Did you read An Old Friend's post and the attached link from VEB? Are you sure your "opinion" is correct?
Give it UP.
Reminds me me of your Cards AAA and Saggese threads...just relentless and having to have the last word...harmless and sad
Yes it is.
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
2016 Cardinals:
Team WAR: 39.4 (9th in MLB)
779 runs scored, 712 runs allowed, +67 run differential
X-W/L: 88-74
Actual W/L: 86-76
Once again, you keep listing a bunch of cherry-picked names--as if that's supposed to be some kind of compelling argument--without noting the actual underlying production of the players on the roster. The reality is the 2016 Cardinals were a good--not great--team that performed pretty much in-line with their underlying raw production. So why do you persist in trying to weave this utter fiction that Matheny somehow magically transformed chicken-s into chicken salad?
I’m not weaving anything. I’m just saying he did fairly well with some of the average players on the roster. He sure didn’t have All Stars at every position and a bunch of Cy Young candidates in the rotation. If that’s “cherry picking” so be it.
No, you have compared him favorably to other Cardinals managers such as Joe Torre and Tony LaRussa based solely on the records of the teams they managed, which is beyond simplistic. In fact, you have asserted that those W/L records "speak for themselves" in evaluating managerial performance, which is of course absurd. And you have clearly asserted--without evidence--that Matheny outperformed the quality of the rosters he was given.
As for your last throw-away observation: during all those years, what teams DID have "All Stars at every position and a bunch of Cy Young candidates in the rotation"? I could go down the rosters of all the other teams and cherry-pick their role players and replacement-level players, but that doesn't mean those names are representative of the overall productivity of the rosters.
Yes, he had a good winning percentage. And yes, he wasn’t given a good MOTO in the last several years. And yes, he was very inexperienced for the job and made a lot of mistakes.
Especially with bullpen management. And yes, he had issues he probably created with several of the players that led to clubhouse toxicity. There were good things and bad things.
Did you read An Old Friend's post and the attached link from VEB? Are you sure your "opinion" is correct?
Give it UP.
Reminds me me of your Cards AAA and Saggese threads...just relentless and having to have the last word...harmless and sad
Yes it is.
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
Remember when Matheny was fired and the guy in charge cited his poor results as part of the reason for the firing? But those results (team was one game above .500 at the time) were in line or better than 3 of the 4 seasons put up by the current manager? And the current manager at one point, in spite of said results, received a contract extension so that he wouldn't have to be concerned that poor results could put his job at risk?
And all of that is leaving out the manager in between who was the most successful of the three...
Reminds me me of your Cards AAA and Saggese threads...just relentless and having to have the last word...harmless and sad
Yes it is.
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
Remember when Matheny was fired and the guy in charge cited his poor results as part of the reason for the firing? But those results (team was one game above .500 at the time) were in line or better than 3 of the 4 seasons put up by the current manager? And the current manager at one point, in spite of said results, received a contract extension so that he wouldn't have to be concerned that poor results could put his job at risk?
Make it make sense.
No doubt there’s been a recent stale nature of things settling in. But changes are happening. Is it overdue?
Sure.
desertrat23 wrote: ↑22 Aug 2025 08:36 am
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
Remember when Matheny was fired and the guy in charge cited his poor results as part of the reason for the firing? But those results (team was one game above .500 at the time) were in line or better than 3 of the 4 seasons put up by the current manager? And the current manager at one point, in spite of said results, received a contract extension so that he wouldn't have to be concerned that poor results could put his job at risk?
And all of that is leaving out the manager in between who was the most successful of the three...
Make it make sense.
And here's what the owner said when he fired Matheny:
"You know, in some places 'winning' is just a winning record, or even .500 is acceptable. Players have a nice season and go home, and get back to their families and so forth. But not in this city. Not with this franchise. Not with this history. And not with our great fans."
--Bill DeWitt, Jr. (2018)
Now we're told by his staunchest apologist that just having a winning record is "success" and fans should be satisfied with that.
Reminds me me of your Cards AAA and Saggese threads...just relentless and having to have the last word...harmless and sad
Yes it is.
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
2016 Cardinals:
Team WAR: 39.4 (9th in MLB)
779 runs scored, 712 runs allowed, +67 run differential
X-W/L: 88-74
Actual W/L: 86-76
Once again, you keep listing a bunch of cherry-picked names--as if that's supposed to be some kind of compelling argument--without noting the actual underlying production of the players on the roster. The reality is the 2016 Cardinals were a good--not great--team that performed pretty much in-line with their underlying raw production. So why do you persist in trying to weave this utter fiction that Matheny somehow magically transformed chicken-s into chicken salad?
I’m not weaving anything. I’m just saying he did fairly well with some of the average players on the roster. He sure didn’t have All Stars at every position and a bunch of Cy Young candidates in the rotation. If that’s “cherry picking” so be it.
Reminds me me of your Cards AAA and Saggese threads...just relentless and having to have the last word...harmless and sad
Yes it is.
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
2016 Cardinals:
Team WAR: 39.4 (9th in MLB)
779 runs scored, 712 runs allowed, +67 run differential
X-W/L: 88-74
Actual W/L: 86-76
Once again, you keep listing a bunch of cherry-picked names--as if that's supposed to be some kind of compelling argument--without noting the actual underlying production of the players on the roster. The reality is the 2016 Cardinals were a good--not great--team that performed pretty much in-line with their underlying raw production. So why do you persist in trying to weave this utter fiction that Matheny somehow magically transformed chicken-s into chicken salad?
I’m not weaving anything. I’m just saying he did fairly well with some of the average players on the roster. He sure didn’t have All Stars at every position and a bunch of Cy Young candidates in the rotation. If that’s “cherry picking” so be it.
Reminds me me of your Cards AAA and Saggese threads...just relentless and having to have the last word...harmless and sad
Yes it is.
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
Remember when Matheny was fired and the guy in charge cited his poor results as part of the reason for the firing? But those results (team was one game above .500 at the time) were in line or better than 3 of the 4 seasons put up by the current manager? And the current manager at one point, in spite of said results, received a contract extension so that he wouldn't have to be concerned that poor results could put his job at risk?
Make it make sense.
No doubt there’s been a recent stale nature of things settling in. But changes are happening. Is it overdue?
Sure.
You’re SO close! Just say it with me: “John Mozeliak should have been fired years ago.”
desertrat23 wrote: ↑22 Aug 2025 08:36 am
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
Remember when Matheny was fired and the guy in charge cited his poor results as part of the reason for the firing? But those results (team was one game above .500 at the time) were in line or better than 3 of the 4 seasons put up by the current manager? And the current manager at one point, in spite of said results, received a contract extension so that he wouldn't have to be concerned that poor results could put his job at risk?
And all of that is leaving out the manager in between who was the most successful of the three...
Make it make sense.
And here's what the owner said when he fired Matheny:
"You know, in some places 'winning' is just a winning record, or even .500 is acceptable. Players have a nice season and go home, and get back to their families and so forth. But not in this city. Not with this franchise. Not with this history. And not with our great fans."
--Bill DeWitt, Jr. (2018)
Now we're told by his staunchest apologist that just having a winning record is "success" and fans should be satisfied with that.
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
Remember when Matheny was fired and the guy in charge cited his poor results as part of the reason for the firing? But those results (team was one game above .500 at the time) were in line or better than 3 of the 4 seasons put up by the current manager? And the current manager at one point, in spite of said results, received a contract extension so that he wouldn't have to be concerned that poor results could put his job at risk?
Make it make sense.
No doubt there’s been a recent stale nature of things settling in. But changes are happening. Is it overdue?
Sure.
You’re SO close! Just say it with me: “John Mozeliak should have been fired years ago.”
You’ll feel better, I promise.
John Mozeliak should probably have been given a different role in the Cardinals organization years ago, if he would have accepted it. He should have anticipated the backward slides of Goldy, Arenado, Walker, and Gorman. No excuse for it.
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
Remember when Matheny was fired and the guy in charge cited his poor results as part of the reason for the firing? But those results (team was one game above .500 at the time) were in line or better than 3 of the 4 seasons put up by the current manager? And the current manager at one point, in spite of said results, received a contract extension so that he wouldn't have to be concerned that poor results could put his job at risk?
Make it make sense.
No doubt there’s been a recent stale nature of things settling in. But changes are happening. Is it overdue?
Sure.
You’re SO close! Just say it with me: “John Mozeliak should have been fired years ago.”
You’ll feel better, I promise.
John Mozeliak should probably have been given a different role in the Cardinals organization years ago, if he would have accepted it. He should have anticipated the backward slides of Goldy, Arenado, Walker, and Gorman. No excuse for it.
I know you’re being facetious but yeah, kinda. The guy gets paid a lot of money to be right — and he wasn’t.
Did you read An Old Friend's post and the attached link from VEB? Are you sure your "opinion" is correct?
Give it UP.
Reminds me me of your Cards AAA and Saggese threads...just relentless and having to have the last word...harmless and sad
Yes it is.
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.
Reminds me me of your Cards AAA and Saggese threads...just relentless and having to have the last word...harmless and sad
Yes it is.
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.
I talk about both the minuses AND the pluses.
If that’s talking out of “both sides of the neck”, so be it.
Trying to be objective with people who are always 110% negative is always going to be out of step.
Reminds me me of your Cards AAA and Saggese threads...just relentless and having to have the last word...harmless and sad
Yes it is.
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.
I talk about both the minuses AND the pluses.
If that’s talking out of “both sides of the neck”, so be it.
Trying to be objective with people who are always 110% negative is always going to be out of step.
Sure, just overlook the context of my comment(it was a response to something very specific) and present that^ bull[shirt].
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.
I talk about both the minuses AND the pluses.
If that’s talking out of “both sides of the neck”, so be it.
Trying to be objective with people who are always 110% negative is always going to be out of step.
Sure, just overlook the context of my comment(it was a response to something very specific) and present that^ bull[shirt].
Sorry, AEP. You say bull-shirt and you don’t get a response.
Just the way it is, friend.
Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
Remember when Matheny was fired and the guy in charge cited his poor results as part of the reason for the firing? But those results (team was one game above .500 at the time) were in line or better than 3 of the 4 seasons put up by the current manager? And the current manager at one point, in spite of said results, received a contract extension so that he wouldn't have to be concerned that poor results could put his job at risk?
Make it make sense.
No doubt there’s been a recent stale nature of things settling in. But changes are happening. Is it overdue?
Sure.
You’re SO close! Just say it with me: “John Mozeliak should have been fired years ago.”
You’ll feel better, I promise.
John Mozeliak should probably have been given a different role in the Cardinals organization years ago, if he would have accepted it. He should have anticipated the backward slides of Goldy, Arenado, Walker, and Gorman. No excuse for it.
part of coaching and part of managing talent is understanding what is sticking and not sticking with your players. If you don't see the trends of what your players are doing relative to the other players in your system and the macro of the league, then thats on you. Walker and Gorman being younger in the development side should have clear markers they are achieving. Goldy and Arenado should have well established trends that you are tracking and when they stop trending in those parameters, you should be able to understand why. Even if that excuse is age.
An Old Friend wrote: ↑22 Aug 2025 08:00 am
I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.
Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do
Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.
It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.
Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.
Or a rotation in 2016 of -
Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA
Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.
Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?
Remember when Matheny was fired and the guy in charge cited his poor results as part of the reason for the firing? But those results (team was one game above .500 at the time) were in line or better than 3 of the 4 seasons put up by the current manager? And the current manager at one point, in spite of said results, received a contract extension so that he wouldn't have to be concerned that poor results could put his job at risk?
Make it make sense.
No doubt there’s been a recent stale nature of things settling in. But changes are happening. Is it overdue?
Sure.
You’re SO close! Just say it with me: “John Mozeliak should have been fired years ago.”
You’ll feel better, I promise.
John Mozeliak should probably have been given a different role in the Cardinals organization years ago, if he would have accepted it. He should have anticipated the backward slides of Goldy, Arenado, Walker, and Gorman. No excuse for it.
part of coaching and part of managing talent is understanding what is sticking and not sticking with your players. If you don't see the trends of what your players are doing relative to the other players in your system and the macro of the league, then thats on you. Walker and Gorman being younger in the development side should have clear markers they are achieving. Goldy and Arenado should have well established trends that you are tracking and when they stop trending in those parameters, you should be able to understand why. Even if that excuse is age.
Arenado went from 7.9 WAR in 2022 to 2.2 WAR in 2023.
Going from 31 years old to 32 years old. You’re saying that should have been anticipated?
