Skip to content

Working around Albert Pujols’ desire for a no-trade clause

Dec 6, 2011, 3:41 PM EDT

pujols grimace Getty Images

Really, this shouldn’t be a dealbreaker.

Albert Pujols wants a no-trade clause. The Marlins have a long-standing policy of not offering them.

Both of those positions are understandable. Still, there should be a way around it.

For starters, Pujols would automatically get full no-trade protection after five years with the Marlins under the league’s 10-5 policy (any player with 10 years of service time, including five continuous with the same team, has the right to veto any deal).

So, the Marlins just need to do something that would cover the first five years of the deal. And that should be easy enough: simply include two $30 million options at the end of the contract that would become guaranteed in the event that Pujols is traded in the first five years of the deal. No team in its right mind would ever consider taking on a contract that had Pujols earning $60 million at ages 42 and 43.

Or, better yet, Pujols should just decide not to worry about it and sign with the Marlins if he wants to sign with the Marlins. Veto power or no, how often do superstars get traded when they’re not completely on board with the deal? It doesn’t happen. No team is going to want to make a huge investment in a potentially unhappy Pujols. And if the day comes that the Marlins will want to trade Pujols, then most likely, Pujols is going to want the deal, too.

  1. umrguy42 - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:44 PM

    As a Cards fan… I’m hoping like hell it’s a dealbreaker. 😛

    • 78mu - Dec 6, 2011 at 4:09 PM

      The contract’s size is a no-trade clause. The Marlins won’t find anyone to take on his contract anyway.

      If this is a dealbreaker for the Marlins they are not being serious.

      • djpostl - Dec 6, 2011 at 4:12 PM

        Lol Miami isn’t the issue. Everything you stated should make it a non-starter for Pujol’s end. It makes every drop of sense in the world for Miami to NOT break that rule. Once they do, they can’t ever dig in on other players.

        Once that genie is out of the bottle she is never being put back in.

    • pjmarn6 - Dec 6, 2011 at 4:30 PM

      I love how Matthew Pouliot throws around figures like 30 million, 60 million, …….Idiotic. These are overgrown boys playing a child’s game, that, according to baseball stats, 78% will be bankrupt in 5 years.
      The only way for the fans to come out ahead is to pitch to them some crazy business deal where like the players, you get your cut up front.
      Again according to baseball stats, an average player plays a little less than 5 years. Pujols ba has been down every year for the last five years and his rbi production has been down every year for the last three years. 95% of baseball players are finished by 35 years of age. The owners are playing the odds against the law of diminishing returns. And it does correlate pujols down numbers with the decreased use of steroids.

      • pjmarn6 - Dec 6, 2011 at 4:34 PM

        Of course you could be smart like the Yankees and Alex Rodriguez. He got a guaranteed $32.5 million guaranteed contract and hit .276 and 66 rbis. His last at bat in the playoffs cost the Yankees $9,000 and he struck out.
        Now have all the owners lost their minds or is there an epidemic of stupidity flu running around the ball parks?

      • WhenMattStairsIsKing - Dec 6, 2011 at 5:32 PM

        Show us these “baseball stats” where 78% of MLB players will end up bankrupt. That would be 585 current ballplayers.

      • JBerardi - Dec 6, 2011 at 5:40 PM

        Enough, dude. We get it. I mean, we don’t CARE or AGREE, but we get it…

  2. randygnyc - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:47 PM

    The marlin’s don’t exactly have a great history when it comes to dismantling teams to be rid of payroll. I’m sure Albert wants stability for his family/kids should he decide to make this move to Florida.

    • hackerjay - Dec 6, 2011 at 4:11 PM

      It does seem to me though, that if the Marlins do have a fire sale, that Pujols would want to be traded in that situation. I guess he just wants to have control over where he is traded to.

  3. uyf1950 - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:47 PM

    It does have to make you wonder how committed the Marlins really are long term to winning. And if some of these signings are just for show and their fan base and not long term commitments.

    • randygnyc - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:52 PM

      It reminds me of the whole “should I ask for a prenup” or “why do they want a prenup” debate. Never a good way to start a marriage, although sometimes the prudent thing to do.

  4. delphinos455 - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:48 PM

    Fingers crossed, Pujols will be on a flight to Miami soon.

  5. mondogarage - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:49 PM

    The Marlins 2012 post season fire sale starts….now.

  6. dodger88 - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:50 PM

    Couldn’t agree more. If you go back 20+ years I can see how important a no trade clause could be for a player but in this day and age with the money and length of contracts you either end up a bargain (i.e. Longoria) that a team would never dare trade or an albatross (i.e. Soriano) that a team can’t move. If the Marlins indeed have the best offer and he is willing to leave the Cards and play in Miami, Pujols should accept the contract without a no trade clause.

    • paperlions - Dec 6, 2011 at 4:02 PM

      Yeah, screw this guy…wanting to determine for himself where he lives, works, and raises his family….who does he think he is?

  7. Eric Fay - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:52 PM

    I can’t believable!!!

  8. Kyle - Dec 6, 2011 at 3:58 PM

    The 10-5 stuff really just makes this whole thing kind of silly, doesn’t it?

  9. mrznyc - Dec 7, 2011 at 8:29 AM

    Marlins sign Albert, win the World Series, have a fire sale – Deja vu all over again

Leave Comment

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

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Wright (2954)
  2. J. Fernandez (2334)
  3. Y. Cespedes (2311)
  4. G. Stanton (2153)
  5. D. Span (1952)
  1. Y. Puig (1912)
  2. M. Teixeira (1907)
  3. G. Springer (1861)
  4. H. Olivera (1842)
  5. F. Rodney (1818)