More from Rosenthal: (Fox Sports)
The Angels have joined the Pujols sweepstakes, with the LA Times reporting that the team has $15 million to $20 million to spend for next season. That would put them in the ballpark with the Marlins' offer, which is reported to top $20 million a year.
Earlier today, the Florida Marlins reportedly offered Pujols a 10 year deal in the range of $220 million. Meanwhile, the Cardinals continued to be involved in negotiations for the slugger.
As I stated in February of this year after negotiations broke down with Pujols prior to Spring Training, a "10 year deal for Pujols would be money poorly spent" and "do not be surprised if the Angels became involved in the free agent discussions."
|Will Albert Pujols Land In Miami?|
Why would the St. Louis Cardinals let Albert Pujols go? Simple, it would be a wise choice if they cannot sign him for a shorter duration than 10 years. Most respected baseball people think that an Albert contract at the end of the 2011 season could be in the range for 10 years at $30 million per. That is a contract which would sink the Cardinals, much like the A-Rod deal sank the Rangers and Tom Hicks.
The top two spenders (Yankees and Red Sox) are locked up at first base assuming a Gonzales deal gets done. Six other teams do not make financial or team structure sense. That leaves the Cubs and the Angels as front runners.
Ok, I miscalculated the steroid induced proforma financials the Marlins are calculating for their new stadium cash flow AND the potential popularity of their new logo with the rave crowd.
2 out of 3 ain't bad.
Until Next Time,
There are contradictory reports and denials from the Angels camp according to St. Louis Post reporter Bernie Miklasz.. Dan Lozano may be embellishing interest because he read my Feb 2011 article about Pujols prospects, or Fuzzy Zoeller has hacked multiple twitter accounts fueling this rumor after a few at the 19th hole. You decide.