St. Louis Cardinals Draft Review

by John Sickels on Jun 12, 2025 8:00 PM EDT Comment 13 comments

Wilfredo Lee - AP

St. Louis Cardinals outfielder Colby Rasmus, drafted in the first round in 2005. (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee)

Finishing up the NL Central with the St. Louis Cardinals.

St. Louis Cardinals Draft Review
1) Zach Cox, 3B, University of Arkansas: His bonus demands knocked him down towards the bottom of the first round, but the Cardinals should be able to sign him. A very polished hitter who can remain at third base, will hit for average and get on base, home run output still uncertain.

1S) Seth Blair, RHP, Arizona State University: Emerged as Sun Devils ace thanks to better command of 92-95 MPH fastball, improved breaking stuff. Very good pick in the supplemental round.

1S) Tyrell Jenkins, RHP, Texas HS: Outstanding athlete with live arm, long-term development project with high upside, Baylor football not likely to stand in the way.

2) Jordan Swagerty, RHP, Arizona State University: Smallish guy at 6-1, but has a good fastball and an excellent curve. Should move fast in relief role.

3) Sam Tuivailala, SS, California HS: Many teams liked him better as a pitcher, but Cardinals want his athleticism in the infield. Fresno State scholarship will have to be dealt with. High upside but a long-term project.

4) Cody Stanley, C, UNC-Wilmington: Average tools, average defense, shows polish with the bat. Poor depth in 2010 catching crop drove him up draft boards.

5) Nick Longmire, OF, University of the Pacific: Excellent athlete, but raw for a college player and did not hit especially well this year.

6) John Gast, LHP, Florida State University: Sort of a pitching version of Longmire: has good physical ability (can hit 93), but did not perform well this spring and will need more development time than most college guys.

7) Greg Garcia, SS, University of Hawaii: Good defender with major league bloodlines, grandfather was major league manager Dave Garcia. Bat is questionable, could be utility infielder.

8) Daniel Bibona, LHP, UC Irvine: Smallish lefty with average velocity but an excellent curveball and sharp control, put up terrific numbers in college.

9) Tyler Lyons, LHP, Oklahoma State University: He was a top prospect two years ago, but has lost much of his stuff and is now a pretty marginal prospect. Maybe he can get it back against wood.

10) Reggie Williams Jr, OF, Middle Georgia Junior College: Major league bloodlines and good tools, but very raw even for a junior college player.

FOUR OTHERS OF NOTE: 12-Austin Wilson, OF, California HS; 18-Boone Whiting, RHP, Centenary; 19-Chad Oberacker, OF, Tennessee Tech; 26-Victor Sanchez, 1B, University of San Diego.

COMMENT: I like the top four picks a lot, good blend of current performance and upside. Blair and Jenkins are both particular favorites of mine in their respective categories. After that, the draft tapers off a bit and looks average to me. Austin Wilson at 12 is not likely to sign, but if they could manage it this draft would be a real winner. As it stands, it's pretty good because of the top group in my view.

0 recs | Comment 13 comments | Add comment | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Read More: 2010 mlb draft, St. Louis Cardinals

Comments

What I'd Do

Don’t sign Cox, get the Supp pick next year, sign Wilson.
You get an extra first rounder in a stronger draft, and still have a first round caliber guy.

My Guys: Gillies, Pacheco, Drabek, Verlander, Ozuna, A Salcedo, S Rodriguez, and others.

by cwhitman412 on Jun 12, 2025 8:31 PM EDT reply actions

that sounds like an awful idea

Even if you don’t think Cox was the type of guy who should go top ten in a draft, he was an absolute steal for the Cardinals, and even given the quality of next year’s draft he’s most likely better than the guy they would get at 26 in 2011. Cox is also a much safer bet than Wilson to ever do anything for a major league team.

Wilson is a terrific athlete, but could easily flame out in A ball . . .basically you’re taking what happens to be a coup for the Cardinals and throwing it back in exchange for a lottery ticket.

by mrkupe on Jun 12, 2025 8:47 PM EDT up reply actions

Plus

that pick would be a must-sign next year, right? So the Cards would have to go the safe route, which could further limit who they may have to choose from at that slot.

Go for the bird in the hand, and figure out if you can also afford Wilson.

"In the event of a significant release of oil, an accurate estimation of the spill's total volume . . . is essential in providing preliminary data to plan and initiate cleanup operations." - Page 2 of British Petroleum's regional plan for dealing with offshore oil leaks.

by siddfynch on Jun 13, 2025 4:30 AM EDT up reply actions

I think it's a good idea

The comp pick next year (which is supposed to be a much deeper and better draft) will be the #25 pick (assuming no other team that drafted ahead of them fails to sign their 1st rd. pick) - not a supp pick.

I’d go hard and fast after Wilson and Jenkins, and even if one of them doesn’t sign I’d still only offer Cox slot money.

Card’s fan should hope that Cox’s ego kicks in and he keeps on demanding top-10 money, because he was a bad pick. Cox will not be able to stick at 3B - he’s got no range and no hands - so he’ll have to move to 1B. For some reason I believe the Cards have 1B manned for at least the next 8 years. Cox is a glorified singles hitter - only 21% of his hits this year were for extra bases. When he tried to hit for power last year (2009) he struck out at an alarming rate. I was so worried that the Giants were going to take him at #24, and then I LOL’d when the Cards took him at #25. His draft demands were not the only reason he fell so far and fast.

Other than Cox, though, I really liked the Cards’ other 6 top picks.

"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner

by Fla-Giant on Jun 13, 2025 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions

cards

They drafted No. 25 this year. If they don’t sign Cox, they’ll essentially have 25a next year . . .or 26. Which is what I said.

Your entire argument is based on the idea that Cox = bad player. While you’ll find very few people who think he’s worth Pedro Alvarez money, I think that’s led to a slippery slope towards assuming that Cox is actually not very good. Exceptionally few people in the know seem to think this . . .the question is not whether he will be a major league hitter, but what kind of hitter he’ll be and how good he’ll be.

Cox would go in the first round next year too.

by mrkupe on Jun 13, 2025 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions

To go it an awful idea is wrong

Austin Wilson + 26th overall selection next year is probably better value than Zack Cox. Cox is safer but Wilson has more upside. It’s a trade off that doesn’t make one better than the other. Each is a great player that I thought wouldn’t fall close to us if they were asking for slot. But add in the 26th pick and suddenly you’re talking about getting another very good player.

Our 12th round pick this year was basically a 1st round pick. It’s as simple as that.

The fact that the 26th pick is a must sign next year means very little. Only a handful of prospects are tough signs. A lot of good players that have gone 26th and later on have been easy signs with great potential(see Colby Rasmus).

by UncleBuck44 on Jun 13, 2025 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions

IF AND ONLY IF

they are absolutely CERTAIN they can sign Wilson, that might be a viable strategy, for the reasons you cite. However, it sounds like there’s a very good chance that all the money they could possibly throw at him wouldn’t be enough to get him to change his Stanford plans. (Good on him, say I; this kid sounds like he has commendable personal strength of character.) If that’s right, they simply can’t take the risk of having a very nice-looking draft turn bad through inability to sign both of their top prospects. Go for Cox, declare victory when you get him, and then try for the Wilson grand slam once some other guys have signed, accepting that the odds are not in your favor.

StanTheManFan
Contributes any way he can.
He's normally a nuclear physicist
Except when writing for this list.

by StanTheManFan on Jun 12, 2025 11:52 PM EDT up reply actions

Since when

do the Cardinals draft lots of “long-term projects”? Seems contrary to their traditional style … although I very much like the fact that they did it, particularly with a couple of high-probability guys at the very top.

StanTheManFan
Contributes any way he can.
He's normally a nuclear physicist
Except when writing for this list.

by StanTheManFan on Jun 12, 2025 11:45 PM EDT reply actions

Colby Rasmus

by mg050369 on Jun 13, 2025 9:18 AM EDT up reply actions

Shelby Miller

Baseball makes the world go 'round, or at least in my world it does.

by Whiteyballer on Jun 13, 2025 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions

So basically it's Luhnow

The post-Jocketty era seems to include more risk/reward type picks in the early rounds.

Albert Pujols does not have "down" years. He has "~6 WAR" years.

by mattybobo on Jun 13, 2025 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions

Yessir

Gotta like that from a fans standpoint.

Baseball makes the world go 'round, or at least in my world it does.

by Whiteyballer on Jun 13, 2025 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions

Raz

was hardly a “long-term project.” He had a solid skill set straight out of high school, and could have played in the Show 2+ years after he was drafted, if there’d been a need. Of course, it probably worked better to wait a year, but 3+ years from draft to MLB is still hardly “long term.”

With this year’s “long-term projects,” it may be two or three years before it’s clear that they can even play at all. Arrival on a 5-year time frame is more like it. And yes, Whitey, this isn’t a complaint, quite the contrary, it’s a good thing … but we must be patient.

StanTheManFan
Contributes any way he can.
He's normally a nuclear physicist
Except when writing for this list.

by StanTheManFan on Jun 13, 2025 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions