Comments on: Second Guessing St. Louis

By: Sky

Sky — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 00:48:11 +0000

Backing up Matthew’s point about the Cardinals’ pitching staff, St. Louis has one of the better fielding teams in the league, bringing down their ERA a lot. And then consider than the offense is damn good with few holes, the best hitter in baseball, and three other hitters near the top of their position: Ludwick, Ankiel, and Glaus. If the fielding is really good and the hitting is really good and you only have an outside shot at the Wild Card, there’s gotta be a weakness (ahem, pitching).

By: Matthew Carruth

Matthew Carruth — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 19:21:53 +0000

That’s exactly my point Steve. ERA doesn’t measure what starters have done. It combines about 40% from starters, 50% from defense, 10% from a subjective scorekeeper and makes no adjustments for the pitcher’s home park. That’s bad. If you want to measure what a pitcher has actually done (and only the pitcher) you have to use a different measure.

For a more expansive explanation, you can read Dave Cameron’s article on the matter: http://ussmariner.com/2006/08/29/evaluating-pitcher-talent/

The measurement that I subscribe to is tRA, which is described here: http://www.statcorner.com/tRAabout.html and which shows the Cardinals rotation to be the 6th worst in baseball.

By: Big Steve

Big Steve — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:54:13 +0000

We are talking about what the starters have done, not what they theoretically should have done based on a formula. I think these formulas are valuable in predicting future performance, but the problem in that there is no holy grail fip? Qera? ERA? Dip? Pitching Vorp?…etc. These are all calculated differently using similar principals, but all have flaws. Fact is that the Cardinals starters ranked 4th in runs allowed this season and were middle of the pack in OPS against (slightly better than league average). In terms of pitching Vorp they rank 5th in the league INCLUDING the bullpen which has been pretty terrible by any measure, especially in high leverage situations. Now do you still think the cardinals starters have been HORRIBLE?

By: Matthew Carruth

Matthew Carruth — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:34:08 +0000

ERA is a misleading measurement for pitcher’s effectiveness. Look at their strikeout, walk, homerun and line drive rates. The Cardinals rotation is well below league average.

By: Big Steve

Big Steve — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:31:29 +0000

The cardinals ERA for Starters is 4.04, league average is 4.42. Horrible? Really? How about backing up what you say instead of make ridiculous stand alone statements.

By: Matthew Carruth

Matthew Carruth — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:12:54 +0000

While the bullpen has been a problem, the rotation for the Cardinals has been horrible.

By: drive2fast19

drive2fast19 — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:08:08 +0000

The problem with this analysis is that the Cardinals did not act (or fail to act) in a vacuum.

1) There were no other available pitchers who would have had a similar positive impact on the Cardinals.

2) The rotation has not been the problem; the bullpen has blown 29 saves this season, including 3 of 4 in STL right after the Sabathia trade you mentioned. The improvement was needed in relief.

3) The Cardinal organization has gone through a long stretch having no real minor league system to speak of. Now it is univerally agreed that they are on the cusp of producing some home-grown ML-ready talent. To trade that away for a few months of a rental starter who would then sign elsewhere would put them right back at the bottom of the hill they just climbed.

I don’t disagree with your main point; the numbers indicate that the Cardinals needed to make a move to keep up with the Cubs and Brewers THIS YEAR. However, for the good of the organization, I, for one, am glad they didn’t.