For the Matheny haters

[AnExParrot]

Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.

I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.

Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do

Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.

It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.

Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.

Or a rotation in 2016 of -

Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA

Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.

Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?

He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.

I talk about both the minuses AND the pluses.
If that’s talking out of “both sides of the neck”, so be it.
Trying to be objective with people who are always 110% negative is always going to be out of step.

Sure, just overlook the context of my comment(it was a response to something very specific) and present that^ bull[shirt].

Sorry, AEP. You say bull-shirt and you don’t get a response.
Just the way it is, friend.

Except, that was a response, in keeping with your desperate need to get the last word.

[Cranny]

I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.

Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do

Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.

It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.

Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.

Or a rotation in 2016 of -

Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA

Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.

Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?

He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.

I talk about both the minuses AND the pluses.
If that’s talking out of “both sides of the neck”, so be it.
Trying to be objective with people who are always 110% negative is always going to be out of step.

Sure, just overlook the context of my comment(it was a response to something very specific) and present that^ bull[shirt].

Sorry, AEP. You say bull-shirt and you don’t get a response.
Just the way it is, friend.

Except, that was a response, in keeping with your desperate need to get the last word.

If continuing to respond to people who address me on this thread is “desperately” needing to get “the last word”, I plead guilty.

[AnExParrot]

Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do

Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.

It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.

Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.

Or a rotation in 2016 of -

Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA

Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.

Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?

He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.

I talk about both the minuses AND the pluses.
If that’s talking out of “both sides of the neck”, so be it.
Trying to be objective with people who are always 110% negative is always going to be out of step.

Sure, just overlook the context of my comment(it was a response to something very specific) and present that^ bull[shirt].

Sorry, AEP. You say bull-shirt and you don’t get a response.
Just the way it is, friend.

Except, that was a response, in keeping with your desperate need to get the last word.

If continuing to respond to people who address me on this thread is “desperately” needing to get “the last word”, I plead guilty.

Your desperate need to get the last word made you say, "...you don't get a response" in the middle of <checks notes>a response. And that same desperate need created that^ response.

If saying "bull[shirt]" means I don't get a response, then don't [fork]ing respond.

[Cranny]

Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.

It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.

Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.

Or a rotation in 2016 of -

Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA

Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.

Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?

He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.

I talk about both the minuses AND the pluses.
If that’s talking out of “both sides of the neck”, so be it.
Trying to be objective with people who are always 110% negative is always going to be out of step.

Sure, just overlook the context of my comment(it was a response to something very specific) and present that^ bull[shirt].

Sorry, AEP. You say bull-shirt and you don’t get a response.
Just the way it is, friend.

Except, that was a response, in keeping with your desperate need to get the last word.

If continuing to respond to people who address me on this thread is “desperately” needing to get “the last word”, I plead guilty.

Your desperate need to get the last word made you say, "...you don't get a response" in the middle of <checks notes>a response. And that same desperate need created that^ response.

If saying "bull[shirt]" means I don't get a response, then don't [fork]ing respond.

See, AEP? If you just let it lie, this thread will end. But when you childishly throw around bull-shirt and forking, you’re absolutely the poster who feels like they have to get in the last word.

[ecleme22]

Yes it is.

Very simple, Red. You and your tag team troll partner should just stay off a thread if you don’t like it.

I do take a particular enjoyment in the folks who want to dispute the piece that I posted but their debate points are basically "just because". People are generally challenged when data doesn't align with their preconceived opinions... and then they react emotionally instead of rationally or cordially.

Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do

Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.

It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.

Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.

Or a rotation in 2016 of -

Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA

2016 Cardinals:
Team WAR: 39.4 (9th in MLB)
779 runs scored, 712 runs allowed, +67 run differential
X-W/L: 88-74
Actual W/L: 86-76

Once again, you keep listing a bunch of cherry-picked names--as if that's supposed to be some kind of compelling argument--without noting the actual underlying production of the players on the roster. The reality is the 2016 Cardinals were a good--not great--team that performed pretty much in-line with their underlying raw production. So why do you persist in trying to weave this utter fiction that Matheny somehow magically transformed chicken-s into chicken salad?

I’m not weaving anything. I’m just saying he did fairly well with some of the average players on the roster. He sure didn’t have All Stars at every position and a bunch of Cy Young candidates in the rotation. If that’s “cherry picking” so be it.

Some Cards offense numbers in 2016:

Garcia: .393 obp
Molina: .787 ops
Adams: .780 ops
Hazel: .775 ops
Diaz: .879 ops!
Carp: .885 ops
Piscotty: .800 ops
Gyroko: .801 ops

6 players hit 20 or more HR.

Also, no team has an all star at every position.

Wait. You mean he and his staff brought out some good things from average players?

No, they just had decent offensive talent. And Diaz plopped in their lap.

“Decent”? Okay. “Better than decent” to go deep into October? Maybe not so much.

Cranny: "look at the 2016, they didn't have anybody!"
Me: "Actually, look at their good offensive numbers."
Cranny: "Looks like Matheny's staff brought out things from average players!"
Me: "No. They just had decent offensive talent."
Cranny: "'Decent?' You need better than 'decent' to go deep in October."


LOL. This is the perfect example of Cranny when debating Matheny.

1. The team had inferior talent.
2. When shown how the team had good talent, then attributes it to Matheny's staff.
3. When someone disagrees about the MM attribution, he goes back to saying the team's talent was inferior.

LOL

[NYCardsFan]

Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.

Or a rotation in 2016 of -

Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA

Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.

Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?

He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.

I talk about both the minuses AND the pluses.
If that’s talking out of “both sides of the neck”, so be it.
Trying to be objective with people who are always 110% negative is always going to be out of step.

Sure, just overlook the context of my comment(it was a response to something very specific) and present that^ bull[shirt].

Sorry, AEP. You say bull-shirt and you don’t get a response.
Just the way it is, friend.

Except, that was a response, in keeping with your desperate need to get the last word.

If continuing to respond to people who address me on this thread is “desperately” needing to get “the last word”, I plead guilty.

Your desperate need to get the last word made you say, "...you don't get a response" in the middle of <checks notes>a response. And that same desperate need created that^ response.

If saying "bull[shirt]" means I don't get a response, then don't [fork]ing respond.

See, AEP? If you just let it lie, this thread will end. But when you childishly throw around bull-shirt and forking, you’re absolutely the poster who feels like they have to get in the last word.

"See, AEP, if you just let it lie, this thread will end."

Meanwhile, number of posts in this thread:
AEP: 7
Cranny: 76

[Cranny]

Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.

Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?

He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.

I talk about both the minuses AND the pluses.
If that’s talking out of “both sides of the neck”, so be it.
Trying to be objective with people who are always 110% negative is always going to be out of step.

Sure, just overlook the context of my comment(it was a response to something very specific) and present that^ bull[shirt].

Sorry, AEP. You say bull-shirt and you don’t get a response.
Just the way it is, friend.

Except, that was a response, in keeping with your desperate need to get the last word.

If continuing to respond to people who address me on this thread is “desperately” needing to get “the last word”, I plead guilty.

Your desperate need to get the last word made you say, "...you don't get a response" in the middle of <checks notes>a response. And that same desperate need created that^ response.

If saying "bull[shirt]" means I don't get a response, then don't [fork]ing respond.

See, AEP? If you just let it lie, this thread will end. But when you childishly throw around bull-shirt and forking, you’re absolutely the poster who feels like they have to get in the last word.

"See, AEP, if you just let it lie, this thread will end."

Meanwhile, number of posts in this thread:
AEP: 7
Cranny: 76

Is that the “last word”, NY?

[callitwhatyouwant]

Sounds like you’re talking about yourself because that’s exactly what you do

Exactly. OldFriend has it in his mind that the Matheny criticism should've been directed at Mo. So he found a Viva article (even though he [shirt] talked the site earlier in this thread) and is getting chummy with Cranny.

It's well documented that Matheny's bullpen use was reactive, random and widely called into question for years. Along with the way he ran the clubhouse, weirdly favored certain players, etc.

Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.

Or a rotation in 2016 of -

Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA

Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.

Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?

Remember when Matheny was fired and the guy in charge cited his poor results as part of the reason for the firing? But those results (team was one game above .500 at the time) were in line or better than 3 of the 4 seasons put up by the current manager? And the current manager at one point, in spite of said results, received a contract extension so that he wouldn't have to be concerned that poor results could put his job at risk?

Make it make sense.

No doubt there’s been a recent stale nature of things settling in. But changes are happening. Is it overdue?
Sure.

You’re SO close! Just say it with me: “John Mozeliak should have been fired years ago.”

You’ll feel better, I promise.

John Mozeliak should probably have been given a different role in the Cardinals organization years ago, if he would have accepted it. He should have anticipated the backward slides of Goldy, Arenado, Walker, and Gorman. No excuse for it.

part of coaching and part of managing talent is understanding what is sticking and not sticking with your players. If you don't see the trends of what your players are doing relative to the other players in your system and the macro of the league, then thats on you. Walker and Gorman being younger in the development side should have clear markers they are achieving. Goldy and Arenado should have well established trends that you are tracking and when they stop trending in those parameters, you should be able to understand why. Even if that excuse is age.

Arenado went from 7.9 WAR in 2022 to 2.2 WAR in 2023.
Going from 31 years old to 32 years old. You’re saying that should have been anticipated?

we don't have access to all the data sets they use that break down how players are trending and when. I'm not saying that age is the reason, I'm saying part of the reason behind a players dropoff has to be attributed to lack of oversight by coaching, lack of effort by player, or like I said sometimes EVEN age. There are definitely metrics that would signal a dropoff. Not for people that slump 1 year and then rebound. Those are different circumstances.

[WLTFE]

Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.

Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?

He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.

I talk about both the minuses AND the pluses.
If that’s talking out of “both sides of the neck”, so be it.
Trying to be objective with people who are always 110% negative is always going to be out of step.

Sure, just overlook the context of my comment(it was a response to something very specific) and present that^ bull[shirt].

Sorry, AEP. You say bull-shirt and you don’t get a response.
Just the way it is, friend.

Except, that was a response, in keeping with your desperate need to get the last word.

If continuing to respond to people who address me on this thread is “desperately” needing to get “the last word”, I plead guilty.

Your desperate need to get the last word made you say, "...you don't get a response" in the middle of <checks notes>a response. And that same desperate need created that^ response.

If saying "bull[shirt]" means I don't get a response, then don't [fork]ing respond.

See, AEP? If you just let it lie, this thread will end. But when you childishly throw around bull-shirt and forking, you’re absolutely the poster who feels like they have to get in the last word.

"See, AEP, if you just let it lie, this thread will end."

Meanwhile, number of posts in this thread:
AEP: 7
Cranny: 76

It's difficult to have the last word with someone who lives on this site....unless you point out that they lied about putting people on ignore..then poof...they disappear...fortunately, it's easier to understand when you realize they are seeking attention and are harmless.

[rockondlouie]

Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.

Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?

He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.

I talk about both the minuses AND the pluses.
If that’s talking out of “both sides of the neck”, so be it.
Trying to be objective with people who are always 110% negative is always going to be out of step.

Sure, just overlook the context of my comment(it was a response to something very specific) and present that^ bull[shirt].

Sorry, AEP. You say bull-shirt and you don’t get a response.
Just the way it is, friend.

Except, that was a response, in keeping with your desperate need to get the last word.

If continuing to respond to people who address me on this thread is “desperately” needing to get “the last word”, I plead guilty.

Your desperate need to get the last word made you say, "...you don't get a response" in the middle of <checks notes>a response. And that same desperate need created that^ response.

If saying "bull[shirt]" means I don't get a response, then don't [fork]ing respond.

See, AEP? If you just let it lie, this thread will end. But when you childishly throw around bull-shirt and forking, you’re absolutely the poster who feels like they have to get in the last word.

"See, AEP, if you just let it lie, this thread will end."

Meanwhile, number of posts in this thread:
AEP: 7
Cranny: 76

At .10 cents a post cranny is paid by Mo he made $7.60 off this thread!

[AnExParrot]

Right. It has nothing to do with a lineup containing Gyorko, Piscotty, Grichuk, Martinez, Greg Garcia, Voit, Peralta, Moss,
Adams, Hazelbaker, etc.

Or a rotation in 2016 of -

Martinez - 3.04 ERA
Waino - 4.62 ERA
Leake - 4.69 ERA
Garcia - 4.67 ERA
Wacha - 5.09 ERA

Then maybe the guy who put the weak rosters together shouldn’t still be here almost a decade later.

Longest leash of any top executive in the league. Inexplicable.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around Cranny, CTs biggest Mo defender, shoving him under the bus to defend MIKE MATHENY?

He talks out of both sides of his neck when it suits him.

I talk about both the minuses AND the pluses.
If that’s talking out of “both sides of the neck”, so be it.
Trying to be objective with people who are always 110% negative is always going to be out of step.

Sure, just overlook the context of my comment(it was a response to something very specific) and present that^ bull[shirt].

Sorry, AEP. You say bull-shirt and you don’t get a response.
Just the way it is, friend.

Except, that was a response, in keeping with your desperate need to get the last word.

If continuing to respond to people who address me on this thread is “desperately” needing to get “the last word”, I plead guilty.

Your desperate need to get the last word made you say, "...you don't get a response" in the middle of <checks notes>a response. And that same desperate need created that^ response.

If saying "bull[shirt]" means I don't get a response, then don't [fork]ing respond.

See, AEP? If you just let it lie, this thread will end. But when you childishly throw around bull-shirt and forking, you’re absolutely the poster who feels like they have to get in the last word.

You're still talking?

[sdaltons]

He is and he will respond to that post as well. There's one poster in this thread who very clearly needs the last word and it's cranny.

Eventually he will reply, like I've done here, without quoting the poster to whom he's speaking. Except I did it because the string of quotes was so long. He'll do it in hopes that since he didn't quote you, you'll miss it and he will lock in the de facto last word.

[AnExParrot]

He is and he will respond to that post as well. There's one poster in this thread who very clearly needs the last word and it's cranny.

Eventually he will reply, like I've done here, without quoting the poster to whom he's speaking. Except I did it because the string of quotes was so long. He'll do it in hopes that since he didn't quote you, you'll miss it and he will lock in the de facto last word.

Yup... same as it ever was.

[Bad14]

He is and he will respond to that post as well. There's one poster in this thread who very clearly needs the last word and it's cranny.

Eventually he will reply, like I've done here, without quoting the poster to whom he's speaking. Except I did it because the string of quotes was so long. He'll do it in hopes that since he didn't quote you, you'll miss it and he will lock in the de facto last word.

Yup... same as it ever was.

100%. He needs a hobby.

[icon]

There once was a poster named Cranny
Who acts like he's some kind of nanny.
If you cross him, he'll scold
like it never gets old,
While kissing the Cards owner's fanny.

[Ozziesfan41]

He is and he will respond to that post as well. There's one poster in this thread who very clearly needs the last word and it's cranny.

Eventually he will reply, like I've done here, without quoting the poster to whom he's speaking. Except I did it because the string of quotes was so long. He'll do it in hopes that since he didn't quote you, you'll miss it and he will lock in the de facto last word.

Old friend is a close second on needing the last word