STLtoday.com

CorneliusWolfe wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 08:33 am

Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 08:19 am

CorneliusWolfe wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 08:08 am

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I’ve still yet to see a championship since the big shift from old-man outdated baseball to the great new cutting edge analytics approach.

And you wont until they fix the analytics department. There’s a reason the rays are successful on a next to nothing budget there’s a reason the brewers with their low budget are very successful with their analytics department. I’m trying to think of a successful team right now that doesn’t have a good analytics department and can’t think of any

Not sure if our failures are due to a bad analytics department, or just bad trades, bad personnel choices, bad in-game management, an inability to develop young players, and an unwillingness to fill obvious holes. It seems more like basic bad baseball decisions.

Sonny Gray has the elite spin rate, and advanced analytics favor Noot, Gorman and Walker, but the results have obviously not been there. As much as I’m not a a Burleson fan, the analytics say the aforementioned are the keepers, yet he’s outperformed them all.

The right answer probably lies somewhere in between our contrasting assessments.

ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 06:45 am 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.

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.

Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:25 am

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)

11WSChamps wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:27 am

Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:25 am

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?

Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:34 am

11WSChamps wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:27 am

Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:25 am

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.

11WSChamps wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:41 am

Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:34 am

11WSChamps wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:27 am

Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:25 am

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.

imadangman wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 06:58 am Analytics is such an umbrella term, especially for the anti-analytics crowd. There are different categories of analytics. They're also up to interpretation. And you can place levels of importance on things anywhere between 1-99, it doesn’t have to be 0 or 100. 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?

CorneliusWolfe wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 08:33 am Not sure if our failures are due to a bad analytics department, or just bad trades, bad personnel choices, bad in-game management, an inability to develop young players, and an unwillingness to fill obvious holes. It seems more like basic bad baseball decisions.

Sonny Gray has the elite spin rate, and advanced analytics favor Noot, Gorman and Walker, but the results have obviously not been there. As much as I’m not a a Burleson fan, the analytics say the aforementioned are the keepers, yet he’s outperformed them all.

The right answer probably lies somewhere in between our contrasting assessments.

Melville wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 08:27 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 07:22 am

ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 07:02 am

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.

StlMike1969 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 10:07 am Baseball has always been about:

See ball, hit ball
See ball, catch ball
See ball, throw it where other guy cannot hit it.

It is that simple. Every aspect of the game should focus on making those 3 things as good as they can be. Analytics are good under coaching scenarios that are trying to improve those aspects. Batting cage time and a guy is trying to refind his stroke he can use video and analytics to find the sweet spot. Pitcher trying to find the right angle and look. He can use video and analytics to refine things. Other than that the team needs one alpha male and 5 to 7 other alpha male types to command the room, send the message and keep the team chemistry high. That is what wins championships. Not analyizing and breaking down every aspect and pitch in a game and trying to plan against it. A good alpha male coach will rely on his instincts that decades of playing the game has taught him. That is the one thing that cannot be analyzed. What this team is missing in addition to good players.

Quincy Varnish wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 10:03 am

CorneliusWolfe wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 08:33 am Not sure if our failures are due to a bad analytics department, or just bad trades, bad personnel choices, bad in-game management, an inability to develop young players, and an unwillingness to fill obvious holes. It seems more like basic bad baseball decisions.

Sonny Gray has the elite spin rate, and advanced analytics favor Noot, Gorman and Walker, but the results have obviously not been there. As much as I’m not a a Burleson fan, the analytics say the aforementioned are the keepers, yet he’s outperformed them all.

The right answer probably lies somewhere in between our contrasting assessments.

Other than walk rate, which metrics do you think favor Gorman over Burleson?

ecleme22 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:43 am

11WSChamps wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:41 am

Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:34 am

11WSChamps wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:27 am

Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑19 Sep 2025 09:25 am

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.