Nady unlikely to be ready for full time duty until June
by DC Cubbie on Mar 10, 2010 7:45 PM CST
Email
PrintNot sure how big of a story this is considering Nady was never really slotted for full time duty but it might possibly have an effect on how the roster shakes out. If Nady can't play more then a few days a week until June, it would seem to give Fuld the edge on the 5th outfield spot. I wonder if management and the medical staff expected this would be the case with Nady when they signed him considering we had other options we could have gone with instead. I think if nothing else we can expect opponents to be taking an extra base on Nady in the early going.
http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/03/piniella-nady-wont-be-ready-to-play-regularly-until-june.html
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.
421 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It may be that Nady starts the year on the DL.
Which would likely make room on the team for Tracy and Millar.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
If that is the case...
aren’t we then back to the “Baker as an occasional OF” thing? Or are you putting Tracy or Millar out there as the 5th OF (assuming Fuld is 4/5)?
Probably Tracy or Millar, I'd guess.
Although neither one has much recent OF experience.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
If Nady is not ready he should be rehabbing
and Fuld AND Colvin or Millar should be on the team. A guy rehabbing his shoulder sounds virtually worthless in the field and unless he is superman to pinch hit.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
uhho
next years question for Lou?
jessica: if Nady was not ready, why didnt you play Colvin, FUld and MIllar more in ST?
lou: sweetheart, didnt we have this talk last year?
Sunday Feb 28 at 7 PM CST free webcast of the live taping of The Austin Variety Show www.austinvarietyshow.com/
It is his elbow
not his shoulder. He is able to hit otherwise he would not be suiting up as the DH in ST games.
"All I want is food and creative love" - Rusted Root
by TheRiot Police on Mar 11, 2010 11:16 AM CST up reply actions
Fuld has always had the edge for the 5th outfield spot and Nady was supposed to be the 4th.
At least that was the conventional wisdom. But now? If Nady can only pinch hit, that doesn’t sound like much of a 4th OFer. So does Fuld become #4? Too bad Colvin isn’t RH – assuming he keeps doing well in ST, he could have been an interesting platoon partner for Dome.
Bottom line – it’ll be interesting to see who is the first OFer off the bench until Nady is ready.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Jim Hendry screwed up ... AGAIN
So let me get this straight. I like Xavier Nady. I really do. But Hendry went out and spent $3 million on a ballplayer that may miss a couple months to start the season and everybody is okay with that?!?!
When precisely do the kool-aid drinkers of BCB wake up the geniune awfulness of Jim Hendry?!?!
So who know platoons with the $13.5 million per year singles hitter in right? Where is the insurance plan in left field for the $136 million nightmare?
Unbelievable. Unfrigginbelievable. Hendry is IMMUNE from ANY accountability. And I’m the rat bastard of the board for DARE suggesting this is a 75 win team in the making.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
by BLou on Mar 10, 2010 8:33 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
I think i'm starting if figure you out.
You think if you pick the Cubs to win 75 games, and they win around that number, then you’re not disappointed. If they win more than that, you’ll feel great because the Cubs did better than you convinced yourself they couldn’t do. You’re just a sensitive guy who feels shy to express his feelings to physical people, so you do it here. YOU"RE SO CUTE.
"A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality." John Lennon
Hendry is ACCOUNTABLE
The BCB apologists can defend the man all they want. I don’t give a rat’s ass. It is TIME for this team to win a World Series. And that will not happen so long as Jim Hendry is permitted with his ruinous ways.
$140 million largely PISSED away. Yeah, I’m mad at that. You should be too.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
I agree with you hear BLou
Another crappy FA signing by Hendry
cmon, BlueMike
you can’t just say “we must win a WS”. The best anyone can do is put together a roster that’s competitive. There are valid arguments that this roster isn’t, but there are valid arguments that this roster is, too.
Nady wasn’t going to be a huge piece of the puzzle either way, I don’t think.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 9:35 AM CST up reply actions
I think getting a legitimate OF bat was a pretty big piece of the puzzle.
Our OF offense has been absolute crap lately, which is why we were so excited about adding Dye or Nady. There’s a not-insignificant chance that said player would become a starter and middle-of-the-order bat in 2010…. every OF “starter” is a question mark.
Compared to Dye, Nady obviously has the higher upside, but if he’s still going to be limited by injury for a substantial portion of the season and we were only getting him for a 1-year deal, I would have preferred to roll the dice with Dye – he’s not that far removed from a dominant season, and he’s had these types of resurgences throughout his career.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Even if Nady was the right signing ...
his health status makes me wonder why we gave him so much guaranteed money — especially considering how tight things are with the budget this year.
Agree 100%.
There were plenty of free agents out there that could have actually helped this team.
And we picked up the one who had just had an injury.
That really is unbelievable. And I actually like Hendry.
And
Just because BLou is the one posting it doesn’t make it not true. This, with the Grabow signing are two of the stupidest moves I have ever seen for a team strapped for dollars.
It’s hard to throw stones in another’s direction when you’re the guy who wanted Rondell White. And yet I feel compelled to do so with liberty.
This really should have been a separate fanpost...
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Mar 10, 2010 8:42 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
lets be objective here
you would complain regardless of which RF he signed
by jesus christos on Mar 10, 2010 9:00 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, you're right
Let Jim Hendry off the hook YET AGAIN. A check of medical records and prognosis?!?!? Screw that….here is $3 million for being a pinch hitter. Meanwhile, NO platoon partner for the right fielder. NO viable insurance plan for the Guess Hitting Hack.
But Jim Hendry? Let’s throw the a-hole a parade.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
Let Jim Hendry off the hook YET AGAIN
where exactly did i say that?
by jesus christos on Mar 10, 2010 9:12 PM CST up reply actions
Pound sand
You’re one of this fly by kool-aid drinkers who has NOTHING to add other than to rip to shit anybody who dare takes an objective look at this team.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
whoa ...did you just tell Jesus Christos to pound sand?
I’d be careful if I were you – a couple more cracks like that and you might find yourself in amongst swine and cast off the edge of a cliff…
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
isnt that Detroit?
Sunday Feb 28 at 7 PM CST free webcast of the live taping of The Austin Variety Show www.austinvarietyshow.com/
More like turned into a pillar of salt
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Mar 10, 2010 10:17 PM CST up reply actions
Actually, it kind of fits
always looking back, always arguing… dunno about the being Lot’s wife part…
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 9:39 AM CST up reply actions
Too Old Testament...
"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is." -- Yogi Berra
The Blackhawks
signed Marian Hossa to a 12 year deal…he had a bum shoulder that not everyone knew about and missed the start of the season…how’s that working out?
"You've got to get your damn shirts rolled up and go out and kick somebody's ass. That's what you've go to do. Period." -- Lou Piniella
by tripdenten on Mar 10, 2010 9:13 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
rec'd
for the honesty.
plus i like Hossa
Sunday Feb 28 at 7 PM CST free webcast of the live taping of The Austin Variety Show www.austinvarietyshow.com/
Well, that was a 12 year deal.
We only have Nady until the end of the 2010 season.
I don’t know what Nady’s injury situation is, but if he’s going to spend the first 2 months of the year on the DL, then he definitely appears to have been overpaid. You’d think that Hendry would have wanted a team option at a similar price for 2011.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Let's face it...
…the Cubs have had a history of not managing injuries well. How many times have we heard a player will be back by a certain time, and it turns out being much later. The worst part about this, is most of the problems have occured during ST, when a player has had the entire offseason to rehabilitate. Sometimes I think the Cubs don’t keep tabs on what these guys are doing in the offseason.
This whole thing about Soriano not running hard yet on his knee was another head scratcher. The guy had a minor scope, and he should have been fully healed within 4-6 weeks tops. 5 months later, he is saying he is 85% and hasn’t tested his knee yet – WTF is that all about???
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
Again, how would you characterize
how the Twins handled Nathan? One day he has a little elbow “soreness,” the next day his career is in jeopardy.
Again, maybe this is the way medicine works for everybody.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 11, 2010 1:19 AM CST up reply actions
DINGDINGDING!
We have a winner. This happens all the time. Injuries aren’t cut and dried. Sometimes they get worse from what’s originally diagnosed.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Al...
I know you love the Cubs. I do too.
However, there were plenty of other free agents who could have helped this club. Why did 3 million of guaranteed money have to go to one who has a recent injury history, who essentially didn’t play last year, and who is at best a backup OF?
The whole signing was flawed. Just because it’s coming from BLou doesn’t make it not true. The fans have a total right to be pissed.
As an example...
we needed more help in the pen. We wanted someone with seniority who could help. This was actually advertised to all of the fans, so there was no mistaking it. Kiko Calero would have been perfect. He actually played last year, unlike Nady.
The Mets signed him to a minor league no risk deal.
And we signed Nady. To $3 million of guaranteed money.
Ugh.
totally, totally agree
The Calero situation is baffling.
though I'm not sure Calero would have been perfect ...
but he was definitely worth a cheap, non-guaranteed deal.
IIRC
Kiko is a possible injury risk as well.
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
by Kinky Reggae on Mar 11, 2010 1:13 PM CST up reply actions
I'm looking at...
…a much longer period of time than one injury. Sure some times something crops up and it’s worse than you think, but the long term trend with the Cubs points more towards a lack of due dilligence than bad luck.
Just my opinion.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
exactly
and why it is called the study of medical science, not the perfection of medical science
Sunday Feb 28 at 7 PM CST free webcast of the live taping of The Austin Variety Show www.austinvarietyshow.com/
Stop
While I do agree with some of your reasoning, the continued bombast is silly. There is a viable insurance plan for the “Guess Hitting Hack” and the recently disclosed fact that Nady won’t play the OF until around June is exactly the disclosure of that. Rather than trying to justify what this disclosure says about Nady, more importantly, it echoes to Soriano….you’ve got until June to show that you can still play. If you can’t, Nady will be a viable replacement for you as an everyday LF.
Bold? Yes….all of that money on the bench would likely end Hendry’s tenure. However, if the Cubs really want their best LF hitter out there on an everyday basis, it’s Nady, not Soriano.
"When the day comes with that last winning run and I'm crying and covered in beer. I'll look to the sky and know I was right to think someday we'll go all the way." - Vedder
I'm sorry, but it's rather ridiculous to claim that Nady being out until June was Hendry's plan all along
which is what you appear to be claiming.
I guess I'm just a worrier, that's why my friends call me whiskers
by Nunyabidness on Mar 12, 2010 1:32 PM CST up reply actions
He's not out until June.......
Read the article. Jim also clearly knew what his status would be through June upon announcing the signing.
well, then Jim's kind of an idiot. Wait, I already knew that
I did mispeak when I said out until June.
I guess I'm just a worrier, that's why my friends call me whiskers
by Nunyabidness on Mar 12, 2010 2:13 PM CST up reply actions
Why's that?
Nady was signed to spell Fukedome against lefties and perhaps Soriano now and again. He can do that now……….what’s the issue?
Comes back to the core issue:
There is REAL disagreement as to Nady’s role.
Right-which Hendry clearly outlined when Nady signed.....
He will occasionally spell Fukudome…….for some reason people have in their heads that we was intended to be a full time starter.
Did I miss a parade?
DAMMIT, I always miss the Hendry parades!
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
by Kinky Reggae on Mar 11, 2010 9:48 AM CST up reply actions
I wouldn't...
this was a B.S. signing from jump, that Hendry was only getting the benefit of the doubt on so long as Nady was weeks behind. Bad, bad move.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 10, 2010 9:12 PM CST up reply actions
No, you didn't..
I’m saying that while BLou might bitch about whomever Hendry signed, I wouldn’t, and I think this article officially calls out what a dumb signing this was.
Three and a half million bucks for a guy to pinch-hit? You can’t make this stuff up. I need to go find a stiff drink.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 10, 2010 9:26 PM CST up reply actions
i agree that hendry should have waited until mid february when people are desperate for contracts
or you know, not pay that much for a guy coming off TJS.
by jesus christos on Mar 10, 2010 9:44 PM CST up reply actions
agreed
if Nady wasn’t able to play the field spending 3.3 million on him was a waste when guys like Gomes were available for practically nothing
in addition add in the money for Grabow and that extra $6 million is the annual cost of Aroldis Chapman… just sayin
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 10, 2010 10:43 PM CST up reply actions
Oof.
Holy crap this team can piss away money.
One day, we’ll have a GM who will realize that it’s a bad thing to take the money you’d need for one elite talent, and instead invest it in 2 mediocrities.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
who, exactly
is ok with this?
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 9:38 AM CST up reply actions
Completely agree
Thanks BLou..one of the more sane posters here along with MPH and dartmouth. How a new owner couldn’t recognize that the first thing that needs to be changed is the GM completely astounds me. This is what depresses me. Hire some part-time “ambassadors” to improve the “fan experience”! How about just winning some trophies??? Thats the best way to improve experience!
Instead, keep the bumbling fool that dug this hole and go further away from the prize. And to those who say he needed to be kept around for “continuity”..the first thing you do to get out of a hole is to stop digging!
The journey is the reward!
Hendry's dug a hole
that’s led to 2003 — nearly the WS — and 2007-2008 (two divisional championships in a row) and 2007-2009 (three winning seasons in a row.
Why would we want to stop digging?
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 11:19 AM CST up reply actions
well, I kinda agree
But he dug a hole LAST offseason that led to a very disappointing season. I can forgive some of the older contracts because they led to the postseason.
I guess I just can’t figure out what people think it possible. Hendry has statistics which show what people HAVE DONE in the past. You build projections, which are basically statistically supported guesses. And then you put the team on the field. No one thought Rami would miss two months in March of 09. No one thought Soriano would turn into a lump the way he did. No one expected Bradley to play as poorly as he did.
You put together the best team you can for the money. Then you have to let them play. Yes, last year sucked from a 2008 perspective. Of course, we would have been happy to have that record in the 80s.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 11:27 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
He made several poor moves last offseason ...
Bradley, Miles, Heilman, Gregg, not having a backup for Ramirez … Those weren’t good decisions that turned out badly. They were bad decisions.
And, sure, everybody makes mistakes (FWIW, I advocated signing Bradley). Hendry just made a lot of them last year.
oh great
2003 another one that got away. How long do you live on woulda coulda shoulda?? By the way, what happened then in ‘04,’05.,’06? If I recall correctly, one of those teams lost 96 games.
3 winning seasons in a row!! Woopdy fricken do! You know where that would get you in New York? Fired. Thats why they’ve won so many championships and the Cubs say well we almost in ’69, 84, 03..pick your year
The journey is the reward!
why don't you
Become a Fan of the Brewers…………you’re more suited for that based on your comments.
why?
Just because I dont wear the rose colored glasses and think the GM is doing a great job? I just want the team to win period. Hendry is not the guy that’ll get the players to win a world series. He has proven that over 15 years in the organization.
The journey is the reward!
Last time I checked.......
It’s the players job to win a World Series-not Hendry’s. He has put together teams that are capable, they’ve just flopped in the playoffs.
ok..
then Bakker should still be manager..
this is an old tired argument..
Players need to perform..Hendry needs to get the right players. There is overwhelming evidence he hasn’t
The journey is the reward!
if the Cubs don't play pretty well this year ...
Hendry will be gone, IMO.
So the fact that........
We made the playoffs how many years last decade indicates we didn’t have the right players? I’d say we had the right players, they didn’t perform at crucial times. If we didn’t make the playoffs, then we didn’t have the right players.
+1
Hendry put together a good roster in four years — 2003, 2007, 2008, 2009 (being not as good as the other three because of questionable backup choices). Three of those four went to the post season. 2009 was obviously a disappointment.
I think the 2010 roster has the ability to surprise a lot of people.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 11:45 AM CST up reply actions
well..
If you are going to be happy with having to catch every break to brarely make the playoffs and get bounced in the first round, then fine.
I’m more interested in seeing the team dominate and win a world series.
The journey is the reward!
So Am I..........
But I am also realistic in my commentary………..you can’t just play “fantasy GM” all the time. Hendry’s made good moves, he’s made bad moves. Nobody’s perfect. Could we do better for a GM-maybe, provided somebody better wants to come here. But to say there is “overwhelming evidence he hasn’t gotten the right players” is too much of a black/white statement, and that’s where you’ll get pasted on this board if you can’t back it up.
Trying to be reasonable..
The guy has had 15 years in the organization. Much of that time was as Director of Player Development. The Cubs system has produced precious few top level players.
As GM, he is paying a very average left fielder an unreasonable amount of money. He is paying a right fielder a ton of money to be a platoon player. He had to shed a guy he was paying $10 mil a year because he was a cancer. He had no good backup plan for 3rd base last year. He paid Aaron Miles a ton for about 29 hits last year. Now $3 mil for a backup that you need because the $16 mil right fielder isnt good enough is hurt and won’t play regularily until June?
Sorry, I’m not trying be a jerk, but I just think the guy needs to go and can’t understand the arguments for him..
The journey is the reward!
So you named 4...........
1) D Lee signing
2) Ramirez trade
3) Trade for Karros/Grudz
4) Signing Ted Lilly
5) Signing Ryan Dempster
I would state we’ve had some decent players, some of which haven’t panned out due to mis-management.
Prior, Wood (both injury prone due to mis-management), Zambrano, Wells, Soto, Theriot. But yes, as far as development goes, I would agree that wasn’t Hendry’s strong suit.
His prowess as a GM isn’t top of the line either, but I would also say there are many who are worse. I don’t defend him as a GM, but I also don’t pretend other top GMs are clamoring to come to the Cubs either.
catch every break?
the 2008 team won over 95 GAMES!!!!
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 1:19 PM CST up reply actions
it's like you've put rollerskates on those goalposts.
You said:
If you are going to be happy with having to catch every break to brarely make the playoffs
The 2008 Cubs dominated in the 2008 regular season. Best record in the national league.
I think you have some serious perspective issues.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 1:48 PM CST up reply actions 5 recs
exactlly..
catching every break to make the playoffs is a forward looking statement.
The ’08 season got you 95 wins in regular season, and how many again in the playoffs?
The journey is the reward!
...
do you… speak english?
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 2:26 PM CST up reply actions
ok.
I’ll try not to attack personally. I would hope you are above that, but I don’t know you personally.
You like to point out the juggernaut that was ’08. What aboout ’09? 07? 06? 05? and 04?
The journey is the reward!
what about them?
we won the division in 07, and had a winning season in 09. First time in a long time the Cubs had three winning seasons in a row.
I ask the question because the words you’re using don’t mean what you seem to think they mean.
I understand if you feel that’s not good enough, but don’t try to suggest that we’re all Hendry’s willing dupes simply because we think that he’s not the worst GM in the history of baseball.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 7:12 PM CST up reply actions
Drew...
…just because they had three winning seasons in a row, does not mean the baseball organization is doing a good job.
Keep in mind, this is also the first time they have outspent their entire division and the entire NL to acquire players as well and their division is on the weak side.
You have to look at the big picture – how they have done at developing their own players, what the return has been on the money they have spent, and how they are set up to have success in the coming years.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
he's using
wins and losses as his success meter.
I’m not saying that Hendry is a GREAT GM, either. But he’s done pretty well.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 8:51 PM CST up reply actions
there is common ground
I dont think he’s the worst GM ever. I just don’t think your goal should ever be simply a winning season, or win the division. It should always be to win the World Series.
To plan to just win a crappy division, and then take your chances in the playoffs, will get you what you’ve got.
The journey is the reward!
Its deeper than that...
…the goal should be to build a world class baseball organization (in all facets of the game).
The Cubs are quite a ways away from several clubs that have fewer financial resources than they.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
Sigh........
he/she just doesn’t get it………
you are right
I just don’t get how anyone can defend this train wreck.
I guess we’ll agree to disagree and let time tell.
The journey is the reward!
It had nothing to do with that......
it has to do with the fact that you change your argument when it’s convenient for you and refuse to acknowledge it.
Hold on..
you sight 1 year in the Hendry era where they were really good and it’s proof that he built a consistent contender??
In the 7 year Hendry era, they’ve averaged 84.8 wins.
I’ll stand by the original staement that they usually need to catch every break to make the plyoffs in order to get bounced in the first round.
The journey is the reward!
I didn't cite one year.......
check your facts.
Let me repeat myself.......
“So the fact that……..
We made the playoffs how many years last decade indicates we didn’t have the right players? I’d say we had the right players, they didn’t perform at crucial times. If we didn’t make the playoffs, then we didn’t have the right players.”
First, you said we didn’t have the right players, then you said we didn’t win in the playoffs.
YOU CAN’T CHANGE THE GOALPOSTS!
I’m done.
IMO...
…the 03 team, would have kicked the 08 team’s collective ass if they met in the playoffs.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
GREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEN
Sunday Feb 28 at 7 PM CST free webcast of the live taping of The Austin Variety Show www.austinvarietyshow.com/
IMO...
…the Cubs won a divisions (in a fairly week division) in 2007 and 2008 because they simply opened the check book and outspent the division opponents by quite a margin. Also, Lou making the call on who to nuke off the club in June of 07 didn’t hurt.
Now, you have to ask yourself this; would the Cubs have won either of those divisions without the highest payroll in the NL? I kind of doubt it. The other question is this; what has been the return on investment for the 140 mil or so we have in place? Lastly, how is the club set up to succeed in the next 2-3 years?
In 2003, Hendry did a terrfic job putting that roster together. And I still say, if Patterson wasn’t hurt in June, that club probably doesn’t make the playoffs. Also, when you look at that 2003 club from July on, it was easy to see why they made the run they did, but Hendry completely ingnored those same ingrediants in assembling one dimensional clubs in 04, 05, and 06. To this day, the Cubs one and two hole performance since 03 has been poor (some years absolutely horrid) and that was the main reason the 03 club could score runs with a less talented lineup on paper.
I don’t dislike Hendry (in fact I respect some of his traits), but he doesn’t know how to build a strong baseball organization, and that is what a GM does. With the resources this club has, you can’t afford to have a mediocre GM.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
Well stated MPH
It’s absurd that some people like to compare performance of past decades to build up the current regime as though the Cubs were outspending divisional opponents by 40 million back then.
However, I do agree with Ricketts decision to retain Hendry. I just think that he’ll likely be cutting ties with him at the end of the year.
3 consecutive winning seasons for this franchise is an accomplishment, though.
Yes, winning a World Series is paramount. But Jim Hendry built a roster that accomplished something the Cubs hadn’t done in nearly 60 years, if memory serves. And while last year was disappointing, you don’t throw the baby out with the bath water, just because you are a new owner.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
by Bill Potter on Mar 11, 2010 11:33 AM CST up reply actions
Oh, come on.
The Yankees went a decade without winning a championship. And they’re almost always in contention because they outspend EVERYBODY.
SI ranked all the GMs last week and put Hendry in the middle of the pack. They, correctly, said that he’d made a lot of good moves but that the teams hadn’t put it together to win it all. I’d say that’s true for every year since 2003 except 2006 and last year.
The point is that Hendry did what he could and did well in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007 and 2008.
wow
How many teams outspent the Cubs the last few years? Not many.
A decade without a world series?? I’d love it if the Cubs could say “it’s been a whole DECADE” since we’ve been there..
The journey is the reward!
well, you said ...
the Yankees would can their GM for “three winning seasons in a row.” I was pointing out that you’re wrong on that.
I’m not a kool-aid drinker as BCBers go, and Hendry’s decisions baffle me some times. But he’s done a decent-to-good job in his time as GM. I’d take him over Andy McPhail or Larry Himes every day of the week.
Not sure..
of exactly the GM history of the Yankees, but I do know they don’t tolerate not winning a championship for too long..
Also, there are a lot of names that Hendry is better at being a GM than..I mean he’s probably better at it than Howard Stern, David Letterman or Al Franken..and I wouldn’t want those guys to GM the Cubs either..
My point is, there is certainly someone better out there than Hendry. He has had plenty of time and money to bring a consistent winner and has failed.
The journey is the reward!
three years
in a row with a + .500 record IS a consistent winner.
But setting that aside, who would you pick, then? Don’t just winge. Provide a solution.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 1:21 PM CST up reply actions
If I were Cubs owner..
that would be my job.
But I’ll play along
How about Pat Gillick?
How about John Hart?
How about Gene Michels?
How about Billy Connors?
I’m sure you’ll find something wrong with all of them and tell me Hendry is the best guy on the planet for the job..
The journey is the reward!
and you don't even consider
the possibility that Rickets wants to wait until after the season to make a big change?
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 2:28 PM CST up reply actions
i don't see why you need more evidence..
fans have already waited 100 years..how much damage could you really do by replacing a guy a year eraly who hasn’t gotten the job done?
The journey is the reward!
Couple reasons...
…Ricketts may have decided to absorb 2010 before he cleans house:
1. he simply didn’t want to pay off Hendry and have to pay a replacement.
2. If he did bring in someone new, they wouldn’t have had much flexibility to make many changes, and put his stamp on the club because of payroll issues.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
a one man ownership
vs a corporation changes how Hendry can do business. One is about making money first for shareholders then being successgul, the other is about being successful first then making money.
Sunday Feb 28 at 7 PM CST free webcast of the live taping of The Austin Variety Show www.austinvarietyshow.com/
Does anybody ever think
that nothing will change for the Cubs unless there’s some stability in the top jobs? Changing regimes every 4-5 years isn’t the way to get it done.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 11, 2010 5:20 PM CST up reply actions
I'd agree with that
I’m not a big Hendry supporter, but if Ricketts believes he’s the guy, so be it. But you’re right – the constant changes under TribCo have contributed to the futilty.
For as much grief as MacPhail takes – some of it well deserved – he brought stability to the front office.
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 Mar 11, 2010 5:33 PM CST up reply actions
i agree with all three of us
Sunday Feb 28 at 7 PM CST free webcast of the live taping of The Austin Variety Show www.austinvarietyshow.com/
really?
you’ve waited for 100 years? You’re remarkably spry.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 7:15 PM CST up reply actions
and when he says god has damned his lawn
he MEANS it.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 8:51 PM CST up reply actions
Great point, elgato
After all, Hendry did get Ramirez from the Pirates for a steal. He did get Nomar at the deadline in ’04. He did bring back Maddux. He did get Harden in ’08 at minimal cost.
That those teams didn’t win it all is no fault of Jim’s.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 11, 2010 12:30 PM CST up reply actions
I've been wondering whether Hendry made the right moves before 2005 ...
It was the only season in the past decade where the Cubs were decent, but not contenders. Every other season was either one where the Cubs had a shot at the playoffs until late in the year or made it (‘01, ’03, ’04, ’07, ’08, ’09) or they were just terrible (’00, ’02, ’06).
Certainly he made the right moves in 2003
and in 2004 as well.
I think the only really “bad” offseason he had was the last one. And even then, a lot of those moves were defensible.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 11, 2010 5:22 PM CST up reply actions
The offseason before 2006 ...
sure doesn’t look very good. Three good pitching prospects for Juan Pierre?
context
is everything.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 11:39 AM CST up reply actions
I stopped reading after
“BLou..one of the more sane posters here”
While I agree with you...
…I am banking on Ricketts using this year to absorb everything and then he will make his move to bring in the right leader of the baseball operations. Given his comments on how he wants to build a winner during his initial press conference (and I am taking him at his word) those skill sets are not in Jim Hendry’s repertoire.
The Cubs need a someone who is a “builder”, not someone who just “acquires”. For the 2010 season, I’m really not sure how much good a new guy could have done – considering all the money that is tied up with the current roster. In essense, Ricketts is saying; “we have committed a boatload of money to this roster, so they either win something now, or we reboot after 2010”.
There is probably a good chance the – Ctrl-Alt-Delete buttons are pushed after this season.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
Was really hoping
Nady would be healthy . I thought this signing was good . He is capable of 25 homeruns in a season and would be a great platoon partner with Fuku in right field .
78 wins
Baseball Prospectus says 78 wins for the Cubs, as of last week. So 75 may not be far off, BLou.
My 2 cents; 72-90, with a new GM and Manager by September.
by kimo from kauai on Mar 10, 2010 8:58 PM CST reply actions
i see so many posts about "new gm"
that at times i fear some fans (not you, in general) almost hope the Cubs lose enough games to get Hendry fired.
Sunday Feb 28 at 7 PM CST free webcast of the live taping of The Austin Variety Show www.austinvarietyshow.com/
I'm gonna say it right here and now...
I WANT the Cubs to lose 90 in 2010. Everybody in the organization needs that cold splash of water in the face. No more of this 82-87 wins nonsense. The Cubs are a big market team with a big market budget and they’re just hosing it all over the lawn. Jim Hendry has to go. If Tom Ricketts et al don’t see that, then we’re stuck with another mediocre owner. If a GM has $145M to work with, he’d damned well better come up with something better than the likes of Milton Silva, Alfonso Soriano, and Xavier Nady. Hope is nice and admirable but at some point we have to say to hell with hope, get us a winner now!
We have to demand more!
by copingwiththecubs on Mar 10, 2010 10:09 PM CST up reply actions
All I can say is...
…I hope and pray Ricketts is smart enough (and I think he is) to hire a solid baseball man as head of baseball operations as his first move this offseason.
If he doesn’t, it will be a major mistake.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
I want the Cubs to lose 90 in 2010 ...
but “get us a winner now!”
Makes sense.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 11, 2010 1:20 AM CST up reply actions
Yup. We ain't gonna win anything in '10 so...
let’s start working immediately on building a dependable contender. Step one — goodbye, Jim.
We have to demand more!
by copingwiththecubs on Mar 11, 2010 9:13 AM CST up reply actions
No, it makes no sense at all
I would say this franchise has built itself into being a “dependable contender.”
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 11, 2010 12:32 PM CST up reply actions
Dependable contender..
for the NL Central maybe. For the world series..? ah no.
The journey is the reward!
Fallacy.
Once you get into the playoffs, it is a crapshoot.
Building a perennial contender that gets to the playoffs every year, or most years: that’s the way to approach it.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
fallacy
its not a crapshoot for all teams
in general the WS win %’s go higher up the more wins you have
its not “all created equal”
a 100 win team has a better chance of winning the world series than an 87 win team
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 11, 2010 1:26 PM CST up reply actions
Mostly, yes.
Because the 100-win team is generally more talented – but health and recent roster changes matter, too. The gist of what you’re saying is true – the better teams have a better chance.
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 Mar 11, 2010 1:29 PM CST up reply actions
not true.........
How many wild card teams have won the World Series recently? It’s been more than a couple, so quit with the “in general” logic.
lets put some numbers to it
since your comment is very “general” as well. A WC team is a poor indication because a wildcard team can range from anywhere from like 84 wins to 95 wins and those teams are much different in strength, so lets sort by 90+ win and less than 90
since we’ve gone to the wild card format and had a full season (1996)
Teams in World Series Won
below 90 20 2
90 and above 82 12
So let’s take a look at this.
over 80% of the teams that got into the playoffs won 90 games, so right there if you’re constructing a team to win less than 90 games you have a remote chance of contention
Once in the playoffs teams that are 90+ win teams have on average won the world series 86% of the time. This would suggest a sub-90 win team winning the world series is pretty unlikely.
But you’re looking at the samples and saying well of course they’d win less often, they generally make up the smaller group. Fine. But they’re also winning less often.
10% of the teams that have made it and are under 90 wins have won the world series
15% of the teams that are have greater than 90 wins have won the world series
Might seem like a small difference but remember, the 90+ win teams are knocking each other out because they play each other more often
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 11, 2010 2:01 PM CST up reply actions
Okay......
To be less argumentative about this………if you look at it solely based on # of wins, yes. However, if you look at the 8 teams to make the playoffs in any given year, here is where their record stands amongst the 8 who made it, counting down from 2009:
1st, 6th, 2nd, 8th, 2nd, 3rd, 7th, 4th, 6th, 8th, 3rd, 1st, 4th, 3rd.
If you take an average over the 14 years, it’s about 4.14, so right about in the middle. I’d say we’re both right (or both wrong).
i dont think i stated my argument clearly enough
at the beginning, but i don’t think the Cubs have constructed a perennial contender (Al’s words) because the team has generally been projected to fall short of 90 wins in most seasons (and has), we’ve just happened to be in a crappy division
taking that a step further i don’t think its reliable to depend on being in a crappy division for eternity
so in order to really be a contender in my mind you’re building a perennial 90+ win team. The Cubs have won 90 games just once in Jim Hendry’s tenure, so while we’ve had success its largely been the result of “being the best of the worst”
this is why in my opinion we’ve been feigning competitiveness
also i just don’t think the playoffs are a pure crapshoot, when it comes to big disparities in quality.
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 11, 2010 2:30 PM CST up reply actions
fair enough.....
I’d agree with your statement about the Cubs needing to win 90 games more consistently. But, the playoffs can be a crapshoot based on the state I gave you above…….don’t ya think?
eh....
a numerical ranking of 1-8 and then making judgments from there? I mean… there’s nothing accounting for the dispersion of wins in those sets… its not really the best way to look at it
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 11, 2010 6:13 PM CST up reply actions
You said.....
“in general the WS win %’s go higher up the more wins you have”, which is obvious given the best teams make the playoffs.
However, once you have your 8 playoff teams, my point was that the more wins you have doesn’t necessarily mean you win the WS, as the variability of winners in that group was high.
Said another way:
Most wins= 14% of WS wins
2nd most wins = 14% of WS wins
3rd most wins = 21% of WS wins
4th most wins = 14% of WS wins
5th most wins = 0% of WS wins
6th most wins =14% of WS wins
7th most wins = 7% of WS wins
8th most wins = 14% of WS wins
So more wins doesn’t increase your % chance to win the WS, at least in the group of teams that makes the playoffs. Your statement more broadly applied to all MLB teams is kind of a no duh statement.
by jballgame on Mar 11, 2010 6:22 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
i'll try to explain again
in your scenario the 4th most team could have 91 wins or they could have 97
different years, i’m saying the 97 win team has a higher chance of winning the world series than the 91 win team
not that the team with the most wins each year has the best chance.
For example a year in which the spread from 1-8 is say 110, 104, 98, 96, 91, 90, 88, 87 is not the same as 93, 93, 93, 93, 91, 91, 91, 91
the first scenario is likely one in which a team in the top 4 has a much larger chance at winning than a team in the bottom 4
in the second scenario its likely more of a “crapshoot”
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 11, 2010 6:59 PM CST up reply actions
Okay, so using that line of rationale, here's the data, with WS winner in bold.....
2009: 103, 97, 95, 95, 93, 92, 91, 87
2008: 100, 97, 97, 95, 92, 90, 89, 84
2007: 96, 96 94, 94, 90, 90, 89, 85
2006: 97, 97, 96, 95, 93, 88, 88, 83
2005: 100, 99, 95, 95, 95, 90, 89, 82
2004: 105, 101, 98, 96, 93, 92, 92 , 92
2003: 101, 101, 100, 96, 95, 91, 90, 88
2002: 103, 103, 101, 99, 98, 97, 95, 94
2001: 116, 102, 95, 93, 92, 91, 90, 88
2000: 97, 95, 95, 95, 94, 91, 91, 87
1999: 103, 100, 98, 97, 97, 97, 95, 94
1998: 114, 106, 102, 98, 92, 90, 89, 88
1997: 101, 98, 96, 92, 90, 90, 86, 84
1996: 99, 96, 92, 91, 90, 90, 88, 88
To me, that doesn’t help, as when teams in the bottom 4 won, the ranges were at least 10 games top to bottom.
Here......
2009: 103, 97, 95, 95, 93, 92, 91, 87
2008: 100, 97, 97, 95, 92, 90, 89, 84
2007: 96, 96 94, 94, 90, 90, 89, 85
2006: 97, 97, 96, 95, 93, 88, 88, 83
2005: 100, 99, 95, 95, 95, 90, 89, 82
2004: 105, 101, 98, 96, 93, 92, 92 , 92
2003: 101, 101, 100, 96, 95, 91, 90, 88
2002: 103, 103, 101, 99, 98, 97, 95, 94
2001: 116, 102, 95, 93, 92, 91, 90, 88
2000: 97, 95, 95, 95, 94, 91, 91, 87
1999: 103, 100, 98, 97, 97, 97, 95, 94
1998: 114, 106, 102, 98, 92, 90, 89, 88
1997: 101, 98, 96, 92, 90, 90, 86, 84
1996: 99, 96, 92, 91, 90, 90, 88, 88
That alone ought to be proof enough that the playoffs are a crapshoot.
Twice, the team with the FEWEST wins has won.
Only four times has the team with the MOST victories won, and one of those (2007) had four teams within a 94-96 win range, nearly identical.
Just get in. After that, anything can happen, as we found out in 2007 and 2008.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
sorry
I’ll agree to disagree again. This is still a relatively small sample size. Have you ever read the Black Swan?
My opinion is that it is just a very bad plan to say that we’ll be just good enough to make the playoffs and take our chances. You will always run into a better team, and over time, the better teams will win and larger percentage of the time.
The journey is the reward!
With all due respect, you are incorrect.
The numbers above back up my claim — and those are all the numbers since the current playoff structure has been put into place (except 1995), so it’s not “small sample size”.
FWIW, here are the 1995 numbers, lower because there were only 144 games played that year:
100, 90, 86, 85, 79, 79 78, 77
Again, the team with the best regular season record dit not win.
You build to make the playoffs every year. It is simply not possible to “build a team to win the World Series”.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
sorry Al
We’ll agree to disagree.
I just don’t think it’s wise to take that approach in anything, whether it be building a baseball team, a company, or a house. I’ll refer again to NY. They do not build to make the playoffs..they build to win the WS.
The journey is the reward!
Yep, I'll agree to disagree.
You cannot do that. It’s impossible.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
you'll notice
the years the low-win teams won also happen to be the years the teams with the most wins were the lowest (all 97)
In addition those years the teams were really tightly packed
2006: 97, 97, 96, 95, 93, 88, 88, 83
2000: 97, 95, 95, 95, 94, 91, 91, 87
this gets to the dispersion point i was making
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 12, 2010 7:54 AM CST up reply actions
2006 isn't "tightly packed".
There’s a 14-game spread, and a fairly large drop from 93 to 88.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Heck, look at 2001
Seattle had 116 wins and the WS winner had 92.
Completely agree...
…and the major point is this; to be a “perennial legit contender” – YOU MUST HAVE A FAIRLY CONSTANT FLOW OF YOUNG TALENT FROM YOUR FARM.
Beyond that, you have to know who to spend money wisely, and put the RIGHT pieces together that form a TEAM, and not just acquire guys who don’t match what you really need and hope it works out for the best.
With the Cub’s resources, they should be one of the top 5 teams in baseball year in and year out and they should never have to go through seasons like 05 and 06 or 09 if they had a solid foundation to work from.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
posters always do
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 11, 2010 3:12 PM CST up reply actions
ask the red sox.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 7:26 PM CST up reply actions
Glad I read ahead
the season has not even started and the lunatic fringe is alive and well
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 11, 2010 3:11 PM CST up reply actions
There's no way this team loses 90 games
without trying to do so.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 9:41 AM CST up reply actions
dont be too sure
the middle relief is a shambles, only 3 proven starters..no player of star quality under 30…
The journey is the reward!
You suggest that Wells is not proven? He was the best pitcher last year.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 11:19 AM CST up reply actions
A lot of people thought Fontenot was a sure thing a year ago.
One season of success isn’t really enough to be considered “proven” in my mind.
Alright, fair enough.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 11:46 AM CST up reply actions
ditto on Soto
Nice thing is Soto has a chance to put himself into the “proven” category this year – and he already has taken major steps towards that goal with his offseason work.
Not so sure if Fontenot will get that chance or not – depends I guess on what kind of platoon is going to come out of the 2b position.
As for Wells… if he can avoid the sophomore slump and put together another solid year, then I think you’d be safe saying that he’s a proven starter… …next year.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Sorry,..
I was referring to the starting rotation..and to me, 1 year wonders dont really count. Wells has promise, but it was 1 year. Let’s see if he can do it with some consistency.
The journey is the reward!
no apologies needed - I think we're all in agreement on Wells.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
This was a stupid move
I think Jermaine Dye would sign for that same $3million if he was offered now, and he would actually be ready to throw the freakin baseball from the OF in March. Nady is a worthless signing if all he can do is pinch-hit till June. How is that going “rest” Soriano and Fukudome more?
I was hopeful for this season, but with the BP now a huge question mark and now our 4th OF who was supposed to platoon with Kosuke and give Sori/Lee more rest throughout the season is another question mark.
Just another crappy FA signing by Jim Hendry, should we expect anything better
Yep
This is a total and utter failure of scouting and proper medical evaluation on the part of JIM HENDRY. I’m sick of this crap. Tom Ricketts needs to get off his ass and FIRE Jim Hendry so the real future of this organization has hope of happening.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
+1
This really looks bad. This team has so much money sunk into bad signings and injured players that they probably won’t be able to re-sign productive players like Ramirez and Lee. Jim Hendry has been around long enough to prove his worth to this organization. It’s time to pull the plug on this guy.
"Hats for bats.....keep bats warm." - Pedro Cerrano
"Hey bartender, Jobu needs a refill !!!!!!!" - Eddie Harris
by willie mays hayes' gloves on Mar 11, 2010 2:15 AM CST up reply actions
And...
If/when Ramirez and Lee can’t be re-signed, who do you build your younger roster around? Soriano?
Yikes. It’s scary just thinking about it.
They'll re-sign Ramirez
They won’t re-sign Lee. This season probably is his last with the Cubs.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 11, 2010 2:02 PM CST up reply actions
It's a very big story...
Which once again makes Hendry look like the idiot in the room. Major, major fail.
Well I guess I'm confused about the anger in this thread
This says he won’t be ready for FULL time til June. He was signed to be a 4th OF and probably platoon with Fukudome against lefties. This would mean he isn’t needed more than 2 or 3 starts a week. I don’t see how this really effects anything. If he can get back to his old numbers while playing only 2 or 3 times a week then the signing is just fine.
Whether or not he gets back to his old numbers is yet to be seen. But I will withhold judgment until it plays out. That’s why the games are played.
thank you
" It’s spring fever - you don’t know what it is you want, but it fairly makes your heart ache, you want it so. "--Mark Twain
by cooliogirl47 on Mar 10, 2010 9:31 PM CST up reply actions
Huh?
You’ve just been told that your platoon right fielder can’t throw, will be limited two one – two games a week, and the Cubs will have to baby him for most of the season. And Lord only knows what that will do to his timing and swing. Couple that with the fact that the Cubs paid close to $3.5 million for this pleasure – which incidentally, they could very much use back right now to acquire a reliever – and this deal looks epically dumb.
And forgive me, but the couple of times a week projection is coming from the Cubs, who are often wildly optimistic on medical reports, so now I don’t even know what the $#% to believe.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 10, 2010 9:37 PM CST up reply actions
But if I might add one more thing...
There were baseball people who were reporting that Nady wouldn’t/couldn’t clear a physical when the Cubs signed him, so not only did they apparently say $@# the medical reports, but we’ll pay rate to make sure that we get our man.
You really can’t make this stuff up.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 10, 2010 9:39 PM CST up reply actions
serious question...isnt the key phrase here that he cant play full time....
my understanding is that he’s able to play part time, which is how we need him.
" It’s spring fever - you don’t know what it is you want, but it fairly makes your heart ache, you want it so. "--Mark Twain
by cooliogirl47 on Mar 10, 2010 9:45 PM CST up reply actions
The Cubs need him to play part-time...
on their schedule, not the players. When you can’t freely move a player in and out of a lineup as needed, you’ve got a problem. If they’re nursing him for the next few months at least, they’re somewhat handcuffed by his health concerns, not to mention the fact that since he can’t throw – notice no one said anything about him being able to throw to third? – you’re forced to get very situational with him.
This is all fine if this is a guy making a million bucks, and/or with a less critical role. I say critical because I do believe the Cubs looked to him to make big contributions this season. But at a contract that guarantees him millions? This plays as a very dubious signing.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 10, 2010 9:51 PM CST up reply actions
well put that way, you just have to say what was JH thinking....
IIRC I have heard all along Nady was not 100% which also makes me wonder what the intent in aquiring him was…thanks for reply
" It’s spring fever - you don’t know what it is you want, but it fairly makes your heart ache, you want it so. "--Mark Twain
by cooliogirl47 on Mar 10, 2010 9:59 PM CST up reply actions
"Wildly optimistic on medical reports"
What would you have called how the Twins handled Nathan, Damen?
Maybe ALL major-league organizations handle medical reports about the same way.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 11, 2010 1:17 AM CST up reply actions 3 recs
What does one have to do with another?
Nathan had soreness, had an MRI, and a diagnosis was quickly made. He wasn’t injured last fall, had the team tell people that it was his tricep, reinjured it this spring, had the team tell people it was soreness, and then had the team start making prognosis even before the diagnostics got back.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 11, 2010 6:10 AM CST up reply actions
And he was already in the organization - not signed as a free agent.
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 Mar 11, 2010 6:31 AM CST up reply actions
Yeah, why did the Twins go out and acquire Nathan this offseason anyway?
This little analogy has me hopelessly confused… no one is saying that Hendry should have the ability to prevent player injuries with the power of his mind. The argument is that Hendry should have waited for the full physical report before dedicating a large chunk of his 2008-09 resources to a player who is substantially limited by a preexisting injury.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
rec'd
Sunday Feb 28 at 7 PM CST free webcast of the live taping of The Austin Variety Show www.austinvarietyshow.com/
where
does it say he will have to be “babied” for most of the season?
The article doesn’t say that.
This is silly. If you have to, put him on the DL till he’s ready, and bring up Colvin. No one should be happy about this situation, but it hardly spells doom.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 9:43 AM CST up reply actions
stop being sensible
you must start panicking right now and hoping for a 90 loss season if you are a real Cub fan
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 11, 2010 3:13 PM CST up reply actions
LMAO squared
It’s never too early to panic, I guess.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 11, 2010 5:23 PM CST up reply actions
Am I reading the same article as you?
The article says Nady won’t be ready for FULL TIME DUTY until June 1, that he will be on the team to pinch hit and play the field, and that they are not worried about him throwing or playing the field. Lou said that the Cubs “will have to be cautious with Nady because of the ‘cold weather’” and the effect it has on the return from Tommy Johns.
Is this something we didn’t already know? I know the specific date of June 1 was surprising, but I think they’re just trying to be cautious while the weather is bad. It sounds like he can still make spot starts a couple times a week.
Sorry to post something similar to gizmo above...
…should’ve read it more carefully.
He should not be on the 26 man roster
until he is ready to play at 100%. Sadly we don’t need a DH till June and that is what he would be and a questionable one at that. A guy with a bum shoulder will NOT be able to field reliably. Keeping him on the roster is going to mean a LOT more playing time for Fuld which I would love , but what happens when starts in CF and the Cubs are protecting a one run lead in the 9th and Sori drops the ball? Fuld is useful for defense, pinch running, bunting, hitting for contact etc, but if he is the ONLY guy who can actually be a back up fielder it changes the whole equation. I don’t trust Millar in the OF so think Fuld and Colvin should be the 4th & 5th outfielders and Nady should rehab till he can actually play correctly.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Mar 10, 2010 11:23 PM CST up reply actions
I'd agree with you if that were the case...
…but from this story it sounds like they aren’t worried about his fielding or throwing, just his durability in cold weather. In your scenario, if Fuld (I’m guessing that’s who you were talking about) starts in center once a week – and I doubt it would be much more than that – it sounds like Nady would be able to fill in at that interval without a problem. And he’d (hopefully) provide power off the bench. Whether that’s how it actually plays out obviously remains to be seen.
Btw it was his elbow that was operated on (UCL)…we’d be in much bigger trouble if it was a shoulder injury.
It sounds to me like they are only going to be able to use him as Pinch hitter
The problem is not so much Fuld starting once a week, it is how to let him pinch run in the 7th when you might need him even more for defense in the 9th. It does not make sense to carry a player on the roster who has serious limitations. Look if Nady can in fact field OK and be an effective PH, great but I am cynical about that. I like Nady and I am not jumping on Hendry for signing him , but I don’t want him on the roster unless he can really play.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Mar 11, 2010 1:27 AM CST up reply actions
Agree wholeheartedly with the last sentence.
This is all speculation until he gets some more experience. The plan seems to be to play him in the outfield for the second half of Cactus League games. I’m guessing the Cubs will evaluate him at that point and make a decision as to whether or not he can adequately fill in at LF and RF. If he truly can’t cut it as a consistent defensive replacement at the least, I agree, have him start the season on the DL.
I just thought it was ridiculous for people to freak out after his first game, 4 weeks before the season starts.
Exactly.
Three weeks from now, maybe he’ll have improved enough to be ready to start the season.
Analysis of an article like the one linked, with no nuance, no thoughts that maybe he can get better, regarding this as an absolute, is just plain wrong.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
What the hell are you talking about?
Al, I really don’t know how many times we have to cover this ground. The recovery time for Tommy John is 12-18 months, period. I told you this before the Cubs signed Nady, told you once the Cubs signed him, and now I’ll say it again. And of course, the Cubs are now acknowledging the same. He doesn’t have a stomach flu here. so no, he won’t be miraculously waking up next week and giving the all clear.
He is on a recovery program that the Cubs have now told you they won’t be accelerating, and if anything, they’ll be slowing down. Let’s be able to at least speak reasonably about these issues.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 11, 2010 6:18 AM CST up reply actions
Nady's not a pitcher.
The article linked says simply that he can’t play full time — which he wasn’t supposed to do anyway. It appears to me that he’ll be able to play on a limited basis.
The freakout here over this is way, WAY over the top.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Because...
HE CAN’T THROW!, which makes him unable to take the field on a consistent basis.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 11, 2010 6:48 AM CST up reply actions
Where in that article does it say he "can't" throw?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
The whole article is about
him being unable to play defense, and his ongoing recovery from Tommy John. What are you missing?
Piniella said the Cubs will have to be cautious with Nady in the early going because of the “cold weather, (and) the fact that when you come off that Tommy John surgery, it takes a certain amount of time” to come back.
But I did appreciate the money quote:
“We don’t care about throwing. He can throw the ball to the second baseman or throw the ball to the shortstop.”
by Damen Jackson on Mar 11, 2010 7:33 AM CST up reply actions
I still don't see anywhere where it says he "can't" throw, as you claimed.
All it says is that they’re going to be “cautious”. We knew this when he signed. The hysteria in this thread is ridiculous.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
And seriously, what are the odds that someone will try to score on him?
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
And somewhere Jacque Jones is muttering...
“Oh sure – now you say that…”
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
And Juan Pierre is enviously muttering...
“He can throw the ball to the second baseman OR the shortstop? What an arm!”
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Mar 11, 2010 9:05 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
the money quote
is referring to finishing spring training. Lou’s not suggesting that Nady won’t ever have to throw to third base during the regular season. Cmon.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 9:46 AM CST up reply actions
I'm with you on this..
are we all reading the same article.. Up above people are giving Hendry the death sentence (not defending him but this instance is getting way to blown up).. All they said is for full time duty. I don’t think anyone had him penciled in for a starter. He has been playing this spring training with that same arm. Do you really think they’d play him at all if they didn’t think he was healthy (for the most part..)
But to each there own.. Lets get overly worked up before the season even starts on a guy thats recovering. Lets not forget that 2 years ago everyone was ready to give Dlee away and he came back and played pretty well last year (different injury but same idea)
Go Cubs Go!!
I don't get it
I am sure this does not come as surprise to the Cubs. At least that is my take. This guy was not a starter, a bench player. I had him getting about 250-280 AB’s.
Amazing, very few wanted Dye, " he is a butcher in rightfield" The majority liked the Nady sign even though we all knew he had surgery in less than a year.
I guess we should of signed Jason Bay right?
no
its that we shouldn’t have spent 3.3 million on a guy only contributing as a PH, its absurd
especially when similar players all were available for under 2 million (reed johnson, eric byrnes, johnny gomes to name a few)
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 10, 2010 10:56 PM CST up reply actions
I would go so far..
as to say paying $3.5 million (minimum) for 250 at-bats is beyond absurd.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 10, 2010 11:09 PM CST up reply actions
But that was the original plan.
Nady was signed to be a backup. In fact, he’s making about what Reed Johnson did last year for essentially the same job.
I don’t have a problem with that.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
could have signed Reed Johnson
who is healthy and ready to play NOW. By the way, Reed is making $1million in 2010, which is $2.5million less than were giving Nady, who won’t be ready to play 9 innings of baseball till June.
And this was not the original plan, the original plan was for Nady to primarily rest Soriano and platoon with Fuku in RF for the majority of the season, not 4 months of it.
And Hendry has the gall to cry about Milton. Please. Hendry is the sole reason that this team is projected to be 2nd or 3rd place in 2010, he throws crap after crap out there in the OF, and hope one of them sticks.
Reed Johnson
was a known injury risk. Nady’s upside is higher, too.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 9:47 AM CST up reply actions
I liked the Nady signing
But a known injury risk vs. a known injury . . .
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 Mar 11, 2010 10:11 AM CST up reply actions
sure, well
hindsight continues to be 20-20.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 11:20 AM CST up reply actions
Huh? What do we know now that we didn't know then
RJ was a known injury risk then and I would suppose still is.
Nady had a known injury when we signed him and he still does.
If there’s hindsight here, it’s applicable to both situations.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
that would be
a known injury risk vs. a known injury risk. That’s not what Badger said.
I continue to believe that Nady has a higher upside than RJ.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 1:23 PM CST up reply actions
I said known injury vs. known injury rish
Jeez, Drew. Nady was already hurt. And I acknowledged that I liked the Nady signing. But to make it look good, you include Johnson as an injury risk. What’s worse – an injury risk, or a KNOWN injury?
What Ballhawk said IS what Badger said. Cripes, you’re obstinate sometimes.
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 Mar 11, 2010 1:27 PM CST up reply actions
I liked the Nady signing
but I thought Gomes would be better because he would of been ready to play with no questions asked.
2010 is OUR year.
So the Nady signing was almost universally praised
and now the usual suspects are screaming bloody murder?
Instead of the constant bitching from BLou and his acolytes, I’d like them to tell me what they would have done and who they would have signed under the same parameters. Please be specific.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 10, 2010 11:07 PM CST reply actions
I think the consensus was
it was a good signing, DAMEN. (Just making sure I got that right.: ))
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 10, 2010 11:23 PM CST up reply actions
I'm going to respectfully disagree...
I spot-checked through some old posts, and it seemed like more an up in the air sort of signing. Just my opinion at a quick glance. I will say that I was at least lukewarm about it personally, but like most, that was assuming that Nady would be healthy.
Since you asked though – although I hope I’m not viewed as an acolyte – I was very high on Mike Cameron, and thought for certain that he was coming to Chicago. I liked the Dye possibility a bit more than most. And I felt Gomes was a good guy to have in some capacity. Although, my highest personal preference probably was to grab Hudson to play second, and give Baker some time out in the outfield.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 10, 2010 11:30 PM CST up reply actions
I'm not all that high on Cameron
He would have been OK, but he’s also 37. For all the carping about how “old” the Cubs are getting, adding someone older than most everybody on the team isn’t necessarily the way to go, IMHO.
Dye, no, thanks. As Jess notes below, he’s still unsigned. Jonny Gomes? Meh. Hudson? Maybe, but he doesn’t do much for me, either.
I liked Nady quite a bit when he was with the Pirates and Padres. I think, once again, some Cubs fans are overreacting a bit (as they seem to have every day of spring training so far). The regular season can’t get here soon enough.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 11, 2010 1:15 AM CST up reply actions
You say meh to all these guys, but a big difference is
that these other guys are healthy and will most likely get 300+ PAs, Nady won’t get more than 150+ PAs this season if Soriano or Fuku are healthy all season.
If the choice is $3million for either: an injured till June Nady vs a healthy RIGHT NOW Dye, Gomes, et al, I’m sorry, but I’d rather have the healthy guy who can help rest Sori and platoon with Fuku for April and May.
We’re basically going to end up paying Nady $3.5million for < 200 PAs in 2010, unless Sori/Fuku/Byrd go out with an injury or something for several weeks.
Forgive me if I say BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
Felipe Lopez. Orlando Hudson. Jermaine Dye. Orlando Cabrerra.
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." ~ Frank Sinatra
The only OF on that list is Dye who is so great
he remains unsigned.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Mar 10, 2010 11:36 PM CST up reply actions
Dye would be signed by now if he wasn't asking for a +$5million salary 2-3 weeks ago
The reason he is unsigned is not because he doesn’t provide value, its that he overvalued himself relative to the market last month and now there just aren’t many open slots for a LF/RF/DH/1B on MLB rosters right now.
I doubt he could get a a million
He is probably waiting for an injury , but again he won’t get much
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Mar 11, 2010 1:53 AM CST up reply actions
In that case, the Cubs should sign him immediately.
There’s going to be some DL activity. We could use an OF bat.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Thanks. I wasn't aware about the positions played.
Actually, unlike Hendry I don’t believe the signing of an OF was the lone option for a free agent move this off season.
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." ~ Frank Sinatra
Healthy Nady = solid signing
Not able to play in the OF till June Nady = Jermaine Dye (or countless other healthy OFs) would have been better
There’s your alternative and your reason for why this was another terrible, rushed FA signing by Hendry.
On a side note. Hendry is a real piece of work. In one breath, he’ll say Bradley didn’t perform, it was his fault, and we had to get rid of him. On the other hand, he signs an injured guy like Nady a year after he signed the malcontent player who he had to get rid of.
The gall of this guy is unbelievable! What a joke!
You are parsing this wrong.
Nowhere in that article does it say Nady will “not be able to play in the OF till June”.
Let’s see how he does in the OF in a couple of spring games first before we blast Hendry for this signing.
I swear, you’d think it was already June and the Cubs were 10 games out of first place, the way some people are posting here. It’s MARCH. Still more than THREE WEEKS before a game that counts.
Relax, people. Please.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Dude
It says “June” in the title of the freakin’ article, and June is in the 1st sentence of the 1st paragraph. And its information straight from the Cubs organization, the manager no less. What are you missing here?
Cubs don’t expect Nady at 100 percent till June
Xavier Nady is not expected to be able to play the outfield regularly until June, Cubs manager Lou Piniella said after Wednesday’s game.
If he can’t play the OF till June, and we have no DH in the NL, what exactly will Nady be doing in April and May?
What part of "regularly" did you not understand?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
What part of "can't play OF regularly till June" do you not understand?
I guess we have different definitions of the words “playing regularly” as it relates to baseball. When I read “can’t play regularly in OF till June”, I interpret that to mean that Nady will be limited to pinch hit duty and potentially a late inning defensive replacement for Soriano.
I guess I’m just not okay with that when there are/were other decent options on the market that could do the job of being a 4th OF for the entire season, not just 4 months.
So how exactly are you defining the words “playing regularly” what do they mean to you? because clearly, it is different than my definition…..
I read it to mean ...
pinch-hitter, late defensive replacement and OCCASIONAL spot starts — kind of the Daryle Ward role.
The problem is, if Soriano goes down for a significant period of time, or if Kosuke struggles, Nady can’t be plugged in for any significant period of time.
and if that happens
you call up Colvin.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 9:53 AM CST up reply actions
OK, sure.
But why give $3.3 million to Nady, then?
Because
you don’t WANT to pull Colvin up to sit on the bench, you want him to get at bats in AAA so that he can replace Byrd or Dome full time when those contracts are up.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 10:00 AM CST up reply actions
I can see that, too.
I’m not saying the Cubs shouldn’t have signed a fourth outfielder. I’m saying that they should have signed someone whose health wasn’t something that would necessitate calling up Colvin.
At least, they shouldn’t have signed Nady for so much guaranteed money. An extra million would be huge right now, considering our bullpen mess.
well,
I don’t disagree on the money. I suspect the front office thought Nady would be ready in April. Again, I’m not happy about this, but who do you blame in an injury/recovery situation like this? The team doctors?
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 11:21 AM CST up reply actions
Who gets blamed ...
depends on information we’re not really privy to. Unless we blame Hendry (he is the GM) for pursuing a risky player like Nady in the first place.
Interpret it any way you want.
That’s not how I see it.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
It says he won't
be 100% til June. Not that he can’t play at all. Aramis Ramirez came back after dislocating his shoulder last season and claimed to be playing at around 85% the rest of the season. You can still play baseball at less than 100%!
This is a fourth outfielder we’re talking about…
"You've got to get your damn shirts rolled up and go out and kick somebody's ass. That's what you've go to do. Period." -- Lou Piniella
He's not really a #4 OF.
Based on our current OF situation, and the amount invested in Nady, it’s pretty clear that the team thinks of him as a potential starter, if any one of our (universally iffy) nominal starters totally craps out. He’s arguably our best OF bat.
I am surprised that Hendry didn’t get a 2011 team option on Nady – that used to be his calling card for signing guys coming off of TJ surgeries. What good is it to pay a salary and wait out a rehab if some other team is going to reap the benefit?
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
I was thinking the same thing about the 2011 team option
That would have been a great move by Hendry. If Nady rakes from June-October, then you just pick up the team option.
Should this be another reason for me to get mad at Hendry? (just kidding)
He's a backup option
The cubs will start Byrd, Fukudome, and Soriano if all are healthy and playing like major league caliber players, which Fuku and Sori sometimes don’t do. Nady is on this team to play sparingly at the beginning of the season, if by July either Fukudome or Soriano are struggling immensely, Nady could be a starter, but until then the guy won’t start often.
I agree with you on the absence of an option for 2011, usually JH includes one in these instances, perhaps he offered, but Nady refused thinking he could get more $ on the open market if he plays well?
"You've got to get your damn shirts rolled up and go out and kick somebody's ass. That's what you've go to do. Period." -- Lou Piniella
None of us know what the available medical information at the time of the signing was,
so it is a bit far fetched to cast Hendry as the devil incarnate and/or blithering idiot for signing Nady. The signing of Nady may turn out to be an error of judgement, but may also turn out to be brilliant. In all likelihood, it will turn out to be a middle of the road “we gambled a bit and neither really lost nor won” type signing. Only time will tell.
"A waist is a terrible thing to mind." - Terry 'Fat Tub of Goo' Forster
@Twitter as @brommmietze
by eths on Mar 11, 2010 4:27 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
Some people here apparently like to speed up time and pretend it's already midseason.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
but i think we could all agree
it wouldn’t make sense to invest heavily in something without having a clear understanding of the problem
either this was Hendry’s plan all along and he spent wildly for a 200-250 AB OF
or the Cubs medical staff did an extremely poor job in assessing the medicals
or we’re making decisions without having much information to form opinions on
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 11, 2010 1:31 PM CST up reply actions
I'll vote for
Door No. 3, Monty Hall.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Mar 11, 2010 2:03 PM CST up reply actions
Reading over the article, it seems like you guys are getting a little more worked up than you should be
It seems like Lou implied that nady would still be up for the occasional start, but he just wouldn’t be capable of going back-to-back in the field. I guess an analogy would be that when relievers come back from injury, throwing on back-to-back days can be an issue. But for a bench player, not being able to play the field in back-to-back days wouldn’t exactly be the end of the world.
Brad Miller is god.
FACT: Al Yellon is a Jim Hendry apologist, and the slant of his blog reflects that
And before I get ripped for being a “name caller” or Debbie Downer, I submit to you that Al actually finds the characterization a GOOD THING.
The majority of BCBers live in delusion and see no reason that Jim Hendry shall be held accountable for this $140 million trainwreck created under his watch. It is the very essence of Luvable Loser affliction manifesting itself. And I shall have no part of it. You see, I actually want to the Cubs to be viable World Series contenders someday within my lifetime.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
by BLou on Mar 11, 2010 6:37 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
Spoken by the man who on multiple occasions said Milton Bradley would be among the best hitters in the NL last year.
Why do I keep bringing this up? Proof that your statements have little credibility.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al Yellon on Mar 11, 2010 6:48 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe it's the delusion talking, but...
Hendry has done some excellent things, to go along with some terrible things. Whether the genius bits (the Karros/Grudz trade; the Lofton/A-Ram trade; the D-Lee trade; building the first back-to-back division winners of my lifetime) outweigh the bad ones is highly subjective.
I can see why he has his critics, but the notion that this is a “$140 million trainwreck” because the team he constructed finished above .500 for the third straight year but missed the playoffs for the first time in those years, is kool-aid drinking of another kind.
by Orval Overall on Mar 11, 2010 7:00 AM CST up reply actions 8 recs
You are right. The Cubs have the fifth best record in baseball over the last three years.
Not exactly a train wreck.
by Rick B on Mar 11, 2010 8:22 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
owww - the logic it hurts!
"There are no curses here...Games are won and lost on the baseball field" - Lou Piniella
Hendry's been good with trades
But terrible at FA signings, and by FA, I don’t mean resigning your own players, I mean signing FAs from other teams. Besides Lilly, please list me off the good Hendry FA moves. For every 1 you can provide, I’ll provide 3 crappy FA signings. I’ll start with the 2 worst
Bradley for $30million and Soriano for $120+million
I'll play......
Edmonds, DeRosa, Alou (as asst GM), Dempster, Zambrano (if you count him-he was not a trade acquisition), Marmol (same as Z). Can you name 12 or 18 bad ones? I’ll even start it for you: Soriano, Fukodome, Miles, Heilman, Gregg. Note, I will not give you anyone they’ve signed this season because the jury is out.
dont want to nitpick but
gregg and hurlman were trades
by jesus christos on Mar 11, 2010 4:17 PM CST up reply actions
EVEN BETTER.....
Thanks Jesus. So, Magic Blue, you owe me 8-14……….
marmol, zambrano
weren’t signed from other teams….
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 11, 2010 6:15 PM CST up reply actions
im guessing hes referring to undrafted free agency
by jesus christos on Mar 11, 2010 6:19 PM CST up reply actions
Yes I am........
And i said “if you count him”…..hence the 8-14 range
ZOMG! JOSH HAMILTON IS THE GREATEST BALLPLAYER EVER!!!!!!! XOXOXOXOXO
by Orval Overall on Mar 12, 2010 6:03 AM CST up reply actions
He counts for at least 5-10, so only need 3-4 more magicblue
by Orval Overall on Mar 12, 2010 6:05 AM CST up reply actions
DID YOU KNOW WE COULD HAVE HAD J HAM
BUT THAT IDIOT GM TRADED HIM FOR CRAP
GRR
"The roar from the crowd really fired me up," Burish said. "In warmups there were a lot of signs. One said 'Burish, my grandma is pregnant.' I don't know what that means. I skated by it and said, 'it's not mine.' "
by jesus christos on Mar 12, 2010 5:00 PM CST up reply actions
rec'd
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 9:55 AM CST up reply actions
So you'd call
Dempster and Lilly terrible? Our #2 and #3 starters? Hmmmmmmmmm
Is this a response to me?
No, I wouldn’t call those two terrible. But I would call a number of other things terrible, particularly in hindsight (where we are all eventually judged anyways). A lot of his free agent signings have not worked out and would not have received the same money again even a year after Hendry signed them (e.g., Soriano, Bradley, Dome). I don’t fault him for trying, and I don’t even fault him as much as some others would for the logic at the time the deal was made, but if you don’t criticize him even a little bit for those deals then I think you have some ’splainin to do.
by Orval Overall on Mar 11, 2010 2:01 PM CST up reply actions
Oh, nevermind
Didn’t see magicblue’s post in between. so what is that name – just bluemike under a different handle?
by Orval Overall on Mar 11, 2010 2:02 PM CST up reply actions
not so far as we know.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 2:29 PM CST up reply actions
rec'd
Sunday Feb 28 at 7 PM CST free webcast of the live taping of The Austin Variety Show www.austinvarietyshow.com/
FACT: BLou is clueless, and the content of his posts reflect that
Two division titles and the best record in the NL in 2008 is hardly a trainwreck. Is his handling of the 2009 offseason a fireable offense? It sure could be. However Ricketts did the smart thing. He wasn’t going to come in and clean house. He’s going to give it time to see how the operation works before he starts cutting heads.
Ted Lilly won’t be ready until May. Lets trade him immediately. He will serve us no good. The season is already over and he won’t be any use to us.
Have you ever thought that Fukudome normally starts like a gangbuster the first 1-2 months? They probably won’t need Nady to be a full time player until then. If Nady can come in and play full time with numbers that resemble 2008 we’ll be very pleased. It could be similar to the Jim Edmonds deal in 2008.
It is foolish that people are complaining that a guy who was signed to be a platoon player will be exactly that for the first couple months. I understand the money involved, but give me an example of a deal they should have made instead? There weren’t any no brainers available.
Its funny, you spend most of your life gripping a baseball. And in the end, its almost always the other way around.
by TCobb1911 on Mar 11, 2010 9:17 AM CST up reply actions 6 recs
Thank you for being the voice of reason here.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Your just rationalizing behavior
Ted Lilly was our player, what are we supposed to do? Nady was an injured FA signing. Fukudome has never hit left handed pitching in the MLB, not even in April or May, when he’s a “gangbuster”. Soriano says he’s not even 100% and had knee surgery in September. Its cold in Chicago in April and May with more potential for injuries.
The bottom line is that this team needs a healthy 4th OF right now. Look, if Nady was healthy, he would have been a nice signing. But he’s not going to be ready to play the OF regularly (read 1-2 times a week) till June. Forgive me for thinking that there are better ways to spend the limited resources the team had this off-season, than on an injured Nady.
I’ll say this, I hope the Cubs aren’t stupid and let Nady be the 25th man on the roster until he is healthy and able to play in the OF regularly (read June). Personally, I’d like to see Colvin get a shot. Why not? the guy was dedicated this off-season and seems to have that hunger to be successful in MLB
That's foolish.
Nady was not signed to be an everyday player! So you’re going to remove a guy off the roster for being able to do exactly what you signed him to do?! That makes zero sense. So say an OFer goes down with injury. He goes on the DL and now you have room. No where in the article does it say that Nady will be unable to platoon with Fukudome. The article mentions playing every day. Again, what are people thinking when they get upset Nady will only be able to perform for exactly what they signed him for until June? That’s like being pissed that Baker, Fontenot, or Blanco can’t play every single game. NEWSFLASH: They were never meant to! And neither was Nady. Best case scenario was Nady be able to take over in RF with his 2008 numbers, but he was never signed with the expectation of doing so.
There is also no reason to think Soriano won’t be able to play his normal number of games. The 100% crap is exactly that, crap. We are in March and he is performing with no pain. I’d say he’ll be just fine.
As far as the Fukudome debate… the numbers of righties faced vs. the numbers of lefties isn’t even close. He’ll get most of the ABs anyhow.
Its funny, you spend most of your life gripping a baseball. And in the end, its almost always the other way around.
If you're arguement is solely
about the money and what else could be done with it, you have a point. But this move was made before Guzman went down and they knew they needed a platoon partner for Dome.
Its funny, you spend most of your life gripping a baseball. And in the end, its almost always the other way around.
Dome needs a platoon partner
And also, (speaking in sotto voce) a total replacement.
That was the underlying beauty of the Nady signing…. there are prolonged stretches where Dome is simply unusable, and adding a Nady or a Dye could remedy that issue.
We’ll have to see how much Nady can play, but it seems odds-on likely that at some point this season, he’s going to be needed as an everyday player. And it may be sooner than we all think.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Right.
This is why the signing made sense in January. Nady could spell Soriano or Kosuke (and Lee, for that matter) AND play decent defense — which is something the other available FA options really couldn’t do.
But I assumed Nady would be healthy enough to play every day before June 1.
Soriano says he’s not even 100% and had knee surgery in September
that was about a month ago and most likely soriano talking out of his ass
by jesus christos on Mar 11, 2010 4:18 PM CST up reply actions
I didn't see anyone defending Hendry before you went off BLou.
Most of us don’t throw an immediate tantrum when something goes wrong. That doesn’t mean we are defending Hendry. Besides, in the end, it only matters if the Ricketts think Jim Hendry sucks.
no sh#t! :)
" It’s spring fever - you don’t know what it is you want, but it fairly makes your heart ache, you want it so. "--Mark Twain
by cooliogirl47 on Mar 11, 2010 8:23 AM CST up reply actions
Weighing in late ...
but I think Hendry et. al knew this was likely when they signed Millar and Tracy. They were Nady insurance (and insurance against other injuries).
Nady is the Soriano insurance, Tracy is the Nady insurance, and Millar is the Tracy insurance.
And that’s why the eggs are in the soapdish, the soap is in the fishbowl, and the goldfish is in your cowboy hat, Bert!
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Mar 11, 2010 9:11 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
too bad we didn't offer Calero a non-guaranteed contract ...
to be the Guzman insurance.
I'm pretty sure that Shark was Guzman insurance, and no one sells shark insurance.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Really?
My understanding was that Shark was ticketed for a rotation spot — in Chicago or Des Moines.
I'm mostly in this for the puns and wordplay right now.
That said, I have never seen Shark look particularly great as a starter – but he showed flashes of…. well, not greatness, but at least “goodness”… in ’08 as a 1-inning fireballing relief pitcher.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Definitely.
But I don’t think that’s what the Cubs are planning for Shark, unless I’m not up to date on that …
I wonder...
If, as the article suggests, the middle infielders will roam out further into the OF to receive throws from Nady, who is going to roam out to the OF cutout to receive the throws from Theriot’s pop-gun arm?
"When the day comes with that last winning run and I'm crying and covered in beer. I'll look to the sky and know I was right to think someday we'll go all the way." - Vedder
I find it funny..........
That depending on which side of the fence you are, you are using the interpretations of this article to FURTHER your own opinion. The article says:
“play the outfield REGULARLY until June”……..it doesn’t say he CAN’T/WON’T play the outfield at all. It means he can play on a limited basis, i.e 2-3 days per week.
It also says “Until then, the Cubs will have to rely on Nady as a pinch-hitter and occasional fill-in in left and right fields.”
So, for those of you that say he CAN’T play the outfield until June, you are WRONG.
Finally, who is repsonsible for the medical evaluation of Xavier Nady? Jim Hendry, or the medical staff? I realize Jim had made good and bad decisions, but he can only operate off of the medical reports given to him, and Nady passed his physical……….
It's worrisome that Fukudome doesn't have a platoon partner.
The guy simply cannot hit MLB lefty pitching.
And for long stretches of the season, he also can’t hit MLB righty pitching.
But, for now, he’s the everyday RF.
I think that a lot of the furor here comes from the fact that every one of our nominal starting OFs is a big question mark offensively. There was some hope that Nady – who has a decent chance of being our best offensive OF – would be a shot in the arm for this offense. Now, I’m suddenly wishing that I could pencil in “Jermaine Dye” in the #6 spot vs. all lefties, defense be damned.
If only we could graft Dome’s arm onto Nady’s body, we’d have a complete player. Except that Nady would have to learn how to throw left-handed, and that would be tricky. Plus, he’d need to buy a new baseball glove. So maybe this “grafting” plan wasn’t very well thought out. But as a metaphor, it still works, I’d argue.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Mar 11, 2010 9:39 AM CST up reply actions 2 recs
+1, I couldn't have said it any better
Jermaine Dye in the 6 hole against lefties sounds pretty good right now to me as well.
Who says.........
He can’t platoon with Kosuke? How often do you expect us to see lefties?
It sounds like he's not capable of playing 9 innings in the field yet.
It also sounds like he’s not capable of throwing to 3rd or home, which is a pretty big problem. Time will tell.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Read the friggin' article:
“But if he can’t play more than a couple times a week until June”………
“but is not expected to be able to play the outfield regularly until June”
“Until then, the Cubs will have to rely on Nady as a pinch-hitter and occasional fill-in in left and right fields”
that says PLATOON……..how else can you interpret it? Where is anyone getting these absolutes of can’t play the outfield, can’t play 9 innings, etc.? Or are you just sticking to your own interpretations or building off of others uninformed comments on here?
Platoon to me means playing 9 innings of baseball (or at least 7) against lefties or resting Soriano (i.e., playing 1-2 games per week). If the guy can’t throw the ball effectively from RF to 3rd, LF to 1st, or either LF or RF to home plate, I fail to see how he can be a platoon partner for anyone.
The already questionable OF defense would go from average to terrible really fast. Most likely, Nady is going to start the season on the DL, and won’t be ready to play 9 innings of baseball in the OF 1-2 times a week until late May/Early June.
And no one has yet said that Nady will not be capable of doing that.
Unless you’ve read some mystery article that the rest of us haven’t.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Oh I see magicblue..........
And now that I’ve blown up your argument above:
“Look, if Nady was healthy, he would have been a nice signing. But he’s not going to be ready to play the OF regularly (read 1-2 times a week) till June. Forgive me for thinking that there are better ways to spend the limited resources the team had this off-season, than on an injured Nady.”
…….you’re going to resort to his arm strength. Nice argument shift.
Neither of us know when he's going to be able to play defense.
Nady’s contract, and the Cubs’ OF situation, dictates that he’s being thought of as more than an occasional replacement. He’s a potential starter. And he may be fine in the field, and have some kind of marginal pain which means that he’s capable of playing, so long as he gets rest or whatever.
It’s more likely, in my opinion based on this article and the Cubs MO, that his lingering injury issues are going to keep him relegated primarily to a PH role for the first 2 months, probably tied at the hip to Fuld the way Cedeno used to be tied to Ward.
Unfortunately, we have a decent risk of one of our starting OFs totally augering in during April/May – a period when the Cubs need to pile up a crapload of wins, based on their strength of schedule.
Nady may be more than capable of doing what Daryle Ward did for us. But we didn’t pay him $3.5 or whatever to do that – we paid him because we know that Soriano, Byrd and Dome are shaky starters.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Its just a lot of red flags man, that all it is.
I just think there were better options. I liked the Nady signing when I thought he’d be able to play 1-2 games regularly in the OF to help our team for most of the season.
The articles suggest that he might not be able to do that regularly till late May or June because of his inability to throw the ball in from the OF. If this was the AL, I’d be happy about having Nady because no one is doubting that he can bat right now, he DHed yesterday I believe.
I just think this team really needed a solid 4th OF option for many of the reasons stated by D98.
I’m not really arguing here. I hope Nady is ready to play the OF tomorrow and help our team win. Only time will tell. If that’s not the case, then I feel like that money could have been used to sign a Gomes or Branyan and maybe add a guy like Kiko Calero or another veteran RP. Both of those moves could have been done for the same money, and all those guys are ready for full-time duty right now.
Disagree........
The article suggests that he will be able to play 1-2 games a week regularly, which most likely will be what Kosuke needs based on the amount of lefties we face.
What the article is not clear on is his ability to throw and the degree to which he can throw. You could interpret either of these comments to support or refute his arm strength at this point. Therefore, it is all speculation on the arm until we know the full context of the interview or what shape his arm is in.
“Piniella was not concerned about Nady’s arm in right or left.
‘We don’t care about throwing,’ he said. " ‘He can throw the ball to the second baseman or throw the ball to the shortstop.’ "
by jballgame on Mar 11, 2010 10:31 AM CST up reply actions 4 recs
Given what happened with Guzman last week ...
I think some posters are assuming Nady’s injury will be the worst case scenario, and that “regularly” means anything more than a spot start here and there is impossible for months.
With the Cubs injury reports, the subtext is essentially "bold text".
It’s becoming easier to read between the lines than it is to read the actual lines, frankly. Still, here’s hoping that he’s a huge contributor all year.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
If that's what the furor is.........
It needs to be stated that way, not making interpretations of the article that are untrue just to support an opinion.
Look
I am not all that disappointed with this signing. In the past, my issue with the Hendry signings have been the YEARS he commits, not the $$ (Fozi of course is the freaking exception).
This is a one year deal that may work out. Show me where the 3.5 mil prevented him from signing another, much needed, component to this team.
BlueMike just like to rip ass, that’s all.
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
I wonder ...
why the Cubs gave Nady so much guaranteed money. If more of the total payout was based on incentives, they might have been able to spend $2 million on a one-year deal to make sure Andrew Cashner isn’t the primary righty setup guy to Marmol.
Perhaps
but I haven’t seen any key FA signing that the Cubs seemingly “missed out” on due to a lack of 2 mil.
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
by Kinky Reggae on Mar 11, 2010 10:04 AM CST up reply actions
3.5 million to Nady + 2.75 million to Grabow
= 6.25 million
Aroldis Chapman was signed to a 6 yr $30 million dollar deal
that 6.25 million will have little impact on the Cubs chances this year, but had it been invested in someone like Chapman we could have another elite pitching prospect in the system to help rebuild a declining, aging roster that is projected to finish around .500
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 11, 2010 1:34 PM CST up reply actions
I thought it was 3.75 for Grabow
Am I wrong? I thought it was two years for 7.5
Shameless self promotion: Check out my website!!!
http://www.itsnotabook.com
by WittyUserName on Mar 11, 2010 1:42 PM CST up reply actions
no you're right
7.5 million…
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 11, 2010 2:02 PM CST up reply actions
Sure
and had Hendry known that this was the price for Chapman, perhaps Nady is a no go. We cannot discuss this citing knowledge that could not have been available when the signing happened.
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
by Kinky Reggae on Mar 11, 2010 3:36 PM CST up reply actions
had he offered
perhaps he’d known….
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 11, 2010 6:16 PM CST up reply actions
How do you know he didn't offer?
the Cubs were one of the interested teams……
i'm surmising hendry didn't offer 7 million a year
because chapman signed for less
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Mar 11, 2010 7:07 PM CST up reply actions
Sure
but “Guzman’s spot” wasn’t an issue at signing. DEspite what BlueMike thinks, Jim Hendry cannot see the future. MB was a BIG MISTAKE, but some aren’t so obvious.
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
Oops, reply to elgato
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
by Kinky Reggae on Mar 11, 2010 10:10 AM CST up reply actions
Here's the thing ...
Injuries are always going to occur, and the Cubs knew that their financial flexibility was limited. Given Nady’s injury history — and injury present — I think the Cubs would have been smart to only guarantee (say) $2.3 million, and pass on Nady, otherwise. Note that no one’s saying that something that happened since the signing caused the recovery to slow down.
If the Cubs had done that, they would be in a better position across the board right now.
Oh, and I thought of someone the Cubs could have snagged with an extra million or so: Felipe Lopez.
Felipe Lopez.
Bad clubhouse guy, not needed. What would the point of that have been?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Well, a pretty damn well-run organization ...
signed Lopez, for the SECOND time. That makes me think less of his purported bad rep. As for your other point …
Lopez is a proven left-handed bat, who could back up at ALL of our infield positions. Is he an All-Star? Well, no — but he’s better than Mike Fontenot AND he can play short! Are you in all honesty telling me you’d rather have Mike Fontenot than Felipe Lopez? BTW, they’re the same age.
The only thing in Fontenot has in his favor is that the Cubs are already paying him. But with Lopez on the roster — and not adding depth to our biggest rival — the Cubs could have used Fontenot as trade bait to strengthen the pen.
and you think Fontenot will have a better year than Lopez ...
who, by the way, has experience at short?
Especially for Lopez.......
UZR rates his defense as above average at second and third, but below average at short.
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1311&position=2B/SS#fielding
as opposed to Mike Fontenot ...
whose defenders note couldn’t hit and adapt to a new position at the same time.
Fontentot's UZR.......
Is better than Lopez’ at 2 of 3 positions and pretty close at 3rd:
SS: Fontenot -1.7, Lopez -42.3
2B: Fontenot 9.6, Lopez 5.1
3B: Fontenot -0.6, Lopez 2.0
And projections are roughly the same for offense, so why would we pay for somebody we already have?
frankly ...
because I think the projections are wrong on Fontenot.
Anyway, how does Fontenot have a UZR at short? He played like half a game there in 2007 (or something). Maybe I don’t understand UZR enough … ?
Laughing out Loud
Then I’m not going to debate with you any more because even when you’re given data to disprove your perspective, you dispute the data.
They’re not projections-they’re taken from past history.
Let me be more clear ...
I don’t expect Fontenot to meet projections. He was terrible in 2009, and I don’t really buy the talk that he would have met 2009 expectations if he hadn’t had to play third. I’m sure that hurt his numbers to a point — especially when he had to face lefties — but his numbers FELL OFF A CLIFF last year.
I also don’t think the Cubs can/will use Fontenot in a way that best meshes with his talents. Given the Cubs lack of left-handed hitting starters, I think Lou will overuse him. Remember, Fontenot’s best year was 2008, when he was basically a SPOT starter-plus for half a season— not a platoon guy who will play most of the time (because more starters are righties) most of the season.
I know a lot of people believe that Jeff Baker will get most of the playing time at second. Frankly, I’ll believe that when I see it.
Also, I see YOU didn’t address my point about Fontenot’s UZR at short.
Fontentot's UZR at SS........
Is better than Lopez’. What else do you want?
What is the UZR based on?
Two games? That means nothing.
The book is out...
…on Fontenot, and I’m not sure he will be able to make enough of an adjustment to be very productive over the entire season.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
yup
Frankly, I’m annoyed that the Cubs have banked so much on Fontenot in the past two years. Everyone points to MB as the reason the Cubs traded DeRosa — but I really doubt that deal would have been made had the Cubs not clearly overestimated Fontenot’s abilities. And I don’t want to hear all the crap about how Fontenot had “earned a shot.” Baloney.
(And, no, DeRosa wouldn’t have necessarily saved 2009 — but his presence WOULD have made the Cubs better — if for no other reason than it would have meant less playing time for Fontenot and Miles.)
Not signing Lopez to a cheap, incentive-laden deal (and instead letting him make the Cardinals that much deeper) shows the Cubs AGAIN banked on Fontenot. As posters here have said, why sign Lopez if you have Fontenot — which is likely what the Cubs were thinking, too.
But Lopez has more than two games at short in his career (negating the UZR point for Fontenot), he can play third regularly without it affecting his hitting, he’s faster than Fontenot AND he’s a switch hitter!
Oh, and they’re the SAME AGE.
You're so staunch in your convictions.......
So, you want someone to back up Theriot who’s UZR at SS is -42.3? That’s atrocious!!!!!!!! Did you ever think that MAYBE the Cubs are relying on some combination of Blanco, Fontenot, and PERHAPS Castro this year? We didn’t need to spend money, albeit a small amount, on a 5th middle IF. We have Baker, Theriot, Blanco and Fontenot, with Castro waiting in the wings.
So, let’s play this out. If the Cubs sign Lopez, who gets left off the roster assuming 13 position players?
1) Soto-no
2) Hill-no
3) Lee-no
4) Theriot-no
5) Baker-no
6) Rami-no
7) Soriano-no
8) Fukudome-no
9) Byrd-no
10) Nady-no
11) Fuld-no
12) Blanco-no
13) 1B back up-no
Where the heck are you going to put Lopez? We already have to make a choice b/t a 4th middle infielder (Fonte/Blanco) and a back up to Lee, who I would believe will be Tracy/Millar/Hoffpauir.
I assume you’ll say “trade Fontenot” assuming there’s a market. You can’t send him down (as I believe he’s out of options)….
Simply saying...
…I don’t believe Fontenot is going to be very productive.
Nothing more, nothing less.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
well, if they''re relying on Blanco, Fontenot and perhaps Castro
They could rely on Blanco, Lopez and perhaps Castro, right?
The bench log jam wouldn’t have been any worse if the Cubs had signed Lopez, because I’m assuming Fontenot would have been traded or released. The nice thing about Fontenot’s salary is that another team almost certainly would have claimed him and his salary if the Cubs put him on waivers (assuming a trade couldn’t have been made).
Last thing, I totally agree that Lopez’s UZR is scary — but you keep ignoring the fact that Fontenot has hardly played there. For all we know, he could be much, much worse at short — or he could struggle AGAIN at the plate because he’s learning a new position.
I'm not ignoring it.......
I’m simply disagreeing that Lopez is a viable answer.
And Fontenot isn’t listed on the 13 position players list above. SO-answer the question-who does Lopez replace?
If the Cubs waived Fontenot-aren’t THEY responsible for his salary? If it were that easy-wouldn’t we waive Silva?
If the Cubs are responsible, then you’d be paying $2M plus incentives for Lopez.
I believe ...
that if someone claimed him off waivers, that team would have to pay his salary. Anyway, I think the Cubs could find a taker for Fontenot, even if the return is minimal.
The bench question is a good one. I’d say Lopez would replace Blanco. I know, I know, it’s a downgrade at short. But I have a feeling that Fontenot will get the spot over Blanco, anyway. That’s why Fontenot is getting time at short this ST.
You have to admit that you have no way of knowing whether Fontenot is a better shortstop than Lopez. Fontenot’s UZR comes from too small a sample (unless I’m missing a UZR nuance).
Agreed......
I don’t know if Fontenot is better than Lopez at short. Only a larger sample size would tell.
The thing I get frustrated with is people saying “the Cubs should do X” without thinking through all the downstream effect……I know nobody’s perfect, and people react with emotion/opinion on this board, but people also need to be prepared that if they put something out there without thinking it through, it’s going to get challenged.
I get that.
But I’ve thought a lot about this, as you might have noticed.
Oh, and Lopez is a switch-hitter ...
meaning he can actually hit left-handed pitching. Fontenot really can’t.
being a switch hitter doesnt make you able to hit all pitching
see: that guy that played RF last year
"The roar from the crowd really fired me up," Burish said. "In warmups there were a lot of signs. One said 'Burish, my grandma is pregnant.' I don't know what that means. I skated by it and said, 'it's not mine.' "
by jesus christos on Mar 12, 2010 5:01 PM CST up reply actions
Do you have numbers to back that up?
We DO know that Fontenot can’t hit lefties.
i didnt say he could
im just saying being a switch hitter doesnt make you a beast against RH and LH pitching
"The roar from the crowd really fired me up," Burish said. "In warmups there were a lot of signs. One said 'Burish, my grandma is pregnant.' I don't know what that means. I skated by it and said, 'it's not mine.' "
by jesus christos on Mar 14, 2010 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions
Of course they are going to occur
and clearly the finances were limited, this isn’t the Yankees. hindsight is always 20/20. You may argue this isn’t hindsight buut I would say, had his recovery been sped up and he was ready on opening day, and let’s say he rakes in 2010, then this discussion isn’t happening so to some extent, it is hindsight (I hope that makes sense).
Felipe Lopez, meh. And I have to add, management didn’t and doesn’t see the IF as a hole, though I would disagree. Not sure Lopez makes me any happier. Point taken though.
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
DAMMIT! Reply to elgato!
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
by Kinky Reggae on Mar 11, 2010 10:35 AM CST up reply actions
we didn't see Nady's medical reports ...
but I doubt Hendry signed him thinking he couldn’t play regularly in the field until June. If he did, and he still guaranteed Nady $3.3 million (at a time when the club is so budget-conscious), my opinion of Hendry just dropped a few notches.
Now that I would agree with
I just have a hard time believing that the estimated time was mid June and Hendry just said, “Ah, F it”. My guess is he had hopes that opening day, playing some helpful role, which in some opinions, may still occur.
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
by Kinky Reggae on Mar 11, 2010 10:53 AM CST up reply actions
I'm envisioning a Daryle Ward-style role ...
for the first couple months. That’s certainly helpful, but worth $3.3 million?
Well, this is where it gets interesting..
I pulled this nugget out of my notebook:
Nady is hoping to join the short list of players — mostly pitchers — to return from two such procedures and his agent, Scott Boras, e-mailed FoxSports.com last week to say that the outfielder is “on schedule to be ready in Spring Training.” Another source, though, told the same Web site on Tuesday that Nady passing his physical was, “not a foregone conclusion.” That physical will likely take place before the end of the week.
So, you have a few possibilities. That Hendry looked at the medical reports, and said $$$#$ it, we’ll take our changes. Someone on the Cubs medical staff severely $##@! up. Or, Nady has suffered setbacks that the Cubs are not disclosing.
In any case, it’s troubling.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 11, 2010 11:05 AM CST up reply actions
Not sure where you get those conclusions........
Nady passed his physical, and has begun playing in Spring Training. Therefore, I’d say he’s on schedule. We’ll see if he plays the field any time soon given his ability to be “occasionally available.”
agreed...loose connections.
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
by Kinky Reggae on Mar 11, 2010 11:16 AM CST up reply actions
HE WASN'T SIGNED..........
to play regularly. He was signed to platoon, which the article clearly states he can do right now!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not really.
Hendry’s comments from the time of the signing, and the amount of money he was paid, indicate that the team definitely considers Nady as potentially more than just a Dome platoon partner. Nady is here b/c the team needs OF offense rather desperately, thought he was a potential starter, and paid him accordingly.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Disagree...........
He was signed to be a platoon/fill-in player, the additional incentives are built off of the fact that he COULD be a starter. If the Cubs signed him solely to be a starter, he would have been paid like a starter in guaranteed money, and not given incentives based on playing time.
Reed Johnson was paid $3M in 2009-was he a starter? Think not. Nady’s salary is $3.3M this year plus incentives, indicating that the Cubs signed him to be a role player, but hoped he might be something bigger.
The Reed argument doesn't mean much.
Most free agents got less this offseason than in offseasons past (aside from the superstars). Look what Reed will get from the Dodgers. Tat’s more akin to fourth outfielder money in this offseason.
Still going through some notes..
But I will add this quote from Hendy (emphasis mine):
“Quality, quality hitter. Certainly a legitimate middle-of-the-lineup hitter from his past. We searched long and hard in the winter to come up with one more solid bat to give Lou going into camp. This really came together rather quickly in the last week…We feel like we’ve got an everyday, legitimate 5-hole-type hitter to augment our offense.”
by Damen Jackson on Mar 11, 2010 11:15 AM CST up reply actions
No lies there IMO.
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
by Kinky Reggae on Mar 11, 2010 11:17 AM CST up reply actions
Thanks for the creative editing, but you're wrong:
Nady, 31, is not quite seven months removed from his second Tommy John reconstruction, and Cubs general manager Jim Hendry conceded that there remains a chance that Nady will be limited somewhat defensively at the start of the season.
That didn’t stop the club from committing to a deal that, according to The Associated Press, guarantees Nady $3.3 million and has $2.05 million more available in incentives for games played.
Hendry expects Nady to be on the Cubs’ Opening Day roster even if he remains under throwing restrictions at that time.
“First and foremost, he’s going to be paid to knock in runs,” Hendry said in a conference call that included Nady and agent Scott Boras. "We’ll see how the throwing program goes in the next two months and if ‘X’ is limited throwing at the full-throttle level on April 1, we’re not going to tax him.
“But we’re certainly counting on the bat as he grows into more and more playing time as his arm gets stronger. There’s no way to predict when that throwing will be 90 percent or 100 percent, but he’s on the path.”
Hendry referred to Nady as an “everyday, legitimate five-hole hitter,” but Nady would have to displace another Cubs outfielder to land that role. For now, the Cubs projected starters from left to right field are Alfonso Soriano, Marlon Byrd and Kosuke Fukudome.
Here’s the link to check for yourself (and for others to see you creatively edited to support your own point)….additionally, seems like Hendry was pretty realistic about the situation we find ourselves in.
If this was a reply to me...
I gave the exact credited quote from Jim Hendry, not the writers opinion, as you have in your larger piece. If you feel that Hendry was misquoted, take it up with Bruce Miles, or the Daily Herald, as this was verbatim from one of their articles.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 11, 2010 11:23 AM CST up reply actions
read the rest........
If Jim is making comments about “throwing restrictions”, “growing into more and more playing time”, “there’s no way to predict when that throwing will be 90/100%” does that spell starter to you? Think not.
This article should be a prerequisite to commenting on this thread :)
" It’s spring fever - you don’t know what it is you want, but it fairly makes your heart ache, you want it so. "--Mark Twain
by cooliogirl47 on Mar 11, 2010 11:33 AM CST up reply actions
It wasn't the writer's opinion.......
Hendry referred to Nady as "a legitimate five-hole hitter,’’ and suggested that if fully recovered from surgery he could get a chance to challenge for at-bats seemingly earmarked to outfield regulars Alfonso Soriano, Marlon Byrd and Kosuke Fukudome.
Everyone relax...
all lou said was he wont be 100% until june 1 in his opinion. but he also said that nady will still be playing, they are just making adjustments with the cut off men to lower the distance thrown by nady. on a side note, enough with the love fest with fuld. id take colvin over fuld anyday. colvin brings some pop and hes earning his pt in spring.
The Al Yellon Apologist Society had better shut their pie holes when June 1st comes along...
And Xavier Nady has been minimally used because of his rehabilitation and meanwhile the $13.5 million right fielder has a sub-human batting average against lefties en route to his wondrous annual production totals of a .255 BA to go along with 50 RBIs.
Don’t ANY of you come back in bewildment when this ballclub is on pace for a 90 loss season. Not a single soul among the kool-aid drinkers and Jim Hendry Fan Club.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
I hate pie
" It’s spring fever - you don’t know what it is you want, but it fairly makes your heart ache, you want it so. "--Mark Twain
by cooliogirl47 on Mar 11, 2010 12:50 PM CST up reply actions
You know what, Al..
It’s really time to cut the bull$$t, and come clean. There’s only one explanation for BLou; he’s your alter ego. You trot that persona out anytime the hits drop below a certain level on the site, and watch the comments soar back up.
We demand transparency! It’s time to come clean.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 11, 2010 1:47 PM CST up reply actions
And by the way......
No response to your creative editing?
Not unless you want me to say something
unkind, which I’d prefer not to right now.
by Damen Jackson on Mar 11, 2010 1:52 PM CST up reply actions
There's no way I could keep up that level of bombast.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Dude
the only freakin pie hole that needs shutting is yours BlueMike. Your posts are so ignorant that it is bewildering that you make it through everyday without stumbling muindlessly into traffic.
You have been proven to pass judgement inappropriately so often that even you BM, should recognize your errors. We, the people who don’t agree that this is the most god awful signing ever, do not defend Jum Hendry as you so accuse us. We simply are stating our OPINIONS that this signing isn’t so bad and that Hendry didn’t make as blind a signing as you have speculated.
Just shut up for a change. You are the Rush Freakin Limabaugh of BCB. Close your own GD hole for once!
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
by Kinky Reggae on Mar 11, 2010 1:22 PM CST up reply actions
Spelling errors acknowledged!
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
by Kinky Reggae on Mar 11, 2010 1:24 PM CST up reply actions
So Mike...........
Are you going to publicly state you are wrong when the Cubs DON’T lose 90 games? Turnabout is fair play………….
deal
so long as you shut your pie hole when none of what you have predicted comes to pass.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Mar 11, 2010 1:26 PM CST up reply actions
I'm saving this one...........
for later BLou. We’ll see if you’re right on the wins and on Sori’s stats.
Means Tracy is a virtual lock to make the opening day roster
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
not ready
till june?? why was this guy signed? we need players that can play. he sounds like he would have been better suited as a dh. thanks jim.
Christ.....
Read the article………he won’t be ready for FULL TIME duty until June. He can play a few days a week until then, which is exactly what he was signed to do.
Talk about Revisionist History
I don’t remember any Nady-hate in his pending physical thread or his signing thread
And there was love in Nady BCB projection thread, and warnings that he might start on the DL.
"On offense, your most precious possessions are your 27 outs" - Earl Weaver
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
