STLtoday.com

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

Melville wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 20:00 pm

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

They have understood this for the past several years.
And have acknowledged it many times.
Super Slo Mo, always defined by fear and timidity, simply lacked the skill and the will to do anything meaningful about it.

The Nard wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 20:49 pm

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

Since when have they had a pitch-to-contact approach? Not for almost 10 years. They seem to have many hard-throwing prospects come up, who couldn’t hit the side of a barn

Maybe Mikolas and Pallante are who you’re thinking of. Yet they succeeded when they have command of their pitches.

Contact pitchers who have good command of the zone - changing speeds andhitting the outside corners - will still succeed in this era.

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 02:56 am

The Nard wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 20:49 pm

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

Since when have they had a pitch-to-contact approach? Not for almost 10 years. They seem to have many hard-throwing prospects come up, who couldn’t hit the side of a barn

Maybe Mikolas and Pallante are who you’re thinking of. Yet they succeeded when they have command of their pitches.

Contact pitchers who have good command of the zone - changing speeds andhitting the outside corners - will still succeed in this era.

As a team, the Cardinals have been 29th in K/9 over the last three seasons, 29th in K/9 over the last five seasons, and 26th in K/9 over the last 10 seasons. They have not prioritized "strikeout stuff" on their pitching staff.

NorthernBird wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 03:27 am

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 02:56 am

The Nard wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 20:49 pm

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

Since when have they had a pitch-to-contact approach? Not for almost 10 years. They seem to have many hard-throwing prospects come up, who couldn’t hit the side of a barn

Maybe Mikolas and Pallante are who you’re thinking of. Yet they succeeded when they have command of their pitches.

Contact pitchers who have good command of the zone - changing speeds andhitting the outside corners - will still succeed in this era.

As a team, the Cardinals have been 29th in K/9 over the last three seasons, 29th in K/9 over the last five seasons, and 26th in K/9 over the last 10 seasons. They have not prioritized "strikeout stuff" on their pitching staff.

The Cards were less than 1 strikeout per game lower than league average, and less than 2 strikeouts per game lower than the league leader.

Is that meaningful? Are two SOs a game what did it in for the Cards’ staff?

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 03:36 am

NorthernBird wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 03:27 am

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 02:56 am

The Nard wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 20:49 pm

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

Since when have they had a pitch-to-contact approach? Not for almost 10 years. They seem to have many hard-throwing prospects come up, who couldn’t hit the side of a barn

Maybe Mikolas and Pallante are who you’re thinking of. Yet they succeeded when they have command of their pitches.

Contact pitchers who have good command of the zone - changing speeds andhitting the outside corners - will still succeed in this era.

As a team, the Cardinals have been 29th in K/9 over the last three seasons, 29th in K/9 over the last five seasons, and 26th in K/9 over the last 10 seasons. They have not prioritized "strikeout stuff" on their pitching staff.

The Cards were less than 1 strikeout per game lower than league average, and less than 2 strikeouts per game lower than the league leader.

Is that meaningful? Are two SOs a game what did it in for the Cards’ staff?

Seems like it turns out to be meaningful.

Of the top 10 teams in K/9, eight had team ERAs under 4.00. Of the bottom 10 teams in K/9, seven had team ERAs above 4.00.

Maybe not a "decisive" difference, but a meaningful one.

NorthernBird wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 03:44 am

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 03:36 am

NorthernBird wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 03:27 am

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 02:56 am

The Nard wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 20:49 pm

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

Since when have they had a pitch-to-contact approach? Not for almost 10 years. They seem to have many hard-throwing prospects come up, who couldn’t hit the side of a barn

Maybe Mikolas and Pallante are who you’re thinking of. Yet they succeeded when they have command of their pitches.

Contact pitchers who have good command of the zone - changing speeds andhitting the outside corners - will still succeed in this era.

As a team, the Cardinals have been 29th in K/9 over the last three seasons, 29th in K/9 over the last five seasons, and 26th in K/9 over the last 10 seasons. They have not prioritized "strikeout stuff" on their pitching staff.

The Cards were less than 1 strikeout per game lower than league average, and less than 2 strikeouts per game lower than the league leader.

Is that meaningful? Are two SOs a game what did it in for the Cards’ staff?

Seems like it turns out to be meaningful.

Of the top 10 teams in K/9, eight had team ERAs under 4.00. Of the bottom 10 teams in K/9, seven had team ERAs above 4.00.

Maybe not a "decisive" difference, but a meaningful one.

I don’t think you’ve made a case for meaning in 2 SOs per game. What you’ve instead now pivoted to is overall stats correlating with better pitching staffs. However, there’s no causation proven that 2 extra SOs per game is the difference maker from a bottom of the league staff and a top of the league staff.

Just for a minute, remove yourself from the numbers and think about the actual game. Two SOs. Maybe one extra in the 2nd inning and one in the 7th. That’s it. The difference between the Rockies and the Dodgers, according to your argument.

hugeCardfan wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:55 pm

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

RIP Dave Duncan...

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 03:36 am

NorthernBird wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 03:27 am

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 02:56 am

The Nard wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 20:49 pm

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

Since when have they had a pitch-to-contact approach? Not for almost 10 years. They seem to have many hard-throwing prospects come up, who couldn’t hit the side of a barn

Maybe Mikolas and Pallante are who you’re thinking of. Yet they succeeded when they have command of their pitches.

Contact pitchers who have good command of the zone - changing speeds andhitting the outside corners - will still succeed in this era.

As a team, the Cardinals have been 29th in K/9 over the last three seasons, 29th in K/9 over the last five seasons, and 26th in K/9 over the last 10 seasons. They have not prioritized "strikeout stuff" on their pitching staff.

The Cards were less than 1 strikeout per game lower than league average, and less than 2 strikeouts per game lower than the league leader.

Is that meaningful? Are two SOs a game what did it in for the Cards’ staff?

Seems like it turns out to be meaningful.

Of the top 10 teams in K/9, eight had team ERAs under 4.00. Of the bottom 10 teams in K/9, seven had team ERAs above 4.00.

Maybe not a "decisive" difference, but a meaningful one.

When you play ~50 one-run games a year, two fewer balls allowed in play could make a difference in more than a few of those.

alw80 wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 06:10 am Load up on pitchers. You can save a lot of money on your rotation and BP by supplying your own pitchers from your system.

NorthernBird wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 03:44 am

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 03:36 am

NorthernBird wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 03:27 am

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑26 Nov 2025 02:56 am

The Nard wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 20:49 pm

mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑25 Nov 2025 19:44 pm ...when it comes to modern, pitching prospects.

Instead of their antiquated, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs approach to prioritizing pitchers, get fastball-slider guys who throw really hard (Fitts 60/60 FB, 55/55 SL; Clarke 60/60 FB, 70/80 SL; Doyle 70/70 FB, 50/60 SL). If you can get fastball-slider guys to develop one more pitch and better control, you have the makings of a FOR SP. And even if you can't, you can fill a bullpen with dominant fastball-slider guys and be able to shut down games from the sixth inning on.

Their traditional soft tossing, pitch-to-contact, try to get groundballs pitchers almost always have a limited ceiling and a basement of being unusable instead of a floor.

Since when have they had a pitch-to-contact approach? Not for almost 10 years. They seem to have many hard-throwing prospects come up, who couldn’t hit the side of a barn

Maybe Mikolas and Pallante are who you’re thinking of. Yet they succeeded when they have command of their pitches.

Contact pitchers who have good command of the zone - changing speeds andhitting the outside corners - will still succeed in this era.

As a team, the Cardinals have been 29th in K/9 over the last three seasons, 29th in K/9 over the last five seasons, and 26th in K/9 over the last 10 seasons. They have not prioritized "strikeout stuff" on their pitching staff.

The Cards were less than 1 strikeout per game lower than league average, and less than 2 strikeouts per game lower than the league leader.

Is that meaningful? Are two SOs a game what did it in for the Cards’ staff?

Seems like it turns out to be meaningful.

Of the top 10 teams in K/9, eight had team ERAs under 4.00. Of the bottom 10 teams in K/9, seven had team ERAs above 4.00.

Maybe not a "decisive" difference, but a meaningful one.

I don’t think you’ve made a case for meaning in 2 SOs per game. What you’ve instead now pivoted to is overall stats correlating with better pitching staffs. However, there’s no causation proven that 2 extra SOs per game is the difference maker from a bottom of the league staff and a top of the league staff.

Just for a minute, remove yourself from the numbers and think about the actual game. Two SOs. Maybe one extra in the 2nd inning and one in the 7th. That’s it. The difference between the Rockies and the Dodgers, according to your argument.