SB Nation St. Louis - Features

New Rams Stadium Proposal: Team Demands Enormous Ransom From St. Louis

2012-05-15T12:15:01Z

The St. Louis Rams' new stadium proposal is little more than a 39-page ransom note.

The St. Louis Rams' stadium proposal—counter-proposal, really—has been made public, and it's a doozy. It would run about $500 million on the low end, it involves tearing out the entire structure and facade of the recognizable side of the Edward Jones Dome, and it's not a serious attempt by the team to stick around in a city that has no reason to spend that much money to rehabilitate a stadium it's still paying down debt on. It involves rerouting Broadway, building a new facade and lower seating bowl, moving the playing field 50 feet west, and, practically, building a new stadium that sits on the same footprint as one that's less than 20 years old. More practically still, it involves the Rams proposing the kind of inevitably public expenditure that's justly become an anathema in the wake of the recent recession.

And if this is their best offer, more power to them—I hope Stan Kroenke enjoys it out west.

I'll say this for them: It's a beautiful stadium they'd like St. Louis to build them, devoid of the reflexive retro touches that have doomed the Edward Jones Dome and Busch Stadium to their status as some of the last ballparks in their sport to remain in thrall to the Camden Yards house style. This one's all glass and moving pictures and isn't a dome at all, but a stadium with a partially retractable roof.

But if you can spot the reused elements on this diagram, even when it points them out to you, you have a better architectural eye than I do:

In case you've forgotten, the original CVC proposal involved $124 million, an enormous new jumbotron, some new windows, and a new building providing for a special entrance for the people in the extra-expensive club seats. This one, if you believe the Rams' captive consultant, would cost something like $500 million.

Obviously negotiations are all about this kind of back and forth, and the CVC got itself into playing this game in the first place. But it's hard to imagine two sides being farther apart than the distance between adding a building and a big new entrance (and asking the club to pay half) and knocking down the wall that appears in all the Edward Jones Dome press photos and rebuilding the inner bowl of the stadium.

But here's the real problem: This shouldn't even be a debate we, you and I, are involved in. If the Rams want a gorgeous new stadium in downtown St. Louis, they should go ahead and build it. Football teams are enormously profitable, and the recent sale of the Los Angeles Dodgers shows that the increasing fragmentation of the TV market means they'll only get more valuable in the future. Stan Kroenke's worth $3 billion, and just tried to buy up another team because he felt like it; he could probably swing it.

But they won't go ahead and build it, because sports teams have become accustomed to earning enormous, unjustifiable subsidies from increasingly indebted cities and states—and, one middle-man over, the taxpayers of those cities and states, not all of whom are willing or especially able to pay a fee for the right to see the Rams go 2-13 and a Revitalized Downtown, the canard of every public stadium project, produce more sports bars with big Bud Light banners hanging over their facades.

The threat of moving teams—particularly to Los Angeles, but generally just moving them elsewhere, even to the suburbs—and the ignominy of being the elected official who didn't get his constituents the Super Bowl have combined to become a sleazy mechanism by which billionaires extract tax dollars under absurd claims of economic multipliers and vibrant downtowns eight times a year. This ought to stop, eventually, and St. Louis is as good a place as any to see it happen. If the Rams would like their fans to pay this ransom, they should contact them directly.

Chris Carpenter And The St. Louis Cardinals' Rotational Surplus

2012-05-12T14:00:13Z

Chris Carpenter's injury leaves the St. Louis Cardinals with some pretty good problems to have. Just don't stare at him, he doesn't like that.

The Cardinals are rolling. After a minor speed bump against the second-class citizens of the NL Central, the Cards are on the upswing again out west against the struggling Arizona Diamondbacks. They've gotten great starting pitching, just enough outs in relief to get by and an offensive performance reminiscent of the breakout the 2011 Cardinals experienced in Arizona in mid-April. Yep, everything is perfect in Cardinal Nation.

Well, almost everything. Pay no attention to the elephant in the room. The one with the leg tats and the 5 o'clock shadow staring a hole through your head as we speak. No, that elephant exists, but we don't know what to think about it. So lets not think about it at all. And dear god, whatever you do, don't look it directly in the eyes.

The Chris Carpenter dilemma is an interesting one. When word of Carpenter's injury first came, there was much hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth among Cardinals fans. 'What now?' they asked. 'This storyline again?' they cried. 'Quit listening to my personal conversations,' they warned. Roy Oswalt could hear them clamoring for him from his tree stand.

But Lance Lynn arrived to save the day. And then Lance Lynn arrived. And he saved the day.

Now, the fan base is left to wonder how the Cardinals deal with their impending surplus of starting pitchers. It's not terribly impending - there is still no timetable on Carpenter's return, making this discussion somewhat academic at this juncture - but the expectation is that at some point in the future the Cardinals will have six guys for five spots.

How should the Cardinals deal with their newfound depth? First, lets identify some truths.

If Lynn continues on like this, he's too valuable to move to the bullpen. Relievers are both easier to find and are worth less to their teams than starters. The first reliever doesn't show up until the middle of the second page on FanGraph's 2011 pitching WAR leaders, and only six guys among the top 88 made fewer than 17 starts in 2011. Relievers can post decent WARs, but they have to be pretty darn good (and used pretty darn often) to make any kind of meaningful positive impact.

It's not hard to argue Lynn has been the best Cardinals starter thus far. He's got the best blend of results (6-0, 1.40 ERA) and peripherals (8.61 K/9) of anyone on the staff, and a 2.89 FIP suggests he's not just smoke and mirrors. Some of his numbers are unsustainable - his .209 BABIP will surely go up, and his 93.8% strand rate will surely go down - but everything seems to suggest this is more or less the pitcher he is. And the pitcher he is belongs in the starting rotation.

Carpenter belongs in the rotation, too. The last time he pitched in relief was in 2008. It was one inning. In September. Before that, he hadn't pitched out of the bullpen since his early Toronto days. Chris Carpenter is a starting pitcher, and while he'll say all the right things and do what is best for the team, what's best for the team is to have Carpenter start every fifth game.

Still, a six-man rotation seems unlikely. Maybe in the earlygoing it'll happen as they ease Carpenter back into the mix. Teams like the Rays and White Sox went to six-man rotations for parts of 2011, but each example is short-lived.

The Texas Rangers had plenty of reason to switch to a six-man rotation to begin 2012 but still chose to send Alexi Ogando to the bullpen instead. With an increased emphasis on matchups and starting pitchers' outings becoming shorter, teams can't afford to sacrifice that extra arm in the bullpen. And the Cardinals are no exception.

Trading one of the starters to open a spot is a bad idea. Teams in contention rarely deal away starting pitching, no matter how great their depth. The two usual suspects are Kyle Lohse and Jake Westbrook, both of whom have no-trade clauses, so a trade is even less likely to happen. One need look no further than the Cardinals' hockey counterparts to see that a surplus can quickly evaporate with an ill-timed injury. Unless the Cardinals can get a piece in return that upgrades their chances of winning the World Series, it seems to make the most sense for the team to hold onto its chips.

So what's the answer, then? Simply, wait. Lohse is a traditionally strong starter who begins to falter in the summer months. Westbrook, while having a track record that suggests last year was the exception and not the rule, still can't be fully trusted despite the promising start. And in a rotation in which four members have now had Tommy John surgery in their lifetime health can't be assumed, either. More likely than not, the decision will be made for Mike Matheny & Co.

In the meantime, enjoy the ride. And seriously, do not look Carpenter directly in the eyes. Just don't.

Legopiece Theater: Dugout Abbey: Fox Sports Midwest Sits Down With Sign Guy

2012-05-11T15:00:39Z

Our local reporter catches up with one of Cardinal Nation's most notorious fans.

So, Why Should Taxpayers Have To Pay Anything For Stadiums, Again?

2012-05-09T13:00:47Z

The St. Louis Rams and Minnesota Vikings are both in stadium negotiations. Explain to me why the taxpayers need to foot any of this bill.

Sorry, but I'm confused. I know I was educated in public school in Kentucky, but I've still tried very hard to understand the stadium situations that are unfolding around the St. Louis Rams and the Minnesota Vikings.

The Rams presented, last week, a counter-proposal to the month-old CVC plan to upgrade the Edward Jones Dome. Now, since each side has been though the revision portion once, the two sides have until June 15th to come to an agreement. If one isn't reached, then arbitration is scheduled. Unlike baseball, though, the arbitration isn't binding and the Rams can vacate their lease after the 2014 season.

Further north, the Vikings are in the midst of trying to push legislation through the Minnesota congress. The house of representatives have approved the plan, the senate is revising the plan and the owners of the Vikings are pissed at the plan. Mostly for tacking on another $ 105 million to the price the team will have to put into the nearly $1 billion project.

The Rams seem to be haggling with the CVC over around $60-65 million by most reports, and the Vikings' $105 million. Both are staggering sums of money that all of us here will never get near realizing in our lives.

And both are pretty insignificant in the world of the NFL.

Late in 2011, the NFL renegotiated the TV contracts for the league. When all was said and done, the 32 teams in the league were set to split $3 billion in revenue. Per year. Read that again... three billion dollars per year. That wasn't a typo. That's roughly $94 million per year per team.

Or in other words, with what both of these teams would make off one source (albeit a huge source) of revenue, they can pay for these renovations-slash-new stadiums. Instead, they hold the specter of Los Angeles over the the fans and the governments of Missouri and Minnesota to get the taxpayers to subsidize these revenue-generating machines.

Again, public school in Kentucky, but why do the taxpayers need to be involved in this at all?

I mean, I get it from the team's perspectives. Why the hell not have someone else pay for something they want? If a guy in a Ferrari pulled up next to you on the street and asked you for 10 bucks, you'd laugh and move on. But for some reason, with NFL teams, we entertain the idea that somehow Joe Six Pack should be ponying up for large portions of stadium building costs.

It's truly insane. We hand them the 10 dollar bill. And feel like we've done something good.

This isn't some political statement. Nor is it a indictment of how much a sports team might mean to a city. Rather its a wake up call: stop giving NFL teams money. As in any money. At all. Ever. For anything they want. I promise you they can afford it. Just because somebody else did something a while back doesn't mean they get the same breaks.

It's life. It's not fair. They'll eat.

No, the popular move isn't to sacrifice a team to LA to prove a point. And no, I don't want the Rams to leave St. Louis. But once LA is off the board, the NFL isn't going to be able to leverage that huge TV market against taxpayer dollars elsewhere. So take some solace in the fact that the NFL isn't exactly eager to get the LA deal done, when several other markets could use it to hijack more taxpayer money.

I can't say I exactly trust the government to spend what they'd save not financing the Rams on something productive, but that's not the point.

The point is that the NFL is the most popular sports league in the US. It makes its teams almost $100 million a season before they play a single down. It's time to cut the lifeline. You want a new stadium, pay for it.

We'll show up and drink the $9 beers wherever you want to put it.

NFL Draft Results 2012: St. Louis Rams' Wide Receivers Come Later Than Anticipated

2012-04-30T14:31:24Z

Here's a complete look at the St. Louis Rams' 2012 NFL Draft results.

For something like two months the St. Louis Rams were given one, uniform set of 2012 NFL Draft results: Justin Blackmon at No. 6, with offensive linemen and defensive help after, in no particular order. Now: The Rams' draft results start with Michael Brockers, a mostly unexpected defensive tackle at No. 14, and move on to wide receivers in later rounds. Here're the complete draft results, for posterity:

No. 14 overall: DT Michael Brockers. Brockers is a raw pass-rusher who should provide immediate help at stopping the run. Which is good, since the Rams allowed 4.8 yards per carry last year. Some were skeptical, but here are four reasons not to hate the Michael Brockers pick as a Rams fan.

No. 33 overall: WR Brian Quick. Quick is a big, raw wide receiver who the Rams thought enough of to open the second round with. Which leaves us wondering what the Rams will do with Danario Alexander.

No. 39 overall: CB Janoris Jenkins. The Rams made an enormous gamble with Jenkins, who has Top 10 talent but also some major character problems. But it earned the Rams some high draft grades.

No. 50 overall: RB Isaiah Pead. Pead was a major surprise as the Rams' belated final second-rounder. He's a speedy change-of-pace running back who'll earn most of his touches on third down and could do some lining up as wide receiver. Here's 200 words about Isaiah Pead, which is 200 more than I knew before they drafted him.

No. 65 overall: CB Trumaine Johnson. The Rams' third rounder is a cornerback who might be a safety, big and quick but with a lot to learn before he'll worry Cortland Finnegan or Janoris Jenkins.

No. 96 overall: WR Chris Givens. Givens is the smaller, speedier counterpart to Brian Quick, confusing though that might be. He mentioned the Greatest Show on Turf immediately after being drafted, which is the right way to ingratiate yourself with the St. Louis Rams fanbase.

No. 150 overall: OG Rokevious Watkins. The Rams didn't have a fifth round pick, due to the Brandon Lloyd trade, until they swapped second-rounders with the Chicago Bears. They used their bounty to finally select an offensive lineman.

No. 171 overall: K Greg Zuerlein is a kicker, for some reason. But he's going to start!

No. 209 overall: LB Aaron Brown is a linebacker from the University of Hawaii, which might make him pals with Greg Salas.

No. 252 overall: With their near-irrelevant compensatory pick the St. Louis Rams drafted Daryl Richardson, a running back from Abilene Christian who has a shot at earning some special teams time if Isaiah Pead gets out of there.

With St. Louis Cardinals' Stolen Bases Up, Mike Matheny's No La Russa On The Bases

2012-04-28T14:00:07Z

The St. Louis Cardinals are more aggressive on the basepaths with Mike Matheny at the helm. But they won't abandon caution.

When new St. Louis Cardinals manager Mike Matheny began to outline his vision for the 2012 team, one of the most notable ways he differed from former manager Tony La Russa was his desire for players to be more aggressive on the basepaths.

It's not as though the Cardinals were terribly conservative under La Russa—Jose Oquendo is among the most aggressive third base coaches in the game, and Albert Pujols was notorious for his daring nature on the basepaths—but the running game went dormant in 2011, with the Cardinals swiping only 57 bases all year. Only the Detroit Tigers stole fewer bases last season.

The cause for the low total was two-fold. Managing a team with some of the most dangerous 3-4-5 batters in baseball, La Russa often erred on the side of caution with stealing bases at the top of the lineup, hoping for an extra-base hit rather than trying to manufacture a run. The personnel on the Cardinals didn't lend themselves to opening up the running game much, either; Pujols, arguably the second-slowest member of the club, was second on the team with nine stolen bases.

With Pujols gone and Carlos Beltran in, along with a full season of Rafael Furcal and the opportunity to get Tyler Greene regular playing time at second base, the 2012 Cardinals are better equipped to swipe more bags. Still, Matheny said his intent isn't to run with reckless abandon; rather, he wants his team to make smart decisions using well-timed aggression. In an April 7 piece on Cardinals.com, Matheny clarified his goal:

"We have a couple guys who have a good history of being able to take a base in the right situation and have good instincts with that," Matheny said. "We'll continue to be aggressive when it makes sense."

That smart baserunning has already manifested itself 18 games into the season. Through Friday, the Cardinals were 15-for-18 in stolen bases; they ranked fifth in the league in FanGraphs' baserunning statistic, with a score of 1.3. They finished 2011 with a baserunning score of 4 and a 59-percent success rate on stolen base attempts, worst in the league.

It's coming from unexpected sources, too. Carlos Beltran leads the team in stolen bases, and "Sugar" Shane Robinson leads the team with a baserunning score of 0.8. Eight position players currently have a positive baserunning score.

An example of what Matheny was talking about showed up in the Cardinals-Reds game on April 18. With Beltran on second base and Lance Berkman on first, the pair executed a double steal, taking advantage of Reds pitcher Mat Latos's indifference. It was a play almost certainly ad-libbed by the two veterans, the exact kind of play Matheny wants his team to make when given the opportunity.

The Cardinals need look no further than last year's team for cautionary tales regarding a team's ability to go downhill quickly. Despite the ugly finish, the 2011 Cardinals were 11-for-14 in stolen base attempts through their first 17 games. Even with the added ambition on the bases, this team won't rank near the top of the base-stealing category when all is said and done. But that's not the goal, and it's not what Matheny is preaching. If they can continue to make smart, aggressive baserunning decisions, though, Matheny will be well on his way to distancing himself from his former manager.

NFL Draft Results: Four Reasons Not To Hate The Michael Brockers Pick, Rams Fans

2012-04-27T16:41:16Z

The reaction to the St. Louis Rams' selection of Michael Brockers with the No. 14 pick was swift and it was harsh. Here's why you shouldn't pay attention.

So you wanted a wide receiver, didn't you? Too bad. The Jacksonville Jaguars jumped into the No. 5 pick of the 2012 NFL Draft to snag Justin Blackmon one spot ahead of the St. Louis Rams. Smartly, the Rams decided to trade down to the No. 14 pick in an exchange with the Dallas Cowboys, presumably to snag Notre Dame WR Michael Floyd.

You know, until the Arizona Cardinals drafted him with the 13th pick.

Only the Rams... Sigh.

Michael Brockers anyone? The LSU Defensive Tackle was the Rams' pick with #14 and the reaction was swift and decisive: WTF? Hashtag LOLRams. Facepalm. In any combination.

Brockers was a one-year starter with two career sacks and the weakest bench press at the combine for d-linemen. In a rapidly evolving fun n' gun league, the Rams once again were left at the altar searching for that partner for Bradford, the last of the mega-paid draft bonus babies. And I can't say I wasn't looking forward to writing a piece defending Justin Blackmon to his critics and searching message boards for mock Blackmons in Rams jerseys.

But we've got ourselves a Brockers. So here are four reasons that you shouldn't hate having his back.

1. He would have been a top 5 pick in 2013. Anyone can wander out and get hit by a bus, but the scouts are in love with Brockers's potential... and he's got tons to spare. The reason he wasn't a super-blue chipper in 2012 was lack of playing time for his career, not the things he was doing on the field when he played. He was one of the few players on LSU who showed up for the national championship game in January and consistently beat double teams inside against the elite SEC teams. Fast forward 12 months and you'd LOVE this pick.

2. Jeff Fisher got Albert Haynesworth to play hard. Read that sentence again. Fisher's teams are built inside-out and now the Rams sport one of the youngest and most talented d-lines in the NFL. The new coach was brought in to toughen these sally's up and the Brockers pick signals what we already assumed... the Rams are going to be tougher. In the NFL that means stuffing the run and attacking the QB. They're better equipped to do that today.

3. The Rams always wanted a DT. With the Rams having three picks in the 2012 second round, and the WR draft deep, it was the smart play to take the DT when you could and get a WR later on. Many were questioning Blackmon's potential to be a true No. 1 and Floyd was a pretty big risk at No. 13. So maybe the Rammies were just smart here, picking up another pick in the 2nd round that should be deluxe while also actually getting the guy they liked. I know it's hard to trust the Rams, but don't we have to give them the benefit of the doubt until they start losing some games?

4. He majored in "General Studies." That's code for, "He was at LSU to learn how to play football and get drafted high in the pros." He wasn't there to broaden his horizons... he was a football machine.

The Rams are going to get a WR. (note: PLEASE SWEET BABY JESUS) and in the meantime picked up an elite DT. I'm not saying we won't be back here later this weekend ripping the Rams 2012 draft.

But we're one pick in... and that pick isn't as bad as you think.

Poll

Are you happy with Michael Brockers at #14?

Yes

172 votes

No

36 votes

Let's Wait And See

104 votes

312 votes | Poll has closed

Predicting Every St. Louis Rams Game In 2012

2012-04-26T14:00:08Z

The NFL released the St. Louis Rams' 2012 schedule this week. Let's predict every single game right now.

The NFL released the 2012 schedule last week. The St. Louis Rams were thankfully still considered an NFL team, so theirs was included as well. Let's take a look at what we're dealing with...

Week 1: Detroit Lions (A) - Matthew Stafford may be the best QB that can't stay on the field in the NFL, so the Rams getting him in Week 1 is the worst possible scenario. The former Georgia Bulldog is throwing the pill to Megatron, who might just be worth the first overall pick in your fantasy draft for this game alone. The Lions will be everyone's favorite pick to 'breakout' in 2012... LOSS (0-1)

Week 2: Washington Redskins (H) - He's coming to STL in all his glory, making half as much as Sammy Bradford with two years' less experience. Every single blogger will have the 'Did The Rams Make a Mistake Not Taking RGIII' story locked and loaded if the Rams can't pull out a win. Considering the No. 2 overall pick's best target had a marital melt-down on Twitter forcing the 'Skins to trade or release him, the Rams get by... WIN (1-1)

Week 3: Chicago Bears (A) - Jay Cutler brings the most punchable face in America to the table. But the real stars are the Chicago fans, when they take out all their frustrations for a Blues Stanley Cup and a St. Louis Cardinals World Series in this game... LOSS (1-2)

Week 4: Seattle Seahawks (H) - Much better uniforms, Seattle. Not much better players, Seattle. A coin flip of a game that could land either way, but the Rams are a much tougher team in 2012 than they were in 2011 and they handle the Seahawks at home... WIN (2-2)

Week 5: Arizona Cardinals (H) - Kurt Warner isn't walking through that door, people. And by Week 5, Salvation Army of Arizona will be taking collections for Larry Fitzgerald's therapist... WIN (3-2)

Week 6: Miami Dolphins (A) - The Dolphins were a much tougher out in 2011 than anyone expected. But they dumped Brandon Marshall and are counting on Reggie Bush taking it up a notch? Not happening... WIN (4-2)

Week 7: Green Bay Packers (H) - We will remember that 4-2 record fondly. If not, the 45,000 Packer fans at the EJD will remind us about it after the game... LOSS (4-3)

Week 8: New England Patriots (H*) - The on, then off, then back on London game that will be a home game, but not really, because London loves the Patriots. Whatever. The Rams are crossing six time zones to cash a check and take their whuppin'. Good to see the Rams embrace the college system of mercenary beatings for paydays... LOSS (4-4)

Week 9: BYE

Week 10: San Fransisco 49ers (A) - Alex Smith's hands are small. Very, very small. They're still big enough to beat the piss out of the Rams. Remember that 4-2 start? Neither do I... LOSS (4-5)

Week 11: New York Jets (H) - I have to believe that the Rams, by this point fading fast, make some sort of appeal to sell discounted tickets to Christian church groups and their chance to see Tim Tebow... LOSS (4-6)

Week 12: Arizona Cardinals (A) - Sometimes the best QB is the one you never knew you had in the first place. The guy taking snaps for the Cardinals by Week 12 will probably not start the season with the team. He'll be all over Sports Center by the time this game is over... LOSS (4-7)

Week 13: San Fransisco 49ers (H) - Remember when the 49ers sucked for a long time? We couldn't beat them then. So now that they're good? We're still not beating them... LOSS (4-8)

Week 14: Buffalo Bills (A) - Beauty is a December afternoon in the outskirts of Buffalo NY. Two below average teams meet for a game that makes FOX question if they really made a sound investment with this latest NFL package... WIN (5-8)

Week 15: Minnesota Vikings (H) - Loser moves to LA... WIN (6-8)

Week 16: Tampa Bay Bucs (A) - The hardest game on the schedule to predict. Were the Bucs of 2011 a deviance from the mean of 2010 or more of a baseline for 2012? We're already +4 on the wins for the season year over year... LOSS (6-9)

Week 17: Seattle Seahawks (A) - Remember when the Rams and Seahawks played that game the last week of the season in 2010 to see which team would go the playoffs? That feels like forever ago... LOSS (6-10)

Gaining four wins in 2012 wouldn't be cause for a parade down Market Street, but at the same time, it would put them in a position to improve again for 2013 and compete for a NFC West title.

Hopefully.

PLEASE?