Secondary Trade Targets

[Have a seat, Neifi]

Ortiz is 31 and Manny's 35 also, FWIW.

 

I think both perspectives are valid, but the fact is a player's "prime" is fluid and often can't be accurately discerned until after it's already ended. Some players don't really hit their stride until their early 30s (like a Steve Finley), some break down by their mid 30s (Garrett Anderson), and some keep on trucking as if they're still 28 (Manny, A-rod, Griffey, Jeter, etc.).

 

I recall that part of the rationalization behind signing a 31-year old Soriano was that the perception is that he's a young 31, and probably won't experience noticeable attrition for another 4-5 years. Now I'm not sure what the exact rationale behind that is - maybe due to his wiry frame and raw ability, I dunno - but I do think every player is subjected to different trends at different rates. For example, the one thing Bonds hasn't lost at all (despite being in his 40s) is his eyesight, which is arguably the most crucial facility a hitter can have. Otherwise, he's a shell of the baserunner and fielder he used to be. So age has affected parts of his game but not others. Point being, it's impossible to predict what's going to happen to these guys as they age, other than point that it's clearly more likely they get injured than if they were 26. But it's by no means assured, and more and more players are remaining productive later into their careers due to strength/conditioning, film, off-season routines, drugs (legal and otherwise), etc...

[weis21]

While one can never really be certain from one year to th next if the window of opportunity is opening or closing, I believe the Cubs better days are in front of them. Their impact players (Soriano, Lee, Ramirez) are all in the prime of their careers. .

 

Soriano is not in the "prime" of his career unless he's going to be playing as long as Minni Minoso or Julio Franco.

 

He's 31 and will be 32 next January.

 

31 is past prime? news to me. Other players past their prime:

 

A-Rod(32 this month)

Vlad(31)

Jeter(33)

DLee(31)

Tori Hunter(31)

 

Not to mention players like sheffield and griffey who aren't in their prime, but when healthy can contribute very late in their careers. 31 may be in the later part of their prime but surely not out of it.

 

It's past prime. It does not mean end of career. It means past their prime, which typically occurs from around 26-28/29 in hitters.

 

so even though you are putting up as good(or in some cases better) numbers than you did earlier in your career you are past your prime? This doesn't make sense to me. Shouldn't your production be the meter used to determine your "prime", instead of age?

[jersey cubs fan]

so even though you are putting up as good(or in some cases better) numbers than you did earlier in your career you are past your prime? This doesn't make sense to me. Shouldn't your production be the meter used to determine your "prime", instead of age?

 

The reason that age is listed as prime years is because players' most productive seasons generally coincide with those ages. Players tend to improve up until around 26 or so, they peak sometime in the 26-29 range, plateau in the 29-30/31 area and decline starting in their early to mid 30's. Soriano, at 31.5 years, is likely to be a guy whose numbers have seen their heights and will begin to pull back.

 

Of the names you listed, DLee put up his best numbers at age 29, he's far off that pace now and likely will never return to that pace.

Jeter's best year was at age 25, he's fluctuated quite a bit since then, but he's probably not going to be returning to his best numbers. Vladdy's best year was at age 26, he's flirted with those numbers since then, and he is again this year, but again, we're probably not going to see him best those numbers.

 

Hunter has been very inconsistent from year to year. He's on pace to have a career year, but he's no guarantee to maintain those numbers.

 

Alex Rodriguez is the best player in baseball. His best years were between 24 and 29, with the two best seasons coinciding with each of those ages. He's on pace to eclipse those numbers this year, but there's a lot of time to play.

 

Soriano doesn't compare with ARod if you want to talk about guys capable of sustaining greatness. When somebody talks about the Cubs best players being in the prime of their careers, they are really reaching. Soriano is past his prime years. He may pull out a career year sometime in the next few years. But by and large, you can count on his age 31-35 seasons to be a step off what he did from 25-30. He's not in his prime.

 

This isn't just made up nonsense by people who want to pick on the Cubs. Players are at their best in the mid to late 20's, while pitchers are a couple years later. Truly great teams, like the late 90's Yankees, with great players like Williams, Jeter, Posada, Tino, Knoblauch, have studs in their 20's and can sustain winning over a long time.

 

If your best players are in their 30's already, you better win now, because contrary to what the original post insinuated, the Cubs best days are not ahead of them, not with Ramirez already at 29 and Lee and Soriano in their 30's. They will need an influx of great younger players if they want that window to stay open.

[abuck1220]

whew...it makes me feel better to know that soriano is a "young" 31. does that mean he'll be a "young" 37 when he's pulling in 18 mil and ops-ing .750?

[JeffH]

Dragnet threadjacking trivia:

 

What is Sgt. Friday's badge number and why?

714, because that's how many home runs Babe Ruth hit.

 

Well done.

[weis21]

well whatever, i guess we have different definitions of "peak". Of all of the examples that I stated, all are in the top 5 in AVG. or HR in their respective league. If you are putting up those numbers, then to me your in your still in your "peak". You may not be in 3 or even 2 more years. But right now you are. That was the argument.

[jersey cubs fan]

well whatever, i guess we have different definitions of "peak". Of all of the examples that I stated, all are in the top 5 in AVG. or HR in their respective league. If you are putting up those numbers, then to me your in your still in your "peak". You may not be in 3 or even 2 more years. But right now you are. That was the argument.

 

That's a really bizarre and arbitrary definition of peak.

[Have a seat, Neifi]

whew...it makes me feel better to know that soriano is a "young" 31. does that mean he'll be a "young" 37 when he's pulling in 18 mil and ops-ing .750?

Hey man, just reporting what I read on this board at the time. As I mentioned it that post, I'm not even sure what they're talking about. Just hypothesizing. He definitely 'feels' younger than 31 to me, though perhaps based solely on how he looks.

 

Also, the future will not be brighter if Zambrano walks after the season. Then we'd have our 3 best hitters on the wrong side of 30 with no #1 starter, a bloated payroll and new ownership.

[Guest]

I think a less "mockable" way to put it would be this: Soriano is expected to age well because he is so athletic. He should have an extended peak and age relatively gracefully. According to one theory, anyway.

 

Lee is an interesting case. Wrist injuries are so tricky with power hitters. Some guys never recover the bat speed and some guys just take a couple seasons to get all the way back. Only time will tell if Lee has permanently lost that extra oomph or if we'll see more power later in the contract.

 

In a touch of irony, Choi is a guy that never really fully recovered from his hand/wrist issues when he was at Iowa.

[jersey cubs fan]

I think a less "mockable" way to put it would be this: Soriano is expected to age well because he is so athletic. He should have an extended peak and age relatively gracefully. According to one theory, anyway.

 

Or maybe he "feels" younger because so many people were used to his former stated age before that 3 year offseason.

 

As far as Soriano aging gracefully due to his athleticism, the contrast to that theory would be that since his game relies so heavily on his athleticism (as opposed to somebody like Bonds' whose game is completely different), the inevitable wearing down of a 30-something player could accelerate that decline.

[Guest]

I think a less "mockable" way to put it would be this: Soriano is expected to age well because he is so athletic. He should have an extended peak and age relatively gracefully. According to one theory, anyway.

 

Or maybe he "feels" younger because so many people were used to his former stated age before that 3 year offseason.

 

As far as Soriano aging gracefully due to his athleticism, the contrast to that theory would be that since his game relies so heavily on his athleticism (as opposed to somebody like Bonds' whose game is completely different), the inevitable wearing down of a 30-something player could accelerate that decline.

I'd definitely expect that the value provided by his steals to go down, but hopefully that will cause him not to try so often. He gets picked off and thrown out too much for his steals to be of much value right now, anyway.

 

I don't think his hitting style should be impacted that much by the acceleration you mention. He should be able to drop that big ol' bat head down on those ankle high pitches in the future, too.

[weis21]

well whatever, i guess we have different definitions of "peak". Of all of the examples that I stated, all are in the top 5 in AVG. or HR in their respective league. If you are putting up those numbers, then to me your in your still in your "peak". You may not be in 3 or even 2 more years. But right now you are. That was the argument.

 

That's a really bizarre and arbitrary definition of peak.

 

For crying out loud, a lot of players still produce as well as ever in their early 30's (even 31.5 :shock: ). If they are, then I would say they are still at the "peak" region of their career. What is so damn bizarre about that? Obviously each player is different then another. So to make the statement "a player over 29 years old is past his prime" is too broad of a generalization. Some are, some aren't.

 

I think i'll just go bang my head against the wall now.

[weis21]

and for the record, I was never arguing that Soriano was or was not past his prime. I was simply saying that I thought that age alone was not enough to determine who is past their prime.

[jersey cubs fan]

well whatever, i guess we have different definitions of "peak". Of all of the examples that I stated, all are in the top 5 in AVG. or HR in their respective league. If you are putting up those numbers, then to me your in your still in your "peak". You may not be in 3 or even 2 more years. But right now you are. That was the argument.

 

That's a really bizarre and arbitrary definition of peak.

 

For crying out loud, a lot of players still produce as well as ever in their early 30's (even 31.5 :shock: ). If they are, then I would say they are still at the "peak" region of their career. What is so damn bizarre about that? Obviously each player is different then another. So to make the statement "a player over 29 years old is past his prime" is too broad of a generalization. Some are, some aren't.

 

I think i'll just go bang my head against the wall now.

 

Bang harder.

 

To say a guy must be in his peak if he is top 5 in his league in AVG or HR is absurd. You don't understand the concept of peak. To be past your prime does not mean you stink. It means you aren't as good as you were at your best. ARod is the only guy you listed who is outperforming what he has done at younger ages. Soriano is off the pace he set last year and will probably remain there throughout his time with the Cubs. He's past his prime.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Soriano's numbers now are nearly identical to where they were at the break last year. Seems pretty arbitrary to label a player past his prime just because they don't repeat the best season of their career(Soriano is putting up the 2nd best season of his career, OPS wise).

[CubinNY]

well whatever, i guess we have different definitions of "peak". Of all of the examples that I stated, all are in the top 5 in AVG. or HR in their respective league. If you are putting up those numbers, then to me your in your still in your "peak". You may not be in 3 or even 2 more years. But right now you are. That was the argument.

 

That's a really bizarre and arbitrary definition of peak.

 

For crying out loud, a lot of players still produce as well as ever in their early 30's (even 31.5 :shock: ). If they are, then I would say they are still at the "peak" region of their career. What is so damn bizarre about that? Obviously each player is different then another. So to make the statement "a player over 29 years old is past his prime" is too broad of a generalization. Some are, some aren't.

 

I think i'll just go bang my head against the wall now.

 

Bang harder.

 

To say a guy must be in his peak if he is top 5 in his league in AVG or HR is absurd. You don't understand the concept of peak. To be past your prime does not mean you stink. It means you aren't as good as you were at your best. ARod is the only guy you listed who is outperforming what he has done at younger ages. Soriano is off the pace he set last year and will probably remain there throughout his time with the Cubs. He's past his prime.

 

Just to tag on and to reiterate:

 

PAST PRIME DOES NOT MEAN WASHED UP.

 

It means not likely to get significantly better. Some players plateau, not many though. Most get worse and stay worse (than their prime) until they retire.

 

I'm with Abuck, I don't fancy seeing a 38 year young Soriano in a Cub uniform making 18 million. However, that doesn't mean that he won't be an ok player.

[jersey cubs fan]

Soriano's numbers now are nearly identical to where they were at the break last year. Seems pretty arbitrary to label a player past his prime just because they don't repeat the best season of their career(Soriano is putting up the 2nd best season of his career, OPS wise).

 

Prime years are 26-29. I don't see how it's arbitrary to say a player who is 31 is past his prime. Soriano has an OPS+ of 126 right now, below what he had at 26, 27 and 30.

 

This all started when somebody mistakenly claimed the Cubs future looks bright because their 3 best hitters are in the middle of their prime, when in fact, that couldn't be further from the truth. The Cubs, as is usually their M.O., have failed to take advantage of the prime of their best players (Ramirez, Lee) or acquired players after their best days were behind them.

[weis21]

I'm just saying that any of those players that I mentioned and a lot of others could have a career year past the age of 30. It wouldn't be the first time and it wouldn't be unheard of. Many players won't, but others will. I understand what you are saying, and I agree that many don't duplicate their career best years which are often in the mid to high 20's. However, each player ages differently and those that keep in very good shape are very likely to have great seasons well into their 30's. That was my entire point to begin with.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Soriano's numbers now are nearly identical to where they were at the break last year. Seems pretty arbitrary to label a player past his prime just because they don't repeat the best season of their career(Soriano is putting up the 2nd best season of his career, OPS wise).

 

Prime years are 26-29. I don't see how it's arbitrary to say a player who is 31 is past his prime. Soriano has an OPS+ of 126 right now, below what he had at 26, 27 and 30.

 

Prime years are not static for everybody, it goes back to what Have a seat, Neifi! was talking about. His OPS+ for this year is trivially lower than a couple years past, especially considering the difference in OBP making up any difference in league/park factor. The point is that Soriano is playing just as well as he has at any point in his career(again, look to last year's numbers at the break), I don't see how you can say he's past his prime just because he's 31. Also, 26-29 isn't universally accepted as the normal prime years either, ranges from 28-32 have also been cited.

[CubinNY]

Soriano's numbers now are nearly identical to where they were at the break last year. Seems pretty arbitrary to label a player past his prime just because they don't repeat the best season of their career(Soriano is putting up the 2nd best season of his career, OPS wise).

 

Prime years are 26-29. I don't see how it's arbitrary to say a player who is 31 is past his prime. Soriano has an OPS+ of 126 right now, below what he had at 26, 27 and 30.

 

Prime years are not static for everybody, it goes back to what Have a seat, Neifi! was talking about. His OPS+ for this year is trivially lower than a couple years past, especially considering the difference in OBP making up any difference in league/park factor. The point is that Soriano is playing just as well as he has at any point in his career(again, look to last year's numbers at the break), I don't see how you can say he's past his prime just because he's 31. Also, 26-29 isn't universally accepted as the normal prime years either, ranges from 28-32 have also been cited.

 

OK. Let's not lose sight of the point here. Whether the prime is 26-29 or 28-32 Soriano, Lee, and Aramis are not "entering" their prime they are "leaving" their prime.

[jersey cubs fan]

Soriano's numbers now are nearly identical to where they were at the break last year. Seems pretty arbitrary to label a player past his prime just because they don't repeat the best season of their career(Soriano is putting up the 2nd best season of his career, OPS wise).

 

Prime years are 26-29. I don't see how it's arbitrary to say a player who is 31 is past his prime. Soriano has an OPS+ of 126 right now, below what he had at 26, 27 and 30.

 

Prime years are not static for everybody, it goes back to what Have a seat, Neifi! was talking about. His OPS+ for this year is trivially lower than a couple years past, especially considering the difference in OBP making up any difference in league/park factor. The point is that Soriano is playing just as well as he has at any point in his career(again, look to last year's numbers at the break), I don't see how you can say he's past his prime just because he's 31. Also, 26-29 isn't universally accepted as the normal prime years either, ranges from 28-32 have also been cited.

 

OK. Let's not lose sight of the point here. Whether the prime is 26-29 or 28-32 Soriano, Lee, and Aramis are not "entering" their prime they are "leaving" their prime.

 

How dare you. These are all individuals and we have to judge them individually. You can't just make assumptions based on their ages.

[weis21]

Soriano's numbers now are nearly identical to where they were at the break last year. Seems pretty arbitrary to label a player past his prime just because they don't repeat the best season of their career(Soriano is putting up the 2nd best season of his career, OPS wise).

 

Prime years are 26-29. I don't see how it's arbitrary to say a player who is 31 is past his prime. Soriano has an OPS+ of 126 right now, below what he had at 26, 27 and 30.

 

Prime years are not static for everybody, it goes back to what Have a seat, Neifi! was talking about. His OPS+ for this year is trivially lower than a couple years past, especially considering the difference in OBP making up any difference in league/park factor. The point is that Soriano is playing just as well as he has at any point in his career(again, look to last year's numbers at the break), I don't see how you can say he's past his prime just because he's 31. Also, 26-29 isn't universally accepted as the normal prime years either, ranges from 28-32 have also been cited.

 

OK. Let's not lose sight of the point here. Whether the prime is 26-29 or 28-32 Soriano, Lee, and Aramis are not "entering" their prime they are "leaving" their prime.

 

I never said they were "entering" their prime. I said that 31 wasn't necessarily past their prime.

[A New Era]

While one can never really be certain from one year to th next if the window of opportunity is opening or closing, I believe the Cubs better days are in front of them. Their impact players (Soriano, Lee, Ramirez) are all in the prime of their careers. They have a pretty decent rotation that has plenty of upside in Hill and Marshall. And they have some good youth in Pie, Therot, Pagan and Fontenot.

 

If the Cubs believe they can and will re-sign Zambrano, then I would not be that upset if "significant" move(s) were NOT made by July 31. While they've been playing well of late, I don't want them "breaking the bank" because the might get to 87-89 wins and have a shot in the playoffs. That's the impetuous line of thinking the Cubs are so famous for doing in the past (remember Matt Karchner and his impact). I think this team (even in its current state) can be better next year than this year.

 

I'd rather the Cubs stand pat as opposed to making some desperation move that might pay off this year but come back to haunt them in the future.

 

I agree, I'd rather get somebody, who used correctly. . could really help us. A RH bat off the bench, or for a platoon in RF. Floyd is putting up decent #'s. Platoon him with a RH bat and that would be a great platoon. Someone not named Pagan or Jones though. I do like that they played Ward in RF that one game. :lol:

[Mephistopheles]

Soriano's numbers now are nearly identical to where they were at the break last year. Seems pretty arbitrary to label a player past his prime just because they don't repeat the best season of their career(Soriano is putting up the 2nd best season of his career, OPS wise).

 

Prime years are 26-29. I don't see how it's arbitrary to say a player who is 31 is past his prime. Soriano has an OPS+ of 126 right now, below what he had at 26, 27 and 30.

 

Prime years are not static for everybody, it goes back to what Have a seat, Neifi! was talking about. His OPS+ for this year is trivially lower than a couple years past, especially considering the difference in OBP making up any difference in league/park factor. The point is that Soriano is playing just as well as he has at any point in his career(again, look to last year's numbers at the break), I don't see how you can say he's past his prime just because he's 31. Also, 26-29 isn't universally accepted as the normal prime years either, ranges from 28-32 have also been cited.

 

OK. Let's not lose sight of the point here. Whether the prime is 26-29 or 28-32 Soriano, Lee, and Aramis are not "entering" their prime they are "leaving" their prime.

 

How dare you. These are all individuals and we have to judge them individually. You can't just make assumptions based on their ages.

 

yes you can. the fact show its VERY likely hes past his prime. betting on him is betting on failure.

[davearm]

Prime years are 26-29. I don't see how it's arbitrary to say a player who is 31 is past his prime. Soriano has an OPS+ of 126 right now, below what he had at 26, 27 and 30.

Kinda blows a hole in your entire argument to point out that Soriano's two lowest OPS+ seasons since his rookie year came at ages 28 and 29, right square in the middle of his alleged peak, doesn't it?