07-04-2010, 02:41 PM
<!--quoteo(post=104012:date=Jul 4 2010, 12:09 PM:name=Dirk)-->QUOTE (Dirk @ Jul 4 2010, 12:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=104005:date=Jul 3 2010, 11:19 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jul 3 2010, 11:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=103972:date=Jul 3 2010, 01:17 AM:name=Gracie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gracie @ Jul 3 2010, 01:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Hendry's strength has always been in making trades. Unfortunately, it's in free agency where he's been lackluster. He seems to think that everyone we sign or re-sign needs a deal giving them twice as much cash as they're worth with a no-trade clause as the cherry on top.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've stayed out of this for a while, but this theme seems to be pretty universally accepted. And it's wrong.
Ramirez signed an under market contract
Zambrano signed an under market contract (see Zito, Barry)
Fukudome was offered more than the Cubs offered, but chose the Cubs anyway.
I think that leaves Soriano in the no-trade clause category. You might convince me that the Cubs paid way more than anyone else was offering (despite the fact that no one one this board can possibly have any actual proof of this), but one contract does not make Hendry guilty on ALL contracts.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For me it's not a matter of how good/bad each individual contract looks when you stack it up against the rest of baseball, it's about the sum of the parts- what can you get for a top 3 payroll? Compare the Cubs to the Red Sox who have a similar payroll the last few years. Yeah, the Red Sox have 2-3 bad contracts that I can think of, but they've had a lot more to show for it too. Furthermore, why is it that none of the Cubs contracts look pretty good in hindsight? I can understand a bad contract or two (by the way- you're not counting Grabow and Bradly), but shouldn't the majority of FA deals that you hand out be good ones? 4 years into all the big deals being handed out, how many still look good? Maybe Dempster and Lilly? So yeah, maybe he got a few guys under market value, good for him. They were still huge ass contracts that are now burdensome.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But none of this responds to my argument. Gracie stated (and I believe a lot of people agree with him) that Hendry is known for wildly overpaying FA's while giving them no trade clauses. The fact is, that isn't what happened. I didn't bring up Grabow and Bradley because they didn't get no trade clauses.
If you want to argue that Hendry's body of work is less than spectacular when it comes to free agents, you aren't going to get much argument from me. I think you are underselling how much of a bargain Lilly and Dempster have been, but many of his big ticket signings could not be categorized as steals by any means.
Of course, that is almost always the case when dealing with big ticket free agents.
I've stayed out of this for a while, but this theme seems to be pretty universally accepted. And it's wrong.
Ramirez signed an under market contract
Zambrano signed an under market contract (see Zito, Barry)
Fukudome was offered more than the Cubs offered, but chose the Cubs anyway.
I think that leaves Soriano in the no-trade clause category. You might convince me that the Cubs paid way more than anyone else was offering (despite the fact that no one one this board can possibly have any actual proof of this), but one contract does not make Hendry guilty on ALL contracts.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For me it's not a matter of how good/bad each individual contract looks when you stack it up against the rest of baseball, it's about the sum of the parts- what can you get for a top 3 payroll? Compare the Cubs to the Red Sox who have a similar payroll the last few years. Yeah, the Red Sox have 2-3 bad contracts that I can think of, but they've had a lot more to show for it too. Furthermore, why is it that none of the Cubs contracts look pretty good in hindsight? I can understand a bad contract or two (by the way- you're not counting Grabow and Bradly), but shouldn't the majority of FA deals that you hand out be good ones? 4 years into all the big deals being handed out, how many still look good? Maybe Dempster and Lilly? So yeah, maybe he got a few guys under market value, good for him. They were still huge ass contracts that are now burdensome.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But none of this responds to my argument. Gracie stated (and I believe a lot of people agree with him) that Hendry is known for wildly overpaying FA's while giving them no trade clauses. The fact is, that isn't what happened. I didn't bring up Grabow and Bradley because they didn't get no trade clauses.
If you want to argue that Hendry's body of work is less than spectacular when it comes to free agents, you aren't going to get much argument from me. I think you are underselling how much of a bargain Lilly and Dempster have been, but many of his big ticket signings could not be categorized as steals by any means.
Of course, that is almost always the case when dealing with big ticket free agents.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.
