JV wrote:

Max wrote:

I wonder if offering something with "wow" factor would get the deal done, say, $150/5 with performance-triggeered options years for another 5 years? (grin)

I actually agree on performance bumps - significant ones - for milestones reached in a Cardinals' uniform. Make an eight/nine-year offer with (as Alz suggested) big, record-setting AAV in the early years, then declining guaranteed money but massive rewards for 550, 600, 650, 700, 725, 750... homers, similar marks in hits, RBI, AB, BA... anything that reflects continued productivity and glory brought to the franchise. That's easy for me to say, but maybe not so simple to put together in a way that satisfies both sides.

I'm actually in favor of this for all sports, but the players union would never agree to a performance based contract schema. Mostly because it allows a team employee (the manager) to adversely hinder the ability of a player to reach said bonuses. Example: If I get 30 starts, I make an extra 450K! Last week of the season, Matheny doesn't play you in favor of a spot start from AAA. It's a shady move, but if you're literally 4 days from the end of the season, the owner will be PISSED if you cost him 450K for no reason.

forsberg_us wrote:

but I smell another one year run and purge in the works.

but that could work in pujols' favor too.  suppose it worked something like this, Marlins finally sweeten the deal to something that Pujols likes, and then inserts a trade clause, allowing trades to only teams that Pujols might want to play for.  Pujols gets his payday and lands with a team he is happy with.

Max wrote:

APRTW wrote:

*"The Cardinals are unlikely to remain wed to a nine-year proposal since last season represented the first installment of the rejected extension."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Bfe6CgYbH8

We're getting way off topic, but as long as you broke the seal on The Jerk ... DIE GAS PUMPER!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tcwz8-EfFYE

Heyman says the Marlins want a decision today or tomorrow. If they publicly withdraw, Lozano will lose all leverage he has with the Cardinals.

I just can't believe Pujols would accept without a NTC. That would be nuts.

tkihshbt wrote:

Heyman says the Marlins want a decision today or tomorrow. If they publicly withdraw, Lozano will lose all leverage he has with the Cardinals.

I just can't believe Pujols would accept without a NTC. That would be nuts.

Oh well, those of us who have been claiming fatigue with the process might have just gotten their wish.  I dread to read the news tomorrow morning.

Strauss seemed to be suggesting that the Cardinals were already contemplating "Plan C" (i.e., the option with no Pujols and with Craig unavailable) and that Carlos Beltran's name had surfaced.  The suggestion was that they could turn the Pujols money into Beltran plus a shortstop and maybe work on a second base upgrade.

windwalker wrote:

I heard this afternoon that the offer was 10/250m, and that theres only a no-trade for the first 5 yrs because after that he'd have 10/5 status again and could veto any deal

My guess is that any 'information' is wild speculation, but if that's true, then I'd say Pujols is gone.  I also don't like fors's post about the Cards having moved to Plan C.

This might all be posturing, but it's pretty ominous.

Last edited by Max (12/06/2011 7:24 pm)

Mozeliak said that he imagines the resolution will come "sooner rather than later."



Read more: http://www.stltoday.com/sports/baseball/professional/cardinal-beat/winter-meetings-cardinals-present-formal-offer-to-pujols/article_22739f34-2020-11e1-befd-001a4bcf6878.html#ixzz1fnw7JjiZ

The Cardinals are not under the impression that they will get an opportunity to match or beat an offer before Pujols' accepts it, and a source with knowledge of Pujols' thinking on the subject said that he does not feel obligated to give the Cardinals a last crack at signing him before he selects another team.



-- Derrick Goold


Read more: http://www.stltoday.com/sports/baseball/professional/cardinal-beat/winter-meetings-cardinals-present-formal-offer-to-pujols/article_22739f34-2020-11e1-befd-001a4bcf6878.html#ixzz1fny8VRR8

Max wrote:

Mozeliak said that he imagines the resolution will come "sooner rather than later."



Read more: http://www.stltoday.com/sports/baseball/professional/cardinal-beat/winter-meetings-cardinals-present-formal-offer-to-pujols/article_22739f34-2020-11e1-befd-001a4bcf6878.html#ixzz1fnw7JjiZ

Why is that a bad thing?

It's either us or the Marlins.  If it's them, it's time to move on and it's better to know now rather than later.

Max wrote:

It's a bad thing because my read of that is that Moz knows his offer isn't as good as that of the Marlins and we'll be saying goodbye to Pujols by tomorrow morning.  That doesn't make you sad?

As for whether it is $220 or $250, I repeat my guess that it is all wild speculation.  Either way, we'll know soon enough if Pujols takes it. 

And as long as we are crossing t's and dotting i's, my read of the Cards current offer, and this is just a guess, is that both years and dollar value went down from last year's offer.  So, if we lose to Florida, this could be another of those situations where our offer for a prime FA was barely nipped by another team that was willing to offer two more years and several tens of millions of dollars more.

You read it much differently than I do.  Not surprising.

But at the end of the day, if we lose Pujols because Moz/Dewitt weren't stupid enough to offer a 32 year old player a 10 year deal, no that won't make me sad.

FWIW- both Rosenthal and Strauss are now tweeting that issues in the Marlins offer have caused them to have to meet with the commissioner's office to determine if the offer complies with the new CBA.  Strauss speculating that the Marlins offer contains significant deferred money.

Ken Rosenthal just tweeted that the Angels are in the hunt.