Larkin?
« Kiko Calero | Main | McGee for Cooperstown! »Larkin said the St. Louis Cardinals are the only club to talk to him about being an everyday shortstop.
Larkin or Alomar? You make the call!
Posted by Josh at January 4, 2005 05:51 PMHow about neither! Between the two I would say Alomar, his glory years are not quite as far removed.
I would still rather see Grudzelanek or Cora.
Hell I would take Luna and Hart over Larkin
Posted by: Bob at January 4, 2005 06:03 PMI don't know, Larkin last year was pretty solid to the tune of .289/.352/.419 in 346 at bats. We can add him to the Eckstein mix and have all three of them take turns.
Posted by: Iron_Throne at January 4, 2005 06:34 PMI wouldn't mind either one, but I don't know that either one should be a starting 2B either. Ideally, you would sign Cora and Larkin and let them fight it out, i guess.
Posted by: Fitz at January 5, 2005 12:02 AMThanks for putting up another Cardinals blog!
At this point, I'd sign both...cheep.
Most likely, neither will play enough games to be considered a season long starter and I'm not really excited about all the infield singles that will come from the lack of arm that Eckstein has at short stop. I haven't really seen Larking play in the past few years - who has? ;) - so he may not be any better defensively at this point.
Posted by: Adam T at January 5, 2005 01:07 AMThat's a tough call. I honestly think that Larkin would be a better fit (as long as it's a 1-year deal, obviously), although I'm probably the most reluctant person here to see Eckstein go to 2B. To me, Alomar has a lot higher potential to suck than Larkin, and I'm not so sure that their best-case scenario stats would be all that far apart.
Posted by: MO Boiler at January 6, 2005 01:05 AM