17 Seconds

I don't see why you think it's not acceptable for GM's to be held t different standards based on payroll. It is clearly an enormous advantage to have a payroll like the Cubs, as opposed to the Pirates or somebody like that. It's enormous.

Moron?! There's no need to be an a-hole. It was an honest mistake. That post just got reported. Before your edit. Nice try though. So you repeatedly give me a bunch of attittude and say I shouldn't participate in the discussion because I don't know what I'm talking about, then I call you a moron when we find out that it was, in fact, YOU that was wrong... you report me? Nice dude I even deleted it right after I posted it because I figured you'd get all pissy about it In the future don't cop an attitude with people if you can't handle getting it back, especially when you're in the wrong Hey man, I'm all for a good baseball discussion -- even if it involves some attitude -- which is what this is/was. And I can admit when I was wrong, or when I made a mistake -- like I did. But when I'm talking to someone who resorts to calling me a moron, yeah, that kinda ticks me off. It's uncalled for, and it's just juvenile. And if you were some random guy at a bar that I struck up a conversation with (like I compare internet blogs/message boards to), trust me, you wouldn't say that to my face. Maybe you are a juvenile, I have no idea. But I didn't expect that kind of childish crap at "the place for discussion about the Chicago Cubs." It really shouldn't bother you when somebody calls you a moron on the internet... especially if you deserve it. It's the internet, and it's the word "moron". Who cares? Oh and I'm sure I'd be terrified to say that to you in person. I'm aware that internet message board posters who act like women when they're called "moron" tend to be huge badasses in real life. I'm staying clear of you, buddy. I don't want any trouble.

What a dumb statement. I'm not some idiot that thinks RBI's and Runs scored are the important stats. Don't respond to my posts assuming so. What I, very clearly, stated, was that while other stats certainly mean a whole lot more when evaluating a player... when discussing player A, the former Cub was traded to make room for player B, their run producing stats are absolutely fair game for conversation. Ugh. No they're not. They play in completely different lineups. You just don't get it. RBIs are a worthless stat to look at when determing whop has been a better hitter. RBIs are as much about luck and lineup positiomning as they are about actually performance. Nobody is saying the RBIs themselves don't matter. But to use them to compare playuers is dumb, yeah. You should be using rate stats and stuff like that. Thing that a player... you know.... actually controls. I'll say this again. James Loney has 49 RBI's and has a .732 OPS. Do you understand that Loney has more RBIs than many many players who have been much better than him this season? So is run driven in % fair game? Or is it all about OBP/SLG and nothing else in your eyes? There is literally a laundry list of stats that are better indicators. exactly

Moron?! There's no need to be an a-hole. It was an honest mistake. That post just got reported. Before your edit. Nice try though. Wow man, don't do anything extreme! The cops just showed up and apparently I'm looking at 5-10. Thanks a lot, fasttrack21.

Moron?! There's no need to be an a-hole. It was an honest mistake. That post just got reported. Before your edit. Nice try though. So you repeatedly give me a bunch of attittude and say I shouldn't participate in the discussion because I don't know what I'm talking about, then I call you a moron when we find out that it was, in fact, YOU that was wrong... you report me? Nice dude I even deleted it right after I posted it because I figured you'd get all pissy about it In the future don't cop an attitude with people if you can't handle getting it back, especially when you're in the wrong

yes but unfortunately the 2009 cubs still suck

LOL, WTF? http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl/player_search.cgi?search=2003+cubs http://www.baseball-reference.com/player_search.cgi?sourceid=Mozilla-search&search=2007+cubs You done embarrassing yourself yet? Dude, what is your deal? Do you not understand how numbers work? Oh now I see what you're doing. You're look at the pyth record. Nice Manager: Dusty Baker (88-74) Manager: Lou Piniella (85-77) It would probably be best if you just left now.

Again, try and keep up. Dear god. You must be joking. I was talking about the 2007 division. THE 2003 CUBS WON 88 GAMES, NOT 85. NOBODY BROUGHT UP THE 2003 CUBS. WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE 2007 CUBS. Just admit you were wrong and move on. You're making yourself look worse now by trying to wiggle out of it.

And who built the 67 win team? He turned them into an 85 win team by buying everything, again going back the payroll thing. That 85 win season also came at the cost of giving Soriano 136 million dollars. So let's see. He built a horrible 67 win team, then was given a ton of cash to make it better, spent all that cash, then won an okay 85 wins in a horrible division, and we're supposed to congratulate him for that? Wow. Such low standards. What on earth are you talking about? The 2003 Cubs won 85 games. We're talking about the 2003 team here. Please, if you're going to participate in the discussion... know what the discussion is about. Umm, apparently you're the one who needs to pay attention. The 2003 Cubs won 88 games, not 85. The 85 win team is obviously the 07 team. Maybe you should make sure you know what you're talking about before saying things. Jesus Christ... YOU are the one who first brought up the 85 win team... which was the 2003 team. For the love of God, please try and keep up. Dude are you joking? THE 2003 CUBS WON 88 GAMES. THE 85 WIN TEAM WAS IN 2007. Jesus.

And who built the 67 win team? He turned them into an 85 win team by buying everything, again going back the payroll thing. That 85 win season also came at the cost of giving Soriano 136 million dollars. So let's see. He built a horrible 67 win team, then was given a ton of cash to make it better, spent all that cash, then won an okay 85 wins in a horrible division, and we're supposed to congratulate him for that? Wow. Such low standards. What on earth are you talking about? The 2003 Cubs won 85 games. We're talking about the 2003 team here. Please, if you're going to participate in the discussion... know what the discussion is about. And, of course, you don't know who built the 2002 Cubs. No surprise. It wasn't Hendry, though. I'd tell you to look it up yourself, but for some reason I don't think you'd have success. Hendry took over as GM midway thru the '02 season. The 2003 Cubs won 88 games. Please, if you're going to participate in the discussion... know what the discussion is about. I'm the one who brought up the 85 win team. I was and still am talking about the extremely mediocre 2007 Cubs, for which Hendry should receive very little credit, if any. now he'll just ignore it because of how stupid he's made himself look

And who built the 67 win team? He turned them into an 85 win team by buying everything, again going back the payroll thing. That 85 win season also came at the cost of giving Soriano 136 million dollars. So let's see. He built a horrible 67 win team, then was given a ton of cash to make it better, spent all that cash, then won an okay 85 wins in a horrible division, and we're supposed to congratulate him for that? Wow. Such low standards. What on earth are you talking about? The 2003 Cubs won 85 games. We're talking about the 2003 team here. Please, if you're going to participate in the discussion... know what the discussion is about. Umm, apparently you're the one who needs to pay attention. The 2003 Cubs won 88 games, not 85. The 85 win team is obviously the 07 team. Maybe you should make sure you know what you're talking about before saying things.

He took a 67 win team that was embarrassingly bad and turned them into a division winner the following year -- again, his job. Yes, neat indeed. I wonder who assembled that 67 win team. Hendry's breathing oxygen a good man could be using. He's a waste. Always has been. Christ, does anyone in this thread know what the hell is going on? Hendry didn't assemble that team! Umm, he didn't? Then who did? Hendry has been the GM since 2002. And they won 66 games in 06, not 67.

It should only be expected from people who don't really know anything about stats. What a dumb statement. I'm not some idiot that thinks RBI's and Runs scored are the important stats. Don't respond to my posts assuming so. What I, very clearly, stated, was that while other stats certainly mean a whole lot more when evaluating a player... when discussing player A, the former Cub was traded to make room for player B, their run producing stats are absolutely fair game for conversation. Ugh. No they're not. They play in completely different lineups. You just don't get it. RBIs are a worthless stat to look at when determing whop has been a better hitter. RBIs are as much about luck and lineup positiomning as they are about actually performance. Nobody is saying the RBIs themselves don't matter. But to use them to compare playuers is dumb, yeah. You should be using rate stats and stuff like that. Thing that a player... you know.... actually controls. I'll say this again. James Loney has 49 RBI's and has a .732 OPS. Do you understand that Loney has more RBIs than many many players who have been much better than him this season?

And who built the 67 win team? He turned them into an 85 win team by buying everything, again going back the payroll thing. That 85 win season also came at the cost of giving Soriano 136 million dollars. So let's see. He built a horrible 67 win team, then was given a ton of cash to make it better, spent all that cash, then won an okay 85 wins in a horrible division, and we're supposed to congratulate him for that? Wow. Such low standards.

Umm, what? You're saying that having a higher payroll doesn't make it easier to build a team with more wins?

Not really. They have nice ERA's, but they've all been walk machines. Gaub has walked 19 in 30.1 IP. Stevens has walked 19 in 35.2 IP. Archer has walked 36 in 53.1 IP. Those are some really ugly totals. It's hard to get excited about that. DeRosa didn't get 30 million dollars.

never said it was

Give credit for him signing Derosa? Well, perhaps if he were: A: Still a Cub B: Wasn't traded for marginal prospects C: Not playing for the Cardinals DeRosa is not a good example. When DeRosa was signed he was considered a risk considering he really never played everyday for a full year. DeRosa went on to have a pretty decent season and then a career year for the Cubs and played a big role in both divison titles. They sold high on a 34 year old Middle Infielder, something you rarley can do. DeRosa OPS'd .857 last year. There was no way he was going to do that again. DeRosa also got helped out by leading the league in "lucky" home runs last year with 8. Look DeRosa is a good player, however he is not a superstar. He is below avg. defensivly basically everywhere you up put him. The biggest reason why the Cubs are struggling this year IMO is your bullpen and the loss of A-Ram. To blame this all on Hendry just seems like a scape goat. The fact is they have a bunch of players underachiving... Soriano, Bradley, Marmol, Harden, Gregg and Soto just to name a few. And then take out the Cubs best player (Aramis) and you end up being 2 games under .500. But lucky for the Cubs (and brewers) its the NL Central. You still have a really good starting rotation. And for how bad and under achving the cubs have been they are still only 3.5 games back. please explain to me what a lucky home run is, it sounds so moronic that maybe im just to smart to understand It's not really hard to figure out what it means. Bill James keeps a stat like that, but I'm not sure if that's the one he's talking about. Lucky home runs = wind aided home runs, home runs to small parts of parks, etc. A lot of DeRo's home runs last year were either wind helped or just barely got into the basket. That's what he's talking about. It's kind of pointless to talk about that though since he's hitting even more home runs this season.

We can't blame him for the Cubs not performing in the playoffs. That's not what he's saying. He's saying it's silly to congratulate Hendyr for winning the division in 07, when really it was only because the Cubs played in an awful division. Jim built a roster that beat the competition and won the division -- that's his job. No, he built an 85 win team. He got into the playoffs because the other teams sucked. If the Brewers win 87 games that year and win the division, did Hendry still do a good job? He won 85 games in a horrible division with a big payroll. Neat.

Remember when Hednry said in the offseason that Dempster was a key clubhouse guy and they had to re-sign him beause of that? Good times.

We can't blame him for the Cubs not performing in the playoffs. That's not what he's saying. He's saying it's silly to congratulate Hendyr for winning the division in 07, when really it was only because the Cubs played in an awful division.

It should only be expected from people who don't really know anything about stats. Comparing RBIs is useless in every situation. RBI's are a result of lineup position, lineup talent, luck, and rate stats. He was brought here to hit. Look at stats that show how he's done that. James Loney has a .732 OPS and has 49 RBIs.

Because it's hard to find many good things he's done

Once again, Hendry has little to do with the drafting since he's become the GM. And he didn't get just "marginal prospects" for DeRosa. Then what would you call Gaub, Archer, and Stevens? They are the very definition of marginal prospects.

good