User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.5746 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
So the 2012 Cardinals will consist of Matt Holliday, Albert Pujols, and 23 guys making the minimum, right?
I'd say it's about the AAV he should've expected, and for 2 years more.
Indeed. Not that I'd expect it to turn out that poorly. Or as poorly as Soriano's deal.
WEll, given the Texeira deal, I think he expected at least $20M p.a. Statistically he's been as goo as Tex.
PS. I'm not saying that's the only reason he'd have a no-trade clause; moving sucks. I'm just surprised the Yankees didn't get him.
I can't believe the Cardinals would have even considered signing Holliday if they weren't pretty damned sure they'd have enough to extend Pujols--hence my opening comment.
EDIT: Also, I'm very happy to have been wrong about the Yankees and Holliday. Damon's a solid two wins worse.
That's a contender in the NL Central.
The Cardinals' point of view probably includes a fair dose of 'we need to do this or else Pujols will decide we're not trying to win, and walk.'
Only because the Yankees are holding LF open for Mauer :>
Long as he's not as goo as Prince Fielder.
Weren't there rumors going around that Holliday desperately wanted to play for the Yankees? It's actually likely just the opposite--Holliday doesn't want to get traded anywhere BUT New York. Therefore, the no trade clause.
Hell, you could probably say that about Pujols and 24 guys at the minimum.
The Cardinals' point of view probably includes a fair dose of 'we need to do this or else Pujols will decide we're not trying to win, and walk.'
That's the conundrum.
Not that athletes won't always want to play for winners if the opportunity presents itself, but the Pujols-era Cardinals haven't exactly been starved for winners.
Kyle Lohse is signed for 2012. Cardinals hold 2012 options on Carpenter, Wainwright and Molina.
I was being flip, of course.
Yeah, because of Pujols. I would imagine Pujols would rather not spend the rest of his career surrounded by scrubs, and the Mets/Angels/Red Sox will almost certainly be able to offer more money than the Cardinals will. There's probably a legitimate feeling from the Cardinals that they need at least one other star on the team to keep Pujols happy.
Yep. It's called bargaining leverage. Love me? Love my contract extension #############!
Concur. Though clearly the length is more the issue than the annual $.
I do think I was right about which moves would be in the Yankees' best interest, and the Yanks not signing Holliday makes it notably more likely that the Sox will take the AL East next year. So that's good.
The Yankees last year needed a bat. They needed a first baseman. Teixeira was talking with the Red Sox. Those were three reasons he made sense.
This year they don't need another bat, they don't *need* another outfielder, and the Red Sox weren't after Holliday. And next offseason there are potentially bigger free agents who fit bigger needs. No reason to lock yourself into 7 seasons of someone who you don't need, and who, while very good, isn't necessarily an elite player.
My first thought was he really did not enjoy being traded to Oakland.
This. Mauer, Jeter, Rivera, Beckett, Cliff Lee, Brandon Webb, Carl Crawford ... I think the Yankees are wisely saving their bullets for next winter.
Seriously. It seems like the Cards bid against themselves. I guess the Cards didn't want to get into a prolonged staring match with Boras like the Yankees are doing with Damon.
They bid against Holliday's threshold for punting the whole long-term contract idea this off-season and go to the Yankees on a 1/18 contract.
What I liked about the Tex signing last year is it gave me hope that there was no way the Yankees could sign Pujols after 2011... Thereby also keeping alive my faint hopes that the Red Sox somehow land him (moving Youkilis back to 3B). Dare to dream...
for at least three years of the contract it's probably acceptable, but the last portions is going to be painful. And yes, this means that any deal that is within an acceptable(30per or less) range, means the Cards keep Pujols.
personally, I would have let him walk, not worth that much to be honest, but I guess the implication is that the team are trying to compete year in, year out.....not sure the message was necessary
Hope they're stockpiling the lighter fluid. That'll be cool to watch.
No; yes. I'd expect them to re-sign Pujols at a fairly steep discount... probably pretty similar to Teixeira's contract, just slightly more than that for appearance sake. The 8/200 neighborhood.
I think Albert will stay with the Cardinals, but I'd guess 9/270.
There, that's my analysis.
.... wow.
I realize he took a hometown discount last time but this seems like a little much. A-Rod is getting what, $27.5 million per year for ten years? I don't see anyone approaching that one, even Albert. Not for the Cardinals, at least. If I had to hazard a guess now, I'd guess 8/215 for an average around $27.
He can move to 1st when Pujols leaves...
Actually not true. He was just the 9th player* to ink a 9 figure deal - and he was 3 full seasons away from free agency
*after Brown, Griffey, A-Rod, Jeter, Manny, Hampton, Giambi, Helton
There is nary a hint of a 'discount' anywhere in the coverage of the signing
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/4201009/
That being said, I think #59 is on the money with 200/8...
I like the way you think.
In my opinion, the thing that made the deal was the giant attendance lift that Holliday provided last year. Before Matt, the team was leaving several thousand seats unsold every game. As soon as they got him they sold out every game, not to mention that they ran away with the division. Bill De Witt (the lead owner) said at the time that the fans had just sent him a message, and he had been alert enough to read it. I guess he meant that. I also assume that merchandising revenue went way up, too, but I have no data on that.
As a fan, I'm very very happy. The core of the lineup is now Schumacher leading off, whoever is hitting batting second, followed by Pujols, Holliday, and Ludwick. If Colby Rasmus proves able to hit, he goes into the second slot. That's certainly enough offense, even if Yadier Molina goes back to hitting .270, which is what I expect, and neither the shortstop nor third baseman can hit, which is unlikely.
One other factor: As much as I like Rick Ankiel's drive to succeed, and his power, arm and speed, he has no idea where the strike zone might be, he's very old for his years of service as a position player, and he (and/or Boras) want "starting center fielder" money AND a job guarantee. Signing Matt gives the Cards the freedom to let Rick go, rather than overpay him and overplay him. That savings counts against Matt's contract. Therefore, the Cards are getting a discount on Matt, just because they aren't frozen into keeping Rick for lack of any other starting outfielder.
- Brock Hanke (Cardinal fan since 1954)
Pujols 30-31
Holliday 30-31
Carpenter 35-36
Wainwright 28-29
Molina 27-28
Rasmus 23-24
agreed, then add in the lohse contract, the developing brendan ryan and otherrs etc......
c molina
1b pujols
2b schumaker
ss ryan
3b???????? we have options but really this is the only debate out there going into next season
rf ludwick
cf rasmus
lf holliday
1 carpenter
2 wainwright
3 penny
4 lohse
5 typical team debate.....
as of right now, is there any debate on the quality of the team going into the season?
i'll take even odds right now that the cards make it to the post season....and heck i'll give ####### odds to be honest..... i mean seriously who is the cards competitor right now????
If either Pujols or Carpenter get hurt or significantly regress, things will get dicey.
So the Yankees will have enough money to re-sign Jeter ($80M) and Rivera ($30M), who history has shown are not going to be playing for cheap, one year contracts, as well as Mauer ($100M), Crawford ($60M), and Lee/ Beckett ($90M) (minimum estimates my own). Call me incredulous, but I don't think even they have the resources to throw another $350M+ into their payroll...
Yeah, losing your best position player and best pitcher can do that.
Really? I think this is way high. Maybe he gets the 9 years, but he's not excedding A-Rod's AAV. My guess would be 8/200-220.
As for Holliday, lump me in with the good signing for the short term, but good luck with that in 2015-16 crowd. If that's the move they ahd to make to ensure they kept Pujols, however, then it seems it's obviously worth it.
There's no way they're getting Mauer. Minn is in the same spot StL is with Pujols. They'll pay up.
They'll resign Rivera and Jeter. Rivera is old enough he'll probably agree to one year at a high AAV (~$15M). Jeter will probably get 3 years.
Then they'll add one more guy. If Joba and Hughes develop well, it'll be a hitter. If not, probably a SP.
Seriously. They'll kick off The Revolution~! if they don't keep Mauer. Minnesota will turn into some agrarian commune with parts of Target Field and the Metrodome used to wall off the state. We'll write "Here Thar Be Dragons, But No Catchers" on maps.
No team lets guys like Pie and Reimhold block acquiring a great player like Holliday. That's like saying the Yankees wouldn't sign Holliday b/c they have Brett Gardner.
It'll only be stupid for the last three years---the first four years at $17M per for .900+ OPS offense seems OK---and fans will forgive the team because it will have been worth the two World Series titles.
Think of it as $22M p.a. for the first 3 and $13.5M p.a. for the last 4 (with some NPV benefit from paying later).
Holliday is worth the $22M now, and will very likely be worth $13.5M at the end.
The last three years, he's been 11th, 9th, and 7th in MLB in VORP among position players. He's a top-level star by any reasonable accounting.
The last three years, he's been 11th, 9th, and 7th in MLB in VORP among position players. He's a top-level star by any reasonable accounting.
Yes. I have trouble understanding this.
Are people over-correcting for Coors?
If he finishes in the top-10 in MVP balloting in 2016, a $17 million option vests for 2017. According to AP, there is a $1 million buyout if the option does not vest.
There are so many ways that could go wrong.
How do you figure? Holliday wouldn't get to 10th place in MVP voting without being at least a little good, and he wouldn't be an albatross if he was that good at that point.
I guess the question is could a single (or two) 2nd or 3rd place votes get him in the top ten?
Because a mediocre and fading Holliday could easily throw a couple hundred grand to some writers to get those votes.
Long as he's not as goo as Prince Fielder.
Or as Gish as Billy Corgan.
This is a pretty optimistic picture of Jim Hendry's future isn't it?
Has anyone checked George Bell's 1987 banking activity?
Fine, then, Ed Wade.
Not that I would put it above a sportswriter to do such a thing (and I'm sure it's happened in the past) but it just seems like it would be too suspicious if Holliday doesn't have a pretty good year. I would think that that kind of thing could end your career if there was even an inkling that you'd taken money from a player. Not to mention the feds coming after you for tax evasion or something.
And Holliday would have to, you know, not suck. I mean, even the 10th guy on MVP lists is almost always at least pretty good. Who's the worst top-10 MVP vote getter?
EDIT: It looks like most of the lousy ones were big base-stealers. That's not going to happen with Holliday.
Are people over-correcting for Coors?
That's my guess, in part because it's been sort of my own knee-jerk reaction (and not just to Holliday--it's an instinctive reaction to any current/ex-Rox, which I have to fight).
Call it the Dante Bichette Effect.
Maybe, during his time in Coors, Holliday's home/road splits were the most extreme on the club, which could lead one to wonder if maybe he was taking unusual advantage of the high altitude, which might mean that while he was as valuable to the Rockies as his OPS+/Vorp numbers say he was, there was a question that he would not be as valuable to another club.
Up until he was traded to STL last year, his Oakland numbers (120 OPS+) were looking a lot like his Coors' era road numbers
I mean, it's possible, but it doesn't look like it's happened much in history. I'm going to go on the record and say that Holliday will be way too mediocre by then for even a pity vote that might trigger the option. You can quote me on that and ruthlessly mock my naivete if I'm wrong. Seven years from now.
It depends on how clear-cut the awards are in any given season. Normally, a top-10 finish requires between 40 and 50 points; the more clear-cut the top players are, the fewer the number of points needed. A second-place vote is worth 9, a third-place vote is worth 8, so you're looking at about five of those.
-- MWE
Could we just ruthlessly mock you now, and apologize in 7 years if we're wrong?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main