trade rolen?

by cards4life on May 15, 2007 3:53 PM EDT

bernie posted a trade proposal that i would like to introduce to the veb community:
scott rolen for wilson bitment and one of two outfielders: kemp or ethier. would you make this trade?

http://www.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=456497&sid=87b760b59dff63fac3bc07b187a965d9

http://redbirdramblings.wordpress.com

Poll

would you make this trade?

yes

28 votes

no

46 votes

yes, but only for all three players

20 votes

yes, but for a different combination of players

24 votes

no way, your a crazy loon!

19 votes

137 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

no way...

your a crazy loon!

Jason Marquis still sucks.

by kyle man on May 15, 2007 3:54 PM EDT reply actions

please

the poll was bad enough -- it's "you're"

On with the youth movement!

by aet15 on May 15, 2007 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions

kyle man

restrict your criticism to the comment, not the commenter. ie, "that's a crazy idea," not "you're crazy."

not that "crazy loon" is a particularly stinging rebuke or anything . . . .

by lboros on May 17, 2007 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions

but for three different players than those i liste above. i would try to get a starting pitcher and a couple of blue chip prospects, one at ss and the other at of, but thats just me. i think iam a crazy loon.

2007 season: dedicated to Josh Hancock, RIP.

by cards4life on May 15, 2007 3:57 PM EDT reply actions

No

nein, nyet, nix, nu-uh, not. Not for those guys. I'm not against trading Rolen either, but only if we get the better end of a deal by far. Which probably won't happen with his light stick this year and his chronic shoulder problems every year. The time to deal him was right after the WS, when he shoulda been the MVP (IMHO). Too late now to get the return we'd need. He may yet pick it up and start hitting like the ol' ScoRo we used to know. But if somebody came up with the proverbial "offer we can't refuse," I'd be for it. I love the guy, but he sure is looking out of gas for everyday play. :-(

by rockin redbird on May 15, 2007 4:42 PM EDT reply actions

No thanks.

If we can't do better than that package then it makes no sense to trade him.

I would trade him...but we would have to do better than that, much better.

DFA Wils....Arghhh!!! I can't even figure out who I hate the worst right now.

by bobbyballgame1 on May 15, 2007 4:50 PM EDT reply actions

Rolen/JED/Enca Trades

Just isn't feasible. Imagine holding a stock as it went from $50 to $10, but your long term expectation was that it would be worth $30-$40 (i.e. not what it once was but not what its worth right now). You wouldn't sell the stock at $10 if you had some information that allowed you to believe it was worth $30.

Rolen and Edmonds probably won't see 2004 production again, but I firmly believe they are both capable of finishing 2007 at or near 2006 levels (more so for Rolen than Edmonds, but I've got to have hope for Edmonds too). That said, the only hope we have to trade these guys is if they can nudge there respective OPS up to the 825-850 range by the trade deadline. If that was the case you could probably find a buyer at that time and you might have to sell.

If these guys were 27/28 you could probably get decent value for them now but they are both on the wrong side of 30 so they will need to get out of their slumps before they are tradeable (again, unless you want to get pennies on the $)...

by Lawless on May 15, 2007 5:02 PM EDT reply actions

Yes

Few people realize how good Matt Kemp is. I would much rather have Kemp than Ethier also. Now if we included another player and got LaRoche instead of Betemit that would be the ultimate.

Remember if we trade Rolen that means we could go after a high priced free agent in the offseason as there will be another 10M free'd up.

That being said, I seriously doubt a trade happens.

by bigboy1234 @ Viva El Birdos on May 15, 2007 5:25 PM EDT reply actions

other players

i'd want laroche or one of their good SP prospects. laroche + kemp/ethier or
billingsley + kemp/ethier

they have various other interesting prospects--kershaw, loney, elbert, miller

if we could get some premium prospects for rolen i'd do it...this would also be under the assumption the savings from rolen's contract would go towards finding an impact player in the offseason.

by dmb60614 on May 15, 2007 5:54 PM EDT reply actions

Not Rolen due to defense

Trading Rolen, unless we got an outstanding defensive third baseman in return, would prove damaging since it would expose Eckstein/Miles at short, and thereby greatly harming our defense and in turn our pitching.

If we had to trade someone I'd consider trading Thompson or Reyes plus prospects for a young leadoff-type OF with speed and long-term pitching prospects.

I have no idea if this is feasible, nor do I have anyone in mind for the outfielder we'd get in return.

by bailorg on May 15, 2007 6:37 PM EDT reply actions

How come when Rolen struggles

we get 'trade talks' and when Pujols struggles, Tony goes out of his way to come up with 'injury of the week' (hammy, knee, heel, oblique, ankle) to defend him?

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 15, 2007 6:41 PM EDT reply actions

Well...

Good as Rolen has been in the past, he ain't been Albert.

by rockin redbird on May 16, 2007 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions

And Albert

is the face of the franchise. That said, if it were me, I would've put Albert on the bench for a few days, just to send a message that no one is expendable.

by cardsrul on May 16, 2007 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions

No one is expendable?

meaning we can't get rid of anybody?

Walk your dog, not Pujols.

by Hardcore Legend on May 16, 2007 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions

PARDON ME

I was half asleep when I wrote that for Christ's sake. Maybe I should have said inexpendable, or untouchable, or "everyone is fair game". Clear enough?

by cardsrul on May 16, 2007 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions

Why the hostility?

He corrected you so everyone could understand your post, the word in that place could change the meaning of the whole sentence. Thus, if anything, you should be thanking him.

RIP: Jack Buck, DK57 & JH32

by gibbons on May 16, 2007 10:19 PM EDT up reply actions

indespensible you mean?

Jason Marquis still sucks.

by kyle man on May 16, 2007 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions

kemp looks really good

pecota loves him, a lot more than it likes ethier. kemp is scheduled to ops about .875 for the foreseeable future. and he's a righty, which the cards need in the OF right about now (even if jed leaves, better to have a righty in RF to balance dunc).

betemit would be a huge step down from rolen, though. ouch.

the comment above about the $50 stock going to $10 is on point. i'm not sure how much better jimmy is going to do, but i think rolen will end up with 2006 numbers. if that's the case, i'm not convinced the difference between encarneasada and kemp is worth the difference between rolen and betemit.

that's just a talent comparison, though, and doesn't take money into account. if money enters into the equation, and we can lock kemp in for cheap (he's really young), and then actually have the cash to go after a power third baseman (miggy, arod, something along those lines) then it might be worth pulling the trigger.

at this point, though, i don't think there's any rush, because again, i think we're seeing the worst of rolen, not the best. i think he's going to improve by the trade deadline, which means this deal, if it's there now, will be there then - and maybe something better.

instead of rolen <--> betemit/kemp,
rolen/encarnacion <--> laroche/kemp

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on May 15, 2007 6:53 PM EDT reply actions

i just looked at this again

and there is NO WAY the dodgers take rolen/encarnacion for laroche/kemp. rolen's defense is legendary, but that's all the dodgers would gain. kemp is a much better hitter than encarnacion, and at this point rolen/laroche is a wash on offense. and both kemp and laroche are in their early 20s - they're only going to get better - and rolen and encarnacion aren't, and they're only going to get worse.

that trade doesn't make sense for la at all. which means if we can get it, we take it immediately.

I believe in the Sports Guy rule. Any "complaining" in this post is actually happy, cheerful "constructive criticism."

by nycbirdo on May 15, 2007 8:47 PM EDT up reply actions

Kemp maybe

Ethier no way. Ethier's a fourth outfielder, and the last thing the Cardinals need is another one of those.

by DanUpBaby on May 15, 2007 9:24 PM EDT reply actions

Awful

I live in LA so I get to see Betemit in all his glory every day.... that would be an AWFUL trade. And why trade Rolen now when his value might be at the lowest point because of the way he's hitting? Rolen is a potential future HOFer... you DO NOT trade those guys. Cards made a great trade in getting him... why panic now less than 40 games into the season and dump him?

by nzach54 on May 15, 2007 9:58 PM EDT reply actions

trade

but u have to get better players in return. do not just give him away

SWH

by BRINGBACKWILSON on May 15, 2007 10:50 PM EDT reply actions

giveaway

You trade Rolen if two things are true:

This season isn't going anywhere
Trading Rolen will make you a better team over the next few years.

The first has to be true, because you have to figure that for -this year- Rolen is going to put up better numbers than the guys discussed above. So if you're still in it, you keep Rolen.

Assuming that this year is gone (too soon to make that judgment now, but might be clear by July), you have to figure that Rolen is going to get worse, not better, over the rest of his contract. Getting younger players who, while perhaps not Rolen's equal at the moment, will equal or surpass his production in 2008-10, would be huge.

It would still be worthwhile even if you projected them to be a bit worse than Rolen. Because the tremendous cash savings would allow you to fill other holes in your team--say, a shortstop, or a pitcher. If the dropoff between Rolen and the return player(s) is not too severe, the Cards could even afford to "generously" eat a bit of his salary, since they would be saving many millions regardless.

Are Betemit+Ethier/Kemp better than Rolen right now? Doubtful. But are Betemit+Ethier/Kemp+$20M savings better than Rolen over the next three years? I say yes, assuming this season is a lost cause.

by blove121 on May 16, 2007 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions