Here is the environment. The St. Louis Cardinals want Matt Holliday back. All indications are that the outfielder and his agent Scott Boras are heading out into the open market. Boras has made rumblings that he is looking for a Mark Teixeira-kind of contract.
Last winter, the first baseman signed with the Yankees for eight-years, $180 million. That may be a neighborhood in which the Cardinals would not want to live, especially with an Albert Pujols extension that looms even larger still in the planning stages.
From the Cardinals perspective, their direction for next two years seems clear, but things get fuzzy after that. Pujols, who may not be motivated to sign a new offer any time soon, has two years remaining on his current deal.
What happens after 2011?
Manager Tony La Russa is not under contract for 2010, but is expected to return. For at least the last 20 years, he has always signed either two or three-year deals. A new two-year commitment would take La Russa through 2011, like Pujols.
Chris Carpenter is also locked up through 2011, though the club holds a 2012 option. Early in the 2012 season, the ace will turn 37 and has a history of physical problems. Ryan Ludwick will be first-time free agent eligible following the 2011 season, as well.
No matter what happens, the Cardinals 2012 cupboard should not be entirely bare, however. Catcher Yadier Molina and emerging co-ace Adam Wainwright should be around through at least 2012 and 2013, respectively.
Still, in deciding whether or not to sign with St. Louis, could Holliday have concerns about the club’s competitiveness following the 2011 season? Though he would likely never settle for a two-year deal only, there is another possibility – build an early out into a longer-term contract.
It is a strategy Boras has used to his advantage in the recent past.
Boras clients and opting out
During the 2007 World Series, the agent announced that Alex Rodriguez was opting out of his contract with the Yankees due to concerns over the club’s future direction. Of course, it was merely a negotiating ploy to get the New Yorkers to pay more for A-Rod’s services.
It worked to the tune of ten years, $275 million, a new MLB record. It eclipsed Rodriguez’ own ten-year, $252 million deal signed with Texas, of which he completed seven years before tearing it up and starting over.
A year earlier, Boras left the Dodgers high and dry when he sold high on former Cardinals outfielder J.D. Drew. Having led Los Angeles with 100 RBI in 2006, Drew then bailed out of the final three years, $33 million remaining on his five-year, $55 million Dodgers contract.
Dodgers general manager Ned Colletti was understandably angry, stating that Drew had “changed his word”. He also noted that Boras never asked for Drew’s contract to be re-negotiated before they bolted onto the open market.
A free agent again as he was two years earlier, Drew re-emerged as a member of the Boston Red Sox. His new deal was for five years, $70 million.
I have often wondered if Boras’ and Manny Ramirez’ shady act to get Manny out of Boston and into a Dodger uniform wasn’t some kind of payback for the Drew escapade. Even if not, every new contract means a bigger cut for the agent. He never loses – he just wins less on rare occasions.
But back to Holliday and the Cardinals.
Could the wishes of the player, his agent and the club come together to enable a four-, five- or even six-year contract with an out after just two years? Why not?
The slippery slope
If the Cards gave such a deal to Holliday, why would not Albert Pujols expect the same kind of structure? After all, Pujols has been the most vocal of Cardinals players about wanting to ensure the organization fields a competitive team on an ongoing basis.
In fact, maybe Holiday and Pujols could time their perpetual two-year outs to align, regularly holding a pair of big guns to the heads of Cardinals ownership to keep the team strong – or else! La Russa could hang with the bi-annual plan as long as cares to, as well.
Coletti probably acted mad on behalf of the fans, since they would have been disappointed to see Drew exercise his contractual right to become a free agent.
These opt out clauses seem to be becoming routine for highly sought after free agents. Since the Cards want to retain Pujols and Holliday, the Cards are probably going to need to compete for them by offering this kind of benefit. Its too bad for the team, but its what has to be done.
Routine? Who else has this type of clause?
An interesting discussion but two things:
1) Do you think Holliday/Boras would do this to ensure he’s playing for a “competitive team” motive or the financial leverage. Drew didn’t seem to have any competitive team interest. Maybe a clause that Holliday can opt out if team payroll is not in the top half of the league would be a better solution if that is truly the motive.
2) Why would the Cards do this? After seeing the Dodgers get burned I find it highly unlikely they would.
1) Of course Boras/Holliday would want it for their own financial leverage primarily. But their public comments might be to play the “competitive” card, as it aligns with what Albert has already started to do. Consider the doomsday scenario that Pujols bails out, Carp shows his age, TLR and Duncan retire and the team enters a downslide. They might want an escape hatch. The most flexible escape for Boras would be a simple out after x years.
2) The Cards might be willing to do this to have a hedge against committing too high a percentage of their payroll to two superstar players for six or eight years. They know Holliday won’t sign for just two years, but this way they satisfy TLR and Boras and have an out themselves. They might not have to pay both Pujols and Holliday huge salaries indefinitely if the team’s success and revenues do not grow accordingly.
If I was the Cardinals, I would prefer two sure years of Holliday to none, which is what I think could easily happen once the bidding wars begin.
I hadn’t realized that the Drew/Dodgers contract allowed either to bail after two years. In that case, if the Cards could also elect to bail after two, OK. But why would Drew have signed a deal that would have let the Dodgers cut him after two? No buyout money? Strange.
The problem with the financial angle from the Cards standpoint is that you are talking about a player option. If they sign Holliday, to retain him under this scenario, they need to sign Pujols as well. That gives Pujols more leverage (like he needs it !) – do the Cards want to do that?
You say the Cards have an out under this scenario – what is it? Not sign Pujols?
The only scenario under which I can see the Cards doing this is one in which they think they can’t sign Albert and will trade him and still want to remain competitive in the short term.
I don’t give much credence to the theory of TLR/Duncan being important to what players we re-sign/retain. i’m sure they attract some players and repel others just as other people in those positions would do.
CC, Pujols has all the leverage he needs, with or without Holliday.
The Cards’ out would be to approach Boras in two years and say “Scott, we are having trouble with our finances and need to contract. We would not object if you take Holliday back into the market.” Of course, Boras wouldn’t need the team’s permission to do that, but no one wants to break glass unless they have to. The Cardinals’ out is that they would not have to pay Holliday after two years, despite making what would appear to be a five or six-year commitment to him now.
There is risk that they lose both Pujols and Holliday in two years, but when push comes to shove, I believe they will do whatever it takes to keep Albert.
I think you underestimate the strength of TLRs voice. Who do you think pushed to get Holliday in the first place?
bb, the reason a player has a contract like this is that they have confidence in two things. 1) I will continue to play well, making me more desirable in two years than I am today. 2) Market prices will continue to go up, so the same performance will be worth more in two years than it is now.
Look at Albert’s current contract. Seven years, $100 million is a steal at today’s prices.
So as I understand it, if Holliday set the world on fire, he could opt out after two and get more money. But if he went off a cliff, or was injured in a career threatening kind of way, the Cards would be stuck for the duration?
I still don’t see the Cardinal’s “out”. They are going to rely on Scottie’s good graces for him to opt out whether the market dictates that he should or not? If finances for the Cards are bad they may likely be bad for every team in which case Holliday stays put and the Cards are stuck.
I was talking about TLR’s role in acquiring FA’s and retaining potential FA’s. Heck, I said Mo should go out in get Holliday – you sure he wasn’t listening to me
A couple of scenarios where the player opt out could come in to play – Holliday signs below what he would otherwise (almost guaranteeing he takes the opt out) or Holliday gives up his no trade clause insistence in exchange.
The simple way I view it is that the odds are good that Holliday will be worth more in two years than he is now. The Cards may only want Holliday for two years, not six, but an opt-out gives them a chance to minimize their financial commitment to him.
Of course what signal does that give Pujols? That in 2 years we aren’t may not be willing to pay the freight to be competitive? Does that entice him to sign?
Opt out clauses, by the player only, are indicative of his strength. Its bad enough for a team to have to promise 6 years. Its even worse to promise 6 years, but the guy can ask for money from you after two.
If the player gets injured or slumps, the team is still on the hook for the full contract. The player only exercises his option if he does well and looks for a bigger deal. Its a heads I win, tails you lose arrangement. The Cards have not yet given out one of these because they typically do not land elite free agents. However, if they go after Holliday and Pujols, its the new normal for players of this rank.
Ramirez, the 3rd baseman with the Cubs, had an opt out clause and collected millions more, as a result, to stay put. CC Sabathia got a deal like this from the Yankees. AJ Burnett went with Toronto over the Cards, and got an opt out clause that enabled him to cash in again last winter with the Bombers.
Holliday and Pujols are going to get multi year deals, money, and opt out clauses, from some team, because they have sufficient leverage. Maybe they can get opt outs after every season? For elite players, its a seller’s market.
Re Brian’s comment #7 above, yes, if a player decides to leave after two years, the team gains from not having the onus of his salary. This would equally be true for 2012, if Albert leaves after 2011.
Pujols has been under control of the Cards since his rookie year of 2001, so we fans can think of him as a permanent fixture. A bridging deal paid him more money in exchange for the Cards gaining by extending their control over him through 2011. Starting in 2012, its a new ballgame and Albert seems to have a tough agent.
I seem to get bashed for sugar-coating some topics. Accordingly, I will note that celebrating the financial benefits for DeWitt of Holliday or Pujols leaving, solely at their choice, after exercising a player’s option right to free agency provided within a contract, if and when this happens, it might cause pain to the fans and a hullabaloo. I wish to clarify that this lets look on the bright side of things observation did not come from this Shrimp. I can understand the point. Yes, we would liberate budget that could be then invested in other ways. Yet some fans might not find this silver lining to be mollifying, if their hero departs.
There is always the possibility of a big star wearing out his welcome, and losing the fan mollifying bargaining chip. Both Albert and Yadi strike me as being possibly suseptible to that in the future, whereas neither Carp nor Wainy do.
If Albert’s welcome is exhausted for some fans, they will of course be free to choose to enjoy his departure, in the event of its coming to pass. I will not be one of them.
If the Cards cannot meet the price of Albert’s agent, then they may feel obliged to consider the example of the Indians, who traded marvelous players in CC Sabathia and Manny Ramirez. Indians fans are used to this, but it would be a change of pace for the St Louis fan base.
Now there is a P-D article up on the Deportes interview with Albert. He’s in no hurry. It’s ‘in God’s hands’. Hopefully, God likes St. Louis better than the other guys.
http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/commishs-hot-stove/commishs-hot-stove/cardinal-beat-updates/2009/10/cardinals-mvp-pujols-not-desperate-for-extension/
Mark Texiera wanted to play for the Yankees all along. The entire dance was to create a desire by the Yanks to posses and pay him……………Boras pulled it off. That is the market.
The strongest team the Cardinals could field might not have Pujols on it. If you sign Holiday and take the players you might get from Boston or elsewhere in a trade, with Cardinal pitching could be very formidable. That might bother Albert a bit.
This is based on an observation I might offer. Albert and Matt are from very different cultures. Their commonalities are that they are very gracious family men. Other than that, competitively, they have a little oil and water problem. You could count the games that they produced together on one hand. Oklahoma and the Dominican are more distant than a globe shows.
When the Cardinals made a play for Matt last year, I said that his signing in 2010 and it improbability was the sole cause. Things changed mid season……..maybe……… the reasoning might remain unspoken here. Who knows that anyway……………….the Cardinals are a important cog in creating a market interest for Holiday, in the mind of Scottie B. It should be an interesting winter.
In 2004, Pujols had a big season in company with party hearty Jimmy Edmonds from S. California and quiet Scott Rolen from S. Indiana. Three very different cultural roots, a lot of success. Pujols and Holliday can get along with one another, if they get a chance to play together some more.
In the past, Cardinals heroes did not have the economic right to leave. Musial, Dean, Brock, Gibson, they had no earned labor right of free agency. Modern day heroes have either declined (Edmonds), been injured (Rolen), or been willing to take a less than market money (McGwire, Morris’ first 3 year deal).
Its a newish situation for the Cards and their fans to have stars, in their primes, at free agency (Holliday) or nearing it (Pujols).
The opening salvoes have been vollied. DeWitt and Mo tell the press how eager they are to work with Albert to make him a lifetime Cardinal. Albert tells Mo to speak to the Beverly Hills Sports Council about this eagerness. Meanwhile Albert eludes reporters in St Louis and takes a trip home to Santo Domingo. Guess who Albert encountered? Another reporter. For him, they are everywhere, all the time. Albert told this one in Spanish that he is relaxed and not eager to sign an extension. He will trust to the Lord and be guided by Him
These seem like reasonable opening statements, from each side. DeWitt and Mo have expressed their love of Albert to the fans, while Albert has expressed his love of competition and is taking a much needed retreat home.
Meanwhile Dave Diuncan has admitted he will coach again, if TLR is willing to manage again. They are sitting on the fence too. They are not in a rush, just like Albert.
Its going to be a busy off-season for Mo.
Here is why I think Mo has a tough job. Try to put yourself in his position. Can you imagine a job in which your mission is to keep offering money to Boras or the Beverly Hills gang until they say, oh, stop, you are being too generous, Mo, we just cannot accept another million?
How would want to have a job of satisfying insatiable appetites for cash?
At least the McCourts are getting divorced out in Los Angeles. They spent so much money on Manny, Jason Schmidt, Juan Pierre, Furcal, Joe Torre, Orlando Hudson, Scott Boras, and Andruw Jones that the stress must have induced divorce proceedings. Perhaps as a result, the Dodgers may not bid on Matt Holliday.
‘we love you, give us less money’
‘oh, stop, you are being too generous’
Keep it coming Jumbo, you are getting to the good part.
Derrick Goold has an article headlined should the Cards trade Pujols? Its not just WestCoast who wonders about this.
The good news is that the Cards have a lot of budget to throw at Matt Holliday and at Albert Pujols. The soft economy may help curb their value a little, though they will each still be expensive.
It was not a good sign that the Cards could not get it done with Holliday in September. However, they could still get it done in October. By December, its too late. Then it becomes an auction and a big market team will land Holliday. Its Ocyober or no Matt. TLR may sit on the sidelines to watch how that turns out.
I’m glad you’re taking the time to investigate all the permutations of this situation Jumbo. Be sure you’re eating right and getting some exercise.
I had an idea. All this tension created by Tony and Dave, and now Albert. What secret truth do you think God is showing them…..and not us………. to be so wary of Bill DeWitt. He seems like a God fearing man of the community. And how come so many local business people are unhappy about what they say are Billiam’s endless delaying tactic concerning Cardinal Village. Can’t a guy make an honest dollar in this world……..
Common God……..get it together here. And don’t send Michael Moore either.
Westie, you seem in a Village muddle. There was a big bubble within the US economy, pumped up partly by Big Government: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and FDIC deposit insurance which reduced fear of poor loans. After the bubble popped, there has been a significant decline in the value of real estate assets and it may not be over. The last thing downtown StL needs is to add another 1,000 more condos and retail. This is why no Ballpark Village. It has nothing to do with DeWitt, rather owes to bigger events.
TLR could be on stand-by to see what happens with Holliday. He should learn within the next week or two.
Muddle? Bubble? I’m watching the runaway balloon on live Tv Jumbo. They say its a 6yr old boy inside. I’m not so sure he’s alone. This is clearly a byproduct of big government.
Late in September, the Chairman and Mo got their story out to the fan base. 2009 was a successful campaign. They made a great trade to land Matt. They would like him to return next year and are eager to make a deal. It will not be for as much money as Matt could make by going into free agency, but it will be a fair deal.
So everything hinges on Matt and where he chooses to play. The money will be a little higher somewhere else, because other markets are bigger, but it will still be a great deal. We love having him here and hope he feels just as welcome being here.
If Matt decides to move on, then there is an perfect fall guy, Mr. Boras. And the Cardinals take two draft picks and move on toward Plan B or C or whatever.
JS loves you Matt. Stay here and make us proud!!
Don’t worry about saving money for Albert, Matt. Albert can look after himself. Squeeze Mo as hard as you can. Ask for 30 Arby’s franchises to be thrown in. Take DeWitt’s home and have Mo mow your lawn. Get it in the contract. Plus a player’s only option every off-season. Its going to need to be a huge deal, Matt, so Scottie Boras does not lose face signing before free agency.
Would this be insulting to everyone? (Including Pujols)
How about offering Holliday $34 million for 2 years and $75 million over 5 years. Two separate offers.
The two year deal would be the best for the team and might be best for Holliday. I don’t see too many teams going crazy on free agent money this offseason or going crazy with 7 year contracts unless it is for pre-arb youngsters.
All it will take is one other team, chief, and I am positive it is out there.
It seems unusual for the longer term deal to have a lower annual value than the short-term one. I think it is usually the other way around. The annual amounts usually grow in later years, especially for a player in the prime of his career. There were reports that Holliday/Boras turned down four years, $72 million from Colorado one year ago. If they had to accept 5/$75, they would probably consider it a defeat.
I’m not sure that a longer term deal has a greater AAV for a prime player. I’ve heard of offers that were greater AAV for short term but can’t think of anyone that accepted one.
I’m predicting 7 years $131 million guaranteed for Holliday ($18 AAV + $5 million buyout on an 8th year option).
Pujols and Holliday are the same age, turn 30 this winter. Both of them are looking to ring up the biggest haul of their career. They will either want a contract to take them through the end of their career, or one short enough so they can still sign another biggie when its up. That would be the arguement against a 7 year contract for either of them. It would run out at age 36 and they would be looking at getting a new contract to start at age 37. Probably not a scenario either of would care for.
A two year offer for Holliday at $36 million would be a good one, it is true that some owner would offer more but that doesn’t seem worthwhile with the economic downturn but maybe some owners don’t feel that as much as most.
If Pujols keeps up his production for seven more years that would be some heck of a career, I hope he stays a Cardinal.
The way the Phillies hit the Dodgers, and vise versa, it brings up an interesting topic. Hal McRae.
The depth and extension on Ibanez’s Hr was the antithesis of Hals handy work. At this point its meaningless to bring up a topic I have ragged on the whole season, save for this;
Mo singled out Hal as a possible scapegoat or hopefully, with a realistic valuation of his talents, (what ever moves you), for release. Considering that this happened before the Dave announcement, or Tony’s current posturing, McRae has, it appears, to have been stretched across the battle lines between Management and the on field operations crew.
I believe if you watch this situation closely, you might find some clues to the strategies and tactics of the opposing camps.
For me, openly letting Hal go right now, and making healthy offers to FA’s, shows that you are interested in competing and winning. It shows that you are doing the right things with an open hand, no matter the outcome. It also elevates the value of your hitters by pointing to a cause for their poor showing, beyond their apparent native abilities.
If they do not do that, its seems to indicate a concern by management for being seen to be making a provocative gesture into the on field camp of the embattled Tony, Dave and Albert . Thats a real cause for concern. Not because it would be invasive. But because it gives the appearance that Mo?BD are managing the situation, with consideration for the critical time line involved in these processes.
The offer for Holiday should be significant, and will be dated if I’m not mistaken. Boris will be absolutely determined to get Holiday to open free agency. In other words, it has to be tempting enough to get Matt to pressure Boras, with a meaningful deadline that will put some heat on. If that fails, he is likely to be lost. If it was a good offer, there should be nothing to be embarrassed about.
The real question here is; Why does Albert, Tony and Dave still think that everything might not be above board here. Why the Tony posturing, reinforced by the scowling Albert. Why do they think they still need to leverage DeWitt, because it is clear that they do…….. Watch the Hal situation. If nothing more is said, thats trouble. It means he will be fired in the Tony retirement house cleaning, or the worst case scenario, he stays as a relic from a miss handled negotiation or roster battle. His departure is a sign of the health of the organization, no matter the winner.
This Joe Strauss article is interesting:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/cardinals/story/E893D8464F515EAB86257651000F68EE?OpenDocument
He brings in the specter of Albert suddenly electing to go Tommy John.,,,(second opinion),,,,,, Maybe with his own career in mind, and not with the delicate chronology of the necessary Cardinal negotiations this winter. If he elected the surgery, which seems possible right now, the Cards would defiantly be pressured into spending a little extra on their Holiday bid and else where, least the fans react at the box office. He has so many reason in my view for doing this now, (as I said a year ago) just to cool things down, including his own personal issues.
Albert would very reasonabley want to be at his best physically, with no elbow issues on the table, no expanding waistline/limited offseason training issues, etc. when negotiating his next contract. He would also be well served to avoid negotiating after a depressing end of season. The lack of urgency to re-up makes sense. Fix the elbow, resume the Albert-like training regimen, regain form and results at the plate. At the same time the efforts to force MO/BD to field a competitive team hopefully results in a strong 2010 and at the height of the euphoric frenzy send in the suits. Brilliant.
This is the interesting statement BB;
“Paletta and Pujols discussed performing the ligament replacement in tandem with last October’s procedure before Pujols eventually declined.”
Think of the implications of that offer……………… we wouldn’t even be talking about Tony or Holiday if he would have said yes. Knowing how closely Paletta is controlled………….. where were the Cards heading do you think with that offer?
Another goody…………. if Andrews is the second opinion, what was Paletta’s first?
BB, you bring up a whole different debate: what if Albert does have the surgery this year? WCW and I ping-ponged on this in another discussion. I think Pujols aggravated the elbow at the all-star game/festivities. WCW thinks Albert’s slump may have been brought on by mental issues; fatigue, god, doubt, focus, jealousy etc. Frankly I buy into some of those too.
The bottom line is that surgery would mean Albert misses a good chunk of 2010, which begs these questions: do we write off the season and not bother signing Holliday (or Bay) and go for the high draft picks or do we acquiesce, sign Holliday and hope he can keep us in the race until Albert is fit to return? Plus maybe resign Glaus to play 1b until El Hombre is ready to ascend back onto his thrown. Maybe Holliday doesn’t want to take that gamble.
This could be a whole different dynamic to the off season and I’d bet just as much thought is being put into ‘Contingency Plan A’, as is the regular scenario being discussed by everyone.
Axcion, an interesting line of thinking. Still, I don’t think the rest of the Cardinals roster would want to throw in the towel on 2010 if Pujols was out. Another point is that estimates I have heard puf Pujols’ return at mid-season if he has surgery.
Perhaps Brian, JM and BD decide to make it a rebuilding/retooling year, which is not quite throwing in the towel. Let David Freese master 3b; get Colby past the sophmore season; put a combination of Craig, Stavinoha, Jay, Hoffpauir, Greene & Hamilton on the bench and see how they develop. Put two of Garcia, Boggs, McClellan or Hawksworth in the rotation. Hand the closer reigns to Sanchez, Salas, Mulligan or Parise late into the season and see who emerges. I think there are a plethora of options here.
In essense you’re looking to build toward a championship in 2011. Mind you, in the best case scenario the young guys keep us competitive until Albert comes back and then we make mid-season adjustments like we did this year. Strictly the decision of the FO of course. ((: If not then a lot of these guys have experience under their belts and are ready for 2011.
There are a lot of decisions hinging (pun intended) on Albert’s elbow.
P.S. If anyone could return on schedule from surgery it would be Pujols, however, if Carpenter and Glaus’s injuries haven’t taught us not to count them damn chickens to soon then shame of everyone.
I would think TLR/DD would have an opinion on a rebuilding year. I understand the concern about past surgical recovery estimates from the club as I have been among the skeptics all along (check back and read what I said about Glaus last spring, for example). However, TJ surgery is about as routine as any these days. Some kids actually have it when not required just to strengthen their arms. If I knew the truth about how much it really bothered Albert this season and the answer was “considerable”, I would probably be in favor of him getting it done.
Craig can play first.
Albert not being a pitcher, I put it at 6months with 2extra for Rehab. Mid season. Albert, depending on the team situation, he may well push for a trade before the break if his negotiations or player quality weren’t showing. Considering all I said on this subject, both sides might be seeking comfort in that solution.
Cardinals were prepared to ride 4 or 5th place in 2009. Carp survived and Albert got hot. BD’s business plan did not plan for a winner. But he started playing fast and loose……….thats the game. He has a choice now. Tony is waiting as are we. Is he a gamer, or does he get his kicks in the board room? I place no bets.
Reds hired a pitching coach and its not DD. Walt would be among the first to know.
Tony and Albert threated endlessly BB, last year and even early this year. The only consequence in the mind of BD is being exposed across the board concerning all of his activities. Cardinals village subsidies went from 118 million up another 50 million or so in the last six months to a year. There is a remote possibility that he could become hooked on being a sportsman. Don’t count on it.
The same naivety that the American people have displayed concerning the Iraq war, has got to seem a real temptation to a man like BD. There is a fortune to be made off the gullible. He has made St Louis society revolve around Cardinal participation. He may gamble that they will come anyway while he reestablishes payroll precedents.
Carefully though, the public perception of buggery by the dastardly big money on the coasts and their talent pimps must be convincingly spun, lest the ‘them’ in us against them be revealed as miserly management.
Word……. BB
Quite frankly Brian, I don’t think Tony and crew would come back next year if they thought it was going to be a rebuilder. TLR just doesn’t have the patience for that many young players.
It just seems inconceivable that our whole business plan for 2010 would ride on one single elbow ligiment, but there it is. Everyone is awaiting the test results from fans to players to coaches to management to ownership and most importantly, to those who write about the team. Where do we go from here?
My opinion is that unless the ligiment snaps, Albert will delay the surgery indefinitely. Every years totals add to or extend his mounting records. WCW (the world’s formost sceptic on Pujols) would probably agree that Albert does not want to break his streaks. His dominance means everything to him and as a Cardinal fan that’s just fine with me.
With Albert on the sidelines, we need only keep pace with our division rivals and then take full flight when he comes back in July. This means we would have to sign Holliday or Bay for left field for sure and possibly Glaus to play first. A suitable offense is a must, but it could be done with exceptional pitching all year (precedent already set) to go with it.
Geez, I’m already looking forward to next year. You can tell I’m not a Cubs fan!!!
The ligament risk with Albert might be a good reason the Cards shouldn’t consider a 2 year contract with Holiday. Why go “all in” with a high risk that one of your Cards (pun!) won’t hold up.
Albert already had the ligament issue at the start of the season. He then had the best first half of his career, so the ligament was not an issue at the time. Then, something must have happened and he had the worst power slump of his career. Any team looking at commiting $200+M would want to know why. Albert would have to either say its the elbow and I’m getting it fixed, or …….what, exactly? He’s not going to have his Beverly suits in there spewing psycho-babble at the bean counters. Ax is right on, ‘there it is’.