Reader Mailbag: The coming trade deadline, a possible Marlins target, Val Kilmer movies, profound thoughts on Miles Mikolas, and more

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

Let’s get to those mailbag questions as the hobbled Cardinals lineup gets ready to test their mettle in Wrigley for the first time this season.

Tony writes:

What type of return would we need to trade any of our perceived tradable 26-man roster players? Someone who could help the team this season? Someone who is good enough to be put on the 40 man roster this season or offseason? A bag of baseballs?

I would expect the Cardinals would focus on longer-term lottery tickets, maybe a prospect or two who qualifies as “currently promising.” Ryan Helsley’s been sort of trending upward in recent appearances, and if he’s able to maintain that over the next three weeks or so then maybe he fetches something interesting. Contenders are always looking for high-leverage relief help, but Helsley needs to show he’s past those early-season control issues (while also continuing to miss bats). Still, he’s a rental, and a trade would mean no possibility of a qualifying offer for the team that acquires him. He’s the only Cardinals trade piece to whom making a qualifying offer can be justified.

At this juncture, I think Steven Matz could net the best return. That’s thanks to his ability to start or be a multi-inning reliever. As well, he presently boasts a 2.65 FIP, a 3.35 xFIP, and a strong 18.3 K-BB% that ranks 37th out the 194 pitchers who have worked at least 40 innings this season. He also grades out well according to the major pitch-modeling metrics. I don’t want to oversell, as I certainly don’t think you’re getting, say, a top-50 prospect for Matz or anything like that, but I do believe he’ll have broad market appeal provided he continues on his current course.

Elsewhere, Erick Fedde certainly isn’t going to bring back much given his deep struggles at the command-and-control level this season (trade him anyway, I say), and Nolan Arenado would of course be more of a salary offload than anything else. Sonny Gray would no doubt fetch a strong return, but I’m operating under the assumption that he’s still unwilling to waive his no-trade clause. I also assume Willson Contreras still isn’t interested in moving elsewhere. Phil Maton is moveable, of course.

To repeat, I would expect any deadline moves to be future-oriented in terms of what the Cardinals are targeting. I think all the “churn” arms they have on the 40-man obviates the need to address the current bullpen, and I can’t imagine they have any interest in rotation upgrades given the prices of those and the need for Michael McGreevy to take regular turns in St. Louis.

Touching on Arenado once more, the Max Muncy injury situation in L.A. is worth monitoring. He has a bone bruise in his left knee (the result of a collision at third base while he was making a tag on Michael A. Taylor). The injury looked very ugly at the time, but the MRI showed no structural damage. That said, Muncy is out a minimum of six weeks, and it’s the kind of injury that could sideline him for longer than that. The Dodgers are supposedly one of the teams to which Arenado would be willing to approve a trade. To be sure, I don’t want Arenado to be traded while playoff contention is still in play, but it’s worth keeping an eye on the Dodgers should Muncy’s timeline get pushed out before the July 31 trade deadline.

Bob writes:

As the Cardinals compete for a playoff spot what one area of the team would you improve via trade? How aggressive would you be? Would you consider trading Walker to get what you need?

The only thing I’d target to help the current roster is someone on the pitching side who would also help the future rosters. Specifically, that would be a young to young-ish starting pitcher with multiple years of team control remaining, and even then I’d do it only if Fedde is out the door and the Cardinals are willing to shift Miles Mikolas to a relief role for the rest of the season (McGreevy as a rotation regular needs to be a post-deadline priority). Needless to say, young to young-ish starting pitchers with multiple years of team control remaining are in short supply and not often traded away. Maybe righty Edward Cabrera of the Marlins would be a viable target? I have concerns about the Cardinals’ rotation as Matthew Liberatore’s and Andre Pallante’s workloads rise, especially in light of the thin crop of ready-now reinforcements behind McGreevy. If Miami does indeed dangle Cabrera, his big fastball, and his putaway breaking stuff, then it’s worth a conversation. He’s 27 and not eligible for free agency until after the 2028 season.

As for Walker, no, I wouldn’t trade him. He’s still just 23, and I still want to see what he becomes as a hitter. “Selling low” is a grossly overused trade descriptor in MLB, but dealing Walker right now would be an example of it. It would be all downside from the Cardinals’ standpoint.

Jay writes:

It feels like every July, as the deadline approaches, fans/media love to scour the rosters of fading teams and see which former Cardinals could potentially be made available for trade. We love our reunions in St Louis, but the results (aside from Pujols) have been largely uninspiring. Will Bloom’s rise to the big seat change the organization’s approach to always trying to reunite with the past… especially when done in lieu of actually acquiring impact players?

I would hope so, but the unknown is to what extent the DeWitts were driving such decisions in the name of playing the hits to the fan base. The current emphasis does seem to be cultivating internal solutions and growing that core of “surplus value” young talents that’s essential to any winning roster – especially one with St. Louis’ resources. Otherwise, the Cardinals would not have invested so heavily in rebooting the player-development system. I would guess the occasional reunion happens, but the question to ask is whether the reunion makes baseball and roster sense. I’ll just say I have confidence in Bloom’s capacity to steer decisions in that proper direction until proved otherwise.

Jibby writes:

Who is your favorite bad Cardinals baseball player all time? Someone you know just wasn't very good but couldn't help loving.

I have to say Jim Lindeman. He was a former first-rounder, and in his fourth game of the 1987 season, when he was still rookie-eligible, he hit a pair of homers against the Pirates. That was enough for me as a 15-year-old to believe he would be a reliable source of thunder at the plate for years and years to come. Bulletin: He was not. However, that early promise (if it can even be called that) stuck with me, and I’ve had a soft spot for Lindeman ever since.

In some ways, my “pre-Enlightenment” days of thinking about baseball were better, in that I could easily latch on to such tiny-sample nonsense and imbue it with a megatonnage of meaning. I did the same a few years later when Scott Cooper had a three-hit day in his first game after the Cardinals acquired him from Boston in a spring trade. In part, I blame Mike Shannon who after Cooper’s third hit of the game said something like, “St. Louis is now Cooper’s town!” Well, my trusted source Mr. Shannon would hardly say something like that if Cooper weren’t going to be a special player for the Cardinals. Bulletin: He was not.

Anyway, Jim Lindeman it is. I was tempted to say Tito Landrum, for whom I had outsized affections as a kid, but he was actually useful in his limited role.

Jared writes:

What's your Mt. Rushmore of Val Kilmer movies?

Good question.

1. Tombstone

2. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

3. Real Genius

4. Willow

Speaking of Tombstone, I whisper into the bathroom mirror every morning, “I have not yet begun to defile myself.” Doing so greatly enhances my locus of control, or at least my sense of it.

Jay writes:

Please help me make sense of Mikolas’ refusal to waive his NTC. Candidly, on the surface, it seems pretty selfish. This club has paid him $56m over the last 3 seasons and received a back-end-of-the-rotation ROI. Does Mikolas think that if he stays through the end of the season it will somehow increase the possibility that Bloom re-signs him? I don’t believe that move would be well received by fans, even as a 1-year band-aid. I guess I just can’t see his endgame, when he could help out an organization that has been overly generous to him for almost a decade, all while auditioning for 2026 with a playoff team.

I am no fan of Mikolas, but I don’t consider it selfish to use one’s contractual rights. Being traded introduces upheaval and uncertainty into one’s life, and players and their reps push for no-trade protections in part to have control over that. Yes, the Mikolas extension was an ill-advised one, but that’s the fault of team brass for committing to a pitcher with middling stuff into his mid-thirties and beyond. Mikolas hasn’t been derelict in his pitching duties in terms of effort and preparation. He’s just been (somewhat predictably) bad at those duties. On another level, I’m not sure any team would want him in trade, anyway.

If at some point one hopes very soon, Mikolas is approached about switching to a long-relief role and he then balks or grouses about it publicly or outright refuses, then I’d sign on to any accusations of selfishness. I can’t get there, though, just for his wanting to stay where he signed.

OK, folks, thanks for all the great contributions to this here mailbag. Back soon.

dp