December 25, 2020 at 1:45 pm #150380
stlcard25, please return to the prior page on this thread and read post 150250 from the day before yesterday, as I already gave my POV on your questions about Brebbia.December 25, 2020 at 3:15 pm #150385
JJ, not that it matters in regards to Brebbia but I don’t think CMart is a lock for the rotation. Mo has said he will have to earn it and Mo also said that Reyes will get a shot at the rotation.December 25, 2020 at 3:38 pm #150388
“earn it and hold it” is up to CMart, but he’s no lock for me either.
It wouldn’t surprise me if they stretch out as many arms as possible.December 25, 2020 at 5:44 pm #150390
stlcard25, please return to the prior page on this thread and read post 150250 from the day before yesterday, as I already gave my POV on your questions about Brebbia.
I saw that and it’s definitely one way to view things. I’d also contend that no matter what the player says, it’s iffy that he will be back from TJ that quickly and just as iffy that he’ll be a contributor next year. Is he a better bet than Nogowski to provide value in the next three years? Probably, but we are talking about guys who are likely in the bottom half or even quarter of expected value on the 40 man.
I guess I’d say that I can understand people who wanted to keep him, but I also find the idea of dropping him as plenty defensible.December 25, 2020 at 5:51 pm #150391
“…we are talking about guys who are likely in the bottom half or even quarter of expected value on the 40 man.”
The results don’t agree. In the relevant comparison group, relievers, over last two full seasons combined, Brebbia was the team’s most valuable reliever.
2019 (Cardinals relief WAR):
I get that the future promise of others could exceed that, but I will continue to disagree that letting three years of Brebbia go for nothing was the best idea. As far as Nogo, he was just an example. Right now the Cards have three roster openings so they could have delayed a final decision on Brebbia to see what happens with trades and free agents and only risked probably $800K at most. Even if he would be waived later, he would likely be claimed, in which case, the Cards are free of both the salary and roster commitment. To me, this feels more like pinching pennies than prudent roster management.
Clearly the Giants saw value as they made the same big league deal the Cardinals turned down. Even with his (supposedly iffy) rehab status that to me appears a positive, Brebbia wasn’t a free agent long.
I defend the Cardinals’ moves at least as often as not, because I can follow their logic. But this time, I flat out disagree. (Then again, I was surprised by Wong, too, and times are a-changing.)December 26, 2020 at 8:25 am #150410
Again, Brebbia was being shoved out because of his injury and that there’s a queue of other talented relievers in the pool. If they go with 5 right handed pitchers in the bullpen, you have Gallegos, Hicks, Reyes (if not starting), Helsley, Gant, Ponce, and Woodford. Plus They’d like to find a place for Fernandez, Elledge, and Whitley. How do you fit in a pitcher who may or may not come back in 2021 and be effective coming off surgery
when you already have 10 candidates for 5 or 6 slots?December 26, 2020 at 9:07 am #150437
…because there are multiple injuries every spring, and I even posted the actual data from the last decade.
…because enough of the candidates have minor league options such that the team can be prepared for said injuries.
…because it is rumored that the Cardinals are looking to trade pitching to get more offense.
…because it would have cost almost nothing to keep a reliever who had been one of their best arms for what could be the next three years.December 26, 2020 at 9:14 am #150439
Brian, the front office is typically a little more shrewd than to let a useful player go for nothing. It makes me wonder if they had some insight that we do not? Time may prove that it was a terrible move, or may show Mo and Girsch to be smart in seeing the signs ahead of time.December 26, 2020 at 9:41 am #150446
Yes, we will see. Brebbia has proven he is better than the standard waiver-wire reliever and he found a new home quickly. Perhaps the Giants were fooled by their examination and it will be a flop signing for them. But in the meantime, I am not giving the Cardinals the benefit of the doubt on this one.December 26, 2020 at 10:12 am #150456
I’ll have to agree with the professional baseball men in the Cardinals organization on this one. Plenty of bullpen pieces. Injuries are a part of the game, but you can’t block too many of your major league ready youngsters who are on the 40 man.
They’ve worked long and hard for their shot.December 26, 2020 at 10:16 am #150458
I’ll have to agree with the professional baseball men in the Cardinals organization…
Please remember your words when you are tempted to rehash the outfield again! Because we all know it is coming… just hopefully not on this bullpen thread, too… 😉December 26, 2020 at 11:05 am #150464
I have heard some say that the Cardinals are saving $800k by letting Brebbia go. That is not true because his replacement will make at least the league minimum of $600k, so the savings are $200k.
And I don’t agree with making room for a blocked youngster. What blocked youngster do we have who is better than Brebbia? If Brebbia were making $5M with only one year of control I could see letting home go for a cheaper youngster but that is not the case here.
I get the apprehension about the TJ surgery but giving him one year to prove he is back wouldn’t have been unreasonable, especially since it is almost certain the season is not going to start on time. The owners and MLBPA probably couldn’t agree on what day of the week it is is so we know the negotiations will drag on forever.December 26, 2020 at 11:09 am #150465
The bullpen is stacked. Many of them have come through the system. They have the advantage also of converting some starters to relievers, and their drafts in many years have emphasized pitchers in the high rounds. Outfielders? The only one coming through the system who has really worked out long term in recent memory is Jay.
Guys like Piscotty, Grichuk, Pham, etc. simply haven’t worked out and are gone. Thankfully, we now have Carlson.December 26, 2020 at 11:30 am #150468
There is no such thing as too much pitching. When it comes to baseball never a truer statement was ever uttered.December 26, 2020 at 11:48 am #150471
Ok, I’ve decided I don’t understand all the debate about a 800K FA reliever. Brebbia’s value to STL is only if they tender and commit to pay him. Why do that now?
We could sign another 800K FA reliever at any time, not named Brebbia, and add that same value back to the staff. It’s the easiest sign on the market, and our rosters least concern.December 26, 2020 at 12:02 pm #150475
Totally agree, jj.December 26, 2020 at 12:08 pm #150476
I must have it totally backwards then.
*wink*December 26, 2020 at 3:36 pm #150483mudvilleParticipantPaid - Annual
The Cardinals have too much pitching. All any one has to do is look earlier in this thread, particularly at the very first post by stlcard25. Now if they trade some of the pitching that they have, that will, obviously, change things.December 26, 2020 at 5:16 pm #150485
There are certain pitchers that would bring value. The Weaver, Marco Gonzalez,
Gallen, Alcantara types. Trading value for value. Right now our pitching and hitting are way out of balance. We can’t go forward and be successful with one of the weakest offenses in the major leagues. It doesn’t make any sense.December 26, 2020 at 7:13 pm #150488
We could sign another 800K FA reliever at any time, not named Brebbia, and add that same value back to the staff.
How many proven 1 WAR relievers age 30 (or younger) with three years of cost control are available at $800K?
The reality is not that they are going to sign a replacement or they would have just kept him, but the concern is they let the one of value they had get away.December 26, 2020 at 7:15 pm #150489
Agree with those who suggest the team should trade pitching for hitting. And if/when they do, what happens to their supposed pitching surplus? The depth clearly takes a hit, of course. I’ve been trying to make this point (plus others) all along.December 26, 2020 at 7:34 pm #150491
Well, the question would be, how much depth would they really be willing to trade? Of course depending on the player traded for, it will look different. But I would doubt that the Cards would trade three of their MLB ready relievers anyway. It seems to me it would maybe be one from the Ponce-Gant-Helsley-Gomber bucket, one from Woodford-Rondon-Thompson-Liberatore bucket, and probably a position player. Of course, the caliber of player the Cards would be targeting would decide which set of players would be going in a trade.
While it’s easy to argue that the first group is going to be counted on for the MLB staff’s success, the second group probably isn’t at this point, and the third player would most likely not be a third pitcher. So you’re looking at losing “Brebbia” (who didn’t pitch) and another reliever from the 2020 pen, which was one of the best in the game. You’ve got guys like Helsley, Fernandez, Elledge and Cabrera who possibly may even make them opening day roster.
So yes, depth is necessary and it’s probably not the best that the Cards let a late season depth piece go, but it will be his age 31 season, he’s coming off Tommy John, and may not be effective until his age 32 season (remember that late bloomers often fade early).
Even if they trade some pitching for a hitter, it’s not like they’ll suddenly become a terrible pen with the normal injury or two.December 26, 2020 at 8:52 pm #150493
Just to be clear, it wasn’t 3yrs control for 800K on Brebbia, it’s 3yrs / 3.6mil using the 40/60/80 arb scale.
If Mo makes some trades and finds he’d like to add another reliever, that option will exist.December 26, 2020 at 10:04 pm #150494
Of course, it would be impossible for any MLB player to sign for three years for just $800K total. That is the first year only. Thought everyone understood that already.December 26, 2020 at 11:00 pm #150496mudvilleParticipantPaid - Annual
I think they should have kept Brebbia, also. But, of course, it’s not my money. If Brebbia was not ready until, say, August 1rst, then the Cardinals would have been paying him for 4 months that he wasn’t producing anything, while at the same time paying another reliever to occupy Brebbia’s space on the active roster which amounts to about $400K if that player is getting the minimum. Then, when Brebbia returns, the player that gets sent down would have enough time accumulated in 2021 to be entitled to full pay for the entire season. Without figuring all the math, it does look like the cost of keeping Brebbia on the payroll would be about $800K as previously stated by others. Brebbia is a known quantity by now. I agree that they should have kept him. On the other hand, the boss has got to feel appreciative if his main guy shows him $800K that he won’t have to eat in 2021. I think letting Brebbia walk was strictly about saving money.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.