Cubfanintheknow

Yep, sure can. But not when he's coaching the team with the highest payroll in the league (including Sosa's money). And you're kidding yourself if you think this is the 1 bad year. Last Sept was absolutely dispicable. Dusty clearly lost control of his team. The Cubs have been in the top 3 in payroll in the NL for all his 3 years, and they got 1 playoff berth, with a mediocre 88 wins. Regardless of the wins/losses, Dusty has lost complete control. The team was fighting with their own broadcasters, leaving early, quit on him. This year, the team has had several spans of horrible baseball. Point is, he hasn't done what he was brought in here to do. He wasn't a good fit then, he's not a good fit now. Using this line of thinking, I suppose Joe Torre should have been fired already. A payroll far and above every other team in baseball, a roster full of All-Stars, the ability to land just about any player in the offseason and during the regular season, the "Choke of All Ages" last year against their chief rival and amazingly inconsistent play for the better part of this season. Joe Torre has a handful of World Series rings. He gets a mulligan. Right...2001. What about 2002, 2003 and 2004? It's a shame players don't get blamed enough for losing games You got it! Torre definitely put his players in a position to succeed each of the last three seasons. The players just didn't get it done. And nowhere was that more evident than last year's ALCS.

Not to diminish the accomplishments of the Atlanta Braves, but it helps when you have an expansion team in your division (granted one that has won two World Series recently during the same time frame where the Braves haven't won any), the Montreal Expos/Washington Nationals and the generally inept New York Mets and Philadelphia Phillies. Only four times in the 13 straight years the Braves have one the NL East has the wild card also come from that division (ironically, all four of those teams went on to the World Series).

Yep, sure can. But not when he's coaching the team with the highest payroll in the league (including Sosa's money). And you're kidding yourself if you think this is the 1 bad year. Last Sept was absolutely dispicable. Dusty clearly lost control of his team. The Cubs have been in the top 3 in payroll in the NL for all his 3 years, and they got 1 playoff berth, with a mediocre 88 wins. Regardless of the wins/losses, Dusty has lost complete control. The team was fighting with their own broadcasters, leaving early, quit on him. This year, the team has had several spans of horrible baseball. Point is, he hasn't done what he was brought in here to do. He wasn't a good fit then, he's not a good fit now. Using this line of thinking, I suppose Joe Torre should have been fired already. A payroll far and above every other team in baseball, a roster full of All-Stars, the ability to land just about any player in the offseason and during the regular season, the "Choke of All Ages" last year against their chief rival and amazingly inconsistent play for the better part of this season. Joe Torre has a handful of World Series rings. He gets a mulligan.

Seems like it to me, too, and I like it! Wish there was some way ballclubs could relieve themselves of at least part of the burden of that player's salary should he be DFA'ed, like the NFL. Having to pay all minus the league minimum can be quite a pain at times. Not sure to go about it, though.

I haven't chimed in too often in the debates regarding the competence of Baker and Hendry. But I think it's a natural reaction for folks to look at the people in charge when they look at the problems this ballclub has.

McClendon has always been a victim of his team's lack of financial support. Could you honestly say that he's ever had a squad with enough quality players to succeed? A manager only works with the tools he's given, and when your GM dumps quality guys yearly in exchange for salary relief, your managerial skills will be tested regardless of ability. Personally, I think McClendon's a talented manager who gets a lot out of some lesser players. And your mentioning of TLR and Bobby Cox really just illustrates the advantage of having stability in the manager's office; they're the 2 most successful current NL managers by far. I'll admit it--lousy example! But I'll still stick by my main premise, which is that the manager needs to be a good fit for the organization and the way it attempts to meet its goals. Put it this way; if you need to choose between keeping a manager who's not a good fit for the sake of stability or making a change to find that manager who'll fit into the organization's theory on managing a ballclub, I'd put more emphasis on the latter. Much more emphasis.

Kirk Wessler is a wad. I've had the great displeasure of reading some of his drivel in the past. He is a wad. That said, you dont keep someone around for the sake of stability. Look at Lloyd McClendon. Only TLR and Bobby Cox have managed longer in the NL. And what has that gotten the Pirates? Managers are usually fired because the teams they lead are unsuccessful. How that manager fits with the team and it's philosophy is a byproduct of that success.

There was a report this morning on Chicago Newsradio 780 that Ken Griffey Jr. has cleared waivers and that the White Sox are interested. Can anyone confirm this? Is there any place on the web that shows players who have cleared waivers, or is that a highly secretive thing?

He isn't that terrible. Most of the throws to the plate he's gotten recently have been pretty bad or just too late. Base stealers have a 74% success against him, which isn't good, but I don't think that matters that much. As far as the pitching goes, there's no way to prove that any of that is Barrett's fault, and I'm pretty sure the pitchers have been doing better with him catching. I'd like to see the stats on that. That said, his bat is solid, excellent for a catcher. That alone is enough for me to feel his being here is justified. If you got rid of him, who could you realistically bring in to play the position? I think that success rate would go down a bit if a certain Hall of Fame-bound pitcher could do a little better job holding runners on. MInd-boggling, really.

I think it would have been awfully hard to double up Mark Grudzielanek with a 5-4-3 double play, so that one's hard to argue. On the other hand, his throw to first in the seventh...

Except that there's no way Baker would come here for anything less than four years. And Jim Hendry wanted him badly enough to give it to him. Right. So again: how is Hendry escaping the axe? I never hear any media on his case, nobody ever examines the endless train of bad moves he has made to get us in this position, the incredible ignorance of players who were obviously not capable of staying injury free, the blind seeking of Dusty Baker without knowing anything about his lack of actual managerial skills. In my view this whole debacle rests right at the feet of one Mr. Jim Hendry. Every season has been worse than the last. Every year a deeper nightmare. Sure he made a couple good moves in 2003. Good for him. GM's with TALENT make great moves every single season. Witness Jocketty and Beane. Hendry couldn't touch their jock straps. It's time for Hendry to go back to running the minor leagues and bring in an actual talented GM. Talent-wise, the Cubs are probably not as bad as their record indicates. They sould be a couple games over .500 unstead of five games under. I really don't have a problem with most of the Cubs roster as it stands--which is Hendry's job--but I don't like the way it's being used--which is Baker's job.

Nice try by Corey. But he'll never win a Gold Glove until he learns to get up slowly and limp back to center, like his counterpart.

11M is only a few million more than elite closers are paid. It would suck to overpay for a closer, but it's preferrable to putting Wood in the rotation and having him land right back on DL again. People, including myself, are going to speculate about this stuff. That's what message boards are for. Except Kerry Wood is not an elite closer. He's not even a closer. And you still want to pay him "a few million more" than an elite closer? It's more of a risk having him close than putting him back in the rotation, in my opinion.

Except that there's no way Baker would come here for anything less than four years. And Jim Hendry wanted him badly enough to give it to him.

The rain may be letting up for now, but there is more on the way. My guess is the get in three to five innings before another round of rain moves in, which I think will last up to two hours. So here's to hoping the Cubs lead after 4-1/2!

Kerry Wood is scheduled to make $11 million next season. Unless the front of the jersey says "Yankees," you don't pay $11 million for a closer, much less one who has never closed a game in his life. He's only made four relief appearances! So give the "Wood for Closer" talk a rest, because it isn't going to happen. Wood's career has taken a very similar path to that of Matt Morris. Both had Tommy John surgery and come back from it. After last season, a very trying one for him, Morris had arthrscopic surgery to clean out his labrum, a surgery Wood is going to have as well. As long as the Cubs are mathematically alive for the wild card, Wood will pitch out of the bullpen. When the Cubs are officially done in 2005, Wood will go under the knife, then start re-habbing. He'll be ready to join the rotation in 2006 with plenty of time to spare. Ryan Dempster has done pretty well in the closer's role thus far, especially considering it's his first season--and not even a full one at that. I'd be willing to give him a multi-year deal with incentives for games closed.

Unless there is a direct quote by Jim Hendry saying, "I wouldn't trade Rich Hill for Adam Dunn straight up," there's really no point to this thread. I wouldn't say that. Why not have an interesting debate stemming from speculation? That's what 90% of the Transactions forum is, anyway. EDIT: I would agree though, that we shouldn't blame Hendry for not doing the deal, since we don't know if it was ever out there. That's fine to speculate on trades. But personally, I'd shy away from what Jim Hendry was purported to have said until he actually says it.

Nomar would have none of this back when the Red Sox were talking to A-Rod. The theory was to move Nomar to 2ed or 3rd to allow A-Rod to play short. Moving Nomar to the outfield wasn't mentioned back then, so I cannot comment on what the gossip, boards, radio etc. had to say about that. I doubt it would go over well with Nomar though. He doesn't seem to be that much of a team player. Actually, rumor had it that if the Red Sox acquired A-Rod, Nomar would be traded. The White Sox were mentioned as a destination for Nomar. Here's a link: http://cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/story/6935544 When the trade fell through, it was reported that Garciaparra was "upset" because he felt the Red Sox didn't appreciate him. At this point, I think Nomar would at least consider a move to another position, although perhaps not at the expense of Todd Walker, who was a teammate of his in Boston as well. A move to left might lessen the risk of injury, which would certainly be to his benefit.

Well, it works for Gary Sheffield... :P I think bat-waving is kinda stupid and juvenile. I also think Shef does it to try to distract the pitcher... although good pitchers look at the batter from the waist down. That's what Prior said he did, in an interview when he first came up. Finally, I think that Gary Sheffield is still getting some "help", and he's a drug test away from being in a Palmeiro-style doghouse. The difference is that Sheffield has one of the fastest swings in the game. He can afford to do it because he gets to and through the zone so quickly. Corey does not have this luxury. Nice job pointing that out. WHen you have hands as fast as Sheffield's, you can get away with stuff like that. Patterson's hands are pretty fast, but not as fast as Sheff's. Corey looked pretty good at the plate on Friday. O-fers don't always tell the whole story. He's looking a lot more comfortable at the plate these days.

Because I believe it to be fact. Because I believe Jocketty's record in trading over his tenure speaks for itself. But it's not a "fact" that can be proven as incontrovertibly as "hydrogen has one proton", so you are free to feel different. At one time, lots of people believed the Earth to be flat. Just because you believe it doesn't make it so.

Unless there is a direct quote by Jim Hendry saying, "I wouldn't trade Rich Hill for Adam Dunn straight up," there's really no point to this thread.

Well, apparently he doesnt have the balls to tell Dusty to his face and TELL him what to do because Dusty hasnt followed Jim's ideas at all this year. Unfortunately, Hendry telling Baker how to play the players is hard to do. If Hendry starts telling Baker how to use players, Baker quits. Not necessarily a bad thing. But it would be awfully difficult hiring a new manager when he knows his GM is going to micro-manage everything. I know I wouldn't want to take over a job knowing my boss is going to hover over me and do things I'm being paid to do. So telling him what to do isn't as easy as it sounds.

He did address the closer situation. Over the off-season he stated on several occasions he wanted Ryan Dempster to close. Dusty Baker wanted him in the starting rotation instead. Had Dempster been in the closer's role all along the Cubs would be better. Not significantly better, mind you, but at least around .500 unstead of six games under.

I think you're right. Friday, August 5th was supposed to be a big day for the Cubs. Kerry Wood, Scott Williamson and Nomar Garciaparra were coming off the disabled list. Combine that with the newly acquired Matt Lawton and the team was ready for the stretch run. You've probably noticed, though, that they haven't won since. I think he's gone at the end of the season.

There's no correlation between how much someone gets paid and how hard they will work. Money has nothing to do with it. Baseball is a job. It's a good job most of the time and it pays well but make no mistake; it's a job from the moment someone pays you to do it. That means you have to do it even when you don't want to. No matter who you are or what you do, no matter how much you love your job there are going to be days when you'd rather stay home. I've had quite a few jobs. These guys have basically had just one: baseball. I think it would be very hard to stay focused each and every day.