Yankees interested in Zambrano?

[Ace]

<!--quoteo(post=72937:date=Dec 24 2009, 11:03 AM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Dec 24 2009, 11:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72936:date=Dec 24 2009, 11:49 AM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Dec 24 2009, 11:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72934:date=Dec 24 2009, 10:47 AM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Dec 24 2009, 10:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72932:date=Dec 24 2009, 11:36 AM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Dec 24 2009, 11:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72925:date=Dec 24 2009, 10:14 AM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Dec 24 2009, 10:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I am heading out of town soon, so I need to wrap this up - and I can't be bashing my head in the whole trip, so let me try to phrase this in a way we can all agree, even if we disagree on the particulars.

If you have two teams, and over a long enough period of time (we can debate how long it has to be before it stops being "luck"), Team A has won 10 more games per season (again, we can debate how many games) than Team B, but the two teams have had the same payroll (again, we can debate how close they have to be to be the "same"), that SUGGESTS that Team A has a better front office than Team B.

I cannot fathom anyone disagreeing with this BASIC proposition. We can debate all those little internal things (and I suspect that's what you guys are doing), but the BASIC premise must be true.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This post, and this post only. Agree with it. I need it. Note that "suggests" means "suggests but does not ALONE prove."
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I disagree with the post. I do however think that Boston has the better front office though.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

How is it even possible to disagree with that post? I am not exaggerating - I *literally* cannot understand it. And I'd like to, because I feel like I must be missing something.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Clone all MLB players, prospects, coaches, scouts, personel, and anyone else that has any affiliation with the teams as well as recreate all facilities and markets each team uses/plays in. Take two different GMs and put them in charge of the same franchise of both leagues and say "Go!". Give them four or five years to see what they can do. The one of the two GMs that has done consistently better in that time period is with very high probability the better GM.

There's just too many variables for me. If you put it in a vacuum, then I can agree with it. I just don't think the amount of wins is the complete telling factor. It is what GMs are judged on, and I do believe the amount of wins a club has annually has a high corelation with the ability of the GM. But only knowing the amount of wins in the year relative to other teams is not enough for me to draw a conclusion.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I suppose that's fair. I disagree, but now I see what you're saying. Whew. I am off the ledge now.

Merry Christmas, Scarey.

[Ace]

For my part, in case anyone doesn't remember, I was a *huge* Hendry booster until two years ago. It's been a steady decline since then, to the point now that, although I don't blame him absolutely for the Cubs' failings, I do think he has underperformed given his resources, and it's time to move in another direction.

[cherp]

Ace - I struggle with concluding that Boston's FO is better - mostly because of how subjective that is.

The payrolls are very different when you look at full organizational payrolls - by like 30mm+ per year.

Even if - The sample size we are talking about is still small. And the Cubs did make 2 post seasons in the past 3, and had a good team that just didn't play well in a post season series.

I wouldn't want Hendry as my GM - Don't get me wrong. But I wouldn't conclude Theo is better either. He has tons more at his disposal. He can afford to go out and buy Dice K, and then win despite that. He can spend 10mm on utility players. He can overpay slot on 6 guys per year in the draft and get young high end prospects in the middle rounds of a draft.

Cost per win...all that tells me is a result. It doesn't tell me how the result happened. I hate using output metrics without understanding all the inputs. That's why the pencil fuckers piss me off so much. Statistics, out of context, don't tell the story to me.

[rok]

<!--quoteo(post=72952:date=Dec 24 2009, 01:31 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Dec 24 2009, 01:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->For my part, in case anyone doesn't remember, I was a *huge* Hendry booster until two years ago. It's been a steady decline since then, to the point now that, although I don't blame him absolutely for the Cubs' failings, I do think he has underperformed given his resources, and it's time to move in another direction.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh, I remember those days very well. I'm right there with you on Hendry, though my skepticism started sometime in the 2005 offseason. I've gone back and forth over the years on my opinion of Hendry. It isn't as clear cut as some make it out to be, no matter what metric you use to judge him. Also, it isn't easy to compare Hendry to past Cubs GMs. I mean, we've gone through so many over the years, and he's had the longest tenure with the most success (relatively speaking) of any in my lifetime. You can't really form an unbiased opinion of someone, anyone, simply by looking at results. The Cubs are such a unique situation with their own unique set of circumstances, that honestly I can't even make up my own mind as to how I feel about things at times. Right now though, I just feel that a change would be best, mainly because there is a ton of baggage surrounding this organization, and all that I hear and see gives me very little optimism.

[cherp]

<!--quoteo(post=72957:date=Dec 24 2009, 02:07 PM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ Dec 24 2009, 02:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72952:date=Dec 24 2009, 01:31 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Dec 24 2009, 01:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->For my part, in case anyone doesn't remember, I was a *huge* Hendry booster until two years ago. It's been a steady decline since then, to the point now that, although I don't blame him absolutely for the Cubs' failings, I do think he has underperformed given his resources, and it's time to move in another direction.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh, I remember those days very well. I'm right there with you on Hendry, though my skepticism started sometime in the 2005 offseason. I've gone back and forth over the years on my opinion of Hendry. It isn't as clear cut as some make it out to be, no matter what metric you use to judge him. Also, it isn't easy to compare Hendry to past Cubs GMs. I mean, we've gone through so many over the years, and he's had the longest tenure with the most success (relatively speaking) of any in my lifetime. You can't really form an unbiased opinion of someone, anyone, simply by looking at results. The Cubs are such a unique situation with their own unique set of circumstances, that honestly I can't even make up my own mind as to how I feel about things at times. Right now though, I just feel that a change would be best, mainly because there is a ton of baggage surrounding this organization, and all that I hear and see gives me very little optimism.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Which leads to an interesting question Rok... So if Hendry gets fired, and the best GM available is hired, what does that person do?

Blow it all up and rebuild? Find a taker for Soriano - and pay off that deal. Trade Z for a strong package of prospects. Dump all the crumby MIs for prospect. Send Lee and Aramis somewhere for building blocks... and let the Ricketts regime start off as awful as humanly possible so that it has nowhere to go but up?

Do the Cubs fans have an appetite for this?

Or do they go ahead and try to fix this, keep from sucking, and try to turn it around?

I really don't know. I really don't know if either of those would get you where you want to be either. Part of me thinks that given the moved Hendry has made, the only option right now is to stay the course and hope for the best. I know that's not encouraging.

[Scarey]

<!--quoteo(post=72959:date=Dec 24 2009, 04:31 PM:name=cherp)-->QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 24 2009, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I really don't know. I really don't know if either of those would get you where you want to be either. Part of me thinks that given the moved Hendry has made, the only option right now is to stay the course and hope for the best. I know that's not encouraging.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You say that, and I think it has a lot to do with Cubs fans perceptions right now. But, it's very possible that the Cubs could be the cream of the NL this year. If Soriano hits 35-40 HRs next year, Soto puts up an .800 OPS, and players stay relatively healthy, just think about what this team could do.

If a new GM comes in, I think there's a 95% chance that the new person, whoever it may be, would try to contend to the best of his/her ability. There's no other way to do it. This team is not that bad off. If they don't look promising at the trade deadline, they can always unload then. It's just silly though to think the 2010 Cubs are done before we even start the year.

[cherp]

<!--quoteo(post=72962:date=Dec 24 2009, 03:19 PM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Dec 24 2009, 03:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72959:date=Dec 24 2009, 04:31 PM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 24 2009, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I really don't know. I really don't know if either of those would get you where you want to be either. Part of me thinks that given the moved Hendry has made, the only option right now is to stay the course and hope for the best. I know that's not encouraging.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You say that, and I think it has a lot to do with Cubs fans perceptions right now. But, it's very possible that the Cubs could be the cream of the NL this year. If Soriano hits 35-40 HRs next year, Soto puts up an .800 OPS, and players stay relatively healthy, just think about what this team could do.

If a new GM comes in, I think there's a 95% chance that the new person, whoever it may be, would try to contend to the best of his/her ability. There's no other way to do it. This team is not that bad off. If they don't look promising at the trade deadline, they can always unload then. It's just silly though to think the 2010 Cubs are done before we even start the year.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


I can't see a new GM coming in and not putting their stamp on things. I agree - with a good rebound or two the Cubs could definitely contend. But a new GM should come in with an organizational plan that will make the team a favorite in the NLC every year. I think that would take a few years to execute and would require some rebuilding and restructuring to be done right. It is hard to do that, while competing at the same time.

[cherp]

<!--quoteo(post=72943:date=Dec 24 2009, 12:29 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Dec 24 2009, 12:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Ace, I hope you enjoy your holiday, knowing that you are totally and completely correct in this argument. Yes, Cherp, Scarey and BT are making very, very good Pike's Peak-type points. However, you are making Mt. Everest-type points that trump theirs.

(BTW, when you made that 5-year comparison, you didn't even mention the fact that if it were a <i>six-</i>year comparison, it would have included that <i>other</i> Red Sox championship.)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


But it still only was mlb payroll. That just doesnt tell enough of the story They outspend on international posting fees and on draft bonuses to HS kids and underclassmen. They spend more on coaches and on player development.

Not saying that I wouldnt take that staff to run my team...just that it is not an apples to apples comparison.

[SandbergMVP1984]

<!--quoteo(post=72962:date=Dec 24 2009, 03:19 PM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Dec 24 2009, 03:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72959:date=Dec 24 2009, 04:31 PM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 24 2009, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I really don't know. I really don't know if either of those would get you where you want to be either. Part of me thinks that given the moved Hendry has made, the only option right now is to stay the course and hope for the best. I know that's not encouraging.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You say that, and I think it has a lot to do with Cubs fans perceptions right now. But, it's very possible that the Cubs could be the cream of the NL this year. If Soriano hits 35-40 HRs next year, Soto puts up an .800 OPS, and players stay relatively healthy, just think about what this team could do.

If a new GM comes in, I think there's a 95% chance that the new person, whoever it may be, would try to contend to the best of his/her ability. There's no other way to do it. This team is not that bad off. If they don't look promising at the trade deadline, they can always unload then. It's just silly though to think the 2010 Cubs are done before we even start the year.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I fully agree with this. If the position players stay healthy, I think we'll be fine offensively. I don't even think we should bother with the free agent stroke CFs that are available. Try to swing a trade for a right fielder or just wait it out.

[Scarey]

<!--quoteo(post=72964:date=Dec 24 2009, 06:07 PM:name=cherp)-->QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 24 2009, 06:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72962:date=Dec 24 2009, 03:19 PM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Dec 24 2009, 03:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72959:date=Dec 24 2009, 04:31 PM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 24 2009, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I really don't know. I really don't know if either of those would get you where you want to be either. Part of me thinks that given the moved Hendry has made, the only option right now is to stay the course and hope for the best. I know that's not encouraging.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You say that, and I think it has a lot to do with Cubs fans perceptions right now. But, it's very possible that the Cubs could be the cream of the NL this year. If Soriano hits 35-40 HRs next year, Soto puts up an .800 OPS, and players stay relatively healthy, just think about what this team could do.

If a new GM comes in, I think there's a 95% chance that the new person, whoever it may be, would try to contend to the best of his/her ability. There's no other way to do it. This team is not that bad off. If they don't look promising at the trade deadline, they can always unload then. It's just silly though to think the 2010 Cubs are done before we even start the year.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


I can't see a new GM coming in and not putting their stamp on things. I agree - with a good rebound or two the Cubs could definitely contend. But a new GM should come in with an organizational plan that will make the team a favorite in the NLC every year. I think that would take a few years to execute and would require some rebuilding and restructuring to be done right. It is hard to do that, while competing at the same time.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I think the Cubs can rebuild and stay competitive. I expect them to. Count me as one of the Cub fans that does not want to sacrifice a single year on "blowing it up".

[jstraw]

<!--quoteo(post=72972:date=Dec 24 2009, 09:13 PM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Dec 24 2009, 09:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72964:date=Dec 24 2009, 06:07 PM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 24 2009, 06:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72962:date=Dec 24 2009, 03:19 PM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Dec 24 2009, 03:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72959:date=Dec 24 2009, 04:31 PM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 24 2009, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I really don't know. I really don't know if either of those would get you where you want to be either. Part of me thinks that given the moved Hendry has made, the only option right now is to stay the course and hope for the best. I know that's not encouraging.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You say that, and I think it has a lot to do with Cubs fans perceptions right now. But, it's very possible that the Cubs could be the cream of the NL this year. If Soriano hits 35-40 HRs next year, Soto puts up an .800 OPS, and players stay relatively healthy, just think about what this team could do.

If a new GM comes in, I think there's a 95% chance that the new person, whoever it may be, would try to contend to the best of his/her ability. There's no other way to do it. This team is not that bad off. If they don't look promising at the trade deadline, they can always unload then. It's just silly though to think the 2010 Cubs are done before we even start the year.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


I can't see a new GM coming in and not putting their stamp on things. I agree - with a good rebound or two the Cubs could definitely contend. But a new GM should come in with an organizational plan that will make the team a favorite in the NLC every year. I think that would take a few years to execute and would require some rebuilding and restructuring to be done right. It is hard to do that, while competing at the same time.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I think the Cubs can rebuild and stay competitive. I expect them to. Count me as one of the Cub fans that does not want to sacrifice a single year on "blowing it up".
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I just wonder what happens when Alf and Fuk are really done and still have years on their contracts.

[Scarey]

<!--quoteo(post=72974:date=Dec 25 2009, 12:11 AM:name=jstraw)-->QUOTE (jstraw @ Dec 25 2009, 12:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72972:date=Dec 24 2009, 09:13 PM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Dec 24 2009, 09:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72964:date=Dec 24 2009, 06:07 PM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 24 2009, 06:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72962:date=Dec 24 2009, 03:19 PM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Dec 24 2009, 03:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=72959:date=Dec 24 2009, 04:31 PM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 24 2009, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I really don't know. I really don't know if either of those would get you where you want to be either. Part of me thinks that given the moved Hendry has made, the only option right now is to stay the course and hope for the best. I know that's not encouraging.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You say that, and I think it has a lot to do with Cubs fans perceptions right now. But, it's very possible that the Cubs could be the cream of the NL this year. If Soriano hits 35-40 HRs next year, Soto puts up an .800 OPS, and players stay relatively healthy, just think about what this team could do.

If a new GM comes in, I think there's a 95% chance that the new person, whoever it may be, would try to contend to the best of his/her ability. There's no other way to do it. This team is not that bad off. If they don't look promising at the trade deadline, they can always unload then. It's just silly though to think the 2010 Cubs are done before we even start the year.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


I can't see a new GM coming in and not putting their stamp on things. I agree - with a good rebound or two the Cubs could definitely contend. But a new GM should come in with an organizational plan that will make the team a favorite in the NLC every year. I think that would take a few years to execute and would require some rebuilding and restructuring to be done right. It is hard to do that, while competing at the same time.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I think the Cubs can rebuild and stay competitive. I expect them to. Count me as one of the Cub fans that does not want to sacrifice a single year on "blowing it up".
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I just wonder what happens when Alf and Fuk are really done and still have years on their contracts.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Fuk only has 2 years left on his contract and he gets on base a ton. He'll never be what we hoped he would when he signed his contract, but he'll be good enough.

Alf... I think he still has 2 good years left in him...

[Coldneck]

Damn. I'm sorry I missed this argument, but I really wouldn't have added anything to it since I am in Ace's corner. He is right. The rest of you are wrong.

[Scarey]

<!--quoteo(post=72986:date=Dec 25 2009, 12:09 PM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Dec 25 2009, 12:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Damn. I'm sorry I missed this argument, but I really wouldn't have added anything to it since I am in Ace's corner. He is right. The rest of you are wrong.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Right about what? Did you actually read through this whole thing?

[VanSlawAndCottoCheese]

MY apologies to those who don't celebrate. And yes, I recognize the hypocrisy, as I modified the damned image on Christmas. Y'all can just bite my figgy pudding.