Indeed. He will have a choice, though. There will be a few similar offers.
It does. I believe that has been discussed. Yes. There is a comparison to draw there between Aledmys Diaz's contact-oriented approach and lack of walks, and whether that was sustainable. DeJong has brought up that he needs to mix in more walks to assure that he is able to remain productive and not see a sink in his other numbers.
Fair rebuttal. Perhaps the choice of wording could have been better, and that's on me for not making sure it was clear -- or that it could have been clearer.
No. Just one of the cards in the 2018 Series. Came in a box.
Not really. Most of it was a) the high-cost of making the trade and b) the lack of interest from the other team in making the trade. That's all.
I could see that, yes. Would open up 50 new roster spots. Many new jobs for established players. Yes.
You mean like in a dating app? Like they should meet? Or do you mean they are the same people? Either way, doing so would be beyond me.
That is something that the courts are going to have to provide, alas. That does not seem to have much CBA traction.
Have not, no. There's always 2018.
Entirely possible. Hasn't worked for the third-best starter in this year's market, though.
They are aware, yes, and it made them reluctant to look at other options, so they'll go into this year braced for it to be an issue, but knowing they're getting that concern for a pre-free agent reliever, not one they paid free agent prices for.
In large part because they're different voters operating with different sets of information and different rules set forth by baseball. I'm not sure how the voting body in the 1980s would vote today about PED users because the voting body from the 1980s isn't around. I have no idea how today's voting body would vote on players from the 60s and 70s because the modern voting body didn't get that chance. I, you know, wasn't eligible being not yet born and all. If you allow that our understanding and acceptance of stats has changed -- wins out, RBIs out, rates in! -- then can we also agree that our understanding and awareness of PEDs and banned substances has changed. It's actually rather predictable when you consider that the voters reflect the society. So, to your question about what is the difference in the eyes of the voters? It's the eyes of the voters that are different.
Cardinals' spring training facility for Colorado's.
I tried to address the spirit of the question, not wade into the fine print, because we do have to consider that banned substances are banned substances, controlled substances are controlled substances.
Matt Holliday worked out. You could argue that Jayson Werth did for the Nationals. Jon Lester is well on his way to working out for the Cubs, as is Max Scherzer. But, yes, those are the outliers at this point. And teams are increasingly fine-tuned when it comes to the risk management and risk aversion that comes with stat/data-driven decisions in the front office, looking for value ahead of production, and constantly protecting the cost-effective future. It's my hedge fund analogy.
That coupled with players debuting younger may actually work in the player's benefit. It's this weird moment when we're stuck in between -- see: Donaldson, Josh -- that has caught some players in the vice. They're reaching free agency in the early 30s and teams are wary of longterm contracts, where Harper and Machado and others who debuted with a more modern young age will hit like Heyward did -- entering the prime and commanding an opt-out that really favored the players.
Yep. He just has to sign with another team.
It's a good question, and through the course of this chat, we've talked about some of the additions that would nudge the Cardinals forward, or even change the look of the division race. But let's take this moment to suggest that it may not be a free agent add today that changes the division. The team the Cardinals start the year with is by no means the one they're expected to end the season with -- and you shouldn't expect that. Trades can be made during the season. Acquisitions can be found. There are deals that have their roots in talks during the winter -- but they don't flower until June or July. And the Cardinals have some questions about their team -- questions that they're going to try to answer by watching it play, and then making a move perhaps to address. Or, at least that should be your expectation. If they're still looking for a closer come June and not looking to trade for a closer then you have a fair criticism, and I imagine we'll talk about that during the chat. If there is a lack of production from a spot in the infield and no in-house option, then by all means it won't be because they didn't sign Moustakas or Hosmer -- or won't only be because of that -- it will also be a test of whether they address that need now that it's inarguable and clear. A contending team goes through changes. The Cardinals are no different, if they contend.