the game against the lions was exciting, albeit a little sloppy for my taste.

the most encouraging thing about the win was the fact that the offense finally looked to be on track. until this week, they looked awful and out of sync. a big part of them putting it together was scott linehan allowing them to revert back to some of the old plays and terminology from the martz era. those changes obviously made bulger more comfortable running the offense and allowed them to finally get into the endzone more than once per game. i think that really speaks volumes about linehan. he might be a first year head coach, but he's been running that offense of his for a few years now. most coaches like that would employ the "my way or the highway" attitude. they'd force the players to either adapt to the new terminology and plays or find other guys that would. instead, linehan made the necessary adjustments for his team to be successful. he put winning before his own pride. i like that. mike martz would never have done something like that. martz's failure (stubborn refusal) to make adjustments based on his personnel was/is his biggest weakness. linehan showed that he doesn't have that problem and that bodes well for the rams.

while the offense got back on track, the defense seemed to take a step back. guys were out of position, screwing up their assignments, they failed to get any real pressure on kitna and the tackling wasn't nearly as crisp as it had been in previous games. i'm hope haslett is working hard to fix that. also, we could really use another cornerback. special teams was pretty unimpressive this week too.

this next game against green bay should be interesting. the packers are pretty weak. lets hope the boys can bring home win number 4!

dear mr. mulder,

to begin, i would like to say that i truely appreciate the fact you are taking the mound and trying to help the team. this is very noble of you, because you are clearly not right, yet you continue to go out there anyway. you do this because the cardinals need you, or more accurately, they need the you that you used to be. as said before, the effort is appreciated, however, at this time i feel it is in the best interest of all parties involved for you to take a leave of absence. you are welcome to remain with the team, however, your services on the mound are no longer necessary. i understand that you might feel as though you are healthy and able to pitch, but there is clearly something wrong. i ask, regardless of how you feel, that you inform management that you are no longer capable of pitching at the major league level, at least for the rest of this season. for you to continue to try to pitch will be a detriment to the team and to your career. stepping aside will allow the team to utilize a pitcher more capable ot helping the team win. it will also allow you the opportunity to solve the issues that are leading to your poor performance, which will hopefully help you to continue your career next season. thank you for your understanding and your cooperation.

sincerely,
adam mettrick, concerned cardinals fan

the diamondbacks just designated russ ortiz for assignment. now i realize that he's been awful since he made the move to arizona, but i think he might be worth a shot. dave duncan has a long history of straightening out veteran pitchers and the guy is only 3 seasons removed from winning 21 games for the braves. the d-backs have 10 days to release him, waive him, or trade him, and it seems unlikely they'll find any trade partners willing to take on the $22 million left on his contract, which means he'll likely end up a free agent, and probably a cheap one. it never hurts to have another arm. any thoughts?

With our friends on the north side of Chicago limping through May and dealing with disappointing losses, a disappearing offense, and disorderly conduct, an interesting thought occured to me. What if Dusty Baker was managing the Cardinals rather than the Cubs?

Continue reading this post »

Reggie Sanders has gotten off to a good start over in KC. His line through April 11:

.348 2 HR 7 RBI

It was noted this evening on Baseball Tonight that if he's playing well come July the Royals are likely to trade him to a contender in need of an OF in exchange for a prospect. Personally I wouldn't mind seeing the Cards trading to bring him back. I know they didn't resign him for a reason (thinking his production would fall because of his age), but if he keeps producing why not go out and bring him back to fill the void in left? What do you guys think?

I've been reading a lot of comments by posters who are already calling Encarnacion a "bust" because of his 1 for 9 start at the plate. That kind of talk is awfully premature. I know a lot of people were upset by his signing and are ready to point out every time he fails. I wasn't exactly excited by the signing either, but I also know that we could have done a lot worse. We could have Jaque Jones patrolling RF instead and he has started out 0 for 6. Beyond that, Manny Ramirez has started this season at 1 for 9. I can't imagine anyone is ready to call his season a bust yet. Paul Konerko is an even worse 1 for 13 but I doubt anyone is writing him off yet either. All I am saying is that maybe you guys should give Encarnacion a little bit more time to prove himself before you jump all over him. Is it possible that he will be a bust? Absolutely, but he could also have a good season. Give him a couple weeks before you pass judgment.

Alright so I really don't have anything to back this up. It's just a thought that came to me the other day, and I figured I'd share it.

Could Rick Ankiel's injury this spring be a hoax? Could the Cardinals be faking his injury in order to increase their chances of passing him through waivers come the end of spring training? It sounds kind of silly and unlikely, but the more I think about it the more plausable it seems. If Ank doesn't get into any gmaes this spring, it gives the other teams less to go on when trying to decide if they want to claim him or not. If they think he's one of those players that can't stay healthy, maybe they won't bother taking a chance on him. It seems like the Cards already knew he wouldn't have a chance to make the big league team and might be trying to sneak him through waivers by listing him as injured and unable to play and not letting other teams get a good look at what he can do this spring.

Of course, it's also very possible that he's just injured (again) and nothing more. It also still seems like it would stupid for a team not to scoop him up if given the chance. He might be too old to really be a prospect, but he still has quite a bit of upside.

In discussing the upcoming season with a few of my friends and co-workers, all of whom happen to be Cubs fans, it has dawned on me that they all seem to be off in dream land. They all seem to think that Jaque Jones and Juan Pierre are going to cure thier on-base problem, something I can't help but laugh at. The thing that really gets me though is the fact that not one of them believes me when I tell them that Derrek Lee is going to fall back down to earth this year. Apparently they see a 60 point increase in batting average as a normal occurance. I, on the other hand, have already pinpointed Lee as this years Adrian Beltre. I understand that everyone wants to be optimistic about their chances this time of year, but isn't this just a little ridiculous if not border line idiotic?

Espn.com has a story by Tim Kurkjian up today talking about all the changes at second base throughout baseball for the upcoming season. Nothing too interesting really, except for a breif mention of the Cards. Oddly enough Kurkjian says this:

"Spivey has played next to shortstop David Eckstein before, and they did well together."

I know they've never played in the big leagues together before, which begs the question, what the heck is Kukjian talking about? Anyone know?