Honestly, Len Kasper should be...

[TB_11]

John Paxson made a leap from the booth to GM for the Bulls and has done a great job. He apparently was able to learn the ins and outs of being GM on the fly. Maybe Kasper would make a similar easy transition, but I'd rather try someone with a little more experience and is just waiting to get a chance as GM. I like Len in the booth, lets keep him there.

 

Pax is also a former player and former assistant coach.

 

I agree with keeping Len in the booth; he's a solid play-by-play guy.

[Magnetic Curses]

is it just lip service when kasper gushes on and on about a sac bunt by the #2 hitter in the first inning? is he just trying to be liked by upper management when he talks at length about "fundamentals" or is he just trying to not get beaten up by brenly?

 

kasper wouldn't impress me as GM, he can just stay in the booth, mention WARP once or twice a year to impress the sabr crowd, and then laud some hitter for "putting the ball in play" or "moving a runner over" and not get called out on it.

 

kasper is no stat-head.

[Andy]

is it just lip service when kasper gushes on and on about a sac bunt by the #2 hitter in the first inning? is he just trying to be liked by upper management when he talks at length about "fundamentals" or is he just trying to not get beaten up by brenly?

 

kasper wouldn't impress me as GM, he can just stay in the booth, mention WARP once or twice a year to impress the sabr crowd, and then laud some hitter for "putting the ball in play" or "moving a runner over" and not get called out on it.

 

kasper is no stat-head.

I believe that Len knows a lot more about stats and the game and what constitutes a good player than he lets on over the course of a broadcast. And I think the Trib probably has something to do with that.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

is it just lip service when kasper gushes on and on about a sac bunt by the #2 hitter in the first inning? is he just trying to be liked by upper management when he talks at length about "fundamentals" or is he just trying to not get beaten up by brenly?

 

kasper wouldn't impress me as GM, he can just stay in the booth, mention WARP once or twice a year to impress the sabr crowd, and then laud some hitter for "putting the ball in play" or "moving a runner over" and not get called out on it.

 

kasper is no stat-head.

 

Kasper would lose his job in a snap if he didn't do those things. He's done several chats and interviews that are much more revealing of his thought process.

[SouthSideRyan]

He's also broadcasting to a large audience. If he spent the whole broadcast spouting off stats that 99% of the people watching have never heard of he'd be a terrible announcer.

[Magnetic Curses]

is it just lip service when kasper gushes on and on about a sac bunt by the #2 hitter in the first inning? is he just trying to be liked by upper management when he talks at length about "fundamentals" or is he just trying to not get beaten up by brenly?

 

kasper wouldn't impress me as GM, he can just stay in the booth, mention WARP once or twice a year to impress the sabr crowd, and then laud some hitter for "putting the ball in play" or "moving a runner over" and not get called out on it.

 

kasper is no stat-head.

I believe that Len knows a lot more about stats and the game and what constitutes a good player than he lets on over the course of a broadcast. And I think the Trib probably has something to do with that.

 

i don't know why the trib would stifle kasper's use of sabermetrics during a broadcast, i really don't. if they do, just to listen in on that conversation between he and his producer would be baffling.

[Drew Doughty]

is it just lip service when kasper gushes on and on about a sac bunt by the #2 hitter in the first inning? is he just trying to be liked by upper management when he talks at length about "fundamentals" or is he just trying to not get beaten up by brenly?

 

kasper wouldn't impress me as GM, he can just stay in the booth, mention WARP once or twice a year to impress the sabr crowd, and then laud some hitter for "putting the ball in play" or "moving a runner over" and not get called out on it.

 

kasper is no stat-head.

I believe that Len knows a lot more about stats and the game and what constitutes a good player than he lets on over the course of a broadcast. And I think the Trib probably has something to do with that.

 

i don't know why the trib would stifle kasper's use of sabermetrics during a broadcast, i really don't. if they do, just to listen in on that conversation between he and his producer would be baffling.

 

In other interviews, Len shows more knowledge about the game than he does during Cubs games (like that interview with the Milwaukee guys a few weeks ago). I think he tones it down for games because the audience won't care to hear what he has to say. I don't think the trib stifles him, but he does it on his own.

[Magnetic Curses]

He's also broadcasting to a large audience. If he spent the whole broadcast spouting off stats that 99% of the people watching have never heard of he'd be a terrible announcer.

 

he could spend part of the broadcast attempting to explain simple, non-sabr stats like IsoD or IsoP, the importance of plate discipline. or, as i heard pat and ron talking about the other day, the fact that philadelphia has scored more runs than any other national league team while also leading the league in stranded baserunners.

 

if you get more baserunners, it's easier to score runs, so we don't have to hit 1.000 with runners in scoring position.

 

i think that idea would be well received by a large audience. it's simple, easy to comprehend, and useful to the casual fan. just point out simple connections, relationships, and causations without using the name of billy beane or the term "sabermetrics".

[CubColtPacer]

is it just lip service when kasper gushes on and on about a sac bunt by the #2 hitter in the first inning? is he just trying to be liked by upper management when he talks at length about "fundamentals" or is he just trying to not get beaten up by brenly?

 

kasper wouldn't impress me as GM, he can just stay in the booth, mention WARP once or twice a year to impress the sabr crowd, and then laud some hitter for "putting the ball in play" or "moving a runner over" and not get called out on it.

 

kasper is no stat-head.

I believe that Len knows a lot more about stats and the game and what constitutes a good player than he lets on over the course of a broadcast. And I think the Trib probably has something to do with that.

 

i don't know why the trib would stifle kasper's use of sabermetrics during a broadcast, i really don't. if they do, just to listen in on that conversation between he and his producer would be baffling.

 

In other interviews, Len shows more knowledge about the game than he does during Cubs games (like that interview with the Milwaukee guys a few weeks ago). I think he tones it down for games because the audience won't care to hear what he has to say. I don't think the trib stifles him, but he does it on his own.

 

I think it's a personal thing as well. Look for example on how many people on this board try their hardest to not listen to Joe Morgan because of how extreme he is in the other direction. If Len was too far on the numbers side, he realizes that some people would turn him off in much the same way-so to be a good broadcaster, he tries to present a balanced view that represents some part of all the people who listen to him.

[CubColtPacer]

He's also broadcasting to a large audience. If he spent the whole broadcast spouting off stats that 99% of the people watching have never heard of he'd be a terrible announcer.

 

he could spend part of the broadcast attempting to explain simple, non-sabr stats like IsoD or IsoP, the importance of plate discipline. or, as i heard pat and ron talking about the other day, the fact that philadelphia has scored more runs than any other national league team while also leading the league in stranded baserunners.

 

if you get more baserunners, it's easier to score runs, so we don't have to hit 1.000 with runners in scoring position.

 

i think that idea would be well received by a large audience. it's simple, easy to comprehend, and useful to the casual fan. just point out simple connections, relationships, and causations without using the name of billy beane or the term "sabermetrics".

 

Len does talk a great deal about the importance of OBP and plate discipline in his broadcasts, at least to me.

[Magnetic Curses]

is it just lip service when kasper gushes on and on about a sac bunt by the #2 hitter in the first inning? is he just trying to be liked by upper management when he talks at length about "fundamentals" or is he just trying to not get beaten up by brenly?

 

kasper wouldn't impress me as GM, he can just stay in the booth, mention WARP once or twice a year to impress the sabr crowd, and then laud some hitter for "putting the ball in play" or "moving a runner over" and not get called out on it.

 

kasper is no stat-head.

I believe that Len knows a lot more about stats and the game and what constitutes a good player than he lets on over the course of a broadcast. And I think the Trib probably has something to do with that.

 

i don't know why the trib would stifle kasper's use of sabermetrics during a broadcast, i really don't. if they do, just to listen in on that conversation between he and his producer would be baffling.

 

In other interviews, Len shows more knowledge about the game than he does during Cubs games (like that interview with the Milwaukee guys a few weeks ago). I think he tones it down for games because the audience won't care to hear what he has to say. I don't think the trib stifles him, but he does it on his own.

 

I think it's a personal thing as well. Look for example on how many people on this board try their hardest to not listen to Joe Morgan because of how extreme he is in the other direction. If Len was too far on the numbers side, he realizes that some people would turn him off in much the same way-so to be a good broadcaster, he tries to present a balanced view that represents some part of all the people who listen to him.

 

i don't try "to not listen to joe morgan" because i don't find him offensive. he's said some idiotic things, but he has decent insight into game situations and philosophies, and he definitely understands the importance of OBP.

 

however, if len just used some easy to understand concepts without complicating things with indecipherable sabr stats, he'd be able to get a point across.

 

my stance is that he has no point to get across, other than he likes "fundamentals" and useless sacrifice bunting.

[Jehrico]

What exactly has Hendry done/not done that makes him so hated? Did he overwork his young arms? I am in the minority, but I still think he has been a good GM. This year was a gigantic snowball, but there wasn't much of a Free Agent crop out there last offseason. He has made some great pickups the past few years, and he is strapped with a bum manager.

 

I wonder how close he was to actually getting the Cubs Beltran and Furcal.

 

I'm in the minority that is lukewarm on Hendry. He's had his share of successes and failures. Just some of them to list...

 

Successes:

before being promoted to GM - Built up our international scouting program in both SE Asia and Latin America

-Developed what was rated as one of the top farm systems in all of baseball

-Acquired Aramis for Bobby Hill

-Acquired Derek Lee for Hee Seop Choi

-Acquired Murton and Nomar for a bunch of minor leaguers

-Didn't get stupid and vastly overpay for Furcal like LA did

-Hasn't had any key players walk on him via FA that we wanted to keep

 

Neutral moves

-Clement and Alphonseca for Willis and scrap (I call it neutral because it should have been the move that got us to the WS, had it not been for the meltdown, and there was no reason to expect Willis to become so good so soon at the time)

 

Failures:

-Failing to implement a sound organizational philosophy centered around the ability to get on base, among other things

-Gave up way too much for Pierre (ties in with the faulty organizational philosophy as well, i.e. the prototypical "leadoff man")

-Routinely overpaying for crap like Rusch and Pierre

-Bringing aboard numerous lefties just for the sake of having a lefty, i.e. Estes, and once again, Rusch (see organizational philosophy again)

-Not holding Dusty liable for his poor performance

-Relying too much on injury prone players (once again, see organizational philosophy)

-Failure to pony up and bring in any impact players as FAs

 

I could live better with his shortcomings if it weren't for the last one. Outside of that, I do not think his shortcomings outweigh his successes, but it's like the old saying goes...one oh sh*t outweighs a thousand atta-boys. His atta-boys don't outweigh the other stuff by enough to satisfy the masses.

[Soriano12]

-Didn't get stupid and vastly overpay for Furcal like LA did

-

 

 

Then turned around and gave near 7 million in combined contracts to

Neifi and Rusch.

 

Is Furcal overpaid yes. But he could have overpaid for Furcal and locked up

the leadoff position for a few years, and kept 2 good arms.

 

Instead he took the money he saved on Furcal and flushed it down

the toilet.

 

 

Now it appears they are going try to re-sign Pierre who

will command a contract near that of Furcal plus they will need to spend

money on another starter for the rotation. If they still had Nolasco

he could have filled this roll at a bargain price.

 

Hendry only thinks 1 move at a time. He would lose to a 2nd grader in a game of chess.

[YearofDaCubs]

-Didn't get stupid and vastly overpay for Furcal like LA did

-

 

 

Then turned around and gave near 7 million in combined contracts to

Neifi and Rusch.

 

Is Furcal overpaid yes. But he could have overpaid for Furcal and locked up

the leadoff position for a few years, and kept 2 good arms.

 

Instead he took the money he saved on Furcal and flushed it down

the toilet.

 

 

Now it appears they are going try to re-sign Pierre who

will command a contract near that of Furcal plus they will need to spend

money on another starter for the rotation. If they still had Nolasco

he could have filled this roll at a bargain price.

 

Hendry only thinks 1 move at a time. He would lose to a 2nd grader in a game of chess.

We now also have to deal with Izturis' contract as well.

[CubColtPacer]

-Didn't get stupid and vastly overpay for Furcal like LA did

-

 

 

Then turned around and gave near 7 million in combined contracts to

Neifi and Rusch.

 

Is Furcal overpaid yes. But he could have overpaid for Furcal and locked up

the leadoff position for a few years, and kept 2 good arms.

 

Instead he took the money he saved on Furcal and flushed it down

the toilet.

 

 

Now it appears they are going try to re-sign Pierre who

will command a contract near that of Furcal plus they will need to spend

money on another starter for the rotation. If they still had Nolasco

he could have filled this roll at a bargain price.

 

Hendry only thinks 1 move at a time. He would lose to a 2nd grader in a game of chess.

We now also have to deal with Izturis' contract as well.

 

If we didn't have Izturis, we'd still have Neifi.

[YearofDaCubs]

And just to add, here are Furcal's numbers for the year right now...

 

.292AVG, .362OBP, 9HR, 53RBI, 94R, 33SB.

 

Pierre:

 

.289AVG, .333OBP, 2HR, 34RBI, 71R, 49SB.

[YearofDaCubs]

-Didn't get stupid and vastly overpay for Furcal like LA did

-

 

 

Then turned around and gave near 7 million in combined contracts to

Neifi and Rusch.

 

Is Furcal overpaid yes. But he could have overpaid for Furcal and locked up

the leadoff position for a few years, and kept 2 good arms.

 

Instead he took the money he saved on Furcal and flushed it down

the toilet.

 

 

Now it appears they are going try to re-sign Pierre who

will command a contract near that of Furcal plus they will need to spend

money on another starter for the rotation. If they still had Nolasco

he could have filled this roll at a bargain price.

 

Hendry only thinks 1 move at a time. He would lose to a 2nd grader in a game of chess.

We now also have to deal with Izturis' contract as well.

 

If we didn't have Izturis, we'd still have Neifi.

I'm not so sure about that. Hendry found a fool in the Tigers GM to acquire Neifi and his bad contract off our hands. If the Tigers weren't desperate we might have both right now.

[Jehrico]

-Didn't get stupid and vastly overpay for Furcal like LA did

-

 

 

Then turned around and gave near 7 million in combined contracts to

Neifi and Rusch.

 

Is Furcal overpaid yes. But he could have overpaid for Furcal and locked up

the leadoff position for a few years, and kept 2 good arms.

 

Instead he took the money he saved on Furcal and flushed it down

the toilet.

 

 

Now it appears they are going try to re-sign Pierre who

will command a contract near that of Furcal plus they will need to spend

money on another starter for the rotation. If they still had Nolasco

he could have filled this roll at a bargain price.

 

Hendry only thinks 1 move at a time. He would lose to a 2nd grader in a game of chess.

If you noticed, I did include that paying what he paid for Rusch and Neifi as a failure.

 

Regardless, your logic is wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right. Not signing Rusch and Neifi and using that money to overpay for someone else doesn't make that a good move either. It wouldn't have been as bad going for Pierre and overpaying Glendon and Neifi, but it still would have been a bad move. Choosing the lesser of two evils when there are other options isn't a good move.

[Soriano12]

Regardless, your logic is wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right. Not signing Rusch and Neifi and using that money to overpay for someone else doesn't make that a good move either.

 

 

You consider my logic wrong probably because part of you still believes in Hendry and the Hendry philosophy.

 

Never overpay for a quality player, but overpay for a mediocre guy.

 

 

Thanks to that philosophy we get the Jeromy Burnit'z and Jacque Jone's of

the world, not the Beltrans.

[CubColtPacer]

-Didn't get stupid and vastly overpay for Furcal like LA did

-

 

 

Then turned around and gave near 7 million in combined contracts to

Neifi and Rusch.

 

Is Furcal overpaid yes. But he could have overpaid for Furcal and locked up

the leadoff position for a few years, and kept 2 good arms.

 

Instead he took the money he saved on Furcal and flushed it down

the toilet.

 

 

Now it appears they are going try to re-sign Pierre who

will command a contract near that of Furcal plus they will need to spend

money on another starter for the rotation. If they still had Nolasco

he could have filled this roll at a bargain price.

 

Hendry only thinks 1 move at a time. He would lose to a 2nd grader in a game of chess.

We now also have to deal with Izturis' contract as well.

 

If we didn't have Izturis, we'd still have Neifi.

I'm not so sure about that. Hendry found a fool in the Tigers GM to acquire Neifi and his bad contract off our hands. If the Tigers weren't desperate we might have both right now.

 

I'd agree that it was likely that we would still have both..but if we hadn't traded for Izturis, do you really think that Hendry would have said yes to giving up Neifi? The trade for Izturis made it possible to get rid of Neifi, and then the Tigers were silly enough to actually make the trade for Neifi possible.

[Jehrico]

Regardless, your logic is wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right. Not signing Rusch and Neifi and using that money to overpay for someone else doesn't make that a good move either.

 

 

You consider my logic wrong probably because part of you still believes in Hendry and the Hendry philosophy.

 

Did you even read more than the first couple lines in my original post earlier, or do you just select bits and pieces that give you something to attack? The first fault of his that I cited (and bolded, and referred to three more times after that) was his failure to implement a sound organizational philosophy.

 

I never once supported signing anyone along the lines of Burnitz, Jones, or anyone like that, you're making crap up out of thin air to slander me now.

 

Overpaying for overrated players simply because it's not the worst option is not a sound philosophy. Overpaying for good players is obviously better than overpaying for bad players, but that doesn't make it a good way of doing business.

[Soriano12]

Regardless, your logic is wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right. Not signing Rusch and Neifi and using that money to overpay for someone else doesn't make that a good move either.

 

 

You consider my logic wrong probably because part of you still believes in Hendry and the Hendry philosophy.

 

Did you even read more than the first couple lines in my original post earlier, or do you just select bits and pieces that give you something to attack?

 

You consider that an attack yet you are the one that says "your philosophy is just wrong" You don't know if my philosophy is wrong.

It may be it may be not.

 

I don't think its too much of a stretch to say this team would be alot better

today if it had Furcal at SS, and Nolasco in the rotation.

[Jehrico]

Regardless, your logic is wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right. Not signing Rusch and Neifi and using that money to overpay for someone else doesn't make that a good move either.

 

 

You consider my logic wrong probably because part of you still believes in Hendry and the Hendry philosophy.

 

Did you even read more than the first couple lines in my original post earlier, or do you just select bits and pieces that give you something to attack?

 

You consider that an attack yet you are the one that says "your philosophy is just wrong" You don't know if my philosophy is wrong.

It may be it may be not.

 

I don't think its too much of a stretch to say this team would be alot better

today if it had Furcal at SS, and Nolasco in the rotation.

I didn't say your philosophy is wrong, I said your logic is wrong (your logic is it's okay to overpay for player A because it's better than overpaying for player B. My logic is they're both wrong). I supported why I thought that. It's my opinion, and if you can't handle opinions, you shouldn't be on here. No one should have to preface their opinions with "It is my opinion" or something like that when it's a topic that is obviously based on opinion. Some people are so paranoid about other interpreting them as quoting fact that they put a disclaimer on most of thier posts. It's unneeded, ridiculous, and I refuse to do it.

 

You're the one that came out and suggested that I believe in Hendry and the Hendry philosphy, despite the fact that in my first post in this thread I CLEARLY stated that was my number one problem with him. Hence, I accuse you of not reading the whole post and picking bits and pieces that suit you to attack others.

[Soriano12]

I have no problem with people disliking my opinions.

 

bottom line:(my opinion)

Hendry is the worst GM in baseball by far

The need to start spending more to get some quality players, if it means

overspending fine. Whats the cost of overspending in baseball? Fitszimmons

doesn't get that bonus trip to the bahama's.

 

There is no way in hell though I would give 100+ million to hendry to

spend. He needs to be fired and a compentant GM brought in.

 

thats it, thats my view..if people don't like it..fine.

[Soriano12]

Jehrico I'm sorry if I came off as a jag. I apologize.

 

It has been a terrible season and I'm just frusrtated.