Bourjos traded to Cardinals

[Fullmer17]

I love the trade. Grichuck and bourjos have had injuries in the past. Same with Freese. Calhoun and JB made bourjos expendable. There aren't any free agent everyday 3bman worth the $ this year. Jimenez played well defensively at 3rd but his bat was suspect. Adding Freese and Calhoun to the starting lineup makes our team better.

[jshep]

Would you rather received Salas for Grichuk or Jake Westbrook?

 

I would have rather received neither and held onto Grichuk, for if nothing else, part of a different trade.

 

Salas doesn't really accomplish anything for the Angels. He's basically another body in our ridiculous scrap heap of fungible AAAA middle relievers.

Edited November 22, 2013 by jshep

[jshep]

I love the trade. Grichuck and bourjos have had injuries in the past. Same with Freese. Calhoun and JB made bourjos expendable. There aren't any free agent everyday 3bman worth the $ this year. Jimenez played well defensively at 3rd but his bat was suspect. Adding Freese and Calhoun to the starting lineup makes our team better.

 

JB Shuck doesn't make anyone expendable. Ever.

[Amazing Larry]

I know you meant David Feese...I seriously doubt most Cards fans,serious or otherwise, have a clue who Peter Borjous is either..

 

Ya I don't know why I said Josh. I've got drums on the mind apparently.

[Spirit]

This thread will be available shortly.  Need to clean up some stuff.  

 

 

[Spirit]

Ok kids.  I think I got most of it.

 

Keep it classy. 

[Angels_Make_Me_Drink]

I like the trade and I know I'm in the minority. I am not a big Bourjos fan and I don't think he's critical to a playoff run. If Freese can stay healthy, he'll be a nice contributor. This also moves Trout to CF permanently, if that matters at all. It also gives Calhoun a permanent spot in the lineup, which I love. I wasn't fond of the Blanton signing, but this move I actually do like. I hope it works out for us. I'd look to move Kendrick for SP help, now.

[Dave Saltzer]

 

Hi Dave,

 

This is not about a Trout vs. Bourjos playing CF argument. As I postulated to Chuck in an earlier post, there is no reason to not move Trumbo, the more desired piece in the current trade marketplace, and play an OF of Trout (LF), Bourjos (CF), and Hamilton/Calhoun (RF/DH). Thus Peter's value is maintained and he is given an opportunity to increase his value in 2014 and show what I think you would agree is a decent offensive player with gold glove aspirations and capability.

 

Those arguments about Trout in LF were originally based on the false belief that Trout's offensive performance suffered because he wasn't playing CF and nothing more.

 

Being a fan of the Angels has nothing to do with evaluating this trade. Yes we need to see how it turns out over the long run to fully evaluate it, but you can look at the surface of the trade and make determinations as well.

 

Aybar, Kendrick, and Trumbo were all free to be traded. Bourjos had nothing to do with whether or not middle infielders were moved. If the organization decided Trumob was more important than Peter then there is nothing I can do about that, but I do disagree with it.

 

Based on injury research players with back issues are more likely to see their performance suffer and Freese has a back issue. Giving up a year of control (for Freese) and age is questionable in my opinion.

 

Finally I, for one, am not in full-blown panic. There are other moves that have to be made. Maybe the other moves will improve the team enough that this trade will be overlooked. Maybe we will get lucky and see an improved Freese.

 

Beyond that though I am going on the record stating that we did not extract good value for Bourjos and that is an opinion from a die-hard Angels fan.
 

 

Ettin,

 

Thank you for the reasoned response. My point about the whole Trout in CF vs. LF thing is that people's opinions here aren't necessarily consistent. If playing Trout in CF makes him happier or more willing to stay here, that's an issue. Some of the people radically criticizing this trade have in the past been very opposed to playing Bourjos in CF over Trout. This trade ends that debate.

 

Trumbo may still be traded, but should net a better haul in a trade. I wouldn't necessarily trade him unless it gets us a solution to our pitching needs because he still is our insurance on Pujols at 1B.

 

Freese had back issues. Bourjos has hamstring issues and is coming off of wrist surgery. Both have been shown to be as problematic to a career as the back issues are. Freese is not a long-term solution at 3B. I still see Cowart as that solution. Freese is better than what he have currently for 3B and better than what we had last year. If he is healthy, then it could be a better deal for us. The same risk issues are a concern for STL as they are for us, which is why Bourjos alone wouldn't net us too much.

 

I want to wait until the whole offseason is over until judging the whole thing. I'm not greatly in favor of this trade, but am not overwhelmingly opposed to it either. I see it as a first step. Personally, I am unhappy to see both Bourjos and Grichuk go, as both are great guys, but that's baseball.

[Richard]

Salas is Mexican.

 

I LOVE THIS DEAL.

[kevinb]

Terrible trade! The GM of this team has absolutely no plan and I have said that from the beginning. We didn't need Pujols and we didn't need Hamilton. What was the point trading Callaspo for a huge 2nd/3rd baseman if you didn't plan on playing him at 3rd. There is no way Howie's production will be replaced by Green at 2nd if he is next to be traded. You traded the best CF in baseball for a worse Callaspo at third who was in the NL who will need a "year" to adjust to AL pitching lol. On top of that we traded a good prospect for a terrible relief pitcher. Seriously fire Dipoto the guy has no plan and just does awful moves.

[HaloCory22]

Orale

[kevinb]

Really looking forward to 4th place next year.

[CaliAngel]

NNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Hollyw00d]

A realistic view of this trade. way to start the off season, team!

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/cardinals-continue-being-smart-acquire-peter-bourjos/

[gotbeer]

I like the trade and I know I'm in the minority. I am not a big Bourjos fan and I don't think he's critical to a playoff run. If Freese can stay healthy, he'll be a nice contributor. This also moves Trout to CF permanently, if that matters at all. It also gives Calhoun a permanent spot in the lineup, which I love. I wasn't fond of the Blanton signing, but this move I actually do like. I hope it works out for us. I'd look to move Kendrick for SP help, now.

 

Could mean that it's not to give Callhoun a permanent spot.  But Shuck.  He's the only one I think that can do the leadoff, outside of Trout.  And I think with Trouts overall numbers, they are going to move him to 3/4 in the lineup.  And with Shuck being the Angels defensive player last year, although personally I don't think he was even close, you know that Scioscia is going to go gaga over that.  Plus Shuck is a Dipoto guy that was brought in.  

[Mark68]

Didn't Grichuk have to be on the Major League 40man and be protected from the RuleV draft this year? So, maybe we got something for a guy that wasn't going to be protected? Or, maybe, got something for a guy that was going to be plucked from us by the Astros or Cubs?

He actually was added to the 40-man just before the Rule V.

[ettin]

 

 

 

Ettin,

 

Thank you for the reasoned response. My point about the whole Trout in CF vs. LF thing is that people's opinions here aren't necessarily consistent. If playing Trout in CF makes him happier or more willing to stay here, that's an issue. Some of the people radically criticizing this trade have in the past been very opposed to playing Bourjos in CF over Trout. This trade ends that debate.

 

Trumbo may still be traded, but should net a better haul in a trade. I wouldn't necessarily trade him unless it gets us a solution to our pitching needs because he still is our insurance on Pujols at 1B.

 

Freese had back issues. Bourjos has hamstring issues and is coming off of wrist surgery. Both have been shown to be as problematic to a career as the back issues are. Freese is not a long-term solution at 3B. I still see Cowart as that solution. Freese is better than what he have currently for 3B and better than what we had last year. If he is healthy, then it could be a better deal for us. The same risk issues are a concern for STL as they are for us, which is why Bourjos alone wouldn't net us too much.

 

I want to wait until the whole offseason is over until judging the whole thing. I'm not greatly in favor of this trade, but am not overwhelmingly opposed to it either. I see it as a first step. Personally, I am unhappy to see both Bourjos and Grichuk go, as both are great guys, but that's baseball.

 

 

Okay Dave I see where you are coming from.

 

I mentioned earlier in a different response to another poster that perhaps this is a move towards pacifying Trout and if it is I sincerely hope we sign him to a long-term extension soon.

 

As far as insurance at 1B, Calhoun did play a bit there in the Minors but I never heard how he panned out. Beyond that Efren Navarro is high on the depth chart so although Trumbo would be a solid backup there are others available.

 

I guess my main problem is that Bourjos plays the more demanding defensive position better than Freese plays the less-demanding defensive position. Both of them provide different kinds of offensive output that, when you sum it all up, is not that entirely different with Freese getting the slight edge. Bourjos will cost less total dollars in salary and is controlled one year longer.

 

So for me it is Bourjos >> Freese. Then there is the Salas/Grichuk swap which again doesn't totally make sense from a value perspective but does from a depth perspective.

I am, of course, a Bourjos fan and I do agree that we have added to a position of weakness on our team at 3B but I feel we gave up too much to obtain that incremental upgrade. I hope that it works out for us in the long run.

 

Thanks for the clarification Dave!

[m0nkey]

I don't know what pagr I'm on, but I agree with grichuk/salas part being an eyebrow raiser. I liked bourjos too, but people need to get off his dick. Sure he had a solid 11, but that was two years ago. How do we know they're trading him while his value is "low", do you have confidence he could've rebuilt it on this team?

Children please

[m0nkey]

Ok kids. I think I got most of it.

Keep it classy.

Boo. You suck

[Mark68]

Honestly, I don't like this trade, because I don't think offense at third base should have been a priority. Maybe Freese was injured and will have a comeback year. That would be nice, but not sure if it's likely.

 

However, one (maybe two) of the pieces that could have been used to obtain more pitching is now gone. I hope that doesn't become an issue.

 

Also, Freese, defensively, is not going to help the pitchers that are or will be here.

[ettin]

There are a lot of reasons not to deal Trumbo actually... 30/100, those guys dont grow on trees.

 

Okay so you named one, what are the others?

 

Don't get me wrong I like Trumbo as a player and for his power but that is all that he is able to offer.

Edited November 22, 2013 by ettin

[CaliAngel]

Without a doubt behind Trout Bourjos was my favorite prospect to come up through our farm system.

Too bad thanks to Scioscia and now this trade, he was never really given a fair shot.

Best of luck to Gorgeous Bourjos. He will flourish in St. Louis.

[Mark68]

I thought the RuleV was during the December GM Winter Meetings.

You may be right.

 

Grichuk was added to the 40-man in the last couple of days, either in anticipation of the Rule V or to trade him.

[HaloCory22]

The thing I don't like about this trade is I can't for the life of me remember the last time a player has actually improved upon or met their previous stats after coming here via trade. Freese scares the shit out of me cus he follows this same pattern. Hope he proves me wrong. I really do.

[The Ghost of Bob Starr]

Did all the wind let out of the sail, when this got locked?   Feels like it