USSoccer

I try never to listen to the Score between 12 and 2. It's like open mic night at the idiots club. I also get a kick out of people that clamor for Soriano but think Aramis is lazy.

Lee was out most of the season. Why focus on only two months of that time? In fact, Lee played the first half of April, so really you're talking about one and a half months of the season and using that to dismiss the need for the Cubs to hold on to their most productive offensive player over the last three years because all you "remember is him dogging it and slacking." Sound reasoning. Ramirez in 2006: April: 71 ABs; .197/.321/.394 (Derrek Lee had 44 ABs) May: 109 ABs; .266/.296/.495 (Lee had zero ABs) June: 105 ABs; .276/.325/.476 (Lee had 22 ABs) July: 96 ABs; .344/.414/.750 (Lee had 53 ABs) August: 111 ABs; .333/.400/640 (Lee with 12 ABs) September: 98 ABs; .306/.346/.551 (Lee had 44 ABs) Ramirez was VERY productive. He played in the most games of his career and he improved greatly on defense. Oh, I guess he's just a "second tier" guy though because of the few grounders he didn't bust ass down the line on. IMO he is a 2nd tier guy because when the cubs needed him, he was invisable....according to some in sports radio, he even asked to be moved down in the line up.... maybe he has been the most productive offensive player in the last 3 years, but remind me, what did the cubs win in 2004, 2005, and 2006?? i want all the players to play 100% him included.... This is crazy. First of all, nobody ever reported he asked to be moved down, and even if he did, does that violate some sort of sports machismo rule? Secondly, a baseball season is 6 months long. You don't judge a player based on a rough 6 weeks. Also, just because the Cubs didn't win anything doesn't erase his performance. If it does, then it should also erase the performances of Soriano, Schmidt, Lee, Zito, Matsuzuka, and ARod, because they also didn't win anything over the last 3 seasons. And finally, the .950 OPS he put up in the 2003 playoffs continues to be ignored. Was that somehow "un-clutch"?

Miguel Tejada is on the downslope of his career, and I can make a very strong case that Aramis is a better player right now. ARod is better, but the odds of matching up with NY in a deal are very, very low. Add to that the player cost of ARod and the fact that you aren't *that* much better with ARod over ARam, and you get a bad 2007 team. Add Tejada or ARod to a team with Lee and Aramis, and now you have something. And FYI, Aramis's OBP is comparable to Tejada's. Without the high strikeout total. I'm not on a "Hate Aramis" mission, I just recognize the many holes on this team and I'm struggling with whether (1) Aramis is really part of the long-term solution, and/or (2) whether the money he'll demand is a wise investment. The guy HAS shown a tendency to persistent, nagging injuries. #1-A 28 yr old Aramis is more likely part of the long term solution than a 31 year old Tejada. #2-Aramis stayed healthy all of 2006. #3-Aramis' production shows no indication that a long term, expensive contract is a big risk.

I will. Replacing Aramis with either of those two is simply treading water offensively. It will be a huge deal in the media, but we will be improving marginally if at all. It will make us older, however. Hendry didn't trade Ramirez when he could have gotten a boatload for him, now it's time to bite the bullet and give the man his money. The only way i would approve of letting him go is if a deal was in place to get Cabrera. Even then, we still need another bat and we likely have no prospects left. Ramirez is not a high OBP guy, never has been, and he has absolutely no speed. None. Tejada and especially, A-Rod, would be DEMONSTRABLY superior players that improve the team incrementally, without even considering that both play a harder position to fill. Tejada makes $12MM/year, A-Rod makes $16MM/year net (the Yankees payment). Ramirez likely wants $13MM to $14MM/year? No way. Miguel Tejada is on the downslope of his career, and I can make a very strong case that Aramis is a better player right now. ARod is better, but the odds of matching up with NY in a deal are very, very low. Add to that the player cost of ARod and the fact that you aren't *that* much better with ARod over ARam, and you get a bad 2007 team. Add Tejada or ARod to a team with Lee and Aramis, and now you have something. And FYI, Aramis's OBP is comparable to Tejada's. Without the high strikeout total.

Well, unfortunately for the Cubs I'm with you on this one. Losing Ramirez basically crushes any momentum the Cubs could have had going into the offseason. Hendry better get this done, or he's looking at a huge backlash from Cubs fans. Will he? It seems like the media outlets have really been downplaying ARam's signifigance to the team.

Reports have had the Yankee's splitting time with Giambi and Matsui at 1B/DH when Sheffield is dealt. So you stil have Cabrera, Damon, and Abreu in the OF.

Brian Cashman isn't stupid. He's not going to take our garbage for a top 5 player making a reasonable amount of money. Even Pie/Hill/Eyre wouldn't get it done, and that's the best combo possible using those players. And even if they accept a deal like that, and you lose Ramirez, the upgrade you get isn't so signifigant as to justify the loss you your 3 best trading chips. You've made a marginal upgrade at a steep player cost, and you still have holes to fill, only now you have fewer assets with which to improve.

John Paxson is the best GM in this city by a wide, wide margin.

If Ramirez walks, your only hope is that you can swing a deal for Alex Rodriguez and one for Pat Burrell, sign Soriano, Padilla and Matsuzuka, and pray that Hill is really going to be good and that Z's arm doesn't fall off. The problem is that the odds of all of those things happening are next to none. If ARam walks your best option really would be to blow it up.

I agree completely. The only difference is that 90% of the Chicago media are either indifferent or can't wait for Hendry to let him walk, which is absolutely baffling. Ramirez doesn't have many advocates in the media, despite being nothing but productive in his 3.5 seasons here. Boers and Bernstein have the best view on it I've heard from a media outlet. Either Hendry should have dealt him in July, or should give him market value and make sure he stays put.

Do we know that for a fact? Ramirez had no trade protection according to today's papers - maybe he vetoed a trade. I like Aramis. But, you can put me in the group that believes the Cubs will be fine even if he signs with somebody else. Based on what? He's the best FA bat out there. He walks, you need 2 bats to make up for it and improve. I've heard Gary Sheffield's name bandied about. You'd rather have a broken down Sheffield than Ramirez? Carlos Lee? He's wildly overrated, and can only play LF, which is a position that id ably filled by a cheap, good young player. Soriano? I'd like him in CF or 2B, but he's going to cost more than Ramirez, is older, and not as good. Trade for ARod? We don't have the parts to compete with Anaheim and the White Sox, if it comes to that. Ramirez is the best offensive player on the team. You just don't find guys to replace him laying around. He leaves, and we will not compete in 2007.

If it's one thing that the Tigers have shown us, it's that if you overpay a player, they will come to you. With the potential of A-Ram off the books, as well as the Tribune kicking up the payroll and several other chunks of change from departing players, Hendry has the opportunity to overpay for talent. Given the dire straits the Cubs are in (if or when Ramirez leaves), that's the only recourse Hendry has. As you say, the Cubs don't have the minor league talent for trades, but they do have baskets of money at their disposal. I think the important thing to keep in mind is, will Hendry overpay for the RIGHT players. In that instance, I don't think he's the best judge. He's shown the ability to pay who he wants what it will take, but Since Ramirez is the best FA bat available, why wouldn't you overpay to keep him, instead of overpaying for the overrated Carlos Lee? You have 3 "premier" offensive FA's: Ramirez, Soriano and Lee. If you were going to overpay one of them, Ramirez would be the one to do it with. He's far and away superior to Lee, and he's better than Soriano as well.

Don, if Ramirez walks, you then have to sign or aquire 2 impact bats to improve. Thjat's going to be next to impossible this winter. As far as being the next Ron Santo in terms of fan support, I'd rather people be indifferent to him and he continue to outproduce every other 3B in team history than be popular.

The fact the contract had an opt out clause is motivation enough to lynch Hendry. No, it's not. Not at all. You have no idea what Aramis and his agent dropped from their request after Hendry agreed (not suggested) to include an opt out clause. Maybe they were asking for a hell of a lot more money. You have no idea. And therefore you can't use it against Hendry. But didn't Hendry have the leverage at that point? I'm not sure that I understand where you're going. But if he did have the leverage, and he included an opt out clause over a ridiculous amount of money, he should have. And frankly, I think it's pretty clear that adding the opt out clause was the alternative to Aramis being paid a lot more than he was the past two seasons. What that sum would have been, and if the clause turned out to be a better call, that's up for debate. I'm pointing out the absurdity of leverage in this conversation. Now, supposedly, Ramirez has the leverage, so Hendry can't be blamed for not having him signed. However, Hendry also can't be blamed for giving him the opt out clause, despite the fact that Hendry had more leverage in April of 2005. It can't be both ways. And let me go on record that I think whatever Aramis' financial demands were in 2005, they'd not only have been better than the opt out clause, but likely cheaper than he's going to cost us now after 2 more really good seasons.

The fact the contract had an opt out clause is motivation enough to lynch Hendry. No, it's not. Not at all. You have no idea what Aramis and his agent dropped from their request after Hendry agreed (not suggested) to include an opt out clause. Maybe they were asking for a hell of a lot more money. You have no idea. And therefore you can't use it against Hendry. But didn't Hendry have the leverage at that point?

Keep in mind also we've been down the "be patient" road before with Hendry. The 2004 Winter Meetings came and went, and we did nothing. Some people here (correctly) called out Hendry for being overly focused on dumping Sosa and allowing the best players available to come and go. At that time, all those people were told "it's early, you're stupid if you think everything needs to happen at the Winter Meetings, etc". We ended up with Jeromy Burnitz. I have zero faith in Jim Hendry's ability to properly value players, make proper offers to players, and build this roster. It's on him to prove me wrong. He's long past the benefit of any kind of patience or grace.

That's me explaining that giving Hendry an additional 2 weeks before starting to hand-wring. when he's had a month to get something done is silly. Why continue to be patient when the majority of the time has passed? Again, that's because there's no way Ramirez is going to get a good enough deal before he opts out. I don't have a problem with Hendry trying to get a good deal for Ramirez before he opted out. Now that he has, if Hendry doesn't up the ante he'll lose Ramirez and he'll be to blame. But just throwing up the number of days that he hasn't been able to ink Ramirez is pointless without context. And that context is that Ramirez has no reason to negotiate until he has leverage, and he gets that leverage once he opts out. Everyone knew he was opting out. Even just the threat is leverage enough.

Ramirez holds the cards, not Hendry. Ramirez dictates the pace of the negotiation, not Hendry. The stalling is primarily on Ramirez not Hendry. Nothing in your response speaks to what I wrote. I don't think Hendry is stalling. I think Hendry was stupid for allowing it to get to this point. "He's had every day since the season ended to resolve this. No progress has been reported." That is you putting the lack of progress of Hendry. That is what I responded to, and it is directly relevant. That's me explaining that giving Hendry an additional 2 weeks before starting to hand-wring. when he's had a month to get something done is silly. Why continue to be patient when the majority of the time has passed?

Ramirez holds the cards, not Hendry. Ramirez dictates the pace of the negotiation, not Hendry. The stalling is primarily on Ramirez not Hendry. Nothing in your response speaks to what I wrote. I don't think Hendry is stalling. I think Hendry was stupid for allowing it to get to this point.

So? He's still worth that cost. Let me ask you a question, since you seem hell bent on resigning Ramirez. At what cost do you just tell him to walk away? What's the most you'd be willing to give him? More than 5/$90, I think, would be excessive. Although it depends. He's 28 years old. He's very productive. He plays an improving 3B. And most importantly, we'd be getting his prime years, which is key. I'd shoot for something like 4/$65 or 5/$80. I'd even give him another opt out clause if he wanted. No trade? Done. Understand that there's no point in announcing payroll increases and intentions of contending, and then letting your best offensive player walk over $3m per extra. If it means we have to deal Izturis or have to go with a young player on the bench instead of some washed up regular, so be it.

So? He's still worth that cost.

Or maybe he's just using the time alotted to get the best contract he can. Now that Ramirez has opted out, Hendry will in all likelihood be forced to up the offer to sign him, which if history is any indication, is what's probably going to happen. What history? I'd say it's far more likely that Hendry allows him to walk and signs someone completely lousy to play 3B than it is that Hendry actually pays a top 5 player at his position market value. The history I was just talking about. While each situation is different, Hendry has always locked up the players he wants to keep. He's in negotiations with Ramirez and Ramirez is opting out to improve his leverage. I'm not saying to blow it off and ignore the situation, but there's an excess of hand-wringing over it. If we're still in the same spot by next Friday, then it's time to really worry. Why Friday? He's had every day since the season ended to resolve this. No progress has been reported. Bruce can ever verify that they aren't anywhere close. Why be optimistic, or wait an arbitrary amount of days for pointing out that (once again) Hendry has screwed up and put our team in a terrible position? And again, there is no history for this situation. Hendry has never had a player as good as ARam be FA eligible.

Can you remember the last time when one of those players deserved a top flight contract on the open market? There's a big difference between Hendry wanting to keep Neifi and Glendon, and Hendry paying what Aramis deserves to be paid. He's going to let him walk. Granted he has re-signed most of his own FA's early, but he has a pretty good track record with Wood, Lee, Barrett, and others. Barrett's not as good, Lee had a career year and got resigned a year before FA, and Wood was also resigned a year before FA. If Hendry were truly serious about Aramis being his "#1 priority", this would have been done by now. Or maybe he's just using the time alotted to get the best contract he can. Now that Ramirez has opted out, Hendry will in all likelihood be forced to up the offer to sign him, which if history is any indication, is what's probably going to happen. What history? I'd say it's far more likely that Hendry allows him to walk and signs someone completely lousy to play 3B than it is that Hendry actually pays a top 5 player at his position market value.

He's easily worth that, BTW.