Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: RSL Soapbox for Real Salt Lake Fans!

BREAKING: Rolen for Glaus Swap Pending Physical

Per Rosenthal:

Scott Rolen is on the verge of escaping St. Louis manager Tony La Russa. Troy Glaus is on the verge of escaping the artificial turf in Toronto.

The Cardinals and Blue Jays are closing in on an exchange of their third basemen, major-league sources say, but both former All-Stars must pass physicals before a deal is completed.

Those physicals are no small issue since Rolen is coming off surgery on his right shoulder and Glaus surgery on his left foot.

While both players have agreed to waive their no-trade clauses, the differences in their contracts also might need to be resolved, most likely through a cash payment from the Cardinals to the Blue Jays.

Update [2008-1-12 14:31:1 by lboros]: well, here's another leg for the la-russa-runs-the-club theory to stand on . . . . glaus is clearly a better hitter than rolen at this point; he has outhomered and out-rbi'd rolen in each of the last 3 seasons, outslugged and out-OBP'd him in 2 of the last 3:
ab hr rbi avg obp slg
glaus 07 385 20 62 .262 .366 .473
rolen 07 392 8 58 .265 .331 .398
glaus 06 540 38 104 .252 .355 .513
rolen 06 521 22 95 .296 .369 .518
glaus 05 538 37 97 .258 .363 .522
rolen 05 196 5 28 .235 .323 .383

he'd give the cardinals a true 30-hr bat (something rolen hasn't been since 2004), plus he's younger than rolen and is on a shorter contract, which is a good thing when you're discussing over-30 players with health issues.

UZR does not like glaus's glove, but all the other systems (PMR, enhanced ZR, dewan's +/-) have him as an above-average defender --- not quite as good as rolen, but within 5 runs a year or so. not sure why the blue jays would want to make this deal --- maybe glaus' foot problems are serious enough that they expect a precipitous decline --- but it looks like an advantageous move for the cards on every front. even if rolen and la russa were bosom buddies, this would be a good trade.

although i'd rather get back a young player like adam laroche . . . . . .

Update [2008-1-12 14:54:3 by lboros]: i just took a look at glaus's game log from last year. he abruptly stopped hitting in mid-july ---- went .220 / .333 / .384 over his last 44 games and then had season-ending surgery. maybe that's why the blue jays are ready to dump him.

0 recs  |  Comment 168 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Are you kidding me?
We're swapping a chronically injured, 30+ third baseman for another chronically injured, 30+ third baseman...and throwing in cash? Aside from the fact that Glaus is getting one fewer guaranteed year, this trade completely fails to give the Cards more money, prospects or a fresh look.

I feel sick.

The Falcoholic
The SBNation's Atlanta Falcons Blog

by Dave the Falconer on Jan 12, 2008 1:04 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I agree
I'm not feeling to good either.

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 1:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Am I the only one who likes the deal?
Rolen isn't guaranteed to ever rebound to his old form, and he can't get along with LaRussa. We're sacrificing defense but getting a guy who can hit 40HR and 100RBIs with a good OBP. I'm OK with it.

by matt reeder on Jan 12, 2008 1:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Not just you
I like it as well, for reasons mentioned below.

by roebirds on Jan 12, 2008 1:14 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

no, i like it actually
i for one am so sick of this stupid soap opera, and glaus is a good bat. i'm not so excited about his ped issues, but we need a power bat and i don't think rolen is it anymore
I hate... so much about the things that you choose to be.

by erik on Jan 12, 2008 1:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Blearghle
I'm just so staunchly in the "let's rebuild" camp that I can't help but be aghast that we're picking up another aging, injured slugger. Glaus probably is a better bet to have a healthy, productive season. I just can't make myself believe that this is what the Cardinals needed to get back for Rolen.
The Falcoholic
The SBNation's Atlanta Falcons Blog

by Dave the Falconer on Jan 12, 2008 1:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

well, glaus is
on contact for a year, then he can opt out. then we can sign someone younger, or freese or craig could surprise us and be ready. i don't think it's terrible, i don't really like it. i'm sick of the fact that we have to structure the team around tlr. but truth be told, rolen is being a baby. he won't even show his face to winter warm up, which is about the fans. the guy has got himself traded off of two teams now.

i love the way he plays, but he seems like his skin is about as thick as as a slice of carl buddig pastrami.

I hate... so much about the things that you choose to be.

by erik on Jan 12, 2008 1:49 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

preview button
i said i like, and i don't

i like it because the soap opera is over and pujols has some protection. i personally think rolen isn't going to ever become the hitter he was. and i like it because we don't feel like we're stuck w/him anymore.

what i don't like is how this whole thing shook out, and i'm not crazy about glaus and the whole peds thing.

hey, maybe they'll throw burnett it...now if you excuse me i'll be on the moon, eating spare ribs.

I hate... so much about the things that you choose to be.

by erik on Jan 12, 2008 1:54 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Rolen needed to go
I just wanted to get some Future Redbirds cannon fodder in return for him. If Glaus is effective, I'll be pretty happy. I'd just be a lot happier if I thought he was going to be effective on a team that was going to win more than 80 games.
The Falcoholic
The SBNation's Atlanta Falcons Blog

by Dave the Falconer on Jan 12, 2008 1:54 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Glaus may be aging, but
he's younger than Rolen, which people tend to forget.

My initial reaction to this was neutral to negative, but the more I think about it, the less negative I am.  There are three key points.  First, going forward, Glaus is more likely to be a plus than Rolen, even though Rolen was the better player up until now.  That's true simply on health and age grounds, even if you ignore the chip on Rolen's shoulder and concentrate on the damage in the shoulder.  Second, whether he's got the better future or not, TLR so thoroughly poisoned the well with that press conference that I'm surprised that it's even possible to talk about this trade straight up, let alone anything better.  Third, it's not like the minors contain anything likely to represent a rebuilding-oriented alternative any time soon.  I don't expect Craig to be able to stick at 3B owing to his brutal defense, any projection of Freese as better than just adequate must be considered wildly optimistic, and while I've heard good things about Arnoldi Cruz, he's a long way away.

So maybe I'm "neutral to positive" rather than "neutral to negative," but much depends on the exact terms.  One thing sure: De Witzliak need to tell TLR that the next time he runs down one of his players in public while the front office is trying to move said player, he should terminate the press conference with "... and I resign."

by StanTheManFan on Jan 12, 2008 3:39 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

the low road
absolutely agree.  tlr needs to think of the organization first and his spleen second in these matters.

by sportsman on Jan 12, 2008 4:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Nope...
I like it as well.  Glaus hit 38HR, in '06 and would have hit well over 30 in '07 were it not for the injury.

I don't see much cash changin hands either.

"You're either rebuilding for something special, or you're on the verge of something special. To be in between is foolish." Billy Beane

by bobbyballgame1 on Jan 12, 2008 3:14 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Rolen-Glaus
A swap of one player notable for whining and crying in exchange for one notable for problems with meds and peds.  Rather much a push

by akaitori on Jan 12, 2008 7:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Guess my
suprise for spring training is comming early.
Makes sence, both players with ????. I don't think we should pick up a dime in the deal because Rolen is a better defender. I know I'm bias, want to see my Rolen jersey, but I think we should get a prospect or 2 back also.

New meat for VEB to rip and love all at the same time.

by That's a Winner on Jan 12, 2008 1:05 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Rolen gone
I'm okay with this as long as we're not eating any of the contract. Glaus may be an injury risk like Rolen, but he's a year cheaper and not on the drastic downward slope of offensive productivity.

by roebirds on Jan 12, 2008 1:13 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I'm witholding judgement
Until the deal is final and we see exactly who and what cash is going where, but I'm initially inclined to like it.  We lose Rolen's defense but Glaus offers some real, actual protection for Pujols and is a lefty-masher.  

At full health I'd take Rolen over Glaus any day of the week, but does anyone really think Rolen will ever be at full health again?  Glaus has his own injury concerns, but a foot problem is less worrisome than Rolen's bum shoulder, and the move to natural grass should help him.

"A great catch is like watching girls go by; the last one you see is always the prettiest." - Bob Gibson

by stl tyler on Jan 12, 2008 1:19 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Plus
There's virtually no chance that Glaus doesn't show up for spring training.
"A great catch is like watching girls go by; the last one you see is always the prettiest." - Bob Gibson

by stl tyler on Jan 12, 2008 1:20 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

withholding judgement as well...
Although it pains me to see another piece of our mini dynasty get shipped off, I'm cautiously optimistic about this deal. We desperately needed some protection in the lineup for Pujols and I never thought we'd get an all-star player in return for Rolen.

On the down side, our pitching staff is still the 'pitch to contact' staff that relies heavily on oustanding defense. This worked when we had Pujols, Grudz, Renteria, Rolen, Sanders, Edmonds, Walker...but not so much when you replace those defensive studs with names like Ryan, Glaus, Duncan, Ankiel and Ludwick...

Acquire AJ Burnett!

by TheFranchise9 on Jan 12, 2008 1:39 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

speaking of my signature...
while we're on the phone with toronto, why don't we see about adding burnett and taking a giant step towards retooling our rotation and letting some power arms have a shot.
Acquire AJ Burnett!

by TheFranchise9 on Jan 12, 2008 1:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Why I like it
This deal is pretty much a wash, but it will bring the LaRussa/Rolen soap opera to an end.  No matter who is at fault, its just ridiculous.  

The main reason I like it is because his deal ends one year earlier.  It happens to be just the time Miguel Cabrera hits the free agent market.  He has already expressed an interest in playing across the diamond from Albert.  So as long as we can give him a competetive offer, I would think we have an edge there.

This may also depend on whether or not we are under new ownership at the time.  Which I think we will be.

"Your mom likes Albert Pujols" - Happy Joe

by fatbellyjefferson on Jan 12, 2008 1:40 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

2 Points
1. Glaus' deal does end 1 year earlier, however his deal includes an 11.25 million dollar player option.  

(note: I don't understand Rosenthal's article at this point.  He says Glaus is GUARANTEED 24 million over the next two years and has a 11.25 million player option for 2009.  I'm assuming this is a typo and should be 2010.)

2.  I don't think you want to see what a "competitive" offer for Miguel Cabrera in two years is.  Think Pujols money and then double it.

by Big Red on Jan 12, 2008 1:56 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Here's what I don't like......
I know I'm in the minority here, but Glaus has been linked to PED'S--I'm sick of that!  I have sons that play baseball, and I hate that this organization embraces all kinds of former (maybe current) players involved with PED's.  Am I the only one that cares about this issue?
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on Jan 12, 2008 1:43 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Its unavoidable
Unfortunately this is the way it is in baseball today.  Until the commissioners office stands up to the players union and gets things cleaned up, this is going to be an unaviodable part of the game.
"Your mom likes Albert Pujols" - Happy Joe

by fatbellyjefferson on Jan 12, 2008 1:46 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Well, it bothers me immensely......
and it bothers me that no one seems to care about this.  If these guys were caught with marijuana or heroin they'd be in bigger trouble than if they were taking ILLEGAL steroids or ILLEGAL HGH.  I guess the Cards are going to corner the market on all of them.  Let's sign Jay Gibbons and Barry Bonds too!

And how unfair is it to the guys who DON'T use PED's to have to compete for their jobs with those who do?

Like I said, I know I'm one of the few people who care about this issue, so this is all I'm going to say, because I know I'm almost irrational about it because it makes me so mad.

Everyone have a nice day.

She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on Jan 12, 2008 1:58 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Unfortunately
I, as a P.E. teacher understand your concerns. But right now, if you're going to want to separate your team from players who have used PEDs, you're going to have to accept a losing ballclub.  Between the players who were named in the Mitchel Report and those that are using (or did) and were not named, there's probably not that much to pick from that's worth a damn.

by Big Red on Jan 12, 2008 2:03 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

big mac land
Well bush has big mac land.  He was at the forefront of PED's so I would let it go Jill.  I know it is not ideal but it is hard to avoid this day and age.

I would suggest not supporting STL and the Big Mac Land if you don't like PED's.

by ICbirdfan on Jan 12, 2008 2:10 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I think more people care than what you think
but many are willing to accept that this has been the way of life for certain players for a while.  We really will never know all of who did what.  All we can do now is just move on and try to prevent such a gross abusive of PEDs from ever happening again.

by saladdays on Jan 12, 2008 4:13 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I appreciate
...Your idealism on this issue.  It's quite refreshing.  

However, if the Cardinals were to simply say "We don't want ANY PED users on this team" then they'd have no team.  That is the only way to make sure they don't have any if you follow that policy to its logical conclusion.  It is a simple fact that no one has any clue who all has/will use PEDs at some point.  I mean, Brian Roberts and Gary Bennett were named in the Mitchell Report for crying out loud!  Those are among the most random people to be PED users I've ever seen!  What happens if it comes out that Skip Schumaker(first name I could think of) used PEDs?  What proof do you use to boot him off the roster?  The word of some reporter with an axe to grind?  A guy who worked out with him one time a few years ago in Podunkville Gym?  

I'm not saying that the Cardinals or any other team needs to just throw their hands up in the air on this one.  They need to do whatever they can to educate their players on the dangers of PEDs.  They need to have strict penalties for anybody caught using (failed drug test).  But they can't just start making decisions based on past PED use.  It's the FO's responsibility to put a winning product on the field.  That's it.  No matter what we fans say about "class" or "professionalism" or whatever, that's just a collection of buzzwords that get in the way of objective business decisions.  The Giants went to the WS with Jeff Kent and Barry Bonds on their team, and you didn't see SF fans up in arms b/c they were winning sans class.

For the record, I am a parent as well and see what you are saying about "protecting your kids" and what not.  But that's our job, not the St. Louis Cardinals' job.  Its frustrating knowing that our kids are so hypnotized by TV and the crap they see on it.  But it's my job to explain to them why what they see in unrealistic and innapropriate for real-life behavior.  I'm lucky, b/c my two oldest kids are girls who play basketball and volleyball and could give a crap about baseball.  But if my son ever wants to know why he shouldn't use 'roids, the first thing I plan to do is talk about Lyle Alzado and Chris Benoit.  

BTW...This post is brutal.  I started about 4 sentences with "but."  What is wrong with me?

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 12, 2008 4:58 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

jill, I know how you feel...
but I think the fact that the Cubs are going hard and heavy after Roberts proves that whatever misgivings that these clubs have about PED's are going to be glossed over by an overwhelming desire to win...I live in Chicago, and nobody here is expressing any doubt about him coming to the Cubs, except maybe Jay Mariotti...it's not right, but at least we have reached a point where it's all out in the open (for the most part) and we can clean up the game from this point forward...what happens with the history remains to be seen.

by tbell61 on Jan 12, 2008 8:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

It's not as though
He'll be the only Cardinal linked to PEDs...

I'm sure there's several Cardinals who have used PEDs in the past, beyond Ankiel and now Glaus.  Just because they weren't named in the Mitchell report doesn't mean they were innocent.  

I mean, Larry Bigbie for cryin' out loud.  He should have got a refund from his dealer.

"A great catch is like watching girls go by; the last one you see is always the prettiest." - Bob Gibson

by stl tyler on Jan 12, 2008 1:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I care about it Jilsinmo
and that's why I said earlier that I wasn't feeling to good about it..and Stl tyler you can say, "its not like he'll be the only Cardinal linked to it" but I can say that he'll be "one more Cardinal linked to it." I'll be anxious to see what Rolens numbers will be in Toronto compared to Glaus in Stl. next year. Might be better, but you won't see the instintively excellent play at third that Rolen has given in his time here.

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 2:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Well, thanks for replying to my concerns.
I don't like to see yet another Cardinal linked to PED'S.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on Jan 12, 2008 2:24 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Then stop watching baseball
Because it will continue happening, no matter what team you follow.

by Jhusk on Jan 12, 2008 11:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

ped-0-philes
yes, trying to extrapolate what glaus will do based on what he has done with perhaps the aid of peds is hard to do.  is he a non-ped 30-40 homer guy?  an open question i think

by sportsman on Jan 12, 2008 4:06 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Good deal for both teams.
Both players are unhappy and want to get out. Rolen had a WARP3 last year of 5.7 and Glaus 5.8; both coming from slight pitcher's park. Glaus is two years younger and has one less year on his deal. The Bluejays asking from some cash thrown is is perfectly reasonable. I think this is a good move for both teams.

by maurerdj on Jan 12, 2008 1:49 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I like it too
The chances of us getting fair value for Rolen when everyone knew that we were dying to get rid of him was pretty small, so I'm pretty happy with this all things considered. He's only one year removed from a .252/.355/.513 season, and the offense desperately needs that kind of OBP/Power combo.

by mikedallas23 on Jan 12, 2008 2:03 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

nice work la russa
i don't think we'd be paying toronto anything if la russa hadn't been so public about everything.

however, i like this trade, if only to be done with the entire stupid soap opera.  

at least it's not russell branyon...

by age3in82 on Jan 12, 2008 1:53 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Rolen
Probably the bad shoulder caused that not TLR.  All teams knew he had health concerns.  He was not going to fetch much.

by ICbirdfan on Jan 12, 2008 2:09 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I was so excited to see that Cards and Jays
working on major trade.  Thought AJ Burnett was coming our way.

This is a sideways move.  Not a bad one, not particularly a good one.

We sure do like collecting PED users, though.

I will be boxer briefs

by Hardcore Legend on Jan 12, 2008 2:03 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Sideways
If you're looking at last year's numbers or money being owed, then yes I agree it's a sideways deal.

However, if you're looking at potential to improve, power and the removal of a major sourse of drama, then it's very much a positive move IMO.

by Big Red on Jan 12, 2008 2:06 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Honestly
it is more than likely that our quota of 2002 Angels had dipped to hazardously low levels and Mo had to act fast before the team reached critical mass.
I will be boxer briefs

by Hardcore Legend on Jan 12, 2008 2:09 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Good point
I completely forgot he played for the Angels.

by Big Red on Jan 12, 2008 2:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

great comment,
Hardcore..wish I'd thought of that.

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 2:32 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Beat me to it
I was thinking the same thing.
After all we missed out on Darren Erstad.
But Bartolo Colon is still out there if need to get our Angel fix.

by That's a Winner on Jan 12, 2008 2:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Any Angels in the Outfield?
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on Jan 12, 2008 3:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm so infuriated with the Cardinals and Larussa
The Cardinals have a such a great and history. We keep players and they retire as Cards and when the go into the hall they want to be Cards.

Where is the loyalty now with these new owners? I think the Cards need new owners that want to spend and win.

Trading Edmonds made some sense... But he was still a fan favorite and people came to the ballpark to watch Jimmy Baseball play the outfield like no one has played since the Say Hey Kid.

Now we trade Rolen, my personal favorite cardinal since Ozzie Smith. Why??? Because he plays the game correct, he works his tail off every game. He shows up everyday to win. He plays the hot corner like no one I have ever seen. And he doesn't show boat. How can we trade a borderline Hall of Famer like this? Just because he hates the manager... BTW Larussa is the one in the wrong here. He should have apologized for treating a veteran the way that he did. He just let the problem fester.

Larussa is a great manager. He is a Hall of Fame manager. But the Cardinals can win without Larussa, they cannot win without Scottie Baseball. His defense saved are horrible pitching staff. He was invaluable during our 06 World Series. He should have been the MVP actually.

I don't see the Cardinals filling many seats next year. The only reason to go is to watch Pujols hit and Wainwright pitch. The rest is going to be to hard to watch.

by jamieoverkamp on Jan 12, 2008 2:10 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Amen
jamieoverkamp, you'll probably get critizied for your bold comments, but it won't be from me.

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 2:20 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

JED and Rolen...
... both asked to be traded. the organization accommodated them. i'd say that the organization has done just fine by those players.

i don't really know what "loyalty" means in the context of a multi-billion dollar industry, but i would suggest that JED and Rolen were the ones who were disloyal, by telling the organization that they didn't want to play for their manager any longer and asking for trades.

in my opinion, there is no reason to be upset with the Cardinals organization over these trades. they have improved the long-term chances for success, and probably the short-term chances as well (remember: JED's back-ups out-performed him last season). the Cardinals are trying to do right by the fans. the fans just need to understand that it's going to take a little time.

by kindred on Jan 12, 2008 2:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

agreed...
for me the bottom line is they didn't want to be here...I'm all for people working where they want to work, and if they are not happy, then move on...fact is we are going to have a lot of young players in the clubhouse over the next couple of years, and I would just as soon see "bad apples" and "clubhouse lawyers" be moved off of the premises...go spread your poison somewhere else, thank you.

by tbell61 on Jan 12, 2008 8:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

wanna take
the under on 2,000,000 fans in regards to your "fans filling the seats" line? I'll take the over and see who comes out on top.

I love how for some fans loyalty is a one way street--it's the OWNERS that have to be loyal to the players and cater to their every need. Yeah, that's fair.

SUBURBS: Where Americans cut down trees and then name streets after them.

by beanocook on Jan 12, 2008 3:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Agree
No one ever seems to remember that baseball is a business.

by saladdays on Jan 12, 2008 4:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Loyalty...
There's no such thing as loyalty in professional sports anymore, especially baseball. It died with the advent of free agency and the owners' collusion. You'll never again see a Gwynn, Ripken, Brett, or Yount, where they spend their entire career with one team(well, maybe Jeter). I wouldn't be surprised at all if Pujols walks eventually.
"It's always about the money. Anyone who says it's not is lying."- Gene Simmons

by cardsrul on Jan 12, 2008 4:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I criticize him ridgsee...
simply because his comments are emotionally based and there's no use for that when looking at a logical business decision.  Let's break this down one emotional, illogical statement at a time:
  1. The current Scott Rolen is not a HOFer.  He's barely above replacement level with the season he put up last year.  He's not one of the 5 best third baseman currently playing in the major leagues and the list of the active elite at that position is awful short. (A-Rod, Chipper, Wright, M. Cabrera, A. Ramirez, that's it).  Just look at the HOF standards ranking for Rolen at baseball-reference.  He isn't remotely close right now.  I don't see him ever getting back to 2003 or 2004 numbers...even if he did they wouldn't be markedly better offensively than Glaus.
  2. Both Rolen and LaRussa are in the wrong.  Fault lies on both sides of the isle on this one; LaRussa for putting it out in the open, Scott for continuing to pout about it.  Rolen was upset when he got benched in the playoffs?  Tough shit Scott, your backup was hitting the hide off of the ball and was a better option at the time, it was simply a "better for the team" decision.  A person who "plays the right way" would recognize that and not create a distraction for the team.
  3. Both Edmonds and Rolen asked to be traded.  The team obliged.  I don't remember Ozzie ever asking to be traded to a contender in his late years, but I'm sure that the team would have been happy to oblige him for his years of service.  Loyalty is such a bunch of bullshit: Fans want players to be loyal to a team that lowballs them on money, and would cut them in a second if they stop producing.  Fans want teams to be loyal to players even though fans have a quicker trigger than club management about poor play.  Jeff Suppan got BOOED at a regular season game I was at in 2006.  Let's stop pretending that loyalty means anything.  It's business, let's treat it as such.
  4. Why would people not show up to watch this ballclub?  Are you kidding?  Fans love home runs, Glaus hits a lot of those.  More than Rolen has hit in his career.  There are a lot of young players with good upside, a potential superstar in the minors, and a 1st ballot HOFer on the roster.  Saying you aren't going to watch is one thing, saying fans won't show up to watch this club is quite another.
(I also completely disagree that Edmonds was the best CF since Willie Mays.  There was a guy named Griffey who used to play there, maybe you've heard of him?  Ken Jr. used to catch balls on the run that Jimmy would be belly diving after...he's by far the best I've ever seen in person as I'm not old enough to have watched Mays or Mantle)
"I just wish that the late Harry Carey were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jan 12, 2008 4:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Good to hear from you fourstick
must have took you a long time composing that big giganic.. post but all the things you presented, I had already considered (I didn't just fall off a turnip yesterday and neither did he) but the one thing that impressed me with jamieoverkemp's and jillsinsmo's comments was that they showed moral concerns and values even if "the comments are emotional and there's no use in that in logical business decisions" as you say. It's that kind of "High Brow" comments that gripes me. Why can't somebody make a  emotional comment at a time like this on this blog without some intellectual posting a "full page add" to try to make him look like an idiot. He didn't  "post for show"  (as some people do) and neither did I. If at any time you feel someone's comments are below your intellect, why not just skip on by, but no...this is not the first time you have decided I needed a good lesson and I say again I don't need your lecturing.

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 6:02 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

C'mon
Its fine to post emotional reactions that show moral concerns, but don't make those posters seem like martyrs when other posters correctly point out their errors in logic and complete ignorance of facts.  

I have grown so tired of fans trying to take the moral high ground, claiming the Cardinals have a moral obligation to field a PED-free team.  I don't think this issue is a moral or emotional one, myself, but I suppose it is for some people.  However, aside from the problems of knowing who took PEDs, for how long, their legality, and weight of the evidence, these concerns are a mile wide and an inch deep.  I guarantee these "morally conscious" fans you allude to were cheering just as hard as anyone else when Big Mac was hitting monster HRs, when Rick Ankiel was hitting homers last year, and will be cheering along side everyone else if the Cards and their former PED-using players make the playoffs next year (or the year after that, or the year after that).  Stand on your morals if you want and don't watch the team or cheer for suspected users -- but you don't simply get the benefit of standing on a moral high ground by making a post on a blog.  

You can't have it both ways -- you can't make "emotional comments" based on "moral concerns" if those comments and concerns aren't backed up by facts and at the same time complain about other posters arguing against you.  Emotional comments and "moral concerns" don't get a free pass -- they get the same treatment as all other posts on this site; all are open to scrutiny and debate.  

by Ray Lankford on Jan 12, 2008 6:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

You're right ray langford
It's just the snobbish way of doing it that I detest. Now your comments..good, courtous, no "aloofness" made your point and didn't try to shove a bunch of garbage down my throat..I respect that.

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 7:00 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not trying to be snobbish...
and if that's the way my post came off I apologize.  I was simply trying to add some logical opposition to what was said, and I'm sorry that it takes more than 40 words to say it.  I do think that my points stand on their merits.
"I just wish that the late Harry Carey were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jan 13, 2008 8:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Lecturing...
So you think I'm lecturing you...then you proceed to lecture me...interesting way of making your case.  If you have a problem with anything I had to say or feel that something I said in the post was incorrect, then please reply and call me out.  I'm not calling anyone out on this subject, I'm simply putting what was said to the test based on facts and numbers like we all do on this site.

I have posted on this site more than one time that I have always liked Scott Rolen as a player, and I wish him the very best in Toronto, but that doesn't mean the deal is bad for the team or for the players involved.  I think everyone wins in this situation, except maybe the Blue Jays unless they get some cash in the deal.

"I just wish that the late Harry Carey were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jan 13, 2008 8:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

excellent, excellent
I agree with every thing you had to say, fourstick.  

jamieoverkamp: as a teenager  i had a similar emotional response when willie mcgee was traded. the following year it hurt seeing him in an a giants uni.  maturity and time will remedy this. it ain't easy, but you'll get over it.

I'd rather my sister become a prostitute than my brother become a Cub fan.

by _pistol_ on Jan 12, 2008 8:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Rolen was
not barely above replacement level last year. That is absolutely incorrect.

As for him asking to leave, that doesn't preclude the issues the original poster raised wrt LaRussa. In fact, it strengthens it, if anything. Where you lay the blame there is another matter.

I'm more interested in the fact that the Cardinals brought LaRussa back knowing it would be an issue, no matter who is "right".

by plh903 on Jan 13, 2008 1:11 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The stats back me up on that one....
Rolen's 2007 VORP: 4.1

That is the definition of barely above replacement level.

Glaus' 2007 VORP: 20.5

Keep in mind both got hurt and had relatively the same amount of healthy AB's last season.

"I just wish that the late Harry Carey were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jan 13, 2008 8:51 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I totally disagree
Rolen and Edmonds both ASKED to be traded.  They both have no-trade clauses and could say "no" to any trade.  And yet, curiously, Edmonds didn't do that.

Rolen is being traded b/c his shoulder was hurt, got benched, and pouted about it for a year.  The dude is a grown-ass man, not some little boy.  Surely he should get about half of the blame with TLR for their relationship going into the shitter.  I highly doubt he's being traded b/c he "doesn't show boat" as you suggest.  I agree that TLR is in the wrong here too for not handling the situation a little more privately and in a more professional manner, but a 30+ year old man pouting and holding grudges is a bit problematic, don't you think?

I don't get what you're saying here RE: Edmonds.  That the FO should have held on to him so the fans could see him go off into the sunset?  The guy is a baseball player, not a zoo animal that you hold on to for the amusement of the fan base.  He asked to be traded b/c he didn't want to be a platoon player at this point.  If they HADN'T traded him, that would have seemed awful jealous for the FO.  Besides, the Cardinals have several exciting/young players who are better than him right now.  The FO owes it to the fans to put a good product out there, not to put a bunch of "aw shucks" fan favorites who stink on the field.  

by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 12, 2008 4:32 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

For crying out loud
This isn't little league!  (although our manager and third baseman's conduct suggest otherwise)  Players come and players go.  For fans, the best thing to hope for is that the organization put the best team on the field possible.  Why did we trade Rolen?  Three reasons: 1) he's often injured and in decline, 2) he's had a public fued with the manager,  3) he ASKED TO BE TRADED.  

Its great that you want to see Rolen and Edmonds retire as Cardinals, but they didn't want to.  You can't hold that against the organization.

You think this year will be hard to watch?  Yeah, maybe it will.  But no more so than last year, when we had our heros Rolen and Edmonds.  

I really don't mean to be offensive.  Don't want to watch the Cards next year?  Cool.  Don't.  But I'm willing to bet that as soon as the club can cultivate another great player, you'll start watching again and all this fuss over Rolen and Edmonds will be forgotten.  

by Ray Lankford on Jan 12, 2008 4:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

according to Cot's...
... Glaus is only signed through this year, then has the $11.25mn player option. he's owed $12.75mn for this year. Rolen is owed $12mn for each of the next three seasons.

so, basically, the Cards are saving $12mn in 2010, although it looks like they'll be sending some cash over to compensate.

Glaus' OPS+ the past three seasons: 126, 122, 120. Rolen's OPS+ the past three seasons: 84, 126, 89.

Rolen's defense is only valuable if he's on the field, and he has averaged only 104 games played the past three seasons.

i think i like this deal. it continues Mo's trend of trying to get younger, and frees up some future cash. as a bonus, the TLR/ScoRo saga will finally be over.

by kindred on Jan 12, 2008 2:15 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Glaus
not a bad pickup, really.  As long as he's healthy, he'll put up good enough numbers to replace Rolen, and we eliminate the risk that comes with paying Rolen to sit on the surgeon's table or the bench in 2010.  Those of you that wanted to see Rolen's money freed up - well, you've got it.

Also, we don't have a 3B prospect knocking on the door until at least 2009, so it's not like Glaus blocks anyone.  And it helps keep us at least competitive in 2008 instead of going into full rebuilding mode with whatever mediocre prospects Rolen would fetch in return.  Overall, if Glaus is healthy, good trade.

Note that Glaus logged 8 games at SS in 2006.  Maybe we can plug him in there?  Heheheh

by siddfynch on Jan 12, 2008 2:22 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Glauss at SS
Is the thought being put out there to play Glauss at SS? Defensively, would he be that much worse than MilesEck were there last year.  Think of the offense with him at SS and another 3B-league average bat in the lineup. That would be pure genius.

by bdief on Jan 12, 2008 6:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

You couldn't be anymore wrong with every point
I will say, "Please don't take this the wrong way", but I know it's tough to sugar coat what I'm about to say.

You are dead wrong.

I understand and respect your fandom of Scott Rolen, but you're way wrong here.

Tony LaRussa IS a hall of fame baseball manager.  No doubts about it.

Scott Rolen is NOT a Hall of fame third baseman.  He could have been if he hadn't gotten hurt, but he has absolutely no chance of Hof induction right now.  Btw, Edmonds is MUCH closer to being a hall of famer than Rolen is and ever will be.

He's a third baseman with 261 homeruns.  Not even close.

And it's that loyalty to players that has gotten this team in its predicament that its currently in.  Having ageing ballplayers on the team just so they can retire as Cardinals flys in the face of having a competing ballclup every year.

And you can't cry about loyalty to players and how they should go into the hall as cardinals and then say you think the Edmonds trade 'made some sense'.  

And to your last point.  Busch III will sell out virtually, if not every, home game.  That's pretty much a given.

by Big Red on Jan 12, 2008 2:23 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

jamieoverkamp
I thought I hit "reply to this post" but apparantly didn't.  

Just to clarify, this is in response to jamieoverkamp.

by Big Red on Jan 12, 2008 2:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

also... Glaus is a known steriod user.
Being a Cards fan, I take pride in the fact that the Cards work hard and do things right. I know some people have made mistakes on the organization. But why would they trade for a cheater???

Here is the SI article below.

By Luis Fernando Llosa and L. Jon Wertheim, SI.com

Former World Series MVP and four-time All-Star Troy Glaus, currently a third baseman for the Toronto Blue Jays, received multiple shipments of performance-enhancing steroids through an allegedly illegal internet distribution network, according to information obtained by SI.

A source in Florida with knowledge of the client list of Signature Pharmacy, an Orlando-based compound pharmacy, alleges that between September 2003 and May 2004, multiple shipments of nandrolone and testosterone were sent to Glaus at a Corona, Calif., address that traces to the player. Though the information only pertains to receipt and not actual use of steroids, both nandrolone and testosterone were on Major League Baseball's banned list at the time.

Glaus, then with the Angels, missed much of the 2003 season with a tear in his right rotator cuff and frayed labrum and underwent season-ending shoulder surgery after attempting a comeback in 2004.

The prescriptions, written in Glaus' name, were obtained through New Hope Health Center, a California-based anti-aging clinic that advertises the sale of anabolic steroids and human growth hormones on its Web site. The prescription was processed by Signature. The prescribing physician was Ramon Scruggs, M.D. According to the Medical Board of California, as of March 2007, Scruggs has been on probation and is prohibited from prescribing drugs over the internet. He also was reportedly involved in a lawsuit with Mobile-based Applied Pharmacy, which, ironically, was the subject of a previous multi-agency raid. (Contacted through New Hope and given the chance to comment on Friday, Scruggs responded with expletives and ended the conversation abruptly.)

by jamieoverkamp on Jan 12, 2008 2:24 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I'm now going to back off you since
I've come to the conclusion you are MUCH younger and naive than I am.

But just to make a point.  The Cardinals are one of the few teams that are at the focal point of the steroid investigation.

Just to list a few names:

Tony LaRussa
Mark McGwire
Rick Ankiel
Cody McKay
Darryl Kile (Mitchell Report, right?)
etc, etc.

by Big Red on Jan 12, 2008 2:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Big Red
I don't think I'm younger and more naive than you. In fact I think I'm much older and some ways wiser than you. Why could not have not shown jamieoverkemp the courtesy of just stating that you disagreed with him and presented your reasoning instead by starting out with remarks like. "you are dead wrong," what makes you the authority. I told you, you would get some flack jamieoverkemp.

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 2:49 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Please stop the personal attacks
and keep it on the arguments about baseball and whether or not this was a good move.  Doing so is what makes VEB a great community.  Thanks.

by k randolph on Jan 12, 2008 3:09 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree ,K randolph
it's just that it gripes me for somebody to think it's necessary throw out about 3 or 4 demeaning remarks before presenting his argument..now if it is done in good fun (jest) thats a different matter. I'm sometimes guilty of that but if I see it has offended, I quickly amend..but no, I'm far from perfect too and can be an ass at times as confirmed by my wife.  

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 4:00 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I guess I didn't realize
that saying someone is much younger than I am and more naive (they kinda go hand in hand in many cases) is such a personal attack.  Thought it was more of a statement of fact.

However, according to these responses i see that it apparantly is, so I appoligize.  

by Big Red on Jan 12, 2008 4:09 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Thats good Big Red,
if you're apologetic then I'm apologetic.

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 6:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That was Condescending and uncalled for
Since I'm 30 years old does that mean I can't make an argument on this board?  

I am coming around to this deal somewhat, but I think jamieoverkamp makes a great point with the steroid issue.  Anabolic steroids are a bit different than HGH in my mind.  None of the players you mentioned were linked to the former.

"It takes pitching, hitting and defense. Any two can win. All three make you unbeatable". Joe Garagiola

by MRCARD on Jan 12, 2008 3:59 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Really?
Do Tony LaRussa and Mark McGwire not count anymore?

Say what you will or believe whatever you want, but Tony LaRussa is at the epicenter of this whole thing.  From his days at Oakland all the way down to Cody McKay.

I mention McKay simply because he was named in the Mitchell Report.  I don't think the Report was specifically about HGH only, so we are unsure of which PED he was taking.

Oh, and he just so happens to be the son of our first base coach and one that has been a close friend and employee of one Tony LaRussa and Mark McGwire all the way back to those days in Oakland where the steroids seemed to flow like a river.

To perpetuate the fantasy that the Cardinals are some high and mighty orginazation that is somehow above all of this is not only misguided but an act of completely turning a blind eye to a very dark situation.

by Big Red on Jan 12, 2008 4:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Steroids vs. HGH
One was a banned substance and the other was not with some admitted grey area.  You reply to my argument but dance around my point.  To me there is a legitimate difference.  While Tony may have suspected PEDs and didn't do anything, or did not know, to call him "the epicenter" of the whole PED phenomenon in MLB is an amazing exageration to try to prove a point.  That is just not correct.  The Cardinals aren't above the fray, but they don't have to lead the pack...
"It takes pitching, hitting and defense. Any two can win. All three make you unbeatable". Joe Garagiola

by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2008 12:20 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Check your facts Big Red
First off not sure how you came to the conclusion you are WAY older than me. And I'm not sure what age has to do with posting a blog on VEB. Actually if I were younger than you, I would probably be more familiar with a computer and the internet... you being MUCH older would be more familiar with an abacus and cave man drawings.

Ok, now that I feel I have defending off your attack I can post about your names that you listed.

LaRussa - Last I checked he doesn't play baseball, so I'm not sure why he would take steroids. Yes he got a DWI, but we were talking about that.

McGwire - I realize he was the most obvious person you could bring up, and I'm glad you did. There's nothing anyone can say about McGwire that someone hasn't already brought up. Plus he's retired.

Ankiel - Was in the Mitchell report and admitted to using HGH, which was prescribed by a legit doctor and has been removed from possible trouble from the MLB. (read the mitchell report this is in there)

McKay - Was one of the players I was talking about that used it before, but he's not on the Cardinals and probably never will be again.

Kile - You're joking right? Tell me you've actually read the Mitchell Report. You must not have because he's not in it. He was on that leaked fake version that listed Pujols and a bunch of other players that weren't on the report.

Next time check your facts, especially before you attack someone.

BTW how ancient are you?

by jamieoverkamp on Jan 12, 2008 9:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

At the risk of fanning the flames . . .
I think what Big Red was reponding to was your claim that you "take pride in the fact that the Cards work hard and do things right."  All he was saying was that there have been plenty of other Cards linked to PEDs, so the uproar about Glaus is disingenuous at best.

by Ray Lankford on Jan 12, 2008 10:58 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Depends...
Disinengenuous is pretty strong.  When you consider the difference between anabolic steroids (a banned substance at the time) and HGH (which was not), I think he's got a great point.  At the very least it shouldn't be so flippantly disreguarded as "naive" or something we should just accept.
"It takes pitching, hitting and defense. Any two can win. All three make you unbeatable". Joe Garagiola

by MRCARD on Jan 13, 2008 12:13 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

You're not really helping your position
with this attempt to get me.  And for what it's worth, I have no idea what internet knowledge had to do with my origional post...but I'm sure it makes sense to you.

Since you are having a hard time understanding why I listed the players I listed, I'll try to clear things up for you on last time.

1.  Tony LaRussa.  Now I understand you probably weren't born yet, but Mr. LaRussa once coached the mighty Oakland A's (Athletics to us old-timers).  Something of note about those A's is that team is known to be one of the biggest abusers of steroids in an era of major steroid use.  

And do you know who was in charge of that operation?  Yup, Tony LaRussa, Dave Duncan and Dave McKay.

Fastfoward roughly 10 years and you have the St. Louis Cardinals and a certain lumberjack of a first baseman who just happens to become the all-time single season home run king.  And then later, when the good story of the downtrodden ex-pitching phenom turned powerhitting outfielder is exposed as a user of HGH.

And do you know who was in charge of that operation?  Yup, Tony LaRussa, Dave Duncan and Dave McKay.

These "substances" and big stories seem to follow these three guys and AWFUL lot, don't ya think?

  1. McGwire.  Just because he's retired doesn't change reality.  He's one of the biggest users EVER and was associated with the Big 3 mentioned above for his entire career.
  2. Ankeil.  First of all, he never admitted to using HGH.  He got up (well, stood behing Walt Jockety) and denied ever using the darn substance even though there's a record of payment and perscriptions for HGH coming from a defunct dentist in Florida.  I guess he wasn't there to talk about the past either...
  3. Cody McKay.  I don't know how to stress it enough.  HIS FATHER IS DAVE MCKAY!!! It doesn't get any more damning than that.  
  4.  Kile.  Okay, I admit.  I couldn't remember if he was on the actual Mitchell Report or the fake one.  That's why I put it in parentheses and added a little question mark (i.e., Mitchell Report?).  It's a way of saying "I'm not sure."  But I figured a young computer whiz like yourself would have understood that.
Hopefully, this clears everything up for you once and for all.  I am now done responding to you since this conversation has run it's course.  If you don't understand the importance of the names I've listed and the magnitude of their roles in this issue, than nothing is going to convince you.

Keep on believin'.......

by Big Red on Jan 13, 2008 12:10 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Hey Big Red
I am not disagreeing with you by any means but I feel I must point out that considering the magnitude of the steroid use in Baseball, you could pick many managers out who have had numerous steroid users on their teams......

by Calhoun on Jan 13, 2008 12:22 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

let's end the argument here everybody
it's a difference of opinion --- let's leave it at that.

by lboros on Jan 13, 2008 5:51 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

what
Should they do with Rick Ankiel then? Cut him loose? Fans act like taking steroids made these guys super human guys who didn't have to work or had no natural ability to play baseball otherwise.

I could care less if a guy took roids, HGH, etc.

SUBURBS: Where Americans cut down trees and then name streets after them.

by beanocook on Jan 12, 2008 3:03 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree.
I'm tired of the "who played clean and who didn't" crap. They all play clean now(at least we hope). I think they should allow HGH & Steroids for players recovering from injuries/surgeries. IF it gets them back on the field quicker wouldn't that be good for the sport,fans, and the players?
"Why does he keep saying that?"

by Red Blazer on Jan 12, 2008 3:23 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

They use some of that stuff for medical treatment
anyway, don't they?  Why not let players use it for injuries?

by saladdays on Jan 12, 2008 4:19 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

There has to be more to this deal...
It wouldn't make any sense unless they are just dumping Rolen which is what Mo said he wouldn't do. If we only get one year of Glaus I say we shouldn't have to pick up any of Rolens salary unless there are more players involved.
"Why does he keep saying that?"

by Red Blazer on Jan 12, 2008 2:24 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Anyone else think Rolen won't waive his NTC?
I mean, there is having to deal with Tony Larussa and then there is having to deal with John Gibbons. John Gibbons, the guy who got into a fist fight with Ted Lilly. A guy who routinely 'undresses' his players while they are on the field if he doesn't like the way they covered second. Gibbons is worse than LaRussa or Bowa. Rolen would REALLY have to want to get out of St. Louis to agree to this trade.
I will be boxer briefs

by Hardcore Legend on Jan 12, 2008 2:25 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

i thought the word on the street is
that both players already waived the ntc. also, isn't this just a straight cut-and-paste of rosenthal's article? is that kosher?

by ortic jones on Jan 12, 2008 2:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Glad you brought that up...
If Rolen doesn't waive his NTC, then he can't really bitch at the front office or the manager anymore.  He had an opportunity to get out and didn't take it, so shut up and play ball.

Either way it should be an end to the clubhouse soap opera.

"I just wish that the late Harry Carey were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller

by fourstick on Jan 12, 2008 4:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

"Pending Physicals"...
If this trade does go through, which seems to be a pretty significant "if" given these two guys' injury histories, then I am really torn on how to feel about it.

On the one hand Rolen is my favorite ball player post-ozzie, but on the other he being a complete bitch lately and that doesn't help the team.  

Glaus is an interesting return for Rolen.  I really thought we'd be in Jupiter before Rolen would get dealt, and when he did we'd be sheading salary and picking up a major league ready SP and a not-so-major league ready P.  

Here's hoping we find a gem and get 35 bombs and 100 rbi's from Glaus next year.  But here's to Scott and his 34 HRs and 99 RBIs I hope he finds elsewhere.

by mwinf12 on Jan 12, 2008 2:29 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

One cause for optimism if this happens...
Glaus's injuries could be at least partially due to playing his home games on artificial turf.  A move to grassy Busch could actually do him some good, whereas Rolen's injuries are either better or not.  There's no reason to think this year will be any different than the last few for Scotty.

I'm also holding back judgment on this one, but initially, if our goal is to build a winner for 2009 and beyond, this does help us in that regard.  Glaus is a better bat and his current contract will be off the books at the latest for the 2010 season, and possibly for 2009, whereas Rolen's wouldn't clear until the 2011 season.

by mtalken on Jan 12, 2008 2:36 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Keep in mind
Glaus will be moving from the American League East to the National League Central.  And vice versa for Rolen.

by Big Red on Jan 12, 2008 2:39 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

yup...
... Rolen's gonna have fun facing Josh Beckett, Dice-K, Joba Chamberlin, Phil Hughes, Scott Kazmir, Erik Bedard, etc. a few times a year apiece.

by kindred on Jan 12, 2008 2:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Which means that they are both
going to have an adjustment period, getting use to different pitching and different parks.  I guess we should come back and re-evaluate at the end of the season.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on Jan 12, 2008 2:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

true
But Rolen is now facing really good teams and pitchers while Glaus---not so much. Heck, the switch in divisions adds numbers to a guy going to the NL and vice versa to the AL.
SUBURBS: Where Americans cut down trees and then name streets after them.

by beanocook on Jan 12, 2008 3:06 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

But remember,
Glaus has already played in the NL once with Arizona, so he's not a stranger to it.
Also, LB,  he had a damaged nerve(probably exacerbated by the artificial turf) that was operated on in September, which could be the main reason he crapped out in the second half of '07.
"It's always about the money. Anyone who says it's not is lying."- Gene Simmons

by cardsrul on Jan 12, 2008 4:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

FWIW...
... the first (and so far only) commenter at Bluebird Banter (the Blue Jays' SB Nation blog) doesn't like the deal. he also cites some '08 projections:

Marcel
Glaus: .260/.360/.480
Rolen: .270/.340/.440

ZiPS
Glaus: .247/.350/.469
Rolen: .255/.331/.397

Marcel has Glaus as 60 OPS points better, while ZiPS has Glaus as about 90 OPS point better. This was also projected assuming that Rolen would be in the NL Central and Glaus in the AL East.

Unless the Cards are giving up a lot of cash, and maybe even if they are, i can't see how the Cards didn't get the better of this deal.

by kindred on Jan 12, 2008 2:50 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

larry
why is this trade another leg for the la-russa-runs-the-club theory to stand on?

If Glaus is the better player, this seems like a good move no matter who is the GM/Manager.

I will be boxer briefs

by Hardcore Legend on Jan 12, 2008 2:50 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

agreed
Hardcore. I kind of found it a needless shot at LaRussa. The Cardinals would be getting a better, younger offensive player with a more favorable contract?

Heck, if that's LaRussa running the show I'll take it every time. The market for Scott wasn't high. I have felt all along that if you are going to trade him you would get a similar high-priced, pseudo risk in return. People aren't lining up to give up young prospects for Scottie.

SUBURBS: Where Americans cut down trees and then name streets after them.

by beanocook on Jan 12, 2008 3:05 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

this trade wouldn't have happened
if not for the untenable relationship between rolen and TLR. the cards wouldn't have had rolen on the market; they wouldn't even have listened to offers from the jays, and they certainly wouldn't have approached the jays about a trade.

both players contributed to the bad blood, but tony made a bad situation impossible by writing his letter to rolen and subsequently trashing rolen in the press.

in this instance case, tony's meddling might accidentally lead to a trade that helps the club. but it's not a healthy framework in which to make decisions.

by lboros on Jan 12, 2008 3:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree
I think the letter writing was a silly, tacky way of handling the matter and if La Russa made any kind public statements as attributed; as to "Rolen being the only player that had not expressed willingness for his return,"  that is even more dolt. Rolen might be a little to touchy, but Larussa in MHO fueled this fire to the point where Rolen had to go..and it's because La Russa say so..again MHO.

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 4:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Indeed.
Because TLR said he wanted Scotty on the team and that the Cards need him.  But Tony also said he didn't understand what the problem was.

by cardsgirl95 on Jan 12, 2008 3:28 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

don't do it, Mo!
On with the (good) youth movement!

by aet15 on Jan 12, 2008 2:58 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Wow, Edmonds and Rolen both gone
in a matter of a few weeks. I guess this is really the end of an era, huh? This may work out great for the Cards, and I agree that the TLR-Rolen soap opera had to end, but Scott is one of my all-time favorite Cardinals, and I'm sad to see him go. Being the dorky English teacher that I am, I can't help but think of Bedivere's words to the dying King Arthur in Tennyson's Morte D'Arthur:

"Then loudly cried the bold Sir Bedivere,
'Ah! my Lord Arthur, whither shall I go?
Where shall I hide my forehead and my eyes?
For now I see the true old times are dead,
When every morning brought a noble chance,
And every chance brought out a noble knight.
Such times have been not since the light that led
The holy Elders with the gift of myrrh.
But now the whole ROUND TABLE is dissolved
Which was an image of the mighty world;
And I, the last, go forth companionless,
And the days darken round me, and the years,
Among new men, strange faces, other minds.'"

Melodramatic, yes, but that's the first thing that came to my mind.

"Players like Pujols don't come along once in a lifetime. They never come along." -Buzz Bissinger

by PujolsFor President on Jan 12, 2008 3:12 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Teeter-totter
If we trade straight up and can shed a large contract sooner for a better hitting player who can also butcher SS, great.  I will be happy with the deal.

If we throw in some cash and Glaus keeps his option, then this is silly...we should hold and try to trade when his value is better for prospects.

by RedbirdRay on Jan 12, 2008 3:22 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I agree
completely.
On with the (good) youth movement!

by aet15 on Jan 12, 2008 5:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

hasta la vista baby
Rolen has been such a whiner the last few years I'm ready to see him go. While there's no doubt he was once a good ball player his injuries have hindered him too much. I'm glad to see him go primarily because I don't want to his attitude poisoning the younger players in the club house.

by steve on Jan 12, 2008 3:25 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

You guys are clearly missing the point
We lost 2 of our '02 Angels contingent in Eckstein/Percival and had to pick up one to compensate.  
Cheeseburger in paradise.

by joker24 on Jan 12, 2008 3:26 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

per bernie
glaus won't waive his ntc unless we pick up 09. deal breaker?
I hate... so much about the things that you choose to be.

by erik on Jan 12, 2008 3:28 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

just pick up the option
two years is still better than three. the system probably won't produce a replacement before 2010 anyway.

by lboros on Jan 12, 2008 3:32 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

player option?
I thought the report was that Glaus held a player option?  Must be a team option then.

by jjray on Jan 12, 2008 3:32 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

according to everything i've seen...
... it is a player option.

maybe he's asking for more money in order to waive his NTC?

by kindred on Jan 12, 2008 3:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

or...
... perhaps the Cards are insisting that that year is guaranteed, which would make some sort of sense.

by kindred on Jan 12, 2008 3:46 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Cot's says "player option"
and that website is pretty reliable.

I'm officially confused now.

by Big Red on Jan 12, 2008 3:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The Cardinals
want Glaus to pick up his own option, or they won't complete the trade.

There's little use to have him show up with all the leverage. If he has a bad year he picks it up, if he has a good year he elects for free agency.

Makes sense from the Cards' perspective. Not that I agree with the trade.

by plh903 on Jan 13, 2008 1:14 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I like the trade
... if it goes down.  The bad blood between TLR and Rolen threatened to eat away at the clubhouse.  Tony is a stubborn man acting like a spurned lover.  He was sure to pick a fight with Rolen and then bench the guy as a result.  This petty vindictiveness why Edmonds left.  Given the high motivation for the Cards to dump Rolen and his contract and injury history, I am practically shocked that we landed Glaus unless a boat full of money is floating north up the river through the great lakes and on to Toronto.  Rolen's shoulder has been operated on what, 3 times?  He has 3 years left on his contract.  Any team taking him runs a huge risk that Rolen reinjures the thing and goes completely bust.  Could happen in spring training ... only the baseball gods know.  I think Glaus will rake in the NL Central.  We'll see.

by jjray on Jan 12, 2008 3:31 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I love this trade!!!!!!!!
It takes down our infield defense some but Glaus hopefully will make up for it with his bat.
With a legitimate power bat to protect Pujols it will make our entire offense better.........
I really hope they both pass their physicals.

by Calhoun on Jan 12, 2008 3:52 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Great job, Mo!
I love it, a great trade. Glaus can easily beat Rolen's offensive numbers. He mashes lefties AND he's off the books a year earlier (two even!).

by sjoshi on Jan 12, 2008 3:58 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

change hurts
all stats/arm chair GM stuff aside...there isnt a single personality on the cards that I care for anymore...maybe Molina and Wainwright. I love to win, but I also love to like my team. Otherwise, I understand the trade...I will miss Rolen...if the trade goes through.

 

by birdsonbat on Jan 12, 2008 4:18 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

A few I like
I like Molina and Wainer a lot also.  

I also like Reyes.  Despite the very public controversy of his handling, he has taken his lumps well and handled himself gracefully.

Pujols has developed the personality of a super-star, but I still like to watch him get interviewed.  He still has obvious respect for the game and says the right things (mostly).

I can't wait to "meet" a few of the new guys also.  Rasmus seems to have a good head on his shoulders from written interviews, but I look forward to seeing him on camera.

I don't really care to get to know the personalities of the stop-gaps.

by RedbirdRay on Jan 12, 2008 4:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I would like Molina better if he would
stop setting up so far out of the strike zone....I like Wainwright, he seems like a classy young man.  And I've never made a secret that I have a huge amount of respect and admiration for the way Anthony Reyes handled his difficulties last season.   He's even going out on one of those 2 day caravans AFTER all the terrible things management and the fans have said about him.  And Al Hrabosky is on the same caravan-the same Al Hrabosky who probably said one positive thing about him to every 73 negative things he said about him on FSN.  And everyone wants to give up on someone like that?  If you'll excuse me, I'd just like to tell you what my son says-"He's got a pair on him, don't he?"  He said it with admiration.......I've resigned myself to the fact that he's going to be gone, perhaps he'll even be part of this deal with Toronto.
Mr. Duncan and Mr. LaRussa are convinced he's no good, and that he'll never be any good.  They might be right.  But they might be wrong too-but what Mr. LaRussa wants, Mr. LaRussa gets.
She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on Jan 12, 2008 6:10 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Jill would you
really want your son to wear his trousers and cap like tony king?
It happened on a Sunday afternoon, August 22, 1982.

by Glenn Brummer stole home on Jan 12, 2008 11:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

granted,
LaDuncan screwed with ARey's head, but at some point, you gotta start showing something, you know?

If Reyes is as great as it sounds like you think he is, he'd have tossed a couple of decent starts last year. No matter how much a coach/manager screws with you, if you've got talent, that's inevitably going to come through at some point.

by Jhusk on Jan 13, 2008 12:08 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Hey, I like Anthony. So what?
He sure hasn't pitched all that well, but he has handled himself with grace and dignity-more than the organization that employs him has. Folks here and in other media have put him in the middle of the controversy, but he has never addressed any of it publicly.  

Oh, my son  wears his trousers however he wants to.   He's almost 21 and just returned to college, I don't control that-nor would I want to.  

She isn't crazy, she's just not impressed.

by jillsinmo on Jan 13, 2008 8:03 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Miklaz seems to think the deal won't get done
if they can't gaurentee that Glaus will be here through 2009.
"Why does he keep saying that?"

by Red Blazer on Jan 12, 2008 4:24 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

It's about 4:30
Let's all quit and go watch some football, Green Bay  Seattle. Good game...I hope.

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 4:28 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i'm holding out judgment
till i see how much coin MO is sending the jays way. i have no issues with it & i actually like this deal. BUT i'd much rather it be a straight up deal with no money changing hands.

uh, MO while your at it, get them to toss in AJ will ya?

OK, now will every one who wanted MO to do something, anything, please put a cork in it?

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jan 12, 2008 4:31 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I like it
just fine. Even hurt, Glaus hit 20 homers in 115 games. That's better protection for Albert. Scotty's D will certainly be missed, but hey, he was shaping up into being a complete clubhouse cancer this year. Just about everything I loved about Rolen no longer applies--his game or his attitude. I'll always think fondly of him as an integral part of the MV3 and the 06 Champs, but I'd rather have him gone than have to watch more of the TLR/ScoRo soap opera. And even though Glaus is over thirty and has chronic foot issues, I'm glad they traded for someone with pop. I was afraid they were gonna pull another Edmonds-type deal just to give Scotty his ticket out. Better bat, lesser defense--seems like pretty much a wash as far as player ability. Ending the soap opera and potential clubhouse discord (as well as getting Rolen out of here before we all end up hating his guts)--now that's priceless.

by rockin redbird on Jan 12, 2008 4:44 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Makes Sense...
gels with what i've been guessing.  glaus's contract comes off the books next year, giving the cards about $50MM to throw around after 2008.

by tingler on Jan 12, 2008 4:56 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Glaus is a Liquid Asset
This is a great deal in my opinion.  Setting aside the fact Glaus is a more productive player, Glaus is a much much much better trade chip than Rolen -- he's a little younger, $12 mill cheaper, and clearly the better hitter.

This is a win-win deal.  This year the Cards are a better lineup with Glaus in the 4-hole behind Pujols, and if they want to make a move for the future, Glaus is a better and easier piece to move.        

Guarantee the 2009 and sign on the dotted line.  Excellent move Mo.

by MrPlow on Jan 12, 2008 5:12 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I don't know about that
Last year Toronto was trying to move Glaus just to get rid of his contract and couldn't. I wondered why at the time and why now taking on Rolen's contract to move him..still leaves me wondering why. Angels considered him expendable. Diamondbacks considered him expendable and Blue Jays considered him expendable..so I'm still wondering.. but look Mike Lowell nobody wanted him and Miami finally forced him on Boston and look what he did. Just hope Glaus is another Lowell.

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 8:06 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Artificial turf
Didn't Rolen have a problem with turf at one point?

by Red in Chicago on Jan 12, 2008 5:55 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Glaus's contract status...
for those wondering. Next season is his only guaranteed season, he has a player option for 2009. I highly doubt he will exercise his option unless he has a terrible year, otherwise he'll be one of the premier 3B FA's on the market next year, and can most likely pull down a 4-5 year contract worth more than his option year. So in reality, we are getting these albatross contracts off the books faster.

I am a fan of this trade.

Miller sucks.

by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Jan 12, 2008 7:00 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

alright, it's 7pm out here on the east coast
the news broke a little before 1pm east coast time.

is this sucker a done deal or not?

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jan 12, 2008 7:00 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Physicals are set
for Monday according to MLB sources, plus Selig has to approve it because of the amount of cash. We probably won't get final word 'til Monday P.M. or Tuesday, but it looks like it's all but done.
"It's always about the money. Anyone who says it's not is lying."- Gene Simmons

by cardsrul on Jan 12, 2008 10:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

so how much coin is MO sending north?
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jan 12, 2008 10:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Wow at the fielding difference, though...
If we can believe Zone Rating, Rolen gets to 11% mor e balls than Glaus does (at least based on last years ZR of .847 vs .737)

And that's not really a fluke, either.

OTOH, using Dave Pinto's PMOR, they are almost identical.

http://www.baseballmusings.com/archives/023949.php

So I guess we'll see.  

He had to go, anyway. It was either him or Tony, and with Tony staying, him going was the only option. I think every was sick of the soap opera. I would have preferred Tony going, but...

by DiscoJer on Jan 12, 2008 7:05 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Astroturf...
... in Toronto surely accounts for some of that difference. i'm not saying that Rolen isn't better than Glaus defensively, but it's a lot harder playing the hot corner on Astroturf than on natural grass.

by kindred on Jan 13, 2008 1:14 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

trade
It is time Rolen left. I can't stand players who complain and Rolen has complained in both cities. That shoulder of his will never be right. He never had more than slider bat speed. His defense was great but so is Molina's and he can't hit a lick either. Glaus has power and as far as i know has never complained. Fresh start for both, i loved the way Rolen played hard ,head down, no showboat, but his days are over.
"Today is the day now is the time"- Billy Graham

by clemente21 on Jan 12, 2008 7:51 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

now that is a good observation clemente
Rolen did have trouble getting around on the good fast balls at least after the first injury. That's why he popped to right so much.

by ridgesee on Jan 12, 2008 9:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Troy Glaus--Fading down the stretch
I don't know how worried I'd be about the way Glaus looked post-All Star last year. He had a terrible slump from mid July through most of August, but from August 25th until he was shut down, he went 16 for 43 with four home runs and 14 walks.

I'm rather stunned that Mo' actually managed to improve the team by dealing Rolen, assuming this goes down. And Rolen's been one of my favorite baseball players for a long time.

by liam on Jan 12, 2008 9:02 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I am too
Didn't think Rolen would bring back anything until he showed he was healthy.  Of course this is all still pending a physical.

by Merry CRasmus on Jan 12, 2008 11:06 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

What happened to TLR?
If I think back to when Tony first came to St Louis, there never seemed to be problems.  He was regarded as a genius, even if we weren't winning championships.  In the last 3 years its been feuds, bickering, stubbornness, and lack of regard for young guys.  He won us a world series in this time, so it isn't as if everyone is turning against him because he is a loser.

So the question is, what has changed about him?  Or is he still the same, and we are just starting to get another perspective on him as blogs and sports reporters start to cover the bickering more often?

by Quel on Jan 12, 2008 9:18 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I don't think it's a new development
I remember Ron Gant having trouble with him.  That was pretty early on in the tenure.  Later it was Tino.  Now Rolen.  There are others I am missing that are not coming to mind right now, I know.

I think Tony always had an ability to rub people the wrong way.  If you look at the three examples I gave, there's a few common denominators there.  They were all veterans, they were all high priced, and they were all struggling to produce.  I think he takes a pretty strong "To whom much is given, much is required" stance.

Tony just isn't a guy to give out too many atta boys and pats on the back when guys are struggling.  He's apt to get more involved and maybe even try to light a fire under them when that happens.  

On one hand, I agree with the comment regarding lack of regard for young guys.  He seems to strongly favor the veterans that max out on limited talents (Miles, Paquette, Gallego).  Even if it's over young guys with more talent but no established track record.  But to be completely fair, the targets for much of his bickering and feuds have historically been high priced underperforming veterans.

by Merry CRasmus on Jan 12, 2008 10:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Add Ozzie Smith
to that list.  Doesn't Ozzie still refuse to speak to LaRusa or become involved in the Cards organization because of LaRussa?  (all stemming from LaRussa playing Royce Clayton over Ozzie)

by Ray Lankford on Jan 12, 2008 11:05 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Oops
Overlooked the most obvious one there.  Thanks.  Another one on the list.  

by Merry CRasmus on Jan 12, 2008 11:11 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

his wife is an
equester...equestri...er, a..horse lover. missouri's a much better place have horses then toronto, i imagine.
I hate... so much about the things that you choose to be.

by erik on Jan 12, 2008 9:56 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

dude i got a connection
in the horse world. she can ride derby winners all she wants if thats what its going to take to get this done. just let me know.
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jan 12, 2008 10:18 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Horse`s
My brother works where they house the Clydesdale's whenever they come through Missouri and he has gotten to pet them they are MASSIVE....

by Calhoun on Jan 12, 2008 11:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Tons of Clydesdales in Missouri...
at both the St. Louis AB Brewery and at Grants Farm (AB Owned). You can pet them at Grants farm, but not on the Brewery tour.
Miller sucks.

by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Jan 13, 2008 12:48 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Really?
I never knew that but I was specifically speaking of the Budweiser Clydesdales they keep them in Mid-Missouri sometimes and that's where my brother works.

by Calhoun on Jan 13, 2008 12:59 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

how many
players haved loved to play him. you will always have players that u do not get along with. i have been a cardinals fan all of my life. i am also a scott rolen fan . but the cardinals will go on without him. and glaus is a good player and could be a more powerful bat behind albert
HURRY BACK CARP AND MULDER

by LaRussa4President on Jan 12, 2008 11:05 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Latest News...
Word from Jayson Stark is that there is no cash in the deal.  Repeat:  no cash in the deal.  Each team assumes all of the contract of the player they are getting.  Also, the deal was contingent on Glaus exercising his player option for 09 (Cards were unwilling to give up 3 years of Rolen for 1 year of Glaus).  D.GOOCH
Cardinals, Cardinals, Cardinals!

by GOOCH24 on Jan 12, 2008 11:40 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

In that case
I'm starting to fall in love with this deal.
"A great catch is like watching girls go by; the last one you see is always the prettiest." - Bob Gibson

by stl tyler on Jan 13, 2008 12:03 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

LINK
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3193566

OK, if this is true, i am now officially a big fan of this deal.

also here's derrick goold's updated article.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/cardinals/story/71C7A81A35B99753862573CF0017C69C ?OpenDocument

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson And That's A Winner!

by gdm426 on Jan 13, 2008 12:33 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i speculated on that above...
... i'm not actually sure whether forcing Glaus to exercise his option is a good move or not. i think it probably is, especially since we've got no viable options in the minors, but plantar fascitis can be a real bitch.

by kindred on Jan 13, 2008 1:18 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

We love it
Pujols has it.
Glaus has it.
Brendan Ryan developed it last year.

I think someone should disinfect the team's shoes.

I will be boxer briefs

by Hardcore Legend on Jan 13, 2008 1:28 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Option
Well, if he has a bad season in '08, you're going to be stuck with him in '09 anyway because he will exercise the option.  If he has a good year, you're just guaranteeing that he will be there in'09 when he otherwise might not.

I certainly wouldn't let it hold up the deal unless I was certain right now that Rolen was as healthy as an ox.

by South Side Cards Fan on Jan 13, 2008 1:28 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Gotta love it!!!!!!!!
Gotta love it if this is true!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Straight up with no money exchange this is a great deal!!!!!!!!!!!! if there is a money exchange it is still a good deal!!!!!!!1

by Calhoun on Jan 13, 2008 12:38 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

I am not really
A fan of that SS Izturis that we signed earlier on in the offseason...But, maybe this makes it better. We lose a plus defender on the left side, but gain more offense at third. With a crappy hitting shortstop, and an above average bat at third, our offense is better than with the crappy stick from SS and an unpredictable bat from Rolen. Which would rather have, two good defenders or a good defender and a good hitter?

by Pujols Is A God on Jan 13, 2008 1:28 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Challenge Trade in More Ways Than One
Does it make anyone nervous that the "our doctors are better than your doctors" component of this challenge trade might be more important than the "our third baseman is better than your third baseman" component?

Call it bad luck or bad circumstances if you will, but the Cards haven't had much luck with medical issues, Chris Carpenter's emergence after shoulder surgery being the lone bright spot among a forest of players griping about treatment (Lankford, Rolen, Edmonds), poor outcomes on surgeries/treatment regimens (Rolen, Mulder, McGwire, Edmonds, Carpenter, Lankford, Al Benes).

I sure hope the Cards get a couple of extra opinions on Glaus's charts before signing on the dotted line.

by South Side Cards Fan on Jan 13, 2008 1:34 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Carp
I believe his surgery happened while in the care of the Blue Jays' doctors.
How about handin' me another helpin' of those mashed taters...thank you very much!

by Elvis on Jan 13, 2008 11:14 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Jays to send money
According to mlbtraderumors, the Jays are sending $1.8 mil along with Glaus.  Seems like pretty good news to me, and surprising as well.

by spencegrif on Jan 14, 2008 1:25 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the Internet's #1 St. Louis Cardinals blog.
Start posting about the Cardinals »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

1753738656_110919ebe9_o_small
2010 Hot Stove Post #1: CHONE hitter projections

Recent FanPosts

Avatar_small
How to EASILY make tables for Fanposts
Arch_small
Number 15
Small
Some thoughts on Holliday (and potential replacements)
Small
Ok let me try this again...
Knights-09_small
Disenchanted Blue Jays Fan Looking For A New Team
Painterlance_small
The Holliday Dilemma (Rocks Fan Perpsective)
375830-r1-025-11_011_small
Anybody read Bob Gibson's new book yet?
Flanders_small
Yadi2first
Small
40 Man Question..

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Jack_benny_small DanUpBaby

Editors

Bender1_small azruavatar

Adam1_small chuckb

Kid-a-bear_small the red baron