Who should be the new Cubs president? (Kenney Staying)

[Banedon]

I remember an interview (I don't remember when or where) that I heard on the radio and while I don't remember all that was said, I remember thinking that I didn't want him anywhere near the Cubs. I know, not exactly a great argument, but I just know that I didn't like him then, and I doubt I would like him now.

 

I'm just not sure what he could possibly say that would make his potential departure more important than Jim Hendry's.

[jersey cubs fan]

Yeah, my understanding has always been that Kenney was on the business/marketing/PR side of the coin. I don't think him staying would preclude Ricketts bringing in someone like Alderson either, as was mentioned in the other thread.

 

He is the chairman of the Chicago Cubs. If he's being brought back in the same capacity, there's going to be some issue when trying to find a president of the team who would then go and hire a GM.

[Sammys Boombox]

I remember an interview (I don't remember when or where) that I heard on the radio and while I don't remember all that was said, I remember thinking that I didn't want him anywhere near the Cubs. I know, not exactly a great argument, but I just know that I didn't like him then, and I doubt I would like him now.

 

I'm just not sure what he could possibly say that would make his potential departure more important than Jim Hendry's.

 

While I can't stand Hendry, that is mostly founded upon what he has done the last two offseasons. I think Kenney staying means that the number in the profit column will be more important than the number in the W column. He does understand that winning makes it easier to make money, but I don't believe his number one goal is to win a WS. I don't question Hendry's intentions.

 

I could be wrong, but wasn't Kenney hired by Zell? I thought he was brought in to squeeze as much out of the team as possible for the Tribune. If that meant making the team or the stadium more valuable or whatever, that's what his job was. Again, could be wrong, but that has been my impression.

[jersey cubs fan]

I remember an interview (I don't remember when or where) that I heard on the radio and while I don't remember all that was said, I remember thinking that I didn't want him anywhere near the Cubs. I know, not exactly a great argument, but I just know that I didn't like him then, and I doubt I would like him now.

 

I'm just not sure what he could possibly say that would make his potential departure more important than Jim Hendry's.

 

While I can't stand Hendry, that is mostly founded upon what he has done the last two offseasons. I think Kenney staying means that the number in the profit column will be more important than the number in the W column. He does understand that winning makes it easier to make money, but I don't believe his number one goal is to win a WS. I don't question Hendry's intentions.

 

I could be wrong, but wasn't Kenney hired by Zell? I thought he was brought in to squeeze as much out of the team as possible for the Tribune. If that meant making the team or the stadium more valuable or whatever, that's what his job was. Again, could be wrong, but that has been my impression.

 

You're way off. Kenney was with the Tribune and took over when McDonough left. He was basically the last suit standing. And the payroll skyrocketted under his watch.

 

Being overly tight with money is the least of his issues.

 

And it shouldn't just be what Hendry has done lately that has you concerned. Do you not know what happened in 2005 and 2006? He inherited a very talented franchise that was primed for success, enjoyed financial dominance over the competition, and came away with one lousy 90-win season (out of 7 so far).

Edited August 25, 2009 by jersey cubs fan

[Wrong Sider]

 

I could be wrong, but wasn't Kenney hired by Zell? I thought he was brought in to squeeze as much out of the team as possible for the Tribune. If that meant making the team or the stadium more valuable or whatever, that's what his job was. Again, could be wrong, but that has been my impression.

 

 

Wrong. He replaced Dennis FitzSimmons as the Tribunes man in charge of the Cubs in 2003

[SouthSideRyan]

Kenney's been around for awhile, and every team has somebody who's in charge of making money from the team. Blaming Kenney for being cheap when the Cubs have a bloated payroll seems strange.

[JonnyRed]

Kenney is staying...

 

In my opinion, Rickett's is 0-for-1. I would rather Hendry stay than Kenney, by a long shot.

 

What has Kenney done that has been so horrible?

[Sammys Boombox]

I remember an interview (I don't remember when or where) that I heard on the radio and while I don't remember all that was said, I remember thinking that I didn't want him anywhere near the Cubs. I know, not exactly a great argument, but I just know that I didn't like him then, and I doubt I would like him now.

 

I'm just not sure what he could possibly say that would make his potential departure more important than Jim Hendry's.

 

While I can't stand Hendry, that is mostly founded upon what he has done the last two offseasons. I think Kenney staying means that the number in the profit column will be more important than the number in the W column. He does understand that winning makes it easier to make money, but I don't believe his number one goal is to win a WS. I don't question Hendry's intentions.

 

I could be wrong, but wasn't Kenney hired by Zell? I thought he was brought in to squeeze as much out of the team as possible for the Tribune. If that meant making the team or the stadium more valuable or whatever, that's what his job was. Again, could be wrong, but that has been my impression.

 

You're way off. Kenney was with the Tribune and took over when McDonough left. He was basically the last suit standing. And the payroll skyrocketted under his watch.

 

Being overly tight with money is the least of his issues.

 

And it shouldn't just be what Hendry has done lately that has you concerned. Do you not know what happened in 2005 and 2006? He inherited a very talented franchise that was primed for success, enjoyed financial dominance over the competition, and came away with one lousy 90-win season (out of 7 so far).

 

I was wrong about when and why Kenney came, as I said I may be. This does change my perspective on him, at least somewhat.

 

I do know what happened in 2005 and 2006. Keyword in my post before would be "mostly." I'm not really standing up for Hendry. I want him gone as well.

 

It's funny you chose 90-wins as a benchmark. While he may only have one 90-win season, he does have three 88-win seasons...

[Sammys Boombox]

Kenney's been around for awhile, and every team has somebody who's in charge of making money from the team. Blaming Kenney for being cheap when the Cubs have a bloated payroll seems strange.

 

Never blamed Kenney for being cheap. I just stated that I thought that his only goal was to make as much profit off of the Cubs for Sam Zell. Which he did say in that radio interview I mentioned earlier. Although you can't blame him. Zell wouldn't have kept him around if he didn't at least portray that attitude. I didn't realize that he was here before Zell, which does change my opinion of him somewhat.

 

While my facts were incorrect (Zell hiring Kenney). My conclusion based on the incorrect "facts" is one I think most of the posters would have come to.

 

1. Zell hired Kenney to squeeze as much money out of the Cubs as possible.

2. Zell is finally done with the Cubs.

3. Ricketts is keeping the man who was brought here for intentions that didn't include a WS winner.

4. Ricketts made a bad decision in keeping Kenney.

[jersey cubs fan]

I remember an interview (I don't remember when or where) that I heard on the radio and while I don't remember all that was said, I remember thinking that I didn't want him anywhere near the Cubs. I know, not exactly a great argument, but I just know that I didn't like him then, and I doubt I would like him now.

 

I'm just not sure what he could possibly say that would make his potential departure more important than Jim Hendry's.

 

While I can't stand Hendry, that is mostly founded upon what he has done the last two offseasons. I think Kenney staying means that the number in the profit column will be more important than the number in the W column. He does understand that winning makes it easier to make money, but I don't believe his number one goal is to win a WS. I don't question Hendry's intentions.

 

I could be wrong, but wasn't Kenney hired by Zell? I thought he was brought in to squeeze as much out of the team as possible for the Tribune. If that meant making the team or the stadium more valuable or whatever, that's what his job was. Again, could be wrong, but that has been my impression.

 

You're way off. Kenney was with the Tribune and took over when McDonough left. He was basically the last suit standing. And the payroll skyrocketted under his watch.

 

Being overly tight with money is the least of his issues.

 

And it shouldn't just be what Hendry has done lately that has you concerned. Do you not know what happened in 2005 and 2006? He inherited a very talented franchise that was primed for success, enjoyed financial dominance over the competition, and came away with one lousy 90-win season (out of 7 so far).

 

I was wrong about when and why Kenney came, as I said I may be. This does change my perspective on him, at least somewhat.

 

I do know what happened in 2005 and 2006. Keyword in my post before would be "mostly." I'm not really standing up for Hendry. I want him gone as well.

 

It's funny you chose 90-wins as a benchmark. While he may only have one 90-win season, he does have three 88-win seasons...

 

90-wins is kind of a low threshold for a great season. And back in 2003 I was expecting this team to have multiple great seasons, not every year, but multiple. There were 16 NL teams with 90 wins between 2003-2008, more than 2.5 per season, and there are 4 NL teams on pace for that this year. In a league that does not have a Yankees/Red Sox duo to dominate play, there's no good reason why the Cubs, at the top of the NL food chain, could not have had multiple 90 win seasons from 2003-2009. The Cubs are a .518 W% team since the beginning of 2003, the equivalant of an 84 win team (a little less than 84 wins). That is mediocre performance for what should be a top dog team, whose suits have provided more than enough resources to be a top dog team.

[Sammys Boombox]

90-wins is kind of a low threshold for a great season. And back in 2003 I was expecting this team to have multiple great seasons, not every year, but multiple. There were 16 NL teams with 90 wins between 2003-2008, more than 2.5 per season, and there are 4 NL teams on pace for that this year. In a league that does not have a Yankees/Red Sox duo to dominate play, there's no good reason why the Cubs, at the top of the NL food chain, could not have had multiple 90 win seasons from 2003-2009. The Cubs are a .518 W% team since the beginning of 2003, the equivalant of an 84 win team (a little less than 84 wins). That is mediocre performance for what should be a top dog team, whose suits have provided more than enough resources to be a top dog team.

 

Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. I said I wasn't defending Hendry. I agree with everything you are saying about him. I was being sarcastic (although looking back at my post I didn't make it as obvious as I thought) about the 88-win seasons. The fact of the matter is, the Cubs have only had one "top dog" team so far under Hendry. I agree with that. We haven't enjoyed a single measly playoff victory in what will be 6 years. I'm just as frustrated as you are.

[NCCubFan]

Kenney's been around for awhile, and every team has somebody who's in charge of making money from the team. Blaming Kenney for being cheap when the Cubs have a bloated payroll seems strange.

 

Never blamed Kenney for being cheap. I just stated that I thought that his only goal was to make as much profit off of the Cubs for Sam Zell. Which he did say in that radio interview I mentioned earlier. Although you can't blame him. Zell wouldn't have kept him around if he didn't at least portray that attitude. I didn't realize that he was here before Zell, which does change my opinion of him somewhat.

 

While my facts were incorrect (Zell hiring Kenney). My conclusion based on the incorrect "facts" is one I think most of the posters would have come to.

 

1. Zell hired Kenney to squeeze as much money out of the Cubs as possible.

2. Zell is finally done with the Cubs.

3. Ricketts is keeping the man who was brought here for intentions that didn't include a WS winner.

4. Ricketts made a bad decision in keeping Kenney.

Just because Ricketts is retaining Kenney doesn't mean that Ricketts doesn't consider winning a championship to be a high priority. I think it's possible that Ricketts is keeping Kenney for money-making purposes, but with the intention of using that money to increase payroll, spend more on player development, etc. It's possible that he's planning to have both Kenney and Alderson at comparable organizational levels, with Kenney having full control of the business end and Alderson with full control on the baseball end. Alderson wouldn't necessarily be reporting to Kenney or vice versa; they might both report directly to Ricketts.

[pitchcs]

Kenney is staying...

 

In my opinion, Rickett's is 0-for-1. I would rather Hendry stay than Kenney, by a long shot.

 

What has Kenney done that has been so horrible?

 

Blamed a priest for "blessing" the Cubs dugout?

[WilcoFan]

I know that people love to do ledge jumping when rumors come up ("Grabow for Jackson? WTF?"), but the "report" to ESPN1000 was a comment by Harry Teinowitz, host of the afternoon show on their station. There are myriad issues with this report, namely:

 

1. Not one other outlet has picked it up, nor has anyone gotten any other confirmation on it.

2. Teinowitz is a notorious jock-sniffer, and it would not be surprising to see that his jock sniffing extends to front office types.

 

Before people take this report as fact, you might want to wait and get some actual confirmation on it.

[Soonernation]

I also don't think Lou's job is necessarily safe.

 

Bernstein was suggesting yesterday that he's not buying that Lou wants to stay for next year...instead he thinks Lou is posturing to get "fired". Basically that he wants a buyout of at least a portion of his salary for next season. I could see that.

Hell yeah, can't say i blame him on that; this team is a train wreck and it's getting worse by the day

[Hall7810]

Crane Kenney will continue on with the Cubs after the sale to the Ricketts family is completed, and WGN-Ch. 9 will continue as the primary over-the-air broadcaster of Cubs games.

 

According to the court documents filed by Tribune Co., "the contract of the chairman of the Cubs is being modified and assumed in connection with consummation of the formation agreement." That means Kenney is back, but for how long and what role Kenney will assume with the club is not spelled out.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-26-cubs-brite-chicago-aug26,0,2839033.story

[LuvChicagoSports]

I wrote an article delving into this topic.

 

I wrote how the Cubs can keep Crane Kenney but still bring in another guy to run baseball operations. I think it is very important for the Cubs to bring in the right pieces now and not wait so they can begin to fix the enormous problems that are facing the organization. It will be VERY easy for the next GM to blame the mess on Hendry to get some slack from the press. He can simply point to untradeable contracts and a lack of organizational depth and there is nothing the media can do to prove him wrong.