Aramis

USSoccer · July 20, 2011

In a team full of holes, trading away one of the solid contributors (perhaps THE solid contributor) is a pretty good way to retool. Aramis is very good and he's having a good year, but he can bring a couple blue-chip prospects in return I would do it in a second. Same goes for Marmol, Soto.... A 2012 team with Aramis and no other changes will be terrible (again). Trade him while his value is highest (for once).

Let the slamming begin.

Major market teams don't trade away cornerstone players for prospects.
Aramis just turned 33 years old. Do you really think the Cubs will compete for a World Series ring in the next 2 years or so when he could still be a major contributor? If the answer to that question is no, then trading him for prospects seems like a good idea to me. I'm not opposed to picking up the option, or even giving him a 2-year extension in place of the option, but if the Cubs can get good value in return for him then I'm all for it. They may have to spend the same amount of money to attempt to replace him, but then they will have replaced him plus gained young talent in return. It all comes down to whether the Cubs are going to continue to try to patch teams together or if they may actually commit to building for a few years down the road.

-I'm biased here, but I think he should retire as a Cub

-Yes, the Cubs can conceivably contend for a title within the next two seasons. Their division sucks and they have the biggest market in said division.

-The Cubs can commit to building for a few years down the road without gutting their major league roster of their best talent. Aramis and Castro are their best two players. Castro is more valuable due to positional scarcity and age, but Aramis is their best offensive player. You decide to trade him for the nebulous "young talent" that we currently suck at developing, you're begging to suck for the next 2-3 years unless we get lucky and land Pujols or Fielder.

dew1679666265 · July 20, 2011

The $60M you quote doesn't include the fact that you're keeping Aram. Also, as I have said in other threads, that $45M isn't guaranteed to be thrown right back into payroll. Attendance is down which means that concessions are down. The payroll was reduced going into this year and the players leaving need to be replaced. It is too presumptive to assume that the payroll next year will remain the same, or even increase. It is a business.

It really isn't presumptive to think that the guy who said all money will go back into the team will keep to his word. If, after the Cubs have back to back awful seasons, Ricketts comes in and drops payroll even further, the Cubs will get even worse and even fewer fans will show up. The worst possible business decision at this point is to drop payroll and alienate more fans and Ricketts knows that. I don't expect much, if any, payroll increase, but the most likely scenario is it holding steady right around $134 mil.

And you're right that Aramis isn't factored into the $60 mil I quoted, I remembered incorrectly. But $2 mil already is (the buyout) and picking up the option (the most expensive option) cuts $12 mil from that total. The Cubs could quite easily fit Fielder and Wilson into $48 mil and should be able to fit Pujols/Wilson into it. With as many prospects as we have coming up, we shouldn't need to sign any more free agents than that.

This team can still easily afford to add the necessary starpower to fit around the young guys coming up and contend next year.

I'm not trying to be combative, I'm saying that the team needs to consider trading while someone's value is at it's highest. I wouldn't let him go for "a couple prospects", the deal would have to include some very good major league ready talent. Maybe a team is willing to do that, maybe not but I think it's worth investigating either way.

I understand your feeling, as I've said in this thread I'm not opposed to trading Aramis in the perfect deal. But not because the Cubs don't have a chance to compete next year (they do). It's because we have a chance to compete that I'd want pretty much the perfect deal to even consider trading him.

Benchwarmer · July 21, 2011

He's a lazy player, who gets on these hot streaks.

If only we could find a team that is close in their division and needs a bat at 3rd base. Some team that is close to Chicago, so ARAM could take care of his 'family situation'. Is 35th and the Ryan close enough? We get Edwin Jackson and peddle him.

XZero771679666304 · July 21, 2011

He's a lazy player, who gets on these hot streaks.

Take it easy there, Kaplenbloom.

JimSorgi · July 21, 2011

He's a lazy player, who gets on these hot streaks.

If only we could find a team that is close in their division and needs a bat at 3rd base. Some team that is close to Chicago, so ARAM could take care of his 'family situation'. Is 35th and the Ryan close enough? We get Edwin Jackson and peddle him.

You forgot to call him a bad fielder.

Vanilla Ice · July 21, 2011

I don't think we can ultimately know whether the payroll is going to increase, decrease, or stay the same next year. Hendry and Ricketts obviously know this much better than we do. I think the deal (or non-deal) we make with Aramis has to be judged after we see the payroll next year. If we make a serious run at Pujols or Fielder (plus Wilson or whoever), it does not seem to make much sense to trade Aramis unless we got a great deal with some major-league ready talent. We can definitely compete next year with Pujols, Castro, Garza, Wilson, and Ramirez as our core.

However, if Ricketts' plan is for the payroll to go down, I don't see us competing next year. We could, but it is not likely with the same team plus Jackson, McNutt, Flaherty, whatever other prospects. A solid deal for some talent that could be ready in 2013 or 2014 might make sense.

All in all, I would love to see the payroll raised slightly and see us exercise the option on Aramis and sign Pujols+Wilson. If we can't (or won't) swing that financially, I would not mind a deal for Aramis.

UMFan83 · July 21, 2011

I'm ok with keeping Aramis if you can promise me 2 things:

1) He won't leave for nothing this season (if he opts out) or next. I'm assuming that due to his awful year last year, he has a chance to be a Type B FA if he opts out this year.

2) We don't give him more than 2 years for his next deal. The last thing we need is another broken down position player with an untradable contract.

USSoccer · July 21, 2011

He's a lazy player, who gets on these hot streaks.

If only we could find a team that is close in their division and needs a bat at 3rd base. Some team that is close to Chicago, so ARAM could take care of his 'family situation'. Is 35th and the Ryan close enough? We get Edwin Jackson and peddle him.

Oy veh

July 21, 2011

I'm ok with keeping Aramis if you can promise me 2 things:

1) He won't leave for nothing this season (if he opts out) or next. I'm assuming that due to his awful year last year, he has a chance to be a Type B FA if he opts out this year.
2) We don't give him more than 2 years for his next deal. The last thing we need is another broken down position player with an untradable contract.

Offering Ramirez arbitration when you don't want to keep him is not a very good idea.

SouthSideRyan · July 21, 2011

He's a lazy player, who gets on these hot streaks.

If only we could find a team that is close in their division and needs a bat at 3rd base. Some team that is close to Chicago, so ARAM could take care of his 'family situation'. Is 35th and the Ryan close enough? We get Edwin Jackson and peddle him.

Oy veh

He's just confused because Jackson's baseballreference page says he was born in West Germany. He'll back off when he realizes he's not white.

CubColtPacer · July 21, 2011

The $60M you quote doesn't include the fact that you're keeping Aram. Also, as I have said in other threads, that $45M isn't guaranteed to be thrown right back into payroll. Attendance is down which means that concessions are down. The payroll was reduced going into this year and there players leaving need to be replaced. It is fooling to think that the payroll next year will remain the same.

I'm not trying to be combative, I'm saying that the team needs to consider trading while someone's value is at it's highest. I wouldn't let him go for "a couple prospects", the deal would have to include some very good major league ready talent. Maybe a team is willing to do that, maybe not but I think it's worth investigating either way.

It's no more foolish to assume payroll will remain the same than to assume it will go down. A big market team isn't going to respond to reduced attendance by slashing payroll, especially after raising ticket prices.

If the team retains Ramirez, that leaves two, maybe three holes to fill. And we're probably looking at at least 40MM to fill those 2-3 holes. Retaining Ramirez next year won't handcuff the Cubs in any significant way. Trading him would create a hole even harder to fill than the others.

The Cubs won't have that much money.

If they retain Aramis, they will have 86.6 million tied up in 7 players. That does leave about 47 million from this year's payroll. But that doesn't take into account arbitration guys. Garza, Soto, and Baker alone I would guess would command at least 15 million combined. So that's 32 million left with 10 players paid for. I have no idea what a guy like Wells would make and DeWitt probably will only get a small raise.

For Ramirez and a guy like Pujols to fit into the payroll, they'll have to cut just about everything else. No Samardzija, probably no Wood, no veteran bench or bullpen players.

It's a tough decision. Aramis is a great hitter still who is a poor defender at 3B (the defensive metrics are split on him this year but they are pretty clear from the previous few years that he is definitely well below average there, which also correlates with how he looks). He also gives away some of his value on the bases. If he continues on his 2011 pace so far for the rest of the season he'll probably have been worth about his contract this year, which anytime you can say that about a player with a contract that high is a really good thing. But he only has downside risk with no real upside to that contract. I'd probably pick up his option at the end of the season, but if I could get a decent amount of value for him in a trade that would be my preferred option (unless he would take a lesser contract which I doubt he would do until after his 2012 year was done).

questionmarkgrace · July 21, 2011

I was on the Aramis bandwagon early in the year but ive now I'm leaning toward the pick up his option crew. Yes, I'm fickle. But his play has been too darn good to ignore and this streak he is on is unbelievable. The real question is who you can get back for him. In other threads it has been established that the cubs pitching depth on the farm is largely lower levels and besides McNutt and possibly Struck there isnt much to look forward to above high A. We really need to retool the farm with guys who are close to the majors.

On the flipside, if ricketts is serious about pursuing a Pujols or a Prince Fielder it would be in our best interest to keep Aram. Realistically, Aram and Fielder next year dont make this team a playoff contender without also adding some pitchers as well.

The key question: How much payroll room do we have for 2012 if the cubs pick up Aram's option?

apete6 · July 21, 2011

Before today's game, Aramis had the 24th highest OPS in baseball as well as 30th in wOBA, and 47th highest WAR. Might want to just go ahead and pick up that option and then consider hammering out a longer term extension or trading him.

In the offseason, Aramis might consider waiving his NTC and he would still be a very attractive trade chip. If not, another typical Aramis season wouldn't be the worst part about the 2012 Cubs.

It amazes me how many people are begging for the day they let him go, as well as all the reports that he is as good as gone next season.

If he walks, they will have to spend just as much money to get back to where they are today, let alone add another stud.

Agreed. We had 1 season of decent 3B play between Santo and Aramis (Madlock) and people are ready to ship Aramis anywhere. 3B in baseball is a giant pile of crap right now. With so many other holes on this team, might as well ride Aramis as long as possible.

What do you consider decent? Maybe not great, but I'd think the following were all at least decent.

1983 - Cey 658 PAs , .805 OPS, 118 OPS+
1986 - Cey 306 PAs, .891 OPS, 138 OPS+
Lopes 191 PAs, .908 OPS, 144 OPS+
Trillo 172 PAs, .740 OPS, 99 OPS+
1993 - Buechelle 520 PAs, .782 OPS 110 OPS+

Plus quite a few years where the 3B had OPS+ over 100. Again, I'm in no way saying these were great seasons (although the 86 team had really good output from 3B), but they weren't crap either.

As a side note, in looking at B-R for these numbers, when I saw the batting stats from 1993 I was surprised they were a 4th place team, granted they did win 84 games. Then I saw their pitching stats for that season. How did they finish over .500 when their best starter was Greg Hibbard, with the 100 ERA+ and 1.340 WHiP. Their best starter!?

Shouldn't pretty much every 3B in MLB have an OPS+ over 100 when accounting for all of the terrible offensive players at SS, 2B, and C, at least theoretically? Besides that 1986 platoon, which was good, the others are still pretty bad production wise for 3B, historically an above average offensive position.

jersey cubs fan · July 21, 2011

Shouldn't pretty much every 3B in MLB have an OPS+ over 100 when accounting for all of the terrible offensive players at SS, 2B, and C, at least theoretically?

I have no idea why you would think this is true. 3B is probably next on that list of positions without production. 1B and the corner OF should have the most above average producers. But even those positions will be manned by a few hacks.

jersey cubs fan · July 21, 2011

I was on the Aramis bandwagon early in the year but ive now I'm leaning toward the pick up his option crew.

What is the difference here?

SouthSideRyan · July 21, 2011

Before today's game, Aramis had the 24th highest OPS in baseball as well as 30th in wOBA, and 47th highest WAR. Might want to just go ahead and pick up that option and then consider hammering out a longer term extension or trading him.

In the offseason, Aramis might consider waiving his NTC and he would still be a very attractive trade chip. If not, another typical Aramis season wouldn't be the worst part about the 2012 Cubs.

It amazes me how many people are begging for the day they let him go, as well as all the reports that he is as good as gone next season.

If he walks, they will have to spend just as much money to get back to where they are today, let alone add another stud.

Agreed. We had 1 season of decent 3B play between Santo and Aramis (Madlock) and people are ready to ship Aramis anywhere. 3B in baseball is a giant pile of crap right now. With so many other holes on this team, might as well ride Aramis as long as possible.

What do you consider decent? Maybe not great, but I'd think the following were all at least decent.

1983 - Cey 658 PAs , .805 OPS, 118 OPS+
1986 - Cey 306 PAs, .891 OPS, 138 OPS+
Lopes 191 PAs, .908 OPS, 144 OPS+
Trillo 172 PAs, .740 OPS, 99 OPS+
1993 - Buechelle 520 PAs, .782 OPS 110 OPS+

Plus quite a few years where the 3B had OPS+ over 100. Again, I'm in no way saying these were great seasons (although the 86 team had really good output from 3B), but they weren't crap either.

As a side note, in looking at B-R for these numbers, when I saw the batting stats from 1993 I was surprised they were a 4th place team, granted they did win 84 games. Then I saw their pitching stats for that season. How did they finish over .500 when their best starter was Greg Hibbard, with the 100 ERA+ and 1.340 WHiP. Their best starter!?

Shouldn't pretty much every 3B in MLB have an OPS+ over 100 when accounting for all of the terrible offensive players at SS, 2B, and C, at least theoretically? Besides that 1986 platoon, which was good, the others are still pretty bad production wise for 3B, historically an above average offensive position.

I know you were talking historically, but it's a sorry, sorry lot this season.

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=3b&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=180&type=8&season=2011&month=0&season1=2011&ind=0

MSG T · July 21, 2011

It amazes me how many people are begging for the day they let him go, as well as all the reports that he is as good as gone next season.

If he walks, they will have to spend just as much money to get back to where they are today, let alone add another stud.

Agreed. We had 1 season of decent 3B play between Santo and Aramis (Madlock) and people are ready to ship Aramis anywhere. 3B in baseball is a giant pile of crap right now. With so many other holes on this team, might as well ride Aramis as long as possible.

What do you consider decent? Maybe not great, but I'd think the following were all at least decent.

1983 - Cey 658 PAs , .805 OPS, 118 OPS+
1986 - Cey 306 PAs, .891 OPS, 138 OPS+
Lopes 191 PAs, .908 OPS, 144 OPS+
Trillo 172 PAs, .740 OPS, 99 OPS+
1993 - Buechelle 520 PAs, .782 OPS 110 OPS+

Plus quite a few years where the 3B had OPS+ over 100. Again, I'm in no way saying these were great seasons (although the 86 team had really good output from 3B), but they weren't crap either.

As a side note, in looking at B-R for these numbers, when I saw the batting stats from 1993 I was surprised they were a 4th place team, granted they did win 84 games. Then I saw their pitching stats for that season. How did they finish over .500 when their best starter was Greg Hibbard, with the 100 ERA+ and 1.340 WHiP. Their best starter!?

Shouldn't pretty much every 3B in MLB have an OPS+ over 100 when accounting for all of the terrible offensive players at SS, 2B, and C, at least theoretically? Besides that 1986 platoon, which was good, the others are still pretty bad production wise for 3B, historically an above average offensive position.

Looking at 1980-1990 on Fangraphs, if my count was right, there were 15 3B that had an OPS above .800 for the decade out of 200+ that played there. 6 of those were qualified 3B, Boggs, Schmidt, Brett, Pedro Guerrero, Molitor and Bonilla. Notice any similarities among 4 of those 6? 3B just isn't as offensive based as you would think. There have been many that were, the four above examples plus others like Matthews and Santo. But overall, offensively, the position has had much more in common with middle infielders and catchers than the OF and 1B.

Look at Graig Nettles and Brooks Robinson. Both were thought of as great all around 3B. Guys that could hit very well and were excellent fielders. And they were both good hitters for 3B. But, look at their numbers. Nettles had a career 110 OPS+ and B Robinson had a 104. Both fairly pedestrian. And they were considered very good, but not great, with the bat.

You're comparing a bunch of years where the Cubs had average 3B production to a guy that should be in the HoF and was one of the best hitters of his generation, let alone for his position, and a guy that has been a top 3-5 3B for the last (almost) 10 years. Santo was a great hitter, period. When looking at 3B he's one of the best ever. ARam has been very, very good since he joined the Cubs. You have two outliers at that position bookending a bunch of average (for the position). That's really not fair. I'm not saying people should be happy and not try to improve on a .750 OPS from 3B. But, that shouldn't be looked as as horrible either. That's really pretty close to what one would expect an average 3B to produce.

MSG T · July 21, 2011

It amazes me how many people are begging for the day they let him go, as well as all the reports that he is as good as gone next season.

If he walks, they will have to spend just as much money to get back to where they are today, let alone add another stud.

Agreed. We had 1 season of decent 3B play between Santo and Aramis (Madlock) and people are ready to ship Aramis anywhere. 3B in baseball is a giant pile of crap right now. With so many other holes on this team, might as well ride Aramis as long as possible.

What do you consider decent? Maybe not great, but I'd think the following were all at least decent.

1983 - Cey 658 PAs , .805 OPS, 118 OPS+
1986 - Cey 306 PAs, .891 OPS, 138 OPS+
Lopes 191 PAs, .908 OPS, 144 OPS+
Trillo 172 PAs, .740 OPS, 99 OPS+
1993 - Buechelle 520 PAs, .782 OPS 110 OPS+

Plus quite a few years where the 3B had OPS+ over 100. Again, I'm in no way saying these were great seasons (although the 86 team had really good output from 3B), but they weren't crap either.

As a side note, in looking at B-R for these numbers, when I saw the batting stats from 1993 I was surprised they were a 4th place team, granted they did win 84 games. Then I saw their pitching stats for that season. How did they finish over .500 when their best starter was Greg Hibbard, with the 100 ERA+ and 1.340 WHiP. Their best starter!?

Shouldn't pretty much every 3B in MLB have an OPS+ over 100 when accounting for all of the terrible offensive players at SS, 2B, and C, at least theoretically? Besides that 1986 platoon, which was good, the others are still pretty bad production wise for 3B, historically an above average offensive position.

I know you were talking historically, but it's a sorry, sorry lot this season.

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=3b&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=180&type=8&season=2011&month=0&season1=2011&ind=0

Go back and look at some of the seasons from the 70's and 80's. Outside of about 2-3 future HoF'ers, things were worse.

Backtobanks · July 21, 2011

Phil Rogers suggests trading ARam to the White Sox so he will not have to move his family. The ridiculous suggestion included ideas like getting Morel in return and possibly finding a way to make the money work so that they could include Peavy allowing Hendry to trade Garza.

:-k

What an idiot.

BeerHere · July 21, 2011

Phil Rogers suggests trading ARam to the White Sox so he will not have to move his family. The ridiculous suggestion included ideas like getting Morel in return and possibly finding a way to make the money work so that they could include Peavy allowing Hendry to trade Garza.

:-k

What an idiot.

No idea how that moron keeps his job.

Little Slide Rooter · July 21, 2011

Phil Rogers suggests trading ARam to the White Sox so he will not have to move his family. The ridiculous suggestion included ideas like getting Morel in return and possibly finding a way to make the money work so that they could include Peavy allowing Hendry to trade Garza.

:-k

What an idiot.
No idea how that moron keeps his job.

Assuming the plan was to let Aramis walk at the end of the year, Id definitely take Morel in a trade for him despite his offensive struggles in the bigs, but I dont see why we want broken down Jake Peavy over Matt Garza.

SouthSideRyan · July 21, 2011

Phil Rogers suggests trading ARam to the White Sox so he will not have to move his family. The ridiculous suggestion included ideas like getting Morel in return and possibly finding a way to make the money work so that they could include Peavy allowing Hendry to trade Garza.

:-k

What an idiot.
No idea how that moron keeps his job.

Assuming the plan was to let Aramis walk at the end of the year, Id definitely take Morel in a trade for him despite his offensive struggles in the bigs, but I dont see why we want broken down Jake Peavy over Matt Garza.

Ramirez's value is a lot higher than Brent Morel.

BeerHere · July 21, 2011

Phil Rogers suggests trading ARam to the White Sox so he will not have to move his family. The ridiculous suggestion included ideas like getting Morel in return and possibly finding a way to make the money work so that they could include Peavy allowing Hendry to trade Garza.

:-k

What an idiot.
No idea how that moron keeps his job.

Assuming the plan was to let Aramis walk at the end of the year, Id definitely take Morel in a trade for him despite his offensive struggles in the bigs, but I dont see why we want broken down Jake Peavy over Matt Garza.

Ramirez's value is a lot higher than Brent Morel.

Considering results and payroll, Garza is a much better fit than Peavy. So glad that deal didn't go through.

Backtobanks · July 21, 2011

Phil Rogers suggests trading ARam to the White Sox so he will not have to move his family. The ridiculous suggestion included ideas like getting Morel in return and possibly finding a way to make the money work so that they could include Peavy allowing Hendry to trade Garza.

:-k

What an idiot.
No idea how that moron keeps his job.

Assuming the plan was to let Aramis walk at the end of the year, Id definitely take Morel in a trade for him despite his offensive struggles in the bigs, but I dont see why we want broken down Jake Peavy over Matt Garza.

Morel plus a lot more for ARam. We would want Peavy to take over the #1 spot in the rotation.

questionmarkgrace · July 22, 2011

I was on the Aramis bandwagon early in the year but ive now I'm leaning toward the pick up his option crew.

What is the difference here?

the hate bandwagon.

Aramis

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blogs