Home » Around the Blogs » The Cardinals Don't Need Pujols
9
February 16, 2011 Around the Blogs Joe Janish

The Cardinals Don’t Need Pujols

My ESPN SweetSpot buddy in St. Louis — Matthew Philip of Fungoes — cracks out the calculator to prove that the Cardinals don’t need Albert Pujols to win. Matthew may win the battle on this one, but will he win the WAR?

Another SweetSpotter, Bill Baer of Crashburn Alley, is running team-by-team previews with other NL East bloggers. So far there have been previews on the Braves, Nationals, and Mets. That guy he interviewed for the Mets sounded pessimistic.

Bernie Madoff speaks from behind bars through the mouthpiece of The New York Times. Madoff claims that the faceless, nameless administrators and bureaucrats of banks “had to know” that his investments were a fraud — but insisted that his best friends since childhood (Fred Wilpon, Saul Katz, et al) “knew nothing”. We’re supposed to believe this?

In a refreshingly welcome escape from the morbid reality surrounding the Mets right now, Matthew Callan is going through his old This Week in Baseball videotapes at Amazin’ Avenue. The latest episode of TWIB he remembers is the 1988 spring training preview. How about that!

Are there still players available who can help the Mets? Kerel Cooper shares his thoughts on the remaining free agents over at OnTheBlack.

Tags: ,

Joe Janish began MetsToday in 2005 to provide the unique perspective of a high-level player and coach -- he earned NCAA D-1 All-American honors as a catcher and coached several players who went on to play pro ball. As a result his posts often include mechanical evaluations, scout-like analysis, and opinions that go beyond the numbers. Follow Joe's baseball tips on Twitter at @onbaseball and at the On Baseball Google Plus page.
Related Articles
  1. Mic February 16, 2011 at 11:40 am
    http://www.amazinavenue.com/2011/2/16/1996617/asking-rob-neyer-about-the-mets…really good talking points
  2. Timo February 16, 2011 at 2:59 pm
    Honestly, if Pujols doesn’t sign with the Cards he will be a Nat next year. The Nats signed J. Werth to a ridiculious deal and don’t have a 1st basemen (Adam Laroche is not going to cut it). Plus the Nats owners want to spend money. If Pujols signs w/Nats that would scare me as a Met fan. The NL east would be like the AL east.
  3. Rich Morey February 17, 2011 at 1:25 am
    The Mets are not serious contenders for Pujols – they have serious financials issues thanks to Bernie Madoff. But I don’t see the Nats offering King Albert the kind of money / years he wants. If he is serious about wanting 10 years then it will have to be an AL team that offers him that many years.
  4. Ryan February 17, 2011 at 10:49 am
    Someone will pay Pujols what he wants. Someone has the money.

    Hey Joe, just caught your article in ESPN regarding Nolan Ryan’s informed usage of pitch counts. Loved it. Hope that trend infects all of baseball, and you know what, I think it will.

    • Joe Janish February 17, 2011 at 11:25 am
      Thanks Ryan! Obviously, I hope that virus spreads as well.
  5. Andy February 17, 2011 at 1:31 pm
    I think Madoff’s statements are not as implausible as you suggest. Big banks have all sorts of policies about the level of due diligence and “know-your-client” procedures they have to go through before doing business with someone. OTOH, if you invest in a fund run by your childhood friend, you may not be more trusting and not as meticulous.
    • Joe Janish February 17, 2011 at 4:23 pm
      True enough.

      And maybe it was a complete coincidence that Wilpon and Katz pulled a $30M profit out of their investment just before the dominoes of the Ponzi scheme started tumbling.

      • Andy February 17, 2011 at 5:42 pm
        May not mean anything. The news stories suggest that the Wilpons were putting money in and out of Madoff’s fund all the time, using it almost as you or I would use a savings account or a money market. Was that $30 million much more than they usually were in the habit of withdrawing at a given time? Or did they withdraw some months earlier than usual? If they did, then I guess that would be part of the trustee’s evidence . . .
        • Joe Janish February 17, 2011 at 7:14 pm
          I guess we’ll find out eventually as this case drags on.

          As my grandmother used to say, “it all comes out in the wash” (whatever that means).