Which has been the REAL problem?

[JuanAgosto]

Did DeWitt tie the front office's hands with payroll demands that were unrealistic in building a winner?
Or did Mozeliak just suck at building legitimate roster?

Was it DeWitt being cheap? Was it Mozeliak being a putz?

I'm asking a serious question. Who was the REAL problem?

[45s]

Some roster decisions not based on building the best roster to win…

That suggests Dewitt ‘s marketing department…

[ecleme22]

Did DeWitt tie the front office's hands with payroll demands that were unrealistic in building a winner?
Or did Mozeliak just suck at building legitimate roster?

Was it DeWitt being cheap? Was it Mozeliak being a putz?

I'm asking a serious question. Who was the REAL problem?

Either scenario leads back to Mo.

Case in point: the Fowler signing or the Ozuna trade have nothing to do with tightening payroll.

[Cranny]

Did DeWitt tie the front office's hands with payroll demands that were unrealistic in building a winner?
Or did Mozeliak just suck at building legitimate roster?

Was it DeWitt being cheap? Was it Mozeliak being a putz?

I'm asking a serious question. Who was the REAL problem?

Either scenario leads back to Mo.

Case in point: the Fowler signing or the Ozuna trade have nothing to do with tightening payroll.

The Ozuna trade was actually a good trade as lauded by many on CT. No one on here had a problem with it at the time. The Cardinals traded 4 minor league prospects for a MOTO bat who had slashed .312/.376/.548/.924 in 2017 with Miami. He had 37 home runs and 124 RBI. Was 26 years old and an All Star in both 2016 and 2017.

[ecleme22]

Did DeWitt tie the front office's hands with payroll demands that were unrealistic in building a winner?
Or did Mozeliak just suck at building legitimate roster?

Was it DeWitt being cheap? Was it Mozeliak being a putz?

I'm asking a serious question. Who was the REAL problem?

Either scenario leads back to Mo.

Case in point: the Fowler signing or the Ozuna trade have nothing to do with tightening payroll.

The Ozuna trade was actually a good trade as lauded by many on CT. No one on here had a problem with it at the time. The Cardinals traded 4 minor league prospects for a MOTO bat who had slashed .312/.376/.548/.924 in 2017 with Miami. He had 37 home runs and 124 RBI. Was 26 years old and an All Star in both 2016 and 2017.

You: "CT liked it."
Me: Who cares? CTers have no insights into players.

You: Ozuna had .924 OPS in 2017.
Me: Yeah, and look at his stats in previous years. He ended his Marlins tenure w a .786 OPS. So he was obviously playing above his weight.

But even if Ozuna was the real deal. You are trading two really good cost controlled arms for a two year rental.

It all comes down to talent evaluation...

[Cardinals4Life]

Did DeWitt tie the front office's hands with payroll demands that were unrealistic in building a winner?
Or did Mozeliak just suck at building legitimate roster?

Was it DeWitt being cheap? Was it Mozeliak being a putz?

I'm asking a serious question. Who was the REAL problem?

Either scenario leads back to Mo.

Case in point: the Fowler signing or the Ozuna trade have nothing to do with tightening payroll.

The Ozuna trade was actually a good trade as lauded by many on CT. No one on here had a problem with it at the time. The Cardinals traded 4 minor league prospects for a MOTO bat who had slashed .312/.376/.548/.924 in 2017 with Miami. He had 37 home runs and 124 RBI. Was 26 years old and an All Star in both 2016 and 2017.

You: "CT liked it."
Me: Who cares? CTers have no insights into players.

You: Ozuna had .924 OPS in 2017.
Me: Yeah, and look at his stats in previous years. He ended his Marlins tenure w a .786 OPS. So he was obviously playing above his weight.

But even if Ozuna was the real deal. You are trading two really good cost controlled arms for a two year rental.

It all comes down to talent evaluation...

Ozuna wasn't a terrible player for the Cardinals and he's had some good years after he left as well. The problem was he was lazy and a thug and not the lind of guy the Cardinals wanted to keep around. That was the mistake. If you're going to give away talent for a player, you had better be certain he is a guy you want to extend. Ozuna wasn't.

They were also one bat short that year. Same as most years under the late Mozeliak years. They never finished their rosters fully - always leaving a gaping hole or too many question marks heading into the season.

[ecleme22]

Did DeWitt tie the front office's hands with payroll demands that were unrealistic in building a winner?
Or did Mozeliak just suck at building legitimate roster?

Was it DeWitt being cheap? Was it Mozeliak being a putz?

I'm asking a serious question. Who was the REAL problem?

Either scenario leads back to Mo.

Case in point: the Fowler signing or the Ozuna trade have nothing to do with tightening payroll.

The Ozuna trade was actually a good trade as lauded by many on CT. No one on here had a problem with it at the time. The Cardinals traded 4 minor league prospects for a MOTO bat who had slashed .312/.376/.548/.924 in 2017 with Miami. He had 37 home runs and 124 RBI. Was 26 years old and an All Star in both 2016 and 2017.

You: "CT liked it."
Me: Who cares? CTers have no insights into players.

You: Ozuna had .924 OPS in 2017.
Me: Yeah, and look at his stats in previous years. He ended his Marlins tenure w a .786 OPS. So he was obviously playing above his weight.

But even if Ozuna was the real deal. You are trading two really good cost controlled arms for a two year rental.

It all comes down to talent evaluation...

Ozuna wasn't a terrible player for the Cardinals and he's had some good years after he left as well. The problem was he was lazy and a thug and not the lind of guy the Cardinals wanted to keep around. That was the mistake. If you're going to give away talent for a player, you had better be certain he is a guy you want to extend. Ozuna wasn't.

They were also one bat short that year. Same as most years under the late Mozeliak years. They never finished their rosters fully - always leaving a gaping hole or too many question marks heading into the season.

Ozuna wasn't horrible.

What was horrible was his trade. If the Cards don't make that trade, the team from 2019-2024 would be so much different.

[Melville]

Some roster decisions not based on building the best roster to win…

That suggests Dewitt ‘s marketing department…

You get it.
As I have been saying for several years, under Mo (and at DeWitt's dictate), the Cardinals were not a baseball team with a marketing department.
They have been a marketing company with a baseball department.
We shall see if that changes under Bloom.

[Cranny]

Did DeWitt tie the front office's hands with payroll demands that were unrealistic in building a winner?
Or did Mozeliak just suck at building legitimate roster?

Was it DeWitt being cheap? Was it Mozeliak being a putz?

I'm asking a serious question. Who was the REAL problem?

Either scenario leads back to Mo.

Case in point: the Fowler signing or the Ozuna trade have nothing to do with tightening payroll.

The Ozuna trade was actually a good trade as lauded by many on CT. No one on here had a problem with it at the time. The Cardinals traded 4 minor league prospects for a MOTO bat who had slashed .312/.376/.548/.924 in 2017 with Miami. He had 37 home runs and 124 RBI. Was 26 years old and an All Star in both 2016 and 2017.

You: "CT liked it."
Me: Who cares? CTers have no insights into players.

You: Ozuna had .924 OPS in 2017.
Me: Yeah, and look at his stats in previous years. He ended his Marlins tenure w a .786 OPS. So he was obviously playing above his weight.

But even if Ozuna was the real deal. You are trading two really good cost controlled arms for a two year rental.

It all comes down to talent evaluation...

Sure does. MLB.com that year ranked Alcantara the 6th best prospect in the system and Gallen the 24th.

[ecleme22]

Did DeWitt tie the front office's hands with payroll demands that were unrealistic in building a winner?
Or did Mozeliak just suck at building legitimate roster?

Was it DeWitt being cheap? Was it Mozeliak being a putz?

I'm asking a serious question. Who was the REAL problem?

Either scenario leads back to Mo.

Case in point: the Fowler signing or the Ozuna trade have nothing to do with tightening payroll.

The Ozuna trade was actually a good trade as lauded by many on CT. No one on here had a problem with it at the time. The Cardinals traded 4 minor league prospects for a MOTO bat who had slashed .312/.376/.548/.924 in 2017 with Miami. He had 37 home runs and 124 RBI. Was 26 years old and an All Star in both 2016 and 2017.

You: "CT liked it."
Me: Who cares? CTers have no insights into players.

You: Ozuna had .924 OPS in 2017.
Me: Yeah, and look at his stats in previous years. He ended his Marlins tenure w a .786 OPS. So he was obviously playing above his weight.

But even if Ozuna was the real deal. You are trading two really good cost controlled arms for a two year rental.

It all comes down to talent evaluation...

Sure does. MLB.com that year ranked Alcantara the 6th best prospect in the system and Gallen the 24th.

Mo's worst trade of his tenure.

[JuanAgosto]

Did DeWitt tie the front office's hands with payroll demands that were unrealistic in building a winner?
Or did Mozeliak just suck at building legitimate roster?

Was it DeWitt being cheap? Was it Mozeliak being a putz?

I'm asking a serious question. Who was the REAL problem?

Either scenario leads back to Mo.

Case in point: the Fowler signing or the Ozuna trade have nothing to do with tightening payroll.

Interesting point. I'd like to have 10% of the bad contracts Mo handed out.

[An Old Friend]

Did DeWitt tie the front office's hands with payroll demands that were unrealistic in building a winner?
Or did Mozeliak just suck at building legitimate roster?

Was it DeWitt being cheap? Was it Mozeliak being a putz?

I'm asking a serious question. Who was the REAL problem?

Either scenario leads back to Mo.

Case in point: the Fowler signing or the Ozuna trade have nothing to do with tightening payroll.

The Ozuna trade was actually a good trade as lauded by many on CT. No one on here had a problem with it at the time. The Cardinals traded 4 minor league prospects for a MOTO bat who had slashed .312/.376/.548/.924 in 2017 with Miami. He had 37 home runs and 124 RBI. Was 26 years old and an All Star in both 2016 and 2017.

You: "CT liked it."
Me: Who cares? CTers have no insights into players.

You: Ozuna had .924 OPS in 2017.
Me: Yeah, and look at his stats in previous years. He ended his Marlins tenure w a .786 OPS. So he was obviously playing above his weight.

But even if Ozuna was the real deal. You are trading two really good cost controlled arms for a two year rental.

It all comes down to talent evaluation...

Mozeliak’s talent evaluation and spending decisions were both horrific AND he allowed the organization to fall behind developmentally.

He heavily pursued David Price but didn’t offer Scherzer
He tried to acquire Giancarlo Stanton but didn’t engage Bryce Harper
He’d pay back end starters but not front end. They weren’t in the conversation for either Kevin Gausman or Zach Wheeler, but paid Mike Leake, Miles Mikolas, Steven Matz… and gave up long reliever contracts to Cecil and Miller.

He was bad at his job and ownership enabled it.

[Whatashame]

We can talk about bad trades and bad FA signings all day long but the craziest decision made by the Cardinals was to cut back on coaching and development. I will never understand the thinking behind that. The Cardinals are a mid market team with limited resources. Their lifeblood has to be in drafting and development of young players then supplementing that with the occasional FA signing to take care of a need. A smart trade from time to time is a bonus.

To cut their own lifeline for any reason just befuddles me. Whose idea was that? Do I believe that BDW underfunds this team? You bet. We will never know how much because the owners have let a system get out of control because they are so protective of their true financial interests. We can guess, Forbes can guess, the Athletic can do articles, the WSJ can do stories but they are just guesses. Some may be more accurate than others but they are still just guesses.

The biggest roadblock to any CBA that would contain any cap/floor/revenue sharing would have to include the owners opening their books so everyone knows what the whole pie looks like. BDW tells us how baseball isn’t a very profitable industry but the guesstimates would show us different.

[WLTFE]

Did DeWitt tie the front office's hands with payroll demands that were unrealistic in building a winner?
Or did Mozeliak just suck at building legitimate roster?

Was it DeWitt being cheap? Was it Mozeliak being a putz?

I'm asking a serious question. Who was the REAL problem?

Either scenario leads back to Mo.

Case in point: the Fowler signing or the Ozuna trade have nothing to do with tightening payroll.

Interesting point. I'd like to have 10% of the bad contracts Mo handed out.

+1... he was terrible at every level and DeTwit kept him on board...his apologists can try and justify his legacy but the fans
were speaking loud and clear...

[mattmitchl44]

IMO, it was a lot of things:

(1) After the success of 2000-2015, it seems that ownership became fixated on continuing that level of success and directed the organizational focus away from the organizational infrastructure necessary to keep delivering high quality young talent to STL and toward patching the ML team. That led to the trading away of young talent (e.g., Gallen, Alcantara, etc.) for established players (e.g., Ozuna) and apparently to redirecting money that could/should have been spent on modernizing facilities, hiring instructors, etc. toward the ML team. Basically, they kept prioritizing "win now" even as them hollowed out the player development pipeline that would be so critical to maintaining their ability to compete.

(2) The FO made a number of bad decisions when it came to spending the money which had been allotted to the ML team. They signed (Fowler, Cecil, Miller, etc.) and extended (Carpenter, Mikolas, Molina, etc.) a number of players where the contracts did not work out in the team's favor. Dip into those waters enough times and any team is eventually going to roll snake eyes a few times. So whether those decisions were indicative of bad talent evaluation on the FO's part or just bad luck isn't completely clear. And some of those decisions, in particular the ones for early extensions for existing Cardinals players may have also been pushed by ownership to retain "fan favorites" from a marketing perspective rather than completely rational baseball decisions.

(3) The Cardinals had rocky period when it came to having the young talent they held onto (Oscar Tavares, Alex Reyes, Nolan Gorman, Jordan Walker, etc.) realize their potential for the ML team. That made the hollowing out of their minor league system due to trades for veteran players even more damaging to their long term success.

(4) Philosophically, the Cardinals haven't kept up with modern trends in baseball. For example, since 2018 Cardinals pitching ranks 29th in K/9 (ahead of only Colorado) and the offense 21st in ISO. In particular with the "pitch to contact" approach, there has seemingly been an organizational stubbornness to evolve and change. Maybe part of that has been because ownership failed to put the money into facilities like pitching labs which could have demonstrated the value and necessity of the organization changing its approach.

[sikeston bulldog2]

IMO, it was a lot of things:

(1) After the success of 2000-2015, it seems that ownership became fixated on continuing that level of success and directed the organizational focus away from the organizational infrastructure necessary to keep delivering high quality young talent to STL and toward patching the ML team. That led to the trading away of young talent (e.g., Gallen, Alcantara, etc.) for established players (e.g., Ozuna) and apparently to redirecting money that could/should have been spent on modernizing facilities, hiring instructors, etc. toward the ML team. Basically, they kept prioritizing "win now" even as them hollowed out the player development pipeline that would be so critical to maintaining their ability to compete.

(2) The FO made a number of bad decisions when it came to spending the money which had been allotted to the ML team. They signed (Fowler, Cecil, Miller, etc.) and extended (Carpenter, Mikolas, Molina, etc.) a number of players where the contracts did not work out in the team's favor. Dip into those waters enough times and any team is eventually going to roll snake eyes a few times. So whether those decisions were indicative of bad talent evaluation on the FO's part or just bad luck isn't completely clear. And some of those decisions, in particular the ones for early extensions for existing Cardinals players may have also been pushed by ownership to retain "fan favorites" from a marketing perspective rather than completely rational baseball decisions.

(3) The Cardinals had rocky period when it came to having the young talent they held onto (Oscar Tavares, Alex Reyes, Nolan Gorman, Jordan Walker, etc.) realize their potential for the ML team. That made the hollowing out of their minor league system due to trades for veteran players even more damaging to their long term success.

(4) Philosophically, the Cardinals haven't kept up with modern trends in baseball. For example, since 2018 Cardinals pitching ranks 29th in K/9 (ahead of only Colorado) and the offense 21st in ISO. In particular with the "pitch to contact" approach, there has seemingly been an organizational stubbornness to evolve and change. Maybe part of that has been because ownership failed to put the money into facilities like pitching labs which could have demonstrated the value and necessity of the organization changing its approach.

I actually read the whole thing. A nice write. All this trouble simply due to- bad signings thus rotting infrastructure. Or rotting infrastructure leading to bad signings/extentions.