Free Agency heating up, lets get Puljos!!!!

[cubsfan5]

Indians let Grady Sizemore go today, free agency is about to heat up!!! Do you think the Cubs have a chance at landing Puljos????

[SpongeWorthy]

DID YOU GUYS SEE AVATAR?! I NEVER SAW AVATAR!

[Guest]

Let's do it. I'm on board.

[UMFan83]

and you guys were saying the lack of new members on NSBB was a bad thing.

[Little Slide Rooter]

[expletive] yeah! Puljos rocks! Let's him or Flieder!

[CubInOK]

I only want Puljos if we can get him for the league minimum.

 

Wislon, though... he should get 20/$500M.

[JimSorgi]

Albertpujolsfreeagent2012.com. I gotta admit, I'm jealous I didn't come up with that.

[Guest]

Indians let Grady Sizemore go today, free agency is about to heat up!!! Do you think the Cubs have a chance at landing Puljos????

First off, welcome to NSBB!

 

Second, sorry about the welcome from the others. I believe they are implying that there are a few open threads where this topic is being discussed.

[Guest]

And to the rabble in the thread...be nice!

[Geech]

I'm worried about his decline this year and the years he might receive on his next contract, but getting Pujols would be tremendous.

[Irrelevant Dude]

I may be in the minority, but I don't want Pujols. He will be 32 years old next season and likely only has 2-3 more peak years left. 2-3 years is also a pretty good estimate for when the Cubs will begin to see improvement in their organization as a result of dedicating resources to drafting, scouting, and player development. It just doesn't make sense to me to spend a ton of money on a guy who will be on the decline by the time the team is built to contend consistently.

[Guest]

I may be in the minority, but I don't want Pujols. He will be 32 years old next season and likely only has 2-3 more peak years left. 2-3 years is also a pretty good estimate for when the Cubs will begin to see improvement in their organization as a result of dedicating resources to drafting, scouting, and player development. It just doesn't make sense to me to spend a ton of money on a guy who will be on the decline by the time the team is built to contend consistently.

While I understand your point, I think that there are two places where I disagree:

 

1) I think the Cubs can compete as soon as 2012, depending on the available resources and being able to make a few key moves. This means that the remaining peak years will be extremely valuable to making this happen. As we've seen twice from St Louis, all you have to do is make the playoffs - anything can happen from there.

 

2) While Pujols will inevitably start to decline during this contract, he's starting from a peak as one of the 5-10 best hitters of all time. Even declining production from Albert will still be very good until near the end of the contract.

[Guest]

I may be in the minority, but I don't want Pujols. He will be 32 years old next season and likely only has 2-3 more peak years left. 2-3 years is also a pretty good estimate for when the Cubs will begin to see improvement in their organization as a result of dedicating resources to drafting, scouting, and player development. It just doesn't make sense to me to spend a ton of money on a guy who will be on the decline by the time the team is built to contend consistently.

While I understand your point, I think that there are two places where I disagree:

 

1) I think the Cubs can compete as soon as 2012, depending on the available resources and being able to make a few key moves. This means that the remaining peak years will be extremely valuable to making this happen. As we've seen twice from St Louis, all you have to do is make the playoffs - anything can happen from there.

 

2) While Pujols will inevitably start to decline during this contract, he's starting from a peak as one of the 5-10 best hitters of all time. Even declining production from Albert will still be very good until near the end of the contract.

 

 

Glad I hit refresh before I typed out a similar, albeit much less succinct, response.

[Irrelevant Dude]

I may be in the minority, but I don't want Pujols. He will be 32 years old next season and likely only has 2-3 more peak years left. 2-3 years is also a pretty good estimate for when the Cubs will begin to see improvement in their organization as a result of dedicating resources to drafting, scouting, and player development. It just doesn't make sense to me to spend a ton of money on a guy who will be on the decline by the time the team is built to contend consistently.

While I understand your point, I think that there are two places where I disagree:

 

1) I think the Cubs can compete as soon as 2012, depending on the available resources and being able to make a few key moves. This means that the remaining peak years will be extremely valuable to making this happen. As we've seen twice from St Louis, all you have to do is make the playoffs - anything can happen from there.

 

2) While Pujols will inevitably start to decline during this contract, he's starting from a peak as one of the 5-10 best hitters of all time. Even declining production from Albert will still be very good until near the end of the contract.

I do agree with both points and I won't be upset if they do sign him, but my preference would simply be that they don't. I agree that the Cubs can compete in 2012, but I also believe at some point they have to make decisions that are either best for today or best for the long term. While those decisions are not always mutually exclusive, they definitely can be. I truly think Epstein's comments thus far indicate an unwillingness to overspend on a player toward the end of his prime, so I would consider Fielder a much more realistic possibility.

[Guest]

I may be in the minority, but I don't want Pujols. He will be 32 years old next season and likely only has 2-3 more peak years left. 2-3 years is also a pretty good estimate for when the Cubs will begin to see improvement in their organization as a result of dedicating resources to drafting, scouting, and player development. It just doesn't make sense to me to spend a ton of money on a guy who will be on the decline by the time the team is built to contend consistently.

While I understand your point, I think that there are two places where I disagree:

 

1) I think the Cubs can compete as soon as 2012, depending on the available resources and being able to make a few key moves. This means that the remaining peak years will be extremely valuable to making this happen. As we've seen twice from St Louis, all you have to do is make the playoffs - anything can happen from there.

 

2) While Pujols will inevitably start to decline during this contract, he's starting from a peak as one of the 5-10 best hitters of all time. Even declining production from Albert will still be very good until near the end of the contract.

I do agree with both points and I won't be upset if they do sign him, but my preference would simply be that they don't. I agree that the Cubs can compete in 2012, but I also believe at some point they have to make decisions that are either best for today or best for the long term. While those decisions are not always mutually exclusive, they definitely can be. I truly think Epstein's comments thus far indicate an unwillingness to overspend on a player toward the end of his prime, so I would consider Fielder a much more realistic possibility.

I won't complain if they go that direction. I just don't want them to punt the next two years to go with a youth movement. It's just not necessary given the available resources.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I hate that all these discussions come down to people wanting or people not wanting Pujols.

 

The issue here is how much you are willing to pay. There is a price where any of us would take him, and there's a price where any of us should be willing to walk away.

[bukie]

Unfortunately, if a team wants premium talent, they'll likely have to pay a premium to get it. No reason to bid yourself up, of course, but chances are if the Cubs do land Pujols/Fielder, they'll have paid above value to get one of them.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I hope to be ordering my Pujols jersey for Christmas.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I hope to be ordering my Pujols jersey for Christmas.

You mean Puljos?

[Guest]

I hate that all these discussions come down to people wanting or people not wanting Pujols.

 

The issue here is how much you are willing to pay. There is a price where any of us would take him, and there's a price where any of us should be willing to walk away.

Perhaps, but he's not the only only availble choice. The Cubs could allocate lower dollars for the same years and get pretty good value from Fielder.

 

I'd be happy with either one.

[Clem Fandango]

http://espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&page=wojciechowski-111028

 

Ludicrous tidbit...

 

Jon Heyman of SI.com floated an agent-sourced wish-list figure of six years, $240 million for Pujols' next contract.

 

$40 million a year. I think Albert has more than earned the right to be paid the same as A-Rod, maybe even a little more, but $40 million is absurd. This isn't F1 racing.

[davell]

I'm not saying he'll get that, because he won't. But, if he's willing to take a 6 year deal, he's definitely going to make more than AROD on a per year basis. 40 is too much, but I wouldn't be upset if we went to 33 or 35 per honestly.

[Clem Fandango]

I'm not saying he'll get that, because he won't. But, if he's willing to take a 6 year deal, he's definitely going to make more than AROD on a per year basis. 40 is too much, but I wouldn't be upset if we went to 33 or 35 per honestly.

 

I probably wouldn't either. There's a chance he wouldn't put up that kind of production value at any point in the contract, but his production would probably definitely be worth $25-$30 million easily. In this situation you're essentially paying him extra because he's the greatest hitter of our time and he'd bring so much more to the table than just being in the Cubs lineup... especially since he wouldn't be on the Cardinals anymore. Take away our rivals greatest asset, kill two birds with one stone. Make the team better while substantially making another worse... and pissing off an entire fan base in the process.

[Guest]

somewhere between $30-35M for 6 is something i can definitely be on board with and is much more palatable than 30 for 10.

[NewUserName]

I would be upset if we are not at least trying to drive up the price on Albert. I am not sure the Cards can handle 2 large contracts with diminishing returns.