There is nothing wrong with the deal other than they didn't get a Harper or Machato type younger player.

Goldy is the top ranked 1st basemen in MLB for FB, at $24MM per its cheap.

I guess the whole “we don’t want to sign a player to a deal that goes into his mid 30 decline years “ talk about why they wouldn’t d a long term one with Harper or machado was all talk

I wanted Harper as well. I do think this deal helps us. I hate the DH, but if it is coming to the NL then our young corner infield prospects will have room to ascend.

:harumph:DH in the NL

Would you rather pay 25 million in AAV for Paul Goldschmidt's decline years or 25 million in AAV for Bryce Harper's prime and then his decline years?

There were ways to make this all work out great, but this team in not well run.

The Sonny Corleone move would be to give Harper whatever he wants
The Fredo Corleone move would be to sign a 32 yo 1B to a five year extension
The Micheal Corleone move would be to sign Harper and give Goldschmidt a shorter deal with a higher AAV.

There is no ****ing way he would get 5/130 in FA w/ a QO attached to him. None.

This team is not intelligent. They routinely overpay for players on the wrong side of 30 (Fowler, Cecil, now Goldschmidt) and piss away millions on contracts for the most volatile and fungible players in baseball--middle relievers.

Gregerson+Cecil+Miller will be lucky to give the Cardinals 1.5 WAR this year, and they'll cost as much as Bryce Harper.

Sure, mostly agree, and I would add letting Pham go was idiotic. I still like having Goldy than not, despite thinking Harper was a better option both need wise and financially.

You don't get to count year 1 - that's an independent question.

They're paying $26 million/yr for a guy who can only play 1b (and eventually - sigh - DH), who hits RH and who's strikeout rate is going in the wrong direction. That's a very common problem for players approaching a dip in production in their early 30s, especially if they start to see issues with chase rates.

Possibility A is that they're not intelligent.
Possibility B is that they are, and their interests don't align with yours.

The 'Michael Corleone' move you suggest is certainly the best way to win a championship. But it's probably not cost-effective for a franchise that already puts 3 million in the stadium. Don't get me wrong - they won't lose money or anything close to it had they made that move. But they won't make as much.

I don't think they're unintelligent - I think they're willing to toss red-meat to the ill-informed masses so they can saw 'we tried' in a manner that doesn't create as many long-term liabilities. They're plenty smart, but they are putting that brainpower to making the most money possible, not winning the most games possible.

Dewitt admitted it when he said their goal is to win 90 games. This team doesn't care as much about winning as they used to and that's a difficult thing for us to get our minds around.

They could literally spend the same amount of money by not changing middle relievers, though. I have no doubt they care about profit, but even if that's all they care about they're still going about it the wrong way because they could spend the same amount of money and have a team that could win five more games at a minimum.

Gotta convince the fans you're trying, though.

And when the team loses ballgames in the late innings because their manager is a dipshit, they could just say "the bullpen was bad" and convince the rubes by signing Brett Cecil.

As for Andrew Miller...well, you may be right there. I have no earthly idea how the team that watched Cecil fall apart before their eyes and Holland completely implode, not to mention the demise of Gregerson after he was ridden so hard, can look at Miller and thing "well this time it will be different"

The Miller signing is one of the best examples of not learning from your mistakes you'll ever see. Best guess I have is that the 2 year deal was short enough to pique their interest.

I get that but its my understanding they are 2-3 years away, correct? We are just supposed to accept having sub par defenders and 1 bat position at those two offensive positions?

I think the NL will have the DH in two years as part of the new CBA, so thats not going to be an issue.

I wanted to pay Harper up to $400 million. I'm sure the posts will be easy to find. I was all in on Harper. Sucked it looks like we didnt even really try or he want interested in St. Louis? Either way, it didnt happen. Now what? Just put the same offense out there again that missed the playoffs 3 years in a row?
Irrelevant. Mo has made some bad deals, no, alot of bad deals. He needs to go. I'm with DJ on this, he stays because he's making money hand over fist for the Dewitts.They have two recent WS Championships, They are way too comfortable and "safe" with their FA's. That said......

I'm not going to beat them up on the money spent on salary as long as the Cardinals remain in the top 10 salary teams in baseball. We are never getting into the top 5. I think its a reasonable expectation to spend between the #5-#10 teams in baseball. We are there. Our issue has been spending it on the wrong players. Cecil, Fowler, Holland, Gregerson etc.

Langoush: STLCards rotation in Milwaukee will be as follows:

Mikolas (Thurs.)
Flaherty (Fri.)
Hudson (Sat.)
Wacha (Sun.)
That sets Wainwright up to start in Pittsburgh on Monday.
Flaherty draws the home opener at Busch Stadium.

That looks like about like what I would have hoped. Matheny probably would have started Wainright in the opener.