A new day, Jim Hendry still sucks
I also really hate how every sports journalist, especially major market sports journalists, like to play GM, and make possible suggestions as to who the Cubs should get based on absolutely no information or rumors or anything.
Why is Hendry a sucky GM? Well, mainly because Aramis still doesn't have a contract. I understand how negotiations work. If I'm GM, I start low, the other side starts high. Then we work towards the middle. If it's a 6-year, $90 million deal Aramis wants, as has been reported, I say that's not too extreme. But, I haven't even really heard of discussions going on with the Cubs and Ramirez's agent. And we only have about a week left for exclusive negotiating rights. Why not give Ramirez the 6 year deal with a player option after 4? Or, hell, guarantee all of it. I do'nt care. Either he'll opt out after 4 (if we give him the option), possibly choosing to make more money, or he'll take all 6 so he gets the money he was guaranteed. By that point he'd be a 10/5 player, so he could veto any trade. And if his value is high enough and we know we can't re-sign him then, we actually trade him for something. What a great idea. Trading and getting something useful in return. Why, it's such a novel idea, I wonder why Hendry hasn't thought of that.
Seriously, it's not like we haven't seen this coming all season. Especially when Aramis started heating up after the All-Star break, we knew he was going to opt out of his contract, and we should have been prepared. If Hendry doesn't want to keep him, then why did he play out his final games with the Cubs? We could have gotten two or 3 top-level prospects for him, since he's probably one of the top 5 all-around 3rd basemen in the game, and his availability makes him a hotter commodity. Or, we could have started restructuring and renegotiating on the contract back then.
But this is Jim Hendry we're talking about. Foresight is a foreign concept to him. It's sort of like calculus. Explain it all you want, it's still not going to make any sense to him. Also, foresight isn't a strength of the Cubs. This is the team who knew their President was going to 'resign' and never bothered finding a replacement.
But, rather, we could end up losing Aramis for absolutely nothing. Which is where Paul Sullivan's article from Tuesday comes in. He was naming possible successors for Ramirez, should we not be able to re-sign him. Sidenote, if we can't re-sign him, seriously, Hendry should not have a job. Let McDonough be GM as well, he couldn't possibly do any worse than 'do-nothing' Hendry.
Anyways, option 1? Nomar Garciaparra. Yes, let's replace Aramis with a player who has been unable to stay off the DL for the past, oh, 4 seasons or so. Even this past year, in a good year for Nomar, he still made 2 separate trips to the DL. And, as much as you want to, Nomar is going to need a lot of days off. So you'd need a good backup as well. So we might as well just give Freddy Bynum the job. Wait, I said good backup. Nevermind.
Option number 2, trade for Mike Lowell. Lowell hit .284 in 153 games with 20 HR and 80 RBI's. Not bad, but still, you're trading for him. What are you going to have to give up? A Matt Murton? Not worth it. Oh, also, WE HAVE A BETTER PLAYER THAN THAT ON OUR ROSTER WHO WE CAN KEEP FOR NOTHING BUT A SMALL RAISE.
Today on chicagosports.com they have an article that says that the Sox and Cubs are both interested in Gary Matthews Jr. and Chone Figgins. It also says that the Angels are also interested in Matthews and Aramis Ramirez. And my guess is they're willing to throw money at both of them. But, lucky for the Cubs, if they manage to pull one or the other, we could trade for Figgins. Woo, nothing like losing a player to free agency when you could have traded him for prospects, only to have to trade for a replacement.
It probably sounds like I'm repeating myself a lot with all of this talk about Aramis Ramirez. That's because I probably am. It's simple. We trade nothing, we sign him, we win. If we don't re-sign him, then we're up shit creek. Again.
Why is Hendry a sucky GM? Well, mainly because Aramis still doesn't have a contract. I understand how negotiations work. If I'm GM, I start low, the other side starts high. Then we work towards the middle. If it's a 6-year, $90 million deal Aramis wants, as has been reported, I say that's not too extreme. But, I haven't even really heard of discussions going on with the Cubs and Ramirez's agent. And we only have about a week left for exclusive negotiating rights. Why not give Ramirez the 6 year deal with a player option after 4? Or, hell, guarantee all of it. I do'nt care. Either he'll opt out after 4 (if we give him the option), possibly choosing to make more money, or he'll take all 6 so he gets the money he was guaranteed. By that point he'd be a 10/5 player, so he could veto any trade. And if his value is high enough and we know we can't re-sign him then, we actually trade him for something. What a great idea. Trading and getting something useful in return. Why, it's such a novel idea, I wonder why Hendry hasn't thought of that.
Seriously, it's not like we haven't seen this coming all season. Especially when Aramis started heating up after the All-Star break, we knew he was going to opt out of his contract, and we should have been prepared. If Hendry doesn't want to keep him, then why did he play out his final games with the Cubs? We could have gotten two or 3 top-level prospects for him, since he's probably one of the top 5 all-around 3rd basemen in the game, and his availability makes him a hotter commodity. Or, we could have started restructuring and renegotiating on the contract back then.
But this is Jim Hendry we're talking about. Foresight is a foreign concept to him. It's sort of like calculus. Explain it all you want, it's still not going to make any sense to him. Also, foresight isn't a strength of the Cubs. This is the team who knew their President was going to 'resign' and never bothered finding a replacement.
But, rather, we could end up losing Aramis for absolutely nothing. Which is where Paul Sullivan's article from Tuesday comes in. He was naming possible successors for Ramirez, should we not be able to re-sign him. Sidenote, if we can't re-sign him, seriously, Hendry should not have a job. Let McDonough be GM as well, he couldn't possibly do any worse than 'do-nothing' Hendry.
Anyways, option 1? Nomar Garciaparra. Yes, let's replace Aramis with a player who has been unable to stay off the DL for the past, oh, 4 seasons or so. Even this past year, in a good year for Nomar, he still made 2 separate trips to the DL. And, as much as you want to, Nomar is going to need a lot of days off. So you'd need a good backup as well. So we might as well just give Freddy Bynum the job. Wait, I said good backup. Nevermind.
Option number 2, trade for Mike Lowell. Lowell hit .284 in 153 games with 20 HR and 80 RBI's. Not bad, but still, you're trading for him. What are you going to have to give up? A Matt Murton? Not worth it. Oh, also, WE HAVE A BETTER PLAYER THAN THAT ON OUR ROSTER WHO WE CAN KEEP FOR NOTHING BUT A SMALL RAISE.
Today on chicagosports.com they have an article that says that the Sox and Cubs are both interested in Gary Matthews Jr. and Chone Figgins. It also says that the Angels are also interested in Matthews and Aramis Ramirez. And my guess is they're willing to throw money at both of them. But, lucky for the Cubs, if they manage to pull one or the other, we could trade for Figgins. Woo, nothing like losing a player to free agency when you could have traded him for prospects, only to have to trade for a replacement.
It probably sounds like I'm repeating myself a lot with all of this talk about Aramis Ramirez. That's because I probably am. It's simple. We trade nothing, we sign him, we win. If we don't re-sign him, then we're up shit creek. Again.
posted by Jtrouble at 7:31 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home