forsberg_us wrote:

"When you are buying the services of a person who has a service that no one else in the world offers,"

Pujols' services aren't unique, and last season several people performed those services at a higher level.

This is more of the reasoning that will not lead to a good, enlightening conversation.

The 9/198 was a fantastic deal. It made him the second richest player and gave him security through 40. Pujols turned that down because he thought he could get better. He was right. Money was the most important thing and he got his wish. Although the way he acted Saturday you'd never believe he thought he made the right call.

Team Pujols is losing the PR war badly. Mrs. Pujols is making it worse and fans are done with him. You can believe DeWitt is running the most intricate campaign that involves the P-D and national scribes but no one else is.

In my opinion, a man who wants to stay might bow out of contract discussions, but wouldn't close them down. That's why he pays 5-10% to his agent, so he can work the details, and come back with a summarized list of contract options. He says yes/no, and gets back for the next session in the batting cage. It really is that simple.

Did Dewitt offer the contract to keep him? Obviously not. Max man, you have to listen to the shit coming from Didi. Stop with the assault on Dewitt for a moment, and get on google, and just listen to the absolute BULLSHIT coming out of this woman's mouth. Dewitt isn't my favorite person right now, but I'm not throwing my hat in with that crazy bitch. Woman is absolutely out of her head.

"finally, the whole point was that DeWitt essentially dared Pujols to test the market, so he did."

Bullshit. Pujols called off the negotiations, not the Cardinals. If anyone was involved in a dare, it was Pujols daring the Cardinals to increase their offer before the deadline he imposed.

forsberg_us wrote:

It's fair to say that Dewitt could have made the offer sooner, but it's unfair to ignore that Pujols arbitrarily cut off discussions once the offer was made.

But DeWitt KNEW about the deadline . . . long in advance.  Pujols did not "cut off discussions once the offer was made" DeWitt made the offer just before the deadline.

Your argument on this score is so disingenuous as to be incredible.

artie_fufkin wrote:

"finally, the whole point was that DeWitt essentially dared Pujols to test the market, so he did."

Bullshit. Pujols called off the negotiations, not the Cardinals. If anyone was involved in a dare, it was Pujols daring the Cardinals to increase their offer before the deadline he imposed.

"called off the negotiations"  et tu, Arte?  Pujols "called off the negotiations" months or years BEFORE the offer was made.  If that can be construed as "called off the negotiations", then we have some wiggle room for discussion.

forsberg_us wrote:

"sometimes we can have a reasonable, enlightening discussion.  but not when you make twisted statements like these. 

first off, pujols had a self-imposed moratorium on discussions during the season (spring training, no?)."

Twisted statements like what?  You figured it out just fine--Pujols imposed the moratorium.  Why?  Because HE wanted to test the market.

So there's not even a slight possibility that Pujols was honest, in that instance, and that he imposed the moratorium because he wanted to play the game without the distraction of negotiations?  You're absolutely sure that Pujols was lying about that?

Max wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

Max wrote:

For what it's worth, my views are dead center, or too conservative, in my circles, with my most unusual opinion being that I give a shit about baseball.  So, the idea that I'm contrarian is humorous to me.  If there's anything unusual about me, it's that I'm an odd sock in baseball fandom, particularly Cardinal Nation.

I try to reach out and show this discussion isn't personal, and I get my hand slapped. Will someone remind me of this snotty reply next time I'm in a good mood?

Oh for crying out loud, I was furthering your response to AP's contention that I am contrarian.  People are getting amazingly sensitive.  My opinion is different from many in this crowd, as you note, but I'm not contrarian.

I didn't suggest you were. I refer to Burwell as a contrarian, and then I wrote your point of view was different than almost everyone else's on the board, which I then wrote was fine by me.
And then you came back with an uptight reply about how you're "dead center" and "too conservative" and that you found "humorous" something I intended to be a peace offering about it being ok to agree to disagree.
It must be a terrible burden to be the smartest person in the room, Max.

Max, to be fair you just ripped out .... what 6 replies? You're turning into a blur of dialogue and it's hard to follow the jumps.

If you want be angry with DeWitt, that's fine, but my notion of Pujols being the better man goes out the window with the comments and statements from his entire camp over the last few days.

You ask why people don't offer their best deal up front? When do they ever? It's a negotiation, and you don't ever make your opening bid your top dollar best. If you don't believe me? Go to Ebay, or buy a car, or buy a house. There's always bidding, offers and counteroffers.

It's like the NFL Lockout. Who was the bad guy? The multi millionaire players with their spoiled "PAY US MORE" attitude, or the billionaires who signed their checks. This is all set in a realm of reality that NONE of us can identify with.

Another side note, and one I just thought about today. What's the difference to Lorenzo from a 9/198 deal with a lot of deferred money, and a 10/254 million with every dime guaranteed? Well, just on 5% the first deal is almost 10 million, and the latter? 12.7 Million. I would assume the man has a lot of money, but for an agent a 3 million dollar difference is significant. Maybe enough to advise Pujols to run for greener pastures. He has 3 million reasons for Pujols to leave (and depending on the structure of agent payments, and deferred money, he may have a lot more reasons), and might have been in his ear.

Truth is, I have no idea what turned Pujols from the "It's not about money" to the "It's about money, but I don't want you to think it's about money" version he morphed into now. Could be everything he said for years was all bullshit, and he was making nice with the media until he could leave. Could be that he priced himself so ridiculously, that the Cardinals were just at the bargaining table so the fans wouldn't riot. Could be Pujols wanted to stay, but Lorenzo morphed into Jafar and corrupted him.

We don't know. I know that DeWitt did make offers that were solid, if a man truly didn't care about the money and it was about winning. I know the Cardinals didn't kill negotiations, under any circumstances. I know that the Cardinals offered him more in a 5 year extension then Pujols originally presented, and not only did Pujols turn it down, he took offense to it (according to his wife). I know that a 10 year deal in some fashion came over to Pujols from the Cardinals, which prevented him from ever having to be a free agent again. He turned that down too. Why? Shit I have no idea, ask him. However, I saw DeWitt cross a lot of "good sense for the business" lines to keep him around, and that makes him leaving a lot easier to take.

If you want to burn DeWitt in effigy, I guess go ahead. I'll agree that DeWitt blundered on the 5/125. So will DeWitt, or he wouldn't have made a 5/130 offer back. Beyond that, I don't think I've seen anything outside the grounds of negotiation that make me think DeWitt low-balled Pujols. He was trying to sign Albert, and still have money to put people around him. That's going to come out to be money far less than Anaheim, and Pujols either understood and took it, or wanted the money and walked. He's in Anaheim, so that answers that question. You really should be angry with Albert. He's just as liable (moreso really) for him leaving for money as DeWitt. He could have been a bigger man, he didn't, so now he's Anaheim's problem. Our "problem" is that we have a serviceable replacement, and money to fill some holes. Sure there's no Pujols star power, but we can field a really great team. We'll see what happens.

Max wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

"sometimes we can have a reasonable, enlightening discussion.  but not when you make twisted statements like these. 

first off, pujols had a self-imposed moratorium on discussions during the season (spring training, no?)."

Twisted statements like what?  You figured it out just fine--Pujols imposed the moratorium.  Why?  Because HE wanted to test the market.

So there's not even a slight possibility that Pujols was honest, in that instance, and that he imposed the moratorium because he wanted to play the game without the distraction of negotiations?  You're absolutely sure that Pujols was lying about that?

Pujols might feel in his own ego driven mind that he isnt at fault or was treated unfairly.  With the information we have and that seems to be enough I dont believe that is the case.

alz wrote:

Truth is, I have no idea what turned Pujols from the "It's not about money" to the "It's about money, but I don't want you to think it's about money" version he morphed into now


We don't know. I know that DeWitt did make offers that were solid, if a man truly didn't care about the money and it was about winning. I know the Cardinals didn't kill negotiations, under any circumstances. I know that the Cardinals offered him more in a 5 year extension then Pujols originally presented, and not only did Pujols turn it down, he took offense to it (according to his wife).

I am going to cherry pick these two points. 

To the first one Pujols said the Angles offer seemed less about business.  That is untrue.  He just like the Angles bussiness more.  Any contract is all bussiness. 

To the second comments it is insulting to me that Pujols was insulted.  A 26 million dollar AAV is insult to play a player to the age of 37?  Not only that, what is the shit he said about admiring Big Mac's decision to walk away from the game, not taking the money to playout years his producting wasnt worth the check?  If that is true why was it so important for him to be paid top dollar untill he is 42?

Honestly, I may be on to something with the Lorenzo angle. Pujols may not care about money, but I'm fairly certain 3 million+ in commissions has a decent effect on his agent.

meh who cares, in the end, Albert is gone, and 11 years of adoring the man as a fan is out the window. Do I think DeWitt mishandled the situation, max? Sure I do. Do I think Albert made the situation unforgiveable and gave DeWitt no chance of redemption? Yes, I actually do. Dewitt was immediate in his reply. They wanted Pujols, but couldn't come together on something that worked for the club. I can buy that, even while holding him accountable. Pujols made a series of moves too though, that were unnecessary, and in my mind prevented the situation from having a positive outcome. He had just as much of a stake in this as DeWitt. In the end, he had long term offers from the Cardinals, and he let his hurt feelings get in the way. It's a business, and it's always been a business. Of course DeWitt is going to lowball him, the same way he dumped Furcals 14 or 16 million dollar option, and resigned him for 2 years at that price. It's how the business goes.

First off, Artie, that avatar change is hilarious! hahaha.

Second, Max, you seriously cannot say Pujols is blameless here. I don't have a problem with you putting the blame on Dewitt, but come on man. Pujols could have been the bigger man here. There were 4 million people that wanted him to stay here (roughly based on stadium attendance alone), and he stuck it to all of them to stick it to Moz/Dewitt. Me, you, tk, fors, artie and the rest of Cardinal nation got to take it in the ass because those two GROUPS could not come together over years of negotiations. I'm not sure how you take all the blame for that, and dump it on one side of the table.

Third, assuming you will admit Pujols had a hand in this debacle, then it's just a question on how much you blame each party. That's relative and opinion, and totally up to you.

I just have a difficult time hearing Pujols cast as a shining angel of god himself who was above error, while Dewitt was offering the apple to Eve, and fucking up mankind forever in the process. It didn't go down like that, both of these pricks sat across the proverbial table with the entirety of Cardinal nation waiting and crossing their fingers. BOTH let us down. In my opinion, Dewitt has the most defensible position. He blew the 5/125 call, tried to make up for it, but couldn't sacrifice the entire franchise to keep Albert. Albert has played here for 11 years, and has watched numerous people play for less to stay here, but somehow couldn't be bothered to take less when the deal was 9/198 million. If your entire persona is "It's not about the money, want to be a Cardinal for life, want the commitment", you can't walk from that offer, no matter when it's made. Albert could have taken it, maybe disliked Dewitt, but did it for Cardinal Nation, who he "loved". Maybe did it because STAN MOTHER FUCKING MUSIAL asked him to stay. Maybe it didn't have to be about Dewitt, and Albert could have really walked the high road that he talked about so often. In my opinion, he could have, and instead of doing it, he gave us a nice middle finger.

So, in my humble opinion, fuck him and his christian ways. Hope he enjoys his money, and I hope he goes to the Hall of Fame as an Angel.