New Gm, New Manager

[Sammy Sofa]

I do not think it's possible for an average GM to take a top 4-8 payroll and make it just an average team.

 

That seems to be a pretty extreme conclusion to come do. Why do you think that more money is going to always allow an average GM to overcome their mistakes and misconceptions as opposed to just amplifying or increasing them?

 

If more money makes you worse, you aren't average. You're incompetent.

 

But it's not a given that he or someone similar in the same situation are "worse" so much as their flaws in judgment are just magnified. You're seemingly talking about having more money like it somehow makes a GM smarter or make better decisions, when it ultimately just lets them make more of types of decisions they were making already.

 

I say Hendry is average because I look around and see the lack of truly well constructed teams. There's really only a handful. Sure, many teams have a much smaller budget, but even then you see that money being inexplicably wasted time and time again on really bad or shortsighted signings. These are the guys that tend to occupy the GM spot. Most of them all have their inefficient, myopic ways of how a team should be made. It's almost a lock we'll be at least just as pissed as the next as we as Hendry.

 

*AGAIN, THIS IS NOT AN ENDORSEMENT TO KEEP HENDRY.

Edited July 22, 2010 by Sammy Sofa

[Guest]

I think Kenny Williams is an above average GM. Very underrated.

 

He's like a half-step worse than Hendry.

 

If he's worse than Jim Hendry why do his teams consistently win more than the Cubs?

 

This year would be the 3rd year out of 8 that his team won more games than the Cubs.

[jersey cubs fan]

But it's not a given that he or someone similar in the same situation are "worse" so much as their flaws in judgment are just magnified. You're seemingly talking about having more money like it somehow makes a GM smarter or make better decisions, when it ultimately just lets them make more of types of decisions they were making already.

 

I am not at all talking like that and I have no idea how you can possibly make such a statement. Money is a necessity for making deals. The more you have, the more you can do, and the better your team should be if you aren't screwing up. Jim Hendry is screwing up so his teams haven't been good despite more money than most. His rather pathetic win % is supported heavily by the two season super spurge in spending that catapulted them from more than most to more than almost everybody status.

 

People like to blame McDonough and the Trib for the bad contracts, but choose to forget that without that spending, the 2007/2008 Cubs would have sucked. It's funny that the same "I didn't want to spend it they made me" defense that Hendry apologists give for reasons why Ricketts should keep him is arguably the only reason he still has a job today, since a continuation of the 2005/2006 Cubs into the heart of the selling process would have almost certainly cost him that job.

[jersey cubs fan]

I think Kenny Williams is an above average GM. Very underrated.

 

He's like a half-step worse than Hendry.

 

If he's worse than Jim Hendry why do his teams consistently win more than the Cubs?

 

This year would be the 3rd year out of 8 that his team won more games than the Cubs.

 

In 8 years they've averaged nearly 86 wins while the Cubs have been at 83.

[Soul]

And with less overall money to work with than Jim.

 

There's no way Williams is a worse GM than Hendry. It's the other way around.

[Guest]

I think Kenny Williams is an above average GM. Very underrated.

 

He's like a half-step worse than Hendry.

 

If he's worse than Jim Hendry why do his teams consistently win more than the Cubs?

 

This year would be the 3rd year out of 8 that his team won more games than the Cubs.

 

In 8 years they've averaged nearly 86 wins while the Cubs have been at 83.

 

Yes, I see that. Just because Williams' bad teams win 75 games instead of 65, that doesn't mean he's any better at his job. And besides, if we're measuring GM effectiveness, 3 wins is well within the range of things like luck, injuries, scheduling, etc.

[jersey cubs fan]

Yes, I see that. Just because Williams' bad teams win 75 games instead of 65, that doesn't mean he's any better at his job. And besides, if we're measuring GM effectiveness, 3 wins is well within the range of things like luck, injuries, scheduling, etc.

 

In any one season, not averaged out over 8 years.

 

And it's pretty stupid to say that a 10 win difference is meaningless.

[Sammy Sofa]

I am not at all talking like that and I have no idea how you can possibly make such a statement.

 

Because you said this:

 

If more money makes you worse, you aren't average. You're incompetent.

 

I certainly didn't say that more money made him worse, so I assumed that was what you were saying. I said more money just amplifies a GM's flaws. It doesn't make them "worse" so much as give them the ability to make more of the mistakes they were already making.

[Guest]

In any one season, not averaged out over 8 years.

 

Yes, even over 8 years, especially when Williams is +53 wins in 3 of the 8 years, and Hendry is +20 the remaining 5. "Consistently win more" was your phrasing, and it's just not true.

 

And it's pretty stupid to say that a 10 win difference is meaningless.

 

In the context of this comparison, there is very little difference. Neither team was close to getting a playoff spot and neither team was so bad it impacted their ability to return to being good.

[Guest]

There is just no way someone can justify why Hendry still has a job at this point. The Yankees and Red Sox end nearly every season with winning records despite the fact they play in the toughest division in baseball.

 

Hendry has had 8 years to mold this club into a powerhouse, and the Tribune gave him all the tools to help him accomplish that goal. He literally has no excuse for this train wreck of a team, yet he still offers them up like candy.

 

If this team never had a history of being the lovable losers with their own tv contract playing in one of the best venues in all of baseball, the seats would be emptier than a Florida Marlins home game in July.

 

No one should want to pay their hard earned money to go watch a 140m team lose games over and over to teams with payrolls below 50m. If that's the best Hendry has to offer, then it's time for someone else to have a chance to make this team something better than they currently are. It's a gamble I'm sure the biggest percentage the fans of Chicago would be willing to take, also.

 

We don't want a GM who spends entire offseason's looking to unload his previous mistakes. We want one that comes from a pedigree of winning now and in the future. We want one that won't just spend money so that he can say he spent money. We want one that spends it wisely or just puts it back in his pocket until he can spend it wisely.

 

If I performed Hendry's job at the level he has, I'd fully expect to be fired. Although I'd probably feel guilty that I didn't tender my resignation first. The fans deserve better than Jim Hendry has offered. It's a sad truth.

[Sammy Sofa]

There is just no way someone can justify why Hendry still has a job at this point.

 

Nobody here is. What people are doing are offering measured responses to things like this:

 

Hendry has had 8 years to mold this club into a powerhouse, and the Tribune gave him all the tools to help him accomplish that goal.

 

This is an inaccurate statement. I'm assuming "all the tools" means the budget as we know it now, and that didn't occur until after the 2006 season, and really only existed leading into the 2008 season, too. Hendry has not done a good job at all, but let's not make it ridiculous by basically making up scenarios that didn't exist.

[Guest]

There is just no way someone can justify why Hendry still has a job at this point.

 

Nobody here is. What people are doing are offering measured responses to things like this:

 

Hendry has had 8 years to mold this club into a powerhouse, and the Tribune gave him all the tools to help him accomplish that goal.

 

This is an inaccurate statement. I'm assuming "all the tools" means the budget as we know it now, and that didn't occur until after the 2006 season, and really only existed leading into the 2008 season, too. Hendry has not done a good job at all, but let's not make it ridiculous by basically making up scenarios that didn't exist.

 

The payroll has gone up every year he's had the team while many teams have reduced their payrolls significantly during that time. He's also been able to spend money at the trade deadlines. He's had the ability to spend well in the draft. All the tools means exactly that. He really hasn't been hamstrung on anything other than a few bad contracts when he took over the team. I can't think of a single time the Tribune told him "no".

 

While he didn't have an upper echelon budget when he first started, he had the #1 farm system in baseball and a budget that was expanded to allow him to make improvements where necessary.

[Sammy Sofa]

The payroll has gone up every year he's had the team while many teams have reduced their payrolls significantly during that time. He's also been able to spend money at the trade deadlines. He's had the ability to spend well in the draft. All the tools means exactly that. He really hasn't been hamstrung on anything other than a few bad contracts when he took over the team. I can't think of a single time the Tribune told him "no".

 

He was effectively told "no" plenty of times until after the 2006 season. I'm obviously not saying he hasn't had resources available to him that many other GM's don't, but you're being way too broad.

 

While he didn't have an upper echelon budget when he first started, he had the #1 farm system in baseball and a budget that was expanded to allow him to make improvements where necessary.

 

That's not "all the tools." With as much money as the Cubs have had since he's been on board, there's a drastic difference between how much he could spend prior to the 2006-2007 off-season and then the the 2007-2008 off-season.

 

There's no need to overstate the circumstances as to how bad Hendry's been at his job.

[Wilson A2000]

I think Kenny Williams is an above average GM. Very underrated.

 

He's like a half-step worse than Hendry.

 

That's because the World Series trophy he is carrying is slowing him down.

[Sammy Sofa]

I think Kenny Williams is an above average GM. Very underrated.

 

He's like a half-step worse than Hendry.

 

That's because the World Series trophy he is carrying is slowing him down.

 

So if the Cubs had won the WS in 2003, and then everything else afterward plays out exactly the same as we've seen in the last 7 years, Hendry would suddenly be a good GM?

[A New Era]

Hendry sucks, please stop defending him. Let him go man, let him go.

[Benchwarmer]

Two words: Chad Fox

 

Hendry should be fired and let a new GM pick the new Mgr.

[Soul]

Hendry sucks, please stop defending him. Let him go man, let him go.

 

This.

 

Trouble is, our fearless leader won't let him go.

[jersey cubs fan]

I think Kenny Williams is an above average GM. Very underrated.

 

He's like a half-step worse than Hendry.

 

That's because the World Series trophy he is carrying is slowing him down.

 

So if the Cubs had won the WS in 2003, and then everything else afterward plays out exactly the same as we've seen in the last 7 years, Hendry would suddenly be a good GM?

 

Obviously he would not, but the team sticking with him for as long as they have would be more understandable. Given a 5-year grace period after winning one, we'd be well past that by now. And the overall record would still be unacceptable.

[Sammy Sofa]

Hendry sucks, please stop defending him. Let him go man, let him go.

 

This.

 

Very few people are actually defending him.

[Tarver]

A major thing to Williams' credit is he seems to know when to trade guys at the peak of their value. The return may be questionable, so he should be criticized for not maximizing the opportunity cost, but he seems to always get what he wants and doesn't seem to ever get burned.

 

Maybe Ricketts should look into sniping some Sox scouts.

[daske17]

I think Kenny Williams is an above average GM. Very underrated.

 

He's like a half-step worse than Hendry.

 

That's because the World Series trophy he is carrying is slowing him down.

 

So if the Cubs had won the WS in 2003, and then everything else afterward plays out exactly the same as we've seen in the last 7 years, Hendry would suddenly be a good GM?

 

In a vacuum, I'd say yes. If the Cubs won in 03, Hendry would have looked like a genius for the moves he made that year (Ramirez, Lofton, Simon, Prior, etc.) more than he does now. Subsequently, I think he would have been given more latitude given that the World Series monkey would have been off the organization's back.

 

However, I don't think he would have made it past the 09 season based on increased expectations.

[Sammy Sofa]

A major thing to Williams' credit is he seems to know when to trade guys at the peak of their value. The return may be questionable, so he should be criticized for not maximizing the opportunity cost, but he seems to always get what he wants and doesn't seem to ever get burned.

 

Maybe Ricketts should look into sniping some Sox scouts.

 

Which guys has he moved at their peak value?

[Tarver]

Gonzalez, Rowand, Wells, Reed just for well known examples.

 

The verdict's out on Tyler Flowers, but it's not like AtL got a haul for Vazquez. And Olivo has bounced around as much as Patterson.

 

Don't get me wrong, a lot of his trades seem downright laughable. I used to think of him as an incredibly, incredibly lucky version of Bowden. But it's happened too often to be ignored, so either he has some of the best scouts in baseball, or the [expletive] should just invest in lottery tickets.

[Sammy Sofa]

Eh, honestly, I was expecting a more impressive list. It's not bad, but they're all easily countered with a list of players they've held on to under him for WAY too long, some of which are still on the team right now.