Holliday and Fuentes per Gammons on BBTN
by jcarro197 on Jul 27, 2008 7:17 PM EDT
161 comments
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/41107-cardinals-and-rockies-potential-trade-partners
Gammons says that the Cardinals and Rockies have been "Burning up the Phone lines over Holliday and Fuentes" A deal could happen within the next few days. Chips from our side include Garcia,Mcclellan,Anderson,Todd, Robinso, and Craig. NO RASMUS! Those are the potential players that Gammons said could be dealt. Not Neccesarily all of them. We shall see if the lines continue to sizzle as the deadline closes.
0 recs |
161 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Sorry, dude, you need to re-read the piece.
The quote from Gammons said only that the cards and rockies were “burning up the phone lines.” The 20-year-old college student and huge cardinals fan who wrote the article supplied the names in question, based on nothing, apparently, other than his own say so.
The quote from Gammons in fact concludes, “We did not discuss the circumstances surrounding the trade, other than the Cardinals want Holliday and Fuentes.” Meaning, the Rockies did not say what they wanted in return. Okay, the Cards want Holliday and Fuentes. And the Rockies are not changing the phone number to Coors Field. This is not news.
by tom s. on Jul 27, 2008 8:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I dissagree with ya tom,
I think this is news. It is the first time that we have heard the the cards are actively pursuing Holliday. We all knew about fuentes but I think most of us had ruled out Holliday because of asking price but from Gammons quote it is obvious that the cards are in hot pursuit of both.
Read it agin,
“I [Gammons] have spoken to the Colorado Rockies, and the St. Louis Cardinals are aggressively seeking a trade for [Matt] Holliday and [Brian] Fuentes,” Gammons said on the show. “The Rockies expect it to happen before the July 31 trade deadline. We did not discuss the circumstances surrounding the trade, other than the Cardinals want Holliday and Fuentes.”
They want both, not just fuentes. I do understand what your saying about the names involved but the key thing is that the cards have made their wants known and the rockies think something can be done befor the trade deadline.
Either way though this could all just fall through, but lets hope for the best
The wind in here just shifted 360 degrees!!!
-Mike Shannon
by cardsphan04 on Jul 27, 2008 8:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
all true
except that the poster put together the names of the pieces that they’d be trading, not Gammons. If Gammons had said something about which players were involved, THAT would be news. He didn’t, the poster just extrapolates what he think would have to be traded to get that deal done. That’s no better than the 500+ posts on the catch all thread on VEB…
"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 Jul 28, 2008 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
God, I hope not
why blow up the farm system to finish in 3rd place?
by Hardcore Legend on Jul 27, 2008 8:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i'm pretty sure before this season started,
you predicted they’d be in last.
by baw on Jul 27, 2008 8:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
which has wahat to do with blowing up the farm system
(although I don’t think that the above names constitute blowing up the farm system)
by azruavatar on Jul 27, 2008 9:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
because now he's predicting third place
so since he got wrong last place, and they’re in third, math says that predicting third place equals first.
At least that’s how I read it . . .
On with the (good) youth movement!
by aet15 on Jul 27, 2008 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If this happens I would be absolutely ecstatic
Matt Holliday is in the top 15 of hitters in all major league baseball! And I agree with azruavatar that this does not at all constitute blowing up the farm system
They say I look like yadier molina
by ANDYAK47 on Jul 28, 2008 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
Garcia
McClellan
Anderson
Todd
Robinson
Craig
That’s our top 3 pitching prospects, our highly thought of catching prospect and some above average throw ins.
The farm system would be drastically depleted.
by Hardcore Legend on Jul 28, 2008 12:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd make the trade
Six for two is a lot … I think the Cards could have made a better offer than the Yankees for Nady and Marte and I would have preferred those two players over the Rockies two players … but St. Louis is in a position to compete for a playoff spot this year … who knows for sure what kind of position the team will be in the next two years … Holliday & Fuentes fill two major needs the Cardinals have had for quite some time—one more big bat for the heart of the batting lineup and a decent lefty out of the bullpen … how many more years are we going to wait to fill those needs? ... Albert isn’t ageless … the time to fill those holes is now, imho.
by RedbirdattheBeach on Jul 28, 2008 1:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody ALL six players
At least thats what I have gathered. All 6 wouldnt be selling the farm, but still stupid.
by bornin82 on Jul 28, 2008 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Me too
I don’t think it’d be all 6, but even if it is we have Holliday for this year and next ($13.5m in ‘09). Even if we lose Fuentes to FA next year, I like our chances in ‘09 with Holliday and Pujols in the middle of the lineup.
I’d rather spin a Shumaker or Mather, but Anderson is going to blocked by Yadi anyway, might as well get an MVP for him.
by roebirds on Jul 28, 2008 5:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The farm system would only be depleted...
for a couple of years. If we don’t re-sign Fuentes and offer arb, we would get 2 draft picks due to him being a Type-A free agent. We could have 3 picks before the 2nd round even started. I can’t argue with those odds especially the way we have drafted in recent years. If it wouldn’t be for that opportunity, then I would say to not do it at all.
by Jumsy on Jul 28, 2008 7:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Loshe
Maybe two picks for Loshe as well! Our 2009 draft is going to be awesome baby. Sorry to digress but even if Loshe walks (or is dragged by Boras) he’ll pay a huge dividend for our modest investment. How about last season with a league minimum investment in Troy Percival who returned Lance Lynn in the sandwich … just an awesome return on investment.
by jjray on Jul 29, 2008 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where is the prediction thread
I’m pretty sure I predicted they’d be in 3rd. But maybe I am remembering it wrong.
by Hardcore Legend on Jul 27, 2008 11:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I found it
I had them winning 79 games, finishing 5th.
by Hardcore Legend on Jul 27, 2008 11:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry, but
the pendulum swings in this place are just wacky. i didn’t mean to single you out, but it’s like unbridled, negativity-ridden criticism one day, then “aw shucks, we did win the world series” the next.
i wasn’t talking about the prediction thread, but i appreciate you finding that. it just feels like so many people are ready to throw this team in the garbage at every opportunity: cesar signing, miles reacquisition, any significant injury, etc., etc., etc.
by baw on Jul 28, 2008 1:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The best would be no Holiday because he'd be too much....
... and the schedule is just not in our favor. The brewers have the Nats and 9 games with the Bucs and an inordinate number of games with sub 500 teams. The Cubs’ offense is too consistent. The Cubs are simply better unless Harden goes down and Marmol’s arm falls off, making him accompany Wood on the DL for a prolonged amount of time.
But then, the ND receiver looked better today than anything we have to offer lately.
Seriously, Garcia and Todd trades would be a mistake.
Holliday away from Colorado isn’t as gret as you think
by greenwichvillagecard on Jul 27, 2008 8:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well....
Harden hasn’t went down yet, but a case could be made for the fact that Marmol’s arm is barely hanging on
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
by mattyfrommo on Jul 27, 2008 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
are you freaking kidding me?
Garcia,Mcclellan,Anderson,Todd, Robinso, and Craig, for two mediocre players? MO better not be this stupid. if he is, the folks who called him Walt Jr last winter were right.
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Jul 27, 2008 8:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not saying I support the trade...
but Fuentes and Holliday are definitely better than “mediocre.” Holliday has an OBP of .431 and a SLG of .577, both of which are very good. Fuentes has an ERA of 3.15 and a WHIP of 1.125, which isn’t stellar, but it’s definitely above average. Also, if you read the fanpost, it specifically states that not necessarily all of those players would be traded.
"I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to go chase it."- Rogers Hornsby
by redbirds8233 on Jul 27, 2008 9:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Check Holliday's numbers when not in Coors:
Home: .365/.429/.664
Away: .277/.343/.449
It’s all Coors effect.
by craig3410 on Jul 27, 2008 9:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it could also be an "at home" effect.
A lot of players simply play better in their home ballpark. Coors really doesn’t affect avg. that much. If he had a new home ballpark, he may be able to turn it around.
On with the (good) youth movement!
by aet15 on Jul 27, 2008 9:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hmm
Coors really doesn’t affect avg. that much.
Look at the Rockies home/road team splits over the last few years.
2006 home/road: .294/.247
2007 home/road: .298/.261
2008 homeroad: .292/.245
by jdub176 on Jul 27, 2008 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
going back a little further
(and damn, I missed an apostrophe in my last post…)
2005: .300/.232
2004: .303/.245
2003: .294/.239
by jdub176 on Jul 27, 2008 10:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow
nvm then. But if you really want to play devil’s advocate to the “he’s only good at home theory” you could say it has something to do with that the whole team plays better at home . . . just saying. But yeah, good point.
On with the (good) youth movement!
by aet15 on Jul 27, 2008 10:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't buy the "he's only good at home theory"
See my post below – last year he had an .860 OPS on the road. In ‘06 it was around .820. He’s just not as good on the road, but he’s still pretty good. And he plays better at home (as his team does) because Coors is an extreme hitter’s park. Not as extreme as when Larry Walker was putting up ridiculous numbers, but it’s significant nonetheless.
by jdub176 on Jul 27, 2008 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
right
and a .277 hitter still isn’t that bad, especially with the run production he puts in. Plus, I think he’d adjust to Busch.
On with the (good) youth movement!
by aet15 on Jul 27, 2008 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's hard to say
His run production will depend on who gets on base in front of him. For argument’s sake, I think he’d settle in around .280/.365/.480 with the Cardinals, but who knows.
by jdub176 on Jul 27, 2008 11:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and for the record
While this is fun to talk about and everything, I don’t think trading for Holliday would be a great idea. He’d be good, but he’s going to be expensive, and I imagine we’d have to give up too much.
by jdub176 on Jul 27, 2008 11:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
psh
holliday would be awful away from the accommodating lighting stanchions at coors field!
by baw on Jul 28, 2008 1:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
again
hilarious.
Have you ever played the game? Apparently not, because playing in a place 81 times a year make a big difference vs. playing at a place 4-12 times a year. Disagree all you want, but you’re still wrong. And now you’re just being a jackass to boot.
"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 Jul 28, 2008 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
dude, lighten up.
no one said players NEVER hit better at home. i understand they do.
but “dimensions” does not mean… will not mean… and never HAS meant… “how the light comes off the lighting stanchions.” i just cannot get over the way you keep insisting that’s true. in the meantime, it’s becoming a running joke.
by baw on Jul 28, 2008 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I play the game
And I still disagree with you. What now? We seem to have reached an impasse. The “you don’t play the game” argument is a bad one, and falls apart completely when someone who plays, like myself, disagrees with you.
This is really one of the finer shows of internet stubbornness I’ve ever seen. There might be an argument to be made regarding people hitting better at home, but your reasoning (i.e. the “dimensions”) was pretty terrible. You flat-out refuse to so much as admit you used poor wording and to clarify, and instead INSIST on trying to twist the word to include lighting conditions and possibly wind, temperature, and the location of the moon in the sky.
P.S. For someone throwing out the “jackass” label, you’re not exactly Mr. Smiles-and-Rainbows. Beware berating the kettle, pot.
by mojowo11 on Jul 28, 2008 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
whoa whoa whoa there
mojowo. You have to have played the game, retired, and then landed a job with ESPN to know the real truth. Like Joe Morgan, Rob Dibble, John Kruk, and Harold Reynolds – true bastions of baseball knowledge.
by jdub176 on Jul 28, 2008 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+3,000,000
Those guys is smart at base ball game. They know stuff, like, how it is bad to clog up the bases and how being clutch is the reason that A-Rod and his .3-million EQA is an AWFUL baseball player and Derek Jeter uses his clutchiness and his steely eyes to will the Yankees to all the wins they get. Also, you forgot Steve Phillips, who comes up with these great trade ideas like ManRam, Papi, Paps, Ellsbury, the Freedom Walk, the USS Constitution, Yawkey Way and all Yawkey Way-affiliated products, and the deed for Fenway for Johan Santana, Justin Morneau, and 2 dozen homer-hankies. He are smart at base ball sport too…
BTW, all snarkiness aside, it’s pretty sad that Karl Ravech usually knows the most baseball and has the most common sense on that show. He’s the host. Sad.
"Your Holiness, I'm Joseph Medwick. I, too, used to be a Cardinal."-Joe Medwick, to Pope Pius XII.
by redbirdnation8206 on Jul 28, 2008 8:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
While an .860 OPS
sounds good, it would still be behind Ankiel, Ludwick, Glaus, and Pujols. Not really very impressive for a left fielder.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Jul 29, 2008 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly, thanks for those numbers i couldn't find them
Hollidays hits well at home, but he’s average on the road. in case you didnt notice, Busch III isnt exactly a hitters park. he’s not the answer in the 4 hole for the Cards. i dont know who is, but its not him.
Lboros, who lives in Rockies country says Fuentes isn’t an upgrade for our pen. thats all i need to hear. let some one else give up top prospects for him.
after Kmac’s performance vs Wright, Delgado & Beltran late Saturday night, i can’t believe MO would even consider trading him. you can’t let that kid get away. hell he should be the Cards de facto closer right now.
maybe i’m valuing Anderson more than i am, but i think he should bring a lot all on his own. him & garcia should bring what ever MO wants all by themselves. right?
this is just a bad trade. i’m not a fan. MO should walk away.
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Jul 27, 2008 9:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
really?
I mean, Larry is a great writer, is very knowledgeable, and I totally respect his opinion, but you’re not going to do any other research before writing Fuentes off? Fuentes is definitely an upgrade in our pen. He’s not going to be lights out and might not be worth the price, but he’s definitely an upgrade in my opinion.
On with the (good) youth movement!
by aet15 on Jul 27, 2008 10:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
when it comes to the Rocks asking price, hell to the yes i'm talking Larry's word for it
now if their price comes way down, then he’s an upgrade. but for what they are asking for, he’s not an upgrade because he hurts the future. get my point?
like most on here i follow all teams, not just the Cards. and i’ve seen Fuentes pitch this season & i dont like what i see. now Larry’s seen a lot more of him than i have, so when he says pass, it fortifies my thinking as well. so yes, without running the numbers, no thanks, i’ll pass
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Jul 27, 2008 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
can you quantify that statement?
i’ve seen Fuentes pitch this season & i dont like what i see
What don’t you like? I’m not saying we should trade for him, but you’ve got to expand on your point a little!
by jdub176 on Jul 27, 2008 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't say it's all the "Coors effect"
Last year his OPS was .860 on the road, which isn’t chopped liver by any means.
by jdub176 on Jul 27, 2008 10:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are currently 21 MLB regular OFs
with OPS > .860 including our own Ryan Ludwick and Rick Ankiel. Holliday would be, at best, the fifth best offensive player on the team.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Jul 29, 2008 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't get me wrong
I would not want to trade for Holliday. I was just saying that he’s better than average….some in this thread have said that he’s mediocre.
But I also think it’s hard to say he’d be the fifth best offensive player on the team, at best.
by jdub176 on Jul 29, 2008 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
couple things to keep in mind wrt "Coors Effect"
it works both ways, for three reasons.
First, the NL West has 2 hitter friendly parks and 3 pitcher friendly parks; when you remove coors from the “away” park for Rockies players, it really hurts their home/road split vis a vis the rest of the NL west, especially, but really all of the NL.
Second, when a player who put up “coors effect” numbers is moved from Coors as a home park to another park, his home/road splits regress significantly, both home and away. Take a look at Kaz Matsui’s splits as an example of this. The altitude makes it easier to hit at coors and harder to hit away from coors (jdub’s data below backs this up). It’s also easier to hit for average at coors because of the park dimensions. There have been several THT and BP studies about this (I’m on a dial-up right now so I can’t really take the time to link to them, but they are there if you look). My guess is that the air at Coors causes breaking balls to move differently, which causes minuscule imbalances in CO players away from home.
Third, players almost ALWAYS hit better at home. MLB as a whole in ‘08 has a 44 point OPS split between home and away.
"..and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped." -Sir Belvedere
by SleepyCA on Jul 28, 2008 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I think Holliday would be a .900+ OPS player at Busch III, quite an upgrade over who we currently have manning LF, and another good right handed batter in the order.
I still think that the price may be too high, considering we’d probably be stuck with someone like Miles, Kennedy, or Izturis leading off, I’m not sure that our run expectancy goes up all that much really. I’d like to see someone do an analysis removing Skip from the lineup and substituting Holliday in the 4 hole.
"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 Jul 28, 2008 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cardinals top four run producers
all hit for higher OPS on the road than at Busch III. I don’t think there are much data to support it, but I can’t think of any significant players who left a hitter-friendly home park and didn’t experience a significant decline in production.
Sleepy, what happens to the OPS spread if you filter out all the best hitters’ park and the best pitchers’ parks to look at the middle of the data? When you have players in Coors and Arlington putting up massive differences between home and road splits does that distort the numbers, or do the Petcos and the Safecos make up for it?
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Jul 29, 2008 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah there is an obvious difference...
but it’s not like .277/.343/.449 is bad. whether or not those stats are worth some of our top prospects is very debatable, but you can’t deny that Holliday would be a nice to have hitting behind Pujols
"I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to go chase it."- Rogers Hornsby
by redbirds8233 on Jul 28, 2008 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't think it's very debatable
If the best we could expect out of Holliday is .277/.343/.449, then there’s no way he’s worth it. Rasmus projects to put up numbers like that very soon with better defense…and he’ll be cheap.
I think Holliday would be better than that, but that doesn’t mean he’s worth it. Not that it’ll happen anyway.
by jdub176 on Jul 28, 2008 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that does not neccesarilly mean it is a coors effect, it could be that he is just much better when playing at home period
They say I look like yadier molina
by ANDYAK47 on Jul 28, 2008 12:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It could be that we have night and day
because the sun revolves around the earth.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Jul 29, 2008 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Conjecture
But really even if those names were real (and probably several are), I could live with all being traded save McClellan. I really think Kyle has a future as a starter with this team and not just an average back of the rotation guy. I’d hate to see him blossom elsewhere.
by paposse on Jul 27, 2008 9:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
For those of you AGAINST such a trade.....
What exactly is going to happen during the offseason that will make us better next year? Sure, we’ll have Carp and Waino all year, hopefully, but Izzy and Franklin appear to be shot. Will we still not need a closer? We gonna pony up big dollars for one in FA? Doubtful. Same with a bat. We’ll need one or two again next year. Not many options, especially at SS/2B, and the ones worth persuing will want BIG dollars.
If we aren’t going to offer big pay days to FA’s, we’re going to have to make some moves. So long as we don’t completely gut the system, and we keep drafting/evaluating well, we’ll still get/have the depth that some of you fawn over.
by SoonerfanTU on Jul 27, 2008 9:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
but
fuentes will be a , so why give prospects for him if we are shooting at 09? what we need is one MI, preferably SS, who can hit a lick.
If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, perhaps you haven't grasped the situation!
by sportsman on Jul 27, 2008 9:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is the bottom line
being better next year? How many years of being good are we willing to sacrifice to be better “next year?” This trade will be for 2 months of Fuentes and 1 year and 2 months of Holliday. How much should we give up to go for it this year and next?
Now, both will be worth 2 draft picks when they decline arbitration but it’s a huge step backward from AAA prospects to draft picks. I’m not completely opposed to this trade but I’m not going to sell out the farm to try and win twice either.
by chuckb on Jul 27, 2008 11:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Fuentes is going to walk for sure.....
then I agree. Why couldn’t why sign him though? Surely management has an idea if he’d be interested in talking, or what he’ll be asking for.
My point isn’t just about Fuentes and Holliday though. It’s about trading in general. We don’t have anybody save Rasmus that has a chance to “upgrade” us anywhere next season. Where are the other upgrades going to come from? Perez, Worrell, Motte…..all solid arms, but the first two have proven to not quite be ready yet.
Again, how do we get better next year, if it isn’t by trade?
by SoonerfanTU on Jul 27, 2008 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm with Soonerfan
I have to believe if Cards trade for Fuentes, St. Louis is pretty confident he will be in a St. Louis uniform beyond this season … Holliday I can see perhaps not being retained after next year and that wouldn’t be the end of the world … much would depend on how good Rasmus really proves to be and the contract situations of Ankiel and the outfielders … I’m all in for competing for a shot at the playoffs this year and next and worry about if St. Louis will be better than .500 in 2010 somewhere between a month before the 2009 trade deadline and end of 2010 spring training … most of us have been pining for another legit bat since the days before Walt tried to sell Cardinals Nation on the JuanE signing.
by RedbirdattheBeach on Jul 28, 2008 1:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is Fuentes a Type A free agent?
If you are trading the farm for him, maybe it is best to let him walk for the 2 first round picks.
by Hardcore Legend on Jul 28, 2008 2:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
thats not terrible if you get colorados picks
by bornin82 on Jul 28, 2008 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You get the picks of whoever signs him, I think
by mojowo11 on Jul 28, 2008 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought you got one of the picks of whoever signs him
and a sandwich pick
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on Jul 28, 2008 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's right
I knew I was forgetting something.
by mojowo11 on Jul 28, 2008 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
++++++++++1
exactly sooner…..couldn’t have put it better. Who has the list of FA’s next year?
Life is short! Break the rules! And never regret anything that made you smile.
by Section8 on Jul 28, 2008 8:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
we could sign him next year
but he’ll be 33 next month and someone will pay him to be a closer. Should that be the Cardinals? Absolutely not. That means, what, 3 years and $25 or so million for a 33 year old left-handed reliever. I’d rather have the 2 draft picks and the $25 million to spend on players who will help us for all 3 seasons. I don’t have a lot of confidence in 35 and 36 year old relievers—at least not $8M + confidence in them. Would you pay Russ Springer $8 M per season? He’s a nice reliever but, come on. Perez, maybe Motte, and maybe Perdomo, not to mention McClellan could all be worked into the setup man/closer’s role and we could pay all 4 of them, combined, about half of what we’d pay Fuentes to do worse.
by chuckb on Jul 28, 2008 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am all for making a trade
under the right circumstances. If we can acquire players that fill a real need and will be available beyond this year, and we can get those players at a fair price, then let’s do it. I don’t think that makes me a “fawner”.
Holliday doesn’t really fill a need and there is at least some reason to believe he will be a lesser player away from Coors. Fuentes will be gone after two months. Besides, those two players will not solve a significant share of our problems.
I don’t have any illusions that the Cardinals will actually spend big money in free agency, but at least the money will be there to be spent.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Jul 29, 2008 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This was already posted in the main blog post after Reyes was traded
it’s pure speculation.
Rockies aren’t out of the race, they are the hottest team in the NL West, they will NOT be selling. I’ll guarantee you that.
boo cubs, hooray beer
by Raconteur on Jul 27, 2008 9:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
not about holliday/fuentes
but mlbtraderumors mentions the very very very unlikely scenario of the cardinals acquiring roy halladay for a package of players with rasmus as the centerpiece.
halladay is apparently unhappy in toronto, but i don’t see this ever happening…ever
by barry whiteteeth on Jul 27, 2008 10:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If that deal is on the table, I hope that Mo says yes without hesitation
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on Jul 27, 2008 10:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Halladay?
I agree. I think he’s worth the lost farm.
"Fortune favors the bold!" - Virgil
by player2bnamedl8r on Jul 27, 2008 10:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
with Rasmus as the centerpiece?
Halladay’s a great pitcher but I always worry about injuries with them. I’d really hate to lose Rasmus.
by azruavatar on Jul 27, 2008 10:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even for Rasmus
assuming that we’re not giving up too much otherwise (or that we’re not also getting a reliever), I think we have to make that deal. Pujols, Carpenter, and Glaus aren’t getting any younger, and Halliday improves the hell out of the team for the stretch run this year, and for next year. We can survive with Ank, Ludwick and Skip for another year, maybe two, all fo them have room for improvement from their current production (though you can quibble about skip, but he’s shown pretty consistent improvement over the past year and a half that he’s recieved regular AB). A move like that improves the team in the short and the long term.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on Jul 27, 2008 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Love the idea of Halladay best of all
Ace quality starters are just too hard to come by … that’s why it was so hard to see Cubs get Harden for the Cubs’ stale peanuts … Halladay in St. Louis may be just a pipe dream, but with the series with Milwaukee still stinging somewhat, it’s nice to dream a little dream like that.
by RedbirdattheBeach on Jul 28, 2008 1:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not me
this should be a no deal … period. Halladay is a super pitcher - one of the best in the game - but he’s already 31 and is a free agent after 2010. We’d have him for 2 1/3 years. If we’re going to consider trading Rasmus for a pitcher, it should be for a young pitcher under the team’s control for 4 years or so. Think Tim Lincecum.
by chuckb on Jul 27, 2008 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
what if Halladay agrees to a 2 or 3 year extension & AJ's options are picked up?
wouldn’t MO have to seriously consider making that trade then?
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Jul 27, 2008 11:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Adding years to a 31 year old pitcher's
contract doesn’t make the deal BETTER.
by Hardcore Legend on Jul 28, 2008 12:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why couldn't we sign Rasmus
to a 6 year extension after his 6 years are up? Now we’re trading 12 years of Rasmus for 4-5 years of Halladay. No thanks. Plus, now we’re talking about Halladay’s age 34 and 35 years—not exactly prime pitching years. The fact that he’s signed through 2010, as opposed to ‘09, makes it worth considering but, the fact is, Halladay would cost Rasmus + 1 or 2 other mid-range prospects. I’m not trading all that for a chance to win twice.
by chuckb on Jul 28, 2008 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd be happy with Halladay becuase he basically the best pitcher in baseball
and he’s super durable. We need some one who can absorb innings badly.
by JI on Jul 27, 2008 11:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not trading Rasmus
for an innings-eater. Lohse can do that.
by chuckb on Jul 28, 2008 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's more than an innings eater...
He’s one of the top 5 pitchers in all of baseball.
If that deal is on the table, it merits serious consideration. Look at all the pitchers of Halladay’s caliber who are having stellar seasons in their late thirties this year. It’s not like 31 is ancient for a starting pitcher.
Houston, what exactly WOULD you trade Rasmus for? Would Barry Bonds in his prime be enough? Seriously—this is one of the best starters in all of baseball and we’d have him for 2 years beyond this season with the possibility of extending him at that time. With that kind of pitching in the rotation, this club becomes very formidable the rest of the way this year and the next two years.
Rasmus is a great prospect, but if you’re not willing to part with him for one of the 5 best starters in baseball, then I think you’ve crossed the stage into “total fanboy” territory.
"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 Jul 28, 2008 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
quite an example there
With Barry Bonds, whose prime lasted from like 1991-2004.
by jdub176 on Jul 28, 2008 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have to be gone for a couple hours
But I’m interested in this debate. I’ll stay tuned.
by jdub176 on Jul 28, 2008 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
my point
was to be over the top. He literally shoots down any trade that would involve Rasmus, so I want to know what his asking price is.
I can’t see it getting better than a top 5 starting pitcher.
"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 Jul 28, 2008 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i can
lincecum
hamels
kazmir
kershaw
volquez
hell, joba chamberlain
ugh, dan haren
i probably wouldn’t trade him for any of those arms outside the top 2, maybe 3.
by baw on Jul 28, 2008 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'm not saying
whether i’d support this trade or not, but it seems like the big hang-up is the apparently questionable longevity of halladay versus the potential of rasmus.
it’s fairly clear that rasmus might be one of the better players in baseball for years to come. but it’s also clear that halladay has been one of the most consistently good pitchers in baseball for the last six or seven years playing for a mediocre team.
i’m not a huge proponent of trading for pitchers on the wrong side of thirty, but i have to assume that, barring a debilitating injury (which to be fair could also happen to rasmus) that would cause a steep decline in performance, halladay would continue to be a top notch pitcher for years to come. look at the renaissance that mike mussina is having at 39.
trades like this depend so much on trying to divine the future of an established but aging star with the potential of a blue-chip prospect.
*btw, skip bayless (the much maligned skip bayless) is still picking the cardinals to win the division, with the cubs finishing third. what do you all think?
by barry whiteteeth on Jul 28, 2008 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
still?
if he seemed to have a good reason for the prediction i’d call it brave and interesting. but so far (admittedly, based mostly on what i have gleaned from firejoemorgan.com) he seems to like us because “there’s something about this team” which is just a little vague. i wonder if he likes us so much just because he and schumaker have the same nickname…
by mattybobo on Jul 28, 2008 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and i'm sure
schumaker agrees with skip bayless that the NFL should get rid of the field goal. something about just tells me he hates kicking, spheroids and plays that score three points
by barry whiteteeth on Jul 28, 2008 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think he picked the cards
at the beginning of the season, so he’s just trying to stick with it and look like a genius later.
by baw on Jul 28, 2008 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh yeah...
in that case i almost admire him for taking that kind of gamble!
by mattybobo on Jul 28, 2008 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
to skip's credit..
...this prediction has worked out a lot better than John Kruk’s from a couple years ago. That’s when he said the Pirates would win the division, and if I recall, it later turned out that ESPN goaded him into saying it for argument’s sake.
by jdub176 on Jul 28, 2008 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't Krukie predict that RJ woudl win 30 with the Yankees?
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on Jul 28, 2008 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
haha yep
“2 weeks left in the season…RJ needs to pitch in and win all of the Yankees’ remaining games for Kruk’s prediction to come to fruition…”
by jdub176 on Jul 28, 2008 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hey, he played the game, he knows what he's talking about
that’s something you (we) mother’s basement vorpy types with our “blogs” and our “statistics” can’t ever say!
by mattybobo on Jul 28, 2008 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
haha
Even though I’m posting this from the finest academic library in northern Missouri, rest assured that mom’s basement will always be home to me. Now I sound like a) an elitist who b) lives with his mom. Only “a” is true.
Oddly enough though, I give Kruk some credit with that prediction. He was acknowledging that wins are largely a team statistic, albeit in a convoluted, wildly exaggerated manner.
by jdub176 on Jul 28, 2008 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that is a good point
because it was pretty much implied that most teams can’t possibly support a 30 game winner, but maybe the yankees could.
by mattybobo on Jul 28, 2008 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
re: mussina
to be fair, look at the “renaissance” he had last year, at 38.
it was the worst season of his career.
by baw on Jul 28, 2008 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was injured last season
and pitched through it.
by Hardcore Legend on Jul 28, 2008 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
isn't that the point?
old pitchers, injury risks?
by baw on Jul 28, 2008 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's a fair point
but if you compare his stats this year to his career averages, he’s actually doing slightly better than normal. numbers-wise, he’s having his best season since 2003 when he was 34 (older than halladay’s 31).
my point is, pitchers don’t automatically become crappy once they reach a specific age. it is possible for some to continue playing at a high level well into their thirties and are you willing to trade a young prospect for that possibility.
by barry whiteteeth on Jul 28, 2008 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't either
shoot down any trade involving Rasmus. Read it again. Better yet, have someone read it to you and explain what the big words mean.
by chuckb on Jul 28, 2008 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was responding to JL's post above
where he says “we need someone (sic) who can absorb innings badly.”
Halladay’s very good, but I wouldn’t give up 6 years of Rasmus + 2 others for him.
And, fourstick, you could ask questions of other posters w/o acting like an ass. I would trade Rasmus for a young pitcher, as I wrote above. Someone along the lines of Tim Lincecum. It’s a high price but I wouldn’t trade him for a 31 year old starter earning $15 M per year.
I guess everyone has to agree w/ everything you write in order to avoid your righteous indignation, huh?
by chuckb on Jul 28, 2008 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was simply asking a question
First, every time someone brings up trading Colby, you feel the need to post about how it isn’t a good idea. Most of the time, I agree with you, but the kid is not Albert Pujols, so he’s not just the untouchable man. I’ve seen too many top prospects flame out in the big leagues to just render him untouchable. I simply want to know what kind of deal would be good enough to trade him. I think that’s a fair question.
Second, JL brought up Halladay, who happens to be one of the top 5 pitchers in the entire league for the last 7 years running. He didn’t bring up some league average innings eater, so if you were responding to his post it’s easy to assume you wouldn’t trade Rasmus in a deal involving Halladay. If I misunderstood you then I’m sorry, but you can see how it’s easy to make that assumption.
Third, I’m not saying I’m right and you are entitled to your opinion. But I’m also entitled to mine, and I think it’s insane to not move a prospect like Rasmus for a pitcher as good as Halladay is. There’s probably only 3-4 guys who’ve been better for the last 7 years, whereas I can name a slew of outfielders who’ve been as good as Rasmus is supposed to be, and he may not reach his expectations, we just don’t know. I’m looking at the fact that I know I’m getting a top starting pitcher in Roy Halladay for some fairly unknown, but talented prospects.
"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 Jul 28, 2008 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Colby the untouchable man
Most of the time, I agree with you, but the kid is not Albert Pujols, so he’s not just the untouchable man.
Albert’s the best right-handed hitter of his generation, and one of the best of all time. That’s a mighty high standard you have for a guy being untouchable.
I’ve seen too many top prospects flame out in the big leagues to just render him untouchable.
And I’ve seen pitchers on the wrong side of 30 flame out in the midst of expensive, long-term contracts. I’m not saying that will happen to Halladay, but if it did, the effect would be devastating.
I’m looking at the fact that I know I’m getting a top starting pitcher in Roy Halladay for some fairly unknown, but talented prospects.
Who are you talking about here? It would take some pretty well-known prospects to get a Roy Halladay.
by jdub176 on Jul 28, 2008 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
To your three points
I was using Pujols as a reference because he’s the only Cardinal position player I would consider completely untouchable, i.e. I would not trade him in any deal, ever, for the length of his contract. I would probably say the same about Wainwright as well, but that has as much to do with the friendliness of his contract as it does his overall talent level, which is good. If there isn’t a single trade where you would deal Colby Rasmus, that’s fine, I just personally think that is a ludicrous judgement to make on a player without a single at-bat in the big leagues. As HC pointed out, he would move Rasmus for a young stud starting pitcher like Lincecum, which was what I was trying to find out in the first place: Who he would want in exchange for Colby.
Halladay is only signed until 2010, so it’s not a long term deal for the Cardinals and could be reevaluated after that year. If the club isn’t competitive he could also them be flipped for good prospects to a team in contention that year as well. Barring a major arm injury, which he’s never had, he would be a huge asset to the ballclub. Devastating if he totally fell apart by 2010, but definitely not likely,
I’m talking about unknown in terms of mlb track record, of which they have none, not unknown in terms of “I don’t know his name”. The essence of making a deal like this is that you’re dealing unknown quantities of talent to get a known quantity of talent in return that can help your ballclub. Looking at PECOTA comps for this year for Rasmus and Halladay, I’m simply saying it would be a lot harder to sign a player of Halladay’s talents than it would be to find a player of Colby’s talents, if Colby actually hits or surpasses his PECOTA projection. Would that player be more expensive? Obviously he would be, but in terms of talent, a free agent pitcher of Halladay’s quality, of which I can find only one this offseason (CC Sabathia), is probably going to cost 7M-10M more than Halladay is due to make, and would be a longer term committment for a pitcher only 2 years younger. To me, that makes the financial point of view a wash, which brings us back to known talent vs. unknown talent. You’re gambling on Halladay being as good as he’s been and healthy, or Colby living up to and exceeding expectations. I’m going to gamble on the former since I think it helps the Cardinal situation more over the next 2.5 seasons.
"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 Jul 29, 2008 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am sure glad we didn't trade Pujols
when he was an unproven prospect.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Jul 29, 2008 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't have much of a chance
He went from late-round draft pick to the majors in less than 500 ABs.
by mojowo11 on Jul 29, 2008 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, yes
but thin of the value we could have gotten for Reyes in the offseason after 2006. And holding on to Chris Lambert didn’t work out so well. It’s all a matter of properly calculating risk and reward.
And remember, Pujols was never a massively touted prospect. He was a magical phenom that took off out of nowhere.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on Jul 29, 2008 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok
If there isn’t a single trade where you would deal Colby Rasmus, that’s fine, I just personally think that is a ludicrous judgement to make on a player without a single at-bat in the big leagues.
I never said that. If you’re referring to the subject line of my last post – “Colby the untouchable man” – I was just making fun of your post below where you said “so he’s not just the untouchable man.” I’d hand him to the Giants for Lincecum, for what it’s worth.
Halladay is only signed until 2010, so it’s not a long term deal for the Cardinals and could be reevaluated after that year.
I was referring to earlier when you suggested that we could re-sign him. If we did, it would be to a long-term, expensive deal where there would be a good chance of him missing significant time, not to mention that he would probably decline even if he were healthy. If we didn’t re-sign, then we have him for just a couple seasons. Is that worth many years of Colby Rasmus?
The essence of making a deal like this is that you’re dealing unknown quantities of talent to get a known quantity of talent in return that can help your ballclub.
To what extent is Rasmus an “unknown quantity of talent?” Sure, he hasn’t hit the majors yet, but it’s not like the only record of him playing is a carving on a caveman’s wall that says “Rasmus GOOD!” We don’t know exactly how he’ll perform once he’s with the big club, but there are good indicators that say he’s going to be pretty damned good, and for quite a long time since he’s young. It’s also worth noting that there’s a good chance it would take more than Rasmus to get Halladay, which doesn’t sweeten the deal any for me.
I’m going to gamble on the former since I think it helps the Cardinal situation more over the next 2.5 seasons.
And I’ll gamble on the latter because I think it helps the Cardinals’ situation more over the next 6+ seasons.
by jdub176 on Jul 29, 2008 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem is age
I agree that Halladay has been dominant for the last seven years…but seven years ago, Colby was 14 years old! If Halladay was at his current ability level and was 25 years old, it’d be a no brainer. But the guy doesn’t have a clean injury history and is getting toward the old side for pitchers, which makes him riskier and riskier each year. Rasmus, most agree, has very good potential and he’s very cheap for a very long time. Halladay has been good for a long time, but how long can he keep it up? Will he get hurt?
I agree the entire issue is basically 100% subjective…it involves a lot of guesswork and weighing of odds and so on. But saying that being unwilling to trade Raz for a 30+ year old pitcher @ 3 yr/$15+ mil is fanboyism is implying that the issue at hand is a simple one. It’s not.
by mojowo11 on Jul 28, 2008 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My point was...
I hadn’t seen a single scenario where he would trade him to this point, so I was wondering if there was one out there in which he would be willing to deal him.
If there wasn’t a scenario where he would deal him—implying that he’s simply better than All-Star major leaguers with proven track records, then I would relate that to being a fanboy because it’s more about the player than it is about the situation.
HC brought up a situation in which he’d be willing to part with Rasmus, which was all I was looking for.
"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 Jul 29, 2008 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you're missing the point though
“implying that he’s simply better than All-Star major leaguers with proven track records…”
Even if HC had said “Rasmus is untouchable,” that doesn’t mean he’s “simply better than AS major leaguers with proven track records.” It just means that Rasmus is more valuable to us because we have him for 6 years, whereas trading him away might mean getting a better player, but only for a couple years. But since HC refuted the “untouchable” assertion, it doesn’t really matter.
by jdub176 on Jul 29, 2008 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
something to consider
Halladay projects to have a steady decline in IP over the next few years. He’s already got a lot of innings logged, so if we acquired him and extended his contract, it’s quite likely he’d spend extended time on the DL. Granted, Rasmus may have his own stints on the DL during that time, but we wouldn’t be paying him $15 million a year (or more) for it.
by jdub176 on Jul 28, 2008 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
mlb trade rumors is the equivalent of one of those grocery store tabloids
boo cubs, hooray beer
by Raconteur on Jul 27, 2008 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you say this...
because he’s a Cubs fan or do you actually have a reason?
by mynameistyler on Jul 27, 2008 11:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Probably because it
was a terrible site that posted crap when it started. Now it’s just a a collection of sourced rumors from beat writers and journalists. Nothing wrong with that.
by haltz on Jul 27, 2008 11:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
true - it has gotten significantly better from it's origina lform
but I still find it to be a very poor source of information.
Has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the guy who runs it is a Cubs fan, I didn’t even know he was.
boo cubs, hooray beer
by Raconteur on Jul 28, 2008 1:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's pretty good
as a “compilation of rumors” site, which is all it is advertised as being. The comments are atrociously infantile.
I thought it was better earlier on when the guy who ran it actually did opinion bits about what trades would make sense etc…
"..and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped." -Sir Belvedere
by SleepyCA on Jul 28, 2008 1:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No Offense
but after a century of futility and sellout games, cubs fans just might be the best fans in baseball. I mean that, I’m a cards fan that hates their stinking guts. Walking with that stupid “C” on their heads and “Got Wood?” on their backs..
by bornin82 on Jul 28, 2008 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trading for Holliday is retarded. There's nothing wrong with our of and the MOTO is fine.
We need an arm or three and a shortstop.
I fucking hate you Ryan Franklin.
by JI on Jul 27, 2008 11:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
that sure was insightful.
On with the (good) youth movement!
by aet15 on Jul 27, 2008 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rockies are only 6 games out in the West and just came off a sweep
and are 9-1 in their last 10 games. Considering their run last year…I really doubt they are going to give up and trade their best hitter and closer right now. I bet alot of this “talk” happened last week before their sweep over the Reds this weekend. I REALLY REALLY doubt this trade is still “in the works”.
by KYCards on Jul 27, 2008 11:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
In fact I think the Rockies have a better chance of making the playoffs
than we do right now…to be honest.
by KYCards on Jul 28, 2008 12:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Their closer
Fuentes is probably still available. Manny Corpas seems to have figured out his issues and could slide back into the closer’s role if they traded Fuentes.
by mojowo11 on Jul 28, 2008 9:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was thinking...
Where would Holliday go in the lineup? I mean, Ankiel and Ludwick are leading the team in HRs and Skip is the best leadoff guy in the team? So… who do you bench? I say MO’s objective this trade deadline is keeping Rasmus…
Yadi swings and hits a high fly ball... Endy Chavez goes back, to the track, to the wall... ITS A GUNNER!! Yadi gives St. Louis the lead in the bottom of the eighth!
by Paulspike on Jul 28, 2008 12:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well in a perfect world
Skip could move to 2nd base and we could have a OF of Holliday, Ankiel, & Ludwick. But the chances of that happening are like the chances of the Rockies trading away their best players right now considering they are only 6 games out with 2 months to play in a weak division….slim and none.
by KYCards on Jul 28, 2008 12:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Schumaker is an outfielder
In his professional career, he’s only played 6 games in the infield, all at third base, all during the 2004 year, and he has (albeit, in a small sample size) about an .850 fielding percentage in the infield.
Just because the guy was drafted as an infielder doesn’t mean he can play there now.
by mtalken on Jul 28, 2008 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's why he said "in a perfect world".
He was drafted as a CF, btw. But I’m not giving up on “skip at second” until he plays there and fails.
"..and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped." -Sir Belvedere
by SleepyCA on Jul 28, 2008 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Knowing TLR...
... he’d probably be infatuated with the “damage” Holliday could do batting second, defeating the whole purpose of offering better and more consistent protection behind Albert … I’d take Holliday as the power pickings are slim and I think he’s a solid vet who can be counted on like Larry Walker … however, I’d still prefer a “true cleanup” hitter to bat fourth everyday instead of someone like Holliday as I’m more comfortable with Glaus batting No. 5 or No. 6 and Ankiel/Ludwig at No. 6 or No. 7 and Molina No. 8 (were it not for TLR’s infatuation with the double leadoff lineup and batting the pitcher No. 8) ... still, Holliday would give St. Louis a better lineup for scoring runs than the team has at the present time.
by RedbirdattheBeach on Jul 28, 2008 1:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
holliday's .400+ OBP
would be perfect at the #2 position.
The best lineup would probably go something like glaus/holly/ank/apu/luddy/riffraff.
"..and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped." -Sir Belvedere
by SleepyCA on Jul 28, 2008 1:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I doubt it
Holliday could probably manage on his own, much better than Lud or Ank. I’d fit in one of those two in the 2 hole, and one in the 6 hole behind Glaus. I’d bet LaRussa would see it the same way.
by stlfan on Jul 28, 2008 9:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
These questions are very easy to answer
right now he would take ankiel’s spot because he is is currently sidelined
by bornin82 on Jul 28, 2008 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank goodness
Count me in the group that wouldn’t want either of them. I’d take Holliday for the right price, but I’d stay away from Fuentes. No reason, he just seems like a guy who’s overvalued.
Cardinal fan in the heart of Braves country
DFA Adam Kennedy and Randy Flores!
Track 'em Tigers - An SB Nation Blog for Auburn Tigers fans
by Mr Redbird on Jul 28, 2008 12:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Via mlbtraderumors...
it is now unlikely that holliday or fuentes will be traded, and the rockies are now in buying mode
"I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to go chase it."- Rogers Hornsby
by redbirds8233 on Jul 28, 2008 1:03 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
no one listens
if they did they wouldnt have posted this thread. The link was from aThursday source..I posted numerous times Sat that Timy K on ESPN radio said its higly unlikly Holliday goes anywhere calling him the face of the franchise. Now it’s been confirmed.
I can't believe i gave up a homerun to that punch and judy hitter-major league 2
by punchinjudy on Jul 28, 2008 7:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rockies Trade
I like Gammons and he has a lot of credibility so maybe there’s something here, maybe not. Holliday and Fuentes aren’t worth the entire farm system. If the trade takes place, I think an outfielder or starter or both has to go to Colorado. along with at least one solid prospect. The Cards would have a log jam in the outfield otherwise. But in the last interview Mo seemed to have given up on any trades so I doubt anything will happen. Unless Mo was just bluffing…
by Gibsonfan on Jul 28, 2008 1:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Mather?
Gotta believe he’d put up some pretty solid numbers in the mile-high atmosphere as he gains more playing time/experience.
by RedbirdattheBeach on Jul 28, 2008 1:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No!!!
We don’t want to trade Joey Bombs. He is going to give us that Speizio type corner OF/ corner IF for years to come.
I have discovered in twenty years of moving around a ball park, that the knowledge of the game is usually in inverse proportion to the price of the seats. ~Bill Veeck
by bukowski on Jul 29, 2008 8:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does he play 3rd?
Cardinal fan in the heart of Braves country
DFA Adam Kennedy and Randy Flores!
Track 'em Tigers - An SB Nation Blog for Auburn Tigers fans
by Mr Redbird on Jul 29, 2008 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that the team is rather locked into third place this year - w or w/o the Rox cavalry coming to the resuce. No reason to burn the farm and eat the seed corn . . .
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 Jul 28, 2008 3:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
great analogy
"Textbooks are Soviet propaganda" - Rev. Jerry Falwell
by elirock83 on Jul 28, 2008 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seems to me in a deal
for Holliday and Fuentes Ludwick would be on his way to Coors. Probably with Anderson and either Garcia or McClellen. You can’t get the “should have been MVP” of the NL last season for a grab bag of minor leaguers. Most of you guys are from the “show me” state, but I seem to be the only one who hasn’t seen much of anything from the vaunted Cards’ minor league system. When called upon, they’ve been pretty miserable. What, exactly, has Rasmus done? made a few lists, and not much more. Don’t get me wrong, I hope he is all that, but so far there is little hard evidence.
by vinniefromjersey on Jul 28, 2008 7:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
what had jeff bagwell done
when he was traded by boston for the 1990 equivalent of a 1-year Russ Springer rental?
"..and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped." -Sir Belvedere
by SleepyCA on Jul 28, 2008 10:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can play this back and forth a lot
A lot of this is a crap shoot involving probabilities.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on Jul 28, 2008 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that is the case with all prospects
you can’t prove yourself until you get to the majors. If people think that you can’t be proven as a serious option until you prove yourself as a MLB level player, the what in the world is the use of having prospects or a minor league system anyway?
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
by mattyfrommo on Jul 28, 2008 10:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it makes sense that
we’d be parting w/ at least 1 of the four outfielders in a deal for holliday. i’m not sure why the cardinals would make a deal that creates more of a logjam by adding a 5th outfielder who would immediately play every day, thus making duncan even more expendable than he already is. as for rasmus, he’s 20 years old, if i’m not mistaken. so all he’s done at this point is show a ton of potential as a 5-tool player in AAA before he can drink legally. hopefully the sprained knee heals well, and he’ll start producing in the big leagues in the next couple of years.
by thecardinallaw on Jul 28, 2008 11:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
trading mcclellan = trading harren
i think mcclellan has a HUGE upside. i would consider him more untouchable than rasmus. anytime a good hitting, defensively adequate aaa catcher is even talked about in a trade for a reliever, you can be sure the market is out of whack.
victim of the sixties
by victim of the sixties on Jul 28, 2008 6:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If that reliever is Fransisco Rodriguez, I'd listen
just sayin’...
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
by Valatan on Jul 28, 2008 11:23 PM EDT 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.
