$25mm per is fine. If the market demands an eight-year deal (I'd be very surprised if it does), then the Cards should absolutely let him walk. Pujols will come back if TLR doesn't, but it might take giving the managerial job to Oquendo.

I might have brought my arrowhead collection. I didn't. So I'm not going to look for it. I'm going to look for things I *brought* on board.

“That’s something he has shown since the moment I got to the big leagues – to be able to help us players, young players, and give us trust and let us play."

Sure, if you're a young player who plays like Albert Pujols.

if Albert wants to win, he can easily stay in STL, and simply insist that the $4M that TLR is paid gets spent on draft picks, instead.

Albert, Boston is a big, big fan. You should check out the city sometime.

[1] Do you mean something more than $200M (8x25)? You'd let a guy who comps well to inner-circle HOF guys walk, rather than go 8 years at 25? I have a hard time believing that.

I wouldn't want that deal for a player Pujols's age. Four years in, that could keep a team with the Cardinals' payroll habits from contending for the next four.

Now, if ownership consideres the Pujols money "special" money, and the $70 million non-Pujols payroll would be augmented by another $15-20 million in the event of cost-sinkage, then I'd consider it.

Several consecutive years of non-contention by a midwestern franchise, even the Cardinals, could be very, very bad for its long-term future if the economy stays anything like it is.

8/200 gets tricky, although fwiw Albert's BBRef Comps are about whom you'd expect, and they were all so remarkably good that even in their decline decade they were putting up an average OPS of 145. Of the ten only Hank Greenberg had less than six years left in his career, and that was because of WW2. Even Albert's worst year, 2003 on, was worth around $25m, while his best rack up around $40m.

If I'm the Cardinals I'd much rather sign him for 6/150, but I don't imagine that's possible. I wouldn't be all that worried about this from St. Louis's point of view. If I had to guess I'd guess Pujols is likely to be worth more than the contract's AAV for the first four years of an eight-year deal, somewhat less than the AAV for the next two, and worth something in the neighborhood of $10m-$15m of the last two years of the deal. An eight-year deal would take him through his age 39 season, and would be a damned sight better than Alex Rodriguez's deal, which takes Roddy through his age 42 season, essentially throwing him a bonus of $50m or so for no reason I can think of. Pujols has a pretty good chance to retain enough value to be a useful starter at 1b through 2019. Given the alternative there's probably not a whole lot else for St. Louis to do if they can get him for 8/200.

No GM wants to be known as the one who allowed Pujols to leave St. Louis. If Pujols wants to stay in St. Louis, DeWitt and Mozeliak will find a way to make it happen.

8/200 is the low end of what he'll receive, and it wouldn't surprise me if it was more along the lines of 8/240 plus options.

I think he's going to start with Alex Rodriguez's contract and not take a dime less. He shouldn't anyway. If A-Rod can get 275 million at age 32, then he should get at least the same amount at a similar age, more since he's a better player. There might be some doubts about how he'll age because of he's not a great athlete and because of the doubts surrounding his actual age. But his contact skills are so good, so reminiscent of Hank Aaron, that I think he'll age just fine.

Even Albert's worst year, 2003 on, was worth around $25m, while his best rack up around $40m.

Are you using Fangraphs' Magical Make Up a Number and Act as Though It Means Something stat? I love that stat.

I think he's going to start with Alex Rodriguez's contract and not take a dime less. He shouldn't anyway. If A-Rod can get 275 million at age 32, then he should get at least the same amount at a similar age, more since he's a better player.

He's a better hitter. That doesn't mean he's a better player.

Pujols is the best player since Rodriguez to come to free agency, it's true, but there's a reason that no other player has ever really come close to either of Rodriguez's contracts, and it's not just how much better he is than everybody else. With A-Rod in his third straight year of decline at the age of 34, he's an object lesson in exactly why you shouldn't -- and, I think, no team not playing in New York, Boston, Chicago, or Los Angeles would -- hand out contracts of that magnitude to dudes in their 30s. If Pujols had become a free agent, like A-Rod, in his mid-20s, you almost certainly would have seen him get that kind of contract, but Pujols would be testing the market for the first time at 31, not 25, and he'll be entering it in a radically different environment to what Rodriguez did even the second time. Rodriguez signed his new contract (A) after having his best season, which Pujols will not be doing, and (B) when the economy appeared to be much stronger.

The only way Pujols gets close to $275 million is if he lets the Red Sox and Angels and Mets get in a bidding war for him. In fact, the Mets probably don't have the money -- the only teams with the need and the $ at this juncture are Boston and LAA. Is that what he wants? Who knows? Saying this kind of crap about La Russa might be the first salvo in a rear-guard action on his way out of town. But he has always seemed to value things other than money, chiefly, or at least people want to believe he does. If he wants to stay in St Louis, he's not getting A-Rod money, no way, nohow. He probably won't even if he leaves.

[1] Do you mean something more than $200M (8x25)? You'd let a guy who comps well to inner-circle HOF guys walk, rather than go 8 years at 25? I have a hard time believing that.

He's 30+, signing a contract to carry him to age 38. Even if he's a fan favorite in the home town & one of the best players in the game, you have to be careful about paying for past production.

8/200 would not be as bad as the A-Rod or Ryan Howard deals, but I don't think it would be a good deal for STL.

He's a better hitter. That doesn't mean he's a better player.

Doesn't mean he's not, either. It's very debatable.

B-Ref WAR (and all the caveats that come with it):

Even Albert's worst year, 2003 on, was worth around $25m

More accurately had a market value of. Almost certainly didn't bring in $25 million in revenue.

EDIT: On the other hand, St. Louis tends to bring in a fair bit more revenue that you'd expect. It behaves as a larger market both in terms of revenues and expenses. And I'm fairly confident that their record of being consistently in contention has something to do with this.

Cutting ties with Pujols without making a corresponding impact player signing would almost certainly cost them a great deal of money.