I have immense respect for Cardinals chairman Bill DeWitt Jr., and team GM John Mozeliak. The admiration is based on the Cardinals’ consistent success under DeWitt’s leadership. Since DeWitt and partners purchased the franchise before the 1996 season, the Cardinals are third in the majors in regular-season wins and lead the National League with 71 postseason victories.
Since 2004, a span of 12 seasons, no NL franchise has won as many games as the Cardinals in the regular season or postseason. The first 20 campaigns of the DeWitt Era include 13 playoff teams and the current streak of five consecutive seasons of October baseball. And DeWitt has added four NL pennants and two World Series championships to the franchise’s illustrious history.
DeWitt is smart, level-headed, and pragmatic. He maintains discipline on the business side of his baseball decisions. When you allow franchise icon Albert Pujols to walk away to accept a 10-year, $240 million contract offer from the Angels, the restraint is evident. This is not a whimsical man.
Compared to other MLB team owners DeWitt was well ahead of the curve in embracing advanced metrics and the new methods for player evaluation, devising a model that’s more economically efficient. And the DeWitt way is paramount in the team’s sustained excellence. Mozeliak is an extension of that, operating with the same intelligent judiciousness that defines DeWitt’s operational style. The Cardinals have used a shrewd approach to roster construction and player development to limit the inevitable payroll inflation. That should be commended — not condemned.
However … all of that said …
I’ve become annoyed by all of the public talk about the Cardinals’ willingness to expand payroll and spend more money in an effort to strengthen their future and maintain their hold on the NL Central. The challenge has become more difficult, with he Cardinals being pushed by their excellent division rivals in Pittsburgh and Chicago. The Cardinals let us know: they would not stand pat. And after watching helplessly as injuries and fatigue reduced a 100-win team’s punching power late in the season and again in the NLDS loss to the Cubs, the Cards seemed fired up to reinforce their roster.
“How long can you take the body blows?” Mozeliak said last month in comments made to the Post-Dispatch. “That’s why thinking about outside markets and understanding that maybe it’s time to be more aggressive there might make sense. If we’re compelled to do something that may be a little bit out of our comfort zone, it could happen from time to time.”
The theme was repeated often.
Story after story, blog after blog, piece after piece, analysis after analysis …
BEWARE, BASEBALL!
THE CARDINALS ARE READY TO SPEND!
Maybe. Maybe not. We’ll find out soon enough.
I think DeWitt and Mozeliak raised expectations by dropping substantial hints and publicly expressing a desire to compete for higher-priced talent. After losing starting Lance Lynn (elbow surgery) for all of 2016 and keeping watch on the multiple vulnerable arms in their current rotation, the Cardinals are vulnerable. And team management signaled an intention to throw some money around to buy some protection.
DeWitt seems to be backing away from that now.
In an interview with Post-Dispatch baseball writer Derrick Goold — in response to the Cardinals’ losing bid for free-agent lefty David Price, the top free-agent starter — DeWitt had this to say:
“When we pursue a player and we feel we have a legitimate chance to sign him, we want him,” DeWitt said. “But that doesn’t mean that we’re going to get into an auction and win at any price. We’re going to do it on the basis that our metrics tell us what’s a prudent thing to do and a value for what we’re giving. For a special situation, we’re going to stretch that limit. We know the better players are going to have multiple bidders and we don’t expect to win those bids and have the player sign every time. Or, even a high percentage of the time. No team can. There are a lot of teams there all thinking and trying to do the same thing.”
DeWitt added, “We felt like we stretched in the Price situation, and we’ll stretch again if we see the right opportunity in someone who has the characteristics that he had. Those are tough to replicate. There was a lot going for him. Those are always competitive situations and historically we have not been the high bidder in what I’ll call a ‘bidding situation.’ If the player is going to take the high bid, in general, we’re not the high bid and we think our strategy has proved out to be pretty sound.”
Going by the Cardinals’ prestigious track record during DeWitt’s first 20 years, their approach is absolutely sound.
But at some point, the Cardinals may have to make an uncomfortable, risky move to buttress a vulnerable rotation in a meaningful way.
And I don’t see the point of the Cardinals’ tendency to frequently make the second-highest bid.
Where exactly does that get you? If you want a player or pitcher … then sign him.
The Cardinals’ aggressive pitch to Price for a reported $180 million — while generous — wasn’t close to Boston’s winning bid of $217 million.
The Cardinals reportedly had at least some interest in RH Jeff Samardzija … at least until San Francisco rushed in after losing out to Arizona in the frenzied auction for Zack Greinke and gave “The Shark” a five-year $90 million contract. Samardzija is a nice bounce-back candidate after a surprisingly off-kilter 2015 season, but the Cardinals didn’t share the the Giants’ exuberance. Another 200+ innings starter came off the market.
There’s been a lot of pundit-class speculation about the Cardinals’ heightened in nterest in RH Mike Leake, but based on Goold’s Monday report that interest has cooled due to Leake’s rapidly rising cost.
If the Cardinals pass on Leake, another durable 30-start pitcher will be employed elsewhere next season. The market is said to be bubbling up for Wei-Yin Chen, late of Baltimore, another right arm that could supply 30+ starts. There are quite a few pitching names still out there including unrealistic choices (Johnny Cueto) and potential upside choices (Ian Kennedy.)
The Cardinals were never in on Greinke — who stunned the industry by getting an average of $34.4 million per season on a six-year deal with Arizona. (How about that Tony La Russa? Or maybe Greinke was attracted to those weird new D-Backs uniforms.) And right at the opening of the free-agent market Jordan Zimmermann got five years and $100 million from Detroit.
In some respects the real eye-raiser was career mediocrity J.A. Happ getting $36 million over three years from Toronto.
The Happ signing was the first warning of the impending buying frenzy. And team owners and GMs were served notice: pitching was plentiful in this winter 2015 market — but it’s going to cost you a lot more than anticipated.
That’s why we may see the Cardinals move to a cheaper section of the store.
The may even hurry on over to the “Everything Must Go!” discount bin in the back of the store.
I was surprised by the Cardinals’ ambivalence toward John Lackey, the ornery and edgy competitor that’s been among the most durable starters in the majors over the past three seasons. After struggling terribly in 2012 — his comeback year from Tommy John elbow surgery — Lackey fully rebounded. Between 2013 and 2015, he ranked 14th among MLB starters in innings, averaging 203 IP and 31 starts per season. Lackey pitched to a 3.35 ERA over the three seasons and cranked out 67 quality starts.
For context, consider: Lackey’s 67 quality starts since 2013 are only two fewer than Greinke and Felix Hernandez, one less than Jon Lester, the same as Zimmermann and Chris Sale, and more than a long list of notable starters including Price, Madison Bumgarner, Lynn, Leake, Samardzija, Cueto, Corey Kluber, and Dallas Keuchel.
The Cubs gave Lackey a reasonable two-year deal worth $32 million to put some spine into a thin rotation. The Cubs ranked 15th in the majors in quality starts last season with 81. Lester and Cy Young award winner Jake Arietta were responsible for 50 of the 81 quality starts; no other Cubs’ starter had more than 12. The signing made a lot of sense for the Cubs, who clearly needed a No. 3 starter behind Lester and Arietta.
The two-year contract will cover Lackey’s age 37 and age 38 seasons, so there’s obviously some risk involved here. But that’s the benefit and appeal of a two-year contract for an older pitcher; a team’s liability is limited. Even if the Lackey spirals into decline and the signing becomes regrettable, the Cubs won’t be paying for their mistake past 2017.
Lackey became the Cards’ de facto No. 1 starter last season after Adam Wainwright went down on April 25. Lackey came through with 218 innings (9th), and a 2.77 ERA (10th.) Only four MLB pitchers had more quality starts than Lackey’s 26 in 2015. Two won the Cy Young award (Arietta, Keuchel), another (Greinke) just signed for $34.4 million a year and the fourth (Clayton Kershaw) happens to be the game’s best starting pitcher since graduating to the big leagues in 2008.
I suppose that Lackey’s arm could wither at anytime, but there’s been no decline in his velocity, strikeout rate, walk rate, line-drive rate, or home-run rate. The Steamer 2016 projections forecasts 190 innings and a one-run (plus) jump in ERA for Lackey in 2016, up to 3.89. But much of that spike is based on a more realistic strand rate for Lackey in ’16, and the analysis has merit. (Lackey stranded 82.6 percent of his runners on base last season — a 10-point increase above his career norm.)
At the going rate for younger free-agent starting pitchers, a two-year investment in Lackey seems relatively safe — and certainly reasonable. After all, the Cardinals were willing to bring Lackey back for one season at a salary of $15.8 million; that was the amount of their qualifying offer. The Cardinals will receive the Cubs’ late first-round draft pick for the Lackey signing, but if Lackey can help the Cubs win the division and a World Series over the next two seasons, I don’t think anyone in Chicago or St. Louis will be obsessing over a draft choice.
I thought the Cardinals would be reluctant to go in on a three-year deal for Lackey … but they balked at two years?
And they wouldn’t go two years with Lackey even after losing Lynn?
Very, very interesting.
The Cardinals paid Lackey a base salary of about $550,000 last season — he earned another $2.5 million in incentives — in exchange for his 3.6 Wins Above Replacement. According to FanGraphs.com, that’s a value of $28.8 million. So if we were keeping score here, the Cardinals were already way ahead in the return in their modest investment in Lackey.
Obviously the Cardinals may know something about Lackey’s pitching health that caused internal alarm. Moreover, the salty and temperamental Lackey doesn’t fit the mold of polite baseball boy scouts preferred by manager Mike Matheny. Perhaps Lackey was too bullheaded and sassy for Matheny. And if that’s the case — good grief, what a silly reason to let a pitcher walk to your chief rival to upgrade their rotation. With Lynn missing and Lackey gone for 2016, the STL rotation has lost 40 percent of its starts made in 2015. A healthy Wainwright should be able to fill in about half of that, but the Cardinals still face a precarious set of circumstances.
That’s why I’m fascinated by watching DeWitt and Mozeliak make a big play for David Price — only to apparently be taken aback by the cost of making a deal with an elite free-agent starter at a time when MLB is absolutely flush with revenue. And the Cardinals have the financial clout to buy any pitcher at any cost. It’s one thing to suggest to prepare that you’re ready to take that leap — but it’s more difficult to let go and and take the plunge.
Perhaps we’ll see the Cardinals regroup and reassess the inevitable cost of established pitching.
And I can understand why the Cardinals would be motivated to spend on a larger scale.
The Cardinals’ advanced methods for player evaluation are astute, but all 30 franchises now have an analytics department. The Pirates and Cubs have savvy baseball men that can match or surpass the Cardinals’ acumen for identifying value-driven talent.
DeWitt and Mozeliak are in an interesting situation. Obviously the formidable Dewitt-Mozeliak partnership is widely respected. But with the industry now loaded with sharp-minded front offices, the Cardinals’ analytics work is unlikely to create as much of a competitive gap between themselves and other cunning baseball-ops staffs. And the St. Louis organization still faces possible sanctions from MLB for hacking into the Houston Astros’ data base. That could mean the loss of draft choices.
So yeah, this is appears to be a good time for the Cardinals to deviate from their normal cautious standards in an attempt to solve some of their issues with increased spending. I don’t think anyone is demanding that the Cardinals lose their minds and engage in crazy business, but we must also recognize that the times have changed.
If DeWitt and Mozeliak want to buy above-average of elite starting pitching … well, sorry … but the price has gone way up.
So what will it be? The Cardinals can choose to stay out of the big-fish market and search for relative bargains. Maybe the Cards can rehab a broken-down pitcher. Maybe they can take a chance on another fixer-upper and get terrific results as they have in the past with (among others) Chris Carpenter, Jeff Suppan and Kyle Lohse. The team has the option to remain fully committed to developing starting pitching through the draft and player development.
The Cardinals don’t have to do anything that gives them great pause.For now, their credibility remains intact and should shield them from the fan-media darts that take aim at an organization’s commitment to winning. But for a team that needs innings and quality stars and a power boost for their lineup, there’s still plenty of help available right now as long as DeWitt and Mozeliak are willing to spend. There are pitchers. There are corner outfielders (Justin Upton, Alex Gordon, Yoenis Cespedes. There’s at least one high-profile slugging first baseman (Chris Davis) and a few options to improve the infield depth. Right fielder Jason Heyward looms over all of this; no one seems to have much of a read on where the Heyward market is headed. But the Cardinals will have to spend to a bunch to keep Heyward in St. Louis just to maintain what they had offensively and defensively in 2015. I’ve heard abundant of talk about the Cardinals’ self-declared intentions, but I’m much more intrigued by their actions.
Thanks for reading …
–Bernie
The post Will the Cards Spend Money? Or Just Talk About It? appeared first on 101Sports.com.