Walker traded to the Padres

[goonys evil twin]

But nothing in Jim Hendry's past suggests that is possible.

But it is unbalanced statements like this one that I tend to challenge and I am often met with nothing but ridicule when I do. Wouldn't one have to ignore all of the good moves that Hendry has made in order to stand by such a statement?

 

All the good moves? This team is about 30 under .500 the past two seasons. Where are all these good moves?

I don't really have to list them for you, do I? I think you know what the good moves he has made have been. But we are in agreement that it certainly hasn't been enough the past two seasons.

 

Listing them is pointless. He's had a couple decent moves, but only when you look at them without considering the big picture. Concentrating on bullpen, speed and defense was an absolute failure of strategy, no matter how well Eyre and Howry have pitched. Top notch relievers are pointless when your lineup and rotation suck.

 

Jim Hendry is an awful GM. He not only has failed to win a WS, he's failed to field a competitive team. He's also been the most inefficient GM in the league, with the highest payroll/win ratio. It's stunningly pathetic how poor of a job he has done. This isn't just a GM with a mid range payroll building a .500 team. This is a GM with an upper echelon payroll building a way below .500 team.

 

I repeat.

 

Nothing in his past suggests he is capable of making the necessary moves to turn this team into a winner.

[USSoccer]

Listing them is pointless. He's had a couple decent moves, but only when you look at them without considering the big picture. Concentrating on bullpen, speed and defense was an absolute failure of strategy, no matter how well Eyre and Howry have pitched. Top notch relievers are pointless when your lineup and rotation suck.

 

Jim Hendry is an awful GM. He not only has failed to win a WS, he's failed to field a competitive team. He's also been the most inefficient GM in the league, with the highest payroll/win ratio. It's stunningly pathetic how poor of a job he has done. This isn't just a GM with a mid range payroll building a .500 team. This is a GM with an upper echelon payroll building a way below .500 team.

 

I repeat.

 

Nothing in his past suggests he is capable of making the necessary moves to turn this team into a winner.

 

Don't forget squandering the depth that we once had in our system, retaining the wrong players and holding onto others long after their values peaked.

[CubsWin]

But nothing in Jim Hendry's past suggests that is possible.

But it is unbalanced statements like this one that I tend to challenge and I am often met with nothing but ridicule when I do. Wouldn't one have to ignore all of the good moves that Hendry has made in order to stand by such a statement?

 

All the good moves? This team is about 30 under .500 the past two seasons. Where are all these good moves?

I don't really have to list them for you, do I? I think you know what the good moves he has made have been. But we are in agreement that it certainly hasn't been enough the past two seasons.

 

Listing them is pointless. He's had a couple decent moves, but only when you look at them without considering the big picture. Concentrating on bullpen, speed and defense was an absolute failure of strategy, no matter how well Eyre and Howry have pitched. Top notch relievers are pointless when your lineup and rotation suck.

 

Jim Hendry is an awful GM. He not only has failed to win a WS, he's failed to field a competitive team. He's also been the most inefficient GM in the league, with the highest payroll/win ratio. It's stunningly pathetic how poor of a job he has done. This isn't just a GM with a mid range payroll building a .500 team. This is a GM with an upper echelon payroll building a way below .500 team.

 

I repeat.

 

Nothing in his past suggests he is capable of making the necessary moves to turn this team into a winner.

What he did between July of 2002 and the end of 2003 is still in his past, isn't it? He came awfully close to proving you wrong right there. If he can do that, why can't he get 5 more outs at some point down the road?

 

I understand your reasons for doubting him, but to say that there is nothing in his past just seems unsupportable to me. If the Cubs had done nothing from July 2002 to now, would 2003 have happened?

[imb]

But nothing in Jim Hendry's past suggests that is possible.

But it is unbalanced statements like this one that I tend to challenge and I am often met with nothing but ridicule when I do. Wouldn't one have to ignore all of the good moves that Hendry has made in order to stand by such a statement?

 

All the good moves? This team is about 30 under .500 the past two seasons. Where are all these good moves?

I don't really have to list them for you, do I? I think you know what the good moves he has made have been. But we are in agreement that it certainly hasn't been enough the past two seasons.

 

Listing them is pointless. He's had a couple decent moves, but only when you look at them without considering the big picture. Concentrating on bullpen, speed and defense was an absolute failure of strategy, no matter how well Eyre and Howry have pitched. Top notch relievers are pointless when your lineup and rotation suck.

 

Jim Hendry is an awful GM. He not only has failed to win a WS, he's failed to field a competitive team. He's also been the most inefficient GM in the league, with the highest payroll/win ratio. It's stunningly pathetic how poor of a job he has done. This isn't just a GM with a mid range payroll building a .500 team. This is a GM with an upper echelon payroll building a way below .500 team.

 

I repeat.

 

Nothing in his past suggests he is capable of making the necessary moves to turn this team into a winner.

What he did between July of 2002 and the end of 2003 is still in his past, isn't it? He came awfully close to proving you wrong right there. If he can do that, why can't he get 5 more outs at some point down the road?

 

I understand your reasons for doubting him, but to say that there is nothing in his past just seems unsupportable to me. If the Cubs had done nothing from July 2002 to now, would 2003 have happened?

 

This team, as currently constructed is in far, far, far worse shape than it was when we got to 5 outs away from the world series. To get back to that point, Hendry will have to pull some kind of super rabbit out of his hat, which is something that he appears to be incapable of doing, seeing as how he has done pretty much nothing right since the Nomar trade.

[Hacking Out Machine]

Listing them is pointless. He's had a couple decent moves, but only when you look at them without considering the big picture. Concentrating on bullpen, speed and defense was an absolute failure of strategy, no matter how well Eyre and Howry have pitched. Top notch relievers are pointless when your lineup and rotation suck.

 

Jim Hendry is an awful GM. He not only has failed to win a WS, he's failed to field a competitive team. He's also been the most inefficient GM in the league, with the highest payroll/win ratio. It's stunningly pathetic how poor of a job he has done. This isn't just a GM with a mid range payroll building a .500 team. This is a GM with an upper echelon payroll building a way below .500 team.

 

I repeat.

 

Nothing in his past suggests he is capable of making the necessary moves to turn this team into a winner.

 

Don't forget squandering the depth that we once had in our system, retaining the wrong players and holding onto others long after their values peaked.

 

 

Also don't forget devaluing his own players to almost nothing and trading them at their absolute lowest value.

[goonys evil twin]

What he did between July of 2002 and the end of 2003 is still in his past, isn't it? He came awfully close to proving you wrong right there. If he can do that, why can't he get 5 more outs at some point down the road?

 

I understand your reasons for doubting him, but to say that there is nothing in his past just seems unsupportable to me. If the Cubs had done nothing from July 2002 to now, would 2003 have happened?

 

What did he do then? He created an 88 win team, the same win total from 2 year before. Big freaking deal. I didn't say there is nothing in his past. I said there is nothing in his past that indicates he can make the moves that will make this team a winner. That team was already in place, including a HOF corner OF and several great young pitchers (before he allowed the manager to abuse the crap out of them).

 

This team needs a ton of work, and what it needs most is OBP. Jim refuses to get OBP, so we know that won't be addressed. He didn't prove me wrong, he actually lived up to my worst nightmares by hiring Dusty Baker, ignoring the value of walks, sticking with antiquated baseball theories that have since been proven wrong..... etc. Jim started making mistakes at the beginning, only the mistakes just kept getting worse and worse. It's a downward trend that shows no signs of abating.

[Hacking Out Machine]

What he did between July of 2002 and the end of 2003 is still in his past, isn't it? He came awfully close to proving you wrong right there. If he can do that, why can't he get 5 more outs at some point down the road?

 

I understand your reasons for doubting him, but to say that there is nothing in his past just seems unsupportable to me. If the Cubs had done nothing from July 2002 to now, would 2003 have happened?

 

What did he do then? He created an 88 win team, the same win total from 2 year before. Big freaking deal. I didn't say there is nothing in his past. I said there is nothing in his past that indicates he can make the moves that will make this team a winner. That team was already in place, including a HOF corner OF and several great young pitchers (before he allowed the manager to abuse the crap out of them).

 

This team needs a ton of work, and what it needs most is OBP. Jim refuses to get OBP, so we know that won't be addressed. He didn't prove me wrong, he actually lived up to my worst nightmares by hiring Dusty Baker, ignoring the value of walks, sticking with antiquated baseball theories that have since been proven wrong..... etc. Jim started making mistakes at the beginning, only the mistakes just kept getting worse and worse. It's a downward trend that shows no signs of abating.

 

Very, very well said.

[KingCubsFan]

Listing them is pointless. He's had a couple decent moves, but only when you look at them without considering the big picture. Concentrating on bullpen, speed and defense was an absolute failure of strategy, no matter how well Eyre and Howry have pitched. Top notch relievers are pointless when your lineup and rotation suck.

 

Jim Hendry is an awful GM. He not only has failed to win a WS, he's failed to field a competitive team. He's also been the most inefficient GM in the league, with the highest payroll/win ratio. It's stunningly pathetic how poor of a job he has done. This isn't just a GM with a mid range payroll building a .500 team. This is a GM with an upper echelon payroll building a way below .500 team.

 

I repeat.

 

Nothing in his past suggests he is capable of making the necessary moves to turn this team into a winner.

 

Don't forget squandering the depth that we once had in our system, retaining the wrong players and holding onto others long after their values peaked.

I think we can blame John Stocksill for squandering the depth in our system.

[snoodmonger]

I'd like to see what Walker gets ranked at the end of the year before I make up my mind about the trade. If he gets an "A" ranking, I wish we would have held on and offered Arby. If he gets a "B" ranking, I'm happy enough with the deal.

 

I don't think there's anyway he's an "A". He may even be a borderline "B". IIRC, he was a Class "C" FA after the 2004 season.

I wonder if that's due to playing time. His rate numbers certainly rank well with 2b-men. And Elias doesn't consider defense when doing the rankings.

 

This is the scenario. Walker is bats well enough to be an "A", but the Neifi love diminished his playing time enough so that he became a borderline "B"/"C".

ESPN.com's player rankings seem to think Todd Walker no longer exists for some reason, but I'd imagine that's the case.

 

I think he's listed as a 1b on espn

[Jon]

I'd like to see what Walker gets ranked at the end of the year before I make up my mind about the trade. If he gets an "A" ranking, I wish we would have held on and offered Arby. If he gets a "B" ranking, I'm happy enough with the deal.

 

I don't think there's anyway he's an "A". He may even be a borderline "B". IIRC, he was a Class "C" FA after the 2004 season.

I wonder if that's due to playing time. His rate numbers certainly rank well with 2b-men. And Elias doesn't consider defense when doing the rankings.

 

This is the scenario. Walker is bats well enough to be an "A", but the Neifi love diminished his playing time enough so that he became a borderline "B"/"C".

ESPN.com's player rankings seem to think Todd Walker no longer exists for some reason, but I'd imagine that's the case.

 

I think he's listed as a 1b on espn

Ah. Well, that doesn't help me, especially since he wasn't listed as a 2B for last season.

[CubsWin]

What he did between July of 2002 and the end of 2003 is still in his past, isn't it? He came awfully close to proving you wrong right there. If he can do that, why can't he get 5 more outs at some point down the road?

 

I understand your reasons for doubting him, but to say that there is nothing in his past just seems unsupportable to me. If the Cubs had done nothing from July 2002 to now, would 2003 have happened?

 

What did he do then? He created an 88 win team, the same win total from 2 year before. Big freaking deal. I didn't say there is nothing in his past. I said there is nothing in his past that indicates he can make the moves that will make this team a winner. That team was already in place, including a HOF corner OF and several great young pitchers (before he allowed the manager to abuse the crap out of them).

 

This team needs a ton of work, and what it needs most is OBP. Jim refuses to get OBP, so we know that won't be addressed. He didn't prove me wrong, he actually lived up to my worst nightmares by hiring Dusty Baker, ignoring the value of walks, sticking with antiquated baseball theories that have since been proven wrong..... etc. Jim started making mistakes at the beginning, only the mistakes just kept getting worse and worse. It's a downward trend that shows no signs of abating.

For the most part, I'm not disagreeing with you on this stuff. Just that there is nothing in his past that suggests he can succeed.

 

I think saying that he refuses to get OBP is an inaccurate statement. He brought in Ramirez who was a huge OBP upgrade over what was there before. Same with DLee, and Michael Barrett has improved upon the OBP coming out of the catchers position. Pierre's OBP is an improvement over Patterson's. And I think Murton's OBP is an improvement over Alou's, but I haven't looked that one up. He's lost OBP a ton in RF and has struggled mightly to get it back. But its not like .400 OBP guys are easy to come by. Would I have liked him to get Beltran? Yes. Does he need to improve the OBP coming out of the middle infield now? Probably.

 

He has had to deal with the unexpected loss of Prior and the partially expected downfalls of Wood and Sosa. Both of those kingpins completely failed him and he has failed to overcome the gaping holes that have been left in their place.

 

But to say that it has been a steady decline from the beginning of Hendry's reign would be revisionist history. There was a decidedly huge uptick before the decline. I don't think that can be accurately challenged.

 

Again, not challenging much, just those statements that seem unbalanced and inaccurate. On the whole, I agree. But you never addressed the point I made about there being more than nothing in his past. You just changed the subject.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Intriguing, raw prospect. Seems better than what the Cubs got for Williamson or Maddux.

[KingCubsFan]

What he did between July of 2002 and the end of 2003 is still in his past, isn't it? He came awfully close to proving you wrong right there. If he can do that, why can't he get 5 more outs at some point down the road?

 

I understand your reasons for doubting him, but to say that there is nothing in his past just seems unsupportable to me. If the Cubs had done nothing from July 2002 to now, would 2003 have happened?

 

What did he do then? He created an 88 win team, the same win total from 2 year before. Big freaking deal. I didn't say there is nothing in his past. I said there is nothing in his past that indicates he can make the moves that will make this team a winner. That team was already in place, including a HOF corner OF and several great young pitchers (before he allowed the manager to abuse the crap out of them).

 

This team needs a ton of work, and what it needs most is OBP. Jim refuses to get OBP, so we know that won't be addressed. He didn't prove me wrong, he actually lived up to my worst nightmares by hiring Dusty Baker, ignoring the value of walks, sticking with antiquated baseball theories that have since been proven wrong..... etc. Jim started making mistakes at the beginning, only the mistakes just kept getting worse and worse. It's a downward trend that shows no signs of abating.

For the most part, I'm not disagreeing with you on this stuff. Just that there is nothing in his past that suggests he can succeed.

 

I think saying that he refuses to get OBP is an inaccurate statement. He brought in Ramirez who was a huge OBP upgrade over what was there before. Same with DLee, and Michael Barrett has improved upon the OBP coming out of the catchers position. Pierre's OBP is an improvement over Patterson's. And I think Murton's OBP is an improvement over Alou's, but I haven't looked that one up. He's lost OBP a ton in RF and has struggled mightly to get it back. But its not like .400 OBP guys are easy to come by. Would I have liked him to get Beltran? Yes. Does he need to improve the OBP coming out of the middle infield now? Probably.

 

He has had to deal with the unexpected loss of Prior and the partially expected downfalls of Wood and Sosa. Both of those kingpins completely failed him and he has failed to overcome the gaping holes that have been left in their place.

 

But to say that it has been a steady decline from the beginning of Hendry's reign would be revisionist history. There was a decidedly huge uptick before the decline. I don't think that can be accurately challenged.

 

Again, not challenging much, just those statements that seem unbalanced and inaccurate. On the whole, I agree. But you never addressed the point I made about there being more than nothing in his past. You just changed the subject.

I think you're missing the point. The players you mentioned all were OBP upgrades, but that's not why Hendry got them. Ramirez and Barrett are OBP upgrades because they're good hitters, not because they're necessarily proficient at taking walks. In fact, they are perfect examples of the type of players Hendry was talking about in his interview a few weeks ago. Lee could always take walks, but that didn't seem to be the reason Hendry got him. If I remember correctly, Hendry consistently mentioned Lee's power, defense and athleticism when he acquired him.

Anytime you allow a top of a lineup to have the OBP the Cubs' teams have had the past couple of years, you don't really value it that much.

And I don't think it's inaccurate to say that there has been a steady decline since the beginning of Hendry's reign. Every year has been progressively worse, unless you want to count 2004's 1 win gain and overlook the fact they blew a spot in the playoffs in the final week of the season.

[CubsWin]

What he did between July of 2002 and the end of 2003 is still in his past, isn't it? He came awfully close to proving you wrong right there. If he can do that, why can't he get 5 more outs at some point down the road?

 

I understand your reasons for doubting him, but to say that there is nothing in his past just seems unsupportable to me. If the Cubs had done nothing from July 2002 to now, would 2003 have happened?

 

What did he do then? He created an 88 win team, the same win total from 2 year before. Big freaking deal. I didn't say there is nothing in his past. I said there is nothing in his past that indicates he can make the moves that will make this team a winner. That team was already in place, including a HOF corner OF and several great young pitchers (before he allowed the manager to abuse the crap out of them).

 

This team needs a ton of work, and what it needs most is OBP. Jim refuses to get OBP, so we know that won't be addressed. He didn't prove me wrong, he actually lived up to my worst nightmares by hiring Dusty Baker, ignoring the value of walks, sticking with antiquated baseball theories that have since been proven wrong..... etc. Jim started making mistakes at the beginning, only the mistakes just kept getting worse and worse. It's a downward trend that shows no signs of abating.

For the most part, I'm not disagreeing with you on this stuff. Just that there is nothing in his past that suggests he can succeed.

 

I think saying that he refuses to get OBP is an inaccurate statement. He brought in Ramirez who was a huge OBP upgrade over what was there before. Same with DLee, and Michael Barrett has improved upon the OBP coming out of the catchers position. Pierre's OBP is an improvement over Patterson's. And I think Murton's OBP is an improvement over Alou's, but I haven't looked that one up. He's lost OBP a ton in RF and has struggled mightly to get it back. But its not like .400 OBP guys are easy to come by. Would I have liked him to get Beltran? Yes. Does he need to improve the OBP coming out of the middle infield now? Probably.

 

He has had to deal with the unexpected loss of Prior and the partially expected downfalls of Wood and Sosa. Both of those kingpins completely failed him and he has failed to overcome the gaping holes that have been left in their place.

 

But to say that it has been a steady decline from the beginning of Hendry's reign would be revisionist history. There was a decidedly huge uptick before the decline. I don't think that can be accurately challenged.

 

Again, not challenging much, just those statements that seem unbalanced and inaccurate. On the whole, I agree. But you never addressed the point I made about there being more than nothing in his past. You just changed the subject.

I think you're missing the point. The players you mentioned all were OBP upgrades, but that's not why Hendry got them. Ramirez and Barrett are OBP upgrades because they're good hitters, not because they're necessarily proficient at taking walks. In fact, they are perfect examples of the type of players Hendry was talking about in his interview a few weeks ago. Lee could always take walks, but that didn't seem to be the reason Hendry got him. If I remember correctly, Hendry consistently mentioned Lee's power, defense and athleticism when he acquired him.

Anytime you allow a top of a lineup to have the OBP the Cubs' teams have had the past couple of years, you don't really value it that much.

And I don't think it's inaccurate to say that there has been a steady decline since the beginning of Hendry's reign. Every year has been progressively worse, unless you want to count 2004's 1 win gain and overlook the fact they blew a spot in the playoffs in the final week of the season.

In order for that to be true, we would have to completely ignore what Hendry did to make 2003 happen. I'm not disagreeing that there is bad, just trying to make sure that the good gets included too.

[thedaymen]

I'm glad to see Hendry go this route rather than trade him for some toolsy 24-year old SS who has never produced.

 

How do you feel about this statement now?

[goonys evil twin]

nevermind, not worth the aggravation.

[GlassCow]

See Ya, Todd

 

I'll leave you with a good memory.......

 

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j163/Niner74/ToddWalkerJenniferAniston.jpg

 

That is the most glorious thing I have ever seen. Marry me Jennifer Anniston.

[CubsWin]

nevermind, not worth the aggravation.

That's for sure.

[abuck1220]

did anybody catch the bit on the colbert report about the walker trade? they were doing a bit where they take calls from "viewers" and one of the callers, who thought he was calling a sports talk show, started in about how the cubs were stupid to trade walker (though he was ok with them trading maddux). he even mentioned ceda by name and noted that walker had the second highest OBP on the team.

 

that's right, even comedy central knows the value of OBP.

[Andy]

See Ya, Todd

 

I'll leave you with a good memory.......

 

http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j163/Niner74/ToddWalkerJenniferAniston.jpg

 

That is the most glorious thing I have ever seen. Marry me Jennifer Anniston.

Me first

[Laura]

Intriguing, raw prospect. Seems better than what the Cubs got for Williamson or Maddux.

 

If anyone ever writes the obituary for this season, that may the bottom line.

 

I know BP knocked the Walker trade under the assumption that the Cubs could offer arby and get a couple of draft picks, assuming Walker was Class A (after Clement being designated Class B, it's hard for me to imagine who could be A vs. B). And everyone has to asterick and caveat all comment concerning Walker; given that he was going to be traded and he was not going to be here next year, I'm happy with the return.

 

And yah, I would have been much happier with a similar return on Maddux vs. the Little Cesar! return.