Backtobanks

If Ricketts is a hands-on owner starting next year, it might not hurt to keep Hendry. Most posters agree that trading is Hendry's strong point, so dumping him when the club needs to trade off dead weight might not be a good idea. Also paying off Hendry (2 years) plus paying a new GM adds to the financial woes. Just keep a close eye on him when it comes to signing free agents.

I might understand this deal if Hendry already had a deal with another team set up to take an OF, but like you said it doesn't make much sense to add another OF.

I think he was just saying that Soriano is setting the sights a bit low to be content with a split. The problem is that he doesn't seem to even know the Reds are the team in first place right now. I'm well aware of the fact the Reds are in 1st place, but it's not exactly like they're the 1927 Yankees. Everyone makes a big deal about how mediocre the NL Central is. For a player to hope for a split at home against the Reds just goes to show how lost this team is. The discussion about "firing Piniella" should be centered on the fact that this team that this team has no fire and doesn't seem to care. Thats actually about the last thing that thread should be centered on as it has no merit or proof. Z tried fighting a teammate showing the "fire" and boy has it done wonders. Lee slammed his helmet down after hitting into another DP, there is that fire and care, but yet Cubs still lose. Actually what I should have said was the manager and coaches seem to be totally disinterested and have accepted failure. Two perfect examples today with the breakup of the double play at 2B where the runner was obviously out of the base path and the game ending double play where Colvin should have been called safe. Nobody argued either call and DeJesus kind of shrugged his shoulders as he walked off the field. Combine the comatose demeanor of Lou with the terrible record and you have a reason to fire him.

I think he was just saying that Soriano is setting the sights a bit low to be content with a split. The problem is that he doesn't seem to even know the Reds are the team in first place right now. I'm well aware of the fact the Reds are in 1st place, but it's not exactly like they're the 1927 Yankees. Everyone makes a big deal about how mediocre the NL Central is. For a player to hope for a split at home against the Reds just goes to show how lost this team is. The discussion about "firing Piniella" should be centered on the fact that this team that this team has no fire and doesn't seem to care.

That makes this Soriano quote funnier... I'd love to see what a Jim Hendry fire sale looks like. All those NTC's. Nothing like hoping to split a series at home against a team that was picked to finish below you. That's a great way to gain ground on the leaders.

On MLBTR they listed a bunch of possibilities on trading Zambrano for other bad contracts. Personally, I don't think the Cubs have to trade him now (at the deadline) or would necessarily have to take back 2 or 3 bad contracts because I would think there will be teams interested in Zambrano at a reduced price. Having said that, the one deal that had slight possibilities is: •The Indians could match the Cubs' Zambrano commitment almost perfectly with Travis Hafner, Kerry Wood, and Jake Westbrook. It seems pointless, though, and Hafner isn't able to play first base. How about: Zambrano + Baker + Atkins + $7 million for Westbrook + Wood + Peralta Contracts: Zambrano - $17.8, $17.8, $18 Baker - $1 Westbrook -$11 Wood - $10.5 Peralta - $4.8 Club options not included Indians get Zambrano for app $25 million over 2 1/2 years. Cubs financial burden could end after season.

I agree with you Tim, but I still don't think he'll opt out. In this economy, I can't believe he'll get offers of around $40 million over 3 years with his history of injury and his "down" years. If he comes back next year ($14.6 million) and shows that he's healthy, he would be in line to get $16 million in 2012 from the Cubs or a 2-3 year deal from another team.

It's borderline adequate, from what I've seen. The bigger issue with him is whether or not he'd accept a one year deal, and if not, what could be done with him after 2011. I think he'll be able to get a multi-year deal again. Having said that, I would very much approve of using him as a stop gap between Lee and Adrian/Prince/whoever. As for 2011, I think the Cubs can content next year is things are played shrewdly between now and then. And while I think Hendry will be shown the door immediately after the season ends, it's up to him to effectively sell before this years deadline. I know as a lame duck GM that might not seem likely (to many), but it would behoove him to do it to the best of his abilities for his long term employment chances. I would trade Lilly, Lee, Nady, Silva and Theriot before the deadline, for prospect packages. I think Hendry really would like to trade Z, but wonder if Ricketts will allow it. I hope no, since he and Lou are doing their best to drive his trade value down, and the Cubs would take a huge bath in a Z deal. Kosuke may be traded, but I doubt it. Ramirez would have to be a fool to opt out after this season. Given that, my best case, realistic scenario 2011 roster is this: C: Soto 1B: Dunn 2B: Fontenot/Baker SS: Castro 3B: Ramirez LF: Soriano CF: Byrd RF: Fukudome Bench: Castillo, Barney, Baker, Colvin, Snyder Rotation: Dempster, Gorzelanny, Cashner, Jackson, Zambrano/Wells/Marshall Bullpen: Marmol, Stevens, Russell/Gaub/Parker, Grabow, Marshall No, it's not inspiring, to say the least. Pretty similar in the lineup, but utilizing a lot more of the farm instead of nickel and dime contracts for bit players. But in this division, it's capable of contention, provided a decent manager and Ramirez not absolutely sucking again. When Ramirez and Fukudome come off the books, it will open up a few more options. If the Cubs add a premier 1B and allocate resources better, I can see the team being a championship contender a couple years down the road. Looking at the FA class, Dunn is probably the 2nd best positon players behind Crawford, and he may ver well end up with a 3-4 year deal. Also, Im not so sure that the Nats wont keep him around for a few more years. For this same reason, even if Ramirez has a slight bounceback in the 2nd half, he'll probably opt out for a 3-4 year deal, as the only other 3B that might generate any interest is Jorge Cantu, who I might be interested in if Ram does opt out. Give him a 2-3 year deal, and hope that by the time it winds down Vitters will be ready. He'll only be 22-23 by then. I can't see ARam opting out of his contract. Nobody is going to offer him a 3-4 year deal after 2009-2010. He would have to stay healthy, hit .315-.320 with 24 HRs., and slug about 1.000 the rest of the way to end up at .260/30 HR/.730 slugging. Obviously, his best option is to stay healthy, take his $14.6 million in 2011, and go after a 2-3 year deal after that.

I don't know if the budget will be that low vs. who will be available to spend money on. The only places to really spend money would be 1B, 2B, 3B(Maybe), and maybe one outfield spot. These guys are available at each spot according to Cot's (I removed a couple of players with team options that will be picked up): First Basemen Adam Dunn WAS Wes Helms FLA Jason Giambi COL Paul Konerko CWS Derrek Lee CHC David Ortiz BOS * Lyle Overbay TOR Carlos Pena TB Second Basemen Willie Bloomquist KC Mark Ellis OAK * Akinori Iwamura PIT Jose Lopez SEA * Kaz Matsui COL Aaron Miles STL Third Basemen Garrett Atkins BAL * Jorge Cantu FLA Eric Chavez OAK * Pedro Feliz HOU Bill Hall BOS * Brandon Inge DET Maicer Izturis LAA Mike Lowell BOS Melvin Mora COL Nick Punto MIN * Ty Wigginton BAL (More likely a 1st baseman at this point) Aramis Ramirez CHC Outfielders Alfredo Amezaga LAD Frank Catalanotto NYM Carl Crawford TB Coco Crisp OAK * Michael Cuddyer MIN * David DeJesus KC * Jody Gerut MIL Jose Guillen KC Willie Harris WAS Brad Hawpe COL * Austin Kearns CLE Jason Kubel MIN * Magglio Ordonez DET * Marcus Thames NYY Jayson Werth PHI *2011 Option On that list the only players worth looking into would be: 1B: Pena, Dunn, Konerko (1 or 2 yr contract), Wiggington (eh), or bringing back Lee for a couple years. 2B: Hahaha, no. 3B: ARam, Cantu, nothing else really OF: DeJesus (Probably will have his optioned picked up), Werth (Probably will be re-signed by the Phillies), Crawford, Kubel (Team option, probably won't be there), Hawpe (Same) There really isn't much available this offseason to warrant spending the money. I think I read somewhere that Hendry liked Pena @ 1B. He's okay, but I wouldn't get too excited about him. I still think Lee counld be re-signed if he rebounds somewhat.

Who gets sent down?

I really don't see why Lou or Hendry should be fired over Z pitching a fit. He's been a very good pitcher for a few years now and, while he's been overpaid, his contract didn't look very bad at all when he was signed to it. A player throwing a fit shouldn't be held against the manager or GM. His contract is ridiculous for a pitcher that has #1 stuff, but the head of a middle reliever in A ball. Zambrano has been treated like a diva for years while underperforming. If you look at results, he hasn't been the "ace" of this staff for years. In fact, he's probably been somewhere between #3 and #5 in the rotation for awhile. He's a perfect example of what a player could've been.

If the Cubs could trade Zambrano, he would have been gone earlier this season. If the Cubs pay 50% of his contract ($23 million) at the deadline, they might find a taker. 2 1/2 years @ $23 million might be worth it for another team, especially if they didn't have to give up too much in the way of prospects. Of course the dreaded NTC might come into play because Zambrano might not want to leave because no other team would baby him as much as the Cubs. If they could find a taker, that might solve the problem of who to trade (Silva, Lilly, Gorz).

After reading the Tribune story, it kind of shocked me that Santo is 70 years old. I've been a fan of his since the beginning, but somehow all of my early favorites (Banks, Williams, etc.) seemed to age more than Santo. For all of his physical problems, he certainly looks younger than 70.

Who said it was the only consideration? The problem with the job Hendry has done is that this team has very mediocre results and a very high payroll. If they were a low payroll team with the same results, you'd probably give the GM some credit for making due. But this team has underperformed teams that have spent less than it throughout the Hendry era, and he has outlived much of his competition during that time. But if the object is to win 90-95 games consistently (or the WS), why would we give credit to some GM of a low-budget team for finishing at .500?

The Cubs have definitely underperformed their payroll in the Hendry years overall, but his era certainly hasn't been some kind of awful mess. We're certainly not the only organization – or even the only good organization – that gives out bad contracts, overpays for relievers or underperforms at times. Though they have had their share of each. Having been a Cub fan for 56 years and watching those horrible teams in the mid-50's, it is hard to get too upset with the team that bounces between underperforming and contending. I despise the notion of this is as good as we've seen it, be happy. It was this same mindset that tried telling people to be happy with back to back .500 seasons and stop complaining about the Baker years. The Hendry years have been horrible in comparison to how they should have been. Back in 98/99/00, this team was on the verge of becoming a force, ownership went from providing a middle fo the road payroll, to top ten and kept climbing to top 5. The fact that other organizations have struggled is meaningless. The Cubs are a top payroll club, but a middle of the road performer in the Jim Hendry era. That is abysmal. It would be one thing if this club won 90-95 a few times and when they struggled, they only won 85. But this team has lost 90 three times this past decade, are flirting with 90-loss pace again this year. Struggling on occasion is completely forgiveable, but Hendry's track record has been terrible. You cannot seperate the underperforming payroll from the judgement of the job he has done. Nobody said you should be happy or satisfied with the Cubs under Hendry. You state that "It would be one thing if this club won 90-95 a few times and when they struggled, they only won 85", but if they don't win the WS, what's the point? I agree the Cubs should be doing better than they are, but if payroll is the only consideration, then why play the games.

The Cubs have definitely underperformed their payroll in the Hendry years overall, but his era certainly hasn't been some kind of awful mess. We're certainly not the only organization – or even the only good organization – that gives out bad contracts, overpays for relievers or underperforms at times. Though they have had their share of each. Having been a Cub fan for 56 years and watching those horrible teams in the mid-50's, it is hard to get too upset with the team that bounces between underperforming and contending.

Z doesn't fit this at all. He had three years of xFIPs in the 3-range (3.82, 3.88, 3.54) from 2003-2005. Since then his xFIPs have been 4.20, 4.62, 4.45, 4.27 and 4.26. He re-signed with the Cubs in 2008, the 4.45 xFIP year. Since signing, he's been about the same to a little better than the two years immediately preceeding the extension. Aramis is much the same way. Before re-signing with the Cubs, he had OPS' of .956, .921, .912 and .915. Since the 2007 extension – .898 and .905. A bit of a dropoff, but not huge In both cases, if the contract had been given out because of one amazing year, it would have been given out much earlier than it was. If anything, both of them got big contracts for consistently very good performance over a number of years. Soriano: As a Yankee: .824 OPS. As a Ranger: .814 OPS. As a National: .911 OPS (1 year). As a Cub: .840 OPS. Lee: As a Cub: .909 OPS. As a Marlin: .822 OPS. Both have been better as a Cub than anywhere else, with the exception of Soriano's breakout year with Washington (which he almost matched in Chicago with an .897 OPS). ARam has been better as a Cub than Pirate by a huge margin, but that would be expected. Z has only been a Cub. You make some good points in this, but a couple of issues: On point #2: The Cubs have been one of the least budget conscious teams since Hendry took over. They've consistently raised the budget anytime a player they felt could help was available. I do agree that they've misspent a lot of that budget, but until the past couple of years they really haven't been all that budget conscious. Also on point #2: The Red Sox rarely have the best player at every position. The Yankees come close because of their ridiculous payroll, but the Red Sox generally have good to very good players at every position, but not top players at each. Just this year, they have less than top 5 production at 2B, SS, RF, CF, LF and DH. Looking just at players, they have David Ortiz DHing, Marco Scutaro at SS, J.D. Drew in RF and Adrian Beltre at 3B. I doubt any of those guys, entering the year, would be considered top players at their position. I think all of us are guilty of "the grass is always greener" syndrome. Most of us eat, sleep, and pour over every aspect of the Cubs without realizing that other teams overspend, under produce, and frustrate their fans as much as the Cubs. As frustrating as the Cubs are, can you imagine living in a city where the owners refuse to spend the money and have last place teams every single year?

Almost every FA signing could be described as the "flavor of the month, based on one or two amazing years." If a player has a great season or two just before he hits free agency, he's going to be ridiculously overpaid by some team (and not just the Cubs). The economy has slowed this down some, but a few years ago #3 starters were getting contracts in the $10 million per year for 3 years range. I think the real killer in most bad deals is the years rather than the money.

I'm sure Lou is very popular with the starters because it seems that he leaves them in a game to try to get the win rather than replacing them. Sometimes that strategy works, but often it doesn't.

Lee and Aramis are like the last guys I think of on this team in terms of having bad contracts. My point is that the teams with big payrolls tend to lock up most of their money in good players whereas the Cubs seem to love spreading it around too much overpaying for the wrong guys time and time again. Yeah, but Lee and Aramis fit the description from your previous post pretty well. Totally agree with you Tim. DLee and ARam have been solid and consistent (when not recovering from an injury) and deserved the money they got. Every high-budget team has a few bad contracts, but they go unnoticed if the team is reasonably successful.

Marlins Designate Renyel Pinto For Assignment By Mike Axisa [June 16 at 9:29pm CST] The Marlins have designated lefty reliever Renyel Pinto for assignment, tweets MLB.com's Joe Frisaro. The move clears a roster spot for reliever Tim Wood, who was recalled from Triple-A. Pinto, 27 next month, had a 2.80 ERA in 15.2 innings for Florida this year, striking out 16 to eight walks. He has actually fared better against righthanded batters in his career than lefties. Pinto is owed approximately $640K for the remainder of the season, and he will be under team control for both the 2011 and 2012 seasons. His career numbers are pretty decent. Can't believe he won't be picked up by some team soon.

That has to be the funniest post I've read in a long time. Take a page of of Kenny Williams' book? The WS have one of the worst farm systems and he has traded all of his prospects for "young" players like Andruw Jones, Peavy, Pierre, Teahen, and Kotsay. :lol: Did you even read what he said? Williams isn't all that great at his job, but he is smart about what KCF was talking about. Carlos Quentin being the most obvious example, although injuries seem to have kept him from being useful since 2008. Well the guys I listed average almost 32 years old and have a 2010 line of .228/.321/.371/.693. That certainly doesn't sound like "some underachieving/underutilized young players" to me and neither does it sound like guys I want to build a team around. BTW, I agree that Quentin was worth taking a chance on, but he's been terrible this year too. What about Quentin, Matt Thornton, Bobby Jenks, Sergio Santos, John Danks, Gavin Floyd and Paul Konerko (maybe before Kenny's time)? Konerko was before Williams took over, Jenks and Santos were brought up from the minors. Danks and Floyd were acquired in a trade, but neither was underachieving or under utililized. Thornton and Quentin would fit the "underachieving/underutilized young player" description.

That has to be the funniest post I've read in a long time. Take a page of of Kenny Williams' book? The WS have one of the worst farm systems and he has traded all of his prospects for "young" players like Andruw Jones, Peavy, Pierre, Teahen, and Kotsay. :lol: Did you even read what he said? Williams isn't all that great at his job, but he is smart about what KCF was talking about. Carlos Quentin being the most obvious example, although injuries seem to have kept him from being useful since 2008. Well the guys I listed average almost 32 years old and have a 2010 line of .228/.321/.371/.693. That certainly doesn't sound like "some underachieving/underutilized young players" to me and neither does it sound like guys I want to build a team around. BTW, I agree that Quentin was worth taking a chance on, but he's been terrible this year too.

That has to be the funniest post I've read in a long time. Take a page of of Kenny Williams' book? The WS have one of the worst farm systems and he has traded all of his prospects for "young" players like Andruw Jones, Peavy, Pierre, Teahen, and Kotsay. :lol:

What an idiot. As others have pointed out Hill's "superior" defense hasn't won very many games for a team starving for offense.