Aramis Ramirez’s 2012 Option Does NOT Vest if He’s Traded

[Guest]

The Cubs have needs beyond 3B and finite resources. If they are better next year with Ramirez's money spent elsewhere, they need to do it. Especially since Ramirez isn't a long term piece at this point.

 

They won't be better. Every theory is based on longshot hopes of unrealistic production from garbage internal candidates. It's a pointless exercise.

 

It's impossible for the Cubs to better use Ramirez's money than on his salary? Don't be ridiculous. The Cubs were bad in several areas. If they use Ramirez's money towards a 4-5 win pitcher like Wilson, then you don't need any production out of 3B(which doesn't HAVE to be a platoon of current guys) to break even, and you've made yourself better for future years as well.

The Cubs will need production from somewhere. Also, you do know that winshare numbers aren't real? They're like a Z score.

 

The only way to be better without Ramirez will be to add enough offense to offset his production +. If they get Fielder and let him walk they will be a weaker offensive team by a larger margin. So, Wilson will need to be an elite pitcher to factor for the loss of Aramis. I guess the question is: Is Wilson + Fielder enough to make up for the loss in production of Aramis. I don't know, but I suspect the answer is no given the other problems the Cubs have.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

The Cubs will need production from somewhere. Also, you do know that winshare numbers aren't real? They're like a Z score.

 

The only way to be better without Ramirez will be to add enough offense to offset his production +. If they get Fielder and let him walk they will be a weaker offensive team by a larger margin. So, Wilson will need to be an elite pitcher to factor for the loss of Aramis. I guess the question is: Is Wilson + Fielder enough to make up for the loss in production of Aramis. I don't know, but I suspect the answer is no given the other problems the Cubs have.

 

Yes. From there it should be considered that more moves can be made.

[Little Slide Rooter]

The Cubs have needs beyond 3B and finite resources. If they are better next year with Ramirez's money spent elsewhere, they need to do it. Especially since Ramirez isn't a long term piece at this point.

 

They won't be better. Every theory is based on longshot hopes of unrealistic production from garbage internal candidates. It's a pointless exercise.

 

It's impossible for the Cubs to better use Ramirez's money than on his salary? Don't be ridiculous. The Cubs were bad in several areas. If they use Ramirez's money towards a 4-5 win pitcher like Wilson, then you don't need any production out of 3B(which doesn't HAVE to be a platoon of current guys) to break even, and you've made yourself better for future years as well.

The Cubs will need production from somewhere. Also, you do know that winshare numbers aren't real? They're like a Z score.

 

The only way to be better without Ramirez will be to add enough offense to offset his production +. If they get Fielder and let him walk they will be a weaker offensive team by a larger margin. So, Wilson will need to be an elite pitcher to factor for the loss of Aramis. I guess the question is: Is Wilson + Fielder enough to make up for the loss in production of Aramis. I don't know, but I suspect the answer is no given the other problems the Cubs have.

 

But they also need to think beyond 2012. Fielder and Wilson would be sufficent enough change for 2012, even if it doesn't make us immediately better. It will be a process. If none of our internal 3B options pan out, find a 3B in 2013. It's not like there are any 3B options avaialble this offseason that we'd ever look back and think damn, we should have got him.

 

If Aramis wants to give us a hometown discount, something along the lines of 3/35, go for it, but he has too many suiter to do that, and due to the thin market, somebody will overpay for him. He could end up with something like a 3/45 year deal, and I'd just as soon let somebody else give it to him.

[javy knows my name]

The Cubs have needs beyond 3B and finite resources. If they are better next year with Ramirez's money spent elsewhere, they need to do it. Especially since Ramirez isn't a long term piece at this point.

 

They won't be better. Every theory is based on longshot hopes of unrealistic production from garbage internal candidates. It's a pointless exercise.

 

It's impossible for the Cubs to better use Ramirez's money than on his salary? Don't be ridiculous. The Cubs were bad in several areas. If they use Ramirez's money towards a 4-5 win pitcher like Wilson, then you don't need any production out of 3B(which doesn't HAVE to be a platoon of current guys) to break even, and you've made yourself better for future years as well.

The Cubs will need production from somewhere. Also, you do know that winshare numbers aren't real? They're like a Z score.

 

The only way to be better without Ramirez will be to add enough offense to offset his production +. If they get Fielder and let him walk they will be a weaker offensive team by a larger margin. So, Wilson will need to be an elite pitcher to factor for the loss of Aramis. I guess the question is: Is Wilson + Fielder enough to make up for the loss in production of Aramis. I don't know, but I suspect the answer is no given the other problems the Cubs have.

 

I'm kind of excited for TT's response to this.

[Guest]

The only way to be better without Ramirez will be to add enough offense to offset his production +. If they get Fielder and let him walk they will be a weaker offensive team by a larger margin. So, Wilson will need to be an elite pitcher to factor for the loss of Aramis. I guess the question is: Is Wilson + Fielder enough to make up for the loss in production of Aramis. I don't know, but I suspect the answer is no given the other problems the Cubs have.

 

Uh, Fielder and Wilson are both more valuable than Aramis, so yes, both of them easily offset his production. Unless you meant to ask "Is Wilson + Fielder - Aramis enough to make the Cubs contenders/division favorites/etc?" In which case, the answer is that with their financial restrictions, there's no clear path to being a clear-cut favorite for next year, save for somebody saving the team from Soriano's and/or Zambrano's money. But those moves make the team better for next year and the following years, so the answer is obvious. You cut Aramis loose for the opportunity to add two players younger and better than him instead of only one.

[Guest]

The only way to be better without Ramirez will be to add enough offense to offset his production +. If they get Fielder and let him walk they will be a weaker offensive team by a larger margin. So, Wilson will need to be an elite pitcher to factor for the loss of Aramis. I guess the question is: Is Wilson + Fielder enough to make up for the loss in production of Aramis. I don't know, but I suspect the answer is no given the other problems the Cubs have.

 

Uh, Fielder and Wilson are both more valuable than Aramis, so yes, both of them easily offset his production. Unless you meant to ask "Is Wilson + Fielder - Aramis enough to make the Cubs contenders/division favorites/etc?" In which case, the answer is that with their financial restrictions, there's no clear path to being a clear-cut favorite for next year, save for somebody saving the team from Soriano's and/or Zambrano's money. But those moves make the team better for next year and the following years, so the answer is obvious. You cut Aramis loose for the opportunity to add two players younger and better than him instead of only one.

I don't think the answer is as obvious as you seem to. Wilson only plays once a week and I don't think Fielder won't make up the production of Aramis and whomever would play first.

 

But most importantly to me, the will have to cut him loose before they pursue anyone. It's a risk with tremendous downside given the corner they've painted themselves into.

Edited September 20, 2011 by CubinNY

[jersey cubs fan]

The only way to be better without Ramirez will be to add enough offense to offset his production +. If they get Fielder and let him walk they will be a weaker offensive team by a larger margin. So, Wilson will need to be an elite pitcher to factor for the loss of Aramis. I guess the question is: Is Wilson + Fielder enough to make up for the loss in production of Aramis. I don't know, but I suspect the answer is no given the other problems the Cubs have.

 

Uh, Fielder and Wilson are both more valuable than Aramis, so yes, both of them easily offset his production. Unless you meant to ask "Is Wilson + Fielder - Aramis enough to make the Cubs contenders/division favorites/etc?" In which case, the answer is that with their financial restrictions, there's no clear path to being a clear-cut favorite for next year, save for somebody saving the team from Soriano's and/or Zambrano's money. But those moves make the team better for next year and the following years, so the answer is obvious. You cut Aramis loose for the opportunity to add two players younger and better than him instead of only one.

 

That is not anywhere close to an obvious answer. Odds are you'll miss out on at least one of those players if that is the move you attempt to make. It's completely foolish and incredibly risky to limit yourself to such a strategy. The Cubs have a very good player and an easy way to keep him. They should do that and then look to add elsewhere. Pretending there are no other teams bidding on free agents and all players will be happy to accept what the Cubs offer makes no sense.

[CubColtPacer]

I think the decline Ramirez's option camp is working off a few premises:

 

The Cubs want to get either Pujols or Fielder

 

The Cubs need to upgrade their starting pitching in some way in order to compete in 2012.

 

Ramirez will want a multi-year deal after 2012 that the Cubs will not (should not) want to pay so basically his last year in a Cubs uniform if they choose the club option will be 2012.

 

Does anyone dispute any one of these premises?

[Backtobanks]

All of the discussion about Fielder producing more than Ramirez are forgetting the production of Pena. As was stated earlier, the combination of Fielder + Baker/Flaherty (or whoever) is not much of an improvement (if any) over Pena + Ramirez. Personally, I think Ramirez will sign an extension with a hometown discount. Hopefully it will only be for 2 years.

[seattlecub]

Not to nitpick, but doesn't Aramis want a multi-year contract following this year, not after 2012?

[Outshined_One]

Why are people assuming the Cubs get Wilson and Fielder if Ramirez walks?

[Guest]

Why are people assuming the Cubs get Wilson and Fielder if Ramirez walks?

I've mentioned that a couple of times.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Why are people assuming the Cubs get Wilson and Fielder if Ramirez walks?

I've mentioned that a couple of times.

 

Nobodies assuming anything. It's discussion. Until the new GMs in place, nothing can be assumed.

[dew1679666265]

Why are people assuming the Cubs get Wilson and Fielder if Ramirez walks?

 

Nobody is. I, and others, are arguing that the Cubs should pursue both of them and since the Cubs have as much or more money to spend than any other team, they have a chance to land both. It's a risk, but standing pat with the current team (or something close to it) isn't going make us any better next year or going forward.

[Guest]

Why are people assuming the Cubs get Wilson and Fielder if Ramirez walks?

 

Nobody is. I, and others, are arguing that the Cubs should pursue both of them and since the Cubs have as much or more money to spend than any other team, they have a chance to land both. It's a risk, but standing pat with the current team (or something close to it) isn't going make us any better next year or going forward.

Attempting to go after Fielder/Pujols while keeping Aramis is not standing pat. The risk/reward favors it, IMO. If they whiff after letting Aramis walk they will almost surely be worse.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Why are people assuming the Cubs get Wilson and Fielder if Ramirez walks?

 

Nobody is. I, and others, are arguing that the Cubs should pursue both of them and since the Cubs have as much or more money to spend than any other team, they have a chance to land both. It's a risk, but standing pat with the current team (or something close to it) isn't going make us any better next year or going forward.

Attempting to go after Fielder/Pujols while keeping Aramis is not standing pat. The risk/reward favors it, IMO. If they whiff after letting Aramis walk they will almost surely be worse.

 

If we didn't get Fielder(or Pujols) and a top starting pitcher, even if we did re sign Ramirez, I don't think the team would be very good anyway. The team would have the same question marks it did coming into the this season, the difference being that the question marks would be a year older.

[dew1679666265]

All of the discussion about Fielder producing more than Ramirez are forgetting the production of Pena. As was stated earlier, the combination of Fielder + Baker/Flaherty (or whoever) is not much of an improvement (if any) over Pena + Ramirez. Personally, I think Ramirez will sign an extension with a hometown discount. Hopefully it will only be for 2 years.

 

What Ramirez do we get next year? Do we get this year's Aramis who was mostly healthy and generally very productive, or do we get last year's Aramis who was bad for quite some time, hurt a lot, and only came on strong in the second half of the year?

 

You're talking like Aramis is some sure thing to be healthy and productive next year when that's not the case at all. He'll turn 34 during the season and just last year he was worth .3 WAR. He posted a .745 OPS last year. Yes he was hurt, but that wasn't that much of an anomaly. With the Fielder/Wilson combo (should we get both), you have elite production and the certainty that comes with younger players. Best case scenario you get an .833 OPS from Pena and an .871 OPS from Aramis. But how likely is that scenario?

 

In the Fielder/Wilson scenario (if we get both, obviously), you have a much greater likelihood of getting the .871-.958 OPS Prince has posted each of the past three years and the 2.97-3.35 ERA and 1.17-1.25 WHIP Wilson has posted his 2 full years starting. Plus, both of those players likely remain highly productive for at least 2-3 more years (less certainty with Wilson), whereas Aramis and Pena are likely declining by 2013, if not next year.

[dew1679666265]

Why are people assuming the Cubs get Wilson and Fielder if Ramirez walks?

 

Nobody is. I, and others, are arguing that the Cubs should pursue both of them and since the Cubs have as much or more money to spend than any other team, they have a chance to land both. It's a risk, but standing pat with the current team (or something close to it) isn't going make us any better next year or going forward.

Attempting to go after Fielder/Pujols while keeping Aramis is not standing pat. The risk/reward favors it, IMO. If they whiff after letting Aramis walk they will almost surely be worse.

 

You're definitely worse if you let Aramis walk and then whiff on either Fielder or Wilson. However, if you take the risk and it works, you have a chance to win next year and you have a really good core moving forward. If you keep Aramis and sign Fielder, you're better so long as a 33-34 year old Aramis can stay healthy and productive. He did this year, but he did not last year. If Aramis is hurt a large portion of next year (very real possibility) and ends up with another .745 OPS, then you're worse next year and you have less of a base from which to build for the future.

 

Sometimes you have to take calculated risks in order to win and given the money the Cubs have available to them this offseason, this is the time to take a risk. If it doesn't work of course it hurts, but taking the safe route isn't a sure thing to be competitive or even that much better next year.

[Little Slide Rooter]

All of the discussion about Fielder producing more than Ramirez are forgetting the production of Pena. As was stated earlier, the combination of Fielder + Baker/Flaherty (or whoever) is not much of an improvement (if any) over Pena + Ramirez. Personally, I think Ramirez will sign an extension with a hometown discount. Hopefully it will only be for 2 years.

 

What Ramirez do we get next year? Do we get this year's Aramis who was mostly healthy and generally very productive, or do we get last year's Aramis who was bad for quite some time, hurt a lot, and only came on strong in the second half of the year?

 

You're talking like Aramis is some sure thing to be healthy and productive next year when that's not the case at all. He'll turn 34 during the season and just last year he was worth .3 WAR. He posted a .745 OPS last year. Yes he was hurt, but that wasn't that much of an anomaly. With the Fielder/Wilson combo (should we get both), you have elite production and the certainty that comes with younger players. Best case scenario you get an .833 OPS from Pena and an .871 OPS from Aramis. But how likely is that scenario?

 

In the Fielder/Wilson scenario (if we get both, obviously), you have a much greater likelihood of getting the .871-.958 OPS Prince has posted each of the past three years and the 2.97-3.35 ERA and 1.17-1.25 WHIP Wilson has posted his 2 full years starting. Plus, both of those players likely remain highly productive for at least 2-3 more years (less certainty with Wilson), whereas Aramis and Pena are likely declining by 2013, if not next year.

 

People just need to understand that Fielder and Wilson would be cornerstones, not the tickets to the World Series. As more money comes off the books, more holes can be filled, and all the while, hopefully filling other holes through the farm system, and others through trade. We should have a top team by 2014, possibly 2013. And to those who say "well why wouldn't Fielder just sign with a ready made winner if the moneys similar", to that I say there are guys who might prefer to be the cornerstone than just another piece. Hopefully Fielder is one of those guys.

[Outshined_One]

Why are people assuming the Cubs get Wilson and Fielder if Ramirez walks?

 

Nobody is. I, and others, are arguing that the Cubs should pursue both of them and since the Cubs have as much or more money to spend than any other team, they have a chance to land both. It's a risk, but standing pat with the current team (or something close to it) isn't going make us any better next year or going forward.

 

The problem is timing. The Cubs have a limited window in which they can exclusively negotiate with Ramirez for a potential long term contract. After that period of time, it's open season on Ramirez. If Ramirez opts out and hits the open market, there's a risk that Ramirez could be signed away by another team before Fielders and Wilson are signed. In that scenario, the Cubs would have to go for broke if they have any hopes of competing in 2012.

 

To put it bluntly, I'd rather the Cubs take the risk that they stand pat over the risk that they end up substantially worse next season.

[dew1679666265]

The problem is timing. The Cubs have a limited window in which they can exclusively negotiate with Ramirez for a potential long term contract. After that period of time, it's open season on Ramirez. If Ramirez opts out and hits the open market, there's a risk that Ramirez could be signed away by another team before Fielders and Wilson are signed. In that scenario, the Cubs would have to go for broke if they have any hopes of competing in 2012.

 

To put it bluntly, I'd rather the Cubs take the risk that they stand pat over the risk that they end up substantially worse next season.

 

If the Cubs are committed to bringing in both players, the chances of them missing both are pretty much slim to none. They have a lot of money to spend, so adding one of Fielder/Wilson should be a near certainty. I'll admit it's far less likely they net both, but coming out of the offseason missing Aramis, Fielder, Pujols, and Wilson is extremely unlikely if they're committed to going after those players. And if they basically trade Aramis for any one of those players, they're in better shape long term than if they just stood pat with Aramis.

 

Keep in mind that if you stand pat you face the very real risk that Aramis continues to decline. Is it really a smart idea to give a 3/45 deal to a 33 year old injury prone slugger? Especially one who posted a .745 OPS last year? You could just pick up his option and not give him a new deal, but there's still no certainty that he'll produce like a $14 million player next year. There's a ton of risk in both scenarios, but there's a ton of upside in the Fielder/Wilson route, while there is little in the Fielder/Aramis route.

[Guest]

The problem is timing. The Cubs have a limited window in which they can exclusively negotiate with Ramirez for a potential long term contract. After that period of time, it's open season on Ramirez. If Ramirez opts out and hits the open market, there's a risk that Ramirez could be signed away by another team before Fielders and Wilson are signed. In that scenario, the Cubs would have to go for broke if they have any hopes of competing in 2012.

 

To put it bluntly, I'd rather the Cubs take the risk that they stand pat over the risk that they end up substantially worse next season.

 

Barring something unexpected(increased payroll, significant Z/Soriano money coming free), the Cubs have very little chance of legitimately competing if they're paying Ramirez 16 million. Plus, there's no long term risk to losing Ramirez because he's trending downwards. While getting several FA targets isn't given, the payroll flexibility can be used for trade targets too, and those guys are likely to have value to the team beyond 2012, unlike Ramirez.

[Outshined_One]

If the Cubs are committed to bringing in both players, the chances of them missing both are pretty much slim to none. They have a lot of money to spend, so adding one of Fielder/Wilson should be a near certainty. I'll admit it's far less likely they net both, but coming out of the offseason missing Aramis, Fielder, Pujols, and Wilson is extremely unlikely if they're committed to going after those players. And if they basically trade Aramis for any one of those players, they're in better shape long term than if they just stood pat with Aramis.

 

How would it be a near-certainty? Wilson will be the most heavily pursued SP in the offseason, with teams like the Yankees and Angels after him. Fielder will likely get interest from the Orioles, Rangers, Nationals, and possibly Mariners. The Marlins are also looming for both, especially since they have a new stadium. Those are all teams with the resources to match any offer the Cubs put out there.

 

I'd say the odds of the Cubs missing both is a heck of a lot higher than slim. If the Cubs are operating under that assumption, they're playing with fire.

[dew1679666265]

How would it be a near-certainty? Wilson will be the most heavily pursued SP in the offseason, with teams like the Yankees and Angels after him. Fielder will likely get interest from the Orioles, Rangers, Nationals, and possibly Mariners. The Marlins are also looming for both, especially since they have a new stadium. Those are all teams with the resources to match any offer the Cubs put out there.

 

I'd say the odds of the Cubs missing both is a heck of a lot higher than slim. If the Cubs are operating under that assumption, they're playing with fire.

 

The Cubs have as much or more money (from the estimates I've seen) coming off the books than anybody else this offseason. If the Cubs are committed to bringing in at least one of those players, they should not be outbid for that player. Every one of them would have to be willing to take less money to go elsewhere and that's very unlikely. Or it would mean that teams threw out ridiculously high offers to every one of those players, which is also very unlikely.

 

Keep in mind as well that the Cubs can heavily backload one of the deals if they pursue both Fielder and Wilson. They could set up, say, Wilson's contract so that he's only getting $10 million next year on a (for instance) 5/100 deal. If they're simply picking up Aramis' option, they obviously can't backload it. That gives them a bit more flexibility going the Fielder/Wilson route.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

If the Cubs are committed to bringing in both players, the chances of them missing both are pretty much slim to none. They have a lot of money to spend, so adding one of Fielder/Wilson should be a near certainty. I'll admit it's far less likely they net both, but coming out of the offseason missing Aramis, Fielder, Pujols, and Wilson is extremely unlikely if they're committed to going after those players. And if they basically trade Aramis for any one of those players, they're in better shape long term than if they just stood pat with Aramis.

 

How would it be a near-certainty? Wilson will be the most heavily pursued SP in the offseason, with teams like the Yankees and Angels after him. Fielder will likely get interest from the Orioles, Rangers, Nationals, and possibly Mariners. The Marlins are also looming for both, especially since they have a new stadium. Those are all teams with the resources to match any offer the Cubs put out there.

 

I'd say the odds of the Cubs missing both is a heck of a lot higher than slim. If the Cubs are operating under that assumption, they're playing with fire.

 

Not if the CC opts out, which IMO would really help the Cubs out.