Fox Sports: Ramirez SIGNS WITH CUBS!

[USSoccer]

it's important to remember that when it came time for aramis to decide whether or not to opt out, it was basically just a matter of deciding whether or not he could get a contract better than 2/22. aramis could've broken a leg in july and done better than that.

 

Which is why you proactively deal with it 12 months ago.

[RichHillIsABeast]

 

There are two sides to this problem. Hendry has every incentive in the world to get this done. Kinzer and ARam do not.

 

It all depends on how much character the player and agent have. I'm not too optimistic anymore, but Hendry shouldn't take the bulk of the game on this one.

 

If anything, Hendry tends to think everyone is as good as their word. He certainly is a quality person.

 

 

Screw that noise. I'm sick and tired of people attempting to rationalize this. The very fact that his contract situation got to this point where he is going to hit the open market is the problem. Hendry didn't screw around with Derrek Lee. He signed him after a fluke career season a full year before he was FA eligible. You're telling me that Hendry deluded himself into actually believing that Aramis wasn't going to opt out? Look at that FA class. Everyone knew it was going to suck 18 months ago (which is why Hendry should have taken advantage of the Beltran FA class) and you're telling me that a 27 year old player coming into his prime with Aramis' ability wasn't going to opt out?

 

No way. You get that deal extended last winter. You tear it up and sign him long term so you don't go into November of 2006 virtually guaranteed to be losing your best offensive player.

 

This was poorly planned from the start. Allowing it to get to this point should be grounds for Hendry losing his job. We're going to lose our best offensive player for nothing because our GM is a good guy and took a player and his agent at their word that they "probably won't use the opt out clause".

 

I'll repeat: We're going to lose Aramis for nothing. We didn't deal him, we didn't extend him like we did with Derrek Lee, and now we'll get a stupid draft pick for a guy we either should have hitting .300 with 30 HR's and 110 RBI until 2011, or should have gotten top, blue chip prospects for this past July.

 

Give me a break. I'll take my chances with a soulless shark of a GM over the "good guy" who screws up an entire major league roster and farm system within 3 years.

 

I'm sick and tired of 20/20 hindsight. Show me where anyone advocated signing Ramirez to a new contract this past winter. Until that happens, your POV is all 20/20 hindsight.

Edited November 10, 2006 by RichHillIsABeast

[treebird]

it's important to remember that when it came time for aramis to decide whether or not to opt out, it was basically just a matter of deciding whether or not he could get a contract better than 2/22. aramis could've broken a leg in july and done better than that.

 

Which is why you proactively deal with it 12 months ago.

 

exactly. there's virtually no way aramis' price goes down from there.

[USSoccer]

 

There are two sides to this problem. Hendry has every incentive in the world to get this done. Kinzer and ARam do not.

 

It all depends on how much character the player and agent have. I'm not too optimistic anymore, but Hendry shouldn't take the bulk of the game on this one.

 

If anything, Hendry tends to think everyone is as good as their word. He certainly is a quality person.

 

 

Screw that noise. I'm sick and tired of people attempting to rationalize this. The very fact that his contract situation got to this point where he is going to hit the open market is the problem. Hendry didn't screw around with Derrek Lee. He signed him after a fluke career season a full year before he was FA eligible. You're telling me that Hendry deluded himself into actually believing that Aramis wasn't going to opt out? Look at that FA class. Everyone knew it was going to suck 18 months ago (which is why Hendry should have taken advantage of the Beltran FA class) and you're telling me that a 27 year old player coming into his prime with Aramis' ability wasn't going to opt out?

 

No way. You get that deal extended last winter. You tear it up and sign him long term so you don't go into November of 2006 virtually guaranteed to be losing your best offensive player.

 

This was poorly planned from the start. Allowing it to get to this point should be grounds for Hendry losing his job. We're going to lose our best offensive player for nothing because our GM is a good guy and took a player and his agent at their word that they "probably won't use the opt out clause".

 

I'll repeat: We're going to lose Aramis for nothing. We didn't deal him, we didn't extend him like we did with Derrek Lee, and now we'll get a stupid draft pick for a guy we either should have hitting .300 with 30 HR's and 110 RBI until 2011, or should have gotten top, blue chip prospects for this past July.

 

Give me a break. I'll take my chances with a soulless shark of a GM over the "good guy" who screws up an entire major league roster and farm system within 3 years.

 

I'm sick and tired of 20/20 hindsight. Show me where anyone advocated signing Ramirez to a new contract this past winter. Until that happens, your POV is all 20/20 hindsight.

 

If the search function worked I'd show you my posts after we signed him saying the opt out clause was idiotic and that it would come back to bite us in the rear. If the search function worked I'd show you posts from last winter saying that we should resign him then.

 

But it doesn't. Don't act like it's unbelievable that no one saw this coming. Nearly everyone here thought the opt out clause would come back and kill us, and now it's going to.

 

It's not hindsight. It's watching a train wreck slowly take place, knowing full well that you saw it coming the second the contract details became public in Arizona in 2005.

[treebird]

 

There are two sides to this problem. Hendry has every incentive in the world to get this done. Kinzer and ARam do not.

 

It all depends on how much character the player and agent have. I'm not too optimistic anymore, but Hendry shouldn't take the bulk of the game on this one.

 

If anything, Hendry tends to think everyone is as good as their word. He certainly is a quality person.

 

 

Screw that noise. I'm sick and tired of people attempting to rationalize this. The very fact that his contract situation got to this point where he is going to hit the open market is the problem. Hendry didn't screw around with Derrek Lee. He signed him after a fluke career season a full year before he was FA eligible. You're telling me that Hendry deluded himself into actually believing that Aramis wasn't going to opt out? Look at that FA class. Everyone knew it was going to suck 18 months ago (which is why Hendry should have taken advantage of the Beltran FA class) and you're telling me that a 27 year old player coming into his prime with Aramis' ability wasn't going to opt out?

 

No way. You get that deal extended last winter. You tear it up and sign him long term so you don't go into November of 2006 virtually guaranteed to be losing your best offensive player.

 

This was poorly planned from the start. Allowing it to get to this point should be grounds for Hendry losing his job. We're going to lose our best offensive player for nothing because our GM is a good guy and took a player and his agent at their word that they "probably won't use the opt out clause".

 

I'll repeat: We're going to lose Aramis for nothing. We didn't deal him, we didn't extend him like we did with Derrek Lee, and now we'll get a stupid draft pick for a guy we either should have hitting .300 with 30 HR's and 110 RBI until 2011, or should have gotten top, blue chip prospects for this past July.

 

Give me a break. I'll take my chances with a soulless shark of a GM over the "good guy" who screws up an entire major league roster and farm system within 3 years.

 

I'm sick and tired of 20/20 hindsight. Show me where anyone advocated signing Ramirez to a new contract this past winter. Until that happens, your POV is all 20/20 hindsight.

 

i was definitely saying that aramis was obviously just going to opt out after the second year all the way back when he signed this contract. others were as well. i remember it quite clearly. everyone was ecstatic about the contract at first, then we learned of the out clause, and then we knew that basically the contract was going to go one of two ways:

 

1) aramis has success and opts out after the second year

 

2) aramis collapses completely and the cubs are stuck paying him for very little production

 

neither scenario is particularly good for the cubs, and we knew it as soon as we knew of the out clause.

[RichHillIsABeast]

 

There are two sides to this problem. Hendry has every incentive in the world to get this done. Kinzer and ARam do not.

 

It all depends on how much character the player and agent have. I'm not too optimistic anymore, but Hendry shouldn't take the bulk of the game on this one.

 

If anything, Hendry tends to think everyone is as good as their word. He certainly is a quality person.

 

 

Screw that noise. I'm sick and tired of people attempting to rationalize this. The very fact that his contract situation got to this point where he is going to hit the open market is the problem. Hendry didn't screw around with Derrek Lee. He signed him after a fluke career season a full year before he was FA eligible. You're telling me that Hendry deluded himself into actually believing that Aramis wasn't going to opt out? Look at that FA class. Everyone knew it was going to suck 18 months ago (which is why Hendry should have taken advantage of the Beltran FA class) and you're telling me that a 27 year old player coming into his prime with Aramis' ability wasn't going to opt out?

 

No way. You get that deal extended last winter. You tear it up and sign him long term so you don't go into November of 2006 virtually guaranteed to be losing your best offensive player.

 

This was poorly planned from the start. Allowing it to get to this point should be grounds for Hendry losing his job. We're going to lose our best offensive player for nothing because our GM is a good guy and took a player and his agent at their word that they "probably won't use the opt out clause".

 

I'll repeat: We're going to lose Aramis for nothing. We didn't deal him, we didn't extend him like we did with Derrek Lee, and now we'll get a stupid draft pick for a guy we either should have hitting .300 with 30 HR's and 110 RBI until 2011, or should have gotten top, blue chip prospects for this past July.

 

Give me a break. I'll take my chances with a soulless shark of a GM over the "good guy" who screws up an entire major league roster and farm system within 3 years.

 

I'm sick and tired of 20/20 hindsight. Show me where anyone advocated signing Ramirez to a new contract this past winter. Until that happens, your POV is all 20/20 hindsight.

 

If the search function worked I'd show you my posts after we signed him saying the opt out clause was idiotic and that it would come back to bite us in the rear. If the search function worked I'd show you posts from last winter saying that we should resign him then.

 

But it doesn't. Don't act like it's unbelievable that no one saw this coming. Nearly everyone here thought the opt out clause would come back and kill us, and now it's going to.

 

It's not hindsight. It's watching a train wreck slowly take place, knowing full well that you saw it coming the second the contract details became public in Arizona in 2005.

 

There is no incentive for Ramirez to sign a new deal this past winter. None. He had 3 years left on his deal (at that point). You're going to guarantee him more? Why? All he has to do is play out that year and opt out like he did. He doesn't have an injury history or up and down production. The odds are he produces just fine and makes a boatload on the open market. If he gets injured, it's probably a fluke injury and he still has his guaranteed years.

 

There was no incentive for Ramirez to sign a new contract/extension this past winter. Well, unless you threw ridiculous money his way.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

I'm sick and tired of 20/20 hindsight. Show me where anyone advocated signing Ramirez to a new contract this past winter. Until that happens, your POV is all 20/20 hindsight.

 

I thought you visited this board a lot before you registed? If you did, you'd have noted a lot of people wanted Aramis re-signed before it got to this, and everyone hated the opt-out clause.

[USSoccer]

 

There is no incentive for Ramirez to sign a new deal this past winter. None. He had 3 years left on his deal (at that point). You're going to guarantee him more? Why? All he has to do is play out that year and opt out like he did. He doesn't have an injury history or up and down production. The odds are he produces just fine and makes a boatload on the open market. If he gets injured, it's probably a fluke injury and he still has his guaranteed years.

 

There was no incentive for Ramirez to sign a new contract/extension this past winter. Well, unless you threw ridiculous money his way.

 

And why did Derrek Lee sign his deal, then? Because he got guaranteed years and more money.

 

That's the name of the game. Aramis would have taken a 5yr/$65m deal last winter because it gives him an extra 2 years as well as big money, and when the deal is done he's still 31 and can get one more big deal.

 

We'll be lucky to get him for under $80m over 5 years now.

Edited November 10, 2006 by USSoccer

[RichHillIsABeast]

i was definitely saying that aramis was obviously just going to opt out after the second year all the way back when he signed this contract. others were as well. i remember it quite clearly. everyone was ecstatic about the contract at first, then we learned of the out clause, and then we knew that basically the contract was going to go one of two ways:

 

1) aramis has success and opts out after the second year

 

2) aramis collapses completely and the cubs are stuck paying him for very little production

 

neither scenario is particularly good for the cubs, and we knew it as soon as we knew of the out clause.

 

That was MacPhail, not Hendry. I thought the opt out clause was dumb too, but that's not the issue.

 

The point was no one I know was clamoring for a NEW CONTRACT last WINTER.

[RichHillIsABeast]

 

There is no incentive for Ramirez to sign a new deal this past winter. None. He had 3 years left on his deal (at that point). You're going to guarantee him more? Why? All he has to do is play out that year and opt out like he did. He doesn't have an injury history or up and down production. The odds are he produces just fine and makes a boatload on the open market. If he gets injured, it's probably a fluke injury and he still has his guaranteed years.

 

There was no incentive for Ramirez to sign a new contract/extension this past winter. Well, unless you threw ridiculous money his way.

 

And why did Derrek Lee sign his deal, then?

 

Derrek Lee didn't have 3 guaranteed (to the player) years on his deal. Big difference.

[USSoccer]

 

There is no incentive for Ramirez to sign a new deal this past winter. None. He had 3 years left on his deal (at that point). You're going to guarantee him more? Why? All he has to do is play out that year and opt out like he did. He doesn't have an injury history or up and down production. The odds are he produces just fine and makes a boatload on the open market. If he gets injured, it's probably a fluke injury and he still has his guaranteed years.

 

There was no incentive for Ramirez to sign a new contract/extension this past winter. Well, unless you threw ridiculous money his way.

 

And why did Derrek Lee sign his deal, then?

 

Derrek Lee didn't have 3 guaranteed (to the player) years on his deal. Big difference.

 

See the edit.

[USSoccer]

i was definitely saying that aramis was obviously just going to opt out after the second year all the way back when he signed this contract. others were as well. i remember it quite clearly. everyone was ecstatic about the contract at first, then we learned of the out clause, and then we knew that basically the contract was going to go one of two ways:

 

1) aramis has success and opts out after the second year

 

2) aramis collapses completely and the cubs are stuck paying him for very little production

 

neither scenario is particularly good for the cubs, and we knew it as soon as we knew of the out clause.

 

That was MacPhail, not Hendry. I thought the opt out clause was dumb too, but that's not the issue.

 

The point was no one I know was clamoring for a NEW CONTRACT last WINTER.

 

You're wrong. I did. I'm sure others thought it might be smart, too. And even if MacPhail put the clause in (which I still doubt, BTW), how exactly does that absolve Hendry for allowing it to come to this?

[treebird]

The point was no one I know was clamoring for a NEW CONTRACT last WINTER.

 

im like the twelfth person to point this out, but that's not true at all.

[RichHillIsABeast]

I'm sick and tired of 20/20 hindsight. Show me where anyone advocated signing Ramirez to a new contract this past winter. Until that happens, your POV is all 20/20 hindsight.

 

I thought you visited this board a lot before you registed? If you did, you'd have noted a lot of people wanted Aramis re-signed before it got to this, and everyone hated the opt-out clause.

 

Thanks for handling that via PM, Raisin. Anything else I say on the subject will be conducted off these boards, thank you.

 

Where did I say that no one complained about the opt out clause? I was against that at the time too.

 

I don't remember one person, much less all those up in arms about the present situation calling for a new contract this past winter (which is ridiculously implausible anyway).

[nilodnayr]

 

There is no incentive for Ramirez to sign a new deal this past winter. None. He had 3 years left on his deal (at that point). You're going to guarantee him more? Why? All he has to do is play out that year and opt out like he did. He doesn't have an injury history or up and down production. The odds are he produces just fine and makes a boatload on the open market. If he gets injured, it's probably a fluke injury and he still has his guaranteed years.

 

There was no incentive for Ramirez to sign a new contract/extension this past winter. Well, unless you threw ridiculous money his way.

 

And why did Derrek Lee sign his deal, then?

 

Derrek Lee didn't have 3 guaranteed (to the player) years on his deal. Big difference.

 

Even for this board this is getting ridiculously circular.

[USSoccer]

I'm going to sum this up in bulletpoint style.

 

Ways this contract got screwed up:

 

-Including opt out clause to begin with

-not looking at the 2006 FA class and renegotiating after 2005

-not negotiating or trading figures during the season

-believing that Ramirez wouldn't opt out

-not dealing him at the deadline if they weren't going to take resigning him seriously.

 

-not making this the #1 priority (before even Lou)

-nonchalantly going about the initial negotiations

-playing chicken with the exclusivity deadline

[USSoccer]

I'm sick and tired of 20/20 hindsight. Show me where anyone advocated signing Ramirez to a new contract this past winter. Until that happens, your POV is all 20/20 hindsight.

 

I thought you visited this board a lot before you registed? If you did, you'd have noted a lot of people wanted Aramis re-signed before it got to this, and everyone hated the opt-out clause.

 

Thanks for handling that via PM, Raisin. Anything else I say on the subject will be conducted off these boards, thank you.

 

Where did I say that no one complained about the opt out clause? I was against that at the time too.

 

I don't remember one person, much less all those up in arms about the present situation calling for a new contract this past winter (which is ridiculously implausible anyway).

 

So because you don't remember myself and others saying it might be a good idea to proactively resign Aramis, the point has no merit?

[RichHillIsABeast]

i was definitely saying that aramis was obviously just going to opt out after the second year all the way back when he signed this contract. others were as well. i remember it quite clearly. everyone was ecstatic about the contract at first, then we learned of the out clause, and then we knew that basically the contract was going to go one of two ways:

 

1) aramis has success and opts out after the second year

 

2) aramis collapses completely and the cubs are stuck paying him for very little production

 

neither scenario is particularly good for the cubs, and we knew it as soon as we knew of the out clause.

 

That was MacPhail, not Hendry. I thought the opt out clause was dumb too, but that's not the issue.

 

The point was no one I know was clamoring for a NEW CONTRACT last WINTER.

 

You're wrong. I did. I'm sure others thought it might be smart, too. And even if MacPhail put the clause in (which I still doubt, BTW), how exactly does that absolve Hendry for allowing it to come to this?

 

MacPhail is Hendry's superior. You and I do not know what they were thinking at the time that contract was signed. All we do know is MacPhail wrote that contract with the opt out clause (last minute sweetener courtesy of Katz).

 

What would you have done? Not given him the opt out clause and let him play out the season (assuming that was a dealbreaker for Ramires/Katz/Kinzer)? We'd have been in the position we are now one year earlier.

[treebird]

i was definitely saying that aramis was obviously just going to opt out after the second year all the way back when he signed this contract. others were as well. i remember it quite clearly. everyone was ecstatic about the contract at first, then we learned of the out clause, and then we knew that basically the contract was going to go one of two ways:

 

1) aramis has success and opts out after the second year

 

2) aramis collapses completely and the cubs are stuck paying him for very little production

 

neither scenario is particularly good for the cubs, and we knew it as soon as we knew of the out clause.

 

That was MacPhail, not Hendry. I thought the opt out clause was dumb too, but that's not the issue.

 

The point was no one I know was clamoring for a NEW CONTRACT last WINTER.

 

You're wrong. I did. I'm sure others thought it might be smart, too. And even if MacPhail put the clause in (which I still doubt, BTW), how exactly does that absolve Hendry for allowing it to come to this?

 

MacPhail is Hendry's superior. You and I do not know what they were thinking at the time that contract was signed. All we do know is MacPhail wrote that contract with the opt out clause (last minute sweetener courtesy of Katz).

 

What would you have done? Not given him the opt out clause and let him play out the season (assuming that was a dealbreaker for Ramires/Katz/Kinzer)? We'd have been in the position we are now one year earlier.

 

you've changed the argument.

[USSoccer]

 

MacPhail is Hendry's superior. You and I do not know what they were thinking at the time that contract was signed. All we do know is MacPhail wrote that contract with the opt out clause (last minute sweetener courtesy of Katz).

 

How does any of this prevent Hendry from dealing with it last winter? Or dealing with it differently the last 6 weeks? Or last July?

[RichHillIsABeast]

I'm going to sum this up in bulletpoint style.

 

Ways this contract got screwed up:

 

-Including opt out clause to begin with (so you let him walk at the end of the year instead of giving him the sweetener?)

-not looking at the 2006 FA class and renegotiating after 2005

-not negotiating or trading figures during the season (what incentive does Ramirez have when he's healthy, producing and FA is coming close?)

-believing that Ramirez wouldn't opt out (the only thing Hendry can be legitimately faulted for, IMO)

-not dealing him at the deadline if they weren't going to take resigning him seriously. (No Trade Clause)

 

-not making this the #1 priority (before even Lou) (how do you know it wasn't? - the agent/Ramirez have no incentive not to take this to the wire or FA)

-nonchalantly going about the initial negotiations (any proof besides Sullivan?)

-playing chicken with the exclusivity deadline

(again, no incentive for the other side to make a deal)

 

 

This stuff doesn't happen in a vaccuum. Ramirez and his agents have an agenda that's quite different from Hendry's.

[RichHillIsABeast]

 

MacPhail is Hendry's superior. You and I do not know what they were thinking at the time that contract was signed. All we do know is MacPhail wrote that contract with the opt out clause (last minute sweetener courtesy of Katz).

 

How does any of this prevent Hendry from dealing with it last winter? Or dealing with it differently the last 6 weeks? Or last July?

 

He has a guaranteed two more years worth 22.5MM. He'll be what...31 at the end of that contract and still in line for another big FA payday. Think of the contract Soriano is in line for right now. Another couple of years and the prices will be even higher than they are now. That's the nature of the FA market.

 

If you are Ramirez you either opt out (including that was the big mistake here) or you just play out your contract and hit FA while you're still in your prime.

 

This is about getting the most money. Not loyalty. Not pleasing the fans. Not stability in the FO. Money.

 

You get the most money by hitting FA as many times as possible. Why did Furcal take the 3 year 39MM deal instead of our 5 year offer? FA money. Teams have plenty of cash to burn and holes to fill. Agents don't ask for opt out clauses b/c it might cost their client money long term.

[radarluv1]

 

MacPhail is Hendry's superior. You and I do not know what they were thinking at the time that contract was signed. All we do know is MacPhail wrote that contract with the opt out clause (last minute sweetener courtesy of Katz).

 

How does any of this prevent Hendry from dealing with it last winter? Or dealing with it differently the last 6 weeks? Or last July?

 

He has a guaranteed two more years worth 22.5MM. He'll be what...31 at the end of that contract and still in line for another big FA payday. Think of the contract Soriano is in line for right now. Another couple of years and the prices will be even higher than they are now. That's the nature of the FA market.

 

If you are Ramirez you either opt out (including that was the big mistake here) or you just play out your contract and hit FA while you're still in your prime.

 

This is about getting the most money. Not loyalty. Not pleasing the fans. Not stability in the FO. Money.

 

You get the most money by hitting FA as many times as possible. Why did Furcal take the 3 year 39MM deal instead of our 5 year offer? FA money. Teams have plenty of cash to burn and holes to fill. Agents don't ask for opt out clauses b/c it might cost their client money long term.

 

agents dont ask for opt out clauses? isnt that in the players best interest to have the option?

[RichHillIsABeast]

i was definitely saying that aramis was obviously just going to opt out after the second year all the way back when he signed this contract. others were as well. i remember it quite clearly. everyone was ecstatic about the contract at first, then we learned of the out clause, and then we knew that basically the contract was going to go one of two ways:

 

1) aramis has success and opts out after the second year

 

2) aramis collapses completely and the cubs are stuck paying him for very little production

 

neither scenario is particularly good for the cubs, and we knew it as soon as we knew of the out clause.

 

That was MacPhail, not Hendry. I thought the opt out clause was dumb too, but that's not the issue.

 

The point was no one I know was clamoring for a NEW CONTRACT last WINTER.

 

You're wrong. I did. I'm sure others thought it might be smart, too. And even if MacPhail put the clause in (which I still doubt, BTW), how exactly does that absolve Hendry for allowing it to come to this?

 

MacPhail is Hendry's superior. You and I do not know what they were thinking at the time that contract was signed. All we do know is MacPhail wrote that contract with the opt out clause (last minute sweetener courtesy of Katz).

 

What would you have done? Not given him the opt out clause and let him play out the season (assuming that was a dealbreaker for Ramires/Katz/Kinzer)? We'd have been in the position we are now one year earlier.

 

you've changed the argument.

 

Nope. The argument was over offering a contract this past winter. You changed the argument to the opt out clause, which I then addressed. Was it crucial to the argument? Nope. It was a tangent.

 

Rhetorical.

[treebird]

Nope. The argument was over offering a contract this past winter. You changed the argument to the opt out clause, which I then addressed. Was it crucial to the argument? Nope. It was a tangent.

 

Rhetorical.

 

all i can really say in response to that is that you had better start coming up with next years excuses for why it's ok that hendry screwed up now. otherwise, it's going to be even more obvious that he's not doing a very good job.