2018/19 Offseason Not Worthy of its Own Thread News

Discuss what's happening in the day-to-day baseball world.
User avatar
Cronos
The Prodigal Son Returns
Posts: 34796
Joined: June 30 06, 7:49 am
Location: St. Louis

Re: 2018/19 Offseason Not Worthy of its Own Thread News

Post by Cronos »

Swirls wrote:
Holliday is a good example.

They certainly lit the fuse when they went for Heyward, Price, and Stanton. Yes, someone stomped it out before it ignited the barrel. But they certainly tried to use it.

They used it last year with Holland.
It's sadly not surprising that there is still this patently false belief that the Cardinals are cheap.

If one wants to make an argument that ALL the teams and owners are cheap, than that at least holds a little more water than specifically the Cardinals are the cheap ones.

User avatar
Big Amoco Sign
Master of Hyperbole
Posts: 7316
Joined: December 1 17, 11:05 am

Re: 2018/19 Offseason Not Worthy of its Own Thread News

Post by Big Amoco Sign »

Cronos wrote: It's sadly not surprising that there is still this patently false belief that the Cardinals are cheap.
Because they are cheap.

They dropped their payroll down substantially and ink players early to save money. They invest in the minor leagues in order to create cheap talent and avoid the marquee players. They trade for players like Ozuna who have high output prime years during their rookie deals. They trade for Goldschmidt for similar reasons. They go to Asia for Mikolas and Oh. How is that big spending behavior?

Exactly how are they big spenders? Because they make dumb reliever signings yearly?
Last edited by Big Amoco Sign on February 28 19, 1:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Fat Strat
Official GRB Sponsor of Larry Bigbie
Posts: 27952
Joined: April 17 06, 9:16 pm
Location: No. 16 on the Cards Top 15 Prospect List

Re: 2018/19 Offseason Not Worthy of its Own Thread News

Post by Fat Strat »

Big Amoco Sign wrote:
Cronos wrote: It's sadly not surprising that there is still this patently false belief that the Cardinals are cheap.
Because they are cheap.

They dropped their payroll down substantially and ink players early to save money. They invest in the minor leagues in order to create cheap talent and avoid the marquee players. They trade for players like Ozuna who have high output prime years during their rookie deals.

Exactly how are they big spenders? Because they make dumb reliever signings yearly?
Lol, how/when exactly have their "dropped their payroll down substantially?"

And why is it bad to "ink players early" to save money? Or bad to invest in the minor leagues? Or trading for players like Ozuna?

You know what, never mind. Answer if you want to, but I think I said a few weeks ago I was done with this kind of conversation. There's no point in continuing to get sucked in by it.
Last edited by Fat Strat on February 28 19, 1:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Cronos
The Prodigal Son Returns
Posts: 34796
Joined: June 30 06, 7:49 am
Location: St. Louis

Re: 2018/19 Offseason Not Worthy of its Own Thread News

Post by Cronos »

Fat Strat wrote:Lol, how/when exactly have their "dropped their payroll down substantially?"

And why is it bad to "ink players early" to save money? Or bad to invest in the minor leagues? Or trading for players like Ozuna?

You what, never mind. Answer if you want to, but I think I said a few weeks ago I was done with this kind of conversation. There's no point in continuing to get sucked in by it.
I've done my best to ignore it so far, but it truly just boggles my mind.

The things people are listing as to why they are "cheap" are the same among all owners. Again: if they want to call all owners and all teams "cheap", then do that and that I would at least understand the viewpoint more.

Saying the Cardinals specifically are the cheap ones is just incorrect. A lot of Cubs fans are complaining about Ricketts being "cheap" these days also, when they have the 2nd highest payroll in baseball. It's weird.
Last edited by Cronos on February 28 19, 1:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Big Amoco Sign
Master of Hyperbole
Posts: 7316
Joined: December 1 17, 11:05 am

Re: 2018/19 Offseason Not Worthy of its Own Thread News

Post by Big Amoco Sign »

The payroll is down nearly 10 million from last year which is against team and MLB trends. Those aren't bad things on their own. But the combination of many many cheap moves = owner being cheap. The whole point.

And because the whole league turning into the Rays also proves my point.

"We're not cheap if they're all cheap!"

User avatar
Cronos
The Prodigal Son Returns
Posts: 34796
Joined: June 30 06, 7:49 am
Location: St. Louis

Re: 2018/19 Offseason Not Worthy of its Own Thread News

Post by Cronos »

Besides; why complain so vociferously about something that very likely won't change? And may not even be the case per your admitted standards by opening day if, say, they ink Goldschmidt to an extension? Or pick up another player?

It's kind of like complaining about a specific politician obscuring the truth, lying and manipulating. They all do it all over the world. What's the point of complaining (yes, complaining to the point that threads get locked and moved around as often as they have been, not discussing) to such an extent?

It would be much better to find a solution to keep ALL owners from "being cheap"; ie changing the rules with the MLB player agreement (that they all agreed to at the time).

Fat Strat
Official GRB Sponsor of Larry Bigbie
Posts: 27952
Joined: April 17 06, 9:16 pm
Location: No. 16 on the Cards Top 15 Prospect List

Re: 2018/19 Offseason Not Worthy of its Own Thread News

Post by Fat Strat »

Big Amoco Sign wrote:The payroll is down nearly 10 million from last year which is against team and MLB trends. Those aren't bad things on their own. But the combination of many many cheap moves = owner being cheap. The whole point.

And because the whole league turning into the Rays also proves my point.

"We're not cheap if they're all cheap!"

Not even remotely true.
https://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/c ... cardinals/

Opening day 2018 - 159.7M
Current payroll - 159M

That's with AW's base salary. Add in the lowest level of likely incentives from AW and put Weiters on the roster and our opening day payroll is above last year.

User avatar
TheoSqua
Next Gen Wart
Posts: 8646
Joined: April 22 06, 6:53 pm
Location: St. Louis
Contact:

Re: 2018/19 Offseason Not Worthy of its Own Thread News

Post by TheoSqua »

This thread is to discuss offseason moves that don't merit their own thread. Let's please not turn this into yet another cardinals are cheap no they're not pissing contest.

User avatar
Big Amoco Sign
Master of Hyperbole
Posts: 7316
Joined: December 1 17, 11:05 am

Re: 2018/19 Offseason Not Worthy of its Own Thread News

Post by Big Amoco Sign »

Fat Strat wrote:
Big Amoco Sign wrote:The payroll is down nearly 10 million from last year which is against team and MLB trends. Those aren't bad things on their own. But the combination of many many cheap moves = owner being cheap. The whole point.

And because the whole league turning into the Rays also proves my point.

"We're not cheap if they're all cheap!"

Not even remotely true.
https://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/c ... cardinals/

Opening day 2018 - 159.7M
Current payroll - 159M

That's with AW's base salary. Add in the lowest level of likely incentives from AW and put Weiters on the roster and our opening day payroll is above last year.
SportTrac was different.

Off it.

User avatar
Famous Mortimer
All-Star
Posts: 2460
Joined: November 14 14, 5:23 am
Location: Cherokee

Re: 2018/19 Offseason Not Worthy of its Own Thread News

Post by Famous Mortimer »

Swirls wrote:
Holliday is a good example.

They certainly lit the fuse when they went for Heyward, Price, and Stanton. Yes, someone stomped it out before it ignited the barrel. But they certainly tried to use it.

They used it last year with Holland.
Unless there's a prize for finishing second on a bunch of free agents, I don't think they did. The Cardinals knew Stanton was never going to come here so it didn't matter how much they offered.

Post Reply