rangers gave up Chris Young (All-Star), Adrian Gonzalez (All-Star), and Terrmel Sledge for Adam Eaton (now with Philadelphia), Akinori Otsuka (elbow surgery, out 2nd half of 2007 and now all of 2008) and a minor leaguer, I wonder why?).

PD did also say that 90% or better of trades discussed don't happen; perhaps 9 of 10 between teams, and 49 of 50 floated as ideas in the organization, are just talk. As an aside, the fellas over at U.S.S. Mariner recently alluded to this fact as why they don't post any old trade rumor on their site; there's just too much uncertainty. Based on Paul's remark, they're very wise men.

Q: Is there conflict between what the process calls for and what individuals can do? (Specific example cited was drawing walks)
PD: People have different abilities at the plate. You have to work with a players strengths, and if his strengths don't fit what your process deems important, well then you modify your process so that player can succeed. Ex: Jason Giambi was the prototypical patience/power hitter when with the A's; he'd walk 120 times a year. Miguel Tejada, however, wasn't going to walk, wasn't going to take a lot of pitches, so the organization put him in a position in the batting order to maximize his ability and potential for success. (Editorial comment: I think this is a very sound business philosophy.)

Q: What do you think about how Bud Black uses his relief pitchers?
PD: Defused the discussion by saying the following: As far as the roster makeup goes, everyone has input, but Kevin Towers makes the final decision. During the game, the coaches have input, but Bud Black makes the decisions. KT isn't going to call the dugout in the sixth and say, "hey get Cla Meredith up." Also decisions in-game are driven by the roster, and the physical abilities of the player on that day in that situation.

Q: How many minor league teams to the Padres have and how many do they own outright?
PD: Seven, which includes teams in the Dominican Republic. The Padres own 2 at the rookie level, and have working agreements with the rest (A through AAA).

Q: Of the Rule V draftees this year, how many have a realistic shot at making the team?
PD: We think 2 of the 3 we took have a shot. Probably one reliever and one other.

Q: What do you look at when evaluating a player
PD: There's so much information - on players, on the organization, on future payroll (which isn't released outside the team), as well as personal data not widely available on a particular individual. (Editorial: It seems evaluation of players goes well beyond the statistics we all use In hindsight this seems obvious.) The Padres are among the top 5 or 6 teams in MLB in spending on players, and the value assigned to a player drives his salary. For instance, they might not feel so bad paying a guy $8 million if his skill set is valued at $12 million.

Q: Stolen bases - what percentage do you use to say a guy is a successful basestealer?
PD: When he's safe (laughter). Actually, 75-80% success rate is considered successful, although he'd prefer some margin (say 85%).

Q: Contract negotiations with Khalil Greene? How's it going?
PD: Slow. It's a dialogue, and both sides are talking. Khalil has removed himself from the process, and that's fine - we're negotiating with his agent.


More questions (and answers) later in the week. Thursday is United Cardinal Blogger Project day, and I'll be a posting as a part of that effort. The rest of the Q&A will be up Friday.

The San Diego SABR meeting - Part 1

With the most exciting news out of St Louis being the signing of Todd Wellemeyer to a one-year deal, I turn to last Saturday's Society of American Baseball research meeting - at the PETCO Park Community Room.

I have a lot of information to put out, so to avoid making this an uncomfortably long post (both for you as the reader to slug through at work, and for me to type, as well as organize a coherent thought), I'm going to break the post into 3 parts: one tonight, one tomorrow, and one Wednesday. So sit back, relax, and hopefully learn something. Because I did this weekend.

The keynote speaker was, of course, Paul DePodesta. Mrs. Rant and I actually made it to the meeting 10 minutes early - no small feat, considering we have 2 small children and had to drop them off at the sitter. Amazingly we were able to get everyone up, showered, and out of the house by 0810. This feat was not without a small price: Mrs Rant didn't get breakfast, and I got to change shirts twice courtesy of my precision bombing youngest. He's a crack shot with the spit.

Anyway, despite some initial anxiety about being left at the sitter, my sons perserved - considering the sitter was their Grandparents, and they can get away with pretty much anything (as well as be stuffed with all sorts of sugary goodies). Off we go!

After listening to DePodesta speak for about 5 minutes, it's easy to see how he got the GM slot with the Dodgers. He has an easy going manner, an engaging personality, is funny without forcing it, and communicates very well with his audience. I'm going to cover the Q&A period over the next two posts; in all, he answered over two dozen questions from the audience on a wide variety of topics, from general baseball interest to specific moves the Padres have made recently. Paul started speaking about 0930 and spent almost 2 hours with us. I'm quite sure if our chapter president hadn't cut the session short, we'd have peppered him with questions all afternoon - and he'd have answered them. Well worth the price of admission (which was free, BTW).

The Community Room at PETCO faces Park Boulevard. To get to it, you would walk past the main entrance, past the ticket office, past the group ticket office, and the last sliding glass window you come to is the room. Typically it appears to be used as an employee lounge. The Padres provide free beverages to their employees, and this room serves as kind of a warehouse for that purpose. They graciously allowed us to utilize this service; let me say their coffee maker is first rate - and the coffee isn't bad, either.

After Paul spoke we had a presentation by Tammy Lechner, 'photojournalist/author', and her book Our Team, Our Dream: A Cub Fan's Journey into Baseball's Greatest Romance. How was it? Imagine your least favorite Aunt, the one who lives alone with 27 cats, inviting you over to see her latest vacation photos. It was that bad. She faced the screen and scrolled through the slides. And mumbled. Frankly the funniest moment was when the Mrs challenged her by questioning whether Cardinals/Cubs is really a rivalry, since it's so one-sided. Caught Tammy completely off guard, generated several chuckles from members, and irritated the 2 Cub fans in the room. High comedy. Never got a straight answer, either.

I should mention, at these meetings those who present on recently published books also bring copies of their book to sell. Needless to say we didn't pick up Tammy's book.

After a short break to splash some water on our collective faces, we had a trivia contest. One of the members put together a list of questions, 14 for this meeting, and we see who can answer the most. Here are the questions from Saturday:

Note: All questions involve the Cubs, A's, or Babe Dahlgren

1. Who managed the A's before Art Howe?
2. Who is the last Cub to pitch a no-hitter?
3. Who was the next regular Yankee 1B after Babe Dahlgren? (His MLB career lasted one year)
4. Who played for the Padres in 2005 and the Cubs in 2006?
5. Who is the only Athletic 1B to win a Gold Glove?
6. What pitcher was a member of both the 1984 Cubs and 1988 A's?
7. Who is the only catcher to lead both leagues in bases on balls?
8. Who was the first Cubs player to amass 425 total bases in a season?
9. Babe Dahlgren twice led the league in games played; once for an AL team and once for an NL team. Name the teams.
10. What pitcher who was denied a start in the World Series due to an earthquake won the Cy Young Award the next year?
11. Of the Barry Zito-Tim Hudson-Mark Mulder A's trio, whose major league pitching debut came the earliest?
12. What Hall of Famer retired after the 1994 and unretired in 1996?
13. What pitcher holds the record for balks in a season?
14. Who is the last Cub to win a batting title?

Take a crack at those. I will post the answers tomorrow.

Why did all the questions all involve Dahlgren, Cubs, and A's? It matched the pedigree of our 3 presenters for the meeting.

Now at the last meeting, I tied with one other guy for the most answered, but lost the prize (A DVD of World Series games, I forget for what team) on the coin flip. This time no such bad luck. My prize: Sports Illustrated from September 23, 1985. Ozzie Smith graced the cover of that issue - and signed it. Very cool.

(there would be a photo here of the cover, but my camera is on the fritz).

Lastly, we had a presentation from Matt Dahlgren, grandson of Babe Dahlgren, on his new book, Rumor in Town. This was also worth hearing about. Visit the website www.rumorintown.com for more information, but suffice it to say Dahlgren was one of the better defensive first basemen of his generation. He came up with the Red Sox in 1935, was purchased by the Yankees prior to the 1937 season, and was a vital cog in the 1937-1939 World Series Champion Yankee teams. He had his best offensive year as a Yankee in 1940, but was sold outright to the Boston Braves before the 1941 season. Boston was the second worst team in the NL in 1940; only the hapless Phillies kept them out of the cellar. Odd, right?

From there an odyssey of trades, releases, and the like followed: sold to the Cubs during the 1941 season, then sold to the Browns (who returned him to Chicago) and later the Dodgers during the 1942 season, traded to the Phillies before the 1943 season (where he was an All-Star), and traded to Pittsburgh before the 1944 season. He was finally sold to the Browns again before 1946 (who kept him this time), but hurt his shoulder diving for a line drive early in the season; it would be his last at the Major League level.

Why did he go from being on a champion team to being shuttled around like a lot of baggage? Because of a rumor he smoked marijuana. How did the rumor get started? You'd need to read the book to find out.

Now I am not stumping for Matt Dahlgren to increase his book sales; he has no idea I'm writing this, and I have not and will not receive any compensation for this review. The story, however, is compelling - from describing the power a rumor has to destroy someone's reputation to the extraordinary character it takes for a man (or a woman for that matter) to fight the rumor as long as it persists. I'm looking forward to reading the full story.

The meeting broke up around 1300. We headed back to rescue Mrs Rant's parents from our two energetic boys.

If you have a chance to attend one of these meetings, I would highly encourage it - it's a great forum for folks like us, who love the game of baseball, to get together and discuss the game of baseball, as well as see what research is being done out there. Virtually every part of the country has a SABR chapter. Check out the society's home page for more details.

Tomorrow we'll post the first 14 questions posed to (and answered by) Paul DePodesta.

And I'm Off by a Day

Case in point about what I described yesterday: I thought last night was Thursday night. Wow.

So a real short post tonight.

I now understand why the Cardinals went out and signed Josh Phelps - AP's balky elbow. His offensive numbers have always been amazing. To learn he was doing it with a right arm he can't fully extend is remarkable. Since most of us have written 2008 off as a lost year, if his arm really gives him trouble this would be the year to shut it down and do the surgery/long rehab prepping for 2009.

That said, anything can happen; so I'm glad he's going to start the year. But if he can't go because the pain's too great, at least we have a back-up with some seasoning who can hit for power. And a lot more power than Spiezio can.

The other note from today is Mike Matheny will be in camp as a roving instructor.

That's it. Told you it would be short.

[Update 1/25 0810]: And C70 had the information on his site the whole time. Apparently, mentally I'm orbiting Jupiter this week. I'd link to it, but my work settings won't allow it (that's another story altogether)

Not Much of a Post, But Anyway...

I don't have much free time these days. For the past year, my masters program has been set up such that both classes had homework due on Mondays, leaving the weekend to do all the reading/homework. I had become accustomed to doing the reading during the week and the problems on the weekend. This quarter, one class has decided to makehomework due 0900 Tuesdays, the other 1600 on Thursdays. Of course, I'm not working ahead, so I'm doing a lot more work at night during the week.

Which cuts into my blogging time.

That, coupled with the usual silliness and attempts to find/buy a new house, well, not much time is left over. So I apologize for being away. This will be a mish-mash of my thoughts on some recent happenings.

1. Ankiel signed for 1 year, $900K. Seems fair.

2. Molina signed for 4 years, $12Mil. Seems eminently fair. Most in the blog-o-sphere put greater emphasis on offensive statistics than defense, or so it seems; how else to explain some of the 'dump Molina, promote Brian Anderson' things I've read? I still firmly believe you win with pitching and defense. Molina handles the staff well and his defense is HOF-caliber. Great signing.

3. AP bans KTVI from his press conference at the Winter Warm-Up. I giggled (in a masculine way, of course) when I read that. Bill Simmons discusses Eff-You Touchdowns? This was the Eff-You press conference. Nice to see the irresponsible have to face the consequences of their actions. Unfortunate that it was taken out on a reporter/camerman who most likely had nothing to do with reporting the lie about AP being in the Mitchell Report. Pujols should sue the NY affiliate and KTVI for slander.

4. LaRussa jabs at Kennedy for missing the Winter Warm-Up. Unbelievable. Why take a guy to task publicly, especially over something stupid like missing a meeting (which, essentially, is what the Winter Warm-Up is)? This, coupled with the calling out of Rolen earlier this off-season, are two red flags for me. LaRussa isn't acting like a leader; he's acting like someone suffering from acute paranoia, lashing out at everyone. It's ironic to me that when he had his DUI the organization stood behind him publicly. I don't know what happened behind closed doors; I would expect/hope he had the Riot Act read to him, considering his position in the organization and his responsibilities to his men. Obviously he didn't learn from that example.

5. Not doing too well in the Tournament of Champions; so far, 1930 lost to 2000 (and got swept to boot). Eight series to go, so there's still time to tear it up. See C70 at the bat's website for overall status. I was hoping he'd post the game results (not the VEB writeup or box score, just the score), but he's not. Oh, well. Maybe I'll do that here.


Saturday's the SABR meeting here in SD, down at PETCO. If you're in the neighborhood, stop by (admission should be free, but don't hold me to that). Details are on the Ted Williams SABR web link in the margin. I'll be there; I'll be the guy wearing a Padres gray road jersey (camouflage, you see) with a 2004 and 2006 St Louis WS press pin on it (can't go completely native). I'll also be taking copious notes during DePodesta's presentation. As promised, I will post a summary of his talk here.

All-Time Cardinals Simulation Tournament

I'm going to assume most (all) folks who find there way here also read Viva El Birdos on a regular basis.

They're going to try and conduct a tournament in which the best St Louis baseball teams (and I have to say St Louis; the Cardinals came into existence as we know them in 1892, and this tournament includes teams from before that) square off to see who's the best team. An interesting idea.

So I entered some picks. Mine are no doubt correct and I look forward to my many congratulatory emails as a prescient prognosticator.

Just kidding. I know next to nothing about the teams from the 1880s, which makes this interesting - especially since the game was played differently then than it is now.

However, for lack of a better topic, here is who I picked and why:

Game 1: 1887 vs 1996

I've long considered the 1996 Cardinals the greatest over-achieving team of my lifetime, narrowly edging the 1987 club. This is a team that finished 19 games under .500 in 1995 and 16 games under in 1997; they caught lightning in a bottle for one great season. Although I did enjoy the 2 NLDS games I made it to (Game 2 in St L, which is a good post topic for a later time, and Game 3 in SD) that year. The 1887 club on the 3rd of 4 consecutive American Association pennants. No brainer.
Pick: 1887

Game 2: 1888 vs 1987

This was tough because the 1987 team was fun. They won 17 of 18 before the All-Star break that season; and during a memorable September series against the hated Mets, they rallied from 3 down in the ninth to tie and scored 2 in the 10th to win the opener 6-4. In 2 innings they went from being 1/2 game up to being 2 and 1/2 up with 13 to play. When they beat Gooden 8 -1 the next day a dagger had been shoved through the heart of the Mets. That said, it was a patchwork and bailing-wire team that finally quit hitting in the post-season. I don't think they have enough to beat a good 1888 squad.
Pick: 1888

Game 3: 2005 vs 2002

Another tough one. The 2002 squad was galvanized by the death of Darryl Kile; the 2005 squad played tough, alert, aggressive baseball. Both lost a tough LCS. Both teams are very similar (and have some of the same players on them: Rolen, AP, Edmonds, etc), and it may be more of a tip-of-the-cap to the 2001 team (which I believe was better than they generally get credit for being), but I decided to vote against the 2005 team. No clear reason why.
Pick: 2002

Game 4: 1930 vs 2000

The 1930 club lost to the last of Connie Mack's great A's teams, then beat them the following year. The 2000 club avenged the 1996 LCS loss to Atlanta in the Division Series and then rolled over against the Mets. Any club from the Gasehouse Gang Period, even if they weren't technically the Gasehouse Gang yet, gets my vote.
Pick: 1930

Game 5: 1985 vs 1887

My favorite Cardinal team of my lifetime against a team I don't know anything about. Seemed fairly easy.
Pick: 1985

(You'll notice not a lot of scientific thought went into these picks.)

Game 6: 2004 vs 1888

My second-favorite Cardinal team against another team I don't know much about. The only thing that bothered me about this pick is Chris Carpenter isn't available to pitch. However, I think this Cardinals team at the zenith of their powers, and with Walker/Pujols/Rolen/Edmonds in the heart of their lineup is too tough a matchup for the 1888 squad.
Pick: 2004

Game 7: 2002 vs 1943

Aside from the 1885-1888 teams, the 1942-44 teams are the only Cardinals teams to win more than 2 consecutive pennants. The Yankees avenged their 5-game loss in 1942 in the 43 Fall Classic. 2002? Were crushed by Barry Bonds' big giant head in the NLCS. I'll take the Golden Age of Baseball toughness here. Not to mention Stan the Man.
Pick: 1943

Game 8: 1930 vs 1885

Both teams are a year away from winning the World Series. The 1885 squad is at the start of their run; the 1930 squad has won 3 pennants in 5 years, and will win 2 of the next 4, so a solid team. This was the toughest call. In the end, I almost flipped a coin, but decided to go with the wily 19th century team - figuring they'll be a lot more bunting and baserunning from them to keep the 1930 team honest.
Pick: 1885

Game 9: 1968 vs 1928

Let's see: Gibson vs Rajah. Now those would be interesting at bats to watch. But since Gibby was the best pitcher in the solar system that year (no apologies to Denny McLain), I don't see how the 1928 team will get many hits. And Gibby will probably pitch 3 times in the series. I like my chances.
Pick: 1968

Well do this again once these games have been completed and the 16-team field is filled out.

Lastly, this will be my last call for proposed questions to Paul DePodesta. So if you've got something you'd like to have asked, send it to me this weekend.

A Quick Note on Rolen and Glaus

A couple of quick notes - I plan on doing a longer post tonight for tomorrow's "extravaganza".

Scott Rolen was introduced by the Blue Jays yesterday, and declined to discuss his relationship with LaRussa. Which I think is the height of professionalism. Well Done, Scott.

Mozeliak, discussing Glaus, specifically mentioned he was gotten to provide protection for AP in the lineup, as reported in today's Post-Dispatch. Which does make a lot of sense, but isn't as elegant as my lefty-righty-lefty-righty lineup posted a couple of days ago. The other thing that lineup didn't do was find a place for Colby Rasmus. Despite all the buzz about Rasmus in the blog-o-sphere, I don't know all that much about him; some research is in order to figure out where in the lineup he'll best fit. For now I'll stick him in the eighth spot. Revised lineup:

Kennedy
Ankiel
Pujols
Glaus
Duncan
Molina
Rasmus
Izturis
Pitcher

Rolen Flees to Canada

Scott Rolen, like any American avoiding confrontation, has moved to Canada.

{Moving to avoid potential bolt of lightning}

Seriously, Rolen escaped a noxious situation in St Louis when the Cardinals and Blue Jays agreed to swap injured third sackers. Cardinals get Troy Glaus, who's younger than Rolen and packs some thunder in his bat (he's right handed).

Glaus missed most of the second half last year with a foot injury, identified recently as plantar fascitis, the same thing that afflicted Pujols in 2005/06. He did pass a physical (as did Rolen).

I saw the rumors swirling about this deal but decided to refrain from comment until it was done, which it is as of this afternoon. Also I'd been swept away by Charger mania...until they won yesterday and now get to have their asses handed to them by New England (again).

Glaus was a fantasy stud last year until he got hurt. Rolen's shoulders haven't been completely right since his collision in the 2002 NLDS. Granted, he had productive years in 2003 and 2004, and his collision with Hee Sop Choi is the one that really screwed him up; but I wonder if his shoulder would have collapsed as badly as it did if it hadn't been injured 3 years prior.

On paper this does look like a good trade for the Cardinals.

I will be interested to hear what Rolen has to say at his next press conference, if he brings up the situation with LaRussa at all. If it were me, I'd let it go publicly, but use it to motivate me to a couple of great seasons in Toronto.

As for Glaus - the man can certainly hit, and his glove is at least average (several prognosticators say it's above average). Not much of a drop off from what Rolen could do; some would argue he's an improvement. Where will he hit in the lineup? Rolen hit fourth until his production sagged. Let's assume Tony won't hit Glaus 4th until he gets some familiarity with the new league, so the order could look like this:

SS Izturis
LF Duncan
1B Pujols
RF Ankiel
3B Glaus
CF Schumaker
C Molina
2B Kennedy
Pitchers spot

Just a guess, because I'd alternate my righty/lefty power. Ankiel's a better overall hitter than Duncan, and Duncan thrived hitting in front of Pujols in 2006 (which shouldn't be a surprise; I'd thrive hitting in front of Pujols). Glaus starts in an RBI slot in the order but doesn't have to shoulder the load of being the primary RBI guy right out the chute. The rest of the order I just filled in as I thought appropriate.

So this piece of off-season drama is resolved. Thanks, Scott Rolen, for the memories and the effort. Welcome, Troy Glaus. Good Luck.

All Star Games and the Post Season

Today the Post-Dispatch reported the Cardinals completed a minor-league deal for Josh Phelps, late of the Pittsburgh Pirates. Terms were not disclosed, although the agreement did include an invitation to spring training for Phelps. He's only 29.

His best seasons were 2002-2003 with Toronto, when as a part time player (never more than 119 games), he hit about .270 with 17 HR and 62 RBI (on average). He was traded during the 2004 season to Cleveland, and has bounced around a lot since then (Tampa Bay, Detroit, Yankees, and finally Pittsburgh). He spent all of 2006 in the Detroit farm system.

The Cardinals suffer from a dearth of right-handed power, so if this kid can make the team as a bench player/pinch hitter that's a plus in my opinion.

Other than that, it's been quiet. So in searching for things to write about, I thought I'd dust off my thoughts on the All-Star game as it currently stands.

When the 2002 All-Star Game completed 9 innings tied at 7, Commissioner Bud Selig had two choices: continue playing the game to conclusion (as baseball rules require), or stop the game. Complicating matters, each manager had managed their roster to ensure all players had appeared in the game, as had become the custom; neither one had a pitcher left in reserve, meaning the one throwing the ninth inning would be back on the mound for the 10th. and 11th. and so on...

Bud chose the latter of the two options, and baseball quickly became a laughingstock. They couldn't even put on an All-Star game right.

To stop the laughter, and prevent this situation from happening again, MLB instituted the 'this time it counts' slogan and declared the league winning the All-Star game would have home field advantage during the World Series.

Fast forward to 2007. The AL has dominated the whole game, and leads 5-2 in the bottom of the ninth, but with the bases empty and 2 out a rally starts. Suddenly the NL's scored two runs, Putz and K-Rod have walked the bases loaded, and a single wins the game. NL manager Tony LaRussa has Albert Pujols available to hit. He sticks with Aaron Rowland, later citing concerns that AP needed to be available if the game went extra innings. Rowland flies out; game ends.

Although ripe for questioning (and it was heavily second-guessed at the time), I'm not going to dissect Tony's decision process for that at-bat. The real issue here is that AB had larger than it should significance because of the rules in place governing the post-season. Instead of just trying to win the game, Rowland had the weight of an entire league (not to mention 10 years of futility in these games) riding on it. All because of a poor decision made by Selig in 2002.

That wasn't fair to Rowland and it isn't a fair way to determine who hosts 4 of the potential 7 games played in the World Series. So let's fix it.

Here's how:
1. The team with the best overall record will have home field advantage for the World Series.
2. Teams making the playoffs as the wild card are never allowed to have home field advantage in the World Series, unless both teams in the Series are wild cards; then we revert to rule #1.

Now, this would marginalize the All-Star game again, right? And potentially set us up for another 2002 debacle. Possibly. So change the mentality of the All-Star game and bend the rules a little.

Here's how to avoid the 2002 debacle:
1. Manage the game like it's a regular season game. In 1955 Musial pinch hit for Del Ennis in the 4th inning - and played the rest of the game, winning it with a HR in the 12th. Current rules require the starters to play 2 innings and get an AB. If the starter is a liability (like Bonds), substitute for him as soon as you're allowed. If the starter is the best player in the league at that position (like Ichiro) leave him in there.

2. Designate one pitcher as the long man upfront. He and his team should know so they can plan for it. He then becomes the guy to work a lot of innings if the game goes into extras.

3. Remember, this is still an exhibition - so allow one player who has been taken out of the game to be eligible to return for each 2 extra innings played. Since rule #2 took care of pitching, most likely this would be a hitter who can then be used as situations demand it.

4. Players and managers mayl need incentive to take it seriously now that 'this time it counts' is removed. So set aside some of the post-season money for the All-Stars. The winning side would get paid, and slightly more than players on the losing team. It won't be much, but hell, nothing motivates like cold hard cash, right?

Leagues could even dedicate the game to a favorite charity or cause and donate the team's winnings to that charity or cause. Talk about a PR bonanza.

What do you think? Post your thoughts in the comments. And keep the questions for DePodesta coming...

Gossage Gets Call; McGwire Treads Water

First, some notes: Thanks to Larry over at Viva El Birdos for posting a plug and link to my GM question article. His note is here if you hadn't read it. I'm looking forward to reading the questions I get. Also, here's the link to the San Diego SABR site announcing the meeting, so you don't think I'm just full of shit.

Second, you may have noticed I've been posting every day of late. This is something I'm trying to do this year (call it a resolution, if you like). We'll see how long I'm able to stay with it. My intentions are to do short posts every day but Tuesday and Friday; on those days the posts should be a bit longer.

Third, the Post Dispatch article today discussed the three Cardinals going to arbitration shortly: Ankiel, Yadi, and Wellemeyer. Of the $6M the team freed up by trading Edmonds to the Cardinals, figure $1.4 was spent on Miles; how much of the remainder will be used on these 3 players? I would expect (hope) Yadi gets the lion's share of the remaining money. I don't care if he hits in the 240s (220s?) and drives in less than 50 runs a year; the fact that no one will run on him means the double play is always in order - a vital defensive piece for a team that stresses pitch to contact. He probably prevents as many runs as he drives in.

Finally, the HOF results are in: Goose Gossage gets voted in this year. A lot of observers saw his selection as a near certainty after Bruce Sutter made the cut last year. Sutter was a tremendous reliever, and brought a pitch to the ML level (the split-finger fastball) that revolutionized pitching (too strong? perhaps), but Gossage was the most feared reliever in the game in the late 70s/early 80s. Congratulations to the Goose and that most excellent mustache of his, which I hope is prominently displayed on his plaque.

Mark McGwire? Got exactly as many votes this year as last year. Obviously it means he didn't get in, and will be on next year's ballot. More ominously it means those who didn't vote for him last year (and this year) probably never will. If Roger Clemens has really thrown his last pitch, it will be veeerrry interesting to see the balloting in 5 years, since I expect McGwire to still be on the ballot.

Keep the questions coming.....

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.