White Sox get Vazquez according to ESPN

[CardsFanInChiTown]

I keep seeing these posts that say Hendry's teams have regressed every year since he took over, and he hasn't improved the team since the "not so good" 2003 team. I 100% disagree with this. Hendry very much improved the 2004 team. He traded for Lee, signed Maddux, Latroy and Dempster, then traded for Nomar at the break. We were loaded that year IMO. He can't help the injuries. I'll admit he did a very poor job assembling the 05 team, but to say he's been asleep at the wheel just isn't accurate.

 

I agree, Hendery did a good job with the 04 team. Sometimes things just don't work out. At the same time when a team fails no matter what the reason the blame should still fall on the GM's shoulders.

 

edit - added last sentence.

Edited December 14, 2005 by CardsFanInChiTown

[mg420]

it just goes to show how assumptions stated as facts can be misleading. if you want to call that semantics be my guest. i also consider it a valid question and not a "smartass line". whos to say that williams is a supposedly lesser gm btw-he's the one with the ws ring. unless one subscribes to the fact that he's not good but lucky (which is VERY hard to do in a full season & post season in baseball imo).

 

If you can point to one article written by any news source that Hendry has been interested in any Pacific Rim player since Hee Sop Choi and Jae Kuk Ryu I'd really like to see it/them.

 

Untill then the absence of evidence does equal the evidence of absence no matter what Dick Cheney wants us to believe.

 

there are a huge amount of things that go on in baseball that do not and will not ever get reported. that does not mean they dont happen. that is a very naive way to think imo.

[da bears]

That guy gets rid of prospects like it's nobodies business.

 

And he's won a World Series with his philosophy. I would trade away all the good prospects in the Cubs system if it meant just one lousy World Series.

[goonys evil twin]

i think the issue is that people's assumptions are being posted as if they are facts and these assumptions are the basis of their arguments.

 

I think that is only an issue if you go into these debates failing to consider the reality of the message board.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

That guy gets rid of prospects like it's nobodies business.

 

And he's won a World Series with his philosophy. I would trade away all the good prospects in the Cubs system if it meant just one lousy World Series.

 

There is more then one way to build a team and trading away prospects for proven plays is one of them. It's also the Cards trading philosophy for better or worse.

[BigbadB]

i think the issue is that people's assumptions are being posted as if they are facts and these assumptions are the basis of their arguments.

 

And you can trust that none of these people posting here are Jim Hendry or Jim Hendry's wife or Jim Hendry's dog.

 

I don't think everyone should have to put "IMO" at the front of every comment they make. It would be easier if everyone just assumes that opinions are being expressed, not fact, when facts are not provided.

[YearofDaCubs]

You know what I was going back and forth with other members in another thread regarding Ken Williams and his job as GM. All I have to say is when people call last year's team complete luck and discount KW as the one who put the coaching staff, some of the drafts, and pickups together two words. Sour Grapes. At least KW has no problem getting rid of some prospects to make his team a contender. Look at Hendry. He hold on to his prospects so damn long they lose value or get hurt. He hasn't done squat since the end of 2004. I have no faith in Hendry and if I was a White Sox fan I would be ecsatic I have a GM that improves the team year-in year-out.

[BigbadB]

I didn't think much of KW's moves his first few years in Chicago. That trade to Pittsburgh was horrible (Kip Wells for Todd Ritchie).

 

However, he has created a winner in Chicago. He put together a strong pitching staff, they stayed healthy and the team won.

 

He's had good moves and bad moves along the way. Lately, all of his moves have turned to gold, which is what you basically want your GM to do for your team.

[RynoRules]

This may not be a great sample, but unless KW has psychic powers, I don't see where he deserves that much credit. I didn't pay that much attention to the offense because frankly, theirs wasn't very good. They somehow scored more runs than the Cubs offense despite the Cubs leading them in doubles, TB, BA, OBP, SLG, and OPS. The White Sox only had a very slight advantage in triples and HRs. The only significant advantage for the White Sox was RBIs.

 

Was it all luck?

 

Way to gloss over the points that don't support your theory.

 

What about Iguchi, a Japanese player. Hendry and the Cubs haven't even thought about bringing in Japanese players. If you call the $8m Lee's line of .265/.324/.487 very good for a LF, then Iguchi's .278/.342/.438 at 2.3m from 2B is great. Iguchi, Pods and Dye combined to make less than Lee, while Dye (.274/.333/.512) outperformed Lee on his own.

 

Like I said, individual deals can be debated forever. But they don't matter. What matters is the total package. Williams has done a much better job with the total package than Hendry, and he's done more to improve his team this offseason than Hendry, and he apparantly still has plenty of youth to both add to next years roster plus trade for more parts. And Kenny did all this with a payroll $25m below Hendry's. That right there is a huge fact that people like to pretend doesn't exist. Williams has to make due with an average payroll, he's had an above average team every year, and built a great one last year. Hendry has had a top 5 payroll every year, and has had either an above or below average team as a result, never greatness, and it doesn't look to be coming. Hendry's extra $25m can be used to bring in a sure thing corner OF and allow you not to take the downgrade from Lee to Pods. Hendry's extra money should be an asset. So far it has not been.

Yes, I didn't bother going into the offense. Yes ,Iguchi had a very good year for them. As did Dye. But did they do more than prevent the offense from being terrible? The team's success can't be tied to what the offense did. And he didn't build a great team. He put together a team whose offensive production was lacking and whose pitching production was amazing. It was all about their pitching. But where were KW's great moves with the pitching staff? How likely is it for their staff to repeat their great success?

 

I'm not defending Hendry. He's been very disappointing. But how much more credit should he deserve if the Cubs were to have won it all in 2003? Just because KW has a ring doesn't mean he's done a very good job. As the Cubs have shown, relying on all of your pitchers to click in one year with barely adequate offensive production is not a very strong strategy.

 

Probbaly right, but it does mean, IMO, that he has been better than Hendry.

[YearofDaCubs]

The ultimate goal is to win the World Series. If a GM has a ring because his team that he put together won it then yes I think he did a very good job.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

The ultimate goal is to win the World Series. If a GM has a ring because his team that he put together won it then yes I think he did a very good job.

 

Correlation does NOT equal causation. Does a world series appearance or win mean that Dusty, or Guillen, or Brenly are good managers? Of course not.

[Hector Villanuevas Pants]

All these sour grapes about KW being lucky are pretty embarassing.

 

Last year the Sox were the dominant team in baseball. They went wire to wire with the best record in the AL (and for much of the season, the ML) and they swept through the playoffs losing only one game. Is that a lucky team? A lucky team would be one that rides a few hot starters for a month or so into the playoffs and almost into the WS, i.e. the 2003 Cubs.

 

If you argue KW is lucky, one can make an equally valid argument that KW has has been really unlucky. Since he has been GM, he has had a plan (build around veteran pitching, speed, and defense) and has been very aggressive and persistent around pursuing that plan. KW has always aggressive pursued veteran pitching: see David Wells, Todd Richie, Bartolo Colon, Freddie Garcia, etc. Was it "bad luck" that Wells, Richie, and Colon didn't pan out? Who really cares. He had a plan, stuck with it, and finally it paid off in a WS. I'll take a "lucky" WS anyday.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

To me JW has made a lot of high risk high reward type moves and they have paid off. You can call that luck if you want but there was also skill involved.

[abuck1220]

the cardinals are lucky, the white sox are lucky...boo hoo, everybody gets the breaks except for the cubs.

[BigbadB]

the cardinals are lucky, the white sox are lucky...boo hoo, everybody gets the breaks except for the cubs.

 

Sure would rather be lucky than good...... :D

[minnesotacubsfan]

To me JW has made a lot of high risk high reward type moves and they have paid off. You can call that luck if you want but there was also skill involved.

 

 

didnt know I was a GM.... :D

 

 

(my initials are JW, I think you mean KW...)

[JC]

The one thing nobody can take away from Williams is that he has been aggressive in improving his team. At the same time, he has tempered his aggressiveness, for the most part, with not being overly aggressive and needlessly disposing of quality prospects (see, Sisco).

 

I don't follow the Sox that closely, but I like a GM that sticks his nose in every deal to look to see if there is a fit for his club. While aggressiveness doesn't in and of itself prove a thing, aggressiveness combined with results/an improved team is demonstrative of a good executive, IMO.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

To me JW has made a lot of high risk high reward type moves and they have paid off. You can call that luck if you want but there was also skill involved.

 

 

didnt know I was a GM.... :D

 

 

(my initials are JW, I think you mean KW...)

 

:oops:

[goonys evil twin]

To me JW has made a lot of high risk high reward type moves and they have paid off. You can call that luck if you want but there was also skill involved.

 

When dealing with a middle of the road payroll, I really think you have two choices. Be ultra conservative, try to maximize every dollar spent and every prospect you have, or be ultra aggressive and go for broke. The thing about the Sox is that even when those high risk high reward teams bombed, they never totally bombed. They've win 81 or more games for 6 straight seasons. Their worst three seasons this decade have been 79, 79 and 81 loss seasons. The Cubs worst three were 97, 95 and 83 loss seasons. The Cubs are the ones hitting bottom on the high risk moves. The Sox have been anywhere from average, to good, to great. The Cubs have been either good or bad.

 

The Cubs payroll allows them to be conservative, but take high reward risks at the same time. They should be able to field an 81-85 win team every year, and mix in plenty of 90-95 win seasons, and the occasional 99 win season. There really is no excuse.

[noisesquared]

The ultimate goal is to win the World Series. If a GM has a ring because his team that he put together won it then yes I think he did a very good job.

 

Correlation does NOT equal causation. Does a world series appearance or win mean that Dusty, or Guillen, or Brenly are good managers? Of course not.

 

I don't think it's a fair comparison between GM's and field manager's. Both positions' performance is a result of the players' on-field performance, but the GM acquires the players, the manager only works with what he's given. It's very possible if the GM does his job and provides enough on-field talent that the on-field manager's performance has a minimal impact on the team's success.

[Cubzfan64]

To me JW has made a lot of high risk high reward type moves and they have paid off. You can call that luck if you want but there was also skill involved.

 

When dealing with a middle of the road payroll, I really think you have two choices. Be ultra conservative, try to maximize every dollar spent and every prospect you have, or be ultra aggressive and go for broke. The thing about the Sox is that even when those high risk high reward teams bombed, they never totally bombed. They've win 81 or more games for 6 straight seasons. Their worst three seasons this decade have been 79, 79 and 81 loss seasons. The Cubs worst three were 97, 95 and 83 loss seasons. The Cubs are the ones hitting bottom on the high risk moves. The Sox have been anywhere from average, to good, to great. The Cubs have been either good or bad.

 

The Cubs payroll allows them to be conservative, but take high reward risks at the same time. They should be able to field an 81-85 win team every year, and mix in plenty of 90-95 win seasons, and the occasional 99 win season. There really is no excuse.

 

I think this is an excellent analysis of the Chicago Cubs and where the organization SHOULD be more often than not. Barring unforeseen injuries (which we've legitimately had alot of the last 2 seasons), there's really no excuses for not competing for the division most every season.

 

I really feel the last few season's offenses were simply too "one dimensional" with too many hitters with similar aggressive styles and good pitchers took advantage of that in general and exposed that weakness. The one thing I feel Hendry has failed in is putting together a more balanced offensive team - if we mixed in 2-3 guys with some speed, OBP and bat control, we would have other ways to score runs and win games besides the old "swing for the fences" strategy. IMO, a more balanced offense (in terms of power, OBP, AVG. and speed) gives you a much better consistency over a 162 game season - in other words, "you'll find yourself in more ballgames."

 

It remains to be seen if Hendry can find a way to address the lack of OBP guys in our everyday lineup.

[JC]

 

It remains to be seen if Hendry can find a way to address the lack of OBP guys in our everyday lineup.

 

Unfortunately, I think the answer to this query has been borne out time and again.

[RynoRules]

*Points to signature*

[katway]

Excellent move by the Sox. Gives them 6 strong starters going into next year.

 

Now, Williams has the luxury of letting McCarthy mature a little more or even trading a guy during a high value year (i.e., Garland) for another strong position player.

 

In any event, a surplus of high quality pitchers combined with their improved team offense will make them a tough team next year.

 

I hope these moves will put pressure on the Cubs to make their own headlines by taking a risk to get a good player.

[UBlink]

You know what I was going back and forth with other members in another thread regarding Ken Williams and his job as GM. All I have to say is when people call last year's team complete luck and discount KW as the one who put the coaching staff, some of the drafts, and pickups together two words. Sour Grapes. At least KW has no problem getting rid of some prospects to make his team a contender. Look at Hendry. He hold on to his prospects so damn long they lose value or get hurt. He hasn't done squat since the end of 2004. I have no faith in Hendry and if I was a White Sox fan I would be ecsatic I have a GM that improves the team year-in year-out.

 

I think the 2 words are "da nile". As long as the Sox success can be attributed to luck, there is less incentive to look in the mirror and look objectively at one's self. I guess all we've proved is money won't buy you luck.