kgarrett12486 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 20 hours ago, StLunatic88 said: I agree that he isnt a Starter, never has been. But HE thinks he is. And with this change in his career, I would be he tried to make the shift and sell someone on it. He can market himself as that all he wants, but teams know what he is... If he wants to get any sort of possible MLB deal it'll be as a RP IMO... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StLunatic88 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 20 hours ago, CWood21 said: My best guess is they try and get someone on a 1 year deal and see if they can hold the rotation until midseason when Flaherty/Reyes are ready. But who is out there that is even worth signing? You already pulled us out of the Big Guns (Arrieta, Darvish & Tanaka) Lackey isnt coming back here. Almmost any guy under the age of 35 isnt going to want to sign just a 1 year deal (I get that some might have to eventually) So that leaves you with CC Sebathia? Dont think he is coming here either. With the parameters we have set, limiting a guy to a 1 year deal, really dries up the Free Agent Pool. Its going to be hard to get anyone decent enough that we arent rushing Reyes back or Flaherty up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgarrett12486 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 2 hours ago, StLunatic88 said: But who is out there that is even worth signing? You already pulled us out of the Big Guns (Arrieta, Darvish & Tanaka) Lackey isnt coming back here. Almmost any guy under the age of 35 isnt going to want to sign just a 1 year deal (I get that some might have to eventually) So that leaves you with CC Sebathia? Dont think he is coming here either. With the parameters we have set, limiting a guy to a 1 year deal, really dries up the Free Agent Pool. Its going to be hard to get anyone decent enough that we arent rushing Reyes back or Flaherty up. Agreed, I think the 1 year options will be limited at best and I don't see us pursuing as they likely won't offer more than we have internally. I think if we're going the FA route a guy like Alex Cobb would be an ideal candidate. He's only 28 and is probably in middle tier shelf of pitchers. Could probably land him on a 2-4 year deal... I really think we're going to purse a starter via the trade market though. Especially think it since we jumped into the Sonny Gray discussions at the deadline... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share Posted September 7, 2017 3 hours ago, kgarrett12486 said: Disagree, this move helps us right now. This team is right there in race for 2nd WC spot and we're hot right now... It bolsters our BP for this stretch run and gives us arguably the best set-up man in the NL this year and more importantly a guy who could be the closer we're missing right now... I like the move. Yah it sucks we didn't pull it off before Sept. 1st, but that's hindsight. He could be a very valuable piece to help push us to the playoffs. Once you get in the playoffs, always have a chance... We didn't loose anything of value either. Jen Langosch reported today Alvarez had fallen out of view in the minors and was likely to be taken off the 40 man in off-season and exposed to rule 5 draft anyway. We clearly didn't value him any longer... It was never about losing Alvarez for me. Honestly, he wasn't more than a utility MIF who didn't have any history of playing SS at best for me. It's the concept of trading for a reliever when the Cardinals seemingly already waived the white flag on the playoffs. I don't feel very strongly one way or the other on this deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share Posted September 7, 2017 3 hours ago, StLunatic88 said: But who is out there that is even worth signing? You already pulled us out of the Big Guns (Arrieta, Darvish & Tanaka) Lackey isnt coming back here. Almmost any guy under the age of 35 isnt going to want to sign just a 1 year deal (I get that some might have to eventually) So that leaves you with CC Sebathia? Dont think he is coming here either. With the parameters we have set, limiting a guy to a 1 year deal, really dries up the Free Agent Pool. Its going to be hard to get anyone decent enough that we arent rushing Reyes back or Flaherty up. There's a couple of guys who are probably looking a 1 year deals, although none of them actually give you any confidence which is to be expected. Anyone whose semi-reliable is going to give you good innings is going to receive a multi-year deal. Ubaldo Jimenez and Jeremy Hellickson are coming off down years, and probably aren't going to get multi-year looks. I think it's more likely they look to guys who are 2018 FA if they're going to get a SP. James Shields has been pretty bad since the White Sox acquired him, so if they're willing to eat most of the salary he'd be another buy-low candidate. Obviously, none of those are overly appealing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share Posted September 7, 2017 28 minutes ago, kgarrett12486 said: Agreed, I think the 1 year options will be limited at best and I don't see us pursuing as they likely won't offer more than we have internally. I think if we're going the FA route a guy like Alex Cobb would be an ideal candidate. He's only 28 and is probably in middle tier shelf of pitchers. Could probably land him on a 2-4 year deal... I really think we're going to purse a starter via the trade market though. Especially think it since we jumped into the Sonny Gray discussions at the deadline... LIS, I don't see the Cardinals handing out a multi-year deal to any FA SP. I think if they're going to acquire a pitcher, it's going to be via trade. And based on the comments about dealing from a position of strength, it seems that the Cardinals could use their OF glut to fix their rotation. IF there was any truth to the rumors about Mo floating a Piscotty/Flaherty offer for Sonny Gray, I wonder if they'd push their focus towards Chris Archer. Obviously, he'd cost significantly more but that's a clear co-ace you can place next to Carlos Martinez. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StLunatic88 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: LIS, I don't see the Cardinals handing out a multi-year deal to any FA SP. I think if they're going to acquire a pitcher, it's going to be via trade. And based on the comments about dealing from a position of strength, it seems that the Cardinals could use their OF glut to fix their rotation. IF there was any truth to the rumors about Mo floating a Piscotty/Flaherty offer for Sonny Gray, I wonder if they'd push their focus towards Chris Archer. Obviously, he'd cost significantly more but that's a clear co-ace you can place next to Carlos Martinez. I do think a trade is more likely, but I also wouldnt rule out a multi-year signing for the right guy. If you sign a Cobb type to 3 years, he helps solidify your rotation for 2018, You can give Reyes more time, and dont have to rely of Wacha (is that a big enough upgrade?). Then next year Waino is gone, you dont have to force anyone into the rotation, and still gives you Flaherty as a trade piece for a Bat maybe? (Still hoping for Donaldson) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share Posted September 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said: I do think a trade is more likely, but I also wouldnt rule out a multi-year signing for the right guy. If you sign a Cobb type to 3 years, he helps solidify your rotation for 2018, You can give Reyes more time, and dont have to rely of Wacha (is that a big enough upgrade?). Then next year Waino is gone, you dont have to force anyone into the rotation, and still gives you Flaherty as a trade piece for a Bat maybe? (Still hoping for Donaldson) LIS, I don't see them going after any of the big named FA and given that they jettisoned Mike Leake for cap relief it seems kinda pointless if they're digging into that second or third tier and handing off a long term contract to another SP. Is Cobb really that much of an upgrade over Leake, especially noting the fact that he's never thrown over 170 IP in any given season. It just seems like a gamble that's not worth it. Let someone else overpay him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgarrett12486 Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 4 hours ago, CWood21 said: It was never about losing Alvarez for me. Honestly, he wasn't more than a utility MIF who didn't have any history of playing SS at best for me. It's the concept of trading for a reliever when the Cardinals seemingly already waived the white flag on the playoffs. I don't feel very strongly one way or the other on this deal. That's the thing though, they haven't waived the white flag. They committed to playing the young guns and see where it took them because the vets weren't getting it done... They're 2 games out and nothing wrong with adding help to bolster while giving up next to nothing... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgarrett12486 Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 15 hours ago, CWood21 said: LIS, I don't see them going after any of the big named FA and given that they jettisoned Mike Leake for cap relief it seems kinda pointless if they're digging into that second or third tier and handing off a long term contract to another SP. Is Cobb really that much of an upgrade over Leake, especially noting the fact that he's never thrown over 170 IP in any given season. It just seems like a gamble that's not worth it. Let someone else overpay him. Agreed, I don't see us pursuing the big names. I'd even throw resigning Lance Lynn into that category, as he's likely looking at a Jordan Zimmerman type deal (5 Years - $100-110 million). I think we're all on the same page that the trade route is probably the most realistic route to get a true impact arm. I love Archer, but I doubt we'd sell the aspects to get him. It will likely be a SP we never even thought about... I think Cobb would be an upgrade, but likely at a more reasonable commitment. He's dealt with injures seemingly every season, so that will deflate his value and hence why he has yet to eclipse 170 IP threshold. However, he's still only 28 and just entering his prime. I definitely think he could be had on a 2-3 year deal, which isn't a 'long-term' investment in my eyes. Cobb will likely want to test the market again in a few years to seemingly get that last big deal after he builds his value more... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tttmikeb Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 13 hours ago, kgarrett12486 said: That's the thing though, they haven't waived the white flag. They committed to playing the young guns and see where it took them because the vets weren't getting it done... They're 2 games out and nothing wrong with adding help to bolster while giving up next to nothing... This is where I'm at, too. I don't see them as having given up. In just about any other context, trading a veteran starter w/ a multi-year deal for cap relief and making the decision to promote & play so many youngsters would seem like giving up. I get that. But looking at this team, this year, this situation, with how good the Memphis Redbirds have been, it's not a white flag. I'd say these moves were made to actually make us more competitive now, and I'd say it's helped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StLunatic88 Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 19 hours ago, CWood21 said: LIS, I don't see them going after any of the big named FA and given that they jettisoned Mike Leake for cap relief it seems kinda pointless if they're digging into that second or third tier and handing off a long term contract to another SP. Is Cobb really that much of an upgrade over Leake, especially noting the fact that he's never thrown over 170 IP in any given season. It just seems like a gamble that's not worth it. Let someone else overpay him. The Leake situation was obviously more complicated than just trading a player. He wasnt fitting here, he didnt want to be here, and he wasnt preforming very well. It was time to cut ties and just recoup as much flexible money as we could. And looking at Cobb shouldnt be compared to Leake, if we are looking at him as an upgrade, it would be over Wacha. Thats where the question is. Im not saying this is our plan, I think they would rather make a trade, but if we cant get one done, then we have to go to plan B. And if that is just sitting with Wacha, Weaver and a Reyes/Flehety combo, as the back end of our rotation, we might as well just not even try next year. Bottom line, I am saying Michael Wacha should be no more than our #5 Starter, emergency plan if Reyes isnt ready, That is the situation we need for me to feel comfortable with the rotation for 2018. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 8, 2017 Author Share Posted September 8, 2017 21 hours ago, kgarrett12486 said: That's the thing though, they haven't waived the white flag. They committed to playing the young guns and see where it took them because the vets weren't getting it done... They're 2 games out and nothing wrong with adding help to bolster while giving up next to nothing... I guess "waiving the white flag" was probably a bit too extreme for what I meant. I mean, go back to August 30th when the Cardinals dealt Mike Leake to the Mariners. They were 5.5 GB of the Rockies for the last Wild Card spot and now they're 3 GB after playing a little over a week. I don't think the Cardinals turned to the youngsters with the intention of making a playoff run, I think they were planning on using that last month to audition their youngsters both in terms of evaluating them as legitimate MLB talent as well as potential trading chips. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 8, 2017 Author Share Posted September 8, 2017 6 hours ago, StLunatic88 said: And looking at Cobb shouldnt be compared to Leake, if we are looking at him as an upgrade, it would be over Wacha. Thats where the question is. Im not saying this is our plan, I think they would rather make a trade, but if we cant get one done, then we have to go to plan B. And if that is just sitting with Wacha, Weaver and a Reyes/Flehety combo, as the back end of our rotation, we might as well just not even try next year. Bottom line, I am saying Michael Wacha should be no more than our #5 Starter, emergency plan if Reyes isnt ready, That is the situation we need for me to feel comfortable with the rotation for 2018. I just don't understand the logic of the people who are advocating signing Alex Cobb, but are so critical of Michael Wacha. Between the two of them, only one of their six seasons combined have they hit at least 180 IP and that was Wacha in 2015. Alex Cobb figures to hit that mark this year, but it's still worth noting. And I think hoping that Alex Cobb will accept a 2-3 year deal as @kgarrett12486 alluded to is wishful thinking at best. If his agent can't fetch him a 5 year deal, he needs to fire his agent immediately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgarrett12486 Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 19 hours ago, CWood21 said: I guess "waiving the white flag" was probably a bit too extreme for what I meant. I mean, go back to August 30th when the Cardinals dealt Mike Leake to the Mariners. They were 5.5 GB of the Rockies for the last Wild Card spot and now they're 3 GB after playing a little over a week. I don't think the Cardinals turned to the youngsters with the intention of making a playoff run, I think they were planning on using that last month to audition their youngsters both in terms of evaluating them as legitimate MLB talent as well as potential trading chips. Definitely think they wanted to give 'more' of the young players a look and evaluate, but that wasn't the sole reason and Mo has stated this. The young guys got their chance, albeit by injury or just simply outperforming their counterpart. The team started to take off and they rode the wave. I think as the FO started to see it wasn't just a 1-2 week 'high' they felt we had a legit chance to make the playoffs and added to an area of need. I don't think the FO doesn't believe this group can't make the playoffs given their play over the last month and a half... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.