What is Ricketts Wating For?

[Guest]

Because the vast majority of the time the interim manager is someone from the current FO, so firing "the lot of them" in the middle of the season seems pretty dense unless they already a replacement FO lined up.

 

Explain how firing Hendry after this season means Ricketts is "stupid."

I've already done that on numerous occasions only to get some flippant response, I'll not waste my time.

[Sammy Sofa]

Because the vast majority of the time the interim manager is someone from the current FO, so firing "the lot of them" in the middle of the season seems pretty dense unless they already a replacement FO lined up.

 

Explain how firing Hendry after this season means Ricketts is "stupid."

I've already done that on numerous occasions only to get some flippant response, I'll not waste my time.

 

How are dew and XZero's responses "flippant?" Why is firing a GM in October instead of July stupid? Who do you expect to man the FO is you want everyone fired now? That seems like a pretty big sticking point.

[Guest]

Because the vast majority of the time the interim manager is someone from the current FO, so firing "the lot of them" in the middle of the season seems pretty dense unless they already a replacement FO lined up.

 

Explain how firing Hendry after this season means Ricketts is "stupid."

I've already done that on numerous occasions only to get some flippant response, I'll not waste my time.

 

How are dew and XZero's responses "flippant?" Why is firing a GM in October instead of July stupid? Who do you expect to man the FO is you want everyone fired now? That seems like a pretty big sticking point.

It's you to whom I was referring.

 

If the next person is a caretaker until Ricketts get's his person, what does it matter who that person is? Is Randy Bush (or anyone else) going to go bonkers and trade Castro for Beltran? And without Ricketts' permission?

 

Since I've already began, firing Hendry now moves the process forward faster. Faster is better, again, IF he intends to get rid of Hendry. If he knows he's going to get rid of Hendry, he obviously doesn't think he's the right person for the job. Why let him make trades and do other things when he doesn't think he's the right person for the job? It's really freaking stupid.

[TruffleShuffle]

Since I've already began, firing Hendry now moves the process forward faster. Faster is better, again, IF he intends to get rid of Hendry. If he knows he's going to get rid of Hendry, he obviously doesn't think he's the right person for the job. Why let him make trades and do other things when he doesn't think he's the right person for the job? It's really freaking stupid.

 

isn't firing hendry for some place-holder from another organization (and who is really going to leave a job with another organization to be a 3-month GM who isn't allowed to do anything?) also really freaking stupid?

[Guest]

Since I've already began, firing Hendry now moves the process forward faster. Faster is better, again, IF he intends to get rid of Hendry. If he knows he's going to get rid of Hendry, he obviously doesn't think he's the right person for the job. Why let him make trades and do other things when he doesn't think he's the right person for the job? It's really freaking stupid.

 

isn't firing hendry for some place-holder from another organization (and who is really going to leave a job with another organization to be a 3-month GM who isn't allowed to do anything?) also really freaking stupid?

Hire some lifer like Torre or Bobby Cox to be the interm GM and have that person help Ricketts hire the new guy. It's not rocket science.

 

I don't need to know that Torre is already employed by MLB, he's an example of someone who could do it.

 

He doesn't have to fire the lot of them, I was trying to make a point that it doesn't matter who is the placeholder.

[seanhopper]

Since I've already began, firing Hendry now moves the process forward faster. Faster is better, again, IF he intends to get rid of Hendry. If he knows he's going to get rid of Hendry, he obviously doesn't think he's the right person for the job. Why let him make trades and do other things when he doesn't think he's the right person for the job? It's really freaking stupid.

 

isn't firing hendry for some place-holder from another organization (and who is really going to leave a job with another organization to be a 3-month GM who isn't allowed to do anything?) also really freaking stupid?

 

I believe the right approach for the Ricketts would be to hire a baseball man as president of the organization ASAP --during the season possibly. This person will be responsible for evaluating the entire staff and determining (at seasons end) who stays, who goes and the direction of the organization. Not much good will come from firing Hendry at this time and the only reason not to hire a president during the season is if the Ricketts believe that a current GM (i.e. Andrew Friedman) is the best choice for a role as president.

I had the opportunity to speak with one of the other groups that was vying to purchase the team and it was clear from my discussions with them that one of the first things they were going to do was bring in an experienced "baseball man" to help run the team. I really wish the Ricketts had. I hate to say it, but the family appears to be in over their head. This next few months will determine if they have learned from their mistakes.

[Sammy Sofa]

Since I've already began, firing Hendry now moves the process forward faster. Faster is better, again, IF he intends to get rid of Hendry. If he knows he's going to get rid of Hendry, he obviously doesn't think he's the right person for the job. Why let him make trades and do other things when he doesn't think he's the right person for the job? It's really freaking stupid.

 

isn't firing hendry for some place-holder from another organization (and who is really going to leave a job with another organization to be a 3-month GM who isn't allowed to do anything?) also really freaking stupid?

Hire some lifer like Torre or Bobby Cox to be the interm GM and have that person help Ricketts hire the new guy. It's not rocket science.

 

I don't need to know that Torre is already employed by MLB, he's an example of someone who could do it.

 

He doesn't have to fire the lot of them, I was trying to make a point that it doesn't matter who is the placeholder.

 

It does if you're inexplicably hiring someone outside of the organization to be the placeholder/lame duck GM for 3 months. Really, how many times has that happened?

 

Sometimes people aren't being flippant if they're really just confused over why someone would think something so unusual (and that's being generous) would be seriously proposed.

 

You still haven't explained why the Ricketts would be "stupid" if the fired Hendry in October instead of July. The slow part you've explained just fine, but not the stupid. Not firing Hendry now doesn't preclude them from knowing now who they want to pursue after he's fired.

[Guest]

Since I've already began, firing Hendry now moves the process forward faster. Faster is better, again, IF he intends to get rid of Hendry. If he knows he's going to get rid of Hendry, he obviously doesn't think he's the right person for the job. Why let him make trades and do other things when he doesn't think he's the right person for the job? It's really freaking stupid.

 

isn't firing hendry for some place-holder from another organization (and who is really going to leave a job with another organization to be a 3-month GM who isn't allowed to do anything?) also really freaking stupid?

Hire some lifer like Torre or Bobby Cox to be the interm GM and have that person help Ricketts hire the new guy. It's not rocket science.

 

I don't need to know that Torre is already employed by MLB, he's an example of someone who could do it.

 

He doesn't have to fire the lot of them, I was trying to make a point that it doesn't matter who is the placeholder.

 

It does if you're inexplicably hiring someone outside of the organization to be the placeholder/lame duck GM for 3 months. Really, how many times has that happened?

 

Sometimes people aren't being flippant if they're really just confused over why someone would think something so unusual (and that's being generous) would be seriously proposed.

 

You still haven't explained why the Ricketts would be "stupid" if the fired Hendry in October instead of July. The slow part you've explained just fine, but not the stupid. Not firing Hendry now doesn't preclude them from knowing now who they want to pursue after he's fired.

There is nothing inexplicable about it. Businesses do it all the time. When someone in upper management gets canned, a business often hires an experienced caretaker to help them transition. But I also said it doesn't matter who the interm GM is. They can keep Bush or whomever. It doesn't matter.

 

I don't think it's unusual to fire a GM midseason.

 

I think it's stupid to keep a person in a position when I think they are not good and when they are costing me money. Like I said, I don't think Ricketts is stupid. I don't think he's lazy either. I think he and I don't share the same opinion on Hendry.

[dew1679666265]

How do you know any of what you wrote is true? I think Ricketts can talk to whomever he likes. Those guys aren't indentured servants. I also think that any good GM would give "permission" to his underling to go for a better job. It's a feather in the GM's cap. The question is whether he could keep it out of the media or whether he would want to "talk" to anyone while he currently has a guy in the position.

 

Because these people are under contract the same as in every professional and collegiate sport. No one under contract is allowed to talk with other teams without the permission of their current employer. MLB could be the lone exception to this rule, but I highly doubt that.

 

And GMs want those under them to get promotions, true, but not right before the trade deadline when the future of their organization is on the line. Teams in contention will want their top FO people and best young assistant GMs to stick around to give them the best chance possible to win, while teams out of the race want their best and brightest around to help them rebuild the team in preparation for next year. If the Ricketts come calling in August or September, there's a chance that permission would be granted and certainly it would be in the offseason. But a GM/team president/etc wants their team to win first and foremost and see promotions for their guys second, so there's no way they'd grant permission for an interview during one of the most important times of the year (trade deadline).

 

IF Ricketts intends to get rid of Hendry and he keeps him around until the end of the season, he's either stupid or lazy. I don't think he's either, so I think Hendry will keep his job; which sucks for us.

 

It's certainly possible Ricketts intends to keep Hendry, but I don't see how keeping him through the season is an indication of that.

 

Why does everyone assume Randy Bush will run the team? Why not [expletive] him too? Why not [expletive] the lot of them?

 

I expect Randy Bush to take over if Hendry is fired in season because that's how it almost always happens. The GM is fired midseason and his top assistant (Randy Bush) takes over. Could they go get some old, retired guy to take over the team for 3 months? Sure, but I don't see why that retired guy would be interested in taking over a team for just three months and, probably largely for that reason, that scenario never really happens.

[dew1679666265]

There is nothing inexplicable about it. Businesses do it all the time. When someone in upper management gets canned, a business often hires an experienced caretaker to help them transition. But I also said it doesn't matter who the interm GM is. They can keep Bush or whomever. It doesn't matter.

 

How can someone not in any way associated with the team previously help you transition to a completely different GM? He's almost certain to have a different philosophy from Hendry and a different one from the new GM who will take over, so he would make trades for players he likes (after having participated in little to no player evaluation for who knows how long) but those players may be completely different from what the new GM wants.

 

Then you have the issue of whether the retired guy you bring in is actually high quality. Pat Gillick would probably be a good hire if you could coax him out of retirement, but I don't know why he'd want to take the job for just three months. And I know Cox was just an example likely off the top of your head, but he's a very old school type guy who likes his grit and small ball despite how good a manager he was. Would his player evaluations and trades mirror in any way a potentially more progressive GM the Ricketts might bring in? Or if he's helping in the search for a new GM would he go after the more progressive types, or those who are more similar to his philosophy? Even if you take the name Cox out of that sentence, many of your older, currently retired GM/managers are going to have more of an old school mentality. Is that interim GM going to be better than Hendry? If not, why make a move until you can bring in a permanent guy?

 

I don't think it's unusual to fire a GM midseason.

 

I don't remember it happening a lot, but I don't think it's a wildly rare occurence either. However, when a midseason GM change is made, I'm pretty certain it's always or almost always followed by a guy inside the organization being promoted to interim GM, primarily because that's the only real option.

 

I think it's stupid to keep a person in a position when I think they are not good and when they are costing me money.

 

Is Randy Bush going to be better than Hendry? If you're not fairly confident he will be, then I don't see the point in the move. Why go from one averagish GM to a potentially worse GM?

[XZero771679666304]

So we hire someone from the outside to be GM for three months? To begin the transition to another transition?

 

People just need to admit they want Hendry fired now because he made this mess and they're sick of seeing and hearing him because it's like rubbing salt in the wound of the fact the Cubs suck, not because of some "beginning the transition" hogwash.

 

I have a bad feeling Hendry will still be the GM next year, but it's not like we're in some critical 2-3 month window that will determine that.

[dew1679666265]

So we hire someone from the outside to be GM for three months? To begin the transition to another transition?

 

People just need to admit they want Hendry fired now because he made this mess and they're sick of seeing and hearing him because it's like rubbing salt in the wound of the fact the Cubs suck, not because of some "beginning the transition" hogwash.

 

I have a bad feeling Hendry will still be the GM next year, but it's not like we're in some critical 2-3 month window that will determine that.

 

Exactly. A real transition won't begin until the Ricketts bring in a permanent GM. At that point the new GM would begin the transition of articulating the new organizational philosophy, bringing in his own people and doing all the other things a new GM does. The only way bringing in an interim GM from outside the organization would help start this transition is if Ricketts knew that interim GM would share many of the same philosophies the permanent GM will have and will value the same types of players the permanent GM would.

 

Bringing in an interim GM from outside the organization who has clearly different ideas from the previous and the next regimes would only serve to much things up even worse rather than anything positive.

[TruffleShuffle]

plus how much can hendry really screw things up in the next few months? his trade chips, assuming that aramis doesn't waive his NTC and the clause that his 2012 salary becomes guaranteed if he's traded, and assuming that wood doesn't want to go anywhere, are 2-3 months of guys like pena, fukudome, baker, reed johnson, etc. let's be honest, the best GM in the world isn't getting a big-time haul for those guys, and basically the quality of the return will depend on how much money the cubs are willing to eat, which comes from the owner and not the GM.

[Soul]

It's only a few months. We can deal with it until the fall.

 

I'm still concerned he might be back next year though...

[mul21]

 

Exactly. A real transition won't begin until the Ricketts bring in a permanent GM. At that point the new GM would begin the transition of articulating the new organizational philosophy, bringing in his own people and doing all the other things a new GM does. The only way bringing in an interim GM from outside the organization would help start this transition is if Ricketts knew that interim GM would share many of the same philosophies the permanent GM will have and will value the same types of players the permanent GM would.

 

Bringing in an interim GM from outside the organization who has clearly different ideas from the previous and the next regimes would only serve to much things up even worse rather than anything positive.

 

This made me consider something. Thinking about hoe Hendry has kowtowed to what his managers have wanted in the past, is it possible that just replacing Crane Kenney could possibly be a solution? I mean, if the Ricketts are really going to push the player development angle, having a president in place to help prod Hendry along in that direction might work out okay. He's obviously got good relationships throughout baseball, and while I'd like to see him gone as much as everybody else, the fear that he sticks around wouldn't be as horrible of an option if he's got a "baseball guy" overseeing what he's doing. Just a thought.

[SouthSideRyan]

A "baseball guy" (Hate this term soooo much) isn't going to keep Hendry unless he wants to.

[shnsajax]

A "baseball guy" (Hate this term soooo much) isn't going to keep Hendry unless he wants to.

 

You could easily classify Hendry as a "baseball guy". Your right the term is stupid.

[jersey cubs fan]

I have a bad feeling Hendry will still be the GM next year, but it's not like we're in some critical 2-3 month window that will determine that.

 

Really? I mean I think the opposite is pretty damn clear. All signs point to Ricketts keeping Hendry going forward. It might take a disaster of epic proportions to bring about change.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm pretty certain it's always or almost always followed by a guy inside the organization being promoted to interim GM, primarily because that's the only real option.

 

Why does this ridiculous notion keep getting repeated?

[KingCubsFan]

I have a bad feeling Hendry will still be the GM next year, but it's not like we're in some critical 2-3 month window that will determine that.

 

Really? I mean I think the opposite is pretty damn clear. All signs point to Ricketts keeping Hendry going forward. It might take a disaster of epic proportions to bring about change.

How so? And I think the Cubs are well on their way to losing 100 games, which is pretty disasterous.

[dew1679666265]

I'm pretty certain it's always or almost always followed by a guy inside the organization being promoted to interim GM, primarily because that's the only real option.

 

Why does this ridiculous notion keep getting repeated?

 

Because that's what happens? You don't believe that when a GM is fired midseason, he's generally replaced by an interim GM promoted from within?

[dew1679666265]

This made me consider something. Thinking about hoe Hendry has kowtowed to what his managers have wanted in the past, is it possible that just replacing Crane Kenney could possibly be a solution? I mean, if the Ricketts are really going to push the player development angle, having a president in place to help prod Hendry along in that direction might work out okay. He's obviously got good relationships throughout baseball, and while I'd like to see him gone as much as everybody else, the fear that he sticks around wouldn't be as horrible of an option if he's got a "baseball guy" overseeing what he's doing. Just a thought.

 

My preference would be for the Ricketts to bring in a Sandy Alderson type team president (others have mentioned Pat Gillick and that could actually be realistic) and let him make the decisions on firing Hendry, who to replace him with, etc.

[Sammy Sofa]

There is nothing inexplicable about it. Businesses do it all the time. When someone in upper management gets canned, a business often hires an experienced caretaker to help them transition. But I also said it doesn't matter who the interm GM is. They can keep Bush or whomever. It doesn't matter.

 

But it is inexplicable in the business of baseball to see an interim GM hired from the outside midseason to then only be dismissed several months later once the season ends.

 

And I don't see the point of firing Hendry now because I think the a good chunk of the FO needs to go as well. Just make it a big boot out the door for multiple people (likely Bush included at the end of the season). Firing just Hendry and maybe a select few others now, in my opinion, makes it too unlikely that the FO gets the comprehensive overhaul that it needs.

 

I don't think it's unusual to fire a GM midseason.

 

It isn't. But at the point/situation the team is in right now there's arguable negligible difference in terms of what is being "gained" between firing Hendry now and in October.

 

I think it's stupid to keep a person in a position when I think they are not good and when they are costing me money. Like I said, I don't think Ricketts is stupid. I don't think he's lazy either. I think he and I don't share the same opinion on Hendry.

 

Hendry should have been fired already, but how is he costing them more money between now and the end of the season if he's fired in October instead of during the season?

[Sammy Sofa]

I'm pretty certain it's always or almost always followed by a guy inside the organization being promoted to interim GM, primarily because that's the only real option.

 

Why does this ridiculous notion keep getting repeated?

 

Did you mistake that as his him saying that Hendry's replacement would be likely to get a PERMANENT promotion to GM? Because what he actually said isn't "ridiculous" at all and is what usually happens when a manager is fired midseason.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm pretty certain it's always or almost always followed by a guy inside the organization being promoted to interim GM, primarily because that's the only real option.

 

Why does this ridiculous notion keep getting repeated?

 

Did you mistake that as his him saying that Hendry's replacement would be likely to get a PERMANENT promotion to GM? Because what he actually said isn't "ridiculous" at all and is what usually happens when a manager is fired midseason.

 

I took that as him saying the only option for replacing Hendry right now is with an internal interim GM.