Credit to Jim Hendry

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=73456:date=Dec 30 2009, 09:20 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Dec 30 2009, 09:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=73442:date=Dec 30 2009, 07:27 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Dec 30 2009, 07:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=73424:date=Dec 30 2009, 04:07 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Dec 30 2009, 04:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->How did the teams on either side of the Cubs do in the decade? That's what I want to know (but we've been through this before).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


In the 7 years Hendry has been GM, the Braves have won a total of 11 more games than the Cubs, or less than 2 per season. The Dodgers have won 21 more games, or 3 per season. The Braves have been to the playoffs as many times as the Cubs, and the Dodgers have gone once more.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I didn't literally mean the immediate two teams on either side - I just meant the teams with comparable payrolls. Still, interesting to know.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Well, the Yankees and even the Red Sox (who spent 30 percent more than the Cubs) aren't really comparable. As for the rest, the Cubs are not shining examples, but they are not an embarrassment either . The Mets have been worse with a higher payroll, the Mariners worse (zero playoff appearances) with a lower one, but the Angels and Cardinals have done better.

I think a detailed breakdown of these numbers won't really give either side a decisive edge in an argument as to what Hendry's legacy looks like.