Funkpie

It would be shame to see Pujols leave St. Louis. Much like Griffey was a legend in Seattle, I didn't much like when he went to the Reds. I'm a Reds fan and was happy to have him, but I think he basically ruined his legacy when he left. I'd hate to see Pujols do the same. But if he's not willing to price himself decently for the sake of remaining a Cardinal, I wouldn't fault St. Louis letting him go. You just can't tie up that much money on one player for too long. Again saying this as a Reds fan, I'm hoping St. Louis ends up tying all kinds of money up with his resigning. Enough to where they end up having a mediocre pitching staff because they can't afford anything else But really, I hope he does stay in St. Louis and ends his career there. It would be good for the game in general.

Goat3001

Funny you mention the Giants because I bet if he leaves STL it'll be the Giants that throw the most money at him.

dsa_shea

I doubt that. I would say that the Angels will go all out for him.

davidh777

RIP Woodie Fryman, though I have to say I did a double-take at the CBS headline "Expos' Hall of Fame pitcher Fryman dies at 70." I didn't realize they were talking about the Montreal Expos Hall of Fame.

Goat3001

^We'll have to wait and see, I honestly doubt it even gets there... but my thinking is that the Angels would take Prince Fielder for lesser money and use him as a primary DH allowing the Giants to open up the wallets for Pujols. I'm also assuming that the Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies (all are set at 1B) and Mets (because of their financial situation) would be out of the running.

Calculon

Wouldn't the Cubs be on the short list as well?

wirefan

This would be my darkhorse, unless Albert has an issue going to a rival.

He would stay in the NL central, he'd be in a good home park and the Cubs have massive payroll coming off the books. They have something like 125mil committed this year and only ~60-65mil next year, and the following year Zambrano's 19mil per comes off the books.

I think the other darkhorse may be Texas... especially if they are able to trade Michael Young. They were willing to go 25-26mil per for 6 years to Lee, what's another 4mil and 2-4 years?

I don't see the Angels going high enough (unless Pujols for some reason wants to play there).

Drexl

If Pujols is going to leave, the Angels is about the least painful team from a Cardinals fan's standpoint. Get him out of the National League, and away from the "evil empires" (New York, Boston). And yet, he could win there.

LurkerDan

If Albert were in play, I am pretty sure the Mets would be interested. They have big money coming off the books, and their financial situation may not be so dire as to prevent them from going after him.

NotThatGuy

I wish the Wilpons would sell already. Mark Cuban....can you PLEASE save the Mets?!

dsa_shea

If the Mets ownership holds onto the Mets then they're likely fucked for the next few years. And even if they sell the franchise it could still be on the hook depending on the terms in which the team is sold.

ctyankee

Is this just what you wish would happen with magic dust or are you serious? Because that's crazy talk. Met ownership has publicly stated that they want to bring down their salary expenses not keep the status quo. So no way Pujols goes to a team that can't/won't spend on a supporting cast and no way does he want to try to hit homers at Citi Field.

VinVega

The Mets need to trade Beltran's $20 mil, Santana is slated to make over $22 mill this year and Oliver Perez is untradable with his $12 mil that he's owed this year. The Mets can't get Pujols in 2011. Maybe next year, but he'll be gone by then.

LurkerDan

????

Albert isn't a FA right now, so what does Perez's 2011 salary have to do with anything? The Mets payroll will be much lower in 2012. I believe Beltran, Perez and others come off the books. I couldn't find definitive info in my 2 minutes of searching. But this article says what I understood to be the case. The Mets are committed to only $88 million for 2012, some $50 million lower than now. So I'm not sure why y'all think I'm smoking crack for thinking they might be in play if Albert is available.

I realize the financial troubles of the Wilpons could derail this, but the Mets may be able to swing it.

ctyankee

Let's say the article is absolutely correct. Now explain why in the world Albert Pujols would want to come to the Mets? To be around a team fielding players with league minimum contracts? To set the all-time walk record as teams pitch around him? Who are you going to get to bat before and after him in the lineup because you sure don't have those guys now. How much are you going to pay those guys?

VinVega

So the Mets have to trade to get Pujols this year? Who are they going to deal? Ike Davis I guess? Point is the Mets are at $136 mil for payroll and the owners are up to their neck in Madoff scandal. How are they going to add $16 mil to the payroll (which is what Pujols' 2011 option is) when they are already broke? They have to dump either Beltran or Santana. Santana they could move, except he's coming off major surgery and Beltran has underperformed and been a clubhouse cancer as well as making a kings ransom in salary.

It's possible he will be a FA at the end of the season, but there will be some sign and trade partners for the Cards now if they want to move him, so to just assume he'll be available at the end of 2011 is not a given. Also, why would you trade for Pujols when you have a young and cheaper option in Davis at 1B? The Mets are obviously going to rebuild. I could see them trying to land a big name pitcher or OF before Pujols. I just don't see him as a top priority of the Mets.

LurkerDan

Jesus, the statement I made was in reference to which teams would be in play if Albert walks. Seems like that was the discussion. Not who might be a trade partner. I never assumed that he would be available at the end of 2011. The discussion was who might open up their wallets IF he was available at the end of 2011.

LurkerDan

and ctyankee, the Mets don't suck as bad as you make them out to be. He would not be surrounded with league minimum contract guys (how you get that idea from a 2012 payroll of 88 million PLUS Albert's hypothetical contract is beyond me. And NY is not exactly an awful destination for players; the potential for extra income is hugely improved. I'm not saying it's a given that he's going there or anything, I just said they MIGHT be in play if he walks. That is by no means a stretch, no matter how emphatically you say otherwise.

Until you start talking in reality, it's really not worth discussing.

dsa_shea

I don't think he goes to any other team for less than what he is already asking and the amount is absurd.

ctyankee

All I asked is who you are going to bat before and after Pujols in the order and all you did is avoid the question. The League Minimum guys comes from the link YOU cited. Perhaps you should read articles first so you understand them. That's supposedly how they MAY get down to 88 million.

I don't know what kind of reality there is in your universe but your team was 18 games out of first last year and I and the whole tri-state area has no idea how that is going to improve anytime soon. The Phillies just got a star pitcher, Atlanta has a bunch of young talent (yet again) - - if everything falls your way maybe you can get third place. So give the pipe a rest and try to figure out who is going to play shortstop for you guys next year or something else in the realm of true possibility because the chances that Pujols is coming to play for the weak sister in the New York marketplace are slim and none and ... slim died.

wirefan

COTS is a good site for contract info and is kept up to date (but will wait for contracts to become official)

The 2011-2016 spreadsheets within the team pages are pretty cool to get an idea of money coming off the books. For the Mets the big stuff is Beltran, Perez, Reyes, Castillo, probably K-Rod... and they have ~60-70mil coming off the books. The issue is they'll need a CF, SS, 2B, closer and a stater or 2, so even if they held payroll flat (which is a big if given the Madoff stuff), it would leave ~30mil to fill 5-6 positions, which is doable but probably means letting Reyes go and going for a cheaper SS option.

I don't think they have a lot of internal options, but I don't know their farm system that well. Pagan could probably play center which would leave them needing a RF which might be easier to fill. They have that pitcher Meija who could probably start in '12, but the other positions probably are free agents/trades to fill them.

I think Pujols would be doable if the financial situation was cleared up, but given the uncertainty I don't see it. Since the Mets have a cost controlled, cheap option (even if it is much less productive) at 1B in Ike Davis, I don't see them adding so much salary when they will have so many other roster holes next year.

LurkerDan

It's funny that you accuse me of not understanding the article when you don't read so gud. That article didn't say that they'd have 8 lineup spots filled with minimum salary guys. The only reference to minimum salary guys was in computing their payroll commitments, they used all players under contract and the remaining roster spots they assigned minimum salaries. FYI, remaining roster spots doesn't mean "starting lineup". David Wright, Ike Davis (plays the same position, but could move or be valuable trade bait), Angel Pagan, Jason Bay (not including Reyes, since he's an unknown for 2012), to name a few. Those are productive players who would not exactly leave Pujols in a lineup of minimum salary players.

I did not say "Pujols is coming to NY!" I did not predict where the Mets would finish. The discussion was who might make a play for him if he became a FA. I merely said that dismissing the Mets as not interested is premature. And if they make a top offer, who knows what he would say? Glad to know that you have a crystal ball and know, keep it up!

ctyankee

It's kind of like the question ... how can a 10 go for a 5? Well, unlike the fantasy world of Hollywood, unless they have a ton of money, they don't. And unfortunately for the Mets, they are both (relatively) poor and unattractive.

LurkerDan

Your humorous picture has convinced me that you are correct.

davidh777

Sorry to interrupt the Mets debate, but I could easily see the Cubs being a player here, though I still believe Pujols will stay in St. Louis. They love to make the big free-agent splash (please no "fire Jim Hendry" trolls), and subtracting from St. Louis would be an added bonus. Whether that would be a good spend or not is the question.

Speaking of teams that like to go for the free-agent splash without the results to show for it, would the Orioles be a player, or is that not their philosophy any more? Or would Albert not even give them the time of day?