STLtoday.com Forums
https://interact.stltoday.com/forums/
https://interact.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1517362
I'm hoping for a C. Utley type!11WSChamps wrote: ↑27 Oct 2025 23:05 pmKind of reminds me of a more athletic Greg Jefferies.AZ_Cardsfan wrote: ↑27 Oct 2025 19:03 pmTrue. Hopefully that is what JJ becomes. Fingers crossed.11WSChamps wrote: ↑27 Oct 2025 18:41 pm We are not even in "Royals" territory.
They have a bonafide star in Witt and we don't.
I don’t see how 2006 compares at all to last year or this coming year.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 10:08 amJust telling the truth. Nobody thought the 2006 team could win it all but they didn't sell off all the veterans.
Yes……expanded playoffs do make it easier for weaker teams to get a spot…C-Unit wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 17:09 pmYeah, you have a point. For the most part, if you get in you have a chance and with expanded playoffs it should be a bit easier to set your sights on a playoff spot, and less tempting to go the other way.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 14:03 pm We averaged 5,917 more fans per game this season. After the 1985 debacle they didn't make the postseason for 29 years. Won a WS in 2015 and within 3 season lost 104 games. Took them 9 seasons after the WS to post a winning record.
We have to get rid of the mentality of 5 games over .500 at the all star break is an automatic sell off like we did this season.
But a competitive roster needs to be geared towards winning 90-94 games year in year out. Not 83-85. Anything happens if you get in, yes. But there is still a difference between a 94-win team and a 85, the main difference being that you aren't entirely counting on luck to carry you (just to make the playoff spot, even).
You need help45s wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:26 amYes……expanded playoffs do make it easier for weaker teams to get a spot…C-Unit wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 17:09 pmYeah, you have a point. For the most part, if you get in you have a chance and with expanded playoffs it should be a bit easier to set your sights on a playoff spot, and less tempting to go the other way.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 14:03 pm We averaged 5,917 more fans per game this season. After the 1985 debacle they didn't make the postseason for 29 years. Won a WS in 2015 and within 3 season lost 104 games. Took them 9 seasons after the WS to post a winning record.
We have to get rid of the mentality of 5 games over .500 at the all star break is an automatic sell off like we did this season.
But a competitive roster needs to be geared towards winning 90-94 games year in year out. Not 83-85. Anything happens if you get in, yes. But there is still a difference between a 94-win team and a 85, the main difference being that you aren't entirely counting on luck to carry you (just to make the playoff spot, even).
But expanded playoffs also requires those weaker teams to win more rounds to get to the series…
I just don’t see a weak third wild card team surviving enough rounds to get to the series…
Philosophically, the Cardinals should be positioning their organization to where they can, many years (say 2 out of 3), have a roster going into the season that on paper looks to be ~Top 3 in the NL when they bulk up to a $180-$200 million payroll.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 10:45 am Okay, under what circumstances should we add at the all star break? Under this organizational philosophy we would have dumped in July 2006. isn't the goal to attain the rare feat of winning the world series?
Sadly, there’s no one on this board that can provide such…C-Unit wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:35 amYou need help45s wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:26 amYes……expanded playoffs do make it easier for weaker teams to get a spot…C-Unit wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 17:09 pmYeah, you have a point. For the most part, if you get in you have a chance and with expanded playoffs it should be a bit easier to set your sights on a playoff spot, and less tempting to go the other way.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 14:03 pm We averaged 5,917 more fans per game this season. After the 1985 debacle they didn't make the postseason for 29 years. Won a WS in 2015 and within 3 season lost 104 games. Took them 9 seasons after the WS to post a winning record.
We have to get rid of the mentality of 5 games over .500 at the all star break is an automatic sell off like we did this season.
But a competitive roster needs to be geared towards winning 90-94 games year in year out. Not 83-85. Anything happens if you get in, yes. But there is still a difference between a 94-win team and a 85, the main difference being that you aren't entirely counting on luck to carry you (just to make the playoff spot, even).
But expanded playoffs also requires those weaker teams to win more rounds to get to the series…
I just don’t see a weak third wild card team surviving enough rounds to get to the series…
I don't see them having the money to bulk up to that level but the question is dump or add in July. What's the benchmark number for that?mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:39 amPhilosophically, the Cardinals should be positioning their organization to where they can, many years (say 2 out of 3), have a roster going into the season that on paper looks to be ~Top 3 in the NL when they bulk up to a $180-$200 million payroll.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 10:45 am Okay, under what circumstances should we add at the all star break? Under this organizational philosophy we would have dumped in July 2006. isn't the goal to attain the rare feat of winning the world series?
But to do that against the Dodgers, Phillies, Braves, Mets, etc., they have to have a ~Top 5 farm system in terms of delivering talent to the ML team - producing both solid, average starters and the occasional impact player (a 4-5 fWAR position player or #1/#2 SP). They are getting there, but the ML team hasn't yet realized the benefits. Maybe after Wetherholt, Doyle, etc. matriculate, they will start to get the pipeline back to where it needs to be.
If they get to the trade deadline and it looks to be holding true (based on player performance, injury avoidance, etc.) that they have a ~Top 3 in the NL roster, then by all means look to "win now" and make additions to push for a WS that year.
In retrospect they all look like great players but at the time in 2006 the team only made the playoffs because the central division was weak and they had a worse record than Philadelphia who missed the playoffs.Ronnie Dobbs wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:03 amI don’t see how 2006 compares at all to last year or this coming year.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 10:08 amJust telling the truth. Nobody thought the 2006 team could win it all but they didn't sell off all the veterans.
We were in first place and 58-46 at the deadline. We were coming off two straight 100 win seasons, resulting an an NL Pennant and losing in the NLDS the two previous years. We had the best player on the planet in his prime, Scott Rolen in his prime, and an aging Jim Edmonds that still had a 136 OPs+ the previous year. We also had an ascendant Yadi and Chris Duncan was looking like a real hitter and ended up with a 140 OPS that year. We also had a very solid rotation led by prime Chris Carpenter.
There’s no way team even thinks about selling. In 2007 and 2008, however, no we’re getting closer to this team, but even then, they still had Pujols, Molina, and Wainwright to build around. And they too had to make some tough decisions. They did a little mini-rebuild of their own, firing Walt Jocketty, building up the minors, then they traded some old players, and had two down years before coming back in 2009. And look how it eventually paid off for them. They ended up winning a WS in 2011.
I think that helps make the case for recognizing when you need to make changes, suck it up, and make tough choices that won’t necessarily be popular.
We ain't offering45s wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:57 amSadly, there’s no one on this board that can provide such…C-Unit wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:35 amYou need help45s wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:26 amYes……expanded playoffs do make it easier for weaker teams to get a spot…C-Unit wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 17:09 pmYeah, you have a point. For the most part, if you get in you have a chance and with expanded playoffs it should be a bit easier to set your sights on a playoff spot, and less tempting to go the other way.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 14:03 pm We averaged 5,917 more fans per game this season. After the 1985 debacle they didn't make the postseason for 29 years. Won a WS in 2015 and within 3 season lost 104 games. Took them 9 seasons after the WS to post a winning record.
We have to get rid of the mentality of 5 games over .500 at the all star break is an automatic sell off like we did this season.
But a competitive roster needs to be geared towards winning 90-94 games year in year out. Not 83-85. Anything happens if you get in, yes. But there is still a difference between a 94-win team and a 85, the main difference being that you aren't entirely counting on luck to carry you (just to make the playoff spot, even).
But expanded playoffs also requires those weaker teams to win more rounds to get to the series…
I just don’t see a weak third wild card team surviving enough rounds to get to the series…
I reviewed my comments….C-Unit wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 12:16 pmWe ain't offering45s wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:57 amSadly, there’s no one on this board that can provide such…C-Unit wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:35 amYou need help45s wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:26 amYes……expanded playoffs do make it easier for weaker teams to get a spot…C-Unit wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 17:09 pmYeah, you have a point. For the most part, if you get in you have a chance and with expanded playoffs it should be a bit easier to set your sights on a playoff spot, and less tempting to go the other way.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 14:03 pm We averaged 5,917 more fans per game this season. After the 1985 debacle they didn't make the postseason for 29 years. Won a WS in 2015 and within 3 season lost 104 games. Took them 9 seasons after the WS to post a winning record.
We have to get rid of the mentality of 5 games over .500 at the all star break is an automatic sell off like we did this season.
But a competitive roster needs to be geared towards winning 90-94 games year in year out. Not 83-85. Anything happens if you get in, yes. But there is still a difference between a 94-win team and a 85, the main difference being that you aren't entirely counting on luck to carry you (just to make the playoff spot, even).
But expanded playoffs also requires those weaker teams to win more rounds to get to the series…
I just don’t see a weak third wild card team surviving enough rounds to get to the series…
The benchmark is - when the trade deadline approaches, does it look like they have a Top 3 in the NL roster or not? If yes, add. If no, but are firmly in a spot to make the playoffs, hold. If no and not firmly in a spot to make the playoffs, sell.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:58 amI don't see them having the money to bulk up to that level but the question is dump or add in July. What's the benchmark number for that?mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:39 amPhilosophically, the Cardinals should be positioning their organization to where they can, many years (say 2 out of 3), have a roster going into the season that on paper looks to be ~Top 3 in the NL when they bulk up to a $180-$200 million payroll.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 10:45 am Okay, under what circumstances should we add at the all star break? Under this organizational philosophy we would have dumped in July 2006. isn't the goal to attain the rare feat of winning the world series?
But to do that against the Dodgers, Phillies, Braves, Mets, etc., they have to have a ~Top 5 farm system in terms of delivering talent to the ML team - producing both solid, average starters and the occasional impact player (a 4-5 fWAR position player or #1/#2 SP). They are getting there, but the ML team hasn't yet realized the benefits. Maybe after Wetherholt, Doyle, etc. matriculate, they will start to get the pipeline back to where it needs to be.
If they get to the trade deadline and it looks to be holding true (based on player performance, injury avoidance, etc.) that they have a ~Top 3 in the NL roster, then by all means look to "win now" and make additions to push for a WS that year.
Sorry. That is WAY too logical. Can't have that here.mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 14:13 pm
The benchmark is - when the trade deadline approaches, does it look like they have a Top 3 in the NL roster or not? If yes, add. If no, but are firmly in a spot to make the playoffs, hold. If no and not firmly in a spot to make the playoffs, sell.
So if we aren't top 3 abandon all hope? 2011 we were wild card but we added a pitcher in July named Edwin Jackson who got us to the playoffs - barely. That's a lot of dumping and not a lot of trying to win.mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 14:13 pmThe benchmark is - when the trade deadline approaches, does it look like they have a Top 3 in the NL roster or not? If yes, add. If no, but are firmly in a spot to make the playoffs, hold. If no and not firmly in a spot to make the playoffs, sell.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:58 amI don't see them having the money to bulk up to that level but the question is dump or add in July. What's the benchmark number for that?mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:39 amPhilosophically, the Cardinals should be positioning their organization to where they can, many years (say 2 out of 3), have a roster going into the season that on paper looks to be ~Top 3 in the NL when they bulk up to a $180-$200 million payroll.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 10:45 am Okay, under what circumstances should we add at the all star break? Under this organizational philosophy we would have dumped in July 2006. isn't the goal to attain the rare feat of winning the world series?
But to do that against the Dodgers, Phillies, Braves, Mets, etc., they have to have a ~Top 5 farm system in terms of delivering talent to the ML team - producing both solid, average starters and the occasional impact player (a 4-5 fWAR position player or #1/#2 SP). They are getting there, but the ML team hasn't yet realized the benefits. Maybe after Wetherholt, Doyle, etc. matriculate, they will start to get the pipeline back to where it needs to be.
If they get to the trade deadline and it looks to be holding true (based on player performance, injury avoidance, etc.) that they have a ~Top 3 in the NL roster, then by all means look to "win now" and make additions to push for a WS that year.
As my early response showed the talent level of 06 was vastly better than 25. There were also no super teams built in 06. Not at all comparable. Tell me who is the Carpenter, Rolen, Pujols, Molina and Edmonds on the 2025 Cardinals?ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 10:08 amJust telling the truth. Nobody thought the 2006 team could win it all but they didn't sell off all the veterans.Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑27 Oct 2025 21:22 pmNothing in your response answers the questions I asked, You dodged the questions.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑27 Oct 2025 18:27 pmIn early 2006, the St. Louis Cardinals had the weakest playoff odds of the NL Central division at not quite 36%, making it the tightest division, according to Baseball Prospectus. By the end of the season, the teams that ultimately qualified for the postseason were the New York Yankees, Minnesota Twins, Oakland Athletics, Detroit Tigers, New York Mets, Los Angeles Dodgers, San Diego Padres, and St. Louis Cardinals.Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑27 Oct 2025 15:30 pmHow did Milwaukee, Cincinnati and Philly do against the Dodgers? What makes you think STL would have done anything against LA? The game is different than it was in 06.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑27 Oct 2025 11:52 amThere is no norm. In the wild card era - 30 years - the team with the best record has won the world series 24% of the time. You make the playoffs. The it's a new season.Stlcardsblues wrote: ↑27 Oct 2025 08:19 amThe 2006 Cardinals run was not the norm. Besides this team lacked a Carpenter, Pujols, Molina, Rolen and Edmonds. Far too many teams lie to themselves and their fan base when stuck in the middle and turn it into years of mediocrity with no real hope of getting out of it. They can’t admit they are not a true playoff contender and need to build from within.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 16:38 pmGreat if it works but teams like the Pirates have been trying to do that for decades. There is a 2006 world series banner at Busch Stadium for a team that was 5 games over .500 for the season. They won the world series because you don't need more than 3 starting pitchers in the playoffs. First you make the playoffs. Then you win.Ozziesfan41 wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 14:39 pmI’m glad they are getting rid of the finishing over .500 is a good season and want to build a team that can actually win something instead of being dumb holding onto players so they can be one and done in the post seasonScotchMIrish wrote: ↑26 Oct 2025 14:03 pm We averaged 5,917 more fans per game this season. After the 1985 debacle they didn't make the postseason for 29 years. Won a WS in 2015 and within 3 season lost 104 games. Took them 9 seasons after the WS to post a winning record.
We have to get rid of the mentality of 5 games over .500 at the all star break is an automatic sell off like we did this season.
Royals went 29 years with no playoffs. 2 consecutive world series. Dump and rebuild another 9 years before they had a winning record.
Sometimes teams need a reset to build things up. The 2025 Cardinals needed that. It would have been insane to not sell at the deadline hoping this team can make a magical run. They should have traded Romero as well.
Now it’s on DeWitt and Bloom to show they are building towards success and not becoming a terribly run team like Pittsburgh and Colorado.
What part of the 25 team left you feeling like they had any chance at post season success?
I know resets stink but all teams need them occasionally when they can’t spend 250 million on payroll.
You think Pozo, Noot and the rest were beating anyone in the playoffs?
Did you not read:ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 15:05 pmSo if we aren't top 3 abandon all hope? 2011 we were wild card but we added a pitcher in July named Edwin Jackson who got us to the playoffs - barely. That's a lot of dumping and not a lot of trying to win.mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 14:13 pmThe benchmark is - when the trade deadline approaches, does it look like they have a Top 3 in the NL roster or not? If yes, add. If no, but are firmly in a spot to make the playoffs, hold. If no and not firmly in a spot to make the playoffs, sell.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:58 amI don't see them having the money to bulk up to that level but the question is dump or add in July. What's the benchmark number for that?mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 11:39 amPhilosophically, the Cardinals should be positioning their organization to where they can, many years (say 2 out of 3), have a roster going into the season that on paper looks to be ~Top 3 in the NL when they bulk up to a $180-$200 million payroll.ScotchMIrish wrote: ↑28 Oct 2025 10:45 am Okay, under what circumstances should we add at the all star break? Under this organizational philosophy we would have dumped in July 2006. isn't the goal to attain the rare feat of winning the world series?
But to do that against the Dodgers, Phillies, Braves, Mets, etc., they have to have a ~Top 5 farm system in terms of delivering talent to the ML team - producing both solid, average starters and the occasional impact player (a 4-5 fWAR position player or #1/#2 SP). They are getting there, but the ML team hasn't yet realized the benefits. Maybe after Wetherholt, Doyle, etc. matriculate, they will start to get the pipeline back to where it needs to be.
If they get to the trade deadline and it looks to be holding true (based on player performance, injury avoidance, etc.) that they have a ~Top 3 in the NL roster, then by all means look to "win now" and make additions to push for a WS that year.
If no, but are firmly in a spot to make the playoffs, hold.