And not a knock against Aramis’ offense.

2011 (Apr. – Sept.): .758/.725/.893/.917/1.004/.904

2010 (Apr. – Sept.): .498/.494/.813*/1.006/.862/.794 (*only 10 games in June)

Those are facts. It is undeniable that in the last two years he has been a much, much less effective hitter the first 2 months of the season than he was the rest of the year; and still less effective even in June than he was in July-Sept.

Now, do I think he’s “lazy” or “disinterested” like other people have said before? No, not at all. If you look at his other years with the Cubs, he’s been great in April and May and sometimes had his bad months later in the year. But for whatever reason, the last two years he has started painfully slowly, and it has had a big impact on the team because he hits in the 3, 4 or 5 hole and does nothing for two months while the team digs itself a big hole. Since those games count just as much as any games in August to September, I would say that yes, people have good reason to be concerned about the prospect of paying $16 mm (or somewhere north of $13 mm on a multi-year deal) to a star player whose bat doesn’t show up until the weather gets warm.

The problem is, Aramis is aging, will be supremely overpaid, and even at his best, was a second-tier star.

The Cubs don’t need to set their sights on a complementary guy making $15MM/year to be a non-game-changing player the in the second tier of offensive players at a position with very, very few good offensive players. Especially when his glove is approaching league-worst, and will presumably continue to decline.

And especially when it doesn’t matter anyway, as said player has already said he’s voiding his option year and leaving.

I think your missing BB’s point. Its not that he’s simply collecting stats by year’s end, but rather by the end of the year he has good numbers. That’s what I read.

Why keep a guy who’s one year older, starts slow (injured or not), and has expressed a desire to leave? If he goes, good. If he happens to stay I hope he can have a better, consistent 2012.

As far as other names for 3B its a bit too early for that. Once they hire me as GM, I will spell all of this out for you.

…but I wasn’t trying to justify the content of their remarks.

Regarding your first question, then what’s the big deal here, right? If only those with superior on-field accomplishment qualify as critics then why care? That’s a lame standard to begin with but I think the criticism of Aramis is unwarranted based on what’s publicly known. If there’s something that the public doesn’t know that drives then the criticism should remain private.

I am surprised that Aramis is being criticized publicly like this because players and broadcasters that used to play just don’t do it as a general rule and Aramis isn’t the kind of guy you would associate as an exception.

I think around 17-18 million a year, for 3 years. Fielder is 27, and I don’t think he will age like his father.

If you can get that guy for that amount, then get him. I’m afraid you’re off by about 2 years and 92 mill.

$22M-$25M seems more likely, especially after Pujols kills the suspense be re-signing with the Cards.

In the middle BB says

“That combined with the fact that he did statistically have a good year, he needs to maximize this. If this is going to be his last big contract, I think it behooves him and his agent to go out there and see what they can get in the free market. It should be a pretty sizable contract.”

He’s trying to give an honest assessment and he does realize that the offense will probably make some team pay up for sizable contract.

I’m sure it was easier for Brenly to give this honest assessment when he knew that ARam planned to test the free agent market.

Brandon Inge isn’t surround by gobs of talent besides Peralta and Cabrera.

Polanco was surrounded by a bunch of players having a very off offensive year, besides Howard.

Aramis isn’t the guy that you say that about. You can’t say “well the Cubs are deficient in RF but that’s okay because we have Ramirez at 3b.”

He has a combined 12 WAR over the last 4 seasons and he has had a negative dWAR his ENTIRE career. This is not a star player. He is a bad defensive third baseman that runs the bases like a blind man and can hit.

makes me alittle upset because Ramirez has the talent to be hall of fame great. The man can hit, and the defense should be a fixable problem for him. He has always had the tools, it just seems like he remained complacent.

It’s just my opinion on him.

2011 was Aramis’s 2nd best season as a Cub (next to 2004). So, I’d say that “is” is the correct word, not “was.”

I don’t see a decline of that magnitude in Ramirez.

In 04 he wasn’t a vet like Sosa and Alou were. But in 2006 his OPS in the first half was 801, and in the second half it was 1.041. I think that’s where a lot of the criticism of Aramis started.

.. said that him and Ramirez had a “feeling” about them losing game seven. I dunno, I just don’t like that mentality.

DeWitt doesn’t really do anything well, I just don’t see why you would pay more than the league minimum for a guy like him.

It’s hard to think of a time where they won a lot of games, at all!

Brenly also said

“Everything has to be tightened up. And at this stage of his career he’s not going to get better defensively. For me I think maybe it’s time for him to move on and go somewhere else. I’m sure he still has a number of good years left as an offensive player, but if you’re looking to re-tool the team in a different image it might be time for him to go.”

When he says “Everything has to be tightened up.”, he’s talking about the Cubs defense.

So if the Cubs are looking to get younger and play better defense, it’s hard to start that with ARam. If it’s just bomb’s away, resign ARam, sign Fielder, and get Soriano a fountain of youth potion.

His critique is not entirely right, but it’s not entirely wrong either.

When the next GM is hired, he/she needs to decide what type of team they want to construct and does ARam fit that team at this point in his career. Especially considering where the team is right now.

IMO… You target Pujols first. Taking him from the Cards would enact a meltdown in STL. Adding a legendary player who should still have about four more exceptional seasons (and another season or two of just being good) while simultaneously single-handedly solving your attendance “problem” is just too good to pass up.

Fielder does those things, too, just to a lesser extent. And we know Fielder is leaving… so if you can pry Pujols away, two of your main rivals take huge hits.

All that said, I think they have to quickly assess wither Albert will actually entertain leaving. I really don’t think he will… in which case you happily turn your attention to Fielder.

And as a side note, I’m not really worried about what the cost is. Get one of them. Yes, even if it takes ~$25M annually. While some will worry about “oh no… another albatross contract”, I’m just not that worried about it. The Cubs’ problem has been having multiple terrible contracts at the same time. The Cubs didn’t have payroll issues this year just because of one bad deal… they had issues because of Z, Sori, Silva, Grabow, Fukudome, and to a lesser extent (if nothing else the simple volume for mediocre results), Pena, Byrd, Dempster, and Marmol.

So even if Fielder/Pujols turned into an “albatross”, the Cubs should be able to have a large enough payroll to stomach one “mistake” contract (for instance, as awful as Sori’s deal is… it really isn’t a “problem” in 2013 & 2014 since all the other bad money is gone).

Now, ideally, of course, you don’t make any mistakes. But, I’d be willing to roll the dice on either of those two difference makers.

Stealing Pujols kills the Cards, but during his peak the Cubs won’t enough other parts to take advantage. Pujols is hitting the age when players decline, and while he is coming down from a high peak, no one cheats the Reaper.