Cubs sign Soriano

[Mephistopheles]

so we went from terrible to average spending 150 million in the process when we probably could have done it for less than half that.

 

Were not at $150m. We're more close to about $100mil so far. Where do you get $150m? Man, some of you guys are making things up just to be negative. I don't get it?

 

136 (Soriano) + 13 (DeRosa) = 149.

 

I wasn't looking at a per year. I could do that too. Let's see, let's say Lugo gets 10 a year. So we achieved the same effect by spending about half of what we did on Soriano and DeRosa.

 

Are me and Nilo the only people that understand that last year was an anomaly? Quoting nonsense like 40-40-40 and RBI is bad enough, but the entire point is that he had a career year and he's very likely not going to do that again.

 

:(

[iowacub]

Playing cf is actually easier than playing lf or rf. You just have to have the physical tools to be able to cover some ground and have a strong enough arm to get the ball over the mound in cf. RF in Chicago is a tough position to play so I would assume with Pie coming up that you would want to put Soriano in right (definetly has the tools to do so) and shop for a cf. Either 1) trade jones or 2) you could plattoon him in lf with murton or 3) have jones as your 4th of. If I remember right, Jones' contract was front loaded and the last 2 years are very reasonable and he is terrible against lefties.

 

In a side note, with 3 players locked up long term and Zambrano probably next, I think that I am trading Barrett this offseason unless the Cubs are going to committ long term to him. You have to get something for him and not let him walk after next year.

[Neuby]

Would anyone else rather have Drew and Meche then Zito or Schmidt?

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Are me and Nilo the only people that understand that last year was an anomaly? Quoting nonsense like 40-40-40 and RBI is bad enough, but the entire point is that he had a career year and he's very likely not going to do that again.

 

:(

 

Haha.

[erik316wttn]

Why lead him off?

 

Why not bat him between Lee and Aramis?

[Chocolate Milk]

Oh man! I hope this doesn't put us over the salary cap!

[jjgman21]

so we went from terrible to average spending 150 million in the process when we probably could have done it for less than half that.

 

emphasis added.

 

I love the arm chair quarterbacking of GMs. noboday has any idea whatsoever of what happens in these negotiations, yet people presume they know what probably could have happened.

 

Agreed.

 

Ok, then I GUARANTEE Lugo signs for less than 67M. You are obviously missing KC's point.

 

not at all. I can perfectly see how this deal has zero appeal if viewed completely in a vacuum.

 

are you seriously arguing that Lugo will outperform Soriano? do we really know what Drew and Lee will sign for?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Good God. I tried to read this whole thread. But I stopped at page 5. I swear some people would complain about ANYTHING!!

 

Point #1: We should shop smart, I don't like this signing. - The Tribune is finally PAYING OUT THE WAZOO to WIN and WIN now and you are complaining!!?

 

Point #2: He's gonna suck at 38, he sucks now - He hit 40 HR, 40 steals, 119 runs in 2006. He's got very good states when teams have let him lead off. Lou already stated he plans him for lead-off. He does NOT suck, and furthermore you guys were commenting on a RUMORED amoung when infact it is more like 6/90 with 2 option years.

 

I just can't beleive how many people in the first dozen pages I read were COMPLAINING about this. It just #*#*@*! boggles my mind. How can you not be happy about this? We get a couple above average pitchers and we are now the STRONGEST team in the NL Central by a large margin.

 

SORIANO IS NOT AN EXTREMELY STRONG OFFENSIVE PLAYER

 

Are me and Nilo the only people that understand that last year was an anomaly? Quoting nonsense like 40-40-40 and RBI is bad enough, but the entire point is that he had a career year and he's very likely not going to do that again.

 

On a tangential note, how does everyone think Soriano's approach is going to age? He doesn't have the most compact swing in the world, which could lead to big problems once he loses a tick of bat speed.

 

the 40-40-40 thing is a little silly, but one could argue that 04-05 were the anomoly. OPS+

 

 

2002 131

2003 128

2004 98

2005 110

2006 132

 

how can it be an anomoly if it happened three out of the past five years?

 

OPS+ hides Soriano's inability to get on base(I know you've argued about the marginal benefit on this point before, but I'm going to have to disagree). It was the first year he has EVER put up a .340+ OBP. EVER. And we just gave him a truckload of money to be our leadoff hitter and RF, and his (in)ability to get on base is mediocre to awful for both(even with the lower than "expected" production of RF's).

[oldcubsfan]

Oh man! I hope this doesn't put us over the salary cap!

I doubt it, the cap is close to $!48 mil

[nilodnayr]

Soriano will be more productive than Lugo. Again, it isn't our money, if they are committed to upping the payroll they have to spend it somewhere.

 

They will still get some pitching, you don't make a move like this and not improve your pitching.

 

Let them spend.

 

Except Soriano would be replacing Juan Pierre and Lugo would be replacing Cesar Izturis and Ronny Cedeno.

 

Exactly. KC's excellent analysis is regarding the marginality of the replacement players. Hence his point that upgrading on a position basis from bad to OK does just as much for your team as upgrading from OK to good or good to great. However, upgrading from bad to OK cost significantly less than the other alternatives. Hence, Lugo does just as much for your offense (over 2006 cubs SS production) as Sori does (over 2006 cubs CF production).

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Are me and Nilo the only people that understand that last year was an anomaly? Quoting nonsense like 40-40-40 and RBI is bad enough, but the entire point is that he had a career year and he's very likely not going to do that again.

 

:(

 

Terribly sorry, I forgot/was too hasty to remember you and CubinNY.

[Mizzou]

Why lead him off?

 

Why not bat him between Lee and Aramis?

Cause he feels more comfortable leading off, and is far better when leading off. At least I think I remember reading that.

[Mephistopheles]

are you seriously arguing that Lugo will outperform Soriano? do we really know what Drew and Lee will sign for?

 

thats not the argument. the argument is that the difference between ronny cedeno/cesar izturis and Julio Lugo is greater than the difference between Soriano and Juan Pierre.

[nilodnayr]

See STL. I assume they will make the nec. moves as well. I see them putting Wainwright in the rotation along side Carpenter, Reyes, and probably Suppan (again) and some project. As well as maybe one more arm in the pen.

 

They'll likely go with Duncan or another OF'er in LF.

 

They will improve.

 

Carpenter, Wainwright, and Reyes has the makings of a good rotation.

 

Reyes was about as good as Marshall last year and nowhere near as good as Hill when all was said and done.

 

Wainwright, tough to tell. high touted, but history of mechanical and arm problems. moving into the rotation will be interesting to watch.

 

Carpenter? I'm still waiting for his surgically repaired arm to fall off after all these innings and curveballs.

 

Many pitchers struggle in their first go round, it doesn't indicate they will pitch to that level the rest of their career. This goes for both Reyes and Marshall, but Reyes is a potential #1 starter and Marshall a 3-4. I'd be much more concerned if Anthony will remain healthy for a full season.

 

Comparing Reyes to Marshall and Hill is comical. Especially when you use their first year in the majors #s to do it. Wainwright was dominant last year and is highly touted as well, and Carpenter...ohh just two healthy Cy Youngish campaigns are pretty decent.

[questionmarkgrace]

Exactly. KC's excellent analysis is regarding the marginality of the replacement players. Hence his point that upgrading on a position basis from bad to OK does just as much for your team as upgrading from OK to good or good to great. However, upgrading from bad to OK cost significantly less than the other alternatives. Hence, Lugo does just as much for your offense (over 2006 cubs SS production) as Sori does (over 2006 cubs CF production).

 

doesn't that analysis fail to take into account what soriano does for the rest of the line up?

[Mephistopheles]

doesn't that analysis fail to take into account what soriano does for the rest of the line up?

 

and what exactly does he do? Get out a lot making sure they don't come up to bat? because julio lugos career OBP is higher than sorianos

[CubColtPacer]

Soriano will be more productive than Lugo. Again, it isn't our money, if they are committed to upping the payroll they have to spend it somewhere.

 

They will still get some pitching, you don't make a move like this and not improve your pitching.

 

Let them spend.

 

Except Soriano would be replacing Juan Pierre and Lugo would be replacing Cesar Izturis and Ronny Cedeno.

 

Exactly. KC's excellent analysis is regarding the marginality of the replacement players. Hence his point that upgrading on a position basis from bad to OK does just as much for your team as upgrading from OK to good or good to great. However, upgrading from bad to OK cost significantly less than the other alternatives. Hence, Lugo does just as much for your offense (over 2006 cubs SS production) as Sori does (over 2006 cubs CF production).

 

The problem with this argument is that if we signed Lugo to play SS we'd still need an outfielder. That outfielder's salary would have to be added also in order to see what the difference between Lugo+Outfielder is better than Soriano+Izturis, with the possibility of subtracting Izturis's salary from part 1 if he was able to be traded (which is reasonable).

[jjgman21]

 

OPS+ hides Soriano's inability to get on base(I know you've argued about the marginal benefit on this point before, but I'm going to have to disagree). It was the first year he has EVER put up a .340+ OBP. EVER. And we just gave him a truckload of money to be our leadoff hitter and RF, and his (in)ability to get on base is mediocre to awful for both(even with the lower than "expected" production of RF's).

 

shall we ignore the fact that the supposed better alternative has an anomalous OBP year inflating his OBP? don't by it all you want, but the difference between Lugo's career OBP and Soriano's career OBP translates to about 10 additional times on base over the course of a 700 AB season. with 1/4 the power.

 

the point about him leading off I have no argument with. you will find me over and over in these threads saying he shouldn't bat leadoff. hopefully Lou will make a change if the OBP takes a plummet.

[nilodnayr]

so we went from terrible to average spending 150 million in the process when we probably could have done it for less than half that.

 

emphasis added.

 

I love the arm chair quarterbacking of GMs. noboday has any idea whatsoever of what happens in these negotiations, yet people presume they know what probably could have happened.

 

Agreed.

 

Ok, then I GUARANTEE Lugo signs for less than 67M. You are obviously missing KC's point.

 

not at all. I can perfectly see how this deal has zero appeal if viewed completely in a vacuum.

 

are you seriously arguing that Lugo will outperform Soriano? do we really know what Drew and Lee will sign for?

 

you just completely contradicted yourself. You say that you aren't missing KC's point, but then ask if I am arguing that lugo will outperform soriano. The arguement is that Lugo over cubs 2006 SS = Sori over cubs 2006 CF. Not that Lugo is better than Soriano.

[Rob]

Some of you need some serious help. We just signed the top free agent out there and all you can do is complain about how horrible a deal it is. Some of you will never be happy. Even when we win the World Series you'll cry about how we did it or some other bs.

 

We just signed SORIANO!!!!! Enjoy it or go cheer for the Royals!!!!!

 

First off, Soriano clocks in at #4 on the "readily-available" market. Aramis, Matsuzaka, and Drew all have been and will continue to be more productive than Soriano for the immediate future. And there's a huge drop down in production from those top 3 to Soriano.

 

That doesn't even take into account the fact we could easily get a few guys in trades, too. ARod, Manny, and Cabrera are all out there for the taking right now... and they're all exponentially better bets than Soriano.

 

I'll hold off complaining about the contract for the time being, as we have no hard figures... but the fact remains that sinking that kind of money and years into a merely "very good" at best player is fiscally irresponsible. Is that much of an issue of the Cubs continue to bump payroll? Probably not for 3-5 years at least... once he declines, it could be trouble (but there is the chance there's some option years we can get out of).

 

The real issue at hand is what happens if the Cubs are sold soon (as has been rumored). If a new ownership group cuts the payroll to the $100 mil level, this signing would be enough to drag this team down the crapper for half a decade.

 

Let's do an experiment.

 

I'll give you Soriano's numbers and a mystery player. You tell me how much this mystery player is worth to you.

 

2004:

 

Soriano - .280/.324/.484 OPS+ of 98

Player X - .274/.352/.468 OPS+ of 105

 

2005:

 

Soriano - .268/.309/.512 OPS+ of 110

Player X - .305/.355/.474 OPS+ of 115

 

2006:

 

Soriano - .277/.351/.560 OPS+ of 132

Player X - .278/.355/.398 OPS+ of 93

 

 

 

Both players had years in 2006 out of line with their career numbers. While Player X is indeed three years older, he has shown himself to be quite capable of outperforming Soriano by doing so 2 of the last 3 years.

 

Would you even think of giving Todd Walker five million per year for 4 years to patrol right field? How about seventeen million per? I sure as hell wouldn't... But he's not that far from being comprable to Soriano as an offensive threat.

[Mephistopheles]

shall we ignore the fact that the supposed better alternative has an anomalous OBP year inflating his OBP? don't by it all you want, but the difference between Lugo's career OBP and Soriano's career OBP translates to about 10 additional times on base over the course of a 700 AB season. with 1/4 the power.

 

it still doesnt matter because signing lugo gives us an additional OBP boost (and power), and thats not having Ronny Cedeno and/or Cesar Izturis combining for 700 plate appearances.

Edited November 20, 2006 by Mephistopheles

[A New Era]

Soriano is bad, we shouldn't have signed him. I won't be saying this if Soriano repeats his #'s next year. Oh wait, that's right. He won't. Because I am psychic.

[questionmarkgrace]

Look at total bases, when lugo is on base he is not in scoring position as nearly as often as soriano.

[nilodnayr]

Are me and Nilo the only people that understand that last year was an anomaly? Quoting nonsense like 40-40-40 and RBI is bad enough, but the entire point is that he had a career year and he's very likely not going to do that again.

 

:(

 

Terribly sorry, I forgot/was too hasty to remember you and CubinNY.

 

I think Jon is pretty much in our camp too...and I haven't really seen anything from Navin either way, but its been tough to keep up.

[Mephistopheles]

Soriano is bad, we shouldn't have signed him. I won't be saying this if Soriano repeats his #'s next year. Oh wait, that's right. He won't. Because I am psychic.

 

Even if he DOES repeat his numbers, signing Lugo is still a better alternative on the field, without even talking about monetary differences.