In late December in the first article of this series, I broke down the 11 first-year players that debuted with the 2008 St. Louis Cardinals. In the final section, part three, I will look forward to 2009.
Here in part two, I will review past first-year players and rookies each season during the Tony La Russa years. One addition from last time is a designation of whether or not the player exhausted his rookie qualification that season. That separates the cup of coffee guys from those that stuck around long enough to probably contribute.
As a reminder, here are the rookie qualification guidelines: More than 130 at-bats or 50 innings pitched in the Major Leagues, or more than 45 days on the Major League active roster during April-August, excluding time on the disabled list.
Among last year’s rookies, four – Brian Barton, Joe Mather, Kyle McClellan and Chris Perez (pictured) – met one or more of the guidelines.
The table that follows summarizes the first-year player introductions by the Cardinals over the last 13 years. To the left is the total number of first-year players, then with pitchers broken out between those that were up long enough to exhaust their rookie eligibility during their initial season and those that did not, labeled cup of coffee players, or “Cup of java”.
| Debuts | Met rookie qual | Pitchers | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Met rookie | Cup of java | |||
| 2008 | 11 | 4 | 7 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 2 | ||
| 2007 | 6 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | ||
| 2006 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 2005 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 2004 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | ||
| 2003 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ||
| 2002 | 6 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 2001 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 2000 | 8 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 3 | ||
| 1999 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 1998 | 7 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | ||
| 1997 | 12 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | ||
| 1996 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | ||
| total | 83 | 23 | 50 | 14 | 36 | 33 | 9 | 24 | ||
| avg | 6 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | ||
| pct | 28% | 60% | 40% |
Here are some associated factoids.
On the average
- During an average season, six rookies make their Cardinals debuts, 60% of whom are pitchers with position players making up the other 40%.
- Only two of them stay around long enough that season to exhaust their rookie eligibility, or 28% of the total.
- The two are made up of one pitcher and one position player, on the average.
Yearly trends
- In La Russa’s first five years, 1996-2000, only five first-year players in total saw enough time during their initial season to use up their rookie status.
- In the eight years since, 18 players have met the criteria.
- In only one year did the number of first-year hitters exceed the new pitchers, 2004.
- In only two years did the number of hitters that used up their rookie qualification exceed the number of pitchers, 1996 and 2004.
Top year
- The 11 first-year players in 2008 was second only to 1997.
- Four of the 11 in 2008 exhausted their rookie qualification as opposed to 1997 when only three of the 11 players did.
- The 2008 total of four qualifiers is the highest count in the La Russa era.
Now, here’s the player detail by season.
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 2008 | 7 | Chris Perez | Mike Parisi | 2008 | 4 | Brian Barton | Nick Stavinoha | |
| Kyle McClellan | Mark Worrell | Joe Mather | Rico Washington | |||||
| Mitchell Boggs | ||||||||
| Jaime Garcia | ||||||||
| Jason Motte | ||||||||
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 2007 | 4 | Kelvin Jimenez | Dennis Dove | 2007 | 2 | Brendan Ryan | Brian Esposito | |
| Troy Cate | ||||||||
| Andy Cavazos | ||||||||
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 2006 | 3 | Anthony Reyes | Josh Kinney | 2006 | 1 | John Nelson | ||
| Chris Narveson | ||||||||
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 2005 | 3 | Brad Thompson | Tyler Johnson | 2005 | 3 | John Rodriguez | John Gall | |
| Adam Wainwright | Chris Duncan | |||||||
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 2004 | 1 | Carmen Cali | 2004 | 2 | Yadier Molina | |||
| Hector Luna | ||||||||
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 2003 | 4 | Dan Haren | Jim Journell | 2003 | 1 | Bo Hart | ||
| Kiko Calero | Kevin Ohme | |||||||
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 2002 | 5 | Jason Simontacchi | Josh Pearce | 2002 | 1 | So Taguchi | ||
| Mike Crudale | Kevin Joseph | |||||||
| Matt Duff | ||||||||
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 2001 | 3 | Bud Smith | Jason Karnuth | 2001 | 3 | Albert Pujols | Stubby Clapp | |
| Chad Hutchinson | Bill Ortega | |||||||
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 2000 | 5 | Britt Reames | 2000 | 3 | Chris Richard | |||
| Justin Brunette | Keith McDonald | |||||||
| Jose Rodriguez | Luis Saturria | |||||||
| Mike Matthews | ||||||||
| Gene Stechschulte | ||||||||
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 1999 | 3 | Rick Ankiel | 1999 | 1 | Adam Kennedy | |||
| Rick Heiserman | ||||||||
| Curtis King | ||||||||
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 1998 | 4 | Rich Croushore | Jose Jimenez | 1998 | 3 | Joe McEwing | ||
| Cliff Politte | J.D. Drew | |||||||
| Braden Looper | Mark Little | |||||||
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 1997 | 6 | Manny Aybar | Brady Raggio | 1997 | 6 | Eli Marrero | ||
| Rigo Beltran | Sean Lowe | Luis Ordaz | ||||||
| Matt Morris | Tom McGraw | Micah Franklin | ||||||
| Scarborough Green | ||||||||
| Mike Gulan | ||||||||
| Jeff Berblinger | ||||||||
| Pitchers | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | Hitters | Tot | Met rookie | Cup of java | |
| 1996 | 2 | Mike Busby | 1996 | 3 | Miguel Mejia | Dmitri Young | ||
| Eric Ludwick | Aaron Holbert |
Addendum: At the suggestion of DizzyDean17 in the comments below, I have broken out the cup of coffee players in the above table into two groups. The names not in bold have not reached 130 major league at bats or 50 innings pitched, so they might be considered true career cup of coffee players – at least so far. In contrast, the names in bold did reach that rookie qualification mark – over a subsequent season or seasons. This adds a career perspective beyond the original single-year view of this article.
| Debuts | Met rookie qualification in debut year | Met rookie qualification later | |
| 2008 | 11 | 4 | TBD |
| 2007 | 6 | 2 | 0 |
| 2006 | 4 | 1 | 0 |
| 2005 | 6 | 2 | 3 |
| 2004 | 3 | 2 | 0 |
| 2003 | 5 | 3 | 0 |
| 2002 | 6 | 2 | 1 |
| 2001 | 6 | 2 | 0 |
| 2000 | 8 | 0 | 4 |
| 1999 | 4 | 0 | 3 |
| 1998 | 7 | 1 | 6 |
| 1997 | 12 | 3 | 4 |
| 1996 | 5 | 1 | 3 |
| total | 83 | 23 | 24 |
| avg | 6 | 2 | 2 |
| pct | 28% | 29% |
This data shows that 56% of the new players eventually earned 50 innings / 130 at-bats as major leaguers. But what I find most interesting is the concentration of players that reached the milestone after their debut year. 20 of the 24 “met rookie qualification later” players came from the first five of the La Russa years, 1996-2000.
Since 2000 however, just four players have accomplished that. The jury is still out on the 2008 cup of coffee pitchers. In other words, they still have a chance to get those necessary innings in 2009 or beyond. Most of the other cuppers from 2007 and earlier are already gone from the organization, so even if they do make it later on, it won’t help the Cardinals. Josh Kinney and Nick Stavinoha remain as 2009 possibilities.
This data seems to add support to a theory that the Cardinals are placing less emphasis on September call-ups of prospects in recent years. At least to me, the recent data seems to show that either the players come up and get significant time pretty quickly or they have their cup of coffee and fade away.
oh, Scarborough Green…where are you now?
I’m not sure why you would differentiate between the players who used up their rookie status and those that only had the proverbial cup of java. Clearly,many in the second group were back the next year and playing key roles.
I think the second group is the one that needs clarification. Certainly, Rick Ankiel’s cup of java in 1999 was different from Justin Brunette’s the following season.
DD, I added that distinguisher at CariocaCardinal’s request after I posted the original report, which was a simple view of the number of debuts during a single season – 2008. The expanded thought was to separate out those that contributed in year one from the ones that did not. Obviously, a player cannot make his debut more than once, hence with this focus, a name only appears in the year in which he first appeared.
Instead, if one wanted to take a full career view instead of a single season, then yes, some number of the cup of coffee players later received enough at-bats, innings pitched or elapsed time in the majors to exhaust their rookie qualification.
Your clarification thought is a good one – to break out the first year java players as to which ones eventually made it and which did not. Now added – see above.
Jumbo, note the nod I gave to your “September is less important” theory. I can certainly interpret the data that way.
I think there may be a popular feeling among fans that September is a nifty time for minor league auditions. And fans reasonably look forward with some eagerness to seeing new guys who could make the team the next season.
I am not sure if September play is a harbinger of the future or not. There seem like there are a variety of factors that the Cards can consider and these can vary by year or player. For instance, frugality seems a useful principle, and this principle probably denied Freese, Anderson, Rasmus last September, because they would have cost flexibility on the 40 man roster in November (and maybe started ML service clocks though I am fuzzy on this). Another principle is where we are in a pennant race; in a race, we may not add as many rookie callups.
Last September, TLR gave deference to vets Izturis, Lopez, and Kennedy. Now Cesar, Miles, and Lopez have left town, there is more breathing room (playing time) this spring for Ryan and Barden. I do not assume limited playing time last September necessarily implies Barden is a longer-shot for this spring, in TLR’s eyes, since TLR should know he did not give the guy much of a look in September and not hold that against him.
I guess Barton is down the depth-chart, with a need to improve his D. I have no idea about Barden. Its going to be up to him in spring training. He has a good foundation of AAA preparation, working in his favor.
Brian, I wish to salute your energetic creativity. This new web site has given you a greater outlet for analysis and thinking about baseball. You are taking advantage.
Jumbo, thank you very much. I really do appreciate you taking the time to remark. I am having a ball here and as you observed, was somewhat constrained creatively by the inherent limitations of the Scout site. I still have plenty to offer there too, though. Getting back to blogging, which I did long before it became so popular and prevalent, was a natural move for me. I only wish there were more hours in the day.
I firmly believe there is a place for more in-depth analysis than offered by the traditional news sources that seem to be more driven by artificial means such as editors, deadlines, print space and the need to appeal to the lowest common denominator of fan. I am not sure what label to put on what I do, but I know it is different.
There are so many subjects I want to explore, though I do have five more articles queued up and ready to run in the near future!
My idea was actually to show how many guys left rookie status whether it was there debut year or not. For example, Boggs and Stavinoha played in the bigs last year but neither lost rookie status so you can infer there contribution was minimal. I would expect Boggs to lose his rookie status this year (which would show that he has contributed to some level of significance) while Stavihoha might or might not. Parise may never see the bigs again but if he did I’d not eit when he did.
CC, the data in the addendum illustrates that – which players later achieved their rookie at-bats or innings pitched levels. While I didn’t identify the specific subsequent year, it is reasonable to assume that it was the very next season in a vast majority of the cases. You suggested it. I agreed and added it.
Of course, we have no way of knowing what will happen in 2009 and beyond, which affects Stavinoha and the others. That is a projection that will be part of an article coming on Monday.
Brian,
Thanks for doing the addendum. I think you’ve hit the nail on the head that less emphasis is being placed on September call-ups.
IMO the four main reasons are A) the desire to delay the arbitration clock, B) keeping the 40 man roster flexible, C) preserving options, and D) higher minimum salaries.
The month spent in the bigs goes toward service time and increases the chances of a young player being a part of the Super Two class of arbitration eligible players. That translates to increased salary during the player’s third season.
Adding a player to the 40 man roster before it is necessary increases the chance of losing a real prospect in the Rule 5 draft. A year ago, I went round after round with a poster on the Scout board over the reasons for not adding Bryan Anderson in September 2007. He would have been on the 40 man roster throughout the 2008 season, limiting moves during the season and it would have represented his first of three options.
Not to mention, we would have had to pay him roughly $75,000 for the month plus his hotel and per diem expenses.
DD, I am with you on the points except for the last one, D. I haven’t pulled the data, but off the top of my head, I don’t suspect the Cardinals are calling up fewer players in September. It just seems like they are not calling up many prospects, for the other reasons mentioned. For example, since they pretty much always bring up one extra catcher anyway, they were still writing a check to Mark Johnson instead of Bryan Anderson.
I should have addressed that point, Brian. I think Jumbeau mentioned in a thread somewhere that there were probably agreements with some minor league free agents to add them to the 40 man roster as an inducement to joining the organization. That might explain why some of the players recalled are guys without much of a future as a Cardinal.
I also should have mentioned service time in general. The team can control a player in his seventh major league season if he has less than six full seasons of service time. The extra few games he’s on the roster in September may be the difference between five years plus 160 games or so and six full years. It’s not uncommon to see a prospect called up a month or so into the season. Ryan Braun and Evan Longoria come to mind as recent examples.
I do understand service time and its impact on arbitration and free agent eligiblity and am not debating those points.
Like I said, I didn’t dispute any point other than your last one about September cost savings, where you used $75K as the specific example. Do you see a significant incremental cost savings in promoting a veteran over a rookie?
It is an interesting theory that there are pre-determined agreements for September call-ups, but there is no proof of that that I have seen. It is possible, though one must use caution as Jumbo’s many theories are not always worded as such and can be mis-interpreted as fact. However, even if true, it does not support the point on cost savings as far as I can tell.
Seems to me that if anything, it would cost MORE to bring up Johnson than Anderson, for example. So using that particular point as part of the justification for not calling up the rookie instead seems faulty logic to me.
I guess to fully answer this, we would have to compare the population of call-ups by year. I am basing my points on a relatively consistent number of call-ups with only the possible mix of vets vs. rookies changing. On the other hand, I sense you may be suggesting fewer players in total are getting the call. In that case, money would surely be saved.
Sigh!…. another project to put on the list….
Brian,
Given the adversarial relationship I had for years with the guy, please understand that I would be unlikely to accept one of Jumbo’s theories as fact. In this case, though, I think he is on to something.
I am not suggesting that it is less expensive to bring up a career minor leaguer such as Johnson. The other factors I named weigh far too heavily on the decision. I am merely suggesting a reason why prospects are less likely to be recalled in September than in past years. Of course, the past years I’m thinking of are probably far more in the past than the past years you are discussing.
I’m thinking of the years when 12-15 guys would be recalled for a cup of September coffee back in a simpler time without arbitration, free agency, etc. The additional cost per player is far more expensive than it was back in those days. $75,000 in salary is probably a bit high. It’s probably closer to $60,000 per player.
I haven’t gone through your data to examine when these cups of coffee occurred. Some may have taken place in May or July to replace an injured player and the guy didn’t impress enough to warrant a return to the majors that year.