Jim Hendry Scheduled to be on Bruce Levine's Show

[Soul]

personally, i'd rather have kearns, injury concerns and slumps included, over jones on the payroll for 3 years at 16M. kearns isn't my favorite option for RF either, but he was available (still is) and doesn't make a ton of money. he would be easy movable (or just dropped) in the future should some stud RF come along in FA or via trade. jones is not going to be easily movable if he tanks.

 

jones doesn't catch the ball well enough to justify giving him 3 years. i'd rather pay a couple million more for Burnitz (1 year contract), who played solid D with comparable offensive numbers.

 

I'd rather keep Prior & Zambrano b/c one of them is what the Reds would have asked for. The Cubs would had to overpay for Kearns, since the Cubs & Reds are in the same division. A combination of Williams & other prospects wouldn't have done it for the Reds. IIRC, there were reports during the GM meetings that JH had talks with the Reds about Kearns & that the cost was too much.

 

They didn't ask for Prior or Z. :wink:

 

It might have cost us as much as Rich Hill.

Did Jim tell you this? :roll:

 

be nice. all media reports i read mentioned hill or someone of his caliber. none of them mentioned Z or Prior for Kearns.

 

Just a question: what good is a player who can't get off the DL?

 

Kearns is worth about as much as a bag of crusty donuts.

[CubDad4Ever]

I think most teams realized the cubs needs and tried to "hold the cubs up more than we think" I think the left handedness and strong fielding aspects of Jones , along with my previous thought , resulted in Frenchy Jones playing RF for us. Im not worried about him being tradable. Their are a lot of contracts that will be tougher to dump than 2 years for an athletic lf hitting of with some pop. We tend to underestimate what people ask for in trades and also that other teams will amazingly take contracts on that we think and in fact might be lame. Gods Peace and Who knows how it will work out. Coach L

[stitchface]

personally, i'd rather have kearns, injury concerns and slumps included, over jones on the payroll for 3 years at 16M. kearns isn't my favorite option for RF either, but he was available (still is) and doesn't make a ton of money. he would be easy movable (or just dropped) in the future should some stud RF come along in FA or via trade. jones is not going to be easily movable if he tanks.

 

jones doesn't catch the ball well enough to justify giving him 3 years. i'd rather pay a couple million more for Burnitz (1 year contract), who played solid D with comparable offensive numbers.

 

I'd rather keep Prior & Zambrano b/c one of them is what the Reds would have asked for. The Cubs would had to overpay for Kearns, since the Cubs & Reds are in the same division. A combination of Williams & other prospects wouldn't have done it for the Reds. IIRC, there were reports during the GM meetings that JH had talks with the Reds about Kearns & that the cost was too much.

 

They didn't ask for Prior or Z. :wink:

 

It might have cost us as much as Rich Hill.

Did Jim tell you this? :roll:

 

so its ok for you to suggest they asked for zambrano or prior but not for him to say it was rich hill (despite media reports that confirm this)?

[SoonerCubFan]

Back to the original question:

 

Seriously, my question would be: why did we beef up the bullpen at a premium and get stuck with jones in the OF? jones couldn't have been your first choice for RF.

 

I'd personally answer it that the bullpen has a much bigger impact on the game, individually and especially over the course of a season, than a corner OF. Nothing is as reassuring as a solid pen, and nothing is as deflating as blown leads late.

 

I'm not enamored with the Jones deal in context of what it does beyond 2006, but the Cubs can win many more games with a strong pen. That is one area I have no qualms about spending early offseason $.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Back to the original question:

 

Seriously, my question would be: why did we beef up the bullpen at a premium and get stuck with jones in the OF? jones couldn't have been your first choice for RF.

 

I'd personally answer it that the bullpen has a much bigger impact on the game, individually and especially over the course of a season, than a corner OF. Nothing is as reassuring as a solid pen, and nothing is as deflating as blown leads late.

 

I'm not enamored with the Jones deal in context of what it does beyond 2006, but the Cubs can win many more games with a strong pen. That is one area I have no qualms about spending early offseason $.

 

The bullpen doesn't have a bigger impact than the offense, and Jones contributes to a below average offense.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Back to the original question:

 

Seriously, my question would be: why did we beef up the bullpen at a premium and get stuck with jones in the OF? jones couldn't have been your first choice for RF.

 

I'd personally answer it that the bullpen has a much bigger impact on the game, individually and especially over the course of a season, than a corner OF. Nothing is as reassuring as a solid pen, and nothing is as deflating as blown leads late.

 

I'm not enamored with the Jones deal in context of what it does beyond 2006, but the Cubs can win many more games with a strong pen. That is one area I have no qualms about spending early offseason $.

 

The bullpen doesn't have a bigger impact than the offense, and Jones contributes to a below average offense.

 

And once again, it's not an either/or proposition. It was possible to upgrade both, but now we know for sure RF isn't an upgrade, and the jury is out to whether the big money relievers repeat their career years.

[bmkhawk]

I'd answer, but you'll just say he wasn't really "available".

 

Ah, what the heck...he should have overpaid whatever it took to get Giles.

Well how about Milton Bradley or Brad Wilkerson. Both were traded this offseason, and therefore were available. Either would look a lot better in RF than Jones right now.

 

-Banghart

 

I wasn't aware that the Cubs had someone the likes of Alfonso Soriano to offer up for Wilkerson.

 

Not a fair example.

 

So many of you want your cake and to eat it too. Texas had to give up proven major league talent to get Wilkerson. Who could the Cubs have given up? Walker? please.

[bmkhawk]

I'd ask why aren't you forward thinking enough to have landed Andy Marte and Kelly Shoppach for yourself, instead of wasting time on deadbeats like Jacques Jones, Neifi Perez, Marquis Grissom and Pagan Angel? Just curious Jim.

 

Instead of wasting your thoughts away on pipe dreams, how 'bout you come up with some possible scenario where the Cubs could actually acquire those two without giving up some key component for next year's team? I don't see the Cubs just sitting around with an extra Coco Crisp to throw the Red Sox way and please don't suggest Patterson.

 

So many fans here seem insistant on focusing on the "why not" rather than the "how"...no wonder so many have a warped sense of reality. Of course, playing video game GMs have that impact sometimes....

[wade]

I don't ever play "video game G.M.", but I often find myself wondering why my favorite team didn't get a better right fielder this off-season. Maybe Hendry will answer that on the radio show today.

[rawaction]

I'd ask why aren't you forward thinking enough to have landed Andy Marte and Kelly Shoppach for yourself, instead of wasting time on deadbeats like Jacques Jones, Neifi Perez, Marquis Grissom and Pagan Angel? Just curious Jim.

 

Instead of wasting your thoughts away on pipe dreams, how 'bout you come up with some possible scenario where the Cubs could actually acquire those two without giving up some key component for next year's team? I don't see the Cubs just sitting around with an extra Coco Crisp to throw the Red Sox way and please don't suggest Patterson.

 

So many fans here seem insistant on focusing on the "why not" rather than the "how"...no wonder so many have a warped sense of reality. Of course, playing video game GMs have that impact sometimes....

 

Thanks for taking a personal shot at dkwg at the end there. That was uncalled for.

[Banghart]

I wasn't aware that the Cubs had someone the likes of Alfonso Soriano to offer up for Wilkerson.

 

Not a fair example.

 

So many of you want your cake and to eat it too. Texas had to give up proven major league talent to get Wilkerson. Who could the Cubs have given up? Walker? please.

I think it is completely fair to say that the Cubs could have gone out and improved at the position more than Jacque Jones. You might be right that we might not have matched up with the Nationals in making a trade, but let's also point out the fact that the Rangers got more than Wilkerson back. That means thatthe Nats valued Soriano more than Wilkerson. There were numerous reports that Nationals had interest in Patterson. It is entirely possible that a package of Patterson, Walker, and pitching prospect(s) (if the Cubs had said Rich Hill's name in a possible deal, I think the Nats would have listened very hard to the offer). It might have required the Cubs to overpay in a deal, but I don't think you can sit here and say that there was no way the Cubs could have acquired Wilkerson.

 

However, Wilkerson was available, and that fails to address Milton Bradley at all. The A's gave up prospects of some value to get him, but it wasn't a package the Cubs couldn't have beat if they wanted to. Instead they were willing to settle for the OBP void that will be Jacque Jones' spot in the batting order.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

However, Wilkerson was available, and that fails to address Milton Bradley at all. The A's gave up prospects of some value to get him, but it wasn't a package the Cubs couldn't have beat if they wanted to. Instead they were willing to settle for the OBP void that will be Jacque Jones' spot in the batting order.

 

The A's got Bradley for pennies on the dollar. They got Milton plus another solid bench player in Perez for someone who amounts to Brandon Sing that's 11 months younger.

[Banghart]

The A's got Bradley for pennies on the dollar. They got Milton plus another solid bench player in Perez for someone who amounts to Brandon Sing that's 11 months younger.

Yeah I recall being particularly frustrated when the Cubs failed to land Bradley. Thanks for the additional info about how little the A's gave to get Bradley. So I think it is pretty clear that the Jim Hendry had a few options that would have improved the offense versus Jacque Jones. Hendry could have improved the offense. However, he decided that not only was Jones a short term solution this year at a position the Cubs had no real prospects for, but was a long term solution at the position (the 3 year contract Jones received from Hendry as proof). I don't know if it can be shown any more clearly that the Cubs could have done better at RF, and that would have gone a long way to improve this offseason instead of at best remaining even with last year.

 

-Banghart

[Balsa]

So when is Hendry gonna be on?

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

it's on right now.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Hendry - "we had to address some glaring weaknesses"

- 7th and 8th inning pitching

- leadoff hitter (only 5-6 great ones in game)

 

- Howry and Eyre to be outstanding 8th inning pitchers

- big name closer would have been a splash, but we had Dempster

 

is the season going to depend on Wood and Prior?

- we've obviously added depth to the staff

- mentioned Angel Guzman as competing for a spot in ST

- confident Mark Prior is completely healthy

- Wood should be ready open week (or at worst a couple weeks behind according to doctor who did surgery)

- Rusch and Williams are fine

- we took a chance with Miller

- Z is on the road to stardom

- Maddux "can still pitch"

 

on Rusch...

- said Rusch's contract is very, very fair

- pitches well against St. Louis and Cincy

- owns left handed hitters

- Cinci matched up well against our right handers

 

Maddux hired a trainer in offseason (first time in 20 years he's done that)

- Greg has been really getting after it

 

phone line time!

-----------------------

Murton got sent down after performing fantastically. if goes 0-4 opening day, will we see grissom from then on?

 

- we are very committed to playing Murton and Cedeno every day.

- Ronny is unanimous ROY in Venezuela (close to being MVP of league)

 

STATION BREAK

[ThePenguin11]

...I'm new Cubs-kiss-ass, Bruce Levine, and this is baseball 365!

[JWCUB]

Hendry - "we had to address some glaring weaknesses"

- 7th and 8th inning pitching

- leadoff hitter (only 5-6 great ones in game)

 

- Howry and Eyre to be outstanding 8th inning pitchers

- big name closer would have been a splash, but we had Dempster

 

is the season going to depend on Wood and Prior?

- we've obviously added depth to the staff

- mentioned Angel Guzman as competing for a spot in ST

- confident Mark Prior is completely healthy

- Wood should be ready open week (or at worst a couple weeks behind according to doctor who did surgery)

- Rusch and Williams are fine

- we took a chance with Miller

- Z is on the road to stardom

- Maddux "can still pitch"

 

on Rusch...

- said Rusch's contract is very, very fair

- pitches well against St. Louis and Cincy

- owns left handed hitters

- Cinci matched up well against our right handers

 

Maddux hired a trainer in offseason (first time in 20 years he's done that)

- Greg has been really getting after it

 

phone line time!

-----------------------

Murton got sent down after performing fantastically. if goes 0-4 opening day, will we see grissom from then on?

 

- we are very committed to playing Murton and Cedeno every day.

- Ronny is unanimous ROY in Venezuela (close to being MVP of league)

 

STATION BREAK

 

Very nice recap. Keep it up. :)

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

...I'm new Cubs-kiss-ass, Bruce Levine, and this is baseball 365!

 

haha, that was funny how he threw in that bit about Dusty loving the kids and the reason he has that label is that he didn't get any quality youngsters to play in SF. :lol:

[ThePenguin11]

...I'm new Cubs-kiss-ass, Bruce Levine, and this is baseball 365!

 

haha, that was funny how he threw in that bit about Dusty loving the kids and the reason he has that label is that he didn't get any quality youngsters to play in SF. :lol:

 

That, and the fact that he prefaced the whole thing by basically saying "We'll be taking calls with Jim later, so please be really nice and don't ask any tough, critical questions.

[JWCUB]

I hope Jim says that he has loaded up on pitching to trade them to get a BIG TIME bat. Say.......Abrau, Manny......Right :lol:

[ThePenguin11]

That Jones/Pierre caller had to be a ringer. That sounded like a question that they would want Jim to be asked.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

all new OF

- will be a very productive OF

- Pierre will ignite offense, quality defender, good teammate

- happy with Murton's progress; hit for power and average

- Jones isn't getting hoopla, but is very good player and is productive

 

- ability is there to get hits, but we didn't have timely hitting last year

- more hitting and running, and running

- cedeno and murton could eventually be #2 hitters

- we think we have some good candidates for the 2 hole

 

phone

-----------

excited about pierre as cub. how does he mesh with jones?

 

we needed a lefty hitter. our scouts felt jones was a much better player than the last couple lines on his bubble gum card. he plays outstanding D and will be much more productive than he was last year.

------------

 

Felix Pie had unfortunate winter

- hairline stress fracture in June

- should have been here same date as Murton but injury happened

- didn't get a chance to get a good look at him

- missed a lot of time

- off to a slow start b/c of a lack of playing

- needs to play more in the system

- w/ missed time won't be ready to go opening day in MLB

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

haha, the screener won't let me on air b/c my question isn't nice. :cry:

[ThePenguin11]

haha, the screener won't let me on air b/c my question isn't nice. :cry:

 

That might explain why we're listening to Jim's biography. NO SOFTBALLS!!!