PDA

View Full Version : Ludwick to decline option



Joseph
10-17-2012, 02:06 PM
Per Jon Heyman of CBS sports.

link (http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/jon-heyman/20580639/ludwick-will-turn-down-$5m-option-but-reds-still-hope-to-sign-him-back)

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/jon-heyman/20580639/ludwick-will-turn-down-$5m-option-but-reds-still-hope-to-sign-him-back

mdccclxix
10-17-2012, 02:17 PM
They want him back, but you could probably bet they'll offer some deferred payments.

REDREAD
10-17-2012, 02:22 PM
Not unexpected.. Would be nice to bring Ludwick back.. If he walks, we're back to hunting for a cleanup hitter, which is difficult to find..

DGullett35
10-17-2012, 02:29 PM
Cant blame him. Hes tryin to cash in one more time before retirement. I do hope we can work something out with him tho. What do you guys think it will take? 8 mil a year? Im sure he wants at least 2 maybe 3 years also.

camisadelgolf
10-17-2012, 02:58 PM
Think this would get the deal done?
2013 $6M
2014 $8M
2015 $10M club option with a $2M buyout

Keep in mind that Ludwick is 34 years old. I'd say Michael Cuddyer is a good comp, and he signed a 3-year deal worth $31.5M + incentives at the age of 32.

marcshoe
10-17-2012, 03:18 PM
Ludwick's been much more than I thought he would be. I hope he sees that the Reds are a good fit.

Benihana
10-17-2012, 03:31 PM
Think this would get the deal done?
2013 $6M
2014 $8M
2015 $10M club option with a $2M buyout

Keep in mind that Ludwick is 34 years old. I'd say Michael Cuddyer is a good comp, and he signed a 3-year deal worth $31.5M + incentives at the age of 32.

That is the ABSOLUTE most I'd be willing to do. I was going to say no more than 2 years at 7MM per. If he walks from both of those, then let him walk.

And trade for Justin Upton. :beerme:

vic715
10-17-2012, 04:07 PM
Is Kevin Youkilis a free agent this year?

Caveat Emperor
10-17-2012, 04:08 PM
No surprise. This is probably Ludwick's last chance to get paid before he hangs the spikes up.

lollipopcurve
10-17-2012, 04:10 PM
Is Kevin Youkilis a free agent this year?

Yes. He's kind of interesting as a 3B option. But if they re-sign Ludwick, another aging slow RH hitter who plays average defense at best, I don't see Youk as a great option.

PuffyPig
10-17-2012, 04:21 PM
Think this would get the deal done?
2013 $6M
2014 $8M
2015 $10M club option with a $2M buyout

Keep in mind that Ludwick is 34 years old. I'd say Michael Cuddyer is a good comp, and he signed a 3-year deal worth $31.5M + incentives at the age of 32.

Yes, $16M guaranteed over two years. It's more than I would pay. We need to find next year's Ludwick.

Benihana
10-17-2012, 04:30 PM
Yes, $16M guaranteed over two years. It's more than I would pay. We need to find next year's Ludwick.

As another poster mentioned earlier in this thread and I've been saying for some time, next year's Ludwick could be Kevin Youkilis. And I wouldn't be surprised if we could get him for $5MM or less considering the hometown discount.

See if Frazier's bat can hold up enough to be an everyday LF. If not, trade for Justin Upton and move Frazier back to 3B in 2014 and/or when Youk goes on the DL in 2013.

Bumstead
10-17-2012, 04:37 PM
If I were Jockety, I would be careful what I offered a 34 year-old LF'er that just had one of his top 3 seasons...Frazier can play LF or 3B, so there will be more options than just OF's to consider. Plus Frazier can hit 4th just as well as Ludwick did. I wouldn't have minded seeing Ludwick back at $5M for 1 year. Committing more to him is just asking for trouble in my opinion.

Bum

BuckeyeRedleg
10-17-2012, 04:38 PM
Let him walk.

HokieRed
10-17-2012, 04:39 PM
Two years max. I like him a lot, liked the signing at the time, but I'd bargain hard here and let him walk if the terms aren't exactly right for the Reds. 2 yrs. for 14. And, given his age, that could look really bad in less than a year.

Chip R
10-17-2012, 04:42 PM
Two years max. I like him a lot, liked the signing at the time, but I'd bargain hard here and let him walk if the terms aren't exactly right for the Reds. 2 yrs. for 14. And, given his age, that could look really bad in less than a year.

I agree.

westofyou
10-17-2012, 04:46 PM
Yes. He's kind of interesting as a 3B option. But if they re-sign Ludwick, another aging slow RH hitter who plays average defense at best, I don't see Youk as a great option.

If he grew up in Cincinnati he'll be an option folks will clamor for until he dies

Reds1
10-17-2012, 04:47 PM
This is a dangerous signing. I'm almost in the let him walk camp. It depends on the deal, but some of the numbers I've seen on this post I would say no way. Just too much risk at his age. If we are going to spend 6-9 mllion for example try to get a younger talent and put that money towards it. We really need a top hitter who doesn't strike out. Our line up is full of that. I was hoping he would do the option, but I understand why not.

Wonderful Monds
10-17-2012, 04:53 PM
Everyone is acting like we've been rich in LFs since Adam Dunn left, as if we haven't been struggling to fill that hole ever since.

I wouldn't want to go more than 2 years either, but pay the man. I would have no problem with 2 yr/25m.

UKFlounder
10-17-2012, 04:57 PM
So should we instead act as if he has been a consistantly very good (or better) player in recent years? He's 34 and just one good year after struggling a bit. It's a tough call - yes we need a good LF, but can we count on Ludwick to be good again?


Everyone is acting like we've been rich in LFs since Adam Dunn left, as if we haven't been struggling to fill that hole ever since.

I wouldn't want to go more than 2 years either, but pay the man. I would have no problem with 2 yr/25m.

lollipopcurve
10-17-2012, 04:58 PM
2 yr/25m.

Yikes. That might be more than they have left to pay Cueto. NO thanks!

Wonderful Monds
10-17-2012, 04:58 PM
So should we instead act as if he has been a consistantly very good (or better) player in recent years? He's 34 and just one good year after struggling a bit. It's a tough call - yes we need a good LF, but can we count on Ludwick to be good again?

Years spent in San Diego. Yeah, doesn't bother me.

Wonderful Monds
10-17-2012, 04:59 PM
I can also guarantee if he's resigned, RZ collectively will hate the contract.

Bumstead
10-17-2012, 05:00 PM
I wouldn't want to go more than 2 years either, but pay the man. I would have no problem with 2 yr/25m.

I think the Reds will have you "pay the man" at that rate...1 year of production that was good, not great, doesn't warrant doing something like that.

lollipopcurve
10-17-2012, 05:01 PM
Bump the 1-year offer a little, not much, add some incentives. Add a second year on a mutual option, just like this year. That's as far as I'd go.

Ludwick's got a big swing. Once it slows, he'll be in real trouble.

westofyou
10-17-2012, 05:01 PM
12 million bucks for him?

Pass

_Sir_Charles_
10-17-2012, 05:07 PM
That is the ABSOLUTE most I'd be willing to do. I was going to say no more than 2 years at 7MM per. If he walks from both of those, then let him walk.

And trade for Justin Upton. :beerme:

I don't think I'd go that high to be honest. I could easily see Ludwick revert to his previous seasons'.

And as for who I'd target, it ain't Upton. I'd prefer AAAAAHHH-Choo! *excuse me* ;)

RANDY IN INDY
10-17-2012, 05:08 PM
Jocketty needs to be savvy with this. There may be better options.

kaldaniels
10-17-2012, 05:08 PM
12 million bucks for him?

Pass

He did put up 2.8 WAR this year. That is 14 MM worth of value when talking about free agent dollars spent. (Figuring 5 MM per 1 WAR)

If you think he can be 80 percent of his 2012 season over the next 2 years, 12 MM is a bargain.

Now if that 6 MM a year is gonna break the budget, that is another story.

westofyou
10-17-2012, 05:13 PM
He did put up 2.8 WAR this year. That is 14 MM worth of value when talking about free agent dollars spent. (Figuring 5 MM per 1 WAR)

If you think he can be 80 percent of his 2012 season over the next 2 years, 12 MM is a bargain.

Now if that 6 MM a year is gonna break the budget, that is another story.

I don't care about WAR

I don't think he's a 12 million dollar player at 35 nor for 2 years.

PuffyPig
10-17-2012, 05:16 PM
Everyone is acting like we've been rich in LFs since Adam Dunn left, as if we haven't been struggling to fill that hole ever since.

I wouldn't want to go more than 2 years either, but pay the man. I would have no problem with 2 yr/25m.


That would be a very bad contract. And way more than it would take to sign him.

Which players are you dumping to afford him?

Bumstead
10-17-2012, 05:21 PM
He did put up 2.8 WAR this year. That is 14 MM worth of value when talking about free agent dollars spent. (Figuring 5 MM per 1 WAR)

If you think he can be 80 percent of his 2012 season over the next 2 years, 12 MM is a bargain.

Now if that 6 MM a year is gonna break the budget, that is another story.

No, it's not. :explode:

kaldaniels
10-17-2012, 05:22 PM
I don't care about WAR

I don't think he's a 12 million dollar player at 35 nor for 2 years.

Ok, I see what happened. Somewhere this thread took a turn for the worse. We went from signing him for 6-7 MM per to 12 MM per. 12 MM a year is nuts. I thought the 12 MM was over 2 yr.

westofyou
10-17-2012, 05:25 PM
Ok, I see what happened. Somewhere this thread took a turn for the worse. We went from signing him for 6-7 MM per to 12 MM per. 12 MM a year is nuts. I thought the 12 MM was over 2 yr.

12 a year too much yes, 6 is a different story (said the man playing with others money)

kaldaniels
10-17-2012, 05:26 PM
No, it's not. :explode:

6 MM a year would not be a bargain for a 2+ WAR player on the open market? It looks like you are as guilty as not reading full posts as I am.

oneupper
10-17-2012, 05:40 PM
2/25? On another thread I suggested he would get paid 3/22 or 4/30 and was severely mocked. Ludwick WILL get paid. I don't think it will be us.

Vottomatic
10-17-2012, 05:51 PM
I haven't read this entire thread. But I remember reading on Redszone during the season........someone in the know with the Reds said that Ludwick would not be back next season, and the club was ready to move on without him.

I swear I read that on here during the season. Someone in the know posted it.

_Sir_Charles_
10-17-2012, 06:09 PM
As I've said before, my #1 target is Choo. He solves TONS of problems for us. And he'll be WAAAAY more affordable than Upton.

kaldaniels
10-17-2012, 06:21 PM
As I've said before, my #1 target is Choo. He solves TONS of problems for us. And he'll be WAAAAY more affordable than Upton.

That's cool.

Now I'm the Indians GM. I've got a few other teams inquiring on Choo. Put your best offer on the table.

camisadelgolf
10-17-2012, 06:23 PM
2/25? On another thread I suggested he would get paid 3/22 or 4/30 and was severely mocked. Ludwick WILL get paid. I don't think it will be us.
It's not so much the issue of money as it is the length of the contract. I just don't see any possible way he'd get a 4-year deal. I think 2 years with an option is most likely, but if his services are more desired than I expect, I could see a 3-year deal.

Last off-season, we saw 7 players get deals for 4+ years. Every single one of them was both younger and better than Ludwick (although Yu Darvish was a question mark at the time). You could make the argument that Ludwick isn't even a top-10 outfield free agent, let alone top-10 free agent in baseball. He's more Jason Kubel than he is Carlos Beltran. He could be relatively expensive to keep around, but he shouldn't break the bank. And I'll reiterate that there's no way someone will offer him a 4-year deal.

camisadelgolf
10-17-2012, 06:27 PM
That's cool.

Now I'm the Indians GM. I've got a few other teams inquiring on Choo. Put your best offer on the table.

Or is he a free agent? If so what is your best offer?
Choo is heading into his last year of arbitration. He will become a free agent after the 2013 season. I'd say the Indians are likely to hang on to him until the All-Star break. But if the Reds are trading for Choo, you can bet that it'd take some starting pitching plus prospects to get it done.

KronoRed
10-17-2012, 06:30 PM
Yikes, pay Ludwick that kind of cash?


If he grew up in Cincinnati he'll be an option folks will clamor for until he dies

I think we need Jeff Shaw in the bullpen.

Chip R
10-17-2012, 07:15 PM
Wonderful must be Ludwick's agent. ;)

Brutus
10-17-2012, 08:23 PM
Any club will have to assume some risk if they expect to compete, so I would surmise Ludwick would need to be offered at least a second year even if one doesn't believe he'll continue to produce beyond next season. That said, any risk needs to be measured and I don't think it's wise to go beyond two seasons (at least without a club option) nor would I pay $12 million on the basis of expecting he'll completely repeat what he did this year.

So I'm in the camp of two years, $6 million per with a third option year.

hebroncougar
10-17-2012, 08:24 PM
I'd go 2 years $15 million with a mutual option for year 3. I wouldn't go beyond 2 guaranteed. The Reds can't afford to make those kinds of mistakes down the road.

RedsManRick
10-17-2012, 08:30 PM
Let him walk.

I agree. Stop while you're ahead.

I think he gets something like 2/15 with an option or 3/24.

traderumor
10-17-2012, 08:33 PM
I'm happy with what we got out of Ludwick this year for 2/3 of the year, but the 1/3 was so butt ugly, I'm not sure I buy into the risk that we see more than 1/3 of the 1/3 next year.

I'm looking for some serious turnover in the outfield this offseason. There is nothing in the system ready to step in, so WJ's offseason slobberknocker this season should focus on the outfield.

Take Stubbs and do a change of scenery deal. Find someone who thinks they can fix him. Atlanta is going to be looking for a CFer with Bourne heading out. Texas might kick the tires. Houston, but they don't have much to send back.

Put Heisey, Leake, and Arredondo in a package might get a fair return to fill a hole also, considering the haul we got for Sappelt, Wood, and Torreyes last year.

But Ludwick, appreciated his tear while Votto was out, but I'm not sure I trust his production for another full season at cleanup.

Kc61
10-17-2012, 08:34 PM
I'd go 2 years $15 million with a mutual option for year 3. I wouldn't go beyond 2 guaranteed. The Reds can't afford to make those kinds of mistakes down the road.

This is about as high as I would go for Ludwick, maybe even a tad less.

Ludwick's attractiveness is that he fills the cleanup spot relatively cheaply. If he's too expensive, the Reds might as well explore the free agent and trade markets.

The Reds need to leave some money available for a lead off hitter. They can't overspend on Ludwick.

kbrake
10-17-2012, 08:51 PM
I am firmly in the Let Him Walk camp. If Choo is in LF on Opening Day I would be a very happy man.

traderumor
10-17-2012, 08:53 PM
I am firmly in the Let Him Walk camp. If Choo is in LF on Opening Day I would be a very happy man.Heisey, Leake, Arredondo, and a prospect? Too much? Not enough?

kbrake
10-17-2012, 09:11 PM
Heisey, Leake, Arredondo, and a prospect? Too much? Not enough?

I would do it in a second which means my first instinct is that it wouldn't be enough.

PuffyPig
10-17-2012, 09:14 PM
I would do it in a second which means my first instinct is that it wouldn't be enough.

Choo is one year from FA, which affects his value greatly.

Look what it did to Marshall's trade value.

DGullett35
10-17-2012, 09:15 PM
Heisey, Leake, Arredondo, and a prospect? Too much? Not enough?

Add Stubbs instead of Heisey. They may think Stubbs is a better player with some room for improvement but yeah it probably isnt enough because I would do that deal also in a heartbeat. Actually this has kind of gotten me thinking. What about Frazier, Stubbs/Heisey and Ondrusek for Choo. Im just throwing guys out there and they probably wouldnt want Frazier anyhow with Chisenhall as one of their prized prospects at 3rd. Would you guys deal Frazier if the player in return was a good piece?

PuffyPig
10-17-2012, 09:17 PM
Add Stubbs instead of Heisey. They may think Stubbs is a better player with some room for improvement but yeah it probably isnt enough because I would do that deal also in a heartbeat. Actually this has kind of gotten me thinking. What about Frazier, Stubbs/Heisey and Ondrusek for Choo. Im just throwing guys out there and they probably wouldnt want Frazier anyhow with Chisenhall as one of their prized prospects at 3rd. Would you guys deal Frazier if the player in return was a good piece?

I wouldn't trade 5 years of Frazier for one year of Choo.

And who would play third?

traderumor
10-17-2012, 09:18 PM
Add Stubbs instead of Heisey. They may think Stubbs is a better player with some room for improvement but yeah it probably isnt enough because I would do that deal also in a heartbeat. Actually this has kind of gotten me thinking. What about Frazier, Stubbs/Heisey and Ondrusek for Choo. Im just throwing guys out there and they probably wouldnt want Frazier anyhow with Chisenhall as one of their prized prospects at 3rd. Would you guys deal Frazier if the player in return was a good piece?I think Frazier straight up would be overpaying. He has the kovorka, I'm bullish on Frazier.

kbrake
10-17-2012, 09:21 PM
Choo is one year from FA, which affects his value greatly.

Look what it did to Marshall's trade value.

Completely forgot to factor that in. Thanks for pointing that out, definitely changes the entire equation.

alloverjr
10-17-2012, 09:58 PM
Not too worried about this. Let him leave. Mutual option, right? If I'm Walt I may not have picked it up even if he wanted to stay. Ludwick had a good 2nd half and a nice chunk as to why the Reds were 1st in the division. I don't necessarily think he's a bad player or that 34 is old (says the guy on the wrong side of...), but I really think this offense needs to be turned in a direction that involves guys who can put the ball in play and get on base. I don't think that just replacing CF is enough, which leaves only one other possible position to change - LF (or 3B depending on Frazier's home). I'd pay 6 - 9 million/year, hey it's not my money, but not for Ryan. Thanks, you were a good Red, now go sign with Texas.

Brutus
10-17-2012, 10:27 PM
Not too worried about this. Let him leave. Mutual option, right? If I'm Walt I may not have picked it up even if he wanted to stay. Ludwick had a good 2nd half and a nice chunk as to why the Reds were 1st in the division. I don't necessarily think he's a bad player or that 34 is old (says the guy on the wrong side of...), but I really think this offense needs to be turned in a direction that involves guys who can put the ball in play and get on base. I don't think that just replacing CF is enough, which leaves only one other possible position to change - LF (or 3B depending on Frazier's home). I'd pay 6 - 9 million/year, hey it's not my money, but not for Ryan. Thanks, you were a good Red, now go sign with Texas.

I'd be terribly shocked if the Reds didn't exercise their portion of the option considering it's only $5 million. You could cut Ludwick's production in half and, in theory, he'd still be worth that much.

That said, I think it's too early to assume that declining the option means he won't end up in Cincinnati next season. Jocketty has shown that declined options on either end doesn't preclude a team from hammering out a deal. The market will obviously determine whether the Reds can make a decent offer without assuming too much risk.

PuffyPig
10-17-2012, 10:36 PM
Not too worried about this. Let him leave. Mutual option, right? If I'm Walt I may not have picked it up even if he wanted to stay. ........I'd pay 6 - 9 million/year, hey it's not my money, but not for Ryan. Thanks, you were a good Red, now go sign with Texas.

So, you moght not have picked up his $5M option, but you'd pay him between $6-9M?

757690
10-17-2012, 10:51 PM
Not too many 34+ year olds are productive middle of the lineup bats, and Ludwick doesn't fit the profile of the few that do.

Thank him and let him walk.

corkedbat
10-17-2012, 10:54 PM
If they can re-sign Luddy to a decent contract, I'd also consider adding Kelly Johnson. A LH bat with power. Could fill in at 2B, 3B & LF. He and Didi or Valdez could be your reserve IF's.

alloverjr
10-17-2012, 11:43 PM
So, you moght not have picked up his $5M option, but you'd pay him between $6-9M?

Well, if you're going to respond to my post, and quote a portion of it, at least read it first. So, I guess the answer would be "No".

alloverjr
10-17-2012, 11:50 PM
I'd be terribly shocked if the Reds didn't exercise their portion of the option considering it's only $5 million. You could cut Ludwick's production in half and, in theory, he'd still be worth that much.

That said, I think it's too early to assume that declining the option means he won't end up in Cincinnati next season. Jocketty has shown that declined options on either end doesn't preclude a team from hammering out a deal. The market will obviously determine whether the Reds can make a decent offer without assuming too much risk.

Frankly, I would have been shocked as well if it were squarely on Walt's shoulders. I just said that's would I would have done. I personally don't expect Ryan to repeat this year in 2013 and think his expected production could be had for less. Or more to the point, I don't believe his 2012 production could be had without praying to the gods. Gut feel only of course.

Brutus
10-18-2012, 01:16 AM
Frankly, I would have been shocked as well if it were squarely on Walt's shoulders. I just said that's would I would have done. I personally don't expect Ryan to repeat this year in 2013 and think his expected production could be had for less. Or more to the point, I don't believe his 2012 production could be had without praying to the gods. Gut feel only of course.

I also don't expect his 2013 season to be as good as 2012. I am still up in the air as to whether I think he'll be worth bringing back, though I think he had a good enough season that it makes sense to take on a small amount of risk in doing so.

NL teams are definitely always fighting a losing battle, though, with guys like this. Ludwick is too prime a DH candidate to beat out for his services at this age.

AtomicDumpling
10-18-2012, 02:53 AM
I think Ludwick wants to stay in Cincinnati and I think the Reds want to have him back. I think 2 years and 12-14 million dollars total will get the deal done -- and I think it is a good deal for both sides.

lollipopcurve
10-18-2012, 07:13 AM
Ludwick is too prime a DH candidate to beat out for his services at this age.

Some AL teams are moving away from using the DH for just 1 player. And I doubt Ludwick wants to go into that role at this point anyway. Lots of players prefer to keep playing defense. Maybe the Reds will get beat out by an AL team for Ludwick, but I'll surprised if he signs to DH.

cumberlandreds
10-18-2012, 07:41 AM
I think Ludwick wants to stay in Cincinnati and I think the Reds want to have him back. I think 2 years and 12-14 million dollars total will get the deal done -- and I think it is a good deal for both sides.

I agree wit this. Ludwick knows he has to play in a small ballpark like GABP. He's comfortable here since its his home area. I believe in the end he will sign a contract with a hometown discount.

edabbs44
10-18-2012, 07:50 AM
The one part of the equation that we fail to understand is what the alternatives are. Is there a sense in the FO of who is available to replace Ludwick if he does walk? The money being discussed here does not sound completely prohibitive so, if accurate, it comes down to the alternatives.

Steve4192
10-18-2012, 07:52 AM
Let him leave.

I appreciate what Ludwick did for the Reds this year, but the reality is that the guy hasn't ever strung together multiple quality seasons as a full-time player. This season was an extreme outlier versus his career performance. He is far more likely to post a sub-800 OPS next year than he is to repeat his 2012 performance. The Reds should thank him for his contributions, wish him the best, and let someone else pay for the decline in production that is sure to come in the future.

Redhook
10-18-2012, 08:02 AM
Let him leave.

I appreciate what Ludwick did for the Reds this year, but the reality is that the guy hasn't ever strung together multiple quality seasons as a full-time player. This season was an extreme outlier versus his career performance. He is far more likely to post a sub-800 OPS next year than he is to repeat his 2012 performance. The Reds should thank him for his contributions, wish him the best, and let someone else pay for the decline in production that is sure to come in the future.

I agree.

And, I agree with others who believe he'll be difficult to replace; however, I'd rather the Reds pay someone they think will be productive in 2013, not pay someone for what they did in 2012. I think the Reds would be foolish to believe Ludwick will duplicate this season. Any multi-year deal would most likely be an overpayment for the production he'd give. I like Ludwick and greatly appreciate his season, but I think it's best for the Reds to pass on re-signing him.

Steve4192
10-18-2012, 08:02 AM
The one part of the equation that we fail to understand is what the alternatives are. Is there a sense in the FO of who is available to replace Ludwick if he does walk? The money being discussed here does not sound completely prohibitive so, if accurate, it comes down to the alternatives.

There are loads of alternatives out there. One alternative is already in-house. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to see Todd Frazier in LF every day, assuming the Reds can find another corner utilityman to cover the inevitable injuries that will crop up in 2013. I'd rather see the Reds sign/trade for a LF masher and keep Frazier in his current role, but as contingency plans go, you could do a lot worse than Frazier in LF.

_Sir_Charles_
10-18-2012, 08:31 AM
That's cool.

Now I'm the Indians GM. I've got a few other teams inquiring on Choo. Put your best offer on the table.

I get your point, but I'll leave the armchair gm'ing to the posters here who know the Indians franchise/needs better than me. I know what players I'm willing to part with, but without knowing what the Indians are really looking for (especially the status of their farm system) I'd be shooting in the dark.

My point was that with the Indians collapsing this year I have a feeling they'd be open to offers of most players. Maybe Choo's untouchable in their opinion, in which case my suggestion is moot.

So....anybody know what the Tribe is looking for?

mdccclxix
10-18-2012, 08:55 AM
I get your point, but I'll leave the armchair gm'ing to the posters here who know the Indians franchise/needs better than me. I know what players I'm willing to part with, but without knowing what the Indians are really looking for (especially the status of their farm system) I'd be shooting in the dark.

My point was that with the Indians collapsing this year I have a feeling they'd be open to offers of most players. Maybe Choo's untouchable in their opinion, in which case my suggestion is moot.

So....anybody know what the Tribe is looking for?

They would need a replacement for Choo, for one. I think they are ok with Chisenhall at 3b, Cabrera at SS, Kipnis at 2b, Santana at C, and Brantley in CF. That leaves LF, 1b, and pitching, and RF. Personally, I'd like Brantley the most. A few years of team control, good OBP in CF...Bailey and Stubbs for Brantley would be my first guess.

kbrake
10-18-2012, 09:10 AM
I would also be interested in Brantley but if Bailey is part of the cost I would begin to shop at a different store.

lollipopcurve
10-18-2012, 09:14 AM
but if Bailey is part of the cost I would begin to shop at a different store.

Definitely. That would be the Chase Headley or Justin Upton store.

_Sir_Charles_
10-18-2012, 09:18 AM
They would need a replacement for Choo, for one. I think they are ok with Chisenhall at 3b, Cabrera at SS, Kipnis at 2b, Santana at C, and Brantley in CF. That leaves LF, 1b, and pitching, and RF. Personally, I'd like Brantley the most. A few years of team control, good OBP in CF...Bailey and Stubbs for Brantley would be my first guess.

Choo for Stubbs/Heisey, Arredondo & one of Corcino/Cingrani (and then extend Choo a couple of years). I'd hate to give up one of the young pitchers but I don't think both of them see the rotation in the next 3 years. And I'd hate to see them waste away in AAA or flipped to the pen. If the Reds are going to seriously consider moving Chapman to the rotation, then they're both available IMO.

Superdude
10-18-2012, 09:18 AM
Are there better options if we let Ludwick walk? Ludwick probably won't be an ideal contract, but asking Chris Heisey to fill in the shoes of an .877 OPS bat leaves me a little worried.

dsmith421
10-18-2012, 09:20 AM
Choo is a Boras client, good luck extending him.

However, that should in no way foreclose the possibility of trying to make a move. He's exactly the kind of high-OBP impact hitter we need in 2013. There's nothing inherently wrong with making deals for the short term.

Steve4192
10-18-2012, 09:55 AM
Are there better options if we let Ludwick walk? Ludwick probably won't be an ideal contract, but asking Chris Heisey to fill in the shoes of an .877 OPS bat leaves me a little worried.

Asking Ludwick to fill the shoes of an 877 OPS worries me even more, because unlike Heisey, Ludwick's paycheck is going to eat up a good sized chunk of the payroll budget.

Prior to his career resurgence in 2012, Ludwick's stat line from 2009 through 2011 was a meager 251/321/409/731. There are plenty of options out there that can give the Reds a mid-700s OPS at relatively little cost in terms of cash or talent surrendered. Hell, Todd Frazier can likely do that with without the Reds having to make any moves at all. There are also plenty of options who can give the Reds much better production if they are willing to give up something of value in return.

Ludwick is a 'boom or bust' player. We just witnessed the 'boom'. I'd rather not watch the 'bust' happen in a Red's uniform.

REDREAD
10-18-2012, 09:56 AM
Choo is heading into his last year of arbitration. He will become a free agent after the 2013 season. I'd say the Indians are likely to hang on to him until the All-Star break. But if the Reds are trading for Choo, you can bet that it'd take some starting pitching plus prospects to get it done.

My guess is that it depends on what other trades the Indians make.
They are rumored to be possibly trading A Cabbera, Chris Perez, and maybe even Masterson.. If they trade 2-3 of their better players now, there's not much point in holding on to Choo.

Getting Choo is going to cost us though.. Is everyone prepared to give up one of our Top 4 prospects to get him? IMO, that's a benefit of signing Ludwick or another FA OF.. trading for a cleanup hitter takes a lot of prospects.
Although according to baseball reference, Choo is not a FA until 2014.. Didn't realize that.

Chip R
10-18-2012, 10:23 AM
Are there better options if we let Ludwick walk? Ludwick probably won't be an ideal contract, but asking Chris Heisey to fill in the shoes of an .877 OPS bat leaves me a little worried.

I seriously doubt the Reds brass sees Heisey as anything but a 4th OFer. They gave him every opportunity this year to win that LF job but he wasn't able to do it. If Ludwick doesn't re-sign, I think they will be very active in trying to find a LFer.

_Sir_Charles_
10-18-2012, 10:33 AM
My guess is that it depends on what other trades the Indians make.
They are rumored to be possibly trading A Cabbera, Chris Perez, and maybe even Masterson.. If they trade 2-3 of their better players now, there's not much point in holding on to Choo.

Getting Choo is going to cost us though.. Is everyone prepared to give up one of our Top 4 prospects to get him? IMO, that's a benefit of signing Ludwick or another FA OF.. trading for a cleanup hitter takes a lot of prospects.
Although according to baseball reference, Choo is not a FA until 2014.. Didn't realize that.

But the key to those prospects is the fact that they have very limited odds of reaching the big club due to us being pretty well stocked and for an extended period too. Hamilton should be off limits I'd think. Pretty much everyone else should be fair game I'd think.

PuffyPig
10-18-2012, 10:37 AM
Choo for Stubbs/Heisey, Arredondo & one of Corcino/Cingrani (and then extend Choo a couple of years).

Why would Choo, 1 year from FA, allow the Reds to extend him for a "few years"? If we give up 4 players for him, it would only be in the basis that we entered into a 5 year contract with him likely. At a price that would not be cheap.

mdccclxix
10-18-2012, 11:42 AM
Why would Choo, 1 year from FA, allow the Reds to extend him for a "few years"? If we give up 4 players for him, it would only be in the basis that we entered into a 5 year contract with him likely. At a price that would not be cheap.

That's true. Half a year of Beltran cost a top 25 prospect. So the price will be expensive for 1 year of Choo. I don't think Choo is realistically a great fit for the Reds, except for his bat, which would improve any team.

corkedbat
10-18-2012, 11:53 AM
Choo for Stubbs/Heisey, Arredondo & one of Corcino/Cingrani (and then extend Choo a couple of years). I'd hate to give up one of the young pitchers but I don't think both of them see the rotation in the next 3 years. And I'd hate to see them waste away in AAA or flipped to the pen. If the Reds are going to seriously consider moving Chapman to the rotation, then they're both available IMO.

I'd want Choo and Masterson for that price (and maybe a little more). Then use Leake as part of a deal to grab a CF (Fowler?).

I wouldn't have a problem with bringing Ludwick back at all, but he's gonna have some solid leverage. Other than Hamilton and Swisher, I don't believe there will be that many corner OF bats on the market this winter.

osuceltic
10-18-2012, 12:17 PM
Asking Ludwick to fill the shoes of an 877 OPS worries me even more, because unlike Heisey, Ludwick's paycheck is going to eat up a good sized chunk of the payroll budget.

Prior to his career resurgence in 2012, Ludwick's stat line from 2009 through 2011 was a meager 251/321/409/731. There are plenty of options out there that can give the Reds a mid-700s OPS at relatively little cost in terms of cash or talent surrendered. Hell, Todd Frazier can likely do that with without the Reds having to make any moves at all. There are also plenty of options who can give the Reds much better production if they are willing to give up something of value in return.

Ludwick is a 'boom or bust' player. We just witnessed the 'boom'. I'd rather not watch the 'bust' happen in a Red's uniform.

That leaves out a lot of the story -- where he was playing for much of that time, the impact the park had on his performance, etc. I think at the price he will demand, Ludwick is as good a bet as anyone else on the market. If you want to go shopping, tell me a better fit for Ludwick money. And if your solution is Todd Frazier, then find me a third baseman who is a better bet to produce Ludwick numbers at a Ludwick price.

I'm all for being creative. I'm open to anything and certainly do not think just shopping off the free agent shelves is the only -- or even most likely -- option. But if we're talking just about letting Ludwick walk and then giving that money to someone better -- I'll have to see the someone better.

_Sir_Charles_
10-18-2012, 12:20 PM
Why would Choo, 1 year from FA, allow the Reds to extend him for a "few years"? If we give up 4 players for him, it would only be in the basis that we entered into a 5 year contract with him likely. At a price that would not be cheap.

Firstly because maybe he'd like to play for a contender? Secondly, the deal I posted would be for 1 year of Choo. I meant that once we had him, we should try to extend him. If he's not open to that, move on. Hamilton would most likely be ready by 2014 IMO.

Reds/Flyers Fan
10-18-2012, 12:36 PM
That's true. Half a year of Beltran cost a top 25 prospect. So the price will be expensive for 1 year of Choo. I don't think Choo is realistically a great fit for the Reds, except for his bat, which would improve any team.

The Indians need a lot of help in a lot of different areas. They may be the perfect trading partner, just like talent-deficient San Diego was last year. If the Reds view Choo - or anyone else really - as the missing piece that would make this lineup work and they're confident they can extend him, then a relatively high price would be worth it.

I know the Reds have financial constraints to consider, but they've invested so much in Votto, Phillips, Cueto, Bruce, Chapman, etc., and they're so close to having a team that could go on a BRM-type run, there's no sense in not completing the puzzle.

Steve4192
10-18-2012, 01:29 PM
That leaves out a lot of the story -- where he was playing for much of that time, the impact the park had on his performance, etc.

I think you are WAY overstating park effects in regards to both his struggles and his success. Of his 1466 ABs from 2009-2011, only 303 came at Petco. Nearly two-thirds of those ABs (188) came in 2011 when he OPSed 658 at Petco and 673 overall. Hardly a monumental difference.

The same goes for the influence of the GABP on his numbers in 2012. Sure, he was better at home, but only marginally so. He posted an 896 OPS at home this year and 856 OPS on the road. He had a good year. The park helped, but it was just icing on the cake. It didn't cause his great year in 2012, just like it won't prevent a return to normalcy in 2013.

Wonderful Monds
10-18-2012, 02:03 PM
My guess is that it depends on what other trades the Indians make.
They are rumored to be possibly trading A Cabbera, Chris Perez, and maybe even Masterson.. If they trade 2-3 of their better players now, there's not much point in holding on to Choo.

Getting Choo is going to cost us though.. Is everyone prepared to give up one of our Top 4 prospects to get him? IMO, that's a benefit of signing Ludwick or another FA OF.. trading for a cleanup hitter takes a lot of prospects.
Although according to baseball reference, Choo is not a FA until 2014.. Didn't realize that.

Forget Choo, get Cabrera.

edabbs44
10-18-2012, 02:55 PM
There are loads of alternatives out there. One alternative is already in-house. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to see Todd Frazier in LF every day, assuming the Reds can find another corner utilityman to cover the inevitable injuries that will crop up in 2013. I'd rather see the Reds sign/trade for a LF masher and keep Frazier in his current role, but as contingency plans go, you could do a lot worse than Frazier in LF.

Who is playing 3rd?

Kc61
10-18-2012, 02:57 PM
Who is playing 3rd?

A-Rod. See the other thread.

REDREAD
10-18-2012, 03:05 PM
Forget Choo, get Cabrera.

Yea, that would be a great trade.. Wonder if the tribe would take Cozart +prospects for Caberra? Although a downside is that Cabera is owed an average of 7 million/year.. Might not be able to fit that in the budget, esp if we are looking to find two OFers..

edabbs44
10-18-2012, 04:36 PM
A-Rod. See the other thread.

Oh, then I am totally down with that.

cincrazy
10-18-2012, 05:45 PM
I love Ludwick. But he caught lightning in a bottle this year. I don't think it's likely he repeats that performance. I wish him luck, and move in another direction.

Tadasimha
10-18-2012, 05:47 PM
Yea, that would be a great trade.. Wonder if the tribe would take Cozart +prospects for Caberra? Although a downside is that Cabera is owed an average of 7 million/year.. Might not be able to fit that in the budget, esp if we are looking to find two OFers..

6.5 mill in 2013 and 10 mill in 2014. He's a definite upgrade over Cozart at SS with the bat (defensively they're probably pretty even) but that wouldn't leave a lot of cash for LF/CF and/or 3B (if Frazier goes to LF).

Superdude
10-18-2012, 06:38 PM
Asking Ludwick to fill the shoes of an 877 OPS worries me even more, because unlike Heisey, Ludwick's paycheck is going to eat up a good sized chunk of the payroll budget.

Prior to his career resurgence in 2012, Ludwick's stat line from 2009 through 2011 was a meager 251/321/409/731. There are plenty of options out there that can give the Reds a mid-700s OPS at relatively little cost in terms of cash or talent surrendered. Hell, Todd Frazier can likely do that with without the Reds having to make any moves at all. There are also plenty of options who can give the Reds much better production if they are willing to give up something of value in return.

Ludwick is a 'boom or bust' player. We just witnessed the 'boom'. I'd rather not watch the 'bust' happen in a Red's uniform.

Ludwick's numbers really look about the same across the board except for the spike in power. Take away the lost years in Petco and he might've been doing this all along. There's probably some aging for the next two or three years, but he's in good shape and doesn't play a demanding position. It's not my favorite contract, especially if he wants three years, but mid .700's OPS out of left next year is gonna be a big hit to the offense.

FlightRick
10-18-2012, 06:50 PM
I think you are WAY overstating park effects in regards to both his struggles and his success. Of his 1466 ABs from 2009-2011, only 303 came at Petco. Nearly two-thirds of those ABs (188) came in 2011 when he OPSed 658 at Petco and 673 overall. Hardly a monumental difference.

The same goes for the influence of the GABP on his numbers in 2012. Sure, he was better at home, but only marginally so. He posted an 896 OPS at home this year and 856 OPS on the road. He had a good year. The park helped, but it was just icing on the cake. It didn't cause his great year in 2012, just like it won't prevent a return to normalcy in 2013.

In so far as those numbers go, you're right: Ludwick has been roughly the same hitter at home as on the road the past 3 years. But -- and I do not intend to speak for the original poster -- there can be a lot more to the effect of a park than just home/away splits.

And in the specific case of Ryan Ludwick, he's laid claim to those different factors. His story, as related in numerous interviews in late May and early June, is that he adopted a lot of bad habits trying to hit at Petco. He tailored his swing to the park, and that followed him on the road. One month playing Pittsburgh at the end of 2011 wasn't enough time to fix anything. It was only after starting to get regular playing time with the Reds that he kicked all those bad habits, and went back to his old approach. And voila: his numbers went back to their old selves, too.

Now, I'm not even close to being an eagle-eyed enough swing doctor to know if he's telling the truth, or just tossing out some malarkey to try to explain away the crazy ups and downs of baseball... but as far as anecdotal evidence goes, it DOES seem to fit the facts.

Ludwick's first 3 years in STL as a regular averaged out to .280/.350/.510 (.860 OPS)... his first half of 2010 (still in STL) was .281/.343/.484 (.827 OPS), which is roughly in line with his career up to that point, minus a bit of power (which could just have been a figment of the small sample size in 300 AB). Everything was still dandy when he got traded to SD.

Then a full season in Petco, plus about 40 games after being traded to PIT, all while picking up all kinds of bad habits, resulted in roughly a .230/.310/.330 (.640 OPS) line.

Head to Cincinnati, finally get the swing fixed up, and over the course of the season, he puts up .275/.345/.530 (.875 OPS), which looks strangely familiar. Ludwick just may have a bona fide justification for his fluctuations over time.

I don't have any foolish notions that Ludwick will ever be the hitter his was in June/July/August this past year, especially not at 33 or 34 or whatever. But I think it is perfectly realistic that he could put up another season or two of overall numbers in that neighborhood.

That said, I'd probably have reservations about any new deal that includes a guaranteed third year, or an annual average value much more than $7-8m. Age is not on Ludwick's side, and the way the Reds have been handing out the cash the past two off-seasons and the presumed payroll limitations, this could quickly turn into exactly the kind of mistake the Reds can't afford to make...


Rick

Superdude
10-18-2012, 07:35 PM
Head to Cincinnati, finally get the swing fixed up, and over the course of the season, he puts up .275/.345/.530 (.875 OPS), which looks strangely familiar. Ludwick just may have a bona fide justification for his fluctuations over time.

I don't have any foolish notions that Ludwick will ever be the hitter his was in June/July/August this past year, especially not at 33 or 34 or whatever. But I think it is perfectly realistic that he could put up another season or two of overall numbers in that neighborhood.

That said, I'd probably have reservations about any new deal that includes a guaranteed third year, or an annual average value much more than $7-8m. Age is not on Ludwick's side, and the way the Reds have been handing out the cash the past two off-seasons and the presumed payroll limitations, this could quickly turn into exactly the kind of mistake the Reds can't afford to make...

Aging and diminishing skills will likely come into play with this contract, but the question is what skill level is Ludwick starting at. As you pointed out, I think a strong case could be made that last year wasn't a fluke and we're looking at a current .850+ OPS bat. I'd go hard after a two year contract and see if he bites. Finding that production elsewhere is gonna be a real challenge IMO.

DGullett35
10-18-2012, 07:41 PM
Yea, that would be a great trade.. Wonder if the tribe would take Cozart +prospects for Caberra? Although a downside is that Cabera is owed an average of 7 million/year.. Might not be able to fit that in the budget, esp if we are looking to find two OFers..

Id pass on Cabrera. All the Cleveland press does is complain about how unmotivated he is and how how overweight he comes into spring training every year. The guy commits alot of errors and is a notoriously horrid 2nd half player. The last 2 years hes raked the first half and tanked the 2nd. Cozart is a much better option IMO.

_Sir_Charles_
10-18-2012, 07:58 PM
Id pass on Cabrera. All the Cleveland press does is complain about how unmotivated he is and how how overweight he comes into spring training every year. The guy commits alot of errors and is a notoriously horrid 2nd half player. The last 2 years hes raked the first half and tanked the 2nd. Cozart is a much better option IMO.

I'd also pass on Cabrera...but just to play devil's advocate for a minute, they said very similar things about Brandon Phillips while he was at the mistake by the lake. Just sayin'.

lollipopcurve
10-18-2012, 08:40 PM
they said very similar things about Brandon Phillips while he was at the mistake by the lake. Just sayin'.

Lot more tread on Cabrera's tires. Phillips was still young and unproven.

Blitz Dorsey
10-19-2012, 01:08 AM
I have no doubt Lud will re-sign with the Reds for two years and somewhere around $13-14 million total. ($6.5 or $7 million per season.)

If he can get more elsewhere, good for him. He was a huge piece of the puzzle this year and I want him back, but the Reds can't (and won't) overpay for him.

I bet it all works out though. He seems to like Cincinnati, they like him, he probably won't get a better offer ... add it all up and I'd say the odds are definitely in favor of Ludwick remaining a Red.

GAC
10-19-2012, 04:27 AM
I have no doubt Lud will re-sign with the Reds for two years and somewhere around $13-14 million total. ($6.5 or $7 million per season.)

Sounds like a reasonable offer. Other then that - let him walk. There are other "Ludwicks" out there in the market. We found him. ;)

Raisor
10-19-2012, 06:11 AM
I wouldn't give two years guaranteed for him. Another year with a team option. Someone give him more, let him go.

NJReds
10-19-2012, 09:42 AM
Nick Swisher's price tag probably dropped a whole lot. He might be a good fit over Ludwick.

kaldaniels
10-19-2012, 12:33 PM
Ludwick just seems like a young 35 to me, not Grandpa-esque as Rolen seemed to always be, no slight intended.

But maybe it's just that full luscious hair that is fooling me. :D

edabbs44
10-19-2012, 05:43 PM
Nick Swisher's price tag probably dropped a whole lot. He might be a good fit over Ludwick.

He makes me nauseous. His act wore really thin in NY down the stretch.

traderumor
10-19-2012, 07:03 PM
He makes me nauseous. His act wore really thin in NY down the stretch.What, you're not into feigned cheerleader enthusiasm and cheesy smile? I thought I was the only one gagging. :beerme:

Blitz Dorsey
10-23-2012, 08:25 PM
He makes me nauseous. His act wore really thin in NY down the stretch.

Funny, in '09 when Swisher helped the Yankees win a WS championship, the common thread was "He's brought some much-needed levity to the Yanks' clubhouse. It was too sterile in there before he arrived."

Now it's "Swisher is immature and not as professional as we want our Yankees to be."

Sorry, I'm no NY hater, but I do have some Yankee friends and it's been hilarious watching them do a complete 180 on Swisher. They used to love him; now they want him gone. However, nothing has really changed with him. Numbers are pretty much the same (a bit down this year, granted) and he's always behaved in this fashion. It's just that winning cures all. Losing magnifies everything.