Fox Sports: Ramirez SIGNS WITH CUBS!

[soccer10k]

What happened to the Jim Hendry bashing?

 

Reserved for when he misses out on all the non-cub FAs.

 

It is funny that he's suddenly getting some love even though the 2007 team is identical to the 2006 version so far.

 

Yeah, but minus Pierre.

 

But c'mon, you gotta give him some credit. So far he couldnt be doing much better.....so far.

 

I agree the Wood and Ramirez deals were very good moves, I just find it a little funny.

 

Yeah, as of right now, I'm pleased. But if this is the end of the offseason Hendry would and should get ripped. He's still has problems with the starting pitching to solve.

[VanceJergins]

What happened to the Jim Hendry bashing?

 

Reserved for when he misses out on all the non-cub FAs.

 

It is funny that he's suddenly getting some love even though the 2007 team is identical to the 2006 version so far.

 

Yeah, but minus Pierre.

 

But c'mon, you gotta give him some credit. So far he couldnt be doing much better.....so far.

 

I agree the Wood and Ramirez deals were very good moves, I just find it a little funny.

 

Yeah, I think we should save the praise til we have a $100 million caliber team with our 100 million dollars

[Ding Dong Johnson]

What happened to the Jim Hendry bashing?

 

Reserved for when he misses out on all the non-cub FAs.

 

It is funny that he's suddenly getting some love even though the 2007 team is identical to the 2006 version so far.

 

Yeah, but minus Pierre.

 

But c'mon, you gotta give him some credit. So far he couldnt be doing much better.....so far.

 

I agree the Wood and Ramirez deals were very good moves, I just find it a little funny.

 

Yeah, I think we should save the praise til we have a $100 million caliber team with our 100 million dollars

 

I'm waiting for the 3/30 Darrin Erstad deal and the 3/33 Miguel Batista signing.

[RichHillIsABeast]

5/73.. anything else? No-Trade-Clause?

 

Some one said partial NTC. Also a mutual option for the 6th year, no word on how much.

 

We don't know how it's broken down so far, but it averages 14M per season with a 3M buyout of the option year.

[abuck1220]

rogers' article makes no sense.

 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-061112rogers,1,7323026.column?coll=cs-cubs-headlines

 

 

Given his bosses' desperate desire to go from 66-96 to competitive again overnight, there was no way general manager Jim Hendry could allow anyone who drove in 119 runs to leave as a free agent—though he almost did.

Now they'll have to hope Ramirez can generate more run production when it matters, suffer fewer lapses on the bases and never again let a pop-up bonk him in the coconut in the 11th inning.

 

There were indications that Ramirez could have received six- or seven-year offers elsewhere had he turned down the Cubs, with the total value beyond $90 million. The most amazing part of this deal might be that anyone who lived through the angst at Wrigley Field the last couple of years would have wanted to come back.

 

This business behind him, it's time for Hendry to start filling holes. He's thankful he doesn't have a new one to fill.

 

so...is he glad they re-signed him or what?

 

and why is aramis suddenly the poster boy for the cubs' failures over the past three seasons? and why do people want to make him out to be a choker? does anyone remember the 2003 postseason?

[cjbucks]

rogers' article makes no sense.

 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-061112rogers,1,7323026.column?coll=cs-cubs-headlines

 

 

Given his bosses' desperate desire to go from 66-96 to competitive again overnight, there was no way general manager Jim Hendry could allow anyone who drove in 119 runs to leave as a free agent—though he almost did.

Now they'll have to hope Ramirez can generate more run production when it matters, suffer fewer lapses on the bases and never again let a pop-up bonk him in the coconut in the 11th inning.

 

There were indications that Ramirez could have received six- or seven-year offers elsewhere had he turned down the Cubs, with the total value beyond $90 million. The most amazing part of this deal might be that anyone who lived through the angst at Wrigley Field the last couple of years would have wanted to come back.

 

This business behind him, it's time for Hendry to start filling holes. He's thankful he doesn't have a new one to fill.

 

so...is he glad they re-signed him or what?

 

and why is aramis suddenly the poster boy for the cubs' failures over the past three seasons? and why do people want to make him out to be a choker? does anyone remember the 2003 postseason?

 

I've been doing all i can to forget it.

[Guest]

How did that article make him the poster boy? I only read your quotes but he seemed to be incredulous that Ramirez wanted to come back.

[USSoccer]

That's why Aramis Ramirez, who is clearly not the Cubs' best player, is now their highest-paid player

 

That's a really untrue statement. He's probably been their best offensive player over the last three seasons. I think Z is more valuable, but it's not "clearly" anything, Phil.

 

He should point out to Ramirez that only Wilson Betemit had a lower range factor among the 30 primary third basemen in the majors last year.

 

While the attempt at statistical analysis is welcome, range factor is garbage.

 

He's not a great player; he's a one-time All-Star.

 

The justification for his point could be made for Derrek Lee, too. Did Phil write a similar article 7 months ago when Lee was extended?

 

The danger of this five-year, $73 million deal is that it tells Ramirez he's as good as he needs to be. If it does, the Cubs are going to be sorry they gave it to him.

 

While I want Ramirez to improve, if he simply recreates his 3 year averages over the course of this contract without an ounce of improvement he'll be a bargain.

 

I really don't like Phil Rogers.

Edited November 13, 2006 by USSoccer

[jjgman21]

Yeah, I think we should save the praise til we have a $100 million caliber team with our 100 million dollars

 

is he redeemed if he again assembles a 100M caliber team and pays 100M for that team, but only 65M of players end up actually taking the field in 2007?

[RichHillIsABeast]

I'd be nice if Rogers actually watched the Cubs once in a while.

[USSoccer]

I'd be nice if Rogers actually watched the Cubs once in a while.

 

Between Rogers and Sullivan the Trib have no good Cub reporters.

[Guest]

I'd be nice if Rogers actually watched the Cubs once in a while.

 

Between Rogers and Sullivan the Trib have no good Cub reporters.

 

they had a chance to sign bruce miles for $8 million but opted for rogers and sullivan for $5 million each.

[abuck1220]

How did that article make him the poster boy? I only read your quotes but he seemed to be incredulous that Ramirez wanted to come back.

 

i don't know...just seems like ramirez has been catching a lot of flak over the past few weeks. people should be commending him for sticking with the cubs for less $.

 

Right place, right time. That's why Aramis Ramirez, who is clearly not the Cubs' best player, is now their highest-paid player.

 

He's not a great player; he's a one-time All-Star.

 

Now they'll have to hope Ramirez can generate more run production when it matters, suffer fewer lapses on the bases and never again let a pop-up bonk him in the coconut in the 11th inning.

 

those kind of comments seem to be bashing ramirez.

[abuck1220]

also i misread this quote...

 

The most amazing part of this deal might be that anyone who lived through the angst at Wrigley Field the last couple of years would have wanted to come back.

 

to say...

 

The most amazing part of this deal might be that anyone who lived through the angst at Wrigley Field the last couple of years would have wanted him to come back.

[USSoccer]

I'd be nice if Rogers actually watched the Cubs once in a while.

 

Between Rogers and Sullivan the Trib have no good Cub reporters.

 

they had a chance to sign bruce miles for $8 million but opted for rogers and sullivan for $5 million each.

 

What a deal! 2 bad writers for $2m more than one really good one!

 

Did Andy MacPhail swoop in and insert a "No-Freelancing" clause at the last moment?

Edited November 13, 2006 by USSoccer

[Guest]

I figured that's what you did - and without reading the rest of the article, I didn't see the bashing. Cub fans hopefully will show him lots of love come opening day.

[soccer10k]

I'd be nice if Rogers actually watched the Cubs once in a while.

 

Between Rogers and Sullivan the Trib have no good Cub reporters.

 

They're good in the Tribune's eyes because they say what the Tribune wants them to say.

[JGalt73]

Keith Law at ESPN weighs in...

 

Aramis Ramirez was supposedly asking for "Beltran money" (the new gold standard for top-of-the-market hitters) if he didn't re-sign with the Cubs. And if we believe the market was likely to provide that salary to Ramirez, then the Cubs got themselves an outstanding hitter at a good 20-percent discount.

 

Whether some other team was, in fact, going to pay Ramirez $17 million a year is an open question. How good this deal was for the Cubs won't be clear until the hot stove league starts to cool off, or at least until Alfonso Soriano, J.D. Drew and Carlos Lee have all signed.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Keith Law at ESPN weighs in...

 

Aramis Ramirez was supposedly asking for "Beltran money" (the new gold standard for top-of-the-market hitters) if he didn't re-sign with the Cubs. And if we believe the market was likely to provide that salary to Ramirez, then the Cubs got themselves an outstanding hitter at a good 20-percent discount.

 

Whether some other team was, in fact, going to pay Ramirez $17 million a year is an open question. How good this deal was for the Cubs won't be clear until the hot stove league starts to cool off, or at least until Alfonso Soriano, J.D. Drew and Carlos Lee have all signed.

 

Keith's crotch has to hurt with all of that sitting on the fence.

[RichHillIsABeast]

Keith Law at ESPN weighs in...

 

Aramis Ramirez was supposedly asking for "Beltran money" (the new gold standard for top-of-the-market hitters) if he didn't re-sign with the Cubs. And if we believe the market was likely to provide that salary to Ramirez, then the Cubs got themselves an outstanding hitter at a good 20-percent discount.

 

Whether some other team was, in fact, going to pay Ramirez $17 million a year is an open question. How good this deal was for the Cubs won't be clear until the hot stove league starts to cool off, or at least until Alfonso Soriano, J.D. Drew and Carlos Lee have all signed.

 

Ramirez's deal also helps set the market low, so I don't agree with Mr. Law.

[NCCubFan]

Aramis will not be back.

 

http://dese.mo.gov/moheritage/images/TheViewFromIndependence/TheViewFromIndependence44.jpg

 

:D

[Laura]

Ken Rosenthal / Fox Sports[/url]"]

Third baseman Aramis Ramirez actually is guaranteed $75 million in his new five-year deal with the Cubs, not the $73 million that was initially reported.

The extra $2 million, according to sources with knowledge of the contract, comes from a buyout if the team fails to exercise his option for 2013.

 

Ramirez received full no-trade protection for the first four years of his deal, the sources said, and his contract stipulates that any team that acquires him in the fifth year will be obligated to exercise his sixth-year option.

 

Believe it or not, the Cubs again granted Ramirez an escape clause, this time after his fourth year instead of after his second. The risk isn't as great; Ramirez figures to be less attractive at 32 than he was at 28.

 

While the Angels were believed to be the team most interested in Ramirez if he tested the free-agent market, the Orioles, Padres, Giants and Phillies were perhaps more willing to meet Ramirez's desire for a six-year deal, sources said.

[Balsa]

We gave him ANOTHER escape clause????

 

Good lord, do we never learn? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad he's back....but there's nothing good that can come of an escape clause.

[Brian]

We gave him ANOTHER escape clause????

 

Good lord, do we never learn?

 

Like it said after 4 years at 32 it won't be as big of deal. If they pick up the 6th year he probably wouldn't use it.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

We gave him ANOTHER escape clause????

 

Good lord, do we never learn?

 

I have no problem with one at age 32. Rosenthal makes the same point that Tim, Outshined and others have already made in this thread...Aramis at age 32 is not the same as Aramis at age 28, opting out might not be in his best interest. He'd be past his prime.