ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥

Looks like there's a good bundle of questions already popping in here. I'll dive in -- and then also set up the file so I can recreate the chat below this window for easier reading. As always, questions are not edited for grammar or spelling.

They are ignored for vulgarities and threats of violence.

The chat has a hard out at 1 p.m. St. Louis time due to other assignments today, so please keep that in mind and get your questions in quickly!

Jock Ewing: Derrick - Do the Cardinals care about something like WRC+ at the catcher positon or is it more about framing, defense and "handling" the pitching staff?

DG: They do. It's all on a sliding scale. And that goes back to the Tony La Russa days when he insisted that Yadier Molina did not need to get a hit for him because of all he did at catcher, any hit was just bonus. La Russa may have based that on batting average or slugging or OBP or whatever, and now they're able to use wRC+ and a galaxy of metrics to also look at it. I don't know of any team that makes a decision based on only one number or two numbers or six metrics. They take them all into account and recognize that for each position they're going to have to adjust where they put the most weight on their decision. For catcher, the Cardinals have time and time and time and time again sided with defense/receiving over offense.

bigron: Musials and Williams still have fit .300?

DG: Probably, but not as high as they once did. The Cardinals used a shift against Williams in the World Series and all indications are that it helped neutralize one of the best hitters of all time. So imagine if more teams did that -- because more teams would if he played a few years ago. They would have shifted against him all the time and he'd face 162 games of that, not just seven or the 19 (was it 19? maybe it would be 6 or 7) he played against Boudreau's club. More velocity. More spin. Sliders. Shifts. These would all reduce their averages from those lofty heights, and yeah you'd see a few seasons of .280s in there.

What I also find interesting -- is what would Musial and Williams give up on their average to chase damage, which is what gets paid these days. They obviously valued average when they played. But now the value is on slug. So would those two extremely talented, elite of the elite hitters be in the modern game chasing .600 not .300. And how would that look?

Simple.10: Can the Cards down, then up, now down season be summed up in two words - they're young?

DG: Exactly.

Ron: This team looks ready to be sellers at deadline

DG: And in the coming week they may look like buyers, and then the week after that more closer to sellers. It's going to be a tempestuous six weeks. They'll look like a lot of things in the coming week. Should make it entertaining.

DenMizzou: Hello, Mr. Goold. Thank you for your outstanding coverage of the Cardinals. As many others probably have told you, it is one of the main reasons why I subscribe to the Post-Dispatch. I have two questions, if I may, please. One, Why do the Cardinals have so much trouble developing power hitters? Over the past 25 years or so, the only ones that I can think of are Pujols, Carpenter, Lankford, Simmons, DeJong, and maybe Molina. Second, why doesn't MLB allow teams to trade draft picks in the First-Year Player Draft? I think it would increase interest in the draft -- which MLB sorely needs -- and it would give bad teams a chance to improve faster. Thank you.

DG: Great questions, and if I had a complete answer to 1), the Cardinals would like to have it too. There are two significant reasons why the Cardinals have had difficulty developing power hitters in recent years, and your list helped show it -- such hitters are rare and such hitters often go high in the draft (where Cardinals have not, until recently, selected) or they emerge after the draft. The Cardinals have certainly chased power. Almost a decade ago now, I wrote a story about how the Cardinals were trying to collect data on this thing called exit velocity -- or the speed someone hit a ball off their bat. They had it on an infielder at Illinois State from a radar gun pointed at a batting tee, and they took the infielder in the draft, Paul DeJong. They had exit velo on Randal Grichuk and traded for him, and you'll definitely recall that they saw pitching depth as a plus and power as a need so they swapped Marco Gonzales for Tyler O'Neill because they didn't have that power in the organization. The appeal for signing Adolis Garcia was the same -- the need for power. So they've chased it, and they've seen it develop in some cases, but not stick with them. That's the third one. They've been impatient at times. Those three things can really power from player development -- an overall lack of it, it goes high in drafts (remember the reaction when the Cubs took Kyle Schwarber!), and impatience to see it manifest.

2) The inability to trade most draft picks is a vestigial tail from when the draft was not really capped and the concern was that if teams could trade picks then the high-spending teams would just vault up to the top of the draft, and rather than being a distribution of talent in reverse order of the standings it would just give more access to the top talent to the highest-spending teams. I could write a counter argument to that notion, but there has always been a concern that the best would get better if they could swap draft picks. We're seeing that shift ever so slowly. Now comp picks can be traded. That's a start. Every so often there's talk of trading picks when a new CBA comes up. We'll see. But the reason has to do with making sure the draft runs closer to the reverse order of the standings (lottery-based, now). I'll add that the MLB draft is so based on the future -- most players are 3, 4, 5 years away -- that stirring interest in it via trade would introduce current players into the evening's discussion. I'm not sure if that would make it more exciting. But it would make it more urgent. It's worth discussing.

Ed AuBuchon: If the roster is "short" it may be because having 3 catchers + Contreras is questionable!

DG: There is no "if" about it. It's short. And it got shorter with getting people rest or breaks, and yes carrying three catchers is part of it.

Walt: Have the principles of playing 1B changed in the last few years

DG: I believe so. Most positions change, evolve, etc. If you're more specific perhaps I can offer a more detailed answer.

Marc: The Athletic published some polling of favorability ratings for playing at (or not) for various MLB teams, and for various managers. St. Louis Cardinals and Oli Marmol were both ranked poorly. I was surprised.... Do you have any reflections about that?

DG: I do not. One of the players asked just wanted to name a manager in the division because you know rivalry things yadda yadda yadda. In that particular polling, they had only 40 players respond. Three times as many answered the question about who they would like to play for. So you're talking about 1/3 of the voting body, and then you're talking about the top two answers being 12.5% of the responding group. At least one of which said put down the name of a manager who they did not know the name of.

The far more compelling poll was on gambling and the experiences players have had as a result of its larger presence in baseball and pro sports. The article that grew from that polling -- written by Tyler Kepner -- is worth the read.

Ken: Good morning Derrick. To quote DG ( and many others ) : you can never have enough pitching! It seems to be catching up to the team now. Do you think they have enough in the minors ( getting healthy again ) to make the wild card .

DG: No.

They will need a surprise to emerge or an addition to help.

South City Steve: If you had to plot on a graph the level of organizational fear related to making the wrong move (x-axis is the year, y-axis is the level of fear) with a late 20's player who shows potential but can't seem to consistently reach it, where do things stand currently and where was the maximum value under Mozeliak? And will all of this reset under Bloom?

DG: I was promised there would be no math.

Actually, I don't mind math.

I am having a hard time visualizing your question here or even how to answer it without a ruler and some graph paper, and even then it seems like you're just asking me to invent a metric and draw it. I apologize for not understanding what you're going for, and perhaps if you could reposition it or explain it in a different way I'd be smart enough to catch on.

South City Steve: I'm asking for some speculation on your part, but you also know the history of this organization under Mo. If Mo was going to continue in his current role for the forseeable future, would you take the over or under on 2.5 extensions already signed with arb elibible players currently on teh roster?

DG: No need to speculate. I can rely on reporting here. This is something that is perpetually reported, and so you're asking about it before they made a call with Bloom taking over, and there's always reason to ask about it every spring.

The answer is under.

Brendan Donovan was the one that had some discussion and both sides expressed interest in it this past fall, and may have even made some progress, but things changed and it did not gather any momentum over the winter. That's 1. Two more seemed unlikely. So, it's under.

chico: If the Cardinals are going to experiment with young players,why not give scott a opportunity at lead off?

DG: They may. That is certainly an option they could explore, and it hasn't been ruled out.

Please consider at the moment that putting Victor Scott II at leadoff in place of Lars Nootbaar would put replacing a hitter with a .197/.271/.303 slash line and 47 Ks in past 170 plate appearances with a hitter who has a .214/.315/.241 slash line and 40 strikeouts in his past 133 plate appearances.

Ray jay: Going forward, do you think we will see more of the April Cardinals or the May Cardinals?

DG: I don't know. Volatile team. My view has been that they'll beat teams they're better than, win more than they lose against teams that are their equals, and lose to the standout clubs. They did beat Philly and LA, so already my stance is not entirely correct. They have a strong defense, a fine offense, but not a lot of power. They are, in several ways, the opposite of what wins these days. They don't strike out opponents and they don't hit homers. So they have to be perfect elsewhere, and that will lead to some volatility.

Tackleberry: It doesn’t sound like the Cardinals were in on the Devers discussion. Do you think that was more Bloom’s intel guiding that or DeWitt’s reluctance to spend guiding that?

DG: It was neither of those things. Why would they be interested in adding that contract when they have expressed the exact opposite this season -- of reducing payroll? Of course they weren't involved.

They've got plenty of DHs.

All of them at a lower price point.

I did not expect to get a question critical of the Cardinals for not trading for Devers. The chat never disappoints!

larry harnly: Do you think jj wetherholt will be moved to memphis this season? if he becomes the second baseman in 26, what do you see as the future for donovan and nootbaar? will bloom try to extend donovan?

DG: He's headed that way, yes. One caveat: I do wonder if the Cardinals will give him a chance to be in the postseason somewhere, and if Springfield clinches that here in the near future, you could see Wetherholt experience that. He was part of a championship team in Palm Beach, and that's a bit of an old-school approach that the Cardinals used to prioritize. Get their prospects into a playoff crucible when possible. The Memphis Mafia benefited from that. Pujols did. Schumaker did. On and on. And here's Wetherholt with a chance to do that, too.

Great question about where he fits if it's not SS (Winn), can it be 2B (but Donovan! Gorman!) or what about third (Arenado trade talks again?). There is so much overlap there for sure. And, yes, Nootbaar factors in too, and so does Walker. They want clarity on who will be in the lineup with Wetherholt and the players in the majors have the chance to perform now and determine that. I say this cautiously ... is center field in play for Wetherholt? Sure seems like he's the 2B of the future, but is another entry point to the majors possible.

I don't know at this moment how Bloom looks at contract extensions. The Cardinals have used this opportunity to create an open field for him when it comes to that. Yes, Donovan was the one player who seemed bound for a cross-over extension, one that would be signed with Mozeliak but carry into Bloom. That didn't happen. Look for both sides to have some talks this fall just by the nature of the contract and arbitration, but Bloom's model when it comes to extensions will be something we watch develop -- and ownership will play a big role in shaping it.

Walt: Sorry I hit enter early. I noticed Contreras using his glove side foot as his anchor to the base on the two swinging bunts in the 7th inning Sunday. This is opposite of how I learned to play the position., it reduces the extension of the stretch. My problem is I went back to Saturdays game and he did it there also. I'm shocked the ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥es haven't corrected this. On one of those plays Sunday the runner almost beat the throw because he had no stretch at all, standing tall with both feet shoulder width apart. on a line from 1B to 2B. I see two possibilities why this has happened. Contreras hasn't been properly ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ed or this is how he was ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ed. Neither make sense to me at the highest level of the game. I would appreciate you looking at the plays and seeing if you see what I saw. and if so asking directly if this is how they want the position to be played? Almost halfway through a season I'm not accepting he is learning a new position, All of this should have been covered extensively in Spring Training. If he is backsliding in his fundamental the ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥es should have caught it immediately. The third possibility is I'm older than dirt and the basic defensive principles have changed.

DG: I'll take a look. This is a hyper-detailed question and will take more time than usual, so I'll dig in after the chat and see if there's a reason, answer, explanation for what you see, once I check on it.

DenMizzou: Mr. Goold, I don't understand Marmol sitting Winn on Sunday. The Cardinals clearly are slumping, crying for runs, had already lost 2 of first 3 games of series, Winn has shown signs of emerging from his own slump, the leadoff hitter (Nootbaar) already was ruled out for the game, the No. 3 hitter (Donovan) was trying to get back from an injury, and the Cardinals were scheduled for a day off on Monday. Did Marmol explain why he sat Winn under those circumstances? Was it because of Winn's back problems? Thanks.

DG: He did explain. He wanted to put a day off next to an off day to steal back to back breaks for Winn. That was scheduled going into the week and the Brewers series, and he's done it with other everyday players throughout the past few seasons. He told us Sunday morning about his preference to get Winn the day off then and a break on Monday because the feeling internally is that Winn is likely going to lead the team in games played and innings in the field.

Dick: Hey DG, always enjoy your chats. I found it aamusing and somewhat predictable a couple of weeks ago, when Cards entered a 13 game stretch against Royals, Dodgers, Blue Jays and Brewers, 9 were at home. They go 4-9, fulfilling their long standing Self Fulfilling Prophecy of Doom. Two years ago, the vaunted early West Coast trip was so daunting, they go 1-8. Until this organization stops talking itself into failure, I see no progression in the groupthink. You would have thought they were facing the 27 Yankees or 75 Reds the last 2 weeks, based on comments and your reporting. I just don't hear other teams whine and fulfill doom like the Cardinals do. That mindset has to change.

DG: I hear other teams talk about the difficult stretches on their schedule all the time. That is especially true for the Central teams when it comes to the challenge of their west coast trips. Every year they talk about that and the timing of it and the demands of it. I think it's possible we're talking to different people. I don't think my reporting ever mentioned the 27 Yankees or the Big Red Machine. That would be silly.

Tackleberry: Please highlight the criticism in that question for me?

DG: The question seemed to come from a place that they were involved but for Bloom's intel or ownership nixing the spending, and those are false choices because they weren't involved for entirely other reasons. Thus, the criticism was limiting the options to those two possible reasons, rather than acknowledging they weren't going to be a team interested.

Capstone: Taking center cut fast alls and swinging at pitches that you're bad at seems like a talent and adaptation issue

DG: Hard to hit in a South County batting cage with that approach.

Capstone: How frequently do players have eyesight checked

DG: Regularly.

Fan 41: Could Gorman and/or Contreas play a corner outfield position (left)

DG: Both have taken fly balls in left field and at least explored the possibility of doing that. Contreras' famously did during that odd, unfair time that he wasn't a catcher a few weeks into hi Cardinals career. Gorman has done it more quietly, being open to it in spring training and recognizing that maybe with Arenado at third that was going to be a spot where he would fit.

Craig: Derrick, the Cardinals said they wanted to see what they have this season. Now that flag day has come and gone, I'm just curious what do you think the Cardinals have? I mean that in terms of who they look to build around next season. In terms of position players, I'd say Winn, Herrera and Donovan are sure bets. Do you agree?

DG: That seems like a fair assessment of where they are. Herrera's position is up for discussion. I would add Pedro Pages at catcher. What he does behind the plate has earned a spot on the team, and the Cardinals have learned about what they have there in him.

Millo Miller: Derrick, greetings this Monday. The Cardinals should have a very good idea of who stays and who goes after this Season. And yes there are contracts expiring if they have not already been dealt. How heavily will the expiring CBA weigh in on ownerships willingness to go after quality players to fill the holes. I realistically could see them waiting until after there is a new CBA to seriously fill out the roster. What are your thoughts and thank you.

DG: Absolutely that is a factor, and you outline well how that could play out. The CBA will influence signing throughout the industry this upcoming winter, especially for players in those mid-tiers. Locally, the timeline for the Cardinals lines up -- they want time to see what they have, to reduce spending, to reposition the team during a drop in revenue from TV and upgrades to the stadium, and then be ready to spend when the homegrown roster is ready to contend. They aren't advertising when or the timing of that, but you could see how two years of "runway" leads to the labor negotiations and possible stoppage, and then coming out of that the Cardinals would have their core of Winn, Wetherholt, No. 5 pick and outfit that group with additions -- with the new CBA in place. There is some feeling around the organization that this upcoming offseason could be a quiet one when it comes acquisitions, and the CBA -- as you point out -- is a reason.

Dicky: Pedro Pages cmon dude Crooks and Bernal are coming fast - Pages another love toy by the org

DG: They are indeed. That doesn't change the fact that Pedro Pages is one of the answers to the question posed by that chatter: What answers to the Cardinals have. They have a good feel for what Pedro Pages does behind the plate.

Dicky: Why do so many Cardinals take strike 3 fastballs right down the middle, the Walker AB was so disappointing as was Scott and Winn

DG: I don't believe they do it on purpose.

Tackleberry: DG - I’m long time chatter. I’ve got to say, something has jaded you, brother. Maybe it is these chats, perhaps it is interactions on socials - you’ve mentioned frustrations with that medium before. But you’re just extremely sensitive these days.

DG: I actually feel that I'm less so than ever. But that's just my view. Yours is clearly different. While this chat is humming along, I will remind you that discourse in general everywhere has gotten meaner, less receptive to different viewpoints, angry when someone challenges a view that someone just wants affirmed whether it's factual or not, and while you don't see the worst of those questions, there are some that I won't un-see.

JB: Why have the Cardinals been so careful and intentional at scheduling their rotation to maximize rest and performance but then seemingly done the opposite with their position players by having an inflexible roster? Guys like Nootbaar seem like they are wearing down already after playing so much early in the season.

DG: Fantastic question. Especially how you juxtaposed to the two discussions. I've been looking into a bit of this -- well, really this late last year, and earlier this morning I called up an interview I had in December that I'm going to revisit later today. That's a way of saying, that I'm trying to explore a related question for a story, if it works out. Specifically to your question -- when it comes to pitching it's obviously scheduled by the nature of the role, and there is a heavy emphasis on avoiding injury, which is a pitch by pitch risk, as you know. With position players it's more staying ahead of fatigue, and in the past week or so it's been responding to struggles. Why it stands out so much here in the past week is injury. Scoring Nootbaar a few days off looks differently if Donovan is out, and Donovan being out with a toe injury is a bit different if Walker isn't on the IL or Nootbaar is hitting or Scott is on base all the time. There's just been a confluence of events here, and while the focus for pitching schedules is to avoid injuries, the position player goal is to do the same, but by avoiding fatigue. In recent weeks, the Cardinals have also had to take into account struggles.

Aaron Knopf: Thanks, as always, for chatting. If Nootbar keeps struggling, could you foresee Donovan getting more time in LF to give Gorman or Saggese opportunities at 2nd? Or would Burleson in LF (to avoid the platoon situation with Walker) be the more likely outcome. Or is Noot given the whole season to rebound?

DG: Nootbaar is going to get a lot of time to rebound, but they won't wait the whole see if his struggles continue at this level. They're not going to make any decision in the near future though about replacing him in LF, just some of those starts could go elsewhere. Emphasis on some. They still believe in his upside, in his production, in his potential. That's the team's view even if it's become popular in some corners to have the opposite. Aaron, you do a good job of summarizing their alternatives and where some -- emphasis on some -- of those starts could go and why. Those are for sure in discussion and may even see some time here as Gorman plays well, he's got to play somewhere, and that does nudge Donovan out to LF, unless Herrera is going to catch. The roster is a puzzle at times. Performance can help solve it. Gorman hits, he's going to start. Burleson is hitting, he's going to start. If Herrera is at DH, neither will be there, so left field becomes an option.

Bryan C: With the big trade between the Red Sox and Giants last night, do you think we will see anymore trades of that type before the day of the trade line?

DG: I don't. I think that was such a Devers-specific and Giants-specific blockbuster, not some indication of bigger whopper deals as the deadline approaches. Boston had an unsettled situation with a high-dollar player, Giants had money it's tried to spend on free agents and a statement to make, and they could do it view trade instead of getting a free agent to say yes. I would love to be wrong on that, though. It would be more fun if there are big moves.

MS Bird Brain: It seems fair to tie a significant amount of the "runway" commitment for this season to the emergence of Gorman and Walker. As bad as the last couple weeks have been, I am getting a different vibe from that combo recently. The lineup struggled without Walker, and opposing clubs seem a lot more aware of Gorman with his increase in playing time. Is there anything to that vibe?

DG: This is it exactly. No question. The crux of the Cardinals' "runway" season is whether or not they emerge from 2025 with Gorman and Walker in the middle of their future lineups, Gorman or Walker in the middle of their future lineups, or neither in the middle of their future lineups and no place for their first-round picks that they've invested heavily in. This is the crux of it for the Cardinals. Can they get the hitters they need from these two young hitters they have, who they drafted for this potential, or does this year suggest they have to find it elsewhere. They are at the nexus of this year, for sure. And success for the Cardinals is getting an answer.

Ed AuBuchon: Interesting that Devers didn't have a NTC. Did he ask or Chaim Bloom purposely wouldn't include in contract?

DG: I don't know the answer, and a quick look at the coverage in the Boston Globe and elsewhere about the contract -- I could not find comments or reporting to explain that. I do know this: Extensions like that often mirror the arbitration process because it can be used for other players in the arbitration process to argue their value. No-trade clauses have a dollar value. So an extension through the arb years is likely to trigger the 10/5 no-trade clause rather than insert a no-trade clause during the years covered. That's not unusual, and it could be a reason here.

MS Bird Brain: Pat yourself on the back. A couple weeks ago you responded to my question about the generally poor start from the top Cardinal prospects in the minors by pointing out it was just May. In the last couple weeks Wetherholt and Bernal have started banging on the ceiling of the Texas League. Crooks went off. Mathews and Hence are showing they are healthy. Would they promote an 18 yo catcher out of Jupiter? Roby is doing well. Anyway you were right, take a bow.

DG: Thank you. Wetherholt is a superb talent, for sure. That Springfield team is entertaining -- and that's without Roby now.

Bryan C: Helsley is not as dominant as he was last year. What type of return can they get for him before or at the deadline? Same question for Fedde?

DG: Still a strong one for Helsley. Closers like him can command a good return, one that should boost the Cardinals' prospect rankings. Fedde less so, and it's interesting that you brought that up because I was a guest on a podcast this morning and was thinking through what it would look like for the Cardinals to get more for Fedde -- if possible -- than the Sox did in that trade. That will be an interesting comparison if it happens. There is another pitcher drawing interest from other teams that the Cardinals could us that interest to get a compelling return for him ...

(drumroll please)

Steven Matz.

Listen for and expect teams to come calling on him if the Cardinals send up any signs that they're selling.

Kevin61: Will Bloom have a lot or little input in this years draft? With the glut of current middle infielders will the Cardinals draft another one in the first round?

DG: He will be part of the think tank and executives group making the calls on the draft. He will be in charge by the time this No. 5 pick will be ready for the majors -- barring a shocking arrival this season, I guess. And Mozeliak has been consistent and clear that he brings Bloom into the conversation for a lot of decisions, especially those that shape the out years.

South City Steve: This organization has traded away a lot of young, controllable talent in the past 7 years, talent that could have sustained them in areas for a decade plus. Mo was clearly on full tilt post-Gallen/Alcantra. That trickled down to the Bader/O'Neill/Carlson era, where they were reluctant to wave the white flag (particularly on Carlson) until things were untenable and the player's value was far from peak. Would they move a Nootbaar at the deadline? What about Burleson or Gorman? Or are they so afraid of a player having success elsewhere that they'd rather watch the player's value drain in St. Louis than risk them popping elsewhere?

DG: There's a lot of truth in your question, and it's a truth that the Cardinals have definitely acknowledged and explored over the past two, three years in various interviews. Yes, they are really concerned about their first-round picks or their held-onto talent thriving elsewhere. They don't want to see Jordan Walker be the tentpole of a lineup in another city when they couldn't get him to be that here. Walker or Gorman doing what Arozarena did is reason to be worried and careful and committed and learn from past impatience. And while the Cardinals have all these examples that we know by heart -- that's mostly because we just talk about the Cardinals. Other teams have examples too. It was 15 years ago that Ryan Ludwick was an All-Star for the Cardinals and Cleveland was frustrated. The Cubs watched DJ LeMahieu thrive in Colorado while they searched for such a hitter. The Cardinals' impatience cost them at times -- Ozuna deal comes to mind -- but when you put yourself back at that time without knowledge of the production that followed (they didn't have that info), the pressure is palpable and I imagine most teams would make the same deal with that pressure. There was criticism they need to make a move. There was criticism that they didn't give their young players more time. And now there is criticism that it's too much time. The only constant is whatever the approach there will be criticism ... until ... there's a pennant? There's an All-Star? Or just always?

Kevin61: Does Marmol not like to sacrifice bunt? With two on snd no one out in the ninth yesterday it seems a sacrifice bunt was in order. From the games I’ve watched it doesn’t seem to be the preferred strategy in extra inning games.

DG: He's not a huge fan of the bunt, no, and not in that spot on the road. He's been fairly detailed in discussing that with fans or media and how the location of the game factors into the choice, too.

Phil: I noticed the same things you did about the lack of responses in that polling about managers. But it was notable to me that Marmol didn't appear on the list of managers who players responded they *would* want to play for. Shildt was on both the "want" and "don't want" lists this year, and I assume TLR would have been years ago as well. Marmol may not have a particularly negative impression across the league, but it doesn't seem like the club is a destination like it once was, and while that's more about the whole organization than any specific manager, it's something worth paying attention to.

DG: I think we can all agree that the Cardinals are not the destination they once were. They haven't been that for several years, and perhaps the manager is the image of that, if not the reason for it. The Cardinals no longer being the destination place has been a major storyline of the past decade, one that Giancarlo Stanton's choice illuminated for those who weren't already aware, and one that Mozeliak brought up when Nolan Arenado made it a point he wanted to be a Cardinal. Mozeliak specifically said that was an example of the Cardinal regaining that reputation and how important it was to them. This topic has also been discussed when it comes to the Cardinals being an appealing place for players from Asia or for free agents -- this is all part of the current reality for the team and their view that they have to become stronger again at player development suggests they recognize player interests have changed, player preference has changed, and their appeal has changed.

Tackleberry: What is the industry standard age for “they are who we thought they were� with MLB players? Does it change with pitchers? The Cards just have some guys who are not as young as they used to be and, while I know this organization prefers to keep believing until a players crashes and burns, what does the rest of the league do?

DG: I'm not sure there is a specific age. There is a point in contracts when that question is asked -- and that's when the salary starts to climb through arbitration. So you're looking at year 4-5 and definitely by 6 is when that question is being asked. And that comes at different ages depending on age at draft and age at MLB debut. Yes, with pitchers it's different -- but mostly because when one team makes that call, there's a good chance another team will pick up the pitcher at a lower salary and begin the process for them. Pitching is in demand, pitching is volatile, and pitching can come together at an older age, or pitchers can change as they age.

Craig: Hi Derrick, have you heard any talk of Saggese getting called up this month? Seems like they could use a fresh bat and set of legs. He can play multiple positions and he hits.

DG: Only from fans, really. If Donovan's injury had led to a longer absence, Saggese would have received more discussion as a callup for that spot. I do get why fans are asking. As they should. There's a strong case they can make. He's hitting .419 this month with more times on base than opponents have gotten him out. He can hit, and the Cardinals do want to see improvement in other phases of his game while he's playing regularly at Class AAA Memphis.

Millo Miller: Derrick, I'm surprised there hasn't been many Nootbaar questions considering his recent struggles. I harken back to your previous response about what type of players Musial and Williams would have been if they chased "Damage" instead of "Average". Is that what is happening to Lars? Watching him with increased strikeouts and increased chase rates I was wondering if that might be an issue. Reminds me of Matt Carpenter who in his younger days was a gap to gap hitter with a great eye but became pull happy chasing damage and became regressed as a hitter. Your thoughts? Thank you

DG: It's a fair question and I appreciate the details you've included. My first reaction is ... no. In talking with him and the Cardinals, that isn't what's happening here, not some change in his approach to chase more damage. He had the profile of a hitter who was going to provide that just by being himself. What's awry here is the bedrock skill he's always counted on, and that's the feel for the strikezone and pitch recognition. He spoke with a few of us after a tough game for him in Milwaukee, and I asked him if he felt "in between" -- late on heat, early on spin. He agreed with that description and went further into how his push for production his wish to swing his way out of trouble has made him at times antsy, which is not his game. That's why he got that break from hitting for a few days. It was a mental break as much as anything kind of calm, work, and regroup.

Jim from DeBary FL: Should we expect that Chaim Bloom will have a major input in the draft this year?

DG: For sure.

Simple.10: DG - from your most recent podcast with Gordo, and the discussion of Asian players choosing west coast teams. I know Asian teams have a limit on the number of Americans they can have on their team? Any discussion of limiting the number of Asians an MLB team can have on the roster? Second question also from the podcast. What are the limits on players on the IL? Might those limits be tightened to keep certain teams from stashing SO MANY pitchers there for use later in the season?

DG: 1) There are not discussions about that. There are discussions about a draft, so that there would be rights drafted for players and that would be a way for teams like the Cardinals to make a move on a top talent, or at least trade the rights for a return.

2) Limits on the IL. Those already exist, though not in numbers like you suggest. It's trickier. MLB did shift the IL for pitchers back to 15 days because the Dodgers were manipulating the 10-day IL so that a pitcher only missed one start, and that was giving them a competitive advantage and new way to use their financial might that other teams wanted to constrain. There is another way that rosters are limited when it comes to injuries, and that's the use of the 60-day IL. The 60-day is only available when a 40-player roster is full, and it does require 60 days of absence with less time now that teams can backdate. (Same is true for 10- or 15-, honestly.) So, yes, a team can theoretically have infinite players on the IL and stash players, but it comes at a cost and eventually the players must go on the roster or must be available to others. The Dodgers due continue to use their financial muscle to maximize how they use the roster, and limits on the IL are some of the reasons why you see them cycling through relievers -- on the 40, off the 40, claim Loutos, waive Loutos, claim Stratton, waive Stratton, etc. Hope that helps.

Uncle Redbird: Do you foresee a trade where overlapping offensive pieces or depth are moved for a pitcher like Marlins' Cabrera for next year and beyond? Maybe a lefty bat like Burleson or Gorman, and/or depth piece like Saggese or Crooks with Wetherholt and Bernal on the rise?

DG: While not specifically that pitcher, that packaging of talent or reduction of repetition is one outcome of this year that the Cardinals would welcome because it means production from many players and clarity on who they want to keep and who they have to trade for what they need to add.

Jim from DeBary FL: I know it's been asked a few times over the past couple years about Yadier Molina's possible status with the organization. With the substantial number of catchers in the Cardinals organization, from the low minors up to the major league team, with positive ratings, it seems his presence as a roving instructor would be highly beneficial for the organization. Any hints he might be able to make himself available for such a role. Even if only in a spring training setting.

DG: He is in Texas, where he's living now, and he's enjoying his time as a father and husband and spending a lot of time with his son as he rises as a prospect at a High School there. Had a strong spring that positions him well as his draft class approaches. That is where Molina says his focus is, and his friends have shared that same sentiment, as have the Cardinals.

Myronjax: DG. Good day sir. I just read an article on college bats (available for this year's MLB draft), and the write-up for Jace Laviolette includes %-tile exit velo and max exit velo. It got me to wondering-how do scouts translate/compare these stats to the MLB game, because aren't these players in college all using aluminum bats? Thanks for your time.

DG: They do indeed. And this is where there Cardinals made great strides like 20 years ago. They were able to take stats from smaller colleges and adjust to project what the players would do as a pro, specifically at a Class AA level. It was that statistical model that the Cardinals used to draft Matt Adams and a few other small-college players, and it was because the Cardinals were confident in their model's ability to project what Adams would do with a wood bat at Class AA. And he did. Now all teams (well, most) are doing similar models with vastly better and more detailed stats that they can use to make more accurate projections.

Alright, the clock doesn't stop ticking and deadline is approaching for another assignment today. I need to pivot to focus on it. Thanks for the great questions today. So many were so detailed -- and detailed in their support of either why the question as important or why the criticism had merit. Good stuff. That gave the chat a real chance to be a conversation -- and those are the best chats.

Back at the keyboard for the chat next week. At the keyboard on the South Side of Chicago all week. This will be my first time at the Sox ballpark since parking outside of it to cover games during the 2020 season. Will be nice to go inside this time!

Look for a story in tomorrow's paper that will dive into one of the topics we touched on in this chat.

Stay healthy.

-