Comments on: Rangers “have not changed their position” on Kyle Lohse

By: DelawarePhilliesFan

DelawarePhilliesFan — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:37:00 +0000

I don’t know specifically, but generally speaking, any Union realizes they have to give in some areas in order to collect in others. Heck, even Marvin Miller was willing to make players “indentured servants” for 3 years, knowing that teams had to have SOME sort of cost certainty somewhere.

It helps players as a whole to have the first 3 years locked then Arbitration, then FA. But a guy who has a phenomenal rookie year then is a bust, he would have been better off to have some leverage after year 1. Same thing here – it may screw certain players, but help the players overall, as getting this as a concession made the owners willign to give in on another point

By: albertmn

albertmn — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:25:44 +0000

Lohse’s problem is that he would be a short term solution at best. Teams that would stand to lose a pick don’t want to pay the price. Teams that are high enough in the draft to not lose their first round pick are too far from competing to take a chance on a short term solution like Lohse. It is a rough deal for Lohse, but I would bet that it will cause players and agents to take a far different look at signing the offer form in the future (or working on extensions with the current team for “less” than what they think their market value might be).

By: gibbyfan

gibbyfan — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 13:23:21 +0000

Cards will miss him –Carp out, Waino may not work out, who know with Garcia, Lynn tailed off in the second half. He’s certainly better than Westbrook —if all goes well would provide trading flexibility with one of the younger guys

By: churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged

churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 12:57:27 +0000

I don’t know what the hell the MLBPA was thinking when they agreed to this procedure.

Why wouldn’t they agree to it? Lohse had a guaranteed $13.3M offer on the table which he refused. It’s the player’s choice if they want to chase a long term deal with no guarantee on AAV.

By: paperlions

paperlions — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 12:41:33 +0000

A team like the Indians, who has already given up their first 2 picks, could consider a 1 year deal….but you are right, a 2-3 year deal would be better…especially if the dollars are south of $10M/year, which I highly doubt.

By: ultimatecardinalwarrior

ultimatecardinalwarrior — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 12:37:14 +0000

If a team is a contender that needs rotation help, definitely. You have to remember that even a top 4 pick only becomes a regular contributer on an MLB squad about a quarter of the time. The respective value between 200 innings from Lohse and a prospect, which by its very definition is no sure thing, could be great. I mean, it doesn’t make sense for the Astros to sign him, but the Rangers or Nationals? Sure. Heck, even the Pirates could use him for a playoff run.

By: dawgpoundmember

dawgpoundmember — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 06:00:02 +0000

Isn’t Lohse the last player not signed that was offered a qualifying offer that didn’t accept?

My guess is that the MLBPA thought it would be the NFL equivalent of the franchise tag. Louse had a great year last year but as we all know, at age 34, baseball players are over the cliff, not hill.

It worked for everyone else but this one Boras client. MLB owners may have finally found a way around Boras while still pleasing MLBPA.

By: cardinalcrazy

cardinalcrazy — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 05:51:12 +0000

This is correct, they would be able to get a pick in 2014 if they tender a contract to Lohse and he doesn’t accept. Of course knowing that no one is likely to offer you a great contract as a result of the draft pick, Lohse would more than likely accept the offer. He would be crazy not to.

Also keep in mind, any team who trades a player throughout the season can no longer give a qualified offer and expect a draft pick as a result of the player not accepting it.

By: Old Gator

Old Gator — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 04:57:27 +0000

I don’t know what the hell the MLBPA was thinking when they agreed to this procedure. Either someone just didn’t understand what they were doing and needs to be fired, or the entire association suffered a collective cerebroflatular episode then they voted.

By: bmoreballers

bmoreballers — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 04:27:51 +0000

Then the braves or angels should sign him for as cheap as possible use him as back of rotation or even bullpen guy while they try to trade him and get something decent back from a team who didn’t want to fork over the pick

By: losanginsight

losanginsight — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 04:26:57 +0000

Loshe and his Giant arm should has signed the Cards 1yr offer.

By: fbwangus8736

fbwangus8736 — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 04:25:20 +0000

My question is can a team sign Lohse this year and lose their pick. Then next year put that same tender like the Cards did on Him to gain a pick next year?

By: bjbeliever

bjbeliever — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 03:58:09 +0000

they would give up the highest pick they have, ie 2nd or 3rd round

By: bmoreballers

bmoreballers — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 03:55:50 +0000

So what happens if a team signs him but doesn’t have a first round pick? Does it go to second round or what

By: andreweac

andreweac — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 03:45:14 +0000

Why would a team sign him to a 1 year deal? Is that worth a top draft pick? Far more likely he goes for 2-3 years at $7-$10 per. More value for a team that way.