2015/16 offseason

[SABR Gamer]

I've pointed out that Theo traded many of the ML players left over from Hendry to restock the minor leagues.

 

You keep throwing this out there like it's some kind of key rebuttal. It's not plus for the old GM when the new GM has to clean up their mess.

 

If you read the post carefully, it's not a rebuttal about cleaning up the mess. It's a rebuttal to the notion that "cupboard was bare" mentality that was being passed around in these discussions.

 

Well it wasn't literally empty, but there wasn't all that much either. He left the team in a pretty shitty spot, and saying that there was a non-zero number of assets left isn't the positive statement you seem to think it is. Hendry was pretty bad man.

[Backtobanks]

I've pointed out that Theo traded many of the ML players left over from Hendry to restock the minor leagues.

 

You keep throwing this out there like it's some kind of key rebuttal. It's not plus for the old GM when the new GM has to clean up their mess.

 

If you read the post carefully, it's not a rebuttal about cleaning up the mess. It's a rebuttal to the notion that "cupboard was bare" mentality that was being passed around in these discussions.

 

Well it wasn't literally empty, but there wasn't all that much either. He left the team in a pretty [expletive] spot, and saying that there was a non-zero number of assets left isn't the positive statement you seem to think it is. Hendry was pretty bad man.

 

There was Baez, Castro, and enough to trade for Rizzo, Russell, Wood, Grimm, Ramirez, Hendricks, Villanueva, Torreyes, and Black. Theo deserves the credit for having a plan and trading players that didn't fit in his plan, but apparently those players were valuable enough to acquire the players listed above.

[Guest]

It's funny to think about what Baez would've been under Hendry/Fleita.

[Backtobanks]

It's funny to think about what Baez would've been under Hendry/Fleita.

 

I don't know why he would necessarily be any different than what he is now. They saw his potential when they signed him and he still shows that potential.

[Guest]

It's funny to think about what Baez would've been under Hendry/Fleita.

 

I don't know why he would necessarily be any different than what he is now. They saw his potential when they signed him and he still shows that potential.

 

Submitted by Arizona Phil on Sat, 10/17/2015 - 12:22pm Permalink

E-MAN: The Cubs Player Development Program has changed in various ways under the new regime.

 

The Cubs now have a "Player Development Plan" for each minor league pitcher and player, which basically lists and explains (in detail) what each individual pitcher or player is trying to accomplish, and the pitcher's or player's development & instruction history up to that point in time. So when a minor league coach or instructor works one-on-one with a particular pitcher or player during the course of Minor League Camp, Extended Spring Training, the minor league regular season, and/or Instructs, the coach or instructor knows exactly what that player is working on, what problems the pitcher or player may be having, and what instruction the player has received from other coaches & instructors.

 

For example, I can recall vividly pitchers & players at Fitch Park back in the day telling me that one coach would tell the pitcher or player one thing, and then a month later another coach would tell him something different, sometimes exactly the opposite. And then the kid would sometimes ask ME(?) for advice (like "What should I do?" or " Who should I listen to?"). Needless to say, a lot of players would end up either getting totally confused, or would just stop listening to everybody and try to go it alone. The lucky ones might find one particular coach or instructor who would become the player's "guru" (so to speak), and that would work (but just for that player or pitcher).

 

Also, the philosophy of instruction varied from coach to coach. Some coaches would yell at players (sort of like a boot camp drill instructor), while others would be almost passive and wait for the player to approach the coach, and then others would just do bizarre stuff. Like I can recall a particular coach who was serving as game manager at Extended Spring Training one year, and he decided to bench players DURING A GAME (by having the player's slot in the batting order get skipped next time up) if the player got called out on strikes. This was not conducive to getting good results. (When you see a slot in the batting order being skipped in a Minor League Camp, EXST, or instructs game , it's usually because a catcher is needed to warm -up a pitcher in the bullpen, or because a player has finished his work for the day, or to get another player an additional AB, and NOT because the player got called out on strikes in his the previous AB!).

 

In addition, the new regime has implemented a sophisticated video (and audio) operation that records everything that happens on the field during games (including Minor League Camp, Extended Spring Training, and Instructs, as well as intrasquad activity & "sim" games, too, and sometimes even BP, infield practice, PFPs, and bullpen side-sessions), and members of the organization can call-up the videos from anywhere at anytime.

 

Minor League Field Coordinator Tim Cossins has made Instructs (I'm talking about the "basic" version, not advanced instruicts) about instruction and not about playing games against other organizations. Time that formally was spent playing games against other organizations is now spent working on drills and playing "sim" games that can be stopped in mid-inning (if necessary) for a "teaching moment." In fact, the Cubs are the only MLB club in Ariziona that does not play "basic" instructs games against other organizations. Every day is "Camp Day," full of instruction without worrying about stopping a drill so that the team can get BP in before the bus leaves for an AZIL game at another ball park. It works so well for the Cubs, I'm surprised more teams don't stop playing AZIL games and spend that time on instruction. (Again, I''m talking about "basic" instructs, not advanced instructs, which is really more of a "junior AFL").

 

The instruction itself has also changed, with more conventional "teaching" techniques, like what would be essentially a unique "lesson plan" for each day, and making the drills more fun for the players by finding more-interesting ways to present a particular drill and teach a particular skill.

 

Players are allowed to fail and make mistakes or errors without being verbally abused, while at the same having the nistake or error addressed by a coach or instructor immediately (instead of waiting for the next day, as happens when players are playing games most every day against other organizations).

 

The Cubs also make use of the auditorium at the Under Armour Performance Center after field work for what would be essentially "classroom" instruction, with use of multi-media to keep it interesting for the players (remember, a lot of these kids are teenagers!)

 

So with a Player Development Plan for each player (where coaches, instructors, and players are now on the "same page"), a video operation that allows members of the Player Development Department (the director, managers, coaches, and instructors) to actually see (in "real" time if desired ) what each player is actualy doing ON THE FIELD, a heightened emphasis on actual field instruction over playing games against other organizations, and classtroom instruction ("mental skills") that's presented in a fun and interesting way, the Cubs Player Development Department is on the cutting edge of professional baseball instruction.

 

While some might say that therefore the Cubs should develop more big league players, the Player Development Department can only do what it can do to help the player reach hisd potential. The player has to do his part, and the Scouting Department has to provide the players to the Player Development Department who have the talent and potential to become MLB players and pitchers.

[davell]

Your lack of minor league knowledge is really a main reason why you should stop trying to trumpet ANYTHING he did.

 

I posted the differences between how player development has been run from the last regime to now, from AZPhil. It's apalling, hysterical, sheds all the light needed as to why we couldn't get many players contributing at the ML level.

 

At any rate, saying Javy would have developed the same just because......Thats dumb. I'd think extremely hard on Shark. I'd say there was a relatively decent chance he wouldn't have had nearly the value under Hendry.

 

It's obvious you pay no(or very little) attention to anything minor league related. Go to the 27th post(maybe 28th) in the AZLeague roster thread and read it.

 

If you still think Hendry had a clue of how to run a franchise or if you think guys develop just as easily under his "system", then everyone should finally just flat out ignore you. Oh and your complete silence on the Edwin contract isn't going away until you just admit you pulled something out of your ass with nothing to back it up at all. It's better to just come clean than ignore.

[davell]

Now just read it in THIS thread. It's what David just put in here.

[Sammy Sofa]

I've pointed out that Theo traded many of the ML players left over from Hendry to restock the minor leagues.

 

You keep throwing this out there like it's some kind of key rebuttal. It's not plus for the old GM when the new GM has to clean up their mess.

 

If you read the post carefully, it's not a rebuttal about cleaning up the mess. It's a rebuttal to the notion that "cupboard was bare" mentality that was being passed around in these discussions.

 

Well it wasn't literally empty, but there wasn't all that much either. He left the team in a pretty [expletive] spot, and saying that there was a non-zero number of assets left isn't the positive statement you seem to think it is. Hendry was pretty bad man.

 

There was Baez, Castro, and enough to trade for Rizzo, Russell, Wood, Grimm, Ramirez, Hendricks, Villanueva, Torreyes, and Black. Theo deserves the credit for having a plan and trading players that didn't fit in his plan, but apparently those players were valuable enough to acquire the players listed above.

 

It's staggering how you think this is some kind of plus for Hendry. Nobody takes over a team completely devoid of any value or assets, so stop [expletive] dwelling on the obvious hyperbole of a phrase like "the cupboard is bare." Nobody ever said Hendry was incapable of finding good or useful players, but selling off the remnants from his broken teams isn't some kind of positive legacy for him. That they had someone like Matt Garza to trade was the result of Hendry stupidly trading for him in the first place, not, "boy, that Jim Hendry sure was smart for landing Matt Garza!"

[Sammy Sofa]

Basically it always comes across as "don't forget about Hendry!" and all I want to say is, "well, I keep trying, but you're making it really hard to do so."

 

And the interesting thing is that I moved on from Hendry years ago, while many of you can't seem to stop bringing up his name.

 

You're packed to the brim with dung from a boring, boring horse.

Edited October 26, 2015 by Sammy Sofa

[sneakypower]

I've pointed out that Theo traded many of the ML players left over from Hendry to restock the minor leagues.

 

You keep throwing this out there like it's some kind of key rebuttal. It's not plus for the old GM when the new GM has to clean up their mess.

 

If you read the post carefully, it's not a rebuttal about cleaning up the mess. It's a rebuttal to the notion that "cupboard was bare" mentality that was being passed around in these discussions.

 

Well it wasn't literally empty, but there wasn't all that much either. He left the team in a pretty [expletive] spot, and saying that there was a non-zero number of assets left isn't the positive statement you seem to think it is. Hendry was pretty bad man.

 

There was Baez, Castro, and enough to trade for Rizzo, Russell, Wood, Grimm, Ramirez, Hendricks, Villanueva, Torreyes, and Black. Theo deserves the credit for having a plan and trading players that didn't fit in his plan, but apparently those players were valuable enough to acquire the players listed above.

all those wonderful players mentioned here that he left over combined to be barely replacement level this year (0.5 fwar)

 

what we ought to thank Hendry for was depleting the organization of talent so deeply and completely that it forced us to pick at the top of the draft for a few years

[Backtobanks]

all those wonderful players mentioned here that he left over combined to be barely replacement level this year (0.5 fwar)

 

what we ought to thank Hendry for was depleting the organization of talent so deeply and completely that it forced us to pick at the top of the draft for a few years

 

I hate to break it to you, but this isn't the year that those guys were traded so 0.5 fwar means nothing. Also, Hendry didn't force us to pick at the top of the draft for a few years - that was part of Theo's plan.

[Thed Hoyerstein]

all those wonderful players mentioned here that he left over combined to be barely replacement level this year (0.5 fwar)

 

what we ought to thank Hendry for was depleting the organization of talent so deeply and completely that it forced us to pick at the top of the draft for a few years

 

I hate to break it to you, but this isn't the year that those guys were traded so 0.5 fwar means nothing. Also, Hendry didn't force us to pick at the top of the draft for a few years - that was part of Theo's plan.

 

javier baez and albert almora say hi

[Backtobanks]

 

It's staggering how you think this is some kind of plus for Hendry. Nobody takes over a team completely devoid of any value or assets, so stop [expletive] dwelling on the obvious hyperbole of a phrase like "the cupboard is bare." Nobody ever said Hendry was incapable of finding good or useful players, but selling off the remnants from his broken teams isn't some kind of positive legacy for him. That they had someone like Matt Garza to trade was the result of Hendry stupidly trading for him in the first place, not, "boy, that Jim Hendry sure was smart for landing Matt Garza!"

 

Many posters continually stated that "the cupboard was bare" and that Hendry depleted the organization of talent deeply and completely, so maybe you ought to get on them for hyperbole. My point in posting on this topic is all of the hyperbole about Hendry left nothing and Theo magically waved his magic wand and produced Rizzo, Russell, etc.

[sneakypower]

"Theo's Magic Wand" would be a good name switch for b2b

[Backtobanks]

Your lack of minor league knowledge is really a main reason why you should stop trying to trumpet ANYTHING he did.

 

I posted the differences between how player development has been run from the last regime to now, from AZPhil. It's apalling, hysterical, sheds all the light needed as to why we couldn't get many players contributing at the ML level.

 

At any rate, saying Javy would have developed the same just because......Thats dumb. I'd think extremely hard on Shark. I'd say there was a relatively decent chance he wouldn't have had nearly the value under Hendry.

 

It's obvious you pay no(or very little) attention to anything minor league related. Go to the 27th post(maybe 28th) in the AZLeague roster thread and read it.

 

If you still think Hendry had a clue of how to run a franchise or if you think guys develop just as easily under his "system", then everyone should finally just flat out ignore you. Oh and your complete silence on the Edwin contract isn't going away until you just admit you pulled something out of your ass with nothing to back it up at all. It's better to just come clean than ignore.

 

So you're saying there's a reasonably decent chance that he would have had the same value under Hendry too? As for Javy, he was signed at a very young age as a prospect and became one of the top prospects in baseball. Obviously Theo has improved the ml system and probably helped Javy in his development, but nobody can accurately say what would have happened under Hendry to a prospect with that much potential.

[Guest]

I can say that between what Javier Baez is and what the Cubs were teaching (and not teaching) in the minor leagues, it was a likely recipe for complete and utter disaster.

 

He still might not end up being anything, but I have zero confidence that he would've amounted to anything but a complete bust in that organization.

[Banedon]

 

It's staggering how you think this is some kind of plus for Hendry. Nobody takes over a team completely devoid of any value or assets, so stop [expletive] dwelling on the obvious hyperbole of a phrase like "the cupboard is bare." Nobody ever said Hendry was incapable of finding good or useful players, but selling off the remnants from his broken teams isn't some kind of positive legacy for him. That they had someone like Matt Garza to trade was the result of Hendry stupidly trading for him in the first place, not, "boy, that Jim Hendry sure was smart for landing Matt Garza!"

 

Many posters continually stated that "the cupboard was bare" and that Hendry depleted the organization of talent deeply and completely, so maybe you ought to get on them for hyperbole. My point in posting on this topic is all of the hyperbole about Hendry left nothing and Theo magically waved his magic wand and produced Rizzo, Russell, etc.

 

Ok, ignoring whether you're right or wrong....

 

Who the hell cares? Honestly? Why is this a thing?

[Derwood]

This argument is boring. I'm bored. Hendry has zero to do with the 15/16 off season, so stop talking about his stupid face

[Sammy Sofa]

 

It's staggering how you think this is some kind of plus for Hendry. Nobody takes over a team completely devoid of any value or assets, so stop [expletive] dwelling on the obvious hyperbole of a phrase like "the cupboard is bare." Nobody ever said Hendry was incapable of finding good or useful players, but selling off the remnants from his broken teams isn't some kind of positive legacy for him. That they had someone like Matt Garza to trade was the result of Hendry stupidly trading for him in the first place, not, "boy, that Jim Hendry sure was smart for landing Matt Garza!"

 

Many posters continually stated that "the cupboard was bare" and that Hendry depleted the organization of talent deeply and completely, so maybe you ought to get on them for hyperbole. My point in posting on this topic is all of the hyperbole about Hendry left nothing and Theo magically waved his magic wand and produced Rizzo, Russell, etc.

 

This means absolutely nothing.

[biittner77]

This argument is boring. I'm bored. Hendry has zero to do with the 15/16 off season, so stop talking about his stupid face

 

Stupid fat face.

 

DONUTS!

[Banedon]

http://i.imgur.com/mVzwG.gif

[KingCubsFan]

I can say that between what Javier Baez is and what the Cubs were teaching (and not teaching) in the minor leagues, it was a likely recipe for complete and utter disaster.

 

He still might not end up being anything, but I have zero confidence that he would've amounted to anything but a complete bust in that organization.

He would have followed a path similar to Ryan Harvey. And there's no way Hendry would have kept him at SS.

[sneakypower]

[jumbo]

 

I'm sick imagining that team

[biittner77]

 

I'm sick imagining that team

 

Who's Starlin Castro? I think the rest of these projections are dead on.