Join Cardinals beat writer Derrick Goold for his live chat at 11 a.m. Monday

Join Cardinals beat writer Derrick Goold for his live chat at 11 a.m. Monday

Bring your Cards questions and comments to Monday’s live chat at 11 a.m.

  • In your time covering the Cardinals can you recall a time when they had a worse bench than the one they have now?
    Yes. But not many times. I think people have forgotten how ragged that 2007 team was.
    Hi Derrick, a lot of angst on here about the pitching, but let's not forget yje sad state of the bench. If and when Bader and Dejong return things will improve, but until then Shildt doesn't have anyone better than Oviedo to bat with the bases loaded. This is a problem.
    Agreed. 
    I think you mean Elledge, right?
    Either way, yes, it speaks to that whole situation.
    Mentioned Gibson what about Kennedy too a package deal would help the team. What would the cost be I know Gibson is also signed for 22
    Kennedy is a closer now, and I get asked about him a lot. Not sure what the move would be there. Gibson, yes, would be taking on more salary, and that helps with the trade. It is actually why it makes more sense. The Cardinals don't have a full rotation for 2022. Kim's contract is up. Martinez has team options. So there is movement there. Salary available. Etc. And it might lighten the cost -- as far as it being a ready-now major-leaguer, can be more of a prospect move.
    Shilt sent Nogowski to hit for Oviedo, which is not much of a difference.
    That is a huge difference.
    You get a lot of questions on here about the bad trades from MO and I understand the frustration and I myself have not been a fan of many of his decisions. To his credit though he brought in Arenado and Goldschmidt the best players at their respective positions and also got Gallegos and Gant, two very vital pieces and keys to a lot of wins the last couple years. IMO the two biggest mistakes were the Fowler and Ozuna signing/ trade. Fowler because we gave 5 years and 20 million/year to a player who was a career .270 hitter and on the wrong side of 30 and then repeatedly kept him in the lineup when his play did not merit that and ended up in more deserving players being traded like Pham and Arozarena. Ozuna was a mistake because we traded a premium for him to be a 3 hole hitter which he is not. I understand his numbers were good and he was coming off of .330 40 HR season but that was in the same lineup as Stanton and Yelich, he had protection more pitches to hit, he swings to violently to be very consistent and when he was brought to St. Louis to be the man he had no protection and teams were able to pitch around him. That’s why he was better immediately in Atlanta, Acuna and Freeman offer protection which means more fat pitches to attack. This also resulted in Alcantara and Zac Gallen being traded. Alcantara is a budding ace in Miami and I believe Gallen has done well in Arizona, those two would look great in the rotation right now. In my opinion these are the two crucial mistakes from the last 5-6 years. Your thoughts please and as always thank you for your time.
    You pick the two deals that were done ... well, under what passes for duress. And there's probably a lesson there. In the case of Goldschmidt and Arenado, these were the players the Cardinals wanted, period. Those two. Those names. Those specific players. In the case of Fowler and Ozuna, the Cardinals' goals and targets were more general than specific to one player.
    After 2016, they wanted a center fielder and leadoff hitter.
    After 2017, they wanted a middle-order bat, who played outfield, likely a Marlin.
    In each case, they made at least the second move they attempted, and in neither case the best-case scenario trade/signing they tried. Remember coming out of 2016, they explored a trade for Eaton, they met with Colorado to discuss a deal for Blackmon. Both outfielders. Both arguably leadoff types or excelling at leadoff already. And both lefthanded. Bonus! We've covered this ground often, but remember Eaton went to Washington for a huge all. Lucas Giolito was one of three players involved. Giolito! Would you have traded Flaherty for Eaton? For Blackmon? Yeah, neither would the Cardinals, so stunned by the price admission for a trade, the Cardinals pivoted quickly and went to spend cash. They added an extra year to the offer to Fowler, and signed their rivals leadoff hitter.
    (In a recent Best Podcast in Baseball -- still available -- an esteemed member of the Chicago media suggested that signing was the beginning of the end of the Cubs Dynasty that Wasn't.)
    And we don't need to re-litigate the whole Stanton, Yelich, Ozuna events. Cardinals preferred Yelich, right down to his contract and his promise. They made a deal for Stanton that Stanton rejected. And here is the lesson: Instead of focusing on Yelich, they moved to deal for Ozuna so they weren't left without an outfielder, or left to sign McCutchen. Milwaukee waited. The wait paid off. The Brewers focused on the one player they wanted.
    Kind of like the Cardinals did with Arenado, with Goldschmidt ...
    Kind of seems like this is applicable today, no?
    Sorry if this has been asked already. What is your opinion of Fulmer and Boyd from Detroit? And what would a possible trade look like? AA prospects?
    Has not been asked -- this year. Has been asked before. Boyd is interesting. Fulmer always seems to be on the verge of being traded somewhere, based on reports. Have not really heard their names come up here in the past 48-72 hours, though. Give it time.
    Do you see Carlson in danger of being compromised by aggressive shifting? He seems to pull everything left of center when batting left handed? Thanks. Paul
    Worth watching, for sure. For this year. As a hitter, he won't be foiled for long by it.
    Do you find it difficult to accept fans' criticism of players when you personally know (and like) the player (or coach)? Does it change your approach to discussing their failures or successes?
    Nope. As long as your fair and professional, that's what they should expect. That's all I promise. All that changes my discussion of failures or success is that I do keep in mind that they're human. And there are times -- rare times, you hope -- when there is something going on in a player or coaches world that requires being human first. 
    Also, I know them professionally. So it's easy to set the standard -- be fair, be professional, and be those things consistently. I learned that long ago from wise mentors. Don't vary. Promise professionalism and stick with it. Very few players do I know personally, just even fewer take the time to know me personally.  
    I took a peak at the 2007 Cardinals roster, and I think I actively shuddered when my eyes landed on Kip Wells.
    True story: Was taking care of my infant son when that press conference was hastily called to announce the signings of Kip Wells and Adam Kennedy. Had to race to cover it. No time to do anything but try to do my best and ask for the patience as I attended with an infant on my shoulder and a hope in my heart that he wouldn't cry. Talk about professional, right? News doesn't care if you have a babysitter.
    I believe it was Adam Kennedy that pointed out I had throw up all over my shoulder as I asked a question.
    Good times.
    Imagine this team without Arenado. They would be the Rockies. Meanwhile Shildt's slapping butts for a good effort. And pro athletes wonder why they're despised. Mind showing some effort for $5M a year?
    This is falling on deaf ears here, sorry. I don't get it. I suppose you mean to insult professionals with one of the worst things to say about them, so go on. Easy from anonymity.
    If 40,000 people and another hundred thousand at home paid to watch me type, I'd expect to be compensated accordingly for the entertainment, and if I had to do it 8 hours a day for 183 a year, I would hope my typos aren't considered a "lack of effort."
    But that's just me.
    Do you think MLB made a mistake scheduling these extended streaks of games with no off days after last year’s short season ?
    Nope. I'm not sure how they could have done it differently. I guess they could have assigned certain seven-inning doubleheaders. That would have done it. That was discussed. But, you know, ticket sales, revenues, money, yadda yadda.
    Many sports have rules against certain defensive or offensive formations/sets. Would baseball putting rules on the shift really be such a radical thing?
    It would not be radical. It would be foolish, cosmetic, and against the history and spirit of the game. 
    But it would not be radical.
    With all the same 3 injuries most players are having is the weight training gotten way out of hand? We never use to here of most of these injuries.,
    Part of why we didn't see these injuries before is because we didn't have names for these injuries before. Or, the tech wasn't detailed enough to find these injuries before. There are injuries identified and uncovered and viewed today that 15 years ago didn't exist. When I started on the hockey beat, it was a few years after players had groin injuries that were later described as hockey hernias, and then sports hernias, and now they're known to be a tearing of the abdominal wall. Not the groin at all. Not specific to hockey. And should be treated as such. Thanks science!
    Same with obliques. And for PRP injections. And for flexor strains, and calcifications like the one uncovered in Mikolas' arm. Or a few years ago when it took both modern tech and doctor savvy to determine what injury was gripping Kyle Lohse's forearm. Years earlier, he would have kept pitching until an injury developed that was, you know, easier to spot. 
    I tore my intercostal once playing in that World Record Baseball Game. Could barely breathe. Struck out to end the event. Wheezing. But, hey, at least I learned what an intercostal was, and the difference between that an oblique strain. Fun times.
    All words that you wont' find in injury reports 25 years ago.
  • No one is "untouchable" so Bader, Sosa, DeJung will be in play trade wise.
    Of course they will be. The question will anyone be interested.
    "Destiny is a good thing to accept when it's going your way. When it isn't, don't call it destiny; call it injustice, treachery, or simple bad luck."
    Joseph Heller
    Catch-22 may be the most incredible, impressive writing I've ever read.
    I realize it's a different sport, but I'm curious as to your perspective on the Naomi Osaka mess at the French Open.
    The freedom to speak is also the freedom not to speak.
    That's how I've always felt.
    I respect the right an individual has to choose not to talk and to accept the fines, etc., that go with that based on the requirement of the employer, tournament, league, event sponsor, etc. I also would advocate on behalf of the benefit of speaking. It allows for the person to answer questions directly and not turn the narrative wheel over to the public or the media. 
    I welcome the conversation this has brought to sports about mental health. It's important. And that goes within the walls of baseball, too.
    I am most bothered by some of the fellow journalists who misrepresented what sportswriters do, what press conferences are actually like, or, in some cases, sportswriters journalistic bona fides. 
    Media literacy is really important, and we don't do ourselves or our readers any favors when we misrepresent another discipline in our industry, another section of the same newspaper. I invited that dialogue on Twitter. Alas, I was not taken up on it.
    As I said on Twitter, I can only speak from my experience about the benefit of access, what press conferences are like, when I've walked out of them and why or not gone at all. I do my best to be honest with readers and chatters about how the job is done -- and I would be honest with colleagues too -- but only from my perspective of being a beat writer for the NHL, NBA, MLB, and major college football and covering sports now for a daily paper for now almost 28 years. It's up to them to decide what that means.
    Just wanted to point out that there was only 1 out when winker came up in the 9th. Either way I don’t think he should’ve been pitched around. Reyes just shouldn’t have been throwing his 3rd best pitch with 2 strikes.
    Correct. The pitch wasn't executed. The strategy was.
    Has anyone actually asked Mo, Schildt, etc., what they will do to fix the current mess? Understanding the problem and offering explanations is easy, but actually executing a firm plan to fix things is hard. So what's the plan?
  • Every day, yes. That is what we ask. Often we're more specific. We identify the issue and then ask about that specific issue. Walks for example. Pitching for example. And so on. I urge you to take a look at the coverage over the past 14 days in Post-Dispatch because it covers all of these issues and their answers far better than I can type into a short answer here in the chat.
    The issues are myriad. The answers are there. The plan is explained.
    Warning: You may not agree.
    Of the Cardinals current 40 man, at the deadline, who is most likely to be traded and for what type of return.
    I have no clue. Sorry. That's partially because the Cardinals don't know either.
    With all the injuries in MLB, is it time to expand the 40 man roster to 42 or 45? What are the pros and cons? What organizations would benefit?
    No. I completely understand the question. It would be better to expand the active roster first, not the 40-man roster. The 40-man roster is really more about protecting a players chances of moving up, as much as it is about depth and organization. A player is only permitted so many years in the minors before he must be protected on the 40-man roster. (This is the Rule 5 draft.) If unprotected, that player can move to another organization and be protected. Player movement is the goal. Once a player is on the 40-man roster, the clock starts ticking toward running out of options. That encourages a player's movement up. Same thing. Player upward movement is the goal. You ask for pros and cons, the pros would not be the sudden depth to cover injuries. They can always use the 60-day IL for that. The cons would be more players in the open market, cast off of rosters and unprotected, and a crowded Rule 5 where the supply would really outrun the demand, and the goal of the 40-man roster would, to encourage upward movement of players, would influence the market. Or lead to some players just loitering through a peak year on the 44-man roster -- protected but unused.
    How about a DeJong for Story trade? Is that a ridiculous trade?
Powered by Platform for Live Reporting, Events, and Social Engagement