11WSChamps wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:06 am
What they failed at was not having another Pujols, Edmonds and C. Carpenter and proper management in the dugout.
You guys sure do like to complicate things.
They don’t need another pujols or c. Carpenter they just need players that don’t completely suck. They have players that can field but can’t hit (church/scott) players that can hit but can’t field (Herrera/burly) and players that can’t field or hit (Gorman and walker)
When is the last time this franchise won a championship without generational talent?
Well I hope the cardinals don’t believe that and are waiting for generational talent in order to try to win because if they are they will be waiting several more decades. Generational talent doesn’t grow on trees it’s definitely not something you just go get.
Well they aren't going to win with bunch of analytics either.
You have to have the horses and the right jockey.
This team has neither.
Every other team in the Central has star or star capability player/players other than the Cardinals. That's not counting the Phillies, Mets, Dodgers, Padres, etc.
They're out there for sure.
We just don't have any.
You're not going to win without them.
Those are the facts.
The org has to be analytically sound, be able to identify talent and, yes, add talent to the roster.
Without talent first all your analytics are a fool's errand.
Analytics help you evaluate talent and leverage it to the fullest.
Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 07:49 am
Well the current cardinals team is the result of them falling behind in the analytics department which is why they brought bloom in to fix mos mess. Back when the cardinals were good with Lunhow and company they were ahead of the game in the analytics department so sign me up for supporting better analytics
Was it really even “Luhnow and Company” or TLR/DD? We had Pujols and Yadi but a large part of the WS rosters were veteran free agent acquisitions and midseason veteran trade acquisitions (Rasmus trade comes to mind). We didn’t need analytics to know those dudes could play well enough to fill the necessary gaps.
I’ve still yet to see a championship since the big shift from old-man outdated baseball to the great new cutting edge analytics approach.
You're right. It seems to me Mozeliak employed the same strategy but the players who were developed internally aren't as good of they were a decade or two ago probably because they aren't being developed properly or coached at the MLB level properly.
Matheny's world series team the top 5 pitchers in games started were Wainwright, Lynn, Miller, Westbrook and Kelly. 4 of those were developed in the Cardinals system. Career high wins from Miller and Kelly. That's why I believe we need a manger with some knowledge of baseball and the autonomy to push back against what the computer says.
An example where analytics has changed the 'old school' style .. the batting order
Older fans grew up with this model .. 1st batter .. fast guy , who draws walks , can steal , get on base type
2nd guy... if first guy is on or even stolen 2nd, this guy's job is to hit it to the right side to move runner over
then MOTO middle of the order bats
3rd .. your highest batting avg. guy would bat here
4th .. the slugger HR guy concept was if couple of 1,2 3, guys get on he may bop a homer now
Then analytics tracked and found this ... the guys who get the most at bats during a season are your 1st and 2nd batters as makes sense they get up more times being earliest in the lineup . Your 1st and 2nd guys have more chance of batting 5 times in a game than your MOTO bats.
So analytic stats , put your better hitters EARLY in the lineup .. Ex. this year Brewers often had Yelich batting 2nd
Analytics (or stats ) proved that you do better overall in hitting by having your better avg. guys bat high in the lineup . Makes sense
11WSChamps wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:06 am
What they failed at was not having another Pujols, Edmonds and C. Carpenter and proper management in the dugout.
You guys sure do like to complicate things.
They don’t need another pujols or c. Carpenter they just need players that don’t completely suck. They have players that can field but can’t hit (church/scott) players that can hit but can’t field (Herrera/burly) and players that can’t field or hit (Gorman and walker)
When is the last time this franchise won a championship without generational talent?
Well I hope the cardinals don’t believe that and are waiting for generational talent in order to try to win because if they are they will be waiting several more decades. Generational talent doesn’t grow on trees it’s definitely not something you just go get.
Well they aren't going to win with bunch of analytics either.
You have to have the horses and the right jockey.
This team has neither.
Every other team in the Central has star or star capability player/players other than the Cardinals. That's not counting the Phillies, Mets, Dodgers, Padres, etc.
They're out there for sure.
We just don't have any.
You're not going to win without them.
Those are the facts.
The org has to be analytically sound, be able to identify talent and, yes, add talent to the roster.
Without talent first all your analytics are a fool's errand.
Analytics help you evaluate talent and leverage it to the fullest.
imadangman wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 06:58 am
Analytics is such an umbrella term. There are different categories of analytics. It's also up to interpretation. However the Cardinals have misinterpreted their analytics should be an indictment on them, not the analytics. Baseball is a business, can you think of any other business sector where you would say it's advantageous to throw "analytics" out the window?
Listening on the radio I hear the announcers astounded at the lack of fundamentals. I believe Marmol was hired because he never played the game at a high level and will rely on analytics. I suspect he will be kept but if replace it will be by someone with a similar mindset.
You realize analytics isn’t the enemy of fundamentals, right?
Doesn’t have to be but if Oli doesn’t have what it takes to make us above average in both, then being well versed in analytics alone isn’t enough
rockondlouie wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 08:42 am
Like everything in society things always seem to go TOO FAR.
I think we've reached the saturation point in sports where analytics are starting to be seen as simply one tool managers/coaches can use along w/their extensive experience.
In most walks of life the pendulum never stops in the middle.
ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 06:45 am
I think there is far too much emphasis on analytics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaim_Bloom
The franchise had been one of the most innovative under his management; he integrated analytics into all aspects of the game. He was an early user of breakthrough strategies, now more widely used, such as a much heavier emphasis on shifts and the use of openers (starting games with relief pitchers).
I think we need a baseball man as manager and not someone who is proficient with a computer. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
You’re not behind the times. Analytics = cherry pick and dig up any obscure data you can to support and justify going cheap and sell it to the fans as hope in projections.
“This guy has a 5 ERA but his spin rate compares favorably to the average top 5 Cy Young contenders!”
Or it could be like the "cutting edge" things Tony Larussa used to do with his bullpen such as using pitchers differently.
In reality, Duncan was an analytics guy. He just did it without the computer, instead he had piles of notebooks. He said in an interview during a game this year that had analytics been around when he was coaching, he would have been deep into them.
imadangman wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 06:58 am
Analytics is such an umbrella term. There are different categories of analytics. It's also up to interpretation. However the Cardinals have misinterpreted their analytics should be an indictment on them, not the analytics. Baseball is a business, can you think of any other business sector where you would say it's advantageous to throw "analytics" out the window?
Listening on the radio I hear the announcers astounded at the lack of fundamentals. I believe Marmol was hired because he never played the game at a high level and will rely on analytics. I suspect he will be kept but if replace it will be by someone with a similar mindset.
You realize analytics isn’t the enemy of fundamentals, right?
In theory, true.
In practice, false.
I am a performance consultant and individual improvement advisor.
The value of analytics is immense.
The best decision making must be data driven in order to make maximum performance possible.
No question.
However, data guides and informs.
It does not execute.
People do.
There is no substitute for human asset development.
In all industries, analytics must be a priority because there can never be a pathway to success with the roadmap data provides.
But it can never be prioritized over the individuals who make the journey.
I largely agree with Irish.
MLB has embraced analytics - but too many prioritize it over executing the fundamentals of the game.
The last 2 years STL was in control of a W/C spot - and faded badly.
Analytics did not fail them.
They failed in executing the fundamentals.
Easy.
Obvious.
Correct.
Yes, ability to execute is important. Of course.
So why is Nolan Gorman one of your faves when he is not able to put the bat on the ball 33% of the time?
And Lars Nootbaar -- a Statcast and walk-hunting hero -- just needed a full season to prove his real potential, many on this forum said, based on analytics. Well, he has gotten 553 PAs this year, and all he has to show for it is 13 HRs, 47 RBIs, 4 SBs and a 97 wRC+.
Meanwhile, Jordan Walker is Top 5 in bat speed in MLB, but has a slight problem of where and when to put his bat in the hitting zone.
I have no "favorites".
My analysis is always without bias or agenda.
Including with the 3 players listed above.
rockondlouie wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 08:42 am
Like everything in society things always seem to go TOO FAR.
I think we've reached the saturation point in sports where analytics are starting to be seen as simply one tool managers/coaches can use along w/their extensive experience.
In most walks of life the pendulum never stops in the middle.
And I sure hope we're snapping back to the middle where we start seeing more and more managers using both analytics and their guts (re: accumulated baseball knowledge).
you have to gather the right information, have a system which helps you learn the right lessons, and then know how to apply them.
An example.
Juan Soto is a great hitter who happens to be slow as dirt. Statcast puts his speed in the 13th percentile.
This year Soto has stolen 33 bases for the Mets and has been caught just 3 times.
In fact the entire Mets team is great at stealing bases, 136 up and 17 down. A few other teams have stolen more this year but none has been more successful.
I don't believe Soto's and the team's success just happened. A recent Fangraphs article informed me about a Mets drill "designed to increase the length of their leads and improve their jumps by taking a flat-screen TV monitor showing video of pitchers’ deliveries and pickoff moves out to the infield dirt."
That's analytics coming together with coaching and technology to grab an advantage, and it's helping keep the Mets in the wildcard race despite the collapse of their starting pitching.
(1) gathering information
(2) analyzing that information and deciding what lessons can be learned from it and
(3) applying those lessons learned.
That's what is done in just about every walk of life.
But you have to gather the right information, have a system which helps you learn the right lessons, and then know how to apply them.
But those currently in charge of MLB are for the most part NON traditional baseball men. Ivy league PHDs who lack the insight, intuition, and nuance of the game are making the calls. So perhaps if analytics were exclusively in the hand of Whitey, Dunc, TLR they could filter and translate better to the field what works and is critical. Currently it’s a video game
(1) gathering information
(2) analyzing that information and deciding what lessons can be learned from it and
(3) applying those lessons learned.
That's what is done in just about every walk of life.
But you have to gather the right information, have a system which helps you learn the right lessons, and then know how to apply them.
But those currently in charge of MLB are for the most part NON traditional baseball men. Ivy league PHDs who lack the insight, intuition, and nuance of the game are making the calls. So perhaps if analytics were exclusively in the hand of Whitey, Dunc, TLR they could filter and translate better to the field what works and is critical. Currently it’s a video game
The ability to analyze information and decide what new lessons can be learned from it often comes from non-traditional individuals who can think entirely differently about a problem.
And "baseball men" are still the managers in every MLB dugout.
imadangman wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 06:58 am
Analytics is such an umbrella term. There are different categories of analytics. It's also up to interpretation. However the Cardinals have misinterpreted their analytics should be an indictment on them, not the analytics. Baseball is a business, can you think of any other business sector where you would say it's advantageous to throw "analytics" out the window?
Listening on the radio I hear the announcers astounded at the lack of fundamentals. I believe Marmol was hired because he never played the game at a high level and will rely on analytics. I suspect he will be kept but if replace it will be by someone with a similar mindset.
George Kissell never played the game at a high level. Neither did Mike Shilt.
(1) gathering information
(2) analyzing that information and deciding what lessons can be learned from it and
(3) applying those lessons learned.
That's what is done in just about every walk of life.
But you have to gather the right information, have a system which helps you learn the right lessons, and then know how to apply them.
But those currently in charge of MLB are for the most part NON traditional baseball men. Ivy league PHDs who lack the insight, intuition, and nuance of the game are making the calls. So perhaps if analytics were exclusively in the hand of Whitey, Dunc, TLR they could filter and translate better to the field what works and is critical. Currently it’s a video game
The ability to analyze information and decide what new lessons can be learned from it often comes from non-traditional individuals who can think entirely differently about a problem.
And "baseball men" are still the managers in every MLB dugout.
Would Mo and his in game analytics crew have the same influence on TLR as he has Oli??
