1964cards

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 25 posts - 1,101 through 1,125 (of 1,133 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Bud Norris to Cardinals #43702
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    This is a steal, if … Norris can stay healthy and repeat his 2017 first half performance for the entire season. If not the club threw away $3M.

    I know most see Norris pitching out of the pen exclusively. I would think the Redbirds would want to ultize Norris in whatever mode would maximize his value to the club.

    in reply to: Slow Market. Owner collusion? Player strike? #43345
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    It has to be collusion…plain and simple. Is there any ither explanation for each Steve Boras client not signing a record deal extending to age 45!

    in reply to: Slow Market. Owner collusion? Player strike? #43192
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    I think that “cardinals2016” nailed it. There are several factors working against this year’s free agent class. The players can complain, but I am not sure what the remedy is.

    in reply to: Marlins Yelich-Ozuna trade thread #42608
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Bold moves by the Brew Crew … The road to the playoffs just got tougher for the Cardinals!

    in reply to: Trade Ideas/Acquisition Ideas/Non-Cards Rumors – 2017-2018 #42300
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    I agree with Brian’s assessment of the Grichuk trade. The team definitely needs to strengthen the ‘pen and Leone should help. The closer role is the critical role that needs to be defined. The team’s inability to consistently close out games was a major reason why the 2017 team missed the playoffs.

    in reply to: Trade Ideas/Acquisition Ideas/Non-Cards Rumors – 2017-2018 #41742
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Brian, thanks for all the notes! I found the material very helpful.

    I remain an optimist and have accepted Brina’s advice to be patient. I recognize that this club still has some voids that need to be filled. I am confident that the front office continues to evaluate the talent that is available via free agency and trade. They will make a move if it makes sense on balance. However, I think we should all be unwilling to have them make a move that does not make sense for the long-term. Contracts that limit the clubs flexibility should not be considered (e.g. Heyward contract). I think most ML clubs are beginning to follow an approach that Mo lays out in some of his talking points – contract control that is affordable.

    This offseason has been very interesting to me. I could be wrong, but I think we are starting to see the luxury tax start to work as a salary cap in MLB. Most, if not all, the clubs with the potential to be big spenders (e.g. Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox) are choosing to pass on deals that put them over the luxury tax threshold. We are starting to see contracts moved to free up cap space similar to the NBA (e.g. Kemp deal between the Dodgers-Braves). If true, and if it holds, this will drive player contracts to shorter lengths and will limit the number of mega-contracts. The big stars (e.g. Harper) will still get their pay day, but the contract length may be shorter and the dollar value per year higher. It also appears that clubs are starting to notice that player performance drops off at age 34 or older in the non-steroid era. I believe all of this combined will have the effect of driving down the contract values of non-superstar players.

    Why do I bring this up? If true, this has the potential to drive player contracts to more affordable levels for small and mid-market clubs. Mo may very well have his eyes on a few free agents that could help this club. However, the players and their agents have not fully accepted the potential for a change in the market. We may start to see players settle for less than they are asking to get a deal and be on a roster by spring training.

    The next four to six weeks of the “hot stove league” could be very interesting.

    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    When is it time to panic? I do not see a clear path to add another starter, a closer and another bat. In my opinion, these are all gaps with the current composition of the big league club. I am getting concerned that the Redbirds will enter Spring Training with some significant roster gaps.

    in reply to: Trade Ideas/Acquisition Ideas/Non-Cards Rumors – 2017-2018 #40185
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Listened to MLB Radio this evening. The announcers believe that the Hosmer and Moustakas markets may be leaning in the Cardinals favor. The Longoria trade hurt Moustakas and the Moreland signing by Boston indicates that the primary target of Boston is J.D. Martinez. They did not mention Moustakas having any formal offers and that San Diego appears the only club to have a formal offer of a deal to Hosmer.

    Both players are winners and could help the Cards. Carp has been told to be prepared to play multiple positions (assume this means 1b, 2b and 3b). So signing one or both would appear to be consistent with what Carp has been told. However, signing both or just Moustakas may indicate Gyrko may be moving. Signing Hosmer leads me to believe that Gyrko may get the starting 3b and Carp rotates on a daily basis.

    in reply to: Manny Machado thread #40040
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    I agree Brian. The only way a Machado deal makes sense is if he agrees to a two year extension for a total of three seasons in St Louis. Otherwise, the Orioles are asking for too much.

    in reply to: Giancarlo Stanton thread #39050
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    My take is not at fatalistic as some posters…

    – The front office aggressively pursued Stanton. He had a short list of cities, and St Louis was not one. I cannot blame the front office for a players preference.

    – The Cards have missed on landing a few “big fish” over the past few seasons. In some cases, it worked to the clubs advantage (e.g. David Price, Jason Heyward).

    So, I am going to sit back and see the next steps the front office takes. They gave options and they have payroll. I am not willing to close the door on the upcoming season so soon.

    in reply to: Giancarlo Stanton thread #38593
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Sounds as if the birds are still in the game. The next 48-72 hours will be interesting.

    in reply to: Cards Trade Diaz #38592
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    I am going to stay optimistic. I am nOt surprised that the club moved Diaz…for all the reasons stated. I am disappointed they couldn’t get something other than a OF in return…for all the reasons stated. So, I am hoping this move is part of a bigger plan. That is, this move paves the way for another prospect to be included in a deal to help acquire talent to fill gaps at the ML level.

    in reply to: Braves GM resigns due to international cheating #38156
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    This whole situation makes you think MLB would be better off holding an International Draft or including the international players as part of the Amatuer Draft. It seems this would be much easier process to regulate for MLB. Way too many rules and way too much opportunity for someone to game the system.

    in reply to: Giancarlo Stanton thread #38047
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    It would be interesting to see the options the Redbirds have presented. The buzz is that the Marlins want to shed as much payroll as possible. How much would they be willing to eat for higher quality prospects.

    Thus push for Stanton places some of the trades over the past six or seven months in perspective.

    in reply to: Logan Morrison free agent thread #38013
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Morrison had a career year. I fear this could turn out to be a scenario where the buyer is getting a player after they have had the best year they will ever have.

    in reply to: Giancarlo Stanton thread #37806
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    I am still struggling to understand how a Stanton trade is affordable to anyone but the Cubs, Dodgers, Red Sox or Yankess. I cannot see the Marlins eating any of his salary if their “rumored” budget goal is accurate. Given this, do you really think that ownership and the front office are willing to dedicate such a high percentage of the club payroll to one player over such a long period of time? Or, is management in the hunt to either: a) drive up the price for the eventual winner or b) hope all othe negotiations fall apart and they can work a more reasonable deal.

    The businessman in me believes the club is making noise as if they are in heavy pursuit of Stanton. However, the real story is that they are actively pursuing other options. Options that are more affordable and provide the club more flexibility over the long term…while retaining a critical mass of valued prospects.

    in reply to: MLB playoff thread #35945
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Ratsbuddy, I think you are right. This may well be the end for Dusty. A sad way to go out losing the way they did. It will be a long winter of soul searching in DC wondering what went wrong.

    in reply to: MLB playoff thread #35926
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Washington looks awful. Not the way you want to finish a season. It will be a long offseason unless there is a miracle finish.

    in reply to: Trade Ideas/Acquisition Ideas/Non-Cards Rumors – 2017-2018 #34673
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    I have struggled to see how the Cardinals address their gaps. I agree the club needs at least one, if not two, big bats in the middle of the line up. The “pen” needs to be reworked. I agree that most of the names mentioned could really help the club. The question is how does the front office get this done?

    If the front office follows their traditional approach the Cardinals will:

    1) Look for a “Beltran” type free agent(s) to add some punch to their line up. They may pursue a high profile free agent, but their track record has not been great landing such players. This has worked to managements’ advantage the past few seasons as most of the high profile players they pursued have struggled since (e.g Heyward, Price).

    My concern with some of the names mentioned is not the annual salary, it will be the length of the contract.
    The club got a great two year deal with Beltran. We will have to see how the free agent market develops. I am not too optimistic.

    2) Pursue a trade for a “Beltran” type player. I am not sure the organization has enough talent on the ML roster to obtain some of the younger players mentioned. There may be some position players in the minors that may draw some interest, but I suspect clubs will want more than one of the young pitching prospects. Will the front office really be willing to ship off young, promising and controllable pitchers?

    I suspect the front office will need to pursue the not-so-obvious players to fill the gaps. This can be successful, but until it proves out there may be unrest within the fan base.

    in reply to: 2017 MLB Game #149: Cards at Cubs Sun Sep 17 #33302
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Brian, your last list says it all … It is pretty hard to win the Division if you cannot beat your Divisional opponents. The Cards would have roughly five more wins if we just played .500 against the Brewers, Reds and Cubs. It is hard to believe the Redbirds only won one game in Wrigley this season.

    in reply to: 2017 MLB Game #149: Cards at Cubs Sun Sep 17 #33289
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Very frustrating. Wonder what the Redbirds are batting with RISP in this series?

    in reply to: 2017 MLB Game #149: Cards at Cubs Sun Sep 17 #33264
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    Another opportunity to add on and the Redbirds cannot get the big hit. Very frustrating!

    in reply to: 2017 MLB Game #149: Cards at Cubs Sun Sep 17 #33225
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    The Redbirds really needed to cash in there. Just cannot get the big hit in this series.

    in reply to: 2017 MLB Game #149: Cards at Cubs Sun Sep 17 #33218
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    More fielding issues! Yikes!

    in reply to: 2017 MLB Game #148: Cards at Cubs Sat Sep 16 #33170
    1964cards
    Participant

    Paid - Annual

    The Cards need more fire power on offense. It us hard to win when you cannot score. Gone are the days of Pujols, Edmonds and Rolen. The front office needs to focus on getting one or two big bats to fit in with what players they want to hold on to.

Viewing 25 posts - 1,101 through 1,125 (of 1,133 total)

First-hand news and commentary on the St. Louis Cardinals™ and minor league system for over 20 years