5 unpopular decisions the Cardinals have made that ended up being right

The St. Louis Cardinals have made a lot of mistakes over the last few years, many of which resulted in their worst season in franchise history in 2023.

The organization faces a major test in 2024 to see if they can rebound from the mistakes of their past. Some of the moves they made this offseason (Sonny Gray, bullpen overhaul, Chaim Bloom, among others) indicate steps in the right direction, while other moves (signing Kyle Gibson/Lance Lynn, not adding a second front-line starter, etc.) give fans reason to be concerned.

We've talked at length about the mistakes the organization has made in recent years, and imagine we will continue to do so. But today I wanted to take a moment to look at some decisions the franchise made that ended up being the right calls, even if they were unpopular at the time.

Again, this is not a defense of the front office, but rather a quick glimpse into some "fork in the road moments" where things actually did go right, and maybe offer some hope about better decisions to come. Ultimately, their play on the field and future decision-making will dictate our thoughts here, but I do think it's important to note that there have been things fans have wanted the Cardinals to do that would not have been good for the team.

1. Passing on a Sean Murphy trade

The Cardinals tend to avoid spending big money in free agency, instead opting to trust their young talent or send the trade capital necessary to upgrade their roster.

While trades are a vital part of building a good team, we've seen the Cardinals make massive mistakes in the trade market, giving away future contributors for an immediate reward that did not pay off. The Cardinals had the opportunity to trade for one of the best catchers in baseball in Sean Murphy last offseason, but the asking price was way too high.

Reportedly, the Cardinals would have had to part with Lars Nootbaar, Brendan Donovan, and Gordon Graceffo to get the deal done. Nootbaar and Donovan are both key pieces in the Cardinals lineup who are cost-controlled, and Graceffo is a young arm who could make an impact in the near future. Murphy is a really good player, but that is a ton of talent to give up for him, especially with an option like Willson Contreras available for just cash and a compensatory pick.

That's the direction the Cardinals ended up going in, and one I think most of us can agree is the right decision. Which side of this "trade" would you rather have?

Side 1:
C Sean Murphy (6yr/$73m)
2023 2nd round pick

Side 2:
C Willson Contreras (5yr/$87m)
OF Lars Nootbaar (FA in 2028)
UTL Brendan Donovan (FA in 2028)
RHP Gordon Graceffo

Um, I'll take side two in a landslide.

Things did not go well for Willson Contreras in the first half of 2023 with St. Louis, struggling at the plate and being removed from his catcher duties for a period of time. But from July on, he was one of the best hitters in all of baseball (literally) and has put in a ton of work this offseason to improve defensively. Contreras has his flaws, but not enough to give up Nootbaar and Donovan to make the "upgrade" to Murphy.

2. Trading Jordan Montgomery rather than extending him

We saw it with the Yankees and Aroldis Chapman in 2016 - trade your valuable expiring asset for prospects, and then look to bring them back in the offseason. The Cardinals hit the ball out of the park with their return in the Jordan Montgomery trade but have failed in the second department.

Extending Miles Mikolas last spring was a mistake, but that does not mean they could have extended Montgomery at that moment instead. Montgomery is a Boras client, so the likelihood that he was going to sign an extension before the 2023 season that would have been a good deal was slim at best.

So, once the Cardinals fell out of contention, they flipped Montgomery for Thomas Saggese, Tekoah Roby, and John King, the former two being top 100 prospects in all of baseball. That's an excellent haul for a guy who was on a heater last season and was going to hit free agency either way.

Had the Cardinals extended Montgomery, that wouldn't have been a bad move (assuming the numbers are not crazy), but they'd be without that prospect capital they were able to acquire. They should have gone out and signed Montgomery or someone else in his tier to pair with Sonny Gray this offseason, and that's where they are making a huge mistake. But trading Montgomery away instead of extending him was clearly the right decision.

I get that the Cardinals only had one starting pitcher under contract for 2024 before resigning Mikolas, but the wisest thing to do with a player like that would have been to wait and see what his year would be like. I highly doubt he would have gotten more money than St. Louis gave him even if he had a good year, and so that's where they really shot themselves in the foot in this whole process.

Still, the Cardinals have an opportunity to right their wrongs and bring back Montgomery before another team snatches him up. I like the idea of the organization having all three of Montgomery, Saggese, and Roby, and they should too.

4. Deciding not to sell the farm system for Juan Soto

This is a hill I will die on that I'm honestly surprised more fans do not agree with. If the Cardinals had traded for Juan Soto at the 2022 Trade Deadline, the organization would be in the midst of a full-scale rebuild, the likes we have not seen in St. Louis during the entire DeWitt era...

Let me explain.

Context is key with every potential transaction. I was all in on the idea of a Soto trade at the time, until I saw the price the Padres ended up paying. I've written about this a few times now, but trading for Juan Soto was not as simple as the Cardinals not wanting to trade Dylan Carlson. The deal would have required the Cardinals to give up a historic haul, something the Padres ultimately wound up doing.

While it's not possible to know the exact package the Nationals would have accepted for Soto from St. Louis, comparing the Cardinals' assets from that time to the package San Diego gave up, it would have wound up looking something like this...

Cardinals receive: Juan Soto

Nationals receive: Jordan Walker, Nolan Gorman, Matthew Liberatore, Masyn Winn, Tink Hence, and Dylan Carlson.

Don't believe me? Check out this story I wrote in January where I compared the Padres package in depth to that haul St. Louis would have had to give up.

Juan Soto is on track to be one of the best players we have ever seen play this game, so it feels really odd to say St. Louis should not have jumped at the opportunity to grab him. The problem had nothing to do with Soto's talent level and everything to do with how much worse the Cardinals' situation would have been in the last 12 or so months if they had pulled off such a deal.

Maybe they make a deeper run in the postseason that would have made it worthwhile in 2022, but assuming they wouldn't have, Juan Soto and his $23 million price tag in 2023 would have kept the Cardinals from making the upgrades they needed to make, and let's just be honest, they probably weren't going to give him the kind of extension he'd need to resign.

So the Cardinals, coming into this past offseason, would probably have needed to not just trade Soto as the Padres did, but they'd also likely need to go into full rebuild mode, moving on from the likes of Paul Goldschmidt, Nolan Arenado, and others as well. Why? Well, they'd be coming off their worst season in decades and have most of their emerging young core playing in the nation's capital instead of St. Louis.

Now, if the Cardinals operated with a larger budget (like they should) and had managed their farm system better in recent years, they could have been aggressive here. Even so, it's hard to convince me that two and a half years of Soto is a better idea than having Walker, Gorman, Hence, Winn, and others under team control for a long time.

5. Not signing one of the big-name shortstops (kind of)

The last decision on this list is probably the one that you can argue against the most, but here's why in hindsight I think it made sense to pass on the free-agent shortstop market...for the most part.

It's hard to argue that this team shouldn't have signed Corey Seager, Marcus Semien, or Trea Turner when they had the opportunity to. All three, especially the first two, have been great gets for their clubs so far and the Cardinals would easily be a better team with them. If the Cardinals were willing to expand their budget further than they do right now, it would be even more of a no-brainer, especially compared to the Soto situation, where a deal also required a bunch of young talent.

There are a few reasons why I think it may have made sense to avoid that market though, but only if the club ends up investing in other areas in the next few seasons. Masyn Winn is not one of those players, and while he could develop into one, passing on those three guys I mentioned before because of his promise alone is a mistake. But saving that money to invest into the true weaknesses of this club does make sense, something we really haven't seen St. Louis do yet.

Let's take a brief look at each of the major free agent shortstop contracts signed from the previous two offseasons.


Corey Seager - ten years, $305 million

Marcus Semien - six years, $110 million

Trevor Story - six years, $140 million

Javier Baez - six years, $140 million

Carlos Correa (twice) - three years, $1053 million with opt-outs, and then six years, $200 million

Trea Turner - eleven years, $300 million

Xander Bogaerts - eleven years, $280 million

Dansby Swanson - seven years, $177 million

Out of all of those contracts, I really only think you'd want to have Seager, Semien, or Turner. Story and Baez have already been major busts, while Swanson and Bogaerts will not age well at all. Correa may end up being a good deal, but I'm not too upset about that one.

Part of this argument again hinges on the fact that the Cardinals just are not going to spend like the biggest markets in baseball. Yes, they do need to spend more, I 100% agree, but they just are not going to compete in spending with Los Angeles and New York. So at some point, they need to be aware of how they are spending and make sure they have financial flexibility to upgrade other parts of their roster.

I really wish one of Seager, Semien, or Turner was in the Cardinals lineup. They would probably have the best unit in all of baseball. But If they end up deciding to upgrade their pitching next offseason with the freed-up money they have organizationally, then I see the reasoning. But if they had signed any of the other shortstops, it would have been a massive mistake in my opinion.