goonys evil twin

Major league baseball is about competition. You measure good and bad up against the rest of the league. The worst player on the worst team is still an elite ballplayer as compared to the rest of the world, but there's no point in comparing them to anybody but other players in major league baseball. Likewise, GMs can only be judged against other GM's in major league baseball. There's two things you can use to judge a GM, W-L record, and wins per dollar spent. W-L is most important. But the differences in payroll mean that it's easier or harder for certain GM's to win. Hendry rates very low on the W-L criteria, and extremely low on the wins per dollar spent. He has a huge advantage over most of the rest of the league, and he's squandered it. Compared to the rest of the league, he's a bad GM. The only way to fix that is to put together a team that wins big, soon.

You act like there is something wrong with waiting to praise a GM until after his team actually wins something.

As long as Dusty isn't calling plays we should be fine.

Where are you going to be sitting at the game? I don't know. My friend has all the tickets and they are spread throughout the stadium. It's up to him.

Good times! :D Are you going to the Jets game too? Abso-freaking-tively. Foxboro too? Nope.

That might be the best part about him. I don't really want Roberts. He's old, and he has serious leg issues. But he's been better than Juan Pierre during their careers. Roberts' peak years were a bit better than Pierre's, and his worst year wasn't as bad. Plus, the past two seasons, he's been significantly better. If Roberts costs $2.5m, he's a nice option to have. Aside from the lack of productivity, Pierre's biggest knock against him was the cost to acquire, as well as the cost to keep.

Jim hasn't done anything yet. He's managed to maintain a flawed roster. Congratulations. My doctor hasn't killed me yet, either. Jim has a very long way to go before he deserves any accolades. The most important part of this offseason was finding better players. He hasn't done that yet.

I believe he'll decline in his 30's as well. But as Tim pointed out, a lack of planning years ago has led the Cubs to be forced into taking that risk. I expect Ramirez to be very productive for another 3 years or so, and the cost of that productivity is probably going to be overpaying for it in the latter years. But every team ends up overpaying towards the end of older guy's contracts. That's why you need a bunch of under 30 players, and why you need to plan in advance to take advantage of guys' underpaid years. If you want to win you can't pass on every player who is unlikely to live up to his contract down the road. Beane is really the only guy who has gotten away with that approach. The Cubs don't have the luxury of letting guys walk away simply because they feel the player won't be all that good 3-4 years from now. Ideally you could do that, but it's just not possible, given the state of the franchise.

Good times! :D Are you going to the Jets game too? Abso-freaking-tively.

The Jets are a "hold on and hope to have the lead at the end" type of team. That is, they don't do anything all that well. They don't run particularly well, they don't pass all that well. They don't stop the run much, nor do they stop the pass. They are dead even if the giveaway takeaway. The Jets epitomize mediocrity. I think the Bears will be able to kick the crap out of them even if they aren't playing their best ball. But, as usual, they can't afford a letdown game.

That was fun. It was well worth the completely soaked jeans. Giants fans were on edge all game, even with the lead. After the Bears came back a bitter old man sitting near me started telling me I better enjoy this because the Bears had no chance of going to the Super Bowl. I asked him who in the NFC was better, and he just sat there looking stupid.

I think Padilla is a fine option if you aren't signing an ace somewhere. But at $10m, that's a steep price, and makes him far less attractive.

That's great in theory, but we're talking about a GM who gave away 3 pitchers for Juan Pierre. And a GM who reportedly has soured on Pierre and is learning a thing or two about OBP this offseason. The question was what is he going to do about leadoff. My answer was hopefully nothing. Leadoff is not a position. It's also not a position Jim seemed overly concerned with filling until Dusty kept begging for it.

I don't think Lowell is a great comparison for Ramirez. Look at Lowell's age 26-28 seasons. He was a little above average in the OPS+ category. He's not much of a strong guy, although he had his moments. He peaked late, at 29, but he started coming down the next year. He's also a guy who battled cancer, which can have longterm ramifications. I think Lowell's lack of athleticism is quite different from Ramirez's as well. Aramis is a strong bulky guy. He might carry an extra pound or ten, but he's a bull. Lowell is a lanky soft guy.

Hopefully he doesn't do anything about leadoff hitter, because leadoff hitter isn't a position. You don't go out looking for 2nd hitters, or 6th hitters. He should acquire the best 8 position players he can afford to get, then let the manager decide where they bat in the lineup.

I'm missing something on this one. ARod has stated already that he has no intentions of leaving NYY, and wants to make it work. Cashman has gone on record saying (more than once since the end of the season) that they have absolutely no intention of trading him. Boras has also chimed in saying that ARod holds the "hammer" with his no-trade saying he won't waive it. So again, am I missing something here? I dont know why people keep bringing it up, its a great dream but in reality we dont have the talent to pull it off and Alex apparently doesnt want to go anywhere. If they Yankees wanted to trade him they could get many better offers than what the Cubs are able to offer and probably places that are more attractive to Alex (if he actually wanted to be moved). On the surface it seems to be a moot point. But my theory is that Alex doesn't want to look like he's giving up on NY. He doesn't want to admit that NY beat him, or at least give that impression. Likewise, it serves Cashman no good to say anything other than "we have no intention of trading Alex." And Boras bringing up the no-trade clause is just typical Boras speak for, "The player will have final say about where he plays." I don't think there's a great chance he gets traded, but it's certainly not an impossibility. And it's certainly not anything like Ryan Howard or David Ortiz getting traded.

I can't believe people are trying to argue that we can't call Hendry a stupid GM.

what did he do?

Prior showed a lot more than that in 2005, and had a better history than Miller currently does. So I'm not sure Miller is really less of a risk than Prior.

Then you would be creating another hole on the team. Not if they're determined to pick up at least 2 other starting pitchers. It all hinges on what else Hendry can get done. And Sanchez seems pretty good. That deal doesnt make sense. You dont trade a staff ace. Their determined to pick up at least 2 other starting pitchers? Who are these guys that are better than Zambrano? Who said better than Zambrano? STL won after letting their past ace, Morris, leave. The Yankees went on an ace acquiring binge in the 2000s and didn't win the WS. Florida got rid of their best pitchers and are poised to be better than the Cubs for a while. Oakland has won despite ace type pitchers leaving. It's never good to get rid of a great pitcher. But it's all about the net gain. If you can turn that 1 great pitcher into 1 great position player and 2 good pitchers, you are probably better off.

I'm actually not nervous or angry right now. I don't expect much good to come out of this offseason. The Ramirez thing is going to come down to the last minute, that has been pretty clear since a couple weeks after the season ended. I expect him to leave if he's not signed by this weekend.

He won't be 39 til Nov. 18, 2007. :party1: But he's gonna be 39, regardless. He's also gonna be 41, 45, and 67. He will be 38 next season. I was trying to make a joke.

He never said he'd never use it. yeah, i was wondering about that. Well he didnt say that but it was more in the lines of " Its just there, I dont think ill ever use it though" Yeah, so what? 2 years ago he said he didn't think he'd use it. Maybe he thought Hendry would talk longterm with him before it came time to use it. Who cares though? If people have an opportunity to make more money, they are usually going to take that opportunity, unless it would require a significant increase in the effort they prefer to give. I would neither boo nor cheer Ramirez upon his theoretical return, unless maybe once he left he started ragging on Cubs fans.

He never said he'd never use it.

I'd like to see five years guaranteed, a sixth year vesting option, and a seventh year player option. I would not like to see the player option. I'm fine with seeing that 6th year option vest automatically if he averages 550 PA in years 4 and 5. I should clarify that I would prefer not to have the player option, but I would be confident that, if he were healthy enough to trigger the vesting option, the player option would be safe to offer as a carrot. With an agent talking about 6 years, I don't see much value in offering a 7th as a carrot. And I'm not sure they'd view it as a carrot, since the 6th year would have to be triggered to make it happen.