I think I just threw up in my mouth..Hendry/Dusty Extensions

[Tim]

Bruce, you need an avatar.

 

I'm lucky I know how to turn on a computer. For work, I just have to know how to type and hit "send."

:D

 

Thanks for stopping by, Bruce. And thank you again for all the insight.

 

I really don't think the Cubs are far from contention in 2006. They will have the resources to get what they need. Which, in my opinion, is primarily a big, lefty bat to put between Lee + Ramirez that provides a very high OBP. Giles would go a long way to curing what's wrong here.

[Bruce Miles]

The thing about today's game that's different from what it was years ago is that you can go out and buy a guy or two (or three) and get yourself right back in contention. The Cubs will spend the money. That's not the problem. They've got to spend it the right way, start understanding the importance of stats such as OBP and somehow get a dependable bullpen, which is the hardest thing to do in the game today. There might be some trepidation about Giles' numbers this year. I don't get a sense they're that high on him. We'll see.

[erik316wttn]

You're right about Bayless.

 

On the front-office relationships, the MacPhail-Hendry relationship is very strong. Baker and Hendry still have a good relationship, but as you saw with the Wendell Kim firing, Hendry will step in and assert his authority. You will see that again this winter. Let's remember that Hendry hired Baker because he thought he was the right guy at the time for the job. I'm sure he still thinks that, but time changes things. Most GMs will go awhile with their guy because after they fire one, the clock starts ticking on the GM.

 

So what you're saying is that Hendry is stuck with Dusty, like it or not?

[Bruce Miles]

I've got an appointment with a treadmill in the morning (some of us writers do keep in shape). I knew you guys would have a lot to say after this game today. No sport I know of sparks this much conversation. And to think we do this every day.

[bhogg]

Thanks, Bruce!

[Deeg]

Bruce, I echo Tim's thanks for your contributions here - it's great to have access to someone with an insider prespective who writes without a lot of hyperbole. Just the facts, Man - with your share of opinions, sure, but sound and well-reasoned. It's not easy being a Cubs fan right now (ever?) but it's really great to be able to read your stuff in this setting.

[CubfaninCA]

Ugh. Doesn't sound good w/ Giles. Am starting to think Manny's more likely than Giles. Of course, Manny's not a "character guy."

[erik316wttn]

Ugh. Doesn't sound good w/ Giles. Am starting to think Manny's more likely than Giles. Of course, Manny's not a "character guy."

 

Screw character. If Manny hits as well as he usually does for us, he can sacrifice goats to Satan in the locker room before every game for all I care.

 

People put far too much stock into chemistry and character. Look at those Oakland teams of the 70's that won 3 championships in a row. They would routinely get into fistfights in the locker room before and after games, but all they would do is win.

[Brian]

What do you feel is the teams confidence in Cedeno. If they don't get Furcal, will Cedeno (assuming Nomar is let go) be given a fair shot, or will it be another Hollandsworth/Dubois situation that I'm afraid of (With Neifi getting most of the PT).

[CubfaninCA]

Ugh. Doesn't sound good w/ Giles. Am starting to think Manny's more likely than Giles. Of course, Manny's not a "character guy."

 

Screw character. If Manny hits as well as he usually does for us, he can sacrifice goats to Satan in the locker room before every game for all I care.

 

People put far too much stock into chemistry and character. Look at those Oakland teams of the 70's that won 3 championships in a row. They would routinely get into fistfights in the locker room before and after games, but all they would do is win.

 

Yep screw it. 3 years and $57 million isn't too bad for someone who can hit like Manny.

[Mark Priors Calves]

Thanks Bruce, we all appreciate you stopping by.

[ConstableRabbit]

Ugh. Doesn't sound good w/ Giles. Am starting to think Manny's more likely than Giles. Of course, Manny's not a "character guy."

 

Screw character. If Manny hits as well as he usually does for us, he can sacrifice goats to Satan in the locker room before every game for all I care.

 

People put far too much stock into chemistry and character. Look at those Oakland teams of the 70's that won 3 championships in a row. They would routinely get into fistfights in the locker room before and after games, but all they would do is win.

 

You're right about the chemistry. The thing is, winning seems to settle all of those disputes losing teams have...

[ConstableRabbit]

the price, however, is a different matter...

[mhuber92211]

well in regards to my comment earlier, the strong argument is Baker's record. He has equaled wins and the futherest playoff experience the Cubs have had in over a decade. For the casual fan and even for us fans that look deeper into things, its simple, Baker has won.

 

That is a strong argument, especially of the Cubs finish at .500 or better this season. When was the last time a Cubs team finished 3 straight years over .500?

 

But the trouble is that Baker has his faults and certainly seems to have lost his way. Us here at this forum see talent at a level we haven't seen before. Therefore we naturally expect a winner (maybe even a dynasty). But realize that we have gotten a winner of sorts, now we just want to get better. The Cubs can get better and will. Hendry has seen to that. Each year the team has gotten better on paper and the last 2 seasons the plan has had to be altered midstride. Last year it worked for awhile, this year it hasn't so well. Back to the drawing board and start all over with a new team? Yes it might help, but it could get worse and put the the team back even further.

 

Right now, the team is without a specific leader who has the ability to act in "baseball" decisions. So far most of the decisions have been intelligent and justifiable. I am willing to continue with the current leadership in the hopes that their initial plan can be seen for an extended period of time.

[Yeti]

I'm not sure why "we'll deal with contracts this spring" automatically means "extension". I see it as meaning one of several things:

 

1. Extensions

2. "No Comment", meaning something may be done but not right now.

3. After off season analysis, they decide not to extend one or either.

 

FINALLY a voice of reason! when i first started reading this thread i didnt even read the quote, 2 pages in i decided to go read the article in its entirety...WOW WAS I RELIEVED!

 

this article is mere speculative crap, "contract matters...will be discussed in the spring" is McPhails canned answer for all contract questions. In fact there is NOT EVEN A DIRECT QUOTE FROM MacPhail IN THE ENTIRE ARTICLE.

 

 

its too early to give up on '07 and '08....'06 maybe, unless dusty gets canned this offseason....

 

PERSONALLY I AM GOING TO CHOOSE TO INTERPRET MCPHAILS CANNED ANSWER TO READ, IM REALLY DISGUSTED WITH DUSTY BAKER BUT IM NOT GONNA HAMSTRING HIM WITH ONE MONTH LEFT IN THE SEASON....BUT BE SURE HE'S GONE IN THE OFFSEASON

 

ok, im not really that optimistic, but i just dont see how one can take Andy's canned answer as "they will both be given extensions in the spring"

[waffle]

Hendry said sometime earlier in the year "and we'll have a payroll of around $100 million next year also if we continue to fill the seats/make money" or somesuch. In other words, if the finances are positive, which with the cubs huge following, good T.V. deal and filled seats, should not be a problem

 

Exactly how much will we have under contract next year? How much will we have to spend to get up to $100?

 

Furcal - yummy

Giles - also yummy, but I have my doubts he'll go here

Manny - oh would I LOVE to see him hitting in Wrigley. He's one wacky dude. Betcha he ends up in Mets-land, though

Starting pitching - my bet is that the cubs figure they have enough potential here. Which they do

[craig]

Great to have your input, Bruce.

 

Hendry is a popular guy, and is obviously quite safe. Reality can differ, but he's always said he's on the same page with Dusty and loves Dusty, etc.. Dusty remains the second biggest free agent sign Hendry has ever done, second only to Maddux.

 

It's just a shame that managers need to always be extended in advance. Would be nice to ride things out, but clearly they aren't ready to fire him yet, and probably figure that if he goes into his FA-year, the media hassle will be too much to bear, better to buy it off by extending him. But once you do, then money reasons force you to keep that up until you're finally ready to eat some guaranteed contract.

 

"If healthy, Wood will begin next year as a starter. With so many holes to fill on offense, I don't see them signing a big-name starting pitcher." Bruce

 

This will be interesting to watch. I admit it's kind of scary to envision an opening rotation with at best both Maddux and Williams in it, and in the likely even that Wood or Prior or Z pops an injury, then having a rotation where fading Maddux is the #3 starter and no-stuff Williams is #4. Kind of scary.

 

On the missed signs: Cedeno said a sign was on, but Hairston wasn't running. So during the split second when pitch-is-in-flight, he's watching pitch to hit, he's watching which middle infielder is abandoning position, and he's seeing Hairston standing there, he's got a nanosecond to figure out what to do. Did I miss the sign, and it was really bunt? I'm thinking that Hairston's missing his sign was the problem, and cedeno's "mistake" was a result of Hairston's mistake. Had Hairston caught his sign, Cedeno would have hit-and-run as signed to do.

 

If Dusty gets a 2-year extension, should that then change the winter planning? Maybe try to trade Hill, Cedeno, Murton, and perhaps also Pie now, while their trade stock is high?

[YearofDaCubs]

I'm not sure why "we'll deal with contracts this spring" automatically means "extension". I see it as meaning one of several things:

 

1. Extensions

2. "No Comment", meaning something may be done but not right now.

3. After off season analysis, they decide not to extend one or either.

 

FINALLY a voice of reason! when i first started reading this thread i didnt even read the quote, 2 pages in i decided to go read the article in its entirety...WOW WAS I RELIEVED!

 

this article is mere speculative crap, "contract matters...will be discussed in the spring" is McPhails canned answer for all contract questions. In fact there is NOT EVEN A DIRECT QUOTE FROM MacPhail IN THE ENTIRE ARTICLE.

 

 

its too early to give up on '07 and '08....'06 maybe, unless dusty gets canned this offseason....

 

PERSONALLY I AM GOING TO CHOOSE TO INTERPRET MCPHAILS CANNED ANSWER TO READ, IM REALLY DISGUSTED WITH DUSTY BAKER BUT IM NOT GONNA HAMSTRING HIM WITH ONE MONTH LEFT IN THE SEASON....BUT BE SURE HE'S GONE IN THE OFFSEASON

 

ok, im not really that optimistic, but i just dont see how one can take Andy's canned answer as "they will both be given extensions in the spring"

Keep reading and find some of the posts which were written by Bruce. Then maybe you wont be so relieved.

[neely crenshaw]

one point of contention.....dusty has not become a worse manager. the problem is that the team that hendry has put together has progressively gotten worse. no longer can they overcome poor managing because plain and simple they aren't very good.

if they extend hendry, it will end any chance of the cubs winning during this window of oppurtunity. the window is just about shut. as soon as prior and z are arbitration eligible, we are done.

if the cubs and hendry screw up this chance, it is very likely that the cubs will not win in the next 20 years. there is nothing that tells us they will ever get an oppurtunity like this again. their front office did not do this, pure dumb luck did. if minnesota does not pass on prior the cubs would not have ever gotten him or someone like him.we would have z and wood but that is a far cry from prior,z and wood.

[ltb]

if minnesota does not pass on prior the cubs would not have ever gotten him or someone like him.we would have z and wood but that is a far cry from prior,z and wood.

 

boy it sure would suck to have joe mauer behind the plate.

 

or, man, mark teixeira at first base would just KILL this team.

[erik316wttn]

if minnesota does not pass on prior the cubs would not have ever gotten him or someone like him.we would have z and wood but that is a far cry from prior,z and wood.

 

boy it sure would suck to have joe mauer behind the plate.

 

or, man, mark teixeira at first base would just KILL this team.

 

He never said that.

 

He said our ROTATION would be weaker, not our overall TEAM.

[ltb]

if minnesota does not pass on prior the cubs would not have ever gotten him or someone like him.we would have z and wood but that is a far cry from prior,z and wood.

 

boy it sure would suck to have joe mauer behind the plate.

 

or, man, mark teixeira at first base would just KILL this team.

 

He never said that.

 

He said our ROTATION would be weaker, not our overall TEAM.

 

show me where he mentions that the rotation would be weaker. he says we'd have z and wood at the end, but the whole attitude of the post is that we "got lucky" to get prior and that if we didn't get him, we wouldn't have picked anyone like him. sorry to burst your bubble, but i think joe mauer and mark teixeira are pretty comparable players.

[erik316wttn]

if minnesota does not pass on prior the cubs would not have ever gotten him or someone like him.we would have z and wood but that is a far cry from prior,z and wood.

 

boy it sure would suck to have joe mauer behind the plate.

 

or, man, mark teixeira at first base would just KILL this team.

 

He never said that.

 

He said our ROTATION would be weaker, not our overall TEAM.

 

show me where he mentions that the rotation would be weaker. he says we'd have z and wood at the end, but the whole attitude of the post is that we "got lucky" to get prior and that if we didn't get him, we wouldn't have picked anyone like him. sorry to burst your bubble, but i think joe mauer and mark teixeira are pretty comparable players.

 

I never said they weren't comparable players. Mauer and Teixeria are awesome and will be stars in this league for a long time.

 

I interpreted his post as there weren't any pitchers on the same level as Prior.

[JC]

I can't begin to communicate how disgusted I am with this organization. The closer these extensions come to reality, the more likely I will place my affections for this organization in hibernation until a new regime takes control.

 

I mean, if this organization is so hindered that it fails to identify and address shortcomings of its leaders, why should I invest me time in it? I don't feel like its abandonment as much as it seems like I'm being pushed away by incompetence and stupidity.

 

This regime has lost its way. I am confident that the millions of dollars available this offseason will be spent in ways that further hamper this organization's chances to claw its way out of futility. Big money contracts to low talent players will stunt the ability to make the team better should better talent later become available. Likewise, inept managing, tantamount to baseball malpractice, will continue to [expletive] development and carelessly mismanage rotation and bullpen arms.

 

If the suits had any sense, they would cut MacPhail off before he ushers in the vanguards of mediocrity for another go around. Continuity of leadership is only effective when that leadership is competent.

[CubinNY]

I can't begin to communicate how disgusted I am with this organization. The closer these extensions come to reality, the more likely I will place my affections for this organization in hibernation until a new regime takes control.

 

I mean, if this organization is so hindered that it fails to identify and address shortcomings of its leaders, why should I invest me time in it? I don't feel like its abandonment as much as it seems like I'm being pushed away by incompetence and stupidity.

 

This regime has lost its way. I am confident that the millions of dollars available this offseason will be spent in ways that further hamper this organization's chances to claw its way out of futility. Big money contracts to low talent players will stunt the ability to make the team better should better talent later become available. Likewise, inept managing, tantamount to baseball malpractice, will continue to [expletive] development and carelessly mismanage rotation and bullpen arms.

 

If the suits had any sense, they would cut MacPhail off before he ushers in the vanguards of mediocrity for another go around. Continuity of leadership is only effective when that leadership is competent.

 

Well, written JC. I mostly just read here anymore (in baseball related discussions) as I don't know what to say about this organization. They can change the players, but as long as the philosophy and management doesn't change neither will the results.