Viva El Birdos: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Purdue wins Paradise Jam Tournament 73-72

Miscellany

Jack_benny_tiny by DanUpBaby on Comment 235 comments

I.

MEMO

RE: Rawlings™ Gold Gloves, Offense, 1B A.P.

Friends,

Am pleased to see voting continue apace—remember to place all ballots in the accompanying SASE by Friday. I've had my secretary attach a list of first basemen sorted by games played at first base. I can not stress this enough: please make sure your first place vote goes to someone who played at first base. 

In any case, there's been some confusion and someone recommended, as a result, that we reiterate the criteria for selecting a Rawlings™ Gold Glover based on his offensive contributions. You will find this list attached.

  1. Candidate must be an excellent offensive player. I think this goes without saying.
  2. Candidate must not be too excellent an offensive player. There is a point at which one's offense simply becomes a distraction, one that may in fact be detrimental to team defense. If one's first baseman hits .357 what's to keep a shortstop from playing down on his heels, content that a run or two can be made up on offense? It's a useful corollary to remember that players whose offensive skills seem ill-suited for their position—not enough power at first, too much speed in an outfield corner—are outstanding defensive players, because if they weren't why would they be playing the position at all?
  3. When all else fails, just guess. Who's to say? There are lots of great defensive players in the league. Just vote for somebody you think is one!
  4. Say Rawlings™ before you say Gold Glove. In the phrase "Adrian Gonzalez is going to win the Rawlings™ Gold Glove!", for instance.
I hope this proves to be of assistance. For our next meeting I'd like everyone to come in with their pick, bake sale or car wash, so that we have time to debate the winner.

Yours,
Bud Selig

II.

Al at Bleed Cubbie Blue reports, from the Sun-Times, that Mark Cuban will not be the Cubs' next owner. I don't know about you guys, but for me this is cause for a sigh of relief. Cuban may be a little crazy, but he's also a guy who has no readily apparent upper spending limit—a guy who seems to own the Mavericks as a money-losing hobby first and a business that might make him some money only incidentally. 

If he'd have been able to combine that with the Cubs' unreal revenue stream... well, I think their idea of a free agent problem would be running out of free agents. 

III.

Lots of interesting stuff in this Strauss article, which has already made the rounds. In order of interest, for me, we have:
  1. Chris Duncan ready for Spring Training(!?)
  2. The Cardinals have expressed early interest in Jeremy Affeldt and Arthur Rhodes. Neither is a top-of-the-line lefty reliever; Rhodes, 39 next year, has had intermittent control issues since his Seattle heyday while Affeldt still has those troubling years with Kansas City weighing down his record. But both seem likely to be a significant upgrade at a spot where the Cardinals got no traction all last year.
  3. Ryan Ludwick or Rick Ankiel might might might be traded, maybe. Honestly this seems to really mean that Ryan Ludwick might be traded—seeing as, at this point, he's already been involved in purported discussions for Braves 2B Kelly Johnson and, now, omnipresent trade icon Matt Holliday.
Now, I think Matt Holliday is an excellent baseball player, above-average in every facet of the game and underrated by the fact that just about every player hits better at home than he does on the road, unless he's Albert Pujols or some other kind of cyborg, and doubling a player's road split rarely seems to accurately gauge their value.

But trading Ludwick straight up for him only works if your owner is Mark Cuban, because if Holliday has the kind of season that would make the trade a successful one the Cardinals would suddenly be on the hook for a six year deal. Ludwick, on the other hand, will be cost-controlled for the next few years, which could well take the Cardinals right through his prime.

As for Kelly Johnson, he's a fine player but it would be an aggressive move for Moz to make, one that not only assumes that Ludwick will regress but that Rasmus (or Rasmus and some combination of Mather and Duncan and Barton) is ready to put up, say, a 110 OPS+ and sterling defense to off-set some of his value. Given Mozeliak's early trades of Rolen and Edmonds, two beloved former all-stars in their own right, I think he's gutsy enough to do it, but I don't know if he'll see enough value there. 

0 recs  |  Comment 235 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Read More: Ryan Ludwick (RF - STL), Matt Holliday (LF - STL), Kelly Johnson (2B - ATL), Adrian Gonzalez (1B - SDP), St. Louis Cardinals

Comments

Display:

Cuban

I don’t think Cuban would scare me as a Cubs owner.

His biggest asset is quirky methods of getting people interested in his team, getting tickets sold, and in general, generating interest. The cubbies don’t need help with any of that.

He is impatient as an owner, and gets in the way of day-to-day opperations. He also blew up the Mavs, and blew any chance of them competing for anything meaningful over the next few years.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 10:25 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

I agree with

DanUpBaby on this one…he would scare the daylights out of me. They might have gone for Sabathia, Dempster, Burnett, and Manny this offseason.

by stlfan on Nov 7, 2008 10:29 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Based on what?

The guy is rich, but his money supply isn’t endless. He didn’t spend like that in Dallas. In fact, his cheapness (letting Nash go over money) is the reason they don’t contend any longer.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 10:41 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

You don't want a guy like that owning YOUR team

but you kind of don’t want a guy like that owning a team in your division, either. Look at all the stupid nonsense that Steinbrenner has pulled over the years. But you sure as hell wouldn’t want him owning a team in the NL Central.

They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...

by Valatan on Nov 7, 2008 11:09 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

somehow, cuban is being compared to stein?

it’s not even close, on any level. cuban has never been or shown he’s a free spending juggernaut nor would he do it as a baseball owner.

you don’t want him owning the cubs because he’s very, very smart, will surround him by smart people and won’t have sentimental attachment get in the way of return on investment for the player assets he seeks.

but one thing he’s not is someone that will double payroll to win a ws, not even close.

the fact that he’s out of the running shows that the cubs franchise is being pumped and overvalued beyond belief.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 11:30 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Big difference between NBA and MLB

Salary Cap.

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 7, 2008 12:10 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

soft cap

and if you have followed anything the mavs have done, several of the years they could have traded or bought their way into a “player of the moment” and went over the cap for a year to attempt another run.

he has never, ever shown to spend money like he didn’t earn it. nor would he in baseball imo.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 12:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

the two statements you made above seem contrary to each other.

they did trade for jason kidd – player of the moment.

by rlgosnell on Nov 7, 2008 12:50 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Kidd sucks.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 1:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

kidd's old

but suck he doesn’t.

Surprised he didn’t get your vet juices flowin’, NBA not like the MLB for ya?

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 1:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Kidd was the captain

of a USA team that just won the gold medal. I agree with AE here.

"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 7, 2008 2:05 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

He was a captain based on his career.....

Not the player he currently is.

Dude is probably not even a top 12-15 pg in the NBA right now.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 2:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Right

the Mavs got him to do the job that Devon Harris couldn’t…lead the team…Coach K had him as captain because he has been a leader throughout his career. A player doesn’t have to put up tremendous numbers to be an important assest to a team. Kidd’s role is to distribute and make smart decisions on the court.

"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 7, 2008 2:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

he was 9th last year in a year where he was surrounded by a horrid core 5/8ths of the year and then shifted teams and systems and played in system that didn’t allow any free movement. It’s been documented many times that he would be on an 3-2 break and Avery would scream him back for a set play.

His Roland rating has dramatically shifted from last year to this year already. Almost ten points.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 2:44 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

and just to add for kicks

In adjusted +/- he was actually the 3rd best point guard and 10th overall with players over 2k minutes. That doesn’t exactly describe… sucks imo.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 3:18 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

wow

I see SoonerfanTU is not really a basketball expert. Sure Kidd is not the player he once was, but he is still pretty damn good. Sucks? wow, hardly.

I still don’t like the trade Dallas made to get him, but that is besides the point.

by Knighttime on Nov 8, 2008 12:04 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I disagree. Shaq was a player of a moment. By all accounts.

Kidd made the team better in numerous ways the ED (efficiency differential) for the team jumped up .6 in 23 games to stand at just under 5.0 on the season and was a dramatic turn around pre-Kidd, Dirk’s Win Score also had a dramatic turn around.

And that was counting the fact that Avery was clearly not on board to allow any freedom.

Even from a business point of view it allowed them to not be looked at from a “in the west and didn’t do a thing” perspective. it was a smart move overall and may pay real dividends this year.

(side bar, I bet and cap NBA, but i’m not a mav fan, so this isn’t homerism or cuban fanboyism. he has his faults, but that signing wasn’t one of them)

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 1:37 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

you may say Cuban is very smart and that is undoubtedly true

however owning a successful NBA team and a successful MLB team are not achieved by the exact same means (and by successful i mean rings). NBA teams do not require the scouting depth or developmental systems that MLB requires. The decisions in the NBA are more limited and can be more direct because you are playing with 5 starters and a 12 man roster. In MLB you have 9 starters and a 25 and 40 man roster plus an extensive farm system. The deals Cuban can make in the NBA impact his team exponentially more than they might in MLB. He would have to discover a new approach if he did make the leap into this arena.

by rlgosnell on Nov 7, 2008 12:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

They aren’t the same means at all, the impact statements are true. But at the same time under baseball negative impact signings can compound a lot quicker.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 1:42 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

There's a salary cap in the NBA

that limits how much Cuban can spend.

"Cross a lawyer with the Godfather, make you an offer you can't understand" - Don Henley

by TurdFerguson on Nov 7, 2008 11:10 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

its a soft cap

they can spend more than the cap but have to put a dollar for dollar amount back to the nba’s spreading of the wealth

"Textbooks are Soviet propaganda" - Rev. Jerry Falwell

by elirock83 on Nov 7, 2008 11:33 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Sort of.....

The soft cap prevents a team from signing anyone that they don’t have “bird” rights for once they’re over the cap. It limits what a team can do, because it means you have to acquire new players through trades, either real trades or the good ole’ sign-and-trade.

Either way, you have to have a willing partner, and there is, of course, the luxury tax that you refer to as well, but that threshold is actually higher than that of the salary cap.

by mtalken on Nov 7, 2008 9:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

The Nash thing

might be just as much a cap issue as anything else. Also, they had a first round draft pick at point in Devan Harris who was turning into a pretty good player at the time too.

Had there been no cap in the NBA, I bet Nash is still wearing a Mavs uniform.

by mtalken on Nov 7, 2008 9:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

not going to disagre with you...

but the NBA has a psudo Salary Cap – totally different situation. As far as that goes, the Mavericks did have the 2nd higest 2007-08 payroll, and paid the 2nd highest luxury tax behind the Kincks. They also have the 3rd highest payroll for 2008-09.

I think Cuban would spend more in the NBA if he was allowed to. No question he would be a high spending owner in baseball – not sure if he would be good, but he would spend.

by Knighttime on Nov 7, 2008 11:56 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Bernie has a nice article up on the Holliday action...

He showed that his road splits have actually improved the last 3 years and more so the last 2 years.

He also pointed out his defensive abilities as being above average for LF.

The idea of Holliday is starting to grow on me especially if it means we put Ank in a safer area of the outfield to take some wear and tear off his body and get Raz up for CF next year.

I mean can you really complain about an OF of Holliday, Raz, Ank…?

*Rasmus is to CF as Longoria is to 3B*

by Red Blazer on Nov 7, 2008 10:30 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

And yet

the title of said article is “Matt Holliday? Let the Buyer Beware”

by cardsgirl95 on Nov 7, 2008 10:40 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

But...

is he an upgrade over Ludwick? If yes, enough to offset the $10 million difference in salary for 2009 and having Ludwick cost controlled for 2010-2011*? Would the whole point be so that we can sign him long term? This doesn’t do anything to clean up our outfield log-jam/create room for Rasmus…Holliday plays in left where Ludwick would be playing. One more thing…we’d have TWO free agent outfielders after next season one in line for $16mil+/season and the other for $10mil+/season…suddenly we have concerns about outfield depth.

  • can the final year of arbitration still be considered cost controlled? Players are usually making FA money at this point.

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 10:42 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Ankiel goes, Ludwick stays

As much as TLR loves Ankiel like a son, he should be the odd man out. One less year of cost control. Plays CF where Rasmus is to be inserted. His agent is Boras. We could stop right there with the last point. Granted, Ankiel has lesser trade value than Ludwick but we have lots of trading chips on the farm not named Rasmus.

by jjray on Nov 7, 2008 10:47 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Rick has two* years less cost control/team control, not one. he’s a FA after next year, he’s also a large question mark in regards to his second half last year and the injuries therein. You have to add that he’s considered a lot less discipline with the bat and while I hate to admit it, there’s going to be some mental make up questions.

He isn’t even close to a Luddy in terms of trade power.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 11:12 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

if

you normalize the at bats it’ll be pretty close. But I was coming from a perception thing, Rick’s swing is considerably longer than Ryans, by a margin.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 2:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

true

but I think it’s a bit of a myth that Ankiel is that bad of a hitter

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 3:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not saying he's bad

but if you were to ask all front offices/scouting dept of all teams in the league if Rick can be summed up as a

a.) long swinging mistake hitter
b.) disciplined at bat.

A will win convincingly. Add that with his injury and mental make up woes and then throw in the fact that he’s going on his FA year. Why would you want to touch that?

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 3:44 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

that’s why I think he is staying, and that if we traded him, we’d be ripped off.

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 4:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That's a great point

about the free agent OF. If we’re trading Ludwick, we would be better served to get some MI and/or rotation help, IMO.

"Cross a lawyer with the Godfather, make you an offer you can't understand" - Don Henley

by TurdFerguson on Nov 7, 2008 11:09 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Really wish.....

We could move Ank instead of Luddy, but I think I like it either way.

We still run into the problem of having a glut of left-hand hitting OF’s. 3 of the top 4 (Ankiel, Skip, and Raz) would be lefties. Love Skip in the 4th OF role though.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 10:43 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I love Skip

in the trade chip role

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 2:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Why?

He is cheap, and hits righties very well. You don’t think that is valuable? He can start if need be, plays a couple of OF spots. Can run some.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 2:03 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

the problem is

that description matches up with Colby Rasmus better than any other tradable outfielder.

by DanUpBaby on Nov 7, 2008 2:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

But it's dumb.....

to have Colby on the bench, getting half the AB’s as he’d get in AAA.

If Colby is in the Majors, he needs to be starting.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 2:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

You don't HAVE to move Skip

To start Colby.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 2:59 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Then why keep around another LH OF'er

that can only platoon? Since Colby is LH and if we make a broad assumption that he would need a platoon partner (sometimes) vs LHP, that ain’t Skip.

Skippy become redundant.

Still looking for 1985 Regular Season games on DVD/VHS

by Hardcore Legend on Nov 7, 2008 3:00 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah

I want to remove as much temptation from TLR as possible. As long as Skip is around, TLR will say he is proven and Colby is not. Therefore, Colby will have to “earn” his playing time, or worse yet be left in the minors.

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Nov 7, 2008 4:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I think Skip's valuable...

and if we get rid of Ankiel might make sense as a 4th OFer…but with Ankiel and Rasmus a third LH’d OFer is probably too much (that’s not to mention Duncan). If we have both Ankiel and Rasmus to start the year Skip has a lot more value to another team than to the STL.

My hope is that we trade one or both of Skip and Ankiel leaving an ‘09 OF of Ludwick, Rasmus and Mather as starters with Duncan and Jay or Barton on the bench. If we keep Ank Mather doesn’t start. If we keep Schu Barton or Jay isn’t on the team.

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 2:14 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

even more reason to trade Schu

I think Barton will be the better leadoff guy. going with my gut there.

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 2:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

It's not just your gut

Skip as leadoff: .309/.370/.416/.786
BB as leadoff: .271/.362/.451/.813

Virtually the same OBP, but Barton has way better ISO and better speed. Pretty similar OFs overall with different strengths. Plus, Barton had identical OPSes against LHPs and RHPs.

I don’t know if he is the best leadoff hitter we can come up with, but he has a pretty good chance to be an improvement over Skip with extended playing time.

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Nov 7, 2008 4:22 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Which is exactly why he is a good trade chip

Mather is cheap, can hit righties, start if need be, runs well, and can play CF. He can also provide more power than Skip, so why keep Skip around if we have plenty of good options for a 4th OF. I know you are probably thinking if this is the case then Mather should be the trade chip. Well if we can fit him into a package that benefits us and we keep Skip in the 4th spot I’m all for it.

"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 7, 2008 2:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I have a feeling we've witnessed Skips upside

and Mather’s has a bit to go. Sell high on Skip, Mather is an asset in a LH heavy OF

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 2:18 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

exactly

I think if anyone regresses in the OF, it’ll be skip

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 3:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

man I hope not

because if he regresses any it’ll be off the RHP (since LHP can’t really get any worse), then we’re really stuck with a poor, poor asset

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 3:37 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

+since he has nothing else to offer*

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 3:37 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

A package that benefits us?

Mather for Zobrist?

Zobrist’s .844 OPS sure would look nice at SS…

by mojowo11 on Nov 7, 2008 10:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Note

He is a .385 hitter with a .478 on base percentage and an .872 slugging percentage at Busch Stadium. That’s even better than his numbers in Colorado.

by pattimagee on Nov 7, 2008 1:11 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Devil's advocate

I think that’s an interesting point. But I also have two comments.
1) That is over 46 plate appearances, a very small sample size.
2) His performance against us at our home might be overly influencing our appraisal of him.
3) You might be well aware of all the above and are in fact being sarcastic. In such an event I would feel like kind of a dope.
You may also notice that I made three comments, when I said I would make two. I would point out that our political leaders often succeed in convincing us that one and one makes three. Two is one and one. Ergo, two comments = three comments.

by mattybobo on Nov 7, 2008 1:23 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

and yet somehow you just made one comment

I’d like to see which of our pitchers he was going up against in those 46…

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 2:02 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

If you want to give weight

to the small sample size that Holliday has at Busch, then how is this for a recent small sample: .100/.308/.100/.408

That is Holliday’s 2008 slash line at Busch. It has just about as much validity as a projection as his overall Busch III split. He has about as much chance of matching those numbers as Floppy has of matching his .379/.427/.483/.910 line at Busch.

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Nov 7, 2008 4:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I think a (possible) Holliday trade...

…is an example of what can be done right now, as opposed to addressing the middle infield/lefty relief/starting pitching. The Rox are apparently committed to dealing Holliday sooner than later, while the Braves aren’t (quite) ready to move Escobar or K. Johnson immediately.

Of the Cards’ three current OFs (Lud/Ank/Skippy), I expect them to keep two; C. Duncan is a huge unknown coming back from disc surgery, and they’ll need a “fall-back” if Rasmus isn’t MLB-ready next season. Middle infield may be a much more pressing need, but ya gotta have trade partners to make a move! (I am of the opinion the Birds will be out-bid for Furcal/O. Hudson… and that might not be the worst thing, anyway, given those two players’ age and injuries…)

"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra

by The Ol Goaler on Nov 7, 2008 10:37 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

getting a push on right now

Trading Ludwick for Holliday doesn’t make sense to me, and it would represent a complete reversal of the Cards strategy under the Mo regime. What does make sense to me is that they might be trying to create some urgency for Atlanta to get a deal done sooner rather than later.

by apack on Nov 7, 2008 11:12 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That is the only way make sense

That this is all bull shit to appease LaRussa and create value for Ludwick.

by FlimtotheFlam on Nov 7, 2008 12:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

that's probably the best case scenario

moz playa playa

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 2:19 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes

It’s Strategery

"Do what you want to the women and children but leave me alone"- George Carlin

by That's a Winner on Nov 7, 2008 4:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

beating a dead horse

I can’t wait until the cardinals are free to build the best team for a manager to manage, rather than building a team the manager thinks he can manage best.

by Ricky Vaughn on Nov 7, 2008 12:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

the one thing I do know about Duncan

is that he’s not an outfielder

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 2:18 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

So...after reading the P-D the last couple of days...

Could we end up getting Holliday, Escobar, and a pitching prospect (Lillebridge – sp?) for Ludwick and Ankiel? If so, I might say it’s a good idea…if Rasmus is as good as advertised.

That would give us a lineup something like this:

Skip/Barton RF (v. R/L)
Rasmus CF
Pujols 1B
Holliday LF
Glaus 3B
Molina C
Escobar SS
Pitcher
Kennedy 2B

by stlfan on Nov 7, 2008 10:40 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

not much lefthanded power in that lineup

i know that is somewhat nit-picky, but that would make things easier for managers in terms of how to manage their bullpens

still, mo would prove his mettle if he pulled that off

oh and isn’t lillebridge a SS…the pitching prospect i heard mentioned was hanson

by VolsnCards5 on Nov 7, 2008 10:44 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Well...

Ankiel would be gone…yes…but Pujols and Holliday hit righties as well as lefties.

by stlfan on Nov 8, 2008 11:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

my issue with the whole holliday situation

the Rockies are going to want more than just luddy…i’m afraid they are going to want a lot more than just luddy, like two B-level types…(jones and todd?)…that scares me

to me ludwick, while he won’t put up the nmbers that holliday will, will not be enough worse to justify trading one or two A-B level prospects

if we make this deal, we have to sign holliday to a multi-year extension in the range of 15-18 million(thats just a guess, may be more, may be less)…that is a ton of money to spend….my question becomes whether or not holliday will be 8-10 million dollars better than ludwick over the next three seasons(assuming luddy gets around 5-8 million in arbitration)

i guess i just don’t see the point of this deal…maybe holliday is really that much better than ludwick, but i’m not seeing it…if we are going to trade ludwick, i’d rather package him with a couple prospects for a young MI(i know, i know…those are not readily available)

by VolsnCards5 on Nov 7, 2008 10:41 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

if we're after an impact bat

Luddy is more of an impact bat than Holliday. If we’re after a guy who can hit for average, than Holliday is our guy.

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 2:20 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

just to add, holliday can hit lefties pretty well and as a team we don’t fair well against them. just to add to the puzzle.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 2:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

just another chance to use my favorite word

this is convoluted

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 3:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Hmmm

Holliday vs. LHP in 2008: 896 OPS
Ludwick vs. LHP in 2008: .929 OPS

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Nov 7, 2008 4:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Ludwick for Career .797 in 493 PA
Holliday for Career .892 in 660 PA

While I have a bias for Luddy, I’m trying to look at a sample size that is larger than 208 PA.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 4:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Trades

I’m beginning to warm on Holliday as well, but I’m still mostly skeptical. I do admit that I like the idea of trading Ludwick. I loved his season, and hope he can keep it going (in StL or elsewhere), but…

Hey, this team needs some pieces, putting it mildly.

On the other hand, I read somewhere that the Phillies are charging hard over Holliday. If true, I think that makes it unlikely that Ludwick gets Holliday. Might be more, in the end.

So, in my opinion, if Ludwick buys Holliday- ok, fine. If it’s Ludwick+, forget about it and enjoy Philadelphia sir.

by Scarecrow7775 on Nov 7, 2008 10:45 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

I just don't get this...

is Holliday really better than Ludwick? I can’t wrap my mind around this whole trade theory. If we’re moving Ludwick it’s because we have a glut of Major League OFers…why trade an apple for an apple when you’ve already got a bushel of apples? Ludwick has more VALUE than Holliday…his name might not be as big…but he has more value due to years of service.

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 11:15 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I think it comes down to...

projectability (is that a word). Holliday is proven (inasmuch as a Rockie can be) while Ludwick has had one great season and a whole bunch of man-sized injuries.

by Scarecrow7775 on Nov 7, 2008 11:22 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Anybody care to post the projections from...

ZIPs, Pecota, Bill James etc…for Ludwick vs. Holliday?

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 11:28 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

there’s a discussion between sleepyca and I in the hotstove post for this week that delves in that direction

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 11:32 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Skimmed through it...

and I do agree with Sleepy’s points about projecting Luddy and Ankiel…but I didn’t read anything about this year’s projections. I’d be curious to see what they are/how they compare.

On another note would it be reasonable to use park factor to deflate Holliday’s Coors numbers to what they would look like if his home games were played at Busch III? Somebody did this for Brian Giles in another thread.

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 11:59 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

sleepy did that too

but if you deflate the home numbers due to being in StL, then you should inflate the road numbers for being in the NL Central and being out of the denver effects, in my opinion at least.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 12:03 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm a little confused about that last part...

are you saying that the NL West is more run-suppressing that the NL Central? That I agree with – Petco and Dodger Stadium are both pitchers parks…I believe PacBell? (whatever the Giants stadium is called now) is pretty Neutral while Cincinatti, Chicago and Houston all inflate offense I think Milwaukee and Pittsburgh are pretty neutral. If there was someway to compare OPS vs. National League East it might make for a level playing field.

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 12:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

average park factors

NL Central= .993 highest factor= Cincinnati @ 1.069
NL West= .988 highest factor= Arizona @ 1.135

Pretty much even.

by ICbirdfan on Nov 7, 2008 12:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

now what happens when you remove st lous and denver?

because when you’re looking at road splits, that’s what you need to do.

meaning, does coors pump up the average park factor? does StLhave any effect in the other direction?

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 12:28 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

louis*

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 12:28 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

exactly...

STL’s park factor lowers the NL Central and Colorado’s raise the NL west. Surprised to see AZ has a higher park factor than Coors.

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 12:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

mee too...

I was in too much of a hurry to take out coors and what not. i was just showing both leagues overall were close. The NL West has 2 parks in the top ten just like the NL Central but the NL centrals two in the top 10 are lower

by ICbirdfan on Nov 7, 2008 12:51 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

It all depends on what you mean

by “corrected”. The HR totals are no longer like a video game, but it is still the 2nd best park for hitters in the NL. Averages are still very high due to the dimensions and every significant Rockies hitter except one has much batter numbers at home.

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Nov 7, 2008 4:32 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

just saying it's not as much of an offensive oasis

as it used to be I guess

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 5:32 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I just fed last year's data into the Pinto Lineup toy

With a few normalizing adjustments, using Lopez (assumes OBP=.350/SLG=.450) at second, with a plug for a new SS and pitcher.

The runs created with Ludwick (assumes OBP=.375/SLG=.550) were 5.506 and with Holliday (assumes OBP=.395/SLG=.570) were 5.547. (With optimal lineups this goes slightly higher, to 5.6 RPG.)

You have to assume serious regression by Ludwick, beyond even what I put in for this deal to make sense.

by Red in Chicago on Nov 7, 2008 12:04 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Where did you get the .395/.570 line...

for Holliday? Last year he put up .409/.538 per BR.

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 12:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Just a SWAG

He’s going to slug better than .538, for sure. But I just figured his OBP would be down a little bit with fewer ABs at Coors. Likewise, I figured Ludwick’s SLG would be down a bit off last year.

by Red in Chicago on Nov 7, 2008 12:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I think Holliday is quite a bit better.....

And I think it is a consistency issue as much as anything. I don’t expect Holliday to be nearly as streaky as some of our other hitters, Luddy included. That is what killed us last year…..poor hitting from the MI, coupled with droughts from Ank/Lud/Glaus. If you replace a streaky guy with a guy that is more consistent, AND better, well, that is a good thing.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 11:30 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I have to say I'm not surprised you think...

Holliday is better. You tend to trust the veteran players a bit more..not that there is anything wrong with that. I happen to think they are about equal players, and very difficult to compare/project for mulitple reasons. As for streakiness…Ludwick had a HORRIBLE June…but posted the following OPS’s by month last year…pretty consistent if you ask me.

April – 1.037
May – 1.124
July – .994
August – 1.036
September – .941

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 12:09 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Nice

How is Holliday a vet compared to Luddy? Not like I’m touting one of them over Raz.

I like Luddy. I’ve posted several times that I’d rather move Ankiel.

My consistency theory isn’t on a month-to-month basis, more on a game to game basis. Maybe week to week. Doubt there is a stat for what I saw with my eyes while watching the games this year. We seemed to be an all or nothing type offense. Alot of that, IMO, was due to Glaus, Ankiel, and Luddy. Probably Luddy less so than the others, but that might change next year. We need consistent hitters. Adding Holliday to the lineup makes a ton of sense.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 12:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Because of major league experience...

I guess I should say you lean towards “PROVEN” players…? Do you consider Ludwick a veteran? Surely not in the way you would consider Holliday.

I had Holliday on my fantasy team this year…and I can attest to the fact that he is no more consistent than Ludwick. He definitely had hot and cold streaks…though month to month it balanced out (notice how his Sept. compares to Ludwick’s June OPS of .704):

April – .901
May – 1.023
June – .955
July – 1.127
August – .948
September – .662

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 12:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Adding Holliday to the lineup makes a ton of sense...

IF he is replacing Ankiel, or even Glaus. Both of whom are lesser hitters than Ludwick and more expensive. Replacing Ludwick with Holliday does nothing to improve this team…and could do a great deal to make the team worse in 2010 and 2011. Let’s not forget that the extra $10 mil we would pay Holliday vs. Ludwick means we can’t sign a FA starter, SS, closer or whatever else you want that could actually IMPROVE the team.

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 12:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

nailed it

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 3:06 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

agree 1000%

luddy out and holiday in means mo’s brain is on holiday

"No matter where you go, there you are" Buckeroo Bonzai Across the 8th Dimension

by sportsman on Nov 7, 2008 8:56 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I know we are discussing Holiday for Ludwick

But streaky hitting wasn’t what killed us last year. Our pitching is what killed us last year, with our shitty middle infield coming in a close second, as you note. Acquiring Holiday ensures (assuming the Rox don’t eat salary, which I doubt they will) that we will have, at best, marginal upgrades to our bullpen, staff, and middle infield.

You just don’t trade for a slight upgrade when you will have to pay exponentially more for it — particularly when you have infinitely more pressing needs.

by Ray Lankford on Nov 7, 2008 1:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't know where to find the stats.....

But I be we had an unusually high number of games where we scored 2 runs or less.

I think Holliday helps reduce that number.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 1:36 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

What

by being a less productive hitter than Ludwick?

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Nov 7, 2008 1:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Uh.....

okay

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 1:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I think giveml thought "that number" meant

the number of runs and not the number of games. I had to reread your post :)

by outraged on Nov 7, 2008 2:58 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Holliday

had a lower slugging % than Ludwick. what more do you want?

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 3:12 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

only one team in the NL

was shut out fewer times than us. Were were pretty much average for scoring 1 and 2 runs.

STL							
runs    0     1     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9   10+
STL     5    16    21    24    18    22    15     9    11     7   14
NL Avg 9.3  15.3  21.1  23.7  21.1  18.0  15.1  12.4  8.3   6.3  11.4

the enemy's gate is down.

by SleepyCA on Nov 7, 2008 2:14 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

come on

don’t come to those debates with stats. ;)

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 2:20 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

great quote from urban meyer this weekend

“They say statistics are for losers, but losers are usually the ones thinking that,” Meyer

lol

the enemy's gate is down.

by SleepyCA on Nov 7, 2008 2:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

nice, heh

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 3:19 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think that really proves anything.....

Now compare our numbers to the averages for “good” teams. Like, the top half of the league.

Of course we compare pretty well when you factor in lineups like Pittsburg and Washington.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 2:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

takes forever to format the tables, grumble

anyway, FYI, the data is available from B-R under team page, then “game logs” for pitching. At the very bottom there is a “run support” area. Anyway, just comparing NL playoff teams and STL:

runs    0     1	 2      3      4      5     6     7+
STL     5    16	 21     24     18     22    15     27
Other  7.8   15.2  18.6   22.6   17.4   18.6  16.2   32.4

Looks like our real problem was that we didn’t score 7+ as often as the other teams.

the enemy's gate is down.

by SleepyCA on Nov 7, 2008 2:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Well.....

We should try to do that more than. lol

I’ll admit that those numbers seem to show the problem that I still think we had last year, but I really can’t argue with them. Thanks for putting that together. Mind if I ask where you got the stats from?

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 3:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

just realized the 7+ is wrong

I was adding 7-9 run games but didn’t include 10+. When you do that, STL had 41 and the other teams averaged 43.0, so it’s not that big of a difference- we had 14 10+ games.

the enemy's gate is down.

by SleepyCA on Nov 7, 2008 3:05 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

bug you for more data?

Thank you for putting together the distributions for run/game. I thought the results are really interesting.
1. I did a chi-squared test based on your data and found that the difference between distributions (i.e. STL vs. playoff or STL vs. NL) are not statistically significant. Which makes me wonder if playoff vs. non-playoff would be. This was a bit surprising to me, since I thought surely the playoff distribution would look different.
So would you mind doing the non-playoff distribution? i.e. NL non-playoff teams?
2. In building the frequency and cumulative frequency distributions from your data, I found that the playoff data was slightly off. The total only added to 159.4 instead of 162. Did I miss something?
3. Your data shows that median is slightly lower than 4 while the average run for STL is 4.84. This is no surprise since run/game distribution is skewed. This makes me wonder if a team staff with less than the median runs allowed per game would most likely mean a winning season?
Your data really peaked my interest, so I’ll try to do some more work. If anything worthwhile comes out of it, I’ll do a fan post.

born Dodger blue, now dyed Cardinals red

by totalloser on Nov 7, 2008 4:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

likely some rounding error

also, Chicago only played 161 games. But I could very well have a mistake in there… Yup, there it is. Took forever to find, since I didn’t save the spreadsheet after doing the work and had to replicate it from the csv file, lol.

What happened is that I erroneously included NYM instead of MIL in the list of playoff teams (they were right next to each other in the list), but the 7+ column was calculated separately, and used MIL’s value for 7+. ugh. The correct number for “other, 7+” should be 45.4, not 43.0. But “playoff teams” becomes “NYM, CHI, PHI, LAD”.

Full spreadsheet available here, so you can see what I’m talking about or do whatever other analysis you want with the data.

the enemy's gate is down.

by SleepyCA on Nov 7, 2008 9:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I think our real problem

Was that our pitching allowed too many runs. Especially that bullpen of ours.

Our offense scored a bejesusload of runs last year. Offense was not the culprit.

by mojowo11 on Nov 7, 2008 10:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, but was that Ludwick's fault...

Or that the team has 2 middle infielders who can’t hit a lick?

Felipe Lopez - next year's Joel Pineiro

by DiscoJer on Nov 7, 2008 3:52 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Trading Ankiel would most likely be selling low

I think most people agree that Ludwick’s numbers are great, but likely higher than what he will do on average. Trading him would be selling high, but of course most teams recognize this as well so probably his expectations aren’t worth much in terms of trading.

For me the real question is whether Ankiel has shown us all that he is capable of. In terms of defense (both his great throws and his terrible throws), definitely. But is he going to better offensively?

His late season performance was sporadic. He tore through July, struggled through August, and then the injuries. Plus he only has 1000(?) at bats as a professional hitter – suggesting he’s got some learning/improvement ahead of him.

I guess the only thing that is clear is that uncertainty on Ankiel is high, that means (assuming GM’s are biased toward risk aversion) that his trade value is lower than what it should be. Plus Boras is a negative on the trade market it seems.
 
As a result, I’d say trading Ankiel is a mistake because we’re unlikely to get his true value, even if he doesn’t improve.

by enoscountry on Nov 7, 2008 11:01 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

not to mention...

…that after everything, trading Ankiel now seems kinda…well, stupid.

What with all that water under the bridge I think we might as well keep him in red and be glad we have a deep outfield.

by Scarecrow7775 on Nov 7, 2008 11:08 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

If Ank leaves we would be selling low, by far. Right now all he screams is potential, the injuries and how he comes back, the bat discipline, the mental make up is all up in the air.

If anything Rick would be a fill in piece, not a cornerstone one

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 11:50 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

trading either Ludwick or Ankiel would be selling low imo, since the other managers will point out that they are rather unproven; then you get screwed in the trade and watch them rake for some other team, which is not good.

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 3:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I have to agree...

but I still hope we move Ankiel midseason 2009 after he reestablishes his power swing and stellar defense. I still think Skip is our optimum trade piece.

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 3:19 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I would be thrilled

if we move Skip for a hard throwing LHP reliever in AA.

Absolutely thrilled. Removes a peice of glut that has no true role when Colby runs on the field.

AA LHP too low? I don’t think so. It adds at least depth if not immediate impact.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 3:39 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That is crazy.....

You don’t move a guy that played like Skip last year, for AA, LH relief help.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 5:00 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

You realize that you didn’t quantify that at all, right? What does “played like Skip” mean?

Here’s what I seen, tell me if you seen anything different.

I seen a guy who has very little power sitting in a corner OF spot. Did you?
I seen a guy who got dominated by left handed pitching. Did you?
I seen a guy who doesn’t have a lot of speed for a top of lineup spot. Did you?
I seen a guy who had the second highest GDP behind Yadi (just two shy) Did you?
I seen a guy who put almost 280 ground balls out of 480 balls in play. Did you?

Now allow me a crystal ball :)
I see a guy who forces us into a platoon when facing LHP.
I see a guy who will not fill a “lead off” role any longer with Colby on the team. (even when we give days off because…)
I see a guy replaced by Barton when we need to platoon/ give days off.
I see a guy who we won’t be able to get rid of should his RHP hitting go down.
I see a guy who is probably at his peak production wise.

I don’t know who you think we could get for him, but allow me to inform you of who we’re not. he’s not going to get us experienced pitching or AAA prospects. Teams are wanting kings ransom for those this year as even the bigger markets are looking.

He’s not going to give us a MI worth a lick.

We don’t need to trade him for OF, 3B, 1B or C assets as we’re either blocking or have glut.

We do have LHP needs for now and depth. If he can get us a decent prospect LHP who is projected to be a ML Bullpen guy, the deal IMO is a no brainer.

No offense, but sometimes it feels like you pull 5 players out of a hat and decide to defend them for a week or four, then move on to something else. Playing devils advocate is one thing, but it’s almost exhausting.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 5:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

His favorites are:

Holliday (not a Cardinal)
Isringhausen
Skip Schumaker
he kinda likes Luddy
I assume he’s ok with the middle infielders we have
I assume sftu thinks Pujols is ok, but he seems to think he could do more (at least a couple of months ago he did)
and of course, Larussa

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 5:37 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

and if you really like skip

start watching for Jay, as he’s projected to be Skip with speed + possible upside.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 6:09 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i've said this before

but according to the rumors floating around skip could be a nice piece in getting us javier vazquez.

i’m not sure how the money would work out as javy is going to get 11.5 for each of the next two years. i think that would be a nice pick up.

"Sorry about him, he's dealing with being an inker. " - Chasing Amy

by FutureMan on Nov 7, 2008 6:44 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I do too. I could handle that.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 9:02 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Sounds like a nice option

No draft picks surrendered, makes Pinata the #6 start if Carp is healthy. I’d explore that.

by mojowo11 on Nov 7, 2008 10:37 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i agree on the selling low

however, there isn’t much time for him to reestablish that value.

there aren’t a lot of avavilable CF’s this offseason which increases rick’s value.

"Sorry about him, he's dealing with being an inker. " - Chasing Amy

by FutureMan on Nov 7, 2008 4:54 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Ludwick, scarecrow

I am not sure that it would take a whole lot more than Ludwick to land Holliday. The Rockies are looking for Major League Ready OFers and we have one to spare. I do think we would have to give up another mid level prospect, say Jon Jay or maybe Ottavino/Herron or someone that has promise but hasn’t completely delivered (I know Jay doesnt fit that description).

Moving on to my main point though, the Phillies have no such outfielder to offer. The Phillies farm system is almost barren with their only strength being some upside pitching. If you like John Sickels, they have zero guys above Double-A that could offer anything but league averageness, which the Rockies have plenty of themselves. So all that to say, the Phillies will not be able to match Holliday for Ludwick, let alone Holliday for Ludwick+.

I of course leave out the possible scenario that the Phillies sign Manny or resign Burrell, and then put a package together that includes Victorino or maybe even Werth, but I still dont think those packages would compare with what we could come up with quite easily.

by t7rick on Nov 7, 2008 11:10 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

and he's cheap

and now that you mention it, Ludwick’s cheap and will remain so for a bit. I’m guessing Colorado would enjoy that extra payroll flexibility. Yeah, maybe Ludwick would be enough to swing it. What the hell- Mo should pull the trigger on that one. I’ll go ahead and toss that out there as my management decision for the day.

by Scarecrow7775 on Nov 7, 2008 11:16 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

On the other hand

Nobody enjoys “payroll flexibility” as much as DeWitt

by Scarecrow7775 on Nov 7, 2008 11:18 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

"if a package can be constructed"--joe strauss

the flexability could be obtained through a package of players dealt.
tulo’s contract could help offset holliday over 6 years, if he returns to core payer value.

by ball in play on Nov 7, 2008 11:24 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

but you have to look at his overall point

even without looking at specific players.

A FA SS is going to cost us some serious coin. Have you seen the offer for Furcal? (that lots of posters have said they wanted) 25-30/2 and that wasn’t enough.

If you happen to gain one in a package deal, the costs and team needs will offset short and long term.

You have to look at the other players involved, and we don’t have a clue on who they are before rendering a judgment.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 11:36 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

No offense...

but I’m glad you’re not the GM making this decision. I don’t think Ludwick gets Holliday by himself…but I als don’t think I’d trade Ludwick straight up for Matt from the Cards perspective. There is nothing in Ludwick’s 2008 season that suggests it’s a fluke. He was supposed to be a great hitter, and now that he’s injury free he is a great hitter. Ludwick for Holliday does not improve this team…it only raises payroll.

Holliday put up a great .321/.409/.538 (.947 OPS) line last year that compares favorably to Ludwick’s .299/.375/.591 (.966 OPS).

Also you can’t ignore the road numbers on a Coors field benificiar (career) .280/.348/.455 that’s an .803 OPS though it was .892 last season.

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 11:27 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

"nothing in Ludwick's 2008 season suggests it's a fluke."

I’m not sure I can agree that there is nothing to suggest it. But I do think the suggestion is an overblown one. His linedrive rate did jump significantly from his career, didn’t it? Caveat; I don’t know if that is limited to his major league career, which is relatively smal sample sized, or if it includes his minor league days. Maybe healthy Ludwick just hits linedrives at an even better rate than previous Ludwick? I dunno. It might not have been a fluke, but that is different from saying that it might be a career year. I definitely agree with your maint point though—I don’t understand what we gain from getting Holliday and losing Ludwick, beyond a possible marginal improvement. Isn’t Holliday only a year younger than Ludwick?

by mattybobo on Nov 7, 2008 12:16 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I thought an increased...

line drive rate was usually considered a sustainable improvement/part of a skillset…not a blip in the radar. The fact that he sustained the high line drive rate ALL season (even in June when his BABIP dipped to .263 vs. about .350 for the rest of the year) suggests to me that it is sustainable. The only thing that says Fluke to me is that it’s only one season worth of superstar performance.

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 12:24 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I remember in spring training

how all the talk was about Ludwick’s new, improved shorter swing. I even remember him being interviewed about it. He is an improved hitter, it is not a fluke.

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Nov 7, 2008 12:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

sweet!

If there’s reason to believe that 2008 linedrivin’ Luddy is not a ghost than that puts to bed any Holliday temptation as far as I’m concerned. Seriously MO, you’re scaring us. I really hope this is either posturing or that there’s more to the possible deal than we’ve been able to glimpse.

by mattybobo on Nov 7, 2008 12:46 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

+potential?

So I’ve only heard about Luddy’s potential to regress to minor league+limited major averages. But does he have to the potential to improve in some areas? My impression is that he might improve, for example, with hitting with two strikes. Maybe shorten swing, go the other way, more contact, etc.. Here is an unfair comparison, since it’s vs. The Mang, but it’s also interesting to look at Milesy.
Luddy .187 .253 .331 .584
El H. .270 .337 .484 .820
Grits .238 .278 .302 .580
Do others see the potential?

born Dodger blue, now dyed Cardinals red

by totalloser on Nov 7, 2008 4:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I could see Ludwick putting up Soriano type hitting numbers....

they seem similar……

1. can’t hit balls up in the zone
2. have trouble laying off balls low and away
3. Good power
4. pretty good OBP
5. Strike out a lot
6. walk enought that they are not horrible

by ICbirdfan on Nov 7, 2008 5:09 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

straight up

That Ludwich→ Holliday straight up doesn’t seem likely is my initial read as well. From my point of view the competition with the Phils will drive the price up. But, I made that point above in another string and someone (can’t remember who) made a decent case that it actually could be as easy as it shaping up in the press.

On another note, someone up there said something like, “trading an outfielder for an outfielder when we have a glut of outfielders?” Point well taken. Looking at this possible trade from that angle, this would only make sense if another of our flychasers gets moved as well.

Assuming I’m right about that (which is an admittedly large leap of faith) who else do we trade for what?

by Scarecrow7775 on Nov 7, 2008 8:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

depends on who is coming here. that’s the crux of all of this

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 9:03 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I. Memo

Just wanted to say the Selig Gold Glove memo in this post was hilarious. Brightened my morning. The corollary in point (2) in particular. Cheers!

SBN now has a NY Islanders blog at LighthouseHockey.com.

by Dominik on Nov 7, 2008 11:18 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Please, Please, Please Mo

Keep Luddy!!!

I wouldn’t mind seeing Ankiel go. You know the Rockies are impressed with him, because of what he did back in May (I still can’t believe that made it into USA Today)…Anyways Ank and Holliday compare fairly well in terms of their status. Both have one year til they hit big money and both are Boras clients. I’d be willing to send Ank and Todd for Holliday, but if I’m Mo, I am keeping Luddy with the BOB. An outfield of Holliday, Raz, and Luddy wouldn’t look too bad would it? Let Holliday be a Cardinal for a year, win a WS title for us, then we let him hit the market and we keep our cost controlled stud OF.

"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 7, 2008 11:19 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Some numbers on the Coors effect

I have heard many folks say something more or less like, “Everybody hits better at home”, or “You can’t just double road splits to project how a Rox player would do for another team.”

My gut was telling me both of those statements were false, so I thought I would do a little quick and dirty research project. I could only think of four previous Rox players who were slugger types and also played for other teams: Dante Bichette, Vinny Castilla, Preston Wilson, and Larry Walker. I may be missing some, but I promise I am not cherry picking – these are the only ones I could think of and I don’t have time today to make this into a big project.

I don’t think the numbers below prove anything, but they are good food for thought.

Bichette was a semi-regular for Anaheim and Milwaukee from 90-92. For those seasons he put up an average OPS of .705. I am merely averaging the OPSes here as I don’t have time to get an exact number. For his Rox career his road OPS was .739 and his home OPS was 1.019.

Castilla essentially started his career with the Rox although he had played some with the Braves prior to arriving at Coors. I have tried not to use partial seasons so I am ignoring those. His road OPS with the Rox was .747 with a home OPS of .967. In what amounts to five full seasons combined with Tampa, Atlanta, Houston, and Washington he put up an OPS of .574 (cringes).

Preston Wilson was a regular with the Marlins for four season prior to his Rocky Mountain high and also played a full season with Houston and the Cards in ’06. His OPS for those teams average out to .796. During his lone healthy season with the Rox his home OPS was .960 with a road OPS of .795.

I figured Larry Walker would be the one to break the trend, but even though I can’t stand Lee Corso I have to say, “Not so fast, my friend.” Walker played five full season with Montreal prior to Colorado and had a split season between Colorado and St.Louis and another fullish season with the Cardinals ath the end. His combined OPS for non-Colorado teams was ..869 while he put up a road OPS for the Rox of .903 and a home OPS of 1.177.

So, as I said earlier this doesn’t prove anything, but the net of it all is that only one of these guys (Wilson) had a career road OPS as a Rockie that was above his non-Rockie OPS. That guy was Preston Wilson and he did it by .001. Bichette was .034 below his road OPS, Castilla was .173 below his, and Walker was .034 below his.

I realize that Holliday is a better player than Bichette, Castilla and Wilson. I don’t think he is as good as Walker.

But wouldn’t it completely suck if Holliday put up several seasons for the Cardinals of .800ish OPS while making $16-20 million per year over 6-7 years while Ludwick put up MVP type numbers in Colorado?

I would hope the fact that Holliday is in his prime will offset this factor, but I will be absolutely stunned if he puts up numbers anywhere near his career averages of .319/.386/.552/.948 . Probably a lot closer to the career .803 OPS on the road. He will likely do a little better as he seems to be a more patient hitter these days.

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Nov 7, 2008 12:26 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

isn't it only about a 1 year difference in age?

b-ref has 2008 as Holliday’s age-28 season. it has 2008 as Ludwick’s age-29 season.

by mattybobo on Nov 7, 2008 12:51 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

well, by birthdates it's more like a year and a half.

not sure what to think of that. Ludwick is not exactly an old man, and Holliday is not exactly on the cusp of entering his prime.

by mattybobo on Nov 7, 2008 12:53 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

the age comment was more directed at the former Rox I was comparing him to. The rest of them spent what could arguably be their prime in Colorado.

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Nov 7, 2008 12:59 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Oh. I misunderstood you then.

Interesting stuff, by the way.

by mattybobo on Nov 7, 2008 1:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Humidor has been in effect since 2001

Wilson’s Coors numbers are from 2003.

Walker ’98-00: Home OPS = 1.237, Road OPS = .852
Walker ’01-03: Home OPS = 1.134, Road OPS = .883

Walker’s OPS combined in Montreal and St. Louis: .869

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Nov 7, 2008 4:40 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

ok

I thought they started using it only 3 years ago or so; the 21st century has been flying by…

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 5:38 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Not to mention.....

HItting in front or behind Pujols will likely help Holliday out as well.

He’s always been “the man” in Colorado. He won’t have to carry the load here, which shouldn’t do anything except help his numbers.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 12:29 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

woh

you just blew my mind. j/k

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 3:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

heh

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 4:11 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That was about 5 years ago.

"Stats are for losers," Muschamp said after last week's victory. "I like winning games."

by SoonerfanTU on Nov 7, 2008 5:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe Helton is more like canned spam.

*Rasmus is to CF as Longoria is to 3B*

by Red Blazer on Nov 7, 2008 5:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

is there any other kind of spam?

besides the virtual kind?

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 5:54 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

kelley johnson, matt holliday.......

how about “matt cain for r. ludwick day”………soon :)

by ball in play on Nov 7, 2008 12:33 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I'd do ank, ludwick, and boggs

for lincecum in a heartbeat

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 3:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

me too

cain for luddy seemed fairer to both teams, to use as an example. both have 3 yr arb yrs left…….
i’d rather flip ludwick for a top end starter, at a comparable financial commitment, to what we have in ludwicks arb yrs.
a #2sp in cain, does the roster more good by pushing pineiro’s innings down, than an outfield wash/+/- in production does. (along with budget issue)

by ball in play on Nov 7, 2008 4:22 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

so PMR is out for second basemen

link

Adam Kennedy was the best 2B defender in the majors in 2008, by PMR, yet as a team we were barely average at the position. Kennedy made 21 more plays than predicted, while Miles made about 12 less than predicted. Felipe Lopez was 13 less than predicted.

Wonder how much of our second-half swoon was due to the fact that we cut back on Kennedy’s playing time in the second half?

Dan Uggla does surprisingly well, btw, and Kelly Johnson was 7 below predicted.

the enemy's gate is down.

by SleepyCA on Nov 7, 2008 1:54 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

If larussa would play him, Kennedy wouldn’t be a bad option next season. I’m sure he’ll get right on that.

Sleepy, are there any studies on what defense means to pitchers specifically, not just in a run scored, runs allowed sense, but rather in a number of pitches thrown, innings pitched and inherently an injury prevention stand point?

by Ricky Vaughn on Nov 7, 2008 2:25 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I have come to the Conclusion

That Defense is the new OBP of Moneyball. It is by far the most undervalued part of the game. We should be aggressively targeting the best defensive players at SS and 2B…. Wait a second … looks at roster.

That would be Iz2 and Kennedy!!!! We should keep both of them for next year. We will probably keep Miles to fill in between both of them. Or preferably get Yunel Escobar who is great defensive, cheap, and has a good bat. An Escobar and Kennedy MIF would be money defensively.

Than since we still would have a lot of money left over for a FA signing. We could spend some real money on the Bullpen. Fuentes was amazing last year and would be worth a 3 year/$36 mil contract.

by FlimtotheFlam on Nov 7, 2008 2:58 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I definately see that

I am of the unsubstantiated conclusion that a run saved on defense is better than a run scored on offense.

escobar might be a pipe dream, but he would be a three win upgrade over izturis. Since the replacement level for right field is so high (Mather/Duncan/Schumaker/jay) Ludwick for escobar is an easy decision to make given the opportunity.

by Ricky Vaughn on Nov 7, 2008 3:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

win shares above bench 2008…..izturis -1.0, escobar +2.0, ludwick +15.
other teams shouldn’t get trade credit, for our depth of replacement. (rasmus/mather/barton)
they should have to send equal value.

by ball in play on Nov 7, 2008 5:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

true

but part of that trade would be positional scarcity. SS being a lot harder to replace than LF in general.

"Sorry about him, he's dealing with being an inker. " - Chasing Amy

by FutureMan on Nov 7, 2008 6:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Isn't the goal to make a better team?

If you believe 2008 is Ludwick’s true talent level, and not an aberration, than I don’t have much of an argument. Personally, I’ll take the younger player who plays a premium position and is under team control for longer, especially if you consider the positional scarcity and the inability of the system to produce a shortstop any time soon.

by Ricky Vaughn on Nov 7, 2008 7:02 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

if we do that

we better significantly improve our pitching abilities

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 3:28 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Doesn't vastly improved defense

automatically improve your pitching abilities?

Those Pilgrims ain't lookin' so proud now...

by giveml on Nov 7, 2008 4:42 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

yes, to an extent

but if you are going to skip improving the middle infield, then you need to concentrate improving things elsewhere, or why else do anything in the offseason?

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 5:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Is it bad that all I'm hoping for is a SS who can lay down a bunt

that isn’t named Miles? I’m not asking for too much am I?

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 3:41 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i hoping for a SS

that would never be asked to bunt because you would be taking the bat out of his hands. :)

"Sorry about him, he's dealing with being an inker. " - Chasing Amy

by FutureMan on Nov 7, 2008 5:00 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

"I have a dream..."

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 5:33 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

exactly

heh

"Sorry about him, he's dealing with being an inker. " - Chasing Amy

by FutureMan on Nov 7, 2008 6:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i agree with the d

the cards have been targeting good defensive players for a while now. mv3 anyone?

no good with fuentes. he lost his closers job in 07. i dont trust him.

by joelcards on Nov 7, 2008 5:51 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I keep asking myself why would we trade Luds for Holliday?

Sometimes it makes sense and then I remember we need a closer, SS, middle relief help maybe a 2B.

So there has to be more to this deal than appears.

Not to mention Luds really creamed the ball last year and he did drive in more than 130 Runs. How many more than that do you expect from Holliday?

I’m torn.

*Rasmus is to CF as Longoria is to 3B*

by Red Blazer on Nov 7, 2008 2:15 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

130?

Luddy drove in 113 runs this season…second on the team to APu with 116. Holliday drove in 88 runs in 13 less games than Luddy, but in 06 and 07 when he was healthy he drove in 114 and 137 runs respectively.

"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 7, 2008 2:26 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

so i missed the fact

that holliday was injured last year. What was his injury?

It would be an even worse trade if we traded Luddy, Luddy put up 3-4 MVP years in colorado, and Holiday got hurt!

the enemy's gate is down.

by SleepyCA on Nov 7, 2008 2:29 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

back tightness

if I recall correctly

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 2:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I think he was scratched a few times with that...

but he did have a strained left hamstring that landed him on the 15-day DL also.

"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 7, 2008 2:35 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

I still contend that this deal shouldn’t be looked at from a Holliday vs Ludwick perspective, but what other peices are involved. It also could be said that we could be building value for both parties involved (Mo does have past connection with the Rockies) and is around to send signals.

Have to keep in mind the last OF we were “interested” in heavily was Bay, and that was clearly a move to drive up his value.

Something tells me either there’s some extra pieces with the Rockies on both sides that makes a trade look a lot different, or that we amping demand on Ludwick to use later on.

To add a couple of things – When more teams are involved in the talks about Luddy, his perceived risk of being a one year wonder starts to deminish. He’ll get more looks. It’s fairly well documented that his body is the risk, that is bat is and has been for real.

There’s a lot of speculation out there that while Atlanta is the frontrunner, they may not be able to close on Peavy, if they can’t close then you would have to think that there’s going to be instant interest back to Luddy for MI help. Which may actually be the entire point.

Can’t see Mo jumping into the Holliday scenario as its presented with both feet. Something else has to be at play.

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 2:30 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

exactly

if we had legitimate options at LHP, SS, and 3/4 SP i would be all about getting holliday.

"Sorry about him, he's dealing with being an inker. " - Chasing Amy

by FutureMan on Nov 7, 2008 5:02 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

we shouldnt

we should get uggla and resign cesar.

by joelcards on Nov 7, 2008 5:49 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

seen ya put this quite a bit

so before I instareact and list reasons why it would he would be an absurd trade target, i’m curious on why you think he’s worth it

"The Post-Dispatch Cardinals website continues down a path where you'll notice it's really a few McCarvers leading a pack of Dusty Bakers. I'm so glad they don't represent Cardinal Nation. No wonder newspapers are going down in shambles"

by AdjustedExpectations on Nov 7, 2008 5:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

My bad. I assed out again.

I got the 37 homeruns confused with 113 RBIs and got it all wrong.

Sorry.

*Rasmus is to CF as Longoria is to 3B*

by Red Blazer on Nov 7, 2008 2:28 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

No problem

I call that numerical dyslexia…happens to me all the time

"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 7, 2008 2:31 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Outcomes

Holliday is obviously good and has a proven track record.
Ludwick is obviously good and entering arbitration.
Ludwick is a year and a half older than Holliday.
Holding on to Ludwick gets us potentially great production for a few years at a steadily increasing salary. This year’s salary will likely be in the 5-8 mill range apparently.
Trading for Holliday gets us likely great production for 1 year plus a nice shot at signing an extension for a player thats a year and a half younger than Ludwick – at a price premium of about 5 million dollars. Do you pay 5 million dollars for Holliday’s track record and slight age advantage? I think I would…

by Birds on the Matt on Nov 7, 2008 5:17 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

My problems with your analysis...

Age isn’t an issue as they are both in there prime and we’re not talking about long term extensions and both players are likely 3-4 years from decline.
I don’t think Ludwick will get $8 mil based on 1.5 seasons of stellar play…$5 mil is reasonable
$13.5 – $5 mil = $8.5 million difference in salary.
$16 – $10 mil = $6 million
$17 – $12 mil = $5 million
$8.5 + $6 + $5 = $21.5 million difference in salary over next three years SWAG…Holliday may get $20 mil+ per year.
Do you pay $8.5 – $21.5 million for Holliday’s track record (established in the 2nd most hitter friendly park in baseball) and slight age advantage? I sure as hell don’t!

by cardzfanbub on Nov 7, 2008 6:19 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

+1

The age difference is almost a complete non-factor

"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 7, 2008 6:27 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

They way Arbitration normally rates up vs FA

1st Year of Arbitration: 40% of what it would cost on FA Market2nd Year of Arbitration: 60% of what it would cost on FA Market
3rd Year of Arbitration: 80% of what it would cost on FA Market

by FlimtotheFlam on Nov 7, 2008 6:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Just a thought on the potential deal with the Rocks.

If they have thier 3B on the block might they need Freese in the deal?

Could that help us get something else of value from them?

*Rasmus is to CF as Longoria is to 3B*

by Red Blazer on Nov 7, 2008 5:32 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

OT: I am offically a Nerd

I could not resist and bought this Hoodie

by FlimtotheFlam on Nov 7, 2008 5:39 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

that thing is awesome

nerds rejoice

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 5:43 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Where did you find that?

"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 7, 2008 5:46 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

$98!!!!!!!!!

i was in to it until i saw the price. holy crap!

"I'm as nauseous as I've ever been. I have a terrible headache. My head is pounding. I feel like throwing up and I'm having trouble swallowing. And the beauty of it is, you want to feel like this every day." - Tony LaRussa

by adiueordie on Nov 7, 2008 5:54 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

holy crap

he really must be some kind of hifalutin graphic designer!

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 5:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah...

I still can’t afford it…shoot! Wish I had a disposable income. That Fett one is sweet!!!

"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 7, 2008 6:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

awesome

"I'm as nauseous as I've ever been. I have a terrible headache. My head is pounding. I feel like throwing up and I'm having trouble swallowing. And the beauty of it is, you want to feel like this every day." - Tony LaRussa

by adiueordie on Nov 7, 2008 5:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

nice

I think I’d like this one better if it weren’t for the random faux scratches; I know it’s more authentic this way, but… I think it’d be cooler without them

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 5:56 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

uberdorky!

If I had the dough, I might just do the same… although if I had to pick one it’d be pretty hard.

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 5:58 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I bought 4 of them at $60 apiece

Plan on keeping 2 and selling 2 on Ebay cause they are going for a lot more than $100. They sold out so fast. I am hoping to cash in on Christmas

by FlimtotheFlam on Nov 7, 2008 6:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

haven't seen you (or anyone else really)

over at hypertextation; what you been up to? I’ll post some metal stuff I’ve been recording over there. are you in any bands now?

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 5:57 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i haven't been on hypertextation lately

i’m not playing at the moment, though i’m trying to get something going with some guys. post the link on ht and i’ll check it out in a bit.

"I'm as nauseous as I've ever been. I have a terrible headache. My head is pounding. I feel like throwing up and I'm having trouble swallowing. And the beauty of it is, you want to feel like this every day." - Tony LaRussa

by adiueordie on Nov 7, 2008 6:01 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

cool

I’ll post it tomorrow night

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 10, 2008 1:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

i agree

that is very nerdy and very awesome. can u wear the hood closed and breath through it? that would be cool.

by joelcards on Nov 7, 2008 5:48 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

bye for the weekend

I’m outta here

this line is dedicated to '09

by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 7, 2008 6:00 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

Please Mo

do not make that trade. It has failure written all over it. Havent read all the comments yet so forgive if this has already been asked and answered. Does Holliday have no trade clause? If so it might be very foolish for him to go anywhere without a long term deal in place as he may certainly in a new park in his FA year. No? Ludwick’s ’08 campaign should not be ignored or underestimated when comparitavely speaking it costs nothing to see if he can repeat. What would his trade value be after another great season in ’09?

by Walking Underwear on Nov 7, 2008 6:42 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

+1

"No matter where you go, there you are" Buckeroo Bonzai Across the 8th Dimension

by sportsman on Nov 7, 2008 9:21 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

oops

may certainly regress in a new park

by Walking Underwear on Nov 7, 2008 6:43 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

my head hurts like a mother

and i’m alone on this wretched cold & rainy Friday night. so please, MO, don’t make my mood even more bleak by trading LUD for Holliday. the only thing this does is shut Tony up. let him bitch & throw a fit for one more season, and then i promise you, you’ll never have to deal with his crap ever again.

be strong MO. you’ll our only hope.

I'm going to go try to find a puppy and kick it. - Brad Thompson AND THAT'S A WINNER!

by gdm426 on Nov 7, 2008 8:26 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

obi wan for manager in 2010?

"I'm as nauseous as I've ever been. I have a terrible headache. My head is pounding. I feel like throwing up and I'm having trouble swallowing. And the beauty of it is, you want to feel like this every day." - Tony LaRussa

by adiueordie on Nov 7, 2008 9:17 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed

Search

User Tools

Welcome to the Internet's #1 St. Louis Cardinals blog.
Start posting about the Cardinals »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Avatar_small
How to EASILY make tables for Fanposts

by FlimtotheFlam 2 days ago

13 comments | 8 recs

1753738656_110919ebe9_o_small
2010 Hot Stove Post #1: CHONE hitter projections

by vivaelpujols 8 days ago

427 comments | 8 recs

Recent FanPosts

Arch_small
Number 15

by shadetree 6 days ago

75 comments | 0 recs

Small
Some thoughts on Holliday (and potential replacements)

by BigMac545 13 days ago

78 comments | 1 recs

Small
Ok let me try this again...

by live6453 14 days ago

17 comments | 0 recs

Knights-09_small
Disenchanted Blue Jays Fan Looking For A New Team

by Jevant 15 days ago

204 comments | 1 recs

Painterlance_small
The Holliday Dilemma (Rocks Fan Perpsective)

by PinchHitLancePainter 15 days ago

17 comments | 0 recs

375830-r1-025-11_011_small
Anybody read Bob Gibson's new book yet?

by chicagojedi 15 days ago

12 comments | 0 recs

Flanders_small
Yadi2first

by BVHeck 15 days ago

20 comments | 8 recs

Small
40 Man Question..

by AdjustedExpectations 18 days ago

5 comments | 0 recs

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Recent Posts

SBNation.com Recent Stories

St. Louis Cardinals' Albert Pujols (5) follows through on a three-run home run off Pittsburgh Pirates pitcher Denny Bautista in the sixth inning of a baseball game in Pittsburgh Sept. 4, 2009. The Cardinals won 14-7. (AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar)

Albert Pujols Unanimously Wins Third N.L. MVP Award

Photo +2 updates

Joe Mauer Beats Yankees At Something, Wins 2009 A.L. MVP

Photo link

Diamondbacks Acquire Pitcher Aaron Heilman

AZ Snakepit

More from SBNation.com >

Managers

Jack_benny_small DanUpBaby

Editors

Bender1_small azruavatar

Adam1_small chuckb

Kid-a-bear_small the red baron