IMO the Cubs are so bad that if the only team Pujols could go to was the Astros and the Cubs I would pick the Astros.  At least they are committed to rebuilding.

APRTW wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

"3b-Ramirez-10million"

Ramirez declined an option for $16 million next year, so he's probably going to cost more than $10 million.
Why the hell are we doing this anyway? Who in the world cares about a team that finished behind the Pirates?

I said I was being the optimistic Cub fan.

I did it because the debate was how bad are the Cub/how bad is their payroll issues/what it would take to fix the team in realationship to signing Pujols.

Well, if that be the case, I would think signing a 32-year-old player to a long term deal with an aav between $20 million-$25 million isn't the way to rebuild. It's not Theo's m.o. anyway. He wanted to get rid of Manny Ramirez's contract almost as soon as he inhereted it.

FWIW- during local radio was interviewing a WGN radio Cubs reporter about Sandberg interviewing with the Cardinals.  After the Sandberg discussion, the local guys asked about Pujols/Cubs and the reporter's take was that he doubted the Cubs even made an offer.  I don't remember the guy's name, and have no idea how much credibility he has, but he was a Cubs beat reporter.  He also seemed fairly knowledgeable on the managerial issue.

Alz, I think you seriously underestimate professional athletes' ability to distinguish between the personal side of their craft and the business side.  I think you probably take it more personal than Pujols does. 

Pujols has raised his family in St. Louis.  He's headquartered a foundation here and opened a restaurant (where they just erected a 10 foot statue of him).  He's got a fan base here that largely adores him.  He's won two world series, played in another, played for the pennant 5 times and played in the post season 2 other times.  The organization may not always go "all in" to bring home a winner, but they've committed enough to get to the playoffs 7 times in his 11 seasons.  When Pujols complained that he needed protection, they traded for and then re-signed Matt Holliday.

Pujols has said repeatedly that the most important thing to him is to collect rings.  The organization has fairly consistently provided him that opportunity.

As for letting him play out the season and risk injury, they offered him a 9 year deal before the season.  Yes, it was below "market," but excuse me if I don't get as worked up as you that Pujols might ONLY receive $300M over the course of his career.

Alittle more on Fors comments about the Cardinals win ways since Pujols has been here.  Pujols has really only been a part of one bad Cardinals team.  When they finished below .500 in 2007.  We were not happy with the 2008 team but they did win 86 games.  I dont remember thinking of 2003 as that bad of a year. Even when the Cardinals are not good they are not the worst.   


I also agree that there is a very good chance that the Cardinals have very little compitition in the Pujols bidding.  Every big money team but the Ranger are not interested or bad fits.  Also Fielder takes away one suiter.

Last edited by APRTW (11/09/2011 6:34 pm)

forsberg_us wrote:

Alz, I think you seriously underestimate professional athletes' ability to distinguish between the personal side of their craft and the business side.  I think you probably take it more personal than Pujols does. 

Pujols has raised his family in St. Louis.  He's headquartered a foundation here and opened a restaurant (where they just erected a 10 foot statue of him).  He's got a fan base here that largely adores him.  He's won two world series, played in another, played for the pennant 5 times and played in the post season 2 other times.  The organization may not always go "all in" to bring home a winner, but they've committed enough to get to the playoffs 7 times in his 11 seasons.  When Pujols complained that he needed protection, they traded for and then re-signed Matt Holliday.

Pujols has said repeatedly that the most important thing to him is to collect rings.  The organization has fairly consistently provided him that opportunity.

As for letting him play out the season and risk injury, they offered him a 9 year deal before the season.  Yes, it was below "market," but excuse me if I don't get as worked up as you that Pujols might ONLY receive $300M over the course of his career.

Hey look a second needless and even inflamatory reply from fors. The only thing that has me worked up is you assuming your opinions are god-sent, and mine could have no possibility of any truth. You want an example of this shit going south? Brett Favre. Sure he dallied and danced on retirement, but in HIS mind he left feeling slighted, and went to a rival as soon as humanly possible to stick it to his old club. So don't sit there with your snot-shit replies and tell me this never happens. Everything we've done for Pujols, Wisconsin did for Favre.

And let's get this straight right now you hypocrit, you just asked me to imagine a professional athletes ability to seperate personal and business, then listed about 900000 personal things you think will make him stay. Practice what you preach, and don't come after me with snotty replies for having an opinion that differs from your pompous bullshit.

Last edited by alz (11/10/2011 8:49 am)

"Alz, I've traveled this road with you before and I'm not doing it again."

forsberg_us wrote:

I think you probably take it more personal than Pujols does. --excuse me if I don't get as worked up as you--

Then leave statements like this, and the general "I'm right, and you can't even possibly assume otherwise" air to your posts in the trash where it belongs. We're entitled to our opinions.

If you want to assume Pujols owes it to the fans to sign for less than he's worth, that's your opinion. I can disagree, and that doesn't matter at all. I "think" Pujols disagrees too however, and if that's true, that matters a ton. I made the opinion that the Cardinals owe it to Pujols to pay market value for the man, you disagreed, and that's totally cool.

Your banter however does everything possible to negate any opinion or situation or minimize any possible bad dealings the Cardinals have done that have made this situation potentially bad. That needs to stop. Take off the fan-boy glasses and understand something.

1) Pujols offered a 5/125 contract, the Cardinals laughed, the price is now higher/longer.
2) Pujols did have to play a contract year, risking injury. NO PLAYER IS EVER HAPPY ABOUT THIS.
3) Pujols did tell the team to fuck off, he wasn't negotiating shit during the season.
4) Pujols did say he wouldn't allow any trade to better the Cardinals at his expense.
5) Pujols has said he will entertain offers from other clubs.
6) Pujols has spoken complimentary about the Cubs.
7) Numerous players have asked him to stay, and he's just laughed and said (at best) it's a discussion for another time.

Take note of this list, none of this is personal, ALL related to the business side of the craft, and all of it spells DOOM for trying to resign Pujols. We'll see what happens, I hope I'm wrong, but if I was the best player in baseball, and this shit was what I got from a team that I'd cut financial BUSINESS breaks to for years, I'd probably put on my most serious business face, and go get every dime I'm entitled to command.

You can't let it die, fine.

"If you want to assume Pujols owes it to the fans to sign for less than he's worth, that's your opinion."

No, actually that's not my opinion at all.  Feel free to find a single post where I said that.

What I have said repeatedly is that I think Pujols will re-sign with St. Louis for less money than someone else will probably offer him because IN HIS OPINION, the move will be in his and his family's best interest.  I fully expect Pujols to do what's best for himself and his family--and for the umpteenth time, let me say it again--HE HAS EVERY RIGHT TO DO EXACTLY THAT AND I WILL NOT CRITICIZE HIM FOR THAT EVEN IF IT MEANS HE SIGNS ELSEWHERE.

Everything on your list is factually accurate, but you are interpreting each of those items in a certain, singular way.  Focusing specifically on the last 5 items, you cite them as evidence that Pujols is pissed at the organization.  In the end YOU MAY BE 100% CORRECT.  On the other hand, maybe they are brilliant negotiating ploys designed to maximize his deal.  Why should he negotiate during the season or agree to a trade?  Why not entertain offers from other clubs?  And letting it leak that he wouldn't mind playing for the Cubs is pure genius.

This may not be a good example, but it's the best I can think of--Company and Union are in heated negotiations over the next collective bargaining agreement.  Company insists it needs concessions that the Union isn't willing to give and the Union threatens to call a strike vote.  One day an employee goes to the copy maching and "accidentally" stumbles upon a flyer advertising that the Company is seeking replacement workers.  The Company doesn't necessarily want a strike and they may not be prepared to hire replacement workers.  But it helps their negotiation position if the UNION THINKS they are.

LET ME SAY THIS AGAIN--YOU MAY BE 100% CORRECT.  But in my opinion (which you do not have to agree with and which may be 100% wrong), I don't think Pujols is going to make the decision on where he plays out his career based on spite.  I think he is smarter than that, and I certainly believe is agent is smart enough to explain all the reasons why that would be a bad idea.  Pujols is going to play where it makes the most sense for him and his family.  In my opinion (again, you don't have to agree and I may be completely wrong), that place will be St. Louis.

Thanks fors, a much more giving post from you.

I must have misread this.
"Yes, it was below "market," but excuse me if I don't get as worked up as you that Pujols might ONLY receive $300M over the course of his career."
It sounded like you only want the Cardinals to resign Pujols if he's underpaid.

I'm not necessarily saying Pujols is PO'd either, I'm just saying that I think he could be. Any positive can be spun to a negative, and vice versa. Only Lorenzo and Pujols know the psyche Albert has going into this, and neither are talking. Who knows what he's going to do?

I'll believe Pujols and the Cardinals want Pujols to stay a Cardinal when the deal is signed. Until then, it's all speculation, and no more valid then either of our opinions. Can we just get to the Winter meetings already?

forsberg_us wrote:

"Fielder played the business end in a business-like manner, and said it was unlikely that Milwaukee could afford him."

Fielder rejected a 5 year, $100M offer from Milwaukee.

He'll get a bigger offer than that.

Max wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

"Fielder played the business end in a business-like manner, and said it was unlikely that Milwaukee could afford him."

Fielder rejected a 5 year, $100M offer from Milwaukee.

He'll get a bigger offer than that.

He will because he had a very good 2011, but he took a risk that he could have been injured or had a really bad season and received less.  The gamble paid off.

I understand, and agree with what you're saying fors. I just don't like the fact that Pujols is out there paraded for anyone to try and grab, and hoping that when the dust settles, we'll still have him in a Cardinal uniform in 2012. I begin to despise every misstep taken along the way. It could be that Albert's mind is nothing more than, "I'm going to make over 22 million a season, I wonder who it's going to be with! I hope it's St. Louis!". I'm jaded as hell about it because of him playing through the contract year, that's almost NEVER a good thing. Most guys just don't do that if they truly want to stay put....

It's better to be surprised then dissappointed right?

IMO Pujols wans to bein St. Louis and doesnt plan on going to another team.  However he doesnt want to leave money on the table.  He benunderpaid and not bitched about it.  I am sue he feels he is owed max dollar.