He's Not Dead, Jim

by Al on Sep 12, 2006 9:08 AM CDT in Recaps Comment 77 comments

Scene in Jim Hendry's office, late in spring training:

SCOUT: Hey Jim! I just saw this guy play for the A's, he's fantastic, you gotta go get him!

HENDRY: Who is he?

SCOUT: Frankie or Freddie something-or-other, I forget, lemme get my notes...

(shuffles through papers, pulls out a paper that has mustard and ketchup stains on it)

SCOUT: ... Byman or Bynum or something like that. He hits for power! He's really fast! He plays a bunch of positions!

HENDRY: Anything else?

SCOUT: Well, he clogged the bases with a couple of walks, but don't tell Dusty that. He's really fast!

HENDRY: OK, I'll get him. We got a million pitchers. Here, gimme a quarter, I'll do some coin flips to decide who to trade for him.

Now, it probably didn't happen quite exactly in that way (though there is a Steve Rosenbloom Q-&-A with Hendry in today's paper in which Hendry says:

There's a misconception that the company doesn't care about winning, the Tribune doesn't give us enough to win with, they don't care as long as the place is packed. I have found that nothing could be further from the truth. Our budget is very fair to compete. I think three or four of the last World Series champions don't have any bigger budget than we have. I've never been told "No" in the middle of the year.

So who are you going to believe on this? A bunch of people hunched over their basement keyboards, or the guy who actually works there?

In any case, making trades for guys like Freddie Bynum based on seeing games like this one or this one, where he Bynum played really, really well (and in the second one, he played shortstop), in the blazing sunshine of Arizona where guys like Scott McClain have put up Hall of Fame-type numbers, is very dangerous, because when those sorts of players leave the Valley of the Sun, often times their bats shrivel up. No, I said BATS.

Bynum, as you all know, has been mostly a disaster for the 2006 Cubs (not that the rest of the team hasn't been the same), but last night he had the major league game of his life (three walks, a single, two runs scored, and turned a nifty double play), and the Cubs inexplicably won a game they figured to lose big, 8-3 over the Braves, avoiding a season sweep and really costing the Braves big-time in their late-season push to squeeze out another playoff berth (they're now 5.5 games out with 19 left).

It wasn't just Bynum, of course -- Derrek Lee had his first multihomer game of the season, one of them a three-run shot (after Bynum and Aramis Ramirez had clogged up the bases with walks), and it's very, very good to see D-Lee starting, at last, to hit the way he was a year ago; this bodes well for his performance potential in 2007. Jacque Jones also hit a three-run homer; though this doesn't make him a good player, it does put him on target to have an utterly predictable season, given his track record.

Now, Bynum's game-of-his-life doesn't mean he should be playing next year, next week, or even today -- and in fact, if Dusty Baker wanted to be consistent, he'd bench Bynum today after he drew those three base-clogging walks. Remember, the original Baker base-clogging quote stated that "walks just clog the bases for people who can run", so maybe he thinks that if Bynum walks, he can then steal bases. What difference does that make? GETTING ON BASE IN THE FIRST PLACE is the important thing.

I know, I'm preaching to the choir here. What's most amazing about Bynum's night is that the three walks are one-third of his entire season total, in over 120 plate appearances. Do not expect this to be repeated.

The other amazing thing about last night's offensive outburst was that it came off John Smoltz, who had beaten the Cubs early and often throughout his career. According to Braves manager Bobby Cox:

"He tweaked (the groin) a little bit and got some balls up," Cox said. "Obviously, it bothered him. He didn't have good location. He's had this before and it usually goes away. Tonight, it didn't."

OK, whatever works. Rich Hill threw reasonably well again, though he had to be yanked in the sixth inning after throwing an unreasonable 120 pitches (80 strikes, at least his control was still good), and the bullpen was able to keep the Braves offense down. Bob Howry made his 76th appearance -- nine more will break the club record.

Finally, back to OBP for a moment. What impressed me most about last night's telecast was the fact that Bob Brenly went on for quite some time about how getting on base, by hit OR walk, is the most important thing, and how the Cubs under Baker simply haven't done this. I don't think he was lobbying for the manager's job by saying this, either -- I think he was simply stating the obvious, and it's about time we heard this on a Cub telecast.

0 recs | Comment 77 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I'm glad

we won last night. What I don't understand is why we can't play like that or something close to that every night? I just don't get it.

I cringed every time Freddie came up to bat last night. I'm so afraid we will never see Theriot again unless it's just to PH late in the game. I have the feeling we will see Ronny before we see Ryan. :(

Really happy to see Derrek hit so well last night. It wasn't one of Hill's best outings but it wasn't bad.

Football season is here. GO HAWKEYES!!!!!!

by sue369 on Sep 12, 2006 9:20 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

How about #25?

Lee is knocking the cover off the ball. So far this month, he's batting .324/.343/.706, with four homers.

AC036198

by gjdow on Sep 12, 2006 9:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Juvenile Humor

"He tweaked (the groin) a little bit and got some balls up," Cox said.

There's just way too much going on in that sentence to leave alone....

by BadGuy on Sep 12, 2006 10:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Glad I'm not the only one who saw that.

It still makes me laugh.

by Teacherdave on Sep 12, 2006 2:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

What the hell are you talking about?

There's nothing juvenile about that. It's just funny.

by jcub on Sep 12, 2006 4:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

So who are you going to believe on this? A bunch of people hunched over their basement keyboards, or the guy who actually works there?

Do you really think there's anyway Hendry is going to say anything other than what he said? Maybe they've never said no because he knows not to ask. I'm not saying he's lying or even lying by omission. I'm just saying I don't think his statement proves anything. I'm sure the Tribune would prefer a winning team to a losing one, but I don't doubt for one minute that the most important thing is the financial viability of the team.

That being said it doesn't make a bit of difference as to whether or not Hendry can build a winner. GMs all around MLB work within a budget and build winning teams. He makes the important point that teams are winning spending less than the Cubs and that is purely an indictment of Hendry.

by jolietconvict on Sep 12, 2006 10:09 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree with you...

... on the point that Hendry has not made good use of the budget he has been given. This has been a problem with Cub GM's going back to Larry Himes.

by Al on Sep 12, 2006 10:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

He could say he doesnt like bear claws either

but if you take a look at his size 50 strech pants, you no otherwise.

Produce or go home! Jim Hendry has been saying the same thing over and over, and people evidently are still accepting it at face value.

Jim,

Sit the Jack down and build a long-term winning program, if you can't retire. But SHUT UP with the fake Mea Culpa act, we're not buying what your selling.

by Santos Sorrow on Sep 12, 2006 10:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

"no" should be "know"

n/t

by Santos Sorrow on Sep 12, 2006 10:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Point taken, and I agree...

... and I have said that Jim Hendry is at fault this year for putting too many eggs in the Wood/Prior basket, not getting a good power bat, signing Jones to a ridiculous deal, and not putting a good bench together.

Produce, indeed. He just got a two-year extension. Time to put up.

by Al on Sep 12, 2006 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I am not a Jones apologist but....

His contract is far from ridculous. 3yr at 16 million for a guy who has batted .285 with 24 hr and 72 rbi's is not bad. Don't fault him because his manager misuses him by playing him against lefties and in RF. I think that to be market value if not a little below. If Jones hit the FA market right now what kind of contract would he get, I personally feel he would get more than what we have him at.
I think your position comes from the idea that Jones wasn't the type of player the cubs needed but rather what was left. I would fill more comfortable saying Dempster's contract is ridculous now, but wasn't when we signed him as was/is Wood's contract. It is all a matter of perception and currently i don't think you can call Jones deal ridiculous. My .02 anyway.

by Lablover on Sep 12, 2006 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

Jacque Jones is a lot of things, but owner of a bad contract isn't one of them. $16 million spread over three years is eminently reasonable. But of course Al and the other members of the payroll police go crazy over this stuff. I tell you, the Yanks, Mets, Red Sox, Dodgers, etc. do not obsess over future bad contracts. Rather they obsess about building a winnner. If a contract mistake or three happens along the way, then so be it. The big boys suck it up rather than cry and let it handcuff future moves. I'm sick of the big fat rich Cubs allowing "cap management" issues be the excuse. It is a joke. Especially when you are dealing with a 98 year losing streak.

Win a World Series, THEN worry about a bad contract or two that you are saddled with.

by BlueBooHoo on Sep 12, 2006 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jones

too many people here are still obsessed with his bad arm and the 5 times he's been doubled-off base this year, but honestly, how many wins has that cost the cubs? one? two? His OBP is average, but his OPS is decent. I guess because he'll be such an old man after this season he won't put up the same numbers for 2 more years. gimme a break. the hatred for this guy is baffling. If Hendry and Dusty would have had a good RH hitter for him against lefties he wouldn't get nearly as much venom spewed at him. For the situation we were in by not being able to trade for anyone, coupled with the lousy farm system, we got a good deal. he is one of the least of our problems.

by cashcowsquirtingsourmilk on Sep 12, 2006 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

As long as he's platooned next year...

...then I'm fine with Jacque Jones in a Cub uniform.

Against RHP he does well. Against LHP he is a major liability.

But properly utilized he's not a bad player to have around.

by theprognosticator on Sep 12, 2006 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

exactly. that is the key.

Let's hope the new skipper will utilize him correctly.

by cashcowsquirtingsourmilk on Sep 12, 2006 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree completely

Jones needs to be platooned. Although the real reason why this was a bad signing is that you don't pay a platoon player $4 mil a year. Yet the Cubs do exactly that.

by Jhoratio on Sep 12, 2006 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That Depends.....

on what you pay the other half of the platoon. A Murton/Jones platoon would be cheap in LF and very productive. It would raise both of their averages and would probably increase HR and OBP because they would be better rested and have a defined role rather than this coin flip crap that is going on now

by Lablover on Sep 12, 2006 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would agree with this.

This means going out and getting a power bat to play right field, and don't say "Gary Sheffield". Who else is out there?

by Al on Sep 12, 2006 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Would you settle

for Cliff Floyd as 4th outfielder complement to Pierre, Murton and Jones. Because that is the type of move Hendry is most likely to make. He isn't going to sign, or acquire, a marquee bat for the outfield. Soriano ain't coming to Chicago and Hendry has little to trade. The little he does have to trade, must be used to secure more starting pitching.

by BlueBooHoo on Sep 12, 2006 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree

The Cubs don't need to trade anyone for SP. Zambrano, Hill, Marshall, Miller, Prior, a free agent.

Why wouldn't Soriano or Lee come here? Please don't give me the standard line that they haven't brought in anyone before. This year is a different scenario than other years have been.

by NO100 on Sep 12, 2006 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh Dear Lord

If you think either Alfonso Soriano or Carlos Lee are coming to Chicago, then I have a bridge to sell you. Why not add Barry Zito to your list of fantasies.

by BlueBooHoo on Sep 12, 2006 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sell me the Bridge!!

I like bridges. I love the one on Damen just south of the CostCo. Very simple yet elegant, in it's own way. Can I get that one?

Whether Lee or Soriano sign with the Cubs is not anything I can comment on becaus eI just don't know what will happen with them. Neither of them may be available. Also, the Cubs may not need to persue them because of other factors.

I still maintain that if either of those two guys are available and still make sense when free agency begins, the Cubs will persue them.

I don't think that they will persue Zito though.

by NO100 on Sep 12, 2006 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I like that bridge too........

a friend of mine moved near there this past weekend.

by PriorandAramisfan23 on Sep 13, 2006 1:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Because...

...he's Mike63, and providing support for his arguments just isn't his style. I think Carlos Lee is a distinct possibility, as he has gone on the record saying he likes playing in Chicago, and he rakes at Wrigley Field (I can't find the exact numbers, but I think it's over .300 with a lot of RBIs and a disproportionate number of HRs). Problem is that that basically makes Murton useless, and he'd be my pick to lead off next year. Soriano is more of a stretch, but here's to hoping Hendry can pull off his first good offseason since 03/04.

by Perkins on Sep 12, 2006 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Honestly

I debated whether I should have even responded to him but I did and I've learned my lesson.

by NO100 on Sep 12, 2006 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Eh

Happens to all of us. I admit that I'm susceptible to being baited, so I usually have a problem laying off.

by Perkins on Sep 12, 2006 3:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Al, you're right

The quality of power hitting right fielders is very, very thin. Dye, Guerrero, Abreu, Swisher. After that, who do you have? Rios, Kearns, Francouer, Giles, Ordonez, Jones. The list gets so thin.

The Cubs won't get a better hitting RF than Jones for next season. I don't think he's THAT much of a liability against lefties. He still can get the occasional big hit. If he could only throw to the right base and run the bases better (Like he did in Minn), I'd be happy.

by NO100 on Sep 12, 2006 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Jones

Of course you fail to note that Jacque Jones played primarily in left field for the Twins. Matt Murton isn't an option anywhere but left. That leaves one of them to go in trade, or the status quo to remain in tact.

by BlueBooHoo on Sep 12, 2006 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not sure where you get your numbers...

... Jones was the Twins' principal LF for two years, 2001 and 2002.

In 2004 and 2005, he was their regular right fielder.

In 2000, he split time between LF and CF, and in 1999, his first season, he played mostly CF.

Career games before this year: 461 LF, 297 RF, 159 CF. He is probably better suited to be a left fielder.

by Al on Sep 12, 2006 2:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Whoa!

Let's leave evidentiary support out of our arguments. Mike tends to lose if we go that route.

by jcub on Sep 12, 2006 5:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Quality is one thing...

... AVAILABILITY is another. On that list, who would be available?

by Al on Sep 12, 2006 2:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd make Jones available

for the following reasons.

Look at his numbers since the break. He's down to a .254 BA and .754 OPS. It seems as if the league pitchers have caught up to him, even the RH pitchers. More and more guys are throwing him down and in and he's been looking very bad. In time, I'd expect him to see more and more of that.

If there is a shortage of power OF on the market, he'd appear to be very saleable at his payroll.

It would avoid the necessity of getting a platoon player to work with him. Further, it would stop any possible idea that Murton is a platoon player.

It allows us to agressively pursue either Soriano or Lee for the OF. Do the numbers. Soriano $15M plus Murton $ .5M minus Jones $5.5M = $10M

Players win awards but teams win championships.

by tharr on Sep 12, 2006 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

OK I am gonna throw a couple names out...

that haven't been discussed but I have seen lately mentioned as being available. The other day on SI they mentioned that the Rangers may be willing to trade Hank Blalock and Mark Tiexera for young pitching. Well the cubs have bundles of young, though not always good, pitching. Now both of them primarily play positions we are currently enterenched at. However upon looking at their fielding spilts you see that Blalock has played 2b a very small amount and that tiexera has played a fair amount of LF and RF. Now if hendry could some how do a Hill, Murton and other young pitcher for Tiexera I would be happy having him in LF, Pierre in CF and Jones in LF with a platoon.

by Lablover on Sep 12, 2006 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Teixiera

I can't see him available even though there's the rumors to that effect. I'll believe it when I see it.

Blalock might be more availible, but I think he's overrrated because he plays his home games in Arlington. I'd stay away, but that's just me.

by NO100 on Sep 12, 2006 4:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Very much...

against this signing before the season but he has produced offensively far better than I ever expected and is now easily worth what was originally an excessive amount. Let's hope he keeps it up...

by DudeVf1 on Sep 12, 2006 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree 100%

on the spending. That's why I don't understand all the moaning here that the Cubs don't spend money. Their salary cap is competitive and significantly more than the Marlins and Pirates who both have better records.

I'm sure the financial situation of the Cubs is a priority for the Trib execs but they do spend enough money that there is no excuse for the current roster.

by rlpete on Sep 12, 2006 10:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Marlins and Pirates?

Jesus Christ

Our peers are the Mets and Red Sox, not the Marlins, Pirates, Royals. We live in Chicago. As you may have guessed from the length of your morning commute, this is a rather large market. The luxury tax threshold according to HardBall Dollars is $136.5 million for '06 and '07. With the revenue sources, distribution network, national following, there is NO JUSTIFICATION the Tribune doesn't budget to AT LEAST the tax threshold.

by Santos Sorrow on Sep 12, 2006 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The point was, I think...

... that the money available OUGHT to produce better records than the lower-revenue Pirates and Marlins, and that is absolutely true.

by Al on Sep 12, 2006 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Correct

but the fact you can build a winner with a restricted budget doesn't justify the Chicago Cubs for not taking full advantage of the many luxuries they are afforded by their specific situation.

by Santos Sorrow on Sep 12, 2006 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not implying

that the Cubs peers are the Pirates or Marlins just that there is no excuse for this current team with the money spent. The team's salary cap has nothing to do with this year's disaster.

by rlpete on Sep 12, 2006 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

He brings up a good point.....

If the luxury tax is $136 million and McFAIL has repeatedly stated that he will not go over it then why is this team spending almost $40 million less than it could?? $95 million is plenty good enough to contend but with this team that extra $40 million is going to be the difference between fixing what's wrong or mearly putting a band-aid on it. With a payroll that's just below the luxury tax its not out of a question that a Soriano AND Schmidt or Matsuzaka could be signed very easily.

by PriorandAramisfan23 on Sep 12, 2006 10:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Correct

Fan justification for poor ownership is at least a percentage of the reason the Chicago Cubs, through yesterday, have a .478 winning percentage (1943-2119) since Tribune purchased the team in 1981.

Other interesting Tribune facts:

Number of .500 seasons: 7 (out of 26 - inc. '07)
Winning % year after .500 record: .463
Playoff appearances: 4 ('84, '89, '98, '03)
Winning % year after PO: .479
Andy MacPhail hire date: June '94
# of losses since 1995: 1002

Any way you look at it, the period of Tribune ownership has been an abhorrent failure. The only real hope we have, considering their past performance as owners, is that continuing pressure on newspaper subscriptions and advertising revenues cause the Chandler Trust, Ariel Capital, and allies to break the company up after their "turn-around" grace period (which Chandler is allowing) ends.

by Santos Sorrow on Sep 12, 2006 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Who cares if they care?

So who are you going to believe on this? A bunch of people hunched over their basement keyboards, or the guy who actually works there?

I think you miss the point, Al. Others have addressed the budget issue.

Who cares if the Tribune Co. 'cares' about winning?

The fact is that under 25 years of Tribune ownership, the Cubs haven't won. They aren't winning now. There's no evidence that Tribune Company knows how to win.

I don't care if they hold hands, chant kumbaya everyday and weep their little hearts out over every loss. I only care whether they can produce a winning team and, as Santo's Sorrow points out, they've been dismally pathetic at doing so.

P.S. I'm wireless and typing this up on the back porch ... no hunching problem in a dark basement here! :-)

What does not kill you makes you stronger.

by Pa on Sep 12, 2006 11:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree that budget isn't the problem

It's the budget-devouring contracts for non-factors that are the problem.

Pierre: $5.7 million
Jones: $4 million
Dempster: $4 million
Izturis: $3.2 million
Eyre: $3 million (good but we're overpaying)
Howry: $3 million (see above)
Rusch: $2.75 million
Mabry: $1 million

That's $26+ million right there. That's Beltran, V. Wells, B. Abreu money. Money like that would buy a pretty nice FA if we'd have used it right.

Hendry passes out $3-4 mil contracts like they were candy. If the supposed strength of this franchise is young pitching, how does it make any sense to throw money at journeyman relievers? We have a $10 million bullpen for God's sake! And, as a whole, they're not even all that good.

by Jhoratio on Sep 12, 2006 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

No

The PROBLEM is a minor league system that continues in its failure to produce quality major league talent on a consistent basis to fill spots in the lineup.

by BlueBooHoo on Sep 12, 2006 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That is certainly a problem

but even that won't help you if you're committed to throwing money away on overpriced journeymen.

by Jhoratio on Sep 12, 2006 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

No

The Cubs have not thrown massive excesses away on "journeyman" players. It is the price of doing business. The PROBLEM is the Cubs haven't acquired high-price tag marquee talent (e.g., Carlos Beltran, Rafael Furcal) in place of some of the journeyman stuff. And the even BIGGER PROBLEM is a minor league system that continues in its inability to generate bonadide major league positional talent. Look at the good teams around baseball. They generate their own quality non-pitchers IN HOUSE. That enables more money to be spend on acquiring primo talent. Look at the Yankees, White Sox, Dodgers, etc.

by BlueBooHoo on Sep 12, 2006 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mets are the best example of this

Everyone talked about how much they went out and spent this year with Delgado, Wagner et al but their payroll wasn't THAT much more than the cubs since they had Reyes and Wright being pillars of their lineup making league minimum-ish

by JonH on Sep 12, 2006 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If that's true

what do you do for 2007?

Players win awards but teams win championships.

by tharr on Sep 12, 2006 4:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wait, did they contract the Marlins and Pirates?

Damnit.

by jcub on Sep 12, 2006 5:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

BB ... It's The Boom Boom and Brenly Show

It is funny how closely I was listening to BB's comments last night, and I agree with you Al; they did seem to be quite precise and constructively critical in nature. Of course I'm sure he's been saying the same stuff all year ... but there seemed an odd confidence in his words, like a man who knew he could be the problem solver ... maybe.

I'm glad Boom Boom had a great night last night, but like Sue, I do wonder if that means will ever see The Riot again!

Besides Lee's great play last night, I thought Izturis added some very nice defense, and for a moment, I saw an example of what this year might have been.

So much for Fantasyland ... sigh ...

"The good news is, the Cubs have reached rock bottom. The bad news is, they've started to dig." Bob V., May 2006, WGN Baseball Blog ...

by Littlerock Rynofan on Sep 12, 2006 10:09 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Cox gives Hill two thumbs up

"He's tough," Atlanta manager Bobby Cox said of Hill. "He's going to be a real good one. He's a good guy to have in your rotation, that's for sure."

Big Z is smarter than I thought...

"He and his agent have requested a second opinion with a doctor in Miami," trainer Mark O'Neal said.

Zambrano was examined on Tuesday by Dr. Frank Eismont, a back specialist at the University of Miami. Results of the exam were not immediately disclosed.

Atta boy, Carlos.

by VS on Sep 12, 2006 10:22 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Here Here Convict

Hendry spelled backwards is Yrdneh. Which makes about as much sense as his moves since becomming GM. Pay whatever it takes to get Billy Beane as GM, can you imagine what he could do with a payroll like the Cubs have, and jettison this fool Hendry to the same scrap heap you sent the other clueless GM, Ed Lynch, that replaced McPhail.

by Clute on Sep 12, 2006 10:24 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't think

it's a money thing with Beane. If it was, he'd be in Boston as he had that job years ago and turned it down.

by rlpete on Sep 12, 2006 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

10- year 40 million dollar deal

Mr Beane is here in November.

by Santos Sorrow on Sep 12, 2006 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not quite

Beane has an ownership stake in the A's that's worth a lot more than his GM salary, and he essentially functions as the A's President/CEO. I doubt the Tribune would or could offer him a deal that good.

by jamie on Sep 12, 2006 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I can't think of a more

mystifying hire than Ed Lynch. Remember that? Andy McPhail comes in with all this hoo ha about proven winner this and two world series that and just a matter of time blah blah blah and then immediately turns around and hired a rookie GM who was totally underqualified for the job. Honesty, did that move make any sense at all???

Meanwhile, the Tigers hire Dombrowski and are competitive within 3 year.

I agree with the hire Beane chorus. The guy just continues to assemble winners. Schuerholz wouldn't be too bad either, although we probably won't be able to get either one of them.

by Jhoratio on Sep 12, 2006 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

2007

So what exactly are the financial committments to Cubs players for 2007 - I'm getting different numbers from different sources.

Do they have the resources to go after two or three Free Agents, or is it going to be another case where after resigning current players and arbitration, the Cubs have just enough left for a mediocre 2B-man and another bullpen arm?

Anyone got the real numbers?

"Bite my shiny metal ass!" -- Bender Bending Rodriguez

"Life is just one crushing defeat after another until you just wish Flanders was dead."

by The Jade Scorpion on Sep 12, 2006 10:43 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Contract Info

Cot's Baseball Contracts is a good site to check contract information. Most estimates I've seen have the Cubs committed to $70-80M next year, the flux depending on a number of factors like whether they'll buy/out Z this off-season and for how much; whether Aramis stays or goes; whether Wood gets an incentive-based offer on top of the $3M buyout; etc.

At $100M, that optimistically gives the Cubs ~$25M to spend on CF; the bench (+ deciding which curent bench players, if any, return); whatever outside pitching they acquire; whatever additional OF help they acquire (bench or starting/platooning); and 2B. Obviously, Aramis leaving would free up more money but would also require replacement spending at 3B.

As for what they'll do? Well, Carrie Muskat advises readers not to expect Zito - Carlos Lee because both would be too expensive. (Muskat also talks a bit about contractual obligations in her column)

What does not kill you makes you stronger.

by Pa on Sep 12, 2006 12:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

SEASON TICKET HOLDERS!

PLEASE Write Mc Phail requesting NO PRICE Increase!

1060 W. Addison
60614

Beat Iowa in all sports. Go Illini!

by TheEman on Sep 12, 2006 11:58 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

The other person you could write is....

... Mark McGuire (that's McGuire with a "U"), the VP of business operations.

Also, a reminder that Cubs email addresses generally take the form

firstiinitiallastname (at) cubs (dot) com

by Al on Sep 12, 2006 1:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

For the record

Wrigley Field's ZIP Code is 60613.

by gauchodirk on Sep 12, 2006 2:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Make sure to have your return address on there

so he can write back, "Are you F***ing kidding me, you idiots will pay whatever I want you to pay. Bend over, and shut up."

by Santos Sorrow on Sep 12, 2006 6:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bynum? Really?

Freddie Bynum, though a major target of ridicule, has hardly been a disaster, if for no other reason than he hasn't played enough. He's the new Neifi whipping boy, but you can't really call a guy who's amassed less than 130 plate appearances a disaster. His effect on the 2006 Chicago Cubs has been minimal.

The disasters on this team start with the guys who didn't pitch this year (Prior, Wood, Miller), most of the guys that took their place, our sub .600 OPS previously starting shortstop, and the guys in the bullpen not named Howry, Eyre, and for the most part, Wuertz. Those are your disasters.

But a player who hasn't really had major playing time, and was never intended to be more than a guy who gets 130 plate appearances, i.e., the 4th or 5th man off the bench, is not a disaster. I know the game he dropped some sure DP throws stick in everybody's mind, but that doesn't make him worthy of this distinction anymore than the game a popup bonked off Aramis's head makes him a disaster as well. Now, I'm not saying Boom Boom's an ideal player by any stretch of the imagination, but he's not a major part of the problem.

by theprognosticator on Sep 12, 2006 1:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Enough Budget...

available to be competitive each year and to make it to the WS...

The Trib. values winning no doubt because it provides greater margin for ticket prices and all other things sold at the game...Ad revenues are better, everything is better when you win...

The Cubs don't compete for the most expensive free agents, probably because of their budget, but that isn't bad per se. The most expensive free agents usually are not worth the money and it's extremely unlikely that the Cubs would permit a budget that results in payroll tax revenues to other teams...If they were "talked into" such expenditures, then they'd likely have to cut back elsewhere. Like it or not, the Cubs have a significantly lower level of finite resources compared to the Yankees and Red Sox and that's a management restriction.

The biggest hurdle to winning for the Cubs is what their GM, Manager, Scoting Director, maybe even McPhail, view as important for winning.

Until they get sharper in their approach, especially with a lower budget, they will struggle to compete. Of course if all the young pitchers are healthy next year and dominate, then the Cubs may be successful and everyone will call Hendry a genius, but when they get smoked in the playoffs due to poor managing and an offense that doesn't score runs, we'll all hear about curses and the need for small ball, etc...If we get very lucky, then things can change, that's our future.

by DudeVf1 on Sep 12, 2006 2:33 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Bye, Bye Cy...

...Last night's complete game shutout by Carpenter effectively ended any chance of Z winning the Cy Young Award.

I wrote the longest post and best post I ever have. And it just dissapeared, I am so dissapointed right now. Sorry.

by Reverend Jim Ignatowski on Sep 12, 2006 2:45 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Don't forget about

Brandon Webb and Brad Penny in what is a mega-weak contest for 2006 NL Cy Young.

by BlueBooHoo on Sep 12, 2006 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Webb would probably get my...

...vote, although it's too close to call. My point was that last night Carp pitched another great game in a big game situation and has clearly moved past Z. I think Penny may slip and my prediction is Webb, Carp, Z,Penny in that order----at least as of today!

I wrote the longest post and best post I ever have. And it just dissapeared, I am so dissapointed right now. Sorry.

by Reverend Jim Ignatowski on Sep 12, 2006 4:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sadly

Most of the Cub losses were winnable games. A botched DP or innings when the leadoff man gets a double or triple and we can't drive him in. Not enough walks and too many given up. If we correct those things, even with this team they should be at .500. Fundamentals killed us this year and when D Lee went down Aramis wasn't there to pick us up. Our hitters have no plate discipline.LLook at St. Louis, as good as they are, they still look really lousy at times. The D backs just swept them this past weekend and the Cards are in a pennant race. Hell, we had their number early in the season. Even with that horrible stretch after Lee got injured, we should have still been in the Wild Card race. How 'bout them Marlins! The only streaks we had this year were losing streaks.

BigJohnAZ

by BigJohnAZ on Sep 12, 2006 2:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Nice comment

So who are you going to believe on this? A bunch of people hunched over their basement keyboards, or the guy who actually works there?

LMAO, Al you ignorant Cubbie blue slut.

by ccd on Sep 12, 2006 4:01 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

ROTFLMAO!!!

At least we're laughing!

by Al on Sep 12, 2006 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

A sense of humor...

is mandatory in Cubdom.

I'm heading back to my basement!

by ccd on Sep 12, 2006 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

ROTFLMAO again!

n/t

by Al on Sep 12, 2006 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm in my

basement typing this. :)

Football season is here. GO HAWKEYES!!!!!!

by sue369 on Sep 12, 2006 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Im hunched in my office

hitting Alt-Tab throughout the day as people walk by.

by Santos Sorrow on Sep 12, 2006 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Alt-tab

is one of the greatest PC innovations ever. Along with the "boss" feature on mlb.tv so you can get away with watching ballgames during the workday....

Forget about '07. Let's wait until 2008!

by secdelahc on Sep 12, 2006 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I remember

"the guy who actually works there" from such falsehoods as "Mark Prior has a tweaked achilles tendon" and "there is nothing seriously wrong with Kerry Wood, he should make his next start."

So I'll take the keyboard trolls, thanks.

"It's hard to put your finger on it. You have to have a dullness of mind and spirit to play here." --Jim Brosnan

by cubbiejulie on Sep 12, 2006 4:08 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs