SORIANO HAS ARRIVED!

NewUserName · June 10, 2007

Who cares what he's making? It's not coming out of my pocket.

Soriano could single tomorrow, and it would LOWER his June slugging percentage. Absolutely zoned in.

It is coming from the money that is going to be used to bring in other players though. Just because we aren't directly responsible for the budget doesn't mean that it doesn't affect us as fans, or that we shouldn't take it into consideration.

For years Cub fans have cried the Cubs don't do what it takes to get in top teir FA's. They finally do it but people still aren't happy.

Not me. It is a crappy way of building a year in year out championship contending team. The best way to build a championship caliber team is to have a productive farm system. The one good thing about the Cubs overpaying Soriano is they will be forced to build thru their farm system now because they will not have enough money to sign top caliber free agents. Of course that really means the Cubs will probably sign 3rd tier free agents to fill out the roster instead of actually playing a youngster.

sunnydoo · June 10, 2007

.326/.373/.941 in 2007

v.

.282/.328/.841 in career

i likey the 2007 version more better. :wink:

June so far:

.514/.538/1.674 in 8 games...that is obscene.

Jon · June 10, 2007

In his career, Soriano's OPS with the bases empty is .862. With runners on, it's .799 and with RISP it's .770. So no matter where in the lineup you hit him, he becomes a worse hitter with men on base, and it makes little sense to move him down in the order in hopes of getting men on in front of him, thus making him a worse hitter.

In comparison, Ramirez has an .804 lifetime OPS with the bases empty, .858 with runners on, and .870 with RISP (.998 with them loaded btw). Lee goes .864 -- .867 -- .884. Just for fun, Manny Ramirez: .951 -- 1.062 -- 1.067. Now there's a guy who should never lead off. Soriano should, unless you want to make him less effective.

Also, with all the money the Cubs have blown on the Rusches and Neifis and Joneses and Izturisises of the world, it's nice for once that they overpaid for someone who's actually productive, whether he's truly "worth it" or not.
You get a different sense of things if you look at the none on/men on splits year by year. Over his last five seasons:

2002
Overall - .300/.332/.547/.879
None on (464 ABs) - .287/.322/.550/.872
Men on (232 ABs) - .328/.353/.543/.896

2003
Overall - .290/.338/.525/.863
None on (439 ABs) - .305/.348/.569/.917
Men on (243 ABs) - .263/.320/.444/.764

2004
Overall - .280/.324/.484/.808
None on (358 ABs) - .265/.308/.480/.788
Men on (250 ABs) - .300/.345/.488/.833

2005
Overall - .268/.309/.512/.821
None on (349 ABs) - .292/.340/.547/.887
Men on (288 ABs) - .240/.273/.469/.742

2006
Overall - .277/.351/.560/.911
None on (435 ABs) - .278/.326/.556/.882
Men on (212 ABs) - .274/.396/.566/.962

His career splits with nobody on vs. with men on are really skewed by two seasons (2003 when he had a good year and 2005 when he had a mediocre year). Of those five seasons, though, he actually had a higher OPS with men on base compared to nobody on in three of the five seasons. And that includes his career year, when he had a significantly higher OPS with men on base than he did when he came up with the bases empty (mainly because of a huge increase in walks).

I really don't think there's any real statistical foundation to the belief that he's just a better hitter batting leadoff than hitting in the middle of the order. The idea that he can only do well batting leadoff just took off earlier, yet I have yet to see anything that makes me believe there is anything actually behind it.

I don't see how breaking it down by year changes the fact that his OPS over his career is significantly higher with nobody on base. Solo homers offend my sensibilities too but that doesn't mean I have to ignore reality. The bottom line is that if they keep winning, he's probably gonna stay there, and I bet we can all agree that would be just fine.

Those numbers show that his career splits do a pretty poor job of telling the whole story. While he may have better stats overall throughout his career with the bases empty than with men on base, if you look at the last five seasons, he was actually better with men on in three of those seasons than with the bases empty. Yet because his splits in the other two seasons were more pronounced, his overall numbers show him hitting better with the bases empty. What breaking them down by seasons shows, though, is that you cannot assume that he hit better with the bases empty throughout his career. Across his career, yes, but not throughout. Not when he actually hit better with men on base more often than he did with the bases empty over the last five seasons.

As a hypothetical, let's say his OPS was .200 points higher with the bases empty in one season but in the other four seasons, his OPS was .020 higher with men on. While his overall splits would show him hitting better with the bases empty, would that accurately reflect how he hits in those situations? I'd be more likely to look at the other four seasons where his numbers were right around his overall line for each of those seasons and see that as what we should expect. The fact he actually hit better with men on during his career season probably carries a little bit more weight with me, as well.

So yes, it may be a fact that he hit better with the bases empty over his career thus far, but it's also a fact that he hit better with runners on base more often (at least on the scale of a full season) than he did with the bases empty over the last five seasons.

The statistical support for the idea that he has to hit leadoff just isn't there.

cubfan1955 · June 10, 2007

In his career, Soriano's OPS with the bases empty is .862. With runners on, it's .799 and with RISP it's .770. So no matter where in the lineup you hit him, he becomes a worse hitter with men on base, and it makes little sense to move him down in the order in hopes of getting men on in front of him, thus making him a worse hitter.

In comparison, Ramirez has an .804 lifetime OPS with the bases empty, .858 with runners on, and .870 with RISP (.998 with them loaded btw). Lee goes .864 -- .867 -- .884. Just for fun, Manny Ramirez: .951 -- 1.062 -- 1.067. Now there's a guy who should never lead off. Soriano should, unless you want to make him less effective.

Also, with all the money the Cubs have blown on the Rusches and Neifis and Joneses and Izturisises of the world, it's nice for once that they overpaid for someone who's actually productive, whether he's truly "worth it" or not.
You get a different sense of things if you look at the none on/men on splits year by year. Over his last five seasons:

2002
Overall - .300/.332/.547/.879
None on (464 ABs) - .287/.322/.550/.872
Men on (232 ABs) - .328/.353/.543/.896

2003
Overall - .290/.338/.525/.863
None on (439 ABs) - .305/.348/.569/.917
Men on (243 ABs) - .263/.320/.444/.764

2004
Overall - .280/.324/.484/.808
None on (358 ABs) - .265/.308/.480/.788
Men on (250 ABs) - .300/.345/.488/.833

2005
Overall - .268/.309/.512/.821
None on (349 ABs) - .292/.340/.547/.887
Men on (288 ABs) - .240/.273/.469/.742

2006
Overall - .277/.351/.560/.911
None on (435 ABs) - .278/.326/.556/.882
Men on (212 ABs) - .274/.396/.566/.962

His career splits with nobody on vs. with men on are really skewed by two seasons (2003 when he had a good year and 2005 when he had a mediocre year). Of those five seasons, though, he actually had a higher OPS with men on base compared to nobody on in three of the five seasons. And that includes his career year, when he had a significantly higher OPS with men on base than he did when he came up with the bases empty (mainly because of a huge increase in walks).

I really don't think there's any real statistical foundation to the belief that he's just a better hitter batting leadoff than hitting in the middle of the order. The idea that he can only do well batting leadoff just took off earlier, yet I have yet to see anything that makes me believe there is anything actually behind it.

I don't see how breaking it down by year changes the fact that his OPS over his career is significantly higher with nobody on base. Solo homers offend my sensibilities too but that doesn't mean I have to ignore reality. The bottom line is that if they keep winning, he's probably gonna stay there, and I bet we can all agree that would be just fine.
Those numbers show that his career splits do a pretty poor job of telling the whole story. While he may have better stats overall throughout his career with the bases empty than with men on base, if you look at the last five seasons, he was actually better with men on in three of those seasons than with the bases empty. Yet because his splits in the other two seasons were more pronounced, his overall numbers show him hitting better with the bases empty. What breaking them down by seasons shows, though, is that you cannot assume that he hit better with the bases empty throughout his career. Across his career, yes, but not throughout. Not when he actually hit better with men on base more often than he did with the bases empty over the last five seasons.

As a hypothetical, let's say his OPS was .200 points higher with the bases empty in one season but in the other four seasons, his OPS was .020 higher with men on. While his overall splits would show him hitting better with the bases empty, would that accurately reflect how he hits in those situations? I'd be more likely to look at the other four seasons where his numbers were right around his overall line for each of those seasons and see that as what we should expect. The fact he actually hit better with men on during his career season probably carries a little bit more weight with me, as well.

So yes, it may be a fact that he hit better with the bases empty over his career thus far, but it's also a fact that he hit better with runners on base more often (at least on the scale of a full season) than he did with the bases empty over the last five seasons.

The statistical support for the idea that he has to hit leadoff just isn't there.

BA DA BING!

Thanks for posting THE facts.

Paying a guy $136 million over 8 years to be your leadoff hitter when he has the potential to hit 40-50 homers a year is beyond stupidity. Words can't describe it adequately.

Mizzou · June 10, 2007

Soriano this year:

Leading off: .337/.382/.589/.972

Not leading off: .179/.258/.286/.544

So this year and last year, he's been significantly better leading off. This is fact. Who cares how he performed 5 years ago? That's completely irrelevant.

TB_11 · June 10, 2007

i'm pleasantly surprised, soriano has been very good so far.

though i wonder if he can sustain his .377 babip.
That's due to regress, but I've seen more outrageous BABIP and for longer (BP Upton).
I'm not sure "regress" is the right word, though. Crash might be more accurate. Even last year his BABIP was .302.

Soriano has never been a high BA guy. In fact, his BA last year was .277. His career high in 2002 was an even .300. Once his BABIP starts to drop, hopefully he'll become a little more patient. His IsoD is .027 lower than it was last year, which will need some improvement over the full season, and his IsoP .041 lower. The challenge for him will be to see if he can continue to put up good numbers when some of those balls start not to drop for hits.

Personally, I'm just hoping for a few good seasons out of Soriano. I don't think there's any way he lives up to his contract in any of the 8 seasons (when looking at the contract divided evenly across the seasons instead of the way it's backloaded right now), so I can only keep my fingers crossed that something good happens very soon with this team. Even with the possibilities of market inflation down the road, it doesn't look pretty.

The way he's hitting this year, he should have a higher BA he has put up historically. His LD% is 22.1% this year, which translates roughly to a BABIP of .340. Over the last three years he's put up LD% of 18.7%, 19.0%, and 19.6%. While his BABIP is due to regress, it shouldn't drop to just .300 if he keeps on hitting like he has.

Keener98 · June 10, 2007

Soriano this year:

Leading off: .337/.382/.589/.972
Not leading off: .179/.258/.286/.544

So this year and last year, he's been significantly better leading off. This is fact. Who cares how he performed 5 years ago? That's completely irrelevant.

LOL he has how many at bats outside of the leadoff spot this year?20-30 maybe? That has to be the most irrelevant argument Ive seen in awile.

He has 29 AB's outside of the leadoff spot. If you take anything from those stats, then that says it all right there.

Sammy Sofa · June 10, 2007

OK, I've seen the arguments for and against Soirano in terms of whether or not he's been a better career hitter in the leadoff spot.

Which is right?

Mizzou · June 10, 2007

Soriano this year:

Leading off: .337/.382/.589/.972
Not leading off: .179/.258/.286/.544

So this year and last year, he's been significantly better leading off. This is fact. Who cares how he performed 5 years ago? That's completely irrelevant.

LOL he has how many at bats outside of the leadoff spot this year?20-30 maybe? That has to be the most irrelevant argument Ive seen in awile.

He has 29 AB's outside of the leadoff spot. If you take anything from those stats, then that says it all right there.

Yeah it's a small sample size, but it's better than looking at his numbers from five years ago. Let me ask you this... how many at bats out of the lead off slot would you like to see this year before you make a decision?

Keener98 · June 10, 2007

Soriano this year:

Leading off: .337/.382/.589/.972
Not leading off: .179/.258/.286/.544

So this year and last year, he's been significantly better leading off. This is fact. Who cares how he performed 5 years ago? That's completely irrelevant.

LOL he has how many at bats outside of the leadoff spot this year?20-30 maybe? That has to be the most irrelevant argument Ive seen in awile.

He has 29 AB's outside of the leadoff spot. If you take anything from those stats, then that says it all right there.
Yeah it's a small sample size, but it's better than looking at his numbers from five years ago. Let me ask you this... how many at bats out of the lead off slot would you like to see this year before you make a decision?

I dont have an exact number, but I know its a lot more than 29 AB's. I mean if we take anything from 29 AB's then Chris Shelton was the best hitter in baseball last year. Let me ask you this...With the way Soriano is hitting right now, do you honestly think if we put him down at 3-5 hes going to stop hitting?

Tracer Bullet · June 10, 2007

Soriano this year:

Leading off: .337/.382/.589/.972
Not leading off: .179/.258/.286/.544

So this year and last year, he's been significantly better leading off. This is fact. Who cares how he performed 5 years ago? That's completely irrelevant.

LOL he has how many at bats outside of the leadoff spot this year?20-30 maybe? That has to be the most irrelevant argument Ive seen in awile.

He has 29 AB's outside of the leadoff spot. If you take anything from those stats, then that says it all right there.
Yeah it's a small sample size, but it's better than looking at his numbers from five years ago. Let me ask you this... how many at bats out of the lead off slot would you like to see this year before you make a decision?

all of them

cubfan1955 · June 10, 2007

OK, I've seen the arguments for and against Soirano in terms of whether or not he's been a better career hitter in the leadoff spot.

Which is right?

The right thing is to try to maximize your run scoring potential and gain victories over the opposition. I believe scoring more runs achieves this and I think the Cubs would score more runs with Soriano batting 5th than with JJ hitting there. (JJ should be on the bench or gone anyway but that's another thread.)

Mizzou · June 10, 2007

Soriano this year:

Leading off: .337/.382/.589/.972
Not leading off: .179/.258/.286/.544

So this year and last year, he's been significantly better leading off. This is fact. Who cares how he performed 5 years ago? That's completely irrelevant.

LOL he has how many at bats outside of the leadoff spot this year?20-30 maybe? That has to be the most irrelevant argument Ive seen in awile.

He has 29 AB's outside of the leadoff spot. If you take anything from those stats, then that says it all right there.
Yeah it's a small sample size, but it's better than looking at his numbers from five years ago. Let me ask you this... how many at bats out of the lead off slot would you like to see this year before you make a decision?

I dont have an exact number, but I know its a lot more than 29 AB's. I mean if we take anything from 29 AB's then Chris Shelton was the best hitter in baseball last year. Let me ask you this...With the way Soriano is hitting right now, do you honestly think if we put him down at 3-5 hes going to stop hitting?

We're not just looking at 29 at bats this year. This isn't the first time that Soriano has been better leading off. This isn't that hard to understand.

And to answer your question... yes. Well, he won't completely stop hitting. But I'd bet money that he would drop off. He's a very sensitive player, we've seen that last year with Washington, and this year playing center vs. playing left.

TB_11 · June 10, 2007

OK, I've seen the arguments for and against Soirano in terms of whether or not he's been a better career hitter in the leadoff spot.

Which is right?
The right thing is to try to maximize your run scoring potential and gain victories over the opposition. I believe scoring more runs achieves this and I think the Cubs would score more runs with Soriano batting 5th than with JJ hitting there. (JJ should be on the bench or gone anyway but that's another thread.)

Even if that means Soriano losing out on PAs? In the NL, a player batting 5th would have 60-70 less PAs in a given year than a player batting 1st.

CubColtPacer · June 10, 2007

For those who want Soriano moved, the other big question becomes-who does the team bat leadoff?

Theriot only has a .330 OBP overall, and since May 3rd has put up a line of .228/.296/.307 (114 AB's)-that's certainly not a player you want at the top of the order.

Murton would be an ok option-he's putting up a .261/.341/.348 line. He's only going to play half the time though anyway, especially when he's still 100 points in OPS behind Floyd.

Floyd would be a decent option as well-he's put up a .306/.364/.423 line. The same thing applies though-he's only going to play half the time, and who knows if that OBP/SLG combo is going to stay the way it is, or if it is going to start to shift towards SLG as the year goes along.

DeRosa and Pie are also options, but Pie is better served where he is right now (taking some of the pressure away) and DeRosa's OBP is falling.

Even if Soriano's numbers don't drop while moving him down in the order (which is doubtful, considering that he's a person who relies on comfort-look at his change both in leadoff and when Pie is on the team, and also his better numbers when he moved back to LF, along with not wanting to be an outfielder last year and then declaring that he doesn't want to be an infielder anymore now that he's used to outfield now), even if that's the case, the loss of production that the Cubs will have with losing at-bats by Soriano and by an inferior hitter taking more at-bats will counteract any more runs driven in by him in a lower spot.

There simply is not much to gain and too much to lose by moving him. At best, you get a balanced effect, and at worst, Soriano's production drops and its a disaster. Plus, the Cubs promised him he would bat leadoff, and they should stick to that promise unless there's a clear reason why they would be better moving him. Here, there's not.

Tracer Bullet · June 10, 2007

Soriano this year:

Leading off: .337/.382/.589/.972
Not leading off: .179/.258/.286/.544

So this year and last year, he's been significantly better leading off. This is fact. Who cares how he performed 5 years ago? That's completely irrelevant.

LOL he has how many at bats outside of the leadoff spot this year?20-30 maybe? That has to be the most irrelevant argument Ive seen in awile.

He has 29 AB's outside of the leadoff spot. If you take anything from those stats, then that says it all right there.
Yeah it's a small sample size, but it's better than looking at his numbers from five years ago. Let me ask you this... how many at bats out of the lead off slot would you like to see this year before you make a decision?

I dont have an exact number, but I know its a lot more than 29 AB's. I mean if we take anything from 29 AB's then Chris Shelton was the best hitter in baseball last year. Let me ask you this...With the way Soriano is hitting right now, do you honestly think if we put him down at 3-5 hes going to stop hitting?
We're not just looking at 29 at bats this year. This isn't the first time that Soriano has been better leading off. This isn't that hard to understand.

And to answer your question... yes. Well, he won't completely stop hitting. But I'd bet money that he would drop off. He's a very sensitive player, we've seen that last year with Washington, and this year playing center vs. playing left.

So now we're buying that playing LF instead of CF is also partially responsible for his surge?

And this is the same sensitive player that threw a fit when the Nationals wanted to put him in the OF (didn't he sit our or nearly sit out some ST games over the move?), then went on to have his career season while playing LF? Sounds to me like it's not so much sensitivity as it is fiction.

Yestheydo · June 10, 2007

There simply is not much to gain and too much to lose by moving him. At best, you get a balanced effect, and at worst, Soriano's production drops and its a disaster. Plus, the Cubs promised him he would bat leadoff, and they should stick to that promise unless there's a clear reason why they would be better moving him. Here, there's not.

Good point. Why move him while they're winning? Even in the two losses this week they scored 10 runs. The offense is looking pretty good; let's worry about the pitching.

cubfan1955 · June 10, 2007

OK, I've seen the arguments for and against Soirano in terms of whether or not he's been a better career hitter in the leadoff spot.

Which is right?
The right thing is to try to maximize your run scoring potential and gain victories over the opposition. I believe scoring more runs achieves this and I think the Cubs would score more runs with Soriano batting 5th than with JJ hitting there. (JJ should be on the bench or gone anyway but that's another thread.)

Even if that means Soriano losing out on PAs? In the NL, a player batting 5th would have 60-70 less PAs in a given year than a player batting 1st.

By that logic our best hitter (Lee) should be leading off to get him the extra AB's.

Tracer Bullet · June 10, 2007

OK, I've seen the arguments for and against Soirano in terms of whether or not he's been a better career hitter in the leadoff spot.

Which is right?
The right thing is to try to maximize your run scoring potential and gain victories over the opposition. I believe scoring more runs achieves this and I think the Cubs would score more runs with Soriano batting 5th than with JJ hitting there. (JJ should be on the bench or gone anyway but that's another thread.)

Even if that means Soriano losing out on PAs? In the NL, a player batting 5th would have 60-70 less PAs in a given year than a player batting 1st.

Yes and for the same reason that no team has their best hitter leading off (not that Soriano is our best hitter, but he's certainly hitting like it right now). You don't want your best hitter coming up on the heels of your 2 worst hitters (8th and P here). Same reason so many people were upset with Dusty for putting Corey, Neifi, etc in front of Lee in 05. You don't put a .500+ SLG guy right behind the worst hitters on your team. It's stupid. How many leadoff hitters in the history of the game were among the league-leaders in HRs and SLG. Soriano was in the top 5 and top 10, respectively last year. If he produces like that, you don't want to waste that power by hitting him after Izturis and the pitcher.

With ARam out, Soriano should hit 4th (just like he hit 3rd w/ Lee out). Even with ARam back, I'd hit Soriano 4th, but 5th would still be better than 1st. Let him hit with guys on base, as long as he can keep up this .900 OPS stuff.

cubfan1955 · June 10, 2007

There simply is not much to gain and too much to lose by moving him. At best, you get a balanced effect, and at worst, Soriano's production drops and its a disaster. Plus, the Cubs promised him he would bat leadoff, and they should stick to that promise unless there's a clear reason why they would be better moving him. Here, there's not.

Good point. Why move him while they're winning? Even in the two losses this week they scored 10 runs. The offense is looking pretty good; let's worry about the pitching.

Last I checked they are 27-33 and 5-5 in their last 10 games. If you want to call that winning fine. I don't.

cubfan1955 · June 10, 2007

For those who want Soriano moved, the other big question becomes-who does the team bat leadoff?
Theriot only has a .330 OBP overall, and since May 3rd has put up a line of .228/.296/.307 (114 AB's)-that's certainly not a player you want at the top of the order.
Murton would be an ok option-he's putting up a .261/.341/.348 line. He's only going to play half the time though anyway, especially when he's still 100 points in OPS behind Floyd.
Floyd would be a decent option as well-he's put up a .306/.364/.423 line. The same thing applies though-he's only going to play half the time, and who knows if that OBP/SLG combo is going to stay the way it is, or if it is going to start to shift towards SLG as the year goes along.
DeRosa and Pie are also options, but Pie is better served where he is right now (taking some of the pressure away) and DeRosa's OBP is falling.

Even if Soriano's numbers don't drop while moving him down in the order (which is doubtful, considering that he's a person who relies on comfort-look at his change both in leadoff and when Pie is on the team, and also his better numbers when he moved back to LF, along with not wanting to be an outfielder last year and then declaring that he doesn't want to be an infielder anymore now that he's used to outfield now), even if that's the case, the loss of production that the Cubs will have with losing at-bats by Soriano and by an inferior hitter taking more at-bats will counteract any more runs driven in by him in a lower spot.

There simply is not much to gain and too much to lose by moving him. At best, you get a balanced effect, and at worst, Soriano's production drops and its a disaster. Plus, the Cubs promised him he would bat leadoff, and they should stick to that promise unless there's a clear reason why they would be better moving him. Here, there's not.

Since we're talking hypotheticals here, Murton for leadoff playing everyday, followed by Pie, Lee, Ramirez, and Soriano. Flip flop Ramirez and Soriano if you like. The options are less ideal if the Cubs insist on playing Jones in RF almost everyday but I'd still rather see Soriano and his bat in the middle of the lineup. I'd much rather have a 2 or 3 run homer in the first than a leadoff shot but that's just me.

Tracer Bullet · June 10, 2007

For those who want Soriano moved, the other big question becomes-who does the team bat leadoff?
Theriot only has a .330 OBP overall, and since May 3rd has put up a line of .228/.296/.307 (114 AB's)-that's certainly not a player you want at the top of the order.
Murton would be an ok option-he's putting up a .261/.341/.348 line. He's only going to play half the time though anyway, especially when he's still 100 points in OPS behind Floyd.
Floyd would be a decent option as well-he's put up a .306/.364/.423 line. The same thing applies though-he's only going to play half the time, and who knows if that OBP/SLG combo is going to stay the way it is, or if it is going to start to shift towards SLG as the year goes along.
DeRosa and Pie are also options, but Pie is better served where he is right now (taking some of the pressure away) and DeRosa's OBP is falling.

Even if Soriano's numbers don't drop while moving him down in the order (which is doubtful, considering that he's a person who relies on comfort-look at his change both in leadoff and when Pie is on the team, and also his better numbers when he moved back to LF, along with not wanting to be an outfielder last year and then declaring that he doesn't want to be an infielder anymore now that he's used to outfield now), even if that's the case, the loss of production that the Cubs will have with losing at-bats by Soriano and by an inferior hitter taking more at-bats will counteract any more runs driven in by him in a lower spot.

There simply is not much to gain and too much to lose by moving him. At best, you get a balanced effect, and at worst, Soriano's production drops and its a disaster. Plus, the Cubs promised him he would bat leadoff, and they should stick to that promise unless there's a clear reason why they would be better moving him. Here, there's not.

Given how far (and quickly) Theriot has fallen, I'd hit him 7th or 8th and let Murton lead off. He's shown the ability to get on base at a .350-.360 clip, which is solid. All those concerned with his lack of power should have those concerns eased b/c he'd be hitting 1st, where power is less important. And Murton should be starting every day in RF anyway.

Actually, I'd start Murton every day in LF and put Soriano in RF, but that's a discussion for a different day. No telling what effect a move to RF and out of the top spot would have on our $136m egg-shelled-psyche star.

BTW - how does Soriano not wanting to move to the OF last year, then putting up career best #s, fit with your suggestion that his performance hinges on comfort? If his comfort dictated his offensive output, would he really have started last season with a .921 OPS in April and .977 in May?

Jon · June 10, 2007

Statistics tell you what happened, especially splits like these when you only have two seasons of non-leadoff numbers to look at, but not always why they happened. There are lots of factors that could explain why he didn't hit well in Texas, not just whether or not he was hitting in the middle of the order.

For those who do think that the numbers really show that he is (not has been, but is) a better hitter in the leadoff spot, would you go so far as to say that he would've hit better in Texas if he was hitting leadoff exclusively? If yes, why? And if no, then I think you'd agree that his career splits don't prove that he will perform better in one spot in the order than another, only that he has.

Yestheydo · June 10, 2007

Last I checked they are 27-33 and 5-5 in their last 10 games. If you want to call that winning fine. I don't.

They're 5-2 in the past week, and playing better than they've played in a long time. Soriano/ Pie are both thriving right where they are. But by all means let's screw with it just so people won't think we're stupid for batting a 40 homer guy at leadoff.

No thank you. Can we at least wait until we lose a few games in a row first? Just in case ?

Tracer Bullet · June 10, 2007

Last I checked they are 27-33 and 5-5 in their last 10 games. If you want to call that winning fine. I don't.

They're 5-2 in the past week, and playing better than they've played in a long time. Soriano/ Pie are both thriving right where they are. But by all means let's screw with it just so people won't think we're stupid for batting a 40 homer guy at leadoff.

No thank you. Can we at least wait until we lose a few games in a row first? Just in case ?

No. Decisions should not be made based on the last 2 (or even 7) games. Is that really what you're suggesting here?

Edited June 10, 2007 by yanrslatr

SORIANO HAS ARRIVED!

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blogs