PDA

View Full Version : Cards get Westbrook, ship Ludwick



Hollcat
07-31-2010, 01:33 PM
it wouldn't surprise me at all to see Westbrook become a very solid starter for the Cards but I'm so happy to see Ludwick go. I dread seeing him against the Reds and now it's only three more games this year.
Ludwick
.887 career OPS vs Cin, .921 at GABP

Westbrook
3.86 career ERA vs Cin. but with a 1.48 WHIP and a .297 BAA so he's had some luck.

RedsManRick
07-31-2010, 02:14 PM
I think Ludwick is more productive than Westbrook, but with John Jay around and Suppan and Hawksworth in the rotation, this team makes them better.

Brutus
07-31-2010, 02:17 PM
I think Ludwick is more productive than Westbrook, but with John Jay around and Suppan and Hawksworth in the rotation, this team makes them better.

It makes them better if Jay keeps hitting the way he has. But given what he did in the minors, I am not sure that's realistic. We already know he's living vicariously through a .446 BABIP--which is, of course, highly unsustainable.

Jay is a nice, solid hitter. But I can't help but think the Cards are losing some offensive punch to acquire an OK starter.

mth123
07-31-2010, 02:20 PM
It makes them better if Jay keeps hitting the way he has. But given what he did in the minors, I am not sure that's realistic. We already know he's living vicariously through a .446 BABIP--which is, of course, highly unsustainable.

Jay is a nice, solid hitter. But I can't help but think the Cards are losing some offensive punch to acquire an OK starter.

You may be right, but the upgrade from Suppan to Westbrook > the drop from Ludwick to Jay. Overall the cards improved. The Reds may need to make a similar move that is a loss on the surface but upgrades the team overall.

Brutus
07-31-2010, 02:24 PM
You may be right, but the upgrade from Suppan to Westbrook > the drop from Ludwick to Jay. Overall the cards improved. The Reds may need to make a similar move that is a loss on the surface but upgrades the team overall.

That's possible. I just think when Jay goes into a slump soon, and I truly believe he's due, the Cardinals better hope Westbrook delivers on every ounce of that 4.41 FIP going forward. Otherwise they'll find themselves questioning if it was worth it.

mth123
07-31-2010, 02:27 PM
That's possible. I just think when Jay goes into a slump soon, and I truly believe he's due, the Cardinals better hope Westbrook delivers on every ounce of that 4.41 FIP going forward. Otherwise they'll find themselves questioning if it was worth it.

Lots of OF will get through waivers if Jay falters. Westbrook is probably better than they could do for the rotation by waiting.

MattyHo4Life
07-31-2010, 02:30 PM
If Jay falters, we have Allen Craig. Not sure what I think about this trade yet. I like Ludwick, but he will get really expensive soon. Jay and Craig were blocked by Ludwick, so this trade will open up a door and give them both a chance to win the spot. Jay has been on fire, but I really would like to see what Craig can do.

It will be interesting to see what Dave Duncan can do with Westbrook as well.

Brutus
07-31-2010, 02:36 PM
If Jay falters, we have Allen Craig. Not sure what I think about this trade yet. I like Ludwick, but he will get really expensive soon. Jay and Craig were blocked by Ludwick, so this trade will open up a door and give them both a chance to win the spot. Jay has been on fire, but I really would like to see what Craig can do.

It will be interesting to see what Dave Duncan can do with Westbrook as well.

These are the kinds of comments that people make when teams are going into rebuilding mode -- not the kind they make in the middle of a pennant race. Opening the door for unproven rookies in the middle of a race, after trading one of your most reliable hitters, is not the kind of leap of faith teams should make in August. And if they do, they better be darn sure the prospects they've opened the door for are capable getting through said door.

Craig specifically has better credentials to make it long term, but will he actually be given that chance this year? Even if he is--how smart is it to count on him?

mth123
07-31-2010, 02:41 PM
These are the kinds of comments that people make when teams are going into rebuilding mode -- not the kind they make in the middle of a pennant race. Opening the door for unproven rookies in the middle of a race, after trading one of your most reliable hitters, is not the kind of leap of faith teams should make in August. And if they do, they better be darn sure the prospects they've opened the door for are capable getting through said door.

Craig specifically has better credentials to make it long term, but will he actually be given that chance this year? Even if he is--how smart is it to count on him?

Smarter than counting on Suppan and Hawksworth.

PuffyPig
07-31-2010, 02:41 PM
Craig specifically has better credentials to make it long term, but will he actually be given that chance this year? Even if he is--how smart is it to count on him?

I like Jay better than Craig. He at least has more than one tool.

Criag should be in the AL where he could play his best position, DH.

MattyHo4Life
07-31-2010, 02:50 PM
These are the kinds of comments that people make when teams are going into rebuilding mode -- not the kind they make in the middle of a pennant race. Opening the door for unproven rookies in the middle of a race, after trading one of your most reliable hitters, is not the kind of leap of faith teams should make in August.

I would say that you were right if the Cardinals were trading for prospects, but the Cardinals traded to fill a hole in their rotation. Ludwick had an amazing year 2 years ago. Last year he didn't do so great. He is having a better year this year than he did last year, but I don't think the Cards will be hurt without him.

Allen Craig has been up a couple of times this year, so he will get a shot as well as will Jay. I don't think the Cards are counting on any one rookie. LaRussa probably feels that he can replace Ludwick's bat with a combination of any number of players including Jay. Ludwick was our 3rd best outfield. He isn't the power threat that he was 2 years ago. We need Westbrook more than we need Ludwick.

mth123
07-31-2010, 03:00 PM
Losing Ludwick is a non-issue IMO. The Cards needed to get a starter. If in house options falter there will be plenty of Luke Scott/Jose Guillen types for the taking on waivers. They will be able to backfill Ludwick. The rotation hole was huge and getting bigger as Garcia starts to falter.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 03:02 PM
Losing Ludwick is a non-issue IMO. The Cards needed to get a starter. If in house options falter there will be plenty of Luke Scott/Jose Guillen types for the taking on waivers. They will be able to backfill Ludwick. The rotation hole was huge and getting bigger as Garcia starts to falter.

With Pujols' questionable health, I'd say they have offense concerns too. As far as waivers are concerned, Cards are going to have a lot of talent blocked before it falls to them.

PuffyPig
07-31-2010, 03:05 PM
I We need Westbrook more than we need Ludwick.

Agreed.

But you needed both.

The Cards didn't have the pitching prospect (they weren't moving Miller) to get what Clevelend wanted, so they reluctantly traded Ludwick to the Pads to get the propsect Cleveland wanted.

But with Rasmus slumping badly, the Cards are suddenly relying on Jay to play fulltime and for Craig to contribute. I'm not saying they can't, but Ludwick would have expected to play, more or less, as a regular for the rest of the year.

That's a defintite downgrade in the OF anyway you cut it.

But a bigger upgrade to the rotation.

mth123
07-31-2010, 03:09 PM
With Pujols' questionable health, I'd say they have offense concerns too. As far as waivers are concerned, Cards are going to have a lot of talent blocked before it falls to them.

I think the offense might be an issue. But Freese will be back soon and Felo can play 2B with Schumaker in RF if all else fails. Nick Stavinoha is rehabbing as well. They won't miss Ludwick as much as they would an arm.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 03:10 PM
I think the offense might be an issue. But Freese will be back soon and Felo can play 2B with Schumaker in RF if all else fails. Nick Stavinoha is rehabbing as well. They won't miss Ludwick as much as they would an arm.

They robbed Peter to pay Paul.

mth123
07-31-2010, 03:11 PM
They robbed Peter to pay Paul.

But they have two more Peters in rehab and they are fresh out of Pauls.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 03:12 PM
But they have two more Peters in rehab and they are fresh out of Pauls.

I wouldn't get real stoked about Freese or Stavinoha.

MattyHo4Life
07-31-2010, 03:12 PM
Are you stoked about how well Ludwick has played the last couple of years? I'm not.

OnBaseMachine
07-31-2010, 03:13 PM
Ryan Ludwick has a 120 OPS+ this season, he's been well above average. I'm glad to see him out of the NL Central.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 03:14 PM
Are you stoked about how well Ludwick has played the last couple of years? I'm not.

.830 OPS with solid defense? As a Reds fan following a team whose OF's can't crack a .750 OPS in a dinky park, I'd take it, yeah.

MattyHo4Life
07-31-2010, 03:15 PM
Well...I do like his defense...especially his arm. That will be missed more than his offensive production.

mth123
07-31-2010, 03:16 PM
I wouldn't get real stoked about Freese or Stavinoha.

Stavinoha is a bench player, but Freese can match Ludwick. The dog days are here and the cards were about ready to lose three of five each time through the rotation. Garcia is wilting and the others are horrid.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 03:17 PM
Stavinoha is a bench player, but Freese can match Ludwick. The dog days are here and the cards were about ready to lose three of five each time through the rotation. Garcia is wilting and the others are horrid.

Garcia isn't wilting. He had two bad starts earlier in the month. That's not a wilt.

If that's a wilt then the entire Reds rotation has bloomed, died, and been turned into fertilizer.

OnBaseMachine
07-31-2010, 03:24 PM
Stavinoha is a bench player, but Freese can match Ludwick. The dog days are here and the cards were about ready to lose three of five each time through the rotation. Garcia is wilting and the others are horrid.

David Freese is OPSing .765 despite a .376 BABIP.

MattyHo4Life
07-31-2010, 03:26 PM
Well, I'm not worried about Garcia. It's Suppan and Hawksworth I'm worried about. Lohse is on his way back, but Penny isn't anywhere near being ready. Nobody even knows what Lohse will do when he comes back. He could come back and go right back on the DL. The rotation has 2 huge gaps in it. Ludwick isn't going to create a hole that a combination of players can't fill.

mth123
07-31-2010, 03:26 PM
David Freese is OPSing .765 despite a .376 BABIP.

I hope the cards screwed the pooch as much as anybody, but they needed Westbrook more than they needed Ludwick. Its that simple IMO.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 03:27 PM
Lohse is better than Westbrook, and Westbrook's improvement over Suppan or Hawksworth is not enough to justify sending out Ludwick.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 03:28 PM
I hope the cards screwed the pooch as much as anybody, but they needed Westbrook more than they needed Ludwick. Its that simple IMO.

No, they needed a good starter, not Westbrook.

mth123
07-31-2010, 03:29 PM
No, they needed a good starter, not Westbrook.

Those were gone when Lee and Oswalt and maybe Haren were dealt. Westbrook was probably the best available and he's a light years leap from Suppan and Hawksworth.

reds44
07-31-2010, 03:30 PM
Those were gone when Lee and Oswalt and maybe Haren were dealt. Westbrook was probably the best available and he's a light years leap from Suppan and Hawksworth.
Westbrook isn't as good as Lilly or Meyers.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 03:31 PM
Westbrook isn't as good as Lilly or Meyers.

Understatement.

mth123
07-31-2010, 03:31 PM
Westbrook isn't as good as Lilly or Meyers.

Myers I might give you, but I'm not convinced he's available. I'd take Westbrook over Lilly.

reds44
07-31-2010, 03:32 PM
Myers I might give you, but I'm not convinced he's available. I'd take Westbrook over Lilly.
Not a chance in hell.

mth123
07-31-2010, 03:36 PM
Not a chance in hell.

We'll see how he fares when he gets to face a pitcher each time through the order.

MattyHo4Life
07-31-2010, 03:37 PM
The Astros and Cubs wouldn't help the Cards out.

BoydsOfSummer
07-31-2010, 03:44 PM
LaRussa probably feels that he can replace Ludwick's bat with a combination of any number of players including Jay.

I wish The Dusty understood this concept, MattyMo. The Reds outfield SCREAMS platoon advantages.

TheNext44
07-31-2010, 03:48 PM
I have to think that Walt chuckled to himself when he heard this trade go down.

The Cardinal can defend this all they want and maybe trading Ludwick for Westbrook makes them better due to the make up of the team. However what this trade glaringly points out is how weak of an organization the Cardinals are at this point.

They desperately needed Westbrook, a declining, overpaid, back of rotation arm so much that they had to trade their starting RF, who is an above average player to get him. Nearly every other team has the organizational depth to get a Westbrook without having to give up anyone on their 25 man roster. Nearly every team can get a Westbrook without even giving up a top ten team prospect. I would argue that the Cardinals gave up more for Westbrook than what was give up for Lee or Haren.

This trade might help them win the division this year, but it reveals that the Cardinals have some tough times ahead of them in the future.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 03:50 PM
I have to think that Walt chuckled to himself when he heard this trade go down.

The Cardinal can defend this all they want and maybe trading Ludwick for Westbrook makes them better due to the make up of the team. However what this trade glaringly points out is how weak of an organization the Cardinals are at this point.

They desperately needed Westbrook, a declining, overpaid, back of rotation arm so much that they had to trade their starting RF, who is an above average player to get him. Nearly every other team has the organizational depth to get a Westbrook without having to give up anyone on their 25 man roster. Nearly every team can get a Westbrook without even giving up a top ten team prospect. I would argue that the Cardinals gave up more for Westbrook than what was give up for Lee or Haren.

This trade might help them win the division this year, but it reveals that the Cardinals have some tough times ahead of them in the future.

They aren't a weak organization, but this is a headscratcher by their GM.

MattyHo4Life
07-31-2010, 04:51 PM
I really don't have a problem with trading Ludwick. I think most Cardinals fans expected him to be gone possibly after this season, and for sure after 2011. The only thing that I'm questioning is if they got the best value for Ludwick. I've never been crazy about Westbrook, but maybe Duncan can work with him. I would much rather see Ludwick be traded than any of our younger players such as Craig and Jay. To think that this shows the Cardinals are weak, I just don't buy that. I see it as trading an older more expensive offensive player to make room for younger guys while helping the pitching staff.

I do believe the Cardinals are better off now than they were before this trade.

mth123
07-31-2010, 04:56 PM
I really don't have a problem with trading Ludwick. I think most Cardinals fans expected him to be gone possibly after this season, and for sure after 2011. The only thing that I'm questioning is if they got the best value for Ludwick. I've never been crazy about Westbrook, but maybe Duncan can work with him. I would much rather see Ludwick be traded than any of our younger players such as Craig and Jay. To think that this shows the Cardinals are weak, I just don't buy that. I see it as trading an older more expensive offensive player to make room for younger guys while helping the pitching staff.

I do believe the Cardinals are better off now than they were before this trade.

They'll find another bat. A sinkerballer moving away from the DH and to Dave Duncan seems like a good addition. The improvement to the rotation is considerable when you consider the guys they are replacing. I'm a Reds die hard and not a Cards fan at all, but Reds fans saying this made them worse is wishful thinking IMO.

Mario-Rijo
07-31-2010, 05:54 PM
Myers I might give you, but I'm not convinced he's available. I'd take Westbrook over Lilly.

I agree 100%.

fearofpopvol1
07-31-2010, 07:01 PM
Garcia isn't wilting. He had two bad starts earlier in the month. That's not a wilt.

If that's a wilt then the entire Reds rotation has bloomed, died, and been turned into fertilizer.

If Garcia had been a Reds pitcher and made 2 bad starts, you would have claimed he was "wilting."

PuffyPig
07-31-2010, 07:28 PM
If Garcia had been a Reds pitcher and made 2 bad starts, you would have claimed he was "wilting."

Even the Cards now that Garcia is wilting.

They push him back a day or two every chance they get these days.

PuffyPig
07-31-2010, 07:37 PM
They'll find another bat. A sinkerballer moving away from the DH and to Dave Duncan seems like a good addition. The improvement to the rotation is considerable when you consider the guys they are replacing. I'm a Reds die hard and not a Cards fan at all, but Reds fans saying this made them worse is wishful thinking IMO.

The two factors that makes this less of a screming deal for the Cards is:

(1) the Cards infield defense which protected guys like Suppan, Pineiro all those years is actually quite bad these days with guys like Lopez, Skippy and Greene manning 3rd, SS and 2nd. Even a (obviously hurting) Pujols isn't quite up to his previous GG defense; and

(2) Jon Jay had been replacing a very much slumping Rasmus. If Rasmus doesn't get it going, that leaves Craig as the RF. That weakens the defense in CF and RF.

I think the past Cards defense had as much to do with making "pitch-to-contact" pitchers look very good as did Dave Duncan.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 07:37 PM
Even the Cards now that Garcia is wilting.

They push him back a day or two every chance they get these days.

Then by that logic is Leake wilting? I don't think he is necessarily.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 07:38 PM
I think the past Cards defense had as much to do with making "pitch-to-contact" pitchers look very good as did Dave Duncan.

No doubt.

PuffyPig
07-31-2010, 07:40 PM
Then by that logic is Leake wilting? I don't think he is necessarily.



I think he is a bit. THough, IIRC, the Reds basically had him miss one start. They haven't consistently given him extra days.

mth123
07-31-2010, 07:41 PM
The two factors that makes this less of a screming deal for the Cards is:

(1) the Cards infield defense which protected guys like Suppan, Pineiro all those years is actually quite bad these days with guys like Lopez, Skippy and Greene manning 3rd, SS and 2nd. Even a (obviously hurting) Pujols isn't quite up to his previous GG defense; and

(2) Jon Jay had been replacing a very much slumping Rasmus. If Rasmus doesn't get it going, that leaves Craig as the RF. That weakens the defense in CF and RF.

I think the past Cards defense had as much to do with making "pitch-to-contact" pitchers look very good as did Dave Duncan.

Freese will be back to upgrade 3B soon and if they're smart Felo goes to 2B (where he's not bad) and Schumaker is that alternative in CF (where he used to be decent). I think they know they have these backfills coming and its part of the equation. Freese may not hit as much as Ludwick, but the drop-off is much less than the improvement they are going to get by dumping Suppan or moving Hawksworth to the pen.

mth123
07-31-2010, 07:42 PM
Then by that logic is Leake wilting? I don't think he is necessarily.

Leake most certainly is wilting. Its one reason why the Reds needed to make a deal and failed.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 07:44 PM
Leake most certainly is wilting. Its one reason why the Reds needed to make a deal and failed.

Well, Leake will need to be protected, but that's not the same thing as saying he's wilting. His performances have been fairly consistent, provided Dusty doesn't try to get him a complete game.

mth123
07-31-2010, 07:49 PM
Well, Leake will need to be protected, but that's not the same thing as saying he's wilting. His performances have been fairly consistent, provided Dusty doesn't try to get him a complete game.

Leake ERA by month:

April: 3.25, May: 1.88, June: 5.22, July: 4.56. Wilting.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 07:51 PM
Leake ERA by month:

April: 3.25, May: 1.88, June: 5.22, July: 4.56. Wilting.

I think you could argue that his record charts closely to opponents faced. I'm not sure I see that his repertoire has changed very much or that he's unable to pitch out of the third inning or something. Good offenses have gotten to him, Dusty's left him in too long on a few occasions, but he's been surprisingly consistent. IMO.

mth123
07-31-2010, 07:56 PM
I think you could argue that his record charts closely to opponents faced. I'm not sure I see that his repertoire has changed very much or that he's unable to pitch out of the third inning or something. Good offenses have gotten to him, Dusty's left him in too long on a few occasions, but he's been surprisingly consistent. IMO.

He's not awful, but he's not the pitcher he was early which is the same point I was making earlier about Garcia. If the Cards are going to be taking him out sooner or pushing him back, they most assuredly need a vet like Westbrook to give them some innings w/o being a batting tee more than they need Ludwick. They have reasonable in house alternatives to replicate what Ludwick did. There is no reasonable altenative to Westbrook. Ludwick may seem like an overpayment, but this deal definitely improved their team.

jojo
07-31-2010, 07:57 PM
I hope that Leake develops into a guy that either strikes out more batters or walks fewer or maybe both.

bucksfan2
07-31-2010, 07:58 PM
I don't understand this trade at all from a Cards standpoint. Westbrook isn't going to "kill" you when he takes the mound every 5th day but he sure isn't going to blow anybody away. The Cards traded their starting RF for an aging pitcher who is more than likely a 4th type. It reminds me when the Reds traded or Brian Moehler a few years ago. I just don't see Westbrook making any kind of impact down the stretch.

jojo
07-31-2010, 07:59 PM
I don't understand this trade at all from a Cards standpoint. Westbrook isn't going to "kill" you when he takes the mound every 5th day but he sure isn't going to blow anybody away. The Cards traded their starting RF for an aging pitcher who is more than likely a 4th type. It reminds me when the Reds traded or Brian Moehler a few years ago. I just don't see Westbrook making any kind of impact down the stretch.

It's a calculated risk for sure. Fun stuff.

mth123
07-31-2010, 07:59 PM
I don't understand this trade at all from a Cards standpoint. Westbrook isn't going to "kill" you when he takes the mound every 5th day but he sure isn't going to blow anybody away. The Cards traded their starting RF for an aging pitcher who is more than likely a 4th type. It reminds me when the Reds traded or Brian Moehler a few years ago. I just don't see Westbrook making any kind of impact down the stretch.

Keeping the ball out of Jeff Suppan's hand is a huge positive.

PuffyPig
07-31-2010, 08:00 PM
Freese will be back to upgrade 3B soon ....

Maybe, maybe not.

And he highly overrated on offense.

Only a very lucky BABIP of .376 is likely keeping his OPS above .700.

He doesn't walk, he strikes out plenty and has little power. His OPS has been BA driven, and a BA driven by a very unsustainable BABIP.

PuffyPig
07-31-2010, 08:04 PM
They have reasonable in house alternatives to replicate what Ludwick did.

I don't think they do.

Criag is more a 1st/DH type with decent power and little else.

Jay was already replacing Rasmus, which is a downgrade on defense and power.

I think the Cards are betting heavy on Rasmus reverting to his early success, which is certainly possible. But the Cards don't have very many options at all.

Ludwick is a career .832 OPS RF with decent defensive skills.

The Cards don't have that kind of replacement inhouse.

Ron Madden
07-31-2010, 08:04 PM
Keeping the ball out of Jeff Suppan's hand is a huge positive.

Yes it is.

mth123
07-31-2010, 08:11 PM
I don't think they do.

Criag is more a 1st/DH type with decent power and little else.

Jay was already replacing Rasmus, which is a downgrade on defense and power.

I think the Cards are betting heavy on Rasmus reverting to his early success, which is certainly possible. But the Cards don't have very many options at all.

Ludwick is a career .832 OPS RF with decent defensive skills.

The Cards don't have that kind of replacement inhouse.

So they downgrade to a .750 or so. Its not optimal, but it doesn't hurt as much as replacing Suppan with Westbrook helps. Suppan is basically the pitching version of Willy Taveras at this point. Removing him and replacing him with a competent back end guy would probably improve the team enough that Ludwick's replacement would never even have to get a hit.

And the waiver deals might provide a replacement. A competent starter wouldn't make it throough, but a pricey OF who can help could.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 08:16 PM
I hope that Leake develops into a guy that either strikes out more batters or walks fewer or maybe both.

While most on here stridently remind us to give Bruce (age 23) more time to develop, I think the same should probably extend to Leake (age 22). Even moreso, since pitchers tend to adjust to the majors more slowly.

PuffyPig
07-31-2010, 08:21 PM
So they downgrade to a .750 or so. Its not optimal, but it doesn't hurt as much as replacing Suppan with Westbrook helps. Suppan is basically the pitching version of Willy Taveras at this point. Removing him and replacing him with a competent back end guy would probably improve the team enough that Ludwick's replacement would never even have to get a hit.

And the waiver deals might provide a replacement. A competent starter wouldn't make it throough, but a pricey OF who can help could.

I agree that replacing Suppan is huge, don't get me wrong.

I would just think you could pick up a replacement for Suppan without giving up your regular RF, arguably the (current) third best hitter on your team.

mth123
07-31-2010, 08:28 PM
I agree that replacing Suppan is huge, don't get me wrong.

I would just think you could pick up a replacement for Suppan without giving up your regular RF, arguably the (current) third best hitter on your team.

I think the Cards knew they weren't going to go to arb with Ludwick ($5.45 Million in 2010) and he was a non-tender candidate. They were giving up two months of a guy that they can probably replace in a waiver deal if in house optons don't work out. Instead of giving up one of the few prospects that their thin system might have, they actually added one in the deal for a guy they weren't likely to keep. Moving his $ made adding an established starter possible. Moving a kid may have made the money a problem.

Falls City Beer
07-31-2010, 08:30 PM
Suppan's dealing tonight. But it is the Pirates. Still, the relative unsexiness of Suppan and Hawksworth was the wrong target for improvement. They needed a bat--like, say, Ludwick's.

mth123
07-31-2010, 08:32 PM
Suppan's dealing tonight. But it is the Pirates.

He'll probably throw a shut out since I've been knocking him.

He may be pitching for his baseball life right now.

MattyHo4Life
07-31-2010, 08:55 PM
Jay was already replacing Rasmus, which is a downgrade on defense and power.

Jay has only been replacing Rasmus this past week. Jon Jay has been replacing Ryan Ludwick for the last month. Ludwick returned to the line-up last week. So to think that losing Ludwick will suddenly have a huge impact on the Cards offense is ignoring the fact that he hasn't even been playing for about a month.

Tony Cloninger
07-31-2010, 09:06 PM
How long do you think having Jay out there for Ludwick will last....in that sense that he will replace whatever Ludwick could provide? And Randy Winn? The stereotypical "veteran with presence" along with a bat that would make Patterson wince? I know that Duncan is a wizard with pedestrian pitchers...but I do not see any great additions here for the Cardinals at all.

This is all even going into the last 55+ games.

REDREAD
07-31-2010, 11:58 PM
I hope the cards screwed the pooch as much as anybody, but they needed Westbrook more than they needed Ludwick. Its that simple IMO.

I agree.. They couldn't get the deal done with prospects, so they had to give up their RF.. It's not pleasant, but it still had to be done.

Blitz Dorsey
08-01-2010, 12:03 AM
Let's see. The Cardinals had four decent/good outfielders in Holliday (very good), Rasmus, Jay and Ludwick. The latter never seems to stay healthy for long stretches and is basically a one-year wonder at this point (and is 30, so it's not like he's a young prospect).

Also, the Cards had a pair of scrubs in their starting staff: Hawksworth and Suppan (sandwich). This allows the Cardinals to get a decent starting pitcher in there (Westbrook) to replace one of the scrubs. I imagine Hawksworth will go back to pen (where he was effective last year) and they will live with Suppan as their No. 5 until either Penny or Lohse is ready.

Any way you cut it, the Cards improved their chances of winning the Central. They had an abundance of outfielders and a huge hole (or two) in their starting pitching staff. Jake Westbrook isn't great, but he's solid. A good return for Ryan Ludwick, who, again, is a 30-year-old one-year wonder until he proves otherwise.

Scrap Irony
08-01-2010, 12:19 AM
Let's see. The Cardinals had four decent/good outfielders in Holliday (very good), Rasmus, Jay and Ludwick. The latter never seems to stay healthy for long stretches and is basically a one-year wonder at this point (and is 30, so it's not like he's a young prospect).

Also, the Cards had a pair of scrubs in their starting staff: Hawksworth and Suppan (sandwich). This allows the Cardinals to get a decent starting pitcher in there (Westbrook) to replace one of the scrubs. I imagine Hawksworth will go back to pen (where he was effective last year) and they will live with Suppan as their No. 5 until either Penny or Lohse is ready.

Any way you cut it, the Cards improved their chances of winning the Central. They had an abundance of outfielders and a huge hole (or two) in their starting pitching staff. Jake Westbrook isn't great, but he's solid. A good return for Ryan Ludwick, who, again, is a 30-year-old one-year wonder until he proves otherwise.

Unfortunately for your argument, Westbrook has already proven he's an above average bat and glove in RF. He's going to be replaced by a guy who's likely to give them 100 points less in OPS in Jay.

And Westbrook's ERA+ this season is 85.

Jeff Suppan's ERA+ in St. Louis? 86.

Putting it another way, St. Louis just traded Jay Bruce for Aaron Harang.

jojo
08-01-2010, 12:25 AM
While most on here stridently remind us to give Bruce (age 23) more time to develop, I think the same should probably extend to Leake (age 22). Even moreso, since pitchers tend to adjust to the majors more slowly.

I thought it was kind of obvious that my post was pointing to what he could become, i.e. he was still developing...

TheNext44
08-01-2010, 12:50 AM
I thought this was an interesting quote from Jayson Stark on ESPN.com

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=5426919



We didn't love the idea of moving Ryan Ludwick. But Jake Westbrook is the Cardinals' kind of pitcher. And he gives them not just one of the deepest rotations in the league but, more importantly, a rotation deep enough to match up with the Reds. "I think the Reds made them play this the way they played it," said one NL exec. "This was about winning the division they play in. They had to try to match up with the Reds. And now, I think they do."

Basically, he has the Cardinals thinking they had to keep up with the Reds in terms of starting pitching. Thought I'd never hear that.

Blitz Dorsey
08-01-2010, 01:55 AM
Unfortunately for your argument, Westbrook has already proven he's an above average bat and glove in RF. He's going to be replaced by a guy who's likely to give them 100 points less in OPS in Jay.

And Westbrook's ERA+ this season is 85.

Jeff Suppan's ERA+ in St. Louis? 86.

Putting it another way, St. Louis just traded Jay Bruce for Aaron Harang.

No they didn't. Jay Bruce is 23 and has a very high ceiling. Ryan Ludwick is a one-year wonder (as far as we know since he hasn't come close to duplicating his '08 performance either before or after that season) and is 30. Huge difference. The Cards weren't going to keep Ludwick after this season and they needed another starting pitcher.

And FWIW, I would take Westbrook over Harang (although I agree they are comparable).

MattyHo4Life
08-01-2010, 06:33 AM
Putting it another way, St. Louis just traded Jay Bruce for Aaron Harang.

Since when was Jay Bruce a 31 year old Outfielder that has an increasing price tag? If you are talking about a Jay Bruce equivelent, then you should be thinking of Colby Rasmus. Even when they were in the minors and ready to come up ot the Majors, I've thought those two compared very well.

MattyHo4Life
08-01-2010, 06:38 AM
I agree.. They couldn't get the deal done with prospects, so they had to give up their RF.. It's not pleasant, but it still had to be done.

I don't agree with that. The Cardinals could have gotten it done with prospects. You don't think the Cards could have gotten Westbrook for Shelby Miller? The point is that they didn't want to trade any more prospects. They paid a high price last year in prospects. Personally, I'd much rather see them trade Ludwick whose time was almost up in St. Louis instead of losing any of our younger prospects such as Miller, Craig, or Jay.

traderumor
08-01-2010, 07:38 AM
It sure would be interesting to see numbers on the Cards offense when Ludwick was in it this year vs. when he was not. My guess is it was dramatically better. Westbrook is meh. He might pitch a good game here and there, but overall a below average arm.

MattyHo4Life
08-01-2010, 07:47 AM
It sure would be interesting to see numbers on the Cards offense when Ludwick was in it this year vs. when he was not. My guess is it was dramatically better. Westbrook is meh. He might pitch a good game here and there, but overall a below average arm.

Well... the Cards offense sure didn't miss miss a beat without Luddy last night.

On a serious note, I'd love to find those stats. You have me curious about that TR. I'm not so sure that you are right though.

OesterPoster
08-01-2010, 07:49 AM
One of the St. Louis sportswriters doesn't agree with the trade:

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/bernie-miklasz/article_8c4c55c1-9aad-5d18-8fea-7f1dd87899ab.html


My first thought after hearing that the Cardinals had given up Ryan Ludwick for a No. 4 starter, Jake Westbrook: The winning GM in the deal was Walt Jocketty.

Jocketty, of course, is competing against the Cardinals from his new power chair in Cincinnati.

MattyHo4Life
08-01-2010, 08:05 AM
One of the St. Louis sportswriters doesn't agree with the trade:

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/bernie-miklasz/article_8c4c55c1-9aad-5d18-8fea-7f1dd87899ab.html

Well... most Cardinals fans don't agree with the trade. I'm not one of them though.

Falls City Beer
08-01-2010, 08:44 AM
Ryan Ludwick is a far better producer than Bruce right now.

MattyHo4Life
08-01-2010, 11:33 AM
Ryan Ludwick is a far better producer than Bruce right now.

Would you trade Bruce for Ludwick?

PuffyPig
08-01-2010, 12:22 PM
I don't agree with that. The Cardinals could have gotten it done with prospects. You don't think the Cards could have gotten Westbrook for Shelby Miller? The point is that they didn't want to trade any more prospects. They paid a high price last year in prospects. Personally, I'd much rather see them trade Ludwick whose time was almost up in St. Louis instead of losing any of our younger prospects such as Miller, Craig, or Jay.

The Indians wanted a pitching prospect. The Cards weren't going to deal Miller, and the Cards simply didn't have anyone one else to include.

You don't think the Cards wanted to keep Ludwick?

They were desperate for a back end starter, and held their nose and pulled the trigger.

If they had the "meh" prospect that the Indians ended up with, they would have pulled the trigger. I just can't believe they could get more for Ludwick.

Falls City Beer
08-01-2010, 12:32 PM
Would you trade Bruce for Ludwick?

Yes. The Reds get the cheap Bruce, but they're also going to get the cheap mediocre Bruce.

I'll take the player at a price tag that fits his production over a cheap player who doesn't play all that well. Bargains are great; production is better.

Marc D
08-01-2010, 12:44 PM
Yes. The Reds get the cheap Bruce, but they're also going to get the cheap mediocre Bruce.

I'll take the player at a price tag that fits his production over a cheap player who doesn't play all that well. Bargains are great; production is better.


I wouldn't trade a 23 year old 1.5 WAR player that costs $440K for a 31 year old 2.5 WAR player that costs 5.5MM a year.

If he was consistently the 2008 version of Ludwick (5ish WAR) then fine but as they both stand right now its a simple marginal cost/marginal revenue problem. You don't get the extra benefit for the extra cost in a straight up swap of Bruce and Ludwick.

Falls City Beer
08-01-2010, 12:48 PM
I wouldn't trade a 23 year old 1.5 WAR player that costs $440K for a 31 year old 2.5 WAR player that costs 5.5MM a year.

If he was consistently the 2008 version of Ludwick (5ish WAR) then fine but as they both stand right now its a simple marginal cost/marginal revenue problem. You don't get the extra benefit for the extra cost in a straight up swap of Bruce and Ludwick.

If I want to win in the near term I make that trade.

PuffyPig
08-01-2010, 01:53 PM
Yes. The Reds get the cheap Bruce, but they're also going to get the cheap mediocre Bruce.

I'll take the player at a price tag that fits his production over a cheap player who doesn't play all that well. Bargains are great; production is better.

Westbrook>Ludwick>Bruce

Wow!!

Falls City Beer
08-01-2010, 01:55 PM
Westbrook>Ludwick>Bruce

Wow!!

Not how I interpret it. Ludwick>Bruce>Westbrook is more accurate.

But that configuration might change if I were the Pirates. Bruce would bump up to the top of the order in that case.

mth123
08-01-2010, 02:01 PM
Westbrook>Ludwick>Bruce

Wow!!

But that's not really the decision.

Westbrook plus lesser OF > Ludwick plus lesser pitchers.

Baseball is still a team game and making the pieces fit is a huge part of the decision process.

MattyHo4Life
08-01-2010, 03:06 PM
Westbrook>Ludwick>Bruce

Wow!!

Nobody is saying that Westbrook is better than Ludwick.

oregonred
08-01-2010, 03:14 PM
But that's not really the decision.

Westbrook plus lesser OF > Ludwick plus lesser pitchers.

Baseball is still a team game and making the pieces fit is a huge part of the decision process.

Yep, that's obviously the equation the Cards were thinking for the rest of 2010. We'll see how it plays out.

westofyou
08-01-2010, 03:52 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-tradewinnerslosers073110



St. Louis Cardinals.

For a team that ranks in the bottom half of baseball in runs scored, the Cardinals certainly had no problems letting go of Ludwick, their fourth-best hitter. Because … rookie Jon Jay (and his .446 batting average on balls in play) is hitting well? As nice a pitcher as Jake Westbrook(notes) can be – and he suits the Cardinals and their groundball-gobbling tendencies – it’s curious that St. Louis focused on a starter when Kyle Lohse’s(notes) return is imminent and Adam Wainwright(notes), Chris Carpenter(notes) and Jaime Garcia(notes) form the core of the Cardinals’ success. Should St. Louis maintain its lead on Cincinnati – which sat by idly at the deadline – Westbrook will be nothing more than a long man come playoff time, while the hole Ludwick leaves will remain unfilled.

PuffyPig
08-01-2010, 04:39 PM
But that's not really the decision.

Westbrook plus lesser OF > Ludwick plus lesser pitchers.

Baseball is still a team game and making the pieces fit is a huge part of the decision process.

The fact of the matter is, the Cards should have come away with Ludwick and Westbrook.

That's their collosal failure.

MattyHo4Life
08-01-2010, 05:08 PM
The fact of the matter is, the Cards should have come away with Ludwick and Westbrook.

That's their collosal failure.

So the Cardinals should have given up prospects for Westbrook? Now that would be a trade that I wouldn't like. We need to make our current team better without selling the future. I would have liked to see them get more for Ludwick, but apparently other teams don't think as much of Ludwick as most Reds and Cardinals fans do.

PuffyPig
08-01-2010, 08:08 PM
So the Cardinals should have given up prospects for Westbrook? Now that would be a trade that I wouldn't like. We need to make our current team better without selling the future. I would have liked to see them get more for Ludwick, but apparently other teams don't think as much of Ludwick as most Reds and Cardinals fans do.

Everybody (or at least most) felt Cincy should have given up some prospects for some spare pieces to help this year.

Yet the Cards gave up their regular RF for a #4-5 starter.

Cleveland got ONE prospect for him, a starting pitcher projected to be a #4-5starter. So don't start with "prospects".

When you attepmt to improve for a playoff run, you give up prospects. You don't create another (and maybe) bigger hole than you have filled.

mth123
08-01-2010, 08:26 PM
Everybody (or at least most) felt Cincy should have given up some prospects for some spare pieces to help this year.

Yet the Cards gave up their regular RF for a #4-5 starter.

Cleveland got ONE prospect for him, a starting pitcher projected to be a #4-5starter. So don't start with "prospects".

When you attepmt to improve for a playoff run, you give up prospects. You don't create another (and maybe) bigger hole than you have filled.

Unless, of course, you need to free up cash to take on the pitcher. Ludwick makes $5 Million plus. Adding Westbrook w/o subtracting something may not have been in the Cards (pardon the pun).

MattyHo4Life
08-01-2010, 08:27 PM
Everybody (or at least most) felt Cincy should have given up some prospects for some spare pieces to help this year.

Yet the Cards gave up their regular RF for a #4-5 starter.

Cleveland got ONE prospect for him, a starting pitcher projected to be a #4-5starter. So don't start with "prospects".

When you attepmt to improve for a playoff run, you give up prospects. You don't create another (and maybe) bigger hole than you have filled.

The Cards and Reds are in two totally different situations. The Cards give up prospects for talent nearly every year. If you do that every year, then you end up with a thin farms system. Luckily, the Cardinals had a good draft this year. if they can sign all of their picks that is. The Cardinals do have some good young players such as Craig and Jay that are both ready for a shot. There is no guarantee that Ludwick would be our starting Right Fielder if he stayed with the team, because they had too many Outfielders. Rasmus has been benched once Ludwick came back just because they had to make room for Jay. As for starting Right Fielders, Jay has been the starting Right Fielder for the last month.

The Reds have more prospects because they don't have the history of trading prospects for established players like the Cardinals have, so they have more prospects to trade. Also, they don't have a huge contract like Pujols's coming up soon to make room in the payroll for.

MattyHo4Life
08-01-2010, 08:31 PM
Unless, of course, you need to free up cash to take on the pitcher. Ludwick makes $5 Million plus. Adding Westbrook w/o subtracting something may not have been in the Cards (pardon the pun).

I don't think it was about the money this year. Dewitt has said that there was room in the payroll since attendance has been so good again this year. Two years from now is a different story.

PuffyPig
08-01-2010, 08:58 PM
There is no guarantee that Ludwick would be our starting Right Fielder if he stayed with the team, because they had too many Outfielders. Rasmus has been benched once Ludwick came back just because they had to make room for Jay. As for starting Right Fielders, Jay has been the starting Right Fielder for the last month.



Jay was the starting RF becuase Ludwick was injured.

Once Ludwick came back he went back to RF, Jay went to CF to replace the slumping Rasmus and Craig went to AAA. Make no mistake, Rasmus was benched becuase he was striking out most of the time, as a .593 OPS in July will attest to.

As long as Ludwick produced like he has been producing over the last 2.5 years (where he leads NL RF's in RBI's during that period), he was playing. He certainly wasn't sitting for Craig, who was sent back to AAA when he got healthy, and who's best positions are first and DH.

MattyHo4Life
08-01-2010, 10:15 PM
Jay was the starting RF becuase Ludwick was injured.

Once Ludwick came back he went back to RF, Jay went to CF to replace the slumping Rasmus and Craig went to AAA. Make no mistake, Rasmus was benched becuase he was striking out most of the time, as a .593 OPS in July will attest to.

As long as Ludwick produced like he has been producing over the last 2.5 years (where he leads NL RF's in RBI's during that period), he was playing. He certainly wasn't sitting for Craig, who was sent back to AAA when he got healthy, and who's best positions are first and DH.

I really don't disagree with any of this. Although all ballplayers go through slumps. If Rasmus came out of his slump, then Luddy would be the one on the bench.

PuffyPig
08-01-2010, 10:54 PM
I really don't disagree with any of this. Although all ballplayers go through slumps. If Rasmus came out of his slump, then Luddy would be the one on the bench.

Unless Jay stopped BABIP'ing .446. Then he would go to the bench. And going forward, who would bet any player would essentially win the lottery of BABIP?

Ludwick was likely your 3rd best hitter going forward. No RF in the NL had more RBI's over the last 3 years.

Ludwick has done more over the last 3 years what Jay can only dream of doing on a fulltime basis.

Look, all I'm saying is that Ludwick wasn't moved because he became redundant.

He was moved because either the Cards were so deperate for a #4-5 starter they had no choice but to move a better player to fill a serios weakness, or because for some unknown (but heavily speculated) reason, Ludwick had to be moved.

MattyMo, thanks for engaging me on this. It's good to get a Cards perspective on this. I know you aren't a "homer", and I appreciate your view.

RED VAN HOT
08-01-2010, 11:00 PM
Ludwick pinch hit today and received a standing ovation in his first plate appearance for the Pads. He delivered a key two out hit that kept alive what became the winning rally. I think his absence will be felt by the Cardinals, --less protection for Pujols and Holliday.

MattyHo4Life
08-01-2010, 11:55 PM
He was moved because either the Cards were so deperate for a #4-5 starter they had no choice but to move a better player to fill a serios weakness, or because for some unknown (but heavily speculated) reason, Ludwick had to be moved.

MattyMo, thanks for engaging me on this. It's good to get a Cards perspective on this. I know you aren't a "homer", and I appreciate your view.

No problem Bro... I like coming here because there are so many knowledgeable baseball people such as yourself. I do believe 100% that Luddy was moved for financial reasons. That doesn't bother me, because I understand the reasons. In two years, Pujols will most likely sign an enormous contract with the Cardinals. IMO, Pujols, Holliday, Carp, and Waino are the priorities. Luddy is a luxery, but the Cards were hoping to produce cheaper alternatives on the farm. I think most Cardinals fans expected Luddy gone once he became a Free Agent, and some thought it would happen after this season. I didn't expect it to happen now, and not for Westbrook. I think the Cardinals tried many other options, but couldn't make a deal for Lee, Oswalt, or Haren, and Westbrook may have been all they could get. They knew they had to make a move, and I think they deserve credit for making an unpopular move that they felt would improve the team.

nate
08-02-2010, 08:26 AM
No problem Bro... I like coming here because there are so many knowledgeable baseball people such as yourself. I do believe 100% that Luddy was moved for financial reasons. That doesn't bother me, because I understand the reasons. In two years, Pujols will most likely sign an enormous contract with the Cardinals. IMO, Pujols, Holliday, Carp, and Waino are the priorities. Luddy is a luxery, but the Cards were hoping to produce cheaper alternatives on the farm. I think most Cardinals fans expected Luddy gone once he became a Free Agent, and some thought it would happen after this season. I didn't expect it to happen now, and not for Westbrook. I think the Cardinals tried many other options, but couldn't make a deal for Lee, Oswalt, or Haren, and Westbrook may have been all they could get. They knew they had to make a move, and I think they deserve credit for making an unpopular move that they felt would improve the team.

Is his nickname really "Waino?"

If so, the Cardinals have bigger problems than trading Ludwick for Westbrook.

:cool:

medford
08-02-2010, 09:04 AM
Luckily, the Cardinals had a good draft this year. if they can sign all of their picks that is.

The Reds have more prospects because they don't have the history of trading prospects for established players like the Cardinals have, so they have more prospects to trade. Also, they don't have a huge contract like Pujols's coming up soon to make room in the payroll for.

I'd say its way to early to say the Cards (or anyone) had a 'good' draft this year. The success rate of draft picks is low, and so random you'll need another 2-3 seasons before most of those guys are considered real prospects worthy of trade consideration, if not help w/ the big league club.

While Votto's contract won't be in the Pujols territory, he's going to be due a sizable contract shortly if the Reds plan to keep him around long term. Same could be said of Cueto/Volquez.

RichRed
08-02-2010, 09:42 AM
I'm not a very good trade analyst. I do, however, like that the Cards were sufficiently concerned with the Reds that they felt like they had to make a risky deal like this. It's been a long time since the Reds scared anybody.

MattyHo4Life
08-02-2010, 09:54 AM
I'd say its way to early to say the Cards (or anyone) had a 'good' draft this year. The success rate of draft picks is low, and so random you'll need another 2-3 seasons before most of those guys are considered real prospects worthy of trade consideration, if not help w/ the big league club.

That's true, but what I'm basing that comment on is that the Cardinals drafted players that were thought to have gone much higher in the draft, but were passed by a lot of teams, because they were deemed unsignable. The Cards took a big risk...if they don't sign their picks then obviously it turns into a bad draft, but taking that risk knowing that it will cost a lot extra to sign those players does show that they are trying to rebuild a flat farm system.

MattyHo4Life
08-02-2010, 09:56 AM
Is his nickname really "Waino?"

If so, the Cardinals have bigger problems than trading Ludwick for Westbrook.

:cool:

lol well that's what the fans call him. Adam has said that he doesn't care much for the nickname.

OnBaseMachine
08-02-2010, 11:21 AM
I watched a little bit of Ludwick's debut yesterday with the Padres. He went 1-for-2 against Josh Johnson and the lone hit was a big one. He also made a great slide at the plate to avoid a tag from the catcher. I never admitted this because he was a Cardinal, but I've always liked Ryan Ludwick as a player. Good, solid all-around player and I've never heard him complain about anything. Very nice pickup by the Padres.

Strikes Out Looking
08-02-2010, 11:34 AM
Regardless of what you think of the Ludwick/Westbrook trade I'm happy that this is all the Cardinals came up with at the deadline. I was worried they'd end up with Lee or Oswalt. Now Roy's out of the division and he's not in St. Louis. Somehow I think the Reds did just fine with these deals.

medford
08-02-2010, 12:49 PM
That's true, but what I'm basing that comment on is that the Cardinals drafted players that were thought to have gone much higher in the draft, but were passed by a lot of teams, because they were deemed unsignable. The Cards took a big risk...if they don't sign their picks then obviously it turns into a bad draft, but taking that risk knowing that it will cost a lot extra to sign those players does show that they are trying to rebuild a flat farm system.

Honestly, I know nothing of the Cards draft this season, my only thought is that the success rate of any draft is so low, that to deam any class the same year as that draft (and before everyone signs) way to early to say that they have re-stocked their minors (as you hinted.) Its going to take another 2-3 years to deem if any of those guys are worthy of true prospect status. The Cards class may indeed be special, after all, perhaps you have another Albert Pujols type lurking in the 12th round, or it just may be ordinary in that it produces 1 major league regular and a fringe player or 2. I understand the optimism, encourage it even, just caution that the success rate is way too low to feel at all comfortable w/ anyone's true prospect status. They can't be moved for another year anyways, and by that time they may have big red flags on everyone's scouting board.

GoReds
08-03-2010, 12:11 PM
Appropo of nothing, but...

Ryan Ludwick's "terse meeting" with manager Tony La Russa preceded trade to Padres


According to Strauss "hours before" the trade "Ludwick voiced concerns over his choppy playing time during a terse meeting with manager Tony La Russa."

Mozeliak and La Russa both downplayed the role that frustration and the subsequent "terse meeting" played in the trade

LINK (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/top-posts/ryan-ludwicks-terse-meeting-with-manager-tony-la-russa-preceeded-trade-to-padres.php)

MattyHo4Life
08-03-2010, 12:29 PM
Appropo of nothing, but...

Ryan Ludwick's "terse meeting" with manager Tony La Russa preceded trade to Padres



LINK (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/top-posts/ryan-ludwicks-terse-meeting-with-manager-tony-la-russa-preceeded-trade-to-padres.php)

I haven't heard about that, but it isn't surprising. One thing is for sure...if you cross LaRussa...you get shipped out of town. Just ask a whole list of former Cardinals....including Scott Rolen. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with it, but that's the way it's been since LaRussa came to St. Louis. Of course, it's always denied, so it depends on who you believe.

traderumor
08-03-2010, 01:56 PM
Appropo of nothing, but...

Ryan Ludwick's "terse meeting" with manager Tony La Russa preceded trade to Padres



LINK (http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/top-posts/ryan-ludwicks-terse-meeting-with-manager-tony-la-russa-preceeded-trade-to-padres.php)LaRussa: "Son, I invented the game before you were a glimmer in yo' momma's eye."

They need to learn how to use spite, though. Trading a non-goosestepper to a team going to the playoffs is not how its done. Trade him to Pittsburgh, KC, or Arizona. That'd show him who's boss. :rolleyes:

MattyHo4Life
08-03-2010, 04:48 PM
Here is an article by Rosenthal that goes into the background of the trade. I know it won't be enough to appease the majority of my fellow Cardinals fans that are angry over this trade, but I think it makes a lot of sense of the trade on both the business side and the baseball side.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/jake-westbrook-trade-works-for-everyone-080210

PuffyPig
08-03-2010, 05:14 PM
Here is an article by Rosenthal that goes into the background of the trade. I know it won't be enough to appease the majority of my fellow Cardinals fans that are angry over this trade, but I think it makes a lot of sense of the trade on both the business side and the baseball side.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/jake-westbrook-trade-works-for-everyone-080210

I still find it hard that the Cards could not have gotten a pitcher of Westbrook's ilk without giving up Ludwick.

They could have had their back of the rotation starter and their RF.

Then trade Ludwick in the offseason.

I've heard about needing money for Pujols, but that's in 2012, not during the 2010 pennant race.

I guess if the Cards could not increase payroll this year, and had to get rid of equivalent salary, maybe they had to dump Ryan to pay Jake.

I guess we should be thankful that the Cards have hit the wall money wise. At least for this season.

But this trade was simply upgrading a weak area, while downgrading a now weak area.

With zero cost. I don't think I understood the zero cost requirement until now.

MattyHo4Life
08-03-2010, 06:02 PM
With zero cost. I don't think I understood the zero cost requirement until now.

That is the one aspect that I wasn't aware of either. Especially since they made a push to get Oswalt before he was traded to Philly.

PuffyPig
08-03-2010, 06:57 PM
That is the one aspect that I wasn't aware of either. Especially since they made a push to get Oswalt before he was traded to Philly.

Which means it may not be true, but they are now hiding behind it.

MattyHo4Life
08-03-2010, 07:29 PM
Which means it may not be true, but they are now hiding behind it.

Yep...that is a definite possibility. I do know that Ludwick's salary was going to be a problem in the future. Whether it was a problem this year, I just don't know.

MattyHo4Life
08-03-2010, 10:54 PM
Here is an article about the days prior to the Ludwick trade. It's a good read. Very insightful as to what "could" be the reason for the trade. just some food for thought.

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/baseball/professional/article_3bf17419-b396-5bb2-a999-39e7b61894ed.html