Random Redbird Reasoning

Wrapping it up

2006-02-08T08:32:00.000-06:00

It what has become blatently obvious over the past 3 months, I am going to have to officially shut down my blog. Between work, hobbies, and going back to school for another degree, I don't have the time required to committ to writing on a regular basis. And rather than having a few of you check in from time to time to see if I've finished up my Jocketty trade analysis - I haven't - I would rather just close shop.

I've been enjoying reading Cardinilly and Viva el Birdos - they do a much better job of writing than I ever could, and are much more committed to consistently providing content. You'll see me sticking my head in to both of those blogs and posting comments from time to time. (Robb is the name that I post under.)

Not Quite

2005-10-21T07:34:00.000-05:00

I actually was fortunate enough to go to Game 6 on Wednesday night, thanks to a friend who got tickets and offered me an extra. ("Well, I'll think about it....") We were sitting 12 rows behind home plate and were so jacked about the game that we got there more than 2 hours before game time - in plenty of time to see the Cardinals take batting practice.

Before the game started, I realized that we were sitting right behind Greg Mathews. I didn't say anything to him all night, as I just kind of assumed that he'd want to be left alone. I will note right now, though, for the record, that no one appeared to come to him and say anything all night (other than his friends, of course.) And I must further admit that I didn't remember him having such a solid year in 1987 - so solid, in fact, that he started (and won) Game 1 of the NLCS that season. So I honestly felt kind of bad for not saying something to him during the game. You'd think that a key part of an NL champion team in St. Louis should have at least been recognized by someone. Whatever the case, you'll see that I'm now sponsoring his page on baseball-reference.com. Call it my small part to help remind people. And if any of you happen know Mr. Mathews, send me his email address. I'd like to say something to him properly.

Anyway, I'm not going to break down the game or the series with much, if any, detail. That's been done to death already. I will, however, say that the game was somewhat surreal last night. When Marquis allowed the 4th Astro run of the game, it was pretty obvious that the Cardinals weren't going to get it done. That's when - at least, in my section - people seemed to shift gears from thinking about 2005 to thinking about Busch stadium. Yes, there was still hope that the Cardinals would come back, but it didn't seem all that realistic, or maybe even important.

Once the final out was made, the entire crowd just kind of stood around in silence. People were taking pictures of each other in the stadium for one last time, saying their good-byes. Many stuck around for the video presentation of highlights of Busch (complete with cheesy music - think NBC and the Olympics.)

The post-game mood in the stadium reminded me of a funeral for a long-suffering relative. Fans knew this day was coming, and had known so for a long time. Once the inevitable had finally happened, they were choosing to remember the good rather than focus on the sadness - not only of the stadium, but of the 2005 season. In fact, my personal impression was that the season being over was minor in comparison to the loss of Busch Stadium, the only home that many of us have known for the Cardinals.

My friend and I left shortly after the video presentation, before the players came back onto the field. It felt like the end of an era - and, in reality, I guess it was.

Look for me to finish up the Walk Jocketty trade series sometime over the next few weeks. Yes, I know - I've said that before. And then we'll start looking at contract situations, free agents, and 2006.

Win Expectancy

2005-10-18T00:08:00.000-05:00

Many of you have probably seen this little tool floating around. In a nutshell, Phil Birnbaum took the time to gather the boxscores for every game between 1979 and 1990, with the help of retrosheet. Chris Shea then put together this nifty little calculator that allows you to put in the game situation as an input. It then gives you, as an output, the number of games between 1979 and 1990 that had the same situation, the number of times the team won, and thus a percentage of liklihood that a team can win a game in a certain situation. Check it out for last night's game.

9th inning

Start of the Inning - 5.6% Chance of a Cardinal Victory
John Rodriguez strikeout - 2.4%
John Mabry strikeout - 0.9%
David Eckstein single - 2.7%
David Eckstein steal - 1.1%
Jim Edmonds walk - 5.3%
Albert Pujols Home Run - 82.9%
Reggie Sanders strikeout - 81.1%

Obviously, the system isn't perfect, and the numbers shouldn't be looked at as pure odds. Not every team during the 11 year span in question had Brad Lidge as a closer, or Albert Pujols as a hitter. And the fact that Eckstein actually hurt the teams chances of winning by stealing 2nd is a fluke in the data.

But the fact remains. The Cardinals, with none on and 2 outs, had less than a 1 in 100 chance of winning that game according to this data. On the road, in the playoffs, facing a team that hadn't blown a 9th inning game all season? It was likely even more improbable.

Wow.

Well...

2005-10-17T23:20:00.000-05:00

That was fun.

I said this earlier today:

The truth of the matter is, the wins are more enjoyable when they are earned.
How much fun was it to see the Cardinals win Games 6 and 7 in the NLCS last year
when they appeared dead after Game 5? Not to mention the walk-off home run by
Edmonds in Game 6, the game saving catch by Jimmy in Game 7. None of those
moments would have been nearly as memorable had they come in Games 3 and 4 of a sweep. You have to walk the rocks to see the mountain view, as they say.

For those of you that turned off the game after the Berkman home run - you didn't go through the pain, so you can't enjoy the pleasure nearly as much.

Un-freaking-real.

Keep the Faith

2005-10-17T00:18:00.000-05:00

I'm starting to wonder if I have the mental make-up to enjoy the playoffs. I mean - the Game 2 loss kicked my butt. The Game 3 loss didn't hurt as badly, but only because I thought the Cardinals would win Game 4. Which, in turn, really got me in a great mood last night/this morning...

I think, in a nutshell, the Cardinals recent trends in the playoffs has conditioned me to think this; once a trend starts, it seems to continue. Call it La Russa's law of playoff dynamics. Look at what La Russa's playoff teams have done in history.

1983 (White Sox) - 1-3 in the ALCS
1988 (Athletics) - 4-0 in ALCS, 1-4 in WS
1989 (Athletics) - 4-0 in ALCS, 4-1 in WS
1990 (Athletics) - 4-0 in ALCS, 0-4 in WS
1992 (Athletics) - 2-4 in ALCS
1996 (Cardinals) - 3-0 in NLDS, 3-4 in NLCS (after winning 3 of the first 4)
2000 (Cardinals) - 3-0 in NLDS, 1-4 in NLCS
2001 (Cardinals) - 2-3 in NLDS
2002 (Cardinals) - 3-0 in NLDS, 1-4 in NLCS
2004 (Cardinals) - 3-1 in NLDS, 4-3 in NLCS, 0-4 in WS
2005 (Cardinals) - 3-0 in NLDS, 3-3 in WS

What do you see? Very few La Russa led teams do anything half way. They tend to either sweep or be swept. Which is especially strange when you consider that four of those teams (1988, 1990, 2004, and 2005) were 100 win teams. The teams that appear to be outliers to "Tony's Law" were the 1992 A's (2 wins in a series?), the 1996 Cardinals (who built a lead then blew it), the 2001 Cardinals (just missed winning that one), and the 2004 Cardinals (dug out of a 3-2 series deficit in the NLCS.)

It gets even stranger if you break it down a bit further. The 1996 Cardinals, as I mentioned above, actually had a 3 games to 1 series lead in the NLCS before dropping 3 straight. Which means, they went 6-1 to start the playoffs, 0-3 to finish. 2004? Similar. They started the playoffs off by going 5-1, only to go 2-7 over the last 9 games of October. In fact, if you break all of his playoff teams into "hot" and "cold" categories, it looks like this.

Hot, 37-3 (.925 winning percentage)
Cold, 10-39 (.256 winning percentage)

There you have it. Tony's teams have gotten off to hot starts, winning 93% of their games. Once this hot streak lasted through the World Series. Three times it never started. Generally, however, it ends during the LCS. Why? Anyone? I have trouble thinking that the manager can guide a team into the playoffs, as well as (usually) past the 1st round, only to forget how to win.

OK, so enough of that stuff. Back to 2005. Carpenter goes tonight, and if there's anyone on the staff that you'd want going in a must win, it's him. And you know if the Cardinals can send this thing back to Busch, anything can happen.

Which brings me back to my initial train of thought. I'm not sure if I can handle the playoffs. The truth of the matter is, the wins are more enjoyable when they are earned. How much fun was it to see the Cardinals win Games 6 and 7 in the NLCS last year when they appeared dead after Game 5? Not to mention the walk-off home run by Edmonds in Game 6, the game saving catch by Jimmy in Game 7. None of those moments would have been nearly as memorable had they come in Games 3 and 4 of a sweep. You have to walk the rocks to see the mountain view, as they say.

In 2004, the Red Sox were down 3-0 in the ALCS before going on to win the World Series. In 2003, the Marlins were down 3-1 in the NLCS before going on to win the World Series. Both of those teams had 2 must-win games on the road in their respective LCS', with the Marlins having to do so in Games 6 and 7. By comparison, the Cardinals having to win one in Houston pales.

Of course, there is the final thing of having to beat Pettitte, Oswalt, and Clemens in consecutive starts. That's not going to be easy - but it's been done as recently as 3 months ago by none other than the Cardinals.

July 15th - Pettitte Start, Cards win 4-3
July 16th - Oswalt Start, Cards win 4-2
July 17th - Clemens Start, Cards win 3-0

Yes, I'm grasping at straws here. In a nutshell? Win tonight. Worry about Game 6 if that happens.

What a Difference

2005-10-14T07:24:00.000-05:00

Funny how one's mood can be drastically different over a 12 hour (or less) period.

Yesterday, before the game, I was the fan of a 4-0 playoff team that hadn't trailed in a game. They were getting ready to face a starter they'd beaten up on this year, and countering with a guy that had given the Astros problems. I was wondering, at the time, if the Cardinals would win the NLCS in 5 games or 6!

Last night, by about the 8th inning, I was resolved to the Cardinals losing the game, potentially losing Sanders, and hoping they could find a way to win a game in Houston to send this series back to St. Louis. Talk about a roller coaster.

I don't have a bunch of stats or theories to pour over this morning. I'm more interested in venting a little frustration and getting my mind back into focus.

First, the Cardinals played very un-Cardinal like last night. It started in the first inning, when Grudz didn't cover 1st base on a Taveras bunt. That worked out just fine, but it was a sign of things to come.

As in, the 1st Astro run was scored on a passed ball, which was very un-Molina like. Things like that happen, but the game would have had a different feel in the 8th if it had been a tie game instead of a 2-1 Houston lead.

Julian Tavarez continued his crappy post-season by pitching horribly in the 8th inning. (I thought Marquis was the new 8th inning guy?) After the leadoff double to Berkman, Tavarez regrouped a little by getting Ensberg and Lane to ground out. (Side note - Tavarez has been lit up by left handers all season, as I mentioned in a previous post. Having him pitch to the switch hitting Berkman was a bad move off the bat.) Personally, I'm not sure why they didn't intentionally walk Burke at that point to set up force out at any base, but that call could go either way. Whatever the case, Burke singled him in, padding the lead. Then Adam Everett put the game out of reach, and potentially put Reggie Sanders on the shelf - even though that should have been a routine catch.

So...passed ball allows a run. The Cardinals pitch to Burke with a runner in scoring position and 2 outs and it burns them. And Sanders blows a simple play. The Astros took advantage of Cardinal mistakes, basically - just like the Cardinals have been doing to everyone else before last night.

And on one final negative note - let's hope that Sanders is in the lineup and healthy on Saturday for Game 3. It's bad enough that the Cardinals have been reduced to depending on (basically) 4 hitters to score runs for them in October with Walker struggling again. If they can only count on Eckstein, Edmonds, and Pujols for the rest of the playoffs, it could get ugly.

On the plus side - Mulder is obviously fine after taking a liner off the bicep. Edmonds made a great catch, even though he came up short with 2 men on twice last night. Marquis actually got the job done in relief. (Maybe Tony will move him ahead of Tavarez now.) And the Cardinals made Lidge work, even if it was only slightly.

I went into this series thinking the Cardinals should win it, and do so in 5 or 6 games. On top of that, I was only expecting a split of the first 2 games - which makes it even funnier that I'm upset over the loss, since I called it. (Of course, I also thought it would be Morris in Game 2, Mulder in Game 3.) So - like I said before this started - Game 3 is the swing game of the series. If the Cardinals find a way to win, they'll go up 2 games to 1, be looking at facing Backe in Game 4, and bring back Carpenter in Game 5. Driver's Seat City.

If the Astros win Game 3. Well, it won't be over, but it will set up a must win situation on Sunday. As in - while the Cardinals could beat Pettitte, Oswalt, and Clemens in 3 straight games to win the series, it wouldn't exactly be a given.

Nice Win

2005-10-12T22:17:00.000-05:00

Fun fact for the night

Houston record vs. left handed pitching in 2005:

19 wins, 22 losses

Go Mulder!

NLCS Preview: Starting Lineup

2005-10-11T13:53:00.000-05:00

Cardinals vs. Astros (2005)

Here is what will likely be the regular lineup during this series, with Walker and Sanders likely flipped vs. Andy Pettitte.

Eckstein - .294/.368/.338, 707 OPS, 68 at-bats
Edmonds - .262/.324/.459, 783 OPS, 61 at-bats
Pujols - .302/.397/.524, 921 OPS, 63 at-bats
Walker - .340/.407/.553, 961 OPS, 47 at-bats
Sanders - .429/.529/1.179, 1708 OPS, 28 at-bats
Grudzielanek - .246/.246/.377, 623 OPS, 69 at-bats
Nunez - .200/.226/.200, 426 OPS, 30 at-bats
Molina - .245/.260/.367, 627 OPS, 49 at-bats

What you see there is a tail of two lineups. The first 5 have given the Astros fits this year, with the exception of Edmonds, who can't exactly be pitched around. You especially have to like the line sported by Sanders, who's entering this series with 1 or more RBI's in each of his last 9 games. (While I know that RBI's are a team dependant stat, that's still a nice trend.)

Once you get past Sanders, the bottom 4 (including the pitcher) have been automatic outs against Houston this year. (Other than Marquis and his .500/.538/.917 line over 12 at-bats, of course.) With that being said, if the top 5 hit anything close to the lines shown above, the bottom 4 will just be needed to provide solid defense and pitching. Everything else will be gravy.

Let me just say - a healthy Rolen in the lineup and on the field sure would be nice right about now.

No one on the Cardinal bench had any real success against Houston this year other than Einar Diaz (2 for 5 with a home run) and John Gall (1 for 1).

Astros vs. Cardinals (2005)

Biggio - .217/.269/.350, 619 OPS, 60 at-bats
Tavarez - .299/.319/.313, 632 OPS, 67 at-bats
Berkman - .263/.378/.605, 983 OPS, 38 at-bats
Ensberg - .339/.369/.629, 998 OPS, 62 at-bats
Lamb - .233/.273/.433, 706 OPS, 30 at-bats
Lane - .327/.375/.519, 894 OPS, 52 at-bats
Everett - .258/.288/.323, 610 OPS, 62 at-bats
Ausmus - .222/.300/.289, 589 OPS, 45 at-bats

Not quite as fearsome as the 2004 NLCS lineup with Beltran, Kent, and Bagwell, is it?

While the Cardinals offense vs. Houston is top heavy, the Astro offense vs. St. Louis is middle heavy. Based on these numbers, the Cardinals basically need to make sure that Berkman, Ensberg, and Lane don't beat them. Everyone else can be gotten to. Which, really, isn't a big surprise.

The best pinch hitting options for the Astros (based, once again, on head to head stats) are Raul Chavez (3 for 8) and Jeff Bagwell (4 for 16).

Here are how the lines match up if you look at the entirety of both teams head to head.

Astros - .250/.306/.378, 684 OPS
Cards - .265/.321/.428, 749 OPS

Yes, the Cardinals get on base more, but extra bases are the real difference seen.

The Cardinals clearly have an advantage in this series with the bats. The famous "they" always tout the mantra "good pitching beats good hitting." We'll see if it holds true.

NLCS Preview: Starting Pitching

2005-10-10T00:47:00.000-05:00

Here we are, back in the NLCS against the Astros. I certainly would have liked to have seen the Houston/Atlanta series go 5 games, but I guess an 18 inning Game 4 is the next best thing. Today I'm going to look at the starting pitchers for both teams and how they have fared against each other this year. Tomorrow, time willing, I'll do the same for the starting lineups.

Cardinals

First, the Cardinal starters.

vs. Houston (2005)

Carpenter - 4-0, 1.85 ERA, 0.95 WHIP, 39 innings
Mulder - 1-1, 2.48 ERA, 1.00 WHIP, 29 innings
Marquis - 4-0, 3.22 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 36.1 innings
Morris - 1-1, 3.27 ERA, 1.09 WHIP, 11 innings.

Note that Jeff Suppan didn't face the Astros this season, making his last start agianst them back in Game 7 of the 2004 NLCS. In my mind, that actually may make him the ideal man to start Game 2 or 3 of this series.

OK, more numbers.

vs. Houston (2005)

Mulder - .215/.254/.299, 553 OPS, 107 at-bats
Carpenter - .229/.259/.336, 594 OPS, 140 at-bats
Morris - .238/.289/.357, 646 OPS, 42 at-bats
Marquis - .277/.310/.409, 719 OPS, 137 at-bats

The starters that actually faced the Astros this year did very, very well. Obviously, Carpenter should be the #1 starter for the Cardinals during this series even if you ignore his numbers vs. the Astros. Seeing them spelled out above, of course, only strengthens the argument.

Mark Mulder was also solid against the Astros this season, holding their batters to lower numbers than even Carpenter managed. Unfortunately, his health is a bit of a concern after getting hit in his pitching arm in Game 2 of the NLDS. It sounds as if Mulder should be ready to go in either Game 3 or Game 4. Hopefully it's Game 3, setting him up for Game 7 if needed.

Who should start Game 2? As I mentioned above, Jeff Suppan may be a prime candidate. Not only was he solid down the stretch for the Cardinals, but the Astros haven't seen him this year. That may make him a little harder to solve, as opposed to someone like Marquis, who has had 137 at-bats against the Astros this year.

If the team has to pick between Marquis and Morris for the Game 2 start, I think the slight nod has to go to Morris. Matt allowed fewer base runners against the Astros this year - although, he did not pitch in Minute Made Park all season. And we know if Morris has a problem, it's the long ball. Game 2 might work nicely for Morris, allowing him to pitch Game 6 in his 2nd start, avoiding the small park all together.

Which, of course, brings us back to Game 4 being potentially between Marquis and Suppan. One has been successful against the Astros, one hasn't faced them. Which is more important?

One final thing. I thought I'd list the number of starts each pitcher has had in each park. I know that in an earlier post I mentioned that Houston has a strange park factor this year, but common sense dictates that it's still a home run hitter's park.

Carpenter, 5 starts, 2 in St. Louis
Marquis, 5 starts, 2 in St. Louis
Mulder, 4 starts, 2 in St. Louis
Morris, 2 starts, 2 in St. Louis

So, as you can see, the numbers that the first 3 listed have posted have come in both parks, with Morris being the only unknown in Houston.

Astros

vs. St. Louis (2005)

Pettitte - 0-1, 1.35 ERA, 0.85 WHIP, 20 innings
Clemens - 1-1, 2.63 ERA, 1.29 WHIP, 24 innings
Oswalt - 1-2, 5.21 ERA, 1.32 WHIP, 19 innings
Backe - 0-1, 10.32 ERA, 2.47 WHIP, 11.1 innings

For those of you wondering, Wandy Rodriguez got 2 starts against the Cardinals, with Ezequiel Astacio and Brandon Duckworth getting 1 each, thus helping to make the Cardinals head to head record look a little better than the match-up's we'll see this week.

vs. St. Louis (2005)

Pettitte - .188/.222/.319, 541 OPS, 69 at-bats
Clemens - .239/.304/.293, 597 OPS, 92 at-bats
Oswalt - .299/.313/.481, 793 OPS, 77 at-bats
Backe - .420/.483/.740, 1223 OPS, 50 at-bats

Pettitte really killed the Cardinals this year. Having him going in Game 1 is ideal for Houston, even though his dominance will be offset by Chris Carpenter. Clemens actually pitched rather well against the Cardinals, he just had more of his 2005 bad luck (Mark Mulder's 10 inning shutout as exhibit A.) An interesting note about Clemens - in 24 innings against the Cardinals, the power pitcher only struck out 13 batters, while walking 9. I think that's a great sign.

Oswalt was really hit hard by the Cardinals this year. Was it a fluke? To an extent, I'll say yes. In 2002 through 2004, Oswalt went 5-3 against the Cardinals with a 3.32 ERA. While that ERA is slightly higher than his overall numbers over that span (3.16), it's not exactly getting shelled. I'm going to hope that the Cardinals can continue to dominate Oswalt in the NLCS, but not expect it.

And the Cardinals absolutely owned Backe this year, which isn't a shock for a guy that had a 4.76 ERA, 1.46 WHIP on the entire year. Will he actually start in Game 4 of this series, or will Garner try to get Pettitte, Clemens, and Oswalt to start every game? With Garner, you never know.

Finally, the breakdown of starts.

Clemens, 4 starts, 2 in St. Louis
Pettitte, 3 starts, 1 in St. Louis
Oswalt, 3 starts, 2 in St. Louis
Backe, 2 starts, 2 in St. Louis

This chart seems to indicate that the Cardinals man-handling of Oswalt and Backe wasn't even aided by Minute Made Park. That can only be a good thing.

Wrap Up

Basically, all of the Cardinal starters were very solid against the Astros this year. On the other side of the coin, Pettitte and Clemens were tough, although Clemens' ERA was almost an entire run higher vs. the Cardinals as opposed to the rest of the league. Meanwhile, the Cardinals had their way with Oswalt and Backe. If you take some semi-educated guesses as to who the Cardinals and Astros will start in this series, it may look something like this:

Game 1 - Pettitte vs. Carpenter
Edge - Cardinals due to home field advantage, but the edge is slight.

Game 2 - Oswalt vs. Morris
Edge - Cardinals due to the Cardinals dominance of Oswalt this year.

Game 3 - Mulder vs. Clemens
Edge - Toss-up due to Mulder's health uncertainty and the Houston home crowd.

Game 4 - Marquis/Suppan vs. Backe
Edge - St. Louis due to Backe.

Game 5 - Pettite vs. Carpenter
Edge - Astros due to home field advantage.

Game 6 - Oswalt vs. Morris
Edge - See Game 2

Game 7 - Clemens vs. Mulder
Edge - Home field advantage is huge in Game 7.

My guess is that the Cardinals should split the first 2 games, and should be able to beat Backe in Houston. Game 3 could end up being the pivotal game of the entire series. If Mulder can pitch effectively and even get the win over Houston - putting the series at either 2-1 or 3-0 St. Louis - then the Cardinals are likely to win this thing in 5 or 6 games.

Of course, the bullpen has to pitch too...

Comments

2005-10-07T10:20:00.000-05:00

I've finally had it with the spam comments on posts, so I've changed it so that only registered users can post them. I honestly don't know what effect that will have on anyone that wants to post a comment, or even if that will stop the spam. We can only hope.

Oh, and Go Cardinals!

Playoff Bullpen

2005-10-03T15:45:00.000-05:00

With the very, very unfortunate news that Al Reyes is done not only for the playoffs, but for most of next year, I thought we'd better take a look at the bullpen for October.

The Cardinals can only carry 11 pitchers in the playoffs this year, which should be more than enough. Of course, Tony appears to be ready to carry all 5 of his starters, which limits the rest of the staff to 6 slots. Al Reyes was a shoe-in for the roster, of course, considering that he was either the best or 2nd best reliever the team had this year, depending on where you ranked Isringhausen. But with Reyes gone, the options are as follows.

Right

Jason Isringhausen
Julian Tavarez
Cal Eldred
Brad Thompson
Anthony Reyes
Adam Wainwright

Left

Ray King
Randy Flores
Tyler Johnson

Out of those 9 guys, 6 will be on the NLDS roster. Personally, I suspect that Izzy, Tavarez, Eldred, and Thompson are given from the right side. Likewise, King and Flores will likely fill out the roster. I really don't think that Wainwright and Johnson have a realistic shot to make the team. What about Anthony Reyes, though?

OPS Allowed (overall)

Al Reyes - 545
An Reyes - 546
Izzy - 595
Thompson - 647
Flores - 700
Eldred - 708
Tavarez - 765
King - 818

Off the bat, we miss Al Reyes. Anthony Reyes - in very limited work - was actually just as good as his (near) namesake.

OPS Allowed vs. Left

An Reyes - 426
Izzy - 495
Al Reyes - 547
Florez - 583
Thompson - 629
Eldred - 675
King - 680
Tavarez - 815

People are already saying that Al Reyes will be missed due to his ability to retire both right handed and left handed batters. Take a look at the splits of the other Reyes, though.

OPS Allowed vs. Right

Al Reyes - 544
An Reyes - 618
Thompson - 650
Izzy - 678
Eldred - 736
Tavarez - 745
Flores - 812
King - 981

Once again, Anthony Reyes is among the staff leaders. In fact, he leads this list when you factor in guys that can actually pitch tomorrow.

General Assessment

In general, I think an argument could easily be made that Anthony Reyes should be on the playoff roster. Maybe he doesn't get used in late situations due to the unknown factor, but recent history would suggest that that doesn't have to be an issue. (Francisco Rodriguez, Anaheim, 2002) I'm not 100% convinced that Anthony would completely replace Al, but I think the Cardinals could do worse. Such as, counting on Julian Tavarez and his 765 OPS allowed to pitch the 8th inning.

Randy Flores should be used as a LOOGY. (Left handed One Out GuY).

Ray King should be used as an extreme LOOGY.

Julian Tavarez, in all honestly, should be used as a ROOGY. (I don't think that's a real acronym, but I'm standing by my assessment!)

With those 3 guys limited to facing either lefties or righties, and Izzy limited to the 9th inning...well, that leaves 2 guys in the bullpen, plus a converted starter (Marquis, Morris, or Suppan.) Who is the 8th inning guy? Rookie Brad Thompson? Veteran Cal Eldred?

Seriously. Tony. For the love of Pete. Consider Anthony Reyes.

Izzy vs. Lidge

2005-09-29T11:26:00.000-05:00

I've heard it many, many times. From the timid "this guy makes me nervous" to the extreme "I hate this guy." Let's face it - Jason Isringhausen is viewed by many, if not most Cardinal fans, as a tightrope walker who more often than not blows the game. Meanwhile, Brad Lidge is viewed as the un-hittable closer. When he comes in, it's lights out. Is the difference between these two really that different this year?

Traditional Stats

Lidge
4-3, 40 saves, 3 blown saves, 2.13 ERA, 1.12 WHIP

Izzy
1-2, 37 saves, 4 blown saves, 2.21 ERA, 1.18 WHIP

Not a lot to get upset about, is there? Izzy allows 0.06 more baserunners per inning, and 0.08 more runs every 9 innings he pitches. Sure, he's blown 1 more save, but he's lost 1 less game. His save percentage (90%) is just lagging that of Lidge (93%).

More Traditional Stats

As in, "let's look at some more" as opposed to "these are more traditional."

Lidge
101 K's, 23 BB's, 67.2 innings, 5 HR

Izzy
48K's, 25 BB's, 57 IP, 4 HR

This, obviously, is the big difference. Lidge strikes out an insane amount of batters, while Izzy walks too many. I can understand the awe that is created by a guy that strikeouts out more than a batter an inning. I can also understand the frustration created by a guy that walks a batter every other inning. Of course, that's why statistics can be an important tool. Other than frustration, does it matter how many baserunners Izzy allows, as long as he's not giving up as many hits? (WHIP). Or as long as he's getting the job done? (Losses, Blown Saves.) Realistically, no. Emotionally? That's a little different.

One other note - Lidge has allowed 0.66 HR/9 IP, Izzy 0.63 HR/9 IP. Dead even.

Batting Stats Allowed

Lidge
657 OPS Allowed vs. Left
563 OPS Allowed vs. Right
609 OPS Allowed Overall

Izzy
498 OPS Allowed vs. Left
667 OPS Allowed vs. Right
591 OPS Allowed Overall

That's right, folks. Jason Isringhausen has a lower OPS allowed than Brad Lidge this season. "But wait!" you say. "Lidge plays his home games in a home run park." I don't know about you, but I hadn't paid any attention to park factors this year. Have you seen them? According to ESPN, Busch stadium has been the 4th most offense friendly park in the majors this season. Minute Maid Park? Last!? 43.8% fewer runs have been scored in Houston than in an average park this year. Yes, that is partly impacted by Houston's pitching and lack of hitting, but remember that the numbers for both home and road teams are taken into account in park factors. (I wonder how many Cy Young voters take park effects into consideration, since Carpenter is the only contender playing in a park that hasn't been pitcher friendly?)

That's freaky. But whatever the case, Izzy has a lower OPS allowed, and has done so while playing in (for this year at least) a park more friendly to hitters than Lidge has.

Less Popular Stats

Lidge
11 Win Shares, 6 WSAB, 22.6 VORP

Izzy
9 Win Shares, 5 WSAB, 21.0 VORP

Lidge does come out a bit on top when it comes to these metrics. Basically, Lidge has been worth about 2/3 of a win more than Izzy this year, and about 1.6 more runs over a replacement pitcher. Lidge's VORP ranks 95th among pitchers in the majors, while Izzy ranks 107th.

(For another oddity, both rank 2nd on their team in VORP - Russ Springer leads the Astros, while Al Reyes leads the Cards.)

Summary

So, what's my point? Basically, I just wanted to point out that Izzy isn't quite disaster waiting to happen that many, many Cardinal fans make him out to be. If I needed a strikeout to win a game and had the luxury of choosing between Lidge and Izzy? I'd go with Lidge. Duh. But you know what? Isringhausen has been getting the job done this year. He may not be going about it in as sexy of a manner as Lidge, but the truth of the matter is - the closer is not even close to the top of the list of my post-season concerns this year.

RRR Update

2005-09-23T13:11:00.000-05:00

I just added links to two new websites that I've come across. (Cool Standings and Fan Graphs.) You may not like them as much as I did, but I think both are great.

I'll be getting some new articles out over the next few weeks. Namely, the concluding articles of the Walt Jocketty trade series (which, I know, has taken me months instead of weeks) in addition to playoff previews. For those of you that stop by from time to time - thanks for the patience!

2nd Base in 2006

2005-09-15T12:10:00.000-05:00

I know - long time no post. Time flies when you're having fun.

Anyway, I was looking at some random stats last night and stumbled across something kind of interesting. Hector Luna, in limited play, has the exact same OPS as Mark Grudzielanek as of today. To me, this brought up an interesting thought - is Luna actually ready to be a cheaper alternative to Grudz as soon as next year?

Offense

First, let's take a look at the offensive numbers. As I already mentioned, Grudzielanek and Luna have the same OPS in the majors this season.

Grudz - .292/.331/.412, 743 OPS (476 at-bats)
Luna - .284/.331/.413, 743 OPS (109 at-bats)

A bit of rounding error gives them the same OPS despite Luna having a higher SLG by 1 point. Kind of interesting, no? If you adjust Luna's counting statistics to assume the same number of at-bats, you see something like this.

Grudz - 29 doubles, 2 triples, 8 home runs
Luna - 30 doubles, 8 triples, 4 home runs

Basically, Luna's speed gives him triples to offset the slight edge in home runs seen by Grudzielanek. A few more numbers:

Grudz - 22 walks, 72 strikeouts, 8 steals, 5 caught stealing
Luna - 26 walks, 83 strikeouts, 34 steals, 4 caught stealing

Here's where Luna's speed really shines. Those 34 projected stolen bases in the same amount of playing time really add to the potential value provided by Luna. Especially if his success rate (89%) could be maintained. And finally, some team dependant numbers.

Grudz - 59 runs scored, 53 RBI
Luna - 104 runs scored, 56 RBI

Obviously, this stat is tainted by the fact that Luna is frequently used as a pinch runner late in games who ends up being driven in without increasing his at-bat totals. But at the same time, the fact that he's putting himself into scoring position (stealing bases) does help his cause here.

In a nutshell - Luna has performed very well with the bat in the majors this year. In fact, he's been just as good as Grudzielanek. We shouldn't forget, however, that he wasn't nearly as good in AAA this year.

.224/.294/.332, 223 at-bats.

Has being around the "big club" inspired him to do better? Has someone figured out a problem that has since been corrected? Obviously, I don't know. I don't think it's outside of the realm of possibility, however, that he's simply starting to come into his own at this point in the year.

Defense

So what? you say. Grudz is a gold glove candidate this year. That was certainly my first instinct. Then I looked at the defensive numbers.

Grudz - .989 Fielding %, 5.48 Range Factor, .870 Zone Rating
Luna - .976 Fielding %, 6.06 Range Factor, .895 Zone Rating

I wouldn't have guessed it, but Luna is actually getting to more balls in play than Grudzielanek. Granted, he's only played 120.1 innings compared to 1055.1 for Grudz. Nonetheless, he's gotten the job done during the time allotted to him. "But Grudz is valuable for the double plays he turns" you say. Take a look at this.

Double Plays per 9 innings

Grudz - 0.86
Luna - 1.05

That's right - Luna actually has turned double plays at a higher rate than Grudzielanek! I certainly didn't expect to see that.

Conclusions

Mark Grudzielanek has been a great acquisition for the Cardinals this year without a doubt. Both defensively and offensively, Grudz has given the Cardinals an upgrade over Tony Womack for a measly $1 million bucks, helping the team to get back to the 100 win plateau in back to back seasons.

At the same time - he's been somewhat injury prone over the past few years, and turned 35 in June. His role on this Cardinal team - especially his defense - has probably driven up his market value so that someone somewhere will likely be willing to pay him $3 to $4 million a year for the next 2 to 3 years.

Meanwhile, the Cardinals have a player on their team in Luna who has put up similar numbers in limited playing time this year. He doesn't turn 26 until February, and the Cardinals have the rights to him for the next 4 years - including what will likely be a very cheap salary in 2006 (less than $500,000.)

Do the Cardinals let Grudzielanek become the 2006 versions of Womack and Matheny? I don't think it's out of the question. By keeping Luna, and thus keeping an extra $2 to $3 million off of the books, the Cardinals would be in a better position to go after the corner outfielder they need next year, either by trade or by free agent signing.

Just something to keep in mind over the next couple of weeks, as we wait for the real season to begin.

Pujols, Edmonds, and....Nunez

2005-08-18T07:33:00.000-05:00

Word is that Scott Rolen's chances of playing again this year are becoming more and more slim every day. Not that this is exactly shocking, mind you - I've felt all along as if the Cardinals probably can't count on more than two out of four of their current injured players (Rolen, Walker, Sanders, and Molina) contributing this post-season. But it still hurts to hear Jocketty himself start to incinuate as much.

Which, of course, leaves the Cardinals with the options of Abraham Nunez, John Mabry, and Scott Seabol manning the hot corner the rest of the year. I thought I'd spend some time today focusing on the guy that has been (and probably will continue to) getting the most time at 3rd base, in Abraham Nunez.

When the Cardinals invited Nunez to camp last off-season, I wasn't excited nor worried about his inclusion. I personally saw him as the 2005 version of Hector Luna (without a promising future) - a player who wouldn't hit much, but could give players days off in the infield. Nunez had the added benefit of solid defense, plus switch hitting capability. All in all, kind of a ho hum, 25th man on the bench.

Prior to 2005, Nunez had spent 8 years in the major leagues. Coming up with the Pirates at the age of 21, Nunez basically spent his entire career as a backup middle infielder, never playing more than 118 games in a season, or getting more than 311 at-bats. His career hitting line before this year was .238/.306/.316 with an OPS+ of 62. As in, he has been 38% worse than an average major league hitter over his career. He had career season highs of 4 home runs, a .262 batting average, a .344 OBP, and a .375 SLG. Note that his .344 OBP came over just 52 at-bats in 1998, and that his 2nd best season was a .311 mark. Similarly, his .375 SLG season was over just 40 at-bats in 1997, but that he posted a similar SLG of .357 in 2003.

Defensively, Nunez spent most of his time at shortstop (229 games, 810 innings) and 2nd base (226 games, 1395.1 innings). His MLB experience at 3rd base consisted of 8 games and 23.1 innings prior to this year. The defense he displayed at short and 2nd were basically league average in relation to fielding percentage and range factor, while his limited duty at 3rd base wasn't pretty. Of course, we all knew that he would likely play 3rd base this year under La Russa, which was fine with me. In fact, I suspect that a healthy Rolen would have resulted in Nunez seeing time in the outfield as well this year. But I digress.

Enter 2005. Due to the unfortunate health of Scott Rolen, Nunez has played a lot of 3rd base this year. So far? He's answered the bill and then some.

Offensively, Nunez has already set career highs in runs scored (45), hits (84), home runs (5), RBI (36), and walks (29), despite only having played in 98 games and getting 278 at-bats. What's more, if the season finished today, he would eclipse his previous season highs in batting average (.304), OBP (.370), SLG (.409), and OPS (.779). Granted, he's been cold lately (547 OPS in August), but his increased walk rates and power are still something to be encouraged about.

Defensively, Nunez has shined at 3rd. I'm not going to bother trying to compare Nunez to every 3rd baseman in baseball, but I will compare him to a pretty ok fielder in St. Louis - Scott Rolen. Looking at defensive stats from just this year, you'll see that Nunez actually has a slightly higher range factor than Rolen. Basically, Nunez (this year) has been better at making more putouts than Scott, while having fewer assists. Intuitively, that makes since with the cannon Rolen has. To show you what I mean, here are the number of putouts and assists per 9 innings at 3rd base for both players this season.

Putouts/9

Rolen - .41
Nunez - .80

Assists/9

Rolen - 2.78
Nunez - 2.59

To top that off, Nunez has a slightly better fielding percentage this year as well. In other words, he's not hurting the team with his glove.

Summary

As you can tell by this post, I didn't really have anything in particular to say about Nunez starting over Rolen, other than to write down some thoughts I was having. Defensively, Rolen would be preferred over Nunez from a gut feel. In 2005, however, it's not really cut and dry that he would be head and shoulders above Nunez.

Offensively, of course, a healthy Scott Rolen would be much, much preferred over Abraham Nunez, no matter how well he's playing. However, we've never really seen a healthy Rolen this year, so once again - that's not a cut and dry argument.

Nunez has obviously been playing better than ever this year. To be honest, I keep expecting it to end - and his August splits may be an indication that the party is in fact starting to end. (Or, he could just be tired of playing from the heat.) Whatever the case, there are signs (walk rate, for example) that Nunez is doing things a little differently this year. He doesn't have to be a superstar in this lineup to help the team win. If he can maintain a .350 OBP in the playoffs - thus not hurting the team as an automatic out - and provide solid defense, then the team can still win it all.

Cardinal Trades - 2002

2005-08-15T00:11:00.000-05:00

This was an interesting year in Cardinals history. The somewhat expected death of Jack Buck came first, quickly followed by the very unexpected death of Darryl Kile. The death of Kile brought on a trade that likely wouldn't have happened other wise, in the form of Chuck Finley. On the bright side, 2002 also saw the addition of current cornerstone (when healthy) Scott Rolen.

The Cardinals send Luis Garcia and Covelli "Coco" Crisp to the Cleveland Indians for Chuck Finley.

As I mentioned above, this trade likely wouldn't have even taken place without the unfortunate death of Darryl Kile. With that being said, you may remember that 2002 actually featured several rotation members going through health problems. Woody Williams missed a lot of time with an injury. Andy Benes more or less retired early in the season, only to come back very strong after the death of Kile. And Bud Smith started his repid decline during the 2002 season, after having a very promising 2001. However, the Cardinals had been treading water in the division behind the solid starting pitching of Matt Morris, Darryl Kile, and Jason Simontacchi (aka, the Brit Reames of 2002.)

Anyway, the death of Kile, combined with the injuries to Williams and the uncertainty surrounding Benes, led to the need for another starting pitcher. Adding a lefty to the rotation was a bonus.

Sent away in this deal was Luis Garcia, the key player in the trade at the time. Garcia has never played in the major leagues.

Coco Crisp was actually a player to be named later in this deal. Obviously, the Indians did a nice job in naming him later, because he's made this trade one that is coming back to hurt the Cardinals a little in present day. After being acquired in Cleveland in 2002, the Indians promoted him from AA all the way to the majors, where he hit .260/.314/.386 over 127 at-bats. Interestingly enough, he provided the Indians with 3 Win Shares in 2002, whereas Finley provided the Cardinals with 4. Overall, Crisp (prior to this season) has hit .280/.324/.401 for the Indians over the past 3 seasons, spending most of his time in center field. In 2005, he's currently hitting .296/.345/.446, 791 OPS.

Chuck Finley was 39 years old at the time of his acquisition, and he ended up finishing his career as a Cardinal. During his half season in St. Louis, Finley went 7-4 with a 3.80 ERA, 103 ERA+. He eventually ended up getting the only win for the Cardinals in the NLCS despite giving up 4 earned runs over 5 innings pitched against the Giants.

Win Share Totals

Chuck Finley - 4 (1 year in St. Louis)

Luis Garcia - 0
Coco Crisp - 24 (3 years and counting)

The Cardinals send Placido Polanco, Mike Timlin, and Bud Smith to the Philadelphia Phillies for Scott Rolen and Doug Nickle.

The rumors running up to the trade deadline always mentioned the Cardinals as a possibility in this trade, but it took a while for me to believe it was going to happen. Over the last week, the rumors had the Cardinals giving up both Bud Smith and Jimmy Journell, which had me thinking the price was too high (shows what I know.) In the end, the Cardinals ended up giving up 3 players, and actually getting 2 in return.

Polanco was included in the trade in order to give the Phillies a 3rd baseman to replace Rolen. Polanco had always been a solid hitter, but not for a corner infielder. What's more, his glove was always great, no matter where they seemed to play him in St. Louis. I, for one, was one of the people interested in moving Renteria for needed players, while keeping Polanco at shortstop. Whatever the case, Polanco brought Rolen into town, and it's hard to argue with that. Over three seasons with the Phillies, Polanco hit .294/.340/.441, 781 OPS, spending most of his time at 2nd base over the last 2 years.

Also included in the trade was Mike Timlin, who was getting ready to become a free agent. Timlin was actually one of the better arms in the Cardinal bullpen in 2002 (2.51 ERA, 156 ERA+), making me scratch my head as to why he was included in the deal at the time. After all - the Phillies weren't going to the playoffs, and Timlin wasn't going to be back with them in 2003. I, for one, would have liked to have seem Timlin stay in town, but that's splitting hairs at this point. Timlin finished off the season in Philly, posting a 3.79 ERA over 35.2 innings. He has since spent his time in Boston, picking up a World Series ring. Since leaving St. Louis, Timlin is 14-11 with 3 saves and a 3.82 ERA.

Bud Smith has not pitched in the majors since this trade. As far as I can tell, he actually pitched in 3 minor league games this year, but hasn't been in a game since mid-May. I'd love to see him get it back together some day, but at this point it's a long shot. At least he can tell his kids that he pitched a no-hitter in the majors.

Scott Rolen probably doesn't need a very detailed introduction here. He was a former rookie of the year who already had 3 gold gloves when he was picked up in this trade. What's more, he had hit 25 or more home runs in each of the previous 4 seasons. He had a rap as a bit of an injury prone player, but it was believed that playing on grass rather than turf would help him out. So far, I believe that has actually helped, despite his injury problems last year and this. Especially this year, when his problems were caused by a collision. Since coming to St. Louis, Rolen has hit .296/.381/.561, 942 OPS, including 76 home runs and 272 RBI (not counting 2005.) He's pretty good.

Doug Nickle was placed on waivers right after this trade and claimed by the Padres. He hasn't pitched in the major leagues since.

Win Share Totals

Scott Rolen - 75 (3 years in St. Louis)
Doug Nickle - 0

Placido Polanco - 42 (3 years)
Mike Timlin - 17 (3 years)
Bud Smith - 0

The Cardinals send Jared Blasdell and Jason Karnuth to the Cubs for Jeff Fassero

Supposedly, Dave Duncan saw Jeff Fassero jogging near the arch on a hot day in August during a Cubs series. His dedication to staying healthy despite playing for a horrible Cubs team impressed Duncan, who pressed for the Cardinals to pick him up.

Jared Blasdell was the main player the Cubs wanted for Fassero. Considering he never played in the majors, I guess that was a bad idea.

Jason Karnuth was a player to be named later in this trade. He pitched 5 innings for the Cardinals in 2001 with a 1.80 ERA, but hasn't pitched in the majors since.

Fassero actually wasn't too bad for the Cardinals in 2002, pitching 18 innings with a 3.00 ERA, 130 ERA+. He also ended up pitching 3.1 shutout innings in the playoffs, which included the winning decision in 2 of the 3 Cardinal wins against the Diamondbacks in the NLDS. I'll do my best to remember that part of his career in St. Louis, rather than his adventures for the team in 2003.

Jeff Fassero - 2 (2 years in St. Louis)

Jared Blasdell - 0
Jason Karnuth - 0

The Cardinals send Chris Morris and Mike Matthews to the Milwaukee Brewers for Jamey Wright.

I may be wrong, but I remember this trade as an attempt to revive the career of a starter who had shown some promise earlier in his career. To be honest, they gave up too much for Wright, even though it really didn't hurt them in 2002 or beyond.

Chris Morris was a young player who many thought would end up being a great leadoff hitter for the Cardinals. Morris tore up A ball in 2001, posting a .401 OBP and stealing 111 bases - an organization record, if I recall correctly. For whatever reason, however, the Cardinals traded him away for Wright. Even more perplexing, however, is the fact that Morris is still in the minors - but has never played above A ball.

Mike Matthews was also sent away in this trade, but never really put together a solid season in the majors after leaving town. Overall, he went 8-5 with a 5.02 ERA over 3 seasons after this trade.

Jamey Wright pitched in 4 games for the Cardinals, including 3 starts. Overall, he went 2-0 with a 4.80 ERA, 81 ERA+. For whatever reason, he was grated free agency after the season despite having been traded for. Which brought up an interesting 2003 for Mr. Wright:

January 28, 2003: Signed as a Free Agent with the Seattle Mariners.
March 18, 2003: Released by the Seattle Mariners.
March 26, 2003: Signed as a Free Agent with the Milwaukee Brewers.
April 28, 2003: Released by the Milwaukee Brewers.
May 7, 2003: Signed as a Free Agent with the Texas Rangers.
June 15, 2003: Released by the Texas Rangers.
June 20, 2003: Signed as a Free Agent with the Kansas City Royals.
October 30, 2003: Granted Free Agency.
December 29, 2003: Signed as a Free Agent with the Chicago Cubs.

Win Share Totals

Jamey Wright - 1 (1 year in St. Louis)

Chris Morris - 0
Mike Matthews - 3 (3 years)

2002 Totals

Win Shares acquired by St. Louis - 82

Win Shares given up by St. Louis - 86

Net Win Shares gained - negative 4, or 1 loss.

Basically, 2002 can be boiled down to two things. Scott Rolen improved the team for years to come over the players sent away. Chuck Finley improved the team slightly in 2002 - but the loss of Coco Crisp actually hurt the team for years to come. Assuming, of course, that the Cardinals would have played him. Considering that he's about an 800 OPS player, it's hard to imagine them using him in a corner slot. Worst case scenario, the Cardinals probably should have kept him around in order to use him in a better trade. But that's easy to say right in hind sight. In 2002, it probably looked like the loss of Morris was going to be a bigger problem.

Here's the updated WS matrix.

1996, -5, -2
1997, 9, 3
1998, -5, -2
1999, -4, -1
2000, 32, 11
2001, 34, 11
2002, -22, -7
2003, -15, -5
2004, -2, -1

It's interesting to note that the Cardinals were 95-67 in 2002 - yet had 7 fewer wins than they would have by keeping around players that had been traded away. However, when you look at the specifics you can see why this is misleading.

For one thing, the death of Darryl Kile makes the numbers look worse than reality. Kile only compiled 4 win shares in 2002 over 14 starts. Considering that he had 17 and 18 win shares over the previous 2 seasons, he most likely would have finished the year with 14 or more, bringing up the Cardinals totals. Not helping the balance sheet is the fact that one of the players sent away for the Kile package - Jose Jimenez - posted 13 win shares in 2002.

The other trade from the past that caught up to the Cardinals in 2002 was the Garret Stephenson/Ron Gant deal. In 2002, Stephenson was horrible for the Cardinals as he fought injury problems, picking up 0 win shares over 45 innings pitched. Meanwhile, Ron Gant (12 Win Shares) and Cliff Politte (7 Win Shares) were having solid seasons in San Diego and Toronto, respectively.

Taken together, Darryl Kile and Garret Stephenson posted 28 fewer win shares than Jose Jimenez, Ron Gant, and Cliff Politte, more than making up for the difference listed above. With that being said, it's impossible to argue that the Darryl Kile trade of 2000 was a failure because of his death. In addition to that, the Cardinals dealing away Ron Gant was probably needed from a clubhouse standpoint, even if he had been able to help out the team in 2002. After all - with an outfield of J.D. Drew, Jim Edmonds, and Albert Pujols, where was he going to play? (If he could have helped the Cardinals avoid the Tino Martinez signing, I guess it could have been worth it.) All in all, the Cardinals should have kept Politte around in 1999. That, in a nutshell, was the factor that would have been nice to have erased looking back.

Cardinal Trades - 2001

2005-08-11T12:11:00.000-05:00

2001 was a fairly low activity year in regard to trades. The team was coming off of a trip to the NLCS the previous year and felt as if they were somewhat loaded and ready to go. There were a couple of key moves, however.

The Cardinals send Fernando Tatis and Brit Reames to the Montreal Expos for Dustin Hermanson and Steve Kline.

This trade brings back some memories. I personally remember thinking the Cardinals were stupid for giving up on Tatis so quickly. He was, after all, hurt in 2000, thus his lower production. Shows what I know - it ends up that his work ethic really wasn't cut out to every really come back from that injury. Either that, or something more sinister in his make-up scared off the Cardinals. Whatever the case, they made the right call. Ditto that on Brit Reames, who was probably the 2nd best pitcher on the staff during the playoffs the previous year.

Tatis ended up playing for the Expos (and in the majors) for 3 seasons after this trade. In those seasons, he only totaled 208 games, 701 at-bats, and 19 home runs. His batting line was .225/.295/.357. Obviously, something changed with Tatis after he left the Redbirds, since he had hit .281/.381/.530 over the previous two years. In light of recent scandals in baseball....well, you never know.

Brit Reames had a similar, albeit more expected, fall back to earth after his stellar year in St. Louis. After going 2-1 with a 2.88 ERA over 40.2 innings for the Cardinals in 2000, he was shipped north, much to the displeasure of some Cardinal fans. Of course, when the dust cleared Reames, like Tatis, only spent 3 more years in baseball. In those 3 years, he went 5-12 with a 5.53 ERA over 164.1 innings.

Steve Kline gave the Cardinals a solid, durable left handed pitcher for the bullpen. He was especially awesome in both 2001 and 2004, while being serviceable the other two years. Overall, Kline went 12-11 with 21 saves over 4 seasons, posting a 2.69 ERA over 247.1 innings.

Dustin Hermanson was a bit of a disappointment in St. Louis. He came over to be the #3 starter behind Kile and Morris, but in reality finished the season behind both Bud Smith and Woody Williams on the depth chart (more on Williams shortly.) He was still solid on the year, however, going 14-13 with a 4.45 ERA over 192.1 innings. He was traded away after the season.

Win Share Totals

Steve Kline - 30 (4 years in St. Louis)
Dustin Hermanson - 8 (1 year in St. Louis)

Fernando Tatis - 8 (3 years)
Brit Reames - 3 (3 years)

The Cardinals send Ray Lankford to the San Diego Padres for Woody Williams

This was another strange trade. I always felt like Ray Lankford was used as a scapegoat, even though he was still putting up decent numbers (.235/.345/.496 with St. Louis in 2001). I guess the batting average was too scary for those afraid of OBP. Whatever the case, Lankford and Williams both cleared waivers, thus were swapped in a basic salary/change of scenery swap.

Lankford actually flourished after the trade, hitting .288/.386/.480 over 125 at-bats. However, his production really nose dived in 2002, as he was only able to hit .224/.326/.356 over 205 at-bats. Once again, Walt traded before the value was completely gone. Overall, Lankford only played those 2 seasons for San Diego, hitting .248/.344/.403 for the Padres before getting an exit tour with the Cardinals last year. (He took 2003 off.)

Williams was perhaps the most surprising return in a trade in my lifetime. He kicked things off in 2001 by going 7-1 with a 2.28 ERA, leading the Cardinals back to the playoffs for the 2nd year in a row. Personally? I thought it was a fluke, but was happy to see it happen. Of course, as you all know, he proved me wrong over the next few years. Overall, Woody spent parts of 4 seasons in St. Louis, going 45-22 with a 3.53 ERA. Not bad for a waiver pick-up.

Win Share Totals

Woody Williams - 39 (4 years in St. Louis)

Ray Lankford - 15 (2 years)

2001 Totals

Win Shares acquired by St. Louis - 77

Win Shares given up by St. Louis - 23

Net Win Shares gained - 54, or roughly 18 wins.

Interestingly, there were only two trades made all year - but they almost improved the team (18 wins) as much as the multitude of trades pulled of the previous year (27 wins). What's more, Walt gave the team a solid #2 starter in Woody, as well as a solid left handed reliever in Kline for the next 4 seasons - key parts of the 2001, 2002, and 2004 playoff teams.

Here is how the win share matrix shakes out, including the 2001 trades.

1996, -5, -2
1997, 9, 3
1998, -5, -2
1999, -4, -1
2000, 32, 11
2001, 34, 11
2002, -24, -8
2003, -4, -1
2004, -3, -1

Just like 2000, the Cardinals ended up being 11 games better in 2001 than they would have been by simply building with their farm. What's more, you can see that future talent given up to that point wasn't having much of an impact, at least in 2003 and 2004.

Is J-Rod for Real?

2005-08-08T17:28:00.000-05:00

Editor's note: Note one - if I had an editor, I wouldn't be needing to add this note. Note two - someone pointed out to me that I had used XBH:AB as a metric instead of XBH:H. That made zero sense, but totally gave me a false impression on J-Rod. I have re-written several sections of this article, with most of it based around XBH:H and the summary.

I was asked this question the other day. My gut instinct, of course, is to say "no." Any time a player doesn't crack the big leagues until the age of 27 he usually isn't going to sustain a .333 average and a 961 OPS over any extended period of time. But maybe, just maybe....

Minor Leagues (pre-2005)

Rodriguez has always been a fairly solid hitter in the minor leagues. Through last season he spent 8 years in the minors, hitting .270/.353/.461, good for a 814 OPS. Minor league numbers are fairly hard to analyze for us common folk, since information on park effects, level of competition, and other factors are a little harder to dig up than their major league counter parts. For that reason, I have a few metrics that I normally look at when digging through minor league stats. They are by no means the definitive answer to how good a player is, but we'll still walk through them in regard to J-Rod.

BB per AB

In general, I like to see a player drawing walks at a rate of about 10% per at-bat. (Yes, I know a BB doesn't count as an at-bat - it's just a rule of thumb.) During Rodriguez' minor league career, he has exceeded the 10% mark in walk rate every season but one, when he had a 7% rate in 2001. In his 8 seasons before this year, his career walk rate was actually 12%. In other words - he's not afraid to get on base.

BB to K Ratio

This ratio, sometimes referred to as "batter's eye", is another useful tool in seeing how patient a hitter is. I use a 0.5 mark as a baseline when it comes to this ratio. In other words, as long as a hitter is striking out 2 or fewer times for every 1 time he walks, I trust his strike zone judgment. Rodriguez comes in looking good in this measure as well, as he had a ratio of 0.5 or better in 6 out of 8 minor league seasons, with a career mark of 0.5 leading up to this season.

K to AB Ratio

This may seem like a redundant measure, but it's not if you think about it. Sure, a player may only strike out 2 or fewer times for each BB drawn, but what he he walks a lot? Then he's being fooled a lot as well. That's why I also check out the K:AB numbers. I don't like to see a minor leaguer striking out more than 1 time every 5 trips to the plate. If he's being fooled more than that in the minors, life is going to be hard on him in the majors. Rodriguez is borderline in this category. His career mark up to this season had been 0.24, just worse than my preferred 0.20 level.

Extra Base Hits per Hits

The final mark I look at his XBH:H. I like this measure for a couple of reasons. One, park factors can give or take away home runs from players, skewing their slugging percentages. Two, younger power hitters tend to hit a lot of doubles, that eventually turn in to home runs as they gain power as they mature. In general, I like to see hitters getting extra base hits 30% of the time in the minors, regardless as to if they're hitting doubles, triples, or home runs.

When I first wrote this article, I had inadvertently calculated XBH per AB instead of per hit. Thankfully, someone caught my stupid mistake, because believe me - it made a world of difference. Rodriguez has actually shown power in the minors from day one. As a 19 year old rookie in the Gulf Coast League in 1997, extra base hits accounted for 32% of all of his hits over 157 at-bats. In fact, over his 8 seasons leading up to 2005, 30% was the lowest XBH:H ratio Rodriguez put together in a season (1999).

On the high side, J-Rod really started exhibiting some serious power in the 2001 season, having extra base hits account for 48% of all hits (393 at-bats.) He then followed that up with XBH 47% of the time in both 2002 (354 at-bats) and 2004 (378 at-bats). 2004 is especially impressive, as he did it in AAA. The fact that he only had 16 home runs is a bit misleading in regard to his power potential when you look at his total extra base hits, which included 10 triples.

Overall, he ended up having extra base hits account for 39% of all of his hits in the minor leagues leading up to this year. Folks - that is the sign of a power hitter in the making.

Minor Leagues (2005)

Rodriguez began this season in the Cleveland Indians organization, which included a very impressive spring training (.320/.370/.760, 1130 OPS, 25 at-bats.) He was then sent to AAA Buffalo, where he hit .247/.323/.447 over 170 at-bats, giving him an OPS of 770 - very similar to his career mark of 814. Looking at his rates from the above section:

BB:AB - 0.09
BB:K - 0.6
K:AB - 0.24
XBH:H - 0.5

Almost every one of those numbers is right in line with his career minor league marks, other than the power stroke. His XBH:H ratio actually looks more like 3 of his previous 4 seasons, with 2003 being a potential fluke.

Then, he was traded to Memphis, where he proceeded to thump the league over the head. Over 120 at-bats, Rodriguez hit .342/.419/.808, giving him a 1227 OPS. He also hit 5 doubles, and 17 home runs. (His minor league stats for this year are here.) Take a look at his ratios at Memphis:

BB:AB - 0.11
BB:K - 0.6
K:AB - 0.23
XBH:AB - 0.54

What you see is - essentially - his walks and strikeouts stayed about the same. His extra base hits rate did in fact increase, but only from 50% to 54% - it just happened that his doubles had turned into home runs. The fact that Rodriguez was hitting an inordinate amount of home runs but only a few doubles suggests something fluky - be it weather, the new home park, or just plain old luck, I can't tell you. Whatever the case, his previous career high in home runs was 22 over 393 at-bats - but he had always shown power potential in the minors in the form of doubles and triples. His short season in Memphis was likely a fluke in the total number of home runs, but not really out of line with his career mark in extra base hits!

Major Leagues

Now let's take a look at the ratios he's putting up in the bigs.

BB:AB - 0.10 (0.12)
BB:K - 0.35 (.50)
K:AB - 0.27 (.24)
XBH:AB - 0.39 (.40)

The set of numbers in the parentheses are his career minor league numbers, including 2005. As you can see, his walk rate is slightly lower, his K rate is slightly higher, and he's hitting for a little less power than he did in the minor leagues - all expected, as he's facing tougher competition. With that being said, he doesn't appear to be performing at a level that suggests he's completely out of his head right now.

Summary

John Rodriguez appears to me to be the type of player that may be able to contribute for more than just a few weeks. He isn't afraid to take a walk from time to time, giving him solid OBP numbers over his career (.353 lifetime minor league OBP.) What's more, he has always displayed power in the minors, usually in the form of doubles and triples up until his crazy visit to Memphis earlier this year.

Is Rodriguez going to be a .300 hitter in the majors? Probably not, at least on a consistent basis. Is he going to be a 30 home run guy? The first time I wrote this article, I said no. Now, I'm not so sure. The fact that he never reached that mark in the minor leagues cannot be used as an argument against him, since he never had more than 408 at-bats in a season. With the power he's displayed starting in 2001, I think he in fact could surpass 30 home runs if given 500 or more at-bats.

All in all, now that I've re-looked at the numbers, I think the Cardinals may have stumbled onto something here. Rodriguez isn't likely to become the next Albert Pujols, Jim Edmonds, or Scott Rolen. However, he in fact could be an 850 to 900 OPS guy in the corner outfield who could be signed relatively cheaply. And considering his young age (27), he could help out the Cardinals for the next few years.

All I need to know about Hal McRae

2005-08-08T08:29:00.000-05:00

From the Post-Dispatch:

Cardinals hitting coach Hal McRae approached leadoff hitter David Eckstein
with a rhetorical question Sunday during batting practice: How many walks had he
had in the past 20 games?

Eckstein guessed four.

The answer was one.

"That," McRae said, "is the point."

At McRae's advice, Eckstein waited out pitches and didn't swing the bat
once in his first two plate appearances Sunday. For the day, he reached base
four times, doubling with his first swing and winning the game with its final
swing.

I'll let those words speak for themselves, since most of you reading this blog are already fans of plate discipline.

With a little luck, you'll see some posts from me this week. I'm hoping to do one on John Rodriguez, and at least one more in my (everlasting) series of trade evaluations.

Cubs Series

2005-07-25T10:21:00.000-05:00

I have to say, while I would have loved to have seen the Cardinals take 2 out of 3 from the Cubs, the end result of that series doesn't have me upset this morning. Any time you have a series that features a lineup with your starting catcher, 3rd baseman, and left fielder on the DL, along with your regular 1st baseman and right fielder on the bench? You're not likely to win. As is, the Cardinals had a chance to win (or lose) all 3 games. In fact, Pujols had a chance to win each of the last 2, just coming up short.

In the meantime, the Cardinal's health (or lack thereof) is starting to make me just a little nervous. Breaking it down:

Yadier Molina - broken hand (kind of important for a guy who snags 90+ MPH fastballs.) The last I heard, it will be at least another 2 weeks.

Reggie Sanders - broken leg (and bye bye 30/30 season.) Sanders, in my mind, is the guy most likely to be able to come back and play at a high level in September.

Scott Rolen - shoulder problems. His defense was still fine, it's just the fact that he can't hit. He has me very nervous right now.

Larry Walker - neck problems. They're talking about another cortizone shot this week. Let's face it - the dude is old. If he can actually play come October, at this point it will be a bonus to me.

Rumors are bouncing around that the Cardinals may be interested in dealing Jason Marquis for Melvin Mora, then calling up Adam Wainwright to fill out the rotation. Mora is having a slight down year (.294/.352/.493), but would be a great upgrade over the current bench. What's more, the guy has played all 3 outfield positions, as well as 3rd, 2nd, and short. Even if everyone gets healthy, he could play plenty. And, of course, the Cardinals only need 4 starters in the playoffs anyway. Between Suppan and Marquis, one was going to either move to the bullpen or be left off of the roster anyway.

Sidebar - yes, it's been sparce to see me posting here. I'm working on it, people. (My real job has to take a higher priority, even when I don't want it to....)

Chris Carpenter

2005-06-26T09:40:00.000-05:00

Just a quick note this morning. ESPN has been tracking game scores this season, which is a Bill James methodology of rating how good a start is. To learn more about it, check out this link, which also includes the best game scores of the season.

And while you're there, of course, note that Chris Carpenter now has the best 2 games pitched this season in the NL - last night's (2nd), and the 1 hitter against the Blue Jays (1st). In fact, he now has 2 of the best 3 starts in the majors on the year.

Cardinal Trades - 2000

2005-06-21T21:42:00.000-05:00

After a few weeks and a couple of thousand miles of travel for work, I'm finally back on the job of reviewing Walt Jocketty's Cardinal trades. Due to the distress my time off from the blog has created for the 5 or so of you that check in from time to time, I am voluntarily taking a 50% pay cut...

Here we go!

The Cardinals send Alberto Castillo, Lance Painter, and Matt DeWitt to the Toronto Blue Jays for Pat Hentgen and Paul Spoljaric.

This is the trade that kicked off the 2000 rebuilding project. Alberto Castillo had been a decent player for the Cardinals in 1999, but was used as trade bait to upgrade the rotation. And looking at his numbers since being traded away, it's easy to see why. Over 457 at-bats, Castillo hit .212/.280/.284 over the past 5 years. He was solid for the Royals last year, however.

Lance Painter was actually pretty solid for the Blue Jays in 2000, going 2-0 with a 4.72 ERA over 66.2 innings. Overall, he only pitched 2 years after leaving the Cards (not counting 2003, when he was back in town.) During that time he was 3-1 with a 5.27 ERA.

Matt DeWitt was in the majors for parts of the next 3 years after this trade, but never had a season with more than 19 innings pitched. He finished his career with a 1-3 record, 4.95 ERA.

Coming back to the Cardinals was Pat Hentgen. Hentgen provided the Cards with an innings eater type pitcher. He didn't lead the team in ERA, ERA+, innings pitched, or wins - but he was a solid contributor in 2000, going 15-12 with a 4.72 ERA over 194.1 innings.

Paul Spoljaric was waived by the Cardinals during Spring training. He ended up pitching 9.2 innings for the Royals that season, then retired.

Win Share Totals

Pat Hentgen - 10 (1 year in St. Louis)

Alberto Castillo - 10 (5 years)
Lance Painter - 5 (2 years)
Matt DeWitt - 2 (3 years)

The Cardinals send Jose Jimenez, Manny Aybar, Rich Croushore, and Bret Butler to the Colorado Rockies for Darryl Kile, Dave Veres, and Luther Hackman.

At the time, I actually remember not being overly impressed by this trade. I wasn't convinced that Kile was really going to get it back moving back to "normal" altitude, while the Cardinals were sending away a young pitcher with a no-hitter under his belt in Jimenez. Was I ever wrong.

Of the players sent away, Jimenez did in fact end up having the best career post-trade. In the past 5 years, Jimenez went 16-30 with 110 saves and a 4.59 ERA. While the ERA isn't stellar, he did spend 4 of those years in Colorado. He was especially impressive in 2000 through 2002, posting ERA+ seasons of 186, 127, and 138. And believe it or not, he's had more Win Shares over the past 5 years (40) than Darryl Kile had as a Cardinal (39.) (And yes, I realize that isn't exactly a fair comparison.)

The next best player sent away was Manny Aybar - and should tell you a lot about this trade. In his post-Cardinal career, Aybar ended up going 5-3 with a 4.53 ERA over 119.1 innings for 5 different teams.

Brent Butler was almost as good as Aybar. He played parts of three seasons for the Rockies, hitting .245/.285/.380 over 553 at-bats, hitting a grand total of 11 home runs despite half of his games coming in Coors Field.

Rich Croushore, the screwball pitcher, was actually pretty solid for the Cardinals in 1999. Unfortunately for him and the Rockies, is was a career year for him. He pitched 16 innings in 2000 between the Rockies and the Red Sox, posting a 7.88 ERA. He hasn't pitched in the majors since.

The keystone coming back to the Cardinals, of course, was DK. Kile was completely awesome in 1997, going 19-7 with a 2.57 ERA. He tried to cash in by going to Colorado, but as we know - that's not the place for a curve ball pitcher to try to make a living. Coming to St. Louis, Kile became the anchor of the staff in 2000, going 20-9 with a 3.91 ERA. Over his 2 and a half year stint with the Redbirds, Kile was 41-24 with a 3.54 ERA. It's hard to imagine that it's been 3 years ago tomorrow (June 22nd) since he passed away at the age of 33. Rest in Peace.

Dave Veres wasn't chopped liver as he came over in the trade, having recorded 31 saves in 1999 with a less than spectacular 112 ERA+ for the Rox. While many Cardinal fans never really felt comfortable with him in the game, Veres nonetheless spent 3 years in town as the closer, picking up 131 saves with a 3.33 ERA. He was especially tough in the 2000 season, getting 29 saves with a 2.85 ERA, 162 ERA+.

Luther Hackman was really a throw in player in this trade, but he ended up having as good of a career with the Cardinals as 75% of the players given up in this trade. Only with the Cardinals for 3 years, Hackman went 6-6 with a 4.30 ERA and eventually was dealt for Bret Tomko.

Win Share Totals

Darryl Kile - 39 (3 years in St. Louis)
Dave Veres - 27 (3 years in St. Louis)
Luther Hackman - 5 (3 years in St. Louis)

Jose Jimenez - 40 (5 years)
Manny Aybar - 7 (4 years)
Bret Butler - 7 (3 years)
Rich Croushore - 0 (1 year)

The Cardinals send Juan Acevedo, Eli Alfonzo, and Matt Parker to the Milwaukee Brewers for Fernando Vina.

Acevedo had been a serviceable swingman for the Cardinals in 1998 and 1999, getting both starts and closing opportunities during both seasons. But Walt had many irons in the fire pitching wise (such as the newly acquired Dave Veres) and thus had room to deal him away. After leaving the Cardinals Acevedo's days as a starting pitcher were officially over. During the next 3 seasons, he went 7-22 with 34 saves and a 3.97 ERA for 6 different teams.

Eli Alfonzo and Matt Parker were both players to be named later in this trade. Looks like the Cardinals did a poor job in drafting them, and the Brewers did an even poorer job in "naming them later." Neither ever made it to the majors.

Fernando Vina had been coveted by Walt Jocketty for a while, as rumors of him coming to the Cardinals had been floating around since at least the 1999 season. And that's easy enough to understand - he played hard, was solid defensively, and was perceived to be a leadoff hitter. Actually, other than his first pitch swinging, he was a pretty good leadoff guy in 2000 and 2001. 2002 and beyond left quite a bit to be desired, but overall he was a solid player for the Redbirds. Vina hit .285/.327/.384 over his 4 years in "The Lou," picking up a pair of gold gloves.

Win Share Totals

Fernando Vina - 61 (4 years in St. Louis)

Juan Acevedo - 23 (4 years)

The Cardinals send Kent Bottenfield and Adam Kennedy to the Anaheim Angels for Jim Edmonds.

This trade may be looked back upon in 20 years as the Brock/Broglio deal of this era. At the time, it didn't seem quite like a no-brainer. Bottenfield had just had an 18 win season and Kennedy looked like the real deal.

Bottenfield, as I just said, went 18-7 in 1999 with a 3.97 ERA, 115 ERA+. Obviously, the Angels GM at the time must have gone to the Joe Morgan school of "wins are the only pitching stat that matters." 18 wins looks great, but doing so with a 3.97 ERA in the NL? It wasn't likely to happen again....and it didn't. Bottenfield's ERA ballooned up like his waistline in the AL as he had a 5.71 before being traded to the Phillies at the deadline. Over 2000 and 2001, Bottenfield went 10-15 with a 5.63 ERA. Last I heard he had a Country/Christian album coming out earlier this year.

Some were afraid that Kennedy was going to haunt the Cardinals down the road, and he has been a solid player (with a World Series ring to boot.) But overall, Kennedy has been nothing more than a nice player, hitting .278/.322/.406 over the last 5 years. In other words - he's no Jim Edmonds. (He's not even David Ecksteine....)

Jim Edmonds. What's not to like? He was acquired to play 2nd banana to Mark McGwire, but Big Mac went down and Edmonds ended up leading the team in OPS+, HR, RBI, R, and a case of other statistics as the Cardinals made it back to the playoffs for the first time since 1997. In his 5 years with St. Louis (prior to this year) he's hit .298/.409/.593 with 181 home runs and 5 gold gloves in center field. I'm very biased, but I don't think you can find a better centerfielder in baseball during that time span. If he can get to 400 home runs and add a World Series ring to his portfolio, I think he has a legitimate shot at the Hall of Fame.

Win Share Totals

Jim Edmonds - 146 (5 years in St. Louis)

Kent Bottenfield - 7 (2 years)
Adam Kennedy - 63 (5 years)

The Cardinals send Jose Leon to the Baltimore Orioles for Will Clark.

With Big Mac down and out, the Cardinals got help in the form of Will Clark. Someone forgot to tell him that it was 2000, not 1990. But first, Jose Leon.

Leon did make it to the majors, playing with the O's from 2002 through 2004. However, he only got 209 at-bats during that time, hitting .225/.262/.321. Not exactly great numbers out of a corner infielder.

Clark, on the other hand, played out of his mind. Over 171 at-bats, Will the Thrill hit .319/.418/.546, including an amazing 12 home runs and 42 RBI over those 51 games. While I wanted Clark to come back for the 2001 season, I know there is no way he could have finished his career with a better flourish than what he did.

Win Share Totals

Will Clark - 10! (1 year in St. Louis)

Jose Leon - 0 (3 years)

The Cardinals send Chris Richard and Mike Nussbeck to the Orioles for Mike Timlin.

The Cardinal bullpen was pretty shallow leading up to the trade deadline, thus this trade (and the next one.) Other than Dave Veres, Matt Morris, and Mike James, there wasn't much that could be counted on out there until the acquisition of Timlin.

Richard actually ended up with more win shares than Timlin in 2000 as he hit .276/.335/.563 with 13 home runs in August and September for the O's. But Richard never really was able to re-capture that level of performance again during his career. He hasn't played since the 2003 season, having career numbers of .258/.324/.452.

Mike Nussbeck never made it to the majors.

Mike Timlin went 3-1 with 1 save and a 3.34 ERA in 2000, helping stabilize the Cardinal bullpen. He, like Timlin, was never fully trusted by the fans, but more often than not he got the job done. Spending parts of 3 seasons in St. Louis, he went 9-8 with a 3.53 ERA over 155.1 innings and helped land an important part of the MV3's in a later year...

Win Share Totals

Mike Timlin - 13 (3 years in St. Louis)

Chris Richard - 19 (4 years)

The Cardinals send Jack Wilson to the Pittsburgh Pirates for Jason Christiansen.

The Cardinals were desperate for a left handed pitcher in 2000. Yes, they had Rick Ankiel in the rotation, but the bullpen? Jesse Orosco? 2.1 innings pitched, out for the season. Scott Radinsky? One - ONE - pitch thrown during a game, out for the season. Mike Matthews, Justin Brunette, Jose Rodriguez - all were given a shot, none got the job done. So Walt made a move for Christiansen, giving him his only bad trade of the 2000 season.

First, Jack Wilson. Wilson is a slick fielding shortstop who the Cardinals felt was expendable with Edgar Renteria in town. Fair enough. Between 2001 and 2004, Wilson hit .265/.303/.370 with a 75 OPS+, making the highlight reel with his glove on a regular basis. He was especially good last year, giving people ammunition to complain about the Cardinals giving up on him. With that being said, I thought last year was likely a fluke. So far, it appears to have been (.238/.275/.367 through today.)

Christiansen had a great season. In 1998. Did I mention we were talking about 2000? So far in the year, Jason had a 4.97 ERA, 92 ERA+ over 38 innings. That's not great, but maybe he was a LOOGY waiting to happen? Maybe, maybe not. Whatever the case, he pitched 10 innings for the Cardinals with a 5.40 ERA. He did, however, pitch 2.1 perfect innings in the playoffs, which was the whole reason he was brought to town. He finished his Cardinal career having just pitched 29.1 innings for the Redbirds, posting a 4.91 ERA with a 2-1 record and 3 saves.

Win Share Totals

Jason Christiansen - 3 (2 years in St Louis)

Jack Wilson - 51 (4 years)

2000 Totals

Win Shares acquired by St. Louis - 314

Win Shares given up by St. Louis - 234

Net Win Shares gained - 80, or roughly 27 wins.

This was a banner year for Walt, and really the beginning of both his and the Cardinals great run. He revitalized the pitching staff by picking up 2 rotation members. Furthermore, he added a new closer, and a solid setup man at the trade deadline. Not to mention the Will Clark pickup. I realize that Walt likely never expected what he got out of Clark, but luck counts too.

The only blemish of the year, as mentioned, was the Wilson/Christiansen trade. Do I blame Jocketty for trading Wilson? No. Do I blame them for wanting a left handed reliever? Again, no. It is likely, however, that a better candidate could have been picked up to fit the bill that could have helped out the Cardinals more both in 2000 and beyond.

Not only did the trades in 2000 set up the Cardinals for their playoff run, it also placed the 2001 team into a position to be a playoff contender. Here is the updated WS matrix. Once again, this is a breakdown of the difference in Win Shares between the players the Cardinals acquired and the players the Cardinals sent away. Remember - this is a worst case scenario, as players sent away count for the remainder of their MLB careers, whereas players recieved only count during their time with the Cardinals.

1996, -5, -2
1997, 9, 3
1998, -5, -2
1999, -4, -1
2000, 40, 13
2001, 16, 5
2002, -29, -10
2003, -21, -7
2004, -17, -6

Under Walt Jocketty, the Cardinals were 13 games better in 2000 than they would have been by simply building from their farm system. What's more, the 2001 team was already 5 games better before any moves were made.

Five years down, 4 years to go. I promise, it won't take me three weeks to get to 2001.

I'm still alive

2005-06-16T07:40:00.000-05:00

I just wanted to check in and let you all know that I am still around, and do plan on finishing up my trade evaluations. The real world, once again, has been a little more pressing as of late. Look for me to get back into the swing of things by Monday night of next week.

Cardinals Trades - 1999

2005-05-26T12:18:00.000-05:00

Let's get right to it.

The Cardinals send Braden Looper, Armando Almanza, and Pablo Ozuna to the Florida Marlins for Edgar Renteria.

In an effort to win the World Series before Y2K ended the world as we know it, Walt went after a young shortstop with a championship in his portfolio.

Braden Looper was easily the best player given up in this trade. Having pitched 3.1 innings for the Cardinals in 1998 with a 5.40 ERA, young Looper has gone on to become a closer, currently with the Mets. Since leaving St. Louis Looper is 18-18 with 75 saves, a 3.45 ERA, and a World Series ring.

Almanza hasn't been as successful as Looper, but is still making a living playing a kids game. He managed to play 5 years with the Marlins and spent last year in Atlanta. Over his career, the reliever is 14-13 with 2 saves and a 4.87 ERA over 210.2 innings.

Ozuna was supposed to develop into the stud of this bunch. Yet more proof that prospects are never a sure thing. Ozuna made it to the majors in 2000 at the age of 25 and hit .333/.333/.375 over 24 at-bats. He's never quite managed to stick at the major league level, however. Before this season he's never had more than 47 at-bats in a given year. His overall hitting line is .261/.297/.333 with a OPS+ of 63 and 0 MLB home runs.

Edgar Renteria ended up being a nice, solid player for the Cardinals. Over his 6 years in St. Louis he hit .290/.350/.420 and picked up 2 gold gloves, 3 silver sluggers. He had an especially great 2003, hitting .330/.394/.480 with 47 doubles, 34 stolen bases, and 100 RBI. That's a lot of production out of a defensive shortstop. Unfortunately for Cardinal fans, his 2003 season and not the rest of his hitting career was looked at this off-season, putting him out of the Cardinals price range. Well, I say unfortunately - the Cardinals appear to be doing just fine with Eckstein, Mulder, and Grudzielanek for about the same amount of 2005 dollars.

Win Share Totals

Edgar Renteria - 109 Win Shares (6 years in St. Louis)

Braden Looper - 50 Win Shares (6 years)
Armando Almanza - 10 Win Shares (6 years)
Pablo Ozuna - 2 Win Shares (4 years)

The Cardinals send Ron Gant, Jeff Brantley, and Cliff Politte to the Philadelphia Phillies in exchange for Garrett Stephenson and Ricky Bottalico

This trade is a classic example of teams dumping players that they really wish they didn't have onto each other, with both sides hoping they can get the benefit of a change of scenery bump in production. In the end, clubhouse benefits aside, the Phillies ended up getting the short term benefit of this trade.

Ron Gant and Tony La Russa supposedly didn't get along. Claims of racism surfaced, but have never made any sense to me personally. (Would a true racist actually dislike blacks, but have no problem with Latin players? I guess it's possible...) Gant had a respectable 1998, playing in 138 games and hitting .260/.364/.430. His 16 win shares that year were more than any Cardinal outfielder - it was a year, after all, in which Willie McGee got 271 at-bats while hitting .251/.293/.277. (How he got playing time with a racist manager is beyond me.) The Phillies kept Gant around until the trade deadline the following year, when they sent him on to the Angels. Overall, Gant played 5 years after his stint in St. Louis, hitting .254/.345/.457 with 37 home runs over 859 at-bats.

Jeff Brantely really was horrible after leaving St. Louis - even worse than he was with the Cards. Over three years, the current announcer went 3-10 with a 5.61 ERA over 85 innings pitched. Somehow, some way the Phillies allowed him to record 23 saves in 2000 despite a 5.86 ERA, 81 ERA+.

Cliff Politte was a player that, for some reason, the Cardinals threw in in this deal. Personally, I don't see why it was needed. He was born and raised in St. Louis and had shown some limited promise in a few of his 8 starts during the 1998 season. But gone he was. The Phillies eventually converted him to a reliever during the 2000 season, which was a good move for Mr. Politte. Overall, Politte is 11-17 with 14 saves and a 4.26 ERA over his post-St. Louis career.

Coming to St. Louis in this deal was Curt Schilling's buddy Garrett Stephenson. Stephenson was always a little bit better in his mind than on the field. Overall, the Cardinals got a good season out of him in 2000, and an O.K. one in 2003. Over four years in St. Louis, Garrett was 42-47 with a 4.46 ERA over 781.2 innings.

Then there was Ricky Bottalico. I'm not sure why the Cardinals thought that he would be an upgrade over Brantely considering his 6.44 ERA in 1998. But nonetheless, he was the new closer for 1999. The good news was he recorded 20 saves. The bad news was he had a 3-7 record. When your closer has a 4.91 ERA and 1.80 WHIP, things are not good - although, to be fair, he was actually better than Brantley in 1999. Thankfully, though, he was a free agent after the season.

Win Share Totals

Garrett Stephenson - 21 Win Shares (4 years in St. Louis)
Ricky Bottalico - 4 Win Shares (1 year in St. Louis)

Ron Gant - 39 Win Shares (5 years)
Jeff Brantely - 5 Win Shares (3 years)
Cliff Politte - 21 Win Shares (6 years)

The Cardinals send Shawon Dunston to the New York Mets for Craig Paquette

Two of my recent least favorite Cardinals involved in the same trade. I didn't really completely dislike Dunston, so much that I hated seeing him actually taking playing time away from J.D. Drew in the outfield. The defensive downgrade alone should have been enough, but Drew was a much better hitter - even against lefties, which was usually when Dunston got the nod (This was especially a problem in 2000, when Dunston came back like a fungus). Whatever the case, Dunston wasn't bad for the Cardinals in 1999, hitting .307/.327/.467 over 150 at-bats.

Craig Paquette was very similar to Dunston in that he despised drawing walks. In six major league seasons prior to 1999, Paquette's single season high in OBP was .296. Unfortunately (so to speak), he won over a lot of fans at the end of the 1999 season by hitting 10 home runs in just 48 games. Now - I can't completely discount Paquette. There is value in a guy that was able to play 1st, 2nd, 3rd, right field, and left field. And a power bat from the right side of the plate is always nice off of the bench. I simply never liked a player of his talent actually getting 340 or more at-bats in a season, as he did in both 2000 and 2001. Overall, Paquette spent parts of three seasons with the birds on the bat, hitting .267/.307/.461.

Sidebar - A friend of mine went to Colorado during the opening series of the 2001 season. Sitting on the lower level, he was able to maneuver into position to get an autograph from Paquette and speak to him briefly before the game. My friend asked Paquette how much impact young Mr. Pujols would have on the team that year. Paquette, obviously disgusted that Pujols might take away some of his playing time with McGwire on the DL, basically said "the kid isn't good enough to stick on the roster long enough to have an impact." My friend was so ticked that he ended up throwing away the baseball. That comment, combined with Paquette's general suckiness, helped me to thoroughly enjoy it when Vina went on the DL in 2003 - a week after Paquette retired from baseball while toiling in AAA Memphis.

Win Share Totals

Craig Paquette - 25 Win Shares (3 Years in St. Louis)

Shawon Dunston - 4 Win Shares (1 Year)

1999 Totals

Win Shares acquired by St. Louis - 159

Win Shares given up by St. Louis - 131

Net Win Shares gained - 28, or roughly 9 wins

Basically, Walt had what I would consider to be a great trade (Renteria), a solid trade (Paquette), and a bad trade (Stephenson/Bottalico.)

Renteria, as mentioned above, had a great run with the Cardinals. He was especially valuable to the team in 2002 and 2003 when he recorded 26 and 25 win shares, respectively. In fact, Renteria had more win shares in each and every season with the Cardinals than Looper, Almanza, and Ozuna combined.

Paquette drove me crazy, but he was in fact a solid bench player. The fact that Paquette had more WS in 1999 for the Cardinals (5) than Dunston had with the Mets (4) would have made it a decent trade to start with. When you further consider that he contributed another 20 WS with the Redbirds over the next 2 years - with Dunston as a teammate in 2000 as he re-signed - and it is an obvious no-brainer.

The third trade, as already stated, was a case of house-cleaning in both organizations. In reality, Gant ended up being the best player involved in the deal, but only had 2 solid seasons over the rest of his career. Considering that Stephenson had 1 himself, the bulk of the trade deficit in this deal was in the 1999 season. If the Cardinals could have kept Politte for themselves in this deal and worked them into their bullpen, Jocketty wouldn't have looked quite as bad on this one.

Here's the updated WS matrix, updated through the 1999 trades.

1996, -5, -2
1997, 9, 3
1998, -5, -2
1999, -3, -1
2000, -4, -1
2001, -26, -9
2002, -29, -9
2003, -15, -5
2004, -18, -6

Basically, you have the Cardinals not gaining or losing much in Walt's trades through the 1999 season. As far as future talent, the Cardinals had so far sent away roughly 9 wins in both 2001 and 2002. Could that deficit be made up in future trades? Stay tuned for the 2000 season, when Jocketty really kicked it into gear.

Cardinals Trades - 1998

2005-05-23T00:24:00.000-05:00

After almost two weeks without working on this series, I'm finally back at it. That pesky real world just gets in the way sometimes. Hopefully I can rip out 2 or 3 of these this week, as well as deal with the 2005 Redbirds.

The trades we'll talk about here are those that had an impact on the 1998 team. For that reason, the Jeff Brantley/Dmitri Young trade will be discussed here, even though it actually took place in late 1997.

The Cardinals send Dmitri Young to the Reds for Jeff Brantley

Young, a switch hitter, was a nice, solid player that had progressed through the Cardinal system. Since he was primarily a 1st baseman, and since a certain Red headed power hitter had been acquired in 1997, Mr. Young became expendable. Prior to the trade, Young had hit .257/.337/.354 over 362 major league at-bats with St. Louis over the previous 2 seasons. With the Reds, Young turned into a solid player, hitting .304/.357/.488 over the next 4 years, playing 1st, 3rd, left field, and right field. Overall, Dmitri has hit .298/.350/.494 in his 7 seasons since the trade. Considering he'll turn 32 in October, he should have several years left in the tank.

Jeff Brantly was supposed to be the closer that the Cardinals needed in 1998 to replace the departed Dennis Eckersley. Brantley was coming off of a season in which he was only able to pitch 11.2 innings, but had recorded 44 saves with a 2.41 ERA just 2 years previous. The good news was that Brantley was healthy in 1998. The bad news was that he would never sniff his 1996 levels again in his career. He ended up only playing 1 year for the Redbirds, going 0-5 with 14 saves over 50.2 innings. His ERA+ of 94 was actually the best of the last 4 years of his career.

Win Share Totals

Jeff Brantley - 5 Win Shares (1 year in St. Louis)

Dmitri Young - 86 Win Shares (7 years)

Cardinals send Todd Stottlemyre and Royce Clayton to the Texas Rangers for Darren Oliver, Fernando Tatis, and Mark Little

Even though it's only been 7 years, it seems odd to be talking about a time when the Cardinals were selling and the Rangers were buying in July. But that's exactly what happened in 1998, when it was obvious by the deadline that the Cardinals weren't going to be playing come October.

Todd Stottlemyre was solid for the Rangers in 1998, going 5-4 with a 4.33 ERA over 10 starts. Thanks to help from Stottlemyre and Clayton, the Rangers finished 1st in the West, 3 games up on the Angels - then proceeded to get swept by the Yankees in the first round of the playoffs. Stottlemyre got one start in the post season where he went 8 innings, gave up 2 earned runs, struck out 8 - and took the loss as David Wells pitched 8 shutout innings. After the season Todd signed with the Diamondbacks, where he was never healthy again. Over his post-Cardinal career he went 20-15 with a 4.68 ERA, never pitching more than 101.1 innings in an individual season.

The Rangers got a bit more of a return with Clayton as he stayed in town through the 2000 season. His best overall season came with the Rangers in 1999, when he hit .288/.346/.445 and had a 98 OPS+. Overall, Clayton never really put it all together. He will likely be remembered as a guy with a slightly above average glove and a below average bat with some speed in his prime. Overall, his post-Cardinals numbers were .261/.316/.391, and he's still playing in 2005.

Darren Oliver was the key target of this trade. The 27 year old left handed starter was 41-27 with a 4.68 ERA over the previous 6 years for the Rangers. After joining the Cardinals, he went 13-13 with a 4.26 ERA in St. Louis through the 1999 season. After 1999, he was granted free agency.

Fernando Tatis ended up being the diamond in the rough among this group -although, it was a short lived success. Tatis, a third baseman, had hit .264/.297/.378 in limited time with the Rangers between 1997 and 1998. Only 23 years old at the time of the trade, the Cardinals plugged him into the every day lineup and were not disappointed. Through the 2000 season, Tatis would hit .282/.378/.525 with 60 home runs over 1063 at-bats. His 1999 season was especially a memorable one as he hit .298/.404/.553 with 31 doubles, 34 home runs, and 107 RBI. Rob Neyer declared that he would be the best 3rd baseman in the current decade before the 2000 season (I searched, but can't find the article.) And, of course, there is the 2 grand slams in the same inning thing. All in all, he was a great player in his brief time with the team. (More one him in a future article.)

Mark Little actually played for the Cardinals in 1998. 12 at-bats, 1 hit, 2 walks, and a stolen base. He was later granted free agency.

Win Share Totals

Darren Oliver - 5 Win Shares (2 years in St. Louis)
Fernando Tatis - 39 Win Shares (3 years in St. Louis)
Mark Little - 0 Wins Shares (1 year in St. Louis)

Todd Stottlemyer - 16 Win Shares (5 years)
Royce Clayton - 63 Win Shares (7 years)

1998 Totals

Win Shares acquired by St. Louis - 62

Win Shares given up by St. Louis - 165

Net Win Shares gained by St. Louis - negative 103, or roughly 34 wins

Running Totals (1996 - 1998)

Win Shares acquired by St. Louis - 254

Win Shares given up by St. Louis - 342

Net Win Shares gained by St. Louis - negative 88, or roughly 29 wins

The trades made for the 1998 season really appear to be bad. Part of that is actual, part of it is misleading.

Dmitri Young for Jeff Brantley has been claimed by Walt Jocketty to have been his worst trade, but it's not as bad as some make it out to be. Yes, Brantley was a bust. Yes, Young has been a solid player. And yes, the Cardinals should have gotten more out of him. But Young's best season was 2003, when he posted 19 win shares. Those win shares in 2003 would have made him the 5th best player on the Cardinal team, behind Pujols, Rolen, Edmonds, and Renteria. Of course, if the Cardinals had kept him, the Tino Martinez experiment may have never been needed.

The other aspect of the 1998 trades that looks bad today is trading Royce Clayton. Of course, we all know that having Edgar over Clayton was eventually what took place, as will be covered in the 1999 trade edition. The simple fact that Clayton has remained a regular over the last 7 years skews the numbers away from the Cardinals. I am, as you can see, continuing to count ALL win shares accumulated post-trade against the Cardinals. I will keep doing that until I have covered the 2004 season. At that point, I will likely go back and adjust the numbers to reflect the contract status of players traded away. (The Cardinals, for example, may not have chosen to re-sign Young after is arbitration years were up.) But for now I want to see how the numbers shake out once Renteria, Kile, Edmonds, and Rolen enter the picture.

Finally, here is the new version of win shares accumulated by year with the 1998 trades included. Once again, listed are the year, net win shares picked up, and net wins picked up.

1996, -5, -2
1997, 9, 3
1998, -5, -2
1999, -2, -1
2000, -14, -5
2001, -34, -11
2002, -21, -7
2003, -29, -10
2004, -22, -7

Right now, it's not an encouraging trend. With that being said, 1999 and 2000 are the years and Jocketty really started to acquire talent. Stay tuned.

Housekeeping

2005-05-13T09:24:00.000-05:00

I'll be getting back to my year by year trade evaluations today or tomorrow. I would have had a couple more of them out this week, but I actually stayed at a hotel in a major American city the past 2 days that didn't have internet access. Go figure.

But before I start digging back into the trades, I thought that I should spend a breif moment on the 2005 Cardinals again, since so much is going on.

Scott Rolen

Scott Rolen going down for 3 to 6 weeks isn't exactly a blessing, but it's not the end of the world, either. Take a look at this.

Abraham Nunez - .333/.388/.556, 951 OPS, 45 at-bats
John Mabry - .333/.442/.472, 914 OPS, 36 at-bats

Scott Rolen - .257/.347/.477, 824 OPS, 109 at-bats

Would I expect Nunez and/or Mabry to out-hit Rolen all year? No. Do I think it's even likely during Rolen's trip to the disabled list? Not really. Especially in the case of Nunez, who is a career .241/.309/.323 hitter. But right now, the Cardinals aren't losing the 2004 version of Scott Rolen out of their offense. They're losing a guy with an 824 OPS - the same level that David Eckstein has hit to this point in the season. I'm fairly certain that Mabry and Nunez, along with Seabol, can keep things at the level that Scotty had been hitting during his injury. Once Rolen returns, hopefully he'll turn things around and improve the offense even more.

Bench

Speaking of Seabol, here is what he'd been doing in Memphis thus far in 2005.

.324/.374/.658
14 doubles, 1 triple, 8 home runs, 120 at-bats
10 BB's, 21 K's

Very good numbers out of Seabol, who has played 3rd and 2nd in AAA, and is likely to see time in the outfield under Tony La Russa. Personally, I'm very glad to see Seabol getting a shot here, and hope they allow him to start at least once or twice a week. In my opinion, the Cardinal bench is sorely lacking a right handed power threat. Seabol could be the answer to that, even when Rolen returns. Consider the bench as a whole.

Einar Diaz - Backup catcher. Needed
John Mabry - Lefty with some power, plays corner outfield and infield. Needed
Abraham Nunez - Switch hitter, defensive specialist at 2nd, short, and 3rd. Needed
So Taguchi - Righty, solid defensively, primary backup in center. Needed

That leaves...

Roger Cedeno - can only play the same positions as Mabry and Taguchi, and is a defensive liability. Hasn't had a good season with the bat in several years, and it currently hitting .128 with a .146 OBP. No longer a stolen bases threat.

Seabol has a golden opportunity here to take advantage of Rolen's injury. Obviously he's not going to end up as the regular 3rd baseman in St. Louis with the other Scott under contract for the next several years. But if he can show some versatility with the glove and provide just a little pop from the right side - ala Eduardo Perez - he could end up pushing Cedeno off the roster and find himself in the quest for a World Championship.

May Splits

Here's a look at what's going on the first 12 days of May.

As a team, the Cardinals are hitting .325/.396/.516, 912 OPS for the month (12 games.) Their opponents are hitting .257/.325/.407, 733 OPS over the same time span. That's a big advantage despite the meager 7-5 record. No less than seven Cardinal batters have an OPS of 1000 or better in May. Three more are looking at an OPS of 850 or better, including Jason Marquis, pinch hitter extraordinaire. Rather than listing a ton of numbers, here are the leaders in a few key categories with no minimum at-bats required.

Batting Average - David Eckstein, .449
OBP - John Mabry, .533 (24 at-bats)
SLG - Reggie Sanders, .750
OPS - Reggie Sanders, 1189

Runs - Albert Pujols, 11
RBI - Reggie Sanders and Albert Pujols, 10
Home Runs - Reggie Sanders, 4
Doubles - Mark Grudzielanek, 5
Walks - Albert Pujols, 9
Steals - Reggie Sanders, 2

That's what I would call a well-rounded attack. It's especially interesting to see the offense clicking so well without Jim Edmonds, Larry Walker, or Scott Rolen being among the team leaders in any major categories. Don't let that mislead you, though - they're still hitting well this month.

Walker - .367/.457/.667, 1124 OPS
Edmonds - .325/.438/.475, 913 OPS

The fact that Eckstein and Walker are both seing their OBP climb to .390 and higher on the year is going to allow Pujols to drive in a ton of runs.

Oh, and one final May split for you from the hitting side.

.385/.429/.423, 852 OPS, 26 at-bats.

That from no other than....Yadier Molina.

Pitching wise, the Cardinals are having a bit of a letdown this month. Not that it was unexpected - you know there will be stretches this year where the offense carries the pitching, and vice versa.

The rotation has still been steady, with all 5 starters looking at ERA's of 4.50 or less. Mark Mulder has been the class of the group, of course, going 2-0 with a 0.64 ERA, 0.71 WHIP, and 15 K's over 14 innings.

The bullpen has had some bright spots and some dim spots (and are happy to see Izzy back on the roster tonight.) On the one hand, Tavarez and Reyes have been getting the job done with neither allowing an earned run this month. Brad Thompson has also been a shot in the arm in limited work, posting a 1.80 ERA over 5 innings. On the flip side, everyone else in the bullpen has an ERA of 6.75 or greater in May - thus the revolving door that now has Gabe White joining the big club. (It's nice to have a big lead in May to allow your team to give everyone a shot!)

Cardinal Trades - 1997

2005-05-10T12:06:00.000-05:00

The 1997 St. Louis Cardinals looked to be a team on the rise. They were coming off of a season in which they won 88 games and had the Braves down 3 games to 1 in the NLCS before dropping 3 games in a row. Most of the team was returning in 1997, with rookies Dmitri Young and Matt Morris ready to lend a hand to the cause. Free agent acquisition Delino DeShields was the only move made outside of the organization to improve the team.

Unfortunately, 1997 just wasn't meant to be in St. Louis. Brian Jordan, Donovan Osborn, and Alan Benes all missed considerable time to injuries, while Ron Gant and Gary Gaetti saw their production drop off in a major way. The end result was kind of odd - the Cardinals found themselves going after Mark McGwire despite their not being in the playoff hunt and him being in the last year of his contract. The gamble paid off as Big Mac enjoyed the fans of St. Louis and decided to ink a 4 year deal with the Redbirds, setting a trend of big name players coming to St. Louis for a discount. That was the only trade pulled off by Walt Jocketty for the 1997 season - but what a trade it was.

The Cardinals send Eric Ludwig, T.J. Matthews, and Blake Stein to the Athletics for Mark McGwire.

Ludwig didn't do much before or after playing with the Cardinals. After leaving St. Louis, the A's got 24 innings out of him in 1997 with an 8.25 ERA. The A's ended up dealing him to Florida for Kurt Abbot during the off-season of that year. Overall, Ludwig went 2-8 with an 8.11 ERA over 3 seasons after leaving St. Louis.

Matthews was the best of the bunch sent away for McGwire. He actually played for Oakland from the time of the trade until the middle of the 2001 season, when the A's released him. He was then signed by the Cardinals in 2001, giving them 14.2 innings and a 3.07 ERA during the push for the pennant. He played for Houston in 2002, which was his last season in baseball. Overall, the reliever was 25-15 with a 4.60 ERA post-trade.

Blake Stein may have helped the A's the most, but in an indirect manner. Stein was with the A's until the trade deadline in 1999 when he was packaged with Jeff D'Amico and Brad Rigby for Kevin Appier, who was a big part of the A's 2000 playoff team. Stein himself had a couple of decent seasons as a starter for the Royals. Overall he finished his career after the 2002 season with a 21-28 record, 5.41 ERA after leaving the Cardinal organization.

Mark McGwire joined the Cardinals with 34 home runs - the most ever traded away at the deadline, if memory serves correct. He hit 24 more in St. Louis, giving him 58 on the year - the most in the majors. He actually led the A's in home runs on the season, and had the 2nd most for the Cardinals (Lankford led with 31 that year.) And, of course, you all know the rest. He hit 70 in 1998, 65 more in 1999. There is plenty of controversy surrounding Mark McGwire these days, but no matter what you think about his accomplishments you have to concede a couple of points. One, as mentioned above, McGwire started the trend of bigger name players signing with the team rather than testing free agency. (McGwire lobbied Jim Edmonds, for example, after his trade to St. Louis.) Two, it is very likely that Mark McGwire and the excitement generated by his power hitting was a large part of getting the new stadium approved in St. Louis.

Win Share Totals

Mark McGwire - 109 Win Shares (Parts of 5 years in St. Louis)

Eric Ludwig - 0 Win Shares (3 years)
T.J. Matthews - 20 Win Shares (6 years)
Blake Stein - 18 Win Shares (5 years)

1997 Totals

Win Shares acquired by St. Louis - 109

Win Shares given up by St. Louis - 38

Net Win Shares gained by St. Louis - 71, or roughly 24 wins.

Running Totals (1996-1997)

Win Shares acquired by St. Louis - 192

Win Shares given up by St. Louis - 177

Net Win Shares gained by St. Louis - 15, or roughly 3 wins.

After just two years of becoming the GM of the St. Louis Cardinals, Walt Jocketty had received more value than he had given up in trades. It is worth mentioning, however, that the Bernard Gilkey trade actually ate up a lot of the advantages that Jocketty received when he picked up Big Mac. Here is the updated table for WS over time.

1996, -5, -2
1997, 9, 3
1998, 40, 13
1999, -7, -2
2000, 3, 1
2001, -11, -4
2002, -8, -3
2003, -3, -1
2004, -3, -1

As you can see by the above numbers, the biggest benefit to the Cardinals provided by Mark McGwire (and the other players traded for by Jocketty) came in 1998, when the team won 13 more games than they would have by simply promoting their farm sytem. Another item of note is that McGwire had more win shares than the players the Cardinals traded for him every year but 2001. That season, McGwire had 8 WS, while Stein had 7 and Matthews had 2. Personally? It was worth it.

Cardinal Trades - 1996

2005-05-09T12:47:00.000-05:00

Here it is - the first in a series of articles in which I will evaluate the trades made by St. Louis Cardinal General Manager Walt Jocketty. This is a work in progress, and before it's over I may change the methodology being used. In general, however, this is what I have in mind.

First, the players acquired will be looked at. The total number of Win Shares they contributed to the Cardinals will be counted as the value received. Easy enough.

Second, the players traded away will be looked at as well. Since we are grading Walt Jocketty's moves instead of both GM's in question, I am going to look at the Win Shares the player(s) acquired would have had assuming they had played with the Cardinals the rest of their career.

Third, should I miss any trades that went down along the way, please pipe up. When the dust clears, I would like to have a running total of the trades made over the last 10 seasons which can be added to as time goes on. With that being said - let's get started.

1996

The Cardinals send Jay Witasik, Allen Battle, Carl Dale, and Bret Wagner to the Oakland A's for Todd Stottlemyre.

Todd Stottlemyre became an important part of the 1996 division winning Cardinals - the first division win in St. Louis since the 1987 season. During that year, Stottlemyre went 14-11 with a 3.87 ERA over 223.1 innings, making him roughly the third best starter on the team. Overall, he pitched for the Redbirds in 1996 and 1997, plus most of 1998 before being dealt at the trade deadline. During his tenure in "The Lou", he went 35-29 with a 3.77 ERA. Not a bad record, considering the Cardinals were only 2 games over .500 over that 3 year span as a team.

Jay Witasik was the best player given up in this trade, which says a lot about what was given up. The A's only got 51 innings out of Witasik over the next 3 years, with him never posting an ERA under 5.73. Witasik was later traded to the Royals for Scott Chiasson. Over his 9 year career before this season, Witasik went 29-36 with a 4.72 ERA over 614 innings pitched, with the bulk of his games coming in relief. Stay tuned for more information on Witasik in the years ahead as he'll only turn 33 this year, currently pitching for Colorado with a 9.00 ERA over 4 innings.

Allen Battle was the next best player given up in this trade. How good was he? In 1996 for Oakland he hit .230/.324/.274 over 248 at-bats. At the age of 27, it was his last season in the majors.

Carl Dale was an even bigger bust for the A's. After spending 1996, 1997, 1998, and most of 1999 in the minors, the A's traded him to the Brewers for Rich Becker. With the Brewers, Dale ended up pitching a grand total of 4 innings in the major leagues, posting a 20.25 ERA.

Bret Wagner had the worst career of all of the above, never making it to "the show."

Win Share Totals

Todd Stottlemyer - 35 (3 years with St. Louis)

Jay Witasik - 25 (9 years and counting)
Allen Battle - 1 (1 year)
Carl Dale - 0 (1 year)
Bret Wagner - 0 (0 years)

The Cardinals trade Steve Montgomery to Oakland for Dennis Eckersley.

Eckersley, like Stottlemyre, was an important part of the 1996 playoff team. Over his two seasons with the Cards, Eckersley recorded 66 saves with a 3.58 ERA - although, it is interesting to note that he also had a 1-11 record during that timespan. Of course, considering that the guy was 41 and 42 years old during those seasons, he did a great job.

The A's, on the other hand, didn't get much out of Mr. Montgomery. During 1996 and 1997 he only pitched 20 innings for Oakland, posting a 9.45 ERA. During the 1997 season he was placed on waivers by the A's and claimed by the Cleveland Indians. The Indians waived him the following Spring, and thus began a list of events in which he signed with various teams. Overall, he ended his major league career with 90.1 innings and a 4.98 ERA.

Win Share Totals

Dennis Eckersley - 16 Win Shares (2 years with St. Louis)

Steve Montgomery - 6 Win Shares (4 years)

The Cardinals trade Bernard Gilkey to the New York Mets for Eric Ludwig, Erik Hiljus, and Yudith Ozurio.

Bernard Gilkey had signed a contract with the Cardinals early in the 1995 season, then was traded in January of 1996. I am not certain as to what the contract terms were with Gilkey, but I can tell you that the Cardinals had signed Ron Gant the previous month, giving them a log jam in the outfield. The Cardinals chose to trade away Gilkey over Brian Jordan and Ray Lankford, which wasn't a bad idea. All three of them were 28 years old, and in 1995 Gilkey had been the worst of the three as he had 16 WS compared to Jordan with 18 and Lankford with 22. Meanwhile, Gant was coming off of a 21 WS season in which he hit 29 home runs in just 119 games.

Interestingly enough, Gilkey turned in a career year in 1996, posting 30 WS while hitting .317/.393/.562 with 30 Home Runs and 117 RBI - easily out producing Gant and his 18 WS. It ended up being an aberration, however, as Gilkey never came close to matching those numbers again. In fact, after 1996 he played 5 more seasons, only hitting a total of 36 home runs over that entire time. Branch Rickey once said that it's better to trade a player a year too early than a year too late - but the Cardinals likely would have been better in 1996 with Gilkey and without Gant (let alone Gant's albatross contract.)

And while it's better to trade a player too soon rather than too late, it's also better to actually get something in return.

Eric Ludwick gave the Cardinals the most production of all players received in the Bernard Gilkey trade. Which is sad, considering he only pitched 16.2 innings with a 9.16 ERA for the team over a 2 year span. Of course, Oakland must have seen something in him (stay tuned for 1997).

Eric Hiljus had the best major league career of the players received in this deal. Unfortunately, the Cardinals released him in August of 1997 before he reached the majors, and thus they received no benefit from him.

Yudith Orozio never made it to the major leagues with any organization.

Win Share Totals

Eric Ludwick - 0 Win Shares (2 years in St. Louis)
Eric Hiljus - 0 Win Shares (0 years in St. Louis)
Yudith Orozio - 0 Win Shares (0 years in St. Louis)

Bernard Gilkey - 62 Win Shares (6 years)

The Cardinals send Allen Watson, Rich DeLucia, and Doug Creek to the San Francisco Giants for Royce Clayton and a player to be named (Chris Wimmer).

Royce Clayton was picked up to be a defensive shortstop - much to the chagrin of an aging Ozzie Smith. In fact, Ozzie still holds a grudge against the Cardinals for playing Royce over him during the 1996 season, even though Ozzie was the better player in Spring training. Whether Ozzie was wronged or not, Royce saw the bulk of the playing time at short for the Redbirds for parts of three seasons, hitting .262/.313/.371 with 82 stolen bases. He was eventually packaged with Todd Stottlemyer in a trade for Fernando Tatis.

Chris Wimmer never played in the major leagues.

Allen Watson is likely the biggest name on this list, due to him picking up a couple of World Series rings with the Yankees in 1999 and 2000. In 5 years after being traded from the Cardinals, Watson was 32-34 with a 5.02 ERA, spending most of the last 3 seasons as a reliever.

Rich DeLucia was a right handed pitcher who was 31 years old at the time of this trade. DeLucia was coming off of a season in which he posted a 3.39 ERA, 125 ERA+ out of the bullpen for the Cardinals. In what would be the first of many examples of Jocketty selling at just the right time, DeLucia spent the next 4 years going 11-17 with a 4.82 ERA. His last season was 1999.

Doug Creek was a lefty specialist who pitched 6.2 shutout innings for the Cardinals as a September call-up in 1995. After being traded from the Cardinals, Creek ended up playing for 7 different major league teams plus a team in Japan. Overall, his MLB numbers were 7-14 with a 5.32 ERA.

Win Share Totals

Royce Clayton - 32 Win Shares (3 years in St. Louis)
Chris Wimmer - 0 Win Shares (0 years in St. Louis)

Allen Watson - 25 Win Shares (5 years)
Rich DeLucia - 11 Win Shares (4 years)
Doug Creek - 9 Win Shares (7 years)

1996 Totals

Win Shares acquired by St. Louis - 83

Win Shares given up by St. Louis - 139

Net Win Shares Gained by St. Louis - negative 56 (roughly 19 fewer wins acquired than traded away)

Keep in mind that the -56 WS value is slightly misleading. For one thing, Gilkey provided for most of the loss (30 WS) in one year and one year only. What's more, Jay Witasik is still posting WS to this day. Every WS he racks up makes the 1996 trade look worse, as I am looking at the difference assuming the Cardinals had kept players traded away for their entire career.

Considering that many trades made by the Cardinals in years past have been made for short term benefits, the following table is going to provide useful. Basically, I have broken down the net difference in WS traded away and acquired into a year by year basis. By doing that, the WS totals racked up by players like Witasik over long stretches of time is more adequately accounted for. Listed below is the year, the WS net difference, and the equivalent in wins.

Year, Win Shares, Wins

1996, -5, -2
1997, 2, 1
1998, 4, 1
1999, -26, -9
2000, -8, -3
2001, -10, -3
2002, -7, -2
2003, -3, -1
2004, -3, -1

As you can see, when you spread the trades out over the time in which the players impacted their respective teams, things smooth out more. In 1996, the Cardinals ended up trading away 5 win shares, or 2 wins more than they received in return. Of course, when you consider the free agent signings of Ron Gant (18 WS), Gary Gaetti (16) and Andy Benes (14), the Cardinals still ended up fielding an 88 win team and making it to within 1 win of the World Series. What's more, the trades made prior to the 1996 season actually made the Cardinals a better team in 1997 and 1998, as Gilkey started performing more like the Cardinals probably expected him to.

Obviously the table is a work in progress in every year from 1997 and up. Stay tuned over the next several weeks as I pick apart all trades in every individual season and continue to add up both the overall and the individual season impact that Walk Jocketty has made through trades.

Note - if anyone out there can explain to me how to put a table into my blog via html, please either email me or place something in the comments section. It would be nice to make the table easier to read.

Monday Morning Thoughts

2005-05-09T08:29:00.000-05:00

- While it's frustrating that the Cardinals are off to a 3-7 start against teams not in the NL Central, it's not all bad news. For one thing, the Cardinals have yet to be swept in a series this season. For another thing, out of their 7 losses against teams from the NL East and NL West, 4 of them were of the 1 run variety. Just a couple of small breaks here and there and the Cardinals could have a 7-3 record instead of the one they're looking at.

- Thanks to the 15 run outburst yesterday, including 11 in the first inning, the Redbird offense is finally clicking. The Cardinals now have the 2nd most runs scored in the NL with 154 - right behind their opponents for the next 4 games who have scored 161. The Cardinals OPS is 3rd best in the league at 780. The Dodgers have an 801 mark, with the Giants 2nd at 783.

- Even though the pitching was letting the team down during the San Diego series, on the season the Cardinals still have the 3rd best ERA in in NL at 3.69. Once Isringhausen comes off the DL, the pitching should really come into focus.

- Down on the farm:

Adam Wainwright - 3-1, 1.96 ERA, 34 K's, 5 BB's, 41.1 innings
Anthony Reyes - 4-1, 2.61 ERA, 40 K's, 6 BB's, 41.1 innings

How and when are the Cardinals going to get those 2 plugged into the major league roster?

- Over the next few weeks, I'm going to start working on articles that will address the trades made by Walt Jocketty since joining the Cardinals. A lot of work was done on this front at Redbird Nation back in 2003. I'm going to further that work by looking at the win shares gained by each side in each trade so that, when it's all said and done, we can assign the number of wins added or lost by Walt for the Cardinals. My plan is to do it on a year by year basis, starting with 1996 and working my way up. Hopefully, I'll get one out today with more following over the next 3 weeks. (Thanks to Eleven for the suggestion.)

Random Thoughts

2005-05-06T12:35:00.000-05:00

- Yadier Molina got off to an 0-16 start, and only had 1 hit in his first 29 at-bats. Since then, Yadier is hitting .278/.316/.333/.649 over 54 at-bats. Obviously a 649 OPS isn't exactly Mike Piazza, but the .278 batting average over that time is encouraging. (Not that the team is exactly expecting Molina to carry the team offensively in the first place.)

- The bullpen has been a bit shaky, especially with Izzy out. But don't let anyone tell you that they would have been better off right now if they had kept last year's unit in place.

Kiko Calero - 5.19 ERA, 1.50 WHIP, 8.2 innings
Dan Haren - 5.50 ERA, 1.49 WHIP, 34.1 innings
Steve Kline - 6.52 ERA, 1.86 WHIP, 9.2 innings

Sure - those guys are still likely to be better than Pulsipher, Journell, and Cali this year. But nothing is set in stone.

- If someone had wanted to bet you $100 that Mark Grudzielanek would be out-hitting Scott Rolen on May 6th, would you have taken them up on it?

Grudz - .319/.374/.495, 868 OPS
Rolen - .261/.352/.467, 820 OPS

- It's taken a little time, but the Cardinal offense is gaining steam. Entering play today, the Cardinals have scored the 5th most runs in the NL (130) and have the 7th best OPS (757). That without a lot of help from Scott Rolen and Larry Walker.

- Over the last 7 days, Neifi Perez (SS, Cubs) is hitting .105/.190/.105, 296 OPS over 17 at-bats. What, you expected him to hit around .400 with a 1000 OPS all year?

Cardinals May Schedule

2005-05-02T17:34:00.000-05:00

Even though one game has already been played in May, here is a quick breakdown of the opponents coming up the remainder of the month.

Based upon current won/loss records, the Cardinals only have two teams on their schedule in May with a winning record - The Dodgers at 16-8, and the Nationals at 13-12.

Four other teams on their schedule this month are currently within 4 games of the .500 mark - The Reds at 10-14, the Padres at 11-14, the Mets at 12-13, and the Phillies at 11-14.

The other three teams the Cardinals are playing this month are already looking towards 2006 - the Royals at 7-18, the Pirates at 8-15, and the Rockies at 6-16.

If you combine the winning percentages of all teams and weigh them to the number of times the Cards are scheduled to play them in May, the component winning percentage of the competition is currently at .452. Compare that to the "strength of schedule" so far this season, which is .497 heading into play today.

That's not to say that this month's schedule is going to be a cake walk, but on paper it appears to be easier than April. Especially the end of the month.

3 @ Kansas City (7-18)
3 vs. Pittsburgh (8-15)
3 vs. Washington (13-12)
4 @ Colorado (6-16)*

*Note - 2 of these games are played the 1st 2 days of June.

That two week stretch of games could provide a great opportunity for the Cardinals to pile up some wins. Of course, last year the Pirates swept the Cardinals in the middle of the season - so you never know!

Cardinal Players of the Month - April

2005-05-02T08:24:00.000-05:00

This is nothing official, just my own take on the subject.

Starting Pitcher - Matt Morris

It would be easy enough to argue for Mulder, Carpenter, or Marquis, but Morris is my pick. Signing a cheap deal during the off-season, Morris was not expected to be able to join the Cardinals until May, if not June. Instead, Matty-Mo took the mound three times in April, compiling a 2-0 record with a 2.12 ERA. His peripheral stats look great as well. Nineteen strikeouts over 17 innings vs. just 3 walks. A WHIP of 0.94. Batters hitting just .210/.242/.323/.565 off of him. But most important of all? He's only allowed 1 home run so far this year. Take a look at his home runs per at bat ratios over recent history.

2001 - 0.060
2002 - 0.076
2003 - 0.116
2004 - 0.173
2005 - 0.059

I'm not ready to proclaim that Morris is going to return to 2001 form based on just 3 starts, but it is encouraging. And for those of you that may not recall - 2001 was the season that Morris went 22-8 with a 3.16 ERA. If the Cardinals get anything close to that out of what was supposed to be their #4/#5 starter this year? Look out!

Relief Pitcher - Randy Flores

Yes, I realize he hasn't been perfect. But Flores, thus far, has provided a solid 2nd lefty out of the bullpen. And don't let his inflated ERA (5.19) fool you. Opponents are only hitting .188/.297/.313/.610 off of him this season - the best OPS allowed out of the bullpen in April among guys that aren't now on the DL. He's striking out 11.4 batters every 9 innings, and sporting a WHIP of 1.15. Once he piles up some more innings, his ERA is going to come into line as well.

Starting Hitter - Albert Pujols

The guy is supposedly off to a slow start, yet still hit .322/.396/.611/1.007 in April, hitting safely in the last 11 games of the month. Compared to 2004, he's off to a better start hitting wise, but worse OBP wise (.287/.411/.609/1.020). Through yesterday, Pujols is on pace to hit 56 doubles, 42 home runs, and drive in 134. Ho hum.

Bench Player - So Taguchi

What the heck has gotten into this guy? He hit .370/.433/.630/1.063 over 27 at-bats in April. Entering this season, So had 13 career doubles, 3 triples, and 6 home runs. Last month he hit 2 doubles, 1 triple, and 1 home run. Seven career stolen bases entering the year, 1 in April. We can hope that he keeps it up, but he did have a couple of hot months last year as well.

April - .214/.241/.286/.527
May - .400/.429/.650/1.079
June - .212/.250/.273/.523
July - .242/.250/.364/.614
August - .450/.500/.550/1.050
September - .293/.383/.415/.798

I must say - the last 2 months of last year, combined with his start this year, may indicate a bit of improvement on his part. Not that it's likely, mind you. But nonetheless, he was great in April!

Braves Mini-Preview

2005-04-29T12:40:00.000-05:00

This weekend is going to provide some fun baseball in Atlanta as the Cardinals and the Braves face off. Looking at the schedule so far, one could argue that this is the first playoff caliber team the Cardinals have faced all year. (Unless, of course, Derek Lee and Neifi Perez can hit around .400 all year long - but I digress.)

Rather than getting too wrapped up in tonight's exciting pitching match-up, I simply wanted to take a quick look at the Braves offense. Atlanta enters play tonight with the 14th best offense, based upon OPS, in the NL. Overall, the team is hitting .243/.310/.385, 695 OPS. Granted, a team featuring Brian Jordan and Raul Mondesi as regulars shouldn't be expected to be an offensive powerhouse (this is, after all, 2005, not 1995), one would expect Chipper and Andruw Jones, Marcus Giles, and Rafael Furcal to provide some help offensively. That just hasn't been the case so far.

As of right now, the Atlanta offense only features three hitters - two regulars - with an OPS of 800 or better.

Chipper Jones - .381/.513/.698, 1211 OPS
Wilson Betemit - .231/.444/.538, 983 OPS (13 at-bats)
Marcus Giles - .316/.391/.474, 864 OPS

I'm no expert, but that tells me that Chipper should be avoided like the plague until someone else steps up and proves they can beat you as well.

Against left handed pitching, however - as will be the case tonight with Mulder on the hill - the Braves have fared much better. In limited chances this season vs. southpaws, the Braves are hitting .339/.409/.527, 936 OPS over 112 at-bats. That includes 7 position players with an OPS of 900 or greater.

Wilson Betemit - .500/.600/1.500, 2100 OPS, 4 at-bats
Eddie Perez - .429/.429/.857, 1286 OPS, 7 at-bats
Marcus Giles - .556/.600/.667, 1267 OPS, 9 at-bats
Pete Orr - .500/.750/.500, 1250 OPS, 2 at-bats
Chipper Jones - .444/.545/.667, 1212 OPS, 9 at-bats
Rafael Furcal - .333/.333/.600, 933 OPS, 15 at-bats
Andruw Jones - .308/.286/.615, 901 OPS, 13 at-bats

(No, that's not a typo - Andruw has a lower OBP than AVG. Remember that sacrifice's don't effect batting average, but do affect OBP.)

That's not a lot of at-bats to judge by, but Mulder may have his work cut out for him tonight. Especially considering how dominate Hudson has been so far this year (0.96 ERA).

With that being said - even if the Cardinals do lose tonight, I like their chances of being able to out-score the Braves in the other two games of this series. If Mulder can come up big again tonight, a sweep wouldn't be hard to imagine.

Defense at Catcher

2005-04-27T07:20:00.000-05:00

Similar to the situation at shortstop, much was made this off-season about the perceived downgrade the Cardinals were going to have at the catching position.

Most felt that Yadier Molina would likely be able to match the offensive production of Mike Matheny (although we're still waiting.) Most even felt that, eventually, Molina would be as good or better than Matheny with the glove. But in 2005? A 21 year old starting catcher trying to take a veteran team back to the playoffs? The Cardinals were all but certain to miss the veteran leadership, the handling of pitchers, blah blah blah. I didn't bother to look up any of these gloom and doom quotes last night - after all, the season is barely at the 10% mark and the Cardinals could still end up being wrong on this one. But I have looked up the defensive statistics, and the results may surprise you a bit.

"Normal" Defensive Statistics

First, let's look at the old standby numbers of Fielding Percentage, Range Factor, and Zone Rating. I'm not going to spend much time on these since, frankly, range factor and zone rating for catchers doesn't really tell you a whole lot.

Matheny - 1.000 FP, 6.35 RF, 1.000 ZR
Molina - .983 FP, 7.42 RF, 1.000 ZR

Molina has committed two errors which actually ties him with 5 other catchers for most in the majors. With that being said, one of the guys he's tied with is Brian Schneider who has a great glove. In other words, 2 errors this early may just be a fluke - we'll see.

Molina's RF is the 9th best in baseball, with Matheny coming in 21st. How important of a factor is RF for a catcher? Mike Piazza ranks 1st. This from the guy that's allowed 20 steals while throwing out just 1 base runner.

Zone Rating is equally useless. Out of 27 catchers listed on ESPN's defensive website 23 have a ZR of 1.000. Next.

Caught Stealing

This is the area that first caught my eye and caused me to write this article.

Molina - 2 Stolen Bases Allowed, 4 Caught Stealing, 67% CS
Matheny - 11 Stolen Bases Allowed, 3 Caught Stealing, 21% CS

We all know that Molina has a cannon for an arm, but he's only allowed 2 steals this year? That's pretty amazing, as is his MLB best 2/3 rate for throwing out base runners. His great arm, combined with a high early success rate, may deter teams from even thinking about running on him.

Meanwhile, Mr. Matheny has already allowed 11 stolen bases. At that pace, he'd allow in the neighborhood of 90 steals this season. Over his career, he's allowed as many as 69 in a season, but had kept teams to 44 or fewer since coming to the Cardinals in 2000. Interestingly enough, his CS percentage isn't much worse than it had been over the past 2 seasons when it was under 30%. Supposedly, teams were afraid to run on him because his arm was so good, thus only top notch base stealers were running on him and skewing his caught stealing rates. Maybe the NL West didn't get the memo that he couldn't be ran on?

Handling of Pitchers

Ignore Matheny's bat. Ignore is ability to block balls in the dirt and (supposedly) throw out base runners. The real, real aspect of Mike Matheny that the Cardinals were going to sorely miss was his ability to handle the pitchers. After all - how could anyone reasonably expect a mere kid like Molina to know how to call the right pitches, settle down the hurler, etc?

CERA
Matheny - 5.28
Molina - 3.11

Molina has the 2nd best CERA (catcher's ERA) in the majors, while Matheny comes in at his uniform number of 22. In other words - every 9 innings that each of them catch, Molina's pitcher's are allowing 2 fewer runs than Matheny's.

Obviously this isn't a great comparison, considering that they have two different pitching staffs to work with, not to mention 2 different parks to play half of their games in. Heck, for that matter the Giants may have played a few games in Coors Field already, thus skewing the numbers. On the other hand, Matheny is playing his home games in more of a pitcher's park than Molina.

To take it a step further, I looked up the starting pitcher's for each team. Listed below are each player's current ERA, along with their career ERA.

Giants
Jason Schmidt - 3.41, 3.90 Career
Noah Lowry - 5.09, 3.57 Career
Bret Tomko - 5.70, 4.53 Career
Kirk Rueter - 7.20, 4.18 Career
Jerome Williams - 6.48, 3.77 Career

Cardinals
Matt Morris - 2.45, 3.53 Career
Jason Marquis - 2.77, 4.16 Career
Mark Mulder - 3.10, 3.92 Career
Jeff Suppan - 3.42, 4.80 Career
Chris Carpenter - 4.15, 4.59 Career

Interesting, don't you think? The Giants rotation is worse than their career across the board, while the opposite is true of the Cardinals. Disclaimers abound, of course. Mulder, Suppan, and Carpenter spent the bulk of their careers in the AL, thus should have better ERA's in the NL. Not to mention, when you're talking about 3 to 5 starts per pitcher, one lousy one can badly inflate an ERA (thus Carpenter's rotation high ERA in St. Louis...for now.)

With those things being said - if a catcher really, really has an effect on the performance of a pitcher (which is open for debate), and if Matheny really, really is so gifted in that area - wouldn't you expect at least 1 or 2 of the Giants rotation to be showing an improvement over their career marks? Or better yet, wouldn't you expect more than 1 member of their rotation to have an ERA under 5.00?

Wrapping it up

Overall, there are still a lot of games to be played. I suspect the pitching will get better in San Francisco, and likely will get a little worse in St. Louis (unless you think Marquis and Morris can keep it up all year.) What will really be interesting to keep an eye on will be if teams continue to run on Matheny like mad. Even if they don't - Yadier is showing in the early going that his $323,000 2005 salary is very likely to be a much, much better value than the $10.5 million the Giants are paying Matheny over the next 3 years.

Origins of an Article

2005-04-26T11:25:00.000-05:00

This morning, while looking through some team stats, I noted that the Cardinals rank 21st in the majors in walks drawn, and even worse, 14th in the NL. Furthermore, I saw that the Cubs - a team loaded with non-walking players - had drawn 3 more walks thus far. Yes, I realized that they had also played in 2 more games, but was this a sign of a Cardinal team still getting it's footing? Or worse yet, is the new hitting coach (Hal McRae) having a negative effect on the Cardinals and their desire to draw walks?

Well, after looking up a few more team stats, I convinced myself that this isn't the case. But rather than throw it out, I decided to go ahead and share what I found with you in the event that someone else is starting to worry about the Redbirds and their slow starting bats.

BB/PA

Thus far this season, the Cardinals have drawn 0.86 BB/PA, which is the 14th most in MLB. While being middle of the road may not sound all that great, consider that in 2004, en route to winning 105 games, the Cardinals drew 0.87 BB/PA, good for 12th most in the majors. Something tells me that one less walk every 1000 trips to the plate isn't going to ruin the Cardinals playoff hopes. Here are the BB/PA numbers over the past few seasons.

2005 - 0.86
2004 - 0.87
2003 - 0.90
2002 - 0.87

Not much has changed over that time span. And, of course, the year the Cardinals drew the most walks is the only year in that grouping that they didn't go to the post-season.

Individual Walk Rates

Curious to see how players are looking in regard to getting on base, I looked up walks per at-bats for the 8 regulars in the Cardinal lineup. Note that I'm using at-bats instead of plate appearances simply because it's a bit easier to look up, while still conveying the same general information - even though a walk is not an at-bat. Listed are each players 2005 BB/AB rate, along with his career entering this season following in parentheses.

Eckstein - 0.153 (0.075)
Walker - 0.145 (0.132)
Pujols - 0.87 (0.129)
Edmonds - 0.245 (0.144)
Rolen - 0.91 (0.137)
Sanders - 0.102 (0.109)
Grudzielanek - 0.053 (0.051)
Molina - 0.019 (0.096)

Basically, Sanders and Grudz are a wash. Of the other six players, 2 have improved slightly, 2 have declined slightly. That leaves Edmonds, who's almost doubled his rate, and Molina, who's cut his by around 80%. In other words - a wash. I think everything listed there can likely be explained by early season hot and cold streaks. Although, I must admit I'm hoping that Eckstein's rate is for real as that will bode well for the Cardinals during the season.

Finally, out of curiosity I looked up a couple of more measures.

K/AB

I thought that maybe the Cardinals and their new hitting coach was putting more emphasis on not striking out, so I looked up their K rates for the last four seasons.

2005 - 0.145
2004 - 0.195
2003 - 0.168
2002 - 0.168

In other words, Cardinal hitters are striking out in 5% fewer at-bats this year than in 2004. While that sounds good on the surface - are the Cardinals adjusting their swing, either with 2 strikes or not, in order to make contact more often, and thus not getting as many extra base hits?

SLG

2005 - .418 (7th in NL)
2004 - .460 (1st)
2003 - .454 (2nd)
2002 - .425 (2nd)

Many will probably laugh at me suggesting that the Cardinals are not hitting for as much power as in years past. After all, they have the 3rd most home runs in the NL despite playing 2 to 3 games less than most other teams. However, they have only hit 29 doubles as of yet, the 2nd fewest in the NL.

Conclusions

How many disclaimers can I fit into this wrap-up? The Redbirds have only played 17 games, Pujols and Rolen have been heating up, and Walker is likely to follow. Pujols and Edmonds are both on pace to hit around 50 home runs this season. And to be honest, I'm not exactly sure how much of an impact a hitting coach actually has on veteran players - especially guys like Albert Pujols who tend to end up being the teacher rather than the pupil.

With those things being said, I started looking into the Cardinal offense expecting to see a team not getting on base as much as it has been in recent history. Instead, I found a declined K rate, combined with a SLG that is down quite a bit year over year. This may point to a new team methodology, inspired by their new hitting coach, to avoid striking out more, which is in effect limiting their doubles.

Or, it could be the fact that the Cardinals have already faced Oswalt, Zambrano, Sheets, and Clemens once each this season - 23% of all games played.

Either way - keep an eye on the team SLG to see where it goes. (Hopefully, this has the same effect as my Scott Rolen article.)

Oh - did I mention that the Cardinal pitching staff is leading the majors in walks allowed (50) and home runs allowed (8)?

2005 MLB Playoffs - NFL Style

2005-04-25T07:13:00.000-05:00

The NFL is deemed by most to be the most popular team sport in the United States. Whether you measure it by Super Bowl TV ratings, TV dollars, national interest - it seems to come out on top. One of the reasons for this is supposedly the fact that the NFL has a salary cap, and thus more parity, which in turn holds more fan interest during the regular season.

While I think it is likely true that the salary cap does at least partly help promote a more even playing field in the NFL, I personally don't believe that the credit can all be given to that. (We won't go into the fact that, despite so-called parity, the NFL Champion has been the same team 3 of the past 4 years.) No, I think that the 16 game season, combined with 12 teams making the post-season, allows teams to go on hot streaks just long enough to make the playoffs. Why am I writing about this today? It just so happens that every team in MLB has now played 16 or more games, allowing us to look at who would make the playoffs under this kind of a system.

AL East - Red Sox, 10-6
AL Central - White Sox, 12-4
AL West - Angels, 9-7

Wild Card - Twins, 10-6
Wild Card - Orioles, 9-7
Wild Card - Athletics, Rangers, Mariners, 8-8

(Note - ESPN doesn't have their team vs. team standings updated for 2005, and I didn't want to look at 3 weeks of scores to sort it out.)

Your 1st round playoff match-ups would be the Angels vs. the #6 seed (either Oakland, Texas, or Seattle) with the Twins getting home field advantage over the Orioles. The White Sox and Red Sox would have the 1st round bye, with the White Sox having the overall #1 seed.

NL East - Marlins, 9-7
NL Central - Cardinals, 11-5
NL West - Dodgers, 12-4

Wild Card - Nationals, 9-7
Wild Card - Braves, Mets, Cubs, Reds, Diamondbacks, 8-8

A little bit more "parity" in the NL. The Marlins and Nationals would get to host 1st round playoff match-ups, each playing teams with an 8-8 record among those listed. The #1 seeded Dodgers and #2 seeded Cardinals would be resting for the 2nd round.

Using these criteria for picking and seeding playoff teams, you see that the Yankees don't even come close to making the playoffs. Granted, they aren't exactly off to a great start, but do you think they will finish the season without finishing in the top 8 in the AL? It's also hard to imagine the White Sox finishing the season tied for the best overall record in baseball, but with a short season the improbable becomes possible.

The NL doesn't provide any huge shocks among the division winners, but the rest of the playoff pool is very interesting. The Washington Nationals not only making the playoffs, but having home field in the first round? And what about the Reds and/or the D-Backs making the playoffs this year? Neither are very likely in MLB, but would be very possible in the NFL.

This post isn't meant to tear down the NFL, so much as to show that too much credit is given to the salary cap. Anyone who claims a cap is needed in baseball and uses the NFL as proof? Well, a cap may or may not be the answer for baseball, but the NFL isn't the right example to use in their argument.

Defense at Short

2005-04-22T15:35:00.000-05:00

We're only 13 games into the season, but I'm ready to take a cursory look into the defense we're getting from David Eckstein.

Much was said (and printed) this off-season in regard to the downgrade the Cardinals were going to have at shortstop with the departure of Edgar Renteria and the addition of Eckstein. We heard plenty of sources pointing out that he has sure hands, but not much range, and even less of an arm. Of course, I personally pointed out that Eckstein's defense from a statistical standpoint was hard to judge due to him playing on fly ball, strikeout pitching staffs (thus fewer balls to make plays on.) Here's how the two shortstops stack up here in the early going.

Fielding Percentage
Renteria - .972
Eckstein - 1.000

Eckstein obviously isn't going to go all season without giving up an error, but he's always been steady, only having 14 errors over the last 2 years, or 2176 innings in the field. Renteria, by comparison, had 11 errors just last year over 1307 innings. Renteria's fielding percentage is actually about what one would expect, as he has a .970 FP over his career at short.

Range Factor
Renteria 4.62
Eckstein 5.14

Range Factor, or RF, is simply the number of assists and putouts a player averages every 9 innings in the field. In other words, Renteria is averaging 4.6 assists and/or putouts per game, with Eckstein at 5.1. Yes, that's right - thus far, Eckstein has been getting to 1 extra ball in play every 2 games when compared to Renteria. That current RF for Eckstein is far and above his career mark of 4.23, and even more so than his 2004 mark of 3.83. While it's too early to say how much better his RF is this year, it shouldn't surprise anyone that's looked into the numbers if he does improve in this area. In fact, when you look at his career 4.23 mark, consider his new pitching staff, then compare it to Renteria's career RF of 4.44 - well, it's still not impossible to imagine Eckstein getting to as many or more balls in play as Edgar did as a Redbird.

Zone Rating
Renteria .857
Eckstein .813

STATS, Inc. provides Zone Rating (ZR) data by noting the percentage of balls in play that a defensive player should get to. Looking at these two players, they're saying so far this year that Renteria is getting to 86% of the balls that he should, while Eckstein is getting to 81%. Renteria's numbers are in line with his career mark, which is .851. Eckstein, on the other hand, has been quite a bit below his career average of .868. (Yes, that's right - over their careers, Eckstein has a better ZR than Renteria. Go figure.) ZR is a nice statistic to use in conjunction with RF (and FP) as it is not as dependant upon the pitching staff. In other words, a player can have an inflated RF on a groundball staff, but his ZR will help one to determine how often he's getting to the balls that he should be.

According to the Fox Sports Midwest broadcasters, Rolen has been playing farther off the line this year to help make up for the (perceived) smaller range provided by Eckstein. That, combined with the fact that Rolen is so awesome with the glove, might explain why Eckstein is showing a decreased ZR in the early season. It will be interesting to see if Rolen starts playing closer to the line as the Cards gain confidence in Eckstein.

Conclusions

So far, so good with Eckstein at short. Watching him play, I completely understand why his arm has been questioned. Visually, you can tell that he has to really put his entire body behind his throws to get them across to first base. With that being said, the more I see him play (and dig into his stats) the more I think that the improved error rates, along with the potential for range as good or better than Renteria, is going to end up replacing Renteria's gloves quite nicely.

Addendum

For those of you not living in the St. Louis area (or in a region with local broadcasts) you may have missed this little nugget of information on Eckstein. According to the FSN broadcast team, Eckstein - he of the 3 year, $12 million contract - is currently driving the same car he's had since he started in the majors. That would be, of course, a 1999 Nissan Maxima. Talk about someone that appears to be well grounded.

I wonder if he'd take a challenge to drag race me in my 1998 Mazda 626?

This, That, and the Other

2005-04-19T21:24:00.000-05:00

Amazing how a 5 game road trip against the two worst teams in the division can change the outlook of a team so quickly. Concerns about Rolen, Mulder, Molina, and even Morris have been reduced greatly over the past 5 days. The rotation has turned in 5 consecutive quality starts, showing signs of the 2004 Cardinals back in action. The offense has scored 18 runs over the past 2 games, showing signs of coming out of their funk. And while I'm excited about those developments, I'd like to show you all something that you might not see somewhere else. Take a look at the bullpen over the past 7 games.

14.1 innings pitched
0.00 ERA
.113 Average Allowed
.175 OBP Allowed
.170 SLG Allowed
.345 OPS Allowed
16 K's
4 BB's
6 Hits Allowed (1 Double, 1 Triple, 0 Home Runs)

There was much wringing of hands going on among "Cardinal Fans" about the bullpen, especially during the horrific opening weekend against the Phillies. Some were claiming that there was no way the Cardinals could replace Calero and Haren in the pen, and that they were a big downgrade over the 2004 version. While I realize the Brewers and the Pirates aren't exactly offensive juggernauts, a .345 OPS allowed over 7 games is still pretty impressive. If the rotation can continue to limit the workload of the pen like they have recently, you're going to continue to see great results out of the relief core.

Some other thoughts

- Am I the only one who notices that Tony La Russa cannot win? Yes, this isn't exactly a revelation for Cardinal fans, but it's taken a new turn lately (in my eyes at least.) In the last week I've heard La Russa railed on for using statistics too much in his decision making, especially with lineups and bullpen use. Yet at the same time, his managing style (via "Three Nights in August") is described as "Anti-Moneyball" in just about every review of that book I've seen. Which is it? Does he use statistics too much or too little?

- Yadier Molina has a .139 OBP over 35 at-bats, and hits 8th. David Eckstein has a .438 OBP over 37 at-bats and hits leadoff - yet both have scored 3 runs. Eckstein is going to have to learn how to be more of a clutch OBP guy like Molina if he's going to have an impact for this team.

- The Cardinals now have a 7-2 record against the NL Central, and a 6-1 road record. It's great to see them warming up in April instead of late May this year. (Which probably doesn't exactly make the rest of the division feel good about their chances in the early going.)

- Heading into today's game, the Cardinals had played opponents with a .502 winning percentage, while the Cubs had played teams with a .423 mark. Considering how badly the Cubs have played against crumby teams, the Cardinals have a chance to make a huge statement on Wednesday and Thursday. (Keep an eye on RPI standings here.)

Cardinals Schedule

2005-04-15T08:52:00.000-05:00

After suffering through 4 off-days during the first 11 days of the regular season, the Cardinals are going to play a lot of baseball over the next few weeks.

Over the next 13 days, counting today, the Cardinals will not have a single day off as they churn through the entire NL Central (if you count the last 2 days against the Reds.) After getting a day off on Thursday April 28th, the Redbirds play on 17 straight days, giving them 30 games over the next 31 days (barring rain). That's quite a stretch with not much downtime.

We're going to find out a lot about the team during this 31 day span - especially the first stretch of 13 games. How is Jimmy Journell going to look this time around? Could Journell and Cali be this year's version of Calero and Haren? Is Morris going to be in 2004 form, or pre-2004 form? How will Mulder look vs. the Pirates on Monday? Stay tuned...

Rolen's not Rollin'

2005-04-14T08:17:00.000-05:00

I'll ignore the Mark Mulder thoughts for now. I'll give him a few more starts before I allow his rough start (combined with his 2004 finish) to give me visions of Haren, Calero, and Barton over the next few years to keep me up at night. For now, Scott Rolen has me a bit concerned.

As you all know, Rolen missed some time in September last year with a calf strain. The injury went from a day to day thing, to Rolen missing two weeks during prime tune-up time for the playoffs. Rolen did come back to play the last week of the regular season.

2004 Regular Season (After Injury)

.167/.318/.333, 652 OPS, 0 doubles, 1 home run, 18 at-bats

Okay, so that's only 18 at-bats. No big deal. No one should expect Rolen to turn on the switch when coming back from an injury. He needed time, right? Sure. Except he didn't tear it up during the playoffs, either.

2004 Playoffs

.161/.277/.357, 634 OPS, 2 doubles, 3 home runs, 56 at-bats

To Rolen's credit, he had a very good NLCS, including the 2 run homer in Game 7 off of Clemens to give the Cardinals the lead. In that series he hit .310/.355/.690 with all of his post-season extra base hits. (In fact, he didn't have any hits in the other two series.) The fact that he put up those kinds of numbers in the NLCS with Clemens and Roy Oswalt starting for the Astros provides a glimmer of hope.

Then comes the Grapefruit league, in which Rolen continued to look rusty. Maybe he was just working on some new things, although La Russa specifically mentioned his concerns with the way both Rolen and Edmonds looked this Spring.

2005 Spring Training

.232/.328/.357, 685 OPS, 1 double, 2 home runs, 56 at-bats

Granted, Spring training isn't exactly a great indicator of talent when it comes to veterans - not to mention small sample sizes - but the OPS looks very much like those posted by Rolen at the end of 2004. Enter the regular season.

2005 (First 7 Games)

.143/.172/.179, 351 OPS, 1 double, 0 home runs, 28 at-bats

Not a great start, obviously. In fact, he's been even worse getting things started this year than he was at the end of last year. If you take the above sections of statistics and combine them, you get a line like this:

.184/.283/.323, 606 OPS, 4 doubles, 6 home runs, 158 at-bats

Over the last four seasons he's averaged 548 at-bats per year. If you adjust his doubles and home runs for a 548 at-bat season using the above rates, Rolen would project to hitting 14 doubles and 21 home runs. Not exactly what the Cardinals need out of him.

Obviously, Scott Rolen hasn't forgotten how to hit. Last season he hit .314/.409/.598. And it's also very unlikely that he'll keep hitting at a 351 OPS level this regular season. My main concern is that he is actually still injured and is still trying to play through it for whatever reason. He's made some great defensive plays already this year, so that would lead me to believe that he's just off to an extra cold start. I'd just be more comfortable about it if he had displayed a better Spring.

Rough Start

2005-04-11T08:32:00.000-05:00

To say the least.

The last 4 games - and especially the last 2 - are what tends to happen when the offense isn't hitting and the pitching isn't getting people out.

Pitching Bright Spots

Ray King, Cal Eldred, and Al Reyes have all looked good in relief. Reyes has been especially tough after a rough first outing, having now struck out 8 batters over 4.1 innings. Overall, they have a 2.07 ERA with 12 K's and 3 BB's over 8.2 innings pitched, giving the Cardinals a few relievers in the early going that appear as if they can be counted on.

Starting Staff Woes

Jason Marquis would appear to also be a bright spot, but his stats are misleading. He does have a K:BB ratio of 4 and an ERA of 1.50, but his 9 hits allowed over 6 innings is less than impressive.

Overall, the starting staff has a 1-3 record with a 6.50 ERA. They've struck out 13, walked 8, and given up 42 hits - over 26.1 innings. Obviously that's got to improve.

Hitting Bright Spots

David Eckstein is off to a great start, sporting a .476 OBP after 5 games. Unfortunately, he's only been driven in twice despite being on base almost half the time, showing how weak the offense has been.

Reggie Sanders has his power stroke going, sporting a .733 SLG thanks to 2 home runs and a double. It's nice to have him in the 7 slot (assuming the rest of the lineup starts producing soon.)

The Cardinal bench is off to a nice start as well. John Mabry, So Taguchi, Einar Diaz, and Abraham Nunez are hitting a combined .385/.429/.769 with 1 double, 2 home runs, and a walk.

Not So Much

Albert Pujols, Scott Rolen, and Jim Edmonds are not quite in mid-season form just yet. So far they are hitting a combined .218/.283/.364 with 2 doubles, 2 home runs, and 5 walks. When your bench has the same number of home runs as the "MV3's" over 1/5 the number of at-bats....well, a 2-3 start is not only unsurprising, it's welcome.

Conclusions

After a great opening day, it's been a disappointing start to the season. The silver lining in my opinion is basically - they've played about as bad as imaginably possible yet still managed to go 2-3. Last year they also got off to a 2-3 start, with a major exception - they did so against Milwaukee and Arizona, both teams that were bad last year. This year they've done the same against teams that have a shot at the playoffs, especially Philadelphia. I have no doubt the hitting will get on track. (Jim Edmonds indicates that pitchers have been coming inside more, including the World Series last year - which he claims will be fixed.) I also have no doubt that the starting pitching will get on track - especially Carpenter and Mulder.

That doesn't make it any more fun this Monday morning, though.

Miscellaneous

2005-04-06T14:20:00.000-05:00

On the plus side, I'm on a business trip doing work that got finished up early today. Thus, I am able to watch the Yankees and Red Sox on ESPN during the day!

On the negative side, I'm in Pittsburgh, the Pirates played earlier today so I can't get to that game, and I won't be able to see the Cardinals on TV tonight. Again. Thankfully, MLB.com has a cheap audio package.

- Interesting feelings watching the Yankees and Red Sox play for the 2nd time this week. (Gee, those poor East Coast teams never get any coverage, do they?) I used to love to see the Yankees lose to the Red Sox, but ever since the World Series....well, I've about had my fill of Bean town. Can I root for both teams to lose at the same time?

- Adding to the interest, I find myself happy every time Edgar Renteria hits into yet another out (or in his case, 2 outs as he's hit into 2 double plays today.) I'm all for a free market economy. I believe that everyone should attempt to negotiate the best salary possible for themselves. But there's just something about Edgar continuing to say the Cardinals "didn't respect" him. Let's see, the Red Sox are paying you approximately 8% of their total payroll, while the Cardinals offered you 11% of theirs. Respect?

- The Ying to Renteria's Yang is Tino Martinez coming off of the Yankee bench. I hope he's happy back in New York. God knows that all he seemed to talk about during his 2 years in St. Louis was New York.

- Of course, there is Tony Womack as well. Man, am I glad the Yankees "stole" him from St. Louis! I suspect he'll get the Javier Vazquez treatment this off-season.

- For a nice article on the Cubs loss last night, head on over to The Cub Reporter. They, as always, do a good job of holding Dusty Baker's feet to the fire.

Early Indications (Pitching Edition)

2005-04-01T11:57:00.000-06:00

Yesterday we looked at hitters, so I thought I'd follow suit today with the pitchers. See yesterday's article for disclaimers on sample size, park factors, etc.

Starting Pitching

Mark Mulder - 3.60 ERA, 25 innings, 17 K's, 8 BB's, 1.56 WHIP
Woody Williams - 7.20 ERA, 15 innings, 8 K's, 6 BB's, 1.73 WHIP

I liked the "Woody Williams era" in St. Louis as much as anybody else, maybe more. With that being said, I was glad to see the Cardinals paying Mulder $6.75 million in 2005 over Woody's $8 million in 2004. Anytime you can improve your staff and cut costs, you're doing something right.

Looks like Woody is off to quite a rough start, even when you account for the extra offense in the Cactus league. Mulder, on the other hand, seems to be rounding into shape despite a high WHIP during the Spring.

Left Handed Relief

Bill Pulsipher - 0.00 ERA, 10 innings, 7 K's, 3 BB's, 1.10 WHIP
Randy Flores - 6.52 ERA, 9.2 innings, 8 K's, 2 BB's, 1.65 WHIP
Steve Kline - 1.64 ERA, 11 innings, 9 K's, 2 BB's, 1.27 WHIP

Bill Pulsipher has been great....until he had his toe broken on Wednesday. Speaking as someone who broke a toe three weeks ago, I can say that A. it's quite painful and B. it should heal quickly. (Of course, I wasn't trying to throw a baseball 90 MPH as mine healed, so....).

If Pulsipher can come back quickly, he looks primed to step into the #2 lefty role. Flores has some work to do, but him striking out the side in last night's game was at least a sign of hope.

Right Handed Relief

Al Reyes - 2.61 ERA, 10.1 innings, 9 K's, 4 BB's, 0.87 WHIP
Kiko Calero - 0.66 ERA, 13.2 innings, 11 KK's, 4 BB's, 0.88 WHIP
Dan Haren - 6.65 ERA, 23 innings, 12 K's, 7 BB's, 1.65 WHIP

I liked Calero (and Haren for that matter) a lot. With that being said, I thought entering this Spring that Reyes could replace him. So far so good, as this Spring he had a lower WHIP and a better K/9 ratio. Haren has been starting, and looks like he's still a bit on the rough side.

Conclusions

Between today and yesterday we looked at comparisons for departed players vs. those joining the team. In the early going - and there is a long time to go - the Cardinals appear to have replaced everyone quite nicely from a production standpoint, including the so-called "power righty" in the bullpen that some still seem to think the Cardinals need.

Of course, you'll still read some experts out there talking about how much "leadership" and "veteran presence" the Cardinals lost in the off-season. I know the guys lost - Matheny especially - were great in that role, but don't you think the "intangibles" lost have been a bit overblown?

1. Of the currently projected 25 man roster, 20 players spent time with the Cardinals for at least a portion of last season, including 6 out of 8 position regulars and 4 out of 5 rotation members. It's not like there are a lot of new faces needing to learn how to fit in with the defending NL champs.

2. The Cardinals did lose 3 players with World Series rings (Edgar Renteria, Woody Williams, and Tony Womack), but added 1 (David Eckstein) to go with the retained Reggie Sanders.

3. 20 players on the current roster have played in the Fall Classic (Randy Flores was not on the playoff roster last year.)

4. The 5 players on the current team that have not played in the World Series include Mark Grudzielanek, who has played in an NLCS with the Cubs, Einar Diaz, who has played in the playoffs 3 different seasons with the Indians, and Mark Mulder, who has 4 career playoffs starts with a 2.25 ERA.

Leadership is great, and I know it has more of an impact than we stats geeks can fully understand at times. But the Cardinals aren't exactly a ship without a rudder.

Early Indications

2005-03-31T12:58:00.000-06:00

The weather is finally turning nice, teams are leaving Florida and Arizona, and baseball is just 3 days away from opening in Boston! Needless to say, I'm ready.

With just a handful of Spring games left, I thought it might be interesting to take a look at how the new position players are doing compared to the old ones. Keep in mind - Spring training stats aren't exactly a good indicator of how a player will do in the regular season, as pitchers tend to work on new pitches, batters try getting more looks at pitches, regulars end up facing AA players, etc. With that out of the way - how are things looking?

Shortstop

David Eckstein - .420/.517/.560, 50 at-bats, 15 Runs, 4 Doubles, 1 Home Run
Edgar Renteria - .222/.314/.378, 45 at-bats, 8 Runs, 4 Doubles, 1 Home Run

Eckstein has been amazing this Spring, having one stretch where he reached base in 14 out of 16 games. All he has to do this year is get on base and he's going to be helping out the offense a lot. Note that his runs scored rate would translate into 150 over a 500 at-bat season. Granted, he's not going to get on base more than 50% of the time during the regular season, but if he can just crack the .380 mark he'll be the best leadoff hitter the Cardinals have had since Fernando Vina in 2000.

2nd Base

Mark Grudzielanek - .412/.464/.510, 51 at-bats, 5 RBI, 6 R, 5 Doubles
Tony Womack - .439/.476/.614, 57 at-bats, 9 RBI, 11 R, 3 Triples

Obviously, neither of these guys is going to hit .400 with a .450+ OBP in 2005, but they've both torn the cover off of the ball this Spring. Much like Eckstein, Grudzielanek has been getting on base a lot, having a stretch of 15 consecutive games where he reached.

Maybe Womack really didn't have a fluke season last year? Personally, I'm not buying that unless he can pull it off again this year.

Catcher

Yadier Molina - .289/.333/.378, 45 at-bats, 9 RBI, 7 R, 4 Doubles
Mike Matheny - .316/.350/.395, 38 at-bats, 2 RBI, 2 R, 3 Doubles

Matheny has been hitting slightly better, which of course is likely helped by the fact that he's the only guy in this article playing in the offensive-friendly cactus league.

If anything, one can look at Molina's stats and get a better understanding of just how good the St. Louis lineup really is. When the guy hitting 8th in a lineup is on pace to drive in 99 and score 77 over 500 at-bats despite only reaching base a third of the time, he is surrounded by some serious talent.

Diamond-Mind Projections

2005-03-30T16:03:00.000-06:00

My favorite annual MLB predictions article is out, and you can find it here.

I've said it before, but let me say it again. DMB was the only organization that I read last year that actually picked the Cardinals to win the NL Central. This year? More of the same, according to their prognostications. You have to like comments like this:

"No team has an easier path to the World Series."

If you're in the market for a nice software package for simulating baseball games, I highly recommend their products. I've been using their software for the past 4 years, and have nothing but high regard for their methodology.

Bench Option?

2005-03-30T13:10:00.000-06:00

The Pirates - yes, the Pirates - sent Ben Grieve to AAA today.

Yahoo had this to say about it.

I especially like their assertion that "Grieve hasn't hit over .261 in the past five years so needless to say his skill set has declined to the point it is no longer serviceable." Sure...until you realize that his OBP has been .353 or better in each of those 5 seasons. So much for "Moneyball" at least having a minimal impact with the Fanball staff.

Rotoworld had this to say:

"Pirates reassigned OF Ben Grieve and RHP Mark Corey to minor league camp.

Hitting .355/.382/.452 this spring didn't earn Grieve a roster spot. He has yet to decide whether to begin the season at Triple-A Indianapolis or become a free agent. He's worthy of a spot on some team's bench."

Here's a guy that's only 29 years old, hits left handed, has a career OPS+ of 112, and is hitting .355 this spring....and can't catch on with the Pirates, who are at best a 3rd place team. Huh?

Over the last 3 years, Grieve has hit righties to the tune of .256/.365/.440. His OPS+ has only been below 102 one time over his 8 year career, when he had a 92 during the 2003 season for Tampa Bay. Granted, he never has been able to repeat his rookie of the year season, when he posted a 122 OPS+ while hitting 41 doubles and 18 home runs. But AAA at his age? I understand that his defense is more reminiscent of Lonnie Smith than Jim Edmonds, but the guy doesn't make outs (thus his career .367 OBP).

I would love to see him chose to become a free agent, and for the Cardinals to pick him up. Yes, I realize that they have a log-jam of outfielders on their roster. But how could you pass up on a guy that has a better track record of getting on base than your current leadoff hitter? Grieve could take the roster spot of Hector Luna, who is currently slated to make the team out of Spring training. This would give the Cardinals another genuine hitter to give Sanders and Walker days off, in the event that John Mabry can't repeat his career 2004 numbers. Furthermore, it would give the Cardinals a chance to move Roger Cedeno to some team in need of a.....guy that can't really field, can't really hit, and can't really run anymore.

2005 Predictions Wrap-Up

2005-03-24T08:14:00.000-06:00

It was long. It was tedious. And frankly, I'm sure many of you found it too boring to read. But it's done. I've looked at the NL Central, attempted to figure out who's playing for who and where, and have made my fearless predictions for 2005. Here's a bit of a correction to my predictions, along with some basic re-cap.

"Lucky Wins"

As anyone who read any of my articles knows, I used Win Shares to predict the number of wins for each team, but further used the teams 2004 Pythagorean wins to adjust for the 2005 season. For more information on Pythagorean wins, see this article. Basically, it's a simple equation that predicts the number of wins a team should have based upon nothing more than runs scored and runs allowed.

By using a team's 2004 "expected wins" total, I adjusted their 2005 wins by the opposite amount. So, for example, the Cardinals had 5 more wins than expected last year, thus I subtracted 5 wins from my prediction total in 2005. Why? In general, when a team is lucky in one season, they are going to be unlucky in the future, and vice versa. Bill James calls this tendency "the Plexiglas principle" in one of his baseball abstracts. However, it bothered me during my predictions that I was using a 1 to 1 ratio in making my adjustments (especially in the case of the Reds, who had 9 lucky wins last year.) That didn't seem to be the best method of adjusting for luck.

In order to adjust my "luck" corrections, I did a quick and dirty study. I simply looked up all win totals in the NL Central since the 2001 season, including expected wins. That gave me a total of 18 seasons in which to look at. Granted, that's a small sample size, but I only had limited time. Using that data, I simply compared predicted "lucky/unlucky" wins for each of the 18 seasons in question and looked at how close the predictions were.

Using a 1 to 1 ratio, the results weren't too bad. Over the 18 seasons, the median error was 2.5 games. The prediction was exactly right 1 time, and was within 4 games 11 times, or 61% of the time. Unfortunately, there were 4 seasons in which I was off by 10 or more games.

From there, I simply started manipulating the prediction values by simple methods. I tried dividing by various numbers and fractions, raising them to different powers, taking the square root, etc. When the dust cleared, the best correction factor appears to be to simply divide last years "lucky" wins by 3 to adjust for this year.

When dividing by 3, the median error dropped to 2 games. But more importantly, the average error was reduced from 4.7 to 3.4, as the huge errors were reduced by quite a bit. The prediction was exactly right three times, and was within 4 games 13 seasons, or 72% of the time. And most importantly, the prediction was off by 10 or more games only 1 time.

Naturally, there could be much more work done on this topic. For one thing, 18 seasons is not much to go on. Ideally, you'd go back at least 10 seasons, and use every team in baseball. And even if you find a great relationship - well, luck is called luck for a reason. You never know when a team is going to have things fall their way one year, after nothing went right the year before. Bullpens are going to improve, thus helping a team win more one run games, offenses will get more consistent, new coaching staffs will teach new things, etc. That's why they play the games, as they say.

Anyway, my predictions can now be modified slightly, by taking the luck factors I used and dividing them by three. When you make those final adjustments, my modified predictions look like this.

NL Central

Cardinals 98-64
Cubs 92-70 (6 Games Back)
Astros 89-73 (9 Games Back)
Reds 80-82 (18 Games Back)
Pirates 79-83 (19 Games Back)
Brewers 68-94 (30 Games Back)

A couple of notes. I think the Cardinals win total is a bit high using this adjustment, but it makes the win totals for the Cubs and the Reds look more in line with reality. I also think the fact that this prediction shows 5 teams within 19 games of one another shows the reality of the division, which is that is should be better than last year.

Here is the breakdown of the division based upon various aspects of the teams. Listed below will be the Win Share predictions that I made in my NL Central reports, broken down into Starting Pitching, Bullpen, Starting Lineup, and Bench.

Starting Rotation

Cubs – 79
Astros – 66
Cardinals - 55
Pirates – 50
Brewers – 48
Reds – 34

This makes sense to me. The Cubs have what is far and away the best rotation in the NL Central. What's more, that will likely hold true even without Wood or Prior for a chunk of the season. (If both of them miss time, it's another story.) The Astros in 2nd also seems sound, with a nice 1-2-3 punch at the top of the rotation.

Bullpen

Pirates – 41
Reds – 37
Astros – 37
Cardinals - 36
Cubs – 27
Brewers – 20

This one is a bit surprising to me. While I like the Pirates bullpen, I'm not sold that it's the best one in the NL Central this season. I'm also not sold that the Astros 'pen is good enough to be near the top, but Brad Lidge is going to make it very formidable. The Cubs and the Brewers being back from the pack is very realistic.

Starting Lineup

Cardinals - 179
Reds – 151
Cubs – 137
Astros – 128
Brewers – 115
Pirates – 113

I'm completely fine with this. The Cardinals lineup is the class of the NL, let alone the Central. The Reds have a very strong lineup as well, which could challenge the Cardinals if Griffey and Kearns stay healthy, and if Casey can repeat last year. And the Cubs have a great infield, but their outfield is going to drag them down by a bit.

Bench

Astros – 36
Cardinals - 36
Pirates – 32
Reds – 27
Cubs – 27
Brewers – 20

I'm not at all convinced that the Cardinals have the best bench in the division. I'm not certain that this is an endorsement of the Cardinals role players, so much as it's an indictment on how bad the rest of the league is in depth.

All in all, my predictions were done in fun, and to give me (and hopefully some of you) a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the division this year. I do, however, find it kind of amusing that it took me six weeks and several hours of work to come to this conclusion: The Cardinals should win the NL Central, with the Cubs having the best shot at catching them. I could have told you that in January without going through these gyrations!

2005 Brewers

2005-03-22T08:31:00.000-06:00

The NL Central has not one, but two teams that have managed to post losing seasons for the last 12 years in a row. That's quite a feat. But the future is looking brighter for the Brewers. They have some solid young players on their roster, several more top notch prospects on the way, and they've finally managed to shake themselves from the Selig family.

Rotation

Last year's rotation managed a respectable 47 Win Shares. That's not bad. The problem was, two of their starters (Ben Sheets and Doug Davis) accounted for 34 of those Win Shares. That's bad. Both Sheets and Davis would have been the #1 starter for the Cardinal staff last year based upon ERA+, which gives the Brewers a great right handed/left handed 1-2 punch at the top of their lineup. Can they build around them this year?

Ben Sheets - At the young age of 25 last year, Mr. Sheets really came into his own as he pitched 237 innings, striking out 264 batters with a 2.70 ERA and a 154 ERA+. The only items of concern I see are the fact that he's thrown 216.2 or more innings in each of the past three seasons (and at a young age), and that he's allowed 21 or more home runs in each of those seasons. However, his progress appears to be real, and to my knowledge he hasn't had any signs of arm injury to be worried about.

I honestly think that 2004 was just the start for this guy. I'll stay somewhat conservative and only increase his 2005 WS total by one, giving him 22 for this year.

Doug Davis - After playing for three different teams in the 2003 season, the Brewers made Davis a member of their rotation last year - and it paid off. Davis posted his first 200 inning season, and did so with career bests in ERA (3.39), ERA+ (122), and Wins (12). Interestingly enough, his ERA+ wasn't that much of an improvement over his 2004 numbers, when he had a 113 over 109.1 innings, which makes me wonder just how he ended up getting traded twice that season.

The irregular workload over the past few seasons makes it hard to judge how good Davis will be this season. Based upon his career ERA+ numbers, he appears as if he'll be slightly above average at worst. In other words, as long as he gets innings, he's going to be successful. He had 13 Win Shares last year, and 7 in 2004 over essentially half a season. In order to be on the conservative side, I'm going to predict a slight decline in 2005, but only down to 12 Win Shares. That would still be, by far, his 2nd best season in his career.

After Sheets and Davis, it gets ugly. As far as I can tell, the next three in line are likely to be Victor Santos, Wes Obermueller, and Chris Capuano. The three combined for a 5.25 ERA in 2004.

Victor Santos - Santos is quite the journey man for someone that's only 28 years old. Over the past 4 seasons, he's played for 4 different organizations, getting both starts and relief appearances in each and every season at the major league level. He was really good in 2001 for the Tigers. He was really bad in 2002 for the Rockies. And he's been below average in 2003 for the Rangers, as well as 2004 for the Brewers. 2004 was, however, the first season in which he topped the 100 innings pitched mark, racking up 154 innings over 31 games, 28 starts.

Santos had an ERA+ of 83 in 2004, which was almost exactly at his career mark of 84. He also posted 4 Win Shares, which was his best since the 2001 season. Santos is at an age where he could actually improve by a bit more, but it's kind of hard to imagine to be honest as he gives up a lot of hits, a lot of home runs, and a lot of walks. I'll mark him down for 4 more WS in 2005.

Wes Obermueller - You know a rotation has problems when a guy with a 5.80 ERA is given 20 starts in a season. Obermueller is a lot like Santos in that he gives up a lot of hits, home runs, and walks. Unfortunately for Obermueller, he also doesn't strike anyone out as he has 98 career K's over 191.1 innings. He had 4 WS last year over 118 innings, after posting 2 in 2003 over 65.2 innings. Looks like he's good for 1 WS per 30 innings pitched.

So I guess the question is - how much is he going to pitch this year? Or, on the other side of the coin - who else do the Brewers have that can take his place? I'll write him down for 150 innings pitched, and thus 5 WS this season.

Chris Capuano - Capuano wraps up the rotation of 29 and under starters. The young lefty wasn't horrible last year, posting an 83 ERA+ over 17 starts, 88.1 innings. He's going to have to give up fewer home runs, though, as opponents his 18 off of him last year. I'll assume that he's going to improve slightly with a slightly larger workload, giving him 5 WS in 2005.

Lineup

Last year, it looked a little something like this (ranked by WS.)

Lyle Overbay - 21
Scott Podsednik - 15
Geoff Jenkins - 14
Brady Clark - 13
Keith Ginter - 12
Craig Counsell - 10
Wes Helms - 4
Chad Moeller - 2

Keith Ginter got most starts (and more WS) at 2nd base, but Junior Spivey was hurt and may be more accurately described as the starter. And Wes Helms only got 274 at-bats on the season. With those things being said, the above players are going to be considered to have been the starters last season. The performances of others will be accounted for on the bench.

From the above group, Counsell, Ginter, and Podsednik are all gone. Counsell will be replaced with J.J. Hardy, Ginter with Spivey, and Podsednik with the newly acquired Carlos Lee. Damian Miller was also picked up this off-season, and will be the new starting catcher.

Lyle Overbay - The Brewers did a good job in getting Overbay from the DBacks for Sexson, who they would have lost to FA after the season anyway. (In fact - Overbay, Spivey, Counsell, and Moeller all came over for Sexson, along with Capuano and Jorge De La Rosa. Four positions starters and a starting pitcher for Sexson? Nice.) Finally getting to play every day in Milwaukee, Overbay posted a .301 average, .385 OBP, and a 127 OPS+. What he lacks in home runs (16 over 579 at-bats) he somewhat makes up for in doubles (53). And while an 863 OPS out of 1st base isn't top notch, the price is right.

With a season under his belt, Overbay should continue to mature and may have another season or two of improvement in his back pocket. He had 21 WS last year. I'm going to put him down for 23 this year, as Carlos Lee comes along to take some of the pressure off of him.

Carlos Lee - Lee come to Milwaukee via trade for, basically, Scott Podsednik. Another nice move by the Brewers in my estimation, as the trade value for Podsednik was likely as high as it was going to get. In return, the Brewers get a player that has topped 30 home runs and 35 doubles in each of the past 2 seasons. His OPS+ has been 116 or higher in each of the past 3 seasons.

Lee will provide the Brewers with some much needed power, as they only had one player with more than 16 home runs last year (Jenkins with 27). Lee posted 24, 20, and 17 WS over the past 3 seasons and will only be 29 this year. I look for Lee to have another solid season, and will mark him down for 22 WS in 2005. Which is a nice improvement over the 15 provided by Podsednik last season.

Geoff Jenkins - Jenkins is another hard one to project. Last year, he played in a career high 157 games, with his previous high being 135 games in 2000. However, he also saw his walk rate, home run rate, and double rate go down last year, resulting in him posting 6 fewer WS over 33 more games.

The bottom line is, Jenkins is a solid player, albeit overpaid (he made $8.7 million last year, just $600,000 less than Jim Edmonds.) The Brewers need the health of 2004 Jenkins, with the play of 2003 Jenkins. I'll simply average his numbers for the past 2 seasons and project Jenkins to have 17 WS in 2005.

Brady Clark - Clark posted a career high OBP of .385 last year, and the good news is that it didn't come from a higher batting average, but from drawing more walks. After drawing just 21 walks in 2003 over 315 at-bats, he managed to draw 53 last year over 353 at-bats. In fact, he had more walks than K's (48). Even more interesting, that walk rate was very similar to the one he posted in 2001 when he drew 22 over 129 at-bats, indicating that he may have "re-discovered" the importance of getting on base.

With Podsednik gone, Clark is likely to get more playing time as the regular in centerfield. We can't be sure that his OBP skills are here to stay, but I am fairly certain that if he stays healthy he's going to top 400 at-bats for the first time in his career (if not 500). Clark had 13 WS last year over 353 at-bats. For 2005, to be conservative, I'm going to say that Clark will only improve to 15.

Junior Spivey - Spivey is still trying to get back to 2002 form when he burst onto the scene with a .301 average, .389 OBP, and an All-Star appearance. Since that season, health has been a problem as Spivey has only played in 165 games over the past 2 years. What's more, his batting average, OBP, and SLG have not been back in the 2002 range during those seasons.

Last year, other than the injury, was somewhat encouraging for Spivey as he had his OBP back over the .350 mark, even though his power was still not back to his previous form. Over the past 3 years, Spivey has had 5, 10, and 23 WS. If Spivey can stay healthy this year, he should be able to post 12 WS for the Brewers.

J.J. Hardy - Good luck trying to project this guy. He only played 26 minor league games last year due to an injury, and has no major league experience. In AAA last year, at the age of 22, Hardy did hit 277/330/495/825, including more BB's (9) than K's (8).

This season, Hardy is going to be getting on the job training. I suspect he'll be hitting 8th, unless he shows promise - which is very possible. My guess is he'll be a solid shortstop that will show flashes of brilliance, and provide an upgrade over Counsell last year. I'll simply mark down Hardy for 12 WS.

Wes Helms - I realize that this may be a platoon with Russ Branyan, or that Branyan may even win the job outright. But for now, I'll assume Helms as the starter, and Branyan on the bench.

Helms was disappointing in 2004 after hitting 21 doubles, 23 home runs, and posting a 100 OPS+ in 2003. He was still getting on base at a respectable clip last year, but his power seemed to have evaporated. Add in the .904 fielding percentage, and you have a guy that lost playing time, and deservedly so.

Over the past 2 seasons, Helms has had 4 and 12 WS. I'm going to assume that his playing time in 2005 will stay similar in 2005, with Helms starting largely against left handed pitching. He'll get 4 WS again this year.

Damian Miller - Miller has been a pretty steady catcher over his career. Over the past 7 years, he's had an OPS+ of 91 or better 6 times, including a 104 in 1998. No one is going to confuse him with Johnny Bench, but he's sure and steady both with the bat and the glove.

Last year, Miller had a career high 442 plate appearances which resulted in him having a career high with 15 WS. Over the previous 2 seasons, Miller had 10 WS each year. As he is now 35 years old, I think the playing time is likely to revert to prior levels. Miller should be able to give the Brewers 10 WS in 2005.

Bullpen

Last year, the Brewer bullpen had 39 Win Shares which included Danny Kolb with 39 saves and a 2.98 ERA. Unfortunately for the Brewers, 15 of those 39 Win Shares have been traded away in the forms of the aforementioned Kolb and Luis Vizcaino. Replacing Kolb and Vizcaino in the bullpen are Justin Lehr and Ricky Bottalico. Right now, I have no idea who the closer is going to be.

Mike Adams - Adams was the best guy in the pen last year not named Kolb, as he posted a better ERA+ than Vizcaino. Adams, pitching as a rookie, posted a 122 ERA+ over 53 innings, and I suspect is in consideration for the closer's job. On one hand, I'm usually leery of players that have success out of the pen as rookies, as they usually have a rough 2nd year. On the other hand, if he is given the chance to close games, his WS totals will go up by quite a bit. Adams had 5 WS last year without recording a save. I'm going to say that 2005 will see him getting 7 WS.

Brooks Kieschnick - Kieschnick flip flopped in 2004, going from a solid hitter that didn't pitch well to a solid pitcher that didn't hit well. (If he can combine the two, it will be amazing.) His ERA+ last year was 110, which is about the same level as Cal Eldred in 2004. He had 4 WS last year. He's probably going to get about the same this year.

Jeff Bennett - Like Adams, Bennett was in the bullpen last year as a rookie. He ended up posting an 86 ERA+, and unfortunately gave up 12 home runs over 71.1 innings. Last year, he got 2 WS. I cannot imagine him improving on that for 2005.

Ricky Bottalico - Pros: Last year he had a 3.38 ERA and a 127 ERA+ over 69.1 innings, striking out 61. Cons: It was his highest ERA+ since 1996, and the first time he'd been over 86 since the 2001 season. Expecting him to repeat last year is a long shot at best. He had 6 WS in 2004, after having 0 in both 2003 and 2002. Are the Brewers going to make him their closer? For their sake, I hope not. I'm going to say that Bottalico can amass 4 WS this year.

Matt Wise - 2004 was the first season since 2001 that Wise pitched more than 8.1 innings. All told, Wise posted a 93 ERA+ over 52.2 innings and had 2 WS. Like Bennett, It's hard to imagine him improving on that in 2005.

Justin Lehr - Yet another pitcher in the Brewer bullpen who was a rookie in 2004. Lehr pitched 32.2 innings, striking out 16, walking 14, and posting an 89 ERA+. Considering he did that at the age of 26, I don't hold out much hope for a pitcher with a career 1.50 WHIP and a K/BB ratio of 1.1. He had 1 WS last year. Look for the same this year.

Bench

Last year's bench put together 31 WS, which isn't bad. (Once again, remember that I'm counting WS from Clark and Ginter in the starting lineup, not the bench.) However, this year's bench has lost some firepower. Ben Grieve, the leading WS player off of the bench, is gone. Junior Spivey (who I counted as a bench player in 2004) is in the starting lineup, with Ginter no longer on the team to take his slot on the bench. Bill Hall, who tied Grieve with 8 WS last year, is still around, but his career .280 OBP has to be of concern.

Russ Branyan is going to be on the team, whether that means on the bench or starting at 3rd. He provided the Brew-Crew with 6 WS last year over just 158 at-bats. I'm going to say that he'll end up helping the team more than that this year, giving them 8 WS. Those 2 extra WS will go to the bench total in this article.

After Hall and Branyan, along with backup catcher Chad Moeller, the bench gets harder and harder to determine. I assume Dave Krynzel will be there to backup the outfield. After that - who? It's uncertain to me, a mere outsider. Overall, however, I'm going to predict that Moeller, Krynzel, and 2 more bench players will only combine to provide 4 WS on the bench this year. Combine that with 16 out of Branyan and Hall, and you have a much worse bench available to Milwaukee this year.

Totals

Starting Rotation - 48 Win Shares (47 in 2004)
Bullpen - 20 Win Shares (39 in 2004)

Starting Lineup - 115 Win Shares (91 in 2004)
Bench - 20 Win Shares (31 in 2004)

That's a grand total of 203 Win Shares, or 68 Wins. Last year they had 1 less win than predicted (Pythagorean wins), so for this year I'll add a win, bumping them up to 69. Does this pass the sanity test?

I'm showing the rotation as about the same as last year, which makes sense. They basically have the same unit returning, and will be counting on both Sheets and Davis to repeat last year to get that much done.

The bullpen is much worse than last year, which once again make sense with Kolb gone and the only major additions being Ricky Bottalico and Justin Lehr. Not exactly Gagne and Smoltz.

The bench is also shown as being downgraded in a large manner. Even though I counted Clark and Ginter as starters, the Brewer bench really is downgraded with Clark starting, and Ginter in Oakland. Let alone Grieve being gone altogether.

That leaves the only improved portion of the team being the starting lineup, which sounds reasonable. Damian Miller is a nice upgrade over Chad Moeller, and Carlos Lee should provide the team with some much needed power. Brady Clark, as a starter, will likely replace Scott Podsednik nicely, just without the stolen bases.

So - another losing season in Milwaukee. Can it be avoided? Yes, but a few things are going to need to happen.

1. The Brewers need a 3rd starter. Whether that means one of their current guys to step up, or a rookie to come in and win the job (Jose Capellan?), 2 starters backed up by 3 below average guys isn't going to get it done.

2. The Brewers need bullpen help. And one guy isn't going to be enough. If Bottalico and Adams can repeat their 2004 seasons, that's a nice start, but not enough to replace the departures of Kolb and Vizcaino. Once again, they need someone to step up, or for Jose Capellan to come in an blow people away (even though he's more valuable as a starter.)

3. The Brewers need their offense to click. If Spivey can revert to 2002 form and if Hardy acclimates to MLB pitching quickly, the team could easily win an extra 3 or 4 more games than I have projected, putting them closer to the .500 mark.

4. The Brewers need bench help. If Branyan ends up starting most of the time, the Brewers are not going to have anyone available off the bench with good OBP skills or good power. That really ties the hands of a manager in close games. And since I seriously doubt that the Brewers are going to put Rickie Weeks and/or Prince Fielder on their bench, I'm not sure that this area is going to be addressed unless some good waiver plays can be made.

If 3 of the 4 areas above could be addressed, the Brewers might make a run at .500. But right now, I'm afraid they are the doormats of the NL Central in 2005.

If I were the GM of the Brewers, I'd be tempted to start shopping Lyle Overbay and Junior Spivey to other teams. Currently, they are both solid young players will some upside, who happen to be blocking the #1 2nd base prospect (Weeks) and the #2 1st base prospect (Fielder) in the minors. Let's face it - the Brewers are unlikely to even finish .500 this year, let alone make a playoff run. Fielder at 1st and Weeks at 2nd may not be great this year, but they'd take their licks, and maybe even be as good as Overbay and Spivey. If the Brewers could get, for example, a #3 starter for Overbay, and a bullpen pitcher for Spivey - the team could be improved for this season. And with the experience to Weeks and Fielder, along with Hardy, 2006 could be the year that Milwaukee finally remembers what it fees like to win more than they lose.

NL Central Predictions (Current)

Cardinals 95-67
Cubs 95-67
Astros 88-74
Pirates 80-82
Reds 74-88
Brewers 69-93

Pujols Watch

2005-03-16T10:41:00.000-06:00

One of my favorite websites on the entire internet, if not the favorite, is Baseball-Reference.com. Everyone should have that site bookmarked, and send them a little pocket change when you get the chance. The amount of information they have available for a free site is out of this world.

Today's post is in regard to a new feature they have which is very interesting. You can now sort statistical leaders by age using this section.

Using their new content, I decided to look into where my favorite young hitting stud ranks among others that have played the game at his age. Keep in mind that these statistics are different than those you may have seen that group players by their first 4 seasons in the majors.

Through Age 24

Mr. Pujols stacks up quite well on the all-time list of players at the age of 24 and younger.

OBP - .413, 10th
SLG - .624, 4th
OPS - 1.037, 4th
OPS+ - 169, 6th (Right behind Stan the Man at 170)

Doubles - 189, 9th
Home Runs - 160, 8th
Extra Base Hits - 358, 5th

The only contemporary players that tend to rank ahead of Pujols in counting stats are Ken Griffey Jr and Alex Rodriguez. Which, of course, isn't a shock considering they were both great young players, and that they both were getting major league at-bats at the age of 19, compared to Pujols at 21.

In the World of OPS+ - well, take a look at Albert's peers.

1. Ted Williams, 191
2. Joe Jackson, 183
3. Ty Cobb, 176
4. Lou Gehrig, 172
5. Stan Musial, 170
6. Albert Pujols, 169
7. Mickey Mantle, 166
8. Jimmie Foxx, 165
9. Tris Speaker, 162
10. Dick Allen, 161

Talk about some great company. Seven members of the Hall of Fame, Dick Allen, who was no slouch, and Joe Jackson, who may have found his way into the hall if he hadn't cheated.

Through Age 25

As Pujols starts his Age 25 season, what kind of milestones can we keep an eye on in regard to his age?

Doubles - Pujols only needs 42 doubles this year to have the 2nd most ever through the age of 25. Fourty two would give him 231, which would be one more than Ty Cobb's 230. Considering that he had 51 in each of the past two seasons, 41 should be very realistic, assuming his foot can keep up the pace.

The top mark through the age of 25 is 258 doubles by Joe "Ducky" Medwick, former Cardinal great and a Hall of Famer.

Home Runs - The field is more crowded in the home run department. Below, I'll list the milestones for where he could end up this year.

7th - 32 Home Runs to pass Orlando Cepeda
6th - 43 Home Runs to pass Frank Robinson
5th - 48 Home Runs to pass Mickey Mantle
4th - 52 Home Runs to pass Mel Ott

Pujols has hit 43 and 46 home runs over the last two years, and I've seen projections for him to hit as many as 50 this year.

Total Bases - Albert Pujols would need 372 total bases in 2005 to knock Ken Griffey Jr. and Frank Robinson out of 10th place. Over the past two seasons, he's had 394 and 389 total bases. If he is able to make the top 10, it will be the first time in his career that he's made the cut for his age group.

As a side note - Alex Rodriguez at 2nd on this list, just behind Mel Ott, is a great reminder of just how good he was at such a young age.

RBI - This one is a slight long shot, but not impossible. If Pujols can drive in 131 runs this year, he'll edge out Joe Medwick for 10th on the all time list. His career high was 130 as a rookie, but with a full season of Larry Walker hitting in front of him, topping that mark could be done.

Extra Base Hits - A completely underrated statistic. As I mentioned last year in this blog, Pujols made a run at becoming just the 3rd Cardinal to ever have 100 XBH in a season, falling just short with 99. (Rogers Hornsby and Stan Musial have each topped the century mark with the Birds on the Bat.) His 99 XBH's, however, were the 3rd most recorded by a 24 year old in MLB history, behind Lou Gehrig (117) and Jimmie Foxx (100).

In 2005, Pujols should pile up enough XBH to pull into 4th place all time for his age. To hit that mark he needs just 76, which matches his career low from the 2002 season. If Pujols somehow manages to fight off his injury enough to amass enough XBH to hit 3rd on that list (119), we'll not only be looking at an MVP season, but a triple crown run.

Summary

While this article likely would bore 99% of the general population (or more), I enjoy looking over statistics of this manner. Not only does it help put a player like Pujols into perspective, it also serves to help us connect with players from the past that most of us didn't have a chance to see. Names like Mel Ott, Jimmie Foxx, Joe Medwick - sure, we've heard of them. But seeing their names and numbers in relation to current players helps me to gain a better appreciation for what they were able to do in a different era.

Left Handed Complements

2005-03-14T11:54:00.000-06:00

I was thinking about writing a short article about the left handed pitching competition today when I ran across this little blurb on Rotoworld.com:

Cardinals lefty reliever Ray King won't pitch again until next weekend at the earliest. King experienced muscle soreness near his left shoulder after his only appearance of the spring, March 8th. With Rick Ankiel done as a pitcher and Mike Myers struggling early in camp, King is the only reliable lefty St. Louis has on the roster. Mar. 14 - 10:31 am etSource: St Louis Post-Dispatch

The non-bold portion of that paragraph was added by Rotoworld as commentary.

Obviously, injuries are the biggest potential problem for the Cardinals this year. And having 2 superb lefties available in relief last year was a huge help for the team. With Kline gone and Ankiel no longer an option, the loss of King for any length of time could be a problem. And, of course, King's workload over the past four seasons are reason to actually expect King to not be as sharp this year.

Take a look at Ray King over the past 4 seasons. I'm going to list games pitched, his rank in his league, and ERA+.

2001 - 82, 3rd, 122
2002 - 76, 10th, 131
2003 - 80, 3rd, 118
2004 - 86, 2nd, 160

"Big deal" you say. "He's a gamer". Well, take a look at another gamer with a similar pattern over a 4 year period.

1998, 78, 2nd, 149
1999, 82, 1st, 126
2000, 83, 1st, 133
2001, 89, 1st, 240

That list of statistics belongs to one Steve Kline. After the workloads listed, he was much less effective in 2002, pitching in 66 games with an ERA+ of 115. There are many similarities between Kline and King during their high workload runs. Both started out with three seasons very similar, followed by a very successful 4th season. Will the appearances have the same effect on King this year?

On the plus side, Kline pitched 298.2 innings during his 4 year span, while King pitched 241 innings, or roughly 14 fewer per season. On the negative side, Kline was 28 in the 4th season of his run, while King was 30. Obviously, comparing 2 left handed pitchers is the definition of small sample size. However, lots of games pitched does have a tendency to catch up to relief pitchers sooner or later. Let's hope it's not this year in the case of King.

OK, with that out of the way - who can the Cardinals count on this year? Supposedly, the Cardinals were going to send a few left handed pitchers to the minors today. Who are the likely candidates?

Mike Myers

Rotoworld already mentioned him, claiming he was struggling in camp.

Myers - 4 innings, 4.50 ERA, 4 K, 4 BB, 3 Hits allowed

Not glowing, but not horrible. We all knew that Myers is a one out specialist, who hasn't been able to get righties out for years. The walks are, of course, of the most concern in the line above.

As a 2nd option, he may still be fine. If, however, King is out, Myers is not the option to be the lone lefty in the pen should it come to that.

Carmon Cali

The comparisons to Billy Wagner have been spoken, but I'm not ready to say as much out of a 26 year old who started last season in AA ball. But still - any time you have a lefty hitting the mid-90's on his fastball, you have to be somewhat excited.

Cali - 2.2 innings, 3.38 ERA, 3 K, 2 BB, 1 Hit allowed

You can't exactly see a lot out of 2.2 innings pitched, but the K and BB numbers look great. Not shown here, however, are 2 wild pitches. It's early, but looks like he needs some time in AAA. He may be a great mid-season option, however.

Randy Flores

Flores was great with the Cardinals last year, posting a 1.93 ERA over 14 innings. He has the added benefit of the ability to both start and relieve, which is what Ankiel was supposed to be providing this year.

Flores - 4 innings, 4.50 ERA, 3 K, 0 BB, 4 Hits allowed

He's looking pretty good. All of his hits allowed have been singles, and he hasn't given up a free pass as of yet. Add in his limited major league experience, and he's in the mix.

Bill Pulsipher

Talk about a dark horse candidate. This guy was working as a grounds keeper just last Spring, and hasn't pitched in the majors since the 2001 season. For you youngsters out there, Bill Pulsipher and Jason Isringhausen were supposed to be big for the Mets by the late 90's. Think Cardinal hopes for Rick Ankiel and Chad Hutchinson just 5 years ago. (Ouch).

Pulsipher - 5 innings, 0.00 ERA, 4 K, 0 BB, 4 Hits allowed

Not bad for a 31 year old pitcher with a career 5.13 ERA. As with Flores, all of his hits allowed have been singles. Anytime a left handed pitcher is allowing fewer baserunners than innings and has a K/BB ratio of infinity, he's in the running.

Hector Mercado

Technically, he's a starting pitcher, but do you honestly see him cracking the rotation?

Mercado - 1 inning, 0.00 ERA, 1 K, 1 BB, 1 Hit allowed

I don't know if Mercado is hurt, or if there is another reason he hasn't pitched much at this point. I do, however, know this. The Cardinals have had 10 Spring games, and he's only pitched 1 inning. Not exactly a ringing endorsement at this point.

Breakdown

Those are your candidates. For now, let's assume that King will be able to go come the beginning of the season. Looking at the early standings, you have to assume that Cali is going to the minors, with Mercado joining him if he isn't released. That leaves Myers, Flores, and Pulsipher.

Myers, as mentioned, is a one out guy. He can come in and punch out one lefty, but will get lit up like a Christmas tree if the other team pinch hits a right handed batter. The bullpen can handle that if he's the 2nd lefty. He's not an option, however, as the primary. We know that Tony likes veterans, so anything close to a tie will go to Myers. But the Cardinals have been known to cut veterans loose if they have a bad Spring, with the most recent comparable being Al Levine during the 2003 pre-season.

Flores is really hanging tough, and his ability to start games in a pinch could really make him a valuable part of the team. If nothing else, he'll be available down the river in Memphis should the Cardinals have injury problems. (Even Dan Haren and Kiko Calero didn't make the 2004 team out of Spring training, after all.)

Pulsipher is the interesting one in my book. To take 3 seasons off from baseball, then start off Spring training like he has is a great story. It's still early, but if he continues to be half as successful as he has been already, the Cardinals will probably try to find a spot for him on the 2005 roster. In fact, right now my guess is that he is possibly the current favorite to win the #2 left handed job out of the pen.

Addendum (2:17 pm)

It could be worse - we could be having injury problems to the starting staff instead of the bullpen.

Random Thoughts

2005-03-11T09:57:00.000-06:00

Or, if you will, Random Redbird Reasoning, without much to do about Redbirds.

How washed up is Darius Rucker, aka Hootie, to be signing jingles for Burger King? I should have known that the Blowfish were done when they played Ribfest at Naperville last year.

While were on washed up bands, what is up with Bret Michaels, the former (and current) lead singer for Poison? I've never watched an episode of Nashville Star, but isn't that him that I keep seeing on the commercials? Why use him for a judge to pick the next George Straight? I mean, I realize that Paula Abdul could have never cracked the top 100 in an American Idol competition, but at least I can kind of see her as a judge. A bad choice of a judge, but a judge nonetheless.

OK, this next one is a bit racy. In fact, I probably shouldn't even post it. If you're a kid, stop reading now.

I stumbled across a web site that is cracking me up completely. If you get bored sometime, go to Gizoogle. You enter a url into their "search engine", and it will translate it for you into "Snoop Talk." Here is an example.

Here is a paragraph from what I wrote about Ankiel a couple of days back.

Let's see - Ankiel is out of options, and thus will have to either clear waivers or stay on the active roster. The Cardinals currently have 3 outfielders on their bench, making it uncertain as to how there will even be room for Ankiel in the first place. And, of course, there is the fact that he hasn't had a major league hit since the 2000 season, when he hit .250/.292/.382 over 68 at-bats.

And here it is after getting "Gizoogled".

Let's see - Ankiel is out of options, n thus wizzill hizzle ta eitha clear playa or stay on tha active rosta. The Cardinals currently hizzy 3 bitch on they bench, mak'n it uncertain as ta how there W-to-tha-izzill even be rizzy fo` Ankiel in tha fiznirst place. And, of course, there is tha fizzay thizzat he hasn't had a major league hit since tha 2000 season, when he hit .250/.292/.382 over 68 at-bats wit da big Bo$$ Dogg.

Beware - it will spit out some F-bombs and whatnot (thus I didn't show you the last paragraph of the same article.) It's worth a chuckle or two. Who knows? It might even liven up a Peter Gammons article.

2005 Pirates

2005-03-10T11:09:00.000-06:00

Enough with steroids and Ankiel - on with the NL Central outlook.

The Pirates are coming off of their 3rd straigh somewhat respectable season, even though they haven't managed to have a .500 season since 1992 - back when they had a guy named Bonds on their roster. This year, their most notable move was unloading the overpaid but solid Jason Kendall. How will they fare in 2005?

Rotation

Last year, the Pirate's rotation totaled 40 Win Shares, including an impressive 17 from Oliver Perez. In fact, their rotation featured 2 young lefty pitchers in Perez (22) and Sean Burnett (21), who both hold a lot of promise for the future. And, of course, the geezer of the rotation (Kris Benson, 29) was traded to the Mets at the deadline.

As of right now, it looks like the rotation will contain Oliver Perez, Mark Redmon, Josh Fogg, Kip Wells, and someone else. And even the first four are spotty, as I read that Wells is a little banged up as we speak. The 5th slot is up for grabs among a cast of plenty, with Zach Duke not completely out of the question.

Oliver Perez - Had a breakout year in 2004, posting a 2.98 ERA (139 ERA+) over 196 innings. And it wasn't the first time that he had been solid in the majors, as he posted a 109 ERA+ over 15 starts as a 20 year old for San Diego in the 2002 campaign. It's hard not to be impressed by a guy that has struck out 474 batters over 412.2 major league innings. I think that Perez will improve by a bit this year, posting 20 win shares.

Mark Redman - Gives the Pirates a solid 2nd left in their rotation this season, as he's pitched over 190 innings with an ERA+ of 99 or better the last three seasons. Redman will likely see a bit of a "Jeff Suppan" effect this year, with his ERA getting better with the move to the NL. Over the last 3 seasons, he's had 9, 11, and 10 Win Shares. Pretty consistent. Mark him down for 10 again this year, giving the Pirates a much better #2 pitcher than they had in 2004.

Josh Fogg - Has been a solid yet unspectacular pitcher for the Pirates for three years now. He's thrown 142 or more innings each year, getting 10 or more wins - but with an ERA+ fluctuating between 81 and 99. Last year, at the age of 27, Fogg had posted an 89 ERA+, just under his career average of 92. Fogg has likely settled in as a slightly below average major league starter. Pencil him in for 7 Win Shares in 2005, matching his 2004 mark.

Kip Wells - Is a very important piece of the puzzle for Pittsburgh this season. In 2004 he struggled with an injury, which required surgery in October. His ability to come back healthy this year is huge, as he was able to post ERA+ seasons of 121 and 129 in 2002 and 2003. (And once again - what exactly did Kenny Williams see in Todd Ritchie that made him give up both Fogg and Wells for him?) Along with the solid ERA+ seasons, Wells posted 13 and 16 Win Shares leading up to last year, when he only had 6. In other words, his injury cost the Pirates roughly 3 wins last year. To be conservative, let's split the difference and say that Wells can give the Pirates 10 Win Shares in 2005.

5th Starter - I don't know who it's going to be, as Burnett had elbow surgery and isn't an option in the early going. Dave Williams got 6 starts last year, posting 1 Win Share. Burnett managed to get 2 WS over 13 starts despite a 5.02 ERA. Rather than get too carried away, I'm just going to say that the 5th slot will be even this year over last, giving the Pirates 3 Win Shares, or 1 win.

Lineup

In 2004, the Pirates regulars and Win Shares totals looked like this.

Jason Kendall - 25
Jack Wilson - 23
Jason Bay - 18
Craig Wilson - 18
Rob Mackowiak - 15
Tike Redman - 11
Jose Castillo - 8
Daryle Ward - 7

More or less, anyway. The 3rd base job floated around a lot, but since Mackowiak had 15 Win Shares compared to Chris Stynes with 0 - well, I'm going with this. That's 135 WS out of the starting lineup, which isn't bad. Of interest to me is the oddity of a catcher and a shortstop providing the most WS from the lineup on a team. As mentioned, Kendall is gone. Not mentioned is the fact that both Oliver Perez and Jason Bay were received from San Diego for Brian Giles. That trade looks to be working out well for the Steel city.

Gone is Kendall, in is Matt Lawton, acquired from the Indians, and Benito Santiago, who is as resilient as Jason Vorhees. And to be honest - I don't know who in the heck is going to start for the Pirates in the outfield and at 1st base, because it's crowded. I assume Jason Bay and Matt Lawton are locks in the corner outfield, leaving 1st base for Craig Wilson and Daryle Ward. Centerfied could go to either Redman or Mackowiak, with 3rd base going to either Wiggington or Mackowiak. For the purposes of this exercise, I'm assuming Redman in center, Mackowiak at 3rd, and Wilson at 1st. Which means it won't happen, of course.

Benito Santiago - Turned 40 yesterday, but is still going somewhat strong. The Carlos Santana look-alike still has some pop in his bat, as he slugged .434 last year over 175 at-bats. His ERA+ over the last 3 years has been 107, 96, and 96 - which is decent for a catcher. His glove work still appears to be adequate as well. The biggest question I have, of course, is why did he only play in 49 games last year? (I could look it up, but....) I seriously doubt, of course, that the Pirates are expecting him to play in 150 games this year. In fact, his high over the past three years is 136 back in 2002. Over the past 3 seasons he's posted 3, 13, and 15 Win Shares. I can only assume that he'll play in roughly 120 games this year. Assuming a similar level of play to 2004, that translates into about 7 Win Shares this season, or a loss of 6 wins at the catcher position for the Bucs.

Craig Wilson - I have a soft spot for Craig Wilson. He was, after all, the starting catcher for my 2002 Simulation St. Louis Cardinals, who went on to win the World Series. Wilson still caught 4 games for the real Pirates last year, and maybe it's not out of the question to play him more there now that Kendall is gone. Whatever the case, the man can hit pretty well. He has a career OPS+ of 121, which he has exceeded in each of the past 2 seasons. Last year was the first time the Pirates let the guy get more than 375 at-bats, and he did not disappoint as he piled up 29 home runs, 35 doubles, and 5 triples while looking like one of the Alman Brothers. Wilson, who'll be 28 this year, has had 18, 10, and 10 WS over the past 3 seasons. If they actually let the guy play, he'll continue to hit. Give him another 18 WS this season, with low 20's not out of the question.

Jose Castillo - I don't have much to say about. He was only 23 last year as a rookie, posting a 75 OPS+ with an above average glove. He'll be starting again this year, unless Bobby Hill manages to beat him out this Spring. I'll take the easy way out and project him for 10 WS this season, as he gets more playing time, but struggles a bit against pitchers seeing him for the 2nd time.

Rob Mackowiak - A Tony LaRussa favorite, I'm sure, as he hits left handed, and plays all three outfield positions along with 3rd base. Honestly, I doubt he'll start at 3rd base this year, but it has to be an option considering his 15 Win Shares last year. His OPS+ last year was 93, matching his career mark. From an historical WS perspective, he had 6 in 2003, 12 in 2002. Most likely, you'll see him play at about the same level this season as last, with playing time the determining factor of his total production. Let's just assume a repeat, giving him 15 again this year.

Jack Wilson - After a torrid 1st half, Wilson came back to the pack a bit in the 2nd half of the year, but still had a great season. The always spectacular fielder added hitting to his game at the age of 26, posting a 107 OPS+, along with 41 doubles. Here's my concern.

2002 - 527 at-bats, 37 BB's, .252 average
2003 - 558 at-bats, 36 BB's, .256 average
2004 - 652 at-bats, 26 BB's, .308 average

Without digging too deeply, I have to think that a lot of his improvement last year was due to luck more than anything else, as his plate discipline actually decreased. And while it's not unusual for power to develop as a player ages, his 100 point jump in SLG last year seems a bit out of the ordinary. In other words - I'm not going to be a believer unless he repeats this year. He's had 23, 11, and 12 WS over the past 3 seasons. I'm going to say he can create 15 this year.

Jason Bay - In 2003, over 87 at-bats, he posted a 148 OPS+. Last year, over 411 at-bats, he posted a 135 including 24 doubles, 4 triples, and 26 home runs. The power is there, even if the plate discipline needs some help. Considering that this is his 26 year old season, he should continue to show improvement. I'm going to say that he can post 25 Win Shares this year. That may be a bit high, but I think it's reasonable.

Tike Redman - He's good defensively, but that's about all he brings to the table. Which, of course, isn't the end of the world for a Center Fielder. His career OBP is .319, and he was under that last year. It's unlikely that he'll improve much more over his current numbers, so I'll give him 11 WS again in 2005.

Matt Lawton - Might be a nice pick-up for the Pirates this year, although the Indians may have traded him when his stock was about as high as it was going to get. He's a career 105 OPS+ hitter, exceeding that mark in each of the past 2 seasons. He's a decent BB guy, as he averages 84 every 162 games played. Over the past 3 seasons, he's had 15, 10, and 9 WS, with the spike coming last year due to him saying healthy for a change. I think it's likely that either injuries, competition, or both will limit his playing time this year over last, pulling his WS total down to 12 for 2005.

Bullpen

The Pittsburgh bullpen last year was actually pretty solid, albeit a little top heavy. Jose Mesa got 43 saves with an ERA of 3.25, with Saloman Torres and Mike Gonzalez providing right and left handed setup options with ERA's under 3.00. Additionally, Brian Meadows served as a good long man, posting a 3.58 ERA. Those four pitchers combined for 33 of the 36 WS out of the pen last year.

This year, all 4 of them will return to the Pirate bullpen, along with another couple of players. Who? I don't know. Most likely they will be from the ranks of John Grabow, Mike Johnston, and Dave Williams.

Jose Mesa - After a horrible 2003 season, in which he got 0 win shares for 58 innings of 6.52 ERA pitching, Mesa rebounded to have a solid year, including a 128 ERA+. Unfortunately, he turns 39 in May and only struck out 37 batters over 69.1 innings last year. It's hard to imagine him repeating this year, making it likely that the Pirates will regret not trading him last year (even though he said he didn't want to be.) Mesa had 9 WS last year. I'll put him down for 8 this year, and expect him to miss that mark.

Saloman Torres - 2004 marked the first time since 1997 that Torres was a full time bullpen pitcher, and he did not disappoint as he got 7 wins with a 2.64 ERA, 157 ERA+. Most notably, Torres kept the ball in the park in 2004, which was a problem for him the previous season. I suspect that Torres will be solid again in 2005, most likely becoming the Pirate closer by mid-season at the latest. He had 11 WS last year in relief. This season, I'm going to say that he will improve slightly due to extra save opportunities, posting 13 WS.

Mike Gonzalez - Came out of nowhere last year, posting a 1.25 ERA and a 332 ERA+. Frankly, it's hard to imagine someone repeating that season, considering it was his rookie campaign and didn't come until he was 26 years old. Usually, a season like his is followed by a bit of a disappointment. He had 8 WS in 2004. I'll cut it in half for this year, giving him 4.

Brian Meadows - Here is another interesting player. He's never given up many home runs, never given up many walks, yet has had problems getting work over the past few years. Over the last 3, he's had ERA+ seasons of 116, 90, and 111. Last year he set career highs in ERA+, as well as games (68) as he had his first season as a full time reliever. Personally, I think last season was a sign of things to come for the 29 year old left hander. He's had 5, 3, and 3 WS over the past 3 seasons. I'm going to predict that he'll put together a 7 WS season in 2005, with more not out of the question.

5th and 6th Bullpen Slots - I simply don't know who to project into these slots. Last year, they only got 3 WS out of the back end of their pen, and it's hard to imagine it being that bad again this year. Rather than getting too carried away, I'm simply going to say that these slots will provide 2 extra wins this year over last, or a total of 9 WS.

Bench

Ah, the bench. How I hate trying to guess this one. Last year, the Pirates bench combined for an ugly 15 Win Shares led by Bobby Hill with 4, plus Raul Mondesi and Ty Wiggington with 3 apiece. This year, I'm projecting Daryle Ward to join the bench. Leaving are Mondesi, along with Tony Alvarez and Abraham Nunez. And, of course, Wiggington may end up starting with Mackowiak being on the pine, but I'm going to stick with my methodology for now.

Basically, I know that Bobby Hill, Daryle Ward, and Ty Wigginton (for me) are on the bench, along with catcher Humberto Cota. Ben Grieve is in Spring training tearing things up, which bodes well, and infielder Freddy Sanchez is another likely bench candidate.

To make this simple - I assume that Bobby Hill and Ty Wiggington will provide the same amount of production as last year, or 7 WS. Humberto Cota, getting more playing time, will improve from 1 WS to 3 WS in 2005. Freddy Sanchez will replace the production of Abraham Nunez, getting 1 WS.

That, however, will leave Daryle Ward and Ben Grieve to add to the bench. Ward had 7 WS last year, while Grieve had 9 WS between time with the Brewers and the Cubs. It may not be realistic for both of them to get any playing time on a team chocked full of RF/LF/1B types, but they still should improve the bench. I'm going to say that they can both repeat last year's numbers, adding antother 16 WS to the Pirates bench.

Totals

Starting Pitching - 50 Win Shares (40 in 2004)
Bullpen - 41 Win Shares (36 in 2004)

Lineup - 113 Win Shares (135 in 2004)
Bench - 32 Win Shares (15 in 2004)

That's a total of 236 Win Shares, or 78 Wins in 2005. Adjusting for luck, we add 2 wins, giving a prediction of 80 wins for the Pirates in 2005. Let's see if that looks right.

Improved rotation? Check - especially if Kip Wells can revert to pre-2004 form.
Improved bullpen? Maybe. They need help from the back end, though.
Improved bench? Should be, with Grieve and Ward joining it (by my logic, of course.)

Worse Lineup? With Kendall gone and me not believing in Wilson, yes.

So, could the Pirates actually make a run at a .500 season this year? It's not out of the question. They'll need Wilson to repeat his 2004 season and for Wells to come back - neither of those are impossible to imagine.

NL Central (2005 Wins)

Cardinals - 95
Cubs - 95
Astros - 88
Pirates - 80
Reds - 74

Note - I'm working on revising the way I factor in "luck" into my predictions. I believe that simply adjusting the previous year on a 1 to 1 basis is too harsh. Once I finish the Brewers recap, I'll come back and adjust my predictions slightly, explaining my reasoning at the time.

Ankiel a Bust?

2005-03-09T10:20:00.000-06:00

According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Ankiel is an outfielder, effective immediately.

This comes as a complete surprise to me, although it does not surprise me that his problems this Spring may have been even worse than they were letting on. The fact that his first start was moved back twice, then changed to a B game, then to a relief appearance were all bad indicators.

Personally, I'm a little bit miffed about this. The Cardinals kept faith in Ankiel for the past four years, hoping he would come back some day. They didn't trade him two years ago when other teams were asking about him. Their return? Apparently, he has decided (on his own) to give up pitching and switch to the outfield.

Let's see - Ankiel is out of options, and thus will have to either clear waivers or stay on the active roster. The Cardinals currently have 3 outfielders on their bench, making it uncertain as to how there will even be room for Ankiel in the first place. And, of course, there is the fact that he hasn't had a major league hit since the 2000 season, when he hit .250/.292/.382 over 68 at-bats.

I guess it's possible that Ankiel will continue to work on pitching, but it doesn't sound like it. If he's serious about giving up pitching, it's probably time for the Cardinals to go ahead and place him on waivers to see what happens. If they lose him, they lose him. At this point - especially if he's given up pitching - I don't see any value in keeping him anyway.

Why Not?

2005-03-07T08:18:00.000-06:00

Anyone else catch this little section buried in a St. Louis Post-Dispatch article?

La Russa said he has a lineup now that could produce even more offensively if he had the pitcher bat eighth instead of in the usual No. 9 slot. But he's not going to do so. In 1998, he batted the pitcher No. 8 for about half the season with considerable win-loss success.

This season, with Mark Grudzielanek and David Eckstein he has two leadoff-capable hitters and could use them as bookends, thus getting Albert Pujols and Larry Walker up in the first inning, but keeping two de facto leadoff hitters ahead of them in every subsequent inning.

The constant explanation - to media and to players - isn't worth the switch, La Russa said. But it's still academically of interest. "We won 105 (games last year) hitting the guy ninth," La Russa said. "I'm not sure I want to (mess with) it."

My question is - if La Russa honestly thinks that it would produce more runs, why not go with it? Who cares about the baseball purists complaining? I, personally, would welcome the discussion and find it interesting.

Of course, the move would likely only result in very few extra run over the course of the season (see Curve Blog for more fun with lineup changes.) And possibly, La Russa knows (or has been told) that the advantage would likely only produce a handful of runs over the course of the season, thus he's choosing not to rock the boat. But it would be fun...

2005 Reds

2005-03-01T10:26:00.000-06:00

Today, I'll continue my NL Central predictions. The same methodology will be used - basically, win shares, ERA+, and OPS+ over the past 3 years for players to predict their 2005 performance.

Rotation

Last year, the Reds rotation combined to provide just 23 win shares. To make matters worse, 8 of those win shares were provided by Luke Hudson and Josh Hancock, who only combined to make 18 starts on the season. In an effort to improve upon their pitching, the Reds signed Eric Milton during the off-season, and added Ramon Ortiz via trade. That gives them a rotation this year that will likely look like this:

Paul Wilson
Eric Milton
Ramon Ortiz
Corey Lidle
Luke Hudson/Josh Hancock

Paul Wilson had what some thought to be a breakout season in 2004, posting his first double digit win total at 11. Interestingly enough, if you look at his ERA+ totals over the past 4 seasons, he's pegged 92 each and every year. Over the past 3 seasons, Wilson has had 8, 5, and 7 win shares. Write him down for 7 this year.

The Cardinals were supposedly interested in Eric Milton this off-season. Thankfully, they got Mark Mulder instead. Milton gave up an impressive 43 home runs last season for the Phillies, while putting up an ERA plus of 92. And while Milton hasn't been as consistent as Wilson, he did post an ERA+ of 91 in 2002, which was the most recent season before 2004 in which he was healthy. Milton has had 8, 2, and 9 WS over the past 3 seasons. I think he's good for 8 this year.

Ramon Ortiz, acquired from the Angels, was a bit disgruntled last year as he was asked to work out of the pen for the bulk of the season. And he may have been entitled to such an opinion, considering that guys like Bartolo Colon (5.01 ERA) and Aaron Sele (5.05) were in the rotation ahead of him. Overall, Ortiz posted a 4.43 ERA, 104 ERA+ on the year for a playoff team. In 2003, he had his career worst season. 2002? Career best. What will the Reds get out of him this year? It's hard to tell. Over the past 3 seasons, Ortiz has posted 7, 5, and 14 WS. Let's be a bit on the optimistic side and say that Ortiz can have a bit of a revival and provide 10 WS to the Reds in 2005.

Cory Lidle is another player that is hard to judge. Was he for real in '01-'02 for Oakland, when he was 20% better than league average? Or was the '03-'04 version accurate, when he was 17% below? Lidle has never been a strikeout pitcher, and has always allowed his fair share of home runs. The problem over the past two seasons has been the number of hits he's allowed, which has skyrocketed over his previous seasons. Over the past 2 seasons he's provided 7 and 5 WS. I think it's likely he can be counted on for 6 this season, unless he re-discovers earlier glory.

The #5 slot is going to be a Spring training battle. For now, I'll assume that Hudson, who had a 2.42 ERA over 9 starts, will end up getting the job. Hudson was undoubtedly playing over his head last season, posting a 168 ERA+. Since we were optimistic with Ramon Ortiz, and since the Reds rotation has already shown a lot of improvement in our analysis above, let's play it safe with Hudson and predict a very low WS total of 3 this season. Note, however, that even with that low guess, the Reds rotation is currently projected to have 34 WS this season - an improvement of 11 over last year, or 4 wins.

Lineup

Adam Dunn and Sean Casey kept the Reds in the hunt for a .500 season last year, putting up great numbers. Had Griffey stayed healthy all year, they may have been able to best the mark. This year, the notable addition to the team is 3rd baseman Joe Randa.

2004 Regulars/Win Shares

Adam Dunn (OF) - 32
Sean Casey (1B) - 30
D'Angelo Jimenez (2B) - 23
Ken Griffey, Jr. (OF) - 16
Wily Mo Pena (OF) - 15
Jason LaRue (C) - 15
Barry Larkin (SS) - 10
Felipe Lopez (SS) - 9
Juan Castro (3B) - 4

Note that Ryan Freel got a lot of playing time in the place of Griffey, as well as at 3rd base last year, totalling 19 win shares. His production will be included in the bench section of this post.

Dunn had a true breakout season last year, posting a 152 OPS+ which was 9th best in the NL. And he just turned 25 in November, folks. I think we're likely to see more of the same out of Mr. Dunn this year. Let's chalk him up for 35 WS in 2005.

As much as I think Dunn is for real, I wonder about Sean Casey. At the age of 29, Casey posted a career high 142 OPS+, after having seasons of 98 and 78 in the previous 2 seasons. His win share totals over that time span were 30, 17, and 5. I have to think that Casey had a bit of a fluke season last year. I'm going to predict a drop-off for him, giving him 22 WS in 2005.

Rumors abounded that the Reds might non-tender Jimenez this off-season, but I'm not exactly sure why. The "bad work ethic" tag seems to follow him around, but we're talking about a 27 year old switch hitting middle infielder who has a career OPS+ of 98, and has seen that mark about 100 in each of the past 2 seasons. Over the past 3 years, his WS totals have been 23, 17, and 11. Last year may have been his career high, but the trend is encouraging. I'm going to give him an estimate of 22 in 2005, making him as valuable as Sean Casey.

Ken Griffey Jr. When the Reds got him, I remember a friend of mine telling me it was the beginning of the new Big Red Machine. Of course, since joining the Reds, Cincinnati has not made the playoffs once, and Griffey has only managed to top 140 games one time. He hasn't played in more than 83 games in each of the past 3 seasons.

Griffey is now 35 years old. While it's hard to predict injuries, with Griffey it's almost a given at this point. From a production standpoint, it's hard to judge. He hasn't topped 22 home runs over the past 4 seasons, while his OBP and SLG have been all over the map. Griffey has had 16, 6, and 5 WS over the past 3 years. He could literally finish the 2005 season with as many as 35, and as few as 0. Let's be somewhere in the middle and predict that Griffey will find a way to generate 18 WS in 2005.

Also having a breakout season last year was Wily Mo Pena. At the ripe old age of 22, Pena posted an OPS+ of 121 thanks in large part to hitting 26 home runs over just 336 at-bats. I'm not familiar with the Reds, so I don't know for sure that Pena will be assumed to be starting in a corner this year over Austin Kearns. I'll keep things conservative here and assume that Pena will post 16 WS this year, as maybe he'll have a bit more trouble with pitchers that have seen him.

Jason LaRue had a career year, plain and simple. At the age of 30, the career 89 OPS+ hitter posted a 103, giving him his first above average season in his career. His WS totals over the past 3 years were 15, 10, and 11. LaRue should regress back to the 11 neighborhood this season.

Felipe Lopez started showing signs of power last year, hitting 18 doubles and 7 home runs over 264 at-bats. With Barry Larkin retired, Lopez should be the regular at short for a full season for the first time. Last season was his career high with 9 WS. Let's assume he'll improve a little this year, providing the Reds with 15 WS over the year.

Joe Randa should be the regular for the Reds this year, unless the Austin Kearns experiment starts back up. (And I, for one, liked the sentiment.) Randa is a solid if unspectacular option at 3rd base. He'll give the Reds a .340 OBP and a solid glove with little power. Over the last 3 years, he's had 12, 14, and 11 WS. 12 is the mid-point, so let's go with that for 2005.

Bullpen

The Reds Bullpen was horrible last year. A total of 20 Win Shares spread out over several pitchers, and a composite 5.72 ERA in relief. The Reds tried to address this situation by signing David Weathers, Kent Merker, and Ben Weber in the off-season. As far as I can tell, they'll join Danny Graves, Ryan Wagner, and Jose Acevedo in the pen this year.

Danny Graves. The good news for him last year was 41 saves. The bad news was 9 blown saves. His ERA+ was 102, which is horrible for a closer. It's hard to say what he'll be able to do in 2005, since his 2004 was so poor, and his 2003 season featured him in the rotation instead of the bullpen. This will be his 31 age season, so I will be generous and predict an improvement for Graves this year. He's had 5, 3, and 17 WS over the past 3 years. Let's give him 10 in 2005.

Ryan Wagner struggled a bit last year after having an impressive audition in 2003. Wagner will turn 22 during the 2005 season, and should be ready to step it up a notch. I'm ready to say that Wagner will provide 5 WS in 2005, with a bright future to come.

David Weathers bounced around last year, pitching for the Mets, Astros, and Marlins. Overall on the season, he ended up with a 102 ERA+, his lowest mark since posting a 98 in 1999. If you look at Weathers in the previous 4 seasons, his ERA+ was 134 or higher each year, maxing out at 181 in 2001. While Weathers may not ever see the 130's again, it's likely that 2004 was an off year. He posted 4, 8, and 7 WS over the past 3 seasons. I think Weathers can be counted on for 7 in 2005.

Ben Weber was almost a David Weathers clone entering the 2004 season. They were both 34, and they were both coming off of multiple solid seasons. In the case of Weber, he had posted ERA+ seasons of 139, 171, and 158 in the 2001-2003 time span. Then last year, for whatever reason, he was horrible, posting an 8.06 ERA, 57 ERA+. I'll admit it - I don't know if he was injured last year or not. However, with his innings pitched total so low, I have to assume he was. Over the past 3 years, Weber posted -1, 8, and 11 WS. He should be due for a rebound, giving him around 8 in 2005.

Kent Merker is coming off of great back to back seasons, posting ERA+ values of 178 and 218. In each of those years, he had 6 win shares. Personally, I see no reason why he can't do it again.

Jose Acevedo got 27 starts last year, but also pitched 12 games in relief. With the new additions to the rotation already mentioned, I'm going to assume that Acevedo will be the swing man in the bullpen. It's just a guess, but frankly - it doesn't matter that much. This slot is for the 6th man in the pen, and that guy almost never contributes very much. Give him 1 WS.

Bench

I always have problems projecting the bench. Playing time to regulars can really mess with playing time. With the Reds, this is especially true. Their bench will likely consist of Ryan Freel, who had 19 win shares for the Reds last year due to spot starts. Austin Kearns will likely join him there, along with Jacob Cruz, Javier Valentin, and a couple of more players that I'm frankly not aware of.

Look - the bench provided 34 win shares last year, including the 19 from Freel and 5 more from Kearns. I'm going to take the easy way out and simply say the bench looks like it's about as good as it was last year, but won't get as much playing time due to the conservative estimates given in my lineup projections. 27 Win Shares.

Adding it Up

Starting Rotation - 34 Win Shares (23 in 2004)
Bullpen - 37 Win Shares (20 in 2004)

Starting Lineup - 151 Win Shares (163 in 2004)
Bench - 27 Win Shares (34 in 2004)

That's a total of 249 Win Shares, or 83 Wins on the season. To be consistent, however, I have to adjust for the 2004 Pythagorean win total. The 2005 Reds, believe it or not, had 9 more wins than predicted. That forces me to subtract 9 wins from my prediction, turning it down to 74 wins in 2005.

Overall, the Reds have improved their rotation a little, and their bullpen a lot. I'm expecting their offense to actually regress by a bit due to Sean Casey and Jason LaRue not having career years again, combined with Felipe Lopez not being able to quite make up for the loss of Barry Larkin.

Of course, all isn't lost for the Reds. If Casey was for real last year, Griffey can stay healthy this year, and the Reds can keep up their good luck from 2004? They could in fact make a run at the division. That, of course, is a lot of if's.

NL Central Predictions

Cardinals - 95 Wins
Cubs - 95 Wins
Astros - 88 Wins
Reds - 74 Wins

I hope to wrap up the Brewers and Pirates in the next couple of weeks.

Good Fit?

2005-02-22T21:49:00.000-06:00

According to this article:

At Clearwater, Fla., Placido Polanco isn't happy about being a backup to Chase Utley on the Philadelphia Phillies, and he hopes that he'll be with another team on opening day.

``It's a situation I can't control,'' Polanco said before the team's first full-squad workout. ``I don't like to be in this situation. I hate to be in this situation, but I have to live with it.''

Polanco hit .298 with a career-high 17 homers and 55 RBIs in 126 games, but the Phillies plan to start Utley every day at second base, and use Polanco in a reserve role.

Polanco is scheduled to make $4.5 million this season. (Yes, I feel sorry for his "horrible situation.") Can the Cardinals go out and get him? Only if a few planets align.

It appears to me as if the only way the Cardinals can pick up Polanco is if they think a couple of things will happen. One, Morris will in fact have to be back sooner rather than later. According to early Spring optimism, Morris may in fact be ready earlier than planned. Two, Ankiel will need to be ready to contribute. Personally, I haven't heard anything about Ankiel yet this Spring. And Three, either Anthony Reyes or Adam Wainwright (or both) will need to be available to come up in the event of an injury to the starting staff.

Why those three things?

If Morris and Ankiel can be part of the rotation, the Cardinals can throw them in with Mulder and Carpenter for the front four. The 5th starter could be one of Jason Marquis and Jeff Suppan, with the other being traded to the Phillies for Polanco. Both Marquis and Suppan would make salaries in the neighborhood of Polanco, with Suppan's being closest in dollars. (Of course, Suppan is the only guy I trust to be healthy this year, so I'm not sure that he should be the guy traded if this happens.) And teams always need an emergency option, which Reyes and/or Wainwright would have to be available for.

Polanco, if acquired, would be able to start 120 or more games, depending on health and the whims of Tony. He would provide a defensive upgrade at either 2nd or short, and further would be an offensive upgrade over Grudzielanek or Eckstein. Most likely, Polanco would be the usual starter at 2nd, playing at short to give Eckstein time off (or cover in the event of an injury.) Grudzielanek would still get plenty of starts at 2nd base, and could be further used as a utility player.

Think about it - Polanco would essentially replace Abraham Nunez or Wilton Guerrero on the 25 man roster. That, my friends, is a no-brainer. With Polanco obviously available, I suppose we'll learn something about the Cardinals real feelings on the return of Morris and Ankiel.

2005 Cubs

2005-02-16T11:01:00.000-06:00

Today, I'll attempt to assess the Cubs for the upcoming season. Once again - I'm simply looking at the Win Shares of the key players on the roster over the last 3 years and making an estimate as to how many the Cubs can expect to receive from these players in 2005.

Rotation

Having to go without Mark Prior and Kerry Wood in 2004 is largely credited with the Cubs missing the playoffs, which is fair. Prior and Wood only combined to make 43 starts last year, compared to 62 in the previous season. By simply looking at Win Shares in 2003 vs. 2004, the loss of Prior and Wood cost the Cubs as many as 5 wins on the season, putting them into the playoffs if they had been healthy. And this same argument is helping the average Cub fan to look to the 2005 season with hope.

2004 Win Shares

Zambrano - 19
Maddux - 12
Rusch - 9
Wood - 8
Prior - 7

(Note: Clement had 11 in 2004)

Carlos Zambrano may be a nut job, but he's a great pitcher. This guy doesn't turn 24 until June 1st, yet has already finished in the top 7 in the NL in ERA twice, and last year was in the top 10 in the league in ERA, wins, strikeouts, innings, and complete games. Oh, and he led the majors in hit batsmen with 20. Want an interesting comparison? Bob Gibson never hit more than 13 batters in a season.

Cubs fans should be a little nervous about the workload that Zambrano has seen at such a young age, exceeding 209 innings in each of the past 2 seasons. But so far, Zambrano has taken everything Dusty Baker has thrown at him and only improved. Over the last 2 seasons, Zambrano has posted 19 and 18 win shares. I'm going to write him down to have 20 in 2005.

Greg Maddux, the eternal 15 game winner, was the 2nd most valuable pitcher on the Cub's staff last year. His ERA+ of 113 was actually a slight improvement over the 105 he posted the previous season. Considering that Maddux turns 39 in April - well, he has to decline at some point. Maddux had 12 WS in 2004, and 11 in 2003. I'm going to assume that Maddux has one more solid season left in him, and give him a 10 WS prediction for 2005.

Glendon Rusch essentially came out of no where last year to keep the Cubs in the Wild Card race. Note his ERA+ trend over the past 4 seasons:

2001 - 89
2002 - 85
2003 - 68
2004 - 131

How good is a 131 ERA+? Kerry Wood has only exceeded that level once in his career when he posted a 133 in 2003. The Cubs having 129.2 innings of Rusch pitching like Kerry Wood was a huge plus for the North Siders last year. Did he learn how to pitch at the age of 29?

In 2004, Rusch had 9 WS. I haven't been able to find a Win Share total for Rusch in 2003, but in 2002 he had 7 WS for the Brewers over 210.2 innings. Based upon that season and the fact that I think Rusch was very lucky last year, I'm going to assume he can match the 7 WS mark in 2005.

That brings us to the guys the Cubs need to be healthy. First, Kerry Wood. Wood had quite a disappointing year, going 8-9 with a 3.72 ERA. His 122 ERA+ was quite respectable, but being limited to 140.1 innings due to injury hurt his counting stats. And, of course, critics of Wood always point to the fact that he's "never had more than 14 wins in a season." Personally, I'll point to the fact that he's played for horrible teams, but for some reason that gets ignored.

If Wood can stay healthy this year, he could be huge. He will turn 28 in June, and with a lower workload last year he may in fact be healthy again. Wood's career high in Win Shares was 18, which he posted in 2003. I'm going to go out on a limb ever so slightly and give him a 20 WS projection for this year.

Then there's Mark Prior - the man that was never going to get hurt due to his perfect mechanics. So much for that theory. In 2003? He was a stud. In 2002? He performed at the same level as his 38 year old rotation mate, just over fewer innings.

I'm a huge Mark Prior fan. I think he's going to be a blast to watch for years to come, and that he's going to be back to 2003 levels (if not better) this year. Assuming Dusty Baker doesn't overdo it, of course. Prior had 22 WS in 2003. This year, I think he can put together another 22 WS season, putting him back as the ace of the staff.

Bullpen

The Cubs bullpen had plenty of problems last year. Consider this - the Cubs had 8 relievers combine for 32 win shares. The Cardinals and Astros each had 39 WS out of the bullpen, giving both teams approximately 2 more wins out of relief pitching alone. What's more, 56.3% of the Cubs bullpen WS came from just two players - LaTroy Hawkins with 12 and Kent Merker with 6.

And, of course, it gets better. The Cubs let Kent Merker go to free agency, and further traded away their #3 bullpen pitcher in Kyle Farnsworth (3 WS in 2004). And they've added? Well....not much. An area that was a weakness for the Cubs in 2004 is even more uncertain in 2005 as they will be counting on AAA callups, retreads, and reruns.

Hawkins will be back, and is a great bullpen asset. Over the last 3 years, he's had 12, 13, and 11 WS. I suspect he'll be right back again this year with 12 WS. He appears to be best suited to work in setup, and it looks like he'll be back in that role this year.

Mike Remlinger missed time with an injury last year, only pitching 36.2 innings instead of his usual 70. Of course, considering that he turns 39 in March, it's hard to imagine that not happening to him again this year. He had 3 WS last year - I think that's likely to be what he does again this year.

Here's an interesting one for you - the Cubs let Merker go, as was already mentioned. Who is going to replace him as the 2nd lefty? As far as I can tell, they only southpaw they signed was Stephen Randolf who posted an 81 ERA+ for the DBacks last year. Randolf did have 3 WS last year, however, over 81.2 innings (including 6 starts). Let's scale him back to 2 WS this year due to a likely reduced work load.

That leaves the production provided last year by the likes of Leicester, Wuertz, and Beltran. Rather than getting too carried away, I'm simply going to say that the back end of the Cubs bullpen will provide them with 7 WS, which is what the 3 of them had last year.

After those guys it gets even murkier.

Ryan Dempster is supposedly the Cubs closer heading into Spring training. Dempster looked decent last year coming off of an injury - 116 ERA+ over 20.2 innings. However, he walked 13 batters over those innings, which has always been his problem. Last year was also just the 2nd time over his 7 year career that he's posted an ERA under 4.71. Personally, I'm not sold on him, although some claim he's well suited for bullpen work. For now, I'm simply going to assume that he can replace Farnsworth in the pen, giving him 3 WS on the season.

Other Cubs projects for this year include Chad Fox and Scott Williamson. Both have been solid in the past, both are struggling with injuries. Fox may be able to have an impact in 2005, while Williamson likely won't help until 2006.

Lineup

Talk about a different look. Out is the face of the Cubs for the last decade along with Bartman's best freind. In are Jeromy Burnitz and Jerry Hairston, Jr. How much production are the Cubs going to lose?

2004 Win Shares

Ramirez - 22
Lee - 21
Patterson - 19
Burnitz - 18
Barrett - 15
Walker - 14
Nomar - 6 (11 over 81 Games on the year)
Hairston - 8

(Note - Gone are Alou with 26, Sosa with 14, and Grudzielanek with 9)

Aramis Ramirez finally put together the type of season expected of him last year. Well, I say expected - he was only 26 years old. Ramirez had career highs in batting average, OBP, SLG, R, BB, HR - the list is long. His OPS+ of 136 was the best he had posted since his 125 in 2001. Do keep in mind, however, that Ramirez is just 3 years removed from a season in which he posted a 69 OPS+ with and OBP of 279. However, I think that was a fluke. ARam had 22 WS last year after posting 19 the year before. Chalk him up for 20 this year due to a slight decrease in production.

Derek Lee had a great season last year as well, posting career highs in hits and doubles and just missing his first 100 RBI season. Interestingly enough, Lee was off last year. His 114 OPS+ was lower than his previous 2 seasons (135 and 131 respectively), and his 21 WS was as well (25 and 23). Considering that he'll be 29 this season, I see no reason why he won't have a bounce back this year, posting 24 WS.

People forget that Corey Patterson is still very young. Despite being 24 for most of last season, Patterson managed to hit 24 home runs, steal 32 bases, and play solid defense in centerfield. He also saw his walk totals climb from a career high of 19 to 45. I'm not sold that he's ever going to be an OBP machine, but he's a solid player for a centerfielder. For this exercise, I'm going to assume that Patterson will progress a little more this year and provide the Cubs with 20 WS.

Nomar Garciaparra is an interesting player. After posting back to back 1000 OPS seasons in 1999 and 2000, Nomar has never been the same. Various injuries have kept him from reaching those amazing numbers since. (I'll ignore any Jose Canseco inspired rumors on Nomar.) With 4 straight seasons of 880 or less OPS, I think that it's safe to say that Nomar likely won't see those levels again. He should, however, be able to be a great player for the Cubs this season, assuming he can play in 150 or so games. Last year, Nomar would have had 22 WS if he had played a full season, even though he was playing through an injury. The previous 2 seasons saw Nomar posting 25 and 27 Win Shares. I think the Cubs can expect to get 24 WS out of him again this year, helping them replace the loss of Alou.

Michael Barrett had a career year last year, posting a 105 OPS+ over the season despite a career mark of 81. Barrett isn't going to regress to his 2003 level of 63, but it's hard to imagine him repeating his 2004 performance with the bat this year. From a WS standpoint, I think that he's likely to produce 12 this year, which would match his 2002 total.

Jeromy Burnitz gets a nice, juicy contract thanks to playing half of his games in Coors field. Are there really GM's out there that don't get that in 2005? Apparently so. Burnitz is a player that only provides value from his power. Over the past 3 seasons, his OBP has been .356, .299, and .311. And of course, the .356 came in a hitter's park. From a Win Shares standpoint, Burnitz had created 18, 9, and 7 over the past 3 years. One of these is not like the others. I think Burnitz will likely hit 30 home runs this year, but still only create 11 WS. And I might be generous in giving him that many.

That leaves the confusion of 2nd base and left field for the Cubs. Todd Walker is likely to start the bulk of the games at 2nd base, with Todd Hollandsworth and Jason DuBois available in left. And then there's Jerry Hairston Jr. who can play both positions. Combine that with Dusty Baker's preference to play veterans, and I'm not exactly sure what's going to happen here. My best guess is that Hairston is going to limit Walker's playing time by a little, and will limit DuBois already limited playing time by a lot.

At 2nd Base, Todd Walker will probably see a little more playing time than last year. Walker is a solid hitter who gets on base, although he's not a world beater (97 career OPS+). His glove gets a bad rap, as he's league average at worst. Over the last 3 years, Walker has had 14, 15, and 21 Win Shares, with the 21 coming when he played 155 games with the Reds. Since he's highly unlikely to play that much this year, I'm going to give Walker a 15 WS prediction.

In Left Field, Baker was expected to platoon Hollandsworth and DuBois, giving Hollandsworth the bulk of the at-bats. With Hairston on hand, I'm going to assume that he and Hollandsworth will in fact get the majority of the starts. This also makes the prediction easier, as neither Hollandsworth nor Hairston usually play the entire season injury free. Hollandsworth had 6 win shares last year over just 167 PA's. Of course, he was playing out of his mind, posting an OPS+ of 134, his best in 3 years. Over his career, Hollandsworth has a 101 OPS+, posting 96 and 97 in the 2 seasons leading up to 2004. I'm going to go back to his 2002 season, in which he got 430 at-bats to project his 2005 campaign. That season he got 12 WS between the Rockies and the Rangers. Since he's now 2 years older, let's give him a 10 WS prediction for this year.

That leaves Hairston, who will get starts at both 2nd and left. Over the last 2 years, he's averaged about 250 at-bats, which should approximate his playing time this year. He chalked up 8 WS last year, and 7 the year before. Another 7 WS this year should be about right.

Bench

And you thought their bullpen was weak? The Cub's bench was almost a joke last year. In 2004, the top 3 teams in the NL Central featured the following amount of WS.

Cardinals - 39 Win Shares (13 Wins)
Astros - 36 Win Shares (12 Wins)
Cubs - 24 Win Shares (8 Wins)

I knew the Cubs bench was bad last year, but had no idea just how bad. Just looking at their weaker bench and bullpen, the Cubs had 7 fewer wins than the Cardinals last year. And what have they done for this year? They've promoted their best bench player, Hollandsworth, to the starting lineup, and let their other one, Ramon Martinez, go to free agency. Hollandsworth and Martinez combined to produce 12 WS last year - a full half of the total for the bench! It would have been even uglier had Neifi Perez not arrived late in the year and provided 4 WS by playing at a level he'll never sniff again. (And yes - he's back!)

The Cubs bench will usually consist of one of the three between Hollandsworth, Walker, and Hairston, so at least they'll have one decent pinch hitter available. After that, they have the likes of Henry Blanco, Neifi Perez, Jose Macias, and I suppose Jason DuBois. Dave Hansen was also given a Spring training invitation, and should have a good shot of making the bench.

Here's how I'm going to break it down. Hollandsworth/Walker/Hairston will reproduce the value created by Hollandsworth last year (this is already accounted for in the lineup section of this article, however). Jason DuBois will reproduce the value lost by Ramon Martinez leaving. Blanco and Bako will cancel each other out, and Macias will get his 4 WS from last year again. Neifi Perez will get 6 WS, helping the Cubs out by 2 more over his production last year (only over a season instead of a month.) That leaves the end of the bench - Dave Hanson? - to come up with at least 1 win share to make the Cubs bench as "good" as the 2004 version. I think he can do it. In fact, I'm going to say that the Cubs bench will actually be a little better than last year, posting an extra 3 WS (or 1 win.) Hard to imagine with that cast of characters, but that's what I'm going to stick to.

Survey Says?

Starting Rotation - 79 Win Shares (66 in 2004)
Bullpen - 27 Win Shares (32 in 2004)

Lineup - 137 Win Shares (146 in 2004)
Bench - 27 Win Shares (24 in 2004)

That's 270 Win Shares, or 90 wins. Don't forget our friend Pythagoras, though. The Cubs had 5 - 5! - "unlucky" losses last year. If we assume that they can get a correction this year and have 5 "lucky" wins, the Cubs are projected to win 95 games, putting them right there with the Cardinals. Does this hold water?

Our little analysis shows the Cubs rotation improving in 2005 over 2004, giving the Cubs 4 more wins than last year. That seems to be conservative, if anything.

The bench also appears to be slightly better than the 2004 version, which I wouldn't have expected. The only way this becomes reality is if DuBois is allowed a decent amount of playing time, and if Dave Hansen makes the team.

The Cub offense does take a hit, however. The starting lineup appears poised to cost the team 3 wins over the 2004 version. Of course, this depends largely upon Nomar returning to pre-2004 form, but I don't think that's a long shot. Also key to the offense is the production of Aramis Ramirez, Derek Lee, and Corey Patterson. They have to play at or above their 2004 levels.

And, of course, the bullpen is a bit weaker on paper as well, costing the Cubs just under 2 wins from the 2004 season.

Looking at Win Shares alone, the Cubs appear to be about a wash over the 2004 version. Interestingly enough, luck factors more into my win prediction than performance. Can the Cubs in fact swing their luck around from having 5 fewer wins than expected to 5 more? To be honest, it's hard to imagine.

Usually, teams are not close to their predicted wins due to a bad record in close games, and by winning by large margins in blowouts. A bad record in close games is usually attributed to a bad bullpen - which the Cubs had last year and have not really addressed. And teams that blow out opponents from time to time are usually teams with a lot of power - which the Cubs had last year, but don't have as much of this year. With that being said - I'm sticking with my analysis method for the sake of consistency. (After all, my predictions have all seemed high to me thus far - so why change now?)

How can the Cubs improve? Obviously they need bullpen help, and could still use a corner outfielder or two.

How can they miss the playoffs? If just 1 of their top 3 starters (Zambrano, Prior, or Wood) miss half of the season or more, things get tight for this team quickly.

NL Central Win Predictions

Cardinals - 95
Cubs - 95
Astros - 88

So far, it's shaping up to be a fun Summer.

2005 Preview - Houston Astros

2005-02-14T12:00:00.000-06:00

I am going to attempt to predict the number of Houston wins this year by the same method that I made my St. Louis prediction. Which is to say, I'm going to look at win shares, OPS+, ERA+, factor in age and injuries, pull some things out of my butt....and presto! Keep in mind when you read this, of course, that I'm not as familiar with the Astros as I am the Cardinals, so some of my points may be even worse than the assumptions I made for St. Louis.

Rotation

The Astros will head into Spring training with a solid, albeit top-heavy rotation.

1. Roger Clemens
2. Roy Oswalt
3. Andy Pettitte
4. Brandon Backe
5. Pete Munro/Tim Redding/Carlos Herndanez

Note that I'm especially fuzzy about that #5 slot.

So, what can the Astros expect to get this year vs. last?

Roger Clemens posted 20 win shares last year, en route to the Cy Young award. At the age of 41, he went 18-4 with a 2.98 ERA despite pitching in a hitter's park. Impressive stuff. Unfortunately for Astros fans, even if you ignore his age it's highly unlikely that he'll repeat that season in 2005.

His ERA+ in 2004 was a very, very impressive 145 (or 45% better than league average). How good was that? He did not have a season as good in his entire run with the New York Yankees. The last time he had an ERA+ better than that was way back in 1998 when he posted a 176 for the Toronto Blue Jays. In fact, if you look at the last 9 seasons you'll see that Clemens only had 2 years better than 2004 over that time span. The odds of him repeating it again in 2005 (at the age of 42) are slim to none. You see the same thing if you take a look at his win shares.

2004 - 20
2003 - 15
2002 - 11

If you're an optimist, you'll see the trend there and predict that he'll get 25 this year! If you're a realist, you'll probably say that Clemens is more likely to revert to the 15 WS range, costing the Astros about 2 wins that they had last year.

Roy Oswalt had a great season, giving the Astros rotation a fearsome 1-2 punch (which may have caused the Cardinals problems in the NLCS had Phil Garner used them properly in the NLDS.) On the year, Oswalt had 19 win shares and an ERA+ of 123. Interestingly enough, his ERA+ was the worst of his career. However, since he was able to pitch 237 innings, he was able to put together his first 20 win season of his career. (I'm sure he'll do it again a time or two before his career is over.)

With Oswalt only being 27 this season, combined with the fact that he was actually below career numbers last year, this could be a big season for him. Over the last three years, he's posted 20, 10, and 19 win shares, with his 10 WS season coming off of only 127.1 innings. I'm going to predict, however, that Oswalt will "break out" this year (if a 20 game winner can do so) and post 25 win shares, thus making up for any decline in the production of Roger Clemens. Of course, if Oswalt has continued health issues, all bets are off.

Andy Pettitte will give the Astros something they didn't have much of last year - a regular, reliable left handed starter. Look at the ERA+ numbers for Pettitte over the last 5 seasons.

2004 - 111
2003 - 109
2002 - 134
2001 - 112
2000 - 116

Pretty consistent, with that bump in 2002 sticking out as the outlier. If Pettitte stays in the rotation this year, he's likely to produce 12 to 15 win shares for the Astros, which is a step in the right direction for a team that only got 6 out of him last year.

I can only assume that Backe is going to be the #4 starter for the Astros this year, after getting 9 regular season starts in 2004 which were followed by 3 starts in the playoffs. Call me a skeptic, but I think Backe was a flash in the pan. After all - even Jason Simontacchi and Brit Reams had great half-seasons for the Cardinals as starting pitchers, only to crash and burn. Backe had a 100 ERA+ last year, which was the first time in his career he was as good as average.

Last year, Backe posted 5 win shares over just 67 innings. However, I think that it's highly unlikely he can produce at that rate this year. I'm going to take a wild guess and claim that Backe will post 8 win shares in 2005 (which is, in part, based upon the fact that Jeff Suppan and Matt Morris had 7 last year).

Finally, there is the #5 slot. The Astros probably have someone that can fill this slot without killing the team completely. However, that's not a given. Tim Redding, Pete Munro, Carlos Hernandez, and Brandon Duckworth combined to make 51 starts last year, yet only gave the Astros 2 win shares. That's less than 1 win of value, folks. I see more of the same this year. In order to be generous (and allow for any Brandon Backe success stories) I'll give the #5 slot in the Astro rotation 3 win shares this year. Note that this doesn't replace the 7 WS that Wade Miller gave Houston in 2004.

Bullpen

And you thought their rotation was top-heavy? The Astros bullpen posted 39 win shares last year, the same total the Cardinals had. The difference was, however, that Brad Lidge accounted for 43.6% of those win shares all by himself! After Lidge, Dan Micelli posted 7 WS, with Chad Qualls and the departed Octavio Dotel getting 4 each. The rest of the pen gave the team 7 win shares, or just over 2 wins.

Lidge is a stud, plain and simple. However, he's hard to gauge in regard to 2005 performance. He had 17 win shares last year after only posting 8 in 2003. Of course, the fact that he got 29 saves last year vs. 1 the previous season make up for a large number of those WS. His ERA+ also shot up last season, from 123 in 2003 to 227 in 2004. My guess is that Lidge will fall off in ERA+ this season by a bit, but will continue to see his WS value stay high assuming his high workload for the last 2 years doesn't catch up to him. I'm going to predict 20 win shares for Lidge, giving him a value of 1 more win over last season.

The rest of the pen is a large question mark. Dan Micelli is gone (turning Japanese, I really think so), with Dan Wheeler and John Franco coming in. It's interesting to note that the loss of Micelli really might cost the Houston bullpen by a bit, since no one else was really very good at all. What's more, Dotel's production really hasn't been replaced either. Unless, of course, you think that John Franco was just having an off-year last year when he posted an ERA+ of 81 at the age of 43.

Micelli and Dotel combined to provide 11 win shares last year. I'm going to predict that they have only replaced half of that value, or roughly 6 win shares, giving the "non-Lidge" portion of the Houston bullpen a loss of 5. Overall, their bullpen slips by 2 win shares, or almost 1 win.

Lineup

Here's what the regulars did for Houston last year.

Lance Berkman - 32
Jeff Kent - 23
Jeff Bagwell - 23
Carlos Beltran - 18
Craig Biggio - 18
Adam Everett - 12
Morgan Ensberg - 10
Brad Ausmus - 6

A few items of note from this list. Jeff Kent is gone, which leaves the Astros looking for 8 wins at his position alone. Carlos Beltran is gone, giving them another 6 win loss (which is amazing considering he was only with the team for half of the season.) Not listed are Mike Lamb, Jose Vizcaino, and Richard Hidalgo, who combined to provide another 24 win shares for the Astros as part time starters during the season.

Lance Berkman will likely be the best hitter on the team again this year, which he has been 3 of the last 4. Unfortunately for Mr. Berkman, he'll start the season on the DL. Last year, he had 32 win shares after posting 25 in 2003 and 30 in 2002. He also posted a 161 OPS+ last year, which was his best season since 2001. You can probably expect a drop-off in production from Lance this year, both due to him having a bit of a peak last year, plus reduced playing time. I'm going to project him to have 25 WS in 2005.

Jeff Bagwell is an interesting case. Look at his OPS+ numbers over the past several years.

1999 - 169
2000 - 152
2001 - 141
2002 - 137
2003 - 127
2004 - 117

If that keep up, his 2005 production is going to be about 7 to 10% above league average. Over the past 3 years, Bagwell has posted 23, 22, and 23 win shares. I suspect that he'll have a hard time posting 23 again this year unless he gets an age 37 bump in hitting. Peg him for 20 win shares.

Craig Biggio is another aging "Killer B." Last year he posted an OPS+ of 106, which was actually just the 2nd time in 5 years that he's been above average. He turned 39 on December 14th - think he'll be above average this year? Unlikely. He has had 18, 20, and 15 win shares over the past 3 years. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it will only slip to 15. (Not that you really want a 15 WS player in the corner outfield, mind you.)

The rest of the Houston offense is going to rely on the likes of Morgan Ensberg, Adam Everett, and Jason Lane.

Ensberg had a disappointing season after looking good in 2003. Unfortunately, his 2003 season looks like a fluke if you consider the two seasons on either side. Still, look for Ensberg to provide 12 WS this year over 10 in 2005 if he gets more playing time.

Everett had 12 win shares in 2004 after posting 11 in 2003. Let's keep up the trend and give him 13 this year.

Jason Lane only got 136 at-bats yet still managed to post 6 win shares. If he can get 500 at-bats and keep up that rate? He'll be worth about 20 win shares. That may be a stretch, but I think he can do it.

The Catcher is Brad Ausmus, who has posted 6, 12, and 9 WS over the past 3 seasons. Looks like we can pencil him in for 9.

The 2nd baseman is likely to be Chris Burke, who hit .315/.396/.507 last year in AAA. The strange thing about him is that his 903 OPS in AAA was the first time he's exceeded the 767 mark as a pro. Had he played in pitchers parks? Did he mature? Or was he lucky? I have no idea. All I can say is that his bat is highly unlikely to replace Kent this year, while his glove has to be better. Let's be somewhat optimistic and say that he'll cost the Astros 3 wins from Kent, giving him 14 win shares on the season.

Bench

As was the case with the Cardinals, the bench is hard to gauge. Who was really on the bench, and who really was a part time starter? Take Mike Lamb for example. He started in the place of Morgan Ensberg when he was hurt - and proceeded to provide more value to the team (12 WS vs. 10).

Overall, the Astros bench had 36 win shares last year. Mike Lamb, Jose Vizcaino, Orlando Palmeiro, Erik Bruntlett, and Raul Chavez all return, and may be joined by the likes of Charles Gipson and prospect Willy Tavarez. I see no reason as to why the bench is going to be any worse, nor any better, than last year. So, for simplicity sake, I'm going to say that the Astro bench will remain neutral this year, giving them 36 win shares once again.

Grand Total

Starting Rotation - 66 Win Shares (60 in 2004)
Bullpen - 37 Win Shares (39 in 2004)

Starting Lineup - 128 Win Shares (140 in 2004)
Bench - 36 Win Shares (36 in 2004)

That's a grand total of 267 win shares, or 89 wins. From a Pythagorean standpoint, they had 1 "lucky" win in 2004, so we need to take that adjustment here as well, putting my prediction at 88 wins. Does this pass the sanity check?

I'm predicting a Houston rotation better than the 2004 version by 2 wins. This prediction includes Roger Clemens not being as good, Roy Oswalt being a little better, and a full season of Andy Pettitte. It also assumes Brandon Backe being average or slightly below on the year, and the #5 starter being slightly better than last year. It seems high, but within the margin of error.

I'm predicting a bullpen to be a downgrade over 2004 by about 1 win. This takes into account a full year of Lidge as the closer, but with the rest of the pen weaker with Micelli gone, and not getting the benefit of Dotel for half of the year. Once again, this seems like a conservative estimate, but not insane.

The lineup prediction is of course where most of the loss is taken. Berkman out for a month or more, Kent and Beltran gone, Biggio and Bagwell older. The only way my prediction of 4 losses due to those players holds is if in fact Jason Lane and Chris Burke can play at a decent level this season. If either of them do not produce, or if Biggio and/or Bagwell regress more than I'm projecting then the Astros could have trouble playing .500 ball this year.

And, of course, the bench prediction is hard to deal with, but does not seem out of line. If anything, I'm probably off by 1 win in either direction.

So as it stands right now, the Astros are looking like a Wild Card team at best. If they can add some production at either 2nd base or corner outfield (thus moving Biggio back to 2nd), it would be good for their win total. Additionally, the Astros should be on the market for a middle reliever or two, as they really need to bridge the gap between the rotation and their closer.

2005 vs. 2004

2005-02-11T13:15:00.000-06:00

I am so ready for baseball season. The problem is, it's been harder than I ever imagined to come up with things to write about this time of year. Once spring games start, I'll be posting more. I swear.

Anyway, here's my attempt at making a prediction of the number of wins the Cardinals will make a run at in 2005. Of course, this isn't much better than a wild guess on my part, but it's a fun exercise nonetheless. Also, note that I'm simply comparing the 2005 team vs. the 2004 team, and am not taking the competition into consideration.

Rotation

This is the area that the Cardinals got hammered for last year, and they continue to get no respect so far in 2005.

1. Mark Mulder
2. Chris Carpenter
3. Jason Marquis
4. Jeff Suppan
5. Rick Ankiel/Matt Morris

Without using statistics for starters, take a look at that rotation. The starting pitcher for the AL in last year's All-Star Game is the #1. The #1 starter on a 105 win team 2004 (by performance) is now their #2. Jeff Suppan, the man who won the clinching games in both the NLDS and the NLCS, is in the middle of the pack. And a guy that was a 22 game winner just 4 years ago finds himself as the #5 starter right now.

Granted, there are plenty of question marks. The only guy in that group with a low injury risk is Jeff Suppan. Mulder was shaky down the stretch, Carpenter didn't pitch after mid-September, Marquis had a career high inning count, and Morris had off-season surgery. And we won't even go into the Ankiel situation.

OK, enough of the subjective stuff.

Mark Mulder takes over for Woody Williams. Last year, Woody posted 8 win shares, while Mulder had 15. Woody was just below average for a starting pitcher, while Mulder had 3 win shares above average. On an ERA+ basis, Mulder was off last year, only posting a 106. His 3 previous seasons he had put together ERA+ seasons of 126, 134, and 136. Considering that Mulder turns 28 this season, if he really is healthy? Expect him to rebound to pre-2004 form, thus posting more like 17 to 19 win shares. If we split the difference and say Mulder will post 18 win shares this year, we have a 10 WS advantage over Woody, thus giving the Cardinals about 3 more expected wins than the 2004 team.

Chris Carpenter and Jason Marquis are in a similar situation to one another, in my opinion. They were both great, they were both worked more than they had been in recent memory, and they are both an injury risk in 2005. Marquis had 14 win shares last year, with Carpenter getting 11. (I know that sounds backwards, but Marquis helped himself with his bat while Carpenter didn't.) How do we quantify the injury risks for these two? I'm sure there is a good way of doing so, but I'm not sure what it is. For me, I'm simply going to say that the two of them will see a 20% reduction in win shares this season. That would take their total from 25 to 20 win shares. If you don't like my method? Well, tell me a better way to make an estimate.

Jeff Suppan catches a lot of flak from the fans of other teams who don't tend to pay much attention. "He was lucky and can't do it again" is the general consensus. Which makes no sense, of course.

2004 - 7 Win Shares, 100 ERA+
2003 - 14 Win Shares, 105 ERA+
2002 - 9 Win Shares, 97 ERA+

In fact, that ERA+ in 2002 is the only time over the past 6 seasons in which Suppan has been below average. And last year was the first time in that same time span that Suppan didn't throw 200 innings, due to him getting some extra rest down the stretch after the Cardinals wrapped up the Central. End result? What you saw in 2004 is probably about what you're going to get, regardless of what Cubs fans want to believe. If anything, Suppan may in fact have a better season in 2005. We're going to assume, however, that he'll be even.

Finally, there is the #5 slot. This one is tough. Morris is likely out until May, if not June. Ankiel will start the season as the team's #5 starter, assuming he doesn't implode in Spring training. What are the Cardinals going to get? Who knows? With Ankiel - my feeling is that he is going to be fine, based upon the fact that he played in 3 levels of the minors, plus the majors, plus some Winter ball without any wildness issues. Granted, his ERA was ugly with St. Louis last year, but based mainly upon one bad Coors Field outing. I can live with that. And even if Ankiel doesn't look good, the Cardinals have so many off days in April that they may only need him (or someone else) to make 4 or 5 starts before Morris is back.

Morris is another wild card. Last year was the first season in his 7 year career in which he was below average. His 89 ERA+ was well below his career average of 118, as well as his career single season low of 111. Morris only posted 7 win shares last year after having 10 in 2003 and 14 in 2002.

The #5 starter slot presents a gamble on the part of the Cardinals, but with some serious upside. Yes - Ankiel could end up out of the game forever, with Morris injured the entire season. On the other hand, the Cardinals could end up with 2 guys with #1 stuff filling out their rotation. Ankiel could become a spot starter with nasty bullpen stuff, or the Cardinals could deal a starter for help in the middle infield. Either way, I like the Cardinals chances to get something special here. For the sake of this article, however, let's be conservative and give the Cardinals 10 win shares out of the #5 slot.

Bullpen

The Cardinals bullpen was great last year, netting the team 47 win shares which translates into about 16 wins. Some are wringing their hands over the losses of Kline, Calero, and Haren - and for good reason. Kline was great as a 2nd lefty, with Calero and Haren providing some great stuff out of the pen. However, those 3 pitchers only accounted for 12 win shares last season, or 25.5% of the total out of the pen. I realize that 1/4 of bullpen win shares being lost sounds bad, but those 3 accounted for 30% of the players that the Cardinals used in that role. Perhaps more interesting to note is the following.

Reyes - 2
Flores - 1
Lincoln - 1
Haren - 1

I wouldn't have guessed that the likes of Al Reyes, Randy Flores, and Mike Lincoln actually contributed as much (or more) to the Cardinals success last year as Dan Haren, but according to win shares they did. That's not to say that Haren won't be missed, because he will. But he can in fact be replaced in the 2005 season. (Beyond that may be another story.)

So basically, the Cardinals have let Kline, Calero, and Haren go. Kline will be replaced by someone out of Mike Myers, Carmon Cali, and Rick Ankiel. (I half expect Myers to go the way of Al Levine this Spring.) Calero and Haren will probably be replaced by the returning Al Reyes and a healthy Mike Lincoln, with Anthony Reyes and Adam Wainwright not out of the question by the end of the season.

Kline's 6 win shares will likely not be completely replaced, unless Ankiel and Morris both come back with a vengeance. Let's assume a let-down in that area by half, or 3 win shares. The 6 win shares lost by Calero and Haren will most likely be replaced by Al Reyes and Lincoln quite nicely.

That leaves the rest of the bullpen, which is Issringhausen, Tavarez, King, and Eldred. Personally, I think Izzy will be slightly better than last year, with the other 3 being slightly worse. Let's assume a net reduction of 4 win shares out of those 4 players, giving the Cardinals a reduction of 7 win shares in the bullpen.

Starting Lineup

Obviously, this is the bread and butter of this team. And, of course, many are already citing that the Cardinals are going to be hit hard by their losses "up the middle." Personally, I think the rumors of the death of the Cardinals middle infield have been greatly exaggerated. Here are the win shares of our dearly departed brethren. (Well, I'll miss Renteria and Matheny.)

Womack - 18
Renteria - 17
Matheny - 10

The fact that Womack had more Win Shares than Renteria last year speaks volumes in my opinion. Talk about planets aligning - Womack had a career year, while Renteria was less than spectacular. The Yankees will regret the Womack signing by about May 15th. The Red Sox probably won't be too upset until 2006 or later.

What are the Cardinals going to get in return? I personally think that Molina is going to provide more wins at the Catcher spot in 2005, as evidenced by him having 0 WSAA last year compared to Matheny at -2. I'm going to expect the Cardinals to get 3 extra WS there.

Grudzielanek is unlikely to produce 18 win shares next year. He will be better than Womack defensively, but he can't match the offense provided by Womack last year. (Of course, Womack wouldn't have either.) Grudz did post 18 win shares in 2003, but I personally think that was a fluke. Unless the Cardinals make a deal for Placido Polanco by mid-season, the Cardinals are going to have a loss at that position. Assume a loss of 10 Win Shares.

Renteria to Eckstein is an interesting one. And believe it or not, the potential is there for Eckstein to replace Renteria this year. Look at his win share totals from the last 3 seasons.

2004 - 9
2003 - 11
2002 - 20

That's not the kind of trend you want to see, and I'm not ignoring that. But the fact that just 2 years ago he was a player producing at 2004 Renteria levels makes it at least within the realm of possibility. However, I think a loss of 10 Win Shares at SS should be expected.

That leaves the rest of the team. Assuming Pujols doesn't have heel problems, he could actually improve slightly over last year. Rolen is due to decrease a little, but should be offset by Albert. I think Edmonds will remain constant, giving us a 2nd year of a trio of MVP caliber players.

That just leaves the corner outfield, where the Cardinals will see a full year of Larry Walker rather than a cast of thousands. Walker's health is the obvious issue. If he can play 120 or more games, he's going to be a big plus. If he only plays in 44 or less, then the Cardinals won't receive any additional help over last year. Personally, I expect Walker to be around more often than not this year. If he can play in 132 games this year - exactly 3 times more than he did with the Redbirds last year - and at the same level as 2004, he'll give the Cardinals 21 win shares. That's approximately 5 more than they received from right field in the first 4 months of last season.

Bench

The bench is the hardest task of this exercise. For one thing, with Tony La Russa it's hard to pin down who's the starter and who's the bench player a lot of the time. For another thing, win shares puts a lot of value into hitting and defense, thus giving role players a larger impact on wins than may be actual. (Cody McKay receiving 1 win share last year for example.)

Overall, the Cardinal bench provided 39 win shares last season, or 13 wins. Of that bench, the Cardinals have 3 players returning in John Mabry, So Taguchi, and Roger Cedeno. Taguchi and Cedeno will likely provide similar production to last year, with Mabry having a decrease. Let's assume their impact will be 3 WS less than last year.

Einar Diaz will take over for Yadier Molina as the primary backup catcher. Last year, Molina had 5 WS. Diaz? Five as well. Let's assume a wash.

That leaves replacements for Luna, Lankford, and Anderson. Those 3 combined for 12 Win Shares last year, and are being replaced by some cheap bench filler. In fact, it's so uncertain now as to who the players are that will replace them that I hate to speculate. But let's put it this way - if a Rule 5 player, a guy that was out of the game for a season, and a backup player that had a 649 OPS last year with no glove can combine for 12 WS? Then I suspect the Cardinals can replace them with players out of the pool of Abraham Nunez, Bo Hart, Wilton Guerrero, et al.

Adding it Up

Rotation +7 Win Shares
Bullpen -7 Win Shares

Starting Lineup -12 Win Shares
Bench -3 Win Shares

According to this quick and dirty analysis we see a pitching staff that is essentially the same as last year with the rotation slightly better, the bullpen slightly worse. We also see a team with a lineup quite a bit worse than last year (by 4 wins), and a bench that is slightly weaker as well. (And I can hear people already telling me that I didn’t need win shares to tell you that much….)

The net loss in Win Shares is 15, which translates to 5 fewer wins than last year, or 100 total. And to make things slightly more accurate, let's throw in the luck factor. Last year, the Cardinals predicted wins (based upon the Pythagorean method) was 100, meaning they had 5 "lucky" wins. Since predicted wins usually reverts to the norm, we can assume that the Cardinals will be "unlucky" this year by 5 games, shifting my prediction to 95 wins.

Do I think the Cardinals will win 95 games? Obviously, about one thousand things factor into this, making it highly unlikely that my crappy little analysis here will peg their win total. Do I think it's in the right neighborhood? Assuming the team doesn't go through catastrophic injuries this year - yes I do.

Sosa Traded to the Birds

2005-01-31T19:01:00.000-06:00

Orioles, that is.

Well, if you've been paying attention since about the last day of the regular season, you knew this day was likely to come. It seemed as if the day Sosa left early on the last day of the season was the last straw for the Cubs organization. (I guess never coming to Spring training on time, avoiding the annual Cubs convention, forcing the Cubs to choose between he and Mark Grace, his corked bat, and his premature hopping were A-OK.) As someone else mentioned on a message board - it's going to be harder to hate the Cubs without Sosa and Alou around. (I said harder, mind you.)

And the Cubs, of course, find themselves with some offense to replace. Last year, Alou and Sosa combined to hit 74 home runs - 31.5% of the total hit by the Cubs. They also drew 124 walks (25.4%), drove in 186 runs (24.6%), scored 175 runs (22.2%), and hit 57 doubles (18.5%). That's a lot of lost production lost in just one year from two players.

Of course, the Cubs are not going to just sit on their hands and head into Spring training without making an attempt to address their corner outfield production (or lack thereof.) Rumors in Chicago have the Cubs looking into signing Jeromy Burnitz or attempting to make a trade for the likes of Aubrey Huff. If the Cubs head into the regular season with one of these guys plus a platoon of Todd Hollandsworth and rookie Jason Dubois, will it be enough?

2004 OPS+

Alou 128
Sosa 110

Hollandsworth 134
Huff 124
Burnitz 115
Jerry Hairston 100 (received in the Sosa trade)

At a glance, it appears as if by making a trade for Huff, the Cubs could replace the hitting of Alou in their lineup on an OPS+ basis. But will they replace the production lost from both corners, even if they can pry Huff away from Tampa Bay? At a glance - it appears unlikely.

The Current Suspects

Hollandsworth had a great season last year, posting an OPS of 939 over 167 plate appearances. But there are plenty of reasons to consider his season a fluke. It was his 2nd best OPS season ever, with his best coming in Colorado (surprise surprise). Over his career, his OPS is only 784 - with the bulk of his at-bats coming in Los Angeles, which is of course a pitcher's park.

His career OPS+ is only 101, making him essentially a league average hitter. He's only been above average twice over the last 5 years - last year, and his Colorado season in 2001. He's only been a regular three times in his career, and has only posted above average numbers one time in those chances when he posted a 114 OPS+ as a 23 year old in LA. There is a slight bit of hope for Cubs fans, though. Against right handed pitchers over the last 3 years, Hollandsworth has an 832 OPS over 700 at-bats. Of course, he's also only had 25 home runs, 109 runs, 100 RBI, and 71 walks to go with 146 K's. Not a bad track record for a guy coming off the bench. Not a good track record for a guy that may be starting 120 games against right handed pitching.

His potential platoon parter, Jason DuBois, had a cup of coffee with the Cubs last year. Rather than looking at his major league stats, I took a look at what he did in the minors. Last year in AAA Iowa, Dubois hit .316/.389/.630 with 31 home runs and 99 RBI over 386 at-bats. I'm no expert on prospects, let alone Dubois, but it looks as if he's always been a high power hitter, but a guy who gets on base due to hits rather than walks. He's never drawn more than 57 walks during a professional season - but he's never had more than 443 at-bats, either, due to shorter seasons. His 2005 ZiPS projection, via Baseball Think Factory, is .272/.345/.500, giving him a predicted 845 OPS. Let's assume that means he can hit lefties to the tune of an 875 to 900 OPS (yes, that's a flat out guess on my part.)

Jeromy Burnitz is attracting attention from the Cubs....why again? Well, I'm not exactly sure. He did have a bit of a revival last year. Of course, he was playing in Colorado. He posted a 916 OPS last year with 37 home runs, giving him his first 900+ OPS season since 1999. In 2003, splitting time between the Dodgers and the Mets, Burnitz managed a 786 OPS with a .299 OBP. Yes, that's right - he failed to reach base 30% of the time. On the plus side for Jeromy, he has hit 31 or more home runs in 6 of the last 7 years, which would help replace some of the lost power in the Cubs lineup.

Aubrey Huff is one of the best hitters that most people have never heard of. Stuck in Tampa Bay, he has been well above league average in each of the past 3 seasons, posting the Devil Rays top OPS in each of the last 2. Huff has a career OPS+ of 119 and is only 28 years old. I guess the question is - would the Devil Rays actually want to trade the guy? Rumors have the Cubs interested, but what good does that do if the Rays aren't? Huff, a left handed bat, only played 9 games in the outfield last year, spending the bulk of his time at 3rd, 1st, and DH. His career high in home runs is 34, but Tampa Bay is a pitcher's park. He would likely see a power spike if he were to end up playing half of his games in Wrigley Field.

Then there is Jerry Hairston, Jr. Here's a guy that I was hoping the Cards would pick up to start at 2nd base, as he posted a .378 OBP last season in limited playing time. There is a small chance that Hairston could end up starting for the Cubs in a corner outfield slot this year. Or even in a longer long shot, I suppose Walker could end up in a corner, with Hairston at 2nd. This seems somewhat unlikely to me, however. Maybe the Cubs will be interested in having a guy that can get on base and steal a few bases. Only time will tell.

Here are a few more stats to take a look at.

2004 Win Shares

Alou 26
Sosa 14

Huff 20
Burnitz 8
Hollandsworth 6
Hairston 8

2004 Win Shares Above Average

Alou 8
Sosa 0

Huff 4
Burnitz 3
Hollandsworth 2
Hairston 0

Summary

Basically, the Cubs are going to be hard pressed to replace the production that Alou provided to the 2004 Cubs (soft skin and all.) Huff would be the best choice to replace Alou, if the Cubs can find a way to get him. But even Huff would be hard pressed to replicate the season that Alou put together last year. If they end up with Burnitz instead....well, he might at least be nicer to the press. (Not that Stone and Caray are around this year to annoy the team.)

Sosa will be easier to replace, with the platoon of Hollandsworth and DuBois likely being able to match his 2004 numbers - albeit, with less power likely.

Most interesting of all to me is the fact that - unless the Cubs pull someone out of the hat that there are no rumors of them getting, they are once again going to have an offense that is built of guys that do not draw walks. The most walks Huff has ever drawn in a season is 56. Burnitz has drawn 99 walks in a season, but not since 2000. Over his career, he only averages 75 walks every 162 games, and he hasn't drawn more than 58 walks in a season in each of the past 3 years. Compare that with the current Cub regulars.

Walks (Career Highs)

C Michael Barrett - 40
1B Derrek Lee - 98 (68 last year)
2B Todd Walker - 52
3B Aramis Ramirez - 49
SS Nomar Garciaparra - 61
CF Corey Patterson - 45

Not a lot a career patience displayed by the team that finished 14th in the NL in walks last year. If the Cubs replace Alou (68 walks, 1st on Cubs) and Sosa (56 walks, 3rd) with the likes of Huff and/or Burnitz, they are likely to finish the 2005 season last in the NL in the walk department. And that, my friends, does not translate into a good offense without a lot of luck.

Long Time No Blog

2005-01-27T15:33:00.000-06:00

My, how time flies. Between nothing much going on in Cardinal country and that pesky job of mine that pays the bills, I've managed to go three weeks without posting an article. Of course, not much has happened since we last spoke.

The Cardinals signed a bunch of guys to minor league deals.

A new Cardinal blog stocked full of some great Redbird fans kicked off. I highly recommend it - it's a good group of guys.

Construction on the new ballpark is really picking up steam. Click here for some fairly recent pictures.

With Spring training right around the corner and most teams having their rosters set, I think I'm about ready to start breaking down the 2005 season. Most likely, I'll start out by comparing the teams in the NL Central on a fairly detailed basis over several days. Following that will be some less detailed talk of the NL as a whole, followed by some cursory AL talk. Hopefully by the time I get those posts completed we can start pouring through some Spring training stats.

See how that works?

2005-01-06T13:07:00.000-06:00

All I needed to do is post an article about the Cardinals not doing anything, and they turn around and sign Mark Grudzielanek to a rumored one year deal.

Grudzielanek - who may have to have a smaller font used on his jersey to get his last name on the back - is coming off of two solid years for the rival Cubs. Over those two seasons, he's hit .312/.361/.421, 782 OPS, posting OPS+ values of 106 and 96. His career OPS+ is 89, with him being at 80 or higher in each of the last 9 years (which is, all but his rookie season.) His career OBP is .330, but he has been at .347 or higher in each of the past two seasons.

More importantly for the Cardinals - Grudz is a steady defender. Over his career he has a 4.49 RF with a .983 Fielding Percentage at 2nd base. Both values are slightly better than league average during his career.

Grudzielanek should provide the Cardinals with a dependable glove and a solid but not spectacular bat. I suspect he'll be hitting 7th in the lineup, but you never know - he could end up hitting 1st or 2nd depending on the Look Tony is after. (I like Walker's OBP hitting 2nd, but that's just me.) Either way, he is a much better option as a starter than Alomar.

This and That

2005-01-06T09:48:00.000-06:00

When there isn't much going on in baseball with the Cardinals, it's actually hard to come up with a post a week. No new signings have been announced in the last week, other than the potential for Roberto Alomar to come to town. If Alomar is being signed to replace Marlon Anderson, I'm happy. If he's being signed to start - not so much.

As most of you know, Alomar has been on a downhill slide for several years both offensively and defensively. Last year he was especially bad, although some of it was due to injuries. When the dust cleared on the season, he was hitting .261/.321/.392, 713 OPS. While a 713 OPS doesn't sound horrible, keep in mind that he played his home games in Arizona and Chicago (AL) - both hitters parks.

Home - .284/.327/.451, 778 OPS
Road - .232/.312/.304, 616 OPS

I'm afraid that the 2nd line listed is more indicative of where Alomar is these days with the bat - which isn't pretty.

Of course, the rumors are that the deal is $500,000 plus incentives, and most importantly - not guaranteed. Hopefully the Cardinals are still trying to sign the likes of Alex Cora or Barry Larkin (or making a trade for Polanco) and thus putting pressure on Alomar to produce in the Spring or retire.

The other thing the Cardinals did recently is sign Mike Myers. My question is simply why? Myers, who will turn 36 this year, was basically a league average pitcher last year as he posted a 97 ERA+. He did get out lefties - they only hit .233/.322/.340 off of him. Unfortunately, he's going to be one of those 1 out specialists. Righties hit .344/.342/.574 off of Myers. But was he needed?

2005 projected bullpen
Jason Isringhausen - Closer
Julian Tavarez - Right Setup
Ray King - Left Setup
Al Reyes - Right Middle Relief
Cal Eldred - Long Reliever

That leaves one open spot, which we can assume will be the 2nd lefty. The Cardinals already had Rick Ankiel, Carmon Cali, and Randy Flores that could be used in this role. I'm almost certain that Flores could pitch as well as Myers. Cali may need some more polishing, but he really looks sharp. And Ankiel? If he's not in the rotation, he has to go in the pen or be placed on waivers, where he will be taken.

I guess you can never have too many pitchers. I'm just not sure why Myers got a deal.

The Eckstein Signging

2004-12-29T14:04:00.000-06:00

I've been dragging my feet in regard to writing my thoughts on the David Eckstein signing. Personally, I was expecting the announcement of his double play partner to be announced by now as well, allowing me to discuss both at once. However, since it's now been almost a week since the David Eckstein era began, I decided I'd better get to it.

Offense

As has been mentioned many times, Eck has a career OBP of .347. Not mentioned quite as often is the fact that he hasn't had an OBP that high since the 2002 season, when Eckstein helped take the Angels to a World Series championship. In that season, Eckstein had a career high .363 OBP along with 21 stolen bases, putting him in a position to score 107 runs. In the two following seasons, Eckstein only got on base at a rate of .325 and .339 respectively.

In some of the various articles and message boards I checked out after the signing, I began to read some things that - in my mind - made a little sense. Some of the posters on Baseball Think Factory pointed out that Eckstein had actually been very good at drawing walks while in the minor leagues. Their reasoning for his lack of walks in the majors was simple - the Anaheim Angels and hitting coach Mackey Sasser preach against drawing walks. This did not seem completely out of line for me, as I remember many Rob Neyer types during the 2002 playoffs talking about how much the Angels depended on hitting rather than getting on base. The theory then was, if the bats cooled down they were sunk. As it ends up, they didn't, so they weren't. (Of course, they haven't won a playoff series since 2002.)

So - is that true? Was Eckstein better at getting on base in the minors? I looked up his numbers on The Baseball Cube, which I might add is a great resource for minor league and college numbers. What did I see? Quite an improvement. While in the Red Sox system, Eckstein actually drew 87 walks over 503 at-bats in A ball, followed up by 89 walks over 483 at-bats in AA. Unfortunately, however, TBC doesn't have hi by pitch stats from the minors, and thus they do not have minor league OBP values. So....I made some predictions. Based upon his career HBP numbers, I calculated Ecksteins minor league OBP's.

1997 (Low A) - 68 games, .400 OBP
1998 (High A) - 135 games, .425 OBP
1999 (AA) - 131 games, .435 OBP
2000 (AAA) - 134 games, .369 OBP

Interestingly enough, we see (in my estimation) an increasing OBP from level to level until he hit AAA, in which his OBP fell. Of course, those are estimations on my part that could change greatly depending on how many times he was hit by pitch. So, let's just look at his walk rate, which I'm calculating as BB divided by AB (even though a walk doesn't count as an AB).

1997 - 13.3%
1998 - 17.3%
1999 - 18.4%
2000 - 14.6%
2001 - 7.4%
2002 - 7.4%
2003 - 8.0%
2004 - 7.4%

That is quite a drastic change between 2000 (last year in the minors) and 2001 (rookie campaign.) I think that it is in fact quite possible that Eckstein was changing his approach at the plate once he reached the major leagues. Whether is was an edict from the Angels, his own choice, tougher competition, or a combination of the three? Well, we may never know. However, it's hard to imagine a guy that was able to walk around 15% of the time suddenly becoming so overpowered by opposing pitchers that his walk rate fell off by a factor of two. I personally think that this is encouraging. Hopefully, the Cardinals and new hitting coach Hal McRae will encourage Eckstein to get on base more often via the free pass. If so, maybe an OBP of .350 or greater will not be out of the question after all.

Defense

The other thing that seems to be of concern about Eckstein is his lack of range and throwing arm. I think most have heard that Eckstein had the fewest errors at short last year with just 6 on the season. However, I also think that many have read that he was very low in regard to range factor, which is true. I'm not sure the story ends with those two statistics, though.

Fielding Percentage - .988 (1st in the majors)
Range Factor - 3.83 (22nd in the majors)
Zone Rating - .859 (6th in the majors)

What do we see here? A guy who makes plays on the balls that he gets to, but who has a mixed review in regard to his range. Range factor claims he has horrible range. Zone rating, however, tells another story. Which is true?

Range factor, for those that may not know, is calculated by simply adding together a player's putouts and assists, then dividing by the number of innings they play in the field (multiplied by 9.) This is a great rough calculation to measure the value of a defender. After all, it does stand to reason that a player with a lot of range should in fact have more assists and putouts than a lesser player. Of course, it does have its limitations. What if a player is on a team that contains a lot of strikeout pitchers, thus having fewer outs required by the defense? Or what if a team is heavy in regard to flyball pitchers, thus making infielders look worse than they are?

In 2004, the Anaheim Angels had the 4th most strikeouts in the major leagues, having a rate of 7.2 strikeouts per 9 innings of play. The Cardinals, for comparison sake, had a rate of approximately 6.4 K/9. St. Louis fielders had almost 1 extra ball hit in play each game in which to affect the fielders Range Factors. What's more, I have read that the Angels staff was a flyball staff, although I have not been able to confirm this despite looking at several web sites.

What does that tell us? Eckstein played on a team that struck out many batters, giving fewers balls in play. Furthermore, they were supposedly a team that gave up more fly balls than an average team, meaning fewer fielding chances for the infield. Those things, combined with Eckstein's above average zone rating, tell me that Eckstein may in fact be a slightly above average fielding shortstop who could flourish on a groundball staff. Here are the 2004 fielding stats of the guy Eckstein is replacing.

Renteria
FP - .983 (5th)
RF - 4.41 (12th)
ZR - .855 (9th)

There is a chance that the Cardinals may in fact have a player in Eckstein who will end up with similar defensive output to Edgar Renteria when the dust clears after the 2005 season - which we actually saw when comparing defensive win shares per 9 innings in a previous article.

Contract

My first instinct on this signing was that it was for too much money over too many years. Overall, Eck received a $250,000 signing bonus, along with $2.25 million in 2005, $3.5 million in 2006, and $4.5 million in 2007 giving the deal a total value of $10.5 million over 3 years. My personal feeling was - why? Here is a guy that would probably have been happy to have signed with the Cardinals for 1-year at $1 million or less. After all - can you name any other team with playoff potential in 2005 that was looking for a starting middle infielder? I honestly can't. A 1 year deal would have allowed the Cardinals to get a feel for Eck, and allow Eck to gain appreciation for St. Louis, thus potentially signing for less money.

But the more I thought about the signing, the more I was ok with it. The Cardinals are, in essence, getting a player very similar to Orlando Cabrera. Of course, they're getting him for 1 less year and $22 million fewer dollars. Furthermore, they are paying Eckstein over the next 3 years essentially the same amount of money they were willing to pay Renteria in 2005 alone. The Cardinals could pay Eckstein his $2.5 million for this year, put another $5 million in investments to draw interest and not even have to worry about coming up with his paycheck through the end of his contract.

Eckstein's contract doesn't even seem to be way out of line until the 2007 season, in which he is due $4.5 million. Of course, as I already mentioned - the Cardinals will likely have the money on hand at that point if they are smart right now. On top of that, they will be coming out of their first season in the new stadium at that point. Revenue's should be a bit higher at that time, making his contract very small potatoes. Right now, it's hard to imagine this contract coming back to "Tino" the Cardinals. And if Eckstein really does re-discover how to draw walks? He could be an absolute bargain.

Conclusions

Eckstein, in my opinion, was the best option for the Cardinals at shortstop in the current market. I would have loved to have had Renteria back, but $10 million a year is too much in my mind. I was never fond of Orlando Cabrera, and would much rather have Eckstein at 30% of the cost. Polanco would have been a nicer option, in my mind - and maybe it's still not too late? Time will tell....

Regardless, the Cardinals have a guy at short that should be adequate. He may not make Ozzie Smith type plays at short, but he's not going to hurt the team. He's never going to display power, but is not in town to carry the Cardinal offense.

Eckstein is the type of player that the press is going to go nuts over. He plays hard, "knows how to play the game," and "does all of the little things." I'm pretty certain that I'm going to get sick of reading articles and seeing reports along those lines by the middle of Spring Training. Of course - I also like to watch guys that play hard. (I prefer guys that play hard with Scott Rolen's talent, but they don't come along every day.)

Worst case scenario? The Cardinals have a hard working, fan favorite type player who is overpaid by 2007, if not 2006.

Best case scenario? Eckstein starts getting on base more like his minor league days, providing the Cardinals with the best leadoff hitter they've had since the 2000 version of Fernando Vina, while providing gold glove caliber defense at shortstop. And I realize I'm biased - but I don't think that's a long shot.

Are we there yet?

2004-12-22T15:22:00.000-06:00

As we wait on pins and needles for Walt's next move, I just wanted to put down some things to keep an eye on over the next few days. This is more for my own benefit than anyone that will be reading this. And please - feel free to add any comments to this article for discussion purposes.

Cardinals Middle Infield

Tony La Russa was on the radio here in St. Louis yesterday. I personally missed the interview, but heard the radio announcers talking about it at a later time. According to them, Tony said that the Cardinals have a specific trade target in mind for the middle infield, along with a couple of options on the free agent market. Obviously this doesn't tell us much more than we already know, but it does lead me to believe that Placido Polanco or Julio Lugo may be more prominent in the plans than I had previously thought.

Look for the Cardinals to make a trade for one of those 2 guys to start in the middle infield in 2005. I think either will be available for, in essence, a salary dump by either the Phillies or Devil Rays. I would prefer Polanco, who was (in my opinion) the top middle infielder available in the free agent market. Furthermore, I'd prefer him to start at short - but I could handle him at 2nd as well. With Polanco (hopefully) in hand, the Cardinals will likely then sign one or two of the group of guys out there. Eckstein, Cora, Larkin, Reese, Alomar, Relaford. Most of the guys on that list would be an upgrade over Hart and/or Luna. If the Cardinals could manage to get Polanco, Cora, and Eckstein, they would be in great shape (for less money than it would have cost them to sign Cabrera by himself.)

Speaking of Eckstein - here is a good blog article I found yesterday from an Angel/Dodger fan.

National League Central

Peter Gammons has already stated that the Cardinals are the best team in the NL right now, thanks to the addition of Mark Mulder. While I'm going to hold that thought until we see who the double play combination ends up being, I am optimistic about the Cardinals making another run at the World Series right now. One reason for my optimism is the state of the Cardinals. Another reason, however, are the moves being made by the Astros and the Cubs. Or rather - the lack thereof.

The Astros, who finished 13 games behind the Cardinals last year, have so far lost Jeff Kent to free agency, followed by the non-tender of Wade Miller. Miller may or may not be back with the Astros, and apparently he'll be somewhat injured even if he does come back. Houston is still trying to re-sign Carlos Beltran, but he's generating interest from the Yankees. And we know that no team wants to get into a bidding war with George.

Lance Berkman is going to start the season on the DL, providing the Astros with an opening day outfield of Craig Biggio, Orlando Palmeiro, and Jason Lane. And, of course, both Biggio and Bagwell have been in a constant state of decline for several years which is unlikely to reverse course in 2005.

Roger Clemens may be back - if he thinks the Astros are going to compete. If being able to compete is his barometer? I doubt he's back. That could conceivably give the Astros an opening day rotation of Pettitte, Oswalt, Backe, and....who else? I'm not sure. Their bullpen was a one trick pony in 2004, and looks to be the same this year. It could be a long year in Minute Made Park.

Then there is the Cubs. Over their 2004 team - which finished 16 games behind the Redbirds - Chicago has lost Matt Clement and Moises Alou. Alou led the team in Win Shares last year (26), while Clement was arguably the #2 starter on the team. What have they replaced them with thus far? No one.

Glendon Rusch was signed to a somewhat reasonable contract, but he is very unlikely to repeat his 2004 season. And the Cubs have been actively trying to trade Sosa in order to afford to make a run at a big name outfielder. Of course no GM in his right mind is ready to take on the baggage associated with Corky, not to mention his contract. And at the same time - Drew is off the market and the Yankees are circling Beltran, as mentioned above. Rumor has it the Mets are still interested in a big bat as well, which may further complicate the Cubs ability to sign a corner outfielder.

Jim Hendry, Cubs GM, has managed to lock up a nice middle infield with Nomar ($8 million plus incentives) and Todd Walker ($2.75 million). And we all know that Derek Lee, Aramis Ramirez, and (to a lesser extent) Michael Barrett are solid hitters. But right now it's hard to imagine their offense being any better than last year, if that good. Furthermore, the Cub bench is not looking good (yet again), and their bullpen is essentially the same as last year, minus Kent Merker.

If Beltran lands with the Yankees, the Cubs will have to focus their energy on signing Magglio Ordonez - the guy who cancelled his workout to prove he was healthy because "it wasn't needed." Uh huh.

Of course, either the Astros or the Cubs could end up winning the Central. Heck, the Reds were in first place in June in 2004. Anything can happen. But right now? Even though the Cardinals don't have anyone to start at 2nd and short (other than Hart and Luna), they are still in better shape than anyone else in the division.

New Stadium

Finally, I thought I should just mention that the iron work on the new stadium is really taking shape. Every day I drive by, and it's slowly coming together. Currently, they are working on the upper decks in right field, laying out the framework for the stands. You can see the ramps to get from the field level to the upper level coming into form out there as well. It looks to me as if the new stadium is going to have walls by the time we hit opening day in April.

Slim Pickin's

2004-12-21T08:59:00.000-06:00

Polanco accepted arbitration from the Phillies (much to their surprise.) And Jerry Hairston - as far as I can tell - was not non-tendered by the Orioles. (Or is that - he was tendered?). The Cardinals could still end up with either or both of those guys, of course, but not without making a trade. What other options are left at this point?

David Eckstein

With the Angels overpaying for Orlando Cabrera, David Eckstein got the boot from Anaheim. Eckstein, who will turn 30 next month, is a scrappy shortstop who is the proud owner of a 2002 World Series Ring.

No one is going to mistake David Eckstein for Alex Rodriguez. But considering the options the Cardinals have left, he may be a nice fit for the team. Eckstein, a right handed bat, has a career .347 OBP, with a career OPS+ of 87. Of course, the OPS+ is misleading, as he's only exceeded 87 one of his four major league seasons when he had a 103 in 2002, thus skewing his average up. Eckstein has led the AL in hit by pitch twice in his career, and finished in the top 6 all 4 years. He's also stolen 16 or more bases in every season he's played, with a career success rate of 75%. With the glove, however, he leaves a little to be desired.

Fielding Percentage (Career)
Eckstein - .980
League Average - .973

Range Factor
Eckstein - 4.00
League - 4.11

Essentially - his range his slightly below average, while his error rate is slightly above.

What could you expect out of Eckstein? Think Bo Hart with a little more talent. Or maybe a combination of Fernando Vina and Rex Hudler. Nothing spectacular, but probably a fan favorite. And considering he made $2.15 million last year, he should be affordable as well.

Alex Cora

With the signing of Jeff Kent, Alex Cora became expendable, and thus was non-tendered by the Dodgers. Cora is a left handed hitting 2nd baseman who will turn 30 in October.

From an offensive standpoint, Cora has been hard to figure out recently.

OBP
2002 - .371
2003 - .287
2004 - .364

OPS+
2002 - 120
2003 - 68
2004 - 98

Will the real Alex Cora please stand up? Similar to Eckstein, Cora finished 4th in the NL in hit by pitch last year. (The Cardinals could have the 2005 version of the bruise brothers - just a different style than Canseco and McGwire.)

Defensively, Cora is right around league average.

Fielding Percentage (Career)
Cora - .981
League Average - .983

Range Factor
Cora - 4.18
League - 4.34

Last year, which was just the 2nd season that Cora was a regular 2nd baseman instead of a shortstop, Cora showed progress as he was above average both in fielding percentage and range factor. His 5.1 defensive win shares at 2nd was 5th best in the NL. (Womack had 4.5 for comparison sake.) Over his career, Cora has played 338 games at short and 335 at 2nd, making him a versatile player. Cora made $1.3 million last season.

Conclusions

The Cardinals, in my opinion, could do a lot worse than Eckstein and Cora in their middle infield next season. Offensively? Last year Cora was a better hitter than either Womack or Renteria. Of course, he could revert to 2003 form. Then again, he could revert to 2002 form, making him a great asset. Eckstein will likely post a better OBP than Womack in 2005, but probably won't match Tony's 2004 mark of .349.

Of course, at this point we all know that the offense is going to perform based on Pujols, Edmonds, Rolen, and Walker. Any offense received out of the middle infield is just a bonus. So the more important question is - How would the team fare defensively? In an attempt to answer this question, I looked up the defensive win shares for Eck, Cora, Renteria, and Womack in the 2004 season, along with the number of innings each played in the field. I then calculated the number of defensive win shares each player created per 9 innings in the field. The results surprised me a bit.

2nd Base
Cora - .042 Defensive Win Shares / 9 Innings
Womack - .034 DWS/9I

Shortstop
Eckstein - .033 DWS/9I
Renteria - .033 DWS/9I

As expected, Cora was better than Womack with the glove. Surprisingly, though, Eckstein was just as good as Renteria. Obviously, defense is hard to measure with statistics. However, if Renteria really is awesome and Eckstein a chump, you would expect to see some separation there.

The bottom line? If the Cardinals could add Eckstein and Cora to their middle infield, they would likely - at worst - be a slight downgrade defensively over the 2004 Cardinals. What's more, they should be very similar from an offensive standpoint, with the potential to provide a slight upgrade if things fall just right. And considering they could likely be signed for less than $4 million total, the team would still have financial flexibility at the trade deadline to upgrade in weak areas.

Agent Mulder - The Truth is Out There

2004-12-19T09:57:00.000-06:00

Am I the only one who was blind-sided by this trade? After missing out on Tim Hudson and Randy Johnson, not to mention Matt Clement, I was certain that the Cardinals were going to be forced to head into 2005 with essentially the same pitching staff of 2004. You know - the one good enough to win 105 games? And honestly? I was fine with that. Morris should be better, Haren should have been better in 2005 than Woody was in 2004, and Ankiel would be waiting in the wings. That should have put the Cardinals in a situation to trade for extra help in July, when they are all but certain to still be within striking distance of the playoffs. So far for what I thought.

First, Mulder. Last year, he wasn't quite himself. On the season, he posted a 106 ERA+, which would have actually made him just the 3rd best starter on the Cardinal staff. However, last year was an off-season for Mark.

2001 - 126 ERA+
2002 - 134
2003 - 136
2004 - 106

If he can only slightly revert to pre-2004 form in 2005 - which I think is likely - then he will have a great shot at being the top starter on the staff this year. He also has been durable, pitching 186.2 or more innings in each of the past 4 years. And maybe most interesting of all, Mulder will give the Cardinals their first veteran lefty starter since 1999 when Daren Oliver went to Spring training with the Redbirds. To have this guy locked up for 2 years at a price below current market value is a good thing. He should be a good addition.

Now, the losses. I honestly hate to see all 3 of the players given up - Haren, Calero, and Barton - leave the organization. But, as is almost always the case with younger players, the true losses won't be known for some time.

Haren has the potential to be a solid #3 starter. However, many believe that he is better suited to be a bullpen pitcher, which would downgrade his value greatly. Calero is a favorite of mine, with the potential to be a closer in the future. However, he turns 30 next month, and was a 6 year minor league veteran before the Cardinals gave him a shot last year. Al Reyes will likely be able to replace Calero nicely in the bullpen this year. And Barton was considered to be the best prospect in the Midwest league last year by many. However, there is a lot of doubt as to if he can stick at the catcher position from a defensive standpoint. If he moves to corner infield, the Cardinals don't have much use for him for the next 5 or more years. If he moves to corner outfield, he may just be one of many solid hitters at that position.

So, the Cardinals did in fact give up a lot in this trade. But if a few small things happen - such as Haren being converted to a reliever and Barton to a left fielder - then this trade starts to look really good for the Cardinals. Assuming, of course, that Mulder does in fact become the #1 starter for the team next year.

Where does that put the Cardinal rotation for next year?

Mark Mulder
Chris Carpenter
Jason Marquis
Matt Morris
Jeff Suppan

That, my friends, is a list of 5 guys that won 15 or more games in 2004. On top of that, the Cardinals will have Rick Ankiel (hopefully) ready to step in and start in the event of injury. What's more, Adam Wainwright and Antony Reyes could in fact be ready to pitch in the majors by the All-Star break this year, providing the Cardinals with yet more chances to upgrade the team if need be at the trade deadline.

Not a bad move. Now if the Cardinals can just get Placido Polanco, along with some stiff to start at short or 2nd they should be ready for 2005.

2004 Shortstop Win Shares

2004-12-17T08:52:00.000-06:00

Miguel Tejada - 30
Derek Jeter - 26
Jimmy Rollins - 26
Cesar Izturis - 25
Michael Young - 25
Jack Wilson - 23
Carlos Guillen - 23
Khalil Green - 21
Rafael Furcal - 21
Julio Lugo - 20
Omar Vizquel - 17
Edgar Renteria - 17

Well, he was tied with Vizquel to be the 11th best shortstop in baseball last year...

Winter Meetings

2004-12-14T11:32:00.000-06:00

Walt has been to and from Anaheim for this year's winter meetings with nothing to show for it other than the departure of Tyler Johnson. (Don't worry - I suspect he'll be back.)

Of course, a couple of things did happen over the last few days.

Mike Matheny

The Giants signed Matheny to a 3 year deal worth $10.5 million, plus an option for a 4th year at $4 million. Holy cow! I've always liked Matheny, but that deal is beyond crazy. We're talking about a guy that's never posted an OPS+ above 80, and who's career mark is 63. As in, he's 37% worse than an average major league hitter. And now he gets to play half of his games in a park that (other than last year) is tough to hit in.

Yes, I realize he has 3 gold gloves. He's supposedly a good game caller, works well with his teammates, etc. But can anyone honestly say that he was worth $3.5 million per year (on average) through the 2007 seasons with Molina apparently ready to go now? Molina will likely be on par with Matheny with the glove in 2005, and will probably be out-hitting him no later than 2006 - for less than $500,000 each year. And the Cardinals get a compensation draft pick to boot? I like seeing the Cardinals improve without giving up anything.

And on a side note - Brian Sabean has now added Omar Vizquel at $3 million a year and Matheny at $3.5 million. In a pitchers park. Yes, their defense should be a little better this year, but how many automatic outs can one team afford? Maybe Barry can arrange for some arthritis cream for his new, younger teammates...

Edgar Renteria

According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Jocketty has informed Renteria (or his people, if you will) that the Cardinals are standing firm with their 4 year, $32 million back loaded contract offer. No more years, no more money. Which, I have to say, is fine with me.

Renteria circa 2003 would be somewhat of a bargain at an average salary of $8 million per year. We're talking about a guy who hit .330 with a .394 OBP, 34 stolen bases, 100 RBI, and gold glove caliber defense. That season he was 31% better than an average hitter - which is amazing for a middle infielder.

Renteria circa 2004 would be ripping off the Cardinals making $32 million for the next 4 years. I can live with the defense and the .287 average, but he only got on base at a .327 clip and saw his OPS plummet by 146 points over the previous year. He was 10% worse than average. Still not bad for a middle infielder, but elite? Hardly.

The Cardinals are doing the right thing here. If Renteria walks, good for him. He can make tons of extra money while playing for a great franchise. And the Cardinals can use the extra cash to address their team needs, plus garner two extra draft picks for their trouble. And if he takes it? Hopefully he'll revert to 2003 form and make the team even stronger in 2005.

And what kind of shape will the Redbirds be in should they lose Renteria? Well, that depends on who they are able to plug into their middle infield. I still hear lots of talk about Placido Polanco and Jerry Hairston, Jr. Polanco is a free agent, while I've heard that Baltimore is likely to non-tender Hairston in the next couple of weeks. I haven't heard if the Cardinals are thinking of playing Polanco at short, but I certainly am. Would that work?

Offense

2004 Stats

Renteria - .287/.327/.401
Womack - .307/.349/.385

Polanco - .298/.345/.441
Hairston - .303/.378/.397

Based on last year, you'd improve both from an OBP and a SLG standpoint by picking up Hairston and Polanco.

Career Stats

Renteria - .289/.346/.400
Womack - .274/.319/.362

Polanco - .295/.339/.410
Hairston - .261/.334/.371

This is more of what one might expect - Polanco being a probable slight downgrade from Renteria, with Hairston being a probable upgrade over Womack. How about with the glove?

Fielding

Career Stats

Renteria - .969 Fielding Percentage, 4.25 Range Factor
Womack - .975 FP, 4.73 RF

Polanco - .982 FP, 3.57 RF (at shortstop)
Hairston - .981 FP, 5.05 RF

Once again, about what you would expect. A slight downgrade defensively at short, with a slight upgrade at 2nd. And, of course, both players would provide the Cardinals with a ton of flexibility. Polanco has played at 2nd, 3rd, and short, while just last year Hairston played all 3 outfield positions along with 2nd and 3rd base.

How much could Polanco and Hairston be signed for? I assume the Cardinals could easily land Polanco for $5 million per season for the next 3 years. Hairston might be willing to accept a low deal in 2005 for the chance to be a starter for a World Series contender, which could really work in the Cardinals favor from a long term perspective. Hairston will not turn 29 until the end of May, and over the last 4 years has had a great trend in regard to OBP and OPS+.

2001 - .305 OBP, 78 OPS+
2002 - .329 OBP, 89 OPS+
2003 - .353 OBP, 97 OPS+
2004 - .378 OBP, 100 OPS+

Both Polanco and Hairston have a realistic shot at being above average hitters in 2005 - which is more than Renteria and Womack did in 2004, and would thus improve the team.

Hopefully, we'll know something about the Cardinals middle infield by Christmas. Personally - I'm still excited about the possibilities.

Hudson Rumblings

2004-12-09T15:15:00.000-06:00

Take it for what it's worth, but supposedly Ken Rosenthal (The Sporting News) and Dan Patrick (ESPN) are both saying that the Cardinals are close to making a trade for Tim Hudson. Rotoworld.com has some theoretical particulars, but I'm not sure where they got them from. For now, let's ignore who the Cardinals may or may not be giving up and talk about Tim Hudson.

Hudson, a right hander, was 12-6 with a 3.53 ERA for Oakland last season, and his ERA+ of 133 would have made him the best starter on the Cardinal staff. He has led the Oakland staff in ERA 3 of the last 4 seasons, finishing in the top 10 in the league 5 years in a row. Additionally, his ERA+, WHIP, and complete games has been in the top 10 four years in a row.

From a "power pitching" standpoint, he finished in the top 10 in the AL in strikeouts the 4 years previous to 2004. That could in fact make him the power pitcher the Cardinals have been looking for. Of course, the question is - why did his strikeout rate drop last season? What's more, why did he post a 6.23 ERA in September? If you will recall, he was getting plenty of Cy Young buzz last year until he finished the year with a whimper. Declining numbers combined with Billy Beane's willingness to trade him make me a bit nervous.

Overall, Hudson could be a great pickup. He'd be worse than Johnson, but cheaper and less of a risk. He'll turn 30 in July, and could be a prime candidate for a long term contract - should things work out, of course.

Other statistics of interest include

Transaction Analysis

2004-12-09T08:33:00.000-06:00

We finally have some Cardinal player movement to talk about, so let's get to it.

Matt Morris

The Morris signing, in my mind, was the best news of yesterday. According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the contract is worth $2.5 million, which could reach $7 million with incentives based up on starts.

If you've been reading my blog for the last couple of months, you know that I didn't expect Morris to be back, nor was I exactly upset about it. However, with the revelation that he was in fact having shoulder problems combined with the low dollar amount of this deal? It should be a win/win situation. The Cardinals win by saving money, unless Morris hits incentives - which means the Cardinals have a healthy starting pitcher. And Morris wins by having a shot at proving he can still pitch, and thus improving his market value next year.

Morris flashed signs of his former self from time to time this season. And while it's hard to imagine him reverting to 2001 form (137 ERA+), I dont' think 2002-2003 type numbers (11 to 14% above average) would be out of the question. Those kind of numbers would likely make Morris the teams #2/#3 starter in 2005.

John Mabry

Mabry was another player that I wanted to see back. Granted, he had a career year last year that he is unlikely to repeat. But a left handed hitting corner infielder/outfielder with some pop is worth signing - especially when you can do so for $725,000. And he has been above average 2 of the past 3 seasons. Mabry joins Roger Cedeno as the current members of the Cardinal bench, giving them a good start.

Cal Eldred

I didn't expect Eldred to be back. Between his age and Tony's apparent lack of faith during the playoffs, I thought he was long gone. In fact, I was a bit concerned when I heard that the Cardinals were bringing him back. However, he's only being paid $600,000 next season. Not bad for a guy that posted a 111 ERA+ in each of the last 2 seasons, and who just turned 37 last month. Best case, he's only going to be expected to be the #6 guy out of the pen. Worst case, he's not as good this year and is replaced by someone from the minors, thus being released with the Cardinals eating his low salary. (Low in baseball terms, of course).

Arbitration

Edgar Renteria, as expected, was offered arbitration. I think that was the correct move, as they can still sign him for next year. The Cardinals might end up with him back next year at $9 or $10 million. The Cardinals might end up getting draft picks for losing him. The Cardinals might end up signing him for 4 years at a somewhat reasonable rate. I have no problem with any of those three options.

Matheny was also offered arbitration, which surprised me a bit. After all - I don't want the Cardinals to be stuck paying him $3 million or more next year to play half of the time. However, according to the Post-Dispatch (same article listed above) Matheny has already agreed to reject arbitration. He'll either be back next year under a multi-year deal, or the Cardinals will get some draft compensation. That's not so bad. And supposedly, the Cardinals are offering Matheny 2 years at $2 million per. I could live with that, if they can get it done.

Not offered arbitration were Steve Kline and Tony Womack. Neither of those moves surprised me. Ray King is the #1 lefty, with Carmen Cali likely ready to step in for Kline at a reduced rate. And the Yankees signed Womack for 2 years at $2 million each? I'm not exactly what they're thinking up there, but I can say one thing - I'm glad the Cardinals can't be tempted to sign him now. Bring on Polanco.

Other News

Randy Johnson, according to Newsday, has told the Diamondbacks that he'll take a trade to the Yankees and the Yankees only. Of course, they were the ones talking about the Cardinals giving up Haren, Ankiel, and Calero, too. Take it for what it's worth. Whatever the case, it's looking more and more like Johnson isn't going to be in St. Louis next year, unless he's wearing his road jersey.

The Yankees appear to be ready to sign Eric Milton to a 3 year, $24 million contract. First Womack, now Milton? The Yankees are being a big help this off-season.

Personal Predictions

I'm now expecting the Cardinals to end up signing Renteria and Polanco, with them apparently no longer needing to free up the ton of cash required to bring in Johnson. That would give the Cardinals an upgrade both defensively and offensively over the 2004 version of the team in the middle infield - which is nice.

The actual signings they've already made - Morris, Eldred, and Mabry - total $3.825 million, not counting incentives. That leaves the Cardinals with approximately $15 to $17 million to spend this off-season. That should leave them enough money to fill out the bench, sign Renteria and Polanco, and still have enough cash to acquire one more starting pitcher, either via trade or free agency. I suspect that the Cards first choice would be one of the "Big Three" from Oakland, with someone like Matt Clement being the backup plan.

And even if the Cardinals can't get that extra starter? I think they may be in good shape anyway as long as they do in fact bring in Renteria and Polanco. Their current rotation is Carpenter, Morris, Suppan, Marquis, and Haren/Ankiel. Personally, I expect Morris to be better next year, with Haren/Ankiel being an upgrade over Williams. And having both Haren and Ankiel around provide for depth due to injury.

Quick Hits

2004-12-07T09:04:00.000-06:00

Posting has been limited lately, between a lack of Cardinal news and a lack of free time on my part. But I wanted to at least touch on some various items today. I'm not going to link to the articles I'm basing some of my writings on due to time constraints.

Arbitration Deadline

Today is the day. By midnight, the Cardinals have to make some decisions as to which of their departing free agents they would like to offer arbitration. Which, of course, is going to force some interesting decisions.

For those of you that may not be completely familiar with the arbitration process, it goes a little something like this. The Cardinals have until midnight tonight to offer arbitration to free agents. If they don't offer arbitration, they cannot negotiate contracts with said free agent until May 1st. (Think Andy Benes, circa 1997 deadline.)

If they do offer arbitration, however, a few things happen. One, the player has to accept or decline arbitration by December 19th. If they decline, then the offering team still has until January 8th to try to work out a contract with them. If they accept, then a panel of arbitrators will determine what the player is worth, unless the free agent signs a contract before the arbiters make a salary decisions. Regardless as to if the player accepts or declines, the team offering arbitration will be awarded a draft pick should the free agent sign with another team. Simple, right?

So, as I was saying - the Cardinals have some interesting decisions ahead of them. Should they offer Edgar Renteria arbitration? If they don't, he won't be back next year and the Cardinals won't end up with any compensation for his departure. If they do, he's likely to simply accept the 1 year contract (ala Greg Maddux heading into 2003) and thus get a raise on the $7.55 million he was making in 2004. If Renteria ends up making $9 or $10 million in 2005 rather than taking the back loaded contract the Cardinals are offering, they will have much less "wiggle room" to land that pitching ace they're after.

Basically, there are plenty of negatives for either option, and no matter what they do it will probably end up being questioned. I don't think there is any way they can not offer him arbitration. His desire to help the team will be put to the test once that happens.

Matt Morris is another interesting case. He's interested in signing a 1 year contract so he can "prove himself" after his off year. Coming off of surgery, I don't blame him. But if the Cardinals want to be the team to give him the shot, they will have to offer him arbitration. If he accepts arbitration, his 2005 salary is guaranteed to be no more than 20% less than his 2004 level, or $10 million.

I think the only way this happens, of course, is if Morris agrees to reject arbitration. This is the same thing that Chuck Finley did after the 2002 season.

Do the Cardinals offer Mike Matheny or Steve Kline arbitration? I'm sure they would like to have both back, but not at the salaries they were making last year - let alone at increased rates. It will be interesting to see what is left standing tomorrow morning when the dust clears.

More Free Agent Stuff

Of course, not only do the Cardinals have arbitration options today, but all teams do. From what I've read, the Cubs are trying desperately to lock up both Nomar Garciaparra and Todd Walker today before the deadline. The Nomar deal is rumored to be 1 year for $8 million plus incentives.

Should Nomar sign with the Cubs, the shortstop market is going to be getting a little thinner, as Renteria will have one less potential destination to bargain with. And obviously Todd Walker being taken off the market will take away one more 2nd base target for the Cardinals.

Trade Talks

The tide seems to be shifting from Randy Johnson to the Oakland A's. I've read rumors of Hudson, Zito, and Mulder being traded away, and that the Cardinals have been actively trying to land one of them. Apparently, Hudson is the player the A's would most like to move, as he is only signed for the 2005 season. The Cardinals are using Jason Marquis for trade bait, which makes sense. It's just a matter of which prospects it would take on top of Marquis.

Randy Johnson appears to be so overpriced that it's going to take a miracle for him to pitch for the Redbirds next year. Unless, of course, Johnson's demands get louder and louder. I still think the teams most likely to land Johnson are the Cardinals, Angels, and Yankees.

Simulation Baseball

The Diamond Mind Baseball Organization - aka DMBO - currently has a GM opening. If any of you have ever wanted to join a simulation league, this is a good chance to get involved in one of the better leagues out there. For more information, go to DMBO.net. This will be my 4th season involved with the league, and it has ruined me from ever playing fantasy baseball again.

Randy Johnson Update

2004-11-29T10:04:00.000-06:00

According to The Mercury News of San Jose, CA, the Cardinals are still in the hunt for the Big Unit.

"The Cardinals appear to be offering Reggie Sanders in a package that probably includes 26-year-old first baseman-outfielder John Gall, who hit .292 with 22 homers at Triple-A Memphis."

I have to wonder if this rumor is any more reliable than the one I mentioned before that included Dan Haren, Rick Ankiel, and Kiko Calero. Of course, in many ways the deal makes more sense from the Cardinal perspective. Sanders is an aging corner outfielder who would frankly be somewhat easy to replace. And I've already outlined why I think that Gall is a prime trade candidate. I'm just not certain that Sanders makes a lot of sense as the key piece of a trade between the Diamondbacks and the Cardinals.

The Diamondbacks already have Shea Hillenbrand and Luis Gonzalez under contract for next season. Hillenbrand will likely be playing 1st base for Arizona, while Gonzo patrolls left field. Sanders could obviously start in right field, but that would leave Gall in the minors. Assuming of course that the Diamondbacks don't turn around and deal Gonzalez to free up more payroll, which could work.

From the Cardinals standpoint, as I mentioned, replacing Sanders the player would be no problem. Replacing Sanders the person, however, seems more complicated. I'm not a big fan of team chemistry being important - in my mind, winning leads to chemistry as opposed to the opposite being true. But it still does not seem to fit the Cardinals character as an organization to deal away a player like Reggie Sanders after signing him to his first multi-year contract since the 1997 season.

Look at Tino Martinez as an example - they stood by him after a disappointing 2002 season in St. Louis even though it was obvious he was overpaid and essentially not what he used to be. They gave him the 2003 season to further prove himself (or not). When it didn't work out, they traded him to Tampa Bay - where he grew up.

Sanders, on the other hand, is signed somewhat cheap, and played to expectations in 2004. Granted, Randy Johnson would improve the team over Sanders greatly. It just doesn't seem like the kind of thing Walt Jocketty would do. He would essentially be banishing Sanders to a season with a horrible team, after which he would probably retire.

Obviously, the bottom line is that Major League Baseball is a business. Players look out for their best interests more often than not, and teams do the same. What do I take away from this article more than anything else? The Cardinals are still interested in Johnson, the price for him seems to be dropping, and rumors are nothing more than speculation until the deal is done.

Free Agent Options - Starting Pitchers

2004-11-24T07:59:00.000-06:00

Today, we'll discuss free agent options for the starting rotation. Before we get into that, however, let me point out a few things from a St. Louis Post Dispatch article from yesterday. I have plucked out the highlights - quoted word for word - and placed them below.

1. The Cardinals project a 2005 payroll of approximately $87 million but already have $60 million committed to players under contract. Jocketty said a trade is possible to free additional money.

Comment - My projection of $21 million to spend looks to be about right, if not slightly conservative even considering raises to players like King and Marquis.

2. "Is there a No. 1 guy out there from a free-agent standpoint? I don't think so. Is there a guy out there from a trade standpoint? Yeah, I'd say so," pitching coach Dave Duncan said.

Comment - I find this comment interesting. This leads me to believe that Duncan is 100% sold on Johnson, since he's ignoring players like Pedro Martinez, Matt Clement, and Carl Pavano.

3. Jocketty recently trashed print reports that the club had offered pitchers Dan Haren, Rick Ankiel and Kiko Calero for Johnson. La Russa said Tuesday that the report "shouldn't be taken with a grain of salt but with a package of salt."

Comment - this is good news.

4. Retaining Renteria is an organizational priority and the club is crafting a heavily back-loaded offer believed to be for at least four years and worth about $8 million per season.

Comment - This appears to be a realistic contract, and tells me the Cardinals are willing to pay a little more for Renteria than might make sense, but aren't going to bet the farm on him.

5. A lot depends on how much Edgar wants to stay here and how he wants to structure," La Russa said. "Whatever we do for pitching is going to be expensive. If you bring in a veteran, he's not going to pitch as long as Edgar plays. There has to be cooperation from the pitcher and from Edgar."

Comment - This is very, very interesting. The Cardinals appear to be ready and willing to do something for pitching that is going to be expensive.

With those comments out of the way, let's talk a little about some free agent starting pitchers. Obviously, Dave Duncan doesn't feel like there is anyone out there as good as Johnson - which, of course, is true. However, I do think that there are several players available that could be picked up that would improve the rotation should they not be able to land the Big Unit.

Pedro Martinez

Pedro was not himself this year. After posting ERA's of 2.89 or less for 7 years in a row, he posted a 3.90 ERA in 2004, giving him an ERA+ of 125. Martinez, 33, had 17 win shares, 5 WSAA, and pitched 217 innings - and made $17.5 million!

Even with an off year, Pedro would have been the best starter on the Cardinals staff last season. Will he revert to pre-2004 form next year? I would say last year was probably a bit of a fluke, although it's hard to imagine him reverting all the way back to his 200 ERA+ range. Whatever the case, the Red Sox have supposedly offered him a 2 year, $25.5 million contract. Would the Cardinals be offering Pedro enough extra dollars or years to bring him to St. Louis? It's hard to imagine.

Carl Pavano

Somewhat out of nowhere came Mr. Pavano this season. The soon to be 29 year old posted a 137 ERA+ last year, giving him the 9th best mark in the NL on the season. He also posted 20 Win Shares, 9 WSAA - both marks putting him on par with Roger Clemens this season. His 2004 salary was $3.8 million. Side Note - in 1998, Pavano gave up Mark McGwire's 70th home run.

My biggest concern about Pavano is - I'm not certain that this season wasn't a fluke. Over 7 major league seasons, it was just the 2nd time he was above average. His career ERA+ is 100, suggesting that thus far in his career he's been exactly league average. And if you look at his strikeout rate, walk rate, and hits allowed in 2004 vs. 2003, there is not much difference, leading me to wonder how in fact he improved his performance so much.

My suspicion is that the price tag on Pavano is going to be somewhat high, although not as high as that of Pedro Martinez. Personally, I don't think he's going to be worth the gamble that last year was the "real Carl Pavano."

Matt Clement

Matt Clement put together a career year in 2004, posting a 123 ERA+ with 11 Win Shares, 2 WSAA. Last year he made $6 million, and this year he'll turn 30 in August. Clement was the victim of poor run support in 2004, as he posted a 9-13 record despite his 3.68 ERA. He also struck out more batters (190) than he had innings pitched (181). And while this was Clements best season, he has posted an ERA+ of over 100 for the last 3 years in a row.

In my mind, Clement could be a great pick-up for the Cardinals, although no one should expect him to come in and be the staff ace. Compare his numbers to those of Chris Carpenter (121 ERA+, 11 WS, 3 WSAA), and you'll see that they had very similar seasons, with the obvious difference being that Carpenter had more wins (thanks to the team he was on), Clement more strikeouts.

If the Cardinals truly think they need to bring in a pitcher who can strike batters out, Clement might be a nice Plan B if the Randy Johnson/Mark Mulder trades don't work out. In fact, if they could afford it he would be a nice addition to the rotation with Johnson or Mulder.

Odalis Perez

For some reason, I haven't heard much talk about Perez this off-season. Here's a guy who throws left handed and will not turn 28 until June. Last season, he posted a 127 ERA+ with 12 WS, 3 WSAA. Much like Clement, Perez was the victim of poor run support as he only had a 7-6 record to go with his 3.25 ERA over 196.1 innings. Last season he made $5 million.

Perez does not fit the mold of what the Cardinals are looking for, which is supposedly a power pitcher. However, here is another guy that was about as good as Carpenter last season. And there would be an advantage to adding a left handed starter to the rotation, if the Cardinals don't think Ankiel is ready or Johnson will be coming over. Other than the obvious fact that it forces the other team to think about left handed pitching, it also provides more balls hit in play to the left side of the infield. Any time you have a glove like Rolen playing the hot corner, you want to see as many balls as possible hit his way.

Brad Radke

Radke, 32, posted a 136 ERA+ with 19 WS, 6 WSAA. He was the 3rd best pitcher in the AL last year, but just the 2nd best on his own team. Just goes to show you - pitching wins championships. (Oh, wait...) He is beyond durable, as he's thrown 212 or more innings in 8 of the last 9 seasons. Radke made $10.75 million last year.

Most likely, 2004 was a season in which he will not be able to repeat in 2005. However, he does have a career ERA+ of 114. That, combined with his durability, will make him a valuable pitcher to a team next season. Considering that he is not a strikeout pitcher, however, it's hard to imagine the Cardinals going after him.

Eric Milton

I only included him on this list because according to Jayson Stark the Cardinals are "going after him hard." I guess my question is - why? In 2004, the 29 year old lefty posted a 92 OPS+ with 8 win shares and -1 WSAA. All that for $9 million - what a bargain.

Milton has a couple of things going for him in that he's young and left handed. Of course, he's older than Odalis Perez and he stunk last year. What's more, he threw 201 innings. Why is that a problem? Well, he only threw 17 innings the season before, making me leery of him from an injury standpoint in 2005.

If they could sign him at a reasonable cost, he could be a nice Duncan project. Bringing in Milton to "right the ship" of the rotation, however, is not a good idea.

Kevin Millwood

Millwood, unlike some on this list, actually had a career worst season. For the first time in his career, Millwood posted a sub-100 ERA+ as he had a 90. He also battled some injury problems, only posting 141 innings (a career low), and thus holding his WS to 5, WSAA at -2. He made $11 million last season. (Let's see, the Phillies paid $20 million to Millwood and Milton last year - why were they so bad again?)

Over the last 5 years, Millwood has had one very good season (2002), 3 average seasons, and 1 below average season. He is, relatively speaking, a decent strikeout pitcher. Furthermore, he does fit into the Chris Carpenter project mold. Once again, however - he is not the kind of pitcher that is going to come in and instantly improve the staff without a doubt.

Conclusions

There are a few other starters out there that I could have mentioned. Russ Ortiz, Jon Lieber, Derek Lowe, Esteban Loaiza, Paul Wilson, Paul Byrd. Heck, even Matt Morris. But all of these guys, along with many on the list above, have something in common - none of them are head and shoulders better than Chris Carpenter and Jeff Suppan. I guess Dave Duncan's comment early in this article make a bit more sense in hind sight.

Personally, I think the Cardinals should be on the market for a starting pitcher regardless as to if they are interested in making a trade or not. This would provide two things. One, it would put them in a position so that they would not have to make a trade if the prices got out of hand. Two, it would provide them will a little extra trade bait to actually pull off a trade if they have an "extra" pitcher.

My choice of the above pitchers would be Matt Clement. Here is a strikeout pitcher who has been solid for 3 years in a row, yet is still young. What's more, it would be great to use him to stick it to the Cubs. Disclaimer - any Cardinal fan wearing one of those ignorant tape-on-goatees during a Clement start should be removed from the stadium. With Clement, the Cardinals rotation would look something like this.

Carpenter
Clement
Suppan
Marquis
Ankiel/Haren

Between Ankiel and Haren, the one not starting could be in the pen and available for emergency relief. In the case of Haren, he could additionally be in AAA getting extra work.

Should the Cardinals sign Clement, they could further use Jason Marquis as trade bait without jeopardizing the depth of their team. Since we're in a theoretical world here, let's assume that the Cardinals could in fact land Randy Johnson or Mark Mulder with Marquis involved in the trade. That would provide a 2005 rotation looking like this.

Johnson/Mulder
Carpenter
Clement
Suppan
Ankiel/Haren

That, my friends, would be a deep rotation. Could the Cardinals afford it? It's hard to imagine this happening along with Renteria being brought back. However, if the Cardinals were to sign Polanco and Walker for $7 million as I suggested yesterday, the above scenario could in fact happen. Matt Clement would have to take a deal that only paid him $4 million next year. That could work, since the following year the Cardinals would free up the salary owed to Jeff Suppan. Randy Johnson is already due to make around $10 million next year, as $6 million of his salary is deferred.

Overall, it would take some creative accounting. However, with all of the young pitching the Cardinals have coming up through the system it does not appear to be an impossible dream.