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

[Men in Blue]

Its pretty telling STL can replace one of the top 3 starters in the NL and barely skip a beat. The Cubs bring up Coleman.

 

http://drodd.com/images/jim-hendry.jpg

 

"You and your facts".

[SouthSideRyan]

We're a hilarious 3-17 in games started by fill-in starting pitchers. It's not a stretch to say we'd be 500 with perfect healthy.

So the Cubs are 22-22 (not including one start from Wells/Cashner)) basically when Zambrano, Garza, and Dempster throw? Color me skeptical they'd maintain that ratio.

 

Wells has been back for 2 weeks.

[SouthSideRyan]

You know it's possible to make a post without including an image in it

[Men in Blue]

You know it's possible to make a post without including an image in it

 

C'mon! What fun would that be and is there anything better than an image of our clueless leader?

[SouthSideRyan]

Its pretty telling STL can replace one of the top 3 starters in the NL and barely skip a beat. The Cubs bring up Coleman.

 

That has nothing to do with what you said.

[UK1679666180]

Its pretty telling STL can replace one of the top 3 starters in the NL and barely skip a beat. The Cubs bring up Coleman.

 

That has nothing to do with what you said.

 

In terms of FO evaluation it does. The cubs go from an avg pitcher and an unproven yet talented #5 to Coleman and Davis. Yet STL replaces Wainwright with McClellan and pitches like a top of the rotation starter.

[SouthSideRyan]

So you're saying the Cardinals have a better front office than us.

 

ETA: And McClellan certainly hasn't pitched like a frontline starter.

[UK1679666180]

We're a hilarious 3-17 in games started by fill-in starting pitchers. It's not a stretch to say we'd be 500 with perfect healthy.

So the Cubs are 22-22 (not including one start from Wells/Cashner)) basically when Zambrano, Garza, and Dempster throw? Color me skeptical they'd maintain that ratio.

 

Wells has been back for 2 weeks.

Eh, shows how much I've been watching this horseshit team.

 

Still, the 15-20 starts missed by Cashner/Wells would not put this team at .5oo.

[SouthSideRyan]

We're a hilarious 3-17 in games started by fill-in starting pitchers. It's not a stretch to say we'd be 500 with perfect healthy.

So the Cubs are 22-22 (not including one start from Wells/Cashner)) basically when Zambrano, Garza, and Dempster throw? Color me skeptical they'd maintain that ratio.

 

Wells has been back for 2 weeks.

Eh, shows how much I've been watching this [expletive] team.

 

Still, the 15-20 starts missed by Cashner/Wells would not put this team at .5oo.

 

Garza missed a few as well. Davis and Russell have been so historically awful, that it wouldn't shock me. They literally have not won a game started by those 2 goofs.

[CubColtPacer]

Its pretty telling STL can replace one of the top 3 starters in the NL and barely skip a beat. The Cubs bring up Coleman.

 

That has nothing to do with what you said.

 

In terms of FO evaluation it does. The cubs go from an avg pitcher and an unproven yet talented #5 to Coleman and Davis. Yet STL replaces Wainwright with McClellan and pitches like a top of the rotation starter.

 

McClellan hasn't been that good. The ERA still looks pretty good (but he still only has an ERA+ of 93) and the peripherals are below average. Not even close to top of the rotation at least in this scoring environment.

 

The Cardinals have been good because their offense increased by 30 OPS points in a year where a normal offense was decreasing by 20 points. That has moved them up the rankings offensively significantly.

[UK1679666180]

So you're saying the Cardinals have a better front office than us.

 

ETA: And McClellan certainly hasn't pitched like a frontline starter.

 

Better FO and coaching staff, Berkman vs Pena is just a small sample.

 

McClellan. Plus FB and slider, 1st go round as a starter. Hitters haven't squared up.

[Guest]

We're a hilarious 3-17 in games started by fill-in starting pitchers. It's not a stretch to say we'd be 500 with perfect healthy.

So the Cubs are 22-22 (not including one start from Wells/Cashner)) basically when Zambrano, Garza, and Dempster throw? Color me skeptical they'd maintain that ratio.

 

Wait, given that the Cubs are .500 when their 3 best starters pitch, your assertion is that number has nowhere to go but down?

[CubColtPacer]

We're a hilarious 3-17 in games started by fill-in starting pitchers. It's not a stretch to say we'd be 500 with perfect healthy.

So the Cubs are 22-22 (not including one start from Wells/Cashner)) basically when Zambrano, Garza, and Dempster throw? Color me skeptical they'd maintain that ratio.

 

Wait, given that the Cubs are .500 when their 3 best starters pitch, your assertion is that number has nowhere to go but down?

 

No, he's saying that he's skeptical that the Cubs would also be .500 when Wells and Cashner pitched if they have only been .500 when the top 3 pitched this year. And while that might be true, with how bad collectively the top 3 have been the bar that Wells and Cashner would have to make would have been significantly lower and very reachable.

[UK1679666180]

After looking at his numbers more, he has been more middle of the pack, his ERA has dropped lately. Still ignoring him as a replacement compared to Coleman would still be painfully obvious even for a blind man.

[SouthSideRyan]

So you're saying the Cardinals have a better front office than us.

 

ETA: And McClellan certainly hasn't pitched like a frontline starter.

 

Better FO and coaching staff, Berkman vs Pena is just a small sample.

 

McClellan. Plus FB and slider, 1st go round as a starter. Hitters haven't squared up.

 

I was being sarcastic with regards to the front offices.

 

And the Cardinals didn't have a choice between Berkman and Pena. As bad as Berkman is in the OF, he's at least played it before.

[SouthSideRyan]

After looking at his numbers more, he has been more middle of the pack, his ERA has dropped lately. Still ignoring him as a replacement compared to Coleman would still be painfully obvious even for a blind man.

 

Well yeah, cause Casey Coleman sucks.

[Guest]

When Wainwright went down in ST, McClellan was St. Louis' 6th SP option. At that time, Coleman was roughly the 9th option, maybe 10th. The team had Silva throw a fit, Looper and Wellemeyer quit, and Wells and Cashner hit the DL in the span of a week.

[Banghart]

Hendry also traded a much better option as the 6th starter in Tom Gorzellany away to save cash. The Cubs were hurt by bad luck in a lot of ways, but they certainly made several decisions to made the starting pitching thin as well.

[Backtobanks]

All this talk of pitching is wonderful, but let's not forget that you have half of the team's 8 other positions manned by minor leaguers. Barney, Castro, and Fukudome are the only regular position players to not miss significant time to injuries.

[SouthSideRyan]

All this talk of pitching is wonderful, but let's not forget that you have half of the team's 8 other positions manned by minor leaguers. Barney, Castro, and Fukudome are the only regular position players to not miss significant time to injuries.

 

Pena and Ramirez

[XZero771679666304]

All this talk of pitching is wonderful, but let's not forget that you have half of the team's 8 other positions manned by minor leaguers. Barney, Castro, and Fukudome are the only regular position players to not miss significant time to injuries.

 

Pena and Ramirez

 

Maybe he thinks 3-4 games constitutes "significant time".

[Banghart]

All this talk of pitching is wonderful, but let's not forget that you have half of the team's 8 other positions manned by minor leaguers. Barney, Castro, and Fukudome are the only regular position players to not miss significant time to injuries.

Aramis Ramirez and Carlos Pena really haven't missed that much time at any point this season either, and lets be honest this team was in free fall before the injuries to the outfield started to pile up. Look no one can say that the injuries haven't affected this team. I think most of us were of the opinion that this was a low 80 win team. I understand the dynamics that lead to this situation, but I don't think that completely excuses the front office from blame for the team being this bad.

[Tracer Bullet]

Again...how much of that success was really attributable to Beane and how much to the rest of the guys that were there?

 

You are asking an unanswerable, and meaningless question. Beane was in charge. He's been in charge since 1997 and his results blow away Jim Hendry's results.

 

Fuson and Ricciardi were gone for a long time. Oakland won a hell of a lot of games long after they left, at a better rate than the Cubs.

 

How long does Beane get to be mired in mediocrity before we start to question if maybe the landscape has changed to the point where he's not as effective as he once was? He's at a .468 winning percentage the last 5 years and his roster and farm system don't look to be on the brink of breaking out of that funk. It might be that he would be just as effective as he used to be if he had the Cubs' resources, but it's a more than fair question to ask.

 

I have mixed feeling on Beane. it could be that he realizes he has to gamble to make his payroll competitive and when too many of those gambles crap out, you're left with a pretty bad team. I think I'd still prefer to give DePo a shot, but I like ssr's idea of having Beane as president.

[Outshined_One]

Hendry also traded a much better option as the 6th starter in Tom Gorzellany away to save cash. The Cubs were hurt by bad luck in a lot of ways, but they certainly made several decisions to made the starting pitching thin as well.

 

Gorz hasn't exactly been stellar this season for the Nats. I wasn't a huge fan of the move, but this team would not be a whole lot better had he been one of the guys to step up when Wells and Cashner went down.

 

Something else I have to wonder is whether Mark Riggins has been much good as a pitching coach, especially compared to Larry Rothschild. While Dave Duncan has done a spectacular job with the Cardinals, Larry Rothschild also did an excellent job with developing and coaching pitchers for the Cubs. Maybe it's the hands Rothschild and Riggins were respectively dealt, but it seems like Riggins has been a downgrade from Rothschild.

[Banghart]

Gorz hasn't exactly been stellar this season for the Nats. I wasn't a huge fan of the move, but this team would not be a whole lot better had he been one of the guys to step up when Wells and Cashner went down.

 

Something else I have to wonder is whether Mark Riggins has been much good as a pitching coach, especially compared to Larry Rothschild. While Dave Duncan has done a spectacular job with the Cardinals, Larry Rothschild also did an excellent job with developing and coaching pitchers for the Cubs. Maybe it's the hands Rothschild and Riggins were respectively dealt, but it seems like Riggins has been a downgrade from Rothschild.

Gorz hasn't been stellar, and is hurt now as well. However, we have been getting terrible production from Coleman, Davis, and Lopez. Certainly Gorzellany would not have meant this team would be in the playoff picture, but it is an example of how Jim Hendry made himself thin at the positon with a guy that would have been a useful swing guy or someone to stash in AAA.

 

As far as Riggins to Rothschild, it is an interesting question and unforunately I am not sure it is answerable. As respected as Rothschild is I would have to imagine it was a downgrade to Riggins, but how much that has affected the team I don't think we can know.