Holliday deal dead...
by nzach54 on Nov 10, 2008 1:42 AM EST
58 comments
From rotoworld:
Cards GM John Mozeliak said talks with the Rockies regarding Matt Holliday are dead.
Mozeliak admitted that serious discussions took place, but he said all conversations have ceased and "nothing is imminent. That one’s not happening — at all." FOXSports.com reported that the two teams had discussed a deal that would have sent Ryan Ludwick, Skip Schumaker and Mitchell Boggs to Colorado for Holliday. Nov. 10 - 1:20 am et
Source: St. Louis Post-Dispatch
So.... that's a bummer. I had serious doubts about Holliday concerning his home/road hitting splits, but I thought this would have been a good deal to sell high with Ludwick.
So, what's next? Do they still shop Ludwick and/or Schumaker and try to become major players for Jake Peavy?
1 recs |
58 comments
Email
Print
Comments
i wouldn't exactly say bummer
but i am starting to warm on the selling of ludwick high if it does one of two things: brings in a ss or top quality pitching. if not i rather have the status quo.
This trade would have been very bad as a whole for the cardinals, like the roster matrix pointed out no money for middle infield help with out raising the DeWitt salary cap, which in this economy is not going to happen. 3 cheap players for one very expensive one? not gonna do it
"Textbooks are Soviet propaganda" - Rev. Jerry Falwell
by elirock83 on Nov 10, 2008 8:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
3 for 1 was too high
As most on this site noted and suggested the rumored package was not in the Cardinals best interest. What I took from the PD article was:
Mozeliak did not disclose what caused a breakdown in talks, but a source familiar with the process said the Cardinals GM balked at the player package rather than salary concerns.
"Most people have the will to win, few have the will to prepare to win---- Bobby Knight"
by Knighttime on Nov 10, 2008 9:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
too high a price
Sometimes the best deals are the ones you don’t make. Like many I too had concerns about giving up three cost-controlled players for maybe just one season of Holliday. I have little doubt he would have loved playing in the STL and likely would have re-signed, but there’s no guarantee with a Boras client.
Maybe now Mo can flip Ludwick in a better deal that addresses the team’s glaring needs, like middle infield, bullpen and starting pitching.
by 10worldchamps on Nov 10, 2008 9:11 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
setting the bar?
Maybe he’s just trying to establish the value for ludwick before dealing him for a more imminent need – such as SS.
by Birds on the Matt on Nov 10, 2008 9:26 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hot Stove?
Not sure if this belongs there since it is a follow up to yesterday’s main post but I do feel this belongs in either the main post or the hot stove, the reason the hot stove topics were started was to keep the fan post section from balloning in the offseason.
by StLHugo on Nov 10, 2008 9:49 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I don't see a problem with this one...
this has been a hot topic for a few days now…the biggest on this site. I think it deserves it’s own post even if it won’t stimulate much discussion beyond what’s already been discussed. I for one would not have found this on the hot-stove or older threads as they have already passed the point of worthwhile reading for me (though I did read it on MLBTR).
by cardzfanbub on Nov 10, 2008 10:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
True
that is why I included the ? I have my opinion but I know everyone doesn’t share it. The “Fan Post” (Diary) debate of 2007-2008 was quite heated and produced the current standards people are trying to live by and enforce. It is a slippery slope.
by StLHugo on Nov 10, 2008 11:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
This weekend was full of FanPost drama….
Patiently awaiting the day Colby Rasmus does this: .275/.381/.551/.932, 29HR, in St. Louis...
by RunninRedbird on Nov 10, 2008 11:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I saw some of that...
When I checked some of the posts this morning I saw some of the comments about it. But so far nothing like last offseason with our Diary Debates on what should and should not be allowed. I much prefer the Fan Post format that allows full fledged Fan Posts with lots of details, Fan Shots for the short and sweet with little commentary and recommending of the cream of the crop posts.
by StLHugo on Nov 10, 2008 11:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Cudos to JMo
I like the methodical and measured way that he operates (at least these offseason). Perhaps he has learned his lesson from the quick signing of Joel Pineiro last year.
by jjray on Nov 10, 2008 10:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
as demonstrated by
his quick signing of Joel Pineiro this year…
Eh, Kyle Lohse, I mean.
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Nov 10, 2008 12:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I feel like we dodged a bullet on this one
up and comer Ludwick plus 2 other decent to above average players for one expensive guy? no thanks.
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 10, 2008 1:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Oops
As in, the A’s got him.
Not sure what the A’s are giving up, although Huston Street is mentioned.
Seems like an anti-Beenian kind of deal.
by Hoffa on Nov 10, 2008 3:16 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
hmmm,
I obviously dont know how to post a link – help please ??
by rlgosnell on Nov 10, 2008 4:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
two ways
if it is a short easy link then jsut copy and paste it, otherwise click on the link icon (between the quotes and picture) and then paste the link into the box that opens, then click ok, after that type in some text (“Link here” or something) and the text you typed in at the end will become a link to the URL you pasted in earlier.
by StLHugo on Nov 10, 2008 5:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I assume you used the link thingy that looks like a chain link.
when you do it, the cursor appears here: >right here< / a >. You have to type something in there like “Link” or whatever the hell you feel sums up the link and/or you’re current feelings.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Nov 10, 2008 5:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmmm
Ken Rosenthal is saying that the A’s are adding payroll, and that, along with Holliday, they’re looking to get Furcal.
by Hoffa on Nov 10, 2008 3:18 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
wow, that's the biggest FA deal that I remember the A's pulling off in ages.
though I have a feeling the bidding war on furcal might get pretty crazy. Almost every team is rumored to be going after him.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on Nov 10, 2008 4:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wasn't there also talk of them signing Giambi?
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Nov 10, 2008 5:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Like back when he was an A, and they were talking about re-upping him?
I don’t remember that. I remember McGwire calling him trying to convince him to come to StL. I couldn’t imagine them letting Tejada go and wanting to hold on to Giambi. But maybe I’m wrong on that.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on Nov 10, 2008 6:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no,
he’s right. several months ago (after the big McGwire story was published in the paper commemorating the 10 year anniversary), there was talk that Giambi or even Big Mac himself might re-up with Oakland. of course, there was more serious talk about Giambi, but still, Big Mac coming out of retirement? yeah, right…
by dunc4life on Nov 10, 2008 9:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought Chavez was talking it up like a week ago?
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Nov 10, 2008 11:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't make heads or tails of this.
From mlbtraderumors.com on October 20:
Just like he was open to Barry Bonds, third baseman Eric Chavez would like to see the A’s sign Jason Giambi.
But the article only talks about Bonds and about Chavez overcoming yet another surgery. Here’s the linkage.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Nov 10, 2008 11:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
nice job mo
thanks mo. you’ve proved me right, you couldn’t wipe jockety’s rear end. Billy Beane and the A’s are about to sweep holliday up and contend next year. ludwick, shumaker, boggs. is that really that much? hell no. here’s a thought. ludwick may have had great numbers this season but he has huge holes in his swing and if we got to the playoffs, pitches would have exploited him so bad everyone here would ’ve been beggin for this trade to have gone through. shumaker, great against righties, god awful against lefties. the spilts are so bad i cringed whenever we faced lefties this season. and boggs, potential 4 or 5 starter and our next joel pinero. get ready for another mid 80s win season next year and a 3rd or 4th place finish in the central.
by johnscagnetti on Nov 10, 2008 5:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
^Is this a joke?
Yes that is too much, it isn’t all about giving up 3 players, one of which was just as good as Holliday last year, it was that you only get Holliday for 1 year, at a higher salary, which prevents getting the pitching you also say we need. Why trade those players for another OF anyway? Why not trade those same 3 you don’t like for a pitcher or a middle infielder that we actually need? Try to see the Forest and not the Trees here.
by StLHugo on Nov 10, 2008 5:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
It is absolutely too much. Even if Ludwick regresses to a 40.0 VORP season** and Schumaker has another 20.0 VORP season, that is still in the ballpark of what Holliday would provide. Boggs could be a very effective short reliever right now. That all adds up to three useful pieces, all cost controlled, for one very expensive piece that will be here for only one year.
Not many folks around here are going to jump on board with this argument about a guy struggling in the playoffs as a reason not to have him on the squad. It’s small sample size baseball, where just about anything can happen. Carlos Ruiz was awesome this postseason, so maybe the Cards should go get him! Albert Pujols had a poor 2006 World Series, so he clearly isn’t good! Holliday’s OBP in the playoffs is .319, meaning he makes more outs than he should in the playoffs, so he’s obviously crap! Glaus gets ripped all the time for having a long swing with several holes, but he’s a freakin’ World Series MVP! What does this all mean? It means the playoffs are one big old crap shoot.
The point is this: if you have a bunch of guys who “don’t have holes” and otherwise hit well, they are likely to be very expensive. One’s who “don’t have holes” and hit okay will do just that…and in the process you don’t even sniff the playoffs.
**This seems to be some kind of consensus, but I still feel that a guy who mashed all through the minors and was hamstrung by injuries in the majors can still mash once he’s healthy. That is Luddy’s situation right now. He was an elite prospect who kept getting unlucky injuries. I see no reason why he can’t be very very good.
"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.
by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 10, 2008 6:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What the F* are you talking about?
MO couldn’t wipe Jocketty’s rear end? You mean, the Jocketty who saddled us with 2 albatross pitching contracts? The one who traded away a future ace for Mulder, and then committed vast amounts of payroll to Mulder after he began breaking down? You mean, the MO who deftly traded an ailing, unhappy Rolen to Toronto for Glaus, who should have won the Gold Glove, played 36 more games than Rolen, hit 16 more HRs, and 49 more RBIs than Rolen? The same MO who refuses, unlike Jocketty, to mortgage our future (ie: trade away cost controlled, young talent) simply to obtain a player fans like you have heard of?
Take 3 breaths, calm yourself, and get serious. We dodged a bullet. Why the hell do we need another outfielder anyway?
by Ray Lankford on Nov 11, 2008 10:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
well, we were going to trade 2 for one
thus, WJ would have helped reduce our surplus.
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Nov 11, 2008 6:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We could have accomplished the same thing by having fredbird run skippy over on his atv
and burning a pile of 15 million one dollar bills.
by tom s. on Nov 13, 2008 1:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think I like that idea
better than I liked the Holliday trade
by MotherTruckinSteve on Nov 13, 2008 3:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
the question Mo has to ask is
could we sell 46,000 tickets at $350 each to witness that spectacle?
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Nov 14, 2008 12:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
To pull that off that ticket price...
I would speculate that we would have to raise the performance value. Maybe Brad Thompson kicking some puppies.
by MotherTruckinSteve on Nov 14, 2008 3:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd buy that ticket!
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Nov 15, 2008 12:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
because mo won’t get us a pticher or middle infielder that will be an upgrade from last season. he’s content to just fill the holes, trust me. i hope im wrong about him and he gets us someone great in return for ludwick and others but he won’t. point is, holliday’s a superstar and equals more revenue, a proven bat, great future if he signs, and (no one mentions this) decent compensation picks if he doesn’t. ludwick, schumaker, and boggs are not even close to stars. 1 good year doesnt make you albert pujols jr. as far as this being a joke, just wait and see what mo does this offseason and how we finish next season. oh, by the way, you think pujols will stick around if he doesnt think the organization is committed to winning. a couple more years w/o playoffs and pujols either request a trade or test the market (for which the yankees, mets, sox, and others will be thrilled).
by johnscagnetti on Nov 10, 2008 6:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Filling the holes...
…is exactly what he should do. In case you didn’t notice, this was a pretty solid team this year. Fill the holes, and you’re talking play-offs. Those holes, in order of priority, are middle infield (probably both SS and 2B), closer, left-handed reliever, and a back-of-the-rotation starter. Peavy and Holliday do not meet any of those holes, yet from all reports the Cardinals were in serious talks for Holliday. The deal that the Rockies wanted from the Cardinals was Ludwick, Shumaker, and Boggs, which means the Cards would have given up two-thirds of their outfield (one of their strong spots this past season, and one of whom was an All-Star) and a solid pitching prospect for…another outfielder for whom they would have to open the bank in a year…with Pujols’ contract coming up. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
Trading both Shumaker and Ludwick for Holliday would not be a good use of those assets. It would not improve upon last season’s team (Ludwick had a better season than Holliday, without the help of playing in Colorado). Use them to acquire a shortstop, because you’re not going to find a good one in free agency.
by Forsch31 on Nov 10, 2008 6:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
well, no
Peavy does fill the rotation hole. If you need a backend rotation starter, and you get a frontline starter, everyone in the rotation gets pushed back 1 spot, therefore eliminating the hole.
by dunc4life on Nov 10, 2008 6:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Peavy...
Would be another Mark Mulder trade, given his elbow trouble this year. Besides, the Cardinals, although rumored to be in talks, were never serious contendors because they didn’t have the pieces the Padres want in return. It’s a non-starter (no pun intended).
Going out and trading for an ace would create holes were there are none. That’s also not good use of trade assets. Reportedly, the Cardinals would have to give a young, top-line pitcher for Peavy, which means Wainwright, who has not had arm trouble and who has pitched like an ace. How does that help the rotation? How did trading Dan Haren (and a couple of other pieces) for Mark Mulder help the rotation?
by Forsch31 on Nov 10, 2008 7:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no, i agree with you that trading for Peavy would be a bad idea,
i’m just saying that if you were able to trade Boggs/Walters/Garcia?/etc. (not Waino) for peavy, then you would be filling a spot in the rotation.
by dunc4life on Nov 10, 2008 9:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
However...
That’s not the level of talent the Padres are asking for, so that’s not even a consideration. Wainwright would be the level of talent they’re asking for, which is why I (and Goold) mentioned him. Boggs is projected as a back-of-the-rotation guy, Garcia is having surgery, and there’s a question whether Walters actually has the stuff to be a major league starter. Peavy is an ace who’s locked into a contract; he’s not a potential rental like Holliday. It’s going to cost a lot to get him, which is why the Braves are offering Escobar, a top-of-the-rotation prospect, and an excellent centerfield prospect to get him.
It’s also not filling a hole, because the Cardinals really don’t need an ace, just like they didn’t need an ace with Mark Mulder. It would be like getting a Mac truck to haul your motorboat, when a pickup would have worked just as well without all the cost and maintance problems.
by Forsch31 on Nov 10, 2008 10:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no, i know,
i completely agree with you, especially on them asking for WW, but don’t you think they would be really pressed to take the trade if it was Boggs, Garcia, Ludwick, Motte?
by dunc4life on Nov 10, 2008 11:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not applicable...
…because Peavy would cost more than that. The deal that the Braves are offering—and the Padres aren’t sure they’re taking—is better than that. Ludwick and Escobar probably are about even given Ludwick’s All-Star success, but the Ludwick is 4 years older, has a bad injury history, and is a potential flash-in-the-pan compared to one of the best defensive shortshops in the NL with a good bat. Motte is a raw reliever with one great pitch, and Boggs, again, is a back-of-the-rotation guy at best. (And Garcia won’t be part of any discussion, because of his arm surgery. He has absolutely no trade value right now). That’s my whole point—you don’t trade for an ace unless you’re willing to create holes somewhere else, simply because Peavy’s value is that high and requires a sacrifice that high from your own roster. You don’t make a move like that unless you have to. The Cardinals, to be perfectly honest, don’t—they have greater needs, and they need to use their resources better than that. That’s not filling the whole in the rotation.
You especially don’t give up that much to get an ace who experienced elbow trouble this year. The Cardinals need a mid-to-back rotation workhorse. Like Jon Garland or Paul Byrd. THAT would be filling that hole.
by Forsch31 on Nov 11, 2008 12:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Superstar?
I don’t know about that. He’s a very good player, but he hasn’t put up numbers at Coors like Larry Walker did in his heyday, and I’m not sure I’d even put the superstar label on Walker. I’m not sure he’s any more valuable than Nick Swisher was at this time last year, considering his split away from Coors and his 70 point dip in slugging from last year to this year.
Not to mention that Ludwick put up a better OPS+ last year, and had a 120 OPS+ in the second half of 2007. He’s a pretty good player who hits in a much tougher home park, he’s cost controlled for three more years, and he’s already on the team. What’s not to like? If we could trade him for a top flight starter or a superstar young middle infielder I’d be more inclined to make that deal, but to trade him for a player who will give you 2 years less production than Luddy at a much higher price when they are essentially carbon copies of each other (.900 OPS corner outfielders) makes very little since, especially when you have tons of outfield depth on your roster and in the high minors.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Nov 11, 2008 11:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Am I missing something? I don't see the Cards have glaring holes in the outfield. Major moves with major contributors being shopped, are needed elsewhere. . .
. . .badly
An optimist is a man who upon discovering that a rose smells better than a cabbage concludes it will make better soup.
HL Mencken
by akaitori on Nov 10, 2008 6:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Patience
I find it amazing that people are in such a hurry to grab Holliday. The off-season has barely begun. Mozeliak and his team are doing due dilligence, and evaluating all the options. In the end, they decided that Holliday was not going to be worth the cost.
We can all debate the value of various players, but it is a fact that Holliday would have been an expensive short-term move, potentially at the cost of long-term growth. For those who are disappointed by the non-move, lets be patient and see what magic the GM works in the next few months before passing judgement.
by JWO on Nov 11, 2008 12:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
while picking up Holliday would've
brought a lot of excitement to the lineup, it would’ve done absolutely nothing to fix what is wrong with the Cardinals. The Redbirds need middle infield help and help in the bullpen. While I would’ve loved seeing Holliday in the lineup it would’ve increased the payroll and the Cards would’ve still had the same holes to fill with less money for those needs.
If the Cards can trade some of the extra outfielders to fill the holes and use the savings of not bringing in Holliday to pay the contracts of the players needed to fill the holes I’m all for it.
It would’ve been fun to see Holliday and Pujols banging the ball around, but it wouldn’t have brought us a pennant like getting good solid players to fill the holes and eliminating the weaknesses the Cards have will do.
"It ain't braggin' if you can back it up."
-Dizzy Dean
by thegashousegang on Nov 11, 2008 8:04 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Hey!
You there, with your logic…knock that off!!!
I think around here most people were smart enough to realize that the problem with the Holliday trade, as proposed of course, was not acquiring Holliday (which would have been awesome obviously) but rather the mash of players the Cards would have had to give up.
However, many of my co-workers and friends, who I would say are more Blues, Mizzou, and Lambs fans seemed to think "OH WOWZERS MATT HOLLIDAY WAS IN THE WORLD SERIES HE’S GOOD GO GET HIM!!!
"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.
by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 11, 2008 6:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i disagree
what i thought most people had against the holliday trade wasn’t mainly what we would have to give up (which still was important), but signing him. It would have cost 17+ mil per year to sign him, and then we would have to give Albert a raise, leaving us with ultimately NO payroll flexibility.
by dunc4life on Nov 11, 2008 7:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ooops.. sorry about that, I'll knock it off!!!! I promise, no more logic....:)
I have to ask… “Wowzers”? LMAO….
"It ain't braggin' if you can back it up."
-Dizzy Dean
by thegashousegang on Nov 11, 2008 9:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
St. Louis is apparently the home of either Inspector Gadget and/or Penny.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on Nov 11, 2008 10:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I like the word...
…and it sounded good, so I went with it. I’m okay with it.
"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.
by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 12, 2008 12:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I was just having fun with the word,
for its been years since I had heard anyone use it. Sorry if I came across as making fun of you or anything like that. I realized in retrospect that my comment could’ve been taken wrong. I just had to laugh for I haven’t heard it in a while. I was in no way laughing at you… just the word and the memories it brought back. No need to defend the use of it…. :)
Again, my apologies.
"It ain't braggin' if you can back it up."
-Dizzy Dean
by thegashousegang on Nov 12, 2008 2:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Haha
no worries…I understood the sarcasm of your post!
"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.
by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 12, 2008 2:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Whew! (big smile)
I’m glad for I really like VEB and I sure am not going to intentionally offend anyone. I am amazed at the information you all put on the blog here and how well everyone gets along. Some of the other blogs are like a war zone. Some are funny and a riot to read. VEB has a lot of intelligent discussion and I am really glad I found my way here. Glad I didn’t offend you for it sure wasn’t my intention. :)
"It ain't braggin' if you can back it up."
-Dizzy Dean
by thegashousegang on Nov 12, 2008 3:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 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.
