Skip to content

Kyle Lohse has received zero offers as a free agent

Jan 4, 2013, 10:15 AM EDT

Image (1) lohse%20sighing.jpg for post 6205

During a radio interview yesterday Kyle Lohse talked about how teams having to forfeit a first-round draft pick to sign him has slowed his free agent market considerably and Derrick Goold of the St. Louis Post Dispatch takes it one step further by reporting that Lohse has yet to receive a single offer.

Well, except for the qualifying offer he returned down from the Cardinals to become a free agent in the first place, that is. Lohse could have accepted that and locked himself into a one-year, $13.3 million deal for 2013, but the 34-year-old right-hander obviously had his sights on a much bigger deal following back-to-back career-years in which he went 30-11 with a 3.11 ERA in 399 innings.

“It’s not exactly the situation I envisioned, not at all,” Lohse told Goold. “It hasn’t been exactly a free market because I’m tied to a draft pick and other guys in my class aren’t. That comes at a price. You can’t compare this to anything in the past because it hasn’t been like this.”

Goold writes that “Lohse doesn’t doubt a fair contract will arrive, it just may take an inventive solution to make a fit.” And when he does sign you can bet it’ll be for significantly less than he would have gotten without being tied to the draft pick compensation. Lohse revealed yesterday that he hasn’t talked to the Cardinals in months, so don’t expect a return to St. Louis to be that “inventive solution.”

  1. bartis982 - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:33 AM

    Hard to believe a pitcher of his caliber is still unsigned.

    • dcfan4life - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:43 PM

      Hes 34, wants at least a 3 year deal, and a lot of money. All that with a loss of a first round pick. It really does make sense why he is unsigned. But when he does get signed he will be a bargain.

  2. makeham98 - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:36 AM

    “Inventive solution”? I’m sure Boras has been extremely inventive with numbers he’s floated around.

  3. psuravens19 - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:37 AM

    I’m with Jim Bowden on this one… The O’s should make a move on Lohse.

    • rockthered1286 - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:56 AM

      they won’t give up the 1st round pick for a 34 year old pitcher when they can pay Saunders much less and get close to the same production. They’re also sitting on Hammel, Chen, Tillman, Gonzo in the rotation. Adding Saunders makes much more sense. And let’s not forget Bundy has a good shot of coming up midway through 2013. And Wada coming off TJS is still under contract. We already have about 8 options for the rotation, 4 of which are pretty much locks. I’d much rather see them go hunting for a 1B/DH to compliment Davis.

      • Kevin S. - Jan 4, 2013 at 11:50 AM

        Joe Saunders won’t come remotely close to giving them the same production Kyle Lohse will. Over the last two seasons, Lohse has posted a 3.11 ERA and 6.0 fWAR to Saunders’ 3.86 and 3.6, respectively.

      • randomdigits - Jan 4, 2013 at 3:07 PM

        You missed Gausman. Some folks think he is closer then Bundy.

      • rockthered1286 - Jan 4, 2013 at 3:48 PM

        ranomdigits- I knew Gausman was said to be progressing quickly but I didn’t realize that there is a possibility of him coming up in 2013. That right there made my day. Thank you sir.

        Now comes the big question- IF Bundy and Gausman come up and IF we bring Saunders back… how do we fix the logjam in the starting rotation- Hammel, Chen, Tillman, Gonzalez, Saunders, Wada, Gausman, Bundy…that be 8 bodies. Assume 1 gets bitten by the injury bug. 7. Assume one of the Bundy/Gausman duo isn’t quite ready. 6. STILL too many bodies and not worth relinquishing one to the BP that is jammed as well….trade?

        But I gotta say, looking at the vast majority of the group- age is on our side. Wada and Saunders would be the only 2 in their 30’s. The rest are 28 and under. Not too shabby.

      • paperlions - Jan 4, 2013 at 5:48 PM

        Gaussman has thrown 15 innings in pro ball: 6 in A- and 9 in A+ (where he gave up 3 HR in 9 innings)….not exactly a lot to go on in terms of development, and no reason at all to think he’s close to the majors. Definitely future ace potential, but anything more than a cup of coffee seems unlikely in 2013.

  4. sportsdrenched - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:37 AM

    When I read the headline I was like, Dayton, make a phone call…but then I read the caveat about the 1st Round Pick…no wonder his phone isn’t lighting up.

    I bet other FA that are in this position in the future take that into consideration.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:39 AM

      Assuming you mean GMDM, the Royals first round pick is protected. It’s why the Indians didn’t lose a first for signing Swisher, but will lose their second.

  5. jarathen - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:37 AM

    Still can’t believe he was tricked into thinking he was worth more than that ludicrous qualifying offer.

    • genericcommenter - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:56 AM

      He’s 34 and has put together 2 solid seasons. He’s not worth more than one year? He’s better than guys who have signed for more total AND more per year.

      • jarathen - Jan 4, 2013 at 11:26 AM

        You’re right; he’s 34. He is unlikely to repeat his recent success for very long, if at all, and I’m sure most teams aren’t looking to pay a guy with two good seasons under his belt, at his age, a rate anywhere close to $13.3 million a year. Maybe over two years.

        His turnaround came not only under a pitching coach known for engineering them but also maintaining them (think Joel Pineiro, was was awful after St. Louis) but also at a point in his career where most pitchers are on a decline. There’s nothing anyone wants to gamble on there.

        I just wish the Angels had gone in with their Blanton offer to Lohse instead. He couldn’t have been worse than Blanton will likely be.

    • kirkvanhouten - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:59 AM

      The $13 million was $3 million more than annual value of his previous contract….coming at a time when players make more and coming off two consecutive excellent seasons. He went 16-3 with a 2.86 ERA and a 3.76 K/BB ratio. By all accounts, he had an excellent season (and another pretty good one before that). If I were Lohse, I wouldn’t have signed a 1 year, $13.3 deal either.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Jan 4, 2013 at 11:54 AM

        He did have an excellent season; however, he’s 34 and last year was the best year he had. I’m sure teams are a bit hesitant giving 34 year old’s a multi-year contract after one great year AND giving up their first round pick. I’d also be a bit leery of giving any STL pitcher a multi-year deal. Like Cooper with the White Sox, Duncan* seems to work magic on his pitchers.

        *yes I know he took a leave of absence this year, but Lohse has been with the team for 5 years and is getting progressively better.

      • forsch31 - Jan 4, 2013 at 1:26 PM

        “He’s 34” really doesn’t change the strangeness of Lohse’s situation, not when you got older guys like Ryan Dempster (age 36) and R.A. Dickey (age 40) signing two-year deals with about the same or more compensation. Without the draft pick compension, he would have at least fielded some offers by now, if not signed with a team.

        Lohse actually has been good the majority of his time in St. Louis; his two bad seasons were due to a strange forearm injury that no pitcher apparently has ever suffered and took a while to figure out how to properly treat. He probably won’t repeat his success last year, but it’s still highly likely that he would be the same pitcher who delivered a 14-8 season with a 3.39 ERA in 2011 in 30 starts and 15-6 with a 3.78 ERA in 33 starts in 2008, the season before his “motorcross” injury.

        And yes, Duncan wasn’t there last year. The idea that the pixie dust goes away with Duncan or the Cardinals in general is a narrative that is beyond stupid at this point. Lohse was a legitmately good pitcher before he showed up in St. Louis who got a bit better. This isn’t the same situation as Joel Pinerio, who was toast as a starting pitcher when the Cardinals picked him off the scrap heap (and was still pretty bad in the first year of his two full seasons with the Cardinals).

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Jan 4, 2013 at 5:46 PM

        “He’s 34″ really doesn’t change the strangeness of Lohse’s situation, not when you got older guys like Ryan Dempster (age 36) and R.A. Dickey (age 40) signing two-year deals with about the same or more compensation. Without the draft pick compension, he would have at least fielded some offers by now, if not signed with a team.

        Dempster – 2/$26.5 ($13.250.00 AAV)
        Dickey – 1/$5M (extension 2/$24M $12M AAV with an option for 3rd)

        First, both those guys signed deals under what Lohse is looking for considering Lohse turned down a guaranteed $13.3M arbitration offer. The draft compensation lost is huge, obviously but there are other factors. Maybe he’s looking for a $16M AAV deal?

        Lohse was a legitmately good pitcher before he showed up in St. Louis who got a bit better

        He really wasn’t. Before he got to STL he put up:

        1164 IP, 4.82 ERA, 98 ERA+, 5.7 K/9, 2.8 BB/9, 1.2 HR/9, 10.1 H/9 averaging 28 GS a season with 166 IP. That’s below average, not good.

  6. Chris Fiorentino - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:39 AM

    Another happy Bor-ass client. LOL.

    • kirkvanhouten - Jan 4, 2013 at 11:18 AM

      …yes, he is probably very happy with the $40 million contract he got in 2008, especially since he had exactly one season in his previous 5 with more than ten wins and a career 4.67 ERA at the time.

    • skids003 - Jan 4, 2013 at 12:08 PM

      He’ll be screaming collusion before long.

  7. Ben - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:45 AM

    I’m a bit unsympathetic, in that the MLBPA was willing to chuck the draft under the bus because the MLBPA doesn’t technically represent amateurs and minor leaguers. On the other hand though, this does suck for Kyle Lohse, who, through no fault of his own is being squeezed by poorly designed rules.

  8. genericcommenter - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:53 AM

    This guy goes through the long waiting game every time he is a free agent. Last time, it took almost until the beginning of the season for him to get a contract. I remember everyone commenting how surprising that was. He only got $4.25/1.

    The he signed that extension and really stunk up the first 2 years, but he earned his salary the last 2.

  9. cardsfanindelaware - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:56 AM

    There is also another factor that the bidding team has to contend with… I copied and pasted from Derrick Goold’s story yesterday so you didn’t have to take the jump…

    “Another new element of the current CBA is the bonus cap that is in place for the June amateur draft. All 30 teams are assigned a purse before the draft, and each faces a penalty for spending over that purse…Here is where the new compensation rules and the new draft-cap rule merge: It is doubly costly to lose a draft pick.

    A team’s bonus cap is calculated on where a team picks in the draft and how many picks that team has. The Astros, who picked No. 1 last season, had a $11.2-million draft bonus purse. A chunk of that, $7.2 million, was based on the fact that they had the No. 1 pick and its “slotted” (or suggested) bonus was $7.2 million. Minnesota had league-high $12.4-million bonus purse, and the Angels had the lowest bonus cap, at $1.7 million for eight picks.

    If a team loses a pick through the draft-pick compensation rule, they also lose the projected bonus of that pick from their purse.

    This is the real cost of signing Kyle Lohse.

    I’ll offer two examples to help illustrate how this happens.

    Example A. The Oakland Athletics had the 11th overall pick in the 2012 draft, the first pick that would not be protected by the new rules. That pick had a suggested “slot” of $2.625 million. The A’s overall bonus purse was set at $8,469,500, according to Baseball America. Under the current compensation rules, if the A’s signed a free agent, say Michael Bourn, they would lose their pick (11th overall) and have their whole bonus purse recalculated. They would lose 31 percent of their purse.

    Example B. The Cardinals had 14 picks going into the 2012 draft and the $9.1 million purse. With fewer picks, their bonus budget will also be lower in 2013. They are set to have the 20th overall pick, and that was slotted at $1.85 million. Let’s say they sign Bourn in a sudden spending spree next week. That could take at least 25 percent from their purse.

    What does that mean?

    Well, consider that not all draft picks get their suggested slot. The suggested slot for the 86th overall pick in the 2012 draft was $574,500. The Cardinals used that pick to take prep third baseman Carson Kelly, and to sign him they had to offer a $1.6-million bonus, the largest for any player in the second round. The Cardinals were able to do that by a) saving space from their bonuses elsewhere in the top 10 rounds and b) going over their purse.

    Signing a free agent like Lohse means losing the budget for that bonus.

    Losing that slotted bonus means having less flexibility and means altering a draft strategy. The average suggested slot for picks Nos. 11 through 30 in 2012 was $1.7 million. That’s big chunk to slice from an assigned purse of $9 million or less. It ties hands.

    This is money teams are eager to spend.”

    In a nutshell, the Nats didn’t offer Jackson a qualifying contract, they just cut him loose. The Cubs signed him to his 4yr/$52mil contract cuz they didn’t have anything else to lose. That is why he got signed and Loshe (who is a better pitcher imo) remains unsigned.

    • cardsfanindelaware - Jan 4, 2013 at 10:58 AM

      The almighty Borass should have seen this predicament and advised his client to take the Redbirds qualifying offer.

      But we are talking about Borass here…

      • tuberippin - Jan 4, 2013 at 11:36 AM

        Yeah, what does that guy know? He’s only the most successful agent in sports history.

    • rockthered1286 - Jan 4, 2013 at 11:18 AM

      Forgive my ignorance and correct my stupidity in the event that I am wrong here, but doesn’t the team who lost the FA receive a compensatory pick as well? I was under the assumption the team receiving the FA (who turned down his former team’s qualifying contract) lost their pick in the first rd (assuming it’s not protected top 10), everyone moves up a spot, and the former team would gain a pick at the tailend of the first round. IF that’s the case, would their purse increase at that point? Essentially making it even more beneficial to the former team? Example- the Rays lose Upton, would they then add a pick at the end of the round and increase their purse for the draft?

      Again- pardon the ignorance on the matter.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Jan 4, 2013 at 11:57 AM

        but doesn’t the team who lost the FA receive a compensatory pick as well?

        I’m almost positive that it doesn’t work like that anymore. With the latest CBA, the team that signs the player loses their first round pick (unless protected) and the pick just vanishes. All the teams behind them move up a slot. The team that loses the player gets a compensatory pick in the supplemental round (after the first and before the second).

        But someone double check please.

      • paperlions - Jan 4, 2013 at 1:38 PM

        That is exactly how it works.

        What doesn’t happen anymore is that the team “losing” the FA doesn’t get the pick of the team that signed the FA. The team that signs Lohse will lose their first (or second) round pick and the draft allocation $ that goes with it and the Cardinals will get a sandwich round pick an a commensurate increase the the $ they can spend on their draft..

      • Kevin S. - Jan 4, 2013 at 1:48 PM

        Paper, are all comp picks located in the sandwich round between the first and second? As in, the Yankees aren’t hosed because Nick Swisher signed with a team that had a protected first-round pick, and another team wouldn’t be hosed even more if the Indians signed a player causing them to forfeit their third-round pick? How do they determine the order of the picks in the comp round?

      • paperlions - Jan 4, 2013 at 2:48 PM

        As far as I know, all compensation picks are after the first round. Before teams could get less than expected because a team signed multiple FAs or a team had a protected 1st because teams would get the forfeited pick and a sandwich round pick…now (as far as I can tell), there is only 1 sandwich round and it is after the 1st.

        They used to use the ranking system that classified FAs into A, B, or C type FAs to determine pick order in the sandwich round. I don’t know how they’ll do it now.

    • cur68 - Jan 4, 2013 at 11:27 AM

      Well that’s clear, isn’t it? Sign Lohse and lose not only the draft pick but money to spend on other draft picks. So, ideally Lohse is looking at a team that won’t mind losing a draft pick and the $$. The team needs to be reasonably stacked in the farm department, sure of its foreign scouting, able to attract top free agents, and willing to pay Lohse market value. No team I can think of has all of that, but one or two have SOME of that going for them. Now, ordinarily I’d say the Beavz are your Huckelberry here, but they don’t really need Lohse nor are they likely to screw over a draft pick for him. In fact, the one team I can think of that’s shown an interest in getting a big gun and has the most number of factors that’ll see them willing to tolerate the downside is the Mariners. They are NOT able to attract top free agents, true, BUT all else they have going for them with a possible side of good foreign amateur scouting (not sure about that one). They’re the only team that hasn’t really made much headway this offseason in spite of trying to get Hamilton and seeing what Loria and his Bagmen want for Giancarlo Stanton. We’ll see….

    • hisgirlgotburrelled - Jan 4, 2013 at 11:44 AM

      I see what you’re saying about the flexibility, but I don’t think that should much of an issue.

      The slotted amount for the Cardinals 1st round pick was $1.85 million, and they gave Michael Wacha every penny of it. Forgive me if I’m wrong and this actually did happen this year, but I cannot see too many 1st round picks taking less than the slotted amount.

    • Old Gator - Jan 4, 2013 at 12:28 PM

      @cardsfanindelaware: nicely reported and analyzed. Thank you.

      Now my question would be, what did the MLBPA think they were gaining for their members by agreeing to these rules?

      • stex52 - Jan 4, 2013 at 1:44 PM

        Good question, OG. They threw the amateurs and rookies under the bus, but nothing new there. All of the CBA agreements have taken care of the established players at the expense of everyone else. I don’t know what the quid pro quo was on this one.

        Do you suppose they missed all of the details on it? If so, some lawyers would need firing.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Jan 4, 2013 at 5:58 PM

        Now my question would be, what did the MLBPA think they were gaining for their members by agreeing to these rules?

        Assuming, whether correctly or incorrectly, that the $ allocated would go something like:

        old Budget – IFA expenditures – MiLB expenditures = total amount for MLB players
        new Budget – less IFA expenditures – less MiLB expenditures = way more total amount for MLB players

        Except most likely it just lead to more money in the pockets of owners…

    • jeffbbf - Jan 4, 2013 at 12:48 PM

      Other factors: Jackson is 5 years younger, has 5 straight years of double-digit wins, has a better career ERA than Lohse despite pitching most of his career in the AL, and was probably asking for less money.

    • forsch31 - Jan 4, 2013 at 4:07 PM

      Derrick probably would appreciate it if people actually made the jump to his articles. That’s how he stays employed.

  10. JustMeMike - Jan 4, 2013 at 11:42 AM

    Remember collusion?

    Well this isn’t collusion but it has the same effect which is to inhibit free agent movement by tacking on penalties to the teams that sign the Lohses, the Bourns, and the Sorianos.

    1) The qualifying offer of 13.3 million is not chicken-feed, and is certainly serious money. But the Lohses, the Bourns, and the Sorianos WALKED away from the qualifying offers believing they could do better. Nothing wrong with that thinking.

    2) The poison pill effect. The signing team spends the big money on the player. Then they lose the draft pick unless it protected, in which case they lose a pick in the next round, and they lose the pct of their draft bonus allowance as well. This is where I have the problem.

    The solution – the signing team keeps it share of the bonus $$$ slotted for draftees. Since they have 1 pick less, let them use the money on their picks lower down.

    • Kevin S. - Jan 4, 2013 at 12:07 PM

      I kind of like a tiered qualifying offer solution. To qualify for a first-round pick, one needs to offer a three-year deal at the QO amount. For a second-round pick, you need a two-year offer. Third-round picks only require a one-year offer.

      I’d also stop protecting high draft picks. If you were that bad the previous season, you shouldn’t be attempting to spend your way out of sucktitude. Alternatively, players worthy of three-year QOs are typically going to be players worth ditching a pick for anyway, so that shouldn’t be a real issue.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Jan 4, 2013 at 12:20 PM

        Unfortunately that sounds entirely too logical for both the MLBPA and the Owners to agree on.

      • Old Gator - Jan 4, 2013 at 12:32 PM

        I’m sure they can find ways to make it illogical enough to satisfy them.

      • ctony1216 - Jan 4, 2013 at 7:00 PM

        I’m sure everyone’s waiting to see what happens with Lohse, Bourn and Soriano. If the big money doesn’t come through, you might see certain types of players more inclined to accept Qualifying Offers. In particular, relief pitchers, DH’s, slap-hitting outfielders and older pitchers.

        Hiroki Kuroda accepted a qualifying offer — and seeing how this is playing out, seems to have made a smart move. The Sox made a QO to Big Papi, then signed him to a 2-year deal at roughly the same salary ($26 million for 2 years).

  11. spudchukar - Jan 4, 2013 at 12:34 PM

    First off, the Cards only matched the option because they knew Lohse was looking for a multiple year deal, and with the plethora of pitching talent St. Louis possesses his departure was an economic choice. It was a wise move by St. Louis and Lohse probably could have expected a more lucrative multi-year offer from the many teams who need his talent.

    He is a “young” 34, in excellent shape, a good athlete, an excellent fielder, not bad with the bat and a pitch to contact, control artist who still hits 91 on the gun. Certainly, Duncan was a positive influence on his career, it is the Cardinal doctrine to pitch to contact, throw strike one, and do not walk anyone. And it isn’t like he is going to forget what has made him one of the better pitchers in the NL for the past few years, nor is his age going to matter that much due to his style.

    The truth is, he has been quite successful since coming to St. Louis, and those who claim he is some kind of one year wonder, haven’t witness his career as a Card. He came to St. Louis in 2008 and posted a very good first season, 15-6, 3.68, in 200 innings pitched as he learned his knew approach. Then in 2009 he got off to a great start but suffered two weird injuries, one fielding a slow roller on a wet turf, and the other on a HBP, the latter which was initially misdiagnosed, and unfortunately led to a surgery of the forearm sheath, a particularly strange injury for a baseball player, not to mention a pitcher. He tried to pitch through it in 2009, but was ineffective, and it took all of 2010 to recover the strength need to grip a baseball. But he was healthy in 2011, and returned to form with a 18-8, 3.39 in a watchful 188 innings.

    2012 proved to be a banner year, but not really that surprising. 24 quality starts, a MLB leading 33 games started, and an MLB best 16-3, 2.86 ERA, in 211 innings, which would be the optimal year to search for a long-term deal for the remainder of his career.

    Teams like Seattle, San Diego, Los Angeles (either) or New York (Mets), who possess large pitcher’s parks are nuts not to sign him to a 3,4, or 5 year deal. He always takes the ball, is a great teammate, and has proven, when healthy, which he has been throughout the majority of his career, that he is a dependable, innings eater, who always keeps you in the game, walks no one, and while seldom great, is almost always very good, which is exactly what a contender should want from perhaps MLB’s premiere #3 guy. Ideally he needs a good-sized park, and solid defense, though St. Louis was only average, in his successful years there. He would be less successful in a band-box, since his forte isn’t K’s,

    All I know, and I believe most Cards fans would agree, he is miles better than a pitcher named Jackson who the Cubs just handed a lucrative multi-year deal who is susceptible to blowing up at any moment. Some GMs are sleeping out there, enraptured by strikeouts, I guess when the answer to their teams pitching woes is waiting patiently for the call, one he always seems to answer.

    • cardsfanindelaware - Jan 4, 2013 at 1:39 PM

      This is exactly what represents Lohse’s career!! He is a great #3 pitcher to have on your roster. If you don’t have a great pitching staff, he can easily be your #2. When the Redbirds signed Jackson back in 2011, I had reservations about him. Yeah, he can be amazing when he was on, but more times than not, he wasn’t. Jackson has a career ERA of 4.40 over 10 years. Last I knew, someone that has a 4.40 as a career average was a journeyman / #5 pitcher. I don’t know when the average slipped to that range and the pitcher was getting lucrative contracts. Jackson is like Jake Westbrook, not really worth a damn.

      If the Redbirds didn’t have such a plethora of young talented arms waiting in the wings, I wouldn’t have minded the Card’s FO signing him to another 3+ years.

    • paperlions - Jan 4, 2013 at 1:48 PM

      Well put spud, completely agree.

      While teams may be concerned about losing the money associated with the draft pick….agents have already realized that the draftee does have leverage and teams will have to spend most of that money on the pick…because if the pick isn’t signed, they’ll lose ALL of that money from the draft purse. The best most teams can hope for is to save a couple hundred thousand on a late first rounder to spend on someone else.

  12. countduku - Jan 4, 2013 at 12:34 PM

    At 34 yrs. old, 1 yr deals sound about right. no team will look at him as a building block. A shame because this guy is a stud, A 1st rd pick is steep. He’ll get his 1 yr. deal with an option for a 2nd yr, at about the same price he turned down. be patient young man.

  13. tgthree - Jan 4, 2013 at 1:12 PM

    I might feel some pity and be prepared to question the new MLB qualifying offer system if three of the four remaining unsigned free agents tied to draft pick compensation weren’t Scott Boras clients.

  14. missingdiz - Jan 4, 2013 at 2:12 PM

    I don’t have time enough to study, or argue about, the nuances of the rules. But it’s clear there’s something screwed up when Greinke gets almost $25 mil./yr. for 6 years while Loshse doesn’t get an offer. Lohse arguably has been the better pitcher for the past 2 years.

    • tonyc920 - Jan 4, 2013 at 7:51 PM

      Matbe the other teams know something we don’t. There might be issues with his arm or maybe he’s a clubhouse distraction. Believe me, there’s a reason and I don’t think it’s totally about forfeiting a draft choice.

  15. buffalo65 - Jan 4, 2013 at 7:19 PM

    Kuroda didn’t accept his qualifying offer, he sign a few weeks later after turning it down.

  16. tonyc920 - Jan 4, 2013 at 7:46 PM

    GOOD !! What ticks me off are these pitchers who have had injury problems and thier teams stuck with them and paid them 100% of the salary and got nothing for it. Then these players jump ship at the first opportunity to hit the Lottery Sized payday with no consideration to the team that took care of them. I would say the new system will be something they must consider before turning down the eligible offer from their team. There’s no loyalty anymore.

  17. djstat - Jan 5, 2013 at 8:33 AM

    Um… Your 34 coming off two strong years. Teams fear you peaked and will now aim down

  18. thebadguyswon - Jan 5, 2013 at 11:19 AM

    Under this CBA, these guys really need to accept the qualifing offers.

  19. riverace19 - Jan 5, 2013 at 1:28 PM


  20. 85pmart - Jan 5, 2013 at 2:13 PM

    A bird in the hand is, obviously, worth more than millions of nothings in a bush. Probably sucks making $14,000,000.00 mistakes.

  21. vegagreenleaf - Jan 5, 2013 at 2:40 PM

    Maybe it’s just me, but doesn’t the term “free” agent have the implication that it should be “free” for the signing team? I know they have to pay the contract, but the lose of picks and slotting money is stupid. How could a union claiming to have the best interests of its constituency in mind agree to this?

  22. stevincinci - Jan 7, 2013 at 7:51 PM

    C’mon Jocketty. You signed him to the Cardinals. Bring him back to Cincy.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. J. Baez (2278)
  2. B. Crawford (2250)
  3. H. Pence (2194)
  4. B. Harper (2127)
  5. A. Rodriguez (2024)