forsberg_us wrote:

Chad said he had a couple of discussions with Pujols during the season and Pujols really wishes he'd stayed.

Ha, wtf did Pujols expect?  He really didnt expect a city like LA to be like STL did he?  Who did he have to compete with in STL?  The ghost of Kurt Warner?  It is funny that Pujols bought the "family" BS and then his family is shunned.  I kind of feel bad for him for having made a bad decision.  I am still glad he didnt take DeWitt's offer.  I am sure he could talk to Angles management and void his contract..lol

The guaranteed money does make it easier to get over, though.

forsberg_us wrote:

Chad said he had a couple of discussions with Pujols during the season and Pujols really wishes he'd stayed.

That's not surprising.  But I'm stickin' to my guns that the reason he left was the psycho-power games with DeWitt and not the money.  It's hard to be happy working for a boss who doesn't treat you as you wish to be treated in any case, but it is especially true when your talent is such that you can write your own ticket and work anywhere you like.

Max wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

Chad said he had a couple of discussions with Pujols during the season and Pujols really wishes he'd stayed.

That's not surprising.  But I'm stickin' to my guns that the reason he left was the psycho-power games with DeWitt and not the money.  It's hard to be happy working for a boss who doesn't treat you as you wish to be treated in any case, but it is especially true when your talent is such that you can write your own ticket and work anywhere you like.

Even if that's true Max, all he did was trade Dewitt for Moreno. It like the old saying, "sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know."  Moreno fed Pujols' ego with a contract he wanted. Showed him "respect," if you will.

Moreno's a businessman, just like Dewitt. The fact that he's different doesn't make him better. Sounds like Pujols may be finding that out the hard way.

forsberg_us wrote:

Max wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

Chad said he had a couple of discussions with Pujols during the season and Pujols really wishes he'd stayed.

That's not surprising.  But I'm stickin' to my guns that the reason he left was the psycho-power games with DeWitt and not the money.  It's hard to be happy working for a boss who doesn't treat you as you wish to be treated in any case, but it is especially true when your talent is such that you can write your own ticket and work anywhere you like.

Even if that's true Max, all he did was trade Dewitt for Moreno. It like the old saying, "sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know."  Moreno fed Pujols' ego with a contract he wanted. Showed him "respect," if you will.

Moreno's a businessman, just like Dewitt. The fact that he's different doesn't make him better. Sounds like Pujols may be finding that out the hard way.

Yeah, and if it all turned out just exactly like that I blame the highly educated businessman and guardian of the Cardinals franchise for not being able to go to his star's house, sit down, and say, "Look Albert, you've been invaluable to the organization and to my ownership group.  I'm sorry if the negotiation process has left some hard feelings but let's put that all behind us.  I want to show you the numbers, and then you and I can sit down and take a long hard look at what's best for Albert Pujols, what's best for the St. Louis Cardinals, and how we can win a ring for each of your fingers," far more than I blame the star who can write his own ticket anywhere for not going to the boss's office and saying, "Thank you, sir, may I have another."

Max wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

The 8-toed foot reference was mine.
I wasn't implying Greinke has eight toes. Merely suggesting a foot with that many toes would be weird. I was just trying not to use a cliche like "Greinke is an odd duck."

8-toed foot, 600 pound elephant . . . you're on a roll, Artie.  And thank goodness you can take some good-natured ribbing better than the rest of us.

I think there was a pitcher for the Marlins a few years ago who had six toes and six fingers on each hand. Alfonseca or something.
But I'll just stick to the cliches from now on.

"But I'll just stick to the cliches from now on."

Nooooo.  I like these.  I'm still getting a kick out of the 600 pound elephant. I have a vision of an emaciated elephant on death's door at some horrible zoo in Dar Es Salam, or some place like that.

Max wrote:

"But I'll just stick to the cliches from now on."

Nooooo.  I like these.  I'm still getting a kick out of the 600 pound elephant. I have a vision of an emaciated elephant on death's door at some horrible zoo in Dar Es Salam, or some place like that.

I was stuck somewhere between a white elephant and a 600-pound gorilla. Maybe I should have gone with white gorilla.

Max wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

Max wrote:

That's not surprising.  But I'm stickin' to my guns that the reason he left was the psycho-power games with DeWitt and not the money.  It's hard to be happy working for a boss who doesn't treat you as you wish to be treated in any case, but it is especially true when your talent is such that you can write your own ticket and work anywhere you like.

Even if that's true Max, all he did was trade Dewitt for Moreno. It like the old saying, "sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know."  Moreno fed Pujols' ego with a contract he wanted. Showed him "respect," if you will.

Moreno's a businessman, just like Dewitt. The fact that he's different doesn't make him better. Sounds like Pujols may be finding that out the hard way.

Yeah, and if it all turned out just exactly like that I blame the highly educated businessman and guardian of the Cardinals franchise for not being able to go to his star's house, sit down, and say, "Look Albert, you've been invaluable to the organization and to my ownership group.  I'm sorry if the negotiation process has left some hard feelings but let's put that all behind us.  I want to show you the numbers, and then you and I can sit down and take a long hard look at what's best for Albert Pujols, what's best for the St. Louis Cardinals, and how we can win a ring for each of your fingers," far more than I blame the star who can write his own ticket anywhere for not going to the boss's office and saying, "Thank you, sir, may I have another."

Of course you do Max.  There's dozens of posts where you've made that clear.  You think Dewitt should have kissed Pujols' ass and loathe that Dewitt didn't treat Pujols like some cherished treasure who was somehow entitled to finish his career in St. Louis. 

Instead Dewitt treated Pujols like any other baseball player, had his people make a determination as to what they felt Pujols was worth going forward (and what the team could live with) and made an offer that reflected those calculations.  As much as you like to state the contrary, Dewitt made an offer that would have allowed Pujols to remain a Cardinal for life on Dewitt's terms.  Pujols chose not to take the offer.  That was his right.  But Pujols isn't a victim.

forsberg_us wrote:

Instead Dewitt treated Pujols like any other baseball player

Really?  If true I will add a smidgen of respect for DeWitt for his consistency.  But I was not aware that he lowballed and water-tortured Morris, Carpenter, Wainwright, Garcia, Molina, etc. on their extensions.  Details of those negotiations would be valuable.

forsberg_us wrote:

As much as you like to state the contrary, Dewitt made an offer that would have allowed Pujols to remain a Cardinal for life on Dewitt's terms.  Pujols chose not to take the offer.  That was his right.  But Pujols isn't a victim.

I state nothing to the contrary.  DeWitt ultimately offered a pile of money and years, but he did so after practically daring Pujols to leave.  Pujols was indeed a victim of very nasty negotiations.

Guess it depend on how you define those terms Max. If by respect and gratitude you mean that Dewitt should have sat down, kissed Pujols' ass and handed him a blank check, then I can think of several reasons why he shouldn't have. Number one on the list being that past performance doesn't ensure future return