dalgreen

Someone, anyone, reassure me that I'm being paranoid. But why have I had this recurring thought that Hendry would be interested in Jack Wilson?

Since we know that Baker will play Neifi more than he should, how about giving Neifi a PA based incentive, too? $1 million for < 200 PA, and Baker owes the Cubs $50,000 for every plate appearance Perez makes after 200.

I may be wrong, but I could have sworn that after yesterday's game, Len said something about the Cubs' record in 1-run games, and it was positive, something like 24-19? Remember when the Cubs were really bad in 1-run games last year, and everyone said that it was one of the problems with the team? There are a lot of overrated stats in baseball, but the record in one-run games has to be one of the most overrated stats.

If we can't have a middle infield of Walker and Cedeno, I'd like Polanco and Cedeno.

I don't know too many people who felt that Sox could maintain their torrid pace of the first half. But no one thought the Indians would run off a 17-3 record, either. If the Indians had gone 14-6 (still a great 20 game record), talk of a Sox collapse wouldn't even be discussed.

I would cringe anytime I saw Baker speaking with reporters. But I don't think, in this instance, he went out looking for a reporter to tell this to. Somehow, some way, the reporters seemed to already have this information. That's what ticks me off.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-050925cubsbits,1,7820932.story?coll=cs-home-headlines I've seen something about this at least twice in the Trib. Thx. I'm actually pretty pissed about this. For an organization that tries to paint itself as player-friendly, the Cubs sure have an awful way of dealing with things like this. I wonder if Corey could sue under HIPPA laws. I don't know what confidentiality laws have been broken with this. From what I read, this has nothing to do with a medical condition. How would you feel if your employer went to the press and said they were considering sending you to a psychologist? I'd be livid. But maybe that's just me. Oh, I think it sucks that he's hearing this for the first time from a beat writer. But I don't see any laws being broken. It's different if they said, "Due to Corey's (fill in the blank) condition....." I think this is yet another possible solution made out of total desperation by the Cubs. But from what I read, many athletes have seen sports psychologists, so I don't know if it's necessarily a negative thing. I do think the Cubs do an extremely poor job of keeping things "in house."

I'll go even further, I don't know why he was ever re-signed.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-050925cubsbits,1,7820932.story?coll=cs-home-headlines I've seen something about this at least twice in the Trib. Thx. I'm actually pretty pissed about this. For an organization that tries to paint itself as player-friendly, the Cubs sure have an awful way of dealing with things like this. I wonder if Corey could sue under HIPPA laws. I don't know what confidentiality laws have been broken with this. From what I read, this has nothing to do with a medical condition.

I think Bruce Miles also mentioned it in the Daily Herald.

The lineups stunk this year; however, I think you're underestimating just how poor our starting pitching and bullpen were for many parts of the season. I don't think he is underestimating how poor the starting pitching and bullpen have been. A one game swing from the loss column to the win column has the team at .500. A two game swing from the loss column to the win column has the team with a winning record. I don't think it's out of the scope of reality that the Cubs could have won 2 more games with quality OBP guys at the top of the order. I don't think it's out of the scope of reality that they could have won 10 more games with productive OBP guys hitting in front of Derrek Lee all year. Fair enough. I just think there were games this year that we won where we should've lost and definitely vice-versa. I'm just saying even with the crappy lineups that Baker trotted out there, there were many games that we had the lead in the seventh inning or later that the bullpen gave up.

From what I understand it has nothing to do with a medical condition. It was mentioned as "an alternative" solution to get Corey's concentration back. It was also mentioned that guys like Smotz and others have seen a psychologist. Baker did admit that he hadn't talked to Patterson about it.

The lineups stunk this year; however, I think you're underestimating just how poor our starting pitching and bullpen were for many parts of the season.

I wouldn't mind Walker coming back, but I am also interested in what it would take to get Placido Polanco from the Tigers - he's due to make $2 million more than Walker, I think.

Back to Walker, I just thought it was bush league to bring up Pokey Reese's name when asked about his thoughts on whether he'd be back with the Cubs. He later added that the worst case scenario would be the Cubs picking up his option then trading him. Walker said something to the effect of, "Then that takes away from my ability to be a free-agent and choose my employment." Then maybe next time you won't agree to a team option. I would like to see him back, but I'm losing patience with him with his quotes about his former team, Wrigley Field, etc.

I liked the resigning of Hollandsworth. To me, he looked like a guy who could play the part of a Mark Sweeney. Decent outfield replacement when needed and a veteran bat off the bench with some decent punch. Baker was the one who misused him. Whether Hendry had those same intentions or not is not as obvious. I think it hurts the team to not sign a veteran bat for the bench. But, if the manager then turns around and uses the bench bat as an everyday starter, all you can do is beat your head against a wall. Especially if the manager has a contract with more than a year remaining. Maybe I'm wrong and Hendry agrees with Baker's philosophy. If that's the case, Hendry really fooled me. He gave me the impression this past offseason that Dubois would play a lot. He also spent a lot of time and effort building up the farm system. He gave me the impression that he was improving the system from the bottom up, which is a system that works. But, ever since he's had Dusty here, the philosophy seems to have changed. Well there was a lengthy thread last off-season after it was reported that Hendry and Baker had promised him more playing time and that was a big reason that Holla re-signed with the Cubs. I don't think I've come across as a second-guesser, but I've said since last season that Hendry's build up of the farm system will be primarily used for trades and not to stock the Chicago Cubs. And I'm not one that's all enamored with our position prospects, anyway. I hope I'm wrong. And I wouldn't have minded the re-signing of Holla so much, but then why sign Burnitz, too if you wanted to give Dubois more than a "platoon" chance?

I pretty much agree with everything you said, but Baker is playing with the hand dealt to him from Hendry. You mentioned the other teams, yet I doubt their GM's would've re-signed guys like Macias, Perez, Hollandsworth and sign Burnitz if there were young guys up and coming. I blame Baker for not playing some of these guys, but Hendry shouldn't be given a free pass, either. Had he really wanted Dubois given a good shot at the everyday spot, what was the need in re-signing Holla (after promising him more playing time) and then signing Burnitz? If Cedeno was wanted to play a lot, why re-sign Perez? Another example, Jocketty wanted Molina to start. Therefore, he didn't even really entertain an offer to Matheny to come back, nor did he sign a good veteran catcher that might enable LaRussa to play him over Molina. Sometimes the manager's decisions are only as good as the GM's decisions. Baker should be criticized, but Hendry has been his co-dependent.

Dubois has played all this year at 26, and spent 4 years(not exactly an eternity) in the minor leagues. The comparisons are there, Dusty handled their successes nearly the exact same way. Fortunately, Murton hasn't faltered yet so we haven't seen what he'll do if that happens. In baseball terms, it is an eternity. There is a reason why Dubois didn't see his first real big league action until 26, sorry for the misinformation I provided stating he's 27. Maybe Murton hasn't faltered because he's just better than Dubois. I think some just had too high of expectations for Dubois. I still think Murton is in a different class than Dubois. Ding, ding, ding. Correct answer. Murton >> DuBois. DuBois had a hot April then cooled off considerably whereas Murton keeps producing. It's interesting how some totally disregard how Baker has stuck w/ Corey Patterson through thick and thin. He's younger than DuBois. You better duck before you're hit with the flying reason of, "Patterson was already an established position player. So he doesn't count."

Me too.

Hughes was hired by Hendry after Hendry became GM. Hughes did play a huge role in Hendry's career progression, dating back to the Marlins. Thanks. I stand corrected. I thought Hughes was hired by MacPhail while MacPhail was GM. Thanks for the knowledge.

Dubois has played all this year at 26, and spent 4 years(not exactly an eternity) in the minor leagues. The comparisons are there, Dusty handled their successes nearly the exact same way. Fortunately, Murton hasn't faltered yet so we haven't seen what he'll do if that happens. In baseball terms, it is an eternity. There is a reason why Dubois didn't see his first real big league action until 26, sorry for the misinformation I provided stating he's 27. Maybe Murton hasn't faltered because he's just better than Dubois. I think some just had too high of expectations for Dubois. I still think Murton is in a different class than Dubois. The expectations are pretty much irrelevant. I'm not trying to make a point that Dubois and Murton would have similar results, I'm trying to show how the two rookie OFs were treated, and how Dusty pats himself on the back for their success(despite hindering them), yet doesn't take any blame for their failures. The expetations are irrelevant. I guess I don't see the need for even bringing up Dubois as a comparison. Can't we just be angry at the way Murton has been treated without comparing his treatment to a lesser player?

Dubois has played all this year at 26, and spent 4 years(not exactly an eternity) in the minor leagues. The comparisons are there, Dusty handled their successes nearly the exact same way. Fortunately, Murton hasn't faltered yet so we haven't seen what he'll do if that happens. In baseball terms, it is an eternity. There is a reason why Dubois didn't see his first real big league action until 26, sorry for the misinformation I provided stating he's 27. Maybe Murton hasn't faltered because he's just better than Dubois. I think some just had too high of expectations for Dubois. I still think Murton is in a different class than Dubois.

Anytime you have a staff, save Maddux, who generally pitches away from contact makes the opposing scouts' jobs easy. I have ticked a few people off with my criticism of our scouts and minor league instructors. Then again if you constantly sign and trade for guys who have aggressive approaches at the plate what can you expect? i'm curious to know if hendry is aware that: 1. his team throws the most pitches per game. 2. sees the least pitches per game. or if he has connected the dots yet, and "why not?" if he hasn't. the cubs woes are right in front of you jim, and jacque jones is not going to be your savior next season. Wasn't that the case last year? If so, I think you have your answer.

Maybe its not the case, but, for the most part, I'd expect the majority of scouts and instructors to follow the philosophy of the organization's general manager. From an outsider's perspective, baseball organizations appear to be regemented top-down models. Maybe that is an obvious point, I don't know. By the way, I agree with you. I just made a semi-promise to myself in July that I'd stop griping about Hendry since at the time I seemed to be one of the few people taking him to task. So, after spending time criticizing Baker and Hendry, I've moved on to the scouting and instructor departments. But some of the scouting "gurus", namely Hughes, were around before Hendry was the GM.

Anytime you have a staff, save Maddux, who generally pitches away from contact makes the opposing scouts' jobs easy. I have ticked a few people off with my criticism of our scouts and minor league instructors. Then again if you constantly sign and trade for guys who have aggressive approaches at the plate what can you expect?