Is Albert Pujols worth $300M?

That's the big question, right? Should the Cardinals phenomenal first baseman become baseball's first $30M/yr man?

Let's get something out of the way first. No one is worth this money in a sane world. But we aren't talking about sanity here, we're talking about baseball contracts. So it's a valid question.

This kind of money became possible than to one man...and no, it isn't Alex Rodriguez. It's Tom Hicks, who decided that paying A-Rod $252M over ten years was okay. That contract blew up the salary structure. So Albert asking for $30M a year is crazy and ridiculous, but it's consistent with a new structure that owners put into place.

So...is he worth it? I think you would be hard-pressed to argue against it.

He has the 2nd most home runs over last 10 years (408), 2nd most RBI (1230), leads in WAR (83.8) and is second in OPS+ (172). He is a three-time NL MVP who has finished no lower than fourth in the MVP voting nine out of the last ten years. He currently leads all active players with a scorching .426 OBP and an insane 1.050 OPS. According to baseball-reference.com, the players that Pujols has most closely mirrored in his career have been Joe DiMaggio, Jimmie Foxx and Frank Robinson.



Yeah, he's pretty good. He's the best player in the league. He's already a Hall of Fame lock and is only 30 years old. Based on the guidelines that baseball has set for itself, he is easily worth $30M a year. Heck, he's probably worth more.

The problem for the Cardinals is this: the worth of a phenomenal player has accelerated so fast that it consumes more and more of a team's total salary amount. The Cardinals' projected payroll for 2011 is $104M, with Pujols making $16M this year. If everything else stays stable (with some salaries going up and others down) then a $30M/yr deal for Pujols will mean he alone will account for roughly 29% of St. Louis' payroll. That's a lot of cash to sink into one player. Money you can't use to strengthen the team elsewhere. Money you can't use to extend another player or a talented rookie. Unless you are willing to increase your payroll, tying close to one-third of your money is one player is a dangerous plan. Even with a player as talented as Pujols.

The other side of the argument is that in Pujols you have a once-in-a-lifetime player, a solid citizen and someone who far exceeds the other players at his position. Can you actually make up his production with other players? He averages over 40 homers and 120 RBI per season. Oh, and he has a solid glove to boot. How do you let someone like that walk?

So, is Pujols worth what he's asking for? By the standards of common sense, no. But common sense left the stable a long time ago. Based on the current standards of baseball, standards created both by the players and the owners, Pujols is worth $30M. And the Cardinals have to decide whether to sign him knowing it will limit their ability to sign and retain other players, or to risk losing him in free agency after the season ends.