GatewayRedbirds.com

Vidor wrote:I'm a little bit surprised by the loathing expressed towards this trade. Will Jay keep up a 1.051 OPS? No. But it could drop 200 points and still be higher than Ryan Ludwick's. Ludwick isn't Roberto Clemente. He has a career .832 OPS. It's .827 this year. The Cardinals got the starting pitcher that they badly need to hold off the Reds in the NL Central race.

It's more likely to drop somewhere in the 300 point range.

greenback44 wrote:

Faceman wrote:

Cronos69 wrote:As also has been stated, it seems to me that this move reeks of desperation.

That Mo and the Cards brass were willing to move Ludwick for Westbrook and a future long relief guy says that they must not have been too happy with what they saw in Hawksworth and Suppan either, definitely says that they expect Penny is finished for 2010, and also makes one wonder about their view of the future (ie, we have to win now, who cares what it takes to get more pitching) and their thoughts on their chances of signing Pujols long-term.

Desperation? Why? Because they know they are using Ludwick's salary next year to help fund AP's extension? Sounds like planning, not desperation.

Again, there's no rule that says Ludwick has to be offered arbitration next year.

The Cardinals have spent the last month or two advertising their "payroll flexibility". Maybe that was just BS, but payroll in 2010 is the only decent explanation for why they don't have both Ludwick and Westbrook on the 25-man roster right now.

Just because they don't have to offer arb, doesn't mean that Ludwick would re-sign here for much less. Holliday just got $17M. You telling me Ludwick isn't worth half that?

FWIW Sean Smith updated his projections through yesterday apparently, and his spreadsheet thinks Jay is a better player (OFF+DEF, because he is not a better hitter) than Ludwick today.

InvincibleCakeEater wrote:

Vidor wrote:I'm a little bit surprised by the loathing expressed towards this trade. Will Jay keep up a 1.051 OPS? No. But it could drop 200 points and still be higher than Ryan Ludwick's. Ludwick isn't Roberto Clemente. He has a career .832 OPS. It's .827 this year. The Cardinals got the starting pitcher that they badly need to hold off the Reds in the NL Central race.

It's more likely to drop somewhere in the 300 point range.

Okey doke. We weren't going to win the NL Central with Jeff Suppan and Blake Hawksworth in our rotation.

greenback44 wrote:FWIW Sean Smith updated his projections through yesterday apparently, and his spreadsheet thinks Jay is a better player (OFF+DEF, because he is not a better hitter) than Ludwick today.

Some of those defensive projection systems downright adore Jay defensively, which is certainly intriguing.

Jmodene wrote:

greenback44 wrote:

Faceman wrote:

Cronos69 wrote:As also has been stated, it seems to me that this move reeks of desperation.

That Mo and the Cards brass were willing to move Ludwick for Westbrook and a future long relief guy says that they must not have been too happy with what they saw in Hawksworth and Suppan either, definitely says that they expect Penny is finished for 2010, and also makes one wonder about their view of the future (ie, we have to win now, who cares what it takes to get more pitching) and their thoughts on their chances of signing Pujols long-term.

Desperation? Why? Because they know they are using Ludwick's salary next year to help fund AP's extension? Sounds like planning, not desperation.

Again, there's no rule that says Ludwick has to be offered arbitration next year.

The Cardinals have spent the last month or two advertising their "payroll flexibility". Maybe that was just BS, but payroll in 2010 is the only decent explanation for why they don't have both Ludwick and Westbrook on the 25-man roster right now.

That's my whole point - payroll relief was more important in this regard. Hell, the Indians or Padres may have asked for Craig or Jay in the deal, and we may have been the ones who insisted they take Ludwick or the deal was off.

By 2012, we'll be down to Pujols, Holliday, Wainwright, Molina, and 21 sub-$1MM players, as I now expect them to not exercise Carp's $15MM option for 2012.

Ludwick wasn't going to be on the team in 2012 regardless.

Faceman wrote:

greenback44 wrote:

Faceman wrote:

Cronos69 wrote:As also has been stated, it seems to me that this move reeks of desperation.

That Mo and the Cards brass were willing to move Ludwick for Westbrook and a future long relief guy says that they must not have been too happy with what they saw in Hawksworth and Suppan either, definitely says that they expect Penny is finished for 2010, and also makes one wonder about their view of the future (ie, we have to win now, who cares what it takes to get more pitching) and their thoughts on their chances of signing Pujols long-term.

Desperation? Why? Because they know they are using Ludwick's salary next year to help fund AP's extension? Sounds like planning, not desperation.

Again, there's no rule that says Ludwick has to be offered arbitration next year.

The Cardinals have spent the last month or two advertising their "payroll flexibility". Maybe that was just BS, but payroll in 2010 is the only decent explanation for why they don't have both Ludwick and Westbrook on the 25-man roster right now.

Just because they don't have to offer arb, doesn't mean that Ludwick would re-sign here for much less. Holliday just got $17M. You telling me Ludwick isn't worth half that?

They dumped Ludwick for nothing. They could do the same thing in two months and get the benefit of a nice, solid player over that time, and then dump him. This has nothing to do with 2011.

Vidor wrote:

InvincibleCakeEater wrote:

Vidor wrote:I'm a little bit surprised by the loathing expressed towards this trade. Will Jay keep up a 1.051 OPS? No. But it could drop 200 points and still be higher than Ryan Ludwick's. Ludwick isn't Roberto Clemente. He has a career .832 OPS. It's .827 this year. The Cardinals got the starting pitcher that they badly need to hold off the Reds in the NL Central race.

It's more likely to drop somewhere in the 300 point range.

Okey doke. We weren't going to win the NL Central with Jeff Suppan and Blake Hawksworth in our rotation.

I completely agree. I just think that trading 1.3 years of Ludwick for 10-12 starts of Westbrook because Jay has had 115 incredibly lucky at bats was pretty dumb.

Kyle wrote:

greenback44 wrote:FWIW Sean Smith updated his projections through yesterday apparently, and his spreadsheet thinks Jay is a better player (OFF+DEF, because he is not a better hitter) than Ludwick today.

Some of those defensive projection systems downright adore Jay defensively, which is certainly intriguing.

and shocks me TBH. He didn't look too good in Springfield.

Vidor wrote:
Ludwick wasn't going to be on the team in 2012 regardless.

Obviously. And there's something wrong with a system that encourages teams to dump good players just because they think they can't afford them.

Clearly, the goal of the Cards is to re-sign Pujols while keeping payroll under $100MM.

What irritates me about this whole thing, as I stated somewhere else already, is that we gave up a solid player in Ludwick to get a so-so innings-eater coming off a two-year injury. When you compare what we gave up compared to what other teams gave up to get the likes of Lee, Oswalt, Haren, et al, it's irritating. The difference, of course, is that those teams are willing to increase their payroll to win a championship. We, obviously, are not, and that's frustrating.