17 Seconds

It's risk/reward. What's the benefit to trading away Hill? You get a low A reliever. Even if there's a 5% chance that Hill can contribute something this year, that's a better bet than the PTBNL turning into anything. i'd say it's much more likely that the PTBNL helps the cubs than rich hill ever would. as hendry said himself, rich had his shot and he blew it. he blew it pretty badly. Except for that entire season where he was really good

Fukudome is still in the lineup (against RHP, so for the majority of the games) so Bradley isn't replacing him. He's basically replacing Edmonds. Fontenot is replacing DeRosa. And our bullpen is probably worse than last year. Damn, no Eyre or Howry. Or Wood Plus Eyre was really good for the Phillies. I'd love to have him back All Eyre and Marquis had to do was be traded to go from NSBB whipping boys to beloved quality pitchers. When Eyre was still on the team and not being used, many people here were wondering why, and many people were wondering why we dumped him. He only gave up 1 run in his first 10.1 IP last season, then he had 3 straight bad games and they just quit on him. That's when he went to Philly and was light out. Also he had a .74 ERA over his last 30 games (24.1 IP) of 2007.

So basically, this means that if Hill does good there, we get something decent, but if he sucks up the joint, we get garbage? Thats the dumbest thing Ive ever heard. How about I go out and buy a lottery ticket, and how much I pay hinges on if I win. Just keep the damn guy, and if he sucks, let him go. If Baltimore still wants him then, more power to them. So you think those 6 weeks of spring training are going to pretty much tell the tale, huh? it's a guy whose control pretty much disappeared overnight, so yeah, 6 weeks probably could tell the tale. What tale would it tell? That he found his control during spring training and could lose it "overnight" again? The Cubs have obviously seen a lot of him over the last 12 months between spring training / MLB / AAA / winter league and if there was something they were confident they could fix and that it would stick they would have done it by now and would not be looking to move him. They're trading him because they have to. He has no options. And yeah, why would it hurt to give him a shot in ST and see if he can find it? If he does, then you put him on the opening day roster either as a starter or reliever. If he ends up falling apart again a few weeks later, dump him then. What could it hurt? You're not really risking anything.

Fukudome is still in the lineup (against RHP, so for the majority of the games) so Bradley isn't replacing him. He's basically replacing Edmonds. Fontenot is replacing DeRosa. And our bullpen is probably worse than last year. Damn, no Eyre or Howry. Or Wood Plus Eyre was really good for the Phillies. I'd love to have him back

Doesn't matter that Fontenot actually put up better numbers in his playing time last year than DeRosa. DeRosa is a veteran, dude, so you got trust the vets if you want to win. Maybe Fontenot won't be able to cut it, but I don't see the big uproar about giving him a shot. I still prefer Fontenot / Bradley / Fukudome to DeRosa / Fukudome / Johnson if Hendry really had to make the move to clear some payroll. With an unlimited budget clearly DeRosa + Bradley makes the team better than Bradley without DeRosa but Hendry is not so clueless that he does not know that. He must have been under some pressure to move DeRosa if he was going to be allowed to sign Bradley. Also, everyone was pretty excited about Fukudome coming over here last offseason. While I know he struggled in the second half of the season I don't know why it is suddenly inconceivable that he could provide pretty good production out of CF, especially combined with Johnson who is pretty darn good against LH pitching where Fukudome seems to have more problems. The guy always hit in Japan and he seems like a smart player so I am not so sure he can't make the necessary adjustments. For the record, I believe Fukudome was actually better against LHP last season, although all his home runs came against RHP. Also, he was bad for more than just the second half. He sucked for about the last 4-5 months. I'm alright with the CF situation though. I think Fukudome will improve enough to be a decent vs RHP and we know Johnson will mash lefties

Fukudome is still in the lineup (against RHP, so for the majority of the games) so Bradley isn't replacing him. He's basically replacing Edmonds. Fontenot is replacing DeRosa.

As I said, any reasonable person will understand what is going on here. Have a nice day.

Fonteneuax Lil' Babe Ruth isn't enough to disprove my point. true, but it's not like he keeps getting ripped off either

Oh well. I think any reasonable person who looks over the last page of this thread will know who is being crazy and know exactly what posts make sense.

Fonteneuax

But seriously, did I do anything wrong here? I ggt attacked for no reason. Dude is insane. Hopefully the modslook this over.

Ok, what were the good moves after good moves last year? How many moves does the Harden trade account for in the "good move after good move" quote? Name the rest of these good moves that were popular at the time he made them? Dempster starting? Yeah, that was met with excitement. Edmonds? My, oh my, how we clamored for him before he was signed. So in order for a move to end up being good, it has to be popular at the time it's made? Yeah, that's exactly how what I wrote should be understood. In fact, if my statement was read correctly, it means the exact opposite. Oh, I'm sorry, I don't want to hurt your feelings by replying to one of your posts. At the risk of starting another three pages of you crying how you're so smart and everyone else is so stupid, it's posts like the one above that label you the [expletive] that most think you to be. Good lord, what is your deal? I knew as soon as I tried to discuss something with you you'd flip out, go crazy, and sart calling me names. My mistake. And yeah, my post made perfect sense. He said Hendry made a lot of good moves last year. You implied he shouldn't receive credit for those because they weren't percieved as good moves at the time they happened. I think it's pretty obvious what you meant and pretty obvious what my post ws saying. Just like it's obvious that you're trying to start stuff. Whatever.

that's what i'm sayin

I'd rather give him a shot at ST then just throw him away for a PTBNL

i like gus during the ends of games but the rest of the time he's just annoying, epsecially when the other team sores.

WHO CARES?? your mom?? I'm convinced

? thanks thread nazi Umm okay

Ok, what were the good moves after good moves last year? How many moves does the Harden trade account for in the "good move after good move" quote? Name the rest of these good moves that were popular at the time he made them? Dempster starting? Yeah, that was met with excitement. Edmonds? My, oh my, how we clamored for him before he was signed. So in order for a move to end up being good, it has to be popular at the time it's made? No it's the standard defense for stupid moves. Bring up old unpopular moves(to varying degrees) that worked out, and call everyone morons for doubting Jim Hendry. No, I agree with that, to an extent. I don't give hendry much credit for stuff like Edmonds because obviously it was a lightning in a bottle type thing, but you still can't completely discredit the fact that he brought him in.

?

Ok, what were the good moves after good moves last year? How many moves does the Harden trade account for in the "good move after good move" quote? Name the rest of these good moves that were popular at the time he made them? Dempster starting? Yeah, that was met with excitement. Edmonds? My, oh my, how we clamored for him before he was signed. So in order for a move to end up being good, it has to be popular at the time it's made?

-Not vastly overpay for a guy who can't stay on the field. -Not overpay for Aaron Miles. -Actually get something in return for DeRosa -Not overpay for Aaron Heilman -Not overpay for Kevin Gregg -Not fail to offer Wood arbitration and lose a first round pick -Not obsess over "getting more left handed" and end up signing a bunch of crappy hitters -because of it -Not give Ryan Dempster a ridiculous contract -Not turn a solid bench into an atrocious bench Any of those would have been nice If Wood accepted arbitration then Hendry would have vastly overpaid for a player who can't stay on the field. (#1 and #6) First of all, Wood mostly stayed on the field last season. Bradley didn't even have to play the field last year and he still couldn't stay healthy. Plus. even if Wood did accept arbitration, we wouldn't have been overpaying for him. As for the DeRosa thing, are we still pretending that trade was made for Peavy? Why? Even if it was, that doesn't change the fact that he got a poor package.

ok

ok :roll: Thats all very debateable stuff, especially saying overpaid on some of those guys, when the market would say otherwise. I'm sorry but many of you same people been saying this same type of crap about Hendry moves the last two years. So I'm willing to bet you're dead wrong about half of the things you just said. You guys always think you're right, without giving the benefit of the doubt to someone who has proven you wrong the last few years. You're already assuming negative results from these guys, by saying we overpaid. Just like you did, with MANY of the previous Hendry moves the last two seasons. Sure you guys were right a few times, but were wrong alot more then right. Was there really a need for the eye roll? You say it's all debatable, so debate it. I don't see you debating any of that stuff, you're just criticizing instead. The market says otherwise? Really? Look at all what outfielders are getting this year and then tell me we didn'toverpay for Bradley. Abreu and Dunn are comparable, if not better, and they're likely going to settle for one year deals. Burrell got 2/16. Don't act like I'm just criticizing Hendry because he's Hendry. He's done a lot of good things over the past couple seasons and was starting to change my opinion on him, but come on. Nothing I just listed was untrue. You're talking as though I'm looking for ways to criticize Hendry, when I think the opposite is going on. I think you're looking for ways to defend him at all costs and determined to give him a free pass.

-Not vastly overpay for a guy who can't stay on the field. -Not overpay for Aaron Miles. -Actually get something in return for DeRosa -Not overpay for Aaron Heilman -Not overpay for Kevin Gregg -Not fail to offer Wood arbitration and lose a first round pick -Not obsess over "getting more left handed" and end up signing a bunch of crappy hitters -because of it -Not give Ryan Dempster a ridiculous contract -Not turn a solid bench into an atrocious bench Any of those would have been nice

okay, so who do you think are the best and worst of the on-air talent so far? i haven't watched enough to accurately choose, but i do know that al leiter needs to stop saying words