We got Fedde from the White Sox in a 3-team trade.
So we got a cheaper version of Kyle Gibson, who we ended up declining the option on. Without Fedde, we probably pick up Gibson's option.
In other words, we got salary relief. We saved about $4 million on our #2 SP and saved another $6 million or so on our UTIL player (or 2b, since we'll probably put Gorman there again).
But really, it just doesn't matter much. We were going to waste the guy putting him in CF for a mediocre ballclub so he could go out there and be about the same as Siani offensively and worse defensively.
Edman's a great player for a smart, competitive team to have. Which is to say he's simply out of place on this club. [Reply]
Originally Posted by George Liquor:
Gotta remember, baseball isn't very profitable for the Dewallets, they're actually just doing us a favor by owning this team.
Yeah, if they won't even pick up Gibson's option, you can take them out of the mix for any veteran SP. And I'd like to think they've learned their lesson about spending money on swing-men.
So any journey into FA may be for some kind of 1b or corner OF option, but that's probably going to mean overpaying for someone like Santander and they're not going to do that either.
Maybe you see them bring in someone like Joc Pederson to platoon with Walker? Or Carlos Santana to share time with Burleson or Gorman as a DH/1b?
And really, the only reason you do that is if the market doesn't come together for them and you get them as a pump and dump candidate. [Reply]
I sure hope that I am wrong but don't see my beloved Cardinals competing in the playoffs for many years. I just hope that we can make some kind of meaningful run again in my lifetime. For now, I have the Chiefs so just hanging my hat on the run we've had there. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marco Polo:
I sure hope that I am wrong but don't see my beloved Cardinals competing in the playoffs for many years. I just hope that we can make some kind of meaningful run again in my lifetime. For now, I have the Chiefs so just hanging my hat on the run we've had there.
Eh - playoffs are fairly easy to make these days. Just don't actively suck at your job and in a league where 1/2 the teams DO, you should be okay.
I mean it's not like winning 90 games should be all that difficult with 1/3 of the NL being a shitshow more years than not.
With competent leadership, the team will compete for the playoffs in as few as 2-3 years.
But to actually win anything meaningful? Eh, that really does feel like it will require a change in ownership. I mean, lets say we HAD Soto - is there any chance at all that this team would pay to keep him? I mean if Pujols would've emerged as a fully formed superstar in 2016 instead of 2000, is there any doubt at all that he'd be playing somewhere else right now? This ownership group wouldn't have thrown out Ohtani figures to retain him. I mean shit, Harper was too rich for them and his contract is NOTHING in today's landscape.
And the issue is term. It's always been term with DeWitt. Had Pujols not taken a 7 year deal the first time we extended him, that simply doesn't get done. If he insists on 10, he walks in 2007 when he's FA eligible coming off the WS championship.
But Pujols, Edmonds, Molina and Carpenter all loved playing for LaRussa (don't ask me why). So deals got done so they could stick around and that was the core of those teams.
I have no idea how this team would ever keep a genuine difference making talent should they somehow stumble into one. They're not going to keep up with the market and they're not going to get any sort of hometown discount anymore. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Eh - playoffs are fairly easy to make these days. Just don't actively suck at your job and in a league where 1/2 the teams DO, you should be okay.
I mean it's not like winning 90 games should be all that difficult with 1/3 of the NL being a shitshow more years than not.
With competent leadership, the team will compete for the playoffs in as few as 2-3 years.
But to actually win anything meaningful? Eh, that really does feel like it will require a change in ownership. I mean, lets say we HAD Soto - is there any chance at all that this team would pay to keep him? I mean if Pujols would've emerged as a fully formed superstar in 2016 instead of 2000, is there any doubt at all that he'd be playing somewhere else right now? This ownership group wouldn't have thrown out Ohtani figures to retain him. I mean shit, Harper was too rich for them and his contract is NOTHING in today's landscape.
And the issue is term. It's always been term with DeWitt. Had Pujols not taken a 7 year deal the first time we extended him, that simply doesn't get done. If he insists on 10, he walks in 2007 when he's FA eligible coming off the WS championship.
But Pujols, Edmonds, Molina and Carpenter all loved playing for LaRussa (don't ask me why). So deals got done so they could stick around and that was the core of those teams.
I have no idea how this team would ever keep a genuine difference making talent should they somehow stumble into one. They're not going to keep up with the market and they're not going to get any sort of hometown discount anymore.
Its going to be many a long winters for our team.:-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by oldandslow:
They think they can be the Rays. But truth be told the Rays have never won the whole thing either. Money wins, more often than not.
That's probably what we're looking at but with the hope that we can occasionally add a bigger ticket shorter term FA that may give us the nudge over the top that TB never got.
But part of that will be a cycle of rebuild/reload/compete. Because this just isn't a team that's ever going to be in the market for a mid 20s superstar. They're going to continue to look at someone in his early 30s who they can maybe get for 6 years (most being decline years) as opposed to having to commit to 10+.
Look at this FA market as an example. IF the Cardinals were trying to be competitive, they wouldn't be in on Juan Soto or even Corbin Burnes. They might look at Santander, Walker or Nate Eovaldi. And what they'd end up with when they get sticker shock on those guys is someone like Luis Severino or Teoscar Hernandez.
Because Soto is going to require 12-14 years. Burnes will require 6-8. That 2nd tier of older, less capable players will get 4-6 as a position player and 3-4 as a SP.
They're so hung up on risk that they won't chase blue chippers and they'll ignore aging curves.
I don't think those are Mozeliak decisions - never have been. Those are ownership decisions. And the DeWitt group simply doesn't have the appetite for the risk required to get the level of player they once could. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Ocotillo:
3B Nolan Arenado, SS Masyn Winn and UT Brandon Donovan find out tonight if they are Gold Glove winners at 7:30 p.m. CST.
