Albert Pujols tops list of MLB's biggest albatrosses

[Villain]

I'd way rather be stuck with Ricky Nolasco's deal than with Pujols' deal. It's a no brainer, really. Nolasco is expensive and mediocre, but his deal isn't as much dead weight as that Pujols disaster.

 

[Omar 382]

Omar. You are being forced against your will to purchase one of two cars.

A 2008 Honda Civic for 60,000 dollars but the car operates.

A 2008 Honda Civic for 30,000 dollars but the thing doesn't operate at any sort of normal capacity.

You are overpaying for this car either way. Would you at least like to be able to drive the fucking thing?

I'm done trying to convince you you're wrong since your thinking is rigid and unwilling to listen to reason. I'll say one last thing; you're car analogy is not at all comparable to our situation. Let me try to paint a better picture:

You have 25 cars. You leased a car for three years and 50 million dollars. It's a little beat up, but if it miraculously drives well, you can trade it for a couple of other cars that cost around 100 K each (and for the purpose of this analogy, these cars have a moderate chance of driving well in a couple of years when you need them). If this car drives poorly, which it is apt to do, you can give it less driving time and drive other cars that are better. After three years, the lease is up, and you no longer have to pay for it.

On the other hand, you lease a declining, old car for six years and 165 million dollars. Due to how much you payed for it, you have to drive it everyday, even if less expensive cars that drive better are available. After three years, you still have to drive that shitty car everyday and still owe 114 million dollars for it.

So which car would you rather have?

 

[mr.hockey4242]

I'm done trying to convince you you're wrong since your thinking is rigid and unwilling to listen to reason. I'll say one last thing; you're car analogy is not at all comparable to our situation. Let me try to paint a better picture:

You have 25 cars. You leased a car for three years and 50 million dollars. It's a little beat up, but if it miraculously drives well, you can trade it for a couple of other cars that cost around 100 K each (and for the purpose of this analogy, these cars have a moderate chance of driving well in a couple of years when you need them). If this car drives poorly, which it is apt to do, you can give it less driving time and drive other cars that are better. After three years, the lease is up, and you no longer have to pay for it.

On the other hand, you lease a declining, old car for six years and 165 million dollars. Due to how much you payed for it, you have to drive it everyday, even if less expensive cars that drive better are available. After three years, you still have to drive that shitty car everyday and still owe 114 million dollars for it.

So which car would you rather have?

You lost me at trade.

We tried that. What don't you get, the guy actually helped the team by being injured. He was gone. You are paying money for something that does not work. It's a complete detriment to your team.

You can go and get better production then Nolasco for basically free.

You can't for Pujols.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Check back with me in 4 years when the Angels are paying Pujols 30 million a year to produce a .650 OPS and the Twins are debt free

Again. So your basis is no matter what the cheaper/less years is always better haha.

Which is fucking hilarious considering you defended Canos contract. Lol.

 

[Omar 382]

Again. So your basis is no matter what the cheaper/less years is always better haha.

Which is fucking hilarious considering you defended Canos contract. Lol.

Except I never defended Cano's contract. I said it doesn't deserve to be on the list of worst contracts YET. Cano was younger when he signed the contract, and projects to be a better player at a thinner position. He's put up a 7.3 WAR in TWO seasons with the M's, while Prince Albert has put up a 9.1 WAR in FOUR seasons with the Angels. Add that into the Mariners having to pay a premium to get good hitting in Safeco Field, and his contract makes much more sense than Pujols'. Still not good, but by no means one of the worst yet.

Also, there you go again claiming I said things I never said. I never once insinuated that smaller and cheaper deals are inherently better than more expensive ones. I'd be all for giving Trout 450 million dollars. But then Trout is young and has had one of the best four year stretches to begin a career that any player has ever had in baseball history, whereas Pujols was old and well past his prime when he got 240 million dollars. See the difference?

 

[Omar 382]

You lost me at trade.

We tried that. What don't you get, the guy actually helped the team by being injured. He was gone. You are paying money for something that does not work. It's a complete detriment to your team.

You can go and get better production then Nolasco for basically free.

You can't for Pujols.

Except that you can, as Kole Calhoun was a tenth of a win worse than Pujols while making 2% of his salary ($537,500)

 

[mr.hockey4242]

I did produce something of value. 3 years >50 million dollars is better than 6 years and 165 million. Do you disagree?

You are a fucking liar.

Now shut up.

Right here it's the years and money and that's all.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Except that you can, as Kole Calhoun was a tenth of a win worse than Pujols while making 2% of his salary ($537,500)

You mean Kole Calhoun. A guy already in their lineup batting in front of trout?

Fucking brilliant general managing replace production. With production already in your lineup. LOL.

You don't get it. There is no salary cap. There is no debt. You can keep giving bad contracts. The fucking twins gave Mauer still paid Nolasco, then Hughes and Santana. It's a matter of if they can actually play semi competent baseball. Nolasco can't. The other 3 are at least ok baseball players. I'd prefer not to pay any of them a fucking dime. But that's baseball.

A guy with Nolascos numbers is NEVER good. A guy with Pujols numbers is always something you could use.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

And Albert at 32 basically wiped the floor with Cano.

And I love Cano.

Could just have Brian Dozier for far cheaper.

 

[Omar 382]

Dude no one listens to any of the shit you're saying. Just stop already

 

[Omar 382]

You are a fucking liar.

Now shut up.

Right here it's the years and money and that's all.

That was taken completely out of context. If you read the posts immediately before and after that post, you'd see I was comparing players of similar value. You're acting like I said a 200 million dollar contract to Paul Goldschmidt is worse than Nolasco's contract.

If for nothing else, you are very talented at claiming I've said things I've never said.

 

[Omar 382]

You mean Kole Calhoun. A guy already in their lineup batting in front of trout?

Fucking brilliant general managing replace production. With production already in your lineup. LOL.

You don't get it. There is no salary cap. There is no debt. You can keep giving bad contracts. The fucking twins gave Mauer still paid Nolasco, then Hughes and Santana. It's a matter of if they can actually play semi competent baseball. Nolasco can't. The other 3 are at least ok baseball players. I'd prefer not to pay any of them a fucking dime. But that's baseball.

A guy with Nolascos numbers is NEVER good. A guy with Pujols numbers is always something you could use.

Are you Ruben Amaro III? Seriously, this might be the most retarded thing I've ever read on a sports forum board.

 

[Omar 382]

I make more sense and am more coherent when I'm shitfaced on gin, weed, and Klonopin than hockey has been on this thread

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Are you Ruben Amaro III? Seriously, this might be the most retarded thing I've ever read on a sports forum board.

These guys have the money. Why the fuck do you think they paid Pujols all that with shitty ass Hamilton already being paid. Still able to pay trout. Still rumored as a destination for basically every big FA. THE MONEY IS THERE. No salary cap isn't allowing a Jason Pominville contract to handcuff your deadline moves.

Ricky Nolasco is just like Niskioka who literally felt so bad he gave the twins money back and left. We prefer to at this point pay him not to play.

So basically what you are saying is you would rather just give away money for nothing. Then over spend even if you can.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

I make more sense and am more coherent when I'm shitfaced on gin, weed, and Klonopin than hockey has been on this thread

Once again coming from the guy naming himself after a character he doesn't even like lol.

You sound like an extremely intelligent guy.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

That was taken completely out of context. If you read the posts immediately before and after that post, you'd see I was comparing players of similar value. You're acting like I said a 200 million dollar contract to Paul Goldschmidt is worse than Nolasco's contract.

If for nothing else, you are very talented at claiming I've said things I've never said.

Out of context? You fucking said it. I replied. It really couldn't be easier.

You compared Zack Grineke improving to Ricky Nolasco lmao. Because Zack can that means Ricky can?

Well hell yeah!!! Steph curry improved a shit ton!! That's gotta mean Ricky Rubio will eventually shoot at least 42% from the field

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Dude no one listens to any of the shit you're saying. Just stop already

Obviously you do.

You defend Cano. When you can have Dozier.

But get up in arms when a guy who doesn't even pitch is mentioned as being worse than a guy who produces?

Fucking hilarious

 

[Omar 382]

Once again coming from the guy naming himself after a character he doesn't even like lol.

You sound like an extremely intelligent guy.

What's this like the fifth time in 20 posts when you claimed I said something I never said? If you read that thread, you'll see I love Omar. He's just not a top 10 character to me.

I don't see how this relates to my intelligence pertaining to baseball or really anything though.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

What's this like the fifth time in 20 posts when you claimed I said something I never said? If you read that thread, you'll see I love Omar. He's just not a top 10 character to me.

I don't see how this relates to my intelligence pertaining to baseball or really anything though.

It relates to you using a screen name to deduct someone intelligence. Which obviously that would require intelligence on your part to even understand that.

I mean if I really wanted to I could keep deflecting like you do an tell you how you are a fucking idiot regarding television logic too.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Also wasn't the reasoning behind your name something about him being gay and you like making gay jokes?

Yet I'm using "stats" that you used at 9? Lol.