From the Score (I know, I know):

[YearofDaCubs]

I have begun to shake my head at these threads more and more. We demand changes from a "top 5" payroll team because it didn't work. So we put our money where our mouth is and people are upset with the way it is being spent. Yet none of the current ransactions have resulted in the team not acquiring any other players. Eventully will it? Maybe, but not before the remaining issues have been dealt with.

 

As for the idea of Hendry having a top 5 payroll and not being successful with I strongly disagree. Defining success is winning. Hendry has won more games in his tenure then any other GM in recent history. Now our expectations are higher because of this sucess. But what is interesting is that the sucess that led to the higher expectations now is not deemed as sucess at all but an example of the failure of the administration.

 

Its not faith that we need to have in the leaders of the Cubs organization, we just need to tell ourselves the right stories.

Whatever buddy. I guess 4th place in the division is good enough for you.

[CubsWin]

I have begun to shake my head at these threads more and more. We demand changes from a "top 5" payroll team because it didn't work. So we put our money where our mouth is and people are upset with the way it is being spent. Yet none of the current ransactions have resulted in the team not acquiring any other players. Eventully will it? Maybe, but not before the remaining issues have been dealt with.

 

As for the idea of Hendry having a top 5 payroll and not being successful with I strongly disagree. Defining success is winning. Hendry has won more games in his tenure then any other GM in recent history. Now our expectations are higher because of this sucess. But what is interesting is that the sucess that led to the higher expectations now is not deemed as sucess at all but an example of the failure of the administration.

 

Its not faith that we need to have in the leaders of the Cubs organization, we just need to tell ourselves the right stories.

Whatever buddy. I guess 4th place in the division is good enough for you.

Whatever buddy. I guess boiling a very complex thing like the results of a baseball team and a GMs tenure down to the single, most negative result tells the whole story for you.

 

Thats a pretty unfair response, isn't it? I don't believe for one minute that you have based your opinion of Jim Hendry on only one statistic. So why do you think that anyone is happy with a 4th place result? Is that the best you can do?

Edited November 24, 2005 by CubsWin

[Laura]

Geez, such overwrought handwringing here. All we've done is bitch about the Cubs not having a leadoff man for three straight years, how Hendry saw his lousy bullpen and lack of a leadoff man last offseason and did nothing.

 

I don't have a problem with acquiring Pierre. Cubs still need a big bat in RF, but I'll be happy to go into the season with Pierre in CF.

 

Finally, the handwringing over Pinto is ridiculous. Our prospects suck, they've always sucked, they very very rarely pan out. Dontrelle Willis, maybe Jon Garland (though it took 6 years), a marginal reliever like Andy Sisco. Zambrano who we kept. That's it.

 

That's where I differ. I'm undoubtedly overvaluing Pinto, since the minor league gurus (whose opinions I respect) don't rank him that highly among the pitchers, and since he has sucked in his two AAA appearances.

 

Still, I would have tried to include just about any other eligible minor league pitcher in the deal other than Pinto. Maybe it wasn't possible; maybe the Marlins were adament about Pinto. I just don't like trading flamethrowing lefties even with control problems if there's another choice.

 

Maybe there wasn't another choice.

 

Like I said, I'm probably overvaluing Pinto. I just wish it were another name.

[YearofDaCubs]

I have begun to shake my head at these threads more and more. We demand changes from a "top 5" payroll team because it didn't work. So we put our money where our mouth is and people are upset with the way it is being spent. Yet none of the current ransactions have resulted in the team not acquiring any other players. Eventully will it? Maybe, but not before the remaining issues have been dealt with.

 

As for the idea of Hendry having a top 5 payroll and not being successful with I strongly disagree. Defining success is winning. Hendry has won more games in his tenure then any other GM in recent history. Now our expectations are higher because of this sucess. But what is interesting is that the sucess that led to the higher expectations now is not deemed as sucess at all but an example of the failure of the administration.

 

Its not faith that we need to have in the leaders of the Cubs organization, we just need to tell ourselves the right stories.

Whatever buddy. I guess 4th place in the division is good enough for you.

Whatever buddy. I guess boiling a very complex thing like the results of a baseball team and a GMs tenure down to the single, most negative result tells the whole story for you.

There's more to it than that. You write this paragraph about how some of us are unsatisfied with the job Hendry has done and it is because he has lead us to higher expectatons. Is that a bad thing? Maybe there is a reason why we haven't won in almost 100 years. Fans like you see nothing wrong with the way this organization is run top to bottom. We have missed the playoffs the last 2 years when we had one of the highest payrolls. There is a problem there. To me it tells me the person putting this team together is not doing a good job. Hendry the past two years has FAILED. YOu said defining success is winning, well guess what we haven't won squat the past two years. Now that the bullpen is set, give me a good RF. bench, and a leadoff man and I will gladly say that Hendry has done a wonderful job of setting us up to have a successful 2006 season. Until then there is no question that your boy Hendry has failed the past two seasons.

[CubsWin]

I have begun to shake my head at these threads more and more. We demand changes from a "top 5" payroll team because it didn't work. So we put our money where our mouth is and people are upset with the way it is being spent. Yet none of the current ransactions have resulted in the team not acquiring any other players. Eventully will it? Maybe, but not before the remaining issues have been dealt with.

 

As for the idea of Hendry having a top 5 payroll and not being successful with I strongly disagree. Defining success is winning. Hendry has won more games in his tenure then any other GM in recent history. Now our expectations are higher because of this sucess. But what is interesting is that the sucess that led to the higher expectations now is not deemed as sucess at all but an example of the failure of the administration.

 

Its not faith that we need to have in the leaders of the Cubs organization, we just need to tell ourselves the right stories.

Whatever buddy. I guess 4th place in the division is good enough for you.

Whatever buddy. I guess boiling a very complex thing like the results of a baseball team and a GMs tenure down to the single, most negative result tells the whole story for you.

There's more to it than that. You write this paragraph about how some of us are unsatisfied with the job Hendry has done and it is because he has lead us to higher expectatons. Is that a bad thing? Maybe there is a reason why we haven't won in almost 100 years. Fans like you see nothing wrong with the way this organization is run top to bottom. We have missed the playoffs the last 2 years when we had one of the highest payrolls. There is a problem there. To me it tells me the person putting this team together is not doing a good job. Hendry the past two years has FAILED. YOu said defining success is winning, well guess what we haven't won squat the past two years. Now that the bullpen is set, give me a good RF. bench, and a leadoff man and I will gladly say that Hendry has done a wonderful job of setting us up to have a successful 2006 season. Until then there is no question that your boy Hendry has failed the past two seasons.

Slow down, killer. Who are you responding to? I didn't write any of those things. mhuber did. I just thought your response to his post didn't consider the points he was making and was remarkably unfair.

 

No one is happy with a 4th place result, okay?

 

And, of course, there is more to it than that. That is my point. You don't base your opinion of Jim Hendry on one stat and no one is happy with a 4th place finish. That knife your wielding cuts both ways.

[YearofDaCubs]

I have begun to shake my head at these threads more and more. We demand changes from a "top 5" payroll team because it didn't work. So we put our money where our mouth is and people are upset with the way it is being spent. Yet none of the current ransactions have resulted in the team not acquiring any other players. Eventully will it? Maybe, but not before the remaining issues have been dealt with.

 

As for the idea of Hendry having a top 5 payroll and not being successful with I strongly disagree. Defining success is winning. Hendry has won more games in his tenure then any other GM in recent history. Now our expectations are higher because of this sucess. But what is interesting is that the sucess that led to the higher expectations now is not deemed as sucess at all but an example of the failure of the administration.

 

Its not faith that we need to have in the leaders of the Cubs organization, we just need to tell ourselves the right stories.

Whatever buddy. I guess 4th place in the division is good enough for you.

Whatever buddy. I guess boiling a very complex thing like the results of a baseball team and a GMs tenure down to the single, most negative result tells the whole story for you.

There's more to it than that. You write this paragraph about how some of us are unsatisfied with the job Hendry has done and it is because he has lead us to higher expectatons. Is that a bad thing? Maybe there is a reason why we haven't won in almost 100 years. Fans like you see nothing wrong with the way this organization is run top to bottom. We have missed the playoffs the last 2 years when we had one of the highest payrolls. There is a problem there. To me it tells me the person putting this team together is not doing a good job. Hendry the past two years has FAILED. YOu said defining success is winning, well guess what we haven't won squat the past two years. Now that the bullpen is set, give me a good RF. bench, and a leadoff man and I will gladly say that Hendry has done a wonderful job of setting us up to have a successful 2006 season. Until then there is no question that your boy Hendry has failed the past two seasons.

Slow down, killer. Who are you responding to? I didn't write any of those things. mhuber did. I just thought your response to his post didn't consider the points he was making and was remarkably unfair.

 

No one is happy with a 4th place result, okay?

ok there killer, i think my post above should make it clear to mhuber then about what I think about Hendry. As for you, keep being optimistic about everything. You are entitled to your opinion about this organization and I am entitled to mine. 2003 was a fun year while 2004-2005 were depressing. Let's hope 2006 is more like 2003. Although we overpaid for the 2 RP I actually like the Howry signing. Obviously, it's still early but like I said before if we can get a good RF, bench, and leadoff hitter I will be happy with what we've got.

[CubsWin]

I have begun to shake my head at these threads more and more. We demand changes from a "top 5" payroll team because it didn't work. So we put our money where our mouth is and people are upset with the way it is being spent. Yet none of the current ransactions have resulted in the team not acquiring any other players. Eventully will it? Maybe, but not before the remaining issues have been dealt with.

 

As for the idea of Hendry having a top 5 payroll and not being successful with I strongly disagree. Defining success is winning. Hendry has won more games in his tenure then any other GM in recent history. Now our expectations are higher because of this sucess. But what is interesting is that the sucess that led to the higher expectations now is not deemed as sucess at all but an example of the failure of the administration.

 

Its not faith that we need to have in the leaders of the Cubs organization, we just need to tell ourselves the right stories.

Whatever buddy. I guess 4th place in the division is good enough for you.

Whatever buddy. I guess boiling a very complex thing like the results of a baseball team and a GMs tenure down to the single, most negative result tells the whole story for you.

There's more to it than that. You write this paragraph about how some of us are unsatisfied with the job Hendry has done and it is because he has lead us to higher expectatons. Is that a bad thing? Maybe there is a reason why we haven't won in almost 100 years. Fans like you see nothing wrong with the way this organization is run top to bottom. We have missed the playoffs the last 2 years when we had one of the highest payrolls. There is a problem there. To me it tells me the person putting this team together is not doing a good job. Hendry the past two years has FAILED. YOu said defining success is winning, well guess what we haven't won squat the past two years. Now that the bullpen is set, give me a good RF. bench, and a leadoff man and I will gladly say that Hendry has done a wonderful job of setting us up to have a successful 2006 season. Until then there is no question that your boy Hendry has failed the past two seasons.

Slow down, killer. Who are you responding to? I didn't write any of those things. mhuber did. I just thought your response to his post didn't consider the points he was making and was remarkably unfair.

 

No one is happy with a 4th place result, okay?

ok there killer, i think my post above should make it clear to mhuber then about what I think about Hendry. As for you, keep being optimistic about everything. You are entitled to your opinion about this organization and I am entitled to mine. 2003 was a fun year while 2004-2005 were depressing. Let's hope 2006 is more like 2003. Although we overpaid for the 2 RP I actually like the Howry signing. Obviously, it's still early but like I said before if we can get a good RF, bench, and leadoff hitter I will be happy with what we've got.

Now I'm "optimistic about everything". This is laughable. Is putting words in other people's mouths all you've got?

 

mhuber made some cogent points in his post, as did I in his defense. But you never responded to them. Instead, it seems you heard a viewpoint that was different from your own and immediately stopped considering the validity of what either of us had to say. You seemingly assumed that we were either "happy with a 4th place finish" in mhuber's case or "optimistic about everything" in my case. Neither are what we claim to be nor are they accurate descriptions of what we wrote. So it reads like a mixture of a personal attack and putting words in our mouths and not a response to what was actually written in the post.

 

As for my viewpoint of Hendry, I'm just reserving judgment until he actually fails to improve the Cubs offense before being angry at him as if he already has. I'd say I'm showing restraint and perhaps trying to understand things at a more complex level.

 

But, then again, maybe I'm just a simpleton who is always "optimistic about everything" Hendry does.

[fearthecubs]

I'm really not trying to draw battle lines here but what is the common obsession with ruining everything CW posts? He's usually right in my humble opinion. God forbid the guy be optomistic.

[fearthecubs]

Just curious, I wonder what depth of of incentives there are to be the radio station to break a signing before other. Do other urban areas have mutiple stations covering the same team?

[Schwarber Fan]

I was just listening to the score and all that was said on the update was:

 

"A for Juan Pierre, both the Cubs and White Sox are interested"

[CardsFanInChiTown]

I was just listening to the score and all that was said on the update was:

 

"A for Juan Pierre, both the Cubs and White Sox are interested"

 

I have no idea why the Sox would want Pierre considering they have Podsednik.

[Schwarber Fan]

I was just listening to the score and all that was said on the update was:

 

"A for Juan Pierre, both the Cubs and White Sox are interested"

 

I have no idea why the Sox would want Pierre considering they have Podsednik.

Podsednik doesnt play CF, that was Rowand

[RynoRules]

I'll let others commisserate in front of their Our Blessed Martyr Prospect Shrine

 

I'm sorry but this is hilarious! :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Agreed - brilliant post by Kess. I used to got to war with him on a daily basis, but I now I worship at his altar! :wink: :lol:

[CardsFanInChiTown]

I was just listening to the score and all that was said on the update was:

 

"A for Juan Pierre, both the Cubs and White Sox are interested"

 

I have no idea why the Sox would want Pierre considering they have Podsednik.

Podsednik doesnt play CF, that was Rowand

 

Pods played CF for the Brewers - it's his "true" position.

[RynoRules]

I'm really not trying to draw battle lines here but what is the common obsession with ruining everything CW posts? He's usually right in my humble opinion. God forbid the guy be optomistic.

 

G-d forbid any of us be anything other than hyper-critical.

 

The team has been disappointing for 2 years. Dusty is stubbornly ineffective and misguided in his approach. JH did a poor job during last year's offseason.

 

Now lets give them a chance to right the ship. Things are starting to move along; lets see what shakes out.

[fearthecubs]

Now lets give them a chance to right the ship. Things are starting to move along; lets see what shakes out.

 

I'll agree with you there.

[brfahey]

I'll let others commisserate in front of their Our Blessed Martyr Prospect Shrine

 

I'm sorry but this is hilarious! :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Agreed - brilliant post by Kess. I used to got to war with him on a daily basis, but I now I worship at his altar! :wink: :lol:

 

Great post about the "Prospect Shrine." As much as Baker is accused of having an obsession with veterans and/or his guys, some who post here have a similar thing for these prospects. Neither approach is best; you can't just apply a single theory to the development of a real club. Some veterans are better than others as our some prospects. Placing value merely on the label is not going to get you anywhere.

[CUBZ99]

The website alleging the deal is done, and then lists links to stories that say the deal is close to done, has a list of 5 other pitchers that the Marlins could choose or may choose. The five included a whose who list of Cubs pitching prospects: Guzman, Marshall, Ryu, Nolasco, and Pinto. I am hoping that Pinto is the only one out of those five. IMO it would be foolish to trade all of your top level pitching prospects for a one year rental.

[USSoccer]

The website alleging the deal is done, and then lists links to stories that say the deal is close to done, has a list of 5 other pitchers that the Marlins could choose or may choose. The five included a whose who list of Cubs pitching prospects: Guzman, Marshall, Ryu, Nolasco, and Pinto. I am hoping that Pinto is the only one out of those five. IMO it would be foolish to trade all of your top level pitching prospects for a one year rental.

 

Now, see, if we give up another of our higher level prospects in addition to Pinto it will be a very poor deal.

 

CPatt, I went to sleep after your post last night, but you made a comment about how trading for Pierre reduces the available trading chips for a Ramirez or Abreu, and admittedly it is a big concern. Ultimately I guess I feel that if the Cubs eat salary that can make up for not having a Pinto to deal as well.

 

As far as Patterson being Pierre's equal in 2003-4, I know some metrics show that, but Patterson is less likely to rebound playing in Chicago in 2006 than Pierre is. I think mentally Corey is done in this city, and I wouldn't want to take a chance on Corey in CF unless he were flanked by one of the aforementioned RF trade targets. I really hope I'm wrong, but I don't see it happening. I'd be very suprised if he were a Cub by the time April rolls around.

[Wheelimus]

I have to assume they got to pick one of those 5 and then two more lesser pitching prospects.

 

If that's the case, mildly surprising they took Pinto over Guzman.

[USSoccer]

I have to assume they got to pick one of those 5 and then two more lesser pitching prospects.

 

If that's the case, mildly surprising they took Pinto over Guzman.

 

I'm not. Guzman's injuries probably prevent him from being a main trade chip.

[Blueheart05]

If we get Giles, and then trade for A-Rod and put him at short, and then trade for Michael Young and stick him back at 2B, I'm all in favor of having Corey back in the 8 hole.

 

Hell, put him 9th if Wood, Prior, or Z is pitching.

 

 

Sorry but I have to laugh :lol:

 

What makes you think the Yankees are trading A-Rod? What exactly do you think we'd have to give up to get the AL MVP?

[Warpticon]

If we get Giles, and then trade for A-Rod and put him at short, and then trade for Michael Young and stick him back at 2B, I'm all in favor of having Corey back in the 8 hole.

 

Hell, put him 9th if Wood, Prior, or Z is pitching.

 

 

Sorry but I have to laugh :lol:

 

What makes you think the Yankees are trading A-Rod? What exactly do you think we'd have to give up to get the AL MVP?

 

I'm pretty sure the point of that post was that those things were NOT going to happen.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

CPatt, I went to sleep after your post last night, but you made a comment about how trading for Pierre reduces the available trading chips for a Ramirez or Abreu, and admittedly it is a big concern. Ultimately I guess I feel that if the Cubs eat salary that can make up for not having a Pinto to deal as well.

 

It doesn't take much salary eaten then to have that + Pierre to equal what Furcal would've got. I know it's only for that year(probably), but you're still spending that money, plus you've lost the players to trade for Pierre. And again, Furcal will still be relatively young later in the deal, so if that contract prohibits you and Cedeno is ready to take on SS, then dealing Furcal won't be especially difficult.

 

As far as Patterson being Pierre's equal in 2003-4, I know some metrics show that, but Patterson is less likely to rebound playing in Chicago in 2006 than Pierre is. I think mentally Corey is done in this city, and I wouldn't want to take a chance on Corey in CF unless he were flanked by one of the aforementioned RF trade targets. I really hope I'm wrong, but I don't see it happening. I'd be very suprised if he were a Cub by the time April rolls around.

 

I agree, I've said so in this thread a couple times. The point of the comparison is not to elevate Patterson to Pierre's level so to speak, but the other way around, to show that Pierre at his best is not a huge difference maker.

[YearofDaCubs]

I have begun to shake my head at these threads more and more. We demand changes from a "top 5" payroll team because it didn't work. So we put our money where our mouth is and people are upset with the way it is being spent. Yet none of the current ransactions have resulted in the team not acquiring any other players. Eventully will it? Maybe, but not before the remaining issues have been dealt with.

 

As for the idea of Hendry having a top 5 payroll and not being successful with I strongly disagree. Defining success is winning. Hendry has won more games in his tenure then any other GM in recent history. Now our expectations are higher because of this sucess. But what is interesting is that the sucess that led to the higher expectations now is not deemed as sucess at all but an example of the failure of the administration.

 

Its not faith that we need to have in the leaders of the Cubs organization, we just need to tell ourselves the right stories.

Whatever buddy. I guess 4th place in the division is good enough for you.

Whatever buddy. I guess boiling a very complex thing like the results of a baseball team and a GMs tenure down to the single, most negative result tells the whole story for you.

There's more to it than that. You write this paragraph about how some of us are unsatisfied with the job Hendry has done and it is because he has lead us to higher expectatons. Is that a bad thing? Maybe there is a reason why we haven't won in almost 100 years. Fans like you see nothing wrong with the way this organization is run top to bottom. We have missed the playoffs the last 2 years when we had one of the highest payrolls. There is a problem there. To me it tells me the person putting this team together is not doing a good job. Hendry the past two years has FAILED. YOu said defining success is winning, well guess what we haven't won squat the past two years. Now that the bullpen is set, give me a good RF. bench, and a leadoff man and I will gladly say that Hendry has done a wonderful job of setting us up to have a successful 2006 season. Until then there is no question that your boy Hendry has failed the past two seasons.

Slow down, killer. Who are you responding to? I didn't write any of those things. mhuber did. I just thought your response to his post didn't consider the points he was making and was remarkably unfair.

 

No one is happy with a 4th place result, okay?

ok there killer, i think my post above should make it clear to mhuber then about what I think about Hendry. As for you, keep being optimistic about everything. You are entitled to your opinion about this organization and I am entitled to mine. 2003 was a fun year while 2004-2005 were depressing. Let's hope 2006 is more like 2003. Although we overpaid for the 2 RP I actually like the Howry signing. Obviously, it's still early but like I said before if we can get a good RF, bench, and leadoff hitter I will be happy with what we've got.

Now I'm "optimistic about everything". This is laughable. Is putting words in other people's mouths all you've got?

 

mhuber made some cogent points in his post, as did I in his defense. But you never responded to them. Instead, it seems you heard a viewpoint that was different from your own and immediately stopped considering the validity of what either of us had to say. You seemingly assumed that we were either "happy with a 4th place finish" in mhuber's case or "optimistic about everything" in my case. Neither are what we claim to be nor are they accurate descriptions of what we wrote. So it reads like a mixture of a personal attack and putting words in our mouths and not a response to what was actually written in the post.

 

As for my viewpoint of Hendry, I'm just reserving judgment until he actually fails to improve the Cubs offense before being angry at him as if he already has. I'd say I'm showing restraint and perhaps trying to understand things at a more complex level.

 

But, then again, maybe I'm just a simpleton who is always "optimistic about everything" Hendry does.

No, you're wrong. MHuber clearly stated that he disagreed with this team not having success with a top 5 payroll and as far as I'm concerned the only way to define success is if you make the playoffs which we did not do the past two years. Can these signings affect other transactions right now? It sure as heck can. We still have many holes to fill and considering Hendry is looking to upgrade, SS, OF, bench, and SP It can. That's fine reserve your judgement but if I see something I don't like I will be vocal about it. I don't know what your thoughts were on last year but I knew we were not good enough to be a playoff team even though so many people thought we were and I was catching flack about it. I will not reserve judgment on anything. If Hendry makes a good move which I think he has done with Howry I will commend him. If he resigns Perez, and Rusch to ridiculous contracts and overpays for mediocre talent I have the right as a fan to call that garbage out.