PDA

View Full Version : Ryan Ludwick or bust?



powersackers
06-07-2012, 02:30 PM
Batting .259 with 9 RBI in the last 10 games. Only 4 of them starts. Does LF really need "fixed" ?

klw
06-07-2012, 02:41 PM
I imagine that with Stubbs out for a few days at least we will see if either part of Heiswig can get in enough of a groove to claim the job.

Kc61
06-07-2012, 02:41 PM
Batting .259 with 9 RBI in the last 10 games. Only 4 of them starts. Does LF really need "fixed" ?

Yes.

Ludwick has a .207 BA and a .289 OBP.

LF needs to be fixed.

MikeThierry
06-07-2012, 02:41 PM
He's a real streaky hitter and even during his "streakiness", he's just ok.

RedlegJake
06-07-2012, 03:20 PM
I was a Ludwick advocate when the signing was announced. I have since repented of my error and want him gone. Yes, LF needs to be fixed.

klw
06-07-2012, 03:43 PM
Here is a bust of Ludwig. I could not find a bust of Ludwick.
http://www.sculpturegallery.com/beethoven/ludwig_16_1.jpg

Superdude
06-07-2012, 05:23 PM
Here is a bust of Ludwig. I could not find a bust of Ludwick.
http://www.sculpturegallery.com/beethoven/ludwig_16_1.jpg

:clap:

WVRedsFan
06-07-2012, 05:31 PM
:clap:

Ah, Beethoven. Couldn't hear and couldn't drive in any runs.

Reds1
06-07-2012, 05:46 PM
He's had some huge hits and he is producing RBIs. Average is low, but he hasn't been getting consistant time. He has got more time of late and he's moving his ave. up and he's the reason we won yesterday. He has given the reds probalby 3 wins this year by himself.

Vottomatic
06-07-2012, 05:52 PM
Can't hit anything other than a fastball. Terrible plate discipline. K's alot. Not a fan of Ludwick. Too many hitters that are the same type. This team needs high BA/ high OBP guys to compliment a few HR hitters and Votto.

hebroncougar
06-07-2012, 06:54 PM
He's another one of those vets that Dusty just can't refuse from using in situations where he's awful. Don't use him against RHP. I do understand the next week may warrant something different with Stubbs out, but in any other games, it should be Heisey vs RHP, and Ludwick vs. LHP.

camisadelgolf
06-07-2012, 09:05 PM
Ludwick has a .739 OPS. The Major League average for left fielders is .758. Tough crowd. But I guess until Rolen and Stubbs gets back, we need to pick on somebody.

hebroncougar
06-07-2012, 09:10 PM
Ludwick has a .739 OPS. The Major League average for left fielders is .758. Tough crowd. But I guess until Rolen and Stubbs gets back, we need to pick on somebody.

He's also ops'ing about .950 vs. LHP and about .600 against RHP. That's not picking on him, you shoul put him in a position to succeed. This nothing new for Ludwick.

hebroncougar
06-07-2012, 09:35 PM
See, I told you. Play Ludwick all the time!

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

Patrick Bateman
06-07-2012, 09:46 PM
Ludwick has a .739 OPS. The Major League average for left fielders is .758. Tough crowd. But I guess until Rolen and Stubbs gets back, we need to pick on somebody.

Ludwick has sucked pretty hardcore this year. His OBP is atrocious too much the same hitter as most of the other position players. Considering his position, he's the obvious guy to replace. It's of course always ridiculous to pound a guy based on small samples, but one nice night to pick his peak OPS to defend doesn't work either. His last 3 years in concert with this year suggest we know the guy is an extremely replaceable part.

camisadelgolf
06-07-2012, 09:53 PM
He's also ops'ing about .950 vs. LHP and about .600 against RHP. That's not picking on him, you shoul put him in a position to succeed. This nothing new for Ludwick.
Historically, he hits better against rhp than he does lhp. It's pretty rare for a right-hander, but I think the sample size is large enough to make that determination.

Brutus
06-07-2012, 09:54 PM
Ludwick has sucked pretty hardcore this year. His OBP is atrocious too much the same hitter as most of the other position players. Considering his position, he's the obvious guy to replace. It's of course always ridiculous to pound a guy based on small samples, but one nice night to pick his peak OPS to defend doesn't work either. His last 3 years in concert with this year suggest we know the guy is an extremely replaceable part.

What he's done isn't the issue. It's whether he'll continue to hit more like he's done in the past that's relevant.

Lately, he's been showing signs of hitting like the guy that the Reds were hoping to get when they signed him. If he continues to do that, they might not need to worry about upgrading the position too much.

hebroncougar
06-07-2012, 10:03 PM
Historically, he hits better against rhp than he does lhp. It's pretty rare for a right-hander, but I think the sample size is large enough to make that determination.

I stand corrected, I thought it was the opposite. You're right on the splits. I've certainly thought he's looked helpless against eighties with any semblance of a breaking ball this season.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

Patrick Bateman
06-07-2012, 10:20 PM
What he's done isn't the issue. It's whether he'll continue to hit more like he's done in the past that's relevant.

Lately, he's been showing signs of hitting like the guy that the Reds were hoping to get when they signed him. If he continues to do that, they might not need to worry about upgrading the position too much.

He's stunk for awhile now. I don't think there is much hope that he is suddenly going to more than a spare part. He has a chance to be a decent role player, but as far as overall ability, LF is still the biggest hole, with the most options likely to be available to acquire because the amount of people that can play the position.

nate
06-07-2012, 10:21 PM
Oddly, his career BA is .259.

cincrazy
06-07-2012, 10:22 PM
Ludwick sucks. Might as well be blunt. Good guy, terrible player. One "ok" week doesn't change that fact. As someone mentioned earlier he's been done for a while now. He has no spot on a playoff-caliber team.

mth123
06-07-2012, 10:41 PM
Ludwick doesn't suck. But, even though his history suggests he hits RH better than LH, last year he was better against LHP and this year he has cleary been a lefty killer who flails away against the RH breaking pitch. Nothing wrong with a lefty killer on the bench, but there are simply too many of them stacked up in the line-up every day. Frazier, Stubbs, Hanigan/Mesoraco, Cozart, Rolen, Cairo and historically (though not this year) Phillips all fit the same profile.

I'm in the camp that thinks the Reds are married to the guys they have up the middle. The only way to balance things a bit, and give RHP a tougher time when the Reds are playing them, is to try to add a lefty guy who can platoon or play every day at 3B or LF (or both). Its not really a knock on Ludwick, but it would take a major restructuring of the team to try and address the problem at 2B, SS, C or CF. The Reds don't have the depth to acquire upgrades with different profiles at those spots, but they do have some ability to addreess LF, especially if its with a platoon guy who can complement the guys they have. That may mean Ludwick has to go while Heisey or maybe Frazier (Rolen may be back) getting the RH PAs in LF. It may also mean platooning with Stubbs while Heisey shifts to CF against some of the RHP. Because Ludwick lacks both the youth and versatiity of Heisey or Frazier, he's probably the odd man out when they try to change the mix. I'd have no problem with Heisey being the guy to go in a deal if the guy acquired could play CF. I defenitely think less PT for Stubbs against RH is part of the solution. That means Heisey stays (and Ludwick probably goes) or the LH bat acquired needs to be able to play CF a bit.

camisadelgolf
06-08-2012, 12:01 AM
I think he's fourth on the team (Votto, Bruce, Frazier) in OPS. Yup. Really sucks. First place teams can't win with that kind of production in left field. Gomes had a .758 OPS in 2010 btw.

Brutus
06-08-2012, 12:31 AM
He's stunk for awhile now. I don't think there is much hope that he is suddenly going to more than a spare part. He has a chance to be a decent role player, but as far as overall ability, LF is still the biggest hole, with the most options likely to be available to acquire because the amount of people that can play the position.

Just two seasons ago (2010) he had an OPS+ that was above average. It was really only last year that he 'stunk.'

His OBP has to get better, but I'm not thoroughly convinced he doesn't have anything left in the tank that can be of value to the Reds as a starting LF.

If there were a LF available with the ability to get on base at a .360 clip, the Reds should certainly look at that. But since there doesn't seem to be that kind of guy available, I'm inclined to say Ludwick be given the benefit of the doubt as long as he starts hitting for power again as he has recently.

Patrick Bateman
06-08-2012, 01:51 AM
I think he's fourth on the team (Votto, Bruce, Frazier) in OPS. Yup. Really sucks. First place teams can't win with that kind of production in left field. Gomes had a .758 OPS in 2010 btw.

Nobody said that.

I said it was the easiest way to improve the starting 8. Ludwick is at best a marginal starter, I really don't see why that needs to be defended.

camisadelgolf
06-08-2012, 04:41 AM
Nobody said that.

I said it was the easiest way to improve the starting 8. Ludwick is at best a marginal starter, I really don't see why that needs to be defended.

Ludwick sucks.

dfs
06-08-2012, 06:02 AM
Its not really a knock on Ludwick, but it would take a major restructuring of the team to try and address the problem at 2B, SS, C or CF. The Reds don't have the depth to acquire upgrades with different profiles at those spots, but they do have some ability to addreess ...
I know we all like JJ Hoover and all, but boy, wouldn't Juan Francisco look good when you start breaking down this roster.

mth123
06-08-2012, 06:36 AM
I know we all like JJ Hoover and all, but boy, wouldn't Juan Francisco look good when you start breaking down this roster.

I wasn't in favor of the Francisco for Hoover deal. Juan has the same OBP problem that most of the roster has, but he does hit with some power against RHP (.739 OPS this year and .813 for his career). The RH curve wouldn't be the same issue for him that it is for most of the roster simply because he's left handed. At a miimum, the mediocre arms who make the Reds hitters look like fools would have to do something different to get him out and since many of those pitchers are one trick ponies, he'd probably help. He wouldn't solve the problem, but he'd be a better bat on the bench than Harris/Costanzo/Negron and against a RHP he could play 3B with Frazier in LF and Heisey in CF and 2 of the most splitty guys (Stubbs and Ludwick) could sit more often. The Reds would still need to get an on base guy who especially gets on base against RHP (Ahem, David Dejesus, Ahem).

I'm still not sold on Hoover. It will take more than 15 innings the first time around the league to do that, but he does look promising with decent minor league numbers supporting his case. I wouldn't have dealt Francisco for him given the Reds situation with the lack of lefty bats, but the Reds can get some others who may be better than Juan, and possibly for lesser players than Hoover, so if that happens it will prove a good deal.

RedsManRick
06-08-2012, 10:01 AM
I know we all like JJ Hoover and all, but boy, wouldn't Juan Francisco look good when you start breaking down this roster.

The guy hitting .231/.253/.451 with below average defense? I'll pass.

Big Klu
06-08-2012, 10:21 AM
The guy hitting .231/.253/.451 with below average defense? I'll pass.

What he said.

cumberlandreds
06-08-2012, 10:27 AM
The guy hitting .231/.253/.451 with below average defense? I'll pass.


Yep. I'll take a good live arm over that any day of the week.

757690
06-08-2012, 10:27 AM
Ludwick is on pace to hit around 23 homers as a backup. He's done what I expected out of him. Some decent power, and not much else. He definitely can be improved upon, but not without giving up something just as valuable.

RedsManRick
06-08-2012, 11:29 AM
Ludwick is on pace to hit around 23 homers as a backup. He's done what I expected out of him. Some decent power, and not much else. He definitely can be improved upon, but not without giving up something just as valuable.

Give him an average BABIP and he's hitting .265/.345/.500. I agree that upgrades are out there, but I'm not sure that somebody else's 2nd division starter / 4th OF type makes much of an impact.

CySeymour
06-08-2012, 11:33 AM
DeJesus makes sense if they don't have to strip the farm system too much and Dusty hits him leadoff.

Patrick Bateman
06-08-2012, 11:56 AM
Was actually referring to the comment "1st place teams cant win with a player like Ludwick".

I think everyone knows that a team is capable of succeeding with a crappy player or two, even if they don't give him the title of a first division starter.

REDREAD
06-08-2012, 01:21 PM
I think he's fourth on the team (Votto, Bruce, Frazier) in OPS. Yup. Really sucks. First place teams can't win with that kind of production in left field. Gomes had a .758 OPS in 2010 btw.


Honestly Ludwick is having a much better year than Heisey.
Heisey 289 OBP .345 SLG .634 OPS
Yet people are more patient with Heisey because they want to see a young player succeed.

If anything, I think Ludwick should play more, and Heisey play much less.

An upgrade at LF would be nice, but Ludwick is performing fine considering he was basically a dumpster dive find. He's met my expectations. Obviously,the Reds spent the bulk of their resources upgrading pitching this offseason and then there wasn't much cash left for LF, but I still think that was a smart strategy.

REDREAD
06-08-2012, 01:26 PM
I know we all like JJ Hoover and all, but boy, wouldn't Juan Francisco look good when you start breaking down this roster.

IMO, the only thing Franscisco has going for him is that he's a lefty.
He's OPSing 703, and is a below average defender.
I agree the potential is there, but let's say that JF was on the roster instead of Nergon now.. Would you start JF over Frasier? I wouldn't. Frasier is out hitting (OBP and SLG) and out-fielding JF now..

IMO, Hoover is more valuable than a JF on the bench.
At the time, it looked like Simon would be relegated to mop up duty and it was unknown how well Arrendondo would perform.. The bullpen depth was needed, IMO.

WVRedsFan
06-08-2012, 11:46 PM
Honestly Ludwick is having a much better year than Heisey.
Heisey 289 OBP .345 SLG .634 OPS
Yet people are more patient with Heisey because they want to see a young player succeed.

If anything, I think Ludwick should play more, and Heisey play much less.

An upgrade at LF would be nice, but Ludwick is performing fine considering he was basically a dumpster dive find. He's met my expectations. Obviously,the Reds spent the bulk of their resources upgrading pitching this offseason and then there wasn't much cash left for LF, but I still think that was a smart strategy.
Can't argue with Ryan's stats except batting average. He'll aways be a .250 hitter, but you can't argue with the RBI's and clutch hitting. He's done more with a .214 average than Heisey has with better numbers. Heisey is fool's gold.

Sea Ray
06-09-2012, 09:01 AM
Last night in particular showed off Ludwick's weaknesses. I'm not sure a pitcher threw him a strike all night. Smart pitchers will learn that they are idiots if they do. The good hitters will swing at two balls in the dirt and then wise up. Ludwick just keeps on looking silly pitch after pitch. In fairness to him, this is the case with too many Reds hitters

oneupper
06-09-2012, 10:10 AM
Last night in particular showed off Ludwick's weaknesses. I'm not sure a pitcher threw him a strike all night. Smart pitchers will learn that they are idiots if they do. The good hitters will swing at two balls in the dirt and then wise up. Ludwick just keeps on looking silly pitch after pitch. In fairness to him, this is the case with too many Reds hitters

Yep. And this is why LaGenius would stick him in the 2-hole in front of Pujols and he'd rake. He'd get pitches to hit.
Not the case when he's followed by Miguel Cairo.

hebroncougar
06-09-2012, 11:03 AM
Yep. And this is why LaGenius would stick him in the 2-hole in front of Pujols and he'd rake. He'd get pitches to hit.
Not the case when he's followed by Miguel Cairo.

Well, in fairness, it doesn't matter who hits behind him if he swings at balls all night. Once pitchers know the pattern, he's not going to get strikes all night. I was there last night, and in his last ab, I made the comment that I didn't think any of the pitches the pitcher threw were strikes. It will be interesting to see how Verlander pitches him today.

Tom Servo
06-09-2012, 11:06 AM
Ludwick strikes me as a guy who plays best when he's in the lineup everyday.

Sea Ray
06-09-2012, 11:09 AM
Well, in fairness, it doesn't matter who hits behind him if he swings at balls all night. Once pitchers know the pattern, he's not going to get strikes all night. I was there last night, and in his last ab, I made the comment that I didn't think any of the pitches the pitcher threw were strikes. It will be interesting to see how Verlander pitches him today.

Yes, I was there too, right behind first base and I don't think a pitch came within a foot of the strikes zone in that last AB. If he's going to be like that then there's no reason for a pitcher to throw him a strike regardless of who he's hitting in front of. I'm willing to cut him some slack against guys like Verlander and others but he was facing a LH middle reliever. He ought to look better against them

marcshoe
06-09-2012, 11:53 AM
Ludwick's just a frustrating guy; I only realize this now that I see him regularly. You see flashes of what he could do if he only had some plate discipline, but you have to realize that at this point in his career, it ain't gonna happen.

I don't mind having him on the team, but at the plate he's about as valuable as Jonny Gomes. It's frustrating.

Kc61
06-09-2012, 12:07 PM
IMO, the only thing Franscisco has going for him is that he's a lefty.
He's OPSing 703, and is a below average defender.
I agree the potential is there, but let's say that JF was on the roster instead of Nergon now.. Would you start JF over Frasier? I wouldn't. Frasier is out hitting (OBP and SLG) and out-fielding JF now..

IMO, Hoover is more valuable than a JF on the bench.
At the time, it looked like Simon would be relegated to mop up duty and it was unknown how well Arrendondo would perform.. The bullpen depth was needed, IMO.

I've always thought Francisco would succeed once he gets regular at bats. But it's water under the bridge, he's gone. I agree he isn't much of a bench player.

I fear that JJ Hoover is going to break Reds' fans hearts. He misses bats, but he is an extreme fly ball pitcher. Just to use one metric in 2012, he's had 22 fly outs and 10 ground outs in the bigs. There are other metrics in his brief big league career and his minor league career that show this tendency. Not a GABP pitcher IMO.

As for Ludwick, he's a useful player, clearly is fine to have on the 25 man roster. He should be platooning with a LH bat in left field.

camisadelgolf
06-14-2012, 03:48 PM
Ludwick's slash line since May 17th (including today):
.257/.312/.586/.897
That covers 21 games.

Overall:
.215/.289/.450/.739

Major League average:
.260/.329/.426/.755

DGullett35
06-14-2012, 03:54 PM
Looks like Ludwick will be much needed for a bit here with Heisey possibly being put on the DL with a groin strain, and Stubbs not due back for a few more days.

Tom Servo
06-14-2012, 03:57 PM
Ludwick is what he is. Just wish he'd stop chasing everything low.

*BaseClogger*
06-14-2012, 04:02 PM
Anybody else get the impression that Ludwick is a "bad-pitcher hitter"?

Brutus
06-14-2012, 04:26 PM
If Ludwick's OBP was about 25-30 points higher, I think we'd all agree he would be more than adequate. Get that OBP to around .325-.335 and he's fine.

camisadelgolf
06-14-2012, 04:48 PM
Per 162 games, Ludwick is on pace for over 30 home runs this season.

RedsManRick
06-14-2012, 06:15 PM
If Ludwick's OBP was about 25-30 points higher, I think we'd all agree he would be more than adequate. Get that OBP to around .325-.335 and he's fine.

A .221 BABIP suggests that's a completely reasonable possibility moving forward.

Brutus
06-14-2012, 06:24 PM
A .221 BABIP suggests that's a completely reasonable possibility moving forward.

Thanks, Rick. I didn't realize it was that low.

camisadelgolf
06-27-2012, 04:24 PM
His slash line after today's game (I think): .229/.308/.486/.794

Do we still 'need' a replacement?

Patrick Bateman
06-27-2012, 04:34 PM
He's a below average starter (regardless of what he happened to do today), and has been for 3 years. He's not a complete abomination, but continues to man one of the weaker spots in the line-up. If there is anywhere to replace it's probably there. Turning him into a bench bat and upgrading his spot in LF improves two positions.

Brutus
06-27-2012, 04:43 PM
He's a below average starter (regardless of what he happened to do today), and has been for 3 years. He's not a complete abomination, but continues to man one of the weaker spots in the line-up. If there is anywhere to replace it's probably there. Turning him into a bench bat and upgrading his spot in LF improves two positions.

He's currently on pace to finish right at 2 WAR for the year. That's average, is it not?

Kc61
06-27-2012, 04:52 PM
Ludwick needs to platoon with a lefty hitting LF.

Period.

kaldaniels
06-27-2012, 05:02 PM
Ludwick needs to platoon with a lefty hitting LF.

Period.

You mean a lefty hitter with an OPS of 1.000, who is a great defender, and who arrives at the stadium on a unicorn everyday. Period.

I mean hey, as long as we are dreaming....

Brutus
06-27-2012, 05:04 PM
Ludwick needs to platoon with a lefty hitting LF.

Period.

I think this platoon stuff is becoming a little overboard in general, but especially in this case.

Ludwick's 3-year platoon splits from 2009-2011 actually have him hitting righties better than lefties. His 3-year OPS vs. RHP.... .742. Versus lefties... .700. But hey... you know, facts and all that.

wolfboy
06-27-2012, 05:21 PM
who arrives at the stadium on a unicorn everyday.

Dime a dozen.

Kc61
06-27-2012, 05:38 PM
I think this platoon stuff is becoming a little overboard in general, but especially in this case.

Ludwick's 3-year platoon splits from 2009-2011 actually have him hitting righties better than lefties. His 3-year OPS vs. RHP.... .742. Versus lefties... .700. But hey... you know, facts and all that.

Ryan Ludwick in 2011 -- which was the year before this one -- had a .644 OPS against righties and a .763 OPS against lefties.

Ryan Ludwick in 2012 -- which is this year -- has a .667 OPS against righties and a .949 OPS against lefties.

But hey...you know, CURRENT facts and all that.

Platooning overboard? The Reds have zero platoons because they only have two lefty hitters on the team, both full timers. Platooning on the Reds is UNDERBOARD.

klw
06-27-2012, 05:42 PM
Anyone see a distance for his second homerun today?
http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=22633279&c_id=mlb

Brutus
06-27-2012, 05:49 PM
Ryan Ludwick in 2011 -- which was the year before this one -- had a .644 OPS against righties and a .763 OPS against lefties.

Ryan Ludwick in 2012 -- which is this year -- has a .667 OPS against righties and a .949 OPS against lefties.

But hey...you know, CURRENT facts and all that.

Platoon overboard? The Reds have zero platoons because they only have two lefty hitters on the team, both full timers. Platooning on the Reds is UNDERBOARD.

I mean you've made your views on platoons abundantly clear, as you've brought it up in dozens of threads and many, many more game threads.

But if you want to extract a smaller sample to make your case, go ahead. The larger data shows he hits RHP better than LHP. In fact, his CAREER OPS+ against RHP is 103... against LHP it's 94. So as I said... if you want to cherry-pick a sample out of what he's done for his entire career, be my guest. However, the numbers suggest that he's always been a better hitter against RHP than LHP, and it's more likely that the last 700 or so plate appearances have merely been an aberration. Surely you don't really believe that after 3,000 plate appearances as a big league hitter, suddenly he forgot how to hit right handers but not left handers?

Kc61
06-27-2012, 05:55 PM
I mean you've made your views on platoons abundantly clear, as you've brought it up in dozens of threads and many, many more game threads.

But if you want to extract a smaller sample to make your case, go ahead. The larger data shows he hits RHP better than LHP. In fact, his CAREER OPS+ against RHP is 103... against LHP it's 94. So as I said... if you want to cherry-pick a sample out of what he's done for his entire career, be my guest. However, the numbers suggest that he's always been a better hitter against RHP than LHP, and it's more likely that the last 700 or so plate appearances have merely been an aberration.

See, you're the one cherry picking. Fact is that it's now 2012 and stats from 2009 and 2010, and previous to that, are pretty stale.

The current facts show that Ludwick in the last two years -- the most recent years -- is better against lefty pitching.

As for the platoon point, the Reds are 100 points worse (OPS) against righty pitching which they face 3/4 of the time. The Reds also lack OBP, as does Mr. Ludwick. He is hitting .229 with a .308 OBP and a huge lefty/righty split.

While I admire the length of his homers, he isn't what's needed in LF, except perhaps on a platoon basis.

Brutus
06-27-2012, 06:15 PM
See, you're the one cherry picking. Fact is that it's now 2012 and stats from 2009 and 2010, and previous to that, are pretty stale.

The current facts show that Ludwick in the last two years -- the most recent years -- is better against lefty pitching.

As for the platoon point, the Reds are 100 points worse (OPS) against righty pitching which they face 3/4 of the time. The Reds also lack OBP, as does Mr. Ludwick. While I admire the length of his homers, he isn't what's needed in LF, except perhaps on a platoon basis.

For his career, his OPS+ is 103 against RHP, and 94 against LHP. I only used the initial 3-year sample because it was the most readily available data I had in front of me and hadn't taken the time to see his exact career numbers. I didn't even need to cherry pick because whether I used the 3-year sample available on ESPN or his career sample, my point remains the same... he has, as a matter of fact, hit RHP more productively than LHP through his career.

So are you suggesting that only the last 700 plate appearances are representative of his platoon splits, rather than 3,000 career appearances? If that's what you're suggesting, then how is that not cherry-picking?

Kc61
06-27-2012, 06:21 PM
For his career, his OPS+ is 103 against RHP, and 94 against LHP. I only used the initial 3-year sample because it was the most readily available data I had in front of me and hadn't taken the time to see his exact career numbers.

So are you suggesting that only the last 700 plate appearances are representative of his platoon splits, rather than 3,000 career appearances?

If that's what you're suggesting, then how is that not cherry-picking?

Ryan Ludwick isn't a long term project for the Reds. He is here for a year. His recent hitting has been like many (if not most) righty hitters. He has a split strongly favoring at bats against lefties.

It may be that over his career he will again hit righties better. But I don't find it particularly relevant right now.

In addition, left field is one of the few spots, indeed the most likely spot, where the Reds can add some OBP and add someone who specializes in beating up righties. Ludwick simply is not that guy.

Ludwick's lifetime OPS against righties is .795. This is an area of major need for the Reds, hitting righties, and .795 is not compelling. Nor is Ludwick's lifetime OBP of .330 good enough to meet the Reds' needs IMO. Again his recent years' OBP have been lower, .325 in 2010, .310 in 2011, .308 so far in 2012.

So for all his power, which is considerable, I do not think Ludwick fits this team's needs.

HokieRed
06-27-2012, 06:28 PM
Ryan Ludwick isn't a long term project for the Reds. He is here for a year. His recent hitting has been like many (if not most) righty hitters. He has a split strongly favoring at bats against lefties.

It may be that over his career he will again hit righties better. But I don't find it particularly relevant right now.

In addition, left field is one of the few spots, indeed the most likely spot, where the Reds can add some OBP and add someone who specializes in beating up righties. Ludwick simply is not that guy.

Ludwick's lifetime OPS against righties is .795. This is an area of major need for the Reds, hitting righties, and .795 is not compelling. They need a guy who specializes in hitting against righty pitching. Nor is Ludwick's lifetime OBP of .330 good enough to meet the Reds' needs IMO. Again his recent years' OBP have been lower.

So for all his power, which is considerable, I do not think Ludwick fits this team's needs.

Better get used to him, as I'll bet he's back in 2013 if his OPS comes in around .800. I completely agree with your analysis of the team and its ridiculous right-handed bias, but I do think we'll see Ludwick back.

Kc61
06-27-2012, 06:33 PM
Better get used to him, as I'll bet he's back in 2013 if his OPS comes in around .800. I completely agree with your analysis of the team and its ridiculous right-handed bias, but I do think we'll see Ludwick back.

Could be. If so, if they keep Ludwick, I hope they add other players with the skill sets that are needed. LHH, higher OBP types.

If Ludwick stays, there are still Heisey, Cairo, Rolen (if he retires) who could be replaced by a different model via free agency, trades, whatever.

If the Reds added a few lefty OBP guys, I have no trouble with Ludwick on the team. It then just becomes a question of allocation of playing time.

Brutus
06-27-2012, 06:37 PM
Ryan Ludwick isn't a long term project for the Reds. He is here for a year. His recent hitting has been like many (if not most) righty hitters. He has a split strongly favoring at bats against lefties.

It may be that over his career he will again hit righties better. But I don't find it particularly relevant right now.

In addition, left field is one of the few spots, indeed the most likely spot, where the Reds can add some OBP and add someone who specializes in beating up righties. Ludwick simply is not that guy.

Ludwick's lifetime OPS against righties is .795. This is an area of major need for the Reds, hitting righties, and .795 is not compelling. They need a guy who specializes in getting on base against righty pitching.

So for all his power, which is considerable, I do not think Ludwick fits this team's needs.

How is what he's done for his career not relevant to what he's more likely to do going forward? His current platoon splits aren't indicative of what he's done most of his career. It's more likely they will begin to revert back to what he's done.

Why do you care what they "specialize" in? Whether it's against RHP, LHP, or mermaids, just find guys that can produce runs. What the Reds need is guys that will do that.

If the Reds could easily improve the total production from LF by acquiring another player, that would be terrific. Certainly there are players that will produce better than Ludwick, but right now he's hitting right about average offensively when taking into account both OBA and slugging. The team needs to score runs, but it doesn't matter how. I'm not married to Ludwick nor am I suggesting there aren't better players. But who are these players, are they available and at what cost?

My issue with this analysis is not the philosophy of upgrading, but rather that it's on the premise that to arrive at his being subpar in the platoon splits, you have to ignore 80% of his previous career.

History tells us Ludwick hits RHP better than lefties. I've seen guys stop hitting late in their career, but I imagine it's not very likely a guy that hits righties better than lefties suddenly can't hit righties but can still hit lefties. So it's probably more likely he'll hit going forward more in a manner that is consistent with his past production, or at least as far as splits are concerned.

Patrick Bateman
06-27-2012, 09:14 PM
He's currently on pace to finish right at 2 WAR for the year. That's average, is it not?

He also had 0.3 last year. At some point we need to consider more than what he did last night.

He's a fringe starter. He's replaceable. Every other position is in either comparable or better shape. If the Reds want to improve, it's as good a place to start as any. He is a rosterable part, and not a completely heinous starter, but I don't understand why there needs to be such a huge defense team constructed with the suggestion that a guy who has been a below average starter for multiple years running could be replaced in an effort to improve the team.

Brutus
06-27-2012, 10:00 PM
He also had 0.3 last year. At some point we need to consider more than what he did last night.

He's a fringe starter. He's replaceable. Every other position is in either comparable or better shape. If the Reds want to improve, it's as good a place to start as any. He is a rosterable part, and not a completely heinous starter, but I don't understand why there needs to be such a huge defense team constructed with the suggestion that a guy who has been a below average starter for multiple years running could be replaced in an effort to improve the team.

I thought I was considering more than last night since I was referring to what he's done over the course of the entire season :) Based on what he's done for the year, he's now on pace for almost exactly 2 WAR. That means, through late June, on the whole he's been an average player on the nose.

Patrick Bateman
06-27-2012, 11:03 PM
I thought I was considering more than last night since I was referring to what he's done over the course of the entire season :) Based on what he's done for the year, he's now on pace for almost exactly 2 WAR. That means, through late June, on the whole he's been an average player on the nose.

"Last night" was a metaphor for small sample size.

He's on pace for 2 WAR this season. Last season he was 0.3. The overall average is not a particularly enticing starting outfielder. He's at best average. At worst, he's a cut below average. He's aging.

This is a guy who is unlikely to be a significant piece going forward. If the Reds have an opportunity to upgrade anywhere, LF is likely the easiest place. The longer term sample suggests that the Reds don't have an average LF situation going forward. I'm okay exploring a resolution there at a reasonable cost.

Brutus
06-27-2012, 11:14 PM
"Last night" was a metaphor for small sample size.

He's on pace for 2 WAR this season. Last season he was 0.3. The overall average is not a particularly enticing starting outfielder. He's at best average. At worst, he's a cut below average. He's aging.

This is a guy who is unlikely to be a significant piece going forward. If the Reds have an opportunity to upgrade anywhere, LF is likely the easiest place. The longer term sample suggests that the Reds don't have an average LF situation going forward. I'm okay exploring a resolution there at a reasonable cost.

OK fine but how do we know last year wasn't an aberration? He's been a tick above average for the bulk of his career, so why is it out of the question he'll be average the rest of the year? It seems to me that while he's regressed slightly, he's hitting like he has for much of his career. I don't see why we shouldn't anticipate that continuing.

Patrick Bateman
06-27-2012, 11:21 PM
OK fine but how do we know last year wasn't an aberration? He's been a tick above average for the bulk of his career, so why is it out of the question he'll be average the rest of the year? It seems to me that while he's regressed slightly, he's hitting like he has for much of his career. I don't see why we shouldn't anticipate that continuing.

His last 3 WAR years in reverse order are 0.3, 2.0, 2.3.

I think it's fair to suggest based on his recent history that average is his absolute upside, and rock bottom is a possibility (even if we disagree with how large that possibility is). He's likely somewhere in between, closer to average.

Either way, he is imminently replaceable, and of the Reds' position players likely the easiest to upgrade on, or at least find a complimentary piece to exploit each others strengths. It's not an absolute requirement, but a legit way to improve the team a few wins depending on what can be had at a reasonable price.

VR
06-27-2012, 11:52 PM
Anyone see a distance for his second homerun today?
http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=22633279&c_id=mlb

Can't tell where it landed?

Brutus
06-27-2012, 11:57 PM
His last 3 WAR years in reverse order are 0.3, 2.0, 2.3.

I think it's fair to suggest based on his recent history that average is his absolute upside, and rock bottom is a possibility (even if we disagree with how large that possibility is). He's likely somewhere in between, closer to average.

Either way, he is imminently replaceable, and of the Reds' position players likely the easiest to upgrade on, or at least find a complimentary piece to exploit each others strengths. It's not an absolute requirement, but a legit way to improve the team a few wins depending on what can be had at a reasonable price.

All I've been saying is that he's playing as that an average player would play, and in 2010 and 2009 he did exactly that. Seems like what I'm saying is perfectly reasonable that he will likely continue to produce the rest of the year as an average player would (2 WAR). Other than last year, that's what he's been the last few years. So what he's doing now (average) seems fair to expect.

Patrick Bateman
06-28-2012, 12:04 AM
You can't just ignore last season! It all counts. The downs are representative of what he will do when factors don't go his way. We know he is capable of producing 0.3 WAR over 500 at-bats. That shouldn't be ignored just because his first 180 this year are closer to 2009 and 2010. Just a month ago, you could have painted a script that Ludwick was 100% done as a major league player. In total his recent career stats suggest he is somewhere between below average and average. That sums to a part that CAN be upgraded win many different forms.

Kc61
06-28-2012, 12:25 AM
Reds lead off hitters have a combined OBP of .235 this year. Worst in major league baseball. This, with Joey Votto hitting third. Team has a significant OBP problem at the top of the order.

To alleviate this, the Reds will have to make a change at some position. Either they need a new lead off hitter, or they need Phillips to lead off and a new clean up hitter.

LF is the obvious spot for an upgrade, for a lead off hitter (my view) or a cleanup hitter.

This is the major problem with the lineup. I don't see how Ryan Ludwick provides the answer.

I guess the Reds could get a new SS or CF or third baseman to resolve this serious lineup problem. But LF seems like the place to upgrade.

Brutus
06-28-2012, 03:43 AM
You can't just ignore last season! It all counts. The downs are representative of what he will do when factors don't go his way. We know he is capable of producing 0.3 WAR over 500 at-bats. That shouldn't be ignored just because his first 180 this year are closer to 2009 and 2010. Just a month ago, you could have painted a script that Ludwick was 100% done as a major league player. In total his recent career stats suggest he is somewhere between below average and average. That sums to a part that CAN be upgraded win many different forms.

It all counts but it doesn't all mean something of consequence.

Considering he's been a 2-win player in four of his five seasons, I'm more inclined to think last year may have been an aberration rather than anything remotely telling.

Yes, he could fall flat on his face. But he could also continue to hit like an average major league hitter, which he's been the bulk of his career so far.

RedsManRick
06-28-2012, 07:15 AM
Submitted for consideration:


Rank Player PA wOBA BABIP
1 1B Votto 320 .463 .415
2 3B Frazier 164 .366 .320
3 RF Bruce 295 .354 .260
4 2B Phillips 284 .340 .296
5 LF Ludwick 201 .339 .244
6 CF Stubbs 235 .319 .307
7 CA Hanigan 168 .310 .318
8 SS Cozart 303 .304 .299
9 LF Heisey 211 .287 .329
10 CA Mesoraco 116 .276 .211
11 3B Rolen 129 .260 .227

In consideration of current performance and the role luck appears to have played, I submit that the biggest drags on the Reds offense moving forward are likely to be Heisey, Cozart, Hanigan and Stubbs -- with Rolen a distinct possibility of remaining in the tank as well.

As much as we all agree that team OBP is an issue, Ludwick hasn't been the problem from an overall production standpoint. If our whole team was hitting like Ludwick, we'd have the 3rd highest team wOBA in baseball, right behind the Rangers and Yankees.

Raisor
06-28-2012, 09:27 AM
If Frazier isn't going to play everyday, I use him in a rotation with Ludwick and bat them fourth and mover BP Back to leadoff.

Vottomatic
06-28-2012, 11:02 AM
This team is going nowhere is we're relying on Ludwick, Heisey, or Frazier to play LF. This team needs a boost.

camisadelgolf
06-28-2012, 11:07 AM
This team is going nowhere is we're relying on Ludwick, Heisey, or Frazier to play LF. This team needs a boost.
Would you rather have Raul Ibanez? Dayan Viciedo? Vernon Wells? Bobby Abreu? Steve Lombardozzi? The reason I ask is because all five of those players are the regular left fielders for teams that look playoff bound.

Vottomatic
06-28-2012, 11:08 AM
Would you rather have Raul Ibanez? Dayan Viciedo? Vernon Wells? Bobby Abreu? Steve Lombardozzi? The reason I ask is because all five of those players are the regular left fielders for teams that look playoff bound.

Two many identical-type players on this team. Those 3 guys are the same in one.

puca
06-28-2012, 11:38 AM
Reds lead off hitters have a combined OBP of .235 this year. Worst in major league baseball. This, with Joey Votto hitting third. Team has a significant OBP problem at the top of the order.

To alleviate this, the Reds will have to make a change at some position. Either they need a new lead off hitter, or they need Phillips to lead off and a new clean up hitter.

LF is the obvious spot for an upgrade, for a lead off hitter (my view) or a cleanup hitter.

This is the major problem with the lineup. I don't see how Ryan Ludwick provides the answer.

I guess the Reds could get a new SS or CF or third baseman to resolve this serious lineup problem. But LF seems like the place to upgrade.

This is how I see it as well. Probably the easiest way to improve the run scoring is to add a high OBP guy in front of Votto. Adding a high OBP LFer should be easier than adding a high OBP SS, 3B or CF.

Kc61
06-28-2012, 11:41 AM
If Frazier isn't going to play everyday, I use him in a rotation with Ludwick and bat them fourth and mover BP Back to leadoff.

For this minute, with no personnel changes, this is probably a decent idea. Rolen is another candidate for cleanup, although he didn't look too good in the Brewer series.

But keep in mind, Ludwick is hitting .229 with a .308 OBP. While his lifetime numbers are better, is this really the guy you want hitting cleanup and splitting Votto and Bruce?

Frazier could develop into that guy over time and his numbers this year are very good.

My own choice for this year would be to leave Phillips fourth and acquire a lead off hitting left fielder. And eventually perhaps next season have someone else, a new acquisition, a Todd Frazier, or some other candidate assume the cleanup spot from Phillips.

P.S. Against lefties, in a platoon situation, I would have no trouble trying Ludwick at cleanup this year. He is mashing lefties right now and would ride that streak out.

RedsManRick
06-28-2012, 01:33 PM
For this minute, with no personnel changes, this is probably a decent idea. Rolen is another candidate for cleanup, although he didn't look too good in the Brewer series.

But keep in mind, Ludwick is hitting .229 with a .308 OBP. While his lifetime numbers are better, is this really the guy you want hitting cleanup and splitting Votto and Bruce?

You conveniently left off his .486 SLG; to say nothing of his .244 BABIP. I think Ryan Ludwick and Todd Frazier are virtually the same guy at the plate. Frazier has had more success this, but I expect basically the same level of performance from them the rest of the way (as does ZiPS, for what that's worth).

I'd rather them hit cleanup than Philipps or an ailing Rolen.

Kc61
06-28-2012, 01:43 PM
You conveniently left off his .486 SLG; to say nothing of his .244 BABIP. I think Ryan Ludwick and Todd Frazier are virtually the same guy at the plate. Frazier has had more success this, but I expect basically the same level of performance from them the rest of the way (as does ZiPS, for what that's worth).

I'd rather them hit cleanup than Philipps or an ailing Rolen.

I guess we just have a difference of opinion.

You want a guy hitting .229 with a .308 OBP hitting cleanup based on your future expectations and his slugging percentage.

I don't.

HokieRed
06-28-2012, 06:35 PM
I guess we just have a difference of opinion.

You want a guy hitting .229 with a .308 OBP hitting cleanup based on your future expectations and his slugging percentage.

I don't.

How about Ludwick in the 2 spot after a leadoff Phillips? He'd see fewer breaking balls and certainly would be a step up over Heisey. Of course at the moment it seems we have to put Stubbs here as it's the one place he's shown some ability to succeed. [I consider Stubbs better, by a considerable margin, than Heisey but still questionable as the long range fix in CF]

camisadelgolf
06-28-2012, 07:01 PM
I guess we just have a difference of opinion.

You want a guy hitting .229 with a .308 OBP hitting cleanup based on your future expectations and his slugging percentage.

I don't.
Not only is it based on future expectations, but it's based on years of data that heavily support how he got to those expectations. Of course, nothing is a given, but it's not a given that anyone else in baseball would perform better either.

Kc61
06-28-2012, 08:37 PM
Not only is it based on future expectations, but it's based on years of data that heavily support how he got to those expectations. Of course, nothing is a given, but it's not a given that anyone else in baseball would perform better either.

So years of data support Ryan Ludwick being the cleanup hitter on a good team.

And it's not a given that ANY other player in baseball would perform better than Ryan Ludwick in that spot.

Got it. Thanks.

RedsManRick
06-28-2012, 09:46 PM
I guess we just have a difference of opinion.

You want a guy hitting .229 with a .308 OBP hitting cleanup based on your future expectations and his slugging percentage.

I don't.

I make decisions like this based on what I think a guy will do from this point forward. I only care about his stats this year in so far as they inform my expectations for him moving forward.

camisadelgolf
06-28-2012, 10:44 PM
So years of data support Ryan Ludwick being the cleanup hitter on a good team.

And it's not a given that ANY other player in baseball would perform better than Ryan Ludwick in that spot.

Got it. Thanks.
I'd prefer it if we could stick to things that were actually said. To be honest, I'd even settle for sticking to things that were implied. I never said anything about a cleanup hitter. I also never said Ludwick was the best. At anything. He's an average left fielder. Do you want to improve on that? Of course. But I'm trying to be realistic. Walt Jocketty isn't the type to pay millions to a free agent only to have him sit on the bench. And when said player performs almost exactly as expected (i.e. league average), Jocketty isn't the type to pay millions and cough up the organization's best prospects for a left fielder who would be a marginal upgrade. The only exception I can think of would be the deal for Scott Rolen, who was supposedly acquired for his intangibles. Jocketty and others have already lauded Ludwick's intangibles, so I doubt he's looking to go another direction. So anyway . . .

People want to upgrade over Ludwick. I understand that. I do, too. But with whom? Let's look at some realistic options:

Tyler Colvin - Who wouldn't rather have Ludwick?
Coco Crisp - He turned Cincy to play center field in Oakland. Whoops. And now his career seems to be tumbling. Buy low?
Rajai Davis - doesn't get on base, doesn't have power, and isn't much of an upgrade anywhere
David DeJesus - fits the team's needs well (read: good OBP), but is due about $8MM and isn't much better than Ludwick
Chone Figgins - Ew. Yuck.
Jeff Francoeur - just in case you like guys who don't get on base; is owed $7.5MM next year and is worse than Ludwick
Jonny Gomes - Been there, done that. No, thanks.
Alex Gordon - isn't available, but he might be for the right offer once Wil Myers shows he's ready; pipe dream
Scott Hairston - about as good as Ludwick; would only be a rental
Torii Hunter - rental and too expensive unless a boat-load of cash comes with him (not enough will come); the Angels will probably keep him out of loyalty anyway
Bryan LaHair - appears to be a good platoon hitter, is cheap, and might not cost much in prospects; but is he just a flash in the pan?
Logan Morrison - has no business playing in the outfield; just put him on a team where he's playing first base
Mike Morse - he might be available for when Jayson Werth comes back, but what could the Reds offer to a stacked team in win-now mode?
Gerardo Parra - seems like almost a perfect fit to me but is going into his arbitration years, would cost a lot in prospects, and still isn't a significant upgrade
Juan Pierre - another rental; a liability on defense combined with very inconsistent play on offense; soon turning 35, his speed is declining
Carlos Quentin - only a rental; overrated due to his hot start; is the best available on the market, so you know it would cost a lot
Seth Smith - platoon outfielder and would cost a decent amount; Ludwick sounds like a better option to me
Alfonso Soriano - we've had a lot of discussion on this, and the answer is: Not happening.
Eric Thames - intriguing minor league numbers, but what happened to his plate discipline? Is also a horrible defender.
Shane Victorino - go for it if you want, but he's a rental, and the price is high
Vernon Wells - hahaha
Ty Wigginton - mediocre on offense in hitter-friendly parks the past few years; should only be a pinch-hitter or DH anyway
Josh Willingham - is owed a lot of money and one of the few clear upgrades; might be available for the right combination of pitching (start with Homer Bailey + prospects and work from there)

So there you have it. There are a couple interesting names. But only a couple. If you're going to pay millions and give up a lot of prospects, I'd rather do it for a position that's more needed instead of replacing the team's 4th-best hitter (Votto, Bruce, Frazier--although Frazier has many less plate appearances).

Patrick Bateman
06-28-2012, 10:53 PM
LF is as bad a position as any. Playing LF, he should be one of the Reds best hitters in order to make up for the position he plays. The Reds issues right now is that they are fairly average accross the board in most areas except for 1B, 2B, RF, and relief. There are no black holes on the team like the WhiteSox 3rd base situation.

If they are going to improve, its likely to be at an average/below averagish type of position like LF. SS is hard because there is likely nobody available that is better than Cozart. 3rd base is tough because of Rolen, plus we have a great young player there. Catcher is tough to upgrade plus we have youth. Starters tough to upgrade unless you get an elite talent like Hamels.

That essentially leaves the OF as the easiest to upgrade. Finding a good fielding CF that hits better than Stubbs is tough. Ludwick is the easiest guy to upgrade on because there are lots of talents available (easy to transfer a CF or RF there), also we dont have long term solutions there.

If the Reds are looking to really improve, LF is likely the easiest way. Upgrading is never cheap though, but at the same time, if not LF/CF, where do you suggest the Reds upgrade cheaper?

Kc61
06-28-2012, 10:58 PM
I'd prefer it if we could stick to things that were actually said. To be honest, I'd even settle for sticking to things that were implied. I never said anything about a cleanup hitter. I also never said Ludwick was the best. At anything. He's an average left fielder. Do you want to improve on that? Of course. But I'm trying to be realistic. Walt Jocketty isn't the type to pay millions to a free agent only to have him sit on the bench. And when said player performs almost exactly as expected (i.e. league average), Jocketty isn't the type to pay millions and cough up the organization's best prospects for a left fielder who would be a marginal upgrade. The only exception I can think of would be the deal for Scott Rolen, who was supposedly acquired for his intangibles. Jocketty and others have already lauded Ludwick's intangibles, so I doubt he's looking to go another direction. So anyway . . .

People want to upgrade over Ludwick. I understand that. I do, too. But with whom? Let's look at some realistic options:

Tyler Colvin - Who wouldn't rather have Ludwick?
Coco Crisp - He turned Cincy to play center field in Oakland. Whoops. And now his career seems to be tumbling. Buy low?
Rajai Davis - doesn't get on base, doesn't have power, and isn't much of an upgrade anywhere
David DeJesus - fits the team's needs well (read: good OBP), but is due about $8MM and isn't much better than Ludwick
Chone Figgins - Ew. Yuck.
Jeff Francoeur - just in case you like guys who don't get on base; is owed $7.5MM next year and is worse than Ludwick
Jonny Gomes - Been there, done that. No, thanks.
Alex Gordon - isn't available, but he might be for the right offer once Wil Myers shows he's ready; pipe dream
Scott Hairston - about as good as Ludwick; would only be a rental
Torii Hunter - rental and too expensive unless a boat-load of cash comes with him (not enough will come); the Angels will probably keep him out of loyalty anyway
Bryan LaHair - appears to be a good platoon hitter, is cheap, and might not cost much in prospects; but is he just a flash in the pan?
Logan Morrison - has no business playing in the outfield; just put him on a team where he's playing first base
Mike Morse - he might be available for when Jayson Werth comes back, but what could the Reds offer to a stacked team in win-now mode?
Gerardo Parra - seems like almost a perfect fit to me but is going into his arbitration years, would cost a lot in prospects, and still isn't a significant upgrade
Juan Pierre - another rental; a liability on defense combined with very inconsistent play on offense; soon turning 35, his speed is declining
Carlos Quentin - only a rental; overrated due to his hot start; is the best available on the market, so you know it would cost a lot
Seth Smith - platoon outfielder and would cost a decent amount; Ludwick sounds like a better option to me
Alfonso Soriano - we've had a lot of discussion on this, and the answer is: Not happening.
Eric Thames - intriguing minor league numbers, but what happened to his plate discipline? Is also a horrible defender.
Shane Victorino - go for it if you want, but he's a rental, and the price is high
Vernon Wells - hahaha
Ty Wigginton - mediocre on offense in hitter-friendly parks the past few years; should only be a pinch-hitter or DH anyway
Josh Willingham - is owed a lot of money and one of the few clear upgrades; might be available for the right combination of pitching (start with Homer Bailey + prospects and work from there)

So there you have it. There are a couple interesting names. But only a couple. If you're going to pay millions and give up a lot of prospects, I'd rather do it for a position that's more needed instead of replacing the team's 4th-best hitter (Votto, Bruce, Frazier--although Frazier has many less plate appearances).

1. You supported a previous post by another poster saying Ludwick should hit cleanup. You said it was supported by "years of data." If that was not your intention, fine, but that's what anyone reading your post would understand.

2. You are very concerned about the Reds' salary structure. You talk about paying "millions" and giving up prospects. News flash. Virtually every decent major league player costs "millions" and some prospects. If you are looking for players costing a few hundred thousand bucks, you should be on a AAA forum.

3. Me, I think a good team should be able to afford a David DeJesus or a Seth Smith to hit at the top of the order. The team has a .243 OBP in the leadoff spot before tonight. Those are the players the Reds should have in LF, not Ludwick.

Patrick Bateman
06-28-2012, 11:02 PM
Also, an add on, I find Ludwick to be a bad fit with the rest of the line-up. Every righty seems to be a guy with some pop, but lacks onbase skills. I'm not sure else where to find a piece that better fits the construction of the offense (gets on base vs righties) than in LF. CF is the other choice, but I'd hate to lose Stubbs' defense. That's not all a critique of Ludwick at all, I just don't think he compliments the team particularly well.

reds44
06-28-2012, 11:02 PM
DeJesus makes all the sense in the world.

Which begs the question, why wasn't he signed in the offseason?

Raisor
06-28-2012, 11:04 PM
With the current roster Ludwick and Frazier should be playing every day at this point.

camisadelgolf
06-28-2012, 11:06 PM
1. You supported a previous post by another poster saying Ludwick should hit cleanup. You said it was supported by "years of data." If that was not your intention, fine, but that's what anyone reading your post would understand.

2. You are very concerned about the Reds' salary structure. You talk about paying "millions" and giving up prospects. News flash. Virtually every decent major league player costs "millions" and some prospects. If you are looking for players costing a few hundred thousand bucks, you should be on a AAA forum.

3. Me, I think a good team should be able to afford a David DeJesus or a Seth Smith to hit at the top of the order. The team has a .243 OBP in the leadoff spot before tonight. Those are the players the Reds should have in LF, not Ludwick.
If I were talking to Dusty, I'd tell him to go BP, Stubbs, Votto, left fielder, Bruce, third base, Cozart, catcher. I'd get more creative with it, but we're talking about Dusty here. Even with bad luck, Ludwick has decent numbers. They're far from mind-blowing, but I wouldn't say they're hurting the team. And on top of that, he's doing it at a bargain. If the Reds trade Ludwick away or acquire someone to take his place, good luck signing free agents in the future. You have to keep in mind the personal part of the game. Given the Reds' current options for a cleanup hitter, I think you can do worse than Ludwick. I'm not saying he's ideal, and I'm open to getting an upgrade, but I don't see a lot of reasonable options out there who would be a clear upgrade. DeJesus, Parra, and Willingham are the guys I like, but I don't see Willingham going anywhere this year, and the Cubs would likely be reluctant to deal DeJesus to a team within the division. My question is this: how much better than Ludwick are those guys, and is it enough to justify the cost? After all, you know the price would be high.

757690
06-28-2012, 11:09 PM
DeJesus makes all the sense in the world.

Which begs the question, why wasn't he signed in the offseason?

Wanted two year deal and a lot of money.

reds44
06-28-2012, 11:12 PM
Wanted two year deal and a lot of money.
In what baseball world is 2 years, 10 million a lot of money?

reds44
06-28-2012, 11:14 PM
With the current roster Ludwick and Frazier should be playing every day at this point.
True, but that'll never happen with our manager.

Kc61
06-28-2012, 11:18 PM
If I were talking to Dusty, I'd tell him to go BP, Stubbs, Votto, left fielder, Bruce, third base, Cozart, catcher. I'd get more creative with it, but we're talking about Dusty here. Even with bad luck, Ludwick has decent numbers. They're far from mind-blowing, but I wouldn't say they're hurting the team. And on top of that, he's doing it at a bargain. If the Reds trade Ludwick away or acquire someone to take his place, good luck signing free agents in the future. You have to keep in mind the personal part of the game. Given the Reds' current options for a cleanup hitter, I think you can do worse than Ludwick. I'm not saying he's ideal, and I'm open to getting an upgrade, but I don't see a lot of reasonable options out there who would be a clear upgrade. DeJesus, Parra, and Willingham are the guys I like, but I don't see Willingham going anywhere this year, and the Cubs would likely be reluctant to deal DeJesus to a team within the division. My question is this: how much better than Ludwick are those guys, and is it enough to justify the cost? After all, you know the price would be high.

I never said Ludwick should be traded. I said he should be platooned. I'm ok with him hitting against lefties with Phillips leading off. I think that should satisfy the personal part of the game.

Can't understand why the Cubs wouldn't trade Dejesus in the division. Cubs are not competitiors now, they traded Sean Marshall to the Reds. Reds are the perfect place for him.

Again, the problem with Ludwick is the fit. He has skills, but others can supply righty power on the team. The Reds need one or two high OBP players and left field is the obvious spot for it.

mdccclxix
06-28-2012, 11:29 PM
If I were talking to Dusty, I'd tell him to go BP, Stubbs, Votto, left fielder, Bruce, third base, Cozart, catcher. I'd get more creative with it, but we're talking about Dusty here. Even with bad luck, Ludwick has decent numbers. They're far from mind-blowing, but I wouldn't say they're hurting the team. And on top of that, he's doing it at a bargain. If the Reds trade Ludwick away or acquire someone to take his place, good luck signing free agents in the future. You have to keep in mind the personal part of the game. Given the Reds' current options for a cleanup hitter, I think you can do worse than Ludwick. I'm not saying he's ideal, and I'm open to getting an upgrade, but I don't see a lot of reasonable options out there who would be a clear upgrade. DeJesus, Parra, and Willingham are the guys I like, but I don't see Willingham going anywhere this year, and the Cubs would likely be reluctant to deal DeJesus to a team within the division. My question is this: how much better than Ludwick are those guys, and is it enough to justify the cost? After all, you know the price would be high.

I gotta say I agree with you. The cost / benefit ratio will be hard to measure, especially for a FO that didn't sign Beltran, Willingham or Dejesus when they probably had a good shot to begin with. That is, when presented with a chance at getting OBP in LF they opted not to. Now we're asking them to turn their back on Ludwick (not their style) to get a marginal upgrade in the OBP department. I don't see it will happen unless other factors come into play like injury. Walt doesn't like to overspend. I think the Fukudome thing is more his style, like a Hairston pickup. Or he'll find a Edmonds type guy perhaps. We'll all hate it, but maybe they catch lightning like Simon. Get Fukudome and wait for him to correct that .150 BA while hitting .320 and OBP .380 at leadoff. :thumbup:

Kc61
06-28-2012, 11:38 PM
I gotta say I agree with you. The cost / benefit ratio will be hard to measure, especially for a FO that didn't sign Beltran, Willingham or Dejesus when they probably had a good shot to begin with. That is, when presented with a chance at getting OBP in LF they opted not to. Now we're asking them to turn their back on Ludwick (not their style) to get a marginal upgrade in the OBP department. I don't see it will happen unless other factors come into play like injury. Walt doesn't like to overspend. I think the Fukudome thing is more his style, like a Hairston pickup. Or he'll find a Edmonds type guy perhaps. We'll all hate it, but maybe they catch lightning like Simon. Get Fukudome and wait for him to correct that .150 BA while hitting .320 and OBP .380 at leadoff. :thumbup:

I would live with a cheap pick up like a Fukudome if it was a move that might help the team's OBP. Not my first choice, but if that's what they do, ok.

But let's not cloud things by saying that the idea being suggested is a "marginal upgrade" in OBP. Ludwick's OBP is .308 as I recall. DeJesus' OBP is .361. Nobody is suggesting anything marginal on here.

camisadelgolf
06-29-2012, 12:04 AM
In what baseball world is 2 years, 10 million a lot of money?
DeJesus has about $8MM in guaranteed money left on his contract. That's more than five times as much as Ludwick does.

mdccclxix
06-29-2012, 12:09 AM
True, and then you have Heisey and Frazier contributing out there as well. Playing the matchup game, I wouldn't be surprised if the Reds get a .330 OBP out of LF going forward while also getting more SLG than you can get from Dejesus. That, and many other possibilities, makes me unsure how willing Walt will be to give up resources to obtain the type of player we would like to hit leadoff.

camisadelgolf
06-29-2012, 12:09 AM
I would live with a cheap pick up like a Fukudome if it was a move that might help the team's OBP. Not my first choice, but if that's what they do, ok.

But let's not cloud things by saying that the idea being suggested is a "marginal upgrade" in OBP. Ludwick's OBP is .308 as I recall. DeJesus' OBP is .361. Nobody is suggesting anything marginal on here.
Granted, that's more than a negligible difference, and it would certainly be a positive for the team. But looking at only OBP blinds you to the fact that Ludwick is slugging .486 while DeJesus is slugging .394. That's a difference, too. Whether the runs come from slugging or on-base skills (or runs saved by defense for that matter) makes no difference to me as long as the Reds are outscoring the competition.

Let me make this clear, though: I want DeJesus on the team. I just don't see it happening with Walt at the helm. And if it does, I'm not sure the marginal upgrade would be worth the price, which I would expect to be somewhat significant. I'm reluctant to give up prospects following the Latos and Marshall deals. And the problem with adding salary is that it means you have to cut salary elsewhere to keep the players you have. The Reds will have 10 players eligible for arbitration next year, and it will be the 1st time for 6 of them. That's pretty significant. On top of that, Ryan Hanigan, Joey Votto, Jay Bruce, Johnny Cueto, Sean Marshall, Jose Arredondo, and Nick Masset are all guaranteed raises. And you never know--maybe the Reds will pick up Ludwick's $5MM option next year.

Patrick Bateman
06-29-2012, 12:15 AM
DeJesus has about $8MM in guaranteed money left on his contract. That's more than five times as much as Ludwick does.

Which is over 2 years. 8M gets you about 1.5 wins. It's not a lot of money.

He also compliments both Ludwick and the team well. Why such a stickler for improving the starting and substitute rotation?

reds44
06-29-2012, 12:15 AM
Fukudome is done.

reds44
06-29-2012, 12:18 AM
Granted, that's more than a negligible difference, and it would certainly be a positive for the team. But looking at only OBP blinds you to the fact that Ludwick is slugging .486 while DeJesus is slugging .394. That's a difference, too. Whether the runs come from slugging or on-base skills (or runs saved by defense for that matter) makes no difference to me as long as the Reds are outscoring the competition.

Slugging is not this team's problem though. Bruce, Votto, and Frazier are all slugging north of .500. Ludwick and Phillips are both over .450. That's 5 guys. Meanwhile only Hanigan and Votto have OBPs over .330. This team desperately needs guys on base.

It also would help if Dusty would stop hitting Cozart leadoff and stop playing Rolen at all.

Kc61
06-29-2012, 12:24 AM
Granted, that's more than a negligible difference, and it would certainly be a positive for the team. But looking at only OBP blinds you to the fact that Ludwick is slugging .486 while DeJesus is slugging .394. That's a difference, too. Whether the runs come from slugging or on-base skills (or runs saved by defense for that matter) makes no difference to me as long as the Reds are outscoring the competition.

Let me make this clear, though: I want DeJesus on the team. I just don't see it happening with Walt at the helm. And if it does, I'm not sure the marginal upgrade would be worth the price, which I would expect to be somewhat significant. I'm reluctant to give up prospects following the Latos and Marshall deals. And the problem with adding salary is that it means you have to cut salary elsewhere to keep the players you have. The Reds will have 10 players eligible for arbitration next year, and it will be the 1st time for 6 of them. That's pretty significant. On top of that, Ryan Hanigan, Joey Votto, Jay Bruce, Johnny Cueto, Sean Marshall, Jose Arredondo, and Nick Masset are all guaranteed raises. And you never know--maybe the Reds will pick up Ludwick's $5MM option next year.

Want to be concerned about REAL money? How about $225 million?

What good is paying Joey Votto's salary if you don't get guys on base for him?

A player like DeJesus is critical for the Reds to provide Votto with the tools to produce runs. If the Reds weren't going to surround Joey with complimentary pieces, why pay him the dough? To drive himself in on an occasional homer?

As for the money, the Reds have to live in the real world. Guys like DeJesus aren't expensive by today's standards. Another six million over two years isn't that much. Trade Nick Masset for a minor leaguer if you need to raise money. Trade off Cairo and Heisey for minor leaguers and save a few bucks.

Finally, I don't deny Ludwick's power. I'd like to keep him on the team. And he can start in left field for all I care. But somewhere, someplace, the Reds need to add OBP to the lineup, preferably from the left side. There's no DH. There's no short center fielder. There are only eight positions. Somebody has to be replaced.

Reds/Flyers Fan
06-29-2012, 12:31 AM
Fukudome is done.

If Fukudome is done, what, exactly, is Rolen? Or Cairo?

reds44
06-29-2012, 12:48 AM
If Fukudome is done, what, exactly, is Rolen? Or Cairo?
So you want to add another guy to the two washed up guys we already have?

camisadelgolf
06-29-2012, 12:51 AM
Which is over 2 years. 8M gets you about 1.5 wins. It's not a lot of money.

He also compliments both Ludwick and the team well. Why such a stickler for improving the starting and substitute rotation?
I'm not saying I have a problem with improving the team. What I'm saying is that some of the moves are more realistic than others. Baseball is a business about building relationships with people. Jocketty and Ludwick have an established relationship, and now that Ryan Ludwick is doing well, Walt Jocketty is going to sit him down and explain to a former All-Star that his playing time is getting cut significantly for a guy with a .268 batting average and 2 home runs (not to mention struggling as of late)?

By the way, this is Ryan Ludwick's slash line since May 17th: .270/.339/.610/.949

If not for Ludwick, the Reds would probably be in 3rd place right now. Would it be better if the Reds were to get on base more? Yes, absolutely. Do I want it to happen? You betcha. Are the Reds going to obtain someone to make that happen? Maybe, but I'd be extremely surprised if they obtained someone to take away from Ludwick's playing time to make it happen.

People are saying that the Reds need more guys to get on base for Votto to knock in. That would sure be nice, but what about this: what if the Reds kept Ludwick, who who has been driving in Votto very well? And isn't Votto's best skill his ability to get on base in the first place?

Patrick Bateman
06-29-2012, 01:00 AM
He's been worth 0.8 wins this season. The Reds would very likely be in first place without his existence. He's doing a fine job, but even during his hot streak, he's still a guy that has trouble getting on base. Obviously his seasonal line is more representative of his overall abilities this season.

The Reds shouldn't be so concerned about his feelings as much as improving the team they best can. Moving a player that on average is worth about 2 wins per season into a time share situation is not an indefensible position. I would think he checked his entitlement to guaranteed playing time after he posted a near replacement level season before settling into a 2M contract off the open market.

If the Reds want to improve, someone is going to be unhappy. If they sat down Todd Frazier, who had put up numbers all season comparable to what Ludwick has done in his torrid month to play Rolen, a player who has been replacement level with the stick over the last 1.5 years, I would think that they would not have that much of an issue reducing Ludwick from a 400 at bat player to a 300 at-bat player, especially if it meant improving the overall outfield situation. There are plenty of at bats to go around for 4 decent outfielders, and with the always potential for injury, adding to the depth and being able to play match-ups to the Reds favour, I would consider this to be a very realistic upgrade opportunity, as there are virtually no other positions where it makes sense to move assets to upgrade the situation.

camisadelgolf
06-29-2012, 01:14 AM
He's been worth 0.8 wins this season. The Reds would very likely be in first place without his existence. He's doing a fine job, but even during his hot streak, he's still a guy that has trouble getting on base. Obviously his seasonal line is more representative of his overall abilities this season.

The Reds shouldn't be so concerned about his feelings as much as improving the team they best can. Moving a player that on average is worth about 2 wins per season into a time share situation is not an indefensible position. I would think he checked his entitlement to guaranteed playing time after he posted a near replacement level season before settling into a 2M contract off the open market.

If the Reds want to improve, someone is going to be unhappy. If they sat down Todd Frazier, who had put up numbers all season comparable to what Ludwick has done in his torrid month to play Rolen, a player who has been replacement level with the stick over the last 1.5 years, I would think that they would not have that much of an issue reducing Ludwick from a 400 at bat player to a 300 at-bat player, especially if it meant improving the overall outfield situation. There are plenty of at bats to go around for 4 decent outfielders, and with the always potential for injury, adding to the depth and being able to play match-ups to the Reds favour, I would consider this to be a very realistic upgrade opportunity, as there are virtually no other positions where it makes sense to move assets to upgrade the situation.
Making enemies with players, agents, fans, and several others probably isn't the best way to handle a business. In the case of Frazier vs. Rolen, you're comparing a rookie with some luck on his side to a baseball legend who might have something left. And according to fangraphs, Ludwick has 1.0 WAR while DeJesus has 0.4 WAR. If you're going to pay the extra money and set back the future of the organization, you might want to do it for a player who you're convinced is actually an upgrade.

reds44
06-29-2012, 01:15 AM
Making enemies with players, agents, fans, and several others probably isn't the best way to handle a business. In the case of Frazier vs. Rolen, you're comparing a rookie with some luck on his side to a baseball legend who might have something left. And according to fangraphs, Ludwick has 1.0 WAR while DeJesus has 0.4 WAR. If you're going to pay the extra money and set back the future of the organization, you might want to do it for a player who you're convinced is actually an upgrade.
No, he has nothing left. He's done.

camisadelgolf
06-29-2012, 01:19 AM
No, he has nothing left. He's done.
I'd be willing to bet a handshake that Frazier and Rolen produce similarly over the rest of this year. Rolen isn't what he used to be--not even close--but I don't believe he's as bad as his 2012 stats would have you think.

reds44
06-29-2012, 01:24 AM
I'd be willing to bet a handshake that Frazier and Rolen produce similarly over the rest of this year. Rolen isn't what he used to be--not even close--but I don't believe he's as bad as his 2012 stats would have you think.
Oh so he's 2011 .676 OPS bad instead of 2012 .586 OPS bad?

Tom Servo
06-29-2012, 01:28 AM
Oh so he's 2011 .676 OPS bad instead of 2012 .586 OPS bad?
Hey, not everybody can put up a .759 OPS while making $18 million a year like Soriano.

camisadelgolf
06-29-2012, 01:29 AM
Oh so he's 2011 .676 OPS bad instead of 2012 .586 OPS bad?
Maybe more like .745 OPS bad, which is what he's been doing since coming back from the disabled list.

reds44
06-29-2012, 01:42 AM
Hey, not everybody can put up a .759 OPS while making $18 million a year like Soriano.
And play bad defense to boot!

reds44
06-29-2012, 01:43 AM
Maybe more like .745 OPS bad, which is what he's been doing since coming back from the disabled list.
Scott Rolen hasn't put up a full month of .745 OPS since July of 2010. Not a single month.

camisadelgolf
06-29-2012, 01:49 AM
Scott Rolen hasn't put up a full month of .745 OPS since July of 2010. Not a single month.
So you're telling me he's due? ;)

To be honest, I completely understand having no faith in Rolen. If it keeps going, I'd expect him to retire or take an extended stay on the disabled list. I expect to see some mean reversion to help him out, but feel free to call it blind faith. Anyway, I feel like we're getting off topic. If you want to discuss it in a different tread, just let me know.

Patrick Bateman
06-29-2012, 11:51 AM
Making enemies with players, agents, fans, and several others probably isn't the best way to handle a business. In the case of Frazier vs. Rolen, you're comparing a rookie with some luck on his side to a baseball legend who might have something left. And according to fangraphs, Ludwick has 1.0 WAR while DeJesus has 0.4 WAR. If you're going to pay the extra money and set back the future of the organization, you might want to do it for a player who you're convinced is actually an upgrade.

Who's making enemies with players?

I am suggesting that they play Ludwick slightly less often to incorporate a LF hitter in more often. I've mainly been a proponent of Span since he can play CF or LF and give both positions a rotation mate.

If Ludwick is making enemies this easily, I'm surprised nobody has killed him yet.

REDREAD
06-29-2012, 02:33 PM
DeJesus makes all the sense in the world.

Which begs the question, why wasn't he signed in the offseason?

The Cubs jumped fast and signed DeJesus on Nov 30.
At that time, the Reds were still getting their pitching in order.
No Marshall yet, No Latos yet, No Madson yet.

Made sense not to spend a lot of money on a LF when they wanted maximum flexiblity to upgrade the pitching.

oregonred
07-01-2012, 11:51 PM
Ludwick now at .794 OPS on the season. cough, cough...

camisadelgolf
07-02-2012, 12:25 AM
If he keeps this up, would you sign him to a 1-year contract for $4.5MM next year? I ask because he has a team option for next year. Among left fielders with 200+ plate appearances, he has the 11th-best OPS in MLB (better than Alex Gordon), so it at least deserves consideration.

oregonred
07-02-2012, 01:10 AM
If he keeps this up, would you sign him to a 1-year contract for $4.5MM next year? I ask because he has a team option for next year. Among left fielders with 200+ plate appearances, he has the 11th-best OPS in MLB (better than Alex Gordon), so it at least deserves consideration.

Not for 4.5M, but I'll be absolutely thrilled with a .794 OPS from him the rest of 2012 as I've seen enough of the Heisey show on a regular basis. With the GABP reputation, I have to think getting veteran OF production on the cheap is an easy proposition.

That money needs to be allocated to fix the LH/RH roster imbalance and on a longer term solution for LF (and maybe CF). Assuming Frazier can hold down the 3B fort on the cheap, this shouldn't be a massive challenge for the front office. Frazier's development is huge if he can become the answer at 3B for a few seasons.

camisadelgolf
07-02-2012, 01:55 AM
Not for 4.5M, but I'll be absolutely thrilled with a .794 OPS from him the rest of 2012 as I've seen enough of the Heisey show on a regular basis. With the GABP reputation, I have to think getting veteran OF production on the cheap is an easy proposition.

That money needs to be allocated to fix the LH/RH roster imbalance and on a longer term solution for LF (and maybe CF). Assuming Frazier can hold down the 3B fort on the cheap, this shouldn't be a massive challenge for the front office. Frazier's development is huge if he can become the answer at 3B for a few seasons.
Any of these names look good to you?
Rick Ankiel - Over Ludwick? I'll pass.
Lance Berkman - 37, expensive, and injury prone? No, thanks.
Melky Cabrera - Affordable? I doubt it.
Jonny Gomes - Please, no.
Scott Hairston - .302 OBP for his career? Meh.
Josh Hamilton - Yeah, right.
Torii Hunter - Expensive and aging.
Andruw Jones - Over the past five years: .214/.321/.431 = Give me Ludwick.
Austin Kearns - Maybe on the cheap, but since 2008: .232/.331/.348
Carlos Lee - Has no business in the outfield.
Juan Pierre - He's not very good and getting worse.
Carlos Quentin - Just not affordable.
Juan Rivera - His career is about done.
Cody Ross - Maybe a little better than Ludwick at about twice the price.
Grady Sizemore - Maybe he could be counted on for 50 games.
Nick Swisher - Ideal except for the price tag.
Delmon Young - How has someone so bad gotten so much money and playing time?

vic715
07-02-2012, 02:18 AM
I would give him a shot at the cleanup slot and move Brandon back to lead off where he is badly needed.If Ludwick produces there then he might be worth that 4.5 million.

BearcatShane
07-02-2012, 02:47 AM
We'll see what happens. He's starting to hit a lot better and his defense has been excellent in left as far as I can tell. That said, I'm just not completely comfortable with him beyond this season. I think we can do better.

RedlegJake
07-02-2012, 02:46 PM
Ludwick is hitting now, he's playing good defense, his OPS is rising. On top of that he's relatively cheap and can be had cheap next year too. The Reds can do better I hear. Who? Name the player who will better at a monetary price that is able to fit the budget and still leave room for raises coming due. Name a .794 or better left fielder that costs less than 5 million and plays good defense. Be realistic - you know the Reds aren't signing Cargo or Matt Kemp or Josh H. Willingham costs 7 million and isn't that big an upgrade and would cost a ton in prospects and current players, increases payroll and frankly - how many wins would he be in difference? 1, 2? If that? Seriously - the problem is not Ludwick -it's Ludwick not playing all the time and Heisey playing too much when Ryan has earned the lion's share of PT. Starting out I could see a 50/50 split between them but we approach the midpoint and it's obvious to me that Ryan has played his way into a starting role while Chris has played his way into a bench role. Even if the Reds got Willingham my bet is he'd sit every third day so Heisey could get his share of starts in left. Then his numbers would suffer and Redszone would screech that he was a bust and the Reds should find a better player to take his place.

PuffyPig
07-03-2012, 09:23 AM
I guess it's a good thing the Reds didn't DFA him back in April/May when many wanted to do just that.

Another reminder that using small sample sizes to judge baseball is dangerous.

OldXOhio
07-03-2012, 09:42 AM
I'm not sure where LF ranks on the priority list of needs, but my guess is it's now no higher than 3rd behind a high OBP 1 or 2 hitter and SP.

Kc61
07-03-2012, 09:56 AM
I'm not sure where LF ranks on the priority list of needs, but my guess is it's now no higher than 3rd behind a high OBP 1 or 2 hitter and SP.

And where is the OBP hitter going to play defensively?

Finding a high OBP guy with the defensive skills to play CF or SS or 3B or catcher isn't that easy.

The OBP hitter is likely a left fielder. So LF remains a high priority. Fact is that Ludwick, while hitting for good power, remains below NL average at OBP. Reds simply need higher OBP hitters and Ludwick, while having his talents, isn't the guy.

And the comment somebody made that Reds are better off with Ludwick than spending for Josh Willingham. Well, Josh has a .914 OPS this year with a .380 OBP. His lifetime OBP is .362. His last two NL seasons, with the Nats, were .863 and .848 OPS.

If the Reds could get Willingham they will have seriously upgraded the offense and they have their LF and cleanup hitter for the indefinite future.

Scrap Irony
07-03-2012, 10:10 AM
And where is the OBP hitter going to play defensively?


If the Reds want to get the most bang for their buck, so to speak, CF is by far the best place to find a solid obp guy who can also hit at the top of the order. Right now, both Ludwick and Todd Frazier deserve to be in the lineup, and both should be candidates to hit cleanup.

OldXOhio
07-03-2012, 10:55 AM
I get what you're saying re: the availability of desired CF types. While his numbers are below norms this year, Victorino would be an upgrade to the current situation. Not a "high" OBP, but certainly adequate, although the amount left on his contract could be a barrier.

I've sung the Willingham tune for some time....I was all about him when he was with the Marlins. Insert him into LF and the clean up spot, move BP up in the order and I can live with Stubbs lack of production in the 7 or 8 hole. I'm not married to Ludwick by any means, perhaps a better way to have described it is LF has become less of a concern with Ludwick's grabbing the job.

Kc61
07-03-2012, 11:33 AM
If the Reds want to get the most bang for their buck, so to speak, CF is by far the best place to find a solid obp guy who can also hit at the top of the order. Right now, both Ludwick and Todd Frazier deserve to be in the lineup, and both should be candidates to hit cleanup.

Problem is that CF is also a defensive position. So I think it's a tougher find for the Reds. Also, Stubbs is a good defender, I question whether the Reds will want to take a better hitting CF who doesn't field as well as Drew. I think CF is a longer term issue.

So IMO, for this year, the most probable acquisition target is a LF. Can be a guy who will platoon with Ludwick. But I'm talking a real platoon, lefty righty, not the bizarre Heisey/Ludwick thing that has gone on this year.

Ludwick would remain with the team, play against lefties, fill in when Bruce is rested or when there's an injury, and pinch hit. Essentially Ludwick would be the fourth outfielder.

Kc61
07-03-2012, 11:36 AM
I get what you're saying re: the availability of desired CF types. While his numbers are below norms this year, Victorino would be an upgrade to the current situation. Not a "high" OBP, but certainly adequate, although the amount left on his contract could be a barrier.

I've sung the Willingham tune for some time....I was all about him when he was with the Marlins. Insert him into LF and the clean up spot, move BP up in the order and I can live with Stubbs lack of production in the 7 or 8 hole. I'm not married to Ludwick by any means, perhaps a better way to have described it is LF has become less of a concern with Ludwick's grabbing the job.

I'd prefer a lefty hitter for lead off then the Willingham approach. I also think Willingham would be very costly, his performance numbers are so high this year.

Still, if the Reds could get him, there would be an obvious upgrade and I'd be pleased. He's having a fabulous year, has NL experience, hits cleanup on this team. If he's a righty, I'll live with it.

oregonred
07-03-2012, 12:23 PM
Even a Lance Nix type would be of great help as another LH bat. We don't need an all-star. My memory is a bit foggy as to why on Earth we released him at the end of 2010 as an arb eligible but that seems to have been a shortsighted decision given that Heisey hasn't really panned out and the failure to find a suitable replacement LH 4th OF in the last two offseasons.

He'd make a mighty fine platoon with Ludwick with Nix starting 2-3 days a week and as a bat off the bench. In the meantime, Ludwick should be starting 5 days a week.

Scrap Irony
07-03-2012, 02:44 PM
Problem is that CF is also a defensive position. So I think it's a tougher find for the Reds. Also, Stubbs is a good defender, I question whether the Reds will want to take a better hitting CF who doesn't field as well as Drew. I think CF is a longer term issue.

If the Reds are looking for a CF that plays better defense than Stubbs, that should prove fairly easy. Most of the CF discussed in this thread-- Parra, Victorino, even Cody Ross-- rank higher than Stubbs with the glove. According to UZR, Stubbs is NOT a good defensive CF. His -1.3 rating is decidedly average to below average. Ludwick profiles as a better LF than Stubbs does as a CF, in fact, by a fairly significant margin.

Now, I'm not argying that Stubbs may be a graceful CF or a good-looking CF, but, when comparing him with other defensive CF, he's average and has been his entire career.

He's also the biggest hole in the lineup by a fairly large amount.

For 2012, Ludwick is an average LF. He's 17th in wOBA (.339), with a 1.0 WAR. As a middle of the order guy, his most important number is slugging percentage-- he ranks 13th. (That includes a horribly crappy beginning s of the season due to poor BaBIP luck.)

Stubbs, meanwhile, is a below average overall CF. He's 22nd in the league in wOBA (.300), with a 0.6 WAR. As a table-setter, his most important number is obp-- he ranks 26th.

Plus Plus
07-15-2012, 11:42 AM
After last night's walk-off, Ludwick is OPSing .802. Since May 25th, he is hitting .277/.336/.597, and only has a babip of .282.

I think that it would be a good decision to let Ludwick play more in LF, and address CF and the bench at the deadline instead of LF. Furthermore, if Ludwick keeps up his current level of play, does his option get picked up, or is an extension in order? (Maybe a restructured option year into a two-year deal or something?)

RedsManRick
07-15-2012, 03:47 PM
Good to see his BABIP regressing as expected.

757690
07-15-2012, 04:01 PM
If the Reds are looking for a CF that plays better defense than Stubbs, that should prove fairly easy. Most of the CF discussed in this thread-- Parra, Victorino, even Cody Ross-- rank higher than Stubbs with the glove. According to UZR, Stubbs is NOT a good defensive CF. His -1.3 rating is decidedly average to below average. Ludwick profiles as a better LF than Stubbs does as a CF, in fact, by a fairly significant margin.

Now, I'm not argying that Stubbs may be a graceful CF or a good-looking CF, but, when comparing him with other defensive CF, he's average and has been his entire career.

He's also the biggest hole in the lineup by a fairly large amount.

For 2012, Ludwick is an average LF. He's 17th in wOBA (.339), with a 1.0 WAR. As a middle of the order guy, his most important number is slugging percentage-- he ranks 13th. (That includes a horribly crappy beginning s of the season due to poor BaBIP luck.)

Stubbs, meanwhile, is a below average overall CF. He's 22nd in the league in wOBA (.300), with a 0.6 WAR. As a table-setter, his most important number is obp-- he ranks 26th.

Stubbs is an above average CF according to all metrics, even UZR/150, which gives him a +1.7 overall for his career.

redsmetz
07-15-2012, 04:07 PM
I'm not sure where LF ranks on the priority list of needs, but my guess is it's now no higher than 3rd behind a high OBP 1 or 2 hitter and SP.

I know it's knee jerk after never having good enough pitching, but why would starting pitching supposedly be so high an issue?

OldXOhio
07-15-2012, 04:23 PM
I know it's knee jerk after never having good enough pitching, but why would starting pitching supposedly be so high an issue?

Just basing it off of recent quotes by Walt. Perhaps if offensive help becomes too hard to find, WJ tries to boost the rotation further instead.

Scrap Irony
07-15-2012, 07:27 PM
Stubbs is an above average CF according to all metrics, even UZR/150, which gives him a +1.7 overall for his career.

His first year, Stubbs UZR/150 was 22.9.

Since 2010, his UZR/150 has been: +0.8, -2.2, -1.7.

This year, he's 17th out of 28 (as per innings played).

757690
07-15-2012, 08:08 PM
His first year, Stubbs UZR/150 was 22.9.

Since 2010, his UZR/150 has been: +0.8, -2.2, -1.7.

This year, he's 17th out of 28 (as per innings played).

Three years of defensive stats equals one season of offensive stats. Career stats are the best way to evaluate a players true defensive skill.

Also, Stubbs is well above average based on old school defensive stats like range per 9 innings.

Scrap Irony
07-15-2012, 08:14 PM
Of the 12 CFers who've played full-time since Stubbs' rookie season, he ranks 7th in UZR/150 overall.

He's average any way you slice it.

Brutus
07-15-2012, 08:25 PM
Three years of defensive stats equals one season of offensive stats. Career stats are the best way to evaluate a players true defensive skill.

Also, Stubbs is well above average based on old school defensive stats like range per 9 innings.

Generally, I agree with the idea that it's better to use career defensive numbers. However, Stubbs only has about three total years worth of defensive stats, so it's difficult to know for sure one way or the other. But if you take his entire career, at least on the basis of UZR, the numbers themselves aren't terribly flattering.

Patrick Bateman
07-15-2012, 08:44 PM
Of the 12 CFers who've played full-time since Stubbs' rookie season, he ranks 7th in UZR/150 overall.

He's average any way you slice it.

That's of the 12 guys that have qualified. Of the remaining players in baseball who aren't good enough to play CF regularly, are likely to be lesser fielders.

There is an argument to be made that Stubbs is an above average fielding CF.

Scrap Irony
07-15-2012, 09:00 PM
That's of the 12 guys that have qualified. Of the remaining players in baseball who aren't good enough to play CF regularly, are likely to be lesser fielders.

There is an argument to be made that Stubbs is an above average fielding CF.

Okay, there's not a good argument to be made that Stubbs is more than average.

Your presumption is not necessarily true. Some phenomenal CF don't play enough because they can't hit water falling out of a boat.

This year, Stubbs ranks 19th out of 30 that have played the most innings.
Last year, Stubbs ranked 17th.
In 2010, Stubbs ranked 19th.
In 2009, he would have ranked 2nd, had he enough innings. (Of course, those innings could have also really affected his UZR as well.)

Average.

Patrick Bateman
07-15-2012, 09:14 PM
I agree with your point, generally, minor league talent can still translate to good defense.
At the same time, I was just just throwing out food for thought.

Also, not sure how much GABP plays with our OF defense stats due to the small dimensions.

Either way, I think the sample size is sufficient to say that Stubbs is at best, a marginally above average defensive CF. He needs to have some offensive value to be an above average starting player.

757690
07-15-2012, 09:39 PM
Lol.

I'm a huge Stubbs fan, and even I can only dream about him being an overall league average CF at this point, let alone an above average one.

I still think he's an above average CF defensively, if even only by a tick.

757690
07-15-2012, 09:43 PM
Generally, I agree with the idea that it's better to use career defensive numbers. However, Stubbs only has about three total years worth of defensive stats, so it's difficult to know for sure one way or the other. But if you take his entire career, at least on the basis of UZR, the numbers themselves aren't terribly flattering.

His UZR numbers are not flattering, not at all. And that kinda jives with the seeing eye test. He has a ton of talent, but has yet to translate that into ability. With his speed, he should be one of the best CF'ers in the game. But he seems to be a slow learner, with still a bunch to learn.

That said, I still would rather have him patroling CF for the Reds over most CF'ers.

Scrap Irony
07-15-2012, 09:50 PM
Not me.

I'll take Heisey over Stubbs eight days a week.

mth123
07-15-2012, 10:58 PM
Heisey is a 4th OF. Stubbs is a 5th OF.

I'll take David Dejesus. I'd bet he'd get it done in CF with Stubbs coming in late for defense and playing against LHP.

Tom Servo
07-29-2012, 01:20 AM
Ludwick strikes me as a guy who plays best when he's in the lineup everyday.
I'm pretty sure I was also very briefly on the "bench Ludwick, play Heisey" wagon but I'd rather ignore that and instead point out this. :D


But man, how about Ludwick? Up to 17 bombs now. And right now his OPS is even higher than his 2007 and 2009 seasons with the Cardinals.

oregonred
07-29-2012, 01:30 AM
.850 OPS now for Ludwick on the season. June over .900 OPS and July is now well over 1.000 OPS. Ludwick is just locked in right now and filling a huge gap in the lineup.

And Josh Hamilton getting booed in Texas and completely ice cold since the end of May...

Odd sport sometimes.

WVRedsFan
07-29-2012, 01:33 AM
I'm pretty sure I was also very briefly on the "bench Ludwick, play Heisey" wagon but I'd rather ignore that and instead point out this. :D


But man, how about Ludwick? Up to 17 bombs now. And right now his OPS is even higher than his 2007 and 2009 seasons with the Cardinals.

Gotta wonder what those that are so inclined see in Heisey. I've asked many times and get stats and little else. Truth is, the guy is less than Stubbs with his hollow stats,and who can doubt Ludwick at this point? Send Chris where he is needed. He's not needed here IMHO.

oregonred
07-29-2012, 01:46 AM
Heisey is a 4th outfielder. Good for 2-3 starts a week and solid defense but too low of an OBP and BB/K ratio to ever stick full time. Nothing more. That's still a decent commodity to have and not at all a slam on Chris. Too bad he can't bat lefthanded, he'd be more valuable on a less righty heavy team.

Fortunately Ludwick Van Hot-toven has made the discussion moot regarding Heisey stealing much PT in LF for the forseeable future.

Phhhl
07-29-2012, 02:08 AM
Some of you probably hate it, but Ryan Ludwick has picked up this team and carried it on his back since Joey went down. He might be the most important free agent acquisition of the offseason, and if the Reds win a playoff spot Walt Jockety is probably in line for another Executive of the Year award due to this single transaction.

I am proud to say I was on board with Ryan's signing long before it even happened. Look it up. He is an above average defender in left, and has been a run producer his entire career. Even last year, when he was challenged by Petco Park. I like a lot of things that Chris Heisey brings to the team, not the least of which his ability to play centerfield. But, short of signing Josh Willingham, Ludwick was the one deal that excited me coming into this season. It is gratifying to see it pay off in the team's hour of most desperate need.

Tom Servo
07-29-2012, 04:03 AM
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93549

Original Ludwick signing thread, btw. I'd call TRF out on his attitude there, but he's not around much anymore. Just goes to show nothing is certain. :)

Brutus
07-29-2012, 04:33 AM
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93549

Original Ludwick signing thread, btw. I'd call TRF out on his attitude there, but he's not around much anymore. Just goes to show nothing is certain. :)

Interesting thread indeed. I found the Hermida conversation most funny to read in retrospect.

Hermida has only had 27 plate appearances with San Diego this season and has a lowly .647 OPS in the hitter-friendly PCL when he's been playing. Ludwick, now, has an .850 OPS in Cincinnati. It looks like the Reds made the right choice.

edabbs44
07-29-2012, 07:35 AM
Interesting thread indeed. I found the Hermida conversation most funny to read in retrospect.

Hermida has only had 27 plate appearances with San Diego this season and has a lowly .647 OPS in the hitter-friendly PCL when he's been playing. Ludwick, now, has an .850 OPS in Cincinnati. It looks like the Reds made the right choice.

I've been saying it for a while but I think this regime has earned our trust by now.

buckeyenut
07-29-2012, 09:00 AM
Some of you probably hate it, but Ryan Ludwick has picked up this team and carried it on his back since Joey went down. He might be the most important free agent acquisition of the offseason, and if the Reds win a playoff spot Walt Jockety is probably in line for another Executive of the Year award due to this single transaction.

I am proud to say I was on board with Ryan's signing long before it even happened. Look it up. He is an above average defender in left, and has been a run producer his entire career. Even last year, when he was challenged by Petco Park. I like a lot of things that Chris Heisey brings to the team, not the least of which his ability to play centerfield. But, short of signing Josh Willingham, Ludwick was the one deal that excited me coming into this season. It is gratifying to see it pay off in the team's hour of most desperate need.

Ludwick has been great the last couple of weeks, but this is overselling it a little bit. It has been Ludwick, for sure, but it has also been Phillips and Stubbs that have picked it up at the plate in Joey's absense. And the pitching has also stepped up their game over the same time frame. So to say Ludwick is carrying the team is a little much.

I would also say that in watching him play LF, I have never thought of or heard Ludwick described as above average. He is above the average of OUR LF defense the last several years, but he is at best league average out there, I would think. Which I can live with given the rest of our defense and his bat.

hebroncougar
07-29-2012, 09:08 AM
At this point, is picking up Ludwick's contract for next year a given?

Vottomatic
07-29-2012, 09:22 AM
Geez. Tough one for me to comment on. I'm tickled to death the whole team has picked it up while Votto is out. And ecstatic that Ludwick has come on too.

BUT.........you have to remember that the Astros and Rockies are the two worst teams in baseball, if not two of the worst.

Plus Plus
07-29-2012, 09:23 AM
At this point, is picking up Ludwick's contract for next year a given?

I would think so.

redsmetz
07-29-2012, 09:56 AM
At this point, is picking up Ludwick's contract for next year a given?

Keep in mind though that it's a mutual option. Ludwick could well believe he's parlayed a good season into a multiyear deal. Frankly, what player wouldn't?

_Sir_Charles_
07-29-2012, 10:53 AM
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93549 (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93549)

Original Ludwick signing thread, btw. I'd call TRF out on his attitude there, but he's not around much anymore. Just goes to show nothing is certain. :)

I was far from thrilled with this signing at the time, but it truthfully wasn't because I didn't care for Ludwick. I was convinced that Francisco was a lock for the club and that the Ludwick signing was going to mean no Frazier. If I'd known Francisco was leaving via trade...I would've been all for the Ludwick signing. I still would've wanted him to be a bench bat though. Pleasantly surprised by Ryan's performance this year after the sluggish start.

Plus Plus
07-29-2012, 11:28 AM
Keep in mind though that it's a mutual option. Ludwick could well believe he's parlayed a good season into a multiyear deal. Frankly, what player wouldn't?

Ludwick is 33 years old this season, with an OPS so far of .851, wOBA of .358, and wRC+ of 123. He is hitting, especially of late, as a legitimate lineup anchor. Very little of what he has done is an outlier when compared to his career year of 2008, although he has vastly outperformed his years in San Diego, where he is on the record as saying that he had to change his swing and approach due to the ballpark.

Right now, he is playing basically neutral defense in left as far as I can tell.

I wouldn't be upset at all about Ludwick's option being picked up, nor would I be upset about some sort of DeJesus-esque 2-year deal.

oneupper
07-29-2012, 12:29 PM
I hated the Ludwick signing, convinced he was done.
Yummy, yummy crow. Can I have some more, mum?

Tom Servo
07-29-2012, 12:47 PM
Keep in mind though that it's a mutual option. Ludwick could well believe he's parlayed a good season into a multiyear deal. Frankly, what player wouldn't?
One thing to factor in is that Ludwick has said on several occasions that he grew up a Reds fan, always wanted to play for the Reds, and is having the most fun he's had in his career. I'm not saying he'll take a 'hometown discount', but I do think returning to the Reds would be his first priority.

harangatang
07-29-2012, 01:02 PM
Geez. Tough one for me to comment on. I'm tickled to death the whole team has picked it up while Votto is out. And ecstatic that Ludwick has come on too.

BUT.........you have to remember that the Astros and Rockies are the two worst teams in baseball, if not two of the worst.While that is true the Reds did exactly what they were supposed to which is beat them. They didn't let up with Votto out and have kept moving. While Ludwick has been on a tear recently, I credit the pitching which has been the true strength of this ballclub.

Mario-Rijo
07-29-2012, 03:39 PM
While that is true the Reds did exactly what they were supposed to which is beat them. They didn't let up with Votto out and have kept moving. While Ludwick has been on a tear recently, I credit the pitching which has been the true strength of this ballclub.

A harangatang sighting? Wow, nice to see ya! :thumbup:

As far as Ludwick goes whatever he said! ;)

mdccclxix
07-30-2012, 09:15 AM
Ludwick can put the ball knee high on the 1b side of 2b from the wall off the bounce on a turn and fire. He has the best arm in LF for the Reds since I-don't-know-when. He could hold down RF no problem. As far as a glove man, he's average, which is all you need. He may not save HR's at the wall, but he'll get darn near everything else. I think his 5 mil next year would have to do with what gets resolved at CF. They need OBP and know it. If they're still playing Stubbs/Heisey combo in CF next year, I hope that means they upgraded SS or LF in the OBP department. I'm interested in Fellhauer as a 4th/5th OF next year, as his OBP vs RHP is excellent. Add him in with Ludwick and that could suffice. Last thing, we'll see if Ludwick gets the honor of being Dusty's cleanup guy, that could tell you everything you'll need to know about the Reds commitment.

kaldaniels
07-30-2012, 09:54 AM
Nice job pointing out that it is a mutual option...that usually hasn't been mentioned when discussing the option. If he continues to play great, he will seek (fairly) a multi-year deal.

Caveat Emperor
07-30-2012, 01:41 PM
Nice job pointing out that it is a mutual option...that usually hasn't been mentioned when discussing the option. If he continues to play great, he will seek (fairly) a multi-year deal.

And, frankly, if the numbers aren't outrageous, I'm completely fine with it being here.

VR
08-01-2012, 12:45 AM
"Lol" Ludwick's run around the bases on his dinger was like a schoolboy that just got a kiss from the cute 4th grader.

Tom Servo
08-01-2012, 01:52 PM
Ludwick has fast become one of my favorite Reds. :)

Captain Hook
08-02-2012, 12:22 AM
Ludwick has fast become one of my favorite Reds. :)

Well then you must really hate him after tonights game.:D

VR
08-02-2012, 12:46 AM
I believe KC called him Greg Vaughn tonight. Very, very appropriate comparison, let's hope it continues all of the 2nd half as it did for Greg. Wow.

kaldaniels
08-02-2012, 12:51 AM
Ryan Braun NL Leader in HR with 29 HR with 427 PA

Ryan Ludwick in 295 PA has 19 HR

Extrapolating that out...if Ludwick had as many PA as Braun he'd have 27.5 HR, 1.5 off the league lead.

camisadelgolf
09-02-2012, 06:04 AM
I said this earlier in the thread:

I'd be willing to bet a handshake that Frazier and Rolen produce similarly over the rest of this year. Rolen isn't what he used to be--not even close--but I don't believe he's as bad as his 2012 stats would have you think.
Since I said that, Frazier has a .937 OPS, and Rolen has a .923 OPS (but Rolen has been better since the All-Star break). No one took my bet, but reds44 jeered at me. I can at least say na-na na-na boo-boo, right?