WSox get MacDougal; 'extremely close' to acquiring Soriano?

[goonys evil twin]

I'll jump into this and ask a question. I certainly think that baseball more than any other sport can be accurately predicted by statistics. I think however that stats certainly only tell part of the story. My question is-do people who value stats a great deal, is there anything in baseball that cannot be measured well by stats that is still important? Or are all of these things that stats cannot measure just small bonuses or detriments?

 

I value stats as much as the next guy, and I also typically watch hundreds of games every year at all levels. I do not put a lot of stock in defensive metrics. Watching players and their reads, lines, quickness, etc all give a better idea of their value on defense. Outfield assists do not tell me how strong or accurate a player's arm is. Stolen bases do not always give an accurate representation of a players speed. Stats typically cannot show where corrections can be made to improve aspects of a players game. There are plenty more, I'm sure.

 

There are a lot of things stats cannot measure and/or predict. Aside from some listed by Pedro, there's the big one, playoff series. Playing the odds gets you into the postseason. But once in, anybody can get hot, or lucky. Stats don't determine who will win before the season begins. But a smart GM can look at stats and use them to create the best odds for his team to get to the postseason. This is where Hendry has failed. He's terribly inefficient, and puts the team behind the eight ball repeatedly. It's not that it would be impossible for the Cubs to win with Hendry's style, or with Baker for that matter. It's just very difficult.

[CubColtPacer]

I'll jump into this and ask a question. I certainly think that baseball more than any other sport can be accurately predicted by statistics. I think however that stats certainly only tell part of the story. My question is-do people who value stats a great deal, is there anything in baseball that cannot be measured well by stats that is still important? Or are all of these things that stats cannot measure just small bonuses or detriments?

 

I value stats as much as the next guy, and I also typically watch hundreds of games every year at all levels. I do not put a lot of stock in defensive metrics. Watching players and their reads, lines, quickness, etc all give a better idea of their value on defense. Outfield assists do not tell me how strong or accurate a player's arm is. Stolen bases do not always give an accurate representation of a players speed. Stats typically cannot show where corrections can be made to improve aspects of a players game. There are plenty more, I'm sure.

 

There are a lot of things stats cannot measure and/or predict. Aside from some listed by Pedro, there's the big one, playoff series. Playing the odds gets you into the postseason. But once in, anybody can get hot, or lucky. Stats don't determine who will win before the season begins. But a smart GM can look at stats and use them to create the best odds for his team to get to the postseason. This is where Hendry has failed. He's terribly inefficient, and puts the team behind the eight ball repeatedly. It's not that it would be impossible for the Cubs to win with Hendry's style, or with Baker for that matter. It's just very difficult.

 

I definitely agree with both of your comments here. This team does need to do a better job of raising both the teams OBP and SLG. I just question comments like the one above where it is said that if I can get a high OBP, that's sufficient no matter how little speed, defense, and so many other things that cannot be measured. It's a balancing act between those two extremes that can make a team really good. The problem I have with this team is that we have almost none of those components. Out of the 4 components: OBP, SLG, speed, and defense-speed is the only one we have a decent amount of. The problem is, speed is the one element that by itself doesn't work very well. It can be extremely valuable when paired with a high OBP for example, but you can't steal first base. I'm all for increasing OBP and SLG-I just don't know about swinging the pendulum all the way to the other side. It would be better then this side of the pendulum-that's for sure, but I just wonder if somewhere in the middle might be better for a team. To explain, I just wonder if a team with good OBP, good SLG, good speed, and good defense might be better then a team with great of the first two and terrible speed and defense. I think at that point it might come down to how much that pitching staff needed the defense behind them I guess.

[Magnetic Curses]

I'll jump into this and ask a question. I certainly think that baseball more than any other sport can be accurately predicted by statistics. I think however that stats certainly only tell part of the story. My question is-do people who value stats a great deal, is there anything in baseball that cannot be measured well by stats that is still important? Or are all of these things that stats cannot measure just small bonuses or detriments?

 

I value stats as much as the next guy, and I also typically watch hundreds of games every year at all levels. I do not put a lot of stock in defensive metrics. Watching players and their reads, lines, quickness, etc all give a better idea of their value on defense. Outfield assists do not tell me how strong or accurate a player's arm is. Stolen bases do not always give an accurate representation of a players speed. Stats typically cannot show where corrections can be made to improve aspects of a players game. There are plenty more, I'm sure.

 

There are a lot of things stats cannot measure and/or predict. Aside from some listed by Pedro, there's the big one, playoff series. Playing the odds gets you into the postseason. But once in, anybody can get hot, or lucky. Stats don't determine who will win before the season begins. But a smart GM can look at stats and use them to create the best odds for his team to get to the postseason. This is where Hendry has failed. He's terribly inefficient, and puts the team behind the eight ball repeatedly. It's not that it would be impossible for the Cubs to win with Hendry's style, or with Baker for that matter. It's just very difficult.

 

I definitely agree with both of your comments here. This team does need to do a better job of raising both the teams OBP and SLG. I just question comments like the one above where it is said that if I can get a high OBP, that's sufficient no matter how little speed, defense, and so many other things that cannot be measured. It's a balancing act between those two extremes that can make a team really good. The problem I have with this team is that we have almost none of those components. Out of the 4 components: OBP, SLG, speed, and defense-speed is the only one we have a decent amount of. The problem is, speed is the one element that by itself doesn't work very well. It can be extremely valuable when paired with a high OBP for example, but you can't steal first base. I'm all for increasing OBP and SLG-I just don't know about swinging the pendulum all the way to the other side. It would be better then this side of the pendulum-that's for sure, but I just wonder if somewhere in the middle might be better for a team. To explain, I just wonder if a team with good OBP, good SLG, good speed, and good defense might be better then a team with great of the first two and terrible speed and defense. I think at that point it might come down to how much that pitching staff needed the defense behind them I guess.

 

OBP and SLG should never be mentioned in the same tier as speed and defense.

 

defense is more important than speed, but speed is just a peripheral talent that is beneficial to possess if you have the other skills.

[CubColtPacer]

I'll jump into this and ask a question. I certainly think that baseball more than any other sport can be accurately predicted by statistics. I think however that stats certainly only tell part of the story. My question is-do people who value stats a great deal, is there anything in baseball that cannot be measured well by stats that is still important? Or are all of these things that stats cannot measure just small bonuses or detriments?

 

I value stats as much as the next guy, and I also typically watch hundreds of games every year at all levels. I do not put a lot of stock in defensive metrics. Watching players and their reads, lines, quickness, etc all give a better idea of their value on defense. Outfield assists do not tell me how strong or accurate a player's arm is. Stolen bases do not always give an accurate representation of a players speed. Stats typically cannot show where corrections can be made to improve aspects of a players game. There are plenty more, I'm sure.

 

There are a lot of things stats cannot measure and/or predict. Aside from some listed by Pedro, there's the big one, playoff series. Playing the odds gets you into the postseason. But once in, anybody can get hot, or lucky. Stats don't determine who will win before the season begins. But a smart GM can look at stats and use them to create the best odds for his team to get to the postseason. This is where Hendry has failed. He's terribly inefficient, and puts the team behind the eight ball repeatedly. It's not that it would be impossible for the Cubs to win with Hendry's style, or with Baker for that matter. It's just very difficult.

 

I definitely agree with both of your comments here. This team does need to do a better job of raising both the teams OBP and SLG. I just question comments like the one above where it is said that if I can get a high OBP, that's sufficient no matter how little speed, defense, and so many other things that cannot be measured. It's a balancing act between those two extremes that can make a team really good. The problem I have with this team is that we have almost none of those components. Out of the 4 components: OBP, SLG, speed, and defense-speed is the only one we have a decent amount of. The problem is, speed is the one element that by itself doesn't work very well. It can be extremely valuable when paired with a high OBP for example, but you can't steal first base. I'm all for increasing OBP and SLG-I just don't know about swinging the pendulum all the way to the other side. It would be better then this side of the pendulum-that's for sure, but I just wonder if somewhere in the middle might be better for a team. To explain, I just wonder if a team with good OBP, good SLG, good speed, and good defense might be better then a team with great of the first two and terrible speed and defense. I think at that point it might come down to how much that pitching staff needed the defense behind them I guess.

 

OBP and SLG should never be mentioned in the same tier as speed and defense.

 

defense is more important than speed, but speed is just a peripheral talent that is beneficial to possess if you have the other skills.

 

The question is-why is that the case though? Like you said earlier on this page, the difference in 50 points of average is only one hit a week-and of course that would be about 50 points of OBP as well. A guy with great speed compared to a guy with terrible speed can certainly make a difference of one hit a week. A guy with terrible defense can certainly give up an extra hit per week-maybe not an error, but just the inability to get to balls that other people would be able to get to. Isn't not giving up a hit worth just as much as getting one?

[Tracer Bullet]

While the Cubs are struggling, Cub fans are going to criticize or attack any move or rumor that involves Hendry. If the Cubs acquired ARod or Miggy, people would complain that they're over the hill, cost too much in salary, and the Cubs gave up too much for them (Pie, Hill, Cedeno, etc.). I've written more than a few times that while the posters are finding fault with every rumored trade, the Cubs are going to lose 100 games this season. I like Walker, but for goodness sake, there's a thread going on now comparing Walker (favorably) to Soriano (and that's without the salary). Sometimes stat geeks need to take their noses out of a book and watch some baseball.

 

Troll much?

 

As I posted about 2 pages ago, just b/c people use stats to compare players doesn't mean they don't watch games. Show me one post that says that Walker is having a better 2006 season than Soriano. Just one. Go ahead, I'll wait.

 

Having any luck? I'll give you a few more minutes.

 

Ok, I think that's enough time. No one is arguing that. What people are arguing (quite convincingly) is that Walker was the better player in '04 and '05. I'm sorry if that doesn't jive with your views, based on watching some games and some highlights, but it's true.

[goonys evil twin]

The question is-why is that the case though? Like you said earlier on this page, the difference in 50 points of average is only one hit a week-and of course that would be about 50 points of OBP as well. A guy with great speed compared to a guy with terrible speed can certainly make a difference of one hit a week. A guy with terrible defense can certainly give up an extra hit per week-maybe not an error, but just the inability to get to balls that other people would be able to get to. Isn't not giving up a hit worth just as much as getting one?

 

You can certainly make that claim, but that doesn't certainly make it true.

 

OBP and SLG are simply far more important than speed and defense. And defense is most likely more important than speed. That is not to say I'd prefer guys who are slow and can't field. Certainly you'd love a .300/.450/.600 hitter who can steal 40 bases (at an 80%+ rate) and field with the best of them. The problem is those guys are very hard to find. What you need first and foremost is OBP, followed closely by SLG. The guy needs to be competent with the glove, but he doesn't have to be great. And it would be nice if he was fast, but not particularly important.

[CubColtPacer]

The question is-why is that the case though? Like you said earlier on this page, the difference in 50 points of average is only one hit a week-and of course that would be about 50 points of OBP as well. A guy with great speed compared to a guy with terrible speed can certainly make a difference of one hit a week. A guy with terrible defense can certainly give up an extra hit per week-maybe not an error, but just the inability to get to balls that other people would be able to get to. Isn't not giving up a hit worth just as much as getting one?

 

You can certainly make that claim, but that doesn't certainly make it true.

 

OBP and SLG are simply far more important than speed and defense. And defense is most likely more important than speed. That is not to say I'd prefer guys who are slow and can't field. Certainly you'd love a .300/.450/.600 hitter who can steal 40 bases (at an 80%+ rate) and field with the best of them. The problem is those guys are very hard to find. What you need first and foremost is OBP, followed closely by SLG. The guy needs to be competent with the glove, but he doesn't have to be great. And it would be nice if he was fast, but not particularly important.

 

Are you saying that the difference between good and bad defense is less than a hit a week, especially in the outfield and middle infield, or is that hit given up just not worth as much as getting a hit at the plate?

[SouthSideRyan]

it's full of huge ballparks, though. especially the one he plays half his games in.

 

OPS Home/Road - 1.042/.879

 

Doesn't seem to be bothered by the size of his home park.

 

exactly. imagine how he'd be doing if he was hitting in a good park.

 

Yeah, just imagine him in a place like Arlington.

[SouthSideRyan]

World Series, bottom of the 9th, game on the line. Who would you rather see up to bat for your team: Soriano or Walker? I don't think you'd be considering salary at that point

 

Well since the theme of this thread seems to be ignoring sample size, let's look at their career playoff stats.

 

Walker: .349/.391/.767

 

Soriano: .233/.287/.336

 

SORIANO'S UNCLUTCH~!~!~

[Backtobanks]

While the Cubs are struggling, Cub fans are going to criticize or attack any move or rumor that involves Hendry. If the Cubs acquired ARod or Miggy, people would complain that they're over the hill, cost too much in salary, and the Cubs gave up too much for them (Pie, Hill, Cedeno, etc.). I've written more than a few times that while the posters are finding fault with every rumored trade, the Cubs are going to lose 100 games this season. I like Walker, but for goodness sake, there's a thread going on now comparing Walker (favorably) to Soriano (and that's without the salary). Sometimes stat geeks need to take their noses out of a book and watch some baseball.

 

Troll much?

 

As I posted about 2 pages ago, just b/c people use stats to compare players doesn't mean they don't watch games. Show me one post that says that Walker is having a better 2006 season than Soriano. Just one. Go ahead, I'll wait.

 

Having any luck? I'll give you a few more minutes.

 

Ok, I think that's enough time. No one is arguing that. What people are arguing (quite convincingly) is that Walker was the better player in '04 and '05. I'm sorry if that doesn't jive with your views, based on watching some games and some highlights, but it's true.

 

 

First, No I don't troll at all. I have no problem looking at stats, but saying Walker was the better player over Soriano during 2004 & 2005 is something that a stats geek would say. I'm not arrogant enough to say I know more than baseball scouts, coaches, and managers who have spent their lives in baseball. Obviously, Soriano was considered a top player and an All Star while Walker has been offered around the league and rejected in trade proposals. There's a reason Soriano is making $10 million and Walker makes $2.5 million. Not every manager and GM is an idiot (excluding Baker & Hendry). To sum it up, Soriano brings more to a team than Walker and we all know it's not his defense. Do you think that Texas would have traded Soriano for Walker even up at the end of last year?

[goonys evil twin]

First, No I don't troll at all. I have no problem looking at stats, but saying Walker was the better player over Soriano during 2004 & 2005 is something that a stats geek would say. I'm not arrogant enough to say I know more than baseball scouts, coaches, and managers who have spent their lives in baseball. Obviously, Soriano was considered a top player and an All Star while Walker has been offered around the league and rejected in trade proposals. There's a reason Soriano is making $10 million and Walker makes $2.5 million. Not every manager and GM is an idiot (excluding Baker & Hendry). To sum it up, Soriano brings more to a team than Walker and we all know it's not his defense.

 

Soriano has had the potential to bring more to a team than Walker, but he didn't in 2004 and 2005. He was paid more because of the early hype in his career, and expectations for 40/40 seasons every year. He certainly has more upside, but that didn' ttranslate into actual production, until this year.

[abuck1220]

it's full of huge ballparks, though. especially the one he plays half his games in.

 

OPS Home/Road - 1.042/.879

 

Doesn't seem to be bothered by the size of his home park.

 

exactly. imagine how he'd be doing if he was hitting in a good park.

 

Yeah, just imagine him in a place like Arlington.

 

if he were hitting like he is hitting this year in arlington, his numbers would be even better.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

To sum it up, Soriano brings more to a team than Walker and we all know it's not his defense.

 

In 2004 and 2005, it wasn't his offense either. At the risk of sounding like a "stats geek", Walker was better those years. Soriano's OPS+ was 98 and 110 while Walker was at 105 and 115. You've already conceded the defense, there's proof of the offense. What else is there? Soriano's making $10M because he's been vastly overrated through the years. He can steal bases and hit homeruns and not much else.

[abuck1220]

is it so ridiculous to at least consider the possibility that soriano's just gotten better?

[RynoRules]

is it so ridiculous to at least consider the possibility that soriano's just gotten better?

 

That is what I was thinking. It seems to me that has always had the talent, and now the light has gone on.

[goonys evil twin]

is it so ridiculous to at least consider the possibility that soriano's just gotten better?

 

That is what I was thinking. It seems to me that has always had the talent, and now the light has gone on.

 

Certainly that looks to be the case. The question, as always with career/contract year guys (especially post 30 year old), is if the improvement can be maintained. I still have my doubts.

[SouthSideRyan]

is it so ridiculous to at least consider the possibility that soriano's just gotten better?

 

It's quite possible. It's also quite possible that he's Adrian Beltre redux.

[RynoRules]

is it so ridiculous to at least consider the possibility that soriano's just gotten better?

 

It's quite possible. It's also quite possible that he's Adrian Beltre redux.

 

That is a good point, but I think Soriano pre-walk year was better than Beltre was pre-walk year (by some margain). Thus, it appears to be less a motivation issue (which is Beltre's problem) than maturing as a hitter (Soriano's problem?). Still, I see your point.

[noisesquared]

To sum it up, Soriano brings more to a team than Walker and we all know it's not his defense.

 

In 2004 and 2005, it wasn't his offense either. At the risk of sounding like a "stats geek", Walker was better those years. Soriano's OPS+ was 98 and 110 while Walker was at 105 and 115. You've already conceded the defense, there's proof of the offense. What else is there? Soriano's making $10M because he's been vastly overrated through the years. He can steal bases and hit homeruns and not much else.

 

 

If Soriano only played about 2/3 of the Ranger's games in 04 and 05 and was sat against tough right handers on a regular basis, maybe his numbers would be a little more impressive.

 

Right or wrong, Walker has been used sparingly against lefties during his run as a Cub, and Walker's career numbers would indicate this has been beneficial to his Cubs numbers. This is a guess based on observation and Dusty's tendencies, but the only lefties Walker gets to face are either lefties Walker has had prior success against, or against lefties with an unimpressive resume.

 

Todd Walker:

2002 vs LHP 158AB .278 .315 .373

2003 vs LHP 158AB .234 .282 .373

2004 vs LHP 41AB .268 .423 .317

2005 vs LHP 91AB .352 .398 .582

2006 vs. Left 86AB .209 .324 .314

[Tracer Bullet]

First, No I don't troll at all. I have no problem looking at stats, but saying Walker was the better player over Soriano during 2004 & 2005 is something that a stats geek would say. I'm not arrogant enough to say I know more than baseball scouts, coaches, and managers who have spent their lives in baseball. Obviously, Soriano was considered a top player and an All Star while Walker has been offered around the league and rejected in trade proposals. There's a reason Soriano is making $10 million and Walker makes $2.5 million. Not every manager and GM is an idiot (excluding Baker & Hendry). To sum it up, Soriano brings more to a team than Walker and we all know it's not his defense. Do you think that Texas would have traded Soriano for Walker even up at the end of last year?

 

Well, if your comment about stat geeks wasn't intended to attack other posters on this board, I don't understand the point, but whatever.

 

As for Walker and Soriano, this year, Soriano has been better. The 2 previous years, Walker was. The 2 years before that? Soriano was better - he had 2 really good years in '02 and '03 (esp 02). But, as others have said, Soriano's contract is based on hype & potential, which he is matching with performance this year. He wasn't doing that in '04 and '05.

 

As for whether Texas would have traded Soriano for Walker last year, I don't know. Do you?

[Tracer Bullet]

is it so ridiculous to at least consider the possibility that soriano's just gotten better?

 

It's quite possible. It's also quite possible that he's Adrian Beltre redux.

 

That is a good point, but I think Soriano pre-walk year was better than Beltre was pre-walk year (by some margain). Thus, it appears to be less a motivation issue (which is Beltre's problem) than maturing as a hitter (Soriano's problem?). Still, I see your point.

 

I don't know if it's really a maturing issue either. He had 2 good years in '02 and '03 (.880 and .863 OPS). This year is far exceeding even those, but he went from 2 solid years, to 2 average years, to a career year (coinciding with his contract year). Maybe just figuring it out at 30. Maybe just wants a big pay day. Maybe just lucky. Who knows what's going on. I'm just saying I wouldn't trade a top prospect for him while counting on his .950+ OPS to continue.

[Tracer Bullet]

If Soriano only played about 2/3 of the Ranger's games in 04 and 05 and was sat against tough right handers on a regular basis, maybe his numbers would be a little more impressive.

 

Right or wrong, Walker has been used sparingly against lefties during his run as a Cub, and Walker's career numbers would indicate this has been beneficial to his Cubs numbers. This is a guess based on observation and Dusty's tendencies, but the only lefties Walker gets to face are either lefties Walker has had prior success against, or against lefties with an unimpressive resume.

 

Todd Walker:

2002 vs LHP 158AB .278 .315 .373

2003 vs LHP 158AB .234 .282 .373

2004 vs LHP 41AB .268 .423 .317

2005 vs LHP 91AB .352 .398 .582

2006 vs. Left 86AB .209 .324 .314

 

Except Soriano's R/L OPS split was only .060 in '04 and his OPS was .110 better against righties (in other words - reverse split) in '05. If he had sat against RHP in '05, his numbers would have been worse.

[SouthSideRyan]

is it so ridiculous to at least consider the possibility that soriano's just gotten better?

 

It's quite possible. It's also quite possible that he's Adrian Beltre redux.

 

That is a good point, but I think Soriano pre-walk year was better than Beltre was pre-walk year (by some margain). Thus, it appears to be less a motivation issue (which is Beltre's problem) than maturing as a hitter (Soriano's problem?). Still, I see your point.

 

Beltre was at least at an age that guys are entering their peak at being 25. Additionally there were rumors of a botched appendectomy to try and explain away his previous struggles. I always found that excuse to be pretty weak, but at least there was some attempt at an explanation. I've heard nothing to explain Soriano's middling years in Texas. This season for him really just has me in shock.

[goonys evil twin]

is it so ridiculous to at least consider the possibility that soriano's just gotten better?

 

It's quite possible. It's also quite possible that he's Adrian Beltre redux.

 

That is a good point, but I think Soriano pre-walk year was better than Beltre was pre-walk year (by some margain). Thus, it appears to be less a motivation issue (which is Beltre's problem) than maturing as a hitter (Soriano's problem?). Still, I see your point.

 

Right now Soriano has a 111 career OPS+ (that's pre 2006)

Beltre has a 106.

 

Beltre had a 100, 116 and 163 in the walk year with the remainder under 100.

 

Soriano had a 110, 128 and 131, with the remained under 100.

 

I think they were a lot closer than you'd imagine. Basically, Soriano had 1 more good season, but he had his entire peak period to get that extra season.

[noisesquared]

If Soriano only played about 2/3 of the Ranger's games in 04 and 05 and was sat against tough right handers on a regular basis, maybe his numbers would be a little more impressive.

 

Right or wrong, Walker has been used sparingly against lefties during his run as a Cub, and Walker's career numbers would indicate this has been beneficial to his Cubs numbers. This is a guess based on observation and Dusty's tendencies, but the only lefties Walker gets to face are either lefties Walker has had prior success against, or against lefties with an unimpressive resume.

 

Todd Walker:

2002 vs LHP 158AB .278 .315 .373

2003 vs LHP 158AB .234 .282 .373

2004 vs LHP 41AB .268 .423 .317

2005 vs LHP 91AB .352 .398 .582

2006 vs. Left 86AB .209 .324 .314

 

Except Soriano's R/L OPS split was only .060 in '04 and his OPS was .110 better against righties (in other words - reverse split) in '05. If he had sat against RHP in '05, his numbers would have been worse.

 

I'm not saying he would need to sit against all RHP, just the tough ones and ones he has had little success against, like Baker does with Walker. Just glancing at RetroSheet.com, I saw Soriano has sub .200BA/.250OBP against the following pitchers who were in the AL West (with at least 20AB against) - Bartolo Colon, John Lackey, Jarrod Washburn, Joe Kennedy, and Rich Harden. Take those AB away, and I bet Soriano's OBP increases significantly.