Rumor - Murton for Soriano?

[Lefty]

I've posted this a million times. We could get Vidro for nothing if we pay his salary. Considering our payroll is about $8 million below target it seems to fit. Look at Vidro's road stats last year.

[USSoccer]

I've posted this a million times. We could get Vidro for nothing if we pay his salary. Considering our payroll is about $8 million below target it seems to fit. Look at Vidro's road stats last year.

 

If his injury history continues, he'd be a giant waste of that $8m, especially since he'd be coming into a logjam.

[Lefty]

I've posted this a million times. We could get Vidro for nothing if we pay his salary. Considering our payroll is about $8 million below target it seems to fit. Look at Vidro's road stats last year.

 

If his injury history continues, he'd be a giant waste of that $8m, especially since he'd be coming into a logjam.

 

If

[USSoccer]

I've posted this a million times. We could get Vidro for nothing if we pay his salary. Considering our payroll is about $8 million below target it seems to fit. Look at Vidro's road stats last year.

 

If his injury history continues, he'd be a giant waste of that $8m, especially since he'd be coming into a logjam.

 

If

 

Given recent history it's a pretty weighty if.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

I don't know what Hairston's medical condition is after that HBP, but Walker isn't going anywhere for the immediate future.

[CubsWin]

I've posted this a million times. We could get Vidro for nothing if we pay his salary. Considering our payroll is about $8 million below target it seems to fit. Look at Vidro's road stats last year.

 

If his injury history continues, he'd be a giant waste of that $8m, especially since he'd be coming into a logjam.

This argument against acquiring a better 2B because the Cubs already have three of them doesn't hold up. Logjam? If Vidro is healthy, he's clearly the best 2B on the team. If he is healthy, he is starting. What logjam? Do you mean depth? What better time to acquire a player with Vidro's injury history than when you have great depth at that position to cover for him if he got injured again.

 

Who would you rather have backing up the OF, Grissom or Hairston? I know, I know, neither, right? But given the choice, I would much rather have Hairston due to his ability to get on base, his relative youth and defensive range. If Hendry did trade for Vidro and kept Walker, Hairston would likely move Grissom out of the picture and Walker would be the best left-handed power bat the Cubs have had coming off the bench in years. Who would you rather have to step in for Lee in case of injury, Mabry or Walker? Vidro would also provide a great hitter in the two hole.

 

Pierre

Vidro

Lee

Ramirez

Jones

Murton

Barrett

Cedeno

 

is better offensively and defensively than with Walker playing 2B and hitting in the two hole. The bench also improves...

 

Blanco - C

Walker - 2B, 1B

Perez - SS, 2B

Mabry - 3B, 1B, OF

Hairston - OF, 2B

 

with a possible 6th spot if Baker goes with a 6-man pen (Grissom, Sing, Restovich?). That bench would give any manager a lot of options to play the optimal match-up against the pitcher and would provide some decent insurance against injury.

 

And as far as the money is concerned, let them spend it. They're roughly 10 million under budget give or take. Money is rarely much of a concern at the trade deadline because there are only two months of salary left to pay. And in case Hendry trades for a really good but expensive position player, the Cubs have some big salaries coming off the books next season (Maddux, Wood, etc.) which will allow them to keep such a player without needing to be under budget at the deadline.

 

So how is trading for Vidro a bad idea?

[Bull]

 

So how is trading for Vidro a bad idea?

 

How is trading for Nomar a bad idea?

[USSoccer]

I've posted this a million times. We could get Vidro for nothing if we pay his salary. Considering our payroll is about $8 million below target it seems to fit. Look at Vidro's road stats last year.

 

If his injury history continues, he'd be a giant waste of that $8m, especially since he'd be coming into a logjam.

This argument against acquiring a better 2B because the Cubs already have three of them doesn't hold up. Logjam? If Vidro is healthy, he's clearly the best 2B on the team. If he is healthy, he is starting. What logjam? Do you mean depth? What better time to acquire a player with Vidro's injury history than when you have great depth at that position to cover for him if he got injured again.

 

Who would you rather have backing up the OF, Grissom or Hairston? I know, I know, neither, right? But given the choice, I would much rather have Hairston due to his ability to get on base, his relative youth and defensive range. If Hendry did trade for Vidro and kept Walker, Hairston would likely move Grissom out of the picture and Walker would be the best left-handed power bat the Cubs have had coming off the bench in years. Who would you rather have to step in for Lee in case of injury, Mabry or Walker? Vidro would also provide a great hitter in the two hole.

 

Pierre

Vidro

Lee

Ramirez

Jones

Murton

Barrett

Cedeno

 

is better offensively and defensively than with Walker playing 2B and hitting in the two hole. The bench also improves...

 

Blanco - C

Walker - 2B, 1B

Perez - SS, 2B

Mabry - 3B, 1B, OF

Hairston - OF, 2B

 

with a possible 6th spot if Baker goes with a 6-man pen (Grissom, Sing, Restovich?). That bench would give any manager a lot of options to play the optimal match-up against the pitcher and would provide some decent insurance against injury.

 

And as far as the money is concerned, let them spend it. They're roughly 10 million under budget give or take. Money is rarely much of a concern at the trade deadline because there are only two months of salary left to pay. And in case Hendry trades for a really good but expensive position player, the Cubs have some big salaries coming off the books next season (Maddux, Wood, etc.) which will allow them to keep such a player without needing to be under budget at the deadline.

 

So how is trading for Vidro a bad idea?

 

Because the past 2 seasons he's played in 110 and 87 games, respectively, and is coming off of a series of knee injuries, and makes $8m.

 

If the Cubs can get him for the equivalent of Walker's salary, and for a small prospect cost, fine-then it's an appropriate risk/reward level. But if we're taking on all $8m, I'd just as soon save that money in case an impact player becomes available. As good of a player as Vidro was/might still be, he's not the impact player this offense needs.

[Lefty]

 

So how is trading for Vidro a bad idea?

 

How is trading for Nomar a bad idea?

 

It didn't work out as planned, but I don't think it set us back much. We got Murton, and Neifi played for KGon.

[Bull]

 

So how is trading for Vidro a bad idea?

 

How is trading for Nomar a bad idea?

 

It didn't work out as planned, but I don't think it set us back much. We got Murton, and Neifi played for KGon.

 

Yeah but the money is the issue.

Rather use that money for help at midseason and stick with Walker for now. Or let Washington get so desperate that money is no longer an issue. That I souldn't have a problem with. Just as wouldn't have had a problem with Nomar at 5+incentives.

 

But paying someone big bucks to not play is never fun.

[Bull]

Yeah but the money is the issue.

Rather use that money for help at midseason and stick with Walker for now. Or let Washington get so desperate that money is no longer an issue. That I wouldn't have a problem with. Just as wouldn't have had a problem with Nomar at 5+incentives.

 

But paying someone big bucks to not play baseball is never fun.

 

 

Because the past 2 seasons he's played in 110 and 87 games, respectively, and is coming off of a series of knee injuries, and makes $8m.

 

If the Cubs can get him for the equivalent of Walker's salary, and for a small prospect cost, fine-then it's an appropriate risk/reward level. But if we're taking on all $8m, I'd just as soon save that money in case an impact player becomes available. As good of a player as Vidro was/might still be, he's not the impact player this offense needs.

 

Yeah, what he said.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Gammons mentions the Soriano mess in his latest blog.

 

Alfonso Soriano insists he will not recant and move to the outfield. "I'm playing second," he says. But the Nationals believe that in the end, Soriano will accept the move and play left, with Brandon Watson in center and Ryan Church in right until Jose Guillen is ready. Dominican teammates say Soriano is embarrassed by the position he has been put in, but the majority of people in baseball believe that if he can play the outfield it will only increase his value when he hits the free-agent market at the end of the season.

[BigbadB]

Gammons mentions the Soriano mess in his latest blog.

 

Alfonso Soriano insists he will not recant and move to the outfield. "I'm playing second," he says. But the Nationals believe that in the end, Soriano will accept the move and play left, with Brandon Watson in center and Ryan Church in right until Jose Guillen is ready. Dominican teammates say Soriano is embarrassed by the position he has been put in, but the majority of people in baseball believe that if he can play the outfield it will only increase his value when he hits the free-agent market at the end of the season.

 

Soriano is embarrassed to be a starting outfielder in the major leagues while making 10m a year?

 

Feel free to quit and move back to the DR if you're so embarrassed.

 

I really dislike people who think they are bigger than the game themselves.

[goonys evil twin]

Gammons mentions the Soriano mess in his latest blog.

 

Alfonso Soriano insists he will not recant and move to the outfield. "I'm playing second," he says. But the Nationals believe that in the end, Soriano will accept the move and play left, with Brandon Watson in center and Ryan Church in right until Jose Guillen is ready. Dominican teammates say Soriano is embarrassed by the position he has been put in, but the majority of people in baseball believe that if he can play the outfield it will only increase his value when he hits the free-agent market at the end of the season.

 

Can somebody explain to me how playing LF would make him more valuable? He's a good hitting 2B, but as an OF, he's hardly special. It's not that hard to find a decent OF bat, it is hard to find a good 2B bat. If he was a utility man, I could see the flexibility as something that could add to his value. But his next team is not going to be paying him to be a utility man. They are going to pay him because of what he did as an everyday middle infield. If he gets 10-12m per in a multi-year deal, he'd be highly overpaid as a OF.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Gammons mentions the Soriano mess in his latest blog.

 

Alfonso Soriano insists he will not recant and move to the outfield. "I'm playing second," he says. But the Nationals believe that in the end, Soriano will accept the move and play left, with Brandon Watson in center and Ryan Church in right until Jose Guillen is ready. Dominican teammates say Soriano is embarrassed by the position he has been put in, but the majority of people in baseball believe that if he can play the outfield it will only increase his value when he hits the free-agent market at the end of the season.

 

Can somebody explain to me how playing LF would make him more valuable? He's a good hitting 2B, but as an OF, he's hardly special. It's not that hard to find a decent OF bat, it is hard to find a good 2B bat. If he was a utility man, I could see the flexibility as something that could add to his value. But his next team is not going to be paying him to be a utility man. They are going to pay him because of what he did as an everyday middle infield. If he gets 10-12m per in a multi-year deal, he'd be highly overpaid as a OF.

 

I was going to ask the same thing. Vance and I were discussing that a while back. I just don't see it.

 

I kind of think Soriano is justified in his demands. i don't remember him approving the trade in the first place and then the new team (which he has no loyalty to whatsoever at this point) asks him to give up a couple million dollars in FA by changing position? He hasn't handled it very well, but he could have a legitimate gripe.

[CubsWin]

 

So how is trading for Vidro a bad idea?

 

How is trading for Nomar a bad idea?

It wasn't. It was a great gamble to take.

 

I take it you disagree?

[CubsWin]

I've posted this a million times. We could get Vidro for nothing if we pay his salary. Considering our payroll is about $8 million below target it seems to fit. Look at Vidro's road stats last year.

 

If his injury history continues, he'd be a giant waste of that $8m, especially since he'd be coming into a logjam.

This argument against acquiring a better 2B because the Cubs already have three of them doesn't hold up. Logjam? If Vidro is healthy, he's clearly the best 2B on the team. If he is healthy, he is starting. What logjam? Do you mean depth? What better time to acquire a player with Vidro's injury history than when you have great depth at that position to cover for him if he got injured again.

 

Who would you rather have backing up the OF, Grissom or Hairston? I know, I know, neither, right? But given the choice, I would much rather have Hairston due to his ability to get on base, his relative youth and defensive range. If Hendry did trade for Vidro and kept Walker, Hairston would likely move Grissom out of the picture and Walker would be the best left-handed power bat the Cubs have had coming off the bench in years. Who would you rather have to step in for Lee in case of injury, Mabry or Walker? Vidro would also provide a great hitter in the two hole.

 

Pierre

Vidro

Lee

Ramirez

Jones

Murton

Barrett

Cedeno

 

is better offensively and defensively than with Walker playing 2B and hitting in the two hole. The bench also improves...

 

Blanco - C

Walker - 2B, 1B

Perez - SS, 2B

Mabry - 3B, 1B, OF

Hairston - OF, 2B

 

with a possible 6th spot if Baker goes with a 6-man pen (Grissom, Sing, Restovich?). That bench would give any manager a lot of options to play the optimal match-up against the pitcher and would provide some decent insurance against injury.

 

And as far as the money is concerned, let them spend it. They're roughly 10 million under budget give or take. Money is rarely much of a concern at the trade deadline because there are only two months of salary left to pay. And in case Hendry trades for a really good but expensive position player, the Cubs have some big salaries coming off the books next season (Maddux, Wood, etc.) which will allow them to keep such a player without needing to be under budget at the deadline.

 

So how is trading for Vidro a bad idea?

 

Because the past 2 seasons he's played in 110 and 87 games, respectively, and is coming off of a series of knee injuries, and makes $8m.

 

If the Cubs can get him for the equivalent of Walker's salary, and for a small prospect cost, fine-then it's an appropriate risk/reward level. But if we're taking on all $8m, I'd just as soon save that money in case an impact player becomes available. As good of a player as Vidro was/might still be, he's not the impact player this offense needs.

You either disagreed with and ignored or simply ignored the bolded section in my previous post. In any case, the issues raised in it were not addressed in your response. But at least you dropped the "logjam" portion of your argument.

 

No one really knows except for people close to Hendry what the Cubs payroll budget really is. Here is what we do know. They set a record for ticket sales last month. They have approx. 1800 more seats to sell each game this year with some of them being premium priced seats in the RF bleachers. They have sold naming rights to the bleachers which will bring in more revenue. Last season's was around 95 million IIRC, so it would make sense for this season to be more with all the added revenue streams. Given the rate of growth over the last several years, it would be logical to put the Cubs payroll limit at around 100 million not including the new revenue streams. Right now, I have the current players costing the Tribune around 93 million. If the new revenue raises the budget limit to 105, then acquiring Vidro at full salary won't matter much. If Hendry is able to acquire a top-notch RFer at the deadline, he will only have to pay his salary for the last two months of the year. And if that player has a contract extending beyond '06, the 20 million gained from the loss of Maddux and Wood will easily allow for it.

 

It is important to remember that Vidro is an improvement offensively and devensively over Walker and Hairston. I agree that Vidro is an injury risk and that there is a good chance he will miss playing time again this season. How much playing time is yet to be seen. Just because he missed 70 games last season, doesn't mean that he is guaranteed to do so again this year. But if he did, the Cubs would have plenty of depth to cover for him at the 2B position and may well have plenty of money left over to acquire an expensive contract at the deadline.

 

Should Hendry do his best to acquire him at less than his full salary? Of course. I'm not advocating trading for him at full price, just that if it came to that, I think Hendry should still get him so long as the personnel he is trading away is downgraded to match the taking on of Vidro's full salary.

 

So, once again, I ask how is trading for Vidro a bad idea?

[katway]

Gammons mentions the Soriano mess in his latest blog.

 

Alfonso Soriano insists he will not recant and move to the outfield. "I'm playing second," he says. But the Nationals believe that in the end, Soriano will accept the move and play left, with Brandon Watson in center and Ryan Church in right until Jose Guillen is ready. Dominican teammates say Soriano is embarrassed by the position he has been put in, but the majority of people in baseball believe that if he can play the outfield it will only increase his value when he hits the free-agent market at the end of the season.

 

Can somebody explain to me how playing LF would make him more valuable? He's a good hitting 2B, but as an OF, he's hardly special. It's not that hard to find a decent OF bat, it is hard to find a good 2B bat. If he was a utility man, I could see the flexibility as something that could add to his value. But his next team is not going to be paying him to be a utility man. They are going to pay him because of what he did as an everyday middle infield. If he gets 10-12m per in a multi-year deal, he'd be highly overpaid as a OF.

 

Because he's a below average fielder at second. It's why a lot of teams (Cubs included) only wanted him from Texas if he would agree to play the outfield. Compared to all major league outfielder's last year, he would have ranked fourth in homeruns only behind A. Jones, Manny, and Dunn. So, he could still get his $ playing the outfield and may actually be able to defend the position.

[USSoccer]

You either disagreed with and ignored or simply ignored the bolded section in my previous post. In any case, the issues raised in it were not addressed in your response. But at least you dropped the "logjam" portion of your argument.

 

No one really knows except for people close to Hendry what the Cubs payroll budget really is. Here is what we do know. They set a record for ticket sales last month. They have approx. 1800 more seats to sell each game this year with some of them being premium priced seats in the RF bleachers. They have sold naming rights to the bleachers which will bring in more revenue. Last season's was around 95 million IIRC, so it would make sense for this season to be more with all the added revenue streams. Given the rate of growth over the last several years, it would be logical to put the Cubs payroll limit at around 100 million not including the new revenue streams. Right now, I have the current players costing the Tribune around 93 million. If the new revenue raises the budget limit to 105, then acquiring Vidro at full salary won't matter much. If Hendry is able to acquire a top-notch RFer at the deadline, he will only have to pay his salary for the last two months of the year. And if that player has a contract extending beyond '06, the 20 million gained from the loss of Maddux and Wood will easily allow for it.

 

It is important to remember that Vidro is an improvement offensively and devensively over Walker and Hairston. I agree that Vidro is an injury risk and that there is a good chance he will miss playing time again this season. How much playing time is yet to be seen. Just because he missed 70 games last season, doesn't mean that he is guaranteed to do so again this year. But if he did, the Cubs would have plenty of depth to cover for him at the 2B position and may well have plenty of money left over to acquire an expensive contract at the deadline.

 

Should Hendry do his best to acquire him at less than his full salary? Of course. I'm not advocating trading for him at full price, just that if it came to that, I think Hendry should still get him so long as the personnel he is trading away is downgraded to match the taking on of Vidro's full salary.

 

So, once again, I ask how is trading for Vidro a bad idea?

 

In regards to the logjam comment I made earlier, it's not a matter of the talent level, but the fact that i don't think the Cubs would be well served to have a 25 man roster with 5 starting pitchers, 7 pen guys, and 5 middle infielders. It's not a logjam of talent, but it's still 20% of your 25 man roster.

 

Regarding the budget, it's difficult to say where the team's budget stands. As has been discussed ad nauseum, the Tribune Co. has not had the best fiscal year. It could very well be that the parent company has decided to use the Cubs to help stem the cash flow problem they've been having. Also, the team underachieved during the 2 years of expanded payroll, and maybe MacPhail and Fitzsimmons have decided to pull back a little bit. But no one here knows for sure. What I can guess is that at best, the Cubs have about $12m in payroll left. Is it worth eating up 3/4 of that for a player who's not 4 times better than Walker?

 

Your analysis of mideason trades and the impact on the budget is dead on, and it's also likely that during the season the Cubs will shed some of their current payroll. However, I think I'd rather take a wait and see approach before trading for a guy like Vidro. For instance, what if Soriano comes back from the WBC and decides he's not going to play LF? Then, maybe you try and swing that deal, but you have more leverage than you would right now. Maybe you can get them to eat $5-6m of his salary. If Soriano does want to play LF, then why not wait and see how Vidro starts the season? If he gets plays well, then when Guillen comes back, maybe then you can trade for him. Now, the price would be higher, but it's also less of a risk at that point.

 

Finally, replacing Walker with Vidro after his injuries might not be that much of an upgrade offensively, and certainly not worth 4x Walker's salary. If he's cheap, fine. If we wait, and he's healthy, and we pay more in salary later, or more in prospects, fine. It's all about the level of risk, and if I were Hendry, I wouldn't be looking to increase the risk on my team.

 

Right now, as of March 6th, I don't see much point in dealing for him. It's just too big of a risk with too many variables. I'd want to wait and see how it plays out.

[CubfaninCA]

Gammons mentions the Soriano mess in his latest blog.

 

Alfonso Soriano insists he will not recant and move to the outfield. "I'm playing second," he says. But the Nationals believe that in the end, Soriano will accept the move and play left, with Brandon Watson in center and Ryan Church in right until Jose Guillen is ready. Dominican teammates say Soriano is embarrassed by the position he has been put in, but the majority of people in baseball believe that if he can play the outfield it will only increase his value when he hits the free-agent market at the end of the season.

 

Can somebody explain to me how playing LF would make him more valuable? He's a good hitting 2B, but as an OF, he's hardly special. It's not that hard to find a decent OF bat, it is hard to find a good 2B bat. If he was a utility man, I could see the flexibility as something that could add to his value. But his next team is not going to be paying him to be a utility man. They are going to pay him because of what he did as an everyday middle infield. If he gets 10-12m per in a multi-year deal, he'd be highly overpaid as a OF.

 

versatility?

[Tim]

If the scouting of him earlier in the thread is accurate, I have to agree with Goony here.

 

Soriano as a below average fielding second baseman is valuable.

 

Soriano as a below average fielding left fielder is, well, pretty much Jacque Jones without the defense.

[goonys evil twin]

Gammons mentions the Soriano mess in his latest blog.

 

Alfonso Soriano insists he will not recant and move to the outfield. "I'm playing second," he says. But the Nationals believe that in the end, Soriano will accept the move and play left, with Brandon Watson in center and Ryan Church in right until Jose Guillen is ready. Dominican teammates say Soriano is embarrassed by the position he has been put in, but the majority of people in baseball believe that if he can play the outfield it will only increase his value when he hits the free-agent market at the end of the season.

 

Can somebody explain to me how playing LF would make him more valuable? He's a good hitting 2B, but as an OF, he's hardly special. It's not that hard to find a decent OF bat, it is hard to find a good 2B bat. If he was a utility man, I could see the flexibility as something that could add to his value. But his next team is not going to be paying him to be a utility man. They are going to pay him because of what he did as an everyday middle infield. If he gets 10-12m per in a multi-year deal, he'd be highly overpaid as a OF.

 

Because he's a below average fielder at second. It's why a lot of teams (Cubs included) only wanted him from Texas if he would agree to play the outfield. Compared to all major league outfielder's last year, he would have ranked fourth in homeruns only behind A. Jones, Manny, and Dunn. So, he could still get his $ playing the outfield and may actually be able to defend the position.

 

His rank in HR is meaningless. He's nothing special as an OF, certainly not worth $10m+. When you can get his production from 2B or SS, it makes sense to pay a little more. But his production in the OF isn't great.

[goonys evil twin]

Gammons mentions the Soriano mess in his latest blog.

 

Alfonso Soriano insists he will not recant and move to the outfield. "I'm playing second," he says. But the Nationals believe that in the end, Soriano will accept the move and play left, with Brandon Watson in center and Ryan Church in right until Jose Guillen is ready. Dominican teammates say Soriano is embarrassed by the position he has been put in, but the majority of people in baseball believe that if he can play the outfield it will only increase his value when he hits the free-agent market at the end of the season.

 

Can somebody explain to me how playing LF would make him more valuable? He's a good hitting 2B, but as an OF, he's hardly special. It's not that hard to find a decent OF bat, it is hard to find a good 2B bat. If he was a utility man, I could see the flexibility as something that could add to his value. But his next team is not going to be paying him to be a utility man. They are going to pay him because of what he did as an everyday middle infield. If he gets 10-12m per in a multi-year deal, he'd be highly overpaid as a OF.

 

versatility?

 

If he was a utility player, then that would make sense. But if he's a starting OF as opposed to a starting infielder, he's just taking the space of somebody else who can hit just as well, and he's making way more money than he should. Soriano as a middle infielder = valuable, Soriano as a corner outfielder = replacable.

[YearofDaCubs]

Gammons mentions the Soriano mess in his latest blog.

 

Alfonso Soriano insists he will not recant and move to the outfield. "I'm playing second," he says. But the Nationals believe that in the end, Soriano will accept the move and play left, with Brandon Watson in center and Ryan Church in right until Jose Guillen is ready. Dominican teammates say Soriano is embarrassed by the position he has been put in, but the majority of people in baseball believe that if he can play the outfield it will only increase his value when he hits the free-agent market at the end of the season.

 

Can somebody explain to me how playing LF would make him more valuable? He's a good hitting 2B, but as an OF, he's hardly special. It's not that hard to find a decent OF bat, it is hard to find a good 2B bat. If he was a utility man, I could see the flexibility as something that could add to his value. But his next team is not going to be paying him to be a utility man. They are going to pay him because of what he did as an everyday middle infield. If he gets 10-12m per in a multi-year deal, he'd be highly overpaid as a OF.

 

I was going to ask the same thing. Vance and I were discussing that a while back. I just don't see it.

 

I kind of think Soriano is justified in his demands. i don't remember him approving the trade in the first place and then the new team (which he has no loyalty to whatsoever at this point) asks him to give up a couple million dollars in FA by changing position? He hasn't handled it very well, but he could have a legitimate gripe.

When that team is paying you 10mil, you do have to have some sort of loyalty.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Gammons mentions the Soriano mess in his latest blog.

 

Alfonso Soriano insists he will not recant and move to the outfield. "I'm playing second," he says. But the Nationals believe that in the end, Soriano will accept the move and play left, with Brandon Watson in center and Ryan Church in right until Jose Guillen is ready. Dominican teammates say Soriano is embarrassed by the position he has been put in, but the majority of people in baseball believe that if he can play the outfield it will only increase his value when he hits the free-agent market at the end of the season.

 

Can somebody explain to me how playing LF would make him more valuable? He's a good hitting 2B, but as an OF, he's hardly special. It's not that hard to find a decent OF bat, it is hard to find a good 2B bat. If he was a utility man, I could see the flexibility as something that could add to his value. But his next team is not going to be paying him to be a utility man. They are going to pay him because of what he did as an everyday middle infield. If he gets 10-12m per in a multi-year deal, he'd be highly overpaid as a OF.

 

I was going to ask the same thing. Vance and I were discussing that a while back. I just don't see it.

 

I kind of think Soriano is justified in his demands. i don't remember him approving the trade in the first place and then the new team (which he has no loyalty to whatsoever at this point) asks him to give up a couple million dollars in FA by changing position? He hasn't handled it very well, but he could have a legitimate gripe.

When that team is paying you 10mil, you do have to have some sort of loyalty.

 

He was going to get 10M regardless of the team he played for b/c of arbitration. What's it matter where it comes from? I don't agree with that attitude, but what has the team done for him? It should be a reciprocal relationship.