Geovany Soto

[Keener98]

i still have a sinking feeling that hendry has fallen in love with kendall and will resign him.

 

Im still holding out hope Hendry wont be given that option

[radarluv1]

i still have a sinking feeling that hendry has fallen in love with kendall and will resign him.

 

Im still holding out hope Hendry wont be given that option

 

i could live with kendall/soto. the trick will be getting rid of blanco

[TruffleShuffle]

geovany soto

[treebird]

i still have a sinking feeling that hendry has fallen in love with kendall and will resign him.

 

yeah, but think how awesome it would be to see soto hit 400/500/700 at AAA for a full season. after a season like that, he'd almost certainly be a lock to be a backup for the major league team.

[TruffleShuffle]

i still have a sinking feeling that hendry has fallen in love with kendall and will resign him.

 

yeah, but think how awesome it would be to see soto hit 400/500/700 at AAA for a full season. after a season like that, he'd almost certainly be a lock to be a backup for the major league team.

 

that's a conservative estimate of his numbers

[CUBZ99]

i still have a sinking feeling that hendry has fallen in love with kendall and will resign him.

 

yeah, but think how awesome it would be to see soto hit 400/500/700 at AAA for a full season. after a season like that, he'd almost certainly be a lock to be a backup for the major league team.

 

that's a conservative estimate of his numbers

 

Yeah, I think given another full year at AAA, Soto will cure cancer, walk on water and win a pulitzer prize.

[TheDude]

Who knows how many wins Lou has cost the Cubs by not bringing up Soto after the Barrett trade.

 

Probably zero. The Cubs were winning games between Kendall and Barrett. Hill had a winning record as a catcher, by a nice margin. I'm not saying Hill gets the credit, I'm saying the team was winning regardless, so I don't see any real opportunity cost. I suppose the team wins-more in the same game, which doesn't matter at all.

 

The entire Soto craze is way overblown. It's like a bride anticipating a dream wedding that will never happen the way its projected.

 

So, the Cubs never lost a game the entire time that Hill, Bowen, Kendall have been catching?

 

ok

 

That argument doesn't work on so many levels. You're essentially saying that Soto himself could have somehow "won" any games that the other catachers started...you're also discounting that he could have also somehow "lost" any of the games the others won or helped win.

 

No, I'm saying we don't know. The Dude dude is saying none. The only way that is possible is if Soto would have done exactly the same as Kendall, Bowen, and Hill or preformed worse. We have no way of knowing, but I'd wager that it is near imossible to perform worse than the combination of Kendall, Bowen, and Hill.

 

On so many levels? What the hell does that mean?

 

You were saying that you know Soto would have netted more wins. That is exactly what you were saying. Or do you not understand your own reference to opportunity cost? By mentioning the opportunity cost of not playing Soto, there is a clear inference that Soto yields more wins.

 

I agree that Soto is a better player than Hill and Bowen, and potentially better than Kendall. He is an excellent candidate to catch. I'd like to see him get the shot as number one catcher next year. My only point is that you can't successfully argue Soto would have yielded more wins, and it's best to take you're latest, altered stance, which is to suggest we'll never know.

[Outshined_One]

My only point is that you can't successfully argue Soto would have yielded more wins, and it's best to take you're latest, altered stance, which is to suggest we'll never know.

 

The problem is, if you take this kind of argument to its logical extreme, you can pretty much make the following arguments:

 

1) You can't argue that A-Rod playing SS on this team would give this team any more wins than it has.

2) You can't argue that Neifi playing SS on this team would give this team any more losses than it has.

 

In terms of probability, no, we can't say with absolute 100% certainty that Soto would have been given this team more wins than Hill/Bowen/Kendall/Blanco. There's always a possibility that Soto would perform as well as or worse than that quartet.

 

However, given Soto's production in the majors and AAA, I think there's an incredibly good chance the Cubs' offensive production would have increased with Soto behind the dish as opposed to the four catchers mentioned above. With better offensive production, this team would have more wins.

[Careless]

i still have a sinking feeling that hendry has fallen in love with kendall and will resign

Fixed via wishful thinking

[Sammy Sofa]

My only point is that you can't successfully argue Soto would have yielded more wins, and it's best to take you're latest, altered stance, which is to suggest we'll never know.

 

The problem is, if you take this kind of argument to its logical extreme, you can pretty much make the following arguments:

 

1) You can't argue that A-Rod playing SS on this team would give this team any more wins than it has.

2) You can't argue that Neifi playing SS on this team would give this team any more losses than it has.

 

In terms of probability, no, we can't say with absolute 100% certainty that Soto would have been given this team more wins than Hill/Bowen/Kendall/Blanco. There's always a possibility that Soto would perform as well as or worse than that quartet.

 

However, given Soto's production in the majors and AAA, I think there's an incredibly good chance the Cubs' offensive production would have increased with Soto behind the dish as opposed to the four catchers mentioned above. With better offensive production, this team would have more wins.

 

First of all, it's moot to toss out two extremes a la ARod or Neifi when talking about Soto. Secondly, talking about Soto's better offensive production as if it all by itself it would have ensure more wins is also a stretch.

 

Look, you'll find few people that don't think he can't seriously help the Cubs from here on out...but arguing for his playing time based on past what if's ultimately proves nothing and is impossible to be used to justify playing him now.

[Derwood]

i still have a sinking feeling that hendry has fallen in love with kendall and will resign him.

 

yeah, but think how awesome it would be to see soto hit 400/500/700 at AAA for a full season. after a season like that, he'd almost certainly be a lock to be a backup for the major league team.

 

or packaged with Pie and Murton for a 39 year old right fielder

[cubfan]

My only point is that you can't successfully argue Soto would have yielded more wins, and it's best to take you're latest, altered stance, which is to suggest we'll never know.

 

The problem is, if you take this kind of argument to its logical extreme, you can pretty much make the following arguments:

 

1) You can't argue that A-Rod playing SS on this team would give this team any more wins than it has.

2) You can't argue that Neifi playing SS on this team would give this team any more losses than it has.

 

In terms of probability, no, we can't say with absolute 100% certainty that Soto would have been given this team more wins than Hill/Bowen/Kendall/Blanco. There's always a possibility that Soto would perform as well as or worse than that quartet.

 

However, given Soto's production in the majors and AAA, I think there's an incredibly good chance the Cubs' offensive production would have increased with Soto behind the dish as opposed to the four catchers mentioned above. With better offensive production, this team would have more wins.

 

If the Yankess went 162-0 with Neifi at SS it would be pretty hard to say that A-Rod would have given them more wins. I think that is what TheDude is saying. If after the Barrett trade the Cubs went on a long win streak winning most of thier games, it would be hard to say that Soto would have yielded more wins since they already were winning most of the games at that point of time. I don't know if any of that is true since I didn't look it up, but that seems to be the point that is trying to be made.

[CubinNY]

My only point is that you can't successfully argue Soto would have yielded more wins, and it's best to take you're latest, altered stance, which is to suggest we'll never know.

 

The problem is, if you take this kind of argument to its logical extreme, you can pretty much make the following arguments:

 

1) You can't argue that A-Rod playing SS on this team would give this team any more wins than it has.

2) You can't argue that Neifi playing SS on this team would give this team any more losses than it has.

 

In terms of probability, no, we can't say with absolute 100% certainty that Soto would have been given this team more wins than Hill/Bowen/Kendall/Blanco. There's always a possibility that Soto would perform as well as or worse than that quartet.

 

However, given Soto's production in the majors and AAA, I think there's an incredibly good chance the Cubs' offensive production would have increased with Soto behind the dish as opposed to the four catchers mentioned above. With better offensive production, this team would have more wins.

 

If the Yankess went 162-0 with Neifi at SS it would be pretty hard to say that A-Rod would have given them more wins. I think that is what TheDude is saying. If after the Barrett trade the Cubs went on a long win streak winning most of thier games, it would be hard to say that Soto would have yielded more wins since they already were winning most of the games at that point of time. I don't know if any of that is true since I didn't look it up, but that seems to be the point that is trying to be made.

 

Execpt the Dude and you (if you are making the same claim) are wrong. The Cubs lost plenty of games from the time Barrett was traded up to 9/17/07.

 

Opportunity cost are what it cost the Cubs to not have the better player playing. And as I said in the original, "who knows". But I'd bet it is at least one game.

 

Where does this "good enough" mentality come from? Are we supposed to be happy the Cubs are in first and be thankful?

 

According to runs scored and runs allowed the Cubs have won two games less than they should have. That difference can probably be attributable to luck. However, had they put in a better player(s), even with the playing two games under the pyth. record they would probably be six or seven games up.

[Banedon]

Soto went 4-for-5 and the Cubs rapped out 13 hits, giving Piniella what he called "food for thought" in considering whether to let the rookie share playing time with veteran Jason Kendall down the stretch.

[CuseCubFan69]

Soto went 4-for-5 and the Cubs rapped out 13 hits, giving Piniella what he called "food for thought" in considering whether to let the rookie share playing time with veteran Jason Kendall down the stretch.

 

So now Whoopie Goldberg, Billy Crystal, and Robin Williams will have a Comic Relief concert called "Food for Thought" that will free all of the young players trapped behind veterans who have been there.

[Keener98]

Soto went 4-for-5 and the Cubs rapped out 13 hits, giving Piniella what he called "food for thought" in considering whether to let the rookie share playing time with veteran Jason Kendall down the stretch.

 

It shouldent even be a damn question Jesus. The only thing Soto has over Kendall is experience, which shouldnt mean a damn thing considering 3 of our 4 starters are extremely experienced. Hill is the only non experienced guy in our rotation, so there you go Lou, let Kendall catch Hill, let Soto catch everybody else, question solved.

[Balsa]

I love it how everyone's like "well now that Soto has turned it on".....

 

C'MON PEOPLE! HE'S BEEN ON ALL YEAR AND NOT GOTTEN A WHIFF OF COFFEE UNTIL NOW.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

Soto freakin rules

[badger1679666666]

It will be interesting to see everyone turn on him and throw him under the bus IF he pulls a Fontenot, or to a lesser extent, a Riot.

[Keener98]

It will be interesting to see everyone turn on him and throw him under the bus IF he pulls a Fontenot, or to a lesser extent, a Riot.

 

Oh man you are soooo right its going to be unbelievably interesting man....

[CubmanPi]

I'd be thrilled if Soto gets three starts a week, which I think is a rather high estimate of his playing time the rest of the year. I just don't see a major shift there until the end of the year, but hopefully he continues to give Lou no choice.

[TheDude]

Soto went 4-for-5 and the Cubs rapped out 13 hits, giving Piniella what he called "food for thought" in considering whether to let the rookie share playing time with veteran Jason Kendall down the stretch.

 

It shouldent even be a damn question Jesus. The only thing Soto has over Kendall is experience, which shouldnt mean a damn thing considering 3 of our 4 starters are extremely experienced. Hill is the only non experienced guy in our rotation, so there you go Lou, let Kendall catch Hill, let Soto catch everybody else, question solved.

 

Right or wrong, it is a question. Baseball managers at any level have a natural inclination to avoid sticking rookies in a critical role down the stretch, especially rookies just brought up to the big leagues. Hell, managers at any level of any industry have that bias. Experience buys you a longer leash and a first nod in most managers' minds.

 

Few baseball managers will take a gamble on September call-ups in a critical role. The ones that do, usually do it with pitchers, not positional guys. Soto has done exactly what he needed to do in September - make himself memorable to the big league team.

 

I'm not saying Lou is right by sticking with Kendall as the 1st option. I'm saying his actions are pretty standard and traditional for an older baseball mind. But his recent quote is also in line with Lou's habits - he likes to ride the hot hand while it's hot.

 

Even if he doesn't get a lot of time in the last 12 games, he'll get a long look next year in ST.

[Keener98]

Soto went 4-for-5 and the Cubs rapped out 13 hits, giving Piniella what he called "food for thought" in considering whether to let the rookie share playing time with veteran Jason Kendall down the stretch.

 

It shouldent even be a damn question Jesus. The only thing Soto has over Kendall is experience, which shouldnt mean a damn thing considering 3 of our 4 starters are extremely experienced. Hill is the only non experienced guy in our rotation, so there you go Lou, let Kendall catch Hill, let Soto catch everybody else, question solved.

 

Right or wrong, it is a question. Baseball managers at any level have a natural inclination to avoid sticking rookies in a critical role down the stretch, especially rookies just brought up to the big leagues. Hell, managers at any level of any industry have that bias. Experience buys you a longer leash and a first nod in most managers' minds.

 

Few baseball managers will take a gamble on September call-ups in a critical role. The ones that do, usually do it with pitchers, not positional guys. Soto has done exactly what he needed to do in September - make himself memorable to the big league team.

 

I'm not saying Lou is right by sticking with Kendall as the 1st option. I'm saying his actions are pretty standard and traditional for an older baseball mind. But his recent quote is also in line with Lou's habits - he likes to ride the hot hand while it's hot.

 

Even if he doesn't get a lot of time in the last 12 games, he'll get a long look next year in ST.

 

Like I said why do you need an experienced catcher when 3/4's of your rotation is experienced?

[CubinNY]

Even if he doesn't get a lot of time in the last 12 games, he'll get a long look next year in ST.

 

Just what a team should do. Not play a prosppect during the previous season and "give him a look" in meaningless games in ST.

 

It's the Cubs MO and a reason they cannot sustain a winning record year in and year out.

[badger1679666666]

It will be interesting to see everyone turn on him and throw him under the bus IF he pulls a Fontenot, or to a lesser extent, a Riot.

 

Oh man you are soooo right its going to be unbelievably interesting man....

 

sarcasm is unbecoming. you know it will happen, I know it will happen. Just like Fontenot and The Riot were Worshiped. And as a relatively calm observer who maintains perspective, it is interesting. Just because you fly off the handle all the time, I can see why you might not. Clearly you're sarcastic because you're one of the prime examples of flip-flopping.

Edited September 17, 2007 by badger