guvernator wrote:Michael Bradley wrote:guvernator wrote:1) A team doesn't have to comply with a trade request but the jays were in reset mode at that time. Halladay trade talks were also happening. So if you are going to trade your best player, why would you leave other veterans out of trade discussions? Doesn't seem like a sound business strategy to me.
2) Rolen had major shoulder problems the year before. He couldn't pull a fastball for a homerun, if his life depended on it. So to expect Rolen to be a good offensive player in his mid 30s would have been foolish at that time.
3) I don't disagree with your assessment on Encarnacion. He has failed to live up to his top prospect status.
Stewart was Reds' 2nd best prospect at that time. You do not get a team's best prospect for a middling (atleast offensively) 34 year old with lengthy list of health problems. You just don't.
1) But why trade a player for less than a desirable return, especially if you had to chip in $4 million on top of that?
2) Rolen's shoulder was bothering him since I believe 2005 when he messed it up, but IIRC he altered his swing (or something along those lines) and it resulted in increased offensive production that carried over to 2009 and beyond. Like I said his 2010 HR total is probably Cincy-influenced, but from a sheer performance standpoint I don't think repeating his 2009 performance was out of the question in Toronto. He also only had a year left on his deal so it wasn't a crippling contract.
3) The Stewart thing is really wait and see. I think he is better off in relief so I don't view him as highly as others do, although I hope I am wrong and he becomes a good starter long-term. In the end, I think the Jays could have done better with one more 4+ WAR year from Rolen and compensation picks. If the trade was just Rolen for Stewart/Roenicke I could have at least accepted it as a sheer salary dump. But paying Cincy $4 million and then taking EE's $5 million contract on top of that just soured the whole deal, IMO.
JP had to chip in 4 million (just like AA chipped in 6 million in the Halladay deal) to get the prospect he wanted because clearly other major league teams didn't think as highly of Rolen as you did. And I am not bagging Rolen here. He was my favourite Jay after Halladay and Delgado over the last 10 years.
I just disagree with your assessment of Rolen. At the point of the trade it was much more likely that Rolen's production falls off the board than what he actually wound up producing in 2010.
Rolen's OPS from 2006-09 were .887, .729, .780, and .823. If you consider 2007 to be the outlier (which it looks like), then he pretty much showed an .800+ OPS tendency in three of the previous four years, while an alteration in his swing improved his numbers in August/September of 2008, which simply carried over to 2009-beyond. Not unlike Bautista, for different reasons obviously.
"His old way of hitting was determined to be the main reason for Rolen's shoulder issues last year. Rolen -- a seven-time Gold Glove Award winner and five-time All-Star -- has been dealing with shoulder woes for the past four years. Twice in 2005, Rolen had procedures to repair labral tears in his arm, and he also had surgery to remove scar tissue in his shoulder at the end of the '07 season.
When the shoulder problem came up again in 2008, drastically hindering his performance at the plate, Rolen was placed the disabled list on Aug. 10. While shelved, he headed home to Florida and decided that altering his style at the plate was the only way he was going to prolong his career. A great defensive player with a good bat was a pretty safe prediction for him. It was just a matter of staying healthy. I didn't even like the original Rolen trade (for Glaus), but learned to appreciate Rolen when he came over here. Two-way players at 3B are not plentiful right now.
Again, if Stewart pans out, then the deal will be looked at fondly. I just don't see the greatness of it like many here do. It's an overrated good trade.
