Scott Rolen for Troy Glaus (Update: Finalized!)

[clement]

Just arrived.

1. I believe in intangibles.

2. I think the fact that it's not 100% clear that we're getting the bad end of this deal can only be a good thing, given the circumstances.

3. Rolen was apparently the only player on the team that didn't want Larussa back.

4. Independent of the internal conflicts that would exist with Rolen being around, I think there is a reasonable chance that Glaus will outperform Rolen over the next two years, and we'll likely be saving money in the process.

5. While I think Larussa does have some pull with player moves, I think it's often greatly exaggerated. I think any veteran manager with one club will have some degree of leverage. But in the case of this particular move, the leverage is not the manager's, it's the player's. Rolen is the reason he is being traded for Troy Glaus, not Tony.

[KyCardinalFan]

This is very layman and may not apply at all. But I really believe from a hitting aspect, batting with a cast on my foot would be easier than hitting with a sore/bad shoulder. And apparently Pujols plays thru this on a daily basis. If comparing a heel inflamation to a chronically injured shoulder as a hitting impairment, I believe the heel would be preferable by 9 out of 10 physicians.

As well as 4 out of 5 dentists.

[Hungary Jack]

Wow. I go away for two days to go skiing, and I come back here to 36 pages on Rolen - Glaus and the usual bickering.

I think I'll go back to skiing.

[KyCardinalFan]

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.

No, no. Trades must be evaluated and responsible parties must be held accountable within the first 24-48 hours. Player performance clouds the issue.


I agree with your assessment that the trade seems fair. Both sides make good points, but both are heavily reliant on health. I don't see how anyone can say (with the certainty some have stated) one way or the other until it is seen how each player holds up over the season.

Frankly, I see it as push, with perhaps some edge to the Cards regarding the personality 'intangibles'.

[Richie Allen]

No, no. Trades must be evaluated and responsible parties must be held accountable within the first 24-48 hours. Player performance clouds the issue.

I agree with your assessment that the trade seems fair. Both sides make good points, but both are heavily reliant on health. I don't see how anyone can say (with the certainty some have stated) one way or the other until it is seen how each player holds up over the season.

I'm pretty sure this is the forum where I've seen it argued that trades should be evaluated immediately, based primarily on perception, rather than wait to see how they pan out. In other words, if a trade is perceived one way and it turns out another, that's simply luck and the GMs should not be held accountable. You gotta hand it to some people in their creative arguing.

[planet planet]

You gotta hand it to some people in their creative arguing.

That's why I love it!

[KyCardinalFan]

No, I don't want to compare Rolen to Bowa. Rolen wanted off of Bowa's team. Rolen wants off of Larussa's team. The only common denominator there is Rolen. To me, that adds up to Rolen being more of the problem than Bowa or Larussa.

Bingo. I like Rolen. I appreciate how he wants to play hard at all times.

But I think Socnorb11 has made a point that many miss when they start blaming LaRussa and 'his crazy antics' for their feud. Rolen is starting to show a pattern here. If Rolen is such a competitor, then he should act in the interest of the team and not himself. (I'm thinking of instances virtually everyone knew he couldn't bat except him; his refusal to see a day off here or there could be beneficial) Poor communication went both ways, but I feel like Rolen did more to perpetuate it.

[tenniseleven]

so we shouldn't be on here discussing the trade?

except to say let's wait and see, and that's it?

k...

this board is going to be pretty dead, hope no one gets paid for any advertising or anything...

[KyCardinalFan]

so we shouldn't be on here discussing the trade?

except to say let's wait and see, and that's it?

k...

this board is going to be pretty dead, hope no one gets paid for any advertising or anything...

If you're referring to me, no that's not what I said. I said I don't see how people can say with such certainty that this deal is great or horrible. And then argue to steadfast (sometimes with vitriol) that it can't be seen the other way. That's not really discussion.

Just to add, I enjoyed and appreciated those who gave their opinions and then stated why - often backing it up with stats I didn't understand. That does make for a good board.

[GatewaySnayke]

I believe in intangibles.

Let's try this again without getting deleted:

I am guessing you believe in intangibles in the conventional sense of "Derek Jeter's smile propelled the Yankees to 114 wins in 1998" (without the obvious hyperbole).

The Cardinals could have had Rolen and La Russa settle their score before every game by participating in a knife fight, but I'm not entirely sure how this would have affected whether or not the team scores and prevents runs. It's hard for me to accept that getting rid of Rolen helps team morale when team morale could be sky-high and they will still stink.

And I guess that when it comes down to it: I believe that intangibles can hurt a player or not affect him at all. Like Oh my gosh, I'm Albert Pujols and I'm expected to carry these seven dwarves to a victory. I better hit at least 178 home runs. Then he starts trying to rip a slider off the plate into the upper deck.