BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Could Jim Edmonds be coming back to the St. Louis Cardinals?

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, January 18, 2010

Could Jim Edmonds be coming back to the St. Louis Cardinals?

Woo-eee…I dearly miss those Leonard Barra-type pratfalls!

Told that Edmonds wanted to come onto the stage after the show, La Russa summoned Edmonds from his seat.

Upon arriving to the stage as fans cheered, the 39-year-old Edmonds took the microphone from La Russa and told him he would play for free in 2010 if the Cardinals would have him.

Edmonds later recanted and said he would play for the minimum salary of $400,000. But he did seem sincere about his desire to return to baseball after not playing since the 2008 season, and the Cardinals would seem to be a fit for him given their inexperience and youth on the bench.

Edmonds said he was “challenging” La Russa to give him a shot. Kiddingly, La Russa told fans he wished he would have skipped Edmonds’ appearance on stage. At one point, Edmonds continued to talk as La Russa stood next to him with his hand reaching out for the microphone.

Edmonds kept talking, and La Russa finally bent over, put his hands on his knees and stared at the floor of the stage.

Repoz Posted: January 18, 2010 at 10:49 AM | 25 comment(s) | Login to Bookmark
Related News: General, Business, St Louis

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages

1. Home Run Teal & Black Black Black Gone! Posted: January 18, 2010 at 03:01 PM (#3440130)

Awkward. Right?

Awkward.

2. bunyon Posted: January 18, 2010 at 03:16 PM (#3440144)

He's a fake. A phony.

3. Teheran's Uranium Enriched Missiles Posted: January 18, 2010 at 03:17 PM (#3440145)

La Russa finally bent over, put his hands on his knees and stared at the floor of the stage.

Just what is going on here!? Is LaRussa saying he wants to get screwed? Or making not so subtle suggestions that Edmonds was getting stuff injected into his ass?!

4. Dock Ellis on Acid

Posted: January 18, 2010 at 03:20 PM (#3440148)

First he says he'd play for free. Then he says he'd play for the league minimum. If a team is serious about signing him, I bet his next number is a million.

5. Obi One Kenobi Nil (BFFB)

Posted: January 18, 2010 at 03:21 PM (#3440149)

*Mike Piazza Joke*

6. ColonelTom Posted: January 18, 2010 at 03:59 PM (#3440184)

I might be the only person defending Edmonds here, but look at it from his perspective. LaRussa's willing to consider bringing McGwire - who's been retired for eight years - back as an active player (albeit in September), but for the second straight year won't even give Edmonds (.235/.343/.479 in 2008) a look?

I suspect there are back-room whispers about Edmonds' using steroids - he did have a terrific late, sustained peak in St. Louis (after meeting McGwire, perhaps?) from ages 30-35 - but suspicions are a far cry from what we *know* about McGwire by his own admission. If McGwire's welcomed back into the St. Louis fold, there ought to be room for Edmonds.

7. Home Run Teal & Black Black Black Gone! Posted: January 18, 2010 at 04:04 PM (#3440186)

What was Edmonds' asking price last season? I was shocked he couldn't find any work.

8. Walt Davis Posted: January 18, 2010 at 07:42 PM (#3440382)

First he says he'd play for free. Then he says he'd play for the league minimum.

And that was in the space of, what, an hour max? At that rate of inflation, by the time spring training rolls around, he'll be asking for 11.7 google (the number, not the website!) dollars. Just by waiting a day, the Cards have probably cost themselves $20 M.

9. Sleepy supports unauthorized rambling Posted: January 18, 2010 at 08:57 PM (#3440457)

He said something to the effect of "I'm perfectly happy spending time with my kids and have no interest in coming back" at some point this last year.

Anyway, if true, this could be pretty fun. Edmonds is close enough to the HOF that another year or two might make the difference, if he's properly platooned and not completely toast.

10. Dan Posted: January 18, 2010 at 09:25 PM (#3440489)

I can't imagine the Cards have any better options for a backup OF/1B and LH pinch-hitting option. What do they really have to lose by giving him a shot?

11. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: January 18, 2010 at 09:28 PM (#3440494)

The bottom 1/3 of a t-shirt.

12. ess eff Posted: January 18, 2010 at 09:40 PM (#3440504)

LaRussa said today that now that he knows Edmonds is serious, the front office will at least discuss it. The Cardinals' biggest OF need is a righty bat to spell Rasmus in CF, so Edmonds doesn't work for that spot.

13. McCoy Posted: January 18, 2010 at 09:46 PM (#3440511)

Considering that he can't work for free I think saying he'll do it for the minimum is as close to free for these teams as anybody will get.

14. Weeks T. Olive Posted: January 18, 2010 at 09:54 PM (#3440516)

The bottom 1/3 of a t-shirt.

Awesome.

15. Gern Blanston Posted: January 18, 2010 at 10:22 PM (#3440545)

Just by waiting a day, the Cards have probably cost themselves $20 M.

They'll never be able to extend Pujols at this rate.

16. greenback

Posted: January 18, 2010 at 10:41 PM (#3440563)

The Cardinals' biggest OF need is a righty bat to spell Rasmus in CF, so Edmonds doesn't work for that spot.

They could use a LHB corner OF, or in general a LH bat better than Jon Jay or Mark Hamilton.

It's like Ray Lankford all over again.

17. ess eff Posted: January 18, 2010 at 10:48 PM (#3440568)

Yes, they need another lefty bat for the bench. But they at least have (probably weak) candidates like Jay and the switch-hitting Gotay. I don't see the guy anywhere in the organization who's going to spell Rasmus in center against tough lefties, unless we're ready for a Holliday-Ludwick-Craig defensive alignment.

Otoh, there's really nothing to lose by giving JimEd a spring NRI. It should be apparent pretty quickly whether there's anything left.

18. greenback

Posted: January 18, 2010 at 11:47 PM (#3440603)

By my count the Cardinals have three open position player spots (that seems like a lot for this time of year) on the 25-man roster. La Russa is liable to carry a 13th pitcher to drive the platoon Nazis nuts, but otherwise they can fit all of Edmonds, RH CF and Gotay on the roster.

Craig's redundant if they get a RH CF. Greene, or any other IF, is mostly redundant if Lugo and Gotay are around.

19. JJ1986 Posted: January 18, 2010 at 11:57 PM (#3440608)

Who is the Cardinals starting 3Bmen next year? Are they just going to have an open competition in camp between old prospects and NRIs?

20. ess eff Posted: January 19, 2010 at 12:00 AM (#3440611)

Supposedly, David Freese goes to camp with first shot at the job.

21. Tripon Posted: January 19, 2010 at 12:29 AM (#3440631)

Because he has a DUI?

22. Justin T contains indigenous nudity Posted: January 19, 2010 at 12:33 AM (#3440634)

Otoh, there's really nothing to lose by giving JimEd a spring NRI. It should be apparent pretty quickly whether there's anything left.

That's what the Padres said.

23. ess eff Posted: January 19, 2010 at 12:45 AM (#3440640)

Otoh, there's really nothing to lose by giving JimEd a spring NRI. It should be apparent pretty quickly whether there's anything left.

That's what the Padres said.

On the contrary, far from giving him a non-roster invitation, the Padres paid him $6 million for his 103 plate appearances of 40 OPS+. To compound the mistake, they didn't even understand that when you take on an old guy in a salary dump, you should be able to trade some nominal non-prospect in the exchange. Instead, they traded a useful piece -- Freese, coincidentally.

24. Walt Davis Posted: January 19, 2010 at 02:58 AM (#3440725)

Considering that he can't work for free I think saying he'll do it for the minimum is as close to free for these teams as anybody will get.

Yes, we know Mr. Smarty Pants.

On the contrary, far from giving him a non-roster invitation, the Padres paid him $6 million for his 103 plate appearances of 40 OPS+.

I assume the comment was in reference to the ease with which one can judge whether a player has anything left.

But actually, fairly miraculous half-season with the Cubs notwithstanding, I think most teams are simply convinced that Edmonds is toast and that's why he drew no interest last year. I'll grant you that's unusual for MLB teams that nobody would even give him an NRI but I'm sure it's not the first time.

25. Tripon Posted: January 19, 2010 at 03:07 AM (#3440731)

I'd have to think it was a trade for Edmonds that forced Kevin Towers out. Not that trade, but trades like that had Moorad say to himself. "...Nah, I don't want to keep the Gunslinger here."

Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Monday, January 18, 2010

Could Jim Edmonds be coming back to the St. Louis Cardinals?

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics