04/19/24
January 12, 2008
Rolen for Glaus?: Rolen has a simmering feud with manager Tony La Russa, one that has become increasingly public since La Russa agreed to a two-year deal to return to the Cardinals. Rolen has remained mum publicly, though La Russa has described an environment where one player said he would prefer La Russa not return to the club. That player: Rolen.
The Cardinal fans lost when La Russa was given a new deal. Rolen and La Russa have both behaved like children. Rolen needs to suck it up and be a man, keep his mouth shut and play ball. And if the truth be known, more than one player was unhappy about Peta Tony staying in the dugout. Having said all of that, I'd like to see the trade happen. Rolen is injury prone.
posted by budman13 at 04:24 PM on January 12, 2008
Bo should know that the Cardinals win if this pans out.
posted by cardsfan at 04:40 PM on January 12, 2008
I'm not so sure the Cardinals win in this deal. It seems its one injury prone player for another. Rolen is by far the better defensive player.
posted by BoKnows at 04:46 PM on January 12, 2008
You see Rolen has lot of prid and I doubt it would allow himt o go to Toronto, which peopl look down at. However, Rolen is a great player. Glaus got a ring with the Angels, but he really was not a part of the ing. He got that ring for playing for a losing franchise throughout the late 90's and early 00's, the prime of his career, when people thought he was the next Hank Aaron. He then went to Phoenix, he did not make them a winner, went to Toronto, same result. This is good for the Jays, but the Cardinals will be sorry.
posted by Joe188 at 05:19 PM on January 12, 2008
Rolen needs to suck it up and be a man, keep his mouth shut and play ball. First of all, Roland has kept his mouth shut. Larussa, is the only one I've heard negative comments in the past. LaRussa is a prick and I'll never liked the guy because of the Ozzie Smith situation years back. Hoping the GM can make the trade (although I hate seeing Roland go), because Roland deserves to play on team without the friction. As far as La Russa goes-fire him right now. I personally don't think he that great of a manager, and could care less how many games he's won. Personally, the guy couldn't carry Herzog's jock strap.
posted by Nakeman at 05:40 PM on January 12, 2008
Nakeman, I agree with you about LaRussa. He screwed Ozzie over royally and I can't stand him. I thought that he pulled the same shit on Ecstein (sp?) this last season also. But if you take an honest look at this Rolan hasn't always kept his mouth shut. He's also pouted like a 3 yr. old. LaRussa has been more vocal but Rolan by no stretch of the imagination is an innocent.
posted by budman13 at 06:45 PM on January 12, 2008
Rolan hasn't always kept his mouth shut. Please send me the newspaper article or video clip where's he's said anything. Everything has been second hand infomation. That drunk LaRussa should have been fired before the season.
posted by Nakeman at 06:52 PM on January 12, 2008
I'm not so sure the Cardinals didn't win this trade. Glaus is obviously not the defensive player Rolen is, but he is a better offensive player at this point and has at least one year less on his contract (he has a player option for 2009). I'll be sad to see Rolen go, as I generally think he "plays the game the right way," but this one is on both him and LaRussa for not acting like grownups. Scott put up some great years in St. Louis -- Polanco, Timlin and Bud Smith for Rolen was a steal.
posted by holden at 07:22 PM on January 12, 2008
"That drunk La Russa" is one of the best managers the game has ever seen. And if getting caught one time with a (gasp) .09 constitutes a "drunk", why, I don't even know what to say... if a .09 puts him literally to sleep at the wheel, he's no drunk in my world.
posted by bobfoot at 07:23 PM on January 12, 2008
It is now a mute point. I just heard that the deal went through. Scott is no longer a Cardinal.
posted by budman13 at 07:32 PM on January 12, 2008
if a .09 puts him literally to sleep at the wheel, he's no drunk in my world. The state fo Florida said he was drunk at this incident, and that's good enough for my world and reason to fire him. Look at talent he's had on some of the teams throughout the years. I'm sure a lot of managers could've done just as well or better with his personnel. You may be looking at distance at this guy, don't let the record and false modesty fool you.
posted by Nakeman at 07:35 PM on January 12, 2008
I'm sure a lot of managers could've done just as well or better with his personnel. Nakeman, in the Cardinals World Series win, LaRussa made some great managerial decisions throughtout the playoffs. He knew when to bat Spiezio, Taguchi, and most of his moves paid off. He gave the ball to Reyes (rookie) to win Game 1 of the WS. His record speaks for itself: 3rd all time wins, WS in both leagues, manager of the year both leagues. You may be looking at distance at this guy You may not like him, and thats OK, but don't think you embody the thoughts of Cardinal Nation as a whole. The state fo Florida said he was drunk at this incident, and that's good enough for my world and reason to fire him. Why? Do you think everyone who gets a DUI should be fired? Or is it just people in the spotlight that made decisions you didn't like?
posted by BoKnows at 08:50 PM on January 12, 2008
Nakeman, in the Cardinals World Series win, LaRussa made some great managerial decisions throughtout the playoffs. Ok, he did make some excellent decisions in the World Series. I'll not argue the point, however I'm not going to judge him on 1 World Series. Look at the talent the guy had over the years and tell me another manager couldn't done just as well. You may not like him, and thats OK, but don't think you embody the thoughts of Cardinal Nation as a whole. I don't base my opinions what is popular or what other people think. Why? Do you think everyone who gets a DUI should be fired? Or is it just people in the spotlight that made decisions you didn't like? Yes, especially high profile people that influence young fans. If some Joe gets one, who's going to be influenced by some nobody or for that matter who's going to know. I'm responsible for the people around me and how I conduct myself. Tony has the same responsibility with additional burden of the St. Louis Cardinals. Who will be here long after Sir Tony is gone and anybody else that would bring bad press to the Cardinals in my book should dealth with harshly.
posted by Nakeman at 09:15 PM on January 12, 2008
i have been a cards fan since i was three years old (as much as anyone can be at three years old), and i have never loved tony. that said, i think he has done well here. i think hes made mistakes, some of which have gotten us bumped from the playoffs, but over all he has done well. rolen has also done well, but he has been injury prone. since he dislocated his shoulder in the 02 playoffs, he has not been the same. i do hate to lose him, but i do think we get the better end of the deal in this. glause has been good for a long time, and even though they have both started to decline, glause hasnt fallen as far as rolen. my biggest complaint is that i have to replace my cardinals jerseys now. rolen and edmonds. those damn things are expensive!
posted by elijahin at 10:08 PM on January 12, 2008
I also will miss Roland, Edmonds and Eckstein from the Cardinal roster, and wish them the very best, playing for their new teams.
posted by Nakeman at 10:19 PM on January 12, 2008
I don't base my opinions what is popular or what other people think. What I referring to was this: You may be looking at distance at this guy - Your comment suggesting that fans "from a distance" don't have the proper perspective in this matter. Tony has the same responsibility with additional burden of the St. Louis Cardinals. True. He's not the first and won't be the last. But Tony made a mistake, we all do. He got caught. Did you see the videos? He wasn't some blatant raging, cussing, angry, drunk, he composed himself and complied with the police without arguement or further disruption of traffic. (he-he). I believe he is a good-hearted guy that, again, made a mistake. Let's not forget all the respect for his Animal Rescue Foundation. I don't believe one bad decision wipes out all the good decisions he's made in his lifetime. Ultimately, my ideal situation would include Rolen and LaRussa living in peace and harmony. (With The Oz and The Secret Weapon as infield coaches.) By the way, are you talking about Roland or Rolen?
posted by BoKnows at 10:43 PM on January 12, 2008
As a Cub fan, I would be glad to see him in the American League. Rolen single handledly wins 3-4 games a year against the Cubs with his defense. By the way, what did LaRussa do to Ozzie?
posted by scuubie at 10:59 PM on January 12, 2008
ok guys this is bugging the hell out of me. it is R-O-L-E-N. i just read it off the back of my jersey. i know. i know, i spell like a second grader, but for names as simple as this one, i try to get it right. so its scott rolen. thank you.
posted by elijahin at 11:14 PM on January 12, 2008
By the way, what did LaRussa do to Ozzie? he more or less ran him out of town. he braugt in royce clayton to play short, under the impression that ozzie was ready to retire. turns out ozzie was nowhere near ready to call it quits, so tony played royce 2 games to every 1 for ozzie. they seemed to have made piece, but it deffinitly put off alot of cards fans. i was one of them. thats probably why i never have really warmed up to tony, even though he has done a really good job over all as our manager.
posted by elijahin at 11:18 PM on January 12, 2008
By the way, are you talking about Roland or Rolen? posted by BoKnows at 10:43 PM CST on January 12 Thank you for pointing out my spelling mistake. Rolen, boy do I feel better. As far as making a mistake, your right, everyone is guilty of a infraction. On second though, I do admire him for his animal rescue foundation. But, it all immaterial to my premise about spouting off to the press. He's done it in St. Louis and when he was manager in Oakland. I didn't like him before the DUI and liked him even less after the infraction. He took over for Joe Torre and became an excellant manager for the Cardinals, however Torre didn't do so bad himself with the Yankees. Managers are as smart or dumb as the talent they have in most cases. That's why Herzog was in my opinion, a much better Manager than La Russa. Talent base was for Herzog not as good and he still won.
posted by Nakeman at 11:45 PM on January 12, 2008
im with you nake. whitey was one of the more under-appreciated managers of his time. maybe of any time. my best friend andrew and i were watching the rangers and the white sox on espn that sunday night that the cards announced that joe torre would not be returning. both of us are cards fans, and both of us had our jaws on the floor. they were finaly starting to listen to his requests for players, and showing some early signs of progress, and now they fire him! we were pissed. then came the whole ozzie/royce thing. over all i do like tony ok. i just dont think he is the great HOF manager people make him out to be. i just hope all these major changes dont kill us long term. i realize we probably have a year or two before we will be a contender for the centeral again, but if this is gonna be a long term rebuilding project, i would be just as happy if they went ahead and let tony go so that the next manager (oquindo maybe?) can get started doing it his own way.
posted by elijahin at 01:22 AM on January 13, 2008
Nakeman, I understand your point about Herzog winning with less talent but here are some stats: The White Rat 1980-1990 - 1 World Series, 2 NL Pennants 822-728 w/l record Joe Torre 1990 - 1995 - 0 WS, 0 NL Pennants 351-354 w/l record LaRussa 1996 - Present - 1 WS, 2 NL Pennants, 6 Divsion Titles, 1055- 887 w/l record (1st all time for the 100+ year old franchise) Looks pretty good to me.
posted by BoKnows at 02:24 AM on January 13, 2008
I'm pretty sure that it's absolutely impossible to judge this trade right now—it entirely depends on how many games each player logs next year. Who knows? I've always liked Glaus, but watching him hobble around the infield was downright painful. Sure, he may experience a renaissance. So might Rolen. Who knows? This seems like a straight-up "your unknowables for my unknowables" trade, which seems kind of dumb, despite the outcome being in doubt for at least the next season. Maybe Ricciardi needed the cash. Who knows?
posted by DrJohnEvans at 08:11 AM on January 13, 2008
The only question I have regarding these two is which one will spend longer on the DL. My guess is they both wind up missing 3/4 of the season. Any player going into spring training behind either of them on the depth chart has to be really pleased and excited, knowing they'll get practically the entire year to start and play.
posted by dyams at 09:51 AM on January 13, 2008
Bo-I'll concede your stats. Just glad Rolen is gone and away from La Russa. Glaus may be the answer at 3rd base. Deal is done according to reports. Did both check out medically already? Wasn't deal contingent on medical evaluation?
posted by Nakeman at 10:25 AM on January 13, 2008
bo, if i told you about a player with a carreer batting avg. of .260, 138 home runs, 27 stolen bases, and a slugging percentage of 367, you probably wouldnt be all that impressed. but what made hall of famer bill mazeroski great, went far beyond the numbers. i love baseball, but as fans we all get WAY too caught up in the numbers. we use them to justify every opinion because "numbers dont lie" but they dont tell the whole story either.reggie jackson struck out four times as many times as he went deep (2597 so/563 hr) does that mean he doesnt deserve credit for beeing a great offensive player? in the case of whitey, there is a lot more to why he was great. he never had an albert pujols, a scott rolen, a jim edmonds. he never had 5 gold gloves on the same field as tony did at one time. he never came close to the pitching rotations that tony has had. in his eleven year whity won 3 pennants and one series. the two world series that he lost were both in game seven, and most cardinal fans would tell you that they won the 85 series in game six, when jorge orta was thrown out at first for the final out but was called safe, inspite of ortas foot print on top of todd worrell's foot. my point is that numbers are just numbers. there is far more to being a great player or manager than the stats. whitey was a pioneer. he started a style of baseball that has been very successful in places like atlanta and queens the white sox won a world series a couple years ago playing a form of whitey-ball. and thats how the rockies got to the series last year. he is one of the most under-appreciated managers of his time. maybe of any time.
posted by elijahin at 10:42 AM on January 13, 2008
Did both check out medically already? I think it's one of those "Caveat Emptor" deals involving both. Anyone thinking they're not getting risky, possibly damaged goods in either Glaus or Rolen, hasn't been paying attention.
posted by dyams at 11:02 AM on January 13, 2008
elijahin, I realize stats do not mean everything. My point was not trying to prove that LaRussa is better than Herzog/Torre. It was to show that LaRussa knows his job and has #'s to back it up. (And he deserves the credit for his success even from people who disagree with him.) What I do find interesting is the squabbles with Ozzie and Rolen. Tony has managed lots of players in his career, I can only assume is was a personality conflict with these 2 players that caused the turmoil. I think it was bad luck on Tony's behalf that he had these conflicts with two all-time St. Louis fan Favorites. (Let's not paint Ozzie and Rolen innocent though, publicly or not, the disdain for their manager was evident.)
posted by BoKnows at 03:15 PM on January 13, 2008
in the case of rolen i would agree. rolen left philly because of authority issues. and he and tony have had them for years. i like scotty, but he has always had some attitude issues. tony does too, and in this case i have to side with tony. in the case of ozzie, however, it wasnt that there were issues that soured people on tony, it was how he handled them. ozzie had more than earned his right to stay, and had not declined a bit on defense. his offense wasn't nearly as good as claytons had been up until that point (although has anyone heard from him since?) what bothered me, was that he constantly nudged an all-time great out the door before he needed to. ozzie was a fantastic lead-off hitter. he didnt need power numbers. the team wasnt ready to compete for the division crown yet anyway.
posted by elijahin at 03:30 PM on January 13, 2008
but he has always had some attitude issues If a bad attitude is wanting management to make a committment to winning, and expanding payroll to accomplished the goal, then yes, Rolen has a bad attitude. Tony, also has a arrogent attitude when it comes to criticising his players in the press. Aside from Ozzie and the DUI, this is the one aspect of his personality that pisses me off the most.
posted by Nakeman at 03:59 PM on January 13, 2008
I'll bet it was a hard decision for Tony to pressure Ozzie in that way. After all, when Tony joined the team, he chose jersey #10, and used that as motivation to bring the club it's 10th WS in 2006. It was not his job to satisfy the hearts of the fan-faithful by keeping an aging Ozzie around. It was his job to bring in new talent and put the best product on the field. Whether it was Ozzie's time to go or not, Tony had to do his best for what he thought was the long-term. (Obviously, Clayton did not pan out with the Cards.) Seems unfair that a new manager would have to come into a city with a then-struggling franchise and be told "Okay Tony, do what you wish, but just let Ozzie fizzle out without any disruption." Instead, Tony stood his gound, did what he had to do and then got a bunch of bad press. Me, I'd hate to be a MLB manager, that's a tough choice, and I respect anyone who makes those choices and stands by them.
posted by BoKnows at 04:02 PM on January 13, 2008
It was not his job to satisfy the hearts of the fan-faithful by keeping an aging Ozzie around. It was his job to bring in new talent and put the best product on the field. Ya, take look at Ozzie's number in 1996, all were higher than his career average numbers. My money on La Russa's stabbing Ozzie in the back, after making a promise to give Smith a chance at the starting shortstop position.
posted by Nakeman at 04:22 PM on January 13, 2008
bo, don' know diddly. first off. tony has worn the number ten throughout his carreer as a manager. first for the white sox, then for oakland, and now in stl. second, as nakeman points out ozzies stats in 96 were better than his carreer average. what, ha didnt have anything left in the tank? as you said clayton didnt pan out that well himself. yes the franchise was struggling, so yes, lets get rid of the one thing that is going right. thats always a good idea. look tony has done well in stl. im not disputing that. i just think he was wrong in the way he delt with ozzie smith at the end of ozzie's carreer. i give him credit for building the team we had for the last few years. and the one that won the series in '06. but i still think he started off badly. thats all.
posted by elijahin at 04:41 PM on January 13, 2008
a chance at the starting shortstop position. Then he had to make a tough choice. One above average year from Ozzie meant one year of waiting for the club's future. bo, don' know diddly. first off. tony has worn the number ten throughout his carreer as a manager. Please Read. Manager Tony LaRussa chose jersey number 10 in 1996 to mark his determination to win a 10th World Series for the Cards. That came from here. Truce you guys, we all have had valid points, stats and outlooks regarding Tony LaRussa and Co. I want the best for the Cards and the fans of St. Louis, but sometimes it's gonna be hard to swallow.
posted by BoKnows at 05:07 PM on January 13, 2008
sorry bo, i really didnt want to be confrontational, and i debated it in my head, but in the end, i just couldnt pass up the oppertunity to use the "bo don' know diddly" line. its a classic. that having been said, tony did wear the number ten at both of his other managing gigs. he likes to play things up in the media, and hes good with symbolism. i get that he said thats why he chose the number, but the reality is that he, like all baseball guys, is superstitious, and wanted to keep the same number he had worn for fifteen or so years. he can play up the symbolism all he wants.
posted by elijahin at 05:50 PM on January 13, 2008
Ooo...ooo... if we're going there, it is not a mute point, it's a moot point. This is the second thread I have read that on in the past ten minutes. Very grating.
posted by hawkguy at 09:39 PM on January 13, 2008
mute point.....shhhhhh...quiet now. Let's hear for the sound of silence.
posted by Nakeman at 09:47 PM on January 13, 2008
Is this the answer to end the fued? Who wins?