Skip to content

Stores in St. Louis are giving away Pujols merchandise

Dec 8, 2011, 10:04 PM EDT

pujols store ap AP

The St. Louis region was shocked at Thursday morning’s announcement that Cardinals icon Albert Pujols had accepted a 10-year, $250 million pact from the Angels. And so were its retail shops.

According to Matthew Hathaway of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, four area Pro Image Sports stores began giving away Pujols jerseys and jersey shirts (valued between $14.99 and $129.99) soon after the three-time MVP’s decision was made public. Other apparel stores in the area soon followed suit, looking to dump stacks of usually-coveted Pujols gear that had suddenly been rendered worthless.

“It’s not about the money, just like Albert said,” Pro Image Sports owner Paul Russo told the Post-Dispatch. “Except he lied, and we didn’t.” FatHead has also slashed prices on its Pujols stock by over 65%.

  1. Mike Luna - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:09 PM

    I heard about a bar in New York that were giving away free beer for Jose Reyes shirts and jerseys. Those shirts and jerseys would then be donated to the less fortunate.

    Probably something these stores could have considered.

    • lovesmesomeme - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:38 PM

      Do you think TLR has awoken from his drunken stupor and realized that he retired and Albert is gone. Or will he come out of his blackout February 15 and make out his line up card with Albert batting third. I
      I don’t know what I am going to for the next 2.5 months with idiot Cardinal fans to rail on. Maybe I will start taking my meds again

    • somekat - Dec 9, 2011 at 8:24 AM

      Uhhhh….they are giving them away for free. The “less fortunate” can get them as easy as anyone else

      • Mike Luna - Dec 9, 2011 at 11:44 AM

        I suppose, if the less fortunate are wandering by a sporting goods store, they might get a shirt or two.

        But there are organizations that bring clothes specifically to those that need them. For everyone that takes one that isn’t in need, that’s one less that goes to someone in need.

        Not to say that a financially blessed fan doesn’t deserve a free jersey just because they’re not homeless, but if they’re just going to give them away they might as well give them to a worthy cause.

  2. thehypercritic - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:13 PM

    So Pujols played a decade of the best baseball in history for below market value, helped the Cardinals win two rings and some idiots of St. Louis have figured out a way to be upset that the Cards didn’t sign him to an absurd contract that will be crushing to the club on the second half? Really??

    Cardinal fans should be ashamed.

    • richeich - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:24 PM

      They should be ashamed for what. You’re a dumb ass dope!

      • thehypercritic - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:32 PM

        Ashamed for choosing to be angry that the Pujols era wont continue rather than celebrating the fantastic run they had.

      • lovesmesomeme - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:27 PM

        What’s a matter richerich are your feelings hurt that Albert didn’t consult you on his big decision. Because you surely would have told him that he didn’t need that extra $40M and he should stay and be rooted on by “the greatest fans in the world”.
        You can always go to the statue he built of himself and make your way past the security guard and throw eggs at it like the rest of you crybabies who live in your moms basement do. Or maybe you can go to the jersey burning down by the arch.

      • tashkalucy - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:39 PM

        St. Louis people learned the same thing Cleveland people did a few years ago……

        It’s all about the money.

        You’re a sucker if you believe a professional athlete and all the “sports builds character” and “love of the community” and “devotion to the team” cliches.

        The man was offered $200M. Get that? TWO HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS! Can a person and his family…and his extended family…..and all the people he ever went to school with…. spend that kind of money in a lifetime?

        A pity what pro sports has turned into.

      • lovesmesomeme - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:31 AM

        this is nothing like Cleveland. It appears that Albert bargained in good faith all last winter and the Cardinals assumed that they could make him an offer he couldn’t refuse. What more do these crybabies want from the guy.

      • fearlessleader - Dec 9, 2011 at 1:06 AM

        “Lovesmesomeme,” Pujols and Lozano were looking for A-Rod-type money last winter. Locking him up then would have meant offering him an obscene amount of money in the absence of any competition for his services, and then we’d be hearing about what idiots the Cards’ brass were for bidding against themselves. Can’t win.

      • djpostl - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:16 PM

        Lol. Whatever idiot. They got over for 11 years. Underpaid the guy for his entire career, to the tune of arguably one hundred million dollars or more. Now they cry when he takes more money to go elsewhere.

    • lostsok - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:31 PM

      Cards fans should be ECSTATIC. That contract is insane, and the Angels–while enjoying Pujols the next 2-3 years–are going to spend the better part of a decade paying over 20 million a year for an old man.

      Joins the Dodgers contract for Kevin Brown as among the worst in sport history.

    • paperlions - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:33 PM

      No. No one is upset that the Cardinals didn’t re-sign him. They are upset at being lied to….there is no amount of goodwill that offsets being lied to…..people would have preferred if he had just kept his mouth shut or been honest and said it was about the money.

      • lovesmesomeme - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:31 PM

        How do you call telling them that if they wanted to re-sign him they needed to do it last off season. He told them he would not talk after spring training started. He also said he would go where god told him to go, and he went where the paper with in god we trust was most plentiful. God is real good

      • paperlions - Dec 9, 2011 at 8:08 AM

        He also said, “Do I want to be in St. Louis forever? Of course,” Pujols said. “…People from other teams want to play in St. Louis and they’re jealous that we’re in St. Louis because the fans are unbelievable. So why would you want to leave a place like St. Louis to go somewhere else and make $3 or $4 more million a year? It’s not about the money. I already got my money. It’s about winning and that’s it.”

        And he said it repeatedly.

      • djpostl - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:19 PM

        Very true. But then again I doubt it. Look at moronic Orioles fans that boo Mark Teixeira every time he comes back home to Baltimore. There has NEVER been a more honest athlete about this stuff.

        His last couple years in Texas and every stop after (Atl and LAA) he ALWAYS said same thing. “Going to go to the right financial situation, this is a business decision”.

        Not one time did he ever allude to possibly coming to Baltimore, not one. Then they offer him around $35 million LESS than what Yankees do, he goes to New York and they act betrayed.

    • fearlessleader - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:15 PM

      Thehypercritic, this is a both/and, not an either/or. Personally, I’m immensely grateful for the 11 years we’ve had with Pujols, and I’m crushed and bitter that he’s leaving.

      It’s not that complicated.

      • thehypercritic - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:49 PM

        I understand being disappointed, but bitter?

        He got the moon in return, but for many years Albert Pujols was denied the freedoms that most Americans take for granted — to choose where to work and raise a family. To pick an employer. To avail himself of the free market, negotiate with every company in his chosen profession and accept the most money he was offered.

        These are deeply personal choices for a man and his family. After giving so much to (and undoubtedly receiving so much from) the Cardinals organization, I cannot fathom feeling entitled to judge a man for making the choices he felt best for him and his family — it’s what I would do, likely what you would do and hard for me to understand where the bitterness comes from.

      • brewcrewfan54 - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:58 PM

        Albert wasn’t denied anything. He chose to sign that contract that kept him where he was for the last 7 years. He didn’t do it for the fans he did it for himself. He wasn’t a hostage.

      • thehypercritic - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:24 AM

        So he wasn’t drafted by the St. Louis Cardinals, denied the right to negotiate with other clubs as an amateur or prior to his accumulating a completely arbitrary service time??

        Why don’t we start drafting lawyers out of law school, only allow them to work at the firm which selects them no matter where it’s located & compensate them for the first six years at a figure well below market value? Doctors? Reporters? Why do people think it’s okay to do this to athletes?

      • brewcrewfan54 - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:30 AM

        Alebert and every other baseball player knows what they are getting into when they go into professional baseball. If he or any other players have ossue with it they can choose a new line of work. If you arent the boss everyone has to follow rules at work they may not want to. And while I’m no lawyer I believe some of them get their law school paid in return for staying at a company for a certain amount of years or they can buy their way out. Sounds like a contract to me.

      • brewcrewfan54 - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:36 AM

        And in case you missed it, Albert signed the contract that underpaid him. And I’m tired of people relating pro athletes to their normal 9-5. They arent the same. Baseball players are very lucky. Their contracts are guaranteed money. Pujols disn’t sign that contract 7 years ago to be nice to the Cardinals. He signed that contract to guarantee that he was going to get paid. He took less money at the time to ensure that an injury or poor performance didn’t keep him from getting it later. Its a risk/reward situation and he shouldn’t be complaining.

      • thehypercritic - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:44 AM

        Yes, kids out of law school sign contracts and are held to them.

        Only difference is, like everyone who’s profession isn’t athlete and therefore denied these basic rights by people who think like you, they get to approach every law firm in the world and choose the offer that they like considering location, compensation, etc.

      • brewcrewfan54 - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:52 AM

        “People who think like me?”. Yeah I’m a real caveman with my thinking. You’ve failed to give a compelling argument of you point of view. And I have a pretty good feeling that wont change.

      • fearlessleader - Dec 9, 2011 at 1:00 AM

        “denied the freedoms that most Americans take for granted” — I’m sorry, are you listening to yourself?

      • thehypercritic - Dec 9, 2011 at 1:02 AM

        Not sure why you think it’s up to me to point out the various ways the drafts are deeply unfair to players.

        Many accomplished economists have definitively refuted the competitive balance myth in scholarly works that conclude the only true benefit of the draft is artificially capping the price of labor in an industry where the product quite literally is labor.

        I haven’t met anyone who would attempt to defend the draft as fair to athletes in many years — if you’re up for that task go ahead. I’m all ears. But as the vast majority of evidence in the matter, by those smarter and more versed in the matter than I, stands against the draft I must insist that the burden of proof is on you.

      • thehypercritic - Dec 9, 2011 at 1:12 AM

        FearlessLeader, yes I’m listening to myself.

        I think the collusion of billionaire owners to maximize profits by limiting the rights of young labor — often in cahoots with veteran labor who have already gone through the process — is a travesty. If you have a reason why you think it’s right — beyond “they still get a lot of money, just not nearly what their rare skill set is worth” or “I played sports when I was younger and would play for less if I was good enough” — I’m all ears.

      • brewcrewfan54 - Dec 9, 2011 at 1:22 AM

        Well its on you because you are the one saying how unfair it is. I’m not here to discuss the merits of competitve balance of the draft. Anyways the fact of the matter is MLB players are represented by a player union. This union seems to think that the system is working ok seeing as they haven’t changed the draft at all. You seem to be confusing civil rights with baseballs workers’ rights. These players aren’t being held hostage and even the lowest paid guys are getting compensated very well for it.

      • thehypercritic - Dec 9, 2011 at 1:36 AM

        Are you drunk??

        1. The last CBA made huge changes to the draft. That’s been the largest criticism of the agreement.

        2. The MLBPA represents current players, not the amateurs who are harmed by the draft. They got theirs and trade away the rights of players not in the union in the hopes that current membership gets a piece of the increased profits — that’s why you see mediocre veterans receiving princely sums compared to highly sought after amateurs.

        3. I think you’re confusing economic systems and labor rights w/civil rights.

        4. Saying “I think they get paid enough” isn’t an answer — it doesn’t even begin to grapple with determining the value of labor or the specific asset — hand waving away the rights of anyone, even it they are lucky and highly privileged, is a dangerous thing.

  3. richeich - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:22 PM

    He didn’t get paid below market value. When he signed his last contract he got paid a good salary. You don’t know what you’re talking about. What makes us mad is all he cares about is the big bucks.Screw his fans, and the people of Saint Louis that loved him since 2001! Right? I don’t think so. Shut your yap if you don’t know the true facts which you obviously don’t!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • thehypercritic - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:44 PM

      There isn’t a metric on the planet that says Pujols’s salary from the Cardinals was in the same hemisphere as the value he created and money he helped bring to the organization. I don’t feel sorry for Albert — he signed the contract and agreed to terms MUCH lower than he would have received on the open market as evidenced by every big ticket free agent signing of the past decade — but it’s an objective reality that his compensation was less than market value.

      As for the fans? Yes. You don’t matter. You got to watch him play and cheer for him over a decade. That is not being screwed. At the end of the day a grown man chose the city he wanted to live in with his family and took the best deal on the table. Why wouldn’t he?

      He was drafted into an organization over a decade ago. He was deprived of a free market, had his salary artificially capped and instructed where he and his family would have to live and work for the better part of a decade. That at age 31 he’s exercised the right of every American to avail himself of the free market, choose the city and contract details that he desires and somehow be criticized for it… Words escape me.

      • tashkalucy - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:50 PM


        Albert was a poor slave. Toiling on the plantation for mere millions. Having to be treated as a celebrity everywhere he went. Getting adulation from thousands every time he scratched his azz in public.

        And he made money for his team. You know what – maybe the Cardinals should be able to sue every ballplayer they paid that cost the team money! Make it even.

        Puhols got record contracts from the Cardinals. He’s a great ballplayer. Smart, and not just about hitting.

        He did what he did.

        Living in Southern California, I can assure you that he’ll be hot for awhile, then just be another celebrity hanging around.

        He’s a free man and had the right to do what he did. What? He’s supposed to be like his new teammate Jarred Weaver and leave money on the table? Jarred’s Jarred. Albert’s Albert. So?

      • thehypercritic - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:03 AM

        So it’s okay to deny people of the free market and grossly underpay them in relation to the revenues they create for billionaire owners so long as the random fan in SoCal thinks it’s enough.

        Why do so many Americans become socialists when the discussion turns to sports, or communists when it’s college sports?

        And the fame/adoration — at least in my ase, that would be a drawback and not a benefit.

      • tashkalucy - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:11 AM


        Take your crap onto the Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hiliarity shows.

        You make about as much sense as them.

        And by the way – go to the hills in Afganistan and find some old bin Laden supporters. They hate American billionaires that exploit people just like you do.

      • thehypercritic - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:28 AM

        Given the amount of time I spend on, that first part is just funny.

        Secondly, please draw the line for me between my distate for your advocating the arbitrary capping of salary to maximize an owner’s profits and the feelings of Islamic extremists.

      • cur68 - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:37 AM

        I dunno gents, I can see both sides of your arguments, here. Sure, he was idolized and adored in Cardinal-land and sure he hired out to highest bidder, even though he was rich already. But he also fulfilled his contract in an honorable way, behaved like a gent and left town with class (no made for TV melodramas).

        Couldn’t both of your views be correct, and personal insults take a back seat? This is merely a matter of perception, I think. Form my POV, this whole drama was good publicity for baseball and shakes up the status quo a bit in MLB. Some people who might not have otherwise cared for the game are now going to pay attention to how this all plays out, I’ll bet. A dull off season has been given a big shot of excitement, that’s for damn sure. BUT we needn’t debate the moves of some millionaire like its as important as terrorist war in The Middle East. In the end, Pujols is going to play ball come spring for a team which just got a crap ton better and the Cards, who were already very, very good saved a fortune they can spend elsewhere and get better as well.

        * 8 weeks till pitchers & catchers gents; that’s the important bit.

      • jwbiii - Dec 9, 2011 at 2:05 AM

        “He’s supposed to be like his new teammate Jarred Weaver and leave money on the table?”

        Well, he did.

        “You know what – maybe the Cardinals should be able to sue every ballplayer they paid that cost the team money! Make it even.”

        Is anyone suggesting that Albert Pujols should sue the Cardinals?

      • blueintown - Dec 9, 2011 at 7:07 AM

        I was wondering how long it would take someone to incorporate islamofascism into the discussion of this baseball players contract. Good job, @tashkalucy.

      • jwbiii - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:24 PM

        Or maybe Pujols did take the highest bid.

      • stlouis1baseball - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:35 PM

        This guy can’t be serious can he? Players who are drafted are the “victims” as a result of them being drafted as oppossed to being able to conduct individual tryouts for the team(s) of their choice? Does he not realize there are a select number of roster spots on MLB teams? Does he not realize (under the terms of his asinine “free market” suggestion) EVERY player would tryout for only those teams with the highest bankrolls? Yeah…that’s just what Baseball needs. After all…the large market teams aren’t already at a huge advantage are they? Guys have a choice to make when it comes to signing contracts. It’s cut and dried. They either sign…or they don’t. Plenty of players have chosen the later. In Baseball, Football, Basketball, Hockey, etc… they agree to sign or they don’t. No one puts a gun to their head. It’s actually quite simple. Most laughable is his analogy of drafted players being
        ‘victims.” 98% of the population would give their left pinkie toe to be “victimized” by being drafted into MLB. Words escape him alright…because a brain escapes him as well.

  4. lewp - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:24 PM

    This might actually benefit the Rangers.

    Back when that basketball player left Cleveland, there was a tremendous outpouring of hate for him and many, many Cavs fans became Mavs fans when the Mavs and Heat played for the NBA Championship…Mavs won!

    Maybe the same karma for another Texas team?

    • jobooo - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:47 PM

      “Karma” doesn’t mean what you think it means.

    • stlouis1baseball - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:45 PM

      @ jwbiii: Thanks for posting. I called the reported “offer” BS right away. I do appreciate you confirming it though. What’s hardest to understand is he ultimately left for $3.4 Million a year. When you factor in the tax and cost of living differences between Missouri and California this was a real bright “business decision.” But moreso (from the perspective of the majority of Cardinals fans)…is the fact that he blatantly lied about only caring about winning. Specifically stated he wanted to be a Cardinal for life and even mentioned NOT leaving as a result of money cause he “already made his money.” In case you missed the quote I posted previously….

      “Do I want to be in St. Louis forever? Of course,” Pujols said. “…People from other teams want to play in St. Louis and they’re jealous that we’re in St. Louis because the fans are unbelievable. So why would you want to leave a place like St. Louis to go somewhere else and make $3 or $4 more million a year? It’s not about the money. I already got my money. It’s about winning and that’s it.”

      –Albert Pujols, 15 February 2009

  5. xmatt0926x - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:26 PM

    Rejoice Cardinals fans. You will be thanking the Angels for giving Albert that awful deal in 4 years. Yeah you hope a legend spends his whole career in one place but this was just horrible timing. Player looking to be paid with a historic contract for 10 years after his 30th birthday. It’s insane. At the same time acting like he’s public enemy#1 is lame. He’ll go into the Hall of Fame as a Cardinal. He’ll have 11 HOF years in a Cards uni and maybe 4 or 5 good years in an Angels uniform.

  6. jagrbomb18 - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:27 PM

    At least the Phil’s don’t have to worry about him anymore

  7. jeteribarelyknowher - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:42 PM

    Albert made a business decision. One that as a Cardinal fan you don’t agree with. Oh well, grow the fuck up and move on. It has NOTHING to do with you.

  8. thebigwhitecat - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:46 PM

    Couldn’t they just remove “PUJOLS” and the numbers and sell them as generic Cardinals jerseys? Or is that against MLB rules?

    • unlost1 - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:05 PM

      no, they are not sewn in

  9. dalucks - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:51 PM

    Let me help some people understand. Think about your job and how much you get paid and then you get an offer from another company to do the same job for double the money. What would you do? Yes, the moving van will be at your house in the morning.

    • fearlessleader - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:18 PM

      Yeah, it wasn’t “double the money,” and he DID spend the last few years telling us that he wanted to stay in St. Louis and that he wasn’t going to leave for a few million more per year. Otherwise, your analogy is perfect!

      Can y’all just let us work through the stages of grief before you start lecturing us? I don’t know a single Cardinal fan who’s claiming to be rational today.

      • 1943mrmojorisin1971 - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:23 AM

        How can anyone expect you to be? Everyone here lecturing would be equally distraught at seeing their best player from the last decade or even from the last few years walk like this

      • cur68 - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:43 AM

        erm…um..there there, I’m very sorry pat, pat, pat

  10. cup0pizza - Dec 8, 2011 at 10:59 PM

    They should ship them to Haiti and Africa, like they do with the merchandise printed for teams that lose the championship (Eagles super bowl champ t-shirts, etc.)

  11. stoutfiles - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:15 PM

    Pujols will be back to retire with the Cardinals.

    You’re all mad now, but he’s like Griffey Jr., he’ll be loved when he returns.

  12. Joe - Dec 8, 2011 at 11:16 PM

    The thing I don’t get…his choice wasn’t only about the money! He (allegedly) turned down more from Miami, so he took a middle option that paid him more than he would have had in StL, but also put him in a better team environment. Yeah, he didn’t take the sentimental route to stay home for less money, but it’s not like he went all Didier Drogba.

  13. nekotman - Dec 9, 2011 at 1:16 AM

    I have not seen anything about this man’s pride in himself and his job.He has been the best ball player for the last decade. He is still the best. Why not pay him as the best? He knows there is not one player better than him. He obviously felt he was worth all that money and he got it. Good for him. If you think pride and self accomplishment were not important you are mistaken. Even his agent made known that fact. And why not feel a little bitter against the Cards. He wanted a deal before last season. They were the ones who put it off and cost themselves dearly for not trying to get it done. You Cardinal fans are upset and rightly so. But your anger should be at the organization and not AP. You wanted, he provided and now his time is finished there. You people don’t own him.

  14. ghostofjimlindeman - Dec 9, 2011 at 5:55 AM

    Unless you’re a loyal Cardinal fan then it would be hard for you to understand Albert’s betrayal towards the fan base here. There are countless interviews of him proclaiming his love for the Cardinals and their fans and the community here. Albert always acted as if money wasn’t the most important thing in his life and community was important for him so to go and betray us like this is insulting to everyone here. He said one thing to us and went out and did something completely different and we feel lied too.

    There was a stadium full of Pujols jersey’s every summer night here and he sold us down the river. For a man who claimed he wanted to be like Stan Musial, I got news for you captain payday you’re no Stan Musial not now and not ever. Albert coulda been a legacy here, he coulda had a statue out in front of the stadium with Stan’s now he’s just another sell out athlete punk. Too bad the porn king Lazano and Albert have such a short view of history I’m sure he’d of made more in the long run by being a legacy Cardinal.

  15. ghostofjimlindeman - Dec 9, 2011 at 6:06 AM

    I’m guessing the Pujols #5 restaurant with his statue in front will be re-locating to a new location soon? That statue has to come down by the way like now, not in a violent way people a civil way, but that baby is now one hell of an eyesore..

  16. El Bravo - Dec 9, 2011 at 10:27 AM

    There isn’t enough cheese in the world to go with all the whine on this comments board.

    • stlouis1baseball - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:08 PM

      Bravo: I will be the first to acknowledge it is a personal choice and I will never begrudge someone for taking additional monies elsewhere. The key however…is to be honest about it.
      Let me help you understand a little bit. Please pay special attention to the $3-$4 Million Dollar reference in the quotation below. Kind of ironic considering that is EXACTLY what he ultimately left for. Kind of foolish when you also factor in the tax differences and cost of living differences between the state of Missouri and the state of California. After all, these things must be considered since this was a “business decision.”

      “Do I want to be in St. Louis forever? Of course,” Pujols said. “…People from other teams want to play in St. Louis and they’re jealous that we’re in St. Louis because the fans are unbelievable. So why would you want to leave a place like St. Louis to go somewhere else and make $3 or $4 more million a year? It’s not about the money. I already got my money. It’s about winning and that’s it.”

      –Albert Pujols, 15 February 2009

  17. Cowboys Blue - Dec 9, 2011 at 12:38 PM

    The sad news is- in 20 years they will be selling Albert Pujols retro Cards jerseys at full price.

Leave Comment

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

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. H. Ramirez (2448)
  2. G. Stanton (2410)
  3. G. Springer (2389)
  4. C. Correa (2336)
  5. S. Strasburg (2329)
  1. J. Baez (2325)
  2. B. Crawford (2239)
  3. H. Pence (2235)
  4. M. Teixeira (2159)
  5. E. Encarnacion (1994)