This topic contains 176 replies, has 24 voices, and was last updated by 
bicyclemike 1 year, 6 months ago.
-
Posts
-
I took my Wacha comments from here, added some additional points and data, and turned it into a free article.
https://thecardinalnation.com/why-does-a-trade-wacha-movement-exist/
P.S. Just to stay on thread a bit, if Arrieta was signed, I do not think it would be Wacha who would lose his rotation spot.
I didn’t know about the uptick in velocity, among other things. After he got through last season with no shoulder blade problems, it occurred to me, also, that with another offseason of conditioning, the strength of his shoulder and his stamina would improve even more. Then, his innings per start could maybe increase to somewhere over six innings, maybe even get into the 6.5 to 7.5 innings per start range. Nice piece. Thanks.
If one would wanted to avoid a big problem… who would they say is our second best starter?
A. Wainwright
B. Mikolas
C. Weaver
See what I mean.Exactly, that is my point. That is why we need a significant addition to the rotation. I’m not sure how this thread got fixated on just Wacha. The point is, besides CMart, we have a lot of question marks.
Brian, thanks for the free article. I appreciate your efforts and you make some good points about not giving up on Wacha.
However, after reading back through all of the comments on this thread, I didn’t find anyone suggesting that Wacha should be traded. Perhaps you are referring to previous threads a few weeks back regarding trade proposals for Archer and Colome.
Regardless, the point of this thread was to point out that the Cardinals have been mentioned as looking at Arrieta, and who knows how serious they are? Also, I still think it is fair to say that besides CMart our rotation has a lot of question marks and could use an addition whether it is Arrieta or someone else.
The diversion on Wacha, no matter how enlightening, wasn’t really pertinent to this thread.
This was about the point where we argued if Matt Morris was a true ace. Wacha would be our number one if Carlos wasn’t around, and he is actually an All Star pitcher who is just reaching his apex. We just have followed him so long that we have lost our excitement about him becoming an ace. He has not. I bet he intends to be near the top of our rotation.
A lot of questions is a good thing. We have options. This is not a case where we have Alan Babes, Morris, and Osborne and little else. We run deep with guys who could be solid threes. A scout for Houston once argued with me that five threes are the better than having aces and back end guys.Trading Wacha has been mentioned off and on all winter. Since you asked specifically, here is an example from you.
Posted by gscottar on 12/20 (not on this thread):
If we get Hosmer I think Gyroko should be traded. We could use the $6.5M in savings to accomplish some more things (rotation, closer).
As I have stated before we should look to trade Gyroko and Grichuk this offseason and maybe even Wacha. The projected costs are $6.5, $3.0, and $6.0 respectively. That $15M in savings could help us get another starter or closer.
You did say “maybe”, so “maybe” it does not count. 😉
Well like I tried to point out earlier, if Wacha is our number 2 that says more about our rotation than it does Wacha.
As I also tried to point out earlier this thread is not just about Wacha. It is about whether we need an addition to the rotation or not, particularly Arrieta or someone of his ilk. I personally think we do.
I think having a bunch of threes can work in the regular season but you really need some aces in the postseason, unless you have an elite lockdown bullpen, which we currently do not have.
Trading Wacha has been mentioned off and on all winter. Since you asked specifically, here is an example from you.
Posted by gscottar on 12/20 (not on this thread):
If we get Hosmer I think Gyroko should be traded. We could use the $6.5M in savings to accomplish some more things (rotation, closer).
As I have stated before we should look to trade Gyroko and Grichuk this offseason and maybe even Wacha. The projected costs are $6.5, $3.0, and $6.0 respectively. That $15M in savings could help us get another starter or closer.
You did say “maybe”, so “maybe” it does not count. ?
Yes, I have mentioned before that trading our arb eligible players would be a good way to free up funds more significant additions. I still believe that. It was surmised at the time that the Rays might want Wacha in an Archer trade or the Jays in a Donaldson trade, or even the O’s in a Machado trade. I felt then it would be worth it and still do.
But, again, whether Wacha deserves to be traded or not doesn’t change the fact that we need a rotation addition.
I think a rotation improvement would be great. Replacing Wacha is NOT where I would go, however. The reasons stated to defend why some think Wacha is a weak link are weak themselves, including a perceived need to dump him to save money for a more expensive starter. The Cards were ready to pay Stanton, for Pete’s sake!
I did not bring Wacha up on this thread, but I will continue to defend why I think he should stay.
I would just much prefer a cheaper option for the rotation, even Lynn. I personally feel like our rotation is fine as is though.
Our bullpen is not close though.
I think a rotation improvement would be great. Replacing Wacha is NOT where I would go, however. The reasons stated to defend why some think Wacha is a weak link are weak themselves, including a perceived need to dump him to save money for a more expensive starter. The Cards were ready to pay Stanton, for Pete’s sake!
I did not bring Wacha up on this thread, but I will continue to defend why I think he should stay.
Well in all fairness, you were the one who brought up the “why would we want to trade Wacha” question in this thread. It was never mentioned until you brought it up. I merely pointed out Wacha’s weaknesses after 5 innings, which is rather well documented.
This whole thread has been hijacked by a fixation on Wacha when the intention was to discuss whether our rotation was solid enough for a contender or do we need an addition.
If the club does not have a starter step up his game, or acquire someone consistently effective then the loss of Lynn will really be felt. And it could be that one of the highly touted young guys comes through in a big way. Still I don’t completely understand the lack of interest in Lynn, although we do know the Cardinals have a mindset as an organization that works hard to find undervalued players.
Looking at Lynn and Arrieta, Lance has had a 3+ WAR his last three seasons (’14, ’15, ’17). Jake had that incredible 2015, but has gone to 3.4 and 1.9 the last two seasons (B-R numbers). Lynn is a year younger as well.
I would be looking to keep Lynn, but it’s obvious the club wants to look at less costly options. Hard to say which guy of the two would be a better deal. I get the sense that Arrieta will be better next year than last. Lynn will most likely be who he is, a solid 2-3-type starter who gives you innings, and usually keeps you in the game.
Agree that it would be nice to have Lynn back, but not for 5-6 years and $100M+. If we can’t make a trade for a starter, then we’ll just have to win with what we’ve got.
As far as a #2 starter goes…..remember, by this time we were counting on Alex Reyes being perhaps the #1 starter and CMart the #2 starter. Then AR went down with TJ surgery. So its possible that AR could be that #2 starter by seasons end.
r/Rat
gscottar, we may just look at things differently.
For me, directly related to the question of whether or not to add a starter (Arrieta or other) is the question of who he would replace in the rotation – and why (Wacha or other). Gauging “need” for another starter is based this relationship – how much better (and more costly?) is the new guy compared to the old guy?
I do not see why the consideration of who leaves the rotation would be viewed as off-topic when discussing who might be brought in.
Yes, but no one suggested in this thread that Wacha would be the one to leave the rotation until you brought it up. As I mentioned before, Wainwright, Weaver, Wacha, and Mikolas all have question marks by their name. Theoretically any of the four could get bumped if we signed another starter.
To tag along with the point made by Rats above…by July, having Reyes ready to move from the bullpen to the rotation for the stretch run could be huge, a la the boost we got from him in 2016. By then we will know for sure how things are looking with the bottom three in the rotation to determine whether to add a starter.
Bottom line…I wouldn’t go after Arrieta unless he came very cheap. He’s been trending the wrong way for some time.
Recently I am leaning towards keeping Reyes stretched out at Memphis and out of the BP as he is not accustomed to relieving. Having both Reyes and Flaherty ready to step into the rotation adds some serious depth there. Adding another so-so starter doesn’t make sense to me as we already have two now.
The FO doesn’t trade to avoid problems but rather when problems actually occur. It appears that they feel that they will go with Plan A (the present rotation makeup) feeling that Reyes or Flaherty can bail them out if troubles arise. That Plan A could change at ST or if there are any injuries.
My opinion is that Plan A doesn’t provide the team with enough to carry us to a division crown and most assuredly not in a play-off series. There needs to be an infusion of a strong armed prospect or two that need to step up and be successful… then we may have a chance.
********************************************************************************
This having the goal to be a wild card team is a coin-flip mentality that one of the two teams will move on, and one will go home with the feeling that the season has been a failure. And IMO that’s worse than missing the the wild card altogether. High hopes could be dashed by just one play or one pitch. And if you’re on the losing end of a crushing defeat it carries on to the next season. You get a flag with a division championship…. a losing play-in team gets a new manager and has to answer ten thousand ridiculous questions why they lost.
It would be nice to have an experienced closer. But we do have options:
It continues to be amusing to see one or two posters jibbering about trading Wacha, a still young pitcher who has as much potential at this point as any pitcher in the Cardinals organization.
It continues to be amusing to see one or two posters jibbering about trading Wacha, a still young pitcher who has as much potential at this point as any pitcher in the Cardinals organization.
So you think Wacha has more potential than Reyes? Martinez? Hicks?
I think he does if healthy. I think he’s changed up his pitching motion though which lowers his effectiveness to compensate.
It continues to be amusing to see one or two posters jibbering about trading Wacha, a still young pitcher who has as much potential at this point as any pitcher in the Cardinals organization.
The discussion about trading Wacha was blown way out of proportion. That wasn’t even remotely intended to be the main topic of this thread.
The bigger overall question is to determine the vulnerability of our rotation. To me acquiring another front line starter is just as important as another bat, if not more.
-
This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by
gscottar.
I’d be fine with them picking up a Trevor Cahill type and being done with the rotation. We have Jack Flaherty as a sixth starter right now who is one of the best pitching prospects in baseball and already has the innings built up and a taste of MLB experience. How is that not depth?
Then you have Reyes coming back in May. IMO, the very best pitching prospect in baseball.
Plus we are sitting on Gant (April/May depth), Hudson and Gomber (June-July depth), Hicks (August-Sept depth), and a host of others.
Yes we have a lot of depth but it is mostly unproven depth. Are we going to depend on untested rookies to unseat the Cubs?
-
This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.