Last October, in a controversial move, the St. Louis Cardinals hired former home run hero-turned shamed recluse-soon to turn repentant ex-steroids user Mark McGwire as their hitting coach. In the process, his predecessor, Hal McRae, was shown the door after five years.

Among manager Tony La Russa’s many comments at the time:

“The pros overwhelmed the cons… I think I was trusted by our ownership to make the right judgment,” La Russa said, “and I would have been very disappointed if I wasn’t.”

With the 2010 regular season in the books forever, let’s see if the only quantitative measure of McGwire’s results – the numbers posted by his hitters – are pro-Big Mac or con.

During a disappointing season in which the defending National League Central Division champion Cardinals missed the playoffs, the club’s inconsistent hitters were considered by many to have been a key factor in the team’s unexpected shortfall.

Of course, there are a number of variables in any year-to-year comparison, yet the core of the Cardinals offense remained the same from 2009 to 2010. One positive in 2010 was a full-season of $120 million-man Matt Holliday, partially offset by only a half-year of former All-Star Ryan Ludwick.

When all was said and done, across the entire 162-game season, the Cardinals scored six more runs under McGwire in 2010 than they did under McRae in 2009. That works out to a statistically-insignificant rate of 4.54 runs per game compared to 4.51.

Let’s take a look at a number of other stats from the Cardinals offense as well as their rankings within the 16-team National League.

First, we see the team batting average and on-base percentage remained remarkably stable from year to year. The respective stats’ rankings improved in comparison to the rest of the league in a year when pitching was up and hitting was down across the game.

Surprisingly, the slugging percentage of the former slugger McGwire’s Cardinals was down from the year prior, despite an early-season home run burst. The next table breaks down the difference.

As indicated above, McRae’s 2009 charges had hit nine more doubles, ten more home runs and collected 41 more total bases than did the 2010 Cards hitters, with better NL ranks accordingly. Another way to look at it is that the team’s 2010 home run count was down over six percent compared to the previous year.

Just because McGwire’s hitters didn’t bring more pop doesn’t mean they didn’t show at least some improvement in other areas. As mentioned above, they plated six more runs. The batters also demonstrated a bit more patience, drawing eight more non-intentional walks, fanning 14 fewer times and grounding into three fewer double plays than the year before.  In each case, the Cardinals improved their relative standing against the NL.

Remember that the magnitude of all these differences must be considered over a full 162-game schedule, making most of these year-to-year changes relatively minor.

Considering everything, decide for yourself if all the Cardinals McGwire-related activity was worth the benefit received.

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

That in itself is hardly news, as the former Royals and Devil Rays manager has been on the hot seat as the team’s offense sputtered down the stretch and in the post-season despite the addition of three new, high-profile players.

What is news however, is that ESPN is labeling secluded slugger Mark McGwire as the leading replacement.

On one hand, that is not new either, as La Russa has stated on several occasions that he has tried to get his former first baseman into coaching. Yet becoming the full-time hitting coach would be light-years ahead of what appeared to be the previous target – just getting Big Mac to show up at spring training camp as a special instructor.

In fact, McGwire actually agreed to assist La Russa in spring training 2008, but had to back out at the last minute, reportedly over a family matter.

There are a number of reasons the 46-year-old McGwire would be a good and inspired choice to replace McRae.

1. Freshness in the coaching ranks. The continuity that La Russa has fostered in his staff is admirable and a contributor to the team’s success. Yet, no turnover could lead to some stagnation. McGwire, while a long-time La Russa favorite, would clearly change that.
2. Coaching familiarity. Though he has no formal professional coaching credentials, McGwire has worked with current Cardinals Matt Holliday and Skip Schumaker and former Redbird Chris Duncan in California in recent off-seasons. All have been very positive about the instruction given.
3. The Holliday factor. In his evaluation of where to sign a new contract, impending free agent Holliday might give a slight increase in consideration to the Cardinals with McGwire in the dugout. I don’t want to oversell this however, as I sincerely doubt agent Scott Boras cares one way or another enough to increase the value of any “hometown discount” for Holliday’s continued services.
4. The Pujols factor. Albert Pujols came up from the minors in spring training, 2001 and learned the ropes of being a major leaguer at the knee of McGwire, who was then starting what would be his final season. In fact, I have often wondered if Pujols hadn’t learned how to deal with the media from Big Mac, too. Then there is that not-so-little issue of Albert’s contract extension. Having McGwire around again every day surely couldn’t hurt Pujols’ feelings about the Cardinals’ commitment to win.

So, what is not to like?

It’s that 800-pound gorilla in the room – McGwire’s unwillingness to discuss the past. Those darned media types won’t let him alone. And that is the problem, a huge one.

Unless Mac deals head on with the questions that have smudged his reputation since his appearance in front of a congressional committee in March, 2005, his mere presence as a coach could turn the 2010 Cardinals into either a circus, a high-security prison camp or both.

There are two ways this could go. In their zeal to get McGwire out of hiding, the Cardinals may have decided to take the careful path – not addressing the off-field issues directly. Instead, they could decide to build an even stronger protective cocoon around McGwire than they did when he was an active player.

I think most of us can imagine what a distraction that could become and ultimately, how unsuccessful it would be.

The other way to move ahead is for McGwire to do precisely what even La Russa himself suggested this past spring – for Big Mac to provide some closure to the open questions about his past.

“I think if he came to spring training and was seen, so the writers and the fans could say, ‘There’s Mark,’ and answer whatever they want, I think that would go a long way, in my opinion,” La Russa told the New York Times in January.

It is an interesting theory that the prolonged delay on the part of La Russa to announce his return as manager for 2010 is not totally due to his own indecision, but instead to buy time to come up with a workable plan to get McGwire onto his coaching staff.

Here is hoping it is successful, but only if McGwire steps up and allows us all to move ahead.

Update: The Cardinals will be holding an 11 a.m. press conference on Monday. Subject not disclosed.