Join baseball writer Derrick Goold for his live Cardinals chat from the Winter Meetings
Bring your Cards questions and comments to Monday’s 11 a.m. live chat.
-
He is. He has already met with some interested teams (though not in person). And he is getting interest from teams as a left-handed hitting DH and part-time first baseman. There sure does seem to be a match, in of all places, Texas. So, yeah, he's going to play in 2023, and he's going to get a compelling offer from a team. -
Having more left-handed bats has been mentioned as a goal for the Cardinals this year. One name frequently brought up in trade talks for a catcher (particularly Toronto) has been Lars Nootbar. If the Cards want more balance from the left side of the plate, why would they consider trading one of their better left-handed bats? I understand teams have to give up good players to get good players, but that seems more like "robbing Peter to pay Paul" Thanks for taking my question. -
-
Going to keep asking since my question has not been asked by other and hoping this gets through the cue. Any chance you can clarify what the Cardinals thinking is when they hand on the outskirts of a market like this year with starting pitching and shortstop. What are they looking for to get engaged fully outside due diligence checking in.
-
-
To see if there's a value play. Shorter years. Maybe a higher average salary. A shortstop who hasn't found the market he expected and all of those seats are filled. Last year, you might recall that Carlos Correa signed a deal with Minnesota. The Cardinals would like to be in the same position Minnesota was to make a move like that -- though Correa had the opt-out, etc., that shortened his deal. But that's why. They've done that before. They'll do it again. It's one of the things the Cardinals and several handful of other teams do -- stay in tune with a market, see what talent is left with the big spending settles, and see if there's a shorter deal to be had for top talent that is mutually benefiicial.
-
DG, I always felt the value of Yadi was not at then plate, but behind it. I am often surprised at the disdain at the concept of "calling a game" and knowing the pitchers. Of the top three catching trade candidates for the Cardinals, can you provide some insight as to how they rank on that front?
Thanks and happy holidays. -
Christian Vazquez has an excellent reputation for calling games, and obviously got a lot of attention/credit with the no-hitter in the World Series. He's shepherded young pitchers and established pitchers through postseason. Murphy has a solid rep for a young catcher, and he's only going to improve with experience, that's the consensus. Zunino, Narvaez have solid reps for calling games, and Narvaez is appealing to multiple teams looking for catchers/game-calling catchers. Contreras is less heralded for how he manages a game.
-
Isn't Bryan Reynolds whom you'd hope Carlson can be? So why not trade Carlson + Liberatore + another arm for Reynolds? Is that enough? Instead of hoping Carlson turns into Reynolds, just go get Reynolds. Then trade Gorman + Woodford + McGreevy? for Murphy, sign Quintana to flip Montgomery and call it an offseason.
-
Bryan Reynolds would be a great fit for the Cardinals -- and about 20 other teams. But, yes, a solid fit for the Cardinals, a player they'd like to acquire, extend, and do the Cardinals thing by calling him a fixture for years to come.Why not do that trade? Well, it's not enough. Those aren't the names that are driving a lot of trade requests from the Cardinals. Carlson does, for some teams, but not all. Gorman does for several teams. And then you're talking about the lower-level, higher-ceiling players that are headed toward Class AAA and Class AA for 2023. What you suggest is not what it would take to get Reynolds. I appreciate that you're in the right direction in terms of years of control, stacking those up into the 10, 15, 20 area in exchange for three guaranteed years for Reynolds.McGreevy and Woodford is a compelling tandem there in the A's scenario.Flip Montgomery for ... who? Just for kicks?
-
Note to Mo.
Mets, Braves, Dodgers, Padres and Phillies are standing in our way to the world series and the Mets just added Verlander. We will win the central. Our injury prone starting rotation needs help. Our hitting needs 2 more big bats. We need a catcher with a bat. You can build the bullpen with some of the starting pitchers you replace with better & less injury problems.
Mo, lets get to work at the winter meeting. Thank you. -
-
-
Discussed earlier -- none going at the moment, that I know of. Gallegos got his done. Edman is on deck for a discussion with the Cardinals, and that is something to watch in spring training. Edman is definitely one to watch, especially if he gets the Wong/Craig/DeJong-type extension. He's up for that conversation. As mentioned earlier, Montgomery will be interesting, and there's going to be a chat with Mikolas at some point.
-
-
-
-
-
Only what I've already written. Not much except the fact that going two years with some of the best shortstops available and a position that versatile ... well, the Cardinals will have to retire the "opportunistic" quote if they just off stage and watch the show without getting involved.
-
If the league is moving towards robo umps in just a few short years, how much does it shift the defensive focus on framing metrics vs pop time and throw velocity for catchers? With the changes to encourage more base stealing, won't the robo umps wipe out any gains made if the catchers don't have to worry about framing and can just sell out to make throws to nab runners?
-
Quite a bit -- it definitely shifts for teams to prioritize arm strength and the bat when it comes to catcher and not factor in the new-age metrics of pitch framing, etc. If the automated strike zone is going to call the games, then the elasticity of the strike one created by a gifted catcher is going to be ... nonexistent. That is on the mind of some teams, and I recently talked to the Cardinals about this, and they still said that calling games, controlling running game, and other defense-first skills will be prominent with catchers, so the shift won't be tectonic. Just one less facet that has to be sharp, so a few more catchers to consider.
-
-
-
Hey DG, you have mentioned previously, the Cardinals would not mind Winn or a high profile shortstop moving to second base if Winn is good enough to warrant that move. If that is their thinking does it say more about how they view Tommy Edman at 2nd or Nolan Gorman? Thanks for hosting these chats while at the winter meetings!
-
-
What I'm trying to say this: Production will find playing time. Produce. Play. And the more versatile the fielder, the more ways a team has to move players around to get the best producers on the field. There is a way for all of the players you mention to fit on the same field if they're all producing. Gorman could be in left field. Edman could be at 2B. Winn could be in center or shortstop or second. I don't see how any of the players mentioned would be blocked from playing time with the Cardinals if they're producing enough to be everyday players.
-
-
-
-
It does not seem likely, no. Carpenter is getting interest from other teams. There are going to be better fits out there for him, and let's just be quite candid: He's been to Busch Stadium. He's seen how his production/swing plays there, and he knows how it ends. There are better options and fits for him, and a reunion at this point just does not seem likely.
-
-
-
During the chase for Soto the Cardinals had a series in DC. Mo was seen on camera shaking hands with the Nats GM. Commentators at the time thought a deal may have been struck, which later proved false. So the speculation turned to Mo and the Nats playing other teams. If true, why would Mo (or any other GM) do that?
-
Do what? Shake hands? Professional courtesy. They met in person (more than once that weekend, as reported in the Post-Dispatch). They talked about trading for Soto. They did not come to an agreement. There is some thought that the Cardinals were being positioned as the team involved to drive a higher return from San Diego. There may have been some theater to the camera finding both of them talking during a game, broadcasting that meeting, and seeing if someone in San Diego was watching. Sure. But at no point in time was it ever relayed to anyone there or in conversations with the two parties that the handshake was some sort of agreement in place.It was a handshake at the end of a discussion between two executives, one of whom was about to get on the road after the series.I've seen executives exchange handshakes all morning here in San Diego.No deals have been struck.What am I missing in this question?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-