Cardinals trade for Matt Holliday

by on July 24, 2009 · 2 comments

Brett Wallace.

Clayton Mortensen.

Shane Peterson.

Which one is this go-round’s Dan Haren?

As one would expect, the Cardinals’ trade for Matt Holliday brought about much excitement, for there is a new big bat in the daily lineup.  It also brought consternation because of the seemingly exorbitant price.

We can’t add much outside of the opinions already voiced at Future Redbirds, or C70 at the Bat, or Viva El Birdos.

As the initial shock and excitement has worn down, here are some thoughts.

Given the perceived largesse of the Cardinals’ side of this trade, a couple of things stick out:

  1. The Cardinal fans who previously criticized the Front Office for not wanting to compete and not spending enough money now have no leg to stand on.  That is, unless they flip-flop and now are convinced the Cardinals shouldn’t have “given up the future.”  Can’t have it both ways, folks.
  2. Someone sees this team as a legit contender for some big rings come October.  Bill DeWitt, John Mozeliak, maybe even Tony LaRussa.  I just hope this wasn’t an “overpay to keep TLR happy” sort of move.
  3. Early talk about Holliday was Wallace straight up.  Now that the deal is done, and only includes minimal cash on the Oakland side of the ledger, something doesn’t add up.  Mortensen was a legit pitching prospect, he could’ve stuck as a #4 or #5.  I don’t know much about Peterson, but the three of them put together seems to indicate that the Cards weren’t very high on Wallace outside of his bat.  Purely conjecture, but I can’t rationalize this deal without that assumption.
  4. A UCB blogger friend of mine even goes so far to suggest that the Cards drafted Wallace with ulterior motives.  That they never intended on him seeing St Louis wearing the Birds on the Bat, and he was a bat-for-hire.  I say it would’ve been a master-stroke of ulterior motives if that were really the case.  Wallace was the best selection available at their pick that year, and they made it without hesitation.

This is just another step in the progression.  After all, we have yet to see if Wallace is Dan Haren or Daric Barton.

email
Writing about the Cardinals and other loosely associated topics since 2008, I've grown tired of the April run-out only to disappoint Cardinal fans everywhere by mid-May. I do not believe in surrendering free outs.
View all posts by Nick
Follow Nick on Twitter

{ 1 comment }

gforce July 24, 2009

Wallace had his day at Busch III with the Futures Game and couldn’t have more trade value than he does now. Still not sure how I feel about the other two pieces of the deal but at least a trade was done without PTBNL!!

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: