Pujols Contract Extension Thread

[George_Calfas]

The Cardinals have been tight with money as long as I can remember. The fans fill the stadium everyday and the money is there, give Albert his money now and look forward to ST.

George,

You know what the crazy part of this is? Every person (Pujols, Mo, the owners, fans, analysts, writers, etc.) agrees on the following: Record Breaking Contract.

The insane part? Even knowing the yearly figure is around $30 million, the 2 sides might end up being too far apart.

Just nutty!

Stringing this out is what ownership needs to do to save face when they raise ticket prices. I hate this tactic. He will be signed before ST at ~30MIL/Yr.

 

[Adamsince1981]

I certainly am not. I've clearly shown that I'm for at least $30 million per and stated that I'd rather pay $35 over a shorter term contract.

My concern is what Albert and his agent feel he is worth. No one knows their yearly figure and how many years they want it.

Understood, but you seem to be assuming (or speculating?) that paying Pujols a market rate salary would indeed financially cripple the team.

My contention (based on knowing how well the Cards are supported in StL, plus having seen the financial documents of other MLB clubs leaked on Deadspin), is that paying Pujols WON'T cripple the team.

Ownership might have to be content with a $15 million yearly profit rather than a $30 million yearly profit. To me, that doesn't rise to the level of 'financially crippling'.

I'm not accusing Albert of being a dishonest person.

I was simply making a mild point that you can't want to play for a winner while financially crippling that team.

Sure the Cardinals CAN raise payroll, but there has to be a stopping point.

Honestly, I'd rather sign him for $175 million over 5 years($35 mil per is insane BTW) than $30 million per over 8 years.

If Albert demands a record yearly amount AND a long (8 years) term at the same time, then he was not being honest when saying winning is the most important thing.

Wow, accusing Pujols of dishonesty? I think he's shown way more than enough to give him the benefit of the doubt. He's done nothing, but play hard, play the right way, and win for the St. Louis Cardinals. To say that it has something to do with his desire to win is a reckless accusation.

If Cardinal ownership decides they'd rather pad profits than re-sign a truly once in a lifetime player and all-around good guy, that's on them and not on Albert. I'd rather ownership see a lower profit margin (don't think for a second that they'd be losing money on the Cards, even if they did sign Pujols to a record deal), than lose Pujols to another team. You could easily find another billionaire to come in and take over ownership, but you're far less likely to ever replace Pujols.

 

[Adamsince1981]

Sir, I hope you are correct and yes, we'll pay more for tickets next season and beyond.

[quote="George_Calfas":2n3re1dg]The Cardinals have been tight with money as long as I can remember. The fans fill the stadium everyday and the money is there, give Albert his money now and look forward to ST.

George,

You know what the crazy part of this is? Every person (Pujols, Mo, the owners, fans, analysts, writers, etc.) agrees on the following: Record Breaking Contract.

The insane part? Even knowing the yearly figure is around $30 million, the 2 sides might end up being too far apart.

Just nutty!

Stringing this out is what ownership needs to do to save face when they raise ticket prices. I hate this tactic. He will be signed before ST at ~30MIL/Yr.[/quote:2n3re1dg]

 

[hofautos]

^^^You don't know what tight means until you are a padre fan.

Let's see Pujols in pinstripes...we need a change for him...plus we would get more televised games of him.
It may be my imagination, but it seems Many players decline once they become a yankee, and I am curious how he can do.
Baseball needs some big news, and new talk...

I doubt the Cardinals don't pay up though and that they meet somewhere. I really don't think Pujols wants to go anywhere else either.

 

[SamHell]

My guess the problem will be years, not annual salary. Like Adamsince1981 I would rather pay more for less years.
I'd much rather do 6/200 than 10/300. I don't think Albert or his agent will see it that way.

 

[maxpower]

I get what you're saying and why you're concerned. Every dollar that goes to Pujols is a dollar that ownership does not spend towards another player. Thus, the more Pujols gets paid, the less there is to spend on shoring up the rest of the lineup. As a fan, that's tough because you want the team to be as good as it can be.

But instead of looking at it as two buckets of money (money going to Pujols vs. money going to the rest of payroll), you might think of it as THREE buckets (Pujols vs. the rest of payroll vs. Owner's profit margin). From that standpoint, there are two available sources for making the team more competitive: Pujols can take less salary and ownership can take less profits.

It's not all on Albert to help the Cardinals to field a winner.

I certainly am not. I've clearly shown that I'm for at least $30 million per and stated that I'd rather pay $35 over a shorter term contract.

My concern is what Albert and his agent feel he is worth. No one knows their yearly figure and how many years they want it.

Understood, but you seem to be assuming (or speculating?) that paying Pujols a market rate salary would indeed financially cripple the team.

My contention (based on knowing how well the Cards are supported in StL, plus having seen the financial documents of other MLB clubs leaked on Deadspin), is that paying Pujols WON'T cripple the team.

Ownership might have to be content with a $15 million yearly profit rather than a $30 million yearly profit. To me, that doesn't rise to the level of 'financially crippling'.

I'm not accusing Albert of being a dishonest person.

I was simply making a mild point that you can't want to play for a winner while financially crippling that team.

Sure the Cardinals CAN raise payroll, but there has to be a stopping point.

Honestly, I'd rather sign him for $175 million over 5 years($35 mil per is insane BTW) than $30 million per over 8 years.

If Albert demands a record yearly amount AND a long (8 years) term at the same time, then he was not being honest when saying winning is the most important thing.

Wow, accusing Pujols of dishonesty? I think he's shown way more than enough to give him the benefit of the doubt. He's done nothing, but play hard, play the right way, and win for the St. Louis Cardinals. To say that it has something to do with his desire to win is a reckless accusation.

If Cardinal ownership decides they'd rather pad profits than re-sign a truly once in a lifetime player and all-around good guy, that's on them and not on Albert. I'd rather ownership see a lower profit margin (don't think for a second that they'd be losing money on the Cards, even if they did sign Pujols to a record deal), than lose Pujols to another team. You could easily find another billionaire to come in and take over ownership, but you're far less likely to ever replace Pujols.

 

[scotty21690]

What if the Cardinals and Pujols don't work out a deal? Where does he go? Can any team even afford him that doesn't have a 1B locked up for several years?

 

[George_Calfas]

What if the Cardinals and Pujols don't work out a deal? Where does he go? Can any team even afford him that doesn't have a 1B locked up for several years?

I hate to say this, Chicago.

 

[scotty21690]

What if the Cardinals and Pujols don't work out a deal? Where does he go? Can any team even afford him that doesn't have a 1B locked up for several years?

I hate to say this, Chicago.

Ouch, lol. That would be rough for Cards fans...

But you do make a good point.

 

[Codasco07]

What if the Cardinals and Pujols don't work out a deal? Where does he go? Can any team even afford him that doesn't have a 1B locked up for several years?

I hate to say this, Chicago.

The two LA teams would be strong contenders as well. As for the question of fielding a winning team vs. paying Pujols, I don't think the two options are as mutually exclusive as some have suggested. Sure there would be between $25-30 million per year to spend on free agents, but really what does that buy? This offseason it would have been Carl Crawford/Adrian Gonzalez/Jayson Werth and a decent starter like Jake Westbrook. Is that really an improvement over Albert? I don't think so. Any free agent that money would go to is going to face the same aging curve as Albert, but he'll also be starting at a lower peak value. Add in the marketing/community backlash and it's a no-brainer to me that they have to sign him.

 

[Adamsince1981]

What if the Cardinals and Pujols don't work out a deal? Where does he go? Can any team even afford him that doesn't have a 1B locked up for several years?

I hate to say this, Chicago.

The two LA teams would be strong contenders as well. As for the question of fielding a winning team vs. paying Pujols, I don't think the two options are as mutually exclusive as some have suggested. Sure there would be between $25-30 million per year to spend on free agents, but really what does that buy? This offseason it would have been Carl Crawford/Adrian Gonzalez/Jayson Werth and a decent starter like Jake Westbrook. Is that really an improvement over Albert? I don't think so. Any free agent that money would go to is going to face the same aging curve as Albert, but he'll also be starting at a lower peak value. Add in the marketing/community backlash and it's a no-brainer to me that they have to sign him.

A lot of our competitiveness will depend on resigning Wainwright, our current prospects, and our drafting.

We need Shelby Miller to be a star and need a guy like Anthony Ferrara to develop into a back end lefty starter (just an example, not just Ferrara). We will just need to some homegrown talent to emerge.

 

[SINFULONE]

The Cardinals have been tight with money as long as I can remember. The fans fill the stadium everyday and the money is there, give Albert his money now and look forward to ST.

I agree with this.Busch stadium is always has one of the best attendeces in the game, give the guy his money and move on.He's long been underpaid, and the owners have been reaping the benefits from his prescence for quite some time.I've long thought the owners have deeper pockets than they let onto.Like someone else said earlier, I don't think the fans would mind if ticket prices went up a small percentage to offset the cost if it comes down to it.I certainly wouldn't.

Carpenter, Berkman, and Lohse aren't signed long term, so there will be some flexibility when/if Pujols' new deal (if he signs of course) kicks in.Also, something else the ownership should be concered with is the Scrubs only gave Pena a 1 year deal, I don't think they would hesitate at all to open the vault for Pujols if he would become available.That would be a PR nightmare for Mozliak and DeWitt.

 

[elmalo]

A question for Cardinals fans. Would you rather the Cardinals give Pujols a blank check and sign him long term for a ton of money. Assuming that they wont be able to sign anybody significant for years afterwards, or would you rather let him go and use that money to sign good players?

 

[George_Calfas]

A question for Cardinals fans. Would you rather the Cardinals give Pujols a blank check and sign him long term for a ton of money. Assuming that they wont be able to sign anybody significant for years afterwards, or would you rather let him go and use that money to sign good players?

Pujols/

 

[ballerskrip]

What if the Cardinals and Pujols don't work out a deal? Where does he go? Can any team even afford him that doesn't have a 1B locked up for several years?

I hate to say this, Chicago.

Exactly what I was thinking, and guess what? The Cubs have $45 million or so coming off the books after this season

 

[maxpower]

A question for Cardinals fans. Would you rather the Cardinals give Pujols a blank check and sign him long term for a ton of money. Assuming that they wont be able to sign anybody significant for years afterwards, or would you rather let him go and use that money to sign good players?

I would want ownership to pay up to 9 years/$270 million, even if it meant a few years of mediocrity at the tail end of the contract. Pujols means a ton to St. Louis, and I don't think wanting to be paid the going market rate is wrong. For all the millions that he's earned, he's still outplayed his salary and given the Cardinals outstanding value for their money. He's been a great player and a great citizen.

I would want to see Pujols finish his illustrious career in a Cardinal uniform and join the pantheon of Redbird legends. Having to pay full sticker on his contract is no excuse for not getting him signed. It's not just about wins and losses... it's also an investment in the heritage of the franchise.

 

[elmalo]

I am not denying his talent, and I am not saying he is greedy or anything like that. He is a special player and I think he deserves every penny that he will get. I was just curious to see what Cardinal fans thought about it. I feel like if they sign him to the contract that he is going to get than the Cardinals are going to have a rough time not only at the end of the contract, but also immediately. They seem to have a lot of needs. If Carpenter is a free agent next year than I dont see them being able to sign him or any real top flight free agents for a long time. I almost feel that if I were a Cardinal fan I would like to see if they could trade him and get either a star or some serious prospects, or let him go and use the money to be able to get good free agents. I think they could build a better team without him. Just my opinion.

 

[Adamsince1981]

I am not denying his talent, and I am not saying he is greedy or anything like that. He is a special player and I think he deserves every penny that he will get. I was just curious to see what Cardinal fans thought about it. I feel like if they sign him to the contract that he is going to get than the Cardinals are going to have a rough time not only at the end of the contract, but also immediately. They seem to have a lot of needs. If Carpenter is a free agent next year than I dont see them being able to sign him or any real top flight free agents for a long time. I almost feel that if I were a Cardinal fan I would like to see if they could trade him and get either a star or some serious prospects, or let him go and use the money to be able to get good free agents. I think they could build a better team without him. Just my opinion.

We have 0 immediate needs! As long as we sign Pujols, our next 3-5 years should be very fun.

C - Molina
1B - Pujols
2B - Skip/Platoon
SS - Theroit
3B - Freese
LF - Holliday
CF - Rasmus
RF - Berkman

Waino
Carp
Garcia
Westbrook
Lohse

Franklin

 

[craiger122003]

Ok Pujols does not want to leave at all
He will get PAID by STL . I assume
in the 28 to 30 per year range.
The Cardinals have to sign him or risk losing
millions of fans and dollars. In all honesty he pays for himself
when you figure jersey sales,tickets,free Cardinals advertising when
he does endorsments that other companies pay for Nuff said

 

[Codasco07]

I am not denying his talent, and I am not saying he is greedy or anything like that. He is a special player and I think he deserves every penny that he will get. I was just curious to see what Cardinal fans thought about it. I feel like if they sign him to the contract that he is going to get than the Cardinals are going to have a rough time not only at the end of the contract, but also immediately. They seem to have a lot of needs. If Carpenter is a free agent next year than I dont see them being able to sign him or any real top flight free agents for a long time. I almost feel that if I were a Cardinal fan I would like to see if they could trade him and get either a star or some serious prospects, or let him go and use the money to be able to get good free agents. I think they could build a better team without him. Just my opinion.

We have 0 immediate needs! As long as we sign Pujols, our next 3-5 years should be very fun.

C - Molina
1B - Pujols
2B - Skip/Platoon
SS - Theroit
3B - Freese
LF - Holliday
CF - Rasmus
RF - Berkman

Waino
Carp
Garcia
Westbrook
Lohse

Franklin

That's delusional. In my view, the only certainties for the next 3-5 years are Yadi, ALbert (assuming he reups), Holliday, Rasmus in the field and Waino (reup), Jaime, Motte, McClellan, Salas on the mound. The middle infield is patchwork. I believe Skip has one more cost controlled year after his current contract, but after that, unless he shows significant improvement, he will be overpaid. Freese has less than 300 MLB PAs, hasn't shown the ability to stay healthy and in my mind still has a lot of questions about his actual ability. The third OF will continue to be a question barring a breakout from the system. Pitching wise, Carp is on the last year of his contract with an option for next year and there are major questions about how effective he will be this year, let alone in the future. Franklin has apparently deemed himself willing to pitch past this season, but I hope it's for another team. The minor league system offers little to be excited for. Shelby looks like a stud, but there are questions about Cox's ability and ceiling. After that, there's not much there.