Scott Rolen for Troy Glaus (Update: Finalized!)

[EastonBlues22]

the people who are "optimistic" about this trade are the ones most pessimistic about Rolen's health.

That's true. I don't think that sabermatrics has much to do with the optimism/pessimism in this deal. Health is the key issue. Statistically, Glaus hasn't been Rolen offensively. Anyone who disagrees with that is just fooling themselves. At the same time, Rolen hasn't been healthy in years and shoulder injuries are notoriously messy and hard to fully recover from. Anyone who disagrees with that is just fooing themselves.

I agree with all of that. SABR's just have a reputation for only "dispassionately looking at data" and that probably prompted the original comment. Personally, I don't see the sides dividing quite so nicely on this issue.

I also agree that complex joints are terribly unpredictable. Still, unless you think that 2006 was a fluke or accident where he just "happened" to perform that well in spite of a screwed up shoulder, I really don't think we should be concerned that his structural damage from pre-2006 will be limiting him to 2007 or worse moving forward. It certainly makes him a greater risk for injury and early decline than he would otherwise be (a notion that I agree with 100%, fwiw)...but that's completely different from the sentiments that seem to be most prevalent among his "pessimists" here about his production in 2008.

Easton, that's a very convincing post, but:
- Rolen all-but demanded a trade, stripping of us leverage, and,
- Rolen's last three seasons (cumulatively) were ugly, also rendering him less valuable.

With both of those coupled together, it's obvious we weren't going to get full value for him. Given the circumstances and the other rumored offers, I think we did quite well.

He did demand a trade, but the Cards are not obligated to ship him for any return they consider to be inferior. You're right that this isn't a "bad" return for him given his current value level...but I've advocated for awhile now that they should just "risk" playing him to re-establish his value and then return to trade talks during or after 2008. I still think that's the preferable course to this trade. I don't think this return is terrible, but I do think if anyone is coming out on bottom that it's going to be us. That's not a position this team should be interested in putting itself in given it's current composition. This team doesn't need stability to compete in 2008 or beyond nearly as much as it needs an improvement in overall talent level (or at least the hope of it). Again, unless you're just absolutely convinced that Rolen's shoulder is done, I don't see how this trade does that in any way for the Cards.

[haltz]

Regardless of your personal feelings or logically applied statistics, Mo and the Cardinal organization are going to win points on this trade.

But it probably won't help a lot in the runs department either way. They'll "win points" because Glaus hit 38 homers in 2006. The sad thing is Rolen v. 2007, probably makes up the 23-run offensive difference between him and Glaus v. 2006 with the glove.

I'm scared that Rolen is toast as well, apparently a lot more than the Blue Jays are, in fact. One of us has had doctors look at his shoulder.

[Bo Hart]

Cards won a WS with Rolen and TLR feuding, I think they could have been professional enough just to coexist.

I know, I would have thought so, too.... unfortunately, probably never know the real story. Maybe Rolen will write a book when his career his over and it'll have some juicy stories in there.

[indyredbird]

Cards won a WS with Rolen and TLR feuding, I think they could have been professional enough just to coexist.

I know, I would have thought so, too.... unfortunately, probably never know the real story. Maybe Rolen will write a book when his career his over and it'll have some juicy stories in there.

Good Point, but put me on the record I would have rather seen LaRussa leave than Rolen. Especially since a couple months ago I bought a Rolen 2007 Opening Day jersey.

[nwbearcat]

Don't know what to think about the trade.... On the one hand I think a healthy Rolen is a much better player than a healthy Glaus, but who really knows how either responds. So I guess it boils down to the Cardinals wanting to get rid of Rolen's attitude and a year of salary. I just have a hard time understanding how a working relationship in professional sports can come to such an impasse. As a coach for 17 years I have worked with players that I like and others I have not particularly liked, but as long as they worked hard and did what I asked that has never impacted our relationship on the field. I just find it strange that all of this began because Rolen wanted to play hurt and LaRussa opted to play Spezio. Seems to be pretty petty to escalate to this level. Isn't that how the whole squabble began?

As far as the Toronto's field hindering Glaus, or potentially hindering Rolen from an injury perspective, they play on field turf at the Rogers Center and the stuff is softer than grass. It is completely different than the old turf that used to be down in Busch II. We use it daily and our players prefer practicing on it. We now have 4 grass practice fields that sit empty unless we are playing a team that has a grass field. (There is only one in our league now)

[Fat Strat]

He did demand a trade, but the Cards are not obligated to ship him for any return they consider to be inferior. You're right that this isn't a "bad" return for him given his current value level...but I've advocated for awhile now that they should just "risk" playing him to re-establish his value and then return to trade talks during or after 2008. I still think that's the preferable course to this trade.

Let me ask you this, Easton, because I think that you have a reasonable stance. If you had pretty good indication that Rolen was going to possibly sit out of ST continuing to demand a trade and possibly even the season would you still want to "risk" playing him?

I actually agree with the idea that Rolen's highest value would have been after he had re-established himself as a hitter, whether that's ST or the deadline. It's always better to trade a heatlhy, productive player at his peak, than someone at his lowest value level. At the same time, if there is some truth (or a serious threat from his agent, etc.) that risk becomes a little less tolerable. It would weigh heavily over how I considered any possible offer I received for Rolen. Thus, when I see a deal come around for a player that can provide a significant impact, I would be much more inclined to take it, cut my loses with the risky player, and move on with a known commodity.

[tenniseleven]

Rolen's cumulative WARP for past 3 seasons: 14.7 in 309 games

Glaus's cumulative Warp for past 3 seasons: 15.2 in 417 games


Rolen is quite obviously the far superior player....so I guess that's not in question as far as the value of the trade...
although, if Rolen continues to hit like he did last year then Glaus does have a good sized advantage offensively...


the team really isn't any better than it was, and it won't be any worse than it was in 2007 b/c of this trade...

the only thing that did happen was that the POTENTIAL of the team in 2008 went down by 2-3 wins, as a 2006 Rolen is better than anything Glaus can give the team...

but that didn't matter much anyway, as the team probably has less than 15% chance of competing for the division in 08 (CHC, MIL and even CIN are probably all better teams)


it's going to be interesting to watch 3B this year, and we'll really learn to appreciate just how good Rolen had been over the past few seasons over there...REALLY...

[picasso]

Would you rather have a bird or two hands in a bush?

[haltz]

It's two birds in the bush, I believe.

And I'll take potential for this team in 2008 and 2009, actually.

[nwbearcat]

I just hate the direction this team has gone defensively recently. Maybe Reyes does have a place in this rotation .......lets start striking everyone out!