Pujols signs with Angels pg 151

[Butterscup1679666578]

Why were people ok with 5/150 but not ~200/10?

 

Even if its220 is five more years for another 70 all that scary?

 

Because money is hardly a concern, but years are? Are you being serious right now?

[Guest]

Even if its 220 is five more years for another 70 all that scary?

 

Yes.

[ctcf]

Even if its 220 is five more years for another 70 all that scary?

 

Yes.

 

Double yes.

[SABR Gamer]

Here's a fun game. I'm going to list the five best pre free agency seasons by fWAR of three different players (in descending order). One is Prince Fielder. The other two are Alfonso Soriano and Jayson Werth.

 

Player A: 5.7, 5.3, 5.0, 2.3, 2.1

Player B: 5.3, 5.2, 5.0, 3.3, 2.4

Player C: 6.4, 5.5, 5.1, 3.4, 1.7

 

 

A - Soriano, B - Werth, C - Fielder

 

 

Oh, and for the record...

 

Pujols: 10.1, 8.5, 8.4, 8.2, 7.7 (that's just his first six seasons. If we included the time covered by his extension he'd be 10.1, 9.1, 9.0, 8.5, 8.4)

 

Pujols is a true, honest to goodness superstar of the highest caliber.

 

Fielder is Mo Vaughn or Travis Hafner.

 

If we do not manage to bring in Pujols (and it's increasingly likely we wont), I'm honestly split as to whether the Cubs should be looking at Fielder at all. The cost is astronomical, the risk is pretty high and it's not like his production is MVP caliber to begin with.

 

Age at new contract:

 

Soriano: 31

Werth: 32

Fielder: 28

 

That (3-4 years) is a significant difference. That's signing a guy entering his prime versus 2 players on the end/exiting their primes.

 

Through age 27 (where Fielder is now), 5 best WAR seasons:

 

Werth: 2.4, 1.5, 0.4, 0.1, NA

Soriano: 5.7, 5.0, 0.2, -0.2, -0.5

Fielder: 6.4, 5.5, 5.1, 3.4, 1.7

 

Still think that Fielder is on the same level as those two? He just isn't, so I don't know why people try to compare them. You can decide some B.S. "5 years pre free agency" factor and ignore age to make your argument look right, but that's silly.

 

I am purely arguing in favor of Fielder. Not making a comment on Pujols vs. Fielder, because Pujols is clearly better as long as the years aren't long, but that's not going to happen, so idk the point in debating it.

Edited December 7, 2011 by New York Cubs Fan

[davell]

I think it's either the Nats or the Dodgers. And yes, I know most will totally disagree with this, nothing about McCourt surprises me. They've backloaded all of their tiny deals already and look like they could go into next year with an 85 mill payroll. If they're being sold anyway, I could see certainly see an extremely backloaded deal to where Pujols doesn't make more than 10 mill or so in year 1 and even have a ton of their offer deferred much later. At least as much as is allowed. But, I don't think any of us truly know what they're restricted to right now, so they've always been in the back of my mind. That said, I hope it's the Nats and I hope they get him, if it IS them. But I have a feeling it's the Dodgers for some reason.

[ctcf]

I think it's either the Nats or the Dodgers. And yes, I know most will totally disagree with this, nothing about McCourt surprises me. They've backloaded all of their tiny deals already and look like they could go into next year with an 85 mill payroll. If they're being sold anyway, I could see certainly see an extremely backloaded deal to where Pujols doesn't make more than 10 mill or so in year 1 and even have a ton of their offer deferred much later. At least as much as is allowed. But, I don't think any of us truly know what they're restricted to right now, so they've always been in the back of my mind. That said, I hope it's the Nats and I hope they get him, if it IS them. But I have a feeling it's the Dodgers for some reason.

 

Wouldn't baseball have to sign off on that if it were the Dodgers? Or is that bit over?

[Guest]

Why were people ok with 5/150 but not ~200/10?

 

Even if its220 is five more years for another 70 all that scary?

 

Because money is hardly a concern, but years are? Are you being serious right now?

Spreading the money out over more years and paying more later is smarter anyway. All that really matters is the total dollars spent. Are you telling me you'd rather do 150/5 than, let's say, 180/9??

[SaorsaDaonnan]

I swore off message boards a few years back, but damn it, I'm too excited to care at this point! This far into it it's hard to imagine what else there could be to say (didn't we all make up our minds months ago) but it will certainly be fascinating to watch it all go down...

 

I, for one, want Pujols to go into the HOF with a Cubs hat and about nine more rings!

[Rob]

Age at new contract:

 

Soriano: 31

Werth: 32

Fielder: 28

 

That (3-4 years) is a significant difference. That's signing a guy entering his prime versus 2 players on the end/exiting their primes.

 

Through age 27 (where Fielder is now), 5 best WAR seasons:

 

Werth: 2.4, 1.5, 0.4, 0.1, NA

Soriano: 5.7, 5.0, 0.2, -0.2, -0.5

Fielder: 6.4, 5.5, 5.1, 3.4, 1.7

 

Still think that Fielder is on the same level as those two? He just isn't, so I don't know why people try to compare them. You can decide some B.S. "5 years pre free agency" factor and ignore age to make your argument look right, but that's silly.

 

I am purely arguing in favor of Fielder. Not making a comment on Pujols vs. Fielder, because Pujols is clearly better as long as the years aren't long, but that's not going to happen, so idk the point in debating it.

 

Of course, players with Fielder's skillset age quite poorly compared players with multi-faceted skillsets like Soriano and Werth (though that hasn't exactly been a saving grace with Soriano like it was supposed to be)... and Fielder can't exactly move any further down the defensive spectrum. That 3-4 years doesn't really mean jack diddly.

[Splendid Splinter]

Here's a fun game. I'm going to list the five best pre free agency seasons by fWAR of three different players (in descending order). One is Prince Fielder. The other two are Alfonso Soriano and Jayson Werth.

 

Player A: 5.7, 5.3, 5.0, 2.3, 2.1

Player B: 5.3, 5.2, 5.0, 3.3, 2.4

Player C: 6.4, 5.5, 5.1, 3.4, 1.7

 

 

A - Soriano, B - Werth, C - Fielder

 

 

Oh, and for the record...

 

Pujols: 10.1, 8.5, 8.4, 8.2, 7.7 (that's just his first six seasons. If we included the time covered by his extension he'd be 10.1, 9.1, 9.0, 8.5, 8.4)

 

Pujols is a true, honest to goodness superstar of the highest caliber.

 

Fielder is Mo Vaughn or Travis Hafner.

 

If we do not manage to bring in Pujols (and it's increasingly likely we wont), I'm honestly split as to whether the Cubs should be looking at Fielder at all. The cost is astronomical, the risk is pretty high and it's not like his production is MVP caliber to begin with.

 

 

Don't forget that Soriano was 30 (31 Jan that offseason) and Werth was 31 1/2 when they sign their FA contract. Fielder is 27 (won't be 28 until next May). 2 guys were toward the end of their prime years while Fielder is just going into it. So he got 3-4 more years to get to the same age as them when they were FAs. My guess is that Fielder will put another 5 fWAR or 2 by that time.

[Hollandsworths mug]

Everything about Prince Fielder says he is absolutely worth the money and years. No, not 10 years but 6 or 7, yes. He is a difference maker, a leader and a team player.

 

Jed Hoyer making me feel good here:

 

“Well they have to be great players,” general manager Jed Hoyer said Tuesday. “You only do deals for great players. And you want to make sure you’re paying for the future not for the past. But if you’re going to talk about a long deal, it better be for a great player and an elite talent. Otherwise, those are recipes for disaster.”

 

[Butterscup1679666578]

Why were people ok with 5/150 but not ~200/10?

 

Even if its220 is five more years for another 70 all that scary?

 

Because money is hardly a concern, but years are? Are you being serious right now?

Spreading the money out over more years and paying more later is smarter anyway. All that really matters is the total dollars spent. Are you telling me you'd rather do 150/5 than, let's say, 180/9??

 

Well first off, Pujols isn't going to sign a deal for 20 mil.

 

But I'd pay more now for a shorter contract for a guy who is 32 and coming off his worst year yet than be stuck with him during his brutal years (which could be 3-5 years based on that contract), yes.

[Have a seat, Neifi]

@Jim_Duquette

Jim Duquette

Seattle NOT in on Fielder ! - Mariners source.

[SouthSideRyan]

Even if its 220 is five more years for another 70 all that scary?

 

Yes.

 

I know it sounds crazy, but 5 years down the road, I think I'd be ok signing a 37 year old Pujols to 5/70. That's ignoring the fact that you're getting a decent deal on 5/150, and ignoring the reduced value of the 220 considering the time value of money as I invest the backloaded money in the Pujols hedge fund.

[ctcf]

@Jim_Duquette

Jim Duquette

Seattle NOT in on Fielder ! - Mariners source.

 

FTH!?

[XZero771679666304]

@Jim_Duquette

Jim Duquette

Seattle NOT in on Fielder ! - Mariners source.

 

FTH!?

 

Fielder is going to come down to the Rangers and Cubs, imo. I never bought Seattle as a real possibility.

[Guest]

Even if its 220 is five more years for another 70 all that scary?

 

Yes.

 

I know it sounds crazy, but 5 years down the road, I think I'd be ok signing a 37 year old Pujols to 5/70. That's ignoring the fact that you're getting a decent deal on 5/150, and ignoring the reduced value of the 220 considering the time value of money as I invest the backloaded money in the Pujols hedge fund.

 

I don't mean to say that 10/220 is outrageous(although it's the absolute upper bound of what I'd want to do in a 10 year deal), but the extra years and dollars matter.

[Hollandsworths mug]

Prince Fielder has a lifetime OPS of .929, which is very sick. Pujols, of course, is beyond nuts at 1.037. That said, given the age difference, if we can't get Pujols, I will be happy if it we get Prince.

[davell]

I think it's either the Nats or the Dodgers. And yes, I know most will totally disagree with this, nothing about McCourt surprises me. They've backloaded all of their tiny deals already and look like they could go into next year with an 85 mill payroll. If they're being sold anyway, I could see certainly see an extremely backloaded deal to where Pujols doesn't make more than 10 mill or so in year 1 and even have a ton of their offer deferred much later. At least as much as is allowed. But, I don't think any of us truly know what they're restricted to right now, so they've always been in the back of my mind. That said, I hope it's the Nats and I hope they get him, if it IS them. But I have a feeling it's the Dodgers for some reason.

 

Wouldn't baseball have to sign off on that if it were the Dodgers? Or is that bit over?

No idea. Maybe MLB gave them a certain payroll not to exceed heading into the year? I just found it strange they're backloading guys like Capuano. Coletti had said earlier in the offseason they would not be restricted from going after the big guys. Although he did make a comment on Fielder about offering him 3 mill or so for the first year and backloading it. So, I have no clue where they stand financially, but if MLB is looking at it from an overall 2012 payroll thing and not longterm, then I think it's possible.

[PrimeTime]

Roto says take it with a grain of salt

 

Jim Duquette of MLB Network Radio on Sirius XM Radio reports that the Mariners are not in on free agent first baseman Prince Fielder.

We would take this with a big grain of salt. The Mariners have been reported as the favorites for the first baseman, so it would be a surprise if they're suddenly not involved on him at all. The Cubs and the Blue Jays have seemed to be the other two big players for Fielder, and we're not ruling out the Rangers yet.

[Rob]

Prince Fielder has a lifetime OPS of .929, which is very sick. Pujols, of course, is beyond nuts at 1.037. That said, given the age difference, if we can't get Pujols, I will be happy if it we get Prince.

 

There's also defense and baserunning to take into account. And they matter a lot in this case.

[Shilzzz]

travis hafner might be fair, but that mo vaughn schtick is ridiculous. fielder works way too hard to be reduced to that kind of fodder. even then, from all public conversations i've been privy to, hafner is half as smart as fielder. realize this is intangible bs, but it still must be considered. mind doesn't stop a bad body from breaking down, but if a guy has a will and work ethic, he is more likely to buck the trend, & with fielder i think he is as good of a bad body to do so as baseball has seen. i'd say he's more between hafner and a guy like frank thomas.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

Fielder is Mo Vaughn or Travis Hafner.

 

I don't get why people keep talking about Prince, then looking at Mo Vaughn and thinking that's a terrible thing.

 

During his age 30 season, Vaughn hit 40 homers with 117 RBIs and a .402 OPB.

 

During his age 31 season, he hit 33 with 108 RBIs and a .358 OPB.

 

During his age 32 season, he hit 36 homers with 117 RBIs and a .365 OPB.

 

Then he got hurt.

 

When he came back, during his age 34 season, he hit 26 homers with 72 RBIs and a .349 OBP.

 

That last season is not great, of course, but that would be Fielder's seventh season of a seven-year contract.

 

So, if Fielder produced like Vaughn did from his age 28 season to his age 34 season, why would that be bad again?

[Hollandsworths mug]

Fielder is Mo Vaughn or Travis Hafner.

 

I don't get why people keep talking about Prince, then looking at Mo Vaughn and thinking that's a terrible thing.

 

During his age 30 season, Vaughn hit 40 homers with 117 RBIs and a .402 OPB.

 

During his age 31 season, he hit 33 with 108 RBIs and a .358 OPB.

 

During his age 32 season, he hit 36 homers with 117 RBIs and a .365 OPB.

 

Then he got hurt.

 

When he came back, during his age 34 season, he hit 26 homers with 72 RBIs and a .349 OBP.

 

That last season is not great, of course, but that would be Fielder's seventh season of a seven-year contract.

 

So, if Fielder produced like Vaughn did from his age 28 season to his age 34 season, why would that be bad again?

 

Well, it wouldn't. We just have too many people on this board who think Pujols is light years better than Fielder. And that is not the case at all. And I would love Pujols to be a Cub.

[Bruno7481]

Joel Sherman says a person familiar with the Pujols talks says Cubs are definitely in it...