Join baseball writer Derrick Goold for his live Cardinals chat at 11 a.m. Monday
Bring your Cards questions and comments to Monday’s 11 a.m. live chat.
-
I think you make a good point. There is one area of amateur acquisition where the Cardinals can compete with the major spenders regardless of where they finish. If they stay true to their business model they won't pick in the top 15 of the first round, ever, and they shouldn't pick in the top 20, or you could argue even in the top 25. But those limits are in place right now when it comes to pursuing the top international talent. If there's a place where the Cardinals could bid on amateur talent without the restraints of the standings, then it's the international market. They'll point to the fact that they have not done as well with that higher-bonus talent and that their better success has been in the mid tier with numbers and development. They'll be judged by their results, and they're ... middle of the pack. It's an area where they could aim higher. -
-
-
Follow up to the Sean Murphy trade question - your point is well taken about how the market evolved. I guess the question is, do you think the Cardinals should have been willing to trade Donovan and/or Nootbar, as has been reported was the core of the ask? They have depth at both middle infield and outfield, and that move would have left them with more spending room to make another substantial addition...what do you think of the probability that hypothetical route would have resulted in a stronger team today?
-
-
I do not. Going into the winter, I thought that the Cardinals could make a move for Murphy that would not have commanded that return, more in terms of what Atlanta gave up. The asking price was high for the Cardinals. At one point time there were several other teams involved, and that included the Marlins. Clearly the A's were able to use the competitive bidding to hike the ask -- until one of the loudest bidders just bowed out and went for the free agent.
-
-
I worry about DeWitt's desire to continue to build "good" teams. From 2007-2010, in Albert's prime, they rode "good" teams to 1 playoff appearance with zero playoff wins and that was coming off on a WS win. And if you look at it, attendance began to slowly erode over each season (still north of 3.3m). Good is enemy of great, right?
-
That was the era of the team changing its business model, shifting from the prospects for trades to the prospects for contention, and that then arrived in 2011 somewhat and a lot in 2013, especially on the pitching staff.We're seeing a similar stretch now with model that the standings/market/October is saying needs to adapt.
-
-
I cannot write an article based on your suspicions. I treat the ballot like I treat an article. If I can write in the newspaper that a player is connected to PEDs, or I can attribute the report or my own reporting that they used, then I can take that into account when it comes to the ballot. When comes to my vote, I have to go with what I can prove publicly. Signing my ballot is like putting a byline on it and I feel -- and this is my own opinion -- that it is dishonest for me as a reporter to use your suspicion or other's suspicion to inform my ballot when I cannot do the same for an article.Sheffield admitted his use. He was not suspended. He detailed his use. Those would be good stories and comments for you to read, and to know the context in which they were given -- during an investigation and testimony.Alex Rodriguez tested positive and was suspended by MLB. The rules weren't secret.
-
-
-
You have written that Helsley was discussed as part of a potential trade with Jays for a catcher. I can understand the Jays asking, but can't understand the Cardinals entertaining that idea. Obviously, that deal didn't happen. I think the Cardinals may be a dominant late inning pitcher short as it is depending on Cabrera's return to form and Hicks next season. My question is whether this was a deal breaker for the Cardinals or moving him was something they actually would have done?
-
-
I never got the sense that was a "deal-breaker" for the Cardinals. Toronto was seeking a late-game reliever, closer, and Helsley is obviously one of the best. The Cardinals were interested in talking teams off the Nootbaar ask and if there were Walker asks, that wasn't going anywhere. They were more likely to entertain a conversation about a reliever who they did not have signed longterm if they could get a strong package in return. They know the volatility of that position. They also know the value of a player under control within that role. So they would have to get that value in return. What I don't know -- and that's just because sources didn't not describe the four steps after such a conversation -- is if the Cardinals had an related move planned, say, for a free-agent reliever? That would have been possible at that point, too. That said, it didn't go very far. Toronto had interest. The Cardinals at least at the conversation. They weren't rushing to make that move. They signed a free agent.
-
Has Randy Flores' excellent track record altered the team's calculus when it comes to player acquisition? For instance, are they less likely to sign a guy with a QO because, under Flores, that draft pick is even more valuable or is the dollar amount attached to that draft pick the same as it was prior to him taking over the draft?
-
They just signed a player with a qualifying offer for the first time since the last time they signed a former Cub as a free agent. It's a rare move for the Cardinals and it's entirely based on their value of that draft pick. They laud Flores' success. They trust how they value picks. Their reluctance to sign a QO player is more rooted in the latter -- the dollar figure they put on that pick -- than based on what they trust Flores can get for that pick. It hasn't changed. But that's not any commentary on Flores. He's done well in the role and is a rising presence in the front office -- sure seems to be headed toward leading a baseball operations team at some point in his career.
-
-
-
News of interest to you:
Chip Caray could replace Dan McLaughlin on Cardinals telecasts
STLtoday.comNative St. Louisan Caray is a longtime baseball broadcaster who has been calling Atlanta Braves games. -
-
-
-
-
Well, let's start with the fact that writers rarely call themselves by their title. Those are all jobs they're hired to do, and it's the newspaper or media outlet that determines their title based on their job and responsibilities. There was a time when the lead sports columnist at a paper was also the sports editor, and Bob Broeg went by both titles as well as baseball writer when he was at the Post-Dispatch.I am a beat writer. I am tasked with covering a beat. That means providing coverage of news, analysis of the news, seeking out stories that are both immediate and enterprise, and also assuring that readers get an explanation from the team. That does mean using their quotes and reporting to explain their moves/choices, while also offering context so readers can evaluate them and have informed opinions. We do signal stories that are more analytical from the beat writers -- such a the stories that have my name in the headline when I write it or stories that appear under the tagline "On Hockey" or "On Baseball," etc.Matthew DeFranks, Dave Matter, Jim Thomas, Tom Timmernann, Lynn Worthy, and Daniel Guerrero are also beat writers in the sports department at the Post-Dispatch.Beat reporter is a synonym for that role at our newspaper.Jeff Gordon, Benjamin Hochman, and Ben Frederickson are our general sports columnists at the paper. They offer opinions and touch on a wider variety of topics, and they offer their views on things -- advocating for action, for an opinion, for change. That's the role of a columnist and the voice that the newspaper asks from a columnist.I'm not familiar with the phrase "opinion contributors."The opinion page or Editorial page is on the newside and it is a group of writers who present opinions and defend them. Tony Messenger is our Pulitzer Prize-winning metro columnist. And Joe Holleman is writing a political column. Both express their opinions in their writing.Should beat writers get a vote? I'm going to say yes because I continue to vote and I approach it like a beat writer. I vote for what I can prove. My personal opinion on the player can be disproven by research or validated by research.If you have any further questions on this, or wish for a more detailed description please ask.
-
Correct me if I’m wrong. But it seems to me like the Cardinals are more engaged in the relief/swingman market than the starters market, at least as of now. Also, do they plan on further addressing the offense? Maybe a bargain type move for Josh Harrison? Thoughts?
-
Not much movement there, not when I've asked around about Harrison or other similar players on the position side. The Cardinals have not hid from the fact that they would explore adding some pitching depth as spring approached -- and that would likely be as a reliever or swingman. Heck, they've had a few free agents not all that interested in that role when they could start elsewhere. So, it's still on their mind if they get the right pitcher who cannot find a spot of his liking as the music winds down and spring starts.
-
-
-
Thanks for the chat, DG.
Re illegal PEDs and Hall Of Fame voting. Here's how I'd do it, if I had a vote. I very recently served on a jury for a civil suit. And as most of your readers know, Derrick, a civil suit has a burden of proof much lower than a criminal case. The jury is instructed to choose according to "a preponderance of the evidence." In other words, 51/49 rather than Beyond Reasonable Doubt.
So if I had a Hall vote, I would simply say, would I be more comfortable betting my life that the player was using illegal PED's, or would I prefer to bet my life that he did *not*. Simple as that. So of course Clemens, A-Rod, Bonds, Big Mac, Sammy Sosa, Piazza and Pudge Rodriguez, et. al., would be out. And for me, Rolen, Abreu, Helton, and Andruw Jones would be in, among others. -
I appreciate the explanation. The preponderance of evidence is a strong place to start with a decision. The way you describe it -- leaping to your life being decided by it? -- is a difficult standard to maintain. I think we all become more conservative when our life is on the line.
-
-
To be clear, I did not report there were two candidates or that it was narrowed down to two because that was not information I could confirm or how it was described to me at all. Earlier in the chat I wrote what I knew at the time. What I know now is different thanks to my colleague's reporting and the continuing reporting at the Post-Dispatch.
-
-
-
Not as many as should be. I enjoy Olney's podcast with ESPN. I do listen to FanGraphs' podcasts, Effectively Wild and FanGraphs Audio, and I really found them invaluable as I thought through my Hall of Fame ballot. Is Seeing Red a competitor for Best Podcast in Baseball? Or is it a cousin, seeing as BPIB founder Bernie Miklasz is co-host of Seeing Red with Will Leitch. He and I were both "Special to the Post-Dispatch" at one point. I'm still at the Post-Dispatch, lost the special on the byline. He's a bestselling author. I enjoy hearing their challenges to the thinking and covering of the Cardinals.
-
-
-
-
At the moment, they cannot offer him the role that he wants. He wants to start. That's going to be there for him somewhere else. And that's that situation right now. There is no guarantee of starting for him with the Cardinals. No guarantee that he won't be the seventh in line, either.
-
I'm not in favor of a Mikolas or Montgomery extension, my feeling is that Matz should be the middle point of your rotation, youth should fill the two spots behind him, a long-term deal should occupy the #1 spot and a short-term high AAV should be your 1-B picther. Having 4 mid-rotation pitchers, who can flash at times, is not the blueprint for a World Series. We've seen that in the last 20 years.
-
The last 20 years includes the Cardinals going into a World Series with Jeff Weaver as the No. 2 starter. He was acquired in a trade on July 5 as the Angels sought to remove him from the roster. (Terry Evans!) So ... uh ... I think we have in the past 20 years. Just less so recently.
-
Hey, Derrick. Please forgive my long-windedness, good scribe.
I'm not crazy about the Redbird rotation, but I look at this year's bullpen candidates and am pretty darn comfortable with the view. Helsley, Gallegos, Pallante (2.35 ERA in relief), Packy Naughton (3.24 in relief), Hicks, Stratton (2.78 with St. Louis), Genesis Cabrera, Dakota Hudson, Zack Thompson (0.91 in relief), JoJo Romero, and Jake Woodford. (Since September 1st, 2021, only 8 MLB relievers have thrown as many innings as Jake Woodford, with a lower ERA. Only 10 have a lower FIP, for the nerds out there.) And there's Jake Walsh and Freddy Pacheco waiting in the wings. Overall, I'd say that is exceptional depth.
The ZiPS projection system at Fangraphs agrees. It has ranked 27 bullpens so far this offseason, and the Cards currently rate #3 -- and #1 among last year's playoff teams! So why on earth would anyone in his right mind suggest Gordon Graceffo head to the Redbird pen, rather than the Triple-A rotation? This year's bullpen is already quite solid, probably elite. The rotation on the other hand *desperately* needs arms for 2024 and beyond. Graceffo should be learning his craft, his *starting* craft, in the minors, as Wainwright did (45 AAA starts) and Lance Lynn did (also 45 starts in AAA) and Jake Woodford did (55 AAA starts). Thanks for letting me vent, DG! -