Top blogging for January

Between current and older posts, it was a baseball-heavy month as far as the most popular posts last month.

Tops? My hot take on Red Sox CEO Sam Kennedy using David Ortiz's induction into Cooperstown to make Ted Williams and Carl Yastrzemski into nonpersons.

Second? My scolding of a subset of the so-called Best Fans in Baseball™ for opening themselves to mockery by seriously thinking the Cardinals should sign Albert Pujols.

Third? My carefully showing that, even when just limited to this century, Shohei Ohtani's 2021 was nice but not all that.

Fourth? My callout of Jon Lester retirement fellation, especially when seemingly driven by Cubs homerism.

Fifth? My analysis of how blogsite Cooperstown Cred is as bad as Red Satan ESPN on a "Big Hall" mentality for the Baseball Hall of Fame.

Sixth? From last month, explaining why, in detail, Gil Hodges isn't really a Hall of Famer.

Seventh, and we're out of baseball. I take the antivaxxers to task for their Nuremberg Code bullshit.

Eighth, my deep dive on bipartisan bullshit on the border in Tex-ass, along with the accumulating troubles of Kenny Boy Paxton.

Ninth? Similar to No. 6, explaining why, in detail, Tony Oliva isn't really a HOFer.

Tenth? Challenging liberals, and fellow leftists, to talk honestly about how they're going to juice up 100 million electric cars in the future without nuclear power.

So Mo makes a "trade deadline move" for the Cardinals after all?

Actually, it was more the Dodgers who made the move.

I figured Jedd Gyorko was moved from the 10-day to 60-day IL for trade reasons when the Birds signed LOOGY reliever Adalberto Mejia after he was cut by the Angels.

And the Birds got who in return?

Tony Cingrani, also on the 60-day IL, but for actual injury reasons. He's out for the year with shoulder surgery. And, by OPS+, with the exception of half of 2017, he's been a sub-.500 pitcher for half a decade. Beyond that, he's a free agent after this year. And, high-rookies minor leaguer Jeffry Abreu, who probably should not ever be expected to make the majors.

In other words, nothing that will help them win the NL Central. Feel free to hit up the poll at right.

So, my post of earlier today calling out John Mozeliak and Mike Girsch for not making a move still stands. And, paid commenters in the bi-state area are calling out Mo, too. (Many are wondering if Girsch has wanted to do stuff but Mo has his balls in his pocket.) Of course, folks like Rick Hummel at the Post-Dispatch keep fellating Mo.

Actually, that might not be harsh enough.

What this move is, is a salary dump. And not much of that. I guess Cingrani's salary was taken back as the equivalent of the Birds paying part of Gyorko's salary. Well, MLB Trade Rumors says the Cards are sending money back, too. Oy.

Let's look just at this year's remaining salaries. Taking away the $5M covered by the Padres, the Cards owed Gyorko $8M for year. One third of that is $2.66M. One-third of Cingrani's salary is about $900K. So, that's $1.76M left. How much of that are the Cards eating?

Actually, the Cubs come out ahead in another way, it seems. Not only are the Cards eating part of Gyorko's salary AND taking Cingrani's dead money for the rest of this year back? They're also giving the Dodgers some of that valued international player spending money.

So, a $1 million salary dump for a prospect who almost certainly will never wear a Cards uniform? Wow.

Compare that to the Brewers making a mutual improvement swap with the Rays, with the Brew Crew getting another arm in Jake Faria and giving away Jesus Aguilar, who may have already peaked.

Or the Cubs solidifying their lineup with Nicholas Castellanos as a rental, deepening their bullpen with David Phelps, and perhaps finding a starting second baseman in Tony Kemp.

Addison Russell has not really lit it up since returning from suspension and Daniel Descalso remains injured, so not a bad move. And, while Kemp is older and doesn't grade out as well defensively, he does have two more years of team control than does Russell. At a minimum, if he learns shortstop in the offseason, it gives them a full blown replacement for Ben Zobriest, who surely won't be resigned. That's a Cubs $12.5M salary dump for the future, as much as the Cards made with Gyorko.

Can't wait to see how the fellators at the Post-Dispatch play this one.

And, play it they have, with a junior writer being the lead-off fellator before any columnists jump in.

#Cardinals look to move on as #Cubs likely overpay Heyward (newly updated)

The Chicago Cubs just signed former St. Louis right fielder (and pretty much ONLY a right fielder) Jason Heyward for $184 million over eight years. ESPN says it has not just one but two different opt-out provisions.

(Update, May 7, 2017: After a suck-ass 2016,  everybody said Heyward had rediscovered his swing in spring training. He must have lost it somewhere between Arizona and Wrigley. And ESPN notes that the Barves, looking at keeping only Heyward or Freddie Freeman, saw holes in Heyward's swing three years ago, and so were willing to trade him to the Cards.)

And, parsing various news, it seems like the Nats could also, instead of, or in addition to, the Cardinals, were that $200M team that was rumored to be in on him.

That said, Heyward reportedly turned down not just one but two offers that were better. However, the Sun-Times may be out of date on that.

Another source says the Just Say Go Away Kid had not 1, not 2, but THREE offers better monetarily than the Cubs

You heard that right:

Source: Jason Heyward turned down three offers higher than the $184M he took from the Cubs, including two of $200M+.

— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) December 11, 2015

Weird. But it is what it is.

So, Cardinals GM John Mozeliak, despite my initial anger, may have done OK after all. For whatever reasons, maybe that second opt-out option was the deal swinger, or a joint deal-swinger with the higher average annual value.

(Update, Dec. 22: Color me unimpressed by details of the Mike Leake signing.)

And, per Ken Rosenthal, this is what those opt-outs are:

Source: Heyward can opt out of deal with #Cubs after year three or year four if he exceeds certain plate appearance thresholds.

— Ken Rosenthal (@Ken_Rosenthal) December 11, 2015

Jeff Passan of Yahoo has a bit more on those opt-outs:

Opt-outs in Heyward's deal have high $ value, and it's not clear what AAV were in other deals. Still, turning down guaranteed $ is uncommon.

— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) December 11, 201

And, we know how agents sometimes try to sell players on something. Maybe whoever at Excel Sports Management is his representative said something like:

"Hey, Jason, this is kind of like player options, only better. AND, you get to enter history as the first player with not one but two opt-outs!"

And (and assuming I'm right about that second sentence), Jason Wayward (sic) bit.

And, with that said, and appreciating the pyrotechnics of a Cards fan on Twitter, let's get to the two different subjects of the headline.

First, the Cardinals moving on.

To whom?

Sadly, to nobody, it seems, according to Mozeliak, who is now making me angry at him again.

What should he do, instead of "nobody," IMO?

Orioles 1B free agent Chris Davis is my No. 1 choice, albeit with hedges and reservations.

Davis would be ... interesting.

The Cardinals haven't had his type of power bat since 2011, when Phat Albert went to Anaheim and whatever the hell other cities in Southern California Arte Moreno wants named after the Angels. (Sorry, Cards fans, but while Matt Holliday has had decent pop in his bat, he's not in the same slugger class.)

And, a creative, frontloaded six-year contract with option years maybe could land him.

Picture six years, $156M (more than $25M AAV) at $27/$27/$26/$26/$25/$25. Then, two team option years, again front-loaded, at $27M and $23M. Team buyout would be $10M on the first to make Davis and Boras more happy, and $3M on the other one.

But, aren't there options? Alex Gordon? Yoenis Cespedes?

Well, they'd both be cheaper, but, neither plays right. So, is Stephen Piscotty ready to be a right fielder with the Cardinals playing Randal Grichuk in center if Heyward is gone? That said, Cespedes has played some center in his past, which would theoretically let Grichuk go to right, but it's been occasional, and he's been below average. (Per Sportrac, the market for actual right-fielder free agents ain't that good.)

And, no, Ben Hochman of the Post-Dispatch, moving Gordon to first ain't a good option either. Mo will probably claim it is, though, if that's the spinning that needs to be done. (Gordon is now off the market, staying in KC.)

Piscotty in right? I'm sure that's not Mike Matheny's preferred managerial option either, but, it's doable. Piscotty did play primarily right in Memphis and was OK to OK-minus defensively. And, he's not got the arm that would give him plus value to offset OK-at-best range.

That said, Davis would give them that masher that the Cards have had at first base, with Pujols, and Big Mac before him, then Pedro Guerrero (a semi-masher), then Jack Clark back in the middle of Whiteyball. I mean, the 1982 Birds with the Merry Mex at first are the only Cardinals World Series team in the last 50 years to truly skimp on power at first. On the other hand, Davis is a Boras client, and the Cards have generally avoided dealing with him and vice versa.

Is Matt Adams the answer at first? Matt Adams platooning with Brandon Moss and a cameo from Brayan Pena?

Probably not. What Cards fans saw in 2014 is likely near Adams' ceiling, and that involved some judicious platooning. Moss might be worth more as part of a trade to an AL team for whatever. And, with Heyward "walking," and worse, walking within the division, the Cardinals need a real answer, not Band-Aids.

My No. 2 option? Justin Upton. Only two years older than Heyward. Two years younger than Cespedes, and two and a half younger than Gordon. Not a good defender, but not horrible, and can play right and has in the past. Strikes out more than Heyward, yes, but has more pop and almost as much speed. Might he take a three-year deal, straight up, for another taste of free agency after his age-30 season?

My No. 3, risks and all? Denard Span. Yes, also a Boras client. But getting even less buzz than Upton so far. Can play center or right. Might accept a short-term deal to rebuild value. Also has the advantage of not costing a comp draft pick.

(Update, Jan. 9: The Cards whiffed on Span, with the Giants signing him to a relatively non-risky three-year deal, analyzed by me here.)

An old friend of mine wondered about the Reds' right fielder, Jay Bruce. Walt Jocketty hasn't mentioned dumping him yet — he is in the last year of his contract, so he fits that profile. That said, he has badly declined the last two years. And a two-year dry spell, not just one year, makes me very iffy, unless Walt takes a bag of peanuts for him.

That said, on to ...

Part two, and the Cubs possibly overpaying.

How much is Heyward's defense worth, when he doesn't have a corner OF's bat, and when the Braves didn't  play him much at center, for various reasons?

Some might cite Roberto Clemente. Cite away. He had a great arm, but B-Ref gives him "just" 12 career dWAR. Plus, while WAR itself still draws critics, dWAR, and defensive sabermetrics in general, draw even more.

Hence, this piece by Sports Illustrated, attempting to suss out various GMs on just what Heyward is worth. You'll see that they're all over the place.

And, per ESPN, it seems for now the Cubs plan to put Heyward in center, keep Jorge Soler on the team and in right. Dexter Fowler, somewhat defensively challenged, patrolled center for the Cubs last year.

Now, Heyward is moving from the fifth-largest park in baseball, in terms of fair territory, to the second-smallest, per this link. So, he'll have less territory to cover than he would have at Busch, had he played center there.

As for the idea of him playing center?

The Cardinals and Braves combined played Heyward just 32 games in CF. Per Baseball-Reference, going by range factor per nine innings, he was pretty well below average. Call it small sample size or whatever, but the Braves had five years to try to convert him to a center fielder, and didn't.

And, they didn't have defensive geniuses in center in Atlanta. For 2010-11, it was Nate McLouth, not anybody's idea of a great defensive player; for 2012, Michael Bourn, who had one of his good years in CF defensively. For 2013-14, it was Melvin Upton, OK-plus the first year and OK-minus the second, but so much teh suck with the bat that the Barves should have benched him, moved Heyward to CF and started somebody else, like Toe Jam, in right.

Nor did the Cardinals have a defensive genius. Before Grichuk's call-up, it was Jon Jay out there. Jay wasn't bad, but he's not a defensive genius.

So, is Heyward mentally averse to playing center? If so, the Cubs may have overpaid a lot. Per that SI piece, he may have plateaued with his bat. And, per Baseball-Reference, while Heyward's defense in right was valued, especially in a larger park, as far as the perceived defensive worth of the position, Runs from Positional Scarcity treats RF the same as LF.

And, if it was something weird, like a second opt-out (perhaps combined with front-loading the first three years), then let's move on. Far be it from me to agree too often with the Post-Dispatch's Jeff Gordon, but he's halfway right on this (as well as being halfway right about Mo not always being GM genius).

Looks like #Cardinals WILL overpay for Dexter Fowler (updated)

So much for rumors, reported by Bernie Miklasz and others, that Cubs free agent center fielder Dexter Fowler did not want to play for the Cardinals. Also so much for rumors that Cardinals GM John Mozeliak did not want to give him a long-term deal, as in not above four years.

Derrick Goold at the Post-Dispatch and others are reporting a 5-year, $80-million deal is in the offing.

Oh, it's even worse. 5/$82.5 WITH full no-trade.

On salary, it may not be a huge overpay, especially if Mo front-loads the contract, like he did three years ago with Jhonny Peralta. But, he only gave Peralta four years. And, unlike with Peralta, per Cot's Contracts, the contract is NOT frontloaded.

Yes, we're in the land of overpays. And, if Keith Law thinks the Birds "got good value," I know they didn't. Mark Saxon, also at Great Red Satan says its a contract "some in the industry view as market-altering."  Count me as part of that; the full no-trade for a person on the back half of their career is indeed that. In fact, I will likely do an update on this.

Overpay.

It all started with the four-year/$110 million contract for Yoenis Cespedes, which was was itself an overpay under either the old or new CBAs

Then it got worse when it leaked that Washington Nationals outfielder Bryce Harper, via überagent Scott Boras, wants a 10-year, $400-million new contract. No, really. And now, Boras is boo-hooing that the new CBA hurts Latino players not yet inside the MLB system.

I had expected 4/$70 for Fowler, which would be a higher AAV, but by "just" $1.5M per year. (Update: at $82.5, not $80, the AAV is equal.) I later wondered why the Cards didn't consider something like what the Cubs actually did, which set Fowler lose — sign former Card Jon Jay back to the team. C'mon, Redbird fans, you'd have taken him, even with recent injury concerns, at 1 year, $8 million. (Is he another former Card with some sort of animosity toward the team?)

Adam Eaton sounded great in trade, but reportedly the Chisox wanted Alex Reyes as part of the deal, and I'm glad Mo said no, if that was true.

This isn't perfect. I wish they had kicked the tires further on Lorenzo Cain, if they didn't. Of course, maybe Fowler is in "buy me now" mode, and west on I-70, Royals GM Dayton Moore is NOT in "I'll trade now" mode. Ian Desmond seemed another possibility, one talked up by Mo just before he signed with the Rockies.

Otherwise, per my scenario, Fowler's moderately better than Jay at drawing walks, maybe a touch better as a baserunner, but not as good a defender, which makes a deal with Fowler more puzzling yet, if it's for five years and partially because the team doesn't think Grichuk can patrol center. Why they think Fowler will help, I don't know. Even with allegedly having problems with balls straight over his head, Grichuk is right now a better defensive center fielder than Fowler.

Makes me wonder yet more if Mo doesn't have some tiff with Jay or vice versa.

And, of course, Mo will blame naggers among social media users and bloggers for riding his case over this. Yep, that's me.

Cubs vs Indians? I may not watch this #WorldSeries

First, while the team name "Indians," and the colloquial "Tribe," aren't racist — at least not from where I stand — the Wahoo logo is. It indulges in a variety of physical stereotyping, some of which have been applied by whites in America to other racial or ethnic groups as well. And the Cleveland Indians, like the Washington Redskins, have generally as a corporation resisted addressing the issue. (I've become more sensitive to such things since the last time Cleveland was in the World Series.)

And, I even Tweeted LeBron James, asking how, with his active support for Black Lives Matter, he can support a team with a racist mascot. One word from him might actually propel change. That's not guaranteed, but it certainly is possible.

On the flip side, we have the Chicago Cubs.

As I joked on social media last Saturday, the Cubs last got to the World Series in 1945 — the year World War II ended. And now, native Chicagoan and warhawk Hillary Clinton is running for president.

To complete one version of the joke, I said that the only way people could stop World War III was to vote Green for Dr. Jill Stein for president. Some people on Zuckerbook didn't like the joke, including the non-joking truth of Hillary as warhawk.

Worse yet is the saccharine in which this will be draped.

Joe Buck and John Smoltz in the broadcast booth will yammer until the cows come home about how America loves an underdog.

No it doesn't, at least not totally, or in and of itself. That myth is a hoary part of American exceptionalism.

Americans love an underdog only in the Horatio Alger sense, of how it supposedly proves social and other mobility is uniquely possible in America.

No it isn't.

The #Cardinals, Jason Heyward and options

Eight years, and $200 million. Since Jayson Stark, in talking about Cardinals' free agent outfielder Jason Heyward, tweeted this on Thursday:

Hearing talk that Jason Heyward isn't looking for 10 years at $20M/year. More like $24M/year for 8 or 9 years.

— Jayson Stark (@jaysonst) December 10, 2015

That's what the Cardinals are looking at. Whether the Nats also offered that amount, I don't know; it seems clear that was the Cards' offer.

Update, 1:30 p.m. Dec. 11. That's NOT what they were looking at, or else the Cards were the $200M mystery team on a 10-year, no opt-out contract. The Cubs just signed Heyward, but for no more than $185M over 8 years.

And, parsing various news, it seems like the Nats (and thus, not the Cards) were that $200M team.

In other words, despite his tough talk, Cards GM John Mozeliak took a powder at crunch time. I'm not totally angry with him, but I am at least somewhat.

And, now that the trade is official, I've summarized my thoughts on how I think the Cards should move on, AND whether this might be a less than perfect move by the Cubs, in this new post.

Meanwhile, back to the original thread.

Chris Davis: Cardinal?

That $200M is also what Scott Boras (you say Boras, I say BorASS, let's call the whole thing off) is reportedly seeking for Orioles 1B free agent Chris Davis.

Davis would be ... interesting.

The Cardinals haven't had his type of power bat since 2011, when Phat Albert went to Anaheim and whatever the hell other cities in Southern California Arte Moreno wants named after the Angels. (Sorry, Cards fans, but while Matt Holliday has had decent pop in his bat, he's not in the same slugger class.)

But, aren't there options? Alex Gordon? Yoenis Cespedes?

Well, they'd both be cheaper, but, neither plays right. So, is Stephen Piscotty ready to be a right fielder with the Cardinals playing Randal Grichuk in center if Heyward is gone? That said, Cespedes has played some center in his past, which would theoretically let Grichuk go to right, but it's been occasional, and he's been below average. (Per Sportrac, the market for actual right-fielder free agents ain't that good.)

And, no, Ben Hochman of the Post-Dispatch, moving Gordon to first ain't a good option either. Mo will probably claim it is, though.

So, if it's Piscotty in right, I'm sure that's not Mike Matheny's preferred managerial option. Piscotty did play primarily right in Memphis and was OK to OK-minus defensively. And, he's not got the arm that would give him plus value to offset OK-at-best range.

So, add this up and remember that Heyward or a reasonable option is the Cards' top need by far.

That said, Davis would give them that masher that the Cards have had at first base, with Pujols, and Big Mac before him, then Pedro Guerrero (a semi-masher), then Jack Clark back in the middle of Whiteyball. I mean, the 1982 Birds with the Merry Mex at first are the only Cardinals World Series team in the last 50 years to truly skimp on power at first. On the other hand, Davis is a Boras client, and the Cards have generally avoided dealing with him and vice versa.

Is Matt Adams the answer at first? Matt Adams platooning with Brandon Moss and a cameo from Brayan Pena?

Probably not. What Cards fans saw in 2014 is likely near Adams' ceiling, and that involved some judicious platooning. Moss might be worth more as part of a trade to an AL team for whatever. And, if Heyward walks, the Cards need a real answer from somewhere.

That said, the Heyward issue seems down to three teams. Signing Ben Zobrist apparently didn't eliminate the Cubs, and now the Nationals are involved. That said, that guarantees Bryce Harper asking for $35-40M a year, from Washington, or whomever if it won't, when he's a free agent. He IS a Boras client.

Meanwhile, just how much is Heyward's defense worth, when he doesn't have a corner OF's bat, and when the Braves didn't  play him much at center, for various reasons?

Some might cite Roberto Clemente. Cite away. He had a great arm, but B-Ref gives him "just" 12 career dWAR. Plus, while WAR itself still draws critics, dWAR, and defensive sabermetrics in general, draw even more.

Hence, this piece by Sports Illustrated, attempting to suss out various GMs on just what Heyward is worth. You'll see that they're all over the place.

Anyway, Mo should be prepared to spend money. As I've noted before, Holliday has just one year left, unless the team picks up his option in 2017, which it might make sense not to do. And, it's got a new TV contract in 2018. (But, per the update in red, he's apparently quite prepared to not spend money.)

There is one complicating factor. Reportedly, Mo won't get the chance to make an ultra-final counteroffer if the Cubs, the Nats or a mystery team tops him; Heyward will simply take the best offer he has. And, we have just seen that happen.

Two final thoughts.

One is that Davis is about three and a half years older than Heyward. Another is that, for their careers, Heyward's left-right batting splits are 15 OPS+ points worse than Davis'.

And, Ccll it a silver lining, sour grapes, or whatever. Heyward's value lies primarily in his D, but he's going from baseball's fifth-largest park, by fair territory (and infields are all the same, of course), to second-smallest. Cubs, even at this price, may well have overpaid.

As for the idea of him playing center, since last year's Cubs incumbent, Dexter Fowler, is a free agent himself, with below-average skills there?

The Cardinals and Braves combined played Heyward just 32 games in CF. Per Baseball-Reference, going by range factor per nine innings, he was pretty well below average. Call it small sample size or whatever, but the Braves had five years to try to convert him to a center fielder, and didn't.

And, they didn't have defensive geniuses in center in Atlanta. For 2010-11, it was Nate McLouth, not anybody's idea of a great defensive player; for 2012, Michael Bourn, who had one of his good years in CF defensively. For 2013-14, it was Melvin Upton, OK-plus the first year and OK-minus the second, but so much teh suck with the bat that the Barves should have benched him, moved Heyward to CF and started somebody else, like Toe Jam, in right.

Your NL Manager of the Year should be ...

Mike Redmond,
Miami Marlins

Mike Redmond, at least by one line of reasoning.

Who, you say?

The guy who managed the Miami Marlins to a 15-game improvement from last year, despite losing young hot hurler Jose Fernandez for the majority of the season due to Tommy John surgery and Giancarlo Stanton for the last month or so due to a severe beaning.

By the middle of the season, the Fish were starting to gain signs of respect and respectability, to boot.

Now, I know that it's as rare for this award as for an MVP to go to someone on a sub-.500 team. Right, Andre Dawson? Even though Tony Gwynn, Eric Davis, Tim Raines, Dale Murphy, and Ozzie Smith (among others) were all more deserving by WAR, and the Wiz, certainly, by team finish.

That said, Redmond's case is different. Just his second year with the team.

One drawback? The team finished 1 game below Pythagorean expectation.

Cardinal trolls who want to tout Mike Matheny? Please. His stubbornness with Mark Ellis vs Kolten Wong, and Allen Craig vs Oscar Taveras, says enough. That said, even with that stupidity, the team shockingly was 7 games above Pythag. Which makes me wonder how useful it is as a "WAR for managers" tool, even though I've touted it before.

Contra that, though, and while noting all BBWAA awards are voted on at the end of the regular season and based on regular season performance only, he was a bad manager in the playoffs.

Matt Williams improved the Nats 10 games from last year. But, they were a game below Pythag.

The Brewers under Ron Roenicke improved eight games, and they were two games above Pythag.

Anyway, there are various ways to skin the MOY cat — Pythag and improvement from last year are two of them.

On the former, Donnie Baseball had the L.A. Dollars two games above Pythag.

Rick Renteria,
stylin the classic
’70s Pirates hat.

On the latter? Rick Renteria, recently dumped in Chicago by Theo Epstein in favor of Steve Martin Joe Maddon, improved them by seven games, and was two above Pythag to boot.

Frankly, it would be funny as hell to see him get the award.

Unfortunately, BBWAA has shown for years that it has absolutely no sense of humor, and award voting is already done, so this ain't happening.

Too bad.

The #TwelveSteps for #Cubs fans

Recently, on NBC Sports' website, I saw a commenter with the handle "recoveredcubsfan."

Well, I got to thinking about recovery in the drug and alcohol addiction sense, then thought about the Twelve Steps of Alcoholic Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous, so often and so readily spoofed.

And, here's the result.

1. We admitted we were powerless over being Cubs fans—that our lives had become unmanageable.

2. Came to believe that a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.

3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of a goat who accursed our team, including practicing various sacrifices, hex removals, etc.

4. Made a searching and fearless inventory of the suckitude of our roster, the Lou Brock trade for Ernie Broglio, the second curse of Ron Santo clicking his heels in 1969, the managerial ineptitude of Dusty Baker in breaking Kerry Wood and Mark Prior, and Bartman.

5. Admitted to to Pan the goat-god, to ourselves, and to another Cubs fan the exact nature of our team's suckitude and our failure as fans to believe deeply and strongly enough and not ask Oprah to secretly bless us.

6. Were entirely ready to have Pan and Oprah remove all these defects of character.

7. Humbly asked Pan and Oprah to remove our shortcomings, including our jealousy over the 2005 White Sox, and to build us a massive new Jumbotron while they were at it.

8. Made a list of all persons we had annoyed by our martyrdom and other events; wrote each Cardinal fans' name down twice.

9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others. Our amends included wearing Cardinal red whenever possible.

10. Continued to take personal inventory, and when we were wrong, promptly bought tickets to Busch Stadium.

11. Sought through invocation of Pan and Oprah, and if not, invocation of Lou, Gibby and Ozzie, to improve our conscious contact with pennant-winning baseball as we understood it.

12. Having had a baseball awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to fellow Cubs fans, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

#Wrigley100: Babe Ruth and the 'called shot' vs #Bartman

Babe Ruth clearly indicating something in Wrigley Field, Oct. 1, 1932.
Photo via Wikipedia.

As dyed-in-the-wool (or dead on Waveland, heh, heh) baseball fans know, this is the 100th anniversary of Wrigley Field in Chicago.

ESPN recently listed its Top 100 moments at Wrigley. (Sidebar: I didn't realize the Bears played football there until 1970. I thought Soldier Field was older.)

No. 2? The infamous "called shot" game from the 1932 World Series, in which Babe Ruth may, or may not, have pointed to somewhere in Wrigley with his bat, and thus may, or may not, have been calling for hitting a home run after Charlie Root got 2 strikes on him.

To me, this is No. 1. It's No. 1 in part because of the mythos, reinforced the relative paucity of evidence -- we do have some film, but not much -- and by Root's vociferous denial that Ruth was calling anything, claiming he would have beaned him if he was.

Update: Before quotes and comments, here's what reportedly is the actual video (silent):

And next?

Really, Charlie Root? Let's first look at quotes from the Wikipedia link above on the "called shot."

• "Don't let anybody tell you differently. Babe definitely pointed." — Cubs public address announcer Pat Pieper (As public address announcer Pieper sat next to the wall separating the field from the stands, between home plate and third base. In 1966 he spoke with the Chicago Tribune "In the Wake of the News" sports columnist David Condon: "Pat remembers sitting on the third base side and hearing [Cubs' pitcher] Guy Bush chide Ruth, who had taken two strikes. According to Pat, Ruth told Bush: 'That's strike two, all right. But watch this.' 'Then Ruth pointed to center field, and hit his homer,' Pat continues. 'You bet your life Babe Ruth called it.'")

• "My dad took me to see the World Series, and we were sitting behind third base, not too far back…. Ruth did point to the center-field scoreboard. And he did hit the ball out of the park after he pointed with his bat. So it really happened." Associate Justice John Paul Stevens, United States Supreme Court

• "What do you think of the nerve of that big monkey. Imagine the guy calling his shot and getting away with it." - Lou Gehrig

• The Commissioner of Baseball, Kenesaw Mountain Landis, attended the game with his young nephew, and both had a clear view of the action at home plate. Landis himself never commented on whether he believed Ruth called the shot, but his nephew believes that Ruth did not call it

• Washington Post legendary columnist Shirley Povich, detailed in an interview with Hall of Fame catcher Bill Dickey. "Ruth was just mad about that quick pitch, Dickey explained. He was pointing at Root, not at the centerfield stands. He called him a couple of names and said, "Don't do that to me anymore, you blankety-blank."

So, hard to say, but it adds to the mystique, right? And, of the collected quotes, three say he called the shot, and the others are kind of ambivalent.

Relatively recently discovered footage leans more toward the idea of Ruth pointing his bat at the Cubs dugout, Wikipedia claims. So, too, in this video reviewing what we know, Cubs 2B Billy Herman said that catcher Gabby Hartnett said the same. That said, even that and him reportedly holding two fingers up to Root, or pointing at him, would have been something halfway like saying "here it comes." In other words, short of Ruth pointing to the centerfield scoreboard, Root arguably had reason to bean him anyway. Beyond the above, Ruth had already homered off him earlier in the game.

And speaking of? While Root may have wanted to bean Ruth, was he in a position to do so?

Let's look at B-R's play index for that game, to further question Root's claim.

First, the game was tied 4-4 entering the top of the fifth. Root wouldn't want to jeopardize that lead. And, beaning Ruth with 1 out would have brought up Lou Gehrig who, like Ruth, had already hit one homer in the game and by this point was a more dangerous batter than Ruth, even with the likes of "just" a Tony Lazzeri, not a Ruth or Gehrig, protecting him in the lineup.

So, especially with two strikes on Ruth, from quick-pitching or whatever, no Root wouldn't have beaned him. He would have tried to strike him out. Beaning him with a two-strike count to know he would face Gehrig next in a tie game would have been stupid.

In actuality, he didn't and couldn't strike out Ruth. Gehrig then hit another homer too, at which point Root got yanked for Pat Malone.

So, Root may be right, but I kind of doubted it. He had reasons for his statement, of course. Root's not a HOFer, but he is arguably a member of the Hall of Very Good, winning more than 200 games and posting nearly 40 career WAR. And he'd like to be remembered for that.

As for what the Colossus of Clout (aka Colossus of Cocaine) clobbered? Per a new, 2024 ESPN story about what's believed to be Ruth's actual jersey from that actual game? He hit it about 440 feet.

As for the Bartman game? That's No. 1 only for Cubs fans who want to scapegoat one of several fans reaching for a foul ball, while refusing to admit their team gave up 8 runs that inning because, again, Dusty Baker proved he didn't know how to manage a pitching staff, plus that being followed in Game 7 (remember, the Cubs had a 3-2 series lead) where the Cubbies had the biggest postseason implosion since the 1985 Cardinals in the A.D. (After Denkinger) game in the World Series.

Baker waited until three more batters after Luis Castillo eventually drew a walk before yanking Mark Prior, who had thrown 100 pitches or so already at the time of Bartman's hand of god or somebody, and was just in his second year in the league. Then Kerry Wood yakked up a lead in Game 7. Kyle Farnsworth dropped the ball in Game 6 out of the pen, with "help" from Mike Remlinger, but might not have done so if Baker had had him ready to go sooner.

I wouldn't even rank the Bartman game in the top 5 events at Wrigley. Among other things, I'd put Gale Sayers' 6-TD day ahead of it, as one of the best athletic performances in history.

And for anti-Cubs fans wanting to point a finger back, with a bit of schadenfreude, over their lovable losers schtick? I'd put Ron Santo's 1969 heel clicking higher on the list.

As far as saluting Wrigley's history, I'd put Aug. 7, 1988, the first night game at the Friendly Confines, above Bartman.

#Groupon + #Cubbies = guaranteed inanity

It's clear that Groupon as a company and a business model is a piece of shinola and that investors clearly know that.

If that wasn't proof enough, the Chicago-based company is (albeit, for charity) trying to sell a Groupon coupon of sorts to throw out a first pitch for the Chicago Cubs Aug. 30.

Of course, per the Salon story linked at top, this may be part of a new Groupon push:

In a conference call with analysts, the firm’s CEO Andrew Mason kept talking up Groupon Goods, a service in which Groupon sells discounted merchandise to customers—in other words, something completely different from the coupons that earned the firm its IPO.

Yeah, the rights to throw out the first pitch at a late-season Cubbies game is definitely "discounted merchandise"!

More seriously, other MLB teams could do something similar, but smartly cut out the Groupon middleman. You could auction off such an opportunity in a number of ways.

Crap: It's the Angels for Pujols

Albert Pujols hits his record-tying third home run in Game 3 of the 2010 World Series./From Yahoo Sports

To ESPN, it may have been unexpected. But, I had the Los Angeles Angels of I-5 as a prime suitor a year ago, and didn't waver in that, even after the Vernon Wells trade.

So, not totally unexpected in these quarters, to see Albert Pujols head to the Los Angeles Angels for 10 years and a whopping $260 million.

That said, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that, allowing for Florida having no state income tax, the Marlins' last offer was technically higher. (Why didn't the Rangers use Texas not having an income tax to get in the chase themselves?)

First, even with Kendrys Morales, even with signing Wells, I said Angels owners Arte Moreno still had money to burn. That's why the Angels were listed on my poll at right.

If you want details, the Angels have several contracts that run out soon, including Torii Hunter and Bobby Abreu after 2012. (Or the Haloes apparently have a buyout now on Abreu's contract; that said, for $9M, he might be OK still.) Some of their money will go to resigning Dan Haren or Ervin Santana in all likelihood. (I don't expect both to be kept, though.) Wells is around for two more years, but, with a deeper lineup and less pressure, may be come an acceptable 3.5 WAR guy for the rest of that contract. Unless Morales can bounce back and find a new position, he's gone. That frees up money for a midgrade outfielder and a midgrade middle infielder.

As for finding positions for people, we all see that Morales didn't bounce back last year from his 2010 broken leg. So, there's not such a "logjam" for the Angels after all, potentially.

Second, it's a team with a history of winning and a chance to win again, now. Mike Sciosia is a better manager than Ron Washington, and, in the AL West, Jon Daniels will likely regret not making a move. That's doubly true with the Halos taking C.J. Wilson away from him.

Speaking of, per that ESPN story linked up top:

Asked whether life in the American League West had just gotten a little more fun, Rangers assistant GM Thad Levine retorted: "How liberal is your definition of the word 'fun?'

"We just saw him for seven games [in the World Series]," Levine went on. "I think it's safe to say we haven't exactly figured him out yet."

Third, with the Dodgers still in limbo, now was the time for Moreno to strike. I can easily see the Angels drawing 3.5 million next year or more, or near max of 3.65 million in their park.

Add in: Higher TV $$ on next local contract (the Angels were already negotiating a new deal with Fox); Pujols' Angels uniform and other marketing sales; possible hike in ticket prices, etc. Trust me, Moreno will get at least $3-4M a year of this contract back.

Fourth, as far as Pujols' performance, the Angels' ballpark is at least as hitter-friendly as Busch. Per ESPN, new Busch was a smidgen better the last two years, but before that, Angels Stadium was a lot better, probably due to a better lineup. Give him an injury free year, the AL, hitting in parks like Arlington, Boston and New York, and an occasional "rest" day at DH, and I expect his stats to go up. Could be good news for him in career counting stats.

Fifth, let's look at the Cardinals more. As I called it more than a year ago, the "insurance plan" comes into play for the Cards as Lance Berkman shifts to first base. (And, some other Cards bloggers laughed at me a year ago when I said that.)

Sixth, my comment that, based on ticket sales vs. possible dropoff, the Cards had money to do a deal even in this range? Especially if either Adam Wainwright isn't back 100 percent or Chris Carpenter has an "on for injuries" year, adding in the seriousness of Allan Craig's injury, and the Cards lose 200K fans this year.

Seventh, as a Cards fan, it's sad. I don't know, other than straight dollars, what Pujols felt he wasn't getting from the Cardinals, since the offer a year ago reportedly included a small piece of the franchise. Maybe La Russa's retirement was a factor. Maybe he wanted a split marketing deal on milestone memorabilia. Maybe he felt he wasn't being stroked enough. Maybe he felt agent Dan Lozano wasn't being stroked enough. After the Matt Holliday contract, I think all of this is true.

ESPN weighs in, indirectly, on that. It's clear the Cards weren't budging much higher. If Mo/Bill DeWitt refused to modify Pujols' old contract after the Holliday signing, they've reaped the whirlwind.

The Cardinals had planned to talk with Pujols' agent one more time Thursday before heading home. But sources told ESPN The Magazine's Buster Olney that the Cardinals' latest offer was for nine years and a little less than $200 million. That would have made him the fourth-highest paid first baseman. With the Angels deal, he is tops.

One source who spoke with Pujols' camp Wednesday came away with the impression the two sides were farther apart than had been widely portrayed earlier in the day.

Penny wise and pound foolish in St. Louis, perhaps.

Eighth, on the assumption that Prince Fielder is gone from Milwaukee, and NOT to the Cubs, Cincinnati is the default NL Central favorite for 2012 in my book. And, there's a one-in-three chance the Cardinals don't get the wild card, even. (The second WC doesn't happen until 2013.) Add in the fact that Berkman's just signed for one more year, and has indicated he could decide to retire after that, and the Cardinals, while pitching-rich in the minors, may find themselves scuffing and struggling for some time.

Now, some reflections along with analysis, and a look at the St. Louis reaction, below the fold:

Cubs deal selves in on Pujols chase

Well, this news, if any, should officially wake up John Mozeliak, as well as Bill DeWitt's checkbook: the Cubs are "all in" on the Albert Pujols hunt. Especially given that Tom Ricketts has given a 110 percent endorsement of whatever Epstein thinks he needs to do in the free agent market, Theo officially has carte blanche to spend. Oh, and ignore the "and Prince Fielder" in these stories. Theo's seen David Ortiz occasionally play 1B in Boston; he's not interested in a repeat of that on a regular basis in three-four years, so Fielder is definitely Plan B in the Windy City, I'm thinking.

Theo, remember, is club president, not "just" GM. So, there's also the angle of which free-agent first baseman would bring more butts back to Wrigley seats, sell Cubs swag, etc. Again, no question, no contest there.

And, there's the question of which player would boost the Cubs more. Because Pujols is a Gold Glove defender, and arguably more of an overall team leader, again, we know who leads this.

Finally, there's the matter of addition by subtraction. Fielder's likely leaving the Brewers no matter what. And, the Brewers have just one year at the top of the division heap. But, year in and year out, the Cards are the team to beat, and No. 5 is a lot of the reason why.

Price?

I can honestly see Theo going as high as 10/$275. That won't be his initial offer, of course. Something around 8/$210 is more like it. But, he's here to play. And pay.

That's if this is real interest. Jeff Passan says, in a good column, says that likely this is mutual "playing around." Pujols is using the Cubs' interest to jack a higher contract out of the Cards, which the Cubs have no problem doing. Passan adds that interest in Pujols MLB-wide is a bit thin in part due to that perception.

But, what if it's real? Or, what if Pujols does a 1-year contract somewhere, but not with the Cards, as I speculated earlier, and signs that 1-year deal elsewhere in part to show that he'll move, he's serious, etc.?

#Cubbies: Will Ron Santo finally get in the HOF?

For years, Cubs fans have insisted that legendary heels-clicking 3B Ron Santo should be in the Baseball Hall of Fame. And for years, I've pushed back, though I have started to soften. This year, per Yahoo Sports, he could be the most likely "veterans commission" candidate to get in.

First, he arguably tops the list of eligible players.

Second, Brooks Robinson is on the selection committee. And favors Santo's admission.

That said, Ken Boyer is on the ballot, and I've also said before he's not that much below Santo overall. Where do you draw the line? More discussion of Boyer's chances/deservingness here.

Of the others on the veterans' list? Luis Tiant would get the most support from me, as a Catfish Hunter equivalent or better, though I really would prefer to vote out Hunter.

Gil Hodges? No. Everybody else among players on that list, no.

I could, though, see voting in Charlie O. Finley as an exec. Possibly Buzzie Bavasi, too.

#StlCards Pujols fans probably pleading to wrong guy

Hey, Cards fans at Busch Stadium Sunday? If you really want Albert Pujols to stay, you shouldn't (just) have been addressing pleas down to the stadium below, but up to the ownership box. Will Bill DeWitt and John Mozeliak make a better, a significantly better offer, than the 10 years, $191 million that was the last thing they floated in public before spring training?

UPDATE: That said, you can plead away at least one more game, to Pujols, owner Bill DeWitt and general manager John Mozeliak, as WE GO TO THE PLAYOFFS!

You probably also should have called some of your friends on the phone, per the story, to be at the stadium. Second inning? Last home game of the year? Playing the Cubs? Fighting for a playoff spot? And there are still noticeable empty seats/seat areas? What, has Busch become Dodger Stadium?

And, per the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, which reminds us of an overtone, or undercurrent: Was this the last game with the Birds on Bats for The Machine? Meanwhile, he's 1 RBI short of 100, and got a hit, so holding onto .300 chances.

Anyway,  will Bill and Mo come through? Maybe not. Per this Joe Strauss column it doesn't sound highly likely. And, it sounds like Mo, and maybe Bill, have already halfway conceded that. 

Cardinals chairman Bill DeWitt Jr. and general manager John Mozeliak offer reserved testimonials while acknowledging they have no idea where the next two-to-three months will take the relationship with a player who next year almost certainly would surpass Stan Musial as the franchise home run leader.

"It's the era we're in,'' Dewitt said. "Many times they sign back with the same club. With a legendary player like Albert, you hope he stays his whole career with the Cardinals, like Stan did. But that process is going to take place and we're not sure how it's going to play out. I'm sure he's not sure either at this point.''

"When you reflect on his career, it's been a historic run for he and the St. Louis Cardinals,'' Mozeliak said. "As far as our mindset, we still believe there is a chance that Albert will be wearing a Cardinal uniform in 2012."

Strauss goes on to note the team reportedly isn't ready to budge above a rumored eight-nine years, $22-23 million per year contract and may even be wanting to shorten that. (Also note: the last public offer by the team was 10 years, $191 million.)

That only intensifies my guess that it's 50-50 he goes elsewhere. Cubs still rank No. 1 as a landing spot, at least if Pujols has revenge on his mind. Dodgers are No. 2 if Bud Selig can ram through his forced sale soon enough. Braves, with room to spend, are No. 3 and Angels are No. 4. I think the White Sox are No. 5.

I don't know why neither the Braves nor White Sox are on most radar screens. The Braves are one good, experienced bat away from overtaking the  aging Phillies in the NL East. The ChiSox are a competitive team who have money to spend. I know the Braves of the past haven't been major free agent players, but things can change.

That's five teams with legitimate money to spend. Nos. 3-5 are some sort of contenders right now and would be on the A-list of teams to beat if they added Pujols. So, if Mo is thinking there will be a soft market, he's betting wrong.

Others? Mets' financial pic is messier than the Dodgers. The Nats do like to spend, and might come up on the outside. I still really don't see the Yankees involved unless A-Rod, Tex or Albert plays DH, and they'd still have to eat a LOT of money for that. (And don't forget C.C. Sabathia's opt-out.) Red Sox are at their max on payroll.

And, if he moves on? Jimmy Rollins would be an OK free agent pickup, if the price is right. Looking ahead another year? I expect Mo to look at both 1B and 3B free agents for 2013, with the idea that if he doesn't re-extend Lance Berkman, David Freese could be moved across the diamond. No, that wouldn't be ideal, but I'm sure Mo's already thinking about that possibility. Mo will probably wait as long as possible this year to make an improved Pujols offer, anyway. If he sees Prince Fielder move on, and the Reds make no big moves, he knows he can compete in the NL Central for the next two years anyway.

As for Cards fans invoking the sainted name of Stan Musial as a reason for Albert to stay? Get real. If Stan were playing today, he'd likely hold out for the best, or near-best, deal. Besides, both loyalty and lack thereof is a two-way street. After all, the team more than once entertained serious trade offers for Stan the Man.

Finally, while the team's resigning of Pujols may affect Tony La Russa's decision on whether or not to return, despite occasional public protestations of loyalty by Albert, I don't think the other is necessarily true. That said, managerial issues might steer him away from the Cubs. And Latino affinity might give the White Sox and Braves a bump.

Will 'Sign Pujols' movement work?

As Yahoo's Jeff Passan reports, a small group of St. Louis Cardinal fans has come up with a creative way to try to keep Albert Pujols in St. Louis.

These fans have created a website where Cards fans can buy a high-quality, facsimile-autographed, pencil-sketch picture of Prince Albert and the downtown skyline. Proceeds benefit the Pujols Family Foundation, which, as Passan notes, helps the impoverished in Pujols' native Dominican Republic and families of children with Down Syndrome.

The idea is that, by demonstrating fan loyalty to Pujols, it will persuade him to show his loyalty back by signing a new contract.

Well, unless Bill DeWitt and John Mozeliak's lowball offer of last offseason was only a "placeholder," it's going to take more than the charity efforts of Ron Heinz and other fans to keep The Machine in St. Louis.

The Cubs, for revenge and savior factor options, still stand as the No. 1 alternative home for Pujols in my mind. The Angels are No. 2, still. Now that Brandon Belt has been sent back down to the minors, the Giants may be in play again. For that matter, the Dodgers may be, if the McCourt(s) vs. MLB fight gets settled soon enough. The BoSox are out, with Adrian Gonzales getting locked up.

I still say the Braves are a good outside possibility. Low payroll now, and Chipper Jones won't play, probably, more than one year past this one, freeing up more money and creating more need. His contract runs out after next year, though there is a low-budget vesting option for 2013.

Pujols, $35M and Cubs — call it a deal?

Why would Albert Pujols go to Chicago? And, how can the Cubbies land him?

Michael Wilbon says start with the financials.

Maybe Prince Albert would take "just" eight years on a contract if you paid him $35M a year. I'll bet $33M, if you want to start a tad lower, might do it. 8/$260 would be $32.5 per year.

He says the Cubs can easily go that high:

And the Cubs, not coincidentally, are poised to get out from under contractual obligations to Kosuke Fukodome, Carlos Silva, Aramis Ramirez and Carlos Pena, which would amount to more than $45 million. Pena, the ex-Ray, signed a $10 million free-agent deal to play first base this season; but conveniently enough, his contract is for 2011 only.

He adds that Wrigley has fallen to "only" 92 percent capacity in the last couple of years. Add up 250K fans spending, if only $20 a person, and a full Wrigley recoups back $5M of the spending on Pujols.

As for why Pujols would leave St. Louis, Wilbon has it right. The lowball offer is a measuring stick, a cojones-size issue.

(I)f the Cardinals insist on offering something closer to $21 million a year than $30 million, chances are they've got no realistic shot at keeping Pujols, who isn't about to take less money than fellow first basemen Mark Teixeira, Ryan Howard and Miguel Cabrera. If that continues to be the Cardinals' negotiating tack, they might as well wave goodbye even before the five-day exclusive negotiating period starts this fall.

As for why he'd go to Chicago? Wilbon mentions, for lack of a better word,the "savior" factor. If the Cubbies win the World Series, even once, Albert Pujols is the god of Waveland Avenue.

Wilbon also adds the stats angle — the Friendly Confines didn't get its name from pitchers.

I'll add in one thing he doesn't — the revenge factor. L.A. and San Francisco don't offer that to the same degree in the regular season. The Yankees, Red Sox or Angels could only offer that in a postseason matchup. And, frankly, that's the angle that scares me.

Two other ESPN staffers argue the wisdom of signing him on a pro-con page. Jon Greenberg does have the best counterpoint to Wilbon —if Pujols isn't the "savior," the fans never totally embrace him.

Quo vadis Pujols?

It would be sad to see this sight. Will we?

First, as Yahoo's Scott Brown notes, despite the silence on both sides, it seems Albert Pujols and the St. Louis Cardinals are nowhere near a deal. And, as Steve Henson notes ,that's got other Cards wheeling and dealing possibilities, like for Michael Young, on hold.

Brown, per my poll on these pages, lists possible teams to whom Prince Albert could go. Commenters here rank "another team" first. I'm guessing most of that vote is for the San Francisco Giants. The Cubs are a strong No. 2. The Mets' worries about the Madoff suit I think have to take them out of the running. The Rangers, maybe, could jump in. But, I'm still doubtful right now.

And, while everybody claims the Yankees and Red Sox, even, would jump in, I'm not so sure. That would push the Yankees to $250M a year PLUS having to dump Mark Texeira while eating a fair chunk of his contract. If Pujols agreed to a sign-and-trade as part of that, it could happen, but even then, not likely. And, assuming I'm right on the Yankees, I don't see the Red Sox getting in the fray either.

So, other than eliminating the Mets from consideration, which I think you voters have done (if you're picking me up on RSS, stop by and vote on my polls!), I'm not changing the list of "likely teams."

Oh, and if my Photoshopping of Prince Albert at bat, in baby blue pinstripes at the Friendly Confines isn't enough, Fox Sports has put mugshots of him in the unis of all the top signing contenders.

Cubs get Garza? Hmmm — OK, but no more

According to Yahoo and all other sports sites, the Chicago Cubs have acquired Matt Garza from Tampa Bay. Garza would give the Cubs a top-of-the-rotation starter and join a rotation that also includes Carlos Zambrano and Ryan Dempster.

It's still not great, but Garza's young enough he's still got potential for improvement.

That said, the Cubs aren't going much of anywhere in 2011 with their current batting lineup anyway. But, with a bunch of salary coming off the books in 2012, in out years, this could have more significance.

What if Pujols walks?

Jayson Stark reminds us that, per Prince Albert's own deadline, if spring training is the start of the season, the Cards have 10 weeks left to resign Albert Pujols.

I know Albert well enough that once he gets into spring training, he doesn't like distractions," (Cardinals manager Tony) La Russa said Wednesday. "I just know where the heart and heads of both the team and the player [are]. They want it to work out. They'll work at it, and we'll see what happens. Once we get ready officially for 2011, Albert's the strongest between the ears that you can find, and nothing's going to get in his way."

Period.

If not, he's gone. Because he has 10 years overall and 5 in St. Louis, he would have veto rights over any midseason deal, even if he would recognize it as a rent-a-player situation.

I see something in the neighborhood of 7 years, $200 million. And, except for some fielding decline in 2010, most his value numbers have held steady for 4-5 years and, I expect, these numbers will not significantly decline for the next 5, or the next 4 years into a new contract:

                                                 
Year       Tm Rfield Rrep RAR  WAR oRAR oWAR dWAR
2001      STL      6   19  69  6.9   63  6.4  0.5
2002      STL     -4   18  56  5.8   60  6.2 -0.4
2003      STL     14   18 107 10.9   93  9.5  1.4
2004      STL     15   18  93  9.4   78  7.9  1.5
2005      STL      9   19  79  8.2   70  7.2  1.0
2006      STL     14   16  83  8.3   69  7.0  1.3
2007      STL     25   18  82  8.3   57  5.8  2.5
2008      STL     18   17  94  9.6   76  7.8  1.8
2009      STL     12   18  88  9.2   76  7.8  1.4
2010      STL     -2   19  72  7.2   74  7.4 -0.2
10 Seasons       107  180 823 83.8  716 73.0 10.8

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 12/29/2010.

That said, who's got the money AND a location acceptable to Prince Albert if Mozeliak and DeWitt aren't going to cough up $200 million?

1. Chicago. And, a definite 1B opening. And, a fan base that after initial ooginess, would certainly welcome him. That one-year Carlos Pena contract is nothing.
2. Houston, if it wants to immediately vault to NL Central relevance. (Would probably piss off Brett Wallace to be stuck behind Pujols again.)
3. Atlanta? Definitely. With an aging Phillies team, a still-struggling Mets, and a who-knows Nats, a strong move.
4. The Dodgers - IF the McCourt fiasco gets wrapped up quickly enough. But, not sure that's a team Pujols would visit.
4. Mets - See Braves and Astros.
6. Baltimore badly needs a 1B, but not sure it wants to spend like that.
7. The Angels? If they thought they could move Kendry Morales, sure. Especially now that they lost the Crawford sweepstakes this year. But, that's kind of a big if.
8. The Giants. Hmm ... they've got new money, and Huff ain't getting younger.

My guess on Pujols' preferences? Chicago, then Houston. Just a hunch he might have some revenge factor. Folks at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch are thinking coastal only; a poll offers neither of those top options I suggest.

Meanwhile, via an excellent blog on team salaries, here's further assessment of the top contenders' chances.

The Cubs have a good financial setup for chasing Pujols.

Ramirez, Silva, Fukodome all come off after 2011; Dempster, Zambrano after 2012. Fukodome is out; Ramriez is out if not club friendly and ditto for Silva. Like the same on the 2012s.

Astros? Smaller payroll, but no big contracts end in 2011, and just Carlos Lee in 2012.

Braves? No big contracts end after 2011, but both Derek Lowe and Chipper Jones after 2012. They could take a big jump for one year for Pujols and then be better off.

Mets? Beltran's contract ends in 2011; so does Francisco Rodriguez and Oliver Perez.

Angels? Pineiro and Abreu end after this year, but neither has a huge contract and both could be resigned.

So, the Cubs will have a fair amount of free money and in a big market. Astros? It depends on their mentality. Mets will have plenty of money, but doesn't strike me as a Pujols top option. Braves would have to eat a one-year spike, but from 2013 on, would be better set.

So, with that in mind, I'll move Braves up to No. 2 in the running, drop the Astros to No. 3, put the Mets at 4 and Angels at 5.

As for the ridiculousness, seemingly, of paying Lance Berkman $8 million to play either LF or RF? Let's not forget that Fat Elvis can also play 1B, just in case the Cards are able to pull the trigger finger on a trade of Pujols.

And, John Mozeliak is an idiot for not working on a new contract for him at the same time the Phillies did for Howard.

The team as a whole still has the "huh?" factor. Owner Bill DeWitt says talks may not start until January.

That said, the odds that he is gone at or before the start of 2012? 50-50, in my book.

Meanwhile, if the management decides to pull the trigger on a trade, it's not trying to right now. That would be all over the rumor mills.

La Russa to Wrigley?

Ryne Sandberg is the inside favorite to "permanently" replace Lou Pinella as Chicago Cubs manager next year. But, Jeff Passan notes that, down I-55, in Cardinal red, there's a BIG A-list manager whose contract expires at the end of this year.

Fans of both teams would crap in their respective colors if Passan's rhetorical question actually happened.

That said, it's a good article for looking at all the potential managerial changes, and candidates.