The Cards are a surprise, and what has happened to Miguel Cabrera?

At 3-1 with a 2.60 ERA, Adam Wainwright has anchored a surprisingly good Cardinals staff. AP Tom Verducci's Mailbag Tom Verducci will answer select questions from SI.com users in his Baseball Mailbag. Name: Email: Hometown: Question: SEND

I can understand to a point why many remained unconvinced that the Cards are for real, but is their success really that much of a shock? Consider the 2007 production of the players that they replaced and it looks like a classic case of addition by subtraction. Also, a lot of guys had good production in limited 2007 action. Shouldn't we have expected the 2008 edition to be an improvement over last year's squad (which was still poised to take the division until they finally tanked in mid-September)?

-- Greg Pils, Madison, WI

A: I don't know about a shock, but you can't tell me the St. Louis rotation has not been a major surprise. Cardinals starters have thrown the most innings in the NL with a 17-6 record and 3.63 ERA. There's no way that's going to hold up. (They were 48-72 with a 5.04 ERA last year.) The other stuff is all ancillary to me. It's mostly about starting pitching. And you have to give more credit to Dave Duncan for getting the most out of veteran guys. He's been doing it his whole career.

Who should be more worried about his job at this point: J.P. Ricciardi or John Gibbons? And, would you give Roger Clemens a vote for the HOF given the recent reports about him?

-- Mike, Halifax, Nova Scotia

A: I look at Ricciardi and Gibbons as a tandem, though historically the manager goes before the GM does. But I don't see changes coming any time soon. Toronto's pitching has been superlative, but it better find a way to generate more offense. Personally, I don't think the Jays have enough offense to win 90 games. As for Roger, I've got five years before I have to decide on a vote for him. But to repeat my stance on HOF voting in general, I won't vote for guys I reasonably believe used illegal PEDs.

I'm glad that Jim Leyland is shaking things up a bit with the Tigers, but to me there seemed to be one obvious move that has not been made: moving Miguel Cabrera to the DH, Carlos Guillen back to 1B, and Brandon Inge to 3B, with Gary Sheffield either sitting down or (as now seems to be the case) heading to LF. Is there something I'm missing?

-- Daniel, Chicago, IL

A: Is there a guy who morphed into a DH more quickly than Cabrera?

Geez, it seems like he went from a corner infielder to an overweight slug in about five minutes. I know the guy can mash, but that's a whole lot of years and money Detroit gave a guy already with agility and body issues. But I do like your lineup idea, with the caveat that I would rotate Cabrera, Guillen and Sheffield through the DH spot.

When a player signs a contract mid-season, does he immediately have to take a drug/steroid test? The reason I ask is because I'm thinking all these out-of-work sluggers are probably taking steroids right now while they're not in the league, just waiting for a team to make an offer. Once they sign a contract, they could stop the steroids but still be sufficiently bulked up to put up huge numbers again. Has the league given any thought to this issue?

-- John, Brooklyn, N.Y.

A: That's a great point, John, and I've been thinking about this for the last year or two as it seems more and more players "retire" or shut it down because of injury and then launch a comeback. Obviously, they can put whatever they want into their bodies when they're out of the game, then stop with enough time to have it not linger in their system (as far as tests go) yet still have benefited from the strength and recovery advantages. Once you sign a contract, you are subject to be tested at any time. Of course, this applies only to the banned substances that show up on tests. All players, even active ones, are still free to use HGH without fear of being tested for it. I believe we're going to see more and more older players (mostly pitchers) take off months or years to get their bodies back in shape -- with PEDs or not -- and then come back to the game. The big money they've earned allows them the luxury.

These "inning jumps" from year to year are killing me. Now I'm not one of these guys who doesn't believe in pitch counts either; I think there's some relevance to someone's stuff dropping off after 110 pitches or so in most cases. But the "year to year" innings thing just eludes me. Does an arm really know what a "year" looks like? Are we soon to start counting warm up tosses as pitches too? What if pitches and/or innings at full throttle aren't the problem at all? What if it is a question of arm repetition and muscle overuse and thus, perhaps playing extended long-toss is the problem? I find the whole innings thing maddening and for every instance like that Pirates kid who needed Tommy John surgery, there are probably 20 lesser known kids who saw their innings jump by 120 that are fine. I find these things maddening -- your body doesn't know how many days are in a year. How do you feel personally on the issue?

-- Mike Powers, Edison, N.J.

A: All of your questions are very good ones. I'm not one to believe in absolutes when it comes to pitching thresholds. For instance, I don't believe that every single pitcher gets tired at 100 pitches and is abused at 120. There are genetic and mechanical differences that work against one-size-fits-all application. But I do believe in guidelines.

And two things are clear and they are based on hard data, not theory:

The No. 1 risk factor for injury, by far, is overuse, and young pitchers who see their workload increase by about 30 innings or more are much more prone to injury or inefficiency. So yes, it's entirely possible to have a guy increase his innings by 50 and he'll be just fine. But the data tells you that you are increasing the odds of an injury that way, so why risk it? Look at it this way: you are at a far greater risk of injuring yourself if you suddenly increase your running workouts or weightlifting loads by more than 20 percent. It's much safer to get there incrementally. It's the same way with conditioning your arm to carry greater workloads.