USSoccer

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

Please...please get this done.

You have to overpay for talent. You want to field a team full of reasonably priced players, you'll get a losing season nearly every time. If the market for Aramis is Beltran money, then you pay him Beltran money because there isn't another player out there you can get as good as he is. The Cub payroll is going to be $115 million. Aramis at $17m isn't going to kill them; it's going to mean they can't waste money on unproductive bench players. Heaven forbid that happen. Aramis already makes $11m now. We can't find another $6m per in the budget to get him to stay? His contract shouldn't prevent the team from improving itself. Heck, don't resign Blanco, and you're nearly halfway there.

I see no reason why you wouldn't go to 6 years if it means you keep him. He'll be 33 at the end of that deal. Not exactly old, really. Also, I'll say it again, if he's asking for $17m per and the extra $2m or $3m per means we have to pass on Henry Blanco, who cares. This really needs to get done. Sometimes you have to overpay for quality. Sticking to principle in this case will result in our team being absolutely terrible in 2007.

Perhaps loading up to make a play for Cabrera or Willis?

I am surprised not too many are mentioning this. Because it's not particularly true, especially since he's left St. Louis. He missed more than half the 2005 season. I know a lot of people want him, but when you sign him you have to guess that he'll likely miss about a quarter of the season. Since his first full season in 2000, Drew has averaged 120 games per season, so you are dead on. On average, he misses about 1/4 of the games each season. Now that number will fluctuate, but if you account for his missed games by having an adequate back-up option for CF on your 40-man roster Pie then Drew makes a lot of sense for the Cubs because he is exactly what they lack: a left-handed, RBI producing, OBP machine with the ability to play both RF and CF. Get him. But first resign Aramis and get one of the 3 top of the rotation starters. What he said.

Flip-flopping from one extreme to the other without consideration of a middle isn't going to resolve the argument. You have repeatedly trashed Hendry, and Hendry alone, for the Ramirez situation. All people have been trying to accomplish is to show that Ramirez and his agent hold more more sway on this process than Hendry. Two parties, one has has more leverage. That's it. You're wrong. People have been trying to absolve Hendry of any culpability throughout this process. Just because a player has more leverage doesn't mean you can't do something to get him signed. Hendry has shown no urgency to this situation, as if he's negotiating with a 5th starter or a utility IF. He could have begun talks last year. He could have felt Aramis out at the ASB to see if he was going to opt out. He could have tried to trade him, NTC or not, if he felt that Aramis was going to test the open market. What we know is that Hendry didn't think Aramis was going to opt out. He badly misread the situation, and assumed he could negotiate at a snails pace, without any urgency, and Ramirez would sign. He was wrong. There is now info (Sullivan or not) that Hendry has no plans to meet with Paul Kinzer. In 48 hours, Aramis won't be a Cub, we won't have exclusivity, and we'll have to outbid other teams for a prime FA, which is something this club has never done. At what point do you stop apologizing for our "nice guy" GM and admit that over the past 12 months there were steps he could have taken, poor leverage or not, to get Ramirez signed, or at least get value for him?

So basically, Hendry has no power, ever? All deals and negotiations are solely in the hands of the player and the agent? Please. Hendry could have gotten this done. I refuse to believe the weak rationalization that Hendry is a victim of circumstance and a greedy player/agent combo. This could have been avoided. Nothing you can say will make me change my mind about any of my points. If Hendry truly is unable to find a way to get deals done before a player hits FA he should be fired...but wait, he signed Lee a full season before FA and after a mega-career year!! How was it in Lee's interest not to test the open market, like you claim Aramis was always going to do? Could it be because Hendry offered more years and more money up fron without having to deal with FA?

How does any of this prevent Hendry from dealing with it last winter? Or dealing with it differently the last 6 weeks? Or last July?

I thought you visited this board a lot before you registed? If you did, you'd have noted a lot of people wanted Aramis re-signed before it got to this, and everyone hated the opt-out clause. Thanks for handling that via PM, Raisin. Anything else I say on the subject will be conducted off these boards, thank you. Where did I say that no one complained about the opt out clause? I was against that at the time too. I don't remember one person, much less all those up in arms about the present situation calling for a new contract this past winter (which is ridiculously implausible anyway). So because you don't remember myself and others saying it might be a good idea to proactively resign Aramis, the point has no merit?

I'm going to sum this up in bulletpoint style. Ways this contract got screwed up: -Including opt out clause to begin with -not looking at the 2006 FA class and renegotiating after 2005 -not negotiating or trading figures during the season -believing that Ramirez wouldn't opt out -not dealing him at the deadline if they weren't going to take resigning him seriously. -not making this the #1 priority (before even Lou) -nonchalantly going about the initial negotiations -playing chicken with the exclusivity deadline

That was MacPhail, not Hendry. I thought the opt out clause was dumb too, but that's not the issue. The point was no one I know was clamoring for a NEW CONTRACT last WINTER. You're wrong. I did. I'm sure others thought it might be smart, too. And even if MacPhail put the clause in (which I still doubt, BTW), how exactly does that absolve Hendry for allowing it to come to this?

And why did Derrek Lee sign his deal, then? Derrek Lee didn't have 3 guaranteed (to the player) years on his deal. Big difference. See the edit.

And why did Derrek Lee sign his deal, then? Because he got guaranteed years and more money. That's the name of the game. Aramis would have taken a 5yr/$65m deal last winter because it gives him an extra 2 years as well as big money, and when the deal is done he's still 31 and can get one more big deal. We'll be lucky to get him for under $80m over 5 years now.

Screw that noise. I'm sick and tired of people attempting to rationalize this. The very fact that his contract situation got to this point where he is going to hit the open market is the problem. Hendry didn't screw around with Derrek Lee. He signed him after a fluke career season a full year before he was FA eligible. You're telling me that Hendry deluded himself into actually believing that Aramis wasn't going to opt out? Look at that FA class. Everyone knew it was going to suck 18 months ago (which is why Hendry should have taken advantage of the Beltran FA class) and you're telling me that a 27 year old player coming into his prime with Aramis' ability wasn't going to opt out? No way. You get that deal extended last winter. You tear it up and sign him long term so you don't go into November of 2006 virtually guaranteed to be losing your best offensive player. This was poorly planned from the start. Allowing it to get to this point should be grounds for Hendry losing his job. We're going to lose our best offensive player for nothing because our GM is a good guy and took a player and his agent at their word that they "probably won't use the opt out clause". I'll repeat: We're going to lose Aramis for nothing. We didn't deal him, we didn't extend him like we did with Derrek Lee, and now we'll get a stupid draft pick for a guy we either should have hitting .300 with 30 HR's and 110 RBI until 2011, or should have gotten top, blue chip prospects for this past July. Give me a break. I'll take my chances with a soulless shark of a GM over the "good guy" who screws up an entire major league roster and farm system within 3 years. I'm sick and tired of 20/20 hindsight. Show me where anyone advocated signing Ramirez to a new contract this past winter. Until that happens, your POV is all 20/20 hindsight. If the search function worked I'd show you my posts after we signed him saying the opt out clause was idiotic and that it would come back to bite us in the rear. If the search function worked I'd show you posts from last winter saying that we should resign him then. But it doesn't. Don't act like it's unbelievable that no one saw this coming. Nearly everyone here thought the opt out clause would come back and kill us, and now it's going to. It's not hindsight. It's watching a train wreck slowly take place, knowing full well that you saw it coming the second the contract details became public in Arizona in 2005.

Which is why you proactively deal with it 12 months ago.

Sullivan or not, there hasn't been a shred of info to indicate that anything is going to get done.

Screw that noise. I'm sick and tired of people attempting to rationalize this. The very fact that his contract situation got to this point where he is going to hit the open market is the problem. Hendry didn't screw around with Derrek Lee. He signed him after a fluke career season a full year before he was FA eligible. You're telling me that Hendry deluded himself into actually believing that Aramis wasn't going to opt out? Look at that FA class. Everyone knew it was going to suck 18 months ago (which is why Hendry should have taken advantage of the Beltran FA class) and you're telling me that a 27 year old player coming into his prime with Aramis' ability wasn't going to opt out? No way. You get that deal extended last winter. You tear it up and sign him long term so you don't go into November of 2006 virtually guaranteed to be losing your best offensive player. This was poorly planned from the start. Allowing it to get to this point should be grounds for Hendry losing his job. We're going to lose our best offensive player for nothing because our GM is a good guy and took a player and his agent at their word that they "probably won't use the opt out clause". I'll repeat: We're going to lose Aramis for nothing. We didn't deal him, we didn't extend him like we did with Derrek Lee, and now we'll get a stupid draft pick for a guy we either should have hitting .300 with 30 HR's and 110 RBI until 2011, or should have gotten top, blue chip prospects for this past July. Give me a break. I'll take my chances with a soulless shark of a GM over the "good guy" who screws up an entire major league roster and farm system within 3 years. Even if he signs him I'm not taking any of this back. If we're lucky enough to retain him, we'll have paid more than we would have a year ago, and Hendry will have spent valuable time dealing with this instead of fixing the rest of the mess he made. He's a bad GM. He's just bad. He shouldn't have a front office job. He should go back to scouting, or minor league development, but he should not be the Cub GM, and if we luck into a World Series, it will be in spite of the job he's done.

Link. Hendry is an incompetent, idiotic, unqualified colossal failure of a general manager who has done less with more than any GM in Cub history. To say you have no plans to meet with the agent of the most important player you may or may not sign this winter is ignorant and foolish. We will never win a world series with Jim Hendry as GM.

Dai-san or none of them.

As long as Hendry didn't sign him to an idiotic deal, I have zero problems with this sign.

Perfect example of using stats as a drunk would use a light pole. In 2004 Aramis was 4th in OPS in MLB for 3rd baseman In 2005 Aramis was 4th in OPS in MLB for 3rd baseman In 2006 Aramis was 5th in OPS in MLB for 3rd baseman. He is top five 3rd baseman in baseball. Pay him like one. You are incapable of discussion without insults. It's unbelievable. OPS is generally regarded as the most important stat for a player, so I don't see how stating the fact that his declined three consecutive years is a crutch. It's a bloody basic observation on value. I have no problem with paying him good money. But he wants top 10 in baseball money, and he has never been in the top 10 in production. At 5/75 he will be one of the most overpaid players in the league. OPS+ is a better metric. And it indicates an increase from 2004 to 2005, and a dip in 2006. And again, he's 27. Not 33. He won't even be close to one of the most overpaid players in the league relative to his production.

His BABIP also decreased. That would explain the decline.

Lets hope.

I'm not comparing ARam to Lee, I'm comparing ARam to other "great" hitters around the league. I like ARam, and I believe he will stay, but he isn't a player you "throw the money to " to get him to stay. He would be impossible to replace with his production, but I believe if he leaves, he won't be the backbreaker, as some suggested. Yes, he is.....but he is asking to be paid like he is a Top 10 hitter. ANd he isn't a Top 10 hitter. He should be paid accordingly. And the 5 yrs $80 mill is pushing it. If he can't see himself taking a VERY REASONABLE offer from the Cubs, then maybe he shouldn't be on the Cubs anymore. The White Sox did fine without Ordonez. I want ARam to return, but if he is determine to test the FA, then he had no illusions of staying in Chicago in the first place. I don't mind the deadline (although it was a bit premature), and Hendry is trying to get a decision from ARam ASAP. He can't allow ARam to dictate the offseason. If ARam has to listen to other teams offers, fine, but not at the expense of the Cubs sitting at home, waiting for his call. Compare him to other NL 3B. He's no worse than 5th, and as high as 2nd based on his current level of production. Cabrera, Wright, and Aramis are your top 3 NL 3B. Why shouldn't Aramis be paid top 3 at his position? In a weak FA market, isn't he worth whatever the market bears him to be worth? He's the premire FA in terms of age and production. If the difference between what Aramis wants and what Hendry is offering is like $3m per, isn't that worth ensuring that your 3B doesn't suck next year? Isn't Aramis' production worth not having an extra $3-4m for the next 5 years to waste on a reclamation project or a crap veteran? For 3 years Hendry has overpaid garbage baseball players. It's damn time he overpay to keep a very good one.