Turn Off Ads?
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 110

Thread: Ludwick to decline option

  1. #46
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,149

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by BuckeyeRedleg View Post
    Let him walk.
    I agree. Stop while you're ahead.

    I think he gets something like 2/15 with an option or 3/24.
    Last edited by RedsManRick; 10-17-2012 at 09:33 PM.
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #47
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,692

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    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.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  4. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    14,080

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by hebroncougar View Post
    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.

  5. #49
    Member kbrake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,354

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    I am firmly in the Let Him Walk camp. If Choo is in LF on Opening Day I would be a very happy man.

  6. #50
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,692

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by kbrake View Post
    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?
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  7. #51
    Member kbrake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,354

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by traderumor View Post
    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.

  8. #52
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,746

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by kbrake View Post
    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.

  9. #53
    Have Faith In Dusty DGullett35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    O-H-I-O
    Posts
    712

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by traderumor View Post
    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?
    "Losing feels worse than winning feels good." -Vin Scully

  10. #54
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,746

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by DGullett35 View Post
    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?

  11. #55
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,692

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by DGullett35 View Post
    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.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  12. #56
    Member kbrake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,354

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    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.

  13. #57
    getting younger alloverjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    1,164

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    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.
    This place use to be fun

  14. #58
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,583

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by alloverjr View Post
    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.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  15. #59
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,746

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    Quote Originally Posted by alloverjr View Post
    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?

  16. #60
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    11,232

    Re: Ludwick to decline option

    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.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.


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