Comments on: Daily Farm Report - 7/9/08

By: Bob

Bob — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 01:51:35 +0000

Boggs could quite possibly have a fine career as an MLB reliever (same for Parisi). However, there is no chance whatsoever that he will have a fine career as an MLB starter (same for Parisi).

I make this strong generalization based on the sum total of Boggs & Parisi’s minor league careers. I don’t believe there is a *single* halfway decent established MLB starter whose career minor league profile is a good match for Boggs or Parisi. Honest; not one that I know of.

But I’d love to be wrong about that.

By: Bill

Bill — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:52:24 +0000

I’m with those puzzled by the dumping on Boggs. A reasonable case can be made that he wasn’t “major-league ready” when he was called up this year. That, however, is a very different statement than “he’ll never make it.” This is a guy who’s still fairly young, still learning his craft, gives every reason to believe he’ll eventually be a competent major-league starter, if not a star.

That said, I think he’s also attractive trade bait. Better starters are in the pipeline, so he’s expendable, yet he’s shown enough to be worth something in trade. If he’s pitched his last game in a Cardinals uniform because he’s traded to get something we need more, that’s OK.

By: roarke49

roarke49 — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:37:34 +0000

CJ:

While you are right that the Cards did great in 2006 as the underdog, I would not want to trade away our best minor league assets only to get to an underdog’s chance at the title.

I really don’t think that Matt Holliday is the best way to improve this team. We have limited assets to spend in this pursuit. If we are to use them, let’s use them towards fixing a problem that we have, not adding talent to an area that is already solid.

By: Toddy

Toddy — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:25:44 +0000

Here’s my take on Matt Holliday - if the Cards can get him without giving up prospect 1-A (Rasmus), and only have to give up one of either Anderson or Garcia, along with a secondary asset or two, then I think it’s worth the gamble. Best case scenario - Matt helps us get into the playoffs, and his 3-4 months with the Redbirds are such a positive experience that he tells Boras to make a deal happen with StL. Worse case scenario - his home/road splits expose him as a Coors fraud, and we let him walk away and we haven’t given away our top young prospect in the deal. Under that second scenario - there is still a silver lining. . .Cards fans will have known the organization took their best shot to win in 2008.

By: CJ

CJ — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:07:44 +0000

I’m not sure I want to be the favorite, St. Louis did a nice job in 2006 as the underdog, and Colorado in 2007. I think you do everything you can to get Pujols in he playoff in the prime of his career. We are luck to have a player of his calaber on this team, and management needs to realize they are in a unique situation with Pujols and need to win now.

By: travis

travis — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 19:53:16 +0000

First, I think Boggs did a very nice job while up. Many will dog him because he was asked to take a beating when he didn’t pitch well. If we didn’t need to spare the bullpen from innings, he wouldn’t have given up as many runs. He convinced me that with a little more seasoning he can be productive for the Cards.

Second, I have neve rheard anyone suggest Duncan can’t coach LHP. Where is this coming from? I have wondered if he and LaRussa can manage a young staff and develop young pitchers. Our two most prominent have been Reyes and Ankiel. Morris was successful for a long time for the Cards so I would have to count that one as a notch in his belt, but otherwise I think the jury is out.

Last, how old is Richard Castillo?

By: roarke

roarke — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 19:00:47 +0000

CJ:

Here is my theory on the debate you are contemplating: if the team can position themselves as a favorite to make the playoff and win the WS this year by making a move, then you do it. But you’ve got to be pretty confident. Personally, I don’t think adding Holliday/Fuentes makes the Cardinals a favorite (or really even gives them much of a better chance than they have now), so I wouldn’t trade Rasmus and Anderson for them. The Cardinals have been playing above their heads all season and still find themselves looking up at the Cubs and Matt Holliday isn’t going to make enough of a difference, marginally over what we have, to change the situation.

By: shaneo69

shaneo69 — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 18:33:14 +0000

Osborne was decent his first year under Duncan (13-9) before he got hurt, just like Mulder. Coincidence?

Bud Smith threw a no-hitter in Sept soon after being called up. Then at the beginning of the next season he was 1-5 6.74 under Duncan before we unloaded him for Rolen.

Oliver was a .500 pitcher with a 4.26 ERA under Duncan. Mercker’s ERA was over 5.00 both years he started for Duncan.

By: PJ

PJ — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 18:19:33 +0000

Does a correlation exist between being LH/RH and Dave Duncan’s ability to help them? Osborne had ERAs of 3.93 and 4.09 in 2 of the 4 years under Dunc. The one where he was not injured (of the 4) was the good one BTW—so sample size is not the issue.

Bud Smith threw a no hitter under Dave Duncan. However, he didn’t make it with the Cards because he was dealt. It had nothing to do with Duncan.

By: CJ

CJ — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 18:11:57 +0000

I’m not sure what to think of this. The Cards have a chance at the playoffs this year if they can procure a bat and a pitcher. But that will cost us some good minor leaguers (the future of the franchise). But in sports, you win now. I know I am paying for tickets now, and I expect them to win. Maybe it is time to cash in Rasmus and Anderson for Holliday and Fuentes.