StL will guage Arenado trade interest

[jagtrader]

If you're in a "reset," whatever that means in corporate speak, and you're cutting payroll while keeping an injury-prone closer entering his walk year, you're doing it wrong.

A smart team trades Helsley at last year's deadline so teams can get two postseasons out of him and they can maximize his value. But that would require the Cardinals to have some vision 10 seconds into the future. Instead they keep him, decide they're not contending in Helsley's walk year, then STILL don't trade him until, presumably, this July.

[heyzeus]

If you're in a "reset," whatever that means in corporate speak, and you're cutting payroll while keeping an injury-prone closer entering his walk year, you're doing it wrong.

A smart team trades Helsley at last year's deadline so teams can get two postseasons out of them. But that would require the Cardinals to have some vision 10 seconds into the future. Instead they keep him, decide they're not contending in Helsley's walk year, then STILL don't trade him.

We're doing a reset without the reset. It's now January 8 and we haven't added any prospects or young talent. We've just let some free agents walk.

[Jocephus]

and you just know that one of or both fedde or helsley will be hurt/ineffective thus reducing what could be got at the deadline too

[dmarx114]

Good move: Shows immediate and obvious value.

Creative move: A move that might immediately look curious or even bad, but is designed to pay off years later or a high risk / high reward gamble. A creative move could end up good or bad.

It would be good to see the Cardinals make *any* sort of move right now, and maybe we could categorize it. That would be fun.

Feels like more of a risky move.

[MrCrowesGarden]

Breaking: people have different definitions.

[Popeye_Card]

Good move: Shows immediate and obvious value.

Creative move: A move that might immediately look curious or even bad, but is designed to pay off years later or a high risk / high reward gamble. A creative move could end up good or bad.

It would be good to see the Cardinals make *any* sort of move right now, and maybe we could categorize it. That would be fun.

Feels like more of a risky move.

Yes? Though creative doesn't always have to be high-risk. For example, the Cardinals deciding to trade Helsley at the deadline last year wouldn't have been very high risk (he probably would not have had a make-or-break impact on the Cardinals' playoff chances), but would have shown a bit of creativity that the Brewers (for example) have shown in recent seasons.

You can make your own Venn diagram as-needed for these things. If you created a circle on it for "Safe move", you could plot nearly every Cardinal transaction over the last 5+ years.

[TGantz]

I can handle a reset. This isn't a reset. This is stuck in safe-mode.

I was expecting a few more Roddery Munoz type of moves, maybe a few trades to redistribute positions more evenly like Baker or Burleson, maybe re-signing Kittredge, giving Mark Canha a minor league deal to add another RH OF bat. I'll take anything at this point.

This is worst case scenario. Helsley, Fedde, and Matz' values will tank I'm sure. So boring and not worth anyone's time or money.

[Popeye_Card]

On the positive side, I hear that Girsch has just about perfected a paper airplane design that will fly halfway across the field at Busch Stadium.

[Popeye_Card]

In case you are interested, yes Mike Girsch has a LinkedIn profile. I do not appear to have any mutual connections with him.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-girsch-986a846/

[ghostrunner]

My understanding of their priorities earlier on was something like this, which I was/am fine with given the circumstances:

Reduce payroll this year and maybe next due to decreased tv revenue and recent ticket sales.
Hope to contend with a younger roster, but sink or swim on it.
Keep reliable, paid/controlled players like Helsley in areas where they don't have confidence in their prospects. I think they want their starting prospects to start.
Trade players like Arenado, Fedde and Matz - non-difference makers (offensively in Arenado's case) who don't substantially improve upon what the prospect's ceilings are.


I'm now less confident about that last one and it's the only area that bugs me. I don't see any reason to pin what happens with Fedde and Matz to what happens with Arenado but for some reason they seem to be doing that. Or maybe the market just hasn't materialized.

I don't see them spending any money on the bullpen unless they're spending money in general, which we knew they wouldn't.