Bruce Levine: Cubs Won't Offer Harden Arbitration

[Tarver]

Minaya, Wade, Moore, Jocketty, Coletti, and Daniels are all worse. Arguably Sabean too. That doesn't excuse Hendry though.

 

People keeping saying Hendry is a "bottom 5 Gm in baseball" and that is not even remotely true. IMO there ae three catergories of GMs: 1: the really good, 2: Meh, and 3: the really bad. Hendry is in the "meh" catergory. And people who says Hendry is in the "bottom 5th" of GMs really need to toned done the overexaggeration.

 

You make a good point. Name me a NL central GM who is better than Hendry? Melvin squandered a golden opportunity to have the Brewers competitive for years. Huntington is trying to help the Pirates set an unbreakable record for the most consecutive years for a franchise to be under .500. Mozeliak traded many of the Cards top prospects this year and may get swept in the first round of the playoffs and be stuck with nothing to show for the trades. Jocketty appears to have no direction.

 

NL West? Sabean? Doubt it. Colletti? Made the playoffs a couple of years in a row, but according to this board he is terrible. O'Dowd? possible

 

NL East? Wren? taken the Braves down the toilet. Minaya? Once again listed as most people's worst GM's. Rizzo? don't think so... Beinfest and Amaro, Jr.? We may have a winner.

 

Hendry is not nearly as bad as some think.

 

Whoa, you totally miscontrued my post. I was just stating Hendry is not a bottom five, more of a bottom ten.

 

I'd take Melvin or Mozeliak over Hendry in a heartbeat. Wren too. And it's a little early to write off Rizzo. He wasn't a Bowden hire. Either way, Hendry has to go.

[Tim M]

In the NL the only GM who I would definitely take over Hendry is Beinfest . I think you can lump Hendry in with guys like O'Dowd, Wren, Colleti, and Mozeliak. All the others are either worse or unproven.

[Tarver]

Minaya, Wade, Moore, Jocketty, Coletti, and Daniels are all worse. Arguably Sabean too. That doesn't excuse Hendry though.

he made some big mistakes early on, but i'd take Daniels over Hendry

 

Young and Gonzalez for Otsuka and Adam Eaton (!) should've already gotten him fired. The Tex trade helped negate it, but then there's the moronic deals to Millwood and Young. His body of work leads me to really wonder if he has any kind of plan.

[loukycub]

I have not read this entire thread but I wonder if anyone has brought up that waiver claim on harden yet, because I think that's key. if we were not going to offer him arbitration, why did we keep him? why not get the best we could for him from the twins or draft picks and let him go?

 

this whole situation reminds me of the Colorado avalanche and trade day last year, not trading Ian laperriere in the last year of his deal when teams wanted him and then didn't offer him a fair deal in the offseason and he went and signed with Philly.

 

later the gm got fired. sign of things to come here? if harden doesn't resign with us I certainly hope so.

[CUBZ99]

Minaya, Wade, Moore, Jocketty, Coletti, and Daniels are all worse. Arguably Sabean too. That doesn't excuse Hendry though.

 

People keeping saying Hendry is a "bottom 5 Gm in baseball" and that is not even remotely true. IMO there ae three catergories of GMs: 1: the really good, 2: Meh, and 3: the really bad. Hendry is in the "meh" catergory. And people who says Hendry is in the "bottom 5th" of GMs really need to toned done the overexaggeration.

 

You make a good point. Name me a NL central GM who is better than Hendry? Melvin squandered a golden opportunity to have the Brewers competitive for years. Huntington is trying to help the Pirates set an unbreakable record for the most consecutive years for a franchise to be under .500. Mozeliak traded many of the Cards top prospects this year and may get swept in the first round of the playoffs and be stuck with nothing to show for the trades. Jocketty appears to have no direction.

 

NL West? Sabean? Doubt it. Colletti? Made the playoffs a couple of years in a row, but according to this board he is terrible. O'Dowd? possible

 

NL East? Wren? taken the Braves down the toilet. Minaya? Once again listed as most people's worst GM's. Rizzo? don't think so... Beinfest and Amaro, Jr.? We may have a winner.

 

Hendry is not nearly as bad as some think.

 

Whoa, you totally miscontrued my post. I was just stating Hendry is not a bottom five, more of a bottom ten.

 

I'd take Melvin or Mozeliak over Hendry in a heartbeat. Wren too. And it's a little early to write off Rizzo. He wasn't a Bowden hire. Either way, Hendry has to go.

 

Well, it is good thing you don't have any say. Melvin took a Brewers team that had a chance to compete for years, and managed to ruin it. Mozeliak is looking pretty foolish right now. Trading your farm for one shot at the playoffs, only to get swept. And what has Wren done that would lead anyone to believe that he is better than Hendry? He took a Braves team that won the NL East 14 out of the last 15 years, and hasn't even sniffed the playoffs yet? You seem to have a very strange set of criteria for success of a GM.

 

Hendry isn't the greatest GM, but when you start comparing him to other GM's he doesn't look so bad. Its amazing how much people spaz out after having one year of not making the playoffs.

[CUBZ99]

I have not read this entire thread but I wonder if anyone has brought up that waiver claim on harden yet, because I think that's key. if we were not going to offer him arbitration, why did we keep him? why not get the best we could for him from the twins or draft picks and let him go?

 

this whole situation reminds me of the Colorado avalanche and trade day last year, not trading Ian laperriere in the last year of his deal when teams wanted him and then didn't offer him a fair deal in the offseason and he went and signed with Philly.

 

later the gm got fired. sign of things to come here? if harden doesn't resign with us I certainly hope so.

 

You do realize that he will have new ownership in place before the decision to offer Harden arbitration is made right? I'm guessing they won't tell him he doesn't have money to offer Harden arb and then fire him for not doing it. And I would rather Hendry hang on to Harden until he finds out about ownerships intentions rather than getting hosed by the Twins.

[Backtobanks]

Minaya, Wade, Moore, Jocketty, Coletti, and Daniels are all worse. Arguably Sabean too. That doesn't excuse Hendry though.

 

People keeping saying Hendry is a "bottom 5 Gm in baseball" and that is not even remotely true. IMO there ae three catergories of GMs: 1: the really good, 2: Meh, and 3: the really bad. Hendry is in the "meh" catergory. And people who says Hendry is in the "bottom 5th" of GMs really need to toned done the overexaggeration.

 

You make a good point. Name me a NL central GM who is better than Hendry? Melvin squandered a golden opportunity to have the Brewers competitive for years. Huntington is trying to help the Pirates set an unbreakable record for the most consecutive years for a franchise to be under .500. Mozeliak traded many of the Cards top prospects this year and may get swept in the first round of the playoffs and be stuck with nothing to show for the trades. Jocketty appears to have no direction.

 

NL West? Sabean? Doubt it. Colletti? Made the playoffs a couple of years in a row, but according to this board he is terrible. O'Dowd? possible

 

NL East? Wren? taken the Braves down the toilet. Minaya? Once again listed as most people's worst GM's. Rizzo? don't think so... Beinfest and Amaro, Jr.? We may have a winner.

 

Hendry is not nearly as bad as some think.

 

Whoa, you totally miscontrued my post. I was just stating Hendry is not a bottom five, more of a bottom ten.

 

I'd take Melvin or Mozeliak over Hendry in a heartbeat. Wren too. And it's a little early to write off Rizzo. He wasn't a Bowden hire. Either way, Hendry has to go.

 

Well, it is good thing you don't have any say. Melvin took a Brewers team that had a chance to compete for years, and managed to ruin it. Mozeliak is looking pretty foolish right now. Trading your farm for one shot at the playoffs, only to get swept. And what has Wren done that would lead anyone to believe that he is better than Hendry? He took a Braves team that won the NL East 14 out of the last 15 years, and hasn't even sniffed the playoffs yet? You seem to have a very strange set of criteria for success of a GM.

 

Hendry isn't the greatest GM, but when you start comparing him to other GM's he doesn't look so bad. Its amazing how much people spaz out after having one year of not making the playoffs.

 

AMEN! With our GM, it's a case of the grass is always greener on the other side. BTW, an interesting stat in today's Tribune: Billy Beane (the epitome of great GMs according to all of the stats freaks) is responsible for the A's teams that have gone 226-259 (.466) since Barry Zito's exit.

[Sammy Sofa]

Oh, those wacky stats freaks.

[Guest]

AMEN! With our GM, it's a case of the grass is always greener on the other side. BTW, an interesting stat in today's Tribune: Billy Beane (the epitome of great GMs according to all of the stats freaks) is responsible for the A's teams that have gone 226-259 (.466) since Barry Zito's exit.

 

Did I just hear you comparing a small market GM with a big market GM?

 

Yeah, that's fair. Let's see how a guy who has a decreasing payroll each year compares to another guy who is given an open wallet every year.

 

Do you really think Jim Hendry could have generateed a better record for the Oakland A's during that time? Because he's just barely over .500 as a GM while playing in one of the weakest divisions in baseball.

 

I'm not a Beane apologist, but it's absolutely silly to try to paint Hendry as a much better GM considering the tremendous amount of resources at his fingertips in comparison to a small market club.

[CUBZ99]

AMEN! With our GM, it's a case of the grass is always greener on the other side. BTW, an interesting stat in today's Tribune: Billy Beane (the epitome of great GMs according to all of the stats freaks) is responsible for the A's teams that have gone 226-259 (.466) since Barry Zito's exit.

 

Did I just hear you comparing a small market GM with a big market GM?

 

Yeah, that's fair. Let's see how a guy who has a decreasing payroll each year compares to another guy who is given an open wallet every year.

 

Do you really think Jim Hendry could have generateed a better record for the Oakland A's during that time? Because he's just barely over .500 as a GM while playing in one of the weakest divisions in baseball.

 

I'm not a Beane apologist, but it's absolutely silly to try to paint Hendry as a much better GM considering the tremendous amount of resources at his fingertips in comparison to a small market club.

 

He was comparing GM to GM. Is your position that it is okay for a GM to go well below .500 consistently as long as they can use the small market card? I thought Beane's allure was the fact that through stats he could spend much less than other teams and still field a consistent winner? If not, besides the fact that his teams aren't winning what makes him a good GM?

[erik316wttn]

AMEN! With our GM, it's a case of the grass is always greener on the other side. BTW, an interesting stat in today's Tribune: Billy Beane (the epitome of great GMs according to all of the stats freaks) is responsible for the A's teams that have gone 226-259 (.466) since Barry Zito's exit.

 

Did I just hear you comparing a small market GM with a big market GM?

 

Yeah, that's fair. Let's see how a guy who has a decreasing payroll each year compares to another guy who is given an open wallet every year.

 

Do you really think Jim Hendry could have generateed a better record for the Oakland A's during that time? Because he's just barely over .500 as a GM while playing in one of the weakest divisions in baseball.

 

I'm not a Beane apologist, but it's absolutely silly to try to paint Hendry as a much better GM considering the tremendous amount of resources at his fingertips in comparison to a small market club.

 

He was comparing GM to GM. Is your position that it is okay for a GM to go well below .500 consistently as long as they can use the small market card? I thought Beane's allure was the fact that through stats he could spend much less than other teams and still field a consistent winner? If not, besides the fact that his teams aren't winning what makes him a good GM?

 

This team would be a dynasty with Beane at the helm.

[Guest]

AMEN! With our GM, it's a case of the grass is always greener on the other side. BTW, an interesting stat in today's Tribune: Billy Beane (the epitome of great GMs according to all of the stats freaks) is responsible for the A's teams that have gone 226-259 (.466) since Barry Zito's exit.

 

Did I just hear you comparing a small market GM with a big market GM?

 

Yeah, that's fair. Let's see how a guy who has a decreasing payroll each year compares to another guy who is given an open wallet every year.

 

Do you really think Jim Hendry could have generateed a better record for the Oakland A's during that time? Because he's just barely over .500 as a GM while playing in one of the weakest divisions in baseball.

 

I'm not a Beane apologist, but it's absolutely silly to try to paint Hendry as a much better GM considering the tremendous amount of resources at his fingertips in comparison to a small market club.

 

He was comparing GM to GM. Is your position that it is okay for a GM to go well below .500 consistently as long as they can use the small market card? I thought Beane's allure was the fact that through stats he could spend much less than other teams and still field a consistent winner? If not, besides the fact that his teams aren't winning what makes him a good GM?

 

I don't think you can compare GM with GM unless they have comparable resources to work with. Beane is reloading for another run with his limited resources and Hendry's offseason is already being predicted to be a bust with limited resources due to his own poor decisions.

[UMFan83]

The Pirates GM is so much worse than Hendry. Their team lost like 100 games last year. If Hendry was the GM of that team, he'd simply spend $300 million on free agents this offseason. Problem solved. Why doesn't Huntington just do that? And if I was the Brewers GM, I would outbid the Yankees to resign CC so the trade was worth it. Also I would have resigned Sheets and tell him not to get hurt. Also, if I was the Cardinals GM, I would have demanded that the team win more playoff games to justify the Holliday deal. Also I might have targeted a LF that could catch the ball when it was hit right to him.

 

And I love how people don't point out that we traded a bunch of prospects for 1.333 years of Rich Harden and it got us 0 playoff wins. Whats that you say? The prospects sucked? Maybe that has something to do with the farm system that Hendry resides over sucks badly.

[Backtobanks]

AMEN! With our GM, it's a case of the grass is always greener on the other side. BTW, an interesting stat in today's Tribune: Billy Beane (the epitome of great GMs according to all of the stats freaks) is responsible for the A's teams that have gone 226-259 (.466) since Barry Zito's exit.

 

Did I just hear you comparing a small market GM with a big market GM?

 

Yeah, that's fair. Let's see how a guy who has a decreasing payroll each year compares to another guy who is given an open wallet every year.

 

Do you really think Jim Hendry could have generateed a better record for the Oakland A's during that time? Because he's just barely over .500 as a GM while playing in one of the weakest divisions in baseball.

 

I'm not a Beane apologist, but it's absolutely silly to try to paint Hendry as a much better GM considering the tremendous amount of resources at his fingertips in comparison to a small market club.

 

He was comparing GM to GM. Is your position that it is okay for a GM to go well below .500 consistently as long as they can use the small market card? I thought Beane's allure was the fact that through stats he could spend much less than other teams and still field a consistent winner? If not, besides the fact that his teams aren't winning what makes him a good GM?

 

Well said Cubz99. Beane wrote a book and changed the way people looked at players based on getting better production for less money. Then when the record shows he's not getting production, posters bring up the lower budget. Many posters complain about Hendry not winning a WS, but there's only one successful GM per year using that criteria. There's no way of knowing how Hendry would do in Oakland (a small budget, AL West, etc.) any more than knowing how Beane (large budget, NL Central, etc.) would do in Chicago. The bottom line is that Beane hasn't done squat in the last 3 years, regardless of what you think of Hendry.

[Guest]

Beane.

 

Did.

 

Not.

 

Write.

 

Moneyball.

[KingCubsFan]

And I love how people don't point out that we traded a bunch of prospects for 1.333 years of Rich Harden and it got us 0 playoff wins. Whats that you say? The prospects sucked? Maybe that has something to do with the farm system that Hendry resides over sucks badly.

Can't blame him for trading a bunch of questionable prospects for a possible ace. One of Hendry's strengths is evaluating players in his own system, and he rarely has given up anything of value in those types of trades.

[CP_414]

And I love how people don't point out that we traded a bunch of prospects for 1.333 years of Rich Harden and it got us 0 playoff wins. Whats that you say? The prospects sucked? Maybe that has something to do with the farm system that Hendry resides over sucks badly.

Can't blame him for trading a bunch of questionable prospects for a possible ace. One of Hendry's strengths is evaluating players in his own system, and he rarely has given up anything of value in those types of trades.

 

Hendry rarely has anything of value in his system to give up, and that is his fault. We are all excited about some of the additions to the system the last 2-3 years, but the Cubs went a long time under Hendry with a horrible farm system despite having a big market payroll to invest in prospects.

 

Well said Cubz99. Beane wrote a book and changed the way people looked at players based on getting better production for less money. Then when the record shows he's not getting production, posters bring up the lower budget. Many posters complain about Hendry not winning a WS, but there's only one successful GM per year using that criteria. There's no way of knowing how Hendry would do in Oakland (a small budget, AL West, etc.) any more than knowing how Beane (large budget, NL Central, etc.) would do in Chicago. The bottom line is that Beane hasn't done squat in the last 3 years, regardless of what you think of Hendry.

 

What book did Beane write? I'd love to read it!

[Tarver]

Minaya, Wade, Moore, Jocketty, Coletti, and Daniels are all worse. Arguably Sabean too. That doesn't excuse Hendry though.

 

People keeping saying Hendry is a "bottom 5 Gm in baseball" and that is not even remotely true. IMO there ae three catergories of GMs: 1: the really good, 2: Meh, and 3: the really bad. Hendry is in the "meh" catergory. And people who says Hendry is in the "bottom 5th" of GMs really need to toned done the overexaggeration.

 

You make a good point. Name me a NL central GM who is better than Hendry? Melvin squandered a golden opportunity to have the Brewers competitive for years. Huntington is trying to help the Pirates set an unbreakable record for the most consecutive years for a franchise to be under .500. Mozeliak traded many of the Cards top prospects this year and may get swept in the first round of the playoffs and be stuck with nothing to show for the trades. Jocketty appears to have no direction.

 

NL West? Sabean? Doubt it. Colletti? Made the playoffs a couple of years in a row, but according to this board he is terrible. O'Dowd? possible

 

NL East? Wren? taken the Braves down the toilet. Minaya? Once again listed as most people's worst GM's. Rizzo? don't think so... Beinfest and Amaro, Jr.? We may have a winner.

 

Hendry is not nearly as bad as some think.

 

Whoa, you totally miscontrued my post. I was just stating Hendry is not a bottom five, more of a bottom ten.

 

I'd take Melvin or Mozeliak over Hendry in a heartbeat. Wren too. And it's a little early to write off Rizzo. He wasn't a Bowden hire. Either way, Hendry has to go.

 

Well, it is good thing you don't have any say. Melvin took a Brewers team that had a chance to compete for years, and managed to ruin it. Mozeliak is looking pretty foolish right now. Trading your farm for one shot at the playoffs, only to get swept. And what has Wren done that would lead anyone to believe that he is better than Hendry? He took a Braves team that won the NL East 14 out of the last 15 years, and hasn't even sniffed the playoffs yet? You seem to have a very strange set of criteria for success of a GM.

 

Hendry isn't the greatest GM, but when you start comparing him to other GM's he doesn't look so bad. Its amazing how much people spaz out after having one year of not making the playoffs.

 

Spaz? The man make [expletive] up as he goes along. Every year it's some new miopic BS. That's spazzing.

[Outshined_One]

Well said Cubz99. Beane wrote a book and changed the way people looked at players based on getting better production for less money. Then when the record shows he's not getting production, posters bring up the lower budget. Many posters complain about Hendry not winning a WS, but there's only one successful GM per year using that criteria. There's no way of knowing how Hendry would do in Oakland (a small budget, AL West, etc.) any more than knowing how Beane (large budget, NL Central, etc.) would do in Chicago. The bottom line is that Beane hasn't done squat in the last 3 years, regardless of what you think of Hendry.

 

:-)) :-)) :-)) :-)) :-))

 

Are you a big fan of Joe Morgan?

[KingCubsFan]

And I love how people don't point out that we traded a bunch of prospects for 1.333 years of Rich Harden and it got us 0 playoff wins. Whats that you say? The prospects sucked? Maybe that has something to do with the farm system that Hendry resides over sucks badly.

Can't blame him for trading a bunch of questionable prospects for a possible ace. One of Hendry's strengths is evaluating players in his own system, and he rarely has given up anything of value in those types of trades.

 

Hendry rarely has anything of value in his system to give up, and that is his fault. We are all excited about some of the additions to the system the last 2-3 years, but the Cubs went a long time under Hendry with a horrible farm system despite having a big market payroll to invest in prospects.

The farm system has actually produced a good number of contributors the past few years, and Hendry deserves some credit for hanging on to guys like Marmol, Soto, Theriot, etc. while getting rid of guys like Eric Patterson. And that was with a horrible scouting director. I'm not a fan of a lot of the things Hendry does, but it's probably better to focus on things like Aaron Miles and his fetish for veteran middle relievers instead of his past trades (except for Juan Pierre).

[LuvChicagoSports]

I think it's comical that people want to point out Beane's record since Zito left. How about the fact that other GM's in baseball now abide by the same philosophies? The fact that Theo Epstein looks at the same numbers, just as one example, but has far greater resources available makes it even harder on Beane.

 

The book Moneyball was an attempt to explain how the A's were competitive in an unfair game. Since that book was written, statistical analysis in the front office has become much more accepted and much more common. The tools that Beane was using to give him an advantage over teams with money don't work as much now because other teams with more money will pay more for guys that Beane would target.

 

It is absurd to think that teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, and Dodgers don't have an advantage over the competition simply based on the idea that they can buy the players they want. The Yankees and Red Sox keep developing talent from their system in addition to spending in free agency which is what has really made those organizations so great on a consistent basis.

 

Sure a Tampa Bay can be good and catch lightning in a bottle every once in a while, but without financial resources the window is small to remain that competitive.

 

I won't say that Beane would be a great GM here for sure because he has never had a big payroll to work with and I don't know how wise he would be with the money, but Hendry has played with a HUGE advantage over the competition and doesn't have the results needed to keep his job. The Cubs past history shouldn't come into play here because until recently the Cubs did not play with the advantage that they do now.

 

Are you ok paying such high prices with such poor results?

[CP_414]

And I love how people don't point out that we traded a bunch of prospects for 1.333 years of Rich Harden and it got us 0 playoff wins. Whats that you say? The prospects sucked? Maybe that has something to do with the farm system that Hendry resides over sucks badly.

Can't blame him for trading a bunch of questionable prospects for a possible ace. One of Hendry's strengths is evaluating players in his own system, and he rarely has given up anything of value in those types of trades.

 

Hendry rarely has anything of value in his system to give up, and that is his fault. We are all excited about some of the additions to the system the last 2-3 years, but the Cubs went a long time under Hendry with a horrible farm system despite having a big market payroll to invest in prospects.

The farm system has actually produced a good number of contributors the past few years, and Hendry deserves some credit for hanging on to guys like Marmol, Soto, Theriot, etc. while getting rid of guys like Eric Patterson. And that was with a horrible scouting director. I'm not a fan of a lot of the things Hendry does, but it's probably better to focus on things like Aaron Miles and his fetish for veteran middle relievers instead of his past trades (except for Juan Pierre).

 

Please continue after the etc. If Soto (1 great year and 1 garbage year), Theriot (average at best), and Marmol (good relief pitcher) are the highlights of your farm system the last 5-6 years, your system sucks. Compare what has come out of the Cubs system the last 5-6 years against the rest of the league. When you factor how much the Cubs have to spend on talent relative to most of those teams, it is ugly. You can blame it on a bad farm director, I'll blame it on the guy who employed the bad farm director.

[CUBZ99]

I think it's comical that people want to point out Beane's record since Zito left. How about the fact that other GM's in baseball now abide by the same philosophies? The fact that Theo Epstein looks at the same numbers, just as one example, but has far greater resources available makes it even harder on Beane.

 

The book Moneyball was an attempt to explain how the A's were competitive in an unfair game. Since that book was written, statistical analysis in the front office has become much more accepted and much more common. The tools that Beane was using to give him an advantage over teams with money don't work as much now because other teams with more money will pay more for guys that Beane would target.

 

It is absurd to think that teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, and Dodgers don't have an advantage over the competition simply based on the idea that they can buy the players they want. The Yankees and Red Sox keep developing talent from their system in addition to spending in free agency which is what has really made those organizations so great on a consistent basis.

 

Sure a Tampa Bay can be good and catch lightning in a bottle every once in a while, but without financial resources the window is small to remain that competitive.

 

I won't say that Beane would be a great GM here for sure because he has never had a big payroll to work with and I don't know how wise he would be with the money, but Hendry has played with a HUGE advantage over the competition and doesn't have the results needed to keep his job. The Cubs past history shouldn't come into play here because until recently the Cubs did not play with the advantage that they do now.

 

Are you ok paying such high prices with such poor results?

 

What is your definition of a good GM then? Everyone seems to want to pick up on irrelevant little mistakes by Banks (like Beane not writing Moneyball), instead of addressing the argument. I don't blame them, it is much easier to mock someone and take the attention away from the valid points they make, rather than disputing them.

 

You are right, Beane has a lower payroll. But, you seem to be implying that as long as you are in a small market team it is ok to lose season after season. I disagree with the premise that small market team GM is automatically given a pass.

 

In last three years, Hendry run teams have made it to the playoffs 2 of 3 times or 66.667% of the time. Beane run teams have made it 0 of 3 times or 0% of the time. Yet somehow Hendry is a terrible GM and Beane is a good GM? There seems to be a disconnect.

 

Do you measure a good GM by wins? Playoff appearances? Surely you would agree that even small market teams have to have some sort of criteria by which to gauge effectiveness.

[Guest]

And I love how people don't point out that we traded a bunch of prospects for 1.333 years of Rich Harden and it got us 0 playoff wins. Whats that you say? The prospects sucked? Maybe that has something to do with the farm system that Hendry resides over sucks badly.

Can't blame him for trading a bunch of questionable prospects for a possible ace. One of Hendry's strengths is evaluating players in his own system, and he rarely has given up anything of value in those types of trades.

 

Hendry rarely has anything of value in his system to give up, and that is his fault. We are all excited about some of the additions to the system the last 2-3 years, but the Cubs went a long time under Hendry with a horrible farm system despite having a big market payroll to invest in prospects.

The farm system has actually produced a good number of contributors the past few years, and Hendry deserves some credit for hanging on to guys like Marmol, Soto, Theriot, etc. while getting rid of guys like Eric Patterson. And that was with a horrible scouting director. I'm not a fan of a lot of the things Hendry does, but it's probably better to focus on things like Aaron Miles and his fetish for veteran middle relievers instead of his past trades (except for Juan Pierre).

 

Please continue after the etc. If Soto (1 great year and 1 garbage year), Theriot (average at best), and Marmol (good relief pitcher) are the highlights of your farm system the last 5-6 years, your system sucks. Compare what has come out of the Cubs system the last 5-6 years against the rest of the league. When you factor how much the Cubs have to spend on talent relative to most of those teams, it is ugly. You can blame it on a bad farm director, I'll blame it on the guy who employed the bad farm director.

Prior's success was short lived, but he was phenomenal. Zambrano has been one of the best pitchers in baseball if you look at that entire span. Few teams in baseball can match the success of those two alone during that time span. Add to that players like Wells, Marshall, Cruz, Marmol, Guzman, Hart, Ascanio, Caridad, Wuertz, Hill, Ohman. Add on guys like Gallagher, Nolasco, Mitre and others who got traded as they were breaking into the majors.

 

The Cubs farm system has been extremely productive over the past 5-6 years. The only problem is that the vast majority of the production has come from the mound.

[CP_414]

Prior and Z both came up in 2002. They were/are great players...but we are going back 7 full seasons to find a very good player the Cubs have produced.

 

Wells had a great season out of nowhere. I hope it continues, but we'll see. Geo had a good season and Marmol and Wuertz have been good relief pitchers most of the time. The vast majority of the guys on that list are very replacable players.

 

In the last 5 years Boston has had Hanly Ramirez, Pedroria, John Lester, Bucholtz, Papelbon, Youkilis...

The Dodgers have brought up Kemp, Billingsley, Kershaw, Broxton, Loney, traded for Either when he was a prospect, Martin...

The Angels have brought up Morales, Kendrick, Aybar, Weaver, Napoli...

The Mets havn't had a lot of players, but I'll take Wright and Reyes over that whole list of Cubs...

 

These are jost a few of the teams in a similiar payroll situation as the Cubs. Maybe ther Cubs aren't the absolute worst at producing good players, but they are pretty darn bad. You don't keep someone in place because they aren't the worst person at the job, you keep them in place if they are good at their job. Hendry is not good at his job.