Padres trade for Edmonds

by Snake Plissken on Dec 14, 2007 11:03 PM CST

From mlbtraderumors.com (Yeah, I know):

"According to Tom Krasovic of the San Diego Union-Tribune, the Padres have agreed to trade minor league third baseman David Freese to the Cardinals for Jim Edmonds. The Cards will also send more than a million in cash to offset some Edmonds' $8MM salary.

Freese is mildly interesting for a prospect who'll be 25 in April. He's yet to reach Double A but he did draw 69 walks this year. Baseball America says there's a chance he's moved off third eventually (and notes that he's done some catching in an instructional league).

Edmonds is an OK one-year play for the Padres. He dipped to a .325 OBP and .403 SLG last year as a 37 year-old, and only got into 117 games due to back/leg/groin/hamstring/shoulder/toe injuries. It still might make sense to let Scott Hairston handle the lefties. Edmonds seemingly waived his no-trade clause to go to San Diego.

It will be interesting to see Joe Strauss weigh in on the Cards' plan for center field now. Top prospect Colby Rasmus is 21 and hasn't seen Triple A yet. Guys like Mike Cameron, Kenny Lofton, Corey Patterson, Nate McLouth, or Coco Crisp could be options."

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/12/padres-acquire.html

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

Tweet Comment 40 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Overall the move from Cameron to Edmonds...

...is probably a loss in production for the Pads on offense; it's probably an upgrade on defense, but not as much as you might expect -- Edmonds' health issues have been impacting his performance in the field as well. Or Edmonds could just completely bottom out and the Padres would be paying him $7 million or so to backup Scott Hairston. This is where the difference between cheap and frugal makes the Padres so maddening -- they won't spend enough money to get an impact player at the position, but they'll spend enough to gamble on one good year being left in Edmonds.

For the Cardinals, this looks like a pure salary dump. We're really not going to know what this means for them until they do whatever it is they're planning on doing with that salary flexibility. I honestly don't know right now if the Cardinals are trying to win next season or if they've started the rebuilding phase. On one hand, Cesar Izturis is not the start of a rebuilding phase. But at no point does it look like they've gone out to address any of the primary needs of the team. Most rumors about the Cards trade interest mostly include dumping Edmonds and Rolen -- you can improve a ballclub that way, but the Cardinals don't seem to have an impact player being blocked.

One thing to worry about -- we may be facing Colby Rasmus earlier than I would have liked. But them's the breaks.

I would suggest you learn to truly interrupt all stats before using any selective stats. -- cubswin

by cwyers on Dec 14, 2007 11:53 PM CST reply actions

Rasmus

and Pujlos are like generals without an army behind them. Who cares?

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 15, 2007 2:33 PM CST up reply actions

Nah Nah Nah Hey Hey Hey.....

Goodbye!!!

"I guess you had some lean years, and didnt have to beat it hard" - Craig Sager

by Galvan316 on Dec 15, 2007 12:11 AM CST reply actions

wow, talk about 10 cents on the dollar

cardinals couldn't get anything better than that? Cendry got Ceda for Todd Walker. you can't always strike potential gold, but at least get a prospect younger than 25 whose actually gotten past A ball.

but cwyers is right, the downside is now we have to face two top-flight young centerfielders in division play, Pence and Rasmus. Pence really killed us last year, I hope we can do better against Rasmus

by PrincetonCubs on Dec 15, 2007 12:19 AM CST reply actions

Salary dump...

When you're paying less than $3 million for a player, you can get a decent prospect. When you're paying close to $10 million for a player, that player had better be good in order to get quality in return.

by SouthernCub on Dec 15, 2007 8:53 AM CST up reply actions

to be fair

it appears as if the padres will only be paying ~$7 million, with the $1mil the cards are sending.

you're right, of course, but you'd think that if the padres were willing to trade for edmonds, they must see something in him that they want. otherwise...why do the deal? and that would make me think that the cards could have gotten someone a little better in return--if a player has utility to someone else, you should be able to receive something decent in return--but apparently the salary dump was sufficient.

by PrincetonCubs on Dec 15, 2007 9:06 AM CST up reply actions

think they'll use the cash to go after prior?

i do.

"If you play more than two chords, you're showing off."--Woody Guthrie

by buckmulligan on Dec 15, 2007 2:27 AM CST reply actions

Agreed

There'd be nothing better than seeing the Cardinals dump tons of cash into a two or three year Prior deal. Why? So that Cardinals fans could be treated to a few years of "towel drill updates" learns all sorts of new words relating to arm muscles/tendons...and the names of medical procedures designed to fix said muscles/tendons.

Yup, nothing could be better...unless Dusty convinces the Reds to sign him.

by Rev Gunia on Dec 15, 2007 8:36 AM CST up reply actions

no, no, no

We don't want Mark Prior anywhere near St. Louis. That f-ing franchise will find a way to make him a 20-game winner.

Hope that Prior gets out of the division, and preferably the league.

by elgato on Dec 15, 2007 9:05 AM CST up reply actions

Word.

Ultimate spor for him to end up, well Kansas City would be the obvious ulti9mate but since is he free to choose where he'll end up, one can take KC out of the Prior equation, but I can see him going to Anaslime. He'd still be in SoCal and out of the AL.

You never root for a player to be hurt and never play again, but is it so terrible to hope absolute mediocrity out of a player? If Prior ever returns to his faded glory, it won't sit well with me.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. ` Adam Savage Mythbusters

by lemon20pie on Dec 15, 2007 10:26 AM CST up reply actions

*Out of the NL

I reject your reality and substitute my own. ` Adam Savage Mythbusters

by lemon20pie on Dec 15, 2007 11:18 AM CST up reply actions

Chris Carpenter

'nuf said.

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 2:44 PM CST up reply actions

This is a really stupid deal....

... for the Padres. Edmonds' average, OBA and SLG have all dropped each of the last three years, and he has missed time in all of them due to injuries. He will be 38 in June and is going to a pitcher's park.

I guess they didn't give up that much to get him (a 25-year-old who hasn't even made Double-A?), but still.

Also, a reminder when you post info from MLBTR -- please go to whatever link he posts and also post that one. In this case that would be this San Diego Union-Tribune article.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 15, 2007 4:06 AM CST reply actions

Shouldn't

MLBTR get the credit/link, if they are the ones making the information accessible to the people reporting it back here?

That webiste, for all the grief it receives, has been, for the most part, a very good collection of credited articles. If someone, such as you, wants to see the original article referenced, MLBTR always puts a link to the original article from which it got its information.

The author of that website obviously puts a lot of time into gathering information from a wide variety of places about one subject. Gone are the days when he posted nothing but unsubstantiated rumors whith no source (such "Arod might come to the Cubs", or "The Cubs might Murton and Fox for Teahen, and this rumor is WAY different from the Murton for Teahen rumor everyone else is talking about"--oh wait, that's someone else posting unsubstantiated rumors that didn't come to fruition).

I don't see a reason to make people intentionally avoid crediting his site as their source for rumors/news. I also don't see a reason to attack places such as MLBTR and Rotoworld for doing the same kind of "breathless" rumormongoring that you do. At least they have a source that's right occassionally.

DEJESUS!!!

by tomas21 on Dec 15, 2007 9:43 AM CST up reply actions

Sigh.

My words, mischaracterized again.

I'm asking for BOTH to be credited. MLBTR is not the SOURCE of this information; it's simply a clearinghouse.

Also, at times people post info from MLBTR and misinterpret it -- they should always go to the original source to read the information, which MLBTR always links.

I see you used this post as a reason to attack me. You rarely come here any more, and to come here simply to attack, when I made a simple request, is pretty disingenuous.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 15, 2007 10:08 AM CST up reply actions

wow

"Sigh. My words, mischaracterized again" Overly dramatic much?

In what way was I disingenuous? As long as we're calling names, can I call you a stubborn hypocrite person with a fairly serious creepy stalker side? You can play outraged at that characterization, but I think we both know it's true.

DEJESUS!!!

by tomas21 on Dec 15, 2007 11:15 AM CST up reply actions

Easy there, Sparky...

"Fairly serious creepy stalker side"?

Them's fightin' words. Better offer up some serious evidence for an accusation like that.

Al runs an OK site from my perspective, here in the frozen north.

by MN exile on Dec 15, 2007 11:41 AM CST up reply actions

Since you answered this...

... I'm going to leave it posted, to show that certain people here simply come to attack, with no basis for those attacks, based on misinformation and/or lies they have been told.

The only thing I have to say about this is that he said "as long as we're calling names". Check my original post; I did no such thing.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 15, 2007 11:43 AM CST up reply actions

Got your back...

n/t

by MN exile on Dec 15, 2007 11:45 AM CST up reply actions

Thanks, man.

n/t

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 15, 2007 12:45 PM CST up reply actions

stalker

was a poor choice of words. i apologize for that.

and you called me disingenuous, that's a name.

DEJESUS!!!

by tomas21 on Dec 15, 2007 12:50 PM CST up reply actions

No, it's not.

I said your comment was disingenuous, and it was. All I asked was for any poster who uses MLBTR to also post the original link. In no way does that not give credit to MLBTR for doing the legwork, and in fact, I respect Tim, who does that site, very much (he's a Cubs fan, in case you didn't know). Further, it was NOT an attack on you nor the original poster whatsoever; it was simply an explanation of why I asked people to post both links. If you think that was an attack, you're the most sensitive individual I have ever seen.

You have attacked me on this site many times, with absolutely zero justification for such attacks, called me names ("shill" is the one that comes to mind), and generally been nasty. Then you show up a few times in the last couple of weeks, after an absence of several months, only to attack me again?

"Stalker was a poor choice of words"? You're going to have to explain that one, too.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 15, 2007 1:02 PM CST up reply actions

i never called

you a shill, that was always your interpretation of my words.

DEJESUS!!!

by tomas21 on Dec 15, 2007 1:05 PM CST up reply actions

It was, I thought...

... a reasonable interpretation. However, you are correct. This comment you posted in August 2006 is an accurate reflection of both what you said, and the posts that I made that prompted you to write it.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 15, 2007 1:13 PM CST up reply actions

Starting an attack for no apparent reason

The best thing to do would have been to go right to the San Diego Union-Tribune to post a link to the article by Tom Krasovic, the original writer of the post.

He's the guy who wrote the story, he should get the credit. But if a poster uses a "clearing house" site such as the one in question, you better credit both - but you can't use Krasovic's words as "coming from this web site" because THEY DID NOT. They came from the SD U-T. (And Krasovic is the only writer on that paper who's any good)

This argument is nothing but a cheap-shot at BCB.

by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Dec 15, 2007 9:00 PM CST up reply actions

Thank you.

That's all I was asking, and that's all I HAVE asked whenever anyone quotes a MLBTR link. (And also, to read the original link, because there have occasionally been posts here that wind up getting titled "SOANDSO TRADED!" based on a reading of a MLBTR post that isn't quite correct.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 16, 2007 4:30 AM CST up reply actions

Sorry

I forgot.

by Snake Plissken on Dec 15, 2007 2:46 PM CST up reply actions

Did the new Cardinal GM

study under Hendry in GM school? Looks awfully similar to Maddux for Izturis, doesn't it?

When you've got'em by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow!

by Clute on Dec 15, 2007 10:19 AM CST reply actions

Not really.

Maddux still had something left. I don't think Edmonds does. Regardless of whether he got anything for Edmonds, he cleared payroll space and, as the post notes, possibly cleared room for their prized prospect, Colby Rasmus, to start in CF.

The Cardinals are likely to suck in 2008. Why not get a rookie who's probably going to be really good into their lineup?

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 15, 2007 10:21 AM CST up reply actions

First reaction to trade

Was that the Padres were just going after a "name" player to satisfy their frustrated fan base for losing out on Fukudome and the other OF FA that they were unable to land.

But $7 Million is a lot of cash to pay for just a "name" and oddly, Towers must actually think there's something left in Edmonds. We all know that there isn't and will most likely miss around 40-50 games.

At this point, I would put Patterson ahead of Edmonds on my CF want list. Atleast Corey is still relatively young and can play the huge CF of Petco.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. ` Adam Savage Mythbusters

by lemon20pie on Dec 15, 2007 10:36 AM CST up reply actions

Agreed.

Not only did Edmonds decline in all those stat measures, his OPS+ was under 100 (88) for the first time in his career in a year in which he played more than 100 games, and he scored only thirty-nine runs.

He's going to be bad, and they're going to be sorry they made this deal.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 15, 2007 10:47 AM CST up reply actions

My take

Patterson is probably looking for a multi-year deal and San Diego didn't want to offer it. They are probably hoping that Edmonds can give them one year and then see who's available after 2008. In some ways, a better strategy then getting into a multi-year deal that they might regret.

by rlpete on Dec 15, 2007 10:55 AM CST up reply actions

Patterson's best chance for a long term deal

Is to be a starter somewhere and prove he can contribute to the position. He has of yet not done so.

You can take 1 more team looking for a starting CF off that list.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. ` Adam Savage Mythbusters

by lemon20pie on Dec 15, 2007 12:21 PM CST up reply actions

Patterson should call the Royals

they've missed out on everyone else, Patterson I would think might be a good option for them (little less expensive too)

by PrincetonCubs on Dec 15, 2007 3:35 PM CST up reply actions

Is it my imagination....

or have the Cardinals operated the last couple of years (I include 2006 in this analysis, because they were a mediocre team that year who happened to get hot in late September and October) as a small-market franchise? I realize that St. Louis itself is a pretty small market, but they have a huge fan base in the Midwest and the South, and a beautiful new stadium. They are operating like the Boston Celtics of the late '80s and early '90s. We're going to ride our aging stars into the ground and start over from scratch. Don't get my wrong, I'm not complaining if that's the way the Cards want to do things. It certainly makes life easier for us, but it's just surprising.

"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004

by ctcoff99 on Dec 15, 2007 10:47 AM CST reply actions

The Cardinals...

...like the Blue Jays or Braves, work as pan-regional teams that catch a lot of fans that otherwise aren't served by a local team. So they do have revenue opportunities that outstrip their market size.

But models of fanbase size still aren't that charitable to the Redbirds. Their fans are feeling increasingly lied to by Cards managment -- public financing of the new Busch Stadium was supposed to increase payroll, but hasn't.

I would suggest you learn to truly interrupt all stats before using any selective stats. -- cubswin

by cwyers on Dec 15, 2007 11:00 AM CST up reply actions

Looking at the bigger picture

I tend to trust Padres mgt to make a better deal than the Cardinals. Mozeliak hasn't done anything yet that makes me think he knows what he's doing. He signed Cesar and gave Piniero and Springer what I thought were generous deals. Now he's trying to dump salary? Doesn't add up.

The Padres on the other hand tend to hunt for bargains and a lot of times turn up good finds, at least in the pitching dept. They probably feel that Edmonds is a descent gamble for one year given that they had the money to spend, a desperate need and not many other options. Edmonds himself said he played hurt last year (who wouldn't though after the year he had?). He won't prosper at Petco but if he is healthy he could equate approximately what Cameron would have given them at a lesser salary.

The Cards apparently got nothing back and are paying $1 million to boot. Sure they get Rasmus to the bigs quicker but they're also starting his arbitration clock sooner than necessary considering that with or without him they aren't going to be any good next year, and that he'll likely be less productive next year than any of the 4-6 years following. Leaving him in the minors in 2008 wouldn't have been a bad idea.

I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant. - Robert McCloskey

by pageian on Dec 15, 2007 1:12 PM CST reply actions

The Petco park effect

tends to be much harsher on righties than lefties, so Edmonds might be alright if he has anything left in the tank. Here's an interesting question, though - would you rather try Edmonds for a year or Jacque Jones?

All I am saying is give Pie a chance!

by DGU on Dec 15, 2007 2:33 PM CST up reply actions

Atleast with Jones

You know what you're going to get. You know he's going to be healthy. With Edmonds, that is a huge question mark.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. ` Adam Savage Mythbusters

by lemon20pie on Dec 15, 2007 2:49 PM CST up reply actions

No, you have that reversed

Left-handed batters are screwed at Petco. For example, Brian Giles has seen his power numbers diminish ever since he came to the Padres. The only saving grace at Petco is if you are a dead LH pull hitter - to ace one into that little 'jury box' of seats at the RF foul pole.

That's why that RF bomb by Fukudome in the WBC is so impressive -- he nearly got the ball past the first six rows of seats -- the 'upper level' of the RF stands at Petco. That's a helluva dinger.

Right-handed power at Petco is what's needed. The dimensions are much more friendly.

by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Dec 15, 2007 8:49 PM CST up reply actions