Bruce Miles Chat, 2004-12-20

[Bruce Miles]

Hello Bruce,

 

My question is somewhat related to another earlier. Regarding the Cubs' bench--do they plan on bringing Macias back? Have the Cubs looked at some new opportunities like Joe Randa or Mark Sweeney for a bench role? Thanks.

 

Hendry has said he "wouldn't mind" having Macias back. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement. I think they'll try to upgrade. First, I think they'll re-sign Holly and then see what happens with the rest of the non-tenders. My guess is they'll nontender Macias. Sweeney is certainly a possibility, but I'm not so certain about Randa, the fact they almost traded for him two years ago notwithstanding.

[Bruce Miles]

Bruce, thanks for coming back and for always doing a good job on the beat.

 

The Cubs, rightly or wrongly, have taken alot of heat for allowing Andy Sisco and Luke Hagerty to be exposed in the Major LEague Rule 5 draft. Hendry's response has largely been, well you can't protect everybody, and these guys have other issues going on (maturity, injury, etc).

 

My question is, what's the "insider" take on this? Are there those in the front office who were really bummed about losing these two (for now), or do they really believe, as Hendry has stated, that it is likely that both pitchers will be returned to the system?

 

Thanks.

 

I knew I'd get a question on this. The Cubs feel that both pitchers are longshots to make a major-league club. Sisco, they point out, is strictly a starting pitcher who had a down year in the FSL. It's tough for big-league clubs to "hide" starting pitchers all year. You can do that with a reliever, by using him once every eight days. So the feeling is that Hagerty will be back with the Cubs by the end of spring training and while Sisco might make the Royals out of camp, that he'll eventually be back, too. The Cubs felt some of the other guys they protected were closer to being major-league ready and more vulnerable to being lost for good.

[Bruce Miles]

Bruce,

 

This past summer, the Cubs unveiled plans for a four-story structure to be built on Clark and Waveland. The original designs included 400 parking spots that would be available to local residents and businesses on non-game days. If those spots are open over 75% of the year, have you heard any talk about how much additional revenue this plan could bring in annually? Are the odds of this structure actually being approved of by the city any worse than before?

 

As always, thank you for your time.

 

No, I really haven't heard how much revenue they expect to generate with this plan, but I will ask. My guess is that some sort of structure will be built eventually. I can tell you this: I hope it is built. As far as a working facility goes, Wrigley Field is the worst in the big leagues. The front-office staff is almost literally piled on top of one another. The visiting club must come into the Cubs clubhouse to use the weight room. The home clubhouse is a fraction of the size of visiting clubhouses in all the new parks. Expanded batting cages and the like are sorely needed. I'll look into your question, thought.

[Bruce Miles]

Bruce,

 

In a Daily Herald column on Dec. 15th Barry Rozner seemed to be insinuating that Hendry was regaining some control over Dusty "by removing several San Fransisco connections and dismissing key Baker allies and favorites" . Was Rozner making this up or does he have some inside information? If he does have inside information, is 2004 a make or break season for Dusty?

 

Thanks for your time!

 

That was an observation on Barry based on things he's seen. No one actually told him that, just as no one would actually tell me that in those words. Hendry and Baker have a good working relationship, but sometimes the boss must prod people to do things. They mutually agreed on Speier even though Baker was reluctant to get rid of Kim. There was no issue with getting rid of Goodwin and Ramon Martinez. And remember, Bako was "Hendry's guy." This is not a "make or break" situation for Baker, per se. I do think the honeymoon is over with many fans. Baker still has enormous faith in Baker's overall people skills despite the tumult of the past year.

[Bruce Miles]

Hi Mr. Miles, Thanks for joining the community here, hopefully we can see you as another abid Cub Fan & Regular Contributor.

 

Seeing that the Cubs are one of 5 top draws on the road and that their merchandise is one of the top sellers, does the Team have substainal pull amongst the other owners?

 

The Cubs are certainly seen as a "cornerstone" franchise in the NL, and Andy MacPhail's work (and it was great work) in helping to secure the labor deal in 2002 earned him a lot of respect. But all of that didn't do the Cubs much good in getting some of those supensions reduced in 2004. LOL. That said, I don't think the Cubs have an undue "pull" in relation to other teams.

[Bruce Miles]

Bruce,

 

First of all, thank you for taking the time to answer our questions.

 

I really like Aubrey Huff as an alternative to the high-priced/high-risk free agent outfielders on the market this year. He's relatively young, and he will be very affordable the next few years relative to his production. A number of media outlets have reported that the D'Rays may make Huff available through trade, along with some of their other higher priced players. What do you think is the possiblility of the Cubs acquiring Huff if they miss out on the free agent outfielders they covet?

 

I asked directly about Aubry Huff at the winter meetings and was told no. That may change if other windows of opportunity close.

[Bruce Miles]

Thanks for taking our questions Bruce!

 

With Matt Clement's departure seemingly imminent as of right now, the Cubs obviously have a slot in the rotation to fill. Are the Cubs handing the job to Glendon Rusch, are they leaning specifically towards one of the youngsters are on the farm, or are they going to have a competition for the spot in Spring Training without any bias?

 

The Cubs are in a pretty good and flexible position here. As of now, Glendon Rusch is the fifth starter. If he continues making the progress he made under Rothschild this past year, he gives the Cubs the lefty they've needed for some time. If not, there are several other options. As I mentioned in an earlier question, Guzman is one of those somewhere down the line in the 2005 season. It's quite possible somebody could jump up in spring training and take the job, but I see it as Rusch's job to lose as of this moment.

[Bruce Miles]

Bruce,

 

Do you think the Cubs will try to acquire a closer, or fill the position in-house? If in-house, who do you see as the most likely candidate?

This is the million-dollar question. Hendry may have something up his sleeve that we don't know about, but I think he's preparing to have the candidate come from in-house. I know that scares some people, and it is legitimate cause for some concern. But remember, nobody thought Joe Borowski would do the job he did. You'd have been laughed out of town had you suggested he be the closer in '03. Even Jeff Fassero did a creditable job for four months in 2001. Joe Nathan didn't get much confidence expressed in him last year, but he did fine with the Twins. Right now, they'll look at Dempster. I believe they'll keep Farnsworth, and maybe, just maybe, he'll get it. I'm not suggesting that Michael Wuertz be the closer, but he has something to offer somewhere. He threw the ball better than any other relieve this past September. Let's see how it plays out.

[Bruce Miles]

Bruce,

 

First of all, thank you for taking the time to answer our questions.

 

I really like Aubrey Huff as an alternative to the high-priced/high-risk free agent outfielders on the market this year. He's relatively young, and he will be very affordable the next few years relative to his production. A number of media outlets have reported that the D'Rays may make Huff available through trade, along with some of their other higher priced players. What do you think is the possiblility of the Cubs acquiring Huff if they miss out on the free agent outfielders they covet?

As I mentioned, I don't see it now because the Cubs don't. But stay tuned. It could change.

[Bruce Miles]

Mr. Miles,

 

First off, thanks for stopping by NSBB!

 

Ok, I am a huge Sosa fan and I would hate to see him anywhere but here, however there has been a lot of talk that we cannot get Beltran without giving Sammy up. So my question to you is, do we have to get rid of Sammy to be able to sign Beltran, or is it at all possible to do it and still keep sammy. Is the talk that we cannot make a move on beltran without sammy being gone just a smokescreen (kind of like last season, when it was said we could not aquire Nomar without giving up Clement) or is it the hard truth.

 

Thanks for your time!

Right now, Roast, it's the truth. But that doesn't mean things can't change, if you look at my story in today's Daily Herald (shameless plug). No, they weren't going to give the Red Sox in the Nomar trade. The longer Beltran lingers on the market, the better chance the Cubs have of getting him because Hendry has shown he's pretty creative and tenacious.

[Bruce Miles]

Mr. Miles,

 

First off, thanks for stopping by NSBB!

 

Ok, I am a huge Sosa fan and I would hate to see him anywhere but here, however there has been a lot of talk that we cannot get Beltran without giving Sammy up. So my question to you is, do we have to get rid of Sammy to be able to sign Beltran, or is it at all possible to do it and still keep sammy. Is the talk that we cannot make a move on beltran without sammy being gone just a smokescreen (kind of like last season, when it was said we could not aquire Nomar without giving up Clement) or is it the hard truth.

 

Thanks for your time!

Right now, Roast, it's the truth. But that doesn't mean things can't change, if you look at my story in today's Daily Herald (shameless plug). No, they weren't going to give the Red Sox in the Nomar trade. The longer Beltran lingers on the market, the better chance the Cubs have of getting him because Hendry has shown he's pretty creative and tenacious.

[Bruce Miles]

Bruce -

 

Imagine for a moment you are GM of the Cubs, and are allowed to make any 3 moves. Assuming other teams will accept any reasonable move, what moves do you make?

 

(Had some computer difficulty trying to answer before. Let me try again)

 

First, I go to Tribune Tower and get the money for Beltran, regardless of Sammy's situation. If I get Beltran, I go home and have a Merry Christmas.

But really after that, I look into a pitcher who can close, and I get a backup infielder.

[Bruce Miles]

Thanks for stopping by again Bruce!

 

To the best of your knowledge, do you know what the Cubs use to calculate their payroll? Obviously base salaries are included, but do you know how the team handles performance and signing bonuses, as well as player buyouts?

 

From what I've been told, buyouts for 2004 count against the 2004 payroll. Performance bonuses are figured in at the end. The Cubs have said they don't ever mind paying these because the more incentives are reached, chances are the team has done well. I believe signing bonuses are spread out among the life of the contract.

[Tim]

ADMIN NOTE -

 

We seem to have some website called online-age hitting us with about 50 sessions every few minutes right now, causing the connection issues. I'll deal with it as best I can. If you get an error, just keep hitting refresh and the screen will come up.

[Bruce Miles]

Thanks for taking the time again to answer questions, Mr. Miles.

 

Many GM's are known for having distinct philosophies in talent evaluation of offensive players. Beane and his disciples are known for valuing OBP over seemingly all else. My question is: Do you think Hendry has a distinct philosophy or does he look for a certain thing when evaluating offensive players and prospects?

 

I knew this would come up, and it's a great question. Hendry has said repeatedly that he believes baseball is a people business, and for this reason, he values scouts and their opinion. (If you've ever met or talked with his top guy, Gary Hughes, you'd gain a great appreciation for scouts. He ought to be in the Hall of Fame as a scout.)

That said, the Cubs don't completely ignore stats and stats such as OBP specificically. I believe that slowly, but surely, they're coming around to the importance of this stat. They have "stats" guy in their front office now. They used stats extensively to evaluate Troy Percival. They have a long way to go yet, but they've come a long way.

[Bruce Miles]

The Cubs seem to allocate a certain level of flexibility towards being able to add additional payroll around the trade deadline and with Beltran rumors combined with the Sosa rumors; if the Cubs trade Sosa, eat a large % of his salary, and pursue Beltran would they have enough flexibility in July to add payroll (closer, SP, etc.) or would they be extremely restricted?

 

No matter what happens this winter, Hendry will not allow himself to be boxed in come July. This issues has come up every year, and every year, the Cubs have been able to do something in July and even into August and September.

[Bruce Miles]

Bruce,

 

Thanks for stopping by to answer some questions.

 

Does Jim Hendry have any plans to upgrade the bullpen? Is he concerned about the current state of the 'pen? The way it looks to me now, they've got a very good setup man who doesn't seem to have the mentality to close (Hawkins), a converted starter coming off arm surgery a couple of years ago (Dempster), a guy with a rocket arm but a bit of a headcase (Farnsworth - rumored to be on his way out of town), an aging lefty with a bum shoulder (Remlinger), a guy who has closed in the past but who struggled badly due to a shoulder injury last year (Borowski), and a handful of unproven guys with good arms (Wellemeyer, Leicester, Wuertz). It looks to me like another lefty and/or a somewhat proven closer would be a big help.

 

You've pretty much nailed it. Yes, Hendry is looking to upgrade the pen, and as I've said earlier, I think he'll do something. Let's all remember that this is the toughest area for any team to "get right." The Yankees in '03 had trouble and lost the World Series in part because of bullpen woes. The Marlins had trouble putting together a pen until late in the season, much to the Cubs' eventual dismay. Every year it seems that some guys emerges nobody would ever have believed. You're right, Hawkins will be much better as a setup man. He did pretty well there last year. Even for his closer struggles, he still walked very few batters.

[Bruce Miles]

To some of us Pinto amazed us with his ability last year. What can you tell us about Vasquez (knowing he was hurt most of last year), Valdez (from Cuba) and other Cub minor leaguers (not necessarly pitchers) who are current unknowns who are apt to "become known"?

 

I look for Pinto to get a good shot this spring. He'll be with the Cubs at some point in 2005. I haven't heard much of Vazquez lately. I'll ask. They're pretty high on Valdez. You guys all know about Dopirak. The Cubs like him a lot, along with Pie and Bacon. Keep an eye on Connolly. Pignatiello keeps proving people wrong. Nobody seems to like his velocity, but he has a knack for getting guys out. He could be in the big leagues at some point in 2006. Richard Lewis was a good bet to make the club this coming spring, but he suffered a setback, as you guys know. The Cubs are confident of a full recovery. Koronka is another guy who turned out to be a surprise. You may see him this year at some point.

[Bruce Miles]

Hi Bruce,

 

How did Chuck Wasserstrom like his first full year on his new stats job? Did he have much real influence on the player moves the Cubs made, or did the scouting camp led by Gary Hughes more or less drown him out?

 

Cheers,

MLP

 

Chuck did quite well and is enjoying his new job. For those of you who don't know, Chuck used to be one of the top media relations people in the game before moving over to the baseball side last year. Even though his job is stats oriented, he is in line philosophically with Hendry. I really don't think the two camps are mutually exclusive. There's a lot to be gained by listening to people on both sides. Besides, Gary Hughes never shouted anybody down!!! LOL

[Bruce Miles]

Thanks for doing the chat!

 

Are the Cubs putting any emphasis on a "good clubhouse repuation" for any of their future signings? Considering that Hendry said he wishes he had Karros last season to keep the clubhouse loose, and that the general consensus around here was that the clubhouse was in shambles last season, are they actively looking for players who have a good clubhouse reputation?

 

Thanks!

 

Character is always an issue with Hendry. It was a strange clubhouse in 2004, and I've been on the beat since 1998. Individually, there were a lot of good guys, but the "synergy" wasn't there for some reason. I got along with Mercker just fine. LaTroy was hot and cold. Walker is one of the most honest guys I've been around, and I expect him to be a force this coming year. So yes, Jim would be looking for good "character" guys.

[Bruce Miles]

Hello Bruce. We appreciate you taking the time out of your schedule to spend some time here today.

 

It has been expanded upon quite a bit around NSBB regarding the Rule V drafts of Sisco and Haggerty not being the end of the world, but could you give me your opinion as to why they were left unprotected in the first place? Thanks.

 

Sure. The Cubs felt other pitchers who were protected had a better chance of sticking with big league clubs. Sisco had a "down" year at Class A ball. Because he's been only a starting pitcher and that's where his future seems to lie, the Cubs felt he'd have a hard time sticking with a big-league club all season. Haggerty played no higher than Boise this year and would be a real longshot.

[Bruce Miles]

Bruce, I'm a big fan and am surprised that the Trib hasn't tried to trade Paul Sullivan, Phil Rogers and a writer to be named later for you. You wouldn't have to deal with that pesky journalistic objectivity if you worked at the Trib, just toe the party line.

 

Anyway, I wanted to know: how tied is Jim Hendry's job to Baker and his success with the Cubs? Hendry's fixation on/pursuit of Baker made it seem like Hendry put a lot of eggs in that basket

 

Just make sure I get some of the cash in any deal!! I'll hire you as my agent. LOL.

Good observation. Hendry's job certainly is tied into Baker's success or failure to a large degree. He knows this and has said that if he doesn't get the job done and turn the Cubs into winners year after year, he deserves not to be here. That said, I think it's going to be hard for the Cubs NOT to contend for the playoffs for years to come because of the talent they've amassed at the minor league level and the loosening purse strings at the Tower. This is a pivotal, if not exactly make or break, year coming up, to be sure.

[Bruce Miles]

Bruce,

 

Assuming he's healthy (which at this point is a *huge* assumption) what are the Cubs plans for Angel Guzman this season? Does he have an opportunity to compete for the 5th starter spot out of spring training, or do you believe he'll need to show he's healthy with a full minor league season (something he has yet to do) before they consider him for the big club.

 

Along the same lines, if not Guzman, who will challenge Rusch for the 5th starter spot this season?

 

Thanks !!

 

As I said earlier, the Cubs have been and will continue to be, cautious with Guzman. I suspect he'll start the season at Iowa and be among those first called upon when an arm is needed.

[Bruce Miles]

Hi Bruce, fan of your work, what's the Cubs feeling about Jason Dubois? The guy was a monster at AAA last year, but the knock on him is that he doesn't have enough physical gifts. Will the Cubs ignore all his non-stop success in the minors? Does he have a chance to start in LF, or rather than having him languish on the bench (cuz of Dusty's preference for vets) should we expect him in AAA? What does he have to prove there after a .630 slugging percentage?

 

I sure hope he doesn't languish in the system. It's high time the Cubs gave a chance to some of their homegrown position players. That said, I believe Jim Hendry will see to it that Jason has every chance to win the left-field job in '05. Let's first see how the Sammy-Beltran-Drew stuff plays out. It is possible Jim will leave Dusty no alternative but to play Dubois.

[Bruce Miles]

Bruce,

 

Thanks for the time. Since you've seen many Cub teams from the inside, what is your thought regarding team chemistry? Is there anything to it?

 

Another great question. A lot of people seem to think "chemistry" is some sort of media creation. (And we in the media have to be careful not to label teams as "bad" who get along with each other but don't like working with the media. I try to avoid this trap.)

I've talked to a lot of athletes about chemistry, and all insist it's important to some degree. As I mentioned, there were a lot of good guys on the Cubs last year, but the synergy wasn't there for whatever reason. Maybe a lot of the new guys were afraid to speak up early and set a tone.

Winning, of course, overcomes a lot of things.

The 2003 bunch had great chemistry, as did the 1998 wild-card team. The 2001 team, which fell short, also had great chemistry.

It's important, but we shouldn't get too carried away with it.