XZero771679666304

Yes, it is. When they weren't making the playoffs, they were bad, often terrible. When his gambles failed, they did so spectacularly because the system wasn't producing anything to mitigate them. Strong franchises, the ones that are in or on the cusp of the playoffs every year, spend and build from within. Look at the Red Sox, Yankees, Braves, Cardinals, etc. People like to joke about all the money the "empire" teams spend, but look at the rosters of their championship teams and you'll find lots of homegrown talent. Hendry built teams almost entirely comprised of assets obtained from outside the organization because holes couldn't be filled from within. He built volatile, year-to-year teams. If he had sacrificed one or two of the years in which the Cubs were terrible anyway to do what Theo and Jed are doing, he'd probably still have his job. And most people knew that fielding a competitive team this year was going to be a stretch even if the Cubs went "all in" to the FA market. Some people are so short sighted that they think the "dual fronts" approach had to apply from day one to not be a lie. I don't think those people were being honest with themselves regarding the state of the team after last season. The dual fronts spiel was about their overall philosophy, but there was little that could be done to make the 2012 team a contender, but there was a lot to be done to build the foundation. If they had tried to contend this year, they almost certainly wouldn't have traded Marshall or Cashner or done any of the things that they have to improve the system. The net result of that would still have been only an outside shot at contention and the same situation next year. That may have made this season more watchable, but it's a piss poor way to overhaul a franchise in need of it, and it's exactly what Hendry would have done. Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor. Yes rebuilding sucks, but the club will be much better off for having endured this year.

Hendry did some good and Theo made more than a few mistakes. And I liked Hendry as a person, and it was literally painful to watch his exit. I would have liked nothing more than to have seen him succeed with the Cubs. But Theo Epstein has been demonstrably better at his job than Hendry was. It wasn't just the Red Sox payroll, either. He built a strong farm system that produced key contributors to the Sox being in the playoffs nearly every single year. Hendry was great at the trade, but he was abysmal at talent evaluation and identifying weaknesses. And sadly, one of his shortcomings was that he was too nice.

And he failed miserably at that job. The only thing that Hendry failed miserably at was winning a WS. If you judge his success by playoff appearances, he was in the top 1/3 of GMs from the NL during his tenure with the Cubs. Too many peaks and valleys. Hendry could spend money, but he was awful at organization building. Top tier GMs build clubs that sustain success (Yankees, Red Sox, Braves, Cardinals), not winning in fits and starts bridged by periods of being awful. Hendry's tenure mas marked by too much living in the moment, too few contingency plans and too little long term planning. And, to be fair, a solid dose of bad luck. At the end of the day, it's hard to regard Hendry as anything other than a mediocre GM.

I heard it was all of his contract, in addition to multiple top prospects. That hasn't changed just because they put him on waivers. If the Phils are going to compete again in the next few years, it's going to be because of Hamels, Halladay and Lee, or because they got top, ML-ready talent in exchange for one or two of them. You're right, they most definitely aren't going to just give him away to any team that claims him.

Pretty damned close to Fielder (and Pujols), even with LaHair's June. LaHair + Rizzo = 2.1 fWAR Fielder = 2.4 Pujols = 2.6 What difference would signing one of those two have made? Not much.

All of this would be quite intriguing if the Phillies would just let him go. Unfortunately the asking price for Lee pre-deadline was a package of top prospects and that any team trading for him assumed his entire contract, which is not insignificant, to say the very least. Would I claim Lee if his contract was the only cost? Probably. Would I pay all of his contract and surrender 2-3 top prospects? No.

I can't envision a scenario other than total, system-wide injury meltdown in which the Cubs contend any later than 2015. I see next year as a "seeing what we've got" year (in players like Vitters, Jackson, Castillo, a fully stetched out Shark, etc.). There will be a decent amount of (raw, young) talent on the roster, and there are a number of decent SP on the market that can be signed to help fill out the rotation. I think 2013 is another "lost" season, but one that will be a lot more interesting to watch with an outside shot at respectability. If 2013 goes reasonably well (one of BJax/Vitters look like they'll be decent MLers, Shark progresses a bit Rizzo and Castro keep it up/improve), I think we'll see Theo/Jed make legitimate forays into the FA/trade market for solid ML assets. There are handful of potential impact players (SP like Lincecum and Johnson, position players like Ellsbury if BJax can't stop K'ing) and we'll have deeper pool of prospects to trade from. I see 2014 as a year where the Cubs should be on the fringe or in contention for at least a WC spot. By 2015 the Cubs should be solidly in contention for a playoff spot.

I don't know what the exact asking price for Headley was, but it was reportedly outrageous.

That's what I was wondering.

I was listening to one of the Score shows today and the idiot host was ranting about how callers don't understand that the rebuild has to take "years" because they're still "shedding the terrible contracts from Hendry's era." This guy said this TODAY. After this year the only big contract they have from the Hendry era is Soriano's. DO YOUR JOBS BETTER, SPORTS JERKS. I've identified the problem.

I was hoping he'd never visit again. You knew something was coming, though.

I think Law likes Vizcaino.

On fire. His OPS over the past 30 or so games has to be north of .900.

I think it's probable that Vizcaino is a reliever long term, but I don't think it's a given yet. His elbow was an issue for a while before his TJS, and I think giving him another shot to start once it's recovered would be reasonable. On a related note, when are the other guys getting their assignments?

Yep, that's the main thing I was getting at. You just said it better. I asked Goldstein on Twitter the other night if the only reason he ranked Lindor ahead of Baez was that Francisco was perceived as a better bet to stick at SS, and he said it was "huge factor". Honestly, positional value is the only reason I could conceive of that anyone would rank him ahead of Baez. Obviously positional value has meaning, but if Javier were to end up a .950 OPS 3B and Lindor a .750 SS, would that value be enough to bridge the gap? I don't think so.

I'll put it a very simple way: no way in hell would I trade Baez for Lindor. It seems to me that Lindor's floor is probably a bit higher than Baez's, but Javier's ceiling is well beyond Lindor's.

Yeah, but they seem to be going "all in" and their rotation after Kershaw is less than inspiring. I think they needed a SP. I think they might have thought the Rangers/Yankees stuff was just a bluff until it was too late.

Are you implying TJS has no bearing on a prospects value? Who cares about his value? It was a great trade, and a great gamble. TJS isn't a horrible red flag like a shoulder problem. Pitchers almost always recover fully, and often stronger than before. Vizcaino wasn't just a top 100, but a top 40 (and top 15 according to some), and this is while it was known he had elbow damage. He was a top tier arm and if he never regains his status, it almost certainly won't be because of his TJS (thought o be fair, he does have general durabilit issues). We did really well getting him, and it was worth more than what was paid. Acquiring him for Maholm takes a lot of the sting out the Delgado fiasco for me.

Finally coming to their senses and moving Chapman to the rotation for the playoff push?? Their bullpen should not be an area they are giving up resources to add guys. No way he'd get stretched out in time, plus it would risky. But maybe it's Dusty's time to feed...

Good luck in October with that rotation beyond Kershaw, Ned.

[expletive]'s about to go down, and it's gonna be crazy

Well, it's either true or Theo/Jed are playing a mean game of chicken

http://static.tumblr.com/nzpkbao/UfVm63k77/ermahgerd_d_060612023823.jpg Holy [expletive]. I just busted out laughing at that picture/ My co-workers want to know why I'm laughing so hard. Same...lmao

Well it seems a potential inclusion of Webster would be contingent on sending additional players, which may not have been previously discussed.

My productivity level today is at zero.