Abreu to the White Sox in the Rumor Mill

[goonys evil twin]

You're completely missing the point.

 

Hendry is absolutely in a position to carry out the plan you describe (namely, develop young arms and then trade them for a big bat).

 

The rub is, the young arms they've developed (Prior, Z) are worth more than Abreu.

 

So by your logic, the "failure" here is that Prior and Z turned out *too good*.

 

Either that, or you're in favor of a straight swap of Prior or Zambrano for Abreu.

 

As I said at the top, that would be completely consistent with the strategy that you claim Hendry should be pursuing, but somehow can't.

 

Sorry, but you're failing to apply logic to this debate. The plan was never to develop great pitchers and then trade them. The plan was develop a core of players (which Zambrano and Prior are apart of) and then trade others for the difference makers. If Hendry doesn't have those others to trade for a difference maker, than he either failed to develop them, or squandered them frivolously. Either way, the plan was not carried through well enough.

[Shawon12]

The Yanks gave Contreras away for a bag of beans, and now the White Sox are on the verge of turning him into Abreu?

 

:shock:

 

If that happens, Kenny Williams is officially a genius. There would be no possible way to argue against it. I can't believe he would be able to pull this off.

 

The difference is that Contreres pitched like Cy Young for the Sox. Williams is just in a position to sell while his value is highest.

[TheDude]

The plan was develop a core of players (which Zambrano and Prior are apart of) and then trade others for the difference makers. If Hendry doesn't have those others to trade for a difference maker, than he either failed to develop them, or squandered them frivolously. Either way, the plan was not carried through well enough.

 

Then why disagree with trading the most qualified of the pitching youth (Williams) as part of a package to get a bat? I realize this is slightly out of thread context, but we've disagreed in recent weeks on whether or not to use Williams as a trade chip at his current value - with you stating he has more value to the team than as a trade chip.

[davearm]

You're completely missing the point.

 

Hendry is absolutely in a position to carry out the plan you describe (namely, develop young arms and then trade them for a big bat).

 

The rub is, the young arms they've developed (Prior, Z) are worth more than Abreu.

 

So by your logic, the "failure" here is that Prior and Z turned out *too good*.

 

Either that, or you're in favor of a straight swap of Prior or Zambrano for Abreu.

 

As I said at the top, that would be completely consistent with the strategy that you claim Hendry should be pursuing, but somehow can't.

 

Sorry, but you're failing to apply logic to this debate. The plan was never to develop great pitchers and then trade them. The plan was develop a core of players (which Zambrano and Prior are apart of) and then trade others for the difference makers. If Hendry doesn't have those others to trade for a difference maker, than he either failed to develop them, or squandered them frivolously. Either way, the plan was not carried through well enough.

Remind me again how Hendry acquired offensive "difference makers" named Lee, Ramirez, and Garciaparra (and, hopefully, Pierre).

 

To say that Hendry, can't/won't/hasn't done exactly what you're advocating is either misguided, uninformed, or both.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

You're completely missing the point.

 

Hendry is absolutely in a position to carry out the plan you describe (namely, develop young arms and then trade them for a big bat).

 

The rub is, the young arms they've developed (Prior, Z) are worth more than Abreu.

 

So by your logic, the "failure" here is that Prior and Z turned out *too good*.

 

Either that, or you're in favor of a straight swap of Prior or Zambrano for Abreu.

 

As I said at the top, that would be completely consistent with the strategy that you claim Hendry should be pursuing, but somehow can't.

 

Sorry, but you're failing to apply logic to this debate. The plan was never to develop great pitchers and then trade them. The plan was develop a core of players (which Zambrano and Prior are apart of) and then trade others for the difference makers. If Hendry doesn't have those others to trade for a difference maker, than he either failed to develop them, or squandered them frivolously. Either way, the plan was not carried through well enough.

Remind me again how Hendry acquired offensive "difference makers" named Lee, Ramirez, and Garciaparra (and, hopefully, Pierre).

 

To say that Hendry, can't/won't/hasn't done exactly what you're advocating is either misguided, uninformed, or both.

 

By taking advantage of monetary dilemmas in the Lee and Ramirez deals, and by orchestrating a crazy enough deal that he was able to deal quantities of prospects rather than more proven qualities, the Nomar deal. In this(and other cases), the team isn't in a financial bind(although money plays a role in every deal), and there are teams willing to give the more proven commodities that Hendry is unable to provide, because of the reasons I stated before.

[davearm]

You're completely missing the point.

 

Hendry is absolutely in a position to carry out the plan you describe (namely, develop young arms and then trade them for a big bat).

 

The rub is, the young arms they've developed (Prior, Z) are worth more than Abreu.

 

So by your logic, the "failure" here is that Prior and Z turned out *too good*.

 

Either that, or you're in favor of a straight swap of Prior or Zambrano for Abreu.

 

As I said at the top, that would be completely consistent with the strategy that you claim Hendry should be pursuing, but somehow can't.

 

Sorry, but you're failing to apply logic to this debate. The plan was never to develop great pitchers and then trade them. The plan was develop a core of players (which Zambrano and Prior are apart of) and then trade others for the difference makers. If Hendry doesn't have those others to trade for a difference maker, than he either failed to develop them, or squandered them frivolously. Either way, the plan was not carried through well enough.

Remind me again how Hendry acquired offensive "difference makers" named Lee, Ramirez, and Garciaparra (and, hopefully, Pierre).

 

To say that Hendry, can't/won't/hasn't done exactly what you're advocating is either misguided, uninformed, or both.

 

By taking advantage of monetary dilemmas in the Lee and Ramirez deals, and by orchestrating a crazy enough deal that he was able to deal quantities of prospects rather than more proven qualities, the Nomar deal. In this(and other cases), the team isn't in a financial bind(although money plays a role in every deal), and there are teams willing to give the more proven commodities that Hendry is unable to provide, because of the reasons I stated before.

The bottom line is that Hendry got these guys, and in the exact manner being described -- system-bred prospects dealt for "difference makers".

 

What I'm hearing folks here say is that it's a shame that the Cubs don't have more solid-but-unspectacular veteran talent hanging around that could be traded for Bobby Abreu. Instead, we've got a core of bonafide stars surrounded by unproven young guys, essentially -- nothing much in the middle.

 

This mentality assumes two things:

a) the Phils are indeed prepared to deal Abreu for mediocre veteran talent, and

b) absent such trade opportunities, having an abundance of mediocre talent is somehow advantageous to the "high/low" structure the Cubs have instead.

 

It also ignores that the Cubs have their share of solid-but-unspectacular veterans too -- they just don't happen to be of the type the Phils are apparently interested in.

 

Although that's too bad, it's hardly an indictment of the system that's in place.

Edited February 1, 2006 by davearm

[Andy]

I doubt this will happen, but if it did I would wonder if JH and Kenny Williams roles are reversed.

JH convinced teams to give him guys with upside for nothing. KW would, if this trade went through, have convinced Philly to give him an already established star for slightly more than nothing.

 

I don't know if that would speak more to KW or whoever Philly's GM is, but it's definitely not quite the same as what JH did in 2003.

[badger1679666666]

You're completely missing the point.

 

Hendry is absolutely in a position to carry out the plan you describe (namely, develop young arms and then trade them for a big bat).

 

The rub is, the young arms they've developed (Prior, Z) are worth more than Abreu.

 

So by your logic, the "failure" here is that Prior and Z turned out *too good*.

 

Either that, or you're in favor of a straight swap of Prior or Zambrano for Abreu.

 

As I said at the top, that would be completely consistent with the strategy that you claim Hendry should be pursuing, but somehow can't.

 

Sorry, but you're failing to apply logic to this debate. The plan was never to develop great pitchers and then trade them. The plan was develop a core of players (which Zambrano and Prior are apart of) and then trade others for the difference makers. If Hendry doesn't have those others to trade for a difference maker, than he either failed to develop them, or squandered them frivolously. Either way, the plan was not carried through well enough.

Remind me again how Hendry acquired offensive "difference makers" named Lee, Ramirez, and Garciaparra (and, hopefully, Pierre).

 

To say that Hendry, can't/won't/hasn't done exactly what you're advocating is either misguided, uninformed, or both.

 

By taking advantage of monetary dilemmas in the Lee and Ramirez deals, and by orchestrating a crazy enough deal that he was able to deal quantities of prospects rather than more proven qualities, the Nomar deal. In this(and other cases), the team isn't in a financial bind(although money plays a role in every deal), and there are teams willing to give the more proven commodities that Hendry is unable to provide, because of the reasons I stated before.

 

I'm as frustrated with Hendry as the next Cubs fan, especially this off season, but I find it interesting how credit is never given for his great acquisitions (Lee, Ramirez, Barrett, Nomar/Murton).

 

Those moves are not good enough to excuse this piss poor offseason, but Hendry traded prospects for solid talent (which appears to be a large part of his plan all along). We don't have what Philly wants, it's as simple as that.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

You're completely missing the point.

 

Hendry is absolutely in a position to carry out the plan you describe (namely, develop young arms and then trade them for a big bat).

 

The rub is, the young arms they've developed (Prior, Z) are worth more than Abreu.

 

So by your logic, the "failure" here is that Prior and Z turned out *too good*.

 

Either that, or you're in favor of a straight swap of Prior or Zambrano for Abreu.

 

As I said at the top, that would be completely consistent with the strategy that you claim Hendry should be pursuing, but somehow can't.

 

Sorry, but you're failing to apply logic to this debate. The plan was never to develop great pitchers and then trade them. The plan was develop a core of players (which Zambrano and Prior are apart of) and then trade others for the difference makers. If Hendry doesn't have those others to trade for a difference maker, than he either failed to develop them, or squandered them frivolously. Either way, the plan was not carried through well enough.

Remind me again how Hendry acquired offensive "difference makers" named Lee, Ramirez, and Garciaparra (and, hopefully, Pierre).

 

To say that Hendry, can't/won't/hasn't done exactly what you're advocating is either misguided, uninformed, or both.

 

By taking advantage of monetary dilemmas in the Lee and Ramirez deals, and by orchestrating a crazy enough deal that he was able to deal quantities of prospects rather than more proven qualities, the Nomar deal. In this(and other cases), the team isn't in a financial bind(although money plays a role in every deal), and there are teams willing to give the more proven commodities that Hendry is unable to provide, because of the reasons I stated before.

 

I'm as frustrated with Hendry as the next Cubs fan, especially this off season, but I find it interesting how credit is never given for his great acquisitions (Lee, Ramirez, Barrett, Nomar/Murton).

 

Those moves are not good enough to excuse this piss poor offseason, but Hendry traded prospects for solid talent (which appears to be a large part of his plan all along). We don't have what Philly wants, it's as simple as that.

 

Hendry certainly gets credit for pulling off those deals, the problem is that sort of situation isn't always going to be there to help you fill a need.

[Diffusion]

The plan was develop a core of players (which Zambrano and Prior are apart of) and then trade others for the difference makers. If Hendry doesn't have those others to trade for a difference maker, than he either failed to develop them, or squandered them frivolously. Either way, the plan was not carried through well enough.

Remind me again how Hendry acquired offensive "difference makers" named Lee, Ramirez, and Garciaparra (and, hopefully, Pierre).

 

A fair point, but the trouble is that the last and least profitable of those deals was pulled off over 18 months ago now. Garciaparra has since walked, and the offence now has nothing to really commend itself besides Lee and Ramirez. I can see why other people may have their concerns about Walker, Barrett, Murton and Cedeno, individually and collectively, but personally I was reasonably happy with the prospect of those four all being in this year's lineup on one condition: the Cubs filled the two remaining positions, right field and centre field, with one solid above average player and one proper impact player. Three big bats in the middle of the order, supported by three above average bats, plus the two wild-card rookies, that would have given the Cubs the kind of lineup to really put themselves in which a good shot at the World Series.

 

Instead, Hendry went out and he got for himself a pair of mediocrities in Juan Pierre and Jacque Jones. Now we have two offensive stars, two above average bats with questionable defence, two average bats, and two wild-cards. That's not a recipe for any kind of success: instead, if we're going to succeed, it'll be because we got away with heavily relying on the rookies and the starting pitching, things we should have learnt not to do last winter when putting a lot of eggs in the Dubois, Wood and Prior basket didn't turn out to be such a profitable move.

[goonys evil twin]

The plan was develop a core of players (which Zambrano and Prior are apart of) and then trade others for the difference makers. If Hendry doesn't have those others to trade for a difference maker, than he either failed to develop them, or squandered them frivolously. Either way, the plan was not carried through well enough.

 

Then why disagree with trading the most qualified of the pitching youth (Williams) as part of a package to get a bat? I realize this is slightly out of thread context, but we've disagreed in recent weeks on whether or not to use Williams as a trade chip at his current value - with you stating he has more value to the team than as a trade chip.

 

You are wrong there. I'm all for trading Williams for an actual offensive upgrade. He's got value to this team because the pitching is so questionable and they need the qualified arms, so it would be silly to trade him for marginal upgrades, but I would be, and I have been, all for trading Williams for a good bat.

[Diffusion]

I'm as frustrated with Hendry as the next Cubs fan, especially this off season, but I find it interesting how credit is never given for his great acquisitions (Lee, Ramirez, Barrett, Nomar/Murton).

 

He's always given credit for those moves. In the space of the eighteen months up to the Nomar trade, Hendry overhauled the roster and had extremely impressively delivered the team to the verge of the big time. Why people are frustrated with Hendry is because he's since done very little of note, and the Cubs' situation since 31st July 2004 has deteriorated, not improved. That's why people are fed up.

[davearm]

The plan was develop a core of players (which Zambrano and Prior are apart of) and then trade others for the difference makers. If Hendry doesn't have those others to trade for a difference maker, than he either failed to develop them, or squandered them frivolously. Either way, the plan was not carried through well enough.

Remind me again how Hendry acquired offensive "difference makers" named Lee, Ramirez, and Garciaparra (and, hopefully, Pierre).

 

A fair point, but the trouble is that the last and least profitable of those deals was pulled off over 18 months ago now. Garciaparra has since walked, and the offence now has nothing to really commend itself besides Lee and Ramirez. I can see why other people may have their concerns about Walker, Barrett, Murton and Cedeno, individually and collectively, but personally I was reasonably happy with the prospect of those four all being in this year's lineup on one condition: the Cubs filled the two remaining positions, right field and centre field, with one solid above average player and one proper impact player. Three big bats in the middle of the order, supported by three above average bats, plus the two wild-card rookies, that would have given the Cubs the kind of lineup to really put themselves in which a good shot at the World Series.

 

Instead, Hendry went out and he got for himself a pair of mediocrities in Juan Pierre and Jacque Jones. Now we have two offensive stars, two above average bats with questionable defence, two average bats, and two wild-cards. That's not a recipe for any kind of success: instead, if we're going to succeed, it'll be because we got away with heavily relying on the rookies and the starting pitching, things we should have learnt not to do last winter when putting a lot of eggs in the Dubois, Wood and Prior basket didn't turn out to be such a profitable move.

I'm in full agreement, and I bet Jim Hendry is too.

 

The problem is that there comes a point where the cost to acquire that third impact player becomes too high. In this case, that price apparently was Mark Prior (for Tejada or Abreu).

 

At that point you have to ask yourself, "is that crucial third heart-of-the-order bat worth having a significant hole in the rotation?" I, for one, think Hendry was right to answer, "no".

 

Sure we'd all like to have gotten either of those guys for prospects, but that wasn't in the cards... not for our prospects, or anyone else's, if the various reports are accurate indicating each team was holding out for an established #1 or #2 starter.

[goonys evil twin]

Remind me again how Hendry acquired offensive "difference makers" named Lee, Ramirez, and Garciaparra (and, hopefully, Pierre).

 

To say that Hendry, can't/won't/hasn't done exactly what you're advocating is either misguided, uninformed, or both.

 

None of those trades put them over the top, and none of them have happened within the past 2 offseasons (Pierre is no difference maker, he's just an example of Hendry once again overemphasizing unimportant physical characteristics over actual production), when the Cubs most needed an improved bat. The Cubs needed Lee and Ramirez just to form the core, because Jim and his assistants were so terrible at developing position players. The problem is with this core, they're just an above average team at best. Now they have to make those moves to move into the elite, and they've failed miserably in attempting that move (if they even attempted it at all).

 

This all goes back to this team's failures of actually developing major league talent (which Jim is largely to blame, since that was his job for so long). But it includes Jim's failures as GM, which are plainly obvious to anybody that can find the standings and the stats pages. Jim has not built a very good team. And just when this team was positioned to benefit most from a supposedly strong farm system (the core is in place), Jim has come up short transitioning that strong farm into a strong major league team.

 

He's a failure, just like practically every Cubs GM we've ever seen. If he wasn't, this team would have won more than 79 last year, and would be in a position to be a top club this season.

 

He either failed as farm director, failed as GM, or mixed some of both. But the results speak for themselves. I for one don't see the back to back over .500 seasons, followed by two disastrous offseasons, a 79 win season and now hope for an 85 win season, as anything but failure from a GM in charge of a big market team.

[goonys evil twin]

The problem is that there comes a point where the cost to acquire that third impact player becomes too high. In this case, that price apparently was Mark Prior (for Tejada or Abreu).

 

At that point you have to ask yourself, "is that crucial third heart-of-the-order bat worth having a significant hole in the rotation?" I, for one, think Hendry was right to answer, "no".

 

Those aren't the only two possibilities, Prior isn't the only tradable asset, and Jim should have done a better job in past seasons to prepare for a time when he needed that last big bat.

 

You can't excuse the team's overall failings by saying "well, he's made good trades in the past", and you can't say it's not his fault he was priced out of the market this year, when moves, and the lack of moves, in the past, put him in the situation he is in now.

[goonys evil twin]

I'm in full agreement, and I bet Jim Hendry is too.

 

You think Jim agrees that Pierre and Jones are a pair of mediocrities and that the current makeup of the Cubs is not a recipe for success? I don't think so.

 

I think Jim is a little shellshocked that he's left with what he has, but for the most part, I think he is satisfied with what he has put together. He went hard after Pierre, and overpaid. He likes the Jones type of player, and people were predicting he'd end up with Jacque long before they ended up scraping at the bottom of the barrel. This isn't some accident or tough situation that Hendry was thrust into. This team is his making, from the farm to the veterans, it's all Hendry, and it screams mediocre disappointment.

[Roast]

If the Sox get Abreu, I quit.

 

Life.

[Diffusion]

The problem is that there comes a point where the cost to acquire that third impact player becomes too high. In this case, that price apparently was Mark Prior (for Tejada or Abreu).

 

At that point you have to ask yourself, "is that crucial third heart-of-the-order bat worth having a significant hole in the rotation?" I, for one, think Hendry was right to answer, "no".

 

No, at that point you have to ask yourself the question, "how on earth is that other teams have been able to acquire impact players this winter without anyone as good as Mark Prior changing hands?".

 

And a good part of that does boil down to the Cubs having a very unusual roster in that they have stars that the Cubs shouldn't be thinking about dealing, veterans that only the Cubs seem to really want, and prospects that other teams don't seem interested enough in, partially because they're unproven, and partially because we don't have much impact level prospect talent in our system, not enough that the Cubs feel comfortable putting any of it out there on the table.

 

Now whose fault is that? Whose fault is it that the farm system's not that strong? Whose fault is that we persist in signing and playing cruddy veterans, forcing prospects that are actually ready into the periphary? It's our own fault. What little talent we have actually developed we've hardly given the chance to actually prosper and flourish and become decent at the major league level. We've blocked them with the likes of Neifi, Hairston, Macias, Maddux, Rusch, Koronka, Wellemeyer, Bartosh and so on, none of whom have any real value to anyone. If Andy Sisco was still with the Cubs, not for the sake of there being anyone more talented ahead of him, he'd probably be heading back to Double-A this year.

 

The other part of it is that Hendry has recently been showing no creative faculty whatsoever, no willingness to think outside the box a little, nothing. He's seemingly run out of ideas to the extent that he brings up Mark Prior's name in trade discussions.

[KingCubsFan]

 

No, at that point you have to ask yourself the question, "how on earth is that other teams have been able to acquire impact players this winter without anyone as good as Mark Prior changing hands?".

 

Who are these impact players?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

 

No, at that point you have to ask yourself the question, "how on earth is that other teams have been able to acquire impact players this winter without anyone as good as Mark Prior changing hands?".

 

Who are these impact players?

 

Thome, Beckett, Glaus, Delgado, from a quick check. There may be more.

 

EDIT: Giles and Konerko were free agents. Abreu and Tejada were rumored to be traded, along with names like Burrell and Tracy, Wilkerson and Soriano(can o' worms) were dealt. Millwood was a FA, Garland(can o' worms part deux) was rumored to be on the block as well.

Edited February 1, 2006 by Transmogrified Tiger

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

If the Sox get Abreu, I quit.

 

Life.

 

:lol:

[Brian]

Thome, Beckett, Glaus, Delgado, from a quick check. There may be more.

 

None of those impact players play a position of need of the Cubs though (a case can be made for Beckett I suppose)

[YearofDaCubs]

Why would anybody in their right minds still support Hendry? He hasn't done squat in years. I could care less what he did in 2003, last time I checked it's Feb 2006 and with 100mil payroll we still are not WS contenders IMO. Hendry doesn't have a clue on how to piece together a winning team..bank on it. 2003 was an aberration.

[KingCubsFan]

 

No, at that point you have to ask yourself the question, "how on earth is that other teams have been able to acquire impact players this winter without anyone as good as Mark Prior changing hands?".

 

Who are these impact players?

 

Thome, Beckett, Glaus, Delgado, from a quick check. There may be more.

So a pitcher and 3 postion players who play our two strongest postions?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Thome, Beckett, Glaus, Delgado, from a quick check. There may be more.

 

None of those impact players play a position of need of the Cubs though (a case can be made for Beckett I suppose)

 

The idea isn't that the Cubs should've gone out and gotten them, the idea is that the respective teams got those impact players without giving up anyone near Prior's worth.