Rockin' the Red

Baseball's Great Escape

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 05:57:00 +0000

This week in baseball seemed anything but. A hometown hero changed cities in a move that seemed more fitting of Lex Luther than Superman, and the NL MVP's positive test for a banned substance was like finding out the Hulk had calf implants.

If the World Series - and, really, the entire final two months of baseball - hadn't ended in such spectacular fashion, I'd feel a bit more taken aback by this. The fact is, this past week was the embodiment of why fans should be careful to tiptoe the line between fanship and worship, between fantasy and reality, between being human and what it means to be human.

I think it's akin to a gladiator effect, like looking down at a pair of gladiators from the upper bowl of the Coliseum. The perspective is shifted towards what we want them to be, to do, to say, to think, to feel. All perspective looking up from the ring is lost because no one is down there with them. Likewise, we have a tendency to strip athletes of who they are and try to turn them into who we want them to be.

I'm guilty of it. I know this because it's a by-product of what sports are supposed to be - a departure from our own reality to a world where the biggest concern is defeating another team with a bat and ball. We romanticize it and tie a bow on it. Baseball lets us escape to a different perspective where we no longer have to stand in the gladiator ring but can instead sit up top and watch.

To see an athlete we've revered seemingly depart from the virtues we've bestowed upon him is just another sad reality that the escape doesn't apply past the playing field. For God's sake, we called Albert a "Machine". Baseball, despite its beauty and wonder and fantasy, is still played by humans. I think people are upset (although most seem to be coming to terms now) because they saw a player act on his own human emotions rather than ours.

It's tough, I know, but it's the truth. Albert is not who we want him to be. Ryan Braun is not who we want him to be. That doesn't make them any less of a person or the game of baseball any less of a sport. If anything, it magnifies the fact that it is the game of baseball that we should revere in such high a fashion, not the players. To place expectations on a person that most of us don't even know is unjust and, quite simply, a waste of time.

So, Albert isn't who we thought he was. That's not his fault. The takeaway is that no athlete is who we think they ought to be. That's ok. They're human. We're human. We each have different wants, desires, thoughts, and feelings that pertain to our own circumstances. Keep that in mind the next time an athlete makes comments to the media. If you're prone to judge, you can make your judgment accordingly. In the end, no matter who signs next week or who tests positive next month, the game of baseball will live on and be there to let us escape for a while. No more, no less.

Albert's Time to Say Goodbye

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 05:21:00 +0000

First, a moment of silence.

The deed is done. Albert Pujols, our "El Hombre", is leaving for the west coast. I don't necessarily want to discuss the specifics of the transaction just yet. I believe the Cardinals will move on for the better, given the magnitude of Albert's price tag and the flexibility his departure gives us now. However, I do have a few thoughts on the departure in general.

A lot has been made that this was a "business" decision, a choice Albert made that netted him an extra $40 or so million over 10 years. I don't deny that he took the better monetary deal. I've heard, however, that Cardinals fans are being "irrational" by being upset over Albert's decision to leave. The apologists argue that when given a potential 25% pay increase over the next best option, anyone would leave their current situation, whether it's for thousands or millions. The problem is that sports athletes like Albert are operating under a different reality. What applies to us doesn't apply to them. We have a right to be upset. Let me explain.

Many of us have normal jobs. We go to work everyday and have modest incomes. There is a certain cost of living that we all must support: the ability to pay for food, our home, our car, health insurance, water and electric, etc. For us, the value of a dollar, especially in this economy, is high. It brings a certain utility to us with each incremental gain, utility that we need to support the basic necessities of life. There's a concept in economics called the law of diminishing marginal utility, which basically means that your first dollar provides more utility than the second, third, and so on. Paying for a modest cost of living represents a pretty high utility for our income. Essentially, we need the money.

At a certain point, however, you reach a threshold that divides those that have a high utility for money in a normal cost of living and those that don't. Albert, like most other baseball players, falls into that second category. The marginal utility of the money he makes - and will make under his new deal - is incredibly low in relation to what one needs to cover the basic necessities of life. That's what makes him different than us. A 25% pay increase over the next biggest offer when you're making hundreds of millions is nowhere near the same amount of utility as moving from $40,000 to $50,000 or even $100,000 to $125,000. Albert doesn't need the money as much because no one needs the money when you're talking in that high of figures.

Therefore, I think people do have a right to be mad in some aspects. His business decision, no matter how you color it, was how he could make the most money. Money at that level, though, is nowhere near as important as it looks on paper. When factoring in the comments Albert made about wanting to be a lifelong Cardinal, about loving the city and wanting to end his career here, a case could be made that St. Louis still represented the best opportunity for El Hombre, all things considered. Given the low difference in actual utility between the two offers, it makes the comments seem like a sham. I suspect he was speaking from the heart at the time, but they were, regrettably, a sham.

So, Albert, I have a few words. Thank you for all that you gave to St. Louis. Thank you for the World Series rings, the three-home run masterpieces, the versatility to be an All-Star at three different positions, the miraculous recoveries from injury, the charity given back to the community, and the insatiable desire to be a winner every season. I have a jersey with your name on it in my closet. We owe you for the memories, big time. You, after all these years, owe us very little. You were our future Hall of Famer, the crowning jewel of an incredible era of winning in franchise history. We would have loved to watch you fade into the sunset as you entered the twilight of your career, even if it meant a decline in production.

The people of Greater Los Angeles, however, owe you absolutely nothing. You, on the other hand, owe them a quarter of a billion dollars and a whole bunch of presently unrealized expectations. Better make it worth the money.

2011 World Series Champions!

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 06:12:00 +0000

So long a journey, so winding a road, yet we all had a feeling, in our heart of hearts, that it might just lead to this. Remarkable. Absolutely remarkable.

Congratulations, Cardinal Nation.
-Bryan

World Series Game 6 Recap... Wow

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 05:52:00 +0000

Any type of analysis of tonight's game would be like trying to explain why puppies are cute. This game, amid its flops, mishaps, bobbles, and blunders, was baseball at its very finest, one of those instant classics that might just fall under the "legendary" category a few years from now... like, tomorrow.

It had all the side stories and manufactured intrigue that make Joe Buck salivate, but beyond the fluff, this was an incredible example of the random and unforgiving nature of America's pastime. The up-and-down roller coaster ride of emotion is woven into the very fabric of the sport, but the beauty in what we just saw tonight is that we never see it. Quite frankly, 99% of the time, this never happens. We all know those moments: the called third strikes, the inning-ending double-plays, the pop outs to the warning track.

We don't live for nights like tonight, and that's OK. Baseball is a great game in its anti-climatic nature. It's what we're used to, a metaphor for the anti-climatic nature of life in an overly-dramaticized culture. (Thanks for the inspiration, Joe Posnanski) No, we live for the hope of nights like tonight, even if it often ends fruitless. It's in our human nature to run on hope; without it, there wouldn't be a whole lot to live for.

However, every once in a while, we have our hopes confirmed. The fact that we actually got to see the fruition of the collective wishes of several million Cardinals fans is what makes baseball the greatest sport in the world. I honestly didn't think there would be anything that topped that Wednesday Night of Baseball on the last day of the season, when we saw two walk-offs and an extra-inning win to squeak the Cards into the post-season, but in Game 6 of the World Series, we sure did.

Tonight was remarkable. There's not much more to say other than that. A remarkable night of baseball, and we could not have expected anything less in a game that is built to drain our emotions and, every once in a while, blow our minds away.

Have a fantastic Game 7, Cardinal Nation.
-Bryan

World Series Game 2 Rap Sheet

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 04:06:00 +0000

Well, that was a bit deflating. I'll go ahead and take my share of the blame for wearing my Ryan Franklin "Fear the Beard" shirt tonight. I thought we were done with that saga of the back-end of the bullpen, but the ghosts of mid-summer came back to haunt the Cards in particularly cruel fashion. The Rangers made solid contact only once in the 9th; the rest of the inning consisted of a bloop, two pop flies, and a failed cut-off that let the winning run advance to 2nd. Tonight highlighted the real allure of baseball, the simultaneously elating and mind-numbingly exasperating experience of a ball at the cusp of Furcal's glove softly dropping to the grass.

This game was even more proof that this is one of the most evenly-matched World Series we've seen in quite some time, as both teams continued to trade punches like two heavyweights refusing to fall down. The offensive fireworks have been pretty much non-existent, at least in the form that many pundits were expecting. Instead, they've come in the very minutia of what makes baseball so great - the pinch-hit singles, the escape acts with runners on second, the failed sacrifice bunts, the stolen bases and caught stealings. Through two games, this series has been the definition of "old school baseball", and as heart-breaking as tonight was for us, this has been one helluva ride to watch.

Some thoughts on GM2:

1.) Jaime Garcia pitched perhaps his finest game as a Cardinal, and it's painful to see his team squander it in a pitching-starved postseason. Jaime's Win Probability Added was .433, the highest of either team. His location was sharp, his rotation was good on his off-speed pitches, and he kept the Rangers lineup completely off-balance for most of the night. If the Cards can squeeze another start like that from him in Game 6, if necessary, they'll be in very good shape.

2.) Jason Motte didn't look nearly as sharp as last night, and it seemed like his command was really struggling. His success so far in the postseason has been his ability to throw strikes to the tune of a 75% strike rate. Tonight, he was all around the plate and got hit when he came in. The curious move was taking him out against Josh Hamilton when it was clear that you needed a strikeout in that situation. Sometimes you've got to live by the sword and die by it too, but TLR decided to ride his streak of hot hands in the bullpen. For once in a long while, the move didn't work out. Even though Rhodes and Lynn retired all their batters, the crucial strikeout, like the Holy Grail, eluded them. Tony, at long last, lost his hand at the poker table.

3.) This has been an extremely exciting series, and I really think we'll be in for a wild ride in Texas. Matt Harrison, the Rangers' Game 3 starter, has struggled with control in 10.2 innings this postseason, an advantage for the patient and contact-minded Cardinals. It's crucial that the middle of the order produce runs when runners get into scoring position because I have a feeling the next few games won't be quite the one-run matchups we've seen so far.

Thanks for stopping by,
Bryan

Become a Fan of Rockin' the Red on Facebook

World Series Game 1 Rap Sheet

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 05:33:00 +0000

In German folklore, when you feel like you've glimpsed an image of yourself that could not have just been a reflection in a mirror, you're said to have seen your doppelganger, or "double walker" in German. (Thanks, Wikipedia.) Typically, this is taken as a negative omen of misfortune or death. Or too much time on Facebook.

If any two teams could be classified as double walkers, it would be these two. Power offenses, power bullpens, a single staff ace, average defense with a few stellar standouts, and managers with a propensity to pull strings as the game runs its course, albeit with two very different philosophies. I'll let you be the judge of who's bringing the bad luck, but the final score of tonight's game would indicate that these two teams are stacked in a peculiarly even and fascinating way. I don't think we'll see one-run games every night, but the similarities between these two teams will for sure keep you anxious until the last out is counted.

Some thoughts after a terrific Game One:

1.) The number four spot in the Cardinals lineup is going to be a key determinant to how they fair the rest of the series. Ron Washington made it clear that the Rangers won't be taking chances with Albert Pujols with runners on base and definitely won't be having his pitchers give him many strikes to hit. Albert walked once and was hit by a pitch, and he didn't see much to hit in his two recorded at-bats either (both outs). Matt Holliday, batting fourth, went 1-4 but managed to make the Rangers pay with a key double after Pujols took first on a HBP. The double led to a two-run opening burst after Berkman squeaked a single down the first base line.

Whether it's Holliday, Berkman, or even Freese, the Cardinals have to make the Rangers pay by choosing to pitch around Pujols. Then, not only will Pujols actually see a few pitches, pitchers might be forced to throw him more strikes to keep the basepaths clear for the number four guy. Now that's a good situation to be in.

2.) Power bullpens are becoming a necessity for a World Series stretch. What makes a power bullpen... powerful? Not so much velocity as it is strikeouts. In the 7th, Rzepcynski got two heart-pounding strikeouts with runners on first and second to close out the inning. That inning was the inflection point of the game, turning control over to the Cardinals for the final two innings. Rzep had a .170 Win Probability Added (WPA) and increased the Cardinals' chances of winning at that point from 62.6% to 79.6%, a 17-percentage point difference. Those two at-bats had a Leverage Index (LI) of 3.85 (Gentry) and 3.30 (German), the two most meaningful AB's in the game. Full FanGraphs info here.

Rzep may not be considered a traditional power arm with a 91 mph fastball, but he has an 8.57 K/9 in 187 ML innings. The Cardinals clearly built this bullpen around guys who can garner K's, a stark contrast to their pitch-to-contact rotation. Two big K's may have KO'd the Rangers tonight.

3.) If there are two counterparts who aren't doppelgangers, it's definitely the managers. Washington, the play-by-your-gut strategist, versus La Russa, the calculating tactician. The moves tonight are all the evidence you need. Back to the 7th, you have runners on first and second with Fernando Salas on the mound. The Rangers have lefthanded-hitting Murphy coming to bat, so Tony plays the match-up with his lefty, Rzep. Washington pulls Murphy for his righty Gentry, a good hitter in his own right. Instead of pulling Rzep for Dotel, who was warming up in the bullpen but probably not fully ready to come in, Tony elects to have Rzep throw to Gentry. Maybe Tony knows this, but Gentry has a reverse career platoon split versus lefties (.242 against .250 for righties). Either way, K.

Washington then opts to have Esteban German bat in what seemed like an attempt to bait Tony into putting Dotel in the game. Washington had both Endy Chavez and Mitch Moreland on the bench as lefties to bring in if Rzep was pulled. Never happened. Keep in mind that German had only 13 plate appearances in the 2011 regular season and none in the postseason, and Tony had to be salivating over those numbers. Washington's rationale was he thought German could make solid contact, a gut call. Tony called the bluff and the matchup. Well, we know the rest.

The differences between the two managers were no better summed up than in the in-game interview with TLR. When asked about Ron Washington's colorful antics and dance moves during games, Tony acknowledged Wash's enthusiasm for the game. His response to his own philosophy, "I do that on the inside." I don't think we mind, Tony.

Thanks for stopping by,
Bryan

Become a Fan of Rockin' the Red on Facebook

Imagining the Unimaginable

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 02:52:00 +0000

What more is there to say at this point? The Cardinals have exceeded expectations at every imaginable level after falling below them for so long through mid-summer. In fact, they've managed to exceed the unimaginable. A bullpen that not only throws more innings than the starting rotation but outperforms them by over five runs? Check. Beat Roy Halladay, Cliff Lee, and Roy Oswalt to advance to the NLCS? Check. Make up a double-digit deficit to squeak into the #postseason? Check. Sensing a trend here?

It's funny that the theme for this postseason is Tinie Tempah's "Written in the Stars", played perhaps ad nauseum by TBS and FOX (I personally like the song, especially set to highlight reels). Of everyone that made it into October, the Cardinals are the team that most resembles a "written in the stars" kind of destiny. I don't think that's right, though. To say that anything is written in the stars about this team would be taking away from the long, arduous, inspiring road to get here.

If the postseason ended today, this would undoubtedly land near the top of Cardinals folklore, a story we'll be relating to our kids when they're ready to give up on a sport, a hobby, a dream. What lessons can we gain from watching this team? Never give up. Play a hard nine. Enjoy the work you do. Count the little victories. Confidence is momentum. Take the positives with the negatives, and, more importantly, vice versa. Work with what you have. Be creative with it. Let-downs are only let-downs when you let them be. Don't underestimate yourself. Don't stop believing.

Starting Wednesday, the Cardinals have a chance to exceed our expectations one last time. They might even have one more lesson to bestow: let the unimaginable surprise you.

NL Champions!

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 04:24:00 +0000

Congratulations to the St. Louis Cardinals, 2011 National League Champions! More analysis to come in the next few days. What an incredible run it's been.

Love & Baseball

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 02:50:00 +0000

Summer love is a funny thing. It comes when you least expect it, and as soon as you start to take it for granted, it fades away. Tonight, I was prepared to say goodbye to a summer love that has infatuated me and several hundred thousand people like a drug, unwilling to let go even when we knew it wasn't good for us. The heartache, the stomach aches, the bizarre and improbable - this team had it all. If this were any other summer love, the game would have ended after the first inning. There would be no 2-6 double plays, no liners passing inches over outstretched gloves, no home runs to deep center field, no fastballs reaching the catcher's glove before the bat could even leave the shoulder, and certainly no squirrels crossing over home plate like the last leg of the Kentucky Derby. No, for one more night at least, this summer love continues to live on, like a sunset that refuses to pass under the horizon.

This has been a remarkable run for our Cardinals, a run that has exerted nearly all of our capacity for every emotion possible. Of course the Cardinals would lose a perfectly winnable game yesterday by failing to knock in just one of 14 baserunners, and of course the Cardinals would redeem themselves today, on their last breaths of the 2011 season, by hitting their first home run since the first inning of the first game. This isn't just any old summer love, the kind that you shake off in a couple weeks and gets replaced in a couple months. No, this is a run that should be remembered for giving us a thrill when we were ready to close the book on the forgotten.

Think about it now: the Phillies, the best team in the National League and the favorite to win the World Series, will be throwing Roy Halladay, the best pitcher in all of baseball, in Game 5 against the Cardinals, who now put their entire season's hopes in the hands of ace Chris Carpenter. You couldn't write a better script, and you really wouldn't expect any less at this point. No matter how it turns out, this team has reminded us how to have faith when there's no proof in front of you. It's reminded us that a summer fling isn't always just a fling and that a reason to believe can be just as powerful as a reason to doubt. Summer love isn't always a bad thing. Sometimes, it can give you a glimpse of something special, something so remarkable that it doesn't just fade away. For one more night, under the shining lights of the City of Brotherly Love, we'll get a chance to see how much further this infatuation will take us.

Become a Fan of Rockin' the Red on Facebook

La Russa, Francona, and Payroll Efficacy

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 17:07:00 +0000

There's something to be said for longevity in today's Sportscenter age. Look at Terry Francona, the latest victim of an overzealous and overanxious fan base, ushered out after another 90-win season at the helm of Red Sawx, the sixth 90+ in eight years. Sure, it was his decision to leave the team, but there's enough lines to be read between that show his time wasn't for long. Overall, he ended his tenure with Boston with two AL pennants, two World Series Titles, and a .574 winning percentage. Eight years, two titles, and an average of 93 wins per season. Sure, he also managed one of the biggest collapses we've ever seen in baseball, but it takes a severely short-term memory to judge the ability of a manager on a single one-month slide.

In the end, the Sox needed a scapegoat, but they picked the wrong victim. How about a woeful pitching staff that went 7-20 in September, a staff that walked 4.36 batters per nine innings, the highest of any team in September? (Fangraphs) I'm a big Theo Epstein fan, but it would appear to me that the biggest question regarding their team revolves around roster construction rather than management. After all, I think we tend to give the skipper too much credit when we win and too much credit when we lose. It would be great to have a stat that measures a manager's individual contribution to a team, but that's simply a soft skill that must be evaluated subjectively. In my opinion, Francona wasn't the source of the problem.

Often unsaid is the patience of our own Cardinals organization. Not to sound too much like state-sponsored propaganda, but we've been fortunate to have ownership that hasn't given up on Tony La Russa after a "bad year" or two. In 16 years with the Cardinals, TLR has two pennants, a World Series Title, a .544 winning percentage, and an average of 88 wins per season.

Using a metric I'll call Payroll Efficacy, which admittedly measures the ability of a GM as much as the manager, we can see how both Terry and Tony have done given their resources. Taking payroll divided by wins shows how much the team's payroll subsidized a win (of course, we know that money doesn't necessarily buy better performance, but it sure helps). Payrolls courtesy of Cot's Contracts.

Terry Francona's Red Sox:
2011 $163.8M, 90 wins, 1.82 PE
2010 $168.1M, 89 wins, 1.89 PE
2009 $121.7M, 95 wins, 1.28 PE
2008 $133.3M, 95 wins, 1.40 PE
2007 $143.0M, 96 wins, 1.49 PE
2006 $120.0M, 86 wins, 1.40 PE
2005 $123.5M, 95 wins, 1.30 PE
2004 $127.2M, 98 wins, 1.30 PE

Average PE: 1.485

Tony La Russa's Cardinals:
2011 $109.0M, 90 wins, 1.21 PE
2010 $94.2M, 86 wins, 1.09 PE
2009 $88.5M, 91 wins, 0.97 PE
2008 $99.6M, 86 wins, 1.16 PE
2007 $90.2M, 78 wins, 1.16 PE
2006 $88.9M, 83 wins, 1.07 PE
2005 $92.1M, 100 wins, 0.92 PE
2004 $83.2M, 105 wins, 0.79 PE

Average PE: 1.046

As you can see Tony has been operating on a much smaller budget with very similar results, leading to a much lower Payroll Efficacy ratio. When you look at Francona's high PE, it's no wonder why the level of scrutiny and criticism is much higher in his position. Keep in mind, the smaller the number, the better the (overall) management since the team effectively paid less for each individual win. An interesting exercise would be to look at the entire league. Of course, Joe Maddon, Andrew Friedman, and the Rays would presumably top the list.

There's something to be said for longevity in today's Sportscenter age. You can argue with Tony La Russa's decision-making, but you can't argue with results.

Become a Fan of Rockin' the Red on Facebook

Playing with House Money

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 02:10:00 +0000

I've never been very good at playing with house money. At our annual parish picnic, I would always gravitate towards the quarter buy-in spinning wheels, gladly laying down a couple weeks' allowance for the chance to double, triple, quadruple my money. I would eagerly place my quarters on a number or two and sneak my eyes above the table at that colorful, spinning wheel. One rotation, two rotations, three rotations, four. Like the Wheel of Fortune, it would gradually slow down until it settled on a number. To the winner, the fruits of a well-placed bet. I was usually on the losing side.

However, there undoubtedly would come an occasion, as my pocket of quarters dwindled, that I struck gold. A moment of genius - many may otherwise call this luck - would command the fickle Lady to give me my winnings, several dollars on the quarter. "Eureka!" I would announce in my head. My monies were doubled; I had more than whence I arrived, I had a profit. A profit, and as a shrewd businessman, I would reinvest to strike gold again. Perhaps, I might come to make so much as to go on the Big Slide not once but a hundredfold. I would buy a monocle and a monopoly hat and bankrupt the festival. After all, I had nothing to lose.

Ah, what it means to have house money, much less to play with it. As you might imagine, I never was able to buy my monocle.

I did learn a very valuable lesson, however, that only really dawned on me after watching last night's dichotomy of both an ancient Greek epic and tragedy rolled into one simultaneous baseball orgasm. Here, we had two teams with nothing to lose, if you consider the prognostications of national journalists and our own water cooler discussions to be the barometer of what it means to "have a chance". Here, we had two teams with so much equity built up in 8.5 and 9 game Wild Card leads that to lose would be a microcosm of the fall of the Roman Empire. And here, we had four teams with absolutely nothing to gain but the joy of playing a child's game.

The Cardinals and Rays have been playing with house money this entire month after being afforded a chance when so many, including I, had ruled them out. They weren't supposed to be in this position, and they certainly weren't supposed to cash in. After all, as Joe Posnanski puts so eloquently in his fantastic piece, "Baseball, like life, revolves around anticlimax." The funny thing about being ruled out, however, is that it gives us an excuse to do amazing things, to take chances that we might never have thought to take before. It's a heuristic that violates an anti-climatic game and a largely anti-climatic life for most of us. Playing with house money diminishes our perception of risk while amplifying our anticipation of reward.

This month, the Cardinals and Rays were given two sterling, shiny blue chips on their last all-in bet, and they refused to cut their losses and walk away. They were aggressive, resilient, and focused. Series after series, they battled. You might even confuse them for being possessed.

Our rational selves should always lead us to quit when we make house money. In the end, a risk is a risk, even when it's money you didn't have before. It's actually in our biological construction, as Dan Ariely discusses in the great book Predictably Irrational, to be conservative with what we have, to fear risk of loss. However, there's something to be said about not feeling ownership over what you have and not feeling entitled to having it in the first place. The Rays and Cardinals were playing with house money, yes, but I think the greatest point to note is that they simply never gave up. And it's not as if the season was solely won in September. The season isn't one month or two, it's 162 grueling, monotonous games that compile into one standing of historical record. Through 162 games, through injuries and bad luck, through emotional highs and broken hearts, they didn't stop grinding, even if at times they stopped believing.

For once in our self-admittedly boring, anti-climatic lives, we witnessed two teams dare to play with house money through an unrelenting desire to keep going. Maybe that can be an example for what it means to rethink our natural, conservative aversions to loss into opportunities for gain. After all, we all are playing with metaphorical house money in one way or another. As we just saw, with hard work and a little loosening of the reigns when it comes to taking a chance, amazing things can happen.

Albert and the Free Agency Roundtable

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 03:11:00 +0000

I was eating lunch with some friends the other day, and of course the subject of Albert Pujols came up during some comments on the ballgame the day before. How much is he worth, and why hasn't he signed with us already? We all wondered the same circulating argument that's been all but hushed by the front office and beaten to death by the media. It is perplexing that such an icon in the St. Louis community, a man who could have anything he wants from we lesser "humans", would turn down an already gigantic offer from John Mozeliak earlier this spring.

Suddenly, as I stewed over a plate of fries and a Philly sandwich, the dots started to become less baffling and the connecting lines began to permeate from the starch-filled haze of my cerebrum. Why hasn't he signed? Because he doesn't have to sign.

"Tell us something we don't know."

"You're rambling again."

"You graduated college?"

Trust me, I did indeed graduate from school. Let me say it again: he hasn't signed because he doesn't have to sign.

"You're actually a blogger?"

Wait, hear me out.

Why would you prematurely sign a deal that you knew you unavoidably had the most leverage to negotiate?

"Because he could get injured, duh."

"Because it already was a ton of money."

"Because he's a nice, stand-up guy."

All of those things are, unlike Fox News, fair and unbiased observations. They merit just as much of a discussion as anything in consideration of such a negotiation. However, when you're Albert Pujols, who's already trademarked his own personal brand of greatness and proven that age hath no scars, those don't affect decision-making processes as much as they might for, say, Stubby Clapp. Pujols knows he could play first base for any team in the league, he knows that his numbers are beyond any reasonable active-player comparisons, and he knows that he's the face of the St. Louis Cardinals. The Cardinals, without Pujols, are Matt Holliday and Adam Wainwright and a flock of less intimidating grinders.

Negotiating is all about who holds the bargaining power. I was going to look up a fancy definition, but let's be real: negotiating is all about determining who has the most to lose. Quite frankly, the Cardinals don't have anything to offer Pujols that he couldn't get from 10-15 other teams in the MLB. He just proved that even injury isn't going to prevent him from doing his job of spanking the ball on a routine basis. He broke his frickin' wrist. The only positive outcome for Pujols this spring was locking in on a deal before he got so injured that his value to a team drastically decreased. Obviously, that seems to be a non-issue.

You see, Pujols didn't sign earlier this year because he didn't have to. I whole-heartedly believe Albert will be a Cardinal in 2012, but I also whole-heartedly believe he's going to stretch his bargaining power to its brink. Why sign early when you can hold out on the team that knows you're irreplaceable, to the very point that it's about to lose you, to the very edge of knowing what it feels like to be any other NL - or AL - team that watches Albert from a distance for 162 games every season? Why sign early when you can get the opportunity to have the free market determine you're true market value, versus the monopoly of intra-club valuation?

"That's so dumb."

"I already knew that, dude."

Did you? Or did you complain about Mo's lack of fervor in negotiations and Albert's lack of integrity for not signing a deal immediately? You don't buy a car on the first offer, even if you like the guy. You might not even buy it on the second. You buy it once the salesman sees you slowly rise up from your chair and turn your right shoulder across your body to walk towards the door, headed for the dealer one block down. You make a deal when you have your bargaining power maximized. For Albert, that won't be happening until approximately around mid-November. The Cardinals better have their checkbook ready.

"Thank you, Captain Obvious."

You're welcome. I won't be quitting my day job anytime soon.

The Best Time of the Year

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 01:52:00 +0000

Well, that was quite a hiatus. I don't understand why I can't hold down a blog for more than two weeks; there's no deadlines, no dress code, and you can drink beer while doing it. That said, it's probably good to note that I have an actual job post-graduation, so my excuses have a little bit more validity, shallow though they may be.

Where do you start in a season like this? We've had more ups and downs than Oprah Winfrey's waistline, yet we still find ourselves at the top of the NL Central without the likes of Adam Wainwright, David Freese, and now Albert Pujols. This is actually my favorite part of the year - the month before the trade deadline, the season of angry call-ins, out-of-control fan forums, and more proposals than a Spanish soap opera. It's the time of year where anyone and everyone can be a GM and flawlessly craft a mega-lineup of aging veterans that "need a change of scenery" and career AAAA'ers that would totally mash according to their "park-adjusted equivalents." Sniff, sniff... smell that in the air? It's trade proposal season.

Exactly who or what the Cardinals go after is still in that murky formation stage. The needs are pretty obvious across the board: bullpen, middle infield, corner infield, more bullpen. I don't really intend to get into any of the specifics now, other than it bears reassurance that the Cardinals don't need to trade Colby Rasmus for just anyone, don't need to make a huge offer for Jose Reyes, and don't need a name-brand closer to solidify the entire back-end. No, this year is unique in that there's quite a bit of talent on the disabled list due to return at different points in the season. It's like a fine evening spent at a Parisian restaurant: the players come in courses, each with talent slightly more refined than the one before. You start with a Bryan Augenstein, and you end with l'Albert Pujols.

Trade proposal season is upon us, yet we have the unique position of being at the top of the Central with a truckload of players due to return in the next month, a bevy of capables in the minors, and an offense that's done surprisingly well despite it's mélange-like appearance. Let's not get rash.

The Beauty and Curse of Baseball

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 15:43:00 +0000

Expectations. It's the part of life that can be the cruelest, when something fails to live up to them. From November to March, it's all we do. We watch the free agent market and form expectations based on past performance. We watch our team be assembled and disassembled and create expectations for how the team will gel, mold, cohere. We watch as Spring Training rolls around and use the opportunity to tweak our expectations one last time. We watch John Mozeliak fail to re-sign Albert Pujols and expect, expect, expect.

Coming from a chronic "expecter" in all facets of life, it's heaven. I can analyze and overanalyze every facet of the game to create my own conclusions. The illusion of control is in the hands of those that look hard enough.

The thing I love about baseball, though, is that there is no real control. I would argue that there's no other game in the world where expectations and chaos coincide so gracefully. Want to know how many individual wins Ryan Theriot will contribute over the course of this season? There's a stat for that. Want to know how many wins Ryan Theriot will contribute against lefthanded pitching? There's one for that too. Want to know how many wins Ryan Theriot will actually contribute? Unfortunately, you have to watch the game.

It's the age-old argument of "looks good on paper" - we create expectations and overanalyze to death to create the illusion of control. In fact, there is no control in baseball, just like life. As much as I want to analyze how life will be six months from now, I'll never know exactly until it happens. I can analyze and overanalyze David Freese's numbers against righthanders, but I'll never know exactly until it happens. It's the beauty and curse of baseball.

As we recover from a lackluster Opening Day hangover, let us remember in the back of our minds that expectations are just the end result of a sequence of calculations we've made in our brains about how things should go, not how they will go. Embrace the beautiful chaos.

Breakout Candidates for 2011

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 18:21:00 +0000

Happy February, everyone. This month will bring us the Super Bowl, an Albert Pujols extension, and the start of Spring Training. I'm thinking it's going to be a good one.

First of all, however, there's a blizzard getting ready to pound the Midwest, and I saw some interesting tweets on the subject yesterday. The last two great winter storms for St. Louis (1982 and 2006) coincided with World Series champs. So, while you're out there buying your bread and milk, salting your driveway, turning the thermostat to 90, and busting your &@% on the sidewalk, remember the good things to come about eight months from now. Champions. World Series... champions.

The Cardinals have seen a couple breakout players bust onto the scene in the past few years. Last year, it was Jaime Garcia, who ended up placing third in Rookie of the Year voting with a 2.8 Wins Above Replacement (WAR) and Jon Jay, who finished the season with a 1.1 WAR. The year before it was Mitch Boggs and Jason Motte, who both finished the year with decent numbers on the mound and are now thought to be steady contributors to the bullpen.

Who's going to be the breakout candidate, defined roughly as someone who either comes out of nowhere or greatly exceeds expectations, this year? My first candidate is Daniel Descalso, second baseman. I've been high on Descalso since I can remember, probably because he's been the only middle infielder in our system worth mentioning in the past five years. That is changing now, but Dan is still on the radar with the current depth on the active roster up the middle. I like him because he has the patience to take a walk, something that Ryan Theriot has struggled with the past few years. Dan's chance will come in Spring Training, but I suspect he'll make a contribution even if he doesn't make the initial squad.

My second candidate is right-handed reliever Eduardo Sanchez, another unlikely player to make the 25-man. However, Sanchez has filthy stuff, resulting in a 10.33 K/9 in AAA last year and an 86% strand rate. The biggest question mark, as with all high-K relievers, is his ability to mitigate walks allowed. He gave up 4.0 BB/9 last year in AAA, but it wasn't quite as high in AA and A+ ball. The Cardinals won't be able to contain him in AAA for long, and I predict that he'll find his way on the team someway, somehow.

The Value Continuum I: Creating a Value Indicator

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Sun, 30 Jan 2011 16:39:00 +0000

Ahhhh, a lazy Sunday. You know what would make this day better? A little baseball at 12 o'clock. Only a couple weeks to go.

The other day, I was talking about a convoluted "expected value" scale to estimate the future contract of Colby Rasmus. I have no idea if that has been done before (I'm sure it has in some form) or if it's anywhere close to being accurate (I'm sure it isn't). However, it's my blog, and the baseball topics are few and far between other than the giant Pujols in the room. I'm going to just post a running blog occasionally to work through what I'm thinking. We may get somewhere, we may get nowhere. Either way, it's your fault for reading. I apologize if similar work has already been done - simply let me know and I'll attribute it.

Picking up where we left off, I brought up a continuum of value, which can be envisioned as just a line with one arrow on the left and one on the right.

Not this:

This:

<---------------------------------------------------------------------------->

To the left is potential value (PV) and the right is realized value (RV). A player who falls on the farthest left side of the line would have no realized value, only potential. That is, he has no Major League playing experience. In contrast, a player all the way on the right has only a realized value and no potential for greater value in the future. By default, a player with Major League playing time will fall somewhere between PV and RV because he has some experience on which to base both a realized value and a potential value.

For example, Colby Rasmus, with both two years under his belt and a highly-regarded future potential, would fall somewhere between the two, probably closer to the PV side at this point. Trever Miller, however, has been in the league for a prolonged period of time and probably doesn't have much potential to improve his value, if at all. What you see is what you get, and thus he would fall drastically to the right on the scale. Shelby Miller is all the way to the left - no Major League experience, only potential which can be estimated from minor league numbers and subjective evaluation.

What's the use of a continuum? Well, it's a good way to visualize where a player is in his development. Whether he has tons of potential or little to none, he has some place on the line. These really are the two main factors that go into a contract negotiation. Of course, other things can affect PV or RV, such as a penchant for injuries or a newly reconstructed arm, but PV and RV are what drives a club to sign long-term or short-term, for high salary or low.

I think that's where I'll stop for now. The next questions to be addressed are how do we define value? PV? RV? Do we use one statistic or many? Also, what is the typical ascension and decline of a player on the Value Continuum? How does PV and RV translate into dollars? I'll be using a lot of already-researched information, so this stuff is hardly original. However, maybe it will lead us somewhere in the decision-making process of GM's and agents.

If you'll excuse me, I have to go finish up Day 13 of P90X. Bring it!

Why Won't the Cardinals Pay Albert?

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Sat, 29 Jan 2011 17:31:00 +0000

Look, it's understandable that negotiations take multiple rounds to get done. After all, what is a negotiation when one side has all the bargaining power? Right, the NFL. Anyways, this contract or no contract talk is getting to the brink of ridiculous, though, and I discussed a few posts back why Albert Pujols should expect to make $30 M a year. He's worth that much as a player and worth probably 15-25% more as a team icon. It's not arm-wringing by an agent - it's market value for one of the best players in the past 50 years.

Buster Olney at ESPN reported today on what could happen at the February 19th deadline Albert has set for negotiations to end:

The understanding within the St. Louis front office is that Pujols will not accept any trade going forward, according to sources. He has the right to veto any trade proposal, and would do so.

This means there are only two possible results in the negotiations in the Pujols talks: Either he signs a contract extension with the Cardinals, or he will become a free agent this coming fall.

We don't know what exactly Pujols and his agent have been bargaining for, but we can surmise from the collective minds of baseball writers that it will probably be in the $240-$275 M range. The Cardinals are wise to want to take time negotiating from their perspective, and if I were them, I'd make sure it's front-loaded deal that takes advantage of his value now.

Since A-Rod's contract is the standard comparison, let's look at how it's structured.

2008: $27 M
2009: $32 M (+18.5% Increase)
2010: $32 M (0%)
2011: $31 M (-3.13% Decrease)
2012: $29 M (-6.45%)
2013: $28 M (-3.45%)
2014: $25 M (-10.71%)
2015: $21 M (-16%)
2016: $20 M (-4.76%)
2017: $20 M (0%)
Total: $265 M + $10 M Signing Bonus; Average: $27.5 M

The total decrease in value from the peak in year 2 to 2017 is 37.5%.

I'm going to peg Albert at $30 M a year for 8 years. I'm also going to say he gets a salary increase to $25 M this year + signing bonus of $10 M.

2011: $25 M
2012: $35 M (+40.0%)
2013: $35 M (0%)
2014: $32 M (-8.57%)
2015: $30 M (-6.25%)
2016: $28 M (-6.67%)
2017: $24 M (-14.29%)
2018: $21 M (-12.5%)
Total: $230 M + $10 M Signing Bonus; Average: $30 M

The total decrease in value from peak to end is 40%.

That's just one uninformed person's take on what the next contract might look like. Even if Albert regresses to around 4-5 WAR by the end of the contract (think Prince Fielder or Adrian Gonzalez last year), he still will be making right around market value for his production.

Personally, I still have faith that a deal gets done. There's a lot of skepticism out there, but I attribute that to people wanting to be skeptical to increase their own Pujolsian chances. Typical.

Mr. DeWitt, please pay Albert.

Analyzing Colby's Next Contract

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 14:49:00 +0000

I don't have any funny leading quips today. That is, I don't have any attempting to be funny leading quips today. So, here - a Youtube video for all of you who received a Shake Weight for Christmas but are still a little unsure how to use it.

Much has been said about The Albert Pujols Saga, but what about Colby Rasmus? After his one-year, $0.4 M contract, Colby has three more years of arbitration eligibility before he hits the unrestricted market. I propose that the Cardinals make locking him in the next priority behind Albert, much in the same fashion that they did with Adam Wainwright and the Reds with Johnny Cueto.

The rationale for making a deal now as opposed to arbitration each year? First, Colby is an emerging star in the league and integral piece in the long-term future of this ballclub. After Albert, there will be Colby and his group of rag-tag veterans. Signing him to a long-term deal assures you keep that piece in place.

Second, the timing is right. Colby is coming off two solid but not quite spectacular years, and the balance between potential and realized value still heavily leans to the potential side. A deal now capitalizes on his realized value at this point versus his realized value three years from now. Those numbers could be radically different in either direction, and a premium would certainly have to be paid to compensate for the "potential" side of the negotiations. However, if Colby was smart, he would take the long-term deal now and play for a bigger one in the future. Kind of like Pujols and Wainwright.

Third, the deal could serve as a gesture of good faith in a relationship that has been a little rocky to say the least. A motivated Rasmus is a good Rasmus.

The downsides? There are plenty. It may be that Colby is further to the right on the potential-realized value spectrum than we think, and he's worth as much now as ever. In that case, it would make greater sense to move him along year-by-year until he's ready for a long-term contract.

Let me illustrate. Colby was worth $14.1 M last year according to Fangraphs and $10.3 M in 2009. On a regular returns model of player value, the value of a player usually increases with time until peaking a certain point, usually in the late 20's, early 30's. Right now, all systems indicate that the slope of that line - his increase/decrease value - is going to be pretty steep upwards over the next several years, meaning that this year we should expect to see his worth increase even more (Fangraphs predicts $18.1 M). This can be labeled as his future potential, and the $14.1 M he was worth last season as his realized value.

Signing Colby now bases his market on solely his realized value with a premium for future potential. Keeping that premium below his actual future potential will mean that DeWitt gets greater bang for his buck versus having to negotiate a long-term deal at a $20 M starting point plus a future potential premium.

However, the risk the Cardinals face is if the premium exceeds his actual realized value down the road. Maybe he gets hurt, has an awful slump, mentally unravels... who knows? The Cardinals would be overpaying at that point, perhaps by a lot.

Where GM's make their money is identifying future potential and negotiating a premium below that figure. My guess is that Colby's best years still lie ahead of him, and the Cardinals would be wise to capitalize on the time value of potential now... while they still can.

A Look at the Active Roster

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:44:00 +0000

That earthquake I felt the other day? Turns out it was a fraternity brother doing his best attempt to knock the house down. Could've fooled me. I wrote this a while back, and after a year living in the man-cave, I'm readier to leave this place than Jay Cutler in Chicago. Ouch, that one was rough.

I was wondering what the active roster is shaping up to be, now that the last roster spot has been given away. Granted, things could change, but this is my attempt at piecing together what the 25-man roster will look like come Opening Day.

Catchers (2):
Yadier Molina
Gerald Laird

Infielders (6):
Albert Pujols
Skip Schumaker
Ryan Theriot
David Freese
Nick Punto
Tyler Greene

Outfielders (5):
Lance Berkman
Matt Holliday
Colby Rasmus
Jon Jay
Allen Craig

Starters (5):
Chris Carpenter
Adam Wainwright
Jaime Garcia (L)
Jake Westbrook
Kyle Lohse

Relievers (7):
Ryan Franklin
Jason Motte
Brian Tallet (L)
Kyle McClellan
Trever Miller (L)
Mitch Boggs
Fernando Salas

I would put together a projected starting lineup, but we all know that is about as useful as a Cubs jersey in October. Those with outside chances to sneak a spot on the team: Eduardo Sanchez, Ian Snell, Miguel Batista, and Dan Descalso.

S-Jax and Ferragamo-gate

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Tue, 25 Jan 2011 00:23:00 +0000

I realize this is a Cardinals blog. However, we have an emergency on our hands. Rams RB Steven "Where Is He?" Jackson needs a new pair of shoes. Twitter reports:

@sj39: I've been waiting on my Ferragamo loafers to come in and they send wrong size!!!

A tragedy, for sure, but that's only the beginning...

@sj39: Then they tell me it's sold out... (I'm mad)

Uh oh. The big man is angry. You wouldn't like him when he's angry, unless he's being directed by an offensive coordinator that possesses the play-calling genius of Betty White playing Madden. The saga isn't over, however.

@sj39: But the thing is they sent one pair in my correct size .. Then the pair I really wanted wrong.

Shady! Who does that? A cocky, high-end Italian shoe designer, that's who. I call on you, Cardinal Nation, to stand up with me for our St. Louis brethren and take this Italian shoe designer down! Boycott luxury Italian fashion and write to Salvatore Ferragamo to tell him not to mess with the Midwest!

When S-Jax wants a pair of shoes, he @#$!*&! gets them. Who knows who could be the next victim of Italian shoe-shadiness? T.J. Oshie? Ryan Theriot? We can't let that happen. Not in this town. Will I ever be wearing my cashmere Ferragamo loafers to Busch Stadium again? Well, yes... I have to look good. But will I consider buying the special edition mink loafs due out this spring? Not a chance.

Cards Sign Nick Punto

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 15:24:00 +0000

I've been checking the local websites to see if we had an earthquake last night. I'm 80% sure that I woke up to my room shaking at some point during the night, but there's nothing out there so far. If it was one, I can officially say I've finally experienced an earthquake after failing to detect the big one three years ago. Earthquakes, tornadoes, snowstorms, CBA lockouts, Tony La Russa Roasts... the world actually is coming to an end.

Quick post this morning about the newly-signed 2B/SS/3B Nick Punto. Great reading here from Fangraphs writer Matt Klaasen on Punto before he signed with St. Louis. Punto was signed to a one-year, $750,000 roster spot, and Klaasen suspects that Punto will be a 1.5 WAR player, worth between $4-5 million over a year. An excerpt:

While never getting a full season of playing time, the last three seasons he has been 2.5 (377 PA), 1.3 (440 PA), and 1.4 WAR (288 PA), respectively. UZR is impressed with his infield defense at 3B, 2B, and SS. So is DRS, and (to a lesser extent) TotalZone. He’s probably an above-average fielder at second and third (where his range makes up for a weak arm), and although he’s not as good at shortstop, he’s probably at least average-ish. He’s likely close to 1.5 WAR player over a full season.

Punto's projected '11 statistics at BBTF are what you expect: 314 AB, .239/.324/.306, 71 OPS+. He's a defensive standout, capable of playing 2B, SS, and 3B without Aaron Miles' glove of stone. From the surface, the deal looks like a winner - a utility guy on the cheap who should be worth about a win or more. However, the opportunity costs can't be ignored. Tyler Greene, Dan Descalso, and even Donovan Solano are worth having a discussion about whether the long-term future of the team would be better served without Punto. Hopefully, the 25th spot will be open for competition in ST; Punto's relatively small contract would indicate that might be the case. This is TLR we're talking about, however. Like Rex Ryan at a Golden Corral, I'm not sure it's a fair fight.

Albert's Next Contract

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:44:00 +0000

If you're like me, right about now you're staring out the window at the falling snow, constantly refreshing the university website to see if today has been called off. No dice. Unfortunately, college students are expected to traverse the ice and snow for a 50 minute class, while high schoolers taking the bus get to go sledding. It's so... egalitarian.

The Albert Pujols saga continues. Kind of like the NFL lockout, nobody has any f***** clue what's going to happen in the next three months. It's a little discouraging to hear so many people bypass this season completely to talk about where he might go. Cubs? Yankees? Giants? I'm just going to throw it out there that we can't rule out Japan.

No, Albert is staying here. DeWitt and Mozeliak are too smart to let such a valuable business asset leave with little compensation. Wait... did I just suggest he could be a trade target? At this point, you can't really exclude the possibility. The greater bet is on a massive new deal at the start of Spring Training. He's 31-years-old (Sunday was his birthday), and a new 7-year deal would take him pretty much to the point of retirement, plus or minus 2 years.

Albert has been consistently worth $30+ million in terms of player value, according to FanGraphs. In fact, last year ($29.3 million) was the first season since 2005 ($26.8 million) that he didn't eclipse the $30 million mark, and he's been worth an average of $35 million over the past 5 seasons. That's not including the massive marketing potential he has for the team, which could, without a doubt, be estimated in the millions of dollars.

Everyone has been using the newest A-Rod deal to benchmark Albert's next contract, and I don't know if Albert is worth drastically more than A-Rod, who has a front-loaded deal that averages $27.5 million over 10 years. If I'm Mozeliak, I use the same strategy: a seven-year deal, front-loaded at an average salary of $30 million. That's puts him in the $210 million range, which is the number that's been thrown around lately. A word to Mo and DeWitt: it's worth it. It's #$&%*@! worth it.

My Dog Sami

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 03:18:00 +0000

On January 8th, 2011, my dog, Sami, passed away. She was 12 and a half years old; a Golden Retriever mix but looked like a Lab. Her favorite thing was be petted. She hardly ever barked and loved to play ball when she was younger. Her only real trick was to shake your hand, and even that got hard for her to do over the past year. She was a link between families and unceasingly loyal. In the last few months of her life, she loved to hop up on the red chairs in the living room and hang out.

As I think about her, it seems kind of silly on the surface to attribute a greater purpose to a dog, but I think she's deserving of it. She was an example of selfless love, even if she was just acting on instinct with her "pack". She was always there to remind you that you weren't alone, and she would drop anything to follow you, even if she was already snuggled up in her chair. Her purpose was to be an example of love and loyalty for us. After all, what greater source to learn about the most basic principles of life than from nature herself? We learned in school about the Jesuit mindset of finding God in all things. In Sami's case, that was easy.

I hope this is a fitting memorial for such a great dog. I painted this watercolor of her back in 2007, in her classic pose.

Scouring the Free Agent Wire

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 14:41:00 +0000

Most people don't think of this immediately when they think of college in all its Jesse Eisenberg glory, but the biggest thing that affects you here is hygiene. It's like living a reenactment of the Ninja Turtles' sewer pad, minus the rats (much love, Splinter). I spent the first day back here putting my room together, the second day detoxing it, and now the third day wallowing in fear that some teenage virus is going to sneak under my door despite all my precautions.

That's another point. When you're in your senior year at school, you don't get worshipped like the guys in Old School with every waking step you take. No, instead you feel like you're at that age where the playground suddenly became uncool. No, I don't want to jump off the roof into a swimming pool full of jello. It'll throw out my back.

Most everyone has already heard about the signings of Ian Snell, Miguel Batista, and Ramon Vazquez, so I won't expound on them any further than to say there's probably a chance one of them will made a significant contribution to the team. By significant, I really mean any contribution to the team. My money's on Vazquez. There's always a place for weak-hitting middle infielders on TLR's squad.

The topic of this post was to find a free agent that could find his way onto the team, so I'll spare any further grim details of The Life. My pick is Jeremy Bonderman, once a rising star with the Tigers and now looking for a 5th man rotation spot. Currently, the Cards have 5 spots filled, but the notorious long-relief man also has a perpetual spot on TLR's teams. I could see Bondo in that role, and, accordingly, MLBTR has noted that the Cards have shown "minor interest" in him. Jeremy isn't a groundball-heavy pitcher, so it would be a stretch to take a shot on him to compete with Kyle Lohse for a rotation spot. However, stranger things have happened, and without knowing what type of contract he's after, I'll throw him in the running for "Lackluster But Promising Late Winter Pickup."

As for me, I have some more disinfecting to do.

Of Lance and Berkman

noreply@blogger.com (Bryan) — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 16:37:00 +0000

Arguably the biggest Cardinals off-season acquisition this winter was Brian Tallet. The 33-year-old lefthanded reliever is "ready to make an impact" and "looking forward to picking up the saga of Steve Kline and Jeff Tabaka." Although many disputed his sign- wait, got my cue card mixed up. Let me start again.

Arguably the most impactful winter acquisition for St. Louis came in the form of Ryan Theriot. The 31-year-old 2B/SS was an unlikely pick-up, as the Pirates, Royals, Orioles, and even Mariners were said to be in hot pursuit. One unnamed GM described his acquisition by the Cardinals as a "potential gamechanger in the N-" hold up, messed up again. Reverse, reverse!

Arguably the hottest back-up catcher on the market was Einar Diaz... I mean Gerald Laird... I mean, wait.

The Cardinals did sign someone this winter, right?

*whisper*

Lance Berkman, everybody! Good morning, St. Lou-is!

Let's cut right to it. Lance Berkman was signed to a 1-year, $8 million contract and is projected to play left field, moving Matt Holliday to right. My gut reaction to this deal was initial happiness our offense, then despair for our defense, then happiness for our clubhouse, then despair for- really, this deal looks like a net neutral to me. But, it's a smart move in a free agent market that was overvalued and undertalented, a kind of stopgap for a year without losing valuable club resources. Something tells me that if this deal doesn't work out by June, the Cards will be in wheeling mode again. There's still money for that... curse you Ballpark Village!

Speaking of money, the fan projections at Fangraphs have Berkman valued at $9.4 million in value next year, equivalent to a line of 19 HR, 84 RBIs, and a .835 OPS. Offensively, they expect him to be worth 15.2 Runs Above Average. That number looks about right in the NL, hitting before/after Albert Pujols. I'd say the range is between 10 - 25, depending on how much he has left in the tank. Defensively, he's a -6.0. That's what I'm worried about - losing value through subpar defense. After all, he's a first baseman playing the field.

Interesting comments by Rob Neyer on his defense:

He hasn't played any outfield at all since 2007, and hasn't been in LF since 2006...Legitimate concerns, all. There's no reason to think Berkman will be average in left field, and adequate might be a stretch.

It's probably fair to say we can expect the defensive equivalent to Chris Duncan out there, but probably more sure-handed and less whimsically amusing.

As for the total Lance Berkman Puma package, I'm generally optimistic. It's a low-risk, medium-return acquisition. Kind of like a T-bill for our player portfolio. Dear God, this has been a slow off-season.