Competing now vs. rebuilding are conflicting goals

[mattmitchl44]

There's no guarantee a foundation of enough cost controlled players are going to just come along.

Certainly hasn't happened for a lot of teams perpetually in baseball limbo.

Then there's certainly no guarantee that all of this supposed talent is going to come together for enough years to spend on plug in free agents before the young talent is no longer relatively cheap.

Sure I hope things come together in a couple of seasons when the team might extend payroll to plug the holes. But that's far from a given and if we're still inthe bottom half of this division in 3 years or so than where would be the difference?

No plan can guarantee success. Certainly not banking your success principally on brute force spending when 10+ other teams can, and will, spend more than the Cardinals annually.

Suggesting "guarantees of success" is a strawman argument.

Strawman argument?

And what you’re suggesting is a fool's errand.

If you don't have generational players or a way to get them then you're just fooling yourself.

There is no way for the Cardinals to have "generational players," or 3-4 All-Stars, etc. without having developed them (or most of them) internally. That is how they had Pujols and Molina in the 2000s and could build highly talented teams around them.

Without Pujols and Molina signed to well below market value contracts, the Cardinals never have the success they had from 2000-2015.

Without Edmonds, Rolen and Holliday among others they don't have that success either.

Pujoks was the lynch pin but let's don't pretend he went through a long development process. He only played 133 games in the minors and was the ultimate outlier as a 13th round draft pick.

Sure, but keeping Edmonds, Rolen, and Holliday simply came down to a matter of paying them money. They traded for them originally but keeping them such that they had the impact they had was just a matter of paying them to stay.

Finding guys to pay money to is the relatively easy part of the equation. Ever year you'll find a dozen or more FAs, and more you can trade for besides, who can be your Edmonds, Rolen, or Holliday.

The HARD part is finding and developing the players like Pujols, Molina, Matt Carpenter, Wainwright, Morris, Lynn, etc. who are both extremely good AND relatively inexpensive so that you CAN afford to pay your Edmonds, Rolen, or Holliday to put your team over the top.

Make sure you can do the hard part first - having the extremely good and relatively inexpensive guys - before you worry about doing the easy part and bringing in your extremely good and expensive guys.

[11WSChamps]

There's no guarantee a foundation of enough cost controlled players are going to just come along.

Certainly hasn't happened for a lot of teams perpetually in baseball limbo.

Then there's certainly no guarantee that all of this supposed talent is going to come together for enough years to spend on plug in free agents before the young talent is no longer relatively cheap.

Sure I hope things come together in a couple of seasons when the team might extend payroll to plug the holes. But that's far from a given and if we're still inthe bottom half of this division in 3 years or so than where would be the difference?

No plan can guarantee success. Certainly not banking your success principally on brute force spending when 10+ other teams can, and will, spend more than the Cardinals annually.

Suggesting "guarantees of success" is a strawman argument.

Strawman argument?

And what you’re suggesting is a fool's errand.

If you don't have generational players or a way to get them then you're just fooling yourself.

There is no way for the Cardinals to have "generational players," or 3-4 All-Stars, etc. without having developed them (or most of them) internally. That is how they had Pujols and Molina in the 2000s and could build highly talented teams around them.

Without Pujols and Molina signed to well below market value contracts, the Cardinals never have the success they had from 2000-2015.

Without Edmonds, Rolen and Holliday among others they don't have that success either.

Pujoks was the lynch pin but let's don't pretend he went through a long development process. He only played 133 games in the minors and was the ultimate outlier as a 13th round draft pick.

Sure, but keeping Edmonds, Rolen, and Holliday simply came down to a matter of paying them money. They traded for them originally but keeping them such that they had the impact they had was just a matter of paying them to stay.

Finding guys to pay money to is the relatively easy part of the equation. Ever year you'll find a dozen or more FAs, and more you can trade for besides, who can be your Edmonds, Rolen, or Holliday.

The HARD part is finding and developing the players like Pujols, Molina, Matt Carpenter, Wainwright, Morris, Lynn, etc. who are both extremely good AND relatively inexpensive so that you CAN afford to pay your Edmonds, Rolen, or Holliday to put your team over the top.

Make sure you can do the hard part first - having the extremely good and relatively inexpensive guys - before you worry about doing the easy part and bringing in your extremely good and expensive guys.

I understand the theory the execution is what is the concern.

So many variables have to fall into place. All the stars aligning can take a lot of years.

[mattmitchl44]

There's no guarantee a foundation of enough cost controlled players are going to just come along.

Certainly hasn't happened for a lot of teams perpetually in baseball limbo.

Then there's certainly no guarantee that all of this supposed talent is going to come together for enough years to spend on plug in free agents before the young talent is no longer relatively cheap.

Sure I hope things come together in a couple of seasons when the team might extend payroll to plug the holes. But that's far from a given and if we're still inthe bottom half of this division in 3 years or so than where would be the difference?

No plan can guarantee success. Certainly not banking your success principally on brute force spending when 10+ other teams can, and will, spend more than the Cardinals annually.

Suggesting "guarantees of success" is a strawman argument.

Strawman argument?

And what you’re suggesting is a fool's errand.

If you don't have generational players or a way to get them then you're just fooling yourself.

There is no way for the Cardinals to have "generational players," or 3-4 All-Stars, etc. without having developed them (or most of them) internally. That is how they had Pujols and Molina in the 2000s and could build highly talented teams around them.

Without Pujols and Molina signed to well below market value contracts, the Cardinals never have the success they had from 2000-2015.

Without Edmonds, Rolen and Holliday among others they don't have that success either.

Pujoks was the lynch pin but let's don't pretend he went through a long development process. He only played 133 games in the minors and was the ultimate outlier as a 13th round draft pick.

Sure, but keeping Edmonds, Rolen, and Holliday simply came down to a matter of paying them money. They traded for them originally but keeping them such that they had the impact they had was just a matter of paying them to stay.

Finding guys to pay money to is the relatively easy part of the equation. Ever year you'll find a dozen or more FAs, and more you can trade for besides, who can be your Edmonds, Rolen, or Holliday.

The HARD part is finding and developing the players like Pujols, Molina, Matt Carpenter, Wainwright, Morris, Lynn, etc. who are both extremely good AND relatively inexpensive so that you CAN afford to pay your Edmonds, Rolen, or Holliday to put your team over the top.

Make sure you can do the hard part first - having the extremely good and relatively inexpensive guys - before you worry about doing the easy part and bringing in your extremely good and expensive guys.

I understand the theory the execution is what is the concern.

So many variables have to fall into place. All the stars aligning can take a lot of years.

See:

viewtopic.php?t=1518055

[Ronnie Dobbs]

You're talking about the past.

You should be talking about now.

Who knows what payroll will wind up being in a couple of years. Another uncertainty right?

We finished behind the Reds last season and if the Pirates add a bat we could easily be looking up at them for the foreseeable future.

Of course I’m talking about the past. Let’s say you’ve know someone for 30 years and every two years he asks you to borrow a large sum of money that he will pay back in 6 months, but never does, yet you keep loaning him money. So, he’s ripped you off 15 times. What would you do the 16th time? Would you just not think about all the times in the past that you got ripped off and tell him no or would you just worry about the now and the future and figure that he’ll start paying you back now.

The past effects now and the future. The team has a history of doing things a certain way when it comes to money. I expect that to continue after this rebuild because basically every other team that has done a rebuild has done it like this and I would expect the Cardinals to go back to what worked for them for so long. And when looking at the now, I realize that right now they are doing what will make them better now and in the future. Even if they lose 90 games this year, if the organization itself is improved, then they are still better off than continuing to do what they have for the last how many years.

What do you suggest we do? Spend money on free agents to hopefully make the team better? Try and get a player like Kyle Tucker? What kind of contract would you give him and why? If he’s worth 10 years at $35 million a year, how do you come to that decision? Would you not look at his past or are you just judging him on right now? And what makes him more certain to perform at a high level for now and in the future? I’m guessing his past production, right? And why is it so humiliating to finish the Reds and just above the Pirates? What are you judging that on to come to that conclusion? Is it their past history? Why are you looking at the past?

But talking about uncertainty, of course there’s uncertainty. You could sign someone like Framber Valdez and he ends up having shoulder surgery in the spring and never recover. Now you’re screwed.

[Ronnie Dobbs]

C. Carpenter too!

Im glad you brought up Chris Carpenter. For those on this forum saying that we should never look to the past, the future is too uncertain, so only look at the now, look at Chris Carpenter. They signed in 2002 while he was recovering from surgery with the (uncertain) hope that he would be able to pitch hopefully at some point during the season. He didn’t pitch that season at all, but they weren’t only looking at the now when they signed him. They looked at his past, decided that he was a pitcher that might not pay off for them now, but would help them out in the future. Very uncertain, especially with his past injury issues. But they did their due diligence and made the decision to invest in the future and they ended up with one of the best starters they’ve ever had.

[rockondlouie]

C. Carpenter too!

Im glad you brought up Chris Carpenter. For those on this forum saying that we should never look to the past, the future is too uncertain, so only look at the now, look at Chris Carpenter. They signed in 2002 while he was recovering from surgery with the (uncertain) hope that he would be able to pitch hopefully at some point during the season. He didn’t pitch that season at all, but they weren’t only looking at the now when they signed him. They looked at his past, decided that he was a pitcher that might not pay off for them now, but would help them out in the future. Very uncertain, especially with his past injury issues. But they did their due diligence and made the decision to invest in the future and they ended up with one of the best starters they’ve ever had.

The Cardinals don't win in 2006, let alone in 2011 w/o C. Carp.

That masterpiece he hurled vs the Phillies in the NLCS when he outdueled R. Halladay was a classic.

And I still maintain had he not get hurt right before the 2004 playoffs the Cardinals win Game 1 vs the Red Sox w/him on the hill (no way Carp gives up 7 runs by the 3rd inning) and that series takes a whole different turn.

[renostl]

C. Carpenter too!

Im glad you brought up Chris Carpenter. For those on this forum saying that we should never look to the past, the future is too uncertain, so only look at the now, look at Chris Carpenter. They signed in 2002 while he was recovering from surgery with the (uncertain) hope that he would be able to pitch hopefully at some point during the season. He didn’t pitch that season at all, but they weren’t only looking at the now when they signed him. They looked at his past, decided that he was a pitcher that might not pay off for them now, but would help them out in the future. Very uncertain, especially with his past injury issues. But they did their due diligence and made the decision to invest in the future and they ended up with one of the best starters they’ve ever had.

It worked.
A low-risk gamble that paid off.

Which posters would have signed such an often-injured SP
who had a 6.25, 4.0+, and 5.25 era to miss 2003 with another injury?
We can't stand Pallante coming off a single 5.30 and stays healthy.

MO makes that move and in the moment its called low hanging fruit and the idiot
strikes again.

[juan good eye]

If they try to compete and rebuild simultaneously, the net result will much more likely be that they will do both poorly rather than do both (or either) well.

That is the most important thing said in the OP.

Why do the fools not grasp this? Willfully ignorant I believe. These boomers just can’t let go of .500 baseball.

If the Cards trade their best assets that aren’t long term pieces for futures it increases the likelihood of strengthening the farm ie the future roster. When the time comes you’ll be glad they did or wished they had…

On the same note: If the Cards are willing to trade for players further away from MLB in proximity opposed to trading for young MLB players (proven commodities) the return should be higher end talent (more risk involved to a degree). Again, the likelihood of strengthening the farm ie the future roster, increases. I repeat, when the time comes you’ll be glad they did or wished they had…

Also, there was a lot of (bleep) among the BFIB when the Cards didn’t win 85 games each of the last couple seasons yet the same old men are celebrating both top 10 draft picks who are also the top Cards prospects. It’s not magic folks, there’s a formula. Don’t try to cheat like Mo, the FBI might be watching.

2 things -

1) [fork] off with the Boomer comments. There are plenty of young people who feel the same as those you disparage.

2. I’m a Boomer and the rest of your post makes sense.

Noted

[Melville]

"Competing now vs. rebuilding are conflicting goals"
No, they are not.
That is nonsense.
Next topic.