Hendry extended through 2008

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Expecting that those players won't continue along their career norms is being pessimistic. Even if Jones has a "bad" year it shouldn't be too different than Encarnacion's overall numbers.

 

The Cubs can win with them whether they are mediocre or not. The Cardinals aren't running out world beaters in the OF; with the exception of Edmonds, there is nothing special. It will be their pitching, and the presence of their middle of the order hitters, that will decide their season. Similarly, if the Cubs manage to pitch well their offense should be enough on most days.

 

I didn't say to expect the players to dip below career norms, I'm saying that it's as likely as all of them playing over your heads, which you stipluated in the previous post. The Cards have a merely okay outfield, but it's still superior to ours, check the thread in Rivalries.

 

And of course, the Cubs can win with an outfield like that, it just makes things more difficult. With the resources Hendry has, it's not too much to ask that the outfield be better than it is.

 

No, I said that if they play to their career norms the team will be fine, I didn't say anything about playing over their heads...

 

I disagree. If Pierre returns to his career norms, Murton provides consistent offense along the lines of his MiL and ML numbers, and Jones increases his numbers (not a career year but respectable) the team should be fine. I don't care what they hit in relation to other OF in the League, if they get hits, walks, RBI, during their turn in the batters box they will be productive and the team will benefit.

 

Jones playing better than he has the last several years would be playing over his head, as would Murton putting up an .830 OPS. Apologies with regards to Pierre, who's career averages are well below average(87 career OPS+, although he has played in some extreme parks so that probably has some wiggle room)

 

No, it wouldn't be playing over Jones' head. I'm not talking about a career year, I'm talking about taking more walks (which he has increased over the last couple years) and striking out a little less. Even if he has a low BA his OBP can be respectable. I'm also not talking about .830 OPS for Murton. My focus has been on his average and OBP. It's obvious that he is a patient hitter who will manage to get on base (whether he hits for power or not).

 

You said they were going to be a "complete disaster" this is where we disagree the most because you are focusing only on their SLG abilities. My point is that they don't have to be very powerful collectively if they are able to get on base via walk, hit, or other means.

 

The outfield is almost half the offense! They have to have some semblence of power as a group. Jones is just bad at getting on base, and has mediocre power for a corner outfielder. Pierre can be good at getting on base, but he hits for absolutely no power(pre-emptive statement: Power is NOT home runs, it's hitting for extra bases). Murton may or may not give you good OBP or power. In all likelihood he'll give you okay OBP and below average power, especially for a corner OF. On the whole, that makes the outfield not very good at all, especially for a high payroll team like the Cubs.

[Blueheart05]

Expecting that those players won't continue along their career norms is being pessimistic. Even if Jones has a "bad" year it shouldn't be too different than Encarnacion's overall numbers.

 

The Cubs can win with them whether they are mediocre or not. The Cardinals aren't running out world beaters in the OF; with the exception of Edmonds, there is nothing special. It will be their pitching, and the presence of their middle of the order hitters, that will decide their season. Similarly, if the Cubs manage to pitch well their offense should be enough on most days.

 

I didn't say to expect the players to dip below career norms, I'm saying that it's as likely as all of them playing over your heads, which you stipluated in the previous post. The Cards have a merely okay outfield, but it's still superior to ours, check the thread in Rivalries.

 

And of course, the Cubs can win with an outfield like that, it just makes things more difficult. With the resources Hendry has, it's not too much to ask that the outfield be better than it is.

 

No, I said that if they play to their career norms the team will be fine, I didn't say anything about playing over their heads...

 

I disagree. If Pierre returns to his career norms, Murton provides consistent offense along the lines of his MiL and ML numbers, and Jones increases his numbers (not a career year but respectable) the team should be fine. I don't care what they hit in relation to other OF in the League, if they get hits, walks, RBI, during their turn in the batters box they will be productive and the team will benefit.

 

Jones playing better than he has the last several years would be playing over his head, as would Murton putting up an .830 OPS. Apologies with regards to Pierre, who's career averages are well below average(87 career OPS+, although he has played in some extreme parks so that probably has some wiggle room)

 

No, it wouldn't be playing over Jones' head. I'm not talking about a career year, I'm talking about taking more walks (which he has increased over the last couple years) and striking out a little less. Even if he has a low BA his OBP can be respectable. I'm also not talking about .830 OPS for Murton. My focus has been on his average and OBP. It's obvious that he is a patient hitter who will manage to get on base (whether he hits for power or not).

 

You said they were going to be a "complete disaster" this is where we disagree the most because you are focusing only on their SLG abilities. My point is that they don't have to be very powerful collectively if they are able to get on base via walk, hit, or other means.

 

The outfield is almost half the offense! They have to have some semblence of power as a group. Jones is just bad at getting on base, and has mediocre power for a corner outfielder. Pierre can be good at getting on base, but he hits for absolutely no power(pre-emptive statement: Power is NOT home runs, it's hitting for extra bases). Murton may or may not give you good OBP or power. In all likelihood he'll give you okay OBP and below average power, especially for a corner OF. On the whole, that makes the outfield not very good at all, especially for a high payroll team like the Cubs.

 

Here again, I disagree with the tenor of your post because your underline assertion is that their lack of collective power makes winning difficult to impossible. While I will agree that they aren't going to be very powerful, I think they will get a fair share of XBH. However, it's far more important that they get on base consistently. A starting outfield of Alou, Patterson, and Sosa, didn't propel the Cubs to the postseason because the team didn't pitch well enough to win nor did they get on base enough to pressure their opponents.

 

It's obvious that the Cubs aren't going to be playing so called "station to station" baseball. To make up for the lack of power there will be more hit and run plays and stolen base attempts (among other things). Again, none of that means anything if they don't get on base consistently. Team OBP will be much more important than team OPS (or more specifically, OF OPS).

[Geech]

Here again, I disagree with the tenor of your post because your underline assertion is that their lack of collective power makes winning difficult to impossible.

 

That is actually not what he wrote at all:

 

And of course, the Cubs can win with an outfield like that, it just makes things more difficult. With the resources Hendry has, it's not too much to ask that the outfield be better than it is...

 

On the whole, that makes the outfield not very good at all, especially for a high payroll team like the Cubs.

[Blueheart05]

Here again, I disagree with the tenor of your post because your underline assertion is that their lack of collective power makes winning difficult to impossible.

 

That is actually not what he wrote at all:

 

And of course, the Cubs can win with an outfield like that, it just makes things more difficult. With the resources Hendry has, it's not too much to ask that the outfield be better than it is...

 

On the whole, that makes the outfield not very good at all, especially for a high payroll team like the Cubs.

 

 

I think he did say it makes things more difficult... Anyway, I'm not trying to nitpick. I understand what he's saying. The OF won't supply a lot of power (and will actually be below average when compared to other OF). Point well taken. My argument is with the assertion that they will be a "complete disaster." All I'm trying to do is illustrate how they can be productive minus the plethora of XBH.

[CUBZ99]

Here again, I disagree with the tenor of your post because your underline assertion is that their lack of collective power makes winning difficult to impossible.

 

That is actually not what he wrote at all:

 

And of course, the Cubs can win with an outfield like that, it just makes things more difficult. With the resources Hendry has, it's not too much to ask that the outfield be better than it is...

 

On the whole, that makes the outfield not very good at all, especially for a high payroll team like the Cubs.

 

 

I think he did say it makes things more difficult... Anyway, I'm not trying to nitpick. I understand what he's saying. The OF won't supply a lot of power (and will actually be below average when compared to other OF). Point well taken. My argument is with the assertion that they will be a "complete disaster." All I'm trying to do is illustrate how they can be productive minus the plethora of XBH.

 

 

Kind of suprised to be reading this from TT (CPatt20). Of all people he seemed the less likely to argue about, a single stat, mainly OPS being a large factor in the success of the OF.

 

TT - do your statements on the OF take into account the power potential in the infield? Lee, Rameriz, Walker and Barrett are all capable of putting up some decent/great power numbers for their respective positions.

 

*edited for poor english

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Here again, I disagree with the tenor of your post because your underline assertion is that their lack of collective power makes winning difficult to impossible.

 

That is actually not what he wrote at all:

 

And of course, the Cubs can win with an outfield like that, it just makes things more difficult. With the resources Hendry has, it's not too much to ask that the outfield be better than it is...

 

On the whole, that makes the outfield not very good at all, especially for a high payroll team like the Cubs.

 

 

I think he did say it makes things more difficult... Anyway, I'm not trying to nitpick. I understand what he's saying. The OF won't supply a lot of power (and will actually be below average when compared to other OF). Point well taken. My argument is with the assertion that they will be a "complete disaster." All I'm trying to do is illustrate how they can be productive minus the plethora of XBH.

 

 

Kind of suprised to be reading this from TT (CPatt20). Of all people he seemed the less likely to argue about, a single stat, mainly OPS being a large factor in the success of the OF.

 

TT - do your statements on the OF take into account the power potential in the infield? Lee, Ramirez, Walker and Barrett are all capable of putting up some decent/great power numbers for their respective positions.

 

*edited for poor english

 

I use OPS and OPS+ because they are quick(albeit dirty) and easily accessible metrics of overall production. That's the point I'm trying to get across, that our total offensive output from the OF is not going to be very good, and it would take much more time to use RC or XR.

 

The infield's production is largely irrelevant for the purposes of this thread. With the resources at his disposal, Hendry should not have to settle for a poor outfield. Part of that problem is an (over)emphasis on defense(Jones signing), partly an (over)emphasis on lineup position over actual production(Pierre trade), and some bad luck/poor planning in this offseason's moves(losing out on Furcal/Lugo/Giles/etc. leads to having both Murton and Cedeno in the starting lineup). Individually you can make a case for those moves, but when they add up as a whole to the outfield that we have, it's unacceptable for a team with the Cubs payroll.

[Jon]

The bright side of an extension is that he won't have passed off the horrible Jones deal and another year of Neifi and Rusch at those prices onto another GM.

 

OF course there's time for other such deals.

[neely crenshaw]

playing to their career norms is actually over their head for several. it has been a few years since they have performed at their norms so the likely hood of them playing at their norms is a stretch.

jones for one has been around .50 points below his norm...

pierre has been way below

hairston

walker(because of injuries and splitting time)

cedeno has no real norms

murton has no real norms

 

i guess if you mean aram, lee and barrett....and i would say they have to repaet last year(or at least close for lee) for us to win

[mhuber92211]

The bright side of an extension is that he won't have passed off the horrible Jones deal and another year of Neifi and Rusch at those prices onto another GM.

 

OF course there's time for other such deals.

 

Yes because those 3 deals are the reason the Cubs aren't expected to win. Real franchise cornerstones there.

[Jon]

The bright side of an extension is that he won't have passed off the horrible Jones deal and another year of Neifi and Rusch at those prices onto another GM.

 

OF course there's time for other such deals.

 

Yes because those 3 deals are the reason the Cubs aren't expected to win. Real franchise cornerstones there.

That's not much of a defense for three bad multi-year deals.

[USSoccer]

The bright side of an extension is that he won't have passed off the horrible Jones deal and another year of Neifi and Rusch at those prices onto another GM.

 

OF course there's time for other such deals.

 

Yes because those 3 deals are the reason the Cubs aren't expected to win. Real franchise cornerstones there.

 

That's over 10% of the payroll that's sunk into mediocrity, though. You can't gripe about the cheapness of the TribCo if they give a GM $95m and he uses up a 10% chunk of it on bad players.

[Jon]

The deal's going down on Saturday, according to Cubs.com.

 

Or at least that's when it's being announced.

[goonys evil twin]

The deal's going down on Saturday, according to Cubs.com.

 

Or at least that's when it's being announced.

 

I don't get why they announce when they will make an announcement.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

The deal's going down on Saturday, according to Cubs.com.

 

Or at least that's when it's being announced.

 

I don't get why they announce when they will make an announcement.

 

Didn't you get the memo?

[hawkcub]

ESPN 1000 just reported that Hendry signed a 2 year extension.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

ESPN 1000 just reported that Hendry signed a 2 year extension.

 

At least it's only 2 years.

[Jon]

He probably won't want to have this announcement come on the same day that contract talks with Lee get put on hold for the season.

[Jon]

Here's the press release.

[baseball7897]

Now it is time to lock up D-Lee. Not sure what other people think of Jim Hendry but I like the moves he has made, and I'm glad to see he got an extension he deserved it.

[Brian]

The way I look at it is, if they don't extend Hendry the next GM will more than likely be worse then him. Hate him or love him, Hendry has worked some incredible trades, now if he can just sign some good free agents.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

The way I look at it is, if they don't extend Hendry the next GM will more than likely be worse then him.

 

I don't know how you can say that. It could be, but I don't see why it would be more than likely.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

The way I look at it is, if they don't extend Hendry the next GM will more than likely be worse then him. Hate him or love him, Hendry has worked some incredible trades, now if he can just sign some good free agents.

 

Good point. I like Hendry's trades for the most part. It's overpaying for bench players, relievers, and free agents that get me riled up.

 

I wasn't big at all on the Howry, Eyre, or Jones signings...but I'll happily munch on some crow.

[mhuber92211]

The bright side of an extension is that he won't have passed off the horrible Jones deal and another year of Neifi and Rusch at those prices onto another GM.

 

OF course there's time for other such deals.

 

Yes because those 3 deals are the reason the Cubs aren't expected to win. Real franchise cornerstones there.

 

That's over 10% of the payroll that's sunk into mediocrity, though. You can't gripe about the cheapness of the TribCo if they give a GM $95m and he uses up a 10% chunk of it on bad players.

 

Where would we be if that 10% was given to only the good players? IMO those 3 deals aren't as "horrible" as one would think at first glance. It's the number of years that they have signed for that's the biggest sticking point. However, as evidenced, Hendry can get rid of contracts fairly effectively and should he can't trade them, waiving them would be a huge cost that would make it difficult.

[nilodnayr]

The bright side of an extension is that he won't have passed off the horrible Jones deal and another year of Neifi and Rusch at those prices onto another GM.

 

OF course there's time for other such deals.

 

Yes because those 3 deals are the reason the Cubs aren't expected to win. Real franchise cornerstones there.

 

That's over 10% of the payroll that's sunk into mediocrity, though. You can't gripe about the cheapness of the TribCo if they give a GM $95m and he uses up a 10% chunk of it on bad players.

 

Where would we be if that 10% was given to only the good players? IMO those 3 deals aren't as "horrible" as one would think at first glance. It's the number of years that they have signed for that's the biggest sticking point. However, as evidenced, Hendry can get rid of contracts fairly effectively and should he can't trade them, waiving them would be a huge cost that would make it difficult.

 

Hendry's only given up on inherited contracts, never on any hes signed. His recent quotes regarding dusty baker reflect that hes quite stubborn in his evaluation and cant open up his eyes to his mistakes. Dont expect him to ditch Jones, Rusch, and Perez.

[SouthSideRyan]

The bright side of an extension is that he won't have passed off the horrible Jones deal and another year of Neifi and Rusch at those prices onto another GM.

 

OF course there's time for other such deals.

 

Yes because those 3 deals are the reason the Cubs aren't expected to win. Real franchise cornerstones there.

 

That's over 10% of the payroll that's sunk into mediocrity, though. You can't gripe about the cheapness of the TribCo if they give a GM $95m and he uses up a 10% chunk of it on bad players.

 

Where would we be if that 10% was given to only the good players? IMO those 3 deals aren't as "horrible" as one would think at first glance. It's the number of years that they have signed for that's the biggest sticking point. However, as evidenced, Hendry can get rid of contracts fairly effectively and should he can't trade them, waiving them would be a huge cost that would make it difficult.

 

Hendry's only given up on inherited contracts, never on any hes signed. His recent quotes regarding dusty baker reflect that hes quite stubborn in his evaluation and cant open up his eyes to his mistakes. Dont expect him to ditch Jones, Rusch, and Perez.

 

Latroy says hi.