Cardinals chat with Derrick Goold

Cardinals chat with Derrick Goold

Bring your Cardinals questions and comments, and talk to Post-Dispatch baseball writer Derrick Goold in a live chat at 1 p.m. Monday..




    One thing I noticed about Shildt is that he will pull a pitcher in the middle of an inning if the game is on the line, something Matheny was reluctant to do. He has even done this to Hicks and Martinez. I think it has helped us win a few games.
    This is true. Shildt has not had the "king of the world" approach.
    Derrick, you've often talked about how the best way fans can communicate with the front office is with their wallets. However, when Cardinal fans consistently go above and beyond to spend a lot of money on the team they care so much about, isn't there a responsibility on the other side of that coin to strive for more than a middling playoff hopeful? This FO seems to take that support for granted more than some of the other high attendance teams.
    I understand where you're coming from, but you have to look at it like a business. If you continue to buy pizza from the local pizza shop even though the pizza quality has diminished in recent years, then does the owner owe you a return to the good pizza or will he continue to take your money at the same level and just thank his increased profits? He'll notice when you stop buy pizza. Period. That's how the business goes. We all want the best from the local businesses, the return on our emotional investment, right? That is a little part of fan service. But we're not promised it as consumers. And our only course of action isn't to play on a businesses guilt for taking our money, it's to not give the money.
  • Is the starting pitcher, Lance Lynn, that pitches for the Rangers and has 9 wins.
    Is he the same Lance Lynn that was a Cardinal fan favorite that was not good enough for Mo to re-sign and pitch for the Cardinals? He sure would look good at the top of the Cardinals starting rotation.
    Fan favorite. That's rich. And, yes, he'd be an interesting addition.
    Is now the perfect time for Shildt to make big changes in order to help give this team an identity? Why not shake up the lineup? Bat the pitcher 8th. Try an opener. When your team isn't particularly good at any one thing, why not be the team that makes other teams uncomfortable thru strategy?
    I think there's probably something to this, especially the shifting around the leadoff bit. The Cardinals now have a question on how they're going to start their offense and finish games. Not ideal.
     
    The opener has no traction with Shildt. Still.
    Is Rick Ankiel ghosting the Cards front office?
    That would be epic. He'd show up on Fox Sports Midwest as the big reveal. He does still have a role with them. He just stepped aside from it to try and pursue pitching.
    I enjoyed the ovations AP received. Live in Tx and made sure the kids watched Friday night. But the curtain call for the home run was a little much for me. Idk. Opposing player in a close game. Didn’t like it. Felt over the top..... IMO
  • How'd you feel about them chanting his name with the bases loaded in a 2-0 game in the ninth inning then on Sunday? That was something we're not likely to see again, ever.
  • Boston struggled early, Cleveland struggled early, Oakland struggled early. They have all recovered. The Cardinals had a rough May and a better June. They to will recover.
  • It got harder today, but not impossible.
    Clearly what the Cards need is an 80's song to turn their season around. Might I suggest "All I Need Is a Miracle" by Mike and the Mechanics?
    I think you might be onto something, but it can't just be any old song, it's got to be catchy and it's got to be something that the entire ballpark can sing after a win and that can just make the place pulse. I've long wondered why St. Louis doesn't have something like Go Cubs Go or Sweet Caroline or Sinatra. But "All I Need is a Miracle" isn't that song. Sorry. I'm thinking more of a call/response song. Picture it. The Cardinals win. The 1980s tune cues up, and ...
     
    Third base line: "Every now and then I get a little bit lonely/
    And you're never coming 'round"
     
    First base line: "Turn around."
     
    Third base line: "Every now and then I get a little bit tired/
    Of listening to the sound of my tears"
     
    First base line: "Turn around."
     
    You get the idea, and then 
     
    Third base line: "Every now and then I get a little bit terrified/
    And then I see the look in your eyes."
     
    Bleachers: "Turn around Bright eyes."
     
    Now we're really going!
    I know it’s a guessing game, but in your opinion do you think the cards could get either MadBum or MadMax (assuming he requests trade) without giving up Gorman and Carlson? If the cards take on all Scherzer costs would that be enough to keep both, not that the cardinals would do that...
    Bumgarner yes. Scherzer entirely depends on the money being handled by Washington. That will determine the players they get in response. Carlson is good part of this question, truly. He's going to get attention when it comes to teams asking, and the Cardinals are going to try and move away from him being a part of the deal.
    Just a comment here. This past weekend changed my mind, retroactively, on the question of the Cards signing Pujols back in 2011. After seeing what I saw this weekend, I wish they could have signed him, regardless of the decline he has experienced. I find myself really wishing Albert would have only worn the birds on the bat. At the time, I feared the financial consequences, and was almost happy the Angels got him. Feel totally different now.
    Thank you for sharing your view with us, Douged.
    Why did the Cards FO make a more concerted effort to sign Derek Dietrich during the offseason? He is raking in Cincy, 18 HRs, and was a left-handed bat we needed. Instead, they got Drew Robinson, who is nowhere to be found.
    Discussed earlier in the chat. Had to do with their perceived need, their lineup already in place, and the positions they wanted that person to play.
  • I really enjoy all your work, but I have a more general question. Over the last several seasons, the Cardinals have traded for/signed a variety of players who performed at or below their career averages. Many players, including Cecil, Gregerson, Holland, Fowler, Goldschmidt, Ozuna (2018), Leake, and Miller, faced very significant regressions once on the Cardinals. Some of these players (Holland comes to mind) even performed better once leaving the Cardinals organization. Of course, some regression is natural with aging. However, is there another underlying problem? What I mean to ask is, how good are the Cardinals, including their coaching and managing staff, at using analytics and diagnosing what's going wrong with a player and helping them eliminate their weaknesses and improve their strengths (the type of player development discussed in books like the MVP Machine in reference to teams like the Astros and Yankees)? I remember reading recently, I think it was an article of yours, about how the Cardinals coaching staff was telling Goldschmidt to simply watch video of his good offensive stretches, rather than encouraging him to watch his more recent, less successful at-bats to try to diagnose why he isn't doing as well. Is their approach enough to develop players to harness the best of their talent?
    You hit on something that I attempted to explore in the story a few weeks ago about the trade deficit that the Cardinals have. I know that part of the story got a lot of attention and perhaps there were two stories that I fused into one. But one of the reasons why there has been a trade deficit is because the Cardinals have seen regression. Ozuna's can be explained with injury. But others, especially some of the free agents, not so much. When the Cardinals made the move at hitting coach and manager last year, about 12 months ago now, one of the things brought up by the front office was exactly this -- the regression of players they brought in. It led to the dismissal of the previous pitching coach too, or at least contributed to it. The performance would suggest that this is an area that the Cardinals must audit. Their response so far has been to change managers, to change hitting coaches, and we'll see in the coming weeks how they look at changing approaches to trades. Changing how they evaluate players or how they set their metrics would also be on the table. I'm about halfway through the MVP Machine book and, candidly, some of the stuff described in there with pitching development will look familiar to things from 2014-ish or before with the Cardinals, and that's no surprise. Some of the folks in Houston, like Brent Strom, were doing these things with the Cardinals and they continued on doing them. Tim Leveque has been key to that. In the majors we have seen that also change. It's gone more to video scouting, in-house scouting, data scouting, and the conversation that Jeff Albert had about strengths and the notion of Goldschmidt watching the positive at-bats -- that came from Shildt, FYI -- does feed into this idea of focus on the strengths. What do they do best. And then do their best to avoid showcasing their weaknesses. This is a big part of what the Cardinals have to look at, and I'm not sure half a season is an answer or half a season is a fix, but a full season given the trends sure do continue to paint a picture.
    It's how he's being pitched.
    Why has Paul DeJong abandoned hitting to the opposite field? Early in the year it was a strength in his game, but now they have started t shift on him.
    Was anyone able to ask Albert some tougher questions this past weekend, like will he go into the HOF as a Cardinal or if he continues to hold bad feelings toward the Cards management, or whether he misses all the adulation he would have received if he had stayed in St Louis, including a statue out front of Busch? I know it was a love fest, but would have liked to read a one on one with him that answered some of these questions.
    He was asked all of those questions -- though maybe not precisely about the statue. But the hat and all of that stuff. These are tougher questions -- than what? Anyway, he was asked. There was a lot of Tweeting. You can watch the press conference where he was asked those questions. The Cardinals and Fox Sports Midwest put it up in its entirety.
    I should have opened with this Derrick. I really admire the reporting you do and think highly of your analysis. I think it is truly a treat to have a forum where fans can ask questions and get insight from one of the best baseball writers in the business. If the tone of the questions sounds negative they aren't aimed at you and your work, they are aimed at a team and its management that just has not yet gotten better after promising for at least the past three years they were going to.
    Thanks. That's fair. The more years I've done this chat the better I've tried to be about making it clear when I'm explaining the Cardinals' viewpoint so that you don't think that it is also my viewpoint. These are different things. But I know it can all get muddled. There are comments for sure that take issue with my coverage and not with the Cardinals, and those can just get mixed in with the criticism of the team. The more clear we can all be the better conversation we can have, I figure.
    We are continually told that the Cardinals won’t feel a need to spend more until ticket sales drop. While I think you are correct, I find this very discouraging. Most tickets sold are season tickets, and most season tickets sold are sold to corporations who give the tickets to their customers. The corporations won’t stop buying until they can’t give away the tickets, and the team would have to be truly atrocious for a long, long time to get there. I worry that we have decades of mediocre baseball ahead of us.
    That's an interesting perspective. Empty seats also tell a tale.
    Derrick, did anyone dare ask Albert his true age?
    Goodness, I would hope that Arte Moreno did. I know the late Joe Strauss did when he played for the Cardinals. I was there. I know I did when played for the Cardinals. I was there for that, too. Also got to ask him if he took steroids and HGH and all those fun questions that he really, really enjoyed hearing from me and others, I'm sure. So, do you think we should have asked them all again, just to be sure his answers didn't change when his jersey did?
    DG, when you have an aging team and draft low each year, the FO can’t afford many misses to keep the team competitive. The Cards FO has spent money and made moves to improve the team, but the results have been hideously lacking. Mozeliak and crew have lost their touch the past few years. Would you agree?
    I agree with your premise, absolutely. The Cardinals have chosen to take aim at the mid-tier for several years because they believed they could a) get value from that player beyond that cost or b) took less risk if it didn't work out. Well, it didn't work out in some cases, and then the cost of patching over the problem was just as costly. I've been thinking about this lately and trying to figure out how to write or illustrate it, but just consider the Cardinals' search for a lefthanded pitcher.
     
    They invested $30 million in Cecil.
    They traded Voit for Shreve (and got Gallegos!).
    They traded Pham for Cabrera.
    They traded Tilson for Duke.
    They didn't give Gonzales a go, moving him for O'Neill.
    They got Webb of waivers.
     
    On and on and really you could trace some of those moves back to the fact that Cecil didn't work out. They had to add to cover for his absence or his ineffectiveness. It had a cascade effect.
     
    Another former Cardinal will be here this week, Stephen Piscotty. Will he get a standing O, too? Maybe he came last year.
    Probably for his first at-bat. He did not play here last year. Emotional reception for him, likely, given the reason for the trade that took him to the West Coast.
    The Cubs model of sourcing pitching from outside due to most internal prospects flaming out from either injury or under performance looks brilliant at the moment compared to the Cards model. Would you agree?
    I would not. It is the only means they have, and it is the approach that they've taken because they cannot develop pitching. Since 2015 and again in the World Series 2016, I've written about what I find fascinating -- the two philosophies these two rivals have taken. The Cardinals acquire and develop pitching and try to move that into what they need, on the mound or via trade. The Cubs think a pitching prospect is as real as a unicorn, and they've had high draft picks to get the position players. They'll spend on pitching because they can while Bryant and Baez and Schwarber and really Rizzo are so cost-effective. The contrast is fascinating. But it is by no means settled.
  • I enjoyed all the Love Albert received, but just wondering how a Bob Gibson would have approached the situation if he was pitching?
Powered by ScribbleLive Content Marketing Software Platform