Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    39,036
    vCash
    1000

    Jake Westbrook retires

    He wasn't coming back to us anyway.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    ILSTU
    Posts
    7,536
    vCash
    1500
    Good clubhouse guys and back of the rotation starter. Couldn't stand the guy this year but he ultimately contributed to a WS win and other post season berths

    Have a good retirement, Jake

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    7,530
    vCash
    1500
    He had a good MLB run, he was a quality pitcher for awhile. Last year he really hit the point of unserviceable in alot of ways.

    Good Career for Jake, some will disagree but I enjoyed him being a cardinals for most of his time here

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    ILSTU
    Posts
    7,536
    vCash
    1500
    same

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    39,036
    vCash
    1000
    I just disliked him because of the way we acquired him (I felt he cost us Dan Haren and sending Ludwick to a potential playoff rival was brain-dead).

    And because his pitcher type has been proven to be unreliable and of weak service....and he was paid more than he should have been.


    But, Westbrook was a good guy, good clubhouse guy, and that has some value. I don't want to hate on him, but I was never interested in his services on the Cardinals.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    7,530
    vCash
    1500
    I kinda feel like their was something more to the Dan Haren stuff. I dont understand why they would just ignore Haren to take Westbrook. I think the asking price was hire for the Cardinals or the market came down very quickly or something.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    39,036
    vCash
    1000
    Had to be.

    Because what we gave up for Westbrook, wasn't far off from what the Angels (at the time) gave up for Haren.

    Of course, those prospects turned out to be better than expected that the D'Backs got. Saunders was the big piece at the time, and Ludwick had more value than him.


    But outside of Haren. What was really troublesome, was voluntarily giving the team we were likely to face in the post-season, their best bat in Ludwick.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    7,530
    vCash
    1500
    On top of that our offense was scuffling that year, not our pitching. Ludwick was one of our most consistent hitters at the time

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •