whither edmonds?
by lboros on Nov 2, 2006 9:23 AM EST
in St. Louis Cardinals News
Email
PrintUpdate [2006-11-2 12:21:43 by lboros]: scroll down to see how the SB Nation manager of the year polling turned out.[end update]
program notes: i did a fairly lengthy spot on outsider radio tuesday, talking about the cards' triumph in the world series and, in a more general sense, about the playoff format and the marketing of baseball. the link is here; my segment is in the last 1/3 of the show. have another spot coming up on sports byline usa to promote Diehard Cards, will provide a link when available.
another pair of SB Nation award winners will be announced later today; managers of the year. the cy young winners will come out tomorrow, with the al mvp to come on monday and the nl mvp on tuesday. these results will always arrive as updates to the main post, because they're not available for publication until noon eastern time.
as for a general off-season posting schedule: as long as valatan and erik are up for posting through the winter, we should have new material up 6 days a week; i'll be posting mon-tues and thur-fri, with V on wednesday and erik on sunday. if a significant roster move happens on a saturday, we'll get up a quick post about it. i anticipate renewing some of last off-season's tropes, particularly the roster matrix (see here for an example from last november) and the community projections (example). i may also try to line up a hot-stove interview or three.
on to more interesting subjects. perhaps the biggest, and certainly the most immediate, decision facing the cardinals this off-season is whether or not to pick up edmonds' option. they can keep him for next year at a $10m salary, or buy him out for $3m and let him become a free agent. they have to make that call soon --- within the next 10 days or so, i believe. will they do it? should they do it? my opinions are "no" and "depends," and this is why:
will they bring edmonds back?
we've already heard straight from la russa that if edmonds comes back, it'll likely be on a renegotiated deal --- an extra year or two on the contract at a decreased per-year salary. i doubt that edmonds would go for that. he stated loudly at midseason that he'd been promised his option for 2007 would be picked up at $10m, and he was frustrated that the club had gone back on its word; he also compared his situation to those of woody williams, mike matheney, matt morris, mark grudzielanek, and other veterans who were (in their eyes) cast aside with less than full courtesy. maybe edmonds was just speaking out of frustration, or maybe he genuinely felt betrayed; to me, the comments smacked of PR positioning. ie, i think he knew the club would try to retain him at a lower salary, and he wanted the club --- not himself --- to bear the blame when he rejects the offer. that's just my read of the situation; your opinion may differ. i think he doesn't want to look like a greedy ballplayer who turned down a reasonable offer; he wants to look like an aggrieved star who gave his all to the franchise and the city, only to be treated shabbily in the end.
if edmonds does test the market, he can probably get the same type of deal that moises alou and steve finley got in their late 30s --- two years, $15m or so. the cardinals might offer him that same deal, but they'd have to insist that he waive the $3m buyout because otherwise they're not really saving any money; they'd just be paying him $10m this year ($3m buyout + $7.5m salary) and $7.5m next year, which defeats the purpose. would edmonds give up that $3m so he can stay in st louis and have a chance to "retire a cardinal," as he has long expressed a desire to do? i'll believe it when i see it.
should they bring edmonds back?
this is a very complicated call, and it has to begin with a realistic view of edmonds himself: an aging player with declining health and declining skills. he's down across the board --- playing time, power, on-base ability, the whole thing:
| pa | avg | obp | slg | bb/pa | iso | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 612 | .301 | .418 | .643 | .165 | .342 |
| 2005 | 566 | .263 | .385 | .533 | .161 | .270 |
| 2006 | 408 | .257 | .350 | .471 | .130 | .214 |
the playing time alone imposes a major ceiling on his value. edmonds suffered this year from shoulder and abdominal woes, as well as a serious concussion; the shoulder problem was a carryover from late 2005. at age 37, he can't be counted on for more than 500 plate appearances in 2007. i also question how likely edmonds is to regain his effectiveness as a hitter. in only 2 months out of the last 9 --- ie, all 6 months of 2006, and the last 3 or 2005 --- has edmonds slugged over .500. he had spurts of power in september 2005 and july 2006, but aside from those two very short runs he hasn't been a dangerous hitter for a season and a half.
admittedly, a diminished jim edmonds is still a very effective player; baseball prospectus assessed his value at 3.5 wins above replacement this year, despite his injuries and slack statistics. if we accept mgl's benchmark that a win is worth roughly $2m, then edmonds was a $7 million player in 2006. at the very least, he ought to be able to maintain that level of play in 2007. but that really isn't the issue; the question is whether or not edmonds represents the best available use of the $10m in payroll. i can think of at least one option that might be a better use. i'll throw it out for consideration; the response should be interesting. here goes:
now, before you jump all over me, i am not going to argue that dave roberts is a better baseball player than jim edmonds. but i think he might be a better value than edmonds --- ie, a better return on the dollar. and in the era of moneyball, that is really the only question that matters. roberts might be a downgrade in the outfield compared to edmonds, but he wouldn't be as big a downgrade as you think; he would, however, be a major downgrade in salary, even if you factor in edmonds' buyout clause --- and the payroll savings could be used to fill other holes. so if the choices are:
- spend $10m on edmonds, or
- spend $10m to buy out edmonds and sign dave roberts and, say, adam kennedy
- roberts is nearly as good as edmonds. in the last two seasons at offense-stifling petco, roberts has posted a cumulative .767 ops; get him out of that adverse hitting environment and he's capable of close to .800. edmonds at this stage of his career is no more than an .850 ops guy, so the downgrade from him to roberts isn't as steep as you might think at first blush. baseball prospectus valued roberts at 5.6 wins above replacement in 2006, or two wins better than edmonds; even if you assume that those numbers flip-flop in 2007 (and that's assuming a lot), roberts is simply not a precipitous downgrade.
- roberts will cost a lot less than edmonds. players of his type --- speedy singles hitters, particularly outfielders --- don't generally make much as free agents. the cardinals already have one such player on the roster, eckstein --- he signed a 3-year deal for $10m, or about $3.5m a year. likewise, the dodgers got ken lofton for $4m / 1 yr. the exceptions to this rule are guys like rafael furcal and jimmy rollins, who a) are younger than roberts (he is 34), and b) play shortstop rather than the outfield. roberts made $2.25 million in his final arbitration-eligible year; i think he could be signed to a two- or three-year deal very similar to eckstein's, with a 2007 salary of no more than $3.5m.
the question, ultimately, isn't whether edmonds is worth $10m; it's whether there are other ways to spend that money and get a better return on it. and i think that's a debatable point; lot of evidence to support both sides of the argument. also a lot of risk, either way you go; if it were me, i'd take my chances with the value-priced players and spread my risk around, rather than placing one very large bet on a player who might prove to be washed up.
SB NATION MANAGER OF THE YEAR POLLING:
212 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I wouldn't mind seeing Dave Roberts
we did awesome
good question; i'll run a post on that sometime soon.
other offseason ideas....
From the Rolen projection thread:
from Rotoworld.com
"The Angels remain open to signing Jeff Weaver, but they're not going longer than one year with an option for 2007 to get him.
The Los Angeles Times believes the Cardinals and Mets are also interested in Weaver, although the Mets have denied it."
I sincerely hope not...Jeff Weaver is not going to get us closer to a pennant. I vaguely recall Jocketty saying no to this previously but it worries me that we are still hearing rumors about it...
Acquire Jason Schmidt!
by azruavatar on Fri Feb 03, 2006 at 04:18:56 AM CST
[ Reply to This ]
Ummmmmm.... azruavatar? Care to respond?
Amusing
This is why I love these internets
azruavatar looked like a genius in June. He looks like a goat in November.
it happens
It looks bad at the moment but you have to evaluate it in context and look at what he did the whole season.
basically I was right about Weaver with the exception of like 4 postseason games.
Sign me up for a large helping of crow
I'm still not convinced that Weaver is anything more than a #3 but I am impressed with his (seeming) turnaround under Duncan. It's silly to think anyone could have anticipated a sub-3 postseason ERA. I still stand by my comment made at that time. I was ok with the trade once it took place since we gave up so little (I'm still not on the Terry Evans bandwagon) and since the Angels ate alot of the remaining contract.
I'm glad to be wrong. Thank you Mr. Weaver.
That all
Aaron Roward is a FA....
by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Nov 2, 2006 9:57 AM EST reply actions
Roward = Rowand....
by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Nov 2, 2006 9:57 AM EST up reply actions
Thanks to the Hardball Times...
Playing in hitter-friendly Philadelphia... Rowand had an OPS of .746 with 5 Win Shares.
Hitting in Mammoth Cave, er, Petco Park, Roberts put up a .750 OPS with 16 Win Shares. He also stole almost 50 bases with an 89% success rate.
Rowand's affinity for kissing outfield fences makes him look like the better defender... but Roberts actually had more fielding Win Shares in 2006.
LB, even if we keep Jimmy... is there a possibility of signing Roberts to play a corner?
by Matt @ Viva El Birdos on Nov 2, 2006 10:08 AM EST up reply actions
i'd be in favor
if it's gonna cost $6m to sign him, he's not so attractive . . . . . but i don't think he will be that expensive
roberts
encion
I think we trade Juan
by cardsnutincali on Nov 2, 2006 2:12 PM EST up reply actions
i would love
older speed players not bad gamble.
This whole thing troubles me
I'm glad I'm not the one making this decision, because for me there would be far too much emotion involved for me to think straight. Still, I'd hate to see the Ozzie situation repeated when TLR sits him on the bench for half the games next season when his numbers don't improve.
Who's your 3rd rbi guy?
Your lineup would be, what....?
Eck
Roberts
Pujols
Rolen
Duncan
As I explain below
Imagine a lineup of say this come playoff time:
Eck
Roberts
Albert
Rolen
Alou
Duncan
or
Eck
Roberts
Albert
Rolen
Edmonds
Duncan
Imagining Alou in my team's lineup
Is
Alou put up good numbers this season when he was healthy. On a team like the Cards in limited time to keep him healthy, he could be really really valuabe, especialy since he can be had for 5 million or less.
Again with the ancient outfielders?
by MdRedbirdFreak on Nov 2, 2006 10:53 AM EST up reply actions
The
I mean even if the Cardinals resign Edmonds, you are talking about a 37 year old CF who will play no more than 140 games, and would be best served playing only around 120 games. Edmonds is in the same boat as most of the other players I listed above and all can be signed to 1, 2 or 3 year deals, allowing the Cards flexablity to sign major offensive peices that are more attractive or put together deals to lock up the organizations younger players in years to come.
It makes complete sense to patch the outfield this offesason with a combo of vets + Juan E. and Duncan to make a good outfield that can hit and stay healthy throughout the regular season and bring together a good group for the postseason.
it's pretty well established that rbis
so if roberts does what he can do --- get on base and get himself into scoring position --- then everybody who bats lower down in the order (encarnacion duncan molina and the 2bman) should see their rbis increase.
Not to be a smark alek then, but
no
of course
Juan was ok
Where would
was wondering the same this
Would love to plug some RBI replacement in there somewhere
ray durham
Not a fan of Durham
But he has a history of being an injury risk. And his defense is poor at second. Vizquel, even at his advanced age, disguises a lot of Durham's defensive weakness.
by BozCardsFanSF on Nov 2, 2006 10:52 AM EST up reply actions
What about...
They were wrong.
Better re-install the AstroTurf
Roberts is a good player, no doubt, but I don't really see how he fits into this team's needs other than on a strictly salary basis.
it's not like edmonds
The question is
If you could sign Alou and Roberts for a total of 8 million this season (4.5 for Alou on a 1 year deal, 3.5 for Roberts on a 3 year deal) + the 3 million buyout for Edmonds, then the deal really isn't that bad.
The key is the team must protect its outfield from injuries, because with Edmonds, or Alou, or Roberts, all are injury prone.
medwick, you are persuasive
in addition to roberts, the guys in the $3m-$4m range include frank catalonotto, dave dellucci (he'll probably go even cheaper), craig wilson (also cheaper), mark derosa, and our very own preston wilson . . . . you could probably get two of them for $7m, rotate them with duncan and j-enc, and have at least as much production as you would with edmonds --- but also a lot more flexibility and a lot less downside risk.
i can see it.
this all
by Toddius396 on Nov 2, 2006 11:40 AM EST up reply actions
roberts and alou
True
So remember that even with Edmonds at 10 million (7+3), you will also have to sign a guy like a Delluci to be the 4th guy. Pretty soon you are talking about 15 or 16 million to outfit your outfield, just to keep Edmonds and hege against the time off he will need to be a productive healthy player.
4-outfielders
Well
The key for me though, is that Roberts has never been a particuarly healthy player. Much like Edmonds, it is hard to count on Roberts to play more than 500 games. Think back a few years and remember Roberts constant struggles with hamstring problems. 2006 represents a career high for Roberts with 127 games played and 499 at bats.
Frankly, assuming that the Cardinals have to keep Juan E and that Duncan will move into the outfield rotation, brining in either Roberts of Edmonds will require the Cardinals to play a true 4 man outfield, where each of the 4 outfielders plays around 120 games to keep everyone healthy and to allow Tony to mix and match with Duncan against lefties.
The question you must ask yourself is whether the Cardinals are better off with a rotation of
Edmonds, Juan, Ducnan and a 4th player (I think Alou would be a perfect fit in limited time)
Roberts, Juan, Duncan and a 4th player (again think Alou)
or making a major free agent signing like Lee or Roberts to match with Juan E and Duncan in the outfield.
I personaly don't like the idea of Juan E in center or the long term prospects of Lee as an NL outfielder, so I would much rather side with a move that gives the Cardinals a veteran outfield like those I described above.
Be very careful
Padres have already lost Bochy and declined options on Piazza and Klesko - PR-wise they're in a tailspin. They need some positive energy, and signing Roberts would be a good move. If Jocketty throws his hat in that ring he may be forced to pay more than he wants to.
by TantoVanLanstrum on Nov 2, 2006 2:53 PM EST up reply actions
have to say
Soriano rumor false
Eckstein SS
Soriano 2B
Pujols 1B
Edmonds CF
Rolen 3B
Duncan LF
Encarnacion (unless traded than Schumaker) RF
Molina C
P
I'd really like to see Soriano as a Cardinal.
don't forget
j/k
did anyone else see
Spot on, indirect assault of the media in regard to the Cardinals.
by bostoncardsfan on Nov 2, 2006 10:32 AM EST reply actions
LMAO
Spot on indeed...
Just spotted this on the Onion sports ticker...
moneyball, shmoneyball.
first...a confession. i'm about as big of an edmonds fan as there is out there. said it before on this site, but watching jimmy ballgame play centerfield just makes me feel good about myself. for me, it's the same as watching ozzie play shortstop. i just loved it. and i just love seeing jed patrol centerfield. watching him go back on a baseball hit over his head is just the straight dope for me.
now, having said that, baseball is more than "business." it has to be. i think tlr gets this. it's not just numbers or stats or propensities. it's about people.
so when you talk about bringing jed back, you can talk about win-shares and ops and ceilings. you have to. but don't you ALSO have to look at jed and what he's done for this organization? his leadership in the clubhouse, his seniority, his attitude, his work ethic, his committment. oh...and don't you have to look at his performance this post-season? and last post-season? and how he shows up in big games? don't you HAVE TO look at those things? is there a shred of loyalty in this game? because if there is, then the answers to your question is HELL YES we should bring jed back.
to be clear, i'm not advocating BLIND loyalty. if jed was asking for $15m next year, then we'd just have to say...."gosh, thanks jimmy for all you have done for us, but that's just not feasible." or maybe if there was someone out there that was so clearly a better fit for this team than jed, i'd say go after him.
fact is, and you stated it well in the op, roberts or whoever is not a significant upgrade. maybe not even an upgrade at all. who knows? jed could come back healthy and have a big year. (and yes...i know the inverse could happen too).
this seems like one of those "all things being equal" scenario's. and i'll just say it straight out... all things being equal (or even close to equal), i think it's mandatory that we bring jed back. we HAVE TO. we HAVE TO because of what he's done for us. we HAVE TO because we need to demonstrate to everyone what we already know, this organization is the best in baseball and we take care of our own. we HAVE TO because jimmy ballgame has been as big of a part of cardinals baseball as anyone in the last 20 years. we HAVE TO because we are loyal.
oh.....and we HAVE TO because if i have to look out in centerfield next year and see someone other than jed out there, well.....i just don't know how i'd come to grips with it. turnover is inevitable, but not right now. it's not time. not yet.
I just don't see...
Roberts is an intriguing alternative... but where-oh-where do you pick up the RBIs?
by The Ol Goaler on Nov 2, 2006 10:40 AM EST up reply actions
have to look at the combo
I wonder ...
by Urban Pawnee on Nov 2, 2006 10:52 AM EST up reply actions
moneyball
Does paying Edmonds $7mm really = Adam Kennedy over Ray Durham or something equally ridiculous? Are you guys really looking at it this way?
If Edmonds and Durham are considered by Jocketty to be helpful to this club next year, he will not go about attaining their services based on mutual exclusivity.
Sure, this is within reason, but I don't expect us to not sign Edmonds based on a need for a $93mm dollar payroll over a $95mm payroll.
Edmonds services will not be replaced for less than $5mm, period. Pay him seven, then, onward and upward.
I understand getting better value for your dollar, but some people are treating this issue with ridiculous exclusivity.
moneyball
Does paying Edmonds $7mm really = Adam Kennedy over Ray Durham or something equally ridiculous? Are you guys really looking at it this way?
If Edmonds and Durham are considered by Jocketty to be helpful to this club next year, he will not go about attaining their services based on mutual exclusivity.
Sure, this is within reason, but I don't expect us to not sign Edmonds based on a need for a $93mm dollar payroll over a $95mm payroll.
Edmonds services will not be replaced for less than $5mm, period. Pay him seven, then, onward and upward.
I understand getting better value for your dollar, but some people are treating this issue with ridiculous exclusivity.
You can take Moneyball too far
The Cardinals have done an excellent job of paying what it takes to keep their elite players (Rolen, Pujols, Carpenter, Izzy and Edmonds in their primes) and using a value approach to building the rest of the roster. You have to have some elite players, even if, on a dollar-for-dollar basis, they aren't as great a "value."
I have to assume they will use the same approach with Edmonds in this go-around. I don't think, at this stage, that Edmonds is an elite player any more. Still, signing a Roberts only makes sense if it is combined with some other moves--going after Carlos Lee, and trading Duncan for rotation help.
Well, I'd bet that an
by MdRedbirdFreak on Nov 2, 2006 10:57 AM EST up reply actions
You're on to something here
by mikedallas23 @ Viva El Birdos on Nov 2, 2006 11:05 AM EST up reply actions
i'd rather have them
True, but..
by mikedallas23 @ Viva El Birdos on Nov 2, 2006 11:57 AM EST up reply actions
Gil Meche
by Toddius396 on Nov 2, 2006 12:20 PM EST up reply actions
My current pet:
Well
Our elite players are some of the best values on a dollar-for-dollar basis and that is what makes the Cardinals a great team.
Carlos Lee according the the more advanced metrics really isn't great. Soriano has been an above average player 2 of the last 3 years. Guess which one was the contract year?
well said.
Baseball, in its full splendor, is a more-than-the-sum-of-its-parts style game. It's an Ozzie Smith (or Yadi Molina) homerun. Its a diving Edmonds catch. Its whatever forces La Russa to finally take off those shades and smile. And if you want to talk dollars, its Scott Rolen taking a 8yr/$90MM contract here over a 8yr/$140 contract in Philly.
There's something to be said for dollars and cents, but this game's a little more than that. I think that maybe the best evidence is this past postseason. An 83-win team wins it all? In a post-game interview a softer-than-normal Tony La Russa confesses how happy he was to see his shortstop and his centerfielder back on the field.
Baseball, particularly this rare Cardinals tradition, is more than dollars and cents. Seeing a few more uppercut homeruns, flamboiant dives away from a high-and-tight fastball, and a 37-year-old, mostly-broken man gutting it out and diving into the turf to make a catch for his teammates, for his manager, for the city of St. Louis... that's value.
by ilillillli on Nov 2, 2006 10:56 AM EST up reply actions
i appreciate your passion
I just don't think that's too likely
Even if Edmonds did that, I think people (even here) would cut him a large amount of slack. If the FA replacements put up those numbers (and I don't see why the other aging replacements discussed here would be any less likely to decline) they would be booed mercilessly and the team would likely have to go through all sorts of media turmoil that would also spill over to the clubhouse.
i don't believe that.
but i would bet hard against the fact that he was getting booed. with all jed has done for this organization and with how well he is loved in this nation (cards nation), i don't believe for a second that he'll get booed. no way.
by busch league on Nov 2, 2006 12:41 PM EST up reply actions
right --- his stats from this june
re booing, maybe i'm exaggerating. i was thinking of isringhausen and all the boos he heard this year from the very get-go, as well as the savage treatment that rolen got in october (in the chat rooms and on the radio) until he finally began to hit. i don't believe edmonds was booed last year, and maybe he wouldn't get booed next year either --- maybe i am overreaching there.
but i don't think it's a reach to say that st louis fans expect performance. i don't think they would be satisfied with a team that had mere sentimental value. they want to win.
I agree....
Top Ten (time for fun)
Instead of fireworks, games kick off with North Korean nuclear test.
Get "Weird Al" Yankovic to write wacky new lyrics to national anthem.
Detroit Tigers pitcher Kenny Rogers wears nothing but pine tar.
Allow top players to use performance-enhancing supplements . . . Oh wait, they already do that,
Once an inning, catcher has to take one in the (groin).
More shots of FOX's hot new young stars.
Give Mel Gibson some tequila and ask what he thinks of Sandy Koufax.
Oh, I don't know -- shorten the game by 2 or 3 hours.
Just for fun, bring an A-Rod to choke.
Between innings, Madonna adopts a ball boy.
The guy at...
Once you forget how good Edmonds used to be, I think it's fairly obvious that 120 games, good to great defense in center, 20 home runs, and a 260-350-450 line is worth $7mm to a club with title aspirations in '07.
What this title run has shown imo is that in the age of expanded playoffs, it's better to have potentially great but ricketty players like Edmonds, Sanders, Walker etc... than it is to have younger, healthier, but mediocre types like Enc and Roberts. You don't need to worry about the long grind of the season so much anymore as long as you can pull it together at the end.
Edmonds
Edmonds can command $15M over two years in the FA market. I'd suggest offering him $16-17M for two years.
I know its not sabermetric, but I want J'Ed back in a Cards uni.
Edmonds
The leadership he gave in the playoffs transformed this team. We did not have it from him this year. We complained on this site we were missing the leadership of Walker and Sanders when we were stuck in the 8 game losing streaks this year.
I think Edmonds has found his voice, we will be a much improved team with him as a vocal leader. Who will take that role if we let him walk?
I'm with you...
by ilillillli on Nov 2, 2006 11:18 AM EST up reply actions
Isolate power...
by ilillillli on Nov 2, 2006 11:15 AM EST reply actions
AND WALK RATE...
Edmonds and Roberts showed a near-identical OBP this past season. The difference? Edmonds batting average may be decreasing, but he showed an ability to draw a walk in nearly 4% more of his plate apearences than Roberts.
by ilillillli on Nov 2, 2006 11:21 AM EST up reply actions
attn: lboros
Citing: Roberts had a $2.25MM contract gauranteed this year, and earned another $250k in performance bonuses. And although he is 34 years old, he has yet to test free agencey yet.
Kenny Lofton is listed as Roberts' #2 most comparable player. This past offseason, the 39-year-old Lofton signed a contract that ended up making him $3.8MM with the Dodgers.
So I really don't think that, especially with the White Sox, Giants, and Rockies as other possible suitors, that it is impossible to expect at least a $4MM contract for Roberts, possibly pushing $5MM or even more. That's already half of Edmonds contract pre-retooling.
Also, any commitment of longer than 2 years seems slightly foolish to me with Colby Rasmus waiting in the wings to take over.
Roberts has a career RC/G of 4.88, 7.66 for Jimmy. By that measure Jimmy is 1.6 times as productive as Roberts.
To be crude... $5MM for Roberts x 1.6 = $8MM for Jimmy. All the leadership intangibles, which I think are worth considering, I think make keeping Jimmy make sense.
We may not agree, but I hope you at least respect that I attempted to do my homework.
by ilillillli on Nov 2, 2006 1:14 PM EST up reply actions
we can agree to disagree
i do have to differ with some of your analysis. for example, i don't think the 1.6 multiplier applies. over the course of their careers, maybe so. but roberts is at his career peak; edmonds is well below his. if we take 2005-06 together, edmonds created 7.0 per 27 outs; roberts created 5.6. if we take 2006 alone, roberts outperformed edmonds 5.9 rc/27 to 5.7.
that doesn't mean (repeating what i said above) that i think roberts is better than edmonds. but i think he's 80 percent as good --- and with less downside risk.
re the market for roberts, we'll just have to see. i would be very surprised if his 2007 salary exceeds $4m; numerous outfielders last season (p wilson, encarnacion, rondell white, j jones) with better resumes signed for less money. if your assumptions are correct and the market goes significantly north of $4m, then you're right --- roberts wouldn't be such a bargain.
juan
I see where you're going with it, but I don't think the $3.5 million effective difference--especially when it's not even clear it'll be that much--is worth the factors in favor of Edmonds, both in terms of ability and subjective elder-statesmen-ness. (Last year, after all, Jock went out with $3.5 million and came back with Junior Spivey, Sid Ponson, and Ricardo Rincon.) I think Adam Kennedy would be a great fit in St. Louis, but if DeWitt won't go $1-2m over the cost of Roberts/Kennedy to pick up the option on his fan-favorite borderline HOF centerfielder I think we have bigger problems. Honestly, for a big team with a new stadium and playoff revenue, it's too bad that we're looking at Roberts OR Edmonds and not Roberts OR Taguchi/Wilson.
are u sure?
granted, i know juan only got 3.5m in 06, but it was still 3/15, and the only way it isnt is if they pay someone to take him
roberts is 34
career peak
I've got to respectfully disagree on the career peak analysis.
1). I think that Edmonds' numbers (in terms of plate appearences and averages) are skewed low for 2006 because of the post-concussion ordeal. To me this isn't a symptom of age, but rather of one bad fall in US Cellular.
2). I don't think its fair to say Dave is at his career peak. Rather than a peak I view at as a lucky year. Roberts posted a .330 BABIP this year. I consider this to be unusually high for a guy that averaged .289 in this category over the previous 3 seasons. I think that this number will return to a more (career) normal number next season, and his BA will regress accordingly. As his OBP is largely batting average driven, I see this number coming down as well.
Basically I think Roberts put up (slightly) better numbers this year than he should've. Better numbers in a contract year sometimes result in unfairly high paychecks.
Sorry, I'm not trying to be difficult. Just trying to keep myslef sharp.
by ilillillli on Nov 2, 2006 3:18 PM EST up reply actions
sorry...
In my mind a $16MM 2-year restructuring for Edmonds (exempt from buyout) is worth the extra money.
And In addition to all of this, even if the value of Roberts and Edmonds is a push, where is the extra offense going to come from with this current free agent field? I just don't see where. Maybe Delluchi(sp) or Craig Wilson. I didn't look up any of their numbers, just brainstorming.
I love this blog and the intelligent conversations it inspires. Viva El Bridos.
Any thoughts from anyone?
by ilillillli on Nov 2, 2006 1:50 PM EST up reply actions
JEd to Coach?
However, all of us agree that Jim's main strengths are in his seniority and ability to be a true leader.
So why not start grooming him to be a coach? Assuming TLR is in for two years or so (not much more), Jose moves up and JEd takes Jose's place.
by burquebird on Nov 2, 2006 11:46 AM EST reply actions
I'd love that idea
They wanted Larry Walker to help out in ST. I can't remember if he did or not.
Delucci was mentioned earlier
by raisin @ Viva El Birdos on Nov 2, 2006 11:48 AM EST reply actions
Delucci
Find an AL team that values Chris Duncan's cheap bat, then...
--package another player and get a SP or 2B
--sign Delucci, The Cat, or Gonzo for LF
Roberts? Why not Chavez?
Endy Chavez
AVG .306 | HR 4 | RBI 42 | OBP .348 | SLG .431
| SB 12 | 2B 22| 3B 5
Dave Roberts
AVG .293 | HR 2 | RBI 44 | OBP .360 | SLG .393
| SB 49 | 2B 18| 3B 13
Chavez is six years younger, and may have just a touch more pop. His defense, well, Game 7 of the NLCS says it all.
Regarding projections, on the Rolen projections, here's the best one I found:
* * * * * * * *
"Rolen a fatty
BA: .295
OBP: .385
SLG: .555
HR: 25
RBI: 105
R: 95
"The good Lord was good to me. He gave me a strong body, a good right arm, and a weak mind." -Dizzy Dean
by vince eating tarp on Thu Feb 02, 2006 at 02:10:32 PM EST"
* * * * * * * * * *
Rolen's real numbers were:
AVG .296 | HR 22 | RBI 95 | OBP .369 | SLG .518
My compliments to Vince Eating Tarp. Pretty good prognostication!
Chavez Free Agent
Thanks!
by vince eating tarp on Nov 2, 2006 3:56 PM EST up reply actions
What about Duncan?
Personally, I'm in favor of trading Duncan while his value is high to an AL club and net a veteran everyday OF who CAN field and provide steady production (~.820 OPS). Of course, I'm also in favor of trading Encarnacion for something of greater value, and I just don't see that happening.
by PhatAlbert on Nov 2, 2006 11:58 AM EST reply actions
sentimentality vs. pragmatism
a lot of what i'm reading here is that we should keep him because of what he's done for the team, because of our memories of his great deeds while wearing the birds on the bat, because of the leadership he demonstrated in the postseason a la game balls. i don't disagree.
the other side of what i'm reading is, if we can get greater value (two for one salary, younger or healthier players), it would be worth pulling the trigger. saying "thanks and good luck."
my biggest concern with buying him out and using that to get roberts + one of many is that management screws it up. given that the team on the field just delivered a world championship, i'm hesitant to be as critical of management as i was for the bulk of the year, but i'm not convinced we wouldn't end up with no jimmy and an incredibly frightening outfield of dunc, jenc and shumac...
Posted this on yesterday's thread with no response
It says it is from 1962, but I can't find a boxscore that matches up with it.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7331434805640401574&q=cardinals
You have to pay to get the whole hour of the video. Not sure what is missing. They show you most of the entire first inning, so I wonder what innings/half innings are missing from the rest.
by Hardcore Legend on Nov 2, 2006 12:05 PM EST reply actions
Saturday, July 25th, 1959
Blasingame played for the Cardinals through 1959 and the Dodgers moved to LA prior to the 1958 season, so that narrowed the search to two seasons.
I'll have more on this later.
Yeah, I just came back to say I found it as well
by Hardcore Legend on Nov 2, 2006 12:55 PM EST up reply actions
Oh yeah, here is are some links
http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/B07250LAN1959.htm
The DVD is apparently came from:
http://store.tvdays.com/servlet/Detail?no=231
by Hardcore Legend on Nov 2, 2006 12:56 PM EST up reply actions
Edmonds and more.....
Eckstein-3.5mil
Crawford-5.75 mil
Pujols- 16 mil
Rolen - 14 mil
Edmonds- 10 mil
Molina - 800k
Encarnacion/Schumaker- 5 mil/400k
kennedy/loretta- 3-4 mil
pither.
- Rotation - Carpenter-8 mil
Wainwright-800k....sign...Randy Wolf..7-8mil,Woody Williams..4-5mil, and sign either....Matsuzaka or Zito. And I do beleive that the budget would add up to right around what the Cards are looking for.
by Cylix3341 on Nov 2, 2006 12:41 PM EST reply actions
Are you serious?
except you forgot
so all of the signings you listed above would leave the cardinals well above their $90m cap.
well, then....
by Cylix3341 on Nov 2, 2006 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
payroll
I mean, I know that was assumed last year, but the new stadium revenue is actually here now, and the WS revenue should be pretty nice too.
Granted, that's probably not the way DeWitt thinks about it, but still....if nothing else, wouldn't he consider doing it so that Ballpark Village gets that much bigger a push?
Probably just wishful thinking.....
It validates their philosophy
At this point I'd have to agree. Sure we COULD spend more than $90M this year but for what purpose? The season is already probably going to sell pretty well because of the WS this year and if they were to win the WS again next year do you think it would get nearly the attention/revenue that it did this year?
If anything, I think ownership would be tempted to scrimp a little bit in payroll and bask in the free year of goodwill they'll get because of the WS win and then once there's a monetary benefit to higher performance they'd consider spending a little more.
by dontEATnachos on Nov 2, 2006 1:52 PM EST up reply actions
it's fun to hate the owners
I'm not hating the owners
That was really my point, they've gotten such a boost from the WS money (on merch, tickets, etc.) that they can stand kind of pat this year and the halo-effect will keep Busch crowded.
The following year though, they'd probably start seeing a dropoff.
by dontEATnachos on Nov 2, 2006 4:47 PM EST up reply actions
Lets face it
I don't belive any of those things. And thats why the Cards will need to make some outfield signings. Unless the team is willing to pay up for a Soriano or Lee, the only options left are 120 veterans and part time players. So the key is to come up with the best possible combination. Even with a Soriano or Lee in the fold, the club should be worried about the performance of Juan E in the playoffs and about Duncan as the season went along.
As Larry talked about before, the Cards can stand a mediocre offense if it can get good pitching. Therefore, go cheap, figure out the best combo of 4 outfielders for a decent price that allows the team to sign a Zito and move from there. Roberts should be a huge part of any such discussions because he would fit the #2 hole for this team.
The Long Haul
To step right on to my high horse though, I think what is often overlooked in intangibles. Jim Edmonds has in his 7 seasons with the Cardinals earned certain rights/priviledges. One, IMHO, is to be overpaid in his older years, just like Ozzie. We overpaid Ozzie towards then end b/c we knew that with the Cards Ozzie offered us intangibles, including but not limited to putting butts in the seats and keeping eyes on the boob tube.
I would submit that Jim is in a "similar" category (again not arguing he is as belloved as Ozzie only that 7 years counts for something to Cards fans).
To reference some of Jim's examples - Mark G, Matty Mo, Mike Matheny, W. Williams, - none of those guys had the service time of Jim and they all were either overpaid or more risky deals in my opinion.
Jim's deal could be considered slightly overpaid and if I were the Cards I would MAKE PUBLIC an offer of 2 years $17M with at option for a third at $7M and a $2M buyout.
Then, if this is posturing from Edmonds we could see if he is in fact going to take the money and run somewhere else despite a Market offer. My two cents.
Matty Mo
by Irishman on Nov 2, 2006 1:54 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed
Two intersting notes on CNNSI
-- Denver Post
Right-handed pitcher Josh Fogg's future with the Rockies is on hold. Fogg is eligible for arbitration. It isn't likely the Rockies would go to arbitration with him, but they have until Dec. 12 to tender Fogg a contract, which gives general manager Dan O'Dowd nearly six weeks to try to work out a deal.
-- Rocky Mountain News
I don't know about the rest of you, but Josh Fogg as a back of the rotation starter wouldn't be a horrible Duncan project and the Rockies are clearly looking for center fielders. Maybe we have a taker for Juan E. on our hands?
From Walt by way of the P-D:
Any pursuit will come after the Cardinals address center fielder Jim Edmonds' $10 million option for next season. The club has until Nov. 15 to assume the option, exercise a $3 million buyout or negotiate an extension.
Jocketty reiterated Tuesday the club's desire to bring back Edmonds for an eighth season. What he left unsaid was an organizational desire to do so for less than $10 million next season.
"We want him back with us next season," Jocketty said. "It's something I told Jim last week. I would expect to see what can be done relatively soon."
sold......
by Cylix3341 on Nov 2, 2006 2:23 PM EST reply actions
Matthews Jr
manager of the year?
I presume
TLR managed an 83 win team that need a win from the Braves on the last day of the season to limp into the playoffs.
I'm thinking the TLR love was not that great on the last day of the season.
His playoff work was outstanding, but not considered for this award.
Why not
I'm with you Jim
2007 contracts
"swing a trade for an impact bat"
What does he do
It's a tattoo.
by Quietude on Nov 2, 2006 10:30 PM EST up reply actions
i thought
just a beautiful...
I confessed last week
your in luck then
by Cylix3341 on Nov 2, 2006 5:12 PM EST up reply actions
With regards to Chris Duncan
Baby Dunc is tricky for me
Howard: .288 .356 .567 .923
Duncan: .293 .363 .589 .952
Vs Right:
Howard: .323 .396 .645 1.041
Duncan: .318 .390 .644 1.034
vs Left:
Howard: .148 .175 .246 .421
Duncan: .170 .220 .319 .539
Both tall 1st baseman getting their rookie year at age 25. Hmmmmmmmm
oops, meant to post this at the end
Does paying Edmonds $7mm really = Adam Kennedy over Ray Durham or something equally ridiculous? Are you guys really looking at it this way?
If Edmonds and Durham are considered by Jocketty to be helpful to this club next year, he will not go about attaining their services based on mutual exclusivity.
Sure, this is within reason, but I don't expect us to not sign Edmonds based on a need for a $93mm dollar payroll over a $95mm payroll.
Edmonds services will not be replaced for less than $5mm, period. Pay him seven, then, onward and upward.
I understand getting better value for your dollar, but some people are treating this issue with ridiculous exclusivity.
it might seem ridiculous to you
you don't say no to the face
My two cents: Build the team for the long-haul. Rassmus is in the wings, so no more middle-of-the-road, middle-priced, middle-length contracts like JEnc. Resign Jimmy or bring in a cheaper vet to bridge the gap to Colby, but don't go out and sign another 3yr/$15mil guy.
by ninerings on Nov 2, 2006 3:46 PM EST reply actions
That's why it makes sense...
Would there be any way...
by redbird2006in on Nov 2, 2006 3:58 PM EST reply actions
carl crawford
by adam21 on Nov 2, 2006 4:01 PM EST reply actions
All this contract talk
I know the two are not comparable, but I would certainly rather pay Edmonds $10 million to play than $3 million not to play.
I don't think is an easy choice, but I think I prefer the one year $10 million situation as opposed to two years at $15 million. Just take it one year at a time.
Yeah
by viva el rojo pajaro 42 on Nov 2, 2006 6:51 PM EST up reply actions
colby rasmus
is the real deal? or is this a shot in the dark, like most minor leaguers?
He looks good?
Starting the year at Quad Cities (low-a) he hit .310 and got on base at a .373 clip (.884 OPS).
He moved up to Palm Beach and struggled slightly, hitting only .254 but still getting on base 35% of the time.
He seems to have a good eye for the walk, stole 28 bases between the 2 leagues, and hit 16 HR's. I think its too soon to label him a can't-miss prospect, but things look good for him, IMO.
I've heard him labled a B+ prospect, with a projected Steve Finley-esque celing. I'd take that.
by ilillillli on Nov 2, 2006 4:25 PM EST up reply actions
Ha, very similar
its funny...
by ilillillli on Nov 2, 2006 8:02 PM EST up reply actions
About Colby Rasmus
OT... no more Brantley on BBTN
Damn
by rockin redbird on Nov 2, 2006 5:20 PM EST up reply actions
A wonderful tribute
by RosevilleRedbird on Nov 2, 2006 5:31 PM EST up reply actions
about wins above replacement
The other thing I haven't heard people deal w/ in evaluating our offseason is the likelihood that we need to add a closer, or a very good reliever who can close. Wainwright, despite the great postseason, belongs in the rotation and, with Izzy's injury and the likelihood that he'll never be very good again, means that we'll need to allocate at least $4 mill or so toward a closer.
gold gloves
rogers, i-rod, texeria, grudzy, jeter, chavez, wells, hunter and ichiro.
ironic that a tigers pitcher won the gold glove, huh?
nl announced tomorrow. how many will the cards bring home???? i'll put the over/under and 1.5.
personally, i'll take the over. i like jed, albert and yadi.
i wish rolen would win it,
here's to hoping i'm wrong though. would love to see scotty bring it home.
Did you know?
my guess
A Few Thoughts
But, my point for this post is as follows:
We just won the WORLD SERIES!!!!
WE ARE WORLD CHAMPIONS!!!!!
It hasn't even been a week yet and already people are getting angry at each other over our feelings of possible offseason moves. I think we all need to take a step back, a deep breathe, and say one thing out loud:
WORLD CHAMPIONS!!!!!!!
late to the party
edmonds power has been down, he can't seem to stay healthy and i fear he may be headed down the bernie williams post 35 career path. and now he has to be platooned.
don't get me wrong, i love jimmy ballgame, huge fan of his, but roberts and kennedy, plus a big bat like El Caballo, etc wouldn't be a bad way to plug the holes.
What's Duncan get?
Lead?
by Glenn Brummer stole home on Nov 2, 2006 7:08 PM EST up reply actions
The juan E
Duncan got his early
by viva el rojo pajaro 42 on Nov 2, 2006 7:41 PM EST up reply actions
Loretta
Frank Catalanotto
Id rather have Catalanotto playing 2nd than Kennendy.
The name alone would make him a fan favorite
by Glenn Brummer stole home on Nov 2, 2006 8:56 PM EST up reply actions
coco crisp
by adam21 on Nov 2, 2006 8:58 PM EST reply actions
just pick up the stupid option already
I know, I'm not thinking with "good baseball sense" in that I hope more than anything that he retires a Cardinal (and not soon) even if he's so banged up that they have to have someone drive him out to CF in a golf cart every inning. I hate to think this, but I might not care as much about the Cardinals next year if he's not in one of their uniforms.
anyway, there are much better reasons to keep him around that other people have given above. I'd just hate to see him replaced by some no-range having, slap hitter with a noodle arm. gone would be the fuzzy feeling of security that we lost, and then gained back after he returned from his injury this season. that feeling that if the ball is hit anywhere near CF, it's going to be gloved.
Why is everyone calling Edmonds...
We're not going to find equivalent defense in CF for that price. Can we find a upgraded bat at that price? Probably, but will that upgraded bat produce more runs than losing his defense will cost us?
I think it's a no-brainer to bring him back, especially since Rasmus is only about a year away.
by Quietude on Nov 2, 2006 10:35 PM EST reply actions
From your mouth...
C'mon, Piniella, you can fix him.
by Quietude on Nov 3, 2006 12:52 AM EST up reply actions
Tore the cover off the ball...
Downside: he's 32.
by Quietude on Nov 3, 2006 12:52 AM EST up reply actions
Actually, no...
Someone will take a flyer on him (Dodgers make the most sense.)
by Quietude on Nov 3, 2006 1:00 AM EST up reply actions
off-season surgery
i believe i read somewhere that jed was going to have the same surgery he had on one arm/shoulder back in 2004 on the other arm/shoulder this off-season. i view that as a positive. i know he's getting older and has the concussion issue but i believe it's worth $7MM to give him a chance to play another year here. i also believe we do owe him that for the reasons mentioned above but i wouldn't sign up for a 2 or 3 year deal.
by Red State Redbird on Nov 2, 2006 11:45 PM EST reply actions
Edmonds problem at the plate
If that surgery can return his ability to turn on the ball, then hitting 25-30 HRs again isn't out of the question, especially since most of his power comes from his upper body with his wide stance.
by Hardcore Legend on Nov 2, 2006 11:56 PM EST up reply actions
it's an odd situation
That's the thing about concussions
And...if you want a perfect example of the longterm effects of concussions, I offer up ESPN's own Merrill Hoge.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
