STLtoday.com Forums
https://interact.stltoday.com/forums/
https://interact.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516825
Good old “dry powder” lol. Probably the cringiest and most [nonsense] Mo-ism of all. That or “low-hanging fruit”. I know they are common idioms but when he used them to say he’s not doing [shirt] to improve the team, they became way more irritating.
Aside from small (under $3M deals) I'm in agreement w/you govman.govman wrote: ↑03 Oct 2025 15:40 pmIf the DeWitt's are keeping Oli because they don't want to eat his (small) salary, why should we believe they'll give up money to move a player?bccardsfan wrote: ↑03 Oct 2025 12:22 pmI will believe this when I see it......rockondlouie wrote: ↑03 Oct 2025 12:13 pm .....for a better return.
Katie Woo of The Athletic reports that the ownership will now be more willing to eat money in trades, in order to extract greater returns.
That reporting aligns with comments this week from Chaim Bloom, the new president of baseball operations. “As far as cash being a lever on the trade front, that should never be off the table,” he said, per Woo. “Obviously, you’d prefer not to do that, but you could end up in a situation where adding cash to make a preferred deal work just makes sense.”
Obviously refers to NADO & S. Gray, possibly but less likely WillyC.
And fortunately the guy who lacked that skill is now gone.
I was thinking that might be the counterpoint. A manager who is not a strategic genius can at the very least insist on practicing or focusing it. Rewarding success takes no special strategic ability either.bccardsfan wrote: ↑03 Oct 2025 18:31 pmTo change the emphasis on good clean fundamental baseball, even in losing seasons, and the change the culture of the team. Guys have a good game and are on the pine the next... all the head scratching moves....RichieRichSTL wrote: ↑03 Oct 2025 18:16 pmSome truth to that. Then again why waste a costly manager on a team that you know isnt going anywhere,govman wrote: ↑03 Oct 2025 15:40 pmIf the DeWitt's are keeping Oli because they don't want to eat his (small) salary, why should we believe they'll give up money to move a player?bccardsfan wrote: ↑03 Oct 2025 12:22 pmI will believe this when I see it......rockondlouie wrote: ↑03 Oct 2025 12:13 pm .....for a better return.
Katie Woo of The Athletic reports that the ownership will now be more willing to eat money in trades, in order to extract greater returns.
That reporting aligns with comments this week from Chaim Bloom, the new president of baseball operations. “As far as cash being a lever on the trade front, that should never be off the table,” he said, per Woo. “Obviously, you’d prefer not to do that, but you could end up in a situation where adding cash to make a preferred deal work just makes sense.”
Obviously refers to NADO & S. Gray, possibly but less likely WillyC.