Will Hendry be fired if the Cubs miss the playoffs?

[CardsFanInChiTown]

What's the "buzz" on his job status?

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

If the Cubs miss the playoffs, I'm pretty sure Hendry will get a 5 year contract extension.

[Omar]

It all depends on the new owner, IMO. I guess he will have a fair shot because it's late August and they're contending.

[ToupeeOnFire]

Even if the Cubs do make the playoffs, I hope he is fired.

[SouthSideRyan]

Unless an owner comes in that wants to make changes from top to bottom, then he'll stay. I can't see the Canning group firing him.

[erik316wttn]

Unless an owner comes in that wants to make changes from top to bottom, then he'll stay. I can't see the Canning group firing him.

 

If they have an owner that wants to win, he'll go.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

Unless an owner comes in that wants to make changes from top to bottom, then he'll stay. I can't see the Canning group firing him.

 

If they have an owner that wants to win, he'll go.

 

 

Yeah, I'd think any new owner would fire him if he missed the playoffs. Afterall he wouldn't be their guy.

[jersey cubs fan]

Unless an owner comes in that wants to make changes from top to bottom, then he'll stay. I can't see the Canning group firing him.

 

If they have an owner that wants to win, he'll go.

 

 

Yeah, I'd think any new owner would fire him if he missed the playoffs. Afterall he wouldn't be their guy.

 

Depends on when the sale is finalized. If it goes in early 2008, I could see the new owner taking spring training as well and April/May to decide whether he wants to fire him or extend him. If it happens earlier, hopefully they can him, playoffs or not. But if it's the Canning group, which is reportedly friendly with McDonough, then I could even see a situation where they miss the playoffs, finalize the sale in October/November, and still keep the front office intact.

 

Hendry may not make good baseball teams, but he's managed to satisfy more than one executive. Given all the Cubs fans who still want to blame luck, and not bad management decisions on the Cubs failures under Hendry, it wouldn't be suprising if the new owner felt the same way.

[Soul]

Unless an owner comes in that wants to make changes from top to bottom, then he'll stay. I can't see the Canning group firing him.

 

If they have an owner that wants to win, he'll go.

 

 

Yeah, I'd think any new owner would fire him if he missed the playoffs. Afterall he wouldn't be their guy.

 

Depends on when the sale is finalized. If it goes in early 2008, I could see the new owner taking spring training as well and April/May to decide whether he wants to fire him or extend him. If it happens earlier, hopefully they can him, playoffs or not. But if it's the Canning group, which is reportedly friendly with McDonough, then I could even see a situation where they miss the playoffs, finalize the sale in October/November, and still keep the front office intact.

 

Hendry may not make good baseball teams, but he's managed to satisfy more than one executive. Given all the Cubs fans who still want to blame luck, and not bad management decisions on the Cubs failures under Hendry, it wouldn't be suprising if the new owner felt the same way.

 

I find that very unsettling. If the Cubs miss the playoffs this year I expect Hendry to be let go.

[Ivy Walls]

What's the "buzz" on his job status?

 

Naturally it depends on what kind of organization or investor group takes over but in all probability whether or not the Cubs make the playoffs this year depends on the players on the field and coaches in the dugout. Obviously Hendry has provided the talent pool to compete as they are leading the division with 33 games remaining.

 

Now the question really is does Hendry have a long term future with the club? My guess is that yes as does Piniella and staff through at least 2008 depending on the performance.

 

The real culprit was not Hendry it was MacPhail who handcuffed the Cubs payroll so MacPhail could make the case that he is Commissioner material, pandering to the small and mid market clubs (KC, Mil, Minn, Pitt, TB, FL, Oak, Was, and mid-market clubs; SD, AZ, Clev, Cinc, StL, Den, SF's, Balt, Tex, Seattle, Tor, Det) who actually own the majority votes against the 10 biggees: NYY, BSOX, NYM, LAD, LAA, Cubs, CSox, Phil, Atl, & Hou

 

It is about payroll and MacPhail put the Cubs in the mid-market payroll category and not the big market category....($125-135M) which would have given the Cubs a real RF'er, all star catcher or starting pitcher and another bench performer), but he kept the Cubs at $90-100M....That is your culprit.

[Keener98]

What's the "buzz" on his job status?

 

Naturally it depends on what kind of organization or investor group takes over but in all probability whether or not the Cubs make the playoffs this year depends on the players on the field and coaches in the dugout. Obviously Hendry has provided the talent pool to compete as they are leading the division with 33 games remaining.

 

Now the question really is does Hendry have a long term future with the club? My guess is that yes as does Piniella and staff through at least 2008 depending on the performance.

 

The real culprit was not Hendry it was MacPhail who handcuffed the Cubs payroll so MacPhail could make the case that he is Commissioner material, pandering to the small and mid market clubs (KC, Mil, Minn, Pitt, TB, FL, Oak, Was, and mid-market clubs; SD, AZ, Clev, Cinc, StL, Den, SF's, Balt, Tex, Seattle, Tor, Det) who actually own the majority votes against the 10 biggees: NYY, BSOX, NYM, LAD, LAA, Cubs, CSox, Phil, Atl, & Hou

 

It is about payroll and MacPhail put the Cubs in the mid-market payroll category and not the big market category....($125-135M) which would have given the Cubs a real RF'er, all star catcher or starting pitcher and another bench performer), but he kept the Cubs at $90-100M....That is your culprit.

 

What a bunch of bs. How many teams have a 125-135 million dollar payroll, outside of the Yankees and Red Sox? Hendry has been given plenty of money to work with since 2003, and hes done nothing with it. The Cubs since Hendry has been here have been in the top 5 in payroll more often than not. To say Hendry has worked with a mid market payroll is a joke.

[CubColtPacer]

What's the "buzz" on his job status?

 

Naturally it depends on what kind of organization or investor group takes over but in all probability whether or not the Cubs make the playoffs this year depends on the players on the field and coaches in the dugout. Obviously Hendry has provided the talent pool to compete as they are leading the division with 33 games remaining.

 

Now the question really is does Hendry have a long term future with the club? My guess is that yes as does Piniella and staff through at least 2008 depending on the performance.

 

The real culprit was not Hendry it was MacPhail who handcuffed the Cubs payroll so MacPhail could make the case that he is Commissioner material, pandering to the small and mid market clubs (KC, Mil, Minn, Pitt, TB, FL, Oak, Was, and mid-market clubs; SD, AZ, Clev, Cinc, StL, Den, SF's, Balt, Tex, Seattle, Tor, Det) who actually own the majority votes against the 10 biggees: NYY, BSOX, NYM, LAD, LAA, Cubs, CSox, Phil, Atl, & Hou

 

It is about payroll and MacPhail put the Cubs in the mid-market payroll category and not the big market category....($125-135M) which would have given the Cubs a real RF'er, all star catcher or starting pitcher and another bench performer), but he kept the Cubs at $90-100M....That is your culprit.

 

What a bunch of bs. How many teams have a 125-135 million dollar payroll, outside of the Yankees and Red Sox? Hendry has been given plenty of money to work with since 2003, and hes done nothing with it. The Cubs since Hendry has been here have been in the top 5 in payroll more often than not. To say Hendry has worked with a mid market payroll is a joke.

 

That's actually not true. The Cubs have been in the top half every year, but not top 5.

 

2003: 12th in payroll

2004: 6th in payroll

2005: 9th in payroll

2006: 7th in payroll

2007: 8th in payroll

 

So we have been a top 10 team in payroll most years, but never top 5. The Cubs still easily have had enough money to really not put much value on complaining that the funds simply weren't there, but top 5 is overstating it.

[Keener98]

What's the "buzz" on his job status?

 

Naturally it depends on what kind of organization or investor group takes over but in all probability whether or not the Cubs make the playoffs this year depends on the players on the field and coaches in the dugout. Obviously Hendry has provided the talent pool to compete as they are leading the division with 33 games remaining.

 

Now the question really is does Hendry have a long term future with the club? My guess is that yes as does Piniella and staff through at least 2008 depending on the performance.

 

The real culprit was not Hendry it was MacPhail who handcuffed the Cubs payroll so MacPhail could make the case that he is Commissioner material, pandering to the small and mid market clubs (KC, Mil, Minn, Pitt, TB, FL, Oak, Was, and mid-market clubs; SD, AZ, Clev, Cinc, StL, Den, SF's, Balt, Tex, Seattle, Tor, Det) who actually own the majority votes against the 10 biggees: NYY, BSOX, NYM, LAD, LAA, Cubs, CSox, Phil, Atl, & Hou

 

It is about payroll and MacPhail put the Cubs in the mid-market payroll category and not the big market category....($125-135M) which would have given the Cubs a real RF'er, all star catcher or starting pitcher and another bench performer), but he kept the Cubs at $90-100M....That is your culprit.

 

What a bunch of bs. How many teams have a 125-135 million dollar payroll, outside of the Yankees and Red Sox? Hendry has been given plenty of money to work with since 2003, and hes done nothing with it. The Cubs since Hendry has been here have been in the top 5 in payroll more often than not. To say Hendry has worked with a mid market payroll is a joke.

 

That's actually not true. The Cubs have been in the top half every year, but not top 5.

 

2003: 12th in payroll

2004: 6th in payroll

2005: 9th in payroll

2006: 7th in payroll

2007: 8th in payroll

 

So we have been a top 10 team in payroll most years, but never top 5.

 

Point taken, but that still would not classify us as a mid market payroll.

[shnsajax]

I don't think that Hendry has had the ability to go after the Top FA before this year. Sure he made offers but was really never close to what it was going to take before Soriano.

 

I think he is about a 50/50 chance to remain with the team. If Cuban gets the team, I think Hendry might not last.

[seanimal]

I think he is about a 50/50 chance to remain with the team. If Cuban gets the team, I think Hendry might not last.

 

I think it's pretty obvious that if Cuban got the team, Hendry would be gone. Cuban is a numbers guy, big time. Hendry is a scout who got promoted one too many times. I can't see Cuban looking favorably upon extending Hendry's tenure beyond whatever grace period he might need to assess the situation.

 

Cuban is the best candidate for the job, but that doesn't matter to the MLB. They want what's best for the league, not what's best for the Chicago Cubs and ultimately, the Tribune.

[treebird]

I don't think that Hendry has had the ability to go after the Top FA before this year. Sure he made offers but was really never close to what it was going to take before Soriano.

 

it's important to note that when hendry finally got the chance to go after the Top FA, he gave an 8 year contract to a guy who is OPSing 847 as a 31 year old.

 

 

EDIT: OPSing 847 as a 31 year old and very much meeting expectations, i should add.

Edited August 27, 2007 by treebird

[NewUserName]

I don't think that Hendry has had the ability to go after the Top FA before this year. Sure he made offers but was really never close to what it was going to take before Soriano.

 

it's important to note that when hendry finally got the chance to go after the Top FA, he gave an 8 year contract to a guy who is OPSing 847 as a 31 year old.

 

 

It was also a contract that was similar in money to V Guerrero and C Beltran and Soriano is at least a level below Beltran and 2 behind V Guerrero.

[Keener98]

What's the "buzz" on his job status?

 

Naturally it depends on what kind of organization or investor group takes over but in all probability whether or not the Cubs make the playoffs this year depends on the players on the field and coaches in the dugout. Obviously Hendry has provided the talent pool to compete as they are leading the division with 33 games remaining.

 

Now the question really is does Hendry have a long term future with the club? My guess is that yes as does Piniella and staff through at least 2008 depending on the performance.

 

The real culprit was not Hendry it was MacPhail who handcuffed the Cubs payroll so MacPhail could make the case that he is Commissioner material, pandering to the small and mid market clubs (KC, Mil, Minn, Pitt, TB, FL, Oak, Was, and mid-market clubs; SD, AZ, Clev, Cinc, StL, Den, SF's, Balt, Tex, Seattle, Tor, Det) who actually own the majority votes against the 10 biggees: NYY, BSOX, NYM, LAD, LAA, Cubs, CSox, Phil, Atl, & Hou

 

It is about payroll and MacPhail put the Cubs in the mid-market payroll category and not the big market category....($125-135M) which would have given the Cubs a real RF'er, all star catcher or starting pitcher and another bench performer), but he kept the Cubs at $90-100M....That is your culprit.

 

What a bunch of bs. How many teams have a 125-135 million dollar payroll, outside of the Yankees and Red Sox? Hendry has been given plenty of money to work with since 2003, and hes done nothing with it. The Cubs since Hendry has been here have been in the top 5 in payroll more often than not. To say Hendry has worked with a mid market payroll is a joke.

 

That's actually not true. The Cubs have been in the top half every year, but not top 5.

 

2003: 12th in payroll

2004: 6th in payroll

2005: 9th in payroll

2006: 7th in payroll

2007: 8th in payroll

 

So we have been a top 10 team in payroll most years, but never top 5. The Cubs still easily have had enough money to really not put much value on complaining that the funds simply weren't there, but top 5 is overstating it.

 

Also, this is for the entire ML's right? Where have the Cubs been in regards to the National League? Im pretty sure they have been near the top in the NL since Hendry has been here, and thats has equaled 1 playoff team.

[CubColtPacer]

What's the "buzz" on his job status?

 

Naturally it depends on what kind of organization or investor group takes over but in all probability whether or not the Cubs make the playoffs this year depends on the players on the field and coaches in the dugout. Obviously Hendry has provided the talent pool to compete as they are leading the division with 33 games remaining.

 

Now the question really is does Hendry have a long term future with the club? My guess is that yes as does Piniella and staff through at least 2008 depending on the performance.

 

The real culprit was not Hendry it was MacPhail who handcuffed the Cubs payroll so MacPhail could make the case that he is Commissioner material, pandering to the small and mid market clubs (KC, Mil, Minn, Pitt, TB, FL, Oak, Was, and mid-market clubs; SD, AZ, Clev, Cinc, StL, Den, SF's, Balt, Tex, Seattle, Tor, Det) who actually own the majority votes against the 10 biggees: NYY, BSOX, NYM, LAD, LAA, Cubs, CSox, Phil, Atl, & Hou

 

It is about payroll and MacPhail put the Cubs in the mid-market payroll category and not the big market category....($125-135M) which would have given the Cubs a real RF'er, all star catcher or starting pitcher and another bench performer), but he kept the Cubs at $90-100M....That is your culprit.

 

What a bunch of bs. How many teams have a 125-135 million dollar payroll, outside of the Yankees and Red Sox? Hendry has been given plenty of money to work with since 2003, and hes done nothing with it. The Cubs since Hendry has been here have been in the top 5 in payroll more often than not. To say Hendry has worked with a mid market payroll is a joke.

 

That's actually not true. The Cubs have been in the top half every year, but not top 5.

 

2003: 12th in payroll

2004: 6th in payroll

2005: 9th in payroll

2006: 7th in payroll

2007: 8th in payroll

 

So we have been a top 10 team in payroll most years, but never top 5. The Cubs still easily have had enough money to really not put much value on complaining that the funds simply weren't there, but top 5 is overstating it.

 

Also, this is for the entire ML's right? Where have the Cubs been in regards to the National League? Im pretty sure they have been near the top in the NL since Hendry has been here, and thats has equaled 1 playoff team.

 

You are correct on that. On average, AL teams have spent more than NL teams. I'm going to post the Cubs ranking in the NL, the amount of money they spent, and the amount of money spent by the 8th NL team (right around average)

 

2003: 7th in NL. Cubs-86.58 million, 8th place-79.95 million

2004: 3rd, Cubs-91.1 million, 8th-74.67 million

2005: 6th, Cubs-87.03 million, 8th-83.04

2006: 3rd, Cubs-94.42 million, 8th-88.27

2007: 3rd, Cubs-99.67 million, 8th-87.29 million

 

From looking over the numbers, the Mets typically are the leaders in the NL in payroll. After that, the Dodgers, Cubs, Cardinals, Giants, Phillies, Astros, and Braves are all typically pretty close to each other. The Cubs probably have been 5th or 6th best in performance in the Hendry era of those teams that are close to each other in payroll, which is not good out of 7 teams.

Those are the 8 teams who spend money in the NL year in and year out, and then there's a big dropoff to teams like the Padres, Brewers, Reds, Rockies, and Diamondbacks.

[Keener98]

What's the "buzz" on his job status?

 

Naturally it depends on what kind of organization or investor group takes over but in all probability whether or not the Cubs make the playoffs this year depends on the players on the field and coaches in the dugout. Obviously Hendry has provided the talent pool to compete as they are leading the division with 33 games remaining.

 

Now the question really is does Hendry have a long term future with the club? My guess is that yes as does Piniella and staff through at least 2008 depending on the performance.

 

The real culprit was not Hendry it was MacPhail who handcuffed the Cubs payroll so MacPhail could make the case that he is Commissioner material, pandering to the small and mid market clubs (KC, Mil, Minn, Pitt, TB, FL, Oak, Was, and mid-market clubs; SD, AZ, Clev, Cinc, StL, Den, SF's, Balt, Tex, Seattle, Tor, Det) who actually own the majority votes against the 10 biggees: NYY, BSOX, NYM, LAD, LAA, Cubs, CSox, Phil, Atl, & Hou

 

It is about payroll and MacPhail put the Cubs in the mid-market payroll category and not the big market category....($125-135M) which would have given the Cubs a real RF'er, all star catcher or starting pitcher and another bench performer), but he kept the Cubs at $90-100M....That is your culprit.

 

What a bunch of bs. How many teams have a 125-135 million dollar payroll, outside of the Yankees and Red Sox? Hendry has been given plenty of money to work with since 2003, and hes done nothing with it. The Cubs since Hendry has been here have been in the top 5 in payroll more often than not. To say Hendry has worked with a mid market payroll is a joke.

 

That's actually not true. The Cubs have been in the top half every year, but not top 5.

 

2003: 12th in payroll

2004: 6th in payroll

2005: 9th in payroll

2006: 7th in payroll

2007: 8th in payroll

 

So we have been a top 10 team in payroll most years, but never top 5. The Cubs still easily have had enough money to really not put much value on complaining that the funds simply weren't there, but top 5 is overstating it.

 

Also, this is for the entire ML's right? Where have the Cubs been in regards to the National League? Im pretty sure they have been near the top in the NL since Hendry has been here, and thats has equaled 1 playoff team.

 

You are correct on that. On average, AL teams have spent more than NL teams. I'm going to post the Cubs ranking in the NL, the amount of money they spent, and the amount of money spent by the 8th NL team (right around average)

 

2003: 7th in NL. Cubs-86.58 million, 8th place-79.95 million

2004: 3rd, Cubs-91.1 million, 8th-74.67 million

2005: 6th, Cubs-87.03 million, 8th-83.04

2006: 3rd, Cubs-94.42 million, 8th-88.27

2007: 3rd, Cubs-99.67 million, 8th-87.29 million

 

From looking over the numbers, the Mets typically are the leaders in the NL in payroll. After that, the Dodgers, Cubs, Cardinals, Giants, Phillies, Astros, and Braves are all typically pretty close to each other. The Cubs probably have been 5th or 6th best in performance in the Hendry era of those teams that are close to each other in payroll, which is not good out of 7 teams.

Those are the 8 teams who spend money in the NL year in and year out, and then there's a big dropoff to teams like the Padres, Brewers, Reds, Rockies, and Diamondbacks.

 

Thanks for doing the research CCP. Payroll has not been a problem for Hendry since hes been here.

[biittner77]

Why would any business minded person keep Hendry? He wastes too much money on the Henry Blancos of the world for replacement level production. This is like an office manager paying $5 for a bic pen. It's foolishly wasteful.

[Soul]

Why would any business minded person keep Hendry? He wastes too much money on the Henry Blancos of the world for replacement level production. This is like an office manager paying $5 for a bic pen. It's foolishly wasteful.

 

I think goony's point was the timing of the sale might somewhat force the new owner to keep Hendry around for one more year.

 

Personally, if Hendry doesn't come through this year, I'd be willing to hire a GM late for '08, or even go with a temp GM and just use '08 as a clean house year. Don't keep failure in your organization just because of timings or silly things like that. Make it clear from the beginning that failure and poor performance will not be tolerated. This is the primary thing an owner can do, IMHO, other than provide the payroll funds -- set the tone of the organization, and set it from the beginning.

[RynoRules]

If they don't make the playoffs he is gone. He might be gone if they make it but lose in the 1st rnd.

[davearm]

I think he is about a 50/50 chance to remain with the team. If Cuban gets the team, I think Hendry might not last.

 

I think it's pretty obvious that if Cuban got the team, Hendry would be gone. Cuban is a numbers guy, big time. Hendry is a scout who got promoted one too many times. I can't see Cuban looking favorably upon extending Hendry's tenure beyond whatever grace period he might need to assess the situation.

 

Cuban is the best candidate for the job, but that doesn't matter to the MLB. They want what's best for the league, not what's best for the Chicago Cubs and ultimately, the Tribune.

Fortunately what's best for the league also happens to be what is best for the Cubs -- for the Cubs to be contenders.

 

Same holds for BOS and NYY -- the three teams with the largest national followings.

 

MLB would be pleased as punch if all three of those teams were in the playoffs every season.

 

Now ultimately MLB might reject a guy like Cuban for being too renegade or whatever, but make no mistake -- the league will want an owner with a strong commitment to building and sustaining a winner.

[frostwyrm]

I don't think that Hendry has had the ability to go after the Top FA before this year. Sure he made offers but was really never close to what it was going to take before Soriano.

 

it's important to note that when hendry finally got the chance to go after the Top FA, he gave an 8 year contract to a guy who is OPSing 847 as a 31 year old.

 

 

EDIT: OPSing 847 as a 31 year old and very much meeting expectations, i should add.

 

OPSing .847 while playing left field -- the easiest position to fill and the one with the highest offensive expectations.