Cardinals chat with Derrick Goold

Post-Dispatch baseball writer Derrick Goold takes your Cardinals questions and comments in his live chat beginning at 10 a.m. Wednesday.




    ESPN had an article about the 1 player each team should trade and mentioned Carson Kelly, saying he is ready for the bigs. He's demonstrated nothing offensively in his times up with the club. I can see him being traded, but don't see him getting valuable returns.
  • He's considered one of the finest catching prospects in the minors. A catcher who is defensively ready for the majors -- and that has value to teams without a catcher like that -- and there are scouts that also believe if given playing time behind the plate that his offense will manifest and improve a lot like the guys the Cardinals have behind the plate now who got a chance to improve on the job.
    Did Ozuna and Fowler get some work in with Barry Bonds while in San Francisco? Any feedback from them if so?
    They spent some time with Bonds, yes. Fowler told me the plan was to go to dinner or to spend one of the evenings together. He said the purpose was not to talk about hitting, "but I bet baseball will come up." Ozuna, Fowler also spent time talking to Bonds on Thursday, the first day in San Francisco. Bonds was at the ballpark that day. There was no specific feedback from either player about the content of those conversations. Ozuna declined to discuss. Fowler said just general baseball stuff came up and -- this was before he went to meet Bonds -- he expected some tips on his swing, just because Bonds and he are close.
    Why not starting chasing value deals on players who grew up in the Midwest or, like Mikolas, have ties to Jupiter. I would think there's about to a lot of players who grew up enthralled with the recent success the Cardinals have had.
    Maybe. Or, maybe they want to see what the coasts look like. If there is anything from the Stanton endeavor that the Cardinals should/could take to heart it's that they need to sell players on the future -- not try to sell the past. Let them enjoy the past. Let them get to know Gibson and Edmonds and Carpenter and full ballparks and all that -- but sell them on the future. That's what Stanton wanted to hear about and said he didn't believe in as much as the Cardinals do.
    Would you be open to the idea of adding a "utility" gold glove position? For guys who spend a minimum of say 20% of their time at a secondary position? I don't think Buster Posey should be competing for the same GG as Yadi when one spends every game behind the plate and one spends 66% of the time there. Same goes for Baez vs Wong with Baez moving all around
    I think this idea is intriguing, yes.
    What is the long term outlook for Munoz? Do you see him being involved in a trade as a young, versatile, MLB-Ready, team controlled player to help round out any potential offers?
  • That doesn't seem to be the Cardinals' first choice, no. If anything he's being positioned to take on Greg Garcia's role in the same way that Greg Garcia took on Daniel Descalso's role when Descalso started reaching the later years of arbitration, and how Descaslo took on -- what was it Aaron Miles' role? We see this cycle every so often and Munoz is positioned that same way. Just righthanded.
    With all the young pitching here or on the way and the young controllable middle infield, do the cardinals even need to consider a rebuild? Their shopping list should start and stop with Harper.
    This would be their argument, minus Harper being the only option to supplement.
    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but in reading between the lines in a couple of your tweets, the Cardinals could be a lot more forthcoming when it comes to communicating with the local media (which is concerning given the quality of writers the P-D has employed/continues to employ). In previous chats, you've mentioned the organization wants to control the message. And while that may be great for #branding, won't that eventually erode the trust between the Cardinals and the fan base?
    That's really for the fan base to ultimately decide. To think this is happening only St. Louis is to miss a larger trend throughout baseball. Access is changing. The platform players have is changing. Some take to social media to speak directly to fans. Now teams are doing the same. Some teams are creating their own media entities -- on Twitter, in print, on TV, with podcasts, and so on and so on. I saw one team today post its lineup on Twitter -- sponsored by Honda! So, now information like that is the possession of a sponsor. Who is going to get it first in that regard if we're now counting lineups as something that reporters should convey to fans? Things are changing. The Cardinals are the only team to have the media offsite during spring training. The media work room there is now occupied by the in-house coverage group. This is the new world. And it's been my goal to try to adjust with it -- and look at new ways to better cover a team and a sport under these rules. It's not any different than what political writers are going through. It's just this is a game.
    Love the chats - thank you! Please provide an update on Trevor Rosenthal & do the Cards have an interest? Thanks
  • He's throwing. Saw video of him throwing off a mound. He's expected to sign with another team when he makes himself available.
    How is Girsch viewed in MLB circles? When listening to interviews, he seems to be much less organized that Mo. Mo always seems to come across as calm, collected, even keel and chose his words very carefully. Girsch seems to have a much more, lets call it excited, demeanor to him. I would think Mo's approach would command more attention of other clubs when talking deals. Just curious. By no means am I trying to suggest Girsch doesn't.
    Different personalities mesh differently. That's one of the things that Cardinals wanted to capitalize on this past winter. Girsch has strong relationships with some of the new GMs entering the conversation. Many of them have the same background -- how they got into the game, their education, and their age. Girsch also connects with some of the agents because of relationships he's nurtured through the years. Same with Mozeliak. In fact, there's a little bit of history repeating itself here in the sense that Jocketty had well-established relationships with people he had known around the game for 20 years and Mozeliak, as asst. GM, had relationships with others so that they could work together to get deals done. Mozeliak, for example, had a good rapport with Boras and would make those calls, and likewise now you see how Girsch has good rapport with some of the teams that the Cardinals want to talk with. A lot of front offices operate this way.
    DG, you're the man. Last week there were reports that Matheny and Fowler hadn't spoken in months. While I feel that is probably impossible when you consider the closeness of their environment I assume there is some truth to it. My question (no judgment, actual question) for you is why you and your colleagues had not reported on this? Where you not aware or is it because it was gossip and you prefer to report on other things?
  • It's a fair question. It was reported on -- in the sense that it was asked about. It had been asked about. Now, the answers were either not newsworthy or not complete. I respect the reporter who was able to pin it down and push the story -- as we saw. If you scroll back in the chat earlier you'll see the detailed rundown of what I was able to report, and even some earlier conversations that maybe give you a sense of how and why it wasn't viewed as newsworthy at the time.
    Have a scoring question: During a severe shift, some teams move the 3rd baseman between the shortstop and second baseman. If s ball is hit to the “out-of-position” 3rd baseman and he throws the runner out at 1st, how is the out recorded, 5-3 or 6-3 or something else.
    Position numbers never change. So it's a 5-3. To signal a shift, scorers use different things in their scorebook. I use "s." So the scoring for this play in my scorebook would be:
     
    5s-3 
    With the current state of the Cardinals rotation being extremely good and extremely cost controlled, does it behoove them to finally get over the hump w/r/t a big dollar/star FA acquisition sooner, rather than later? I don't feel as if they are adequately taking advantage of the rotational equivalent of the Cubs lineup at this point (ie: young, cost controlled, really good)
  • Sure. That makes a lot of sense.
    It seems like in most college & pro sports, when a manager or coach is fired, the team chooses to make an opposite type hire. Do you think that is what will most likely happen if Matheny is let go? Meaning will they hire someone with experience, like a Joe Girardi. Thanks.
    I don't see Girardi as the polar opposite of Matheny. He's an appealing manager, for sure, and industry folks think Girardi runs a good bullpen. But, keep in mind, one of the people Matheny went to for advice on what to do as a manager, how to relate to fans, how to talk to the media, and how to reach out to players and all of that was Girardi. They're friends. He sought advice from Girardi through the years as he looked to shorten the learning curve.
    Hi Derrick. You are fond of using the term momentum player for Wong. By definition momentum never stops, he gets better and better and becomes a HOFer. Isn't it more accurate to say he is an inconsistent player? He does gain momentum, as he has now, but he always losses it and will spend long periods below average. A good/consistent player is less wild in the variation of his play. I think after 5(?) years we can be rest assured he will be disappear again. Thanks for your hard work!
  • Let's find out. He played a lot last year and got his OBP to a career best. He could play this year a lot in the second half and win a Gold Glove. He could start next year and get all the playing time at second and be an All-Star. Let's slow the roll before you take it to the extreme -- but given a good run, Wong has the ability to momentum-play his way into a career with some nice adornments.
    With the Cardinals essentially at .500 at the all star break, will the Cardinals be sellers at July 31? Is Carlos Martinez their most marketable asset? What could the Cardinals get in return?
    1) What they do in the week after the All-Star break will say more about where they will be at July 31 then this week now.
     
    2) Yes.
     
    3) A good selection of young, controlled players, and one of those top half prospects that you see other teams like the White Sox get in a few deals. It's possible.
    I see a lot of similarities with Fowler and when the Cardinals acquired Tino Martinez as free agent years ago. Both were players with declining skills when acquired , both seemed to be yearning for "the good old days " with prior teams (Yankees and Cubs) even though those teams had no interest in re signing them and both seem to never take to St. Louis and the Cardinals. Your thoughts?
  • They are very different personalities. I was not on the beat when Tino Martinez played for the Cardinals, but I read and heard enough stories -- and then saw him as a hitting coach with Miami -- to now how different they are. He couldn't stop being a Yankee, that's for sure. I think in some ways fans cannot stop seeing Fowler as a Cub. There's a difference. I also want to take a moment and think back to when the Cardinals signed Fowler. There was no indication that his skills were in decline. He had a strong OBP (a career high, sure) and a strong track record of being an OBP monster. That skill, his most marketable one, did not seem in decline at all.
    The chat has frequently discussed the need for the Cardinals to acquire the kind of All-Star talent they currently lack via trade as they have a diminished allure in free agency. But to trade for a true star, we would have to lose significant assets on the roster or throughout the farm system correct? If we leverage the future on that kind of trade and end up with a Cecil or Leake type of performance wouldn't we be even worse off? (Not suggesting we would have to trade for a pitcher with my examples, just not willing to completely write off Fowler the day after a grand slam). It seems like if we are going to make that type of move it would alter the trajectory of the team well into the future, and may remove the "contend every year" theory if we make a mistake, lose the player to injury, etc.. Thoughts? Still worth the risk?
    Well, if doing something else over and over and over again gets you to the same spot -- don't you have to take a risk to make a move? It sure seems like that's where the market is. I'm all for hearing another argument. But you cannot demand the Cardinals have a different result without also recognizing that they also should consider another route, perhaps one that is fraught with risk but has a reward that they aren't getting with their current approach.
     
    Just some food for thought.
     
    It's back with the pretzels in the press box.
    Alright, we've been going for awhile here, and I appreciate the patience as I wrestled a bit with wi-fi before ultimately relocating and getting a chance and see England lose. Next week, the chat will becoming to you live from the All-Star Game in Washington, D.C. Please check local listings for the time. In the coming week we'll have ample All-Star Game coverage, and then we'll break out the midseason stuff. Jeff Gordon is already out with his midseason grades. You can see those at StlToday.com Next week, we'll have more coverage beyond the chat. And then, immediately after the break, the Cardinals begin a four-day, five-game stay at Wrigley Field that will shape the mood and moves of the weeks that follow. No small thing. Buckle up.
Powered by ScribbleLive Content Marketing Software Platform