ROTOWORLD | HANLEY RAMIREZ LATEST NEWS According to Dionisio Soldevila of ESPN Deportes, Hanley Ramirez is in the process of negotiating a contract extension with the Dodgers. Ramirez said that it's a step-by-step process, and that a deal could happen this winter. The 29-year-old shortstop also indicated that he'd like to spend the rest of his career in Los Angeles because of how well he's been treated there. He's coming off a monster offensive season where he slashed .345/.402/.638 with 20 homers, 57 RBI and 10 steals in only 86 games and figures to be an early first round selection in most fantasy drafts next spring. Source: ESPNDeportes.com | Nov 29 - 7:16 PM http://www.rotoworld.com/player/mlb/893/hanley-ramirez
It will be interesting to see how it ends up, ideally (but somewhat realistically) something like 4/75-80 with a 5th year $20M vesting option based on PAs in 2018.
Dodgers Discussing Extension With Hanley Ramirez By Jeff Todd [November 29, 2013 at 6:50pm CST] Hanley Ramirez said recently that he has had ongoing extension talks with the Dodgers, Dionisio Soldevila of ESPNDeportes.com reports (Spanish language link). The 29-year-old is under contract for next year, but his impressive output in an injury-shortened 2013 makes him a definite extension target for Los Angeles. Reiterating once again that he hopes to stay with the Dodgers for the rest of his career, Ramirez said that he believes a new deal could be reached this winter. "We are negotiating something, but we are going step by step," he said (in Spanish). Ramirez declined to discuss the salary and length under consideration, but it is safe to say that the shortstop/third baseman is in line for quite a substantial contract when his current six-year, $70MM pact expires. Last year, in 336 plate appearances, Ramirez posted an outstanding .345/.402/.638 slash, including twenty home runs and ten stolen bases. His 191 wRC+ landed just behind Miguel Cabrera among players with triple-digit plate appearances. In sum, his half-season of work was good for 5.1 fWAR, 25th among field players in all of baseball. __
he slashed .345/.402/.638 with 20 homers, 57 RBI and 10 steals in only 86 games Ok, now THAT'S a slash... I'd like to see Hanley get the extension and I'm not too concerned with how much they pay him given the rising costs of contracts these days. I would, however, like to see them temper the deal with a clause or two about games played, plate appearances, and options that vest with a cumulative total over the life of the extension-not just in the final year. I know, not gonna happen, but if I was GM that's the kind of deals I would toss out. I'd be like "Yeah, we're gonna give you every single dime you want over X years with a nice option at the end, but at the end if you don't have X games and X plate appearances total, you're out on your ass with no buy out."
Wait until next offseason. Make the guy play for a contract. He's Latino, so obviously juicing. As soon as he signs that contract the needles will be put back in the medicine cabinet like Ethier's.
You're probably right. Here's an article about some possibilities, and why to NOT wait: http://www.chadmoriyama.com/2013/11/what-could-a-hanley-ramirez-extension-look-like/
quiet as kept, Hanley played 157 games in 2012. if i'm Hanley i'm saying " fuck that injury deduction " because he's only had 1 injury plagued season in his career and that was last year when he was injured in thw WBC before the season even started. he had a shoulder injury that shelved him in Miami, but it wasn't some rash of injuries back then...just one major one. he's the best hitter we have...pay him and let him play whatever position he wants. a happy Hanley is the best player in the NL
Actually, I'm only basing my post partially on last years injuries. If I were a GM practically every contract I offered would be along those lines. Even the sturdiest players find their way to the DL and fiscally a GM should be looking at ways to protect payroll in the coming years so as to not handcuff himself from future deals if an injury keeps a major contract player off the field. Remember at one point Kemp had the longest streak of games played among active players? And prior to joining the Dodgers Fred McGriff had never been on the DL at all.
that'd be fine in the future when the books are clear and you're starting fresh, but it's hardly fair to do that to Hanley right now when our other big money player's contracts aren't bogged down with clauses. he's the best of our best and one of the premier talents in MLB, so when he finds a better deal on the market he can't be faulted for leaving LA and you couldn't be mad at him. the market is set and it is what it is. they need not be looking for ways to short Hanley Ramirez right now...not when they were 2 games away from the WS...and especially since they aren't even using their own money to finance this payroll. TWC is basically gonna handle their payroll for them for the next 20yrs. pay the man and take care of your very best. 4yrs/112M with a simple team option for a 5th year is as fair as can be. it's a new era. Kasten has been very outspoken about the years they commit to players being of the most importance. even if Kemp were given a bunch of clauses in his old contract, you're hardpressed to get a player like Kemp and his agent to agree to a deal where you're able to just do away with him if he doesn't have X amount of plate appearances and etc. because 1) the player's union would be ready to take you on, 2) the market's been set, and 3) even if Kemp had a rash of injuries thereafter you'd still rather trade him and find a landing spot so to get something in return for him because there's always a team that'll take a chance if the deal is right. we're too close, and we just shed McCourt...the future may be different because they do wanna eventually have a farm to rely on rather than 9 or 10 big money free agent types, but as for now, pay that man and keep him happy because without him we don't have a true 3-hole hitter. i'm not saying give him 8yrs/250M. 4yrs/112M...an average of 28M a year on a reasonable contract in terms of length. pay him annually like he's the best player because he is.
Whoa, pump the brakes. I'm not saying short anybody, least of all Hanley. I said 'give him every dime he wants'. -At what point are the books EVER clear? Each year brings new contracts with new 'closing dates'. Gotta start somewhere. - It's not about being fair, it's about being prudent. It's a business, remember? - Don't care whose money it is, it's still a business. I also don't care how much you pay him, overpay, doesn't matter. At the END, the option only vests if the criteria are met-no buy out. - Ok, the way contracts are structured now the player gets paid for x amount of years with an option/buyout. My proposal is that you pay for x number of years with an option/no buy out. You don't just "do away with him", the numbers decide at the END OF THE CONTRACT whether to pick up the option or he becomes a free agent. If he becomes a free agent, you can still re-sign him. If it's contractual and the player signs it, then the union hasn't got squat to bitch about. 'The market's been set' - I don't get what that's got to do with anything, I'm not sure what you're talking about. As far as trading him, say he signs a 5 year deal and gets injured and it becomes apparent during say the 3rd or 4th year that he's not going to make the numbers for his option to vest. That's when you try to trade to get something if there is no intent to re-sign as a free agent. Ok, now we're saying the same thing. Pay him like a fucking prince for the years on the contract. Don't lowball or try to dicker until he feels you don't value him. Pay him well, just don't give him a buyout if he craps out. Use the option as incentive (that's what it's there for) to make him take care of his body and work to maintain his skill level.
I get what Carolina Blue is saying but the problem lies in getting Hanley to accept that kind of contract. There is simply not motivation on his end when he can just play out his contract and get a guaranteed deal somewhere else. I'd also be careful not to offer Hanley something that pisses him off. He doesn't have the most exemplary record in responding to not getting his way.
I think he really likes it here and it may not be a hometown discount but I believe he'll want to get it out of the way asap.
He would be getting a guaranteed deal, and for a handsome sum. He's just not getting an option unless he meets criteria, which puts the weight on him to stay healthy and work hard, which is as it should be. Also, sorry, we're fresh out of the buy-out business. The way I view it (yeah, I'm odd) is that a buy out is just a way of saying "You suck now, here's X million-now just go away." It's kind of like a buy out is a 'second option'. If you don't get your option picked up, then your option is a cash out at the end. Sort of like, "let's see what's behind door #2". Fuck that, if you don't get what's behind door #1 then you go out the door.
