The Cubs and Aramis Ramirez have a mutal option for 2011 at $16 million, but it’s unlikely he exercises that option. Ramirez is looking for more than a one-year deal and as the best free agent 3rd baseman he’ll easily get a multi-year deal on the free agent market. It’s hard to say whether or not the Cubs will offer him an extension because we really have no idea what the team plans to do. Until we do it’s only speculation.
One argument that was brought up in the comments on that Bruce Levine article was a popular one we’ve often heard about Ramirez: he only performs after the team is out of the race. This is easy enough to check. Let’s start with 2003 which was the first year Ramirez played any important games. I’ll be using rWAR below.
While with the Pirates in 2003 Ramirez batted .280/.330/.448. That was good for a 99 OPS+ and he was worth .7 WAR. After joining the Cubs he hit .259/.314/.491. That’s a 105 OPS+ and in many fewer games he was worth more WAR (1.1).
In the first half of 2004 he hit .326/.374/.550. He then hit .308/.372/.613 in the 2nd half.
First half 2005: .298/.356/.549 and then .311/.362/.608.
First half 2006: .259/.320/.481 followed by .328/.388/.556.
First half 2007: .312/.356/.556 followed by .308/.375/.542.
First half 2008: .285/.386/.515 followed by .294/.371/.522.
He spent much of 2009 injured so it’s not like that it’s his fault.
First half 2010: .207/.268/.380 followed by .276/.321/.526.
First half 2011: .298/.346/.497 followed by .311/.374/.515.
Other than 2010 I don’t know how anybody could say that Ramirez wasn’t performing well in the 1st half. It’s either a lie or it’s ignorance.
Not to mention the obvious flaw in the argument. These people assume it counts early in the season, but doesn’t count later in the season. If a batter goes 0-4 in 81 games and 4-4 in the other 81, does it really matter how it’s distributed? Would his 4-4 every game in the 2nd half have less value than 4-4 in the first half? Of course not.
To these people, it counts early in the season every single year even if you’re the 1999/2000 Cubs or the 2011 Astros. That’s ridiculous. Ramirez has been an excellent player for the Cubs and suggesting otherwise is just plain dumb.
Among players who had 3000 plate appearances as a Cub since 1947, Ramirez’s 126 OPS+ ranks 6th behind Sammy Sosa (139), Billy Williams (135), Derrek Lee (129), Leon Durham (128) and Ron Santo (127). There haven’t been that many with 3000 PA so let’s lower it to 2000.
Ramirez falls to 7th (Andy Pafko is now 3rd). So you know, Ramirez is ahead of Mark Grace, Ernie Banks, Andre Dawson and Ryne Sandberg.
Among 3rd baseman for the Cubs with 1000 PA since 1947, he ranks 3rd behind Bill Madlock and Ron Santo.
Going all the way back to 1876, Ramirez ranks 4th in OPS+ among Cubs players with at least 1000 PA.
Among all infielders he ranks 10th. Since 1876 only Santo and Stan Hack have more Batting Runs at 3rd base for the Cubs than Ramirez. Among all infielders he’s 10th, just barely behind Ryne Sandberg who had twice as many plate appearances. He’s 9th in Batting Runs per 700 plate appearances.
Including all Cubs players since 1876 with 1000 or more PA, Ramirez ranks 21st in Batting Runs. Think about that for a moment. Only 20 Cubs players have produced more WAR Batting Runs in a Cubs uniform than Ramirez has in over 135 years.
Trying to argue that Ramirez has been anything other than a very good player for the Cubs makes a person look unintelligent. There is no argument in favor of such a position. None.
I actually did not know this. That’s pretty impressive.
I will miss Aramis if he’s no longer going to be a Cub but it’s probably for the best for both parties anyway.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
False. He is injury prone because he is so lazy.
Aisle424Quote Reply
Also, your little numbers don’t show how he never, ever dives for a ball because he doesn’t care.
Aisle424Quote Reply
Also, he participates in cock-fighting. We prefer players who treat their cocks humanely.
Aisle424Quote Reply
He gets demerits for sucking on defense and being abysmally slow, but I don’t think he never tries. I’ve seen him dive for ground balls at least five times this season that I can actually remember.
/cool story bro’d
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]He gets demerits for sucking on defense and being abysmally slow, but I don’t think he never tries. I’ve seen him dive for ground balls at least five times this season that I can actually remember.
/cool story bro’d[/quote]
He’s just showing off to get more money, RC. Otherwise, he never dives or sacrifices his body for the team. Ever.
Aisle424Quote Reply
[quote name=Aisle424]Also, he participates in cock-fighting. We prefer players who treat their cocks humanely.[/quote]
I missed this one. Is it true?
/gullible’d
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Aisle424]He’s just showing off to get more money, RC. Otherwise, he never dives or sacrifices his body for the team. Ever.[/quote]
MB’s fagety spreadsheet suggests otherwise.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
What a show-off.
Aisle424Quote Reply
That was the moment when I realized that the 2009 Cubs were fucked. And it astounds me to this day that people seem to forget that Aramis Ramirez injured himself doing something that they claim he never does. He’s not exactly Ron Santo on defense but I just don’t understand how you can say he doesn’t try.
*sigh*
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]That was the moment when I realized that the 2009 Cubs were fucked. And it astounds me to this day that people seem to forget that Aramis Ramirez injured himself doing something that they claim he never does. He’s not exactly Ron Santo on defense but I just don’t understand how you can say he doesn’t try.
*sigh*[/quote]It’s called epistemic closure. People settle on a belief and any countervailing evidence is taken as either a deliberate falsehood or an exception to the rule.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]It’s called epistemic closure. People settle on a belief and any countervailing evidence is taken as either a deliberate falsehood or an exception to the rule.[/quote]
I admit that I am biased for the Lazy Latino players who can crush baseballs and the statistics that back up my position may also be inherently biased but I’d like to also think that my position has stronger backing than theirs (dying laughing)
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]I admit that I am biased for the Lazy Latino players who can crush baseballs and the statistics that back up my position may also be inherently biased but I’d like to also think that my position has stronger backing than theirs (dying laughing)[/quote]But it’s not as if MB had found evidence that Ramirez is shit in high-leverage situations that you’d have raged in comments about how the numbers were wrong and how facts have two sides and other such nonsense that comes from the anti-Lazy Latino Faction segment of the fanbase.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
There was one ESPN commenter who complained that Aramis didn’t come through with a runner on third and less than 2 outs. All he’s done in his career is hit .398 in that situation with a .633 SLG. (b-ref’s #’s are a little off, though. It lists his OBP as .398, although he’s drawn his share of walks). http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=ramirar01&year=Career&t=b#bases
ACTQuote Reply
A favorable “Moneyball” review:
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/09/13/moneyball-review/
Rice CubeQuote Reply
I forgot sac flies. Maybe they just perfectly offset the BB’s. Don’t have time to check now.
ACTQuote Reply
[quote name=ACT]There was one ESPN commenter who complained that Aramis didn’t come through with a runner on third and less than 2 outs. All he’s done in his career is hit .398 in that situation with a .633 SLG. (b-ref’s #’s are a little off, though. It lists his OBP as .398, although he’s drawn his share of walks). http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=ramirar01&year=Career&t=b#bases%5B/quote%5D
How many sacrifice flies? He may have walked/HBP, but he may also have produced just as many sac flies (no official AB, but decreases OBP).
[quote name=ACT]I forgot sac flies. Maybe they just perfectly offset the BB’s. Don’t have time to check now.[/quote]
It would appear your brain works a bit faster than mine.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
He can’t be that lazy. Based on all the t-shirts I saw in St. Louis, Aramis mows a lot of people’s lawns in his off time. And St. Louis isn’t even that close. Maybe he needs the money. Too bad nobody understands his contract.
WenningtonsGorillaCockQuote Reply
People say he doesn’t try because he’s such a bad fielder. The problem is, if he didn’t try he’d be even worse. (dying laughing)
mb21Quote Reply
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
^^^ Win
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=ACT]There was one ESPN commenter who complained that Aramis didn’t come through with a runner on third and less than 2 outs. All he’s done in his career is hit .398 in that situation with a .633 SLG. (b-ref’s #’s are a little off, though. It lists his OBP as .398, although he’s drawn his share of walks). http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=ramirar01&year=Career&t=b#bases%5B/quote%5D40 walks and 71 sac flies. HBP 7 times.
mb21Quote Reply
Ramirez has 174 (H+BB+HBP) in those situations and 437 (AB+BB+HBP+SF). That’s .398. He has 127 hits in 319 at-bats. That’s also .398.
mb21Quote Reply
I still don’t know why ROE isn’t included in OBP though.
mb21Quote Reply
Ramirez in low leverage situations has an .829 OPS. It’s .832 in medium leverage situations and .901 in high leverage spots.
Yeah, he doesn’t perform when it counts. (dying laughing)
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Ramirez in low leverage situations has an .829 OPS. It’s .832 in medium leverage situations and .901 in high leverage spots.
Yeah, he doesn’t perform when it counts. (dying laughing)[/quote]
Your definition of leverage does not align with the haters’ definition of leverage, obviously.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]Your definition of leverage does not align with the haters’ definition of leverage, obviously.[/quote]
Yeah, what is his OPS when the Cubs are = 5 games.
/hater
WaLiQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Ramirez in low leverage situations has an .829 OPS. It’s .832 in medium leverage situations and .901 in high leverage spots.
Yeah, he doesn’t perform when it counts. (dying laughing)[/quote]What don’t you understand about “FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUU”?
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I still don’t know why ROE isn’t included in OBP though.[/quote]
I’ve often wondered this. I note that it’s given a different weight (forgot if it was higher or lower) than a walk in wOBA. However, you could surmise that the traditional stathounds wouldn’t want to penalize the defense while simultaneously awarding the runner with reaching base through no real skill by the batter other than good fortune. Of course you could also argue that a “hit” is good fortune so maybe that argument doesn’t work.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]I’ve often wondered this. I note that it’s given a different weight (forgot if it was higher or lower) than a walk in wOBA. However, you could surmise that the traditional stathounds wouldn’t want to penalize the defense while simultaneously awarding the runner with reaching base through no real skill by the batter other than good fortune. Of course you could also argue that a “hit” is good fortune so maybe that argument doesn’t work.[/quote]
Thing is, if you include IBB or HBP in OBP you should include ROE. ROE is a skill. There’s a lot of variance of course, but that’s true for all stats. Those who hit it on the ground or run faster reach base on an error more often. By including IBB you’re including a strategic decision by the defense. By including the HBP you’re rewarding the offensive player for a pitcher’s wildness. However, good players are IBB’d more often and there is a skill for getting hit by a pitch (see Baylor, Don or Biggio, Craig or for that matter Johnson, Reed).
If I bother to calculate OBP myself I always include ROE.
mb21Quote Reply
BUT HE JOGS TO FIRST ON POP-UPS!!!!
Aisle424Quote Reply
HE WATCHES HIS FLYBALLS INSTEAD OF RUNNING!!!!
WORST. PLAYER. EVER!!!!!!
Aisle424Quote Reply
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Aisle424Quote Reply
[quote name=Aisle424]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/quote]Rec’d. LSA.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=Aisle424]HE WATCHES HIS FLYBALLS INSTEAD OF RUNNING!!!!
WORST. PLAYER. EVER!!!!!![/quote]The best part was when he hit that one last night and watched it. You could clearly see him saying “Wow!”
binkyQuote Reply
[quote name=Aisle424]HE WATCHES HIS FLYBALLS INSTEAD OF RUNNING!!!!
WORST. PLAYER. EVER!!!!!![/quote]That does piss me off when it happens, but the idea that it happens all the time is ridiculous.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Aisle424]HE WATCHES HIS FLYBALLS INSTEAD OF RUNNING!!!!
WORST. PLAYER. EVER!!!!!![/quote]
Pujols and Bonds are absolutely terrible then (dying laughing)
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=WenningtonsGorillaCock]He can’t be that lazy. Based on all the t-shirts I saw in St. Louis, Aramis mows a lot of people’s lawns in his off time. And St. Louis isn’t even that close. Maybe he needs the money. Too bad nobody understands his contract.[/quote]I’ve been to Old Busch and New Busch and I’ve never felt more uncomfortable at a baseball game than at those two places.
binkyQuote Reply
We need to have the ability to turn a comment green. (dying laughing)
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]Pujols and Bonds are absolutely terrible then (dying laughing)[/quote]Also, Babe Ruth.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=josh]I’ve been to Old Busch and New Busch and I’ve never felt more uncomfortable at a baseball game than at those two places.[/quote]Two words: Fenway Park.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]We need to have the ability to turn a comment green. (dying laughing)[/quote]I know we could set it up to do that for administrator comments (myself, 424, AC and berselius), but have no idea how to do it based on votes. Berselius???
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]That does piss me off when it happens, but the idea that it happens all the time is ridiculous.[/quote]
Nobody cared when Griffey admired his homeruns. They hated when Bonds did it because they hated him, but nobody said he was lazy because he did it. I seem to remember people really liking the Dante Bichette bat-flip and slow jog out of the box.
Big homerun hitters do that now. There’s nothing he has done that a million other ballplayers haven’t also done. If the scrappy white guys could actually hit the ball that far, they’d fucking do it too.
Aisle424Quote Reply
I loved Sosa’s hop. That’s my favorite. I liked Brett Boone’s bat flip too.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Aisle424]Nobody cared when Griffey admired his homeruns. They hated when Bonds did it because they hated him, but nobody said he was lazy because he did it. I seem to remember people really liking the Dante Bichette bat-flip and slow jog out of the box.
Big homerun hitters do that now. There’s nothing he has done that a million other ballplayers haven’t also done. If the scrappy white guys could actually hit the ball that far, they’d fucking do it too.[/quote]
I especially liked it when Bonds would destroy a baseball and then drop his bat like he were getting rid of a murder weapon.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Sosa’s hop was great when he first started doing it because it actually was something he did spontaneously. Then it became schtick and I got tired of it. But I was still happy to see it 60 or so times a year.
Aisle424Quote Reply
mb21Quote Reply
Some of those early Sosa hops were awesome because he got some real elevation. It was like, “Holy shit! I just won this motherfucking game!” And he was jumping around almost as much as everybody in the stands.
I miss 1998.
Aisle424Quote Reply
[quote name=Aisle424]Some of those early Sosa hops were awesome because he got some real elevation. It was like, “Holy shit! I just won this motherfucking game!” And he was jumping around almost as much as everybody in the stands.
I miss 1998.[/quote]Eventually he would do it on every long fly ball out as well. but I agree, early on it was energizing.
binkyQuote Reply
Aisle424Quote Reply
I wonder if Glenallen Hill jumped or posed before circling the bases:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3017957919029122909
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I know we could set it up to do that for administrator comments (myself, 424, AC and berselius), but have no idea how to do it based on votes. Berselius???[/quote]
I know nothing about website programming, but if you could set up the shading for administrator, couldn’t you change that so it shades the cell based on the # of likes (if there is a counter for that)? You can even have it turn red based on dislikes (dying laughing)
WaLiQuote Reply
Nice article for college football fans:
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/columnists/brent_zwerneman/article/Aggies-Insider-SMU-player-s-act-draws-praise-2160146.php
Good sportsmanship. But seriously, players need to start wearing helmets that fit and secure them properly.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]I wonder if Glenallen Hill jumped or posed before circling the bases:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3017957919029122909%5B/quote%5DHe probably just looked like he was admiring it because he was so slow.
binkyQuote Reply
[quote name=WaLi]I know nothing about website programming, but if you could set up the shading for administrator, couldn’t you change that so it shades the cell based on the # of likes (if there is a counter for that)? You can even have it turn red based on dislikes (dying laughing)[/quote]There’s certainly a way. It’s a question of how much additional coding it would take. It could be as easy as adding a style to the stylesheet. I’d have to look at the coding for the votes and I’ve never done that.
mb21Quote Reply
That Glenallen Hill home run was something I’d never seen and doubt I ever see again.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]There’s certainly a way. It’s a question of how much additional coding it would take. It could be as easy as adding a style to the stylesheet. I’d have to look at the coding for the votes and I’ve never done that.[/quote]There are if statements in php. If you could figure out the variable that is keeping track of the +1’s, then it would be easy, I think, to set it up from there.
binkyQuote Reply
e.g.,
if( $a == 1 || $a == 2 ) {
if( $b == 3 || $b == 4 ) {
if( $c == 5 || $ d == 6 ) {
//Do something here.
}
}
}
binkyQuote Reply
But would you have to put the entire comments loop in an if statement? I don’t know php well enough to say.
binkyQuote Reply
Not sure if Levine is speculating or if the Cubs are delusional but my relatively uneducated opinion is that the Cubs need more than just starting pitching.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
What’s the definition of posturing, Alex?
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
Good writeup.
So, I was out of Chicago for most of 2003-2010, so I feel like I missed something… When/why/how did the thing about Ramirez being lazy start? I think of as being entirely unable to run, but otherwise pretty sharp on defense (I’ve seen him dive to catch line drives before I realize they’ve been hit); he seems level-headed, rarely makes mental mistakes, runs out hits as much as most players (and a lot better than Soriano), etc., etc.
Was there some crucial moment in 2006 when he failed to dive with the game on the line or something? Or did Sullivan just have nothing to write about for like 50 deadlines in a row so he made it up?
fang2415Quote Reply
Levine’s solution for Aramis Ramirez signing:
http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/6448/heres-a-solution-to-ramirez-question
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=josh]But would you have to put the entire comments loop in an if statement? I don’t know php well enough to say.[/quote]I actually haven’t looked at the comment php so I really don’t know what it looks like. It may be a lot easier than I think, but I just don’t know.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=fang2415]Good writeup.
So, I was out of Chicago for most of 2003-2010, so I feel like I missed something… When/why/how did the thing about Ramirez being lazy start? I think of as being entirely unable to run, but otherwise pretty sharp on defense (I’ve seen him dive to catch line drives before I realize they’ve been hit); he seems level-headed, rarely makes mental mistakes, runs out hits as much as most players (and a lot better than Soriano), etc., etc.
Was there some crucial moment in 2006 when he failed to dive with the game on the line or something? Or did Sullivan just have nothing to write about for like 50 deadlines in a row so he made it up?[/quote]the Ramirez is lazy shit began in 2005 and 2006 when the Cubs sucked. I remember fans calling him a dog even though he was having a great season. Weird.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]Not sure if Levine is speculating or if the Cubs are delusional but my relatively uneducated opinion is that the Cubs need more than just starting pitching.[/quote]Like more defense and more offense
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Dr. Aneus Taint]What’s the definition of posturing, Alex?[/quote]What are the realistic options for Texas (long-term)? I figure it’s something like this and you can correct me.
1. Join the Pac/B10 (B10 if they want to make more money of course)
2. Go independent
3. Start a new conference
???
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=fang2415]Good writeup.
So, I was out of Chicago for most of 2003-2010, so I feel like I missed something… When/why/how did the thing about Ramirez being lazy start? I think of as being entirely unable to run, but otherwise pretty sharp on defense (I’ve seen him dive to catch line drives before I realize they’ve been hit); he seems level-headed, rarely makes mental mistakes, runs out hits as much as most players (and a lot better than Soriano), etc., etc.
Was there some crucial moment in 2006 when he failed to dive with the game on the line or something? Or did Sullivan just have nothing to write about for like 50 deadlines in a row so he made it up?[/quote]
I don’t know when it started either, though I suspect that he got the label at some point for not running out grounders, probably when he had one of his minor leg injuries. Once you’re painted with that brush people only notice things that reinforce that opinion, as MO mentioned above, no matter how many times he dives for the ball. Players who get injured often (especially minor injuries) are often labeled as lazy/wimps as evidenced by the likes of J.D. Drew and tribune whipping boy Mark Prior.
BerseliusQuote Reply
Anyway, it’s nice to see (after a down year last year, and a slow start this year) that Ramirez can still hit. At this point in his career, though, (and going forward) he might be better suited for a DH role in the AL. Having someone that slow at 3B is a liability, and he’s only getting slower.
ACTQuote Reply
I’ve been enjoying NE sports radio. Today we had people downplaying Brady’s 500+ yard game as Brady is only a “system quarterback”. (dying laughing).
BerseliusQuote Reply
If Ramirez wants to stick around another year, that’s great, but I’m not wild about an extension. I wish the media would tell me about what kind of option he has about 2012.
BerseliusQuote Reply
I think Levine said it was a mutual option, but the rest of the beat reporters are too busy trying to figure out how much money Carlos Silva is owed.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]I’ve been enjoying NE sports radio. Today we had people downplaying Brady’s 500+ yard game as Brady is only a “system quarterback”. (dying laughing).[/quote]
Gee, I wish my favorite football team (whichever that’s supposed to be) had a system quarterback.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
My guess it that the Cubs exercise their option on Ramirez. He might stick around, but my guess is he’ll sign elsewhere and the Cubs will get a supplemental draft pick.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]My guess it that the Cubs exercise their option on Ramirez. He might stick around, but my guess is he’ll sign elsewhere and the Cubs will get a supplemental draft pick.[/quote]I know this is the exact opposite of what I’ve argued before, but now that it appears almost certain he’ll not exercise his option, it increases the Cubs odds of doing the opposite. I don’t think they want to pay him $16 million next year.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I think Levine said it was a mutual option, but the rest of the beat reporters are too busy trying to figure out how much money Carlos Silva is owed.[/quote]
According to Cot’s it’s a club option with a $2m buyout, but Ramirez can void the option if the club exercises it. So pretty much a mutual option, just with an extra branch for whether there’s a buyout.
BerseliusQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I think Levine said it was a mutual option, but the rest of the beat reporters are too busy trying to figure out how much money Carlos Silva is owed.[/quote]
The option is listed as a club option on Cots, but the buyout is forfeited if Ramirez voids the option if the Cubs exercise it, suggesting that it is in fact a mutual option.
Or what berselius said.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Incidentally, A-Ram has an average yearly clutch score of about .08, which IIUC means that he’s caused about .08 more wins per year if you consider the game situation than if you don’t. I.e., he does slightly better when the game is on the line than he does overall.
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1002&position=3B#winprobability
fang2415Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I know this is the exact opposite of what I’ve argued before, but now that it appears almost certain he’ll not exercise his option, it increases the Cubs odds of doing the opposite. I don’t think they want to pay him $16 million next year.[/quote]
They would have to offer arbitration and he’d have to decline, which you argued previously wouldn’t happen because he’d get paid more in arbitration. What has changed?
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=fang2415]Incidentally, A-Ram has an average yearly clutch score of about .08, which IIUC means that he’s caused about .08 more wins per year if you consider the game situation than if you don’t. I.e., he does slightly better when the game is on the line than he does overall.
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1002&position=3B#winprobability%5B/quote%5D
ALL-STAR PLAYERS SHOULD BE WORTH +10 CLUTCH POINTS!!!11!one!
BerseliusQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]My guess it that the Cubs exercise their option on Ramirez. He might stick around, but my guess is he’ll sign elsewhere and the Cubs will get a supplemental draft pick.[/quote]
[quote name=mb21]I know this is the exact opposite of what I’ve argued before, but now that it appears almost certain he’ll not exercise his option, it increases the Cubs odds of doing the opposite. I don’t think they want to pay him $16 million next year.[/quote]
Having a bit of a logic fail here. It seems like these comments posted within seconds of one another are contradictory. Or more likely, I can’t read.
BerseliusQuote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]ALL-STAR PLAYERS SHOULD BE WORTH +10 CLUTCH POINTS!!!11!one![/quote]
And they should stay over their allotted time at the Cubs Convention to sign autographs for waiting fans!
(Seriously one of the weirdest things to complain about as it didn’t seem like it was Aramis’ fault)
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]Once you’re painted with that brush people only notice things that reinforce that opinion, as MO mentioned above, no matter how many times he dives for the ball.[/quote]
That’s totally true, but I don’t get what gets players like Rami labeled like that in the first place but not players like Soriano. Does Pena sprint out every ball he hits? And people eventually thought Sosa was a bit of a loon, but he never really got the “lazy” tag, did he?
That’s part of the reason I loved Barney’s smackdown of the Ramirez-isn’t-a-leader thing. It was a reminder that sometimes the players must just shake their heads and think “what the fuck are these guys talking about?”
fang2415Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]What are the realistic options for Texas (long-term)? I figure it’s something like this and you can correct me.
1. Join the Pac/B10 (B10 if they want to make more money of course)
2. Go independent
3. Start a new conference
???[/quote]
Pretty much. The ACC has also been discussed.
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]ALL-STAR PLAYERS SHOULD BE WORTH +10 CLUTCH POINTS!!!11!one![/quote]Correct. Therefore:
Ramirez didn’t make all-star team —–> automatic -10 clutch faget points.
fang2415Quote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]I’ve been enjoying NE sports radio. Today we had people downplaying Brady’s 500+ yard game as Brady is only a “system quarterback”. (dying laughing).[/quote]I used to think Brady was a system quarterback early in his career because I never really thought Brady would be that good if say he was on the Lions or Raiders or something. I still think he’s a system quarterback to a degree but that’s what makes him so great. Other than Montana or Manning, I’ve never seen a QB so good in a system as Brady has been in that system. He wasn’t very impressive early in his career stats wise but he won. Now, his stats are unbelievable but they haven’t won in awhile. I think Manning is more valuable to his team than Brady but I think Brady might be the better QB at this point.
MuckerQuote Reply
[quote name=fang2415]Correct. Therefore:
Ramirez didn’t make all-star team —–> automatic -10 clutch faget points.[/quote]
The amount of backlash Ramirez got for deciding to hang out in the D.R. rather than go to the ASG as the last man picked was ridiculous.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]The amount of backlash Ramirez got for deciding to hang out in the D.R. rather than go to the ASG as the last man picked was ridiculous.[/quote]
IIRC he was basically walking up the jetway when he got the call. I’m sure he would have loved to go if they had gotten to him sooner.
BerseliusQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]They would have to offer arbitration and he’d have to decline, which you argued previously wouldn’t happen because he’d get paid more in arbitration. What has changed?[/quote]Ramirez saying he doesn’t want a 1-year deal changes it. A lot could change of course, but there’s a difference between assuming a player takes the most money possible and being relatively sure he won’t take a one-year deal.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]Having a bit of a logic fail here. It seems like these comments posted within seconds of one another are contradictory. Or more likely, I can’t read.[/quote]What I mean is that I don’t think the Cubs want to pay Ramirez $16 million. If they believe he’ll take the most money possible then they don’t offer arbitration. On the other hand, we now have Ramirez saying he does not want a 1-year deal so it makes it more likely the Cubs offer arbitration knowing he’ll decline it.
It’s all about probability. It’s the same as it was for Harden and Gregg. The Cubs took the gamble that nether would make as much money on the free agent market and that they wouldn’t sign 1-year deals. That gamble paid off. They were right that they’d make less money on the free agent market. If, on the other hand, they were certain the player wanted more years or just wanted out of Chicago then you offer arbitration.
If the Cubs offer arbitration there’s a certain percentage chance that Ramirez accepts it. If the Cubs believe that percentage is high they won’t offer it. If they believe it’s low they will.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]What I mean is that I don’t think the Cubs want to pay Ramirez $16 million. If they believe he’ll take the most money possible then they don’t offer arbitration. On the other hand, we now have Ramirez saying he does not want a 1-year deal so it makes it more likely the Cubs offer arbitration knowing he’ll decline it.
It’s all about probability. It’s the same as it was for Harden and Gregg. The Cubs took the gamble that nether would make as much money on the free agent market and that they wouldn’t sign 1-year deals. That gamble paid off. They were right that they’d make less money on the free agent market. If, on the other hand, they were certain the player wanted more years or just wanted out of Chicago then you offer arbitration.
If the Cubs offer arbitration there’s a certain percentage chance that Ramirez accepts it. If the Cubs believe that percentage is high they won’t offer it. If they believe it’s low they will.[/quote]
How does arb work with a deal like Ramirez’s? It’s an option, not arbitration.
Can you offer arb to guys who void a contract through an out clause?
BerseliusQuote Reply
I think the Cubs now take the chance of offering arbitration. They’re thinking, hey, he wants more than 1 year and will easily get it. He probably doesn’t accept arbitration so if we offer it we get a draft pick.
When Hendry was the GM there was about a 100% chance he’d return if the option was exercised and Ramirez’s agent even said that.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]How does arb work with a deal like Ramirez’s? It’s an option, not arbitration.
Can you offer arb to guys who void a contract through an out clause?[/quote]If you exercise the contract and he does not then he’s a free agent. You can offer arbitration to any free agent unless you’ve agreed not to in the contract. That’s rare. If Ramirez elects to become a free agent after the Cubs exercise they option they have to figure out what the odds are of him returning and whether or not it’s worth the gamble.
mb21Quote Reply
But yes, you can offer arbitration to any free agent unless the contract says you cannot do so. When that’s the case you almost always hear about it because it’s not at all common. In fact, I think it’s mostly Japanese players that this happens to. Fukudome’s contract may even be that way.
mb21Quote Reply
Then again the Cubs beat writers are still trying to figure out how much Silva is owed so they probably don’t have the foggiest damn clue what’s in Ramirez’s contract. (dying laughing)
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]But yes, you can offer arbitration to any free agent unless the contract says you cannot do so. When that’s the case you almost always hear about it because it’s not at all common. In fact, I think it’s mostly Japanese players that this happens to. Fukudome’s contract may even be that way.[/quote]
I recall Fukudome’s contract clause…here’s Cots:
It did not explicitly say no arbitration, but the window of opportunity seems to suggest they wouldn’t have had time for him to accept/decline it anyway. Though I’m not sure what the deadlines are.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Nothing in Ramirez’s contract suggests that he cannot be offered arbitration. World Series ends on October 27th at the latest so it seems he’d be signed within two weeks of that date by somebody.
/RC’s journalism skills at work
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]It did not explicitly say no arbitration, but the window of opportunity seems to suggest they wouldn’t have had time for him to accept/decline it anyway. Though I’m not sure what the deadlines are.[/quote]
That probably doesn’t apply though as the arbitration acceptance deadline is 12/7 and I doubt the Indians try it as Fukudome is likely to accept.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
My favorite Sammy hops were the ones where he was unsure if he got enough, so he just gave the slightest hop of like 1 inch before heading to first. (dying laughing) Those were great.
GBTSQuote Reply
I think the backlash against Ramirez really got going, from my perspective, more recently. Or maybe I was just blissfully unaware. To me, it seems like radio guys like Kaplan started dogging him after 2008. I think that after 2 times of not making any headway in post, they were looking for someone to blame. So of course, it was Rami’s fault for not being clutch, as evidenced by the fact that he doesn’t hustle. Maybe that’s not where it started, but that’s when I became aware of it.
binkyQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]My favorite Sammy hops were the ones where he was unsure if he got enough, so he just gave the slightest hop of like 1 inch before heading to first. (dying laughing) Those were great.[/quote]Where you can tell he kind of wants to take it back. Like, he knew it was just a pop up, but then he thought he saw a Wrigley Roach and so he kind of jumped just because he didn’t want to step on it, because he’s cool like that and all, totally unrelated to that obvious fly ball he just hit.
binkyQuote Reply
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
I remember Cubs fans railing on Ramirez in 2005 and then again in 2006. The team contended in 2007 and 2008 and he was injured in 2009 so that saved him from the critics.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I remember Cubs fans railing on Ramirez in 2005 and then again in 2006. The team contended in 2007 and 2008 and he was injured in 2009 so that saved him from the critics.[/quote]I know he got a reprieve in 2009 (in fact, I seem to recall everyone saying that the team would be contending if not for his absence), but in all through 2010 I would listen to Kaplan and Memelo in postgame and they were always dogging on Rami. I kind of wish I could go back in time before I started listening to those guys. If only I’d discovered the Cubs blogs sooner.
binkyQuote Reply
http://espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/story/_/id/6964904/report-bud-selig-angry-new-york-mets-took-hat-flap-public
Bud Selig is upset at the negative publicity he’s received about the Mets’ caps.
ACTQuote Reply
[quote name=ACT]http://espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/story/_/id/6964904/report-bud-selig-angry-new-york-mets-took-hat-flap-public
Bud Selig is upset at the negative publicity he’s received about the Mets’ caps.[/quote]”God Damn it, everyone knows I’m really a Brewers fan!!”
binkyQuote Reply
[quote name=ACT]http://espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/story/_/id/6964904/report-bud-selig-angry-new-york-mets-took-hat-flap-public
Bud Selig is upset at the negative publicity he’s received about the Mets’ caps.[/quote]Fuck that short-sleeved dress shirt wearing motherfucker. Selig is a piece of shit.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
It would be both amusing and sad if you ever have to bust out the “Arguing Aramis Ramirez Has Not Been A Good Player For The Cubs Means You Are A Fucking Idiot” tag again.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Boise State —————> caught. NCAA punishments on the way.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
Didn’t they just take 3 scholarships away?
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]Boise State —————> caught. NCAA punishments on the way.[/quote]I’m sure the women’s tennis team is really bummed.
GBTSQuote Reply
I just don’t understand the big deal about the hats. They’re fucking hats. The Mets weren’t asking to wear to wear a different uniform. I could understand if MLB didn’t want them to do that, but this is a hat. A fucking hat. A motherfucking hat. It’s beyond belief that MLB would give a shit about something like that on 9/11. Unbelievable.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I just don’t understand the big deal about the hats. They’re fucking hats. The Mets weren’t asking to wear to wear a different uniform. I could understand if MLB didn’t want them to do that, but this is a hat. A fucking hat. A motherfucking hat. It’s beyond belief that MLB would give a shit about something like that on 9/11. Unbelievable.[/quote]Yeah, MLB’s excuse was that every team was wearing their team cap with an American flag on it (only $36.99 at mlb.com!!!), so that ensured unanimity in their remembrance. You know, because the Mariners and their fans were affected an equal amount on 9/11 as the Mets. Especially their respective fire departments.
GBTSQuote Reply
I wonder if it was the Yankees if they’d just have worn the hats anyway. I bet they would have.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I wonder if it was the Yankees if they’d just have worn the hats anyway. I bet they would have.[/quote]
The Yankees have more money and thus could’ve sucked up any fines levied on them. The Mets are bankrupt so they couldn’t afford said fines. That’s what I understand of this situation anyway.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Hey, that reminds me: do the Blue Jays wear American flags on 9/11 (and Memorial Day and all that)?
fang2415Quote Reply
[quote name=fang2415]Hey, that reminds me: do the Blue Jays wear American flags on 9/11 (and Memorial Day and all that)?[/quote]
I believe they had the Canadian flag on one side of the cap and the American flag on the other side.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]I believe they had the Canadian flag on one side of the cap and the American flag on the other side.[/quote]Hm. Can Dominican players on the team also add a Dominican flag?
Slightly more seriously, I wonder if any US teams ever wear the Canadian flag if they’re playing in Toronto on Canadian patriotic holidays.
fang2415Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I wonder if it was the Yankees if they’d just have worn the hats anyway. I bet they would have.[/quote]
So why didn’t they?
We’re talking about
PRACTICEhats. Who cares? If MLB wants to let it happen, fine. If they don’t, fine. It’s their right/business. Doesn’t matter really either way. If the Mets don’t like it, they can wear the hat and take the fine, invent their own special hat wearing baseball league, or just shut up and deal with it. Instead they get passive aggressive in a way that would make most mothers proud. Here’s what Terry Collins had to say after last night’s loss to the Nationals (via the NY Times)..
Chris DickersonQuote Reply
new shit: http://obstructedview.net/chicago-cubs/articles/add-mark-shapiros-name-to-the-list.html
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]Yeah, MLB’s excuse was that every team was wearing their team cap with an American flag on it (only $36.99 at mlb.com!!!), so that ensured unanimity in their remembrance. You know, because the Mariners and their fans were affected an equal amount on 9/11 as the Mets. Especially their respective fire departments.[/quote]Exactly. Selig is a fucking pathetic little man who likes to choose the most public ways in which to exert his power.
Games to slow? Sorry, can’t do much.
Umpires incompetent and confrontational? We’ll have to address that later.
Team wishes to wear same hats MLB allowed them to wear 10 years ago to honor the public servants of their city who gave their lives for that city? THIS IS A FUCKING OUTRAGE! WE MUST ACT NOW SO AS TO NOT SET A PRECEDENT. ALSO IN CASE YOU WERE UNAWARE THE ALL STAR GAME COUNTS NOW.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply