Jump to content
North Side Baseball

dew1679666265

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,547

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by dew1679666265

  1. dew1679666265
    I know, that's part of why we won't be interviewing candidates during the season whether we fire Hendry or not in-season. What's your point?
  2. dew1679666265
    I still think it's a move that could stay within the Ricketts family only and not get leaked out, but it is a possibility. A small front office might actually help keep hiring a search firm secret since there's fewer people who might leak the news. The bigger and more bureaucratic the front office gets, the more likely it is that somebody stumbles upon the news and leaks it out. Even if you can't hire a search firm until you fire Hendry, you can still send out feelers and get an idea of who's out there and who might be interested. The search firm is nice to scout out some lesser known candidates, but the Cubs' focus should be on guys like Friedman/Cashman/Beane/etc early on anyway.
  3. dew1679666265
    Are all of the Cubs' expenditures analyzed and questioned by the media? Barring a leak to the press or something, I don't know how anybody would find out until the Ricketts were ready for the news to come out.
  4. dew1679666265
    Fangraphs has his WAR at 2.0 for the season. He's pitched much better throughout the year than his ERA (4.11) would indicate (2.89 xFIP, 9.56 K/9), but he's regressed in K/9 and K:BB over the past month or so.
  5. dew1679666265
    Exactly my point. Ricketts can send out feelers on who might be interested and he can hire a search firm to very quietly do some research, scout around and narrow the list somewhat all while Hendry is employed or not, but courting currently employed front office members simply won't happen until the season ends and that's what really will make a difference in finding a new GM. "Beginning the transition" is a nice sounding phrase, but it means about as much as calling a player gritty.
  6. dew1679666265
    If he keeps pitching the way he is, Matt Garza is an ace. didn't he already stop pitching the way he was? He's taken a noticable step back since returning from injury. Good point, he has been pretty mediocre in June (xFIP is still solid, but not much else). I was referring to season as a whole numbers, but the trend isn't promising.
  7. dew1679666265
    What can they do in a practical, tangible sense? What steps in this transition can they take after firing Hendry that they cannot take with Hendry employed during the season? Interviews don't happen during the season, a search firm can be hired with Hendry still employed, they can drop hints and gauge interest with Hendry still employed. What specifically can they do in-season without Hendry that they can't do with Hendry?
  8. dew1679666265
    How? You and gooney have both said this, but neither of you have said what they can do without Hendry that they can't do with him. Like I've said, if they've got a long term candidate in mind who will take the job midseason, fine. But I don't see how the team benefits by having Randy Bush replace Jim Hendry. The best time to get rid of Hendry was at the end of last season, the next best time to get rid of Hendry would be immediately after the 162nd game has been played this year.
  9. dew1679666265
    So firing the guy you don't want to run your team next year so that you can name another guy who you don't want to run your team next year as the interim guy is a better idea? How do the Cubs get a leg up on hiring the best prospects by firing Hendry now? They can't interview anybody with a job during the season with or without Hendry, they can hire a search firm to narrow down candidates whether Hendry's on the job or not and they can gauge interest through backchannels and whatnot with or without Hendry employed. What specifically can they do during the season to get a leg up on other teams without Hendry that they can't do with him? If they've got a long term candidate in mind they can hire now, fine, make the move. But I don't get the push to have Randy Bush as the interim GM. This has nothing whatsoever to do with keeping Hendry beyond day one of the offseason. This has to do with what's in the best interests of the Cubs from today to the end of the season, and what's in the best interest of the Cubs is not to have Randy Bush as the desperate interim GM.
  10. dew1679666265
    If he keeps pitching the way he is, Matt Garza is an ace.
  11. dew1679666265
    They likely can't interview anybody because teams won't want their top front office guys focusing on finding another job in July and August. They can hire a search firm whether Hendry's employed or not. I'm not sure exactly what they can do toward finding the right guy during the season that they can't do while Hendry is employed. They can just do it more openly if they fire Hendry.
  12. dew1679666265
    Like CCP said, neither of the two you mentioned who were fired midseason (Byrnes and Bavasi) were replaced by permanent GMs until after the season. You can fire Hendry in season if you want, but his replacement for the rest of the season would almost certainly be Randy Bush and the best case scenario would be that he'd be no worse than Hendry. There's a really good chance he'd be far worse, though. What is the advantage the Cubs would get from firing Hendry midseason and naming Randy Bush as the interim GM?
  13. dew1679666265
    Most GMs get fired in the offseason or very late in the season, which means most GMs are given the wheels for the entire season or most of it and then are let go. It's not all that odd an occurrence and I don't think it plays into whether they'll keep him next season at all.
  14. dew1679666265
    There's very little to no benefit to firing a GM midseason unless you have a long term replacement in mind that you can hire then. Any replacement you name as interim is going to do everything he can to keep the job long term, unless he's the one in a million front office guy who has no interest in being a full time GM. The reasoning isn't applicable at all to the offseason because games aren't being played then and you don't generally have interim GMs in the offseason. I'm saying that there are long term guys out there. Right, but those long term guys are extremely unlikely to leave their current organization midseason, even for a promotion. When's the most recent time a young, up and coming GM was hired away from an organization midseason to replace a fired GM? I haven't looked it up, but I don't recall an instance where that happened.
  15. dew1679666265
    When GMs are fired midseason, just like managers, an interim GM is generally named to serve the remainder of the season. At times, that interim GM impresses the owner enough to convince him to remove the interim tag and make the new GM permanent. Were the Cubs to take this route (the extremely most likely route) then someone in the organization like Randy Bush would take over for the rest of the season. Long term candidates aren't really an option midseason because they're all employed and likely loyal enough to not bolt on their team midseason. Unless you're looking at unemployed GMs, but usually they're unemployed for a good reason - they're not good. I'm not arguing against firing Hendry at all, I'm saying there's no benefit to firing him midseason unless Ricketts has a long term replacement in mind and can lure him away from his current organization now.
  16. dew1679666265
    There's very little to no benefit to firing a GM midseason unless you have a long term replacement in mind that you can hire then. Any replacement you name as interim is going to do everything he can to keep the job long term, unless he's the one in a million front office guy who has no interest in being a full time GM. The reasoning isn't applicable at all to the offseason because games aren't being played then and you don't generally have interim GMs in the offseason.
  17. dew1679666265
    Reposted from another thread: If you fire Hendry tomorrow, who replaces him? Unless there's just some random awesome GM sitting around doing nothing, then the answer is Randy Bush. If Randy Bush becomes the interim GM, his #1 job is not going to be making the Cubs better in the long run, it's going to be making desperation moves in hopes to make the Cubs better in the short term so that he can win the job outright. If you keep Hendry, there's a decent chance he feels secure in his job and considers to take the long term health of the club into account. There's really no upside in firing Hendry now, especially since it'd be a near certainty that the interim GM would make rash desperation moves.
  18. dew1679666265
    For the sake of playing devil's advocate, couldn't you just as easily assume that the Hendry will make desperate, short-term minded moves in order to retain his position? Along with what TT said, there's the issue of certainty with Hendry. Sure he might start feeling the pressure now if something's changed with the Ricketts, but it's pretty much a sure thing an interim GM would make rash desperation moves. There's nothing to gain and a near certainty of quite a bit of loss if Hendry is fired midseason. There's just no point to it.
  19. dew1679666265
    Hendry's best move this year. So much for all of the wannabe GMs here who were begging for Adam Dunn. Wanting Adam Dunn really wasn't all that crazy (and I wasn't in favor of signing Dunn). I doubt there was anybody who could have predicted Dunn would bomb this badly this early in the deal. Even the most fierce Dunn haters would have agreed that he'd be able to hit the first year or two of his deal.
  20. dew1679666265
    I don't know if that's the case at all. Like I said earlier, if you fire Hendry tomorrow, who replaces him? Unless there's just some random awesome GM sitting around doing nothing, then the answer is Randy Bush. If Randy Bush becomes the interim GM, his #1 job is not going to be making the Cubs better in the long run, it's going to be making desperation moves in hopes to make the Cubs better in the short term so that he can win the job outright. As for keeping the GM around for the draft and international FA signings, Wilken is much more in charge of those than Hendry. Keeping Hendry around doesn't really make a difference in those areas unless you plan on dumping Wilken as well midseason and then you're way behind on draft preparation with whoever replaces Wilken. Just because Hendry is the GM today doesn't mean he's any more likely to be the GM after the year.
  21. dew1679666265
    I don't know that it would really change the direction unless the Ricketts had a permanent GM ready to install upon firing Hendry. If Hendry were to be fired tomorrow, the likelihood is that we'd have Randy Bush as the interim GM and he'd be making moves in an effort to win the job outright (which very well might include making desperation moves to trade prospects for very marginal short term upgrades). Ricketts could always hover over Bush and make sure he didn't do anything really dumb, but he could do that with Hendry as well. I just don't think a new direction will be established until a new permanent GM is hired and that's extremely unlikely to happen (or especially be done well) midseason.
  22. dew1679666265
    The minor league gurus can correct me if I'm wrong but I think we had 4 players (Lee, Jackson, Vitters, McNutt) in the top 100 before the Garza trade. We gave up Lee, so that would leave us with 3 top 100 prospects. No we don't have elite prospects, but we have very good prospects and many more encouraging ones coming up. Vitters fell out of the top 100. I'd be stunned if Jackson, McNutt and Szczur weren't there next year. I expect at least 2 of them to be top 50. (Jackson and McNutt were this past season) Ok, thanks. Vitters is the one I wasn't sure about.
  23. dew1679666265
    The minor league gurus can correct me if I'm wrong but I think we had 4 players (Lee, Jackson, Vitters, McNutt) in the top 100 before the Garza trade. We gave up Lee, so that would leave us with 3 top 100 prospects. No we don't have elite prospects, but we have very good prospects and many more encouraging ones coming up.
  24. dew1679666265
    True. I was focusing on the weight gain since 9YRPLAN was using it as a reason why Starlin would both increase his power numbers and have to move off SS. I took his post not so much as an argument that Starlin will gain power, but that he'll gain weight and the effects of that would be increased power and significantly decreased range.
  25. dew1679666265
    Not sure how accurate range factor is, but Starlin's RF/9 has improved from 4.33 to 4.45 from last year to this year and his RF/G improved from 4.20 in 2010 to 4.34 in 2011. As for weight, he's already at 6', 190 right now, so I don't see much room for adding "good" weight. He could get fat, but obviously that's something you don't want to happen. LeMahieu only weighs 185 right now, but is listed at 6'4, meaning he has substantially more room for power growth than Starlin does.
×
×
  • Create New...