schilling has cards on his list

by cards4life on Oct 31, 2007 12:25 AM EDT

curt schilling has filed for free agency and on his blog, he includes saint louis as a team he would consider playing for/signing with if he had the chance. http://38pitches.com/2007/10/30/free-agency-weird/#more-110

he is what, 40 years old? i would take a stab at him, one year deal, maybe an option year also. yes or no and what kind of contract would you give him?

http://www.redbirdramblings.wordpress.com

Poll

assuming the cards are interested, what kind of contract should they offer schilling?

one year 1--12 million with an option year for the same amount of money

48 votes

one year, less than 8 million

19 votes

one year, 10 million

50 votes

one year, 12 million

40 votes

one year, 15+ million

1 votes

get him no matter what the cost is

5 votes

dont need him, he is just a loud mouth showoff

16 votes

179 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 21 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

my bad

last option is supposed to be 10-12 million

waiting for the 2009 season to begin

by cards4life on Oct 31, 2007 12:17 AM EDT reply actions

Dude

He has 13 teams on that list.

Re-acquire Edgar Renteria

by Mr Redbird on Oct 31, 2007 1:01 AM EDT reply actions

Yeah

It's about half of MLB. Way to go out on a limb, Schilling.

While I personally don't care for the guy, he'd be a good fit for the Cards. I'd offer him 11-12ish mil for one year, and since that's what every other team will be offering him, I'd throw in a player option for a second and plenty 'o incentives. Take it or leave it, big mouth.

Well, let's go to the old mill anyway -- get some cider!

by Alxfritz on Oct 31, 2007 1:33 AM EDT up reply actions

Sign

Schilling.
Trade Duncan for another pitcher. (A. J. Burnett)
Sign Milton Bradley.
Trade Reyes for infield prospect(s)
Sign Jose Molina

Let Taguchi and Miles go

That's what I suggested in the main thread yesturday around noon eastern. The payroll balloons for one year to 127m. In '09 it drops back to 115m in '09.

There are things this team can do to be very good.

by nybirdfan on Oct 31, 2007 1:42 AM EDT reply actions

I'd take him

If we do sign him, that's it as far as money goes. But it wouldn't be a longterm deal, and if we were well out of it by the trade deadline he'd be easy to flip to another team.

"A great catch is like watching girls go by; the last one you see is always the prettiest." - Bob Gibson

by stl tyler on Oct 31, 2007 1:51 AM EDT reply actions

I'm thinking something like...

one year $12Mil with $10Mil option and $1Mil buyout. He could be a huge difference maker for this team, and would only be a short term commitment.

by cardzfanbub on Oct 31, 2007 9:07 AM EDT reply actions

Register

I wanted to register for his blog just so I could tell him why the free agency declaration process is so easy: so athletes won't screw it up.

Then I thought, wait, it's Curt Schilling's blog. Ick.

by RedbirdRay on Oct 31, 2007 9:07 AM EDT reply actions

While I think

Curt Schilling is a blowhard, I also think he has a point there - something that could potentially be life changing is that easy to do? No fall backs, no "you want to think about this somemore?", just a phone call and done.

by cardsgirl95 on Oct 31, 2007 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions

Why?

Why is it so life changing? I don't get it.

Why should it be harder?

What are these players other options.

None of these guys have contracts. All could still negotiate with the old team for a little longer. Declaring free agency doesn't obligate you to signing with anyone or even to play.

It basically is just a way for a player to say I might play again and don't have a contract right now. I don't think that should take a lawyer, agent, triplicate forms or otherwise.

by RedbirdRay on Oct 31, 2007 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions

Didn't say

that declaring free agency should be harder or a complicated process. It is just odd that you can change your whole life with one phone call. And, yes, the potential is there for it to be a life altering decision because free agency could lead to a new team, a new home, new schools for your kids. Those things are life changing.

by cardsgirl95 on Oct 31, 2007 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions

Regardless

of what life changing choice a player makes later, declaring free agency isn't really a life choice at all.

They basically decide nothing.

A life changing choice would be to not sign for free agency, then you would be saying you're hanging it up. Declaring your free agency changes nothing. You can still go where you choose. You can still decide not to play. You can still negotiate and stay with your old team.

It's not life changing in any way.

by RedbirdRay on Oct 31, 2007 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions

Whatever

by cardsgirl95 on Oct 31, 2007 8:43 PM EDT up reply actions

Schilling

I think this signing is the best fit for the Cards because it is a one-year deal. By far our biggest need is pitching. We have tons of payroll coming off the books after 2008 (Edmonds / Mulder). If the team, as professed by DeWitt, still wishes to be competitive in 2008, then let's put all our free agent eggs in one basket and get Schilling. This is probably all hypothetical as he's likely to resign with Boston.

by jjray on Oct 31, 2007 11:08 AM EDT reply actions

Got news for you Schill

if you want to cash in on the FA market you don't serve yourself well by saying you will not go to the Yankees and alienating yourself from the Red Sox by blogging about 13 others teams on the same day as the Sox victory parade.

Let me get this straight...Rowand over Pujols??? Really, Tony?

by cardzfan24 on Oct 31, 2007 11:43 AM EDT reply actions

He'll get $13 M w/out either team

there are alot of pitching starved organizations in baseball that could use a 1 year rental on a guy who posted an ERA+ of 122 in 2007 (higher than 2006) while pitching in the AL East.

"Well, you wait for a strike. Then you knock the shit out of it. - Musial to Flood on how to hit a curveball

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 31, 2007 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions

Good point

And Buster Olney said in his blog that the Cardinals are a "sleeper" team in the Schilling sweepstakes.

My question is this...how did we arrive at the point that we are merely an afterthought when it comes to mixing it up in the acquiring of new talent, young or old? Just a few short years ago we seemingly got the big pick up every year and were able to improve the team from it. We had the Edmonds pickup, the Rolen trade, the Carpenter lottery jackpot, the Larry Walker deal, and now offseason excitement is the signing of Joel Pinero and discussing if Ryan Franklin should start and our truly innovative ideas revolve around acquiring Ben Zobrist.

How did we get here and how long will this last? I hope it is merely a phase.

Let me get this straight...Rowand over Pujols??? Really, Tony?

by cardzfan24 on Oct 31, 2007 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions

Schilling

I don't get all the discussion. It might have well said he filed for free agency just like Kerry Wood and various others. Somehow I guess Schilling has some stupid blog where he put 13 teams on his list which makes sense. Of course he isn't going to Tampa Bay, KC.... you get the idea.

Who cares I guess the Cards have a chance as well as the 13 other teams on this supposed list. It is not really worth discussing as I see no way in hell he ends up in STL. The guy can barely walk so I can not imagine him wanting to come to the NL, hitting and then running bases.

Is he a #1 anymore? We need a legit #1 who will make 34 starts a year. Can he do that?

by ICbirdfan on Oct 31, 2007 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions

Schilling had an ERA+ of 120 and 122 the

last 2 seasons.

Adam Wainwright posted a 119. Pineiro and Wellemeyer were the only other two (in small sample sizes) to crack 100.

Schilling's 122 last season was better than any of the Cubs starters. The wear and tear of batting could be a problem but the fact that he will get to face pitchers certainly will help his numbers.

The only concern is that he only made 24 starts last year.

When you are scraping the bottom of the barrel, you don't get much choice. If he flames out, it's a 1 year flame out that costs us no draft picks and doesn't really block anyone next year.

"Well, you wait for a strike. Then you knock the shit out of it. - Musial to Flood on how to hit a curveball

by Hardcore Legend on Oct 31, 2007 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions

Schilling

You know I would be happy to pay 12-13 million (I think it may cost more) to get him for a year or two. God knows we really don't have any major pitching prospect ready to pitch at the MLB level.

My concern is he has had so many lower half issues lately I just don't know how he will hold up in the AL let alone the NL where he will be expected to have at least 3 AB's per game. He will have to run even if it is running out a sac bunt. His chances of tweaking something just go up immensly in the NL. The Cards need stability in the rotation. They don't need a high priced guy who ends up making only 17-20 starts.

That is the problem with Carp and Mulder. They would be good for the rotation if they could pitch.

I think it is pretty risky going after Schilling. No doubt no matter how many innings he actually throws he will be pretty good. In my opinion the Cardinals need stability.

by ICbirdfan on Oct 31, 2007 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions

Well

Yes he's a #1 still when you consider that he posted a 122 ERA+ w/ a 1.245 WHIP in the AL. You have to assume he'd do at least a little bit better switching leagues, even at his advanced age.

The issue of making 34 starts a year is obviously a concern, considering he wasn't the most durable guy last year.

With that said, he's the best guy available and I absolutely think the Cardinals should make a run at him. Even if he only makes 25 starts or so, he'd still be a tremendous addition.

With all that said, I still see him going back to the Sawx.

by redbirdnation8206 on Oct 31, 2007 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions

regarding "big pick ups"

they stopped happening, in large part, and we over-committed on "big pickups" in the past and made some very poor decisions on "small pick ups", so the few that were available were out of our reach or in positions we've filled.

by SleepyCA on Oct 31, 2007 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions