urbanSTL

Off Season shopping list;

Heyward- looking at 6 years $140,000,000 maybe with an opt out after 4 years
David Price- probably a 5/125M
Back up catcher upgrade- Dioner Navarro will be out there
better 8th inning guy- Ryan Madson/ Maybe Jordan Waldon can be that guy
better LH specialist- J.P. Howell



2016 Line up

1. Carpenter 3B 280/25/80
2. Piscotty 1B 290/20/75
3. Heyward 285/20/70
4. Gritchuk 270/30/100
5. Holliday 295/18/80
6. Peralta 275/15/70
7. Molina 285/7/60
8. Wong 265/15/65

Bench
New Catcher
Pham
Garcia
Adams
Reynolds

Rotation
Wainwight
Price
Martinez
Wacha
Garica/Lynn

Bullpen

Closer- Rosenthal
8th- Waldon/ New
LH Siegrist/ new
Carlos Villanueva
Maness
Lyons
Belisle


Dump- Jon Jay, Tony Cruz, Kozma, Lackey, Cishek, Broxton, Moss, Bourjos

moorlander wrote:The Cardinals lost to the better team. Cap tip to the Cubs.

This Cubs team is really good will be force in the Central Division for the foreseeable future. This series should be a wake up call that Mo and Dewitt need to better and need to be deeper.

Considering how well the Cardinals dealt with injuries this season, I think it's a testament to how deep they already are. I feel bad for all the kids approaching Kindergarten age who still haven't seen the Cards win the World Series, but it's hard to be disappointed with this team given their health issues. Unless their health issues are all stemming from rampant steroid abuse or something, I guess.

^ I'm still trying to get over the game 2, 2 error 5 run inning, loss. I had already written off the two games at Wrigley Field but hard dealing with the fact that their is no game five at Busch let alone trying to figure out 2016.

I've never been one to worry about how I'm perceived in defeat... the Cardinals lost to the healthier team. Not the better team. 162 games is a large sample size. The Cardinals were THE best team in baseball. They're just not going to win the postseason tournament.

The Cubs also didn't kick our a**. They won three games by a 2-3 runs each game. And lost one by 4. They're the hot team of the moment and the Cardinals were the least healthy team in baseball.

Can't shame a 97 win team, but I'm not going to go overboard giving them credit. They lucked out that the Cards finally ran out of reserves.

There is also no need for a wakeup call. The Cubs built a strong team by tanking. The Cardinals have remained strong for over a decade by sticking to a formula of spending wisely, drafting keenly and developing tremendously.

As a result, the Cardinals can almost player for player (not position for position) match all of the Cubs young talent. And the Cardinals have more on the way. And unlike the Cubs, they Cardinals can make a decent pitching staff out of it. (Certainly in a normal year where not every goes down injured.)

The Cubs should be competitive for a while. And they beat the Cardinals in a short series in the most random of the major sports. That's a big deal to them. But they've yet to truly move ahead of the Cardinals, and I wouldn't bet on them doing so.

Honestly, I expect they'll take a step back next year. They ought to be able to make the playoffs even in doing so, but the pressure they'll be under will be enormous. Only a couple of them have every dealt with true expectations and pressure. Their beloved manager isn't one of them. It will be a test for him too. This year they were the underdog making noise. Next year they'll be every major media outlets' World Series pick playing in a pressure cooker of a market (when they decide to care).

They'll also be facing pitching that has had all offseason to study their rookies tendencies. If they improve, they should be applauded, but I expect a step back next year, even if it is only temporary.

In the meantime, we'll find out tomorrow to which coast I throw my fiercest allegiances behind.

You're not wrong about the position players. We're not stacked in the minors there, although I suspect we probably do have some pretty good players developing there who just aren't as heralded. Seems to be how it goes.

But what we do have is pitching. We just continue to have great pitching prospects up and down the system.

And again, that's something the Cubs do not have. Could be a difference maker between the two organizations over the next decade.

jstriebel wrote:You're not wrong about the position players. We're not stacked in the minors there, although I suspect we probably do have some pretty good players developing there who just aren't as heralded. Seems to be how it goes.

But what we do have is pitching. We just continue to have great pitching prospects up and down the system.

And again, that's something the Cubs do not have. Could be a difference maker between the two organizations over the next decade.

The Cardinals payroll is opening wide soon. I thought I heard them say on 101.1 the Cardinals have $90 mil on the books for next year, but that it goes down to $65 mil in 2017 and $32 mil for 2018. At least they haven't mortgaged the future.

That's the wonderful thing about the Cardinals approach. They're not afraid to give a big contract and they're not afraid to trade prospects, but they never do either one irresponsibly.

If they give a player what might end up being too much money, they limit the number of years. If they give a player many years, they've generally done a good job making sure it's not too much money.

Their wise approach is why I think Heyward will be re-signed. At 26, I don't think anyone is going to offer him a contract that he isn't truly worth. You could give him 12 years and $300 million (I don't expect this, just saying), and honestly, he'd probably be worth it.

You couldn't do that for Pujols because of his age.

The Cardinals aren't afraid of big contracts, they're afraid of dumb ones. I think Hayward's will be good for both parties, and I think they'll sign him. And what you've alluded to makes it that much more likely. They have money coming off the books in chunks. AND they just signed a pretty big deal with Fox Sports Midwest.

(Which is good for their payroll, but bad for my desires to see major league sports get beyond the cable network contracts and move to something that allows for cord cutting.)

Cardinals just signed a $1Billion tv contract so there will be plenty of money to spend on payroll.

^ And build Phase II of BPV! We're not in mourning still, are we?

shut it roger! Not my fault the Astros choked a 6-2 lead in the 8th, even the Texas Governor tweeted congrats on the ALDS win,
also not my fault that the Rangers couldnt close out a 2-0 lead with 2 games at home
Also not my fault that the dodgers 2 best pitchers turn into Lance Lynn in the postseason
and finally, not my fault the wind was blowing out infield pop ups out of the ballpark in chicago.

shimmy wrote:Then again, there are no fans I hate more in sports than Blackhawk fans. I shudder to think what Cubs fans will be like (especially since many of them are those same Blackhawks fans).

^But that's because you're a fan of the Cubs of the NHL.

Blues fans would be just as annoying if/when they ever win a Cup.

It wasn't a stomach virus. It is a brain virus.

ricke002 wrote:

shimmy wrote:Then again, there are no fans I hate more in sports than Blackhawk fans. I shudder to think what Cubs fans will be like (especially since many of them are those same Blackhawks fans).

^But that's because you're a fan of the Cubs of the NHL.

Blues fans would be just as annoying if/when they ever win a Cup.

I don't see why Blues fans would be any more annoying than any cup-winning team's fans. They might lose like the Cubs but they don't have any of the Cubs' foul-weather fans or lovable-loser status.

The Blues aren't the Cubs of the NHL. That's a comparison that absolutely has to stop (and hopefully not because the Cubs win something).

The Blues have a hugely disappointing history all their own, but it's apples to oranges with the Cubs.

And all winning teams fanbases get annoying to the non-winners. That's just normal. But the Blackhawks are the most annoying in sports because they want you to believe they're the best fan base in hockey (and the media falls into the trap) despite the fact that they abandoned their team for decades.

(Don't give me the ownership run around. You can be upset by ownership and still be engaged with the team. Especially considering they weren't all that bad a lot of those years. I'm not talking about attendance, I'm talking about an entire generation of that fanbase not giving a crap about hockey—in fact many actively degrading it—until suddenly they're partying in college and the Hawks start winning Cups.)

Blackhawks fans are garbage.

The Blues have a core of fans that has never quit. (Our attendance wanes at times, but again, attendance and fan engagement aren't the same thing.) And even a good chunk of the casual fans have always kept up their casual interest. Yes, a championship will bring a bandwagon. It always does. But no chance will it approach the unbearable levels of the Blackhawks bandwagon (which is most of their fan base.)

jstriebel wrote:I'm talking about an entire generation of that fanbase not giving a crap about hockey—in fact many actively degrading it—until suddenly they're partying in college and the Hawks start winning Cups.)

I mostly agree with you, but the way I parse this sentence, it sounds like you're complaining about literal children.

jstriebel wrote:The Blues aren't the Cubs of the NHL. That's a comparison that absolutely has to stop (and hopefully not because the Cubs win something).

^What's your logic that they aren't?

jstriebel wrote: Blackhawks fans are garbage.

Additionally, I appreciate you calling me garbage without ever meeting me. It 100% makes me garbage for having grown to appreciate hockey at a time later than you.

I get that there are annoying BH fans, but there are annoying fans of every team.

Each and every Reds-Cardinals game I've been to (25+) in STL, I've been threatened to have my ass kicked multiple times [Even before the Yadi-Phillips incident]. I'm not a vocal fan; I don't boo anyone; I don't talk crap about the Cardinals: I'm hardly engaged at all. Yet there are still garbage fans who think it neat to be a douche to someone who has the audacity to not think what they think. Am I lazy enough to extrapolate that fan out to ALL Cardinal fans? No, I've not met 99.99875% of Cardinal fans. That would be extremely egregious on my part.