Every Contender Could Use a Donovan

[Talkin' Baseball]

I agree 100% with the OP. No debate in my mind.

They should (and are I believe) marketing Donovan for prospects that might emerge as core players in 2-3 years.

What if, A. we don't get offered future core level prospects and/or B. they don't emerge? To me this is highly likely scenario. Prospects are so overrated by all parties these days that I'm pessimistic.

A) If you aren't offered future core level prospects (you will) you may consider keeping him. This is not a dumping situation. B) Therein lies the risk. You can never be sure top level prospects will pan out. Hence, Walker, Gorman...

[Carp4Cy]

Explain to me "why" it is not a good idea? You'd prefer to trade our arguably best player and trade chip for someone more controlled but unknown?

Because players almost never sign extensions in their walk year and the almost never sign with them after declaring free agency. It happens sometimes with the Guerrero's and Judge's of the world, but I can think of few other examples. You squander your best trade chip for a pitcher who may be great during one year of a rebuild.

It worked for Goldy, Rolen, Edmonds, McGwire, Holliday. The STL Cardinals are much better at trading for a Star or plus player then extending them than they are at signing a top player out of Free Agency.

Are there examples of players doing this in STL, or elsewhere in the past 5 years? That seems like a practice from the past that is rarely practiced anymore.

Goldy was fairly recent memory, and that contract just ended 13 months ago.

[AZ_Cardsfan]

I agree 100% with the OP. No debate in my mind.

They should (and are I believe) marketing Donovan for prospects that might emerge as core players in 2-3 years.

What if, A. we don't get offered future core level prospects and/or B. they don't emerge? To me this is highly likely scenario. Prospects are so overrated by all parties these days that I'm pessimistic.

Well if high level prospects aren't offered keep him. I believe they will be offered because of your B which is they don't always pan out. And teams on the edge of contention will take a chance he is the last piece to push them into a title.

And if they trade for guys who don't pan out that's the cost of a rebuild. There is risk and I do not ignore that. I do not agree they are all overrated though and it is possible to strike gold. The point is Donovan will not be part of the next Cardinals team challenging for a division title and playoff success so there is little risk on STL side. You grab for the brass ring.

[Talkin' Baseball]

Explain to me "why" it is not a good idea? You'd prefer to trade our arguably best player and trade chip for someone more controlled but unknown?

Because players almost never sign extensions in their walk year and the almost never sign with them after declaring free agency. It happens sometimes with the Guerrero's and Judge's of the world, but I can think of few other examples. You squander your best trade chip for a pitcher who may be great during one year of a rebuild.

It worked for Goldy, Rolen, Edmonds, McGwire, Holliday. The STL Cardinals are much better at trading for a Star or plus player then extending them than they are at signing a top player out of Free Agency.

Are there examples of players doing this in STL, or elsewhere in the past 5 years? That seems like a practice from the past that is rarely practiced anymore.

Goldy was fairly recent memory, and that contract just ended 13 months ago.

That's one. I'll stick with almost never happens (even here).

[Carp4Cy]

I agree 100% with the OP. No debate in my mind.

They should (and are I believe) marketing Donovan for prospects that might emerge as core players in 2-3 years.

What if, A. we don't get offered future core level prospects and/or B. they don't emerge? To me this is highly likely scenario. Prospects are so overrated by all parties these days that I'm pessimistic.

A) If you aren't offered future core level prospects (you will) you may consider keeping him. This is not a dumping situation. B) Therein lies the risk. You can never be sure top level prospects will pan out. Hence, Walker, Gorman...

I fully agree with you in that case. But of course, many here will complain that Bloom is just doing the Mo thing and not selling "high". Some here would rather get 'very little' for a core player instead of risking he doesn't extend with us and get 'nothing'. But to me, that's just baseball. Play the guys you have while you can unless you can get more value and production in trade.

[Carp4Cy]

Explain to me "why" it is not a good idea? You'd prefer to trade our arguably best player and trade chip for someone more controlled but unknown?

Because players almost never sign extensions in their walk year and the almost never sign with them after declaring free agency. It happens sometimes with the Guerrero's and Judge's of the world, but I can think of few other examples. You squander your best trade chip for a pitcher who may be great during one year of a rebuild.

It worked for Goldy, Rolen, Edmonds, McGwire, Holliday. The STL Cardinals are much better at trading for a Star or plus player then extending them than they are at signing a top player out of Free Agency.

Are there examples of players doing this in STL, or elsewhere in the past 5 years? That seems like a practice from the past that is rarely practiced anymore.

Goldy was fairly recent memory, and that contract just ended 13 months ago.

That's one. I'll stick with almost never happens (even here).

You are right, its a risk, though for a Goldy level player in 2019, or hopefully a Bubic/Gore type player, worst case they get a QO and we get a compensating draft pick, which is very valuable. Moreso than the level of prospects that franschises make available in these types of trades.

Conversely, how often do we trade for an A or AA level prospect and they turn into all stars like Donovan? Wainwright did, but how many recent examples? I content it is also rare, maybe moreso. Most of our successful prospects originate in our org, just because we aren't working against the loss avoidance bias of other GMs not wanting to give up their crown jewels and offering prospects they have secretly soured on instead.

[ecleme22]

I agree 100% with the OP. No debate in my mind.

They should (and are I believe) marketing Donovan for prospects that might emerge as core players in 2-3 years.

What if, A. we don't get offered future core level prospects and/or B. they don't emerge? To me this is highly likely scenario. Prospects are so overrated by all parties these days that I'm pessimistic.

A) If you aren't offered future core level prospects (you will) you may consider keeping him. This is not a dumping situation. B) Therein lies the risk. You can never be sure top level prospects will pan out. Hence, Walker, Gorman...

I fully agree with you in that case. But of course, many here will complain that Bloom is just doing the Mo thing and not selling "high". Some here would rather get 'very little' for a core player instead of risking he doesn't extend with us and get 'nothing'. But to me, that's just baseball. Play the guys you have while you can unless you can get more value and production in trade.

Well hopefully that’s where our enhanced scouting comes in.

Cardinal fans are used to the Saggese and Rom returns, or waiting 5 years for Libby.

There are good scouting dpts out there…

[ScotchMIrish]

Donovan is a great trade chip but then who plays 3B if we move Arenado? Gorman?

Discuss the downside also. With Donovan we play him at 3B and the Wetherholt 2B or vice versa.

Which is why they won't move both Arenado and Gorman. And why an Arenado deal might not be the forgone conclusion everyone thinks it is.

I think Arenado will be gone and you are probably right they won't trade Gorman but I'd put Saggese at 3B ahead of Gorman. The little bit of power Gorman has isn't worth the low batting average and high strikeouts.

[Carp4Cy]

I agree 100% with the OP. No debate in my mind.

They should (and are I believe) marketing Donovan for prospects that might emerge as core players in 2-3 years.

What if, A. we don't get offered future core level prospects and/or B. they don't emerge? To me this is highly likely scenario. Prospects are so overrated by all parties these days that I'm pessimistic.

A) If you aren't offered future core level prospects (you will) you may consider keeping him. This is not a dumping situation. B) Therein lies the risk. You can never be sure top level prospects will pan out. Hence, Walker, Gorman...

I fully agree with you in that case. But of course, many here will complain that Bloom is just doing the Mo thing and not selling "high". Some here would rather get 'very little' for a core player instead of risking he doesn't extend with us and get 'nothing'. But to me, that's just baseball. Play the guys you have while you can unless you can get more value and production in trade.

Well hopefully that’s where our enhanced scouting comes in.

Cardinal fans are used to the Saggese and Rom returns, or waiting 5 years for Libby.

There are good scouting dpts out there…

hope you are right. I'm still pessimistic until I'm shown otherwise at the MLB level. But I will be watching.

[Talkin' Baseball]

Explain to me "why" it is not a good idea? You'd prefer to trade our arguably best player and trade chip for someone more controlled but unknown?

Because players almost never sign extensions in their walk year and the almost never sign with them after declaring free agency. It happens sometimes with the Guerrero's and Judge's of the world, but I can think of few other examples. You squander your best trade chip for a pitcher who may be great during one year of a rebuild.

It worked for Goldy, Rolen, Edmonds, McGwire, Holliday. The STL Cardinals are much better at trading for a Star or plus player then extending them than they are at signing a top player out of Free Agency.

Are there examples of players doing this in STL, or elsewhere in the past 5 years? That seems like a practice from the past that is rarely practiced anymore.

Goldy was fairly recent memory, and that contract just ended 13 months ago.

That's one. I'll stick with almost never happens (even here).

You are right, its a risk, though for a Goldy level player in 2019, or hopefully a Bubic/Gore type player, they get a QO and we get a compensating draft pick, which is very valuable. Moreso than the level of prospects that franschises make available in these types of trades.

Conversely, how often do we trade for an A or AA level prospect and they turn into all stars like Donovan? Wainwright did, but how many recent examples? I content it is also rare, maybe moreso. Most of our successful prospects originate in our org, just because we aren't working against the loss avoidance bias of other GMs not wanting to give up their crown jewels and offering prospects they have secretly soured on instead.
[/quo

If you are looking at a 5-year plan for the team, trading Donovan for Bubic is a much riskier move than trading for prospects. You mention A and AA. It's true, the further you get from the majors the more room you have to go wrong. Much more is known about AA and AAA. Single A is a crapshoot. The only viable major league player we currently have who was acquired as a prospect is Liberatore. Player evaluation and trade paralysis was a real problem. I'm hopeful that is better now.

[2ninr]

This is where Bloom needs to prove his own worth. He has to evaluate Donovans worth without overplaying his hand. Those thinking we will get an overpay for him may be disappointed. Donovan isn't a power bat or a 1 or 2 level starting pitcher. Those are the guys who get overpaid for. If he wants to move him, it will have to be fairly equitable value on both sides. For me a good deal would be a 2ish sp that is ready in the next couple of years. I don't think you are getting a teams #1 pitching prospect.

[ramfandan]

As for prospects in a deal that may or may not make it , this is where your scouting/ analytical department needs a good eye .
For example , when the Brewers traded top closer Devin Williams to the NYY they received vet pitcher Nestor Cortes and minor leaguer Caleb Durbin

Durbin was rated more than a mid-teen type prospect in the Yankees system . See below:

At the time of the trade with the Brewers in December 2024, Caleb Durbin was not ranked in the top tier of major prospect lists, but he was considered a good prospect within the New York Yankees' system. He was typically ranked in the mid-teens among Yankees prospects, valued for his speed, contact skills, and defensive ability rather than for blue-chip pedigree.

Brewer fans were not particularly jumping up and down for the return they got from NYY. They knew Durbin was fast but as the rport said certainly not a blue-chip type prospect.
Well , Durbin after initially struggling a bit took off like a rocket. They moved him from LF to 3rd base and the guy went nuts. He played so well that he made the Top3 finalists for NL Rookie of the Year. (He won't win it tonight MLB Network 6 pm CT ) So the Brewers got a very nice ballplayer in that deal.
Now if Bloom got a mid-teens player they liked CT would probably react saying 'Holy (bleep), that guy wasn't rated very highly .'

You could be getting a gem.

[AZ_Cardsfan]

This is where Bloom needs to prove his own worth. He has to evaluate Donovans worth without overplaying his hand. Those thinking we will get an overpay for him may be disappointed. Donovan isn't a power bat or a 1 or 2 level starting pitcher. Those are the guys who get overpaid for. If he wants to move him, it will have to be fairly equitable value on both sides. For me a good deal would be a 2ish sp that is ready in the next couple of years. I don't think you are getting a teams #1 pitching prospect.

Yup. I have never used the term "haul". IMO Donovan is worth a back half of the top 100 prospects and a wild card that would fit into STL top 20 prospects.

[renostl]

I agree 100% with the OP. No debate in my mind.

They should (and are I believe) marketing Donovan for prospects that might emerge as core players in 2-3 years.

What if, A. we don't get offered future core level prospects and/or B. they don't emerge? To me this is highly likely scenario. Prospects are so overrated by all parties these days that I'm pessimistic.

A) If you aren't offered future core level prospects (you will) you may consider keeping him. This is not a dumping situation. B) Therein lies the risk. You can never be sure top level prospects will pan out. Hence, Walker, Gorman...

Absolutely true.

It is though like getting a second draft. A draft with a couple more
years of information. Would Hence, Walker, Gorman others still have been
drafted high or others low? That's at the center of the TB method, IMO.

[RunSup]

No doubt Donovan is the Cardinals most valuable asset in getting the best return in a trade. Bloom has to at least explore that opportunity.

Donovan and Burleson are at their highest trade value in their careers so far. Cardinals are not going to be competitive in 2026.

Bloom absolutely ought to be exploring trades. Do something Mo couldn't: Trade High.

[redbirdfan51]

Without a doubt, Bloom's most valuable trade piece.