Reyes may be movin'

Kouzmanoff

I don't know their relative values, but I wonder if a trade centered around Reyes and Kouzmanoff could work. 2 young, pre-arbitration guys with upside. Kouzmanoff last year absolutely mashed lefties (almost 1000 OPS) and wasn't completely useless against righties.

by CardFaninVA on Dec 4, 2007 2:48 PM EST reply actions

Yeah,

he just got off to an absolutely horrible start, but he's apparently seen by many coaches as a guy that could be a stud (like Reyes). But then again, I'd rather us not get rid of Rolen.

Maybe we could get Khalil . . . ? I remember talks about him looking to be traded last year, but I'm not sure what his status is this year.

On with the youth movement!

by aet15 on Dec 4, 2007 3:01 PM EST up reply actions

yeah

I'd like Kouz, he'd be great as an OBP machine in front of Albert, and cheap for awhile. Could also be moved to LF if we ended up finding a better defensive 3B.

Also, note that the Padres have Chase Headley on the way up, pretty much ready for a tester at 3B. I'd think Kouz would be expendable, especially since SD would be one of the worse stadiums in which to shift Kouz to LF.

by siddfynch on Dec 4, 2007 3:08 PM EST up reply actions

Interesting quote from the NL executive

"He's a four-seam guy, and they want him to be a sinkerballer," the executive said of Reyes.

that certainly implies that others are high on him despite his lack of success here and that others believe that Tony and Dunc are trying to force a square peg into a round hole. Hopefully that means he has more value than I thought.

by chuckb on Dec 4, 2007 3:05 PM EST reply actions

Hmm...Interesting

That works in the BOB's favor if it's a widespread belief. I think the bigger problem with Reyes is his health and his mechanics. I don't think struggling w/ adding a 2 seamer causes ones velocity to drop from 93-95 to 86-88 on a radar gun all by itself. I think that is probably due to having arm problems based on poor mechanics, whether its the high pitching elbow, the unaggressive lower half, the poor timing, or whatever else I've heard brought up.

If other teams are overvaluing him and he goes there and has his arm explode than the Cardinals have suddenly gotten a huge break.

by redbirdnation8206 on Dec 4, 2007 3:36 PM EST up reply actions

he was still hitting 92-93, touching 94

towards the end of last season. I can't figure out how to link to gameday directly, but

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/scoreboard/20070823.html

Discussion here:
http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/comments/2007/8/23/19711/6149/211#211

It's easier not to make the mistake than to make the mistake and try to fix it. -Mo

by SleepyCA on Dec 4, 2007 4:43 PM EST up reply actions

Well

His velo has clearly dropped, but he was never 93-95. More 90-93 touching 95 which is a pretty big difference.

Cheeseburger in paradise.

by joker24 on Dec 4, 2007 5:58 PM EST up reply actions

I hope so too, but this

mystery NL exec might be just spouting the conventional wisdom he heard at the hotel bar. I would think that any team seriously interested in Reyes would have a little more detailed understanding of the many, many potential explanations of Reyes' performance.

OTOH, if that facile explanation is enough to get some NL exec to bite and send us back something of value, I'm all for it.

by MdRedbirdFreak on Dec 4, 2007 4:03 PM EST up reply actions

The interest in Reyes is because

the executives KNOW the Cards are looking to dump him. They are going to try and pass the trash to us. He will get nothing for us but a fringe major leaguer are a mid level prospect by himself. They won't offer more-they'll come in with a pile of quotes made regarding how much the Cardinals don't want Reyes on the team. You can search it yourself-it dates back to 2005.

It's a low risk move for any other team to take him on. And don't think Reyes didn't learn something through his difficulties last year. I guarantee he did. And if the Cards are wrong about him, and he does turn it around, I would hope management would be asked some hard questions about how they handled him since he arrived in the ML.

But don't think he's anything other than a minor trade chip by himself.

by jillsinmo on Dec 4, 2007 6:25 PM EST up reply actions

Rolen

I thought the section on Rolen was interesting. Even if the Brewers situation is cooling off, the Dodgers and the Giants have some interesting players to offer.

My preference would be the Dodgers. They have a pretty good crop of young talent, they had a black hole at third last year, and their GM is Ned Colletti, who I once heard described as Walt Jocketty in terms of philosophy, only much much dumber. I wouldn't doubt it if he'd rather plug in Rolen and deal LaRoche and maybe a pitcher. Billingsley perhaps? If that deal were made I'd find MO and give him my undying allegiance.

by redbirdnation8206 on Dec 4, 2007 3:46 PM EST reply actions

+1

that'd make the team better this year and in the future, imho. it'd pretty nice to have laroche and rasmus along with billingsley and wainwright as young and cheap on this team.
is that kind of deal possible? say it's so.

by birdsonthebat on Dec 4, 2007 4:01 PM EST up reply actions

With the added bonus of

watching TLR squirm upon being forced to play a bunch of young guys.

by MdRedbirdFreak on Dec 4, 2007 4:05 PM EST up reply actions

Yeah!

Just like he squirmed when he played Clayton over Ozzie, when he plugged Alan Benes, Morris, and Ankiel into the starting rotation at young ages, like when he gave Pujols a bajillion at bats his rookie year, like when he gave Polanco 400 abs when everyone thought that was crazy, like when he played JD Drew every night, even when he stunk up the joint his first two seasons, like when he plugged Waino and Reyes into the rotation this year out of spring training.

LaRussa plays kids who are good. And LaRoche qualifies as very good. At worst he'd be a good 6 or 7 hitter by the middle of the season.

by redbirdnation8206 on Dec 4, 2007 4:12 PM EST up reply actions

+1

by airhad on Dec 4, 2007 4:33 PM EST up reply actions

Re: LaRoche + Billingsley

I don't think Colletti is that dumb.

by 26thMan on Dec 4, 2007 4:04 PM EST up reply actions

here's hoping

what about adding reyes to the deal?

by birdsonthebat on Dec 4, 2007 4:07 PM EST up reply actions

Probably not

But then again he did sign Pierre to a 5 year, 44 million dollar deal, and brought aboard an aging Gonzo, which effectively blocked Kemp and Ethier. He also hired Grady Little, the guy whose preference for veterans blows LaRussa's out of the water. So I don't know...Maybe he is that dumb.

But sadly that scenario I just cooked up is probably the pipe dream of all pipe dreams.

by redbirdnation8206 on Dec 4, 2007 4:08 PM EST up reply actions

it got me all excited, too

which is a dead-giveaway that it's an unfair deal.

if the dodgers are interested, i just hope that mo is centering the discussions on laroche.

by birdsonthebat on Dec 4, 2007 4:14 PM EST up reply actions

ummmmm

why would they throw in billingley? if we got laroche straight up for rolen i think most would consider it a good deal (depending on how much salery we eat).

. . .I'm your huckleberry. . .

by joshbdork on Dec 4, 2007 4:13 PM EST reply actions

Billingsly is too much to hope for

It'd probably just be Rolen for LaRoche. Depending on how much salary we ate we could maybe add someone like Matt Kemp to the mix. That would be a hell of a deal, swinging Rolen for one of the top 3b prospects in baseball and a right-handed outfield bat. Kemp's career line against lefties is .338/.376/.493. An Ankiel/Kemp platoon in RF looks pretty good to me.

That deal may favor us a little too much (again, it depends on how much salary we ate) but we could always throw in their choice of Reyes, Thompson, or Johnson.

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

by stl tyler on Dec 4, 2007 4:24 PM EST reply actions

Reyes + B. Anderson = Cliff Lee?

Jerry Crasnick just reported that the Cardinals have discussed Reyes and Bryan Anderson for Cliff Lee. Personally, while I wouldn't want to lose Anderson, I think that Cliff Lee has the potential to be a really great pitcher and I would love it if he came to the Cardinals.

by sdelek on Dec 4, 2007 4:30 PM EST reply actions

This trade would be beyond awful

I can't believe Mozeliak would go for this. Lee for Reyes, straight up -- that's possible. Why throw in the 2nd best C prospect in the minors?

by chuckb on Dec 4, 2007 4:33 PM EST up reply actions

Agreed

I'd rather have Reyes sted Lee anyway.

by 26thMan on Dec 4, 2007 4:36 PM EST up reply actions

+1

I wouldn't give them both up for Lee. Maybe Reyes and another low minor leaguer with some potential, but not Reyes AND Anderson.

by joecardsfan on Dec 4, 2007 4:38 PM EST up reply actions

I supported Mo

when he got the job.

If he wastes Anderson on Cliff Lee (a player I'd like to see them get), I give up on him. Cezar Izturis was a bad move, this would be a 'nuke it from orbit' deal.

"Well, you wait for a strike. Then you knock the shit out of it. - Musial to Flood on how to hit a curveball

by Hardcore Legend on Dec 4, 2007 5:03 PM EST up reply actions

I would make this deal

As good of a prospect as Anderson is, pitching is an infinitely bigger need to us right now. Interesting that Crasnick's report says "Anthony Reyes and/or...Bryan Anderson". If Anderson isn't the sticking point I wonder if we couldn't work out something different centered around Reyes. I'm a little unsure about the Indians needs, would something like Reyes, Thompson/Johnson, and Mather be a possibility?

Crasnick also seems to think that Cabrera to the Halos is a done deal. Bring on the Rolen/LaRoche swap.

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

by stl tyler on Dec 4, 2007 4:35 PM EST up reply actions

I take that back

I just looked up Lee's stats, I didn't realize how awful his 2007 was. I wouldn't include Anderson in this deal.

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

by stl tyler on Dec 4, 2007 4:39 PM EST up reply actions

Yea not good

plus he's an ass, and pouts and whines and gets all moody. He's thrown his hat and glove into the crowd (on separate occasions), as well as given the crowd the bird.

by joecardsfan on Dec 4, 2007 4:42 PM EST up reply actions

I'm also a Tribe fan

and they are searching for an everyday LF and potentially some relief pitching and a 3B (they play Blake there, and are still hoping Marte pans out).

by joecardsfan on Dec 4, 2007 4:40 PM EST up reply actions

I just read that too

I'm not sure I'd like that exact deal, but I sure like something along those lines. But Anderson and Reyes together is way too much to give up for Lee.

Unless they're planning on giving us Victor Martinez too . . . (that's a joke, if you couldn't tell)

On with the youth movement!

by aet15 on Dec 4, 2007 4:35 PM EST up reply actions

Agreed

I have liked Cliff Lee for a while, but why on earth would we need to sweeten a Reyes for Lee deal with our future catcher? Lee's good, but he's more like Kevin Millwood good, not Danny Haren good. Also, isn't he coming off an injury-shortened season? Why did he only pitch 97 innings last year? (at a 6+ ERA clip, mind you)

by Ray Lankford on Dec 4, 2007 4:45 PM EST up reply actions

How about they throw in...

Antonetti?

by Yellow Dog on Dec 4, 2007 4:51 PM EST up reply actions

We need a catchall diary

For winter meeting and hot stove happenings.

Not new diary worthy news:
Chris Narveson is now a Milwaukee Brewer.

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

by stl tyler on Dec 4, 2007 4:47 PM EST reply actions

Man

that would be nice.

I will be brief.

by Alxfritz on Dec 4, 2007 5:02 PM EST up reply actions

Nah...

It would only be 1200 posts long by the weekend and impossible to get any info out of.

I don't see the complaint. What else is there to talk about right now.

"I'm hungry. Not for food. Just for baseball" Amaury Cazana Marti

by bobbyballgame1 on Dec 4, 2007 6:07 PM EST up reply actions

As opposed to

having ten new diaries a day about the exact same shit?

I will be brief.

by Alxfritz on Dec 4, 2007 6:15 PM EST up reply actions

I agree

that is excessive, but a "catch-all" is a terrible idea.

It's on the posters. Look at the diaries before posting a new one. If there is already one dealing with the same topic then post your news there.

"I'm hungry. Not for food. Just for baseball" Amaury Cazana Marti

by bobbyballgame1 on Dec 4, 2007 6:31 PM EST up reply actions

I'll agree with that

A catch all diary would be laborious and perhaps overwhelming to get through, but that's the way the diaries are strating to become now. Instead of having a singe page to do a "find [new" command through, there's a bunch of different pages to try to pour through, many with similar info/ conversations.

If there's a diary with "Reyes" in the title just four diaries down, it's a little redundant to post a new one about him. Chances are that info is already being talked about; otherwise, throw it in there and watch it go! Same goes news on Rolen, etc.

As a wise man once said: "When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed. Say something once, why say it again?"

I will be brief.

by Alxfritz on Dec 4, 2007 6:38 PM EST up reply actions

Should've clarified

I wasn't very clear. I meant a catch-all diary for minor happenings. Like Chris Narveson getting signed by the Brewers, or the Cubs trading that crappy middle infielder they got from the Tigers to Atlanta for a minor league reliever. I see the problem with 1200 post diaries, but you can always start a new one AFTER there's a hundred or so posts. But diaries with no content and three or four comments are flooding the front page and knocking off diaries that have actual meaningful discussions.

Other than that, there should be a Reyes diary and a Rolen diary, etc. My complaint is that two people started new diaries about the Rolen to Milwaukee trade cooling off when there was already a Rolen to Milwaukee diary, and there's how many diaries on the front page about the various Reyes rumors?

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

by stl tyler on Dec 4, 2007 7:16 PM EST up reply actions

Not Quite a Catch-All...

Erik's already posted an official winter meeting rumor diary, but I'll suggest this anyway.

As stated, the problem with catch-alls is that they tend to grow too big too quick and it becomes difficult to find specific information. But since the vast majority of diaries appear to to be center on possible movements of specific Cardinal players, howsabout we simply create catch-alls for those players? Reyes, Rolan, Duncan, et al.?

by Forsch31 on Dec 5, 2007 12:15 AM EST up reply actions

reyes and shumacker

forlee and sowers

by cm1000 on Dec 4, 2007 4:56 PM EST reply actions

bad idea

In 4 seasons with 10+ starts he has had an ERA+ of 80, 111, 103 and 75. His xFIP over the last 4 season is 5.04, 4.56, 5.46 and 5.57. In the last two season Reyes has had an xFIP of 5.11 and 5.35. So basically we would trade a 4/5 starter (who's younger and cheaper) and the 2nd best ctaching prospect in the minors for a 4/5 starter. Not a good idea

by maurerdj on Dec 4, 2007 5:09 PM EST reply actions