Edmonds heading to San Diego

Classic threads for your viewing pleasure.
Locked
TimeForGuinness
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 20035
Joined: April 18 06, 7:38 pm

Re: Edmonds heading to San Diego

Post by TimeForGuinness »

But even if Jimmy were to bounce back, we don't have the pitching to compete, we aren't strong up the middle, our 3B is disgruntled, and our LF is always an adventure in basic motor skills.

So really...will we be missing Jimmy *that* much.

IMHO, No.

And even if the 3B prospect is average, we don't even have *average* in our minor league system to package for a trade down the road. We have a few gems, that we really don't want to part with yet, but really not much else.

jim
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
Posts: 50681
Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm

Re: Edmonds heading to San Diego

Post by jim »

TimeForGuinness wrote:But even if Jimmy were to bounce back, we don't have the pitching to compete, we aren't strong up the middle, our 3B is disgruntled, and our LF is always an adventure in basic motor skills.

So really...will we be missing Jimmy *that* much.

IMHO, No.

And even if the 3B prospect is average, we don't even have *average* in our minor league system to package for a trade down the road. We have a few gems, that we really don't want to part with yet, but really not much else.
haltz said as much earlier, and you might be right. If after careful analysis the front office felt that there was no way to compete, or even be on the fringes of competing, then this trade would make perfect sense to me.

And I'm certain I'm getting the real world and our world mixed up, because some of those that have said that Edmonds for Freese was a good trade are saying it in the same breath as the statement that we can compete in '08. I hear that, and strongly disagree, and then the discussions goes down a path and I forget that it wasn't MO who said that we could compete.

User avatar
Go_Crazy_Folks
Everyday Player
Posts: 413
Joined: August 30 06, 3:01 pm
Location: Basement of Busch Stadium
Contact:

Re: Edmonds heading to San Diego

Post by Go_Crazy_Folks »

jim wrote:
Fat Strat wrote:The negativity is getting to me as well, just because I think some on this board aren't being objective or consistent in their views at all when normally they are quite objective and quite consistent. No reason to stop discussing, but still, somewhat annoying.
I couldn't agree more. I have to admit to really scratching my head at some posts that have come from posters that I have the highest regards for.
I know I don't post often, but I like to take part in the good discussions and I've always been overly optimistic w/ the Cards. This is the first offseason I've wondered about the "right" direction to go. I was at first shocked to see the Edmonds trade, then mad...but after a couple of days, I've started to see that I need to be as patient w/ Mo as I was w/ Walt.

I still would like to have seen Jimmy one last year, but I think that should have been last year by just picking up his option. Mo is left cleaning up a mess that at first, I either didn't see clearly or didn't want to see, just how bad it was. The trade frees up a hole for Ludwick/Ank/Barton, and it least we can see some new blood. Although I'm young, I'm old school, yet I'm now excited to see the new breed of GM scouting play out on the field. I'm off my negative thoughts of the past 3 days, and now holding out hope that some moves can be made to show what our direction really is.

User avatar
jdk82
All-Star
Posts: 2886
Joined: April 4 07, 8:58 pm
Location: Iowa

Re: Edmonds heading to San Diego

Post by jdk82 »

There will have to be some big moves made for the Cardinals to compete in 2008 or a bunch of overachievers.

User avatar
ghostrunner
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 25464
Joined: April 18 06, 9:40 pm

Re: Edmonds heading to San Diego

Post by ghostrunner »

I was going to add this earlier from a Padres blog, and forgot:

http://friarforecast.com/?p=229
What did they give up?

Here’s what I wrote about David Freese in my top 30 list:

Freese has done about all you can expect, hitting .307/.399/.516 in his first two professional seasons. But he’s a 24 year old in A ball and that certainly needs to be kept in mind. The defensive reports seem to vary (from BA), but it sounds like he’s going to be average at best in the hot corner. His bat will have to carry him and we’ll know a lot more about him after a full year, I’m assuming, in San Antonio in 2008.

I had him ranked 17th, by the way. To me, he’s not overly impressive by any means, but he isn’t just a throw away guy either. He hit .302/.400/.489 in high A Lake Elsinore last year. His lack of power is a little worrisome at 3b and is ground ball rate is a little alarming (above 50% at every stop). If Freese turns into an average player down the road, the Cards will likely get the better of the deal, at least in a long term perspective.

Also consider that Freese is pretty well blocked in the organization with Headley and Kouzmanoff ahead of him. His defensive reports are not great and a position switch would probably be to a corner outfield spot, if anywhere.

Cashing in prospects for playoffs

As we have talked about recently, the Padres are in a “sweet spot” when it comes to making or missing the playoffs. Adding a player like Edmonds could help boost them into the high 80’s/low 90’s win range, and effectively help them reach the playoffs (more than it would for another team). That would allow to have a shot at the world series and also cash in on an extra chunk of change that comes with making the post-season.

Even in Freese turns out to be worth more in the long term, the Padres added incentive to reach the playoffs this season may make it worth the risk of bringing in an aging star like Edmonds.

Final thoughts

In the end, I look at this deal as a pretty fair one for both teams. It’s certainly somewhat of a risk for the Padres, giving an aging, injury risk in Edmonds ~$7 million. At the same time, they aren’t giving up a top tier prospect and they are only on the hook for Edmonds for one year, if things fall apart physically. The Padres are a better team now, but their farm system is a little worse and they payroll is $7 million higher. All things considered, I’ll call this one a pretty fair deal, in which the Cards get some payroll flexibility and a mid-level prospect and the Padres get a solid player to fill a major outfield hole .

But who knows ….
Seems about right to me.
Last edited by ghostrunner on December 16 07, 7:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
GatewaySnayke
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 11941
Joined: July 23 06, 11:54 pm
Location: GatewaySnaykebird

Re: Edmonds heading to San Diego

Post by GatewaySnayke »

Fat Strat wrote:
I also find it hard to believe that there's not a single team out there that is not interested in Chris Duncan or Rick Ankiel and would offer up a pitcher better than Joel Pineiro.
I'm sure they are interested in Duncan or Ankiel, but we would be giving up some pretty big and cheap offensive cogs for the future in doing so. You can rob from Peter to pay Paul, or you can stick with Peter and try to find a way to get Paul too.
I find Duncan and Ankiel to be redundant players, with one having better on-base skills and the other having better defensive skills. One of them should be jettisoned because they have value. The only thing trading Edmonds accomplished was shedding salary that apparently didn't need shedding, because DeWitt has said before that the money is there for a bat.

They've already resigned themselves to having a putrid offense, this after stating two months ago how they were going to compete. A true effort to be competitive would be dealing one of The Redundants to help a pitching staff that won't have to trade for Jason Grilli and convert him to a starter.

TimeForGuinness
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 20035
Joined: April 18 06, 7:38 pm

Re: Edmonds heading to San Diego

Post by TimeForGuinness »

jim wrote:
TimeForGuinness wrote:But even if Jimmy were to bounce back, we don't have the pitching to compete, we aren't strong up the middle, our 3B is disgruntled, and our LF is always an adventure in basic motor skills.

So really...will we be missing Jimmy *that* much.

IMHO, No.

And even if the 3B prospect is average, we don't even have *average* in our minor league system to package for a trade down the road. We have a few gems, that we really don't want to part with yet, but really not much else.
haltz said as much earlier, and you might be right. If after careful analysis the front office felt that there was no way to compete, or even be on the fringes of competing, then this trade would make perfect sense to me.

And I'm certain I'm getting the real world and our world mixed up, because some of those that have said that Edmonds for Freese was a good trade are saying it in the same breath as the statement that we can compete in '08. I hear that, and strongly disagree, and then the discussions goes down a path and I forget that it wasn't MO who said that we could compete.
I'm not saying we can't compete, but a healthy Jimmy won't be giving us an additional 15 wins with all the other holes on the team.

jim
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
Posts: 50681
Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm

Re: Edmonds heading to San Diego

Post by jim »

Go_Crazy_Folks wrote:
jim wrote:
Fat Strat wrote:The negativity is getting to me as well, just because I think some on this board aren't being objective or consistent in their views at all when normally they are quite objective and quite consistent. No reason to stop discussing, but still, somewhat annoying.
I couldn't agree more. I have to admit to really scratching my head at some posts that have come from posters that I have the highest regards for.
I know I don't post often, but I like to take part in the good discussions and I've always been overly optimistic w/ the Cards. This is the first offseason I've wondered about the "right" direction to go. I was at first shocked to see the Edmonds trade, then mad...but after a couple of days, I've started to see that I need to be as patient w/ Mo as I was w/ Walt.

I still would like to have seen Jimmy one last year, but I think that should have been last year by just picking up his option. Mo is left cleaning up a mess that at first, I either didn't see clearly or didn't want to see, just how bad it was. The trade frees up a hole for Ludwick/Ank/Barton, and it least we can see some new blood. Although I'm young, I'm old school, yet I'm now excited to see the new breed of GM scouting play out on the field. I'm off my negative thoughts of the past 3 days, and now holding out hope that some moves can be made to show what our direction really is.
I think Mo has a very difficult job. I wanted Antonetti, thought we had him, and when he bolted at the last second I kind of had a chill run down my spine.

What was the reason he gave again for not wanting the job?

maddash
is eerily well-versed on Project Runway and irony
Posts: 8521
Joined: June 26 06, 3:07 pm

Re: Edmonds heading to San Diego

Post by maddash »

Just to put the discussion and debate here into perspective - an unscientific poll on stltoday.com:
What's your take on the Jim Edmonds trade?

34%
Great deal. He's too old and too expensive

35%
Lousy deal. That's all the Cards can get -- a Class A third baseman?

30%
Not sure. Depends on Rasmus' ability to move up

Votes: 9,291
Nearly 10,000 people split almost equally in three different ways.

User avatar
thrill
bronoun enthusiast
Posts: 29079
Joined: April 14 06, 10:45 pm
Location: extremely online

Re: Edmonds heading to San Diego

Post by thrill »

Baseball wise, it's a non-move. We aren't going to get that much better production, nor worse. It gives Rasmus a year to season against MLB pitching, but that value is offset by early arby clock.

Sentimentality aside, this isn't something that deserves 50 pages.

Locked