Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman
Moore is turning 26 and never showed much OBP skills. Big year last year, but have to wonder if he's more AAAA guy.
In a contending year, the known value of Ludwick makes more sense IMO, even at Moore's best he's unlikely to be more than a mild improvement. Having to perhaps give up a big prospect to get him would not have been the best course of action IMO.
agree to disagree. He's 26 this year, entering his prime years. prior to last year he had back to back 31 HR seasons. he's younger and likely to stay healthy and cheap. The opposite of Ludwick. Ludwick isn't exactly a known quantity. What is known is he had a very good bounce back year. What isn't know is his ability to sustain that success as he's got no real track record of doing that, not even in STL. Moore is a better value IMO, but it's moot as the Reds didn't even sniff to see if he was available. Ludwick's breakout season came at age 29. Moore's rookie year at age 25 was better than any Ludwick season prior to age 29. In 104 games last year, 29 AAA, 75 MLB he hit 19 HR's, 9 at AAA. Dude has monster power. I hope that with all the guys the Nats have brought in plus four of their top 10 prospects being OF's they see he is expendable and let him go.