Jim Hendry Appreciation thread.

[Derwood]

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?

 

when players are making $40 million per year in 5 years, yeah, we'll be thrilled

[C.C.]

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?

 

And in 5 years he'll be 31 years old.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

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?

 

when players are making $40 million per year in 5 years, yeah, we'll be thrilled

 

What year was the current highest salary signed?

[TruffleShuffle]

i can't believe there is a jim hendry appreciation thread

[C.C.]

i can't believe there is a jim hendry appreciation thread

 

I know, I agree. What the hell took so long!

[Derwood]

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?

 

when players are making $40 million per year in 5 years, yeah, we'll be thrilled

 

What year was the current highest salary signed?

 

whatever year A-Rod was signed, but no one thought that would ever be a good deal (vs. the marketplace). With people talking about Johan Santana getting $25-$30mil a year this offseason, however...

[CardsFanInChiTown]

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?

 

when players are making $40 million per year in 5 years, yeah, we'll be thrilled

 

What year was the current highest salary signed?

 

whatever year A-Rod was signed, but no one thought that would ever be a good deal (vs. the marketplace). With people talking about Johan Santana getting $25-$30mil a year this offseason, however...

 

 

The big difference is ARod is a position player. You aren't going to find many long term deals for pitchers that didn't turn ugly.

Edited August 17, 2007 by CardsFanInChiTown

[C.C.]

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?

 

when players are making $40 million per year in 5 years, yeah, we'll be thrilled

 

What year was the current highest salary signed?

 

whatever year A-Rod was signed, but no one thought that would ever be a good deal (vs. the marketplace). With people talking about Johan Santana getting $25-$30mil a year this offseason, however...

 

 

A big difference is ARod is a position player. You aren't going to find many long term deals for pitchers that didn't turn ugly.

 

I don't think 5 years for a 26 year old with no history of injury is that big of a gamble.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

I don't think 5 years for a 26 year old with no history of injury is that big of a gamble.

 

Given his workloads at an early age I respectfully disagree. Young pitchers with heavy workloads start to run in to problems around his age. The contract would actually be less of a gamble if he were 28.

 

That said, youneverknow.

[NewUserName]

I don't think 5 years for a 26 year old with no history of injury is that big of a gamble.

 

Given his workloads at an early age I respectfully disagree. Young pitchers with heavy workloads start to run in to problems around his age. The contract would actually be less of a gamble if he were 28.

 

That said, youneverknow.

 

 

Yeah but what were the Cubs options? Hoping that Hill, Gallagher or Veal turn into an ace next year. I think the Cubs have a couple of year window to win a WS. It would be a stretch to come up with a plan to improve the team in the next couple of years if Z wasnt resigned.

[C.C.]

I don't think 5 years for a 26 year old with no history of injury is that big of a gamble.

 

Given his workloads at an early age I respectfully disagree. Young pitchers with heavy workloads start to run in to problems around his age. The contract would actually be less of a gamble if he were 28.

 

That said, youneverknow.

 

 

Yeah but what were the Cubs options? Hoping that Hill, Gallagher or Veal turn into an ace next year. I think the Cubs have a couple of year window to win a WS. It would be a stretch to come up with a plan to improve the team in the next couple of years if Z wasnt resigned.

 

No offense, but can we get back to the appreication of our great GM Jim Hendry?

[jersey cubs fan]

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?

 

when players are making $40 million per year in 5 years, yeah, we'll be thrilled

 

What year was the current highest salary signed?

 

whatever year A-Rod was signed, but no one thought that would ever be a good deal (vs. the marketplace). With people talking about Johan Santana getting $25-$30mil a year this offseason, however...

 

 

A big difference is ARod is a position player. You aren't going to find many long term deals for pitchers that didn't turn ugly.

 

I don't think 5 years for a 26 year old with no history of injury is that big of a gamble.

 

It's definitely a big gamble, but it's not necessarily a bad one.

 

In baseball, pretty much every free agent contract is a disappointment, to an extent. You get all your value in a player's pre-free agency years (or maybe his first couple of post free agency). But you can't afford to completely avoid overpaying guys.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

I don't think 5 years for a 26 year old with no history of injury is that big of a gamble.

 

Given his workloads at an early age I respectfully disagree. Young pitchers with heavy workloads start to run in to problems around his age. The contract would actually be less of a gamble if he were 28.

 

That said, youneverknow.

 

 

Yeah but what were the Cubs options? Hoping that Hill, Gallagher or Veal turn into an ace next year. I think the Cubs have a couple of year window to win a WS. It would be a stretch to come up with a plan to improve the team in the next couple of years if Z wasnt resigned.

 

 

Yeah, that's the rub. I don't think there will be any FA position players that make sense for them. The Cubs are handing out a lot of contracts, in a couple of years the fallout should be interesting. If they at least don't make a deep run in the playoffs this yes or next, things could get ugly.

[CubsWin]

383-385

Lots of unusually debilitating injuries to major stars for a few of those seasons make looking only at the team's won-loss record an obviously overly simplistic way of judging the job Jim Hendry's done.

 

That said, over simplify away...

[Exile on Waveland]

383-385

Lots of unusually debilitating injuries to major stars for a few of those seasons make looking only at the team's won-loss record an obviously overly simplistic way of judging the job Jim Hendry's done.

 

That said, over simplify away...

 

It's not an oversimplification; it's the only thing that matters. Winning is the bottom line, and Hendry's teams have not done so.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

383-385

Lots of unusually debilitating injuries to major stars for a few of those seasons make looking only at the team's won-loss record an obviously overly simplistic way of judging the job Jim Hendry's done.

 

That said, over simplify away...

 

 

Are you referring to the pitchers? I think Dusty had a lot to do with that and Hendry hired him.

 

 

Besides, every team deals with injuries.

[SouthSideRyan]

I don't think 5 years for a 26 year old with no history of injury is that big of a gamble.

 

Given his workloads at an early age I respectfully disagree. Young pitchers with heavy workloads start to run in to problems around his age. The contract would actually be less of a gamble if he were 28.

 

That said, youneverknow.

 

You did promise us all that Z was injured when he sucked early in the year.

 

And no I'm not bitter at all that you got into my head and casued me to trade Z at the absolute bottom of his value for Rich Hill at his absolute peak.

[Iceblink]

Thank you, Jim, for losing out on Zito, Schmidt, and the like.

[jersey cubs fan]

383-385

Lots of unusually debilitating injuries to major stars for a few of those seasons make looking only at the team's won-loss record an obviously overly simplistic way of judging the job Jim Hendry's done.

 

That said, over simplify away...

 

Excuses excuses excuses.

 

 

Record vs resources. It's simple because that's all that matters. Excuse away, and you'll just keep getting the same results.

[Backtobanks]

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

 

People criticize Hendry because the only thing that counts is the team's record and then there's an article listing the top GMs and it doesn't include Schuerholz. Just goes to prove that it depends on who is doing the rating. As for Hendry, he could trade for Arod, Cabrera, and Santana during the off season and some posters would complain because we had to give up 3 good prospects to get them.

[CubsWin]

383-385

Lots of unusually debilitating injuries to major stars for a few of those seasons make looking only at the team's won-loss record an obviously overly simplistic way of judging the job Jim Hendry's done.

 

That said, over simplify away...

 

It's not an oversimplification; it's the only thing that matters. Winning is the bottom line, and Hendry's teams have not done so.

While it is true that winning is the only thing that matters, to hold one person solely responsible for the win-loss record of a team, especially one that was so much worse before he took it over, one that suffered an unusual amount of injuries to key, star players and one that had a quickly declining superstar making a ton of money from a contract that Hendry did not give him, is really rather silly.

 

It is an extreme over-simplification.

 

Does that mean that I think he is a great GM? No. But using this team's won-loss record as the lone justification for how well it's GM did is simple and ridiculous.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

I don't think 5 years for a 26 year old with no history of injury is that big of a gamble.

 

Given his workloads at an early age I respectfully disagree. Young pitchers with heavy workloads start to run in to problems around his age. The contract would actually be less of a gamble if he were 28.

 

That said, youneverknow.

 

You did promise us all that Z was injured when he sucked early in the year.

 

And no I'm not bitter at all that you got into my head and casued me to trade Z at the absolute bottom of his value for Rich Hill at his absolute peak.

 

I still don't think he looks right. His arm slot isn't the same and his walk and HR rates are significantly higher then they were 2 years ago.

[CubsWin]

383-385

Lots of unusually debilitating injuries to major stars for a few of those seasons make looking only at the team's won-loss record an obviously overly simplistic way of judging the job Jim Hendry's done.

 

That said, over simplify away...

 

Excuses excuses excuses.

 

 

Record vs resources. It's simple because that's all that matters. Excuse away, and you'll just keep getting the same results.

The Cubs seem to be getting different results from last season, don't they? And '06 seems to be a vastly different result from '03 and '04. If Hendry were the lone reason why the Cubs won the amount of games they did and if he were really as bad as you say he is, then wouldn't they be consistently mediocre? If we are supposed to be getting the same result, why have the Cubs been so close to winning it all and then so far away from it during his tenure?

 

If something is simple here, it's your argument which doesn't seem to hold up under the lightest scrutiny.

[YearofDaCubs]

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

 

People criticize Hendry because the only thing that counts is the team's record and then there's an article listing the top GMs and it doesn't include Schuerholz. Just goes to prove that it depends on who is doing the rating. As for Hendry, he could trade for Arod, Cabrera, and Santana during the off season and some posters would complain because we had to give up 3 good prospects to get them.

Hyperbole.

[TruffleShuffle]

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

 

People criticize Hendry because the only thing that counts is the team's record and then there's an article listing the top GMs and it doesn't include Schuerholz. Just goes to prove that it depends on who is doing the rating. As for Hendry, he could trade for Arod, Cabrera, and Santana during the off season and some posters would complain because we had to give up 3 good prospects to get them.

 

Oh that's my favorite, people criticize Hendry for legitimate reasons, so you think up some outlandish scenario and say that we'd all criticize Hendry for doing something great.