In my opinion it's defense first

[OldRed]

+1.
This team needs offense! As I've posted a number of times - the top offenses, not the top pitching staffs or defense, have won the World Series the past 10+ years. The average winner the last 3 years has been #3 in offense. The Cards were #1 in the NL in 2011 (pre-DH in NL) and #5 in MLB.

10-years - WS winner rank on offense (runs scored):
2025 - #2 LA
2024 - #2 LA
2023 - #3 Rangers
2022 - #6 Astros
2021- #7 Braves
2020- #1 LA
2019 - #6 Nats
2018 - #1 Red Sox
2017 - #1 Astros
2016 - #3 Cubs

Pitching
2025 - #14 -Dodgers
2024 - #13 -Dodgers
2023 -#13 Rangers
2022- #2 Astros
2021- #7 - Braves
2020- #1 Dodgers
2019 - #9 Nats
2018 -#6 Red Sox
2017 -#9 Astros
2016 -#1 Cubs
2015 - #10 KC

Amen

I don't get this obsession w/defense over offense.

Sure you don't want a team of iron gloves but you also don't want a team of all glove/very little offensive players like Winn & VSII either!

Give me the powerhitters and good hitters over defense any day.

JMO

In all sports, basketball, football, hockey and yes baseball it is defense first, which makes the pitching better followed by offense. Sure, we all like offense, but think of the great teams Herzog put together, it started with defense. In hockey you don't win a Stanley Cup without great defense. Same holds true in the NFL, it starts with the defense followed by a good offense. How did the Celtics win all their championships, it was defense with Bill Russell.

Nope, not any more OR.

Not in baseball (or even hockey RE: Oilers w/Gretz), great offenses can win championships w/even league average defense.

The 2025 Dodgers didn't have a great defensive team, but they sure were loaded w/power hitters!

The game has changed dramatically over the past decade or so and now favors power hitting over defense.

Give me a team loaded w/power hitters and good hitters and average defense over one w/too many M. Winn, 2025 NADO & VSII types any day.

JMO

Offense wins games; defense wins championships- old adage.

I believe purely from a consistent standpoint point, that defense wins out. It never slumps. Plus good pitching [censored] down good hitting.

Defense for 1000 please.

Key phrase BDog ----"old adage"

You simply can't win a World Series in this day and age unless you have a powerful offense.

Now if you guys want to amend that to "Great Pitching", then I could see your point but even w/three Hall of Fame starters we saw the Braves win only one World Series.

Great defense, w/o the great hitting (and solid pitching), won't win a WS in today's MLB.

I figured you’d catch the “old” part. I’m not arguing. I’m saying, game per game my defense will show up. I should be in many close games. Then need breaks. Offense teams take holidays and can be shut down. Defense cant. That’s all.

But in reality BDog I've always made the point "How many of those great plays actually won a ball game"?

Or did they come in the 2nd inning w/no one on base?

It's why I don't take WAR to seriously on certain players since they value defense (incorrectly) when they don't know if it really played a part and in what games?

I'm not devaluing defense, you have to at least have players who can make the routine plays.

But I'll take a M. Holliday over a VSII any day.

In Center Field? I guess you don't remember the play Holliday screwed up in LF a playoff series.

No, just using an OF comparison.

And I knew you'd bring that play up to support your position.

So you're going to point to ONE PLAY where Matt messed up and IGNORE the DOZENS upon DOZENS of games his bat won with his eight year Cardinals slash of .293 .380 .494 .874?

I guess you don't remember C. Flood, great defensive CF'er, turning the wrong way on a fly ball that cost the Cardinals the 1968 WS?

I wasn't knocking Holliday who was playing a position not known for defense. But up the middle you need defense.

Sure, I remember 7 time GG winner taking a step in on a line drive that went over his head. That wasn't the only play that cost the 1968 WS.

I guess you have forgotten the great defensive plays Jim Edmonds made to win baseball games

https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r ... ORM=VAMGZC

I haven't forgotten any plays OR.

Guess you forgot J. Edmonds clutch Game 6 2004 playoff HR:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DBXSMFJS_dg/

Great players give you both offense and defense, especially up the middle. This team is and probably will be lacking pitching. They will need the best defense behind them as possible. Hopefully others will step up with offense we haven't seen the last couple of years. But even with a better offense the pitching as I have stated will need a good defensive team behind them and a very good catcher who can throw out potential base stealers. I don't recall a good pitcher that didn't have a good defense behind him. Even the great one's good defenses. That's exactly why Gibson always wanted Maxvill at SS. I guess, I have one opinion and you have another. This is the type of conversations that use to go on at the local bar having a beer.

[rockondlouie]

Amen

I don't get this obsession w/defense over offense.

Sure you don't want a team of iron gloves but you also don't want a team of all glove/very little offensive players like Winn & VSII either!

Give me the powerhitters and good hitters over defense any day.

JMO

In all sports, basketball, football, hockey and yes baseball it is defense first, which makes the pitching better followed by offense. Sure, we all like offense, but think of the great teams Herzog put together, it started with defense. In hockey you don't win a Stanley Cup without great defense. Same holds true in the NFL, it starts with the defense followed by a good offense. How did the Celtics win all their championships, it was defense with Bill Russell.

Nope, not any more OR.

Not in baseball (or even hockey RE: Oilers w/Gretz), great offenses can win championships w/even league average defense.

The 2025 Dodgers didn't have a great defensive team, but they sure were loaded w/power hitters!

The game has changed dramatically over the past decade or so and now favors power hitting over defense.

Give me a team loaded w/power hitters and good hitters and average defense over one w/too many M. Winn, 2025 NADO & VSII types any day.

JMO

Offense wins games; defense wins championships- old adage.

I believe purely from a consistent standpoint point, that defense wins out. It never slumps. Plus good pitching [censored] down good hitting.

Defense for 1000 please.

Key phrase BDog ----"old adage"

You simply can't win a World Series in this day and age unless you have a powerful offense.

Now if you guys want to amend that to "Great Pitching", then I could see your point but even w/three Hall of Fame starters we saw the Braves win only one World Series.

Great defense, w/o the great hitting (and solid pitching), won't win a WS in today's MLB.

I figured you’d catch the “old” part. I’m not arguing. I’m saying, game per game my defense will show up. I should be in many close games. Then need breaks. Offense teams take holidays and can be shut down. Defense cant. That’s all.

But in reality BDog I've always made the point "How many of those great plays actually won a ball game"?

Or did they come in the 2nd inning w/no one on base?

It's why I don't take WAR to seriously on certain players since they value defense (incorrectly) when they don't know if it really played a part and in what games?

I'm not devaluing defense, you have to at least have players who can make the routine plays.

But I'll take a M. Holliday over a VSII any day.

In Center Field? I guess you don't remember the play Holliday screwed up in LF a playoff series.

No, just using an OF comparison.

And I knew you'd bring that play up to support your position.

So you're going to point to ONE PLAY where Matt messed up and IGNORE the DOZENS upon DOZENS of games his bat won with his eight year Cardinals slash of .293 .380 .494 .874?

I guess you don't remember C. Flood, great defensive CF'er, turning the wrong way on a fly ball that cost the Cardinals the 1968 WS?

I wasn't knocking Holliday who was playing a position not known for defense. But up the middle you need defense.

Sure, I remember 7 time GG winner taking a step in on a line drive that went over his head. That wasn't the only play that cost the 1968 WS.

I guess you have forgotten the great defensive plays Jim Edmonds made to win baseball games

https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r ... ORM=VAMGZC

I haven't forgotten any plays OR.

Guess you forgot J. Edmonds clutch Game 6 2004 playoff HR:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DBXSMFJS_dg/

Great players give you both offense and defense, especially up the middle. This team is and probably will be lacking pitching. They will need the best defense behind them as possible. Hopefully others will step up with offense we haven't seen the last couple of years. But even with a better offense the pitching as I have stated will need a good defensive team behind them and a very good catcher who can throw out potential base stealers. I don't recall a good pitcher that didn't have a good defense behind him. Even the great one's good defenses. That's exactly why Gibson always wanted Maxvill at SS. I guess, I have one opinion and you have another. This is the type of conversations that use to go on at the local bar having a beer.

J. Edmonds/S. Rolen types are certainly unicorns (even Albert was an above average fielder at 1st base) but they're extremely hard to find and rarely available (what a great GM W. Jocketty was to steal Edmonds and Rolen while drafting Albert).

I'm firmly w/you having solid defense up the middle (2-4-6-8) is ideal but they have to be surrounded by power from 3-5 & 7-9 if those great up the middle fielders are weak hitters.

As always respect OR and Happy Holidays to you and your Family!

[ClassicO]

It’s amazing that people just ignore statistics. The clear statistics over the past 10 years has been a top offense is the primary factor with a World Series champion. Old adages like “ defense wins championships” are simple, but not supported by the facts.

Of course, very good pitching and defense is necessary. It’s just that the teams that have won the World Series in modern times have pitching that ranks an average of 8th or 9th.

World Series winners also ranked about eighth or ninth in defense compared to third in offense.
I had to use AI for the ranks on defense there but this is Chat GPT’s answer:
• “A broader analysis of the past 30 champions showed that few champions finished No. 1 in defensive efficiency or defensive runs saved — only two (2002 Angels and 2016 Cubs) across a long span — and that many winners had middling defense relative to the league. 
• Over this span, the average defensive efficiency ranking of champions was ~8.6, meaning champions tended to finish in roughly the top third of the league defensively, but with plenty of exceptions.”

[moose-and-squirrel]

the thought of VS playing every day in CF made me throw up in my mouth a little bit

[OldRed]

Nice conservations and no name calling or insulting remarks. Now we wait and see if they can come up with a bat and what direction they go with pitching and defense.

[zuck698]

Didn't read it. .is the liar still claiming he has me on ignore?

It has gotten comical for sure. Of course he reads every post you make. He never put you on ignore.

I believe he spends his entire day on Cards Talk.

Red, do you think he will he admit that he is wrong about stars only coming from the top 10?

It's actually been posted on here many times that one of the problems the Cardinals have in drafting future
"All Stars" is that they historically have drafted toward the end of the 1st round. It's the penalty to be paid for
having winning season after winning season.

Cranny I will post this again as obviously you didn't read it or you are just being obtuse.


Of course it's true. Take the time to check it out.

This isn't hockey Cranny. If it was I would agree with you. But stars for the MLB come from various rounds, not just top 10 picks. Some recent examples: Mookie Betts 5th, Semien 6th, DeGrom 9th, J.D. Martinex 20th, etc. Another example is that 30 of the 54 All-Stars in 2021 were taken in the 2nd round or later. You are just plain wrong here on your stance!

You are wrong in your statement that only stars come from the top ten in the draft. Are you standing by that statement?

Google it, Zuck. "Most elite MLB players are picked very high in the draft." Of course there are many exceptions, but it's a general rule.

No sir. Not good enough retort. “Very high in draft “ doesn’t mean top 10. “Of course there are many exceptions “contradicts general rule.

Cranny, so the example I gave above of 30 out of 54 All-Stars is a "general rule"? What you said was a blatant falsehood, you were proven wrong, and then when this is pointed out to you, you double down on wrong? I remember you had a post one time about how "experience" and "wisdom" came with age. I would have assumed that being man enough to admit when you were wrong, would have came with those two traits, but apparently not for you. Have a great day.

[WLTFE]

Didn't read it. .is the liar still claiming he has me on ignore?

It has gotten comical for sure. Of course he reads every post you make. He never put you on ignore.

I believe he spends his entire day on Cards Talk.

Red, do you think he will he admit that he is wrong about stars only coming from the top 10?

It's actually been posted on here many times that one of the problems the Cardinals have in drafting future
"All Stars" is that they historically have drafted toward the end of the 1st round. It's the penalty to be paid for
having winning season after winning season.

Cranny I will post this again as obviously you didn't read it or you are just being obtuse.


Of course it's true. Take the time to check it out.

This isn't hockey Cranny. If it was I would agree with you. But stars for the MLB come from various rounds, not just top 10 picks. Some recent examples: Mookie Betts 5th, Semien 6th, DeGrom 9th, J.D. Martinex 20th, etc. Another example is that 30 of the 54 All-Stars in 2021 were taken in the 2nd round or later. You are just plain wrong here on your stance!

You are wrong in your statement that only stars come from the top ten in the draft. Are you standing by that statement?

Google it, Zuck. "Most elite MLB players are picked very high in the draft." Of course there are many exceptions, but it's a general rule.

No sir. Not good enough retort. “Very high in draft “ doesn’t mean top 10. “Of course there are many exceptions “contradicts general rule.

Cranny, so the example I gave above of 30 out of 54 All-Stars is a "general rule"? What you said was a blatant falsehood, you were proven wrong, and then when this is pointed out to you, you double down on wrong? I remember you had a post one time about how "experience" and "wisdom" came with age. I would have assumed that being man enough to admit when you were wrong, would have came with those two traits, but apparently not for you. Have a great day.

Good luck waiting for that admission!

[Imperial Capitalist]

the thought of VS playing every day in CF made me throw up in my mouth a little bit

Victor Scott's slg % didn't even equal Trey Turner's batting average, yet many are hopeful he has a 3rd year to....do more of the same?

[dugoutrex]

offense wins championships!

[moose-and-squirrel]

the thought of VS playing every day in CF made me throw up in my mouth a little bit

Victor Scott's slg % didn't even equal Trey Turner's batting average, yet many are hopeful he has a 3rd year to....do more of the same?

who knows? Billy Hamilton, I mean, Victor Scott could start doing 'roids and become the next Aroldis Garcia!

[renostl]

the thought of VS playing every day in CF made me throw up in my mouth a little bit

Victor Scott's slg % didn't even equal Trey Turner's batting average, yet many are hopeful he has a 3rd year to....do more of the same?

VS2 and Winn are the 2 players that average hitting is acceptable, IMO.
Mr Scott has a ways to go to get to average, I'd think that everyone agrees with that.
IF they do that they are contributing on both offense, defense and the base paths.

The larger issue currently are the one tool players not fully bringing that one tool
while not having other attributes. A roster with multiple DH/C and 1B is problematic
when they bring a bat, devastating when none bring SLG.

We should aim higher than either just D or just O.

[Cranny]

Didn't read it. .is the liar still claiming he has me on ignore?

It has gotten comical for sure. Of course he reads every post you make. He never put you on ignore.

I believe he spends his entire day on Cards Talk.

Red, do you think he will he admit that he is wrong about stars only coming from the top 10?

It's actually been posted on here many times that one of the problems the Cardinals have in drafting future
"All Stars" is that they historically have drafted toward the end of the 1st round. It's the penalty to be paid for
having winning season after winning season.

Cranny I will post this again as obviously you didn't read it or you are just being obtuse.


Of course it's true. Take the time to check it out.

This isn't hockey Cranny. If it was I would agree with you. But stars for the MLB come from various rounds, not just top 10 picks. Some recent examples: Mookie Betts 5th, Semien 6th, DeGrom 9th, J.D. Martinex 20th, etc. Another example is that 30 of the 54 All-Stars in 2021 were taken in the 2nd round or later. You are just plain wrong here on your stance!

You are wrong in your statement that only stars come from the top ten in the draft. Are you standing by that statement?

Google it, Zuck. "Most elite MLB players are picked very high in the draft." Of course there are many exceptions, but it's a general rule.

No sir. Not good enough retort. “Very high in draft “ doesn’t mean top 10. “Of course there are many exceptions “contradicts general rule.

Cranny, so the example I gave above of 30 out of 54 All-Stars is a "general rule"? What you said was a blatant falsehood, you were proven wrong, and then when this is pointed out to you, you double down on wrong? I remember you had a post one time about how "experience" and "wisdom" came with age. I would have assumed that being man enough to admit when you were wrong, would have came with those two traits, but apparently not for you. Have a great day.

Thank you for your insults, zuck. Much appreciated. Happy holidays to you too.

[zuck698]

Didn't read it. .is the liar still claiming he has me on ignore?

It has gotten comical for sure. Of course he reads every post you make. He never put you on ignore.

I believe he spends his entire day on Cards Talk.

Red, do you think he will he admit that he is wrong about stars only coming from the top 10?

It's actually been posted on here many times that one of the problems the Cardinals have in drafting future
"All Stars" is that they historically have drafted toward the end of the 1st round. It's the penalty to be paid for
having winning season after winning season.

Cranny I will post this again as obviously you didn't read it or you are just being obtuse.


Of course it's true. Take the time to check it out.

This isn't hockey Cranny. If it was I would agree with you. But stars for the MLB come from various rounds, not just top 10 picks. Some recent examples: Mookie Betts 5th, Semien 6th, DeGrom 9th, J.D. Martinex 20th, etc. Another example is that 30 of the 54 All-Stars in 2021 were taken in the 2nd round or later. You are just plain wrong here on your stance!

You are wrong in your statement that only stars come from the top ten in the draft. Are you standing by that statement?

Google it, Zuck. "Most elite MLB players are picked very high in the draft." Of course there are many exceptions, but it's a general rule.

No sir. Not good enough retort. “Very high in draft “ doesn’t mean top 10. “Of course there are many exceptions “contradicts general rule.

Cranny, so the example I gave above of 30 out of 54 All-Stars is a "general rule"? What you said was a blatant falsehood, you were proven wrong, and then when this is pointed out to you, you double down on wrong? I remember you had a post one time about how "experience" and "wisdom" came with age. I would have assumed that being man enough to admit when you were wrong, would have came with those two traits, but apparently not for you. Have a great day.

Thank you for your insults, zuck. Much appreciated. Happy holidays to you too.

What insults? I simply pointed out the facts that you won't admit when you are clearly wrong. I gave you chance to fess up that you were wrong, but you chose to double down yet again. That is on you Cranny. Happy Holidays to you and the family as well.

[OldRed]

Didn't read it. .is the liar still claiming he has me on ignore?

It has gotten comical for sure. Of course he reads every post you make. He never put you on ignore.

I believe he spends his entire day on Cards Talk.

Red, do you think he will he admit that he is wrong about stars only coming from the top 10?

It's actually been posted on here many times that one of the problems the Cardinals have in drafting future
"All Stars" is that they historically have drafted toward the end of the 1st round. It's the penalty to be paid for
having winning season after winning season.

Cranny I will post this again as obviously you didn't read it or you are just being obtuse.


Of course it's true. Take the time to check it out.

This isn't hockey Cranny. If it was I would agree with you. But stars for the MLB come from various rounds, not just top 10 picks. Some recent examples: Mookie Betts 5th, Semien 6th, DeGrom 9th, J.D. Martinex 20th, etc. Another example is that 30 of the 54 All-Stars in 2021 were taken in the 2nd round or later. You are just plain wrong here on your stance!

You are wrong in your statement that only stars come from the top ten in the draft. Are you standing by that statement?

Google it, Zuck. "Most elite MLB players are picked very high in the draft." Of course there are many exceptions, but it's a general rule.

No sir. Not good enough retort. “Very high in draft “ doesn’t mean top 10. “Of course there are many exceptions “contradicts general rule.

Cranny, so the example I gave above of 30 out of 54 All-Stars is a "general rule"? What you said was a blatant falsehood, you were proven wrong, and then when this is pointed out to you, you double down on wrong? I remember you had a post one time about how "experience" and "wisdom" came with age. I would have assumed that being man enough to admit when you were wrong, would have came with those two traits, but apparently not for you. Have a great day.

Thank you for your insults, zuck. Much appreciated. Happy holidays to you too.

What insults? I simply pointed out the facts that you won't admit when you are clearly wrong. I gave you chance to fess up that you were wrong, but you chose to double down yet again. That is on you Cranny. Happy Holidays to you and the family as well.

Give up. He will never admit when he is wrong, and he will always want the last word.

[WLTFE]

BOOM...sums up trying to talk baseball to some posters. .if you disagree then their feelings are hurt...very sad and pathetic...they apparently need attention!

[OldRed]

BOOM...sums up trying to talk baseball to some posters. .if you disagree then their feelings are hurt...very sad and pathetic...they apparently need attention!

Exactly,