I’d like to see them re-sign Glaus sooner rather than later to a low-base deal with incentives for PAs, HRs, OBP, and UZR. A healthy Glaus immediately beefs up the lineup and infield defense. A low enough base makes it an acceptable gamble. All we need is to get his allergies treated.

the positional adjustments used to calculate WAR are baselined to account for the position switch, so theoretically Cameron would be a +20 LFer (the +10 from CF + 10 for the diff in positional adjustments).

Ironically, that contradicts what I wrote on my own site when I cautioned the quoting of Cameron’s 4 WAR numbers. I guess I’m not completely convinced that he’ll be able to make up the total difference (i.e. be a +20 LFer)

not that he’ll field MORE balls in LF, just that the baseline is “the average LFer” so he’ll be up against the likes of Adam Dunn and Jason Bay, rather than Carlos Beltran and Colby Rasmus.

In reality, there’s so much variability and noise in year-to-year UZR that I think “guaranteeing” that would be a mistake – at most, I think we could hope that he overcomes the positional adjustment (10 runs) of moving to LF.

Really, however, if the guy wants to play CF, what’s to stop us playing him there? Rasmus is not SO good that a guy like Cameron represents a real downgrade, in fact, based on the ever-unreliable eye test, I’m not sure Colby’s UZR wasn’t a bit of an anomaly last year – I can see him being an above-average CF, but not a mind-blowingly good one. He doesn’t lay out for catchable balls, he makes OCCASIONAL bad errors (of course, most everyone does that), and he has a pretty poor arm from what I can tell. I don’t see we’d lose much, if any, defensive quality by moving Rasmus to LF (where he’d be awesome) and letting Cameron play CF (where he wants to be, and where he’s still comfortably above average). If this helps sweeten the deal for Cameron, I’m all for it.

As for Winn, well, “meh” is about all I can come up with. The only reason for signing him would be to go big on the rotation (i.e. Lackey) or if we went after Beltre, and neither of those options enthuse me that much (I don’t mind Beltre), and I think there are better cheap OF options out there. I’d probably rather have Reed Johnson or Matt Murton or someone like that.

I don’t know if that’s really valid though given how much older Winn is, and how that makes him a candidate to drop off a cliff soon. But Winn has never been as bad as Kearns has been the last couple of years. I imagine Kearns has a higher potential too.
Is there a consensus explanation for Kearns’ last two years? Flukey injuries or something? I know he had a thumb thing or a hit-by-pitch thing in there somewhere.

Since he can still probably platoon and play decent defense, he could also be paired with JJ or DJ if either of them is ready. In any case he could easily be a cheaper Ankiel who Tony wouldn’t be so dead set on seeing in CF every few days.

is he’s had two straight appalling years. I’m all for him as a cheap platoon option but, like you say, I’d only want him as a 4th OF. I really liked your idea of a platoon with Cust until I saw Cust’s LF UZR. Ideally, you’d need to find a LHB for corner OF who is a really good hitter and at least a playable defender. I just don’t know if I could cope with watching Cust out there for 120 games this year.

maybe Boras pulled the hive of bees gambit too early, wherein he tricks you into saying his name three times.

It helps me to not get attached. You have “stop-gaps” (Grudz, Izturis, Wells), “rentals” (DeRosa, Holliday), “mid-majors” (Encarnacion, Sanders, Renteria) and “cornerstones” (Wainwright, Carp, Yadi, Izzy, Edmonds, Rolen, Pujols). For example, I only buy the apparel of “cornerstones” and even then only if there are 3 or more years on their contract (Pujols excepted).

I loved the fact we traded for him and I sorta wanted him back next year but then Smoltz has totally replaced him in my affections.

We’re going out to dinner and golf next wednesday. I think it’s love.

Ivan Rodriguez
Varitek
Alex Cora
Felipe Lopez
Beltre
Crede
G Anderson
J Damon
Ankiel
Andruw Jones
Xavier Nady
Rodrigo Lopez
J Washburn
E Gagne
R Villone

I think that is all of tem

Ankiel is flat out done as a Cardinal, I just hope the organization realizes it.

I thought we couldn’t even talk with players outside our team yet

I would say joe is offering an uninformed opinion.

gospel, man. Gospel.

and if we watched winn hit grounders to second every day I’m sure it would seem just as (or nearly as) inevitable. I’m not equating the two, because winn was better for longer, but I think they’re similarly risky propositions.

AnK’s seemed sad since Lil’ Dunc got exiled. Nady and Ank are buddies; I think they were in each others’ weddings or something

(rationalizing)

Unless ownership are serious about bumping payroll to be consistently in the $110m+ region for the next few years.

Basically, it’s Cameron isn’t it. We can talk all we want, but Cameron is demonstrably the best OF option in terms of cost, years and production.

Nady’s a lefty-killer of sorts but he doesn’t really require a platoon, especially. .769 career OPS against righties isn’t bad.

The writer doth protest too much, methinks.

The Cardinals have yet to get full value for the trade.
So they need to re-sign Holliday.
Period.

Sincerely,
Mark ‘Sunk Costs’ Mulder

they were looking for a scapegoat and no other outfielder offered to take more money from them in exchange for less production.

When Bryan Burwell walks on a used car lot, salesmen must smile, because Burwell believes that the “market” is the salesman’s asking price.

And BTW, there are a lot of rusted clunkers on Boras’s client list.

surprises me anymore.

this is a publication in a modest sized sports writing staff that has burwell, gorden AND someone who calls himself a “chatmeister” all on payroll.

My first question was how much Boras paid him to write that? Then there are a series of other questions. Cost matters – it always does. So do years committed. Why does it have to be Holliday at any cost? There are dozens of ways to go about this, assuming you have some money to spend. And we do have some money to spend. If 6/96 doesn’t even get recognized as a real offer to use as a starting point, then there’s an issue. We traded a lot to get him, therefore we must sign him at any cost? I lost a few hundred dollars playing poker Sat at a level I usually can win at, so clearly I should go play at a level above my head to get it back. That’s what Burwell would tell me, at least. Besides that, the signing of Holliday is a completely different scenario than trading for Holliday. We could still have made a play for him without the trade, and he can still sign elsewhere with the trade. There is next to zero correlation between the 2, and anyone should have been able to recognize that when Colorado felt they had to deal him. We should not feel obliged to make this work out to the exclusion of other opportunities, if they are a better return for the cost. Also, using Soriano as a comparison? That’s a great way to solidify your point!

I get so angry at sportwriters that are this myopic. To formulate such an singular opinion as a statement of fact shows what type of “in-depth” analysis Burwell provides his readership. I understand they can’t make their living saying on the one hand, on the other, you could also consider……they have to put a stake down and have a solid opinion. Still, this is extraordinarily weak stuff.

i don’t know of anyone who doesn’t think the soriano signing was a brillint move that returned great value o the flubs

…right?

if espn’s marketing people were put in charge of its programming people, there would be better programming… and less marketing.

That way, Garcia will more than likely get some MLB work in 2010. For 2011, Wainwright, Carp, Lohse, Harden, and Garcia is pretty nice, don’t you think? That is, if a one- or two-year deal would snare Harden. (I’m nearly certain a one-year deal would secure Smoltz for 2009.)