Offline
If part of your point is that we need to give the system credit when it works, I agree. Suppan and Pineiro worked out. Weaver kind of did, too. Wellemeyer did for a while, too. Lohse seems to be making chumps of all those who claimed he sucked.
I'd put Marquis in a different category from Tomko and Wells. Marquis, to me, is closer to Anthony Reyes, a guy with bona fide talent, and an ability to succeed somewhere, just not within the La Runcan system. Reyes fizzled for reasons we can never know for sure, Marquis has continued to help out the clubs he has worked for.
To me Tomko and Wells were classic under-achievers, the talent was there but the mental side of the game wasn't. They haven't helped out anywhere, to my knowledge.
Offline
Max wrote:
If part of your point is that we need to give the system credit when it works, I agree. Suppan and Pineiro worked out. Weaver kind of did, too. Wellemeyer did for a while, too. Lohse seems to be making chumps of all those who claimed he sucked.
I'd put Marquis in a different category from Tomko and Wells. Marquis, to me, is closer to Anthony Reyes, a guy with bona fide talent, and an ability to succeed somewhere, just not within the La Runcan system. Reyes fizzled for reasons we can never know for sure, Marquis has continued to help out the clubs he has worked for.
To me Tomko and Wells were classic under-achievers, the talent was there but the mental side of the game wasn't. They haven't helped out anywhere, to my knowledge.
I wouldnt blame Larussa for Marquis' shittyness unless Tony taught him how to throw his hanging curveball.
Also I think the Reyes situation was looked at wrong at the time. The hype around him and lack of talent in the system made fans and the club think he just had to be the next big thing. The truth was he wasnt a major league pitcher. Throw Reyes into the pool of talent in the system that they have right now and we wouldnt be offended if he didnt make it.
Offline
I think you give Marquis too much credit. You're talking about a guy who was left off of the playoff rosters by 2 different teams in back-to-back seasons (2006 Cardinals, 2007 Cubs).
Compare Marquis and Tomko and you won't find much difference--the most notable being wins, but that's an irrelevant stat in determining effectiveness.
Marquis- 102-94, 1613.1 IP (and counting), 4.54 ERA, 1.43 WHIP, .270 BAA, .771 OPS, 5.2 K/9, 1.51 K/BB
Tomko- 100-103, 1816 IP, 4.65 ERA, 1.37 WHIP, .269 BAA, .779 OPS, 6.0 K/9, 2.08 K/BB
My point about Marquis, however, is that the biggest issue he seemed to have with the Cardinals is that he was told on numerous occasions to stick with his sinker--it was his best pitch--and junk his curveball which was crap. Then he'd get out on the mound, insist on throwing his humpbacked curveball and wonder why he kept getting hammered.
Offline
"Then he'd get out on the mound, insist on throwing his humpbacked curveball and wonder why he kept getting hammered."
I remember some sort of nonsense about him not feeling like a *real* pitcher unless he had a curve in his arsenal. I'm not sure Tom Glavine threw more than a dozen curves during the first 15 years of his career, and I can't imagine anyone wouldn't think of him as a real pitcher.
Offline
I am not a Jason Marquis fan, but he has gone 46-42 with a sub 4.50 ERA since leaving the Cards. Take away a problem filled 2010 season and he was 44-33. And at times he has the mental side to win games, IMO, in a way that a guy like Tomko or Wells never showed. I think Atlanta got rid of him because they gave up on him, and that's pretty much what the Cards did, too. Call me funny, but I think there are worse things in baseball than a rock-headed guy who doesn't listen to anyone but his own inner voice.
Last edited by Max (6/03/2011 4:51 pm)
Offline
Max wrote:
I think Atlanta got rid of him because they gave up on him, and that's pretty much what the Cards did, too.
If you call not resigning a pitcher with an ERA over 6 "giving up on a pitcher," then I guess they gave up on Marquis. Another way to look at it was Marquis was awful and didn't deserve to be re-signed, particularly for the absurd money that the Cubs paid him.
Max wrote:
Call me funny, but I think there are worse things in baseball than a rock-headed guy who doesn't listen to anyone but his own inner voice.
I suppose that depends on what the inner voice tells him to do. If his inner voice tells him to pick up a pigeon and have a conversation with it, there probably isn't any harm. But if his inner voice tells him to throw a Class A caliber curveball after it has been obliterated time and time again, after the pitching coach has told him several times to stop throwing it and that potentially costs the team wins, that's a pretty significant problem.
Offline
Not sure what you're arguing about here, Fors. Do I want him on my team? No. Is he K1p Wells bad? No.
When Atlanta gave up on him, his ERA had never touched 6. When the Cards did, his ERA was 6.02 in his final year. At point he was 42-37 for the Cards, and 14-15 for Atlanta. His combined ERA in his years with the Cards was 4.6, and averaged just over 200 IP/season. The Cards got their money's worth out of him . . . and got rid of JC Drew in the process.
Offline
Not arguing anything. When you said the Cards gave up on Marquis it made it sound like you thought it a mistake. The last post suggests otherwise. I just wasn't sure where you were coming from.
I never said Marquis was as bad as Wells. What I said was that they shared an unwillingness to listen to the advice given to them.
Offline
No. Miscommunication. Giving up on someone is not a mistake in my lexicon. It's just something that happens. Atlanta knew he had talent, but gave up on him, as in they decided he wasn't going to play their kind of baseball. The Cards took him in, he did pretty well, but we would have been crazy to try to sign him. Very much like Suppan that same year, I believe.