MrCrowesGarden wrote:I’m not even specifically talking bullpen. I’m talking we knew this was a flawed roster and apparently had at least $14 million extra to spend on it and only did so on the eve of the season because the manager didn’t like what was in his bullpen. There’s all kinds of red flags about front office negligence there.
I said repeatedly my preference would’ve been to go in more on the lineup to take away some of that volatility. Maybe if they had pulled off the Machado trade Olney reported a few weeks ago we’d have that steadying force.
We may have that steadying force, but we might also be without Flaherty and others.
You've got a whole list of people on this roster who are underperforming. THAT is on the manager, in my opinion.
MrCrowesGarden wrote:I’m not even specifically talking bullpen. I’m talking we knew this was a flawed roster and apparently had at least $14 million extra to spend on it and only did so on the eve of the season because the manager didn’t like what was in his bullpen. There’s all kinds of red flags about front office negligence there.
I said repeatedly my preference would’ve been to go in more on the lineup to take away some of that volatility. Maybe if they had pulled off the Machado trade Olney reported a few weeks ago we’d have that steadying force.
We may have that steadying force, but we might also be without Flaherty and others.
You've got a whole list of people on this roster who are underperforming. THAT is on the manager, in my opinion.
Maybe. But I’m not a believer that Flaherty will be special, so be it. There’s no rings for winning 86 and having a cost efficient roster.
MrCrowesGarden wrote:They’ve been better than most of what we’re trotting out though, and the value of a marginal win is (or was) huge for the Cardinals.
Well, Norris, Hicks and Brebbia haven't been that bad. History tells us that Cecil, Gregerson, Leone and Lyons should have bee MUCH better than they've been (obviously hindsight is 20/20, with regard to how it's gone this season). Most people here had been pretty high on Gomber, until this season. We certainly expected Holland to help, and he hasn't.
It's been a perfect storm of horrible. I don't think anybody could have predicted it. After the Holland signing, I don't recall anyone here saying "our bullpen is still awful".
In his 3rd year of ineffectiveness, nobody should count on Cecil for ANYTHING. He was teetering in his last year with the Jays, and hasn't been who we've needed for a over a year. Shame about Leone(= Walden. You watch..), he could've "helped" us define roles. But he wasn't the answer, just a piece. I'm sure we can all agree that virtually nobody was sure what Hicks would give us. So to say they were planning on him being in the pen is a stretch. He pitched his way onto the roster via openings created by injured vets. Lyons? Yeah, real disappointment considering how good he looked last year. And Norris was here as support for Luke if he couldn't go multiple days in a row. But outside of VERY FEW of us(ICE), nobody expected him to excel at the backend.
The FO had the same 'head-scratcher' of a plan going into the 2nd week of spring training, that Mike has every night of the summer.. Perfect match.
MrCrowesGarden wrote:I’m not even specifically talking bullpen. I’m talking we knew this was a flawed roster and apparently had at least $14 million extra to spend on it and only did so on the eve of the season because the manager didn’t like what was in his bullpen. There’s all kinds of red flags about front office negligence there.
I said repeatedly my preference would’ve been to go in more on the lineup to take away some of that volatility. Maybe if they had pulled off the Machado trade Olney reported a few weeks ago we’d have that steadying force.
We may have that steadying force, but we might also be without Flaherty and others.
You've got a whole list of people on this roster who are underperforming. THAT is on the manager, in my opinion.
Maybe. But I’m not a believer that Flaherty will be special, so be it. There’s no rings for winning 86 and having a cost efficient roster.
OHOH the O’s have Machado and look how well they’re doing.
MrCrowesGarden wrote:I’m not even specifically talking bullpen. I’m talking we knew this was a flawed roster and apparently had at least $14 million extra to spend on it and only did so on the eve of the season because the manager didn’t like what was in his bullpen. There’s all kinds of red flags about front office negligence there.
I said repeatedly my preference would’ve been to go in more on the lineup to take away some of that volatility. Maybe if they had pulled off the Machado trade Olney reported a few weeks ago we’d have that steadying force.
We may have that steadying force, but we might also be without Flaherty and others.
You've got a whole list of people on this roster who are underperforming. THAT is on the manager, in my opinion.
Maybe. But I’m not a believer that Flaherty will be special, so be it. There’s no rings for winning 86 and having a cost efficient roster.
It's not really that cost-efficient, though. The Cards have the 9th highest payroll in baseball, right below the Yankees and Blue Jays.
Momo wrote:
They should have spent elsewhere anyways, but there is the rumor that they sprung for Holland at the last second because Matheny kept asking for a “proven closer.”
In truth, Holland has helped put the team in a "p.r. oven," so mission accomplished, I guess.
MrCrowesGarden wrote:I’m not gonna say Holland has been good, but who exactly has he held back?
More frustrated this team could come up with $14 million to spend on Opening Day and not think that couldn’t have been used somewhere between November and March
They should have spent elsewhere anyways, but there is the rumor that they sprung for Holland at the last second because Matheny kept asking for a “proven closer.”
I’m not sure how true that rumor might be, and if true it’s damning in a different way, but it might at least explain why we didn’t go after one of the other perfectly decent and cheaper relievers earlier.
It sounded like Rosenthal confirmed that rumor last night.
Of course there were other proven closers that they didn’t sign, not just the good and cheap options
None of them have been very good either, though (other than Morrow, who has been OK).
Morrow has been “OK”? Might want to check his numbers again