The Diverging Markets for Albert Pujols and Prince Fielder
by Matthew on Nov 20, 2011 2:44 PM PST
in Seattle Mariners Polling
Email
PrintThis winter (no, still autumn) offseason season is early and based on the tone of the reports, it is unlikely that either Prince Fielder or Albert Pujols signs a new contract anytime soon. However, there appears to be less overlap between the team suitors than I thought would surface. Albert Pujols has been linked almost exclusively to the Cardinals, Cubs and Marlins while Fielder has been connected more with the Brewers and several AL squads. The Mariners are rumored to be included in that group of AL teams and I wanted to dissect the tweet that set it off.
@SI_JonHeyman
Jon Heyman#mariners are hoping to be in on prince (but not pujols). Unsure if there's room in budget tho. But will give it a run.
FavoriteRetweet
Specifically, I'm curious about the team being in on Prince Fielder but not Albert Pujols. A week ago, Jayson Stark surveyed some supposedly impartial club executives on their belief of the contracts the two sluggers would end up with. The consensus came in roughly around this:
Pujols: 8/225 + 1/25 option
Fielder: 7/155
I do not accept such anonymous guesses as gospel, but in this case they match my own gut feelings and, more importantly, they are matching the behavior of the two parties. Albert Pujols is rumored to already have a couple offers in hand in the 8/200 to 9/225 range, but is shooting for more. Meanwhile most of of the waves being made concerning Fielder are coming from Scott Boras and are in the 8/200 territory, suggesting that, barring a repeat of Alex Rodriguez and Texas in 2000, Fielder will eventually settle for less.
So, assuming the figures above are what it cost to bring either player to the Seattle Mariners, how would you feel? Obviously affording Prince Fielder is already a stretch for the team's budget so stepping up to Albert Pujols is even tougher, but would you feel him worth it?
84 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I am one of the peopl who would like to sign Fielder, but if I got to choose between the two sluggers and their contracts, I'd take Pujols.
Baseball is supposed to be a fun distraction, and it would be fun to have one of the best hitters ever on our team. I’m cool overpaying for that.
Quite simply...
…the Mariners are not spending enough right now. They have no excuse not to sign the big bat we need as a cornerstone, AND pay for the rest of the role players who will fill in the blanks for a final year of development.
There are no Fielders or Pujolses available next offseason. Get ’em now, or give up the right to try.
No excuse..... Budget restrictions???
by Patrick Stites on Nov 20, 2011 4:08 PM PST up reply actions
Didn't you know?
Every dollar Nintendo makes is available for the Mariners to spend but they don’t bother because they’re not interested in winning.
by Eyeball Kid on Nov 20, 2011 4:15 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
This would only be true if your choices are (win with Fielder) or (lose without Fielder)
And if it this were all THAT simple, then anyone could run a baseball team. Saying the Mariners have to sign Fielder or commit themselves to losing next season is an incredible oversimplification for what it takes to run a baseball team/business.
I'll preface with the fact that I'd prefer the Mariners don't sign either,
but if the Mariners were to sign Fielder (or Pujols for that matter) I think I would be really excited. I’d probably hate the contract and realize the future restrictions, but still, exciting!
Doug Fister is Dexter. R.I.P. Dave Niehaus
by SeaKoala on Nov 20, 2011 3:01 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
I would be stoked for Pujols. If we landed Pujols and Fielder I think I'd pee my pants. Fielder alone isn't interesting.
Determined, Jonesing Commentor
by Corco on Nov 20, 2011 3:08 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
How are moonshots like this not interesting?
http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=14276275
Every King needs a Prince
by ManifestDestiny on Nov 20, 2011 3:42 PM PST up reply actions
All I can think about when I think of Fielder is Richie Sexson even if they are completely different players
They’re both large, lefty, power hitting Milwaukee first basemen
Determined, Jonesing Commentor
even if Sexson is right handed
Determined, Jonesing Commentor
by Corco on Nov 20, 2011 5:31 PM PST up reply actions 5 recs
That video just put me off from fielder.
Look at him jiggle, he is sporting at least a C cup.
Dave Krieg!
Hell - if sky's the limit and money is being thrown around
Sign em both!
Pujols and 1st, Fielder at DH – that’s pretty awesome. Rosterbating!!!!
but yeah – huge amount of money and years committed there… which i don’t really care about (as long as the front office is still willing to spend when it has to).
Based on those contracts? I voted weakly prefer Pujols.
Money aside (or if they would cost the same-ish), I would much rather have Pujols.
No preference between the two honestly.
Likely relies on who’s more interested in coming here (if interest is about the same then oh dear). Both would be really exciting additions to the team.
I was saying it in jest.
These rumors have been floating around for a while:
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/11/20/the-marlins-think-albert-pujols-is-older-than-he-says-he-is/
I'm no fan of signing either though i also agree i'd be excited by either if they signed...BUT
If we are going to say fuck the budget and go for one of them, might as well go for pujols.
Or both. Or neither and try and build a time machine back to the 1930’s so we can sign every good player from the depression era for cents on the dollar. Hey, $500,000 would seem like a huge amount of money to them!
Goshdang, if we can get Prince for less than $25mil that would be awesome
Every King needs a Prince
by ManifestDestiny on Nov 20, 2011 3:40 PM PST reply actions
I missed the first option and was going to say I need to change my vote
But fuck it, Pujols on the Mariners would be awesome.
Vaughn retired after 2003 so I think we can rid ourselves of that worry.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Nov 20, 2011 4:17 PM PST up reply actions 8 recs
And since you brought it up and I thought this would be fun, let's compare Fielder and Vaughn as he was from age 28 on.
In the years leading up to and including their 27 year old seasons, Fielder walked at a higher rate than Vaughn, struck out less often by a rate of like 3-8%, got on base as much or more (!!!), and hit for similar power in terms of ISO (given fluctuations). Fielder outperformed him in wRC+ ( 133, 137, 138 for Vaughn, 160, 137, 162 for Fielder).
From Age 28 season on for Vaughn: wRC+ of 144, 150, 151, 115, 115, 114.
It seems to me that right now Fielder is a better hitter than Vaughn was at the same age. Vaughn continued to be a great hitter for three seasons and then merely 15% above average. Yes, toward the end of his career Mo Vaughn was a fat dude who shouldn’t have been playing defense. He could still hit.
by abender20 on Nov 20, 2011 4:46 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I would want Mo Vaughn
if you weren’t talking about paying him ARod type money.
Sure, 15M a year, not a problem. But we’re talking about paying him $22M a year when he’s 35 or 36, and posting an OBP of his weight (assumed to be around 700 by that time).
I think I would prefer neither
But if we’re going to break the bank for a player I’d rather it be Pujols. He’s one of the greatest hitters ever. I expect both Fielder and Pujols to fall-off before the end of their contracts but I’d rather have the surefire hall of famer.
Doug Fister. :(
by Mothy on Nov 20, 2011 4:28 PM PST via mobile reply actions
At those numbers I wouldn't want either.
Its close on Fielder though, but I feel like anything over $20 million a year is just too risky.
Too many years for either of them.
I’d much prefer 2-3 solid players at half the years for the same price.
I think Prince Fielder will end up signing for much less than 25 million a season,
I don’t see any team getting that desperate for him. I understand boras has been quoted as asking for like 8/200 or something like that, but who will realistically give him that kindof money? And at that many years?
There's an overwhelming childlike desire in me to have both
Can you imagine that? I literally cannot imagine having both of them on the team next year and the excitement nearly overwhelms all other concerns. In a perfect world I would love for the team to say screw the budget limit and get them.
Rationally, though, both of those contracts terrify the pants off of me.
by Smegmalicious on Nov 20, 2011 5:03 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
A $135 million payroll for 2011, and about $125 or so for the next 7 or 8 years is totally realistic
Doesn’t require a perfect world at all.
A perfect world is both of them on the Mariners and healthy for the next 8 years…
Weakly in favor of Fielder just based on age and less money. However,
both of those contracts are risky for a team like Seattle unless they bump payroll up to $120,000,000 or so. If we could get Fielder for 6 years at around 140 I’d probably do it but going 7 or 8 million north of $150mil is pretty scary
They are both too expensive
I’m sure that both of their contracts will eventually become a burden to their respective teams but if this is what it takes to get a World Series ring then the price is worth it. I doubt the M’s will make a serious play for Fielder.
This is the logic I'm completely baffled by.
For Fielder to make sense, we would have to be a playoff contending team in the next three years. If we were an 85 win team who needed to compete — next year — then it makes sense. But we have question marks at LF, CF, RF, 3, and 1 plus clear needs for a catcher and at least one middle rotation starter.
How likely is it that we get below average production out of these positions in the next few years and don’t make the playoffs. How likely is it that Fielder’s contract becomes a burden in the end years.
Very likely
Which is why I doubt the M’s will make a serious move for Fielder, still too many holes to plug.
You don't think we can be a playoff contending team within 3 years?
by Mariner John on Nov 20, 2011 10:46 PM PST up reply actions
Hey they could make the playoffs next year
if Ichiro, Gutierrez, Carp, Smoak, Wells, Beavan, Ackley, and Pineda all have great seasons. Seriously though it is hard to really know how close this team is to contention, the record didn’t show it in 2011 but I certainly think the team has improved quite a bit over the 09-10 squads. I think we would all love to see a left handed masher on our team.
Pujols is much better than Fielder right now.
And likely always will be, as even age won’t drop him down to Prince status. Do people understand this? I’d rather have Reyes than Prince even at the same price. In actuality, Reyes will be cheaper because premium position players without power are undervalued. M’s obv. don’t need a SS, but value is value, and it’s difficult to predict what M’s needs will be in next 5-7 years.
carl crawford just got 140 million....
he was undervalued?
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 21, 2011 8:25 AM PST up reply actions
so was willie bloomquist...doesnt mean he was undervalued
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Nov 21, 2011 8:43 AM PST up reply actions
Willie Bloomquist is not being compared to other premium position players. Crawford is.
Crawford cost less than the other superstar contracts over the last few years (Teixeira, Kemp, Tulo) despite having a similar avg WAR per season.
Pujols, something something DH, something something never going to happen but since you asked
I mean, if we’re in play money rosterbation territory, might as well spend the extra 3 – 4 million a year in monopoly money for the best hitter alive.
Pre-print all AL lineup cards with him as DH, and all NL lineup cards with him as 1b, until 2020 and call it good.
I'd actually try to DH Pujols as much as possible just so he'll last longer
Determined, Jonesing Commentor
Do you really think he's going to agree to that though?
Pujols can go where he wants, I doubt he’ll choose a team that wants to DH him 90% of the time. Even though it may be in his best interest, players like to think (especially the elite ones) that they can do anything and everything. He’s one of the best players of all-time, and he probably takes a fair amount of pride in his defense.
Remember, this is happy rosterbationland, where they get both Pujols and Fielder
…and I get a ponycorn.
I have to think that if Pujols is ok with an AL team at all, said team is going to DH him as much as possible and he knows and accepts that. If he sees himself resisting or resenting DH role on and off for most of another decade, he might as well eschew the AL and become a Marlin or a Cub or something.
by Chris_FB on Nov 20, 2011 8:09 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Neither
Rather use that money to upgrade at third, of and catcher either this year or next. The team isn’t going to be competitive this year so why piss away 20 million for a season of either.
by Matsui on Nov 20, 2011 5:40 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Spending a lot of money at 3B seems a little pointless at the moment.
Just considering that both Catricala and Martrinez aren’t that far away from breaking into the big league, especially Catricala. We might as well see what we have in those guys before laying down the big money for 3B.
I’m all for the catcher thing though.
by Cascadian Man on Nov 20, 2011 7:39 PM PST up reply actions
Catricala isn't likely to be even decent defensively at third.
Martinez is in 20, in AA, and walked 4.5% of the time last year without major power. He is not going to be chasing anyone off the 25 man soon. The reason to not spend big money at 3b is pointless because the list of available 3B is miserable unless you are entranced by Aramis Ramirez.
by abender20 on Nov 20, 2011 7:47 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm at that stage of the semester where I'm just glossing for meaning.
"Ever tried? Ever failed? No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better." - Samuel Beckett Mariners Minors
by JY on Nov 20, 2011 9:18 PM PST up reply actions
Am I stupid for feeling Pujols' body last longer at 32 than Fielder's at 28?
How come you can do all this other great shit, but you can't lie the fuck down and sleep?
No.
But I think that is a big part of why we’re looking at Fielder getting less money and potentially one less year.
I'm convinced Pujols ages like A-Rod and starts declining next year
While Fielder will age more like Teixiera, thus giving 3 years of primeness before declining like a sack of lard.
Teixeira didn't really decline much last year
He still managed 4.2 WAR, and his slash line was suppressed by a terrible .239 BABIP. I think he’ll still be a 4-5 WAR player next year.
This is why I'd love to give him a 7 year deal with a player opt-out option after 3 (like Sabathia's)
Well, not love but I’d find it much more palatable. Get 3 years of prime production then let someone else overpay him. Maybe unrealistic and somewhat risky though.
Would it be wrong to put up a fanshot that reads "Why the hell would any one sign here?"
by msb on Nov 20, 2011 8:16 PM PST reply actions 3 recs
Only if it can be followed up with "Why the hell wouldn't anyone sign here?"
...and now I'm here
Far away from home (for most)...
weather, poor fan support, not a competitive product, lackluster organization, absent ownership, Geoff Baker.
Basically, imagine if you’re a player with family in Latin America, or the midwest, or wherever. And you’re given the option of choosing between playing in San Diego, or LA, or New York, or Chicago, or Miami, or wherever else and you’re also offered a similar deal for slightly more money (<5% more) to play in Seattle.
I would probably choose all of those places if I were that theoretical player. Seattle is basically the Chicago Cubs with less fans and further away.
Of course, I could be wrong. But I’d give up the extra money to be closer to family or to play for a better or more competitive organization.
Felix Hernandez gave up extra cash to sign with the Mariners.
by Patrick Stites on Nov 20, 2011 9:45 PM PST up reply actions
You responded to a joke.
...and now I'm here
"The answer is simple: Money, dear boy."
How come you can do all this other great shit, but you can't lie the fuck down and sleep?
Or Barry Bonds
Just put some juice in the tank and he’ll be good to go.
by themanleyman on Nov 20, 2011 9:25 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
It's academic...
Pujols will re-sign with the Cards, and when he does the Marlins will offer Fielder close to what they were willing to pay Pujols, and given that Fielder lives in Florida he’ll probably take it. That’s how I see this playing out, anyway…
There's a fan shot up about Halman.
This is sad news indeed. That’s probably the best place to discuss it though.
No matter where you go, there you are.
Prince is my favorite non-Mariner of all-time
So I have a strong preference regardless of the consequences. I feel that if he got to expensive and the team was losing, he will continue to be a semi-valuable trade piece so I feel any performance below expectations could still be mitigated.
It's the last few years that'll bite us
Probably for either one. I’d love to have Albert on our team, but I’ve come around to where I would be ok with getting Fielder, as long as we are only expecting maybe 5 good years out of him, even if we’re paying him longer.
But if memory serves, I thought we were told that once we had Safeco field, we’d have enough money to go get good players. What happened?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Lookout Landing
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
