Should Hednry get another chance?

[Derwood]

Hednry

[risico]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. The Cubs' rosters during the Hendry tenure have been very good and for the most part were picked to win or contend almost every year. Even now, most experts agree that this roster ought to be much better than it is playing. That's the GM's job. Unfortunately, it doesn't always translate to the field. The Cubs have had more than their share of injuries over the last 8-9 years and that combined with unexpected underproduction (i.e. DLee and ARam) at times has resulted in the results we have.

 

Give the "poor luck" shtick a rest. It's a tired argument. Last year Lee and Ramirez had some of the best seasons of their careers but couldn't prop up the rest of Hendry's poorly constructed team (Bradley, Soriano, Harden, Miles).

 

The Cubs have relied on oft-injured players to get the job done - you can't use injuries as an excuse. The injuries to Prior and Wood were to be expected, not to mention guys like Bradley and Harden. Jim Hendry invested heavily in these players with the knowledge of their injury histories and it hurt the team.

 

If there's one thing Jim Hendry has shown over his tenure as a GM, it's that he has no understanding whatsoever of advanced statistics and how to use them. A simple look at the numbers of some of the failures that he's acquired confirms this.

[Guest]

You can't hide behind the excuse of bad luck due to injuries when you continue to rely on players with past injury problems (such as Prior, Wood, Ramirez, Floyd, Bradley and Harden). It seems disingenuous to continue to rate Hendry and the organization with the benefit of a curve due to "bad luck" when the organization has such an advantage in resources and continues to squander it.

 

It's funny that Hendry picked up or re-signed players who conceivably came at discounts due to their checkered injury pasts and yet ran up the bill on a decidedly average run of 8 years. It just goes to show you just how bad he is at filling a roster and valuing assets.

[chasinf5s]

And Marquis, what a moron trade that was

 

??????

 

it has more to do with the cubs got nothing back for him and that player was released 2 weeks into the season to bring shark up. Hendry likely could have gotten much more at the deadline, esp with the way Marquis pitched last season.

[Sammy Sofa]

And Marquis, what a moron trade that was

 

??????

 

it has more to do with the cubs got nothing back for him and that player was released 2 weeks into the season to bring shark up. Hendry likely could have gotten much more at the deadline, esp with the way Marquis pitched last season.

 

We have no idea how Marquis would have pitched had he been with the Cubs last year. At the time he was moved he was an unremarkable starting pitcher who typically stunk in the second half with a terrible contract. It was a contract dump, and as such there's no way the Cubs could have expected to get much in return.

[chasinf5s]

And Marquis, what a moron trade that was

 

??????

 

it has more to do with the cubs got nothing back for him and that player was released 2 weeks into the season to bring shark up. Hendry likely could have gotten much more at the deadline, esp with the way Marquis pitched last season.

 

We have no idea how Marquis would have pitched had he been with the Cubs last year. At the time he was moved he was an unremarkable starting pitcher who typically stunk in the second half with a terrible contract. It was a contract dump, and as such there's no way the Cubs could have expected to get much in return.

 

True but to give him away for nothing was [expletive] in my opinion.

[Sammy Sofa]

What were they supposed to get for him? At that point the only thing he could be counted on was to eat innings. He was far too expensive for the Cubs to expect to get anything decent in return.