Signing utility infielder Nick Punto to be part of the Cardinals bench was an excellent move by general manager John Mozeliak. It helped to solidify a bench that had been left barren and inexperienced by previous moves.
Punto can play multiple positions, plays excellent defense, and can hit from both sides of the plate. He also has a career .247 average. In 2010 Punto managed to hit just .238 in 88 games for the Minnesota Twins. Punto also has 9 years of MLB experience.
Its safe to say that Punto is the prototypical Tony La Russa player.
He can't hit.
He has zero upside.
He'll see more playing time than he probably should.
Again, there is no doubt that the 2011 team can benefit greatly from having Punto on the bench at such a cheap cost. He is a veteran. He plays great defense that will support a pitching staff that preaches pitching to contact.
But here is a question to consider. What does Punto offer that former Cardinals shortstop Brendan Ryan could not?
Sure Brendan Ryan was quirky in the club house and frustrating at the plate. I understand.
But has La Russa's inability to manage a talented enigma like Ryan cost the franchise?
Instead of having the best defensive shortstop in the league, does having a player like Punto, with zero upside, make this team better? Is Punto honestly a better player than Ryan?
Or let me rephrase. Is having the manager be "comfortable" more important than winning?
When the Cardinals traded for Ryan Theriot back in December, the organization clamored about how Theriot is an upgrade offensively at shortstop.
But why didn't La Russa consider using Theriot in the "super-sub" role and keep Ryan, the best defensive shortstop in the league and player who hit .292 just two seasons ago in 2009, the starter at shortstop?
Doesn't Ryan answer the suddenly pressing need to improve defense?
What about the promising young infielders Daniel Descalso and Tyler Greene, who were going to be given every opportunity to contribute to the 2011 Cardinals? Why do these talented young players get thrown to the side in favor of mediocre talent?
It is because once again Tony La Russa can not manage young players. Period.
He refuses to make the sacrifices necessary and to maintain the patience it requires to develop and mentor a talented young player.
La Russa would rather be conservative. He would rather go for what is known, even if it is known to be terrible.
Tony treats players differently. The discrimination is obvious. He lets his personal beliefs and feelings interfere with his decision making, and at times it is to the detriment of the team.
Letting Brendan Ryan go, despite how awful he was at the plate in 2010, was one of those choices.
Don't worry Cardinals fans. You'll see plenty of Brendan Ryan making "Web Gems" on ESPN's Baseball Tonight throughout the season. It'll be in a Seattle Mariner uniform.
Instead, we'll watch Nick Punto, who is a taller version of Aaron Miles. A player with zero upside. A player that barely belongs on a major league roster.
The exact type of player that Tony La Russa loves.
Punto can play multiple positions, plays excellent defense, and can hit from both sides of the plate. He also has a career .247 average. In 2010 Punto managed to hit just .238 in 88 games for the Minnesota Twins. Punto also has 9 years of MLB experience.
Its safe to say that Punto is the prototypical Tony La Russa player.
He can't hit.
He has zero upside.
He'll see more playing time than he probably should.
Again, there is no doubt that the 2011 team can benefit greatly from having Punto on the bench at such a cheap cost. He is a veteran. He plays great defense that will support a pitching staff that preaches pitching to contact.
But here is a question to consider. What does Punto offer that former Cardinals shortstop Brendan Ryan could not?
Sure Brendan Ryan was quirky in the club house and frustrating at the plate. I understand.
But has La Russa's inability to manage a talented enigma like Ryan cost the franchise?
Instead of having the best defensive shortstop in the league, does having a player like Punto, with zero upside, make this team better? Is Punto honestly a better player than Ryan?
Or let me rephrase. Is having the manager be "comfortable" more important than winning?
When the Cardinals traded for Ryan Theriot back in December, the organization clamored about how Theriot is an upgrade offensively at shortstop.
But why didn't La Russa consider using Theriot in the "super-sub" role and keep Ryan, the best defensive shortstop in the league and player who hit .292 just two seasons ago in 2009, the starter at shortstop?
Doesn't Ryan answer the suddenly pressing need to improve defense?
What about the promising young infielders Daniel Descalso and Tyler Greene, who were going to be given every opportunity to contribute to the 2011 Cardinals? Why do these talented young players get thrown to the side in favor of mediocre talent?
It is because once again Tony La Russa can not manage young players. Period.
He refuses to make the sacrifices necessary and to maintain the patience it requires to develop and mentor a talented young player.
La Russa would rather be conservative. He would rather go for what is known, even if it is known to be terrible.
Tony treats players differently. The discrimination is obvious. He lets his personal beliefs and feelings interfere with his decision making, and at times it is to the detriment of the team.
Letting Brendan Ryan go, despite how awful he was at the plate in 2010, was one of those choices.
Don't worry Cardinals fans. You'll see plenty of Brendan Ryan making "Web Gems" on ESPN's Baseball Tonight throughout the season. It'll be in a Seattle Mariner uniform.
Instead, we'll watch Nick Punto, who is a taller version of Aaron Miles. A player with zero upside. A player that barely belongs on a major league roster.
The exact type of player that Tony La Russa loves.
Comments
Post a Comment