Is it time to give Hendry a little bit of credit?

[HoopsCubs]

Honestly, I think this is the last offseason we'll need to ask this question, because I feel Hendry and Baker are both going to be axed by October at the latest. Theo Epstein, anyone?

 

By the way, following the Cubs has always been kind of like Kremlin watching during the Cold War, or Vatican watching when voting for a new pope--you try to read the tea leaves and watch for wisps of smoke escaping from the Tribune Tower. I mention this because I've seen three stories now this offseason, the latest in today's paper, hinting that Ryno has a future as a manager. I know he has no experience, I know he is less animated than spruce tree, but the Cubs could be greasing the skids for a Ryne Sandberg 2007 Cubs Manager plan. And at this point, I'd give that a shot, why not?

 

Just my gut feelings here:

 

As long as Jim Hendry still wants to be the Cubs' GM in 2007, I'd say there is a 99% probability of him having that role in 2007. I'd say only a 90-loss type season in 2006 will cost him his job. Mind you, I don't personally think Hendry has earned another contract, but it's very unlikely that MacPhail and Fitzsimons would let him go.

 

On the flipside, if Dusty Baker still wants to be the Cubs' field manager in 2007, I'd say he needs to guide them into the playoffs in 2006.

[RynoRules]

Why would anyone want the truly awful Paul DePodesta?

 

If we're going to fire Hendry, let's rescue the extremely underappreciated Gerry Hunsicker from his exile in Tampa Bay.

 

What's wrong with DePodesta? Failed to win a world series in one full year?

 

On the flip-side, what did DePo do that makes him so valuable?

[Bruce Miles]

Honestly, I think this is the last offseason we'll need to ask this question, because I feel Hendry and Baker are both going to be axed by October at the latest. Theo Epstein, anyone?

 

By the way, following the Cubs has always been kind of like Kremlin watching during the Cold War, or Vatican watching when voting for a new pope--you try to read the tea leaves and watch for wisps of smoke escaping from the Tribune Tower. I mention this because I've seen three stories now this offseason, the latest in today's paper, hinting that Ryno has a future as a manager. I know he has no experience, I know he is less animated than spruce tree, but the Cubs could be greasing the skids for a Ryne Sandberg 2007 Cubs Manager plan. And at this point, I'd give that a shot, why not?

 

Just my gut feelings here:

 

As long as Jim Hendry still wants to be the Cubs' GM in 2007, I'd say there is a 99% probability of him having that role in 2007. I'd say only a 90-loss type season in 2006 will cost him his job. Mind you, I don't personally think Hendry has earned another contract, but it's very unlikely that MacPhail and Fitzsimons would let him go.

 

On the flipside, if Dusty Baker still wants to be the Cubs' field manager in 2007, I'd say he needs to guide them into the playoffs in 2006.

 

Mr. Hoops' post is pretty much right on. Neither DePodesta nor Epstein will be the Cubs' general manager any time soon. Jim Hendry is likely safe through 2008.

We're all entitled to our opinions, and certainly Hendry has had some successes and failures. The one charge I found unfair in this thread was that he somehow wrecked the farm system. Huh? Take a gander at a Cubs media guide from, say, 1995, 1996 or 1997. When you get through heaving, take a look at it now. In the interim, the Cubs have stepped up _ no, more like created _ a presence in Latin America. Having a good farm system means two things: moving players up to your own big-league team and giving the organizaton good, low-cost alternatives to expensive free agents, and using the farm system to make trades. Obviously, the Cubs have done better in the latter category _ see Bobby Hill, Hee Seop Choi and others.

A few years earlier, the Cubs would not have had the minor-league talent to fetch an Aramis Ramirez or a Derrek Lee, two star players nowadays.

Hendry also drafted Jon Garland, who was foolishly traded away by Ed Lynch.

They all haven't worked out: Ben Christensen, Todd Noel and, at least so far, Luis Montanez.

But overall, the Cubs' farm system is light years ahead of where it was a decade ago.

[USSoccer]

Mr. Hoops' post is pretty much right on. Neither DePodesta nor Epstein will be the Cubs' general manager any time soon. Jim Hendry is likely safe through 2008.

We're all entitled to our opinions, and certainly Hendry has had some successes and failures. The one charge I found unfair in this thread was that he somehow wrecked the farm system. Huh? Take a gander at a Cubs media guide from, say, 1995, 1996 or 1997. When you get through heaving, take a look at it now. In the interim, the Cubs have stepped up _ no, more like created _ a presence in Latin America. Having a good farm system means two things: moving players up to your own big-league team and giving the organizaton good, low-cost alternatives to expensive free agents, and using the farm system to make trades. Obviously, the Cubs have done better in the latter category _ see Bobby Hill, Hee Seop Choi and others.

A few years earlier, the Cubs would not have had the minor-league talent to fetch an Aramis Ramirez or a Derrek Lee, two star players nowadays.

Hendry also drafted Jon Garland, who was foolishly traded away by Ed Lynch.

They all haven't worked out: Ben Christensen, Todd Noel and, at least so far, Luis Montanez.

But overall, the Cubs' farm system is light years ahead of where it was a decade ago.

 

Bruce,

 

Good points, although I will debate one point: At what point does a farm system become useless or wrecked if we never trust the young position players enough to make the system matter?

 

I'm really hoping that Hendry's words about Murton and Cedeno starting ring true. However, we don't have a manager who trusts young players enough to rely on them and trusts them to push through the slumps that will happen. What's even worse is that Baker is in a contract year, so he's more apt than ever to play it safe with veteran options, especially if either Murton or Cedeno start out slowly.

 

As a former farm director, yes, Hendry improved the farm system overall. However, what good will that do us if we cannot develop our own inexpensive position players as Zambrano, Prior, Ramirez and Lee become more expensive? Also, Hendry also gave Baker very espensive security blankets in Rusch and Perez, and opened a dangerous door for another security blanket in Grissom. Hendry is partly culpable for giving Baker the players with which to block the two everyday position players we have that are cheap and have potential to be solid MLB players.

[Bruce Miles]

Mr. Hoops' post is pretty much right on. Neither DePodesta nor Epstein will be the Cubs' general manager any time soon. Jim Hendry is likely safe through 2008.

We're all entitled to our opinions, and certainly Hendry has had some successes and failures. The one charge I found unfair in this thread was that he somehow wrecked the farm system. Huh? Take a gander at a Cubs media guide from, say, 1995, 1996 or 1997. When you get through heaving, take a look at it now. In the interim, the Cubs have stepped up _ no, more like created _ a presence in Latin America. Having a good farm system means two things: moving players up to your own big-league team and giving the organizaton good, low-cost alternatives to expensive free agents, and using the farm system to make trades. Obviously, the Cubs have done better in the latter category _ see Bobby Hill, Hee Seop Choi and others.

A few years earlier, the Cubs would not have had the minor-league talent to fetch an Aramis Ramirez or a Derrek Lee, two star players nowadays.

Hendry also drafted Jon Garland, who was foolishly traded away by Ed Lynch.

They all haven't worked out: Ben Christensen, Todd Noel and, at least so far, Luis Montanez.

But overall, the Cubs' farm system is light years ahead of where it was a decade ago.

 

Bruce,

 

Good points, although I will debate one point: At what point does a farm system become useless or wrecked if we never trust the young position players enough to make the system matter?

 

I'm really hoping that Hendry's words about Murton and Cedeno starting ring true. However, we don't have a manager who trusts young players enough to rely on them and trusts them to push through the slumps that will happen. What's even worse is that Baker is in a contract year, so he's more apt than ever to play it safe with veteran options, especially if either Murton or Cedeno start out slowly.

 

As a former farm director, yes, Hendry improved the farm system overall. However, what good will that do us if we cannot develop our own inexpensive position players as Zambrano, Prior, Ramirez and Lee become more expensive?

 

These are good points. Like the trade or not, Hendry used the farm system to get Juan Pierre.

There are some very subtle ways a GM can get his manager to play young players. One of these occurred in 2003, when Corey Patterson was still an up and coming young player. Baker had to play him because he had no viable alternative. There is really no viable alternative to Matt Murton, at least right now. And no, John Mabry will not be last year's Todd Hollandsworth _ the organization will not stand for it.

Overall, how productive is the Cubs' farm system vis-a-vis the other 29 clubs. I don't know off-hand.

Sometimes stuff just happens, too: What happens if David Kelton doesn't get the yips at third base? What happens if Richie Lewis doesn't break a leg? What happens if Felix Pie doesn't get hurt?

On top of that, the Cubs concentrated most of their efforts on pitchers over Hendry's years as scouting director. We'll get a better idea _ and very soon _ on the chances of guys like Dopirak, Pie, Harvey, Sing and others.

Right now, the Cubs' farm system is reasonably well regarded by Baseball America and very well regarded by baseball people.

[USSoccer]

Mr. Hoops' post is pretty much right on. Neither DePodesta nor Epstein will be the Cubs' general manager any time soon. Jim Hendry is likely safe through 2008.

We're all entitled to our opinions, and certainly Hendry has had some successes and failures. The one charge I found unfair in this thread was that he somehow wrecked the farm system. Huh? Take a gander at a Cubs media guide from, say, 1995, 1996 or 1997. When you get through heaving, take a look at it now. In the interim, the Cubs have stepped up _ no, more like created _ a presence in Latin America. Having a good farm system means two things: moving players up to your own big-league team and giving the organizaton good, low-cost alternatives to expensive free agents, and using the farm system to make trades. Obviously, the Cubs have done better in the latter category _ see Bobby Hill, Hee Seop Choi and others.

A few years earlier, the Cubs would not have had the minor-league talent to fetch an Aramis Ramirez or a Derrek Lee, two star players nowadays.

Hendry also drafted Jon Garland, who was foolishly traded away by Ed Lynch.

They all haven't worked out: Ben Christensen, Todd Noel and, at least so far, Luis Montanez.

But overall, the Cubs' farm system is light years ahead of where it was a decade ago.

 

Bruce,

 

Good points, although I will debate one point: At what point does a farm system become useless or wrecked if we never trust the young position players enough to make the system matter?

 

I'm really hoping that Hendry's words about Murton and Cedeno starting ring true. However, we don't have a manager who trusts young players enough to rely on them and trusts them to push through the slumps that will happen. What's even worse is that Baker is in a contract year, so he's more apt than ever to play it safe with veteran options, especially if either Murton or Cedeno start out slowly.

 

As a former farm director, yes, Hendry improved the farm system overall. However, what good will that do us if we cannot develop our own inexpensive position players as Zambrano, Prior, Ramirez and Lee become more expensive?

 

These are good points. Like the trade or not, Hendry used the farm system to get Juan Pierre.

There are some very subtle ways a GM can get his manager to play young players. One of these occurred in 2003, when Corey Patterson was still an up and coming young player. Baker had to play him because he had no viable alternative. There is really no viable alternative to Matt Murton, at least right now. And no, John Mabry will not be last year's Todd Hollandsworth _ the organization will not stand for it.

Overall, how productive is the Cubs' farm system vis-a-vis the other 29 clubs. I don't know off-hand.

Sometimes stuff just happens, too: What happens if David Kelton doesn't get the yips at third base? What happens if Richie Lewis doesn't break a leg? What happens if Felix Pie doesn't get hurt?

On top of that, the Cubs concentrated most of their efforts on pitchers over Hendry's years as scouting director. We'll get a better idea _ and very soon _ on the chances of guys like Dopirak, Pie, Harvey, Sing and others.

Right now, the Cubs' farm system is reasonably well regarded by Baseball America and very well regarded by baseball people.

 

Stuff does happen, but it happens to every ML club. The key is giving the guys that do make it through the Darwin-like minor league process a fair chance to shine. And that doesn't mean a halfhearted platoon, or a few starts here and there over the course of a month. It means regular, extended play. Murton will probably get that by virtue of his great debut, but how much rope will he have? Worse, the Cubs do have a viable alternative to Cedeno, and he's an alternative that the Cubs overvalue for some reason.

[UK1679666180]

Mr. Hoops' post is pretty much right on. Neither DePodesta nor Epstein will be the Cubs' general manager any time soon. Jim Hendry is likely safe through 2008.

We're all entitled to our opinions, and certainly Hendry has had some successes and failures. The one charge I found unfair in this thread was that he somehow wrecked the farm system. Huh? Take a gander at a Cubs media guide from, say, 1995, 1996 or 1997. When you get through heaving, take a look at it now. In the interim, the Cubs have stepped up _ no, more like created _ a presence in Latin America. Having a good farm system means two things: moving players up to your own big-league team and giving the organizaton good, low-cost alternatives to expensive free agents, and using the farm system to make trades. Obviously, the Cubs have done better in the latter category _ see Bobby Hill, Hee Seop Choi and others.

A few years earlier, the Cubs would not have had the minor-league talent to fetch an Aramis Ramirez or a Derrek Lee, two star players nowadays.

Hendry also drafted Jon Garland, who was foolishly traded away by Ed Lynch.

They all haven't worked out: Ben Christensen, Todd Noel and, at least so far, Luis Montanez.

But overall, the Cubs' farm system is light years ahead of where it was a decade ago

 

Bruce, I don't think Hendry has wrceked the farm system, but while it has improved since the mid 90s, it has gone down since it's peak as the #1 rated farm system (according to BA) in '02 to likely middle of the pack heading into '06.

 

They have switched from utilizing their own scout out in the Pacific Rim to utilizing the Major League Scouting Bureau. Since the departure of Leon Lee, they have not signed a player since his depature several years ago. They haven't signed a player out of Australia even longer than that, Morrissey was the most productive of those signed from Down Under, but it appears they left that program as well.

 

My main concern is with the lack of emphasis in the DR and especially Venezuela. Pie was the last prospect signed internationally to be worthy of a top 10 ranking within the Cubs system.

 

If you use Baseball America as a primary tool in regards to the minors and compare the top 10s of earlier this decade to the the present, you'll see a dramatic drop-off in highly touted international players within the Cubs farm system as well as the overall drop during that same timeframe. That has occured under Hendry's watch, if they've reallocated those resources towards increasing the ML payroll (which has increased compared to '02) to increase the rate of winning or speed up the rebuilding process from '02, it has obviously been a failure so far.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

These are good points. Like the trade or not, Hendry used the farm system to get Juan Pierre.

There are some very subtle ways a GM can get his manager to play young players. One of these occurred in 2003, when Corey Patterson was still an up and coming young player. Baker had to play him because he had no viable alternative. There is really no viable alternative to Matt Murton, at least right now. And no, John Mabry will not be last year's Todd Hollandsworth _ the organization will not stand for it.

Overall, how productive is the Cubs' farm system vis-a-vis the other 29 clubs. I don't know off-hand.

Sometimes stuff just happens, too: What happens if David Kelton doesn't get the yips at third base? What happens if Richie Lewis doesn't break a leg? What happens if Felix Pie doesn't get hurt?

On top of that, the Cubs concentrated most of their efforts on pitchers over Hendry's years as scouting director. We'll get a better idea _ and very soon _ on the chances of guys like Dopirak, Pie, Harvey, Sing and others.

Right now, the Cubs' farm system is reasonably well regarded by Baseball America and very well regarded by baseball people.

 

My biggest beef with Hendry wrt the farm system is the "toolsy" philosophy in preference to guys that are fundamentally sound and exhibit plate discipline. It all comes down to Hendry's well-known disregard at this point for OBP, which rubs most here the wrong way, self included.

 

You look at all the Cub positional "prospects" over the last five years, and how many weren't free swinging, high K, low OBP guys? Murton, but we didn't develop him. Sing and Craig, but both are marginal prospects. Choi, but the organization seemed to hate him. Cedeno looks to be OK. But mostly, we get the Ryan Harveys, and Corey Pattersons, and Brian Dopiraks, and Felix Pies coming down the pipe. Swing from the heels, chicks dig the long ball. Ugh.

[Bruce Miles]

Mr. Hoops' post is pretty much right on. Neither DePodesta nor Epstein will be the Cubs' general manager any time soon. Jim Hendry is likely safe through 2008.

We're all entitled to our opinions, and certainly Hendry has had some successes and failures. The one charge I found unfair in this thread was that he somehow wrecked the farm system. Huh? Take a gander at a Cubs media guide from, say, 1995, 1996 or 1997. When you get through heaving, take a look at it now. In the interim, the Cubs have stepped up _ no, more like created _ a presence in Latin America. Having a good farm system means two things: moving players up to your own big-league team and giving the organizaton good, low-cost alternatives to expensive free agents, and using the farm system to make trades. Obviously, the Cubs have done better in the latter category _ see Bobby Hill, Hee Seop Choi and others.

A few years earlier, the Cubs would not have had the minor-league talent to fetch an Aramis Ramirez or a Derrek Lee, two star players nowadays.

Hendry also drafted Jon Garland, who was foolishly traded away by Ed Lynch.

They all haven't worked out: Ben Christensen, Todd Noel and, at least so far, Luis Montanez.

But overall, the Cubs' farm system is light years ahead of where it was a decade ago.

 

Bruce,

 

Good points, although I will debate one point: At what point does a farm system become useless or wrecked if we never trust the young position players enough to make the system matter?

 

I'm really hoping that Hendry's words about Murton and Cedeno starting ring true. However, we don't have a manager who trusts young players enough to rely on them and trusts them to push through the slumps that will happen. What's even worse is that Baker is in a contract year, so he's more apt than ever to play it safe with veteran options, especially if either Murton or Cedeno start out slowly.

 

As a former farm director, yes, Hendry improved the farm system overall. However, what good will that do us if we cannot develop our own inexpensive position players as Zambrano, Prior, Ramirez and Lee become more expensive?

 

These are good points. Like the trade or not, Hendry used the farm system to get Juan Pierre.

There are some very subtle ways a GM can get his manager to play young players. One of these occurred in 2003, when Corey Patterson was still an up and coming young player. Baker had to play him because he had no viable alternative. There is really no viable alternative to Matt Murton, at least right now. And no, John Mabry will not be last year's Todd Hollandsworth _ the organization will not stand for it.

Overall, how productive is the Cubs' farm system vis-a-vis the other 29 clubs. I don't know off-hand.

Sometimes stuff just happens, too: What happens if David Kelton doesn't get the yips at third base? What happens if Richie Lewis doesn't break a leg? What happens if Felix Pie doesn't get hurt?

On top of that, the Cubs concentrated most of their efforts on pitchers over Hendry's years as scouting director. We'll get a better idea _ and very soon _ on the chances of guys like Dopirak, Pie, Harvey, Sing and others.

Right now, the Cubs' farm system is reasonably well regarded by Baseball America and very well regarded by baseball people.

 

Stuff does happen, but it happens to every ML club. The key is giving the guys that do make it through the Darwin-like minor league process a fair chance to shine. And that doesn't mean a halfhearted platoon, or a few starts here and there over the course of a month. It means regular, extended play. Murton will probably get that by virtue of his great debut, but how much rope will he have? Worse, the Cubs do have a viable alternative to Cedeno, and he's an alternative that the Cubs overvalue for some reason.

 

There's no doubt Neifi should not have been given a two-year contract. But if Ronny Cedeno is healthy, he will be the shortstop. I look for Perez and Hairston to share time at second base. Hairston's stock seemed to rise within the organization in the second half of the season. If Murton starts and gets the bulk of the time in left field and Cedeno does the same at short, that's one and a half players from the system (since Murton came from Boston originally). You can also say that the Cubs used their farm system to get three other starters (Lee, Ramirez and Pierre).

Again, I'd like to see how all 30 teams have done with their farm systems in the last 10 years, both in terms of position players and pitchers.

Edited January 9, 2006 by Bruce Miles

[stitchface]

Why would anyone want the truly awful Paul DePodesta?

 

If we're going to fire Hendry, let's rescue the extremely underappreciated Gerry Hunsicker from his exile in Tampa Bay.

 

What's wrong with DePodesta? Failed to win a world series in one full year?

 

On the flip-side, what did DePo do that makes him so valuable?

 

He had one year! How could you possibly judge him in one year? He can stand pretty proudly on his time with the A's however.

[Neuby]

What postion player have the Cubs had that didn't get a good enough shot that ended up producing for another club?

[Bruce Miles]

What postion player have the Cubs had that didn't get a good enough shot that ended up producing for another club?

 

There hasn't been one since Doug Glanville.

[USSoccer]

What postion player have the Cubs had that didn't get a good enough shot that ended up producing for another club?

 

That's really not an argument in favor of Hendry. Hill and Choi were tagged as utility and platoon players, respectively.

 

Also, please factor in that the players that those 2 were benched for weren;t exactly all star producers.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

What postion player have the Cubs had that didn't get a good enough shot that ended up producing for another club?

 

There hasn't been one since Doug Glanville.

 

Eric Hinske, to a degree.

[Bruce Miles]

What postion player have the Cubs had that didn't get a good enough shot that ended up producing for another club?

 

That's really not an argument in favor of Hendry. Hill and Choi were tagged as utility and platoon players, respectively.

 

Also, please factor in that the players that those 2 were benched for weren;t exactly all star producers.

 

I just thought it was a cool trivia question.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

What postion player have the Cubs had that didn't get a good enough shot that ended up producing for another club?

 

There hasn't been one since Doug Glanville.

 

Eric Hinske, to a degree.

 

Have to throw Sisco's name out there too in that case.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

Here's another problem with the farm system: why have our positional players then panned out so miserably bad? Especially compared to our pitchers. Regardless of whether they reached the bigs with the Cubs or not, compare this list of former top Cub pitching prospects to top Cub hitting prospects. Is this not a serious indictment of the organization's ability to provide proper hitting instruction to young ballplayers?

 

Pitchers: Jon Garland, Kerry Wood, Carlos Zambrano, Mark Prior, Juan Cruz, Andy Sisco, Angel Guzman

 

Hitters: Brooks Kieschnick, Ross Gload, Eric Hinske, Hee Seop Choi, Corey Patterson, David Kelton, Nic Jackson, Bobby Hill

[Bruce Miles]

What postion player have the Cubs had that didn't get a good enough shot that ended up producing for another club?

 

There hasn't been one since Doug Glanville.

 

Eric Hinske, to a degree.

 

Have to throw Sisco's name out there too in that case.

 

Sisco is not a position player, and the jury is still out now that the Royals can send him to the minor leagues.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

What postion player have the Cubs had that didn't get a good enough shot that ended up producing for another club?

 

There hasn't been one since Doug Glanville.

 

Eric Hinske, to a degree.

 

Have to throw Sisco's name out there too in that case.

 

Sisco is not a position player, and the jury is still out now that the Royals can send him to the minor leagues.

 

I left the room and came back and reread the position player thing, you're too quick Bruce. :D

[Neuby]

What postion player have the Cubs had that didn't get a good enough shot that ended up producing for another club?

 

That's really not an argument in favor of Hendry. Hill and Choi were tagged as utility and platoon players, respectively.

 

Also, please factor in that the players that those 2 were benched for weren;t exactly all star producers.

 

Yeah but they played well enough to get us to the playoffs. We spun Choi and Hill for the teams offensive cornerstones. Didn't Depo platoon Choi last year?

Edited January 9, 2006 by Neuby

[don_kessinger_was_good]

Sisco is not a position player, and the jury is still out now that the Royals can send him to the minor leagues.

 

There has been talk in KC that Sisco will get sent to Omaha to get some work in as a starter again. They like him as their lefty setup man, but the Royals recognize he has more value if he can start. I'd say it's 50-50 whether he's in the big league bullpen, or the AAA rotation, in April.

[Neuby]

Here's another problem with the farm system: why have our positional players then panned out so miserably bad? Especially compared to our pitchers. Regardless of whether they reached the bigs with the Cubs or not, compare this list of former top Cub pitching prospects to top Cub hitting prospects. Is this not a serious indictment of the organization's ability to provide proper hitting instruction to young ballplayers?

 

Pitchers: Jon Garland, Kerry Wood, Carlos Zambrano, Mark Prior, Juan Cruz, Andy Sisco, Angel Guzman

 

Hitters: Brooks Kieschnick, Ross Gload, Eric Hinske, Hee Seop Choi, Corey Patterson, David Kelton, Nic Jackson, Bobby Hill

 

Gload was a Marlins Prospect , Jackson can't stay healthy, Kelton tanked at third might have been a fringe major leaguer had he stayed there or moved to second base. Kieschnick turned out to be a better pitched. Hinkse had brief sucess. Choi still might be was overated by many.

[Bruce Miles]

Here's another problem with the farm system: why have our positional players then panned out so miserably bad? Especially compared to our pitchers. Regardless of whether they reached the bigs with the Cubs or not, compare this list of former top Cub pitching prospects to top Cub hitting prospects. Is this not a serious indictment of the organization's ability to provide proper hitting instruction to young ballplayers?

 

Pitchers: Jon Garland, Kerry Wood, Carlos Zambrano, Mark Prior, Juan Cruz, Andy Sisco, Angel Guzman

 

Hitters: Brooks Kieschnick, Ross Gload, Eric Hinske, Hee Seop Choi, Corey Patterson, David Kelton, Nic Jackson, Bobby Hill

 

Ross Gload came to the Cubs in a minor-league trade from another organization. The previous regime drafted Kieschnick and he was let go in the 1997-98 expansion draft. Trading Eric Hinske was a mistake. He was a good hitter when the Cubs drafted him. They didn't need to do much with him. Jackson has been bothered by injuries. Hitting hasn't entirely been Kelton's problem. The Cubs probably overvalued Bobby Hill. Some of this may be related to hitting instruction. Some not. I'm sure there's enough blame to go around among the players themselves, Cubs scouting and hitting instruction.

As I've said, we'll really get a handle on things once we see how Harvey, Pie and Dopirak pan out, if they do.

[Bruce Miles]

What postion player have the Cubs had that didn't get a good enough shot that ended up producing for another club?

 

There hasn't been one since Doug Glanville.

 

Eric Hinske, to a degree.

 

Have to throw Sisco's name out there too in that case.

 

Sisco is not a position player, and the jury is still out now that the Royals can send him to the minor leagues.

 

I left the room and came back and reread the position player thing, you're too quick Bruce. :D

 

An old trick I learned watching Jeopardy _ buzz in quickly.

[Ram1380]

Wasn't Hinske part of the whole Scott Chiasson debacle??