They no longer announce it. They no longer advertise it, either.
People are shouting Russell Westbrook at me. I thought the season was long over.
He needs a break. As much or more than anyone else who comes up so often on this chat.
I'm more Christopher Robin, really. Maybe Owl. If we're doing this Hundred Acre Wood thing.
1. Easier said than done, really. The one thing hitters believe they can control is making hard, solid contact. It's what Matt Holliday referred to as "producer, not director." They believe -- rightly -- that the harder and more solid you hit the ball that in the long run it will find hits, and it will find damage. Feathering or steering hits is a) harder than it sounds and b) not a strategy to deploy in the long run unless you're elite at it. Ichiro-level elite. If anybody could do that and do it routinely they would. Now, bunts to keep a team honest, waiting later on a pitch to go the other way to keep a team honest, these are all things hitters can mix in to dd to the approach that they just should thunder when the situation allows for thundering.
2. I wish I were more versed in Jimmy Stewart's work/personality to answer this question. That's a hole in my game, and not one I expected to be revealed in a baseball chat.
Slouching Toward Fargo. That's independent ball.
A False Spring, one of the best baseball books from any level.
Those are good places to start.
They are doing more developing at the major-league level than ever before. There are two reasons for this. One, the organization feels that it now has a manager open to doing that. Two, the economics of the game has shifted to a point where teams are more willing to bring younger players up sooner, get into their peak years sooner, and not layer Class AAAA players ahead of them. Out the window have gone those old standards of minor-league plate appearances and minor-league innings that some teams used to adhere too -- even if it meant a player didn't debut until 25 or so. So better talent might be coming to the majors earlier, stronger, but the tradeoff is they're arriving rougher, less fine-tuned, less polished. That's had to happen in the majors -- and the Cardinals are hardly the only team experiencing this.
That Carpenter will be fine there. Improved. That's his best position.
You mean, before this one?
They're one of the leaders to sign him at this point.
Not the expense of damage, when it's damage that gets you paid.
And into the pool. Made for great video from the underwater cam.
This is already happening. And there's even a push to use a stat better than one that implies a 4.50 ERA. Quality starts are an excellent start -- far better to start there than wins, which only require five innings. Now, I'd advocate adding one simple inning to the QS definition. Make that a QS+, and that's where the best of the best pitchers live.
He isn't trying to do that, so I doubt that's the issue.
Neither has expressed an interest in being a part of the coaching staff. Both have expressed, directly, the exact opposite of that. Ozzie Smith is now a member of the board that runs the National Baseball Hall of Fame, and he has said that the daily commitment of being a coach is unappealing at this point in his life. He'd miss the golf, he once joked. Willie McGee is already an employee in the front office and he's made it clear that he wants to instruct and enjoys the time with the minors.
That is a name they would explore, absolutely. They're not going to close off any conversation or search when it comes a possible move for a third baseman, or a move that would lead to a bat and involves third base.
Yep. I think the question was about spotting them and giving them playing time from the get-go.
They're pitching would have been exceptionally good to make that happen.
Dave, you put in a lot of thought and copy into this comment, so I wanted to be sure it was shared with the masses. I would point out that it seems unlikely that Craig and Taveras could have coexisted in the same lineup, and thus the Cardinals moved Craig to get Taveras the playing time. I also don't see the Shelby Miller trade like you do, or whether the Cardinals could just have had their pick of players like that. They were as surprised as THE ENTIRETY OF BASEBALL that Atlanta got a shortstop of the future/now in exchange for Miller. That deal wasn't leaping off the page, and the Cardinals, as you will remember, in need of a RF because of tragedy. They had some urgency. This is a trap, after all. We can pull a lot of what-if threads to imagine the lineup as a best-case scenario. Maybe Heyward re-signs with the Cardinals and thus is never there to give the big pep talk, and Cleveland is World Series champs and the Cubs are just another club looking for a title for the 109th year in a row and Fowler is still there in center ...
One way to use all that talent you see coming is to trade it for talent that helps now. That's on the table.
What your question strikes at that is something the Cardinals have to consider: Is getting by on 3.4 million fans and banking on 90 wins the best model for today's game? Or are a few down cycles of selling going to set them up for a better, longer, stronger, and more successful run than just getting into the postseason? Or just being on the fringe of it.
Is always a contender never a champion a busy model St. Louis can stomach?