It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
Moderators: STLtoday Forum Moderators, Cards Talk Moderators
It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
Gorman, Walker, Wong, Carlson, Rasmus, Miller etc.
Vs. Burlseson, Donovan, Edman, Carpenter, Craig.
Strange how that works.
Maybe I better revise my expectations for JJ?
Vs. Burlseson, Donovan, Edman, Carpenter, Craig.
Strange how that works.
Maybe I better revise my expectations for JJ?
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 1807
- Joined: 23 May 2024 15:33 pm
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
As a tangent to the OP, I would note that because some prospects that we have high expectations for don't work out is not a reason to depend less on developing cost controlled young players. Rather, because we know 1/3 or 1/2 of prospects may not pan out , that is why the Cardinals need to acquire, develop, and keep even MORE prospects to ensure they have the ~25 fWAR of cost controlled players they need to be competitive.
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
Some of those guys like rasmus and wong were nof busts at all and had solid careers- people just had sky high expectations and were disappointed despite very solid production
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
In some cases expectations are set too high by the organization that raises fan expectations.
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
Yup, a 20 WAR career from both Wong and Rasmus is a really good outcome from a #22/#28 (respectively) overall pick, many of which never even make it to the bigs.
The only problem is the org/fan hype on these guys, which fans never seem to learn how to guard against. E.g. I'd bet most people right now would say they'd be really disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
Darn it 3dender for calling me out, but yes, I'll be disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.3dender wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 07:32 amYup, a 20 WAR career from both Wong and Rasmus is a really good outcome from a #22/#28 (respectively) overall pick, many of which never even make it to the bigs.
The only problem is the org/fan hype on these guys, which fans never seem to learn how to guard against. E.g. I'd bet most people right now would say they'd be really disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
To be fair, #7 is a different tier of prospect than 20-something. (And I'd also be disappointedJDW wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 07:57 amDarn it 3dender for calling me out, but yes, I'll be disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.3dender wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 07:32 amYup, a 20 WAR career from both Wong and Rasmus is a really good outcome from a #22/#28 (respectively) overall pick, many of which never even make it to the bigs.
The only problem is the org/fan hype on these guys, which fans never seem to learn how to guard against. E.g. I'd bet most people right now would say they'd be really disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.

-
- Forum User
- Posts: 1807
- Joined: 23 May 2024 15:33 pm
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
In the last 50 years, only 441 position players have had careers of 20 fWAR or more.JDW wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 07:57 amDarn it 3dender for calling me out, but yes, I'll be disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.3dender wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 07:32 amYup, a 20 WAR career from both Wong and Rasmus is a really good outcome from a #22/#28 (respectively) overall pick, many of which never even make it to the bigs.
The only problem is the org/fan hype on these guys, which fans never seem to learn how to guard against. E.g. I'd bet most people right now would say they'd be really disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 13150
- Joined: 11 Aug 2023 16:20 pm
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
It’s like Army recruiting. Gotta make 100 contacts to ensure you get 10 appointments. Then 5 must test, then 3 must physical, then 1 must join.mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 05:27 am As a tangent to the OP, I would note that because some prospects that we have high expectations for don't work out is not a reason to depend less on developing cost controlled young players. Rather, because we know 1/3 or 1/2 of prospects may not pan out , that is why the Cardinals need to acquire, develop, and keep even MORE prospects to ensure they have the ~25 fWAR of cost controlled players they need to be competitive.
All that quantity just to get one contract.
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
Agreed, there have been drafts where maybe 1 or 2 of the top 10-15 picks had a 10+ WAR, so to get a 20+ WAR from any 1st round pick is not terrible and shouldn’t be disappointing.3dender wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 07:32 amYup, a 20 WAR career from both Wong and Rasmus is a really good outcome from a #22/#28 (respectively) overall pick, many of which never even make it to the bigs.
The only problem is the org/fan hype on these guys, which fans never seem to learn how to guard against. E.g. I'd bet most people right now would say they'd be really disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.
But the early signs of last year’s draft are ridiculous right now.
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
Burleson can hit some, but he's still only a ~1 WAR player at this point. That's not better than a 1st/2nd round pick star. Winn was 4.5 WAR last year.
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
so to be an above average franchise, the Cards should have gotten about 15-20 of those 441 during my lifetime. Who are they all?mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 09:12 amIn the last 50 years, only 441 position players have had careers of 20 fWAR or more.JDW wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 07:57 amDarn it 3dender for calling me out, but yes, I'll be disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.3dender wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 07:32 amYup, a 20 WAR career from both Wong and Rasmus is a really good outcome from a #22/#28 (respectively) overall pick, many of which never even make it to the bigs.
The only problem is the org/fan hype on these guys, which fans never seem to learn how to guard against. E.g. I'd bet most people right now would say they'd be really disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
Part overhype and also part not understanding defensive value in case of wong and also not understanding posituonal value.3dender wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 07:32 amYup, a 20 WAR career from both Wong and Rasmus is a really good outcome from a #22/#28 (respectively) overall pick, many of which never even make it to the bigs.
The only problem is the org/fan hype on these guys, which fans never seem to learn how to guard against. E.g. I'd bet most people right now would say they'd be really disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.
2b ss and cf just arent expected to put up 1b numbers.
Many casual fans will automatically feel that the 1b/dh is the most valuable player on their own team and on other teams they see around the league just cuz those are the guys with the best raw power hitting numbers- without considering how a guy does at his position compared to others.
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
-
- Forum User
- Posts: 1807
- Joined: 23 May 2024 15:33 pm
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
Since 1975, the position players who have put up 20+ fWAR while playing for the Cardinals:Carp4Cy wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 09:23 amso to be an above average franchise, the Cards should have gotten about 15-20 of those 441 during my lifetime. Who are they all?mattmitchl44 wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 09:12 amIn the last 50 years, only 441 position players have had careers of 20 fWAR or more.JDW wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 07:57 amDarn it 3dender for calling me out, but yes, I'll be disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.3dender wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 07:32 amYup, a 20 WAR career from both Wong and Rasmus is a really good outcome from a #22/#28 (respectively) overall pick, many of which never even make it to the bigs.
The only problem is the org/fan hype on these guys, which fans never seem to learn how to guard against. E.g. I'd bet most people right now would say they'd be really disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.
Pujols
O. Smith
Molina
Edmonds
Lankford
K. Hernandez
Simmons
M. Carpenter
Rolen
Holliday
McGwire
Goldschmidt
McGee
and Arenado (18.7 fWAR currently) may well join them this year.
Of course, there are a number of others (Brian Jordan, Hendrick, Herr, Drew, Renteria, Templeton, Oberkfell, Pendleton, Gilkey, etc.) who were over 20 fWAR for their entire careers, but under 20 fWAR while playing for the Cardinals.
Re: It seems like the lower the prospect level, the greater the chance of success.
Around 34% of 1st round picks never play in mlb at all much less become an impact player. I think a lot of people fail to realize just how much a (bleep) shoot it is.Futuregm2 wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 09:16 amAgreed, there have been drafts where maybe 1 or 2 of the top 10-15 picks had a 10+ WAR, so to get a 20+ WAR from any 1st round pick is not terrible and shouldn’t be disappointing.3dender wrote: ↑20 Jun 2025 07:32 amYup, a 20 WAR career from both Wong and Rasmus is a really good outcome from a #22/#28 (respectively) overall pick, many of which never even make it to the bigs.
The only problem is the org/fan hype on these guys, which fans never seem to learn how to guard against. E.g. I'd bet most people right now would say they'd be really disappointed if Wetherholt only has a 20 WAR career.
But the early signs of last year’s draft are ridiculous right now.