Skip to content

Dodgers, Twins, Reds interested in Skip Schumaker

Dec 7, 2012, 11:19 AM EST

Skip Schumaker Getty Images

General manager John Mozeliak has made no secret about the Cardinals shopping Skip Schumaker and Derrick Goold of the St. Louis Post Dispatch reports that the Dodgers, Twins, and possibly the Reds are among the teams interested.

St. Louis has scaled back Schumaker’s playing time in recent years, giving him 400 plate appearances in 2011 and 304 plate appearances in 2012, but he’s versatile defensively and always gets on base at a decent clip.

At age 33 he’s owed $1.5 million in 2013, so he’d be affordable as a part-time player or even a pure bench bat. Los Angeles seems like the frontrunners because a) they’re trying to acquire literally every player in the world, and b) new Dodgers hitting coach Mark McGwire worked with Schumaker in St. Louis and is said to have a good relationship with him.

  1. paperlions - Dec 7, 2012 at 11:30 AM

    Every player is versatile defensively if you don’t mind him playing the position horribly.

    • Alex K - Dec 7, 2012 at 11:52 AM

      Is he actually a good defender anywhere? I know he’s awful at 2B. Is he passable in a corner outfield spot?

      • spudchukar - Dec 7, 2012 at 12:02 PM

        He is above average in left and right, particularly in right, cause he has a strong accurate arm, and is passable in CF in a pinch, just not great range at this point of his career.

      • paperlions - Dec 7, 2012 at 1:59 PM

        What spud said. He has a great OF arm and his range is plus for a corner spot. His bat just won’t play in a corner spot, which is why the Cards tried to move him to 2B.

  2. spudchukar - Dec 7, 2012 at 11:52 AM

    Boy, if we could secure even a marginal need for Skippy, I say jump on it. “Horrible” is pretty tough, but he is not even average as a second baseman. Granted his OBP is OK, but he offers no power. But the deciding factor for me has always been his lack of speed. Plus he isn’t a good base runner either which is unusual for the “scrappy” type guy. I understand his fit in LA, since he is from the area and is close to McGwire.

    At this point in his career he is pretty much “scrappy” without the “S”.

    • 78mu - Dec 7, 2012 at 12:46 PM

      You nailed it. Skip is what he is – a 280-300 hitter with little power. He worked to make himself a 2nd baseman because he knew he wasn’t going to play much as an OF when Colby was here and the Cards had their usual cattle call at 2nd.

      I like him as a guy in your dugout but he’s not much over replacement value on the field. Is LA looking to reduce payroll? How about Skip for Kershaw and Kemp? Of course Mo would be arrested for grand larceny and Ned committed to an asylum but hey, as a Cards fan I’d be fine with that.

    • paperlions - Dec 7, 2012 at 2:06 PM

      Yeah, if they can get anything useful for him, that would be amazing to me. He’s just a bench guy at this point….fine as a fill in, but not a guy you want to run out there everyday at any position because he gives back too much value with his glove if he’s at 2B and with his bat if he’s in LF/RF.

      • byjiminy - Dec 7, 2012 at 2:19 PM

        Sounds like a Twin to me!

        And I’m a Twins fan.

        Seriously, though, wouldn’t it be cool to have a starting 2B/SS combo of Skip Shumaker and Jamey Carroll?

      • paperlions - Dec 7, 2012 at 2:31 PM

        If by cool, you mean depressing, yeah, yeah it would.

  3. maynardstool - Dec 7, 2012 at 2:33 PM

    Why trade him? You’re not going to get anything for him. Of course they just gave that dumbass contract to a average “lefty specialist”(of which they already had one). So who the hell knows what Mo will do next.

    • okwhitefalcon - Dec 7, 2012 at 2:50 PM

      Why trade him?

      They have younger, cheaper and at this point – better player(s) to assume his role as an end of the roster bench player.

      He’s also built up enough organzational “good guy” equity to possibly move him to a place that will afford him more playing time than the Cards are willing to commit to.

      Sure they won’t get much for him but if a move does indeed happen it could benefit both the player and the club.

      Win/win.

      • paperlions - Dec 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM

        He really just doesn’t have a role on this team, anything he can do…someone else can do better and for less…often with more versatility, especially for infielders.

        At the time, no one thought they got much for Edmonds. Freese turned out to be okay.

  4. okwhitefalcon - Dec 7, 2012 at 5:52 PM

    Indeed, that Edmonds thing worked out just fine.

    It seems the focus is now on finding a versatile vet off the bench with some pop.

    Per Derrick Goold’s winter meetings chats, they’d love to have Mark DeRosa if everything checked out with him health wise and he was willing to accept that kind of role but neither seems to be clear so who knows at this point.

    Beyond the above..

    Here’s a link to Matt Holliday on with Bernie Miklasz this morning, Holliday’s a great interview – doesn’t take himself too seriously.

    http://www.101sports.com/templates/audio_player.php?a=11496&type=s

  5. joeyashwi - Dec 7, 2012 at 6:10 PM

    The Twins have been signing nothing but cheap, below average players since they got their stadium. Mauer and the stooges. The fans of the Twins and the people of Minnesota were duped!

  6. redbirdfan81 - Dec 8, 2012 at 7:10 AM

    Where’s the love Cardinal nation? Skip was great for us and busted his butt all the time. Show him some respect. He’s above average in the OF, great arm, plays all 3 positions & will hit .300 when given the at-bats. Yes, 2B was tough, but he improved & that move is on the team, not him. I wish him well wherever he winds up and will miss him.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Maddon has high hopes for Cubs
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. G. Stanton (5089)
  2. P. Sandoval (3619)
  3. R. Martin (3590)
  4. J. Lester (3352)
  5. Y. Tomas (2620)
  1. T. Hunter (2326)
  2. J. Heyward (2270)
  3. B. Butler (1965)
  4. M. Scherzer (1955)
  5. J. Hellickson (1890)