Your Thoughts on Hendry's Plan

[Careless]

My thoughts on hendry's plan: It's terrible. Bloody awful. A disgrace.

I think the "do what you think the WS champ did that made them win" hypothesis has some validity.

[CubfaninCA]

Hendry's plan is pretty clear to me:

 

(1) Pitching

(2) More pitching

(3) Defense

(4) Durability

(5) Timely hitting

 

He's trying to do what the White Sox and Astros did in 2005, and what the Marlins and Angels did in 2003 and 2002.

 

Anyone who doesn't meet a significant number of those categories is out. Patterson is going to be dealt because of (5) and maybe even (3); Walker is going to be dealt because of (3) and (4). Burnitz and Garciaparra aren't being brought back because of (5), and (3) and (4), respectively.

 

Rusch was brought back because of (2) and (4), and Neifi was brought back because of (3) and (4).

 

Here's the line-up that I am now envisioning:

 

Furcal

Pierre

Lee

Ramirez

right fielder (Encarnacion, Wilson, Mench, maybe Abreu depending on what Gillick wants)

Murton

Barrett

Cedeno/Perez

 

Rotation:

 

Zambrano

Prior

Millwood or Burnett or Washburn or Livan

Maddux

Rusch

Wood

 

Good assessment. So you think Walker will be dealt for a reliever?? I would not be surprised to see him traded to TX and the Cubs get Soriano, which would really hack some people off.

 

Altogether, that team you posted can win a title.

[Guest]

Hendry's plan is pretty clear to me:

 

(1) Pitching

(2) More pitching

(3) Defense

(4) Durability

(5) Timely hitting

 

He's trying to do what the White Sox and Astros did in 2005, and what the Marlins and Angels did in 2003 and 2002.

 

Anyone who doesn't meet a significant number of those categories is out. Patterson is going to be dealt because of (5) and maybe even (3); Walker is going to be dealt because of (3) and (4). Burnitz and Garciaparra aren't being brought back because of (5), and (3) and (4), respectively.

Any GM whose chief offensive concern is "timely hitting" has absolutely no buisiness making personnel decisions for a professional baseball club. (Competitive or otherwise.)

 

Aside from the first two points (which aren't bad) that's a plan for mediocrity even in the best of circumstances.

[CuseCubFan69]

Hendry's plan is pretty clear to me:

 

(1) Pitching

(2) More pitching

(3) Defense

(4) Durability

(5) Timely hitting

 

He's trying to do what the White Sox and Astros did in 2005, and what the Marlins and Angels did in 2003 and 2002.

 

Anyone who doesn't meet a significant number of those categories is out. Patterson is going to be dealt because of (5) and maybe even (3); Walker is going to be dealt because of (3) and (4). Burnitz and Garciaparra aren't being brought back because of (5), and (3) and (4), respectively.

Any GM whose chief offensive concern is "timely hitting" has absolutely no buisiness making personnel decisions for a professional baseball club. (Competitive or otherwise.)

Aside from the first two points (which aren't bad) that's a plan for mediocrity even in the best of circumstances.

 

Maybe I'll buy Jim a Rolex and he can retire then.

[Andy]

Hendry doesn't have a plan. He's doing whatever Dusty Baker tells him to do at this point. It won't be long now before we announce a lifetime contract for Dusty as Cubs manager.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

step 1: bring back all coaches

step 2: sign Glendon Rusch for 2 years

step 3: sign Neifi Perez for 2 years

 

whatever his plan is a freaking hate it, and i'm sure 2 other steps in there are his and dusty's extensions :x.

 

It's the 12 Step Program for claiming last place in the NL Central. =D>

[USSoccer]

Hendry's plan seems to be predicated on health of our pitching, versatility of reserves and chemistry of veteran everyday players.

 

Unfortunatly, that sort of plan never will work. I'd rather have bench players good at one thing than ones that stink at nearly everything. I'd rather not have to count on injuries not hitting us, and guys having career years.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

When is the last time a bench player was signed for 2 yrs and 5 mil? I can't think of one, not even the yankee's.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

When is the last time a bench player was signed for 2 yrs and 5 mil? I can't think of one, not even the yankee's.

 

hey, we gotta spend 100 million somehow.

[fromthestretch]

When is the last time a bench player was signed for 2 yrs and 5 mil? I can't think of one, not even the yankee's.

 

Rob Mackowiak only made $1.5 million in 2005, and I'd prefer to have him on the bench than Neifi.

[Magnetic Curses]

I expect Hendry thinks this offense will win a whole of games 5-4, 4-3, etc., and while small-ball has been shown to be ineffective in most scenarios, it has also been shown to be more effective in one-run games and in the playoffs.

 

this is subjective, and why the cubs organization is worthless. it gives dusty the opportunity to micromanage his way to a losing season, despite dlee having an mvp-type year. small-ball does nothing but give the other team opportunities to keep the score close in a game that should be a blowout. small ball CAUSES more one-run games than it wins.

 

My last comment was not subjective. The data proves it.

 

I have to ask, why does small-ball cause more one-run games? I think you jumped to the conclusion that all small-ball haters jump to, which is to assume that all 9 innings of the game are played that way. The relaity is, you play small-ball in select situations, when down by one run late in the game, or up by one run and in position to grab an insurance run.

 

Since you don't start executing small-ball until you're already in a one-run game, you comment makes no sense to me.

 

where's the data that proves it? just wondering.

 

small-ball causes more one-run games than it wins because too many managers are bunting in the 3rd inning with their #2 hitter.

 

as for close and late, if you get a man on base to leadoff the inning, i don't see how playing small ball makes it any more likely that you will score a run than if you tell your hitters to just hit the freaking ball as hard as they possibly can. the key here is getting a man on any way you can, which goes back to the base on balls being a valuable weapon in every situation.

[daske17]

When is the last time a bench player was signed for 2 yrs and 5 mil? I can't think of one, not even the yankee's.

 

Blanco was signed for 2 yrs and 3 mil. Maybe Hendry gave Neifi extra because he can play two positions?

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

When is the last time a bench player was signed for 2 yrs and 5 mil? I can't think of one, not even the yankee's.

 

Not exactly true. The Yankees signed Lofton before the 2004 season to be on the bench with a 2/6 million dollar contract.

[SAMMYWHO]

We got to believe Hendry has something up his sleeve as far as a big time trade. I would hope for Abreu. I just think it's premature to roast Hendry's behind this early. I hate Neifi but it's not his fault the manager hits him in the 1 or 2 hole.

[YearofDaCubs]

We got to believe Hendry has something up his sleeve as far as a big time trade. I would hope for Abreu. I just think it's premature to roast Hendry's behind this early. I hate Neifi but it's not his fault the manager hits him in the 1 or 2 hole.

We thought the same thing last year after we traded for Sosa and that thing was Burnitz. I'm def not being optimistic about anything this offseason.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

We got to believe Hendry has something up his sleeve as far as a big time trade. I would hope for Abreu. I just think it's premature to roast Hendry's behind this early. I hate Neifi but it's not his fault the manager hits him in the 1 or 2 hole.

 

When we just wasted 5 million dollars on someone we could have paid the league minimum for? It isn't premature.

 

You're right, it isn't Neifi's fault Dusty bats him in the 2 hole. It's ultimately Hendry's fault, as he resigned the offensive black hole.

[Careless]

We got to believe Hendry has something up his sleeve as far as a big time trade. I would hope for Abreu. I just think it's premature to roast Hendry's behind this early. I hate Neifi but it's not his fault the manager hits him in the 1 or 2 hole.

I'll assume you mean you have to believe this to remain sane

[TheDude]

where's the data that proves it? just wondering.

There are lots of places to look, but in the interest of promoting this site, why not look at They Call It Small Ball For A Reason written last year by one of our own regulars.

 

Now the data in the article shows definitively that small ball is questionable in any situation other than 1-run games. But it supports usage in one-run games, even despite the fact that the article is clearly arguing against the usage of small ball.

 

Personally, I promote responsible usage of small ball, which is sparingly and just the situations described previously. I also promote OBP and power. Unfortunately, in my experience, the anti-small ball crowd dismisses this combination and assumes for some reason it's impossible to have balance, and never appropriate to play for one run.

 

small-ball causes more one-run games than it wins because too many managers are bunting in the 3rd inning with their #2 hitter.

This isn't on Hendry though. The GM has to assume the manager is responsible and only plays for one run in the late innings. And btw, I watch baseball daily, and I rarely ever see what you're describing, except for the last week of the season and the playoffs when desperation and pressure sets in.

[TheDude]

Hendry's plan is pretty clear to me:

 

(1) Pitching

(2) More pitching

(3) Defense

(4) Durability

(5) Timely hitting

 

He's trying to do what the White Sox and Astros did in 2005, and what the Marlins and Angels did in 2003 and 2002.

 

Anyone who doesn't meet a significant number of those categories is out. Patterson is going to be dealt because of (5) and maybe even (3); Walker is going to be dealt because of (3) and (4). Burnitz and Garciaparra aren't being brought back because of (5), and (3) and (4), respectively.

Any GM whose chief offensive concern is "timely hitting" has absolutely no buisiness making personnel decisions for a professional baseball club. (Competitive or otherwise.)

 

Aside from the first two points (which aren't bad) that's a plan for mediocrity even in the best of circumstances.

 

It also the plan that won the world series for 4 of the last 5 years.

[CubinNY]

Hendry's plan is pretty clear to me:

 

(1) Pitching

(2) More pitching

(3) Defense

(4) Durability

(5) Timely hitting

 

He's trying to do what the White Sox and Astros did in 2005, and what the Marlins and Angels did in 2003 and 2002.

 

Anyone who doesn't meet a significant number of those categories is out. Patterson is going to be dealt because of (5) and maybe even (3); Walker is going to be dealt because of (3) and (4). Burnitz and Garciaparra aren't being brought back because of (5), and (3) and (4), respectively.

Any GM whose chief offensive concern is "timely hitting" has absolutely no buisiness making personnel decisions for a professional baseball club. (Competitive or otherwise.)

 

Aside from the first two points (which aren't bad) that's a plan for mediocrity even in the best of circumstances.

 

It also the plan that won the world series for 4 of the last 5 years.

 

The plan that won 4 of the last WS was 1 and 2. Three through five do not factor in to the equation. And five is bordeline neglagence, becuase it is the absence of a plan.

[fromthestretch]

where's the data that proves it? just wondering.

There are lots of places to look, but in the interest of promoting this site, why not look at They Call It Small Ball For A Reason written last year by one of our own regulars.

 

Now the data in the article shows definitively that small ball is questionable in any situation other than 1-run games. But it supports usage in one-run games, even despite the fact that the article is clearly arguing against the usage of small ball.

 

Personally, I promote responsible usage of small ball, which is sparingly and just the situations described previously. I also promote OBP and power. Unfortunately, in my experience, the anti-small ball crowd dismisses this combination and assumes for some reason it's impossible to have balance, and never appropriate to play for one run.

 

small-ball causes more one-run games than it wins because too many managers are bunting in the 3rd inning with their #2 hitter.

This isn't on Hendry though. The GM has to assume the manager is responsible and only plays for one run in the late innings. And btw, I watch baseball daily, and I rarely ever see what you're describing, except for the last week of the season and the playoffs when desperation and pressure sets in.

 

Apparantly, you didn't watch many Cubs games when Baylor was managing. The Cubs had 117 sacrifces in 2001. 117. Fifty of those came from non-pitchers. There were numerous occasions where Ricky Gutierrez was called on to bunt after a lead-off double by Eric Young. Nobody out, man on second, early in the game, and the Cubs were bunting.

 

Jim Leyland is another manager that likes to bunt...a lot.

[fromthestretch]

Hendry's plan is pretty clear to me:

 

(1) Pitching

(2) More pitching

(3) Defense

(4) Durability

(5) Timely hitting

 

He's trying to do what the White Sox and Astros did in 2005, and what the Marlins and Angels did in 2003 and 2002.

 

Anyone who doesn't meet a significant number of those categories is out. Patterson is going to be dealt because of (5) and maybe even (3); Walker is going to be dealt because of (3) and (4). Burnitz and Garciaparra aren't being brought back because of (5), and (3) and (4), respectively.

Any GM whose chief offensive concern is "timely hitting" has absolutely no buisiness making personnel decisions for a professional baseball club. (Competitive or otherwise.)

 

Aside from the first two points (which aren't bad) that's a plan for mediocrity even in the best of circumstances.

 

It also the plan that won the world series for 4 of the last 5 years.

 

I'd be very curious to know how you plan for timely hitting.

[TheDude]

Hendry's plan is pretty clear to me:

 

(1) Pitching

(2) More pitching

(3) Defense

(4) Durability

(5) Timely hitting

 

He's trying to do what the White Sox and Astros did in 2005, and what the Marlins and Angels did in 2003 and 2002.

 

Anyone who doesn't meet a significant number of those categories is out. Patterson is going to be dealt because of (5) and maybe even (3); Walker is going to be dealt because of (3) and (4). Burnitz and Garciaparra aren't being brought back because of (5), and (3) and (4), respectively.

Any GM whose chief offensive concern is "timely hitting" has absolutely no buisiness making personnel decisions for a professional baseball club. (Competitive or otherwise.)

 

Aside from the first two points (which aren't bad) that's a plan for mediocrity even in the best of circumstances.

 

It also the plan that won the world series for 4 of the last 5 years.

 

The plan that won 4 of the last WS was 1 and 2. Three through five do not factor in to the equation. And five is bordeline neglagence, becuase it is the absence of a plan.

 

All of the teams in question were solid defensively, so add 3 as relevent. Timely hitting and durability are not something you can plan for, but you can plan against it. Meaning, you can pass on guys with a history of buckling under pressure or lots of injury trouble.

[Andy]

where's the data that proves it? just wondering.

There are lots of places to look, but in the interest of promoting this site, why not look at They Call It Small Ball For A Reason written last year by one of our own regulars.

 

Now the data in the article shows definitively that small ball is questionable in any situation other than 1-run games. But it supports usage in one-run games, even despite the fact that the article is clearly arguing against the usage of small ball.

 

Personally, I promote responsible usage of small ball, which is sparingly and just the situations described previously. I also promote OBP and power. Unfortunately, in my experience, the anti-small ball crowd dismisses this combination and assumes for some reason it's impossible to have balance, and never appropriate to play for one run.

 

small-ball causes more one-run games than it wins because too many managers are bunting in the 3rd inning with their #2 hitter.

This isn't on Hendry though. The GM has to assume the manager is responsible and only plays for one run in the late innings. And btw, I watch baseball daily, and I rarely ever see what you're describing, except for the last week of the season and the playoffs when desperation and pressure sets in.

 

Apparantly, you didn't watch many Cubs games when Baylor was managing. The Cubs had 117 sacrifces in 2001. 117. Fifty of those came from non-pitchers. There were numerous occasions where Ricky Gutierrez was called on to bunt after a lead-off double by Eric Young. Nobody out, man on second, early in the game, and the Cubs were bunting.

 

Jim Leyland is another manager that likes to bunt...a lot.

Bunting in 2001 was a smart move. I think Baylor knew as much as anyone that there was no way in hell the Cubs were scoring many runs if they tried to outslug teams so he played some small ball. It worked out pretty well, didn't it? A very mediocre Cub team talent-wise nearly made the playoffs.

[TheDude]

Apparantly, you didn't watch many Cubs games when Baylor was managing. The Cubs had 117 sacrifces in 2001. 117. Fifty of those came from non-pitchers. There were numerous occasions where Ricky Gutierrez was called on to bunt after a lead-off double by Eric Young. Nobody out, man on second, early in the game, and the Cubs were bunting.

 

Jim Leyland is another manager that likes to bunt...a lot.

 

Despite the fact this is way off-topic, let me ask - where are those guys now? Who ever said Baylor was a good manager. It's like you're putting words in my mouth.

 

I already stated before that I think it's irresponsible for managers to act that way.