Monday Rockpile: It's not a (Matt) Holliday for the Cardinals

by Russ Oates on Nov 10, 2008 8:03 AM MST in Rockpile Comment 13 comments

It appears as though the Cardinals are out of the Matt Holliday sweepstakes . . . for now. The Cardinals' GM, John Mozeliak, is sure on that:

Mozeliak insisted Sunday that discussions involving Colorado Rockies left fielder Matt Holliday have ceased and that "nothing is imminent. That one’s not happening — at all."

Mozeliak goes on to say that the talks were definitely serious in nature but that some of the news swirling around those discussions were "misleading." Mozeliak doesn't specify what was misleading, but it may have been the players involved in the deal. At the very least, Mozeliak thought Matt Holliday≠Ryan Ludwick + Skip Schumaker + Mitchell Boggs. As we've witnessed over the last few days, there are quite a number of opinions on that

Dan O'Dowd says "things are fluid" on the Matt Holliday Front. The battle tactics of the Matt Holliday Front are give and take now.

Here's a list of the Rockies' minor league free agents. You can find every team's minor league free agents here.

Colorado Rockies (18)
RHP: Darren Clarke (AA), Simon Ferrer (Hi A), Josh Hall (AA), Zach McClellan (AA), Tomas Santiago (AA), Sean Smith (AAA), Edward Valdez (AAA), Oscar Villarreal (AAA)
C: Humberto Cota (AAA), Brian Esposito (AA), Nelson Robledo (Hi A)
2B: Gary Cates (AA), Mike McCoy (AAA)
3B: Tony Blanco (AA)
SS: Doug Bernier (AAA)
OF: Sean Barker (AAA), Tom Collaro (AA), Lino Garcia (Hi A)

Given that these guys have reached free agency as minor leaguers, losing any of them isn't too much of a big deal. We'll have nothing to show for trading away Jamey Carroll if Sean Smith takes a walk somewhere else. Knuckleballer Simon Ferrer seemed to hit a wall this season in Modesto; if the Rockies don't bring him back, he'll catch on somewhere.

0 recs | Comment 13 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Relief

The Cardinals have some good minor league talent but none of them were in that proposal. I looked at Boggs’ minor league numbers and while they’re respectable, they don’t look as if they’d translate in the majors.

What I don’t understand is why Dan O’Dowd is refusing to get a left-handed bat. I understand that in 2010 we’d theoretically be looking at some combination of Helton, Hawpe and Stewart as the middle of our lineup but it seemed as though Dan was favoring a mediocre right-handed hitter instead of a better left-handed hitter. Also, all Stewart did this year was crush left-handed pitching so one could make the argument that while he bats lefty, he shouldn’t be viewed as a lefty in terms of lineup configuration.

by Resolution on Nov 10, 2008 8:14 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

Status of...?

Guys like Colonel, what is it. They are not minor free agents, yet not on 40 man. Can this be explained? Thanks

by roxtalk on Nov 10, 2008 8:39 AM MST reply actions 0 recs

I think....

after 6 six years in the minors with a team (never having been on the 40-man roster), a player achieves minor league free agent status. So assuming Colonel doesn’t make the 40-man this year, he will be a minor league free agent after next season.

Additionally, since he’s past the 3 season (4 for under 19 when drafted) exemption for the Rule 5 draft, he could still be drafted this winter, again assuming the Rockies don’t add him to their 40-man. The Rule 5 coming up this winter brings up some interesting decisions for the Rocks. If my research is correct, the most notable Rockies eligible for Rule 5 draft this year would be Chris Nelson and Corey Wimberly. Some others of note: Daniel Carte, Chris Frey, Andrew Johnston and Mike Paulk.

by RockyMtnRedbird on Nov 10, 2008 2:07 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

But the first

pro season is counted in that. Colonel started in ‘03. He played five more seasons (’04-’08), which would give him a total of six.

And it’s 5 and 4 for people to protected. 4 and 3 are the old ones

"Never Surrender Dreams" - Inscription on J. Michael Straczynski's bench

Purple Row - Covering all your Rockies needs!

by Russ Oates on Nov 10, 2008 2:23 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Rule 5

Maybe, I’m just not reading the rules correctly, but what I’ve read would seem to disagree on both.

This article would indicate that 6 full years gives you minor league free agent status, thus starting the year after being drafted.

And according to everything I’ve read, the Rule 5 is a 3 year exemption for 19 & older at time of draft (2005 draft class) and a 4 year exemption for under 19.

According to Wikipedia:

The exemption periods were extended by one year in October 2006 as part of a new Collective Bargaining Agreement. The change took effect immediately, exempting many players from the 2006 Rule 5 draft even though they had been signed in some cases more than four years before the new agreement came into effect. Prior to the rule change, players were exempt from the first two or three Rule 5 drafts held after their signing (regardless of the year they were drafted), rather than from the first three or four Rule 5 drafts after their signing.

by RockyMtnRedbird on Nov 10, 2008 2:55 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, I'll give you the six-year free agent thing,

but Wikipedia is wrong on the Rule 5 stuff. Under the old rules, it was 3 and 4. With the new rules, it’s 4 and 5.

Just one of the many reasons you shouldn’t always trust Wikipedia.

"Never Surrender Dreams" - Inscription on J. Michael Straczynski's bench

Purple Row - Covering all your Rockies needs!

by Russ Oates on Nov 10, 2008 3:02 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

The Wiki doesn't even

source its claim.

"Never Surrender Dreams" - Inscription on J. Michael Straczynski's bench

Purple Row - Covering all your Rockies needs!

by Russ Oates on Nov 10, 2008 3:05 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I think we're arguing the same thing.

2005 draftees are exempt from the first 3 Rule 5 drafts, following their Rule 4 draft, as stated by Wikipedia. Thus they can play for the club for four years (2005, 2006, 2007, 2008) before needing to be protected.

I’m pretty certain that 2005 college players need to be protected this year. And your one referenced article would back this up since last year were saying

High school players drafted in 2003 and college players drafted in 2004 become eligible for the Rule 5 for the first time this year.

by RockyMtnRedbird on Nov 10, 2008 3:14 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs

I wasn't arguing who

was eligible. It was just that the numbers given were wrong. While the first year doesn’t count for six-year free agency, it does for Rule 5 status. So, yes, college players from 2005 are eligible and 2004 high schoolers, as well.

"Never Surrender Dreams" - Inscription on J. Michael Straczynski's bench

Purple Row - Covering all your Rockies needs!

by Russ Oates on Nov 10, 2008 6:56 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs