Fish New Suitor for Michael Young

[Mainge]

True. But still. Kinda worth pointing out. Maybe.

No.

[Ramp]

Fish no longer suitor (never really were)

/JoeCap

[Party]

Good. Leaves the Pujols option on the table. (I am partially serious about this.)

[Miamarlin21]

Oh well.

[Swifty]

Good. Leaves the Pujols option on the table. (I am partially serious about this.)

I'm pretty serious about it too. I know it's like a 5% chance, but the Marlins need to at least keep that option open because there's a lot that would be in our favor this offseason.

[Ramp]

Absolutely agreed with the previous two posts. Don't think it would happen but if Pujols becomes a free agent, there's definitely a chance.

[Swifty]

I mean if Miggy or Matt Kemp or something fall into our lap, then yeah, go for it, but from this point onwards, I'd hope the Marlins are at least entertaining the notion of Pujols in the new stadium, alongside Hanley (who is actually quite a good friend of his) and therefore don't take on any commitments that last beyond 2011 unless the situation resolves itself before the opportunity for the Marlins to make a move arises.

[Big Z]

I'll give Pujols 7/215, by the end of the contract he will be 39.

He will be making around 30.7 mil a year.

[Mainge]

Ehe. Y'all are crazy.

[The_Godfather]

I'll give Pujols 7/215, by the end of the contract he will be 39.

That's quite generous of you to give him that much of your money.

[lou]

I think there is a 0% chance Loria gives Pujols a contract worth half the new stadium. And I additionally don't see this with Hanley, Johnson, and presumably Stanton, all worth serious contracts by the end of 2013. Having Pujols on the books for at least 7 additional years after that, could drastically fuck things up with our ability to retain all our young talent through their prime years. Unless team payroll literally goes to the $120 mark, and I just can't imagine that. They need to target in their prime guys to build around, and not have the husk of Pujols making $30 million in 2019.

[Ralph]

I'd offer him like a 2-3 yr contract for 30-35 mill yr.

[Swifty]

I think there is a 0% chance Loria gives Pujols a contract worth half the new stadium. And I additionally don't see this with Hanley, Johnson, and presumably Stanton, all worth serious contracts by the end of 2013. Having Pujols on the books for at least 7 additional years after that, could drastically fuck things up with our ability to retain all our young talent through their prime years. Unless team payroll literally goes to the $120 mark, and I just can't imagine that. They need to target in their prime guys to build around, and not have the husk of Pujols making $30 million in 2019.

Not that I don't understand and appreciate the pitfalls of what could be a potentially onerous contract, especially years 7-10, but this is the one player in the sport that would almost certainly guarantee a first season sellout at home with the new stadium and then consistent sellouts beyond.

What's more, the excitement of the new stadium and Pujols could allow the Marlins to dictate just about whatever terms they want on the remaining season ticket inventory (PSL's, multi-year commitments, etc). It would be tremendous.

$30 million spent on one player is terrifying when you think of what we'd have to spend to keep Hanley and JJ and Stanton and put legitimate pieces around them, but this isn't just $30 million spent on one player; it's a complete transformation of a franchise and market in the best, if not only, window to completely rewrite the rules of commitment to the team down here.

Any other year it'd be a bad idea, any other player it'd be borderline disastrous, but this is such a perfectly serendipitous offseason for it to happen I just cannot see a downside at all.

To take it a step further, if we don't sign Pujols to keep cash for the in-house re-signings, and if JJ and Hanley then hit free agency being on a consistent 85 win team that plays to a half full stadium in 2013 and beyond (both totally plausible, and arguably generous, predictions) aren't they gone anyway?

[lou]

I get the emotional sense of your argument, I really do, but I have a hard time believing it translates into selling out skyboxes for three years to burger king and carnival on the spot and completely changing the ticket scheme ala Lebron. It would be great for a year or two, then it would just be whatever to this sports market unless we're winning playoff series.

Secondly, then what happens when you lose JJ in 2013 and Hanley in 2014 when you can't handle a second massive contract because Pujols is making literally $30 million which is at least a third, if not more, of your payroll. People will just start the "same old Marlins" thing again. We need to keep that money for Hanley and Stanton or whoever else in their prime 28-32 years, and not 35-40 Pujols.

I'd honestly rather give him a 3 year contract for $40 million a year than 10 years 200 million. He needs to be off the books by 2014, which is Hanley free agency, and massive arbitration time for Stanton, Morrison, and some others.

[Ralph]

When it comes to it I really don't believe he gets 30 unless it's a short contract. I'd say 27 tops if it's 6+ years.