Man of Troy
by chuckb on Jan 13, 2008 2:43 AM EST
in St. Louis Cardinals News
Email
PrintWell, it appears as though the Rolen for Glaus swap is going to happen. I've never been a huge Troy Glaus fan, but I can't shake the impression that this trade favors the Cards. We don't know all the details yet but, at first glance, it appears that the Cards got the better end of this one.
For the last 3 seasons, Glaus has been the superior player in almost every conceivable way. Rolen is still the superior defender, but Glaus' offense has been vastly superior to Rolen's each of the last 3 seasons - enough so to offset the relative deficit in Glaus' defense. Glaus is 16 months younger than Rolen, and his contract expires sooner than Rolen's does. There is the issue w/ Glaus' plantar fascitis but Rolen, as we are all too aware, has issues w/ both shoulders.
In LB's comments yesterday , he used the two players' OPS over the last 3 seasons to make the case that Glaus is the superior offensive player (or at least has been). Here are their other 2007 numbers:
| VORP | EqA | WS | WPA | RC/27 | WARP1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rolen | 4.1 | .257 | 11 | -0.73 | 4.42 | 4.1 |
| Glaus | 20.5 | .281 | 14 | 0.97 | 6.38 | 4.0 |
The only numbers that are close, and in Rolen's favor, is WARP1 which is largely dependent on BP's analysis of the two players' defense. Rolen's defense keeps the comparison close and, perhaps, is the reason the Cards were able to get this trade done. By every offensive measure, the two players weren't even close in 2007.
How about over the last 3 years?
| VORP | EqA | WS | WPA | RC/27 | WARP1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rolen | 40.1 | .266 | 38 | 0.17 | 5.24 | 14.7 |
| Glaus | 87.3 | .285 | 63 | 2.17 | 6.42 | 15.2 |
It should be pointed out that VORP, WS, WPA, and WARP1 are sums of the 3 years' totals. EqA and RC/27, because they are rate statistics, are unweighted averages. Again, Rolen's defense enables him to keep the comparison close according to WARP1, but you should notice that THT's Win Shares, which also incorporates defense, isn't. The two sources have different means of comparing defense and incorporating its value into a player's overall value. Offensively, over the last 3 years, Glaus has been by far the superior player.
What about their projections for next year? The ZIPS, CHONE, and Bill James projections are out but PECOTA isn't so I'm going to use its projections for 2008 prior to last season. You'll notice that its projection can't take into account both players' injuries in '07 so I would expect this year's PECOTA projection to be less sanguine than these are.
Here are the two players' OPS's from the 4 sets of projections:
| ZIPS | CHONE | James | PECOTA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rolen | .728 | .802 | .842 | .857 |
| Glaus | .819 | .854 | .851 | .899 |
All 4 sets of projections believe Glaus will have the better '08 as well. In fact, only the James projections are within 40 pts. of OPS. So, Glaus was better in '07. He was better from '05-'07 and 4 sets of projections anticipate he'll be better in '08. It's true that he's played in more hitter-friendly ballparks than Rolen has but he's also played in a tougher pitching league. He's also been facing the Red Sox and Yankees' pitching 30 times per year...er, I mean, the Red Sox pitching 15 times per year. It's difficult for me to conclude, therefore, that Glaus ISN'T the better player right now.
How about defense? Here are `07's numbers:
| FRAA | rate | PMR ratio | RZR | +/- | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rolen | 16 | 115 | 102.92 | .742 | +15 |
| Glaus | 3 | 103 | 102.78 | .706 | +9 |
FYI, the "Rate" stat used above comes from the Davenport Translations at BP. The +/- is courtesy of the Fielding Bible. From this, we should get that Rolen is better defensively but it's really pretty close. BP has him a good bit above Glaus but PMR, THT, and the Fielding Bible all have them being pretty comparable and PMR shows barely any difference at all. So, is Rolen better defensively? Unquestionably. But he's not that much better - certainly not enough to offset the difference, right now, in the two players' offense.
Add all this up, the fact that Glaus is slightly younger, and the fact that his contract will be on the books for at least 1 year less than Rolen's and it's pretty clear to me that, right now, Glaus is the better player. He's gonna strike out more than Rolen, to be sure. At some point people will complain about a K w/ a runner on 3rd and 1 out in a game we lose to Pittsburgh 3-2. But he is better overall than Rolen is right now.
Rolen is owed $36 M over the next 3 years. Glaus is owed $12.75 M in '08 and he has a player option for '09 at $11.25 M. The word is that the Cards will have to send some dough to the Jays to complete the deal. Considering the relative players' values and the fact that Rolen is owed at least an extra year and $12 M, that's hardly surprising. Glaus' contract is really a pretty good one for the Cards. Yes, he's expensive this year but, if he plays well, he'll likely opt out of the '09 contract and become a free agent. The Cards will then be out from under that contract. If he decides to pick up his player option, the Cards still save a year and $12 M (or a little less based on the amount that the Cards send north).
Will Glaus have to be enticed to waive his no-trade clause? Goold says that the Cards would have to pick up the option in order to make the trade happen. Unless I'm wrong that the option is Glaus', this comment makes no sense. Perhaps he means that the Cards would guarantee the 2nd year? That would seem to reduce, not increase, the value of the contract as Glaus can now opt out if he wants or, if he doesn't, force the Cards to pay the money anyway. Maybe he would want to add a million or two to the '09 player option in order to do the deal. It ought to be worth it to him to agree to the deal just to get off the astroturf and come to the weaker league 1 year before being able to become a free agent once again.
Finally, yesterday LB wrote that this trade adds "another leg for the larussa-runs-the-club theory to stand on" and some took umbrage with that quote in the thread. I tend to agree w/ LB that this is LaRussa's type of trade. Though it does help the club in the long run, as I've pointed out it also helps the club in the short run. What's wrong w/ that? Nothing, but...
Make no mistake about it, Mo could have traded Rolen long ago and gotten less (much less) than Glaus while also dumping most, if not all, of the remaining contract on the other team. In other words, he could've dumped Rolen and his contract on somebody else if he'd been willing to take little or nothing in return. He may have even been able to get a decent or better prospect in return. The benefit of that endeavor would have been that it would've saved the team at least $24 M. It would've opened up an additional $11.25 M in '09 that the team could've spent on something else. It would've opened a hole at 3B for Craig or Freese in '09 if either of them are ready. It's likely, instead, that Glaus will be playing 3B for the Cards in '09.
Trading Rolen for Glaus, as opposed to trading him for a prospect, or for a fungo bat to be named later, will gain the team 4-5 wins this year in all likelihood. Are we now a contender? No, b/c it's a negligible gain this year over Rolen and we weren't a contender w/ Rolen. Still, LaRussa would've never allowed Rolen to be traded for a prospect. He clearly insisted on getting back a player who can help the team this year. Which players have been mentioned in Rolen rumors beside Glaus? It's always been established major league players, never prospects (except in blogs or message boards). So I echo LB's sentiment from yesterday that he'd rather have Andy LaRoche.
Still, all in all, this is a good trade for the Cards. It's not ideal. Some will complain about Glaus' use of PED's. Why? No one complained about re-signing Ryan Franklin! He took them when he was with the Angels, at least 4 years ago. His success in '05 and '06 w/ the Jays had nothing to do w/ `roids. Sure, it's another Angel on the roster but at least Ed Wade signed Darin Erstad. BTW, while we're commenting on the Angel-ification of the Cards' roster, take a look at the left side of the infield up in Toronto!
192 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
No $$$ sent from STL to TOR
Saw this on espn.com:
"According to a source with knowledge of the trade, the Cardinals only signed off on the deal after Glaus agreed to exercise his $11.25 million option for 2009. St. Louis management didn't want to give up three years of Rolen for only one year of Glaus, so Glaus had to commit to the option year as part of the deal.
Both players were also required to waive no-trade clauses.
A source told ESPN.com's Jayson Stark that Toronto will be responsible for the three years and $33 million left on Rolen's contract, while St. Louis will assume the $24.5 million owed Glaus through 2009. Since no cash is involved in the trade, it appears that no approval from commissioner Bud Selig's office is required."
Wow! Another positive in the Cards' favor! I'm still holding my breath that we don't find out there are other players involved. As for how things appear right now, I'm strongly encouraged. Score points for Mozeliak!
I like the deal more now
>>According to a source with knowledge of the trade, the Cardinals only signed off on the deal after Glaus agreed to exercise his $11.25 million option for 2009<<
Seems odd given Glaus's age, injury history and the club's avowed desire to commit to player development ... unless one runs the transaction through the LaRussa prism. 2009 happens to be the last year of TLR's contract. The TLR strategy needs three studs to go with his scrubs: Pujols-Glaus-Rasmus are the new trio. If Glaus lights up NL pitching in 2008 AND stays healthy, we'll come out ahead on the 2009 option. Either Glaus really wanted out of Toronto or the guy is not all that sure about his health.
Know what turf toe is?
by StanTheManFan on Jan 13, 2008 11:07 AM EST up reply actions
Turf Toe
I believe the reason it's called 'turf toe' is because of the prevalence of the injury among players on artificial turf, due to the hard subsurface.
It also seems to be unusually difficult to recover from. Football players often miss most of a year with turf toe. Not sure why it takes so long, but it's definitely nothing to laugh at.
by the red baron on Jan 13, 2008 12:38 PM EST up reply actions
Glaus had to commit to the deal?
Upon further review, it was a shrewd move
I've thought about it some more and now see the wisdom of our bargaining position with Toronto. If Glaus gets hurt or goes into wholesale regression, he was going to exercise his option and the Cards would be on the hook regardless. If he rakes in the NL and stays healthy, he opts out. Thus, there is no risk of loss to the Cards by having the option year contractually locked in up front. They were going to be on the hook for that option under any bad scenario. It's just a win for the Cards. I'm just shocked we not only didn't send money to Toronto but also extracted a concession from Glaus. Kudos to Mozeliak on this one. Other than forcing the team to move Rolen through his feud with the player, TLR probably had nothing to do with the negotiations with Toronto.
Amen
by South Side Cards Fan on Jan 13, 2008 2:00 PM EST up reply actions
Nice analysis
Oh, who am I kidding. Mo is an idiot who does whatever his bosses (and even his employees) tell him to do. (/sarcasm)
by Big Red on Jan 13, 2008 2:02 PM EST up reply actions
The problem we may face is
by Hardcore Legend on Jan 13, 2008 3:20 AM EST reply actions
he wouldn't dare,,,
Why
by mikedallas23 @ Viva El Birdos on Jan 13, 2008 9:33 AM EST up reply actions
If you look at UZR
The three year splits are kind of silly though. This is all based on medical info that no one here presumably has access to. But the Jays do. The point is that we've traded upside for certainty and no clubhouse issues. If I'm the Cardinals I'd like to keep all the upside I can find, even if that comes with big risks.
And Hardcore, why would Rolen waive his NTC and then not report? That doesn't make any sense to me.
i don't think of rolen as having any upside
if nothing else, the contracts make this trade a no-brainer. they're currently on the hook for the age 33 through 35 seasons of an ex-superstar. they're trading that for the age 31 and age 32 seasons of a near-peak star.
It depends on if he'll
If UZR is to be believed, or PMR from 2005 or 2006, there is a substantial difference in defense. Much more than a win. It totally depends on the metric du jour, but those, especially UZR, are the ones I trust.
Apparently the Jays' internal metrics agree (and supposedly Ricciardi is trying to build the next great defense or something), or they don't take the gamble. Their doctors will agree as well if he the deal goes through (I guess the worst case is the deal not happening now, no matter how you feel about the trade).
I'm not sure what the Cardinals metrics or doctors say about Rolen, given that I don't think that was the basis for the trade.
Who knows, it's all medical and anything on that is entirely speculative. But the Jays have doctors too, and no ulterior motives.
UZR is an outlier
each of those three systems gives rolen less than a 1-win advantage with the glove; UZR gives rolen about a 2.5-win advantage. i'm not saying that UZR is wrong --- i have no basis for saying one way or the other --- but it is in the minority.
where EqA is concerned, i'll take my chances w/ glaus, who has been at .280 or above for 4 years in a row. rolen's been in the .250 range 2 of the last 3 seasons. at his age, with his health record, i don't see him returning to .300.
And PMR doesn't
Where does your +/- data come from? Dewan gives Rolen a +47 and Glaus a -25 from 2003-2005, so that would be a serious swing. Dial's ZR likes Rolen much more.
I don't see him returning there either, but if he does he's a hell of a lot better than Glaus.
What this boils down to for me is that Ricciardi isn't a clown, and the Cardinals aren't working from an objective standpoint here. Rolen has to go. This might be the best of a bad situation, but that doesn't mean I like the situation or the trade in a vacuum.
Rolen kills
plus / minus data
RZR has glaus and rolen dead even for 2007, both 14 runs better than average. rolen had a better zone rating, but glaus got to 10 more out-of-zone balls. (see this spreadsheet: http://home.comcast.net/~briankaat/zonecombo2007.xls.) rolen was about 20 runs better than glaus on RZR in 2006.
there's no argument about which guy is a better fielder ---- obviously it's rolen. but there's very mixed evidence about the magnitude of rolen's advantage. the most favorable scenario has rolen at about +30 runs; a more balanced perspective would put rolen at about +15. if you think rolen's bat will be within 15 runs of glaus's bat, then the cardinals come out behind on the deal in 2008 . . . .
but even if that's true --- and i'm certainly not conceding it --- you still have to factor in the contracts. the cards are better off with glaus's shorter contract, even if the exchange costs them a win or two in 2008. they're probably not going anywhere in 2008 no matter who players 3d base, but they might be going somewhere in 2010 --- and they're more likely to do that if they don't have 35-year-old scott rolen soaking up 1/10th of the payroll.
They are only
I'd want to trade Rolen if nobody wanted him. The fact that they do (and there was supposedly an offer on the table from the Brewers -- Doug Melvin isn't an idiot either) makes me think that the situation isn't so dire, and that the Cardinals are acting on directive from the wrong person.
i agree that tony's driving the action here
lboros
If airhad is right
We had a chance to trade 3 years of Rolen for 1 year of Glaus, or should I say 3 years of Rolen's contract for 1 year of Glaus' and we chose 2 years of Glaus'. That's 1 more feather in the veterans-preferred cap!
I don't think that means TLR
I agree with that...
beano, you misunderstand me
i've said this over and over --- i think rolen and la russa are equally to blame for the state of their relationship, but i think la russa's comments this off-season pushed things past the point of no return and left the team in a terrible position. if this trade goes through, the team will be off the hook ---- in spite of tony's poor handling of the situation.
Not if they
Dewan has Rolen at +50 for 2005-2007, and +23 for 2006-2007. He has him at +16 for 2005 in the book. Something's wrong there.
Also, Glaus is +19 from 2006-2007, and terrible off the turf in 2005. Enough (-12, which is in line with his previous performance) to drop him off the 2005-2007 leaderboard.
I'll go with MGL's numbers which are consistent.
Yeah...
Mo couldn't have done any better in this situation, he got 1 year shaved off a big contract. He got a younger player, much more likely to make a full recovery from surgery, and probably made a gain (even if it is marginal) to the team as it currently stands.
Nobody is disputing that a 100% Rolen, is better than a 100% Glaus. The chances of Rolen getting back there are slim to none, and this team desperately needed the offense.
This team is going to be giving major at bats to "hitters" like Molina, Izturis, Kennedy, Miles...they needed the offense.
Mo did a great job here.
by bobbyballgame1 on Jan 13, 2008 1:10 PM EST up reply actions
Toronto disagrees
We don't "need a hitter". The team needs to either save runs or score runs. Either one is fine with me. Glaus will probably have a net positive effect, but he can't match Rolen's if he's somewhat healthy.
I don't care about the payroll flexibility. They have tons of money coming off the books, and are pissing away what they do have on crap like Izturis, Miles and Pineiro. There's over half Rolen's salary right there.
I'm real glad you aren't our GM.
by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Jan 13, 2008 1:41 PM EST up reply actions
I'm glad you
I disagree with nearly everything you said
I care about payroll flexibility. Lots, actually. Glaus is cheaper with a shorter contract and represents an offensive upgrade and only a minute downgrade from Rolen. Rolen will never return to 2004 form -- that was 4 years and two shoulder surgeries ago. Its gone; poof!
We aren't "pissing away" money on Izturis (isn't he a one year deal?) b/c he's a good fielder who can save runs -- something you are concerned about. We aren't pissing away money on Pineiro because we don't exactly have a glut of reliable starting pitching. Pineiro, although not spectacular, is reliable and will eat innings at a league average(ish) clip.
The only thing I agree with is Miles -- we are pissing money away on Miles.
by Ray Lankford on Jan 13, 2008 3:02 PM EST up reply actions
I don't care
The Cardinals have less than $30 million committed in 2010. There is room to make a gamble on Rolen, but if you disagree that he's a good gamble, that's fine. Just don't make it sound like we need to money.
Joel Pineiro hasn't eaten innings at a league average clip since 2004. He's a replacement level player according to projections.
Cesar Izturis is a replacement player as well. Average defense, and a .220 EQA. Brendan Ryan can do better for pennies on the dollar. Even if he flops and is "as bad" who cares? No real downside.
Glad we can agree about Miles.
PLH903
I see his inability to stay healty and I think it is a waste to have him around 3 more years.
I'd trade him
However, I'm of the opinion that he comes close to Glaus when you factor in defense. That lets you take a gamble on him being a 7 win player again.
FWIW, I don't think Craig will stick at 3B (love the bat), and Freese isn't a good a prospect as, let's say, Chris Sabo. I think Chris Truby is much more likely.
I don't know, dude. I'm not a doctor. I don't like that he's being traded because of high school bullshit (though I might ask for a trade if I got trashed in the press by my manager -- and I've never said a word).
I'd say no, get what you can for him from what I know. He was probably worth his contract last year if you take UZR at face value, but I don't think he's likely to stay on the field.
With teams showing interest, I want to find the logic behind that. I see their reasoning, and trust that they are going on projections and medical data, and the Cardinals are going on he said/she said. That doesn't sit well.
I'll add that
I've repeated myself a bunch of times, so I'll stop for now.
Why...
"with you about his chances being slim to none (and he doesn't have to be MV3 Rolen to be better than Glaus). You should probably let them know, I guess."
I'm glad Toronto doesn't agree with me, now they have the commitment of 3 years to Rolen and his shot shoulder.
Pujols would have likely never seen a pitch to hit all year with 8HR Rolen batting behind him.
by bobbyballgame1 on Jan 13, 2008 10:11 PM EST up reply actions
I'm not trying
UZR is not an outlier
The only person who doesn't agree is BIS's scorer with the Blue Jays, whose data has made him look like a competent 3B in PMR and +/-, the two metrics which use BIS's PBP data rather than Stats Inc's, the past two years, where before they agreed with the consensus that he was a poor defender.
by cpebbles on Jan 13, 2008 10:06 PM EST up reply actions
of the 4 major metrics for 2007
RZR
PMR and UZR are in conflict here. Supporting PMR are DTs and a couple of metrics built around the same data. Supporting UZR are his defensive reputation throughout baseball, his history as a fielder, and the rule that players' defense does not tend to improve markedly over the age of 30. I think it's pretty clear that the discrepancy in data is with BIS's scorer.
by cpebbles on Jan 13, 2008 11:48 PM EST up reply actions
Mo is making the best of a bad situation
Two thoughts
- I've seen several comments that we are saving $12 million. I guess that is true if we expect to play without a third basemen in 2010. Aren't we really just gaining some payroll flexibility? What we've done is give ourselves a choice of playing with Freese/other rookie or spending big bucks on a free agent.
- Isn't Plantar Fascitis a common problem for those doing PEDs? Isn't this the problem McGwire struggled with in Oakland for years? If that is the case, I worry that Glaus will break down earlier in his career making the age differential moot.
I have to say...
by mynameistyler on Jan 13, 2008 9:05 AM EST up reply actions
I think you're thinking of
But of course, he never took steroids.
by 26thMan on Jan 13, 2008 10:55 AM EST up reply actions
Plantar vs patellar
Perhaps Silent Bob could weigh in.
I'm not a DR.
McGwire is one possible case that is a coincidence? Which other implicated players have this problem?
Not trying to be a smart arse....just curious
Pujol has it too...
by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Jan 13, 2008 1:42 PM EST up reply actions
See ya Scotty.....
I was OK with Glaus (whom I thought we might trade for last Aug., before the PED accusations) but now I kinda feel just got handed Gary Gaetti or Pete Guerrero again for whatever reason. Except the Rat could actually play a little third base.
More Angels.
All things being equal, Id rather have a healthy Rolen than a healthy Glaus and have a happy TLR wearing pinstripes or a retired TLR running an animal care shelter raking in donations from sympathetic ballplayers.
People who see it as all business that yields a bottom line and numbers will be fairly happy with this and the people who see it as typical fans probably wont.
Plantar Faciais
Question
by mikedallas23 @ Viva El Birdos on Jan 13, 2008 9:38 AM EST reply actions
A blast from the past...
"In Philadelphia, Rolen also had his fair share of feuds with former manager Larry Bowa, teammates and eventually the fans. A month before his trade, a teammate called Rolen a 'cancer' in the clubhouse."
I hope John Gibbons and the Blue Jays fans enjoy their new prima donna!
Look -- these are Philadelphia sports writers
I am generally highly regarded in my job, both by my higher-ups and a strong majority (documented) of the people who work for me, but I was labeled "scum" in one fairly prominent blog by the holder of a minority opinion. Nobody earns a 100% personality approval rating if they're actually doing anything, and Rolen certainly was doing something; he plays baseball, after all. I'm not saying that Rolen was not a "cancer in the clubhouse" in Philadelphia, but I would give exactly zero credibility to this particular report.
by StanTheManFan on Jan 13, 2008 11:19 AM EST up reply actions
That's the dumbest thing i've ever heard...
by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Jan 13, 2008 1:43 PM EST up reply actions
Take the
since when
Just once, ab
- post something that isn't completely obnoxious and insulting to somebody AND
- support it with some kind of facts or even theories as to what you're basing your opinion on
- " attack the opinion, not the person. a guy isn't an idiot simply because he disagrees with you. if you think flawed logic, faulty premises, and/or factual errors underlie his opinion, point those things out; try to persuade him (and the rest of us) that your view of things makes more sense. the entire community can learn a lot from that type of exchange. but we learn nothing --- and you make yourself look stupid --- when you simply taunt your adversary or call him names. flame wars will not be tolerated."
- "what is my true motive in posting? there's a difference between making a critical point and pounding your fists on the floor. if all you have to offer is the latter, do not post. "
- "can i back up my criticisms with some evidence and a line of reasoning? when scott rolen struggled early in the 2006 playoffs, we got dozens of angry rants about how rolen is a habitual choker with a longstanding history of playoff failure. those posts were factually untrue and easily disproven; they detracted from the discussion about rolen's struggles, rather than adding to it. don't post criticism that you can't back up;"
Plantar Faciais
Does anyone
Nailed it in the 2nd to last paragraph.
Yes
by bobbyballgame1 on Jan 13, 2008 1:12 PM EST up reply actions
It's 4-5 wins over trading
I obviously didn't make that clear and I apologize. It came up later in the thread as well.
I dunno
Glaus would have to be 2-3 wins over Spiezio. Barden is supposedly a wizard with the glove and projects at .730.
I think it's still an overstatement.
Over Spiezio
I can't complain
Someone should remind Mr. LaRussa
If it is true
One of the biggest pros was that Glaus offered the Cards the opportunity to free up 12 million a year in 2009 and 2010 combined with the potential to add a Class A or Class B pick if Glaus walks away after 2009.
Well
by Ray Lankford on Jan 13, 2008 1:28 PM EST up reply actions
A player option ...
Forcing Glaus to pickup the option means that if he returns to allstar status, we have a 2-year all-star. Since it is the player's option, if he fails miserably we have a 2-year flop, whether the Cards ask him to pick it up now or he decides to pick it up later next year. In no scenario, did we have an opportunity for one year of good performance.
Picking up the option protects the upside without harming the downside.
by 2ndEdition on Jan 13, 2008 7:27 PM EST up reply actions
worth revisiting
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 Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 01:34:02 AM EDT
[ Reply to This ]
This is the only component that has me worried
Well, now that you mention it,
by StanTheManFan on Jan 13, 2008 12:11 PM EST up reply actions
It doesn't have to
His prognosis may be decent and his glove carries value. It's a big risk for the Jays, but they need to take some to compete in that division.
I'm not meaning
what's in it for the jays
before you give the jays too much credit, check out riccardi's track record. he overpaid vernon wells based on one good year; he overpaid for bj ryan and frank thomas, and he unwisely gave aj burnett an out clause. he got fleeced in the lyle overbay trade (gave up dave bush and gabe gross) and didn't do too well in the original trade for troy glaus (gave up 3 cost-controlled years of orlando hudson plus a year of miguel batista).
So let's say
Vernon Well is a dumb contract. Thomas put up a .303 EQA last year, so that deal isn't a bad one yet. BJ Ryan has already paid for his first two years and then some with the leveraged innings he threw in 2006.
I wouldn't say Schuerholz is a bad GM because he handed out one of the worst contracts of all time. Same with Jocketty and the Mulder trade, or a bunch of other examples.
Sometimes teams give out contracts that they know will be bad. That's the cost of actually trying to win in the AL East.
Toronto put up 87 fake pythag wins last year, and finished ahead of the Red Sox in 2006. He's made some mistakes, to be sure, but he's teams have winning records in that division with $75 million payrolls.
i still don't buy your argument
the part of your argument that i accept is that la russa put the cards in a terrible negotiating position. i like the way mozeliak wriggled out of it.
Forget the
They are giving up a decent third baseman and absorbing the entire contract. The latter part especially is the crux.
I think the Cardinals position of weakness is the hand Mo was dealt. I think he got a nice return given the circumstances, and hate the circumstances.
Cardinals are dealing a clubhouse cancer or some shit, and the Jays are looking at this from a risk/reward analysis perspective with medical info.
As it appears
i don't see why the jays are "rational"
i think your distaste for the circumstances of the deal (ie the la russa factor) is so strong that you're not allowing yourself to consider this as anything but a bad move.
So why
Glaus couldn't play in Toronto any more...
So if they get rid of him, they can either simply try to dump the salary and play someone young (if they have anyone) or try to get another establish 3b to replace him. They picked the latter, obviously.
Of the course the thing is, Rolen had back problems in Philly caused by the turf. Toronto has field turf, which is supposed to be softer. But can he take 3 years of that? Obviously he finds it more appealing than playing for Tony...
But
I'm saying that they
Maybe we win here. In fact, I think it's likely we do, and obviously you'd pick Glaus to be better, but that's not what I'm interested in. I'm interested in the upside (which you say just isn't there), and amazed that the Jays would make a deal that everyone feels is so obviously lopsided. You and I don't have all the information, and that's what scares me.
If Rolen plays at a .728 OPS, he's almost as good as Glaus with an .819 OPS (both ZIPS). That's what the Jays must be banking on, and that they think his huge defensive advantage makes him worth the risk to hit again. They also get to check him head to toe.
Especially if Xei is right, I would rather the Cardinals assume that risk. A Spiezio/Barden platoon gets you closer to Glaus than you might think (based on projections anyway). But now I'm just repeating myself.
Meh gloves and a .830 OPS (or worse if xei
Ummm..
<sigh>
Last year Cardinals Duncan posted an .834 OPS, which was a 115 OPS+. Eckstein came in at .738, and adjusted that was a 93 OPS+. Similar numbers.
22 OPS+ difference. We know that 11.5 OPS+ pts equal one win or ten offensive runs. So Rolen would have to be 19 runs better with the glove.
So yes, according to UZR and whatever metric the Jays are consulting, he probably is.
I know...
If there is a runner on 3rd with one out, and Pujols at the plate the pitcher isn't going to be thinking "Oh Shit!!! Rolen's UZR and OPS make him a useful player!!!" They are thinking, "I'm not throwing dick to Pujols, Rolen can't catch up with the high fastball and worse case scenario he gets a sac fly."
If Glaus is there, the pitcher is bound to think "I better at least try to get Albert out, if I just give him first base the next guy might knock the shit out of the ball and put us down 3-0"
These advanced statistics are great, and they've made it much easier to distinguish players. However, too many people use them as absolutes and disregard things that can't be quantified.
I know one thing. In my opinion, the team got better by this deal. Mo did a FANTASTIC job doing that when we were basically bent over the barrel. Everyone knew we had to get rid of Rolen, and he is still able to make the team better, younger and lose a year of a big contract? How can you not applaud that?
Hell, he deserves to finally get that Jocketty name plate off the front of his office.
by bobbyballgame1 on Jan 13, 2008 10:28 PM EST up reply actions
I already said
Do some research on lineup protection.
Come on..........
If you don't think
Looks like
For Mo's sake, I hope the middle infield wasn't his doing. And we do know that Rolen needed to be traded because of Tony.
Yeah
Dude it takes two to tango..... you do not know that it was specifically Tony`s fault maybe Rolen is a jerk...
He did get himself traded out of Philly so to throw the blame onto the one guy with no evidence is ridiculous.....
I put the blame on both of them and I am glad it happened though because this trade is great!
I'm not blaming
I'm interested in what their medical reports and metrics say. They assumed a lot of risk. I think we know why he's gone from STL, right or wrong.
I'm really not being clear or something today.
AMEN!!!!!!
Sorry just acting like an idiot.....
I agree with everything you said Bobby great post couldnt have said it better myself...
great points
by flynn on Jan 13, 2008 12:33 PM EST up reply actions
Turf toe
I do imagine Glaus would be more comfortable playing on grass, though. It's certainly easier running on soft surfaces if you suffer from it, and it's much less likely to be aggravated.
I don't really understand the effect of turf, though. After I get warmed up, I don't really feel the fascitis at all. Maybe baseball players spend so much time standing around they never get warmed up.
by Red in Chicago on Jan 13, 2008 11:22 AM EST reply actions
Seems more serious than that...
However, he must have had a really bad case, much worse than mine (mine healed on its own), since he had to have surgery on it.
I believe he had a nerve
by Hardcore Legend on Jan 13, 2008 4:40 PM EST up reply actions
With Glaus in the line-up for a full seasons worth
by SethWestern on Jan 13, 2008 11:51 AM EST reply actions
glaus...
i like the trade and will miss rolen
its bittersweet like seeing Jimmy leave
Sorta off topic
john mcdonald
Can you imagine...
Aw hell
You know I just had this thought: Now that Eckstein is playing on a turfy-surface (is it turf or that plastic grass stuff up there? I don't recall...) his lack of arm strength may not be as big of a deal. Now he can just lob it towards first and have it BOING towards Overbay's glove! Like a trampoline or something!
by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 13, 2008 11:58 PM EST up reply actions
sorry to be a stick
"LaRussa would've never allowed Rolen to be traded for a prospect. He clearly insisted on getting back a player who can help the team this year."
It's an absolute 100% opinion--without any factual evidence. The Cardinals traded Jim Edmonds for a prospect. They picked up an OF prospect in the Rule V draft. Sometimes bloggers lean to much on other bloggers and rumors.
Do we know Mozeliak didn't try to get a prospect for Rolen? Have we thought that maybe other teams didnt WANT to give up young prospects for an aging, injured Rolen? To me, that makes more sense--a lot more sense than Tony saying "nope, no prospects for Rolen."
I've been wrong a lot--but I've said since day one--if you are going to trade Rolen you were going to have to get a similar "Rolen" type player back--a higher salary guy, with some injury/background issues who has been good in the past but might be on a decline.
It's irresponsible--IMO, to say that the Tony wouldn't LET the Cardinals trade Rolen for prospects--especially if there is zero evidence to back it up. Saying it as opinion is one thing--fact is another.
Do we have any idea the Dodgers would have been willing to part with Andy LaRoche for Rolen? Are the members here that close to Mozeliak and the Dodgers front office staff?
No, there isn't
by Hardcore Legend on Jan 13, 2008 1:19 PM EST up reply actions
It's not the hot air...
That isn't true
by That's a Winner on Jan 14, 2008 12:22 PM EST up reply actions
houstoncardinal
Where are you coming up with a 40-50 run difference between the two? I wouldn't expect this to add more than 1-2 wins next season to the Cardinals.
Also, Mozeliak deserves major props for getting anything of comparable value for Rolen after the public comments by Tony. This is an impressive trade on his part.
I agree
I noticed that too...
It's 4-5 wins over replacement
Trading him for Glaus, who's probably 5 wins over replacement, adds approximately 1 win to the team's total (over Rolen's 4).
It's not a 40-50 run difference between Glaus and Rolen. It's a 40-50 run difference between Rolen and Spiezio/Ryan/Miles.
My gut reaction is to like this move.
I can see this. Then again, I can see Scotty in the same situation when he pops out weakly to short because he can't get around on a high fastball.
I loved Scott Rolen, but this is definitely in the best interest of the St. Louis Cardinals, IMO.
Any guess on
There should be
note to self: preview before posting
RISP...
by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Jan 13, 2008 1:48 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, I know...
But then again, fan comes from the word fanatic, so what should I expect?
I'd say about
OTOH, the first time Rolen hits one to left that dies at the warning track, fans in Toronto (if they even notice) will say, "Glaus is stronger, he would have hit that one out. We got screwed in that trade." And this position will be neither more nor less goofy than the one that you're predicting -- which I think we would both agree is pretty goofy. People will rant; let 'em.
by StanTheManFan on Jan 13, 2008 5:57 PM EST up reply actions
Glaus nailed on park adjustment
16 points in batting average
9 points in OBP%
62 points of SLG%
vr, Xei
Is that based on last year?
by Big Red on Jan 13, 2008 2:06 PM EST up reply actions
Glaus
vr, Xei
I know the "projections" are for 2008
And then I asked if it was based on a season in which he was shut down by an injury that affected a major portion of his season? What if he'd been healthy and would have hit 40 homeruns? Would that chance projections?
I assume it would. Then, I asked if you took into consideration that he is going from the best division in baseball to the worst division in baseball. Think that would affect things as well?
by Big Red on Jan 13, 2008 6:29 PM EST up reply actions
It's based
I think pitchers get the advantage when moving. Better hitters and the DH. There's better pitching, but it's not as drastic as the .4 ERA drop or whatever you could expect Rich Hill to enjoy.
Keep your eyes open at Baseball Think Factory (tomorrow, probably). Dan Szymborski will do a transaction analysis and project each player again based on their new environment.
Help me understand
Logic check
adjust for league...
vr, Xei
TLR
but lee, glaus' trade value is higher
as noted above --- it's a player option, so if glaus goes out and has a terrible year he would have exercised the option anyway (because his market value would be below $11m). in other words, he could have forced a bad contract onto the cardinals, but if his value was good he could have walked away from the deal. this way the cards retain his rights if he is good --- and if he's bad, they are no worse off.
chone projections
after crunching the numbers, he projects rolen to create 67 runs..he also has rolen at a .802 ops, which seems rather optimistic. he projects defensively, (don't know how he figures defense projections) as +13 runs. so that's 80 runs, optimistically.
he has glaus at creating 84 runs (.854 OPS) while him defensively costing about 5 runs with his glove
so, final tally, just according to chone is rolen is worth 80 runs, glaus 79.
i'd sooner take my chances with glaus's foot that rolen's shoulder. i think glaus could easily reach his projected line or better, while rolen maybe could but then again he'll probably get hurt the next year.
i like the deal, because it gets us off the hook or rolen's contract and glaus will likely produce more then rolen, or at worst be within a run or so of matching rolen. that and i've really had it w/ all the drama.
i just pray they both check out and the thing is finalized by tomorrow.
oh, and it should be noted that
According to
I'd be surprised if the Transaction Oracle posted as big a drop off as Xei claims (no offense, I'd love to see the math actually), but there is something to that.
Yeah, very interesting...
It's actually the biggest inflation of HR for RH hitters in the AL, +.009 (Cin in the NL is +.012 and Philly +.018 by comparison), while Busch is tied (with SF and SD) for the lowest at -.011
Now we can trade Glaus
:D
by Hardcore Legend on Jan 13, 2008 4:41 PM EST up reply actions
Seriously
by 26thMan on Jan 13, 2008 5:33 PM EST up reply actions
well, the west side
That would be genius by MO...
If Dr. Mengele,
I'm not a big fan of Dr. Paletta......
Thank you.
Whoa!
by redbirdnation8206 on Jan 13, 2008 11:50 PM EST up reply actions
Folks...
Nobody jokes
I like the trade...
Rasmus CF
Ankiel RF
Pujols 1B
Glaus 3B
Duncan LF
Molina C
Kennedy 2B
Pitcher
Ryan SS
Lightning in a bottle. Balls will be a flying out of the yard this year...
You mean...
Ankiel CF
Pujols 1B
Glaus 3B
Duncan LF
Ludwick RF
Molina C
Pitcher
Izturis SS
No...
Rasmus CF
Ankiel RF
Pujols 1B
Glaus 3B
Duncan LF
Molina C
Kennedy 2B
Pitcher
Ryan SS
Here's where I think...
this comment from metsblog best expresses....
"It would be more intersting if Scott Rolen swaped wives with troy glaus on the fox reality show."
by Ignatius J Reilly on Jan 13, 2008 5:15 PM EST reply actions
One of the dumbest comments ever...
"
Agreed
Foot injuries may actually be more scary then shoulder injuries.
"
In what world would a shoulder injury be less debilitating to a hitter than a foot injury?! I guess maybe if the guy actually lost his foot entirely, then it would be worse.
by Ankiels Missing Curveball on Jan 13, 2008 7:46 PM EST reply actions
Franklin
For those wondering why
Oh, that's rich......
That still doesn't
The Jays could just dump Glaus for nothing.
off topic
Why the trade makes sense for the Jays
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/hotstove07/columns/story?columnist=crasnick_jerry&id=3193810
Basically he states that the Blue Jays are built to win in the next three years, with their star players signed through 2010. They don't have a third baseman in the pipeline, and are worried Glaus will opt out next year due to the artificial turf and his foot problems. Next winter's free-agent 3B crop consists of Crede and Casey Blake. Once the Rolen trade goes through, Ricciardi won't have to worry about overpaying for Crede (and playing phone tag with Scott Boras) or combing through the bargain bin for a Plan B.
by oquendorocks on Jan 13, 2008 9:27 PM EST reply actions
couldn't go through
My first point is... well meaning tho' many of you guys are, you leave behind us old foggies who don't understand the alphabet soup (the complicated statistics you chart and throw out).
What I DO know (because it requires only 6th grade math) is that Glaus has a career K average around .263 whereas Scotty whiffs at a career clip just a hair under .200.
I'm FOR the deal, overall, having emotionally resigned myself to Rolen's departure some time ago. But the part I DON'T like is having another middle of the order windmill, a'la' Reggie Sanders or Prestone antifreeze Wilson.
I'm very old school, and the two "statistics" I value the most are hitters that don't strike out, and pitchers that don't give up walks.
Hmmm...
All I know is, I'll play my lineup of 9 Glaus clones against your lineup of 9 Molina clones anyday ;)
by bobbyballgame1 on Jan 13, 2008 10:37 PM EST up reply actions
hmmmmmmmmm
There also isn't any way to quantify how hitting in this lineup is going to affect him or how it's going to affect how pitchers pitch to Albert. With a good slugging hitter in the 2 hole (Ankiel) any time he got an extra base hit last season it was a good excuse to pitch around Albert. With Glaus hitting behind him there's a real threat of the 3 run bomb there so I think Albert will probably see more pitches to hit and will get pitched around much less than last year.
Well, according to this article,
http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080113.blair14/GSStory/GlobeSportsBaseball/home
I apologize for not knowing the "tiny URL" way, but it just confuses me.....
Who wrote that article?
I liked the part where he called Cardinal fans corn-fed and happy.
by Hardcore Legend on Jan 13, 2008 10:16 PM EST up reply actions
Some fellow named Jeff Blair....
But it's the only place I have seen any mention of cash going to the Blue Jays.
corn fed...
by oquendorocks on Jan 13, 2008 10:19 PM EST up reply actions
pardon my french
"The Cardinals, had a cynical group of veterans personified by their distrustful superstar, Albert Pujols"
does anyone know what the hell is he talking about?
Girl named Jill
Pretty unprofessional
I highly doubt anyone from St. Louis's "One paper" is going to insult the fans in Toronto.
What an ass.
What a maroon
(And the Belleville News-Democrat has fine sports coverage, too.)
Big Changes from Mo
Even if the Edmonds and Rolen deals were pushed by requests or bad relationships, I believe Mo has put his stamp on this team quickly and decidedly. With the exception of Miles coming back, I think he's safely distanced himself from Jocketty's regime (5/6 ain't bad).
This is certainly a new era for Cardinals baseball. While I am not expecting another pennant, I am excited about the new beginning that I first feared Mo might fail to bring (or at least the guts it took for Mo to ship off two pillars of the MV3).
Did anyone think that
I get your point though:
Out
Eckstein
Taguchi
Cairo
Branyan
Wells
Maroth
Edmonds
Rolen
Bennett
In
Izturis
LaRue
Clement
Jiminez
Barton
Freese
Glaus
His done a nice job of infusing the team with players that were good in 2004 or played for the 2002 Angels.
by Hardcore Legend on Jan 13, 2008 10:42 PM EST up reply actions
2004
by birdsonthebat on Jan 13, 2008 10:57 PM EST up reply actions
2008 Offense
by gnick55 on Jan 13, 2008 11:31 PM EST reply actions
You forgetting the Brewers?
I don't
Brewers
Astros
t-Cardinals
t-Reds
Pirates
by Hardcore Legend on Jan 13, 2008 11:38 PM EST up reply actions
Reds
by Ray Lankford on Jan 13, 2008 11:43 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe...
If Izturis hits like the Izturis of 04, and well, not any of his other years.
If Yadi hits more like last year (which was decent, I'd say)
If Kennedy has a career year (he might bounce back to average, but that won't be that great)
If Duncan can stay healthy the whole year...
If Ankiel resembles the one that was first called up, not the post HGH story one (I suspect he'll bounce back like he did in the last couple weeks, to be an okay hitter)
If Albert's elbow doesn't blow out
I don't see it...
Brewers: Braun, Fielder, Hall, Hardy, Hart
Astros: Berkman, Tejada, Pence, Lee
Cardinals: Ankiel, Pujols, Glaus, Duncan
Reds: Griffey, Encarnacion, Dunn, Phillips
Pirates: Bay, Sanchez, Laroche
I'd have to agree with Hardcore on this one...at best I see the Redbirds as tied for 4th in the division offensively.
When you look at the offenses in the division, the real question is: How much better the Cardinal pitching staff is going to be? The Astros and Cubs should both be better offensive teams this season due to additions and assuming lack of injuries. If the Cardinal staff is not markedly better than last year it's still going to be a long year, even if the offense is 40 runs better.
It will depend on our outfield..
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
