WOW- Vernon Wells

[JeffH]

For Wells, the Blue Jays could have any three pitchers in the organization not named Zambrano or Hill.

 

I would also trade Barrett for him, although I would prefer not to.

[WrigleyField 22]

My post wasn't even about Wells coming to the Cubs.

It was based off the assumption that Toronto might value Barrett and Anaheim values Wells enough to send a couple young players, including Ervin Santana. If one of those young guys is one of Anaiem's good young catchers it might be worthwhile to pursue selling high with Barrett.

 

Wells to Anahiem

Barrett to Toronto

Ervin Santana and young catcher (Mathis or Napoli, preferably Napoli) to Chicago

 

Maybe Toronto or Chicago gets another prospect, but that would be the basis.

 

I don't want Wells on the Cubs, especially if it includes giving up Barrett.

 

Speaking of IsoD and IsoP...

Mike Napoli: IsoD- .132 IsoP- .227

yea...

[jjgman21]

ugh, IsoD is important for every player.

 

it is helpful for all players, but it loses meaning on the extremes. noone complains when a player has a .400 obp but has a .040 IsoD. similarly, there are ligit complaints if a player is batting .213 but has an IsoD of 100.

[Guest]

ugh, IsoD is important for every player.

 

it is helpful for all players, but it loses meaning on the extremes. noone complains when a player has a .400 obp but has a .040 IsoD. similarly, there are ligit complaints if a player is batting .213 but has an IsoD of 100.

IsoD is equally important for those players at the extremes. What your post illustrates is that there are other factors that are important, as well. When one of those other factors is extremely good or extremely bad, then you can still have a good/bad player no matter what the IsoD may be.

[imb]

ugh, IsoD is important for every player.

 

it is helpful for all players, but it loses meaning on the extremes. noone complains when a player has a .400 obp but has a .040 IsoD. similarly, there are ligit complaints if a player is batting .213 but has an IsoD of 100.

 

Exactly, the Howie Kendrick/Mark Bellhorn example. Stupid people equate those that appreciate OBP with valuing walks above all else.

[Outshined_One]

ugh, IsoD is important for every player.

 

it is helpful for all players, but it loses meaning on the extremes. noone complains when a player has a .400 obp but has a .040 IsoD. similarly, there are ligit complaints if a player is batting .213 but has an IsoD of 100.

 

No statistic is a pure measure of just how good a player is. IsoD is a specialized stat meant to measure plate discipline. That's pretty much about it.

 

However, as we all know, plate discipline is one of the most important things any hitter can have. Odds are, if you have a .100 IsoD, you're going to be a pretty good hitter.

[WrigleyField 22]

For the low end guys, it kind of depends on who the guy is. If a guy is a ten year vet and hitting .200/.300 and always has, it doesn't mean much. If a young guy comes in and struggles but keeps an IsoD at a high number, there is good reason to believe that as they adjust and begin to hit their IsoD will continue.

[Outshined_One]

For the low end guys, it kind of depends on who the guy is. If a guy is a ten year vet and hitting .200/.300 and always has, it doesn't mean much. If a young guy comes in and struggles but keeps an IsoD at a high number, there is good reason to believe that as they adjust and begin to hit their IsoD will continue.

 

Guys who hit .200/.300 won't last long in baseball. You don't see many veterans who who manage to stick around long with those numbers. Those who do are an anamoly and will almost certainly be relegated to the bench unless they make up for it with incredible defense or power.

 

I can't exactly think of many players who have a career batting average between .200 and .220 and still have an IsoD over .100. Even Adam Dunn has a career BA of .245 and his IsoD is freakishly good.

[Uber]

Bottom line, IsoD is good.

 

Now back to Vernon Wells.

[jjgman21]

I think my point is this. discipline is usually a very strong determining factor in whether a hitter is good or not, but not always and not as rarely as stated here.

 

the examples on the low end are a little harder to find because they do end up on the bench, but players like Bellhorn, Mirabelli, and Dan Johnson come to mind. but the high end has alot of players. Joe Dimaggio's slightly above league average IsoD does nothing to detract from his greatness because he still had a very good OBP. Ichiro's piss poor IsoD makes no difference if his obp is up around 380+.

 

while I am not comparing Wells to Dimaggio, his poor IsoD shouldn't be a problem as long as his ave. is around .300. while I am aware of the predictive factor IsoD brings, that's not we are talking about here. we are talking about rejecting a player out of hand because of a low IsoD.

[jjgman21]

Agreed, so long as it isn't Barrett (why downgrade from above average offense at one position which is harder to get, it's just a lateral move) i'd love to have Vernon Wells.

 

 

I think Wells should be an afterthought if the Cubs don't get Soriano or Drew. if that happens, I think you have to do a Barrett for Wells swap, even though Barrett is my favorite Cub.

 

if the Cubs can't get solid at every position (aka miss out on Soriano or Drew) you have to start viewing it as improving the team over what the Cubs had last year. since the swap would be Wells for Barrett, you have to compare how the Cubs were in 05 at C and CF and what they can get out of those two positions in 06.

 

in my mind, one position is vastly improved because you have Wells numbers, which are better than Barretts, for 150-160 games, not 115-130. similarly, I think there is a great chance that Blanco/Soto contribute as much to the offense as Pierre did. looking at the defensive side, the team is vastly improved at both positions.

[Outshined_One]

in my mind, one position is vastly improved because you have Wells numbers, which are better than Barretts, for 150-160 games, not 115-130. similarly, I think there is a great chance that Blanco/Soto contribute as much to the offense as Pierre did. looking at the defensive side, the team is vastly improved at both positions.

 

This season:

 

Wells: .303/.357/.542/.899

Barrett: .307/.368/.517/.885

 

Three year splits:

 

Wells: .282/.338/.493/.831

Barrett: .289/.349/.494/.843

 

How much of an improvement would Wells over Barrett be? I understand that Wells would play more games than Bare, but Blanco/Soto would not provide comparable production to Pierre. Blanco is just bad offensively and Soto is unproven without much of an upside.

 

Plus, Wells would only be under this team's control for a year unless he gets an extension.

[jjgman21]

in my mind, one position is vastly improved because you have Wells numbers, which are better than Barretts, for 150-160 games, not 115-130. similarly, I think there is a great chance that Blanco/Soto contribute as much to the offense as Pierre did. looking at the defensive side, the team is vastly improved at both positions.

 

This season:

 

Wells: .303/.357/.542/.899

Barrett: .307/.368/.517/.885

 

Three year splits:

 

Wells: .282/.338/.493/.831

Barrett: .289/.349/.494/.843

 

How much of an improvement would Wells over Barrett be? I understand that Wells would play more games than Bare, but Blanco/Soto would not provide comparable production to Pierre. Blanco is just bad offensively and Soto is unproven without much of an upside.

 

Plus, Wells would only be under this team's control for a year unless he gets an extension.

 

Wells has age on his side and his three year stats skewed by an injury in 2005. more than likely his star is rising while Barrett's is fading. and the fact that Barrett is a catcher is a huge factor in determining who has more impact on the offense. who would you rather have, Wells for 160 or Barrett for 120 and Blanco for 42. 120 games per year the offense would be comparable, but it's not hard to see that the Cubs offense would be significantly better in those 40 games per year with Wells instead of Hank.

 

 

I personally think it reasonable that Blanco and Soto combine for a .315/.410 line. Blanco is bad, but so is Pierre. their OPS has been virtually identical the past two years. Soto has put up a .350ish OBP in every level of minor league play and his ability to draw a walk won't go away. he also has more pop than Pierre. Plus they won't be up at the top of the lineup making outs, they will be at the bottom of the lineup making outs.

 

I don't see your point about control of Wells because the Cubs only have control of Barrett for one more year too.

[CubColtPacer]

in my mind, one position is vastly improved because you have Wells numbers, which are better than Barretts, for 150-160 games, not 115-130. similarly, I think there is a great chance that Blanco/Soto contribute as much to the offense as Pierre did. looking at the defensive side, the team is vastly improved at both positions.

 

This season:

 

Wells: .303/.357/.542/.899

Barrett: .307/.368/.517/.885

 

Three year splits:

 

Wells: .282/.338/.493/.831

Barrett: .289/.349/.494/.843

 

How much of an improvement would Wells over Barrett be? I understand that Wells would play more games than Bare, but Blanco/Soto would not provide comparable production to Pierre. Blanco is just bad offensively and Soto is unproven without much of an upside.

 

Plus, Wells would only be under this team's control for a year unless he gets an extension.

 

Wells has age on his side and his three year stats skewed by an injury in 2005. more than likely his star is rising while Barrett's is fading. and the fact that Barrett is a catcher is a huge factor in determining who has more impact on the offense. who would you rather have, Wells for 160 or Barrett for 120 and Blanco for 42. 120 games per year the offense would be comparable, but it's not hard to see that the Cubs offense would be significantly better in those 40 games per year with Wells instead of Hank.

 

 

I personally think it reasonable that Blanco and Soto combine for a .315/.410 line. Blanco is bad, but so is Pierre. their OPS has been virtually identical the past two years. Soto has put up a .350ish OBP in every level of minor league play and his ability to draw a walk won't go away. he also has more pop than Pierre. Plus they won't be up at the top of the lineup making outs, they will be at the bottom of the lineup making outs.

 

I don't see your point about control of Wells because the Cubs only have control of Barrett for one more year too.

 

The one thing I disagree with is that Soto has more pop than Pierre-Pierre has a very slight edge over their last 4 years SLG percentage (but they are close). The rest of your post I agree with (other than maybe being a little optimistic on the Blanco/Soto platoon). If the Cubs are not ready to give Barrett an extension after this season, then maybe they should trade him for a player who they are ready to sign to an extension.

[Outshined_One]

I don't see your point about control of Wells because the Cubs only have control of Barrett for one more year too.

 

Really? I was under the impression they had Barret signed through 2008.

[jjgman21]

in my mind, one position is vastly improved because you have Wells numbers, which are better than Barretts, for 150-160 games, not 115-130. similarly, I think there is a great chance that Blanco/Soto contribute as much to the offense as Pierre did. looking at the defensive side, the team is vastly improved at both positions.

 

This season:

 

Wells: .303/.357/.542/.899

Barrett: .307/.368/.517/.885

 

Three year splits:

 

Wells: .282/.338/.493/.831

Barrett: .289/.349/.494/.843

 

How much of an improvement would Wells over Barrett be? I understand that Wells would play more games than Bare, but Blanco/Soto would not provide comparable production to Pierre. Blanco is just bad offensively and Soto is unproven without much of an upside.

 

Plus, Wells would only be under this team's control for a year unless he gets an extension.

 

Wells has age on his side and his three year stats skewed by an injury in 2005. more than likely his star is rising while Barrett's is fading. and the fact that Barrett is a catcher is a huge factor in determining who has more impact on the offense. who would you rather have, Wells for 160 or Barrett for 120 and Blanco for 42. 120 games per year the offense would be comparable, but it's not hard to see that the Cubs offense would be significantly better in those 40 games per year with Wells instead of Hank.

 

 

I personally think it reasonable that Blanco and Soto combine for a .315/.410 line. Blanco is bad, but so is Pierre. their OPS has been virtually identical the past two years. Soto has put up a .350ish OBP in every level of minor league play and his ability to draw a walk won't go away. he also has more pop than Pierre. Plus they won't be up at the top of the lineup making outs, they will be at the bottom of the lineup making outs.

 

I don't see your point about control of Wells because the Cubs only have control of Barrett for one more year too.

 

The one thing I disagree with is that Soto has more pop than Pierre-Pierre has a very slight edge over their last 4 years SLG percentage (but they are close). The rest of your post I agree with (other than maybe being a little optimistic on the Blanco/Soto platoon). If the Cubs are not ready to give Barrett an extension after this season, then maybe they should trade him for a player who they are ready to sign to an extension.

 

I guess pop needs a little more explanation. Juan's higher slugging is purely a function of hitting alot of singles and stretching singles into doubles/doubles into triples. Soto has more power in his bat, make no mistake about it.

 

bare in mind that Soto has always been well ahead of the league he's played in for his age. he nearly completely skipped short season and totally skipped low A. he had a 756 OPS in a pitchers dominated league at age 21.

 

bold prediction, Soto will be a starting catcher in the major leagues for a decade.

[jjgman21]

I don't see your point about control of Wells because the Cubs only have control of Barrett for one more year too.

 

Really? I was under the impression they had Barret signed through 2008.

 

I could be wrong and just misinterpreting some statements I heard somewhere on the board here.

[Rob]

I don't see your point about control of Wells because the Cubs only have control of Barrett for one more year too.

 

Really? I was under the impression they had Barret signed through 2008.

 

I could be wrong and just misinterpreting some statements I heard somewhere on the board here.

 

Barret signed a 3 year contract in 05. That makes 07 his last year under the current contract.

[Outshined_One]

I don't see your point about control of Wells because the Cubs only have control of Barrett for one more year too.

 

Really? I was under the impression they had Barret signed through 2008.

 

I could be wrong and just misinterpreting some statements I heard somewhere on the board here.

 

Barret signed a 3 year contract in 05. That makes 07 his last year under the current contract.

 

Hm, there you go.

[Rob]

I don't see your point about control of Wells because the Cubs only have control of Barrett for one more year too.

 

Really? I was under the impression they had Barret signed through 2008.

 

I could be wrong and just misinterpreting some statements I heard somewhere on the board here.

 

Barret signed a 3 year contract in 05. That makes 07 his last year under the current contract.

 

Hm, there you go.

 

Yeah, stupid facts always having to go and kill conversations... damn facts.

[YearofDaCubs]

Trade Jock, trade for Wells or sign Drew for CF and we're set.

 

Soriano

Murton

Lee

ARam

Wells/Drew

Barrett

DeRosa

Theriot

Pitcher

 

I would LOVE that lineup.

[Jazz]

Trade Jock, trade for Wells or sign Drew for CF and we're set.

 

Soriano

Murton

Lee

ARam

Wells/Drew

Barrett

DeRosa

Theriot

Pitcher

 

I would LOVE that lineup.

 

Drew is not coming to the Cubs via Bruce Miles. I'll take his word for it.

 

I'd love Wells. But any deal involving him starts with Barrett, and probably with Pie/Veal.

[YearofDaCubs]

Trade Jock, trade for Wells or sign Drew for CF and we're set.

 

Soriano

Murton

Lee

ARam

Wells/Drew

Barrett

DeRosa

Theriot

Pitcher

 

I would LOVE that lineup.

 

Drew is not coming to the Cubs via Bruce Miles. I'll take his word for it.

 

I'd love Wells. But any deal involving him starts with Barrett, and probably with Pie/Veal.

I would do it.

[Butterscup1679666578]

Trade Jock, trade for Wells or sign Drew for CF and we're set.

 

Soriano

Murton

Lee

ARam

Wells/Drew

Barrett

DeRosa

Theriot

Pitcher

 

I would LOVE that lineup.

 

Drew is not coming to the Cubs via Bruce Miles. I'll take his word for it.

 

I'd love Wells. But any deal involving him starts with Barrett, and probably with Pie/Veal.

I would do it.

 

What's better, Jacque/Barrett, or Blanco/Wells?

[XZero771679666304]

Trade Jock, trade for Wells or sign Drew for CF and we're set.

 

Soriano

Murton

Lee

ARam

Wells/Drew

Barrett

DeRosa

Theriot

Pitcher

 

I would LOVE that lineup.

 

Drew is not coming to the Cubs via Bruce Miles. I'll take his word for it.

 

I'd love Wells. But any deal involving him starts with Barrett, and probably with Pie/Veal.

I would do it.

 

No way do I trade Barrett + Pie/Veal for one year of Wells.

 

I'd much rather trade Izturis and Marshall/Guzman etc. for Coco Crisp.