An Open Letter to Kevin Goldstein
by CalCalender on Jan 13, 2010 6:02 PM CST
Email
PrintThis diary will take a look at Goldstein and the increasing popular notion that the Cubs are filled with HORRIBLE CONTRACTS! that will cripple the team for the next 1,000 years.
Dear Kevin,
I was crusin' through the internets yesterday when I happened to come across your article on BP. Now this isn't the first time you have criticised all things Cub, the last few months have seen you snort at Starlin Castro and generally take every possible contrarian /debbie downer position available on the team. However, yesterday's piece of "journalism" was perhaps the sorriest yet. The themes found in your arguments are ones that have sadly become more popular after the soul crushing season that was 2008. So I figured I would take a look at some of your arguments and see if we can shed a bit more truth on the state of our payroll & whether or not some of our larger contracts are truly bad ones.
My first beef with this article is the sensational line of "Do the Cubs have the worst contract situation in MLB History?". This is so effin absurd that it deserves its own article but I know there are a few (albeit LOUD) posters here who seem to believe this. They can think what they want but I intend to use fact and math instead of hyperbole and hubris to show how full of it those people are. Unlike Goldstein who uses BP's VORP to valuate players (or in the case of Soriano just a slash line) I will use fangraphs WAR stat because it provides a monetary valuation to a players performance. Goldstein lists 8 contracts that to him are the reason we have the worst payroll situation in MLB history. Lets take a look at them
# 8 Carlos Silva-
Current Contract- 2010 salary:* $11.5 million
*Further commitment:* $11.5 million in 2011, $2 million buyout in 2012
Well, this one is a decent point- Silva sucks but keep in mind we didn't give this guy a bucket of money, the former Seattle GM did. Now, Hendry critics have a good point in saying that Silva is the consequence of signing Bradley to a 3 yr 30 million dollar deal. Problem with that argument is that Bradley is worth 30 million over 3 years based on production. Even in a down year like last year Bradley was worth 1 WAR or 4.7 million. But Hendry signed Bradley after a 2008 season that saw him post a 4.5 WAR season worth 20 million dollars. The year before that Bradley was worth 10 million, the year before that you guessed it- 10 million. So even if Milton never hit like he did in 2008 he still would have been worth his deal or just under it. Unfortunately the off field issues forced the Cubs to dump him for Silva and a 6 million dollar discount on his remaining contract. Silva and the $ owed to him isn't ideal but it isn't a franchise killer considering the Cubs got money for something they would have had to cut and used that money to sign Marlon Byrd.
# 7- Ted Lilly-
Current Contract- 2010 contract:* $12 million *Further commitment:* None
This is a head scratcher considering that the Ted Lilly deal is one of the greatest FA pitcher contracts signed in the last 10 years. Back in 2006 when Hendry inked Ted everyone and I mean everyone roasted him for it. 10 million a year for a middling talent was the battle cry and Ted Lilly and his contract became a symbol of the bloated excess of baseball. 3 years later in into the Ted Lilly deal I believe it should considered a shining example to the Hendry haters that Momma Hendry's boy is no fool. Hendry has collected 43.5 millon dollars of value and paid out 28 million dollars. 24 of that was in salary and 4 the signing bonus Lilly received. Think about this for a moment, Hendry has already had that deal pay for itself and Lilly still has a year of basically bonus value. Plus Lilly gave us almost 200 inning's every year and was a fantastic pitcher during 2 division title teams. PLUS this was a free agent pitcher. Those contracts are always deals that come back to haunt GM's. For comparison sake the amazing St. Louis organization and its pitching Archmage Dave Duncan signed off on Kyle Lohse getting almost the exact same deal after the 2008 season. Last year they paid Lohse 7.125 million dollars and got back 3.7 million in value. That isn't a good start and they still owe the guy over 30 million dollars. This just goes to show that free agent contacts to pitchers are the ones that kill GM's and Hendry gave us an absolute gem of a deal with Lilly. Just goes to show that not all big money contacts hurt teams, sometimes you pay big money for big value.
# 6- Derrek Lee-
Current Contract- *2010 salary:* $13 million *Further commitment:* None
Another weird way for Goldstein to make his worst contract situation ever case considering Lee provides great value and this contact like Lilly's comes off the books next year giving Ricketts an additional 25 million to spend. Goldstein even admits that Lee has been "Worth every penny". Ladies and Gentlemen, the new Baseball Prospectus- Where they make crazy statements and then disprove themselves in their own article. FWIW a quick glance at Fangraphs shows that Lee has outperformed his contact every year other than the one he was injured. So another win for Hendry.
# 5- Ryan Dempster-
Current Contract- 2010 salary:* $12.5 million *Further commitment:* $13.5 million in 2011, $14 million player option for 2012
There seems to be some weird animosity towards the deal that Dempster got after the 2008 season. "He won't repeat his 08 season again!" was the general gripe to which I counter- He isn't getting paid to pitch like he did in 2008. He is getting paid to pitch like an above average starter and that's exactly what he has done. Dempster was worth 22.7 million dollars in 2008 and we signed him to a deal averaging 13 million a year. Last year he indeed wasn't as good as 2008 but he was still a very good pitcher worth 16.4 millon dollars. We paid him 8. So even as the back loaded contact increases in the next few years as long as Dempster is the in neighborhood of last season or even slightly worse the deal isn't a bad one. This is the 2nd FA pitcher contract that Hendry has extracted excellent value from so far and I can't stress enough how hard that is to do. So when hacks like Goldstein rant about how the Cubs "can't move these big contracts" ask yourself this- Why? Ryan Dempster is worth more than that contract and other GM's with a lot more resources than "Cal Calender" know that. So it would figure that a GM looking to trade for a good pitcher would probably not be scared off by Ryan Dempster. Baseball is like anything else in life, if you want value you pay for it and teams wanting Dempster would pay for his valuable pitching.
# 4 - Kosuke Fukudome-
Current Contract- OF* *2010 salary:* $13 million *Further commitment:* $13.5 million for 2011
Kosuke is another guy who gets an unfair rap. One of the major problems is that the media & the Cubs hyped him as being a "middle of the order bat" and people got visions of 25 HR's and 100 RBI's and all that. Well he isn't that kind of player but that doesn't mean he is without value. He is a LH bat that posts a solid OBP and at least in RF was a very good defender. So far he has been worth 18.4 million and been paid 17.5 million. Last year he was worth just under what we paid him and this year and next year we will be increasing his salary by 2 million. So we can expect that Fukudome will be not be worth the monetary value of his deal but it won't be off by a major amount. Despite what you hear Fukudome isn't a worthless player, he may not be the kind of player we thought we were getting but he provides value in other ways. Another thing to keep in mind is that the Cubs were in a major bidding war with San Diego and the White Sox so they weren't alone in seeing a ML starter in Fukudome.
# 3- Aramis Ramirez
2010: salary:* $15.75 million
*Further commitment:* $14.6 million player option for 2011, $16 million team option for 2012
Now this one just pisses me off. Goldstein justifies this by saying "Ramirez is worth every penny when he is healthy, yet he's averaged less than 130 games a year over the past five seasons, including just 82 last year." Using last year as some kind of example of Ramirez's fragility is to be frank bullshit. The guy injured his non throwing shoulder in a freak accident. It happens. From 2004-2008 Aramis had appeared in 87 % of possible games as a Cub. He isn't made of glass and never has been. Plus even playing 87 % of the time the guy provided more value than what we are paying him him. Starting to see a pattern here? Another huge problem with Goldstein's line of reason is this- Aramis Ramirez is going to opt out of his contract after this season. So like Lee and Lilly his salary is not going to be on the books after this year. The Cubs are going to have a boatload of money to spend people unless Ricketts gets stingy.
# 2- Big Z
Current Contract- *2010 salary:* $17.875 million *Further commitment:* $35.875 million for 2011-12 with a vesting option for 2013 that will be difficult to reach.
Here is Goldstein's take on Z- Zambrano is paid like an ace, but hasn't pitched like one for the past two years, as he is usually beset by minor dings here and there, with the annual emotional blowup now becoming downright predictable. Like Soriano, he is good, but that doesn't mean he's not overpaid. I take issue with the following-
Zambrano is paid like an ace, but hasn't pitched like one for the past two years -
A- One man's definition of an "ace" and what they should be paid is different than somebody else's. This is a moving goalpost type of argument and a lazy one at that. Worf and others have long used the "Z isn't a shut down ace" argument against him but the bottom line is that the guy is a very good pitcher every single year and was worth over 16 million last year. So we overpaid by a million bucks. Folks, we are a large market team we can afford to do that. F%#K labels like "ace" or people who keep saying Z won't "figure it out" the bottom line is Carlos Zambrano is what he is, a good pitcher. He isn't going to magically turn into a Zen like control master, he may never win 20 games or a Cy Young. He doesn't need to. All he needs to do is keep turning out season like last year's to be worth it to the Cubs. Also, keep in mind that the value I showed above was only his pitching value. It doesn't take into account the production he provides at the plate compared with other pitchers. He is the exact kind of pitcher larger market teams pay to have. You pay a value to secure reliable above average starting pitching.
# 1 - Soriano
Current Contract- 2010 salary:* $18 million 2011-2014 18 mill annually
Well to be frank this isn't a good contract and my defense won't be based on production. Last year Soriano was a sunk cost at 17 million dollars. He was insanely valuable to us in 2007 and was only slightly overpaid in 2008 but if 2009 is the Soriano we have from here on out then this is a very very bad contract. Now, I don't think Soriano will be as bad as he was last year at least in the near future but it's doubtful he will ever be worth what we pay him for going forward. So the anti Hendry camp have a point when they use Soriano as an example of Jim's mistakes. However, nothing happens in a vacuum and you have to remember the situation the club was in after 06. Take the anger and general discontent that is here now and multiply it. 2006 was a travesty and fans were staying away from the park towards the end of the year. Ownership woke up to the fact that even Cub fans weren't going to tolerate a 2nd tier team anymore and they made a huge statement by signing the biggest FA available for the first time since I have been a Cub fan. Everyone knew this contract would eventually be a bad deal for the team but after a year like 06 we were willing to go for the short term and Soriano helped us. He was perhaps the most valuable Cub in 2007 and a major contributor in 08. He helped give us back to back titles for the first time in a long time and we shouldn't throw that away simply because we didn't get it done int he postseason, because without him there never would have been a postseason. Not only did he help on on the field but by the Cubs landing Soriano right away in the 2006 off season we made a statement to other players that the team was going to try and win right now. Getting Soriano probably helped land Lilly and get Aramis to re-sign. As I have show both of those contracts have provided major value to the team as well. Injuries have already started to ravage him and the next 5 seasons could be hard to watch but 1 bad contract doesn't mean Hendry is a bad GM. In fact by my count of the 8 guys listed here 2 are poor contracts (Soriano, Silva) 2 are providing the production that we pay for (Z and Fukudome) and 4 are fantastic deals for the Cubs (Lilly, Aramis, Lee and Dempster).
So to recap Goldstein's assertion that this might be the worst contract situation in history is probably the stupidest thing ever written about baseball in history ; ) especially when you consider that 3 of the guys mentioned have deals the end after this year and only Soriano can be expected to regularity under perform in the future.
PS- If anyone is wondering how Fangraphs assign's the dollar figure to production you can find it in the Tom Tango thread I posted here a few weeks back or at his site.
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.
475 comments
|
30 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
no idea
why the Soriano thing won’t un-bold. I tried.
You must have used the Guess Hack Font tag in your HTML.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 13, 2010 6:14 PM CST up reply actions
Also, good job. Rec'd.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 13, 2010 6:14 PM CST up reply actions
As did I.
Some men learn through what they read. Some men learn through what they're told. Some men have to piss on the railroad tracks. And some men keep on pissin'.
Great Job
Rec’d
"I won't be like A-Rod" - Z, 3/17/09
by Ihatethecards on Jan 14, 2010 11:19 AM CST up reply actions
I'm going to pass on reading the whole thing, and say...
1) I applauded Hendry for signing Ted Lilly, who I referred to at the time as likely to be more productive than Zito, and for 1/3 the price, and 2) this is what writers do. A little hyperbole and exaggeration are to be welcome and applauded in media. Some guys go completely overboard – that means you, Paul Sullivan and Rick Morrissey – but the idea is to throw an argument out there, and encourage the debate. And believe me, you couldn’t get 100 fans to agree that the sun rises in the East, so there will be debate on baseball issues. Don’t take it so personally.
And for what it’s worth, it’s bull. The Cubs don’t even have the worst contract situation in the last five years.
You should read the whole thing.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 13, 2010 6:17 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
was one of the best posts this off season
and really touches on each big contract and breaks them down well.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Were the words "clusterfuck", "craptastic" and "Genius Jim" used in the article?
Some men learn through what they read. Some men learn through what they're told. Some men have to piss on the railroad tracks. And some men keep on pissin'.
i dont know
but i think i caught a “heavens to mergatroid!”
by jesus christos on Jan 13, 2010 7:31 PM CST up reply actions
"Goldstein is brilliant. He is right in everything he mentions."
“He is right to the nth degree”
Some men learn through what they read. Some men learn through what they're told. Some men have to piss on the railroad tracks. And some men keep on pissin'.
did he tell the readers
anyone who says i am wrong can pound sand with mambochicken
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
I have
been working on and off on this for about 2 weeks before Goldstein pissed me off enough to finish it and honestly even I was surprised at just how good some of these deals have been for the Cubs. I am more convinced than ever that Hendry should be retained. Some of the worst moves he has made (dumping Wuertz, Pie) have been Lou motivated moves. If anything I think Hendry should defer less to his managers and stick to his guns filling out the roster.
It was very well done.
One of the better post in a while.
Some men learn through what they read. Some men learn through what they're told. Some men have to piss on the railroad tracks. And some men keep on pissin'.
I'm hopeful that Maddux will take the influence that the managers used to have.
I think Hendry respects the wisdom of experience and I also think he wants to have a good working relationship with his managers. Having Maddux inserted in the situation can only help.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
i would make
Maddux manager long before I would let Sandberg have it
by CalCalender on Jan 13, 2010 7:38 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I agree with you that...
… Hendry has given too much leeway to his celebrity managers (both Baker and Piniella). He has to indeed stick to his own guns, whether the manager agrees with them or not.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
How is everyone so sure
of when Jim makes decisions by himself and when he’s kowtowing to the manager? So when Jim dumps a guy who plays a lot it’s his decision, but when it’s a guy who doesn’t play much it’s the manager’s decision?
well
Hendry can only put people on the 40 man. If Hendry lets Pie rot on the bench or doesn’t trust Wuertz thats on him.
Right.
Also, my guess is that Lou’s “we’re not lefthanded enough” mantra last year pushed Hendry into making last offseason’s wholesale changes, which he has now spent this offseason reversing.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
but
they spent a huge chunk of cash and alot of publicity on that extra bat.
Fontenot?
He was the only left hander who replaced a right hander.
But I get what you’re saying. I just tire of people saying “how did that whole left handed thing work out, huh?!?” as though Milton Bradley is the only guy who can play the outfield and hit from the left side in the world.
he wasn't
the only guy but he was clearly the best guy available in the 08 off season.
Adam Dunn would have been a f****ing disaster in RF. Bradley proven Hendry wrong but I commend the guy for going after the player with the most upside.
We've been through this discussion before.
I wanted Dunn — sure, he would have sucked in the OF but the offensive production might have made up for it.
Abreu and Ibanez also would have been better.
All done now. Let’s move on.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I'd agree with this
Hindsight is part of the job.
But Al, why are are you so persistent in bringing up this “we’re not lefthanded enough mantra” as a big problem? I obviously disagree with your assessment of it, but, to me at least, it seems like when you’re knocking that you’re really knocking Bradley.
Because Lou saying that caused the domino effect that brought Bradley to the Cubs.
Maybe it’d have been different with another LH hitter. We’ll never know. All I know is that the RH-dominant lineup in 2008 led the NL in runs scored by a considerable margin. The “we’re not lefthanded enough” was an overreaction to three playoff losses.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
But again
you’re acting like Bradley is the only left handed hitter on the planet. Obviously he’s not. The idea wasn’t a poor one. Dome didn’t look like he was going to be worth it in rightfield, so they moved him to center, creating a hole in right. Either way, they needed a new rightfielder. The execution was the problem.
so which
RF available after 2008 would you have preferred?
hindsight
doesn’t count. If you were GM after 2008 who would you have picked? I stand by the opinion that all things considered Hendry made the right choice and the highest upside choice it just backfired like alot of things associated with the 2009 Cubs.
Of course it counts
Why judge a signing before a guy plays an inning? Doesn’t make sense to me.
Yes, I completely understand why Jim made the choice he made. But now we have Carlos Silva because it didn’t work out. Therefore, it was a poor signing.
The point I’m trying to make above, however, is that needing to get left handed wasn’t a poor mantra. Signing Bradley, in retrospect, was.
agreed for the most part
although with Edmonds leaving you needed a new OF. Without hindsight I would still want Bradley and I believe the DeRosa trade will prove itself a winner down the road.
As I said at the time...
… my first choice was Dunn. Yes, I am well aware of the defensive liabilities. You could have minimized those with a good choice of a defensive replacement (NOT Joey Gathright), who could have come into most games after Dunn’s, say, 4th AB of the game in the 7th or 8th inning, at least giving you an inning or two of above-average defense.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
How much say does a manager have in constructing a 25 man roster?
I mean, is he checking in with the Iowa manager to see who he should bring up?
Depends on the manager and GM, I'd guess.
Some GM’s give their manager more say, others less. In the end it’s the GM’s responsibility.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
agreed al
there isn’t a set %. But Hendry has show several signs that he defers to his manager. Crazily enough I think he needs to trust his own judgement more than the guys who manage the team.
I agree completely.
Giving in to Baker’s whims ruined the team under Baker — and hurt the team last year when he gave in to Lou.
I think we are seeing it swing the other way this year — hope it works.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
He determines which guys on the roster actually play
No point in having a guy on the roster the manager won’t play. Then the GM has to decide whether to ship out the player or the manager.
The GM can tell the field manager what to do.
Obviously, the field manager’s job is to handle these day-to-day things. But if the GM feels strongly about something, his decision carries the day.
To that end, if a field manager is openly refusing to follow the organizational plan as set forth by the GM, he should absolutely be fired.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
That's ridiculous.
If Hendry doesn’t like what’s happening with the 25-man roster he can have a “come to Jesus” meeting with his field manager. The field manager knows that the GM can fire him. Obviously, this isn’t done over every nitpicky thing, but it does happen.
Take, for instance, the time Billy Beane told Art Howe that he’d be fired on the spot if any of the Big 3 young pitchers went over 115 pitches ever again.
If he’d had strong feelings about it, Hendry could have told Lou to play Pie, or refused to trade Pie. He either kowtowed or agreed with the course of action.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Beane is an extreme example.
Beane, after all, has come under fire for the way he treats managers. Hendry is much more old school about this, seeing he and his field manager as partners.
He either kowtowed or agreed with the course of action.
It’s not so black and white when you’re trying to work with someone. You can also comprimise.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
compromise.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Of course you can compromise.
And obviously, a GM should pick his battles and leave most of the day-to-day decisions to the field manager.
But if the GM and field manager come to absolute loggerheads over, say, whether Felix Pie or Joey Gathright should be on the 25-man roster, or the GM makes the ultimate call.
As it happened last year at this time, we can assume that Hendry either agreed with the decision to trade Pie, or he went along with someone else’s wishes (Lou, in all likelihood). He didn’t trade Pie under protest.
I think that we can both agree that there are numerous examples of Hendry being too deferential to his field manager – most of those examples took place under Dusty Baker.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
You and I have no idea what Hendry has done
“under protest” – to use your words – because Hendry doesn’t bad mouth members of the Cubs. Hendry didn’t even bad mouth Baker who deserved it.
I agree Hendry has been too deferential – for my tastes – but I respect him choosing to work in a style that tries to go hand-in-hand with his field manager. That’s just his style.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
You can't be sure, but
lines can be read between and sometimes there are straight quotes in the papers.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
exactly
the way Lou treated Wuertz was criminal. The guy basically went through a rough patch and was dumped for NOTHING even though he already had a track record of being a good RP.
Eyre's been pretty open about where he stood with Lou.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
possibly the best post of the off season
very well done
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Ahem.
Milton Bradley & Harry Potter, anyone?
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
Great job....do you mind if I print it out, memorize it and quote it when I'm out talking baseball with my buds.
"People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."--Rogers Hornsby
go ahead
make a cool shirt out of it if you want. I’m always pleased if anybody gets anything of value out of these ramblings
would it be too long to copy it all and paste it as my sig line?
what do you think?
by CalCalender on Jan 13, 2010 6:02 PM CST 60 comments
This diary will take a look at Goldstein and the increasing popular notion that the Cubs are filled with HORRIBLE CONTRACTS! that will cripple the team for the next 1,000 years.
Dear Kevin,
I was crusin' through the internets yesterday when I happened to come across your article on BP. Now this isn't the first time you have criticised all things Cub, the last few months have seen you snort at Starlin Castro and generally take every possible contrarian /debbie downer position available on the team. However, yesterday's piece of "journalism" was perhaps the sorriest yet. The themes found in your arguments are ones that have sadly become more popular after the soul crushing season that was 2008. So I figured I would take a look at some of your arguments and see if we can shed a bit more truth on the state of our payroll & whether or not some of our larger contracts are truly bad ones.
My first beef with this article is the sensational line of "Do the Cubs have the worst contract situation in MLB History?". This is so effin absurd that it deserves its own article but I know there are a few (albeit LOUD) posters here who seem to believe this. They can think what they want but I intend to use fact and math instead of hyperbole and hubris to show how full of it those people are. Unlike Goldstein who uses BP's VORP to valuate players (or in the case of Soriano just a slash line) I will use fangraphs WAR stat because it provides a monetary valuation to a players performance. Goldstein lists 8 contracts that to him are the reason we have the worst payroll situation in MLB history. Lets take a look at them
# 8 Carlos Silva-
Current Contract- 2010 salary:* $11.5 million
*Further commitment:* $11.5 million in 2011, $2 million buyout in 2012
Well, this one is a decent point- Silva sucks but keep in mind we didn't give this guy a bucket of money, the former Seattle GM did. Now, Hendry critics have a good point in saying that Silva is the consequence of signing Bradley to a 3 yr 30 million dollar deal. Problem with that argument is that Bradley is worth 30 million over 3 years based on production. Even in a down year like last year Bradley was worth 1 WAR or 4.7 million. But Hendry signed Bradley after a 2008 season that saw him post a 4.5 WAR season worth 20 million dollars. The year before that Bradley was worth 10 million, the year before that you guessed it- 10 million. So even if Milton never hit like he did in 2008 he still would have been worth his deal or just under it. Unfortunately the off field issues forced the Cubs to dump him for Silva and a 6 million dollar discount on his remaining contract. Silva and the $ owed to him isn't ideal but it isn't a franchise killer considering the Cubs got money for something they would have had to cut and used that money to sign Marlon Byrd.
# 7- Ted Lilly-
Current Contract- 2010 contract:* $12 million *Further commitment:* None
This is a head scratcher considering that the Ted Lilly deal is one of the greatest FA pitcher contracts signed in the last 10 years. Back in 2006 when Hendry inked Ted everyone and I mean everyone roasted him for it. 10 million a year for a middling talent was the battle cry and Ted Lilly and his contract became a symbol of the bloated excess of baseball. 3 years later in into the Ted Lilly deal I believe it should considered a shining example to the Hendry haters that Momma Hendry's boy is no fool. Hendry has collected 43.5 millon dollars of value and paid out 28 million dollars. 24 of that was in salary and 4 the signing bonus Lilly received. Think about this for a moment, Hendry has already had that deal pay for itself and Lilly still has a year of basically bonus value. Plus Lilly gave us almost 200 inning's every year and was a fantastic pitcher during 2 division title teams. PLUS this was a free agent pitcher. Those contracts are always deals that come back to haunt GM's. For comparison sake the amazing St. Louis organization and its pitching Archmage Dave Duncan signed off on Kyle Lohse getting almost the exact same deal after the 2008 season. Last year they paid Lohse 7.125 million dollars and got back 3.7 million in value. That isn't a good start and they still owe the guy over 30 million dollars. This just goes to show that free agent contacts to pitchers are the ones that kill GM's and Hendry gave us an absolute gem of a deal with Lilly. Just goes to show that not all big money contacts hurt teams, sometimes you pay big money for big value.
# 6- Derrek Lee-
Current Contract- *2010 salary:* $13 million *Further commitment:* None
Another weird way for Goldstein to make his worst contract situation ever case considering Lee provides great value and this contact like Lilly's comes off the books next year giving Ricketts an additional 25 million to spend. Goldstein even admits that Lee has been "Worth every penny". Ladies and Gentlemen, the new Baseball Prospectus- Where they make crazy statements and then disprove themselves in their own article. FWIW a quick glance at Fangraphs shows that Lee has outperformed his contact every year other than the one he was injured. So another win for Hendry.
# 5- Ryan Dempster-
Current Contract- 2010 salary:* $12.5 million *Further commitment:* $13.5 million in 2011, $14 million player option for 2012
There seems to be some weird animosity towards the deal that Dempster got after the 2008 season. "He won't repeat his 08 season again!" was the general gripe to which I counter- He isn't getting paid to pitch like he did in 2008. He is getting paid to pitch like an above average starter and that's exactly what he has done. Dempster was worth 22.7 million dollars in 2008 and we signed him to a deal averaging 13 million a year. Last year he indeed wasn't as good as 2008 but he was still a very good pitcher worth 16.4 millon dollars. We paid him 8. So even as the back loaded contact increases in the next few years as long as Dempster is the in neighborhood of last season or even slightly worse the deal isn't a bad one. This is the 2nd FA pitcher contract that Hendry has extracted excellent value from so far and I can't stress enough how hard that is to do. So when hacks like Goldstein rant about how the Cubs "can't move these big contracts" ask yourself this- Why? Ryan Dempster is worth more than that contract and other GM's with a lot more resources than "Cal Calender" know that. So it would figure that a GM looking to trade for a good pitcher would probably not be scared off by Ryan Dempster. Baseball is like anything else in life, if you want value you pay for it and teams wanting Dempster would pay for his valuable pitching.
# 4 - Kosuke Fukudome-
Current Contract- OF* *2010 salary:* $13 million *Further commitment:* $13.5 million for 2011
Kosuke is another guy who gets an unfair rap. One of the major problems is that the media & the Cubs hyped him as being a "middle of the order bat" and people got visions of 25 HR's and 100 RBI's and all that. Well he isn't that kind of player but that doesn't mean he is without value. He is a LH bat that posts a solid OBP and at least in RF was a very good defender. So far he has been worth 18.4 million and been paid 17.5 million. Last year he was worth just under what we paid him and this year and next year we will be increasing his salary by 2 million. So we can expect that Fukudome will be not be worth the monetary value of his deal but it won't be off by a major amount. Despite what you hear Fukudome isn't a worthless player, he may not be the kind of player we thought we were getting but he provides value in other ways. Another thing to keep in mind is that the Cubs were in a major bidding war with San Diego and the White Sox so they weren't alone in seeing a ML starter in Fukudome.
# 3- Aramis Ramirez
2010: salary:* $15.75 million
*Further commitment:* $14.6 million player option for 2011, $16 million team option for 2012
Now this one just pisses me off. Goldstein justifies this by saying "Ramirez is worth every penny when he is healthy, yet he's averaged less than 130 games a year over the past five seasons, including just 82 last year." Using last year as some kind of example of Ramirez's fragility is to be frank bullshit. The guy injured his non throwing shoulder in a freak accident. It happens. From 2004-2008 Aramis had appeared in 87 % of possible games as a Cub. He isn't made of glass and never has been. Plus even playing 87 % of the time the guy provided more value than what we are paying him him. Starting to see a pattern here? Another huge problem with Goldstein's line of reason is this- Aramis Ramirez is going to opt out of his contract after this season. So like Lee and Lilly his salary is not going to be on the books after this year. The Cubs are going to have a boatload of money to spend people unless Ricketts gets stingy.
# 2- Big Z
Current Contract- *2010 salary:* $17.875 million *Further commitment:* $35.875 million for 2011-12 with a vesting option for 2013 that will be difficult to reach.
Here is Goldstein's take on Z- Zambrano is paid like an ace, but hasn't pitched like one for the past two years, as he is usually beset by minor dings here and there, with the annual emotional blowup now becoming downright predictable. Like Soriano, he is good, but that doesn't mean he's not overpaid. I take issue with the following-
Zambrano is paid like an ace, but hasn't pitched like one for the past two years -
A- One man's definition of an "ace" and what they should be paid is different than somebody else's. This is a moving goalpost type of argument and a lazy one at that. Worf and others have long used the "Z isn't a shut down ace" argument against him but the bottom line is that the guy is a very good pitcher every single year and was worth over 16 million last year. So we overpaid by a million bucks. Folks, we are a large market team we can afford to do that. F%#K labels like "ace" or people who keep saying Z won't "figure it out" the bottom line is Carlos Zambrano is what he is, a good pitcher. He isn't going to magically turn into a Zen like control master, he may never win 20 games or a Cy Young. He doesn't need to. All he needs to do is keep turning out season like last year's to be worth it to the Cubs. Also, keep in mind that the value I showed above was only his pitching value. It doesn't take into account the production he provides at the plate compared with other pitchers. He is the exact kind of pitcher larger market teams pay to have. You pay a value to secure reliable above average starting pitching.
# 1 - Soriano
Current Contract- 2010 salary:* $18 million 2011-2014 18 mill annually
Well to be frank this isn't a good contract and my defense won't be based on production. Last year Soriano was a sunk cost at 17 million dollars. He was insanely valuable to us in 2007 and was only slightly overpaid in 2008 but if 2009 is the Soriano we have from here on out then this is a very very bad contract. Now, I don't think Soriano will be as bad as he was last year at least in the near future but it's doubtful he will ever be worth what we pay him for going forward. So the anti Hendry camp have a point when they use Soriano as an example of Jim's mistakes. However, nothing happens in a vacuum and you have to remember the situation the club was in after 06. Take the anger and general discontent that is here now and multiply it. 2006 was a travesty and fans were staying away from the park towards the end of the year. Ownership woke up to the fact that even Cub fans weren't going to tolerate a 2nd tier team anymore and they made a huge statement by signing the biggest FA available for the first time since I have been a Cub fan. Everyone knew this contract would eventually be a bad deal for the team but after a year like 06 we were willing to go for the short term and Soriano helped us. He was perhaps the most valuable Cub in 2007 and a major contributor in 08. He helped give us back to back titles for the first time in a long time and we shouldn't throw that away simply because we didn't get it done int he postseason, because without him there never would have been a postseason. Not only did he help on on the field but by the Cubs landing Soriano right away in the 2006 off season we made a statement to other players that the team was going to try and win right now. Getting Soriano probably helped land Lilly and get Aramis to re-sign. As I have show both of those contracts have provided major value to the team as well. Injuries have already started to ravage him and the next 5 seasons could be hard to watch but 1 bad contract doesn't mean Hendry is a bad GM. In fact by my count of the 8 guys listed here 2 are poor contracts (Soriano, Silva) 2 are providing the production that we pay for (Z and Fukudome) and 4 are fantastic deals for the Cubs (Lilly, Aramis, Lee and Dempster).
So to recap Goldstein's assertion that this might be the worst contract situation in history is probably the stupidest thing ever written about baseball in history ; ) especially when you consider that 3 of the guys mentioned have deals the end after this year and only Soriano can be expected to regularity under perform in the future. Finally we get to the most hated contract around here.
PS- If anyone is wondering how Fangraphs assign's the dollar figure to production you can find it in the Tom Tango thread I posted here a few weeks back or at his site.
by Cubbie-Tim on Jan 13, 2010 9:44 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Perfect. LOL
Some men learn through what they read. Some men learn through what they're told. Some men have to piss on the railroad tracks. And some men keep on pissin'.
....you're crazy :D
"People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."--Rogers Hornsby
by cooliogirl47 on Jan 13, 2010 9:49 PM CST up reply actions
but the madical bold part
went away
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Look on the bright side...
… at least it’s not Shakespeare. ;-)
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Jan 14, 2010 9:09 PM CST up reply actions
That's almost as long as Gaius Marius' Shakespearean sig line.
"People ask me what I do in winter when there’s no baseball. I’ll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."
-Rogers Hornsby-
by Vermont Cubs Fan on Jan 14, 2010 10:23 AM CST up reply actions
as you see it was a one time ordeal
but that can be changed during the game threads if you really want
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Nicely done.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Goldstein isn't contradicting himself
He states the players that are weighing the payroll down, as in cost eight figures. He’s not saying they’re all bad, just that they’re expensive. Of the contracts, he states:
what makes this situation so uniquely bad is that many of the contracts are for underperforming players
Emphasis mine.
Overall, you make some good points about the Lilly and Lee deals, but Goldstein agrees with you on that. I’d probably side with you on the Ramirez deal though.
But Silva/Bradley and Soriano are bad, and the jury is still out on Dempster, Dome, and Z, as we’ll have to wait and see because these contracts are backloaded. Saying Hendry made a great deal with Dempster because he only had to pay him eight million this year doesn’t sit with me because the Cubs are making up that difference the last two years of his contract when he’ll likely be worse. I’d feel a lot better if Jim would frontload his contracts, or at least balance them to give himself some flexibility. But a lot of serious Hendry supporters don’t see the value in that.
Do the Cubs have the worst contract situation in baseball? I dunno. Probably not, but I’d be interested in hearing who the OP thinks does. What the Cubs have isn’t very good though.
back loaded contracts
in the info is available to anybody. Go check out Cot’s contracts page. Even with Dempster’s contract going up he is still worth that amount. The guy is basically getting paid to be a good # 2-3 starter and thats exactly the value he is providing.
Regarding Goldstein- Many of the contracts he says are bad aren’t. Thats the point of this article. The guy is wrong point blank and it isn’t even close.
Backloaded contracts
I think one reason the Tribune was willing to sign off on some of these contracts is because they WERE backloaded. They had no intention of paying these contracts themselves, and they were also increasing their asset value at the same time. The Soriano contract was a huge red flag that the team might be up for sale soon, because a deal like that would never have even been up for discussion throughout the Tribune’s ownership tenure.
Some of these contracts, though, you have to be fair to Hendry. He would have been crucified if Zambrano had been allowed to leave via free agency, no matter how mad people get at him and his antics. Probably the same with Dempster after ’08. And as for Fukudome, as CalCalender pointed out, if the White Sox, of all people, would have swooped in and gotten Fukudome by offering more money after we had been trying to land him all winter, Hendry may as well have resigned and moved to Siberia. All of these guys would have gotten the same amount of money, if not more, from other teams if the Cubs had not signed them.
Hendry’s overall body of work up through the 2008 season, IMO, was pretty good. Definitely more good than bad. Since the end of the ’08 season, every move he had made has turned out to be bad. Hopefully Marlon Byrd breaks that streak this year.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
Well perhaps the Cubs wouldn't have to give out those huge contracts
If they could produce some offensive talent from within…
But anyway, yes, I can understand blaming some of this on the Tribune. That still doesn’t mean the situation isn’t bad, but whatever.
The thing is though, the fact that the White Sox or whoever wanted a guy who hasn’t lived up to his billing (Fukudome) doesn’t absolve Jim. Moves are judged in hindsight. Obviously people make mistakes. It happens. But just because a guy like Bradley was great the years before doesn’t mean we can just forgive Jim for signing him and putting the team in a poor situation this winter.
what part
of the Bradley deal can you begrudge the guy? Bradley had been worth at least 10 million for 3 straight seasons and was coming off a major step up. Unless you KNEW that being in Chicago would ruin him then you can’t really fault Hendry for giving him that deal.
Who cares?
It was an awful deal that we’re paying dearly for. Period. I remember Al was against signing him, as well as more than a few other posters. With his attitude problems in the past, this was nowhere near a slam dunk. It seems like you’re telling me that as long as a guy put up decent numbers previously (ignoring every other factor) or that other GM’s were interested, then Jim can’t be at fault. I find that to be, at best, ridiculous.
I think it could have been guessed...
… by most that the glare of publicity in Chicago wouldn’t sit well with someone like Bradley — and I’m not referring to any of his acting-out, I’m referring to him being a very private person who didn’t want to deal with the media spotlight.
He said it himself during the season. He should have known himself that he wouldn’t do well in Chicago. The onus is on both Bradley and Hendry.
in any case, it’s done. Let’s move on.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
my 2 cents
on Bradley is this- he was the perfect player for what the team needed IF he could keep his personal issues in check. Obviously Bradley was able to sell Hendry on the fact that he could do that. It didn’t happen both because of Bradley AND the Chicago media AND Cubs fans themselves.
It was clearly a mistake but I can understand how the mistake was made.
Based on Bradley's performance in 2008?
Sure. But there were so many other issues that should have raised red flags even though MB made nice when he had dinner with Hendry.
Maybe it’s 20/20 hindsight, but I think that could have and should have been seen ahead of time.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
based
on his performance throughout his career 3/30 was exaclty what Bradley deserved. The fact that in 2008 he turned up his production while mostley staying out of trouble undoubtedly contributed to Jim’s willingness to write that check.
Probably so.
It still wasn’t a real good idea.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
well
you have been proven right on that. too bad though, if Bradley could have settled in and done what he is capable of then the Cubs would have been a very very tough team
I'm not saying the situation is not bad.
It is bad. I’m just pointing out that there is more to these contracts than just Hendry spending like a kid in a candy store, and that I agree with CalCalender’s basic premise that some of the huge contracts have turned out pretty good for the Cubs. Also pointing out the fact (it’s not an opinion, it’s a fact) that Hendry would have been crucified by fans and media for not getting some of them done, mainly Zambrano and Fukudome. I also agree with you that Hendry’s body of work since the end of 2008 has not been good. The Bradley deal had plenty of critics long before the ’09 season began (I admit, I was not one of them).
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
Jim was crucified by fans and media for trading DeRosa
Obviously didn’t stop him from doing so, and it shouldn’t. If Jim is that worried about how the fans and media are going to react, then he shouldn’t have the job.
I agree with you.
But you’re missing my point completely. My point is, talking now about how horrible all of these contracts are is very easy. It’s all hindsight, and Monday morning quarterbacking. Now, if you felt that the Fukudome contract was bad at the time he first signed it, and if you were in favor of letting Zambrano walk via free agency, and were generally against all of these contracts, then I guess, kudos to you. You’re a lot smarter and a lot better at predicting the future than me. I’m simply saying that most of these contracts were looked at very favorably by most people at the time they were signed, myself included, so it would be stupid of me to turn around now and talk about how terrible they were, when I know I was in favor of them when they first happened. Even the Soriano contract, at the time it was signed, was viewed favorably by most people because we were all still pissed about 2006. Now, if you first-guessed all of these contracts when they first happened and were against them from the beginning, well, like I said, keep talking then. And send your resume to the Cubs front office, because if you’re really as smart as you say you are, then we need you in the front office.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
I just don't get how hindsight can be ignored
GM’s aren’t stupid people. They have their reasons, good reasons, to make the decisions they do. Cal laid them out above when he talked about Milton. But there are also red flags too. No player is a slam dunk. Every contract is a risk. When things work out, you’re a genius. When they blow up, you’re a fool. Either way, you’re responsible (except for the most extenuating of circumstances). You’re not paying someone for what they did before. You’re paying someone because you feel they’ll be worth that money moving forward. Why judge a contract before a day of work?
Either way, I feel like you’re holding me to the same standard as Hendry, which seems crazy to me. I’m just a yahoo on a blog. Jim Hendry gets paid millions of dollars to make the decisions he does.
the Trib was spending someone elses money
that is why they were happy to backload, and is why I believe the over use of back loading was a direct order not a Hendry special
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
nice post and rec'd
to be honest, at the time of signing I thought the money for Soriano was well-deserved, and would maintain production and be worth the expense even in the latter years. He was renowned for his work ethic, the anti-Griffey, who wouldn’t go to pressers after games in DC because he was in the weight room for a couple hours (repeat: after the game ended, he was working out.) I thought if there was one guy who would hold up over time, it would be him. I still have hope that the contract won’t be as bad as it looks right now, but the last couple seasons have been depressing for sure.
Good stuff Cal.
I like the in-depth analysis and time it took to create this. Recommended.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
Nice post...
I can not judge if MB was the very best choice available at the time and hindsight doesn’t count. A year ago, I would have said that Hendry was taking a gamble on MB, which was justified and not too pricey for the risk. The risk in my eyes was MB’s apparent physical fragility. I did not expect him to be so mentally and emotionally weak and unbalanced.
While Hemdry may be resposible for the signing, he is not Satan’s evil twin, like so many seem to think. At the time, based on the data available, Hendry was not being stupid or acting dumbly.
It was a risk worth taking which went wrong. As you point out above, Jim Hendry’s track record is rather good.
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
@Twitter as @brommmietze
by eths on Jan 14, 2010 2:38 AM CST via mobile reply actions
iPhone reply fail
Sorry, this should part of the MB sub-thread.
Well, I never heard it before, but it sounds uncommon nonsense.
- The Mock Turtle, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll -
@Twitter as @brommmietze
by eths on Jan 14, 2010 2:43 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
agreed.
Bradley was a risk but those are the kinds of moves I like our GM making.
That's great Cal...
…but where’s the cry for Ben Sheets to be a Cub?!
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
Nice job!
But just out of curiosity…if you can’t stand this guy’s writing-why are you reading it? Seems to me it only raises your own BP(blood pressure that is).
"Fasten those seatbelts"-Pat Hughes
Rec'd!
Excellent job Cal. I enjoyed reading it this morning.
You see, you spend a good piece of your life gripping a baseball, and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. ~Jim Bouton, Ball Four, 1970
Good post ...
I’m with you that the contracts for Z, Ramirez, Lee and Lilly rate no worse than acceptable and as good as excellent. Dempster, well, it’s a little early to predict how that deal will work out, but he was worth his contract in 2009 (I admit to being wrong on this point in earlier posts). And I mostly agree with you on Soriano.
However …
Kosuke’s contract was a mistake, unless he improves significantly in 2010 and 2011. Yes, he was only slightly less valuable than what he earned in 2008 and 2009 — but that’s because about $28 million of his $48 million contract will come in the next two seasons. His inability to hit left-handed pitching essentially forces the Cubs to have a platoon partner in right (center, last year), which costs another $2 million or so. And the argument that the Cubs won a bidding war for Kosuke doesn’t really improve my view of the signing. The Cubs won the right to overpay and other teams didn’t. Not exactly a point in Hendry’s favor — especially, as you pointed out, because he so misjudged Kosuke’s strengths and thought he would be a middle-order hitter.
As for Bradley/Silva … this is a case where looking at Bradley’s on-field value isn’t enough. The Cubs should have realized that Bradley in the pressure cooker of Wrigley Field was a bad idea. Sure, I don’t think anyone predicted that things would have gone SO bad, but anyone who knew anything about Bradley’s history could have predicted problems.
I’ve said before that giving Bradley a third year (even based on playing time) was the biggest mistake. If Bradley had gotten a deal similar to Adam Dunn’s, he would have been much easier to trade — and the Cubs should have realized that/kept that in mind during bargaining sessions LAST offseason. If they had, I don’t think Carlos Silva is a Cub right now.
re Kosuke
The guy only has 182 AB’s vs LHP for his entire career. So we don’t really know if he can’t hit LHP yet. He hit them just fine in Japan and we have a larger sample size to judge over there. He has posted a .242/.343/324 line vs them here in the US. That isn’t terrible. He simply doesn’t hit LHP for power.
As to whether we are going to overpay for him- right now it looks like we will but not by much. CHONE predicts him to be worth 2.2 WAR which is just under 10 million dollars.
Plus there is a reason for optimism- in 2008 almost all of his value came from his fielding. Last year his value came from hitting as Fukudome wasn’t rated very highly for his defense in CF. If the hitting adjustments he made last year carry over and his defense stays strong now that he is back in RF his WAR will go up and he could very well be worth his paycheck.
by CalCalender on Jan 14, 2010 10:47 AM CST up reply actions
if he can hit lefties ...
why do the Cubs think he can’t — at least, based on what they did in 2008-09? Why was he a platoon outfielder last year?
That said, it seems like the Cubs are thinking of playing him every day this year. I heard Lou on the radio this morning talking about signing another outfielder in case Soriano needs a day off. Anybody got any info on this?
As for being worth under $10 million this year, he’s due to make $4 million MORE than that this year …
I have no idea
if he can hit lefties and if you have Reed Johnson on the team it makes sense to let him face LHP because he crushes it. That isn’t a knock vs Fukudome its just maximizing your talent.
Kosuke was paid 11.5 million last year and will get 13 million this year so the increase isn’t as large as you think.
by CalCalender on Jan 14, 2010 11:07 AM CST up reply actions
If Fukudome is installed at leadoff and left there...
… I think he’ll be very productive. $13 million worth? Remains to be seen, but at leadoff he has a chance to really help the team.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
YOU CAN'T JUDGE A CONTRACT UNTIL IT'S OVER
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 14, 2010 1:51 PM CST up reply actions
and its not over til we say its over
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Cause when the going gets tough
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
My math was wrong ...
But so was yours. You didn’t figure his $4 million signing bonus into your math, http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/chicago-cubs_112114177768677294.html.
How do you figure the bonus into his value over the course of the contract? Well, to be nice to Kosuke, you COULD divide it up equally over four years, meaning he earned $19.5 million in the past two years (not $17.5 million as you originally posted) and he’ll earn $28.5 million in 2010 and 2011.
So, you’re right in that the contract doesn’t increase that much from last year to this year — the jump would be just $2.5 million. OTOH, the signing bonus was paid at the time of the signing (right?) meaning that he earned $10 million in 2008 and $11.5 million last year. That hurts your original argument. was paid $21.5 million and earned $18.4 million.
Bottom line, Kosuke needs to pick it up. Thus far, he hasn’t been worth his contract.
but
most free agents aren’t worth their contract. That’s the bad thing about free agency- you are forced to pay premium to get guys on your roster. You usually end up over paying a bit because you are filling a spot that you werent able to do through your own system.
Thats what was very surprising/refreshing about doing this piece, Hendry has remarkably come out ahead or just about even on almost all of our bigger deals.
by CalCalender on Jan 14, 2010 12:17 PM CST up reply actions
I agree with most of this for sure
I’ve probably been labeled a “hendry-hater”, but the deals you’ve laid out in this post aren’t really my problem with Jim. It’s the fact that the farm system hasn’t produced enough positional talent to plug into the field instead of having to hand out these big dollar deals.
the farm
is a legit problem although wilken’s drafts are starting to pay off. Our farm made very big strides last year and hopefully they can keep it up. I would still love to see the Cubs expand their scouting budget and allot more $ to sign int’l free agents
by CalCalender on Jan 14, 2010 12:37 PM CST up reply actions
you picked eight deals
He’s come out behind on Bradley/Silva and Soriano, the Kosuke contract is not what I’d term “just about even,” and the Dempster contract is tough to judge, because he still has more than half of the deal remaining.
Hendry’s a decent GM, and a year ago, I would have said he was a good GM (before all the bad moves last offseason). But propping up the Kosuke signing as better than it is is just wrong.
Fukudome
has been paid 19.5 million (including 2yrs worth of the 4 million bonus) and produced 18.4.
Thats overpaying by 1.1 million and hardly a bad deal.
The problem people keep having with Kosuke is that he isn’t the player he was advertised to be. I’m not concerned with that- as long as he finds ways to be productive thats all that should matter. Titles like “ace” or “middle of the order bat” or “LH RBI guy” dont mean anything and can just lead to trouble.
the other problem ...
is that he’s due to make more in the next two years than he did in 2008-09.
like we went over earlier
including his bonus he will make 14 and 14.5 million before the deal is over. So far he produces around 9-10 million dollars a year in value. So it will be a likely over pay. BUT that happens all the time in FA deals, you can live with slight over payments but you want to avoid the Juan Pierre/ Gary Matthews type deals and Hendry for the most part has.
You're also assuming that Kosuke ...
won’t regress as a player, but whatever. I’d be annoyed if someone assumed that he’d improve …
It’s true that the Kosuke deal isn’t Gary Matthews-bad. But, by your own logic, the Cubs will be paying Kosuke about 33 percent more in the next two years if he doesn’t improve or get worse.
You put this under the “Hendry hasn’t done so bad” umbrella. I just strongly disagree with that. If Kosuke “earns” $9 million a year over four years, the Cubs will have paid him $12 million more than he’s worth!
you bring up some good points
and 2 years from now this deal could be a suck sandwich. But this article was about payroll and whether or not the Cubs have crippled themselves with contracts like Fukudome’s . Let’s assume it ends up being a 12 mill overpay. That’s 3 million a year spread over the life of the deal. Ideal? no, but it isn’t the crisis Goldstein made it out to be.
Well, see that's a matter of opinion
If the Cubs had an extra $3 million for the 2010 payroll, things would look different right now. Look at how much credit Hendry got for getting $3 million for this season from Seattle in the Bradley deal!
I do agree that Kosuke’s contract, in a vacuum, might be something the Cubs could deal with. But the Cubs have two bad deals on the books — Silva/Bradley and Soriano — and several other expensive ones. The expensive deals add up.
I think Goldstein picked the deals
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 Jan 14, 2010 2:01 PM CST up reply actions
yeah
goldstein picked them and I was just responding. I still dont know why he included deals even he admitted were positives for the Cubs in an article where he called our situation one of the worst in MLB history. weird.
Maybe in the interest of fairness?
If Goldstein made his claim without including the eight figure deals that have worked out for the Cubs, people (you included) would be up in arms saying that he ignored the big money deals that have worked out for the Cubs.
Even deals that have paid off so far can contribute to a bad situation.
Most of the players on this list are owed a significant amount of money going forward. The point of the list is not about the past context of the contracts, it’s about the risks and limitations to the team going forward. And those are significant.
Of the contracts that have more than one year left: Dempster, Ramirez, and Zambrano have probably all reached their peaks. Each could perform at or above his contract, but it’s likely that in total injuries and decline will take their toll.
Then you have Silva and Soriano. You can argue that the Cubs’ obligations to these players make sense for other reasons, but that doesn’t change how they impact the Cubs’ financial situation going forward.
Ramirez has a player opt out after 1
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Jan 14, 2010 10:28 PM CST up reply actions
Ramirez has a player opt out after 2010 season.
Lee, Lilly and most likely A-Ram come off the books after the ‘10 season, while Fukudome and Silva’s money will be off after the following season. Soriano’s deal is the only real long term deal the Cubs are saddled with and considering they are top five team in revenue and payroll that shouldn’t be a significant barrier to other deals.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Jan 14, 2010 10:31 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, this is true.
I don’t have the historical knowledge to comment on the claim that the Cubs have the worst contract situation of all time. It seems to me that they’ll be constrained by their contracts but not in a disastrous way — I don’t think they’ll be forced to trade valuable players in salary dumps like Detroit. Goldstein probably wasn’t fully taking the Cubs’ high revenue into account with his claim, perhaps deliberately.
My point is that most of Cal’s post was looking at the past, and the point of Goldstein’s article was looking forward. And the Cubs have significant commitments going forward that will definitely limit them for the next few years.
I've always just added the signing bonus into the year one salary.
The first year salary is 4 M shy what a fairly normal inflation would look like – 10 – 11.5 – 13 – 13.5.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
yeah
signing bonuses are always given right away. But it really doesn’t matter that much you can use it however you like.
by CalCalender on Jan 14, 2010 12:50 PM CST up reply actions
but YOU CalCalender ...
did NOT figure in the signing bonus into year one — making Kosuke look like a better signing. You might not have done it on purpose, but your fuzzy math appeared to bolster your argument.
actually I did
I used fangraphs in the main piece about Kosuke. They spread the bonus out over 4 years. So it was included.
the
confusion comes from the fact that I used Fangraphs and Cot’s and it looks like Cot’s doesnt include the bonus in the yearly salary but lists it as a separate item whereas fangraphs just spreads bonuses out into the yearly figure.
not always.
I’m pretty sure that Bradley’s was split over the first two years for some reason. Figures that he’d be the exception to the rule… ;-)
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Check Vernon Wells' contract.
Signing bonus $25.5 mil, paid as $8.5 mil per each of the first three years of the contract. His first-year salary is just $0.5 mil.
Why doesn't Lou think Dome can hit lefties?
Because Lou doesn’t think much of Dome at all. Lou sees Dome for what he’s not and is blind to all that Dome is. It’s the exact opposite for Dome as it is for Riot.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
so the belief that Kosuke needs a platoon partner ...
all stems from Lou being irrational/old school?
No it doesn't all stem from that.
It also stemmed from having Reed Johnson, who should have played v. LHP over Kosuke. Also, I’ve made the case that Dome needs regular rest, because he appears to wear down in the US schedule which has more games and a lot more travel than the Japanese schedule.
But Lou does have an unfair opinion about Dome, based on the frustration that Dome isn’t a slugger.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Great post
Well reasoned. I paid for ESPN insider once, and would never make that mistake again. I think that inflammatory articles like this, especially the teaser opening, are just meant to sell that insider crapola.
"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is." -- Yogi Berra
Good post, but small request...
to you and anyone else who makes a FanPost:
Can you please put the body of your post AFTER the jump. For those of us that like to check out BCB on our phones, the FanPost section can take a long time to scroll through if you leave the entire content of your post in the introduction part. You’ll notice when you create a FanPost that there are two boxes for content with a ‘break’ (or jump) in between. Check out Al’s main page posts to see how that shows up. Thanks, and thanks again for the info here.
Are you on Twitter? Check out the BCB and Cubs Twitter Community! Post your Twitter name and start tweeting with us!
by Schwa on Jan 14, 2010 1:36 PM CST reply actions 3 recs
Good idea.
Rec’d. It’s very easy to do this — just put 3 or 4 paragraphs before the line that says “extended entry”, and the rest after.
Obviously, if your post is only 3 or 4 paragraphs long, this wouldn’t apply.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Nice work!
I especially appreciate your defense of Kosuke, as he’s still a player I stand behind (though I recognize the unlikelihood that he’ll ever produce up to and beyond his contract amount).
Now the million dollar question: Have you tried contacting Kevin Goldstein to let him know your response exists? He has a Twitter page, y’know. Might be worth a shot.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Great plan. Tweet the link here to lure him and I'll locate the torches and pitchforks.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
goldstein
is by far my least favorite writer at BP. I’m happy they signed up former BCB poster CWyers as he is a really really good sabr guy but BP just ain’t what it used to be.
How'd you get this pic? That's me in the green overalls.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
why do you stand behind Kosuke ..
if you “recognize the unlikelihood that he’ll ever produce up to and beyond his contract amount”?
It's
not about standing up for him. It’s simply a recognition that he isn’t terrible. He is likely to be overpaid but that isn’t anything new when it comes to free agents. Plus, I don’t think he will be overpaid by that much.
well, I asked daver the question
And daver said he stood behind Kosuke. So it IS about standing behind him.
Anyway, I NEVER said that Kosuke’s terrible. I’m just annoyed at how many people on BCB will defend this signing when it’s clear (unless he drastically improves in the next two seasons) that the signing was a mistake.
What if Kosuke comes within a million dollars or two of fulfilling his contract?
Would his signing still be a mistake?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Well, he's on track to come within $8 million to $12 million
So if he cut the difference to $1 million or $2 million by 2011, I’d be amazed.
But, if that happens, I’d also agree that the contract wasn’t a mistake. As I’ve said in a lot of my comments about Kosuke, I’m assuming he’ll maintain his performance level — and not improve it.
That's probably what will happen...
…but I think it’s within the realm of possibility that putting (and keeping) him in right field combined with his now two years of MLB experience could enable him to reach a comfort level that remarkably elevates his performance.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
if that DOESN'T happen
… would you still stand behind Kosuke?
Why are you so hung up on this "stand behind him" detail? What difference does it really make?
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 14, 2010 2:35 PM CST up reply actions
I dunno ...
it’s what he said. I might be obsessing over one phrase too much. I’m not trying to be glib, though.
But daver did ask me if the signing would be a mistake if Kosuke played to within $2 million of his contract’s value. I thought I’d ask him the reverse.
can we stand beside him?
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
You could try...
…but those Wrigley Field security guys run fast!
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
so standing behind him is ok
but beside him means i am chased like Conan O’Brian?
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Yes.
You can stand behind him, but it may upset the people in the seats behind you.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
so, it is best to stand behind him
and in front of Ballhawk?
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
You may want to stand beside Ballhawk.
Otherwise, he’ll probably knock you over.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
actually, if your goal is to get a home run ball...
…you’re best off standing behind me.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
the angel of the dangle?
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
I still like Kosuke Fukudome as a player.
And I still think he was an important signing. I’m just not all that caught up in his contract. I think it’s been far less cumbersome to the Cubs situation than you seem to. Obviously, if he completely craps out in his last two years, my positive feelings for him will likely change.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
I still back Fukudome
and for good reason. The power numbers I knew would go down, people didnt take into consideration that the ballparks in the PCL are smaller and have shorter walls on average.
When looking at the contract and complaining that he doesnt earn what he is paid, many forget to include the money the Cubs make off the Japanese market, just like the Angels are now with their signing of Matsui. The money coming in to these teams by having a Japanese born player outweigh any short coming of talent that he is over paid for.
To truly say the contract is or is not a bad contract, there are so many parts to it, not just 100% on the field. Without doing a balance sheet, it is impossible to truly say one way or the other.
I will give an example, using the approx. 1.1 million he has been “over paid”
The below is an example, nothing more, jsut food for thought
If the Cubs have over paid by $1.1 Million
Japanese revenues have generated an additional $3.5 Million for the Cube
Cubs are ahead $2.4 Million
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
great argument ...
Full of red meat for the Kosuke contract defenders — and also impossible to prove or disprove.
and 100% true
Halos Heaven had a write up that touched on this as well
This signing is a goodbye to Vladimir Guerrero. We love you Vladdy, but you don’t move teevee sets in Tokyo. It is an unsentimental move to bring in revenue from other streams besides ticket sales and at least the Angels have an expert in the outdoor advertising field operating behind the scenes.
Hideki Matsui will sell more billboards in the stadium and introduce Angels management to partnerships with corporate advertisers that were off limits to anyone besides the top tier of international markets only last week. Welcome to the future, Angels fans… expect red pinstripes by 2012.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
well, shoot ...
Why not just say that Kosuke helped bring in $100 million from Japan? Then, he would be the best free-agent signing of all time!
isnt the name of the game (in business)
making money? If he brings in more revenue than he costs the team (in production, as well as other revenue streams) isnt that a good contract for the company?
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
here's what this logic reminds me of
I used to be a business reporter at a fairly large newspaper. Anytime a big jobs project was announced — a new factory, etc. — politicians would tout the “spin-off” jobs — suppliers, restaurant workers where factory employees would eat, etc. They claimed that for every factory job, three more jobs would be created.
There was NEVER any way to prove that these jobs were actually created.
Along the same lines, you have no proof (and no way to get proof) that Kosuke’s ability to get Japanese money make up for how much he’s been overpaid.
i am just stating a truth
not being political. Fukudome does bring added revenues for the team that others do not. To disregard that while talking about what he costs a team is just like not including a signing bonus in what he costs a team (just using an example from above)
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
some questions ...
1) Do you really think the Cubs signed Kosuke to the big contract, figuring that he wasn’t worth the money as a player, but that the difference would be made up with the increased revenues he would bring in from Japan?
2) Do you have any way of gauging how much more money the Cubs have brought in from Japan since Kosuke signed? I might be swayed by actual evidence (as opposed to informed speculation), but …
3) If you got those figures — and it confirmed that the 2008-09 Cubs were more popular in Japan than the team had been previously — could you really prove that Kosuke was the reason for the jump?
4) Do you account (in your informed speculation) for the fact that there had been SEVERAL Japanese players in the majors before Kosuke?
5) Do you account for the fact that after his strong start in 2008, that Kosuke has been not been a star player? We’re just guessing here, but I doubt that a platoon outfielder (as he was last year) would really bring in money from the Far East.
This argument is dumb.
1.) Yes, I do think the Trib signed Dome with the income from Japan in mind. I have no doubt it was an incentive. Nobody could possibly predict or count what it’d be worth, but nobody could predict how far + or – his contract the stats would peg him as being worth either. It didn’t matter. They signed a good player who has been worth pretty close to his contracted pay to this point, and got some extra revenue out of the deal. Tying the two together beyond that is pointless. Its there, we can’t count it, and its hardly important anyways.
2.) Who cares? Have you seen the posts from Dome fan “Dragon Fantastic” (i believe, or something like it) on here? There are folks in Japan interested in the cubs that were not before. That is great for the fanbase, great for recruiting from that very lucrative market, great for everyone. You can’t put a number on how valuable it is. Who cares?
3.) Prove it why? Do you have any remotely reasonable alternative reasoning? Again, this very blog gained a fan of Dome’s posting here directly from Japan… making an effort to see the games when broadcast over there, translating Dome’s blog to English for us. Is that proof enough, or should we set up a census in Japan?
4.) Yes, he does account for it… and even quotes other blogs pointing to the financial benefits for their favorite teams who also signed Japanese players.
5.) Again, Kosuke has been worth BARELY under his contracted pay, statistically speaking. Who cares if he isn’t Pujols? He’s a decent right fielder making fair pay and bringing interest to our team in new places.
You are right… i can’t put together a calculus equation to determine the value of koskue on the field, off the field, with the fans, on and on. I can’t compare that against the couple of million he hasn’t statistically earned vs his contract. But i can sit in the bleachers and see those stupid hats and headbands, i can sit on this board and chat with guys in Japan who love him, i can read the stats and see he plays well… and that’s all i need.
What are you hoping for?
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 14, 2010 3:41 PM CST up reply actions
you beat me by 2 minutes
I was typing away as you hit submit lol
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
What do I want?
You fail to mention that Kosuke’s going to earn MORE money in 2010-2011 than he did in 2008-09. I’ve said frequently that everything changes if Kosuke improves significantly in the next two years, but the course he’s on RIGHT NOW indicates that his performance will be $8 million to $12 million LESS than what he’s making.
So, Kosuke contract defenders, I want more than conjecture that Kosuke’s “intangibles” — a word that is used mockingly when discussing other players — make him worth that extra money, or even close to that extra money.
you fail to understand
you cannot say he will or will not earn the future salary until the games are played and they look at it.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
dude, really?
This type of thinking spurred a horrible debate a week or so ago. You can’t judge a contract till it’s through?
I’ve said, repeatedly, that I’ll retract this argument IF Kosuke improves significantly in 2010-2011.
So... guilty till proven innocent, huh?
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 14, 2010 4:52 PM CST up reply actions
i think elgato went to the
BLou school of stats
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
I think ...
you’re desperate to defend this signing.
What’s statistically incorrect about saying that if Kosuke doesn’t improve, he won’t be worth his contract?
Anyway, YOU’RE the one who’s citing intangibles that CAN’T be measured, not me.
not "intangibles"
You’re citing things that aren’t statistical.
you're right
if Dome doesn’t improve, he won’t be worth his signing.
However, it will be a relatively marginal amount, as free-agent signings go, and you CANNOT know what’s going to happen till it does. The projections seem to be contradictory on Dome anyway.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 14, 2010 5:07 PM CST up reply actions
Well, if he's not worth $9.2 million ...
of a $48 million contract, that’s “relatively marginal”?
you CANNOT
flatline the worth annual. each season the worth vs the salary paid will adjust. you know, just like cost of living doesnt stay at a constant.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
can we
wait to see if that actually happens?
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 14, 2010 5:15 PM CST up reply actions
can we not object do discussing this ...
before it does?
what's the point
the projections are mixed, and you’re arguing if a player is going to be worth money they haven’t been paid yet, for games that haven’t been PLAYED yet.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 14, 2010 8:28 PM CST up reply actions
what's the point ...
in claiming that you can’t judge contracts until they’re done, unless the contract belongs to Carlos Silva?
I haven't judged
Carlos Silva’s contract. I’ve said that getting him in trade for Bradley was a poor deal.
You seem dead set on showing Dome is a bad contract, when you lack two years of evidence.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 15, 2010 11:05 AM CST up reply actions
seeing as i have given you links
and proof about my opinion, that you prefer to throw out, its a pointless debate. you want to pick and choose what facts I can use, which eliminates the facts needed to be correct.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
They're not hard numbers
You’re right. This is pointless. We’re not going to agree.
But, the line about BLou stats was uncalled for, IMO.
um, yeah ...
because I’m saying Kosuke has committed a crime.
You can be guilty of things other than crime.
In this case, you insist that Dome is guilty of being paid more than his worth, and you refuse to consider otherwise till his contract is done and he’s proven otherwise.
You do this in the face of evidince that he’s valuable in other ways… and you do so in spite of the fact that his contract, thus far, has been very close to his actual value.
So yeah… what i said fits.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 14, 2010 4:57 PM CST up reply actions
No ...
I’ve said he won’t be worth his contract unless he improves significantly on his performance.
I’ve said that. Repeatedly.
So why are you hung up on Dome then?
I see a list of 9 players (many of them being paid FAR more) right up at the top of this page you should start fretting about. There is a decent chance several of those guys could fall below their contracts worth.
Why beef with Dome and not Sori?
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 14, 2010 5:00 PM CST up reply actions
From my first comment today:
Responding to CalCalender:
“I’m with you that the contracts for Z, Ramirez, Lee and Lilly rate no worse than acceptable and as good as excellent. Dempster, well, it’s a little early to predict how that deal will work out, but he was worth his contract in 2009 (I admit to being wrong on this point in earlier posts). And I mostly agree with you on Soriano.”
So, you see, I DO have an issue with Soriano’s contract. The beef I have is not with Kosuke, but with all of these weird defenses of his contract.
OK, but...
1.) His contract isn’t bad yet.
2.) There is a chance it will end up overypaying him, but not by enough to get one’s undergarments in a twist over.
3.) There is a certain tangible context to Dome (his nationality and the revenue / interest he brings) that makes him under-performing his contract less of a big deal.
Can you at least admit to those three points? I don’t think any of us are defending him beyond reason here.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 14, 2010 5:12 PM CST up reply actions
Well ...
1) Agreed. His contract ISN’T bad yet. But he needs to improve to ensure that it doesn’t become bad (I’ve said this since Jump Street).
2) That’s just subjective. If he’s overpaid by $8 million …
3) Agreed. But I just don’t know how much LESS of a big deal it really is.
The net gain from having a Japanese player...
… is NOT intangible. If you are paying attention you CAN perceive his effect in both interest and revenue. We’ve got fans from Japan on this very blog because of Dome. Somebody is spending a hell of a lot of money on stupid Dome headwear outside the bleachers. Money and interest in Kosuke is, has been, and will continue to be high. That is tangible, and worth something beyond a normal right fielder.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 14, 2010 4:54 PM CST up reply actions
OK, intangible is the wrong word
How about “impossible to calculate”?
let me fix this for you
How about " possibly, impossible to calculate on BCB, but easliy calculated by the Cubs and their finance department crunching the numbers"
I think that is what you wanted to say, since that is correct
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
I'd say it's possible for the Cubs to calculate
Or at least make an educated guess.
a gerneral ledger
makes it a reality.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
agreed that they would have a very good idea ...
of Kosuke’s effect.
my answers
1. at the time, the Cubs were still owned by the Tribune, and they have to report revenues to their share holders and explain about red/black numbers. The shareholders only care that they are making money, not how or where. The amount a player will bring into a corporate financials does matter above Hendry.
2.Can you state that the bonus should be removed, since it is a bonus not salary paid, therefore lowering what his cost vs value is on the field? That is the same as throwing out the revenue generated.
Do I have exact numbers, no but there are many articles which discuss it. Here is one where the follwoing quote comes from
Ichiro Suzuki, Hideki Matsui and Daisuke Matsuzaka all helped open up markets and bring new streams of revenue to their respective teams when they made their major league debuts
And this quote from here
Japan is responsible for nearly 70 percent of baseball’s foreign revenue. Jim Small runs Major League Operations there. He says it’s the most important international market.
The revenue is shared in MLB where about 30% of the revenue is shared with all teams, the balance goes to the team that generated the revenue (such as jersey sales, etc). That is a big difference maker.
3. It would be a given, that Fukudome being on the Cubs roster is why Japanese citizens would wake up to watch a game at 4 am their local time. (this would be best answerd I believe by dragon, who is Japanese and posts here, and he started posting here shortly after the Cubs signed Fukudome).
4. Yes, and seeing as those teams made more $$$$ in those markets based on having Japanese born players I am sure weighed heavily on owners to bid for him. It is a game, but it is also a business.
5. He has been a better than average player, who fans expected more than they should have. He is not paid anything insane, and has earned his money. I believe he is far from a bad signing, and I will continue to say so.
Now when you want to talk about how bad he is as a signing, can you answer the following
1. what is your basis on him being a bad signing?
2. were your expectations based on internet chat or did you actually research him befome making an opinion?
3. while you (or others) have expected more power from him, how many actually looked at the different in the field between Japan and America (the stadiums are about 20 feet on average shorter to the wall from home in Japan, they play about 20 less games a season, the walls are shorter on average as well. these all will lead to more HRs in Japan and more doubles here).
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Didn't mean to step on your toes.
Got worked up, couldn’t resist.
Funny how our answers are pretty much the same though. “YES, i think the greedy mofo’s over at the Trib considered all possible streams of revenue before throwing millions at a guy.” Perfect.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 14, 2010 3:47 PM CST up reply actions
not toe stepping was done
you were just giving your opinions, and thats fine by me.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
answers to your questions
1) He’s a bad signing because he didn’t earn the money he was paid in 2008-09. Worse (and his defenders often fail to note this) he’s due to make MORE money in the next two seasons. Even daver, who defends the signing, says Kosuke probably won’t improve at the plate — though he hopes he will.
2) Maybe I didn’t spend enough time researching Kosuke’s career in Japan. But based on results, it appears the Cubs didn’t, either. If he continues to be worth $9 million to $10 million a season, the Cubs will have paid about $10 million more than he was worth — unless you cite nebulous things like his ability to make other Cubs’ more patient at the plate and/or his ability to attract Japanese fans.
3) I don’t think I ever said I expected more power from him.
I see you are not willing to actually read
what i gave you or others have. you made up your mind and refuse to see beyond that. I disagree with you more than not on this topic.
you are using opinion not facts in your argument, and over looking links provided.
if Fukudome is 1.1 M below his pay to day, to be $10 M down in two seasons he really has to bomb. Try again on that one.
Again, the financials ARE important, which INCLUDES the money generated from Japanese revemues. To disregard that is to put on blinders strictly because it ruins your argument.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
You need to read, apparently
Kosuke was worth 18.4 million in 2008-09. We agree on that?
Without going into the intricacies of his signing bonus and his per year salaries, http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/chicago-cubs_112114177768677294.html, he’s due to get paid $48 million, right?
So 18.4 times two is 36.8 or 9.2 million LESS than 48.
Right? Correct me if I’m wrong — but do it without getting into nebulous off-field stuff.
you are saying his worth
for two seasons he has not played, right? To say what he is worth in his four seasons after playing two is not possible so you are wrong
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
see above ...
I have constantly said that IF Kosuke doesn’t significantly improve, he won’t be worth his contract.
Wow, Just Wow
Way to compare apples to oranges there dude.
2008 paid $7M – earned $8.3M
2009 paid $12.5M – earned $10.1M
Total paid $19.5M – earned $18.4M
So he earned 94% of his salary so far which is a considerably above average return for a LTC. Then for some insane reason you ignore his improving numbers and just lazily double his production. You did this just to slander FK some more. It’s much more likely he’ll be worth around $13-$14M in 2010 and a million or two more than that in ’11, especially if they keep him in comfort zone in RF.
It’s not as if he’ll be making 5-6M more in the future too. It’s only a freaking 1.5M increase and another .5M the next year. My God, you keep implying that there’s some sort of imaginary balloon payment due or something.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Jan 16, 2010 9:58 AM CST up reply actions 3 recs
Hah.
Rec’d. Well played, sir.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 16, 2010 10:28 AM CST up reply actions
Will Dome improve? Or increase in value?
He doesn’t have age on his side, but he has a year more experience with ML pitching. It might be harder, though, for him to increase in value. Based on this offseason’s free-agent signings, the incredibly crappy economy has put a damper on the value of performance.
2009 offensive performance plus 2008 defense would be around 2.8 WAR. But a 2.8 WAR 2010 might not be worth $10.1 mil. Even a 3 WAR 2010, which I think everyone would be thrilled with, is probably not worth his $13M salary. Hopefully the economy picks up for 2011.
Oh, yeah, and the “balloon payment thing”: based on those numbers (which spread the signing bonus over the contract’s length) the balloon is between 2008 and 2009, which makes the second half of the contract pay a lot more than the first. Cot’s indicates that the signing bonus was paid up front, in 2008. Ordinarily that magnifies its value, but in this case 2008 dollars are worth less than 2010 dollars (in a baseball sense). I’d say his pay is more like $10M in ‘08, $11.5M in ’09, $13M in ’10 and $13.5M in ’11. So he’s been paid $21.5M so far, and earned 86% of it. That doesn’t look as good, but it makes the future numbers easier to hit.
I’m not down on Kosuke or the fact that the Cubs signed him. It’s not his fault and not the Cubs’ fault that the economy is so terrible. Given normal inflation he’d have a decent chance to meet his contract values over the next 2 years. Given what we’re looking at now, he probably won’t. The current economy is good for teams that need to sign free-agents for 2010 and 2011 and bad for teams that already have players signed over those years. It’s like the relationship between lenders and borrowers in the presence of less-than-expected inflation. It’s not really the Cubs’ fault, but the economy does affect them in some ways. Fortunately they have a strong fan base in a city that didn’t get hit as hard as some others.
Hmm
Well, I think the only thing you can with any accuracy about Kosuke’s signing bonus is that you really can’t tell when it was or wasn’t paid out. You can go either way. Maybe it’s delineated elsewhere on the web but I wouldn’t know where to even start looking for that info.
As for the future value of WAR, you could be right. Has dollar values been computed as far back as the last crash/correction/recession? I never considered the possibility of performance becoming devalued in the future. I’m sure if I entirely buy into it, but I’ll grant you that it could happen.
My comment wasn’t directed at you, but to those who incessantly march to the tune that Fukudome’s contract was a horrible one. And I believe there’s a good probability that he’ll continue to improve. His game doesn’t revolve around young man skills and he should continue his acclimation to the US game.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Jan 17, 2010 4:45 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, because I'm into slander
I’m not the only poster on this site who doubts whether Kosuke will improve on his stats from last year — or, at least, doesn’t ASSUME that he will improve. He struggled down the stretch again last year AND he’s getting older.
Also, I don’t think I’m the only one on BCB who hoped Kosuke would be worth his contract without invoking nebulous arguments like his value in attracting Japanese fans or his alleged ability to make other Cubs more patient.
Finally, way to NOT figure his signing bonus into the equation. Either way you do it, it’s worse for your argument.
also ...
at various points in this thread I’ve thrown in the caveat that I will retract my statements IF Kosuke improves in the next two years.
Throwing out the issues about his signing bonus and when it was paid, how do you judge that earning 94 percent of his contract is better than most LTCs? You might be right, but I’d like to see numbers before blinding accepting your statement.
And, yes, AndrewJStone — I want to see numbers again. Freaking sue me.
He’s a bad signing because he didn’t earn the money he was paid in 2008-09.
Only barely. By that logic, all but the superstars are bad contracts.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 14, 2010 5:10 PM CST up reply actions
Rest of the graph:
Worse (and his defenders often fail to note this) he’s due to make MORE money in the next two seasons. Even daver, who defends the signing, says Kosuke probably won’t improve at the plate — though he hopes he will.
Its fair to say...
… he WILL perform in the field, though, as long as he remains in right, where he should have been all along.
That’s worth something.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 14, 2010 5:13 PM CST up reply actions
and the worth of a hit so to speak
will also change this seaosn and next season, just like anything in economics and finance do annually. you cannot state for fact that he will or will not for 2010 or 2011 until the season is played.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
agreed on the inflation point
Let’s just leave it at that, OK? I’m tired of this.
See CalCalendar's comments above.
Nearly every free agent contract is a gamble and many (most?) fall short of fulfilling their dollar value. Kosuke Fukudome is a valuable player with important skills that have long been lacking on the Chicago Cubs (patient ABs, OBP, strong right field defense). If he can come close to fulfilling his value, I can live with that. And I recognize that it’s unlikely he’ll produce up to and beyond his contract amount…ya never know.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
like I said before
the only way you can reasonably expect Fukudome to improve at this point are the following scenarios
1. He “gets it” in his 3rd year and establishes a new talent level. Not that likely
2. His batting improved big time from 08 to 09 while he fielding suffered. If his bat stays the same and his glove rebounds by moving back to RF he could end up being a near 3 WAR player and therefore up his production value.
indeed.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 14, 2010 2:29 PM CST up reply actions
taking him out of RF was a stupid move
So I’m optimistic about Point Two as well.
you can’t get much by that #$%@ ballhawk -- LT
Addiction to free agency is an indictment on Jim Hendry and his failed minor league system
So don’t sit there and get all puffy chested and tell us all free agents are a gamble. If Hendry had at least a semi-productive farm system then maybe, just maybe, he wouldn’t have an extreme addiction to free agency to cover up the shortcomings of this organization otherwise.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
yeah!
unpuff that chest, Daver!
Because that farm, it didn’t produce our SS, or Sean Marshall, or the parts that got us Harden, or the 2008 ROY!
Oh, wait.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 14, 2010 5:12 PM CST up reply actions
Man,
If two of the four best things we can say about our farm system these days is that they produced an almost mediocre shortstop and a long reliever, then I think you’re kinda proving his point.
And the 2008 rookie of the year. And the pieces that got us Harden. Etc, etc, etc.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 14, 2010 8:40 PM CST up reply actions
the 2008 rookie of the year
looked like Jerome Walton redux last year. Hopefully he bounces back this year. And management didn’t deem Harden worthy to even offer arbitration this offseason.
I’m not saying the farm system has produced zilch. But compared to the rest of the league, it’s been quite substandard.
I think you'll find this claim unsupportable:
But compared to the rest of the league, it’s been quite substandard.
If you count player wins over the past three years that come only from farm products and players acquired from farm products who have not yet been extended, I doubt the Cubs come out in the bottom fifth of the league. I suspect they are not even in the bottom half of the league.
It would be worth someone doing.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Wouldn't that be weighted against the Cubs though?
At least on offense? Off the top of my head (I know I’m forgetting a few), the only guys who have gotten significant at bats in the past few years from the farm are Fontenot, Theriot, and Soto.
Hopefully someone will run the numbers.
Maybe I will eventually. The pitching also has to be included. One question for this would be when you move Carlos Zambrano from farm product to extended player since he signed mid-season.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Of course
I looked into it a bit, but I couldn’t find an easy way to calculate it that wouldn’t take days and days.
In the course of some rudimentary research I saw that the highest WAR a relief pitcher (Broxton, I think?) had in 09 was 2.9. 2.9 for an outfielder would have put someone tied for 30th with Jason Kubel. Hence why I’m constantly harping on positional development.
I'm all in favor of positional development.
After all, I spent the first half of 2008 bashing the Cubs for failing to give Pie a chance when we had the perfect cover of an offense which was scoring runs in bushels.
But if you can afford a free agent SP who is better than Sean Marshall, you shouldn’t stick with Marshall just because you developed him.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
That doesn’t mean that his 2008 ROY award isn’t valid. He’s a product of the Cubs system, and he won the 2008 ROY.
Dumping Harden was a good decision. he’s made of glass.
The Cubs ML system is probably average. Josh77 would know much better than most of us, I’m sure.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 15, 2010 11:06 AM CST up reply actions
I don't get how
you can commend the Cubs for picking up a guy you were glad to be rid of because “he’s made of glass”.
Do you really not get
how acquiring him mid-season in a pennant race while he is having a great year is a different decision from the decision to re-sign him after a so-so year?
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Of course I get it
I’m not saying it was a bad deal, or anything like that. But you get more credit for a deal that helps in the short and long term (Aramis Ramirez), then you do for the short term that you ending up letting go without a care (Rich Harden).
Does that mean it was a poor deal? Of course not. It was pretty good, actually. But looking at the accomplishments above that Drew is hanging Jim’s hat on really doesn’t speak too well of the farm system.
We got a great pitcher for 1.5 seasons
We gave up a bunch of mediocre prospects, none of whom have panned out. In return we received 1.5 seasons of above average pitching.
Hendry made two decisions with Harden: 1, to trade for him. 2, to not resign him given the asking price vs the risk.
How on earth does decision 2 invalidate the value added from decision 1??
Hendry made two correct moves with Harden
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
I won't be surprised if the Harden moves
end up looking a lot like the Matt Clement moves.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
great comparision IMHO
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
because
we used him properly, and now we need different resources. I don’t get how that’s not relatively easy to get.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 15, 2010 4:16 PM CST up reply actions
First of all, I'm not all puffy chested...
…I’m just happy to see you.
Second, isn’t that the purpose of free agent signings? To fill holes the organization can’t – or isn’t quite ready to? Is Jim Hendry really “addicted” to free agents any more than any other GM? Look at what the Yankees did last off-season. Wouldn’t that make them the ultimate addicts?
And a farm system doesn’t get better over night. I believe the Cubs’ system is in better shape now than it was a few years ago. So how ’bout giving Jimbo a little credit for that. Oh, nevermind.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Welcome to another installment of INSANE THEATER
I can’t believe that there are actually throngs of BCBers taking potshot at this article, even if it is written by a sabermagician doofus.
Did I miss something here??? I’m pretty sure the Alfonso Soriano contract is disaster. I’m also certain that Kosuke is insanely overpaid for what he is. And that the Cubs will be spending nearly $20 million on Carlos Silva to rot on the DL over the next two years as consolation prize for signing Milton Bradley to a $30 million deal last year. Ryan Dempster makes $50 million for being a 4th starter type on any good ballclub. Meanwhile the juvenile and disappointing Carlos Zambrano is paid like he is superstar ace.
And didn’t the Cubs just come off a season where this $130 million plus payroll resulted in 83 friggin wins?!?!
So what precisely am I missing here? Why o’ why is everybody coming to the aid and assistance of Genius Jim Hendry?!?!?
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
Thank you for the cogent thought and facts supporting your opinion.
We are all improved by your contribution as you’ve obviously provided the winning counterpoint to CalCalandar research.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
You're right
Soriano, Kosuke, Dempster, Zambrano aren’t overpaid in the LEAST BIT. Nope, those are fair contracts commensurate with value. And just like the Yankees, Red Sox and Angels it is our means to the World Series Championship trophies we have.
Jim Hendry is a genius. He has one of the biggest payrolls in the game and he has spent wisely in pursuit of constructing a juggernaut that is the envy of baseball.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE
before you run you mouth.
Reading IS fundamental.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 14, 2010 4:30 PM CST up reply actions
I'll ask you again to hold the profanity.
I understand who you’re talking to here, and you should also.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Actually, one area where you are dead wrong is in your use of tense.
Is Soriano overpaid? Per Cal’s research, not yet. Is it safe to assume that Soriano will not be able to perform to value over the term of the contract? Hell yes. Is he currently overpaid, not yet, but we all expect he will be.
Dome & Dempster both have contracts commensurate to or below market at the time they were signed. I would prefer the contracts smaller, but I don’t get to control market and whether they should have been signed.
As for Z, he is still paid on potential.
You’re so busy trying to push your opinion and judgement you’re ignoring the points made.
I’m not a Hendry fan, but the argument was whether the Cubs were screwed by bad contracts forever and Cal used a valid measurement to try to counter that argument.
We’d all prefer for Soriano’s contract to expire in 2010, Dome and Demp to be paid 20% less, and Zambrano to pitch to potential.
If you want the bitch about Hendry thread, start one elsewhere.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
The fact that BLou
thinks Dempster is overpaid just show how clueless the man is. Dempster has given the Cubs value beyond what we paid him for 2 years now. He is a really good pitcher and that is a really good contract.
I understand your points on Demp, but I was concerned about the dollars
and the length when it was signed and still am. I’m hoping my concerns are proved wrong.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
The thing with Demptser is
yes he had a career year in 2008. He probably won’t ever do that again but he didn’t sign a contract that pays him to pitch like he did in 2008. He turned in a 20 million + performance that year. He is only getting 12 million a year so far has pitched well above that standard.
Accepting he was a FA after a career year, I was viewing
that he’d be 35 in the final year of his deal and prior to 2008 had only three years where he pitched 200+ innings. The three years were consecutive and his ERA crept from 3.66 to 4.94 to 5.38.
When discussing Bradley’s career averages over a decade, his career norms were based on 10 years. As a reliable, front end, starter, Demp had 2 years in 11 with a major injury in between.
The $14M in 2013 looks evil and as I may not have said, I like Dempster, and hope I’m wrong.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
i figured more than 3 years was nuts
and i am hoping I am wrong when its all said and done
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Dempster is way underrated by Cub fans
because we remember him from his days as a frustrating closer. But Dempster has remade himself as a pitcher and proved in 2009 that the change is real. You can argue he’s our best starter.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
by DGU on Jan 14, 2010 5:44 PM CST up reply actions 8 recs
True
Dempster was 34th in the majors in FIP (fielding independent pitching), above such talents as Matt Cain, Yovani Gallardo, Derek Lowe, and Matt Garza. Value of contracts aside, all of those are fine arms that most everyone would be happy to spot third in their rotation. When you factor in the personal issues (and I believe he suffered through a few injuries) he had to work through, it is very reasonable to expect a slight bounce back up towards his 2008 numbers. Not to mention the fact that our defense should be better than last year’s in the outfield with Fukudome back in right and a healthy (knock on wood) Soriano in left.
by Bradsbeard on Jan 14, 2010 6:00 PM CST up reply actions 5 recs
Kosuke, Dempster and Zambrano AREN’T overpaid, not really.
But that would require you to look at the facts, and we know how you handle that…
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 14, 2010 5:13 PM CST up reply actions
hooray for making up your own reality
which is exactly what you did BLou. You dsregard all the facts and proof given to you in the post
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Facts?
Fact: Cubs finished 2009 with 83 wins
Fact: Cubs haven’t won a World Series since 1908
Fact: The Cubs have one of the largest payrolls in baseball
So you tell me how this bizarre ratinoalization of the Soriano contract, and the Kosuke contract and the other reference contracts MESHES with that.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
Fact: Size of Payroll doesn't equal success.
Fact: You post dumb things
Fact: You don’t like people that use facts
Fact: I ate Shepherd’s Pie for lunch
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 14, 2010 4:29 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
did he say earlier
that the Cubs last won in 1945, which is right?
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Shepherd’s Pie is good
"A waist is a terrible thing to mind." - Terry 'Fat Tub of Goo' Forster
@Twitter as @brommmietze
by eths on Jan 14, 2010 5:19 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
just got to be careful not to get any shepherds stuck in your teeth.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
i rec this
cuz it is a fact
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
I will also
cuz I agree
"This next song... it's about the White Sox. It's called: F*** Em'." - Eddie Vedder
who is next, so we can green it?
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Awww gee... *blush* ...you are tooo kind
"A waist is a terrible thing to mind." - Terry 'Fat Tub of Goo' Forster
@Twitter as @brommmietze
I will, because I ate some, and it was good.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 14, 2010 5:57 PM CST up reply actions
ever try it with Bison meat?
my friend makes it and wow, talk about some good pie
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Deutschen Schäferhunde approve
"A waist is a terrible thing to mind." - Terry 'Fat Tub of Goo' Forster
@Twitter as @brommmietze
the facts were given to you in the original post
and you disregarded them. That is also a fact and known problem with you BLou. you are a passionate Cubs fan, who posts on opinion and personal feeling alone more often than not.l That is why people jump your posts, you do it and know you do it.
Go read the full post and then make a comment with facts and supporting factual evidence
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
it was a question asked
with the understanding of the answer before asking it….
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Just once I like to see you turn right. Just. Once.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 14, 2010 4:24 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
Thanks again
BLou for not reading/failing to understand anything that was written and instead just spouting off your usual talking points.
Nope
You’re attacking the argument that the Cubs are saddled with an assortment of DREADFUL contracts. And your fundamental premise is that free agency is a crapshoot, which it is. But what you blindly fail to account for is that Hendry’s incompetence has led to an extreme addiction to free agency to bail his ass out. And that in turn has let directly to some truly horrendous and regretful contracts on the books that are absolutely killing this team right now.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
again
if you take the time to actually read what I wrote then you would see how off base 99% of what you are typing here is. If you really want to debate this topic then please take the time to actually read what I worked on.
He doesn't need to read all your mumbo jumbo. He's using FACTS.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 14, 2010 4:32 PM CST up reply actions
Over/Under on when he uses the "Shecky Geen" bit or makes reference to my parents divorce. 10 minutes.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 14, 2010 4:36 PM CST up reply actions
Since you've posted this, he will wait and prove you wrong.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
or blame SWL for the divorce
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
That's batshit crazy, we all know it was
BLou’s fault.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
actually it is Hendry's fault
he probably over paid for SWL’s mom to join the front office, and his dad was not willing to move
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
This is closer to the truth than you know.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 14, 2010 4:46 PM CST up reply actions
we need
a standard picture to post when BLou shows up to hijack a thread. I’m thinking along the lines of a crazy old man yelling
I always envision this when BLou shows up to correct us.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 14, 2010 4:38 PM CST up reply actions
photoshop
“It’s another BLOU thread” in that and run with it.
Or maybe this
"A waist is a terrible thing to mind." - Terry 'Fat Tub of Goo' Forster
@Twitter as @brommmietze
The problem is that you are trying to fight bombast with reasoning.
There’s never going to be a good outcome to that.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
We had a Chicken Little thing going for a while.
I liked my spilled Kool-Aid Man as well.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 14, 2010 5:08 PM CST up reply actions
OH YEAH!
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 14, 2010 5:15 PM CST up reply actions
That would be great.
I have a “manual ignore feature” I use at BCB from time to time. Such a pic would help increase its efficiency.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Jan 14, 2010 9:17 PM CST up reply actions
spending on players as Hendry has done
is what Dallas Green did in the 1980’s with the Cubs. How can you praise one for it and try to destroy the other because of it?
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Once again, you too...
… are trying to be reasonable. There’s no way that will work with BLou.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
she's kinda purty
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 14, 2010 5:16 PM CST up reply actions
She looks like the joker's battered wife
"This next song... it's about the White Sox. It's called: F*** Em'." - Eddie Vedder
watch it with the pornography
else you’ll have to pound sand.
you can’t get much by that #$%@ ballhawk -- LT
pornography leads to sand pounding/
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
sand pounding leads to kool-aid drinking
kool-aid drinking leads to suffering.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 14, 2010 8:09 PM CST up reply actions
suffering leads to BLou posts
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
birds flying
leads to BLou posts. Ants breathing leads to BLou posts.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 15, 2010 12:30 PM CST up reply actions
HEY!!!
I have that saying written on all my checks. :)
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Jan 16, 2010 9:32 AM CST up reply actions
Anybody have a BP subscription?
I think Goldstein weighed in positively on Dome when the Cubs signed him. Check the Top Ten prospects list from Dome’s rookie year.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
i dont know if thats a knock to the cubs farm system
or a compliment to fukudome
by jesus christos on Jan 14, 2010 6:00 PM CST up reply actions
Well a lot of the Japanese imports
come in high on prospect lists – not just Dome.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Used To
But I dropped my subscription a couple years ago. After reading KG’s post here, I will never give them another penny. There was universal praise from BP after the Dome signing, it wasn’t only him. It’s astonishing that BP has degenerated so much in the last few years ….
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Jan 16, 2010 9:31 AM CST up reply actions
Off the top of my head...
this may be the best Fan Post I’ve ever read here.
Well done, CC.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Jan 14, 2010 8:32 PM CST reply actions
One point, Re: Fukudome.
He’s the only (and first, I think) player the Cubs have signed to a MLB contract. Thus, he probably increases their revenue stream more than the average free agent of his playing ability. Even if it’s just netting the Cubs a few extra $100K per year, it increases his value. I have no idea what the impact of his presence is on ratings and merchandise sales in Japan, but my guess (and it is just that… a GUESS) is that it’ll be enough to make his total contract have net positive value.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Jan 14, 2010 9:15 PM CST reply actions
whoops, i missed a pretty important word in that first sentence...
Japanese. That first sentence needed to say he’s the only Japanese player the Cubs have signed…
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Jan 14, 2010 9:16 PM CST up reply actions
and you make that guess based on what, exactly?
I debated some other posters today about this. Let’s say Kosuke’s presence nets a “few extra $100K per year” as you said. That would be about $1.2 million, but, just to be generous, let’s say it’s $1.5 million.
So you think Kosuke will be worth $28.5 million over the next two years?
got cut off ...
because his worth has been slightly less — or slightly more, depending on how you figure in his signing bonus — than his contract in the past two years, depending on how you figure in his signing bonus.
ugh ... having issues
Sorry, for the repetition.
It's ok.
Some men learn through what they read. Some men learn through what they're told. Some men have to piss on the railroad tracks. And some men keep on pissin'.
by Ryno Runner on Jan 14, 2010 10:50 PM CST up reply actions
It's ok.
Some men learn through what they read. Some men learn through what they're told. Some men have to piss on the railroad tracks. And some men keep on pissin'.
by Ryno Runner on Jan 14, 2010 10:50 PM CST up reply actions
I dunno, maybe unwarranted optimism?
I really have no idea what the economics are of Fukudome’s marketability overseas, but I think he’s the type of player whose skill set won’t fall off the cliff and instead he could still produce at the level he has the last couple of years.
It really depends on the added value they get from having a Japanese player. Do you have any ideas on how much that’s worth? (I’m not asking as a counter-argument, just honestly wondering if you have an estimate.)
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Jan 14, 2010 11:36 PM CST up reply actions
After doing some googling...
my guess is the Cubs are making millions more per year with him in their lineup every day.
The guy is probably worth the contract.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Jan 14, 2010 11:55 PM CST up reply actions
something about this logic really irks me
I’m not sure why. It kinda feels like a reach, I guess. And after all the hand-wringing and mocking about players like Ryan Theriot and their baseball intangibles, giving Kosuke credit for attracting Japanese fans borders on inconsistent to me.
I know, I know — you can measure the Japanese market. But you can’t really tell me with any certainty how much of the Cubs’ share comes from Kosuke. Now, if someone showed me an increase in Cubs’ revenue in 2008-09 compared with previous years …
Whatever, though. I’m hoping that Kosuke’s on-field performance makes him worth the contract so these arguments become moot. I’m sure if we asked him, he’d feel the same way.
I'm sure the Cubs have those numbers.
As for us, although Kosuke’s effect isn’t as large as some other players, those sorts of things have been made public for other teams (like the Mariners, Red Sox, and Yankees). Japanese fans seem to follow the MLB teams that have players they want to root for, to a significant extent. So while getting an exact number is extremely difficult, I think it’s reasonable to assume Kosuke has had a sizeable impact on our market income from Japan. You’re right that the uncertainty in this is enormous. But to completely ignore it is silly, as we know the direction of the influence with nearly absolute certainty: more people in Japan watch the Cubs because of him.
And this isn’t some intangible. Let’s use an extreme (and admittedly unrealistic) example. Let’s say that a player was a replacement-level player, contributing 0 WAR to the team. Let’s say that he was also (for some reason other than ability) unbelievably popular, and brought the team an extra $50M/year in revenue. Let’s say the Cubs are paying him $10M/year. Is this a bad contract? No. It’s probably the best one in baseball, even measured in terms of on-field production. Why? Because that extra $40M you’re making off the player could make your team 10 wins better, if spent wisely. Clearly you don’t want a team full of these “money makers” but if you had one of them you could stack the rest of the team with much better players as a result.
This sort of thing is extremely tangible. It’s just not something /we/ can pin down accurately without the revenue numbers. And if Fukudome’s contract is borderline above average in value, the extra revenue brought in from overseas may tip the scales.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Jan 15, 2010 11:44 AM CST up reply actions
Well put.
To try and add to this – I don’t think that what Dome adds to the team is “intangible.” It’s just hard to measure in value. Some of it’s fairly easy to measure – we needed good OF defense and by UZR we have a decent gauge of how Dome’s defense helped in RF. Some of it is very controversial – we needed a LH on-base player, which Dome is. To what degree lefty-righty balance and patience at the plate helps the team beyond simple WAR calculations is questionable.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
I agree with a lot of this ...
And you’re right, what you’re describing is tangible, as opposed to the scrappiness of someone like Theriot. I actually noted that the Kosuke-Japanese fan impact WAS tangible in a comment yesterday. But tangible and quantifiable (without looking at the Cubs’ books) are very different things.
Here’s my last point on this …
When Kosuke Fukudome signed with the Cubs, I was expecting a player who’s on-field impact would help the Cubs win a championship. Before anybody gets up in arms, I’m well aware that Kosuke can’t win a championship by himself.
That said, I wasn’t excited about the potential Japanese revenue streams. I wasn’t excited about possible influence on the Cubs’ overall patience at the plate (which is another argument). I was excited about Kosuke helping the Cubs on the field — and I thought he would perform better than he has.
I agree that Kosuke is more valuable if you consider the (very hard to quantify) impact of making the Cubs more popular in Japan. But I’m disappointed that his performance hasn’t been good enough to justify his contract WITHOUT such caveats.
And even WITH the caveats, he’ll need to step it up in 2010-2011 because his contract increases in value.
I still dont' understand your point, then.
When Kosuke Fukudome signed with the Cubs, I was expecting a player who’s on-field impact would help the Cubs win a championship.
And even WITH the caveats, he’ll need to step it up in 2010-2011 because his contract increases in value.
Shouldn’t all of this this be the case for almost every player on the roster, many of whom get paid far more then Dome and do less to bring in alternative revenue sources?
My gripe isn’t with your claim that Kosuke hasn’t been worth his contract. My gripe is with your insistence in making that in to a big deal, when the difference is minimal compared to other players, and when Dome does contribute to the team in other ways that are worth money off the field.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 15, 2010 1:00 PM CST up reply actions
plus something missing is
that a player who brings in more revenue (such as a chunk of the Japanese revenue stream) allows money to be used on other players, or for stadium upgrades, etc. There is the fans want to win and win often, but there is the ownership and business part that fans forget sometimes.
As I linked to yesterday, the Japanese market accounts for nearly 70% of the internaltional revenue that MLB makes. That is a HUGE amount of the revenue. If the Cubs sell Fukudome merchandise they get 69% of that sale, and the balance is split equally amongst the league.
I wish I had the exact numbers, but I can guarantee it is a lot. How can I guarantee this, simple. MLB wants to have a World Series with Japan. If there was no $$$$$ in that, they would not think about it. Selig might be a dumb ass in many ways, but he knows how to make money.
Signing players like Ichiro, Matsui, Dice K and Fukudome generate a lot of money, and for anyone to ignore that fact, it watching with blinders, or trying to pick and choose what facts can be used in a converstaion.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
dude ...
From my comment today:
“I agree that Kosuke is more valuable if you consider the (very hard to quantify) impact of making the Cubs more popular in Japan. But I’m disappointed that his performance hasn’t been good enough to justify his contract WITHOUT such caveats.”
Not ignoring anything.
it was a general statement, nothing more
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
huh?
Is it so wrong of me to want actual numbers to back up your claim that Kosuke’s appeal in Japan has negated (and will negate) any difference between what he was and will be paid, and what he earned on the field?
And note: I’m not ignoring anything.
I have given you multiple links to shed light
have you not read those?
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
you have provided evidence ...
that the Japanese market is big. You have not provided me evidence that Kosuke Fukudome has increased the Chicago Cubs revenue from Japan by XX percent.
I know McDonalds sells a lot of hamburgers.
Should we discount the effect that hamburgers have on McDonalds bottom line because i don’t know how much the cost, how much they bring in, or how many they sell?
I have to believe you actually grasp this and are just being adverse here, right?
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 15, 2010 2:56 PM CST up reply actions
Good God
I’ll post it for the third time:
"I agree that Kosuke is more valuable if you consider the (very hard to quantify) impact of making the Cubs more popular in Japan. But I’m disappointed that his performance hasn’t been good enough to justify his contract WITHOUT such caveats.""
My point is, I’d like to see actual numbers — not musings (informed as they may be) from fellow BCBers — before I say that the contract is DEFINITELY worth it.
I have not found anything for Fukudome yet
but this is a great example of the additional Japanese that can be generated with one player from the Wall Street Journal
While the Yankees have paid Mr. Matsui $52 million the past four years, the investment seems to have more than paid for itself. By having him on the team, the Yankees have been able to generate nearly $20 million a year in marketing and sponsorship revenue from Japanese companies, according to a person familiar with the deals.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
that's interesting
I ask this without any slant, but that’s the first time you’ve posted that link, right?
Who cares.
Its basically what we’ve all been saying all along. What you can’t take it seriously without it being surrounded by a pretty blue box?
It made perfect sense before that quote.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 15, 2010 3:07 PM CST up reply actions
I'm sorry ...
I prefer actual numbers to your speculation — even if it is logical speculation.
Unfortunatly, that isn't a reasonable expectation.
The cubs don’t release those numbers.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 15, 2010 3:17 PM CST up reply actions
yes
seems the Cubs have not offered up any exacts on “Fukudome Japanese based revenue” but I started searching out other players, and that was the first I stumbled on. That is one hell of an eye opener, even for me
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Isn't Matsui more popular in Japan
that Fukudome ever was? I’m not trying to start an argument, I’m just wondering, because I thought that point was made before.
As far as the Cubs and Dome are concerned, does anyone know of any marketing or sponsorship deals the Cubs have with Japanese companies?
that is one I cannot answer
sadly, Dragon has not been on here recently, he could give the best answer. He is a Fukudome fan from Japan who posts here from time to time
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
but here is one I did find
Nippon Life Insurance Company Announces Sponsorship with Chicago Cubs
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
i really wish the Cubs put more out there
about their finances and where the revenue comes from. I have found numerous showing how much revenue brought in vs payroll alone, but not where ther revenue comes in, nor the additional over head
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
despite our argument the past two days
thank you for doing the research.
no problem
I was/am just as curious about the exact numbers, and wish the Cubs released them (or someone on here could get the numbers somehow).
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
True
Hopefully someone remembers to ask him next time he’s around.
Also, if I recall correctly, wasn’t there some prominent Japanese signage in the outfield at Yankee stadium for a while? I don’t know how much something like that costs a year, but I’d assume it’s a nice portion of that 20 million.
and because we're not
Cubs employees, we WON’T be able to provide evidence. Cmon. It’s a reasonable supposition, supported by some pretty good circumstantial evidence. It won’t convict anyone in court, but it’s not nothing either.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 15, 2010 4:27 PM CST up reply actions
well, as I said yesterday ...
I agree that the Soriano and the Bradley/Silva contracts are worse deals.
As for me making it into a big deal … I merely made a comment on a discussion board and I then responded to the comments I received. I made a point. I stood behind it. I discussed it AND I didn’t get disrespectful (didn’t use words like ‘dumb’ and didn’t compare anyone with unpopular posters).
I at no point have said Kosuke’s a bad player or that I won’t change my mind if he improves his onfield performance.
You made a questionable point...
… and seem intent on clinging to it in the face of lots of evidence that your point may be flawed. Hence, making a big deal out of something not worth it.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 15, 2010 3:00 PM CST up reply actions
quantifiable and available are not the same
the numbers are more than quantified, but they are not public knowledge.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
we cannot account for them in exacts
but we can make educated conclusions based on the facts I have presented, that he has been worth more than the $1.1 million he is “over paid” with the additional revenues he has generated for the Cubs.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Wow, I'll be the first one to admit...
…in all my defenses of Kosuke, I never really looked at him this way or took things to this level. I simply like the way he plays the game and get aggravated when people exaggerate his shortcomings. (Y’know, like equating him to So Taguchi.) But I think you make a very important point. And I’d add that, for the Cubs, finally signing a player from Japan was a step forward in itself. Historically, this is an organization that has always lagged behind the times. They lagged behind in integrating black players; they lagged behind in developing their farm systems; they lagged behind in adapting to free agency. Signing Kosuke was a step forward – perhaps still fairly late compared with other teams, but at least they finally made the step.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
The annual MLB TV revenue in Japan is around $6 billion...
divide that by 30 and you get $20M/team. If the Cubs get an extra 10% from having Fukudome on the team (a reasonable assumption, I think) that’s $2M/year.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Jan 15, 2010 12:18 AM CST up reply actions
revenue sharing, if i am correct
31% gets split, the balance goes to the team that generated it. I do not know if TV is the same split or not
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
That's right.
But I didn’t put that in the calculation because the calculation was stupid simple. I’d include that if I thought my numbers were anywhere near accurate.
In other words, that’s probably not as big of an error as all the simple assumptions made in the post. I’m just trying to get an order of magnitude estimate of Fukudome’s market value in Japan. I’d guess it’s in the millions.
by Shawn Domagal-Goldman on Jan 15, 2010 2:41 AM CST up reply actions
Also, Fukudome has been pretty freaking good
by vivaelpujols on Jan 16, 2010 1:47 AM CST up reply actions
Ah
We don’t let the facts cloud our judgments here on BCB.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Jan 16, 2010 9:26 AM CST up reply actions
He's a japanese robot sent from the future...
… to steal the Cub’s extra payroll flexibility and sabotage the team!
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 16, 2010 10:31 AM CST up reply actions
My favorite stupid quote from Goldstein's article
The $125 million figure doesn’t lead baseball, as the Yankees and Red Sox surpass it
So you’re telling me that the only 2 teams that spend more on their top 10 contracts are the same 2 teams that have a higher overall payroll than the Cubs? It’s almost as if these two things are somehow related.
Exactly.
In another place, a poster said that if farm products even partially panned out, we wouldn’t need to go to free agency. But that’s backwards thinking. If you have the payroll, then there’s no virtue in playing your own farm guys unless they’re better than what you can get in free agency.
For my part, I’m glad that Cubs are one of the most marketable brand names in baseball and I’m glad the ownership has approved putting profits into payroll instead of into their pockets.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Good point. So, do you agree the
knock isn’t that they are willing to try to upgrade a position via either free agency or a trade for a guy about to enter free agency, it’s the guys Hendry has targeted and the dollars and contract length for some of his choices that’s the problem.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
I don't think there's a simple, one-point-only explanation.
I think that Hendry’s faults are overstated, for one thing. But if you look into specifics, there are different problems.
There has been a farm problem, but in general, that appears to have been corrected recently. But not all of the frustrations of the farm have come from bad development. People like to connect Patterson and Pie as if they were simple replays. But Patterson was rushed and Pie was not. Patterson was allowed to move forward without having the skills necessary to succeed at the ML level. Pie was not given the opportunity to prove that he had the skills and ability.
Soriano’s contract is too long, but the Cubs went into it with their eyes open. They were willing to take the bad at the end of the deal in order to get the short-term benefit. But there aren’t really any other contracts like Soriano’s on the team. Soriano was also a misfit – a leadoff hitter w/o plate discipline – but the Cubs have since come to a better understanding of the need for plate discipline and have been teaching that as well as seeking free agents who carry that skill.
Fukudome’s contract doesn’t really bother me. He clearly has more talent than the OFs signed to similar contracts. We’ve had trouble getting consistency from Dome, which I believe to be the fault of bull-headed carelessness from the manager.
One thing about both Dome and Bradley – when signed, nearly everyone of the paid pundits agreed these were perfect fits for what the Cubs were lacking. But in Bradley’s case, it was just clear that everyone underestimate the degree to which problems could be caused by his personality.
As for Z, I think Hendry just loves Z and overrates him a little and gave things away to Z he didn’t need to give – especially to a player who has repeatedly said he wants to play his whole career in Chicago. I’m not sure why Hendry was willing to play chicken with Aramis, but not with Z.
I think Hendry also gives gift contracts to players like Henry Blanco, Neifi Perez, and Aaron Miles if he thinks they’re good guys who deserve it. To what degree it actually hampers the team is questionable – especially if you believe their chemistry additions have value.
I could go on. But the basic point is that I think Hendry has made some mistakes, but I don’t see an ongoing pattern where he doesn’t learn from mistakes. I also think our managers have been careless with our talent and lost value for us that has exaggerated the “failure of the farm.”
And in the end, I think this all looks worse than it is in the shadow of a injury-ridden disappointment season.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
by DGU on Jan 15, 2010 1:17 PM CST up reply actions 7 recs
One of the better comments...
… to one of the better OPs i’ve ever read. Rec’d.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Jan 15, 2010 3:03 PM CST up reply actions
agreed many times over.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Bradley
I think you’re oversimplifying when you say that nearly all of the paid pundits said he was a perfect fit for what the Cubs were lacking. Steve Stone, for one, was incredulous that the Cubs signed Bradley to be a big left-handed bat when Bradley’s best numbers came from the right side.
I think a lot of pundits agreed that Bradley was AMONG THE BEST FITS AVAILABLE, because he could hit left handed and he could play right.
I still don't get how any of this matters
Who cares what the paid pundits say when the signing occurs? Many people were against signing DeRosa after 06. He turned out to be a fantastic signing. Are we supposed to not give Hendry credit for that?
Same thing with Marlon Byrd. Seems like many people were against it. Well, if his ops is 900 this year, then do we just say “well, a lot of people were against the move, so it was still a poor signing?” Of course not. We’ll applaud Jim, and rightfully so.
No
This goes to the question of whether or not Bradley’s personality meltdown and Lou’s inability to manage him was foreseeable. If it was foreseeable, how come no one saw it coming?
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Of course it was foreseeable
All the red flags were debated back and forth when the rumors popped up last offseason. Jim thought it wouldn’t matter. He screwed up. Period.
Go back and look.
The red flags mentioned were that he wouldn’t be healthy. No one predicted there would be a huge personality conflict, that Lou would lose control of the clubhouse.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
I'll ignore the Lou bash
And state that his health AND his personality were both issues when discussing him.
Al has some nice pictures to back it up in this fanpost:
(http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2008/12/31/705873/the-case-for-milton-bradle )
And there seems to be some discussion about who’s going to have take him aside and let him know that his attitude can’t be issue in Chicago (seems like Demp and Lee were the leading candidates)
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2009/1/5/709855/gameboard-set-match-milton
There are a lot of comments in the above post about how Milton’s attitude has been misinterpreted. If his attitude wasn’t an issue, people wouldn’t have felt the need to keep defending it.
It's not a Lou-bash.
It’s just the way things were. Lou couldn’t get control. That doesn’t mean any other manager could have. We don’t have enough information to know if any particular blame should be given Lou.
I’ve re-read one of those recently, and while I remember people complaining about Milton’s attitude, no one predicted a clubhouse blow-up on this magnitude. The reason no one predicted it is because it hadn’t happened, even at the other spots where Milton did have problems.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Stone is incredulous no matter what the Cubs do
He’s like BLou, the main difference being that he’s occasionally correct.
Stone makes
a cottage industry out of being outraged at what the Cubs do, just like Sullivan makes a cottage industry out of taking potshots at guys he doesn’t like.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 15, 2010 4:32 PM CST up reply actions
Well Stone was being simplistic, then.
Bradley was perfect because the ‘08 team had equal splits v. LHP and RHP. Subtracting DeRosa required a balance v. RHP. So, Bradley could stand in the LH batters’ box because of Lou’s theory that Lee and Rami were being hurt by outside strikes, while preserving the team’s balance.
Bradley was also supposed to be such a great fit because the Cubs were supposed to need “fire.” LOL.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Well, what Bradley brought to the team did in fact burn...
but it turned out to be hemorrhoids.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 15, 2010 5:18 PM CST up reply actions
we should have know that it would be a bad signing when
BLou was telling us how great it will be
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
using that logic
byrd will win MVP and holliday will lose a leg
woohoo
by jesus christos on Jan 15, 2010 5:30 PM CST up reply actions
I think Hendry also gives gift contracts to players like Henry Blanco, Neifi Perez, and Aaron Miles if he thinks they’re good guys who deserve it. To what degree it actually hampers the team is questionable – especially if you believe their chemistry additions have value.
There’s also value to having players consider your GM a good guy to work for.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 15, 2010 4:31 PM CST up reply actions
Ok, so
if farm products even partially panned out, we wouldn’t need to go to free agency. But that’s backwards thinking
If my thinking is backwards, what you’re telling me is that a farm system isn’t really important, and that we should just focus on getting free agents, which leaves Jim with very little flexibility (which you also don’t seem to find value in). Just wondering if I’m understanding you.
No
I’m saying that a team with the Cubs’ level of payroll should play the best players they can afford. They don’t have to worry about maximizing farm value in the same way mid- and low-market teams have to.
I value flexibility quite a bit, but the Cubs’ lack of flexibility came from the Bradley contract, which was an unusual situation. The contract wasn’t too long for a player with his skillset. If he hadn’t been suspended, he’d have been moveable.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Flexibility is more than just payroll though
It’s also having tradeable assets, which allows Jim to utilize his greatest strength. I know some people don’t see the importance in that either, but what does Jim do if Soriano is as bad this year as he was last year? What if Kosuke falls off a cliff? We’ve saw what happens with Bradley: we get Carlos Silva.
And I’m quite fascinated by your assertion that Bradley would have tradeable if he hadn’t been suspended. I don’t completely disagree; I think it hurt his value, but not by a whole lot. But are you saying Jim not only screwed up by signing him, but also by suspending him?
The Suspension
I think the suspension was called for, although I don’t know what was really happening. Sometimes you just have to draw a line.
When I say he would have been tradeable “if” – I really mean that it was the total personality meltdown which may well have leaked out while the Cubs were trying to trade MB anyway. If Lou had found a way to make peace in the clubhouse and it wasn’t expected that the Cubs HAD to trade MB, he would have easily been traded.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Nope, not buying it
The longest Milton played anywhere was Cleveland, which was for two years (plus ten games a year before). There’s a laundry list of problems this guy has had with previous teams, which I’m sure you’re well aware of. The fact that he was only able to survive in Chicago for a year should surprise no one.
Regardless, your previous post made it sound like suspending him was a poor choice, which would’ve indicted Hendry. Clearly we can’t have that. So now it’s Lou’s fault that he wasn’t able to make peace in the clubhouse, even though Zambrano stated a couple days ago that Bradley was “good in the clubhouse”
From what I’ve seen, it looked like Bradley was suspended not because of things he did in the clubhouse, but because of things he said to the media. A suspension that occurred with two weeks left in a lost season, which hurt Bradley’s trade value. It was dumb for sure. And it was Jim’s choice.
Hmm, having trouble copying links today
My apologies.
http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/01/big-z-on-bradley-sometimes-a-little-strange.html
There’s where Z made his Bradley comment
I'm not really interested in re-debating Bradley.
There’s just too much behind the scenes to know how much the situation was botched by MB, how much by JH, and how much by LP.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Fair enough
The reason I entered into this debate was because even though you don’t know who was to blame, you don’t seem to have a problem assuming Lou screwed up while defending Jim. To each his own I suppose.
One more time -
I’m not trying to blame Lou or defend Hendry on Milton Bradley. I’m a Bradley agnostic who suspects there’s more to the story of blame than we’ve heard or ever will hear. And, frankly, I’d rather not hear and just move on.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Alright then
When I see things like “If Lou had been able to make peace in the clubhouse” and “Lou not being able to control the clubhouse” but no “If Jim had been more diligent in his research of Bradley” or “If Jim had taken into account the difficulty of playing in such an intense media market”, well, it seems like there is blame being placed on one guy and not another. But oh well. Just my opinion.
i believe there is enough blame to go around
JH, MB, LP, Fans, Media, everyone made this worse than it had to be from the start, and it continues now
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Well I told you what I intended.
You are certainly free to interpret as you please.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
if Kosuke falls off a cliff
I believe that he would need medical attention, and I would hope and pray it was not a high cliff, for his own safety
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
So DGU makes the argument that failure of Patterson and Pie is the failure of Dusty and Lou
Lovely stuff. Lay it all at the doorstop of the manager and not the prospect himself. Or the scouting department. Or the player development team in the minors. Or the comical GM with the huge payroll that fritters away money and has addiction to expensive free agency to cover up the deficiencies of the organization otherwise.
Felix Pie is a failure of Lou Piniella. Wow is that great stuff. Because Lord knows Lou Piniella is wholly unqualified to assess, mentor and develop young promising position talent. The development of young players under his tutelage like Barry Larkin, A-Rod, Jay Buhner, Rocco Baldelli was just a big fat coincidence.
Corey Patterson is a failure of Dusty. Because Lord knows Dusty ruins young talent. I guess what is happening in Cincinnati with Jay Bruce and Joey Votto is a mirage.
Fascinating, wondrous stuff. If a Cub prospect makes it then Jim Hendry is annointed high praise. But if a Cub prospect fails its the manager.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
Felix Pie
went to a team that played him and turned out a good season. In the AL East. How do you explain that away wise guy?
I agree with some of what you say
But you are wrong about Corey. I am sure Corey’s failure has nothing to do with him telling coaches that there was nothing they could teach him (as he said to Sarge for starters).
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
I said Patterson was rushed.
I’m not sure Patterson was going to work out under any manager. He wasn’t teachable and he was rushed – that’s on both Corey and the Cubs. But Dusty sure didn’t help matters by trying to turn Corey into a lead-off hitter, something he was totally unsuited to be. And it was that process that turned Corey from disappointment to disaster.
As for Pie – surely Pie wasn’t ruined by Lou, because Pie ended 2009 hitting and playing well. Lou just failed to recognize what Pie could be.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
or did Pie thrive
for a team with no expectations like the Cubs have from their Media and fans? In the AL East no one expects them to be in the race with the Yanks and Sawks. Having no pressure, could allow him to relax and just paly. Also he was a year older and another year wiser.
Not making en excuse for Lou, but these could be part of the reason he did well in Baltimore
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
In the minors
Pie was extremely competitive with a lot of drive to win.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Felix Pie was selectively used by Baltimore in his role as spare outfielder
My goodness. Don’t sit there and say with a straight face that Felix PIe was an integral part of the Baltimore Orioles or that he was in the lineup every day. Because he wasn’t. In fact, it was widely assumed Andy McPhail was trying to peddle him and had no takers. Then Adam Jones went on the shelf and Pie played.
Felix Pie will forever struggle to hit or get on base enough. He is a 5th outfielder type. The more he plays the more he will be exposed.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
so you are saying that it is not Lou or Hendry who are at fault
you are saying Pie just is not a good player
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
this is hilarous
if I had more time I would go back and find the bullshit BLou was spilling about Pie last year. How he would never make it ect ect. He just posted a 1.8 WAR season in baseballs toughest division at league minimum and he still finds a way to wish it away.
Stuff like this is why nobody takes you seriously Mike.
by CalCalender on Jan 15, 2010 10:21 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Right.
“Selectively used”, he said. Pie had 281 PA — about 1/2 a season’s worth — in 101 games. He played nearly every day from the beginning of August until September 25. During that time he hit .290/.347/.511 in a not-so-small-sample-size 147 PA with six home runs.
We’d have taken a “selection” like that.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
281 plate appearances
This after Adam Jones got hurt and McFAIL tried unsuccessfully to dump the very same Felix Pie who he had only acquired a few short months previous.
Felix Pie will do nothing in 2010. In fact, I’ll bet the ranch he tastes Triple A all over again.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
I don't want your ranch.
Just your admission that you were wrong, if you turn out to be.
Bet I won’t get that, either.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
facts mean nothing when debating anything with BLou
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Al, you know what you say to us about using facts with BLou
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Felix Pie
is absolutely on Lou Pinella. He had no patience for the guy despite a strong track record of success. If the Cubs had given the kid a real shot Pie would have been our starting CF, we never would have signed Bradley (or Byrd) and we would have a cheap league average CF right now.
177 AB’s was all the chance we gave him in 2007 and Hendry and the Cubs minor league guys loved the kid. Hendry deferred to Lou and it was the wrong choice plain and simple. Just like with Wuertz.
by CalCalender on Jan 15, 2010 11:13 PM CST up reply actions
I believe it is part Cubs management and
part Pie,as he was able to thrive better with little to no expectations in Baltimore.
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Is it at all possible that Pie has just improved?
Young players do that. In the off-season they can play winter ball and work on things that you don’t want to mess with when the games count. Sometimes it works.
Yep
You can go through the records of plenty of prospects who are now established and see 100-200 PAs of initial struggling. Without going back to check things, I believe Evan Longoria and Dustin Pedroia struggled about as long as Pie and Carlos Gonzalez struggled twice as long as Pie.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
They had a championship caliber team
You want him to develop Pie as a pet project? Easy to say now when you know they didn’t win in 07 or 08. But it wouldve been a huge mistake to play Pie as much as he needed to be played.
by Orval Overall on Jan 16, 2010 3:07 PM CST up reply actions
the short term for Pie would have been
and who is to say if we would have been as good with or without Pie. Its a debate with no answer
JMHO
Just because you talk a lot doesn't mean you're saying anything. dtpollitt 1-7-10
Wuertz
I believe he had a career year and will revert back to his career norms this upcoming season.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Jan 17, 2010 4:48 PM CST up reply actions
I've seen this double standard quite a bit
If a Cub prospect makes it then Jim Hendry is annointed high praise. But if a Cub prospect fails its the manager.
and I agree, it is tiresome.
So, you're patting yourself on the back for having the same hermeneutic as BLou?
What’s truly tiresome is explaining yourself multiple times only to have people persist in misinterpretation. I’ve given Lou the credit for helping move Hendry towards an appreciation of OBP and I’ve said that Patterson was rushed to the point that probably no manager could have helped.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
I don't see where I'm patting myself on the back at all
but whatever. And DGU, while I respect you quite a bit as a poster, and I think your knowledge rivals any other poster on this site, it’s pretty obvious you put on blinders when it comes to Jim Hendry.
If I’m misinterpreting your posts, then I apologize. But it’s clearly not the first time you’ve blamed Lou for something (Bradley) while completely absolving Jim. And yes, I know you’ve explained that you’re not really blaming Lou, or absolving Jim, all the while making claims like “If only Lou could’ve controlled the clubhouse” while never making a statement like “If only Jim had considered the difficulty of Milton moving to a larger market”. Again, it’s not the first time, and if I’m misinterpreting, then it’s pretty obvious why.
Every other fault of Jim’s is always excused immediately. Developing a farm system? Who cares, the Cubs are rich! Has Jim ever signed or traded for a bad player? Of course not! Kevin Gregg was a poor trade not because he’s a bad player, but because Lou won’t like him! Aaron Miles? Who cares if he was the worst player in baseball? It’s because Lou didn’t use him right!
Felix Pie? Lou made Jim do it! Couldn’t Pie have been used in Gathright’s role? No, Jim’s too nice a guy to make him do that! Randy Wells? All Jim! Wuertz? Blame Lou! The Soriano contract? The Tribune made him do it! Kerry Wood and Mark DeRosa playing much worse after leaving Chicago? Jim knew exactly when to cut them loose!
I’m not saying you’ve made all the claims above, but all the gung ho Hendry defenders tend to deflect any blame on Hendry to Lou (who I’m more than willing to admit has his own faults as well). Even Hendry’s biggest fault according to the defenders (kowtowing to managers) is really just another way to absolve Hendry’s decision making and blame it on these idiot managers (most completely agree that Lou was an upgrade from Dusty). Does Jim ever get blamed for hiring such idiots? Of course not! They made him hire them! Because he’s nice!
And just so I’m not misinterpreted, I don’t hate Hendry. I think he’s an average GM, and my biggest problem with him is his failure to develop a fruitful farm system. It just boggles my mind how some people around here are so insistent on blaming everyone but the boss for any of the team’s failures. Just once I’d like to see these defenders simply say “Jim screwed up”. Not “Jim screwed up by listening to so and so”, not that a mistake was made because Jim is too nice a guy, or was concerned about public relations, but that Jim simply made a poor baseball decision all by himself. Jim’s the boss, and thus he’s accountable for his decisions. But that’s just me, I guess.
by shoemile on Jan 16, 2010 2:10 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
It's about the Cubs, right?
What you call blinders I call the failure to communicate subtlety, and note that I’m saying "failure to communicate" as a way to remove blame from either writer or reader at this point. One way or another, my thoughts on the Cubs are not matching the way you represent my thoughts.
For one thing, on a blog, we tend to be responding to people, which can skew perspective. For another, it’s easy for some people to develop an interpretive pattern of what they expect from a poster. So, even when that poster strays from the pattern, the pattern keeps you from noticing.
Take Kevin Gregg as an example. I haven’t gone back to see what I most said about Gregg, but what you apparently most remember was that it was a bad trade because Lou wouldn’t like him. Now I did say that, but my full thoughts on why Gregg was a bad trade included several other points. I thought we overpaid (even as I was bearish on Ceda). I thought we could have gotten a nearly identical pitcher minus the walks in Brandon Lyon through free agency. I thought we could have waited and seen if Gregg just got cut by the Fish. I thought the deal was rushed to be ready to announce when they announced Wood was leaving.
That last point is my biggest criticism of Hendry – not that he kowtows to his managers – but that he lets players lose a ton of value all for the apparent sake of PR. I’ve said this before.
But why should I have to say it? Say you’re right to assume that I have blinders on. Even if that’s the case, the appropriate thing to do is respond to my argument, not to the man. Arguing about whether or not I mean what I say is of no use. Argue whether what I say about the Cubs is right or wrong
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
I think I'm doing both
But maybe I’m misinterpreting. To brutally simplify it, I thought this was the conversation we’ve been having for a while:
DGU: This is Lou’s fault.
Me: No, this is Jim’s fault.
If you think I’m attacking you personally, I apologize. Eventually all these defenses of Hendry blur together, and it becomes clear that there’s a motive behind each and every one; deflect blame from Hendry. Whether that’s what you mean to do or not, that’s how it comes across.
Look at how things have been going in the Spring Training threads. Here are the type of things someone who’s adamant the Cubs should stay in Arizona says:
1. The Cubs have history there!
2. Travel time in Florida is too long!
3. There are a lot of fans in AZ!
4. There’s more to do in AZ!
Some good points, yes, but then eventually the biases become clear, as well as the inability to give any credit to the other side, so you start “responding to the person” because it’s clear their biases have clouded their logic.
That’s why these discussions have turned into this. At first I was definitely responding to the argument. But then I saw a common theme running through these arguments:
1. It’s Lou’s fault the Cubs had to trade Pie (Couldn’t he have done Gathright’s job? Does Lou get credit for telling Jim to not trade D-Lee last offseason?)
2. Wuertz flourished away from Lou (Does Lou get credit for getting the best out of Wood? Can’t Jim be more forceful about PT? He is his boss, after all.)
3. The Tribune made Jim spend all this money (and they were adamant in how he allocate it as well?)
4. Bradley wasn’t a bad deal because his numbers were good before (But DeRosa was a good deal because he performed better than expected?)
Do you honestly not see where I’m coming from? Yes, I know you’re happy Lou likes OBP (well, I guess FL beaches are nice…), but if you really don’t think that you’re defending Jim at every turn, then I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
I've said all these things.
1) I said Jim shouldn’t have folded on Pie.
2) I said Jim shouldn’t have dumped Wuertz.
3) I said there were better ways to use the money.
And your 4th point doesn’t track to me.
And I praised Lou for seeing in Fontenot what I couldn’t see. I praised Lou for moving to Soto even while Kendall was performing well. I praised Lou for sticking with Edmonds.
And I’ve written posts like this before, but I doubt I will again. I’m tired of repeating my “record.”
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Fair enough DGU
Sorry to agitate you. Like I said, I have a lot of respect for you as a poster. And admittedly, I haven’t been here for very long. I’m only going on the things I’ve seen. ’Til next time, my friend.
Think of it this way.
Say my next fanpost is “Why the Cubs will only win 75 games, but it will be a good thing” and the argument is that we will lose 75 games only because our manager is incompetent, but at the trade deadline Jim Hendry will sell off parts and the trades will be so good we will end up with Adrian Gonzalez and Grady Sizemore.
Now, reading this fanpost, say it seems obvious that I’m not doing anything but expressing unfounded disgust for Lou and unfounded admiration for Hendry. You can respond in two different ways. You can argue the argument, pointing out that Hendry can’t be a good GM if he hires a manager this incompetent and further that if we’re only at 75 wins, it will be very unlikely that our veterans will be performing well enough to bring back anything in trade.
On the other hand, you can respond ad hominem, questioning my motivations. Even if you try and be as polite as possible, even if you’re actually right about my motivations, an ad hominem argument doesn’t get us anywhere because we stop talking about the Cubs, who can be analyzed by observation, statistics, etc. and start talking about the minds of posters, which cannot be analyzed except by supposition.
Till next time, friend.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
i don't doubt you've said any of these things
My only question was did you say:
1. Jim shouldn’t have folded on Pie (by listening to Lou’s opinions that he should be traded)
2. Jim shouldn’t have dumped Wuertz (by listening to Lou’s opinions that he should be traded)
3. There were better ways to use the money (however, the front office demanded they use all the money. Who in their right mind would refuse to use all the money ownership allowed them? Fans would be hysterical if they did so)
Because that’s what I’ve seen. I’m more than willing to be told that I haven’t read your posts (aka opinions) before I joined this quaint community of Cubs fans. If that’s the case, I fully apologize. Again, I’m only stating what I’ve seen.
Imaginary BCB
I really think you’re reading a different website than everyone else.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Jan 17, 2010 5:00 PM CST up reply actions
Wow
Denial is a powerful drug. You do hate Hendry. You just hide it better than most. Your bias shows in every post you make. This particular post is your most egregious one though and really shows your true colors. There are so many misstatements and hyperbole that it boggles the mind. It’d take hours to rebut every single one of them but I’m not going to waste my time and energy one someone like you.
Just one thing before I go, if Hendry was responsible for every single thing in this post, how the hell could any rational person say he’s an AVERAGE GM???
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Jan 17, 2010 4:58 PM CST up reply actions
I'm kinda surprised you can be incredulous
at my assertion that Jim Hendry is an average GM after seeing what the farm has produced under his reign while considering he’s able to outspend everyone in his division by a significant margin. Disagree? Sure. But incredulous? Hmm. Oh well.
Oh, whoops
You’re saying if I blame him for all these mistakes, how could I claim him to be average? Sorry bout that Wayne.
I don’t fully blame him for all these things, Wayne. I’m just pointing out things he’s at least partially responsible for that I’ve seen others fully absolve him for. As for how he’s average, I’ll simplify it and say I think he’s good at trading, average at FA, and bad at farm development. That averages out to…average.
LOL
In some ways, Votto regressed in a couple of areas so it’s highly comical to me that you’d hold him up as a Dusty Baker success story. And Bruce was hurt and had little success when healthy due mainly to a low BABIP fueled by a subpar 13 LD rate. On the bright side, Bruce upped his walk rate and lowered his strikeouts so there is optimism for 2010. But you know how Dusty hates people clogging up the bases with walks so he’ll probably drum the patience out of JB this spring training. One other thing that might hinder Jay’s progress is the wrist injury he had last year. Just remember how long it took Derrek Lee to recover his power after hurting his wrist. It took just over a full calendar year. I’m just saying …
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Jan 16, 2010 9:16 AM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
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 Chicago Cubs Game Threads
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
