Great job as always Neil!

Juan Uribe would be a great bench guy. With him, Miles, and Johnson that will fill any holes we have in the field. Aaron Heilman could be a great player for us if he can pitch like he did a few years ago. I wish we could find someone other then Bako but that going to happen. Im not going to comment about Peavy because im tired of talking about it.

"The Cubs apparently were not thrilled with Blanco's play last year"

huh? he was great defensively and offensively off the bench.. it can only be that the cubs were not thrilled with his right-handedness last year

wow...is it safe to say that i may be gettin a broner while readin this...if the cubbies can sign Millar, Hinske, aurillia, or Uribe as a backup...trade for Peavy and still possibly save Cedeno to trade for Heilman i think we have one of the most dominant teams in a LONG time.

basically we would have trade

Mark DeRosa and Felix Pie

For

Jake Peavy and 3 total pitching prospects (from Cle and Bal)

How could you not be thrilled with Blanco's play? He hit nearly .300, threw out high % of runners, tutored Soto. If there's any truth to possible substance abuse, that would be the only reason I can think of to favor Bako over Blanco. I'll take defense and a .290 avg in my backup catcher anyday, and I don't think Bako will match that.

Regarding Blanco last year...

I said on numerous occasions last year while watching Blanco that I thought he was playing hungover... he seemed to make some boneheaded plays that were not normal for him, like he wasn't thinking.

guys...i liked Blanco alot as a backup but i think we are startin to get a lil ridiculous when we start doggin Hendry over a BACKUP catcher...soto if healthy will start 140 or so games and if he gets hurt it wont matter who plays cuz were screwed anyways.

But i do think its a testament to how far cubs fans have come as far as not accepting losing squads when we become this concerned over a guy like blanco vs bako

I usually agree with Levine, but not this time. Not a true ace...really? The Cubs have 3 aces as of today. Zambrano, Harden and Dempster. If Big Z and Harden are not true aces then what is?
Zambrano; 14-6 with 3.91
Harden; 10-2 with 2.07
Dempster; 17-6 with 2.96
Please compare Sire,
Santana; 16-7 with 2.53
Oswalt; 17-10 with 3,54
Haren; 16-8 with 3.33
Sheets; 13-9 with 3.09 [i would take]

Hey every year we have a lot of ifs", and Our big 3 especially Dempster could come down to earth...but don't tell me we don't have a true ace.

That 25th spot is going to be a very interesting one. If the Cubs end up dealing Cedeno, it seems unlikely that they'd go after a Hinske or a Millar. They'll need another bench guy who can play short or 2nd in a pinch.

If i were jim hendry i would try to sign ben sheets to a 2 year contract with a club option for the third year. The reasoning for this signing would to keep our farm system, especially vitters. I know sheets isn't the prime candidate to stay healthy for a whole season but even if he makes 3/4 or even 2/3 of his starts i think its a much better deal than to trade for peavy. We keep vitters and even marshall, which i think would be included in the deal. I see marshall being a big part of the 2009 team as a big bullpen pitcher and a spot starter, so valuable for our team. After signing sheets I would turn my attention to doing what it takes to get roberts. Roberts is in my mind the best lead off hitter in the game. I love just picturing the lineup top to bottom as Roberts, theriot or fontenot, bradley, ramierez, soriano, lee, soto, fukodome and whatever pitcher. Roberts is our missing piece to a 100+ absent. I know we would have to give up something for roberts but it wont be quite as much as we would give up for peavy. With sheets we would still easily have the best rotation in baseball and if healthy which i know is kind of a big if, sheets is as good as peavy. remeber where peavy pitches? So possibly even better with a healthy sheets and a lot cheaper

I can't tell you how impressed I am with your Cubs coverage. I check this site out every morning. Continue the amazing work!

I too would like to see a Sheets signing for 2 years. We don't give up anything, and when healthy he's as nasty as they come.

I just think the price for Peavy appears too steep if Vitters and Marshall are included.

If you added a Sheets I would then have Marshall as the rotating starter, giving each in the normal rotation a "rest week" after 4-5 starts throughout the season.

Sheets will pitch 3 games all year. He is more injury prone than Harden. We need Peavy. Give up Vitters and keep Marshall for insurance sounds great. But all this Uribe, Millar, Hinske talk is HORRIBLE. If we trade Cedeno then we have Hoffpauir to be the backup 1B/OF. Miles can backup the other IF positions.

We appear to be entering a pre-season period when the unpredictable becomes the norm. I've asked the Shadow because, as some of us learned before the days of picture radio, "Only the Shadow Knows!" And the Shadow said, "Even I'm not sure." So I'm expecting the unexpected in a couple of JH deals.

Until Fehr and the union try to re-work the players agreement, it appears that a highly regarded 20 or more of the 100 remaining free agents will be signed off of the "bargain" counter. The $5 mil + deals for guys like Wolf and the $1.5-2 mil + deals for guys like lefty catcher, Valentin and Hinske could fall 20-30%. And some three year deals will be reduced to one or two years.

Expect the Fehr arguement to be that the compensation for free agents offered arbitration should be only a sandwich pick. The acquiring team would not lose its first round pick (in most Type A cases).

I don't want Heilman--although he has only a 1 year deal at $1.6 mil. He's older and has an injury history. I think JH could do a Mariner deal that could include Hoffpauir, Atkins and Fox for the young lefty reliever Cesar Jiminez and the good prospect first baseman, Carp, who is 22, and another prospect. A deal like that would get us a needed lefty for the 25 man roster, add to our farm and enable adding Hinske as a productive lefty bat for the infield and outfield corners. The Mariners need the power that Hoffpauir and Fox represent.

If the $60 mil + budget commitment is approved (still a big if given that MLB revenues could drop significantly over a couple of years), the Shadow and I do agree that Hart, Stevens, Olson, Cedeno and Cashner get us Peavy and a prospect. That would be another "bargain" resulting from unusual circumstances.

I've been silent for awhile...finally got my internet connected at our new place. Plus, I guess it's best that I didn't comment during these most recent moves.

Doesn't this season strike anyone as too eerily similar to what Hendry did in 2004. Here's a list of transactions made and players let go:

Subtractions:
Damian Miller
Eric Karros
Grudz (reduced role, but not gone)
Alex Gonzalez
Kenny Lofton
Tony Womack
Shawn Estes
Juan Cruz
Mark Guthrie
Antonio AlfonSUCKS

Additions:
Maddux
Hawkins
Mercker
Rusch
Barrett
Martinez
Neifi
Lee
Macias
Garciappara (mid-season)
*young bullpen guys like Leicester, Beltran, Wuertz, and Wellemeyer were counted on to replace veterans let go from 2003

I know Blanco isn't the player Damian Miller was, but they're very similar---can really handle a staff. We shipped off a valuable piece when we traded him for the unproven/untested Barrett.

Hendry foolishly thought Wood and Prior would perform to the same level as they did the year before, despite scouts and media folk pointing out that both had seen unbelievable abuse the year before, and his only fallback plan was to sign Maddux after all other FA options signed elsewhere. He signed an excellent set-up man (Hawkins) to be his closer, and when pressed, went out and got Nomar.

But his biggest error between the 2003-2004 seasons was relying on health. Didn't he learn from the past? When Beck was abused in 1998, his career went on a slide. When Wood was abused that year, he had TJ surgery, and took awhile to get back. Didn't he see it coming not only for Wood and Prior, but also for Borowski? Didn't he start to see Sosa's production go down, especially with the steroid allegations? At that point, I would've traded him IMMEDIATELY, and gotten what I could out of him, which would've been a hell of a lot more that he was worth when he did finally trade him.

The rotation in 2003 was:
Wood
Prior
Clement
Zambrano
Estes

2004 was:
Wood
Prior
Clement
Zambrano
Maddux (better than Estes, I must say)

Our 2008 rotation was:
Zambrano
Lilly
Dempster
Harden
Marquis

Our 2009 rotation is:
Zambrano
Lilly
Dempster
Harden
?

Zambrano and Harden will be injury question marks ALL year. Lilly and Dempster will give you solid outings. But how solid? We know Dempster is coming off a career year----never a good thing.

As for the rest of the team, we've got questions all around. Can Lee ever return to 2005 form? Can Soriano ever stay healthy for a full season? How much will it hurt us to lose our MVP last year---DeRosa? My guess, is an awful lot, especially when Aaron Miles is the guy replacing him (Mini Me, just won't get it done like DeRo did). Can our newest acquisition---Bradley---even stay healthy for 120 games, much less 140, which is what we need out of him? Will our pen be stable without its leader and most consistent reliever--Wood?

If we returned Wood and DeRosa, we'd have a LOT less questions, because we all know how dominating Wood can be in the pen, and DeRosa was the safety net not only for RF, but also for 3B and 1B for us last year. If ARAM or Lee ever needed a break, we at least knew DeRosa could be an extra base/RBI threat, and we wouldn't experience much of a drop off. But I guess Miles must be a HUGE upgrade because he's a switch hitter, right? LOL

I thought 3 tweaks could've been made to the roster...We package Cedeno, Pie, Marquis, and a couple minor league prospects, not named Vitters to get either a solid RF with power, or an innings eating pitcher that has an ERA below 4. The other tweaks would've been to sign Dunn if you didn't get the RF in a trade, and to sign Beimel, or Juan Cruz for the pen.

We've done this so far...
Subtractions........
Wood-5W-4L, 3.26 ERA, 34 svs, 66.3 IP, 54 hits, 3 HR given up, 18 walks, 84 K's

Howry-7W-5L, 5.35 ERA, 1 sv, 70.7 IP, 90 hits, 13 HR given up (WOW), 13 walks, 59 K's
***by the way, Marmol gave up 10 bombs and walked an astonishing 41

Marquis-11W-9L, 4.53 ERA, 167 IP, 172 hits, 15 HR given up, 70 walks, 91 K's

DeRosa-149 games, 103 runs, 144 hits, 30 doubles, 3 triples, 21 HR, 87 RBI, .285 avg, .376 OBP

Edmonds-85 games, 47 runs, 64 hits, 17 doubles, 2 triples, 19 HR, 49 RBI, .256 avg., .369 OBP

Replacement....
Gregg-7W-8L,3.41 ERA, 29 svs, 68.7 IP, 51 hits, 3 HR given up, 37 walks, 58 K's (=HORRIBLE K:BB ratio, but on par w/ his career numbers, which means he's bad)

Vizcaino-1W-2L, 5.28 ERA, 46 IP, 48 hits, 10 HR given up (WOW---in only 46 IP!!!), 19 walks, 49 K's (=even worse than Howry)

Marshall-3W-5L, 3.86 ERA, 65.3 IP, 60 hits, 9 HR given up, 23 walks, 58 K's (now, this is an upgrade over Marquis IMO), but that sampling is only 7 starts out of 34 appearances

Miles-134 games, 49 runs, 120 hits, 15 doubles, 2 triples, 4 HR, 31 RBI, .317 avg., .355 OBP (career year though, so think more along the lines of same peripherals, but .280 avg., .325 OBP)

*now, you could make a case for Bradley replacing DeRosa, because that's essentially what he'd be doing, as there was no way Fukudome was going to be in RF to start the year. So, I'll add that...

Bradley-126 games, 78 runs, 133 hits, 32 doubles, 1 triple, 22 HR, 77 RBI, .321 avg., .426 OBP (still, about the same damn results as DeRosa, so technically, you don't have an upgrade here folks)

Fukudome (takes over for Edmonds essentially)-150 games, 79 runs, 129 hits, 25 doubles, 3 triples, 10 HR, 58 RBI, .257 avg., .359 OBP (basically same production as Edmonds)

See folks, you have to do a comparative analysis and look at what numbers you're replacing in order to say you have a better team. Cubs management has always thrived on "potential" "athletic player", "versatility", "throws real hard", "raw power", etc., as terms they throw out there in the media to excite fans about certain players. You've heard almost all of those terms this offseason regarding Miles, Gathright, Bradley, the pitchers acquired for DeRosa, etc. Management disguises their non-upgrades by using this terminology...it's a way of basically saying, "well...we got rid of _______'s stats, and yeah, this guy doesn't have near what he produced for us, but he does have potential"

Do NOT be fooled by Hendry guys. NONE of his moves this offseason have even remotely improved our team. Even if he trades for Peavy with the young guys he got in the Pie and DeRosa trades, Peavy's still a damn health question mark too for crying out loud, so instead of just Harden and Zambrano, now you have potentially 3 guys that you'll have to replace during the season at some point in the rotation.

Now, if Hendry is able to land Heilman for Cedeno, then I'd say he's being proactive, and he knows what he's doing, otherwise, he's just pandering to the emotions that us Cubs fans have grown accustomed to with the "sexy trade or sexy FA signing" instead of the "shrewed trade or logical FA signing"

shrewed trades involve getting guys like ARAM from the Pirates when they sucked and he didn't want to play for a losing team, and he was too expensive for them, while Hendry knew if he got him, and put him on a winning team, he'd thrive, and he has. Logical signings are like this, "we need a big lefty bat". Oh really, Hendry? Well, Adam Dunn plays an average of 158 games per season, 40 HR, 100 RBI .250 avg., and .400 OBP----did I mention he's that big lefty bat you're looking for?

It's quite possible Milton Bradley can put together a full season (in his mind) of 140 games, and hit 20+ HR, 80+ RBI and a .300 avg, but aside from the avg., those numbers still are less than Dunn. After all, when you consider time out of the lineup, that means your team needs to put a bench player out there, thus making the bench AND lineup weaker at the same time with you out of the lineup. Dunn would be a mainstay, whereas Bradley's health is the HUGE question mark.

I'm excited to see how this season plays out, but I am nowhere near excited about Hendry's moves thus far, and I think he's actually made the team worse.

Great website Neil, I check it out several times a day. It's better then all of the other Cub blogs.

I found this website through your "additions to the blogosphere" and its really good. There gonna have a live chat similar to the one on MLBTR.

keep up the good work Neil

I have reservations about Peavy. The money, years, splits away from Petco and the fact he pitched some 20 fewer innings last year than Sheets. Peavy's stuff is Ace quality to be sure but so is Harden's. Any sniff of an injury should nix this deal that requires such a big investment in money and talent as the FA market still posses an Ace that would cost less in years, money and zero talent to acquire in Sheets.

I like the Uribe rumor as he provides a potent RHB off the bench that is exactly what you're looking for in a backup.

Aaron...

talk about glass half empty man...first of all, hendry is not finished, and second of all the man is one of the greatest gms in baseball and easily the best cubs gm ever so have a lil faith. Its easy to look back on failed moves but that Nomar trade was literally a work of art that he could pull it off at the eleventh hour and involving so many players and teams.

Anyways I would say its a pretty huge upgrade when you take a 97 win team and replace their worst starter (Marquis) with what would in effect be there best starter (if they land Peavy)and then replace their .250 hittin RF with an allstar who led the AL in OBP last season. By havin Fuk in CF (a more defensive minded position) his bat will not be the sore spot that it was last season and if he can even go .270 12 hrs while playin his sweet defense that would be more than enough when flanked by all the studs in our lineup.

Yes, DeRo will be missed but in your argument you talk about Demp comin off of a career year, well if im not mistaken (and I know im not) DeRo is comin off a career year as well and will be 34 and in his last year before FA where we will definitely not bge able to give him the money he will likely receive. It seems as though you are looking for perfection and just like half the season when the cubs were rollin and Plesac admitted he had to fish and knitpick just to find things to talk about where the cubs could improve, it seems as thats what is taking place here. Our division has not improved at all and the Cubs are poised for big things in '09

Welcome back Aaron - now I've got someone to argue with again :-)

First off - Miles and Viscaino aren't replacing anyone. Viscaino was brought back in the Marquis trade as a salary dump from the other direction. As for Miles, he'll be on the bench most of the time. Angel Guzman will be in the pen instead and Fontenot will be the starter at second.

As for stats... DeRo had a career year - you have to admit that. He hit 21 homers in '08 and in his previous 10 seasons combined he had 48. And his 103 runs were 39 more than he had the previous year in only 3 more at bats.

And let's look at the statement that Bradley gives "about the same damn results as DeRosa, so technically, you don't have an upgrade here folks"

-- DeRo --
Batting average .285,
On-base .376,
Slugging .481,
and (a stat that I pay attention to personally), On base plus slugging of .857

-- Bradley --
BA .321
OBP .436 (led the AL)
Slugging .563 (4th in AL)
OPS .999 (led the AL)

Oh - and Bradley's a switch hitter.

They are NOT the same player. Bradley is a SIGNIFICANTLY better hitter. Granted he's got an injury history and lacks DeRo's versatility - but his bat is a legit threat in the middle of the order. DeRo - though a great guy and I hate to see him go - is not.

Now compare these stats with DeRo instead...

BA .305 (vs. Dero at .285)
OBP .395 (vs. .376)
Slug .514 (vs. .481)
and OPS .909 (vs. .857)

Like the stats for Bradley they are also better across the board, but a whole lot closer. Those look like a slight upgrade at the position if we had a player like that.

Oh - that's right - we do. Those are Fontenot's stats.

So as you suggested I did a comparative analysis.

The lineup - more balance left/right and more production potential. Better.

The starters - Marquis is addition by subtraction. If we stand pat and start Marshall. Slightly better. If we sign Wolf or Sheets. Definitely better. Peavy though? Significantly better.

The pen - I agree that we're worse off in the pen without Woody - Gregg isn't the pitcher Wood is - but then again he's not nearly as bad as you portray him. But if you look at the pen losing Wood/Howry and replacing that with Gregg/Guzman (or Hart) - that's not that much of a downgrade when taken as a pair.

Taken as a whole - yes. I feel the team is better right this moment than it was at the end of the year - although not by a large margin. Still though, better than a 97 win team is a good thing.

And if we should get Peavy (he says while simultaneously crossing fingers, knocking on wood, and rubbing the rabbit's foot) - that gap over the team that finished the season last year grows by a pretty large margin.

Anyway - still good to have you back :-)

I might disagree with your personal war on Hendry, but I still admire your passion. I also admire your analytical nature - but I simply don't come to the same conclusions as you do. Maybe two years of sweeps in the first round have simply crushed your spirit LOL

i was wondering why we could just use miles as a second and short backup, use hoff at first and if something comes up with ramirez use miles for a game till we can get vitters up here till ramirez gets back. that would give us the opp to see what he can do during the season and with the strength of our lineup he would not have to worry about being the man and we can just throw him out there and let him work without fear of the bench. he will know the job is his till rammy gets healthy. also i love the point brought up about shets. we have a chance to keep our farm in case we need to make a trade at the deadline. and you know we will have to make one cause that is the nature of the game....bb

Aaron...You may be into paralysis by analysis--where you see most of the same "numbers" that you suggest we have to be overlooking and draw conclusions that are (at least) as questionable as are some of ours. Of course, if a few of our pitchers and position players go on the DL or fade significantly from prior production, we will be hurting. But that's true of everyone else too. Plus, Z and Soriano are more likely to be more productive than less so in 2009.

What's not to like about the 2008 team (compared to 2003 and 2004) and the fact that JH is not standing pat since we came up short of the brass ring? In 2003, we won 88, lost 74, finished first in the division, scored 724 runs, and allowed 683. In 2004, we won 89, lost 73, finished third, scored 789 runs, and allowed 665. In 2008, we won 97, lost 64, scored 855 runs and allowed 671.

Our current pitching staff of Z, D, Lilly, Harden and Marshall plus the pen compares favorably to Wood, Prior, Clement and Estes + in '03 and the staff that added Maddux in '04.

Losing Woodie and DeRo, are negatives, but we needed the money for D and Bradley and using your terms) we have one less known injury risk. We may well have productive replacements for them but we likely needed something close to D's 17 wins and a lefty bat--with some power--more. And maybe the DeRo and Pie trades got JH some trading chips or futures that will be helpful.

I acknowledge the risk that stand-out performers with some history of injuries bring to the table. It's also true that it's very hard to put together a "never gets hurt" team that can win 90 games, let alone play in the world series. I think JH is doing about as well as possible in giving us a chance to win in 2009--which does assume that Bradley will play 140 + games, that Fontenot and Miles will perform well, that Soriano will hit 40 HR's and that Z, D, Lilly and Harden will combine to win about 65 games.

Gary J,

Likewise, man...and I love, and have to agree with your analysis, though it misses the point yet again with Bradley..."when healthy" he can put up those numbers, but my goodness, don't any of you pay attention to historical stats, games played, etc.? Dude's only played more than 100 games 3 times in 8 full seasons of ball, and those numbers are 101, 141, 126 (which was last year, and came mostly as DH, which is an even SCARIER thought that he can't even stay healthy as a friggin' DH)

JimK,

Sorry, but you're too back and forth man..."have one less injury risk"...Actually, buddy, you simply swapped Wood for Bradley, plus added with Gregg, as he's coming off knee surgery.

Joel,

I can understand where you're coming from. I totally get the Peavy thing replacing Marquis, which would, in reality, be what as taking place. However, given Harden's fragility, he'd really be replacing Harden, as most experts point out, Harden would actually move to the 5th spot, so he could be skipped more often. In that case, I get it---that it'd be an improvement. However, my point is still valid. I think it will most certainly come back to bite us with Z, Harden, and Peavy all dealing with shoulder problems of late, and as we all know---once it becomes shoulder "surgery" instead of "soreness" or "strain", then it is almost a death sentence to a pitching career.

If two of them miss starts, which, given the recent episodes with all 3 is VERY likely, then who takes their innings? Maybe it's the conspiracy theorist in me, but I think Marshall was always pegged for the 5th spot, and Samardzija was told to prepare to start because they knew something is wrong with Harden. So, you take those two out of the pen then who takes their spots? If you get rid of Hart in a trade for Peavy, then your last true safety net for a swingman would be Gaudin.

DeRosa also was not coming off a career year---he had 2 solid years coming into last year, so, no, it while he put up his best power numbers, it was NOT a career year, because he was very close to his other numbers.

Now, I spelled out pretty much all the stats for you. Numbers don't lie. How can you tell me this year's team will be better? I don't give a damn about the rest of the division. We've already established the last 2 years that we're the top dog in the Central. What have we done to improve upon 2 consecutive first round exits?!?!?

The answer, my friend, is NOTHING. Here's what your logic tells me...along with Hendry's as well:

You have 1 player that makes $10 million, and he's a stud on the team.

You trade him away, and with the money you save, you buy a horrible reliever for $4 million (same salary as another one you let go via FA), you sign a mid-grade infielder for about $2.5 million, and you trade for another that makes $4.5 million, and in the process, get rid of your top pitching prospect, who would've cost the MLB minimum, and you call that money well spent. However, in the process, you don't account for the lost production from your supposed $10 million man (though, Wood, as we all know now, would've taken a discount to stay), AND in the process, you don't make the team better at all.

Gregg, Vizcaino, and Miles total about $10.5 million in salary

Wood, at most, would've cost us $8 million, which is cheap for a good closer nowadays, and it would've made our team even better with Marmol still in his setup role that he was so effective in. With that $2.5 million, they could've put that towards either another reliever, or, if they really wanted, they could still go after Miles.

I just don't get the logic there, because if you're following Hendry's logic, you're saying that two mediocre guys equal one stud guy, and that's EXACTLY how the Cubs have operated for many years, and look where that's gotten us.

If we're serious about winning, then we sure as hell better define what we're doing. It's almost like there's no clear direction that this team is going. Is it in rebuilding, cost-cutting mode? Because, if that's the case, then getting rid of DeRosa, Marquis, and Wood makes sense. But that can't be the case, or they wouldn't have resigned Dempster and went and signed Bradley. Are we trying to give younger guys a shot? If that were the case, Pie would share CF with Johnson, and Hoffpauir would take over at 1B and the OF bench role. Additionally, we wouldn't be seeking another starter, and they'd just go ahead and frickin' give a vote of confidence to Marshall for the 5th spot (which they haven't), and Fontenot would've been installed at 2B after the DeRosa trade (also didn't happen), so that can't be the direction of the team.

I keep hearing Hendry and Piniella throw out "younger and more athletic"...well, if that were the case, they probably shouldn't have signed Miles, and definitely not traded a 21 year old stud pitcher for a 30-something "never was" reliever, or a 30 year old innings eating starter that was good in the 5th spot for us, for a mid 30's reliever that shouldn't even be in the majors anymore, yet makes the same amount that you'd give to a stud set-up guy.

Everything's backwards my friends. Ask yourself that question....What is it that we're trying to be? Are we trying to be World Champs, or are we just trying to make the playoffs (in years past, the latter would probably be the choice)---but with all the money we've invested in recent years, and the huge market the team is in, I'd say we're trying to be World Champs.

I keep hearing statements like, "I love the Milton Bradley signing....if he stays healthy", or "I love he Gregg trade...if he's not the closer, and IF he can be effective", or "I love the DeRosa and Pie trades...IF they bring us Peavy"

That's a lot of "IF's" guys...If we'd signed Dunn (who is younger, by the way), we wouldn't have to worry about fragility, and we'd know for sure what we're getting production-wise. Have you ever asked yourself what happens if/when Bradley goes down? You'd have an OF like this: Soriano, Fukudome/Gathright, Johnson. Now, an even scarier thought---ever thought what'd happen without Soriano? You'd have Johnson, Gathright, Fukudome in your OF. And, given the facts we have----is VERY likely to occur with the health of Soriano and Bradley very much in question. Now, if Soriano had gone down, and you had Dunn, you'd just slide him into LF, have Johnson in CF, and Fukudome in RF, and that, to me, would be a FAR better choice.

Have you ever thought about the load Marmol has carried that last few years? What if he goes down---which, given our history of handling young pitchers, is very likely...then you have Gregg, a mediocre at best pitcher, coming off 9 blown saves, horrible K:BB ratio, AND off-season knee surgery to boot. There's no Ceda anymore in the system to come up and dominate the way Marmol did for us. Did you ever see Ceda's RIDICULOUS minor league numbers? He had something like 21 straight innings without giving up a hit 2 years ago, and last year, it was a lengthy number of innings without giving up a run...he's also K's about 13/9 innings as well. We also lost our crutch--DeRosa---who played excellent defense, and tremendous offense for us at every position he played last year.

So, I might ask a lot of questions myself, and include "what if's"...but mine are predicated on facts...I use numbers, NOT emotion, to make my judgements, and Hendry is getting a failing grade, and, believe it or not, most in the industry feel that he gets a failing grade as well. How do I know? Because I'm in it!!!!!!!

I now believe that if the Cubs are to win this year, they MUST still sign Dunn, and have an OF of Soriano, Bradley, and Dunn. I know...I know...horrible defense. Or is it? Soriano still has speed, and has a cannon. He might get a lot better this year with another year under his belt in LF, who knows? Bradley came up as a CF, and Dunn actually came up as a RF, and most of his errors came from LF---perhaps a switch back to his normal spot might suit him better? If need be, Johnson and Fukudome could sub for them late in close games when we need to preserve a small lead---who knows?

But I do know one thing---it provides a significant safety net for us if any of Lee, ARAM, Soriano, or Bradley goes down. And thus will avoid a repeat of 2004

I also believe that we MUST trade for Peavy, as long as it doesn't include Vitters and more than one of Hart or Marshall, because we can't let DeRosa be traded in vain.

Also, if that trade takes place, there's no question that we must trade for Heilman.

We sign Dunn, and trade for Peavy and Heilman, and you can virtually guarantee an NLCS appearance at the very least. If we don't do it, there's no guaranteeing that we actually make the playoffs.

Point is Joel, Hendry's not the genius you paint him to be...In fact, the Nomar trade was in NO way orchestrated by Hendry. They needed the Cubs involvement to make the trade work---not the other way around.

Todd Hundley (owed $8 mill/per year) comin off a .211 season

For

Eric Karros who hit .286
AND
Mark Grudzielanek who hit .314
(Where was Hundley after that deal, while those 2 helped us come within 5 outs of the series)

Hee Seop Choi(comin off a .218 season)

For

Derrek Lee(who has turned in multiple gold glove and allstar season while bein a cornerstone since)

Jose Hernandez (eww) and Bobby Hill (who?)

For

Aramis Ramirez(top 3 3rd basemen in the NL easily since his arrival while shoring up the position for the first time since basically Ron Santo)

AND

Kenny Lofton (hit .330 after comin to Chicago and provided veteran leadership and playoff experience)

o ya...AND

Randall Simon (.282 with 6 bombs in only 100 ABs)

The Rich Harden trade while still in its early stages has yielded returns (calling Harden dominant in his NL tenure is an understatement) and even if we can have only 20 starts outta him ill take that all day)

Finally, lets take a look at the Cubs under Hendry since his first full year as GM the 2003 season.

2003- 88 wins, Division champs, (NLCS)
2004- 89 wins, lost out in last week of season (not GMs fault)
2005- 79 wins, finished 4 games under .500
2006- 66 wins, worst record in NL
2007-85 wins, Division champs (one of best turnarounds in NL history)
2008- 97 wins Division champs

I would say 3 division titles (looking to be 4 after 09) in his 6 years includin 4 winning seasons after taking over a team that hadnt called themselves division champs since the 1980s is a pretty damn good run and I dont see him lettin up with the good cubs teams.

Like has been said here before, Aaron, all of us are occasionally wrong--but we are never in doubt. However, most of us don't insist that we are right. Another way to think about one's views--where no one has enough real info to be mostly right most of the time--is not to insist that the other guy is wrong if he disagrees with you.

Regarding Woodie as an injury risk, I didn't say that injury risk Wood got us injury risk Bradley. I said or at least tried to say that Wood is one less injury risk--no matter how many others we have.

IMO it isn't possible for anyone to say that the team is certain to be improved or not improved in 2009. Everyone can have an opinion on that, but we won't know until the games are played--and we either do or don't get to and beyond round one. There does seem to be general agreement that JH needed to make some changes after two post season flops.

Once again, IMO, we should look at the changes collectively--realizing that if we were to do anything big, we likely had to lose Wood and move DeRo and Marquis. So Wood did not get us Bradley, e.g. Wood got us $10 mil by signing with the Indians. DeRo got us 3 prospects and saved about $5 mil of payroll in his walk year. Marquis got us $5 mil and Vizcaino. We didn't blow $4 mil on Vizcaino that we might have spent on someone else.

I may be leaving someone out, but one approach to the trading question is: Are we likely or possibly better off with Bradley, Dempster, Gregg, Miles, Vizcaino and 3 Indian's prospects than we were with Wood, DeRosa, Marquis and Ceda? Keeping D and adding the others are what JH's deals have accomplished.

A lot of us are saying we like what we see. And there may be a couple of additional changes yet to come. My take is that most of the teams' owners and GM's think JH is well above average and certainly competent. That's another subject that none of us here can insist we are the final authority about. And, of course, that doesn't mean that one can't be extremely angry about the man or personally think that he can't find his ass with both hands.

JimK,

I don't think Hendry is the worst GM in baseball. I believe he might be middle of the pack. When you consider his resources, and the fact that players actually WANT to play for the Cubs----I believe he gets a failing grade.

Here's the issue I take with him...if he were on a low budget team, he'd be fired long ago. The reason is simple---he can't put the right staff together to develop players, and low budget teams don't have the resources to compensate for that in free agency like the Cubs do.

The other issue I take with him is his horrible trades in recent years. All Hendry supporters ever reference is ARAM, Grudz, Karros, and Lee whenever they talk about him...they never focus on the exchange of bad salaries (Grudz and Karros) and salary dumping of the Pirates (Lofton and ARAM) as well as Lee from the Marlins. It was sheer luck that Grudz and Karros performed well that year for us.

Trading Choi while his value was high was one of the only true genius moves that Hendry has made. On the flip side, you can create a laundry list of trades where he let guy's values slip too low before he traded them: Sosa, C Patterson, Farnsworth, Pie, Cruz, etc., or he loses guys like Veal that he won't protect in the Rule 5 when they were in high demand before.

I suggest that you do some research involving the Ceda trade, and then you'll truly see how dumb Hendry really is. Trading your top pitching prospect for a "never was" shows stupidity, and that's how Hendry has operated lately.

Giving a 3 year $30+million deal to a guy that's played in 100+ games 3 times in 8 full season is a HORRIBLE move.

Fine, if you want to justify the DeRosa trade, you can, and I'll be on board with that, because DeRosa's value was at an all-time high, YET, many in the business still felt he got hosed in that, and almost 100% on this site couldn't believe what he was doing getting 3 pitching prospects who don't even appear on the damn top prospects list that goes all the way to 20, plus like 10 honorable mentions-----NONE of those guys were on the list, which is HORRIBLE.

So, Hendry doesn't know how to spend (Soriano, Marquis, Bradley, and Lee come to mind?) This year we might add Dempster too....and he doesn't know how to trade, as I've just referenced.

In a time when winning it all is the damn mission of the organization, and is what we've all come to expect, I am NOT fine with a mediocre GM.

I want an Epstein, Beane, or Jocketty (granted, Duncan made Jocketty look genius in most cases)---but I want a create GM who knows how to develop players, identify talent, and maximize the return on his top prospects and solid MLB players.

Right now, Hendry fails in all categories.

I know you think I'm arrogant, and that's fine---that's your opinion. I'm going off what I'm told, and I'm in the profession, and that's what has been said. It might not be all of their opinions about him, but it sure seemed like it was a majority. Many question his moves, especially with his resources. The biggest thing that's been said in our organization is how the Cubs mis-use their talent in the minors, and that's a direct reflection on the GM.

Aaron.... if you don't mind me asking..... who exactly are "they" I guess I am just confused at who you know and how you are affiliated with the Cubs organization. I am not trying to say that you are lying or anything. I am just curious at how you know all of these opinions.

Aaron, I am going to respectively disagree with your assessment of Hendry. Fails in all categories??? Come on...I like Billy Beane, but what's he won? Hendry has taken us just as far as Beane has taken the A's. You can't say he would be fired if he didn't have money as a resource because its not his fault that he DOES have money as a resource. You can't use the "ifs" against people then use them in your favor. I'm not saying we put Hendry on the 5 dollar bill, but let's be fair. His positives outweigh the negatives by far. To say that DeRo didn't have a career year is a little off in my opinion. He did have a couple good years in 06 and 07, but no one had heard of him when Hendry signed him. He was a role player. Last season was his most productive year to date. He nearly doubled his career high in HRs and it was his highest OPS of his career. It was great to finally see us get rid of a guy maybe a year too early opposed to a year too late. Also, you're still pissed about the Ceda deal? Here's the scoop. Yea, Ceda was a top prospect but Hendry didn't feel he was going to help us win THIS year in the 7th,8th, or 9th inning. Again, IMO it's about time we start dealing prospects when they have value. If you are a numbers guy, take a look @ Gregg's ERA on Aug. 24th. An era of 2.72...that's pretty damn solid. He had two really bad outings in a row that jumped his ERA an entire run, but finished solid after that. He is trying to win now, not 2010, or 2011. I'm sure because you're, "in the business", you feel your opinion is greater than ours, but a lot of guys are in the business that you don't agree with, so what's the difference? Also to the point of a "virtually guaranteed" NLCS...come on. If we would have changed absolutely nothing, nothing at all, we would have still been a favorite to win the central (especially in 09 with the Cards doing nothing and the Crew losing so much pitching and also doing nothing) and once you're in the playoffs everyone has the same chance of getting to and winning the WS. Again, check out the numbers. IMO, after two early exits the club felt like it needed to make changes offensively. I like the changes we've made. Yea, there are injury risks with Bradley, but, in his opinion, he was the best option out there. Plus he really wanted to be a Cub. I wouldn't have hated getting Dunn, again, check out the OPS. You pretty much do know what you're going to get out of him and he's younger and has a stronger track record in terms of health. Unfortunately he didn't have a spot open for him on this club. Hendry has done a great job of getting this team in position to be a WS team, like Lou, he can only do so much...he can't throw the strikes for Dempster in game one or hit for entire offense in the series 06-07. Let's agree to disagree without pretending to be omniscient.

I meant 07-08...not 06...sorry

Logan, I work in professional baseball. I am not allowed to disclose the team, (after reading the handbook I realized this after mistakingly mentioning it on here about a month ago), but I can say that the parent club is on the West Coast, and that's all I can say. You can make guesses from there.

I know the opinions because of the player development guys I speak with regularly. I will always be a Cubs fan, and hope they will hire me one day, but all I can do is the best job I can in my current position, and try to get noticed. Obviously, if I'm in an advanced position, my allegiances business-wise will have to change significantly, as they already have, but my heart is still with the Cubs.

I fee like a dumb a$$ for posting this here, but this site has no private message feature. Aaron, I have been trying for years to get a job with a MLB or affiliate team. Basically what it comes down to is you have to know someone to get your foot in the door. I am not asking you to help me but am asking for any info you can give me on the best way to go about this....please contact me at tcompt@gmail.com if you can. This is my lifelong dream and I'm just not ready to give up on it yet.

Neil, your site rocks! I shot you over an email and thank you very much my friend.