Should rebuilding teams just take a Hiatus from playing MLB games? Kinda like pre-expansion teams who only run MILB?
Posted: 08 Nov 2025 13:58 pm
I'm not saying I'm for it, but this is almost the unspoken argument that several here have made. Do we really want this?
Expansion teams start up their minors before launching their MLB team - Colorado ran 2 MILB teams in 1992 and drafted in 1992 before the expansion draft and Free Agency gave them a MLB team in 1993.
What about the Cardinals - if aren't going to compete until 202X - and we decide that veterans just get in the way of prospects by blocking them - then we just trade all our veterans?
But then we also make the argument that we shouldn't promote prospects and start their clock and "waste" their service time because we have nothing to play for? If that's true, then why play the games at the MLB level if we are really that committed to a holding pattern? And that argument does have merit at some level, at least in a vacuum. Maybe we trade Donny because he's "worth more to a 2026 contender than he is to us" and his clock keeps ticking (thank you very much from another MLB franchise for being so generous). And in 2-3 years when and IF we are "ready", by then Winn will be in the same place as Donny is today - so if we aren't winning 95+ games that year, do we trade Winn for Prospects as well so we don't lose him to FA? And then just keep continuing the cycle? And we did the same thing with Helsley, and Maton. And now maybe even JoJo. Should we also Trade Libby for someone younger next year so we don't waste him? I get why, but at some point do we turn a corner?
I get not signing a 38 yo star to an expensive contract if we "aren't" going to compete, but some of us have extended this logic to those a decade younger - who have plenty of career runway after the "non-compete" years expire, just not at minimum wage prices. And those players may be available now and not available later, but still in their primes playing for our competition.
Its like we think we can just suddenly turn the competition switch back on in an instant when some trigger event happens (though no one can say exactly what that trigger is). And if so - why even bother having an MLB team until then?
But if you think that there is value in playing the MLB games and players who are ready developing at that level - then I think you need to commit to fielding the best team you can with what we have in the franchise and with who we can reasonably and smartly bring in without giving up top prospects- a balanced approach. Which means players like JJW and Doyle and others should play and get experience as Soon as they are ready, so we actually can improve the MLB roster enough to take the future steps of "filling in around them" with FA stars. And it also probably means extending the producers we have already promoted to the majors when appropriate. And finally I think it means bringing in the best manager we can to develop both the young prospects and the mid career players who have years of runway left and need to improve.
Expansion teams start up their minors before launching their MLB team - Colorado ran 2 MILB teams in 1992 and drafted in 1992 before the expansion draft and Free Agency gave them a MLB team in 1993.
What about the Cardinals - if aren't going to compete until 202X - and we decide that veterans just get in the way of prospects by blocking them - then we just trade all our veterans?
But then we also make the argument that we shouldn't promote prospects and start their clock and "waste" their service time because we have nothing to play for? If that's true, then why play the games at the MLB level if we are really that committed to a holding pattern? And that argument does have merit at some level, at least in a vacuum. Maybe we trade Donny because he's "worth more to a 2026 contender than he is to us" and his clock keeps ticking (thank you very much from another MLB franchise for being so generous). And in 2-3 years when and IF we are "ready", by then Winn will be in the same place as Donny is today - so if we aren't winning 95+ games that year, do we trade Winn for Prospects as well so we don't lose him to FA? And then just keep continuing the cycle? And we did the same thing with Helsley, and Maton. And now maybe even JoJo. Should we also Trade Libby for someone younger next year so we don't waste him? I get why, but at some point do we turn a corner?
I get not signing a 38 yo star to an expensive contract if we "aren't" going to compete, but some of us have extended this logic to those a decade younger - who have plenty of career runway after the "non-compete" years expire, just not at minimum wage prices. And those players may be available now and not available later, but still in their primes playing for our competition.
Its like we think we can just suddenly turn the competition switch back on in an instant when some trigger event happens (though no one can say exactly what that trigger is). And if so - why even bother having an MLB team until then?
But if you think that there is value in playing the MLB games and players who are ready developing at that level - then I think you need to commit to fielding the best team you can with what we have in the franchise and with who we can reasonably and smartly bring in without giving up top prospects- a balanced approach. Which means players like JJW and Doyle and others should play and get experience as Soon as they are ready, so we actually can improve the MLB roster enough to take the future steps of "filling in around them" with FA stars. And it also probably means extending the producers we have already promoted to the majors when appropriate. And finally I think it means bringing in the best manager we can to develop both the young prospects and the mid career players who have years of runway left and need to improve.
