C.C.

I'm not sure about that because Houston was pretty close to the Mets in money and years and Houston doesn't even have state taxes...And yet he still went to the Mets. It would've taken more then 9 million a year to sign Beltran, and Maddux was signed after Beltran signed. So signing Maddux has nothing to do with not signing Beltran. The Cubs made a fair offer to Beltran but Mets offered more...17 million a year for Beltran is a lot of money...

Ugh, imagine if we had gotten Beltran that offseason... I still remember (during the 04-05 offseason) having hopes of.. Walker, Beltran, Nomar, Ramirez, Lee, Sosa, Barrett, Patterson w/Wood, Prior, Zambrano, Maddux, and ?? Instead, we spent the whole offseason trading Sosa and picked up Hairston and Burnitz... :x I don't think not getting Beltran was Hendry's fault. I think the TRIB pocket books and the Cubs payroll had something to do with that. No one was outbidding the Mets for Beltran that year...BTW - Imagine if we had Pudge in 2003?

Yeah right!!!!

That what if scenario ended in October 2003. People are claiming he was considered gold from 2003-2005. That what if scenario doesn't matter. And some people did feel that. I think he got a free pass even in 2005. I soured on him at the end of 2004 and by the end of 2005, I was full blown get rid of him mode.

And I disagree with you...I think in 2003-04 he was highly respected from a National standpoint and completly gold in the City of Chicago, in turning around this org. and getting 5 outs from a World Series. If you saw it different then you saw it different. What can I say?

Does this sound like I thought he was a genius until a couple of months ago. You pick and choose what you want to believe instead of actually reading what I said... If that's true, you didn't read much but cubs.com headlines then. Hendry has been questioned throughout. You never read anybody question the Baker hiring? His infatuation with tools? His ignorance of patience/walks/OBP? His insistence on overpaying for mediocrity and garbage? I said Generally as said here: And once again here: I never said that nothing was ever said negative about him.

So from those quotes you can make a broad assumtion that I think everyone thought he was a genius up until 3-4 months ago? Don't assume what people think. Does this sound like I thought he was a genius until a couple of months ago. You pick and choose what you want to believe instead of actually reading what I said...

Yeah I know, Jim Hendry should not be working on these things. If they are going to be doing stuff like this they should at least hire a PR/Marketing department. Oh wait they have one :) The Marketing dept. is the only part of this Org. that gets it right.

Interesting, but if you trade young pitching for hitting you still need to get pitching from somewhere, and if it comes from FA it'll cost a heck of a lot more money then the young pitcher you just traded at no guarantee that pitcher will be healthy. Am I making any sense?

Yes, that's got to be it. It becomes pretty obvious once you actually read what people write, instead of taking unwarranted jabs.

Furthermore, in any thread discussing Hendry it is perfectly reasonable to discuss this organizational failure. Of course it is, but that wasn't my point.

Did you not say this? The pitching abuse responses are because of this post. Where is Hendry's name mentioned in this post? Dude, what are you talking about! You are saying that Hendry should have a crystal ball and known that Prior and Wood would go down in 2004? That's what I meant. And where in that post did I mention the pitcher abusing was Hendry's fault? Lord knows we have enough threads about Dusty's abusing our pitching... There are instances where Hendry would have been well within his authority as GM to tell Dusty to put a hard cap on pitches for the 3 most important building blocks of our franchise in 2003. Theo Epstein and John Henry did this with Pedro Martinez in the 2003 ALCS, and the manager's decision to go beyond that hard limit was the reason Grady Little was fired. Hendry didn't do this. We're now seeing what happens when you run a guy with questionable mechanics into the ground, at times for no reason, and we're seeing what happens when a ridiculous workload coupled with freak injuries happen to a young pitcher. Now, obviously Hendry wasn't going to fire Baker after 2003, but to say these injuries aren't an organizational failure is incorrect. Hendry has his share of blame for not asserting his authority to protect important players from overuse and injury. How did this thread turn into another thread about abusing pitchers? Shortly after someone said that everyone thought Hendry was a genius until a couple of months ago. Who said that? A couple of months ago? I said that in 2003-04 Hendry was considered a genius by some, and highly respected GM. You love to read what you think\want to read don't you?

Did you not say this? The pitching abuse responses are because of this post. Where is Hendry's name mentioned in this post? Dude, what are you talking about! You are saying that Hendry should have a crystal ball and known that Prior and Wood would go down in 2004? That's what I meant. And where in that post did I mention the pitcher abusing was Hendry's fault? Lord knows we have enough threads about Dusty's abusing our pitching... There are instances where Hendry would have been well within his authority as GM to tell Dusty to put a hard cap on pitches for the 3 most important building blocks of our franchise in 2003. Theo Epstein and John Henry did this with Pedro Martinez in the 2003 ALCS, and the manager's decision to go beyond that hard limit was the reason Grady Little was fired. Hendry didn't do this. We're now seeing what happens when you run a guy with questionable mechanics into the ground, at times for no reason, and we're seeing what happens when a ridiculous workload coupled with freak injuries happen to a young pitcher. Now, obviously Hendry wasn't going to fire Baker after 2003, but to say these injuries aren't an organizational failure is incorrect. Hendry has his share of blame for not asserting his authority to protect important players from overuse and injury. How did this thread turn into another thread about abusing pitchers?

Rick had a belly that he could pull some reserve out of when he needed the extra power. I think it's a combination of things. The small strike zone, can't throw inside, batters are more patient now, and the fact that if something hurts now players see that their future money may go away so the slightest ache they are more careful than before. I'm curious on how many pitches Rick threw a game because if memory serves me he had pretty good control or the very least didn't have to throw as many pitches per game with that sinker of his. I would also submit that pitchers have to work much harder to get guys out now than they did in the 70's and points previous. Your average MLB hitter is stronger and quicker at the plate than your average 1975 era hitter. Agreed, as OBP has become more important in the mind of some organizations, the amount of pitches per plate appearance has probably risen over the years. Also with the advent of the 5 man rotation and the amount of money invested in these guys they don't throw as much as they used to. In the past, and with fewer teams in the league, most pitchers threw a lot more innings in the minors where they either persevered or flamed out, so their probably were a lot more guys with injuries, they were just out of baseball before they ever made it to the bigs. With expansion and the dilution of pitchers you are seeing guys in majors that probably would have never made it in years past. This could be true. I don't buy the OBP argument. OBP only came into vogue in the last few years, but this injury problem has been going on for far longer than that. Moreover, as we have discussed ad nauseam on this bd., the majority of teams still do not value patience at the plate as much as they do aggressive hitting. OBP has been in vogue for several years, it's just taken more time for some to accept its value, while others refuse to accept it. The Yankees started their run of greatness as a very patient team. For as many arms as he's ruined, Baker has probably saved several others by forcing his players to swing early and often so guys can get in a nice like 79 pitch complete game. A lot of this is perception. You list some random names because those are the ones you can remember. Guys like Mark Buerhle have gone a long time throwing 200+ innings per year, Mussina went a decade. Schilling has several years like that. The thing people don't remember are all the guys who flamed out with arm injuries from the past. By only acknowledging all the guys who pitched a lot, they ignore all the guys who got hurt and disappeared. The fact is Kerry Wood would have been a footnote in 1965. He wouldn't have had the hype coming in, because there just wasn't the media saturation, and because every prospect was a suspect. After his first injury he would have disappeared from the game, so you never would have heard of his 2nd or 3rd stint on the DL. And there were lots of guys that had that very thing happen to them. It was simply easier to pitch back then. You didn't run the risk of giving up a homerun to anybody who came to the plate, millions of dollars didn't ride on every pitch. Patience was not a virtue for hitters. Strikeouts were the absolute worst thing to happen, so guys swung early and just tried for contact a lot of the time. That makes the pitcher's job easier. Very well put and so true. Just listen to any of the old timers and K'ing was a sin! It was embarrassing....Now it's just excepted..

Pie needs another year at AAA. No way is he ready for the bigs yet.

Billek!?!?!?!

Did you not say this? The pitching abuse responses are because of this post. Where is Hendry's name mentioned in this post? Dude, what are you talking about! You are saying that Hendry should have a crystal ball and known that Prior and Wood would go down in 2004? That's what I meant. And where in that post did I mention the pitcher abusing was Hendry's fault? Lord knows we have enough threads about Dusty's abusing our pitching...

No, in 2005 is when people started to question Hendry. In 2003-04 he was considered gold from everything I read. And what do Dusty pitch counts have to do with Hendry? I'm not going to argue about this, because obvisouly we have vastly different views and/or memories about Hendry in first couple of years as the Cubs GM. Hey, if you saw Hendry faults from 2003 and on, you deserve Kudos! Because I sure didn't... As someone who really didn't jump on the anti-Hendry bandwagon until around 2005, you're wrong. There were plenty of people up in arms with him prior to then. Well of couse there is always going to be negative posters about anything no matter how postive things are going! The point I was making is the majority of people and media were overly postive about Hendry. I didn't just mean this forum?

Who knew? Most of the members of this community. It was talked about more often than just any other topic DURING the 2003 season. Feel free to dig through the posts in 2003. You'll find many discussions about the pitching abuse we all saw going on during that season. What does pitching abuse in 2003 have to do with Hendry and the moves he made? Isn't that Dusty department?

No, in 2005 is when people started to question Hendry. In 2003-04 he was considered gold from everything I read. And what do Dusty pitch counts have to do with Hendry? I'm not going to argue about this, because obvisouly we have vastly different views and/or memories about Hendry in first couple of years as the Cubs GM. Hey, if you saw Hendry faults from 2003 and on, you deserve Kudos! Because I sure didn't...

I read it a lot, and wrote much of it myself. Hendry has been a tools-hungry fool forever. He ignored the OBP problems forever, and his biggest move ever, signing Baker, was a disaster waiting to happen for a team that was going to rely exclusively on the fragile arms of young pitchers. People who paid attention pointed that out long ago. See you are talking about when things starting to go down hill for the Org. when you say fragile young arms, because in 2003 they weren't fragile. And who knew in 2004 they would all start breaking down. Hell in 2004 SI front cover had us winning the World Series.

Oh, if we're talking about the average call-in radio fan's opinion in Chicago, then I've got nothing to respond with. I was talking about nationwide perception, which I never pegged as anything close to giving him the genius label. Genius, no-up and coming star: absolutely. Especially after the Nomar trade. I specifically remember Bill Simmons (ESPN writer) lauding Hendry for getting "not only the best player, but the best prospect" in that deal, and using that to point out, along with a number of other points (Lee, Ramirez), that this guy was going to be one of the best GMs in baseball. The "Genius" label was more from the fans...But generally the public and print media was overally positive about hendry. How could you not be at that time?

Miller is only signed for this year. He has not looked good during his rehab. I'd count him out of plans for 2007. Gladfully count him out for 2007! Get guys that can stay healthy and pitch!

Agreed! I remember a time when Hendry was a Genius and Williams was trading away his farm system for worthless players. All my Sox fan couldn't stand the guy before 2005. I don't remember Hendry as Genius. I think he meant the general perception of him as a genius. After the Hunley for Karros and Grudz deal, the Hill and Beltran for Ramirez and Lofton, the Choi for Lee deal, the signing of Hawkins, Walker, and Maddux, and the Nomar trade (the Barrett trade was one of the best during that time, but doesn't factor in to this because no one knew how to judge at the time)-Hendry was widely considered to be one of the up and coming best GM's in baseball-of course, now that perception has done a 180. Thanks and that is what I meant. I never heard claims of him as an up and coming best GM. His critics were numerous from day one, even though I chose to ignore them and only focus on the bright side. I think people thought he was capable of being a good GM, but there was never a general perception that he was a genius or close to the elite. Totally disagree. In Chicago, from 2003-2005, this guy could do no wrong in the minds of most fans here. Kenny Williams was constantly being compared to him as the loser of the two in Chicago-bars, sports radio, columnists, everybody was on the Hendry bandwagon. Even those who couldn't stand Baker liked Hendry. It has only been in the last year that the shine has come off Hendry-and its come off quick. That's the memory I had also. Where did you read anything negative about Hendry in that time span Goon?

Agreed! I remember a time when Hendry was a Genius and Williams was trading away his farm system for worthless players. All my Sox fan couldn't stand the guy before 2005. I don't remember Hendry as Genius. I think he meant the general perception of him as a genius. After the Hunley for Karros and Grudz deal, the Hill and Beltran for Ramirez and Lofton, the Choi for Lee deal, the signing of Hawkins, Walker, and Maddux, and the Nomar trade (the Barrett trade was one of the best during that time, but doesn't factor in to this because no one knew how to judge at the time)-Hendry was widely considered to be one of the up and coming best GM's in baseball-of course, now that perception has done a 180. Thanks and that is what I meant. I never heard claims of him as an up and coming best GM. His critics were numerous from day one, even though I chose to ignore them and only focus on the bright side. I think people thought he was capable of being a good GM, but there was never a general perception that he was a genius or close to the elite. Then we remember things differently.