THE WATERCOOLER

Last week we discussed what the Cardinals should offer Albert Pujols in a contract extension. This week, given some of the comments made by Cardinals president Bill DeWitt III and GM John Mozeliak, we get down to brass tacks on the business side of things and ask …

QUESTION: If the Cardinals are serious about making Albert Pujols a Cardinal for life, what kind of dollars and years do you think it will take in his next contract to get it done?

JOE STRAUSS
A sense of deja vu sweeps over me as I feel I’ve answered this question before. It must have been somewhere else. Has to be.

Anyway, Albert’s representation will likely concede little to Alex Rodriguez’s 10-year, $275 million deal that also comes with $30 million in “marketing” bonuses attached. Pujols will be 31 when his current deal expires after the 2011 season and (barring signing an extension beforehand) enter the first year of his new contract at 32. One would think a six-year deal in order, maybe seven, at a minimum $27 million per. One wonders if Albert will play the deferred money game again after deferring without interest for a portion of his current deal. This contract (7 years/$100M) currently leaves him with the game’s 19th-largest contract, but only its 29th highest average annual value. The Cardinals have enjoyed quite a bargain for quite some time. Albert is now the fourth-highest paid first baseman, trailing the less experienced, less celebrated and less complete Ryan Howard. El Hombre may dust off his reminder from the 2004 Winter Warm-Up, uttered a month before agreeing to his current contract: “There are no breaks. This is business.”

DERRICK GOOLD
I essentially asked this question of Cardinals chairman Bill DeWitt Jr. a week ago, and his answer was this: “It will obviously be a lengthy and substantial one.” It goes without saying it will also be unlike any contract the Cardinals have ever offered a player and, quite possibly, unlike any contract out there. There’s no precedent, no blueprint for signing the best player in the game at his peak to a de facto lifetime contract.

There are, as discussed before, some hints. At 25, Alex Rodriguez signed a monstrous 10-year, $252-million deal with Texas. Such salad (read: lettuce, as in green) days are gone. But Rodriguez is currently on a 10-year, $275-million re-tooled contract that pays him $32 million next season and $31 million in 2011, what would be the first year of Pujols’ re-negotiated deal. Rodriguez’s salary steps down from there, opening the window for Pujols to be the highest-paid player in the game by averaging more than $24 million a year. The other indicator that comes from Rodriguez’s deal is the $30 million in bonuses he could receive for home-run milestones such as 714, 755 and the Barry Bonds’ record. Pujols could have that same structure built in — along with a substantial “Triple Crown” bonus.

On the other end of the spectrum is Mark Teixeira’s eight-year, $180-million deal. Teixeira plays the same position, is considered an impact hitter, and would tell you himself that Pujols is in another stratosphere as a hitter. As Pujols’ agent told me recently: “The money is going to be there.” The question will be how the team outfits the roster around Pujols and how inventive the team is with the bonuses and contract offered Pujols.

RICK HUMMEL
If it’s going to be a lifetime deal, then assume that Pujols, coming up on 30 years old, would want that contract to extend eight and possibly 10 years. Let’s say an average of $26 million a year or $260 million for a 10-year deal and nearly $210 million for eight years. Backloaded, of course.

BERNIE MIKLASZ
At least one dollar more than the deal Mark Teixeira received from the Yankees. That contract was 8 years, $180 million.

BRYAN BURWELL
I would have to think that even the most frugal among us would have to assume the fair market for Pujols would begin with a $20 million a year price tag and then work from there. The more difficult thing is going to be determining the length of the deal.

THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: At what point do the Blues fish or cut bait with Alex Pietrangelo? What can a player his age possibly be gaining by sitting in the press box night after night? Practicing with the big boys is great … but wouldn’t he be better off competing in actual games — either with the Blues or back in juniors?

JEREMY RUTHERFORD
The Blues are only playing by the NHL’s rules. Alex Pietrangelo might have been in the lineup a few more times if not for a rule that limits junior hockey players to nine games before the season counts against the club. NHL teams hold a players rights for seven years, and if Pietrangelo plays in 10 games, this year would start the clock.

The rule is in place to protect junior teams from having their players stashed away on an NHL roster, playing every fifth game when they could be playing with their junior team. It backfires when an NHL team believes that a junior player is benefitting more by being in the NHL every day, but the team can’t play him in more than nine games.

Since the Blues wanted Pietrangelo to play at the upcoming World Junior Championships, an invitation he accepted on Wednesday, it would have made NO sense to put him in his 10th game before the tournament. That is a big part of the reason Jonas Junland was called up for Monday’s game and Pietrangelo didn’t play.

Unless there’s an extreme emergency, Pietrangelo won’t play in the five Blues’ games that are left before he heads to Team Canada’s camp, Dec. 12-16. He’s virtually a lock to make the team, which means he’ll be gone until the end of the tournament on Jan. 5. At that time, the Blues will have a better feel for where their team stands, and then they can decide whether to burn a full season toward owning Pietrangelo’s rights. If the Blues are going strong without him, they can send him back to juniors. If they’re struggling, they’ll bring him back and let him play.

Part of the reason the Blues don’t want to send Pietrangelo back to juniors is because his team, the Niagara IceDogs, has a record of 9-16-4 and sits at the bottom of the Ontario Hockey League standings. It might be more appealing to send him back if Niagara could work out a trade with another OHL team, giving Pietrangelo a chance to compete in the playoffs.

The bottom line: Blues fans won’t see Pietrangelo again until at least January and perhaps the rest of the season.

DAN O’NEILL
Pietrangelo has nothing to gain by going back to his junior team at this point. You get better by playing with and/or against players who are better. In addition, the Blues are able to do things strengthening-wise with Pietrangelo, things he needs, even when he isn’t getting game time. They took a similar approach with David Perron in his rookie season. He played very little the first third of the season.

JEFF GORDON
I fear that the Blues are turning him into a head case. Jerking around a kid at this point of his career is not a good idea. Wasting a developmental year is not a good idea. What is the franchise’s plan for him? Is there a plan? With the World Junior Championships looming, he ought to finally get some work. After that, I would send him back to major junior hockey and let him play out the year. Next year he can play in Peoria. Perhaps by 2011 the team will have something. The talent is there, but Alex needs to play harder and play more confidently. A tentative defenseman is a useless defenseman.

KEVIN WHEELER (Host of “Sports Open Line” on KMOX)
I don’t think there’s any reason to “cut bait” with Pietrangelo anytime soon. He’ll be competing for a spot on the Canadian National Junior team this month and if he makes the team for the World Juniors he’ll be facing better competition than he would at Niagra anyway.

As for what he can gain by sitting in the press box, well, he could learn a lot. Erik Johnson has told me a number of times about how much he learned watching from the sidelines while he was hurt last year, so there is something to be said for observational learning. When you throw in the fact that he’s also practicing with NHL players everyday and training with Nelson Ayotte it seems obvious to me that he’s better off not playing here in St. Louis than he would be facing inferior competition back at Niagra.

From where I sit I can’t see any benefit to sending the guy back to Niagra. He’ll learn more here and improve more — as a player and as a professional — than he would facing inferior talent in a less structured environment back in the juniors.

ANDY STRICKLAND (Hockeybuzz.com, KFNS)
An official decision on what to do with Pietrangelo will take place later this month after the upcoming World Junior Championships, where he’ll represent his native Canada. The obvious answer is yes, the kid needs to be playing games. I also understand the enormous opportunity he’s been given to be on an NHL team, and this shouldn’t go unnoticed.

My issue with the whole situation is the fact that he’s here but it comes across as if he’s not part of the team. How do you explain going to Peoria on two separate occasions to fill a roster spot vacated due to injury? He works his butt off everyday in practice and has done everything he’s been asked to do but gets passed over when an opportunity presents itself. The most recent situation saw two D-men go down with injury yet the club still turned to Peoria to find a replacement. This has to be slightly embarrassing for Pietrangelo, who’s only 19 years of age.

This has become a mild distraction for a hockey club that is trying to win some games. It’s perfectly fine if the club doesn’t feel he’s ready to play a vital role in the NHL at this time. It’s quite clear the team doesn’t want to play him in his 10th game and I think releasing him to Canada for the upcoming WJC is the right move. With this being said it’s time to move forward following the tournament. He either plays regularly in the NHL or in the OHL. How are you supposed to truly evaluate a player who sees live action once every two or three weeks?

THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: Of all of our local D-1 college basketball teams, which do you believe may be most poised to take a step forward this year and why?

BERNIE MIKLASZ
Illinois. Bruce Weber’s recruiting has improved, and the talent level has increased, and I believe the Illini will be much better this season. They’re off to a slow start, but that’s because Weber is still trying to figure out what he has in his freshmen, and he’s still tinkering with his rotation. If the juniors on the roster — the core of this team — take charge and play well, Illinois will be a pleasant surprise in the Big Ten.

STU DURANDO
Illinois and Missouri are both in good shape but only time will tell if the Illini can improve on last year’s first-round NCAA Tournament appearance with two freshmen playing major roles. The Tigers will have difficulty taking a “step forward’’ because of their personnel losses and how far they got last year. They can still have a big year but improving on 2008-09 will be difficult. Illinois clearly has better talent than last season, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it will translate to a better record. The progress of D.J. Richardson and Brandon Paul will determine a great deal. They are more likely to break through next season when virtually the entire team will return and will be joined by a top-10 recruiting class.

JEFF GORDON
Illinois. Missouri can only go backward after a 31-victory season that sent DeMarre Carroll, Leo Lyons and Matt Lawrence off to pro careers. SLU could be a lot better than its A-10 preseason ranking — Rick Majerus has done a nice job underselling his young team. But the Illini seem more likely to make a real move.

BRYAN BURWELL
This is the year for Illinois to step into the spotlight after a down year in 2008-09. Missouri won’t be as good as a year ago when they reached the Elite 8, but will advance to the NCAAs again. SLU is still too young, but because they have fallen off the most, it is hard to expect much from them.

KATHLEEN NELSON
It depends on how you’re defining “local” and “forward.” If local means the bi-state area and forward means improvement, I think Missouri State and SIU Carbondale could make the biggest leaps.

Coach Cuonzo Martin is in his second year at Missouri State and has some of his own recruits mixed with guys from Barry Hinson’s era who have bought into his system. The Bears are 5-0, including victories over decent teams from Auburn and Tulsa, without Justin Fuehrmeyer, their senior point guard from Francis Howell Central. They’ll get roughed up in the Valley, like everyone else, but aren’t likely to finsih at the bottom of the heap, as they did last year.

SIUC coach Chris Lowery was down to eight guys by the end of last year, and the Salukis took their lumps by throwing their freshman into the fire. They’re toughened up this year, though, and have played their last couple games with the defensive intensity that Lowery likes to see. He also has two guys who can handle the ball, sophomore Kevin Dillard and freshman Kendal Brown-Surles.

If you’re defining local as SLU, Illinois and Missouri, I’d take SLU at this point. Illinois let two close ones slip away in Vegas. Missouri lost a lot of front-line scoring in Demarre Carroll and Leo Lyons. Laurence Bowers has shown some promise, but he’s playing only 20 minutes a game and hasn’t gotten much help up front. Until the big guys take some of the scoring burden off the perimenter players, Missouri will be a bit one-dimensional. The Billikens have the farthest to go, and they’re young, but I think they’ll have their moments when they’ll shine.

QUESTION: What do you think Cardinals GM John Mozeliak’s top priorities will be at next week’s Winter Meetings?

JOE STRAUSS
At the very least the Cardinals need to establish a tight timeline for when Matt Holliday will reach a decision about his return or exit from St. Louis. The Cardinals are at least temporarily handcuffed, maybe even paralyzed, until they know Holliday’s intentions. One would expect that the Cardinals will not leave Indianapolis before making a contract offer for the left fielder.

JEFF GORDON
Mozeliak needs to add a good-hitting left fielder one way or another. If he can’t keep one of his free agents (Matt Holliday or Mark DeRosa) or sign another one, then he’ll have to trade for this commodity. Failure is not an option on this front. Given the depth of pitching available on the market, he won’t necessarily have to trade to round out his rotation and bullpen. There is plenty to choose from. In the outfield, the pickings are slimmer.

KEVIN WHEELER (Host of “Sports Open Line” on KMOX)
Obviously getting a read on what Matt Holliday is thinking would be priority number one. If he’s nowhere near ready to make a decision I think Mo should move on to “Plan B” so as to not be strung along by Holliday and his agent, Scott Boras. Remember a few years back when Carlos Beltran took the Astros for a ride throughout the offseason, dragging things on and leaving them holding an empty bag when he signed with the Mets? The Cardinals can’t allow that to happen with the Holliday situation.

If they move on from Holliday, which is obviously not a certainty, the priority becomes the combination of a lesser bat and a veteran starting pitcher to slot into the 3rd or 4th spot in the rotation. Ideally that bat would come in the form of an outfielder, though a proven bat for third base could be a fallback option. Unless they’re signing Holliday or Jason Bay the Cards should look for a short-term answer in the outfield — unless the trade market presents an option we’ve not heard discussed yet.

THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: Rams general manager Billy Devaney was quoted in a Post-Dispatch story Sunday as saying it is too early for the team to be prioritizing draft prospects. Sitting at 1-10, it would seem like the team would be looking at the big picture more than just taking a one-week-at-a-time approach. So if they are not yet putting much thought into next year’s draft, what do you think the front office and coaches are looking to see in the final five games?

JIM THOMAS
Actually, the front office and the scouting department ARE putting in a lot of thought and effort into the 2010 draft. But they’re in the information-gathering mode on hundreds and hundreds of players at every position. When you’ve lost 37 of your last 43 games, it’s not like you’ve got one or two needs. The Rams won’t even begin to trim their list of draft-eligible prospects until the scouts come in for a week in mid-December, and at that point, they’ll only winnow obvious character risks. As much as some Rams fans might want to fast-foward in 2010, there’s still one-third of the season to play. Does QB Kyle Boller have a future here? Is Brandon Gibson good enough to compete for a top three spot at WR? Do the Rams have another viable NFL defensive tackle on the roster other than Clifton Ryan? Those are just a few of the things that can change between now and January.

BILL COATS
I think they’ll be doing final evaluations of the roster that they have and cementing areas that they must target in the offseason. As for the draft, you really can’t get a clear picture until the underclassmen declare anyway.

JEFF GORDON
The Rams need a run-stuffing DT, a developmental QB, a big WR, a big and physical CB, two starting OLBs, another young pass-rushing DE, another starting-caliber RB, a passing-down RB, a pass-catching TE and at least one developmental OT. How they prioritize all that will depend on how some of the fill-ins play the last five weeks. The Rams also must assess the free agent market — which is impossible now — and see which players come out of college for the draft. If particular positions are deep in the 2010 draft, the Rams could move that position down the draft board a bit.

RANDOM THOUGHTS

• Of the 47,475 people that were in attendance at yesterday’s Rams-Seahawks game, I hope that not many were first-timers. They say you never get a second chance to make a first impression, and yesterday’s contest was not just a bad Rams’ performance … it was bad football, period. How bad was it? In terms of entertainment value, I preferred the pee-wee league scrimmage that took place at half-time.

• Good for defenseman Jonus Junland getting the call up from Peoria to the Blues. Many Blues fans have been eagerly anticipating Junland’s arrival. However, many Blues fans also have been wondering why former first-round pick Alex Pietrangelo has been sitting in the press box as a healthy scratch night after night. Sure he’s played nine games and the next one he plays for the Blues starts the clock on how long the Blues control his rights. But what message is the team sending by calling up one of its top defensive prospects while they have another one (Pietrangelo) already here and not playing?

• News flash: The Cardinals have re-signed backup catcher Jason LaRue. I’m thinking this year the team is starting with the low-hanging fruit and working its way up the tree.

QUESTION: With only six games remaining and the St. Louis Rams sitting at 1-9, and with QB Marc Bulger injured, why are the Rams not considering Keith Null at QB so they can see what they’ve got there? Rookie QBs play all the time, surely he’s prepared after being with the team since training camp, right?

JIM THOMAS

Apparently this is hard for some to fathom, but Keith Null IS NOT READY. He played at WEST Texas A&M, not Texas A&M. It wasn’t until October that he even felt comfortable taking snaps from center. If you think Marc Bulger had communication and timing issues with Brandon Gibson, what do you think will happen with Null? To borrow from a Rams Park colleague, about the best thing Null has going for him right now is an absence of failure. And whether you’re 1-9 or 9-1 — this is the NFL. You play to win. This is November, not August. And right now, Kyle Boller gives the Rams their best chance to win.

BERNIE MIKLASZ

No. 1, Null is a very raw project. A small-college guy from a spread offense. He needs a lot of time to prep before he can start an NFL game. He’s at a disadvantage compared to other rookie QBs who played in major-college programs and in more pro-style offenses.

No. 2, he has had virtually no practice time at all in running this offense. It would be a disservice to the kid to throw him to the wolves. Why do people want to see him fail at a job before he’s ready to take on that job? What’s the point? Why get him massacred? Irresponsible.

No. 3, the Rams aren’t as high on Null as people seem to think that they are.

BRYAN BURWELL

Unless there is a major medical disaster to Kyle Boller, there is no reason to put a rookie QB who doesn’t forecast as a star into the lineup as a starter. Would I like to see him in for a look-see? Sure, but perhaps the Rams staff has already seen enough of Null and they don’t think he is ready yet.

BILL COATS

Null’s simply not ready. As the No. 3 QB, he’s gotten very few reps in practice since the start of the regular season because Kyle Boller does the scout-team work. It would be unfair to Null to toss him in there now. You would set him up to fail by doing so.

THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: How much should the Cardinals pay to keep Albert Pujols a Cardinal for life?

DERRICK GOOLD
There’s simply scarce precedent for a contract like the one the Cardinals are going to have to construct with Albert Pujols. Anything is possible. The deal could literally become a lifetime contract with so much deferred cash that it’s paying Pujols even after his righthanded-hitting, lefthanded-throwing son A.J. has retired. The deal will have so many loops and clauses and vesting triggers and bonuses that it will read like a Rube Goldberg contraption. There is no blueprint for how to sign the best player in the game in his prime for the rest of his career.

At 25, Alex Rodriguez, a shortstop with 40-40 ability, signed a monstrous 10-year, $252-million deal with Texas. Those oil days are gone and Pujols is five years older and a few positions to the right on the infield. Rodriguez is currently on a 10-year, $275-million re-tooled contract that pays him $32 million next season and $31 million in 2011, what would be the first year of Pujols’ re-negotiated deal. Rodriguez’s salary steps down from there, allowing Pujols to be the highest-paid player in the game if he averages more than $24 million a year from 2012-2017.

The other indicator that comes from Rodriguez’s deal is the $30 million in bonuses he could receive for home-run milestones such as 714, 755 and the Barry Bonds’ record. Pujols could have that same structure built in — along with a substantial “Triple Crown” bonus.

That’s the high end. The low-end contract is another deal getting ink this year: Mark Teixeira’s eight-year, $180-million deal. Teixeira plays the same position, is considered an impact hitter, and would tell you himself that Pujols is in another stratosphere as a hitter. If Scott Boras believes Teixeira’s contract is the target for Matt Holliday, what would he eye for Pujols? It’s going to be fascinating to see how the Cardinals and Pujols’ agents, the Beverly Hills Sports Council, put an unprecedented contract together. Nothing is non-negotiable.

JEFF GORDON

Well, it’s not my money, so this is easy. He has two years left on his current deal, counting the options. I would offer him seven more years, giving him a year more than Mark Texeira got from the Yankees. I would give him $175 million over that span. That is not an A-Rod deal, but it is mammoth by St. Louis standards. And, yes, the Cards can afford to pay him that much and still contend year after year.

BERNIE MIKLASZ

Easy answer: whatever it takes.

KEVIN WHEELER (Host of “Sports Open Line” on KMOX

Whatever it takes. I know that sounds ridiculous, but Albert is an all-time great and you just don’t let those kinds of guys walk away. If that means the richest contract in baseball history, so be it. A-Rod’s contract with the Yankees pays him $275 million over 10 years so something in that neighborhood may be required. That $27.5 million average annual salary comes to about 13% of the Yankees payroll while it would be more than double that percentage compared to the Cardinals payroll.

Since Pujols talks a lot about wanting to be on teams that can compete for spots in the postseason, ideally he’d put his desire to compete ahead of his average annual salary and not make the team pay max money. This is one of those “put your money where your mouth is” deals to me because the only teams who can cough up that kind of contract and still have plenty of money to spend are the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets.

If he wants to be a Cardinal for life and be on competitive teams, Albert would need to be willing to take less than what A-Rod got unless this team is going to be willing to raise the payroll by 15-20 percent. Not sure I see that last part happening.

THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: Most folks believe Albert Pujols will collect his third NL MVP award when the winner is announced tomorrow. However, I think some were surprised last week when neither Chris Carpenter nor Adam Wainwright picked up the NL Cy. Assuming you believe Albert will win the award, what player(s) could jump up and possibly lay claim to this year’s NL MVP?

DERRICK GOOLD
I’m not sure there is a warped case or arcane number out there that can find a player more deserving of the NL MVP. It just doesn’t compute. Prince Fielder probably has the most attractive blend with his NL-best 141 RBIs and those 46 home runs that put him one behind Albert Pujols. Ryan Howard has claimed the MVP before with a strong finish, and it’s possible his 19 home runs and 63 RBIs in the season’s final two months — for a team pushing for a postseason berth — will attract a fair amount of votes this year, too. Those are the two players who could. The question who SHOULD brings a different answer. Hanley Ramirez plays a premium position and won a batting title. That’s an intriguing combination any year, and it’s one that should have won Joe Mauer an AL MVP award long before today. But the real answer to the SHOULD question is found in Philly: Second baseman Chase Utley, the best player the Philadelphia Phillies have had for several years, has seen two teammates win MVPs and it long past his turn. Pujols may be atop a majority of the 32 ballots tomorrow, but Utley should be close behind him.

BERNIE MIKLASZ
Chase Utley would be the obvious second choice. The Phillies’ second baseman is a terrific run producer and defender and he remains ridiculously underappreciated by voters — whether they be writers or the managers and coaches who vote for Gold Gloves.

RICK HUMMEL
There is zero chance that anybody else will win the award. The only question is whether Pujols will receive all 32 first-place votes and, it says here, that he will. The only debate will be who finishes second: Hanley Ramirez, Ryan Howard or Prince Fielder.

KEVIN WHEELER (Host of “Sports Open Line” on KMOX)
There isn’t anyone who can claim the award over Albert and he should get all 32 first-place MVP votes. If anyone other than Albert gets a first-place vote it would be a vote cast with an agenda, in my opinion. Hanley Ramirez, Ryan Howard and Prince Fielder are the other players who seem likely to finish near the top in the MVP race but none of them can lay claim to having had the season Albert did.

Ramirez led the league in hitting but doesn’t have the power numbers to hang with the big boys this year, plus his team was not a playoff contender. Howard and Fielder had the requisite numbers to enter the fray, though Pujols led the Majors with his 1.101 OPS, but other things work against them. Some would argue that Howard isn’t even the MVP of his own team, though I think he is, and Fielder’s team was not in the playoff mix. Toss in the fact that Albert is better than Fielder and Howard in every other aspect of the game (fielding, base running) and it should be a runaway.

THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: The free agency doors have now busted open completely and teams are free to talk dollars and cents with all free agents. Matt Holliday’s agent, Scott Boras, has talked about seeking a Mark Teixeira-type deal (8 years, $180 million) for his client. At the end of the day, regardless of where he ends up, what kind of a contract do you see Holliday getting in terms of years and dollars?

DERRICK GOOLD
It’s no surprise that Boras would set a high bar for the opening bid on his biggest client this season. It’s just doubtful that the market will reach that level, especially when Mark Teixeira played a different (read: less populated) position and found himself in a cash-o-war between baseball’s biggest (spending) rivals, the Yankees and Red Sox. Boras should hope such a situation develops for Holliday. In the meantime, the Alfonso Soriano deal looks like a more likely indicator. Soriano got eight years; Holliday seems tailored for six (with maybe an option and possibly a walk-away in the middle, ala Alex Rodriguez). Soriano’s salary averages $17 million over the life of the contract. Seems realistic to target Holliday, a much better overall hitter than Soriano, for $18 million or slightly more. That fits Holliday for a deal of about six years, $105 million to $120 million. But truly the offer will be whatever the market commands, and right now the Cardinals appear to be the team most interested and most willing to meet the price.

BERNIE MIKLASZ
Unless there’s a surprise, and there is always that possibility, Boras won’t be able to exploit a depressed market for the kind of fantasy deal he envisions. Instead of Teixeira money, he may be more in line for Alfonso Soriano money. And even that’s questionable, considering this is a weak free-agent class, with Holliday being the best of the lot. That said, it only takes one wacko owner or GM to be seduced by Boras.

JEFF GORDON
I believe Boras really wants to top Alfonso Soriano and get his guy about $140 million over eight years. At the moment, the market for that sort of deal doesn’t appear to be there. The Angels don’t like dealing with Boras, so that team appears headed in a different direction. Boras can only hope that Jason Bay gets a big offer from, say, Seattle — thus forcing Boston to buck up for Holliday. I’ll take a wild guess and say that Holliday gets six years and $105 million from somebody.

KEVIN WHEELER (Host of “Sports Open Line” on KMOX)
Six years, $110 million with a couple of mutual options tagged on at the end and big buyouts attached to each. Those options would make the total potential payout roughly $150 million over 8 years. That’s just a hair over $18 million per season which would make Holliday the second-highest paid outfielder in MLB behind Manny Ramirez and just ahead of Torii Hunter, Ichiro Suzuki and Vernon Wells. He’s certainly a better player than Wells and can impact a game like Hunter and Suzuki, albeit in a different way. If the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets are all legitimately involved (not just “interested”) in talks, that number could certainly be a bit higher. But I don’t think he gets quite to the Teixeira level no matter who signs him.

THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: Kurt Warner has not played for the St. Louis Rams since 2003. In fact, after one year with the Giants, he has spent the last five seasons with NFC West rival Arizona. Yet his name still evokes great passion among most Rams’ fans. What do you think it is about Warner that holds such a special place among the fan base here?

JIM THOMAS
Warner’s rise from obscurity to Super Bowl MVP was THE sports story in 1999. The Greatest Show on Turf teams will go down in history as one of the greatest offenses ever. Teams like the Patriots and Colts may have had longer staying power. Great offenses like the Saints come and go. But no team will probably ever duplicate what the Rams did in scoring 500-plus points three years in a row — at least not in a 16-game schedule. But it’s not just what Warner did on the field as triggerman of those offenses, it’s the way he did it — with class, character, and charisma — that makes him a St. Louis sports icon.

BILL COATS
Two Super Bowls . . . one Super Bowl victory . . . two league MVP awards . . . the best pro football St. Louis has ever seen, 1999-2001. Beyond all that, St. Louisans love to embrace athletes who shine off the field, too. Warner certainly fits that bill, with his charity work, his faith, etc. Plus, his continued loyalty to St. Louis resonates here.

JEFF GORDON
One, he is an amazing story. Two, he actually led this star-crossed franchise to two Super Bowls. Warner was the ultimate underdog-made-good story and he never let his storybook success go to his head. He remained committed to helping people and sharing his faith. So not only did he succeed at a very high level, he remained a genuine hero to his fans. Such stories seem rare in our sports world.

KATHLEEN NELSON
First, he was the Super Bowl MVP. He led Rams fans to the promised land.

Second is his underdog backstory. It fits with the perception of St. Louis — from within as well as without — as a scrappy underdog. He had the common touch, which even nonsports fans can relate to, and he didn’t lose it. He led the underdogs and the undervalued to the promised land

Third, his religious and family values resonate with a large portion of the population. He showed that nice guys could finish first. After success in the Super Bowl, he became more committed to his foundation and its work, spending more time, not less, with his coat drive and families with special needs kids. He was an example of giving back, remembering where you came from, and always staying grounded.