2004 Albert Pujols LVS bat M9 Model M356

[Clutch_Hitter]

Can anybody tell me what the red and blue ball mark on this bat means? It's on the back barrel of the bat, but all the ball seam impressions are on the left barrel. The red and blue ball mark is on the bottom barrel and is larger than the blue ball marks on the left barrel where the ball seam impressions are. It appears to have been a glancing blow. Foul ball...........???? Or is this actually two different ball marks, one red and one blue? Thanks for your help.

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/14-BacktoLeftBarrel.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/13-LeftBarrel.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Back%20Barrel/BackBarrelRedBallMark.jpg

[Clutch_Hitter]

PSA/DNA authenticated this bat, stating it's c. 2004. The PSA/DNA letter stated, "There is a red mark on the back barrel that appears to be a ball mark."

I paid $185.00 plus shipping to and from New Jersey for PSA/DNA services, so I felt they should have been decisive about this characteristic. Is it or isn't it a ball mark? To me, it obviously looks like the blue ball marks, except it's red. Why wasn't it obvious to PSA/DNA? Am I wrong, is it not a ball mark?

PSA/DNA also stated in the letter, "Also visible on the bat are red and blue bat rack streaks....." It does, but it also contains black bat rack streaks. The red and black streaks are much more predominant than the blue streaks. Why didn't the full authentication letter mention this obvious detail?

The PSA/DNA letter stated, "several ball marks and ball stitch impressions are visible on the left and back barrel. Ball marks include blue ink transfers." The back barrel doesn't contain ball stitch impressions. It contains a red and blue mark that "appears to be a ball mark." Or the marks are two different marks, one red and one blue.

When I received the bat and letter from PSA/DNA, I immediately thought it comparable to hiring someone to do construction work and receiving sloppy, incomplete results. No offense to anyone in construction; it's just what I thought at the time.

I've been submitting cards to PSA for years, so I decided to send this bat when I bought it from one of the members here. I believe it's been owned by three members here.

What would cause the red mark that appears to be a ball mark? Thanks for the help.

Greg Martin

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/2-FrontBarrel-1.jpg

[joecoco]

Hello-

That is a great looking bat. The red marks are from the red stiches on the baseball. I have seen it on other bats and also from my experience with wood bats in baseball. It usually occurs with foul ball marks- speaks to the force with which it was hit.

Anyways, that is my take. Cheers! - Joe

[camarokids]

My Travis Lee circa 2003 Devil Rays bat has a similar ball mark....actually has two of them.....

I believe there were special balls used after 9-11-01 and some of these balls have ended up in Batting Practice baseball bins......

36710

[Clutch_Hitter]

Thanks guys. Good information and nice bat David!

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/PujolsbatLOA-1.jpg

I've already covered most everything in this paragraph, except for the cleat marks. PSA/DNA said cleat marks were visible on the back barrel. Hmm, they definitely didn't look at the bat for any length of time. Cleat marks are visible on each side.

The picture of the left barrel in my previous post showed the cleat marks there.

Here is the right barrel, which also demonstrates game use as this chunk likely wouldn't splinter in BP. Anybody have an opinion on how this occurred? My thought was that contact was attempted on the left barrel, as normal, but perhaps an off-speed pitch caused contact on the cup of the right barrel (?).:
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Right%20Barrel/IMG_00112.jpg

Here's the front barrel:
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Front%20Barrel/FrontBarrel2.jpg

[Clutch_Hitter]

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Cup/Cup5-1-1.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/1-FrontBarrelALL.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/4-BackBarrel.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Knob/Knob5-1.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/8-10-044thinning-1.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/9-17-0444thHR.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/10-11-04NLDSgame47thinning.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/10-15-04NLCSGame28thinningsoloHR.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/10-21-04NLCSGame76thInning2B.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/Pujolslowerhandle.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/3-9-04SpringTraining.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/PujolsbatLOA-2.jpg

Who saw it coming?

Evidence Pujols used this bat:
Pujols ordered the bat
Pujols wrote his #5 on the cup
Pujols wrote his #5 on the knob
The #5 was not crossed out, etc by someone else on either end
Deep seam trenches were embedded on the left barrel
Seam impressions were on the sweet spot, high avg and power
Blue ink transfers are present
Red bat rack streaks are presentEvidence Pujols didn't use this bat:
Light coat of pine tar to handleI could settle for the PSA bat salesmen stating: the bat was used by Pujols and possibly another player, but to outright state it was used by another player with Pujols unconfirmed is irrational at best. The short description contained numerous errors, except for the light pine tar on handle. For $200.00 plus in authentication, if they want to say Pujols didn't use the bat, I want to know who did. It was in the St Louis dugout, so figure it out. I paid PSA to research the bat, not to tell me what is typical.

When a criminal investigator interviews a suspect, he or she will ask the suspect about the event in question, and the suspect will typically say, Well, I usually.........That's not what the investigator asked. He or she asked for specifics, not what is typical.

This picture was taken during the sixth inning of game 7, 2004 NLCS. I downloaded the game and watched some before work last week. Pujols was facing Clemens. Between each pitch, Pujols stepped out and grabbed the bat on the upper handle, intentionally applying pine tar to the lower handle. Coming through in the clutch, Pujols doubled:
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/10-21-04NLCSGame76thInning2B.jpg

This picture is from 9-17-04, Pujols 44th HR. Look at the pine tar on the handle and on his right glove:
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/9-17-0444thHR.jpg

[spartanservitto]

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Cup/Cup5-1-1.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/1-FrontBarrelALL.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/4-BackBarrel.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Knob/Knob5-1.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/8-10-044thinning-1.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/9-17-0444thHR.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/10-11-04NLDSgame47thinning.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/10-15-04NLCSGame28thinningsoloHR.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/10-21-04NLCSGame76thInning2B.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/Pujolslowerhandle.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/3-9-04SpringTraining.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/PujolsbatLOA-2.jpg

Who saw it coming?

Evidence Pujols used this bat:
Pujols ordered the bat
Pujols wrote his #5 on the cup
Pujols wrote his #5 on the knob
The #5 was not crossed out, etc by someone else on either end
Deep seam trenches were embedded on the left barrel
Seam impressions were on the sweet spot, high avg and power
Blue ink transfers are present
Red bat rack streaks are presentEvidence Pujols didn't use this bat:
Light coat of pine tar to handleI could settle for the PSA bat salesmen stating: the bat was used by Pujols and possibly another player, but to outright state it was used by another player with Pujols unconfirmed is irrational at best. The short description contained numerous errors, except for the light pine tar on handle. For $200.00 plus in authentication, if they want to say Pujols didn't use the bat, I want to know who did. It was in the St Louis dugout, so figure it out. I paid PSA to research the bat, not to tell me what is typical.

When a criminal investigator interviews a suspect, he or she will ask the suspect about the event in question, and the suspect will typically say, Well, I usually.........That's not what the investigator asked. He or she asked for specifics, not what is typical.

This picture was taken during the sixth inning of game 7, 2004 NLCS. I downloaded the game and watched some before work last week. Pujols was facing Clemens. Between each pitch, Pujols stepped out and grabbed the bat on the upper handle, intentionally applying pine tar to the lower handle. Coming through in the clutch, Pujols doubled:
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/10-21-04NLCSGame76thInning2B.jpg

This picture is from 9-17-04, Pujols 44th HR. Look at the pine tar on the handle and on his right glove:
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Game%20Images/9-17-0444thHR.jpg

Greg,

First off, I love this bat. If you ever plan on selling it, let me know.

Secondly, I agree with your conclusion... given the photographic evidence, and I actually believe the photo where the ball is hitting him in the face is possibly a photomatch. I think at the very least the bat was used by Pujols and someone else.

Granted pine tar isn't a Pujols characteristic, however, you have provided photos that show that it has happened. As for the stitch marks, the conclusion from other members is correct.

Great bat.

-Tony

[MLB_Authentic]

Your kidding right??


Greg,

First off, I love this bat. If you ever plan on selling it, let me know.

Secondly, I agree with your conclusion... given the photographic evidence, and I actually believe the photo where the ball is hitting him in the face is possibly a photomatch. I think at the very least the bat was used by Pujols and someone else.

Granted pine tar isn't a Pujols characteristic, however, you have provided photos that show that it has happened. As for the stitch marks, the conclusion from other members is correct.

Great bat.

-Tony

[spartanservitto]

Its not going to be definitive, but the 5 looks the same... I wouldn't chalk it up, but I believe the bat is genuine. Take it easy on me, geez. :eek:

Tough crowd.

-Tony

[MLB_Authentic]

Style match at BEST.


Its not going to be definitive, but the 5 looks the same... I wouldn't chalk it up, but I believe the bat is genuine. Take it easy on me, geez. :eek:

Tough crowd.

-Tony

[spartanservitto]

Style match at BEST.

Ok man, Im just saying the handwriting looks the same. Relax. Geez. I wouldnt call it definitive by any means. Hostile.

-Tony

[Clutch_Hitter]

Thanks Tony. I have found photos of his #5 written on the knob in various sizes, and the size of the "5" is very close. The handwriting itself is something else I'd like opinions on as well and is something I deal with at work. I'm going to post pictures on that soon.

As for the handle, it is dirty for the most part. Something I never paid attention to before buying this bat is this. During his at bat in the 8th inning of the 2008 NLCS, Albert scooped some dirt up and massaged it into the handle:

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/2004%20NLCS%20Game%207/8thinning4.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/2004%20NLCS%20Game%207/8thinning5.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/2004%20NLCS%20Game%207/8thinning6.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/2004%20NLCS%20Game%207/8thinning7.jpg

He singled in that at bat and removed his dirty gloves at 1st base:

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/2004%20NLCS%20Game%207/8thinning8.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/2004%20NLCS%20Game%207/8thinning9.jpg

In the sixth inning, he hit a game tying two out double down the left field line off a very inside pitch. As the photo from that swing shows, he brought his hands in near his body to get the sweet spot on the ball, outstanding hitter! Albert clapped his hands together after the play, with a dirty glove visible:

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/2004%20NLCS%20Game%207/6thinning7.jpg

Albert scooped dirt in the 4th inning and fastened his gloves right after:

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/2004%20NLCS%20Game%207/4thinning2.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/2004%20NLCS%20Game%207/4thinning3.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/2004%20NLCS%20Game%207/4thinning4.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/2004%20NLCS%20Game%207/4thinning5.jpg

[Clutch_Hitter]

What sort of substance is on the handle and knob of this PSA/DNA authentic Pujols gamer?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ALBERT-PUJOLS-SIGNED-GAME-USED-BAT-CARDINALS-PSA-DNA-/230531569893?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item35acc098e5

I'm not saying I don't think it's authentic, just curious what the substance is. Doesn't Albert's pinkie side palm wrap around the knob, below the handle?

[Clutch_Hitter]

It is two different ball marks, one red and one blue, and each is accompanied by a seam indentation. They are glancing blows:
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Macro/IMG_0052.jpg
The seam indentations on the red mark do not appear to be as deep as the ones on the left barrel, and the blue ink transfers on the left barrel are smaller than the red ink transfers. It is reasonable to say that center hits leave smaller ink transfers and deeper seam indentations, right?:
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Macro/IMG_0158.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Macro/IMG_0086.jpg

So the red mark was caused by stitches because it was a glancing blow? What caused the blue mark, ink? Thanks

[rj_lucas]

What sort of substance is on the handle and knob of this PSA/DNA authentic Pujols gamer?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ALBERT-PUJOLS-SIGNED-GAME-USED-BAT-CARDINALS-PSA-DNA-/230531569893?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item35acc098e5

I'm not saying I don't think it's authentic, just curious what the substance is. Doesn't Albert's pinkie side palm wrap around the knob, below the handle?

I wouldn't rely on the eBay bat as an exemplar. Read Jeff Scott's Letter of Opinion:

http://webpages.charter.net/birdbats/Birdbats/Notes%20and%20Articles/Letter%20of%20Opinion%20--%20Pujols%202008%20Marucci%20bat%2008252008b.pdf

I'd trust Jeff's assessment of an Albert Pujols GU bat over PSA/DNAs any and every day of the week.

Rick
rickjlucas@gmail.com

[Clutch_Hitter]

Roger that, thank you Rick.

[Birdbats]

I can't take issue with anything in the PSA/DNA letter regarding the M356C bat discussed in this thread. But, before discussing specifics, let's look bigger picture.

Albert's preferred Louisville Slugger model was the I13L, usually with the cupped end. I have Albert's LS order records through May 2005 and count 240 I13L bats shipped to him between 2004 and 2005 (the era consistent with the M356C in this thread). During the same period, I count 24 M356C bats. Half of those M356C bats were shipped in early 2004 and likely have the "Select Maple" center brand variation, like this bat:

http://www.shoremen44.com/Pujols%20-%20photomatch%206-13-04%20-%202.JPG

The remaining 12 bats likely have the M9 center brand variation. Of those 12 bats, only 3 (ordered 4/12/05) are 34" long; the other 9 are 34.5" long. Again, my records for Albert end early in the 2005 season, but based on the information I have (and the fact that laser-etched barrels didn't last long into the 2005 season), it's possible he received as few as 3 bats that have the same specs and the bat in this thread. That fact alone makes the odds that he used it pretty long. But, let's ignore that and move forward.

Anecdotal evidence I've heard suggests Pujols gave away most of the M356 bats he received because it was not a model he liked. I've been told he gave several to Mike Matheny, who preferred the M356. This photo shows a laser-etched M356 Pujols bat caked with Matheny's pine tar:

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w232/birdbats/MathenyandPujols.jpg

I also know an unused M356 model was used for a photo shoot for the 2004 Cardinals yearbook, and an autographed, unused M356 once hung in Al Hrabosky's restaurant.

http://www.ford-mobley.com/scans/2004Yearbook.jpg

So, we know Albert didn't receive many M356 bats; I've been told by people who would know that he didn't care much for the model; and there are multiple known instances of him giving them away. None of this rules out the possibility that Pujols used the M356 discussed in this thread. But, it certainly is relevant to the discussion.

Next, you have to consider the use characteristics. I agree that the tar buildup on the lower handle near the knob is inconsistent with what I'd expect to see on a Pujols bat. Here are two photos of two Pujols bats from 2004 and 2005 (both have team LOAs). Note the pine tar pattern -- especially near the knob -- and the presence of marks made by the on-deck weight:

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w232/birdbats/DCP02786.jpg

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w232/birdbats/DCP02787.jpg

As Pujols collectors know, Albert started using a heavier coat of pine tar in late 2008 and really slathered it on in 2009. The photo below shows a 2009 Pujols bat with maybe the most pine tar I've ever seen on a Pujols bat. Even so, look how clean the area is where he grips the bat:

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w232/birdbats/2009GrandSlambat-1.jpg

I have seen my share of Pujols bats, and I know the folks at PSA/DNA have also. I have to agree with them -- when you see a tar buildup where Albert grips the bat, that's a good indication someone else used the bat.

If you accept PSA/DNA's educated opinion (remember, it's just an opinion -- nobody has proof of who used the bat), then you have to accept the statement that use by Pujols cannot be confirmed. It's entirely possible that Pujols did use the bat -- perhaps in a game, in BP or in the cages. But, once somebody else adds their characteristics to a bat, it covers up the characteristics that may have existed prior.

On the whole, this bat has many characteristics that you'd want to see in a Pujols bat. I want to see seam marks and ink transfer on the right-hand hitter's side; I want to see red paint transfer from the bat box at Busch II; I want to see light tar on the upper handle. However, it doesn't seem to have the bat weight marks I'd expect to see, and it does have a buildup of pine tar in a place that's inconsistent with known exemplars.

Based on what I see in the photos, I'd have to agree with PSA/DNA's letter. It could have been used by Pujols, but that can't be stated with certainty because there's evidence that someone else used it. Whether it was used by this batter instead of Pujols or in addition to Pujols, nobody can say. The letter is as clear as it can be. It doesn't say it was used exclusively by someone other than Pujols -- just that it shows something that's inconsistent with Pujols exemplars.

As for the Marucci bat on eBay referenced in post #13 of this thread, it's one of four bats I reviewed belonging to the seller. I wrote letters on all four bats expressing they didn't have Pujols' characteristics -- specifically, a lack of pine tar during a period when Albert was using it liberally. The dark wood near the knob on this particular Marucci bat appears to be some kind of staining, not pine tar. Looks like inferior wood (two of the other bats also had wood discoloration). Here's the letter I wrote about the bat currently on eBay: http://webpages.charter.net/birdbats/Birdbats/Notes%20and%20Articles/Letter%20of%20Opinion%20--%20Pujols%202008%20Marucci%20bat%2008252008b.pdf

[Clutch_Hitter]

Jeff, thank you for taking the time to respond to this. It's very interesting. My primary issue with the PSA/DNA letter was the inaccurate statements in the description. It certainly seemed like they didn't examine the bat in reference to the details they mentioned, saw the handle, copied and pasted.

I have many questions about this, such as:
The tar Matheny used was reddish, but the tar on this bat is brownish and much, much less, right?
Which bats make it to the bat rack? Gamers, BP, etc?
Does the use match anyone else on the team?
The tar on the center is consistent with Pujols, right?
Does Pujols write his number on the cup and knob of each and every bat he orders, or just the ones he plans to use?
Does the fact that the seams indentations are secured tightly on the sweet spot lead you to believe it was a BP bat?
Do Pujols BP bats show evidence of dirt, etc on the handle,maybe like this one:http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Other%20Bats/Pujols6-11web.jpg

I've got more, but I don't want to ask too many at once. Again, I greatly appreciate your time. Here's a few more pictures:

This appears to be mud:
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Macro/IMG_0208.jpg

The space between:
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Macro/IMG_0098.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Macro/IMG_0096.jpg

[Clutch_Hitter]

Correction on the game images from my previous post. That was the 2004 NLCS, not the '08 NLCS.

Evidence Pujols used this bat:
Pujols ordered the bat
Pujols wrote his #5 on the cup
Pujols wrote his #5 on the knob
The #5 was not crossed out, etc by someone else on either end
Deep seam indentations were embedded on the right hand hitter side of the barrel
Seam impressions were on the sweet spot, high avg and power
Blue ink transfers are present
Red bat rack streaks are present
Pine tar on center label consistent for PujolsEvidence Pujols didn't use this bat:
Light coat of pine tar to the dirty handle
No evidence of weight sleeve

[Birdbats]

I have many questions about this, such as:
The tar Matheny used was reddish, but the tar on this bat is brownish and much, much less, right?
Which bats make it to the bat rack? Gamers, BP, etc?
Does the use match anyone else on the team?
The tar on the center is consistent with Pujols, right?
Does Pujols write his number on the cup and knob of each and every bat he orders, or just the ones he plans to use?
Does the fact that the seams indentations are secured tightly on the sweet spot lead you to believe it was a BP bat?
Do Pujols BP bats show evidence of dirt, etc on the handle?
1. Agreed. This bat does not have Matheny's use characteristics.
2. Both... but just because a Pujols bat is in the rack doesn't mean it's not in somebody else's section of the rack.
3. Several of Albert's teammates are known to have used his bats during that period, including Matheny, Hector Luna, Jason Marquis, Yadier Molina and Chris Carpenter. No way to 100% match this bat with any of these players; nothing distinct enough (though we can rule out Matheny).
4. Yes, it's consistent with Pujols. It's also consistent with some other players' bats I own and have seen, especially Hector Luna.
5. To my knowledge, during this period, Pujols wrote his number on both ends of all his bats, whether he'd decided to use them or not. I've heard stories that Albert would reject as many as 9-10 bats out of a shipment of 12 because those bats didn't sound good enough when he held them to his ear and tapped the wood. The rejects were given to others, complete with numbers on the ends.
6. The bat has a significant number of seam indentations. When the surface/grain of a bat has been compromised that many times, some players would opt for another bat with a harder, smoother surface for game use. Don't know if that's the case here, but I wouldn't shocked to learn this was somebody's BP bat.
7. To my knowledge, Albert's BP bats look like his gamers, but with more ball marks.

[Birdbats]

Evidence Pujols used this bat:
Pujols ordered the bat
Pujols wrote his #5 on the cup
Pujols wrote his #5 on the knob
The #5 was not crossed out, etc by someone else on either end
Deep seam indentations were embedded on the right hand hitter side of the barrel
Seam impressions were on the sweet spot, high avg and power
Blue ink transfers are present
Red bat rack streaks are present
Pine tar on center label consistent for PujolsJust to play devil's advocate...
Pujols ordered the bat (Not proof he used it. At that time, he probably used less than half of the bats shipped to him.)

Pujols wrote his #5 on the cup (Again, not proof he used it.)
Pujols wrote his #5 on the knob (Ditto.)
The #5 was not crossed out, etc by someone else on either end (Not unusual for one player to use another's bat and not mark out the number.)
Deep seam indentations were embedded on the right hand hitter side of the barrel (Just means it was used by a righty... or a lefty who bats label down.)
Seam impressions were on the sweet spot, high avg and power (I have pitcher's bats that show just as much use.)
Blue ink transfers are present (Nearly all bats have blue ink transfer.)
Red bat rack streaks are present (Almost every 2005 Cardinals bat has red paint on the barrel end.)
Pine tar on center label consistent for Pujols (and Hector Luna and other guys, also.)I'm not trying to be the bad guy here, and I have no affiliation with PSA/DNA. I just want you to understand that different people can interpret the same evidence in different ways. You seem to want unimpeachable proof that your bat was used by Pujols, but nobody can tell you that based on the evidence. The letter basically says it's a Pujols bat that might have been used by Pujols, but shows characteristics suggesting use by someone else. If the letter was more specific than that ("Only Pujols used this bat," "Pujols used the bat first" or "It was used by only one player and it was someone other than Pujols"), those statements wouldn't stand up to scrutiny.

You have a nice bat. It's a Pujols model, likely one of just 3 M356C natural 34" M9 bats shipped to him in his first MVP year. It may well have been used by Albert during a game or BP. It has a couple characteristics (lower handle tar and lack of weight marks) that aren't consistent with known Pujols exemplars from that period. It is what it is, and no letter from any third-party authenticator can make it more or less authentic.

[Clutch_Hitter]

Jeff, you're a generous man and a great asset to the hobby. I still have questions and will likely post them to this thread at your convenience.

Tony and Jeff, your enthusiasm is contagious.

This forum is loaded with information and obviously a tremendous asset to the hobby.

I collect and process evidence for a living, which may explain some things. I have taken many, many pictures, so I will probably post a few more.

As for PSA, as I have said, I have been submitting pre-war cards for several years. When I received the full letter for the bat and the description didn't include obvious details, I did not trust their final opinion. I will not submit another.

And whoever changed the title of this thread, thank you.

[Clutch_Hitter]

Jeff, the right hand hitter's side is warped from contact. That's common?

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Macro/IMG_0215.jpg

It seems to me that the barrels of BP bats would be dirtier than strictly game used bats because the balls should be somewhat dirtier than the game balls. The barrel of the M356 is fairly clean.
____________________________________________

This bat looks a lot like my bat in every respect. Since Albert apparently wrote his number over the existing number, isn't it safe to assume he used this bat in BP and/or a game?

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Other%20Bats/Pujolscollage.jpg

Here's a few more pictures:

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Macro/IMG_0112-1.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Macro/IMG_0156.jpg

[lakeerie92]

It seems to me that the barrels of BP bats would be dirtier than strictly game used bats because the balls should be somewhat dirtier than the game balls. The barrel of the M356 is fairly clean.
Actually the opposite of that is true. Most BP balls are brand new. I have actually caught BP balls that I later got autographed because they looked like a brand new ball.

[Clutch_Hitter]

Would it be safe to say that BP balls are used more than game balls? For example, during a game, it seems like the slightest flaw leads to the catcher, pitcher, or batter asking for a new ball. Does that happen in BP too? Does each hitter start each of his hitting sessions with unopened boxes? I'm not trying to be smart, just never knew that if it's the case. I would expect BP balls to cause sloppier looking barrels, with blotchy marks. My Gwynn bats has a few areas like that, and my co-worker has a Murph bat that has those characteristics. Thank you

[Birdbats]

Actually, game balls are rubbed in mud (http://baseballrubbingmud.com/) prior to each game and actually are quite dirty compared to most BP balls. Forgot to mention Renteria also used Pujols' bats (he left the team after 2004). The "warping" to which you refer is caused by the surface of the wood being compressed by repeated contact with baseballs. As I mentioned in a previous post, some players want their game bat barrels to be has hard and smooth as possible (in the old days, players would rub their bats with bones and bottles). Sometimes, when a bat becomes this hammered, it's retired or relegated to BP. Depends on the player.

[Clutch_Hitter]

That's very interesting. Thank you

[Clutch_Hitter]

Mr. Pujols never wrote his #5 on this Louisville Slugger I13L bat:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Albert-Pujols-St-Louis-Cardinals-Game-Used-LS-Bat-/390240924065?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5adc2bf1a1

[spartanservitto]

Mr. Pujols never wrote his #5 on this Louisville Slugger I13L bat:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Albert-Pujols-St-Louis-Cardinals-Game-Used-LS-Bat-/390240924065?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5adc2bf1a1

That bat was more than likely not used by Pujols.

-Tony

[Clutch_Hitter]

Thanks Tony,

Evidently Pujols didn't write his number on EVERY bat he ordered, but probably just about every bat. Yadier Molina was number 41, so apparently Pujols gave him the bat when he received it without writing his #5 on the knob first.

Therefore, Pujols' #5 written on the knob and barrel end are pieces of circumstantial evidence, albeit small pieces.

It is obvious that Pujols typically used bats with fairly clean handles. Trust me, I've searched through hundreds of photos, and I'm sure others have as well, and there aren't very many Pujols bats with noticeable substance on the handles. People are fairly predictable until circumstances begin to change though.

The summer months here in the southeast US are very hot. It's not uncommon to walk from the front door to mailbox and have a wet shirt when walking back inside, and to play a round of golf requires three or four gloves.

What team(s) had baby blue bat racks in '04? What about black?

[rj_lucas]

Here's a link to another thread from a while back where there was discussion about pine tar (or lack of) in the grip area on Albert's bats:

http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=35978

Don't know if the information will be useful to you or not, but I remembered the thread so thought I'd pass it along.

Rick
rickjlucas@gmail.com

[taratape]

I can't take issue with anything in the PSA/DNA letter regarding the M356C bat discussed in this thread. But, before discussing specifics, let's look bigger picture.

Albert's preferred Louisville Slugger model was the I13L, usually with the cupped end. I have Albert's LS order records through May 2005 and count 240 I13L bats shipped to him between 2004 and 2005 (the era consistent with the M356C in this thread). During the same period, I count 24 M356C bats. Half of those M356C bats were shipped in early 2004 and likely have the "Select Maple" center brand variation, like this bat:

http://www.shoremen44.com/Pujols%20-%20photomatch%206-13-04%20-%202.JPG

The remaining 12 bats likely have the M9 center brand variation. Of those 12 bats, only 3 (ordered 4/12/05) are 34" long; the other 9 are 34.5" long. Again, my records for Albert end early in the 2005 season, but based on the information I have (and the fact that laser-etched barrels didn't last long into the 2005 season), it's possible he received as few as 3 bats that have the same specs and the bat in this thread. That fact alone makes the odds that he used it pretty long. But, let's ignore that and move forward.

Anecdotal evidence I've heard suggests Pujols gave away most of the M356 bats he received because it was not a model he liked. I've been told he gave several to Mike Matheny, who preferred the M356. This photo shows a laser-etched M356 Pujols bat caked with Matheny's pine tar:

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w232/birdbats/MathenyandPujols.jpg

I also know an unused M356 model was used for a photo shoot for the 2004 Cardinals yearbook, and an autographed, unused M356 once hung in Al Hrabosky's restaurant.

http://www.ford-mobley.com/scans/2004Yearbook.jpg

So, we know Albert didn't receive many M356 bats; I've been told by people who would know that he didn't care much for the model; and there are multiple known instances of him giving them away. None of this rules out the possibility that Pujols used the M356 discussed in this thread. But, it certainly is relevant to the discussion.

Next, you have to consider the use characteristics. I agree that the tar buildup on the lower handle near the knob is inconsistent with what I'd expect to see on a Pujols bat. Here are two photos of two Pujols bats from 2004 and 2005 (both have team LOAs). Note the pine tar pattern -- especially near the knob -- and the presence of marks made by the on-deck weight:

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w232/birdbats/DCP02786.jpg

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w232/birdbats/DCP02787.jpg

As Pujols collectors know, Albert started using a heavier coat of pine tar in late 2008 and really slathered it on in 2009. The photo below shows a 2009 Pujols bat with maybe the most pine tar I've ever seen on a Pujols bat. Even so, look how clean the area is where he grips the bat:

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w232/birdbats/2009GrandSlambat-1.jpg

I have seen my share of Pujols bats, and I know the folks at PSA/DNA have also. I have to agree with them -- when you see a tar buildup where Albert grips the bat, that's a good indication someone else used the bat.

If you accept PSA/DNA's educated opinion (remember, it's just an opinion -- nobody has proof of who used the bat), then you have to accept the statement that use by Pujols cannot be confirmed. It's entirely possible that Pujols did use the bat -- perhaps in a game, in BP or in the cages. But, once somebody else adds their characteristics to a bat, it covers up the characteristics that may have existed prior.

On the whole, this bat has many characteristics that you'd want to see in a Pujols bat. I want to see seam marks and ink transfer on the right-hand hitter's side; I want to see red paint transfer from the bat box at Busch II; I want to see light tar on the upper handle. However, it doesn't seem to have the bat weight marks I'd expect to see, and it does have a buildup of pine tar in a place that's inconsistent with known exemplars.

Based on what I see in the photos, I'd have to agree with PSA/DNA's letter. It could have been used by Pujols, but that can't be stated with certainty because there's evidence that someone else used it. Whether it was used by this batter instead of Pujols or in addition to Pujols, nobody can say. The letter is as clear as it can be. It doesn't say it was used exclusively by someone other than Pujols -- just that it shows something that's inconsistent with Pujols exemplars.

As for the Marucci bat on eBay referenced in post #13 of this thread, it's one of four bats I reviewed belonging to the seller. I wrote letters on all four bats expressing they didn't have Pujols' characteristics -- specifically, a lack of pine tar during a period when Albert was using it liberally. The dark wood near the knob on this particular Marucci bat appears to be some kind of staining, not pine tar. Looks like inferior wood (two of the other bats also had wood discoloration). Here's the letter I wrote about the bat currently on eBay: http://webpages.charter.net/birdbats/Birdbats/Notes%20and%20Articles/Letter%20of%20Opinion%20--%20Pujols%202008%20Marucci%20bat%2008252008b.pdf


Jeff,

you forgot to mention the auto'd m356c M9 bat 34.5" you authenticated for me that you termed "textbook Pujols use characteristics". my bat has the deep seam impressions, blue ink transfer, red bat rack marks, light tar, but has a totally clean handle..... nothing like the bat in question.

[Clutch_Hitter]

Jeff,

you forgot to mention the auto'd m356c M9 bat 34.5" you authenticated for me that you termed "textbook Pujols use characteristics". my bat has the deep seam impressions, blue ink transfer, red bat rack marks, light tar, but has a totally clean handle..... nothing like the bat in question.

Taratape,

Sounds like you have a nice bat, must be the one 34.5 version he used to decide he didn't like the model. Your comment indicated deep seam impressions are a pujols characteristic, yet Jeff said he has pitcher bats that have the same. You have blue ink transfer, yet Jeff said all bats have them. Red bat rack marks indicate anybody's bat rack in St Louis. I would actually disagree, if the handle is totally clean, he didn't use it. It should have light pine tar from him grabbing the center label between pitches.

I don't doubt it's a good bat, OK, but there are redundancies throughout this thread. I've only watched one game looking for tendencies and found Pujols picking up dirt and grinding it into the handle between pitches, grabbing the tar on the center label between pitches, and putting the tar on top of the dirt. He probably didn't pick up dirt often but just one game proved he did. Pictures don't lie. It's more common to have a clean handle.

[taratape]

Taratape,

Sounds like you have a nice bat, must be the one 34.5 version he used to decide he didn't like the model. Your comment indicated deep seam impressions are a pujols characteristic, yet Jeff said he has pitcher bats that have the same. You have blue ink transfer, yet Jeff said all bats have them. Red bat rack marks indicate anybody's bat rack in St Louis. I would actually disagree, if the handle is totally clean, he didn't use it. It should have light pine tar from him grabbing the center label between pitches.

I don't doubt it's a good bat, OK, but there are redundancies throughout this thread. I've only watched one game looking for tendencies and found Pujols picking up dirt and grinding it into the handle between pitches, grabbing the tar on the center label between pitches, and putting the tar on top of the dirt. He probably didn't pick up dirt often but just one game proved he did. Pictures don't lie. It's more common to have a clean handle.

yeah, should have said the handle is just like the photos Jeff presented in this thread...totally clean was probably the wrong way to describe it:o . I think as Jeff and you describe, a clean handle is more common.
Really just wanted to mention there was another m356c that Jeff forgot to mention:)

[Clutch_Hitter]

Rick, thank you for the link.

Taratape, will you post pictures of your M356? Thank you

[Clutch_Hitter]

Here's another bat:

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/Other%20Bats/PujolsMarucci7-27-07.jpg

[Clutch_Hitter]

Here are some more examples of the warped left barrel. The seam impressions themselves are incredible, but what's more incredible is that the entire sweet spot of the left barrel is an indentation in itself; it's caved in.

I counted approximately 14-18 different seam impressions on the sweet spot and four blue ink transfers. Therefore, it took little use to hammer the left barrel to the point of retirement. Isn't this the reason Pujols gamers show moderate use, because he destroys the sweet spot with his highly accurate power?

http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/10-9-10/IMG_0069-2-1.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/10-9-10/IMG_0070-1.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/10-9-10/IMG_0071-1-1.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Pujols%20Bat/10-9-10/IMG_0072-1-1.jpg

[Clutch_Hitter]

Jeff mentioned, But, once somebody else adds their characteristics to a bat, it covers up the characteristics that may have existed prior.

We know that most Pujols bats that are accepted as 100% authentic have fairly clean handles, and when a player uses a Pujols bat after Pujols, it covers the existing characteristics of the handle. But how does that work with the deep seam impressions and the caved left barrel? How are they covered up?

Why is the handle of a Pujols bat the primary factor in determining if a Pujols bat was used by him or a teammate? This bat was ordered and labeled by Pujols and the left barrel sweet spot was subsequently battered into retirement after a few swings. It's really possible for a non-Pujols player to inflict that sort of damage to the sweet spot of the left barrel, even a pitcher? Then why do people make such a big deal out of the deep seam impressions on their power hitter bats? My co-worker let me examine his Dale Murphy bat (Phillies), and I couldn't find one seam indentation, just a lot of deadwood. My Gwynn bat shows extensive use but much shallower seam impressions. Gwynn, one of my favorite players, did hit the ball hard.

During the one '04 game I watched for Pujols characteristics, which again was the 2004 NLCS game 7, Pujols instinctively grabbed the center of the bat immediately after each pitch (that he didn't hit). It was so rapid that it seemed to be habit, wasn't but a split second after the ball hit the mitt. But when he scooped the dirt up, which was only in two at-bats, it certainly didn't seem like a habit. He seemed to be looking around to find the right spot, sort of wondering around. But when he got it in his hands, he wrenched the handle of the bat with those mighty mitts of his.

I'm really trying to understand this........

Pujols is well on his way to being one of the greatest hitters to play the game. How would a major league player foul off two BP fastballs and leave red stitch marks on one of them, just a BP fastball? I played through college and even at that level, we rarely fouled off BP fastballs.

By the way, I played junior college ball at Jefefrson State before moving on to Birmingham Southern. In JUCO, I played against Jorge Posada when he played at Calhoun Community College. He hit two bombs in that game. At Southern, we were ranked 3 to 6 in NAIA both years, defeating Auburn when they were #1 NCAA D1, and Miss State when they were top 25, Delta State when they were #1 D2, etc. Coach Polk was going for a record setting win that game with Miss State. We advanced to the world series in Sioux City, finishing 3rd. Oil Can Boyd was playing for the Redsticks then and spoke at the opening ceremonies. A few years later, Southern moved to NCAA D1 but a new president was acquired, one who wanted football, so they dropped to NCAA D3. Coach Shoop left and is now at UAB, and Coach Polk is Shoop's assistant. Prior to coaching at Southern, Shoop was Polk's assistant at Miss State when W. Clark, Palmeiro, and Thigpen were there. I had the opportunity to play Independent ball after college but couldn't due to finances at the time, although a medical doctor in my hometown offered to pay my room and board. Man, I love baseball!

I'm really starting to wonder about that broken cup on the right barrel. Anybody, please?

[Clutch_Hitter]

Just noticed a Pujols bat that was used by Tino Martinez in the "......heavily used/tarred bats thread." Pujols #5 was completely blacked out on the knob and Tino's characteristics were identifiable. Awesome thread!

[stlbats]

Hey Clutch,

You have a nice bat there, but you are asking questions that no one can answer for sure. Unless someone saw Pujols or another player use/break this bat, then there is no way to say for sure one way or another. I have several GU bats with deep seam impressions. Most all MLB players have the ability to leave deep seam marks on 90 MPH plus pitches. All anyone can go off of is typical player characteristics. That is not to say that there can't be exceptions at times. Unfortunately without an exact photomatch, there is no 100% evidence of anything.

Jason

stlbats@bellsouth.net

[CollectGU]

Is anyone actually looking at the bat handle of this bat? There is hardly any pine tar and appears in line with what I've seen on othet Pujols bats....

Dave

[Clutch_Hitter]

Thanks Jason. This post will be serving as a detailed examination of this Pujols bat, just trying to cover everything.

[Clutch_Hitter]

Thanks Dave.

[Clutch_Hitter]

http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/[IMG]http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Bats/Pujols/1-Label.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Bats/Pujols/1-Label.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Bats/Pujols/2-FrontLeft.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Bats/Pujols/3-FrontLeft.jpghttp://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Bats/Pujols/4-Left.jpg
http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm25/gbmartin34/Bats/Pujols/IMG_0090-1.jpg

Accidentally removed my pictures when I organized Photobucket...

Since this thread started, I've been collecting pictures of various Pujols bats, several hundred now. And I have recently submitted another bat to PSA, should be there soon after an autograph is authenticated. Needless to say, it's easy to understand why it's safer to collect typical Pujols bats, but I never stopped liking this one, flattened left barrel and all.

This one doesn't appear to be one of the typical, controlled release bats. Nice bat
http://sports.mearsonlineauctions.com/LotDetail.aspx?lotid=44932&searchby=0&searchvalue=None&page=0&sortby=0&displayby=2&lotsperpage=100&category=26&seo=2004-Albert-Pujols-St.-Louis-Cardinals-Louisville-Slugger-Professional-Model-Game-Used-World-Series-

And I've certainly enjoyed looking at all the cool GU stuff y'all have, best regards.