This is nuts to me.

[schmidtfan20]

[quote="Sam Banks":1wy6c0dl]http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120103&content_id=26258766&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb&partnerId=aw-7920552108229875874-996

The Angels may have spent nearly $330 million on Albert Pujols and C.J. Wilson this offseason, but because both agreed to take less money up front, the initial blow to their payroll won't be nearly as tumultuous as one would've expected.

A source confirmed a CBSSports.com report stating that the Pujols deal is significantly backloaded and actually adds up to $240 million through his 10 years as a player, then pays him an extra $10 million as part of his 10-year personal service agreement.

Pujols is slated to be paid $12 million in 2012, then $16 million in 2013 -- which is what he made in each of the last four years of his previous contract with the Cardinals. The remaining eight years start at $23 million in 2014, then increase by $1 million each season -- ultimately paying him $30 million in 2021, his age-41 campaign.

I know it doesn't really mean much in the grand scheme of things, but I just can't believe that Albert Pujols is only going to be making 12 million a year.


The Angels are really going to regret this contract in a few years.

I actually don't think so. They're going to field a contender every year. If they win just one championship during the Pujols era it's an easy success in my mind. They're carving out a massive market share in the southern California market and are going to be raking in a disgusting amount of money that dwarfs the player payroll in their television deal.

I say this, and I love the guy, and I love what he's done for St. Louis........but when the hammer drops and it comes out that he's on HGH, and he's about 5 years older than he actually claims, it isn't going to be a good situation. (both of which I believe to be truths)[/quote:1wy6c0dl]


DING DING DING!

 

[rsmath]

I wonder if the back-loading is also because of the luxury tax? Would the luxury tax threshold amount increase in later years so even with a backloaded contract, the Angels can avoid crossing that threshold in Pujols' later years to keep from having to pay a luxury tax?

 

[Leaf]

Baseball is completely out of hand.
Things have to change.....
They have to.
BG

And it's insane this stupid contract was given over TEN years ago. It's just nuts.

Baseball is just like America....
People spend today without consideration of the damage in the future...
Look where our country is....
Sad times.
BG

 

[phillyfan0417]

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120103&content_id=26258766&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb&partnerId=aw-7920552108229875874-996

The Angels may have spent nearly $330 million on Albert Pujols and C.J. Wilson this offseason, but because both agreed to take less money up front, the initial blow to their payroll won't be nearly as tumultuous as one would've expected.

A source confirmed a CBSSports.com report stating that the Pujols deal is significantly backloaded and actually adds up to $240 million through his 10 years as a player, then pays him an extra $10 million as part of his 10-year personal service agreement.

Pujols is slated to be paid $12 million in 2012, then $16 million in 2013 -- which is what he made in each of the last four years of his previous contract with the Cardinals. The remaining eight years start at $23 million in 2014, then increase by $1 million each season -- ultimately paying him $30 million in 2021, his age-41 campaign.

I know it doesn't really mean much in the grand scheme of things, but I just can't believe that Albert Pujols is only going to be making 12 million a year.


The Angels are really going to regret this contract in a few years.

I actually don't think so. They're going to field a contender every year. If they win just one championship during the Pujols era it's an easy success in my mind. They're carving out a massive market share in the southern California market and are going to be raking in a disgusting amount of money that dwarfs the player payroll in their television deal.

Paying way less than market today and probably well above market at the end seems to kind of be neutral and done knowing your revenue will be growing. I work with a few Cardinal fans and we've gotten into some interesting debates about both the age and PEDS debates and when he was a Cardinal, their defense against both issues was outstanding and passionate. Seems like now that he signed elsewhere, its almost fact he's been PED loading and is 75 years old. Break-ups are hard to take. Also, any time you make a comment and the only person who endorses it is schmidtfan, you may want to ask yourself why that is...

 

[muskiesfan]

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120103&content_id=26258766&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb&partnerId=aw-7920552108229875874-996

The Angels may have spent nearly $330 million on Albert Pujols and C.J. Wilson this offseason, but because both agreed to take less money up front, the initial blow to their payroll won't be nearly as tumultuous as one would've expected.

A source confirmed a CBSSports.com report stating that the Pujols deal is significantly backloaded and actually adds up to $240 million through his 10 years as a player, then pays him an extra $10 million as part of his 10-year personal service agreement.

Pujols is slated to be paid $12 million in 2012, then $16 million in 2013 -- which is what he made in each of the last four years of his previous contract with the Cardinals. The remaining eight years start at $23 million in 2014, then increase by $1 million each season -- ultimately paying him $30 million in 2021, his age-41 campaign.

I know it doesn't really mean much in the grand scheme of things, but I just can't believe that Albert Pujols is only going to be making 12 million a year.


The Angels are really going to regret this contract in a few years.

I actually don't think so. They're going to field a contender every year. If they win just one championship during the Pujols era it's an easy success in my mind. They're carving out a massive market share in the southern California market and are going to be raking in a disgusting amount of money that dwarfs the player payroll in their television deal.

Paying way less than market today and probably well above market at the end seems to kind of be neutral and done knowing your revenue will be growing. I work with a few Cardinal fans and we've gotten into some interesting debates about both the age and PEDS debates and when he was a Cardinal, their defense against both issues was outstanding and passionate. Seems like now that he signed elsewhere, its almost fact he's been PED loading and is 75 years old. Break-ups are hard to take. Also, any time you make a comment and the only person who endorses it is schmidtfan, you may want to ask yourself why that is...

I am no Cardinals fan (not an Angels fan either), but I have long suspected that Albert is older than he says he is. I would like to think that he doesn't/hasn't used PEDs, but I can't say for certain one way or the other. He's a great player and I hope that neither are true, but I really do think he's at least a couple of years older than what he says he is.

I am a lifelong, diehard Reds fan. I am sure some will think that skews my POV, but that truly has nothing to do with it.

 

[JzWand]

Some good points on this thread.

I also have to think that the Angels owner believes that he will make enough on ticket sales, TV revenue, and merchandising the first 5 years off of Pujols that he can afford to eat the contract the last 5.

If they make a couple of series and maybe win 1 or 2 it will all have been worth it.

Regarding the merchandising, remember the Moreno made his mark in advertising so hes going to milk this for all its worth!

 

[ahill1]

Didnt the mets just finish paying Bobby B?

just STARTED in 2011 actually.

That's correct I was talking to him the other day(he just bought a plane, and has a hangar with us) . He just started getting 1-1.5mil every year from the Mets for the next 20 years

 

[ballerskrip]

You guys keep saying the Angels will regret it. I am not sure why. They signed a new TV deal paying them BIG BIG BIG time cash that will cover their entire payroll each year. So who cares! Think about it. THey have guaranteed TV cash that makes Pujols contract look like penauts. It might make Cardinals fans feel better to say this, but No, no they will not regret because Fox will be fronting the bill.

 

[200lbhockeyplayer]

The Pujols contract isn't about 6 years from now, because by that time it will either have worked or not worked.

Moreno and the Angels basically went after the LA County market with two huge free agent signings, in part to field a more competitive team, but also to grab as much of the SoCal market as possible. The Dodgers and Padres are both "down" and the Dodgers are in complete limbo, therefore ripe for the picking.

While Pujols probably won't be performing at max dollar value in the second half of his contract, the Angels are betting that they'll be the SoCal baseball team of choice by that time.

 

[ajbraves25]

Finally good to see others post that they don't trust Pujols. I've thought for a few yrs now that he's 3-4 yrs older and quite possibly on "something". I'd like to believe todays athletes are this good, but this guy is in a different solar system. To say his numbers stack up with all-time greats would be a tragic understatement. Maybe he is who he is and clean, if so wow, but I've had my doubts. I remember seeing a SI mock-up of Pujols sitting on steps head in hands. "I'm sorry" was the quote. Funny if who ever did that was telling the future. When I saw him briefly in Peoria he sure didn't look the same as the "kids" there.

~AJ

 

[bigpapiMA32]

Didnt the mets just finish paying Bobby B?

just STARTED in 2011 actually.

Beginning on July 1, 2011, the Mets will pay former player Bobby Bonilla $1.19 million a year for 25 years as part of a buyout of the $5.9 million the team owed him in 2000.

What a country.

DAMN! Interest is a bitch.

 

[ccouch (Chad)]

Every time this Bonilla thing comes up, I'm amazed at how little that people seem to understand the time value of money.

The deferral by Bonilla and the Mets of the $5.9M buyout was nothing more than the Mets selling Bonilla an annuity with an 8% guaranteed annual return. That's it. Eight percent. At the time of the buyout, 8% was pretty close to prevailing market rates on such investments. It was a fair deal. The Mets basically borrowed money from Bonilla at an 8% rate. Could they have done better at the time? Probably not. Could they have done better in the interim? Probably so. And Bonilla is getting a guaranteed 8% percent return on his investment, which would presumably satisfy most of us in our own investments. But he also has no upside above 8%.

Annuities are pretty much just bets. Bonilla is probably winning this one at this point. But he's not winning it to the extent that people think he is.

 

[nosterbor]

Every time this Bonilla thing comes up, I'm amazed at how little that people seem to understand the time value of money.

The deferral by Bonilla and the Mets of the $5.9M buyout was nothing more than the Mets selling Bonilla an annuity with an 8% guaranteed annual return. That's it. Eight percent. At the time of the buyout, 8% was pretty close to prevailing market rates on such investments. It was a fair deal. The Mets basically borrowed money from Bonilla at an 8% rate. Could they have done better at the time? Probably not. Could they have done better in the interim? Probably so. And Bonilla is getting a guaranteed 8% percent return on his investment, which would presumably satisfy most of us in our own investments. But he also has no upside above 8%.

Annuities are pretty much just bets. Bonilla is probably winning this one at this point. But he's not winning it to the extent that people think he is.

And what is Alberts 30 going to be worth in 10 years in todays money? 20? Less? Very smart to set the contract that way.

 

[Benson]

8% guaranteed over the past 4 years is not too shabby.

 

[ccouch (Chad)]

8% guaranteed over the past 4 years is not too shabby.

On average, yes. The S&P has averaged about a 3.6% increase in the past 10 years.

I'm sure that with all of the money he made, this is only part of his investment portfolio and strategy. I think all of us would be happy RIGHT NOW with an 8% guaranteed return on a portion of our investments. But if inflation goes through the roof and/or the stock market follows suit, 8% could look pretty paltry. It is all relative.

 

[Super Mario]

Still nuts to me.