STLtoday.com Forums
https://interact.stltoday.com/forums/
https://interact.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1518589
One more thing, Red. Just asking again. What positions are you referring to for trades, where you would like an offensive upgrade, but want defense to take a higher priority? 3B if Arenado is traded? 1B if Contreras is traded? 2B if Donovan is traded? LF? RF? And what trade targets are you recommending for those positions? I'm assuming that you're okay with Scott in CF. Right?OldRed wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 14:31 pmAll I do is state the truth, sorry you can't handle the truth.Cranny wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 13:21 pmLOL. I won't lower myself to your level, Red. Which unfortunately is lower than it's ever been.OldRed wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 11:59 amHere is one of your posts, completely off topic, trying to change the subject:Cranny wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 08:52 amSB - I read the title of the thread and thought Red was talking about defense, which he has always emphasized. I then aligned my posts with that theme in mind, and especially up the middle defense. With players we already have. But when he criticized me for "high jacking" his thread, I went back to the beginning to read his first post. He talked about any trade should emphasize defense first over hitting, since the pitching is weak. So I then, in response to his first post, asked whatsikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 07:29 amOk. I’ve read it all. He merely refined defense to mean up the middle defense and added names from within to man second. And then he asked others/ your thought on said subject. Am I tracking.OldRed wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 07:24 amCranny hijacked this topic from the 3rd page on. That may be what you are missing.sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 06:53 amI’m following this debate. It’s about trading for defense because the pitching will not be good. One poster wants to solve it from within, another wants a trade. What am I missing.OldRed wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 06:48 amYou can't stay on subject without hijacking someone's thread. Just quit changing the topic. Also, when someone proves you wrong, why can't you admit it?Cranny wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 21:45 pmAlso, Red, if you want to talk about trades, and the fact that you would put defensive skills first in trades, then that's fine.Cranny wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 20:54 pmLet me try again. The title of this thread is "In my opinion it's defense first". I posted about "up the middle" defense
if Arenado and/or Donovan is/are traded. You say that is off topic. I don't understand. So I will ask you again - why is it
off topic when it's talking about the Cardinals defense, which you started a thread about? Will look forward to your answer.
Please tell us what positions you would like to see traded for and maybe even some examples of guys you'd like to trade for that fit your profile.
positions he would trade for to bulk up the defense and if he had any trade targets in mind. Hoping that would bring it back on track to what he was looking for. We'll see what he has in mind. Maybe he's talking about the outfield (since we have so many infielders) - where he wants players in trades who bring defense as well as some offense.
Zuke - it has been commented on here many times - the Cardinals haven't gotten a chance at the premium top half of the first round draft picks because they've had winning seasons in all but 3 seasons this century. This is nothing new. It's been posted on here over the past several years by multiple posters. Why don't you tell all the posters who have posted that over the years to "man up"?
Now tell me what the hell that has to do with defense!
You have become a cantankerous old man that will never admit he is wrong or argues with subjects completely off subject. Talk about hijacking posts then blaming someone else!
Seems like a divorce or couples counseling areOldRed wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 14:31 pmAll I do is state the truth, sorry you can't handle the truth.Cranny wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 13:21 pmLOL. I won't lower myself to your level, Red. Which unfortunately is lower than it's ever been.OldRed wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 11:59 amHere is one of your posts, completely off topic, trying to change the subject:Cranny wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 08:52 amSB - I read the title of the thread and thought Red was talking about defense, which he has always emphasized. I then aligned my posts with that theme in mind, and especially up the middle defense. With players we already have. But when he criticized me for "high jacking" his thread, I went back to the beginning to read his first post. He talked about any trade should emphasize defense first over hitting, since the pitching is weak. So I then, in response to his first post, asked whatsikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 07:29 amOk. I’ve read it all. He merely refined defense to mean up the middle defense and added names from within to man second. And then he asked others/ your thought on said subject. Am I tracking.OldRed wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 07:24 amCranny hijacked this topic from the 3rd page on. That may be what you are missing.sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 06:53 amI’m following this debate. It’s about trading for defense because the pitching will not be good. One poster wants to solve it from within, another wants a trade. What am I missing.OldRed wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 06:48 amYou can't stay on subject without hijacking someone's thread. Just quit changing the topic. Also, when someone proves you wrong, why can't you admit it?Cranny wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 21:45 pmAlso, Red, if you want to talk about trades, and the fact that you would put defensive skills first in trades, then that's fine.Cranny wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 20:54 pmLet me try again. The title of this thread is "In my opinion it's defense first". I posted about "up the middle" defense
if Arenado and/or Donovan is/are traded. You say that is off topic. I don't understand. So I will ask you again - why is it
off topic when it's talking about the Cardinals defense, which you started a thread about? Will look forward to your answer.
Please tell us what positions you would like to see traded for and maybe even some examples of guys you'd like to trade for that fit your profile.
positions he would trade for to bulk up the defense and if he had any trade targets in mind. Hoping that would bring it back on track to what he was looking for. We'll see what he has in mind. Maybe he's talking about the outfield (since we have so many infielders) - where he wants players in trades who bring defense as well as some offense.
Zuke - it has been commented on here many times - the Cardinals haven't gotten a chance at the premium top half of the first round draft picks because they've had winning seasons in all but 3 seasons this century. This is nothing new. It's been posted on here over the past several years by multiple posters. Why don't you tell all the posters who have posted that over the years to "man up"?
Now tell me what the hell that has to do with defense!
You have become a cantankerous old man that will never admit he is wrong or argues with subjects completely off subject. Talk about hijacking posts then blaming someone else!
I just put him on ignore, renostl. I can't take his obsessive pettiness any longer. Along with his trolling tag team partner.renostl wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 15:43 pmSeems like a divorce or couples counseling areOldRed wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 14:31 pmAll I do is state the truth, sorry you can't handle the truth.Cranny wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 13:21 pmLOL. I won't lower myself to your level, Red. Which unfortunately is lower than it's ever been.OldRed wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 11:59 amHere is one of your posts, completely off topic, trying to change the subject:Cranny wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 08:52 amSB - I read the title of the thread and thought Red was talking about defense, which he has always emphasized. I then aligned my posts with that theme in mind, and especially up the middle defense. With players we already have. But when he criticized me for "high jacking" his thread, I went back to the beginning to read his first post. He talked about any trade should emphasize defense first over hitting, since the pitching is weak. So I then, in response to his first post, asked whatsikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 07:29 amOk. I’ve read it all. He merely refined defense to mean up the middle defense and added names from within to man second. And then he asked others/ your thought on said subject. Am I tracking.OldRed wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 07:24 amCranny hijacked this topic from the 3rd page on. That may be what you are missing.sikeston bulldog2 wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 06:53 amI’m following this debate. It’s about trading for defense because the pitching will not be good. One poster wants to solve it from within, another wants a trade. What am I missing.OldRed wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 06:48 amYou can't stay on subject without hijacking someone's thread. Just quit changing the topic. Also, when someone proves you wrong, why can't you admit it?Cranny wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 21:45 pmAlso, Red, if you want to talk about trades, and the fact that you would put defensive skills first in trades, then that's fine.Cranny wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 20:54 pmLet me try again. The title of this thread is "In my opinion it's defense first". I posted about "up the middle" defense
if Arenado and/or Donovan is/are traded. You say that is off topic. I don't understand. So I will ask you again - why is it
off topic when it's talking about the Cardinals defense, which you started a thread about? Will look forward to your answer.
Please tell us what positions you would like to see traded for and maybe even some examples of guys you'd like to trade for that fit your profile.
positions he would trade for to bulk up the defense and if he had any trade targets in mind. Hoping that would bring it back on track to what he was looking for. We'll see what he has in mind. Maybe he's talking about the outfield (since we have so many infielders) - where he wants players in trades who bring defense as well as some offense.
Zuke - it has been commented on here many times - the Cardinals haven't gotten a chance at the premium top half of the first round draft picks because they've had winning seasons in all but 3 seasons this century. This is nothing new. It's been posted on here over the past several years by multiple posters. Why don't you tell all the posters who have posted that over the years to "man up"?
Now tell me what the hell that has to do with defense!
You have become a cantankerous old man that will never admit he is wrong or argues with subjects completely off subject. Talk about hijacking posts then blaming someone else!
legit options at this point.
Seems a bit of a shame.
Exactly.renostl wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 16:50 pmSeems a bit of a shame.
There was once some good discussions, even in this thread some
decent thoughts were brought up.
They were buried in 5 pages of bickering.
I agree...too bad it was hijacked by a front office (donkey) kisser who only wants to argue with several posters and claims they only want to talk about baseball...very sadrenostl wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 16:50 pmSeems a bit of a shame.
There was once some good discussions, even in this thread some
decent thoughts were brought up.
They were buried in 5 pages of bickering.
The little weasel troll rises to post!WLTFE wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 17:10 pmI agree...too bad it was hijacked by a front office (donkey) kisser who only wants to argue with several posters and claims they only want to talk about baseball...very sadrenostl wrote: ↑16 Dec 2025 16:50 pmSeems a bit of a shame.
There was once some good discussions, even in this thread some
decent thoughts were brought up.
They were buried in 5 pages of bickering.
This would be my guess also.ecleme22 wrote: ↑11 Dec 2025 10:17 amDepends what you get for him.OldRed wrote: ↑11 Dec 2025 09:59 amIf you have to pay half his salary to dump him yes, keep him for his defense.
I’m guessing CB will grab a def first 2b/3b if he trades NA and BD
