cards sign sidney ponson

by lboros on Dec 21, 2005 9:52 AM EST in St. Louis Cardinals News

well, what do you expect me to say? he's been a bad pitcher the last two years, and he has a been a bad boy. he was never that good to begin with; in six of his 8 seasons he posted era's of 4.71 or above. his reputation as a good player stems from two years, 2002-2003, in which he went 24-21 with a 3.90 era and a 1.29 whip. that's the upper boundary of this player's ability. (thanks day by day database.)

ponson, larry bigbie, aaron miles, deivi cruz, gary bennett, brian daubach . . . . don't the BFsIB deserve slightly better than this?

on the bright side, ponson slots nicely into the fat-pitcher roster slot vacated by ray king (about whom, by the way, a nice article appeared recently at colorado's mlb.com site). but ray was fat and likeable (hope it works out for you, big fellah); ponson i already dislike.

at least it's a low-risk proposition -- one-year contract, low salary with incentives. (some good discussion about ponson got started in the comments to the previous post.) in isolation this acquisition makes no sense to me, but i'll reserve final judgment on it until i see what other deals follow in its wake; i'm hoping this is a small part of a suite of deals that will go down in the next couple weeks. it doesn't seem at first glance as though ponson alone provides sufficient rotation coverage to free up marquis for a deal; it think it would take another acquisition -- wade miller? -- before tony/dunc could feel secure in letting jason go.

or maybe it's this: ponson doesn't free up marquis for a trade, but he does free up anthony reyes. . . .

which leads me (awkwardly) back to yesterday's coco crisp inklings. i e-mailed SB Nation's cleveland affiliate, Let's Go Tribe, and asked what he thought of a possible crisp-for-marquis trade. he replied:

The Indians have been getting a lot of calls on Crisp, most notably from Boston. He's valuable because he's cheap, and a good defensive outfielder. Of the young players on the team, he's the one most likely to dealt, IMO.

The problem is that the Indians don't really have anyone to replace him. They lost out on Nomar Garciaparra (he would have played right field), and I don't think they want to have Casey Blake playing in the outfield full-time if they can help it. So if they do trade Crisp, they'd probably have to bring in at least another outfielder, and there isn't much out there on the free agent market.

Marquis doesn't really make that much sense for the Indians. He's a free agent after the 2006 season and will make a lot of money in arbitration. {Cleveland GM] Mark Shapiro has said that he's comfortable going with Jason Davis, Fausto Carmona, or Jeremy Sowers as the fifth starter.

Trading Crisp for another starter just doesn't make a lot of sense. The Indians are looking for another bat (preferably right-handed) and another setup man.

i question only that last phrase -- the indians appear loaded with setup men (cabrera betancourt riske rhodes sauerback), and they just signed graves and karsay for insurance. that minor point aside, i agree with what ryan's saying -- the deal doesn't seem to make sense for the indians.

but for some reason crisp's name keeps popping up; he was allegedly the centerpiece of a package the indians offered philadelphia for jim thome, and the indians did contemplate trading coco to the red sox for clement or arroyo a few weeks ago. (now that johnny damon has signed with the yankees, i'd expect the boxos to renew their pursuit of crisp.) so i asked mlb.com's cleveland beat guy, anthony castrovince --- what gives? why is this guy always rumored to be on the move?

The Indians are very reluctant to part with Crisp, as you might imagine. The Phillies thing didn't come from their [ie, Philadelphia's] end. The Phils were asking for Crisp, and the Indians weren't interested in dealing him. I heard those same rumors regarding the Red Sox, but I'm not sure how concrete those were. Basically what I'm saying is, I would consider this a minimal possibility, but I wouldn't exactly expect it to happen.

so what's prob'y going on here is that the cardinals have inquired about crisp -- and that's all it took to trigger the gossip. i'd consider it not only plausible but likely that the cards have made this overture; if the sox are offering arroyo for crisp, why wouldn't jock call up and say "hey, how `bout marquis?" but that may be the extent of the "trade talks" between the two teams; walter calls, cleveland says no thanks -- just as they said no thanks to the red sox. i'm beginning to believe that this is as far as it goes.

well, let's forget our own roster woes and start the day with a smile. check out transaction oracle's graphical interpretation of the cubs' jacque jones signing. you'll be smiling all day. bottom line: "Cub fans are rightly worried about the future of their team."

but, um . . . . should we be, too?

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Ponson

I have a very, very bad feeling that Ponson might be the 4th or 5th starter with Marquis now being freed up to be dealt to Texas for Kevin Mench in that highly rumored deal. Ugh. I'd take Mench, but Ponson sucks. Maybe Duncan could get through to him (he did get off to a good start last year), but I'm not very happy about this signing and I'm downright scared if he's in our rotation in 2006.

The bullpen additions have been nice, and Felix Rodriguez would be a nice signing too. I just hope there's something more out there like a trade for a stud OF or stud starting pitcher.

by I Bleed Cardinal Red on Dec 21, 2005 10:03 AM EST reply actions

I doubt they are penciling him in as #5

I think this is probably a spring training signing. If Ponson gets his fatass into shape (highly doubtful), then the deal is a great one. If not, he blew 300k, not a big deal at all. It's a pretty good reward/risk ratio.

A diamond is just a lump of coal that performed well under pressure

by joker24 on Dec 21, 2005 10:14 AM EST reply actions

Dunno if it was mentioned

here yet, but Brian Daubach is set to be a non-roster invitee.

by cardsrul on Dec 21, 2005 10:16 AM EST reply actions

From the previous post...

Is it possible that Ponson will be used in long relief? Nothing has really said he will be starting and apparently he said he would take any role on any team. Has anyone seen any comments on it from WJ or TL?

by sdelek on Dec 21, 2005 10:25 AM EST reply actions

That's what I immediately assumed.

Long relief, kind of a Cal Eldred replacement. Of course, I'm no baseball genius.

by sdrone on Dec 21, 2005 10:26 AM EST up reply actions

Eldred

Good analogy - Eldred. Rolewise, certainly not characterwise. Track down the pictures of Sir Sid on On the DL and you'll get new insight to the ogre, I mean man.

by flynn on Dec 21, 2005 10:30 AM EST up reply actions

WTF...

I go to bed with a big smile on my face (Flubs sign Jones), only to wake up to this (Birds sign Ponson)? Oh well, at least it's a dirt cheap, "make good," one shot deal and not 3 years/16M. We're not stuck with him if he looks like crap in spring training. Thank the GOB for that. C'mon Walt, time for something good.

by rockin redbird on Dec 21, 2005 10:54 AM EST reply actions

Well...

the smile is back. Check out the Flubfans reactions. They think Ponson is MattyMo's replacement:

http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/story/2005/12/21/101617/42

Sorry to disappoint, O Desperate Ones. Walt is not Hendry and there is no way in hell Ponson is gonna be used as our #3 (or #4 or #5) starter. He'll be damn lucky to earn a long relief role. And if he earns it, well, it wouldn't be the Cards without a drunken fat lout to entertain us (somebody had to assume the Burger King mantle). Now that I see what's going on, this whole thing really means bupkis.

by rockin redbird on Dec 21, 2005 11:17 AM EST up reply actions

No trade

I think that the available crop of OFs that Marquis might fetch in a trade (considering that he'd be giving his new team only one guaranteed year) isn't worth the risk of banking so heavily on a rookie with a history of injuries and Shrek Ponson for 2/5 of the staff. I for one would be content to see those two battle it out in ST for the 5th spot, with the loser competing with Mateo for Eldred's spot. (This assumes the PD reports of Felix Rodriguez signing within the next few days are true.)

Frankly I'm content to start the season with the OF we currently have, then see what we need and try to get it mid-season (basically, the Oakland model of doing things.)

by flynn on Dec 21, 2005 11:23 AM EST reply actions

Agreed...

As anxious as we've all been, this may be the way to go. There will plenty of time to tinker once spring training is underway (even the season itself), and Walt always seems to do very well with last minute and mid-season acquisitions.

by rockin redbird on Dec 21, 2005 11:27 AM EST up reply actions

re:

On behalf of all O's fans, our condolences.

Camden Chat

by SC @ Viva El Birdos on Dec 21, 2005 11:30 AM EST reply actions

a beaken of light

from mets blog...he's had his troubles, and been goofed on...but people that have seen ponson are raving about how fit and focused he is since leaving rehab for alcohol abuse...and for the cardinals to take a shot on him, it says a lot, since the cards are known for avoiding players with baggage...

was somewhat encourage when they said fit and focused

by punchinjudy on Dec 21, 2005 11:49 AM EST reply actions

Just saw

that too--yeah, that does sound encouraging. Heck, if its been the booze troubling him and he's now clean, maybe he will pitch himself into a spot. If he really earns it, and these "sobriety reports" are true, well, give him a shot...

by rockin redbird on Dec 21, 2005 12:18 PM EST up reply actions

its coming

After signing Ponson I would be shocked if Marquis or Reyes isn't traded.

I don't think they sign the Fat Toad without the intention of starting him

by demetre on Dec 21, 2005 12:16 PM EST reply actions

I don't see anything wrong

with signing a guy who may have a fire lit under his ass and has shown that he is capable of a number two or three starter stats; especially for the price you paid for him. He is 29, and ready to prove he can be a good (maybe not great), but good pitcher in this league. If he doesn't pan out for one year, what do you really lose? I'm still thinking he is penciled into the pen for the time being. While Marquis is still on the roster, I think you can assume him as Eldreds replacement (can you think of much better for the price?). And if he does show up to ST with the mind set of a man to prove himself as a starting pitcher, we're in an even better situation. I think the only question about him is his character, which you have to believe TLR, Dunc and ownership assume are behind him, and if not, as mentioned earlier, what do you really lose? I like this signing and hopes he pans out in any role on the club. I'm going to give the guy a chance to prove me wrong with his antics here in this environment before I pass judgement that he can't change. He had some personal demons and sounds as if he overcame them. It's not as if he is made of the same mold as TO or Ron Artest. Let's give him the chance to prove us wrong.

by FarCards on Dec 21, 2005 12:16 PM EST reply actions

now nothing surprises me

I never thought the Cards would take on a guy like Ponson, but here we are. What a bizarre offseason. (I'm especially concerned to see us dropping guys who are fantastic in the clubhouse (see: Reggie Sanders) while taking on fellows of, um, "questionable" character....)

I certainly don't think that Walt/TLR plan on penciling Ponson into the #4 rotation slot and dealing Marquis right away. More likely (assuming he makes the team), he fills the Eldred role and makes some spot starts to allow Reyes to ease into things. Let's not forget that the kid's had arm trouble and has never pitched more than 140 innings in a season -- we don't want to pull a Kerry Wood with the guy. Ryan at Diaspora had some good thoughts on this recently:
http://cardinalsdiaspora.blogspot.com/2005/12/reyes-xmas-sweater.html

by DCRedbird on Dec 21, 2005 12:29 PM EST reply actions

stl today

had a good write up on him..he has had troubles but had to be the man in BAL so not being the man might be good..i reacted like everyone else at first, but now i am thinking it may not be bad..4 or 5 spot for low money..and if he can win 12 games or more then fine...

by punchinjudy on Dec 21, 2005 12:39 PM EST reply actions

Also...

considering the other road Walt may have taken--Kirk Reuter--I think we're better off with Ponson. The chance of Dunc's magic working on someone like Ponson (who does have decent potential) is much greater, I think (providing Pons is serious about staying sober), and if it does work, P's upside will be way better than Reuter's ever could have been. So, as iffy as this is--it's still a lowcost/possibly high return gamble--we may look back on this as another of Walt's "miracle" moves that everybody was sure would be a disaster. Who knows? But at least the one year window leaves a big disaster out of the equation--Pons either works out or he doesn't. But after reading much about Pons since this morning, I'm alot more confident about this being a worthwhile, though certainly not fantastic, move.

by rockin redbird on Dec 21, 2005 2:17 PM EST reply actions

How many

alcoholics are in the Hall of Fame? It's entirely possible that Ponson can function very well as a pitcher and as a persons... if he just doesn't drink!

I think this is a good "shot-in-the-dark" signing... if Sir Sid doesn't make it in ST, send him on his way. If he does, great!

And I wouldn't worry too much about character... can you really imagine somebody screwing up too badly while being watched and, ahem, "counseled" by Albert, Rolen, Carp, et. al? I mean, Jedmonds was supposed to be a non-character guy in Anaheim, but he's been a solid citizen in the Lou...

by The Ol Goaler on Dec 21, 2005 3:45 PM EST reply actions

Solid citizen?

Dude, he's been one of the clubhouse leaders.

by sdrone on Dec 21, 2005 3:56 PM EST up reply actions

re:

Ah, maybe. The thing is from someone that watched just about every Ponson start this year, his arm looked shot. Dan at Transaction Oracle had the same thought, I see, so it wasn't just me. His velocity was down, his offspeed stuff was atrocious. Even if he gets himself together personally there's a very, very good chance he's just plain not a good pitcher at all.

But as you said, the Cards are taking about zero risk on him. If he sucks, you get rid of him. No harm done. I wish him zero success in his professional career. Outside of that I wish him the best, I hope he's cleaned up and happy.

Camden Chat

by SC @ Viva El Birdos on Dec 22, 2005 3:58 AM EST up reply actions