Looper to St. Louis

[Guest GYC]

3 years, $13.5 million. Yikes.
http://rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_previousnews.asp?sport=MLB&leaguenum=&id=5966

]Dec. 15, 2005 - 8:44 pm et Cardinals signed RHP Braden Looper, who had been with the Mets, to a three-year, $13.5 million contract. A nice contract for a pitcher who just had shoulder surgery two months ago. He'll earn $3.5 million in 2006, $4.5 million in 2007 and $5.5 million in 2008. Included are up to $1 million in bonuses, some of them based on games finished in case he becomes the closer. Looper will be healthy for the start of next season, and he figures to be more durable that some of the other relievers getting three-year deals. He probably won't give the Cardinals quite what Julian Tavarez did the last two years, but he'll be decent.

I thought he'd go to a team that doesn't have a concrete closer, that way he could compete for a setup/closer role and be prepared to fill in or something.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

He was the best player named Laverne that the Mets ever had.

[MFS62]

Yancy Street Gang wrote: He was the best player named Laverne that the Mets ever had.

But we did draft Al Shirley.

Later

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

And the Mets actually got six games out of Bart Shirley

[Guest Edgy DC]

The B.J. Bunch grows.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Hey! Is Anna Benson in that group!?!


And that reminds me...

Every day the five principals in the June 15, 1977 Tom Seaver trade get a UMDB hit from a pornographic web site. Out of curiousity (really, out of curiousity) I've visited the referring URL to see if it really has links to the pages of Seaver, Flynn, Zachry, Henderson, and Norman. And it doesn't.

I wonder what's going on.

For anyone who's similarly curious, I can message you the link. I really don't want to post it here.

[Valadius]

Na na na na
Na na na na
Hey hey-ey
Gooodbye...

And yes, that was the door hitting you on the way out.

[Willets Point]

Paula and Carole say:

see ya, see ya,
hope you had a good good time
da dum
hope you have a good good mornin'
um-hmmm
hope we get to see you again
da dum

whistling ...

see ya, see ya,
hope you had a good good time
da dum
hope you have a good good mornin'
um-hmmm
i hope we get to see you again
da dum

whistling ...

see ya, see ya,
glad that you could stay a while
da dum
glad that we could say good mornin'
to you
hope you have a shiny day
da dum
hope you have a shiny day
um-hmmm
hope you have a shiny day
so long,
bye bye now

la la la la la ...

[Frayed Knot]

I still think:

a) we should have offered arbitration.

and

that I'd rather have him than Julian Tavarez



If he accepted arb he'd likely get what he's getting now but only for 1 year, and if not we'd be getting draft picks out of this StL signing.
And with Looper here he'd at least be on the hook for only 1 year. Omar was quoted in one of the papers today as saying that the relievers currently on the market "all want 3 years". He's weighing the options available but thinking about waiting to see what's on the non-tender market instead.

[Zvon]

GET OUT!

I am soooooo totally loving this off season so far.

Bye Looper.
Cya,
wouldnt wanna be ya.

But seriously,..I wish him good luck and hope he rights his ship...
Just as long as he does it anywhere except thru trial and error on the mound for the Mets in the 9th.

[Zvon]

Yancy Street Gang wrote: Hey! Is Anna Benson in that group!?! And that reminds me... Every day the five principals in the June 15, 1977 Tom Seaver trade get a UMDB hit from a pornographic web site. Out of curiousity (really, out of curiousity) I've visited the referring URL to see if it really has links to the pages of Seaver, Flynn, Zachry, Henderson, and Norman. And it doesn't. I wonder what's going on. For anyone who's similarly curious, I can message you the link. I really don't want to post it here.

That is wierd and could be something to be concerned about.

I hope no links at the UMDB take people to unwanted places.
That would be my concern.

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

I don't see where booting him made a lot of sense, unless of course the Mets know more about his health than they ever let on.

[Zvon]

There must be something more than meets the eye in this Wigginton situation.

Roids?
Im not sayin that, just wondering.
Hope not.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

If he is healthy, I still think Looper can be an effective set up guy in the pen. With Wagner slated as the closer, I still think that signing Looper to a one year deal to serve as a set up man could have been a good move. That would either free up Heilman for the rotation, should the Mets trade away a starter, or give depth in the set up role with Heilman and Looper being the bridge to get games to the ninth.

Oh well, doesn't matter now. I wish him luck well in St. Louis.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

I'd guess they were concerned about asking Blooper to accept a demotion, a reduction in status among his teammates, or some such nonsense. Better to fire a guy than to have him demoralizing a unit, making his teammates uncomfortable. "Brad, you (used to be) DA MAN!!!" and all that.

[soupcan]

Yancy Street Gang wrote: Every day the five principals in the June 15, 1977 Tom Seaver trade get a UMDB hit from a pornographic web site. Out of curiousity (really, out of curiousity) I've visited the referring URL to see if it really has links to the pages of Seaver, Flynn, Zachry, Henderson, and Norman. And it doesn't. I wonder what's going on. For anyone who's similarly curious, I can message you the link. I really don't want to post it here.

Pat Zachry, Doug Flynn, Dan Norman, Steve Henderson are somehow linked to internet porn along with Tom Terrific? That's very odd. Message me the link please, I'm curious about that.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

soupcan wrote: Message me the link please, I'm curious about that.

And so, on a gloomy Friday morning, the sad and sordid story of Soupy's fall from the pinnacle of the insurance game to a stretch in federal prison for trafficking in internet porn began...

[Guest OlerudOwned]

Zvon wrote: Bye Looper. Cya, wouldnt wanna be ya.

I would. That 13.5 million over 3 years would be nice.

[smg58]

Righty set-up guys with a 3.98 ERA aren't worth three-year contracts. The Cards are gambling he'll get better, which I suppose is their perogative, but I'm not gonna miss the guy.

[Vic Sage]

i think letting Looper go was a mistake.

2 years ago, he was a perfectly decent closer for the Mets.
Last year, he tried to pitch through an injury and was wildly inconsistent.

with the ridiculous money being thrown at middle-inning and setup guys, It seems to me that re-signing Looper for $4.5m/3yrs would've been a perfectly good way for the Mets to have a setup/backup closer type in the pen. That seems to be what those guys go for now. And, since he was willing to sign for that elsewhere, might he not have been willing to take that, or even less, to avoid having to leave?

Minaya seems to be sanguine about Heilman filling that spot more cheaply. Well, maybe he can and maybe he can't. Personally, if Zeig Heilmann really has turned the corner in his career, I'd prefer him to get 200+ IP as a SP, than 60+ IP as a RP.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Offering him arbitration would have worked well. Either they get him cheaper than he's going for now to St. Louis --- without the long-term tie-down --- or he realizes what he can get with St. Louis (or Philly), turns it down, and the Mets get comped.

[Guest abogdan]

The deal makes sense for the Cardinals. It's not like Izzy has been the healthiest pitcher. Plus, it gives them a cheap option at closer in 2008 after Izzy's contract runs out.

[Guest Rotblatt]

I'm with Vic 100% on both fronts. I'd take Loop at that deal in a heartbeat, and I'd rather see Heilman starting than relieving. Although if he IS relieving, I hope we use him exactly how we used Robo last year (well, maybe a little less frequently).

And I really don't understand why we didn't offer Looper arbitration.

[Guest abogdan]

]why we didn't offer Looper arbitration

He would have accepted and probably gotten something like $7-8 million in arbitration with the current closer market.

[Guest Rotblatt]

]He would have accepted and probably gotten something like $7-8 million in arbitration with the current closer market.

I agree he may have accepted, although given the closer market, he may have figured he could cash in even with a poor 2005. But if we got the Looper of 2001-2004, he'd probably be worth even $8M to the Mets. He has a pretty decent track record and it seems pretty clear that his injury hurt him last year.

If he sucked again, it will have been an expensive mistake, but at least it'd only be for one year.

Anyway, assuming he did rebound, when we offered him arb NEXT year, he'd almost certainly refuse, landing us a draft pick . . .

[Guest sharpie]

I doubt if he would've accepted if he knew there was a 3-year deal somewhere out there.

[Guest abogdan]

I don't agree that Looper would necessarily turn down a one year deal at $7-8 million vs. 3 years for $13.5. If he stays healthy, Looper would likely make more long term by accepting the one year deal this year as a set-up man and then signing a similar three year deal after the 2006 season.

Are you saying that you would have offered Looper arbitration instead of signing Wagner, or would you still do it after signing Wagner? You would be willing to spend $8 million on your second or third (after Heilman) best pitcher in the bullpen?

[Guest Edgy DC]

What would an arbitrator be working with that he or she would conclude that Braden Looper was worth $7-8 million?:

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Looper can argue that he's 70% as good as Billy Wagner.

[Guest abogdan]

]What would an arbitrator be working with that he or she would conclude that Braden Looper was worth $7-8 million?

Three consecutive seasons of 28-29 saves, a career full of below league average ERAs, and a ridiculous market out there for closers. He'd hold up B.J. Ryan as a comparable - someone approximately the same age, with less career saves, fewer career IP and the same career ERA. If a more "unproven" closer got $9 million a year on the open market, it wouldn't be a stretch to think that an arbitrator would be willing to give a more experienced closer a similar deal.