Year #1-Ricketts Regime

[Benchwarmer]

I'm pretty underwhelmed by Team Ricketts at this point. I think all of us thought that this group of younger owners would hit the ground running on Day One. They would have done their homework PRIOR to officially taking over and then implement the changes immediately. What we got was the same old same old. Oh right..they moved Harry's statue and fired the promotions guy. That's the progress we got.

[inari]

Oh right because they should have done _____________ to make the 2010 Cubs a good team. Idiots.

[shnsajax]

Actually few people thought that. There were a lot of question marks on thus team to begin with and no one picked the Cubs to win anything. Money was available if this team was in it at the deadline but they were not.

[jersey cubs fan]

Oh right because they should have done _____________ to make the 2010 Cubs a good team. Idiots.

 

They couldn't have done much of anything about 2010. They could have fired Jim Hendry on day one and absolutely should have fired him by the first day of the offseason. You'd have to be an idiot to think they couldn't have done a better job in year 1.

[dew1679666265]

I'm pretty underwhelmed by Team Ricketts at this point. I think all of us thought that this group of younger owners would hit the ground running on Day One. They would have done their homework PRIOR to officially taking over and then implement the changes immediately. What we got was the same old same old. Oh right..they moved Harry's statue and fired the promotions guy. That's the progress we got.

 

Like others have said, there was simply very little the Ricketts realistically could do starting on day one. Most of the contracts on the team were unmovable - or didn't make sense to move - and firing Lou at the start of the season would have been pretty pointless. They could have fired Hendry - and I think they probably should still - but otherwise, there was very little overhauling they could do. I like what I've heard about some of Ricketts' philosophies and the hiring of the stat-guy seemed at least a good step in the right direction.

 

Keep in mind, though, that year one isn't over yet. We still have the offseason to go and it'll be interesting to see how much independence Hendry has to make moves, how much money is made available and what other changes may be made (or not made) in the front office/management. I don't think you completely evaluate year one until after the offseason (January-March of next year).

[jersey cubs fan]

Keep in mind, though, that year one isn't over yet. We still have the offseason to go and it'll be interesting to see how much independence Hendry has to make moves, how much money is made available and what other changes may be made (or not made) in the front office/management. I don't think you completely evaluate year one until after the offseason (January-March of next year).

 

That's a pretty poor excuse. It's over. He was the final bidder since early 2009 and the deal was finalized in October. Year one is over. They didn't do anything.

[tfarks]

Would have been nice to have seen more money spent in the draft. I think if that would have happened we would have a much more positive outlook, in spite of Hendry's lifetime contract.

[dew1679666265]

Keep in mind, though, that year one isn't over yet. We still have the offseason to go and it'll be interesting to see how much independence Hendry has to make moves, how much money is made available and what other changes may be made (or not made) in the front office/management. I don't think you completely evaluate year one until after the offseason (January-March of next year).

 

That's a pretty poor excuse. It's over. He was the final bidder since early 2009 and the deal was finalized in October. Year one is over. They didn't do anything.

 

I guess it was a poor excuse because it wasn't an excuse. Outside of firing Hendry there was very little they could do up until this point that would have made good sense. I disagree with not firing Hendry, but am also interested to see how the offseason plays out.

[NeifiIsMyHomeBoy]

As the Forbes article pointed out the Cubs get the least bang for their buck of any major league team. Fire Hendry and I support Ricketts. It's that simple.

[jersey cubs fan]

Keep in mind, though, that year one isn't over yet. We still have the offseason to go and it'll be interesting to see how much independence Hendry has to make moves, how much money is made available and what other changes may be made (or not made) in the front office/management. I don't think you completely evaluate year one until after the offseason (January-March of next year).

 

That's a pretty poor excuse. It's over. He was the final bidder since early 2009 and the deal was finalized in October. Year one is over. They didn't do anything.

 

I guess it was a poor excuse because it wasn't an excuse. Outside of firing Hendry there was very little they could do up until this point that would have made good sense. I disagree with not firing Hendry, but am also interested to see how the offseason plays out.

 

It's a poor excuse because you were wrong. He had an offseason and an entire season. It's been a year. Year one is over. If you want to give him a 2nd offseason fine, but don't pretend year one isn't over. And you act as though overhauling the front office is no big deal. There was little to do to save 2010, there was a hell of a lot he could have done to change how the team operates going forward. And he did not. Firing Hendry is a huge move, bigger than any single realistic personel move that could be made.

[dew1679666265]

And you act as though overhauling the front office is no big deal. There was little to do to save 2010, there was a hell of a lot he could have done to change how the team operates going forward. And he did not. Firing Hendry is a huge move, bigger than any single realistic personel move that could be made.

 

Overhauling the front office is a big deal and I've already said he should have fired Hendry. However, I don't think we automatically become 100x better without Hendry nor do I think that's a cure-all. It would be a major move in and of itself, but the more important move would be who Ricketts replaced him with.

 

He's made some minor moves that I perceive to be upgrades and they make me feel a little better about the type of GM he'd choose to replace Hendry. However, firing Hendry is not a move that will automatically fix all ills in this franchise.

[Magnetic Curses]

ricketts needs to fire hendry to make a statement about which direction the franchise is headed.

 

if he's serious about embracing the sabr movement, he needs to bring in a young, outsider GM with a very structured and goal-oriented approach to taking this team to where a large market ballclub should be and within 5 years, and keeping them there.

 

i've had enough of the traditional home remedies, it's time this team got serious about the science behind the game and hired a real doctor to fix its problems.

[Sammy Sofa]

Not gonna happen.

[jersey cubs fan]

And you act as though overhauling the front office is no big deal. There was little to do to save 2010, there was a hell of a lot he could have done to change how the team operates going forward. And he did not. Firing Hendry is a huge move, bigger than any single realistic personel move that could be made.

 

Overhauling the front office is a big deal and I've already said he should have fired Hendry. However, I don't think we automatically become 100x better without Hendry nor do I think that's a cure-all. It would be a major move in and of itself, but the more important move would be who Ricketts replaced him with.

 

He's made some minor moves that I perceive to be upgrades and they make me feel a little better about the type of GM he'd choose to replace Hendry. However, firing Hendry is not a move that will automatically fix all ills in this franchise.

 

I didn't say we automatically become 100x better without Hendry and I'm not sure why you even suggest I did. It's a huge move he could have made in the year he's owned the team. That's just a fact you completely glossed over.

[jersey cubs fan]

Not gonna happen.

 

If it was going to, I think it would have been either day 1, the middle of this past season, or the day after the season ended. Now that all those times have passed it seems he's willing to stick with what Hendry does and giving passing interest to a more statistical approach by hiring what looked to me to be a second rate stat guy to help out.

[dew1679666265]

ricketts needs to fire hendry to make a statement about which direction the franchise is headed.

 

if he's serious about embracing the sabr movement, he needs to bring in a young, outsider GM with a very structured and goal-oriented approach to taking this team to where a large market ballclub should be and within 5 years, and keeping them there.

 

i've had enough of the traditional home remedies, it's time this team got serious about the science behind the game and hired a real doctor to fix its problems.

 

I'd be really interested in that as well, but as Mojo said, it's not likely to happen. There aren't a bunch of Theo Epsteins out there and the ones who were compared to him (Dayton Moore especially) haven't turned out to be nearly as good. Though Ricketts saying he wanted to model us after the Red Sox gives me some hope.

[dew1679666265]

I didn't say we automatically become 100x better without Hendry and I'm not sure why you even suggest I did. It's a huge move he could have made in the year he's owned the team. That's just a fact you completely glossed over.

 

Your focus is entirely on firing Hendry as if that singular move would make this team significantly better. Firing Hendry in and of itself is not that important a move for this franchise. The key is to make an upgrade at the GM spot and other moves that Ricketts makes before firing Hendry give us a better idea whether or not he'd make a good hire.

 

I'm not opposed to making a move at all, but I'm also not sure enough about Ricketts' philosophy to determine whether or not he'd make a good replacement hire. That's why my sole focus is not on firing Hendry and more on figuring out how Ricketts plans on making this club better.

[jersey cubs fan]

I didn't say we automatically become 100x better without Hendry and I'm not sure why you even suggest I did. It's a huge move he could have made in the year he's owned the team. That's just a fact you completely glossed over.

 

Your focus is entirely on firing Hendry as if that singular move would make this team significantly better. Firing Hendry in and of itself is not that important a move for this franchise. The key is to make an upgrade at the GM spot and other moves that Ricketts makes before firing Hendry give us a better idea whether or not he'd make a good hire.

 

I'm not opposed to making a move at all, but I'm also not sure enough about Ricketts' philosophy to determine whether or not he'd make a good replacement hire. That's why my sole focus is not on firing Hendry and more on figuring out how Ricketts plans on making this club better.

 

The focus is on replacing Hendry. He's the biggest problem. The only real significant move Ricketts can make is replacing Hendry. He's had a year and he didn't do it. I'm not sure why you are pretending he hasn't had a year and that there's all this other stuff he could still do to improve the team that isn't centered on replacing Hendry.

[shnsajax]

Outside of replacing Hendry what could he have really done this season.

[jersey cubs fan]

Outside of replacing Hendry what could he have really done this season.

 

Outside of the biggest move he could make there's probably only a couple other things he could have done, like invest in more international free agents and drafts targets.

[Magnetic Curses]

everyone's asking what ricketts could have done, he's had a year to do something and he hasn't changed anything except jettisoning all the payroll he could. which isn't a bad thing, but he's made no positive moves, like acquiring players or impact personnel that would change the chaotic culture of this team.

[Exile on Waveland]

Firing Hendry may not be a panacea, but it least would have been symbolic. He's a huge problem and replacing him with a more progressive general manager would have at least been a sign that Ricketts is serious about overhauling management and moving in a different, better direction. He didn't, which, in itself, is a symbol. A bad symbol. I'm thinking Swastika.*

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Yeah, yeah, I violated Godwin's Law.

[Guest]

Outside of firing Hendry there was very little they could do up until this point that would have made good sense. I disagree with not firing Hendry, but am also interested to see how the offseason plays out.

Building from within:

- Much bigger draft budget for overslot players (and better first round pick?).

- Signing higher quality on the international market.

- Replacing Fleita.

 

Top Level:

- Some additional personnel moves to either clear salary to rebuild or potentially take on salary to position for '11.

- But pick a firm direction instead of a middle path.

- Instead of hiring what appears to be a situational stat guy, find someone like Tango who is at the forefront of in-depth analysis

- How Zambrano was handled

 

There's a lot more, but that's a quick list of things that could have been handled better.

[Magnetic Curses]

tango for gm. i have no idea what he's talking about most of the time, but he sure sounds like he knows what he's talking about.

[scarey]

Maybe I'm crazy, but if I had just invested in a baseball franchise I think I would like to get my feelers out there before making a big splash.

 

You guys are looking at this strictly from the perspective of getting rid of Hendry. I know you understand that someone has to replace him, but do you understand that Ricketts probably doesn't want to be doing another search for a GM in 18 months?

 

Sure, Ricketts could just ask the baseball people in the Cubs organization (which consequently nobody on this site trusts the opinion of the Cubs "baseball people") and find out who they think would be a stat driven GM in terms of personel decisions. That's not it though, that GM needs to know how to conduct themselves publicly, be able to juggle multiple organizational goals outside of personel decisions, and I'm certain they want this person to have some type of idea or more likely experience in running an organization of some type. Remember, this isn't just picking the best player. This is running a freaking organization.

 

So, isn't it within the realm of possibility that Ricketts wants to get to know people around the league? Get to know other organizations and who possible stand-out candidates would be? This is a new business for him. He already is paying a GM and will have to continue paying him whether he fires him or not. So, why let him run the organization, limit any negative recourse (I think we can agree that there hasn't really been much negativity from Hendry's moves since Ricketts took over, right?), and get to know the baseball business. Then, when he's ready he can make a smart business decision instead of a snap decision to "make a statement".

 

That sounds pretty reasonable to me. Sure, it's also possible that he just feels Hendry has done enough to keep his job instead. I personally feel it could be a combination of the former and later. My point here is maybe we should wait and see where Ricketts goes with this before getting upset about a "passing interest to a more statistical approach" after year one.

 

One year may seem like a long time as a fan, but it really isn't very long at all in terms of reaching organizational goals.