PDA

View Full Version : Would you trade



ezluke
07-04-2011, 09:08 PM
Stubbs for rasmus?

RedsFanInBama
07-04-2011, 09:42 PM
No.

DocRed
07-04-2011, 09:51 PM
Yuck Rasmus....no

Knightro28
07-04-2011, 09:52 PM
Neither team would make that trade. Yet.

BAKER12
07-04-2011, 10:00 PM
Janish for O Cab?

RNTquack1
07-05-2011, 10:04 AM
NO, Rasmus is a Cardinal.....

wlf WV
07-05-2011, 12:36 PM
Stubbs for rasmus?
No,but I would trade him for Heisey for a while.

izzy's dad
07-05-2011, 01:16 PM
No way.

Hillsdale87
07-05-2011, 07:15 PM
Not a chance. Stubbs in his current form is better than Rasmus. And he has the potential to widen that gap significantly

NCCardfan
07-05-2011, 07:26 PM
Not trying to pawn Colby off or anything but would it be the spark for both players? It seems to me that both players show flashes of brilliance but not the consistency that either FO or clubhouse would like to see. Sometimes just changing teams jumpstarts a players career and both these kids need a kick in the rear of some type IMO. Just throwing it out for thoughts.

Razzle
07-05-2011, 08:20 PM
Not a chance. Stubbs in his current form is better than Rasmus. And he has the potential to widen that gap significantly

At Rasmus's current age Stubbs was just breaking into the league. One of these guys was a top 5 prospect and the other a fringe top 100. If the potential is there for one to widen the talent gap it's for Colby, not Stubbs.

RedsFanInBama
07-05-2011, 11:05 PM
FWIW, my stance has nothing to do with Stubbs and everything to do with Rasmus being something that starts with a p and ends with a rick. His whole family for that matter.

Getting old watching Stubbs whiff. I could deal with it if his power hadn't completely dried up.

ervinsm84
07-05-2011, 11:15 PM
only semi close bc colbys younger, but no.

stubbs
2010 WAR 5.2
2011 WAR 2.2

rasmus
2010 WAR 3.2
2011 WAR 0.9

Razzle
07-06-2011, 01:25 AM
only semi close bc colbys younger, but no.

stubbs
2010 WAR 5.2
2011 WAR 2.2

rasmus
2010 WAR 3.2
2011 WAR 0.9

Baseball Reference uses Total Zone as opposed to UZR. Fangraphs WAR is generally thought to be more accurate and they have this:

stubbs
2010 WAR 4.0
2011 WAR 2.1

rasmus
2010 WAR 4.3
2011 WAR 1.8

Still close, but with age and potential on Rasmus's side imo (I'm also biased as he's my favorite player) I'd side with Rasmus.

Magdal
07-06-2011, 01:53 AM
Baseball Reference uses Total Zone as opposed to UZR. Fangraphs WAR is generally thought to be more accurate and they have this:

stubbs
2010 WAR 4.0
2011 WAR 2.1

rasmus
2010 WAR 4.3
2011 WAR 1.8

Still close, but with age and potential on Rasmus's side imo (I'm also biased as he's my favorite player) I'd side with Rasmus.

Razzle, you know very well that Colby is a head case, ala JD Drew. He hates LaRussa and will bolt as soon as he can. He asked for a trade last year and the Cards tried to downplay it. I'm sure you remember that.

I would take Stubbs over him in a Cincinatti second.

Razzle
07-06-2011, 02:01 AM
Razzle, you know very well that Colby is a head case, ala JD Drew. He hates LaRussa and will bolt as soon as he can. He asked for a trade last year and the Cards tried to downplay it. I'm sure you remember that.

I would take Stubbs over him in a Cincinatti second.

I totally agree with you that there are some issues (on both sides of the LaRussa/Rasmus riff, including Tony Rasmus Colby's father), but I'd rather take Colby through his arbitration years knowing he won't sign (unless maybe he has a change of heart after LaRussa retires after this year :pray: ). I just don't think it'd be worthwhile to trade for a guy like Stubbs. If we were trading Rasmus, I'd hope he'd be able to improve the middle infield which is more of a glaring need. I'm beyond done with the Schumaker/Theriot comedy show.

Edit: Rereading this I think I may come off as sounding like Stubbs is a terrible player and that is not at all how I feel. He's a fantastic defender, but I don't think this lineup could deal with another 700-750 OPS player, especially if Pujols leaves.

Magdal
07-06-2011, 03:36 PM
Fair enough.