UK1679666180

Yeah, it has been of value and I have learned from it. We have different levels of responsibility pointed towards Hendry for the disappointment over the last two years and it's been civil. I just took the question the wrong way.

Agreed, of course I don't know if that runs parallel with your idea of who's involved with "group think". Unlike Baker, he has earned the right to try and correct the ship for this year b/c he has been good enough to stick around. After that, if the Cubs do well and show progression with players like Murton, Cedeno, etc. and exceed my expectations for this year, I would have no problem with Hendry being inked long-term. But, if the Cubs have a repeat of '05, I think it's time to go in another direction. Hendry's contract ends at an ideal time to allow MacPhail one year to judge the capabilities of Hendry, that should not be wasted by giving him the long-term prematurely or had they fired him prematurely. Although I think there are better GM waiting for their shot, Hendry has earned the right to cont. to try & improve this team.

Only if refs had no say on loose balls as well as fouls that did not involve the act of shooting. Maybe they should just have rugby and then once they go up for a shot, then blow the whistle.

Look at their career EQAs (much more accurate gauge of offensive abilities than OPS) . Gomez-.241 Perez-.219. OPS (last year) Gomez .701 Perez .681. It brought into the discussion his injury history, do you think he would've had an incentive laden deal had not been injured for much of '04? I would not be critical of Drew or Beltran b/c I agreed with the thought process behind either of those acquisitions. that 1st year, it would not have worked out. I addressed Drew and Beltran, I would not have gone after Ordonez. I had no problem with signing Nomar, I did say at the time I would rather trade for Lugo though. but, I had no problem with the signing but caveat emptor and get a better backup than Perez. Neifi's strength was his defense at SS, he is a very good defensive SS. If it was Nomar to Cedeno it would be a big upgrade, but how games did Nomar play at SS? You can say the same thing about going from Murton to Dubois, how games did Dubois start in LF? Murton is an avg. defensive corner OF'er. Until Murton finally got off the bench, Hollandsworth, Lawton, and Dubois probably provided avg. defense overall. The only upgrade I see is Burnitz to Jones, which isn't much. What was the point of this question... What were your intentions of this, how much of a moron do I have to be to actually believe that baseball is completely predictable by numbers? To me, that's the same as implying that I have have never watched or played the game and would rather look at a stat sheet rather than watch the game. B/c (not to sound like conceeded) but I consider myself to have been able to gain some knowledge (hitting and pitching mechanics, as well as the proper thought process behind the actions of a manager or the pattern of a pitcher and the hitter) of the game beyond reading a Baseball Prospectus handbook. That to me is far more important than any number will ever be.

They won 88 games with great starting pitching and a very good top of the pen. They overachieved by making the playoffs with 88 wins and they progressed quicker than I thought they would but no they didn't overachieve. They had a pythag. record of 85 wins, nothing too shocking. You gauge where the talent should be by the quality of your farm system over the last 5 years, combined with payroll and compare it with the current state of the team. Everyone's expectation should've increased after the '03 season, you got a glimpse of how good these 3 young pitchers could be. I've put more blame on Baker (whom Hendry hired). If I had a list of potential FAs for '05, I can tell you who I wanted. I know I wanted Drew or Beltran and I was wrong. So what? What does that prove? That I would've made a mistake? They're not the 1st or the last players that I've wanted that would've bombed. Where haven't I been fair?

You sign him to that contract with your only backup as Perez, you better hope he starts. I wanted Chris Gomez as the backup. Gomez is a much, much better option than Perez. It's not out of the ordinary for SS in his 30s coming off a season where he missed half the year with a wrist injury the previous season to struggle to stay healthy. Also, he was expected to hit 5th or 6th (depending on how poorly Baker constructs the lineup). That's counting on him. You want to try and remember who they should've gone after during the '04-'05 off-season? I was critical of both Hollandsworth and Burnitz being signed before the '05 season started, there's nothing hollow there. Like me, you're counting on the Cubs to stay healthy to have any chance. As long as Baker is here, I question whether Prior and especially Wood and now Miller will be able to handle his usage. Defensively, this team isn't much better than last year and they weren't that bad last year. Baseball isn't predictable or only a game of numbers(and don't try that cute stuff with me, it won't get you far), but "uncontrollable variables" didn't lead to the Sox winning the WS and the Cubs finished below .500.

No, b/c that's before Zambrano & Prior had arrived. You look at in a 3 year window and I choose to look at it in a 2 year window. I take it from where they at its highest and where they're at now. Also, is this team where it should be? The team's talent right now isn't where it should be. If I told you after the '03 season, the Cubs would win 89 and 79 wins and not make the playoffs, that you would be content with the job of Hendry? Hendry is judged by the state of the team. From top to btm, they're not where they should be. I blame Baker more than Hendry, of course, Hendry courted and hired Baker and every Cubs fan except for a select few applauded and were giddy of the hire. I thought it was a mistake then, and it is still a bad hire. It is more than fair to be critical or complentary of Hendry as long as you look at it fairly. I've been both, everything I've ever said about Hendry has been based on results and unbiased.

He was given credit for it, since he was given credit for it, he also deserves blame when the talent regresses. This '06 isn't as talented as the '06 team. I've answered all the questions you've asked. 1)Yes, Houston responded w/out Pettitte, look at what Atlanta did with all the injuries they had. STL responded w/out Rolen. Yankees had pitching injuries as did Boston. 2)No, he is not responsible for Patterson. But, a bad year from Patterson was not the primary reason why the Cubs missed the playoffs. 3)He put Hollandsworth as the starting LF'er, of course he is to blame for putting a 4th OF'er as the starting LF'er. Borowski was hurt before the season started and Remlinger was unproductive before the season started last year. Remlinger was a mistake signing from the start, you don't a sign a middle reliever at his age to a multi-year deal at that cost. Hendry wasn't counting on Dubois, Hill, etc. to determine whether or not this team would make the playoffs. Lawton was a good trade that didn't work out. 4)Yes, Nomar played in half the game the previous season and has had several injuries that were considered to be lingering like his wrist. There's a reason why his contract was incentive-laden, Nomar is the type of player you don't build around, his injury history makes him unreliable to be counted on. 5)No, his inability to address the OF and the bullpen as well as Baker impacted (his mistaken hire) the team in a negative manner worse than the injuries to Prior and Nomar as well as Patterson regression.

If kentucky wins this I think I maybe physically sick. if illinois loses i may go insane from sheer joy... oh wait, they did. yay! i always liked sparks. i guess it was from watching him play in the state tournament in high school. time to start thinking about next year. i hope rondo stays :x I think he will. I don't think we'll see Morris doing anything dumb anymore. They'll be counting on Morris and Crawford to progress.

Meh, UK played their asses off. I've been so critcal of Sparks, it's good to see him go off on a good note.

I've always given Hendry credit when things have gone well and been critical when the Cubs have fallen short. I've looked at Hendry fairly and unbiased. This was a team that was the deserving of being considered the favs. to win the NL in '04 and went to 79 wins a year later. The Cubs have a huge payroll and is probably IMO, the 4th most talented team in the NL behind ATL, NYM, and STL. That's before factoring health into the equation. That to me isn't good enough. I'm willing to give Hendry this year to determine whether or not he should be given a long-term deal. But, anything less than 90 wins and a playoff spot would like equate to not bringing him back.

This refs have been completely one-sided.

Well, the 1st mistake in counting on Nomar to stay healthy. It'll be like the Cubs counting on Wood and Prior to remain healthy this year if Baker continues to wear them down. Plus, Nomar would've never come close to matching Alou's '04 production, even if he stayed healthy. This team will have to depend on rebounding season from Jones and Pierre as well as the health of Ramirez and Barrett/Lee from regressing. I see this offense likely finishing 6-10 range as far as runs scored.

Rusch was at 94 in '05. Rusch had a good year as a spot starter '04. He didn't continue it in '04. Going from a 123 ERA to 94 is a big dropoff. Getting Williams was a very nice acquisition for Hendry. I don't buy this, it's definitely unfair to assume that Hendry did not want Maddux while MacPhail and them forced his hand to go him. Hendry wanted him and they complied with expanding the payroll to get him. And they helped lead the Sox to a World Series, he also signed Iguchi, Dye, etc. I'm sorry, the White Sox have less resources and went into last off-season w/less talent and yet Williams has been able to improve his club while the Cubs have regressed. I've never argued that Hendry hasn't made good trades or signed good players off the scrap heap. But, there's a difference between teams like Atlanta, White Sox, and STL. They have less payroll and had less talent as recently as 2004', yet now they have more talent and been much more productive over the last 2 years. Hendry is responsible for the regression. The farm system hasn't regressed mainly b/c of injury, it has regressed mostly b/c they have allocated less resources international scouting. Who is the Pacific Rim scout? It has gone from Leon Lee to the Major League scouting bureau. Who was the last top prospect from the Domincan Republic? That's Felix Pie who was signed in 2001. The last top prospect signed out of Venezuela was Cedeno/Guzman and that was 7 years ago. When the Cubs at the best farm system Cruz, Choi, and Zambrano were all in the top 100 overall. I have never heard of the Cubs offering more than Oak. to get Bradley. Everything I heard was that they were considering going after him, but nothing was definitive as far as an offer or even who would be involved. I don't think the Cubs did consider Wilkerson an option, I assume they valued Pierre more based on the assumption he is a pure leadoff hitter based on his lack of power, great speed, and decent OBP with his ability to make contact.

Does anybody really believe in 7-10 days he'll be back throwing and everything will be fine? I believe he'll be throwing in 7-10 days, that can range from throwing 5 10 feet on up. But, he won't be fine. He still has a long ways to go before he's ready to face opposing hitters ate the level expected from him.

You think Rusch is as good as Clement? If no, then you'll see why this rotation isn't likely as good as 2004. I didn't the Maddux signing either, he has been overpaid and underproductive for what he is being paid, it did basically signal the end of Clement after the year was up. That signing was a bad one, how is that not reflective on Hendry if you disagree with the signing and watching how it has played out? How did Kenny Williams get Bobby Jenks, Dustin Hermansen, Cliff Politte, etc on the cheap? How did Jocketty get Carpenter & Calero on the cheap? How did Schuerholz get Jaret Wright on the cheap? If you're limited on spending, you have to find ways to be creative. If you want to keep asking me who was avail., I can keep throwing out these types of names, there are plenty of them around. It's pointless to keep me this question b/c it's what separates the great GMs from the avg. ones. How did Schuerholz get Hudson last year? How did get Kenny Williams get Freddy Garcia? They traded top prospects for them without doing serious damage to the farm system. Unlike the Cubs, they have the ability to trade top prospects without destroying the farm system, b/c they have done a much job better job of maintaining a productive farm system. I don't know if they practice biomechanics to level Peterson does in NY or the A's cont. to do since his departure. I don't think you need to dig far in researching whether or not Baker has been reckless in how he has handled Wood, Prior, and Zambrano over the last 3 years. If they cont. to fail to address Baker's usage pattern, then it's doubtful that they'll see Prior and Wood last an entire season w/out getting injured. I get tired of watching of Zambrano, Prior, and Wood cont. to pitch despite obvious signs of extreme fatigue. The proof is right in front of your face in that regard. Yes, the usage patterns of Prior and Wood have impacted their lack of health, moreso Wood than Prior, but Prior would have less long-term questions had Baker not worked them beyond what most pitchers can take. More of the proof stuff... The ultimate argument that can never be proven wrong and more importantly can never be proven right. Why is your only argument around stuff that can't be proven? How do you know that Giles would not have accepted a deal outside of California? How do you know they even went after Giles? If this is the crutch of your argument as it has been, then there is anything to discuss. You'd be better off asking Peter Gammons.

There's no chance that Pierre will be as productive as Patterson and Lofton were in '03. Pierre should easily surpass what Patterson provided in '04 and '05. But this team needs a middle of the order hitter worse than they need a leadoff hitter, Wilkerson or Bradley (despite the baggage) would've filled a greater need than Pierre. I'd feel more more comfortable with Walker/Hairston and Murton hitting 1/2 with Wilkerson/Bradley hitting 5th than Pierre and Walker/Hairston hitting 2nd with Jones hitting 5th. Sure, if you have a natural attrition of rosters, you either A)replace them with similar or greater talent thru FA or trade B)replace them with someone coming from the farm system to provide similar production or C)regress while bringing someone up thru trade/FA or thru the farm system. The Cubs OF has regressed b/c they have unable to fill the production void left by Alou and Sosa. Their replacements have been Hollandsworth (career 4th OF'er), Burnitz (career below avg. corner OF'er), and Jones (early peak followed two poor years). Hopefully, Murton will be able to provide +.800 OPS and be an asset in the middle of the order. Hollandworth and Burnitz were terrible last year. Good GMs find ways to improve positions of need even when there doesn't appear to be options. Shapiro in Clev., needs a 3B who is young, talented, and cheap. Trades a gifted OF'er and gets his 3B, now has a hole at the top of the order and at a corner OF spot and trades an expensive veteran reliever to get an OF who has been platooning for several years, yet extremely productive especially at the top of the order and play well above avg. defense in RF. There weren't any good young 3B roaming freely, he had to make it happen, b/c there doesn't appear to be any good FAs at a position of need doesn't equate to, chalking up another bad offseason to there weren't any good FAs so we'll settle for scraps (Jacque Jones until proven otherwise is a scrap). Hendry is responsible for the Cubs failing last year, you start the year with Hollandsworth and Burnitz as your corner OF'ers, you're in trouble.

Is this '06 team as talented as the '04 team? I don't think so, the rotation has regressed as has the offense. They've improved over the last 5 years b/c of Hendry's ability as scouting director and the Cubs (currently non-existent) allocation of resources towards international scouting from 99'-02'. After the Cubs improved from a bad team to a good team, they have gone from a good team to an avg. team. If Hendry gets credit for bringing them from a bad team to a good team, he also gets blame for taking this team from a good team to an avg. team. He has the resources to make this team a great team, he has yet to utilize the resources to do so. I'll use a reference from the new Schuerholz book. I want to find out why every recent season has begun with Prior or Wood on the DL. Are they overworking them during the season? How effective are their off-season throwing programs? Do the Cubs allocate many hours towards biomechanics? Is Rothschild doing a good job of correcting flaws? There are many more questions as to why they are so injury prone? I refuse to chalk it up to god or bad luck. Right now, the only thing that was mentioned from Hendry was "bad luck". I'll use the Pierre debate, some are incorrectly equating his arrival to completely changing the structure of the Cubs offense. They are basing on what the Cubs in '05 as their leadoff hitter. Pierre is a good leadoff hitter, he wasn't the biggest need on this team and wasn't the best player to go after this off-season. Give me the choice of Dayton Moore as the unknown or Hendry, I'd take Moore, every single time.

Didn't Holy Cross lose to UK by 4 that year? I thought it was 72-68 or 62-58.

Don't you mean UK? :wink:

The huge difference in steals between Pierre and Hairston didn't make up the huge difference in OBP that Hairston had over Pierre last year. Hairston was a better leadoff hitter last year than Pierre. What if Hairston starts at 2B and hits 2nd in the order, are the Cubs still in trouble?

I won't go into much detail as why the Cubs leadoff hitters of '05 being replaced by Pierre is nowhere near the impact of replacing a below avg corner OF'er (Jones) with the greatest single season in MLB history (Bonds of '01). But, Patterson was hitting leadoff less than 25% of the time last year as Hairston led the Cubs in leadoff ABs with 306. Hairston of '05 had an OBP of .342 leading off. Pierre in '05 had an OBP of .322 leading off. If the Cubs would've given Hairston the chance to start and leadoff (when he wasn't injured) more than likely would've been better off with Hairston leading off than Pierre last year. For his career, Pierre has a .355 OBP, which isn't too far off of what I'd expect fron Hairston. To put it in perspective, if the Cubs went w/Hairston (CF) and Walker (2B) over Pierre (CF) and Perez (2B), the Cubs would be better off offensively with Hairston and Walker. Pierre is the best option at leadoff currently, but this offense won't make any dramatic improvements b/c of him, especially if Perez gets a fair share of ABs hitting 2nd. Having Murton for a full season will have a greater impact on this offense than Pierre. Baker could've easily negated the gaping hole with the 1-2 hitters if he could've put together a decent batting order last year.

I'm surprised she didn't call security, you shouldn't be too surprised by it though. The older generation is definitely more racist than ours and the next generation will be less racist than ours. You handled it as well as you could've. The only time I ever offended anyone was at UK and I bumped into my old roomate (who is white) and I said "What's up bro?" and someone (who is black) overhead it and got offended by it. Wasn't meant as anything negative as that's how I greet close friends and still do sometimes. I knew my intentions weren't a form of mockery, so it never bothered me.

I'm going to try and go, I didn't go last year, but I went the year before when they were at North and Clybourn.

21-11, 3 sweet 16 teams gone (Iowa, Ark, and Kan) and one elite 8 (Kan).