Infielder or Outfielder - What's the Roster Move?

[jersey cubs fan]

Look at *why* the Cubs were terrible last year. No depth, and no ability to weather storms of injury and ineffectiveness.

 

Hendry has rectified that problem by arguably *overstocking* this year's roster, thereby virtually assuring that the roster depth problems of last year will not be revisited this year.

 

The downside (if you can even call it a downside) is the redundancy you and others are railing against.

 

What I'm saying is quit complaining long enough to recognize that the alternative to redundancy, namely vacancy, is far worse, as we saw last season.

 

I think this is complete BS nonsense.

 

The Cubs didn't lose because of a lack of depth. They lost because the team sucked, and the team sucked because the GM sucks. Hendry didn't rectify problems, he put together a patch work desperation plan hoping to get lucky and catch a down division. The Cubs sucked because their outfield couldn't produce, there were black holes in the lineup, and the pitching was shaky. Depth was not the problem. Not enough front line production, has been, and still is, the single greatest problem out there. You don't lose because of 4th outfielders and 5th starters. You lose because your best players just aren't good enough and your worst players are just too freaking terrible.

 

You don't lose 90 games because of depth issues. You don't go 4 years with a top payroll for your league without ever winning 90 games because of depth issues. A GM doesn't have a sub .500 record because of depth issues. This isn't about having enough backup outfielders. It's about a clueless GM who can't realize he's making the same mistakes over and over and over again.

[jersey cubs fan]

I can't stand this, "if you guys knew how good we had it, you'd stop all the bellyaching and learn to be accepting of whatever the Cubs do" concept.

 

 

You're getting on people for complaining about the OF problems because they aren't the same OF problems they used to have? We're supposed to satisfied with the fact that the Cubs are still under .500 during Hendry's regime and he's seriously put the future in jeopardy with his freewheeling spending spree on what everybody is hoping will be an above average team?

 

Frankly I don't see how any Cubs fan could be happy with anything less than a team that looks like it's pretty much a lock for 95 wins and a deep playoff run. I didn't get the giddiness over back to back .500 seasons and I don't get the satisfaction with the OF depth problem being "solved".

[Backtobanks]

I can't stand this, "if you guys knew how good we had it, you'd stop all the bellyaching and learn to be accepting of whatever the Cubs do" concept.

 

 

You're getting on people for complaining about the OF problems because they aren't the same OF problems they used to have? We're supposed to satisfied with the fact that the Cubs are still under .500 during Hendry's regime and he's seriously put the future in jeopardy with his freewheeling spending spree on what everybody is hoping will be an above average team?

 

Frankly I don't see how any Cubs fan could be happy with anything less than a team that looks like it's pretty much a lock for 95 wins and a deep playoff run. I didn't get the giddiness over back to back .500 seasons and I don't get the satisfaction with the OF depth problem being "solved".

 

 

That's why they play the games. A lot of teams look better on paper than on the field. As for a team that "looks like a lock for 95 wins", tell me how many teams in all of baseball have won 95 games in the last 5-10 years.

[jyoung55]

What's this thread about again??? Oh yea, I just saw a little clip on the Cubs clubhouse page on ESPN that speculated that Pie was the one going down when Guzman came up to start on Sunday. Anyone else seen anything about that? I assume they got it from one of the Chicago papers??

 

Personally, I like the idea, send him down with the taste of the bigs and with specific instructions on things to work on for WHEN he comes back up later this year, hopefully after Jacque Jones is traded. (note: this is not advocating yo-yo'ing him back and forth)

[davearm]

Look at *why* the Cubs were terrible last year. No depth, and no ability to weather storms of injury and ineffectiveness.

 

Hendry has rectified that problem by arguably *overstocking* this year's roster, thereby virtually assuring that the roster depth problems of last year will not be revisited this year.

 

The downside (if you can even call it a downside) is the redundancy you and others are railing against.

 

What I'm saying is quit complaining long enough to recognize that the alternative to redundancy, namely vacancy, is far worse, as we saw last season.

 

I think this is complete BS nonsense.

 

The Cubs didn't lose because of a lack of depth. They lost because the team sucked, and the team sucked because the GM sucks. Hendry didn't rectify problems, he put together a patch work desperation plan hoping to get lucky and catch a down division. The Cubs sucked because their outfield couldn't produce, there were black holes in the lineup, and the pitching was shaky. Depth was not the problem. Not enough front line production, has been, and still is, the single greatest problem out there. You don't lose because of 4th outfielders and 5th starters. You lose because your best players just aren't good enough and your worst players are just too freaking terrible.

 

You don't lose 90 games because of depth issues. You don't go 4 years with a top payroll for your league without ever winning 90 games because of depth issues. A GM doesn't have a sub .500 record because of depth issues. This isn't about having enough backup outfielders. It's about a clueless GM who can't realize he's making the same mistakes over and over and over again.

Pretty hard to say what the 2006 Cubs would've been if all of their best players would've played. Unfortunately only 2 of the top 5 did. Lee, Prior, and Wood were all lost for the season, effectively.

 

Their downfall was they had no contingency plan for these losses. They lost because their 5th starter became their #3, their #s 4 and 5 belonged in the minors, their 4th OF became their everyday 1B, and they had no viable "Plan B" for Cedeno and Hairston sucking.

 

Those are depth issues, plain as day. Now the blame for all that most certainly falls on Jim Hendry, no doubt about that.

 

Now you can argue whether or not Hendry has satisfactorily corrected the problem for 2007. But I don't see how simply subtracting Cliff Floyd off of this team makes anything better on any level.

[frostwyrm]

I always knew Soriano's contract was absolutely awful if he stayed at LF, but now I've become even more negative about it. If I were a GM I would never ever ever consider giving a gigantic multiyear contract to a LF unless I knew I was virually guaranteed to get huge offense from the guy for a long time. Otherwise having the easiest position to fill being blocked for the next decade just creates too many headaches, as we have been seeing lately. I could live with those headaches if the LF in question were a perennial offensive superstar, but Soriano is not even close, and he's not that young either.

[YearofDaCubs]

I always knew Soriano's contract was absolutely awful if he stayed at LF, but now I've become even more negative about it. If I were a GM I would never ever ever consider giving a gigantic multiyear contract to a LF unless I knew I was virually guaranteed to get huge offense from the guy for a long time. Otherwise having the easiest position to fill being blocked for the next decade just creates too many headaches, as we have been seeing lately. I could live with those headaches if the LF in question were a perennial offensive superstar, but Soriano is not even close, and he's not that young either.

I personally would NEVER give a 30(at the time when the contract was signed)-soon to be 31 year old a 8 year contract. Never, and that's not including the ridiculous amount of 18mil per.

[Amazing_Grace]

Look at *why* the Cubs were terrible last year. No depth, and no ability to weather storms of injury and ineffectiveness.

 

Hendry has rectified that problem by arguably *overstocking* this year's roster, thereby virtually assuring that the roster depth problems of last year will not be revisited this year.

 

The downside (if you can even call it a downside) is the redundancy you and others are railing against.

 

What I'm saying is quit complaining long enough to recognize that the alternative to redundancy, namely vacancy, is far worse, as we saw last season.

 

I think this is complete BS nonsense.

 

The Cubs didn't lose because of a lack of depth. They lost because the team sucked, and the team sucked because the GM sucks. Hendry didn't rectify problems, he put together a patch work desperation plan hoping to get lucky and catch a down division. The Cubs sucked because their outfield couldn't produce, there were black holes in the lineup, and the pitching was shaky. Depth was not the problem. Not enough front line production, has been, and still is, the single greatest problem out there. You don't lose because of 4th outfielders and 5th starters. You lose because your best players just aren't good enough and your worst players are just too freaking terrible.

 

You don't lose 90 games because of depth issues. You don't go 4 years with a top payroll for your league without ever winning 90 games because of depth issues. A GM doesn't have a sub .500 record because of depth issues. This isn't about having enough backup outfielders. It's about a clueless GM who can't realize he's making the same mistakes over and over and over again.

Pretty hard to say what the 2006 Cubs would've been if all of their best players would've played. Unfortunately only 2 of the top 5 did. Lee, Prior, and Wood were all lost for the season, effectively.

 

Their downfall was they had no contingency plan for these losses. They lost because their 5th starter became their #3, their #s 4 and 5 belonged in the minors, their 4th OF became their everyday 1B, and they had no viable "Plan B" for Cedeno and Hairston sucking.

 

Those are depth issues, plain as day. Now the blame for all that most certainly falls on Jim Hendry, no doubt about that.

 

Now you can argue whether or not Hendry has satisfactorily corrected the problem for 2007. But I don't see how simply subtracting Cliff Floyd off of this team makes anything better on any level.

 

I seriously cannot understand why some people continually insist upon defending Jim Hendry by dragging out every tired excuse in the book to try to explain why the Cubs should have done well but didn't. In this case, you're saying the injuries were his excuse.

 

Well, here's my counter. The two most important players that have been continually injured during Hendry's tenure are Wood and Prior, yet, despite knowing they were young, knowing they had a history of injuries, he STILL allowed Dusty Baker to run them out there for 120-130 pitch games on a regular basis when they were healthy. Were some of their injuries preventable. We'll never know but it sure would be interesting to see what a GM who had the testicular fortitude to stand up to his manager would have done in that situation. Besides, every team has injuries. Last year, Pujols was hurt some and Edmonds was hurt a lot. Dusty could have played Todd Walker more and Neifi/Bynum less. He didn't do it. Hendry hired Baker, and took way too long to let Baker go. Every stupid thing that Dusty did, Hendry is partially responsible for, just as my boss is partially responsible if I do a terrible job or make a bunch of the same dumb mistakes constantly. He hired Baker. That's strike one against him before anything else is even considered.

 

You're also blaming Hendry for having no "Plan B" for Hairston and Cedeno sucking, but here's the problem with that logic. You're blaming him for the wrong thing. Good GMs acquire players that don't suck to begin with, or build a team that is strong enough overall, they can afford to have a couple guys have a down year or at least a slow start. The Cubs HAVE NOT DONE THIS. Blame him for acquiring the sucky players in the first place and not replacing them quickly enough. It's two problems, not just one.

 

Hendry continues to make decisions that reflect a lack of understanding of the modern game and how to build a team. When you have Pujols, Rolen, and Edmonds as your 3,4,5, you can get away with Yadier Molina at catcher and the likes of Preston Wilson in your outfield. The Cubs middle of the order isn't close to as good as what the top offensive teams have no matter how you want to debate it. Of the current Cubs players, only 3 have ever put up an OPS above .900 over a full season, and only 1 has done it in more than one season (Ramirez). We haven't even gotten into the fact that OBP seems to be something totally beyond the grasp of our GM or that he gives multi-year, multimillion dollar contracts to middle relievers.

 

The Cubs are giving huge contracts to guys that have had one big season. Derrek Lee may never repeat his 2005. Even with that season, his career OPS is .867. It wouldn't be at all surprising if last season, his line would have been an OPS around .850. It won't surprise me if that's what it is this season, because that's what the historical stats say it's likely to be. DeRosa and Soriano had great seasons last year. Will they repeat those numbers? These are not young players anymore, so which is more likely, a dramatic improvement or a career year? Jim gave each of these guys very good contracts given their stats and their histories. I preferred Carlos Lee to Soriano at the start of the offseason due to the better consistency of the former and his higher historical OBP.

 

To return to the matter at hand, Hendry gave Floyd a heavily incentive laden contract. It could end up costing us if he plays a lot. Does anyone want to see Cliff Floyd starting in LF next year because he can't be moved and Lou will play him to avoid clubhouse problems, or would we enjoy seeing him cut and have that money that could have gone toward free agents, Z, and possibly ARod being payed to Floyd? Hendry KNEW he had signed Daryle Ward as a lefty off the bench. He KNEW he didn't have to trade Jones immediately. He KNEW DeRosa could play corner OF. He KNEW he had Angel Pagan capable of being a late inning defensive sub and occasional PH. He KNEW Felix Pie would likely be ready by midseason. He should have known his personnel well enough to realize he could try Theriot in the OF. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out a middle infielder can probably handle LF. Also, remember that he DIDN'T know that Soriano was going to play in CF, so he signed him as a 5th guy (with Murton, Soriano, Ward, DeRosa) to play the 2 corner OF slots, and that's assuming he thought of Jones as a CF, which certainly was not apparent at the time.

[frostwyrm]

I always knew Soriano's contract was absolutely awful if he stayed at LF, but now I've become even more negative about it. If I were a GM I would never ever ever consider giving a gigantic multiyear contract to a LF unless I knew I was virually guaranteed to get huge offense from the guy for a long time. Otherwise having the easiest position to fill being blocked for the next decade just creates too many headaches, as we have been seeing lately. I could live with those headaches if the LF in question were a perennial offensive superstar, but Soriano is not even close, and he's not that young either.

I personally would NEVER give a 30(at the time when the contract was signed)-soon to be 31 year old a 8 year contract. Never, and that's not including the ridiculous amount of 18mil per.

 

Yeah, it's bad enough that he'll be a huge salary drain for most of a decade, but he'll also be blocking the easiest position to fill (LF) the entire time. That's a mega double whammy. Now for the next 8 years we'll be restricted to backup outfielders who can play RF. No cheap productive LF-only types for us. Thanks, Jim.

[davearm]

Pretty hard to say what the 2006 Cubs would've been if all of their best players would've played. Unfortunately only 2 of the top 5 did. Lee, Prior, and Wood were all lost for the season, effectively.

 

Their downfall was they had no contingency plan for these losses. They lost because their 5th starter became their #3, their #s 4 and 5 belonged in the minors, their 4th OF became their everyday 1B, and they had no viable "Plan B" for Cedeno and Hairston sucking.

 

Those are depth issues, plain as day. Now the blame for all that most certainly falls on Jim Hendry, no doubt about that.

 

Now you can argue whether or not Hendry has satisfactorily corrected the problem for 2007. But I don't see how simply subtracting Cliff Floyd off of this team makes anything better on any level.

 

I seriously cannot understand why some people continually insist upon defending Jim Hendry by dragging out every tired excuse in the book to try to explain why the Cubs should have done well but didn't. In this case, you're saying the injuries were his excuse.

I'm not excusing Jim Hendry for the Cubs' collapse in 2006! It's 100% his fault that the team was unprepared for the adversity it ran into!

 

Well, here's my counter. The two most important players that have been continually injured during Hendry's tenure are Wood and Prior, yet, despite knowing they were young, knowing they had a history of injuries, he STILL allowed Dusty Baker to run them out there for 120-130 pitch games on a regular basis when they were healthy. Were some of their injuries preventable. We'll never know but it sure would be interesting to see what a GM who had the testicular fortitude to stand up to his manager would have done in that situation. Besides, every team has injuries. Last year, Pujols was hurt some and Edmonds was hurt a lot. Dusty could have played Todd Walker more and Neifi/Bynum less. He didn't do it. Hendry hired Baker, and took way too long to let Baker go. Every stupid thing that Dusty did, Hendry is partially responsible for, just as my boss is partially responsible if I do a terrible job or make a bunch of the same dumb mistakes constantly. He hired Baker. That's strike one against him before anything else is even considered.

It's also 100% Hendry's fault that Dusty was ever the manager, and continued in that role for so long!

 

You're also blaming Hendry for having no "Plan B" for Hairston and Cedeno sucking, but here's the problem with that logic. You're blaming him for the wrong thing. Good GMs acquire players that don't suck to begin with, or build a team that is strong enough overall, they can afford to have a couple guys have a down year or at least a slow start. The Cubs HAVE NOT DONE THIS. Blame him for acquiring the sucky players in the first place and not replacing them quickly enough. It's two problems, not just one.

Hendry didn't acquire Cedeno, he came up through the Cubs' system. And Hairston was just a token in the Sosa deal. Hendry would've probably taken anyone to push that deal through.

 

Hendry continues to make decisions that reflect a lack of understanding of the modern game and how to build a team. When you have Pujols, Rolen, and Edmonds as your 3,4,5, you can get away with Yadier Molina at catcher and the likes of Preston Wilson in your outfield. The Cubs middle of the order isn't close to as good as what the top offensive teams have no matter how you want to debate it. Of the current Cubs players, only 3 have ever put up an OPS above .900 over a full season, and only 1 has done it in more than one season (Ramirez). We haven't even gotten into the fact that OBP seems to be something totally beyond the grasp of our GM or that he gives multi-year, multimillion dollar contracts to middle relievers.

Agreed on the OBP. However that crap philosophy seems to have been adressed in the regime change, between Lou and Gerald Perry.

 

The Cubs are giving huge contracts to guys that have had one big season. Derrek Lee may never repeat his 2005. Even with that season, his career OPS is .867. It wouldn't be at all surprising if last season, his line would have been an OPS around .850. It won't surprise me if that's what it is this season, because that's what the historical stats say it's likely to be. DeRosa and Soriano had great seasons last year. Will they repeat those numbers? These are not young players anymore, so which is more likely, a dramatic improvement or a career year? Jim gave each of these guys very good contracts given their stats and their histories. I preferred Carlos Lee to Soriano at the start of the offseason due to the better consistency of the former and his higher historical OBP.

This is a total lose-lose situation. Hendry loses if he doesn't spend money, and if he does spend it, there will always be someone who thinks he should've spent it differently. I wasn't crazy about the Soriano signing myself, but Carlos Lee would've been even worse IMO.

 

And he *definitely* loses if he lets our own guys walk away for nothing (DLee, Ramirez, etc.).

 

To return to the matter at hand, Hendry gave Floyd a heavily incentive laden contract. It could end up costing us if he plays a lot. Does anyone want to see Cliff Floyd starting in LF next year because he can't be moved and Lou will play him to avoid clubhouse problems, or would we enjoy seeing him cut and have that money that could have gone toward free agents, Z, and possibly ARod being payed to Floyd? Hendry KNEW he had signed Daryle Ward as a lefty off the bench. He KNEW he didn't have to trade Jones immediately. He KNEW DeRosa could play corner OF. He KNEW he had Angel Pagan capable of being a late inning defensive sub and occasional PH. He KNEW Felix Pie would likely be ready by midseason. He should have known his personnel well enough to realize he could try Theriot in the OF. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out a middle infielder can probably handle LF. Also, remember that he DIDN'T know that Soriano was going to play in CF, so he signed him as a 5th guy (with Murton, Soriano, Ward, DeRosa) to play the 2 corner OF slots, and that's assuming he thought of Jones as a CF, which certainly was not apparent at the time.

Put yourself back in February, and as you consider the need to sign Cliff Floyd, ask yourself...

 

Who plays OF for the Cubs if Soriano gets hurt, and Pie isn't yet ready? In that event you've got Murton, Jones, and Angel Pagan playing every day, and it's goodbye, 2007 season.

 

Who plays 1B if Derrek Lee gets hurt? Daryle Ward? Again, goodbye, 2007 season.

 

Look Floyd isn't perfect. He's got injury issues, and age issues, and defensive issues. But he's a darn better everyday option than Pagan or Ward, and in the event that nobody gets hurt, he's still valuable as a part-time starter and a primary PH.

 

And if he plays enough to trigger his option, it will mean two things -- one, we really needed him as insurance, and two, he played well enough to keep himself in the lineup when the need arose.

[Amazing_Grace]

Pretty hard to say what the 2006 Cubs would've been if all of their best players would've played. Unfortunately only 2 of the top 5 did. Lee, Prior, and Wood were all lost for the season, effectively.

 

Their downfall was they had no contingency plan for these losses. They lost because their 5th starter became their #3, their #s 4 and 5 belonged in the minors, their 4th OF became their everyday 1B, and they had no viable "Plan B" for Cedeno and Hairston sucking.

 

Those are depth issues, plain as day. Now the blame for all that most certainly falls on Jim Hendry, no doubt about that.

 

Now you can argue whether or not Hendry has satisfactorily corrected the problem for 2007. But I don't see how simply subtracting Cliff Floyd off of this team makes anything better on any level.

 

I seriously cannot understand why some people continually insist upon defending Jim Hendry by dragging out every tired excuse in the book to try to explain why the Cubs should have done well but didn't. In this case, you're saying the injuries were his excuse.

I'm not excusing Jim Hendry for the Cubs' collapse in 2006! It's 100% his fault that the team was unprepared for the adversity it ran into!

 

Well, here's my counter. The two most important players that have been continually injured during Hendry's tenure are Wood and Prior, yet, despite knowing they were young, knowing they had a history of injuries, he STILL allowed Dusty Baker to run them out there for 120-130 pitch games on a regular basis when they were healthy. Were some of their injuries preventable. We'll never know but it sure would be interesting to see what a GM who had the testicular fortitude to stand up to his manager would have done in that situation. Besides, every team has injuries. Last year, Pujols was hurt some and Edmonds was hurt a lot. Dusty could have played Todd Walker more and Neifi/Bynum less. He didn't do it. Hendry hired Baker, and took way too long to let Baker go. Every stupid thing that Dusty did, Hendry is partially responsible for, just as my boss is partially responsible if I do a terrible job or make a bunch of the same dumb mistakes constantly. He hired Baker. That's strike one against him before anything else is even considered.

It's also 100% Hendry's fault that Dusty was ever the manager, and continued in that role for so long!

 

You're also blaming Hendry for having no "Plan B" for Hairston and Cedeno sucking, but here's the problem with that logic. You're blaming him for the wrong thing. Good GMs acquire players that don't suck to begin with, or build a team that is strong enough overall, they can afford to have a couple guys have a down year or at least a slow start. The Cubs HAVE NOT DONE THIS. Blame him for acquiring the sucky players in the first place and not replacing them quickly enough. It's two problems, not just one.

Hendry didn't acquire Cedeno, he came up through the Cubs' system. And Hairston was just a token in the Sosa deal. Hendry would've probably taken anyone to push that deal through.

 

Hendry continues to make decisions that reflect a lack of understanding of the modern game and how to build a team. When you have Pujols, Rolen, and Edmonds as your 3,4,5, you can get away with Yadier Molina at catcher and the likes of Preston Wilson in your outfield. The Cubs middle of the order isn't close to as good as what the top offensive teams have no matter how you want to debate it. Of the current Cubs players, only 3 have ever put up an OPS above .900 over a full season, and only 1 has done it in more than one season (Ramirez). We haven't even gotten into the fact that OBP seems to be something totally beyond the grasp of our GM or that he gives multi-year, multimillion dollar contracts to middle relievers.

Agreed on the OBP. However that crap philosophy seems to have been adressed in the regime change, between Lou and Gerald Perry.

 

The Cubs are giving huge contracts to guys that have had one big season. Derrek Lee may never repeat his 2005. Even with that season, his career OPS is .867. It wouldn't be at all surprising if last season, his line would have been an OPS around .850. It won't surprise me if that's what it is this season, because that's what the historical stats say it's likely to be. DeRosa and Soriano had great seasons last year. Will they repeat those numbers? These are not young players anymore, so which is more likely, a dramatic improvement or a career year? Jim gave each of these guys very good contracts given their stats and their histories. I preferred Carlos Lee to Soriano at the start of the offseason due to the better consistency of the former and his higher historical OBP.

This is a total lose-lose situation. Hendry loses if he doesn't spend money, and if he does spend it, there will always be someone who thinks he should've spent it differently. I wasn't crazy about the Soriano signing myself, but Carlos Lee would've been even worse IMO.

 

And he *definitely* loses if he lets our own guys walk away for nothing (DLee, Ramirez, etc.).

 

To return to the matter at hand, Hendry gave Floyd a heavily incentive laden contract. It could end up costing us if he plays a lot. Does anyone want to see Cliff Floyd starting in LF next year because he can't be moved and Lou will play him to avoid clubhouse problems, or would we enjoy seeing him cut and have that money that could have gone toward free agents, Z, and possibly ARod being payed to Floyd? Hendry KNEW he had signed Daryle Ward as a lefty off the bench. He KNEW he didn't have to trade Jones immediately. He KNEW DeRosa could play corner OF. He KNEW he had Angel Pagan capable of being a late inning defensive sub and occasional PH. He KNEW Felix Pie would likely be ready by midseason. He should have known his personnel well enough to realize he could try Theriot in the OF. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out a middle infielder can probably handle LF. Also, remember that he DIDN'T know that Soriano was going to play in CF, so he signed him as a 5th guy (with Murton, Soriano, Ward, DeRosa) to play the 2 corner OF slots, and that's assuming he thought of Jones as a CF, which certainly was not apparent at the time.

Put yourself back in February, and as you consider the need to sign Cliff Floyd, ask yourself...

 

Who plays OF for the Cubs if Soriano gets hurt, and Pie isn't yet ready? In that event you've got Murton, Jones, and Angel Pagan playing every day, and it's goodbye, 2007 season.

 

Who plays 1B if Derrek Lee gets hurt? Daryle Ward? Again, goodbye, 2007 season.

 

Look Floyd isn't perfect. He's got injury issues, and age issues, and defensive issues. But he's a darn better everyday option than Pagan or Ward, and in the event that nobody gets hurt, he's still valuable as a part-time starter and a primary PH.

 

And if he plays enough to trigger his option, it will mean two things -- one, we really needed him as insurance, and two, he played well enough to keep himself in the lineup when the need arose.

 

Well, at least we can agree Hendry is a bad GM even if we disagree about Floyd. I didn't see the need for Floyd then and I still don't now. At the time, I assumed it meant Jones would be traded. As things turned out, that didn't happen. Maybe Jim tried to trade Jones and there really wasn't anybody out there that wanted him, but I suspect he asked for more than Jacque was worth out and then refused to deal him for the C prospects he was (and still is) worth out of the desire not to have to admit what a waste it was signing Jacque in the first place.

[frostwyrm]

I'm not sure Hendry wanted much for Jones. From what I read my impression was that he mainly just wanted to be rid of the contract but couldn't find a taker, although that could be wrong. If Hendry stuck us with Jones for 2 more years because he wanted more than a C-level prospect then that's just another reason to fire Hendry.

[Backtobanks]

I don't necessarily agree. Ward was signed strictly as a pinch hitter, Derosa was signed to play everyday at 2B, nobody was sure (and still aren't) whether Pie is ready this year, and Floyd was signed to an incentive-laden contract because he has a long history of being injury prone. If Floyd's past shows up and Pie really struggles, then all of a sudden everyone is after Hendry to get another OF. The "problem" has arisen because Floyd has remained healthy and Pie has shown flashes of brilliance.

 

If Floyd wasn't here and Pie wasn't up, the OF would be Soriano, Murton and Jones, and I don't think many people would be clamoring for another guy. And if it was, it wouldn't be the redundent Floyd.

 

 

Hendry bashers blame him for everything that goes wrong on the team, but what about signing Lilly and Marquis and absolutely refusing to trade Hill last year. Soriano will come around, Zambrano will straighten out, Jones will be traded and the Cubs will be okay.

 

Hendry bashers blame Hendry for the sub .500 record during his tenure because he is responsible for everything. Excusing him for one bad signing because he made another good one makes no sense.

 

Exactly. The Floyd signing was unneccessary because we had sooo many guys that could play the corners. The fact that Jones can play CF made him more valuable so had I been in Hendry's shoes, I'd have passed on Floyd altogether. If you subtract Floyd and Pie, you still have 6 guys that can play the OF in Murton, Soriano, Jones, Theriot, DeRosa, and Ward.

 

At the time though, the team didn't know if Theriot could play the OF or not, and I don't think anyone was counting on Ward to play OF.

 

The Floyd signing looks poor now only because Pie came up so quickly (which was partly due to the Soriano injury). If Pie had been held off until June or July (which looked very possible in the offseason) and Floyd had not been signed, the bench would have been Ward/Theriot/Pagan/Cedeno/Blanco. That's not a strong bench at all, and there would have been plenty of complaints that the bench was not producing whatsoever.

 

When Hendry signed Floyd, it basically was a signal that Pie would not be up until Jones was traded. Pie's hot start, Soriano struggling a bit in CF, and Soriano's injury changed all that.

 

That was my point. As I've stated before hindsight is always 20/20. The situation you mentioned above about the weak bench would have had Hendry bashers howling about the fact he did nothing about the bench. The numbers have shown that the Cubs should have a much better record than they do now, so let's give them a chance to become more consistent at the plate and see what happens. Being in the NL Central, if they're at .500 at the All-Star break, they will have more money and trade bait at their disposal to contend the rest of the way.

 

My "defense" of Hendry is based on the fact that all of us armchair quarterbacks think building a team and making trades is easy. Sure I get frustrated and don't agree with Hendry's handling of many things, but we only get second-hand information as to who's available and at what cost to the Cubs. For all of the criticism on signing Lilly and Marquis, look at Schmidt (1-2, 7.36, 2.0 whip and probably out for the season), Zito (2-3, 3.73, 1.28), and Daisuke (3-2, 4.36, 1.21) who aren't doing any better. Look at some of the hitters that were mentioned last year: Sheffield (.200, 2 HR, 8 RBI, .369 OBP, .306 slugging), Carlos Lee (.250, 5, 22, .290, .498), and J.D. Drew (.278, 2, 8, .376, .392). How about developing your own youngsters? Everyone raved about Alex Gordon (.173, 2, 5, .316, .296). Looking at all of this brings me to a few conclusions:

1. It's still early and things can change.

2. None of these players is worth anything near what they get paid.

3. The job of GM is a lot harder than any of us want to admit.

[NewUserName]

I'm not sure Hendry wanted much for Jones. From what I read my impression was that he mainly just wanted to be rid of the contract but couldn't find a taker, although that could be wrong. If Hendry stuck us with Jones for 2 more years because he wanted more than a C-level prospect then that's just another reason to fire Hendry.

 

 

Looking around the league, I can see at least 5 teams that could use Jones. What they probably dont want is Jone's contract. Has there been anything written recently that would make you think that Hendry is still shopping Jones?

[JeffH]

3. The job of GM is a lot harder than any of us want to admit.

 

That's true.

 

It is also true that Jim Hendry is very, very bad at that job.

[CubColtPacer]

From today's Jason Stark column:

 

But if anyone wants a bat, the Cubs have stepped up efforts to deal Jacque Jones in the wake of the decision to keep Felix Pie in the big leagues.

 

I wonder if he has heard that from a Cubs official, but I am not surprised that they are trying to trade Jones. This is the first sort of confirmation though that they've made the decision to keep Pie up. I'd expect Jones to stay in the lineup daily until he's traded (except against some LHP), if it be in CF or RF.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=2858489