Recently, Jeff Jones of the Belleville-News Democrat was on the Dealin’ the Cards podcast. And he said he would not be shocked if the Cardinals end up with a bigger name starter than you’d expect in free agency. But he also said after that it would because that person’s market did not materialize, using Framber Valdez as a reference point. That got me thinking: what kind of free agent would it take to make it worth losing a draft pick given where the Cardinals are?

Some people, and I’ve seen it in the comments, don’t think any free agent this upcoming offseason is worth losing a draft pick. Others are probably a bit more flexible. Let’s look at the 13 players who received a qualifying offer and see “is it worth it to lose a pick for this player?” I’ll put my own judgement in each section. And if you’re wondering about the penalties, the Cardinals are a revenue sharing recipient, so it’ll cost them their third highest selection. Near as I can tell, it does not matter how much you sign the player for, the penalty is the same. That is what it says on the glossary on the official website.

Fangraphs Crowdsourced – 8 years, $280 million

Just to be clear, the worth it section is entirely about whether or not it’s worth it to lose a draft pick, not for his potential contract. That is not the point of this post. I may have future posts about that, although I can promise you I will not be devoting an article to Kyle Tucker. Tucker is the kind of player that is designed for this penalty. We’ll be covering other players later on where it is clear this is not who was in mind when a draft pick penalty was created. But Tucker? Yes, it’s a long, long-term deal and his production throughout his deal is fairly likely to significantly outpace the Cardinals’ 3rd pick of the 2026 draft.

FG Crowdsourced – 5 years, $130 million

Okay, now we’re getting into the nitty gritty. Unless you’re a hardcore never lose a draft pick kind of fan, you’re probably happy losing a draft pick for Tucker. Cease is already arguably in that section of players where your team building philosophy matters for whether you say yes or no. It’s not necessarily about the draft pick itself – if you don’t believe the Cardinals are seriously contending over the next two years, why lose a draft pick when the next time you are seriously contending, Cease will probably be league average.

Cease is also something of a weird free agent too. He deserves a deeper dive honestly. His ERA has wildly fluctuated from year-to-year, going from 3.91 to 2.20 to 4.58 to 3.47 to 4.55. Those are not random years, but his ERAs from 2021 to 2025 in order. He looks a lot more consistent by Fangraphs WAR with seasons ranging from 3.5 to 4.4 fWAR. The culprit is a .320 BABIP against and 69 LOB% for 2025 specifically. I find his career LOB% oddly low for what is considered an elite pitcher: 72.8% for his career. Zach Wheeler, a random name I thought of, has a career LOB% of 75.1%.

Cease just feels like a risky signing to me for some reason and I could reference the LOB% or his career 10% BB rate, but the old school fan stubbornly still in me is still kind of stuck that his ERAs are kind of just good to below average rather than great with the exception of 2022. Maybe it’s me being annoyed at Sonny Gray’s tenure. I mean he’s had two seasons with an ERA better than 3.90. One of them was 2.20, but that was also four years ago. I just feel like I should be more excited to want to sign this guy than I actually am.

FG Crowdsourced – 5 years, $140 million

There is an interesting wrinkle here, because to bring it back to what inspired this article, Jones said that it would not surprise him if the Cardinals ended signing Valdez to a 1 year, $28 million deal. So that’s the kind of deal he had in mind when he said a big free agent name might end up signing with the Cardinals. Why this is interesting as far as losing a draft pick is concerned is that the return at the deadline might be better than the draft pick. That is why you’re signing someone like Valdez. You are not signing him because you are signing him for the future, you are signing him because you saw an undervalued player and thought you could flip him at the deadline.

So your answer might vary depending on what kind of deal he does get. The deal Fangraphs audience predicts? Definitely not. That’s a deal that is 100 percent for a win now in the present team and however optimistic you are about the Cardinals, that’s not them right now. Cease will be the same age as Valdez now in year three of his deal. But Valdez does feel safer than Cease to me because he has a career 61.8 GB% and it kind of feels like his floor is a functional groundball machine. Strikeouts make him an ace, but the groundballs might keep him effective.

But also he intentionally crossed up his catcher, which has to be mentioned. I have literally never heard of that before and consider it a big red flag!

FG Crowdsourced: 4 years, $112 million

I feel like people who want to sign Kyle Schwarber will end up hating his at-bats before his deal ends when he comes to St. Louis. They see the 56 homers and their eyes light up. What they will see everyday is the 197 strikeouts and .231 career batting average. He batted .197 in 2023. Batting average does not matter, but I feel like it matters to people who want Kyle Schwarber.

He is also a DH-only and 33-years-old. Easy pass.

FG Crowdsourced: 7 years, $189 million

I could actually see an argument for Bichette so long as you can convince him to play something other than SS. Imagine an infield with JJ Wetherholt, Winn, and Bichette for the next 4+ years. But again, they aren’t putting all their chips into 2026 and that is money much more wisely spent in a different part of the field, namely outfield.

FG Crowdsourced: 5 years, $125 million

My answer should be no, but I don’t actually have the philosophy of preserving draft picks, this just happens to be a free agency with two pitchers I don’t really want. Cease doesn’t really feel like an elite pitcher and Valdez has the catcher thing, but Suarez has no such problems. Suarez does come with a concern: he’s not a big strikeout guy. He’s actually a very Cardinals looking pitcher in potentially a bad way for the future.

So if your answer is no, I do not blame you. I think Suarez looks like a very Cardinals pitcher in a good way. If that’s at all what his contract will be, that’s super reasonable to me.

FG Crowdsourced: 4 years, $84 million

FG Crowdsourced: 3 years, $54 million

On paper, it sure feels like Grisham should be a yes. Coming off a 3.2 fWAR season and just 29-years-old, he plays above average defense in CF and has a career 102 wRC+. The Cardinals could absolutely use an outfielder and it’s a fairly reasonable deal. But does anybody trust Trent Grisham? He should be getting a much better contract than that given the start of this paragraph. But last year was his first 2 fWAR season since 2021.

He feels a hell of lot like signing Dexter Fowler, albeit two years younger and at a much more reasonable contract length if that is indeed what he gets. But you don’t want to lose a draft pick over Dexter Fowler right now.

FG Crowdsourced: 4 years, $72 million

Again, just not really the right timing. I can envision a scenario where it is worth it to lose a draft pick over Torres, it’s just not with this Cardinals team at this stage of their retool. To again bring it back to Fowler, this is more analogous to Fowler, because the Cardinals have a bunch of infielders who may quickly make Torres look redundant. Whatever you think of Grisham, the Cardinals outfield situation could certainly use an outfielder and it’s unlikely that outfielder looks redundant in a period of three years. But Torres? Winn’s here and Wetherholt’s here and you only need one more guy to emerge. And it’s not like the Cardinals are lacking in guys: it could be Thomas Saggese, Jose Fermin, Nolan Gorman, Blaze Jordan, Deniel Ortiz, Jesus Baez.

Are any of those individual players likely to make Torres redundant? I would argue no, at least not in this timeframe. But if you have a player who’s 20% likely, 15% likely, 10% likely, and so on, well it’s not that unlikely that one of the group does. Just because we don’t know which one does not make it unlikely. When the Cardinals signed Fowler in 2017, I don’t think most people would give very high odds to Harrison Bader being that guy. But he quickly made it look dumb to sign Fowler.

FG Crowdsourced: 4 years, $88 million

Ben Clemens, who wrote the free agent article for FG, thinks King is going to accept the qualifying offer. “King is in a strange middle ground where the qualifying offer meaningfully impacts his prospects; no one minds the draft pick cost all that much when they’re signing a superstar, but signing King would cost most teams a pretty good draft pick.” Another thing that he points out is that since 2021, King has injured nearly every part of his arm: finger, elbow and shoulder. He also has had one full season starting.

I kind of also assume he’ll take the QO, so I don’t think this will end up being a debate.

FG Crowdsourced: 2 years, $40 million

This is an easy one. When Imanaga came over, there were very big concerns about his home run rate, at least from me. I felt his HR rate was not being properly accounted for in the projections. He allowed just three homers in his first nine MLB starts, but then teams gradually started learning how to hit him. After those nine starts, he’s allowed 55 homers in 45 starts. And while he played some of the season injured, his strikeout rate went way down, as did his GB% rate. His contract starts at 32. Forget the draft pick, I still don’t want him.

FG Crowdsourced: 2 years, $44 million

There has to be a chance he accepts the QO right? He picked the worst season to have a down year, and it really was a down year. His ERA ballooned to 4.83, his FIP to 4.50, and he saw his strikeouts decline to league average. You can squint at his stats and see how it would incentivize him to try again next season. You can also squint and see a player who lost it, who was working on a somewhat delicate edge with his stuff, and he should take money while he can get it. But if that’s actually the kind of deal teams have in mind, I think I would just take the QO. If he has another off year, he can probably still get 1 year, $14+ million or something and while that would obviously cost him some money, the reward is so much greater. I don’t think the risk/reward is particularly close. That would not be a hard decision for me.

FG Crowdsourced: 3 years, $66 million

Again, do not blame you if you say no to this. He looked like classic Woodruff last season and while it ended with a lat injury, which is very concerning, this is upside you do not usually get for that price. He actually struck out more batters on a rate basis than he ever has and walked less on a rate basis than he ever has. It wasn’t his best season, because he only made 12 starts and didn’t get groundballs.

The upside of Brandon Woodruff is worth losing a draft pick over. In my opinion.

Those are the free agents who come saddled with a qualified offer. The deadline to accept the qualified offer is November 18th, and it wouldn’t surprise me if someone on this list is removed from the board.