Anyone remember which of the redbird outfielders drove in the most runs back in the World Championship 2006 season? Not Jim Edmonds. Nope, not Chris Duncan. Oh, you remembered that Preston Wilson was a Cardinal in 2006? Not him either. It was Juan Encarnación with 79 RBI that headed the list. He also chipped in 19 home runs, 74 runs, and a respectable .278 batting average. Although something of a journeyman, Juan’s combination of talents and his quiet demeanor helped him find a comfortable niche with this team. An off-season wrist surgery delayed Encarnación’s start in 2007, but he recovered to make solid contributions, picking up 43 runs, 47 RBI, and 9 home runs while carrying a .283 batting mark over 78 games of action. Unfortunately, Juan’s season and, most likely, his career were cut short on August 31st, 2007 when a foul ball caught Encarnación directly in the left eye-socket while he waited in the on-deck circle for his turn at the plate.
There is little information about Juan Encarnación’s status to be found on the web. He maintains a spot on the Cardinals roster, albeit through the 60-day disabled list, yet Cardinals GM John Mozeliak has indicated that Encarnación’s career is likely over. Certainly this sort of trauma is a life-changing event. Perhaps it is Encarnación’s preference to remain out of the spotlight during his recovery, but I feel that Cardinal fans care about their players, past and present, and they would value the opportunity to show their appreciation for Encarnación’s service and sacrifice. I’m still holding out hope that Encarnación may return to professional baseball and, at the least, that his recovery will be complete, if not swift. But, in the meantime, I would like to see the Cardinals organization take a more active role in keeping their fans in touch and, perhaps, providing a channel for Cardinals fans to express their gratitude to a good player who happened to be on-deck at just the wrong time.
Archive for the ‘Past Players’ Category
Missing in Action
Sunday, August 10th, 2008Trading places
Saturday, August 9th, 2008Doug Glanville, who came up with the Cubs and later played at various times for the Phillies and the Rangers, writes an occasional piece for the New York Times. A couple of days ago, he wrote about his experiences being traded, and what it meant to him as a player and as a person. I found his perspective thought-provoking:
A trade is often a stealth move made outside the players’ knowledge, and certainly without his consent….As players, we all understand that to some degree we are property, an asset that can be depreciated and whose title can be transferred. On a whim, no less.
As I fan, I know I’ve often thought of players in these terms, as an asset to be managed, developed, used, and/or traded, all as a means to an end: a World Series title. How many times have I lamented the Danny-Haren-for-Mark-Mulder trade (which came just a year before the Redbird’s 2006 championship, though the parties involved had little to do with it)? Or the Placido-Polanco-for-Scott-Rolen trade, about which I have more complicated feelings? For all my speculation on the values of these, and other, trades to the Cardinals’ chances for success, never did I wonder how Haren, Mulder, Polanco, or Rolen felt about having been traded. Drafts, trades, free-agent signings—these are the stuff of sports-bar arguments, but seldom do we consider the players involved as actual people.
Let’s make this personal: What if, in a hypothetical world in which such a thing were possible, my employer suddenly decided to trade me to a different institution in a different city? Glanville writes, “I had an apartment lease I needed to cancel. I had to somehow move everything I had to Chicago—including a car—and be in uniform the next day. Not to mention say goodbye to teammates and pack my baseball equipment at the stadium.” Could I make a similar hair-pin transition, and on someone else’s whim, and how would I feel about it?
For one thing, I accepted my current job in large measure because of its geographical location; I wanted to live in this city, and I wouldn’t feel comfortable having to suddenly pick up and leave. I certainly wouldn’t want to be forced into being relocated to a strange and unfamiliar place on just a few hours notice.
But more importantly, I’m sure I’d feel betrayed by my employer, to whom I’ve given years of hard work and loyalty. Every baseball trade is an attempt by the team to improve itself, either immediately or down the road, in one way or another; if I were traded, therefore, this would mean that my employer saw my departure somehow as an improvement to the organization. How would I interpret such a trade? As an attempt to dump my ever-increasing salary for a younger, cheaper, less-experienced replacement? As a judgement on the quality of my job performance? As a way, perhaps, to rid the institution of an unwelcome personality? Baseball players, after all, are traded for all of these reasons every year.
As Glanville writes, “Initially, I was offended. After all, I grew up as a baseball fan in the 1980s, when loyalty was still a big part of the professional sports mentality.” He implies, correctly, that loyalty no longer plays much of a role in professional sports (see Ramirez, Manny), but I don’t think that’s true for most of the rest of us. It certainly isn’t true at my job, where many of my colleagues have worked for decades.
Of course, it is different for professional athletes, and Glanville points out that players understand this part of their job. Nevertheless, even as I hope the Cardinals are able to trade for some desperately-needed bullpen help, I also hope I can keep in mind that these are people and their futures, and not just their stat sheets, being discussed.
Organization Misfits
Saturday, August 9th, 2008In a week that saw Manny Ramirez traded to the Los Angeles Dodgers and Brett Favre traded to the New York Jets it is apparent that sometimes a player cannot stay a part of an organization, no matter how much talent they bring to their team. Such moves become reasonable in my mind when the player’s presence affects either the player’s or the team’s ability to do their job effectively. Sometimes, however, it seems like the friction isn’t really with the team, but rather between a certain player and management. Over the last few years I feel that certain players in St. Louis have suffered professionally simply because they were organization misfits.
For a first example, consider John Rodriguez, who played for the Cardinals in 2005 and 2006. Rodriguez owns a career .298 batting average with 46 runs and 43 RBI over 332 AB. This is solid run production. For one reason or another, Rodriguez was not a part of the 2007 Cardinals team and now toils for the New Orleans Zephyrs in the Pacific Coast League, where he’s batting .303 with 20 runs and 20 RBI in just 119 AB. As a Zephyr, Rodriguez is a member of the Mets organization and, at the age of 30, his major league career could be over. His real shot at the bigs came in St. Louis and I have a hard time understanding what he did wrong, other than not fitting in with management.
Yesterday, Anthony Reyes debuted for the Cleveland Indians, turning in six and one-third innings of 1-run baseball. He scattered (since only one run scored) seven hits, while striking out four and walking one. This is a guy that the Cardinals apparently wouldn’t even consider starting during the dark days between Wainright’s finger injury and Carpenter’s return. Instead, the Cardinals gave the nod to newer and greener (not in the good way) prospects Mitchell Boggs and Jaime Garcia. Normally, I would have little issue with spot starts by AAA prospects, but the Cardinals are actually trying to get into the postseason. Why not put the player out there who gives you the best shot at a win? It is even conceivable to me that Anthony Reyes could have earned his way into the Cardinals 5-man rotation from the get-go. But, Reyes, too, was a misfit.
These situations don’t always end poorly for the Cardinals. Fernando Vina had only 115 ABs after leaving St. Louis. Steve Kline was never the same after the 2004 season. Scott Rolen for Troy Glaus worked out great.
A little closer to home, Skip Schumaker seems to have finally earned the respect necessary to make it into the lineup on a daily basis. This is Schumaker’s fourth season as a Cardinal, but the first where he surpassed the 200 AB plateau. He may not have the power of a Rick Ankiel, Ryan Ludwick, or Chris Duncan, but Skip is a ballplayer and he has shown he can play at this level. I wondered last year if he would ever break through and I hoped that he wouldn’t be sent out as another Cardinal misfit.
As a final point of conversation, I imagine that most Cardinal fans remember Brendan Ryan’s faux pas in late 2007 when he swung at a 3-0 pitch and made an out. If memory serves, he was immediately taken out of the game and found himself off the lineup card the following day as apparent punishment. A rookie swinging on 3-0 is not good baseball, but is it really necessary to discipline a major leaguer as if he were a five-year old caught with his hand in the cookie jar? Are the after-effects to blame for Ryan’s recent demotion to Memphis? The jury is still out on this one, but Brendan Ryan just might be another Redbird misfit.
What goes around…
Friday, August 8th, 2008…comes around to score, twice, both times in the form of Jim Edmonds’ solo shots, representing the Cubs’ only runs going into the eleventh inning of a 2-2 ballgame.
Honestly. Wasn’t this guy supposed to be done? Weren’t the Redbirds supposed to have brought up über-prospect Colby Rasmus by now? Ankiel has played a great center field, don’t get me wrong, but this wasn’t the plan. Edmonds leading the Cubs over the Cardinals in the midst of a playoff chase; this is exactly why Green Bay refused to release Favre and let him sign with Minnesota*.
The Redbirds went on to lose in the bottom half of the eleventh when Ryan Franklin loaded the bases with no one out, and Henry Blanco administered the death blow singled home the winning run while mercifully leaving Edmonds sitting on deck. Thank g-d for small favors.
*I know, I know: Edmonds signed with San Diego, not the Cubs. Still. My point is the same, whatever it is. Karma’s a bitch. Harrumph.
Should the Cardinals retire #51?
Thursday, August 7th, 2008As of August 7, 2008, the Cardinals organization has retired ten uniform numbers: 1 (Ozzie Smith), 2 (Red Schoendienst), 6 (Stan Musial), 9 (Enos Slaughter), 14 (Ken Boyer), 17 (Dizzy Dean), 20 (Lou Brock), 42 (Jackie Robinson), 42 (Bruce Sutter), 45 (Bob Gibson), and 85 (August Busch). Remove Jackie Robinson and August Busch from this discussion, since neither played for the St. Louis Cardinals. Jackie Robinson’s number has been retired across baseball and August Busch was a celebrated owner of the organization. Eight of the remaining nine players have earned membership into baseball’s elite Hall of Fame, which seems a high expectation for the retirement of a uniform number. In contrast, consider the fact that the Chicago White Sox retired Harold Baines‘ #3 immediately after he was traded to the Rangers in 1989 and subsequently un-retired his number three times as he returned to the organization as a player twice and then as a coach. In 2007 and 2008, Baines received just over the minimum 5% needed to remain on the ballot, yet it seems plausible that he will eventually garner membership. Nevertheless, the White Sox organization reacted without hesitation to honor his contributions to their franchise.
It is not easy to pinpoint the level of contribution necessary for this honor. A first thought might lead towards dedication to the organization, yet of the nine Cardinal players honored by a retired number, only Stan Musial and Bob Gibson played their entire career with the organization. We all remember that Ozzie Smith started his career as a Padre and Lou Brock began his run in the National League as a Chicago Cub, but some may be surprised to realize that Dizzy Dean also played for the Chicago Cubs . . . after leaving the Cardinals. Bruce Sutter played just four of his 13 seasons with the Redbirds sandwiched between time with the Cubs and Braves. So it must not be years of service.
On to performance. Certainly no player could expect to have their number officially retired without some achievements on the field. Ozzie collected 13 consecutive gold gloves. Stan Musial won the NL MVP three times, owns seven NL batting titles along with an organization best 3630 hits and 475 home-runs, not to mention an unbelievable 177 triples for crying out loud. Brock stole 938 bases and racked up 3023 hits while scoring 1610 runs. Gibson won 251 games, struck out 3117 batters (not including 17 fanned in a single World Series game against the Tigers), and received two NL Cy Young awards, the NL MVP, and nine gold gloves. Performance certainly is important, but is it the single deciding factor?
Success should not be considered solely in terms of individual accomplishments. Each of the Cardinals with a retired number has helped the Cardinals on to a World Championship. Dizzy pitched during the era of the Gas House Gang in the 1930’s, Slaughter, Schoendienst, and Musial played central roles in the Cardinals’ dominance in the 1940’s, while Boyer, Brock, and Gibson led the redbirds through the great years of the 1960’s. More recently, Smith and Sutter played for the 1982 World Championship team with Ozzie also helping the Cardinals get back to the World Series in 1985 and 1987.
It takes a special player to make a uniform number unfit for continued service. For #51, it is through Willie McGee that a claim must be made. Okay, let’s establish up front that Willie didn’t steal more bases than Lou Brock, earn more Gold Gloves than Ozzie Smith, hit more homers than Stan the Man, or save more games than Bruce Sutter. He did, however, win the 1985 NL MVP, three Gold GLove awards, and two NL batting titles. His .353 average in 1985 was the high-water mark for a National League switch-hitter, second in all of baseball to Mickey Mantle’s .365 average in 1957. (Chipper Jones is driving hard to the hoop in 2008, but will need more at bats to make a real claim to the title.) Willie played for the Cardinals from 1982 to 1990 and returned to St. Louis in 1996 for the duration of his career. Willie retired after the 1999 season with 2254 hits, 94 triples, 1010 runs, 352 stolen bases, and a career .295 average. Willie took part in three World Series with the Cardinals, hitting two homers in a single game during the 1982 bout with the Milwaukee Brewers and making a game-saving catch to rob Gorman Thomas beyond the center field wall. And to add a personal favorite, Willie McGee and Vince Coleman teamed up for my favorite play of all time on August 1st, 1985, performing the first ever double-double steal in major league history. Vince stole third and home, while Willie swiped second and third. It was a crazy play, given that Coleman slid past third base and his steal of home came courtesy of a blown rundown, but it was exciting and something of a microcosm of the Whitey-ball approach invented by the Cardinals during the 1980’s.
If you were lucky enough to witness the spectacle of Willie McGee being introduced in the late 1990’s as a pinch hitter, you know that Cardinal fans young and old were equally enamored with the shy, humble player who shrugged and grimaced his way into the batter’s box, tugged his sleeves at the shoulders, and slapped the ball every which way for their team. I’m not sure what it means to the organization when they retire a player’s number and I can’t say that they’re making a mistake by not retiring #51, but I certainly don’t think they would receive any criticism for honoring Willie McGee by hanging up his jersey.