Another Roger Repoz sighting!

So Molina's offensive breakout is more of a mirage then anything else?

It should be Kyle McClellan, not Zach.

The lineup looks ok, but Mo really needs to fix that bullpen.

Molina's breakout was just a flukey BABIP most likely, though his K rate did go down even more so maybe part of the gains in AVG are for real.

Also, you can probably take Juan Encarnacion off the list.

Adam Wainwright Top Near-Age Comps: Dock Ellis, Jeff Weaver


It's same to assume that the DEA's been informed, right?

McClellan's been fixed. The projection was accurate though - no way Zach McClellan is ever that useful.

A Daryl Jones projection might be worthwhile. Mitch Boggs probably should be in there as well, although we can guess what it will look like.

Thanks for everything, except maybe suspending kevin right before the Red Sox lost.

I did do Boggs but didn't add him to St. Louis, so I'm sticking him in. I'll do Daryl Jones on the next sweep.

How is Pujols merely "Excellent"? There should be a higher category for him. Does his optimistic projection break 200 OPS+?

Does his optimistic projection break 200 OPS+?

Nope, just a pathetic 194!

I did do Boggs but didn't add him to St. Louis, so I'm sticking him in.

LOL, another minor league starter who projects as well as Piñeiro. Of course these are the same people that gave us "Braden Looper, Average-ish Starter", so who knows?

what are some thoughts on blake hawksworth? i've got a feeling that he could break out in a huge way in 2009. he has decent enough K and BB rates, but he got beat like a red headed stepchild on balls in play. he's got strong groundball tendencies according to milb.com, but he's less than 50% according to firstinning.


i'm encouraged by the zips projection, but i'm wondering if there's anything more that can be said about him.

They might be good, but the Cards also seem to have a greater than usual chance to fall off a cliff. Ankiel, Ludwick, Wainwright, Loshe, and (obviously) Carpenter have an entirely realistic chance of sucking. Of course, it is unlikely that they will suck collectively. My point is just that this Cardinals team is more likely than your average team to go 2008-Detroit-Tigers.

Charlie Haeger is on there, he plays for San Diego, I believe.

I'M NOT SURE ANYONE (SAVE THE MOST ABSURDLY OPTIMISTIC CARDINAL FAN) REALLY HAD HIGH EXPECTATIONS FOR STL UNTIL THEY WERE STILL COMPETITIVE IN JUNE...

Yeah, I have no idea how Haeger got on there. He's never been a Cardinal or in the organization as far as I can tell - my best guess is I added him by accident when I assigned the next player alphabetically, Haerther.

For the guys over on Viva El Birdos (I know I've posted there before but for some reason, SBNation won't let me post there until 2 days has passed), don't forget that they're ranked by offense. Jimenez isn't really all that impressive a player due to injuries and defense. That 347/392 isn't all that suprising as it's an OPS+ of 93 (his career in the majors of about 2500 PA is an OPS+ of 94)

Are the following statements true about the Cardinals
a) about an 83 win team
b) 12-15th biggest market
c) cash-starved
d) poor group of prospects below Rasmus
e) big holes at ss,2b,sp,rp

If so wouldn't it be wise to consider trading Pujols
Imagine the package you could get for him?

Teams still need to sell tickets. Dumping Pujols would likely damage ticket sales greatly.

Teams still need to sell tickets. Dumping Pujols would likely damage ticket sales greatly.

For trading the reigning NL MVP and easily the best player in the league?

The Cardinals wouldn't fill an AA stadium if that happened.

d) poor group of prospects below Rasmus

No. It isn't 2005.

e) big holes at ss,2b,sp,rp

Look at the list above for the SP's. One guy who's very good (but a large health risk), another who's good, and two more who look to be average or so. That's a decent rotation, maybe a little better. The bullpen could use Springer again and they need a lefty better than one of the Flores brothers, but they do have a couple of guys to fill the holes. The AAA rotation will be composed entirely of prospects, and while admittedly only Todd looks like he has much chance of being particularly good, there is some depth for the various pitching needs.

16. TOLAXOR Posted: October 27, 2008 at 08:33 AM (#2996397)

I'M NOT SURE ANYONE (SAVE THE MOST ABSURDLY OPTIMISTIC CARDINAL FAN) REALLY HAD HIGH EXPECTATIONS FOR STL UNTIL THEY WERE STILL COMPETITIVE IN JUNE...

or maybe the ones that scouted the players with a combination of their eyes and stats.

I love the zips work, but I'll take the over on Molina easily. I'll even take the over on Aaron Miles(if TLR is managing him) but not so much that I think the prediction is too off base. The rest seem to be pretty close at first glance (minus the rookies as I think the Anderson projection and even the Craig seem a tad more optimistic than the Cardinals think, if we could get other teams to see these guys like this, they could make good trade bait)

Are the following statements true about the Cardinals
a) about an 83 win team
b) 12-15th biggest market
c) cash-starved
d) poor group of prospects below Rasmus
e) big holes at ss,2b,sp,rp

If so wouldn't it be wise to consider trading Pujols
Imagine the package you could get for him?

a. true, with potential to be better due to having the best manager in baseball. A legitimate Wild card contender, or a division winner if injuries happen to the Cubs or a breakout year from the team.
b. I thought their market size was even smaller than that, close to 20th than 12th.
c. nope, not in the least.
d. not really, they may not have elite prospects, but as this shows they have a lot of guys who project to be average players next season. A team consisting of all average players is 81 wins(roughly) add Pujols and that makes it an 88 win team, add Wainwright and you pass 90 wins. (of course not everyone of their players is average but the point is they have enough talent to field an average team and Pujols) add in that the ownership group has said they plan on spending roughly 30 mil this offseason(they have more to spend in their budget but the rest is going to arbitration raises)
e. Big holes? not really the difference between a replacement and an average shortstop and second base is fillable, sp has Wainwright, Lohse, and a cast of other characters by the time the season rolls around they should have 6 starting pitchers for five jobs, their bullpen woes is always easily fixable. Motte has a good chance of beating those projections. Kinney is back next season, they are still short a legitimate lefty specialist, but beyond that they have enough talent to fill out the pen and make it a top ten bullpen.

The Cards have two Grade-A prospects in Rasmus and Wallace and a ton of serviceable arms to slot into the rotation. Admittedly most of them grade out as 3/4 starters, but STL has been one of the most successful teams in the game for a decade thanks to the Garrett Stephensons of the world. The pen will be much improved next year thanks to full seasons of Perez and Motte & the absence of Villone and Isringhausen, not to mention the probability that the pen won't cough up a dozen leads thanks to unclutch performances.

SS is a huge hole and will likely remain one given the lack of reasonable FA options. Kennedy/Miles/Lopez can fake their way through 2B; Kennedy remains a great defensive player, and the other two have complementary offensive abilities.

Next year's playoff hopes probably hinge on Carpenter being healthy, but even without him the Cards could easily squeeze into the playoffs if Pujols and Ludwick are healthy. The Cards' recipe for success is much like the Giants' a few years ago: just add Pujols to an otherwise average-ish team and coast in the playoffs. The Cards are fortunate in that they have a collection of valuable supporting players as well as a ton of useful talent in the pipeline in case of injury. There's not a team in baseball that could better handle an injury to a starting OF, middle infielder, or 3B. 1B is another question, though not for lack of depth.

And FWIW, Barton will destroy that projection if he gets more than 200 PAs.

or maybe the ones that scouted the players with a combination of their eyes and stats.

AS A BAYESIAN, I FAIL TO SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO...

Poor group of prospects behind Rasmus---Remember, Daryl Jones and Brett Wallace are not included in the projections, both of which are pretty solid. If not for Glaus, Wallace would probably be the team's starting 3B in 09.

does anybody really think they'll approach 30 blown leads again next year? jeez, just take that off the table and you can't help but feel they'll contend.

not sure about the exact number, but i know it is in that neighborhood.

...with potential to be better due to having the best manager in baseball...

What makes LaRussa statistically better than Cox, Torre or Pinella? What about some of the less experienced guys such as Charlie Manuel (.543 W %), Scioscia (.551 W %), or Gardenhire (.549 W %)?

I'm not saying LaRussa is or is not the best in the game...there's no way of knowing. But stating blankly that he is certainly isn't going to lead credence to your remaining bullet points.

'best manager in baseball' is cfb's (informed) opinion, if i can speak for him. if manuel, torre, pinella, et. al., are still managing after 25yrs and have tony's win percentage, maybe we can compare. cox would be someone i would say has an argument as being better based on results, but he seems to have lost a step. maybe tony has too by now. next couple of years will probably tell. but geez, if tony doesn't get some props for 2006, then all i can say is you have a pretty high bar.

oops, torre slipped in there. he's been managing a long time and has done pretty well, i guess.

OK, I've removed Wayward Charlie Haeger and added projections for Jones and Wallace. I forgot that Jones had a pulse this season after a horrific 2007, so I didn't do him. As for Wallace, I had been kind of hoping that I wouldn't have to do a projection for him given his less than half a year of professional experience, but you guys caught me.

I do not like having players listed more than once on offense.

SS is a huge hole and will likely remain one given the lack of reasonable FA options.

I bet you could get a shiny Julio Lugo for free!

'best manager in baseball' is cfb's (informed) opinion, if i can speak for him. if manuel, torre, pinella, et. al., are still managing after 25yrs and have tony's win percentage, maybe we can compare. cox would be someone i would say has an argument as being better based on results, but he seems to have lost a step. maybe tony has too by now. next couple of years will probably tell. but geez, if tony doesn't get some props for 2006, then all i can say is you have a pretty high bar.

I'll pimp out a future book by Chris Jaffe that supports that opinion, but I'll agree that Cox should be included in the discussion. (not a Torre fan, sorry but his claim to fame is basically doing nothing for a tremendously talented team, it's a great philosophy, but only works when you have the right team)

It's not just win percentage though, I even think that Guillen is a good manager and is on the short list of best managers in baseball. Almost every thing TLR does is something that is defensible and I agree with, there are exceptions, most of them have to do with keeping in a starting pitcher too long or something to that effect.

2009? It's the bullpen stupid!