Rob Neyer's Take on Jim Hendry

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Link.

 

Rob Neyer had this to say about the Cubs' GM:

 

Mike (Madison): Are the Cubs subject to a GM who is trying to up the value of the franchise to make it more attractive to potential owners, a GM feeling the heat, in that, he is the only one left bearing responsibility of a team with only 66 wins left year, or both? What do you think the organization's motives are in regards to these contracts?

 

Rob Neyer: The Cubs are subject to a GM who doesn't properly value on-base percentage.

 

[TheDude]

That's not very insightful.

[goonys evil twin]

That's not very insightful.

 

It's quite obvious to those paying attention. But it's still something that needs to be plainly written out. There's still a large contingent bewildered about Pierre not returning. Many people think the Cubs problem is a lack of small ball and poor defense.

 

It's not saying a lot, but it appears to be an answer to a chat question, and it's a 100% accurate statement.

[Tracer Bullet]

That's not very insightful.

 

It's quite obvious to those paying attention. But it's still something that needs to be plainly written out. There's still a large contingent bewildered about Pierre not returning. Many people think the Cubs problem is a lack of small ball and poor defense.

 

It's not saying a lot, but it appears to be an answer to a chat question, and it's a 100% accurate statement.

 

Which is funny, considering how poorly JP plays CF.

[Chocolate Milk]

Eh.

[Guest]

the Cubs defense was pretty good last year. didn't help much.

[Abe Frohman]

How many CFers in the NL played every day and didn't have one error? Pierre wasn't great, but he was better than good.

[CubColtPacer]

That's not very insightful.

 

It's quite obvious to those paying attention. But it's still something that needs to be plainly written out. There's still a large contingent bewildered about Pierre not returning. Many people think the Cubs problem is a lack of small ball and poor defense.

 

It's not saying a lot, but it appears to be an answer to a chat question, and it's a 100% accurate statement.

 

It's plenty accurate, but it's kind of silly to not even answer the person's question. The question about the contracts and the impending sale was perfectly legitimate, and Neyer just brushed it off completely with a completely different issue.

[Derwood]

That's not very insightful.

 

It's quite obvious to those paying attention. But it's still something that needs to be plainly written out. There's still a large contingent bewildered about Pierre not returning. Many people think the Cubs problem is a lack of small ball and poor defense.

 

It's not saying a lot, but it appears to be an answer to a chat question, and it's a 100% accurate statement.

 

It's plenty accurate, but it's kind of silly to not even answer the person's question. The question about the contracts and the impending sale was perfectly legitimate, and Neyer just brushed it off completely with a completely different issue.

 

making fun of Hendry's OBP problems is the trendy new think in chat's and Q&A's

[CubinNY]

That's not very insightful.

 

It's quite obvious to those paying attention. But it's still something that needs to be plainly written out. There's still a large contingent bewildered about Pierre not returning. Many people think the Cubs problem is a lack of small ball and poor defense.

 

It's not saying a lot, but it appears to be an answer to a chat question, and it's a 100% accurate statement.

 

It's plenty accurate, but it's kind of silly to not even answer the person's question. The question about the contracts and the impending sale was perfectly legitimate, and Neyer just brushed it off completely with a completely different issue.

 

I think in a way, Neyer did answer the question. And the answer is all the concerns mentioned in the question are not a real big concern when it comes to winning and loosing.

 

OBP certianly is.

[goonys evil twin]

That's not very insightful.

 

It's quite obvious to those paying attention. But it's still something that needs to be plainly written out. There's still a large contingent bewildered about Pierre not returning. Many people think the Cubs problem is a lack of small ball and poor defense.

 

It's not saying a lot, but it appears to be an answer to a chat question, and it's a 100% accurate statement.

 

It's plenty accurate, but it's kind of silly to not even answer the person's question. The question about the contracts and the impending sale was perfectly legitimate, and Neyer just brushed it off completely with a completely different issue.

 

I think he answered the question to the best of his ability. He's not in the "are they going to sell the team" side of baseball. He's a guy you ask questions about on the field issues. The person asked if the Cubs are saddled with a GM who has a motive of getting the team ready to sell. I think his answer is no, they are saddled with a GM who has bad priorities when looking at players.

[CubColtPacer]

That's not very insightful.

 

It's quite obvious to those paying attention. But it's still something that needs to be plainly written out. There's still a large contingent bewildered about Pierre not returning. Many people think the Cubs problem is a lack of small ball and poor defense.

 

It's not saying a lot, but it appears to be an answer to a chat question, and it's a 100% accurate statement.

 

It's plenty accurate, but it's kind of silly to not even answer the person's question. The question about the contracts and the impending sale was perfectly legitimate, and Neyer just brushed it off completely with a completely different issue.

 

I think he answered the question to the best of his ability. He's not in the "are they going to sell the team" side of baseball. He's a guy you ask questions about on the field issues. The person asked if the Cubs are saddled with a GM who has a motive of getting the team ready to sell. I think his answer is no, they are saddled with a GM who has bad priorities when looking at players.

 

It seemed to me that the question was "Why are all these big contracts being handed out now? Is it the impending sale, is it the pressure to win, why would they be spending all this money". That's basically a good restatment of the question-and Neyer's answer does not address that question whatsoever.

[goonys evil twin]

It seemed to me that the question was "Why are all these big contracts being handed out now? Is it the impending sale, is it the pressure to win, why would they be spending all this money". That's basically a good restatment of the question-and Neyer's answer does not address that question whatsoever.

 

Well, if that was the intent of the question, it was poorly worded. Neyer doesn't talk about that end of the business, and really, how the heck would he know? He talks about the productivity of players, and their relative value against one another. Asking Neyer want kind of pressure Hendry has to win, or whether the team is for sale is pretty silly.

[FergieJ31]

That's not very insightful.

 

It's quite obvious to those paying attention. But it's still something that needs to be plainly written out. There's still a large contingent bewildered about Pierre not returning. Many people think the Cubs problem is a lack of small ball and poor defense.

 

It's not saying a lot, but it appears to be an answer to a chat question, and it's a 100% accurate statement.

 

I agree. I liked Neyer's answer; it said a lot by saying a little. By making a point to not acknowledge the details in the question, he's saying look, let's not miss the forest for the trees.

[TheDude]

It seemed to me that the question was "Why are all these big contracts being handed out now? Is it the impending sale, is it the pressure to win, why would they be spending all this money". That's basically a good restatment of the question-and Neyer's answer does not address that question whatsoever.

 

Well, if that was the intent of the question, it was poorly worded. Neyer doesn't talk about that end of the business, and really, how the heck would he know? He talks about the productivity of players, and their relative value against one another. Asking Neyer want kind of pressure Hendry has to win, or whether the team is for sale is pretty silly.

 

I understood the question, and it looks like most of the people in this thread did as well. Neyer's answer was very plainly a bad one, because it didn't even come close to addressing the question.

 

It really doesn't matter if Neyer is right or wrong on the OBP issue, his answer was completely useless considering the question.

[TheDude]

That's not very insightful.

 

It's quite obvious to those paying attention. But it's still something that needs to be plainly written out. There's still a large contingent bewildered about Pierre not returning. Many people think the Cubs problem is a lack of small ball and poor defense.

 

It's not saying a lot, but it appears to be an answer to a chat question, and it's a 100% accurate statement.

 

I agree. I liked Neyer's answer; it said a lot by saying a little. By making a point to not acknowledge the details in the question, he's saying look, let's not miss the forest for the trees.

 

I didn't get that at all. I saw someone ask, "why do bananas ripen?" and the answer was, "bananas are yellow".

[CubinNY]

It seemed to me that the question was "Why are all these big contracts being handed out now? Is it the impending sale, is it the pressure to win, why would they be spending all this money". That's basically a good restatment of the question-and Neyer's answer does not address that question whatsoever.

 

Well, if that was the intent of the question, it was poorly worded. Neyer doesn't talk about that end of the business, and really, how the heck would he know? He talks about the productivity of players, and their relative value against one another. Asking Neyer want kind of pressure Hendry has to win, or whether the team is for sale is pretty silly.

 

I understood the question, and it looks like most of the people in this thread did as well. Neyer's answer was very plainly a bad one, because it didn't even come close to addressing the question.

 

It really doesn't matter if Neyer is right or wrong on the OBP issue, his answer was completely useless considering the question.

 

That's your opinon.

 

Mine is that he politely said [paraphrasing] The Cubs problems aren't ginning up the value of the franchize or handing out big contracts. The Cubs problems are the GM doesn't know to how to properly build a team.[/paraphrasing].

 

He's basicly saying the question misses the point.

[FergieJ31]

That's not very insightful.

 

It's quite obvious to those paying attention. But it's still something that needs to be plainly written out. There's still a large contingent bewildered about Pierre not returning. Many people think the Cubs problem is a lack of small ball and poor defense.

 

 

It's not saying a lot, but it appears to be an answer to a chat question, and it's a 100% accurate statement.

 

I agree. I liked Neyer's answer; it said a lot by saying a little. By making a point to not acknowledge the details in the question, he's saying look, let's not miss the forest for the trees.

 

I didn't get that at all. I saw someone ask, "why do bananas ripen?" and the answer was, "bananas are yellow".

 

Neyer's answer might have been glib but the first words of the question were: "Are the Cubs subject to a GM who is ..." Neyer basically said never mind all that - the Cubs are subject to yellow bananas.

 

Besides, how could Neyer realistically address the q anyway without hopelessly conjecturing like the rest of us?

[Chocolate Milk]

I was expecting something interesting.

[TruffleShuffle]

hey, at least he didn't make a reference to hendry being fat