Skip to content

Marlins won’t give Albert Pujols a no-trade clause

Dec 6, 2011, 3:31 PM EDT

Albert Pujols Getty Images

UPDATE: Marlins president David Samson said this afternoon that “there will not be a free agent signed that includes a no-trade clause.” So if that’s truly a sticking point for Pujols, it would be a deal-breaker.


Ken Rosenthal of confirms previous reports that the Marlins have offered Albert Pujols a 10-year contract and adds that the two sides are meeting again to address Pujols’ demand for a no-trade clause.

When the Marlins signed Jose Reyes much was made about their refusal to give any player a no-trade clause, but not surprisingly Pujols wanting the right to veto a move could be enough to change their stance.

According to Rosenthal he wants no-trade rights for the first five seasons of the 10-year deal, at which point his 10-and-5 rights with the Marlins would kick in and give Pujols the ability to block moves anyway. In other words, a no-trade clause for the first five seasons would essentially be a no-trade clause for the entire 10-year contract.

  1. 1972wasalongtimeago - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:47 AM

    Six years from now, if the Marlins stink, he’ll waive it anyway to get traded to a contender

    • Old Gator - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:55 AM

      In three years, if the Feesh stink – Feesh, right? And it’s hot down here, too – he’ll waive it and demand a trade. If that happens, we can hope the Feesh will find some way to get him to take Slobbering Ozzie with him.

      But those three years are going to be very entertaining. I haven’t has so much fun since the Elian Gonzalez fiasco.

      • thejotapee - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:14 PM

        Lmao!!!!! Elian Gonzalez!!!!

    • paperlions - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:55 AM

      He may…but the reason to ask for it is two fold:

      1) to control who he can be traded to,
      2) to use it as a bargaining chip, no one waives their no-trade rights for free.

    • 78mu - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:29 PM

      Six years from now it will probably not make any difference if he has a no-trade clause or not. 20 million a year for the last four years of a contract for a 38 year old player is de facto a no-trade clause

  2. damnyankee13 - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:48 AM

    Okay, now after winning the WS, will they do as they did the previous 2 times and dismantle the team?Tho, if they sign Pujols to 10yrs, might prove me wrong,

    • Francisco (FC) - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:59 AM

      All I can say is that Albert is proving the cliche true:

      – Albert, now that you’ve won the World Series and saved America’s pastime as we know it, what are you going to do!?

      – I’m going to Disneyland!!!!

      • randygnyc - Dec 6, 2011 at 2:24 PM

        Fail, disneyLAND is in California. Should have just quit after Disney.

      • Francisco (FC) - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:53 PM

        Ah well, nobody’s perfect….

    • 78mu - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:55 PM

      Greg Amsinger from MLBtv was just now on KMOX in St Louis and said if the Marlins go 250 million for 10 years Pujols will sign right now. Duh!

      If he gets that contract a no trade clause for the first five years is meaningless. Any team could sign him right now and get his best remaining years instead of letting the Marlins have him for two or three years and then taking on the contract.

      One other thing Amsinger mentioned was that for Pujols a couple million dollars a year is a couple million that will make a big difference for the people in the Dominican Republic where he does a lot of charity work. It’s easy to say Pujols is just a mercenary trying to squeeze out the last buck. But as Amsinger pointed out, Pujols sees this as his last chance to cash in and get as much as he can to help out his native countrymen.

      Of course the more Pujols makes to send down to the DR the more money his agent will get to spend on the things he’s been accused of.

  3. cintiphil - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:48 AM


    Who do you think this information is coming from? Maybe Albert’s agent?

  4. uyf1950 - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:48 AM

    You have to believe that if the Marlins aren’t willing to do that for Pujols they probably aren’t in this for the long haul and that quite possibly Marlins history of dumping payroll is the direction they will take at some point in the near future.

  5. Old Gator - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:51 AM

    I guess now we get to see how desperate and stupid Scrooge McLoria, Beinfest and the Chihuahua really are.

    • El Bravo - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:53 AM

      You must be enjoying this, Gator. I mean, c’mon, do the Phillies even stand a chance anymore? NL East is the new beast division. What’s funny is the Nats will run it within 3 seasons…

      • Old Gator - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:58 AM

        Hell, I enjoyed Hurricane Andrew. I probably would have enjoyed the aftermath of the K/T meteorite impact; one dead, flash-frozen sauropod could keep the Weber in the backyard going for years. Of course I’m enjoying this.

      • El Bravo - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:04 PM

        mmmm, grilled, flash-frozen sauropod….cheers Gator, let’s hope the horsemeat eaters sit in third place all next season with their old arms, powerless line-up and moron closer.

      • Old Gator - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:12 PM

        What is horsemeat without Velveeta but old roast beef on clearance sale?

        The Feelies are still the team to beat in this division and will be until the schmutz clogging the atmosphere from the nuclear winter in Dallas finally settles. I’m not even pulling out my Ouija Scrabble board until Sunday. Sometimes you just don’t want to know, you know?

      • Ari Collins - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:38 PM

        I think you’re giving the Marlins too much credit. They lost 90 games last year. I figure Reyes and Pujols probably add another… 10 wins, if they’re both healthy? I think the only way they unseat the Phillies is with a large dose of luck (Stanton takes another step forward, Hanley bounces back, the rotation figures out how to stay healthy), and even then they might need a Phillies ace or two to go down.

      • SOBEIT - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:44 PM

        Marlins still have no pitching. They need at least 2 starters and a few bullpen arms. Even with a stacked pitching staff, the Phillies didn’t make the WS. There is no way the Marlins hit their way to a WS this time.

      • El Bravo - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:51 PM

        I can’t imagine any of you think I’m being totally serious here. Sure, the Phils are still the team to beat. One thing I should note though: the drum is repeatedly being beaten that too many things must fall in place for the Marlins for them to be successful. Well, that same thing is true for the Phillies. I’d call them lucky that the big three stayed healthy all year long last season. Now, they’ve lost Howard for quite some time. One additional major injury and that team becomes exponentially less intimidating.

        Personally, I still like the Braves’ chances. They’re hanging below the radar right now, but they did this last off season too. That said, I’m not too excited about the prospect of Pujols joining the division.

  6. whatthehellisansky - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:54 AM

    The marlins 2011 payroll is at ~$87 million with bell and reyes..adding pujols would prob put them around $100-105.. which isnt too crazy at all if you ask me – does anyone have any idea what these guys are shooting for from a payroll standpoint?

    • whatthehellisansky - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:54 AM

      2011-2012 payroll*, obviously

    • uyf1950 - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:58 AM

      The only thing I’ve read is that they said their payroll could be in the $100MM range for 2012. If that’s indeed the case it basically means possibly 1 more “big” singing may or may not happen (if it happens to be Pujols or Wilson or Buehrle).

      • uyf1950 - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:03 PM

        sorry for the typo. Should be: signing NOT singing.

      • Francisco (FC) - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:22 PM

        But, singing has a more hilarious twist!

    • imaduffer - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:20 PM

      They are trying to be like the NY Mets.

    • SOBEIT - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:49 PM

      Don’t forget to add a couple starters and a couple more bullpen arms which could push the payroll to $120-$130M/yr. And if you are doing this through trades vs. FA…that means losing some promising prospects or players. They will essentially be doubling their payroll from last year.

  7. phillyphever - Dec 6, 2011 at 11:58 AM

    Be careful Marlins fans, as you learned from the Heat and what I learned from the Eagles (which hopefully gets Reid fired): can’t win a championship through FA. Plus, even if Pujols signs with Miami, all that does is decreases the chances of them getting the starter they desperately need (a CF wouldn’t hurt as well).

    • yankeesgameday - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:03 PM

      Yeah, because NOT having pujols would make them a better team.

    • Old Gator - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:03 PM

      The other three have deputized me to inform you that we know this. They should be bearing down on Buehrle, Wilson and/or Gio or Shields right now. Albert is something they should worry about once they shore up that rotation. (On the other hand, they may believe that if they sign him they’ll have pitchers clamoring to sign with them for hometown discounts when they’re not even from here in the first place – but then, nobody is actually born here; they’re shipped in overnight and placed in the incubators just in time to be put onto the tax rolls.)

    • Ari Collins - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:39 PM

      I’m pretty sure the Yankees’ 2009 championship was mostly through FA.

    • Eric Fay - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:54 PM

      they did in 1997…

  8. Old Gator - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:00 PM

    I think perhaps we have realistically to consider the possibility that Scrooge McLoria recently discovered that he was terminally ill. That, or he sustained a blow to the head and forgot where he left his boxed set of Jack Benny Show DVDs.

    • aceshigh11 - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:47 PM

      Boy, the right-wingers on this site really have it in for you, Gator, as all these thumbs-downs indicate.

      There’s nothing more dangerous than being an unrepentant liberal on a sports messageboard.

  9. ukcardsfan - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:10 PM

    Surely that’s the death knell for any attempts St.Louis will/can make… Unless this is being played out to try and force their hand of course…

  10. - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:15 PM

    I think what’s more important here is for the longest time the thought about the Marlins landing Pujols was: “Oh look at the Marlins being cute and trying to land Pujols”

    The fact that a NTC has been thrown out to the media means there is actual negotiations. Which means Albert could likely not re-sign with the Cardinals…which up till yesterday I thought there was no way that was happening.

  11. thejotapee - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:18 PM

    I’d love this deal a whole lot more if those final 2 years were mutual options.

  12. WhenMattStairsIsKing - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:19 PM

    The contract itself will be a no-trade clause, Albert. Go where you want to go.

  13. belichickee - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:22 PM

    Old Gator you are absolutely killing me with your comments, soooo funny.

  14. thefalcon123 - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:35 PM

    Dewitt has left Dallas…
    …that can’t be a good sign. Unless it is a good sign. Or it doesn’t mean anything at all…

  15. SOBEIT - Dec 6, 2011 at 12:57 PM

    McScrooge is just jealous of the Heat and is trying to replicate their front page news offseason acquisitions. We’ll see how serious he is about committing $$$ for the long term if he agrees to Pujols demands. Once the buzz wears off with the new ballpark and fans stop showing up…he will freak out! The finances of these new contracts just don’t add up when you include the ballpark. This has major bankruptcy written all over it before Pujols gets anywhere near the 5th year of his contract.

  16. phukyouk - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:36 PM

    Well of course they wont.. how else will he be traded in 3 seasons when the firesale happens?

  17. thefalcon123 - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:37 PM

    Douchebag…err…Heyman has been throwing out a lot of tweets to saying the Marlins would offer would have to be $40 to $50 million better than the Cardinals for Albert to take it….

    This shit is killing me.

  18. wegohardinthepaint - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:41 PM

    Went from the frontrunner for a superstar to just the middle of the pack. Some big market team will just swoop him up now or hell resign.

  19. SOBEIT - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:44 PM

    “Marlins president David Samson said this afternoon that “there will not be a free agent signed that includes a no-trade clause”

    We’ll have our fiesale whenever we want to and that has to include every large contract. What’s the point of signing huge contracts if we can’t get out of it when we want to? – David Samson –

  20. paperlions - Dec 6, 2011 at 4:04 PM

    I have decided that I like the Florida Marlins, whereas I have extreme dislike for the Miami Marlins.

  21. benedick47 - Dec 6, 2011 at 5:34 PM

    As a Cardinal fan, I hope St. Louis re-signs him, but not for that kind of money. For that, he can take his talent to South Beach, and be a great hitter on a crappy team.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Wright (3049)
  2. J. Fernandez (2501)
  3. Y. Cespedes (2413)
  4. G. Stanton (2372)
  5. D. Span (2270)
  1. F. Rodney (2099)
  2. Y. Puig (2093)
  3. M. Teixeira (2000)
  4. G. Springer (1969)
  5. H. Olivera (1936)