GatewayRedbirds.com

I'm really starting to worry that the Braden Looper Dream is going to be a reality. He didn't pitch bad today, but he didn't pitch good either, and I really think Brad Thompson has a better chance of being successful than Braden Looper.

I've been dead set against Thompson being a starter for a long time. I've questioned whether he has the repertoire and the stamina, but he HAS to be a better option than Looper. I realize that with the shortcomings in the bullpen with Isringhausen not throwing strikes, Kinney having a hurt elbow and Josh Hancock being...well, Josh Hancock, that the bullpen might need Thompson for his experience and something to keep them afloat with a proven arm.

But I think he can be more useful for the Cardinals as a fifth starter, moreso than Looper. This is what Larry Borowsky (VEB) thinks of the current situation:

i think looper's value has hit rock bottom already
when the cards lost their closer last sept and, instead of promoting looper, turned the 8th / 9th innings over to a couple of rookies instead --- that spoke loud and clear about what looper is worth. he's being paid 8th/9th inning money but is only a 6th/7th inning pitcher.

i found it noteworthy that there was never any discussion this off-season of giving the closer's job to looper if isringhausen hadn't bounced back in time to pitch this spring. even in november and early december, before they floated the looper-as-starter idea, it was assumed wainwright would close if izzy was unable to.

i just think there's no market for looper, and they don't trust him in the late innings, so they're trying to make lemonade out of a lemon. what the hell? try him out as a starting pitcher. if he can deliver 20 decent starts and the team wins half of those games, he might actually earn his $4.5m.

Seems pretty accurate, yes? They don't trust Looper in the late innings, and barely have faith in him to do mop-up duty. But I think that if the Cardinals are pushing the "Looper starting" because they realize they erred big time in giving this stiff $13 million for three years, that just makes it seem like they continue to be as clueless as ever.

What does this have to do with Sidney? I marvel at how his name keeps getting thrown around by Cardinal fans. Surely there's some other pitcher in the Cardinals storied history that deserves to be used as an example of (insert negative thing here). He was only a Cardinal for a few months. Get off his case.

GatewaySnayke wrote:But I think that if the Cardinals are pushing the "Looper starting" because they realize they erred big time in giving this stiff $13 million for three years, that just makes it seem like they continue to be as clueless as ever.

I think they're going to see how he responds to a starting role because we're currently short on starters and it's somewhat obvious that they don't trust him in the late innings. At least not in the ninth.

If we had 5 established starters, like in most recent years, I don't think they'd be pushing him as a starter in an attempt to make it look like they didn't err in giving him 13/3. They'd simply have him slated to be one of the set-up guys, which is what he'll turn out to be if the starting job goes to somebody else.

Actually, I thought that Looper was outstanding on Wednesday, inducing one ground ball after another. I'm not sure what you expect from him for $4 mil per year. If he can be a league average starter for that kind of money, how can you possibly complain??

And if they're making him a starter because they don't trust him in the closer's role, who cares? If it works out, I don't care what their reasoning is. Obviously they're doing what they think is best for the team. Why wouldn't they?

GatewaySnayke wrote:He didn't pitch bad today, but he didn't pitch good either

I'm not calling you out, but were you at the game? By looking at the GameDay log I took it as a good performance. I'm just curious as to how this assessment was made.

PonsOWNED!!







...sorry.

To be "Ponsoned" for Looper would mean pitching poorly in spring training but being awarded the 5th starting position over other people who have performed better.

So far, Looper's done pretty well (in a very small sample size) in the role.

heyzeus wrote:To be "Ponsoned" for Looper would mean pitching poorly in spring training but being awarded the 5th starting position over other people who have performed better.

Ponson pitched much better than Reyes did last spring. IIRC, Ponson's ERA was in the mid-3's while Reyes was in the 6 range.

The only pitcher who really performed better than Ponson last spring (and didn't get a starting spot) was Wainwright, but I think how we used him last year worked out pretty well.

--P--

GatewaySnayke wrote:He didn't pitch bad today, but he didn't pitch good either,

Did you watch him?

So far Looper has looked pretty good as a starter. I've slowly become a believer, and ST is only confirming what I started suspecting in January. Looper can stretch out and he can get guys out well enough to be a decent, though not remotely remarkable 5th starter.

Thompson is in the same boat as a starter. However, as a reliever, Thompson is click or two better than Looper. With Kinney ailing somewhat and no dominant setup man emerging, I would prefer to keep Thompson in the pen for now and see if he can put together a dominant season there.