GatewayRedbirds.com

EastonBlues22 wrote:

greenback44 wrote:I don't have a minor league database, but I'm sure the list of players who haven't played at all above A-ball before their age-25 seasons is pretty bleak.

What percentage of players stay in college through age 22 and then go into pro ball?

I don't know, but those usually aren't the good ones either.

They got somebody better than Evan Rust, but that's not a high hurdle. This is a salary dump, and I won't be happy about a salary dump. And I'm particularly not happy about the Cardinals salary dumping two weeks after making a preemptive strike for Cesar F. Izturis.

haltz wrote: Relative worth within a crappy and shallow system means nothing to me. If this was the basis for trades, then we'd be making a ton of bad ones.

That wasn't the basis for the trade. The basis for the trade was moving a piece that does nothing for the Cards beyond next year (a year that's doomed to fail) for the best someone they can get who might help them in the future. If this is the best someone they could get from the small list of available teams, then so be it.

I expected other teams to value him at about his contract, which apparently the Padres do, and for him to be worth a lot more than that to the 2008 Cardinals.

This seems to be the crux of our disagreement. To me, his 2008 value for the Cardinals is purely cosmetic. There's absolutely no way his presence (or lack thereof) makes the difference between us contending and not at this point. This team isn't contending unless God comes down and pitches three out of every five days while batting cleanup.

Since he's almost certainly gone/done after next year, his value to the team is equal to approximately what we can get for him in a trade...which, it turns out, isn't all that much.

maddash wrote:We're all forgetting the silver lining in all of this: it opens up a spot for the Cards to re-sign Taguchi so he can platoon center with Ankiel.

It also frees up a roster spot for Skip Schumaker.

EastonBlues22 wrote:

haltz wrote: Relative worth within a crappy and shallow system means nothing to me. If this was the basis for trades, then we'd be making a ton of bad ones.

That wasn't the basis for the trade. The basis for the trade was moving a piece that does nothing for the Cards beyond next year (a year that's doomed to fail) for the best someone they can get who might help them in the future. If this is the best someone they could get from the small list of available teams, then so be it.

I expected other teams to value him at about his contract, which apparently the Padres do, and for him to be worth a lot more than that to the 2008 Cardinals.

This seems to be the crux of our disagreement. To me, his 2008 value for the Cardinals is purely cosmetic. There's absolutely no way his presence (or lack thereof) makes the difference between us contending and not at this point. This team isn't contending unless God comes down and pitches three out of every five days while batting cleanup.

Since he's almost certainly gone/done after next year, his value to the team is equal to approximately what we can get for him in a trade...which, it turns out, isn't all that much.

I agree

I'll actually be fine with the move if the money is funneled back into the payroll -- perhaps for someone who can help beyond next season. I'm not holding my breath.

So the Cards have potentially dumped a popular player, saved money and continued to rip off their customers, who are already getting fleeced by ticket prices.

cards2468 wrote:From what I hear Freese has a strong bat, struggles against the curve, and has poor enough defense at 3b that his best shot is 1b... Hate to tell you this, but I doubt we'll see him on the Cards' 25 man roster ever

He did get voted as the best defensive 3rd baseman in the California league this yr by baseball america.

EastonBlues22 wrote:Since he's almost certainly gone/done after next year, his value to the team is equal to approximately what we can get for him in a trade...which, it turns out, isn't all that much.

I don't agree with this. I also don't agree with completely throwing away an entire season.

EastonBlues22 wrote:That wasn't the basis for the trade. The basis for the trade was moving a piece that does nothing for the Cards beyond next year (a year that's doomed to fail) for the best someone they can get who might help them in the future. If this is the best someone they could get from the small list of available teams, then so be it.

I'm not arguing that it was. I'm saying that where he falls in our system tells us only stuff we already knew about our system. It tells us nothing about the trade.

Since he's almost certainly gone/done after next year, his value to the team is equal to approximately what we can get for him in a trade...which, it turns out, isn't all that much.

I'm concerned more about the (-) value of dumping him, than even how valuable his swan song is to ticket sales. I think that's what's being missed here. And in the big picture, it's something else that contradicts any previous Izturis rationale, so instead of me being able to say I disagree with the direction, I'm left just saying "WTF?"

Edmonds love for StL is apparent, especially with his opening of his restaurant not too long ago. Perhaps after he retires he'll become a part of Cardinals baseball again?

Holy crap...I assume this is official?

I know Edmonds didn't have a lot of value, and I hope San Diego's taking his contract...but this better be some amazing third baseman prospect.