![]() |
|
|
| |
« Odds and Ends: Garcia, Greene, DeJesus | Main | Contract Window For Miguel Cabrera? »
Buster Olney is a trusted source for baseball info if there ever was one. Here's an excerpt from his blog today:
The Cardinals are shopping Scott Rolen. Heard on Thursday that the Twins and Cardinals are talking about a deal for Rolen, who is owed $33 million over the next three years. The Cardinals presumably are asking for pitching in return, but because of the money involved and Rolen's injury history, they might not get a lot, because this is more of a salary dump.
On the other hand, Joe Christensen of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune is obviously very close to the Twins. He spoke to two Twins officials yesterday who said they've had no discussions about Rolen at all. Could it be that those two officials didn't speak to the Cards about Rolen, but another member of the Twins' front office did? It wouldn't be the first time baseball execs played coy with the media.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b9a69e2010534a4278a970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Did Twins and Cards Discuss Rolen?:
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


|
|
Something was said, it's no secret rolen wants out now that la russa's back, and straus, derrick Gould, and Bernie Miklaz all had varying accounts on the story.
The twins need a third baseman and its not unheard of for the organization to try and buy low on retreads.
This whole rumor had too much validity to it to be fabricated.
lets say the twins were thinking the cards eat half of Rolen's contract, in return throw back a so so pitcher like baker or bonser,this is completely hypothetical, but if it happened would anybody blame them. would that be a horrible idea? I'd take a chance on Rolen's shoulder under those circumstances.
Posted by: Hammondsbird | November 09, 2007 at 02:10 PM
Twins get: Rolen + 12 Mil
Cards get: Matt Garza
Posted by: registereduser | November 09, 2007 at 02:18 PM
Doesn't seem fair to the Twins, in all honesty. Rolen is a gamble; how sure of a thing is Matt Garza? That's the question we should ask.
And I assume you mean 12 million of the 36 million remaining on his contract? Olney says 33 million, but I was almost positive it was 36.
I don't see the Cards dealing Rolen unless a lot of salary is picked up, because I don't think they will get much for Scott.
Posted by: CarpeDiem | November 09, 2007 at 02:26 PM
As CarpeDiem said, I don't think they can get much for Rolen, either. It's to the point where we would be better off to hold onto him and hope he rebounds. The money sucks, no doubt, we all agree on that, but the point is... we have no one to replace him. Let's just hold on and hope he rebounds because we're going to get absolutely no one of value for him and if he rebounds to what he managed in 2006, he's among the top NL 3B.
Posted by: tyler | November 09, 2007 at 02:28 PM
Yeah, I see $36M too.
I think the best thing like tyler said is to hope for the best, and maybe trade him midseason if he's healthy.
The upside of trading him now is getting out of his contract.
There is absolutely no way they are getting Garza if they only pay $12M.
I have a hard time imagining any team would take Rolen for free at this point.
My proposal from the Yankees was something like Clippard and Pavano for Rolen, which might be the best they can hope for currently.
IF they're going to trade him now, they have a choice - they can include a lot of money and try to get someone good, or they can try to take on another bad contract.
If they wait, they risk him being completely useless and thus paying $36M for nothing, when now they could probably make a trade like the Pavano one, pay just $10M for nothing, and cut their losses.
Guess it depends if they want to gamble or not.
Posted by: bobo | November 09, 2007 at 03:06 PM
by trading him they get out of at least some of that money, and avoid the rift with he and LaRussa...who really don't even speak last I heard. I still think that he makes the most sense for the Yanks though, where the contract doesn't seem so bad with a 180 mil payroll. 3 Years is like 1 year to most other teams...
Posted by: Aduncaroo | November 09, 2007 at 03:34 PM
This makes sense for the Twins if they are planning on extending Santana. But only then. If Rolen is on the field, he's above average offensively and great defensively.
I think the Cards would have to be willing to pay 10M of 36M and take 1-2 lower level pitching prospects from the Twins (or other team). Garza is not even close to be considered.
It essentially can become an addition by subtraction deal for the Cards. Save 8-9M/yr and move a player that has an obvious rift with LaRussa. And getting 1-2 players back is a bonus.
Posted by: kab21 | November 09, 2007 at 04:10 PM
Scott Rolen and cash for Matt Garza? YEAH RIGHT. Even Rolen at 3/24 is still not worth a Garza. There were Garza for Delmon Young rumors going around recently. Garza is a really good pitcher, and it would take a good young position player in return for him. I would say it would be more along the lines of: Cards get: Kevin Slowey, Twins get: Rolen, $6 million
Posted by: scribbletone | November 09, 2007 at 05:00 PM
Bobo's proposal is interesting. Yanks would essentially be getting Rolen for 3/26 (by shedding Pavano's contract). The Birds are only on the hook for $10m this year. They save $3m for 07, $12m in 08 and 09 (or something close to those amounts).
Scott Rolen at $8m/year isn't bad for a team like the Yanks.
Posted by: bjsguess | November 09, 2007 at 05:21 PM
Rolen's not worth Kevin Slowey at this point either.
Slowey's no scrub. He's a control guy, but he's about the best control guy in years. And he was just named AAA pitcher of the year for all of baseball.
I too think it would take lower prospects (maybe Blackburn plus something?) to get Rolen. Not a Slowey/Baker, and DEFINITELY not a Garza.
Posted by: djskilbr | November 09, 2007 at 10:05 PM
Slowey is the best control pitcher in years? Are you sure he isnt the best in the history? Lets not get ahead of ourselves just yet. This guy Maddux is pretty good, and he has been doing it for like 37 years.
Posted by: nrmax88 | November 10, 2007 at 01:42 AM
I hate it when people say the best or the next player x. But Slowey is a very good MLB ready prospect and I don't think Rolen brings in a very good MLB ready prospect right now.
Slowey is overrated by many because he has posted some absolutely ridiculous MiLB stats. In 2.5 seasons he has posted: 354IP, 21-12, 1.93ERA, 8.7 K/9, .86 WHIP. These are great results for anyone.
Slowey is underrated by many because he simply doesn't have dominating stuff. The only positive thing I've ever heard about him is that he has great control.
I think Slowey is a good bet to be slightly better than league average next year, but he probably won't have a high ceiling. My prediction would be something like 13-11, 4.1 ERA, 6 K/9, and a 1.3 WHIP. But he doesn't have any Cy Youngs in his future. And he won't be traded for Rolen.
Maybe Blackburn or Duensing or somebody in A-ball, but not Slowey.
I still think of the Rolen deal as addition by subtraction. If they can save most of his contract (maybe 75%), clear the clubhouse issue with LaRussa, and get a decent prospect back it is a win for the Cards.
Posted by: kab21 | November 10, 2007 at 12:32 PM
If Bernie Miklasz said it then it must be true!
Of all the teams that might be interested in Rolen, I can't imagine that one would be the Twins. If the Twins want to take on his salary then the Cardinals should keep him.
Posted by: plh903 | November 10, 2007 at 02:17 PM
nrmax, obviously I'm talking about PROSPECTS in "years" re: Slowey.
Name me a better "control" prospect over the last 10 years than Slowey. I don't think you can; I honestly don't.
I agree with Kab that he probably won't ever be a Cy Young winner or anything, but his excellent control should make him a Maddux-lite, or Radke-type, over his career. That's still a damn good pitcher that I wouldn't give up for a broken-down Rolen. And I don't think the Twins would either.
Posted by: djskilbr | November 10, 2007 at 03:29 PM
It could be a sign that the Twins might actually extend Santana and have realized that continually surrounding Santana with obviously sub-mediocre players doesn't work. Rolen is a big risk, but if he's on the field he's a plus player offensively and defensively. If the Twins can pay 8-9M/yr for him it fits their payroll.
I'll stand by my comment that trading Rolen might be an addition by subtraction.
Posted by: kab21 | November 10, 2007 at 03:33 PM