The Cardinal Nation blog

Brian Walton's news and commentary on the St. Louis Cardinals (TM) and their minor league system

Cardinals World Series Game 6 DVD Set trivia: “Mo’s beginnings”

Correctly answer a multi-part St. Louis Cardinals-related trivia question and win a free Baseball’s Greatest Games: 2011 World Series Game 6 DVD Set from The Cardinal Nation Blog and A+E Networks Home Entertainment/MLB Productions.

This is the newest installment in our series of St. Louis Cardinals-related trivia questions here at The Cardinal Nation Blog. Before responding, please familiarize yourself with the complete contest rules (follow the link) to ensure your entry will qualify.

The reader who posts the first complete and correct answer below will win a free copy of Baseball’s Greatest Games: 2011 World Series Game 6 - or as the sticker attached to the wrapper calls it, “The historic Freese game”.

In this two-disc set, one of the most exciting post-season games ever is being made available for the first time in high-definition Blu-ray with 5.1 surround sound. This package has the game in standard DVD format as well, along with the audio calls of the iconic contest. It retails for $24.99 and is being provided courtesy of A+E Networks Home Entertainment/MLB Productions.

Here is your trivia question. Note that it has multiple parts, all of which must be answered correctly. Only one answer per person is allowed.

Cardinals Vice President/General Manager John Mozeliak is considered the architect of the 2011 World Championship club. Here, we will go back to his beginnings in the chair.

After becoming the 12th general manager in the franchise’s history, what was Mo’s first official player transaction AND what was the semi-related transaction that followed 18 days later?

Good luck to everyone and please remember to read the rules before answering. And if you don’t win this time, check back for new trivia questions to be posted at random times this week.

Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.

43 Responses to “Cardinals World Series Game 6 DVD Set trivia: “Mo’s beginnings””

  1. CariocaCardinal says:

    If people dont want to participate, need to open these up to previous winners!

  2. sawatski says:

    I’m not sure what you consider an official transaction. His first trade was Jimmy Ballgame for David Freese. About a month later, he traded Scott Rolen for Troy Glaus. I suppose they could be considered related since he traded his established third baseman for the future resident of the hot corner.

  3. kseel says:

    According to MLB.com the first transaction was: Activated 2B Adam Kennedy from the 15-day disabled list and RHP Chris Carpenter, OF Juan Encarnacion, RHP Josh Kinney, 3B Scott Rolen and OF Preston Wilson from the 60-day disabled list.

    18 days later the transaction was: Purchased the contracts of RHPs Kyle McClellan and Jason Motte from Double-A Springfield; Purchased the contracts of RHPs Mike Parisi and Mark Worrell and INF Jarrett Hoffpauir from Triple-A Memphis; Released RHPs Andy Cavazos and Brian Falkenborg.

    • Brian Walton says:

      Welcome kseel. I checked MLB.com and what you note would be correct – if that was my source. However, it is not. Sorry.

      Hint to others (remember no second guesses allowed): I am looking for a transaction one day prior to the one MLB.com lists.

      • kseel says:

        Ehh not to concerned about losing but you did ask for “Mo’s first official player transaction”.

        • Brian Walton says:

          Yes, I did, but many different sources document transactions and the info is not always consistent in content and timing. I am using a source which I consider more reliable than MLB.com, provided directly by the Cardinals. I understand that is a bit vague, but I will explain further once the answer I am looking for is provided.

  4. Jmodene says:

    Near as I can tell, the first transaction was to lose 3B Russell Branyan to free agency, and then 14 days later sign 3B Rico Washington. I’m going by baseball-reference.com’s 2007 transactions.

    • Brian Walton says:

      Sorry, but that is not the answer I am looking for, either. I can see this is going to be extremely challenging because of the various transaction sites being different. BB-Ref’s date for Branyan is just before Mo’s hiring date, but according to them, so is the way they recognize the first transaction in the pair that I am looking for.

      Let me try another clue. You can catch the second semi-related transaction 18 days later listed on the MLB.com page kseel referenced.

  5. blingboy says:

    So, where are all the real fans out there?

  6. kray66 says:

    Released veteran catcher Gary Bennett, then signed Jason LaRue.

    • Brian Walton says:

      I am going to give it to kray66.

      Mo was announced at a press conference on October 31, 2007. The next day, the Cardinals declined their 2008 option on the contract of catcher Gary Bennett. The club exercised a $50,000 buyout rather than pay Bennett’s $900,000 2008 salary.

      On November 19, the club signed free agent catcher Jason LaRue to a one-year contract. La Rue took Bennett’s place as Yadier Molina’s back up in 2008.

      Regarding the dates, my official source is the Cardinals 2008 Media Guide. At The Cardinal Nation, I ran the Bennett hot news on November 2 after a mention of it was made in the Post-Dispatch. The P-D’s article has since been removed from their website. (Why do they do that, anyway?)

      At any rate, congratulations to kray66 and thanks to everyone for guessing!

      • kray66 says:

        Awesome! I loved LaRue. Such a team player and seemed like a cool guy. It’s really a shame how his career ended.

      • CariocaCardinal says:

        Are you sure the media guide isn\t put together by the ame guys that due the web site? :)

      • CariocaCardinal says:

        If there was lots of money at stake here (and it was mine) I’d argue that declining options are not transactions as they are really simply not doing anything (not taking action to pick up the option.) There is no real transaction. It is just an announcement in this case. The paying of the buyout is not a transaction either as it is simply fulfilling a contractual obligation made earlier.

        • Brian Walton says:

          OK, I will play along. Please provide a definition of “transactions” from a reputable source that explicitly excludes option decisions. As I already noted, the Cardinals Media Guide lists this as a transaction. Therefore, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate why this is not a transaction. Your opinion is not enough.

          Let’s step back for a minute. Based on what happened (or did not happen) on November 1, Bennett went from being a Cardinal to being a free agent. That sure seems like a transaction to me. If a player is simply released, isn’t that a transaction? Basically that is what happened here. The Cardinals set the player free.

          Though you did not specifically assert no action was taken, it could get into the specifics of what actually occurred behind the scenes. Unless we know how this contract was written and administered, one cannot prove action was not taken. We do know that it was a club option.

          By a defined date (in this case November 1), does the option year:

          1) Vest automatically if no action is taken?
          2) Void itself, requiring the buyout payment, if no action is taken?
          3) Require the team to make an explicit decision one way or the other? (When declined, a check had to be written. If assumed, the club was on the hook for $900K over the upcoming season.)

          I believe it is #3. Do you have anything to support #2? (Even if so, “no action” turned into a transaction.)

          If you still don’t agree, I will play the trump card. The rules are clear that my decision is binding. ;-)

          • crdswmn says:

            Spoken like a true benevolent dictator. :)

          • CariocaCardinal says:

            Well if writing a check that is required by a contract is a transaction, than I guess every time a player gets paid we should see a transaction listed.

            In many cases I have read where the player had to be notified by x date if the team was going to pick up the option. I am sure it is possible that the contract could be written where the option takes affect if the team doesn’t notify the player of a decline but I don’t think that is the norm. Simply the terminology used of exercising an option implies an action necessary by the team for the option to take effect.

            I doubt very much it is #3. A contract that requires a party to do either A or B is poorly written in that if the failure to do so simply results in A or B happening by default there really is no action required.

            What I also don’t know is does a player whose option was declined have to file for free agency (no longer required for FA s under the new CBA but was at the time).

            Does a player who doesn’t have option and has fulfilled his contract create a transaction at the expiration of that contract?

            Maybe my argument is why MLB doesn’t list this as a transaction.

            Besides, I said i’d argue the point – didn’t say I’d win. Of course, if it was important enough I’d research it further until i was sure i wasn’t correct. :)

            And courts have ruled in some cases that rights can not be abridged even if a person has voluntarily agreed to give them up. :) :)

  7. blingboy says:

    I was thinking the first was picking up the option on Izzy’s contract, but then I realized that was when Mo was only the interim GM, so it technically did not happen ‘after’ being named 14th GM.

  8. blingboy says:

    Robinson has shown enough to at least make an arguement for not getting sent out when Skip comes back. Working out a deal for full rights to Komatsu would give Mo more flexibility. Not that Komtsu deserves to be the one sent out. I wonder what it would take. Will be interesting to see how Matheny uses Skippy.

    • friendmouse says:

      I agree, bb, about being interested in how MM will use Schu-man. Is Craig also very, close to coming back? I haven’t heard much about AC. My bet is that, to bring AC and Skip on board, we send Robinson back to Memphis, and dfa Greene. I understand that may well spell the end to Tyler Greene’s days with the Cardinals, but if some other team claims him off waivers, then perhaps TG will “improve” in a new environment (?? like Colby ??). Also, if Team X were to claim Tyler off Waivers, wouldn’t we get some sort of recompense? Regardless, at this point, I don’t see much up-side of keeping Greene rather than one of the others in the mix.

    • Brian Walton says:

      There is a chance that Komatsu wouldn’t make it through waivers. He would have to clear before a trade could be feasible. That assumes Washington would deal.

      • Jmodene says:

        Not sure if anything has changed since ST, but they were saying during the ST telecast vs. Washington (the one we won, 9-0) that they had talked to Bob Boone, the Nats’ farm director, and he was pretty clear they wouldn’t be interested in making a deal; they would take Komatsu back.

    • crdswmn says:

      I’d rather keep Komatsu, MCarp and Greene and jettison Skip, but I’m just a fount of unpopular opinions that get me in trouble.

      • Brian Walton says:

        C’mon, crdswmn, you won’t get in trouble around these parts – unless you start bad-mouthing TLR again… Nothing can be more predictable to elicit a BW52 rebuke! ;-)

        As much as you would like Skip gone, what odds would you give it actually happening?

        • crdswmn says:

          Zilch.

          I don’t have a personal problem with Skip like I do TLR. I am sure he is a fantastic gentleman. Too bad he is not a fantastic ball player as well. With limited roster spots, he is taking up one that could go to someone better than him. Like 25 current roster players plus a host of other guys in the minors. But no one wants to hear me say any of that and they let me know it. Which is fine, I don’t take it personally. It’s not like anything I say or think matters a hill of beans anyway. :)

  9. blingboy says:

    If Mo would like to see Greene get more of a look than he’s getting, he could take a page out of his dealing with TLR book and send Dan down so MM wouldn’t have much choice. Dan hasn’t been tearing it up any more than Tyler so far.

    I wouldn’t think moving Skip is out of the question at all.

    • JumboShrimp says:

      Its out of the question. No other team is going to want to shoulder his salary. And Skip exemplifies the Cards, a hard worker who converted to a new position for the team and who started Game 7 last fall. Skip owns a roster slot, Komatsu will leave.

    • crdswmn says:

      I don’t see them moving Skip, unfortunately. A below average player taking up a roster spot for no discernible baseball reason. He has no defensive skills other than an above average arm, and he possesses an over-inflated singles hitter batting average. But having players take up a roster spot for no discernible baseball reason (does Randy Winn ring a bell?) seems to be a habit for this organization.

      Komatsu is a better baseball player than Skip, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he is sacrificed to the altar of Scrappy Skip. More’s the pity.

      As for sending Descalso down to force Matheny to play Greene, I wouldn’t do it. Descalso may not be tearing it up at the plate right now, but he is more versatile than Greene and seems to have more going on between the ears.

      Just my humble and irrelevant opinion.

      • Nutlaw says:

        I’ll posit that being able to play four positions gives a player some defensive worth. Although his numbers have slipped over the past couple of seasons, he used to put up serviceable batting lines.

        While Komatsu has more upside, I would strongly question whether he is a superior batter to Schumaker at this stage of their respective careers. Given the organization’s major league ready depth at 2B behind Greene and Descalso, I’d certainly be okay with Skip sticking around for a while longer.

        • blingboy says:

          I too think Skip would come in handy for at least a few teams. His salary is reasonable. Not that I want him out the door.

          • Brian Walton says:

            Further, someone could be hurt tomorrow or next week and the depth would come in handy. Without checking, I seem to recall similar comments last year when Skip was hurt. Then Punto went down and Skip was rushed back from rehab.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.