Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 3  Next >

The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardinals

Posted: 10/14/2012 9:45 AM

The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardinals 


Ok, so the Cardinals have a bigger budget due to a loyal fanbase, probably a better TV deal, etc. 

However, that is not what I want to talk about here.

The difference in the Indians and the Cardinals is the management and the philosophy.

Look at the players the Cardinals used this season:

http://www.baseball-reference..../STL/2012.shtml

The Cardinals used ZERO 4A guys during the season.  Yes, they kicked the tires on a couple of guys who were cut loose by their other teams during the season (Fuentes and JC Romero).  However, as a whole, they didn't go that route, instead choosing to use their own prospects. 

In all, the Cardinals used, at one time or another, a whopping THIRTEEN of the guys in their pre-season top 30 prospects (Baseball America) and used another FOUR players (including Pete Kozma) who were on developed by the Cardinals or acquired in the Rule 5 draft.   One of those guys is Trevor Rosenthal who pitched exclusively in the Midwest League last year, yet the Cardinals trusted him on their post-season roster this year! 

That is amazing.  Here we have a team that knew they were going to be in competition and probably go to the playoffs.  And they chose to use their own minor leaguers instead of AAAA players.  EXCLUSIVELY.  Their bench for the playoffs is almost completely minor leaguers with less than one year of ML experience. 

Now contrast that to the Indians who used at least TWELVE 4A guys and another FOUR who were in-season castoffs by other teams.  They used only FOUR guys from their top 30 and only SEVEN total players (including Cody Allen) who were on BA's depth chart.  Also not that they traded or lost on waivers THREE players from their BA top 30...almost as many as they played in the majors.  Note also that two of those three top 30 prospects were traded for Aaron Cunningham and Kevin Slowey, and the third was lost on waivers due to rostering Cunningham.

How can a team with a great history and stud players knowing they are going to be in contention count on rookies almost exclusively to fill their bench and how can the Indians, a small market team, count on 4A guys to not only fill their bench but also be prime contributors, in some cases AND trade real prospects for some of those 4A guys?

How is that freakin' possible?

That, fans, in a nutshell, is why this organization is having problems.  Bringing in Terry Francona is not the answer.  The answer is either getting rid of the FO or getting their heads on straight.  People here and other places say to use the Oakland A's model which, essentially, is throwing stuff against the wall (some of it AAAA or reclamation project stuff) and hoping it sticks.  I say use the St. Louis Cardinals model of using your own prospects.  Don't trade them away for filler (Cunningham) or for wild ass reclamation projects (Slowey) like the A's did.  Use your own minor leaguers.

The FO signing Francona should NOT be the license to trade prospects for veterans.  It should NOT be the license to sign 4A guys.  It SHOULD be the license to sign three significant FAs (power hitting right handed firstbaseman, left fielder and #2-3 starting pticher).  It SHOULD be a license to use your own prospects on the bench instead of these 4A guys or overpriced free agents (see Kerry Wood, et al) for our bench. 

Unfreakin' believable.  Arrrgh.  
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/14/2012 9:48 AM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 


LOLz "there's this big difference that explains the payroll but I don't want to talk about that"
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/14/2012 11:00 AM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 


yea the cardinals do a nice job of using home-grown talent, but they also have the money to fill in gaps with guys like holliday, beltran, berkman, lohse, carpenter, wainwright, among others.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/14/2012 11:16 AM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 


Again, GIH, I am not talking about the record.  What I am talking about is a team that KNOWS it is going to be in contention, maybe for a WS appearance, using nothing but their own homegrown talent for their bench and for injury filll-ins.

Compare that to the Indians who use washed up 4A guys and diss their own minor leaguers and trade their prospects for more 4A guys to fill their bench.

I mean, they even use a guy who pitched all year in the Midwest League last year in their playoff bullpen.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/14/2012 4:13 PM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 


I'd love to build a homegrown bench too, but of things I'm concerned about, that ain't one of them right now.

(I had more but this is all that matters - if you want to spin your wheels about Lillibridge over Donald or Duncan over Canzler, have at it)

Last edited 10/14/2012 4:15 PM by GopherIndianHybrid

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/14/2012 9:27 PM

Re: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the 



ciperspective6 wrote: The difference in the Indians and the Cardinals is the management and the philosophy.  
The difference between the 2 teams has more to do with the Tribe's 4A front office than their 4A players.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/14/2012 9:40 PM

Re: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the 



WahooinAtlanta wrote:
ciperspective6 wrote: The difference in the Indians and the Cardinals is the management and the philosophy.  
The difference between the 2 teams has more to do with the Tribe's 4A front office than their 4A players.
+1 WIA
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/14/2012 9:58 PM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 



ciperspective6 wrote:

Again, GIH, I am not talking about the record.  What I am talking about is a team that KNOWS it is going to be in contention, maybe for a WS appearance, using nothing but their own homegrown talent for their bench and for injury filll-ins.

Compare that to the Indians who use washed up 4A guys and diss their own minor leaguers and trade their prospects for more 4A guys to fill their bench.

I mean, they even use a guy who pitched all year in the Midwest League last year in their playoff bullpen.

I'm not sure what your point is.

The Cardinals use a different (and better?) source for their role players? So what?

The tribe could jettison the Cunninghams and Sloweys of the world and replace them  with AAA players and they'd still stink.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/14/2012 11:50 PM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 


Agreed about the 4a front office.

The point is still the same, however.  You can win with a bench of young, homegrown guys.   You save money, you build for the future, and you show your minor leaguers if they are productive they will get a chance and not be passed over time and time again for 4A trash. 

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/15/2012 12:27 AM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 


The interesting thing to me about the Cardinals is not the way they use their "homegrown" talent, but that this talent has matured into pieces and parts who play significant roles on the team. There wasn't one time I was aware of in the recent past that the Cardinal system was held in high regard. Not once. And yet, look around their team; it is chock full of players produced by a so-called "weak" sysem.

Now some may regard this as development genius; others may say they're supremely lucky so many guys like Jay and Freese and Craig and Carpenter and Boggs and Motte and Kozma and Chambers and Rosenthal have matured into major-league capable players (by the way, the Adron Chambers story is one of the most remarkable tales in the majors today, and not widely reported).

Anyway, I sure would like to see the Tribe strike some gold in the same way the Cardinals did, because no one saw it coming for St. Louis either.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/15/2012 2:39 AM

Re: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the 


I was a HUGE fan of Shapiro and all of his staff.  Maybe I was looking through my Chief Wahoo colored glasses but for awhile I thought we had the best management in baseball.  In 2007 I remember saying to a co-worker "If Shapiro goes so do the Indians."  In '07 I thought we were going to string off a bunch of years of playoff teams and maybe even a ring or two.

A few years later, we have maybe the worst management in all of baseball.  We are a laughing stock around the league.  Remember when fans used to make fun of Bill Bavasi all the time a few years ago?  That is ShapAntenetti now.  Shapiro & his crew looked like geniuses, starting with the Colon deal, then getting Asdrubal Cabrera, Shin-Soo Choo, Travis Hafner for Ben Broussard, Edguardo Perez and Eniar Diaz, and having very good minor league free agent signings like Casey Blake and Rafael Betancourt.  The drafting and major league free agent signings lacked under them but the positives outweighed the negatives with these guys.

Look at what has happened since then.  Sabathia for LaPorta, Brantley, Jackson and Bryson (and Brantley almost wasn't even in the deal, Thank God he was!), Cliff Lee for Marson, Donald, Knapp (centerpiece that was released) and headcase Carrasco.  Jury is out on the Victor trade, but Masterson has been awful for us in 2009, 2010 and 2012 with one good year sprinkled in.  Absolutley nothing of value for Rafael Betancourt one of the better closers in baseball, Kelly Shoppach who was a year removed from having the highest OPS of any catcher in baseball when we dumped him fro Talbot, Jake Westbrook a very solid #3, Carl Pavano, ect. ect. ect.  You can overlook Brandon Phillips for Jeff Stevens when management is hitting other nails on the head, but Michael Brantley for Sabathia and Lee? rolleyes

The free agent signings have been down right freaking terrible.  We haven't seen a decent left fielder since Coco Crisp, and a good left fielder in over a decade.  Dellucci, Michaels, Damon, Duncan and the list goes on and on.  We had a chance to trade for the guy that just won the Triple Crown but wouldn't part with Adam Miller.  While other teams in the division are spending money left and right we can't even give Josh Willingham a few bucks. 

It looks like we are starting to get better with drafting, but the bottom line is this - out front office sucks at pretty much everything right now.  A small market team needs to hit on draft picks, be competitive and smart about international signings, get a good return on trades and be able to bring in role players via free agency.  We are doing maybe 1 of these things decently.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/15/2012 4:42 AM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 



ciperspective6 wrote:

Agreed about the 4a front office.

The point is still the same, however.  You can win with a bench of young, homegrown guys.   You save money, you build for the future, and you show your minor leaguers if they are productive they will get a chance and not be passed over time and time again for 4A trash. 

Uh, who? 

We've established that the Cardinals stars aren't homegrown. This thread seems to be saying if only the Indians would cut all players they brought in cheaply, they'd win a bunch more games, even though the top levels of the Indians farm system are by all accounts filled with low ceiling types.

Like I said, if anyone wants to whine about Lillibridge v. Donald, go ahead, but don't tell me there's anything on the line with that.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/15/2012 12:15 PM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 


Carl Hanratty: How did you know I wouldn't look in your wallet?

Frank Abagnale Jr.: The same reason the Yankees always win. Nobody can keep their eyes off the pinstripes.

Carl Hanratty: The Yankees win because they have Mickey Mantle.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/15/2012 12:33 PM

Re: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the 



GradysBaby13 wrote: A small market team needs to hit on draft picks, be competitive and smart about international signings, get a good return on trades and be able to bring in role players via free agency.  We are doing maybe 1 of these things decently.
This front office had a decent track record of trades early on. Over the past 5 years or so, the trades have not been good.

I don't see any area that this front office has been decent at in the past 5 years. If they were, we wouldn't be near the bottom of MLB in regards to both major & minor league talent.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/15/2012 3:06 PM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 



MrBananaGrabber85 wrote: Carl Hanratty: How did you know I wouldn't look in your wallet?

Frank Abagnale Jr.: The same reason the Yankees always win. Nobody can keep their eyes off the pinstripes.

Carl Hanratty: The Yankees win because they have Mickey Mantle.
Underrated movie.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/15/2012 3:16 PM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 



GopherIndianHybrid wrote:
ciperspective6 wrote:

Agreed about the 4a front office.

The point is still the same, however.  You can win with a bench of young, homegrown guys.   You save money, you build for the future, and you show your minor leaguers if they are productive they will get a chance and not be passed over time and time again for 4A trash. 

Uh, who? 

We've established that the Cardinals stars aren't homegrown. This thread seems to be saying if only the Indians would cut all players they brought in cheaply, they'd win a bunch more games, even though the top levels of the Indians farm system are by all accounts filled with low ceiling types.

Like I said, if anyone wants to whine about Lillibridge v. Donald, go ahead, but don't tell me there's anything on the line with that.
I don't think he's saying that the bench is why they won, I believe he's saying they didn't prevent them from winning. So it makes a ton of sense to me that going out and finding a bunch of mediocre veterans and career 4A players from outside the organization, isn't necessary. 

But it's very clear to me and has been for sometime now that Shapiro and Antonetti don't trust their own system.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/15/2012 3:27 PM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 



TitoFrancona wrote:
GopherIndianHybrid wrote:
ciperspective6 wrote:

Agreed about the 4a front office.

The point is still the same, however.  You can win with a bench of young, homegrown guys.   You save money, you build for the future, and you show your minor leaguers if they are productive they will get a chance and not be passed over time and time again for 4A trash. 

Uh, who? 

We've established that the Cardinals stars aren't homegrown. This thread seems to be saying if only the Indians would cut all players they brought in cheaply, they'd win a bunch more games, even though the top levels of the Indians farm system are by all accounts filled with low ceiling types.

Like I said, if anyone wants to whine about Lillibridge v. Donald, go ahead, but don't tell me there's anything on the line with that.
I don't think he's saying that the bench is why they won, I believe he's saying they didn't prevent them from winning. So it makes a ton of sense to me that going out and finding a bunch of mediocre veterans and career 4A players from outside the organization, isn't necessary. 

But it's very clear to me and has been for sometime now that Shapiro and Antonetti don't trust their own system.
I just don't understand the myopic focus on the bench. I mean, Marson is on the bench.  And yea, in the AL where guys on the bench play a hell of a lot less often than in the NL, teams tend to value experience over sitting a prospect days on end, even marginal prospects.

None of this is rocket science, and none it is tremendously important. But it's being made a MOUNTAIN instead of a molehill because that's what TJB does.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/15/2012 3:52 PM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 



GopherIndianHybrid wrote:
I just don't understand the myopic focus on the bench. I mean, Marson is on the bench.  And yea, in the AL where guys on the bench play a hell of a lot less often than in the NL, teams tend to value experience over sitting a prospect days on end, even marginal prospects.

None of this is rocket science, and none it is tremendously important. But it's being made a MOUNTAIN instead of a molehill because that's what TJB does.
No it's not a mountain, but promoting from within is also not nothing.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/15/2012 3:54 PM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 



Ocramruf wrote:
MrBananaGrabber85 wrote: Carl Hanratty: How did you know I wouldn't look in your wallet?

Frank Abagnale Jr.: The same reason the Yankees always win. Nobody can keep their eyes off the pinstripes.

Carl Hanratty: The Yankees win because they have Mickey Mantle.
Underrated movie.

First film I saw Amy Adams in that I can recall. I am glad she went to redhead, but I was a little disappointed when I put two and two together later and figured out that that was her and the hair color was completely fabricated.

The movie is probably a lot closer to the truth than many would assume it is. He actually did pass the Louisiana State Bar (he claims he did it "honestly" by studying and process of elimination since you could continuously retake the exam at the time). He also really did play a doctor for nearly a year.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/15/2012 3:55 PM

RE: The RELEVANT differences between the Indians and the Cardina 



TitoFrancona wrote: But it's very clear to me and has been for sometime now that Shapiro and Antonetti don't trust their own system.
Yes & they have plenty of reasons not to trust it (they are 2 of those reasons) yet Dolan makes no changes. Complete & total insanity.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 3  Next >