Do you really want to talk about your track record of Cardinal player predictions?
McGreevy would do well to be a reliable number 3.
Moderators: STLtoday Forum Moderators, Cards Talk Moderators
Do you really want to talk about your track record of Cardinal player predictions?
"McGreevy would do well to be a reliable number 3". I agree. Now Doyle 1 and Mathews 2. I'm concerned about Mathews's velocity. By the way, just having some fun with the predictions and comps. Other posters shouldn't take my musings so seriously. I don't. LOL
Excellent post. Thank you sir.Baseball Savant wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 13:36 pm Ceiling is 3 or 4 he doesn’t have strikeout or overpowering stuff
He relies on movement, change of speeds, matriculating ball around quadrants of zone
Slave to BABIP, ERA from 3.75 to 4.75 dependent on luck and fielders
If McGreevy's ceiling is a 3 or 4. What are Liberatore's and Pallante's ceiling? About the same, maybe?Baseball Savant wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 13:36 pm Ceiling is 3 or 4 he doesn’t have strikeout or overpowering stuff
He relies on movement, change of speeds, matriculating ball around quadrants of zone
Slave to BABIP, ERA from 3.75 to 4.75 dependent on luck and fielders
I've been more concerned lately about where Pallante's floor is. He has been in free-fall for awhile.Shady wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:49 pmIf McGreevy's ceiling is 3 or 4. What are Liberatore's and Pallante's ceiling?Baseball Savant wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 13:36 pm Ceiling is 3 or 4 he doesn’t have strikeout or overpowering stuff
He relies on movement, change of speeds, matriculating ball around quadrants of zone
Slave to BABIP, ERA from 3.75 to 4.75 dependent on luck and fielders
Shady wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:43 pm"McGreevy would do well to be a reliable number 3". I agree. Now Doyle 1 and Mathews 2. I'm concerned about Mathews's velocity. By the way, just having some fun with the predictions and comps. Other posters shouldn't take my musings so seriously. I don't. LOL
What I'm liking about McGreevy. Is his consistency. He seems like the most consistent starter the Cardinals have, right now. Including Gray.Talkin' Baseball wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:51 pmI've been more concerned lately about where Pallante's floor is. He has been in free-fall for awhile.Shady wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:49 pmIf McGreevy's ceiling is 3 or 4. What are Liberatore's and Pallante's ceiling?Baseball Savant wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 13:36 pm Ceiling is 3 or 4 he doesn’t have strikeout or overpowering stuff
He relies on movement, change of speeds, matriculating ball around quadrants of zone
Slave to BABIP, ERA from 3.75 to 4.75 dependent on luck and fielders
There you go. Now don't take my posts so seriously. Try to relax.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:53 pmShady wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:43 pm"McGreevy would do well to be a reliable number 3". I agree. Now Doyle 1 and Mathews 2. I'm concerned about Mathews's velocity. By the way, just having some fun with the predictions and comps. Other posters shouldn't take my musings so seriously. I don't. LOL![]()
Don't worry, Shady--no one has ever taken you seriously.Shady wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:55 pmThere you go. Now don't take my posts so seriously. Try to relax.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:53 pmShady wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:43 pm"McGreevy would do well to be a reliable number 3". I agree. Now Doyle 1 and Mathews 2. I'm concerned about Mathews's velocity. By the way, just having some fun with the predictions and comps. Other posters shouldn't take my musings so seriously. I don't. LOL![]()
Yorkie, that's baloney coming from you. You've been intense. My posts aren't worth getting shook up about. LOLNYCardsFan wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:57 pmDon't worry, Shady--no one has ever taken you seriously.Shady wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:55 pmThere you go. Now don't take my posts so seriously. Try to relax.NYCardsFan wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:53 pmShady wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:43 pm"McGreevy would do well to be a reliable number 3". I agree. Now Doyle 1 and Mathews 2. I'm concerned about Mathews's velocity. By the way, just having some fun with the predictions and comps. Other posters shouldn't take my musings so seriously. I don't. LOL![]()
He is streaky. I guess that's why he's a 5. I think McGreevy is a 4ish type guy. What you see is what you get. He's the same guy he was in AA only with better command.Talkin' Baseball wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:51 pmI've been more concerned lately about where Pallante's floor is. He has been in free-fall for awhile.Shady wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:49 pmIf McGreevy's ceiling is 3 or 4. What are Liberatore's and Pallante's ceiling?Baseball Savant wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 13:36 pm Ceiling is 3 or 4 he doesn’t have strikeout or overpowering stuff
He relies on movement, change of speeds, matriculating ball around quadrants of zone
Slave to BABIP, ERA from 3.75 to 4.75 dependent on luck and fielders
Thanks, I like to shoot it straight, good or badCCard wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:44 pmExcellent post. Thank you sir.Baseball Savant wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 13:36 pm Ceiling is 3 or 4 he doesn’t have strikeout or overpowering stuff
He relies on movement, change of speeds, matriculating ball around quadrants of zone
Slave to BABIP, ERA from 3.75 to 4.75 dependent on luck and fielders
Yeah, his slider looks really good and I think he should use it more often. I know it's hard on the arm though.Baseball Savant wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 17:17 pmThanks, I like to shoot it straight, good or badCCard wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 16:44 pmExcellent post. Thank you sir.Baseball Savant wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 13:36 pm Ceiling is 3 or 4 he doesn’t have strikeout or overpowering stuff
He relies on movement, change of speeds, matriculating ball around quadrants of zone
Slave to BABIP, ERA from 3.75 to 4.75 dependent on luck and fielders
So basically you’re asking, “will the Cardinals one day have someone be an ace at some point in the future?”…I sure as hell hope so. Maybe a good hitter too.Shady wrote: ↑15 Aug 2025 13:31 pm Or maybe Doyle, Mathews, etc. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/ca ... 2c771&ei=9
McGreevy should have been in the rotation a couple months ago. Maybe the Cardinals record would be a lot different.