Message Boards

Yes, it's September.

Yes, we still have 25 games left.

Yes, there's the possibility of eternal glory waiting in October.

But is it too early to ask the question?

All signs are pointing to Holliday looking for a monster contract this offseason. Is it really necessary for the Cardinals to be the one to give it to him?

I realize that the addition of Holliday has helped put the Cardinals into the NL's Elite. But is he worth the risk of tying the club's hands financially for the future?

I read an interesting piece on ESPN tauting the dangers of the Cardinals signing Holliday to a longterm deal. Assuming that Holliday garners a deal in the $15mil/yr range, and that Pujols is extended in the $25-$30mil/yr range...you'd be looking at two players accounting for nearly $50mil in payroll.

I think that we ALL know the Cardinals are NEVER going to be the Yankees. We're never even going to be the Mets when it comes to spending. There just aren't the same monetary gains to be had playing in a market outside of New York or L.A. Therefore, I think it's safe to assume that the Cardinals payroll is always going to hover around the $100mil/yr range.

So, is it really wise to lock up almost 50% of that payroll in TWO players?

Now, I'm not saying that Holliday OR Pujols aren't WORTH the money. Since the two joined forces, the Cardinals have been damned near unbeatable. And it's been extraordinarily fun to watch them this season. But they're not the only one's doing the work. DeRosa, Ludwick, Wainwright, Carpenter, Pineiro. They've all been played big parts in this team's success.

They also all have something else in common...we're at risk of losing them without the proper financial resources.

What would the Cardinals look like without Waino and Carp at the top of the rotation? Would they even have HALF as good a record as they do now? And what about DeRosa and Ludwick? You might give the argument that DeRosa hasn't played at a "Holliday-level" since coming over, but how much of an upgrade has he been over what we had at thirdbase???

Holliday will EASILY be the biggest fish in the free agency pond this offseason. And with Boras as his agent...he'll expect to be paid as such. But does that mean the Cardinals should be the one's to do it.

What other option do we have? Do we risk losing him and slipping back into NL mediocrity?

First of all, anytime you have a team with Pujols in the lineup (coupled with maybe a Ludwick, DeRosa, and a second year Rasmus), I don't think you can be considered a "mediocre" team (especially in the weak NL). Plus, just because you don't sign Holliday doesn't mean you won't pick anybody up.

There are a few decent free agents in the OF this year (Bay, Dye, Guerrero). They might all have their issues, but I that's not to say they couldn't help your team win. And at a considerably lower price than Holliday.

My personal favorite option is somehow winding up with Carl Crawford playing LF and batting leadoff...but that's just because I'm a speed fannatic.

In either case, I don't see the Cardinals becoming after thoughts in 2010...even without Holliday.

Let me know what you think...is signing Holliday a NECESSITY? Or do you worry about it hurting the club later?