It does not. It just means that I need to get access to a group that is locked off screen.
Teams appear to be betting Cardinals will leave him available and can get him without the trade. Now, keep in mind a team that trades for him will have to protect him as well, and the one edge they would have then is they could option him to the minors during the season and not risk losing him.
Thanks. My parents wanted at least one part of my name to pass through spellcheck. You nailed it. Ziegler would be taking on the money and then assigning him a role where he could excel. He has not given up many home runs in those years you mentioned, and he's held righthanded batters to a .314 slugging percentage and a .306 slugging percentage. Oh, and he's a groundball machine. He got four groundouts for every flyout this past season and he has a groundball rate greater than 60 percent. Sound familiar? Sounds like a guy the Cardinals have leaned on before.
Around. Any time. There is some sense that there's momentum for a reliever deal this week. That once the deadline passes today for the roster that the Cardinals could be moving with the market -- or to stay ahead of the market -- on one of their reliever targets.
Yes. Yes it does play into it, and it's something that the National League teams have always had to contend with and understand. That said, the tradeoff is they get better bang for the buck from pitchers, right? because there is one less hitter in the lineup when they're pitching. And you also see teams in the NL able to make value plays on relievers and athletic players. So give a little, get a little.
I do not own any Crocs, though that's just because I haven't thought about them, really. I know there are devotees of Crocs, just never made that leap. And, I do like E.T. Good movie.
Yes. You just have to ask them.
Entering this offseason Alex Cobb looked a lot like a starting pitcher that would draw the Cardinals attention, and I heard a few people (with other teams) making that connection. At the GM Meetings, it sure seemed like the market for him was going to zoom ahead of where the Cardinals want to go for the starter and that others would be there for them to pursue. Reports from Chicago have the Cubs pursuing Cobb, and you can see other teams raising the asking price.
That would be the idea, yes. With time for him at 2B and some at 1B, and 3B. That's where the super utility notion comes in.
The current idea is to go after two, and one of them will be a free-agent signing. They could trade for that second reliever, and if that deal doesn't happen then back into the market they go. It's entirely possible, too, that the Cardinals come out of this with three new relievers to throw at the back end of the game.
He's saying the Cardinals need a player they can build a lineup around and make all of the players, including Pham, better. They need a Tent Pole Player.
Less than that. Think AL.
I asked that exact question. I asked him if the Cardinals were prepared to go $1 shy of the luxury tax, because I had been told that the tax is unappealing and not something the Cardinals will do because of the cost of money and draft picks, two things they avoid spending unless they have to. I passed that answer along to people in the chat before. So I wanted to followup with the chairman. DeWitt told me, in no uncertain terms, that the Cardinals would run into "financial implications" well before they came near the luxury tax. He said they aren't getting that close.
Of course they're all over the map. That's their job. Their job is to check in on the options out there -- which they've been doing -- get a sense of the cost/years and then see what prices they want to meet. Oh, and at the same time consider trade options and realize that if they don't get the targeted reliever they need to keep in touch with their second choice reliever so that they don't then lose him, and same for the third choice and the other choice. When teams talk about due diligence, this is what they mean: they are all over the map. Cardinals have had interest in trading for Colome, they appear to have made a move on Addison Reed, and they have at least looked in at several other relievers, including Brandon Morrow. I believe Bryan Shaw is also in play for them, but I was not able to confirm that beyond that they've looked at him like they have every other reliever out there.
They've been talking for weeks. They are still talking. That's probably a positive sign.
Not this time. I think Boras has a point. Hence, the story over the weekend.
Four players added to 40-man roster: Mercado, Gomber, Derian Gonzalez, and O'Neill.
Lots. It was outlined this past weekend in the paper. The Cardinals have around $103 million in current commitments, and then there are arb raises due a player like Michael Wacha, and then there is the $6 million that the Cardinals are paying Seattle for Leake's salary. Still that puts them well away from the $197 million luxury tax threshold.
Gonzalez has an appealing arm and frame, and he's had some of the tell-tale production of a rising talent, similar to Perdomo. A couple years ago he was listed alongside Fernandez and Alcantara as a rising arm, and when we talked about Gonzalez for the prospect rankings he was often mentioned as a sleeper option. Ben Badler used that term in a review of the GCL Top 20: "He got overshadowed by those two monster arms, but Gonzalez is a good sleeper to watch. He sits around 91-94, tops out at 96-97, not as much life on the pitch as Alcantara or Fernandez but he delivers it with good angle, throws strikes and has a good curveball too." That has continued as he moved up the ranks and got to Class A. This is the kind of move the Cardinals talked about doing in response to the Perdomo and Cordoba lessons of previous years -- one where they look at the upside and realize they need to protect based on that, not just their internal rankings of the feasibility a player will stay in the majors.