Hey Bruce...do you have time for a few questions?

[Careless]

I really do have to wonder why Hendry gave him so much and for two years. That is a question I'd like to see the sportswriters ask. It seems like an aweful high amount for a roster filler.

 

I agree. I can understand that Hendry might see a value in Neifi Perez, I just don't see the need to pay him 2.5 per when there weren't other bidders for his services.

 

There is no justification. He is overpaid. But it should be noted that he did not get a raise - in 2005 his base salary was 1 million and he earned 1.5 million in incentives that kicked-in.

$3 million (salary+bonus)+incentives>$1+1.5

[YearofDaCubs]

Hendry interview going to be on any moment on ESPN 1000.

 

http://espnradio1000.com/listenlive.asp

[fromthestretch]

Would you rather have Furcal (est. 9 million), Neifi (2.5 million), Rusch (3 million) Dempster (5 million) (total = 19.5 million) or Cedeno (300,000) Walker (2.5 million) Byrd (est 7 million) and BJ Ryan (est 9 million)

(total = 19 million) ?

 

No brainer. I would substitute Washburn in for Byrd if it was roughly the same cost.

 

Neither Washburn nor Byrd are worth near that much. How about taking that $7 million, adding another $3-4 million to it and getting Giles?

[USSoccer]

Hendry interview going to be on any moment on ESPN 1000.

 

http://espnradio1000.com/listenlive.asp

 

He said no one saw Hollandsworth struggles coming. :x

[YearofDaCubs]

Hendry interview going to be on any moment on ESPN 1000.

 

http://espnradio1000.com/listenlive.asp

 

He said no one saw Hollandsworth struggles coming. :x

See man. I will say this though. Hendry pretty much said that he has failed the past two years. At least he can recognize that.

[USSoccer]

Hendry interview going to be on any moment on ESPN 1000.

 

http://espnradio1000.com/listenlive.asp

 

He said no one saw Hollandsworth struggles coming. :x

See man. I will say this though. Hendry pretty much said that he has failed the past two years. At least he can recognize that.

 

Yeah, that was the only part of the interview that irritated me. I don't think the questions were the right ones, though. I would have asked about:

 

-Why not Brian Giles?

-Aramis' offseason stretching program

-Dotel?

-Rule 5 draft guys; why not trade some?

-Why not let Neifi go test the market and save money?

-OBP in the 1-2 spots.

[YearofDaCubs]

Hendry interview going to be on any moment on ESPN 1000.

 

http://espnradio1000.com/listenlive.asp

 

He said no one saw Hollandsworth struggles coming. :x

See man. I will say this though. Hendry pretty much said that he has failed the past two years. At least he can recognize that.

 

Yeah, that was the only part of the interview that irritated me. I don't think the questions were the right ones, though. I would have asked about:

 

-Why not Brian Giles?

-Aramis' offseason stretching program

-Dotel?

-Rule 5 draft guys; why not trade some?

-Why not let Neifi go test the market and save money?

-OBP in the 1-2 spots.

Agreed. Those questions would have been excellent to ask.

[frostwyrm]

No one saw Hollandsworth's struggles coming? That's a laugh. Most of us here knew what would happen. People have said a MLB general manager has better things to do than look at message boards, but apparently that isn't true.

[jtownie]

Hendry interview going to be on any moment on ESPN 1000.

 

http://espnradio1000.com/listenlive.asp

 

He said no one saw Hollandsworth struggles coming. :x

See man. I will say this though. Hendry pretty much said that he has failed the past two years. At least he can recognize that.

 

Yeah, that was the only part of the interview that irritated me. I don't think the questions were the right ones, though. I would have asked about:

 

-Why not Brian Giles?

-Aramis' offseason stretching program

-Dotel?

-Rule 5 draft guys; why not trade some?

-Why not let Neifi go test the market and save money?

-OBP in the 1-2 spots.

Agreed. Those questions would have been excellent to ask.

 

Well I know Hendry did mention that Stat-wise the lead-off position was not where it should be. Hendry isn't going to come out and say that Dusty's top of the lineup was terrible. It's just not his M.O. He mentioned that RF was something they are going to be looking at as well as more pitching depth. I didn't expect him to come and tell Silvy and Carmen exactly who he is looking at.

[USSoccer]

Hendry interview going to be on any moment on ESPN 1000.

 

http://espnradio1000.com/listenlive.asp

 

He said no one saw Hollandsworth struggles coming. :x

See man. I will say this though. Hendry pretty much said that he has failed the past two years. At least he can recognize that.

 

Yeah, that was the only part of the interview that irritated me. I don't think the questions were the right ones, though. I would have asked about:

 

-Why not Brian Giles?

-Aramis' offseason stretching program

-Dotel?

-Rule 5 draft guys; why not trade some?

-Why not let Neifi go test the market and save money?

-OBP in the 1-2 spots.

Agreed. Those questions would have been excellent to ask.

 

Well I know Hendry did mention that Stat-wise the lead-off position was not where it should be. Hendry isn't going to come out and say that Dusty's top of the lineup was terrible. It's just not his M.O. He mentioned that RF was something they are going to be looking at as well as more pitching depth. I didn't expect him to come and tell Silvy and Carmen exactly who he is looking at.

 

I wasn't knocking Hendry's answers; I was being critical of the questions that were asked. I didn't think they were the best questions to ask Hendry. He could have answered however he wanted, but if the interviewers at least bother to ask to right questions, that's all I could hope for.

[jtownie]

Hendry interview going to be on any moment on ESPN 1000.

 

http://espnradio1000.com/listenlive.asp

 

He said no one saw Hollandsworth struggles coming. :x

See man. I will say this though. Hendry pretty much said that he has failed the past two years. At least he can recognize that.

 

Yeah, that was the only part of the interview that irritated me. I don't think the questions were the right ones, though. I would have asked about:

 

-Why not Brian Giles?

-Aramis' offseason stretching program

-Dotel?

-Rule 5 draft guys; why not trade some?

-Why not let Neifi go test the market and save money?

-OBP in the 1-2 spots.

Agreed. Those questions would have been excellent to ask.

 

Well I know Hendry did mention that Stat-wise the lead-off position was not where it should be. Hendry isn't going to come out and say that Dusty's top of the lineup was terrible. It's just not his M.O. He mentioned that RF was something they are going to be looking at as well as more pitching depth. I didn't expect him to come and tell Silvy and Carmen exactly who he is looking at.

 

I wasn't knocking Hendry's answers; I was being critical of the questions that were asked. I didn't think they were the best questions to ask Hendry. He could have answered however he wanted, but if the interviewers at least bother to ask to right questions, that's all I could hope for.

 

I wasn't arguing against you. Didn't mean for it to come off that way. Just pointing out some things he said that I wasn't sure anyone knew they were addressed...in particular the OBP in the 1-2 spots. I totally agree that the questions were fairly soft. I think a lot of times they have GMs on just to say they could get them on and talk to them and then they leave it up to Bruce Levine to ask the hard questions...although I am not sure he does either.

The interesting question I heard was about Walker and why we haven't heard about him much. Hendry denied that Walker wasn't in the plans for the future and in a nutshell discredited the rumors that if they sign Furcal 2nd base would come down to just Cedeno and Perez.

[CoolHandLuke]

Would you rather have Furcal (est. 9 million), Neifi (2.5 million), Rusch (3 million) Dempster (5 million) (total = 19.5 million) or Cedeno (300,000) Walker (2.5 million) Byrd (est 7 million) and BJ Ryan (est 9 million)

(total = 19 million) ?

 

No brainer. I would substitute Washburn in for Byrd if it was roughly the same cost.

 

Neither Washburn nor Byrd are worth near that much. How about taking that $7 million, adding another $3-4 million to it and getting Giles?

 

Can't argue with that, in fact I would much prefer it. I was just looking at alternatives to the spots filled who would cost about the same, and be more productive (imho)

[Andy]

Hendry interview going to be on any moment on ESPN 1000.

 

http://espnradio1000.com/listenlive.asp

 

He said no one saw Hollandsworth struggles coming. :x

See man. I will say this though. Hendry pretty much said that he has failed the past two years. At least he can recognize that.

 

Yeah, that was the only part of the interview that irritated me. I don't think the questions were the right ones, though. I would have asked about:

 

-Why not Brian Giles?

-Aramis' offseason stretching program

-Dotel?

-Rule 5 draft guys; why not trade some?

-Why not let Neifi go test the market and save money?

-OBP in the 1-2 spots.

Agreed. Those questions would have been excellent to ask.

 

Well I know Hendry did mention that Stat-wise the lead-off position was not where it should be. Hendry isn't going to come out and say that Dusty's top of the lineup was terrible. It's just not his M.O. He mentioned that RF was something they are going to be looking at as well as more pitching depth. I didn't expect him to come and tell Silvy and Carmen exactly who he is looking at.

 

I wasn't knocking Hendry's answers; I was being critical of the questions that were asked. I didn't think they were the best questions to ask Hendry. He could have answered however he wanted, but if the interviewers at least bother to ask to right questions, that's all I could hope for.

 

I wasn't arguing against you. Didn't mean for it to come off that way. Just pointing out some things he said that I wasn't sure anyone knew they were addressed...in particular the OBP in the 1-2 spots. I totally agree that the questions were fairly soft. I think a lot of times they have GMs on just to say they could get them on and talk to them and then they leave it up to Bruce Levine to ask the hard questions...although I am not sure he does either.

The interesting question I heard was about Walker and why we haven't heard about him much. Hendry denied that Walker wasn't in the plans for the future and in a nutshell discredited the rumors that if they sign Furcal 2nd base would come down to just Cedeno and Perez.

I hope he's not just saying that just to be saying that. Todd Walker should be our starting 2nd baseman next year, and he should be batting 2nd behind Furcal. At least I'd hope that would be the case.

[erik316wttn]

Hendry interview going to be on any moment on ESPN 1000.

 

http://espnradio1000.com/listenlive.asp

 

He said no one saw Hollandsworth struggles coming. :x

See man. I will say this though. Hendry pretty much said that he has failed the past two years. At least he can recognize that.

 

Yeah, that was the only part of the interview that irritated me. I don't think the questions were the right ones, though. I would have asked about:

 

-Why not Brian Giles?

-Aramis' offseason stretching program

-Dotel?

-Rule 5 draft guys; why not trade some?

-Why not let Neifi go test the market and save money?

-OBP in the 1-2 spots.

Agreed. Those questions would have been excellent to ask.

 

Well I know Hendry did mention that Stat-wise the lead-off position was not where it should be. Hendry isn't going to come out and say that Dusty's top of the lineup was terrible. It's just not his M.O. He mentioned that RF was something they are going to be looking at as well as more pitching depth. I didn't expect him to come and tell Silvy and Carmen exactly who he is looking at.

 

I wasn't knocking Hendry's answers; I was being critical of the questions that were asked. I didn't think they were the best questions to ask Hendry. He could have answered however he wanted, but if the interviewers at least bother to ask to right questions, that's all I could hope for.

 

I wasn't arguing against you. Didn't mean for it to come off that way. Just pointing out some things he said that I wasn't sure anyone knew they were addressed...in particular the OBP in the 1-2 spots. I totally agree that the questions were fairly soft. I think a lot of times they have GMs on just to say they could get them on and talk to them and then they leave it up to Bruce Levine to ask the hard questions...although I am not sure he does either.

The interesting question I heard was about Walker and why we haven't heard about him much. Hendry denied that Walker wasn't in the plans for the future and in a nutshell discredited the rumors that if they sign Furcal 2nd base would come down to just Cedeno and Perez.

I hope he's not just saying that just to be saying that. Todd Walker should be our starting 2nd baseman next year, and he should be batting 2nd behind Furcal. At least I'd hope that would be the case.

 

But....but....but his DEFENSE is bad. No matter he can hit .300, he may cost us 5 runs a year with his glove! We CANT have that!

[fromthestretch]

Would you rather have Furcal (est. 9 million), Neifi (2.5 million), Rusch (3 million) Dempster (5 million) (total = 19.5 million) or Cedeno (300,000) Walker (2.5 million) Byrd (est 7 million) and BJ Ryan (est 9 million)

(total = 19 million) ?

 

No brainer. I would substitute Washburn in for Byrd if it was roughly the same cost.

 

Neither Washburn nor Byrd are worth near that much. How about taking that $7 million, adding another $3-4 million to it and getting Giles?

 

Can't argue with that, in fact I would much prefer it. I was just looking at alternatives to the spots filled who would cost about the same, and be more productive (imho)

 

I'm just not of the opinion that the Cubs need to go out and get another starting pitcher. We all know the health problems this team has had, and of course, Hendry should always keep that in the back of his mind. However, if we can believe the progress reports on Wood, the Cubs are looking at a front four of Zambrano, Prior, Wood, and Maddux next April. I see no reason why Williams can't be the fifth man, unless he is part of a deal that brings the Cubs a very good outfield bat. Williams is no Cy Young candidate, but approx. $500,000 for a 23-year old fifth starter with a career ERA under 4.00 is nothing to sneeze at. If someone gets hurt, Rusch can start for an extended period of time. Guzman, if healthy and producing in the minors, could get a shot. Hill is still here. So is Mitre, although I'm not as high on him. Perhaps Pinto or Nolasco could make a start or two if needed (as a last resort). There are plenty of options there.

 

Instead of spending $7 million+ on another starter, the best move IMO is to use that for a big-time bat in the outfield.

[bc2k]

Would you rather have Furcal (est. 9 million), Neifi (2.5 million), Rusch (3 million) Dempster (5 million) (total = 19.5 million) or Cedeno (300,000) Walker (2.5 million) Byrd (est 7 million) and BJ Ryan (est 9 million)

(total = 19 million) ?

 

No brainer. I would substitute Washburn in for Byrd if it was roughly the same cost.

 

Neither Washburn nor Byrd are worth near that much. How about taking that $7 million, adding another $3-4 million to it and getting Giles?

 

Can't argue with that, in fact I would much prefer it. I was just looking at alternatives to the spots filled who would cost about the same, and be more productive (imho)

 

I'm just not of the opinion that the Cubs need to go out and get another starting pitcher. We all know the health problems this team has had, and of course, Hendry should always keep that in the back of his mind. However, if we can believe the progress reports on Wood, the Cubs are looking at a front four of Zambrano, Prior, Wood, and Maddux next April. I see no reason why Williams can't be the fifth man, unless he is part of a deal that brings the Cubs a very good outfield bat. Williams is no Cy Young candidate, but approx. $500,000 for a 23-year old fifth starter with a career ERA under 4.00 is nothing to sneeze at. If someone gets hurt, Rusch can start for an extended period of time. Guzman, if healthy and producing in the minors, could get a shot. Hill is still here. So is Mitre, although I'm not as high on him. Perhaps Pinto or Nolasco could make a start or two if needed (as a last resort). There are plenty of options there.

 

Instead of spending $7 million+ on another starter, the best move IMO is to use that for a big-time bat in the outfield.

 

Well put. I agree.

[bc2k]

I'd love to see what Neifi's incentives were for last year. I'm not going to say he didn't deserve them last year, because he really did. It was Baker's fault he batted at the top of the order.

 

But, if Cedeno did more sitting toward the end of the season because Baker was helping Neifi get incentives added on to his contract, I won't be happy.

 

I assumed it was because Baker was trying to help his own cause (reach .500) and he just couldn't trust a rookie to help him.

 

I hear you. I had the same thoughts in Aug/Sep that Dusty was denying the rookies playing time after the Cubs had been virtually eliminated from the playoffs because of his own personal goal of managing another .500 team.

 

Remember that quote he had down the stretch where he said something like, "I've only managed two teams that didn't finish .500 or better."

 

Dusty has this inferiority complex--maybe justified because the media could have been pressuring him--that makes him sound childish. Take the Subway sandwich "competition" of 2004. When a reporter jokingly informed Dusty that Ozzie's sub is a better seller than Dusty's, Dusty said something like, "Hey dude, Subway originally only wanted me to do that promotion. The only reason Ozzie has a sandwich is because I told Subway that the only way I'll do the promotion is if you include Ozzie too."

 

Dusty, the reporter was joking with you, and even if he wasn't, the popularity of a freaking sandwich is meaningless. Why would you care, why would you get so defensive?

 

This is the same mindset of his .500 goal. He wanted to reach .500 so when criticized in the future, he can point to his history of mostly managing winners. He's so defensive about it that it potentially hurt his 2006 team by not playing Murton and Cedeno more in 2005. As a fan, that's extremely frustrating.

Edited November 10, 2005 by bc2k

[CUBZ99]

Is this still Bruce Miles Q & A?

 

If so, the Mets are reportedly shopping Benson and Trachsel(sp?). Do the Cubs have any interest in acquiring Benson? Seems like I heard a couple years ago when he was still with the Pirates that Hendry was close to getting him.

[Andy]

I'd love to see what Neifi's incentives were for last year. I'm not going to say he didn't deserve them last year, because he really did. It was Baker's fault he batted at the top of the order.

 

But, if Cedeno did more sitting toward the end of the season because Baker was helping Neifi get incentives added on to his contract, I won't be happy.

 

I assumed it was because Baker was trying to help his own cause (reach .500) and he just couldn't trust a rookie to help him.

 

I hear you. I had the same thoughts in Aug/Sep that Dusty was denying the rookies playing time after the Cubs had been virtually eliminated from the playoffs because of his own personal goal of managing another .500 team.

 

Remember that quote he had down the stretch where he said something like, "I've only managed two teams that didn't finish .500 or better."

 

Dusty has this inferiority complex--maybe justified because the media could have been pressuring him--that makes him sound childish. Take the Subway sandwich "competition" of 2004. When a reporter jokingly informed Dusty that Ozzie's sub is a better seller than Dusty's, Dusty said something like, "Hey dude, Subway originally only wanted me to do that promotion. The only reason Ozzie has a sandwich is because I told Subway that the only way I'll do the promotion is if you include Ozzie too."

In fairness to Dusty, I remember hearing about the subs they had picked, and the Ozzie sub sounded better-tasting to me. :lol:

[JC]

Any interest the Cubs would have in Benson or Trachsel, hell, even with interest in Burnett at this point, is a damning indictment of the state of the farm system.

[USSoccer]

Any interest the Cubs would have in Benson or Trachsel, hell, even with interest in Burnett at this point, is a damning indictment of the state of the farm system.

 

Remember being optimistic about Brownlie, Ryu, Guzman, Pinto and Sisco?

 

We'll be lucky if one of them gets to our big league club.

[JC]

Any interest the Cubs would have in Benson or Trachsel, hell, even with interest in Burnett at this point, is a damning indictment of the state of the farm system.

 

Remember being optimistic about Brownlie, Ryu, Guzman, Pinto and Sisco?

 

We'll be lucky if one of them gets to our big league club.

 

Well, we know one of those pitchers is major league caliber...

[USSoccer]

Any interest the Cubs would have in Benson or Trachsel, hell, even with interest in Burnett at this point, is a damning indictment of the state of the farm system.

 

Remember being optimistic about Brownlie, Ryu, Guzman, Pinto and Sisco?

 

We'll be lucky if one of them gets to our big league club.

 

Well, we know one of those pitchers is major league caliber...

 

Brownlie?

 

I still have hopes... :D

[CUBZ99]

Any interest the Cubs would have in Benson or Trachsel, hell, even with interest in Burnett at this point, is a damning indictment of the state of the farm system.

 

Benson seems like exactly the type of pitcher that Hendry would covet.

[biittner77]

Any interest the Cubs would have in Benson or Trachsel, hell, even with interest in Burnett at this point, is a damning indictment of the state of the farm system.

 

Benson seems like exactly the type of pitcher that Hendry would covet.

 

Your use of the word covet is a natural segue to the inevitable mention of Anna Benson that must ensue.