Free agent righty Roy Oswalt is being eyed by the Cardinals, reported Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe yesterday, and he'd love to pitch in St. Louis. However, Joe Strauss of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch tweeted today that a team source downplayed the Cardinals' interest in Oswalt as a starter. Strauss' implication is that the Cardinals might have interest in Oswalt for a relief role, perhaps with big incentives if he is to jump into the rotation. The Cardinals currently have five starters under contract for 2012.
Oswalt has done very little relief work since his 2001 rookie season, and it's not known whether he's open to the idea of joining a bullpen. The 34-year-old was limited to 145 innings in 2011 due to back pain.
What? A reliever? Guess he’s not signing with the Cards then.
How insane. Guy had 140 good innings last year… he was disappointing for the four aces hype but he wasn’t bad at all.
Oswalt in a reliever role? Outside of a playoff rotation? Especially when he’s trying to sign a make-good contract? Yeah – right. Why would he go to St. Louis for that?
If he really wants to pitch for St. Louis, he’d take a reliever job if that’s what it takes.
It’s not like there are teams pounding on his door right now.
Besides, he’d be a reliever in name only. Even odds Westbrook is forced out if they sign Oswalt. Calling him a reliever is simply a way to pay less in salary.
Plenty of temas would likely sign him now that he is looking for a one year deal. He’s not going to be signing with anyone for lack of suitors/interest. He’ll be signing with the team that gives him the best opportunity to prove his durability while also winning games. St. Louis gives him that as a starter. The idea is to sign a one year contract in order to prove himself so that he can get a better contract next off-season. He’s not doing that from the bullpen.
If St. Louis signs him, Westbrook has to be out.
Westbrook will get “injured” if nothing else. Trading him would eat most of his salary anyway.
However, if teams were pounding down his door to sign him to a one-year deal, the St. Louis talk wouldn’t be here. Either that, or the teams that are pounding on his door aren’t the ones he wants to play for.
For the record, I don’t see Oswalt signing with the Cards to join the bullpen. Either he’ll be given assurances behind the scenes that he’ll find his way into the rotation, or he’ll have to lower his expectations far enough to land a different starting job elsewhere (note: quality of team is the key expectation here).
The last article I saw about Roy Oswalt said he had about 8 suitors. He has plenty of interest.
The last full article I read had him listed with 8 or 9. Many of those teams have individual rumors which seem to take them back out.
The article above says Red Sox are likely out. Miami just acquired Z, so they are likely out. Another article here ruled out Blue Jays. Nationals are likely out after Gio. Rangers are thought unlikely if they sign Darvish, Twins can’t afford him, and the Yankees don’t seem interested due to luxury tax.
Things may change, but of the 9 teams listed in the poll on January 1, all but the Tigers and Royals have rumors downplaying their interest. Tigers are looking to make a push for Garza, so they may eliminate themselves too.
I expect things to change after Darvish, Garza and Jackson find their respective homes, but if a team had true interest in him, I think he’d be signed by now. He’s probably the most talented “fall back” option I’ve seen in a while.
Strauss should be embarrassed to write this. He doesn’t really believe the Cardinals would sign him, ship him to the pen, and still trot Jake Westbrook out there every fifth day, does he?
I read the headline of this post and immediately thought “sweet, they traded Westbrook!” No such luck.
No way they add Oswalt without moving Westy – Westbrook makes too much money to move into the bullpen, and the thought of having Oswalt pitch out of the pen is as ludicrous as you point out.
We have to pay Westbrook either way though. I think he’d be good in the bullpen since he is usually awesome for like 3-4 innings, and then falls apart. Financially, it may not be a good idea, but the Cardinals would definitely be better with Oswalt in the rotation and Westbrook in the pen.
I get the impression these are like the Buerhle to StL rumors earlier in the offseason. The Cards would love to have either pitcher, but the rotation is full.
At the right price, you can pitch them from the bullpen (or eat Westbrook’s salary).
The problem here, as with Buerhle, is finding that right price without getting massively overbid.
I’m sure the Cards would have happily signed Buehrle instead of Romero. Buerhle wasn’t about to take three to five million a year.
Oswalt likely won’t either.
Good fit
Great fit! Now, what to do with Westbrook….
Not if he’s a relief pitcher. Heck if Jake Westbrook didn’t have, well let’s say, a well above AAV contract, then I don’t think there’s any hesitation that he would be moved to the bullpen. Not that it can’t happen though.
Saying Oswalt is going to the bullpen is just the Cards’ excuse to sign him when they already have the rotation set. Once he is on the roster they’ll either trade Westbrook or have a “competition” for who becomes the starter. Or Westbrook will have an unexpected “injury” so that they want to give him plenty of “rest”.
I was thinking along the same line. Also, that would be an excuse to keep his base salary low with a lot of incentives on innings pitched.
Oswalt has been a solid starter throughout his career and still has gas in the tank to start on just about any team. Doubt he would sign with any team that didn’t tell him there was a rotation spot for him immediately, on pride alone.
I like the idea of signing Oswalt and moving Westbrook if they can trade him for at least some salary relief because otherwise he’s taking a job from a McClellan or someone with real upside. Oswalt’s past back issues is the only reason to pause on moving Westy but between Mac, Lynn and Scrabble swing man is covered.
I agree with you for most of your statement, but I’m not sure that “McClellan” and “upside” belong in the same sentence.
I think that a pither who has a career whip of 1.29 and a career ERA of 3.61 that wont 28 until the middle of NEXT season should be viewed as a pitcher with upside. At least in this man’s opinion.
He projects to be no better than a 4/5 starter, and doesn’t have the typical makeup to be a closer. Right handed set-up men, no matter how well they perform, are replaceable parts.
Oswalt is a better option in the rotation (or for a spot start) at this point in his career than McClellan is ever likely to be, and the Cardinals always seem to find right handed relievers in the farm.
I like McClellan, but losing (or wasting) him isn’t going to hurt at all.
I don’t think he’s by any means irreplacible, I think packaging him as a starter (with possibly other peices) and using that for a trade to get a young SS or 2B at the begining of the offseason would’ve probably been the way to go. Because at this point he’s probably better that Westbrook and is (healthwise) a better bet that a guy with back issues that will 35 during the season. I just think the 2nd garaunteed year of the Westbrook deal was a mistake from the begining and stops you from putting Mac in the rotation or otherwise upgrading the rotation.
Now if Oswalt thinks he can pull a Smolts, closing for a while to give his body chance to recover from all the innings thrown and then move back to the rotation, in order to lengthen his career while still playing for a team built to contend then the deal makes more sense.
Since when in the English language can you use a number as a verb meaning the age that one will turn that year?
be*
I don’t think he’s going to take this role. Makes no sense. He has to establish that he is healthy.
I would assume any signing of Oswalt would be a prelude to dumping Westbrook to anybody willing to eat at least a few million of his contract. He had a 1.1 WAR season last year, good for $5,000,000. If somebody was willing to stump up $3-4,000,000 I’m quite certain he could be had for a box of rocks.
Eat the whole contract if you have to. You’re paying it regardless.
This is simply a question of whether the improvement of Oswalt over Westbrook is worth whatever they have to pay Oswalt, given that they would have to pay Westbrook’s salary anyway.
And if there’s room in the budget. I think teams are going to be a lot more aggressive (i.e. devote more resources to their evaluation and acquisition) with international free agents and prospects before the new rules come into play.
They are trying to get rid of Loeshe or Westbrook to save on payroll and pick up Oswalt as 4th or 5th. There bullpen is loaded and deep. They are waiting for Shelby Miller and Martinez to be ready.
Getting rid of Lohse wouldn’t take too much salary (someone would pick up most of it – he’s around market based on last year’s performance), but getting rid of Westbrook may require almost all of his $8 million, so you save almost nothing.
Either way, Lohse and Westbrook both have no-trade clauses, so nothing will happen in the end.
Does Westbrook have a no-trade clause?
Unfortunately he does.
Nobody gives Lohse any respect for last year. He had the best season of anyone on the team (The World Series winning team). 14 wins and a sub 3.5 era is great for a #4 or 5 starter. Westbrook is the one in which they are trying to part ways.
Unfortunately, other teams are smart too. No one else wants Westbrook any more than the Cardinals do.
If the Cardinals salary dump, it will be Lohse. If they trade Westbrook, they’ll pay him anyway.
Even if they keep Westbrook, I think he may have a better year this year than last. I believe he started this year as the #2 starter, so he should have an easier time spending the whole year as #5.
“Oswalt And The Cardinals”… Just doesn’t have the same ring to it like “Bennie and the Jets”
You never know. If a SP is moved to the bullpen, they may very well approve a trade to maintain their values as starters on the open market. If I am Westbrook or Lohse, and I am told i am moving to the bullpen or can be traded. I would want to be traded. Lohse has more trade upside than Westbrook for sure, but Oswalt is a huge improvement over both as the 4th starter. Mozeliak has already come out and said they have no interest in Oswalt. Time will tell. 0% chance he comes to the Cards to pitch out of the pen.
Yes, but the Cards would be selling low on Westbrook. He’s better than last year’s performance.
i think you hit the nail on the head, if you tell westbrook he’s going to the bullpen he will want a trade, he’s trying to build value for 2013, but the problem is if someone will take him and how much of his contract do we pay? i think he will definately be better than last year and he is a better option for a 4th or 5th starter than some teams already have.
I think Oswalt would rather have 11m than 5m + a ton of incentives, unless the Cards plan to pay Oswalt a lot to be a reliever
Probably depends on who is offering the 11 million (if anyone). He’s not going to increase his stock by pitching for Baltimore, for example.
He may be willing to give the Cardinals a discount, assuming the Cardinals give him some assurance that he’ll end up in the starting rotation for most of the season. Depends on (if) and how much he wants to play for them.
That being said – I haven’t seen any rumors of $11 million for Oswalt. Most rumors surrounding Oswalt are of teams taking themselves out of the running – not considering putting themselves in.
Yea, I just picked an arbitrary number somewhat based on the fact that it was only one year deal, and also based on what Kuroda was asking for; I’m a believer in Oswalt, but have no idea what offers are going around.
If Edwin Jackson is looking at a 3 or 4 year deal for 10 or 11 million, I’d say Oswalt is worth that much for one year (assuming he’s healthy); but you’re right, going to the Cardinals would be a very good fit, especially compared to his other options.
I agree that Oswalt is worth at least as much as Jackson.
I think the biggest problem is that the teams that aren’t necessarily competitive this year would rather have Jackson for stability (why pay to rent if it won’t win you enough games?), and the teams that are more willing to rent can’t afford the salary.
Yankees and Red Sox may both be out on Oswalt – both are at or above the luxury tax threshold. Oswalt is absolutely worth $10 million, but may not be worth $14 (with 40% luxury tax).
It’s hard to fathom Oswalt pitching an entire healthy season with degenerative discs.
Why not just make Westy the reliever?
Why not make Westbrook a LRP or MRP? Oswalt easily surpasses Westbrook’s ability on the mound as a starter.
I can think of about $8 million reasons why.
Of course, that money is wasted regardless, but still.
Could depend on how hard his ole buddy Lance bends his ear. I, for one, wouldn’t mind seeing the Cards signing Oswalt and if my memmory serves me right he wanted to come to St. Louis when Houston moved him.. As to what role and how many dollars he would agree to, who knows. A chance for a WS ring, fan support, famaliar teammate, all in play. It’ll be interesting as to what he decides and maybe there is no substance in the Cards interest in him. For me, you never have enough pitching.
Too bad we couldn’t look at a Lohse to the Mariners for Figgins. Lohse is coming off a big year, while Figgins is coming off of a down year..Westbrook becomes one of the better 5th starters in the league (last year being a down year), the Cards rotation looks as such: Wainwright, Carpenter, Oswalt, Garcia, Westbrook, and Figgins takes up a lot of time at 2nd with the ability to fill in at 3rd since Descalso is still young and questionable at times and Freese is made out of glass and marshmallows.
Why on Earth would Lohse accept a trade to the Mariners? And if are best option to is get Figgins for Lohse, I would keep Lohse in a heartbeat. Figgins hasnt been good since he left the Angels and Seattle has practically been trying to give him away and nobody wants him. Without question I will take Lohse and Descalso over having Figgins any day. Even Westy for Figgins might be dumb for the Cardinals…I mean the last two years, Figgins has hit a combined .206, that is terrible and on paper, Descalso is much better.
This was all revolving around the idea that St. Louis even signed Oswalt, otherwise it’s a non-issue…Also, just think about the position we were in the last couple of seasons with the Lohse contract. People thought it was one of the worst contracts in baseball. Besides, Seattle would probably be more than willing to eat the majority of Figgins’ salary in the deal…Then think of the prospect of how Figgins could perform in the Central. Adds speed and much needed infield depth that we lost with the non-tendering of Theriot and not re-signing Punto. I love Descalso, I just don’t have faith in Freese’s health, and where would that put us at 2nd base? Of course we have Skip, but I’m still sold on him coming off the bench and filling in in the OF.
Roy would be a pretty monster addition for St. Louis morale, too. The move would fit our concept of bringing in veteran players to mix with younger talent, too. While Lohse definitely played a more than notable role this past season, I still wish we could find a way to move him. That would open up the door for Westbrook to be potentially one of the best 5th starters in the league (assuming he returns to pre-2011 form), and you still have an emerging Lynn that could provide better than fill-in numbers should an injury occur. If Lohse would be willing to waive his NTC, I’d almost be willing to see if anything could develop in a deal with the Mariners for Figgins. He could fill in nicely at second base, also give us some insurance depth at 3rd since Freese is made out of popsicle sticks and marshmallows.
Sweet double-post…idiot.