davearm2

What you do know is very little. That immediately calls into question the conclusion that your theories and assumptions can be characterized as "perfectly reasonable". I prefer "completely speculative", personally.

Bolded the key point for you. There are maybe 50 guys with the sort of firsthand knowledge of the situation required to offer a truly informed opinion, but none of them are posting here. I could have named any of those other 49 guys besides Hendry, and the point would've been the same. So if it makes you feel better, replace "Hendry" with "Piniella" or "Trammell" or "Zambrano" or "Hoffpaiur" or "trainer" or "equipment mgr." or whoever's your favorite. Makes no difference.

This discussion really has very little to do with Hendry. And yet you keep going to the Hendry well to make your point. If you think that, then you, too, missed the point.

This discussion really has very little to do with Hendry.

Kudos to you for recognizing that, just maybe, the depth and breadth of this dude's delusions made trading him at any cost the smart move -- and that only someone up close and personal to the situation (like, say, Jim Hendry) would know for sure. The armchair QBs around here were having none of that hypothesis a few months ago, when this story was still on the front burner. Milton Bradley is so crazy that Jim Hendry had to trade him! We know this because Jim Hendry traded him. Circular logic is circular. You missed the point yet again.

Every Cubs fan I know in person (i.e. not people on this board) had the exact same thing to say about the Bradley/Silva trade: "I'm just glad he's gone." Most people don't want to think about the other stuff. They just don't really care, or want to be told why (I think) they should. Most people don't know anything about baseball. My friends are all idiots when it comes to this stuff. Of course the unintended comedy is that the folks here that think they do know everything about baseball and everyone else is an idiot and/or uninformed, are themselves uninformed on the most critical elements of the situation. I've said it before and I'll say it again: unless you were in the Cubs clubhouse day in and day out last year, then you have no clue what was really going on, and therefore you have no business spouting about what Hendry should or should not have done with Bradley.

LOL Milton Bradley isn't keeping anyone from "taking a serious and honest look at the way they conduct their business". Puhleez. The dude was a nutjob before Chicago, in Chicago, and apparently after Chicago. The Cubs rolled the dice that the good would outweigh the bad. They were wrong. Now they've cut their losses and moved on.

Kudos to you for recognizing that, just maybe, the depth and breadth of this dude's delusions made trading him at any cost the smart move -- and that only someone up close and personal to the situation (like, say, Jim Hendry) would know for sure. The armchair QBs around here were having none of that hypothesis a few months ago, when this story was still on the front burner.

Yes, Milton. It wasn't you. It was something/someone else. Yet again. Obviously.

Well one of the two would have to hit a HR too. Zambrano probably will, at some point. Not sure about Millar.

Maybe Calero preferred the Mets over the Cubs. Just a thought.

Looking at this from an economics/societal welfare perspective, the folks that are willing to pay the most for tickets are the ones that should get them, not the ones that happen to luck out in the VWR or have 100 web browsers open or whatever. Heck if anything they should take this a step further, and add more tiers. Many teams should have tiers below 100% face value as game day approaches. Imagine, tickets are 150% of face value Feb 1-15. remaining tickets are 125% of face value Feb 16-28 remaining tickets are 100% of face value beginning in March remaining tickets are 75% of face value the week of the game remaining tickets are 50% of face value the day of the game As a fan, your willingness to pay (demand) determines how large or small your ticket selection (supply) is. You can wait as long as you wish to try and save money, but you have less desirable inventory to choose from as you do. Now there are reasons why this might not be a profit-maximizing strategy for the team, but from the perspective of economic efficiency, this would be a good thing.

i believe that he had objections to being called the n-word repeatedly by the ususal suspects in the right field bleachers. many interpret this as him bearing the cubs ill-will, or him simply playing the "race-card" (as we all know, racism doesn't exist anymore after it was decided that black people should just stop paying attention to it) because of sour grapes. he was relatively good as a cub. Who can blame Jones for wanting out of Chicago -- the guy got ridden harder by the fans at home than on the road. I know that sort of crap comes with the territory, but still, that's gotta suck to have your own fans trashing you day in and day out.

Hey I've got nothing but good things to say about the sabermetricians and analysts that are busy developing metrics like UZR. Effectively measuring defensive value is clearly the next big thing in baseball. It's been given little or no attention for decades, and that's clearly a problem. But the key word is "effectively". I just don't think we've reached a point of having something that's truly reliable and valuable. So until we do, I will continue to cringe when I read lectures on subjects like Fuld vs. Dye, or how Fukudome is a big liability in CF but a big asset in RF. These sorts of premises are built almost completely on faulty (IMO) data.

NSBB would be such a better place if only this were true...

Theriot bashing was in its infancy about 2 years ago now.

Way too late to non-tender guys. That happens in November or December.

moral? doubtful. morale? definitely. mural? absofrigginlutely.

I'm always amazed that there isn't a little more sympathy for Prior. Conservatively, injuries cost him $100M in career earnings. It would have been closer to $200M, if he could've lasted as long as guys like Maddux and Clemens and Big Unit. The dude essentially won the lottery only to realize his wife sent the ticket through the laundry. Now I realize he should be set for life with the money he made regardless, but still, man that's a lot of dough. Almost unfathomable, really.

Huh. The last time I thought about Kevin Millar, he was hitting cleanup for the Orioles.

Of course Eric Byrnes wants to be a Cub. That'd mean he's still in the bigleagues.

Of course, you're assuming that we get nothing of value for Theriot. If he really is a relatively cheap, 3-4 win player as you suggest, then he should bring back something in trade that we can also use. If not, then obviously don't trade him. Who do you have in mind that would replace the 3-4 wins the Cubs are losing and be a wash in salary? no idea. But it's kind of silly just to close off the idea of exploring it. The first step would be to see who needs a shortstop and what they'd have to offer in return. I do believe you're overestimating the difference between Theriot and the potential replacements, though. Well that principle is generalized enough to be applicable to all players, not just Theriot. I'm sure Hendry is open to discussing trading just about anyone if an offer comes along that makes the team better. Curious, do you think Theriot is less than a 3-4 win guy, or do you think Blanco or whomever would produce above replacement level?

Yes and no. Personally, I'm in agreement that we should probably be in a wait-and-see approach till the deadline based on Castro's improvement, the standings, injuries, our 2B platoon's performance, etc... On the other hand, I don't see the difference between Theriot and Barney or Blanco to be more than two wins (probably closer to one)... and based on your assessment of our playoff chances and the fact that position players generally fetch significantly more in the offseason than at the deadline, it might make sense to move him if there's a willing trade partner out there now and you don't see us as particularly likely to be fighting for a playoff spot. Well the Cubs are certainly not approaching the season with the mindset that they're not particularly likely to be fighting for a playoff spot. That much is obvious. They're in the same win-now mode that they've been in for years. What's also clear, at least to most, is that their postseason chances are tenuous enough that they can't be giving away wins, whether it be one, two, or whatever. As we all know the difference between being in and being out was just a game or two in 03, 04, and 07. My own opinion is that the alternatives to Theriot should be expected to produce no better than replacement level, and further, that Theriot is more than 1 to 2 wins above replacement. 3 to 4 wins would be more like it, and depending on which website's metrics you prefer (fangraphs, baseball prospectus, etc), I suspect they're likely to agree. Of course, you're assuming that we get nothing of value for Theriot. If he really is a relatively cheap, 3-4 win player as you suggest, then he should bring back something in trade that we can also use. If not, then obviously don't trade him. Who do you have in mind that would replace the 3-4 wins the Cubs are losing and be a wash in salary?

Yes and no. Personally, I'm in agreement that we should probably be in a wait-and-see approach till the deadline based on Castro's improvement, the standings, injuries, our 2B platoon's performance, etc... On the other hand, I don't see the difference between Theriot and Barney or Blanco to be more than two wins (probably closer to one)... and based on your assessment of our playoff chances and the fact that position players generally fetch significantly more in the offseason than at the deadline, it might make sense to move him if there's a willing trade partner out there now and you don't see us as particularly likely to be fighting for a playoff spot. Well the Cubs are certainly not approaching the season with the mindset that they're not particularly likely to be fighting for a playoff spot. That much is obvious. They're in the same win-now mode that they've been in for years. What's also clear, at least to most, is that their postseason chances are tenuous enough that they can't be giving away wins, whether it be one, two, or whatever. As we all know the difference between being in and being out was just a game or two in 03, 04, and 07. My own opinion is that the alternatives to Theriot should be expected to produce no better than replacement level, and further, that Theriot is more than 1 to 2 wins above replacement. 3 to 4 wins would be more like it, and depending on which website's metrics you prefer (fangraphs, baseball prospectus, etc), I suspect they're likely to agree.

Defense aside, would you take Nady over Dye based on hitting alone? I wouldn't even if Nady was healthy, let alone coming off a second TJS surgery. Now I realize Dye is horrible defensively, but I hold firm to the position that you sign bench players for their bats, not their gloves. The only time this is not the case is when you're talking about backup catchers or defensive specialists like Blanco or Fuld. Nady is neither. With an injury prone guy like Soriano in left and older players in center and right, having a guy on the bench who isn't a liability in the field is important, though. With the signing of Nady, if Soriano gets hurt for a month, we won't have to rely on only Fuld to replace him. If we had signed Dye, then we would have had the choice of starting Fuld every day or starting a DH in left every day. Nady is the superior option for this team. Should I post the math yet again that proves that if they have to play the field Sam Fuld is a better player than Jermaine Dye? I know you're smart enough to recognize the enormous flaws in that proof. Extrapolating bench-role production to starter-role production? Check. Unresolved park and league factors? Check. Strong dependence on suspect defensive metrics? Check. Small sample size issues? Check. Yeah I'd not put much stock in that one.