Scott Rolen for Troy Glaus (Update: Finalized!)

[Magneto2.0]

We'll bypass the obvious discussion that the HR is hardly the be-all-end-all measurement of offensive contributions and move onto this: Various defensive metrics suggest that Rolen is anywhere from 15 to 30+ runs better than Glaus on average.

I just have a hard time believing this. Not that, that's what the metrics state, just that those numbers are reasonable or accurate. That seems like way too much.

and btw, I'm very confident that

1) Rolen wont play 140 games
2) Rolen wont hit more then 10 HRs

[haltz]

I would bet good money that Rolen only makes 1-2 plays that an average thirdbaseman wouldn't make every 3-4 games...

That's 54 plays; you're actually overestimating. The single is worth .4 runs, and the out (that never happened) is worth -.29. So that's 37 runs, and I think at the corners it's a little more, since plays he misses to his right have more impact. I'll try and look that up. Tango posted a full explanation in a comment at Baseball Musing.

[Rieges]

Easton, I think you're guilty of the same speculative medical analysis that you're using to justify your point.

I don't think so, I think he's just saying we aren't privy to the medical info, which is a good point. That's mostly the stance that his rebuttals are coming from as far as I can tell. FWIW, he's in the Pharm industry, and Dangerous and Clevername are MDs IIRC.

In the end, there are more questions than answers when it comes to Rolen's shoulder and that alone should tell you that Glaus is the better bet to remain a healthy, productive player.

And Cesar Izturis is a good bet to play like Cesar Izturis, and Brendan Ryan is a bit of an unknown. Glaus might be good for 140 games, a .290 EQA and average defense in a punt year. He's also got a NTC. Then he has a player option for when we might be able to compete again in 2009. That's it. If he hits, see you later. If his planter fasciitis incapacitates him he'll exercise it.

This is basically a salary dump. Something that disappoints me with Rolen.

I would characterize these statements as speculative medical analysis:

Either is fine...an injury to a joint like that is going to take more than a few months of rehab to return to full strength and no one should have expected Rolen to be 100% for a full season in 2006. The fact that he put up an average season post-surgery (especially the first year back) is actually a wildly encouraging sign in the grand scheme of things.

He (stupidly) thought he could play through some soreness in 2007 and his condition and production degenerated accordingly as he "tweaked his mechanics" to compensate. That was dumb, and it showed. Still, there was no additional structural trauma that needs to be overcome, and really the outlook for 2008 isn't nearly as bleak as most people are making it out to be.

As for the Rolen trade being a salary dump, I'm not sure what your thought process is there. The Cards are taking on at least $12.75M in '08 salary (more than Rolen's '08 salary) and possibly $24M overall. I realize that they're freeing up money for '10 and possibly '09 with the move but to me, that's just smart baseball unless you truly believe a 35-yr old Rolen will justify the $12M salary.

[Fat Strat]

I just don't think it will translate to wins.

I think it could. Considering that Glaus is out after two years max, and we don't know who will be at 3rd in '10. Could be Craig, Freese... could be anyone. It does give us some financial and positional flexibility that could lead to a serious upgrade at 3rd, SS, or SP. At this point, who knows.

[haltz]

As for the Rolen trade being a salary dump, I'm not sure what your thought process is there. The Cards are taking on at least $12.75M in '08 salary (more than Rolen's '08 salary) and possibly $24M overall. I realize that they're freeing up money for '10 and possibly '09 with the move but to me, that's just smart baseball unless you truly believe a 35-yr old Rolen will justify the $12M salary.

I'll wait until I see the final numbers. If they simply moved the players and the contracts, then I wouldn't expect Glaus to be back unless he performed poorly next year. They might as well have dumped Rolen's salary. If they get a good player in Glaus he's gone, and a bad player with a player option doesn't help.

IOW, I was hoping that we'd gamble on Rolen instead of trying to dump salary. Unless Glaus is guaranteed to stay in 2009, this is about as useful a move.

If I'm DeWitt, I might try and save the money if I think Rolen is shot. But if there's a chance he gets back to form, there aren't any 3B like him available and we are getting short on elite performers. Rolen justified his salary last year, BTW.

[Secret Weapon]

I thought the Cardinals were demanding that the option year became guaranteed before making the trade?

[haltz]

It does give us some financial and positional flexibility that could lead to a serious upgrade at 3rd, SS, or SP. At this point, who knows.

Heh, if this goes through we'll have $27M committed for 2010. So I'd say you are right. That's not a bad thing, but we could also absorb a gamble. This may not be the right one (though the Jays apparently agree with me), but if the Cardinals don't take some gambles we'll see something like 2007 for the foreseeable future.

[Fat Strat]

I'll wait until I see the final numbers. If they simply moved the players and the contracts, then I wouldn't expect Glaus to be back unless he performed poorly next year. They might as well have dumped Rolen's salary. If they get a good player in Glaus he's gone, and a bad player with a player option doesn't help.

IOW, I was hoping that we'd gamble on Rolen instead of trying to dump salary. Unless Glaus is guaranteed to stay in 2009, this is about as useful a move.

There's logic there, but it doesn't really fit the Cards history. The Cards have built a philosophy of taking chances on potential FA's and retaining them before they hit the market. If Glaus plays well and stays healthy, I don't see any reason why he wouldn't accept his player option. It's for a very reasonable salary for a player of his caliber. If he doesn't we still have the ability to renegotiate, which we have a history of doing with impact players, or offering him arbitration, which will result in a high draft pick. All of those options are probably more desirable than just dumping Rolen's salary for nothing.

[haltz]

He played 115 games last year. If he doesn't play well he'll get us a type B sandwich pick. That's not worth $12M. If he hits 38 homers again, let's just say that he'll be 31 and looking at injuries (and a potential move to 1B in the future which would limit his value), so he'd be pretty stupid to pick up his own option.

I was just explaining why I made the first comment though. If 2009 is guaranteed in the deal then my comment isn't really relevant. Can someone point out where that's coming from? I just checked Bernie's comments and I don't see it there or anywhere else. Did I skip over it in this thread?

[tenniseleven]

there are some rumours floating around that the deal could involve other players (namely Burnett)...

not sure how reliable the sources of the rumours (yes I spell rumours with a 'u') are but that would be interesting...

not sure what would have to be involved for the Cards to take on Burnett (Ottavino maybe? Duncan? not sure, he would seem redundant with Stairs), but it does have some merit as it would help offset the financial aspect of the deal...

obviously the Cards would have to be giving some good talent back...


there are also rumours that TOR might trade Rios for someone like Lincecum...which would also seem to add credibility to the Burnett rumours...