In the recent four-game series, Cardinal castoff Edgar Gonzalez blasted his former organization with 15 total bases (8-for-18), an OBP of .474, SLG of .833 and a GPA of .422. Sunday, the Brewers dealt for the Giants’ Ray Durham, owner of a career .352 OBP. And Sunday afternoon, with the game tied and the bases loaded in the ninth inning, Aaron Miles hit a walkoff grand slam. What better entree into a discussion about the Cardinals’ second-base situation?

Have the Cardinals made the right decision in going with the three-headed hydra of Miles, Brendan Ryan and Adam Kennedy (you remember him, right?)? It’s easy to be awed by the weekend performance of Gonzalez, whom the Cardinals let go over the winter. But rather than be swayed by performance against one’s own club (See Joel Pineiro, Jeff Weaver, Roger Cedeno and Miles himself), we’ll look at Gonzalez’s and Durham’s season numbers, along with the Cardinal second basemen:.

As for Gonzalez, that was a preseason decision; it’s only fair to judge it in light of what the Cardinals could’ve known or expected then. What were the preseason projections telling us?

What to make of this? Before the season started, the Cardinals might’ve figured that Gonzalez would provide only the slightest upgrade from Kennedy (whom they had already committed to two more years of a three-year deal) and/or Ryan, at least offensively. Since Gonzalez is no more versatile than Kennedy, the logical decision was to keep Ryan around for the utility infield spot. Sensible enough. As it’s turned out, however, Gonzalez has shown himself to be much more of an offensive weapon than either Kennedy or Ryan, and even moreso than Miles, who likewise is outhitting his projections. Will they keep up their unexpected paces? That’s one of the amusements of the sport, of course, but it’s looking like the Cardinals missed the boat on Gonzalez.

Now to Durham. The preseason projections are less important here, since we’re considering a trade based on what we know today, which is that Durham is the most productive hitter of all of the players heretofore discussed. And it’s not even really close.

Then there’s fielding. The rap against EGonz was that he had no leather, whereas the argument for the Cardinal triple platoon is that they can at least play some defense. We didn’t notice that Gonzalez’s skills were terribly deficient in the recent series (though the unturned forceout on Rick Ankiel’s ball led to the Pads’ demise Friday), and indeed, so far the rap has been a bum one:

So one of three things is likely true: 1) Gonzalez really is deficient as a fielder and time will reveal it, 2) The Cardinals need to do a better job of evaluating fielding at a minor-league level or 3) The claim about Gonzalez’s fielding was a specious justification for never giving him a chance to prove himself in the bigs. We’re not going to level any accusations; we’re comfortable giving the Cardinals the benefit of the doubt. But moving on to Durham and his fielding: In previous seasons, Durham hasn’t been that distinguishable from Kennedy with the glove, so the big RZR margin between them so far in 2008 may be misleading. Durham is no great shakes as a defender, but we seem to recall someone saying that defense was overrated.

The irony with the Brewers acquiring Durham is that they probably need him less than the Cardinals do. He’s not going to automatically win the pennant for them, but at the price the Brewers paid — $1.5 million and, in Jeff Sackmann’s words, "no more than a throw-in" and a pitcher who is unlikely to be "a difference-maker in the bigs" — the Cardinals likely could’ve had him for little pain.

It might be that Kennedy’s multi-year deal has again created a seemingly intractible position for the organization. Funny how even a relatively small contract can prevent future wise moves. Brewers’ manager Doug Melvin said about the Durham trade, "We’re trying to add as many good players as we can. We’re trying to win this thing." John Mozeliak and the Cardinals have one less player to choose from and one less day to prove that they’re trying to win it, too.

Observations from the game Thursday:

• Who would’ve thought that Jake Peavy would allow four home runs? Who knew that it wasn’t even the first time he had ever done so (the other being July 9, 2003)?
• With a lashing single and line-drive home run, Edgar Gonzalez got some revenge on his old franchise. Good for him. But better for Kyle Lohse and Yadier Molina, who finally figured him out in his third at-bat:
  
  The home run (first image) was on a 92-mph fastball with 6-inch break, right on the inside part of the zone. The final two strikes in the fifth-inning at-bat (second image) were exactly the same dimensions, except for one not-insignificant detail, one that Peavy can appreciate: location. Whereas the fastball that Gonzalez hit out of the park was about seven inches inside of center, the two swinging misses were 13 and 11 inches inside, respectively. Four inches made a big difference.
• TLR played his pitchers perfectly — until Franklin came in and the needle scratched the record.
• Some fine defense on both sides: Jody Gerut’s diving catch of Adam Kennedy’s deep line drive in the eighth, Chase Headley’s snare of Skip Schumaker’s opposite-field liner, Aaron Miles’s field-and-fire from the shortstop side of second base on Peavy’s grounder in the fourth (preventing a three-hit night for the pitcher) and Khalil Spicoli’s ranging grab on Cesar Izturis’s flare in the seventh.
• Speaking of defense, here’s one play you probably won’t see for a few more years: Albert Pujols turning an unassisted, reverse double play on Headley in the third. We’re not sure what Kevin Kouzmanoff was thinking, heading back to the bag on the grounder — perhaps he figured that, if it were a ground ball, he was going to be out at second anyway, and so if it were a liner, he’d hedge his bet.
• On the subject of oddities, when was the last time you saw a pinch-hitter appear (not injury-related) in an inning and the pitcher bat for himself later in the same inning?
• Rick Ankiel continues to hit round-trippers at a pace which we admittedly doubted at the outset of the campaign. Still, we wonder why anyone continues to throw the Cardinal centerfielder pitches in the strike zone. After all, he is 17th-worst in the league in contact rate on pitches outside the zone. That in and of itself isn’t bad, except that he is also worst on the team in O-Swing% (the percentage of pitches a batter swings at outside the strike zone). Compare that to Troy Glaus, who swings and misses a lot at balls outside the zone, but only commits to them at half the rate Ankiel does (14% to 29%). It’s pitcher emptor when it comes to Ankiel: Either read the scouting report or suffer the consequences. Just don’t say nobody told you so.
• It’s a good thing that nothing came of the Padres’ seventh inning, when, with a man on first and two outs, Glaus failed to make much of an effort on Gerut’s foul popup that landed about 10 feet in front of the Padres’ dugout. It was a one-run game at the time. We don’t care if you do add .202 of Win Probability, you don’t have the right to loaf on defense. Bush league.
• Speaking of Bush league, to make their already heinous uniforms even worse, the Padres don’t have numbers on the front of their jerseys.
• Thus ends the Ludwick all-star game helmet kerfuffle: The equipment guy in Pittsburgh forgot to pack the Cardinal all-stars’ helmets. Apparently, someone from MLB rounded up a navy CoolFlo model for Albert, but Ludwick got stuck with a red one. If it’s any consolation, kid, even the perennial all-stars sometimes have to make do with less-than-professional working conditions.

When not pondering how many all-stars a manager could have at his disposal and still manage himself into a corner within nine innings, we looked at some first-half (in the figurative sense, anyway) stats for the Cardinals — the team that always has at least one pitcher in reserve — to see which ones were misleading. Here’s a list of Cardinals whose numbers seem to indicate that they’re doing better than they are — and some whose stats make them seem worse than they really are.

Kyle Lohse, 11-2 record, 3.39 ERA: Without a doubt, Lohse has been the rock of the rotation in the first half. But much of his success is illusory: His win-loss record is the by-product of the league’s 19th-most run support (min. 100 IP), and he’s sixth in the league in LUCK. If that’s not enough rain on the parade, Lohse’s ERA is also hiding something: It should be more than a full point higher, given that his expected FIP is 4.52.

Ryan Franklin, Kyle McClellan, Russ Springer, Chris Perez, Randy Flores, ERA: Just when you thought the news about the bullpen couldn’t be any worse, it is, or at least, it should be. That’s because most of the ‘pen has an ERA that is misleadingly low. The worst cases are Franklin, whose ERA (3.43) is 1.73 lower than his expected FIP, and Springer, whose ERA (2.17) is less than half his expected FIP (4.67). Both have benefited from Defense Efficiency Rates (.706 and .728, respectively) higher than team average (.698) and Springer and Flores have "lucked" into below-average HR/F rates (5.9% and 5.6%, respectively). Flores’s failure seems to be well-known, but, with Franklin, TLR needs to understand this and find someone else to use in high-leverage situations in the second half.

Jason Isringhausen, Ron Villone, ERA: Is Izzy finished? Maybe. But don’t say so because of his ERA (5.97), which is much worse than expected (4.78). The same goes for Villone, who has a better xFIP than most of his bullpen mates, despite having a worse ERA (see McClellan, Springer and Franklin). We’re not claiming that Isringhausen is going to return to his vintage form, but at the least, his home-run/flyball rate (17.0%) should regress to the mean (around 11%).

Rick Ankiel, 50 RBIs: Ankiel is third on the team with 50 RBIs, a pace of 84 for the season. But before anyone bases the idea to sign him long-term on his RBI total alone, be aware. That number is largely dependent on his chances (read: batting-order position). He’s only 10th in the league among centerfielders and seventh on the team (min. 200 PAs) with a 12.6 OBI% (Others Batted In Percentage, the fraction of runners on base who were driven in during a batter’s plate appearances), behind less-heralded offensive players such as Skip Schumaker and Adam Kennedy. Also, he’s benefiting from an above-average HR/FB rate (20.0%), though, as a hitter, he may be able to claim it as a product of skill rather than good luck. And, to be fair, he’s still creating runs at a 6.49 RC/27 pace, so his production may still be legit.

Cesar Izturis, .236 batting average: The guy has been nonexistent at the plate this season, if you look at his batting average. Yet, that’s unlikely to continue in the second half. Why? Because he’s had a horrendous .248 BABIP, despite a decent Line-Drive % of 20.4 (compare with Albert Pujols at .338 and 20.7%).

Aaron Miles, .317 batting average: Miles is the flip side of Izturis’s situation. He has nearly the same LD% (20.5%), yet his BABIP is 90 points higher. Expect the diminutive infielder’s batting average to taper off.

Team, Won-Loss record of 53-43, .552 winning %. Their Pythagorean record, however, is a mere 51-45 (.531), and the Cubs, whose Pyth record is identical to their real-world record, would be 6.5 games ahead instead of 4.5 at the break.

Team, 4.7 runs/game: Their runs scored per game is above-average, but only sixth in the league. However, their runs created per game — 5.23 — are third behind only the Cubs and the Phillies. Moreover, the Cardinal offense is second in the league in Gross-Production Average (.265). If the team keeps hitting like it has, expect more "visible" offense — read: runs on the scoreboard.

Yadier Molina, .333 CS%: Why is Molina suddenly not able to throw anyone out this season, with an A.J. Pierzynski-like caught-stealing rate, after posting a .540 rate in 2007? The answer is that it probably has less to do with him than with his pitchers: Lohse and Pineiro, in particular have historically bad rates of preventing runners from stealing (and that’s with several different catchers). Unless the staff works to keep runners close in the second half, Yadier’s CS rate probably won’t change much. But it won’t be a reflection of a defensive shortcoming on his part.

Mark Mulder, 10.80 ERA: The "primary" (Joe Buck’s description during the All-Star game) player that the Cardinals received for All-Star Dan Haren actually has a much better FIP of 6.10 than the forlorn lefty’s double-digit ERA. That’s a a team-low FIP-ERA of -4.70. Hey, gotta look on the bright side, right?

[Ed. note: The United Cardinal Bloggers teamed up to do a progressive game-analysis blog back on May 2nd, and now we present some mid-season questions and answers about the health, well-being and future of the Cardinals. Each blogger submitted a question, and everyone took a stab at answering. Our question and subsequent responses follow; click the links at the end to view the other questions and answers.]

What’s the most radical roster change (lineup, position, pitching role) that just may work?

C70 At The Bat: I’m way too conservative to start coming up with radical notions, but I think it would be at least possible that getting Rasmus into the lineup would spur the offense. Granted, he’d probably struggle as he normally does when going up a level, but if he could start hitting in the #2 hole, say, putting runners on consistently for Pujols, that could be big.

Redbird Ramblings: I think you gotta bring colby up to see if he can give this team a spark. he can patrol centerfield and play great defense and then turn around and bat leadoff or 2nd for you. he is the guy with the "high impact" potential that just my revitalize this team; right now, they look like they were hot during the first half of the 2008 season and are just starting to play like their actual selves; that is scary. I say, bring Raz up and let him play.

The Cardinal Virtue: Don’t think this is the intent of the question but here it is: Bonds. Pujols, Bonds, Ludwick, Ankiel, Glaus–all in one lineup. Filthy. Bonds for league min. If he’s a hassle AT ALL then cut him. It’s a no lose situation.

Mike on the Cards: How about when Carpenter returns, he heads to the bullpen, has to drive the cooler, and McClellan gets an early audition for next years rotation? It’s so crazy, it just might work!

Fungoes: Rick Ankiel as LOOGy, rotating in from the outfield without burning a pitcher. Or Chris Carpenter as closer, as Derrick Goold "broke" back in spring training.

Other discussion:

• CardinalsGM: What type of player or package of players would you be willing to accept in a trade that involved Colby Rasmus in the deal?
• The Cardinal Virtue: What’s more important, bullpen or lineup needs?
• Fungoes: What’s the most radical roster change (lineup, position, pitching role) that just may work?
• Redbird Ramblings: Who do you think will be in the Cardinals starting rotation come opening day 2009? Who should be in or at least get a chance to crack the rotation? Also, come next season, should Ankiel move to right field and give room for Colby to play center?
• C70 At The Bat: Which player or players is the most likely not to be a Cardinal come August?
• Bird Land: Should the Cardinals re-sign Kyle Lohse or save the money and wade into the coming free-agent pitching market for Ben Sheets, C. C. Sabathia, et. al.? How much would be too much to spend on a free-agent pitcher, and where can they find the best value for the contract?

• Albert Pujols showed that when it comes to fielding, like that great Seinfeld character Slippery Pete, he’s the best — and the worst. With a runner on first during Saturday’s game, Pujols was playing behind the runner with the lefthanded Kosuke Fukudome batting. Fukudome hit a liner right at Pujols, which he promptly dropped, hoping to be able to throw to second to begin a double play. It was ruled a lineout, but it was an example of how Pujols is always thinking. On the other hand, as the Cubs were hammering the nails in the Cardinals coffin Sunday, Fukudome grounded weakly to Russ Springer, who turned to throw to first. Pujols, again playing deep, took his time getting to the bag, causing Springer to double-clutch. Pujols strafed his way to the base, like a tight end coming across the middle of the field, and Springer threw errantly. Springer drew the error, but Pujols had put him in a tough spot.
• Pujols hit his 300th home run Friday. While it’s an accomplishment, fans shouldn’t deceive themselves to think that it’s the same feat it once was. After all, of the five players to reach 300 the fastest, four of them did so in the (quiet now) steroid era.
• Tony La Russa and Troy Glaus complained about the ninth-inning strike calls in Friday’s game (TLR: "Check the tape. I think they’ll see there’s a legitimate gripe."). Did he have a "legitimate gripe"? Let’s look at the called pitches for each side:
  
  It would appear that, if anything, Cardinal pitchers had the benefit of as many calls as the Cubs. Indeed, while the Cardinals didn’t have any pitches inside the zone called balls, the Cubs had a couple, and the Cardinals had more pitches outside the zone called strikes. It just so happened that of the four (or so) pitches outside the zone that went the Cubs’ way, three of them happened in the ninth inning.

Erstwhile Cardinal and current Cub centerfielder Jim Edmonds received a hero’s welcome Friday night at Busch Stadium. Given Cardinal fans’ prior history, we wonder at Edmonds’s power to trump team loyalty with some kind of baseball Kavorka. Here was a player who, after the team very generously (and unwisely) extended his contract prior to the 2007 season, put himself ahead of the Cardinals this past winter and requested a trade. Granted, St. Louisans seldom boo players — unless, of course, they’re still Cardinals (see Mitchell Boggs Thursday or Jason Isringhausen, oh, just about anytime). But after another fan favorite, Keith Hernandez, was traded back in 1983, the fans’ response was decidedly different from how Edmonds was welcomed back. The captain of the 1982 World Championship team, a player who came up through the Cardinals’ system and cried tears of lament when he found out that he was traded (and considered retiring), was subsequently vilified and impugned by the locals. In Edmonds’s case, however, fans have been suckers for a player who rejected them (is it, like Bernie Miklasz proposes, the psychology of the spurned lover?). It’s odd, considering some of the facts and similarities:

• The Cubs are, dare we say, every bit as much a rival as the 1983 Mets were.
• At the time of the trade, Hernandez led the team in win shares as a Cardinal; Edmonds was only second (to Albert Pujols).
• When he was traded, Hernandez never derided the Cardinals as an organization; Edmonds has been quoted in less-than-fond words about his Cardinal tenure.
• At the time of the trade, Hernandez was in the prime of his career at age 29 (indeed, he went on to 149 more Win Shares with the Mets and Indians); Edmonds was clearly ready to be put out to pasture.

Perhaps that’s all there is to it, that, as Miklasz suggests, booing indicates a kind of respect, and Edmonds simply doesn’t pose much of a threat to the Cardinals these days (certainly not as much as Hernandez did in the mid-’80s as a Met). But we figure that Edmonds’s comments and current loyalties outweigh his deteriorated abilities. After all, what if Edmonds had homered last weekend?

With Edmonds, the Cubs now have two players on their roster who once earned 14 win shares in a season for their Central-division rivals. Judging from some of the initial reaction in Wrigleyville, the Cub fickle faithful weren’t exactly amiable to the idea of the Cardinal icon patrolling the "friendly" confines. We can’t say we blame them; after all, while the idea of someone like a post-prime Alfonso Soriano (we suppose we repeat ourselves) coming to wear the Birds on the Bat may not be as much anathema to St. Louisans as Edmonds was to Chicagoans, it might take some time to warm to him. Now, however, it’s a swoonfest at Wrigley (Cardinal fans aren’t the only ones susceptible to the Kavorka, it turns out).

Perhaps the newfound love of Edmonds isn’t so much due to his charm but the fact that Cub fans have gotten used to the routine. After all, it isn’t the first time a noted Cardinal has come to roost in Wrigley after spending his most productive years in St. Louis. Following is a list of some of the players who once achieved stardom with the Cardinals (with at least one 14-WS season; each player’s final Cardinal 14-WS season is listed) then moved on to the Cubs:

We aren’t old enough to know how Cardinal fans received former stars like Dean, Hornsby and Pollet (we’re guessing Osborne heard more that a few catcalls, if anything). We doubt whether Edmonds’s legs (shoulder, etc.), let alone fragile ego, will allow him to get much "Cubs history in [his] background," but judging from the reaction of the Cardinal "faithful" Friday night, Cardinal fans are all for it. Apparently, fans will give anything to be possessed by the Edmonds Kavorka.

That was the game-changing at-bat that got us right back in it. Guys were tired. There had been some long innings and that was a lift.

– Troy Glaus on Chris Duncan’s pinch-hit, game-tying home run

Jerry Manuel must’ve been tired, too. How else to explain some of his moves? To be sure, the Met players lost the game on their own merits (or lack thereof), but Manuel’s backward managing didn’t help them. In the first, after Jose Reyes singled, Manuel turned over any momentum that created by having No. 2 man Endy Chavez sacrifice Reyes to second. With all due respect to Joel Pineiro, the Mets don’t need to be playing for one run in the first inning of the game. Of course, the root problem may be that Chavez is batting second for the Mets in the first place, but if you’re going to be bunting Reyes over in the first inning against Pineiro, wouldn’t the same strategy hold in the third inning, when Reyes led off again with a hit?

At any rate, fast-forward to the eighth, when Chris Duncan came to the plate representing the tying run (read: high-leverage situation!). The Mets must not have done enough homework on Duncan: Although in the regular season, Duncan was previously hitless against Feliciano, Duncan had homered off the lefty in a pinch-hitting appearance in the sixth inning of Game 5 of the 2006 NLCS (how soon we forget!). It’s easy to criticize in hindsight, but why not use your best reliever — who happens to be lefthanded — in the most important situation of the game? We’re happy to say that reports of Chris Duncan’s demise have apparently been greatly exaggerated.

It was just one of those nights where I missed 50 percent of my spots.

– Joel Pineiro

Pineiro threw 59 of his 89 pitches for strikes, or 66.3%. That’s about where his season average is (66.7%), so we’re not sure what he was getting at. Even though his line didn’t look that impressive, he actually pitched his third-best game of the season by FIGS:

There’s no justice in this game usually, but today there was.

– Tony La Russa

What does this even mean? Perhaps TLR simply meant that the Mets deserved to lose the game.

While scouting the recent transactions in our office fantasy league, we came across a player we’d not heretofore taken note of: Minnesota third baseman Brian Buscher. Buscher has apparently been hitting well since he was recalled a couple of weeks ago, and his batting average entering Wednesday’s action stood at a heady .368. What really caught out attention, though, was his on-base percentage: .366. Yes, you read that right, Buscher’s OBP is lower than his batting average.

It’s certainly possible, of course, for that to happen, if a batter has at least as many sacrifice flies (or, as Dodgers’ announcer Vin Scully more accurately calls them, "scoring fly balls") as bases on balls (the formula for OBP is H+BB+HBP/AB+BB+SF+HBP). And that’s exactly what Buscher has in 41 plate appearances so far: two sac flies and a walk.

And, as is our wont, that got us wondering if any Cardinals had ever accomplished the dubious feat. And indeed some had. We must warn you, though: This list is not for the novice Cardinal fan, as it will tax your trivial knowledge (not to mention, you’ll see some truly hideous numbers). If you can handle obscure names like Luis Arroyo and Lonnie Maclin and some OBPs like .095 and .067, here you go (listed by year):

The list may not be complete, since sacrifices have only been reliably tracked for the last half-century or so (see the stat’s storied history). But it does reveal some curiosities. Several on the list are pitchers, as one would presume, including the well-known Bob Forsch, who had 14% of his plate appearances go for run-scoring flies back in 1986. But if you think that was something, hurler Tom Poholsky hit six sac flies for a rate of 21% back in 1954 (we’re not counting Bruce Sutter’s 22% over nine plate appearances in 1982). Ed and Omar Olivares will always be known as a Cardinal father-son combo, but they share more than blood. Interestingly, the club has had at least two "negative" OBP seasons in every decade since the SF came into existence, and yet no one in the twenty-aughts has turned the trick. Will 2008 be the year? Let’s see if anyone is close:

Everyone is keeping his OBP head above BA water so far. Will Roberto Mejia be the team’s last negative OBP-BA season? Nick Stavinoha may be the team’s best bet to be the first of the new millenium. If not, trading for Buscher is always an option. Do the Twins need a LOOGy, by chance?

I just didn’t make the pitches. I fell behind, tried to come in and missed inside. And the last one wasn’t close either — four bad pitches. Our game plan was to attack him with the fastball away, because he tries to pull everything, and my stuff matched up good for that situation. It just didn’t work out that way.

– Chris Perez

Perez is now the worst on the team in BB/G, behind even Randy Flores (which is saying something). Perhaps we’re a little late to the party on this one, but the fact that two of Tony La Russa’s favorite relievers in June — Flores and Perez — are so walk-happy struck us that La Runcan is more tolerant of walks than of fly balls, the areas in which Flores and Perez are weak and strong, respectively, and in which Iron Cap Reyes is exceptionally strong (he leads the team in BB/G) and relatively weak.

For the life of us, we don’t understand the preference; can someone make a rational case for it?

I just got to where I thought it was going to be, and when I got there, it wasn’t. I just misplayed it, I guess. I think it cut, because I was right there. I was calling it, and all of a sudden, it was behind me.

– Rick Ankiel

We’ve heard of rampant friendly scoring around the league this season, and Ankiel’s non-error misplay is the latest example. (We suppose that if he had played it better and gotten a glove on it, it would’ve been ruled an error.) Ankiel receives a lot of just credit for his amazing plays, but his fielding account needs to be similarly debited for his ostentatious (and sometimes errant) throws and misplays like Sunday’s blooper in the clutch.

That’s one of those things that makes you enjoy this level of competition. Both clubs had chances. Lot of heroics to get something going, a lot of heroics to stop them. What a great competition.

– TLR

The surest sign that the team successfully pulled itself up from the KC series by its bootstaps: After losing in extra innings, its manager talks of "enjoying the competition."

We got beat. but it was a great series and a great game. Today’s not one of those games where you’re walking with your head down and kicking stuff.

– Joel Pineiro

For his part, Pineiro was perhaps more lucky than good, striking out only one, while allowing a home run (53 FIGS). One of the reasons that the loss was so tolerable was the way the bullpen was deployed. We’ve complained on more than one occasion about how TLR seems to save his best relievers for last (sometimes resulting in them not being used at all), rather than deploy them in a best-first approach in extra innings (or in high-leverage situations). Sunday, however, the relievers appeared in some order of their expected FIP ERAs:

In retrospect, using the rookie Perez in the eighth was unwise. But we commend TLR for using Springer and K-Mac ahead of Isringhausen, Villone and Parisi (and resting the overrated Franklin and underwhelming Flores).

Except for last year, I’ve always been a .300 guy.

– Nick Stavinoha

True, the rookie has a lifetime minor-league batting average of .302. But we’d rather he focus on being a .350 guy — on-base percentage, that is (he’s subpar in our book with a .346 OBP in his minor-league career). Bragging about batting average, this guy clearly didn’t come up through Oakland’s farm system!

I wasn’t going to let (Pineiro) lose that game.

– La Russa, on bringing in Perez to relieve when the go-ahead run came to bat in the eighth

What a ridiculous reason for making a move.

We play the same every day. I don’t care if we’re up or down by nine or 10. Even if we’re down by a mile, we’re going to scratch for an inch because an inch is more than a centimeter.

– Ron Villone

Who says lefties are strange, anyway?

Other than Joel Pineiro outdueling the Royals’ Kyle Davies (67-61 FIGS) in his second-best start of the season, the Cardinals’ 2-1 loss Tuesday gave us little to get excited about, what with the lack of offense (seven total bases and a mere 1.7 runs created). Little, that is, other than the Fan Question of the Day at the ballpark: "Do you support instant replay in baseball?"

(Before we provide our thoughts on the matter, indulge a revelation of this one peccadillo: public opinion polls masquerading as some kind of hand of justice. We live in a constitutional republic, so whether or not a majority of fans think that Cub fans should be locked up — for the record, we don’t — it’s wrong to do so. Whether to use the instant replay in baseball shouldn’t be a matter of public opinion. It’s a matter of doing what’s right.)

Lots of fans and talking/writing heads love the idea of instant replay in baseball. Some claims are true ("Everyone else is doing it," "It will get the play right"), while some are dubious ("It will speed up the games"). But like any possible solution to something that may be a problem, it’s easier to think of the benefit than envision unintended bad consequences (think Wild Card and interleague play). It’s not unlike that classic economic example, the "The Broken Window," in which observers assure a shopkeeper that his newly broken window is actually a good thing because it gives the glazier business: The flaw is that the observers don’t view the economy as a whole. The destruction of the window does, in fact, create some visible economic activity, but you cannot see what activity you would have had without the destruction.

Ditto instant replay. One of the unique historical attractions of baseball — whether people realize it or can articulate it — is its natural element, its ethos of simplicity of design and equipment: It’s played by people of any age and size (MLB, for instance, has the greatest diversity of age and body size of any of the major pro sports), in any field, with little more than a wooden bat and a leather ball.

So in this light, the problem of instant replay becomes not so much a question of "removing the human element" from baseball, but, rather, adding a non-human one. Aesthetically, the sport is self-contained and natural, and requiring a layer of technology destroys that. The very rules of the game would be changed, and yet most places where baseball is played would not be able to play by the new technology-requiring rules, effectively creating a separate set of rules (and you thought the DH was bad). People should be able to play a baseball game with the most nominal accoutrements — and not a replay monitor and camcorder.

The irony of the latest hullabaloo for introducing the use of instant replay is that it is based on the most tenuous example for needing instant replay. As readers may recall, the debate was rekindled by a string of hard-to-rule home runs last month:

• Sun May 18 Carlos Delgado
• Mon May 19 Geovany Soto
• Wed May 21 Alex Rodriguez
• Fri May 23 Ben Francisco

In all four cases, the problem would’ve been averted if the design of the ballpark were improved to clearly distinguish home runs from foul balls and balls in play (watch the videos for yourself). For instance, the Yankees’ Alex Rodriguez lost a home run when umpires decided the ball hit the fence. Replays showed it glanced off a yellow staircase behind the fence. This requires not the sophistry of why MLB doesn’t use instant replay but begs the common-sense question of why anyone would design a park such that a staircase could interfere with the visibility of a home run. At the very least, fans deserve to be able to easily know when important plays — like home runs — occur, and bad park design robs them of that. In the already-ridiculous Minute Maid Park, the outfield wall is reminiscent of a wiffle-ball setup, with nothing but masking tape delineating a home run from in-play. Major League Baseball could implement an instant-replay review sideshow to fix this. Or they could simply require better ballpark field design. It’s not that hard (or, as is likely as important to MLB, costly). See Wrigley Field: Its wire basket not only keeps inebriated fans from falling onto the playing field but provides a visible, unambiguous indicator for home runs.

We’re not convinced that blown calls are a big-enough problem in baseball as to require a fundamental change to the game’s core aesthetics. Does anyone seriously think that the century-plus history of the sport is plagued by unworthy champions and phony statistics because it’s lacked the enlightenment of instant replay? People who are that concerned with the right team winning should be much more outraged by the wild card, the imbalanced schedule due to interleague play and the multi-tiered playoff system (and with the division championship series being only best of five games). But, like the shopkeeper’s friends, these observers are too myopically focused on the short-term and fail to see the bigger picture. Instant replay may yield some minor gains, true. But will anyone think about what has been lost?