Jump to content


Pujols a future possibility for Florida?


STANTONmarlinsfeature
 Share

Recommended Posts

I was watching the MLB Network and the broadcasters were discussing what might happen if Albert Pujols doesn't sign a contract extension with the Cardinals. They mentioned possible clubs if he didn't return to St. Louis, and one of the teams was the Marlins. With Florida about to move into a new ballpark, is it possible that the organization would be looking to pick up a marquee player like Pujols as a welcoming gift for their fans?

-- Benjamin F., Hollywood, Fla.

 

 

As the franchise makes the transition to its new ballpark in 2012, payroll naturally will increase. We're already seeing more dollars spent on players. This year, the Opening Day payroll projects to be about $58 million. Perhaps we could be looking at a $70 million payroll in 2012. Now, if Pujols reaches the open market, would the Marlins make a run at the player who might be the best in the game? I wouldn't rule anything out, because the organization is pretty thorough in exploring the market. If they get creative and something makes sense, then I wouldn't be surprised if Florida made a push for any high-profile player.

 

In the new ballpark, the Marlins should have more payroll flexibility because they don't have many players locked up to long-term contracts. Where the club would be cautious is allocating such a high percentage of its overall payroll on one player. Say Pujols signs a deal like Alex Rodriguez -- he would be making about $25 million to $30 million in 2012. If Florida's payroll jumped to about $100 million, then that figure would fit in more realistically than a payroll of say, $70 million to $80 million.

 

The Marlins don't want a situation like the Rangers had when they signed A-Rod years ago and then weren't able to surround him with enough support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


He has hinted in the past that he wants to play for the Marlins, so this wouldn't be the case of a team like the Nationals having to overpay in order to attract someone of Pujols' caliber.

 

However, it's hard to imagine that it would take less than 7 years in order to give him a contract. Pujols still is the best player in MLB right now but I don't think it will be wise to be paying him that much money down the line when they will need to extend Hanley's contract again and offer Stanton a deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on how badly he wants to play here. If many and contract length play any part in his decision there's just about zero chance seeing as New York, Boston, Chicago, etc, could double up on us and not even blink even with a higher payroll and new ball park. A nice thought, but I see little chance of this happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, I wouldn't rule it out. Given the ballpark coming next season, I think we've got a much higher chance of doing it than most other ballclubs.

 

 

Thing is, this means Hanley won't get resigned. I doubt they could take on both of those contracts.

 

You've got a point there. And if Stanton is what we expect, they won't have the money in, say, 2017, to give Hanley $20M, JJ $20M, Pujols $30M, and Stanton $10M. That'd be $70 on 4 players, not even thinking of guys like CC or LoMo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is certainly possible. Should he hit the market, every single team in baseball will make a pitch and the Marlins will be among them. He lives in Miami, so I'm sure we would be one of his top 5, if not top choice. The questions is, does Loria have it in him to increase payroll to 100+ million? I'm not too sure. However, this would make the Marlins one of the most feared lineup in baseball. Hanley-Pujols-Stanton. HPS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, I wouldn't rule it out. Given the ballpark coming next season, I think we've got a much higher chance of doing it than most other ballclubs.

 

 

Thing is, this means Hanley won't get resigned. I doubt they could take on both of those contracts.

 

You've got a point there. And if Stanton is what we expect, they won't have the money in, say, 2017, to give Hanley $20M, JJ $20M, Pujols $30M, and Stanton $10M. That'd be $70 on 4 players, not even thinking of guys like CC or LoMo.

 

 

Coghlan and LoMo could go by then for all I care, and we could replace with minimum salary-undervalued players.

 

I'm not saying there is, but if there's anyway possible to get Albert Pujols, you do it. For what it's worth, JJ might not be a Marlin by that time. 2017 is six years from now, and we all know that a pitcher can get injured throwing a single pitch. JJ also has a history of injury, already.

 

Albert Pujols is a generational talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, I wouldn't rule it out. Given the ballpark coming next season, I think we've got a much higher chance of doing it than most other ballclubs.

 

 

Thing is, this means Hanley won't get resigned. I doubt they could take on both of those contracts.

 

You've got a point there. And if Stanton is what we expect, they won't have the money in, say, 2017, to give Hanley $20M, JJ $20M, Pujols $30M, and Stanton $10M. That'd be $70 on 4 players, not even thinking of guys like CC or LoMo.

 

 

Coghlan and LoMo could go by then for all I care, and we could replace with minimum salary-undervalued players.

 

I'm not saying there is, but if there's anyway possible to get Albert Pujols, you do it. For what it's worth, JJ might not be a Marlin by that time. 2017 is six years from now, and we all know that a pitcher can get injured throwing a single pitch. JJ also has a history of injury, already.

 

Albert Pujols is a generational talent.

Sure, but my point is that six years from now you can't have all that money on 4 guys, and that's very posiible if we did something like signing Pujols.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, I wouldn't rule it out. Given the ballpark coming next season, I think we've got a much higher chance of doing it than most other ballclubs.

 

 

Thing is, this means Hanley won't get resigned. I doubt they could take on both of those contracts.

 

You've got a point there. And if Stanton is what we expect, they won't have the money in, say, 2017, to give Hanley $20M, JJ $20M, Pujols $30M, and Stanton $10M. That'd be $70 on 4 players, not even thinking of guys like CC or LoMo.

 

 

Coghlan and LoMo could go by then for all I care, and we could replace with minimum salary-undervalued players.

 

I'm not saying there is, but if there's anyway possible to get Albert Pujols, you do it. For what it's worth, JJ might not be a Marlin by that time. 2017 is six years from now, and we all know that a pitcher can get injured throwing a single pitch. JJ also has a history of injury, already.

 

Albert Pujols is a generational talent.

Sure, but my point is that six years from now you can't have all that money on 4 guys, and that's very posiible if we did something like signing Pujols.

 

who knows maybe six year from now we have that kind of money like a 150 million payroll

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt it.... and I wouldn't want to sign him super long-term for a whole bunch of money. For what? To have 3 great players when you need nine on the field? Only three men able to get on base consistently (assuming Stanton gets on base consistently)? If he comes at a low(er) asking price, sure, though I doubt it, if not, then I'm not terribly interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, I wouldn't rule it out. Given the ballpark coming next season, I think we've got a much higher chance of doing it than most other ballclubs.

 

 

Thing is, this means Hanley won't get resigned. I doubt they could take on both of those contracts.

 

You've got a point there. And if Stanton is what we expect, they won't have the money in, say, 2017, to give Hanley $20M, JJ $20M, Pujols $30M, and Stanton $10M. That'd be $70 on 4 players, not even thinking of guys like CC or LoMo.

 

 

Coghlan and LoMo could go by then for all I care, and we could replace with minimum salary-undervalued players.

 

I'm not saying there is, but if there's anyway possible to get Albert Pujols, you do it. For what it's worth, JJ might not be a Marlin by that time. 2017 is six years from now, and we all know that a pitcher can get injured throwing a single pitch. JJ also has a history of injury, already.

 

Albert Pujols is a generational talent.

 

Doubt it happens. Seriously doubt it. BUT if it did LoMo and Gaby would both be gone in 2012. Unless LoMo really excells in LF this year. But a kind of scarey thought would maybe Hanley would be gone also. Replace him with an average bat with GG type defense in order to get a GG MVP player at 1B and who knows? I don't know how the fan base would react to that though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, I wouldn't rule it out. Given the ballpark coming next season, I think we've got a much higher chance of doing it than most other ballclubs.

 

 

Thing is, this means Hanley won't get resigned. I doubt they could take on both of those contracts.

 

You've got a point there. And if Stanton is what we expect, they won't have the money in, say, 2017, to give Hanley $20M, JJ $20M, Pujols $30M, and Stanton $10M. That'd be $70 on 4 players, not even thinking of guys like CC or LoMo.

 

 

Coghlan and LoMo could go by then for all I care, and we could replace with minimum salary-undervalued players.

 

I'm not saying there is, but if there's anyway possible to get Albert Pujols, you do it. For what it's worth, JJ might not be a Marlin by that time. 2017 is six years from now, and we all know that a pitcher can get injured throwing a single pitch. JJ also has a history of injury, already.

 

Albert Pujols is a generational talent.

 

Doubt it happens. Seriously doubt it. BUT if it did LoMo and Gaby would both be gone in 2012. Unless LoMo really excells in LF this year. But a kind of scarey thought would maybe Hanley would be gone also. Replace him with an average bat with GG type defense in order to get a GG MVP player at 1B and who knows? I don't know how the fan base would react to that though.

 

Exactly. If you think about it, you'd be getting rid of a younger player with more potential upside, for an older one in Pujols, I mean come on, I love the guy and we all know he's one of the best in the game right now, but I wouldn't want to risk losing Hanley for him. .. ..... Also, I doubt he's just 31 :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...