Ramirez has opt-out clause in new contract!?...

[mjuedes]

This may have been posted somewhere else, but according to the article on Cubs.com he has an opt out clause similar to his old contract after four years.

 

Here is the link http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20061121&content_id=1745120&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc

 

How could Hendry do this again?

[goonys evil twin]

This may have been posted somewhere else, but according to the article on Cubs.com he has an opt out clause similar to his old contract after four years.

 

Here is the link http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20061121&content_id=1745120&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc

 

How could Hendry do this again?

 

I said it before and I'll say it again, I have no problem with this opt-out.

[C.C.]

It's after 4 years. Who cares?

[RynoRules]

This may have been posted somewhere else, but according to the article on Cubs.com he has an opt out clause similar to his old contract after four years.

 

Here is the link http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20061121&content_id=1745120&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc

 

How could Hendry do this again?

 

I said it before and I'll say it again, I have no problem with this opt-out.

 

Agreed. By the time the opt-out is an issue he will be on the down-side of what will (hopefully) have been a great career, and his production will likely no longer justify his salary, largely b/c he plays a position that is brutal on the body. Look at Scott Rolen.

[goonys evil twin]

It's after 4 years. Who cares?

 

By the time it becomes an issue, I might actually prefer he opts out and signs elsewhere. Ramirez's best years will be behind him by then.

[hawkcub]

The option is for the last year of a 5 year contract, it is miles away from what the previous contract was.

[jjgman21]

what do GMs, agents, and sports writers know about the 10-5 rule that we don't? with Soriano it was "ntc for the first five years." well that means its a ntc for the entire contract since he will have 10-5. with Aram it is "ntc for first four years." same thing, only I think Aram only needed three years max to reach 10-5 protection.

 

 

the best part of this article is the timing. it took 11 days to come out, so hopefully we will see a story with some hints about Soriano's structure eventually and it is not a straight too many years for too much money deal.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

How's the sale of the Cubs coming along?

[Soriano12]

Aram could still be a very productive player at 32, this could bite the Cubs in the ass, again.

[goonys evil twin]

Aram could still be a very productive player at 32, this could bite the Cubs in the ass, again.

 

It's an extremely small price to pay.

[Butterscup1679666578]

Aram could still be a very productive player at 32, this could bite the Cubs in the ass, again.

 

It's an extremely small price to pay.

 

Aramis could still be very productive, but he won't get this money again. If he opted out, it would be because he's tired of Chicago.

[goonys evil twin]

Aram could still be a very productive player at 32, this could bite the Cubs in the ass, again.

 

It's an extremely small price to pay.

 

Aramis could still be very productive, but he won't get this money again. If he opted out, it would be because he's tired of Chicago.

 

If he puts up 4 straight 900+ OPS seasons, and the market does not take a serious dip, I bet he could easily get more money by opting out. A 3 year deal at $15m per would not be out of the question.

[imb]

As backloaded as his contract is, it's going to be hard for him to give away that money. He'd have to be very productive over the next few years to think about doing that.

[cubweiser03]

Aram could still be a very productive player at 32, this could bite the Cubs in the ass, again.

 

It's an extremely small price to pay.

 

Aramis could still be very productive, but he won't get this money again. If he opted out, it would be because he's tired of Chicago.

 

If he puts up 4 straight 900+ OPS seasons, and the market does not take a serious dip, I bet he could easily get more money by opting out. A 3 year deal at $15m per would not be out of the question.

 

Yeah i hope he opts out and wants to renegotiate again. It means he's producing more than $15M worth. In this market the first 4 years are turning out to be a steal. When Carlos Lee signs it will be further proof ARam gave a huge hometown discount. Also im believing the rumors that LAA was going to offer Aram a $100M deal.

[craig]

The previous deal, it was a one-year extension before opt-out. This deal, we're getting 4 good years at good price. You have to make some concessions, and this seems a reasonable one.

 

Aram will be 32. He may be in decline, from complacency or injuries or getting too fat or something. But he's a really special hitting talent, with his ability to swing so hard and hit with so much power, while being such a pure contact hitter and K'ing so rarely. Not certain, but there's a good chance that he will remain one of the best hitters in baseball at that time. And will earn another big contract.

 

He may get better, too. Lots of guys do after age 28. A new manager, new hitting coach might help him. Being in what might be a stronger lineup might help him too. (RBI situations bring out more concentration; having stronger hitters behind might make a guy more willing to be selective and take more walks if the guys behind you are good enough to drive you in fairly often.) Being on good teams can also help, because it's easier to concentrate and stay focused in a pennant race than when the team is in 27th place.

[mjuedes]

What is all this talk about how Aramis will be in decline at age 32? We just signed a 31 tear old to an 8 year deal, and everyone including myself is very excited about it. Nobody has mentioned that Soriano is on the downside of his career. And part of his appeal is his base stealing ability and we all know that decreases with age, if anyone were to decline it would be someone who relies on speed. Aramis should still be very productive at age 32 and still one of the top 3rd basemen in the league when his opt out clause comes up.

[goonys evil twin]

What is all this talk about how Aramis will be in decline at age 32? We just signed a 31 tear old to an 8 year deal, and everyone including myself is very excited about it. Nobody has mentioned that Soriano is on the downside of his career. And part of his appeal is his base stealing ability and we all know that decreases with age, if anyone were to decline it would be someone who relies on speed. Aramis should still be very productive at age 32 and still one of the top 3rd basemen in the league when his opt out clause comes up.

 

Nobody has mentioned it? Try reading some more.

 

It's just a fact of baseball. The peak years are 26-28, some something similar. By the early 30's, the vast majority of players, be they good bad or great, start to decline. At 32, Ramirez probably won't be as good as he was at his peak.

[hawkcub]

It's one year people. Even if it was 5 years with no opt-out clause, he's probably getting similar dollars at 33 as he can get at 32.

[BigbadB]

I have no qualms with that opt out clause. I'm in agreement that it might be a good thing.

 

If you read Tim's article about Aramis, I think there is definitely some substance to his premise that Aramis could decline quickly. I'd like to think he won't, but once a guy gets into his 30's, big money becomes a big gamble.

 

I think Soriano is a bit of a different situation. He's got great speed and a very athletic body. To me, he has the capability to play later into his career than Aramis. Aramis is slow now. Imagine how slow he'll be if he can't keep his weight down. It can also impact his range at 3b. And he certainly doesn't have the best of range now as it is.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

How can an opt out clause be a good thing? It'll only be used if he's being paid below full market value. Heck he could strong arm the Cubs in to giving him another 5 year deal before he really hits his decline. The opt out clause is a significant issue.

[badgercub]

Aramis' agent, Paul Kinzer, has been quoted as saying that since Aramis signed for such a discount, the opt out and the NTC were non-negotiable. Which begs the question, would those of you who think Hendry was stupid for giving it to him also be calling for his head if he let Aramis walk because he was unwilling to give him those concessions?

 

While I would rather there wasn't an out clause or a NTC they are all part of the negotiating process and I think Hendry was smart for not letting that become a deal breaker or giving him more money or years to compensate for not having it in there. They can always renegotiate before it comes time for this to become an issue.

[Backtobanks]

Aramis' agent, Paul Kinzer, has been quoted as saying that since Aramis signed for such a discount, the opt out and the NTC were non-negotiable. Which begs the question, would those of you who think Hendry was stupid for giving it to him also be calling for his head if he let Aramis walk because he was unwilling to give him those concessions?

 

While I would rather there wasn't an out clause or a NTC they are all part of the negotiating process and I think Hendry was smart for not letting that become a deal breaker or giving him more money or years to compensate for not having it in there. They can always renegotiate before it comes time for this to become an issue.

 

Amen! Here we go again trying to find something bad to say about Hendry. As I've stated before, Hendry is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't with some posters. He signed ARam for probably $30 million below market value and ARam insisted on the out clause and a NTC. Hendry did what he had to do to keep ARam and did it very in a way that saved the Cubs $30 million.

[Mark Priors Calves]

As backloaded as his contract is, it's going to be hard for him to give away that money. He'd have to be very productive over the next few years to think about doing that.

 

great sig.

[USSoccer]

There's a big difference in giving a guy an opt out clause at age 27 vs age 32. No problems with that on this end.

[jjgman21]

How can an opt out clause be a good thing? It'll only be used if he's being paid below full market value. Heck he could strong arm the Cubs in to giving him another 5 year deal before he really hits his decline. The opt out clause is a significant issue.

 

it could be used for any one of a variety of reasons. doesn't like the manager, the Cubs aren't winning, his mistresses are hiding around doorways with weapons, the crowds are on him or he thinks he's not getting full market value whether he is or not.

 

he can strong arm all he wants, the Cubs don't have to sign a 33 y.o. player to a 5 year contract if they don't want to. he can opt out and the parties can part ways.

 

the way I understand it is at the end of four years, Aramis can decide if he wants to opt out. if he does, the Cubs can let an aging slugger walk or resign him. if he decides not to opt out, then the Cubs then have a regular team option. so he can strong arm all he wants, the Cubs don't have to sign a 33 y.o. player to a 5 year contract if they don't want to. he can opt out and the parties can go to arbitration or part ways.

 

the only way he can hold the Cubs over a barrel is a terrible market for thirdbasemen in 4 years, no viable prospect or filler, and the Cubs are trying to remain competetive. nobody knows what the market for thirdbasemen will be in 4 years or if the Cubs will be trying to remain competetive.