Master Index of Archived Threads


PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

attgig Dec 08 2011 08:02 AM

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/12/a ... +Rumors%29 The Angels are the bridesmaid no more. Albert Pujols will sign with the Angels for ten years and $250-260MM, tweets Yahoo's Tim Brown. He'll receive a full no-trade clause. Pujols decided this morning, writes Brown. If Pujols received more than $252MM, his new deal will be the second-largest in baseball history in both its total and average annual value. Pujols, 32 in January, was drafted by the Cardinals in 1999 in the 13th round and began his career with a staggering 11-year stretch. The first baseman is the active career leader in batting average (.328) and slugging percentage (.617), he's second among active players in career on-base percentage (.421). Pujols owns a Rookie of the Year award and three MVP awards, and has ranked no worse than ninth in the MVP voting in every season of his career. He's been extremely durable, averaging 155 games per season. In 2011, Pujols struggled to meet his lofty offensive standards early, and had a scorching June cut short by a small fracture in his left wrist. He recovered quickly from the injury and hit .318/.375/.579 the rest of the way, though overall his 9.4% walk rate was a career-low. The Cardinals signed Pujols to a long-term deal in 2004, which ended up being a huge bargain at $111MM over eight years. Pujols and the Cardinals failed to find common ground on an extension in February this year, but the contract didn't seem a distraction as the team ended up winning the World Series. The suddenly free-spending Marlins made a competitive bid for Pujols, offering a ten-year deal. They seemingly dropped out after signing Mark Buehrle, and up until Thursday morning, the Cardinals were considered the favorite. I guess they're trading Kendry?

metsmarathon Dec 08 2011 08:04 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

wowzers!

Edgy MD Dec 08 2011 08:08 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Looks like LaRussa jumped ship at the perfect time. Gar, the Batting Stance Guy wrote: Halos alive in Pujols sweepstakes. Pujols-Maicier-Aybar-Callaspo infield would amass however many HRs Pujols hits.

bmfc1 Dec 08 2011 08:15 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Now smug Cardinals fans (sorry for the redundancy) will say "how can he leave the greatest baseball city in America" and "didn't he want to become the greatest Cardinal of all time" and "he's no Stan Musial." Right [u:2xhajz9b]after[/u:2xhajz9b] I wrote that, Will Leitch says: Will Leitch Albert should have retired a Cardinal. It is insane that he won't. But good Lord that's a ridiculous amount of money for a 32 year old 1B. and birdbrained Chris Reed If there was ever any doubt, it has now been erased for good: Stan Musial is and will remain the greatest #Cardinal of all time.

metirish Dec 08 2011 08:17 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

WOW, Cardinal fans must be sick.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 08 2011 08:27 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

This is worse, for them, than losing Reyes is for us. By a LOT.

TransMonk Dec 08 2011 08:30 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Benjamin Grimm wrote: This is worse, for them, than losing Reyes is for us. By a LOT. Although, they did just win a WS. Their second in 6 years. I'm not weeping for any Cardinal fans.

metirish Dec 08 2011 08:31 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Talk in St. Louis is Berkman moving to first and Beltran now an option for RF.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 08 2011 08:32 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Neither am I. The Cards have had a better recent history than we have, but a worse week.

metsmarathon Dec 08 2011 08:36 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

at least their team made a solid run at it, and forced hte winning team to operpay by a silly silly amount. but yeah, who saw the angels coming?! not me.

smg58 Dec 08 2011 08:40 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

An absurd amount of money and years for a player who, while still great, is already starting to decline. The Angels already had a huge logjam at OF/1B/DH, although Hunter and Abreu will be gone in a year.

smg58 Dec 08 2011 08:41 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Benjamin Grimm wrote: This is worse, for them, than losing Reyes is for us. By a LOT. True, Reyes was not the greatest player in the history of our organization.

Edgy MD Dec 08 2011 08:42 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Joan of Arc saw the angels coming.

seawolf17 Dec 08 2011 08:42 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

If this was the good old days when the Mets had money, I'd take Hunter's last year.

attgig Dec 08 2011 08:49 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

seawolf17 wrote: If this was the good old days when the Mets had money, I'd take Hunter's last year. I'm glad it's not the "good old days" where we paid castillo 6.5 and ollie 12 just because...

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 08 2011 08:51 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Who is the Cardinals' 1B now? This is when it's good to have Muffy/Davis/Duda

Frayed Knot Dec 08 2011 08:54 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

metirish wrote: Talk in St. Louis is Berkman moving to first and Beltran now an option for RF. That's makes a lot of sense on both ends. Berkman really shouldn't be in the OF anymore. He did suddenly look lighter and spryer last season but there's only so far you can push that. Angels kind of went stealthy on this like they did on Vlad all those years ago. The rumors of them getting involved just started to surface last night and then this morning ... BAM!!!

Frayed Knot Dec 08 2011 08:58 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

I bet Astros fans are happy to get Albert out of their division ... oh wait!!

metirish Dec 08 2011 09:00 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Frayed Knot wrote: I bet Astros fans are happy to get Albert out of their division ... oh wait!! Ha!

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 08 2011 09:01 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

smg58 wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: This is worse, for them, than losing Reyes is for us. By a LOT. True, Reyes was not the greatest player in the history of our organization. No, just third or fourth. That said, he leaves the Cards and not for the Fish. I can't help smiling over that, and the fact that Hot Stove vultures won't linger over shots of sad Met fans any more.

metirish Dec 08 2011 09:16 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Heyman and the likes need to shut up about Pujols legacy and acting all hurt that he has left St.Louis, the guy is one of the great players all time, not a bad legacy.....so far.

Gwreck Dec 08 2011 09:21 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Benjamin Grimm wrote: This is worse, for them, than losing Reyes is for us. By a LOT. I'm going to guess that the 2 WS Championships in 5 years will dull the pain

Gwreck Dec 08 2011 09:23 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Who is the Cardinals' 1B now? Fielder is available. If the Cardinals had the $$ for Albert available, they could just as easily sign Fielder.

metirish Dec 08 2011 09:39 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Gwreck wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Who is the Cardinals' 1B now? Fielder is available. If the Cardinals had the $$ for Albert available, they could just as easily sign Fielder. makes sense doesn't it and might even work out for the better

Fman99 Dec 08 2011 10:25 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

TransMonk wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: This is worse, for them, than losing Reyes is for us. By a LOT. Although, they did just win a WS. Their second in 6 years. I'm not weeping for any Cardinal fans. Seriously, fuck them in their towel-holes.

Edgy MD Dec 08 2011 10:43 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

I don't know if it's Lennon or Alderson being snarky but David Lennon wrote: Alderson on Pujols' 10-year, $250-million deal. "I hope he got a box of chocolates with that." #mets

Vic Sage Dec 08 2011 10:50 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

A-Rod was younger, at his peak, and still a SS when he got this kind of deal from Texas. And the owner still had to get out from under it 3 years later. this is just an insane deal. When Albert starts playing like a mortal in the coming years (it may even be THIS year), the Angels fans will be incensed and the deal will cripple the team. Such a decline would likely be met with more generosity of spirit by Cards fans who had already benefited from his HOF career, but he will haves banked nothing but bucks with the Angels. frankly, i'm sorry the cards DIDNT get locked into a franchise-crippling arrangement. They would have posed less of an obstacle for the Mets in the long run.

attgig Dec 08 2011 11:26 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Angels moves past few offseasons: 2007 - signed Gary Matthews Jr to a 5 year/50 million dollar contract because he made one great catch in Texas. 2008 - sign Torri Hunter to a 5 year/90 million contract. he's good, but that good? 2009 nothing 2010 - nothing they missed all that spending so: 2011 - traded away Napoli and Rivera for Vernon Wells and take on $80 mil. 2012 - Pujols to 10 year/250 mil. CJ Wilson for 5 year/77 mil. kinda crazy spending by the Angels. they are in a weaker division, and so have won some division titles, but still. they're the yankees of the west - except they give away money to some bad players.

attgig Dec 08 2011 12:02 PM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Pujols received ten years and $254MM from the Angels, but Bob Nightengale of USA Today says the Marlins offered ten years and $275MM. That would have tied Alex Rodriguez for the largest contract guarantee in baseball history. Nightengale says that with incentives and Florida's lack of a state income tax, the deal could have been worth nearly $300MM.

Ashie62 Dec 08 2011 04:00 PM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS! Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 08 2011 11:01 PM

Edgy DC wrote: I don't know if it's Lennon or Alderson being snarky but David Lennon wrote: Alderson on Pujols' 10-year, $250-million deal. "I hope he got a box of chocolates with that." #mets Sandy should stay in the childrens lounge while the adults talk business..

Edgy MD Dec 08 2011 04:51 PM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

You really think he's out of his depth?

metirish Dec 08 2011 05:02 PM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

attgig wrote: Pujols received ten years and $254MM from the Angels, but Bob Nightengale of USA Today says the Marlins offered ten years and $275MM. That would have tied Alex Rodriguez for the largest contract guarantee in baseball history. Nightengale says that with incentives and Florida's lack of a state income tax, the deal could have been worth nearly $300MM. So he's not a spoiled money grabbing prick after all.

smg58 Dec 08 2011 06:41 PM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

I'm guessing the no-trade clause mattered some, especially since they were already far past the amount of money he'd ever be able to spend.

Ashie62 Dec 08 2011 11:00 PM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Edgy DC wrote: You really think he's out of his depth? His checkbook makes him irrelevant. As far as depth, like the shallow end of the pool.

Edgy MD Dec 09 2011 05:34 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

I think recent history has shown clearly that teams with payroll restrictions can excel.

metsguyinmichigan Dec 09 2011 07:16 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Ashie62 wrote: Edgy DC wrote: I don't know if it's Lennon or Alderson being snarky but David Lennon wrote: Alderson on Pujols' 10-year, $250-million deal. "I hope he got a box of chocolates with that." #mets Sandy should stay in the childrens lounge while the adults talk business.. I think when all is said and done, and Jose's contract is proven to hamper the Fish when he's injured, slower and older, Sandy is going to look pretty smart.

metirish Dec 09 2011 07:18 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

I think MGIM it's more the idea that the Mets weren't even involved that irks, not that they wouldn't surpass the Marlins offer which I think most agree is generous.

Edgy MD Dec 09 2011 07:24 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

This goes back to the A-Rod offseason back in the pleistocene days. If the final deal was not right for the Mets, I don't care if they didn't display a more impressive posture. The deal wasn't going to work. Onward. They likely could have gotten a better deal at the top of last season, but they gambled and lost. We've known that a long time now. Did they show Reyes enough love? Did he show them enough love? Bleh. This isn't One Live to Live.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 09 2011 07:39 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Yeah, I have no problem with Sandy's sane and measured approach. As much as I hated to lose Jose, what are the odds that a guy who's been injury prone in his 20's is going to be less injury prone in his 30's?

metsguyinmichigan Dec 09 2011 07:54 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Kind of like Fonzie. I was really upset when we let him go to the Giants. But the guys who can make the decisions without the emotional attachments made the right call.

Edgy MD Dec 09 2011 08:00 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

And by signing Fonzie to a prohibitive long-term contract, Gary Marshall handcuffed himself long-term. And when it came time to rebuild his team after Ron Howard and Donnie Most left, he had to shop bottom-shelf and came up with Ted McGinley and Cathy Silvers, and was forced to move career backups like Scott Baio and Erin Moran into the top of the lineup. That's no way to stay competitive. Wait... what?!

Frayed Knot Dec 09 2011 08:04 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

The difference between the Fonzie non-deal and the Reyes non-deal was that the Reyes decision was clearly dictated by a shrinking payroll mandate where the Fonzie one was more like a gut decision based on two years of declining production and rising injuries. Now whether they were willing to go as high/long as the Marlins did were the restrictions not there we'll never know. Here only 7 of the 32 peeps who answered my quickie poll said they thought the final price too high (with 7 others on the fence) so it's hard to argue that it was, on its face, a bad deal going in. I, personally, had little problem with letting Fonzie walk at the time.

Mets – Willets Point Dec 09 2011 08:09 AM Re: PUJOLS TO ANGELS!

Edgy DC wrote: And by signing Fonzie to a prohibitive long-term contract, Gary Marshall handcuffed himself longterm. And when it came time to rebuild his team after Ron Howard and Donnie Most left, he had to shop bottom shelf and came up with Ted McGinley and Cathy Silvers, and was forced to move career backups like Scott Baio and Erin Moran into the top of the lineup. That's no way to stay competitive. Wait... what?! BOC