Hendry signs Jones for 3/$16 million

[BigbadB]

Plus, with a the whinning and crying around here I'm not seeing any alturnatives to Jones except Burntiz. Like someone said crap vs. crap.

 

An alternative that would have been better would have been someone that would have signed a 1 year deal, not 3.

 

Reggie Sanders would have been just fine. I wouldn't have liked that deal much either, but to know it would have been for 1 year would have been 10x better than the ridiculous 3 years Jones received.

 

Another alternative would have been Nomar. If the Cubs would have locked him down for 1 year with an incentive laced deal, they could have stuck him out in RF. With Nomar, you wouldn't have needed a platoon. He can hit both righties and lefties.

 

If the Cubs just reupped Nomar, they wouldn't have been in such a predicament to have to overpay for someone like Jones.

 

It's interesting to see all these teams out there that were willing to stick Nomar in their outfield, yet he wasn't even a remote option with our team.

 

I could find all kinds of options or alternatives over Jones. Heck, I would have taken a flyer on Matt Diaz or Michael Restovich out there on a minor league deal before I would have done a 3 year deal for Jones. I would have invited Juan Gonzalez as an NRI before I would have given Jones a 3 year deal.

 

Hendry has made a lot of bad decisions over the last 2 offseasons. This is just another in a long line. Leaving Jose Macias on the 40 man roster when he basically had no room to protect up and coming prospects is just another in a long line of bone headed moves. Hendry gave away Jermaine Van Buren. A team like Tampa might have benefitted from a guy like that. I'm not saying Van Buren is the be all-end all of prospects. But, they gave him away. They gave away Sisco. They've given away a lot of guys lately, and it's going to hurt this team in the long run.

 

When Miguel Tejada was available as a free agent, the Cubs owed Alex Gonzalez 5.5m for the 2004 season. Did the Cubs shop elsewhere because they didn't want to pay Tejada AND Gonzalez at the SS position?

 

Vlad was available too that year. Did they shop elsewhere because Sosa was already in RF for another 2 years and Alou for 1? Alou could have been moved to San Fran pretty easily.

 

2 years later, Hendry is going to give away his top prospect AND the franchise player for Tejada when he could have had him for nothing via free agency.

 

Will Hendry now ignore some other blue chip free agent for RF because Jones has a year or two to go on his contract? It sure looks like he would to me. He did it with Tejada, Vlad and Beltran in the last 2 years.

 

Money obviously wasn't the thing blocking a deal from happening either. A raise of hands on who would have rather seen Hendry sign Tejada instead of Maddux? I'd have done that deal all day long and dealt with Rusch/Cruz or whoever in the 5th spot in the rotation.

 

There is a domino effect going on here right now that is getting uglier by the day. Someone needs to go in and stop the dominoes from falling.

 

If Hendry has a plan, it's not a very good one. Plain and simple. Fantasy GM or no.

[Lefty]

Hendry has made a lot of bad decisions over the last 2 offseasons. This is just another in a long line. Leaving Jose Macias on the 40 man roster when he basically had no room to protect up and coming prospects is just another in a long line of bone headed moves. Hendry gave away Jermaine Van Buren. They gave away Sisco.

 

When Miguel Tejada was available as a free agent, the Cubs owed Alex Gonzalez 5.5m for the 2004 season. Did the Cubs shop elsewhere because they didn't want to pay Tejada AND Gonzalez at the SS position?

 

Vlad was available too that year. Did they shop elsewhere because Sosa was already in RF for another 2 years and Alou for 1? Alou could have been moved to San Fran pretty easily.

 

2 years later, Hendry is going to give away his top prospect AND the franchise player for Tejada when he could have had him for nothing via free agency.

 

Will Hendry now ignore some other blue chip free agent for RF because Jones has a year or two to go on his contract? It sure looks like he would to me. He did it with Tejada, Vlad and Beltran in the last 2 years.

 

Money obviously wasn't the thing blocking a deal from happening either. A raise of hands on who would have rather seen Hendry sign Tejada instead of Maddux? I'd have done that deal all day long and dealt with Rusch/Cruz or whoever in the 5th spot in the rotation.

 

There is a domino effect going on here right now that is getting uglier by the day. Someone needs to go in and stop the dominoes from falling.

 

If Hendry has a plan, it's not a very good one. Plain and simple. Fantasy GM or no.

 

Amen brother!

[YearofDaCubs]

Hendry has made a lot of bad decisions over the last 2 offseasons. This is just another in a long line. Leaving Jose Macias on the 40 man roster when he basically had no room to protect up and coming prospects is just another in a long line of bone headed moves. Hendry gave away Jermaine Van Buren. They gave away Sisco.

 

When Miguel Tejada was available as a free agent, the Cubs owed Alex Gonzalez 5.5m for the 2004 season. Did the Cubs shop elsewhere because they didn't want to pay Tejada AND Gonzalez at the SS position?

 

Vlad was available too that year. Did they shop elsewhere because Sosa was already in RF for another 2 years and Alou for 1? Alou could have been moved to San Fran pretty easily.

 

2 years later, Hendry is going to give away his top prospect AND the franchise player for Tejada when he could have had him for nothing via free agency.

 

Will Hendry now ignore some other blue chip free agent for RF because Jones has a year or two to go on his contract? It sure looks like he would to me. He did it with Tejada, Vlad and Beltran in the last 2 years.

 

Money obviously wasn't the thing blocking a deal from happening either. A raise of hands on who would have rather seen Hendry sign Tejada instead of Maddux? I'd have done that deal all day long and dealt with Rusch/Cruz or whoever in the 5th spot in the rotation.

 

There is a domino effect going on here right now that is getting uglier by the day. Someone needs to go in and stop the dominoes from falling.

 

If Hendry has a plan, it's not a very good one. Plain and simple. Fantasy GM or no.

 

Amen brother!

Very well said.

[BigbadB]

Very well said.

 

Thanks! Of course, I'm also not so blind that I can't recognize the good moves Hendry has made.

 

But, then again, even the worst GM's in the history of the game must have made a good move or two at one point or another.

 

This offseason isn't going to define Hendry's place on the best or worst list, but the 2006 season sure will. There were no excuses this offseason. A weak free agent class doesn't cut it.

[UK1679666180]

Either I've been drinking or I'm looking for silver linings...

 

(both)

 

Jacque Jones has a career batted balls in play avg. of .321, last year he had a miserable .281.

 

If you took the .321 and applied it into his numbers last year instead of his .281.

 

His numbers would've looked like...

 

523 ABs 145AB 25DB 5TR 23HRs

 

.277/.345/.476 .821 straight OPS or a .826 adjusted OPS.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Either I've been drinking or I'm looking for silver linings...

 

(both)

 

Jacque Jones has a career batted balls in play avg. of .321, last year he had a miserable .281.

 

If you took the .321 and applied it into his numbers last year instead of his .281.

 

His numbers would've looked like...

 

523 ABs 145AB 25DB 5TR 23HRs

 

.277/.345/.476 .821 straight OPS or a .826 adjusted OPS.

 

Lay off the sauce, kid...

[UMFan83]

Actually thats pretty interesting. Still not a big fan of the signing but if his BABIP goes up this year, that can be a good thing.

 

Still don't like his day time and outdoor splits though

[UK1679666180]

It's a valid stat though. BABIP is one of the more fluky stats as far as flucuation.

[BigbadB]

Minnesota never has been much of a hitter's paradise. But, Jacque's daytime splits are nothing to make you write home about either. The only solice one can take in that is Minnesota only plays Sunday afternoon games and maybe a travel day game every other week all season long.

[UK1679666180]

He's hit better outdoors than indoors over his career, I don't put much validity into daytime/night-time stats, either.

 

I assume as the more he plays during the day, the more his body will react properly.

 

If he struggles, it won't be b/c of playing in the day.

[UK1679666180]

Side note:

 

Encarnacion was about 30 points higher in '05 (.330s) than his career (.301).

 

If BABIP in '05 was .301 his numbers would've been...

 

.261/.326/.419 straight OPS of .745 or an adjusted OPS of .731.

[mhuber92211]

Hypothecially,

If you could pay 7 million dollars per year for the next 3 years to 2 players that would result in an average line of .280/.350/.400 from RF or pay 12 million dollars to an older player per year for 3 years and have him put up a line of .280/.380/.415 who would you rather take?

 

To me the argument for Giles this offseason was that he was head and shoulders above what else was available and he would immediately impact one of the sorely lacking aspects of the current team (OBP). But instead of paying 12 million for him, Hendry paid half of that (even less in acutal salary and not bonus) for a younger, lesser player who would be easier to move or replace should the opportunity arise and if put in a strict platoon would be nearly as effective given the right partner (Mench). I personally would chose what the Cubs did and might complete then giving Giles 12 million.

[BigbadB]

Hypothecially,

If you could pay 7 million dollars per year for the next 3 years to 2 players that would result in an average line of .280/.350/.400 from RF or pay 12 million dollars to an older player per year for 3 years and have him put up a line of .280/.380/.415 who would you rather take?

 

To me the argument for Giles this offseason was that he was head and shoulders above what else was available and he would immediately impact one of the sorely lacking aspects of the current team (OBP). But instead of paying 12 million for him, Hendry paid half of that (even less in acutal salary and not bonus) for a younger, lesser player who would be easier to move or replace should the opportunity arise and if put in a strict platoon would be nearly as effective given the right partner (Mench). I personally would chose what the Cubs did and might complete then giving Giles 12 million.

 

Uh, .415 SLG? Giles last year in a pitchers paradise had a line of:

 

.301/.423/.483

 

His OBP is better than the SLG of the guy you prefer at 7m. And, it only takes 1 Brian Giles to fill that hole rather than 2 guys to do the work of 1.

 

Put Giles back in the hitter friendly NL Central and watch his SLG go back over .500 easily. He's been over .600 SLG twice in his career and in the NL Central.

[WrigleyField 22]

I think this is the thread where this analogy was made. It really fits anywhere:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v313/snetsrak43/beatup.jpg

[mhuber92211]

Hypothecially,

If you could pay 7 million dollars per year for the next 3 years to 2 players that would result in an average line of .280/.350/.400 from RF or pay 12 million dollars to an older player per year for 3 years and have him put up a line of .280/.380/.415 who would you rather take?

 

To me the argument for Giles this offseason was that he was head and shoulders above what else was available and he would immediately impact one of the sorely lacking aspects of the current team (OBP). But instead of paying 12 million for him, Hendry paid half of that (even less in acutal salary and not bonus) for a younger, lesser player who would be easier to move or replace should the opportunity arise and if put in a strict platoon would be nearly as effective given the right partner (Mench). I personally would chose what the Cubs did and might complete then giving Giles 12 million.

 

Uh, .415 SLG? Giles last year in a pitchers paradise had a line of:

 

.301/.423/.483

 

His OBP is better than the SLG of the guy you prefer at 7m. And, it only takes 1 Brian Giles to fill that hole rather than 2 guys to do the work of 1.

 

Put Giles back in the hitter friendly NL Central and watch his SLG go back over .500 easily. He's been over .600 SLG twice in his career and in the NL Central.

 

I am speaking of expectations for Giles as the next 3 years take him to the decline of his career. If we can use expectations to poorly judge Jones then we should at least be fair and say that it would be expected for Giles to decline more the next 3 years then exceed his previous career norms.

 

My point was that you can pay 2 players 5 million less and get effective numbers. The ultimate question is if Giles' production is worth the difference between the 2 situations. One of the arguments have been that $5 million is too much for Jones. Then the train of thought would then say that the 7 million dollar difference is worth it for the production difference that you would get from Jones to Giles. I disagree. I would love to see how many runs difference just the Pecota projections for the 2 players are. Then we can see how much each run would cost and then it would be a better gauge. If adding Giles over Jones would mean 100 added runs, then each run would equal $70K. Is it worth it in this scenario? Did the Cubs lose the division last season by 100 runs?

[WrigleyField 22]

I'm REALLY bored tonight:

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v313/snetsrak43/rich.jpg

[Careless]

Hypothecially,

If you could pay 7 million dollars per year for the next 3 years to 2 players that would result in an average line of .280/.350/.400 from RF or pay 12 million dollars to an older player per year for 3 years and have him put up a line of .280/.380/.415 who would you rather take?

 

To me the argument for Giles this offseason was that he was head and shoulders above what else was available and he would immediately impact one of the sorely lacking aspects of the current team (OBP). But instead of paying 12 million for him, Hendry paid half of that (even less in acutal salary and not bonus) for a younger, lesser player who would be easier to move or replace should the opportunity arise and if put in a strict platoon would be nearly as effective given the right partner (Mench). I personally would chose what the Cubs did and might complete then giving Giles 12 million.

 

Uh, .415 SLG? Giles last year in a pitchers paradise had a line of:

 

.301/.423/.483

 

His OBP is better than the SLG of the guy you prefer at 7m. And, it only takes 1 Brian Giles to fill that hole rather than 2 guys to do the work of 1.

 

Put Giles back in the hitter friendly NL Central and watch his SLG go back over .500 easily. He's been over .600 SLG twice in his career and in the NL Central.

 

I am speaking of expectations for Giles as the next 3 years take him to the decline of his career. If we can use expectations to poorly judge Jones then we should at least be fair and say that it would be expected for Giles to decline more the next 3 years then exceed his previous career norms.

 

My point was that you can pay 2 players 5 million less and get effective numbers. The ultimate question is if Giles' production is worth the difference between the 2 situations. One of the arguments have been that $5 million is too much for Jones. Then the train of thought would then say that the 7 million dollar difference is worth it for the production difference that you would get from Jones to Giles. I disagree. I would love to see how many runs difference just the Pecota projections for the 2 players are. Then we can see how much each run would cost and then it would be a better gauge. If adding Giles over Jones would mean 100 added runs, then each run would equal $70K. Is it worth it in this scenario? Did the Cubs lose the division last season by 100 runs?

And a decline for giles outside of petco would be an increase in his slg, not a stupendously large decrease

[NorthsideAvenger]

For the love of god, why won't this thread end.....