Jim Hendry Appreciation thread.

[CubColtPacer]

Looks like I should keep my eyes open more, when was the Z deal done?

 

It was announced a little under 3 hours ago.

[YearofDaCubs]

hell no! We would be better off without him. Let's see how you praise him in 6 years when Soriano is almost completely useless and making 1/5 of the payroll.

 

Two posts in and already it starts. Personally, I was expecting it to be the first post.

 

Let's step it up a bit people.

Step it up? While its a hyperbole (he wont be COMPLTELY useless, and will be more like 1/7th of the payroll), the long term considerations of Sorianos contract is absolutely a reasonable concern.

I said ALMOST completely useless. Truth is, we don't know if it will be 1/5 or 1/7. That remains to be seen, especially with a possible new owner on board. The fact is the Soriano contract was terrible and it's going to bite this organization in the ass soon enough.

[Soul]

good job building a $100 mil team that wins slightly more than it loses!

 

What do you think about Kenny Williams spending 108 million?

 

Williams has a much better track record than Hendry, but he did not put together a good club for this year.

 

I think White Sox fandom is pretty sour on Williams' work this year, and rightfully so. The WS win bought him a little time, but 2 non-playoff years in a row has dried up Kenny's reserve of goodwill.

[jersey cubs fan]

The wins just aren't there. I don't see how any other evaluation can be made, outside of "he was unlucky."

 

Well, get his unlucky butt out of here then. Tell me how other GMs win far more games with far less $$$ on the table? Over & over this happens in MLB. Yet Jimbo can't get it done, continually.

 

Appreciation thread? I'll appreciate Hendry's efforts, but that's it. I realize he does try. But as for concrete results? He hasn't delivered.

 

I would definitely say he's a heck of a tryer. I don't doubt his effort.

[USSoccer]

I don't see how an objective observer can say that Hendry's done a good job as GM of the Cubs. Over a 5 year period his ballclub has been overall completely mediocre despite having a top 5 payroll. The farm system has been a letdown (though not all his fault).

 

He's made some good moves for various reasons in various circumstances, but his philosiphies lack clear direction and his teams have all had fatal flaws that have manifested themselves at one point or another.

 

It's hard to say he's been a success.

[SouthSideRyan]

No one denies that Hendry put together an amazing team for the 2004 season, but we didn't do much.

 

I'll deny it. It's not like that was a pre-ordained 100 game winner. It was highly flawed, as evidenced by the continually weak offense predicated on contact and the ignorance of the value of a walk.

 

Amazing? Please. It was set up to be pretty good.

 

Maybe not amazing just because that's such a strong word, but he did put together exactly what we always complain about him not doing. He put a team together that was a 95 win team on paper, and even if things go wrong, they should still win the wild card. That team was great.

[C.C.]

good job building a $100 mil team that wins slightly more than it loses!

 

What do you think about Kenny Williams spending 108 million?

 

Williams has a much better track record than Hendry, but he did not put together a good club for this year.

 

I think White Sox fandom is pretty sour on Williams' work this year, and rightfully so. The WS win bought him a little time, but 2 non-playoff years in a row has dried up Kenny's reserve of goodwill.

 

As did the Minor league system under his watch.

[daske17]

hell no! We would be better off without him. Let's see how you praise him in 6 years when Soriano is almost completely useless and making 1/5 of the payroll.

 

Two posts in and already it starts. Personally, I was expecting it to be the first post.

 

Let's step it up a bit people.

Step it up? While its a hyperbole (he wont be COMPLTELY useless, and will be more like 1/7th of the payroll), the long term considerations of Sorianos contract is absolutely a reasonable concern.

 

Sorry, I was referring to the fact that it took two posts in a Hendry appreciation thread before reality of his tenure reared its ugly head.

 

I was expecting the first post to do that.

[SouthSideRyan]

good job building a $100 mil team that wins slightly more than it loses!

 

What do you think about Kenny Williams spending 108 million?

 

Williams has a much better track record than Hendry, but he did not put together a good club for this year.

 

I think White Sox fandom is pretty sour on Williams' work this year, and rightfully so. The WS win bought him a little time, but 2 non-playoff years in a row has dried up Kenny's reserve of goodwill.

 

As did the Minor league system under his watch.

 

Eh, Gio Gonzalez is pretty good.

[YearofDaCubs]

No one denies that Hendry put together an amazing team for the 2004 season, but we didn't do much.

 

I'll deny it. It's not like that was a pre-ordained 100 game winner. It was highly flawed, as evidenced by the continually weak offense predicated on contact and the ignorance of the value of a walk.

 

Amazing? Please. It was set up to be pretty good.

 

Maybe not amazing just because that's such a strong word, but he did put together exactly what we always complain about him not doing. He put a team together that was a 95 win team on paper, and even if things go wrong, they should still win the wild card. That team was great.

What killed me about 2004 was he didn't go out and get the closer when Borowski got hurt. Of course Dusty had a fault in it as well because that stubborn ass didn't even try other pitchers in the closer role when everyone and their mother knew Hawkins couldn't handle it. Hendry should have made a move, even if it cost us a lot. Waiting until the waivers to pick up Jose Mesa just wasn't good enough for me.

[UK1679666180]

good job building a $100 mil team that wins slightly more than it loses!

 

What do you think about Kenny Williams spending 108 million?

 

Williams has a much better track record than Hendry, but he did not put together a good club for this year.

 

I think White Sox fandom is pretty sour on Williams' work this year, and rightfully so. The WS win bought him a little time, but 2 non-playoff years in a row has dried up Kenny's reserve of goodwill.

 

He has to do better, they did have a 90 win season afterwards as well. He just bombed in building that bullpen stocking it young flame throwers doesn't work if they don't locate. His OF was just a mess as was sticking with Uribe.

 

If I was to guess, they have more potential to win 90 next year than the Cubs. That's putting alot of trust in Williams to correct his mistakes though.

[VanceJergins]

No one denies that Hendry put together an amazing team for the 2004 season, but we didn't do much.

 

I'll deny it. It's not like that was a pre-ordained 100 game winner. It was highly flawed, as evidenced by the continually weak offense predicated on contact and the ignorance of the value of a walk.

 

Amazing? Please. It was set up to be pretty good.

 

I think you're really underestimating that team. Look at the 03 stats:

 

Prior: 2.43 ERA/ 175 ERA+, -young and should have still been improving

Wood: 3.20/ 133, should have been in his prime

Zambrano: 3.11/ 136, young and did improve

Maddux: 3.96/ 105, getting older - maybe drop off a tad

Clement: 4.11/ 103

 

That's like having Santana, Sabathia, and Zambrano this year.

 

Patterson: 116 OPS+

Walker: 95

Sosa: 135

Alou: 113

Ramirez: 104

Lee: 135

Barrett: 63

Gonzales: 82 (if you want to give him credit for Nomar, 121)

 

That seems like a team that could easily win 100 games. In my opinion that's one of the better teams in all of baseball this decade. I won't make excuses for Hendry, but I'll definitely give him credit for building a great team in 04.

[jersey cubs fan]

No one denies that Hendry put together an amazing team for the 2004 season, but we didn't do much.

 

I'll deny it. It's not like that was a pre-ordained 100 game winner. It was highly flawed, as evidenced by the continually weak offense predicated on contact and the ignorance of the value of a walk.

 

Amazing? Please. It was set up to be pretty good.

 

Maybe not amazing just because that's such a strong word, but he did put together exactly what we always complain about him not doing. He put a team together that was a 95 win team on paper, and even if things go wrong, they should still win the wild card. That team was great.

 

Obviously they were not great.

 

The problem is the team looked great on paper because the first thing people saw on paper was the names.

 

But we were still talking about a barely above average offense with a terrible tendency to not take walks and a pitching staff that was far too relient on very young pitchers being extremely good and carrying the team with a heavy workload. It didn't work out.

[YearofDaCubs]

good job building a $100 mil team that wins slightly more than it loses!

 

What do you think about Kenny Williams spending 108 million?

 

Williams has a much better track record than Hendry, but he did not put together a good club for this year.

 

I think White Sox fandom is pretty sour on Williams' work this year, and rightfully so. The WS win bought him a little time, but 2 non-playoff years in a row has dried up Kenny's reserve of goodwill.

 

As did the Minor league system under his watch.

 

Eh, Gio Gonzalez is pretty good.

Last year, the White Sox had 90 wins. That's pretty damn good, unfortunately for them, they were also in the best division in baseball. This year has been bad though for them and Ken.

[Banedon]

Slightly off topic here, but too funny not to mention. As I was googling to find records of various general managers, I came across an article claiming to dicuss the top 5 GM's in the game. And John Schuerholz isn't listed!!

 

http://baseball.suite101.com/article.cfm/top_five_baseball_general_managers

[Soul]

Slightly off topic here, but too funny not to mention. As I was googling to find records of various general managers, I came across an article claiming to dicuss the top 5 GM's in the game. And John Schuerholz isn't listed!!

 

http://baseball.suite101.com/article.cfm/top_five_baseball_general_managers

 

Putting Minaya on there in order to leave Schuerholz off is laughably pathetic.

[Tracer Bullet]

Slightly off topic here, but too funny not to mention. As I was googling to find records of various general managers, I came across an article claiming to dicuss the top 5 GM's in the game. And John Schuerholz isn't listed!!

 

http://baseball.suite101.com/article.cfm/top_five_baseball_general_managers

 

I haven't read it all, but I'd probably keep the top 3 right where they are. Though Schuerholz would be my #4.

[VanceJergins]

No one denies that Hendry put together an amazing team for the 2004 season, but we didn't do much.

 

I'll deny it. It's not like that was a pre-ordained 100 game winner. It was highly flawed, as evidenced by the continually weak offense predicated on contact and the ignorance of the value of a walk.

 

Amazing? Please. It was set up to be pretty good.

 

Maybe not amazing just because that's such a strong word, but he did put together exactly what we always complain about him not doing. He put a team together that was a 95 win team on paper, and even if things go wrong, they should still win the wild card. That team was great.

 

Obviously they were not great.

 

The problem is the team looked great on paper because the first thing people saw on paper was the names.

 

But we were still talking about a barely above average offense with a terrible tendency to not take walks and a pitching staff that was far too relient on very young pitchers being extremely good and carrying the team with a heavy workload. It didn't work out.

 

If you look at the post above yours, you'll see that its not just the names that looked great.

[Soul]

No one denies that Hendry put together an amazing team for the 2004 season, but we didn't do much.

 

I'll deny it. It's not like that was a pre-ordained 100 game winner. It was highly flawed, as evidenced by the continually weak offense predicated on contact and the ignorance of the value of a walk.

 

Amazing? Please. It was set up to be pretty good.

 

Maybe not amazing just because that's such a strong word, but he did put together exactly what we always complain about him not doing. He put a team together that was a 95 win team on paper, and even if things go wrong, they should still win the wild card. That team was great.

 

Obviously they were not great.

 

The problem is the team looked great on paper because the first thing people saw on paper was the names.

 

But we were still talking about a barely above average offense with a terrible tendency to not take walks and a pitching staff that was far too relient on very young pitchers being extremely good and carrying the team with a heavy workload. It didn't work out.

 

If you look at the post above yours, you'll see that its not just the names that looked great.

 

Even if you say Hendry got nipped by injury in '04, you still must concede that he hired Dusty, who is the biggest starting pitcher abuser in the game. I just don't see any way around it. GM's are tagged with the whole thing, it's hard to argue around lack of wins over the course of 4 seasons, especially when you look at other clubs and they're getting it done.

[rocket]

i wonder if in 5 years we'll be thrilled with the deal z got

[VanceJergins]

No one denies that Hendry put together an amazing team for the 2004 season, but we didn't do much.

 

I'll deny it. It's not like that was a pre-ordained 100 game winner. It was highly flawed, as evidenced by the continually weak offense predicated on contact and the ignorance of the value of a walk.

 

Amazing? Please. It was set up to be pretty good.

 

Maybe not amazing just because that's such a strong word, but he did put together exactly what we always complain about him not doing. He put a team together that was a 95 win team on paper, and even if things go wrong, they should still win the wild card. That team was great.

 

Obviously they were not great.

 

The problem is the team looked great on paper because the first thing people saw on paper was the names.

 

But we were still talking about a barely above average offense with a terrible tendency to not take walks and a pitching staff that was far too relient on very young pitchers being extremely good and carrying the team with a heavy workload. It didn't work out.

 

If you look at the post above yours, you'll see that its not just the names that looked great.

 

Even if you say Hendry got nipped by injury in '04, you still must concede that he hired Dusty, who is the biggest starting pitcher abuser in the game. I just don't see any way around it. GM's are tagged with the whole thing, it's hard to argue around lack of wins over the course of 4 seasons, especially when you look at other clubs and they're getting it done.

 

I never said I think Hendry's done a good job overall. I'm just saying we had a crap-load of talent in 04.

[NewUserName]

I didnt read all four pages so I may be saying things that are already said.

 

 

I am not certain about this but our payroll is pretty close to being max-out for next season is my guess. We are not a top 10 team in baseball now. We dont have any players in our system that are going to dramatically improve the team over the next couple of years. So basically Hendry has built his 2nd mediore team. I dont see many ways to improve on this team in the next couple of years. So I am not going to throw flowers at Hendry just yet. If our payroll increases and we add another bat this offseason and Hill becomes a quality number 2 pitcher and everyone else stays at their level than yes.

[jersey cubs fan]

No one denies that Hendry put together an amazing team for the 2004 season, but we didn't do much.

 

I'll deny it. It's not like that was a pre-ordained 100 game winner. It was highly flawed, as evidenced by the continually weak offense predicated on contact and the ignorance of the value of a walk.

 

Amazing? Please. It was set up to be pretty good.

 

Maybe not amazing just because that's such a strong word, but he did put together exactly what we always complain about him not doing. He put a team together that was a 95 win team on paper, and even if things go wrong, they should still win the wild card. That team was great.

 

Obviously they were not great.

 

The problem is the team looked great on paper because the first thing people saw on paper was the names.

 

But we were still talking about a barely above average offense with a terrible tendency to not take walks and a pitching staff that was far too relient on very young pitchers being extremely good and carrying the team with a heavy workload. It didn't work out.

 

If you look at the post above yours, you'll see that its not just the names that looked great.

 

Even if you say Hendry got nipped by injury in '04, you still must concede that he hired Dusty, who is the biggest starting pitcher abuser in the game. I just don't see any way around it. GM's are tagged with the whole thing, it's hard to argue around lack of wins over the course of 4 seasons, especially when you look at other clubs and they're getting it done.

 

I never said I think Hendry's done a good job overall. I'm just saying we had a crap-load of talent in 04.

 

There's the problem. Talent does not equal productivity. The Cubs under Hendry have had a lot of talent. What they have lacked is productivity. Hendry covets talent and does not pay proper respect to production (at least the areas of productivity that matter).

 

The 2004 offense was barely above average, not because of a lack of talent, but because of a lack of respect for the walk. Likewise, the pitching staff was walk happy, and placed an extremely heavy burden on extremely young pitchers (and a manager that was far to happy to place a heavy workload on those young pitchers).

[VanceJergins]

 

There's the problem. Talent does not equal productivity. The Cubs under Hendry have had a lot of talent. What they have lacked is productivity. Hendry covets talent and does not pay proper respect to production (at least the areas of productivity that matter).

 

The 2004 offense was barely above average, not because of a lack of talent, but because of a lack of respect for the walk. Likewise, the pitching staff was walk happy, and placed an extremely heavy burden on extremely young pitchers (and a manager that was far to happy to place a heavy workload on those young pitchers).

 

By talent, I was referring to their production, which I see now is confusing. But with the stats I posted, I just don't see how that wasn't a very well built team. Not the most patient team in the world, but they did have Walker, Lee, Alou, and Barrett who are all pretty patient. With that pitching, comparable to having Santana, Sabathia, and Zambrano, they should have been able to contend with a team full of neifi's.

 

EDIT: I also won't argue with the manager over-working them. But I'm talking strickly about the players and their talent/production.

[RynoRules]

i wonder if in 5 years we'll be thrilled with the deal z got

 

Would you have prefered that he not be re-signed?