Hendry: Sam Fuld is an untouchable

[Keener98]

Marquis is not terrible by any stretch of the imagination. I'm sure that almost every team in the NL would have loved to have their 4th or 5th starter put up the numbers he put up last year. Just for fun take a look at other teams complete rotations, and compare them to the numbers Marquis put up last year. Is Marquis great? Not even close, but he is not terrible.

 

That's because every team uses about 6 or 7 starters, some many more. Of course you can find worse pitchers. But the only way you can be satisfied with the numbers Marquis gave you is if he was a 25 year old making his debut in the majors. You cannot seriously be satisfied getting those numbers in the first year of a three year contract of a guy with Marquis's track record.

 

I think your expectations of a $7MM free agent starting pitcher are unrealistic. Last year, among the other pitchers others were hoping for were Padilla $9MM 5.76 ERA 1.63 WHIP, Zito ($10MM last year, big remaining contract) 4.53 ERA 1.35 WHIP and Schmidt ($15.75MM) 6.31 ERA 1.71 WHIP. Compared to those guys on the market, Marquis' deal was not that bad.

 

All that proves is there are dumber GM's than Hendry. Marquis was a bad signing when it was made, it was a bad signing after his 1st season here, and it will continue to get worse, the longer he stays here.

[nick23]

signing marquis turned out well?

 

It worked out well last year. This year probably not so much.

 

It did? An ERA near 5 and a WHIP of almost 1.4 is working out well? It worked out well for about 1 month(April) and then it was all downhill from there

 

Yes, they may not be sexy numbers but they are still very decent numbers for a back of the rotation pitcher.

Marquis is terrible. I'd rather give that rotation spot to one of the kids making peanuts. And to top it all off they probably will be better than an overpaid Marquis. Terrible contract.

 

Marquis is not terrible by any stretch of the imagination. I'm sure that almost every team in the NL would have loved to have their 4th or 5th starter put up the numbers he put up last year. Just for fun take a look at other teams complete rotations, and compare them to the numbers Marquis put up last year. Is Marquis great? Not even close, but he is not terrible.

Marquis is terrible, period. You can believe what you want but the fact remains Marquis sucks. Have you even seen how bad he was down the stretch? Look at his numbers the year before, the guys SUCKS.

 

Try looking up his stats. He was above average for a back of the rotation starter last year.

I really hate the term back of the rotation starter. What does this mean? He pitches every fifth game just like Zambrano, Lilly, and Hill. The fact is we're paying something like 16 million over the next two years on this guy. That's a lot of money for garbage. It's amazing to me that some people are ok with suckiness just because someone pitches the 4th or 5th game of the season. Marquis sucks period.

[David]

Marquis is not terrible by any stretch of the imagination. I'm sure that almost every team in the NL would have loved to have their 4th or 5th starter put up the numbers he put up last year. Just for fun take a look at other teams complete rotations, and compare them to the numbers Marquis put up last year. Is Marquis great? Not even close, but he is not terrible.

 

That's because every team uses about 6 or 7 starters, some many more. Of course you can find worse pitchers. But the only way you can be satisfied with the numbers Marquis gave you is if he was a 25 year old making his debut in the majors. You cannot seriously be satisfied getting those numbers in the first year of a three year contract of a guy with Marquis's track record.

 

I think your expectations of a $7MM free agent starting pitcher are unrealistic. Last year, among the other pitchers others were hoping for were Padilla $9MM 5.76 ERA 1.63 WHIP, Zito ($10MM last year, big remaining contract) 4.53 ERA 1.35 WHIP and Schmidt ($15.75MM) 6.31 ERA 1.71 WHIP. Compared to those guys on the market, Marquis' deal was not that bad.

 

For Christ's sake... Other team's mistakes (or bad luck) do not justify Hendry's. You could have gotten similarly crappy production out of a rookie pitcher for the league minimum.

[Keener98]

Exactly.

[CUBZ99]

Marquis is not terrible by any stretch of the imagination. I'm sure that almost every team in the NL would have loved to have their 4th or 5th starter put up the numbers he put up last year. Just for fun take a look at other teams complete rotations, and compare them to the numbers Marquis put up last year. Is Marquis great? Not even close, but he is not terrible.

 

That's because every team uses about 6 or 7 starters, some many more. Of course you can find worse pitchers. But the only way you can be satisfied with the numbers Marquis gave you is if he was a 25 year old making his debut in the majors. You cannot seriously be satisfied getting those numbers in the first year of a three year contract of a guy with Marquis's track record.

 

I think your expectations of a $7MM free agent starting pitcher are unrealistic. Last year, among the other pitchers others were hoping for were Padilla $9MM 5.76 ERA 1.63 WHIP, Zito ($10MM last year, big remaining contract) 4.53 ERA 1.35 WHIP and Schmidt ($15.75MM) 6.31 ERA 1.71 WHIP. Compared to those guys on the market, Marquis' deal was not that bad.

 

For Christ's sake... Other team's mistakes (or bad luck) do not justify Hendry's. You could have gotten similarly crappy production out of a rookie pitcher for the league minimum.

 

That is a ridiculous statement. Try actually looking up pitchers stats. If stats like Marquis' were so easy to put up by a rookie or any pitcher, every team would have a rotation filled with pitchers with those stats or better than those stats.

[rocket]

Marquis is not terrible by any stretch of the imagination. I'm sure that almost every team in the NL would have loved to have their 4th or 5th starter put up the numbers he put up last year. Just for fun take a look at other teams complete rotations, and compare them to the numbers Marquis put up last year. Is Marquis great? Not even close, but he is not terrible.

 

That's because every team uses about 6 or 7 starters, some many more. Of course you can find worse pitchers. But the only way you can be satisfied with the numbers Marquis gave you is if he was a 25 year old making his debut in the majors. You cannot seriously be satisfied getting those numbers in the first year of a three year contract of a guy with Marquis's track record.

 

I think your expectations of a $7MM free agent starting pitcher are unrealistic. Last year, among the other pitchers others were hoping for were Padilla $9MM 5.76 ERA 1.63 WHIP, Zito ($10MM last year, big remaining contract) 4.53 ERA 1.35 WHIP and Schmidt ($15.75MM) 6.31 ERA 1.71 WHIP. Compared to those guys on the market, Marquis' deal was not that bad.

 

For Christ's sake... Other team's mistakes (or bad luck) do not justify Hendry's. You could have gotten similarly crappy production out of a rookie pitcher for the league minimum.

 

That is a ridiculous statement. Try actually looking up pitchers stats. If stats like Marquis' were so easy to put up by a rookie or any pitcher, every team would have a rotation filled with pitchers with those stats or better than those stats.

 

of course a lot of gms have boners for guys who've "been there", even if they sucked while they were there.

[Keener98]

Marquis is not terrible by any stretch of the imagination. I'm sure that almost every team in the NL would have loved to have their 4th or 5th starter put up the numbers he put up last year. Just for fun take a look at other teams complete rotations, and compare them to the numbers Marquis put up last year. Is Marquis great? Not even close, but he is not terrible.

 

That's because every team uses about 6 or 7 starters, some many more. Of course you can find worse pitchers. But the only way you can be satisfied with the numbers Marquis gave you is if he was a 25 year old making his debut in the majors. You cannot seriously be satisfied getting those numbers in the first year of a three year contract of a guy with Marquis's track record.

 

I think your expectations of a $7MM free agent starting pitcher are unrealistic. Last year, among the other pitchers others were hoping for were Padilla $9MM 5.76 ERA 1.63 WHIP, Zito ($10MM last year, big remaining contract) 4.53 ERA 1.35 WHIP and Schmidt ($15.75MM) 6.31 ERA 1.71 WHIP. Compared to those guys on the market, Marquis' deal was not that bad.

 

For Christ's sake... Other team's mistakes (or bad luck) do not justify Hendry's. You could have gotten similarly crappy production out of a rookie pitcher for the league minimum.

 

That is a ridiculous statement. Try actually looking up pitchers stats. If stats like Marquis' were so easy to put up by a rookie or any pitcher, every team would have a rotation filled with pitchers with those stats or better than those stats.

 

April ERA 2.37 Whip 1.17 Could a rookie put up these numbers...Probably not

May ERA 3.39 Whip 1.05 Could a rookie put up these numbers...Possible

June ERA 5.09 Whip 1.7 Could a rookie put up these numbers...Absolutely

July ERA 6.20 Whip 1.51 Could a rookie put up these numbers...Absolutely

August ERA 4.45 Whip 1.48 Could a rookie put up these numbers...Absolutely

September ERA 6.21 Whip 1.56 Could a rookie put up these numbers ...Absolutely.

 

Care to keep saying Marquis pitched good?

[CuseCubFan69]

Marquis is not terrible by any stretch of the imagination. I'm sure that almost every team in the NL would have loved to have their 4th or 5th starter put up the numbers he put up last year. Just for fun take a look at other teams complete rotations, and compare them to the numbers Marquis put up last year. Is Marquis great? Not even close, but he is not terrible.

 

That's because every team uses about 6 or 7 starters, some many more. Of course you can find worse pitchers. But the only way you can be satisfied with the numbers Marquis gave you is if he was a 25 year old making his debut in the majors. You cannot seriously be satisfied getting those numbers in the first year of a three year contract of a guy with Marquis's track record.

 

I think your expectations of a $7MM free agent starting pitcher are unrealistic. Last year, among the other pitchers others were hoping for were Padilla $9MM 5.76 ERA 1.63 WHIP, Zito ($10MM last year, big remaining contract) 4.53 ERA 1.35 WHIP and Schmidt ($15.75MM) 6.31 ERA 1.71 WHIP. Compared to those guys on the market, Marquis' deal was not that bad.

 

For Christ's sake... Other team's mistakes (or bad luck) do not justify Hendry's. You could have gotten similarly crappy production out of a rookie pitcher for the league minimum.

 

That is a ridiculous statement. Try actually looking up pitchers stats. If stats like Marquis' were so easy to put up by a rookie or any pitcher, every team would have a rotation filled with pitchers with those stats or better than those stats.

 

of course a lot of gms have boners for guys who've "been there", even if they sucked while they were there.

 

I think a lot of it may matter on how ready your young guys are. If you don't have any guys ready it isn't a bad thing to let a vet go out there and pitch every 5th day. Why bring a young player up too early and wreck his confidence when the vet can just fill in. Now, at 7 or 8 a year it is too much but I'd put in a guy that's been there to take that bullet.

[SouthSideRyan]

All one has to do is look at the awful performances put up by our rookie pitchers in '06 to realize that Marquis does have value. It's not the best use of resources for the Cubs because we have some arms that can fill the spot, but above replacement pitchign that will start 32 times a year has value, and for what Marquis made last year, he was probably a bargain.

 

All that said, I want him gone.

[CubinNY]

Jim is playing chess while they're playing checkers.

 

Step 1: Increase Fuld's trade value by making him "untouchable".

Step 2:

Step 3: Reap the rewards.

[biittner77]

 

fuld sucks people.

 

He also kinda sucks at baseball

[Sammy Sofa]

Guys, GUYS!!!

 

Moment of silence, please.

 

Sam Fuld is obviously a leper, and we need to show a little respect.

[Bruce Miles]

The word "untouchable" was the writer's choice. Jim never uttered the word "untouchable." All he said was "We're not trading Pie, and we're not trading Fuld." That doesn't mean they'd never consider it. At this point, both players figure somehow into their plans. At some point, sooner or later, one or both could get traded if something comes along. I think we're making much too much over some of Jim's comments. I didn't weigh in on the "Life would be easier..." thread, but Jim said it partially in jest and with a chuckle (I didn't use the quote in my story). Yes, they would prefer a left-handed hitter, and yes things would be different if Murton were left-handed. And you've got to remember that these comments are made off-the-cuff and in group sessions where sometimes questions come one right after the other. You may disagree with Hendry and the organizational philosophy, but comments such as these, especially given the context in which they're made, don't make someone an idiot.

[CuseCubFan69]

The word "untouchable" was the writer's choice. Jim never uttered the word "untouchable." All he said was "We're not trading Pie, and we're not trading Fuld." That doesn't mean they'd never consider it. At this point, both players figure somehow into their plans. At some point, sooner or later, one or both could get traded if something comes along. I think we're making much too much over some of Jim's comments. I didn't weigh in on the "Life would be easier..." thread, but Jim said it partially in jest and with a chuckle (I didn't use the quote in my story). Yes, they would prefer a left-handed hitter, and yes things would be different if Murton were left-handed. And you've got to remember that these comments are made off-the-cuff and in group sessions where sometimes questions come one right after the other. You may disagree with Hendry and the organizational philosophy, but comments such as these, especially given the context in which they're made, don't make someone an idiot.

 

Thank you.

 

Hey, are the GM's up yet or are they still sleeping after Pacman Jones took them out last night?

[JeffH]

You may disagree with Hendry and the organizational philosophy, but comments such as these, especially given the context in which they're made, don't make someone an idiot.

 

Jim Hendry is not an idiot. He is, however, a very bad MLB GM.

 

Good morning, Bruce.

 

Bruce, what's up with Kosuke? Is this Royals interest genuine?

[Bruce Miles]

The word "untouchable" was the writer's choice. Jim never uttered the word "untouchable." All he said was "We're not trading Pie, and we're not trading Fuld." That doesn't mean they'd never consider it. At this point, both players figure somehow into their plans. At some point, sooner or later, one or both could get traded if something comes along. I think we're making much too much over some of Jim's comments. I didn't weigh in on the "Life would be easier..." thread, but Jim said it partially in jest and with a chuckle (I didn't use the quote in my story). Yes, they would prefer a left-handed hitter, and yes things would be different if Murton were left-handed. And you've got to remember that these comments are made off-the-cuff and in group sessions where sometimes questions come one right after the other. You may disagree with Hendry and the organizational philosophy, but comments such as these, especially given the context in which they're made, don't make someone an idiot.

 

Thank you.

 

 

 

 

Hey, are the GM's up yet or are they still sleeping after Pacman Jones took them out last night?

 

Good question. Haven't seen any GMs. The writers get to enjoy lunch with Lou in a few minutes. Then he holds his winter-meetings media session. Should be fun.

[Bruce Miles]

You may disagree with Hendry and the organizational philosophy, but comments such as these, especially given the context in which they're made, don't make someone an idiot.

 

Jim Hendry is not an idiot. He is, however, a very bad MLB GM.

 

Good morning, Bruce.

 

Bruce, what's up with Kosuke? Is this Royals interest genuine?

 

Royals probably do have interest. They have a connection, with their manager. They also got some revenue-sharing dough to burn.

[WrigleyinEngland]

Hey Bruce,

 

Any idea on this link with the royals and jake fox/matt murton for tehaen? levine still reporting it and now adding fox as well.

[Sammy Sofa]

Murph is on the air right now saying that Fuld is "untouchable" because of a "failing" Pie.

 

Wow. Murph...just stop.

Edited December 5, 2007 by Sammy Sofa

[ctcf]

The word "untouchable" was the writer's choice. Jim never uttered the word "untouchable." All he said was "We're not trading Pie, and we're not trading Fuld." That doesn't mean they'd never consider it. At this point, both players figure somehow into their plans. At some point, sooner or later, one or both could get traded if something comes along. I think we're making much too much over some of Jim's comments. I didn't weigh in on the "Life would be easier..." thread, but Jim said it partially in jest and with a chuckle (I didn't use the quote in my story). Yes, they would prefer a left-handed hitter, and yes things would be different if Murton were left-handed. And you've got to remember that these comments are made off-the-cuff and in group sessions where sometimes questions come one right after the other. You may disagree with Hendry and the organizational philosophy, but comments such as these, especially given the context in which they're made, don't make someone an idiot.

 

Good to have the voice of sanity check in every once and a while. :D

[CubinNY]

The word "untouchable" was the writer's choice. Jim never uttered the word "untouchable." All he said was "We're not trading Pie, and we're not trading Fuld." That doesn't mean they'd never consider it. At this point, both players figure somehow into their plans. At some point, sooner or later, one or both could get traded if something comes along. I think we're making much too much over some of Jim's comments. I didn't weigh in on the "Life would be easier..." thread, but Jim said it partially in jest and with a chuckle (I didn't use the quote in my story). Yes, they would prefer a left-handed hitter, and yes things would be different if Murton were left-handed. And you've got to remember that these comments are made off-the-cuff and in group sessions where sometimes questions come one right after the other. You may disagree with Hendry and the organizational philosophy, but comments such as these, especially given the context in which they're made, don't make someone an idiot.

 

Good to have the voice of sanity check in every once and a while. :D

I agree, however at the same time I think it shows how piss poor of a GM Hendry is.

[TruffleShuffle]

Interesting. I agree with all of you nobody should be untouchable but maybe the scouts know something we don't? I doubt it but who knows.

 

if the cubs' scouts think sam fuld is some sort of star in the making, then they're even more incompetent than i thought they were

[ctcf]

We need to have a designated Bruce thread.

[Wheelimus]

We need to have a designated Bruce thread.

 

It should be called "The Never Ending Interview"

[CuseCubFan69]

We need to have a designated Bruce thread.

 

It should be called "The Never Ending Interview"

 

 

Yes...and he should be flying a luck dragon!