|
Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 2:07 PM
Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 2:41 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
minor league deal / spring training invite?
He is pretty abysmal hitting-wise and is below-average fielding...
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 3:09 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
What does Cards interest in a mediocre player like Cedeno say about Kozma, Jackson and Descalso? If they are not going to bring in a clear upgrade then i prefer they just go with what they have and hope someone surprises or a better deal materializes.
GO CARDS!
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 3:10 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
cardinalnationhouston wrote: What does Cards interest in a mediocre player like Cedeno say about Kozma, Jackson and Descalso? If they are not going to bring in a clear upgrade then i prefer they just go with what they have and hope someone surprises or a better deal materializes. That's what scares me too.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 3:41 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 3:43 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
i dont mind bringing him in for Spring Training veteran glove might be a good pairing with Furcal for the kids to see, but id rather us look for someone with some outfield versatility
also...anyone see Raburn got a minor league deal or something small..im not saying he woudl have been great, but 2b and Corner OF with some power is not a bad guy to have around...i knwo he stunk it up last year...but he wasnt bad two years ago...
still Cedeno...glove is fine, bat isnt terrible.... just seems like a low hanging fruit option with little to no upside
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 3:43 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
cardinalnationhouston wrote: What does Cards interest in a mediocre player like Cedeno say about Kozma, Jackson and Descalso? If they are not going to bring in a clear upgrade then i prefer they just go with what they have and hope someone surprises or a better deal materializes. It says that Kozma, Jackson, and Descalso stink, which they do. I advocated a Cedeno signing several weeks ago and I stand by that. If nothing else, it gives us more competition and insurance. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 4:25 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
First thing is I think the guy is for most part bad but I question the article. Is Furcal just rehabbing or is he not going to be ready to go by Opening Day? MLBTR has him as questionable for the start of the season. If that's the case he's going to miss all of ST and that is where the drama unfolds folks.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/...nny-cedeno.html
I would rather give Jackson a shot to make the club as long as his secondary issues are behind him. I think Kozma is closer to his minor league career numbers than his cup of coffee and postseason #'s suggest.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 6:37 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
619illinibooyah wrote: First thing is I think the guy is for most part bad but I question the article. Is Furcal just rehabbing or is he not going to be ready to go by Opening Day? MLBTR has him as questionable for the start of the season. If that's the case he's going to miss all of ST and that is where the drama unfolds folks.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/...nny-cedeno.html
I would rather give Jackson a shot to make the club as long as his secondary issues are behind him. I think Kozma is closer to his minor league career numbers than his cup of coffee and postseason #'s suggest.
There seems to be a misconception that Kozma was good in the playoffs last year by some posters. He was flat out terrible. 214 Avg, .688 OPS and he was very shaky in the field.
GO CARDS!
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 8:31 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
Yes and it even fools me at times. He had a couple of big hits and the defense was shaky at times. --------------------------------------------- --- cardinalnationhouston wrote: 619illinibooyah wrote: First thing is I think the guy is for most part bad but I question the article. Is Furcal just rehabbing or is he not going to be ready to go by Opening Day? MLBTR has him as questionable for the start of the season. If that's the case he's going to miss all of ST and that is where the drama unfolds folks.
www.mlbtraderumors.com/...nny-cedeno.html
I would rather give Jackson a shot to make the club as long as his secondary issues are behind him. I think Kozma is closer to his minor league career numbers than his cup of coffee and postseason #'s suggest.
There seems to be a misconception that Kozma was good in the playoffs last year by some posters. He was flat out terrible. 214 Avg, .688 OPS and he was very shaky in the field. --------------------------------------------- |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 9:37 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
El Periodquito, a newspaper from Maracay, Venezuela, is reporting Cedeno has come to terms with the Cardinals. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 9:55 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
PadsFS wrote: minor league deal / spring training invite?
He is pretty abysmal hitting-wise and is below-average fielding... Minor league deal and a spring training invite is most realistic contract he would command. Wouldn't say a .741 OPS is abysmal and by his defensive statistics suggest he's an average defender. Would bring versatile via MIF and some veteran experience.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 10:49 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
A second report out of Venezuela on Cedeno and the Cardinals. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2013 11:57 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
FWIW (and I haven't read Brian's article, so he may have already mentioned this) Cedeno made $1.2MM as a Mets' backup infielder last season. He posted a career-high .741 OPS and 104 OPS+. http://www.baseball-reference....nro02-bat.shtmlNot a bad signing. A capable backup, and could start a few games here and there. Not sure I'd want him starting for an extended period of time though. He turns 30 next Saturday. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2013 4:25 AM
RE: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
I dont hate it at all... Just looks like classic January low hanging fruit... Teams have good luck with these every season...Hopefully this works out well for Birds...
JR
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2013 11:04 AM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
Couple of interesting numbers, small sample size be darned:
Career at Busch III: .303/.340/.371 in 97 PA. 0 HR, 8 RBI.
Career vs. the Cardinals: .319/.353/.442 in 245 PA. 3 HR, 23 RBI.
Career as a pinch-hitter: .266/.356/.456 with 3 HR and 8 RBI in 91 PA.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2013 12:16 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
If he's in his role he was last season I could deal with it. If he's gets 300 PA he's going to get exposed. So we better hope Furcal plays in 120 games this season.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2013 2:18 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
DTFlush234 wrote:
Wouldn't say a .741 OPS is abysmal and by his defensive statistics suggest he's an average defender. Would bring versatile via MIF and some veteran experience. No but a career .647 OPS is... Seems pretty obvious why the Cards are interested; cheap, veteran, middle infielder to push the young guys in ST and be on the big club if they fall on their faces. Generally speaking I have no problem with the Cards being interested in a guy like Cedeno.
Last edited 1/26/2013 2:20 PM by stlcards5129
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/27/2013 1:20 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
Projected infield roster:
Craig
Descalso
Furcal
Freese
Carpenter
Wigginton
Ronny Cedeno?!
Presently, there doesn't seem to be a roster spot for Cedeno.
Here are a few possible explanations for this acquisitions if it happens:
No confidence in Furcal playing much.
Groundwork for a trade.
Cedeno signs a minor league contract as insurance.
MM wants Matt Carpenter and Wigginton to platoon at 2B, and we need another backup for SS besides Descalso.
Last edited 1/27/2013 1:25 PM by mudville
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 1/27/2013 2:45 PM
Re: Cardinals interested in SS Ronny Cedeno
They could make room on the roster by outrighting someone like, say, Browning or Cleto (the former is more likely than the latter).
As for Wiggington - he's strictly here as a pinch-hitter and backup corner infielder. I doubt we'll see him playing 2B much, if at all - he's only played 48 games there total since 2007, and 40 of them came with the O's in 2010.
More likely, what we'll see is a scenario where Wiggington is the RH backup corner infielder and Carpenter the LH backup corner infielder, with Cedeno as the primary backup middle infielder. Depending on how Carpenter's workouts at 2B go, he could get some action in that spot but I doubt he'll be starting or even platooning in that role; more likely he'll be someone who can pinch-hit and take over at 2B in a double switch or something like that.
That's 7 infielders, to go along with 12 pitchers (the usual number these days) and the 3 starting outfielders and the 2 catchers.
That's 24, leaving 1 roster spot for among Robinson, Chambers, Kozma, Jackson, and Adams... no idea who would be the frontrunner there. Possibly Chambers, as he gives us a pinch-runner option and because with Wiggington and Cedeno being righthanded, we might prefer a lefty hitter for the last spot to go along with Carpenter, rather than having 3 righties and only 1 lefty batter on the bench... if not Chambers then probably Robinson because they need to have someone on the bench capable of playing CF since Beltran's age and health don't really permit him to play there any more (147 games total in CF since 2008 and just 9 games and 47 1/3 innings in CF for the Cards in 2012).
And yes, I agree that it would be nice to have a more seasoned backup center fielder than Chambers or Robinson... but who, for what we're willing to pay for one?
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
