Thread: Jamey Carroll

With the Twins having signed Carroll to a fairly small deal over the winter, and the current injury problems of his former team, the Dodgers (seriously, the team right now has about as many injuries as any given day in August last year for the Twins) have been said to be looking for help. Any chance the Twins try to take advantage of this need eventually (because right now Valencia isn't ready to return so they would be on shaky ground with the personnel in the infield)?

If that was a one-year deal, maybe. But again, multi-year deals are unattractive.

You never know....

The Dodgers could do a lot better than Carroll. I know people around here seem to like the guy because he's steady in the field, but he's got a sub-.600 OPS and he's owed nearly $4M next year when he'll be 39. His contract is not an asset by any stretch.

Dodgers recalled INF/OF Alex Castellanos from Triple-A Albuquerque.

Expect Matt Kemp (hamstring) to head back to the disabled list in a corresponding move. Castellanos, 25, was acquired from the Cardinals last July in the Rafael Furcal deal. He's been absolutely crushing the ball in New Mexico, posting a .379/.476/.759 triple slash. Castellanos has some defensive versatility and has played all three outfield spots and third base on the farm before shifting primarily to second base this year. Who you rather have Carrlo or Castellanos?

Originally Posted by Rosterman

You never know....

This is a really insightful post.

Originally Posted by Top Gun

Dodgers recalled INF/OF Alex Castellanos from Triple-A Albuquerque.

Expect Matt Kemp (hamstring) to head back to the disabled list in a corresponding move. Castellanos, 25, was acquired from the Cardinals last July in the Rafael Furcal deal. He's been absolutely crushing the ball in New Mexico, posting a .379/.476/.759 triple slash. Castellanos has some defensive versatility and has played all three outfield spots and third base on the farm before shifting primarily to second base this year. Who you rather have Carrlo or Castellanos?

If you're going to cut and paste from other sites, you should at least give credit.

Originally Posted by USAFChief

If you're going to cut and paste from other sites, you should at least give credit.

I don't think posts in non-fee paying baseball websites qualifies as plagiarism. I didn't read this elsewhere, I found it interesting. Still trying to figure out who Carrlo is though.

Michael Cuddyer took care of business in Thursday's convincing win over the Astros, going 3-for-4 with two runs scored and three RBI.

Cuddyer has been a terrific offseason acquisition for the Rockies thus far, posting a .282/.342/.500 batting line through the first two months. On pace to top 100 RBI for only the second time in his career, the right fielder should continue to see plenty of run production batting in the middle of the lineup.

Signing Carroll to a 2 year deal was a killer. He is no better than a bench bat on a good team and no one wants to be tied to a bench bat at more than the league minimum salary.
The Twins will be forced to cut him and eat the salary next year when they realize they cant have a 40 year old eating at bats on a rebuilding team.

Cuddyer talk bores me Top Gun...sorry! Overpaid and overrated.

Originally Posted by twinswon1991

Signing Carroll to a 2 year deal was a killer. He is no better than a bench bat on a good team and no one wants to be tied to a bench bat at more than the league minimum salary.
The Twins will be forced to cut him and eat the salary next year when they realize they cant have a 40 year old eating at bats on a rebuilding team.

They could certainly do better at the plate than Carroll is currently producing but I hardly think 3.75 mil is a "killer". Granted that money would be far better spent towards some pitching but it doesn't exactly cripple them, especially considering his versatility and effectiveness in the field.

Does anyone else find it strange that Carroll eats bats? Maybe they have lots of fibre, he is almost 40.

Originally Posted by Top Gun

Michael Cuddyer took care of business in Thursday's convincing win over the Astros, going 3-for-4 with two runs scored and three RBI.

Cuddyer has been a terrific offseason acquisition for the Rockies thus far, posting a .282/.342/.500 batting line through the first two months. On pace to top 100 RBI for only the second time in his career, the right fielder should continue to see plenty of run production batting in the middle of the lineup.

Seriously. Cite your sources when you're lifting stuff from other sites, even if the content is freely available. This is just poor form.

Originally Posted by Top Gun

Michael Cuddyer took care of business in Thursday's convincing win over the Astros, going 3-for-4 with two runs scored and three RBI.

Cuddyer has been a terrific offseason acquisition for the Rockies thus far, posting a .282/.342/.500 batting line through the first two months. On pace to top 100 RBI for only the second time in his career, the right fielder should continue to see plenty of run production batting in the middle of the lineup.

Also seems very lazy to do this.

Cuddyer in the middle of a Carroll thread?

Now we're its not just apples to apples; its not even apples to oranges; maybe apples to watermelons?

I bet there will be very little interest from the Dodgers or any other team to trade for Carroll, who has another year on his deal plus a buyout for an option.

I thought the Carroll deal looked bad the minute it was announced. I can't imagine any other team offering him 2 years + in his age 38 season.

Originally Posted by Boom Boom

I thought the Carroll deal looked bad the minute it was announced.

I guess it's all relative...compared to the NIshiYoshiYucki signing...it looked somewhat better.

I think the Twins would be better off trying to trade Casilla than Carroll.

Originally Posted by twinsnorth49

I don't think posts in non-fee paying baseball websites qualifies as plagiarism. I didn't read this elsewhere, I found it interesting. Still trying to figure out who Carrlo is though.

Chief is right.

It's common netiquette to provide links to information when it's copied verbatim.

That, and people may want to know or check out where the info is coming from.

Originally Posted by snepp

Chief is right.

It's common netiquette to provide links to information when it's copied verbatim.

That, and people may want to know or check out where the info is coming from.

It's the blatant obviousness that irks me. What...we wouldn't notice?

And for the record...Chief is always right.

Once I thought I was wrong, but I was mistaken.