Barry Rozner wonders does Dusty want to be fired?

[XZero771679666304]

 

Yes, I knew Nomar was going down for the season in February. And I wasn't the only one. Didn't take any talent at all----he always goes down. He's made of glass.

 

Solid closer in Dempster?? How about having a solid closer coming out of spring training for a change, instead of blowing leads in April & May until you figure out what to do? There's a novel idea: have a good team coming out of spring training!! Oh, wait, it's only a novel idea in Wrigleyville. All the other winning teams have already figured that out.

 

Middle relief---wow, there were plenty of guys available. I'll give you one: Dustin Hermanson. He's done very, very well on the South Side. Yet Hendry didn't even give him a look. Why?

 

As for a backup to Nomar---how about signing a decent shortstop who isn't made of glass in the first place? Other than that, there is a massive laundry list of players who are better than Neifi Perez. He's junk and everyone knew it. Are you saying no other teams signed a backup shortstop who was better than Neifi Perez last offseason? That's a big glass of Cubbie Kool-ade!! You're allowed to drink it if you want to, of course. And I'm allowed to call it what it is.

 

Hendry already did dump Remlinger. So why wait until now?

 

So you're saying Macias is good for a guy with half his butt back in the minors? OK, I'll give you that. I expect more from my bench though. Especially when our bench is as woeful as it has been.

 

Budget? The Cubs have the biggest budget in the NL. Teams with less than 1/3 of our payroll are beating us in the standings. This isn't about budget. How can you possibly even bring that up, when the Cards are 20 games better than us on many, many millions less budget? How about the Stros? What's their budget----20 million less? 25?

 

Again----yes, Baker fills out the lineup cards. So who hired Baker? Yep---Hendry was the guy who wanted him. So sorry dude, but that one isn't going to fly either.

 

Your use of hyperbole is staggering.

You KNEW Nomar was going down FOR THE SEASON, because he always goes down and he's made of glass? Wow. Are you sure about that? From '97-2000 he never played fewer than 135 games. In '01 he missed almost the entire season. He played 156 games in '02 and 156 games in '03. Last year he played exactly half a season (81 games). So in his 9 career seasons coming into '05 there were only 2 seasons where he played less than 135 games. But you're right he's made of glass and always goes down. :roll:

 

Again, Hendry had a solid closer in Spring Training in Dempster. Many here were comfortable with Hawkins starting the season as closer because he had always been an effective reliever in the past.

Like I said as far as middle relief, I'm glad he didn't spend the big bucks. Relievers are incredibly inconsistent and for every Dustin Hermanson you name I can name 10 who have flopped after getting a big contract.

 

Why not dump Remlinger until now? Maybe because he wanted to see if he could still pitch. Early on he was effective when used properly.

 

I already adressed your bogus claim that Nomar is made of glass and has never stayed healthy. Again name me one backup SS who was available and better than Neifi. That's all I'm asking.

 

Don't use that "Cubbie Kool-Aid" condescending tone with me. That's the last thing I'm doing and the last thing I've done all season.

 

You beat me to it on the Nomar issue.

 

As for the Dempster issue, he didn't have to be in the starting rotation in April, because Rusch wasn't. Dempster should have been the closer from day one, as Hendry wanted. Had that been the case, you'd have had Rusch in the rotation (remember how pitched as a starter early in the season?), Dempster as the closer, with Hawkins and Fox (blame Dusty for that one too) setting him up. Having that scenario over the one that actually happened would have seen the Cubs win at least 6-7 more games in April/May, IMO. The resulting bullpen fallout from Fox being lost for the season, Hawkins being ruined be a repeat failure as closer, etc. has almost certainly cost us more games since then.

 

IMO, the following other Dustbrained moves have also cost the Cubs games:

 

Batting his two worst OBP guys 1-2 for a month when Derrek was at his hottest. Walker was back, and should have been the lead off man, without a doubt.

 

Sticking with Hollandsworth for over a month when he was slumping horribly. Dubois, while not what many thought, could have done better.

 

Keeping Perez in the everyday lineup in June/July when his production was below acceptable for even a 25th man. Cedeno could not have possibly done any worse.

 

 

Although it is impossibly to quantify, I would estimate the above moves cost the Cubs between 5 and 6 games, combined.

 

I agree that Hendry could have improved the bullpen in the offseason, but if the pressure to get rid of Sosa was coming from the top, he really did the best he could with the OF, as sad as that is. People gripe about the leadoff man, but Walker would have been above average in that capacity. And as crazy as it seems now, most people were quite pleased when Baker was signed.

 

So Hendry hasn't done his best, but Dusty has really compounded any problems. The bottom line, IMO, is that the 2005 team as it was constructed with injuries figured in, run as Hendry thought it should be, would have won 12-15 more games to this point, conservatively.

 

The story of the 2005 season has been one of moderate personnel problems, and severe mismanagement issues.

[BigbadB]

You beat me to it on the Nomar issue.

 

As for the Dempster issue, he didn't have to be in the starting rotation in April, because Rusch wasn't. Dempster should have been the closer from day one, as Hendry wanted. Had that been the case, you'd have had Rusch in the rotation (remember how pitched as a starter early in the season?), Dempster as the closer, with Hawkins and Fox (blame Dusty for that one too) setting him up. Having that scenario over the one that actually happened would have seen the Cubs win at least 6-7 more games in April/May, IMO. The resulting bullpen fallout from Fox being lost for the season, Hawkins being ruined be a repeat failure as closer, etc. has almost certainly cost us more games since then.

 

IMO, the following other Dustbrained moves have also cost the Cubs games:

 

Batting his two worst OBP guys 1-2 for a month when Derrek was at his hottest. Walker was back, and should have been the lead off man, without a doubt.

 

Sticking with Hollandsworth for over a month when he was slumping horribly. Dubois, while not what many thought, could have done better.

 

Keeping Perez in the everyday lineup in June/July when his production was below acceptable for even a 25th man. Cedeno could not have possibly done any worse.

 

 

Although it is impossibly to quantify, I would estimate the above moves cost the Cubs between 5 and 6 games, combined.

 

I agree that Hendry could have improved the bullpen in the offseason, but if the pressure to get rid of Sosa was coming from the top, he really did the best he could with the OF, as sad as that is. People gripe about the leadoff man, but Walker would have been above average in that capacity. And as crazy as it seems now, most people were quite pleased when Baker was signed.

 

So Hendry hasn't done his best, but Dusty has really compounded any problems. The bottom line, IMO, is that the 2005 team as it was constructed with injuries figured in, run as Hendry thought it should be, would have won 12-15 more games to this point, conservatively.

 

The story of the 2005 season has been one of moderate personnel problems, and severe mismanagement issues.

 

Very well put.

[Soul]

Yeah, you all know I'm right but you can't accept it because you put your faith in Hendry.

 

I did too. But I know when to cut bait if the guy isn't getting the job done. And he's not.

 

So rationalize all you want. I knew this Cub team would be where they are in February. I told you all as much, and was summarily dismissed. That's fine. I'm right about Hendry too. With him as GM, the Cubs will not return to 2003 form.

 

Just wait and see. I know I'll never convince you guys with my words because that's impossible. Time will do the convincing for me.

 

Wait and see. That's all I ask.

[cbbryan]

Yeah, you all know I'm right but you can't accept it because you put your faith in Hendry.

 

I did too. But I know when to cut bait if the guy isn't getting the job done. And he's not.

 

So rationalize all you want. I knew this Cub team would be where they are in February. I told you all as much, and was summarily dismissed. That's fine. I'm right about Hendry too. With him as GM, the Cubs will not return to 2003 form.

 

Just wait and see. I know I'll never convince you guys with my words because that's impossible. Time will do the convincing for me.

 

Wait and see. That's all I ask.

 

Soul.........you put all this on Hendry, but Hendry was a big part of the 2003 team and putting it together. Even when MacPhail was GM, Hendry was in the background.

 

So, I don't understand how you have so much confidence in Hendry not being able to get us back to 2003, but he helped us get to that in the first place. Why couldn't he do it again?

 

Secondly, I still haven't heard anyones response to my earlier post. If your point is that Hendry hired Baker, so Hendry should be fired for Baker's shortcomings as a manager.............why aren't you calling for MacPhail's head? It would go hand in hand with your opinion that Hendry's as much to blame as Baker. My point is that people in any job should be promoted, or fired based on merit. If you're not doing your job, you get fired. If you're doing your job, your safe.

 

While Hendry may be to blame for hiring Dusty, he's certainly doing a better job in other facets of his job. You can't make the same argument for Dusty.

[hawkeyecub]

Yeah, you all know I'm right but you can't accept it because you put your faith in Hendry.

 

I did too. But I know when to cut bait if the guy isn't getting the job done. And he's not.

 

So rationalize all you want. I knew this Cub team would be where they are in February. I told you all as much, and was summarily dismissed. That's fine. I'm right about Hendry too. With him as GM, the Cubs will not return to 2003 form.

 

Just wait and see. I know I'll never convince you guys with my words because that's impossible. Time will do the convincing for me.

 

Wait and see. That's all I ask.

 

So this is what you resort to when some of your claims have been proven wrong? Why didn't you answer any of the questions posed to you? Instead you just resort to wait and see, I'm right?

 

And don't tell me I know you're right. I don't think you're right and that's why I spent all that time refuting your statements. This baiting is ridiculous.

[Soul]

I answered all your questions one by one. Then you just rationalized why my answers didn't mean anything and I'm not going to play that game. My answers to your questions stand, and they prove that Hendry has dropped the ball.

 

Hey dude. If you're OK with a .500 ballclub out of contention in mid-August, that's your business. I'm not. Hendry built this club, and it's not in contention. Therefore he should get some of the blame.

 

I'm looking around the league at ballclubs who *ARE* getting it done. I'm looking at frachises like the A's, who are in contention year after year on a fraction of our payroll. They do it with callup after callup. Where are our callups? Where's our calvalry to save the season? Nowhere to be found.

 

I'm looking at teams like the Braves, who have done it for years with a solid foundation and great F.A. signings. Now they're doing it with a great minor league system feeding the major league ballclub. Again---where is ours? They have a much better manager than we do, too. So---why didn't we hire a better one? Hendry dropped the ball on that, too.

 

I'm looking at even a team like the Brewers. They have no payroll, for all practical purposes. How can they be ahead of us in the standings and you won't even consider Hendry might have failed? What a minor league system they have developed. Meanwhile, ours has been drained.....by HENDRY, and the results have been we are out of contention.

 

The Cardinals do it another way: they sign great F.A.s every year, and piece together a ballclub with deftness and good assessments. So---why is Jocketty able to do this but Hendry can't?

 

How can a new franchise like the Marlins already have 2 World Series Championships and nobody's upset? How does that happen?

 

My point is, Hendry is not getting it done. Why is this even a debate? The ballclub stinks. Hendry is in charge. It's about time he started getting some of the blame.

 

Cbbryan----I agree MacPhail should get some heat. But if I'm going to be crucified on this board for calling foul on one beloved Cubs employee, don't expect me to be crucified for trying to call out all of them at the same time!

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I'm going to once again state that Hendry's main fault has been entrusting this team to Dusty. Has all of his moves panned out? Of course not, but this team as it is has more talent than the 2003 team. Last year's team, talent-wise was head and shoulders above the 2003 team. There's no debate to that. While we've taken a dip talent wise from 2004 to 2005, Hendry has done a decent if not admirable job of improving the talent on the team.

 

What this team has failed to do is maximize that talent. In my opinion, that falls on the coaching staff and the manager. Our GM is partially to blame there because this manager and coaching staff are in this position because of him.

 

But to say that Hendry hasn't improved the team since 2003 is ludicrous. Even with the collapse last season, the 2004 team finished with more regular season victories than the 2003 team. That fact is easily overlooked by those that attempt to use hyperbole to make a point.

[XZero771679666304]

I answered all your questions one by one. Then you just rationalized why my answers didn't mean anything and I'm not going to play that game. My answers to your questions stand, and they prove that Hendry has dropped the ball.

 

Hey dude. If you're OK with a .500 ballclub out of contention in mid-August, that's your business. I'm not. Hendry built this club, and it's not in contention. Therefore he should get some of the blame.

 

I'm looking around the league at ballclubs who *ARE* getting it done. I'm looking at frachises like the A's, who are in contention year after year on a fraction of our payroll. They do it with callup after callup. Where are our callups? Where's our calvalry to save the season? Nowhere to be found.

 

I'm looking at teams like the Braves, who have done it for years with a solid foundation and great F.A. signings. Now they're doing it with a great minor league system feeding the major league ballclub. Again---where is ours? They have a much better manager than we do, too. So---why didn't we hire a better one? Hendry dropped the ball on that, too.

 

I'm looking at even a team like the Brewers. They have no payroll, for all practical purposes. How can they be ahead of us in the standings and you won't even consider Hendry might have failed? What a minor league system they have developed. Meanwhile, ours has been drained.....by HENDRY, and the results have been we are out of contention.

 

The Cardinals do it another way: they sign great F.A.s every year, and piece together a ballclub with deftness and good assessments. So---why is Jocketty able to do this but Hendry can't?

 

How can a new franchise like the Marlins already have 2 World Series Championships and nobody's upset? How does that happen?

 

My point is, Hendry is not getting it done. Why is this even a debate? The ballclub stinks. Hendry is in charge. It's about time he started getting some of the blame.

 

Cbbryan----I agree MacPhail should get some heat. But if I'm going to be crucified on this board for calling foul on one beloved Cubs employee, don't expect me to be crucified for trying to call out all of them at the same time!

 

You haven't done squat to address my post, because you can't. You cannot attribute that lion's share of the 2005 failure to Hendry, and I pretty well proved why. Dusty is at least 50% responsible for the Cubs record this year. If you can refute what I said in my post, go ahead.

[Soul]

I'm going to once again state that Hendry's main fault has been entrusting this team to Dusty. Has all of his moves panned out? Of course not, but this team as it is has more talent than the 2003 team. Last year's team, talent-wise was head and shoulders above the 2003 team. There's no debate to that. While we've taken a dip talent wise from 2004 to 2005, Hendry has done a decent if not admirable job of improving the talent on the team.

 

What this team has failed to do is maximize that talent. In my opinion, that falls on the coaching staff and the manager. Our GM is partially to blame there because this manager and coaching staff are in this position because of him.

 

But to say that Hendry hasn't improved the team since 2003 is ludicrous. Even with the collapse last season, the 2004 team finished with more regular season victories than the 2003 team. That fact is easily overlooked by those that attempt to use hyperbole to make a point.

 

I wasn't talking about 2004. I'm talking about now. You think the team they will be fielding this evening is better than the one that went to the playoffs in 2003? I hope not.

 

The team is in a shambles NOW. Who knows what would have happened in 2004----though it was disturbing that when we finally got healthy, that was when we bought the farm. While we were still injured, we actually played better.

 

I wasn't complaining about Hendry last year. You can try to shift the focus of the discussion to 2004 if you want. I'm not buying. I'm talking about looking back at the end result of 3 years of Hendry, and not liking what I am seeing. It's a 2005 perspective, not a 2004 one.

[Soul]

I answered all your questions one by one. Then you just rationalized why my answers didn't mean anything and I'm not going to play that game. My answers to your questions stand, and they prove that Hendry has dropped the ball.

 

Hey dude. If you're OK with a .500 ballclub out of contention in mid-August, that's your business. I'm not. Hendry built this club, and it's not in contention. Therefore he should get some of the blame.

 

I'm looking around the league at ballclubs who *ARE* getting it done. I'm looking at frachises like the A's, who are in contention year after year on a fraction of our payroll. They do it with callup after callup. Where are our callups? Where's our calvalry to save the season? Nowhere to be found.

 

I'm looking at teams like the Braves, who have done it for years with a solid foundation and great F.A. signings. Now they're doing it with a great minor league system feeding the major league ballclub. Again---where is ours? They have a much better manager than we do, too. So---why didn't we hire a better one? Hendry dropped the ball on that, too.

 

I'm looking at even a team like the Brewers. They have no payroll, for all practical purposes. How can they be ahead of us in the standings and you won't even consider Hendry might have failed? What a minor league system they have developed. Meanwhile, ours has been drained.....by HENDRY, and the results have been we are out of contention.

 

The Cardinals do it another way: they sign great F.A.s every year, and piece together a ballclub with deftness and good assessments. So---why is Jocketty able to do this but Hendry can't?

 

How can a new franchise like the Marlins already have 2 World Series Championships and nobody's upset? How does that happen?

 

My point is, Hendry is not getting it done. Why is this even a debate? The ballclub stinks. Hendry is in charge. It's about time he started getting some of the blame.

 

Cbbryan----I agree MacPhail should get some heat. But if I'm going to be crucified on this board for calling foul on one beloved Cubs employee, don't expect me to be crucified for trying to call out all of them at the same time!

 

You haven't done squat to address my post, because you can't. You cannot attribute that lion's share of the 2005 failure to Hendry, and I pretty well proved why. Dusty is at least 50% responsible for the Cubs record this year. If you can refute what I said in my post, go ahead.

 

Dusty is at least 50%. And Hendry hired Dusty.

 

There. I just completely refuted it. Again.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I wasn't talking about 2004. I'm talking about now. You think the team they will be fielding this evening is better than the one that went to the playoffs in 2003? I hope not.

The team is in a shambles NOW. Who knows what would have happened in 2004----though it was disturbing that when we finally got healthy, that was when we bought the farm. While we were still injured, we actually played better.

 

I wasn't complaining about Hendry last year. You can try to shift the focus of the discussion to 2004 if you want. I'm not buying. I'm talking about looking back at the end result of 3 years of Hendry, and not liking what I am seeing. It's a 2005 perspective, not a 2004 one.

 

The fact is 2004 greatly impacted the team we have in 2005. After coming so close in 2003, Hendry made the choice, which almost all would agree was the right choice, to put the team in contention for 2004.

 

In order to improve on the 2003 team, he

 

1. Traded Choi for Lee.

2. Signed Greg Maddux to be the fifth starter.

3. Signed LaTroy Hawkins to shore up the bullpen.

4. Traded Cruz and Smyth for Pratt and Lewis to give us a loogy in the pen due to injuries to Mercker and Remlinger in the Spring.

5. Traded Miller for Barrett.

6. Replaced Troy O'Leary with Todd Hollandsworth

7. Signed Todd Walker.

8. Replaced Mark Guthrie with Kent Mercker.

 

With the exception of the trade for Pratt, I can't fault him for any of those moves. All improved the team.

 

In addition to that, he signed Kerry Wood to a lucrative extension based on his stellar performance in the LDS.

 

 

That should have set us up for a run in 2004. Once he replaced Gonzalez with Nomar, it's hard to imagine that the team didn't make the playoffs...but the injury to Borowski, the struggles with the rotation, Nomar never being fully healthy, Hawkins not living up to promise, Sosa declining rapidly...and so forth, it ended horribly.

 

But in setting that team up for 2004, Hendry signed contracts that limited most if not all of his financial flexibility for 2005. In essence he was mortgaging 2005 for a run at 2004. For example, if he hadn't giving Maddux 9 million in 2005, we would never have had him for 2004. Lee's extension paid him more down the road, as did Wood's contract and LaTroy's contract....and so forth.

 

Had we made it to the WS in 2004, most of us would be too happy to care that the 2005 team would have holes. But because of lack of finances, Hendry wasn't able to go out and sign a closer or a lead-off hitter. The money wasn't there. And to top it off, the closer options out there this winter haven't been any better than what we have.

 

So, ignore what he did from 2003 to 2004, but it's part and parcel to the point. Ignoring it just so that you're rant makes more sense is pretty ridiculous. For any point to have validity it must be looked at in context and the offseason preceeding 2004 and the motivations behind those moves are very much contextual to the situation we are in today.

[frostwyrm]

Dusty is at least 50% responsible for the Cubs record this year.

 

I'm a confirmed Baker basher but even I wouldn't defintively lay 50% of the blame at his feet. He has done plenty to make bad situations worse but some things that have gone wrong were out of his control. Now if it's true that Prior's and Wood's health issues are the result of Dusty riding them way too hard during the stretch run in 2003, then I would agree that Baker is a franchise-wrecking monster. Unfortunately it's hard to prove that.

[XZero771679666304]

I answered all your questions one by one. Then you just rationalized why my answers didn't mean anything and I'm not going to play that game. My answers to your questions stand, and they prove that Hendry has dropped the ball.

 

Hey dude. If you're OK with a .500 ballclub out of contention in mid-August, that's your business. I'm not. Hendry built this club, and it's not in contention. Therefore he should get some of the blame.

 

I'm looking around the league at ballclubs who *ARE* getting it done. I'm looking at frachises like the A's, who are in contention year after year on a fraction of our payroll. They do it with callup after callup. Where are our callups? Where's our calvalry to save the season? Nowhere to be found.

 

I'm looking at teams like the Braves, who have done it for years with a solid foundation and great F.A. signings. Now they're doing it with a great minor league system feeding the major league ballclub. Again---where is ours? They have a much better manager than we do, too. So---why didn't we hire a better one? Hendry dropped the ball on that, too.

 

I'm looking at even a team like the Brewers. They have no payroll, for all practical purposes. How can they be ahead of us in the standings and you won't even consider Hendry might have failed? What a minor league system they have developed. Meanwhile, ours has been drained.....by HENDRY, and the results have been we are out of contention.

 

The Cardinals do it another way: they sign great F.A.s every year, and piece together a ballclub with deftness and good assessments. So---why is Jocketty able to do this but Hendry can't?

 

How can a new franchise like the Marlins already have 2 World Series Championships and nobody's upset? How does that happen?

 

My point is, Hendry is not getting it done. Why is this even a debate? The ballclub stinks. Hendry is in charge. It's about time he started getting some of the blame.

 

Cbbryan----I agree MacPhail should get some heat. But if I'm going to be crucified on this board for calling foul on one beloved Cubs employee, don't expect me to be crucified for trying to call out all of them at the same time!

 

You haven't done squat to address my post, because you can't. You cannot attribute that lion's share of the 2005 failure to Hendry, and I pretty well proved why. Dusty is at least 50% responsible for the Cubs record this year. If you can refute what I said in my post, go ahead.

 

Dusty is at least 50%. And Hendry hired Dusty.

 

There. I just completely refuted it. Again.

 

Whatever. What did you think when Dusty was hired? Oh wait, I suppose you saw the full spectrum of his poor performance coming the winter he was signed. :roll:

 

Here we go...MacPhail hired Hendry, he must be at fault. No wait, the Trib hired MacPhail, they are the ones at fault. Are the Tribune shareholders responsible for Dusty as well?

 

Come on. Dusty is a professional who should be held responsible for his ineptitude, not a bad child whose parents should be blamed for their poor behavior. Saying Hendry made a poor decision by hiring him is one thing, but putting the full mantle of Dusty's failings on Hendry is patently ridiculous.

 

Hendry is not clairvoyant. I sincerely doubt that he or anyone here could have predicted the litany of terrible decisions that Dusty has made. Is Hendry partly responsible for Dusty? Sure. But saying Dusty's 50% blame is actually Hendry's by default is just stupid.

 

By that logic, you can transfer Hendry's fault to someone else, and no one is really responsible for anything. It is convient for blaming Hendry, but very flawed.

[Soul]

 

The fact is 2004 greatly impacted the team we have in 2005.

 

 

Why did it have to? Other teams don't operate like that. The Braves moves in 2004 haven't impacted their ability to play well in 2005. You may think that passes for good front-office work. I'm telling you it doesn't. And I'm right, because the result is teams like the Braves win every year and we don't.

 

After coming so close in 2003, Hendry made the choice, which almost all would agree was the right choice, to put the team in contention for 2004.

 

Of course I agree putting the team in contention was a good choice. However, sacrificing the future for a season isn't what perennially successful clubs do. They win every season.

 

In order to improve on the 2003 team, he

 

1. Traded Choi for Lee.

2. Signed Greg Maddux to be the fifth starter.

3. Signed LaTroy Hawkins to shore up the bullpen.

4. Traded Cruz and Smyth for Pratt and Lewis to give us a loogy in the pen due to injuries to Mercker and Remlinger in the Spring.

5. Traded Miller for Barrett.

6. Replaced Troy O'Leary with Todd Hollandsworth

7. Signed Todd Walker.

8. Replaced Mark Guthrie with Kent Mercker.

 

With the exception of the trade for Pratt, I can't fault him for any of those moves. All improved the team.

 

That's what I like about you Vance. You pull up all the details. I'm not as concerned about details as I am about being a successful franchise year in and year out. And that isn't happening. I'm concerned about results. If I don't see them, then blame must be assigned. Everyone else feels the same way: that's why the Dusty bashing on this board never ceases, myself included. Hendry deserves some of that blame as well.

 

 

But in setting that team up for 2004, Hendry signed contracts that limited most if not all of his financial flexibility for 2005. In essence he was mortgaging 2005 for a run at 2004. For example, if he hadn't giving Maddux 9 million in 2005, we would never have had him for 2004. Lee's extension paid him more down the road, as did Wood's contract and LaTroy's contract....and so forth.

 

Why did he have to "mortgage the future" for 2004 when other successful franchises, even on less money, don't have to do that?

 

Had we made it to the WS in 2004, most of us would be too happy to care that the 2005 team would have holes. But because of lack of finances, Hendry wasn't able to go out and sign a closer or a lead-off hitter. The money wasn't there. And to top it off, the closer options out there this winter haven't been any better than what we have.

 

We have the largest payroll/budget in the NL, vance. If we can't win with that, then using the excuse that the "money wasn't there" is ridiculous. Even so, I certainly wouldn't have forgiven 2005 bad play just because we made the World Series in 2004.

 

So, ignore what he did from 2003 to 2004, but it's part and parcel to the point.

 

Only because he made it that way.

 

Ignoring it just so that you're rant makes more sense is pretty ridiculous.

 

The only thing that's ridiculous is making excuses for a failure.

 

For any point to have validity it must be looked at in context and the offseason preceeding 2004 and the motivations behind those moves are very much contextual to the situation we are in today.

 

And yet, year after year, others make moves in each offseason, develop players each offseason, put together teams each offseason, and win each and every season. Yet we cannot. For your point to have validity, the moves that teams like the A's, Braves, Cardinals, and others would have to have a bad effect on future years. Yet it doesn't.

[Soul]

Whatever. What did you think when Dusty was hired? Oh wait, I suppose you saw the full spectrum of his poor performance coming the winter he was signed. :roll:

 

Here we go...MacPhail hired Hendry, he must be at fault. No wait, the Trib hired MacPhail, they are the ones at fault. Are the Tribune shareholders responsible for Dusty as well?

 

Come on. Dusty is a professional who should be held responsible for his ineptitude, not a bad child whose parents should be blamed for their poor behavior. Saying Hendry made a poor decision by hiring him is one thing, but putting the full mantle of Dusty's failings on Hendry is patently ridiculous.

 

Hendry is not clairvoyant. I sincerely doubt that he or anyone here could have predicted the litany of terrible decisions that Dusty has made. Is Hendry partly responsible for Dusty? Sure. But saying Dusty's 50% blame is actually Hendry's by default is just stupid.

 

By that logic, you can transfer Hendry's fault to someone else, and no one is really responsible for anything. It is convient for blaming Hendry, but very flawed.

 

Well, at least you're finally admitting some of the blame should fall on Hendry for the decision to hire Dusty. That's alot more than I thought I would get out of you.

 

As for the chain of command: oh come on, you can't honestly tell me you have never entertained the thought of where this club might be if the Tribune sold it to a more proven owner. At least a more dedicated ownership team. I know I have. How many World Series titles have the Tribune deliverd? There's no reason to have any loyalty to them or shield them from criticism. MacPhail either.

 

I think this whole thing has to be blamed on everyone involved. I see alot of Dusty bashing. I engage in alot of Dusty bashing. It's high time Hendry took some heat too. If we want to extend that to MacPhail and the Tribune ownership team (or whatever they call the committee dedicated to the Cubs---probably the Cubs Steering Committee, hah), fine by me.

Edited August 14, 2005 by Soul

[XZero771679666304]

 

That's what I like about you Vance. You pull up all the details. I'm not as concerned about details as I am about being a successful franchise year in and year out. And that isn't happening. I'm concerned about results. If I don't see them, then blame must be assigned. Everyone else feels the same way: that's why the Dusty bashing on this board never ceases, myself included. Hendry deserves some of that blame as well.

 

The problem is that throughout this argument you've sounded a whole lot like someone trying to assign all or nearly all of the blame to Hendry.

 

Unless I am mistaken, no one here has said that Hendry is an awesome or stellar GM. He is certainly flawed, but has done enough to merit another chance, IMO. Dusty hasn't.

[Soul]

 

That's what I like about you Vance. You pull up all the details. I'm not as concerned about details as I am about being a successful franchise year in and year out. And that isn't happening. I'm concerned about results. If I don't see them, then blame must be assigned. Everyone else feels the same way: that's why the Dusty bashing on this board never ceases, myself included. Hendry deserves some of that blame as well.

 

The problem is that throughout this argument you've sounded a whole lot like someone trying to assign all or nearly all of the blame to Hendry.

 

Unless I am mistaken, no one here has said that Hendry is an awesome or stellar GM. He is certainly flawed, but has done enough to merit another chance, IMO. Dusty hasn't.

 

I have used hyperbole to make my point. It's true.

[XZero771679666304]

Whatever. What did you think when Dusty was hired? Oh wait, I suppose you saw the full spectrum of his poor performance coming the winter he was signed. :roll:

 

Here we go...MacPhail hired Hendry, he must be at fault. No wait, the Trib hired MacPhail, they are the ones at fault. Are the Tribune shareholders responsible for Dusty as well?

 

Come on. Dusty is a professional who should be held responsible for his ineptitude, not a bad child whose parents should be blamed for their poor behavior. Saying Hendry made a poor decision by hiring him is one thing, but putting the full mantle of Dusty's failings on Hendry is patently ridiculous.

 

Hendry is not clairvoyant. I sincerely doubt that he or anyone here could have predicted the litany of terrible decisions that Dusty has made. Is Hendry partly responsible for Dusty? Sure. But saying Dusty's 50% blame is actually Hendry's by default is just stupid.

 

By that logic, you can transfer Hendry's fault to someone else, and no one is really responsible for anything. It is convient for blaming Hendry, but very flawed.

 

Well, at least you're finally admitting some of the blame should fall on Hendry for the decision to hire Dusty. That's alot more than I thought I would get out of you.

 

As for the chain of command: oh come on, you can't honestly tell me you have never entertained the thought of where this club might be if the Tribune sold it to a more proven owner. At least a more dedicated ownership team. I know I have.

 

I think this whole thing has to be blamed on everyone involved. I see alot of Dusty bashing. I engage in alot of Dusty bashing. It's high time Hendry took some heat too. If we want to extend that to MacPhail and the Tribune ownership team (or whatever they call the committee dedicated to the Cubs---probably the Cubs Steering Committee, hah), fine by me.

 

Hey, I have bashed everyone recently. And make no mistake, I have no love for the Trib, I was just pointing out the flaw in the logic. I was nearly drooling when Mark Cuban said he would be interested in the Cubs if they ever went up for sale.

 

Maybe there should be a consortium of Chicagoans that buy the Cubs and make them community property, a la the Packers. But the idea of Cuban owning the team is really nice.

 

And I think it is common sense that Hendry is partially responsible for Dusty, and is not worth mentioning. It seemed that you were assigning all of Dusty's blame to Hendry, and that is what got my ire. FWIW, if Hendry refuses to fire Baker, I would see them both gone, and this isn't the first time I've said it on this board. His recent support for Dusty has been perplexing, but I'm taking the wait-and-see-until-the-offseason approach.

[Soul]

That's alright. I'm O.K. with a little "ire" right now.

 

Because as I Cub fan, I don't really think it's O.K. to be happy with what's going on right now.

[Balsa]

Well it doesn't matter much anyway. Jim Hendry said on the Score this morning that Dusty would 'unequivocally' be the manager in 2006. So we might as well get used to it for another year.

[XZero771679666304]

Well it doesn't matter much anyway. Jim Hendry said on the Score this morning that Dusty would 'unequivocally' be the manager in 2006. So we might as well get used to it for another year.

 

And who is saying Jim will "unequivocally" still be in a position to decide that next year? :twisted:

[Balsa]

I certainly hope Hendry doesn't leave.

[XZero771679666304]

I certainly hope Hendry doesn't leave.

 

If he doesn't see what is wrong here, I have to seriously question his judgement.

[Fred Hornkohl]

Well it doesn't matter much anyway. Jim Hendry said on the Score this morning that Dusty would 'unequivocally' be the manager in 2006. So we might as well get used to it for another year.

 

This is the same Jim Hendry who said that Sammy Sosa would be the CUBS' right fielder in 2005, no?

[XZero771679666304]

Well it doesn't matter much anyway. Jim Hendry said on the Score this morning that Dusty would 'unequivocally' be the manager in 2006. So we might as well get used to it for another year.

 

This is the same Jim Hendry who said that Sammy Sosa would be the CUBS' right fielder in 2005, no?

 

It just occurred to me that Hendry may be preventing Dusty from turning him into the bad guy, as Baker did w/Sabean and the Giants.

 

Who knows.