SB Nation - Matt Morris

The Scott Rolen Deal: No Thank You

Charlie — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 23:56:20 -0000

More photos » by Keith Srakocic - AP

3 months ago: Cincinnati Reds' Scott Rolen, center, is greeted by teammates in the dugout after he scored in the eighth inning of the baseball game against the Pittsburgh Pirates in Pittsburgh, Tuesday, Sept. 22, 2009. Rolen scored twice and drove in three runs as the Reds won 10-4. (AP Photo/Keith Srakocic)

Browse more photos »

Forgive me for being a bit late to comment on this article by Dejan Kovacevic, but I just saw it.

Ten Ways to Reboot the Pirates in 2010: 1. Spend.

Sign Rick Ankiel or any free agent -- Nick Johnson? Mark DeRosa? Xavier Nady for a second tour? -- who might bring some pop to the lineup.

Make a trade for a quality player, regardless of cost.

The Pirates' current $23 million roster -- which projects to $28 million with raises -- has to represent the low point. There is no rule that says a team building from within must be a catastrophe at the major league level until the prospects arrive. Provided that acquisitions do not block key players -- signing, say, a center fielder would be absurd -- the only reason not to fill other holes would be to create more leftover money.

When Cincinnati recently traded for Scott Rolen and his $11 million salary after being miles out of contention, many in baseball scoffed. But the Reds went 25-11 with Rolen, and their many youngsters might have their development aided by his presence.

I'm not opposed to spending a bit of money on a player like Nick Johnson. But, as ever, it amazes me how little people have learned from the Pirates' recent experience.

First: the idea that the Rolen trade represents a good model for the Pirates is just beyond belief. Rolen has had a great career and all, but he has now whined his way out of three of the four organizations he's played for. (In fairness, his manager in Philadelphia, Larry Bowa, was hated by everyone, but still.) The idea that he, of all people, would be the sort of veteran player whose mere "presence" aids the development of youngsters is stunning to me. The Reds' ERA did improve after he arrived, and his superior defense probably did help out with that somewhat, but that's hardly a reason to make crazy trades for veterans if you otherwise should be recharging.

If Kovacevic is simply saying that Rolen helped the Reds with his play on the field helped the Reds' young pitchers, that's one thing. But his use of the word "presence" suggests that that's not what he's saying, espec ially since he didn't mention the pitching staff.

Has there ever been any sort of empirical data that shows that the addition of veteran players helps young players? I don't know of one, and while I can't prove it isn't true, it's fair to note that every team has veterans, and so it's quite easy to credit a veteran for his "presence" every time a team plays surprisingly well.

The flipside is that, if you want to, you can blame them and their "presence" when things go wrong. Of course, that would seem mean-spirited and stupid, wouldn't it? Of course it would. And yet it's every bit as logical as suggesting that the mere "presence" of veterans helps.

The best we can do if we're looking at the effect a player has is to look at how he played on the field. Mere "presence" doesn't seem to matter much, and Pirates fans should know that as well as anybody. How many more wins did Matt Morris' "presence" bring? How about Doug Mientkiewicz's? Or Jose Mesa's? Or Jeromy Burnitz's? Or Joe Randa's? Or Eric Hinske's? Just the other day Kovacevic implied that Hinske was a part of the "awful atmosphere" that surrounded the Pirates in 2009. And yet he was one of the Bucs' biggest veteran additions the previous offseason.

To be fair, I'm sure Kovacevic doesn't believe we should acquire these veterans indiscriminately; perhaps he means that there are some veterans who add something with their presence, and others who don't. But then why focus on a well-known whiner like Rolen (who, after all, pretty much did exactly what Hinske did by begging out of Philadelphia, St. Louis, and Toronto) or an alleged PED user like Rick Ankiel? Or, for that matter, a guy like Nady who's probably a perfectly nice guy but who has already spent a considerable amount of time in PNC Park, apparently without dropping any of that magic veteran pixie dust on the place?

There may, of course, be times that veteran "presence" does help. But even if that's true, no one ever seems to know what they are beforehand. The gift of veteran "presence" is one that only seems to appear after the fact, and then it appears completely randomly, such that a perpetual malcontent like Rolen all of a sudden becomes a savior for no other reasons than that 1) his new team happened to play well following a trade and 2) he's old. In Pittsburgh, we've had veteran after veteran, and none of them have brought anything extra to the team other than what they've done on the field. At least nothing we've seen. So why should we make this same mistake again?

The Rolen trade, in particular, was insane. The Reds traded a very good starting pitching prospect (Zach Stewart), a potentially functional young reliever (Josh Roenicke) and a very talented, if extremely frustrating, young third baseman (Edwin Encarnacion) to get him. In terms of value, this would be a little like if the Pirates traded Rudy Owens, Eric Hacker and Lastings Milledge--for a player who's old and expensive and will be gone after 2010. A potential crowd-pleaser, perhaps, but utterly bonkers in terms of the goals of the franchise.

So when someone says that the Pirates, who are two years from contending in the best of circumstances, should "trade for a quality player, regardless of cost" and points to the Scott Rolen deal as an example of what the Bucs should do, I have to ask: Really?

Kovacevic does have a point that there's no reason the Pirates shouldn't sign a veteran or two this offseason--if the right opportunity presents itself. But jeez, let's at least agree on some some basic tenets here. The point of having youngsters on a 62-win team is not to trade for aging free-agents-to-be. And veteran "presence" isn't going to matter without talent to back it up--just ask the 2007 Pirates. Or the 2006 Pirates. Or the 2004 Pirates. And so on.

Make Your Pitch: The NL playoff teams want YOU...

Jim McLennan — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 05:56:50 -0000

The regular season is over, and we now move on to the playoffs. Well, the Diamondbacks don't, but most fans will still be watching with interest as things progress in the post-season. We all have our own loyalties, but in order to decide who gets the Official AZ SnakePit Playoff Endorsements, I reached out to all the SB Nation blogs that are taking part, and asked them to make a pitch for the support of the post-season neutrals here in Arizona. The AL version will follow, just as soon as the league gets their act together and decides who'll be taking part out of the Central division. But after the jump, you'll find what the National League contenders had to say for themselves.

[Update] I have now added a sixth option to the poll, since I suspect a significant number of those voting may not actually be Diamondbacks fans at all...

First up, Dan Moore, from Viva El Birdos, through his hat into the ring with a pitch for the Cardinals.

Thanks for the opportunity to win your fanbase. I thought I'd express my love for the Cardinals in the same way Shakespeare would have, if he were still alive to tell us how much he loved the Cardinals.

THE CARDINALS

A SONNET

by Dan Moore (feat. Albert Pujols)

There on the edge of plausibility,

a figure stalks across beisbol fields—

his swing a picture of agility;

against his accent "G" and "T" yield.

Behind him saunters a standing army,

players we guessed would be lying in traction.

Carpenter's shoulder—lost years, it harmed me—

somehow surviving two seasons' inaction.

A team of destiny and Mozeliak:

Injuries conquered and outfield acquired,

Shortstop still saved with Khalil out of whack,

Unlikely heroes and guns that are hired.

If after all that I still don't have you caring,

"It's our faulg your teang has gongtrol of Dag Hareng."

Eric Stephen, of True Blue LA, bravely takes up the tough job of canvassing on behalf of the Dodgers:

Here's why the AZ Snake Pit members should throw their support to the Dodgers:

Phoenix for years was Dodger territory, with broadcast affiliates in Arizona dating back for God knows how long. Now that you have your own team, obviously it's different, but ask your parents. I bet a lot of them were Dodger fans. You don't want to disappoint your parents, do you?

Speaking of broadcasting, the Dodgers have Vin Scully, in his 60th season behind the microphone. He will be broadcasting the games on radio during the postseason. Who better to be associated with the World Series than Mr. Scully?

Stay within the NL West! A victory for the Dodgers is a win for the division, in the never ending struggle for national respect. I realize the Rockies are also in the NL West, but George Frazier is one of their broadcasters. Why reward Frazier, on of the worst announcers in baseball, over Scully?

The longer the Dodgers last in the postseason, the more highlights we will see of Kirk Gibson's home run in Game One of the 1988 World Series. With each viewing, the announcers might mention Gibson is currently a coach with Arizona. Getting the name "Diamondbacks" into a postseason broadcast is a good thing.

Rooting for the Dodgers can only bring good karma, and you owe us for Rusty Ryal's line drive that nearly ended Hiroki Kuroda.

If the Dodgers win the World Series, it is a lock that Ned Colletti will be given a long-term extension as general manager. He has given a combined $127.2 million to Andruw Jones, Jason Schmidt, and Juan Pierre during his Dodger tenure. This is a good thing for D-Backs fans.

WholeCamels out of The Good Phight, opted to get his pitch in early, creating a Fanpost for the Phillies. But in the interests of completeness, here's what he had to say:

As your Philadelphia Phillies blogger, here's my pitch:

Because red is good (different hues, but so what?).

Because you're as sick of hearing about the National League's inferiority as I am. A repeat World Series Championship for a National League team would benefit the league. "A rising tide raises all ships."

Because we're not the Dodgers or the Rockies, those guys can eat it hard.

Because we sent you Curt Schilling, in exchange for some crap and that sociopath Vicente Padilla. And Schilling begat a World Championship. Show some gratitude.

And lastly, because I am a former short-time Arizonan. I lived in Tucson for a year, and that year happened to be 2001. I went to Game One of the NLDS -- the Curt Schilling/Matt Morris pitchers' duel. I cheered like a crazy person after that Luis Gonzalez blooper in Game Seven, and jumped in the pool at my apartment to celebrate. I'll admit that it helped that there were about a dozen lightly-clothed UofA coeds in there too, but it was still a beautiful, pure moment. I have a Tucson Sidewinders t-shirt that I still wear to this day. I spent a couple nights in Summerhaven just a year or so before the big fire. I miss Eegee's, I used to work at the Speedway Bookman's and acquired about half of my record collection there, saw a bunch of shows at the Rialto and Club Congress, and I got my dog there! He just turned eight years old.

Okay, I realize that most of you are probably Maricopa County folks, but c'mon. Was that a shameless pitch or what?

Go Phillies!

Finally, Russ from Purple Row, adopted the straightforward and to the point approach in support of the Rockies: "We welcome you with open arms over at Purple Row. We had such great fun with those of you who came over during the 2007 postseason, we'd love you to come over again." [Update: RockiesMagicNumber has now provided something a little more detailed]

Here’s why the AZ Snake Pit members should support the Colorado Rockies:

    * Rivalry. It sounds absurd, but after 2007, both teams looked to have a strong presence within the division and the two of us would be beating up on each other with our homegrown rosters for years. As it stands, the gods of regression hit you guys in a disproportionate manner as compared to us, which terrifies me for next season. I hate seeing teams hit by injury and regression, because I know that if we beat them, we’re not saying we bested Brandon Webb and Conor Jackson, we’re beating up on a massively regressed Chris Young and AAA players. It sounds arrogant, but I want to see these two teams embody excellence in building a homegrown team and fight each other to the top of the NL West for years to come. Respect your opponent.
    * Speaking of broadcasting, the Dodgers may have Vin Scully, but since his talents have been wasted on television, Jeff Kingery and Jack Corrigan have been painting the picture of the games over the airwaves for Colorado better than nearly anyone in baseball for the past forever, especially Kingery, who is in his final season. He’s been there since the inception.
    * Stay within the NL West! I agree with Eric, but why reward the Yankees West? I sure wish I could throw an entire payroll at 2 players who aren’t even playing for the team (Schmidt and Jones), don’t you? Then account for Manny and Pierre, and that is just a pile of misappropriated funds. Reward the wise fiscal organization.
    * You don’t want to root for Joe Torre. Or Manny.
    * The Cardinals wouldn’t even be where they were they not able to trade for Holliday at the deadline. The Rockies have been essentially the same club since day 1, adding only a few supplementary pieces here and there.
    * The American League is made of evil and gimmicky rules. "I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter."
    * Much as we “eat it hard” do you really want the entire NL to be centered around Philadelphia even more than it already is? PHILLIES PHILLIES PHILLIES OMG OMG OMG!!! Give me a break. More power to the unappreciated teams in terms of media markets.

Poll

Which NL team will you be rooting for the in the playoffs?

Cardinals

387 votes

Dodgers

80 votes

Phillies

56 votes

Rockies

118 votes

Who cares?

25 votes

I'm not actually an AZ fan, but am here to stuff the ballot-box for my real team.

116 votes

782 votes | Poll has closed

Adam Dunn = 40/100?

Ed Chigliak — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:00:16 -0000

More photos » by Nam Y Huh - AP

Browse more photos »

Ever since Adam Dunn signed with DC, the fans of the Washington Nationals have been told, "40/100!" Yeah, he strikes out and he's a defensive liability in left, but, "40/100". Sure he's getting $10M a year on a team with a $60M+ payroll, but the team needs a big middle of the order bat...40/100! Q: But why have a 40 HR guy with 100 RBI's on a 100-loss team...A: 40/100. Dunn's just 1 RBI away from 100, but he's 3 HR's away from 40 dingers with 17 games left to play, and if he reaches 40 HR's he'll be one of only 4 people to have hit 40 or more in six-straight seasons, and if he does it again in 2010, he'll be one of only two, just Adam Troy "Big Donkey" (DCMD) Dunn and George Herman "Babe" Ruth, with 40 HR's in seven-straight...Here's how and when Dunn hit #40 in each of the last 5 seasons...

August 30, 2004: Houston Astros' right-hander Peter Munro gives up a two-run HR to Felipe Lopez after a Ryan Freel double opens the fifth inning, making it 3-2 Astros, and one out later it's 3-3 when Adam Dunn hits his 40th HR off the season, a solo shot in the 130th game of 2004. Dunn would go on to hit 6 more in September for his career high total of 46 HR's...

October 2, 2005: Game 162. Cincinnati at St. Louis. Adam Dunn hits a solo HR in the third inning of the last game on the Reds' schedule against the first-place Cardinals, who would end up losing the '05 NLCS to Houston in 6 games. Cards' right-hander Matt Morris surrenders his 22nd HR of '05, and Dunn, has two straight 40 HR seasons.

September 8, 2006: In the 141st game of the Cincinnati Reds' '06 season, Adam Dunn takes Pirates' right-hander Brian Rogers deep to right field in Great American Ballpark in the seventh inning of a 9-1 Reds' win. It's the second of only two HR's Dunn hits in September and the last he hits that year...

September 19, 2007: Adam Dunn needed 4 HR's in September 2007 to hit 40 and he got the fourth in Wrigley Field off Cubs' lefty Ted Lilly, who gave up the solo shot to right to give Adam Dunn four-straight seasons of 40 or more. Dunn's solo shot was good for one of the two runs the Reds scored that day in a 3-2 loss to the Cubs. It was the last HR Dunn hit that year in the 152nd game of the season.

September 27th, 2008: In the next-to-last game of the Arizona Diamondbacks' 2008 season, Adam Dunn, who had been acquired by the D-Backs from the Reds on August 11th, hits hit 8th HR for Arizona and his 40th HR of 2008, a solo shot off Colorado left-hander Glendon Rusch in a 6-4 Arizona win over the Rockies. It's Dunn's 4th HR in 14 games to get him up to 40 for the fifth-straight season...

?'s For The DC Faithful...

• Will Adam Dunn reach 40 HR's for the sixth-straight season to tie Alex Rodriguez and Sammy Sosa?

• Will it mean anything to you if he breaks the record next year as a National?

• Do you think he'll be traded before he hits #40 next season?

Leverage and La Russa

DanUpBaby — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 16:00:19 -0000

More photos » by Nam Y Huh - AP

Being a Young Pitcher is hard work.

Browse more photos »

While I was thinking about looking at this I wasn't sure whether the (relative) fungibility of relief pitching made it more likely to reveal a manager's innermost thoughts and desires—i.e. he can use anybody, and there are lots of candidates for the role, so he can lean toward his older pitchers if he wants—or less, that they were so difficult to predict that when one reliever does well he's as good as any other, age be damned. I'm still not sure. But I thought it would be interesting, now that its inclusion on Baseball Reference makes it the next big stat to be overused by lazy bloggers, to take a look at the leverage index of some ghosts of La Russa Relievers Past, just while we're on the subject and there's no game to talk about.

As our arbitrary object lesson I've chosen 2000, because the personalities are far enough away and the bullpen bad enough to be interesting.

PITCHER	AGE	G	IP	K	BB	HR	ERA	aLI
Dave Veres	33	71	75.2	67	25	6	2.85	1.91
Mike Timlin	34	25	29.2	26	20	2	3.34	1.538
Matt Morris	25	31	53.0	34	17	3	3.57	1.235
Mike Mohler	31	22	19.0	8	15	1	9.00	1.134
Mike James	32	51	51.1	41	24	7	3.16	1.092
H. Slocumb	34	43	49.2	34	24	9	5.44	0.788
M. Thompson	29	20	25.0	19	15	4	5.04	0.703
G. Stechschulte	26	20	25.2	12	17	6	6.31	0.540
Alan Benes	28	30	46.0	26	23	7	5.67	0.441

The 2000 Cardinals were a young team, but all that youth was on offense—J.D. Drew, Fernando Tatis, Edgar Renteria, Rick Ankiel... the other four starters ranged from 28 to 32, and the top three relievers, appearance-wise, were between 32 and 34. But really, past the closer, I think La Russa would have preferred all of the pitchers on this list to appear exclusively in blowouts; there's the high-priced bust in Heathcliff Slocumb--who was not only nearly traded with Albert Pujols (Jocketty eventually insisted the Padres take Ben Johnson) but was traded for Carlos Hernandez, the stiff behind the plate when Rick Ankiel, uh, began his career as an outfielder; the flailing LOOGY (eventually replaced by Jason Christiansen, high-priced bust number two); and a cast of several low-leverage non-prospects mopping up after each other. The Mike Timlin trade... was astute.

Keeping that in mind, there are some interesting players here, if you're looking to read La Russa's mind. Matty Mo is the Young Pitcher in this bunch, but given his previous experience as budding ace he didn't exactly have to prove himself all over again. But as a high leverage, multi-inning pitcher he was something of a rare breed, the kind of reliever La Russa probably wouldn't choose to pull out of thin air.

He mopped up in his first appearance, in the end of May, but from then on he was used just about every way except on zero days rest; he mopped up (his lowest LI was 0.06, when he was the first pitcher out of the pen following a 1.2 inning 9 ER beatdown at the hand of the Astros) and he finished one run games, often in back-to-back appearances. He was also used extremely regularly; after his return from the DL there was only one run in which he sat for more than five days at a time. In September his LI rose all the way to 1.72, with only two blowout appearances in seven and four leveraged past 2.0. La Russa could be--can be--flexible both ways. Slocumb's LI falls month-to-month in a neat line until he's traded, moving from 1.11 in April to 0.56 in July.

His capacity for moving relievers around as they wax and wane (much less predictably than the moon) throws his inactivity in the face of Isringhausen's two blow-up years into stark relief, doesn't it? Isringhausen obviously deserved a little more rope than Heathcliff Slocumb, but in 2008 his leverage index was completely unmoored from his ERA; 1.8 in April, 2.12 in May (as his ERA rose, you'll recall, from an even 6.00 to an even 8.00), 1.59 in July (perhaps his best month) until he finally put Izzy on the blowouts-only shelf in July. The same was true in 2006; Wainwright was used increasingly aggressively as the season wore on, moving into high leverage positions more often in the second half, but La Russa's usage of Isringhausen was completely independent of his effectiveness.

That's why it was so infuriating, why so much of what La Russa does--even when it's effective, as it often is--is infuriating. He often displays a finely tuned, intuitive sense of a reliever's abilities and weaknesses. When one falls behind another, considerably moreso than in the rotation, he is likely to recognize it and act accordingly, even when it's a Kyle McClellan or an Adam Wainwright. But he doesn't seem to make any connection between the arbitrary and fickle world of the bullpen and his anointed closer.

I don't doubt that he has some reason for this behavior--maybe it's the baseball equivalent of that old "shooters keep shooting" trope in basketball--but I do doubt its usefulness. If a closer needs to be looked after, mentally, in such a way that it becomes detrimental to the team, he's cut out for high leverage innings anyway, is he?

This is something to watch should Franklin--who, to his credit, has now had two seasons with this brilliant command out of three--regress. He's not the most typical of La Russa closers; he's old, yes, but he began the season behind two youngsters on the depth chart and has already faded badly once before. If somebody can prove himself reliable behind Franklin, and I am not holding my breath, I'll be interested to see how the ninth inning falls.

choosing up sides

lboros — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:00:23 -0000

More photos » by Tom Gannam - AP

jeff luhnow's first selection in the amateur draft was also his best so far.

Browse more photos »

howdy gang; i'll be sitting in today and friday while danup takes his annual leave of the pixels. i got nothing to say about the team this morning that you don’t already know; start hitting soon, boys. please?

the amateur draft starts tonight with rounds 1 through 3, plus a couple of sandwich rounds; i’ll post a comment thread for that, and a concurrent one for the baseball game against florida. i won’t be on hand tonight to update the picks on the front page as they’re made, so if anybody with keys to the blog has a chance to do that, go for it. and thank you.

this will be the 5th luhnow-run draft; that’s a lot of drafts for one guy. according to Baseball America’s executive database, only three scouting directors have run more drafts for the cardinal franchise -- marty maier, fred mcalister (rip), and george silvey. and maier’s were non-consecutive, which leaves silvey and mcalister -- both franchise legends -- as the only two men with longer uninterrupted stints than luhnow at the head of the draft.

there’s still plenty of room for argument about how effectively luhnow has drafted. he’s already had 10 draftees get to the majors -- rasmus, greene, boggs, stavinoha, and garcia from the 2005 draft; perez, walters, luke gregerson, and sugar shane from ’06; todd from ’07 -- but none has been around long enough to establish how good a big-leaguer he will be. the pundits give luhnow good marks -- since he started drafting, the cardinals’ farm system ranking (according to the likes of baseball america, keith law, and kevin goldstein) has jumped from at or near the bottom in 2005 to the top 10 this year. but there are a lot of doubters too, as joe strauss documented in his p-d article on sunday:

.[N]umerous holdovers from Jocketty's regime remain skeptical of a process they believe has amassed plenty of complementary "bat guys" and bullpen arms but few starting pitchers or "impact" players.

Late to the organization's greater emphasis on quantitative analysis, manager Tony La Russa openly has questioned the level of "experimentation" within player development and scouting under Luhnow.

Said La Russa: "What you can look at is: Who did you take? Who did you have the chance to take? What guys get to the big leagues? And of the guys who reach the big leagues, who are impressive? They're fair questions to ask."

Another organization member is blunter still: "There is very little down there, very little. We haven't drafted players you build a team around. We draft guys who may one day help. That's not opinion; that's fact."

anybody want to guess who the anonymous speaker of the last quote is? i'll bet you a number-one draft pick it’s dave duncan . . . . whichever "jocketty holdover" did say it, that comment made me laugh. in the years immediately before luhnow took over, the cardinals didn’t draft players you could build a triple A team around, much less a big-league club. during the dying days of jocketty’s tenure, he’d look down at the memphis roster for a short-term fill-in and his best options would be washed-out 30ish hitters like scott seabol, brian daubach, or timo perez, or mound journeymen like brian falkenborg and kelvin jimenez. the top "prospects" drafted late on jocketty’s watch, such as travis hanson and reid gorecki, didn’t even rise to the level of replacement players.

so it’s a fact -- not an opinion -- that the farm system is stocked with vastly more promise than it was when luhnow took over. he’s been procuring players for four years now, and in that time he’s brought into the organization two likely major-league regulars (colby rasmus and brett wallace), several others who are possible regulars or semi-regulars (daryl jones, pete kozma, tyler greene, bryan anderson), a bunch of others who have bench-player potential (most notably allen craig, john jay, tyler henley, daniel descalso), and a passel of guys with a good chance to stick somewhere as a reliever or mid- to back-rotation starter (mitch boggs, jaime garcia, lance lynn, clay mortensen, chris perez, jess todd, luke gregerson, francisco samuel, fernando salas). that’s not including anybody who’s presently at class A or below (ie, nearly the entire 2008 draft class), nor toolsy caribbean signees like roberto de la cruz and eduardo sanchez and gerardo mannbel.

let’s place that haul alongside the production of previous four-year spans:

	2005-08	2001-04	1997-00	1993-96
STARS	????	dan haren	albert pujols jd drew	matt morris
REGULARS	probably 3 to 5	skip schumaker	adam kennedy yadi molina jack wilson chris duncan coco crisp rick ankiel	placido polanco alan benes braden looper
PART-TIMERS	possibly 8 to 10	kyle mclellan joe mather brad thompson daric barton brendan ryan anthony reyes jason motte	bud smith mike crudale pablo ozuna	eli marrero jay witasick cliff polite britt reames chris richard kerry robinson brent butler

in this chart, the "regulars" category includes starting pitchers who earne a regular rotation spot, plus closers; "part-timers" includes non-closers in the bullpen. i didn’t bother to list replacement-level players (such as stavinoha and shane robinson), who are legion in all the 4-year periods and of absolutely no interest.

what immediately jumps out at me is that the cardinals drafted their asses off in the late 1990s -- and thereby set up the dynasty of the 2000s. between 1997 and 2000 they brought 8 everyday players into the organization, or 2 per year. they drafted an entire up-the-middle core -- yadi behind the plate; kennedy and wilson in the middle infield; crisp in center -- plus a pitcher with ace potential (ankiel) and two mvp-type hitters (pujols and drew). even though they squandered some of the talent (crisp and wilson were both dealt for half-season rentals, and ankiel you know about), the cardinals added an extraordinary amount of value to their portfolio during those years. we don’t think of the 2000s dynasty as being draft-built, but it really was -- their good drafts in the last half of the 1990s yielded albert pujols and matt morris plus (via trade) edgar renteria, jim edmonds, and scott rolen.

could the 2005-08 draft cohort turn out to be as productive as 97-00? not likely, but not impossible. if we’re lucky, rasmus and/or wallace might eventually fit into the "star" category; they might be the two most promising position players the cardinals have drafted since pujols (although wallace’s early showing at memphis -- 4 walks, 21 strikeouts, .088 isolated power in 91 at-bats -- does give me slight pause). daryl jones could turn into coco crisp, and pete kozma could grow up to be jack wilson (a player he was compared to at the time he was drafted); so could tyler greene, for that matter. there might be a closer (perez) and/or a rotation regular or two in the group. . . . in an extremely lucky scenario, there might be 8 everyday players (including a star or two) to come out of luhnow’s first four drafts. more likely the group will produce 3 to 5 regulars plus some bench depth; a good, not great, haul.

will the cardinals be able to build a contending team around these guys? too soon to tell; ask me again when luhnow’s preparing for his 8th or 9th draft . . . . .

Red Baron Note: Hey, gang, Aaron here. I'm going to be covering the draft as it happens over at the RFT, and I'll try to keep the draft thread here updated too whenever a pick is made. I'll probably save the heavy analysis, but I will make sure at least the names and maybe a link or a couple of sentences is put up.

Also, I know Erik is doing a liveblog over at FR via the CoverItLive software, so be sure to check that out as well. Lord, I love draft day.