Thursday, August 27, 2009

Re-Sign Holliday? Probably Not.

I stole this from Jayson Stark from, but it is something I've been saying to all my Cardinal fan friends about the possibility of signing Matt Holliday. Look at the part about the payroll after paying Holliday and then Pujols a few years from now.

Much as he clearly loves St. Louis, Matt Holliday continues to give the Cardinals no indication he's amenable to signing any discounted deals to stick around beyond this year. And if the Cardinals have to pay him free-agent-market dollars to hang onto him, let's sound the alarm right here: They might be putting the franchise in economic peril.

"The worst thing they could do is re-sign him," one American League exec said. "If you start thinking about their long-term payroll, what's the biggest payroll a city like St. Louis could absorb? Let's say it's $100 million. Now you have to give Holliday $15-16 million a year. Then you have to give Albert [Pujols] $25-30 million, and probably $30 million. So now you're paying two guys $45-50 million? That's a lot of money in that market.

"In 2010, it might not matter. In 2011, it might not matter. But when you get to 2014 and you've got half your payroll wrapped up in two 34-year-old guys, that's not a good place to be. … Those are the kinds of contracts you can't get out of."

Tying up Holliday at market dollars, and then re-signing Pujols, would almost assure the Cardinals of not being able to keep Chris Carpenter and/or Adam Wainwright when their next big paydays roll around. While it seemed so logical, at the time they traded for Holliday, to forecast that they'd swoop in and sign him, it's not so logical when you start punching in all those dollar signs.


Anonymous said...

Silly speculation from the unamed exec. Why does Pujols next contract go up just because Holliday's is what it is? Do we think that Pujols is is so insecure that he must be double what Holliday makes. Nonsense.

billy v said...

That is the going rate for the best player in the game. I don't think it will be $30 mil, but it will be at least 18-20. That would put him and Holliday at over 30 mil. That's alot for two players on a small market club that probably won't try to spend 100 mil in payroll.

jon said...

I doubt Pujols brings $30 million. However, $25 million is probably not out of the question. The article has its points, but it also fails to mention that the Cards are currently paying K. Greene and T. Glaus $18 million combined (yikes!). Throw in Ankiel and maybe Pineiro and there is money available. The bigger question is how long is that money available (1 year, 3 years, 5 years?). That answer likely depends on the progression of several minor league players. So, while I don't think it's a slam-dunk as many Cardinal fans believe, I also don't think it's as far fetched as Stark's article makes it sound. As in most things, the reality is probably somewhere in between.

billy v said...

Pineiro is proving his worth, wonder if he can keep it up in non contract year (see Lohse).