Cardinals Hot Stove

#76
Man, I'll take status quo of projecting to win 88 games every year (which sometimes means you'll win 100 like in 2015), making the playoffs 2/3rds of the time while never being out of it in September, and a world series ring every decade or so like this front office has produced since Mozeliak was put in charge before 2008.

Spending just to spend gets you where the Cubs are (and Boston to some extent); in the middle of what should be an extended competitive window, you actually get hamstrung with old guy contracts and are looking to shed payroll (and trade your best player) in order to be able to afford to extend your pre-free agent guys or fill out a pitching staff.
It’s not spending just to spend. It’s spending to get you from 85-90 wins to a team that is actually a threat to win the WS when they get into the playoffs. The cardinals haven’t been that for several seasons now.
 
#77
Boston won a WS in 2018. Dodgers have been in several. Spending big is not really my point though. Standing pat was my point. We need offensive upgrades.
We are built to be competitive and maintain sellouts through September. October is different. The teams you mentioned want to win in October.
Look I am not stupid. I din't say teams that spend over the cap never win.
I said it doesn't work out well. Actually "this strategy backfires more often than it succeeds."
The Dodgers went from $157 mil in 2012 to spending $240 mil in 2013. They didn't make it to the WS. StL did with their $120 mil salary. They faced BOSTON who spent $170 mil. A mere $70 mil behind the Yankees and Dodgers. It was the #3 and 10 spending teams.
In 2014 the Dodgers and Yankees again were over $200 mil but both failed. None of the top 6 teams made it to the WS.
In 2015 LAD still trying to buy a WS went over $300 mil. NYY still over $200 mil. None of the top 12 spenders made it.
In 2016 4 teams were over $200 mil only one of the made it to the WS. #4 Detroit.
In 2017 the big spending Dodgers made it to the WS but lost to Houston who spent $100 mil less. They also threw a bunch of seasons in order to gain high draft picks for years. The same thing the Cubs did as well. One thing the Cardinals have avoided doing.
In 5 years LA spent well over $200 a year and made it to 1 WS which they lost. (That was more than a $ Billion in salaries.) The Yankees had even less to show for their efforts. Almost all the other top 5 spending teams failed to win the WS as well.
It's late. I'm tired I am not going to continue on. You can pretend that spending money automatically means championships. It doesn't. Fowler and Carp prove that.
 
#78
I’m really not talking about lavish spending. I just don’t like our roster. The outfield lacks offense. Carp at third doesn’t suit me defensively. DeJong is serviceable but I question his range. Wong had a great year and Goldy might bounce back offensively.

Standing pat just seems lazy to me. It seemed lazy at the deadline last summer too.

After all that, I do think we compete in the division. I don’t think it’s a playoff roster.
 
Likes: the national
#79
It’s not spending just to spend. It’s spending to get you from 85-90 wins to a team that is actually a threat to win the WS when they get into the playoffs. The cardinals haven’t been that for several seasons now.
As long as you get into the playoffs, the odds are so close to even it doesn't really matter. Dodgers haven't won yet, Astros won once and their pitching window is slamming shut, Cubs won once and failed to make it back (with their window slamming shut because the Ricketts are cheap), Boston is the only team who's made the "spend way too much to win" strategy work over an extended time, and even they have had bottom feeder years in between, and even they are trying to trade their best player for some reason and get cheaper. I'd much rather do the Cardinals thing, make the playoffs all the time, play the odds to get hot and win the world series, because its sustainable.

The Nationals weren't a big spend super team, there was a string of them that won from 16-18, but before that it was mostly just teams who weren't the best record but got hot and won (Royals, Giants x3, Cardinals)
 
#80
i just don’t like our offense against contenders like the Nationals. I see a quality start by Flaherty too easily wasted due to lack of runs.
 
#81
I’m really not talking about lavish spending. I just don’t like our roster. The outfield lacks offense. Carp at third doesn’t suit me defensively. DeJong is serviceable but I question his range. Wong had a great year and Goldy might bounce back offensively.

Standing pat just seems lazy to me. It seemed lazy at the deadline last summer too.

After all that, I do think we compete in the division. I don’t think it’s a playoff roster.
I know. I agree. What I have been trying to say is StL isn't a "cheap" organization. They don't get the big FA names like we would like them to do but in reality those big name deals don't work a lot of the time. Look at how much more flexibility they would have right now if they didn't go long term big dollars on Fowler. He has tied their hands. Look at all the closers they have tried. None of them have worked out. Mikolas might be a mistake but worth the risk.

By and large top shelf FA will not come to StL at this time. The most probable way is to get them via a trade which costs money and talent.
 
#82
I';m not disappointed with the payroll at all. STL has a nice payroll. But, when MLB radio/tv talks about the best front offices in the sport
the Cards/Moz come up, yet we are paying Carpenter and Fowler big dollars that could be spent on more productive players. Carp even
got paid a year early. I'm also concerned about our ability to project our position players in the bigs. It seems we have an abundance of
outfielders that haven't proved they can play everyday and hit and when we tried to move one or more, no one seems to want them.
We also don't have a shortstop in the system. We had to move Dejong to that spot where he's been solid but not spectacular.

I also don't buy that hitter protection isn't a thing. Sometimes its easy to say stats don't back something up but when a hitter is "pitched
around" or walked intentionally because they want the next guy up. around. it might also just be the way someone is pitched, not necessarily
a intentional walk. (hard to stat) I've heard the same about clutch hitting, but continue to see certain guys come thru on a more regular
basis that others. That's not just luck.
 
#83
I';m not disappointed with the payroll at all. STL has a nice payroll. But, when MLB radio/tv talks about the best front offices in the sport
the Cards/Moz come up, yet we are paying Carpenter and Fowler big dollars that could be spent on more productive players. Carp even
got paid a year early. I'm also concerned about our ability to project our position players in the bigs. It seems we have an abundance of
outfielders that haven't proved they can play everyday and hit and when we tried to move one or more, no one seems to want them.
We also don't have a shortstop in the system. We had to move Dejong to that spot where he's been solid but not spectacular.

I also don't buy that hitter protection isn't a thing. Sometimes its easy to say stats don't back something up but when a hitter is "pitched
around" or walked intentionally because they want the next guy up. around. it might also just be the way someone is pitched, not necessarily
a intentional walk. (hard to stat) I've heard the same about clutch hitting, but continue to see certain guys come thru on a more regular
basis that others. That's not just luck.
Man, Paul DeJong has inherited Matt Holliday's criminally underrated Cardinal mantle. Guy is a top 3 all around NL shortstop on the cheap, has gotten better every year, is probably the best defensive SS in the NL, and will likely never be appreciated on the correct level because he doesn't quite look the part.

The whole "line up protection" and "clutch" stats are mostly just sample size noise. Over a large sample, no one has been able to statistically show that the surrounding hitters have any meaningful impact on the subject batter. Same with clutch stats, guys mostly just hit like they hit over a large enough sample, no matter the situation. Kris Bryant is a good example, he was legitimately bad in "high leverage" at bats before 2019, recording an 84 wRC+ in that small sample. Then in 2019 he had a 153 wRC+ in "high leverage" raising his career to 94 wRC+. Obviously moving forward, you'd expect that 94 wRC+ in high leverage to keep creeping up to his career 139 wRC+ as the sample gets bigger.
 
Likes: wpr
#84
Man, Paul DeJong has inherited Matt Holliday's criminally underrated Cardinal mantle. Guy is a top 3 all around NL shortstop on the cheap, has gotten better every year, is probably the best defensive SS in the NL, and will likely never be appreciated on the correct level because he doesn't quite look the part.

The whole "line up protection" and "clutch" stats are mostly just sample size noise. Over a large sample, no one has been able to statistically show that the surrounding hitters have any meaningful impact on the subject batter. Same with clutch stats, guys mostly just hit like they hit over a large enough sample, no matter the situation. Kris Bryant is a good example, he was legitimately bad in "high leverage" at bats before 2019, recording an 84 wRC+ in that small sample. Then in 2019 he had a 153 wRC+ in "high leverage" raising his career to 94 wRC+. Obviously moving forward, you'd expect that 94 wRC+ in high leverage to keep creeping up to his career 139 wRC+ as the sample gets bigger.
Despite your stats, I still believe in “clutch hitters”. If protection just means having several better than average hitters in a row so that a pitcher can’t can’t pitch around the really good one, I believe in that too.

The problem seems to be that all the good ones are swinging for the fences and striking out at a high rate. In that case, pitch them all the same; just don’t hang one in the middle.
 
#85
Despite your stats, I still believe in “clutch hitters”. If protection just means having several better than average hitters in a row so that a pitcher can’t can’t pitch around the really good one, I believe in that too.

The problem seems to be that all the good ones are swinging for the fences and striking out at a high rate. In that case, pitch them all the same; just don’t hang one in the middle.
The selling out for power/ striking out more thing isn't going away. It's literally the same thing as saying "all the NBA teams just shoot 3s, I want the big man back". It's just never going to happen.

Unless they deaden the ball again, or stop the medical/ training progress that has allowed every pitcher to throw 97 mph, guys will be selling out for power because it's the correct thing to do to score the most runs.
 
#86
Right. We agree. Problem is we don’t have that much power. Rank bottom 1/3 offensively.

We won with pitching. Can’t even score a guy from 3rd with a fly ball often enough.
 
Last edited:
#87
Nolan Arenado rumors involving Cardinals and Cubs have surfaced again. By far and away my favorite player to watch play 3rd in MLB.

I’m not getting my hopes up but these contracts will look reasonable after the next CBA. I assume it would take Gorman plus a current plus type major league player like a Wong or Edman.
 
#88
Nolan Arenado rumors involving Cardinals and Cubs have surfaced again. By far and away my favorite player to watch play 3rd in MLB.

I’m not getting my hopes up but these contracts will look reasonable after the next CBA. I assume it would take Gorman plus a current plus type major league player like a Wong or Edman.
When was the last season Matt Carpenter was a better offensive player than Nolan Arenado? You have to go ALLLLLL the way back to... 2018. And Carpenter was hurt in 2019. Not saying they'll be equal moving forward, but one of those players doesn't come with $234MM, so I think I'd just take the risk with Carp.

I'd love to have Arenado too, and the contract isn't that scary, it's exactly market rate. He's just not worth giving up actual assets for unless the Rockies are holding back money, which they won't. I'd give them Edman though.
 
#89
Woodridge, IL
When was the last season Matt Carpenter was a better offensive player than Nolan Arenado? You have to go ALLLLLL the way back to... 2018. And Carpenter was hurt in 2019. Not saying they'll be equal moving forward, but one of those players doesn't come with $234MM, so I think I'd just take the risk with Carp.

I'd love to have Arenado too, and the contract isn't that scary, it's exactly market rate. He's just not worth giving up actual assets for unless the Rockies are holding back money, which they won't. I'd give them Edman though.
How was Carpenter a better offensive player than Arenado in 2018? Arrenado: BA:.297/OBP:.374/OPS:.935/38 HR/110 RBI/WAR 5.6; Carpenter: .257/.374/..897/36/81/4.9. Not to mention Arenado is the best defensive third baseman in the league.

There isn't a single player on our roster or farm system I wouldn't trade to get Arenado. The guy is legit.
 
#90
How was Carpenter a better offensive player than Arenado in 2018? Arrenado: BA:.297/OBP:.374/OPS:.935/38 HR/110 RBI/WAR 5.6; Carpenter: .257/.374/..897/36/81/4.9. Not to mention Arenado is the best defensive third baseman in the league.

There isn't a single player on our roster or farm system I wouldn't trade to get Arenado. The guy is legit.
Arenado plays half his games in Colorado, and Carpenter plays half his games in a pitchers park, which is why you don't just look at slash lines.

Carpenter's 2018 wRC+ (adjusted for park): 140, OPS+ (adjusted for park): 143. So about 40% better than your average hitter.
Arenado's 2018 wRC+: 132, OPS+: 133. So about 33% better than your average hitter, or not as good as Carpenter.

And I was just comparing offense, obviously Arenado is the better defender and the better overall player. You have to go back to 2015 to see the last season where Carpenter was better than Arenado by fWAR.

But your aren't just trading for the player, your trading for the player + contract. So giving up a ton of talent for a guy with a market contract who will probably opt out after 2 seasons just doesn't make much sense. They would have to give up talent, just because of the opportunity, but laying waste to the farm to acquire a guy with a market rate contract won't work. Same reason Kris Bryant the talent probably would be worth ATL's top 3 prospects, but Kris Bryant the talent + contract for ATL's top 3 prospects is laughable.
 
#91
I just love to watch Arenado play 3rd base. I’d buy his jersey. Have bought Goldy’s and Molina. Everyone else? I’ll keep my money.
 
Likes: the national
#92
If Arenado would come, you’d almost hope he performed up to expectations and opts out in 2 years. The part of the contract that bothers me is the total length.
 
#93
If Arenado would come, you’d almost hope he performed up to expectations and opts out in 2 years. The part of the contract that bothers me is the total length.
Yea the opt out really throws a wrench into it. Your upside is limited to 2 seasons, but the downside is locked into the full 7 seasons.

You almost want him to exercise the opt out and should consider the trade package that way, because if he doesn't exercise it, that means he didn't play very well for 2 years.
 
#94
Trade for Liberatore...supposedly for MLB level players...Tampa Bay had been looking for OF bats. I like Liberatore a lot...but I'm anxious to see who we're dealing away.
 
Likes: the national
#95
St. Peters MO
Trade for Liberatore...supposedly for MLB level players...Tampa Bay had been looking for OF bats. I like Liberatore a lot...but I'm anxious to see who we're dealing away.
I hope it is Bader....
 
#96
Jose Martinez and Randy Arozarena for Liberatore and a low level catcher. Swap some draft slots.
 
Jose Martinez and Randy Arozarena for Liberatore and a low level catcher. Swap some draft slots.
Seems like a reasonable trade. I hate to watch players rot away their best years. Both Martinez and Arozarena should have a chance to compete.
 
Likes: whatahack