All games televised by Fox with times, as far as I can tell, TBA. I'll leave it up to Mr. Zed to format this all pretty if he is so inclined.
Wednesday, Oct. 19: Game 1, Texas at St. Louis Thursday, Oct. 20: Game 2, Texas at St. Louis Saturday, Oct. 22: Game 3, St. Louis at Texas Sunday, Oct. 23: Game 4, St. Louis at Texas Monday, Oct. 24: Game 5, St. Louis at Texas* Wednesday, Oct. 26: Game 6, Texas at St. Louis* Thursday, OCt. 27: Game 7, Texas at St. Louis*
* - If necessary
-------------------------------
It's interesting that of the few people who bothered posting in this predictions thread before the season started, none even had the Cardinals in the playoffs, and none of those who had the Rangers in the playoffs picked them to get out of the divisional series.
Anyway, it's unlikely to me that the Cardinals can win this series by relying on their bullpen as heavily as in the NLCS, but I also think their starting pitching will recover enough that they don't have to. Nelson Cruz has been hot, sure, but the Cardinals have the best lineup in baseball without question in my mind, and the ability to put Holliday or Berkman in the DH slot for three games makes it that much more potent.
I love the dynamics of the Cards' postseason this year: The Phillies sweep the Braves to close the year, getting St. Louis into the playoffs to eliminate Philadelphia in the NLDS. Then, the Cards eliminate the Brewers in the NLCS to take advantage of the World Series home field advantage secured largely by the efforts of Milwaukee's Prince Fielder. Wonderful.
Anyway, Cardinals win in six and Busch Stadium II sees its second World Series celebration in just six years of existence. Book it.
It's kinda weird how much these teams are mirror images of each other. Both can rake, can't get a starter past the 5th and have great bullpens. Having just spent about $800 on car repairs, I'm having a tough time deciding if I want to spend the money to go to game 1. But how often do you get a chance to see your team play in the World Series?
Cards in 6.
Enjoy watching the Cards in the Series Nyjer Morgan!
Originally posted by TheBucsFanIt's interesting that of the few people who bothered posting in this predictions thread before the season started, none even had the Cardinals in the playoffs, and none of those who had the Rangers in the playoffs picked them to get out of the divisional series.
The predictions thread went up around the time of Adam Wainwright's season-ending injury and I think that influenced the whole lot of us. To my credit, I am the only guy that had the Brewers winning the division. It almost balances out my prediction of Carl Crawford as AL MVP. Yeesh!
Originally posted by TheBucsFanI love the dynamics of the Cards' postseason this year: The Phillies sweep the Braves to close the year, getting St. Louis into the playoffs to eliminate Philadelphia in the NLDS. Then, the Cards eliminate the Brewers in the NLCS to take advantage of the World Series home field advantage secured largely by the efforts of Milwaukee's Prince Fielder. Wonderful.
Also, the Rangers will be paying Arthur Rhodes to try to beat them.
As much as I still love Furcal and want good things for him, I have to pull for the Rangers here. I'll say Rangers in 5 (but won't put any money on it, after how badly I botched my LCS predictions).
I think we're going to have to stop underrating Texas. This team has a lot of talent, even more talent on the way up from the minors, lots of money to spend and an ever-increasing fanbase. They could be the Braves of the AL West for years to come, thanks to the Angels' tendency to do things like acquire Vernon Wells and dump Mike Napoli.
That said, I have this nagging feeling that the Cardinals are going to continue their Cinderella story and win the Series. Would winning the WS make Pujols more or less likely to re-sign in St. Louis? I expect Texas to be in the market for Pujols and Fielder this winter, so this feud might not end here.
"It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in the spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone." --- Bart Giamatti, on baseball
Originally posted by Big BadWould winning the WS make Pujols more or less likely to re-sign in St. Louis? I expect Texas to be in the market for Pujols and Fielder this winter, so this feud might not end here.
It won't make much difference; Pujols is the Cardinals' to lose. He really, really wants to stay; he just really, really wants them to pay. St. Louis doesn't have to outbid everyone, just meet his price, which will not be cheap. They're paying him about 16 now; if he wants 30, that's another 14 they have to find with little money coming off the payroll. The issue, in fact, seems to be more the length of the contract than the per-year amount. It's doable, particularly when internal estimates, IIRC, have the team losing $20 million in revenue if Pujols doesn't return.
I think it will get done, but with a little heartburn through the holidays.
Originally posted by Big BadWould winning the WS make Pujols more or less likely to re-sign in St. Louis? I expect Texas to be in the market for Pujols and Fielder this winter, so this feud might not end here.
It won't make much difference; Pujols is the Cardinals' to lose. He really, really wants to stay; he just really, really wants them to pay. St. Louis doesn't have to outbid everyone, just meet his price, which will not be cheap. They're paying him about 16 now; if he wants 30, that's another 14 they have to find with little money coming off the payroll. The issue, in fact, seems to be more the length of the contract than the per-year amount. It's doable, particularly when internal estimates, IIRC, have the team losing $20 million in revenue if Pujols doesn't return.
I think it will get done, but with a little heartburn through the holidays.
I would love to see him stay but is he worth it? Would they be better off with a sign and trade? Should they just let him go?
From a PR standpoint they need him down the road but from an on the field perspective, is it the best use of their money?
Originally posted by DrDirtI would love to see him stay but is he worth it? Would they be better off with a sign and trade? Should they just let him go?
It's not the NBA where the retaining team can go over cap and thus signs and deals, and as a 10/5 veteran Pujols has no-trade protection anyway. If he didn't, it would be added to the contract when he resigned (as it will certainly be if he signs somewhere else and loses his 10/5 rights.)
Originally posted by DrDirtFrom a PR standpoint they need him down the road but from an on the field perspective, is it the best use of their money?
I don't have his second half numbers, but they wouldn't fit in this text box anyway. After a bleh April and May, he killed to death every baseball he touched down the stretch. He remains top notch in the field, as shown by his OH HI CHASE UTLEY I WILL THROW YOU OUT AT THIRD NOW in the NLDS, and Joe Sheehan has written several paragraphs in his postseason newsletters (subscribe, people, seriously...it's worth $15 a year) pointing out the little things Pujols does better than others that don't show up in the box score.
That said, ten years? Ewwww...I can see why the Cardinals are hesitant. That's a lot of money years from now for an aging HOFer. They have to find a middle ground for the length of the contract. I'm willing to eat a couple bad years at the end of the deal to keep him a Redbird for life and keep that amazing bat in the lineup for a few more good seasons.
As far as the cash goes, if they have $30 million to spend on him, spend it on him. If they don't have it, then they don't have it to spend on anyone else either. If the figure is $25 million, then the question becomes if you can replace Albert Pujols in that lineup with $25 million, and I don't know if the answer is yes. Berkman at first and Craig in right is not the solution, and the free agent market offers little consolation.
All of this ignores the $$$ ready to be made by the Cardinals when he approaches 3000 hits and whatever HR mark he ends up with.
Originally posted by PeterStorkPujols is the Cardinals' to lose. He really, really wants to stay; he just really, really wants them to pay. St. Louis doesn't have to outbid everyone, just meet his price, which will not be cheap. They're paying him about 16 now; if he wants 30, that's another 14 they have to find with little money coming off the payroll.
If he wants the Cards to "meet the top offer", that sounds more like 'he'd like to stay', or 'he doesn't want his fingerprints on his decision to move on for the money'. That said, I pretty much want them to work this out.
Even as a Cubs fan, (a) Pujols ought to be one of those guys to have a lifelong career with one team, (b) I wouldn't want my team stuck with an 8-10 year contract at $25m per (and up), and (c) if he comes back to St. Louis for a 'fair market' Scott Boras contract, it will be like A-Rod in Texas all over again. Not enough budget to put a team around him.
Would Pujols be satisfied with just a six-year contract....if the Cardinals were to pay him $30 million per year? He (or, his agent, more importantly) could boast about having the most expensive per-year contract in baseball history. Plus, it saves Pujols from still being under contract into his 40's when he'll probably be an albatross on the team.
"It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in the spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone." --- Bart Giamatti, on baseball
As far as I've read, Pujols wants to come back and the Cards want him back. I'm listening to ESPN's Baseball Today podcast now, and they made the case that it could be a Cliff Lee situation where he doesn't take the richest deal, but the richest per-year deal... which hopefully would be with St. Louis. Despite his career with Seattle and Tejas, A-Rod just seems right in a Yankees uniform because he's a (now grossly overpaid) dicknose. For pretty much the opposite reason, Pujols belongs in St. Louis. He's just been there, and a star, long enough that playing anywhere else would feel incredibly wrong.
You wanted the best, you got... the Out of Context Quote of the Week.
"£8.70 for a measly 16 out of your average fag machine." (dMr)
Originally posted by Big BadWould Pujols be satisfied with just a six-year contract....if the Cardinals were to pay him $30 million per year? He (or, his agent, more importantly) could boast about having the most expensive per-year contract in baseball history. Plus, it saves Pujols from still being under contract into his 40's when he'll probably be an albatross on the team.
I know what you're saying. Is it really about the money itself or pride of having "that" contract? Surely you could live the rest of your left with the money in a six year deal. I can't imagine he needs any more money now.
I just hope he can stay and I'm not even a Cards' fan.
Originally posted by PeterStorkI don't have his second half numbers, but they wouldn't fit in this text box anyway. After a bleh April and May, he killed to death every baseball he touched down the stretch.
I don't know that I would go that far. He had an excellent second half for a normal baseball player, but his second half OPS of 960 would, over a full year, be his lowest since 2002. It would have been good for 4th in the NL. This year was also his lowest OPS+ season of his career.
I don't think Albert is going to fall apart in the next couple of years, but I have a feeling he will be paid like the best hitter in baseball even though he is merely one of the better ones going forward.