Fox Sports: Ramirez SIGNS WITH CUBS!

[E.J.]

Is there a specific time today that our negotiating window ends, or does it go til midnight?

 

Goes until midnight tonight. After that all teams can negotiate with him.

[UMFan83]

This "possibly losing Ramirez" thing was just a ploy to not upset fans for losing the Matsuzaka bidding.

[Andy]

Am I the only one that doesn't like "50-50" as it pertains to the Cubs? 50-50 to me is more like 20-80.

[USSoccer]

This "possibly losing Ramirez" thing was just a ploy to not upset fans for losing the Matsuzaka bidding.

 

I'd rather have the everyday player than the pitcher who will only impact 30 games anyway.

[rawaction]

Am I the only one that doesn't like "50-50" as it pertains to the Cubs? 50-50 to me is more like 20-80.

 

That was 50/50 that it gets done TODAY. Although, it's probably not much higher that it gets done at all, once Anaheim and LA enter the bidding. I think Anaheim will offer a $100M contract. Hometown discounts are all well and good til someone completely trumps that.

[TruffleShuffle]

It would be ridiculous for the Cubs to let him go to Anaheim. The Cubs have just as big of a market if not bigger (b/c of WGN) and really have no excuse for not ponying up to pay him a lot. We're not the A's or the Twins, we shouldn't be losing really good players to the Anaheims of the world.

[BigbadB]

I'm not so sure the markets are all that far off. Chicago shares their market with the Sox and Anaheim shares their market with the Dodgers. But, there is plenty of market to share in the LA area. Orange County, LA County, Riverside County, North San Diego County and San Bernardino County is a nice population to draw from.

 

The Angels outdrew the Cubs in attendance this year.

[UMFan83]

This "possibly losing Ramirez" thing was just a ploy to not upset fans for losing the Matsuzaka bidding.

 

I'd rather have the everyday player than the pitcher who will only impact 30 games anyway.

 

In those 30 games, he has a very significant impact on allowing the team to win if they simply score their normal RPG.

[USSoccer]

This "possibly losing Ramirez" thing was just a ploy to not upset fans for losing the Matsuzaka bidding.

 

I'd rather have the everyday player than the pitcher who will only impact 30 games anyway.

 

In those 30 games, he has a very significant impact on allowing the team to win if they simply score their normal RPG.

 

Ramirez has a big impact on said RPG. :D

 

I'd like to have both, though.

[UMFan83]

This "possibly losing Ramirez" thing was just a ploy to not upset fans for losing the Matsuzaka bidding.

 

I'd rather have the everyday player than the pitcher who will only impact 30 games anyway.

 

In those 30 games, he has a very significant impact on allowing the team to win if they simply score their normal RPG.

 

Ramirez has a big impact on said RPG. :D

 

I'd like to have both, though.

 

Has anyone done studies on which is more important, a middle of the order bat or a number 1 starter? I'm sure there has been...

[USSoccer]

This "possibly losing Ramirez" thing was just a ploy to not upset fans for losing the Matsuzaka bidding.

 

I'd rather have the everyday player than the pitcher who will only impact 30 games anyway.

 

In those 30 games, he has a very significant impact on allowing the team to win if they simply score their normal RPG.

 

Ramirez has a big impact on said RPG. :D

 

I'd like to have both, though.

 

Has anyone done studies on which is more important, a middle of the order bat or a number 1 starter? I'm sure there has been...

 

VORP? WARP3? Win Shares, maybe? I dunno. One of those metrics should give us insight.

[Larry Horse]

If you think that paying a guy 15 million a year is more than generous and easily more than his worth when compared against other players of his caliber, but he demands to be paid 18 million, do you give in and allow yourself to get played or do you stand firm on your principles?

 

The Cubs have stood firm on their principles, and as a result have not gotten a premium free agent in Lord knows how long? 15 years? 20?

And, as a result, the Cubs don't have any terrible long term contracts that are binding their hands behind their back. They have plenty of money to spend this off season. There is a trade off. Its not all just the down side of not having gotten a premium free agent in a long time. There are positives, too. And clearly negatives, as well. I'm not happy about missing out on Beltran or Guerrero. But I'm glad Lee signed for what he did.

 

Sometimes, players simply don't want to play in Chicago for a variety of reasons. To think we know that its because of Hendry's ineptitude or the fact some other player is getting paid 3 million a year for two years is simply impossible to know with any degree of certainty.

 

That said, I want Hendry to get it done. Give him what he wants and move on. But to think that it is valid to say that Ramirez won't return because Hendry signed Wade Miller or someone else is simply unsupportable.

 

But here's the problem with that rationale:

 

The Lee contracts are the exception, not the rule.

 

If Hendry targets someone, then at some point he's going to have to step up and pay. To think that a good/great player is going to sign a Lee contract is not realistic. Who wouldn't be happy for what a player like Lee signed for?

 

And if a fear of "terrible long term contracts that are binding their hands behind their back." is going to stop Hendry from signing a top-shelf guy? Then he should continue to sign the mid-tier players of the world and see where that gets him.

[BigbadB]

Boston is paying Manny between 18-20m a year. They still seem to be able to afford other big contracts as well.

 

There is no reason/excuse why the Cubs can't come up with a contract that would secure 3b for the next 6-7 years.

[Pinktermite]

The fact that this whole episode with Aramis has gone on like this just epitomizes the abhorrent philosophy that Jim Hendry has. I so echo the fact that you mention the Red Sox are able to afford Manny...plus other players.

 

It's just plain pathetic. But I will reserve my real complaining until tomorrow when the Cubs have lost out. I thought for sure they'd resign aramis, and I hope it happens, but I'm afraid that they will just be the Cubs...forever.

[USSoccer]

 

If you think that paying a guy 15 million a year is more than generous and easily more than his worth when compared against other players of his caliber, but he demands to be paid 18 million, do you give in and allow yourself to get played or do you stand firm on your principles?

 

I understand what you're saying, but budgetary principles can be stupid things to hang onto.

 

Lets say you have to buy 2 items: You need to buy a TV and a DVD player. You have a fixed amount of money to spend on both. You go into Best Buy saying you want to spend no more than $1000 on the TV, and $300 on the DVD player. You bring $1300 with you. You get there, and you see an unbelievably good TV for $1150. It's more than what you resolved to spend, but it will make a huge difference in picture quality. Do you stick to your budgetary principle and get the inferioir TV that will get you by, and get your nice DVD player with a bunch of options, or do you change your budget around, get the nice TV that will make even a poor DVD player look awesome, and get a midrange DVD player?

 

This is what Hendry is faced with. He has the choice between the really good 3B and a cheap bench, or an average 3B and a moderately priced bench. Which is going to make a bigger difference? Both will cost the same net amount of money; its where you allocate your funds that makes the difference.

Edited November 11, 2006 by USSoccer

[sethuel1]

I expect that by late this evening a despondent USSoccer will either be ripping every other poster in this thread or will be posting a suicide note on here. Not sure which way he's gonna go yet.....

[USSoccer]

I expect that by late this evening a despondent USSoccer will either be ripping every other poster in this thread or will be posting a suicide note on here. Not sure which way he's gonna go yet.....

 

That made me spit up coffee at my desk.

 

:soap:

Edited November 11, 2006 by USSoccer

[Pinktermite]

Hey Soccer, I'm not arguing here, but I don't know that I buy the TV/DVD analogy. Hendry has lots of dollars at his disposal, that's number one.

 

Number two, clearly he can shop well and buy himself additional players IN ADDITION to Aramis, even at 6/100 for him alone.

 

I don't think he needs to make these choices like a team that say, maybe the Cardinals would have to do...

 

If the Cubs are going to win, they are going to have to realize that they need to go after the big guns and forget the fact that maybe the payroll might go to 125 million or 140, rather than 115...

 

I don't know...maybe yer right.

[USSoccer]

Hey Soccer, I'm not arguing here, but I don't know that I buy the TV/DVD analogy. Hendry has lots of dollars at his disposal, that's number one.

 

Number two, clearly he can shop well and buy himself additional players IN ADDITION to Aramis, even at 6/100 for him alone.

 

I don't think he needs to make these choices like a team that say, maybe the Cardinals would have to do...

 

If the Cubs are going to win, they are going to have to realize that they need to go after the big guns and forget the fact that maybe the payroll might go to 125 million or 140, rather than 115...

 

I don't know...maybe yer right.

 

I was mostly trying to draw an analogy to how having budgetary principles shouldn't affect the way you allocate said budget. You prioritize what's important, and it's okay to overspend within your budget on something that's worth it.

[BigbadB]

We, as Cub fans, are used to having Cubs management go out and buy the absolute best big screen tv and the best DVD player and then signing guys like Jeromy Burnitz instead of JD Drew.

 

That's probably a more accurate analogy. :D

[Pinktermite]

Now yer talking. I would say an even better example would be actually buying the best tv/dvd, and then not extending enough cash to pay the friggin electric bill. Hence Neifi, Glendon, Freddie "Boom Boom", Pagan, Jody Gerut...blah blah blah.

 

If they don't sign Aramis, their chances of winning next year and beyond are 10,000 % less than now.

 

Period...

[treebird]

 

If you think that paying a guy 15 million a year is more than generous and easily more than his worth when compared against other players of his caliber, but he demands to be paid 18 million, do you give in and allow yourself to get played or do you stand firm on your principles?

 

I understand what you're saying, but budgetary principles can be stupid things to hang onto.

 

Lets say you have to buy 2 items: You need to buy a TV and a DVD player. You have a fixed amount of money to spend on both. You go into Best Buy saying you want to spend no more than $1000 on the TV, and $300 on the DVD player. You bring $1300 with you. You get there, and you see an unbelievably good TV for $1150. It's more than what you resolved to spend, but it will make a huge difference in picture quality. Do you stick to your budgetary principle and get the inferioir TV that will get you by, and get your nice DVD player with a bunch of options, or do you change your budget around, get the nice TV that will make even a poor DVD player look awesome, and get a midrange DVD player?

 

This is what Hendry is faced with. He has the choice between the really good 3B and a cheap bench, or an average 3B and a moderately priced bench. Which is going to make a bigger difference? Both will cost the same net amount of money; its where you allocate your funds that makes the difference.

 

why should we buy a tv and dvd player when we can get 8 vcr's?

[wade]

 

If you think that paying a guy 15 million a year is more than generous and easily more than his worth when compared against other players of his caliber, but he demands to be paid 18 million, do you give in and allow yourself to get played or do you stand firm on your principles?

 

I understand what you're saying, but budgetary principles can be stupid things to hang onto.

 

Lets say you have to buy 2 items: You need to buy a TV and a DVD player. You have a fixed amount of money to spend on both. You go into Best Buy saying you want to spend no more than $1000 on the TV, and $300 on the DVD player. You bring $1300 with you. You get there, and you see an unbelievably good TV for $1150. It's more than what you resolved to spend, but it will make a huge difference in picture quality. Do you stick to your budgetary principle and get the inferioir TV that will get you by, and get your nice DVD player with a bunch of options, or do you change your budget around, get the nice TV that will make even a poor DVD player look awesome, and get a midrange DVD player?

 

This is what Hendry is faced with. He has the choice between the really good 3B and a cheap bench, or an average 3B and a moderately priced bench. Which is going to make a bigger difference? Both will cost the same net amount of money; its where you allocate your funds that makes the difference.

 

why should we buy a tv and dvd player when we can get 8 vcr's?

 

:D

 

That's classic.

[USSoccer]

 

If you think that paying a guy 15 million a year is more than generous and easily more than his worth when compared against other players of his caliber, but he demands to be paid 18 million, do you give in and allow yourself to get played or do you stand firm on your principles?

 

I understand what you're saying, but budgetary principles can be stupid things to hang onto.

 

Lets say you have to buy 2 items: You need to buy a TV and a DVD player. You have a fixed amount of money to spend on both. You go into Best Buy saying you want to spend no more than $1000 on the TV, and $300 on the DVD player. You bring $1300 with you. You get there, and you see an unbelievably good TV for $1150. It's more than what you resolved to spend, but it will make a huge difference in picture quality. Do you stick to your budgetary principle and get the inferioir TV that will get you by, and get your nice DVD player with a bunch of options, or do you change your budget around, get the nice TV that will make even a poor DVD player look awesome, and get a midrange DVD player?

 

This is what Hendry is faced with. He has the choice between the really good 3B and a cheap bench, or an average 3B and a moderately priced bench. Which is going to make a bigger difference? Both will cost the same net amount of money; its where you allocate your funds that makes the difference.

 

why should we buy a tv and dvd player when we can get 8 vcr's?

 

Half of which are Betamax VCR's.

 

Just because the costs fits into your idea of what something should cost doesn't mean it's worth buying. I personally think I should be able to buy a plasma for $500, but the market doesn't dictate that price, so if I want a plasma, I have to pay market value.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

A little over 8 hours before Ramirez days as a Cub are over.