unapologetic rumor mongering

by lboros on Nov 29, 2005 9:09 AM EST in News Comment 32 comments

the guy behind mlbtraderumors.com wrote me last night. he's hearing that the cards have something large in the works -- so big that "jocketty issued a memo saying that any disclosure means termination." he wanted to know: you got wind of any big signing or trade? a theory at least?

i wrote back that jock's front office never leaks unless he wants it to, and the rumor mill rarely picks up his moves in advance. that said, if jock felt compelled to reinforce his standing policy with a memo specifically threatening to fire a leaker, it would seem to indicate a pretty earth-shattering move. mlbtrade's source hadn't seen the memo personally, but was told of it by a front-office employee -- so we're chasing shadows to some extent. but it takes an object to cast a shadow, no? there might be something to this.

i would add that mlbtraderumors.com has done pretty well for itself this month. the site was the 1st to call the nady-for-cameron deal, 2 days or so before any mainstream media caught wind. it reported that wagner would sign with the mets (getting a guaranteed 4th year) a week ahead of the fact -- and before the ryan signing in toronto, which accelerated the action. it correctly called howry's signing with the cubs, again in advance of official reports. he even was the 1st to report the cardinals' pursuit of octavio dotel -- i read it there (and you read it here) two days before the post-dispatch confirmed it. so if he's received this information, there may well be some substance behind it. maybe not, but maybe.

mlbtrade asked me for theories, so i wrote:

my best guess ---- based on the description of this as a `big' move --- would be that they're signing burnett. that has been their unofficial #1 priority.

if it's a big trade, there was one wild theory mentioned 2-3 weeks ago that i thought actually made some sense to me: edmonds to the yankees for robinson cano and chien-ming wang. i was intrigued by the idea because it would make the cards young and cheap; they could plow the savings into signing giles (replacing edmonds' production) and freeing up marquis to be dealt for another outfielder. edmonds is in his walk year, and i don't think the cards want to re-sign him after 2006; now would be the time to trade him, while his value's still high. i wrote a post about it.

the source of this rumor was bernie miklasz himself; he started his own thread about it at the pressbox with a caveat like, "this crazy idea is making the rounds, i don't put much stock in it but take it for what it's worth." this would certainly be earth-shaking enough to require utter leak-proofness in the stl front office . . . .

other ideas that might fit the "big move" description:

they've figured out a way to get bobby abreu --- and don't ask me how, it would make my brain hurt too much
they're getting griffey from the reds for jason marquis
the opposite of sending edmonds to ny --- they're signing bernie williams to a one-year deal at a discount

the latter three notions came straight outta me arse and are based on nothing other than the speculation that there is a "big move" afoot - one big enough to necessitate a threatening memo to the front-office staff. and here's another caveat: i am NOT endorsing or wishing for any of the above-mentioned moves. nor am i opposed. this is value-nuetral specc'in'.

anybody else have any ideas? if so post `em here. if i hear anything else i'll put it up; please do the same.

0 recs | Comment 32 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

and here's another thought

maybe they're signing nomar to play left

by lboros on Nov 29, 2005 9:15 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Damn...

I'll have to buy myself a beer if that's true. Really, though, considering we've got good outfield depth, it could be cheap and good.

by sdrone on Nov 29, 2005 9:31 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

This is so exciting - I hope it is something...

but looking around the diamond and in the pen, who could be involved in a blockbuster trade?
I am going to immediately say that Pujols and Rolen are not involved. Edmonds is definitely a possibility...but here is my opinion of the others (feel free to disagree - this is just first thought).
Yaddi - Young with potential. My first instinct is that the club has put too much into him and has high expectations, but with a few catchers out there and with some many teams looking - maybe.
Carp - Could STL EVER deal with BOS for Mr. Ramirez? Personally, I hate the guy, but he doesn't want to go to the Mets and wants to head west. We have some OF gaps and imagine him in a lineup with Rolen and Pujols? Carp is coming off a great season, and while I don't think he is a Kent Bottenfield his value is sky high now, his contract is also enticing
Izzy - given the market for closers I almost immediately nix this one, but what if the org. thinks they have a closer in Reyes/Wainwright
Mulder - aside from his cheap contract, why not?
Reyes - Jocketty seems to love trading the hot young prospects for older stuff, could he be included in a deal for Manny or something else big?
While trading any of these guys is unlikely a big deal sure would be exciting!

by sdelek on Nov 29, 2005 9:32 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

No way on Yadier

He's dirt cheap, excellent defensively, and surprising on offense. He even provides some leadership. He's perfect.

by sdrone on Nov 29, 2005 10:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

they can't

trade Yaddie, remember the whole Derrek Barton thing?

Cardinals Diaspora

by VanRam on Nov 29, 2005 10:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Levi

Oh I hope hope hope they're not trading Jimmy. Watching him play has become one of the absolute best things about baseball for me, and even if it might make sense for the team, I don't want to think of him not in center for the Cards this year.

That's just one of the reasons I'm not a GM.

by levistahl on Nov 29, 2005 9:34 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

My thoughts...

And this is pure speculation, but when I hear of big trade in the works, I usually look first to teams that have already been busy this offseason. If Team A has already made signings/trades, it might indicate they're shaking up their roster and need to clear payroll/space for those recently acquired. So, I'd look at the Blue Jays, Mets, Marlins and Cubs, for starters. We can probably rule out the Cubs, as I don't see us doing a big trade with them. What about a 3-way between us, and two of the remaining three teams? I could see Piazza going north of the border, with us hopefully getting a younger OF like Vernon Wells, John-Ford Griffin, or Victor Diaz. Of course, who knows what we would be giving up in such a deal, or what we would be getting in return.

Maybe we're just spending a lot of cash on a "top-notch" free agent, which for this organization is a huge deal.

by PhatAlbert on Nov 29, 2005 9:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Batshit crazy

The one I just pulled out of my ass, on the basis of the Giants needing pitching is sending Marquis and either Reyes or Wainwright to San Francisco for Barry Bonds.

Think about that for a minute before excoriating it. Then laugh.

Personally, I really like the possibility of Nomar coming to St. Louis, especially if he (or Eckstein) plays second, but even if Nomar agrees to play left.

by STLEdge on Nov 29, 2005 10:00 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

GILES OFFERED 5 YEARS FROM TORONTO

REPORTS ARE THAT THE JAYS OFFER IS 5 YEARS AND 55 MIL. TOTAL...

UM, NO THANKS...

by TOLAXOR on Nov 29, 2005 10:11 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Well.,..

if that's true, then Wells could become expendable, no?

by cardsrul on Nov 29, 2005 10:15 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

To all Cardinal fans...

... go here to see what Cub fans have to say about that site.

by Al on Nov 29, 2005 11:29 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

thanks al, but

i don't see anything wrong with mlbtraderumors. first, he's made some excellent calls there, including at least two that originally drew ridicule and scorn from doubters --- but turned out to be true. and second, he advertises in the site title that he's trafficking in rumors --- might be true, might not be; might be partially true.

i guess i just don't see the problem.

by lboros on Nov 29, 2005 11:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Cubs Fans

Why would we give a crap what the Flub Fans think anyway? Me thinks thou doth troll too much.

by Birdman on Nov 29, 2005 1:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

My guess is that

If it was a trade, it wouldn't be such a secret. Think of the Rolen and Walker deals--ultra-secret because Jocketty didn't want competition. I think he's working on acquiring a big name in a structured deal for cash. If players are being traded, they are almost incidental, like prospects or Ray King.

Plus, I understood Edmonds wanted StL to pick up his option so he could "retire as a Cardinal."

by Red in Chicago on Nov 29, 2005 11:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Not seeing a problem either....

I'm with you Larry, what's the problem with the site? The critique of mlbrumors consists of this: "Anyone can do what that guy does, pull headlines from espn and local papers and post wild thoughts from message boards on a site and call them rumors."

I just want to know what his defnition of rumors is, if it isn't just what he described? Or is he criticizing the way the information is gathered? If it is the second choice, citing the false Juan Pierre rumor was a poor way to make his point, in that that one came from a named, ESPN-employed, source. And, I want to know, if that rumor does indeed come true, and it may, will the site then lose the "craptastic" label Al slaps on it?

The site is called "rumors," not "news." It's November and rumors are what sates baseballnerds like us during the interminable wait until spring and in between actual flashes of action like real trades and FA signings.

And, if "anyone can do what that guy does," then why does that site get so much traffic? Seems to me if anyone could do it, they wouldn't need to look to someone else.

Keep it up mlbrumors, this fan likes you.

by flynn on Nov 29, 2005 11:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Couldn't Agree More

I love mlb trade rumors - it's my most frequently visited baseball site after VEB. I don't want to give ESPN the money for Insider to get the same info, nor do I have the time to search all sites, and I also don't have anyone I could consider an inside source. And yes, I take what I read there with a grain of salt, as the owner of the site obviously intends people to do.

by Dweeze on Nov 29, 2005 12:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Rumours is one of my favorite albums.

... wait, what were we talking about again?

matty fred is a web log.

by matty fred on Nov 29, 2005 12:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Only

Flubfans could have a coniption over reading rumors on a site with the word "rumors" plainly stated in its title. If it's so easy, why don't they do it themselves? And I doubt anyone is holding them hostage and making them read the site. I personally enjoy the hell out of that site. True/False/Maybe--who cares? It's yak about baseball, and that's what I want.

by rockin redbird on Nov 29, 2005 1:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Manny?

Man Ram and cash in exchange for Einar Diaz, Ray King, and some Big League Chew.

Why not? The Red Sox don't even have a GM...they'd never even notice.

Cheers, Alex Fritz

by Alxfritz on Nov 29, 2005 12:12 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Trading for Dunn?

Like I said before?

http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/story/2005/11/17/142751/44

by craig3410 on Nov 29, 2005 12:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

No wait, I've got it!

Cardinals trade Jason Marquis and Ray King back to Atlanta, which sends Kyle Farnsworth to L.A., which sends J.D. Drew back to St. Louis.

Hey, it could happen.

by Red in Chicago on Nov 29, 2005 12:33 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

The Farns

Farnsworth is a FA. Braves can't trade him. The question is, who would want him?

by flynn on Nov 29, 2005 1:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

now here's an idea

that makes sense: barry zito. someone posted the notion at the sports lounge --- a's have just signed loiaiza, which maybe gives them the levge they need to give zito up. but for who . . . ? not reyes i hope; at his salary, the guy's just too valuable.

by lboros on Nov 29, 2005 12:42 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Zito

I've thought that too, but I figure Walt would have some trepidation about going back to Beane. I don't want to give up our best pitcher in the minors and our best hitter in the minors AGAIN, which is what Beane would probably ask for. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice.....

by erik on Nov 29, 2005 1:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Barry and Adam

Zito and Dunn both could very easily happen, but by easily I mean "we lose both Reyes and Wainright" which isn't the brightest of options

Cheers, Alex Fritz

by Alxfritz on Nov 29, 2005 12:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Edmonds

It's hard to imagine the Cardinals dealing Edmonds. Ignoring the fact that he's still one of the top centerfielders in the game, there are some other issues.

One, he's a 10 and 5 guy who's stated more than once that he wants to retire a Cardinal. If he can reject any trade, he's going to unless it's a perfect situation.

Two, the Cardinals not only have him in 2006, but they have a fairly cheap option for him in 2007.

Whatever the case - it's hard to imagine the Cardinals being on the verge of a blockbuster deal involving Edmonds, considering the hoops they'd have to jump through to get that done. As in - too many parties being notified to keep it a secret.

I suspect that if Walt is threatening firing over leaks, then it's an FA signing. After all - he can't fire anyone in another office if it's a trade.

by Robb on Nov 29, 2005 12:55 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Ya never know..

If it IS a big trade, he could have told the other GM(s) involved that if anything was leaked too early, the deal was off.

by cardsrul on Nov 29, 2005 1:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Or is it a blockbuster?

Edmonds, Wainwright, Gall, and King to the Yankees for the "anti-clutch" A-Rod and money(the Rangers are paying a good chunk of the guy's salary, I think).

Now that's a half-assed made up "rumor"

by Valatan on Nov 29, 2005 1:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Exactly my point

Robb, you have it right, IMHO. Trades just don't seem as "secret" as FA deals, given that trades involve multiple subjective values of disparate players whereas FA deals involve one easily valued commodity: cash. Anyone can step up and offer another dollar for a given player, which is why I think that's what's going on.

Also, generally pronouncements about leaks only happen after there has been one. In other words, scan the newswires and the story is probably out there in some fashion. An out-of-the-blue thing wouldn't necessitate Jocketty's (paranoid?) prophylactic warning.

I also agree re Edmonds. Plus the Cardinals need left-handed bats, even moreso if Mabry is becoming a Scrub (God help him).

by Red in Chicago on Nov 29, 2005 1:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

one reason to keep trade talks secret

if the deal falls through, you don't want your own player to know that you were trying to trade him. remember how nanny vina got his feelings hurt a few years back because his name surfaced in off-season trade rumors? if a trade is being pursued aggressively but is still touch-and-go, walt might issue a gag order because he doesn't want a disgruntled player in his clubhouse should the deal fall apart.

for that matter, the gm of the other team may feel that way about his own player --- and may warn jocketty, "if you guys leak this i'm backing out."

by lboros on Nov 29, 2005 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs