SB Nation St. Louis Editor's Pick
Predicting How Pujols Might Age, Revisited
Earlier, I posted a small study concerning how Albert Pujols might age by examining similar players. That study used the most similar players lists available at the time: the current Baseball Reference lists for Pujols and the 1-year old 2010 Baseball Prospectus list of 10 most similar players. This is a follow up that uses the 2011 Baseball Prospectus list (generated after the 2010 season). This time I also use Baseball Prospectus’s WARP, instead the similar WAR, since I was already on their site, and I think WARP is probably good enough, as we are looking at shapes of data.
As I said before, Pujols is awesome and will hopefully be a productive Cardinal for a long time. I’m not intending him any disrespect with this post. I know new study is not that statistically sophisticated and uses small sample sizes—I offer this for thought and discussion, not as certainty.
Part 1: The Most Similar Players
Baseball Prospectus uses factors such as a player’s statistics, position, age, and body type to generate similarity scores.
The 10 most similar players, listed from most to least, are these: Lance Berkman, Vladimir Guerrero, Todd Helton, Barry Bonds, Frank Robinson, Wade Boggs, Frank Thomas, Jason Giambi, Jeff Bagwell, and Chipper Jones.
One problem with this list is that few players are in reality very similar to Pujols. A similarity score of 70 is high, and a score over 50 means a player is substantially comparable. Only one player, Lance Berkman, scored over 70. The next two highest are Vladimir Guerrero at 59 and Todd Helton at 58. The other scores ranged from 42-49. By comparison, the other active players in my study have lists of similar players mostly in the 70s or higher. None had a players in the fifties or lower.
I decided to omit Barry Bonds and Jason Giambi from the study due the possibility of their PED use tainting the data. This leaves me with an admittedly small sample, but nonetheless this is a sample of superstars who rake. For active players, I do not count statistics past 2010. I also will not mention the first month of anyone’s performance this year in my discussion.
Part 2: What can we expect from the first 4 years of the contract?
The question is how much Albert Pujols might be expected to produce after his current contract expires. When discussing this, people often say that if he signs a contract of 7 or more years, of course his production will likely be diminished towards the end of the contract. But if you sign him you are paying for the earlier years of the contract when Pujols can be expected to continue his established high level of performance.
Since Pujols was 30 last season, I established his level of performance by averaging his WARP for his age 27-30 seasons. I then did the same for his similar players. From ages 32-35—what will be the first four years of Pujols’s contract, the players averaged a per season WARP value of slightly over 60% of their established value. This is pretty disappointing. If Pujols follows this same trend, he will average a WARP of 6.28, meaning he will be worth a bit more than 6 wins above a replacement player. This value is lower than that of any season of his career (his lowest was a WARP of 6.4 in 2002). Now, 60% of Albert Pujols is quite good--to give you an idea of what that looks like, in 2002, he had a slash line of .314/.394/.561. However, that was in a higher scoring era than today, so the numbers would look lower today, as WARP is normed. But it would still be good.
But he still would be producing only 60% of what he is producing now, and these would likely be the most productive years of his contract. From age 36 on, he can be expected to decline, as all humans do. As my previous study noted, few players can avoid serious decline at these ages.
Part 3: Another approach: individual season performance
One problem with aggregating data is it can mask individual differences. If some exceptional players beat the effects of time, the failings of others can mask it. So I tried other ways to look at this. One question is, how many more seasons at above his established level can we expect from Pujols?
The players in my study have played a combined 54 seasons while aged 32 or older. In six of those seasons these players managed to equal or exceed their established level of production—an average of less than once per player. One player reached his established level twice. Three players never hit at their established level again.
Of course, many of these players could perform at a slightly lower level and be quite productive. So I examined how many times these players reached or exceeded 75% of their established level of production. The 8 players collectively reached this level only 10 times. One player reached it three times, and two players never produced at even 75% of their established level again. In short, producing at a level of 75% of their established level was a difficult feat for these players.
Part 4: Age 32-36 performance, by player
Even taken individually, the players do not present an encouraging picture. I’ll discuss them in order of similarity.
Two players are not yet old enough to discuss from ages 32-36.
During the ages of 32-34, Big Puma has produced at a level equal to almost 95% of his established value. This is a bit misleading, as his established value was driven down by a poor age 29 season (and Pujols’s established value is not driven down by a poor season). This makes it easier for Berkman to reach his established level. Also, since he only has three years of data at age 32 or older, his mammoth season at age 32 completely distorts the data. In contrast to the retention of his value, the trend of his WARP scores during the three years was quite troubling: 8.2, 4.9, 2.0. So he is not really that encouraging of a comp. However, so far he sure has been fun to watch this year!
During the ages of 32-35, Guerrero has produced at a level slightly less than 50% of his established level.
The following players will have their age 32-36 seasonal production examined.
Todd Helton produced at a level equal to 28% of his established level.
Mr. Robinson produced at a level equal to 69% of his established level.
Wade Boggs produced at 37% of his established level.
Frank Thomas produced at 50% of his established level.
Jeff Bagwell produced at a level equal to 74% of his established level.
Chipper Jones, the least comparable player to Pujols, also is the best case scenario. He produced at a level equal to almost 88% of his established value. He had two seasons that exceeded his established level, and another one that was at least 75% of his established level.
Jones, Bagwell, and to a lesser extent Robinson, did fairly well at retaining their value. Still during the 15 seasons they were aged 32-36, they combined for only 4 seasons that exceed their individually established levels of production, and only 6 seasons (40% of the total) reached a level of at least 75% of their established level. Half of those were from Jones.
Part 5: Conclusion
Based on this study of superstars most similar to Pujols, it is not realistic to expect many more seasons of production out of Pujols equal to his established level. The study suggests we can expect one more. If he gets three more, that will be better than anyone on the list. In fact, the study suggests that one more season at or above his established level and two more between 75% and 99% of that level would be beating the odds.
If I had to guess, I’d expect him to beat the 60% average over the first 4 years of a deal and produce at a level equal to 75% to 80% of his established level. But players like Helton and Guerrero provide a warning of the risk that even a superstar can quickly lose his value between the ages of 32 and 36. And this whole study is a sobering reminder of how quickly time erodes the skills of even elite talents.
Part 6: Extras
In the discussion of my previous study, someone asked about the production of players before reaching age 27.
So in response, for this pool of players I looked at how players’ age 24, 25, and 26 seasons compared to the "established level of production" in my study (from ages 27-30). The age 24 seasons were at 75%, age 25 seasons at 95%, and the age 26 seasons at 117%. For Pujols, the numbers were 88%, 79%, an 86% respectively. As a group, the players in this study peaked much earlier than Pujols did. I do not know what implications this has for his aging.
50 comments
|
7 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great post.
Very interesting analysis
"Albert hits good pitches hard and bad pitches even harder. And when he gets in the batter's box, if you pray, then you start praying. And if you don't pray, you think about starting."--Brian Bannister
Trevor Rosenthal Update (as of 4/27/11):
27 IP, 35 K, 11 BB/HBP, 9 ER, 2.31 FIP
by VolsnCards5 on May 7, 2011 4:10 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Great post
I think I was about the only person here who wasn’t interested in signing Albert to a big, long-term deal after he turned down whatever he was offered this off-season, and nothing in this post or what he’s done this year has convinced me otherwise!
I just don’t think he’s ultimately going to be worth what he seems to be asking for. We should let him walk if someone else is going to go 10 years or $250m+.
Still bitching to contact.
absitively
emotionally yes
business-wise, not smart
they already offered him too much
I may be in a rut, but at least I know where I'm going
...to DFA TLR
While it's entirely possible that Albert comps like one of these guys
It’s also possible that he comps out to Ted Williams or Mike Schmidt or Hank Aaron.
But if he wants 30m/yr
he NEEDS to comp like those guys. That needs to be GUARANTEED. We’re paying for 6 WAR/yr pretty much, so he needs to continue to be one of the top 10-15 players in the league, every year, until he’s finished.
I just think the downside is so huge and the upside is fairly small in a fair-market-value deal to Albert.
Still bitching to contact.
by Felonius_Monk on May 10, 2011 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree.
The post just seemed to really be negative in regards to Albert’s projected future worth. I wanted to add some other comps that aren’t too far off honestly that weren’t total and complete examples of players who fell off a cliff.
by WizardofOz1982 on May 10, 2011 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
The issue is body type
I agree the results were negative. They were, to be honest, much worse than I expected when I started this. I’m not happy with them, either.
But what you propose as a list of comps is a group of players who were both smaller and not first basemen.
Pujols 6’3" 230 lbs
Williams 6’3" 205 lbs
Aaron 6’ 180 lbs
Schmidt 6’ 2" 195 lbs
I’ll throw this in as well:
Stan Musial 6’ 175 lbs
Pujols is heavier than these guys. That often is a major difference in how a player ages. Note, Pujols has already had leg and foot problems, which weight is a factor of. Hank Aaron looks pretty small next to Pujols.
Yes, if you set out to cherry pick a list of players who aged well, you will have a list of players who aged well. That does not suggest anything other than that there are indeed a few elite players who age well.
The list I used was based on similarity scores generated by someone else—I did not choose these players with any goal in mind.
I do not think it is impossible that Pujols will age well. I just think the available evidence would cause one to see his production at high levels to be far from guaranteed. Hank Aaron’s aging is close to unique. Counting ton he exception to serve as a rule is risky.
interesting
that observation warrants further study I think. Have there been studies that demonstrate size actually contributes to the aging curv
One would think, however,
that in this day and age, with the advanced healing techniques, more knowledge about proper nutrition, and advanced training that a player would age a little better now than in the past.
I guess you would have to prove that Albert actually trains and eats properly, though.
Can Colby round out our new MV3?
Most of the players in the study
that aged poorly are not from that far in the past. Pujols has played against all of them but Frank Robinson and Wade Boggs. Many are still playing today.
Most of those guys also had significant injury issues
Bagwell had his hand broken a bunch of times and then had the shoulder problem.
Thomas got hurt in ‘99 and again in ’01 and was never really the same player after that, although he was able to put up three 3 WAR seasons in the middle part of the 00’s.
Guerrero played outfield and makes me cringe every time I see him run. Not to mention that his plate discipline is not nearly as good as what Albert’s is, and that should help Albert age better.
You’ve also omitted a couple of guys with similar builds who were/are very productive through their mid-30’s and into their late 30’s: Jim Thome being one, and Fred McGriff being the other.
Can Colby round out our new MV3?
Good points
It it worth noting that I didn’t omit anyone—the list of comps is from Baseball Prospectus.
Yeah, many of these players were undone by injuries. But I do not think Pujols is immune to such risks.
I'm not saying that he's immune
just stating that your sample doesn’t really include guys with similar builds who were productive players into their late 30’s and didn’t have a debilitating injury, so it seems skewed just a bit towards a precipitous decline even though most of those players didn’t age naturally, they had a significant injury that prevented them from playing to their previous ability level.
Can Colby round out our new MV3?
I think the study may lead one to believe
that if comparable players with similar builds all have debilitating injuries, that having such a build leads to a high risk factor of debilitating injuries.
But the sample is small and comps not too good. So I agree, it is not entirely convincing.
Thanks for reading!
I would agree with that,
except that a lot of these guys had injuries that I wouldn’t consider to be age or build related:
- Bagwell’s hand and shoulder seem like real freak injuries to me, but they definitely hindered his ability to play and eventually caused his retirement.
- Berkman clearly had injury/fatness related issues last year and at the end of ‘09, but he’s healthy this year and looks as good as he ever was in Houston through 6 weeks.
- Considering that watching Vlad run makes my knees ache, I think the fact that he’s still able to walk without a cane is incredible, let alone play baseball at a high level.
- Frank Thomas had two bad injuries that rendered a once elite player merely average.
That said, Helton hasn’t really had any major injuries and has slowed down considerably, Thome has back problems that prevent him from playing the field at all (although he can still provide offensive value), Giambi and Bonds have the steroid taint (as would McGwire), and Boggs aged like just about every contact hitter that I can think of.
Can Colby round out our new MV3?
Didn't Helton have back surgery?
Or am I confusing him with someone else? I know he’s had chronic back issues.
by WizardofOz1982 on May 18, 2011 9:04 AM EDT up reply actions
He had disk surgery after the '08 season
but his days as a .600 slugger were over a couple of years before that. I don’t think that his back was directly related to his decline as a player, and he hasn’t missed a lot of games due to injury since the surgery.
Can Colby round out our new MV3?
Glad I wasn't confused.
Pretty sure he was having chronic back issues but played through them for a couple years before the surgery.
by WizardofOz1982 on May 18, 2011 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Could be
On the bright side, while his slugging was diminished considerably, he’s still provided significant value by continuing to get on base at a high rate. So that would bode well for someone like Albert being a 4-5 WAR player late into his 30’s.
He’s probably the most underrated player of the his generation, that’s for sure.
Can Colby round out our new MV3?
I agree
Coors field factor or not. You still have to hit the ball.
by WizardofOz1982 on May 19, 2011 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Depends if you consider him under-rated (and part of Helton's generation) or not
but in terms of national media, I’d say it’s maybe Chase Utley. Close with Helton maybe. Both guys put up consistent 6+ WAR seasons at their peaks. The weirdest thing about Utley is he plays a tough position, he’s got a good glove, he’s good looking, he puts up good non-SABR stats (RBI & BA) year on year, he’s really media-friendly (no scandal, seems to “play the game the right way”), AND he plays in a pretty big market, and yet if you asked the average fan who the best 2 players in baseball the last 6 years have been, I bet hardly any of them would give you the right answer (Pujols & Utley).
Still bitching to contact.
by Felonius_Monk on May 21, 2011 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions
True
But how many people would even get the top 5 right? I would be most CARDINAL fans wouldn’t have the top 5 right, and we have two of the players on that list on our team.
Most people are putting MIggy Cabrera in the top 5 I would guess. And, sadly, they’re probably putting Ryan Howard up there too if they’re an average fan who watches ESPN a lot.
Can Colby round out our new MV3?
First base tends to be easier on the body.
So I’m not sure why position should matter when trying to establish comparable players. I was thinking more about skill sets (good average, good power, consistency all in one player) than body type when I came up with a list of comps in my head. If you just have to have a comp that played first base and was of comparable size (6’, 200) then Gehrig comes to mind. If anything the fact that the comps I used were able to maintain performance throughout their 30s while playing a more physically demanding position is a plus.
Aaron and Schmidt both played some first base later in their careers but still were primarily an outfielder and a third baseman respectively.
I’m still trying to muddle through any ranking system that ranks Wade Boggs as more similar to Albert Pujols than Chipper Jones. At face value this makes no sense to me at all. All three had the great batting average and consistency but Boggs had next to no power unlike Albert and Chipper.
I think given Albert’s skill set and ability level he has every chance of being another Hank Aaron or Gehrig as he does getting injured and falling off like Helton.
Actually looking at your comps again gives me some hope that Albert will be able to maintain. The people on your list that did maintain production were first baseman with the exception of Chipper. Helton is an outlier but he had a catastrophic back injury. Once he was healthy again he produced again. Even those who did maintain (Bagwell and Thomas especially) dealt with injuries the whole time.
by WizardofOz1982 on May 11, 2011 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Position matters
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. While what you say about it being easier on the body sounds like it makes sense, in reality data shows position matters. First basemen tend not to age well (neither do second basemen).
My guess is that why you end up at a position tends to say something about you. First base is pretty much a defensive position of last resort—if you could play elsewhere, you would. So the players who play there tend to have some sort of a weakness that keeps them from playing elsewhere (this would be especially true of right handers—lefties can’t play other infield positions). This weakness shows up in their aging.
Yes, Helton, and Bagwell, and Thomas, and Berkman, all ended up having their careers impacted by injuries—as they aged. That is the point. Even Chipper, who has aged well, has battled injuries. Injuries are a significant part of the aging process.
That Pujols has essentially waged an almost constant battle with chronic injuries throughout much of his career is worrisome. As you get older, injuries tend to become more common and recovery more difficult.
I agree the Boggs comp is odd. And remember, my study says at the beginning that Pujols is unique and the set of comps is not good. My guess is the system looks at Boggs and Pujols as having in common a very high average, exceptional walk rate, and low strikeout rate. The home runs are a big difference, but Boggs slugged over .500 between the ages of 28 and 30.
Pujols has three inches and 30 pounds on Gehrig. I know I do not see people who are three inches taller and 30 pounds heavier than me as comparable to my size.
I think the best argument that Pujols will age better than these players is that he is a unique talent and these players as a set are poor comps, even according to the system that chose them. There just are not players like him.
Can't disagree with anything you're saying
I just wanted to try to offer a valid counterpoint without sounding like an ass.
First baseman tend to not age well and it’s exactly for the reason you’re extolling. First baseman are usually the biggest, slowest, most plodding person on the field (short of maybe the catcher but that’s a totally different deal). Frank Howard jumps to mind. I’m not sure you can just lump Albert in to that group and not get skewed results because of the rest of the field.
Albert is none of those though. He’s not fast but he’s not Frank Howard. He’s athletic like Bagwell was. Actually the comp there is pretty good. Both started as third baseman, I refuse to believe Bagwell only weighed 195 when he was in his prime, etc. Hank Greenberg also comes to mind (6’3", 210 in the 40s) although I didn’t want to use him as a comp because of incomplete stats due to his wartime service.
Anyway you slice it I think it’s a crapshoot. Given his unique talents though I think Pujols is a better bet to age well than most. He’s just really hard to get a read on because he doesn’t really comp well with anyone. He’s a third baseman playing first base. He’s amazingly consistent. He’s got a chronic nagging injury history that’s allegedly all cleared up now.
I really have a hard time believing that Albert really wants 30 million a year. It just doesn’t fit with the person he’s been his whole career. Given the option of 27 million a year and a winning team or 30 million a year and playing for the schlubs I think he settles for 27 million a year.
by WizardofOz1982 on May 11, 2011 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions
lozano tells him he can get it,what does he do
say no?
I may be in a rut, but at least I know where I'm going
...to DFA TLR
Comparable size
My cousin is 6’7" and 275. I’m 6’3" and 265. I consider us to be of comparable size athletically. Just walking down the street he looks much bigger than I do.
by WizardofOz1982 on May 11, 2011 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Beyond the actual contract...
What sort of message does it send to other players? The Cardinals bought out Albert’s arbitration years very very cheaply, plus a few extra, delaying his entry to the FA market until he was past his peak (at least so it’s looking like).
If they screw him over now, it hurts the chances of any other player signing a similar contract.
they weren't exactly screwing him over on that contract, though
pujols traded the possibility of having an enormous payday at 27 for the certainty of be set for life at 24. in hindsight it seems ridiculous to think that he might have faded by, say, 2006, but it’s not out of the realm of possibility.
by DanUpBaby on May 10, 2011 9:26 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
From a business standpoint
The Cardinals have done well with Albert. They got his peak years at a good price and Albert agreed to it. He makes plenty of money, enough to fund his charities.
But If the FO sticks to their latest offer and let him walk then they still had Albert in his peak years and now have Matt Holliday and money to spend.
pujols traded the possibility of having an enormous payday at 27 for the certainty of be set for life at 24.
That’s pretty astute and blunt. That’s the way it is.
Baseball is only a game. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole.
by Dave Pendleton on May 11, 2011 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions
danup rocks
"I do not want my mom to be Fredbird"
free compositionson guitar and keyboards through looping pedal (no overdubs)
by Cards Fan in Chitown on May 12, 2011 8:33 PM EDT up reply actions
or got hurt
he took a sure lucrative thing that paid no matter what happened, including he didn’t perform at this level
and i suspect he would not have performed at this level if he was, say, in the al east
I may be in a rut, but at least I know where I'm going
...to DFA TLR
They gave him, at the time, one of the richest (in fact maybe at that point it WAS the richest, if memory serves) contracts ever given to a pre-free agency player
That doesn’t scream “cheap-out” to me.
Still bitching to contact.
by Felonius_Monk on May 10, 2011 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions
He was not screwed over
He chose to sign the contract of his own free will. I have a lot of respect for Pujols, and I respect his decision to sign the contract.
And as Pujols has made clear, his negotiations for the next contract are pure business, with his looking out for his best interests. I do not know how he or the players would expect the team to not be equally practical.
Wasn’t that contract worth more than 100 million dollars and the biggest contract in team history up to that point?
I doubt that would send a bad message to anyone. The Cardinals signed their best player to a 100 million dollar contract, the biggest in team history, before he was 25. That speaks volumes of their commitment to talented players. Follow that up with what they dished out for Holliday and I think big time players would love to come here.
by sharpwp on May 10, 2011 9:55 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
So if we map this out in WAR:
Pujols to this point has average 7.3 BWar and 8.1 FWar per season. Taking the median of that (7.7 WAR) and extrapolating using your analysis (while also assuming marginal cost per win to be $4.25M at the start of 2012 an increasing by .25M every year):
Year 1: 7.7 X .80 = 6.16 ($26.18M)
Year 2: 7.7 X .80 = 6.16 ($27.72M)
Year 3: 7.7 X .75 = 5.78 ($27.46M)
Year 4: 7.7 X .75 = 5.78 ($28.90M)
Total WAR (After 4 seasons): 23.88
Now, let’s just assume a significant drop from year 4 to year 5 and then a linear regression of skills:
Year 5: 7.7 X .65 = 5.01 ($26.30M)
Year 6: 7.7 X .60 = 4.62 ($25.41M)
Year 7: 7.7 X .55 = 4.39 ($25.24M)
Year 8: 7.7 X .50 = 3.85 ($23.10M)
Year 9: 7.7 X .45 = 3.47 ($21.69M)
Year 10: 7.7 X .40 = 3.08 ($20.02M)
Total WAR (After 8 seasons): 41.75 ($210.31M)
Total WAR (After 10 seasons): 48.30 ($252.02M)
Obviously this is just a back-of-the-napkin analysis, but paying him any more than $25M per season is just asking to lose value over any contract longer than 6 years. I think that something like 8Y$200M is more than fair and it’s more than players at his position have gotten in recent years. If he ages gracefully we got a great deal, if he doesn’t we’re not completely sunk (although we’d be severely crippled as a franchise if Holliday also does not age well). He’d be the highest paid player in the National League and the second highest paid player in all of baseball.
Can Colby round out our new MV3?
I hope Mo and DeWitt
read this post. Albert’s contributions to the Cardinals and the likelihood that he will remain a good player for some time demand that he be given a respectful offer but the FO will not be doing us a favor by giving him a crippling contract. Cardinal fans are best served if he is offered a contract that is realistic for his likely future production.
I'm positive Mo and Dewitt realize Pujols will decline similar to what this post reflects.
"And a boring game for boring people. Did you ever watch golf on television? It's like watching flies FUCK. Think of the intellect it must take to draw pleasure from this activity: hitting a ball with a crooked stick and then WALKING AFTER IT" -George Carlin
by stlcardsfan4 on May 12, 2011 4:20 AM EDT up reply actions
This year makes it interesting...
… I fully expect Pujols to improve from his first month, but right now he’s on track for less than 4 WAR. That doesn’t at all mean he’s done, but it could affect the length of contract during negotiations. The Yankees have gotten screwed with their deals for ARod, Jeter, and Posada and everyone knows it. The Cubs have gotten screwed with Soriano and other long-term deals. The Astros with Lee, etc. AL teams now recognize that they don’t need to pay $15mn/year for a good DH that can’t play in the field anymore. If Pujols doesn’t put up a 6-7 WAR season this year (and he basically can’t, already), it becomes less likely that teams will think he’s capable of front-loading enough value to make a 10 year contract worth it. Why would you pay Pujols for 10 years when you can sign Fielder for 5 or 6?
The Cards FO seems more concerned with years than AAV, as they should be, and I find it doubtful that they’ll be out-bid on a relatively short (5-7 year) contract. It’s years 8-10 that they don’t want to commit to. And if Pujols doesn’t pick up quickly, then no other teams will either and the Cards won’t have to.
And this past off-season showed that the PR effects of letting Pujols go won’t be so bad. For some reason, antipathy for greedy athletes runs stronger than antipathy for greedy owners. If the Cards offer $22mn/year and Pujols goes to the Cubs for $23mn/year, Pujols will draw more ire than DeWallet.
22m\yr is about the amount i'd be comfortable with
Thing is, it’s just impossible to imagine Albert Pujols getting paid less than Ryan Howard going forward. TBH, I even think $25m/yr is a struggle. We’re paying him for 5WAR/yr with that contract and given the likely length (8-10 yrs) that could end up being a disaster.
I don’t really want Pujols back, if the rumours about his contract demands are to be believed.
But who else gives Pujols more than, say, 8/200m? It’ll be really interesting to see where he ends up.
Still bitching to contact.
by Felonius_Monk on May 15, 2011 8:45 AM EDT up reply actions
The team is crazy
if they don’t attach some sort of hedge to years 7-10 of a huge contract, even if it is something like mutual or auto-vesting options.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
You have to keep in mind...
that Howard’s contract is only 5 years in length (through 2016) with a club option for 2017, that if declined pays Howard 10M.
I would be comfortable with 6 years for Albert and club options of declining buyout value (2018-15M buyout, 2019-12M buyout, 2020-9M buyout, and 2021-6Mbuyout). Sure, it would make some difficult decisions in 2019 (is Pujols worth the difference of the buyout compared to the cost to have him play) but at least the club would have a decision. I think you could put in some vesting options tied to MVP voting, such as a Top 10 finish results in the next season option vesting?
In this scenario
I see no reason why the buyouts would have to be that big. Why not just have a $10M buyout each year? Or cascade them down from $10M? A $15M buyout would be silly, as we’d be basically crippling ourselves EITHER WAY! The purpose of a buyout is to give the club control to cut a player while giving the player guaranteed compensation should they elect to do so.
Can Colby round out our new MV3?
I dunno
if we assume the cost of Pujols AAV is $25m:
We can pay him $25m in 2018 +$12m to buy him out after that ($37m to have him just for his age 38 season), or pay him $15m to go away after his age 37 season. So the choice basically is “is Albert Pujols, age 38, plus the value of a possible option of his age 39 season, going to be worth $22m (the difference between the two sums”. I could see the answer to that question being quite finely balanced, actually, depending on how he ages and how FA values change in the next 6-7 years.
I quite like the descending buyout idea, actually – it’s not something I’d considered but it’s something I think could work for both parties. Nice idea, Jumsy.
All that said, I still don’t want Pujols back unless he takes a healthy discount, for me the risks still far outweigh the rewards.
Still bitching to contact.
by Felonius_Monk on May 21, 2011 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
Honestly?
I’d rather just offer a shorter deal with ridiculous AAV. Something like 4Y$125M or 5Y$150. He gets to be the highest paid player in the game for all of those seasons and we’re not stuck with a 36-39 year old gimpy Albert Pujols making $25-$27M per season.
Can Colby round out our new MV3?
Years, not dollars
My favorite line of Joe Sheehan’s was that teams rarely get in trouble with AAV on a contract. It is usually the length that burns them. I think most of us are more comfortable paying Pujols $30 million/year for 4 years than $27 million/year for 8 years.
I know I would be.
I’d be much happier with 5 years/150 million than 7 years/200 million.
by WizardofOz1982 on May 18, 2011 9:06 AM EDT up reply actions
pujols is like global warming
as the earth heats up it does not do so evenly, so the most obvious thing to most people is that the extremes are more frequent
look at what apu has done month by month as he ages
ba, ops, walks, you name it, he is progressively becoming more erratic
one underlying assumption for apu is that his distinguishing consistency will continue, but it has been declining for the last several years
hard to imagine that decline will not continue
I may be in a rut, but at least I know where I'm going
...to DFA TLR

by 






















