New Gm, New Manager

[Guest]

Trading prospects that never really got a shot at the MLB level is not really the same as selling high. Not that it's a strike against him, it's just not out of the ordinary, especially when you're comparing to Hendry(who could have such a list that is twice as long).

[Tarver]

It's just interesting that Hendry has this "trader Jim" stigma when his southside counterpart wheels & deals just as often and usually gives up less.

 

Either way I don't think either GM deserves his job. At least we can point at the Cardinals, no reason why the Sox shouldn't be perennial preseason picks.

[jersey cubs fan]

Trading prospects that never really got a shot at the MLB level is not really the same as selling high.

 

Yes it is. It absolutely is. If it's at the higher end of a players value, it's trading high.

[CubColtPacer]

It's just interesting that Hendry has this "trader Jim" stigma when his southside counterpart wheels & deals just as often and usually gives up less.

 

Either way I don't think either GM deserves his job. At least we can point at the Cardinals, no reason why the Sox shouldn't be perennial preseason picks.

 

It would be pretty hard to give up less than Hendry has in trades. The list of players who have not fallen apart after leaving the Cubs is pretty small. Hendry's bad trades have usually involved acquiring the wrong player rather than giving up the wrong player.

[dew1679666265]

It's just interesting that Hendry has this "trader Jim" stigma when his southside counterpart wheels & deals just as often and usually gives up less.

 

Either way I don't think either GM deserves his job. At least we can point at the Cardinals, no reason why the Sox shouldn't be perennial preseason picks.

 

It would be pretty hard to give up less than Hendry has in trades. The list of players who have not fallen apart after leaving the Cubs is pretty small. Hendry's bad trades have usually involved acquiring the wrong player rather than giving up the wrong player.

 

 

Yeah, I pointed out before probably the best players Hendry's traded away were Nolasco, Pie and Wuertz. Considering the players he's gotten in trades, that's pretty good.

 

However, you're also right that he has a tendency to target the wrong type of player – both through trades and free agency (Miles, Izturis, etc).

[Tarver]

It's just interesting that Hendry has this "trader Jim" stigma when his southside counterpart wheels & deals just as often and usually gives up less.

 

Either way I don't think either GM deserves his job. At least we can point at the Cardinals, no reason why the Sox shouldn't be perennial preseason picks.

 

It would be pretty hard to give up less than Hendry has in trades. The list of players who have not fallen apart after leaving the Cubs is pretty small. Hendry's bad trades have usually involved acquiring the wrong player rather than giving up the wrong player.

 

Sosa, Farnsworth, CPatt, Hill, Wuertz, and Pie all had more value (either real or perceived) than what he got back.

 

At least he got value for Hawkins, but it's Sabean, so he can't get too much credit for that.

 

PR moves yes, but Jim proved he could handle those situations with the Hundley deal. What happened with the above?

[CubColtPacer]

It's just interesting that Hendry has this "trader Jim" stigma when his southside counterpart wheels & deals just as often and usually gives up less.

 

Either way I don't think either GM deserves his job. At least we can point at the Cardinals, no reason why the Sox shouldn't be perennial preseason picks.

 

It would be pretty hard to give up less than Hendry has in trades. The list of players who have not fallen apart after leaving the Cubs is pretty small. Hendry's bad trades have usually involved acquiring the wrong player rather than giving up the wrong player.

 

Sosa, Farnsworth, CPatt, Hill, Wuertz, and Pie all had more value (either real or perceived) than what he got back.

 

At least he got value for Hawkins, but it's Sabean, so he can't get too much credit for that.

 

PR moves yes, but Jim proved he could handle those situations with the Hundley deal. What happened with the above?

 

Perceived value is incredibly hard to quantify and that's especially true with damaged players. Sosa for example seemed to not have any more perceived value because the Cubs spent half the offseason looking for a deal for him. Hill ended up being traded for just cash so its hard to argue that his perceived value was higher than that (if anybody had offered anything the Cubs would have taken it). CPatt and Farnsworth were both terribly inconsistent and in Farnsworth's case the Cubs actually did get a decent return back.

 

The Wuertz trade was definitely the worst one of those listed. His only knocks on his perceived value were his frequent arm troubles and the somewhat lucky 2008. And he's certainly provided lots of actual value that the Cubs could have use.

[Tarver]

It's just interesting that Hendry has this "trader Jim" stigma when his southside counterpart wheels & deals just as often and usually gives up less.

 

Either way I don't think either GM deserves his job. At least we can point at the Cardinals, no reason why the Sox shouldn't be perennial preseason picks.

 

It would be pretty hard to give up less than Hendry has in trades. The list of players who have not fallen apart after leaving the Cubs is pretty small. Hendry's bad trades have usually involved acquiring the wrong player rather than giving up the wrong player.

 

Sosa, Farnsworth, CPatt, Hill, Wuertz, and Pie all had more value (either real or perceived) than what he got back.

 

At least he got value for Hawkins, but it's Sabean, so he can't get too much credit for that.

 

PR moves yes, but Jim proved he could handle those situations with the Hundley deal. What happened with the above?

 

Perceived value is incredibly hard to quantify and that's especially true with damaged players. Sosa for example seemed to not have any more perceived value because the Cubs spent half the offseason looking for a deal for him. Hill ended up being traded for just cash so its hard to argue that his perceived value was higher than that (if anybody had offered anything the Cubs would have taken it). CPatt and Farnsworth were both terribly inconsistent and in Farnsworth's case the Cubs actually did get a decent return back.

 

The Wuertz trade was definitely the worst one of those listed. His only knocks on his perceived value were his frequent arm troubles and the somewhat lucky 2008. And he's certainly provided lots of actual value that the Cubs could have use.

 

So you think the Braves would've traded Miner for Novoa?

[CubColtPacer]

It's just interesting that Hendry has this "trader Jim" stigma when his southside counterpart wheels & deals just as often and usually gives up less.

 

Either way I don't think either GM deserves his job. At least we can point at the Cardinals, no reason why the Sox shouldn't be perennial preseason picks.

 

It would be pretty hard to give up less than Hendry has in trades. The list of players who have not fallen apart after leaving the Cubs is pretty small. Hendry's bad trades have usually involved acquiring the wrong player rather than giving up the wrong player.

 

Sosa, Farnsworth, CPatt, Hill, Wuertz, and Pie all had more value (either real or perceived) than what he got back.

 

At least he got value for Hawkins, but it's Sabean, so he can't get too much credit for that.

 

PR moves yes, but Jim proved he could handle those situations with the Hundley deal. What happened with the above?

 

Perceived value is incredibly hard to quantify and that's especially true with damaged players. Sosa for example seemed to not have any more perceived value because the Cubs spent half the offseason looking for a deal for him. Hill ended up being traded for just cash so its hard to argue that his perceived value was higher than that (if anybody had offered anything the Cubs would have taken it). CPatt and Farnsworth were both terribly inconsistent and in Farnsworth's case the Cubs actually did get a decent return back.

 

The Wuertz trade was definitely the worst one of those listed. His only knocks on his perceived value were his frequent arm troubles and the somewhat lucky 2008. And he's certainly provided lots of actual value that the Cubs could have use.

 

So you think the Braves would've traded Miner for Novoa?

 

Farnsworth was having a ridiculously good season (helped out by a lot of luck in the HR department) at that point. His value had changed. And the Cubs did get Moore who had been the #7 prospect the year before for the Tigers. The Cubs did get a little unlucky there to miss his other career year but he was exactly what he was after the Cubs as he was with the Cubs...a relief pitcher starting to get expensive who was too inconsistent to be worth the expense.

[SouthSideRyan]

Scott Moore was a decent prospect. And Farnsworth had way more value when being traded from the Tigers than coming off a bad season with the Cubs.

[SouthSideRyan]

And Miner wasn't a stud prospect or anything

[Clem Fandango]

Scott Moore was a decent prospect. And Farnsworth had way more value when being traded from the Tigers than coming off a bad season with the Cubs.

 

I had no idea Scott Moore is only 26 years old. I thought he was at least 30 by now.

[Guest]

Is that the Moore that I've noticed getting some PT with the Orioles lately? Too lazy to look it up.

[dew1679666265]

Is that the Moore that I've noticed getting some PT with the Orioles lately? Too lazy to look it up.

 

Yep. 96 PAs this year, .611 OPS.

[Keener98]

Is that the Moore that I've noticed getting some PT with the Orioles lately? Too lazy to look it up.

 

Yep. 96 PAs this year, .611 OPS.

 

And now released

[dew1679666265]

Is that the Moore that I've noticed getting some PT with the Orioles lately? Too lazy to look it up.

 

Yep. 96 PAs this year, .611 OPS.

 

And now released

 

Hadn't heard that.

[Keener98]

Is that the Moore that I've noticed getting some PT with the Orioles lately? Too lazy to look it up.

 

Yep. 96 PAs this year, .611 OPS.

 

And now released

 

Hadn't heard that.

 

Ya he was released when they activated Brian Roberts off DL today.

[dew1679666265]

Is that the Moore that I've noticed getting some PT with the Orioles lately? Too lazy to look it up.

 

Yep. 96 PAs this year, .611 OPS.

 

And now released

 

Hadn't heard that.

 

Ya he was released when they activated Brian Roberts off DL today.

 

Ah, makes sense.

[TruffleShuffle]

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.

 

yeah but don't you remember what biggie said? mo' money, mo' problems.

[TruffleShuffle]

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

 

rowand had an ops of .905 in 2004 and then .736 in 2005. THEN they traded him. in no way did they trade him at the peak of his value - that would have been after his one fluky year. they got jim thome for him because the phillies needed to get rid of him to give ryan howard a spot.

 

and which wells are we talking about? i guess regardless of whether it's kip or david, it doesn't matter, because either one would be a terrible way to support your argument. kip wells sucked the year before they traded him, they got a lousy return and then he pitched well for two years in a pirates uniform. david wells pitched only one year for the white sox, wasn't very good and left via free agency.