July 24, 200917 yr You have to have the team already in place to best benefit from a couple of moves like this. Do you really think the Reds meet that criteria? I'm far from an overenthusiastic sports fan (although you may beg to differ) but I think that adding a Matt Holliday and a Mark DeRosa could prepare the Reds team for a run at the NL Central. I've been advocating the Reds playing their rookies and trading those older players with some value left this whole year, but Holliday, DeRosa, Votto, Phillips, Encarnacion, and Hernandez/Bruce isn't THAT bad, especially in the NL, as well as their pitching.
July 24, 200917 yr You have to have the team already in place to best benefit from a couple of moves like this. Do you really think the Reds meet that criteria? Not at all. Never implied such. Only that it would be nice one of these years for the hometown team to be in a position to do the same thing. And very enjoyable watching them pull off such a trade.
July 24, 200917 yr Exactly. Put Holliday behind him, see how many IBB he will get then. His stats will be unreal (even more than they usually are).Ryan Ludwick's 2008 numbers ... .273-16-61 with an .838 OPS Matt Holliday's 2008 numbers ... .286-11-54 with an .831 OPS How much difference do you think Holliday will make? I don't by the concept of "protection" all that much, anyway. Teams are still trying to get Pujols out, and there will still be times that he gets walked intentionally. I don't see the rest of the NL taking much different an approach, even after the Holliday deal.
July 24, 200917 yr What about Rolen and Edmonds a few years ago And didnt they get to the World Series in 2004 and won the World Series in 2006? :thumb:
July 24, 200917 yr I'm far from an overenthusiastic sports fan (although you may beg to differ) but I think that adding a Matt Holliday and a Mark DeRosa could prepare the Reds team for a run at the NL Central. I've been advocating the Reds playing their rookies and trading those older players with some value left this whole year, but Holliday, DeRosa, Votto, Phillips, Encarnacion, and Hernandez/Bruce isn't THAT bad, especially in the NL, as well as their pitching. Hernandez and Bruce are done for the season, aren't they? Volquez's status is very uncertain, too. At this moment, the Reds aren't quite there. They have a potentially bright future, but there is still some work to do.
July 24, 200917 yr Ryan Ludwick's 2008 numbers ... .273-16-61 with an .838 OPS Matt Holliday's 2008 numbers ... .286-11-54 with an .831 OPS How much difference do you think Holliday will make? I don't by the concept of "protection" all that much, anyway. Teams are still trying to get Pujols out, and there will still be times that he gets walked intentionally. I don't see the rest of the NL taking much different an approach, even after the Holliday deal. Just for the record, in July he hit .338, 3 HR and 14 RBI in 18 games.
July 24, 200917 yr What about Rolen and Edmonds a few years ago I wouldn't put them on the same level as Holliday. And besides 2004, Rolen wasn't THAT good in STL. Nevertheless, they are both solid hitters. But no Holliday.
July 24, 200917 yr Just for the record, in July he hit .338, 3 HR and 14 RBI in 18 games.Ludwick in July: .391-5-23 Again, what's the big difference?
July 24, 200917 yr Hernandez and Bruce are done for the season, aren't they? Are they? I hadn't heard either was done for the year.
July 24, 200917 yr I wouldn't put them on the same level as Holliday. And besides 2004, Rolen wasn't THAT good in STL. Nevertheless, they are both solid hitters. But no Holliday. What? Edmonds was every bit as good as Holliday and IMO BETTER. Holliday is overrated due to his inflated stats in Coors
July 24, 200917 yr Ludwick in July: .391-5-23 Again, what's the big difference? The difference is having two of them rather than one
July 24, 200917 yr Ludwick in July: .391-5-23 Again, what's the big difference? Taking out the Coors Field effect (which IMO is overexaggerated) here is the comparison between Ludwick's career stats vs. Holliday's carreer stats away from home: Ryan Ludwick's career stats- 1446 AB, 223 Runs, 395 Hits, 81 HR, 270 RBI, 142 BB, 371 K, 15 SB, .273 Matt Holliday's career stats (away)- 1481 AB, 218 Runs, 416 Hits, 48 HR, 197 RBI, 145 BB, 307 K, 46 SB, .281 So basically it boils down to whether or not you think being home or away makes a big difference.
July 24, 200917 yr Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't Holliday make more then Pujols. Pujols makes 14.4 this year Holliday makes 13.5
July 24, 200917 yr What? Edmonds was every bit as good as Holliday and IMO BETTER. Holliday is overrated due to his inflated stats in Coors It is a matter of how much importance you put on the Coors factor- I happen to put less than most. Anyways, Holliday's stats away from Coors are comparable to Ludwick's career stats (even though that isn't what you were comparing it too)
July 24, 200917 yr Taking out the Coors Field effect (which IMO is overexaggerated)How is it overexaggerated? Most of the "best players" in Rockies history were perceived as stars or superstars only because of Coors Field's inflation of their offensive numbers. Taking out the Coors Field effect (which IMO is overexaggerated) here is the comparison between Ludwick's career stats vs. Holliday's carreer stats away from home: Ryan Ludwick's career stats- 1446 AB, 223 Runs, 395 Hits, 81 HR, 270 RBI, 142 BB, 371 K, 15 SB, .273 Matt Holliday's career stats (away)- 1481 AB, 218 Runs, 416 Hits, 48 HR, 197 RBI, 145 BB, 307 K, 46 SB, .281 So basically it boils down to whether or not you think being home or away makes a big difference. For the purpose of this argument, it's much better to look at their numbers the last 2-3 years instead of their career numbers, in part because Ludwick has had a pretty unconventional career path. What we're seeing from Holliday this year is what we're going to get. His road numbers the last 2-3 years are of a guy that will hit between .280 and .300 with 20-25 HR and 80-90 RBI.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.