Pujols Signs With Angels

[skmsw]

I think they had a number in mind they thought was fair and could still build a team with.

See, we don't agree here. I think they know they could have spent more and still built a team. They just were too scared. Not that that's bad ... they don't like risk. But when you're a mid-market team, a superstar with a track record of health is actually one of the safer investments you can make ... nevertheless, a $250-$300mm liability on the books for ten years is not easy for some businesses to swallow, even if it is expected to pay off.

Again, the only real issue I had with what you were saying was that it sounded like you said they decided 2 years ago Albert would absolutely without a doubt not remain a Cardinal. You've clarified and we agree.

In some ways that *IS* what I am saying. In fact, if you recall ... I had one fleeting moment where I felt like the current administration was showing semblance of a plan, and making the kinds of decisions I thought they should have been. I thought at the time it was a hopeful sign. In hindsight it looks like the moment they realized.

[vinsanity]

Again, the only real issue I had with what you were saying was that it sounded like you said they decided 2 years ago Albert would absolutely without a doubt not remain a Cardinal. You've clarified and we agree.

In some ways that *IS* what I am saying.

Well then. That's where we disagree. The rest is semantics.

[cards2468]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/09/opinion/p ... ?hpt=hp_c2

Sadly I agree with the article. Can we finally admit that he's a dick?

[Fat Strat]

I think they had a number in mind they thought was fair and could still build a team with.

See, we don't agree here. I think they know they could have spent more and still built a team. They just were too scared. Not that that's bad ... they don't like risk. But when you're a mid-market team, a superstar with a track record of health is actually one of the safer investments you can make ... nevertheless, a $250-$300mm liability on the books for ten years is not easy for some businesses to swallow, even if it is expected to pay off.

So, you're saying that they should have accepted that risk and outbid the Angels.

I disagree there. I agree that they probably could have made the money work, but I don't think that is this case the risk was worth the possible reward.

And here's why: I also completely agree that a superstar with a track record of health is one of the safer investments you can make. And there's nothing from stopping us from doing that again with another core player as soon as tomorrow (though more likely next year). In fact, there's nothing stopping us from committing to a superstar with a track record of health two or three times over during the length of Pujols' contract.

We didn't lose the option of doing just what you describe with other players. We lose the option of doing it with Albert Pujols.

Which is why this all goes back to your original final statement -- now it's all on Mo.

[skmsw]

So, you're saying that they should have accepted that risk and outbid the Angels.

If what I've heard is true, we did not have to out-bid the Angels ... the AP camp was requiring $40mm more from outside bidders. SO we had to, in theory, from what I understand but obviously do not and cannot know for sure, guarantee apx $215mm in order to "match" LAAA's $255mm.

But anyway -- I'm not saying they should or should not have. I'm just saying that I think it is reasonable to conclude that they knew probably two years ago that they were not keeping him, because they had already decided they were not carrying such a large, long contract on their enterprise.

[AdmiralKird]

So the Cardinals set a benchmark, other teams were informed of that mark, then the Cardinals were not allowed to counter?

Either way, ESPN should get the truth and shoot a two hour movie of the entire contract saga in the past few days in lei of not being able to televise an announcement press conference. It would be way more entertaining.

6,000th post.

[sighyoung]

So the Cardinals set a benchmark, other teams were informed of that mark, then the Cardinals were not allowed to counter?

Either way, ESPN should get the truth and shoot a two hour movie of the entire contract saga in the past few days in lei of not being able to televise an announcement press conference. It would be way more entertaining.

6,000th post.

Better yet, hire David Mamet, so that Lozano and Mozeliak say variations of "[expletive] you!" for two hours.

[TimeForGuinness]

Don't know if this was posted yet

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYQMs6i1 ... e=youtu.be][/youtube]

[Molly]

So the Cardinals set a benchmark, other teams were informed of that mark, then the Cardinals were not allowed to counter?

Either way, ESPN should get the truth and shoot a two hour movie of the entire contract saga in the past few days in lei of not being able to televise an announcement press conference. It would be way more entertaining.

6,000th post.

Better yet, hire David Mamet, so that Lozano and Mozeliak say variations of "[expletive] you!" for two hours.

Will hookers be involved?

[heyzeus]

So the Cardinals set a benchmark, other teams were informed of that mark, then the Cardinals were not allowed to counter?

Either way, ESPN should get the truth and shoot a two hour movie of the entire contract saga in the past few days in lei of not being able to televise an announcement press conference. It would be way more entertaining.

6,000th post.

Better yet, hire David Mamet, so that Lozano and Mozeliak say variations of "[expletive] you!" for two hours.

First prize is Albert Pujols. Second prize is a set of steak knives. Third prize is you're fired.