Sammy Sofa

Why you didn't go with a title like "Dick Pole Gets the Shaft" I'll never know.

Zambrano is the best...when did he start that little bow thing with Fukudome? I think he chucked the rosin bag at Soto, too.

I really like what we've seen out of Caridad.

Go, Fred, go!

we would've made a really dumb trade We'd probably be where we are right now.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2416/1517901366_0d238c25fc.jpg?v=0

We all know what you meant. We accept you.

Hmmm, so he's a chubby-chaser. Play on, player.

That's understandable, what with the time you're investing in the trannies and all.

I know what I'd rather see, but there will be plenty of hot trannies for you, too.

Not unless he could be had for dirt cheap. Like, $40 and a bus pass.

That doesn't make much sense. The sale is all but over. That was an excuse the last two years, but no longer. Jim Hendry has been in this organization for well over a decade, a very influential personel man for nearly a decade and in complete control for 7+ seasons. He's been a disappointment. The fear of a worse GM is pointless. Most GMs don't get the financial benefit that Hendry has had. As long as they don't go out and sign Jim Bowden or some retread bum, they should be able to improve. This is a disappointing organization that hasn't won nearly as many games as they should have given their competitive advantages. I don't "fear" a worse GM: I simply recognize the odds of getting one that's actually good are tremendously slim. That doesn't mean I'm opposed to getting rid of Hendry. And I'm not making the limited payroll excuse. The language coming from the organization seems to be making it abundantly clear that money is going to be very tight for the forseeable future. If that's not actually the case, and I hope it isn't, fantastic, but as of right now they're indicating that it is.

If the new guy doesn't have any money to work with, how does Hendry have any money to work with? If it effectively comes down to that the only significant moves the Cubs can make are trades until the payroll can be expanded or contracts come off the table I'd rather just keep Hendry since trades have been the one thing he's largely tolerable to really good at getting done. Once the money situation is more workable go ahead and fire him, but until then it seems largely redundant. It just doesn't seem likely that ownership is going to allow him to make trades and not sign people. This offseason he's going to trade milton Bradley to get money back. Harden is also gonna walk. So he's going to have money to spend. Odds are he won't spend it wisely. Chone Figgins comes to mind. Unless he's told not to sign anyone long term another year of Hendry can do even more damage and push our team even further away. Odds are a new GM wouldn't spend it wisely. Again, I'm not saying that that's a reason to hold onto Hendry: I just don't realistically expect a new GM to be significantly better since most GM's, like managers, tend to be barely tolerable at best and horrendous at worst. We also don't know what the new owners are telling Hendry what he can spend and how he can spend it. For all we know they are placing specific limitations on how much he can spend and for how long. I'm also not sure how trading Milton is likely to get significant "money back" since it would take a miracle to not still be paying most of his salary. At the end of the day I don't care if Hendry is fired. I'm not arguing for the Cubs to keep him like they need to. I just don't think that the time is opportune to do so because of the sale because it ties up the next guy from making any significant changes.

If the new guy doesn't have any money to work with, how does Hendry have any money to work with? If it effectively comes down to that the only significant moves the Cubs can make are trades until the payroll can be expanded or contracts come off the table I'd rather just keep Hendry since trades have been the one thing he's largely tolerable to really good at getting done. Once the money situation is more workable go ahead and fire him, but until then it seems largely redundant.

He seemed defeated at press conferences. Every question was given the answer "What do you want me to do?" with this faux outrage. The last two years he was very candid and humble, qualities I really enjoyed about him. Not so much this year. Am I seeing things? Again, there seemed to be little difference in how he actually managed the games from years past outside of not flipping out as much.

What "philosophy of fear?" Nobody is afraid of firing Hendry.

"Strategy"-wise, I see little difference between this year's Lou and, well, any other year he's been a manager. The main difference is that with the Cubs he hasn't thrown his little hissyfits as often as he did in the past, but beyond that he seems to be the same Lou when it comes to managing.

Nobody's said that. I haven't said it in this thread, but I have said something that could be misconstrued for that if one were really, really dumb. Namely, that firing Hendry for the sake of firing him doesn't do us any good if don't hire a better GM. I wouldn't really see the point of firing Hendry if the best replacement we can muster is Jim Bowden, for instance. Exactly. I said something somewhat similar where I don't see the point of firing Hendry now if there's no significant payroll for a new GM to work with. It seems redundant to saddle a new GM with Hendry's mess without the financial means to do anything about it. I've also said that while I'm not opposed to Hendry ultimately being fired I have little confidence that his replacement will be any better.

Probably not. Most managers are terrible like that.

Nobody's said that.

Lou manages to even mismanage a good bullpen when he has one, so God help the team he manages that has only an average or below average one. I have no idea why Lou seemed to think Wuertz was a guy to be used pretty much only to put out fires and bring him in with people already on base.

None of those three will be a starter next season, and rightfully so.

Am I alone in the thought that a team takes on the identity of its' coach? Are you discounting that entirely? Yes, because it's a horrible idea since most MLB managers are terrible. I'm not so much discounting it as I am hoping to God that it's not true.

Can someone please point me to the reasoning as to why Soriano HAS to bat 6th? Why not just slide him up to 5th and bat Soto 6th? If either aren't having a repeat of the Year of Assiness it seems like it should work.

No, he couldn't.