Scott Rolen for Troy Glaus (Update: Finalized!)

[EastonBlues22]

There seems to be three main lines of thinking developing on the subject:

1) Rolen is done physically. The fact that we're able to get any significant return for him at all makes this trade a win for the Cards.

2) We're trading Rolen for someone who is a lesser, more stable, player (or one who at least has a lower ceiling), but the fact that we're resolving a clubhouse issue and getting value in spite of his injury risk makes up for the difference. In the end, this trade is somewhere between a push and a good trade for the Cards.

3) We're trading Rolen for someone who has his own injury questions, who probably has a lower ceiling, and who has been less productive in general (both when healthy and when injured). That's a bad move for a team that is as desperate for talent (and as far from competing) as the Cards currently are, and the Cards were better off waiting to see what happens with Rolen in 2008. If anyone loses this trade, it's probably going to be the Cardinals.

I think you can make reasonable cases for both #2 and #3, as the difference between the two largely boils down to how patient one is willing to be with the situation and how much (in terms of talent) one is willing to sacrifice in order to be rid of the situation. That's not something that can be measured with numbers, and as a result we see posters with very similar MOs (Fat Strat, Greenback, Kyle, cpebbles, Haltz, myself, etc.) lining up on opposite sides of the divide.

Personally, I think #1 is a less reasonable position that the other two (for reasons that I've already gone into at length), but ultimately the difference between #1 and #2/#3 (that Rolen is done physically with little to no hope of any rebound from 2007) is not something that can be "proven" either with the information we have available. It's only something that we can try to infer from what data we have available.

Anyway you cut it, what's (essentially) done is done...now what do you think this trade says about how the Cardinals view 2008, and 2009 and beyond? What do you think this says about Moz as an independent move and in light of the rest of the offseason? There's still plenty of interesting questions to be explored...

[skmsw]

I have not read this entire thread, but just getting back from the Pats game and wanted to drop a few quick words about my impression:

I'm happy with this trade (if indeed it does go through).

It's been suggested that "we're not medical professionals." Well, I am, actually, and although I have no first hand knowledge about Rolen, I understand from the media reports that last time, he suffered a fully torn labrum -- muscle completely off the bone. That's usually pretty close to a life sentence (not a death sentence, like a completely torn rotator cuff, from which you may never play again, but a life sentence, from which you may never be 100% again). In my opinion he'll never be the same (and while it has been suggested that "there is no data" on these injuries -- rest assured, there is, however unpublished and proprietary it may be).

Rolen's initial surgery may have repaired the shoulder, but as time goes on it is pretty likely it will loosen back up. "No longer repaired"? No, not at all, stil functional -- just no longer capable of driving elite athletic performance. There will be scar tissue, there will be swelling, there will be instability and loss of strength that come and go (or just come). The labrum will lose some flexibility, some strength, some range of motion. Is this 100% guaranteed? Of course not, but it's pretty likely.

His defense has still been elite, but even that has been somewhat worse than his usual standard, and his batspeed is not the same. I happen to agree with those who suspect that we have seen Rolen's last 20-HR season already; the surgery he just had may help, but just like last time, the improvements are likely to erode a bit as the shoulder loosens back up (which it will, in all likelihood).

In return we're getting a legit power bat, a guy who'se a year and a half younger, and whose contract is slightly more favorable. At Rolen's presumed healthy peak, we lose this trade. But as things stand today, I'm very satisfied. Rolen may pleasantly surprise me by being more than a 750-OPS guy -- but for me, it really would be a surprise. I think 700-750 is his new benchmark, and the defense is still strong but already is no longer Robinsonesque, and will continue to deteriorate.

Just my opinion, of course -- but I think this is a solid move, the first one of the off-season.

[stldogget05]

the MV3 is officially done, I guess...

it was a great era in Cardinals baseball...

so many great moments, 3 great HOF level ballplayers...

MV3 done? What about Rasmus, Pujols, and Glaus?

Kidding aside, I just hope that once July and August roles around we can talk about how Mo is brilliant.

[stldogget05]

Also, the many differing opinions shows that this trade is probably a pretty fair trade for both sides. I know Glaus is more than I thought we'd ever get for Rolen. We'll just have to wait it out to see which player becomes the most productive from here out.

[EastonBlues22]

I have not read this entire thread, but just getting back from the Pats game and wanted to drop a few quick words about my impression:

I'm happy with this trade (if indeed it does go through).

It's been suggested that "we're not medical professionals." Well, I am, actually, and although I have no first hand knowledge about Rolen, I understand from the media reports that last time, he suffered a fully torn labrum -- muscle completely off the bone. That's usually pretty close to a life sentence (not a death sentence, like a completely torn rotator cuff, from which you may never play again, but a life sentence, from which you may never be 100% again). In my opinion he'll never be the same (and while it has been suggested that "there is no data" on these injuries -- rest assured, there is, however unpublished and proprietary it may be).

Rolen's initial surgery may have repaired the shoulder, but as time goes on it is pretty likely it will loosen back up. "No longer repaired"? No, not at all, stil functional -- just no longer capable of driving elite athletic performance. There will be scar tissue, there will be swelling, there will be instability and loss of strength that come and go (or just come). The labrum will lose some flexibility, some strength, some range of motion. Is this 100% guaranteed? Of course not, but it's pretty likely.

His defense has still been elite, but even that has been somewhat worse than his usual standard, and his batspeed is not the same. I happen to agree with those who suspect that we have seen Rolen's last 20-HR season already; the surgery he just had may help, but just like last time, the improvements are likely to erode a bit as the shoulder loosens back up (which it will, in all likelihood).

In return we're getting a legit power bat, a guy who'se a year and a half younger, and whose contract is slightly more favorable. At Rolen's presumed healthy peak, we lose this trade. But as things stand today, I'm very satisfied. Rolen may pleasantly surprise me by being more than a 750-OPS guy -- but for me, it really would be a surprise. I think 700-750 is his new benchmark, and the defense is still strong but already is no longer Robinsonesque, and will continue to deteriorate.

Just my opinion, of course -- but I think this is a solid move, the first one of the off-season.

I think it's a bit funny that I agree with pretty much everything you say, but disagree with your ultimate conclusion.

I take it then that you are of the opinion that Rolen's slide in 2007 was a product of that eventual gradual weakening/loosening? Everything I've read so far suggests that the shoulder is still structurally fine...I think there's a good chance that it would have held up long enough (and his production rebounded enough) for us to get a better return either in the middle of, or at the end of, 2008. At that point, though, his value would probably be at its max (of whatever it now has the potential to be) and we should take whatever the best offer available offer is with the intention of unloading him before ST 2009.

Others have argued that the likely difference in talent for the return isn't worth the headache/risk of Rolen falling apart, and I think that's a perfectly legitimate position. A few others (myself included) only seem interested in maxing out the potential talent return and are willing to hedge something in the way of clubhouse chemistry/time/injury concern in order to have a shot at a better return (this team needs everything it can get).

Thanks for chiming in...I'm curious to see what Jim and RC21* have to say on the matter.

[picasso]

I have not read this entire thread, but just getting back from the Pats game and wanted to drop a few quick words about my impression:

I'm happy with this trade (if indeed it does go through).

It's been suggested that "we're not medical professionals." Well, I am, actually, and although I have no first hand knowledge about Rolen, I understand from the media reports that last time, he suffered a fully torn labrum -- muscle completely off the bone. That's usually pretty close to a life sentence (not a death sentence, like a completely torn rotator cuff, from which you may never play again, but a life sentence, from which you may never be 100% again). In my opinion he'll never be the same (and while it has been suggested that "there is no data" on these injuries -- rest assured, there is, however unpublished and proprietary it may be).

Rolen's initial surgery may have repaired the shoulder, but as time goes on it is pretty likely it will loosen back up. "No longer repaired"? No, not at all, stil functional -- just no longer capable of driving elite athletic performance. There will be scar tissue, there will be swelling, there will be instability and loss of strength that come and go (or just come). The labrum will lose some flexibility, some strength, some range of motion. Is this 100% guaranteed? Of course not, but it's pretty likely.

His defense has still been elite, but even that has been somewhat worse than his usual standard, and his batspeed is not the same. I happen to agree with those who suspect that we have seen Rolen's last 20-HR season already; the surgery he just had may help, but just like last time, the improvements are likely to erode a bit as the shoulder loosens back up (which it will, in all likelihood).

In return we're getting a legit power bat, a guy who'se a year and a half younger, and whose contract is slightly more favorable. At Rolen's presumed healthy peak, we lose this trade. But as things stand today, I'm very satisfied. Rolen may pleasantly surprise me by being more than a 750-OPS guy -- but for me, it really would be a surprise. I think 700-750 is his new benchmark, and the defense is still strong but already is no longer Robinsonesque, and will continue to deteriorate.

Just my opinion, of course -- but I think this is a solid move, the first one of the off-season.

I think it's a bit funny that I agree with pretty much everything you say, but disagree with your ultimate conclusion.

I take it then that you are of the opinion that Rolen's slide in 2007 was a product of that eventual gradual weakening/loosening? Everything I've read so far suggests that the shoulder is still structurally fine...I think there's a good chance that it would have held up long enough (and his production rebounded enough) for us to get a better return either in the middle of, or at the end of, 2008. At that point, though, his value would probably be at its max (of whatever it now has the potential to be) and we should take whatever the best offer available offer is with the intention of unloading him before ST 2009.

Others have argued that the likely difference in talent for the return isn't worth the headache/risk of Rolen falling apart, and I think that's a perfectly legitimate position. A few others (myself included) only seem interested in maxing out the potential talent return and are willing to hedge something in the way of clubhouse chemistry/time/injury concern in order to have a shot at a better return (this team needs everything it can get).

Thanks for chiming in...I'm curious to see what Jim and RC21* have to say on the matter.

I personally don't want to see if we can max him out for a trade. He desperately wants to leave. Trade him, we're getting an equitable return, he's earned that.

[EastonBlues22]

I personally don't want to see if we can max him out for a trade. He desperately wants to leave. Trade him, we're getting an equitable return, he's earned that.

I think that's a perfectly reasonable position. I admittedly have less sympathy for him with regards to this situation than most others on this board, and I'm sure that our relative positions on the matter are playing a role in our feelings on the trade.

Personally, I'm not interested in downgrading the talent of this team the least little bit simply because of some stupid spat if I'm the GM. I don't care who started it or why it's still continuing...my rebuilding job is already difficult enough as it is without taking another small step back. I'm holding onto Rolen until I'm absolutely convinced that I'm making a lateral (or better) move. For me this trade, at this point in time and with the knowledge I have available to me, doesn't qualify.

But that's just my (almost certainly minority) opinion and it should be taken with an accompanying grain of salt.

[haltz]

Personally, I'm not interested in downgrading the talent of this team the least little bit simply because of some stupid spat if I'm the GM. I don't care who started it or why it's still continuing...my rebuilding job is already difficult enough as it is without taking another small step back.

If I'm John Mozeliak, I might take the job on whatever terms it's offered to me. It speaks volumes that Tony was given $8 million to come back before any progress was made with the GM search, and then there's whatever you want to infer from the way Hahn and Antonetti acted.

I think you might be assuming too much autonomy on Mo's part, but that is admittedly just my pessimistic opinion (and probably even less popular than the one you and I share about the Rolen trade).

Let's see, in other words, I'm not sure he had much of an option. It might have been a "find the best deal" directive, and within that context, this isn't too bad.

[Richie Allen]

At Rolen's presumed healthy peak, we lose this trade. But as things stand today, I'm very satisfied.

I agree. Not to mention we no longer have to worry about the petty LaRussa/Rolen crap. Between Rolen's injury, and subsequent lack of power, and the threat that Rolen would refuse to play for Tony, I'm now much happier only having to worry about Troy's health. Considering some were wondering if we could get anything for Rolen, I think we made out OK.

[picasso]

Personally, I'm not interested in downgrading the talent of this team the least little bit simply because of some stupid spat if I'm the GM. I don't care who started it or why it's still continuing...my rebuilding job is already difficult enough as it is without taking another small step back. I'm holding onto Rolen until I'm absolutely convinced that I'm making a lateral (or better) move. For me this trade, at this point in time and with the knowledge I have available to me, doesn't qualify.

Mo, as a new GM, knows this trade pleases the owners (less money, eye on '09) Tony (no need for statement here) the fans (hey he's hit 40 HR's!) Plus the guy asked to leave. I like the trade, but looking at the proposition I don't think Mozeliak had a reasonable choice. He pretty much had to do this.