Jim Hendry Bust or Great GM?

[KBisBack!]

That's just like, your opinion bro.

Yeah. I am the only one on the planet who thinks Castro doesn't hustle.

Just me.

The first one to ever bring it up.

 

[KBisBack!]

Sorry my standards are higher given the resources that Hendry had compared to the rest of the division.

And yet your standards are not high enough to be outraged by 100 loss seasons.

If Theo makes the playoffs 3 times in the next decade will that make his tenure a success?

Absolutely.

But should I start pointing out how I carefully said nine years and not a decade??? Sorry dude. Had to do it.

But yes 3 playoff trips in 10 years would be a success even without winning a World Series could it still would likely be in the top third of results. Of course the World Series is the ultimate goal, but you can still be successful without winning achieving the ultimate goal. It is ignorant to think otherwise.

 

[dabynsky]

And yet your standards are not high enough to be outraged by 100 loss seasons.

100 losses and 90 losses are the same thing to me. I've seen far more seasons below .500 than over .500 in my lifetime, and quantify which one sucks more is like complaining about the difference between Carlos Zambrano and Chris Volstad. Yes one sucks more but they both fucking suck.

Absolutely.

But should I start pointing out how I carefully said nine years and not a decade??? Sorry dude. Had to do it.

But yes 3 playoff trips in 10 years would be a success even without winning a World Series could it still would likely be in the top third of results. Of course the World Series is the ultimate goal, but you can still be successful without winning achieving the ultimate goal. It is ignorant to think otherwise.

Just was wondering because I think most have claimed that this regime will be a failure without a championship.

 

[KBisBack!]

100 losses and 90 losses are the same thing to me.

But they are not.

90 losses is ten games closer to being in the playoffs.

That is a significant amount.

I've seen far more seasons below .500 than over .500 in my lifetime, and quantify which one sucks more is like complaining about the difference between Carlos Zambrano and Chris Volstad. Yes one sucks more but they both fucking suck.

Anyone who is a Cubs fan for any length of time has seen more below .500 seasons than over .500 seasons.

So why sit back and defend more seasons intentionally under .500 with the promise of "if we suck for long enough, maybe we will be good". Cause that is really what throwing away seasons at the major league level to go all in on the draft and ignoring FA is.

And dude, comparing what Volstad did for the Cubs to what Zambrano gave the team is poor. Really, really poor.

In 10 seasons of over 100 innings pitched for the Cubs, Zambrano had an ERA over 4 just once and the team had a .600 winning percentage in his decisions.

Volstad was 3-13 with an ERA over SIX last year.

Not even on the same planet.

Just was wondering because I think most have claimed that this regime will be a failure without a championship.

And most people are idiots.

I don't think ANY of the CBS folks who 'dare' to point out how bad the results have been so far have made that claim though.

I think most have said that if he doesn't make the playoffs three times in nine years will make it a failure.

Two out of his first five are already out of the playoffs. That means he needs one in the next three to even equal what Hendry did.

Anyone confident that there is a playoff trip in the next three years without significant spending in FA that everyone is screaming is dumb??

Not me.

 

[The Bandit]

100 losses and 90 losses are the same thing to me. I've seen far more seasons below .500 than over .500 in my lifetime, and quantify which one sucks more is like complaining about the difference between Carlos Zambrano and Chris Volstad. Yes one sucks more but they both fucking suck.


Just was wondering because I think most have claimed that this regime will be a failure without a championship.

Exactly, however, Volstad didn't have as much "baggage" on him as Z did in Chi town.

This regime does fail without a chip. But some people are expecting way to much way to soon. Hendry left a real mess when he left that can't just be cleaned up.

We had no farm
Aging players
No pitching.

A full rebuild was the answer. Yes we are chasing a chip every year, but really you gotta take steps not go out and buy Prince Fielder when it doesn't help us at all. Stop gaps and prospects are here to stay until enough talent is together. That's the way it is, nobody other then idiots expected much until 2014 at the earliest. When I say idiots I mean the idiots posting about rectums and big Z being ok to stay on the cubs.

 

[The Bandit]

But they are not.

90 losses is ten games closer to being in the playoffs.

That is a significant amount.




Anyone who is a Cubs fan for any length of time has seen more below .500 seasons than over .500 seasons.

So why sit back and defend more seasons intentionally under .500 with the promise of "if we suck for long enough, maybe we will be good". Cause that is really what throwing away seasons at the major league level to go all in on the draft and ignoring FA is.

And dude, comparing what Volstad did for the Cubs to what Zambrano gave the team is poor. Really, really poor.

In 10 seasons of over 100 innings pitched for the Cubs, Zambrano had an ERA over 4 just once and the team had a .600 winning percentage in his decisions.

Volstad was 3-13 with an ERA over SIX last year.

Not even on the same planet.




And most people are idiots.

I don't think ANY of the CBS folks who 'dare' to point out how bad the results have been so far have made that claim though.

I think most have said that if he doesn't make the playoffs three times in nine years will make it a failure.

Two out of his first five are already out of the playoffs. That means he needs one in the next three to even equal what Hendry did.

Anyone confident that there is a playoff trip in the next three years without significant spending in FA that everyone is screaming is dumb??

Not me.

So let me get this straight you'd rather get those extra ten wins that mean absolutely nothing at that point and lost position in the draft just because it's closer to the playoffs that we are at that point already eliminated from? Makes total sense bro.

 

[KBisBack!]

So let me get this straight you'd rather get those extra ten wins that mean absolutely nothing at that point and lost position in the draft just because it's closer to the playoffs that we are at that point already eliminated from? Makes total sense bro.

And you would rather be 10 games further from the playoffs to get a player at the top of the draft that will make up more than 10 games by himself???

Um, ok.

Makes zero sense bro.

 

[KBisBack!]

A full rebuild was the answer.

Sorry this is so complicated for you to grasp, but you can rebuild the farm system while still fielding a competitive major league team.

To say a player like Prince Fielder doesn't help at all is totally ignorant.

He 100% guarantees makes the team better.

A top draft pick might make the team better 1/3 of time at best several years down the road and the likelihood of that player ending up being better than Prince is probably less than 5%.

 

[The Bandit]

And you would rather be 10 games further from the playoffs to get a player at the top of the draft that will make up more than 10 games by himself???

Um, ok.

Makes zero sense bro.

That's like the Miami Heat going 82-0 just because they can. They clinched #1 in the conference at 50 so why win the last 32 going all out for no reason when there is nothing to gain. If you're eliminated those extra wins do nothing for you except drop you in the draft. Sorry if you're losing 90 games I highly doubt you were ever in contention in the first place let alone "ten games closer to the playoffs" when you were never in the hunt in the first place.

 

[KBisBack!]

That's like the Miami Heat going 82-0 just because they can. They clinched #1 in the conference at 50 so why win the last 32 going all out for no reason when there is nothing to gain. If you're eliminated those extra wins do nothing for you except drop you in the draft. Sorry if you're losing 90 games I highly doubt you were ever in contention in the first place let alone "ten games closer to the playoffs" when you were never in the hunt in the first place.

Huh???

Thank you Gabby Johnson for your authentic frontier gibberish.

 

[The Bandit]

Huh???

It's called empty wins. They mean nothing same as the end of the season when bad teams play heartbreakers. They're empty wins that mean nothing other then another tick on a bad season. That's it.

 

[KBisBack!]

It's called empty wins. They mean nothing same as the end of the season when bad teams play heartbreakers. They're empty wins that mean nothing other then another tick on a bad season. That's it.

Huh???

 

[The Bandit]

Huh???

I'll try to make this as simple as possible for your slow mental stature.

You need x amount of something say 10.

So you need 10 to reach your quota. You are able to get 5 by the time someone else has the 10 now put that in baseball terms. We are 4th in the division with a month to go. Statistically eliminated. You want to go out and find the other 5 of x acting like it is going to help you after you've already failed.

Probably still doesn't make sense to a Special person like you.

 

[dabynsky]

But they are not.

90 losses is ten games closer to being in the playoffs.

That is a significant amount.

Then I expect to hear about significant progress at the end of this year if the team finishes with 91 losses.

Anyone who is a Cubs fan for any length of time has seen more below .500 seasons than over .500 seasons.

So why sit back and defend more seasons intentionally under .500 with the promise of "if we suck for long enough, maybe we will be good". Cause that is really what throwing away seasons at the major league level to go all in on the draft and ignoring FA is.

And dude, comparing what Volstad did for the Cubs to what Zambrano gave the team is poor. Really, really poor.

In 10 seasons of over 100 innings pitched for the Cubs, Zambrano had an ERA over 4 just once and the team had a .600 winning percentage in his decisions.

Volstad was 3-13 with an ERA over SIX last year.

Not even on the same planet.

And where did I say compare their careers. The conversation throughout this thread and other threads on this board has been about Carlos Zambrano and Chris Volstad when they were traded for each and beyond. Thought that was pretty obvious. They both sucked when the trade was made and they both still suck.

And most people are idiots.

I don't think ANY of the CBS folks who 'dare' to point out how bad the results have been so far have made that claim though.

I think most have said that if he doesn't make the playoffs three times in nine years will make it a failure.

Two out of his first five are already out of the playoffs. That means he needs one in the next three to even equal what Hendry did.

Anyone confident that there is a playoff trip in the next three years without significant spending in FA that everyone is screaming is dumb??

Not me.

I just want to know the criteria we judge this era by. Seems like Theo has plenty of time to equal the mark set by Hendry if he is given the full 9 years.

 

[KBisBack!]

I just want to know the criteria we judge this era by. Seems like Theo has plenty of time to equal the mark set by Hendry if he is given the full 9 years.

At this rate he will have to field 3 playoff teams in 7 years just to equal Hendry.

Again, that looks very far from happening without the significant FA signings most here are against.

 

[KBisBack!]

I'll try to make this as simple as possible for your slow mental stature.

You need x amount of something say 10.

So you need 10 to reach your quota. You are able to get 5 by the time someone else has the 10 now put that in baseball terms. We are 4th in the division with a month to go. Statistically eliminated. You want to go out and find the other 5 of x acting like it is going to help you after you've already failed.

Probably still doesn't make sense to a Special person like you.

Nope it doesn't make sense.

What does make sense is that if you need 90 wins to make the playoffs it is easier to from 70 wins 90 wins then from 60 wins to 90 wins.

But you just keep believing that some year a whole group of prospects will make it to the majors together and transform a 60 win team to a 90 wins team.

Here is a tip for you, Fairy tales are not real.

 

[KBisBack!]

The conversation throughout this thread and other threads on this board has been about Carlos Zambrano and Chris Volstad when they were traded for each and beyond. Thought that was pretty obvious. They both sucked when the trade was made and they both still suck.

Not accurate at all.

Zambrano was slightly below average.

Volstad was about the worst in all of baseball.

Not the same.

 

[dabynsky]

At this rate he will have to field 3 playoff teams in 7 years just to equal Hendry.

Again, that looks very far from happening without the significant FA signings most here are against.

As I've said I want to know what your criteria for success. I really don't care what most people want or don't want. I care what this team actually does. I doubt that this team doesn't sign a signifcant FA during the next seven seasons, but I suppose that would matter what your definition of significant is.

 

[dabynsky]

Not accurate at all.

Zambrano was slightly below average.

Volstad was about the worst in all of baseball.

Not the same.

If Zambrano was merely slightly below average why is he not pitching for a big league team at age 31?

 

[KBisBack!]

If Zambrano was merely slightly below average why is he not pitching for a big league team at age 31?

Can't read Carlos' mind.

The FACTS are his ERA last year was 4.49. The major league ERA was 4.01.

Slightly below average.

Volstad's ERA was 6.31

That is significantly worse and to try and say they were equal is an enormous stretch.