Author Topic: Cubs in '11  (Read 57323 times)

ben

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1380 on: June 09, 2011, 11:53:08 pm »
Jes, Hendry's record is Hendry's record.

I doubt mgmt ever told him to lose, whether in regular season (we've not won enough) or in playoffs (Hendry teams have NEVER won).   Whether mgmt told him to go on a spending spree or Hendry talked them into it is irrelevant.

If he couldn't persuade those he's reported to to do things better, oh well.   His record is HIS record....he's had a VERY LONG TIME to get things done...and he hasn't been real successful, in my opinion...certainly not in recent years, particularly given the tremendous budget he's had and largely squandered.

Hendry seems like a great guy, who is easy to root for, but he's gotta go...he should have been gone LONG ago!

I do agree that the transcript of Papa Ricketts is disturbing for those of us who continue to suffer through each lousy season.   

Jes Beard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1381 on: June 10, 2011, 06:37:39 am »
ben, I don't recall writing that Hendry's record was not Hendry's record, though in 2003 his team did win, just not enough.  As to the relevance of management telling him to go on a spending spree, doesn't the relevance depend on the question?  I did not suggest that Hendry SHOULD be kept, just that I would not be at all surprised if he IS kept.

As to the transcript of Joe Ricketts' comments.... what happened to it?

Jes Beard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1382 on: June 10, 2011, 06:47:38 am »
Strange.  The transcript was posted as post 1374... which is now a Cactus post of a Carrie Muscat comment, and the transcript I prepared of Joe Ricketts' comments is gone.  I am cutting and pasting it below:
*****************************

Quote
Quote from: Cletus on Today at 01:40:41 pm
Tom Ricketts founded and is the CEO if Incapital which is a fairly significant investment bank which has underwritten and distributed hundreds of billions of dollars of corporate bonds in the past 10 years.  I don't know what his  siblings have done but Tom Ricketts certainly has done plenty on his own.



From the video:
Five years ago my son Tom called he and he said, Dad, uh, the Tribune has just changed hands, they own the Cubs, and they're going to be selling the Cubs, so we ought to get ready to buy 'em.  And I said why would I want to buy a baseball team, or any sports team.  I'm not a fan.  I'm not a spectator.  I've got ADD -- I can't watch a whole game of anything for very long.  And he said, 'I'll tell you Dad, the sell every ticket, every game, win or lose," and I said, "Now you're talking about a business.  Now you got my interest." 

So, with Tom as our leader, we went down the road to buy the Cubs, and it was a long hard road, and if you did not looove the Cubs the way my son does, you would not have stayed the course.  It was a huge amount of work.  Of course as you know what happened to the economy, and what happened with all of them going bankrupt, all of that happened in those negotiations.  It was really, really a difficult time. 

And over the next few months he got down to the price where he wanted, but then my son Pete and I said, "Huh, we're done.  Tom, listen, we're not behind you any more.'  This was on a Friday afternoon.  'We're not behind you any more.  You either draw a line in the sand, and they come over and settle, and take this thing, or you have to give up, 'cause we're not going to do it.'   

Well, that forced Tom into saying, 'That's it.  We're done."  And so on Monday they said, "Okay, we'll accept your offer," and we moved on to closing, uh, which was again very difficult, because a lot of things came up that were not foreseen.  That was the most complicated transaction I've ever seen....  But we finally got it done. 

Tom's got his dream job -- he started his own business and he loves that business.  It's a bond business, unique it its market segment.... And so he loves it, and it's just starting to do well now.  He's been at it, oh, maybe ten or 15 years, but I said, 'Tom, listen, if you take my money, and you... buy this baseball team, you have to come over and run it, because I don't want to be exposed to risk.  I know what it's like to run a large business, which a baseball team is -- you have to eat, drink, think, sleep 24 hours a day your business.  You've got to come here and take care of that.  I don't want you distracted by your first love.' 

And he was reluctant, but he said he would do it.  So he's made arrangements for his second in command to take over as CEO, and he got some other people to come in and buy out some equity so he's going to have some money, to, ugh, so he's financially independent, and he's spending his full time with the Cubs....  He does tell me that, 'We've got the ingredients, Dad.  We've got the management and we've got the players, so we've got the ingredients to win a World Series, if we just concentrate on getting to the World Series every year, we'll win a World Series before too long.'


Now, what I take from that is that Hendry did exactly as the Trib wanted when he spent heavily after the 2006 season in order to make the team LOOK as if it was strong and to help dupe some idiot into paying more than the franchise was actually worth.  I also take from it that Tom Rickets, because he was so foolish as to sincerely believe that the Cubs had "the management and... the players... to win a World Series," was in over his head, and that he is running the show because his family insists that he run the show, despite the fact that he really doesn't know the show.  Pops is more concerned with having a family member in place to assure that no one is stealing any of the beans and presumably to assure that they are counted accurately than he is in having someone running the show who has a clue what he is doing.

I actually am more frightened by the video after transcribing it and allowing all of it to sink in than I was initially, because from the concerns his father voiced, I doubt that the family would accept having anyone other than a family member running the show, and because Tom Rickets seems like someone who may actually believe that trying to "be competitive" is all that is needed to fill the seats (since those foolish fans buy up all the tickets win or lose) and to believe that the only problem for this season is those unlucky injuries.... he might not even direct Hendry to make any serious effort to sell at the trading deadline, since it was just those injuries that are a problem this year.

Cactus

  • Guest
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1383 on: June 10, 2011, 09:55:15 am »
 Wrigley is a dumpthat could be a bigger problem than expected for new Chicago Cubs owner Tom Ricketts, according to MLB Network analyst Peter Gammons.

 
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-gammons-wrigley-dump-tying-ricketts-hands-20110610,0,701998.story

buff

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1384 on: June 10, 2011, 11:02:27 am »
It's been a dump for a long time.  Bulldoze the place and start over.  Play in soldier field for a year or 2.


craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13098
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1385 on: June 10, 2011, 04:05:14 pm »
Quote
Now, what I take from that is that Hendry did exactly as the Trib wanted when he spent heavily after the 2006 season in order to make the team LOOK as if it was strong and to help dupe some idiot into paying more than the franchise was actually worth. 


This may well be true. 


I imagine that rolling up scads of bad long-term contracts that would be a millstone around the franchise during the new owner's term might not have been that great for sale, though.  There have been other franchises sold where it was usually assumed that the selling group would try to cut payroll to make it easier on the new owner and thus make the team more attractive. 


I suppose it also may be that Hendry was given money and encouraged to spent it to help the team, but that they didn't explicitly tell him to use it on bad contract and bad players?  He might have came up with that notion on his own? 

brjones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25868
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1386 on: June 10, 2011, 04:37:09 pm »
Fangraphs interview with Darwin Barney:

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/qa-darwin-barney/

Jes Beard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1387 on: June 10, 2011, 08:41:11 pm »
I imagine that rolling up scads of bad long-term contracts that would be a millstone around the franchise during the new owner's term might not have been that great for sale, though....

I suppose it also may be that Hendry was given money and encouraged to spent it to help the team, but that they didn't explicitly tell him to use it on bad contract and bad players?  He might have came up with that notion on his own? 

Watch the video of Joe Ricketts which I posted, or just read the transcript of it, which I also posted.  It is clear that Tom Ricketts was not bothered by those contracts, and in fact thought they were for "the right players."  The 2007 and 2008 seasons were window dressing.  And, yes, someone who followed the game a bit more closely than the Ricketts clan would have known that.... but the Ricketts clan did not.

As to the "bad players" part of your comment, they were not bad at the time.  The contracts were bad, but any time a team makes a major effort to produce a major improvement via the FA market, the later years are going to be painful.  As I recall, very few here complained about the approach or the contracts at the time, because so many wanted to win quickly.  We are suffering the consequences of that.

I understand that virtually anyone can pick any dozen moves Hendry made, or did not make, and assign blame and attribute the move to stupidity and blame him for the current mess, and there is no question that the mess is of his making, but the primary problem is far less how good or bad any individual moves might have been, but instead the natural consequences of the 2006-2007 spending spree as the team was going to get good fast.

I thought it was misguided then, because it seemed to me that the consequences we are now living with were quite likely, but my goal was to see the Cubs field a strong team for several years running, and and not to gussy up a pig to bring a better price at auction.

Cactus

  • Guest
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1388 on: June 11, 2011, 12:58:54 pm »
Casey Coleman is back.

Brad Snyder has been designated for assignment.

JeffH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6158
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1389 on: June 11, 2011, 01:05:15 pm »
I wonder if they're going to continue to start Coleman or if they're going to try him in a bullpen role.

Cactus

  • Guest
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1390 on: June 11, 2011, 01:07:36 pm »
Brad Snyder has been designated for assignment.
Who are they making room for on the 40-man roster?

JeffH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6158
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1391 on: June 11, 2011, 01:22:07 pm »
Who are they making room for on the 40-man roster?

No one.  Snyder is out of options.  If he isn't on the 25-man roster, he can't be on the 40-man roster.

StrikeZone

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4025
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1392 on: June 11, 2011, 01:50:47 pm »
A move like that makes one wonder if Matt Garza will make his next start.

StrikeZone

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4025
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1393 on: June 11, 2011, 02:03:01 pm »
OR maybe I should check to see who's starting today's game before I post a comment.

Dumbass.

CurtOne

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27253
Re: Cubs in '11
« Reply #1394 on: June 11, 2011, 02:23:11 pm »
OR maybe I should check to see who's starting today's game before I post a comment.

Dumbass.

Easy post to agree with.