STLtoday.com

sdaltons wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 15:57 pm

Shady wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 15:49 pm

sdaltons wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:43 pm The only safe assumption is that JJ needed to be on the trajectory he was on to get where he is now.

Starting off the season in MLB may have gone ok or it may have destroyed him. It's a risk not worth taking.

True. But it sure would have been intriguing.

Too bad they don't throw standard player development practices out the window in the name of your intrigue. Maybe we could have seen JJ switched to pitcher!!

That would have been un-Musial.

Shady wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:01 pm In retrospect, the season could have been much better for the Cardinals had McGreevy been in the starting rotation and Wetherholt been the starting 3B from the start of the season. Before you get snarky, think about the possible impact these two might actually have made.

Let's we've already been over McGreevy and despite YOUR statements, it's been proven that he's been inconsistent. So doubt he would have made a difference. I will say this, if you give up 9.7 hits per 9 innings and strikeout 4.9 per 9 innings, a few things are for certain
1- you won't win the award for most strikeouts
2- you won't have the leagues best ERA (might end with the worst)
3- You won't win the CY
4- you won't win 20 games (might lose 20)
5- you're not going to lead a team to a WS

Now JJ, has hit good in the MINOR LEAGUES next year we will see how he hits in the MLB. You do realize that as of the begining of this season he had played a HUGE total of ZERO games at 3rd in the minor leagues. So you wanted to replace one of the greatest defensive 3rd baseman of all time with a rookie with ZERO professional experience, RIGHT? Do you understand how STUPID that sounds? Now JJ did play some 3rd in college and he now has 5 pro games at 3rd.

Maybe start thinking before you post................and then don't

Imagine McGreevy up down starts all season with a 4.5 era. I wish we had others like that.

Gray 4.30
Pallante 5.00
Mikolas 4.99
Liberatore 4.13
Fedde 5.22

I bet with McGreevy we’d be 63-63 if he was here all season instead of Fedde.

Shady wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:09 pm The edit feature was definitely needed on this one. Thanks to those paying such close attention.Now that it's corrected. Please just comment on the subject of the OP.

Now we understand the 10x edit every post! And no Burly or Sagesse in the rotation? What gives? Are you feeling ok Shady?

Shady wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:01 pm In retrospect, the season could have been much better for the Cardinals had McGreevy been in the starting rotation and Wetherholt been the starting 3B from the start of the season. Before you get snarky, think about the possible impact these two might actually have made.

LoL...retrospect

What maroon

Every other day, every other day
Every other day of the week is fine, yeah
But whenever Monday comes, but whenever Monday comes
A-you can find me cryin' all of the time

Shady wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:01 pm In retrospect, the season could have been much better for the Cardinals had McGreevy been in the starting rotation and Wetherholt been the starting 3B from the start of the season. Before you get snarky, think about the possible impact these two might actually have made.

It’s ridiculous to suggest promoting JJ at the beginning of the year.

As far as McGreevy, the Cards starters were good in April and May. Though McGreevy should’ve been brought in as a full time starter a lot sooner, like early June.

Some of you posters love to just wade in mediocrity. You just like to play it safe. Sometimes, to be very successful in athletics, you have to be bold in trying "high ceiling" opportunities. I have realtime athletic/coaching experience to back this theory up.

Shady wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:09 pm The edit feature was definitely needed on this one. Thanks to those paying such close attention.Now that it's corrected. Please just comment on the subject of the OP.

As usual for you, Shades, it is total bullshite.

Shady wrote: ↑21 Aug 2025 09:38 am Some of you posters love to just wade in mediocrity. You just like to play it safe. Sometimes, to be very successful in athletics, you have to be bold in trying "high ceiling" opportunities. I have realtime athletic/coaching experience to back this theory up.

LOL editor Shady.

Shady wrote: ↑21 Aug 2025 09:38 am Some of you posters love to just wade in mediocrity. You just like to play it safe. Sometimes, to be very successful in athletics, you have to be bold in trying "high ceiling" opportunities. I have realtime athletic/coaching experience to back this theory up.

You have a poor track record on CT

Shady wrote: ↑21 Aug 2025 09:38 am Some of you posters love to just wade in mediocrity. You just like to play it safe. Sometimes, to be very successful in athletics, you have to be bold in trying "high ceiling" opportunities. I have realtime athletic/coaching experience to back this theory up.

The guy who worships the ground mediocre Burleson walks on is now lecturing us about high ceilings. You do not get irony, do you?

craviduce wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:20 pm

Shady wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:15 pm

craviduce wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:12 pm

Shady wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:11 pm

craviduce wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:07 pm Well, your momma sure does care about your schooling, son

Heee Heee Heee

Guru, I teed that one up for you to pounce on. Now please comment of the revised edition.

do you pay attention at all to baseball?

He would've never been in the lineup out of Spring Training....1 Hit, 1 (bleep) hit. And before you say anything, no one is listening anyways.

It Happens.

What? [shirt]?

Yeah

"In restrospect" stooge. Also, you recklessly assume "no one is listening anyways'. Wrong, the obsessed crowd, led by you, follow every single word I post.

I've never heard of half of these guys, and the ones I do know are way past their prime.

Most of these guys never had a prime.

That's all I have to say about that.

“This guy’s dead!!”
“Cross him off the list then!!”

Shady wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:01 pm In retrospect, the season could have been much better for the Cardinals had McGreevy been in the starting rotation and Wetherholt been the starting 3B from the start of the season. Before you get snarky, think about the possible impact these two might actually have made.

I am seriously wondering if you are watching the same mcgreevy?
Mcgreevy has a 4.41 era. His era is worse than league average. While hes better than fedde now, fedde pitched better for first few months. Mcgreevy has given up 4 or more runs in half his starts. Only less than 3 in 3 of 8.

And yet you are acting like hes has been an ace with a 2.00 era.

I think he will improve and develop but i dont think he would have made this team better at all other than a few starts earlier than fedde when fedde melted down.

Its like all you remember is his starts 2 starts ago where he gave up 0 runs and deleted from mind the 6 starts before it.

Shady wrote: ↑21 Aug 2025 09:38 am Some of you posters love to just wade in mediocrity. You just like to play it safe. Sometimes, to be very successful in athletics, you have to be bold in trying "high ceiling" opportunities. I have realtime athletic/coaching experience to back this theory up.

And you are praising mediocrity in mcgreevy. Cuz thats all hes been.

And you never learn about hyping these guys early. What happened the first 2 years burly was on team, he wasnt ready and he made team arguably worse despite ypu saying he would be best hitter behind goldy and arenado at that time. And you wanted him up earlier than he was too which probably would have been worse. You did same thing with carlson who was bad his first year, and gorman, and winn, and scott. And thats not even counting how you make them cost more sooner bringing them up forcing cardinals to be mediocre for more years ciz they now wont spend on free agents.

And yet somehow you always believe that rushing the enxt prospect to majors will somehow improve team immensely and call out disagreeing as being content with mediocrity.

Im not content with mediocrity- i just dont want mediocre results for longer. We need to get better free agents long term. Keep thinking each and every prospect is gonna be a stud clearly aint working. Look at the 1st round of drafts from 2018-2022 and then look how many of the top 10 players were whiffs that never amounted to anything. Many even hit in minors. Theres a few that can jump to majors as studs but its mi iscule.

I dont understand what people find exciting about rushing prospects to majors and seeing them fail every time.

Wattage wrote: ↑21 Aug 2025 10:48 am

Shady wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:01 pm In retrospect, the season could have been much better for the Cardinals had McGreevy been in the starting rotation and Wetherholt been the starting 3B from the start of the season. Before you get snarky, think about the possible impact these two might actually have made.

I am seriously wondering if you are watching the same mcgreevy?
Mcgreevy has a 4.41 era. His era is worse than league average. While hes better than fedde now, fedde pitched better for first few months. Mcgreevy has given up 4 or more runs in half his starts. Only less than 3 in 3 of 8.

And yet you are acting like hes has been an ace with a 2.00 era.

I think he will improve and develop but i dont think he would have made this team better at all other than a few starts earlier than fedde when fedde melted down.

Its like all you remember is his starts 2 starts ago where he gave up 0 runs and deleted from mind the 6 starts before it.

Say what you want, but McGreevy competes!!
A pitcher's job is to help his team win the day he is on the bump. He has been doing that. He has been finding ways to win and the club wins most of his starts. His job is to WIN not strikeout the most guys or not allow any runs. A sign of a good pitcher is a guy that wins his starts.

Cardinals4Life wrote: ↑21 Aug 2025 12:22 pm

Wattage wrote: ↑21 Aug 2025 10:48 am

Shady wrote: ↑20 Aug 2025 14:01 pm In retrospect, the season could have been much better for the Cardinals had McGreevy been in the starting rotation and Wetherholt been the starting 3B from the start of the season. Before you get snarky, think about the possible impact these two might actually have made.

I am seriously wondering if you are watching the same mcgreevy?
Mcgreevy has a 4.41 era. His era is worse than league average. While hes better than fedde now, fedde pitched better for first few months. Mcgreevy has given up 4 or more runs in half his starts. Only less than 3 in 3 of 8.

And yet you are acting like hes has been an ace with a 2.00 era.

I think he will improve and develop but i dont think he would have made this team better at all other than a few starts earlier than fedde when fedde melted down.

Its like all you remember is his starts 2 starts ago where he gave up 0 runs and deleted from mind the 6 starts before it.

Say what you want, but McGreevy competes!!
A pitcher's job is to help his team win the day he is on the bump. He has been doing that. He has been finding ways to win and the club wins most of his starts. His job is to WIN not strikeout the most guys or not allow any runs. A sign of a good pitcher is a guy that wins his starts.

No the teams job is to win. The pitcher can't win on his own (well Babe Ruth might have).