Pujols signs with Angels pg 151

[UMFan83]

Here's what we know.

 

The Cardinals have spoken with Pujols' camp, and also have NOT.

The Cubs are still in it, and also definitely out of the running.

The Angels have interest, but have no interest.

The Marlins have blown away the Cardinals offer, and have offered equal value with and without a NTC.

 

That sum up the last 24 hours?

 

And sports journalists wonder why people don't take them seriously anymore.

 

Exactly. I do still like to read all the tweets and articles, but I never take any piece of information anywhere near fact. Every single writer is in a race to throw more and more crap out there. Not one journalist can say that everything they've reported was confirmed and solid info. They just throw garbage out there. Sports journalists are more like the National Enquirer these days. You have to go through 50 pages of BS to find one thing that's accurate.

[Yeti]

You have to go through 50 pages of BS to find one thing that's accurate.

kinda like this thread

[PrimeTime]

MLB Network's Jon Heyman reports that the Marlins are pursuing Prince Fielder.

 

Nothing official yet, but there is increased chatter that Albert Pujols is likely to stay with the Cardinals. Marlins' president David Samson said Wednesday that they always planned a "three-part move" for their offseason, so if they can't land Pujols, look for them to move aggressively on the remaining big-ticket free agents. Mark Buehrle and C.J. Wilson are also possibilities.

[UMFan83]

You have to go through 50 pages of BS to find one thing that's accurate.

kinda like this thread

 

Oooo...so close. I would have accepted "kinda like NSBB in a nutshell"

[Ballgame64]

So in the end, it looks like Albert just wanted the Cardinals to raise their offer to 10 years. Why not just counter their offer in spring training and avoid this circus? I guess he was hoping some team might actually offer him a deal bigger than the $252 million ARod received a few years ago.

[Guest]

So in the end, it looks like Albert just wanted the Cardinals to raise their offer to 10 years. Why not just counter their offer in spring training and avoid this circus? I guess he was hoping some team might actually offer him a deal bigger than the $252 million ARod received a few years ago.

 

 

The Cardinals refused to budge from that offer until now.

[Ballgame64]

So in the end, it looks like Albert just wanted the Cardinals to raise their offer to 10 years. Why not just counter their offer in spring training and avoid this circus? I guess he was hoping some team might actually offer him a deal bigger than the $252 million ARod received a few years ago.

 

 

The Cardinals refused to budge from that offer until now.

Well, yes when there wasn't a counter proposal from Pujols and his agent there was no reason to change their 9 year offer. I think the Cardinals would have been smarter going to 10 years in March with 2011 being year 1 of the deal.

[UMFan83]

If the Cardinals do sign Pujols for $22 million a year, they will have 7 players under contract making a combined $90 million. If they went with minimum salary players for the other 18 spots (414k I believe), their payroll would be right about $100 million.

 

Keep in mind that last year was the first year that they've ever went over $100 million in payroll ($109 m according to cots).

 

BTW, 2 of those 7 players (Carpenter and Molina) are club options (for 15m and i think 8.5m respectively). Could we see them declining one or both options to afford Pujols? Probably not but interesting nonetheless.

[Ballgame64]

If the Cardinals do sign Pujols for $22 million a year, they will have 7 players under contract making a combined $90 million. If they went with minimum salary players for the other 18 spots (414k I believe), their payroll would be right about $100 million.

 

Keep in mind that last year was the first year that they've ever went over $100 million in payroll ($109 m according to cots).

 

BTW, 2 of those 7 players (Carpenter and Molina) are club options (for 15m and i think 8.5m respectively). Could we see them declining one or both options to afford Pujols? Probably not but interesting nonetheless.

Carpenter is not an option for 2012. I am pretty sure the Cardinals extended him in September.

[treebird]

i am really excited for it to come out that he signed for like 10/210 with a bunch of money deferred over 30 years or something and that this deal will allow the team to keep their star and not hinder them long-term at all.

[MWV]

Carpenter received a 2 year $21M extension during the 2011 season. Edited December 7, 2011 by MWV

[Banedon]

i am really excited for it to come out that he signed for like 10/210 with a bunch of money deferred over 30 years or something and that this deal will allow the team to keep their star and not hinder them long-term at all.

 

My guess is they'll expand the payroll as a consequence of signing him.

[Butterscup1679666578]

i am really excited for it to come out that he signed for like 10/210 with a bunch of money deferred over 30 years or something and that this deal will allow the team to keep their star and not hinder them long-term at all.

 

A friend of mine just mentioned this possibility on Twitter and it made me sad and I didn't have a response.

[Rob]

Rob, relating to that fangraphs chart, is "normal player" defined as everyone else in the majors?

 

The author's conclusion was that he proved it was "clear that [Fielder's] best days are behind him" (emphasis supplied). Not that his analysis showed that, historically, players shaped similar to Fielder generally aged poorly; but that comparisions to other players proved, clearly, that Fielder's immediate decline was already written. Such hubris, such complete misunderstanding of what proof entails, should alone call into question the entirety of his analysis.

 

Of course, the writer who wrote the bulk of the article was not the same as the one who did the research on how heavier players age.

 

True, he did not do the research for the chart; he did the graphs and all the writing you quoted. Regardless, the link between the charted players and Fielder seems so thinly related to warrant little persuasive merit.

 

I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say... because it sounds like you're saying Prince Fielder isn't heavy.

[Hollandsworths mug]

I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say... because it sounds like you're saying Prince Fielder isn't heavy.

 

He's oval shaped.

[ManEatingTarp]

St. Louis ownership has alluded to raising the payroll to 110 mil.

 

This isn't a done deal, but "if" Pujols signs and the payroll can be raised to that level they should be fine. At that point they just need to keep moving guys like Jay, Craig, Motte etc. through the system and hope that Shelby Miller is the real deal.

[Exile on Waveland]

Rob, relating to that fangraphs chart, is "normal player" defined as everyone else in the majors?

 

The author's conclusion was that he proved it was "clear that [Fielder's] best days are behind him" (emphasis supplied). Not that his analysis showed that, historically, players shaped similar to Fielder generally aged poorly; but that comparisions to other players proved, clearly, that Fielder's immediate decline was already written. Such hubris, such complete misunderstanding of what proof entails, should alone call into question the entirety of his analysis.

 

Of course, the writer who wrote the bulk of the article was not the same as the one who did the research on how heavier players age.

 

True, he did not do the research for the chart; he did the graphs and all the writing you quoted. Regardless, the link between the charted players and Fielder seems so thinly related to warrant little persuasive merit.

 

I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say... because it sounds like you're saying Prince Fielder isn't heavy.

 

Yes, he's heavy. But what does that matter, exactly? The chart merely separates players based on weight-height ratio. Some of those players would look like Arnold Schwarzenegger, some like Jabba the Hut. Some of those players would be really good, some would be really bad. I have no idea, Fielder may age horribly -- maybe even because of his weight -- but I'm not convinced that's presaged. I need more than 200ish players over the course of MLB history that may or may not even have similar body types or skill-sets.

[ctcf]

I feel like the Marlins would probably price us out of the Fielder race.

[Yeti]

I feel like the Marlins would probably price us out of the Fielder race.

that statement just sounds wierd

[Banedon]

Buster_ESPN: Source: Pujols's side is trying to extract every possible nickel in offer from MIA; would then be in position to take that to StL for last.

[NewCubsDynasty]

Rob,

 

I want you to give me a list that represents any sort of decent sample size to say guys shaped like Fielder are likely to collapse before age 33.

 

I can do ya one better. There was an article on fangraphs a month or so back that had a nice little graph. I'll just copy and paste the relevant stuff.

 

In order to attempt to predict what Fielder will do over the life of his next contract, we should compare him to players with similar body types. Jeff Zimmerman has put together a list of 205 players who weigh more than 3.25 lbs per inch of height in order to construct an aging curve. To put that in perspective, a 6’0″ tall player would have to weigh a minimum of 234 lbs in order to be included in the sample.

 

Below is a graph that shows the aging curve of the heavy players we identified, and the curve for average sized players. Across the x-axis is age, and the y-axis runs (batting, positional, UZR), with 0 being the peak year. The y-axis shows how many runs below the peak year they are at a given age.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Curve2.jpg

 

Two things immediately jump out from this graph:

 

1) Heavy players peak a few years earlier than average players

 

2) Heavy players fall off the map once they are on the wrong side of 30

 

The rest of the article actually talks about Prince specifically and how much value the author expects him to have over his upcoming contract. It's definitely worth a read.

 

At any rate... the premise that bad-bodied, one-dimensional sluggers age poorly has long been a sabermetric tenet and it would seem that premise still holds up. Is it a certainty? No. Nothing is. But if we're gonna bet against the odds, I'd much rather do it for 5 years than 7.

 

Perhaps I'm missing something in the writer's argument. Wouldn't you expect that a correlation to a "normal player" would support the commonly accepted age range for a player's peak years of 27-32? This chart suggests that a player's peak years are 23-28. Just curious.

[ConstableRabbit]

Rob,

 

I want you to give me a list that represents any sort of decent sample size to say guys shaped like Fielder are likely to collapse before age 33.

 

I can do ya one better. There was an article on fangraphs a month or so back that had a nice little graph. I'll just copy and paste the relevant stuff.

 

In order to attempt to predict what Fielder will do over the life of his next contract, we should compare him to players with similar body types. Jeff Zimmerman has put together a list of 205 players who weigh more than 3.25 lbs per inch of height in order to construct an aging curve. To put that in perspective, a 6’0″ tall player would have to weigh a minimum of 234 lbs in order to be included in the sample.

 

Below is a graph that shows the aging curve of the heavy players we identified, and the curve for average sized players. Across the x-axis is age, and the y-axis runs (batting, positional, UZR), with 0 being the peak year. The y-axis shows how many runs below the peak year they are at a given age.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Curve2.jpg

 

Two things immediately jump out from this graph:

 

1) Heavy players peak a few years earlier than average players

 

2) Heavy players fall off the map once they are on the wrong side of 30

 

The rest of the article actually talks about Prince specifically and how much value the author expects him to have over his upcoming contract. It's definitely worth a read.

 

At any rate... the premise that bad-bodied, one-dimensional sluggers age poorly has long been a sabermetric tenet and it would seem that premise still holds up. Is it a certainty? No. Nothing is. But if we're gonna bet against the odds, I'd much rather do it for 5 years than 7.

 

Perhaps I'm missing something in the writer's argument. Wouldn't you expect that a correlation to a "normal player" would support the commonly accepted age range for a player's peak years of 27-32? This chart suggests that a player's peak years are 23-28. Just curious.

Also, Fielder's career peak doesn't fall in line with the "Heavy Guy" curve...

[RammyFanny]

•The Marlins' interest in Fielder has been exaggerated, a good source tells Tom Haudricourt.

Might just be Boras trying to drive up the suitors/price.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Perhaps I'm missing something in the writer's argument. Wouldn't you expect that a correlation to a "normal player" would support the commonly accepted age range for a player's peak years of 27-32? This chart suggests that a player's peak years are 23-28. Just curious.

 

It really varies too much between different types of players to be useful to generalize, but player peaks are much younger than most people realize. 27-32 is far too old.

[Hollandsworths mug]

To quote Z: As of rigth now we still stinks.