It's style of stuff and pitcher, to be sure. A big difference at this point is that development aspect in terms of experience. Flaherty has not yet shown his best at this level and how he'll succeed at this level. Weaver, after a fine-tuning in the minors, is showing that, and that starts with low in the zone, where Flaherty will get with his off-speed stuff in the future.
Because they want him to start as often as possible down the stretch now have him skip a start just to lineup against the Cubs next week. Better to maximize his number of starts then cost him one.
QUICK ASIDE: That said, Cardinals could move the rotation around to only shift him back a day and get him to start Friday at Wrigley. That is on the table right and entirely possible. Martinez last pitched Saturday, so they'd line him up for Friday and sub in Flaherty against the Reds and get it that way. They also wouldn't cost him a game down the road, the way I figure it.
Yes. Follow the pitching.
I don't think you want me out there, not at my age.
Yes. But that's a big difference between swapping teams.
They keep waiting. They see it on the horizon, but they can't be sure. Hence, the Quintana trade that gives them that security they've been lacking.
Shrinking by the day it seems, but I want to stress some of that is posturing. The Cardinals are definitely of a mind that he'll go to market, become a free agent, and see what else is out there for him. And if they think they can get him for a reasonable offer then they know they have the need for innings. They know what the cost will be -- low end. They just need to hear it from another team. And also what else is out there.
No. I think they got him to close.
Haven't heard a good one yet. They like Memphis Mashers, I guess. Redbird Rookies would work, but I think that's taken.
In truth, that does describe their approach with relievers, in many ways.
Goodness. My point is that the standings don't lie: If a team finishes first in the standings, it is the division champ. That cannot be undone. That cannot be erased. Standings don't lie. Playoffs teams are playoff teams. They're not going to stop the season and seed the playoffs based on run differential or Pythagorean record or whatever else you want to cook up. One-run games are not considered half a win in the standings. They are full wins. They count just like a 10-run game or a 7-run game or a 77-run game. Standings don't lie. That's my point. You can judge the effectiveness of a team and how to build a team in the ways you describe -- and teams should. Absolutely. They should try to neutralize luck and health and all of the variables as much as possible to understand where a team is headed and how good a team really is.
But at the end of the season there are five teams from the National League that are playoff teams and will be playoff teams for 2017 from here to eternity.
It doesn't matter if one has a run differential of plus-7 and a team going home is a plus-412.
Standings don't lie.
This is something the Cardinals and their fans should cling to, after all, they are in many ways just an average club, just a mediocre, spiraling .500 club. A lot of stats suggest they need to retool, rebuild, rethink their roster. However, the standings say they're contenders. It seems you probably like that truth.
OK. I won't. But they're not a team I've heard come up. Washington maybe.
They better hope those aren't the only three options they have.
As odd as this season has been for the Cardinals, the tone of questions and comments like this one in the chat -- and there are dozens that are similar -- might be the most confusing thing for 2017.
He is aware of what's possible and the playing time needed to make that happen.
They would not celebrate dress-up trips as much, that's for sure. Been a tough year there on the north side. Dynasty delayed, I guess. No surprise the chatters here who knew all about the pitching issues brewing for the Cubs and, in the end, pitching is what drives a contender. Look at how pitching has helped the Cardinals overcome so, so many issues -- and yet a lack of pitching kept the Cubs, so good at other things, from running away with the division. Go figure. And all of that after the World Series ...
Cardinals Twitter would want its pound of flesh. There would be accountability. Oh, accountability.
I have yet to hear a good explanation from the Pirates. I've read/heard explanations. A good one, no.
Thanks for the kind words. Another sign-and-trade reference. I guess I'm unsure where this sign-and-trade notion is coming from, and maybe I should have asked that sooner so that someone in the chat could clue me into this phrase that is leaking into questions here. Usually there's a reason.
Anyway, Machado has one year of arbitration remaining, like Donaldson. I guess technically, a team tenders him a contract, and assures that he's in the fold for 2018 at a salary determined by arbitration or negotiation and that means he's "signed" before a trade. But that's not usually what sign-and-trades mean. Sign-and-trades mean a deal is done that the current team can only do (max deal, something that) and then the player is traded to a team that wants that deal, and it's all based around the cap and spending limits. That's how it works elsewhere. In baseball, it's more trade-and-sign, like Scott Rolen. Or Jim Edmonds. Is that what people mean? Because that doesn't seem all that likely with Machado at this point. He's got the one year before jackpot and unless he hits the open market he'll never really know how big that jackpot could be.
And no that trio would not get the conversation started. While it has control that tilts the conversation it doesn't have the number of top 100 prospects we've seen go for less time of a lesser player.