Cardinals chat with Derrick Goold

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

  • Do you think Michael Wacha will ever throw 200 innings in a single major league season?
  • That sort of starter is vanishing from the landscape, it sure seems. Wacha could be a 180 inning pitcher and serve a valuable role. He could get to 200 in a peak season, but the likelihood of that is changing -- partially because he's not going to be used that way and mainly because the game is shifting.

    There is no such thing as a Theo Epstein pitching prospect. Last ten drafts, Boston + Chicago? Less than 2 total MLB pitching WAR. You can look it up. Not 20. Just 2. Well, not quite 2.
  • And there is a method to that view, absolutely. Pitching is volatile. Can be replaced.
  • Did you read Dylan Hernandez piece in LA Times about Gurriel? I think MLB should take a player's culture into account before dropping the hammer. Do you really think what he did was THAT egregious?
  • (Ugh, lost my Internet connection and my swell answer. Let me try this again.)
  • Dylan Hernandez's article on the subject in the LA Times was a must-read. It was enlightening, thoughtful, and it was thought-provoking. I agree with you entirely that there is a difference between an act done or said maliciously and one that an act done or said ignorantly. There is a stark line there. But I think you should be careful trying to say something wasn't "that egregious." Who are you to say? There aren't shades of insults when it comes to racist acts, stereotypes, or phrases. Egregious is egregious, and it is the person or people who is the target of the acts that only truly knows whether something was insulting, or harmful, or hurtful. Yu Darvish took the high road here. What he said afterward had meaning, and how he reached out to Gurriel through Carlos Beltran -- as reported by Ken Rosenthal -- had real gravity behind it, and was one of the best, impressive moves of the season, for me. He sought to move on -- but not without first acknowledging that everyone needs to move past. When it comes to the punishment, however, there really is one question that should be answered: Would you allow that in your place of employment at the peak of your profession? Or, would you allow that in your home?

    The answer is the same as it should be in the dugout, and the punishment should fit the fact that such a thing isn't tolerated by baseball, regardless of intent. There aren't shades of egregious.
  • are we going to start seeing 28 player rosters with 15 pitchers, regular season & post season?
    If there is a game 7 do 9 pitchers go one inning each?
  • Don't you have to get home for dinner?
  • Am I missing something re: Oquendo? He's just a third base coach, right? Not going to be the #3 hitter they desperately need, or the #4 hitter they desperately need, or the second/third starter they desperately need, or the closer they desperately need? Does he really possess the magical elixir to turn the collection of largely mediocre defensive players they currently have into something competent? People act like he's a combination of Albert Pujols, Whitey Herzog, and Bob Gibson, but I just don't see it.
  • I don't believe that Oquendo is the free-agent they intend to add, but his value to the team and to the clubhouse is significant because of the experience he brings, the trust he has in place, and the instincts and feel he has for the game.
  • Derrick, Did you see the Dodger home run late in the game last night where a woman caught the ball and she was so happy, then a jerk ripped it away and threw the ball back on the field. What is wrong with people?
  • How much time do you have?
  • I generally think you're e spot on, so I was surprised to disagree with you about the idea of just trying to get to the playoffs vs competing with the cubs. Would you really rather have a perennial wild card team than build one that actually can contend with the Cubs, Dodgers, Astros, and other young, ultra talented teams for a World Series? Not arguing, just want to hear your ideas
  • If that's how it came across, that was not my intent. My intent was to point out that the Cardinals have some work to do to improve their roster and see where that takes them. If they're constantly chasing the Cubs or trying to close the gap on the holes in the roster that you, me, and others perceive, they're doing it the wrong way. They're not going to get a Kris Bryant. They don't have an Addison Russell hanging Busch Stadium. So, find a better team that plays better and close the gap that way. Be a better version of the Cardinals, not some Cubs chaser.
  • You sure make Mondays tolerable. 5 Hour chat! Thanks1
  • Thanks, Zamboni. I'm about to put this chat on ice.
  • The case for moving Marp:
    1) He's a defensive liability anywhere you put him. He does *not* play multiple positions; he plays *zero* positions, and that’s why he hasn’t had a steady home on the diamond. He aspires to neutral 1B, the least valuable defensive position on the field, and he’s only getting older.
    2) He’s a liability on the basepaths. Mozeliak has stated a desire for the team to move towards athletic ability. Marp is slow. Period. He often makes poor judgments trying to stretch for an extra base.
    3) The Cards have a proven leadoff hitter to replace him (Fowler) and another who out-OBP’d him last season and may truly shine in that role, albeit with more to prove (Wong).
    4) His team-friendly contract and elite OBP skills make him very valuable on an AL team where he can DH in a station-to-station offense. The Red Sox and Yankees both come to mind. His positional flexibility actually benefits him in that role, because with limited exposure, it offers an AL manager the option to put him in the field once or twice a week when someone else needs a break. He’d bring a nice return in an offense that’s just one spark plug away.
    5) Could Gyorko and Marp get you Devers and more? Could Marp get you Betances and Greg Bird, or Chad Green and Greg Bird? The Cards could get younger with more upside, quickly, by dealing Marp. I may even be undervaluing his trade potential. What do you think?
  • I appreciate the effort put into this explanation. It does go through some of the concerns, but then it resurrects itself with trades that seem to ignore those same concerns. So, the Yankees are going to rush to trade two of their young players for a player who you just outlined all the reasons why he wouldn't be worth that much to acquire. Which player is the Matt Carpenter you're talking about? The one in 1 and 2 or the elite-OBP, team-friendly contract of No. 4 that gets you the players you suggest in No. 5? Because that guy is worth keeping. And then you suggest your undervaluing his trade potential after listing all the ways you undervalue his production. This is what gets me. And maybe what will take me another week to understand.
  • When I hear ownership talk about what their goals are for the team is that they want them to make the playoffs because once you get in it is a crapshoot. To me when I hear that I hear complacency and being content on being/fielding a team of "we almost did it." From what I remember of the LaRussa days, the whole montra each year was to win the World Series. Am I wrong in noticing a change in how ownership perceives yearly success for the Cardinals?
  • Want to know who told me first about this "crapshoot" philosophy for the postseason? I'll tell you. It was in 2004, and he outlined all the things that you probably have heard from Cardinals ownership/executives. Do you want to know who it was?

    Theo Epstein.
  • Is 2018 Wacha's last year before free agency, or does he belong to the Cardinals through 2019 as well? He came up mid-way through 2013, so he'll have 5.5 years of service time at the end of next season.
  • He's the Cardinals through 2019. He's entering his second year of arbitration rights. Next winter will be his third and final run of arbitration, then free agency arrives unless an extension does sooner.
  • just got home from work. do you think Votto has played himself to a point where some AL team will look at his contract and maybe think it's worth trying to trade for him? best hitter in baseball. thanks
  • There would be teams interested, absolutely. He's a punishing hitter. Could change a team.
  • If the Cardinals were to trade Mercado or Sierra, do you have a feel for who they'd rather keep?
  • I do not, except to say that Sierra has been the more highly regarded prospect, and remained so coming out of this season. Mercado was more of a breakout who they are trying to gauge.
  • It seems like it's common knowledge that the Cardinals really, really want to add a big bat to the lineup. That seems like it gives potential trade partners leverage. Based on your conversations with the Cards' brass, where would you say the currently reside on the desperation scale? 10--will do anything necessary to get a big bat; 1--would rather do nothing than lose a trade.
  • Any team that has a big bat to deal -- i.e., Martinez -- is going hold the leverage because there are not many available, and a team's desperation is not going to tilt that scale one way or the other. What we know from the Cardinals is that if a team attempts to "rob" them of a deal, then they will walk away and wish that team good luck in getting the deal done at all, or to come back to them when they want a real conversation. We've seen this work for and, once, against the Cardinals. The Cardinals aren't hiding from the fact they need a big bat because the 29 other teams have access to box scores and standings too, and they know all about the Cardinals' need. It's something opponents have seen for themselves when playing the Cardinals and thinking about beating them.
  • I've heard and read your break down on the Stanton situation and every point you have made makes sense. However, I have read from multiple national writers that a team would be required to give up a top prospect or 2 even if the Marlins don't pick up money. That has to be wrong doesn't it? Sure seems that if that was the case, a team would have claimed him in August.
  • Exactly. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that 30 teams would prefer to just take on Stanton's contract over sending the Marlins a top prospect (or two) and taking on the contract. I believe I could get 30 sources to confirm that. That said, this is where negotiations come into play, and we've outlined how the Cardinals and multiple other teams are going to look at that deal.

    One wrinkle that we need to explore in the coming weeks is this: Would Stanton accept?

    There was also supposition coming out of Miami that he would not, and then there was a report recently that San Francisco was an attractive landing place because Stanton would like to go the West Coast. The Giants cannot offer the prospects that the Cardinals could, but that only matters so much if Stanton won't accept a deal to the Cardinals. Leverage shifts. This deal is complex, and we'll have several more weeks to chew on it, for sure.
  • Away we go. Seems like a good place to end this week's chat. thanks for filling the box with questions, once again. Still didn't really make a dent in all the questions that came in, and there was enough to fill more than five hours. We'll be back in the coming weeks, and then will have a chat from Orlando and the GM Meetings in the near future. Enjoy the conclusion of this wild, wacky, frenetic, and all-around grand World Series. Have to admit: Seeing Beltran adorn his Hall of Fame career with a World Series ring has a certain appeal. Deserving player. Thanks for an excellent and varied chat. Until next week, thoughts?
Powered by ScribbleLive Content Marketing Software Platform