Hendry's Failures...

[Coldneck]

<!--quoteo(post=101389:date=Jun 14 2010, 11:53 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Jun 14 2010, 11:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=101381:date=Jun 14 2010, 10:02 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Jun 14 2010, 10:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Maybe I misunderstand the question, but I could list like 10 poor free agent signings/re-signings without giving it a ton of thought.

Let's keep the game going. Jason Marquis.

Now you.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


This is a great example. I'll bet a lot of guys agree with you on this. And I don't know how else to put it, but you are wrong.

Marquis was signed for a total of 21 million dollars for 3 years. We bitched and moaned and pissed and screamed (I'm sure I was one of those screaming as well). Marquis proceeded to "earn" over 32 million during those 3 years. In every single year of that deal he earned more money than he was paid. Even if you don't agree with Fangraphs valuation, it's almost impossible to argue that this was a bad signing. This is a pro-hendry argument, not an anti one.

I will admit that I missed Aaron Miles though. For some reason the spreadsheet I found on Hendry didn't include that one.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Hey BeeT, what about Henry Blanco, Scott Eyre and Bob Howry? How do they fare in the Fan Graphs data? I'd imagine Scott and Bob "earned" their money early in the contract and failed to earn in later in the contract.

Furthermore, I don't think we can omit Zambrano, Soriano, and MB from this discussion because I'm sure they fare the worst in the Fan Graphs data. They most definitely have "earned" way less than their salary.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=101427:date=Jun 15 2010, 08:57 AM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Jun 15 2010, 08:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=101389:date=Jun 14 2010, 11:53 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jun 14 2010, 11:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=101381:date=Jun 14 2010, 10:02 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Jun 14 2010, 10:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Maybe I misunderstand the question, but I could list like 10 poor free agent signings/re-signings without giving it a ton of thought.

Let's keep the game going. Jason Marquis.

Now you.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


This is a great example. I'll bet a lot of guys agree with you on this. And I don't know how else to put it, but you are wrong.

Marquis was signed for a total of 21 million dollars for 3 years. We bitched and moaned and pissed and screamed (I'm sure I was one of those screaming as well). Marquis proceeded to "earn" over 32 million during those 3 years. In every single year of that deal he earned more money than he was paid. Even if you don't agree with Fangraphs valuation, it's almost impossible to argue that this was a bad signing. This is a pro-hendry argument, not an anti one.

I will admit that I missed Aaron Miles though. For some reason the spreadsheet I found on Hendry didn't include that one.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Hey BeeT, what about Henry Blanco, Scott Eyre and Bob Howry? How do they fare in the Fan Graphs data? I'd imagine Scott and Bob "earned" their money early in the contract and failed to earn in later in the contract.

Furthermore, I don't think we can omit Zambrano, Soriano, and MB from this discussion because I'm sure they fare the worst in the Fan Graphs data. They most definitely have "earned" way less than their salary.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


with the exception of Eyre, fangraphs disagrees with you, and even Eyre doesn't really prove your point.

The problem is (most) everyone simply looks at the batting component for value. Blanco was BETTER than a replacement player, and in 3 of the 4 years of his contract, met or greatly exceeded his contract. His contract is a "win" for Hendry, unless you think his miserable 2007 somehow ruins his 2006 or 2005 (since he actually had negative value that year).

Howry, same thing. He was very good his first 2 years with the Cubs, easily outearning what he was paid. His last season he was terrible and overpaid.

However, if you look at both his and Eyre's 2005, neither would be considered a replacement level player. Both of them had very good 2005's, earning over 5 million in value. Putting aside the logic of paying guys a lot of money for middle relief (which I am actually not a very big fan of), the fact is, when Hendry was deciding to sign these guys, they had their 2005 performances as their leverage. So their market value was set by 2005. You could certainly make an argument that you shouldn't ever sign a MR coming off a career year, and I'd pretty much agree, but the fact is Hendry had to pay these guys what he paid, or someone else would. It basically worked with Howry, and it didn't with Eyre.

Bringing up Zambrano and Soriano is pointless for at least 2 reasons. They could not, in any shape or form, be considered "replacement players". Also, as most fans do, you are concentrating on the "failures", and are taking the clear wins like Lilly and Dempster (and even Marquis) into account.

Even worse? For the most part, Zambrano is about even with the earned/pay scale, and outside of 2009 Soriano has actually been a bargain. He destroyed that scale in 2007-2008. He was terrible last year, but if he continues to play the same this year, he will earn his salary again.

[Coldneck]

I've come to realize I'm not a fan of Fan Graphs.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=101434:date=Jun 15 2010, 09:29 AM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Jun 15 2010, 09:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I've come to realize I'm not a fan of Fan Graphs.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You can argue with their $$ valuations I suppose, but you can't argue with WAR, and WAR says these guys are better than replacement players.

[Butcher]

I still don't get the value of Fangraphs. For one thing, it doesn't take into account what the market was willing to pay for a player. While Fangraphs may claim that Marquis "earned" his salary, I have a hard time believing that any other GMs in baseball were lined up to give Marquis anything close to a 3-year, $21M contract after his 14-16, 6.02 ERA season.

[rok]

I didn't have a problem with the Eyre or Howry signings. I didn't like the Lilly signing at the time. I was uneasy about the Soriano contract, but was excited still. I thought the Z contract was fair, and still am not ready to write him off. I thought the Marquis contract was an abomination and an affront to civilization as we know it. I didn't mind the Blanco contract, but would have preferred a 1 year deal. The Neifi and Miles contracts, on the other hand, would be enough to get most GMs laughed out of town, all else being equal.

Shows how much I know.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=101437:date=Jun 15 2010, 09:36 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 15 2010, 09:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I still don't get the value of Fangraphs. For one thing, it doesn't take into account what the market was willing to pay for a player. While Fangraphs may claim that Marquis "earned" his salary, I have a hard time believing that any other GMs in baseball were lined up to give Marquis anything close to a 3-year, $21M contract after his 14-16, 6.02 ERA season.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

So you are saying that even though it worked out, and he ended up being a bargain at 7 million a year, Hendry was still wrong to do it?

Further more, you might not believe there were other GM's ready to hand out cash, but:

Adam Eaton went 7-4 with a 5.12 ERA. He got 3 years and over 24 million.
Vincente Padilla, 15 wins, 4.5 ERA. He got 3 years, 34 million.
Mark Mulder 7-6, 7.14 ERA. 2 years, 13 million
Jeff Suppan 12 wins, 4.12 ERA. 4 years, 48 million.
Gil Meche 11 wins, 4.48 ERA. 5 years, 55 million

Does Marquis's contract seem so out of place in that environment?

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=101441:date=Jun 15 2010, 09:49 AM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Jun 15 2010, 09:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=101437:date=Jun 15 2010, 09:36 AM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 15 2010, 09:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I still don't get the value of Fangraphs. For one thing, it doesn't take into account what the market was willing to pay for a player. While Fangraphs may claim that Marquis "earned" his salary, I have a hard time believing that any other GMs in baseball were lined up to give Marquis anything close to a 3-year, $21M contract after his 14-16, 6.02 ERA season.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

So you are saying that even though it worked out, and he ended up being a bargain at 7 million a year, Hendry was still wrong to do it?

Further more, you might not believe there were other GM's ready to hand out cash, but:

Adam Eaton went 7-4 with a 5.12 ERA. He got 3 years and over 24 million.
Vincente Padilla, 15 wins, 4.5 ERA. He got 3 years, 34 million.
Mark Mulder 7-6, 7.14 ERA. 2 years, 13 million
Jeff Suppan 12 wins, 4.12 ERA. 4 years, 48 million.
Gil Meche 11 wins, 4.48 ERA. 5 years, 55 million

Does Marquis's contract seem so out of place in that environment?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
First of all, I don't believe that he was a bargain at $7M a year. 12-9, 4.60 ERA is a lot better than 14-16, 6.02 ERA, but I would hardly call $7M for that kind of production a "bargain" (even if your precious Fangraphs says so).

Those other contracts were idiotic, too. Does presenting other idiotic contracts make Marquis' contract less idiotic by comparison?

[ColoradoCub]

I don't think that Hendry is a bad evaluator of talent, and as a GM, that's a great trait to have. He's had his share of hits and misses, but generally, I think he's come out ahead. Unfortunately, a GM's duties don't stop at talent evaluation, if they did, I don't think anyone would be complaining about the job he's done. I question his contract negotiating skills more than anything. A GM should always be looking at the bigger picture before handing out contracts with no-trade clauses for exorbitant amounts of money that extend well into and beyond player's mid-30's. Of course, if the Tribune and/or Zell were calling the shots when some of those contracts were handed out, then he shouldn't take the blame. Should he be fired? Maybe, maybe not. Should he take a course or two on contract negotiations? Definitely.

[jstraw]

<!--quoteo(post=101450:date=Jun 15 2010, 10:21 AM:name=ColoradoCub)-->QUOTE (ColoradoCub @ Jun 15 2010, 10:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I don't think that Hendry is a bad evaluator of talent, and as a GM, that's a great trait to have. He's had his share of hits and misses, but generally, I think he's come out ahead. Unfortunately, a GM's duties don't stop at talent evaluation, if they did, I don't think anyone would be complaining about the job he's done. I question his contract negotiating skills more than anything. A GM should always be looking at the bigger picture before handing out contracts with no-trade clauses for exorbitant amounts of money that extend well into and beyond player's mid-30's. Of course, if the Tribune and/or Zell were calling the shots when some of those contracts were handed out, then he shouldn't take the blame. Should he be fired? Maybe, maybe not. Should he take a course or two on contract negotiations? Definitely.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't think he has the balls to play chicken with an agent. When he wants a player, he wants him...and considers a signed contract a win. If you're not ALWAYS willing to walk away, you've lost every negotiation before it's begun.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=101447:date=Jun 15 2010, 09:59 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 15 2010, 09:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=101441:date=Jun 15 2010, 09:49 AM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Jun 15 2010, 09:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=101437:date=Jun 15 2010, 09:36 AM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 15 2010, 09:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I still don't get the value of Fangraphs. For one thing, it doesn't take into account what the market was willing to pay for a player. While Fangraphs may claim that Marquis "earned" his salary, I have a hard time believing that any other GMs in baseball were lined up to give Marquis anything close to a 3-year, $21M contract after his 14-16, 6.02 ERA season.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

So you are saying that even though it worked out, and he ended up being a bargain at 7 million a year, Hendry was still wrong to do it?

Further more, you might not believe there were other GM's ready to hand out cash, but:

Adam Eaton went 7-4 with a 5.12 ERA. He got 3 years and over 24 million.
Vincente Padilla, 15 wins, 4.5 ERA. He got 3 years, 34 million.
Mark Mulder 7-6, 7.14 ERA. 2 years, 13 million
Jeff Suppan 12 wins, 4.12 ERA. 4 years, 48 million.
Gil Meche 11 wins, 4.48 ERA. 5 years, 55 million

Does Marquis's contract seem so out of place in that environment?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
First of all, I don't believe that he was a bargain at $7M a year. 12-9, 4.60 ERA is a lot better than 14-16, 6.02 ERA, but I would hardly call $7M for that kind of production a "bargain" (even if your precious Fangraphs says so).

Those other contracts were idiotic, too. Does presenting other idiotic contracts make Marquis' contract less idiotic by comparison?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

You know Butch, I really hate it when I answer your question, with facts, and you not only act like a penis, but you change the argument.

Your contention was that Hendry's contract offer to Marquis was bad because it was more than the market would support. I give you multiple examples showing that it was, in fact, pretty much par for that market. So I've used actual facts and figures, some from my precious fangraphs, to actually counter your argument. Your response is to mock my source, then conclude that everyone signed dumb contracts. Which in no way responds to your original point.

So mock Fangraphs all you want. For me, I will trust the guys who basically do statistical analysis for a living, and take their conclusion that Marquis was worth more than he was paid, over the Butch-o-meter, which simply says "he sucks".

[rok]

<!--quoteo(post=101451:date=Jun 15 2010, 10:24 AM:name=jstraw)-->QUOTE (jstraw @ Jun 15 2010, 10:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=101450:date=Jun 15 2010, 10:21 AM:name=ColoradoCub)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ColoradoCub @ Jun 15 2010, 10:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I don't think that Hendry is a bad evaluator of talent, and as a GM, that's a great trait to have. He's had his share of hits and misses, but generally, I think he's come out ahead. Unfortunately, a GM's duties don't stop at talent evaluation, if they did, I don't think anyone would be complaining about the job he's done. I question his contract negotiating skills more than anything. A GM should always be looking at the bigger picture before handing out contracts with no-trade clauses for exorbitant amounts of money that extend well into and beyond player's mid-30's. Of course, if the Tribune and/or Zell were calling the shots when some of those contracts were handed out, then he shouldn't take the blame. Should he be fired? Maybe, maybe not. Should he take a course or two on contract negotiations? Definitely.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't think he has the balls to play chicken with an agent. When he wants a player, he wants him...and considers a signed contract a win. If you're not ALWAYS willing to walk away, you've lost every negotiation before it's begun.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Except if your last name is Furcal.

[Scarey]

<!--quoteo(post=101447:date=Jun 15 2010, 09:59 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Jun 15 2010, 09:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Those other contracts were idiotic, too. Does presenting other idiotic contracts make Marquis' contract less idiotic by comparison?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Holy crap this is painful.

It's obvious BT was arguing the point that so many make so often.: Nobody else would have paid ______ that amount of money. He just showed examples that they would have in Marquis' case based on other contracts given to mediocre pitchers. It had nothing to do with showing it was or was not idiotic. It's like you're making up his argument for him.

[Scarey]

Queue the BT/Scarey on the Cubs payroll comment.

[Coldneck]

BT, how much does FanGraphs say you and Scarey should make for your performance on the Cubs behalf?