By all means Mr. Rosenthal, lets give Hendry an extension.

[Little Slide Rooter]

•On Saturday Rosenthal talked about the "consensus in the game is that the Cubs need to show progress for GM Jim Hendry to keep his job beyond this season." Rosenthal, however, feels that the Ricketts family should extend Hendry, who in his estimation has built a team that is positioned to contend for the next several years. The club may have over $60MM to spend in 2012 salaries during the offseason, so the Cubs' GM, whoever it is, should be a major player in the free agent market.

[daske17]

If Theo Epstein or Brian Cashman produced the same record as Hendry, they would have been gone years ago.

 

But somehow, it's okay for the Cubs who haven't been near the World Series since Franklin Roosevelt nor won a World Series since Franklin's older cousin Teddy was in office, to retain Hendry; the owner of one playoff series victory in almost 10 years.

 

Yep, makes perfect sense to me.

[SouthSideRyan]

Whoever our GM is on November 1st better be our GM for the offseason. I have no desire to lose out on Pujols thanks to our front office being in flux.

[UMFan83]

I can think of a lot of teams that could contend very soon with $60 million to spend.

 

The fact that Hendry might have $60 mil to spend has almost nothing to do with him.

[Sammy Sofa]

$60 million to spend on FA? That's quacktastic.

[UMFan83]

$60 million to spend on FA? That's quacktastic.

 

Truthfully, for Hendry that's barely enough for Pujols and Grant Balfour or relief pitcher of similar ilk

[erik316wttn]

I can't wait to see what mediocre middle reliever or middle infielder Hendry grossly overpays this offseason.

[KingCubsFan]

I can't wait to see what mediocre middle reliever or middle infielder Hendry grossly overpays this offseason.

Middle infield and relief have been our only real strengths this year. My guess is that he'll overpay for something lefthanded, either a pitcher or hitter.

[CubColtPacer]

I agree completely with the sentiment around the league that Hendry has been given enough time and has no room to complain if he gets fired at the end of the season.

 

I also agree with Rosenthal that the Cubs have done a good job the last couple of years with their new philosophy. If that is primarily from Ricketts or Hendry, I do not know. Their attempt to win now didn't work. The last 1 1/2 to 2 years they've been working to stay competitive while making room for a young core to develop. They've avoided long-term contracts and have been working hard to increase their flexibility. They've opened up spots for young players in a way they haven't done in a long, long time. They are slowly transitioning from a team who relies on FA to a team who relies on their farm. This is a philosopy that fits Hendry's strengths much better than the previous one did so I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs did end up winning under Hendry if he stayed on. But I can certainly understand why people want a fresh start and wouldn't be upset if Hendry was fired tomorrow.

[BeerHere]

I agree completely with the sentiment around the league that Hendry has been given enough time and has no room to complain if he gets fired at the end of the season.

 

I also agree with Rosenthal that the Cubs have done a good job the last couple of years with their new philosophy. If that is primarily from Ricketts or Hendry, I do not know. Their attempt to win now didn't work. The last 1 1/2 to 2 years they've been working to stay competitive while making room for a young core to develop. They've avoided long-term contracts and have been working hard to increase their flexibility. They've opened up spots for young players in a way they haven't done in a long, long time. They are slowly transitioning from a team who relies on FA to a team who relies on their farm. This is a philosopy that fits Hendry's strengths much better than the previous one did so I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs did end up winning under Hendry if he stayed on. But I can certainly understand why people want a fresh start and wouldn't be upset if Hendry was fired tomorrow.

Well said. I couldn't agree more.

[NOLA]

I agree completely with the sentiment around the league that Hendry has been given enough time and has no room to complain if he gets fired at the end of the season.

 

I also agree with Rosenthal that the Cubs have done a good job the last couple of years with their new philosophy. If that is primarily from Ricketts or Hendry, I do not know. Their attempt to win now didn't work. The last 1 1/2 to 2 years they've been working to stay competitive while making room for a young core to develop. They've avoided long-term contracts and have been working hard to increase their flexibility. They've opened up spots for young players in a way they haven't done in a long, long time. They are slowly transitioning from a team who relies on FA to a team who relies on their farm. This is a philosopy that fits Hendry's strengths much better than the previous one did so I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs did end up winning under Hendry if he stayed on. But I can certainly understand why people want a fresh start and wouldn't be upset if Hendry was fired tomorrow.

Well said. I couldn't agree more.

 

Thirded.

[jersey cubs fan]

I agree completely with the sentiment around the league that Hendry has been given enough time and has no room to complain if he gets fired at the end of the season.

 

I also agree with Rosenthal that the Cubs have done a good job the last couple of years with their new philosophy. If that is primarily from Ricketts or Hendry, I do not know. Their attempt to win now didn't work. The last 1 1/2 to 2 years they've been working to stay competitive while making room for a young core to develop. They've avoided long-term contracts and have been working hard to increase their flexibility. They've opened up spots for young players in a way they haven't done in a long, long time. They are slowly transitioning from a team who relies on FA to a team who relies on their farm. This is a philosopy that fits Hendry's strengths much better than the previous one did so I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs did end up winning under Hendry if he stayed on. But I can certainly understand why people want a fresh start and wouldn't be upset if Hendry was fired tomorrow.

 

I don't really understand how you can say the things you are saying. They have not been competitive. They've avoided long-term contracts because Hendry put them in such a crap position and there was no money available, not out of strategy. They've opened up spots for young players in a way they haven't done in a long, long time? What? Castro forced them to play him and in a way Colvin did last spring, sort of. They cleared the way for Cashner by dumping Silva, but that's the only clearing they've done, and it was a no brainer of a move. The change is Castro and Soto are something they never had or never produced when Hendry was in charge of that development.

 

Jim Hendry is a piss poor GM. He's been given uprecedented opportunities to produce a winner in Wrigley and he's struggled to compete with the Florida Marlins when it comes to what matters most, wins. There is no mythological philosophy that better fits Jim Hendry than the philosophy of the guy who lucked into a position and was signed to extensions twice by outgoing superiors. He's done a terrible job and it would be nothing short of idiotic to think he will suddenly learn how to do a better job.

[imb]

i'm holding my opinion until jeffh weighs in

[BigbadB1679666149]

I would like to see a new GM spending any available money this offseason, and I'd like to see that new GM get comfortable at the position before being put in the position of spending that money.

 

Hendry has had enough chances to produce a winner. I'd like him gone now, but that's probably not realistic. If they are sellers in July, it's time to start hunting for a replacement.

[Ballgame64]

On one hand, Hendry has had more success with the Cubs than any GM I can remember. And while that doesn't mean that much given the futility of the Cubs, he has managed to lift expectations of the fans. On the other hand, Hendry has had a better opportunity financially than previous Cubs GMs and has failed to "get good and stay good" (I think that was his line). For me, anything short of the playoffs and Jimbo is gone. I'd say anything short of a championship, but that is probably too harsh given expectations at the start of the year.

 

During his time, the team has had one real good year offensively and that was 2008, otherwise it has been the same crap every year. Although I am not as much into stats as others, Hendry scoffs at them. The 2008 team was very patient, had a terrific on base percentage and enough power to make pitchers pay. Since then, the team has fallen back to a typical Hendry team - little patience and a hard time scoring runs consistently if they are not hitting the ball out of the park

[Sammy Sofa]

It's odd how people often talk about the 2008 team like it was made up of a drastically different offensive lineup when compared to 2007 or 2009. It's not like Hendry succeeded in "making" a new good team that year; it was mostly the same team from 2007 and 2009 and all of the key offensive players happened to kick ass.

[TruffleShuffle]

They've avoided long-term contracts because Hendry put them in such a crap position and there was no money available, not out of strategy.

 

yeah this i agree with... the payroll was $134M in 2009, $144M in 2010 and is $134M this year. the cubs are at about the upper limits of their payroll so it's not like they're just saving big coin and turning the club over to the promising young kids. the cubs haven't been able to spend much money the past 2-3 years because they're overloaded with large contracts.

[UMFan83]

I don't think it's Hendrys fault that he spent so much money. I believe the Trib told him to up the payroll to get a winner however possible. But it's definitely his fault who he spent the money on, with no long term plan or strategy. It should have been blatantly obvious as far back as 2007 that the 2010-2012 years were likely to field mediocre teams. But Hendry was trying to save his job, so f the future right? The worst contract by far for the Cubs is the Soriano contract, and the rumors say his hands are clean on that.

 

Other bad contracts....

-Badley/Silva (his fault given the choices out there and the needs we had this is a inexcusable failure)

-Zambrano (definitely gave him way too many years for a pitcher who at the point was proven to be a level short of elite....everyone let that slide in 2008 when we were winning 97 games but now its awful)

-Fukudome (misjudged his ability to transition his game to US, but then again a lot of us did. I don't remember a single dissenter when we signed him)

-Dempster (pretty damn inexcusable to give a pitcher his age that much money after 1 great season...especially with Z, Lilly, Harden already on the team at the time)

-Grablow (what the hell was he thinking? Seriously. I would pay money to hear him explain his way out of that one)

 

The worst thing about all those contracts (and others)....they are all backloaded and we are paying for it now.

-Soriano is making $9 mil a year more than he made the first year of his deal (07)

-Zambrano is making $~3 million a year more than he made in 08

-Ramirez is making $7.75 million a year more than the first year of his extension (07)

-Fukudome has gotten a $7.5 million raise since the first year on the Cubs

-Dempster's deal has gone up $5.5 million since his first year in 09

-Pena is a 1 year deal paid over 2 years

-Marlon Byrd is making $2.5 million more than he made last year and will make another $1 million next year

-John [expletive] Grabow got a $2.1 million raise after that disaster of a season last year.

-Marmol will make $3.2 mil this year, and $9.8 million in 2 years (but this one is at least arby raises)

-Lilly's contract paid him $5 million in 07 and $12 million last year, a $7 million raise.

 

All in all (excluding Marmol, Pena and Lilly) that's $37.35 in raises from the first year of their deals (all signed between 07-09) to now. How can Hendry get away with this short sighted general managing? Does Tom Ricketts want to know why only 25k are attending games this year? Hendry is a big reason why.

 

Hendry has done a few nice things from time to time. I can't deny that. But what I listed above are fatal errors that demand immediate termination. I will be sick to my stomach if Hendry is in charge of building the next incarnation of the Cubs. Please don't let this happen.

[SouthSideRyan]

Zambrano's contract is not awful, and Dempster's is pretty good.

 

And backloading is smart.

[Sammy Sofa]

Zambrano's contract is not awful, and Dempster's is pretty good.

 

And backloading is smart.

 

Yup.

 

And really, we're seeing the backloading mostly come to a head now. What gangbusters FA did these contracts keep the Cubs from signing in this offseason or the last? Sure, I'd like to see a GM that can better construct team and shell out the money more wisely, but let's not overstate things like Hendry crippled the team from taking part in some amazing FA classes between 2009 and 2011.

Edited May 10, 2011 by Sammy Sofa

[imb]

The backloading was a pretty all-or-nothing deal in a lot of cases, wasn't it. It was the only way to fit the total money in at the time.

[Shilzzz]

I agree completely with the sentiment around the league that Hendry has been given enough time and has no room to complain if he gets fired at the end of the season.

 

I also agree with Rosenthal that the Cubs have done a good job the last couple of years with their new philosophy. If that is primarily from Ricketts or Hendry, I do not know. Their attempt to win now didn't work. The last 1 1/2 to 2 years they've been working to stay competitive while making room for a young core to develop. They've avoided long-term contracts and have been working hard to increase their flexibility. They've opened up spots for young players in a way they haven't done in a long, long time. They are slowly transitioning from a team who relies on FA to a team who relies on their farm. This is a philosopy that fits Hendry's strengths much better than the previous one did so I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs did end up winning under Hendry if he stayed on. But I can certainly understand why people want a fresh start and wouldn't be upset if Hendry was fired tomorrow.

 

I don't really understand how you can say the things you are saying. They have not been competitive. They've avoided long-term contracts because Hendry put them in such a crap position and there was no money available, not out of strategy. They've opened up spots for young players in a way they haven't done in a long, long time? What? Castro forced them to play him and in a way Colvin did last spring, sort of. They cleared the way for Cashner by dumping Silva, but that's the only clearing they've done, and it was a no brainer of a move. The change is Castro and Soto are something they never had or never produced when Hendry was in charge of that development.

 

Jim Hendry is a piss poor GM. He's been given uprecedented opportunities to produce a winner in Wrigley and he's struggled to compete with the Florida Marlins when it comes to what matters most, wins. There is no mythological philosophy that better fits Jim Hendry than the philosophy of the guy who lucked into a position and was signed to extensions twice by outgoing superiors. He's done a terrible job and it would be nothing short of idiotic to think he will suddenly learn how to do a better job.

 

and even there, i thought it was more quade than hendry.

[Tarver]

How many years have we had this same Hendry argument?

 

Should no one be held accountable for failure? He should've been gone years ago, let's not extend our failure.

[BeerHere]

I agree completely with the sentiment around the league that Hendry has been given enough time and has no room to complain if he gets fired at the end of the season.

 

I also agree with Rosenthal that the Cubs have done a good job the last couple of years with their new philosophy. If that is primarily from Ricketts or Hendry, I do not know. Their attempt to win now didn't work. The last 1 1/2 to 2 years they've been working to stay competitive while making room for a young core to develop. They've avoided long-term contracts and have been working hard to increase their flexibility. They've opened up spots for young players in a way they haven't done in a long, long time. They are slowly transitioning from a team who relies on FA to a team who relies on their farm. This is a philosopy that fits Hendry's strengths much better than the previous one did so I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs did end up winning under Hendry if he stayed on. But I can certainly understand why people want a fresh start and wouldn't be upset if Hendry was fired tomorrow.

 

I don't really understand how you can say the things you are saying. They have not been competitive. They've avoided long-term contracts because Hendry put them in such a crap position and there was no money available, not out of strategy. They've opened up spots for young players in a way they haven't done in a long, long time? What? Castro forced them to play him and in a way Colvin did last spring, sort of. They cleared the way for Cashner by dumping Silva, but that's the only clearing they've done, and it was a no brainer of a move. The change is Castro and Soto are something they never had or never produced when Hendry was in charge of that development.

 

Jim Hendry is a piss poor GM. He's been given uprecedented opportunities to produce a winner in Wrigley and he's struggled to compete with the Florida Marlins when it comes to what matters most, wins. There is no mythological philosophy that better fits Jim Hendry than the philosophy of the guy who lucked into a position and was signed to extensions twice by outgoing superiors. He's done a terrible job and it would be nothing short of idiotic to think he will suddenly learn how to do a better job.

I tend to think that the new organization philosophy has more to do with new ownership than Hendry. When Ricketts took over he specifically mentioned using the farm system to develop from within rather than signing FA's. Soto, Colvin, Castro, Cashner, Mateo, Wells, Samardzija, Marmol and to some extent Guzman were examples of developed players that were given a shot in the last couple years or so. I completely agree that Hendry is responsible for the financial state though and as a result he should probably go considering the quality of the teams put out under his watch. Ideally I would like to see an owner and a GM that have the same vision and willingness to spend on the draft and firmly believe in developing from within and augmenting with FA's where needed. The transition to this model has begun but given the long-term contracts it will take a couple years at a minimum.

 

This argument is repeated every single year it seems.

[Sammy Sofa]

How many years have we had this same Hendry argument?

 

What "Hendry argument?"