It's time for me to give credit to Hendry for the offseason.

[Mephistopheles]

and why are we using g/f -- actually thats go/fo? because i find that statistic to be useless. hes not getting groundballs like he used to. he's getting a few more than last year but rothschild didnt fix anything.

[CubColtPacer]

OK, I'll play the "let's ignore all of Hendry's horrible 2006 moves, his poor roster management and general incompetence when it comes to building a well balanced team" game. We'll just look at the offseason:

 

I'll give him credit for properly targeting DeRosa, who has been very good, but I will not excuse the fact that they probably overpaid him.

 

I'll give him credit for Ted Lilly, who has been pretty good, but they probably overpaid him, too.

 

Jason Marquis will not end up being a good sign. I'm happy he's exceeded my lowest expectations, but all that means is that at some point, he's going to regress back to the mean. And we definetly overpaid him.

 

Daryle Ward is fine for the bench, and Hendry managed not to overpay him. Good job.

 

Cliff Floyd needs to start hitting for power. I'm not going to kill him for it on it's own, but he probably should have moved Jones before signing him.

 

Henry Blanco shouldn't have been signed and was overpaid. Again.

 

Aramis bailed Hendry out. I'm not going to ever give him credit for nearly losing our best player by being nonchalant about his extension, and subsequently nearly killing me, Tree and IMB! before Aramis decided to show his class and not chase dollar signs all the way to Disneyland.

 

Which brings me to Soriano. His contract will play out like all of us groupthink skeptics think it will. He's producing this year. He'll probably continue his plateau for 2 years after this. And then, it's going to get ugly. Hendry overpaid him, but I sort of understand his motive there.

 

So yeah, in almost all those cases, he targeted the right guy. But in almost all the cases, he overpaid these guys. He didn't show me anything more than the ability to throw money around like a drunken sailor in a strip club. Yeah, he stumbled onto the hotter strippers. But they're all still strippers, and sooner or later he's going to wish he had that money back.

 

The question is, how are you defining overpaid? Yes, most to all of those players were overpaid-to get a single free agent in last years market, you had to overpay. Lilly has a good shot to be the best value free agent pitcher of the offseason. DeRosa will certainly be the best value second baseman. Ward was easily the best bench player available.

 

The only alternative to not overpaying guys though was to simply not sign anybody in free agency. Considering the Cubs made the decision to enter free agency, Hendry signed most of the best contracts to come out of the 2006 offseason. At least for one offseason, he was better than pretty much all of his peers.

 

But again, it had nothing to do with Hendry being especially clever. It had everything to do with him offering above market value for everyone except Lilly, who was paid pretty fairly, and Aramis, whom he nearly, stupidly lost.

 

He didn't just go out and sign all the best players though. He avoided Zito and Schmidt. He also avoided Durham, Lugo, and Craig Wilson. He was clever because as you said he targeted all the right players and got the best value for his money, rather than signing people like Schmidt and Lugo to ridiculous contracts.

 

As far as market value, the only contract that I can see that nobody else would have signed the player to is Marquis, and even that's debatable (considering the contracts to Eaton and Meche). DeRosa was going to be signed as the starting 3B for the Phillies if the Cubs hadn't gotten him for about the same amount of money. Lilly was getting similar offers from 2 other clubs. Ward would have easily gotten 1 million from somebody else. Floyd had interest from 5 other clubs, but held out for the Cubs. Soriano's offers were at 120 million and climbing when he signed.

[Jazz]

There wasn't much reason to expect DeRosa to significantly outperform Ryan Theriot or even Ronny Cedeno. Before last season he posted OBP consecutively of .316, .293, and .325. It was a buy high move. The smarter move would have been to look at Giles or Durham. Granted, DeRosa has outplayed both of them....but it doesn't mean it was the right move at the time. The money could have been spent better elsewhere. Just like Sorianos. All of the moves (with the exception of Marquis) helped the Cubs -- even DeRosa. It's just he didn't do it efficiently.

 

so you ignore last year, his first year as a full time starter, because it was a "career year", but when he duplicates those numbers, it doesnt mean anything because hendry bought high?

 

derosa was signed to a 3/13, compare that to the 2/14.5 deal of durham, and the 1/3.25, and I really don't think he overpaid.

[Mephistopheles]

There wasn't much reason to expect DeRosa to significantly outperform Ryan Theriot or even Ronny Cedeno. Before last season he posted OBP consecutively of .316, .293, and .325. It was a buy high move. The smarter move would have been to look at Giles or Durham. Granted, DeRosa has outplayed both of them....but it doesn't mean it was the right move at the time. The money could have been spent better elsewhere. Just like Sorianos. All of the moves (with the exception of Marquis) helped the Cubs -- even DeRosa. It's just he didn't do it efficiently.

 

so you ignore last year, his first year as a full time starter, because it was a "career year", but when he duplicates those numbers, it doesnt mean anything because hendry bought high?

 

derosa was signed to a 3/13, compare that to the 2/14.5 deal of durham, and the 1/3.25, and I really don't think he overpaid.

 

hendry cant see the future. there was little reason to think that DeRosa would continue his hitting. Durham would have been expected to add more bang for your buck.

[TruffleShuffle]

I'll give him credit for Ted Lilly, who has been pretty good, but they probably overpaid him, too.

 

Actually the Ted Lilly signing was by far his best signing and was known to be the best at the time, IMO. Given the price of pitching he didn't overpay once you factor in he's a guy who has always had good K rates and always played in the offense happy AL East.

 

Soriano wasn't very good.

Marquis was terrible.

DeRosa was useless and overkill.

Floyd was overkill.

Ward was alright.

 

wrong

 

At the time he was signed, it was a completely correct statement. We overpaid a career utility guy coming off a contract year. He's exceeded expectations, and I've been pleased with his plate discipline, but I can see where Meph is coming from.

 

He's a useful piece. I like that he's on the team, but I'll leave it at that.

 

DeRosa changed his approach at the plate last year, adding the toe tap, and it made him a better hitter. The Cubs gambled that it wasn't a fluke, and based on how good his approach has been this year, I'd say it wasn't. At the very least, the Cubs were getting a utility guy with a good glove and a pretty solid bat, who could be also insurance for the inevitable injury to ARam.

[Jazz]

and why are we using g/f -- actually thats go/fo? because i find that statistic to be useless. hes not getting groundballs like he used to. he's getting a few more than last year but rothschild didnt fix anything.

 

You're really being asinine here. Show me a stat that shows that he isn't forcing ground balls "like he used to". Fine, you don't want to use G/F, but he is on pace to to force 336 ground ball outs this year. His career in that stat

 

2004 - 356

2005 - 350

2006 - 288

[Mephistopheles]

just because he started tapping his toe you should toss out the rest of his career like jumbo dumbo did

[Drew Doughty]

and why are we using g/f -- actually thats go/fo? because i find that statistic to be useless. hes not getting groundballs like he used to. he's getting a few more than last year but rothschild didnt fix anything.

 

You're really being asinine here. Show me a stat that shows that he isn't forcing ground balls "like he used to". Fine, you don't want to use G/F, but he is on pace to to force 336 ground ball outs this year. His career in that stat

 

2004 - 356

2005 - 350

2006 - 288

 

how about groundball percentage?

 

55.5 in 2004

52.3 in 2005

49 this year

 

he's not getting ground balls like he used to.

[Mephistopheles]

and why are we using g/f -- actually thats go/fo? because i find that statistic to be useless. hes not getting groundballs like he used to. he's getting a few more than last year but rothschild didnt fix anything.

 

You're really being asinine here. Show me a stat that shows that he isn't forcing ground balls "like he used to". Fine, you don't want to use G/F, but he is on pace to to force 336 ground ball outs this year. His career in that stat

 

2004 - 356

2005 - 350

2006 - 288

lol counting stats

[Mephistopheles]

and why are we using g/f -- actually thats go/fo? because i find that statistic to be useless. hes not getting groundballs like he used to. he's getting a few more than last year but rothschild didnt fix anything.

 

You're really being asinine here. Show me a stat that shows that he isn't forcing ground balls "like he used to". Fine, you don't want to use G/F, but he is on pace to to force 336 ground ball outs this year. His career in that stat

 

2004 - 356

2005 - 350

2006 - 288

 

how about groundball percentage?

 

55.5 in 2004

52.3 in 2005

49 this year

 

he's not getting ground balls like he used to.

 

<3 Kopitar

[CubColtPacer]

There wasn't much reason to expect DeRosa to significantly outperform Ryan Theriot or even Ronny Cedeno. Before last season he posted OBP consecutively of .316, .293, and .325. It was a buy high move. The smarter move would have been to look at Giles or Durham. Granted, DeRosa has outplayed both of them....but it doesn't mean it was the right move at the time. The money could have been spent better elsewhere. Just like Sorianos. All of the moves (with the exception of Marquis) helped the Cubs -- even DeRosa. It's just he didn't do it efficiently.

 

so you ignore last year, his first year as a full time starter, because it was a "career year", but when he duplicates those numbers, it doesnt mean anything because hendry bought high?

 

derosa was signed to a 3/13, compare that to the 2/14.5 deal of durham, and the 1/3.25, and I really don't think he overpaid.

 

hendry cant see the future. there was little reason to think that DeRosa would continue his hitting. Durham would have been expected to add more bang for your buck.

 

Isn't that what a GM's job is supposed to be? To project what a player is going to be like over the term of the contract? Apparently Hendry thought that the swing adjustments that DeRosa made in Texas were the reason for his success, and so far that has proven to be correct. He had reason to believe that DeRosa could repeat his numbers though with that major swing change.

[Mephistopheles]

no it just proves an idiot can get lucky

[Jazz]

There wasn't much reason to expect DeRosa to significantly outperform Ryan Theriot or even Ronny Cedeno. Before last season he posted OBP consecutively of .316, .293, and .325. It was a buy high move. The smarter move would have been to look at Giles or Durham. Granted, DeRosa has outplayed both of them....but it doesn't mean it was the right move at the time. The money could have been spent better elsewhere. Just like Sorianos. All of the moves (with the exception of Marquis) helped the Cubs -- even DeRosa. It's just he didn't do it efficiently.

 

so you ignore last year, his first year as a full time starter, because it was a "career year", but when he duplicates those numbers, it doesnt mean anything because hendry bought high?

 

derosa was signed to a 3/13, compare that to the 2/14.5 deal of durham, and the 1/3.25, and I really don't think he overpaid.

 

hendry cant see the future. there was little reason to think that DeRosa would continue his hitting. Durham would have been expected to add more bang for your buck.

 

No one can see the future, but as a GM, you have to be able to guess whos going to a better value for what hole you need to fill. At the time of the signing, Derosa had come off a great year in his first year of starting and was 31 years old, and had shown he can play great defense at 2B, 3B, and RF. Ray Durham was pretty much only a 2B who had been consistent in the past, but was 35 years old and was going to command a much higher salary.

[Jazz]

and why are we using g/f -- actually thats go/fo? because i find that statistic to be useless. hes not getting groundballs like he used to. he's getting a few more than last year but rothschild didnt fix anything.

 

You're really being asinine here. Show me a stat that shows that he isn't forcing ground balls "like he used to". Fine, you don't want to use G/F, but he is on pace to to force 336 ground ball outs this year. His career in that stat

 

2004 - 356

2005 - 350

2006 - 288

 

how about groundball percentage?

 

55.5 in 2004

52.3 in 2005

49 this year

 

he's not getting ground balls like he used to.

 

I'm of the opinion that 2004 was a career year, and 2006 was a terrible year., and 2005 was per average for him. is 3.3 % really that huge a margin?

[TruffleShuffle]

There wasn't much reason to expect DeRosa to significantly outperform Ryan Theriot or even Ronny Cedeno. Before last season he posted OBP consecutively of .316, .293, and .325. It was a buy high move. The smarter move would have been to look at Giles or Durham. Granted, DeRosa has outplayed both of them....but it doesn't mean it was the right move at the time. The money could have been spent better elsewhere. Just like Sorianos. All of the moves (with the exception of Marquis) helped the Cubs -- even DeRosa. It's just he didn't do it efficiently.

 

ah, you're one of those people who clings to the "it was the right move at the time" even though you've been proven completely wrong by the actual performance on the field. Yeah, $7.5M for Ray Durham would be looking real good right now.

[Mephistopheles]

durham was a better bet. again all it shows is an idiot can get lucky

[Jazz]

durham was a better bet. again all it shows is an idiot can get lucky

 

Obviously not, or he would be performing this year.

Hendry didn't get lucky. He chose to get a player who was younger and could backup a number of positions well, for a lower price. Getting lucky would have been if Derosa had sucked his entire career until now. That is not the case.

[Mephistopheles]

durham was a better bet. again all it shows is an idiot can get lucky

 

Obviously not, or he would be performing this year.

 

probabilistic outcomes.

[Mephistopheles]

There wasn't much reason to expect DeRosa to significantly outperform Ryan Theriot or even Ronny Cedeno. Before last season he posted OBP consecutively of .316, .293, and .325. It was a buy high move. The smarter move would have been to look at Giles or Durham. Granted, DeRosa has outplayed both of them....but it doesn't mean it was the right move at the time. The money could have been spent better elsewhere. Just like Sorianos. All of the moves (with the exception of Marquis) helped the Cubs -- even DeRosa. It's just he didn't do it efficiently.

 

ah, you're one of those people who clings to the "it was the right move at the time" even though you've been proven completely wrong by the actual performance on the field. Yeah, $7.5M for Ray Durham would be looking real good right now.

 

 

youre a weatherman. you know probabilities. then again, being a weatherman i dont expect you to get them right! (IM KIDDING)

[Bruno7481]

durham was a better bet. again all it shows is an idiot can get lucky

 

Obviously not, or he would be performing this year.

 

probabilistic outcomes.

 

actual outcomes.

[TruffleShuffle]

just because he started tapping his toe you should toss out the rest of his career like jumbo dumbo did

 

yeah sammy sosa added a toe tap and all of a sudden leapt to 66 homers, .377 OBP and a 160 OPS+ at age 29. But those numbers were out of line with his career norms, so there's no way he'd repeat those numbers or even be more productive during the subsequent five years.

[Drew Doughty]

durham was a better bet. again all it shows is an idiot can get lucky

 

Obviously not, or he would be performing this year.

 

probabilistic outcomes.

 

actual outcomes.

 

20/20 hindsight

[Mephistopheles]

you do know sosa hit 40 HR as a 27 year old, right? you do know he hit 33 as a 24 year old, right?

[Mephistopheles]

durham was a better bet. again all it shows is an idiot can get lucky

 

Obviously not, or he would be performing this year.

 

probabilistic outcomes.

 

actual outcomes.

 

20/20 hindsight

 

Yep. That simple.

[Bruno7481]

durham was a better bet. again all it shows is an idiot can get lucky

 

Obviously not, or he would be performing this year.

 

probabilistic outcomes.

 

actual outcomes.

 

20/20 hindsight

 

Yep. That simple.

 

The more of your posts I read the more I understand why you have a Robert Hanssen quote in your signature.