- This topic has 301 replies, 36 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
-
Posts
-
It seems like 20 of 21 (if they sign) might see action in the minors this year. Most pitchers don’t had that many innings this spring.
I wonder if Doyle will start at Palm Beach this year. Don’t the Cardinals have most of their development guys at the complex? It would be easier to work with him on anything there.
The Cardinals signed 4th rounder Cade Crossland to a $729,500 deal. Slot value for the 120th pick is $629,500.
A $100,000 over slot deal.
— Carlos Collazo (@CarlosACollazo) July 18, 2025
So how much extra slot money are we at so far? I think I figure we have 830k or so in savings. Plus the 5% overage.
https://soonersports.com/sports/baseball/roster/cade-crossland/18798
Speaking of Cade crossland…someone circle this square..he had a 6.32 era last year at OU in 13 starts?
All 21 are accounted for (informally). No announcement by the Cardinals yet.
Rd/overall 2025 draft Cls Pick value Signed plus/minus 1-5 Liam Doyle Jr. $8,134,800 $7,250,000 $884,800 2-55 Ryan Mitchell HS $1,720,300 $2,250,000 ($529,700) Comp B-72 Tanner Frankkin Jr. $1,145,900 $1,145,900 $0 3-89 Jack Gurevitch Jr. $879,000 $879,000 $0 4-120 Cade Crossland Jr. $629,500 $729,500 ($100,000) 5-150 Ethan Young Jr. $470,100 $630,000 ($159,900) 6-180 Matthew Miura Jr. $358,700 $358,700 $0 7-210 Payton Graham Jr. $280,800 $280,800 $0 8-240 Ryan Weingartner Jr. $226,500 $226,500 $0 9-270 Michael Dattalo Jr. $202,200 $202,200 $0 10-300 Ty Van Dyke Sr. $190,500 $150,000 $40,500 Pool total $14,238,300 $14,102,600 $135,700 plus- 10 rdrs > $150K Cls Not in totals Signed overage 11-330 Jalin Flores <=$150,000 $175,000 ($25,000) 12-360 Kaden Echeman <=$150,000 $175,000 ($25,000) 13-390 Jake Shelagowski <=$150,000 $150,000 14-420 Anthony Watts <=$150,000 $150,000 15-450 Trevor Haskins <=$150,000 $100,000 16-480 Alex Breckheimer <=$150,000 $200,000 ($50,000) 17-510 Cameron Nickens <=$150,000 $50,000 18-540 Dylan Driessen <=$150,000 $125,000 19-570 Liam Best <=$150,000 $100,000 20-600 Chase Heath <=$150,000 $5,000 FA FA FA 1-10 pool $14,238,300 $14,102,600 1-10-unsign $0 revised pool $14,238,300 105% total $14,950,215 “extra” $711,915 +/- all $35,700 no pick loss extra $ left $747,615 Total spend $14,202,600 Pct of 100% 99.7% Baseball America is reporting the Cardinals signed two UDFA. They list:
Alex Birge, C, California
Bobby Olsen, RHP, VillanovaDisappointing to see them leave $700K on the table. I’ve said Franklin was a pick I didn’t like because they should have had the money to take an upside HS guy there. $1.8 million should have gotten the job done and preferably for a position player. Maybe Franklin can unlock something though in the Cards org though.
Couldn’t agree with you more that the Cards should have used that $700K to invest in another high-ceiling HS player. Perhaps pocketing the 5% overage (for the first time ever, I believe??) is another sign of DeWitt saving money wherever he can…
You hit the nail on the head, Gronky. The discussion probably went like this:
“Our revenues are down, so stay within the 100% base, Flores.”
In fairness, not every organization regularly goes over 100%. This year stands out because the Cards backed off.
Of course, if they are truly focusing on player development as the future, that is one area (starting with the draft) that should NOT be cut. But here we are…
Maybe Randy’s end of it and scouting has not yet been addressed by Bloom, or even is under his control at all. Spending to add a high upside HS kid with present personnel and methodology may not have seemed worthwhile. It wouldn’t to me at least.
It’s hard to know anything here. Maybe they picked all the guys who they truly liked best and it just so happens that cost the team a little less than they could have spent. Would we rather they picked worse players and pay out the max? Or would we rather they overpay the guys they drafted just to max everything out? I think we have a belief rooted in quite a bit of facts that we’ve seen that says the Cardinals have gotten a bit cheap. And while that may be true, it may have absolutely nothing to do with them not spending the 5% over. In the end, we will likely never know.
Also, I do think Bloom and his new team had a lot to do with this draft. They were looking at players and deciding who they thought they could mold best and mixing that into Flores’ scouting information. We see a lot of difference in this draft and that’s the only reasonable explanation. And, I think Flores sticks around as his team has and continues to do well. They are well prepared every year with a strategy and now they are hand in hand with the player development side.
jnevel said:
It’s hard to know anything here. Maybe they picked all the guys who they truly liked best and it just so happens that cost the team a little less than they could have spent. Would we rather they picked worse players and pay out the max? Or would we rather they overpay the guys they drafted just to max everything out? I think we have a belief rooted in quite a bit of facts that we’ve seen that says the Cardinals have gotten a bit cheap. And while that may be true, it may have absolutely nothing to do with them not spending the 5% over. In the end, we will likely never know.
That is very logical. But here is why I don’t think it is likely. Here are some facts to support what I said before.
1) This is Flores’ 10th draft. In every one of his prior nine, the Cards spent over 100%.
2) Over those nine years, the Cardinals averaged 103.5% spend. This year is 99.7%.
3) The 2025 unspent money under 105% is more than the prior six years surplus totaled (2019-24).
4) I have detailed records back to 2013. In every one of those 12 drafts prior to 2025, the Cardinals spent over 100%. That was under three different scouting directors.
So, the data clearly indicates that 2025 is an outlier totally unlike at least any of the prior 12 years and perhaps even further back. It doesn’t mean they had a bad 2025 draft, but it seems very, very likely that staying under 100% this year was not a coincidence, but a decision made in advance.
Brian-
Are you able to provide confirmation as to whether or not the Cardinals will be ineligible to pick in the lottery next year? I’ve seen conflicting information online stating that the earliest they could pick would be 10th, based on being a payor in revenue sharing from a prior year. I’ve also seen mentions where the lottery is defined at #1-6 so as long as the Cards didn’t pick in the Top #6 two years in a row, they could still have a Top #10 pick in 2026. Since they picked 7th in 2024, it made me think that they might still have a shot at a high pick again next year.
Any clarification you can offer is greatly appreciated.
Thank you.Gronky, here is the paragraph I am referencing.
Teams that receive revenue-sharing payouts can’t receive a lottery pick for more than two years in a row and those that don’t can’t get a top-six choice in consecutive Drafts. Furthermore, a club that’s ineligible for the lottery can’t select higher than 10th overall.
https://www.mlb.com/news/draft-rule-changes-with-new-cba
My interpretation is that they cannot participate in the 2026 lottery for the top six picks unless they receive revenue sharing. And they cannot pick in the top 10 for the same reason.
Others can chime in if you see it differently.
My interpretation is that they cannot participate in the 2026 lottery for the top six picks unless they receive revenue sharing. And they cannot pick in the top 10 for the same reason.
Others can chime in if you see it differently.
In 2024, the White Sox set the record for losses in a season.
In 2025, they picked 10th in the draft, due to the new rules. So, you can pick in the Top 10, the rule is no higher than 10th.
This rule also caused the A’s to drop to 11th.
So, the highest the Cardinals can draft next year is #10.
Did the Cardinals receive revenue sharing payouts in the last two years?
No, they are probably 1-2 years away from becoming a revenue recipient.
Man that is really a shame that they left that $700k on the table. They could have gone with a guy like Conor Essenburg in the 5th round, who the Braves got, which would’ve put them right at the limit.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.