[NorthsideAvenger]

I do think so. 30 starts from backup catcher is worth more than 30 appearances by a terrible middle reliever in the 6th inning.

 

I agree to a degree. It would have to depend who the back C is and who the mid relief guy is. Otherwise, the Backup C would createas many wins with his ability, as the mid relief. On the list of importance, TO ME, there are the same. Because you CAN alway find a back up C (note: I didn't say "GOOD") as much as you can find a mid relief guy. In fact both roles could be reasonably filled by players from the farm.

 

FYI, I define middle relief as everyone other than a setup man and closer. The back end of the pen is somewhat important, but middle relief isn't worth spit. The fact that Hendry has dumped so much payroll into the bullpen in the past 3 seasons is insanity. Your bullpen should be fixed only after your lineup and rotation have been properly constructed. It's like building a house and starting with the roof.

 

Now this I will agree....100%. Getting Howry/Erye were NOT bad chooses, but the fact that Jim elected to address the bullpen, before he address the offense is literally quite disturbing. Howry and Eyre (and to a certain degree Remlinger a few yrs back) should have been mere add ons, not the "prime FA". I hope Hendry has learn not to underestimate how bad the Cubs offense can get, and address it.

[TheDude]

The question posed was to list acquisitions that made you think the GM was proactive, and I answered it. The Cubs bullpen was a major issue in 2005 and the GM went out and addressed it immediately the next year. That is pro-active in my book - identify the problem and waste no time addressing it.

 

That's actually pretty much the definition of reactive, not pro-active. Reactive looks at what was bad last year and then tries to fix it. Proactive has a bunch of internal options lined up to fill holes before they become holes, that way you don't have to spend big on middle relief. Pro-active goes out and acquires a stud before he becomes a stud, or signs a player that fills a need that will come up soon, as opposed to one you've been having for years.

 

Reactive is seeing your team lose a game because of the bullpen then going out and signing middle relievers.

 

So I guess Hendry gets big credit for Lee, Ramirez, and Barret, per the bolded part of your quote? Those were also elements of my original post on the matter. The middle relivers text was sniped from that original post.

 

Here's the bottom line - I didn't introduce the use of 'pro-active' or 'forward-thinking' into the discussion. The claim was that Hendry isn't either of these terms with specific regards to Japanese players, and I want to know why folks think this way.

[Guest]

The question posed was to list acquisitions that made you think the GM was proactive, and I answered it. The Cubs bullpen was a major issue in 2005 and the GM went out and addressed it immediately the next year. That is pro-active in my book - identify the problem and waste no time addressing it.

 

That's actually pretty much the definition of reactive, not pro-active. Reactive looks at what was bad last year and then tries to fix it. Proactive has a bunch of internal options lined up to fill holes before they become holes, that way you don't have to spend big on middle relief. Pro-active goes out and acquires a stud before he becomes a stud, or signs a player that fills a need that will come up soon, as opposed to one you've been having for years.

 

Reactive is seeing your team lose a game because of the bullpen then going out and signing middle relievers.

 

So I guess Hendry gets big credit for Lee, Ramirez, and Barret, per the bolded part of your quote? Those were also elements of my original post on the matter. The middle relivers text was sniped from that original post.

 

Here's the bottom line - I didn't introduce the use of 'pro-active' or 'forward-thinking' into the discussion. The claim was that Hendry isn't either of these terms with specific regards to Japanese players, and I want to know why folks think this way.

 

and it was proven to you numerous times.

[goonys evil twin]

Here's the bottom line - I didn't introduce the use of 'pro-active' or 'forward-thinking' into the discussion. The claim was that Hendry isn't either of these terms with specific regards to Japanese players, and I want to know why folks think this way.

 

I think this way because Jim acts this way. He's reactive. The occasional salary dump acquisition really doesn't mean much. Time and time again, Hendry is out chasing yesterday's news. His whole 'save some for the trading deadline' theory screams of not aggressively filling needs. Going into last season with the "I've decided I like guys who can catcher the ball", as well as the chasing after the mythological much needed leadoff man, defines a guy who is not ahead of the game.

 

I don't understand why you routinely fall on the defend Hendry side of discussions, when Hendry has done nothing but fail repeatedly. Acquiring a couple of individuals good players, or making a couple of individual good deals, does not mean nearly as much as the big picture. And the big picture shows that without a doubt Hendry has failed, big time. What is it about him that forces you to pretend otherwise?

[Larry Horse]

Here's the bottom line - I didn't introduce the use of 'pro-active' or 'forward-thinking' into the discussion. The claim was that Hendry isn't either of these terms with specific regards to Japanese players, and I want to know why folks think this way.

 

I think this way because Jim acts this way. He's reactive. The occasional salary dump acquisition really doesn't mean much. Time and time again, Hendry is out chasing yesterday's news. His whole 'save some for the trading deadline' theory screams of not aggressively filling needs. Going into last season with the "I've decided I like guys who can catcher the ball", as well as the chasing after the mythological much needed leadoff man, defines a guy who is not ahead of the game.

 

I don't understand why you routinely fall on the defend Hendry side of discussions, when Hendry has done nothing but fail repeatedly. Acquiring a couple of individuals good players, or making a couple of individual good deals, does not mean nearly as much as the big picture. And the big picture shows that without a doubt Hendry has failed, big time. What is it about him that forces you to pretend otherwise?

 

Well put, Goony.

 

This organization is nothing if it is not reactive.

 

Proactive would have been trading Juan Pierre at the break, instead of getting nothing for him.

 

And this was not just about Japenese players, it was about Hendry as a whole.

[Backtobanks]

A premier middle reliever is still the least important part of your team. Middle relievers are generally failed starters. They can have success for a year or two, but that success usually means that somone overpays them.

 

They are less important than your backup C, IMO. A team with a good rotation won't need them as often, and a team with a great offense can outslug deficincies.

You really think that? No offense, but I think it's silly to say that a backup catcher who starts 30 games a year is more important than the guys who pitch the 6th, 7th, and 8th innings of close games.

 

I do think so. 30 starts from backup catcher is worth more than 30 appearances by a terrible middle reliever in the 6th inning.

 

FYI, I define middle relief as everyone other than a setup man and closer. The back end of the pen is somewhat important, but middle relief isn't worth spit. The fact that Hendry has dumped so much payroll into the bullpen in the past 3 seasons is insanity. Your bullpen should be fixed only after your lineup and rotation have been properly constructed. It's like building a house and starting with the roof.

 

The difference is that a backup C might start 30 games while many middle relief pitchers get into more than 50 games.

[abuck1220]

Way too forward-thinking for Hendry. He would rather go with someone like DeRosa.

 

Based on what?

 

His history of signing mediocre players.

 

Name me the last signing of Hendry where you said "Wow, that was proactive. Hendry was really a step ahead of everyone else with this one."

 

That is exceptionally selective memory on your part. Every year Hendry has made a proactive attempt to fix the bullpen through FA, with names like Hawkins, Howry, and Eyre. All three were solid, proactive signings to fix an annually ragged bullpen. Alfonseca wasn't the best acquisition, but at the time (without the value of hindsight), he was expected to be solid.

 

 

that's not forward-thinking at all. that's looking at the list of available FA middle relievers, picking the one with the best era the previous year, and then throwing a bunch of money at him. that's the definition of playing it safe...there's no advanced philosophy at work there.

 

Thanks for quoting only half my post and omitting all the other examples, that's a fine way to present a case.

 

The question posed was to list acquisitions that made you think the GM was proactive, and I answered it. The Cubs bullpen was a major issue in 2005 and the GM went out and addressed it immediately the next year. That is pro-active in my book - identify the problem and waste no time addressing it.

 

The challenge before that was to suggest signing/posting a Japanese player was too forward-thinking for the GM. I answered that as well, and my answer went completely ignored, probably because there isn't a valid counter argument that will stand up to scrutiny.

 

Folks can continue to pick one example out of the context of the enire issue if they want to, but it does nothing to answer the original question and my original response - why is signing a Japanese player too forward-thinking for the current GM?

 

sorry, i didn't know i had to fully address everything you said in a post in order to respond.

 

anyway, i don't care how you slice it, going out and signing recognizeable names to huge contracts the year after your bullpen sucks is not, in any way, proactive, forward-thinking whatever. and the problem wasn't addressed when he signed remlinger, hawkins, eyre or whoever was the middle reliever coming off the best season because the bullpen still sucked, and in most cases the specific guy he got sucked or was average at best.

 

an example of a forward-thinking, proactive move would be to build your bullpen through the farm system or get guys like howry, remlinger, and eyre just before they have their big season instead of letting them cash in at your expense.

[USSoccer]

A premier middle reliever is still the least important part of your team. Middle relievers are generally failed starters. They can have success for a year or two, but that success usually means that somone overpays them.

 

They are less important than your backup C, IMO. A team with a good rotation won't need them as often, and a team with a great offense can outslug deficincies.

You really think that? No offense, but I think it's silly to say that a backup catcher who starts 30 games a year is more important than the guys who pitch the 6th, 7th, and 8th innings of close games.

 

I do think so. 30 starts from backup catcher is worth more than 30 appearances by a terrible middle reliever in the 6th inning.

 

FYI, I define middle relief as everyone other than a setup man and closer. The back end of the pen is somewhat important, but middle relief isn't worth spit. The fact that Hendry has dumped so much payroll into the bullpen in the past 3 seasons is insanity. Your bullpen should be fixed only after your lineup and rotation have been properly constructed. It's like building a house and starting with the roof.

 

The difference is that a backup C might start 30 games while many middle relief pitchers get into more than 50 games.

 

Middle relievers usually make apperances in games where the team is up big or down big, too. Or maybe they come in and face one guy.

 

They just don't have enough value to ever, ever spend any signifiagnt amount of budget space on them, ever. I don't care that what I just typed is redundant. It's worth being redundant. Being proactive about middle relief is a bloody stupid way to build a roster.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

You know the most proactive thing Jim Hendry can do for the Cubs right now is step down and let someone with half a brain take his job.

 

Maybe even that computer geek who got the Dodgers all those crappy players who weren't clutch enough to win.

[CubsWin]

Well, since I wasn't talking about players acquired via trade ( He's been living off the ARam and Lee fumes for quite a while), I didn't see the point of including it.

 

I was talking about players he signed.

I readily admit that he has missed the boat in signing the big FA star. When I was talking about including his whole past, I wasn't referring to the player's he has acquired via trade, I was talking about the proactive nature in which he jumped on Howry and Eyre and how the Cubs spent a lot more money scouting Asia this past season than in the few years before that.

 

So when I look at the whole picture as it pertains to going after Matsuzaka, I think there is evidence that he has been and can be proactive and is prepared to go after players from the Asian market.

[KingCubsFan]

You know the most proactive thing Jim Hendry can do for the Cubs right now is step down and let someone with half a brain take his job.

 

Maybe even that computer geek who got the Dodgers all those crappy players who weren't clutch enough to win.

Paul Depodesta is certainly not the answer to any of our problems

[CubsWin]

FYI, I define middle relief as everyone other than a setup man and closer. The back end of the pen is somewhat important, but middle relief isn't worth spit. The fact that Hendry has dumped so much payroll into the bullpen in the past 3 seasons is insanity....Being proactive about middle relief is a bloody stupid way to build a roster.

The middle relief guys were all cheap last year, weren't they?

 

Howry and Eyre were the right-handed and left-handed set-up guys. Dempster was the closer.

 

The middle relief guys were Wuertz, Aardsma, Novoa and Ohman. All at league minimum.

 

Remmy was signed to be at the back end of the pen. He didn't perform well enough to stay the whole length of his contract, but that was the gamble Hendry took. In '02, Remlinger was one of the best in the business and not just against left-handers posting a 1.99 ERA. Rusch was signed as a starter to cover for Wood and Prior. He blew-up, but his previous two seasons were pretty good and it was only 3 mill.

 

So where is all this money that Hendry is supposedly wasting on middle relief? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm honestly asking. Am I forgetting some people?

[kroth1342]

You know the most proactive thing Jim Hendry can do for the Cubs right now is step down and let someone with half a brain take his job.

 

Maybe even that computer geek who got the Dodgers all those crappy players who weren't clutch enough to win.

Paul Depodesta is certainly not the answer to any of our problems

 

DePodesta was unfairly made the scapegoat for the Dodger's struggles by baseball Neanderthals like Bill Plaschke - he's a smart, competent GM.

[USSoccer]

FYI, I define middle relief as everyone other than a setup man and closer. The back end of the pen is somewhat important, but middle relief isn't worth spit. The fact that Hendry has dumped so much payroll into the bullpen in the past 3 seasons is insanity....Being proactive about middle relief is a bloody stupid way to build a roster.

The middle relief guys were all cheap last year, weren't they?

 

Howry and Eyre were the right-handed and left-handed set-up guys. Dempster was the closer.

 

The middle relief guys were Wuertz, Aardsma, Novoa and Ohman. All at league minimum.

 

Remmy was signed to be at the back end of the pen. He didn't perform well enough to stay the whole length of his contract, but that was the gamble Hendry took. In '02, Remlinger was one of the best in the business and not just against left-handers posting a 1.99 ERA. Rusch was signed as a starter to cover for Wood and Prior. He blew-up, but his previous two seasons were pretty good and it was only 3 mill.

 

So where is all this money that Hendry is supposedly wasting on middle relief? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm honestly asking. Am I forgetting some people?

 

Well, first off I said Hendry dumped money into the bullpen as a whole, not middle relief in particular. He may not have spent much on the 4 guys you mentioned, but we paid Eyre, Howry, Dempster and Rusch way too much money for what we got. Out of those 4 guys, you maybe needed 2. You had Ohman; why sign Eyre? Did you really need a LH setup man to go with the expensive RH setup guy? If you like Eyre so much, why sign Howry? Didn't Wuertz prove he can be effective if he's not overused? Why even bring back Rusch? I understand he performed above expectations in 2004 and 2005, but his role could have easily been filled for less than half his salary. Why give Dempster a long term, big money(for a reliever) deal after one good year?

 

Your bullpen would look a lot stronger with a better starting rotation. With better starters, your pen is not exposed as much, and the overall effectiveness is much higher. Why not spend money there, in the rotation, where you can try and make it a 7 inning game? What about a better OF? Instead of $6m or whatever we paid Jones, lets forget about the redundancy of Eyre and throw $9m at a good OF?

 

Bullpens should be the last thing you fix.

[VanceJergins]

You know the most proactive thing Jim Hendry can do for the Cubs right now is step down and let someone with half a brain take his job.

 

Maybe even that computer geek who got the Dodgers all those crappy players who weren't clutch enough to win.

Paul Depodesta is certainly not the answer to any of our problems

 

DePodesta was unfairly made the scapegoat for the Dodger's struggles by baseball Neanderthals like Bill Plaschke - he's a smart, competent GM.

 

Did you know that on average, the brains of Neanderthals were 13% larger than modern man's? We have also discovered a great deal of evidence for sophistication, such as sewing needles.

 

Sorry for posting this, I know its completely unrelated to anything. Stuff like that just really is a pet peeve of mine...but I forgive you.

[nilodnayr]

You know the most proactive thing Jim Hendry can do for the Cubs right now is step down and let someone with half a brain take his job.

 

Maybe even that computer geek who got the Dodgers all those crappy players who weren't clutch enough to win.

Paul Depodesta is certainly not the answer to any of our problems

 

Yeah Penny, Lowe, Drew, and Kent are sure stinkin up the joint.

[KingCubsFan]

You know the most proactive thing Jim Hendry can do for the Cubs right now is step down and let someone with half a brain take his job.

 

Maybe even that computer geek who got the Dodgers all those crappy players who weren't clutch enough to win.

Paul Depodesta is certainly not the answer to any of our problems

 

Yeah Penny, Lowe, Drew, and Kent are sure stinkin up the joint.

Neither are Barrett, Lee, Ramirez or Jones. Your point?

[wade]

Did you know that on average, the brains of Neanderthals were 13% larger than modern man's? We have also discovered a great deal of evidence for sophistication, such as sewing needles.

 

Sorry for posting this, I know its completely unrelated to anything. Stuff like that just really is a pet peeve of mine...but I forgive you.

 

Are you the guy from the Geico commercials? :wink:

[Pinktermite]

I think both USSoccer AND CubsWin are both right. But I also think the argument is over small potatoes.

 

All these things relate to each other, and I know I'm preaching somewhat to the choir, as you guys know this stuff better than me. Without good SP, the team loses more games than it should...without good relieving, we lose games where the SP pitched well.

 

Hendry has largely failed to bolster both of these, for reasons we've all discussed ad nauseum. Signing Eyre and Howry were clearly good moves, but for too much money (Goony's right about that 'reactive' thing). So those were NOT bad moves.

 

But given what the Cubs budget is supposed to be (key word 'supposed'), then what we pay those guys is chump change. I for one am glad we have Howry and Eyre. The Cubs should CLEARLY focus on spending on offense and SP this year...the bullpen should always be a secondary consideration.

[Magnetic Curses]

You know the most proactive thing Jim Hendry can do for the Cubs right now is step down and let someone with half a brain take his job.

 

Maybe even that computer geek who got the Dodgers all those crappy players who weren't clutch enough to win.

Paul Depodesta is certainly not the answer to any of our problems

 

Yeah Penny, Lowe, Drew, and Kent are sure stinkin up the joint.

Neither are Barrett, Lee, Ramirez or Jones. Your point?

 

the point is that hendry's had 4 seasons to figure it out and hasn't, while depleting the majority of the minor league system that he himself built. depodesta was given 2 years and fired, while accomplishing everything that hendry had accomplished--he wasn't allowed the time to develop a minor league system (which is what the success in oakland was built around) and was fired before being able to assemble his team.

 

sometimes things have to get worse before they get better. with hendry, they got good (due in part to moves he made and players he had drafted and developed) and then they got way worse, which was directly his fault.

 

depodesta wasn't allowed to build a team. he was allowed to tear down, but not rebuild in his vision. that's totally unfair. the cubs have been very fair with hendry, including giving him a 2-year extension for letting his team get bad. in addition, he's shown no organizational plan other than flying by the seat of his pants, there's no blueprint for going forward or certainty that things will get even slightly better.

[KingCubsFan]

You know the most proactive thing Jim Hendry can do for the Cubs right now is step down and let someone with half a brain take his job.

 

Maybe even that computer geek who got the Dodgers all those crappy players who weren't clutch enough to win.

Paul Depodesta is certainly not the answer to any of our problems

 

Yeah Penny, Lowe, Drew, and Kent are sure stinkin up the joint.

Neither are Barrett, Lee, Ramirez or Jones. Your point?

 

the point is that hendry's had 4 seasons to figure it out and hasn't, while depleting the majority of the minor league system that he himself built. depodesta was given 2 years and fired, while accomplishing everything that hendry had accomplished--he wasn't allowed the time to develop a minor league system (which is what the success in oakland was built around) and was fired before being able to assemble his team.

 

sometimes things have to get worse before they get better. with hendry, they got good (due in part to moves he made and players he had drafted and developed) and then they got way worse, which was directly his fault.

 

depodesta wasn't allowed to build a team. he was allowed to tear down, but not rebuild in his vision. that's totally unfair. the cubs have been very fair with hendry, including giving him a 2-year extension for letting his team get bad. in addition, he's shown no organizational plan other than flying by the seat of his pants, there's no blueprint for going forward or certainty that things will get even slightly better.

DePodesta took a good team and made it worse. Unlike Hendry, he inherited a team capable of winning a division. Of all the players he signed or traded for, he overpaid for all of them. He couldn't even find a manager to replace Jim Tracy. In fact, he was one step ahead of Hendry when he entered the organization because he inherited a great minor league system. I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say that DePodesta "accomplished" in his two years everything that Hendry has. To me, DePodesta really accomplished nothing. If you want to replace Hendry with someone who has ties to Billy Beane, that's fine. But there are much better candidates than DePodesta.

Also, you say that DePodesta never got to build his vision of a team through his farm system. I think all Dodger fans should be thankful for that. One of his few good moves as GM was keeping Logan White, despite the fact that their philosophies on drafting are completely opposite. Without Logan White, the Dodgers would be a complete disaster.

[RationalSoxFan]

You know the most proactive thing Jim Hendry can do for the Cubs right now is step down and let someone with half a brain take his job.

 

Maybe even that computer geek who got the Dodgers all those crappy players who weren't clutch enough to win.

Paul Depodesta is certainly not the answer to any of our problems

 

Yeah Penny, Lowe, Drew, and Kent are sure stinkin up the joint.

Neither are Barrett, Lee, Ramirez or Jones. Your point?

 

the point is that hendry's had 4 seasons to figure it out and hasn't, while depleting the majority of the minor league system that he himself built. depodesta was given 2 years and fired, while accomplishing everything that hendry had accomplished--he wasn't allowed the time to develop a minor league system (which is what the success in oakland was built around) and was fired before being able to assemble his team.

 

sometimes things have to get worse before they get better. with hendry, they got good (due in part to moves he made and players he had drafted and developed) and then they got way worse, which was directly his fault.

 

depodesta wasn't allowed to build a team. he was allowed to tear down, but not rebuild in his vision. that's totally unfair. the cubs have been very fair with hendry, including giving him a 2-year extension for letting his team get bad. in addition, he's shown no organizational plan other than flying by the seat of his pants, there's no blueprint for going forward or certainty that things will get even slightly better.

DePodesta took a good team and made it worse. Unlike Hendry, he inherited a team capable of winning a division. Of all the players he signed or traded for, he overpaid for all of them. He couldn't even find a manager to replace Jim Tracy. In fact, he was one step ahead of Hendry when he entered the organization because he inherited a great minor league system. I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say that DePodesta "accomplished" in his two years everything that Hendry has. To me, DePodesta really accomplished nothing. If you want to replace Hendry with someone who has ties to Billy Beane, that's fine. But there are much better candidates than DePodesta.

Also, you say that DePodesta never got to build his vision of a team through his farm system. I think all Dodger fans should be thankful for that. One of his few good moves as GM was keeping Logan White, despite the fact that their philosophies on drafting are completely opposite. Without Logan White, the Dodgers would be a complete disaster.

Har Har.

[goonys evil twin]

Unlike Hendry, he inherited a team capable of winning a division.

 

Hendry inherited a team that won 88 games 2 years before, then the team went out and won 88 games and won a division.

[CubColtPacer]

Unlike Hendry, he inherited a team capable of winning a division.

 

Hendry inherited a team that won 88 games 2 years before, then the team went out and won 88 games and won a division.

 

That sounds nice, but that doesn't mean the team he inherited could win the division. The 2001 Cubs were nothing of what it looked like at the end of 2002. They had talent at the end of 2002, but the talent was completely different than what it was when they won 88 in 01-the only players even available to Hendry from the 01 team were Sosa, Hundley, Mueller, Wood, and some bullpen guys. That's it-the team in 03 had an almost complete turnover. That's a great deal different then his point that the Dodgers were ready to win then and there.

[goonys evil twin]

Unlike Hendry, he inherited a team capable of winning a division.

 

Hendry inherited a team that won 88 games 2 years before, then the team went out and won 88 games and won a division.

 

That sounds nice, but that doesn't mean the team he inherited could win the division. The 2001 Cubs were nothing of what it looked like at the end of 2002. They had talent at the end of 2002, but the talent was completely different than what it was when they won 88 in 01-the only players even available to Hendry from the 01 team were Sosa, Hundley, Mueller, Wood, and some bullpen guys. That's it-the team in 03 had an almost complete turnover. That's a great deal different then his point that the Dodgers were ready to win then and there.

 

Hendry inherited the team at the end of 2002. The 2003 team was very similar. The rotation, the primary reason they won, was already in place.

 

It's simple absurd to claim that Hendry didn't inherit a team capable of winning a division. He inherited a team, and they won the division.