Pujols Meeting with Marlins

[Chris]

Certain people seem to think it is not a "shitty offer" to Pujols because he'll be old, he'll be underpeforming, blah, blahbety blah blah.

I'm waiting for someone to tell me how the fuck any of that matters to Pujols? Someone made him an offer, we can debate all day long about whether it's a bad offer for the Angels, but to Pujols? The Cardinals paled in comparison to LA's.

 

[macbdog]

Certain people seem to think it is not a "shitty offer" to Pujols because he'll be old, he'll be underpeforming, blah, blahbety blah blah.

I'm waiting for someone to tell me how the fuck any of that matters to Pujols? Someone made him an offer, we can debate all day long about whether it's a bad offer for the Angels, but to Pujols? The Cardinals paled in comparison to LA's.

Because there is a difference between an offer that is beaten by a competitor and an 'insulting' one? The Cards' offer for the length of time they offered was not insulting- just because the Angels went bat-shit crazy with their offer doesn't make the Cardinals' offer insulting. Albert chose to take the money and run- that was his right as a FA. Just don't try and blame it on the Cardinals, who had paid him well for years and were willing to offer him over a hundred million dollars more for the remainder of his career.

 

[AZ_]

Because there is a difference between an offer that is beaten by a competitor and an 'insulting' one? The Cards' offer for the length of time they offered was not insulting- just because the Angels went bat-shit crazy with their offer doesn't make the Cardinals' offer insulting. Albert chose to take the money and run- that was his right as a FA. Just don't try and blame it on the Cardinals, who had paid him well for years and were willing to offer him over a hundred million dollars more for the remainder of his career.

The Angels offer wasn't bat-shit crazy.

They weren't the only team to offer 10, and quite frankly 10 makes more sense for the Angels than it does the Cardinals.

Both from the perspective of the DH, and the fact the Angels new TV deal is richer than holy hell.

 

[Chris]

Because there is a difference between an offer that is beaten by a competitor and an 'insulting' one? The Cards' offer for the length of time they offered was not insulting- just because the Angels went bat-shit crazy with their offer doesn't make the Cardinals' offer insulting. Albert chose to take the money and run- that was his right as a FA. Just don't try and blame it on the Cardinals, who had paid him well for years and were willing to offer him over a hundred million dollars more for the remainder of his career.

An offer for half of what he was offered by someone else is insulting. Sorry. It's clear they weren't serious about keeping him. Who is blaming the Cardinals for anything? I'm more of a Cardinals supporter than a Pujols supporter on this whole thing. I'm just telling you how it is. Their offer was shitty in Pujols' eyes and quite frankly if I were him I'd think the same way. Any time you are half of what someone else is offering, that offer= shitty. St Louis clearly felt they didn't need Pujols; the Angels wanted him more. Think about this statement well before you respond, and make sure you aren't taking it out of context or misinterpreting it.

 

[macbdog]

The Angels offer wasn't bat-shit crazy.

They weren't the only team to offer 10, and quite frankly 10 makes more sense for the Angels than it does the Cardinals.

Both from the perspective of the DH, and the fact the Angels new TV deal is richer than holy hell.

So because other teams were stupid enough to make a similar offer, it makes it sane? I don't doubt that a signing of Pujols will increase some sales for the Angels, and may have had an impact on that TV offer- but do you have any quantifiable evidence that it was 250m+ worth? Would the deal have not gone through had the Angels not signed Pujols? This is part of what I doubt- and that these kind of pipedreams about earnings, without factual evidence, are what agents do to sell owners on silly contracts. Just see Tom Hicks' deal with ARod.

An offer for half of what he was offered by someone else is insulting. Sorry. It's clear they weren't serious about keeping him. Who is blaming the Cardinals for anything? I'm more of a Cardinals supporter than a Pujols supporter on this whole thing. I'm just telling you how it is. Their offer was shitty in Pujols' eyes and quite frankly if I were him I'd think the same way. Any time you are half of what someone else is offering, that offer= shitty. St Louis clearly felt they didn't need Pujols; the Angels wanted him more.

So because someone else offered something dumb, that makes the offer from the team that developed him and has paid him well over a hundred million dollars already 'insulting?' I'm sorry, but that does not equate. That is encredibly entitled thinking and the kind that just digs Pujols a public relations hole. The wife is still up to it- she just claimed in a new interview that they 'never intended on leaving St. Louis.' Well, if you didn't intend, then he would have never hit FA. The whole point of hitting FA is an intention to sign with the highest bidder. Her calling he deal 'insulting' is just an attempt to justify going for the last dollar. Support of her silly argument is being equally blind to the truth, too. Albert wanted to get paid, and he did so. Him and the wife just need to admit the truth like Albert Belle did and stop trying to blame St. Louis for not making a similar silly offer.

 

[Chris]

"Dumb?" They landed the best player in baseball. His play may decline as he gets older, he may get injured, who knows? They can afford it, they got him, and he will be an instant cash cow for them.

Welcome to America. 50% or 100%, which do you choose? The 100% every time, obviously. This is not even a complicated concept.

Pujols' wife needs to just shut up, for what it's worth. But saying the offer is shitty is not hyperbole. How good an offer is depends on what the market is. In this case, the offer was 50% of something else being offered. Truth be told, I find your stance extremely silly on this issue. I don't even know simpler terms to put it in. If people cannot understand that 50%<100% by a fuckload, then it's clear people just refuse to admit they are wrong in an Internet debate. Which is nothing new.

 

[AZ_]

5 years is an insulting offer when compared to 10.

Simple.

They could have gone to 7-8 years, that would have been reasonable if they really wanted to keep them.

I get the whole "that's dumb because he'll break down"...That may be true in time. But the Cardinals have effectively ended their run as a legitimate team because of it.

Hope they're happy.

 

[DaNewCavs]

Simpler terms:

If Pujols played for the Indians and the disparity was that different between the Indians offer and the Angels offer, 90% of the people on this forum would be complaining about how much this organization sucks for lowballing Pujols and how cheap the Dolans are and how he should sell the team and etc etc....