Dusty safe -- for now

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Which is a terrible point. It is acceptable to play horrible rookies, but not to play horrible veterans? I think it is unacceptable to play either. Just because a player is a "younger player" does not mean he deserves to play everyday. Most of the Cubs young players were not ready to step up this year and have proven as much. And the players he points out as holding their own are putting up less than stellar numbers. To say that they are better than Glendon Rusch or Neifi Perez does nothing to make them worthy of playing time.

 

To say they are better than guys who are getting playing time - like Rusch and Perez - makes them worthy of playing time on this team. The Cubs aren't going anywhere and guys like Hill and Guzman, who are pretty much ready for the big leagues (in Hill's case, as ready as he will ever be) need to play so the Cubs can get a chance to properly evaluate them for 2007.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

2. Dusty won't get a chance to finish what he and Joey Cora have valiantly tried to do to Z's arm.

 

What he said.

 

To me this is reason 1, 2, 3, and 4. Especially if he feels his job is at stake he could be even worse in that aspect.

[CUBZ99]

 

Angel Guzman of the 5+ ERA? It was fairly obvious in his time with the club that he is rusty and still has some work to do in the minors.

 

This time of year, with a team this far out of the race is no time to be saying "is veteran player X's stats slightly better than young player Y's?" This time of year is not about stats. Its about finding out what you have.

 

There's a simple question that should be asked about every player on this team right now. The answer will tell you if that player should be playing or sitting/traded. The question is "the next time the Cubs challenge for a division or (dare I say) World Series title, will this player be a part of the mix?" If the answer is no, get rid of them immediately. If the answer is "maybe," then you absolutely owe it to the organization to see if that answer will be yes or no.

 

I agree with your entire post. But, I still dont' believe the argument that Dusty failed to play younger players this year or won't play them down the stretch. Could he have played more? Sure, but he has for the most part stuck with Cedeno, Marshall, and Murton the entire first half of the season. When Hill was with the Cubs he pitched regularly, when Aardsma was with the team he pitched, Novoa has gotten into some critical innings, etc. The only guy I can think of that got shafted was Theriot.

 

Just because the Cubs fire Dusty, doesn't mean that Jim Hendry is all of the sudden going to call up Hill, Guzman, Aardsma, and Theriot.

[CUBZ99]

Which is a terrible point. It is acceptable to play horrible rookies, but not to play horrible veterans? I think it is unacceptable to play either. Just because a player is a "younger player" does not mean he deserves to play everyday. Most of the Cubs young players were not ready to step up this year and have proven as much. And the players he points out as holding their own are putting up less than stellar numbers. To say that they are better than Glendon Rusch or Neifi Perez does nothing to make them worthy of playing time.

 

To say they are better than guys who are getting playing time - like Rusch and Perez - makes them worthy of playing time on this team. The Cubs aren't going anywhere and guys like Hill and Guzman, who are pretty much ready for the big leagues (in Hill's case, as ready as he will ever be) need to play so the Cubs can get a chance to properly evaluate them for 2007.

 

Hill has to be on the team in order for Dusty to pitch him, right? From what I remember, when Hill was with the team he pitched in the rotation the entire time.

[Caryatid]

 

I agree with your entire post. But, I still dont' believe the argument that Dusty failed to play younger players this year or won't play them down the stretch. Could he have played more? Sure, but he has for the most part stuck with Cedeno, Marshall, and Murton the entire first half of the season. When Hill was with the Cubs he pitched regularly, when Aardsma was with the team he pitched, Novoa has gotten into some critical innings, etc. The only guy I can think of that got shafted was Theriot.

 

Just because the Cubs fire Dusty, doesn't mean that Jim Hendry is all of the sudden going to call up Hill, Guzman, Aardsma, and Theriot.

 

First of all, I don't know where all this "putting Novoa with the rookies" thing comes from. Novoa is not a young player (experience-wise)-he debuted in July of 2004. I'm not saying you did this-Baker did it.

 

And you're right, Hendry might not call these players up. But it doesn't mean that's not what he should do. Just because Hendry's incompetent when it comes to long-term franchise health doesn't mean Baker should stay. This is a critique of the entire organization.

 

If Baker was told, tomorrow, that the rotation for the rest of the season should be Zambrano, Marshall, Marmol, Hill, and Guzman, would he really do it? I don't think he would.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

 

Angel Guzman of the 5+ ERA? It was fairly obvious in his time with the club that he is rusty and still has some work to do in the minors.

 

This time of year, with a team this far out of the race is no time to be saying "is veteran player X's stats slightly better than young player Y's?" This time of year is not about stats. Its about finding out what you have.

 

There's a simple question that should be asked about every player on this team right now. The answer will tell you if that player should be playing or sitting/traded. The question is "the next time the Cubs challenge for a division or (dare I say) World Series title, will this player be a part of the mix?" If the answer is no, get rid of them immediately. If the answer is "maybe," then you absolutely owe it to the organization to see if that answer will be yes or no.

 

I agree with your entire post. But, I still dont' believe the argument that Dusty failed to play younger players this year or won't play them down the stretch. Could he have played more? Sure, but he has for the most part stuck with Cedeno, Marshall, and Murton the entire first half of the season. When Hill was with the Cubs he pitched regularly, when Aardsma was with the team he pitched, Novoa has gotten into some critical innings, etc. The only guy I can think of that got shafted was Theriot.

 

Just because the Cubs fire Dusty, doesn't mean that Jim Hendry is all of the sudden going to call up Hill, Guzman, Aardsma, and Theriot.

 

I'd have to say Guzman has been shafted too.

[CUBZ99]

 

I agree with your entire post. But, I still dont' believe the argument that Dusty failed to play younger players this year or won't play them down the stretch. Could he have played more? Sure, but he has for the most part stuck with Cedeno, Marshall, and Murton the entire first half of the season. When Hill was with the Cubs he pitched regularly, when Aardsma was with the team he pitched, Novoa has gotten into some critical innings, etc. The only guy I can think of that got shafted was Theriot.

 

Just because the Cubs fire Dusty, doesn't mean that Jim Hendry is all of the sudden going to call up Hill, Guzman, Aardsma, and Theriot.

 

First of all, I don't know where all this "putting Novoa with the rookies" thing comes from. Novoa is not a young player (experience-wise)-he debuted in July of 2004. I'm not saying you did this-Baker did it.

 

And you're right, Hendry might not call these players up. But it doesn't mean that's not what he should do. Just because Hendry's incompetent when it comes to long-term franchise health doesn't mean Baker should stay. This is a critique of the entire organization.

 

If Baker was told, tomorrow, that the rotation for the rest of the season should be Zambrano, Marshall, Marmol, Hill, and Guzman, would he really do it? I don't think he would.

 

He would if that is all he had. Baker is getting way to much blame for not playing youngersters this year. I agree in the past he has heavily favored veterans, but this year he has given many younger players a shot at playing. Unfortunately many of them either are not ready to contribute just yet or may never contribute.

[abuck1220]

ok, you take rusch, i'll take hill and guzman and whoever has a more productive hand five years from now gets $50 cyber bucks.

 

 

my point is, it's foolish for dusty to continue throwing the kids under the bus when marshall and marmol, who have been far from spectacular, have been no worse than prior, maddux or rusch.

 

Uhh, I hope you realize I wasn't trying to argue against your point. I don't want Rusch.

 

oh, i'm pretty sure i remember you saying he was your favorite player when he played for your favorite team (the mets).

[Caryatid]

 

I agree with your entire post. But, I still dont' believe the argument that Dusty failed to play younger players this year or won't play them down the stretch. Could he have played more? Sure, but he has for the most part stuck with Cedeno, Marshall, and Murton the entire first half of the season. When Hill was with the Cubs he pitched regularly, when Aardsma was with the team he pitched, Novoa has gotten into some critical innings, etc. The only guy I can think of that got shafted was Theriot.

 

Just because the Cubs fire Dusty, doesn't mean that Jim Hendry is all of the sudden going to call up Hill, Guzman, Aardsma, and Theriot.

 

First of all, I don't know where all this "putting Novoa with the rookies" thing comes from. Novoa is not a young player (experience-wise)-he debuted in July of 2004. I'm not saying you did this-Baker did it.

 

And you're right, Hendry might not call these players up. But it doesn't mean that's not what he should do. Just because Hendry's incompetent when it comes to long-term franchise health doesn't mean Baker should stay. This is a critique of the entire organization.

 

If Baker was told, tomorrow, that the rotation for the rest of the season should be Zambrano, Marshall, Marmol, Hill, and Guzman, would he really do it? I don't think he would.

 

He would if that is all he had. Baker is getting way to much blame for not playing youngersters this year. I agree in the past he has heavily favored veterans, but this year he has given many younger players a shot at playing. Unfortunately many of them either are not ready to contribute just yet or may never contribute.

 

If all he had were youngsters, he'd put them in as sparingly as possible in the worst possible situations, then blame them for the lack of success the team had.

 

There are few, if any, young players who come in "ready to contribute." I think that's the whole point of this discussion-"ready to contribute" shouldn't mean a thing at this point in the year.

[Caryatid]

I think the answer to all this is simple:

 

Hendry desperately wants to re-sign Baker.

 

There's absolutely no other reason why the guy would let Baker twist in the wind, with no realistic upside to letting him play out the rest of the year. I am going to bet that if Baker is not managing the Cubs in 2007, it will be because Baker chose not to, not the other way around.

[Soul]

I think the answer to all this is simple:

 

Hendry desperately wants to re-sign Baker.

 

There's absolutely no other reason why the guy would let Baker twist in the wind, with no realistic upside to letting him play out the rest of the year. I am going to bet that if Baker is not managing the Cubs in 2007, it will be because Baker chose not to, not the other way around.

 

Agree 100%. This is about Hendry more than Baker.

 

 

Honestly I can't see how Baker cares either way. He'll have a fat paycheck coming no matter what. And someone else will hand him a job when it's over with the Cubs. No skin off his back. Dusty's not putting on an act. He really is relaxed---doesn't matter to him what happens; all he has to do is sit around doing nothing and collect his paycheck.

 

It's Hendry who can't get over himself. Hendry who assembled a stinker, trusted the franchise to players who were obviously unable to take the field on a regular schedule, then had no backup plan whatsoever once they hit the DL. Hendry who called Pagan the next Beltran & signed Nefi up again. Hendry who drained the minor leagues for players who are no longer with the ballclub. Hendry who can't accept his plan is an abject failure.

 

Baker's junk, true. But Hendry built this dog.

[erik316wttn]

According to the Score, Mike Kiley is reporting that Hendry spoke with Dusty, and told him that his job is safe for the time being, and that he'd like to see him finish out the year.

 

Also, Zambrano is ok, and will pitch Friday.

\

 

3 game winning streaks against the brew crew are apparently huge.

 

Here's to a 15 game losing streak starting out with the Mets. I want Dusty humiliated and Hendry to look like the idiot he is.

 

I want them both gone. But I don't understand those who want Baker fired right now but are willing to give Hendry another opportunity next year to overpay for mediocrity and "toolsy" players. I will say this for the players, if they wanted Baker gone, they could've laid down against the Brewers thus pretty much solidifying Baker's departure. If the Cubs somehow play well enough to finish .500 or a few games below, does Hendry try to re-sign him?

 

They COULD have, but thankfully I think we have players with a bit more integrity than to intentionally tank. Players are starting to speak out against Dusty in the media, and I'm sure that clubhouse is just poision right now, what with the Dusty-created divide between "his boys" and everyone else.

 

I hope we just tank like never before and get Dusty and Hendry the hell out of here.

[louisvillecub]

Hendry is delusional....

 

From the Sun-times today:

 

http://www.suntimes.com/output/sports/cst-spt-cub13.html

 

As he has done steadfastly in the past, Hendry gave no time frame on making a decision on whether to give Baker a contract extension

 

I'd replace steadfastly with "stubbornly"

 

He will continue assessing how Baker, his staff and his players respond in the final three months and only will take action if he sees the situation declining.

 

In the final three months??? And how much worse can this season get before this clown has the gazungas to do something about it??

 

How Hendry's bosses can let him continue in this manner is beyond all reason. Are their heads all in the sand? Are they blind?

 

Good lord above.... :evil:

[Soul]

if he sees the situation declining.

 

 

Welcome to the Twilight Zone, ladies & gents.

[Chocolate Milk]

if he sees the situation declining.

 

 

Welcome to the Twilight Zone, ladies & gents.

 

Really, this is completely insane. Situation declining? Get a clue. Kerry Wood just went down for the season and Mark Prior is injured yet again. We could lose 100 games this year. Situation declining?

 

:roll:

[erik316wttn]

The blame should come from over Hendry's head. They've allowed it to go on this long.

[biittner77]

 

It's Hendry who can't get over himself. Hendry who assembled a stinker, trusted the franchise to players who were obviously unable to take the field on a regular schedule, then had no backup plan whatsoever once they hit the DL. Hendry who called Pagan the next Beltran & signed Nefi up again. Hendry who drained the minor leagues for players who are no longer with the ballclub. Hendry who can't accept his plan is an abject failure.

 

Baker's junk, true. But Hendry built this dog.

 

 

Maybe this is the real reason why Hendry can't fire Baker. Hendry has worked hard to get a reputation as a stand up guy. Scapegoating the manager- no matter how much he needs to be fired- would make it look like he was passing the buck.

 

As for the rest of the season, I would hope that Hendry would dump the likes of Nevin, Rusch and Perez on anyone that will take them. Do that and Baker can't avoid playing the guys that figure into future plans.

 

BY saying that he wants Baker around the rest of the year should take the pressure off to win now at any cost.

[badger1679666666]

Hendry is now becoming stubbornly defensive and won't make any moves almost to spite everyone and let them know HE's the one making the decisions. I suddenly hope something very bad happens to Jim.

[dalgreen]

can't avoid playing the guys that figure into future plans.

 

 

 

We have future plans??? Aren't we in year eight of the famed "five year plan"? :x

[CuseCubFan69]

if he sees the situation declining.

 

 

Welcome to the Twilight Zone, ladies & gents.

 

I swear there's a little creature on the wing of the plane! It's Perez for God's sake!!!! Get him off or we'll crash!

[CuseCubFan69]

can't avoid playing the guys that figure into future plans.

 

 

 

We have future plans??? Aren't we in year eight of the famed "five year plan"? :x

 

Inflation has pushed it to 12.

[YearofDaCubs]

So much for getting rid of Baker and his pets. I swear there is no damn accountability from top to bottom within this organization, it makes me sick!

[CuseCubFan69]

Hendry is now becoming stubbornly defensive and won't make any moves almost to spite everyone and let them know HE's the one making the decisions. I suddenly hope something very bad happens to Jim.

 

If he wants to be stubburn maybe this will help push out the door then. It's about the organization and not Jim Hendry or Dusty Baker and they are not doing their jobs. This debacle is sickening.

[Caryatid]

As stated earlier, I think Hendry simply wants Baker to be manager. So that leaves the question: Which is more pathetic?

 

1. Hendry cannot see that this team is horrible and, through blind stubbornness, holds on to a failing manager and a failing strategy.

 

2. Hendry cannot pull the trigger on a manager despite the fact that he has already hung him out to dry publicly.

 

3. Hendry has the coach he wants, but because it would be bad P.R. to give him an extension, doesn't have the stones to give an unpopular guy an extension.

[dalgreen]

Hendry is now becoming stubbornly defensive and won't make any moves almost to spite everyone and let them know HE's the one making the decisions. I suddenly hope something very bad happens to Jim.

 

If he wants to be stubburn maybe this will help push out the door then. It's about the organization and not Jim Hendry or Dusty Baker and they are not doing their jobs. This debacle is sickening.

 

That's just it. Hendry has always been stubborn, but he hasn't been in our view. We know Dusty is stubborn because we are able to see him for 162 games. I don't think Hendry has no more value for OBP now than what he did in 2003, 20004 and 2005. I still think he values a guy who throws 96+ but can'tthrow strikes over someone at 89 mph who can throw strikes, and on two occasions since August of 2005 he has publicly stated that he takes full responsibility for the crap that is on the field and he has said, "I have to do a better job", yet, he hasn't. In one area he could've done a better job is by firing Baker, but he hasn't done that.

 

And, don't get your hopes up about Hendry being pushed out the door. Remember, MacPhail didn't fire another horrible GM, Ed Lynch, in fact Lynch had to offer a second resignation before MacPhail would accept it. So, I don't see Hendry being fired, even though both he and Baker should be.