RichHillIsABeast

Hendry is going to get it done.

I like how Sosa is glaring at the kid...and the kid is staring at the hand like "WTF is this, retire already."

I have manlove for Z. Massive amounts of manlove.

No. Yes? NO! :lol: But seriously. Even going by numbers alone I wouldn't put him in the top 10 right handed starters, much less overall. I think scouts would put him far below that, like in the 20-30 range. I'd definitely take the Tigers' deal over the offer of Linebrink + mid-level prospects or the rumored Wuertz + mid-level prospects. It's a no brainer, but Sheffield didn't net an elite prospect by any means.

No.

Doesn't Sanchez have weight and injury issues?

Gammons strikes out again. Is this guy ever right?

No wonder the Yanks refused Linebrink for Sheff.

He takes some very esoteric routes to flyballs out there in right... He's the worst defensive outfielder in the game. Your way of saying it isn't nearly as polite as mine. Besides, Dunn might still be worse... maybe. That bad? If that's accurate, we'd better not be trading Wuertz for Sheffield. Wuertz is my choice for closer. 8)

Maybe that lack of info is b/c Hendry (and most of the Cubs ppl in the know) are in Arizona for org meetings. Is Bruce Miles on vacation or what? I haven't seen an article by him in awhile.

That would be sweet. I hate the Yankees. Anything to put a twist in their undies.

How's Sheff's defense lately? I haven't watched him much these past 2 years.

I thought Gammons said the deal was for "mid-level prospects." Wuertz is not a mid-level prospect.

where's that from, abuck? If we go after Drew, we'd better not give him an opt out clause.

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). Either way, there were posters who wanted to have Aramis re-signed (or an effort made) last offseason itself and posted as much. That's fine. Ramirez still wouldn't have signed an extension (unless it was a ridiculous offer). He had 3 guaranteed years (at near market value at the time) and the potential to hit FA in a year. FA is how you make money. We aren't talking about poor/middle class citizen's here. Ramirez was already set for life. When you are set like that, you can take risks. You play out your contract and opt for FA where the big dollars are. Extensions should be called hometown discounts. That's what they really are. Agents are out to make the most money possible. What do you think they would have advised Ramirez to do 1 year ago? Sign another extension with the Cubs? Heck no. Free agency, baby!!

(again, no incentive for the other side to make a deal) This stuff doesn't happen in a vaccuum. Ramirez and his agents have an agenda that's quite different from Hendry's. In response to the bolded points First point...Kinzer said recently that the out clause pretty much came after the negotiations were basically complete (someone help me with the article) Second point...The ASB great time to sit down and talk with your players. Plus he started off the season slow (which he usually does) so you have more leveraging power. Third point...he could have waived it in exchange for an extension. Players don't ask for NTC because they know they dont want to move, they get them so they are in a position of power to demand more money in order to waive them. Fourth point...if ARAM feels that the cubs offer is similar to what the Angels and Dodgers will offer and he wants to stay here, then whats his incentive to take it to the wire. Fifth point...nonchalantness can be inferred by Hendry's comments in the press. 1) Miles recently said that was Katz swooping in at the last minute with sweeteners to get the deal done...or (I assume) Ramirez is willing to walk 2) Ramirez signs a locked in longer term deal while his value has plummeted?...when he has the opt out clause and 2 more guaranteed years? No way. 3) Yeah, he wants an extension on a crappy team. I'll trade my NTC for that. Sure. 4) That's nice and hypothetical. He can always come crawling back to the Cubs after he opts for FA. Ramirez has all the options and power here, not the Cubs. They don't have the power to force him to sign a new contract. You guys need to think from Ramirez's/agent's POV, not a fans'.

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? MacPhail is Hendry's superior. You and I do not know what they were thinking at the time that contract was signed. All we do know is MacPhail wrote that contract with the opt out clause (last minute sweetener courtesy of Katz). What would you have done? Not given him the opt out clause and let him play out the season (assuming that was a dealbreaker for Ramires/Katz/Kinzer)? We'd have been in the position we are now one year earlier. you've changed the argument. Nope. The argument was over offering a contract this past winter. You changed the argument to the opt out clause, which I then addressed. Was it crucial to the argument? Nope. It was a tangent. Rhetorical.

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? He has a guaranteed two more years worth 22.5MM. He'll be what...31 at the end of that contract and still in line for another big FA payday. Think of the contract Soriano is in line for right now. Another couple of years and the prices will be even higher than they are now. That's the nature of the FA market. If you are Ramirez you either opt out (including that was the big mistake here) or you just play out your contract and hit FA while you're still in your prime. This is about getting the most money. Not loyalty. Not pleasing the fans. Not stability in the FO. Money. You get the most money by hitting FA as many times as possible. Why did Furcal take the 3 year 39MM deal instead of our 5 year offer? FA money. Teams have plenty of cash to burn and holes to fill. Agents don't ask for opt out clauses b/c it might cost their client money long term.

(again, no incentive for the other side to make a deal) This stuff doesn't happen in a vaccuum. Ramirez and his agents have an agenda that's quite different from Hendry's.

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? MacPhail is Hendry's superior. You and I do not know what they were thinking at the time that contract was signed. All we do know is MacPhail wrote that contract with the opt out clause (last minute sweetener courtesy of Katz). What would you have done? Not given him the opt out clause and let him play out the season (assuming that was a dealbreaker for Ramires/Katz/Kinzer)? We'd have been in the position we are now one year earlier.

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).

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.

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.

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. There is no incentive for Ramirez to sign a new deal this past winter. None. He had 3 years left on his deal (at that point). You're going to guarantee him more? Why? All he has to do is play out that year and opt out like he did. He doesn't have an injury history or up and down production. The odds are he produces just fine and makes a boatload on the open market. If he gets injured, it's probably a fluke injury and he still has his guaranteed years. There was no incentive for Ramirez to sign a new contract/extension this past winter. Well, unless you threw ridiculous money his way.

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.