Rachel Crader is the editor of semoball.com. She graduated from the University of Missouri School of Journalism in May of 2009 before spending the summer covering the World Series of Poker in Las Vegas.

Highlights from Rachel's days in college include having a class down the hall from Chase Daniel and having NCAA wrestling champion Ben Askren hold the door open for her at Brady Commons, Mizzou's student center. She spent time covering Mizzou basketball, softball and baseball while working for the Columbia Missourian and is excited to return home to Southeast Missouri to cover local sports for semoball.com.

Rachel has covered three Southeast Missourian Christmas Tournaments for the Southeast Missourian and semoball.com, and she'll see you courtside again this year.

The Holliday Blog

Posted Friday, July 24, 2009, at 2:36 PM

By now most of you probably know that Matt Holliday will become/is a St. Louis Cardinal.

The Cardinals sent three minor leaguers to the Oakland A's in exchange for Holliday -- third baseman Brett Wallace, right-handed pitcher Clayton Mortensen and outfielder Shane Peterson. According to ESPN, the A's will give the Cards $1.5 million to help cover the $6 million Holliday is due before the end of the season.

Holliday will be a free agent after this season, and Scott Boras is his agent, meaning (at least to me) that the hope of getting a St. Louis-is-a-great-place-to-play discount is diminished a bit. Of course, I'm working under the assumption that the Cardinals will want to resign Holliday, but that should be a given in this situation.

I've browsed reaction to this deal on several sites and people tend to be falling on one of two sides. Some are ecstatic because they feel like the deal gives St. Louis a chance to win this year. Losing a top prospect like Wallace doesn't bother them because he, unlike Holliday, is unproven at the major league level. Others can't believe the Cards gave up so much for what could turn out to be a 64-game "rental" of a guy having a down year.

It seems like I'm always more sad to be losing players than I am happy to be getting them, for what it's worth, so I feel like my opinion is slanted from the start. However, not every prospect becomes a superstar. That much we know. And the Cardinals probably weren't going to win the World Series this year with the team they had a week ago. Now they could with Holliday in the middle of the lineup...and Chris Duncan and others, well, not in the middle of the lineup.

Maybe the A's just got themselves an infield version of Dan Haren from St. Louis, but it seems unlikely that Holliday will turn into and outfield version of Mark Mulder. Whatever happens, I find it hard to criticize a deal that people pretty much universally agree was made to make the Cardinals win right now.

Are you happy Holliday is a Cardinal?

Comments

View 9 comments

Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

I'm very happy he's a Cardinal IF we win this year. If we don't win this year and he's doesn't resing with the Cardinals, it's a bad deal.

Wallace is a great hitting prospect. He's a bad defensive player so the american league in the best bet for him. I just hate to see him by a 10 time all-star and Holliday go to the Yankees or Red Sox in the offseason.

The Duncan trade was great. Even if Lugo sits the bench, he's better than Duncan.

The DeRosa trade is starting to work out so overall Im very happy with the way the Cardinals are trying to win this year.

-- Posted by FreyGuys on Fri, Jul 24, 2009, at 2:46 PM
If he doesnt resign w/ us, its not too terribly horrible, we will get 2 picks. The best case is that he signs here though I doubt that will happen.

-- Posted by richiro33 on Fri, Jul 24, 2009, at 3:49 PM

Rachel Crader's response:
I could be wrong about this, so please tell me if I am. But, as I understand it, the Cardinals would have to at least offer Holliday arbitration in order to get picks if he does not resign with the team.

I think it was Olney who wrote that he estimated Holliday would be awarded about $16 million or so at arbitration, so the Cardinals would have to risk him accepting that deal. So let's pretend the Cardinals wanted to sign Holliday for $12 million a year for a couple years and Holliday rejected the offer. If St. Louis didn't want to risk having to pay him whatever he was granted in arbitration and therefore did not offer it to him, they would not get any picks. However, if they offered him arbitration and he rejected the deal, the picks would be theirs.

Probably a lot of worry about nothing but something to think about.
Glaus, Ankiel and K. Greene's salaries all come off the books in the offseason. There is a good chance that is enough to sign Holliday. Greene and Ankiel would be replaced by Holliday and Ryan. There may still be a hole at 3B, but not if they can re-sign DeRosa. Who knows what Lugo will do, but the Red Sox are paying his salary.

-- Posted by redhawk04 on Fri, Jul 24, 2009, at 8:04 PM
There is absolutely zero chance he accepts arb. They will be looking at upwards of 20 mil over 5 years on the market.

-- Posted by richiro33 on Fri, Jul 24, 2009, at 8:08 PM

Rachel Crader's response:
Yeah, you are probably right about this.

I should really stop dreaming up worst possible scenarios...haha.
I think they will sign DeRosa and Holliday. Remember signing those two would just about lock in Pujols. Remember Pujols wants to play on a winner. What do you think?

-- Posted by retired1 on Fri, Jul 24, 2009, at 8:19 PM

Rachel Crader's response:
I like to think of Pujols as completely locked already. Anything else is just too painful to even consider.

You obviously make a good point, though.
There is no team without Pujols. DeWitt may be cheap, but he ain't stupid.

-- Posted by gehagge on Sat, Jul 25, 2009, at 1:14 PM
But what about pitching?

Look up Holliday's stats outside Coors field. Even ESPN and Rockies fan sites prove that he was a product primarily of Coors field.

And you can't trust any player that Billy Beane sends to any team. Remember Mark Mulder, Tim Hudson, and Barry Zito. Plus a few other no names all had health problems that Beane said he "didn't know about".

-- Posted by Mosely on Sun, Jul 26, 2009, at 10:00 AM
Mulder, Hudson, and Zito have nothing to do w/ Holiday, he was an A for what? 7 months? It was clear the #1 need on this team was offense and thats what the trade provides. Holliday's power was clearly a product of Coors but he is still capable of winning a batting title while hitting 20-30 homers and stealing 20 bases at a great rate.

-- Posted by richiro33 on Sun, Jul 26, 2009, at 10:26 AM
Ichiro33,

I respect your opinion but we needed two arms. Another dependable starter. Preferably a lefty and at least one solid bullpen guy. If not another starter instead.

How's that Cardinal pitching working out? DeRosa was a solid investment to help protect Pujols. Lugo will be Lugo.

Holliday is a good investment for this season since we're getting paid for part of his salary but keeping him will cost us. Even if we dump Ank, and the others that come off the books.

-- Posted by Mosely on Sun, Jul 26, 2009, at 2:15 PM

Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration:

If you already have an account, follow this link to login
Otherwise, follow this link to register