Comments on: Eduardo Sanchez in 2011

By: Wade

Wade — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 04:12:25 +0000

nothing close to solid MI prospect for those two

By: BigRob

BigRob — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 03:01:05 +0000

On a side note, I just saw where thecardinalnation.com has Oscar Taveras at #11 on their prospect list. I have him much higher on my own personal list. Surprises me to see him that low.

By: Kyle

Kyle — Tue, 04 Jan 2011 22:28:27 +0000

I always thought Sanchez to be a bit under rated as a prospect. I think had Chriz Perez and Sanchez been prospect at the same time, I would have taken Sanchez. When Perez was a prospect I recall him making BA’s top 100 list.

By: cariocacardinal

cariocacardinal — Tue, 04 Jan 2011 18:04:36 +0000

That was his second year in the GCL but he made big improvements. My guess is Batavia to start next year, maybe QC later in the year if he does well. Big Lefty/Righty split in Winter ball so he could get pushed fast as a LOOGY.

By: Gruntosaurus

Gruntosaurus — Tue, 04 Jan 2011 17:22:29 +0000

The blurb on Sanchez in Goold’s article neither raised nor lowered my expectations for him, but something else in that article did catch my eye:

“MANUEL DE LA CRUZ, LHP, Mexicali (LMP): A 43rd-round pick by the Cardinals in 2009, the 20-year-old lefty went 4-2, 1.85 in 28 relief appearances for the Gulf Coast League affiliate. He had 43 strikeouts and eight walks in 34 innings, holding opponents to a .182 batting average.”

He didn’t do nearly as well in the winter leagues (a brief mention of him earlier in a winter-league checkup had been positive, but it didn’t last), but still, I’d heard next to nothing about this guy. He’ll need to show something at a higher level than the GCL, but with a K/9 rate of over 10 and a K/BB ratio of over 5, it looks possible. Any chance we’ll see him at QC this year? Is he a player, or was this just the result of being 20 years old in a developmental league?

By: jjray

jjray — Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:07:03 +0000

By: Clark

Clark — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 23:57:30 +0000

I totally agree, I don’t understand why the Cardinals would allow him to play in winterball

By: Cards fan in Chitown

Cards fan in Chitown — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 22:58:18 +0000

My thinking was that we have Berkman or Craig to play 1B if something does happen to Albert, and I’ve read that they would call up one of their other options for C if something were to happen to one of the current two on the roster. I agree that the “insurance” of having them is nice, but we are much more weak in the MI.

By: BigRob

BigRob — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 22:08:03 +0000

I understand what you’re saying, and I think it would be a good idea to trade our prospects that don’t really have a future with our team. However, it is nice to have the depth in case we see an injury or two. Also, I don’t think we could realistically get much of a prospect back in return for those two. Maybe a middle infielder similar in talent to Descalso.

By: Cards fan in Chitown

Cards fan in Chitown — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 21:45:10 +0000

ALSO, if we get Albert resigned M. Hamilton is just wasting away in our system, the guy has to have some value in the majors as a 1B. Look at the teams giving old and aging 1B 8M a year for 15 HR’s and a .270 avg. I would have to think a 400K guy with a little upside would be valuable.

AND, we have a potential .260-.270 hitting catcher (B. Anderson) with a little pop would be a nice addition to a lot of teams I would think. Granted, Laird didn’t cost much more than the leauge minimum, but it goes to show that TLR has zero interested in playing a “weak defensive catcher”.

So my question is this, why would it not be in the organizations best interest to package the two of them together as major leauge ready players or very close to being, for a solid MI prospect or something along those lines. If a team had a hole or backup need at those positions, I think it would be in everyone’s best interest to make the trade?