When Albert Pujols makes his decision, we'll have a full column on the outcome. But for now, with his situation up in the air, here are some quick-hit observations written at around 11 a.m. Wednesday:
Reading Time 5 Minutes:
* Honest, this was my initial reaction when I read the Joe Strauss report of the Cardinals offering Pujols up to 10 years and $220 million to Pujols: I can't decide what's crazier: their offer or the fact that Pujols didn't take about 1.3 seconds to immediately jump on it. (I'm thinking he will, unless I misjudged him.)
* It's fascinating to watch baseball people do this annual ritual. They sit and idle for weeks, and then suddenly two or three teams rush in to offer a 32-year-old player (as of Jan. 16) a 10-year, salary-heavy contract that will take him into his early 40s. A player that, while still great, has showed signs of decline, and who will face more of a challenge to stay healthy. It's as if these people never learn. They want to pay for past accomplishments and blissfully disregard comprehensive value assessment of what they can realistically expect for their vast investment over the next decade. They never learn from the past. They're throwing money at Pujols as if it's 2001 instead of 2011.
* For those who always hold tickets for a seat in the Short Attention Span Theater, please permit me to remind you that I am in favor of giving Pujols a huge, record-setting annual salary ... but over five years. I'd like to see Pujols get paid. But if he starts to break down after three or four years ... wow. The long-lasting payroll repercussions will be severe. But this is irrelevant now that multiple teams are willing to go 10 years.
* The Cardinals are pretty much in a no-win situation. This is such an intelligent baseball town, many fans understand the folly of giving such a long-term deal to any 32-year-old, including Pujols. I've been surprised -- and probably shouldn't have been -- that so many have a thoughtful and pragmatic long-range view of the situation. So if Pujols takes the contract, the more analytical fans will conclude that the Cardinals lost their heads. But if Pujols decides to take his talents to South Beach the many Pujols fans, including media sycophants, will howl as if the Cardnals are guilty of some sort of atrocity committed against the Pujols family. So the Cardinals will get blasted from both sides depending on the turnout.
* And if Pujols takes the deal? On a personal level I'm good with that. He's a compelling and entertaining figure. If he plays great for the next decade, it will give me plenty of outstanding material for columns, blogs and radio shows. If he ages rapidly and falls apart, it will give me plenty of outstanding material for columns, blogs and radio shows. There will be drama, either way.
* Obviously there's something in this for the Cardinals if Pujols accepts ... the analytics are one side of this. The return on the investment -- on the field -- is one thing. But as many of you have pointed out, the Cardinals can take advantage of various milestones as Pujols pursues 500 homers, 3,000 hits, team records. The dynamic-pricing ticket model gives the team a great opportunity to cash in as Pujols approaches each landmark accomplishment.
* And yes, the sentimental side of me embraces the idea of Pujols spending his entire career with the Cardinals. It seems appropriate. It seems right ... as long as you can overlook the cost involved and what it means for building a competitive team, then have a ball. I know I will.
* ESPN's Buster Olney points out that Pujols and Matt Holliday were born a day apart. (Holliday) is a day older. Holliday has five years left on his contract. And if Pujols accepts the deal for around $22 million a year, it means that the Cardinals will have close to $40 million a year tied up in these two players in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016. And over those five seasons Pujols and Holliday will be 32, 33, 34, 35, 36.
* A long-term Pujols deal would be easier to absorb if the first five or six years are front-loaded with much larger salaries, with lower salaries on the back end, when his production figures to erode.
* I don't understand the Marlins. Their aroused owner and GM are panting in maniacal pursuit of Pujols, but won't give him a no-trade clause? My goodness, that should be a flashing red warning light to Pujols. The Marlins are already telling him that they want to be able to bail out of the contract at anytime, and trade him as soon as the novelty wears off and the fans stop coming to the new ballpark. Pujols surely is smart enough to understand that. You're going to commit your career to people who already have an escape route in place? Amazing.
* So if the money is reasonably close, why would Pujols pick the Marlins over the Cardinals? Six possible reasons: (1) the desire to be the centerpiece of the Marlins' rebranding as the team that the area's prominent and populous Latino population can fully embrace; (2) he's personally ticked at the Cardinals for some reason; (3) his wife wants to live in South Florida; (4) agent Dan Lozano applies pressure in the desire to get a bigger payday; (5) he wants to take his charitable endeavors to South Florida, where he can do a lot of good -- moreover the Dominican Republic is a lot closer to Miami than STL; (6) no state taxes in FLA. Or maybe he just wants to hang with LeBron.
* Was it possible for the Cardinals to get Pujols at a cheaper rate if they had acted sooner? That's a popular theory, but it doesn't hold up to scrutiny or common sense. In the past I repeatedly criticized the Cardinals' owner for moving too slowly in trying to get a deal done with Pujols. But an interesting thing happened. People in the sport that I trust who weren't directly involved with the Cardinals or Pujols filled me in on some of the details that they picked up from talking to the Cardinals' brass or the agent, Dan Lozano. When the Cardinals approached Lozano a couple of years ago, he told them that the starting point was the Alex Rodriguez deal of 10 years, $275 million, and that it was non-negotiable. Pujols/Lozano weren't interested in doing a deal early unless they could top the A-Rod dollars. Otherwise Pujols would take his chances in free agency. So I'm not sure what the Cardinals were supposed to negotiate, exactly. When the other side takes such a hard line, I'd guess it's rather difficult to have a meaningful discussion. Pujols and Lozano had every right to demand their price, but the Cardinals also had the right to defer and take the chance that Pujols wouldn't get that price on the open market. And he hasn't. It is always important to remember that Lozano/Pujols opted to break off the negotiations in the spring. And once they made that decision, it made all the sense in the world for Pujols/Lozano to wait until he hit the FA market. Until now, there was no reason for the Cardinals to act stupidly by giving Lozano an updated offer that he could shop to other teams. Again, this is common sense.
Thanks for reading ...
-Bernie
