Max wrote:

except that they don't have pujols's services.

So?

Max wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

Max wrote:

except that they don't have pujols's services.

So?

Think how much money the Red Sox saved by selling Babe Ruth to the Yankees.

That statement might be relevant if the Cardinals hadn't already proven they could win without Pujols or if Pujols was Babe Ruth. Which brings us back to the original question--so?

Max wrote:

The Pujols-less era is judged by one year, the Pujols era by 11.  Let's talk again in 10 years.

I believe that this point in his career, Pujols is similar to or ahead of the Babe, even if you only count his years with the Yankees.  Ruth had absolutely unreal numbers down the stretch compared to most other players; in his 14th season with the Yankees he was still 34/103/.301, .301/.442/1.023.  If Pujols beats those numbers, he will arguably have been the best single offensive player in the history of baseball.  If he doesn't, he'll still be in the top 5-10.

That production, if it happens, is replaceable and for far less than what you wish they were paying Pujols. As to the value to the franchise of bragging rights to the last 10 years of his career, I'd prefer the Cards be a perennial contender than a showcase for one player.

Max wrote:

except that they don't have pujols's services.

.859 or .876

Guess that OPS

Let me ask you a couple of simple questions Max.

- The Angels 10/$240M is 2nd among current contracts in total money and 3rd among current position players in AAV. With that in mind:

- do you think Pujols is presently one of the top 3 position players in the game?
- do you think Pujols' production over the length of the contract will be among the top 3 players in baseball during that time period?

If you answer yes to either or both of those questions, that's fine. It's your opinion and your certainly entitled to it. We simply disagree.

If, however, you answered no to those questions, then let me ask these questions:

- Should the Cardinals have given Pujols a 10 year contract that pays him like a top 3 player?
- If yes, why?

"In Ruth's first 12 seasons with the Yankees, his slash line was .357/.489/.736. Ruth had nearly a hundred more HR and 200 more RBI.  Pujols isn't close, and if Ruth hasn't been a pitcher for 5 seasons, no one in baseball would ever have approached any of his numbers."

OK, then I am wrong about that.  I knew he had at least one offseason in there, something that Pujols never had until this year.