3 pros (and 3 cons) to the Cardinals targeting 3 starting pitchers this offseason

Pro: The Cardinals need more stability in their rotation, and three starting pitchers can bring that

Mozeliak's quote "We have six starting pitchers" this past offseason has been used against this club so many times since the words came out of his mouth. Sure, they had six options, but it became clear early on that they were not good enough to win games for this team.

The only defense I'll make for Mozeliak here is that, although many called out their lack of starting pitching before the season began, it's gone far worse than anyone could have imagined. Some thought Adam Wainwright would be bad this year, but no one expected him to have one of the worst seasons of all time. Jordan Montgomery was good in his final stretch of starts for St. Louis, but he started off a bit slow. Miles Mikolas did as well. Steven Matz had to be removed from the rotation and then got hurt when he figured things out, and Jack Flaherty was healthy but inconsistent.

The fact that all five of those things happened at once is a major reason why things fell apart. They probably could have weather one or two of those issues, but not all of them. So, I get why they would want to go into 2024 with five reliable options rather than a bunch of "what ifs" in the rotation.

Mikolas and Matz are very capable options for their rotation, but neither can be relied on to be "top-of-the-rotation". Dakota Hudson, Zack Thompson, and Matthew Liberatore are great depth options, but there is increased risk in slotting them into your rotation plans before injuries even take place.

Signing and trading for three proven MLB arms, ones that don't have the same question marks that guys like Flaherty and Wainwright had this year, put the club in a much better position to compete on a nightly basis in 2024.

Con: Targeting three starters could limit the quality of starters they could go after if they were focused on just one or two

Three targets means the Cardinals are dividing their resources even further in their pursuit of pitching. Whatever dollar amount they set for spending this offseason and whatever assets they are willing to trade must be enough to get three guys.

This does not mean they cannot go out and get an ace and a reliable number-two starter. It just makes it more difficult to pull off unless they truly open up their pocketbooks or are willing to part with significant trade assets. In my story on the tiers of starting pitching, I detailed what kind of starters they can get to fill each of those three rotation spots. My question is, if the top-end pitching market gets out of control, will the Cardinals bow out so they can afford to get three starters instead of just one or two?

Limiting their focus to one or two guys makes it even easier to justify the spending or assets given up for top-end pitching. Hudson and Thompson have looked good in recent weeks for St. Louis. Relying on one of them as that "third new starter" isn't a crazy idea.

This con is more of a concern because of how the Cardinals' front office has operated in the past. Ownership seems to have a scarcity mindset when it comes to spending, and it's fair to question their willingness to spend big on one starter if they need to add not just one but two more. I actually think the disaster that 2023 has been may cause ownership to finally increase salary again significantly, which would nullify this con.

Pro: They aren't putting all of their eggs in "one-basket" by investing heavily in one or two guys

Jacob deGrom. Carlos Rodon. David Price. Stephen Strasburg. Patrick Corbin. Robbie Ray. The list goes on and on. The risk of investing so much capital into one top-end starter is possibly the biggest gamble a front office can take, and the one that can do the most damage if it goes poorly.

Injuries can happen to any pitcher at any moment. We like to talk a lot about getting starters who are not "injury prone" but in all honestly, you are holding your breath with 95% of pitchers in this league that they'll avoid any IL stints, let alone missing entire seasons. That hurts no matter who the starter is. But it becomes crippling when you paid that starter $25+ million to produce for your team.

Look at the Tampa Bay Rays. Coming into the season, they had more pitching than they knew what to do with. By the time the trade deadline came around, they were also looking to acquire more starters. Even after the deadline, they've continued to have starters go down with injury. It's never been more true that you cannot have enough pitching.

So for a team that has so many pitching needs, they can't really afford to not bring in multiple options, knowing that injuries will eventually happen. If they do rely on someone like Hudson or Thompson in their rotation, what happens if they have one or two injuries early in the season? Now your rotation has both Thompson and Hudson, plus someone like Liberatore filling in. Things can go downhill quickly.

This is not advocating against going after top-end pitching. I think it's a must for St. Louis. But I do see why they feel the need to add at least three starters, as investing in just 1-2 top-end guys can cripple with one or two untimely injuries.

Con: Will they have resources left over to upgrade their bullpen or other roster needs?

The other elephant in the room is the Cardinals' bullpen issues. Going into 2024, Ryan Helsley, Giovanny Gallegos, and JoJo Romero will surely be a part of that mix. Everything else is up in the air.

Maybe one or two of Thompson, Hudson, or Liberatore factor into the bunch, or other young starters like Gordon Graceffo, Michael McGreevy, Drew Rom, Adam Kloffenstein, or Connor Thomas. Perhaps John King or Guillermo Zuniga carve out roles as well. Regardless, they'll need to add more names to the mix to feel good about their bullpen mix.

Assuming the Cardinals spend on two of their starters in free agency, it makes it very difficult to imagine significant dollars going to relievers as well. Maybe a few buy-low options or one significant reliever could be signed. My guess is they look at some of their trade pieces to grab that bullpen help either way.

I haven't even touched on the potential that the Cardinals could look to add a center fielder as well. I kind of doubt that is in the cards for them at this rate, as with so many other needs, my guess is they rely on Nootbaar and Edman to fill the gap until Victor Scott II is ready.

Resource management will be a real challenge for St. Louis this offseason, in large part due to the massive undertaking this rotation upgrade will take.

Pro: They do not have to roll the dice on their pitching depth until injuries or development forces them to

I only briefly touched on this earlier, but this was more so in regards to how detrimental an injury to one of their offseason acquisitions could be if they only focus on adding one or two starters to the rotation. This point has more to do with the dependence on their pitching depth as a whole.

It's inevitable that they'll have to use their starting pitching depth throughout the season in 2024, but adding three starters ensures that the top end of their depth is stronger than it would be otherwise. If Thompson and Hudson, for example, have to replace someone like Matz and one of their acquisitions for stretches, that is much more manageable than if they are asking Rom, Liberatore, or someone else to do so.

Again, the names are not as important as the point here. Whoever arises from the Cardinals' young pitching group as their top options is going to be much more impactful as injury replacements than being fully relied on to run as their fifth starting Opening Day. Their top need this offseason is the front end of the rotation, but the quality of the pitching depth they can collect will have as much of an impact on the 2024 regular season as the quality of their front-line pitching.

Con: With so many young arms in Triple-A Memphis, their path toward making contributions in St. Louis becomes even murkier

If you want to play devil's advocate here, at what point will arms like Thompson, Graceffo, McGreevy, Rom, and Kloffenstein get real runs in St. Louis? What about guys like Tink Hence, Tekoah Roby, and Cooper Hjerpe who may not be too far behind?

One critique of the Cardinals over the last five or so years has been shoehorning young starters into bullpen roles, or never giving them much of a shot to start, and either stunting the potential as a starter (Ryan Helsley and Jordan Hicks come to mind) or letting them go and they find success elsewhere (Sandy Alcantara is the prime example of this).

Balancing having veterans you can rely on and real opportunities for young arms to shine is a tricky game to play. The Cardinals have not done this well in recent years, and while they must avoid the disaster of a rotation they've had this past year, they have to figure out a way to give real opportunities to these arms they say they are excited about.

While I understand the concern here, I would probably subscribe to the idea that first, opportunities will come, and two, if they have that kind of talent, they'll force their way into the conversation.

Injuries or underperformance will happen, and so rotation spots will open up. Even if not, I think we can undersell the value of developing at the big-league level in the bullpen. In 2013, the Cardinals had future starters like Carlos Martinez and Michael Wacha spend significant time in the bullpen, and they went on to become impact starters when the opportunities arose.

If any of those names truly have the talent to big real difference-makers in the Cardinals rotation, then they'll likely play themselves into that role at some point. There also is not a rush to get those guys into the rotation. Most of them, if needed, can hold off one more year from a rotation opportunity, and I wouldn't be worried about how it impacted their development.