 |
|
|
| |
« Astros Decline To Offer Arb To Wolf, Brocail, Loretta | Main | Mariners Offer Arb To Ibanez »
Cards Decline To Offer Arb To Springer, Looper, Isringhausen
TUESDAY: Another note from Strauss - it seems the Cardinals are moving on from Springer.
MONDAY: According to MLB.com's Matthew Leach, the Cardinals declined to offer arbitration to Russ Springer, Braden Looper, and Jason Isringhausen (as well as their other free agents). The Looper decision comes as a surprise, as he earned only $5.5MM in '08 and would've been a solid addition or trade chip for '09. He's a Type B free agent, but the Cards won't get a pick now. Joe Strauss of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch says Looper is seeking at least a three-year deal. Springer is a Type A, so now he's much more attractive to other teams.
Strauss has a few other Cards notes. He says the Cardinals are not one of the teams interested in Randy Johnson, but may have interest in Andy Pettitte. Also, the signing of lefty reliever Trever Miller is being held up due to health concerns that surfaced at the physical.
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b9a69e20105362ffc46970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Cards Decline To Offer Arb To Springer, Looper, Isringhausen:
Comments
Top Stories
Search MLBTR
MLBTR Features
Recent Posts
Rumors By Team
Monthly Archives
Live Chats
Tuesdays at 2 p.m. CST
For a team that's supposed to be rebuilding this doesn't make a lot of sense. Now they miss out on draft picks.
Posted by: Cardsfan387 | December 01, 2008 at 06:21 PM
Hey Frank Wren, what about Looper for the Braves?
Posted by: drphonic7 | December 01, 2008 at 06:23 PM
Cards unlikely to sign Trever Miller soon, are in talks with other players...
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20081201&content_id=3697441&vkey=news_stl&fext=.jsp&c_id=stl
Posted by: Cardsfan387 | December 01, 2008 at 06:36 PM
Injury concerns are reason that Miller hasn't signed yet
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/cardinals/story/4E599AFF0127C7108625751300016D1E?OpenDocument
Mozeliak would not predict a resolution of negotiations with free agent lefthanded reliever Trever Miller, believed close to formalizing a two-year deal with the club until a team physical raised concerns related to a 2000 surgery to repair a torn labrum.
Posted by: Cardsfan387 | December 01, 2008 at 07:03 PM
Why not offer Russ Springer arb? He was very good the past couple of years. Does he have an injury?
Posted by: DrNo990 | December 01, 2008 at 07:12 PM
The Cards have multiple young right handed relievers that are MLB ready (Perez, Motte, McClellan). Their capable of filling Springers role. The Cards couldn't afford to even offer him arbitration because he would immediately accept. He wants to stay in STL because of a special school for his kid (I think he's handicap). Unfortunately, it just doesn't make sense for the Cards.
Posted by: deeco3307 | December 01, 2008 at 07:45 PM
The decision on Looper is ridiculous really. It would have been highly unlikely that he'd accept considering he's capable of at least 2 years on the open market. Just seems a bit stupid to pass up on a solid draft pick for very little risk...
Posted by: deeco3307 | December 01, 2008 at 07:47 PM
You all have it wrong. It was better for the Cardinals not to offer arbitration to any of these guys. With the vast amount of young right handed RP already on the roster, why take any risk on having older, aging players accept? It's easy to say that the Cards will loose out on draft picks for not offering arbitration, but is it worth the risk of having guys like Izzy and Looper accept and then not playing the young players who are already major league ready? I think not.
Rebuilding just means that you are reloading with different (and normally younger) talent; something the Cardinals are definitely doing.
Posted by: mtzxc | December 01, 2008 at 09:56 PM
I still think Looper should have been offered, no matter how you put it. The Cards rotation could use him.
Posted by: Aduncaroo | December 02, 2008 at 11:39 AM
I agree that Looper should've been offered.
They could have added some picks for him if he declined, and if he accepted then they would just have another dependable arm for the rotation on a one year deal. I just don't think a rotation of Carpenter, Wainwright, Lohse, Wellemeyer and Piniero is very dependable at all.
Posted by: scribbletone | December 02, 2008 at 11:53 AM
i think Looper piched well last year & would have been a good #4 0r #5 in the rotation. he should have been offered arb. Springer did well also, maybe we can still sign him.
Posted by: alan | December 02, 2008 at 12:01 PM
I realize he's old but for all the talk of bullpen problems, Springer has posted two straight years of an ERA in the 2's (!) and you don't even offer him arbitration?
I'm mystified.
Posted by: CubbyFan23 | December 02, 2008 at 12:12 PM
The Cardinals don't seem to have a plan at all. If the idea is to build from within, then you want the draft picks you could get from guys like Springer and Looper. Both are likely to get deals elsewhere and what's the worse that would happen if they accepted arbitration? Then you'd have depth to make a deal at some point. The rotation isn't that deep that Looper wouldn't help; Carpenter is a major unknown and Looper is certainly better than Piniero.
Posted by: Devlsh | December 02, 2008 at 12:21 PM
Cubs should have signed Russ Springer instead of trading away a future star closer for Kevin Gregg.
Posted by: Teetz1 | December 02, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Agreed Teetz. I honestly can't believe the Cubs would have dreamed that the Cards would let him go and not even offer him arbitration though...
I think Hendry got a little desperate...and it showed. We saw the same thing in the Juan Pierre trade as well. He needs to stop dealing with the Marlins altogether!
As for the Cardinals, their biggest issue last year was a horrendous bullpen. Then, they won't even offer arbitration to the guy thats been the best one in it for two striaght years? I'm baffled.
Posted by: Aduncaroo | December 02, 2008 at 01:00 PM
i am scared to see what Moe's next move will be.
Posted by: alan | December 02, 2008 at 01:10 PM
mtzxc- It is a perceived risk that they all might accept, but only Isringhausen and Springer were likely to.
Isringhausen is looking at an incentive-laden deal with someone next season, with an option. I have to think the Cardinals would be overpaying for him when we have younger options.
Springer has been covered, he likely would've accepted.
As for Looper, he's going to get way more on the open market than in arbitration with us, and he might not have another season as good as this one to market himself with. Unless he's in love with St. Louis, 5% chance max he accepts. Even if he does, they get a bargain 4/5 starter one a one-year deal who was nearly their ace the second half of the season. From June on his ERA was a nifty 3.75 with a 1.22 WHIP.
Posted by: mateodh | December 02, 2008 at 01:28 PM
"Cubs should have signed Russ Springer instead of trading away a future star closer for Kevin Gregg."
Agreed, would have loved him in Chicago. I agree with Aduncaroo though that I doubt the Cubs had any idea the Cardinals would be dumb enough to make no attempt to keep their best reliever though.
Posted by: CubbyFan23 | December 02, 2008 at 01:32 PM
"Springer has been covered, he likely would've accepted."
Isn't that a good thing?
Posted by: CubbyFan23 | December 02, 2008 at 01:32 PM
Why wouldn't the Cards have LOVED for Springer to sign in Arbitration with them???
For a team with one of the worst pens in the game last year, wouldn't you want to keep the guy who was seemingly the most reliable in it, and on a one year deal???
I'm so confused...is there any argument really that Springer would be a steal at whatever the arbitration amount would have been for a one year deal?
Is there any argument that the Cards biggest need this year was bullpen help?
Posted by: Aduncaroo | December 02, 2008 at 01:42 PM
Once again, everyone is missing the reason why they weren't offered arbitration. The pen is already full of YOUNG relievers in Perez, Motte, McClellan, Worrell, Kinney, and then add in the veteran Franklin. So why spend any money at all with the older veterans when you have bigger needs?
When you discuss how bad the pen was, it includes an injured Izzy, Franklin closing, and the use of guys like Brad Thompson, Kelvin Jiminez, and Ron Villone. The Cardinals have basically gutted the bullpen and replaced it with the relief prospects that were ready to take over anyways.
Posted by: mtzxc | December 02, 2008 at 08:20 PM
I think everyone who isn't familiar with the Cards situation is having trouble understanding Springer not being offered arbitration. The Cards have 4 legitimate RHP setup candidates going into next season. Each are young and cheap. 1 throws 95+, another throws 98+ and the other has 4 legitimate pitches. All showed promise this season. Why spend 4-5 M on something you already have, and someone who can't pitch back to back games?
As for Looper, its not even an argument that he should have been offered arbitration. The Cards could have used him if he accepted, which was unlikely anyways. I just don't get it. I think it could have actually boiled down to not wanting to pay for another draft pick next season, which is sad. I really can't think of any other reason though...
Posted by: deeco3307 | December 02, 2008 at 09:03 PM
I understand there are a bunch of young unproven guys...but for a guy that was the best reliever in your pen for the last two years, I probably would have offered. Oh well, I guess its MO's call.
I agree...there really isn't much to say about Looper.
Posted by: Aduncaroo | December 03, 2008 at 09:04 AM