Categorized | Mark Timmons

Albert Pujols

Albert Pujols

Let me cut to the chase:

James Loney, Jerry Sands, Chris Withrow, Josh Lindblom, Ethan Martin, Jon Broxton and Casey Blake (hey, St. Louis is home for him) for Albert Pujols.

Call me crazy.

Broxton, Blake and Loney would help keep them competitive NOW, and the rest would help in the future.  Wouldn’t Dave Duncan love to get his hands on Broxton?

Would you do it?

Would St. Louis?

Forget the money right now.

Would you do it?

Lineup:

  1. Furcal  SS
  2. Carroll/DeJesus  2B
  3. Kemp  CF
  4. Pujols 1B
  5. Ethier RF
  6. Uribe 3B
  7. Thames/Gibbons – LF
  8. Barajas /Navarro  C

About Mark Timmons

When you see the invisible, you can do the impossible!

44 Responses to “Albert Pujols”

  1. the truth hurts says:

    in a heartbeat

  2. ken says:

    For a one year deal? Yes.

    The Dodgers would win the World Series, the value of the Dodgers would go through the roof, and neither Frank nor Jamie could afford to buy out the other so they would have to sell the Team the day after Commissioner Gordon ruled that Jamie had a right to a significant portion of the value of the Dodgers and Bud refused to allow the court imposed “Debt” to exist thus mandating a sell. Do you really see Frank and Jamie agreeing to allow Jamie to be a minority owner with no power?

    Well maybe.

    • Mark_Timmons says:

      Then he will have to force Wilpon to sell the Mets too and I don\’t see that happening.

      Isn\’t the value of the Dodgers determined when the divorce is final, not future value?

      • ken says:

        In my opinion you still do not get it.

        La Vida Loca has officially moved on so Kemp might have a good year.

        • Mark_Timmons says:

          \”In my opinion you still do not get it.\”

          I heard those exact same words from another attorney 3 weeks ago… right before the judge ruled in my favor.

          I\’m just sayin…

  3. Bobby says:

    i think the conversation would start with kemp (loney would be there only to give them a solid 1b in return).

    then yea, add our top 3 kids. whichever they want. i don’t care.

    mannnnnn i wish we could do something like this. talk about energizing the fan base!!

  4. Bill Russell says:

    A heap of nothing for the best player in baseball. Hell ya.

  5. Dodger Blue says:

    We would automatically be the GREATEST hitter in Dodger History!

  6. kdogg says:

    There is no way St Louis would do this without getting Kemp or Ethier. Withrow and Martin have been garbage, the Cards would want Gordon Rubby DLR Sands Jansen Loney and either Kemp or Dre. Its nice to dream that we could unload a bunch of crap for the best hitter in baseball but lets be real the Dodgers also don’t have the resources to sign Pujols long term and the only way you make that deal is if you sign him long term.

    • bluetrain says:

      This
      “Dodgers also don’t have the resources to sign Pujols long term and the only way you make that deal is if you sign him long term”

      plus i hate these kind of deals, as sooon as we got him he’d test positve for something. Call me jaded

  7. Aaron G. says:

    NO WAY THIS DEAL HAPPENS….

  8. Dodger Blue says:

    Hate to think that the fucken Mcunts will not give us the chance at Pujols. This type of opportunities dont always happen

  9. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    I would only do that deal if Pujols was also locked up to a long term deal. Otherwise, no way for a one-year rental. From reports I’ve heard, he’s looking for a 10 year, $300 million deal. There’s probably some compromise around that number, although it’s likely to end up at somewhere around a $30 million annual value. If the Dodgers can afford to do that now, and Albert is agreeable, by all means, make the deal. If the Dodgers are willing to pay the freight, but Pujols can’t be locked into a contract now, then the Dodgers should simply wait and get in the bidding when he’s a free agent next year. The Yankees with Texeira and the Red Sox with Gonzalez are not likely to be part of that bidding, so the Dodgers, if their willing and able to pay what it takes, would have as much a chance as anyone of signing him.

  10. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    “They’re”, NOT “their” in the last sentence.

  11. Bobby says:

    haha thanks for clearing that up brooklyn.

    forget about that zack lee signing, which happily shocked all of us. mccourt going out and aggressively getting pujols will build him all the good will in the world from the city of LA!!!!

    i hope ned’s keepin tabs on things. p.s. with him the NL could be ours the next few years, as i see that philly has an old lineup and these pitchers aren’t young kids either!!

  12. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    There is actually one scenario in which the Dodgers should make that deal w/o locking up Pujols now. It would require that the Dodgers have determined that they will not be outbid for Pujols when he reaches free agency next year, and that they are convinced that playing a year in LA would be a positive experience for him, and enough to persuade him to sign a long term deal with them if the money was right. Keep in mind also, that although he’s not Pujols, Prince Fielder may well be on the market next year too.

  13. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    Oh, and if Sands realizes his potential and becomes a big time power hitter, think how nice it would be to sign Pujols as a free agent next year, and have a lineup that included Pujols, Kemp, Ethier and Sands back to back to back to back, in any order you please. Yes, that’s being greedy, but it’s a thought that might even be possible.

  14. Mark_Timmons says:

    OK, the Dodgers sweeten the deal and give up the following players:

    Billingsley

    Loney

    Broxton

    Blake

    Withrow

    Martin

    DeLaRosa

    Sands

    for

    Pujols

    Rasmus

    That\’s a lot to give up.

    Lineup:

    1. Furcal SS

    2. Kemp RF

    3. Ethier LF

    4. Pujols 1B

    5. Rasmus CF

    6. Uribe 3B

    7. Barajas/Navarro C

    8. DeJesus 2B

  15. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    I agree that getting Pujols would be a huge step in building goodwill. I also believe it could be a marketing strategy that could be incredibly profitable. “Albert’s Alley” or “Pujols’ Playground” could replace Mannywood. And I’m sure there would be plenty of merchandise to replace the Manny dreadlocks. But any goodwill that comes with obtaining Pujols would only be lasting if he were locked up long term. Getting Pujols now, and then letting him get away later, is a formula for creating disenchantment among the fan base, and would open the Dodgers to unrelenting ridicule.

  16. ray guilfoyle says:

    The Dodgers would have to give up Kemp, Billingsley and several prospects for Pujols. Plus, I think Pujols already stated he would veto any deal. He has the Cardinals in a corner, and it is being reported that Pujols rejected the Cards offer two weeks ago.
    Pujols also stated he would end contract talks on Tuesday.

  17. lawdog says:

    I follow the Rams in the St. Louis papers and so I’m exposed to a lot on the Cards from various sportswriters and “chats” they have with fans. Apparently, the Cardinals have intention of trading Pujols and have already set aside a $150 million dollar war chest to help sign him to an extension.

    Pujols is said to want an A-Rod type deal for $30 million per season for 6-8 years.

    In any event, they would never trade their star for our scrubs. I don’t know why Timmons still thinks like that. Other GMs aren’t stupid and why would they want our mediocre players plus a bunch of wannabes from the farm and an over priced geezer who probably can’t play 120 games for us and will probably hit .240 or thereabouts again next season when their giving up the most important cog in their starting lineup which they hope to take them past the Phillies and into the world series?

    In the early years on the other boards Timmons was always suggesting these kinds of ludicrous transactions. I thought he’d out grown living in that kind of fantasyland but obviously, I was wrong.

    If you are going to suggest a trade for a star to please at least make it realistic. Otherwise, you’re just fooling yourself and wasting our time Mr. Timmons.

  18. lawdog says:

    Edit: That should have read the Cards have no intention of trading Pujols. Particularly for a weak return package such as suggested by Timmons. Even if they traded Pujols for real value, management would still be crucified by the rabid Cardinal fans , or at least tarred and feathered and then ridden out of town on a rail.

  19. Willie Mays says:

    I haven’t been here long, but that Lawdog Idiot wants you to ban him. He’s begging for it.

  20. Mark_Timmons says:

    Willie,

    I am compelled to ignore him, lest I become like him.

  21. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    Mark,

    It is probably all unrealistic, but I understand it’s an exercise designed to have some fun. I have a feeling even you think it’s farfetched. So going along with the program….

    I like Colby Rasmus, and would love seeing him in CF for the Dodgers. But pitching is also important (verrrrrrrrrry important), so I’m wondering why you would add Billingsley and De la Rosa to get Rasmus added to the deal.

    As for getting Pujols, I’m just hoping that somehow, someway, the Dodgers will be a player if Pujols becomes a free agent next year. I also wouldn’t be in the least bit surprised if he’s locked up by the Cardinals. And I doubt that the February 16th deadline he set is etched in anything resembling stone.

  22. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    Despite the Dodgers’ financial problems, I can picture them bidding aggressively for Pujols if he becomes available next year. As big a marketing tool that Manny was, that will pale in comparison to the cash that Pujols could generate. He would likely pay for himself in attendance/concessions/parking revenues, merchandise sales, sponsorship dollars, and anything else that doesn’t come immediately to mind. And as noted above by Bobby, lots of goodwill, which itself can translate into dollars.

  23. Bobby says:

    any pujols deal, if there is one, would involve a young superstar, or superstar type talent, from the team trading for pujols.

    that would be kemp from LA(i’m sure kershaw is untouchable, unless the trade is kersh/loney and nothing more), jose reyes from NY, kendrey morales from anaheim, etc. yanks, bosox, and phills wont trade for him (i doubt stl wants to pay ryan howard 25 mil/yr for 4 more years)

    on our end, it’d have to be kemp, a replacement for pujols (loney), and high high high ceiling kids. however our ranking system is by the time the trade is being discussed, i’m sure it’ll invole some combination of gordon/sands/de la rosa/withrow.

    i think it’d be worth it, but again, who knows.

    anyone know what other superstar baseball players have been traded for recently? miguel cabrera, much younger than pujols, went for 6 high ceiling minor league guys, plus the contract of dtrain.

    i know beltran went for a lot when he was traded, back when he was a top 5 player.

    granted pujols is the best player in th game, but he’s 31/32, and not 26 approaching his prime. plus he’ll command 25-30 mil a year, which is a ton for a team to absorb. the cost, therefore, in players traded might not be as high. who knows!!

  24. Mark_Timmons says:

    Brooklyn,

    You are indeed correct.

  25. Captain Loose says:

    Trade Pujols? I can’t even wrap my head around that one. St. Louis will do everything they can to keep him there.

    http://www.stltoday.com/sports/baseball/professional/article_7852df60-7c16-5ec5-8e2d-a01c73cd82a4.html

    But in the event he does become a free agent after next year, it is my opinion that if McFlatline still owns the Dodgers, they will not be bidders. It won’t be too hard to figure out who the real players will be in those sweepstakes. As long as there is no salary cap in baseball, only a few organizations can afford $30 million a year contracts and still field a competitive team. L.A. ain’t one of them. Not now anyway. That could change.

    BTW, just a heads up, if you google “Diamond Dollars baseball” you will find several articles that bring some light to these conversations.

    This year’s attendance figures will be a real tell as to where the Dodgers payroll is headed. Have the fans had enough of the McCourt embarrassment?

  26. Mark_Timmons says:

    I almost bought the aforementioned book by Vince Gennaro until I read the review at The Biz of Baseball.com a couple of years ago:

    http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_con

    Part fact, part fiction (speculation) , it may be an interesting read.

    On the Dodgers and Pujols: I have always said that Frank McCourt knows that butts in seats pays the rent and Frank knows how to put butts in seats.

    The Dodgers will be a player for Pujols because he would put more butts in seats than any other player in basball. He will be over paid – that\’s a given. The last two years of his deal will be marginal, but he could put butts in seats like no other player. Frank knows that, so don\’t think the Dodgers can\’t be a player.

    The Padres were forced to sell and have gutted their payroll because they have $100 million less income than the Dodgers. They are essentially a small market team. I am sure that Dodger season ticket sales are lagging. If (BIG IF) Pujols becomes available, I would look for the Dodgers to be a player.

    It might be worthy to gut the farm to get Pujols.

  27. Roger Dodger says:

    Some very interesting comments above on Sir Albert being a Dodger and giving the Cardinals all those players.

    My first reaction is — the Cardinals had Albert last season and Holliday last season — and did not even get in the post season. They had good starting pitching and the rest of the team was ok.

    Second reaction is — the lineup Mark presents is very weak:

    Furcal SS
    Carroll/DeJesus 2B
    Kemp CF
    Pujols 1B
    Ethier RF
    Uribe 3B
    Thames/Gibbons – LF
    Barajas /Navarro C

    7 & 8 can be pitched around and through. 6 might not be the same as last year. 1 will probably be in and out of the lineup. 2 have bunches of question marks. 3-4-5 is solid.

    It is interesting. But risky. It is possible. But really changes the direction of the minor league system. It might happen. But . . . OK – do it. And I bet that Dodger Dogs will be $11.95 and they cut off an inch of the Dog.

  28. Jaydavis says:

    No!!!!!!! I rather have Fielder’s fat ass for half the price

  29. MillaBlue says:

    Can we give him McCourt too?

    Albert makes everyone better. The St Louis faithful would burn down the stadium is we gave them this handful of underachievers!

  30. Bill Russell says:

    Step by Step guide for baseball trading dumbies

    I think you would have to determine which of the two players between Kemp and Ethier would be the easiest to sign long term. Once the Dodgers determine that, the other one becomes the center piece of a trade for Albert or someone like him. We would also need to make sure that you can sign Albert long term. After determining all of that, we would need to find the riches to run the team like it needs to be run in a large market. See very simple

    As simple as 1 – 2 – 3

  31. SpokaneBob says:

    I don’t see us trading for Albert, but I sure would like to have him on the team. How much contract money comes off the books this fall…Furcal, Blakes….perhaps some defered money. Seems like if we went after Albert this winter, we might want to sign Kemp or Ethier (assuming they bounce back with productive years) before signing Albert and raising the payroll bar.

    I don’t think we have much chance in the Albert Sweepstakes but I can hope.

  32. Captain Loose says:

    I agree with that take Bill, with emphasis on ownership. We need an owner with his own money and his own cable network. Giving in to Fox is a bad sign for the Dodgers future.

    “I don’t see us trading for Albert”

    I don’t either Bob. The problem as I see it is having the ability to take on a $30 million contract, and surround that player with a support group that is good enough to win it all. One player never does it. It takes a village. And then there is the tail end of that contract. As was mentioned in the article, every player’s WAR starts going down in his mid to late 30′s. Even Pujols can’t keep it up for 10 years.

    In my opionion, no player should get more than 7 years, especially in MLB where everything is guaranteed. That’s just nuts.

  33. Kdiggity says:

    This will NEVER happen. We should be using all of this energy to politic for Trayvon or Jerry to start in left over Gwibbonthames

  34. Captain Loose says:

    Some of us already tried to suggest that route Kdig. Not gonna fly in here. We MUST go for it all every single year.

    It’s the World Series or bust!

  35. Roger Dodger says:

    So far the early media coverage is the Phillies great pitching; suggested as maybe the best starting 4 ever.

    I think the Spring Training media coverage will have the Pirates, Oakland, Seattle, Cleveland, Toronto, Arizona, Florida, San Diego, Houston, and the Dodgers as the least covered teams. None of those teams have stories ready for prime time. Their individual fans love them and hope for great season, but not much national time.

    Tops in the news: Phillies, Braves, Reds, Redbirds, Milwaukee, Giants, Yankees, Red Sox, White Sox, Texas.

    In the middle for coverage: Tampa Bay, Baltimore, Detroit, K.C., Angels, Mets, Nationals, Cubs, Rockies, Twins.

    Kind of like 10, 10, 10.

  36. Captain Loose says:

    It would appear that not much is expected of the Dodgers this year. Too many “IF’s” Can’t say I blame the media, though I know some will.

    We have the element of surprise going for us.

    I am having quinoa for breakfast.

  37. ken says:

    Some great well reasoned articles today on other blogs. Especially Sir John [sic] and MSTI.

  38. Kyle says:

    None of the trades listed here are good enough.

    Here’s one:
    LA Gets – Pujols, Lohse, Catching Prospect Bryan Anderson, SS Prospect Peter Kozma
    StL Gets – Loney, Kemp, Kuo, Broxton, Gordon, Martin and Lindblom

Trackbacks/Pingbacks


Leave a Reply

Mandatory Daily Dodger Reading