Pujols signs with Angels pg 151

[davell]

I look at signing Pujols like this: Window-wise, he's got(probably) a 4-5 year period where he'll still be elite, followed by a 3-4 year area where he'll be solid. My guess is we'd truly regret the 9-10th years based on how much he'll be making those years. Big surprise there.

 

It's not a reason to not sign him though. We'd have a core of Pujols, Soto, Castro, Barney, Soriano along with Colvin, LeMahieu, Vitters, Szczur and Brett Jackson all having the ability to contribute heavily during the early years of his contract.

 

We'd also have Garza, Cashner, McNutt, Wells, Whitenack and the money available to add an ace as well as far as starting pitching goes. With Marmol, Marshall, Rhoderick, Kurcz, Carpenter, and a few other potential bullpen arms as well.

 

If you add Pujols, it's a move where you're "going for it" and if it's followed by adding an ace as well, we'd have a damn good shot, which is much more than what we have currently.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I think 5 years is on the outside of how long you can expect Pujols to be elite. It's possible, but it's also possible he's got 1-2 years, if that. I think we're vastly understating how fast 30+ players can slip.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I look at signing Pujols like this: Window-wise, he's got(probably) a 4-5 year period where he'll still be elite, followed by a 3-4 year area where he'll be solid. My guess is we'd truly regret the 9-10th years based on how much he'll be making those years. Big surprise there.

 

It's not a reason to not sign him though. We'd have a core of Pujols, Soto, Castro, Barney, Soriano along with Colvin, LeMahieu, Vitters, Szczur and Brett Jackson all having the ability to contribute heavily during the early years of his contract.

 

We'd also have Garza, Cashner, McNutt, Wells, Whitenack and the money available to add an ace as well as far as starting pitching goes. With Marmol, Marshall, Rhoderick, Kurcz, Carpenter, and a few other potential bullpen arms as well.

 

If you add Pujols, it's a move where you're "going for it" and if it's followed by adding an ace as well, we'd have a damn good shot, which is much more than what we have currently.

 

Even in this scenerio, its not like they sign Pujols and no more free agents for the next few years. Anything they cant build through the farm, they should still be able to add free agents around them.

[Tracer Bullet]

I think 5 years is on the outside of how long you can expect Pujols to be elite. It's possible, but it's also possible he's got 1-2 years, if that. I think we're vastly understating how fast 30+ players can slip.

 

maybe. honest question: how many guys that were as elite as pujols fell out of elite status quickly upon turning 30? and just how far, how fast would pujols have to fall to not make a huge impact on the cubs ws chances?

 

boy, it's certainly possible that we'd look back on a 10-year pujols deal as an albatross that tanked the team. but i think it's more likely that we look back on not signing pujols as a huge mistake b/c he continued to be elite well into the 2010s while the cubs played mediocre baseball for another decade.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I think 5 years is on the outside of how long you can expect Pujols to be elite. It's possible, but it's also possible he's got 1-2 years, if that. I think we're vastly understating how fast 30+ players can slip.

 

maybe. honest question: how many guys that were as elite as pujols fell out of elite status quickly upon turning 30? and just how far, how fast would pujols have to fall to not make a huge impact on the cubs ws chances?

 

boy, it's certainly possible that we'd look back on a 10-year pujols deal as an albatross that tanked the team. but i think it's more likely that we look back on not signing pujols as a huge mistake b/c he continued to be elite well into the 2010s while the cubs played mediocre baseball for another decade.

 

I don't think it's going to be an albatross, I just don't think we're going to get late 20s Pujols for five more years.

 

Doing this the completely lazy way, his top-10 comps on B-R through age 30:

 

Foxx started to slip after age 31

Frank Robinson kind of depends on how you define it. His best seasons in his 30s were a step behind his best seasons in his 20s, but he still hit a 150+ OPS+ for while.

Griffey was definitely done being elite after 30, but he had CF innings on his legs so that's a tough comparison

Gherig started to slow down at 35.

Aaron was a machine right up through 39

Mantle's last really great season was at 32

Ott posted a 160+ OPS+ five times in nine years up to 30, then 1 in 6 after. He was still productive but not what he had been

Juan Gonzalez cratered in his 30s

Eddie Matthews' last great season was age 31

Manny Ramirez was awesome in his 30s, though his 20s were better.

 

I know "elite" is a vague term, but I think it's very likely that his best years are behind him. Expecting elite seasons through age 36 is a lot to ask.

[UK1679666180]

I would like to change my stance, given the fact that Pujols might be aging quicker in baseball years than actual years as well as the cubs likely not being good enough to make a consistent run during his remaining peak years.

 

That's a terrible reason.

 

Realizing where the player is likely going to be in conjunction with the team's progression isn't a terrible reason.

 

If you're convinced that Pujols is on a serious decline, fine, but to pass on a player of his ideal impact simply because the team isn't better is usually a terrible idea given how many wins he ideally brings if he's signed. The Cubs would have to be REALLY bad to justify that.

 

I do think he will decline quickly to where that contract is hurting the team more than will provide.

 

Given the roster, there's no doubt they need a strength anywhere on the team. They do nothing well. I question Pujols' health for the long-term, he's got a bad elbow, heel problems, and hamstring issues. Just wonder with him, if it right to pay for his past without getting that in the present. The fact the Cubs are a bad team right now doesn't help that window.

[Sammy Sofa]

I would like to change my stance, given the fact that Pujols might be aging quicker in baseball years than actual years as well as the cubs likely not being good enough to make a consistent run during his remaining peak years.

 

That's a terrible reason.

 

Realizing where the player is likely going to be in conjunction with the team's progression isn't a terrible reason.

 

If you're convinced that Pujols is on a serious decline, fine, but to pass on a player of his ideal impact simply because the team isn't better is usually a terrible idea given how many wins he ideally brings if he's signed. The Cubs would have to be REALLY bad to justify that.

 

I do think he will decline quickly to where that contract is hurting the team more than will provide.

 

Given the roster, there's no doubt they need a strength anywhere on the team. They do nothing well. I question Pujols' health for the long-term, he's got a bad elbow, heel problems, and hamstring issues. Just wonder with him, if it right to pay for his past without getting that in the present. The fact the Cubs are a bad team right now doesn't help that window.

 

Like I said, if you think he will decline too quickly, fine. If you think they should pass on him just because the team is bad, that's nonsensical. It's fortunately not an all or nothing situation for the Cubs.

[davearm2]

I would like to change my stance, given the fact that Pujols might be aging quicker in baseball years than actual years as well as the cubs likely not being good enough to make a consistent run during his remaining peak years.

 

That's a terrible reason.

 

Realizing where the player is likely going to be in conjunction with the team's progression isn't a terrible reason.

 

When your a big market team with a group of good young players like Castro, Soto, Barney, Garza, Cashner, and Marmol, Marshall and a decent farm system, theres no reason not to be able to build a perenial contender around the best player in the world. If they cant manage that, there are a lot of people that need to be fired.

 

If Pujols leaves the Cards, their likely done. When Fielder leaves the Brewers, they might be competitve for another year or 2 until Greinke and Marcum leave, and then their empty farm system leaves them in trouble. After that, I could really see the NL Central coming down to the Cubs, Reds, and Pirates for the next several years.

That "group of good young players" is actually quite depressing. You know things aren't good when Barney starts to show up in that category.

[davearm2]

I would like to change my stance, given the fact that Pujols might be aging quicker in baseball years than actual years as well as the cubs likely not being good enough to make a consistent run during his remaining peak years.

 

That's a terrible reason.

 

Realizing where the player is likely going to be in conjunction with the team's progression isn't a terrible reason.

 

If you're convinced that Pujols is on a serious decline, fine, but to pass on a player of his ideal impact simply because the team isn't better is usually a terrible idea given how many wins he ideally brings if he's signed. The Cubs would have to be REALLY bad to justify that.

 

I do think he will decline quickly to where that contract is hurting the team more than will provide.

 

Given the roster, there's no doubt they need a strength anywhere on the team. They do nothing well. I question Pujols' health for the long-term, he's got a bad elbow, heel problems, and hamstring issues. Just wonder with him, if it right to pay for his past without getting that in the present. The fact the Cubs are a bad team right now doesn't help that window.

Great. Pujols can torture Cub fans for a decade as a Cardinal, and for another decade as a Cub.

[Sammy Sofa]

I would like to change my stance, given the fact that Pujols might be aging quicker in baseball years than actual years as well as the cubs likely not being good enough to make a consistent run during his remaining peak years.

 

That's a terrible reason.

 

Realizing where the player is likely going to be in conjunction with the team's progression isn't a terrible reason.

 

When your a big market team with a group of good young players like Castro, Soto, Barney, Garza, Cashner, and Marmol, Marshall and a decent farm system, theres no reason not to be able to build a perenial contender around the best player in the world. If they cant manage that, there are a lot of people that need to be fired.

 

If Pujols leaves the Cards, their likely done. When Fielder leaves the Brewers, they might be competitve for another year or 2 until Greinke and Marcum leave, and then their empty farm system leaves them in trouble. After that, I could really see the NL Central coming down to the Cubs, Reds, and Pirates for the next several years.

That "group of good young players" is actually quite depressing. You know things aren't good when Barney starts to show up in that category.

 

Again, it's all about expectations. Yes, no superstars on the near future horizon now that Castro is up. But there are also several that project to be very useful everyday players. And you know some of them project to be better than Barney, so don't act like all of a sudden he's the relative diamond in a pile of turds. In all, the farm system is much better than it's been in decades. There's still plenty of work to be done in that regard, but at least they do have guys who have a very good chance to come up and contribute a la a player like Byrd instead of having to go out and waste money on them. That gives you a lot more options (and a lot more money to work with) when players like Pujols and Fielder and Reyes and Kemp and so on show up as FA.

[jersey cubs fan]

Again, it's all about expectations. Yes, no superstars on the near future horizon now that Castro is up. But there are also several that project to be very useful everyday players. And you know some of them project to be better than Barney, so don't act like all of a sudden he's the relative diamond in a pile of turds. In all, the farm system is much better than it's been in decades.

 

No way is this system better than it has been in decades. That's ridiculous. One decade ago it was better. There may be multiple guys who project as useful, but the majority of those will still fail to live up to their limited projections.

[davell]

You include a guy like Barney becuae he's cheap and will be useful. In a perfect world, he's not a starter for us 2-3 years from now. But, to say things look bad with this group of youngsters is just flat out wrong.

 

Castro has superstar potential. Barney will be useful obviously. Cashner has front of the rotation or back end of the pen ability. The rest of what was originally mentioned all have longer major league tracj records and are already in arbitration.

 

But, our system is just fine at the top. McNutt has front of the rotation ability. Between him and Cashner, I'm just hoping for one or the other to work out. Brett Jackson has 20/20 ability and should be a very solid OBP guy too. Superstar? Probably not, but extremely solid, possible all star potential. And those guys are CLOSE to helping now.

 

Then, you have LeMahieu(who's only hitting .373 at the moment, by the way). What's his potential? No idea, but he's hitting for more power than last year and if he can stick at 2B, Barney's going to become a utility guy pretty quickly. Vitters? Disappointment for some? Yeah, me included. But, he's 21 and has played over his level each year so far age-wise and has held his own anyway. It's certainly conceivable that he can make the turn back towards elite prospect this season. If there's a "star potential" guy in our system, it's still probably him.

 

Our system is decent right now. Not special, but could become so if the Cubs spend big this draft. But, the key here is the fact these guys are going to be giving cheap production. Which is what allows teams to spend in other areas and to fill in around a Pujols type alot easier.

[davearm2]

The fact that the term "useful" keeps coming up over and over says a lot.

 

Sure the Cubs have a bunch of young guys that could/should be useful. Useful doesn't move the optimism needle much.

 

The fact is, as we sit here right now it's anyone's guess who will hit 3-4-5 for the next decade, or man the 1-2-3 slots in the rotation. For my money a team with "good young players" doesn't have this many questionmarks.

[Sammy Sofa]

Again, it's all about expectations. Yes, no superstars on the near future horizon now that Castro is up. But there are also several that project to be very useful everyday players. And you know some of them project to be better than Barney, so don't act like all of a sudden he's the relative diamond in a pile of turds. In all, the farm system is much better than it's been in decades.

 

No way is this system better than it has been in decades. That's ridiculous. One decade ago it was better. There may be multiple guys who project as useful, but the majority of those will still fail to live up to their limited projections.

 

In regards to position players? What the [expletive] are you talking about? The Patterson-Choi-Hill era?

[Sammy Sofa]

The fact that the term "useful" keeps coming up over and over says a lot.

 

Sure the Cubs have a bunch of young guys that could/should be useful. Useful doesn't move the optimism needle much.

 

The fact is, as we sit here right now it's anyone's guess who will hit 3-4-5 for the next decade, or man the 1-2-3 slots in the rotation. For my money a team with "good young players" doesn't have this many questionmarks.

 

It's a pretty good bet that Castro is going to be manning one of the top 2 spots for a while (hopefully #2). 3-4 can be filled via FA. Not being able to fill those slots internally doesn't mean the farm system is a failure.

 

Nobody's saying the Cubs' farm system is ideal or set right now, but the repeated efforts to make it sound like it's barren just makes people sound ignorant.

[jersey cubs fan]

Again, it's all about expectations. Yes, no superstars on the near future horizon now that Castro is up. But there are also several that project to be very useful everyday players. And you know some of them project to be better than Barney, so don't act like all of a sudden he's the relative diamond in a pile of turds. In all, the farm system is much better than it's been in decades.

 

No way is this system better than it has been in decades. That's ridiculous. One decade ago it was better. There may be multiple guys who project as useful, but the majority of those will still fail to live up to their limited projections.

 

In regards to position players? What the [expletive] are you talking about? The Patterson-Choi-Hill era?

 

You said, "in all". In all the farm system is not better than it has been in decades. The position players might be, but in reality it's no better than it was three years ago, when it still had Castro and Soto. It's okay. But it's not nearly as good as it should be for an organization that talks such a big game developmentally and supposedly has one of the best drafters in the business.

[Sammy Sofa]

I was referring to position players since that was the obvious tract of the discussion. My mistake for not being more clear. And again, nobody is saying the farm is ideal or doesn't still need a lot of work.

[jersey cubs fan]

I was referring to position players since that was the obvious tract of the discussion. My mistake for not being more clear. And again, nobody is saying the farm is ideal or doesn't still need a lot of work.

 

Well I think that's a distinction that needs to be pointed out. They went from producing a good amount of top line pitching talent with no bats, to producing some okay arms and some okay bats. So they are doing that better than they've done in decades, but it's still lacking quite a bit.

[davearm2]

The fact that the term "useful" keeps coming up over and over says a lot.

 

Sure the Cubs have a bunch of young guys that could/should be useful. Useful doesn't move the optimism needle much.

 

The fact is, as we sit here right now it's anyone's guess who will hit 3-4-5 for the next decade, or man the 1-2-3 slots in the rotation. For my money a team with "good young players" doesn't have this many questionmarks.

 

It's a pretty good bet that Castro is going to be manning one of the top 2 spots for a while (hopefully #2). 3-4 can be filled via FA. Not being able to fill those slots internally doesn't mean the farm system is a failure.

 

Nobody's saying the Cubs' farm system is ideal or set right now, but the repeated efforts to make it sound like it's barren just makes people sound ignorant.

I didn't say the Cubs' farm is a failure, or barren.

 

I said describing the Cubs as having a "group of good young players" is a stretch. Who in that group is fronting the rotation? Or hitting in the middle of the order? The group consists of guys that are more useful than good, and certainly none that project as impact guys.

 

For those reasons I have to question the optimism implied by the phrase.

[Sammy Sofa]

I never said they had anyone for the middle of the order. I've repeatedly said that they're going to have to look to FA to fill that. Fortunately they have money to spend and good FA's available after this season and 2012 to spend it on. I also didn't say they had anyone to front the pitching rotation. But again, use the money for a desired ace and ideally they're able to produce some #3-level starters and maybe 1 or 2 #2's instead of having to shell out for guys like Dempster or Lilly.

 

Quite frankly, I really don't give a damn about your semantics argument because I really don't think I'm overselling the current crop of prospects. I've been abundantly clear that I don't think the Cubs don't have any stars on the horizon now that Castro is up. But I'll be plenty happy if they can fill several spots that they usually have to spend too much extra money on and then be able to use that money on impact players to fill the critical spots. No, that's not the ideal way to be able to utilize the farm, but fortunately the Cubs are in the position starting after this season to have serious money to work through it. It's a "stars aligning" sort of thing that can still work very much in their favor sooner rather than the later even though the farm isn't at the level we ultimately want/need it to be at.

[jersey cubs fan]

I never said they had anyone for the middle of the order. I've repeatedly said that they're going to have to look to FA to fill that. Fortunately they have money to spend and good FA's available after this season and 2012 to spend it on. I also didn't say they had anyone to front the pitching rotation. But again, use the money for a desired ace and ideally they're able to produce some #3-level starters and maybe 1 or 2 #2's instead of having to shell out for guys like Dempster or Lilly.

 

Quite frankly, I really don't give a damn about your semantics argument because I really don't think I'm overselling the current crop of prospects. I've been abundantly clear that I don't think the Cubs don't have any stars on the horizon now that Castro is up. But I'll be plenty happy if they can fill several spots that they usually have to spend too much extra money on and then be able to use that money on impact players to fill the critical spots. No, that's not the ideal way to be able to utilize the farm, but fortunately the Cubs are in the position starting after this season to have serious money to work through it. It's a "stars aligning" sort of thing that can still work very much in their favor sooner rather than the later even though the farm isn't at the level we ultimately want/need it to be at.

 

As fair as you may be treating them, you are still talking about filling both an ace role and middle of the order hitter in free agency, which is next to impossible for anybody outside the Yankees.

[Sammy Sofa]

I never said they had anyone for the middle of the order. I've repeatedly said that they're going to have to look to FA to fill that. Fortunately they have money to spend and good FA's available after this season and 2012 to spend it on. I also didn't say they had anyone to front the pitching rotation. But again, use the money for a desired ace and ideally they're able to produce some #3-level starters and maybe 1 or 2 #2's instead of having to shell out for guys like Dempster or Lilly.

 

Quite frankly, I really don't give a damn about your semantics argument because I really don't think I'm overselling the current crop of prospects. I've been abundantly clear that I don't think the Cubs don't have any stars on the horizon now that Castro is up. But I'll be plenty happy if they can fill several spots that they usually have to spend too much extra money on and then be able to use that money on impact players to fill the critical spots. No, that's not the ideal way to be able to utilize the farm, but fortunately the Cubs are in the position starting after this season to have serious money to work through it. It's a "stars aligning" sort of thing that can still work very much in their favor sooner rather than the later even though the farm isn't at the level we ultimately want/need it to be at.

 

As fair as you may be treating them, you are still talking about filling both an ace role and middle of the order hitter in free agency, which is next to impossible for anybody outside the Yankees.

 

It's all up to what the Ricketts are willing to spend. If they're willing to keep this year as a rough ceiling as to what the Cubs can spend then they're going to have a LOT to spend after this season and the next, to the point they that could conceivably sign someone like Pujols or Fielder + Reyes this year, someone like Kemp next year and still have more than enough money for a true ace.

[jersey cubs fan]

It's all up to what the Ricketts are willing to spend. If they're willing to keep this year as a rough ceiling as to what the Cubs can spend then they're going to have a LOT to spend after this season and the next, to the point they that could conceivably sign someone like Pujols or Fielder + Reyes this year, someone like Kemp next year and still have more than enough money for a true ace.

 

It's more than what you are willing to spend. It's what you are willing to spend in contrast to what all the other big spenders are spending, and what is available. Unless you are the Yankees, signing a middle of the order bat and an ace pitcher is nearly impossible.

[Sammy Sofa]

It's all up to what the Ricketts are willing to spend. If they're willing to keep this year as a rough ceiling as to what the Cubs can spend then they're going to have a LOT to spend after this season and the next, to the point they that could conceivably sign someone like Pujols or Fielder + Reyes this year, someone like Kemp next year and still have more than enough money for a true ace.

 

It's more than what you are willing to spend. It's what you are willing to spend in contrast to what all the other big spenders are spending, and what is available. Unless you are the Yankees, signing a middle of the order bat and an ace pitcher is nearly impossible.

 

Again, it's up to the Ricketts. If they're willing to keep the payroll at approx. $150 million if necessary then the Cubs would potentially have in the vicinity of $50-$60 million to spend. That would easily cover both if both are available. Then they have even more money coming off the books after 2012.

[davell]

The fact that the term "useful" keeps coming up over and over says a lot.

 

Sure the Cubs have a bunch of young guys that could/should be useful. Useful doesn't move the optimism needle much.

 

The fact is, as we sit here right now it's anyone's guess who will hit 3-4-5 for the next decade, or man the 1-2-3 slots in the rotation. For my money a team with "good young players" doesn't have this many questionmarks.

 

Castro's not an impact player? Really? Monetarily, he's probably one of the 5-10 best values in all of baseball right now. Very likely he's a middle of the order hitter within 3-4 years as well. As I mentioned earlier, both Cashner and McNutt have frontline ability. To think one of them succeeds isn't all that much out of the realm of possibilities. I consider Brett Jackson a top of the order hitter myself, but with his power and his walk rate, it's definitely possible he winds up hitting middle of the order too.