Albert Pujols Agrees to 10-Year, $250 Million Deal: Angels

[ToddZ]

Those are good #ers for sure but I bet the unfriendly confines of anaheim will hurt him plus just learning to hit everyday with new backgrounds at new stadiums is bound to take some time.
I have 4 pick in my slow draft & i wont be taking him...

The new Busch Stadium has suppressed right handed power by 27%, Angels Stadium only 4% so by park effects, Pujols should benefit.

[Edwards Kings]

I am sure Anaheim thought of all these things, but Pujols for $254m just does not make good sense to me. Getting Wilson was already a stick in the eye to Texas. Maybe I am just too much an accountant.

It's not just the TV contract, which helps. it is the additional playoff revenue (hopefully). It is the additional attendance as Pujols chases down records.

From an accounting perspective, the amount of money the club makes over the first half of the contract is more than it loses over the second half, resulting in a net gain. The problem is, you can't sign him for just 5 years, you will never get him obviously.

So while yeah, the club may not get its money's worth in years 8, 9 and based on Pujols' performance versus his paycheck, the money they are paying him is only PART of the profit they have already realized from the contract.

We might have to agree to disagree. Let's say Pujols' averages $10m value over the last five years of the contract (probably higher year six and seven, less year nine/ten if he is even still playing). That means the first five years he has to earn roughly $200m over the first five years or $40m a year. Can anyone honestly think any player EVER was worth $40m a year? Especially when you net what other options would have cost versus Pujols' and compare other options full-time stats versus Pujols.

Pujols is the greatest hitter of my lifetime. This is however a major misstep that will hang over the Angels for years.

[ToddZ]

Wayne, the problem is you are (I think) only looking at the baseball value of the contract. Are his "stats" worth the dollars the contract is paying versus other players. The answer is a big, fat, NO!!!!

But to the club, they are paying him for more than the stats.

Even if he just puts 200,000 more fannies in the seats for 5 years, that is 1M extra tickets, multiplied by whatever the cost is -- $20 a seat, $30, more? That's, I don't know, between 20 and 40 million extra bucks in revenue? Now factor in Pujols being responsible for making the playoffs one season that they otherwise would not have done -- how much revenue is that? Plus all the Pujols jerseys, etc.

Now after 5 years, even if he is in decline, Pujols will be chasing records, which again sells tickets.

Places like Fangraphs take stats and convert it to bang for the baseball buck, but to a club, the contract is worth far more than that.

I know I keep using this example, but from an accounting standpoint, Dice-BB has MADE the Red Sox money, solely based on marketing to Japan.

[Winston's Empire]

After watching Albert Pujols be welcomed to the Angels, I just have to say CLASS ACT! It was filled with nothing but positive and I was very impressed. As shocked as I personally was that Albert left St. Louis, I am starting to understand it. He is playing in a place he felt they overwhelmingly wanted him by reaching out and getting him and that will help him stay fresh with both that great weather and the DH option from time to time. The Angels will surely be a great team now and as some of the older guys around him like Tori Hunter, Vernon Wells, and Bobby Abreu phase out, the Angels have proven they will reload with other stars to keep him surrounded with talent in the lineup. Look for Albert to be lifting that WS Title another time or two before its over.

[Edwards Kings]

Wayne, the problem is you are (I think) only looking at the baseball value of the contract. Are his "stats" worth the dollars the contract is paying versus other players. The answer is a big, fat, NO!!!!

But to the club, they are paying him for more than the stats.

Even if he just puts 200,000 more fannies in the seats for 5 years, that is 1M extra tickets, multiplied by whatever the cost is -- $20 a seat, $30, more? That's, I don't know, between 20 and 40 million extra bucks in revenue? Now factor in Pujols being responsible for making the playoffs one season that they otherwise would not have done -- how much revenue is that? Plus all the Pujols jerseys, etc.

Now after 5 years, even if he is in decline, Pujols will be chasing records, which again sells tickets.

Places like Fangraphs take stats and convert it to bang for the baseball buck, but to a club, the contract is worth far more than that.

I know I keep using this example, but from an accounting standpoint, Dice-BB has MADE the Red Sox money, solely based on marketing to Japan.

Well, I would certainly go see a future HOFer shoot for a record. Jaded LA...ok probably.

As to attendance, the Angels already have fantastic attendance. I think the Angels would make the playoffs as much without Pujols as with given their pitching staff and especially since my assertion/belief is that they could have spent the $25.4 to better fill more than one hole that really wasn't a hole to begin with. On regular season games, the Angels have averaged about 40,000 per game each of the last three years. With a stadium capacity (damned accountants ) of about 45,400, that means the most extra seats they could have every home game was 5,400 (if they sold out every game and if they gave no tickets away). I went to a web site for available tickets (only about 1,100 available for most games) and their prices were generally lower than $10 with would be expected with their attendance record (i.e. all the best tickets were probably gone). But even selling out each game, no give-aways, and a $15 ticket price for the 437,400 extra buts in the seats, that is only $6.6m. Closer to the truth would be say 80,000 extra fans and less than $1.5m in revenue per year. Agree to disagree.

[ToddZ]

Pujols contract piece in the LA Times