jersey cubs fan

Sure, but it would be more fun to ban the stupid talk anyway. The media is fretting over this story a hell of a lot more than the man on the street. I know it's not dominating NSBB or anything, but when I can't turn on espn radio for some good bathroom time radio without hearing mike greenberg whine on and on about this story, I get pissed. I was hoping like hell it would die down after the HR, but it's just gotten bigger and bigger and doesn't deserve the attention.

Perhaps Hendry was being told that there would be additional money available right up until the point that the sale was announced, at which time he was told something different, namely that no money would be available. In fact that's precisely what's widely believed to have happened. So you're saying he was a freaking moron for taking his bosses' instructions at face value. I'm saying he's a freaking moron if he couldn't put 2 and 2 together. The Cubs sale was speculated on for a long time. He had to have an idea that money may get tied up if something went down. He screwed up the team from 2003-2006, he should have gone in 2007 with the best team possible and not just hoped he'd be able to fix it on the fly in July. Well now you're just being laughably irrational. Hendry just sat on his hands this past offseason, and made no effort to try and improve, figuring that he'd just fix things in July instead, huh? You'd be hard pressed to come up with something further from the truth than that. Of course I never said that but don't let that get in the way of your theory.

WHY? Baseball Discussions exists for a reason. Yeah, to talk about baseball, not this ridiculously overplayed soap opera.

Gotta be Cedeno Not if they want a backup SS on the roster. Patterson is the most redundent. They have 4 others capable of playing 2B and many others capable of playing LF. Does EPatt play Short? Also you forgot about DeRo, he plays short and I doubt you need more than one backup. DeRosa is not really a shortstop.

Ban any and all references to Barry Bonds on this website. Let everybody get their fill through the weekend, then, starting Monday, lock all threads discussing him and/or the record. Use the word censor ban his name and threaten banishment from the site for anybody who talks about him and/or the record.

Perhaps Hendry was being told that there would be additional money available right up until the point that the sale was announced, at which time he was told something different, namely that no money would be available. In fact that's precisely what's widely believed to have happened. So you're saying he was a freaking moron for taking his bosses' instructions at face value. I'm saying he's a freaking moron if he couldn't put 2 and 2 together. The Cubs sale was speculated on for a long time. He had to have an idea that money may get tied up if something went down. He screwed up the team from 2003-2006, he should have gone in 2007 with the best team possible and not just hoped he'd be able to fix it on the fly in July.

Even though I don't want him here... here's a hint to avoid a Dusty or JJ "situation"... perform up to your capabilities. You'll be beloved in no time. in all fairness to jj, it seems like he is. he's just not very good. the JJ bashing goes a bit far at times. Last year he was pretty good for us. And this year, I can't see how you wouldn't think he's underperforming. No matter what his ceiling is, he's not playing near it. Very few players actually play at their ceiling though. JJ bashing goes far because his suckitude goes far. He was okay (but his SLG heavy OPS was vastly overrated given his continued lacking in OBP). His AVG/OBP are right in line with 3 of the past 4 seasons, the only "strange" underperformance is his power.

Good average, decent power, solid OBP...who? He's got a .399 SLG. At the very least, Murton is similar. But Floyd's numbers are extremely similar as well. DeRosa fits the bill offensively too.

I think that's ludicrous. The budget didn't change. He blew it. So they were negotiating with Z just for fun then? They got all the way to the point where the contract would be signed, and then Hendry looked at Z and said "Oh yeah, I forgot, I don't have any money to give you. I've known about this for a couple months, but I negotiated with you anyway. Sorry" I think that's a lot more ludicrous then to think the budget changed directly after the sale. Z's contract has nothing to do with the 2007 team. Hendry had over $100m to spend on the 2007 team and blew it, just like the $100m he blew in 2006 and the $90+ he blew in 2005. Yes, he didn't make the roster right. We're conceding that. We're talking about the trade deadline though. Hendry thought he had the budget to add a player at the deadline, and he would have had it, except the budget changed on Opening Day. Therefore, Hendry gets the blame for the 2007 roster, but not the blame for adding nobody of significance at the deadline, because the only guys he could add would be rentals. If he didn't think there might be budget issues by July, he's more of a moron than I thought. The Trib ownership was in flux and the team was likely to be in play. If he put together a team with the expectation of adding $5m in July, he's just a freaking moron.

Gotta be Cedeno Not if they want a backup SS on the roster. Patterson is the most redundent. They have 4 others capable of playing 2B and many others capable of playing LF.

I'm not sure you can included somebody on the 40 man roster as a PTBNL.

Let's carry this thought forward. Oakland has three choices here: (1) Pull him back from waivers. (2) Just let him go to the Cubs - Cubs would assume the remaining contract. (3) Make a trade. If I understand waivers correctly with item 3, the Cubs can only trade 3 types of players: (a) player(s) from the Cubs 40-man who has (have) cleared waivers; (b) a player from the Cubs 40-man, who was claimed on waivers first by Oakland; © player(s) who is (are) not on the 40 man roster. If it's scenario 3a or 3b, there would be no impact on the 40-man roster; however, if it's scenario 2 or 3c, the Cubs would have to remove somebody from their 40 man roster to add Stewart. That would be either a player who has cleared waivers or somebody the Cubs would have to DFA. Interested to see how all this unfolds. Are we assuming the Cubs are the highest priority team to put in a claim?

at least i'll be entertained by the cubs playing with two guys in CF. that's something, i guess. They have to go with Murton, Pie, Jones at this point, don't they? Floyd has to sit. Seeing him run into right center over and over made me wince, and those swings are just pathetic.

I think that's ludicrous. The budget didn't change. He blew it. So they were negotiating with Z just for fun then? They got all the way to the point where the contract would be signed, and then Hendry looked at Z and said "Oh yeah, I forgot, I don't have any money to give you. I've known about this for a couple months, but I negotiated with you anyway. Sorry" I think that's a lot more ludicrous then to think the budget changed directly after the sale. Z's contract has nothing to do with the 2007 team. Hendry had over $100m to spend on the 2007 team and blew it, just like the $100m he blew in 2006 and the $90+ he blew in 2005.

I think that's ludicrous. The budget didn't change. He blew it.

That's my point. Most GMs operate under a budget and can't just add to payroll. You have to build a winner in those circumstances, no excuses. Now people are trying to excuse Jim's failures because of a perceived handcuffing by ownership, when he's really just operating under the same rules as everybody else. Fair enough, but you said it backwards. "Not being able to add money to the payroll is an excuse most GM's don't get to use." = most GM's are able to add money to the payroll. No, what I said was they can't use the excuse. Everybody knows going in they have a budget. Saying in July that a GM had his hands tied by ownership isn't an excuse for not building a better team in the first place. My point is people need to quit offering up this excuse for Hendry. He's had the benefit of vastly more resources than most GMs during his tenure, now that his hands may be tied (while still using a much bigger budget) it's no excuse for failure.

I think you can. He built a team that would need trades, and he isn't able to figure out how to get one done. I highly doubt he's been told he can't make trades that add marginally to the payroll. Besides, he's the GM, he needs to figure out how to make the team better. The excuse of not being able to add money to the payroll is an excuse most GM's don't get to use. If he could only improve the team by significantly increasing payroll, that just exposes a major flaw in his ability. That's a fine argument, but he's not the only GM who builds a team with an eye towards the trading deadline. The best teams and best run orgs do it. It's one thing to build a 92 win team that might need a trade for two to get to 95 or so. But Jim has a barely above .500 team (that costs over $100m). There's no reason why going into 2007 the Cubs couldn't have been a near lock for 90 wins. None. That's Jim's doing.

That's my point. Most GMs operate under a budget and can't just add to payroll. You have to build a winner in those circumstances, no excuses. Now people are trying to excuse Jim's failures because of a perceived handcuffing by ownership, when he's really just operating under the same rules as everybody else.

Really? No fault? Ownership has been putting up tons of cash for 4+ years under Hendry and he's produced disappointment after disappointment. He invested a crap load this offseason in a mismatched group of players. Don't you think some of the hand tying could be his fault, since the team is in the position it is today precisely because of what Hendry has done to screw up? GMs work with budgets every day in MLB. Very few can just willy-nilly add to payroll. Yet repeatedly, year after year, GMs with far lower payrolls can far better results than Hendry gets. I think your hatred of Jim has clouded your understanidng of what I posted. His hands are currently tied b/c ownership is in limbo. This is not his fault. Everything that came before that - good and bad - is his responsibility. EDIT: You also ignored the part where I said that the genesis of this team's problems are found in the GM's office. I didn't ignore anything. I just disagree that there is no fault of his own. I believe that if Hendry didn't have such a horrible track record, that ownership would actually be willing to toss a couple bones the Cubs' way. But because there's absolutely no reason to trust Jim to spend it wisely, there's no reason to throw good money after bad. Jim's history of repeated screws ups and money wasting gives ownership more justification to cut off funds. If he had a great track record, I could see them being willing to spend an extra couple million in hopes of making many more millions in revenue through the end of the playoffs.

Nice AVG and SLG over the course of a week, but he's still got a 8:1 K:BB ratio and he's about to turn 23 and is repeating A ball. A guy with power and talent like that is going to look good over short bursts (like many Cubs), but his biggest flaws are what keep him from maintaining any conssitency and having a chance to succeed at higher levels.

Really? No fault? Ownership has been putting up tons of cash for 4+ years under Hendry and he's produced disappointment after disappointment. He invested a crap load this offseason in a mismatched group of players. Don't you think some of the hand tying could be his fault, since the team is in the position it is today precisely because of what Hendry has done to screw up? GMs work with budgets every day in MLB. Very few can just willy-nilly add to payroll. Yet repeatedly, year after year, GMs with far lower payrolls can far better results than Hendry gets.

It's too late. The trading deadline is a deadline for a reason. The only stuff you get off waivers is spare parts. The Cubs have needed impact bats for years and Hendry has ignored the need, instead focusing on nonsense like leadoff hitters, more left handers and utility players. I don't think this is the whole story. See my prior comments about Tejada and Beltran (to name two). I believe that if Hendry had been given the latitude to offer market-setting, Sorianoesque contracts to elite FAs from Day 1, this team would look much different today. You mean there'd be more grossly overpaid players who couldn't even come close to justifying their contracts?

I think you can. He built a team that would need trades, and he isn't able to figure out how to get one done. I highly doubt he's been told he can't make trades that add marginally to the payroll. Besides, he's the GM, he needs to figure out how to make the team better. The excuse of not being able to add money to the payroll is an excuse most GM's don't get to use. If he could only improve the team by significantly increasing payroll, that just exposes a major flaw in his ability.

The Cubs don't have anybody who even has a chance to reach 155 games played this year. Nobody will get 150 starts (Lee might play 152 games - but at least 3 have already been as a late inning sub). This team has been rested up the whazoo, so there's no reason for them to be tired. I think the problem is they don't have enough legit everyday players. They've got a bunch of role players all over the place.

It's too late. The trading deadline is a deadline for a reason. The only stuff you get off waivers is spare parts. The Cubs have needed impact bats for years and Hendry has ignored the need, instead focusing on nonsense like leadoff hitters, more left handers and utility players.