Boston free-agent shortstop Stephen Drew wasn't my original top choice for the Cardinals to fill the Pete Kozma black hole at short.
That's because I thought he would be too pricey.
That made my top options Erick Aybar via trade, as discussed here, or Rafael Furcal via internal re-sign.
But, Christina Karhl, in her weigh-in on the Redbirds' shortstop needs, thinks Drew is available for less than $10M/year. I
kind of doubt that, but ... if he is, I'd take him over Aybar for sure.
Because then, we're near a salary wash, without trading anybody. Sign me up in that case.
That's a lot cheaper than Jhonny Peralta from the Tigers, if he's wanting "much more" than 3/$45M,
which is a massive, massive, overpay. Hell, 3/$45 is an overpay itself, let
alone "much more," whatever that means. And, it's in spitting distance of Aybar's contract, as noted.
Drew, Aybar and Peralta are all in the same neighborhood, at least. Decently above average at bat for the position, and at least a bit above average with the glove. Peralta's a year older than Drew, and with a lot more MLB games mileage on his tank. Aybar's a year younger than Drew, but with about the same amount of MLB games.
That said, to be honest, I'm not even close to convinced Karhl's right. She also didn't even mention the Scott Boras factor with Drew's free agency, of which Bernie Miklasz reminds us. If Peralta's asking $15M/yr, let alone "much more," then Drew has to be asking at least $12M, right? Now, whether either one will draw offers in that area, I don't know. But, $12M/year makes me think a bit more, at the least.
If anybody comments, let me know if you think Kahrl's right, and if not, what's the max per year you'd pay for Drew?