Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Tampa Bay

[mattmitchl44]

But when we mention actually adding payroll….you argue that it isn’t time. It’s never time is it?

BTW - to have to AGAIN answer this "charge" which you know isn't true:

I don't think anyone has said for the Cardinals to not spend ANY money this offseason. If they want to go out and get relatively cheap FAs on short term 1-2 year deals, maybe with an eye towards flipping them for more prospects in July 2026, that would be fine. If that wins them a few more games next year, makes some people feel like they are "being competitive", etc. - more power to them.

What I, at least, have said is that I don't want to see them going out and signing really expensive players over age 30 - your Schwarbers, Valdezs, even Bellingers, etc. - to the 5, 6, 7 year contracts they are almost certain to get.

I don't know why you, zuck, rocko, ccard, etc. have to consistently misrepresent what I've said when it is so easy to find what I've actually said.

Having to build strawman arguments which I have never actually made is usually a sign that you don't have much of a solid rebuttal to what I've actually said.

[ScotchMIrish]

None of them won the world series. I would point out that is the standard Bloom used to dump when we were 5 games over .500 at the break. Making the playoffs isn't enough. If we don't have a world series caliber roster we must dump.

I would also point out the last manager to take the Cardinals to a world series - who never had a losing season - was fired because according to DeWitt Jr "winning isn't enough".

[mattmitchl44]

None of them won the world series. I would point out that is the standard Bloom used to dump when we were 5 games over .500 at the break. Making the playoffs isn't enough. If we don't have a world series caliber roster we must dump.

I don't think that is true either. It is more nuanced than that. It's a matter of who you dump and for what purpose.

Branch Rickey said, "It is better to trade a player one year too soon rather than one year too late." If you choose to dump players mid-season, it should be players who have value at that time, but are of an age where you expect that there is a higher probability that they will fall off the table soon and you should get what you can for them now. For example, every effort should have been made to trade Arenado and Goldschmidt back mid-season in 2023.

Regarding the for what purpose, if your farm system is already healthy and actively producing a high level of young talent for the ML team, you could be less motivated to dump players mid-season for more prospects. But if your farm system is/has been underperforming, you would lean toward being more liberal in your decision to trade older, expensive players in order to try to get prospect to improve that for future years.

[Melville]

None of them won the world series. I would point out that is the standard Bloom used to dump when we were 5 games over .500 at the break. Making the playoffs isn't enough. If we don't have a world series caliber roster we must dump.

I would also point out the last manager to take the Cardinals to a world series - who never had a losing season - was fired because according to DeWitt Jr "winning isn't enough".

Zero wins, a mere 2 appearances in the last 50+ combines seasons - and those 2 appearances were led by players obtained outside their organizations.
No one should ever endorse Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Tampa Bay as models of success STL should emulate.
It is a ludicrous position.
Reality is, 3 relatively easy moves right now would make STL an 85+ win team next year and leave it positioned to be a 90+ win team in years following.
The idea the team needs a 3 or 4 year transition plan to get back to relevance is nonsense.
The idea that a 3 or 4 year transition plan is likely to work is even more nonsensical.
It requires 30 days or less to add the talent currently needed at just 2 positions - and to remove the current obstacles to success.

[ScotchMIrish]

None of them won the world series. I would point out that is the standard Bloom used to dump when we were 5 games over .500 at the break. Making the playoffs isn't enough. If we don't have a world series caliber roster we must dump.

I don't think that is true either. It is more nuanced than that. It's a matter of who you dump and for what purpose.

Branch Rickey said, "It is better to trade a player one year too soon rather than one year too late." If you choose to dump players mid-season, it should be players who have value at that time, but are of an age where you expect that there is a higher probability that they will fall off the table soon and you should get what you can for them now. For example, every effort should have been made to trade Arenado and Goldschmidt back mid-season in 2023.

Regarding the for what purpose, if your farm system is already healthy and actively producing a high level of young talent for the ML team, you could be less motivated to dump players mid-season for more prospects. But if your farm system is/has been underperforming, you would lean toward being more liberal in your decision to trade older, expensive players in order to try to get prospect to improve that for future years.

That was the excuse given for dumping a playoff capable roster.

I wouldn't use Branch Rickey as a shining example. He offered Ralph Kiner a pay cut after Kiner lead the league in home runs and the Pirates didn't start winning until after Rickey left. He also posted 5 losing seasons in 7 years as Cardinals manager. The year after he was fired we won the world series.

He was great at creating logos. Birds on the bat being an example.

[mattmitchl44]

None of them won the world series. I would point out that is the standard Bloom used to dump when we were 5 games over .500 at the break. Making the playoffs isn't enough. If we don't have a world series caliber roster we must dump.

I don't think that is true either. It is more nuanced than that. It's a matter of who you dump and for what purpose.

Branch Rickey said, "It is better to trade a player one year too soon rather than one year too late." If you choose to dump players mid-season, it should be players who have value at that time, but are of an age where you expect that there is a higher probability that they will fall off the table soon and you should get what you can for them now. For example, every effort should have been made to trade Arenado and Goldschmidt back mid-season in 2023.

Regarding the for what purpose, if your farm system is already healthy and actively producing a high level of young talent for the ML team, you could be less motivated to dump players mid-season for more prospects. But if your farm system is/has been underperforming, you would lean toward being more liberal in your decision to trade older, expensive players in order to try to get prospect to improve that for future years.

That was the excuse given for dumping a playoff capable roster.

When? Last year?

By the "transactions" page on ESPN, the only player the Cardinals "dumped" last year was Maton - on July 31 when they were 55-55. The Cardinals just, rightly, didn't choose to be a buyer and double down on a pretty bad hand last year.

[ScotchMIrish]

None of them won the world series. I would point out that is the standard Bloom used to dump when we were 5 games over .500 at the break. Making the playoffs isn't enough. If we don't have a world series caliber roster we must dump.

I don't think that is true either. It is more nuanced than that. It's a matter of who you dump and for what purpose.

Branch Rickey said, "It is better to trade a player one year too soon rather than one year too late." If you choose to dump players mid-season, it should be players who have value at that time, but are of an age where you expect that there is a higher probability that they will fall off the table soon and you should get what you can for them now. For example, every effort should have been made to trade Arenado and Goldschmidt back mid-season in 2023.

Regarding the for what purpose, if your farm system is already healthy and actively producing a high level of young talent for the ML team, you could be less motivated to dump players mid-season for more prospects. But if your farm system is/has been underperforming, you would lean toward being more liberal in your decision to trade older, expensive players in order to try to get prospect to improve that for future years.

That was the excuse given for dumping a playoff capable roster.

When? Last year?

By the "transactions" page on ESPN, the only player the Cardinals "dumped" last year was Maton - on July 31 when they were 55-55. The Cardinals just, rightly, didn't choose to be a buyer and double down on a pretty bad hand last year.

I thought we trade 3 pitchers for prospects. The excuse for not adding was the team was playoff caliber but not world series caliber.

[mattmitchl44]

None of them won the world series. I would point out that is the standard Bloom used to dump when we were 5 games over .500 at the break. Making the playoffs isn't enough. If we don't have a world series caliber roster we must dump.

I don't think that is true either. It is more nuanced than that. It's a matter of who you dump and for what purpose.

Branch Rickey said, "It is better to trade a player one year too soon rather than one year too late." If you choose to dump players mid-season, it should be players who have value at that time, but are of an age where you expect that there is a higher probability that they will fall off the table soon and you should get what you can for them now. For example, every effort should have been made to trade Arenado and Goldschmidt back mid-season in 2023.

Regarding the for what purpose, if your farm system is already healthy and actively producing a high level of young talent for the ML team, you could be less motivated to dump players mid-season for more prospects. But if your farm system is/has been underperforming, you would lean toward being more liberal in your decision to trade older, expensive players in order to try to get prospect to improve that for future years.

That was the excuse given for dumping a playoff capable roster.

When? Last year?

By the "transactions" page on ESPN, the only player the Cardinals "dumped" last year was Maton - on July 31 when they were 55-55. The Cardinals just, rightly, didn't choose to be a buyer and double down on a pretty bad hand last year.

I thought we trade 3 pitchers for prospects. The excuse for not adding was the team was playoff caliber but not world series caliber.

They did, of course, also trade Helsley. Not sure why that didn't show up on ESPN.

And they did trade Matz for Blaze Jordan. How quickly I forget.

So you are correct.

But those were all right at the end of July when they had fallen off to just .500. The Cardinals had gone 4-9 from the A-S Break to the end of July and were in full reverse at that point.

[rockondlouie]

Who is the OP going to lecture, when the forum goes down for a few hours for maintenance, about how the Cardinals need to tank. He REALLY wants BDW to save that dry powder.

Even Shady doesn’t post this much about Burleson.

But I like matt even though we've gone round-and-round on multiple topics for years.

He has his point of view but never gets nasty or acts like a richard if you are on the opposite side of the fence.

That makes for some great baseball debates!

[icon]

I have read every post on this thread so far, and to me, the big question still remains about this reset or whatever you want to call it.

Will BDW Jr. eventually restore payroll to a level that is World Series title competitive? Or is this reset just an excuse to reduce payroll and keep it reduced just like the Pirates model? Or at best like a Brewers, Guardians and Rays model?

[sikeston bulldog2]

I have read every post on this thread so far, and to me, the big question still remains about this reset or whatever you want to call it.

Will BDW Jr. eventually restore payroll to a level that is World Series title competitive? Or is this reset just an excuse to reduce payroll and keep it reduced just like the Pirates model? Or at best like a Brewers, Guardians and Rays model?

Isn’t that the billion dollar question. Will he. My guess. No. Old people late in life get paranoid. Generally results in a withdrawal or back down of spending. Even billion Airs.

[mattmitchl44]

I have read every post on this thread so far, and to me, the big question still remains about this reset or whatever you want to call it.

Will BDW Jr. eventually restore payroll to a level that is World Series title competitive? Or is this reset just an excuse to reduce payroll and keep it reduced just like the Pirates model? Or at best like a Brewers, Guardians and Rays model?

You can consider it to be the question, but there is no answer to it.

You can be completely pessimistic and assume this is some conspiracy where the owners, based on no precedent they have shown to date, are going to reduce payroll and never raise it again.

You can be a little less pessimistic and stick rigidly to "the past is prologue" and believe they will never waiver from "attendance drives payroll." So maybe you have to wait until the young core of players is good enough when combined with only cheap veterans to get back to 86, 87 win seasons in like 2028/2029; then see attendance start to rise; then see payroll rise to where they add better veteran players in 2030/2031/etc. - so really being good is delayed 2-3 more years than it could be.

Or you can be a little optimistic in that they're changing their approach and recognize that at the end of this "rebuild" they'll have to "advance spend" a bit from the money they've "saved" in order to start adding better veterans in 2028/2029, before attendance really rises, so that they can get to 92+ win seasons again as soon as 2028/2029. Then of course attendance would rise and equilibrium between attendance/revenue/payroll would be quickly reestablished.

IMO, the first option is very unlikely, and the second and third options may be equally likely.

[CorneliusWolfe]

But when we mention actually adding payroll….you argue that it isn’t time. It’s never time is it?

BTW - to have to AGAIN answer this "charge" which you know isn't true:

I don't think anyone has said for the Cardinals to not spend ANY money this offseason. If they want to go out and get relatively cheap FAs on short term 1-2 year deals, maybe with an eye towards flipping them for more prospects in July 2026, that would be fine. If that wins them a few more games next year, makes some people feel like they are "being competitive", etc. - more power to them.

What I, at least, have said is that I don't want to see them going out and signing really expensive players over age 30 - your Schwarbers, Valdezs, even Bellingers, etc. - to the 5, 6, 7 year contracts they are almost certain to get.

I don't know why you, zuck, rocko, ccard, etc. have to consistently misrepresent what I've said when it is so easy to find what I've actually said.

Having to build strawman arguments which I have never actually made is usually a sign that you don't have much of a solid rebuttal to what I've actually said.

Call it strawman if you want. Sure are a lot of otherwise reasonable posters burning strawmen just to pick on you I guess. You say you’re ok with spending…on junk free agents to flip for more of what you really want, more prospects.

We want transformative acquisitions who are proven at the MLB level that can help end this losing. Easier said than done, sure…but we still think they should try, and execute, those moves in conjunction with any other team improvement mechanism.

Here’s my biggest problem with your plan - you severely underestimate how lack of experienced leadership, losing culture, no competitive spirit, and being part of a laughingstock team all impact the psyche of a young prospect. We were young men before…we weren’t always as confident as we projected. We needed success and good mentorship and a positive environment to truly evolve.

Another issue is a lack of any real stakes. There was a time when a prospect came up, he had to work hard and perform. Not anymore. Now they can go buy some chains, a flashy car and start living their immature interpretation of the pro athlete lifestyle. No pressure to be good, hell the manager has an open invite from ownership and management to suck, as long as it’s cheap.

The prospects don’t learn to value winning and the work required to get there because no one else around them can show them, or even has a track record to reference. No one to even boo them at the empty park either. A toxic environment is no place to raise a child.

One other note on why we hate your plan…it entails assuming our high prospects will pan out. You keep mentioning “when Wetherholt and Doyle” blah blah, then we can spend and win. What makes you think they’re exempt from flaming out like so many others we see year after year from all around MLB?
Our savior Wetherholy and 1-pitch Doyle might amount to F-all and I don’t feel like waiting and losing another 3-5 years to find out. If they don’t work out, you know what it will be? Oh oh oh, you should see these OTHER new kids down at AA!!

[CorneliusWolfe]

Who is the OP going to lecture, when the forum goes down for a few hours for maintenance, about how the Cardinals need to tank. He REALLY wants BDW to save that dry powder.

Even Shady doesn’t post this much about Burleson.

But I like matt even though we've gone round-and-round on multiple topics for years.

He has his point of view but never gets nasty or acts like a richard if you are on the opposite side of the fence.

That makes for some great baseball debates!

Yeah, he’s alright. It’s like when you like and respect someone but you hate their politics. We used to could coexist that way in regular society but can’t now for some reason.

[icon]

I have read every post on this thread so far, and to me, the big question still remains about this reset or whatever you want to call it.

Will BDW Jr. eventually restore payroll to a level that is World Series title competitive? Or is this reset just an excuse to reduce payroll and keep it reduced just like the Pirates model? Or at best like a Brewers, Guardians and Rays model?

You can consider it to be the question, but there is no answer to it.

You can be completely pessimistic and assume this is some conspiracy where the owners, based on no precedent they have shown to date, are going to reduce payroll and never raise it again.

You can be a little less pessimistic and stick rigidly to "the past is prologue" and believe they will never waiver from "attendance drives payroll." So maybe you have to wait until the young core of players is good enough when combined with only cheap veterans to get back to 86, 87 win seasons in like 2028/2029; then see attendance start to rise; then see payroll rise to where they add better veteran players in 2030/2031/etc. - so really being good is delayed 2-3 more years than it could be.

Or you can be a little optimistic in that they're changing their approach and recognize that at the end of this "rebuild" they'll have to "advance spend" a bit from the money they've "saved" in order to start adding better veterans in 2028/2029, before attendance really rises, so that they can get to 92+ win seasons again as soon as 2028/2029. Then of course attendance would rise and equilibrium between attendance/revenue/payroll would be quickly reestablished.

IMO, the first option is very unlikely, and the second and third options may be equally likely.

Yeah, there is no answer, and that should be troubling. Why is BDW Jr. not answering the question so pivotal in your hypothetical reset? I've heard nothing from him about what he intends to do with payroll going forward. I'm not pessimistic or optimistic. I just want an answer from ownership about what it intends to do with payroll going forward in this reset process. You don't know, and I don't know.

[rockondlouie]

Who is the OP going to lecture, when the forum goes down for a few hours for maintenance, about how the Cardinals need to tank. He REALLY wants BDW to save that dry powder.

Even Shady doesn’t post this much about Burleson.

But I like matt even though we've gone round-and-round on multiple topics for years.

He has his point of view but never gets nasty or acts like a richard if you are on the opposite side of the fence.

That makes for some great baseball debates!

Yeah, he’s alright. It’s like when you like and respect someone but you hate their politics. We used to could coexist that way in regular society but can’t now for some reason.