Hendry's task now: Just win, baby
Cubs GM Jim Hendry got his contract extension today. It was neither the three years many thought it would be nor the five that some had reported. Chairman Crane Kenney and Tribune Co. chief Sam Zell settled on four years. In this day and age of short shelf lives for sports GMs, this is nothing short of extraordinary. If Hendry serves out the term of the deal, he will have been on the job for 10 and a half years. Andy MacPhail named Hendry to the post in July of 2002, when MacPhail fired field manager Don Baylor in the midst of a miserable season.
Hendry and the Cubs have upgraded and beefed up the front office by leaps and bounds in the last few years, hiring scouts and scouting gurus and even creating a stats-oriented position. And in the last couple of years, the Cubs have even shown they're serious about those stats and using them the right way.
Now all that's left for Trader Jim is to get the Cubs to the World Series and win it. Since Hendry came aboard in 1994, the likes of these teams have won the Series: the Anaheim-L.A. Angels, the Florida Marlins and the Arizona Diamondbacks. The Colorado Rockies, San Diego Padres, Houston Astros and, now, the Tampa Bay Rays have gotten there. Yep, all of those teams have come into being since the Cubs last went to the Series in 1945, let alone since they last won it in 1908.
The Red Sox have shed their "curse," if such things exist. The White Sox have won a Series. So have the Cardinals. And they won them back to back to back after the Cubs' painful exit in '03.
Hendry's teams have gotten to the playoffs three times, in 2003 (we all know what happened then), 2007 and this year. But no Series win and no Series appearance.
This year's Cubs won 97 games, but Hendry disputed the notion that you have to build a team for October as opposed to building one for April-September. And he's right. You can't win in the playoffs unless you get there. This year's team had the best record in the NL, just as the Angels had the best record in the American League. Both were bounced out of the playoffs in the first round.
"I don't know how you differentiate between you build a team for April to September and then you try to build something different for October," Hendry said. "We had as good a team as there was in the National League. We had the best record. We just played bad baseball for three days. We stunk last year against the Diamondbacks. We're all going to put our heads together and see if there are other ways we think we can improve the club. All you do is try to get in every year and keep working on trying to get better once you get in there to accomplish that goal. There's a whole history in professional sports of clubs that kept getting close and kept getting close and finally they knocked that door in. That's what we're going to continue to try to do."
When and only when that happens will Hendry's tenure be a complete success. As of now, he's done an above-average job, and the Cubs' front office is in as good of hands as it has been since the Dallas Green years.
Or has anyone else noticed that every time a big name player/manager with a successful winning history signs up with the Cubs, they go down the tubes or struggle mightily to stay afloat?
(Durocher, Baker, Jim Frey, Garciaparra, Soriano, Don Baylor, Derrick Lee, Don Zimmer)
Something tells me there is baaad Ju-Ju at that Wrigley place.
How else do you explain the amazing collapses of the team on the field year after year after year.......after year, after year, after year.
How else do you explain the above mentioned individuals, or the ones that have left the organization to successful careers?
Steve Stone, Greg Maddux twice, Ken Holtzman, Dennis Eckersley, Matt Stairs, etc.)
I cannot imagine what it takes to be a die hard Cub fan based on the above, but I would equate it to a 24/7 stomach virus.
Maybe this will change when new owners evntually buy the organization and move them out of the bad Ju-Ju house.
There are no curses, jinxes, hexes, etc. Nothing cosmic, just a lot of years of bad baseball and/or bad management.
The Cubs finished first two years in a row -- why is everyone still bent out of shape? Sure, I'm disappointed with the playoffs, but THEY WON 97 GAMES. Did Mike Scoscia suddenly become an idiot, too? His team won 100 games and didn't make it past the first round.
Hard for me to talk baseball after having another epic collapse take place by the Cubs. In fact, I'm still not sure I'm ready as I'm in full hockey mode, so bear with me.....
I'm glad Piniella came out and admitted/broadcasted what the Cubs need to do. They desperately need a left handed bat. Badly. THey also need to get more athletic, and if they can get a Brian Roberts (although I doubt they have the pieces after the harden trade), it would force Soriano out of that top spot. It has been stated here, time and time again, that when the Cubs did have postseason success they had a legitimate leadoff hitter, and thus need one now. You can't have a guy who homers or gets out with no in between. Fukudome is a bust. Plain and simple. Unless he retools that swing, he's done. That's one expensive defensive replacement.
I'm also a bit negative as to what Hendry can do. With the payroll already approaching 120 million, what will the Cubs have to spend? Is Ryan Dempster their ONLY free agent target? My vote would be to move Derrek Lee. I was laughing out loud watching the pepsi clutch performers of the year before game 1 of the Ws. What no D-Lee? Yet under the Cubs team highlights were......Aramis Ramirez.....THen again Lee had a very nice postseason. Rumor has it, is that San Fran might dangle Cain and Lee should be able to fetch Cain. From there, the Cubs could throw the bank at Texierra by saving that Dempster contract and using it for Tex. Or get Bobby Abreau, and play Hoffpauir at 1st. Remember, Philly traded Thome when he was still valuable and inserted a lesser known rookie in Ryan Howard. Not saying Micah is Howard, but he could be everything D-Lee is.
Lastly, I also agree with mark grace. This same team has imploded in 6 straight playoff games, and a small amount of tinkering isn't going to cut it. What can Piniella or the players use as motivation? Most of these guys proved again that they wet themselves at the sight of a high pressured game.
The Cubs may win the division by default as their main competition should be Houston and St. Louis, as it looks as if Milwaukee will lose Sheets and Sabathia. However, I'm saving the pride and joy until they win a playoff game. 97 or 85 wins doesn't mean jack, unless you can win when it matters most, and sadly this group of players hasn't been able to figure it out. They are all talk, cliches, and whatever else and very little back up. So lets curb the best team this or that, until a playoff win in October. Until then I will sit back and try not to be fooled.......again.
Chief Concerns should be: Bullpen, left handed bat, #2/#1 starter, lead off man, and a better bench.
No way do the Giants trade Matt Cain straight up for an excellent-fielding, but declining offensive first baseman in his mid-30's.
Even so, no way does Hoffpauir match Lee. He'll never be the same fielder, and it's unlikely that a legitimate MLB hitter takes it until he's nearly 30 himself to break through.
Milwaukee might yet be a player for Cain, or Peavy. They'll still be in the hunt, and the Cubs need to get better.
...than to sign Hendry to an extension, especially with the interest from Seattle.
I don't say this because I think Hendry has done a great job during his tenure as GM. He has done well in some aspects of the job and very poorly in others. For instance, if the farm does not quickly develop position player talent you can put on the field to perform, everyone better hope the new owners are willing to increase the payroll north of $160 million. Furthermore, the Cubs lack of farm talent will also preclude them from being realistic trade partners in the Jake Peavy derby.
The good news is, Hendry is relatively good at trades (except when he holds on to guys to long) and is very good at signing free agents. These two areas are what he will need to concentrate on in the next year or two to bring a championship to the Cubs. If a championship does not happen, and the farm is still spinning it's wheels, its likely the club will need to be retooled at that time because of ageing talent, that is overpaid.
Assuming Piniella does walk away after 2010, I don't see Hendry as the guy who will hire his replacement, unless - there has been young talent developed that is major league ready and or the Cubs at least win a pennant.
Lastly, if Dallas Green would have enjoyed the resources that Hendry has during his tenure, the Cubs wouldn't be going on year 101 without a championship.
You're certainly right on that last point, MPH99. Once the Trib people "learned the lingo" of baseball, or thought they did back then, Dallas became expendable to them.
Catcher Welington Castillo and third baseman Josh Vitters are the best position-player prospects in the system. They could fetch something. The jury is still out on Tyler Colvin. Beyond that, though, you're right, there's not a whole lot to get excited about.
...this club has a real possibility of needing to be re-tooled in a couple of years because of expensive aging talent. Hopefully, they make short term adjustments and are able to win in the window I believe exists (2 years).
I think people tend to place excessive credit/blame on the manager when a team is winning or losing, and fail to see the importance the GM has on the club over time. IMO, it is much easier to build a perennial winner, with a good GM and average manager vs a good manager and an average GM. The GM is responsible for; hiring the manager, scouts, player development directors, making trades, signing FA's and making final roster decisions. The basis for any long term success is where the Cubs have fallen short, and that is developing your own players. Hendry has been involved with this since 1994, and hopefully his recent hires to run that part of the organization, can turn things around.
The scouting director may have been one of Hendry's best and most important hires. He had strong drafts in Toronto. Players such as Samardzija, Vitters, Lansford, Clevenger and Cashner have done well so far, considering how recently they were drafted.
Theriot and Soto were two important homegrown players for the Cubs this year. Pie? We'll see, but I'm not overly optimistic.
Your points are well taken.
over the next two years will decide whether Hendry gets the opportunity to enjoy the full four years of his new deal.
I agree Wilken was a very good hire and they are going to need him to deliver a little magic to avoid needing to go the FA route every year.
...This was Andy MacPhail's philosophy: build a strong farm system and use lower-cost players to fill key needs and sprinkle in the occasional high-priced free agent. Unfortunately for the Cubs, it never quite worked out under MacPhail. He seemed to have a single-mindedness about drafting pitchers, most of whom never panned out. Ironically, Andy had to muster up all the strength in his being in the fall of 2000 when he offered Mike Hampton $105 million. The position players drafted high also didn't work out well, as evidenced by Corey Patterson, Luis Montanez and, so far, Ryan Harvey.
is they are harder to scout and determine whether their skills will develop into major league talent. With pitchers, a dominant guy who throws hard (and can throw strikes) is much more likely to project into major league performance - as long as they stay healthy.
IMO, the organizations who can identify and develop position players are the ones who have won with lower payrolls, or have been able to sustain long term success (Yankees, Red Sox). It appears the Cubs have been hung up on putting too much weight on how many "tools" a position player has vs determining whether they have the self motivation, attitude and fundemental skills to be a good "baseball player". Maybe with Wilken's skills, some of this will change and position players will begin to flow to the ML club before too long.
Because they've had way too many 'swings and misses' (until recently) on position players.
Look at the young crop of studs the Rays have. The Astros were fools (which works for me) to ever let Gerry Hunsicker get away.
I'm glad that signing didn't work out. Talk about getting the big bucks then not living up to the billing...and taking the dough.
..was his departure? I mean, the 1984 club was a result of Green's shrewd trades and no-nonsense business and not so much the farm system.
But look at the young talent that came up after that season and was poised to keep the Cubs in contention for a long time? Maddux, Moyer, Palmeiro, etc. The 1989 division winning team was a direct reflection on Dallas.
But....then like you said, Bruce, Trib stuck their greedy finger right in the middle, then we got Jim Frey, Larry Himes, etc. Ugh, I think I'm going to toss my coffee.
Bruce,
It's going to be interesting to see where the Cubs peg their payroll for 2009. 2008 was around $125MM give or take. If you had asked me in Aug/Sep timeframe, I would have guessed the Cubs would up their payroll to $140-145MM range. But based on the economy and the fact that the club's sale may not go through near-term, I will guess that the payroll to start the year will be no greater than $130-135M.
That's plenty of money in general, but the Cubs have already committed a $110M to 10 players under contract. Even with 8 or 9 additional guys making the league minimum, Hendry still has to decide on what to do with free agents Dempster and Wood - all indications are they'll be back - whether to pick up Blanco's $3M option and deal with 5 arbitration eligible guys, who made a combined $5M in 2008 and could make $8.5M in 2009. Of course, there is also the matter of finding another lefty bat for the outfield (or maybe the infield).
In order to fit that all in the budget, trader Jim is really going to have to earn his moniker this off-season. again. The Cubs will definitely have to move some salary to accomodate all the pieces.
It would be easy to say shop and dump Fukudome, Soriano, Ramirez or Lee, but with having little value because of a poor 2nd half, an immovable contract for a one-dimensional player, no available and obvious back-fill at 3B and a manager's devotion to a clubhouse leader, these seem like stretches (and how can I forget all have no trade protection to boot).
Then, the obvious trade chips to free up salaries might be the 3 guys, who are under Cubs control for only 1 more season as of now: Marquis, DeRosa and Harden. The first two seem like logical choices: Marshall can step into the rotation and Fontenot could be the everyday 2B. Unlike last offseason, I think Marqus definitely has value this offseason. I could see a big-market team like the Angels use him to replace free agent Jon Garland or the Mets, who are likely to lose Pedro, El Duque and Oliver Perez. DeRosa's stock is at an all-time high. If the Cubs don't plan on extending him, trading him now would bring back the most return. At $5.5M, I could see mid-market teams like the D-Backs or Twins take a shot at him.
Hoops
Hoops
..and one that gives me, well, hope (even though that word is much overused in this political season) is the 2nd paragraph about the front office and scouting being beefed up, and focusing in on the important stats.
I think Hendry's quote about not understanding how you build for October w/o building for Apr-Sep is a slap at Soriano.
Now...how about 'slapping' him down to the 5th or 6th spot in the lineup?
...The Cubs' front office was understaffed. That's changed quite a bit in the last few years. In fairness to Andy MacPhail, some of it started under his watch. But it's really taken off the last two years. We'll see what all that mind on the matter produces.
they're "mining" Asia-Pacific and Latin America with what seems a strong aggressiveness.