STLtoday.com

I didn't get to watch the game, but trying to project a career based on six innings of work is foolish. Having said that, here's my take.

Last night McGreevy's GB pct was the highest it's been all year. Sometimes GBs get through for hits. He hasn't shown he'll ever be a high K pitcher so his game is to keep the walks down and the ball in the park. Even doing that it'll take a better IF defense for him to flourish.

He just turned 25 and he should be in the rotation for a while so we'll see for sure how he develops.

jcgmoi wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 16:02 pm I didn't get to watch the game, but trying to project a career based on six innings of work is foolish. Having said that, here's my take.

Last night McGreevy's GB pct was the highest it's been all year. Sometimes GBs get through for hits. He hasn't shown he'll ever be a high K pitcher so his game is to keep the walks down and the ball in the park. Even doing that it'll take a better IF defense for him to flourish.

He just turned 25 and he should be in the rotation for a while so we'll see for sure how he develops.

And it would be foolish to believe a history of giving up a lot of hits and not missing many bats would bring anyone with a hint of knowledge any different take then what some have mentioned here.

PanamaCardFan wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 15:36 pm On today's telecast, Sweeney just said that McGreevy was "excellent" last night.

6 IP, 4 ER, 7 H, 1 BB, 4 K, 1 HR. That's a 6.00 ERA and a 1.333 WHIP for the night. Some might consider that "poor".

What was excellent was seeing a young pitcher, who hlgot down early, pulled it together and gave his team a chance to win. That is a pitcher's #1 job.

11WSChamps, sorry I couldn't fill any gaps in your knowledge.

jcgmoi wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 16:26 pm 11WSChamps, sorry I couldn't fill any gaps in your knowledge.

You never disappoint.

Think before posting.

Carp4Cy wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 10:17 am

sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 08:00 am

AtillaTheBlue1 wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 07:50 am his stat line doesn't tell the story, he was very unlucky to give up 3 of those 4 runs

and on at least 2 of them, he made his pitch and batter got lucky. they didn't hit 1 solid ball to knock in any of 3 runs, 4th run,homer, yes it was tagged.

this is a game where you know, you throw same stuff and you will have quality starts and win games.

The lucky shots, some came from pitches high in the zone. I’m thinking lower down and maybe those are ground balls or line outs.

One of those hits came off a slow roller ground ball that Gorman couldn't field. Nado throws that one out every time.

Nado is not here anymore. They will trade him if they can in the off season. Our pitch to contact guys suffer.

Did anybody have "I miss Arenado at 3B" so soon in their bingo card?

McGreevy is probably going to be fine for what he is. He's a young, cost controlled 4th or 5th starter. Don't expect him to be much better than that, because there's never really been thought of as anything much more than that. But that's a good thing to have and a good thing to be able to consistently develop. We should be consistently churning out a few guys like him every few years.

The problem is when that's all you can develop. And also all you can really sign because you're unwilling to dive into the high priced starting pitching pool, which is understandable.

But hey, there's hope on the horizon. Maybe Doyle can be that guy, and hopefully relatively soon. Once Liberatore gets his endurance up and can get used to those full time starter innings he should be a competent #2 or #3. Add in a McGreevy and a Pallante, that's at least a solid, cost controlled base of four starters. Throw in Mathews who could be a solid #3 and maybe they win the lottery on some of those draft picks.

At the very least it's not as embarrassing as it has been the last few years. And I think I read somewhere that they had the 7th most expensive starting rotation in baseball this year.

11WSChamps--Is there a reason you feel you have to personalize every response to me? You're like clockwork. Can't you talk ball like a normal person?

jcgmoi wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 17:58 pm 11WSChamps--Is there a reason you feel you have to personalize every response to me? You're like clockwork. Can't you talk ball like a normal person?

You're the one that called out people as being "foolish"
For being able to see the obvious in Mcgreevy.

I was talking baseball. You're the one calling people foolish.

I said it was foolish to project a career off of six innings. You disagree? Then I offered my take, which you find obvious so I guess you agree there too.

So why post at all unless it's to take a shot?

jcgmoi wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 18:33 pm I said it was foolish to project a career off of six innings. You disagree? Then I offered my take, which you find obvious so I guess you agree there too.

So why post at all unless it's to take a shot?

You're the one who said six innings. The "obvious" part had to do with his past peripherals not that I was agreeing with your take.

He has a lot more history than that.

I simply pointed that out, all you had to do was look it up.

I pointed out earlier the guy has value..it wasn't meant to be a knock on him.

Clubmaker2 wrote: ↑03 Aug 2025 12:07 pm Will these pitch to contact pitchers be aided a little more than some others, by ball strike call challenge system?

Remembering how the cards wound up with Mulder (after looking at Hudson) after they stated they wanted a power pitcher for the playoffs for when the umps squeezed the plate.

I remember being a quite upset 14 year old that Hudson got swept up by Atlanta. Only to be a quite elated 14 year old a few days later when we got Mulder. I loved that Oakland Big-3 so much.