If Ramirez Leaves Via Free Agency, Should We Blow It Up?

[Shavo]

I don't care who leaves. Lee and Zambrano are untouchable.

 

And can a thread get any more negative? :shock:

 

You should care. Ramirez is every bit as important as Lee, and only slightly less important than Z. Losing him immediately dooms us to being terrible again with virtually no hope of competing for at least 2 seasons.

 

I realize this. I just don't think it justifies setting the team even farther back by trading Lee or Zambrano.

[USSoccer]

I don't care who leaves. Lee and Zambrano are untouchable.

 

And can a thread get any more negative? :shock:

 

You should care. Ramirez is every bit as important as Lee, and only slightly less important than Z. Losing him immediately dooms us to being terrible again with virtually no hope of competing for at least 2 seasons.

 

I realize this. I just don't think it justifies setting the team even farther back by trading Lee or Zambrano.

 

The point is that if you lose ARam, you aren't fixing the team in time to be seriously competitive for the rest of Lee's window. To add to that, Z could fetch a king's ransom in a trade. If you lose Aramis, you're targeting 2009 to contend, so why not completely retool and reload?

[sweetpeteman]

It's already blown up IMO. This team is an utterless boat just floating around mediocreville and will be for years to come.

 

 

Rudderless... utterless isn't anything.

[snoodmonger]

IF Ramirez leaves, then I think you consider blowing it up. If he stays, like Gooney says, we're a creative, competent GM away from fielding a good team.

[Shavo]

I don't care who leaves. Lee and Zambrano are untouchable.

 

And can a thread get any more negative? :shock:

 

You should care. Ramirez is every bit as important as Lee, and only slightly less important than Z. Losing him immediately dooms us to being terrible again with virtually no hope of competing for at least 2 seasons.

 

I realize this. I just don't think it justifies setting the team even farther back by trading Lee or Zambrano.

 

The point is that if you lose ARam, you aren't fixing the team in time to be seriously competitive for the rest of Lee's window. To add to that, Z could fetch a king's ransom in a trade. If you lose Aramis, you're targeting 2009 to contend, so why not completely retool and reload?

 

Lee has a no trade clause. And theres no way your getting a fair deal for Z.

 

Tell me, what would you demand in a trade for Zambrano?

[CuseCubFan69]

It's already blown up IMO. This team is an utterless boat just floating around mediocreville and will be for years to come.

 

 

Rudderless... utterless isn't anything.

 

Oops...thanks spelling king.

[oldstyle81]

Aram would be a HUGE loss

 

if he goes keep

Lee

Zambrano

Wood (1 year to see if he can close cause dempster is crap)

Marmol

Marshall

Theriot

Izturis

Howry

Eyre

Aardsma

 

trade everyone else

[Shavo]

Aram would be a HUGE loss

 

if he goes keep

Lee

Zambrano

Wood (1 year to see if he can close cause dempster is crap)

Marmol

Marshall

Theriot

Izturis

Howry

Eyre

Aardsma

 

trade everyone else

 

I would keep :

 

Lee

Zambrano

Wood (same plan as you)

Marshall

Hill

Marmol

Theriot

Howry

Ohman

Aardsma

Prior (has no value, so why trade?)

[neely crenshaw]

here is the thing...the team is pretty much blown uo right now.

wood is gone

prior is gone...at least he should be out of any plans..we still have his salary

walker gone

neifi gone

maddux gone

pierre gone

 

and maybe aram

the thing is we stand to win between 60-65 games with our 95 mil payroll1 who cares who comes back!

we have lee, barrett, z and hopefully aram

all who we want

most of our bullpen is set to return...and maybe except dempster -rusch we want

we have murton

we are stuck with jones

so we need a ss,2b,cf...maybe another of

and 4 starting pitchers

and basically our entire bench

 

whether we sign or go from within we have to replace most of our team..which is great because we are awful!

[LuckyPup]

i really wonder if there is a valuable, sensible trade out there where you get value for Zambrano- i dont think there is. if Ramirez leaves then we have a serious problem- on the bright side( if there is one) that frees up another 12M for free agency- Zambrano would fetch a huge amount of talent-

 

Would you do any of these deals? if any of the teams agree to them?

 

Z+Izturis+Moore for Tejada+Mora+Bedard?

 

Z+Barrett for Pudge+Verlander?

 

Z+Cedeno for Ervin Santana+ Kendrick+ Wood?

 

Z+Guzman+Murton for Willis and Cabrera?

 

Z for Cano+Wang+Cabrera

 

i really think that if we understand Z is not going to re-sign then he must be traded for a kings ransom. I realize some of these may be unrealistic but not by far- Zambrano would be a HUGE trade- I personally never want Z to go anywhere-EVER-i have sufficient man love for him.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I don't care who leaves. Lee and Zambrano are untouchable.

 

And can a thread get any more negative? :shock:

 

You should care. Ramirez is every bit as important as Lee, and only slightly less important than Z. Losing him immediately dooms us to being terrible again with virtually no hope of competing for at least 2 seasons.

 

I realize this. I just don't think it justifies setting the team even farther back by trading Lee or Zambrano.

 

The point is that if you lose ARam, you aren't fixing the team in time to be seriously competitive for the rest of Lee's window. To add to that, Z could fetch a king's ransom in a trade. If you lose Aramis, you're targeting 2009 to contend, so why not completely retool and reload?

 

That is my point. If the Cubs lose Ramirez, I don't think there's enough there to be a contender before Zambrano becomes a free agent and could leave without compensation. I'd hate for the Cubs to lose Z or Lee, but if the Cubs are aware that contention isn't likely in 2007, then it may be time to rebuild.

 

The Cubs already have a core of young guys, some which may develop into stars, others that may not in Murton, Pie, Marshall, Mateo, Hill, Marmol, and Guzman.

 

If the Cubs were to rebuild, they likely good get a decent piece for Barrett and maybe a whole lot more for Zambrano. And even more if they decided to trade Lee. Furthermore trading these for top of the line prospects would free up a lot of future payroll. One other advantage of gathering prospects and playing them would be to keep the ones who look to be stars and then filling in holes with free agents when it appears we have enough talent to contend. Hopefully, the rebuilding won't take long.

 

Look at how much talent the Marlins received in the deal for their players.

 

What would the Mets give for Zambrano?

 

Could a number of Angels prospects be obtained?

 

A few teams might would like to add Barrett's bat.

 

While I hope this doesn't become the scenario, if Ramirez leaves, it might be the best course of action available.

[Shavo]

Z+Izturis+Moore for Tejada+Mora+Bedard?

 

O's wouldn't accept.

 

Z+Barrett for Pudge+Verlander?

 

 

No.

 

Z+Cedeno for Ervin Santana+ Kendrick+ Wood?

 

:lol: Angels wouldn't accept.

 

Z+Guzman+Murton for Willis and Cabrera?

 

Marlins would never accept.

 

Z for Cano+Wang+Cabrera

 

Yanks would never accept.

 

You really think were going to find a trade that works for both teams?

[NorthsideAvenger]

As much as I am a passenger on the Negative train, but I do not think ARam will leave.

 

But let's say he does.....before the Cubs blow it 'all up', they would have to see if they can find a bat or two to replace ARam. If they Cubs can't find said bats to replace ARam, then yeah, bring up Moore for 3rd, and go with a flat-out youth movement. With Z I would talk serious with teams WITH deep farm system. No NYs, or Boston, only teams that have a deep pool of talent, ie Angels and the Dodgers. Barrett, I would talk to Toronto, and perhaps the Padres. So on, and so on.

 

But knowing that Hendry's job will be on the line starting in 07, there is no way he allows ARam to leave Chicago.

[UMFan83]

What sort of names do you think will be out there on the trading block/FA market that could replace at least 75% Ramirez's production?

 

-ARod, 3B/SS

-Manny, OF

-C. Lee, OF

-Soriano, OF/Bad MI

-Cabrera, 1B/3B/Corner OF

-A Jones, CF

-Burrell, Corner OF

-Tejada, SS

-Sweeney, 1B

-Bonds (:lol:), LF

 

Anyone I'm missing?

[CubsInNC]

If Aramis opts out, and leaves, I'd seriously consider a fire-sale. As GM I'd approach Z, Lee, and Barrett and flat out tell them that you plan on rebuilding. You'd like to keep them around to help see it through, because you but you understand if they would prefer you to seek trades to attempt to place them on team(s) where they would have a post-season chance. I'd bring it up to Lee directly, and mention it to Barrett and Z, after A-Ram leaves, in contract negotiations with both to extend them. If they say they want to stay, I'd trade any and everyone over 25 I could get AA prospects for. I'd offer arbitration to all my players who would command multi-year deals. I'd trade Cedeno, instead of Izturis. Because by the time the prospects are up, Izturis will be done and gone, and Cedeno might net me more in return.

 

If they say no, they want to leave, they're my first pieces to ship. I'd only trade them for prospects and expiring contract veterans. The higher the dollar amount we pay the vet, the better the player we get back.

 

I'd hope to get:

Z+Barrett to NYY for Cano, Hughes, and Tabata (no way it'd happen)

Lee + Prior + Cedeno to Detroit for Maybin, Miller, and Humberto Sanchez (and again, no way)

Howry & Eyre should fetch me some decent prospects back (moreso next June than this offseason, I'd think)

I'd be willing to trade some of, but not all, our now seasoned up and coming pitching as well, for prospects (Hill, Guz, Marshall, etc).

[HoopsCubs]

If Ramirez opts out and signs elsewhere, should the Cubs enter a full rebuilding mode with the goal of contending in 2008-2009.

 

Without Ramirez, I don't see how the Cubs can plug enough holes to contend next season. The Cubs also have players with expiring contracts like Zambrano and Barrett that would fetch a nice payday in prospects and players if the Cubs were to eye rebuilding over trying to contend in 2008-2009.

 

Furthermore, if the Cubs dangled Derrek Lee on the trade market, how high would the offers be for him.

 

I'm not saying this is the course I'd want to take, and it's hard to imagine a team that can afford a 95+ million dollar payroll would need to rebuild, but if the team loses Ramirez, it is something that might need to be considered.

 

I don't anticipate a blow-up. The NL looks very weak to me, and if a big market club like the Cubs brought in 2 or 3 good players, they could become post-season favorites in a blink of an eye.

 

If Aramis were to leave, I could see Jim Hendry making a trade for Mike Lowell, a guy that he has liked in the past. Lowell is under contract for just 2007 at $9M, and the Red Sox will probably be looking to shed his salary this offseason, so that they can move Youkilis to 3B and focus dollars on better pitching. While Lowell doesn't replace Ramirez' production 100%, he would be a good 1 year stop gap if 2007 turned magical and it would buy Scott Moore some more time in the minors to determine if he's for real. I'd rather see a guy like Lowell than a Pedro Feliz or David Bell.

[Iceblink]

If Ramirez opts out and signs elsewhere, should the Cubs enter a full rebuilding mode with the goal of contending in 2008-2009.

 

Without Ramirez, I don't see how the Cubs can plug enough holes to contend next season. The Cubs also have players with expiring contracts like Zambrano and Barrett that would fetch a nice payday in prospects and players if the Cubs were to eye rebuilding over trying to contend in 2008-2009.

 

Furthermore, if the Cubs dangled Derrek Lee on the trade market, how high would the offers be for him.

 

I'm not saying this is the course I'd want to take, and it's hard to imagine a team that can afford a 95+ million dollar payroll would need to rebuild, but if the team loses Ramirez, it is something that might need to be considered.

 

I don't anticipate a blow-up. The NL looks very weak to me, and if a big market club like the Cubs brought in 2 or 3 good players, they could become post-season favorites in a blink of an eye.

 

If Aramis were to leave, I could see Jim Hendry making a trade for Mike Lowell, a guy that he has liked in the past. Lowell is under contract for just 2007 at $9M, and the Red Sox will probably be looking to shed his salary this offseason, so that they can move Youkilis to 3B and focus dollars on better pitching. While Lowell doesn't replace Ramirez' production 100%, he would be a good 1 year stop gap if 2007 turned magical and it would buy Scott Moore some more time in the minors to determine if he's for real. I'd rather see a guy like Lowell than a Pedro Feliz or David Bell.

 

Lowell has done a Todd Walker impression the last month or so (a few hits, a few walks, no power). He's hit for a nice average, and his OBP isn't terrible, but he could be an average to below-average run producer for the rest of his career. Probably a good character/bench guy, and wouldn't be a bad stop-gap if he cost $1M or so. He'll cost 10 times that unless we can get the Sox to split it.

 

So, of course, I agree with you. Hendry will leap at him.

[NCCubFan]

If Ramirez leaves, firing Hendry immediately is mandatory. As far as I'm concerned Hendry put his job on the line by creating the possibility Ramirez could walk, and he needs to be held accountable. Asking loyal, long-suffering Cub fans to be patient and sit through yet another rebuilding project is not an option.

[Mark Priors Calves]

isn't it already blown up?

[A New Era]

It's already blown up IMO. This team is an utterless boat just floating around mediocreville and will be for years to come.

 

 

Rudderless... utterless isn't anything.

 

I guess it would be a cow without utters. . . :?:

[wilk]

It's already blown up IMO. This team is an utterless boat just floating around mediocreville and will be for years to come.

 

 

Rudderless... utterless isn't anything.

 

I guess it would be a cow without utters. . . :?:

 

And then those would be udders. . .

[wilk]

If Ramirez leaves, firing Hendry immediately is mandatory. As far as I'm concerned Hendry put his job on the line by creating the possibility Ramirez could walk, and he needs to be held accountable. Asking loyal, long-suffering Cub fans to be patient and sit through yet another rebuilding project is not an option.

 

I don't understand why people blame Hendry for ARam's out-clause. Do you really believe it was Hendry's desire to add it? In negotiations, such "negotiating" is necessary. Should Hendry have let him walk two seasons earlier by refusing his or his agents demands?

[NCCubFan]

I don't understand why people blame Hendry for ARam's out-clause. Do you really believe it was Hendry's desire to add it? In negotiations, such "negotiating" is necessary. Should Hendry have let him walk two seasons earlier by refusing his or his agents demands?

The blaming Hendry wouldn't be for giving him the out clause in the first place, but rather for not trading and getting someone for him if he were going to leave anyway. Many of us (myself included) were against trading him, but that was contingent on his returning next year. When you're not in contention, if you don't trade an upcoming free agent you've basically comitted yourself to re-signing him. I don't think people would blame Hendry that much for losing Ramirez if that were the only problem he's had; I think it's more like that would be the straw that broke the camel's back when you look at it on top of his other bad moves over the past couple of years. He's more than used up any tolerance for mistakes and simply cannot afford even one more. Think of it as a lifetime achievement award as opposed to an award for one specific performance. :D

[wilk]

I don't understand why people blame Hendry for ARam's out-clause. Do you really believe it was Hendry's desire to add it? In negotiations, such "negotiating" is necessary. Should Hendry have let him walk two seasons earlier by refusing his or his agents demands?

The blaming Hendry wouldn't be for giving him the out clause in the first place, but rather for not trading and getting someone for him if he were going to leave anyway. Many of us (myself included) were against trading him, but that was contingent on his returning next year. When you're not in contention, if you don't trade an upcoming free agent you've basically comitted yourself to re-signing him. I don't think people would blame Hendry that much for losing Ramirez if that were the only problem he's had; I think it's more like that would be the straw that broke the camel's back when you look at it on top of his other bad moves over the past couple of years. He's more than used up any tolerance for mistakes and simply cannot afford even one more. Think of it as a lifetime achievement award as opposed to an award for one specific performance. :D

 

If there was proof that Hendry knew Aramis was definitely going to walk this season and Hendry chose not to trade him in a lost season then sure. However, I don't think that's the case at all. Aramis has at least pretended that he wants to stay and Hendry intends on keeping him. So, trading him instead of trying to keep him would be conceding a huge loss which I think would be quite worse - especially when you consider that every other team would face the same out-clause making a worthwhile return package hard to come by. If a player absolutely refuses to stay with his current team there's nothing a GM can do about it. The decision is Aramis's so I think the blame on a walkout would be his. Now if Aramis leaves and gets minimal more elsewhere while saying he wanted to stay in Chicago but management wouldn't negotiate, of course that'd be the fault of the Cubs, but I don't believe that happens.

[A New Era]

It's already blown up IMO. This team is an utterless boat just floating around mediocreville and will be for years to come.

 

 

Rudderless... utterless isn't anything.

 

I guess it would be a cow without utters. . . :?:

 

And then those would be udders. . .

 

Yeah I know. :lol: