I will enjoy any and all opportunities I get this year to sing Walt's praises for the Mulder deal, especially since I---Nervous Nellie and Scaredy-Cat Extraordinaire---was a loud and frequent critic of the trade from the moment it was made.

All the things I feared would happen, haven't. All the "upside" that was presented I dismissed as best-case-scenario yammering.

Haren, as it tuens out, is just what he was for the Cardinals: a maddeningly inconsistent starter who looks fine for a few innings but has a tendencuy to implode. He may one day be a fine, reliable starter, but for now, he's still learning, and the Cardinals, in "win now" mode, can't afford to be patient.

And I whined particularly loudly about Calero, given the fragile nature of just about any team's bullpen. But as others reminded me, he's a middle reliever--albeit a nasty one over the last couple of years--and if including him in a deal helps secure a "star" player you have to go for it.

But that's where I had a problem: without knowing much about Mulder besides his numbers, I saw us acquiring not a star, but a "name," and a guy with declining numbers who gave up a hit an inning with a very low K rate, coming off a truly horrifying second half. If he was hurt, perhaps there was reason to think that was the reason he sucked and he'd be better once healthy. But he wasn't hurt, by all accounts, he was just bad. My thinking was that, with the Cardinal offense, Haren could win 12-15 games being the No. 4 starter, and that acquiring Mulder wasn't enough to justify losing a No. 4 starter, a live bullpen arm---oh, and our best hitting prospect.

But I sure have enjoyed watching Mulder pitch. That 10-inning game---what'd he have, 2 or 3 strikeouts? I have no problem with that K rate if he's getting through 10 innings on 105 pitches or whatever it was.

Then last night he had the Dodgers flailing at that splitter all night long. They must have swung at 20 balls out of the zone, and I think that Mulder was also helped by a strike zone that was, at the very least, not being squeezed.

I have been really impressed by his demeanor on the mound, as well as, obvioulsy, his performance. Now, with Haren getting lit up, Calero getting rocked, and Barton hitting in the .250s with little power (where would we play him, anyway?), it looks like once again, Walt knows what he is doing. I guess that's why he's the GM and I'm not.

And how about Pujols' at bat in the 5th after the Dodgers had tied the score at 1 in the top of the inning?

He swings at what was probably an outside pitch on 3-1, driving the ball down the first-base line just foul (Al even complained a little that it was fair), then he turns on the 3-2 delivery and hits a screamer just foul down the third-base line, then destroys the next pitch for the 3-run bomb....

I thought the Dodgers had decided to work the count too...Maybe they saw how swinging early worked and decided the reverse strategy was called for. I didn't see 95 mph fastballs, though, just great location in and out, up and down, and a nice mix of pitches.

Rolen does seem to be having a lot of trouble getting to his right. I wonder if he's having trouble adjusting to a different angle, because he's playing way, way off the line this year, presumably to help Eckstein.

Cards telecast had Mulder around 89 for most of the night on his fastball. One nasty 69mph curve ball thrown in as well. I don't think he was reaching mid-90s. Fun to watch, though.

I just wonder if Rolen's slightly injured still, not enough to sit, but just enough to affect his performance in the field and at the plate. He's only hitting .253(ish), and while 2004 was a career year, he's still more like a .290s hitter.

I am particularly concerned about Rolen. Since the calf injury last September he is hitting .242 with a .435 SLG, 5 HR in 124 AB ( 1/24.8 AB) down from 1/19.5 AB over his career, and he has not been as mobile in the field. I do not think that he is "right."

And may the baseball gods smite me for criticizing him on a small sample size.