The Cubs have finally won something....
- Thread starter missouridawg
- Start date
steps up to box in the bottom of the first and Yadi says something to him. Phillips immediately removes his helmet, as does Yadi and the jawing continues.... Benches clear and your typical MLB pre-fight huddle ensues. Lots of face to face yelling (Rolen playing peacemaker in all of it).<div>
</div><div>After around 30 seconds, the mass starts to get a little more hectic and then a fight breaks out and the mass moves from home plate to the netting behind the plate. Johnny Cueto grabs the net with both hands and proceeds to kick, with both feet, at Cardinals players. Also in the middle of all this, is Carpenter (whom Rolen holds back most of the time).</div><div>
</div><div>No ejections announced right now... but something tells me the MLB will look at this type and assess some "time-outs".</div><div>
</div><div>Very interesting.</div><div>
</div><div>Brandon Phillips then proceeded to ground out to second base, very weakly. *****.</div>
</div><div>After around 30 seconds, the mass starts to get a little more hectic and then a fight breaks out and the mass moves from home plate to the netting behind the plate. Johnny Cueto grabs the net with both hands and proceeds to kick, with both feet, at Cardinals players. Also in the middle of all this, is Carpenter (whom Rolen holds back most of the time).</div><div>
</div><div>No ejections announced right now... but something tells me the MLB will look at this type and assess some "time-outs".</div><div>
</div><div>Very interesting.</div><div>
</div><div>Brandon Phillips then proceeded to ground out to second base, very weakly. *****.</div>
Most commonly a sign of respect in the majors and it happens a lot... but you can't do that after you bash a team in the paper. Pretty classless and "ghetto" of Phillips. What is this, an and-1 basketball game?
Would allow a brawl like that to take place and only kick out the managers? WTF?
But yeah, that was not your typical MLB brawl where you have a couple of guys pissed off at each other and everyone else is trying to keep them apart and making dinner plans.
That was a legit "I want to kick your ***" brawl.
I was worried that Carpenter was going to get hurt getting thrown into the backstop like that.
But yeah, that was not your typical MLB brawl where you have a couple of guys pissed off at each other and everyone else is trying to keep them apart and making dinner plans.
That was a legit "I want to kick your ***" brawl.
I was worried that Carpenter was going to get hurt getting thrown into the backstop like that.
Speaking of pussies, what about little Skippy Shoemaker? Clear shot at Cueto when he's kicking Larue in the face, and what does he do? Just looks at him with a Less Miles deer-in-the-headlights gaze.<div>missouridawg said:
</div>
"dissent in Cardinals-ville" thoughts are now.... Fights are a good way to build team chemistry.
They aren't my thoughts. The players' disappointment in the direction of the club - especially in regard to the Ludwick trade - are well documented.missouridawg said:
missouridawg said:
But it did work for the A's in the 70's and for Billy Martin with the Yankees when he almost kicked Reggie's *** in the dugout, so there is some precedent.
He was a great baseball voice. I have been able to get both broadcasts over the years, and when the Cards were playing the Reds, most of the time I had rather listen to Grande call a game as the Cards homers. With Grande, if the Cardinals or whoever made a great play/pitch whatever, he acknowledged it. Now the Reds games are like watching a Cubs game on WGN.
defines "dissent".<div>
</div><div>This one expresses remorse for him going and understanding of the move. Both of emotions of which are expected.</div><div>
</div><div>Ol Blue made it seem like the Cardinals were about to go on strike in support of Ludwick.</div>
</div><div>This one expresses remorse for him going and understanding of the move. Both of emotions of which are expected.</div><div>
</div><div>Ol Blue made it seem like the Cardinals were about to go on strike in support of Ludwick.</div>
You had four posts in this thread before anybody else participated. That's a pretty good indication that you've got the free time to look this **** up yourself.<div>
</div><div>But since I'm such a nice guy, here you go for starters....</div><div>
</div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: tahoma, arial, sans-serif; line-height: 16px; "><span class="discussion-question-host" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; ">Joe Strauss:</span>He dealt from a percieved surplus to address what his manager and coaches insisted was a pressing need. The move was endorsed by TLR but was extremely unpopular within the clubhouse. Indeed, the trade may have been the most unpopular FO move among the rank and file in my nine years of covering this team. I don't know if Mo' is on the hot seat. But the question should be asked why a rebuilding franchise such as Cleveland would have little or no interest in anyone within the Cardinals system beyond Shelby Miller. That's a huge indictment. Ludwick for a rental player, even one as potentially significant as Westbrook, is a massive price. Ludwick was as liked and respected as a teammate as he was productive as a player. The loss of Freese for the remainder of the season doesn't improve the clubhouse take on the move.</span></div>
</div><div>But since I'm such a nice guy, here you go for starters....</div><div>
</div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: tahoma, arial, sans-serif; line-height: 16px; "><span class="discussion-question-host" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; ">Joe Strauss:</span>He dealt from a percieved surplus to address what his manager and coaches insisted was a pressing need. The move was endorsed by TLR but was extremely unpopular within the clubhouse. Indeed, the trade may have been the most unpopular FO move among the rank and file in my nine years of covering this team. I don't know if Mo' is on the hot seat. But the question should be asked why a rebuilding franchise such as Cleveland would have little or no interest in anyone within the Cardinals system beyond Shelby Miller. That's a huge indictment. Ludwick for a rental player, even one as potentially significant as Westbrook, is a massive price. Ludwick was as liked and respected as a teammate as he was productive as a player. The loss of Freese for the remainder of the season doesn't improve the clubhouse take on the move.</span></div>
to Baghdad Bob.<div>
</div><div>But he would vote for a Marlin for Cy Young just to convince himself he's not.</div>
</div><div>But he would vote for a Marlin for Cy Young just to convince himself he's not.</div>
It makes sense to me- a lot of people on here complain about Jim Ellis almost being too unbiased for example. "LSU looking for the double play ball to end the Bulldogs day!"
I know in St. Louis, Mike Shannon is very popular. I'm sure it's the same in many other cities.
The good news if you're a casual baseball fan is there is MLB Network.
I almost said ESPN, but while they're not what I would consider homers, they basically focus on the Yankees and Red Sox non-stop, so there is definately bias there if there is not homerism.
I know in St. Louis, Mike Shannon is very popular. I'm sure it's the same in many other cities.
The good news if you're a casual baseball fan is there is MLB Network.
I almost said ESPN, but while they're not what I would consider homers, they basically focus on the Yankees and Red Sox non-stop, so there is definately bias there if there is not homerism.
Since the cards radio broadcast left KMOX I cant pick up a game on the radio unless Im within 15 miles of Tupelo (aside from mlb.com), but I love Mike Shannon.
I dont think there is another member of the baseball community out there that I had rather sit back, have a beverage, watch a game with and talk baseball with than Mike Shannon. I would love to sit in the box one time with him off the air. If I ever need to be granted a make-a-wish, that would probably be it.
Seriously... I'm obviously a big fan of the team... but I've been quick to criticize players when they've screwed up.<div>
</div><div>Is it because of the Rasmus vs Heyward thread? I mean, all the stats pointed towards Rasmus having a better first half... not that he was more talented.</div><div>
</div><div>Is it because of the Ludwick trade stuff? A surplus in outfield, more money for a contract for Pujols this winter, and a need for a number 4 or 5 pitcher all came together in one deal. I know the players weren't excited about it, but this isn't tee-ball where you get to play with your best friends. Not to mention the pitching prospect that we got...</div><div>
</div><div>Is it because of me defending Carpenter for getting on B. Ryan? Brendan mispalced his glove.... he's a major 17'n leaguer... and he misplaces his glove? The SS on the field is supposed to be the defensive leader and he misplaces his glove? If Peyton Manning ran onto the field without a helmet, how would that be perceived? Carpenter even tried to make that conversation private so we wouldn't be arguing about it. If the TMZ of the sportsworld wasn't broadcasting the game, we would've never known it had happened.</div><div>
</div><div>There are very few things that I'll comment on with confidence.... the Cardinals are one of those. I apologize if that defines me as "homer of the year".</div><div>
</div><div>
</div>
</div><div>Is it because of the Rasmus vs Heyward thread? I mean, all the stats pointed towards Rasmus having a better first half... not that he was more talented.</div><div>
</div><div>Is it because of the Ludwick trade stuff? A surplus in outfield, more money for a contract for Pujols this winter, and a need for a number 4 or 5 pitcher all came together in one deal. I know the players weren't excited about it, but this isn't tee-ball where you get to play with your best friends. Not to mention the pitching prospect that we got...</div><div>
</div><div>Is it because of me defending Carpenter for getting on B. Ryan? Brendan mispalced his glove.... he's a major 17'n leaguer... and he misplaces his glove? The SS on the field is supposed to be the defensive leader and he misplaces his glove? If Peyton Manning ran onto the field without a helmet, how would that be perceived? Carpenter even tried to make that conversation private so we wouldn't be arguing about it. If the TMZ of the sportsworld wasn't broadcasting the game, we would've never known it had happened.</div><div>
</div><div>There are very few things that I'll comment on with confidence.... the Cardinals are one of those. I apologize if that defines me as "homer of the year".</div><div>
</div><div>
</div>
Nobody wanted to see Ludwick go. He was clearly a fan favorite and well-respected in the clubhouse. Those guys have a right to be disappointed.... but this trade helped STL in my opinion (you don't have to agree with it).<div>
</div><div>As I mentioned in another post, 3 things came together all in the same deal:</div><div>1) We had a surplus of OF</div><div>2) We need a #4 or #5 starter</div><div>3) We need to sign Pujols this winter, so he doesn't go to free agency (we can't win in free agency)</div><div>
</div><div>So by trading Ludwick, we thin up our OF, get a very solid #4 or #5 starter in Westbrook, and free up around $6 million in salary to put towards Pujols.</div><div>
</div><div>It's a business... and Ludwick got the short end of the stick. He'll be fine.</div>
</div><div>As I mentioned in another post, 3 things came together all in the same deal:</div><div>1) We had a surplus of OF</div><div>2) We need a #4 or #5 starter</div><div>3) We need to sign Pujols this winter, so he doesn't go to free agency (we can't win in free agency)</div><div>
</div><div>So by trading Ludwick, we thin up our OF, get a very solid #4 or #5 starter in Westbrook, and free up around $6 million in salary to put towards Pujols.</div><div>
</div><div>It's a business... and Ludwick got the short end of the stick. He'll be fine.</div>
missouridawg said:
You define a Cardinal homer. There is nothing wrong with Homers. Every team has them and needs them. Its the ones who are who pretend they aren't that draw ridicule.
As for the Ludwick trade.Getting Westbrook is fine. Giving up a frontline major league player is not.Contenders make deals like that all of the time without giving up a frontline player. I don't think the guys are as upset over losing a buddy as they are over losing a run producer. AGain, for a rental player.
And finally on Pujols. How are the Cardinals - a team that holds to a pretty strict budget - going to be competitive in the years to come if they pay Pujols $25-$30/yr for 7/8 years? If the club had a decent minor league system, I could see it. But they don't - as evidenced by theWestbrook deal. I love Albert Pujols -one of the best players I've ever seen and I go back a ways. He has a year left on his current deal. I suspect part of the Cardinals Pujols plan is to know what his trade value is. At least, it should be. According to Strauss, a contract extension is a 50-50 proposition...
<span class="discussion-question-host">Joe Strauss:</span> The deal was largely orchestrated by Padres GM Jed Hoyer, who essentially acquired Ludwick for two middling prospects. I have no information that the Cardinals were ever part of a three-way for Oswalt. It sounded, however, like the Astros were very reluctant to trade Oswalt and money within the division. As is they acquired a better young pitcher (JA Happ) than the Cardinals could have given them along with another prospect they could flip for Brett Wallace, now their starting first baseman. Last weekend's scandal wasn't necessarily trading Ludwick. It was the obvious lack of leverage to deal from the minor-league system. That's the uncomfortable truth.
As for Albert, I'm sticking to my 50-50 prognosis. FOX Sports analyst Ken Rosenthal, whom I consider one of if not the best information man going, said this morning he believes the Cardinals will be unable to retain El Hombre. Some find that heresy. I find it very plausible.
And then there is this...
Does it really make sense for the Cardinal's to re-sign Albert for the kind of money he is going to demand when his contract is up? When you add in Holliday's contract, I just can't see the ball club spending so much of their payroll on 2 players. I just don't see how the Card's field a decent team year in and year out if they do. Don't get me wrong I love Albert and all he has done, but I love the Cardinals more.
<div class="discussion-answer"><span class="discussion-question-host">Joe Strauss:</span> Your view is gaining traction.</div>