Albert Pujols to Angels

General Intelligent Discussion & One Thread About That Buttknuckle

Moderator: Andrew

Albert Pujols to Angels

Postby Enigma869 » Fri Dec 09, 2011 4:35 am

John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby Ehwmatt » Fri Dec 09, 2011 5:18 am

What a cocksucker. Sorry for St. Louis fans, but hey, at least you got two WS and a WS appearance out of the fatass.
User avatar
Ehwmatt
MP3
 
Posts: 10907
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:15 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Postby fightingilliniJRNY » Fri Dec 09, 2011 5:21 am

I'm a die-hard Cardinals fan, and I think this could have been the best thing to happen to the franchise. Don't get me wrong, I'll miss seeing Albert in the Cardinals uniform, but they got his best years for insanely cheap. I would want nothing to do with years 32-41 at that price with no opt-outs or anything. Part of me was hoping that someone would out-bid the Cardinals and they could back out of negotiations.

He'll certainly be as productive for the next five or six years, maybe seven or eight, but it's the last few years that would frighten me at $25 million per. It's almost as if the Angels really, really wanted the next five years and will worry about the next five when they come. Who can blame them, though - this alone will jump-start that franchise like nothing else. Add in C.J. Wilson, and the AL West will be wild.

Now, I very well could be eating my words if he goes for .330/45/130 in each of the next 10 years with six World Series titles. :lol:
User avatar
fightingilliniJRNY
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:53 am

Postby conversationpc » Fri Dec 09, 2011 5:33 am

Ehwmatt wrote:What a cocksucker. Sorry for St. Louis fans, but hey, at least you got two WS and a WS appearance out of the fatass.


I don't know who you're looking at but I've never seen much fat on that muscle-bound dude.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby Ehwmatt » Fri Dec 09, 2011 5:43 am

fightingilliniJRNY wrote:I'm a die-hard Cardinals fan, and I think this could have been the best thing to happen to the franchise. Don't get me wrong, I'll miss seeing Albert in the Cardinals uniform, but they got his best years for insanely cheap. I would want nothing to do with years 32-41 at that price with no opt-outs or anything. Part of me was hoping that someone would out-bid the Cardinals and they could back out of negotiations.

He'll certainly be as productive for the next five or six years, maybe seven or eight, but it's the last few years that would frighten me at $25 million per. It's almost as if the Angels really, really wanted the next five years and will worry about the next five when they come. Who can blame them, though - this alone will jump-start that franchise like nothing else. Add in C.J. Wilson, and the AL West will be wild.

Now, I very well could be eating my words if he goes for .330/45/130 in each of the next 10 years with six World Series titles. :lol:


Interesting take. It would just be nice to see some famous athlete somewhere (especially in baseball or b-ball) play their careers in a so-called "small/mid" market and not bolt just for a few extra million on top of hundreds already there.
User avatar
Ehwmatt
MP3
 
Posts: 10907
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:15 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Postby conversationpc » Fri Dec 09, 2011 5:54 am

Fact Finder wrote:
Ehwmatt wrote:
fightingilliniJRNY wrote:I'm a die-hard Cardinals fan, and I think this could have been the best thing to happen to the franchise. Don't get me wrong, I'll miss seeing Albert in the Cardinals uniform, but they got his best years for insanely cheap. I would want nothing to do with years 32-41 at that price with no opt-outs or anything. Part of me was hoping that someone would out-bid the Cardinals and they could back out of negotiations.

He'll certainly be as productive for the next five or six years, maybe seven or eight, but it's the last few years that would frighten me at $25 million per. It's almost as if the Angels really, really wanted the next five years and will worry about the next five when they come. Who can blame them, though - this alone will jump-start that franchise like nothing else. Add in C.J. Wilson, and the AL West will be wild.

Now, I very well could be eating my words if he goes for .330/45/130 in each of the next 10 years with six World Series titles. :lol:


Interesting take. It would just be nice to see some famous athlete somewhere (especially in baseball or b-ball) play their careers in a so-called "small/mid" market and not bolt just for a few extra million on top of hundreds already there.



Ha! We thought the same thing when the Reds signed Griffey Jr. to come home. That didn't work out to well. :lol:


Griffey was one of the best players I've ever seen in his prime but he was also more injury-prone than Pujols is. Albert was injured part of last year but he's been a full-time player almost every other year. For that matter, he still even played in 147 games last year.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby Seven Wishes2 » Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:24 am

What a douchebag. I just lost a ton of respect for him.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe."
---Albert Einstein
User avatar
Seven Wishes2
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1621
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 11:49 am
Location: Charlotte, NC

Postby fightingilliniJRNY » Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:39 am

Seven Wishes wrote:What a douchebag. I just lost a ton of respect for him.


In all seriousness, why? I don't understand this sentiment. It's not like he bolted for just like $2.5 million extra after saying he wanted to be a Cardinal for life. The Cardinals offered the FOURTH best deal to him this offseason. We can sit back on our high horse and condemn him for this (for some reason or another), but no matter how much you like your current employer - why wouldn't you at least seriously entertain making significantly more at a new location than they are offering you?
User avatar
fightingilliniJRNY
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:53 am

Postby Enigma869 » Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:41 am

conversationpc wrote:
I don't know who you're looking at but I've never seen much fat on that muscle-bound dude.


Exactly why I'll never be convinced that he isn't part of the juicing crowd!
John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby Enigma869 » Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:43 am

Seven Wishes wrote:What a douchebag. I just lost a ton of respect for him.


Why? You do know that he was a free agent without a contract, right?
John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby Ehwmatt » Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:48 am

fightingilliniJRNY wrote:
Seven Wishes wrote:What a douchebag. I just lost a ton of respect for him.


In all seriousness, why? I don't understand this sentiment. It's not like he bolted for just like $2.5 million extra after saying he wanted to be a Cardinal for life. The Cardinals offered the FOURTH best deal to him this offseason. We can sit back on our high horse and condemn him for this (for some reason or another), but no matter how much you like your current employer - why wouldn't you at least seriously entertain making significantly more at a new location than they are offering you?


This argument is so lame and worn out. I had a chance to take a LOT more (double figures here without getting tactless) at another employer and turned it down because I liked the people at the other place better. And trust me, neither salary would have me set for life after a few days like these guys' paychecks do :shock:

I understand why SOME people would make that choice on such simplistic criteria. But it's disheartening to see pretty much every star in the world of pro sports do it when the amount of money tossed at these big stars is absurd in the first place.
User avatar
Ehwmatt
MP3
 
Posts: 10907
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:15 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Postby marco17 » Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:07 am

These athletes don't think about money the way we average people do. My guess is that Pujols had a good relationship with LaRussa, and had he not retired, Pujols would have stayed put. NYY, Bos, and Philly were not interested in him, and one of the next biggest baseball markets is SoCal, where he will become the media darling and get uber-attention, not to mention a huge paycheck, so he bolted. I'll take SoCal heat over STL's heat and humidity any day too. In today's sports, very few athletes take a hometown discount or show any loyalty unless they find out in free agency that the market for them isn't what they thought it was, similarly to what Jimmy Rollins is experiencing with the Phillies.

The Angels have had a couple off years with injuries and losing players to free agency. Add to that, the debacle up I-5 in LA with the Dodgers bankruptcy and ownership issues, and you now have a West Coast team that is poised to get a significant amount of national and local media attention because of Pujols, not to mention they become instant contenders....at least on paper.
marco17
8 Track
 
Posts: 708
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 3:20 am

Postby Don » Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:22 am

With a full no-trade clause, I see the Angels using him more as a designated hitter as they won't be able to dump him so easily if he breaks down during the next ten years.
Don
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 24896
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:01 pm

Postby conversationpc » Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:39 am

Don wrote:With a full no-trade clause, I see the Angels using him more as a designated hitter as they won't be able to dump him so easily if he breaks down during the next ten years.


Bah...Dude is a fairly decent player in the field also, even though he made more errors than usual this last season (11). He has been gold glove caliber before and first basemen don't tend to get beat up all that much.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby Enigma869 » Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:45 am

conversationpc wrote:Bah...Dude is a fairly decent player in the field also, even though he made more errors than usual this last season (11). He has been gold glove caliber before and first basemen don't tend to get beat up all that much.


No, but I'm certain that signing a 10 year deal at his age, that he strongly considered the AL, because of the DH. It's very likely that he'll be a DH for most of the second half of this contract.
John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby fightingilliniJRNY » Fri Dec 09, 2011 8:01 am

Ehwmatt wrote:
fightingilliniJRNY wrote:We can sit back on our high horse and condemn him for this (for some reason or another), but no matter how much you like your current employer - why wouldn't you at least seriously entertain making significantly more at a new location than they are offering you?


This argument is so lame and worn out. I had a chance to take a LOT more (double figures here without getting tactless) at another employer and turned it down because I liked the people at the other place better.


Okay, then I guess you would turn down extra money. But why should everybody do that? And why should someone who takes extra money be labeled a douchebag and cause people to lose respect?
User avatar
fightingilliniJRNY
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1779
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:53 am

Postby Ehwmatt » Fri Dec 09, 2011 8:33 am

fightingilliniJRNY wrote:
Ehwmatt wrote:
fightingilliniJRNY wrote:We can sit back on our high horse and condemn him for this (for some reason or another), but no matter how much you like your current employer - why wouldn't you at least seriously entertain making significantly more at a new location than they are offering you?


This argument is so lame and worn out. I had a chance to take a LOT more (double figures here without getting tactless) at another employer and turned it down because I liked the people at the other place better.


Okay, then I guess you would turn down extra money. But why should everybody do that? And why should someone who takes extra money be labeled a douchebag and cause people to lose respect?


It's just hard for me to fathom leaving my teammates whom I just enjoyed all that success with for a few dollars when I have so much. The "sports is a business" line simply only goes so far for me. Let's put it this way for a crude example. The Indians ownership is ridiculously cheap. If a guy who made $1 million a year with us breaks out and we can only renew him for $2.5 million or so, I'd totally understand bolting for somewhere offering me $5 million+. That's a big difference and in the long run, if you want to live off your pro athlete income your entire life, I can see that.

But when you're in megastar salary territory? I just don't think I'd be that way. And don't get me wrong, I'm a relatively greedy motherfucker - I like money as much as the next guy. But I think I'd draw the line somewhere.
User avatar
Ehwmatt
MP3
 
Posts: 10907
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:15 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Albert Pujols to Angels

Postby artist4perry » Fri Dec 09, 2011 8:38 am

Enigma869 wrote:So long St. Louis...

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/mlb/stor ... les-angels


I am actually a St. Louis fan. Sad for the Cardinals. :( But I hold no ill will towards him. The man is getting older and has to look for a way to make all the money he can before he retires. I am sure it was not him being a butt. How many of us if we are offered a better job and better money would not take it? I wish him well, I just hope St. Louis gets some decent replacement. :(
User avatar
artist4perry
MP3
 
Posts: 10462
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:42 am
Location: Running around in the vast universe that is my imagination. Send help!

Postby Seven Wishes2 » Fri Dec 09, 2011 9:56 am

My issue with all this is that NO ONE cares about playing for one franchise his entire career anymore. Think about the enormity of Pujols' legacy had he finished his career in St. Louis and won a couple more World Series titles with them. You're talking about a guy who could have wound up with 4,000 hits, 800 home runs, and 4-5 championships in 20 seasons. It's very disappointing, and I don't give a damn about St. Louis other than acknowledging they're one of the great franchises in the history of the game.

Hopefully, Gay-Roid will only have his one, single World Series title to retire with, knowing it should have been 5 or 6. Money, money, money.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe."
---Albert Einstein
User avatar
Seven Wishes2
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1621
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 11:49 am
Location: Charlotte, NC

Postby AR » Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:05 am

Eventually major league baseball will contract to L.A., Chicago, New York, Philly, Dallas, Atlanta, Miami and Boston. Why bother following a team if you don't live in a big market? Sure a small to mid market team can compete briefly if they do almost everything right. At best though it only creates a small window and once their best players' contracts are up they can't afford to pay them and they get snatched up by one of the "big boys". This is why I went from being a huge baseball fan to basically not caring much anymore.
User avatar
AR
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 8530
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:21 am

Postby RedWingFan » Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:10 am

AR wrote:Eventually major league baseball will contract to L.A., Chicago, New York, Philly, Dallas, Atlanta, Miami and Boston. Why bother following a team if you don't live in a big market? Sure a small to mid market team can compete briefly if they do almost everything right. At best though it only creates a small window and once their best players' contracts are up they can't afford to pay them and they get snatched up by one of the "big boys". This is why I went from being a huge baseball fan to basically not caring much anymore.


Baseball's been ridiculously stupid for decades. The only major sport w/o some sort of salary cap. I don't know how anyone can take it seriously.
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
User avatar
RedWingFan
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7868
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Postby Enigma869 » Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:37 am

AR wrote:Eventually major league baseball will contract to L.A., Chicago, New York, Philly, Dallas, Atlanta, Miami and Boston. Why bother following a team if you don't live in a big market? Sure a small to mid market team can compete briefly if they do almost everything right. At best though it only creates a small window and once their best players' contracts are up they can't afford to pay them and they get snatched up by one of the "big boys". This is why I went from being a huge baseball fan to basically not caring much anymore.


The only problem with this argument (and everyone who lives outside of the places you mentioned makes this argument) is that Minnesota almost always fields a competitive team, and they are the poster child for "small market".
John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby AR » Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:47 am

Enigma869 wrote:
AR wrote:Eventually major league baseball will contract to L.A., Chicago, New York, Philly, Dallas, Atlanta, Miami and Boston. Why bother following a team if you don't live in a big market? Sure a small to mid market team can compete briefly if they do almost everything right. At best though it only creates a small window and once their best players' contracts are up they can't afford to pay them and they get snatched up by one of the "big boys". This is why I went from being a huge baseball fan to basically not caring much anymore.


The only problem with this argument (and everyone who lives outside of the places you mentioned makes this argument) is that Minnesota almost always fields a competitive team, and they are the poster child for "small market".


And they are now handcuffed due to the Mauer contract, and were almost contracted once themselves. That's what happens when a small market team tries to keep one of it's good players.
User avatar
AR
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 8530
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:21 am

Postby Enigma869 » Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:34 pm

AR wrote:
And they are now handcuffed due to the Mauer contract, and were almost contracted once themselves. That's what happens when a small market team tries to keep one of it's good players.


Sorry dude. The Mauer excuse doesn't work. They defintely paid WAY too much for the hometown kid. That said, Minnesota is ALWAYS very competitive, and that was the case long before Mauer ever got there.
John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby yulog » Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:40 pm

conversationpc wrote:
Ehwmatt wrote:What a cocksucker. Sorry for St. Louis fans, but hey, at least you got two WS and a WS appearance out of the fatass.


I don't know who you're looking at but I've never seen much fat on that muscle-bound dude.




Thats because he's juiced, but he must be protected somehow since i havent heard anything about him coming up positive, should be just a matter of time. :twisted:
User avatar
yulog
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4285
Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 1:33 pm

Postby AR » Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:56 pm

Enigma869 wrote:
AR wrote:
And they are now handcuffed due to the Mauer contract, and were almost contracted once themselves. That's what happens when a small market team tries to keep one of it's good players.


Sorry dude. The Mauer excuse doesn't work. They defintely paid WAY too much for the hometown kid. That said, Minnesota is ALWAYS very competitive, and that was the case long before Mauer ever got there.


So they should have just let him walk so a big market team could overpay him? - You just proved my point.

Why should the small market teams have to do everything just right to compete while the bloated teams can spend without much consequence and easily shrug off bad contracts? Also, Minnesota is one of the few exceptions that big market team fans will always point to while baseball is dying in many other markets.

You can defend it all you want, and that's fine. All I'm saying is I no longer care about much baseball and this is a big reason why. And like to see all small to mid markets contract and let the Yankees, Angels, Sox and the rest go have their own circle jerk by themselves.
User avatar
AR
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 8530
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:21 am

Postby Enigma869 » Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:04 pm

AR wrote:
So they should have just let him walk so a big market team could overpay him?


Yes. They overpaid for the guy because he's from Minnesota. The guy has a history of being fragile as hell and misses a lot of games. Not to mention, he plays a position that guys fade fast, playing. Dude had AWFUL numbers last season, after getting his payday.

AR wrote: Also, Minnesota is one of the few exceptions that big market team fans will always point to while baseball is dying in many other markets.


And your point? Sure people point to Minnesota. They are a small market team who has won a lot of games and are competitive as hell every season. They're the perfect team to point to when someone claims that small market teams can't compete. Last I checked, the Tampa Bay Devil Dogs aren't a big market team by any stretch of the imagination, and have finished ahead of the Red Sox in the past two seasons!
John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby AR » Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:09 pm

Enigma869 wrote:
AR wrote:
So they should have just let him walk so a big market team could overpay him?


Yes. They overpaid for the guy because he's from Minnesota. The guy has a history of being fragile as hell and misses a lot of games. Not to mention, he plays a position that guys fade fast, playing. Dude had AWFUL numbers last season, after getting his payday.

AR wrote: Also, Minnesota is one of the few exceptions that big market team fans will always point to while baseball is dying in many other markets.


And your point? Sure people point to Minnesota. They are a small market team who has won a lot of games and are competitive as hell every season. They're the perfect team to point to when someone claims that small market teams can't compete. Last I checked, the Tampa Bay Devil Dogs aren't a big market team by any stretch of the imagination, and have finished ahead of the Red Sox in the past two seasons!


And the Sox should be embarassed that it happened considering how many more resources they have.

Last I checked the Twins won 63 games last year. One bad contract.

The Red Sox and others will always be able to afford to eat those.
User avatar
AR
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 8530
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:21 am

Postby Enigma869 » Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:34 pm

AR wrote:
And the Sox should be embarassed that it happened considering how many more resources they have.

Last I checked the Twins won 63 games last year. One bad contract.

The Red Sox and others will always be able to afford to eat those.


And last I checked, the Red Sox finished in third place the last two seasons! While I'm not a fan of the current system in baseball, claiming the team with the number one payroll automatically wins is a dopey argument in all sports, because the reality is that it almost NEVER happens that way!
John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby AR » Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:49 pm

Enigma869 wrote:
AR wrote:
And the Sox should be embarassed that it happened considering how many more resources they have.

Last I checked the Twins won 63 games last year. One bad contract.

The Red Sox and others will always be able to afford to eat those.


And last I checked, the Red Sox finished in third place the last two seasons! While I'm not a fan of the current system in baseball, claiming the team with the number one payroll automatically wins is a dopey argument in all sports, because the reality is that it almost NEVER happens that way!


Dopey? Hardly. Simple logic.

Give the GM in Minnesota a huge payroll and see what happens. Big market teams can be lazy and bloated and spend there way out of anything. Sure the Sox finished 3rd, but they will always be in contention simply because of resources.

I will say this, not only would I like to see a salary cap, but almost more importantly a salary floor. As much as I argue about mid market teams at a competitive disadvantage, there are greedy owners like in Pittsburgh and Baltimore who don't even try. For them it's more profitable to lose.
User avatar
AR
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 8530
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:21 am

Next

Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests