Mozeliak: "Some Changes" Coming For Cardinals, But Not A Rebuild

Discuss all things Cardinals Baseball
Post Reply
cardsfantx
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 12201
Joined: November 6 10, 10:58 am

Re: Mozeliak: "Some Changes" Coming For Cardinals, But Not A Rebuild

Post by cardsfantx »

dmarx114 wrote: ↑
July 27 23, 2:56 pm
MinorLeagueGuy wrote: ↑
July 27 23, 1:32 pm
dmarx114 wrote: ↑
July 27 23, 1:19 pm
phins wrote: ↑
July 27 23, 1:03 pm
There are times I say to myself, “well, at least the Cardinals can’t possibly handle things worse and are finally going to do a fast rebuild and sell.”

Then I read this thread and realize they really have become this antiquated and poorly run.

They’re killing their own trade returns for the off-chance they can save $5M or something.
How did they do this?
I think "cheap extensions", over "trade them, and hope they resign" is how I interpret this. Because in the event that they resign, it will be after other teams have driven the price a few million dollars north of what we potentially could've gotten them for on a team friendly extension.
I am confused. We haven't extended anyone.
Ahhh the old dmarx acting obtuse like he doesn’t know what anyone’s talking about

They’re clearing talking about the extension discussions for hicks and flaherty

Magneto2.0
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 18092
Joined: June 16 07, 2:12 pm

Re: Mozeliak: "Some Changes" Coming For Cardinals, But Not A Rebuild

Post by Magneto2.0 »

jagtrader wrote: ↑
July 27 23, 3:00 pm
Magneto2.0 wrote: ↑
July 27 23, 2:53 pm
If y'all don't think their trade chips are valuable, y'all can't also be mad if they don't get anything much back for them. Which is it?
For the rentals …

Not expecting blue chip prospects at all. Was hoping for some live arms for the bullpen and a Kutter Crawford kind of starter. Maybe two.
That's fair then. I wouldn't be surprised if some of these trades are package deals to get more value.
Last edited by Magneto2.0 on July 27 23, 3:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Magneto2.0
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 18092
Joined: June 16 07, 2:12 pm

Re: Mozeliak: "Some Changes" Coming For Cardinals, But Not A Rebuild

Post by Magneto2.0 »

cardsfantx wrote: ↑
July 27 23, 2:59 pm
Magneto2.0 wrote: ↑
July 27 23, 2:53 pm
If y'all don't think their trade chips are valuable, y'all can't also be mad if they don't get anything much back for them. Which is it?
I’ve only seen 1 person talking about how we don’t think they’re valuable

They’re valuable….flaherty, Monty, hicks, Stratton, dejong are valuable.

Even if they aren’t? You still trade them.

Monty is the only one you’d make a qualifying offer to, as the rest would accept (and dejong has an option to decline)

So I’m not letting them walk for nothing.

Even if it’s crap; it’s better than getting absolutely nothing.
I 100% agree they need to be traded. But I'm trying to get a gauge of expectations, because if they're not valuable then the expectations on a return should be low.

I believe they have value because they one of the few sellers in a buyers market. My expectations have always been they should be able to get a team's top 10-15 prospects for both Flaherty and Montgomery and a team's top 20 for Hicks. Helsley also seemingly is on the market, so I'd say another team's top 15 prospect for him as well.

jagtrader
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 12651
Joined: June 5 06, 10:01 am

Re: Mozeliak: "Some Changes" Coming For Cardinals, But Not A Rebuild

Post by jagtrader »

It’s time to trade from the OF/MI surplus to get a legitimate starter who can give you 170 above average innings.

User avatar
Transmogrified Tiger
Puppy Murderer
Posts: 9323
Joined: April 25 06, 6:07 pm
Location: Across the River

Re: Mozeliak: "Some Changes" Coming For Cardinals, But Not A Rebuild

Post by Transmogrified Tiger »

jagtrader wrote: ↑
July 26 23, 4:19 pm
Media really wants Arenado on the Dodgers.
Little surprised there isn't more convo about this, the linked article below makes it sound like more than media wishcasting
The Dodgers have engaged in talks with the St. Louis Cardinals to acquire the eight-time All-Star third baseman, according to people with knowledge of the situation but who are not authorized to speak publicly. The Cardinals could also send a starting pitcher — Jack Flaherty or Jordan Montgomery — to Los Angeles for a package of major leaguers and prospects.

The Cardinals would want young pitching in a deal; they have eyed Bobby Miller, Gavin Stone, Ryan Pepiot, and Emmet Sheehan in talks, according to people with knowledge of the situation. A trade would also likely include the Dodgers sending Max Muncy or Chris Taylor, if not both, to St. Louis.

jagtrader
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 12651
Joined: June 5 06, 10:01 am

Re: Mozeliak: "Some Changes" Coming For Cardinals, But Not A Rebuild

Post by jagtrader »

The Cardinals aren’t trading Arenado no matter how badly the LA media want it.

User avatar
CardsofSTL
All Hail the GDT Master
Posts: 69945
Joined: April 26 11, 6:06 am
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: Mozeliak: "Some Changes" Coming For Cardinals, But Not A Rebuild

Post by CardsofSTL »

I don't put much stock in beat writers for scoops until they've earned it.

jagtrader
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 12651
Joined: June 5 06, 10:01 am

Re: Mozeliak: "Some Changes" Coming For Cardinals, But Not A Rebuild

Post by jagtrader »

What the Cardinals need, MLB ready pitching, is difficult to get. I don’t see rentals pulling that off unless it’s a filler/back end of the rotation type.

User avatar
CardsofSTL
All Hail the GDT Master
Posts: 69945
Joined: April 26 11, 6:06 am
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: Mozeliak: "Some Changes" Coming For Cardinals, But Not A Rebuild

Post by CardsofSTL »

DeJong is obviously a likely candidate to be moved but y'all are overlooking the fact that if that happens I have to find a new avatar; and that is just too much stress.

cardsfantx
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 12201
Joined: November 6 10, 10:58 am

Re: Mozeliak: "Some Changes" Coming For Cardinals, But Not A Rebuild

Post by cardsfantx »

oh wow, so we get to give them arenado and a flaherty/monty and get to get back their trash of muncy and taylor?

lol, who the [expletive] is this guy

Post Reply