GatewayRedbirds.com

I just don't buy that at all. How does the fact that Pujols was on the team change or de-value what those guys have done? Was it Pujols' magic that helped Freese win it in the 11th? Did Pujols throw that knee buckling curve ball to strike out Beltran?

Already, they are heroes and their efforts are the stuff of legend. Already, they're superstars across baseball. Already, they're sought out by media and talked about by the talking heads. Already, they've been multi-time top finishers and winners of the major awards in the MLB regular and postseasons. There's probably nothing those guys can do to top what they've already done.

If you're waiting for someone to come along out of the "shadow" of Pujols and do more than those guys, then you are (and I mean this quite literally) waiting for the next-next Stan Musial. And you're probably going to be waiting for your entire life for that guy to come again.

_________________

I think if you talked to the national types, they'd say the Cardinals have some really nice pieces and some all-star caliber talent, but I don't know that anyone is annointing anyone on the roster the "face of the franchise." I'm not ready to do that. If it makes you feel better and you need to have a face of the franchise, consider whoever you want to be that guy.

Still, there's not replacing an Albert Pujols in that role in terms of what he meant to the team and the sport as a whole. He transcended the Cardinals. No one else on the roster does that.

The franchise doesn't need to have a "face" right now. It's just a decent group of players.

_________________
The Chicago Cubs: be-LIE-ving since 1908

"Do I want to be in STL forever? Of course. People from other teams want to play in STL and they are jealous that we're in STL because the fans are unbelievable. So why would you want to leave a place like STL to go somewhere else and make 3 OR 4 MORE MILLION A YEAR? IT'S NOT ABOUT MONEY. IALREADY GOT MY MONEY. IT'S ABOUT WINNING, THAT'S IT." Albert Pujols (February 15th, 2009)

I said Carp.

_________________
“It is my last night in Chicago. In four days, I did everything you can do here. I ate well, drank a lot, and earlier this afternoon I beat the Cubs 11-2.”

TV funnyman Conan O’Brien, wrapping up his stint in the Windy City.

Waino...two reasons:

1.) When he got hurt this year, everyone counted us out...that's an impact franchise player.
2.) He threw the best curveball we've ever seen in 2006.

That's what I'm getting at, though. They are not a decent group of players. We have at least three guys who are or have been in the top 5 players at their position in baseball for multiple years. These guys are awesome baseball players in their own right. We just lost the best baseball player maybe in history, haven't made a single transaction this offseason, and we're still likely the odds on favorite to win the NL Central next year.

What you are saying would be like suggesting that Matt Kemp and Clayton Kershaw are just a decent group of players for the Dodgers because they haven't transcended the sport yet. I just don't think we should undersell or under-appreciate what we have around here. We have a strong, highly-talented, elite-level core group of players who are surrounded by other guys who, imo, are a "decent group of players".

_________________

I'd say Kemp and Kershaw are the faces of the Dodgers. They are at the top of their game right now and are highly regarded throughout baseball.

Had Waino not missed all of last year after surgery, I'd easily call him the new face of Cardinals baseball, but he's been gone a whole year. He needs to come back and still show he's that elite level player. If he does and wins about 20 games, you have your face of the franchise.

The rest of them just aren't up to that level. YOu've got Carp on the wrong side of 35, and despite an October renaissance, he's off the worst year of his Cardinals career. Holliday has underperformed of late and battled injuries, and Berkman has only one year in STL and is also on the wrong side of 35. Just seems slimp pickings when annointing one of them "face of the franchise." That's just my opinion though.

Molina could be a candidate, but while he's a great catcher, he doesn't have the overall skills of a Pujols, Fielder, Kemp, Kershaw, etc. Freese is young, and been injury prone, but he's a good candidate going forward too. he has to sustain some excellence though.

_________________
The Chicago Cubs: be-LIE-ving since 1908

"Do I want to be in STL forever? Of course. People from other teams want to play in STL and they are jealous that we're in STL because the fans are unbelievable. So why would you want to leave a place like STL to go somewhere else and make 3 OR 4 MORE MILLION A YEAR? IT'S NOT ABOUT MONEY. IALREADY GOT MY MONEY. IT'S ABOUT WINNING, THAT'S IT." Albert Pujols (February 15th, 2009)

I really want to go with Carp. Freese was our MVP in the WS and NLCS, but Carp had to be our playoff run MVP. It seemed like every game was bigger than the last game for him and he'd always come up big. Game 162, shut out against the Astros. Game 5 of the NLDS, goes up against Halladay and throws a CGSO while only getting 1 run for support. He ended up setting the record for most post season wins for a Cardinal, then became the first pitcher in 10 years to make 3 starts in the WS winning game 1 and 7. He's sort of in the same boat as Berkman. They're the wise old badasses on the team that still have something to give. Leaders? Absolutely. Face of franchise? I guess not.

The media will focus on Freese and Wainwright next year. Freese is the new hero, and Wainwright is back after a whole season of the media questioning us for not having him healthy. Freese is a solid ball player, but I don't see him ever being an MVP option. He might make it to the ASG a couple times, but I don't see him being the cream of the crop for 3b in the bigs. I guess this coming year will tell. Maybe Holliday will come out of his shell and be a personality fans will like. At the moment, he's easily our best offensive product.

_________________

I guess for me, I have a stricter definition of what a franchise player means. To me, it's more all encompassing than simply who is your best player at any given time.

To me, a franchise player is a guy who is in the top 30-50 players in the sport overall. He's a leader on and off the field. He's the most marketable face and personality on the rosters. He's the top guy talked about for your team nationally, and he's the first player thought of when your team name is mentioned by an overwhelming margin.

The Cardinals, as much as any team in baseball has a clear lineage of who that guy is.

Hornsby...Dean ...Musial...Gibson... Brock...Smith... McGwire...Pujols.

Really, if you go back to the 30's, you've got a total of 8 players that have been that transcendant star and truly been the "face of the franchise" for the Cardinals.

The Cards have some great pieces and some marketable personalities between Freese, Waino, Carp, Holliday, and Molina. But, realistically, none of those guys listed have reached the level of the 8 I named above. The cruel fact of Pujols to LA is the Cardinals lost the face of their franchise and that's not something easy to replace.

The Baltimore Orioles have been searching for a face of the franchise since Cal Ripken Jr. left. The've never found that guy.

Hopefully, the Cardinals will find one soon. Someone will have to step up and take the mantle.

_________________
The Chicago Cubs: be-LIE-ving since 1908

"Do I want to be in STL forever? Of course. People from other teams want to play in STL and they are jealous that we're in STL because the fans are unbelievable. So why would you want to leave a place like STL to go somewhere else and make 3 OR 4 MORE MILLION A YEAR? IT'S NOT ABOUT MONEY. IALREADY GOT MY MONEY. IT'S ABOUT WINNING, THAT'S IT." Albert Pujols (February 15th, 2009)

I wouldn't put McGwire on that list, but that's just me.

McGwire was about the only reason people went to games in '98 and '99. He may not have been the face for long, but he was a pretty significant figure while he was here.

_________________