There is no reason for the Cardinals to give either of them a long term contract. Yet. They both are on their way to potential contracts, but it’s still outside the business norm for either of them. Cardinals can pay them market value and give themselves some flexibility to see how they continue to progress. I also disagree the arb process will become ugly. It’s pretty standard procedure for baseball in my opinion.

Trading Ludwick now would be trading him at his peak value. Plus it frees up spots in the outfield for the future. Duncan gets playing time and could potentially be the same player as Ludwick production-wise, but left hander. This way is just an idea and would be very risky however.

Honestly, I don’t feel a sense of urgency regarding Ludwick. I like him, and I’d hate to see the club lowball him year to year while he’s working toward his "freedom," but nonetheless it will be a while till he’s in a strong negotiating position. And every now and then (read: last night), it’s just odd to watch him look so bad at the plate. Those last two at-bats were terrible. That was one of the weirder 2-for-6 nights I’ve seen in a while; shades of Dave Kingman.

Ankiel, very interesting question. While I acknowledge your thought that he may not be inclined to "stick it to the Cardinals," he’s approaching the moment that will determine how much money he’s going to have for the rest of his life. I would not underestimate his desire for a big payday.

I’d like to see the Cards commit to him for four or five years, but honestly, I don’t know what kind of money he would command. He is a special talent, but what is his ceiling? Does he project to be another Edmonds, or another Lankford? I’m guessing in-between. Four years, $6-$7 million per? I don’t know if that gets it done.

Under the previous GM the Cards tied up millions in worn out players with serious health problems. The result was a substantial part of the payroll going for hospital beds, not productive players. The Cards need to invest in guys that can go out and play every day. I think locking up younger players is just good business. I’d rather see Ankiel and Ludwick sharing the $13 million wasted on Mulder. If the team has concern about a player’s health, then why not at least offer them a modest basic contract with built in incentives? It would show the teams interest in keeping the player which could have a positive impact on the player’s morale. If the player is lost due to injury, the team is not on the hook for a lot of money. If these players continue to be healthy and productive and they wait to try to sign them, the team will spend a lot more in the long run to keep them in St. Louis.

I say get Ankiel for 3 years $21 mil with maybe a couple of club option years at $10 mil a piece. It’s difficult trying to figure out what he’s worth, because he only has one full season at the plate. Is $7mil over or under paying him? Honestly, I can’t tell.

As for Ludwick, here’s my harebrained idea: Trade something like Duncan, Reyes, Wallace and Perez to Colorado for Holliday and Fuentes. Then, trade Ludwick to the Twins for Liriano. If they really mean what they say, then they don’t have a need for him in their rotation and could certainly use a little more offense.

I’m very surprised that there have been zero rumors regarding Liriano, considering his situation. What’s going on with that? Is Minnesota really trying to screw him out of some cash, or did he piss some people off at the Big League level?

Ankiel playing for anybody but us, and I think he is/will be good for a while.

Given the fact that he is still a very young outfielder (meaning that he is newer to the position), and given the fact that he is still a relatively new batter, I think the sky is the limit with him. I’m not sure if it’s true, but I think someone on here mentioned Ank being a very good breaking ball and changeup hitter, that he is primarily struggling with pitchers that have a plus fastball; if that is the case, I would think it would be a relatively simple adjustment to make, as opposed to a guy like Duncan who seems to struggle with the breaking stuff.

He has made some rookie mistakes in the field, but he has also blown us away with some plays that bring to mind Edmonds, and some throws that are among the best I’ve ever seen.

Everything that I have read about him says that he is one of the hardest workers in the organization, that he is willing to learn and put into practice the things he is taught. If true, then I think, taking into account his athleticism, his ability to learn, his willingness to work hard, and the fact that he is one of the fan’s favorites, it makes a great deal of sense to try and sign him for four or five years. Maybe you get a bit of a hometown discount, since he and TLR have what seems to be a good relationship. I don’t know what a reasonable salary would be, or what Ank’s sabermetric projections for the next ten years are, but he seems like a good baller that has a good chance of becoming really, really special.

but my only concern is….who do you put out there to hit lefthanders? With Ludwick, Ank, Skippy, and Colby, we need at least ONE right-hander that can smack the crap out of a lefty.

To me it is sound business practice to have one - and only one - contract on a team that overpays, in objective terms, to keep a guy around because he’s such a hit with the fans. A player like that has enormous value to the team just in terms of keeping fans in the seats. From where I sit, Hobbs is nearly the ideal candidate to fill that role. (See below.) I would accordingly be prepared to bite the bullet and overpay him for a few years relative to his probable value on the field—with the distinct possibility that it turns out not to be overpaying at all, as his baseball skill and experience matures into his extraordinary physical gifts.

Otherwise, outfielders are fungible. The team should pay market value, and no more, for any and all other outfielders; put the best possible team on the field at any given time; and constantly be on the lookout for opportunities to sell high. A sensible 2009 outfield is Ank, Raz, Luddy, with Skippy and Barton/Mather on the bench and Duncan hopefully cashed in for some talent elsewhere on the field. If Jones continues to develop at his current rate, plug him in for Schumaker in 2010. But any and all of these guys, except Ank and Raz, should be flipped in a trade if something in shorter supply (high-OBP middle infielder, power lefty arm with good resistance to injuries) can be obtained. Outfielders are too fungible to fall in love with them, no matter how much we want to.

(**) Note that Pujols does NOT fall into the category of fan faves that the team should overpay for—because you CANNOT overpay for that kind of once-in-a-lifetime player. Pay him what he’s worth, and be prepared for that to be an awesomely big contract.

once Rasmus is on the team Skippy doesn’t really fill any need. Strike while the Skippy is hot and get something for him now!

my initial thought is to negotiate a deal with ankiel this offseason and use arbitration to our advantage with ludwick.

much of my logic on this is based on anecdotal observations, but ankiel strikes me as a guy who has yet to peak. obviously, we all know he’s only spent a few seasons as a professional hitter (skipping AA with injury), and plate discipline, pitch recognition, and such are arts he is still improving. i am one of the believers that the best is yet to come from rick ankiel. for some reason, i’m not concerned about him breaking down, or dropping off early in his 30’s. there was an interview last year with a AAA teammates (i believe tagg bozied?, his best friend at memphis?) talking about rick’s intense work ethic, including how close he watches nutrition. looking at rick, he just seems to be a physical specimen; a guy i think is gonna hold up physically. and, i don’t think anyone questions his natural talent as a ballplayer. anyhow, i was thinking along the lines of 3 years/21 million as many have suggested. maybe tack on a 10 mil option.

with ludwick, i don’t get that impression. this may be the beginning of many similar years, but it may not. since he has three arbitration years left, i wait another year before considering a long term contract. i say negotiate a fair one year deal, maybe around 4-5 million?, for next year and see what happens.

someone alluded to this, but if colby comes up and is all we’ve hoped and dreamed, how soon do we try to wrap him up?

Similar comps this year to Ankiel (hitters in the NL) are David Wright, Carlos Lee, Troy Glaus, Nate McLouth, Xavier Nady, and Adam Dunn.

David Wright signed a 6 year, $55 million deal for 2007-2012 (with an option for 2013).
Carlos Lee signed a 6 year, $100 million contract for 2007-2012.
Troy Glaus signed a 4 year, $45 million contract for 2005-2008 (with an option for 2009).
Nate McLouth is arb. eligible and is playing this year at $425k.
Xavier Nady is on a 1 year deal worth $3.35 million.
Adam Dunn is in an option year of an original 2 year, $18.5 million deal. It upped to 3 years, $31.5
million when the option was exercised.

Those average out to a 4 year deal worth approximately $8.5 million a year.

I wouldn’t mind seeing some sort of 4 year deal structured like this:
2009: $6 million – around what he’d make in arbitration
2010: $8 million
2011: $9 million
2012: $11 million
2013: $12 million club option
1014: $14 million club option

This is something that I’ve been pondering for some time and I think that I’d trade one, or more, of them for a quality middle-infielder; but one good enough, and young enough, to fit into the team’s long range plans. With the plentiful number of outfielders that are currently available in the organization, they could afford to trade two of them, if the return were promising enough.

Because we have so many decent outfielders, I’d even be willing to part with Rasmus, but only for a middle-infielder whose value is similar. Of course I’d rather keep Rasmus - afterall, one day Rasmus may be one of those players who are so valuable that no price tag is sufficient - but there are two things that keep him from being off limits: 1) a middle-infield upgrade would probably provide more scoring then any upgrade in the outfield would, and 2) we MUST get rid of some outfielders or we’ll simply be burning money by letting it rust in the minors.

While I understand the organization doesn’t place much value on middle-infielders, the positions seem to be the two where an upgrade would provide the biggest boost (and I say that, while at the same time, believing that Aaron Miles is under-appreciated.) With the exception of Rasmus, I’d gladly trade any one outfielder on our current 25-man roster, along with any outfielder currently in the minors, and I’d gladly include Rasmus with any outfielder, except for Ludwick and Ankiel, as long as the return were promising enough.

Obviously I’m not talking about making a trade for just any middle-infielder, but just those that have the possibility to fit into our long range plans, and providing a significant upgrade over the average middle-infielder, while there. I’m not sure that one exists that doesn’t include an additional boatload of cash (Ian Kinsler, maybe?), but if one does, and such a trade were a possibility, I’d jump on it.