Comments on: Guest Post: salukihoops

By: picklefork

picklefork — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 02:33:41 +0000

Gregerson gone, Perdomo in?

I would take that trade if that does indeed happen, one thing is for sure if the Cards are going to make a trade RH setup guys they can spare to part with.

When you factor in what you already have in terms of RH late inning arms and then add in the RH starters who will probably end up there, RH relief is very deep.

Probably too deep, which means they need to stop drafting 1 and 1.5 pitch starting pitchers so early in the draft.

By: Kazahkstanny Danny

Kazahkstanny Danny — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 23:18:13 +0000

I guess Brian Sabean has sampled some of the smokable materials that can be purchased in many a San Fransisco head shop, and decided in his drug addled state, that his team apparently can contend this year.

That is fine with me. The Cardinals can never have enough power arms in their minor league system. And I would like to see what Perdomo could do with a full season in Triple A.

Seriously, though how even if they do want to contend, why could they not find a place in their bullpen for a young power reliever? If the Cardinals could find a place for a 25 year old outfielder with little power, than the Giants could find room for Perdomo. Who do they have besides Wilson and Affeldt that could be better?

By: Mike G.

Mike G. — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 22:05:13 +0000

The Cardinal want him back? If that’s so, can someone please explain why he wasn’t protected on the 40- man (except for the Cardinals it’s more like 35-man) roster in the first place? There was plenty of room, even after the dubious decision to protect Scherer.

By: tom s.

tom s. — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:39:56 +0000

not quite. the giants could trade perdomo to another squad — for this example, let’s say the padres. the padres would get perdomo, but would have to keep him on their roster under the exact same terms as the giants would. the giants would get to keep the player they won in the trade, regardless of whether perdomo finished the season in memphis, in san diego, or even in texas (because the padres could trade him on again). the giants would be trading not perdomo, but their rights to perdomo. the padres would be trading for the opportunity to develop perdomo.

By: lassie01

lassie01 — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:34:38 +0000

I’m guess I’m not following how the Giants could trade him. Does that mean if they traded him and he didnt stay on that team’s roster, that team would have to give him back to us and then they’d get what they traded to the Giants back?

By: tom s.

tom s. — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 20:22:42 +0000

if the giants lack space, i guess the question is who needs basic currency like middle-of-the-road, unpolished right handed relievers like perdomo, and who has the roster space that would make the Rule 5 encumbrance not a big deal.

san diego jumps out as a team desperate for right-handed relievers (as well as almost anything else), especially now that worrell’s headed for TJ surgery. the question is, I guess, whether such a team poor in just about everything would have anything to trade for perdomo. the nats would fall in this category since their bullpen is on the whole horrendous, but they have little more to offer and might do better sniffing around for position players who aren’t outfielders.