Jacque Jones Deal to Marlins is Off Because of Hendry

[questionmarkgrace]

Hendry pulling out.

:-s

[wilk]

shouldn't the thread title reflect what we know, not the opinion of the person who changed the thread title?

 

 

Just call it "deal to the Marlins off." no Zell, no Hendry. if people want to read and form their own opinion, fantastic, but we have no idea what transpired.

 

Guys, Bruce Miles - perhaps our most respected source on this board - is where we got the info that Zell had nothing to do with the deal being canceled and that it was indeed Hendry pulling out.

 

Then I wonder why Bruce Miles didn't use the headline "Deal off because of Hendry." Or, "Because of Hendry, Jones still a Cub." Odd that it's not.

 

Reporters don't write headlines, editors write healdines, and the editors didn't put Hendry in the headline because he is not the critical part of the article from a news angle. He specifically said in the game thread that Zell did not interefere, and that he felt the main reason the deal did not get done was because of Hendry. You can check it out for yourself if you like.

 

I'm sorry, I guess you really really missed the point. But thanks for telling me I can open the game thread. I'll check it out and see if it makes me think the phrasing of the thread title is any less ridiculous.

[Amazing_Grace]

In the game thread, Bruce just said it wasn't Zell that nixed the deal.

 

That isn't surprising. It never made any sense for a guy who is buying the Tribune and not the Cubs to veto a trade that wouldn't have affected the sale price of the team in any significant way and would have saved the Tribune money. Now, if Hendry was taking on ARod's contract, that could lower the sale price because higher payroll means lower profits and Zell might not like that, or on the other hand he might encourage it, gambling that a playoff run would drive up the sale price. Either way, he has no reason to get involved in something as minor as who we dump Jones on and how much contract we have to eat to do it.

[abuck1220]

what difference does it make what the title of the thread is? is it not accurate? the trade was called off, presumably by the general manager, who is the person in charge of making or not making trades.

 

i mean, hendry is the one that called it off, no?

[E.J.]

The Cubs seemingly still have the same problem, at least in Lou's eyes, of not having enough pitchers in the bullpen. He has said over and over again that he wants to get back to 12 pitchers, so I wonder if we see a move tomorrow or sometime this weekend. Hopefully we'll find out in the next couple of days that Jones or Izturis is gone.

[jjgman21]

what difference does it make what the title of the thread is? is it not accurate? the trade was called off, presumably by the general manager, who is the person in charge of making or not making trades.

 

i mean, hendry is the one that called it off, no?

 

when I wrote my post criticizing the name of this thread, there was very little indication in this thread that Hendry was the one nixing the trade. I think that's obvious when reading people's follow up.

 

the source of the information in the thread title is found in a different thread, hence the confusion for many of us.

[E.J.]

Star Tribune[/url]"]Twins no longer trying to get Jones

 

The Twins were interested in dealing for Chicago Cubs outfielder and former Twin Jacque Jones before Jones' trade to the Marlins fell through. But indications are that the Twins and Cubs won't be able to rekindle talks because of finances.

 

According to sources, the Twins looked into the deal before the Cubs agreed to send Jones to Florida for a minor leaguer. The Cubs reportedly were willing to eat $6.6 million of the $7.2 million remaining on Jones' contract through 2008.

 

Now there are indications the Cubs have decided they can't afford to eat that much salary, causing the deal to fall apart. The club is expected to keep trying to trade Jones, who's batting .233 with two homers and 20 RBI. The Chicago Tribune has begun a "Jacque Watch," on its website.

 

Jones, a Twin from 1999-2005, would have played left field while Jason Kubel shifted to desginated hitter. It's unclear who the Twins would have given up in the deal.

 

For a deal with the Twins to work, the Cubs would have to pay about $6.6 million of Jones' remaining salary

 

I'm guessing a bunch of teams lost interest when they found out the Cubs weren't going to pick up basically all of Jones' contract.

[SouthSideRyan]

I wonder how much of Jones's contract teams were looking for the Cubs to pick up in the offseason.

[wilk]

what difference does it make what the title of the thread is? is it not accurate? the trade was called off, presumably by the general manager, who is the person in charge of making or not making trades.

 

i mean, hendry is the one that called it off, no?

 

Correct and yet never ever do we hear the reason for trades failing as a flat and empty "Because of [GM]." Perhaps a much longer thread title explaining Hendry's apparent original intentions and the reasons the deal broke would be more appropriate yet obviously impractical. So that's why usually we're just informed of the actualities and can read and form a conclusion ourselves. Of course the reason isn't "because of Hendry" anyway -- it's because of Hendry's decision that it wasn't helping the Cubs enough (or whatever his reasoning). Otherwise, every single thread in transactions should say "Because of Hendry" or the respective GM at the end, no? "Petrick called up because of Hendry," "Dempster to DL because of Hendry," etc.

 

It's not that it's "wrong" so to say, it's just a little absurd. I'd say the popular opinion of Hendry (as fat, lazy, dumb and incompetent) is what helps "because of Hendry" seem like mature reasoning... I just think it's funny.

[sethuel1]

I wonder how much of Jones's contract teams were looking for the Cubs to pick up in the offseason.

 

not enough. We had to wait for him to really suck first.

[jjgman21]

what difference does it make what the title of the thread is? is it not accurate? the trade was called off, presumably by the general manager, who is the person in charge of making or not making trades.

 

i mean, hendry is the one that called it off, no?

 

Correct and yet never ever do we hear the reason for trades failing as a flat and empty "Because of [GM]." Perhaps a much longer thread title explaining Hendry's apparent original intentions and the reasons the deal broke would be more appropriate yet obviously impractical. So that's why usually we're just informed of the actualities and can read and form a conclusion ourselves. Of course the reason isn't "because of Hendry" anyway -- it's because of Hendry's decision that it wasn't helping the Cubs enough (or whatever his reasoning). Otherwise, every single thread in transactions should say "Because of Hendry" or the respective GM at the end, no? "Petrick called up because of Hendry," "Dempster to DL because of Hendry," etc.

 

It's not that it's "wrong" so to say, it's just a little absurd. I'd say the popular opinion of Hendry (as fat, lazy, dumb and incompetent) is what helps "because of Hendry" seem like mature reasoning... I just think it's funny.

 

I agree to people being able to decide for themselves, but I don't mind a short description either. the problem I originally had is it seemed like somebody determined it was because of Hendry on their own and therefore made that the title, even though there were varying accounts of what happened.

 

if there is a description, "b/c of JH per Bruce." but even so, that's just Bruce's account, and while he is one of the few reputable sports journalists in town, he's not omnipotent, and didn't exactly develop the details of his inquiry and the organizations response to said inquiry. thus, we have still chosen one persons two or three word opinion on what shook down.

 

what I don't get is Bruce obviously knows the fans are interested in what happened, and apparently knows what happened, yet we haven't seen an account of what happened. while I do understand that's the nature of the biz and discretion is often what is called for, he should know that reporting things on here isn't wise after Gallagher's call up.

[Larry Horse]

Star Tribune[/url]"]Twins no longer trying to get Jones

 

The Twins were interested in dealing for Chicago Cubs outfielder and former Twin Jacque Jones before Jones' trade to the Marlins fell through. But indications are that the Twins and Cubs won't be able to rekindle talks because of finances.

 

According to sources, the Twins looked into the deal before the Cubs agreed to send Jones to Florida for a minor leaguer. The Cubs reportedly were willing to eat $6.6 million of the $7.2 million remaining on Jones' contract through 2008.

 

Now there are indications the Cubs have decided they can't afford to eat that much salary, causing the deal to fall apart. The club is expected to keep trying to trade Jones, who's batting .233 with two homers and 20 RBI. The Chicago Tribune has begun a "Jacque Watch," on its website.

 

Jones, a Twin from 1999-2005, would have played left field while Jason Kubel shifted to desginated hitter. It's unclear who the Twins would have given up in the deal.

 

For a deal with the Twins to work, the Cubs would have to pay about $6.6 million of Jones' remaining salary

 

I'm guessing a bunch of teams lost interest when they found out the Cubs weren't going to pick up basically all of Jones' contract.

 

Which tells me Hendry didn't call off the Marlins trade. He was probably told by one of his bosses or the commissioners office that he would not be allowed to send that amount of money in a trade.

[Elrhino]

I don't see Jacque getting traded anytime soon. When it comes out that Hendry tried to eat $6.6 of a $7.2 contract, its pretty obvious he's not getting a lot of offers. There's really no incentive for any team to have a sense of urgency about trading for him. The only thing that's going to make JJ more appealing is if he starts getting hot (and on his behalf, he is playing better) and makes himself a more attractive player. I'm not sure Lou is going to give him the playing time necessary to do that, and nor should he if his job is to win as many baseball games as possible with this roster this year.

[JeffH]

(and on his behalf, he is playing better)

 

He is?

 

April .280 .337 .341 .678

May .205 .263 .329 .592

June .196 .275 .304 .579

[sethuel1]

(and on his behalf, he is playing better)

 

He is?

 

April .280 .337 .341 .678

May .205 .263 .329 .592

June .196 .275 .304 .579

yeah!

[UBlink]

if there is a description, "b/c of JH per Bruce." but even so, that's just Bruce's account, and while he is one of the few reputable sports journalists in town, he's not omnipotent, and didn't exactly develop the details of his inquiry and the organizations response to said inquiry. thus, we have still chosen one persons two or three word opinion on what shook down.

 

Sorry to be picky here, but I think the word you're looking for is omniscient. If Bruce was even close to omnipotent I think the Cubs would look a little better.

[The Voice of Reason]

According to fanball.com, Minnesota is no longer an option. Who in their right mind would take on the ridiculous contract Hendry gave Jones. The Cubs may be stuck with him for a while.

 

http://www.fanball.com/

 

The News

The Twins showed some interest in acquiring outfielder Jacque Jones from the Cubs last week, but talks have cooled because of financial issues. According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, the Twins were interested when the Cubs were willing to eat as much as $6.6 million of the $7.2 million remaining on Jones' contract through 2008, but since then the Cubs have backed off on that assertion, and the Twins can't afford his salary.

 

Our View

Jones had his best years playing for the Twins and the team is desperate for another bat to play designated hitter and rotate into the outfield. Jones would have been perfect, but the small-market club is not willing to pay Jones' salary so Jacque is unlikely to return to Minnesota.

[killthegoat06]

The Cubs seemingly still have the same problem, at least in Lou's eyes, of not having enough pitchers in the bullpen. He has said over and over again that he wants to get back to 12 pitchers, so I wonder if we see a move tomorrow or sometime this weekend. Hopefully we'll find out in the next couple of days that Jones or Izturis is gone.

 

It was either in today's tribune or sun-times that I read that there are still teams interested in Jones and that "his last at-bat with the cubs may have been in the sixth innning yesterday" and that it's very likely he could be gone by the weekend.

 

 

AKA: Get your hopes up, only for nothing to happen. :wink:

[E.J.]

The Cubs seemingly still have the same problem, at least in Lou's eyes, of not having enough pitchers in the bullpen. He has said over and over again that he wants to get back to 12 pitchers, so I wonder if we see a move tomorrow or sometime this weekend. Hopefully we'll find out in the next couple of days that Jones or Izturis is gone.

 

It was either in today's tribune or sun-times that I read that there are still teams interested in Jones and that "his last at-bat with the cubs may have been in the sixth innning yesterday" and that it's very likely he could be gone by the weekend.

 

 

AKA: Get your hopes up, only for nothing to happen. :wink:

 

I'm sure Hendry is working the phones hard before Friday's game since Lou wants to get back to 12 pitchers. I just doubt he's going to be able to trade Jacque if he's not allowed to pick up a huge portion of the contract.

[Post Count Padder]

The Cubs seemingly still have the same problem, at least in Lou's eyes, of not having enough pitchers in the bullpen. He has said over and over again that he wants to get back to 12 pitchers, so I wonder if we see a move tomorrow or sometime this weekend. Hopefully we'll find out in the next couple of days that Jones or Izturis is gone.

 

It was either in today's tribune or sun-times that I read that there are still teams interested in Jones and that "his last at-bat with the cubs may have been in the sixth innning yesterday" and that it's very likely he could be gone by the weekend.

 

 

AKA: Get your hopes up, only for nothing to happen. :wink:

 

I'm sure Hendry is working the phones hard before Friday's game since Lou wants to get back to 12 pitchers. I just doubt he's going to be able to trade Jacque if he's not allowed to pick up a huge portion of the contract.

Agreed. I do believe JH is trying to do his best, but if we don't pick up at least $5-6 million, I don't see Jones going anywhere until possibly a team gets desparate at the deadline.

[killthegoat06]

The Cubs seemingly still have the same problem, at least in Lou's eyes, of not having enough pitchers in the bullpen. He has said over and over again that he wants to get back to 12 pitchers, so I wonder if we see a move tomorrow or sometime this weekend. Hopefully we'll find out in the next couple of days that Jones or Izturis is gone.

 

It was either in today's tribune or sun-times that I read that there are still teams interested in Jones and that "his last at-bat with the cubs may have been in the sixth innning yesterday" and that it's very likely he could be gone by the weekend.

 

 

AKA: Get your hopes up, only for nothing to happen. :wink:

 

I'm sure Hendry is working the phones hard before Friday's game since Lou wants to get back to 12 pitchers. I just doubt he's going to be able to trade Jacque if he's not allowed to pick up a huge portion of the contract.

Agreed. I do believe JH is trying to do his best, but if we don't pick up at least $5-6 million, I don't see Jones going anywhere until possibly a team gets desparate at the deadline.

 

I don't think desparate is a strong enough word for a sorry ballclub that comes to us for Jones.

[Post Count Padder]

The Cubs seemingly still have the same problem, at least in Lou's eyes, of not having enough pitchers in the bullpen. He has said over and over again that he wants to get back to 12 pitchers, so I wonder if we see a move tomorrow or sometime this weekend. Hopefully we'll find out in the next couple of days that Jones or Izturis is gone.

 

It was either in today's tribune or sun-times that I read that there are still teams interested in Jones and that "his last at-bat with the cubs may have been in the sixth innning yesterday" and that it's very likely he could be gone by the weekend.

 

 

AKA: Get your hopes up, only for nothing to happen. :wink:

 

I'm sure Hendry is working the phones hard before Friday's game since Lou wants to get back to 12 pitchers. I just doubt he's going to be able to trade Jacque if he's not allowed to pick up a huge portion of the contract.

Agreed. I do believe JH is trying to do his best, but if we don't pick up at least $5-6 million, I don't see Jones going anywhere until possibly a team gets desparate at the deadline.

 

I don't think desparate is a strong enough word for a sorry ballclub that comes to us for Jones.

How about every outfielder in their system becomes simultaneously injured?

[killthegoat06]

The Cubs seemingly still have the same problem, at least in Lou's eyes, of not having enough pitchers in the bullpen. He has said over and over again that he wants to get back to 12 pitchers, so I wonder if we see a move tomorrow or sometime this weekend. Hopefully we'll find out in the next couple of days that Jones or Izturis is gone.

 

It was either in today's tribune or sun-times that I read that there are still teams interested in Jones and that "his last at-bat with the cubs may have been in the sixth innning yesterday" and that it's very likely he could be gone by the weekend.

 

 

AKA: Get your hopes up, only for nothing to happen. :wink:

 

I'm sure Hendry is working the phones hard before Friday's game since Lou wants to get back to 12 pitchers. I just doubt he's going to be able to trade Jacque if he's not allowed to pick up a huge portion of the contract.

Agreed. I do believe JH is trying to do his best, but if we don't pick up at least $5-6 million, I don't see Jones going anywhere until possibly a team gets desparate at the deadline.

 

I don't think desparate is a strong enough word for a sorry ballclub that comes to us for Jones.

How about every outfielder in their system becomes simultaneously injured?

 

That's a start.

[RedIvyCub]

In the game thread, Bruce just said it wasn't Zell that nixed the deal.

 

Everyone is missing the obvious here IMHO. Zell is only on the Tribune board of directors at the moment since the deal has not completely closed. Ever consider that this came from Dennis FitzSimons since he is the top dog at Tribune?

 

With Zell's interest in the Sox, the Cubs will be sold by Tribune before the deal is complete of his purchase of the Tribune.

 

Are you suggesting that you have knowledge that it did come from FitzSimons or are you simply speculating?

 

I guess you could say it is speculation but it is a logical conclusion since the Zell purchase of Tribune hasn't yet been finalized and Zell strictly has a seat on the board of directors. Any other decisions prior to now similar to this have come from the top and the top is still Dennis FitzSimons.

[RedIvyCub]

With Zell's interest in the Sox, the Cubs will be sold by Tribune before the deal is complete of his purchase of the Tribune.

That was my understanding of how it would work all along, that the Trib would sell the Cubs before Zell takes over the Trib rather than Zell selling the team afterwards. I actually think it would HAVE to work that way unless Zell actually gets approved as an owner by MLB.

 

Yes it would have to work that way as an owner cannot have ownership interest in more than one club. That is how it happened with Henry of the Red Sox. He had to divest himself from the Marlins before the Red Sox transaction was completed. Jeffrey Loria was handy and it worked out.