Turn Off Ads?
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 110

Thread: Ludwick to decline option

  1. #76
    Flash the leather! _Sir_Charles_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,479

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by mdccclxix View Post
    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.
    2014 predictions:
    99-63 WS champs (Cards take 2nd WC, Mil 3rd, Pit 4th, Chi 5th)
    Bruce/Votto neck and neck MVP race (neither takes it)
    Bailey CYA winner
    Hamilton ROY & GG

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #77
    Member Superdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,805

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    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.

  4. #78
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,347

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    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.

  5. #79
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Posts
    4,251

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by Superdude View Post
    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.

  6. #80
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    21,197

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by camisadelgolf View Post
    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.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  7. #81
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    34,541

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by Superdude View Post
    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.
    The Rally Onion wants 150 fans before Opening Day.

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rally-...24872650873160

  8. #82
    Flash the leather! _Sir_Charles_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,479

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD View Post
    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.
    2014 predictions:
    99-63 WS champs (Cards take 2nd WC, Mil 3rd, Pit 4th, Chi 5th)
    Bruce/Votto neck and neck MVP race (neither takes it)
    Bailey CYA winner
    Hamilton ROY & GG

  9. #83
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,744

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_ View Post
    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.

  10. #84
    Member mdccclxix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Crown
    Posts
    3,995

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    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.

  11. #85
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Lexington
    Posts
    6,281

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_ View Post
    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.

  12. #86
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Posts
    1,375

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve4192 View Post
    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.

  13. #87
    Flash the leather! _Sir_Charles_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,479

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    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.
    2014 predictions:
    99-63 WS champs (Cards take 2nd WC, Mil 3rd, Pit 4th, Chi 5th)
    Bruce/Votto neck and neck MVP race (neither takes it)
    Bailey CYA winner
    Hamilton ROY & GG

  14. #88
    Member Reds/Flyers Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Cincinnati USA
    Posts
    3,384

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by mdccclxix View Post
    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.

  15. #89
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Posts
    4,251

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by osuceltic View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Steve4192; 10-18-2012 at 02:33 PM.

  16. #90
    Member Wonderful Monds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,693

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD View Post
    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.
    They don't think it be like it is, but it do.
    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Schuler View Post
    He has also taught me that even when the Reds win it is important to focus on the fact that they could have lost.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25