Home › The Cardinal Nation Forums › Open Forum › Breyvic Valera and Josh Lucas traded
- This topic has 37 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 12 months ago by SoonerinNC.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 2, 2018 at 11:13 am #47153
I cant fault Mo for sticking with Norris. His Spring wasnt disasterous and I think most people thought it was a fair price when they signed and that doesnt change. He could be really good or he could tank. I think his contract price reflects that.
Lucas did all he could but if Norris got the 25 man roster nod it is not inconsistant that he would get the 40 man roster nod. I think we got a lot back for Lucas. A player that possibly has a higher upside. In that situatiin, that is a lot to get.
April 2, 2018 at 11:18 am #47156I agree. There is no need to flush $3M down the toilet based on a small sample of spring outings. Let’s give Norris a chance.
Cecil on the other hand……………
April 2, 2018 at 11:22 am #47158I have no doubt the Cardinals weren’t planning on signing Holland when they signed Norris.
As for Meisner having potentially higher upside, I don’t know. Lucas seemed to be a useful bullpen piece and I think its funny how every year the Cardinals sign a middling reliever in the offseason and then go out and acquire one at the deadline, but continually pass over their AAA arms even though they admit they get themselves into trouble by hanging onto veterans too long.
April 2, 2018 at 11:23 am #47160And yes, maybe Cecil would have been better to get rid of. But then you are flushing $22 million down the toilet.
April 2, 2018 at 11:35 am #47163i agree that this is a lot of hindsight talking…however losing Lucas because of Norris is not the only decision that landed us there
Pena getting Kelly’s spot also got us there…i can’t imagine they thought Pena would be “as good” as they thought, but thinking that Kelly’s production and performance would not be affected by not playing a lot is a pretty obvious mistake…and one that everyone saw coming
they fought hard against the ideas and outcry that Kelly would be wasted by being a backup yet they end up caving on the decision which puts Pena on the 40man… which combined with Norris means Valera and Lucas are gone…
Norris still i think can be good i dont doubt that…i just question HOW much better will he perform than a Lucas filled spot along with Holland…if HOlland was a legitimate option even at a 1yr deal then why not wait on Norris? If you feel pressed for Norris beausse Holland isnt going to happen…then don’t push Kelly down for Pena at least not right away…
losing Valera was going to happen it seems…and maybe for the best with Max and Yairo added… but losing Lucas did not need to happen….
Kelly getting more ABs > Lucas in the organization
or
Norris + Holland > Lucas in the org. + HollandNow what happens when Reyes returns…i have no idea at this point
Voit
Brebbia
Mayers
…maybe you try to put Pena through to Memphis and bring up Kelly?
…maybe Gregerson or Waino are more hurt than we think?
…maybe Cecil is an easy 60 day DL option as they are not for sure what is going on with him?
…maybe someone else gets hurt?
…maybe a trade?…Kelly + Hudson + Tuivalala for Archer? (Waino not being good to go and they want to wait on Flaherty being in the rotation for too many innings)I’d guess Cecil to 60day DL at some point clearing a spot for Reyes to come off
April 2, 2018 at 12:12 pm #47169Unless he is doing well, I would rather lose Norris than anyone else on the 40 man roster. We can’t be so cheap that we start losing prospects over underachieving veterans. Besides time is on our side here, since Reyes doesn’t come back until the end of May.
And how will Reyes situation unfold? He can be on rehab while on the 60 day DL, right? So theoretically he could rehab early/mid May at Memphis. And can Reyes come back any sooner than May 28? I thought I read that is not possible.
April 2, 2018 at 12:20 pm #47170If the question is, “Can a player on the 60-day DL be activated early?”, the answer is “No!”.
April 2, 2018 at 1:37 pm #47179And yes, maybe Cecil would have been better to get rid of. But then you are flushing $22 million down the toilet.
The difference being that Cecil has thrown 67.2 regular season innings as a Cardinal and Norris has thrown 1.1. I think we know what we have in Cecil and it isn’t good.
April 2, 2018 at 3:45 pm #47195I agree with you gscottar, but the Cardinals won’t admit a mistake until the player is in the final year of his contract.
April 2, 2018 at 4:13 pm #47198Like Mike Leake, you mean? That was a $17 MM flush not in his last year, but rant on, folks…
April 2, 2018 at 4:27 pm #47205And who would become your second lefty in the pen to replace Cecil? Sherriff? Make Gomber a reliever? Add Gilmartin to the 40-man? Those are the only options I can see and I have little confidence any would be better than Cecil at this point. Maybe Gomber later in the year.
April 2, 2018 at 4:31 pm #47206I would take Sherriff over Cecil any day of the week. I couldn’t say on Gomber.
BTW, Leake has been very good for Seattle.
April 2, 2018 at 10:45 pm #47245Leake was also good for us the first half last year. Still a 50/50 pitcher in the long run.
We signed Norris because we had no assurance that we would get Holland. With 20/20 hindsight I would have waited too. But most of those free agents at the time all believed that they would get long lucrative contracts and the Cardinals usually don’t go for those.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.