Holliday on keeping Pujols: 'A tough deal'

Give the man his money

No Pujols, no Cardinals and that is a fact.

Really he should stay with the cardinals. How much money do these guys need?

Just throw in a percentage of the beer concessions.

Hey Cardinals. Tick-tock. Your relevance expires in three weeks if this contract is not done. No pressure.

QUOTE(#4):

Originally posted 08:48 AM ET  02.02 by Home Theater Guy

No Pujols, no Cardinals and that is a fact.

The Cards were around a very long time before Pujols and will be around for a very long time after Pujols!

Let some other idiot team pay him $300M

QUOTE(#8):

Originally posted 09:20 AM ET  02.02 by stargatebabe

The Cards were around a very long time before Pujols and will be around for a very long time after Pujols!Let some other idiot team pay him $300M

Sorry - hit send too fast!

As a Cards fan, I'm getting tired of his unreasonable demands

QUOTE(#8):

Originally posted 09:20 AM ET  02.02 by stargatebabe

The Cards were around a very long time before Pujols and will be around for a very long time after Pujols!Let some other idiot team pay him $300M

You are in the minority opinion, though one could think of a number of different ways a team could spend that money and be a better team than to pay Pujols.

No my money...or maybe it is, some of it anyway. I am going to have to cut down on what I spend on baseball, vote with your wallet, these guys are all too rich.

I have to believe (maybe not to the same extent though) that the Cardinals would be in the same situation as Minnesota was with Mauer with this deal. Ultimately, the Twins gave Mauer an 8/184M deal to avoid riots in the streets. I think the Cards get this deal done with Pujols, even if its a dollar more than ARod money, I think they pay him.

QUOTE:

Originally posted by

Use the 300 million to buy the Dodgers, and then take all their good players.

Ethier and Kemp, you can have the rest.

Have a tough time believing (1) 300mil contract for a single huge bat is better than (3) 100mil contracts for 3 very respectable big bats. Pay him if you will Cards, but I have to believe this would make Albert a liability as opposed to the asset he's been.

QUOTE:

Originally posted by

Don't sleep on Kershaw and Billingsly.

Nor Broxton.

QUOTE(#10):

Originally posted 09:45 AM ET  02.02 by AllStarz Ruinating the Nation

You are in the minority opinion, though one could think of a number of different ways a team could spend that money and be a better team than to pay Pujols.

I know I'm in the minority but don't get me wrong. I like Pujols - he's a great player - but I'm just getting tired of his demands.

QUOTE(#16):

Originally posted 10:04 AM ET  02.02 by The_Big_Hurt

Have a tough time believing (1) 300mil contract for a single huge bat is better than (3) 100mil contracts for 3 very respectable big bats. Pay him if you will Cards, but I have to believe this would make Albert a liability as opposed to the asset he's been.

IF they sign him for $300M/10, yes he will be a huge liability for maybe 3 or 4 years. I don't see them paying him that much money! DeWitt (owner) has already said he won't do "an A-Rod type deal"

Kershaws 12-6 hook is unbelievable but needs to be more consistant....Also, closers are overrated.

So Pujols walks and signs a deal with the Evil Empire then...

QUOTE(#17):

Originally posted 10:04 AM ET  02.02 by THE BISHOP!

Nor Broxton.

He's washed up. He's just a big meathead with a halfway decent fastball.