If the Cardinals ever reach the point of considering the unthinkable, trading Albert Pujols, Mark Teixeira’s history provides an important lesson.
In my earlier post, “Time to act on the Holliday-Pujols contract FUD”, I concluded with a case why I think the timing is right for the St. Louis Cardinals to push to secure a contract extension for Albert Pujols on the heels of Matt Hollliday’s seven-year, $120 million deal. I said this despite the fact that Pujols is still two seasons away from free agency, an indication that perhaps there should be no urgency.
I also raised the possibility, albeit remote, of trading Pujols at this July’s deadline if it could be determined he would be unsignable. It would be a year and a half prior to his reaching free agency, but the last time the Cardinals could deal their franchise player without his consent. This has significant bargaining value for the organization if needed.
Many disagree with this entire line of thinking for different reasons.
- Some would not consider the notion of voluntarily parting ways with a franchise icon under any circumstances. I can understand that, though I think it is bad business not to thoroughly evaluate every avenue.
- Others feel that since both sides appear to be amenable to a deal, the boat should not be rocked. I can see that point of view, too, but waiting may become increasingly distracting to all involved due to external pressures. Good intentions alone do not always lead to the desired result.
- Yet others suggest Pujols’ re-signing price could actually decline over the next two years due to market, performance or injury factors. This is a real possibility, though one I think is less likely than the alternative. I am also concerned that the closer it gets to Pujols reaching free agency, the chance he ends up testing it may increase.
A first baseman with recent circumstances most similar to Pujols may be the New York Yankees’ Mark Teixeira. Last winter, agent Scott Boras extracted a mammoth commitment for $180 million over eight years for Tex, then a free agent. His $22.5 million annual salary is second only to teammate Alex Rodriguez in all of Major League Baseball.
What makes Teixeira’s story even more fascinating is his trade history. It is unusual for a player of his caliber to be dealt once, let alone twice, yet that is precisely what occurred. Better yet, the trades were one-and-half and a half-year respectively prior to his free agency.
As such, this offers an extraordinary view into the declining trade value of a top talent as free agency neared.
In July 2007, the Texas Rangers, Teixeira’s home since he was taken in the first round of the 2001 draft, dealt him to the Atlanta Braves. Their justification was the feeling they could not afford to keep their first baseman when he would achieve free agency following the 2008 season.
The Rangers’ take was immense – five of Atlanta’s top 20 prospects at the time, including their top three. (An aged journeyman lefty reliever, Ron Mahay, also joined Teixeira in Atlanta.) Three of the five prospects the Rangers received are now established major leaguers, exciting shortstop Elvis Andrus, hard-throwing pitcher Neftali Feliz and catcher Jarrod Saltalamacchia. It is certainly not entirely due to this trade, but it is still worth noting that the Rangers have improved in each of the two seasons since trading Teixeira away.
| Date | Tex time to FA | From | To | With | For | BA team rank |
| July 2007 | 1.5 years | Texas | Atlanta | Ron Mahay | Jarrod Salatamacchia | #1 |
| Elvis Andrus | #2 | |||||
| Matt Harrison | #3 | |||||
| Beau Jones | #14 | |||||
| Neftali Feliz | #18 |
One year later, the Braves found themselves in a similar situation, unable to keep Teixeira. With the first baseman closing in on free agency, their take from the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim was much less. For Teixeira, they received just two players – former top prospect and major leaguer Casey Kotchman plus the Angels’ then-sixth-ranked prospect.
| Date | Tex time to FA | From | To | For | BA team rank |
| July 2008 | .5 years | Atlanta | Angels | Casey Kotchman | MLB #1 2005 |
| Steve Marek | #6 |
With a year-and-a-half of hindsight, this second trade looks even worse than it did at the time. Kotchman has since been flipped twice, to Boston then Seattle, first for a partial season of Adam LaRoche, then for a major league reserve, Bill Hall, and a player to be named later. Kotchman is still struggling to establish himself as a front-line first base starter.
Once the 2008 season ended, Teixeira spurned the Angels for the Yankees and their hefty contract. Los Angeles received two draft picks in compensation. They became the 25th and 40th selections in the 2009 draft.
| Date | From | To | For | Draft position |
| Jan. 2009 | Angels | Yankees | Michael Trout | Rd 1/25th overall |
| Tyler Skaggs | Rd 1/40th overall |
In summary, Teixeira’s market value dropped from five top prospects at 1.5 years out to one major leaguer and a top prospect at .5 years prior to free agency to finally a pair of future draft picks at signing, two players far from being able to contribute at the major league level.
While this may not have a direct relationship to Pujols’ situation with the Cardinals, it does illustrate that in the unlikely situation it is determined that he needs to be dealt, sooner is better than later, lest his trade value take a similar negative trajectory as Teixeira.
I want to reiterate that I am not advocating a trade, but I do believe the Cardinals need to push the Pujols camp into providing them a clear signal as to his signability within whatever long-term financial planning guidelines club officials have established. The Holliday trade opens the door to do this if it hasn’t already been done.
We as the public will likely not be informed of any discussions between the two sides, as it should be. The other edge of that sword is that no news will not be perceived by many as good news as the pages of the calendar slowly flip toward Pujols’ free agency.
If not now, at some point over the next two years, the external noise over Pujols’ future will become so deafening and the repetitive questions will become so distracting that perhaps both sides will just sit down and get the deal done.
Good analysis though it is unclear why the Braves couldn’t get at least equivalent to what Oakland got for Holliday (unless one thinks Mo way over paid).
The Braves tend to be generous in dealing prospects. For one year of JD Drew, the Cards got 6 years of Adam Wainwright, plus 3 of Jason Marquis, and the lefty reliever King. That was a good haul.
Why the Braves then dealt Texeira for a suspect like Casey Kotchman is unclear. They could have instead collected a couple of high draft picks, as the Angels did.
The Braves seem to make poor trade decisions. They should have just held onto to their elite prospects and been patient. If they had done that, they would be in a strong position. Instead, they have tried to compete each year, sacrificing strong prospects, instead of being realistic and patient. As a result, they have become consistently mediocre.
Nice write up Brian. I believe it will take 30 mil a year to sign Albert and if the Cards are hoping for 24 or 25 getting the job done they may need to look into trading him, and fairly quickly.
That being said, I don’t think Mo/BD will be able to pull the trigger on a trade even though I believe as you do that a trade in the near future would bring in a motherload of players/prospects. My contention is that Mo will attempt to get Albert on this home discount everyone keep mentioning but it will never get done. It is my belief that Albert should be paid in the 30-32 mil a year range as he is head and shoulders the best player in the game and has been playing for relative peanuts comparitively speaking.
I would hope that if the Cardinals/Mo/BD are planning on this home town discount and are not willing to pay Albert what he is worth then they should trade him ASAP.
I just can’t see the powers that be in the MLBPA allowing Albert to sign for 22, 23, or even 24 mil a year and I wouldn’t expect Albert to do that either. Albert’s value in dollars to St. Louis may be immeasurable but you can bet he would be worth every penny of whatever he gets in his next contract if it is 32 million bucks a year. I ordinarily wouldn’t feel as strongly about any player holding out for the highest dollar but in Alberts case he is as deserving as any player of that huge contract.
Here is the solution, call Albert and his representatives up and ask for a meeting. As the meeting begins, slide a contract across the table and tell Albert to write down a figure as to what he believes he is worth. And then pay the man. End of negotiations
I don’t think there will be a happy ending if the cards try to lowball Albert.
Now if the cards aren’t willing to go market value for Albert he should be dealt quickly in order to get the maximum number of players.
Now this may not be the best solution for the cards to win in the long run but players like Albert don’t come around every day and one would hate to look back at a Ruthian like trade mistake ala the Red Sox.
Even throwing out Atlanta’s trades entirely, getting two prospects isn’t much for a superstar. Perhaps Michael Trout and Tyler Skaggs will someday become stars. Just as easily, they could become Chris Lambert and Michael Ferris.
Thanks, RC. I think there is a lot of practicality in what you suggest. The $64,000 question is determining Pujols’ true value in this market vs. the market next year vs. in two years. The Pujols camp surely has reasons to wait as long as possible and will probably do so if the Cardinals are passive.
The Cards took an enormous step forward by re-signing Holliday. Some said it could never be done, because Boras never, ever, never, ever re-signs a free agent. This was probabalistically proven, Boras has horns on his head, ete., etc. Mere reality is more complicated. Lohse and now Holliday have re-signed. The Cards will selectively pay a market price for a handful of veterans. Pujols will be another. The Cards did what had to be done with Holliday to show Albert he would not have to win all by himself.
Texeira may be a good player, but is still an imperfect comparison to the Pujols situation. The Cards are famous franchise, the Texas Rangers are not. Has Texeira won MVP awards (and been denied a few he should have won)? I doubt it. Its no big deal for the Rangers, whose owner went into bankruptcy by the way, to dump Texeira. A non-illustrious franchise headed into a financial dumpster cashes in a tradeable asset. The Rangers were fortunate to rope a dope the Braves.
The Cards, on the other hand, are a famous team, the second most WS wins among MLB. Pujols is a titanic figure in Cards history. It would disrespect the franchise to trade him. DeWitt is unlikely to do that. DeWitt should make Pujols a fair offer. And if Albert decides to leave, its better that he take responsibility, than the team.
Do the Cards want to trade a guy who looks skyward every time he lands on home after circling the bases? Or trade a guy who buys fresh beddings for poor kids in lean-tos down in the Dominican? I doubt it.
The Cards are not going to hometown discount and low ball Pujols. The Cards know how to play nice with the Union as good corporate citizens and pay the piper.
Money within baseball is a complicated topic and not easy to understand. The Cards may not be super high rollers, but they are also not cheapskates as regards stars.
If they think Albert is worth $210MM/7 years, then the Cards will offer him that. Some people complained the Cards overpaid Holliday, because there was not an underbidder. The reason there was not another bidder is because other teams knew the Cards would pay Holliday a fair and strong price, so there was no point for them to waste their time bidding. We did not try to chisel Holliday for a “hometown discount”, and we will not be doing that with Pujols either.
The only way I could see the Cards trading Pujols is if they think they simply cannot afford to pay him a fair salary. This would give them a way out, to trade him. They could say he is worth $30MM/yr, but with the economy and with debt payments on the stadium, etc., we cannot afford to pay him what he deserves, so the way to respect him is to trade him.
But I dont think this will happen. Boras has said the Cards have some money at their disposal, given the gross income of the franchise. Pujols is such a huge profile figure, you either have to pay him whatever it takes, or DeWitt should put the team up for sale, because unfit to be managing owner.
Nobody can play the Pujols is greedy card, because fans assume Albert is going to give a ton of money to worthy social causes. And they may well be right.
People who foolishly use words like “never” and “always” will often be proven wrong. Then again, those who use past behavior to help predict the future have a stronger base upon which to stand than those who base their case on emotion or anecdotes.
Though it is totally irrelevant to Pujols, I want to respond to the Boras comments. I actually took the time to pull the data on Boras’ clients’ free agent history. I presented that in an article on Scout.com in July 2008. From 2004 through early 2008, of Boras’ 17 top free agents, 15 of them changed teams. That is fact. Here is the link with the details.
The Cardinals managed to buck that tide with Lohse and Holliday. That still doesn’t change Boras’ MO. As this applies to Pujols, yes the Cardinals have shown a willingness to spend. That is encouraging. Would they pay $30 million times ten years if necessary? No one knows, but if that hypothetical deal was Pujols’ demand, I would call it greedy.
Which is worse – to be known as the franchise that traded Pujols and got something back for him or be known as the franchise that didn’t trade him yet didn’t re-sign and got virtually nothing for him in return.
My guess is the Cards will play around with years/numbers in the 8/25 per range. They will not trade Albert because they now are cocky because they made Boras blink they think they will make Albert and company blink. Time wlll tell if they are right though.
Brian, do you think the CBA expiration at the end of 2011 will effect the negotiations? Rumblings are for less FA compensation and more luxury tax.
Good question about the CBA. I don’t know. I don’t see the FA compensation as a big deal for a player of Pujols’ stature. More luxury tax if enacted could hurt Pujols’ market value. At this point, these are such uncertainties, I don’t know if they could yet be factors in Pujols’ decision whether to delay.
What do others think?
Brian, a lot of agents use the earned right to free agency to extract competiitive bids for their clients, not only Boras. Other agents compete against Boras for the job of representing players. These other agents have to be tough to compete versus Boras.
The Cards and Boras also have a long history. The Cards went way over a slot bonus for the time (1997) to sign Boras client Rick Ankiel, the elite arm of his amateur year group. We met the signing price for Boras client JD Drew (1998), after the Phillies passed in 1997. We traded a lot for Matt Holliday (as if we knew we had a chance to retain him, as has in fact just happenned.) Boras played in the minors for the Cards during the mid-1970s. We tapped 2B Shane Boras in the 2008 draft out of a S. California high school that had never had any kid drafted before; afterwards, Shane’s daddy told a New York Times reporter that he called up the Cards to say thanks.
On this I am pleased to see that we agree: “past behavior can help predict the future.”
I didn’t say “ancient history can help predict the future!”
Carioca, I dont think the Cards think they made Boras blink. I think the Cards were respectful of Matt Holliday and made him a fair and strong offer. They were patient and Boras found out there was not a higher bidder, so he then had grounds to accept the offer. This was just business-like, for this kind of situation, with an elite talent.
The Cards have to do lots of business with Boras and with other agents, year after year, player after player. Negotiation is the name of the game. Given this, you want to earn a reputation as a fair and sincere negotiator. No trying to make anyone blink or look bad, and no feeling cocky, if you arrive at a mutally happy deal. Everyone should celebrate, both player and team.
[...] TheCardinalNationBlog.com wonders how much better Albert Pujols can [...]
Brian, you are deeply knowledgable about some baseball history that is so incredibly ancient, it happenned even before the birth of the real life JumboShrimp. (smiley face)
Would $300MM/10 be “greedy”?
I think its good to steer clear of emotional words like greed.
Albert Pujols, for instance, is reputedly generous toward charitible causes. I do not know enough about them to disbelieve this reputation.
Maybe the reason Albert is such a determined player is he is on a mission to serve others by means of baseball.
DeWitt has said Albert had done his side of the deal. Albert has produced. Henceforth the team and Albert’s agent need to talk about what this translates into, financially. DeWitt and Mo want Pujols to retire as a Cardinal. Holliday thinks they are serious. I dont see any reason to doubt anyone. The dollars will be big. I do not know what they will be. But I dont think Mo is going to be suggesting anybody is greedy.
No one said Mo would call a hypothetical 10/300 demand from Pujols greedy, but I would. You wouldn’t. So be it.
Well, Mo said he was 5 minutes from walking out the door if Boras and Holliday didn’t accept his offer so I’ll bet Mo took that as Boras blinking.
One problem with labelling $300MM/10 years greedy is what about $240MM/8 years? Is the lower number also greedy?
If Holliday getting paid $120MM/7, is he being greedy? Its sure a lot of money, almost $120MM more than Jumbo will be making over the same period. Its hard for someone as poor as myself to decide exactly what is greedy. Where is the tipping point of greed?
jumbo, obviously labeling is a personal decision, but the largest contract in baseball history in terms of years and dollars (by a considerable margin) in a time when the market is supposedly down would have to draw special scrutiny.
There is the 5/10 no-trade factor with Albert. Doesn’t this effectively shorten the horizon compared to Tiexiera, so that we are now one year out not two as far as trade value.
Carioca, some of these stories are theatrical, like pro wrestling antics. They get relayed to the press, for reading by the loyal fan base.
Mo says he was just five minutes from walking right out that door! We fans then think, hooray for Mo, he showed that jerk Boras a thing or two. Mo becomes the hero who saved the day.
Brian, aseball salaries for pinnacle athletes are stratospheric. Its tempting to accept the insanity and think of one huge number as being greedy, whereas another huge number is not greedy. I simply prefer not to go there.
The WWU site has Matt’s autograph at $100. Albert was a lottery for a chance to pay $175.
Jumbo, Mo is not a great thespian and I am not naive.
RC is likely right about Albert and the MLBPA and the $30M it will take. But westy’s point on another thread is key. There are a lot of ways of getting the numbers to say $30M on paper. As an example, what if a 10/300 contract called for the 300 to be paid all at once up front? (reverse deferral?) BDWIII told us the debt service cost on $300M is around $20+M a year. So if the team borrowed the money the cash flow drain would be $20+M a yeaar. Albert would owe the team interest on the part of the $300M recieved but not yet earned. You get the picture. When you are looking at financing a player who would be ‘the franchise’ in any MLB city, you are not constrained by what has been done before.
Carioca, I am not too proud to admit that I am naive. Also while I am not a thespian, I play a role here at the CNB.
The commissioner is making a move in Oakland before he’s done (pro-owners). Yankee/Boston brass lead an obvious collusion………without the Bonds case as a shield…Union will have to come to grips on that, Scotties counting on it………………..Yanks and Sox farm systems are exhausted, LA has problems, Angels have problems. As of yet….Pujols hasn’t shown that he would be productive in an “ego competitive environment”………
Cards are now well on their way to the highly anticipated youth movement…….one way or another.
They won’t be looking to take on big salary in trade for AP. Albert’s agents know this. No one is going to trade for Pujols without the extension in place, so like Tex and the Braves lesson, Albert’s agents really have to get him to FA just to negotiate. Cards would probably have to give him away.
This presents difficulties all around………enough to kill the radical market expansion that could happen with a 300 million dollar contract……….it ain’t gonna happen………that’s what this off season has been about. Teams that compete against Pujols aren’t as intimidated as his followers apparently believe. He is a good player………….the A-Rod market is gone.
Mo: We will go 10/260, the biggest contract ever.
BHSC guy: He is worth more on the market.
Mo: So?
BHSC guy: What?
Mo: He is not on the market.
BHSC guy: He will be.
Mo: In two years.
BHSC guy: So?
Mo: What will he be worth then?
BHSC guy: What?
Mo: We will go 10/260, the biggest contract ever.
Let us set up a scale of justice. On one side we place two years of Albert Pujols squarely in his prime, with Holliday hitting behind him and, depending on the new CBA, throw in two high picks. On the other side of the scale, what does it take to tilt the scale over? My position, it can’t be done.
“Union: Present-day value of Holliday deal $113.6M or $16.2M per yr. Agent: Cards see p-d value as lower. Team uses different discount rate. ”
about 4 hours ago from txt
Ken_Rosenthal
Ken Rosenthal
WC, Tex and Holliday were each traded twice without extensions. AP could, too.
bb, gotta keep Holliday’s present day value under Albert’s $16 million. Also, no-trade protection is far from absolute. It gives the player two things. The ability to: 1) Determine where he will go and 2) Squeeze out some more cash for waiving his right. Once it is clear they are no longer wanted, few players want to remain. Halladay and Peavy are a couple of recent examples. Both had NTCs so could wait until trades suited them.
The Market is changing radically. The world economy is changing radically.
The commissioner want to do a world championship round with the Japanese?
There are likely to be big changes in the Union/Owners contract coming up after 2011 The conservatives aren’t going to want the oval office again for a while with Obama doing everything they want anyway. The climate for record contracts is over.
Do you think Albert’s agents want him to become the poster boy in the upcoming struggle between players and owners. Hell know. The owners created the rapid inflation they desired when they had political control. The have the ticket prices they want, and the concession prices they want, and the TV revenue they want. They will draw back now and start collecting the profits. NY and Boston just showed that they can sacrifice for the benefit of the owners.
Even if Albert hit FA, the Cardinals aren’t out of it with current market forecasts. They might even save money if they go that route and just bid along with everyone else……………………… Pujols would be smart to take 8/200 right now as that is probably as good as he’s ever going to get………if he plays well this year and next that is. BD would go for it because the president for differing salary is already set by the Holiday deal. BD would love to save 4 or 5 mill a year to be paid later.
Brian, I believe Atlanta thought that Tex was a good old boy……………oops! The only possible trade for Albert would be Tex and 30/40 million. Boras would need some greasing to get him to convince Tex to wave his know trade. We would be unbeatable with a switch hitter in the 3 slot. So would the Yankees though.
“Do not underestimate the powers of the commissioner, young Brian”. (Return of the Jedi)
The A-Rod PED’s leak……..also including David Ortiz………shows some control with respect to fairness. He might not be the source….but he knows who it is……..and likely has some influence.
Welcome to the club Westy. I’ve been talking about the market changing all the rules for quite a while. In the old days a team didn’t have to have positive cash flow for the same reason investment real estate didn’t have to. In a market marching ever upward, an asset that doesn’t cash flow is worth having because of the appreciation in value every year. BDW paid $150M for the team and its worth $485M now. He has cleaned up even without 1dollar of positive cash flow. Now its different. Without reliable yearly appreciation, 100% of return on investment has to come from positive cash flow. That’s why Epstien and Cashman got cut off. Moving from the income statement to the balance sheet, if you take on a big debt going out quite a few years, and the appreciation of your assets will cause your equity to go up each year, you are in good shape. But what happens if the value of your asset does not go up? How do you avoid having your debt/equity ratio head south? What happens is you go for 1 or 2 year deals and hope they don’t go sour. If you are careless and allow your GM to sink your D/E ratio, it affects your credit risk, triggers a rate increase in your stadium bonds, or whatever you borrowed to buy the team, and you are then drawn and quartered and nailed to the cross. This is the same basic reason why any kind of business can’t commit to anything long term right now. My guess is its the $300+M increase in the value of the team since purchase, equity in other words, that is somehow being used to allow BDW to do the MH deal and potentially the AP deal. John Henry and George S. would not do that even for Pujols.
The Forbes estimate of the value of a franchise is its sale value, under economic conditions assumed by Forbes. If Forbes estimates $485MM, then maybe this is based on an estimate that the team generates $30MM/yr profit.
DeWitt and company may have bought the Cardinals cheap. Busch may have wanted to sell to owners who would keep the team in St Louis and DeWitt’s group may have been the high bidders on a sweet deal.
In the US economy, there is still potential ahead for continued real estate deflation (residential and commercial alike) and for a surge in inflation (owing to gross overspending by government and Federal Reserve debasing the currency).
Ballpark Village seems to be caught up in that environment. After having said for years construction would begin sooner, rather than later (where have I heard that phrase before?), last month BDWIII said it likely won’t get off the ground in 2010 and he has no idea when it will.
BDWIII is just being honest, which is refreshing. Our leaders are obliged to be positive and to look for silver linings. Who is going to re-elect them, if as honest as BDWIII? But there are some genuine difficulties within today’s economic circumstances and not easy choices about how to ameliorate them.
More happily, we have the escapist world of sports to lift our spirits. There is still some money to be found for a hard-throwing southpaw, Arnoldis Chapman, from Cuba and now a citizen of the Pyrenees state of Andorra. He must be promising, if the Red Sox like him. And he is expensive, if the Red Sox drop out at $15MM. If Chapman lands $23MM from the Blue Jays, they are being aggressive, since this is 8 times what the Cards gave Shelby Miller, 4 times what Porcello got from the Tigers. Chapman helps make Matt Holliday seem a wise investment.
Ballpark Village seems to be caught up in that environment. After having said for years construction would begin sooner, rather than later (where have I heard that phrase before?), last month BDWIII said it likely won’t get off the ground in 2010 and he has no idea when it will.
If you read carefully Brian, the Cardinal Organization has reserved the right to control the bond sale. As with the stadium. They were up to 180 million in subsidies from the city and state. But that isn’t the point. Someone very special want to hold those bonds, and he can’t right now. So they delay………until the time is right.
BDW at least had time to pull the plug. Wonder how Steinbrenner and his bondholders like sitting on a brand new stadium that isn’t going to appreciate in value any time soon. Its probably worth less than it cost. That $100M or so appreciation per year they were counting on to show return on $1.5Billion investment isn’t happening. I’ll bet they wish that $1.5B was sitting in the bank earning interest. Bet they’d trade Tex for a sack of batting practice balls to anybody that would take the contract, A-Rod too.
Taking your above post at face value for a moment, bb, could this be a reason for the Yanks spending less this winter on free agents? More importantly, what would it mean to Pujols’ value if Teixeira’s and A-Rod’s contracts were really worthless junk bonds? Paying Albert $30-32M as RC suggests he is worth seems badly out of phase.
Brian, check out my comment above at 11:20pm. Albert could make $30M on a one year deal. But it would have to be a team that believed signing Albert would increase it’s revenue by $30M. Remember, its all about cash flow in this market. I don’t believe the market will be any better in two years, and nobody is going to sign a 32 year old Albert for a humungous long term deal. Mo should make a reasonable offer, considering that he is uniquely valuable to the Cards, and if he rejects, enjoy his services for two prime years, then talk about again then.
Scott Boras is smart, but he seems to assume that the market will certainly be better next year, which leads me to believe he does not understand why it was bad this year.
Next winter it will be interesting to see what happens with the Beltres of this winter. Here is a quote which I think represents the typical thinking:
“Surprisingly, Beltre turned down three-year, $24MM deals from both Oakland and Philadelphia to play in Boston. If he has a big season, however, he should be able to hit free agency and earn far more than $24MM total over the course of 2010-2012. ‘ (S. Adams, MLBTR)
The assumption is the FA market will be better next year. I don’t claim to know the future, but I can’t understand why that assumption would be made. I’ve heard it said that Mauer will bring out the big money bidders that didn’t show up for Holliday. Really? Why is that? I think that Mauer has unique value to the Twins like Holliday and Pujols have for the Cards, so he will get the big offer from them. There will be no 8/180 bidders for the same reason there were not this year. I have been keeping a good lookout and have seen no reasonable argument as to why next years FA market will be different. The reason is there is no sign the economy and financial markets will be any better. Inertia will keep things stationary until some force sets the markets rolling again. It will not happen just due to the passage of time.
I’m sure Scottie must have told Beltre and Damon and some other guys that the market will be better next year. I wonder if any of them required him to explain why the smart money is on that.
The Boston contract to Beltre shows that Scottie understood the nature of the agreement with the Yanks. It obviously is based on the Luxury tax threshold. The trick option year financing shows that to be true.
The Market will be stronger next year because of the players. Whats Jeter suppose to do, leave NY for a better offer? They will have to pay him to keep the peace. He already makes 20+. When Mauer feels the outdoor cold, he will leave. There are plenty of players to go around. I think teams will conspire to control prices by agreeing to a players destination. That happened with Holiday.
The addition of Holiday seriously changes Pujols options. Add in performance challenges and you are back to players determining there competitive values. The NY teams have opened their stadiums. The economy has affected attendance. NY showed that it could buy a WS. The greatest available wealth for the owners to compete for is in the hands of the players. They have drawn first blood.
I would think the amount of money coming off the books will matter more than the players availible. I don’t know what the money teams have coming off next year. Not enough is my guess.
If Boras was willing to yield to reality with Beltre, maybe BHSC will with Pujols. That guy with the blog at the Belleville paper suggests 30/300.
If it started in 2010 it would give us another $6M for an arm. 
Thinking outside the box is the point I guess.
Here is some encouragement (I think) from the ChiTrib:
“For comparison’s sake, group eight starters in the field, four starting pitchers and the best four relievers from each team. Then evaluate them strictly on their 2009 performance based on Bill James’ measure of Win Shares. The Cardinals are at 230. . . . . . The Brewers are at 180,. . . . . . .The Cubs total a meager 166 . . . .”
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-10-rogers-inside-baseball-jan10,0,1033848.column
Its likely the the BHSC guys see Pujols as a loose cannon. They want him in a large Market…..NY..Boston..LA……..just because it would enhance their endorsement business which no doubt would be much more lucrative than their salary percentage. There prediction of hanky panky by the Cards concerning Albert s elbow, and then proving it on their dime likely has Albert believing everything they say. Who knows how knows how it will end…………BD bought his ticket…. It isn’t going to be his fault.
Did you see the Reds/Walter speculation with Chapman? Now that’s differed money.
Haven’t paid attention to the Chapman thing. I would guess they are looking to turn a profit. So far I haven’t noticed the Reds getting better with Jockety.
Getting fired by Albert would be high profile where ever he’s playing.
I didn’t think anyone even used win shares anymore (everyone uses WAR now days). Interesting though that his crude analysis shows us as the best in the division even without Pujols and better than the Cubs without Pujols or Holliday.
A general question that I dont really have an answer to – how much will Mauer’s contract affect Pujol’s contract?
[...] signed Matt Holliday, I explained the merits of trying to extend Pujols at that time as well. “What if Albert Pujols becomes Mark Teixeira?” – I looked at a comparable situation to see what the Cardinals might land in trade if they [...]