[Redbird Reveille] Good things and bad things

by on June 2, 2009 · 5 comments

Well, judging by the title, this should be a fun exercise, no?

Good thing: Colby Rasmus going three-for-four with a home run, double, single, a run scored and one batted in.

Bad thing: Dan and Al going on incessantly about how Rasmus “only needs a triple for the cycle” following the single to put him in such status.  Ask @MatthewHLeach, this is annoying.

Good thing: Todd Wellemeyer didn’t give up ten runs and he didn’t walk a whole lineup of batters.

Bad thing: He gave up four runs (three earned) and that is enough to beat this Little League offense right now.

Good thing: Trever Miller, Dennys Reyes, Chris Perez, and Kyle McClellan all made scoreless appearances in relief.

Bad thing: Blaine Boyer didn’t.  (And McClellan walked two.)

Good thing: Joe Thurston was three-for-three.

Bad thing: Joey T is still not the answer at third base.

Good thing: The Cards were not the Mets tonight, who surrendered five runs in the eighth inning to blow a 5-0 lead against the Pirates.

Bad thing: The Cards couldn’t score five runs all game, which is all they needed to push into extra innings.

Good thing: Ryan Ludwick finally made it off of the bench tonight to pinch hit.

Bad thing: Rick Ankiel and Chris Duncan had already flailed their way to four strikeouts in seven at-bats by the time he appeared.  (Does anyone else wonder why Ankiel and/or Duncan still see fastballs?  Ever?)

Good thing: We get to do it all over again at 7:15p – Central time.  Go Cards!

—–

Feel free to add your own in the comments – this is fun!

email
Writing about the Cardinals and other loosely associated topics since 2008, I've grown tired of the April run-out only to disappoint Cardinal fans everywhere by mid-May. I do not believe in surrendering free outs.
View all posts by Nick
Follow Nick on Twitter

{ 4 comments }

Cardinal70 June 2, 2009

So, did Rasmus just need a triple for the cycle? Really? Why wouldn’t someone mention that?

It’s gotten to where I expect an Ankiel strikeout just about every time up. People are pitching him away, away, away and he’s swinging at them.

PHE June 2, 2009

I really wish that MLB.tv had gotten their “listen to radio while watching television broadcast” feature right. At least then I could chalk up most of the ignorant comments to Shannon being drunk. Dan and Al just have no excuse.

Ankiel’s last strikeout seemed to punctuate, for me, that he is either not healthy or has peaked in his development as a hitter. It seemed clear he was expecting the breaking ball in the dirt (like he would normally see in that situation), and when his bread and butter fastball came across the outside corner he was caught like a deer in headlights.

It’s Rasmus’ time in St Louis, methinks.

Cardinal70 June 2, 2009

I’m with you, but unfortunately until Ank starts hitting, well, like Boba Fett says, “He’s no good to me dead.” Nobody’s going to trade for a .220 hitting outfielder with limited track record, even if he has hit bombs in the past.

Same goes for Duncan, of course.

Oh, and if doing it again today is the good news, the fact that Thompson is starting could be the bad.

PHE June 2, 2009

Well, he’s no good either way if he’s not hitting or can’t be traded. Either way they’re on the hook, but they have a choice not to play him if he can’t hit.

Giving up before the game even starts?! That’s not like you Daniel! Have some faith in Thompson…maybe he’ll put in a start tonight that belies his 14 year old appearance. :)

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: