It is true, yes. Cardinals are not a revenue-sharing team. That's how it works.
It's by definition. They don't get money from other teams, per the rules governed and agreed upon in the Collective Bargaining Agreement. They are considered a small-market but their revenue is high enough on its own to sweep them out of that definition.
Sheesh. He went like 74 weeks without playing. If you're judging Carson Kelly on his batting average, then it's on you not on him. He had a strong year, a breakthrough year offensively really, and he's one of the finest catching prospects in the game. So, yes, the Cardinals could get good return for him.
You Don't Know How it Feels.
Don't Come Around Here Anymore.
Just to name a few.
Really did like listening to the Traveling Wilburys. My parents played their music on some of the long car rides during the summer. At The End of The Line.
Not without a few hours to really dig back into the rosters at that time and audit the prospects. But in general terms. The Cubs had a prospect deficit. Their farm system was barren. And they had some players like Feldman, Cashner, Samardzija that they wanted to move to get a number of young players. They got lucky, too. If you'll permit me to presume the direction you're going with your question: Yes, the Cardinals are in a far different spot than the Cubs were at the time they did the teardown to build back, but you could argue that by moving Martinez -- for example -- and having full buy-in on a rebuild the Cardinals could do it quicker than five consecutive last-place finishes, ala Milwaukee.
There is a good rule of thumb when it comes to teams that the best roster usually wins. Bruce Bochy is an excellent manager, no doubt, but he didn't have the magic to pull those players, their performance, and that roster out of the abyss this season. Heck, that team didn't even play to his strengths of bullpen management. The World Series last year was a clinic when it came to the value of a manager. Joe Maddon made some curious moves in Games 6 and 7 that could have doomed the Cubs -- and put him on the hottest of hot seats all winter -- and yet the players came through with the win so that Maddon only had to face questions (from media, from his bosses) and not an acid bath of criticism. The Cardinals roster and the players deserve credit for the winning percentage. The manager's job is to put those players in the best position to perform: Matheny has done that with some of the players, absolutely, from Jose Martinez to Matt Bowman (through the years), and he has been unable to do that with some other players. Grichuk is a recent example. The aforementioned pitchers and their splits would be another one. That's where a manager should be judged. Not on the results -- but the moves that were predicated on getting the best results.
Yes, the fans are demanding. They should be. They had a World Series winning roster and a Hall of Fame manager in 2011, and the standards and future of that team have been entrusted to Matheny. If the fans are demanding, they are only responding to the team's own publicized expectations.
Lots of packing and goodbyes.
There will be moves in November, yes, as the Cardinals need to tidy and tighten the 40-man. This is a good question, because they won't have the time to let it grow until the winter meetings. Some of the deals will have to be made with urgency. Deadlines create that.
Outline often. The three outfielders in Miami. Teams are interested to see the direction Baltimore, San Diego, and a few others go. Either of those two teams would have bats to put in the mix.
Just one thought: I don't think this would be a wise series of moves.
He's not a free agent for another year, so it's not a question of signing him to solve a problem now. And there have been a few different views of how he would fit with the Cardinals. I've heard both sides. I imagine that's because he's only theoretically available at this point -- not actually available.
Thanks for the compliment. I honestly think that the top five would change depending on the team you're asking. There was one team this past trade deadline that was high on Grichuk, not Pham, and another that was high on Pham, not Grichuk. Here's the read I have ...
Mercado and Bader would be in the mix there at five, too. Again depending on the team and what it wants. Some want talent on the rise, some want talent for the now.
As outlined before, I agree that it's disingenuous to point to the winning percentage as some measure of a manager. It's silly really. I might believe it if the team offered an explanation like this: We calculated the likely winning percentage of this roster as .515 and we got a .590, and we feel that was achieved by the manager maximizing the roster with his lineup and bullpen moves and general feel for his team. He made the team achieve an outlier. Then winning percentage would be interesting.
What is behind the Cardinals' support of Matheny is multi-faceted, but the high points are how the front office and ownership believe he relates to players and motivates players and stays on message for them from day to day; how he and his coaching staff are able to adapt to the growing youth of the roster; how he's from the system and committed to St. Louis and in that way is homegrown like they increasingly want their roster to be; and how he represents the organization and the ideals they want, from the face-forward daily appearance he has on TV articulating the view of the team to the fans to the standards he sets for the players. Do no discount this last part. Remember a year ago at this time Matheny was about to get an extension that went past any of the players. That contract and his role said he was the face of the franchise.
Bill DeWitt Jr., Mozeliak, and Girsch will be the ones leading the moves. Yes, there will input from others like Slater, Jorgensen, and now Rodriguez, each a lieutenant with either a specialty or appreciated view. They will use their contacts within teams and with agents to determine possible moves, outline them, weigh them, calculate them, and then arrive at a decision. They pour a lot of their thoughts and then rely on the data and their agreed-upon analysis of the data to come to a decision on whether or not it's a value trade for them.
And, this happens daily, not once a week. The talks and options are constant.
Batting average is a lousy way to judge all three players. Carpenter is not a .230 hitter because in OBP is where it matters, and he found his way on base as well as many leadoff hitters in the game, and better than most. Grichuk may be a .230 hitter at times, but if he's slugging better than .500 then what's the difference? He slugged .548 a few years ago, and that's the number that matters most. Or, OPS if you prefer, but even his OPS is going to be heavily weight by the slugging. As for Piscotty -- he's got to be an OPS guy. That blend of getting on base and then doing some damage to take a run at that .850 or more. He's got some work ahead to prove this was a fluke season and he's much more than the hitter he was always searching for this season.
Do have a few hours? I'd rather keep my feet at firmly planted as possible and speculate as little as possible. We get more out of this chat if that's the case, other wise it's just smoke. It's gone the moment it leaves my fingers -- and just as valuable. The goal of this chat is not to be writ on water.
It would be helpful if they could count on that, but there has been a strong retrenchment from the commissioner about the DH staying only in the AL, and shockingly that never got much traction in the recent CBA discussion even though the union and owners expected universal DH to play a part in the talks. So, better not to count on it during the life of Stanton's contract.
It;s universal agreed upon that they would like to add a bat and that they would benefit from that.