I know this has been dicussed time and time again, but I just don't think St. Louis gets their due.
Tudor is filthy. If Coleman can get on base- he scores, especially if you're playing against someone who can't cut him down stealing.
I think St Louie is the worst team in the game. I do much worse with them than i do with Houston. Thats just my personal preference though.
I'm kind of split. There is no doubt in my mind that St. Louis and Houston are the worst teams in the game. But to as who is the worst, now that's a toss up depending on what style of game you play and what your personal strengths are. Personally, I think Houston is dead last because St. Louis has the edge for speed, batter contact, and pitching.
Later,
Mike Beales
SmokedUBad
www.dee-nee.com/rbi/mbeales (http://www.dee-nee.com/rbi/mbeales) - The Official R.B.I. Baseball COTUT
I'd take St. Louis over Houston due to the cocaine factor.
STL probably has the best team speed on the game. they are the easiest team to play small-ball with and if u sub Morris for Herr (he hits more HRs than the average guy with only 3) and take out Ford and put in Lindman,who is always good for a HR, this makes ur team a little bit stronger. dont get me wrong the cardinals still suck, but with the pitching they have and after these minor alterations they can be pretty descent.
i would not go and say that st louis is the worst team in the game they can hold their own with anybody with jack clark who is always good for a multi homer game and vince and ozzie at the top with blazing speed and sub in lindaman you got a hell of a team you just got to know how to use em
st. louis is competititive only because of their pithcing... however, if the opponent puts up any runs at all then there is no chance for the red birds... anyone with any experience can neutralize the cardinals speed... playing a rookie or the computer is a different story.
i have to say that, altough they are scrappers, st louis is far too streaky, and frankly far too poor to consitently compete with anyone...speed is one thing, but when you are hitting pop up after pop up, you can run around the bases 12 times and it wont matter....their pitching is solid...ill grant them that...but they are not a real good team...small ball is dead....on that note, i threw out vince twice at second in one game...unheard of...matty nokes was really sharp that game.....
St. Louis is definetly the worst or second worst team in the game. But they can contend sometimes. Tudor is good and coleman and smith are fast if they can hit it on the ground or in the gap. Just hope you have some guys on base for Clark and Lindeman because both have good power.
I agree with what's been said - St. Louis can contend in some games, but nobody outside of Clark and Lindeman are consistent power hitters. I also agree with MickeyG's sub of Tommy Herr. Blank Morris is an underrated player and has surprising pop. All that being said, St. Louis just doesn't put up enough runs from game-to-game....
Still better than Houston though...
Why is St. Louis' pitching considered so dominant?
While they definately have a decent staff, I'd rather have Nolan, Scott and Kerf. in usual. Though admittedly, they can actually score multiple runs a game, something Houston rarely does against a competent player.
St. Louis is just really streaky though, and it's frustrating... though they'll have a special place in my heart for the game I was down 7-0 in the 6th and came back to win it 8-7 in 10 inning on a walkoff inside the park homerun (on a throwing error)
Quote from: Polish Rifle on 11/27/07, 04:49:23 PM
Why is St. Louis' pitching considered so dominant?
Because they have John Tudor, the best pitcher in the game.
Quote from: Attezzobal on 11/27/07, 05:52:48 PM
Because they have John Tudor, the best pitcher in the game.
This statement is fkn hard to debate. Tudor=lefty with great curve 2nd only to Fernando in terms of leftys. Throws harder than Fernando as well. Did i mention he's a lefty with awesome curve?
Put Tudor on most any team and they catapult up to near the top.
I'm bias because we used to play the St. Louis/Boston matchup a ton (I was always St. Louis), and Tudor always seemed to have the perfect control for that "S" pitch against the righty heavy Boston lineup.
'nando always let me down because since we never played with all star teams but as a wind down at the end of the night, I never really learned to harness his curve, and would leave way too much over the plate.
Quote from: The__Rocket on 11/17/02, 04:50:41 PM
jack clark who is always good for a multi homer game
I suppose you think Tudor can hit an over the wall HR? Because Jack Clark as the same amount of multi HR games for me as Tudor does single HR games. 0