General Manager vs Manager

[RynoRules]

JC: Didn't want to requote all of the above, but it sounds to me like you just don't like JH and are spinning everything he does or has done into a negative. Your argument that timing and context allowed JH to pull these deals off is illogical, IMO, because it applies to every deal ever made. This is not to say that JH does not deserve a heaping share of criticism - he does. But he isn't as much of a fool as you make him out to be.

He is a fool. 2003 was a long time ago and with an expanded payroll we still haven't been into the playoffs since then. He has done some good trades but overall most of his FA signings have been questionable. It seems like every year we go into the season with question marks and some of them aren't corrected the following year. This years debacle takes the cake and as fans I believe we deserve better than Baker and Hendry.

 

I don't think we went in 04' with that many questions. That team was the best in the game on paper and folded like a cheap tent. Every year since has been a different story, I agree. He isn't a fool, but he's done a cr*p job the last two seasons.

[RynoRules]

JC: Didn't want to requote all of the above, but it sounds to me like you just don't like JH and are spinning everything he does or has done into a negative. Your argument that timing and context allowed JH to pull these deals off is illogical, IMO, because it applies to every deal ever made. This is not to say that JH does not deserve a heaping share of criticism - he does. But he isn't as much of a fool as you make him out to be.

 

And you'd be wrong. Look, I don't agree with his style or approach. I make no bones about that. But, I notice that you don't dispute the facts I set forth. Instead, you just want to assume I have a vendetta against him. Show me where I'm wrong and I'd be happy to discuss it. I just ask that the debate remain civil instead of foisting assumptions around. For instance, I didn't call him a fool. I gave him credit for the Hawkins deal, just not a huge amount. Show me results.

 

He set this team up in 2004 to be succesful and they blew it, and in a big way. I don't blame him for 04'.

 

I do agree that in 2005 and 2006 his foresight and approach have been very bad, bordering on awful. I guess I didn't like the way you approached your argument. For all intents and purposes you argued that he lucked his way into every good deal, a sort of Forest Gump among GMs. Beyond having no proof of this assertion, it also makes no sense that other GMs would be taken so easily.

[Sosa21MVP]

what cf, rf and pitchers should have been brought in then?

 

they're fine @ 1b, 2b, ss, 3b, lf and catcher correct?

 

I was fine with DLee, Walker, Cedeno, ARam, Murton and Barrett. The Pierre acquisition sounded good at the time but I've had discussions with some Florida fans and they indicate he was a bit over-rated at the time the Cubs pursued him.

 

One huge mistake is bringing in Jacque Jones to be the everyday RF. His numbers had started to decline and he can't hit left-handed pitchers to save his life. Very little plate discipline.

 

I'd have preferred Furcal over Pierre to be the leadoff hitter but hey, Furcal went to the Dodgers for less money so not much you can do about that.

 

Get Felix Pie up on the bigs??

 

Regarding pitchers, I mean we needed to add somebody solid with Prior and Wood obviously not ready to go. Maddux, Zambrano and...Rusch? Huge mistake to assume Rusch could hold down a rotation spot. His best success has been as a spot starter/middle reliever.

 

2/3 of the outfield is struggling. 3/5 of the rotation has been rookies. I have to think there were better options out there. If I'm wrong, so be it. But the group of players that we fielded on opening day has too many holes to contend. So what is the plan, get by for this season then get back on track in 2007?

 

It's my opinion Hendry hasn't done enough to make the Cubs playoff competitive this season. Maybe I'm wrong and the DLee injury is the main problem. I know it hurts the team pretty bad. But then why do we stick Todd Walker at first? Get a natural 1B who is comfortable with that position.

 

Just my opinions, I don't expect everyone to agree. :wink:

[YearofDaCubs]

JC: Didn't want to requote all of the above, but it sounds to me like you just don't like JH and are spinning everything he does or has done into a negative. Your argument that timing and context allowed JH to pull these deals off is illogical, IMO, because it applies to every deal ever made. This is not to say that JH does not deserve a heaping share of criticism - he does. But he isn't as much of a fool as you make him out to be.

He is a fool. 2003 was a long time ago and with an expanded payroll we still haven't been into the playoffs since then. He has done some good trades but overall most of his FA signings have been questionable. It seems like every year we go into the season with question marks and some of them aren't corrected the following year. This years debacle takes the cake and as fans I believe we deserve better than Baker and Hendry.

 

I don't think we went in 04' with that many questions. That team was the best in the game on paper and folded like a cheap tent. Every year since has been a different story, I agree. He isn't a fool, but he's done a cr*p job the last two seasons.

On the contrary, going into 2004 we had a ? mark with CPatt coming off an injury. It was also a problem because we lost our leadoff hitter in Lofton. Our bench wasn't that great. A lot of people including myself felt that an upgrade at SS was necessary before the season started. Losing Borowski really hurt us and it killed me when Hendry didn't go out and try to get a closer or at the very least try another player in the closer role when Hawkins was faultering. I fault Baker for leaving Hawkins in that role. Did they even try to use Farnsworth as a closer that year? I don't think they did. All that being said I felt that we were WS contenders going into the season but we did have some question marks.

[RynoRules]

Fair enough re SS and (to some extent) re CPatt and the bench, but every team has some issues; I challenge you to find a perfect one. The 04' team should have won big with what Hendry put out there. Baker and the players fouled it up. Every year since has been a steep step down for Hendry.

[YearofDaCubs]

what cf, rf and pitchers should have been brought in then?

 

they're fine @ 1b, 2b, ss, 3b, lf and catcher correct?

 

I was fine with DLee, Walker, Cedeno, ARam, Murton and Barrett. The Pierre acquisition sounded good at the time but I've had discussions with some Florida fans and they indicate he was a bit over-rated at the time the Cubs pursued him.

 

One huge mistake is bringing in Jacque Jones to be the everyday RF. His numbers had started to decline and he can't hit left-handed pitchers to save his life. Very little plate discipline.

 

I'd have preferred Furcal over Pierre to be the leadoff hitter but hey, Furcal went to the Dodgers for less money so not much you can do about that.

 

Get Felix Pie up on the bigs??

 

Regarding pitchers, I mean we needed to add somebody solid with Prior and Wood obviously not ready to go. Maddux, Zambrano and...Rusch? Huge mistake to assume Rusch could hold down a rotation spot. His best success has been as a spot starter/middle reliever.

 

2/3 of the outfield is struggling. 3/5 of the rotation has been rookies. I have to think there were better options out there. If I'm wrong, so be it. But the group of players that we fielded on opening day has too many holes to contend. So what is the plan, get by for this season then get back on track in 2007?

 

It's my opinion Hendry hasn't done enough to make the Cubs playoff competitive this season. Maybe I'm wrong and the DLee injury is the main problem. I know it hurts the team pretty bad. But then why do we stick Todd Walker at first? Get a natural 1B who is comfortable with that position.

 

Just my opinions, I don't expect everyone to agree. :wink:

Hendry keeps relying on injury prone pitchers to come in stay healthy and save the day. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Rusch as a starter? You have got to be kidding me. Going into the offseason we had several holes and getting a OF and SP would have been excellent moves to make. Instead, he resigns Rusch and Neifi and signs JOCK to a 3 year deal. Not exactly the offseason I was expecting. Hendry could have been creative and made some good moves to make us competitive this year. Unfortunately, he blew it but I'm not surprised since he did the same thing in 2005.

[soccer10k]

I'm curious when Hendry got his lobotomy. 3 years ago he was a genius when he fleeced the Pirates for A-Ram, Lofton and Simon. He got Lee for next to nothing. Everyone here thought he was the greatest thing to hit the front office in years.

 

Now he's suddenly less competent than Jim Bowden. Amazing how our perceptions change

 

Feb 2 2005. He traded Sosa for nothing and signed Burnitz.

 

Sosa needed to leave. What was Hendry supposed to do, eat Sosa's salary? I don't see what else Hendry could have done with that sitation.

[YearofDaCubs]

I'm curious when Hendry got his lobotomy. 3 years ago he was a genius when he fleeced the Pirates for A-Ram, Lofton and Simon. He got Lee for next to nothing. Everyone here thought he was the greatest thing to hit the front office in years.

 

Now he's suddenly less competent than Jim Bowden. Amazing how our perceptions change

 

Feb 2 2005. He traded Sosa for nothing and signed Burnitz.

 

Sosa needed to leave. What was Hendry supposed to do, eat Sosa's salary? I don't see what else Hendry could have done with that sitation.

He did eat Sosa's salary and he could have signed a top tier FA OF instead of Burnitz.

[soccer10k]

I'm curious when Hendry got his lobotomy. 3 years ago he was a genius when he fleeced the Pirates for A-Ram, Lofton and Simon. He got Lee for next to nothing. Everyone here thought he was the greatest thing to hit the front office in years.

 

Now he's suddenly less competent than Jim Bowden. Amazing how our perceptions change

 

Feb 2 2005. He traded Sosa for nothing and signed Burnitz.

 

Sosa needed to leave. What was Hendry supposed to do, eat Sosa's salary? I don't see what else Hendry could have done with that sitation.

He did eat Sosa's salary and he could have signed a top tier FA OF instead of Burnitz.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you, but please refresh my memory on who his other options were that year besides Burnitz because I don't remember.

[YearofDaCubs]

I'm curious when Hendry got his lobotomy. 3 years ago he was a genius when he fleeced the Pirates for A-Ram, Lofton and Simon. He got Lee for next to nothing. Everyone here thought he was the greatest thing to hit the front office in years.

 

Now he's suddenly less competent than Jim Bowden. Amazing how our perceptions change

 

Feb 2 2005. He traded Sosa for nothing and signed Burnitz.

 

Sosa needed to leave. What was Hendry supposed to do, eat Sosa's salary? I don't see what else Hendry could have done with that sitation.

He did eat Sosa's salary and he could have signed a top tier FA OF instead of Burnitz.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you, but please refresh my memory on who his other options were that year besides Burnitz because I don't remember.

Magglio, Alou, Beltran, Drew and Dye.

[soccer10k]

JC: Didn't want to requote all of the above, but it sounds to me like you just don't like JH and are spinning everything he does or has done into a negative. Your argument that timing and context allowed JH to pull these deals off is illogical, IMO, because it applies to every deal ever made. This is not to say that JH does not deserve a heaping share of criticism - he does. But he isn't as much of a fool as you make him out to be.

He is a fool. 2003 was a long time ago and with an expanded payroll we still haven't been into the playoffs since then. He has done some good trades but overall most of his FA signings have been questionable. It seems like every year we go into the season with question marks and some of them aren't corrected the following year. This years debacle takes the cake and as fans I believe we deserve better than Baker and Hendry.

 

Don't forget that only 4 teams in each league make the playoffs every year and the Cubs had a better record in 2004 then in 2003. Is it Hendry's fault that the Cardinals won 100 whatever games in 2004? No. If this was basketball, the Cubs would have made the playoffs in both 2001 and 2004.

[YearofDaCubs]

JC: Didn't want to requote all of the above, but it sounds to me like you just don't like JH and are spinning everything he does or has done into a negative. Your argument that timing and context allowed JH to pull these deals off is illogical, IMO, because it applies to every deal ever made. This is not to say that JH does not deserve a heaping share of criticism - he does. But he isn't as much of a fool as you make him out to be.

He is a fool. 2003 was a long time ago and with an expanded payroll we still haven't been into the playoffs since then. He has done some good trades but overall most of his FA signings have been questionable. It seems like every year we go into the season with question marks and some of them aren't corrected the following year. This years debacle takes the cake and as fans I believe we deserve better than Baker and Hendry.

 

Don't forget that only 4 teams in each league make the playoffs every year and the Cubs had a better record in 2004 then in 2003. Is it Hendry's fault that the Cardinals won 100 whatever games in 2004? No. If this was basketball, the Cubs would have made the playoffs in both 2001 and 2004.

We should have been a lock for the wild card but our inconsistent offense and blown saves cost us that year.

[soccer10k]

I'm curious when Hendry got his lobotomy. 3 years ago he was a genius when he fleeced the Pirates for A-Ram, Lofton and Simon. He got Lee for next to nothing. Everyone here thought he was the greatest thing to hit the front office in years.

 

Now he's suddenly less competent than Jim Bowden. Amazing how our perceptions change

 

Feb 2 2005. He traded Sosa for nothing and signed Burnitz.

 

Sosa needed to leave. What was Hendry supposed to do, eat Sosa's salary? I don't see what else Hendry could have done with that sitation.

He did eat Sosa's salary and he could have signed a top tier FA OF instead of Burnitz.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you, but please refresh my memory on who his other options were that year besides Burnitz because I don't remember.

Magglio, Alou, Beltran, Drew and Dye.

 

Honestly, I was ticked we didn't bring Alou back. I didn't like that one bit. I was glad we didn't get Beltran. I didn't think that one good month was worth $100+ million. Drew had a bad injury history. Magglio would have been a good sign though. Thanks for the info.

[soccer10k]

JC: Didn't want to requote all of the above, but it sounds to me like you just don't like JH and are spinning everything he does or has done into a negative. Your argument that timing and context allowed JH to pull these deals off is illogical, IMO, because it applies to every deal ever made. This is not to say that JH does not deserve a heaping share of criticism - he does. But he isn't as much of a fool as you make him out to be.

He is a fool. 2003 was a long time ago and with an expanded payroll we still haven't been into the playoffs since then. He has done some good trades but overall most of his FA signings have been questionable. It seems like every year we go into the season with question marks and some of them aren't corrected the following year. This years debacle takes the cake and as fans I believe we deserve better than Baker and Hendry.

 

Don't forget that only 4 teams in each league make the playoffs every year and the Cubs had a better record in 2004 then in 2003. Is it Hendry's fault that the Cardinals won 100 whatever games in 2004? No. If this was basketball, the Cubs would have made the playoffs in both 2001 and 2004.

We should have been a lock for the wild card but our inconsistent offense and blown saves cost us that year.

 

With the postseason situation in baseball, nobody is a lock to make the playoffs.

[USSoccer]

 

I'm not disagreeing with you, but please refresh my memory on who his other options were that year besides Burnitz because I don't remember.

 

Drew. Ordonez. Beltran.

 

Those were 3 options.

 

Regarding the Sosa thing, if the Trib hadn't completely tossed him udner the bus and trashed his trade value, we might not have been in the position to settle for Burnitz by Feb. If you want to deal someone, you don't purposefully tank his trade value.

 

Hendry is an overrated GM. The Ramirez and Lee deals came about because 2 teams decided to shed salary. Lofton was Hendry's main target, and taking Ramirez's salary of Pittsburghs hands was the reason we gave up so little. Ditto for the Lee deal. The Nomar deal was a gamble that failed. The Pierre deal wasn't a good one, but I'm a little suprised it's as bad as it looks right now. However, his trades aren't the real problem....

 

...His FA moves have been a problem. He's resigned Perez twice, Rusch twice, and the second time both got paid 2x as much as they should have gotten for 2x the years they should have gotten. Yet Hendry acted as if they were priceless commodoties that needed to be locked up. He overpaid Henry Blanco for no good reason. The fact that he brought back Jose Macias after 04 and gave him a raise in 05 is absurd on principle. He grossly overpaid both Howry and Eyre, to the point where the players themselves were shocked at the offer. Regardless of his perfomance this season, and the injuries to Prior and Wood, he overpaid Maddux in years and money. Those types of irrespnosible decisions tied up a large enough chunk of the payroll to the point where we couldn't get in on the bidding for an impact offensive player.

 

And lets not forget him outbidding himself to sign Jones for more money and more years than he ever, ever should have gotten.

 

Hendry consistently makes the same mistakes over and over. He has a plan, but the plan itself is flawed. He over and over goes for versatility and tools over production and value. He overpays his mediocre bench players, hamstringing both the budget and the offense, and insuring that the team cannot survive an injury to a key player.

 

Both Baker and Hendry are at fault, for the composition of the roster and the wasting of the best core of players this team has had since the mid-60's. There is no reason beyond incompetence that a core of Lee, Ramirez, Barrett, Prior, Wood and Zambrano shouldn't have been surrounded with good enough talent to win over the past 3 years. Yet they have been. This team won in spite of their manager in 2003, imploded in 2004, was crippled from the start in both 2005 and 2006, when there were plenty of positions to fill and plenty of money within the budget with which to do it.

[JC]

JC: Didn't want to requote all of the above, but it sounds to me like you just don't like JH and are spinning everything he does or has done into a negative. Your argument that timing and context allowed JH to pull these deals off is illogical, IMO, because it applies to every deal ever made. This is not to say that JH does not deserve a heaping share of criticism - he does. But he isn't as much of a fool as you make him out to be.

 

And you'd be wrong. Look, I don't agree with his style or approach. I make no bones about that. But, I notice that you don't dispute the facts I set forth. Instead, you just want to assume I have a vendetta against him. Show me where I'm wrong and I'd be happy to discuss it. I just ask that the debate remain civil instead of foisting assumptions around. For instance, I didn't call him a fool. I gave him credit for the Hawkins deal, just not a huge amount. Show me results.

 

He set this team up in 2004 to be succesful and they blew it, and in a big way. I don't blame him for 04'.

 

I do agree that in 2005 and 2006 his foresight and approach have been very bad, bordering on awful. I guess I didn't like the way you approached your argument. For all intents and purposes you argued that he lucked his way into every good deal, a sort of Forest Gump among GMs. Beyond having no proof of this assertion, it also makes no sense that other GMs would be taken so easily.

 

Your post doesn't make sense. In particular, you argue that I provide no proof of an assertion that I never made. You are either mischaracterizing or misunderstanding my points, providing little incentive for me to continue responding to you.

 

I've pointed out facts. If you want, point to facts to the contrary, but don't veil your opinions as to my posts as contrary arguments, because they aren't.

 

The Forest Gump thing is completely off base, and a pretty sophomoric assumption. I have given Hendry credit where credit is due for the ARam deal. He pulled the trigger. Good for him and the Cubs. The facts regarding Pittsburgh's finances and organization, team needs, and league demands remain, well, facts. Further, the sequence of events with regard to the PTBNL is accurate.

 

With regard to Lee, I applaud Hendry for seeing getting Lee. But, circumstances again played a large part in that dea. Further, the club had glaring needs at other positions that ought to have been addressed when pertinent FA were available.

 

If you are going to tout Lee and ARam as evidence of brilliance, explain why the team, at Hendry's control, is as terrible as it is. Explain why the team has regressed each year since he has taken over as GM for a full year. Explain why he has tabbed the bullpen as a priority need for the last three years and has been unable to properly reconstruct it. Explain why Estes got $3M; explain why Alf got a raise after 2003; explain why Hendry thought he was setting the market for lefties by paying a 37 year old Remlinger $11.65M; explain why he did not demand Wendell Kim be fired before or during 2004; explain why he paid a premium for Dusty Baker; and, explain how he has made $100M smell so bad.

 

Sorry if you resent the fact that I have been consistent with my disapproval of Hendry, I don't know what to say. I'm certainly not going to apologize for it at this point.

[USSoccer]

If you are going to tout Lee and ARam as evidence of brilliance, explain why the team, at Hendry's control, is as terrible as it is. Explain why the team has regressed each year since he has taken over as GM for a full year. Explain why he has tabbed the bullpen as a priority need for the last three years and has been unable to properly reconstruct it. Explain why Estes got $3M; explain why Alf got a raise after 2003; explain why Hendry thought he was setting the market for lefties by paying a 37 year old Remlinger $11.65M; explain why he did not demand Wendell Kim be fired before or during 2004; explain why he paid a premium for Dusty Baker; and, explain how he has made $100M smell so bad.

 

This is the key paragraph. Hendry has made a pattern of grossly overpaying the guys he target, which is terrible, since usually the guys he makes his mind up to get fill an idea in his head about a certain role or trait, like being left handed and being a starter, or being fast and a toolsy OF, or being a versitale utility guy.

 

The problem comes in when all these guys are are the traits. They aren't any good, but not only do we sign them, we overpay them to boot, ensuring that we can't pursue anyone that's an impact player.

 

It's tools and versatility over value and production. It's poor payroll management. It's poor general management.

[YearofDaCubs]

 

I'm not disagreeing with you, but please refresh my memory on who his other options were that year besides Burnitz because I don't remember.

 

Drew. Ordonez. Beltran.

 

Those were 3 options.

 

Regarding the Sosa thing, if the Trib hadn't completely tossed him udner the bus and trashed his trade value, we might not have been in the position to settle for Burnitz by Feb. If you want to deal someone, you don't purposefully tank his trade value.

 

Hendry is an overrated GM. The Ramirez and Lee deals came about because 2 teams decided to shed salary. Lofton was Hendry's main target, and taking Ramirez's salary of Pittsburghs hands was the reason we gave up so little. Ditto for the Lee deal. The Nomar deal was a gamble that failed. The Pierre deal wasn't a good one, but I'm a little suprised it's as bad as it looks right now. However, his trades aren't the real problem....

 

...His FA moves have been a problem. He's resigned Perez twice, Rusch twice, and the second time both got paid 2x as much as they should have gotten for 2x the years they should have gotten. Yet Hendry acted as if they were priceless commodoties that needed to be locked up. He overpaid Henry Blanco for no good reason. The fact that he brought back Jose Macias after 04 and gave him a raise in 05 is absurd on principle. He grossly overpaid both Howry and Eyre, to the point where the players themselves were shocked at the offer. Regardless of his perfomance this season, and the injuries to Prior and Wood, he overpaid Maddux in years and money. Those types of irrespnosible decisions tied up a large enough chunk of the payroll to the point where we couldn't get in on the bidding for an impact offensive player.

 

And lets not forget him outbidding himself to sign Jones for more money and more years than he ever, ever should have gotten.

 

Hendry consistently makes the same mistakes over and over. He has a plan, but the plan itself is flawed. He over and over goes for versatility and tools over production and value. He overpays his mediocre bench players, hamstringing both the budget and the offense, and insuring that the team cannot survive an injury to a key player.

 

Both Baker and Hendry are at fault, for the composition of the roster and the wasting of the best core of players this team has had since the mid-60's. There is no reason beyond incompetence that a core of Lee, Ramirez, Barrett, Prior, Wood and Zambrano shouldn't have been surrounded with good enough talent to win over the past 3 years. Yet they have been. This team won in spite of their manager in 2003, imploded in 2004, was crippled from the start in both 2005 and 2006, when there were plenty of positions to fill and plenty of money within the budget with which to do it.

Post of the year.

[CubfaninCA]

what cf, rf and pitchers should have been brought in then?

 

they're fine @ 1b, 2b, ss, 3b, lf and catcher correct?

 

I was fine with DLee, Walker, Cedeno, ARam, Murton and Barrett. The Pierre acquisition sounded good at the time but I've had discussions with some Florida fans and they indicate he was a bit over-rated at the time the Cubs pursued him.

 

One huge mistake is bringing in Jacque Jones to be the everyday RF. His numbers had started to decline and he can't hit left-handed pitchers to save his life. Very little plate discipline.

 

I'd have preferred Furcal over Pierre to be the leadoff hitter but hey, Furcal went to the Dodgers for less money so not much you can do about that.

 

Get Felix Pie up on the bigs??

 

Regarding pitchers, I mean we needed to add somebody solid with Prior and Wood obviously not ready to go. Maddux, Zambrano and...Rusch? Huge mistake to assume Rusch could hold down a rotation spot. His best success has been as a spot starter/middle reliever.

 

2/3 of the outfield is struggling. 3/5 of the rotation has been rookies. I have to think there were better options out there. If I'm wrong, so be it. But the group of players that we fielded on opening day has too many holes to contend. So what is the plan, get by for this season then get back on track in 2007?

 

It's my opinion Hendry hasn't done enough to make the Cubs playoff competitive this season. Maybe I'm wrong and the DLee injury is the main problem. I know it hurts the team pretty bad. But then why do we stick Todd Walker at first? Get a natural 1B who is comfortable with that position.

 

Just my opinions, I don't expect everyone to agree. :wink:

 

Easier said than done. Players just don't fall into a team's lap.

 

Besides Millwood, who got overpaid, I don't recall anyone calling for signing a pitcher. Most of us were cool w/ Jerome Williams, who has sucked, and there were lots of calls for the kids. The kids are up now and the team's 13th in ERA in the NL. It would be hard to win even with Lee.

[BigbadB]

Other pitchers were mentioned besides Millwood (Zito, Lowe), but most everyone was under the impression we would be starting the season with:

 

Zambrano, Wood, Prior, Maddux, Williams.

[soccer10k]

Just to get it on the record, I think that the GM is more important than the manager. Like other people have said, the GM makes the moves and if he gets the right players, any breathing manager should be able to lead them to a decent finish.

[CubfaninCA]

Yes, there's been a drop since 2003, but what isn't being mentioned is that everything went right in 2003 and the team overachieved. Prior & Wood actually didn't get hurt. The Cubs pulled some reliever from the Mexican League, or wherever he was, and he was a stud. Patterson was awesome until he got hurt, then Lofton came in and played like a young man. Farnsworth was real good. Remlinger was solid, etc.....

 

Altogether, Hendry inherited a pile of crap team in 2002, and people got their expectations way too high in 2004. His biggest mistake is not firing Baker after last year cause Baker's on his way to ruining this season.

[CubfaninCA]

drew, ordonez and beltran.

 

1. the trib wasn't going to allocate the money for ordonez & beltran unless sammy was off the books.

 

2. there would have been tons of bithin&moaning about all 3 last year, and this year is early. drew & ordonez are due for the DL anyday now.

 

Jermaine Dye's the one who got away, but Billy Beane passed him, so Hendry can't be faulted.

[CubfaninCA]

Other pitchers were mentioned besides Millwood (Zito, Lowe), but most everyone was under the impression we would be starting the season with:

 

Zambrano, Wood, Prior, Maddux, Williams.

 

Good point. Wood pitching in April was shaky tho. I do recall a rumor he'd be ready by opening day. Too good to be true tho...

 

3/5's of the rotation out is a tough pill to swallow. Fortunately, Marshall has picked up the ball for the most part. Too bad the Cubs weren't 8 starters deep.

[RynoRules]

JC: Didn't want to requote all of the above, but it sounds to me like you just don't like JH and are spinning everything he does or has done into a negative. Your argument that timing and context allowed JH to pull these deals off is illogical, IMO, because it applies to every deal ever made. This is not to say that JH does not deserve a heaping share of criticism - he does. But he isn't as much of a fool as you make him out to be.

 

And you'd be wrong. Look, I don't agree with his style or approach. I make no bones about that. But, I notice that you don't dispute the facts I set forth. Instead, you just want to assume I have a vendetta against him. Show me where I'm wrong and I'd be happy to discuss it. I just ask that the debate remain civil instead of foisting assumptions around. For instance, I didn't call him a fool. I gave him credit for the Hawkins deal, just not a huge amount. Show me results.

 

He set this team up in 2004 to be succesful and they blew it, and in a big way. I don't blame him for 04'.

 

I do agree that in 2005 and 2006 his foresight and approach have been very bad, bordering on awful. I guess I didn't like the way you approached your argument. For all intents and purposes you argued that he lucked his way into every good deal, a sort of Forest Gump among GMs. Beyond having no proof of this assertion, it also makes no sense that other GMs would be taken so easily.

 

Your post doesn't make sense. In particular, you argue that I provide no proof of an assertion that I never made. You are either mischaracterizing or misunderstanding my points, providing little incentive for me to continue responding to you.

 

I've pointed out facts. If you want, point to facts to the contrary, but don't veil your opinions as to my posts as contrary arguments, because they aren't.

 

The Forest Gump thing is completely off base, and a pretty sophomoric assumption. I have given Hendry credit where credit is due for the ARam deal. He pulled the trigger. Good for him and the Cubs. The facts regarding Pittsburgh's finances and organization, team needs, and league demands remain, well, facts. Further, the sequence of events with regard to the PTBNL is accurate.

 

With regard to Lee, I applaud Hendry for seeing getting Lee. But, circumstances again played a large part in that dea. Further, the club had glaring needs at other positions that ought to have been addressed when pertinent FA were available.

 

If you are going to tout Lee and ARam as evidence of brilliance, explain why the team, at Hendry's control, is as terrible as it is. Explain why the team has regressed each year since he has taken over as GM for a full year. Explain why he has tabbed the bullpen as a priority need for the last three years and has been unable to properly reconstruct it. Explain why Estes got $3M; explain why Alf got a raise after 2003; explain why Hendry thought he was setting the market for lefties by paying a 37 year old Remlinger $11.65M; explain why he did not demand Wendell Kim be fired before or during 2004; explain why he paid a premium for Dusty Baker; and, explain how he has made $100M smell so bad.

 

Sorry if you resent the fact that I have been consistent with my disapproval of Hendry, I don't know what to say. I'm certainly not going to apologize for it at this point.

 

I just don't get your "circumstances" argument. Circumstances play a huge role in each and every deal. How do these circumstances take away from the good deal that was Lee for Choi? The ARam deal? Nomar? The argument makes no sense because context plays a role in each and every trade.

 

And where did I tout his "brilliance"? Please show me. I believe that my position is and was that he has done a horrendous job in 2006, and the same in 2005. Just b/c I don't believe that the same was true in 2004 doesn't mean that I think he is any way brilliant.

 

I find it interesting that you are accusing me of miscomprehension, yet you have blatently inserted words in mouth. And I really could not care less if you have been consistent in your dislike of JH. I was simply disagreeing with how you characterized what has gone on.