Reader Mailbag, Part 2:

Readers have questions, writer has answers -- some of them possibly correct and coherent

Last time, we had part 1 of this particular mailbag – thankfully, I answered all the Brendan Donovan questions before the trade to Seattle went down – and now it’s time for part 2. Onward …

An anonymous contributor writes:

I have a couple friends who, over the last couple years, have had conversations with both current and former Cardinals players (sorry, I don’t want to name names). These players almost always say the same thing: that the Cardinals’ advanced analytics are extremely inferior - like, below what you might expect from a top-flight Division I college program - and that the whole league knows it.

1. Have you heard anything similar?

2. If these grapevine reports are at all true, how on earth did Mozeliak/DeWitt - who were once on the cutting edge of MLB analytics departments - let it come to that?

3. Do you see any signs of improvement in this area under Bloom?

I have heard second-hand complaints about the Cardinals’ tech capacities and “philosophical consistency” when it comes to player development, but those are at least a couple of years old. In broad terms, a lack of investment in staffing and infrastructure is the leading culprit, and then of course there’s the seeming lack of adaptability among some long-tenured front office members under John Mozeliak (a byproduct of the “loyal to excess” DeWitts). As we learned, Mozeliak in recent years was given a single budget for all of baseball operations to be divided up as he saw fit, and he favored major-league payroll over investing in the decaying player-dev system. Over at CBS Sports, I recently wrote about what got the Cardinals to this point, and much of that is germane to your comments. We can call it a multi-pronged failure.

Looking forward, yes, I’m quite optimistic that Chaim Bloom is addressing these deficits. He’s already significantly expanded the relevant staffing levels, and the Cardinals are heavily investing in tech upgrades. The construction delays at the Jupiter training complex are playing a role here, but that belated work is already well underway. It doesn’t appear that the facilities will be fully upgraded by spring training, but they appear to be on schedule to be functional. Once all the work is done, something approaching “state of the art” is the expectation. Bloom has for years been at the forefront of analytics and tech-driven player development, and that’s in large measure why he’s now in the big chair. It’s taken too long to get here, but thankfully the past is now the past.

Mark writes:

With the new regime implementing their program, do you see this helping (more structure and coaching in the minors) or hurting (he’s not our guy) players like Chase Davis who was drafted high by the previous regime.

Building off the above, I think improved training tools and expanded support, coaching, and coordinator staff will only make it more likely that flailing prospects like Davis find a higher level. I suspect that, for instance, Joshua Baez’s great leap forward last season might not have been so substantial if Bloom’s build-out hadn’t already been underway. This is speculative on my part, yes. I don’t think there’s any “not my guy” thinking in place, as that would be pretty self-defeating (the overwhelming majority of players in the organization right now are not Bloom’s guys). Broadly, I think every player in theory can benefit from improved player-dev resources.

Tony writes:

Who’s happier about the Kyle Tucker signing, Rob Manfred or Tony Clark?

I’ll say Manfred. The owners were always going to push for a salary cap because at heart it has nothing to do with competitive balance. They want a cap to limit labor costs and increase franchise valuations, full stop. The Tucker signing is really just a convenient cudgel for Manfred and the team owners who tell him what to do. Maybe it makes their messaging stronger and gives them a talking point when trying to win over the public, but the cap push was always going to happen.

Now for a pair of questions regarding Mr. Walker …

Chris writes:

How much more patience does the team have with Jordan Walker? I want to believe that he can still turn into that middle-of-the-order thumper they desperately need but I’m no longer sure he can be that guy. Thoughts?

Ken writes:

What are your thoughts on Jordan Walker and the 2026 season? Does he get 500 at bats no matter what? Seems like it’s make or break time for Walker.

This is one of the central questions of the upcoming season now that the rebuild is fully underway. Barring injury, yes, I think it’s all but guaranteed that Walker will get well more than 500 PAs at the highest level this season. He has a pretty long checklist of things to improve upon at the plate, but the hope is that an offseason devoted to grooving swing changes will be to his benefit. Too often he’s tried to make such changes midstream during the season, and he’s understandably struggled to make that happen.

Let’s also remember he’s still just 23 years of age – 111 days older than JJ Wetherholt – so as frustrating as Walker’s arc has been to date, there’s still plenty of time. I think even modest progress by Walker this season when it comes to making more consistent contact and lifting the ball more often keeps him within the long-term core, which, again, reflects in part how young he still is. If he doesn’t make any progress on those fronts and continues the downward trend that’s been in place since his rookie season, then it’s possible that Baez passes him as an organizational priority in the outfield. And yet, Walker’s capacity for top-of-the-scale exit velocities and the like still make him something on which we can dream. Obviously, the hope is he fully realizes his potential in 2026, but I’ll take incremental progress in light of his last two seasons. Walker is still a highly important young player in the organization, and he’ll be deployed as such.

Zac writes:

Over under to how close cards meet fangrpahs ZIPS projection; either under or over that win total of 77?

That strikes me as a pretty sensible figure. I’ll take the under, as I think the rotation could really struggle in 2026. My preliminary prediction is 74-88.

Jibby writes:

If Oli Marmol were a character on The Wire, who would he be and why?

Lester Freamon. Steady hand, intense when he needs to be. Was given unfavorable circumstances (those complicated and flawed Mozeliak rosters) but just got to work with what he had. The Bloom regime, which for these metaphorical purposes we’ll compare to the Avon Barksdale investigation, gave him a new purpose. I also expect Oli to get eyeglasses at some point and wear them on a lanyard.

Matt writes:

Was curious if you heard of any discussions with Detroit during this offseason of StL Tradeapolooza. They opened up a possibility for Chaim to add yet another “draft dart” when they signed Framber, forfeiting their 3rd highest pick, currently Comp B #68. They don’t appear to have a solid backup C nor much 1B depth after Tork, and could use a solid LH in thier pen. Offer some combo of Pagés, JoJo, and Burleson to get St Louis native Matt Vierling (RHB can play all OF, plus 3B), Comp B #68, and maybe Jace Jung (needs a reboot) or Colt Keith (very team friendly contract for several years)?

I do not know why I am down on Burly, he just seems to be at his highest potential and his position needs more power. 1B needs to be Gorman’s to share with Herrera as needed until the C thing either works or doesn’t. Gorman/Herrera as 1B/DH tandem would seem to work well going forward, if Gorman can hit consistently now.

I’m not sure about discussions with Detroit, but maybe they engaged on Sonny Gray. I do think we’ll see additional trades, but those may happen in-season. Romero of course seems likely to go, maybe at the deadline. If Lars Nootbaar proves he’s back to form after double heel surgery, then he seems like a player who’d be moved during the season, maybe well in advance of the deadline if Baez fares well at Memphis in the early going. As you note, there’s also that catcher logjam to sort out. I think the need to trade from that depth probably becomes more pressing if Herrera sticks at catcher this spring (I tend to doubt he will, but we shall see).

As for Burleson, I still think he has some power he can get to. You’re right that power is welcome at first base (or, really, at any position), but in terms of overall production, Burleson’s just fine. Last season, for instance, Burleson had a wOBA of .346, while the average MLB first baseman had a wOBA of .327. Through that lens, Burelson is an asset by positional standards, at least at the plate. Gorman, meantime, needs to prove he’s capable of making contact at an acceptable rate and thus producing before the Cardinals shuffle roles for him. I think it’s probably a make-or-break season for Gorman, who’s going into his age-26 campaign and has more than 1,500 plate appearances in the majors.

OK, that’s all for this round. Back soon.