- This topic has 2,233 replies, 52 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’d also lean away from a Miller extension. If he came reasonably cheap, I wouldn’t mind offering him another year to be the LH DH, but I am sure he will want more than a year or two if he finishes with a .900 OPS or better.
I would think that one of Carlos or Hudson and one of Bader or O’Neill should fetch a big bat from somewhere.
Why would resigning Miller and getting another bat have to be mutually exclusive? A 100% salary increase to Miller would be just $4 MM.
If the DH is kept in the NL, I would all for a Brad Miller re-signing. I want no more than 2 years (prefer 1) and an AAV of $5 million or less.
If the expectation is to bring Miller back as a part time bat, which was the expectation going into this year, then a one year deal worth no more than $5M might be acceptable. If the expectation is that he is going to be an everyday component of the lineup putting up big numbers then I think we will be disappointed.
Not to mention that the current logjam we have now will still be in play next year unless some people are moved.
Some of the external big bats I have in mind would be a DH candidate, which would lessen the need for Miller. Every budgetary penny is going to be crucial due to the current financial obligations and potential revenue question marks so we don’t need to make any significant expenditures to anyone this winter unless we expect them to be an everyday producer.
I don’t think that the signing of Miller and acquisition of a big bat would be mutually exclusive. I just think that Miller will want more than some are willing to offer if he keeps swinging the bat so well all season. Perhaps the FA market will collapse and he could be had for 2 years and $10M or less, but that’s probably pushing it.
One more player who wouldn’t require a trade would be George Springer. He’s probably going to be seeking a big deal, though. The salary could fit in as a second bat after Goldy and a CF/RF candidate if we traded one of the young OFers. It would require us to find a taker for at least one salary though (Miller, Carp, Cmart, Wong, Fowler).
On the overall FA market, my prediction is that the very few superstars will still get paid (as Betts did before reaching FA), but everyone else will suffer as the owners declare poverty. It will make negotiations for the next CBA even more acrimonious. I realize these are not big stretch predictions…
Closer to home, Mo has already made reference to the uncertainty in the budget for next season when asked why he didn’t acquire a player on a longer-term deal on August 31. Of course, that is primarily a reference to Wainwright and Molina. I predict the former will be as easy as the latter will be difficult, due to feelings of disrespect. The two players have made some talk about deciding as a unit, which I think could help, with Wainwright perhaps moderating Molina’s view.
Interesting thoughts on the FA market, Brian. So perhaps it’s possible that guys might be willing to take one year fliers before the new CBA? I would assume that things will end up a bit more player friendly. Although that may have more effect on the guys who are pre-free agency than the older players. Hard to say where it will go, though.
I like the thought of Waino and Molina on a package deal. I still like both to have some incentives to meet to max their salaries. For Yadi specifically, I’d like to see the $$ max at something like 100-120 games. You know he’ll never take a day off if he has two reasons to tell Shildt that he’ll be in the lineup every day. I’d like to see Knizner or Herrera get some playing time at some point next year.
It only makes sense that the owners will want to live within their means. If there are owners that are still willing to commit mega-dollars to players, that’s good news for Lindor, Springer, and the Rockies organization. Based on Betts’ contract, it does seem logical that there will always be somebody, somewhere who will jump into one of those mega-contacts. Too bad for the other players if they have to suffer through offers of, say five million dollars, or heaven forbid, less than that.
I think Yadi is hanging on because he can still do it. But he has also said that he ultimately wants to make the HOF. That’s enough motivation for him do be at his best. He’s not a player that will lay down on us because he’s working on his last guaranteed contract, regardless. Who knows how long Wainwright will last? His veteran presence has got to be good for the ball club. Both players are subject to the types of injuries that father time brings with him. The St. Louis Cardinals will be forever changed when Yadi and Waino are gone.
I suspect Molina’s drive to play every day is far more driven by his personal legacy than money. In other words, a game financial cap may not have the desired effect.
I agree, Brian. But the Cards would do well to give themselves the flexibility to play other guys. If they set the max at 140 games or something, you risk greater ire from Yadi, and by proxy, a segment of fans. Yadi just seems to keep rolling, but someone will take over for him some day. It would be good if they had a little experience first.
I am not quibbling about the number. I just think the concept of a games cap will a non-starter for Molina. In fact, if presented, my guess is that it would offend him. And the money offer is probably already going to upset him enough! 😉
If the front office wants Molina to play less, they need to tell Shildt to make it happen. There is no need to force it via his contract.
Historically the Cardinals have had more success acquiring “big name” players via trade instead of free agency, which is why I would be more focused on players that can be traded. (Benintendi, JD Martinez, Gallo, etc..)
Springer is an attractive player but would cost a fortune. If we want to go the FA route cheaper options would be Peralta or Pederson. And as I mentioned before our old friend Ozuna will be a FA again, if we are just looking for a DH.
I expect Waino to take another 1 year deal between $5M-$10M. Molina will want two years and Mo will probably give it to him but I would prefer if they go year to year. I would offer him one year at $12M.
As an aside I am not a big fan of caps, incentives, signing bonuses, deferred money, team options, player options, mutual options, vesting options….. Just come up with a dollar amount and length of years and go with it.
I expect Waino to take another 1 year deal between $5M-$10M. Molina will want two years and Mo will probably give it to him but I would prefer if they go year to year. I would offer him one year at $12M.
As an aside I am not a big fan of caps, incentives, signing bonuses, deferred money, team options, player options, mutual options, vesting options….. Just come up with a dollar amount and length of years and go with it.
“Yadi, Adam… we’re going to offer you $20 million this year. You split it between yourselves however you decide.” 😂😂
The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of a Joc Pederson stopgap for a year. He’s had a down year, and with the owners being poor, he might be had for cheap. He made $7.75M this year… possibly a 1 year/$5-7M deal. He pummels righties and can play all three positions. It would allow Carlson to start in Memphis and you could get another “normal year” look at O’Neill and Thomas, plus Pederson provides insurance in case Fowler is bad again.
If we can’t trade for Kepler, this would give us a proven bat against RHP. Even if we traded for Kiriloff, which would be my dream scenario, he could still be signed.
I think Pederson would be a good signing too. He and O’Neill might be a very good platoon in LF depending on which pitcher they are facing that day.
Do the Cardinals look at behavioral skills in addition to athleticism/baseball skills when considering whether to draft, trade for or sign a player?
This was a Q asked in Hummels Q&A chat yesterday. His answer was kind of vague but this is a great question and something that I’ve thought about constantly for all my years following this here game of baseball.
In drafting, the answer is absolutely yes. For professionals already signed to contracts with other teams who might be trade targets, any investigations would have to indirect only. For free agents, teams often meet with them (along with their agent) before signing. Of course, as in any business, there is a bustling informal communications network.
Stlcard25, I might take that a step further. Sign Peterson. Trade O’Neill and a SP for Kiriloff. They would still have Fowler, Bader, Thomas, Carlson and Edman to man the OF along with Peterson.
I like the way you think, Forsch. That outfield would be solid enough and possibly very stellar in two years’ time. I like O’Neill but I think Kiriloff will be a star.
Why not keep O’Neill and add another pitcher to the offer for Kiriloff? There are definitely teams that need pitching (from the Cardinals) and have an outfielder they should be able to offer (to the Cardinals). Kiriloff is one, and the Mariners have Jarred Kelenic and Julio Rodriguez. The problem as always is that every team overvalues its prospects.
MLB has Kirilloff rated as the Twins 2nd best prospect so the asking price would be astronomical I imagine. He is basically their version of Nolan Gorman.
The Twins need pitching. We have pitching. Kiriloff is still unproven. If CMart would pitch up to his ability for the rest of the year, the Twins could get a top of rotation pitcher for Kiriloff and only one or two other prospects from the Twins. If CMart continues to disappoint, then try something else.
They aren’t really a big budget team. If they want pitching they will ask for the likes of Liberatore, Thompson, and/or Oviedo.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.