Yankees interested in Zambrano?

[cherp]

<!--quoteo(post=73049:date=Dec 28 2009, 12:52 AM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Dec 28 2009, 12:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=73048:date=Dec 28 2009, 12:54 AM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 28 2009, 12:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Are guys (other than KB, who we all know hates nearly anything Hendry does) really bashing Hendry for resigning Grabow to a low risk, low cost deal, and for pursuing a guy like Capps who could be a strong contributor to the pen and a backup closer if something goes wrong?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I'm not up in arms about Capps. He's been a solid reliever with one shitty year last year. The thing is. Grabow really isn't that good. I think he's been lucky for several years. Do you realize that for his career he has a 1.44 WHIP? Just for reference, Kevin Gregg has a career 1.32 WHIP and I would have been quite unhappy if he had signed a 2 year 7.5 mill deal with the Cubs.

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Scarey - I'm with you - you need to roll the dice on kids with a few of your slots. I'm just not supporting doing it with every slot in your pen.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I've never promoted this idea. You already have Marmol, Guzman, and Marshall who have all had success as relievers. Throw the guys I just listed and see what sticks. I don't think a Marsmol, Guzman, Marshall, <b>Parker, Gaub, Caridad </b>bullpen looks too bad personally.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I do. If my team came in with a bullpen of 6 guys, none of whom have more than 3 years of experience, I'd be very concerned about their chances of winning. Could it work out? Sure - but if my team, with a history of failed prospects, tried this, I'd be very very skeptical.

I sure hope it works out that 2 of those guys hold their own. But if I were a Cub fan, I would be very glad to see Grabow as a left handed reliever coming off of 2 straight very good years in my pen to support a bunch of guys who have fewer than 200 career big league IP.

[cherp]

<!--quoteo(post=73056:date=Dec 28 2009, 07:08 AM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Dec 28 2009, 07:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=73054:date=Dec 28 2009, 07:59 AM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Dec 28 2009, 07:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=73047:date=Dec 27 2009, 11:40 PM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 27 2009, 11:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=73037:date=Dec 27 2009, 07:03 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Dec 27 2009, 07:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=73022:date=Dec 27 2009, 03:27 PM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 27 2009, 03:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=73013:date=Dec 27 2009, 09:22 AM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Dec 27 2009, 09:22 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=73012:date=Dec 27 2009, 10:19 AM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 27 2009, 10:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=73011:date=Dec 27 2009, 08:18 AM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Dec 27 2009, 08:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=73008:date=Dec 27 2009, 12:31 AM:name=cherp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Dec 27 2009, 12:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I'm sorry - must be Hendry's fault that half his lineup was hurt (Aramis, Lee, Soriano and Soto) or completely underperformed expectations (Nutty Milton).

Hendry put together a team that should have won a lot of games last year. He was missing exactly what you say he shouldn't have gone after (a strong veteran reliever to support a young pen (Gregg was a disaster).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Cherp makes some goods points, with the exception of the bullpen point - as Scarey pointed out - and these two points.

Just want to note, cherp, that of course it was Hendry's fault that Milton underperformed. Everyone knew that Milton was deeply flawed, both as a teammate and as a player in the National League. Hendry took the risk, and it back-fired. How is that not Hendry's fault?

Second, you can't on the one hand use Gregg's failure as a closer/reliever for the Cubs as support for the notion that Hendry should go out and get relievers and on the other hand completely ignore that Hendry CHOSE to go out and get Gregg in the first place.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ace - I agree with your point. But in my opinion, those are calculated gambles. They were moves that could have worked and may not have. I wasnt around when Milton signed, but was there a large # of people who said it was a bad signing? And Greggs failure shouldn't deter JH from doing the right thing in the future. A pen cant live on kids alone.

Scarey - I agree there are SOME candidates out there. I just hate seeing teams count on their farm to make a pen. That often blows up ij their face. (agreee - so does signing guys.)
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Oh yes. Many, many of us thought the Bradley signing was really, really risky, and was for too much money and too many years.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I agree that both the length and $ were risky - but were people peojecting him to be a year 1 complete and total disaster...so bad that the best Hendry could get for him was Carlos Silva's crappy contract? I think most reasonably conservative baseball minds (myself included) questioned the wisdom/riskyness of the deal. But I didn't project year 1 catastrophe. Did people here?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Perhaps I'm confused, but are you asking me whether the consensus was that Bradley would be so bad, both in performance and attitude/behavior, that the Cubs would have to dump him for nothing after the first year?

If that's what you're asking, the answer is of course not. But I don't think that's a very informative question; if that's what you're asking.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I was assuming that was the answer. That's why I won't blame Hendry. I'd blame him if it was complaining in year 3 that he was underperforming - but I won't blame him for what this ended up being. It was a calculated gamble - but one that failed.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

So a GM only makes a mistake if the consensus is that the move is a disaster that is guaranteed to end as badly as any move ever has in history?

Gotcha.

I would have thought it would be ok to call a move a mistake if, for all the reasons folks were fearing, a deal ends very badly. Too simple, I guess.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Once again, I agree with Ace. If we signed Bradley for a really cheap, short term contract than the gamble might have been worth it. But we signed Bradly to an expensive, 3 year contract, for which the gamble cannot be justified. At least we have Silva.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Nobody signs a guy coming off of a 1.000 OPS season for a really cheap short term deal. The failure of the deal wasn't the length. He failed in month 2. They realized by month 4 that they wouldn't get into year 2. Hendry's fault - sure - he's the GM. But does that make him a bad GM worthy of scorn from fans? Not in my eyes. The douche worthy of scorn is now a Mariner. If he signed a crappy player - that would be one thing. But look at then numbers Milton put up in the two years prior to Hendry signing him... This was not a guy who we expected to only hit .257 and have a SLG% of .397.

IMHO, if Bradley hit like he did in the two years prior, he'd still be a big fucking douchebag...but, to paraphrase, he'd be "our" big fucking douchebag. They were forced to trade him, and get shit back for him, because he sucked, in addition to being a DBag.

[cherp]

<!--quoteo(post=73055:date=Dec 28 2009, 07:03 AM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Dec 28 2009, 07:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Cherp, the Grabow signing is the current example of Hendry signing replacement level players to expensive multiyear deals. In a vacuum, the Grabow signing isn't a big deal. But when the team has repeatedly said it doesn't have payroll flexibility and Hendry has a history of signing Miles, Neifi, Blanco, Howry, Eyre, etc. (I'm forgetting some others) to multi year deals the Grabow signing is the straw that broke the camel's back.

On second thought, the Grabow signing sucks if looked at in a vacuum too. We could have offered him arbitration and paid him about the same for one year instead of two. I guess you could say it was a gamble because we'd save $1M next year if he is successful this year. But it's an unnecessary gamble.

Let me also say that I respect your arguments and appreciate your informed baseball opinion.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Cold - first - thanks for the compliment - I appreciate it, and feel the same about you (and the rest of the folks on this thread as well)...

That said, I just don't agree. They got a LH reliever locked up through his FA, for very little money, who is coming off of two VERY good years. They avoided going to arbitration (which no teams enjoy doing with guys they want) and having to argue why Grabow sucks. He had two straight years with very good numbers. (2.84/1.27 and 3.36/1.41) and would have likely won an arbitration hearing if the Cubs lowballed him. I can easily see him getting 4-5mm in arbitration in year 5, and then more in year 6. They gave him 7.5mm for the two years.

Put it this way, he's the best LH RP the Cubs have in the back of that pen. Assuming Marshall starts, or is the long guy, he's the only LH RP the Cubs have in the back of that pen. I understand your concerns - but if they don't do this, they go to Arbitration with him, end up losing a case if they try for anything lower than 4mm, and then have to do it again next year. Just doesn't feel like a bad move to me - although again, I understand your point.

My bottom line - I wouldn't, in evaluating Jim Hendry, put signing John Grabow on the negatives of his +/- chart quite yet - if at all.

Not that I want to be known as the defense for Jim Hendry - because I don't like a lot of what he does...I just feel it is fair to blame him for some clearly stupid shit he did, not for stuff that (IMO) sits on the margins.

[Coldneck]

Fair enough. Although if I had the energy I'd argue that 3.36/1.41 is definitely not "very good" and that relievers' performance is so unpredicatable you should always try to limit the length of the contract.

[kbwsb]

<!--quoteo(post=73055:date=Dec 28 2009, 07:03 AM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Dec 28 2009, 07:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Cherp, the Grabow signing is the current example of Hendry signing replacement level players to expensive multiyear deals. In a vacuum, the Grabow signing isn't a big deal. But when the team has repeatedly said it doesn't have payroll flexibility and Hendry has a history of signing Miles, Neifi, Blanco, Howry, Eyre, etc. (I'm forgetting some others) to multi year deals the Grabow signing is the straw that broke the camel's back.

On second thought, the Grabow signing sucks if looked at in a vacuum too. We could have offered him arbitration and paid him about the same for one year instead of two. I guess you could say it was a gamble because we'd save $1M next year if he is successful this year. But it's an unnecessary gamble.

Let me also say that I respect your arguments and appreciate your informed baseball opinion.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Coldneck, thank you for perfectly summing up the Hendry mindset. It's something a Sox fan can't fathom, which is why Cherpie loves O'l Jim so much.

[kbwsb]

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Are guys (other than KB, who we all know hates nearly anything Hendry does) really bashing Hendry...<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Totally and completely <b>false</b>.

Is this new "Cherp" actually Kid? (in the Rick Wronga sense?)

[bz]

No, KB, you do hate everything he does and have for like 6 years now.

[kbwsb]

<!--quoteo(post=73135:date=Dec 28 2009, 02:25 PM:name=bz)-->QUOTE (bz @ Dec 28 2009, 02:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->No, KB, you do hate everything he does and have for like 6 years now.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Totally and completely false.
Easiest example: I was in favor of the Milton Bradley signing, probably Jim's boldest move of the past few years. And there are multiple other examples.

(Are we talking <i>basic philosophy</i>? Yeah, it's true that I disagree with some of Jim's basic tenants: valuing athleticism over baseball playing ability (especially when it come to "getting on base"), his blinding passion for middle relief, his theory that old guys in their 30's are superior to younger ballplayers...I do disagree with those things, but even then, I admit that arguments can be made in Jim's favor on those issues. Specious arguments, but hey, you could make one, at least.)

[bz]

Nope. You have used every and anything he has done as a reason for him to be fired.

[cherp]

<!--quoteo(post=73131:date=Dec 28 2009, 02:18 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Dec 28 2009, 02:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=73055:date=Dec 28 2009, 07:03 AM:name=Coldneck)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Coldneck @ Dec 28 2009, 07:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Cherp, the Grabow signing is the current example of Hendry signing replacement level players to expensive multiyear deals. In a vacuum, the Grabow signing isn't a big deal. But when the team has repeatedly said it doesn't have payroll flexibility and Hendry has a history of signing Miles, Neifi, Blanco, Howry, Eyre, etc. (I'm forgetting some others) to multi year deals the Grabow signing is the straw that broke the camel's back.

On second thought, the Grabow signing sucks if looked at in a vacuum too. We could have offered him arbitration and paid him about the same for one year instead of two. I guess you could say it was a gamble because we'd save $1M next year if he is successful this year. But it's an unnecessary gamble.

Let me also say that I respect your arguments and appreciate your informed baseball opinion.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Coldneck, thank you for perfectly summing up the Hendry mindset. It's something a Sox fan can't fathom, which is why Cherpie loves O'l Jim so much.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


That's awfully douchey of you KB...I can't disagree with you without "not being able to understand" or "loving o'l Jim"? Fuck off.

[kbwsb]

Cherp = Kid

We haven't had personal attacks on the board for a long time. But since this is the 3rd or 4th time Cherp has decided to cuss me out instead of debating the Cubs, perhaps we're ushering in a new era.

+ Koz [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/koz.gif[/img]

[cherp]

<!--quoteo(post=73140:date=Dec 28 2009, 02:41 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Dec 28 2009, 02:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Cherp = Kid

We haven't had personal attacks on the board for a long time. But since this is the 3rd or 4th time Cherp has decided to cuss me out instead of debating the Cubs, perhaps we're ushering in a new era.

+ Koz [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/koz.gif[/img]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Pot - meet kettle?

You say that "a sox fan can't understand" and that I love Jim Hendry - and somehow this is my fault? Not to mention you calling me Kid - worse than anything.

Want to have a legitimate discussion? I'd love to. Just be honest about things, and quit with the bullshit. Nobody buys it.

[ruby23]

I love the Grabow signing and hope that Capps is next. The Cubs were 2nd in the NL in QS last year, which was often wasted by the bullpen. If you think spending a little money to make the bullpen better is a bad idea, you're a numbskull.

[Coach]

<!--quoteo(post=73135:date=Dec 28 2009, 03:25 PM:name=bz)-->QUOTE (bz @ Dec 28 2009, 03:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->No, KB, you do hate everything he does and have for like 6 years now.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is correct. I spent a week arguing with KB on Cubstalk about Hendry and his flavor of the month, Brian Sabean.

[PcB]

<!--quoteo(post=73161:date=Dec 28 2009, 04:47 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Dec 28 2009, 04:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I love the Grabow signing and hope that Capps is next. The Cubs were 2nd in the NL in QS last year, which was often wasted by the bullpen. If you think spending a little money to make the bullpen better is a bad idea, you're a numbskull.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
...didn't Capps sign with the Nats last week?