Report: Curtis Granderson traded to the Yankees
by Chanman25 on Dec 8, 2009 1:38 PM CST
Email
Print
Rotoworld is reporting this. Here:
Jon Paul Morosi of FOXSports.com reports that the Yankees have acquired OF Curtis Granderson as part of a three-team blockbuster deal with the Tigers and Diamondbacks.
The Yanks did really well here, snagging the 28-year-old Granderson for Ian Kennedy, Austin Jackson and Phil Coke. It's a small price to pay for a player of Granderson's talent and personality. As part of the three-way deal, Detroit will receive right-handers Max Scherzer and Daniel Schlereth from Arizona and Coke and Jackson from the Yanks. The D'Backs, meanwhile, receive a questionable return in Edwin Jackson from the Tigers and Kennedy from the Yanks. Granderson can be used in either left or center field in New York, giving general manager Brian Cashman some flexibility in negotiations with free agent outfielder Johnny Damon. It's safe to say the Tigers now have the payroll flexibility they wanted while securing a tremendous haul of young players.
Here's another article here that's not a source such as rotoworld. the Miami Herald is reporting this as well here: http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/baseball/wires/story/1371851.html
more to come I'm sure.. Big win for the Yankees, looks like we could have made a similar deal but this is definitely a huge blockbuster. Hendry must be on the phone with either Damon or Cameron now.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
350 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Damn it.
Mrs. Zeke will be ROYALLY pissed off…
Now only 12,859 on the "Cubs Season Tickets Waiting List"...
I was wrong Mrs. Zeke wasn't pissed. She was livid.
Remember the scene in “Shrek” where the villagers go to Shrek’s hut with torches and pitchforks? Yeah, like that.
Now only 12,859 on the "Cubs Season Tickets Waiting List"...
Who was she goint to attack
Brian Cashman ?
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Dec 8, 2009 4:39 PM CST up reply actions
As long as it's not me, I'm gettin' the heck out of the way ;)
Now only 12,859 on the "Cubs Season Tickets Waiting List"...
Pissed does not begin to describe!
Let me get this straight. We gave up the chance to acquire a left hand hitting, leadoff hitter who is also a clubhouse leader. For what? A unknown potential shortstop? How many recent players (coff Pie coff Hoffpauir) shone at Iowa and were lackluster at Wrigley? So now the Cubs will have to once again resign themselves to taking someone else’s leftovers (Ankiel or Cabrera)
SHE HAS REASON
to be ..Just like the fish that got off the hook !! Dewitt is not the only unhappy community tonite .
Hendry's not on the phone with anyone...
… except teams who he’s trying to get to take [name redacted]. THEN he can work on free agents.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
yes, but at least have them nearby
good news is nobody seems to want to have Cameron or Damon
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
theres a reason why people dont want damon
This Chicago Cubs team is currently Aaron free. Keep it that way, please.
by jesus christos on Dec 8, 2009 3:41 PM CST up reply actions
well he'd be our fourth best option
if Cameron or Byrd fall through. who else would there be? Might as well just throw Colvin out there. That’s why I think Hendry virtually has a deal done with Cameron in private but he won’t publicly sign until Bradley is gone
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
Ankiel would probably be a better option
By virtue of him actually being able to play center field-quality defense (something Damon can no longer do).
yeah, but Ankiel's bat isn't anything special
I hope it doesn’t have to come down to that though; I do not see anyone else in CF next year but Cameron now
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
There are still lots of options.
Melky Cabrera being the most recently-rumored one.
Rick Ankiel, as I mentioned.
Marlon Byrd.
If you can pay the high, high price for him, Carl Crawford is quietly being shopped.
And if you were really desperate / creative, Juan Pierre and Nick Swisher are available. And of course everyone’s favorite Gary Matthews Jr.
All of those options are better than Johnny Damon. His center field defense is atrocious. His CF UZR is nearly -10 in center in his career and that includes his prime years. His UZR in 2008, the last time the Yankees trotted him out there semi-regularly, was -36.5.
There are probably more center fielders available right now than there are jobs for them available.
none of which I like
We’d be better keeping Bradley (gulp) than having Pierre or Swisher as a CF.
Byrd and Ankiel aren’t anything special nor are reliable to be solid bats throughout the season. Crawford will be nice, but like you said, his price is tremendously high
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
colvin is a fourth outfielder, at best
This Chicago Cubs team is currently Aaron free. Keep it that way, please.
by jesus christos on Dec 8, 2009 4:03 PM CST up reply actions
Unsure how they couldn't have just traded for Granderson...
…And then just traded away he who should not be named.
Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.
Very simple...
…Ricketts wouldn’t let him, and if that is the case, I wouldn’t blame him one bit, as there has been way to much money pissed away.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
I think it is because
Hendry doesn’t know what he is able to spend until he trades Bradley. I’m assuming Bradley’s trade, whenever it happens, won’t open up any financial flexibilty of significance for 2010 anywhay. So why not just sign other players needed before other teams sign them? I think it is because Hendry doesn’t know who he has available to trade either until he finishes a Bradley deal.
Grandeson's making 5 M in 2010
which is definitely doable under any circumstance.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:17 PM CST up reply actions
Top priority
Agreed on the $5 million. If Hendry thinks other players have to be involved in a Bradley trade, then how can he sort through and know who he could have traded away to acqure Granderson. A Bradley trade is obviously the top priority and there are only so many viable players to trade.
It's the same reason we couldn't sign Vlad Guerrero before trading Sammy Sosa.
It’s flawed logic, but it’s consistently flawed. I can’t stand the short-sighted way this team does business.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Dec 8, 2009 9:03 PM CST up reply actions
Of course, Hendry is the sole cause of that problem.
I know your stance on letting Hendry try to clean up his own mess, but… well…. to be blunt, there’s a reason that I don’t let my 3-year old clean up his own messes.
What could possibly give you any confidence that Jim Hendry is the best man available to clean up the problems caused by Jim Hendry? I have to agree with BLou – swapping out GMs on day 1 would have given the Cubs the best chance at getting out from under the 30-ton weight Hendry has affixed to the franchise.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Dec 8, 2009 9:02 PM CST up reply actions
[name redacted]: the gift that keeps on giving...
Now only 12,859 on the "Cubs Season Tickets Waiting List"...
Bradley really hasn't helped us out with keeping players and getting them
Wood, DeRosa, Harden, Granderson. Thanks Fischer Price..
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
As Hendry has learned, some mistakes are harder to get past than others...
Now only 12,859 on the "Cubs Season Tickets Waiting List"...
I'd be willing to give him more of a pass....
….if these mistakes weren’t so obvious at the time Hendry made them. Oh well.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Dec 8, 2009 9:06 PM CST up reply actions
Yes, but he'll blame the media
(sarcasm all around)
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Dec 8, 2009 2:04 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
His fault? No.
But did Hendry’s having to deal with MB’s situation instead of paying attention to other Cubs needs affect the Granderson outcome?
We may never know.
Now only 12,859 on the "Cubs Season Tickets Waiting List"...
Well, I'm just going to assume you're correct nothing else has been accomplished this off-season
Which is really too bad, because if he was able to concentrate more on the other Cubs needs instead of that Milton Bradley shaped albatross maybe he could have signed one of our free agent relievers, gotten rid of Heilman before having to make an arbitration decision, or dumped Aaron Miles’ awful contract on someone else. Sadly, it looks like we’re still stuck with Miles and Heilman, and Grabow is as good as gone to free agency.
At least, I’m assuming that’s true based on your statement. I haven’t been paying much attention lately so I could be wrong.
Point(s) taken.
Maybe the glass is half full after all… ;)
Now only 12,859 on the "Cubs Season Tickets Waiting List"...
None of those moves really helped this team, either.
Basically, Hendry has scrambled — and almost managed — to tread water with his back-loaded contracts, and to that end, Rich Harden and Jake Fox are gone. He’s spending the 2009 offseason atoning for his hilariously bad 2008 offseason.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Dec 8, 2009 9:08 PM CST up reply actions
No way.
Hendry isn’t too busy with MB. That’s not how it works. He’s accomplished trading away two Aarons already this off-season.
What happened is that the Cubs were rightfully drawing the line on Starlin Castro. We don’t know if maybe we’d have gotten to the point in negotiations where Castro wasn’t necessary. But you can’t just jump at the first round of offers.
Meanwhile the D’backs came charging in with a deal that was too good to pass up. The Tigers got offered Sherzer and took it. They and the Yankees were right to take advantage of the D’backs over-eagerness to make a deal. It happens. It’s not Jim Hendry’s fault, it’s Byrnes’ fault.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 3:49 PM CST up reply actions
agreed
Granderson isn’t worth clearing out the farm for. Now we still have Vitters, Castro, and Jackson, all of whom may thrive in the ML
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
You can't regret not taking the first offer
and getting outbid by someone else.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:03 PM CST up reply actions
Well, that's too bad, really would have liked trading for Granderson
The evil empire strikes again, they always get their man.
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies." - Mike Royko
Evil umpire?
Is CB Bucknor involved?
Oh, you said evil EMPIRE. Never mind…
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
He had a hand in it as well
Some how, some way, Bucknor is involved, he does live in Brooklyn.
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies." - Mike Royko
Dang
CF prospects really seem to fall off quickly after Granderson.
Paging Mr. Cameron…..
"I tried to let Ryan know that [jumping over the dugout railing] was a thing that maybe just athletes should stick to." -- Ted Lilly, 28 July 2009
by CaughtInTheVines on Dec 8, 2009 2:26 PM CST reply actions
We hardly knew ye...
It’s too bad that even in the off season Gameboard is hurting the team… sadfacepalm
i'll bring it up here in the separate granderson thread
but what amazes me is the centerpiece from the yankees perspective was essentially Austin Jackson. Jackson’s a nice prospect but he’s nothing special. In fact his minor league career is inferior to that of Felix Pie’s based on production and age at certain levels. Now perhaps he becomes a better player than Pie, but both had similar prospect statuses before being promoted to the majors
one team turned that prospect into Curtis Granderson
the other refused to ever give the prospect real playing time, had a manager openly unwilling to play him, destroyed all his value and then traded him for essentially aaron heilman
it is incredible to me why people wonder how we got where we are
Our management never has a plan that’s more than the current off-season away. We’ve operated this same way ever since 2003, each offseason presents a list of problems that our management believes need to be fixed in that offseason and do so with no consideration of the impact down the line
in 2004 it was bullpen help
in 2005 it was get rid of Sosa
in 2006 it was a leadoff hitter (netted us Juan Pierre) and RF (Jacque Jones)
in 2007 it was a new manager and suddenly new purse strings (Soriano, Lilly, Fukudome, Marquis)
in 2008 it was LH bat (Milton Bradley) and to purge the team of the CF “issue” (issue meaning we have a young CF prospect that the manager doesn’t want to play)
in 2009 its get rid of MB
each season a move was made that negatively impacted seasons in 2 and 3 years down the line (with the exception of say the 2005 offseason)
In 2006 we gave away Nolasco, Pinto, Mitre for Pierre a short-term fix that didn’t work
in 2007 we tied ourselves to a bevy of long-term contracts that have saddled the purse strings going forward
in 2008 we compounded the mistake by committing big dollars to MB in order to push Pie out
now in 2009 we entered the offseason with the following needs and no salary flexibility:
1) CF
2) SP Depth
3) LHRP
4) Salary Flexibility
Well, Pie could’ve been the CF, Nolasco could’ve been the SP, and Pinto though not very good (career WHIP of 1.46) could’ve been a cheaper on the roster alternative to having to give money to Grabow (career WHIP of 1.44) or trade prospects for him at last year’s deadline. And ALL of these options would’ve brought about salary and roster flexibility with them because they’re internally produced options which are inherently cheaper than the FA market.
All i want from this team is a vision and a plan. Since the end of the 2003 system the organization has shown ZERO foresight and has often spent each offseason compounding previous mistakes.
Please stop focusing on short-term fixes and start building a plan for the 2011 offseason when we’ll have some money again. And if the current GM isn’t able to build that plan because he’s not sure if he’s going to be here, put someone else in that position.
Please.
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 2:35 PM CST reply actions 6 recs
Not bad...
except Pie is not a long-term solution to anything
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
guess that's up for debate
he’s 24 and just put up a decent .763 OPS and in his first shot at consistent playing time in the 2nd half put up an .842 OPS
I think suggesting he’s NOT a long-term solution is as uncertain as suggesting he IS a long-term solution at this point
the bottom line though is… he’s a better short and long-term solution than anything we’ve had on the roster when you take into account salary, production, etc
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 2:42 PM CST up reply actions
You're asking for a vision and a plan...
… and that’s a fine idea. But it cannot be put in place one month after an ownership change.
Right now the focus is cleaning up last year’s mess. At least give Hendry a shot at doing this. He hasn’t failed — yet.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
why not?
why can’t part of the plan be excavating the current albatross contracts and then building for the future
My ramblings thus far are all related to the past and how its put us in a tough position now.
The only offseason move I thought was a mistake was the re-signing of Grabow. To me that indicated no change in direction from the previous Hendry-led administration. We’re going to over-spend in FA for replacement level or slightly above replacement level performance
This strategy hasn’t worked before and its unlikely to work now.
Outside of that move though the offseason has been fine, moving Heilman and Miles for bullpen arm depth and fringe major leaguers is absolutely fine
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 4:05 PM CST up reply actions
They are TRYING to excavate at least one albatross contract.
You’re right, Hendry has a lot of digging to do. But you cannot expect all of that to happen in one month.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
i don't
most of my post was lamenting past mistakes
as i said the only move i’ve had an issue with is Grabow
Now my larger issue is IF Hendry is going to be replaced or has the threat of replacement he’s going to feel the need to “win now” to accomplish that, which means he may not act in the best interests of the organization long-term and may act in the best interests of trying to preserve his job
if the ownership is looking at a potential change down the road “unless Hendry wins now”, I think we’re setting ourselves up for a horrible situation
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 4:20 PM CST up reply actions
If Hendry is feeling that pressure
then that’s on Rickett’s isn’t it? Ricketts needs to be clear about what goals he wants Hendry to pursue.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:22 PM CST up reply actions
i completely agree
no idea what is taking place, but i certainly hope the right expectations are communicated
we’re not a team that is “that” close to winning a title that we should be pushing all our chips in the middle. I hope the owner realizes this. My concern is most fans don’t, and the owner recognizes himself as a fan
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 4:23 PM CST up reply actions
Where we're at
has a lot to do with the moves the Cards, Brewers, and Reds make because on the one hand, we could be the divisional favorites and on another hand we’ve got one of the best farms in the division. It would be a shame, for example, to have the NL Central be won by 85 wins and we missed it just because we wouldn’t spend 5 M on a CF.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:31 PM CST up reply actions
5 mil for one year
that doesn’t cost a draft pick, and no suitable replacement exists? I’m on board. I’m not opposed to spending this offseason, I’m opposed to multi-year deals to replaceable asset
I’d like a one year Mike Cameron signing, works just fine for me. I hate a 2 year John Grabow signing when that money could have been dedicated to a Mike Cameron type player or dumped back into the draft budget and we could’ve acquired a bunch of bullpen arms and let them sort it out like a lot of the smaller market teams do and have had success
In fact we’ve even done that through trade
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 4:36 PM CST up reply actions
this is an interesting point:
My concern is most fans don’t, and the owner recognizes himself as a fan
However, I think the Ricketts group are business people before anything else. Admittedly, they’re fans but don’t necessarily know much about the intricacies of running a sports team. I think they have and will continue to behave as students/passive observers in 2010, lest they be labeled overzealous, amateurish, micromanagers. Unfortunately, this means a complete status quo not only in management (Lou, Hendry), but in philosophy. The reality is that the Ricketts probably only have a vague philosophy (the Boston model, if you will), and, at least in the short term, wouldn’t really know how to implement anyway. At the same time, Hendry probably thinks his best chance of keeping his job beyond 2010 is to tread water next year, and aim small (but miss small). Getting credit for a revamped farm system is probably the best way Hendry could impress the new owners (it’s a critical facet of the Boston model, after all). Pushing all-in with Granderson and possibly failing to win a playoff series anyway is a move that would all but guarantee Hendry’s departure. I contend that if ownership had not changed this year, Hendry would have made the trade in a heartbeat and Granderson would be standing in front of the ivy next Spring.
The Grabow contract is the same mistake made with Hawkins-Howry-Eyre
Guaranteed years at multiple millions for mid-level middle relief is one of the reasons the Cubs are in their current mess.
Jim Hendry simply cannot understand the value in paying elite money to elite players, and filling the rest of the roster with the best cost-controlled players he can get.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Dec 8, 2009 9:14 PM CST up reply actions
And in the meantime, missed a chance to get a center fielder
Even if they get rid of Bradley scot-free, that is a major FAIL.
Pshaw.
Teams do this all the time. Sometimes, the best — or only — chance to change the institutional philosophy is to change the brain trust at the top.
Hendry has failed, and rather spectacularly. It’s time for a new perspective.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Dec 8, 2009 9:11 PM CST up reply actions
Really?
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 8, 2009 9:44 PM CST up reply actions
Well, yeah.
Almost anyone could turn $130M into 85-90 wins annually. It takes a special kind of incompetence, bordering on a breach of fiduciary duty, to turn Felix Pie into Aaron Heilman, who is in turn traded for minor league non-entities. It takes a special talent to assemble a $40M outfield with no legitimate offensive threat.
Hendry’s MO is to massively outbid the field on players he “likes”, for whatever reason. $7M for Jeff Samardzjia. $3M+ annually for the middle relief flavor of the month, every offseason. For years, $3M annually for the backup catcher. $2.5M annually for Aaron Miles. $12M annually for Kosuke Fukudome, for crying out loud. The GM spends eight figures each, annually, on Fukudome and Bradley, and wonders why he has no payroll flexibility.
Every GM is permitted 1 or 2 serious head-scratcher moves. Hendry makes 1 or 2 every offseason, and these moves flop with remarkable consistency.
Seriously, who spends $138M on a CF who has never actually played CF?!
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Really?
Let’s see, his teams have made the playoffs in 3 of the last 7 years. Do you even know how many other teams can fail that spectacularly? They’ve also had winning records in five of those seven seasons. Do you know how many teams can say that? Again, unless your definition of “failed spectacularly” is grossly exaggerated, then quit your whining. Seriously.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 8, 2009 10:12 PM CST up reply actions
Many other teams can claim as much success. Almost none spend as much money.
You and I could spend our way to 85 wins. A major league GM with $140M to burn should not leave his organization in the mess the Cubs are in.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
BUZZZZZ!!!
Wrong Answer. Would you like to try again?
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 8, 2009 10:24 PM CST up reply actions
boy
the mets are in for a surprise
This Chicago Cubs team is currently Aaron free. Keep it that way, please.
by jesus christos on Dec 8, 2009 10:28 PM CST up reply actions
Shhh
Who knows what D98 will say when he finds out that they have one fewer winning season and a single playoff appearance.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 8, 2009 10:43 PM CST up reply actions
You can't possibly be this dense.
Take a minute or two and re-read the post you responded to.
Here’s what I said:
1. Many teams can claim 3 postseason berths since 2003. This is undeniably true. To recap, STL (4), MIN (4), LAA (5), NYY (6), BOS (6), LAD (4), ATL (3), PHI (3).
2. Almost no teams spend as much money as the Cubs. Also undeniably true. In fact, of the teams listed above, only BOS and NYY will spend more this year.
Now, here’s where you made your mistake. You noted the fact that the Mets have only 1 postseason appearance in the last 7 years, which has absolutely nothing to do with either of the above arguments. Apparently, you thought that I wrote “no one has done less with more money than Jim Hendry.”
Obviously, that’s not what I said at all. And since you took a minute to re-read at the top of this post (or, I hope you did), you’ve probably caught on by now.
To recap – There are many teams that have enjoyed as much success, or more success, than the Cubs have over the last 7 years. (9 of 30 – and that’s cherry-picking the best possible timeframe, and leaving out teams that have won pennants and titles in fewer than 3 appearances, but I won’t quibble). Moreover, the Cubs will have one of the highest payrolls in the game in 2010.
If you have a response that’s more on point that your Mets thing, or more substantive than BZZZT!, go right ahead.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Dec 9, 2009 9:38 AM CST up reply actions
Cherry Picking?
How is cherry picking to count the seasons where Hendry was the General Manager? He was promoted to GM in July 2002 so his first full year was 2003, so BZZZZT to you.
many – n. a large or considerable amount of people or things
Only 6 teams have made the playoffs more than the Cubs while Hendry has been in charge. Is 6 a “large and considerable amount”? That’s only 20% of the league so that means 80% of teams went to the playoffs as many or fewer times than the Cubs. I would never want to be in a class where you’re the teacher if you have such an irrationally extravagant expectations.
How much the Cubs spend on the roster is completely irrelevant. All that matters is the results. I couldn’t care less if they have the 3rd or 30th highest payroll. They were decimated by injuries last year and still managed to compile a winning record. How can one even argue against that? Nobody has sufficient depth to replace 4/5ths of the starting rotation, the 3B, the ROY C, the All-Star LF and RF. The 1B even missed 20 games with various injuries. Their 4th OF was hurt for most of the season as well. It wasn’t the payroll that kept the Cubs from the playoffs.
IT WAS ALL THE FREAKING INJURIES!!!!!!!!!!
DGU has posted several excellent posts enumerating how all you Hendry haters only focus on a handful of deals and ignore the vast majority of free agent signings and trades that were good/great/neutral for the club.
Finally, since you didn’t ask and I went through all the trouble, are were only 7 teams with more than five winning seasons since Hendry was promoted. Again, I use your terminology of “failed, and rather spectacularly”. He hasn’t failed and the only spectacular things are your hatred of JH and/or ignorance of the facts.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 9, 2009 4:14 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
The odd 15-day DL stint doesn't mean "REPLACING 4/5 of the rotation!!!1!"
The Cubs were never without 4/5 of their rotation. 2009 wasn’t 1985.
The Cubs weren’t any more decimated by injuries than the average ballclub. They were decimated by the fact that their GM has hired a bunch of mediocre players at elite player rates.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Dec 9, 2009 8:54 PM CST up reply actions
LOL
BZZZZT! Wrong again.
Do you like being wrong so much? Does it come naturally to you?
Dempster didn’t pitch in the majors from July 2 to July 28
Lilly from July 20 to August 17
Zambrano from August 1 to 25
There are two overlapping periods where two of their starters were on the DL at the same time. This stuff is easily found on various websites. Why can’t you do simple research before you go off on your crazy rants?
PS. I never said they were without 4/5 of their starters all at the same time. Why did you assume I meant that? Furthermore, why didn’t you then assume I meant that they played without their C, 3B, LF, RF & 1B all at the same time too?
So tell me about other teams who finished above .500 that had injuries to 4 of their 5 Opening Day starters and five of their OD position players too?
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 9, 2009 11:06 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
"replace 4/5 of their starting rotation"
You said “no one has enough depth to replace 4 out of 5 starters”. That is true, but as you note, the Cubs never had to replace 4 out of their 5 starters. They only rarely had to replace more than 1.
You are out of your element. As anyone who has read this board for any length of time will attest, I’ve been right a lot more than I’ve been wrong, and I have been the first to admit when I was wrong. (For instance, I was very down on D-Lee going into last year, and thought his stats portended a Dale Murphy-type collapse. In April, that seemed prescient. By July, not so much.)
You don’t like to hear the truth about Hendry, because it makes you uncomfortable. Suffice it to say that his last year and a half has been miserable beyond measure, and that he has repeatedly wasted the Cubs money and young players for very, very little return. And according to published reports, the organization is getting awfully tired of these failures.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
side note
I think Pie will develop a bit more, but I think people are putting a lot of weight into his overall 2nd half line. Essentially, he had a hot two week stretch from mid-late August before cooling down again.
my faith in Pie
is much more based on the minor league dominance than the major league performance last year
few players dominate the minors at the ages he did without being productive major leaguers
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 6:18 PM CST up reply actions
Exactly - and don't forget, he had an adjustment period at almost every level.
Pie’s career pattern was pretty well established. Promotion, struggle, adjustment, dominance. The Cubs were patient with him, coached him exceptionally well, shepherded him through the system and watched him repeatedly dominate leagues full of slightly older players.
Then, 200 AB into his MLB career, we said “screw it, sign Joey Gathright and trade Pie for Heilman.”
I would have fired Hendry on the spot, literally the same day. What a hilarious waste of resources! Can you imagine Colby Rasmus or Brett Wallace being traded for absolutely nothing, 200 or so AB into their MLB careers?
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Dec 8, 2009 9:19 PM CST up reply actions
You know I'm sypmpathetic to a lot of this
except that this deal got done because of Sherzer – not so much any of the other players involved.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 3:53 PM CST up reply actions
not the granderson part of it
the dbacks could’ve dealt scherzer/schlereth for Edwin and the Tigers would’ve taken it in a heartbeat and Granderson would’ve gone no-where
the Granderson part of the equation from the Tigers end got done because of Austin Jackson. If you want to argue the DBacks wouldn’t have gone through with it because they demanded Ian Kennedy and that was the Yankes tie to the deal I could see it, but Austin Jackson was the main piece that landed Granderson for the Yankees
everything else was essentially the glue that got the deal done
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 4:07 PM CST up reply actions
The D'backs put the big piece in
and were reported to be the ones pushing this deal. They get to decide how valuable Kennedy is to them, compared to what we could have offered comparatively – Wells or Marshall. And if Hendry had a chance – and he may not have had a chance – to get in and replace the Yankees here, well, he would have balked on Wells or Marshall, because of Lilly’s injury.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:14 PM CST up reply actions
I'm not upset we didn't get the deal done here
i’m upset we got Aaron Heilman for the equivalent of what the Yankees traded to get Curtis Granderson
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 4:15 PM CST up reply actions
And I'm certainly sympathetic to that.
The mistake was made on Day 5 of the 2008 season when Jim Hendry didn’t tell Lou to stop messing up a prospect we needed to work out.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:18 PM CST up reply actions
This is why theYankees win championships...
And the Cubs are coming out of a lost century.
Hendry hamstrings himself into a bad payroll situation, but still wants to improve the team, focusing in a center fielder, preferably left-handed. He then finds a young one in his prime, but whiffs, deciding to protect a teenage prospect instead. As if he has any record of developing young, raw talent. So instead, insert marginal upgrade in center [here].
I’m really starting to sour on the Hendry regime.
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 2:39 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
Bullshit!!
The reason the Yankees win championships is they can afford to pay anything for anybody and if it don’t work they can afford to pay anything/anybody to replace them. How did Carl Pavano fare for them? How about Wang? I can keep going and going….
You cannot compare anyone with the Yankees cause they 3 times the market everyone else has. The can make 140 million dollar worth of bad signings and still field a 100 million dollar team!
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
They have
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
Oh crap
I meant to write BS instead of writing it out! Sorry Al
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
3 times the market?
How does a team that comes from CHICAGO complain about market size? The Cubs have just as many resources as the Yankees, be it a devoted national following, major television network agreements, huge fanbase size, historic stadium and team history, etc. all leading towards huge revenues. The Cubs have just have been cheapasses for most of their existence.
And besides the fact that spending money doesn’t guarentee wins, even if it did the Yankees payroll is only marginally bigger than the Cubs (relative to other franchises). If we were the Royals, maybe then we’d have a right to complain.
Bottom line is that the Yankees are just a well-run organization that knows how to use their advantages, but also has a first-rate front office. I don’t get what’s gained by hating on success. Rather than complaining about it, we should focus on trying to emulate it (since the Cubs could if they wanted to).
by CubsWin!Oregon on Dec 8, 2009 4:07 PM CST up reply actions
I call bullshit to your bullshit...
My point is that -regardless of how they accomplish the goal - the Yankees set out every year with the goal of contending for a championship. They identify holes, and make sharp, decisive move to fill them. The Cubs “hope” to be competitive, and dabble at the margins, hoping to catch some lightning in a bottle.
New York comes off a Series win managing to upgrade their outfield, while actually reducing the amount of money that they’re spending for it. Hendry hopes for a teenage prospect to be star, and lead the team in a few seasons. Sorry, I can’t get behind this line of thinking.
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 4:14 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
recently
the Cubs have set up for that goal and done it spectacularly poorly, trying to start with basically nothing at the end of 2006 (little major league talent, poor farm system) and tried to buy there way into contention
i’d argue this exact mantra is what has gotten the cubs into this mess in the first place
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 4:17 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
The Yankees understand that Mark Teixera is worth more than Bradley + Fukudome.
They pay elite money to elite players. We pay 60% of elite money to marginal players.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Dec 8, 2009 9:26 PM CST up reply actions
Who knows what Hendry would have done
with Castro had there been more negotiating time.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 3:55 PM CST up reply actions
"Starting" to sour?!
The Hendry regime has smelled awfully sour for a long time. Given the resources he has been given, he’s just beyond awful. A 1 on a scale of 1 to 10. Year after year of counterproductive, contradicting trades.
For instance, were we a “win now” team last year, or in “rebuild the farm” mode last year? Because we swapped our starting 2B for relief pitching prospects, and then traded our top prospect CF for Aaron Heilman, within weeks of each other.
This is a GM who refused to bid on Carlos Beltran, and then when we needed a CF, gave Alfonso Soriano – an older, lesser player, the exact same deal given to Beltran…. plus an extra year – based on the fact that Hendry really, really believed that Soriano would be able to play CF.
Hendry isn’t playing with fake money – he’s playing with hundreds of millions of dollars of the Tribunes – and now the Ricketts’ – money. I just can’t believe that he gets to keep this job…. there are at least 10 posters on this board who would be dramatically better at it.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Dec 8, 2009 9:25 PM CST up reply actions
Well
If you’re counting yourself among them, there are only 9 then.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 8, 2009 10:16 PM CST up reply actions
This is a GM who refused to bid on Carlos Beltran, and then when we needed a CF, gave Alfonso Soriano – an older, lesser player, the exact same deal given to Beltran…. plus an extra year – based on the fact that Hendry really, really believed that Soriano would be able to play CF.
soriano was a FA in 2006, beltran in 2005, i dont remember the specifics but i think that the cubs still had money tied with sosa in 2005
This Chicago Cubs team is currently Aaron free. Keep it that way, please.
by jesus christos on Dec 8, 2009 10:29 PM CST up reply actions
What Hendry needs to do is find a way to snare a reclamation project with upside for CF...
Namely Chris Young of Arizona. He has speed to spare, great D, and if Jaramillo could find a way to get him to hit- would fit nicely in CF at Wrigley. I know that AZ has soured on him a little, and he might be easy to get.
I'm a truth teller, I'm a risk taker, I'm like Johnny Cash - I walk the line...
if Pineilla couldn't stand Pie's approach
how on earth would he tolerate CBY’s approach….
just throwing that one out there
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 2:44 PM CST up reply actions
Good point...
I'm a truth teller, I'm a risk taker, I'm like Johnny Cash - I walk the line...
by Jimmyeatworld on Dec 8, 2009 2:50 PM CST up reply actions
Pardon my French...
But fuck a reclamation project. How Hendry decides to pass on a player that not only fits his need to a T, is one of the most marketable players in the game, is a local favorite, and one of the good guy of the sport is beyond me. Oh, and did I mention that his contract for the next few seasons is below both value and market rate?
I’ll get to enjoy watching Castro play for the Cubs at Wrigley in 2011, for certain. But I suspect that he won’t.
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 2:48 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I'd rather have a reclamation project with upside than a stop gap veteran such as Cameron or Damon...
It sucks, but this is what Hendry is stuck with now.
I'm a truth teller, I'm a risk taker, I'm like Johnny Cash - I walk the line...
by Jimmyeatworld on Dec 8, 2009 2:51 PM CST up reply actions
I don't see the upside that you do..
Both of those players are playing at solid levels, and look likely to sustain that for at least the next two seasons. Besides, I can’t think of any reason in the world that Damon would want to leave the AL at this point in his career. Young looks more and more like a flash in the pan. Saw him in person a few times last season, and he was a damn mess. And now he’s entering his arb years. Pass.
But that’s really besides the point. This isn’t Pittsburgh. They need to do better.
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 2:56 PM CST up reply actions
Agreed Damen.
So Cameron, and his meth it is!
I'm a truth teller, I'm a risk taker, I'm like Johnny Cash - I walk the line...
by Jimmyeatworld on Dec 8, 2009 2:57 PM CST up reply actions
I don't think he's a meth head, but that was what his suspension was for at the beginning of last year...
I'm a truth teller, I'm a risk taker, I'm like Johnny Cash - I walk the line...
by Jimmyeatworld on Dec 8, 2009 3:08 PM CST up reply actions
Hmm...
I wasn’t aware that the substance had every been made public. Okay.
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 3:11 PM CST up reply actions
Probably not meth per se, but it was for a banned stimulant...
I'm a truth teller, I'm a risk taker, I'm like Johnny Cash - I walk the line...
by Jimmyeatworld on Dec 8, 2009 3:21 PM CST up reply actions
So it wasn't McCallan's, then
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Dec 8, 2009 3:42 PM CST up reply actions
although McCallan's is a performance enhancer...
I'm a truth teller, I'm a risk taker, I'm like Johnny Cash - I walk the line...
by Jimmyeatworld on Dec 8, 2009 4:05 PM CST up reply actions
Improves reaction time
It’s been on the banned list for a couple of years now, and part of baseball for decades.
For some reason it doesn’t get the crazy outrage that HGH and steroids do, probably because it was a part of the “golden generation” of baseball players.
Are you kidding me, speed enhances everything...
… and makes you feel like Superman. Although it is a brutus drug, and wreaks havoc on the body.
I'm a truth teller, I'm a risk taker, I'm like Johnny Cash - I walk the line...
by Jimmyeatworld on Dec 8, 2009 4:17 PM CST up reply actions
Is Granderson coming here?
Did the Cubs and Tigers not discuss a Granderson trade? You think it’s unfair of me to put two and two together, and count four? What?
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 4:00 PM CST up reply actions
There's a difference between "passed"
and in “ongoing negotiations.”
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:04 PM CST up reply actions
If this is how Hendry "negotiates"
It’s no wonder Soriano got eight years, Milton Bradley got three, and Miles got 5 million bucks.
Sorry, but I’m really beginning to sour on his “negotiation” skills.
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 4:07 PM CST up reply actions
Look I'm just as frustrated as you that we missed the opportunity to get Granderson.
But I honestly don’t see anything here than the D’backs making a bad trade and Jim Hendry being right not to outbid.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:09 PM CST up reply actions
Wow you're being shrill about this
The Tigers just got a crazy haul. It’s pretty clear that we would have had to give up Castro to get Granderson, who is good but not great.
I wouldn’t give up Castro for Granderson either. The Cubs got massively outbid by a package deal that included an extremely good, cost-controlled pitcher and multiple high-value prospsects. Putting this on Hendry is just silly.
Yes I am...
This one just puts a burr(sp?) up my butt, because I know what comes next; giving Mike Cameron – who I’m still fond of — too much money and too many years.
Only in Chicago does a GM go “Gee, I need a young, athletic, LH outfielder, who can hit in the middle of the lineup, and is cheap enough to fit into my modest budget”, get one offered in front of him, and fumble it.
Geterdonejim!!
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 4:20 PM CST up reply actions
There are players who are worth mortgaging your organization's future for
Curtis Granderson is not one of those players.
Mortgaging your future?
What are you talking about?
If the Tigers asked the Cubs to drain the farm system in a deal, then I take back everything, and humbly apologize to Jim Hendry. If this boiled down to the future of Castro — as has been reported — then it’s hardly mortgaging the team’s future, and I’ll stand by my comments.
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 4:36 PM CST up reply actions
To be fair
we don’t know who the other two prospects were in the Castro offer. I could do a Castro-Colvin-no-one-I’ve-heard-of offer, but even then I wouldn’t say yes right away, would you?
On the other hand, if it was Castro and two other top 15 prospects?
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:40 PM CST up reply actions
Would I?
Yes. Three weeks ago in a post regarding Curtis Granderson, I said:
Now you just have to worry about the Yankees pitching Melky, with a promise to take a bad contract back.
Wrong players, right idea. The Yankees were going to get in on this, and it was obvious from jump. So yes, given how well Granderson matches up with the Cubs needs, I would have moved decisively to put this deal down.
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 4:48 PM CST up reply actions
So you'd have given Castro - Jackson - Rhee?
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:51 PM CST up reply actions
No,
And I’ve seen nothing to suggest that they were making those sort of demands. Have you?
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 4:53 PM CST up reply actions
I don't think they were -
just curious how far you’d go. I could contemplate a Castro deal, but not much more than Castro – and I really wanted Hendry to try and get it done w/o Castro.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 5:06 PM CST up reply actions
spec from Bruce Miles
it was in a post he made on his blog, but his spec was that they were asking for another top prospect to go with Castro.
I'm not so sure the Tigers got a crazy haul
but it was a decent-solid trade for them. Everything rests on Scherzer staying healthy and being able to stay as a top of the rotation type arm.
That said, I’m not putting this on Hendry either. the Cubs couldn’t have been the third team. While I fully believe we could’ve match or beaten Coke/Kennedy without much of a problem, we simply didn’t have a young CF prospect to offer, even if AJAx is overhyped and a bit overrated.
He was a 3.4 WAR player last year
Sarcasm font missing or misfired attempt at BLouvian exaggeration?
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:05 PM CST up reply actions
Ok, I'm exaggerating there. I admit it.
Though to be fair I think 2 of those wins come from his positional adjustment.
And the Cubs have an overwhelming stock of center fielders?
I mean, they’re talking about spending $$$$$ to sign what’s left of Mike Cameron.
Great move by Detroit, and what the hell are the D'bags thinking?
Scherzer is nasty. Either they know something about him that no one else does, or they’re just idiots.
Are you on Twitter? Check out the BCB and Cubs Twitter Community! Post your Twitter name and start tweeting with us!
by Schwa on Dec 8, 2009 2:48 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
I think that's D'BACKS...
Then again, if the bag fits…
Now only 12,859 on the "Cubs Season Tickets Waiting List"...
The Tigers made out like bandits today!
They sold HIGH on Jackson, who has never produced an overwhelming year other than last year and has shoulder problems. Granderson is, in my opinion, a glorified platoon player, obviously I wouldn’t give up much for him.
They have FOUR MLB ready players with lot’s of talent!!! Scherzer has immense talent, his stuff is phenominal. His fastball has nice tail to it as well, he’s truly suited to be a top tier MLB starting pitcher. The same could be said for Schlereth with closing, great fastball and a good complementary pitch, doesn’t try to Bobby Jenks it. AJax could also lead off for the Tigers for years, the kid needs a little more refining, but by the time he’s settled in he should be quite the player. Coke is already a decent reliever, he should get better..
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
This does look like a very lopsided deal....
at a glance.
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 2:57 PM CST up reply actions
Well from someone who thinks very lowly of both the players sent away...
it is a lopsided deal.
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
i'm not of that opinion
i think they did fine
i think the Yankees got the lopsided portion of the deal while the DBacks made a seemingly large mistake
Scherzer is an appealing starter but many scouts have always envisioned him as a late inning reliever because of his mechanics and lack of a 3rd pitch. He’s struggled to work deep into games and is sort of projected like a poor-man’s Harden (a bit lesser stuff, a bit lesser health concerns). Schlereth is a bullpen arm, Jackson is going to be a cost-controlled slightly above league average CF (doesn’t look like a star to me). In the meantime they gave up two players who had each performed at a high level and weren’t costing “that much” compared to some of the other payroll constraints
I think the likelihood they got out on Jackson at a high is similar to the likelihood of Scherzer ending up in the pen
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 3:05 PM CST up reply actions
That was my point...
The Yanks look good, the Tigers look good, and I can’t figure out how the DBacks agreed to this.
by Damen Jackson on Dec 8, 2009 3:08 PM CST up reply actions
only thing I can think of
is that they are really concerned about Scherzer health wise.
Even then, I still don’t think they got enough value.
Bandits?
Look, I think they get a decent-solid deal. But bandits? They got a loogy in Coke, a decent power pen lefty in Schelereth. AJax is a decent OF, but overhyped. Solid fielder, little power, strikes out a lot, doesn’t walk a ton. If he’s a leadoff hitter, it’s more by default.
Scherzer’s the key to the deal. If he stays as a solid TOR guy, then it’s a good deal for them.
But only one team made out like bandits today, and that’s the Yankees. A 5th starter, a LOOGY, and a decent CF prospect for a 3-4 WAR player signed at a reasonable deal, in his prime, filling one big hole for them, and a guy who is a potentially excellent fit in that stadium. Even if you think Granderson has plateaued, he’s still a cheap enough that, as long as he maintains his performance last year, this deal will have been worth it for the Yankees.
My question is how does this effect our plans?
If we don’t sign Cameron, who then?
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
I still would love to get
Jordan Schafer.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 3:58 PM CST up reply actions
you've mentioned that a couple times this week
Why do you think he’s available?
Braves fan friend of mine suggested he might be
and I read it somewhere – can’t remember where.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:06 PM CST up reply actions
only problem I have with it is
He was caught using HGH at such an early age therefore giving us no clue how he will be able to perform in the ML. There must be a reason the Braves traded for McClouth when he was virtually given the job
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
Well the Braves traded for McLouth because Schafer utterly failed in his first MLB trial.
And the HGH was supposedly bought by friends and not used by him – yes, supposedly, who knows the truth, not me.
There are definite question marks.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:11 PM CST up reply actions
Unless...
you do it while staying at a Holiday Inn Express.
by CubsWin!Oregon on Dec 8, 2009 4:42 PM CST up reply actions
Interesting...
Trading Ganderson (5.5M) and Jackson (2.2M in ’09) but keeping Ordonez (18M), Cabrera (20M), Guillen (13M), Bonderman (12.5M), Willis (12M), Robertson (10M) gives them payroll flexibility (quote from source in original post)?
No doubt they got some good young (read: cheap) players back, but they gave up some good cost-controlled players as well. Meanwhile they still have several payroll anchors on their team. Overall it was probably a good deal for them, but I wouldn’t be citing payroll flexibility as one of the benefits.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Remember that Granderson's contract balloons after this year
And a lot of those other contracts are off the books after this one. It might not give them much flexibility in 2010 per se, but it gives them quite a bit going forward, if they’re thinking about signing someone long-term.
Small Ballons
2010 5.5 M
2011 8.25 M
2012 10 M
2013 13.5 M (or 2 M club opt out)
That said. I hate the deal all around. The Yankees got the best player in the deal and gave up next to nothing to get him.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 8, 2009 4:07 PM CST up reply actions
reality is
most of their bad contracts are immovable. After this season, a lot of contracts will come off the books.
If I was
the Tigers GM I would’ve insisted the Yanks take one of their bad contracts in the deal. The Yankees made out like bandits in this deal, they probably could’ve been convinced to take on some money as well.
I will never shed a tear if Hendry gets canned, that’s for sure. From all accounts a really nice guy, but he sure has made a clusterfudge of this team.
DEJESUS!!!
How did the Yankees make out like bandits here?
They gave up some highly valued prospects for a center fielder coming off his worst season, who can’t hit left-handed pitching.
Who would you rather have, Castro or Granderson? Because that’s what Dombrowski wanted from the Cubs for Granderson. They didn’t lower their price until this trade came together.
Prospects are just that
they may never pan out. I would have traded Castro in a package for Granderson. Castro better be like Rollins, Reyes or Hanley within 3 years or passing on this trade was a huge mistake. The Diamondbacks got taken to the woodshed! I would be willing to give Chris Young of the Diamondbacks a look for a trade possibility. I know he was terrible last year but maybe a change would help him turn it around.
by Cubsfan Waveland on Dec 8, 2009 3:31 PM CST up reply actions
I think you're grossly overestimating Granderson's value
He’s good but he’s a seriously flawed player who has been trending downward recently.
I think
Granderson had a bad year last year, I wouldn’t call that trending downward recently. The Cubs have a window to win now and I think Granderson could have been a difference maker. I do think very highly of Granderson I will admit that. The Cubs will regret not making this trade.
I predict a line of .272 32hr 94rbi 108r 26sb for Granderson in a Yankees uniform in 2010.
by Cubsfan Waveland on Dec 8, 2009 4:16 PM CST up reply actions
in general
I think, as I’ve said all offseason, that Granderson’s value was inflated by a lot of people. At the end of the day, only the combination of Granderson and Jackson was able to draw the Tigers a top young guy, a guy who has some questions in his own right. that said, the Yankees really didn’t give up much.
Not many lefties just
rake against good LH pitchers. I don’t believe you put 9 righties in a lineup just because a LH pitcher is on the mound. I don’t need to media to sell me on Granderson, the Tigers are the team I have watched over the last 3 years on MLB package when the Cubs have played a day game. The Yankees just improved their team bigtime.
by Cubsfan Waveland on Dec 8, 2009 7:28 PM CST up reply actions
sooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ur saying Granderson is to CFers what Rollins, Reyes and Hanley Ramirez are to SS’s??
huhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh???????
No
I am saying Castro better be a big time player.
by Cubsfan Waveland on Dec 8, 2009 4:10 PM CST up reply actions
What The What?
Highly Valued Prospects? Phil Coke? Ian Kennedy? Austin Jackson?
Jackson is by far the best “prospect” of the bunch and he had an insanely high .392 BABIP last year and barely managed to hit .300. 44% of the times he managed to make contact, he hit a GB. 4 HRs in over 500 ABs. He’s Cameron Maybin without the power or some of the walks.
Worst case scenario, they gave up a 5th OF, a 5th starter and a long reliever. It’s horrible.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 8, 2009 4:16 PM CST up reply actions
The Yankees side
I agree with not dealing for Castro, and since we lacked a CF prospect, I understand that we couldn’t have fit in this 3-way.
That said, I think the Yankees easily made out like bandits. A 5th starter, a centerfielder with no power and a high strikeout rate who isn’t projected to be a plus defender, and a LOOGY for Granderson at that contract? Highway robbery in my book.
It is now being said
that the Cubs could take a run at Melky Cabrera who is now expendable to the Yanks.
If the Yankees acquire Granderson, sources said the Cubs could take a run at Yankees switch-hitting center fielder Melky Cabrera.
eh...I dunno about that
who would we have to give up to get him?
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
Hopefully, minor league roster filler.
Really, Cabrera isn’t that good. I’d rather have Reed Johnson.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
me 2
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
Cabrera
is a bad alternative to Cameron. I’d rather have Reed Johnson and Ankiel platooning,..
Cabrera had nearly the same wOBA and UZR as Granderson in 2009
Plus he’s a switch hitter.
Just sayin’.
UZR = basically how many runs a fielder prevents or allows
no idea what is wOBA is
This Chicago Cubs team is currently Aaron free. Keep it that way, please.
by jesus christos on Dec 8, 2009 4:12 PM CST up reply actions
hah yeah, I tend to just look at boxscore stats
you know the usual: hits, ba, so, bb, errors, 2b, and home runs
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
So in review
You posted a rude answer to the original question, then when someone tried to help, you posted a rude answer to them – neither of which was actually helpful.
Neat!
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Dec 9, 2009 7:21 AM CST up reply actions
I just saw the link and reported,
It didn’t say who we’d give up for him. I think there are better options out there. Maybe they’ll take MB haha. Could you imagine him in NY?
please no
just say no. no, no no. He’s a poor defensive centerfielder who lacks power. Give me Sam Fuld in CF over Melky anyday, particularly when you factor in we’d have to give up assets for Melky.
Granderson
I can’t understand the hand wringing over not getting Curtis Granderson. He has trended downward lately as Wreckard said and has NEVER hit lefties well. Essntially he’s a platoon player. I think Cameron on a one year deal is a better alternative than giving up Castro plus others for a platoon CF.
As for Melky Cabrera……….DO NOT WANT!!!
there's hand-wringing ...
because Granderson could have addressed the Cubs’ needs better than any other option. Cameron might be fine, Ankiel might be a high-risk guy who works out and Byrd might be OK — but none of them is a low-paid, good character, lefty-hitting player who plays a good CF.
yes, but he wasn't worth giving up our prospects for
It would have been very similar to the Juan Pierre trade, IMO
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
Oh, I'm not saying we should have traded the whole farm system for Granderson
I’m just saying that I understand the hand-wringing. Granderson (without looking at the price) was the best fit for the Cubs.
yeah he was, just too pricy, IMO
Cameron would be a better fit until we can mature more players in the minors. I would love to see somebody like Colvin thrive in Spring Training and make it in the active roster, which he very may do considering we have no bench players right now
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
it's possible
It’s hard for me to judge. The Cubs are pretty wacky when it comes to knowing what prospects to deal and when to deal them.
Yeah
Cause its not like were in any need for a championship!
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
I don't think Granderson ...
was a silver bullet for a championship.
me neither
I think he would have complimented this offfense well, but Mike Cameron might not be any different than Granderson in production
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
he might not be ...
and he might be cheaper, as good a guy in the clubhouse AND come without having to give up prospects.
OTOH, he’s right handed, which sucks, and the Cubs signing him could look like a Sabean-esque move (“Hey honey — this guy was great in 1997!”).
There is no silver bullet for a championship...
and those who think so are severely lacking in the baseball acumen department.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 8, 2009 4:11 PM CST up reply actions
I'm only pissed
that the Yankees made off like bandits. Overall, I can understand, and agree with, not dealing Starlin Castro for him and we didn’t have the CF prospect to get into that 3 way.
If only Hendry had held onto Jake Fox....he could have been the keystone player we needed to aquire Granderson.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 8, 2009 4:06 PM CST reply actions
We will all rue the day when fox breaks the alltime home run record
This Chicago Cubs team is currently Aaron free. Keep it that way, please.
by jesus christos on Dec 8, 2009 4:13 PM CST up reply actions
Even money says he chooses to go into the HOF wearing a Cubs Hat on his plaque.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 8, 2009 4:15 PM CST up reply actions
Trade Bradley for Burrell, sign Cameron
we have an above average bat in CF with decent defense and a great bat off the bench in Burrell.
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
the safe money is on this chain of events
Though I wouldn’t be surprised if Burrell doesn’t remain a Cub that long. Sullivan mentioned something today about flipping him to Toronto for prospects.
I dunno, I like the idea of using him as a bench player
Our bench is dead right now. There is not one bat on it I can trust. Hoffpauir, Colvin, Hill, that’s it right now
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
This is posted in the main thread, too.
Let’s hope it’s right.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
It's gotta be KS for Meche
what about Boston though? they need a RF…
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
They already have a oft injured RFer
This Chicago Cubs team is currently Aaron free. Keep it that way, please.
by jesus christos on Dec 8, 2009 4:19 PM CST up reply actions
Good point
possibly
This Chicago Cubs team is currently Aaron free. Keep it that way, please.
by jesus christos on Dec 8, 2009 4:28 PM CST up reply actions
TWITTER!!! AGH JUST DIE!!!
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
no way it's Seattle
I’ve heard they are trying to go after Jason Bay and htey already signed Figgins
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
they'd qualify as "a surprise"
they need offense, they’ve been aggressive. They have needs at OF/DH, have money to spend after some big contracts have come off the books. They got torn up by MB while he was with Texas
Its one of the few AL teams that hasn’t been linked in some way to Bradley and one of the few teams that has been uber aggressive in the offseason
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 4:29 PM CST up reply actions
I've always thought Seattle made sense.
And if they want to move quickly and aren’t getting positive signs from Bay or Holliday (why would a RH slugger want to go play there), then Bradley makes even more sense.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:32 PM CST up reply actions
the more i think about it
the more i think they make sense, even Jose Lopez (who i posted below about) would be an attractive option for Jim Hendry (given what Hendry tends to value)
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 4:38 PM CST up reply actions
Hey - Lopez is the guy I said and posted about in the other thread -
great minds apparently and all that… now let it be…
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:40 PM CST up reply actions
Seattle is a team I thought might be interested...
… back in September when he was sent home.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
or Jose Lopez
the Mariners hate Lopez’s defense at 2B, we could use a 2B….
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 4:38 PM CST up reply actions
Rotoworld blurb
http://www.rotoworld.com/content/home_MLB.aspx?rwr=1
According to Bob Dutton of the Kansas City Star, the Royals have interest in Felix Pie but are struggling to fit the Orioles’ needs.
Peter Schmuck of the Baltimore Sun reported earlier this week that Pie is drawing “a lot of interest” at the Winter Meetings, so the O’s may have their pick of organizations to deal with. Pie, 24, finished the ’09 season with a .266/.326/.437 batting line, nine homers and 29 RBI in 252 at-bats.
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 8, 2009 4:21 PM CST reply actions
perhaps the "surprise AL" team is Baltimore?
Bradley for Pie? most likely no..
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
Pie would be a perfect fit for us...
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 4:23 PM CST up reply actions
If Hendry has to wait to trade you know who
before he signs a CF, I am thinking Fuld MIGHT get a starting job as soon as Edmonds and Lofton turn down Hendry’s offer to come of retirement in Feb after he trades the player Al can no longer bring himself to mention to the Pirates on the day before Spring Training starts for Cedeno and agrees to pay 20 of the remaining 21 million of the contract.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
Wow, that's a scary amount of wrong information.
Funny, though.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
um satire usually contains "wrong information"
Remind what the satire font is again.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Dec 8, 2009 5:14 PM CST up reply actions
Was that one sentence?
Without a comma or any other punctuation?
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
"punctuation" ?
I don’t need no stinking punctuation.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Dec 8, 2009 5:15 PM CST up reply actions
This is why theyre the Yankees and we're the Cubs
they have the huevos to make a move like that with one of their top prospect b/c they know theyre built to win now, after all Arod and Jeter arent spring chickens.
Should we start working on Starlin Castros Hall of Fame Plaque?
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
I call shenanigans on that.
We’re joshed for never having a farm system and for never being able to develop our own, and IF there was a Curtis trade to be made, I’m going to go out on a limb and say it was because we valued our own prospects too highly to give them up. Is that a fair prediction? I appreciate that perspective, honestly. We’re an old team. We need youngsters.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
We're an old team with nothing of imminent value coming up
Vitters and Castro are a few years away from being solid major leaguers,meanwhile our own group of All-Stars is fading fast, and we wont be at this level again for probably another 7 or 8 years, perhaps longer if Ricketts is a tightwad.
Sacrificing a 19 year old SS for an all-star CF to take a shot at the crown doesnt sound like a bad idea to me at all, its not as if Granderson would have to face Sabathia, Santana or Cliff Lee on a regular basis.
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
to be fair
Austin Jackson isn’t in Starlin Castro’s category as a prospect as of now. The Yankees got lucky that Josh Byrnes somehow decided he had to deal Max Scherzer this offseason. Scherzer’s the biggest young asset in this deal.
No
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 9, 2009 4:19 PM CST up reply actions
Castro should be around #25
and Jackson was #36 in baseball america’s rankings:
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/rankings/top-100-prospects/2009/267699.html
Thanks
But Castro was nowhere to be found in that list and Jackson will be lucky to be in that list next year. Do you have any list that lists them both in the same top 50? If not, then the answer is still no.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 9, 2009 11:11 PM CST up reply actions
Castro came out of nowhere this year AFTER baseball america published their rankings
I feel pretty confident Jackson will remain in the top 50
Outstanding move by the Yankees
This is why they have 27 World Series Championships and counting. Curtis Granderson is a great addition to an already exceptional lineup card. He adds great defense and a needed infusion of athleticism too.
And they we have the Cubs chasing the tail of a 37 year old Mike Friggin Cameron who is almost as big a hack as Alfonso Soriano. And hey, we might even get Pat Burrell to DH for us !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
What are your intentions then?
how do we fix the current state of the Cubs?
Wrigley Bound in the Summer of 2010
Fire Hendry!
Then everything will be fine.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 5:55 PM CST up reply actions
dont forget
sandy alderson
This Chicago Cubs team is currently Aaron free. Keep it that way, please.
by jesus christos on Dec 8, 2009 6:03 PM CST up reply actions
He should be fired
But if our options are Pat Burrel or Mike Cameron, Id just as soon keep Milton.
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
We shouldn't fire him
before taking the opportunity to draw and quarter him. He’s evil! We should be winning the WS every year with our payroll!
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 6:53 PM CST up reply actions
Payroll doesn't equal winning.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 8, 2009 6:54 PM CST up reply actions
It would if we had any other GM than Jim Spendry
We should fire him now while Bowden is available! Or Krivsky!
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 6:57 PM CST up reply actions
Really?
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 8, 2009 6:58 PM CST up reply actions
Submitted, for your approval
Fact: Cubs have the 3rd highest payroll in baseball
Fact: Hendry swung and horribly missed on Jock Strap Jones, Alfonso Soriano, Kosuke Fukudome (the contract is assinine for what he is) and Milton Bradley.
Fact: Despite having the 3rd highest payroll in baseball, the Cubs are saddled with a joke of a situation in the middle infield.
Fact: The rotation has question marks aplenty
Fact: The bullpen has question marks aplenty
Fact: The team defense sucks…the ONLY thing reasonably noteworthy on defense is Derrek Lee
Fact: The minor league system continues to suck
Fact: Hendry changes his strategic plan for winning more times then most change their socks
Fact: JIm Hendry is an abysmal failure … GMs with 1/2 the financial resources of Hendry run circles around him all around baseball.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
But you still haven't made any positive suggestions.
Not that I expect any out of you.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Jeepers Al
What do you want me to suggest?!?! You see, thats just it…Jimbo Hendry has boxed this organization into such a corner and there are so many needs that it is enormously difficult to be optimistic. Or to come up with viable and realistic way to improve things in the immediate.
BCB has been reduced to the Milton Bradley Watch. That is just plum darn goofy. This team has a lot of needs and moving Bradley doesn’t solve a damned one of them, except of course securing a DH to bat against lefties in interleague games played on the road.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
This is a site for discussion of Cub-related issues.
Right now, getting rid of Bradley is at the forefront of moving on.
I never see you promote any moves that would improve the team, or offer positive suggestions. All you do is bitch. You can’t really enjoy being a fan of this team, can you?
Oh, and PS. If you’d been paying attention today, the trade for Burrell appears unlikely now.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Not true Al,
BLou was one of the biggest proponents of getting Harden. Remember?
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 8, 2009 7:57 PM CST up reply actions
OK, I take back "never".
How about “not in the last year and a half”?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Hmmm.
Here’s what I do. I bite the bullet and let some of these God-awful contracts unwind themselves. No, I don’t live under the delusion that I am a legitimate contender in 2010, which leads me therefore to do silly stupid expensive things like acquiring Mike Cameron.
What I do is put a front office team in place that knows how to properly scout, select and develop talent.
Patience Grasshopper. The team that lives delusionally in the present is the team that can never get itself on the proper track.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
I still don't get this idea that somehow
Mike Cameron is going to damage the Cubs future. The only thing he’ll cost is some salary space in 2010 and maybe 2011. considering we don’t have a CF lined up, unless the Cubs give Sam fuld a look, I don’t see what the harm is.
Has it occured to you that the Cubs are doing exactly what you are asking them to do? A Mike Cameron move is aimed at not throwing prospects away in some sort of ill-fated trade. It’s a short term stopgap move so that our improving system can get better, and so we don’t have to rush anyone. Essentially, it’s preaching the patience you are suggesting.
I’ll be honest, I don’t care about Mike Cameron. I would rather see Sam Fuld start in CF than waste that money. That said, I still don’t see the negative that you seem to be suggesting
why sign Grabow then?
instead of pumping more money into development when there are a boatload of relievers that can perform at his level or just below
i’m not saying i don’t agree with you, but i think the team is trying to feign “world series contender” again to appease the masses
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 6:30 AM CST up reply actions
Why
Do you assume it’s a zero sum game with the two?
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 9, 2009 4:20 PM CST up reply actions
How disappointing.
If you actually believe what you’re spouting – that the Cubs have no chance in a very soft NL Central (which will remain soft until the Cardinals prove otherwise this offseason) – then standing pat isn’t the right move at all. If we have no chance then Jim should explain this to Lee and Lilly and ask them which teams they will accept trades to. We should also be selling high on Theriot, Marshall, etc. for what they can return even if it be not much.
But this isn’t the NL East where 4 teams are legitimate contenders for a playoff spot. We are in a curious position of having one of the better farm systems in the division – one that is much better than our two closest payroll rivals – but of also having a roster which is imperfect but also one of the two best in the NL Central at this point in the off-season.
If our playoff system was different and you had to be a top 5 team to win the World Series, then your case would be stronger. But imperfect teams win the World Series every other year. And in the Cubs’ situation, just getting to the WS would provide a lot of cash to improve future teams anyway.
So, this is a situation where a Moises Alou makes sense – only in this case we need a CF. And if we look like a .500 team at the ASB, you can still talk to Lilly and Lee then. But if everyone else looks like a .500 team or worse, then you go for it again.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 8:35 PM CST up reply actions
If you can say with a straight face that this Cub team is a tweak or two away from legitimate contention...
…then I just don’t know what to say. It is the eternal optimist of certain Cub fans that disallows them the ability to see things objectively. There is little about this team that puts them even close to par with the best teams in baseball. There are challenges and issues offensively, defensively, in the rotation and in the pen. Too many challenges and issues smacked up against a payroll cap and a farm system that is still not in a position to shower us with a Gordon Beckman or anything remotely approaching quality.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
I didn't say we're one of the best 5 teams in baseball
I said the NL Central is soft and the playoffs are a crap shoot. If we don’t hurt our farm development (as we did in the first year of Lou’s tenure) but if we patch with veterans on short contracts – what harm have we done?
Meanwhile, if you really think we have no shot at the NL Central crown, then why in the world do you suggest standing pat?
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 8:43 PM CST up reply actions
i understand what you're saying
but that flawed logic is what’s gotten us here in the first place
trying to be “good enough” to win a crap division isn’t a team contending for a world series
a business plan of “trying to get lucky in a crapshoot playoffs” isn’t what i’m looking for
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 6:31 AM CST up reply actions
Well we were the best team in the NL two years ago
and that got us nowhere in the playoffs. This isn’t flawed logic. It is what it is. The last NL Central team to win the WS was more flawed than good.
And people are stil whining in this very fanpost about Hendry taking the best team in the NL and doing things you’ve asked for – rebuilding the farm system by trading DeRosa and giving a young player who had looked promising a shot by playing Fontenot.
The thing is – when you have a window to win, you go for it. You don’t sit there and say, “Well our players are in their early-mid thirties and I envisioned a team winning when all the players were 29, so I’m not going to take the shot.”
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 9, 2009 7:51 AM CST up reply actions
2 years ago
we were the best team in the NL, this is correct. We were also a team loaded with players in the middle or towards the end of their peak years, most of our team was between the ages of 29-32, largely considered the back-end of peak performance
Lee – 32
Ramirez – 30
Soriano – 32
Fukudome – 31
Dempster – 31
Lilly – 32
Marquis – 29
Fontenot, Theriot were 28, Zambrano 27 but had the mileage of a pitcher in his late 20’s thanks to making the majors at a young age and being a workhorse through his early 20’s
2 years while short in life, is a significant amount of time in an athletes lifespan, in most cases it represents say 20% of their career.
In those 2 years most of our players have moved beyond the period of traditional career peaks. Not so surprisingly last year the team fell off either because of age, bad luck, injury, whatever you will. The point is the team fell off significantly and its likely that “some” of the reason for fall-off in health or performance is age-related.
Thus, assuming a significant spike back in health or performance is in some ways defying logic of traditional career paths. Could it happen? Sure. Would I bet on it happening? No… there’ s a long history of player career arcs that would suggest things are more likely to get worse in terms of health/performance than better.
Now you bring up the contradictory stance on the last two offseasons, which I can see how you feel posters like myself are being contradictory when assessing the two offseasons.
Last offseason I wanted us to stand pat coming off the 2008 season in which we were the best in the NL. In my opinion last season was the season to take the shot. There was less chance of a drop-off in production/health because it was only 1 year removed (now we’re 2) and the team was the best in the NL in the regular season
Instead we chose to make wholesale changes not to “rebuild” as you suggest but to clear room for Milton Bradley. (Let’s be honest Hendry’s trade of DeRosa had nothing to do with rebuilding and everything to do with signing MB. If we were really “rebuilding” why trade Pie away to sign MB? Don’t make it sound as if last offseason efforts were made to rebuild, they weren’t.)
This year we’re 2 years removed and already saw some deterioration in skill/health from the core of players. In addition while the system has improved its not ready to produce major league equivalent fill-ins to provide the depth needed to support the likely issues with health. We don’t have the SP depth at the minor league level yet (maybe we will by midseason) or depth at the position player level to fill in right now when guys go down.
That’s the difference between this year and last. Last offseason we had the depth in the rotation, we had the young players who could fill in or take the roster spot (Pie, Fox, Cedeno) if needed. Last year we were just 1 year removed from likely player peaks, this year we’re 2. It may seem like a big difference but in an athletes’ career its significant.
I’m not saying we don’t compete for the division, I’m saying why spend unnecessary money for negligible improvements to feign competitiveness. Signing John Grabow made us no better than we were before. We have ample depth in the bullpen that could easily replace him for a fraction of the cost.
Signing Mike Cameron to a 1 year deal on the other hand, i’d agree with since we don’t have the immediate depth that can handle that position in house because we were stupid enough to trade it away last offseason when you suggest Hendry was working to rebuild the farm
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 9:08 AM CST up reply actions
I had a longer response
but I accidentally hit back and lost it. Argh.
The main point is that I think you are missing the trees for the forest, talking about what is likely in general while not paying attention to the actual players on the Cubs. We had a lot of players under-perform their projections based on possible BABIP-luck and injuries that should be fixed. Plus the team isn’t 35 – decline doesn’t often happen in cliff-jumping style in the early thirties to players in good physical shape – which was my point on DLee the whole first month of last year.
Second, you know that the situations with Pie, Fontenot, and DeRosa defy a simplistic narrative of either “go young and rebuild” or “win with veterans.” Lou believed in Fontenot and did not believe in Pie. We gave a younger player a chance in one situation and cut bait in another for that player to get a chance. We could have kept Pie as a backup, but Hendry didn’t believe that was fair to Pie. You can argue that a GM doesn’t have the luxury to be nice and has to treat every player like an asset. I appreciate the honest, generous side of Jim Hendry.
Is he traded yet?
ok
on point 1.
“We had a lot of players under-perform their projections based on possible BABIP-luck and injuries that should be fixed.”
Injuries are a part of the aging process, as players get older they become more injury prone. Factoring in better health for players into their 30’s is silly especially when we didn’t have freak season-ending injuries all the injuries suffered by Cubs players last year were of the nagging variety. These aren’t going away.
On the luck side, lets break it down by individuals and see what kind of regression we can expect:
Soto – .246 (agree very likely to improve)
Lee – .333 (unlikely to change, though at 34, power shouldn’t be expected to maintain, likely slight decline)
Fontenot – .281 (slight regression upwards but is playing time increased or has he earned a reserve role?)
Theriot – .327
Ramirez – .331
Soriano – .280 (slight regression upwards)
Fukudome – .314
BRadley – .311
so basically we’re expecting regression from just 3 players (Soto, Soriano, Fontenot).
One of those players isn’t guaranteed an everyday role (Fontenot). Soriano though likely to receive a boost in luck also showed significant erosion in skill as his K Rate jumped a full 2% and his XBH Rate dropped nearly 3%. He’s going on 34 and reports suggest he could be 2 years older than that. Any regression in luck may be mitigated by further negative regression in skills
Soto’s really the only guy I agree we’ll see a significant bounce back from. Is that enough to compensate for the losses we’ve seen since the 2008 team was the best in the NL?
Since 2008:
- lost effectiveness of Marmol
- lost versatility/production of DeRosa
- loss of bullpen depth with Wood
- loss of starting rotation depth Harden
And when assessing luck why not talk about the pitchers?
Actual ERA vs. FIP
Dempster 3.64 vs. 3.87
Lilly 3.10 vs. 3.98
Wells 3.05 vs. 3.88
Grabow 3.36 vs.4.20
why are we conveniently leaving all the good luck we had on the pitching side out of the mix?
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 10:18 AM CST up reply actions
A few things
I only talked about the luck of the hitters because you were talking about the hitters.
Soriano’s age – where are you hearing that? He’s already had his age adjusted once post 9/11.
Soriano was injured all last season. He should bounce back.
Fontenot will have a chance to win playing time, I believe, even if we get Castillo. Lou likes him and he’s LH on a team w/o LH players.
Fukudome should be more valuable, I believe, by limiting him to RF and a platoon role.
And a lot of this is a compound effect. The Cubs 2008 offense had no easy outs. The Cubs 2009 offense often had a third to half of the lineup as easy outs. And despite this, the
Cubs had a winning record in 2009! To post a winning record despite the misery of our offense…
Is he traded yet?
largely
because of the luck of the pitching…
look we won 83 games… we’re losing more pieces than we’re gaining (Harden, Bradley, etc).
Even counting on a significant rebound in performance from essentially two guys, you think it’s 7-10 wins worth? That seems steep given the lack of SP depth, lost pieces, aging roster, and limited flexibility to make improvements
I wish it weren’t the case but it is. I think you’re drinking the kool-aid if you think the Cubs can magically turn into a 90 win team
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 10:49 AM CST up reply actions
Would you have said that in December 2007?
That team “magically” turned from an 85-win team into a 97-win team without really adding too many parts.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
good question
I’d probably have said I wouldn’t bet on it but i could see signs for hope. We only won 85 but were an 87 win team on paper. To jump 3-4 wins to get to the 90’s wouldn’t have been a massive jump given the young players we had ready to potentially fill in
At the time we had Felix Pie ready to step in and contribute at CF, I thought he could be a significant upgrade. Soto looked interesting in his 2007 call-up but I wouldn’t have banked on his breakout 2008.
I guess I might have seen 90, but no not 97
The big areas of improvement in 2008 came from Soto’s breakout, the resurgence of Jim Edmonds off the scrap heap, the career turn around of Ryan Dempster and nearly every bench player having career years
2008 was largely a lot of good fortune. We didn’t have significant injuries, no one in the rotation ever went down. We caught career years from Dempster, DeRosa, the entire bench, etc
But to answer your question, no I probably wouldn’t have predicted that in December of 2007. That said looking at the last few seasons, 2008 looks like an aberration and if you just look at what happened in that season and all the good luck that we had its easy to say it was an aberration
2007 – 85 wins
2008 – 97 wins
2009 – 83 wins
but as i said before comparing the 2010 Cubs to the 2008 Cubs is silly. Not only are we 2 years advanced in the age cycle for our stars but we’ve lost the following players:
Jim Edmonds
Mark DeRosa
Rich Harden
Kerry Wood
Jason Marquis
Michael Wuertz
and we’re unlikely to see repeats of the 2008 production from:
Mike Fontenot
Carlos Marmol
Ryan Dempster
Its just not an apt comparison
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 11:06 AM CST up reply actions
All correct, which is why...
… you can’t assume a 7-game improvement can’t happen, even with minimal moves.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
i'm just playing probabilities here
….
i dont think you can expect it to happen either
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 12:51 PM CST up reply actions
I haven't said we were going to be a 90 win team
I’ve said the NL Central is soft and you don’t have to be a 90 win team to win the WS.
It wasn’t all lucky pitching last year. We have talented pitchers who project well.
Is he traded yet?
who are the talented pitchers who project
better than what they performed last season????
who?
all of the projections i’ve seen would show a decline for Wells and Lilly and we’ve lost Harden. That’s 60% of our rotation!
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 11:08 AM CST up reply actions
I didn't say they'd perform better than last season.
I said they’d perform well.
Z-Lilly-Dempster is a solid front three.
Wells-Gorz-Marshall are a solid back three.
And we’re talking about adding another arm – I like Jim’s odds of picking someone up who will surprise. He does well at that sort of thing.
Is he traded yet?
sigh
but if they’re not BETTER than last year how is the team going to get better this year…
if they’re not improving and we can’t find an equivalent to Harden, how are we going to get better?
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 11:19 AM CST up reply actions
This team is going to get better
by fielding an offense that doesn’t make easy outs every other batter in the lineup.
Is he traded yet?
who are the non-easy outs coming in?
we have all the same pieces offensively. Soriano had 520+ PA’s last year, Soto was the everyday C, Bradley is on his way out and being replaced by who knows?
If you’re recognizing the pitching isn’t likely to improve you’re expecting a heck of a lot from the hitting with no actual personnel changes and all a year older and past their primes to improve and net the 3-5 win improvement the team needs to be a division title winner
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 11:23 AM CST up reply actions
Look at the roster
For the first month, DLee was an easy out. Then Dome, then Riot, and on it went, so that the Cubs never had the lineup running on even the majority of its cylinders. It’ a compound effect I say and say again!
Platooning Dome should help him a lot. The health should be better in at least half of Rami, Soto, Sori, and Lee. We can stomach 2 of 8 lineup spots hurting. But having 4 of 8 plus a pitcher kills run creation.
Is he traded yet?
also for what its worth
list of world series winners who won less than 90 games:
2006 – St Louis Cardinals (83 wins)
2000- NY Yankees (87 wins)
1987 – Twins (87 wins)
1959 – Dodgers (89 wins)
1945 – Tigers (88 wins)
1926 – Cardinals (89 wins)
In the last 83 years its happened SIX times.
There’s a 93% chance based on history that if you don’t win 90 you’re not winning the title. Planning to be a world series contender but not win 90 games is ridiculous
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 11:11 AM CST up reply actions
Fun with numbers.
Yes, in the last 83 years it’s happened six times.
In the last ten years it’s happened twice.
So does that mean the chances have gone up to 20% based on RECENT history? Remember, there are now eight postseason qualifiers instead of two, so the chances of getting into the postseason are much higher now than they were before 1969.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
ok...
in the wild card era there have been 2 teams in 15 years… 13% chance based on that sample
I don’t think its unreasonable to suggest that sculpting a team with the goal of winning a crappy division at 84-87 wins is not the same as sculpting a world series contender
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 12:53 PM CST up reply actions
13%
That’s like 1 in 8, isn’t it?
Huh.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 9, 2009 4:02 PM CST up reply actions
so no, based on what i discuss below,
the odds of a sub-90 Cub team winning the WS is more on the order of say 1 in 20
kind of backwards math
i realize i started the backwards math, but no a sub-90 win team doesn’t have a 1 in 8 chance of winning the world series, they have far worse
if you take all the teams that finish from say 82 (winning season) to 89 wins in the last 15 years and figure out how many won the world series, the percentage drops down to well below 3-4%
we’re judging the end result and then assessing a percentage to it which is backwards
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 10, 2009 10:26 AM CST up reply actions
So, it's 1 in 8 in the wild card era
and we need to watch Selig’s replacement carefully to make sure the WC isn’t nixed. I’m ok with that qualifier.
Is he traded yet?
no... its not 1 in 8...
the math is far worse
number of teams that have won 82-89 games since 1994
2009: 9
2008: 10
2007: 10
2006: 8
2005: 7
2004: 6
2003: 10
2002: 2
2001: 8
2000: 8
1999: 3
1998: 8
1997: 6
1996: 8
1995: strike-shortened
1994: strike shortened
so there have been 2 world series champions out of 103 teams that have won between 82 and 89 games, that’s a 1.9% chance
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 10, 2009 8:52 PM CST up reply actions
Goodness sakes
you’re a generally smart person and yet doing everything you can to avoid the point!
The point is that the NL Central looks soft. Once we get into the playoffs, it doesn’t matter how many games we won. If it will only take 86 to win the NL Central and we’re an 84 win team, you don’t sell your vets in the pre-season. You do prepare to sell off at mid-season, but a few short-term vets are the way to go.
Is he traded yet?
and...
you’re missing the point the playoffs are not as much of a crapshoot as you’re suggesting an 84-86 win team getting in doesn’t have a 1-in-8 chance at winning the world series….
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 10, 2009 9:42 PM CST up reply actions
Answer this.
Let’s say Albert Pujols, Lance Berkman, Joey Vott, and Prince Fielder are all falsely convicted of some strange crime and banned from baseball for 2010. Would that change your off-season plan or not?
Is he traded yet?
seriously?
you want me to respond to this?
1) its absolutely ludicrous
2) NO, it wouldn’t. As I continnue to say I don’t care much about how we stand relative to just the NL Central. If our division was a AAA division and we have the best AAA team in the majors we’re not going to win the world series.
We have to build a team that isn’t just the best in a bad division. We have to work towards building a team that can be the best in all of baseball. That’s going to give us our best chance of winning a world series
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 12, 2009 9:08 AM CST up reply actions
OK, how many teams with fewer than 90 wins have gotten into the World Series?
Something the Cubs haven’t done in my lifetime.
postseason history
http://www.baseball-reference.com/postseason/
4 in the wildcard era
4 in the last 20 years
12 in the history of baseball (not counting strike-shortened seasons)
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 12, 2009 3:28 PM CST up reply actions
Wins are not a very good indicator of team strength...
given the disparity between the AL and NL over the last decade. I looked at espn’s RPI (which accounts for strength of schedule) and found a that there is little variance among WS winning teams. Basically, if you have an RPI around 0.525, you have a very good chance of winning to all. Guess what the Cubs’ RPI was in 2008? 0.525. What you can take from this is that the Cubs will probably need to be a 97-win team in the NL Central (again) to be real WS contenders. Not all wins have the same value in this era of baseball.
It's difficult to make reasonable positive suggestions at this point.
Hendry has completely painted the organization into a corner. I don’t know why you’d prefer that he keep holding on to the paintbrush for another year.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
"Fact"
“You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 8, 2009 7:47 PM CST up reply actions
Challenges on
a) I actually don’t think much of Fukudome and would love to clear the contract. That said, since you are claiming fact …
In the first two years of his deal, Fukudome has cost a 19.5 million. He has been worth 18.3 million. A fair case can be made that, if he had been in RF this past year, the overall value of the two years might have balanced out. The remaining 2 years is pretty bad, I’ll grant you that, but there’s actually a decent chance that, Fukudome, at the end of the contract, will have been worth close to what he was paid. Even if he’s worth a little less, it’s hardly in the asinine category. Not good? Sure. Bad? Perhaps. Asinine? I hardly think that can be claimed as a fact.
b) The middle infield situation – Ryan Theriot, who I would love to move to the bench at some point in the near future, has been worth a combined 5.9 WAR in the last 2 years, at a total value of around 26.8 million dollars. Even the most pessimistic scenario would probably put him at around 2-2.5 WAR for 2010. He’ll probably end up close to 3 WAR again. Unless you think Jeff Baker is negative value, I don’t see how this is a joke of a middle infield. Again, I’d love to see a better shortstop, but a joke?
c) The minor league system – As recent commentary has shown from very knowledgeable sources, the minor league system is in the middle of the pack.
The minor league system was top 10 ranked a few years ago too
SO what precisely is your point? I could care less what a bunch of Rob Neyer and Dayn Perry types think in terms of the rating of our farm system. Its about the RESULTS that show up in a major league uniform.
The middle infield? A team with the luxury of a $140 million payroll had better damned not have a middle infield situation that you expect to see in a place like Kansas City or Pittsburgh.
Kosuke Fukudome is massively overpaid for what he is, yet somehow he is the best outfielder signing of all Hendry’s woeful outfield signings. But point is players of Fukudome’s skill set are a dime a dozen and readily available at much cheaper going rates.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
re
a) What did Rob Neyer and Dayn Perry write about system?
b) On the minor leagues, your point is that the minor league system was bad the last few years (think about your argument … it’s about the results … which means that your argument isn’t a comment about the system right now, but about the system before). So … what precisely is your reply to my comment about the system right now?
c) Again, your exact words is a joke of an infield. My point was that you are essentially going to have an middle infield that is worth around 5+ War. How exactly is that a joke?
d) Again, as I showed, calling his contract asinine and massively overpaid belies the facts. I’m not claiming it’s a good deal. I’m claiming that your assertion of fact has not been proven.
Toons
You’d have better debate with the vines on the outfield wall.
BLowhard will just ignore everything that contradicts his insane arguments and misinterpret anything else you say.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 8, 2009 9:42 PM CST up reply actions
Seriously, though, isn't that the first step?
No one can deny that Hendry has been exceptionally poor at handling the Cubs’ resources. The Cubs need a change at the top.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Dec 8, 2009 9:47 PM CST up reply actions
Yes We Can
And no Hendry hasn’t.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 8, 2009 10:23 PM CST up reply actions
Reasonable people can and do.
Your argument is that 138 M should buy a championship. Well, since the Cubs upped their payroll, they’ve been in the playoffs 2/3 years and would have competed for 3/3 had 4/8 of the lineup not been injured. Basically, the only way to take your argument seriously is to believe part of that 138 M should have bought bionic arms and legs to keep players from being injured.
Is he traded yet?
I think 138 million should buy a division title
Unless you’re in the AL East, where it should buy a playoff appearance. Anything less (for a few seasons) usually leads to the soup line. So I commend you, Mr. Hendry, for doing an adequate job.
But that’s not the end goal, of course. The end goal is the World Series. A pennant would be nice too. Or a playoff win. It seems like the teams who do those things get real contributions from their farm system more than every six years. And not just middle relievers, bench players, or subpar middle infielders.
So, a high payroll and a productive farm system lead to pennants (once a decade, at least). If it doesn’t, the GM usually gets fired. Jim Hendry is only responsible for one of those. And it’s the one the Cubs have been failing at.
Does that mean I think Jim should be fired this second? No. But this season, to me at least, is his last chance to prove he’s the right guy for the job.
So, let's say that Hendry's team
goes .520 after struggling through a season-ending injury to Zambrano, Lilly never getting back together, Marmol’s arm falling off, and Theriot having back troubles which he refuses to go to the DL for, but leads-off all season with a .315 OBP.
Now Hendy has gone 2/4 since having the big payroll advantage. So you fire him. You don’t just fire him, you hang him in effigy outside of Wrigley and declare it Guy Hendry day so all of Chicago can rejoice in the not-so-faux bloodlust we’ve been privileged to see here on BCB for so long.
Now who do you hire who will do better than have a winning team four seasons in a row despite massive injuries and two playoff berths?
You can have a 400 M budget and still not make the playoffs when half your starting lineup are riddled by injuries.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 9, 2009 7:57 AM CST up reply actions
You keep bringing up this question of "who could do better?"
As though there’s this long list of assistant GM’s on baseball reference or fangraphs whose stats I can look up.
Who could do better? Someone who could build a farm system. Someone who doesn’t have to over rely on free agency.
Jim Hendry is building a farm system
one that is considered by some to be the best in the NL Central. Yes, there have been mistakes in the past, but we have a GM who adapts and learns and that is valuable. Meanwhile assistant GMs from smart organizations are looking incompetent right now in KC and AZ.
Is he traded yet?
c'mon DGU
you keep comparing the Cubs just to this division and its a silly comparison. The rest of the division is terrible too.
Setting the bar that low – to just be better than some of the worst teams in baseball – isn’t what a team striving to win a championship should be doing
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 11:14 AM CST up reply actions
1 in 8 chance.
I want to strive to get to a more solid team, but I’m not going to throw away a 1-8 chance because my principles are against giving John Grabow 7 M.
This is absurd. What division do you think we are in? “The rest of the division is terrible too” That’s my point exactly! If we’re not going to make moves that hurt our long-term advantage with our farm system, then why not sign veterans to one and two year deals?
Is he traded yet?
because the 1 and 2 year deals have effects
the money used on them could be dumped into development/scouting/draft
the roster spots they take up could delay other younger talent from coming in
the inability to use that money to pay others to take our bad contracts can also hurt our chances at roster flexibility down the line
the money matters
i agree with you if its spent well and spent on improving our chances, but if its spent on completely replaceable assets (like Grabow) then its not improving our chances at all AND its throwing away money
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 11:25 AM CST up reply actions
Again
You’re assuming that those are zero sum games. You don’t know what the budgets are for any of those. You can’t know. Why do you constantly assume that one takes away from the other? There has been no proof of that whatsoever.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 9, 2009 4:32 PM CST up reply actions
why wouldn't they
it would be completely illogical for an organization to not have flexible budgeting
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 9, 2009 9:06 PM CST up reply actions
Why Ask Why
Why would they? Do you know his budget for payroll? Do you know his budget for development/scouting/draft? If you don’t have that information, then you can’t say one way or the other. How do you know that the latter budget isn’t 50 million dollars? I don’t think we’ll know the answer until a couple of years from now. Why do you assume Ricketts will be such a cheapskate as to shortchange scouting/draft/development? All indications point otherwise thus far.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Dec 9, 2009 11:24 PM CST up reply actions
because i'm being logical
Organizations have fluid budgets based on revenues, costs, etc
It would make very logical sense that if you spend less in one area it allows you the opportunity to either dedicate more resources to another or pocket the savings.
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 10, 2009 10:30 AM CST up reply actions
With that amount of payroll our goal should never be to win a division title, it should be to win the series. Obviously the division is a step towards that, but it does us no good comparing ourselves against the weak teams in our division.
One baseball game, he came to the plate and heard a woman in the crowd shout to the pitcher, "I'll make you a chocolate cake if you strike out that 'so-and-so'!" Says Strong: "I hit that ball out of the park. Then I looked at her like, 'Do I get a cake now?' "
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
- Shane Victorino lands role on ‘Hawaii Five-0′
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
