Hmmm. Which is more impressive? The return of Ankiel to the majors, or the return of Hamilton to baseball after a 3 year hiatus? Hard to say.

I like baseball

Rick Ankiel may seriously be the rejuvination the Cardinals need. We may not get there this year, but next year, we will end up deep in the playoffs.

Can we add Zack Greinke to that list?

Pfffft...........yeah okay. One 28 year old outfielder who has had two good games is the only reason you guys aren't going to repeat as champs this year.....lol. Ankiel might end up being pretty good.......but you guys need a LOT of pitching help next year...and you won't be getting it from Carpenter......Looper sucks, Wells sucks.....who else is starting for you???? Wainwright....Reyes......potential there....but your pitching is a LONG way from being a serious playoff threat......winning the NL Central isn't out of the question next year due to how horrible every team in that division is......no real good team at all.........but even that is a stretch.


4.74 team ERA this year...near last in all of baseball.........maybe better than 3-4 teams.........but oh, those numbers are "skewed" because you had some bad pitchers who simply gave up a whole lot of runs in short periods of time...lolz. I'm sure they'll try and acquire arms in the offseason...but you guys need a LOT of arms..and the offense isn't exactly a monster either....

Lol....no.

Ankiel is by far the great story......Hamilton was away because he was a drug addict........fine, he's back and clean now, great......but he did that to himself. Greinke had some anxiety problems...fine, he's back and healthy....but neither of those compare to Ankiel....no one in the world would've blamed him if he had quit and gone on to live a "normal" life..but he didn't, he worked his a$$ off and endured setback after setback...and now is back in MLB.

That being said...let's not try and pretend that Ankiel is some super prospect now who is gonna be an offensive force for a long time...we'll see...........but he is already 28, right?? He's got a LOT to prove and not THAT long to do it......I'm rooting for him, but let's keep the expectations realistic for now.

I agree with you there, he already has 6 K's.

he does have issues w/ strikeouts, but his RBI rate has been pretty good since he's become a position player. He really doesn't have as many ABs as the Cards would like in the minors, but his production, coupled w/ the struggles of others kinda forced his callup.

He's not a savior, but he provides the power that's been sorely lacking on this team. As for pitching...Wells has SUCKED this year, but he's finally starting to perform like they expected him too. Reyes has been up and down, but kinda seems like he's got it figured out a bit this time. Mulder should be back for next year...the ownership needs to pony up some cash and get 1 more quality starter at least for next year.

I don't doubt that their pitching might improve........but with a rotation of Mulder, Reyes, Wells..Looper..and Wainwright.......no chance that's a playoff contender. I know that probably won't be what they have next year...but for now that seems to be what they are looking at........a #2 starter and some #4 and 5's ..........if that.

Koop is raining down some hate on the cross state rivals. I'm loving it. Do the Twins next. Please oh please.

It comes the other way all the time....trust me.

Well, a healthy Mulder (the 2005 version at least - 16-8, 3.64 ERA), is probably a #2/3 starter. We'll have a better idea of that probably by the end of the year...he's supposed to make a rehab start here soon, they're hoping to have him up by September.

Wainwright to me is a #2/3 based on how he's pitched the last 10-12 starts (he struggled a bit early in the year as he was getting back into the mode of starting).

Wells has been good lately, but he'll have to continue pitching extremely well down the stretch to be on this team next year (need someone else here).

Reyes has been better since his last call up, but I would consider him a 4/5 at best probably.

Looper is a #5 at best in any legitimate conversation (he started off great, but now he's leveling out). Ideally, I'd say he's a bullpen guy who can spot start if needed.


Maroth/Pineiro have possibilities if Maroth fixes himself or Pineiro continues pitching well. That type of rotation is BETTER than what we've had this year...and we're in it now (even though our offense has sucked for half the year). I don't really see how you could say that's not a playoff contender, since the crap we've thrown out there this year has us about 5 games out in August. This division=crappy. Plus, Cubs might not have Zambrano next year, which basically could cripple their chances for next year.

Yeah, but this is our worst year this decade...and we're one good winning streak from being in first. The Royals finish near last place every year. Enjoy.

Sorry for the hijack. Perhaps this quote from Willie Randolph will shut the door on the earlier discussion:

"The bottom line is the entire National League stinks. We're the best of the whole stinking lot. I'll define ourselves as being grateful not to be in the American League."

that's a subjective opinion though

Who's to say that the NL isn't an evenly matched league that beats up on each other?

If you don't believe that the AL is significantly better, I have to question your intelligence.

I think interleague play shows that the AL is far superior than NL.

Uhhhhhh.....credibility flying out the window???

Come on dude........you know..you KNOW that the AL is just flat out superior to the NL this year..and in the recent past....come on man. Put the Royals in the NL Central right now and we're AT LEAST right there with the Cardinals, probably better with the way we've been playing lately (winning record over the past three months.....that's fairly decent I'd say). Put the Cardinals, Cubs, or Brewers in the AL Central and they are about where the ChiSox are right now..if that.

Get your shots in now while you still can...........things are turning around.......don't let yourself be one of the shocked ones when we're an above .500 team next year....we are absolutely loaded with good young talent (both offense and pitching) and we are going to keep on getting better and better.........young arms pitching well (did I mention we have a much better ERA than STL...and better than Detroit.....we are basically a middle of the pack team pitching wise...18th of 30....and will keep getting better and better and better as we have a lot more potential to be realized.....) and good young bats that will continue to develop (Gordon, Butler, Buck, Teahen, Gathright, DeJesus, German...to name a few...)...and with 20+ million dollars coming off the books for next year and an expanding payroll and our new GM from the Atlanta system who is turning things around..........you'd better get as many jokes in as you can....they will sound pretty silly here before you know it. We've been playing winning baseball for the past three months now while playing in the WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY tougher league..........oh, but you see the words "Kansas City" and automatically think we are just the worst team ever...blah, blah, blah. Too bad you guys can't pay attention to anything going on outside out of St. Louis...oh, but you guys are the "best fans in baseball." LOL.......good luck with that Kip Wells..yeah, he'll surely turn it around and be great next year...yeah, Mulder will come back better than ever..yeah, that's it. Yeah, Maroth will just "fix it" and be real good...yeah, that's it. Yeah, Pinero will all of a sudden be a real good pitcher............that's why teams keep on getting rid of him...lol. Keep the blind faith alive!! Don't worry, if you were in the AL, you'd be better than the Devil Rays..and the Rangers...and.....and...well......that's probably about it.

Actually, according to the KC Star...which does a decent job of covering KC baseball...we will have 35 million dollars in free payroll for next year...and even more for the following 2-3 years..............with plans to spend it all......oh, but I forgot, we are KC, so........I guess we'll probably end up lowering payroll, yeah, that's it.



Lots of young, good pitching, lots of young, good hitting..and lots of payroll to play with to add FAs next year....oh, but yeah, we suck, what a horrible spot our organization is in.

Clearly you just want to argue and have a complex about STL. Newsflash, we really don't care about the Royals. If you weren't on here whining about how the poor Royals have to be in the big bad AL or else you'd be right in it, I wouldn't even think about them. You know why, because they're a last place team...every year basically (yes, I remember the one year they started off good and finished a little above .500 or whatever it was).

I would argue about how you didn't even come close to hitting my points correctly about pitching, but what's the point. I'll make the comeback: "If the Cards were in the AL, they'd be a last place team too!"

Notice the title of this thread: "Official St. Louis Cardinals Thread". Please take your Royals crap over to that 40 something page thread of nonsense you have in this forum plz. Kthxbye.

Lol...I'm not whining about the Royals being in the AL..I like it....just stating the facts...the AL is way way way tougher than the NL.

Also, I've been comparing the Royals and Cardinals in a Cardinals thread. The cardinals are involved in the discussion, so I think this is a good place for it.

Also, KC probably won't even be in last place this year....they are only two behind Chicago..and will most likely pass them.......we should already be ahead of them...we have scored more runs this year and given up fewer runs this year.......either we've gotten unlucky somewhere or they've been a pretty lucky team...either way, we're climbing out of the cellar and will probably be a 3rd place team at worst next year.

Hahaha...whatever, man.

Oh come on. I agree you'll be better than the White Sox. But are you gonna be better than Cleveland? Unlikely. Are you going to be better than Detroit. Probably not. Are you going to be better than Minnesota? Well you see they actually do have good young pitching. So which of these three teams are you going to pass?

double postaments

I never said it wasn't. I was stating that that his opinion is subjective, the same way that statement that I just made was. I'm just trying to interject some debate here instead of stating flat out that the AL is better. Do I believe the AL is a better league?...absolutely. Do I think it is significantly better?...no I don't. The World Series is the telling point of this. Since 2000 the AL has won 4 and the NL has won 3, and in the last 6 years it’s been an even 3-3 split. Now that’s a long way from being “significantly better.”
While the AL may better, the NL is more competitive. This year 56% of the teams in the NL have winning records while only 50% of the AL does. Also, there are only 6 AL teams that have legitimate shot at the playoffs right now, while a whopping 9 NL teams have a chance at the post season. You know at the beginning of the season who most likely contend for playoff spots in the AL every year, it’s not that way in the NL. In the AL you can pencil in the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, Twins, & White Sox, and can pretty much ink in the Yankees and Red Sox. In the NL you can pencil in the Mets and Braves…that’s it. There is such a competitive balance in the NL that it makes it impossible to foretell who will make it and who won’t.
The AL is the better hitting league, and the NL is the better pitching league (check baseball prospectus if you don’t believe me)…again a long way from being “far superior.”
Again I’m trying to stir up a little debate here. If the AL is “significantly better” then back it up…start a discussion…just don’t state something then leave it as is. I want to see why you think this, and saying that “it just is” or “everyone knows it to be true” or something along those lines doesn’t cut it.


Again back it up, prove it to me. I’m not trying to stir up shit here, I just want you open up a little and tell me why.

spanking the Brewers tonight...important week for the Cards. Could be very close to first w/ a 6-1 week

Couple of problems with this:

1.) The AL being significantly better than the NL is a recent thing, really coming into its own last year. The AL may have had an edge before, but the disparity grew during last season. Going back to 2000, is answering a different question than the one asked.

2.) Using the World Series is a bad idea for two reasons: Small sample size of games and only a couple of teams are actually competing. It would be just as valid to use All-Star games to determine league strength. During the 2000-now time frame, the AL is 7-0-1 (and 10-0-1 since 1998), which would suggest crushing dominance to me.

3.) Since we're considering leagues as a whole it makes way more sense to look at interleague play where all the teams participate.

2006: AL 154-98 .611
2007: AL 137-115 .544

Tot: AL 291-213 .575

A team with a .575 winning percentage would have the third best record in baseball. A team with a .425 winning percentage would be fourth worst. I think this is fairly strong evidence for a sizable gulf between the leagues.

While we're here, Kansas City is 20-16 (.556) in interleague play the last two years, and 94-150 (.385) otherwise.

The All Star Game can never be used to determine who's better between the two leagues until the leagues go back to an even amount of teams. The National League has an inherent disadvantage in that the two extra teams require two players to be selected that probably wouldn't be selected otherwise due to the "all teams represented" rule. Interleague Play shouldn't be used either. It's mainly setup for the "natural rivalries", most of which are very one sided. For every good Yankees/Mets series you are going to have a very bad Marlins/Devil Rays, Giants/Athletics, Astros/Rangers, or Indians/Reds series. As for the World Series I consider it a good barometer in that it's the best team from each league playing a best of 7 series (which is more than adequate to determine who's better unlike the 5 game counterpart).

Based on those numbers, the NL is closer to the AL this year than last year. If we're comparing the leagues this year, why are you even using 2006 numbers? The AL is somewhat better than the NL, but for every Boston, you have a Texas Rangers or similar bad team. Also, when will the AL fix the dumbest rule ever (I shouldn't have to mention it, but I'm referring to the DH).

I agree that the using the All-Star game won't tell us everything about which league is better (though I don't think it's because of who is filling the bottoms of the rosters). A continued streak of excellence would suggest that league is better (like the NL in the 60's), but that doesn't prove anything.

The natural rivalries are a pain. Playing the Braves year in and year out was no fun for a long time. However, I don't see how this would impact the records. If the good teams are beating up on the weak teams in another league, that just leaves the converse to occur. I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

I don't think 7 games is enough to determine which team is better in the postseason. Injuries/late season call-ups (of the KRod variety)/teams just running hot and cold can play a huge part. Certainly you wouldn't consider a poker player who wins 4 of 7 heads up matches the certainly superior player? Also, I don't believe this says anything about a league in total (especially when you have interleague to draw on). You're still only dealing with two teams. You could replace the National League save for the Mets with AA teams and the Mets would go to the World Series, but it says nothing about the league they came from.

There's reason behind starting with 2006. It was the date used in the link analyzing win shares that I posted earlier. That article, while somewhat flawed makes an important point. Regardless of your feelings on win shares, a substantial amount of talent migrated from the National League to the American League in the 2005-2006 offseason. Following that, the American League flat out dominated. It is very improbable that the American League went 60 games over 500 over 250 games if they aren't significantly better. This dominance must color our perception of the current state of the leagues for a few reasons:

1.) No corresponding migration of talent occurred between the leagues last year that would shift the balance dramatically back towards the NL

2.) Therefore, the changes in league quality comes from rookies, and veterans improving and declining. There's no reason to believe that the veterans in one league maintained/improved significantly versus the other. As for the rookies, I think it would be a huge story if 60 wins of National League young players showed up at once.

3.) When evaluating players, you don't just look at one year of performance. In order to get a full picture of a player, you need to look at a couple recent years to try to filter out the noise of random variation. People have up years and down years. So do teams and so do leagues. So you compile as much information as you can. You weight the recent more heavily and try to put together the most complete picture possible.

Right now, I'd say the AL is somewhere in between the .611 of 2006 and .544 of this year...probably closer to the .544. If we call it .560 that translates to a 90-72 record. That is a 2006 White Sox to the 2006 NL's Orioles....Dodgers to Nationals.

hijacking the thread back....SWEEP!!!

The kids are playing with some passion now! We're going to have a stacked young outfield here in a couple years w/ Duncan/Ankiel/Rasmus(a baseball america top 30 prospect before the season, even though he's not thought to be ready until 09). Wainwright threw 7 another shutout today, after a complete game loss last time out where he only gave up a 2R HR in the 9th. He's looking more and more like a solid #2 starter everyday really.

I'm just finally glad to see him get back into form after that awful streak he had.

Hooray for rain and skipping Zambrano

Amen...and finally got a win today against the Cubs to stay within striking distance. Now if we could only figure out a way to keep Tony from playing Juan Encarnacion....

Tonya Hardingaments?

Your ideas are intriguing to me, I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter

Koop's posts.....are choppier.....than the Ginsu Guys.....trapped in a barrell.....of whole tomatoes. I don't know....if that made any sense.....but you know what I mean.

We won tonight..Another clutch hit by Rolen! Hopefully the Cubbies lose and we will be back to 3 out. Go Cards!!

This thing is reaching a boiling point. They cant slip up now.

2nd place now. Wouldn't have thought it possible a couple weeks ago.

no kidding, as long as they don't falter at the end of the season like they did last year they will be sitting pretty

they can't afford to falter this year

Ankiel=awesome....true story.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3000675

that was horrible to see.

a lot of people want him gone, but not like this

Agreed. Cards keep on rolling!

Tony comparing it to Hancock's death is a bit nutty

I think it had more to do with the tragic circumstances, not the death itself. Also, I heard on the radio today that the doctor treating Encarnacion said it was the worst trauma he has ever seen on a baseball player. I think Encarnacion should be happy if he gets his vision back in the eye since it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that his career is over.

Steve Yzerman came back from a similar injury in '05. JS,

I know, but baseball and hockey are completely different animals. You can play hockey and play it well with one working eye. However in baseball you need both eyes in order to see the ball correctly due to the head angle when at bat. Kirby Puckett's career ended because glaucoma caused one of his eyes to not function properly...his other eye worked perfectly fine. Also due to the severity of the damage to Encarnacion's optical nerve, he will be lucky to see out of that eye again.