01-30-2009, 10:21 PM
<!--quoteo(post=14926:date=Jan 30 2009, 04:49 PM:name=Dirk)-->QUOTE (Dirk @ Jan 30 2009, 04:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14925:date=Jan 30 2009, 05:42 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jan 30 2009, 05:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14827:date=Jan 30 2009, 10:15 AM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jan 30 2009, 10:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14819:date=Jan 30 2009, 09:40 AM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Jan 30 2009, 09:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=14814:date=Jan 30 2009, 09:10 AM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Jan 30 2009, 09:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->I have been considering the possibility that Lou is behind some of this shit, but the buck stops with Hendry.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
IMO, every single move this offseason has come because that's what Lou wanted.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
me too. there's no doubt in my mind.
as for hendry. the lateral or negative moves aren't significant enough to really hurt this team and the positive moves are really gonna help.
i like the team the way it's constituted. my only real concern is injuries. if we can stay relatively healthy or at the very least not all get injured at the same time, we'll be just fine in 2009.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--coloro:#0000FF--><!--/coloro-->What were the positive moves? Bradley? Considering how much time he'll play, he'll basically replace Edmond's production for the 2 or 3 months we had him. Gregg? He's a small step back from Wood. Miles? He's a huge step back from DeRosa. Bako is a step back from Blanco (not that a backup catcher is going to make a huge difference, but still). I have no idea who our #5 starter will be, but maybe they'll be better than Marquis. Who really knows? Probably a lateral move, at best.
We'll probably still win the division, but that isn't because we improved. It's because the NL Central is going to blow.
The problem is that Hendry was incredibly active this offseason -- he probably made more moves than any GM in baseball so far, but where has it gotten us? He's just wasted resources, as far as I can tell.
The DeRosa deal was really the kicker. We got dogshit in return for him, and look how valuable he would be the way this team is constructed. He could play 2B when we're facing a LHP. He could play RF when Bradley hurts his vagina. He could play 3B when Ramirez goes down. He could spell Lee at 1B to give him a day off here and there. Without having a starting spot on the team, he could play in 100+ games, easily. Instead, we have Aaron Miles.
And don't tell me it was some sort of salary issue. DeRosa will be making $5.5M this season. That's an absolute bargain. Miles is getting paid $2.2M this year and we have him for $2.7M in 2010 for some reason. Did we really need to give Aaron fucking Miles a two-year deal to land him? In this market, was Miles worth $5M over two years? The answer to both questions is a big, fat no.
We should still win somewhere between 88 and 92 games, IMO. But that doesn't mean Hendry had a good offseason.<!--colorc-->
<!--/colorc-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Butcher and I have always agreed about 95% on all "baseball/Chicago Cubs" topics. Which is why I've always considered it a bit mystifying that he's the most popular guy on the board, and I'm about the least popular.
Maybe it's because he's a cool guy, and I'm a dick.
But that 95% has been upped to 100% with this post of his.
It's perfectly written and <b>completely accurate.</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're not even the least popular guy whose name starts with a k.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/spit.gif[/img]
Dirk cracks me up.
Lighten up guys.
IMO, every single move this offseason has come because that's what Lou wanted.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
me too. there's no doubt in my mind.
as for hendry. the lateral or negative moves aren't significant enough to really hurt this team and the positive moves are really gonna help.
i like the team the way it's constituted. my only real concern is injuries. if we can stay relatively healthy or at the very least not all get injured at the same time, we'll be just fine in 2009.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--coloro:#0000FF--><!--/coloro-->What were the positive moves? Bradley? Considering how much time he'll play, he'll basically replace Edmond's production for the 2 or 3 months we had him. Gregg? He's a small step back from Wood. Miles? He's a huge step back from DeRosa. Bako is a step back from Blanco (not that a backup catcher is going to make a huge difference, but still). I have no idea who our #5 starter will be, but maybe they'll be better than Marquis. Who really knows? Probably a lateral move, at best.
We'll probably still win the division, but that isn't because we improved. It's because the NL Central is going to blow.
The problem is that Hendry was incredibly active this offseason -- he probably made more moves than any GM in baseball so far, but where has it gotten us? He's just wasted resources, as far as I can tell.
The DeRosa deal was really the kicker. We got dogshit in return for him, and look how valuable he would be the way this team is constructed. He could play 2B when we're facing a LHP. He could play RF when Bradley hurts his vagina. He could play 3B when Ramirez goes down. He could spell Lee at 1B to give him a day off here and there. Without having a starting spot on the team, he could play in 100+ games, easily. Instead, we have Aaron Miles.
And don't tell me it was some sort of salary issue. DeRosa will be making $5.5M this season. That's an absolute bargain. Miles is getting paid $2.2M this year and we have him for $2.7M in 2010 for some reason. Did we really need to give Aaron fucking Miles a two-year deal to land him? In this market, was Miles worth $5M over two years? The answer to both questions is a big, fat no.
We should still win somewhere between 88 and 92 games, IMO. But that doesn't mean Hendry had a good offseason.<!--colorc-->
<!--/colorc-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Butcher and I have always agreed about 95% on all "baseball/Chicago Cubs" topics. Which is why I've always considered it a bit mystifying that he's the most popular guy on the board, and I'm about the least popular.
Maybe it's because he's a cool guy, and I'm a dick.
But that 95% has been upped to 100% with this post of his.
It's perfectly written and <b>completely accurate.</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're not even the least popular guy whose name starts with a k.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/spit.gif[/img]
Dirk cracks me up.
Lighten up guys.
A herd of buffalo can move only as fast as the slowest buffalo. When the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members.
In much the same way the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, we all know, kills brain cells, but naturally it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers.
In much the same way the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, we all know, kills brain cells, but naturally it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers.