Can Silva Turn Things Around and Be Useful?

[Ding Dong Johnson]

And again, it really doesn't matter if he has awesome trades on his resume. He has to be judged by the wins and losses of the team over the 8 years he's been in charge, and in comparison to reasonable expectations, he's fallen way short. There's no good reason why the Cardinals should have averaged 6.5 more wins per season than the Cubs during his tenure.

 

Talking about the great trades Hendry had made doesn't have to mean that you're a fan of his. I don't see a problem with it.

 

It's absurd. It's like talking about the great outings Shawn Estes had. Sure, he had a couple gems, but he sucked.

 

So if a player, coach or executive isn't good overall you can't discuss the good points about him? That doesn't make much sense. Hendry hasn't been good overall, but I see no reason why we should be forbidden from discussing some of the good things he's done.

It seems a bit silly to say "he's good at X because of these examples" when X is also littered with bad examples.

[jersey cubs fan]

Backtobanks aside, no one in the thread was trying to use a list of good trades to justify Hendry's performance. They were just trying to come up with the good deals he's made.

 

That list gets repeated everytime the Hendry discussion takes place, and it makes absolutely no sense.

[Guest]

Backtobanks aside, no one in the thread was trying to use a list of good trades to justify Hendry's performance. They were just trying to come up with the good deals he's made.

 

That list gets repeated everytime the Hendry discussion takes place, and it makes absolutely no sense.

 

Again, backtobanks aside, no one is having a serious discussion about Hendry's performance, it's a tangent in a thread about Silva.

[Outshined_One]

Backtobanks aside, no one in the thread was trying to use a list of good trades to justify Hendry's performance. They were just trying to come up with the good deals he's made.

 

That's pretty much what I was doing. Don't get me wrong, I think trades are important in evaluating a general manager's performance. They're not the be-all, end-all, but trades are an important part of building a successful franchise.

 

Jim Hendry should be evaluated on his trades...but in reality, how good has he been at it? The Izturis and Pierre deals were two bad ones, but what about some of Hendry's other stink bombs? For example, Juan Cruz for Andy Pratt and Richard Lewis was pretty awful. Or, one of my personal favorites, Jake Renshaw, Rocky Cherry, and Scott Moore for Steve Trachsel was just dumb.

[Soul]

See, I block those out of my mind because they are painful.

 

Then you bring them back up again.

 

Thanks!

[Outshined_One]

See, I block those out of my mind because they are painful.

 

Then you bring them back up again.

 

Thanks!

 

Sammy Sosa for Dave Crouthers, Mike Fontenot, and Jerry Hairston Jr.!

[BeerHere]

Psycho-Bradley for Silva and 9Mil is a pretty good looking trade at this point.

[Backtobanks]

Now that a few of you want to use my name in your posts, you should at least accurately point out my position. Hendry has some positives (more good trades than bad) and some negatives (giving too much money/years to FA). He deserves blame for a team that has many veterans with unmovable contracts, but he deserves some credit for building teams over the years that won the division or were competitive. An important positive is that he hired Rothschild and Jaramillo as coaches. He has played an important part in rebuilding the farm system. He has been unlucky in having a high number of injured stars (Prior, Wood, Aram, DLee, etc.) over the years. If you want to use only wins and losses as a tool to grade him then he probably should be fired, but I think Ricketts might go a little deeper than W/L. My point has always been that it's real easy for all of us "pretend GMs" to criticize every move he makes (or doesn't make) without having all of the necessary information. I think he's respected by many people in baseball and if he's fired, he will have a job very soon afterward.

[imb]

i think everyone in baseball hates his fat ass and makes fun of him behind his enormous back

[SpongeWorthy]

As always, imb gets right down to brass tacks.

 

Anyway, he probably would get a job pretty quickly but so what? Everyone knows pro sports, even the SABRized MLB, is an insular culture with retreads all over. That being said, I think we should look at Kevin Towers.

[17 Seconds]

Now that a few of you want to use my name in your posts, you should at least accurately point out my position. Hendry has some positives (more good trades than bad) and some negatives (giving too much money/years to FA). He deserves blame for a team that has many veterans with unmovable contracts, but he deserves some credit for building teams over the years that won the division or were competitive. An important positive is that he hired Rothschild and Jaramillo as coaches. He has played an important part in rebuilding the farm system. He has been unlucky in having a high number of injured stars (Prior, Wood, Aram, DLee, etc.) over the years. If you want to use only wins and losses as a tool to grade him then he probably should be fired, but I think Ricketts might go a little deeper than W/L. My point has always been that it's real easy for all of us "pretend GMs" to criticize every move he makes (or doesn't make) without having all of the necessary information. I think he's respected by many people in baseball and if he's fired, he will have a job very soon afterward.

 

people hate jim hendry for his win-loss record? isn't his w-l record pretty decent since taking over?

 

that's not why people dislike him. they dislike him because he makes way more crappy moves than good moves. it's as simple as that.

[dew1679666265]

It seems a bit silly to say "he's good at X because of these examples" when X is also littered with bad examples.

 

Every GM has made bad trades, not nearly as many have acquired talent like Lee, Ramirez, Lofton, Harden, Nomar, Karros and Grudz for guys who have done little in the majors.

 

With the exceptions of the Maddux and Pierre trades, Hendry's bad trades have consisted of trading decent to solid bullpen guys (Cruz, Wuertz) for players who didn't turn out. Those are bad trades, but are overshadowed by the very good trades.

 

Like TT said, I'm not arguing that Hendry has been great. I'm not even defending Hendry in any way. I think it's time for a new GM. I just don't see what the big deal is about discussing good trades he's made and how, overall, he's good at pulling off trades.

[Rob]

Silva's numbers are beginning to erode somewhat. His luck on hits at the start of the year has evaporated, with him now giving up 42 over 42.1 IP. Likewise, he's given up more home runs to bring his HR rate to around the league average. His walk rate is around his average as well.

 

The only real difference that we can point at to say the FO saw something and "fixed" him is that bump in his K/9. He's still well below league average (85th highest K/9 among 117 qualifiers), but that's a category he "lead" before, so power to him I suppose. We'll see how well that aspect holds up.

 

At any rate, the nice ERA is pretty much the product of some above average strand rates and that W-L record is due to some nice run support.

 

He's probably not one of our 5 best starters. Zambrano, Dempster and Lilly are no-doubt better, Wells very likely is, Gorzelanny probably is as well, and we may have a few guys like Cashner and Jackson down in AAA who could turn in better seasons. But there are worse 5th starters out there than Carlos Silva.

[Backtobanks]

It seems a bit silly to say "he's good at X because of these examples" when X is also littered with bad examples.

 

Every GM has made bad trades, not nearly as many have acquired talent like Lee, Ramirez, Lofton, Harden, Nomar, Karros and Grudz for guys who have done little in the majors.

 

With the exceptions of the Maddux and Pierre trades, Hendry's bad trades have consisted of trading decent to solid bullpen guys (Cruz, Wuertz) for players who didn't turn out. Those are bad trades, but are overshadowed by the very good trades.

 

Like TT said, I'm not arguing that Hendry has been great. I'm not even defending Hendry in any way. I think it's time for a new GM. I just don't see what the big deal is about discussing good trades he's made and how, overall, he's good at pulling off trades.

 

 

That's exactly my point. It's not the end of the world if he's fired, but it bothers me that posters just can't look at both sides of a discussion. Also, be careful what you wish for. Everyone wanted Baker gone and most thought Piniella was a great hire. Now we have threads on firing Lou because he's an idiot.

[Outshined_One]

With the exceptions of the Maddux and Pierre trades, Hendry's bad trades have consisted of trading decent to solid bullpen guys (Cruz, Wuertz) for players who didn't turn out. Those are bad trades, but are overshadowed by the very good trades.

 

The Sosa trade was pretty bad, especially considering this organization did everything it could to railroad him out of town. Most people around here expected a better return than what we got for Sosa (remember, Fontenot wasn't well thought of at the time), but the problem was the Cubs pretty much shot themselves in the foot when they made it blindly obvious they were trying to trade him and distance themselves for him. Even worse, that whole fiasco handcuffed the Cubs in an offseason where (potentially) they could have pursued high quality replacements for Sosa (which included Beltran and JD Drew). Instead, they ended up with Jeromy Burnitz.

 

Hendry also traded away potentially useful guys like Bill Mueller, Mark Bellhorn, and Felix Pie. Plus, Cruz and Wuertz weren't the only bullpen guys who got shipped off for scrap; there have been plenty of those trades during Hendry's tenure.

 

Like TT said, I'm not arguing that Hendry has been great. I'm not even defending Hendry in any way. I think it's time for a new GM. I just don't see what the big deal is about discussing good trades he's made and how, overall, he's good at pulling off trades.

 

If we're going to talk about his good trades, we also need to talk about his bad trades, imo.

[SouthSideRyan]

It seems a bit silly to say "he's good at X because of these examples" when X is also littered with bad examples.

 

Every GM has made bad trades, not nearly as many have acquired talent like Lee, Ramirez, Lofton, Harden, Nomar, Karros and Grudz for guys who have done little in the majors.

 

With the exceptions of the Maddux and Pierre trades, Hendry's bad trades have consisted of trading decent to solid bullpen guys (Cruz, Wuertz) for players who didn't turn out. Those are bad trades, but are overshadowed by the very good trades.

 

Like TT said, I'm not arguing that Hendry has been great. I'm not even defending Hendry in any way. I think it's time for a new GM. I just don't see what the big deal is about discussing good trades he's made and how, overall, he's good at pulling off trades.

 

 

That's exactly my point. It's not the end of the world if he's fired, but it bothers me that posters just can't look at both sides of a discussion. Also, be careful what you wish for. Everyone wanted Baker gone and most thought Piniella was a great hire. Now we have threads on firing Lou because he's an idiot.

 

Despite the fact that in '06 I said Baker > Piniella, Baker's not even close to as good a manger as Piniella is. Piniella has some serious serious faults, but Dusty Baker is one of the worst managers in baseball.

[dew1679666265]

With the exceptions of the Maddux and Pierre trades, Hendry's bad trades have consisted of trading decent to solid bullpen guys (Cruz, Wuertz) for players who didn't turn out. Those are bad trades, but are overshadowed by the very good trades.

 

The Sosa trade was pretty bad, especially considering this organization did everything it could to railroad him out of town. Most people around here expected a better return than what we got for Sosa (remember, Fontenot wasn't well thought of at the time), but the problem was the Cubs pretty much shot themselves in the foot when they made it blindly obvious they were trying to trade him and distance themselves for him. Even worse, that whole fiasco handcuffed the Cubs in an offseason where (potentially) they could have pursued high quality replacements for Sosa (which included Beltran and JD Drew). Instead, they ended up with Jeromy Burnitz.

 

Hendry also traded away potentially useful guys like Bill Mueller, Mark Bellhorn, and Felix Pie. Plus, Cruz and Wuertz weren't the only bullpen guys who got shipped off for scrap; there have been plenty of those trades during Hendry's tenure.[

 

Yeah, the Sosa trade wasn't particularly good. I think they got good value for the time (especially seeing how Fontenot turned out), but his value really shouldn't have been driven down so much. That's definitely one of Hendry's bad trades.

 

Like TT said, I'm not arguing that Hendry has been great. I'm not even defending Hendry in any way. I think it's time for a new GM. I just don't see what the big deal is about discussing good trades he's made and how, overall, he's good at pulling off trades.

 

If we're going to talk about his good trades, we also need to talk about his bad trades, imo.

 

I have no problem with that. I was just responding to your question about his awesome trades.

[bukie]

If Hendry is worth anything, he's on the phone as we speak trying to see who else wants Silva.

[Sammy Sofa]

Everyone wanted Baker gone and most thought Piniella was a great hire.

 

The bold text is completely false. You had a few people here gung-ho for Lou, but most were vehemently opposed against hiring him even when it was just being suggested before Dusty was actually gone. When Lou was got hired the general consensus beyond those fanatical few was basically "at least he's not Joe Girardi/it could be worst" in terms of being positive.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

It seems a bit silly to say "he's good at X because of these examples" when X is also littered with bad examples.

 

Every GM has made bad trades, not nearly as many have acquired talent like Lee, Ramirez, Lofton, Harden, Nomar, Karros and Grudz for guys who have done little in the majors.

 

With the exceptions of the Maddux and Pierre trades, Hendry's bad trades have consisted of trading decent to solid bullpen guys (Cruz, Wuertz) for players who didn't turn out. Those are bad trades, but are overshadowed by the very good trades.

 

Like TT said, I'm not arguing that Hendry has been great. I'm not even defending Hendry in any way. I think it's time for a new GM. I just don't see what the big deal is about discussing good trades he's made and how, overall, he's good at pulling off trades.

I guess I prefer to judge his performance on the sum of the parts as it should be. Over the better part of a decade, somebody should be able to make a few good or great choices. The problem is, he hasn't made nearly enough and made way too many bad ones.

[dew1679666265]

I guess I prefer to judge his performance on the sum of the parts as it should be. Over the better part of a decade, somebody should be able to make a few good or great choices. The problem is, he hasn't made nearly enough and made way too many bad ones.

 

Again, I'm not evaluating Hendry's overall job performance at all. I'm simply discussing a few of the great trades he's made. It's not an evaluation in any way, shape, or form. Outshined One asked what awesome trades Hendry has made other than the ones he mentioned, I brought up a pretty nice trade. It's not an evaluation nor a statement on his overall job performance.

[Backtobanks]

One interesting statistic that I saw. The Cubs had 6 winning seasons in the last decade for the first time since the 1930's. Doesn't mean he's a great GM, but he deserves some credit for that.

[soapy]

Hendry was promoted to GM mid-way thru 2002. From 2003-2009 the team compiled a record of 587-545 while managing to increase payroll from $75.7 million in 2002 to $146.6 million in 2010.

 

I have no idea why anyone would consider that impressive. The guy has absolutely done some good thing in his tenure, but his overall record is completely unimpressive once you consider the resources he's been given. He took over a team in a bad state, but he's had nearly eight years to turn this team into a regular contender while having a sizable financial advantage over most of the competition for much of that time.

 

Just because this is a team with a history of failure doesn't mean I need to accept six winning seasons in the last decade as something impressive. As far as I'm concerned, that should basically be the floor of expectations for a team with the kind of resources the Cubs have. I'm in no way in the "anyone but Hendry" camp, but I think he's been given ample oppurtunity and it's time to move in another direction.

[soapy]

Now that a few of you want to use my name in your posts, you should at least accurately point out my position. Hendry has some positives (more good trades than bad) and some negatives (giving too much money/years to FA). He deserves blame for a team that has many veterans with unmovable contracts, but he deserves some credit for building teams over the years that won the division or were competitive. An important positive is that he hired Rothschild and Jaramillo as coaches. He has played an important part in rebuilding the farm system. He has been unlucky in having a high number of injured stars (Prior, Wood, Aram, DLee, etc.) over the years. If you want to use only wins and losses as a tool to grade him then he probably should be fired, but I think Ricketts might go a little deeper than W/L. My point has always been that it's real easy for all of us "pretend GMs" to criticize every move he makes (or doesn't make) without having all of the necessary information. I think he's respected by many people in baseball and if he's fired, he will have a job very soon afterward.

 

I guess I'm just not sure why you need to "go deeper" than W/L. Isn't that the bottom line? His job is to put together teams that win. His record is barely over .500. End of story, IMO. Every team has injuries. One can even excuse one bad year because of injuries, but it's been 7-8 years now. In that time, there's really only been one team that was very good (2008). In fact, that's the only team that won more than 90 games.

 

He's out of excuses.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I guess I prefer to judge his performance on the sum of the parts as it should be. Over the better part of a decade, somebody should be able to make a few good or great choices. The problem is, he hasn't made nearly enough and made way too many bad ones.

 

Again, I'm not evaluating Hendry's overall job performance at all. I'm simply discussing a few of the great trades he's made. It's not an evaluation in any way, shape, or form. Outshined One asked what awesome trades Hendry has made other than the ones he mentioned, I brought up a pretty nice trade. It's not an evaluation nor a statement on his overall job performance.

And I still find it silly. It reminds me of women that say "I know my boyfriend beats the [expletive] out of me but sometimes he buys me nice stuff".