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

[mul21]

Pujols for 6/$200M? I'm in. The one reason I don't want him is the absurdity of giving a guy a 10 year contract that starts in his age 32 season. If you can be done with him at the end of his age 37 season? Awesome, even if the AAV is a bit ridiculous. He'll probably be worth, or close, it until maybe the last year of the deal.

[d_money]

Prior to the WS this year, my hope was that StL would lose. Then sign AP in the offseason for an amount and time frame that would cripple them for the second half of his contract and ultimately, make them go away for 5 years.

 

I now believe StL will be able to re-sign him at a relatively priced contract - similar to their offer before ST. With Wainwright coming back, Jaime Garcia, Shelby Miller coming up and bringing back AP (with Holliday under contract), the Cards aren't going away any time soon - which puts my visits with the in-laws for Christmas in StL a painful experience for years to come.

[Sammy Sofa]

Prior to the WS this year, my hope was that StL would lose. Then sign AP in the offseason for an amount and time frame that would cripple them for the second half of his contract and ultimately, make them go away for 5 years.

 

I now believe StL will be able to re-sign him at a relatively priced contract - similar to their offer before ST. With Wainwright coming back, Jaime Garcia, Shelby Miller coming up and bringing back AP (with Holliday under contract), the Cards aren't going away any time soon - which puts my visits with the in-laws for Christmas in StL a painful experience for years to come.

 

Why do you think the WS makes him more likely to return to the Cardinals? Or make them more likely to pay so much more?

[C.C.]

Zilch! WS win is meaningless.

[CubInOK]

His body language throughout the playoffs makes me think he's not going back to STL.

[C.C.]

His body language throughout the playoffs makes me think he's not going back to STL.

 

Depends on the $$$. He's pissed because he feels he's been underpaid throughout his career. Highest bidder wins, and you are right, I don't think it'll be St. Louis.

[Guest]

His body language throughout the playoffs makes me think he's not going back to STL.

 

Depends on the $$$. He's pissed because he feels he's been underpaid throughout his career. Highest bidder wins, and you are right, I don't think it'll be St. Louis.

 

The feelings are accurate. He's been extremely underpaid. He's given St. Louis many great and fairly cheap years. Now it's time to pay up. They have a new stadium now, a World Series ring. They have no excuse to not pay him, and if they won't, he won't blink as he signs somewhere else. They can cry that they can't afford him, but in reality they've paid everyone else they've wanted to keep, and it's Albert's turn.

[d_money]

 

Why do you think the WS makes him more likely to return to the Cardinals? Or make them more likely to pay so much more?

 

Mainly b/c ownership may realize what a bad PR move this will be. The WS win only underscores the importance of AP in the line up, team player, community, etc... He's a future HOF'er and the modern day Gehrig.

 

Also, whats the market for him? Looking at the list of top payrolls (ranging approx. from $118M - $200M) - the 2 NY teams, Boston, us, White Sox, Phillies, Tigers, LA Angels - there is either no need for a 1B or the no appetite to increase payroll. The next tier of team payrolls begin at $90M and of those teams - who would increase payroll 28% for a period of 8 years? (assuming he signs in the neighborhood of $25M/year).

[Sammy Sofa]

 

Why do you think the WS makes him more likely to return to the Cardinals? Or make them more likely to pay so much more?

 

Mainly b/c ownership may realize what a bad PR move this will be. The WS win only underscores the importance of AP in the line up, team player, community, etc... He's a future HOF'er and the modern day Gehrig.

 

Also, whats the market for him? Looking at the list of top payrolls (ranging approx. from $118M - $200M) - the 2 NY teams, Boston, us, White Sox, Phillies, Tigers, LA Angels - there is either no need for a 1B or the no appetite to increase payroll. The next tier of team payrolls begin at $90M and of those teams - who would increase payroll 28% for a period of 8 years? (assuming he signs in the neighborhood of $25M/year).

 

The bottom line is that there are teams out there that can and will pay either what he wants or at least close to what he wants (last year's top payrolls do not sum up everyone who could pay him if they chose to do so). So far the Cardinals have not demonstrated a willingness or ability to do so.

 

Basically this is all on the Cardinals. Seeing as how much production he's given them for well under market value he's likely going to expect at least 8 years from them, and probably the 10. I can see him technically given them a "discount" (ie-coming down from the $30 million per), but not to the levels that they've been reported as offering. They're going to have to at least match and likely technically exceed Howard and Arod's annual salaries to keep him.

[davearm2]

Pujols for 6/$200M? I'm in. The one reason I don't want him is the absurdity of giving a guy a 10 year contract that starts in his age 32 season. If you can be done with him at the end of his age 37 season? Awesome, even if the AAV is a bit ridiculous. He'll probably be worth, or close, it until maybe the last year of the deal.

Me too. I've been against Pujols, but it's because of the 8-10 year commitment. Those last few years scare the bejesus out of me, and no amount of "well we're a big market team and can afford to eat a big contract" is going to change my mind on that. Pujols isn't "a big contract". He's 20% or more of the payroll.

 

$30-$32M per for 6? Go for it.

[davearm2]

Zilch! WS win is meaningless.

Maybe not. The Cards made a bunch more money this postseason.

 

What if you're the owner and decided, "let's keep half of the postseason profits for ourselves, and add the other half to our offer to Albert."

 

Seems reasonable, since he's at least half the reason they won the darned thing in the first place.

[Sammy Sofa]

And the money they're making due to this WS translates to them paying his entire new contract....how exactly?

[davearm2]

And the money they're making due to this WS translates to them paying his entire new contract....how exactly?

I said add it to their offer. If that offer was $200 over 9 or whatever, now it's $200 + x.

[Little Slide Rooter]

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.

 

Compete is one of those terms that mean different things to different people. To some, it means automatically become the hands on favorite for the division. In reality, compete means just that. Be good enough to be in the playoff conversation all season long. My thing is how much money do we want to spend to compete? Do we want to have a massive spending spree, sign Pujols/Fielder+Aramis+Wilson so that we're back on top for another 2-3 years before we get old and useless again, and hope that enough prospects pan out to stay competitive at that time? I agree, I would sign Pujols and get those 2-3 peak years and hope for the best the rest of the way, but then how do we want to conduct the rest of the offseason? I'd just as soon sign him(or Fielder) and call it an offseason, unless we can get Sizemore for cheap and perhaps a cheap reclamation type starting pitcher and call it a day. I'd then like to keep building next offseason when we have the Dempster, Zambrano, Byrd, and remaining Pena money off the books, and see what's available then through FA or trade.

 

Our shopping list for the next 2 years is:

 

1st Base

3rd Base

Corner OF

Front line Starting Pitcher

Mid Rotation Stating pitcher

Perhaps a 2nd baseman, but first I'd like to cycle through guys like DeWitt, LeMahieu, Flaherty, and perhaps Junior Lake.

Maybe a cheap RH backup outfielder.

 

That will run us at least 70 Mil if we acquire all through free agency, which is doubtful judging by Theo's philospohy, but that's pretty much what's coming off the books between now and next October.

[Sammy Sofa]

And the money they're making due to this WS translates to them paying his entire new contract....how exactly?

I said add it to their offer. If that offer was $200 over 9 or whatever, now it's $200 + x.

 

That still seems like it would put them too far apart, at least over a contract the length of what Pujols reportedly wants.

[dew1679666265]

I'd just as soon sign him(or Fielder) and call it an offseason, unless we can get Sizemore for cheap and perhaps a cheap reclamation type starting pitcher and call it a day. I'd then like to keep building next offseason when we have the Dempster, Zambrano, Byrd, and remaining Pena money off the books, and see what's available then through FA or trade.

 

Since we know that money's coming off the books next year either way, why is it better to wait and commit money next year instead of the same money this year? The Demp, Z, Pena, etc., money comes off the books at the same time, in the same way next year whether we sign Wilson to a 5/90 deal this offseason or Greinke to a 5/90 deal next offseason.

[Guest]

I'd just as soon sign him(or Fielder) and call it an offseason, unless we can get Sizemore for cheap and perhaps a cheap reclamation type starting pitcher and call it a day. I'd then like to keep building next offseason when we have the Dempster, Zambrano, Byrd, and remaining Pena money off the books, and see what's available then through FA or trade.

 

Since we know that money's coming off the books next year either way, why is it better to wait and commit money next year instead of the same money this year? The Demp, Z, Pena, etc., money comes off the books at the same time, in the same way next year whether we sign Wilson to a 5/90 deal this offseason or Greinke to a 5/90 deal next offseason.

I like Greinke a lot more, though.

 

Of course, I also expect him to get a bigger deal than Wilson with fiercer competition.

[Conky]

6 Years at 30-32M? Sure. You jump on that. 6 for 40M is across that arbitrary line that no one seems able to find, though. That would be more than 25% of a large market club's payroll. That is just too much if the leaked number is what they are pursuing. Good luck getting someone to pony up.

[javy knows my name]

I'll dance naked in the streets if we sign Albert for 6/200mm

[Hairyducked Idiot]

6/$30 makes me flinch a little. I'd probably do it, but I wouldn't feel like I was getting a bargain or anything.

[javy knows my name]

6/$30 makes me flinch a little. I'd probably do it, but I wouldn't feel like I was getting a bargain or anything.

 

I don't understand how you can expect anything better.

 

Hell, I don't know how you could expect anything that good. That's a steal.

 

Edit: I don't know if celebrations get any more joyful or pure than my naked street dance, but if we sign him at 6/180, I'll be doing whatever that is.

Edited October 30, 2011 by Castro's Spray Chart

[Hairyducked Idiot]

6/$30 makes me flinch a little. I'd probably do it, but I wouldn't feel like I was getting a bargain or anything.

 

I don't understand how you can expect anything better.

 

Hell, I don't know how you could expect anything that good. That's a steal.

 

Limited market for 1bmen, and I don't think the rest of the league is as dismissive of his worrisome 2011 as some Cubs fans are.

 

The Cardinals are offering $22.5 million AAV. Jumping from that to $30 million is Tom Hicksing yourself, even if you get to take a few years off the end.

[javy knows my name]

6/$30 makes me flinch a little. I'd probably do it, but I wouldn't feel like I was getting a bargain or anything.

 

I don't understand how you can expect anything better.

 

Hell, I don't know how you could expect anything that good. That's a steal.

 

Limited market for 1bmen, and I don't think the rest of the league is as dismissive of his worrisome 2011 as some Cubs fans are.

 

The Cardinals are offering $22.5 million AAV. Jumping from that to $30 million is Tom Hicksing yourself, even if you get to take a few years off the end.

 

If you subscribe to the 1 WAR = $5 mil theory, he's an excellent bet to exceed the proposed $30 million AAV for the first 3-4 years. I think you're greatly understating the value of "taking a few years off the end." I would rather not commit Theo's sin of paying for past performance in years 7-10 or whatever. Rather pay him what he's worth when he's worth it; needless to say, that means happily upping the AAV.

[Guest]

6/$30 makes me flinch a little. I'd probably do it, but I wouldn't feel like I was getting a bargain or anything.

 

I don't understand how you can expect anything better.

 

Hell, I don't know how you could expect anything that good. That's a steal.

 

Limited market for 1bmen, and I don't think the rest of the league is as dismissive of his worrisome 2011 as some Cubs fans are.

 

The Cardinals are offering $22.5 million AAV. Jumping from that to $30 million is Tom Hicksing yourself, even if you get to take a few years off the end.

 

But you're going to have to offer more than the Cardinals are offering to get him to leave. If the Cards are the highest bidder, he's going to stay there. And if the Cards are offering an extra year or two than the Cubs - say 8 years vs. 6 - then another team will have to offer more money per year.

[dew1679666265]

I like Greinke a lot more, though.

 

Of course, I also expect him to get a bigger deal than Wilson with fiercer competition.

 

Out of curiosity, why do you like Greinke a lot more? Greinke is 3 years younger, but has thrown around 500 more MLB innings than Wilson, so he's got more mileage. Greinke did have that exceptional 2009 season (9.3 WAR, 2.16/2.33/3.09 ERA/FIP/xFIP), but that's looking like a clear outlier at this point as he's been at 5.1, 4.9, 3.9, and lower the rest of his career. Since becoming a starter, Wilson has posted K/9 rates of 7.5 and 8.3 and BB rates of 4.10 and 2.98. Greinke will K a few more (he's at 8.83 since 2008 if my math is right) and he walks a few less than Wilson did this year (2.26 since 2008, again if my math is right). Wilson's averages are around 1 per 9 innings worse than Greinke's, but Wilson has shown clear improvement from year one to year two, so it's not unrealistic to think the 2011 numbers are closer to what he'll do over the next few years as well.

 

I could understand preferring Greinke to Wilson, but by a lot?

 

And I expect Greinke to get more too, I was just throwing numbers out there since they weren't the crux (or particularly important to) my post.

Edited October 30, 2011 by dew