- This topic has 1,131 replies, 47 voices, and was last updated 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Is the 6mil Arenado has already deferred in both 25′ and 26′ tradable? Or is that a locked in STL expense like COL’s 5mil? How much of Nolans remaining salary can be traded?
The reports on the Houston trade stated that the Cardinals were sending $5M per year for 2025, 2026, and 2027. I assume Houston was picking up the rest. The deferrals weren’t mentioned.
I’m assuming Bill would not offer to eat 15mil, AND another 12 on deferrals, of the 64mil he owes. Outsider status can only assume 😀
Is the 6mil Arenado has already deferred in both 25′ and 26′ tradable? Or is that a locked in STL expense like COL’s 5mil? How much of Nolans remaining salary can be traded?
The money that was deferred a few years ago should remain on the Cardinals books. I have read one article that indicated a new club would assume those liabilities, but every other article has indicated a new club would only be responsible for the money owed in 2025, 2026 & 2027 and the deferrals associated with those years. From an accounting perspective, those earlier deferrals should remain with the Cardinals.
As for how much of Arenado’s remaining salary can be traded, that’s going to depend on who is left standing that wants a 3B and for whom Arenado will play. We discussed this at the beginning of the thread, but I think the Cardinals need to pay down a minimun of $15 million, and probably closer to $25 million, unless they package players the other team wants.
Frankly I think it would be funny if Mo would now come out and declare that Arenado is remaining with the team for 2025. He then proceeds to trade Fedde, Helsley, Matz, and Noot. That would reduce the payroll another $30M which would make Bill DeWitt happy.
Donovan makes more than Noot. The Cardinals can save a projected $1.2 mllion by trading Donovan instead of Noot.
It seems likely that St. Louis would be open to moving Mikolas or Matz with or without an Arenado trade, though Sammon and Woo note that the Cardinals would prefer to keep Fedde until closer to the deadline, if they move him at all.
The Cardinals management still does not know how to manage trades.
They are trying to trade all the undesirable pieces, while keeping decent pieces on team-friendly deals.
This tells you two things:
1. This is all about a payroll purge
2. This is not going to be a one-year “reset.”This FO is going to find a way to walk away with nothing from Helsley & Fedde.
Exactly LA. Arenado, Matz, MM, worth the same now or td. Helsley, Fedde need to be dealt now or they will lose value.
I agree Fedde should be dealt now. His value likely only falls as the season progresses – unless he pitches spectacularly well, which seems unlikely. Helsley should be kept unless you’re worried about injury. His value will be about the same at the deadline and he helps the team win games. Unless a team overwhelms with a great offer, then I’d keep him for now. No reason to just dump him to the highest bidder while free agency is going on.
Ideally, Matz is dumped with the Cardinals eating half his contract and getting no return and Arenado is dumped for somewhere around the Cardinals eating $5 million per year – perhaps a touch more since a buyer may be tough to find with Arenado’s restrictions. I think everyone else is here opening day. Mikolas just doesn’t make sense to trade given the cost. And I don’t see the team waiving the white flag and trading away Donovan or Nootbaar.
Fedde’s a soon to be 32 year old pitcher who in 630 IP’ed has compiled a second rate, lackluster W/L record of 30-42 with a career ERA a shade under 5.00 and should have been left on the shelf.
If DeWitt is demanding a payroll purge, the Cardinals should be asking teams what their offers are for Helsley and Fedde and should be trying to drive up the acquisition costs as high as possible.
That’s $15 million off the books with decent prospects coming back.
I would be shopping the two as a package deal (starter + elite closer). You’d have 25 teams bidding on that package.
Since the entire focus of management is on $$, I’d be surprised if they got rid of Helsley, unless they think the club will be awful. with or without him. If they think this will be a repeat of last year, you definitely want Helsley around, because a .500 ballclub is going to generate a lot more revenue than a 90 (or worse) loss club.
If they think there won’t be that many save situations anyway, I guess getting rid of Helsley makes sense, since he is at peak value, career wise.
As each day passes Mo is running out of runway to purge more salary. The longer Bregman remains unsigned means they can’t move Arenado. Eventually Mo is going to have to pivot to Plan B. That means that Helsley, Fedde, Matz, and either Noot or Gorman should be on the clock.
I see no reason to keep Helsley either way. There is no upside. Sure we might win 75 games instead of 70 but big deal. His value might be around the same at the deadline but injury or underperformance would completely derail that plan and then you are stuck with nothing. They could trade Helsley and sign Finnegan for half the cost and pair him with Fernandez and Jo Jo to close games.
Fedde would be easy to trade but I think the Cardinals would prefer to wait until the deadline if they could. He doesn’t have the injury history that Helsley has and we need someone to give us starter innings. But if we are stuck with Nado then he goes now.
Matz could be moved by eating half the salary or bundling him with a younger player. That could be Noot or Gorman since either one of them could become spare parts if Nado remains on the roster.
Mikolas probably isn’t going anywhere. His remaining salary is underwater and he has a NTC.
Risk avoidance regarding Helsley’s value is smart. That would mean trading before ST begins. His value might be highest just before ST, when other options are off the table. On the other hand, teams willing to go all in for a premium closer might have made arrangements by then. It is sort of like Boras trying to figure the market for one of his top names. If holding out for top dollar backfires, you settle for whatever you can get.
That means that Helsley, Fedde, Matz, and either Noot or Gorman should be on the clock.
I don’t think Arenado staying means either Gorman or Nootbaar have to be moved. In fact, the biggest weakness of the club is the outfield, so that’s the last place the Cardinals should be dealing from…
Fedde would be easy to trade but I think the Cardinals would prefer to wait until the deadline if they could. He doesn’t have the injury history that Helsley has and we need someone to give us starter innings. But if we are stuck with Nado then he goes now.
Matz could be moved by eating half the salary or bundling him with a younger player. That could be Noot or Gorman since either one of them could become spare parts if Nado remains on the roster.
Fedde makes $7.5 million, Matz makes $12.5 million. If you have to eat half of Matz’ salary to move him, you are better off trading Fedde.
And if you have to attach Gorman or Nootbaar to move Matz, you are also better off trading Fedde and getting prospects back.
His value might be highest just before ST, when other options are off the table.
Yes, on the Cardinal Territory podcast where they talked about reasons for not moving Helsley, it was basically that all the FA relievers were still on the board, so you aren’t going to get the trade value, and that is the argument for keeping him until the trade deadline.
But if he gets injured during the season, he walks for nothing in return.
As far as the Cardinals trading philosophy this offseason, it seems they can only think about trades for one person at a time.
They won’t try trading Matz until Arenado is gone.
They won’t try trading Fedde until Matz is gone.
They won’t trade Helsley until the deadline, in case they are only five games back and decide to buy instead of sell.
We don’t know all that they are working on and we don’t know their payroll target. So we can’t draw many meaningful conclusions.
But they have said they prefer to not trade Fedde and Helsley. If they can move Arenado with the kind of deal the Astros accepted, that may be enough to hit their target. But if they can’t move Arenado, then they may be short of their budget target, so at that time, they may get serious about trading others they’d rather not.
It is bad enough to cut payroll. It would be inconsistent with their plan to trade everyone tradeable and end up beneath their budget target. They are not rebuilding or gutting the roster, they say. They still want rear ends in seats in 2025.
So having a sequence to cut just enough payroll makes complete sense to me. That it is not happening fast enough is not under their control. The Cardinals have to hope that Bregman signs soon, then maybe there will be more Arenado offers.
But they have said they prefer to not trade Fedde and Helsley.
They have gone further with Helsley, in that other teams have reported that they’ve come away with the impression the Cardinals are not trading him at all.
It is bad enough to cut payroll. It would be inconsistent with their plan to trade everyone tradeable and end up beneath their budget target. They are not rebuilding or gutting the roster, they say.
I don’t know anyone that has ever been reprimanded for coming in below budget. Does spending an extra $7.5 million in a season where you are trying to remove $80 million from the books somehow drive any marginal revenue? They have been leaking everywhere that their primary motivation is a payroll purge.
Move everyone simultaneously, don’t do it in order of largest salary first. They are hurting themselves in negotiations.
And regardless of the spin they are putting on this, it is a rebuild. They tried to tear it down to the studs, but were blocked by the NTC’s they gave the last two free agents they signed.
LACF said:
I don’t know anyone that has ever been reprimanded for coming in below budget. Does spending an extra $7.5 million in a season where you are trying to remove $80 million from the books somehow drive any marginal revenue? They have been leaking everywhere that their primary motivation is a payroll purge.
They still want to win enough games in 2025 for fans to want to come. That will help their profitability, which matters more than expense. Stabilize revenue and you don’t have to cut expense as hard.
Even if their PRIMARY motivation is cost cutting, it is not the ONLY motivation. That is why they prefer to keep Helsley and Fedde. They are relatively cheap performers.
I don’t think Arenado staying means either Gorman or Nootbaar have to be moved. In fact, the biggest weakness of the club is the outfield, so that’s the last place the Cardinals should be dealing from…
They wouldn’t HAVE to be moved but it keeps the same cluttered roster we have been dealing with. They have said they want Gorman to get everyday AB’s. If Arenado stays then Gorman either has to play 2B everyday or DH everyday or some combination. If he plays 2B where is Donovan at? If he is at DH then where is Burly or Contreras when they aren’t at 1B? That is why I think Gorman could be traded or Noot could be traded so Donovan could move to LF.
Fedde makes $7.5 million, Matz makes $12.5 million. If you have to eat half of Matz’ salary to move him, you are better off trading Fedde.
And if you have to attach Gorman or Nootbaar to move Matz, you are also better off trading Fedde and getting prospects back.
I don’t view those as either/or situations. If Arenado stays then both Fedde and Matz would need to be moved (and probably Helsley too) to purge the amount of salary they could have purged if Arenado was traded.
The thing to remember about Noot and Donovan is they will be near or at or past the end of team control by the time the Cardinals are worrying about competing. So it makes sense to think about when will their value be at its highest. Of course, it also depends on how serious ownership is about fielding a team the next couple years. Any starting player moved must be replaced.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.