Attn: John Mozeliak
by pkjsp83 on Nov 4, 2008 2:55 PM EST
57 comments
I have recently been searching for a SS worth trading for and an impact bat to put behind Pujols. I think I may have found both in one player. Brandon Wood for the
L. A. Angels of Anaheim. And I believe it just so happens that the angels are in the market for someone to replace Garret Anderson in the outfield (something that we have an abundance of) since they are not picking up his contract in the offseason. "Brandon Wood spent most of the 2005 season with the Angels' High-A Rancho Cucamonga Quakes, hitting .321 with a California League record 43 home runs and 51 doubles. Combined with two doubles and a triple in four games with the Triple-A Salt Lake Stingers, Wood became the first known minor leaguer to hit more than 100 extra-base hits in one year." Now I know that he is one of the angel's prized prospects but I think he might could be had for either Ankiel or Ludwick and maybe one other prospect. Let me know what you think.
0 recs |
57 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I'll play the part of the Angels GM
HELL YEAH!!!!!!!!
WHERE DO I SIGN?
Ludwick + another prospect for Brandon Wood. Hell, I’ll even pay his moving fees.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Nov 4, 2008 3:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah...
there’s a big difference between Ankiel + prospect and Ludwick + prospect. That being said I’m not sure I wouldn’t consider it…will BW stick at short defensively?
by cardzfanbub on Nov 4, 2008 3:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Might be a big difference
but I wouldn’t do either scenario.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Nov 4, 2008 3:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
this line is dedicated to '09
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 4, 2008 5:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
not to mention
that they wouldn’t do Ankiel + prospect because they have Torii Hunter and Vlad. They’d definitely do Ludwick though — moved Vlad to DH, trade Rivera someplace else, and re-sign Tex. That would be a sick lineup with Ludwick in it. Hell, he’d probably hit 6th for them!
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Nov 4, 2008 3:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Angels AAA affliliate
They must play in a bandbox — they always have 3-4 players who hit 20+ homers nearly every single year.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Nov 4, 2008 3:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
They play in Salt Lake City, I believe
"Cross a lawyer with the Godfather, make you an offer you can't understand" - Don Henley
by TurdFerguson on Nov 4, 2008 4:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Angels in the Infield?
Sounds good to me! I know T Glaus is supposed to be a cornerstone but with 1 year left and his value as high as ever why not make him the piece to be moved. TG for Wood and Chone Figgins. Our lineup would end up looking like:
Figgins 2B
Rasmus CF
Pujols 1B
Ankiel RF
Ludwick LF
Freese 3B
Wood SS
Molina C
Kills two birds with one stone and if Wallace is supposed to be ready around midseason why not?
by RayMonD! on Nov 4, 2008 3:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I can't see Glaus alone
being enough for Wood AND Figgins especially with there only being 1 year left on his contract…Maybe Glaus and Ankiel instead of Ank + prospect or Lud + prospect, but I wouldn’t see the Angels biting on that deal either.
"I've never felt better to be hit by a big guy like that in my life." - Brad Lidge on Ryan Howard
by RunninRedbird on Nov 4, 2008 7:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
do the angels need outfielders?
not sure that would entice the angels
by VolsnCards5 on Nov 4, 2008 3:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I posted a message in regards...
to Howie Kendrick on the Halos Heaven blog to find out what it would take to get him. The response didn’t mention getting Kendrick, but did mention that an Angels fan would send erick aybar and a pitching prospect to STL for Glaus. I really doubt you would be able to get Figgins and Wood from the Angels for Glaus. The Angels also do not need outfielders (Hunter, Willits, Matthews Jr., Guerrero).
by Jumsy on Nov 4, 2008 6:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Don't tell Hardcore Legend
you are interested in the Cardinals acquiring Howie Kendrick……it might get ugly.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Nov 4, 2008 8:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
GET REAL!
The Angels don’t need another OF. They have Vlad for at least another year, Torii Hunter for four more and Gary Matthews for three more (at least they’ll be paying him for three more), they also hope to re-sign Garret Anderson.
Figgins can also play OF, and they have Reggie Willits.
They probably wouldn’t do Figgins for Glaus straight up, let alone for Wood and Figgins.
by bdunn20 on Nov 4, 2008 6:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Anderson is old
they’ll probably let him walk, Vlad isn’t the same hitter as he was two years ago, Matthews had a sub-par season. Luddy or Ank allows them to not re-sign Anderson, and DH Vlad. So they could have a potential outfield of Luddy, Hunter, Matthews or Matthews, Hunter, Ank.
I agree that Glaus wouldn’t get anything in return that we would be interested in…btw if you wan’t to respond to a certain person’s comments click ‘reply’.
"I've never felt better to be hit by a big guy like that in my life." - Brad Lidge on Ryan Howard
by RunninRedbird on Nov 4, 2008 7:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Angels will move
Figgins to OF and play Wood at 3B, they aren’t trading him.
by Knighttime on Nov 4, 2008 10:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I don’t think they would trade him…I was just pointing out options they could have with their outfield if we dealt Luddy or Ank to them. I don’t want this deal to get done even if it was a realistic option. The Angels wouldn’t consider Ank for Wood, it would have to be Luddy and I don’t want us to get rid of him.
"I've never felt better to be hit by a big guy like that in my life." - Brad Lidge on Ryan Howard
by RunninRedbird on Nov 5, 2008 8:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
so where does
“I have recently been searching for a SS worth trading for” fit, between the spectrum of “the giants are looking for a left-handed 1B” and “what do you all think of trading for jake peavy”?
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Nov 4, 2008 7:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
In the middle...
not a joke (yet) like “lefthanded 1B”, but not the rabid nintendo trade talk. Kind of like Tina Fey playing Sarah Palin – funny, yet a hint of truth to get you think.
Don’t think they’ll give up Wood.
I have discovered in twenty years of moving around a ball park, that the knowledge of the game is usually in inverse proportion to the price of the seats. ~Bill Veeck
by bukowski on Nov 4, 2008 7:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Mr. Mo
Please don’t sign Renteria. Please don’t sign Renteria.
Think Furcal.
I have discovered in twenty years of moving around a ball park, that the knowledge of the game is usually in inverse proportion to the price of the seats. ~Bill Veeck
by bukowski on Nov 4, 2008 7:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I'm still pulling for the Zobrist trade...
But I agree, Rafael over Edgar for sure
"I've never felt better to be hit by a big guy like that in my life." - Brad Lidge on Ryan Howard
by RunninRedbird on Nov 4, 2008 8:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
For the thousandth time
Ludwick had the 6th best OPS in baseball last year. 6th best. He put up, and he costs basically zilch.
Here’s a comparison with another hitter:
2008 Luddy: 29-30 y.o. / .966 OPS / $411,000
2008 A-Rod: 32-33 y.o. / .965 OPS / $28,000,000
LUDWICK IS REALLY, REALLY GOOD AND INSANELY CHEAP WE NEED TO NOT TRADE HIM AWAY.
If Luddy drops 70 points of OPS in 2009 (a substantial and not unrealistic regression), he will still cost next to nothing and will produce an OPS around what Josh Hamilton, Adam Dunn, and Aramis Ramirez posted this past year.
I love prospects, too, but we can’t just trade away the second-most important part of our offense for unproven commodities, especially when there’s no salary relief involved. That’s just silly.
by mojowo11 on Nov 4, 2008 8:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Would you trade him for Kelly Johnson?
Because that rumor is coming out of Atlanta.
Catherine whispered into my ear, her breath rich with faraway spices, that she desire to make love. She wanted to try shinshi shinshi. Now, I'd been begging her to try shinshi shinshi for months. She'd refused on the grounds that it was unclean. Finally, she was willing to accept her lover's body in places no one had ever trespassed. Specifically, the ear canal.
by Tackle Box on Nov 4, 2008 9:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Gut reaction: no way.
Now let me look at his #’s. (He checks the numbers.)
He’s certainly a good hitter, better even that I realized (and I like KJ). I believe he has a bad reputation on defense? Not that defensive reputation is worth much these days. I wish I was more in tune with defensive stats.
Probably still no, but I’d need to think more about how it would affect our OF situation and infield situation, which I can’t do now because I’m in class.
Still, worth looking at, at least.
by mojowo11 on Nov 5, 2008 3:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Kelly Johnson
may be a good hitter for a second baseman, but we’d be trading away a guy with a 150 OPS+, good for 4th in the NL. Basically a great hitter for an average hitter who is good for a offensively-weak position. No thanks, unless there is a really good prospect thrown in.
by Ray Lankford on Nov 6, 2008 11:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Let me put it a different way...
Corner OF who had a .875+ OPS last year: 18
3B who had a .875+ OPS last year: 5
Luddy is a lot easier to replace than say, A-Rod, especially considering that 2008 was around A-Rod’s career average season. Ludwick has done it once. Let’s not compare one of the best players on the planet who’s been consistently that good for 13 seasons to a guy who’s done it for a season and a half.
I’m not saying that Luddy isn’t valuable, but even Bill James (who’s always optimistic with offensive numbers) has Ludwick having a considerable drop off next year. I think we all can agree that Colby Rasmus probably has a better skill set than Ludwick does, plays a premium defensive position, and also happens to be 8 years younger. If you can trade Ludwick for a middle infielder, preferably a SS, that can put up an .800 OPS than you have to make that trade because that would be more of an upgrade at that position than the drop off from Ludwick to, say, Mather or Rasmus, who I think could put up an OPS between .800 or .850 within a two year period if given Luddy’s AB’s. I’m obviously being extremely optimistic with both of those players, but I do believe that both of them are that good, which makes holding onto a 30 year old outfielder coming off of a career year a tenuous proposition if you can trade him to improve areas of the ballclub that need attention.
I’m not saying you trade him for anyone, but middle infielders with .800 OPS’s don’t grow on trees. I think that it would be easier to find someone internally to replace Luddy than to find someone like that for the middle infield.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Nov 4, 2008 11:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
the difference offensively in 2008
between kelly johnson and adam kennedy was 14.2 runs. About a win and a half. Definitely not “the big move” we need to make, imho.
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Nov 5, 2008 2:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't say that he was
but saying “we should not trade Ludwick for any reason, he was as good as A-Rod last year!!!!” is a ridiculous statement. I would trade Ludwick straight up for Uggla, Utley, Hanley, Kinsler, Reyes, Pedroia, or any combination of a SS and 2B where both guys would improve over what we had last year. Not one of those players had a higher OPS than Ludwick last year, but don’t tell me you wouldn’t trade him for any of those guys.
I think it’s safe to say that some people don’t understand what “depth” is. You can’t just trade your spare parts and get good players in return — sometimes you have to roll the dice and trade away a good player for another good player in a position of need and hope that the depth at that particular position can help make up for the guy you traded away. Considering the numbers that Skip, Mather, Rasmus, and Barton are capable of putting up when replacing Ludwick, I think he’s a viable trade chip, especially since he’s 30 and coming off of a career year.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
by fourstick on Nov 5, 2008 11:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
for utley, hanley, reyes, pedroia, yes
uggla maybe, but unlikely. Kinsler, no. polanco, no. Roberts, maybe, if he could play SS and signs an extension. Peralta, probably. Escobar, yes. KJ, absolutely not.
Ludwick is absolutely a viable trade chip, but the suggestions to trade him for what amounts to minor upgrade are what irks me. I think it’s safe to say that some people don’t understand how good our existing guys actually were. Both Luddy and AK are being very much underrated in trade proposals.
No matter how many 3 win players there are available as “depth”, a GM doesn’t improve a team by trading an 8-win player at a position of surplus for a single player who is 3 wins better than what he already has signed to a contract. You have to get a 5-win or better guy in return to break even, or two 3-win guys at positions of need, etc.
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Nov 5, 2008 8:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
add: Rollins, no.
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Nov 6, 2008 1:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
5 win
if a GM has to get a 5 win upgrade, no trades would happen. somebody has to settle for something and take a chance.
Smell the Glove
by emrfg8 on Nov 6, 2008 9:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
or maybe you just don't trade away your 8-win players!
Unless you are sure they are going to regress, or can’t afford to keep them for financial reasons. The first of these may apply for Luddy- and if so, then moving him might make sense- but right now the second does not.
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Nov 6, 2008 12:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wait, did you say AK is being
underrated in the trade market? Wow, I hope you can live with an offseason featuring no trades, if you’re valuing him so highly.
I love Luddy and I suspect that he is NOT just a one-year wonder, but if I were GM of another team I would laugh hysterically at the thought of flipping a player like Utley/Pedroia, etc. for him, and I wouldn’t flip an Uggla/Peralta/Roberts-level guy for him either. I’m betting that, in the eyes of non-Cardinal front offices, Luddy is still considered a risky bet.
by MdRedbirdFreak on Nov 6, 2008 4:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
and that's fine.
If that is the way he is seen, then don’t trade him. They might be right, but even if they are, there’s no reason to give luddy away for less than he is really worth.
the enemy's gate is down.
by SleepyCA on Nov 6, 2008 5:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So just exacty
how can you be so certain that Ludwick’s production in 2008 amounts to a career year? It isn’t like he has a long, established track record to compare the season to. Is there some kind of axiom that says a player must decline upon reaching age 30? I hope not, ‘cause we are going to be paying many tons of money for Albert’s 30+ years. I don’t know Ryan Ludwick, but I bet he is pretty motivated to work towards that ultimate free agency pay day.
Maybe he was a one-time sensation and maybe not. I think the only way you trade him is if the value is line with his 2008 season, not some vague assertion of what he might do in the future.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Nov 6, 2008 8:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why can't we compare them?
There’s nothing wrong with comparing the two. Certainly I would never equate the two — obviously A-Rod is a much more valuable commodity. All I was really trying to do was use A-Rod’s name/reputation as a way of demonstrating just how amazing Ludwick was last season. He was so overshadowed by Albert that even Cards fans seem to have missed his astounding offensive season.
I made sure to include the bit about a 70-point OPS regression. I know he’s not A-Rod, and I know he’s only done this once. But the point is that he can regress a pretty substantial amount and still be a huge offensive force that costs pennies. Ludwick has only been an elite hitter once, but Brandon Wood has done that exactly zero times.
That, and I worry about cherry-picking .875 as a breakoff point. The number is 18/5 there, but if you break it at .900 it’s 4 corner OFs and 3 3Bs — and that hot corner number excludes Huff and Youk, both of who can play there (though I think I excluded Milton Bradley for corner OFs, but whatever, you get my point).
.800 OPS middle-infielders don’t grow on trees, but neither do .950+ OPS outfielders who cost jack diddly.
Let me restate where I stand on this: I’m not vehemently against trading Ludwick, but trading Ludwick for anything less than an elite, cost-controlled player at a position of need would be silly. What he meant to our offense and what our offense meant to our team’s success are nothing to scoff at. I’m just a little tired of his name being thrown around willy-nilly, that’s all.
by mojowo11 on Nov 5, 2008 12:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Looks like you
pretty much nailed that one.
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Nov 6, 2008 8:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Luddy for Johnson= HELL NO
people say we need an impact bat to protect Pujols. Ludwick hit 37? homers. Honestly. that would put us in a VERY difficult offense spot.
by EFan on Nov 5, 2008 1:07 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
As I said above, I'm inclined to agree
Though I think it depends on how the MIF situation falls out this year…right now it’s _ at SS and Miles/Kennedy at second.
Kennedy wants out, Lopez is likely back (but not a sure thing), Furcal and Cabrera and others are out there.
Maybe I’m okay with trading Luddy if we end up with a MIF of Furcal and KJ, both putting up .750-.800 OPS numbers. Promote Rasmus, platoon Skip/Barton/Mather in left…how much, if any, does that hurt the offense? I don’t know. Someone who’s better with the numbers than me should mock up the projected scoring power of some of these lineups.
I feel like I probably sound like I’m flip-flopping on this issue, but whatever. What’s the difference between these two lineups?
2008:
Schumaker
Miles/Kennedy/Floppy
Pujols
Ludwick
Glaus
Ankiel
Molina
P
Izturis
2009:
Furcal
K. Johnson
Pujols
Glaus
Ankiel
Rasmus
Molina
P
Schumaker/Barton
Maybe not that much. Hmmm. If healthy, Furcal and KJ together would probably combine for 20-25 homers (our 2B/SS combined for 8 total this year). Does Rasmus make up the rest of that longball output?
Bah. I can’t think about this right now. Too much to do, too may variables and possibilities to consider.
by mojowo11 on Nov 5, 2008 3:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
your hypothetical 2009 lineup
has a chance of having an average or above-average bat at every position (assuming yadi doesn’t slide way back or something) and that’s a pretty intriguing notion. but then there’s defense to think about…
by mattybobo on Nov 5, 2008 4:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Defense seems solid enough
Both MIF’s would be steps down defensively but big steps up offensively. I think in the end it works out. Furcal’s no Iz2, but he’s no slouch either (from what I hear). Johnson supposedly sucks, but…well, I dunno. He’s a hitter, not a fielder. Can’t always have a defensive whiz at every position, I suppose.
Pujols is amazing. Glaus was amazing this year. Ankiel is solid to good, Rasmus is supposedly top notch, Molina is beastly, and Schu/Moonman are above average. Seems like even if Johnson kinda sucks, the team would still be pretty damn solid on D.
by mojowo11 on Nov 5, 2008 4:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
coolness
if furcal held his own, as you think he would, johnson would really be the only bad defensive player. i have also ready, however, that johnson’s offense+defense is barely better than kennedy, since kennedy’s defense is so good. but it would solve the problem of lineup blackholes. i’m torn on johnson, i really don’t feel like i would want to give up ludwick for him but i have to admit it makes some sense, assuming we improve at SS as well.
by mattybobo on Nov 5, 2008 7:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
above average? Schumaker?
I believe the term was “gold glove caliber.” :)
by tom s. on Nov 11, 2008 12:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ludwick for Johnson is absurd
Decimation of the top of the order and a decent, for a not outstanding upgrade in middle infield hitting. You’re talking about a Top 5 slugger last year. For Kelly Johnson? Uggla, maybe. But not Johnson. Hell, not even for Escobar. Johnson looks like Kahlil Greene in a good year. Kahlil Greene is available. You’ve got 6-8 adequate middle infielders, including a couple of outstanding ones available through free agency or trade. Are we saving money for Matt Holliday or something? If that’s the plan, then fine. Otherwise, forget it.
by Red in Chicago on Nov 6, 2008 12:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Vlad really needs to DH to save that back of his
his swings have taken a major toll on it & he’s definitely on the wrong side of his career.
would i trade LUD? not if Skippy or Ank would get the job done. we need LUD a lot more than we need Skippy or Ank. just sayin’
I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!
by gdm426 on Nov 5, 2008 2:08 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Personally
I get sick of seeing Adam Kennedy’s name in any other context except G O N E.
And ill at any Luddy reference other than “starting in right field and hitting fourth.”
by the Tewk on Nov 6, 2008 2:08 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
How about starting in RF
and hitting third?
Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...
by giveml on Nov 6, 2008 8:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Did it
ever occur to anyone that Albert might WANT to bat third?
by spants on Nov 6, 2008 3:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, ludwick hitting third makes ME ill, b/c I think it will happen when Pujols' ligament finally snaps.
by tom s. on Nov 11, 2008 12:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
YOU KEEP
THOSE THOUGHTS TO YOURSELF!
:P
by spants on Nov 11, 2008 1:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
exactly!
where is Tackle Box with those flags when we need him?
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
by mattyfrommo on Nov 11, 2008 7:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hold on guys
I don’t see the Cards trading away Ludwick unless they can come up with a healthy right handed outfield bat. We have a lot of lefty bats in the outfield and Luddy is a the best value on the team. Then again, if Matt Holliday were on the line…
by bigmotors on Nov 6, 2008 2:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
If we trade Ludwick for Kelly Johnson straight up
then my faith in Mo and this organization would hit an all time low (at least since the early 90’s). They had better have a REAL reason to do this as in getting Holliday or someone like him that can hit behind Albert. If the reason for this is so Skip can be an everyday player with Rasmus coming up…then say goodbye to any hopes of having a team that can compete for the playoffs. Albert will be walked even more and the team will really struggle to score runs. Luddy was a HUGE part of the line-up this year. Hell he was an All-Star for crying out loud. Without him we would have probably been a 5th place team and wouldn’t have come close to a wild card spot as we were until the final month.
I hope I am wrong but I am starting to get a real bad feeling about this off season. If we go for cheap again and watch the Cubs get even better (they are serious players in the Peavy hunt) I am going to really start wishing DeWitt would just put the team up for sale and SOON. I know the economy sucks…BUT I’m getting pretty tired of the Cards playing the “cheap card” and settling on getting average to below average players for one year deals hoping that they “catch lightening in a bottle” while our rival makes their team better (even though they have no championships to prove it).
But oh yeah I forgot we have to stick to the plan because our prospects are going to save the day. Sorry I forgot. The mindframe should be to not worry about 2009 and just worry about 2011 and beyond. But wait….last year it was we were playing for the great team we are supposed to have for 2009. …..is that still the plan? I’m a little confused about this..it seems like the years have changed. Last year it was play for 2009…and now I am hearing 2010 and 2011 from some people.
I hope this rant is all for not and they do have a plan to make the Cards serious contenders next season…but as of now my hopes are not real high. I know ..I know I need to stick to the “2011 plan” so I need to be the “good fan” that sticks with the team’s plan to save money and prospects now and hope for the best in the years to come when the Championships will start to roll in again. RIGHT????
We’ve got a long way to go and a short time to get there.
by KYCards on Nov 6, 2008 6:09 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Is Johnson really that valuable?
He is a pretty good hitter for a second baseman, but from what everyone says his defense is bad. Kennedy is the reverse, and we don’t have to give anything up for him. The Cardinals offense (OPS 2nd in league) and defense (RZR tied for 1st, OOZ 3rd) were both really this year, and while improvements can be made, I don’t think they should be the priority. Even with the outstanding defense and the one of the worst hitter’s ballpark in the majors, the team ERA ranked only 7th in the league. FIP was 12th.
Once the rotation looks good and we’ve got a competent lefty in the pen, I would be willing to upgrade the lineup.
by aNdrOss on Nov 6, 2008 3:43 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
