Weighing Hendry's good/bad moves

[Coldneck]

I should add that looking at the broad scope there are more good transactions than bad. My problem with Hendry is that he has not managed the payroll effectively. He may not be entirely to blame for this, but in the end he has a payroll 40% higher than any other team in the NL Central and is grossly underachieiving.

[rok]

<!--quoteo(post=71878:date=Dec 16 2009, 11:22 AM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Dec 16 2009, 11:22 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71875:date=Dec 16 2009, 11:17 AM:name=rok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ Dec 16 2009, 11:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71874:date=Dec 16 2009, 11:14 AM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Dec 16 2009, 11:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If you go by fangraphs, Fukudome wasn't a "bad" signing at all. He wasn't great, and he hasn't lived up to expectations, he had an obp of 375 last year, and he plays good defense. Fangraphs has him "earning" 18.4 million over the last 2 years while making 19.5 million. Not anything to write home about, but I think his miserable 2nd half o 2008 has tainted peoples view of him.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He had a shitty 2nd half of 2009 as well. I think it's that pattern of inconsistency that pisses people off. You essentially had an all star for 2 halves of both seasons, and then a bum for the other 2 halves.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


He was better in the second half of 2009 than he was in the first half. He had a higher avg, obp and ops+ after the all star game than before it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I guess I put more emphasis on his Sep '09 line of .202/.331/.613, but I guess he wasn't as bad as I recall for the entire 2nd half.

[Butcher]

The Harden trade was good.

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=71887:date=Dec 16 2009, 11:34 AM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Dec 16 2009, 11:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I should add that looking at the broad scope there are more good transactions than bad. My problem with Hendry is that he has not managed the payroll effectively. He may not be entirely to blame for this, but in the end he has a payroll 40% higher than any other team in the NL Central and is grossly underachieiving.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think Hendry's strength seems to be making trades. He doesn't seem to get taken in a deal very often. However, I don't think he reads the free agent market very well (if at all). He seems to have a weakness for replacement-level players, as well.

[leonardsipes]

Soriano has been good so far. Hendry had to make one big signing. Honeslty, my choice would have been Carlos Lee and then Barry Zito. Ownership orederd Hendry to spend the mo9ney. Soriano has produced 2 out of 3 years. His outfield assists alone got the Cubs into to '07 playoffs.

Jaque Jones was a good signing. Hendry correctly predicted he could rebound from his 2 poor seasons. I think after watching him play, Hendry should have realized the '06 were inflated, and traded him at the deadline.

[wcplummer]

Was he around when we got Dempster?

[leonardsipes]

How can winning the division 2 out of 3 years be grossly under achieving?

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=71891:date=Dec 16 2009, 11:42 AM:name=leonardsipes)-->QUOTE (leonardsipes @ Dec 16 2009, 11:42 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Jaque Jones was a good signing.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/spit.gif[/img]

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=71892:date=Dec 16 2009, 11:45 AM:name=wcplummer)-->QUOTE (wcplummer @ Dec 16 2009, 11:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Was he around when we got Dempster?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes. He signed Dempster in '04. I'll add him to the "good" list.

[wcplummer]

In the spirit of Christmas it should be a naughty/nice list.

[wcplummer]

Dusty - BAD
Lou - mehhh

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=71897:date=Dec 16 2009, 11:52 AM:name=wcplummer)-->QUOTE (wcplummer @ Dec 16 2009, 11:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Dusty - BAD
Lou - mehhh<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Although I really don't like Dusty, and in general I don't like paying a lot of money for managers...I liked the Dusty signing because he represented the ushering in of a new era. A new commitment to winning, etc. And while I hated the way he abused our young arms, and undervalued the ability to get on base, and overvalued speed, etc., etc., etc., I think he helped the organization shrug off the "lovable losers" tag. I still like Lou, too -- even though he's probably overpaid. I'm just not sure either of them are bad enough to go under the bad list. Just my opinion, of course.

[BT]

You guy realize that, again according to fangraphs and baseball prospectus, the Neifi Perez signing was a GOOD signing? The Cubs paid him a TOTAL of 3.5 million over the 2 years he was with us (think about that for a minute, you fuckers are still bitching about an outlay of 1.75 million dollars a year FIVE YEARS AFTER IT HAPPENED), and according to fangraphs, Perez was "worth" 5.5 million in 2005 ALONE. He had a WAR of 1.6. His WARP 1 was 2.7, which made him the eighth most valuable playing on the entire team, despite making less than 2 percent of the total payroll. Those number also, by definition, mean he was not a "replacement level player", but rather he was better than replacement level. Now, he was awful in 2006, but even as bad as he was, it doesn't erase what he did in 2005.

I'm not trying to argue signing Neifi was a masterstroke, but the insane obsession with some of you guys on this board acting as if signing him was on par with the Red Sox getting rid of Ruth, just isn't justified.

[The Dude]

<!--quoteo(post=71894:date=Dec 16 2009, 11:47 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Dec 16 2009, 11:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=71891:date=Dec 16 2009, 11:42 AM:name=leonardsipes)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (leonardsipes @ Dec 16 2009, 11:42 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Jaque Jones was a good signing.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/spit.gif[/img]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
racist

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=71900:date=Dec 16 2009, 11:56 AM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Dec 16 2009, 11:56 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->You guy realize that, again according to fangraphs and baseball prospectus, the Neifi Perez signing was a GOOD signing? The Cubs paid him a TOTAL of 3.5 million over the 2 years he was with us (think about that for a minute, you fuckers are still bitching about an outlay of 1.75 million dollars a year FIVE YEARS AFTER IT HAPPENED), and according to fangraphs, Perez was "worth" 5.5 million in 2005 ALONE. He had a WAR of 1.6. His WARP 1 was 2.7, which made him the eighth most valuable playing on the entire team, despite making less than 2 percent of the total payroll. Those number also, by definition, mean he was not a "replacement level player", but rather he was better than replacement level. Now, he was awful in 2006, but even as bad as he was, it doesn't erase what he did in 2005.

I'm not trying to argue signing Neifi was a masterstroke, but the insane obsession with some of you guys on this board acting as if signing him was on par with the Red Sox getting rid of Ruth, just isn't justified.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In <b>67 plate appearances</b> in 2004, he was amazing (playing way the fuck over his head, of course). Everything after that, he blew dog dick. In 246 plate appearances in 2006, for example, his OPS+ was <b>53</b> (it was 75 in 2005). Are you saying you couldn't find a guy you could pay league minimum to put up an OPS+ of 75 and 53 in consecutive seasons?

If Fangraphs says it was a good signing, I won't put much stock in that site ever again.