MacPhail: Deal is dead (p. 297), stop posting, go outside

[ThePenguin11]

Are you talking about the Alfonso Soriano who strikes out 130 times and walks 30 times? Pitchers are worried about walking him?

 

Well that's your argument for why as a leadoff hitter he gets more pitches to hit. If they werent afraid to walk him then they would just throw balls in the dirt all day no matter what order he is batting.

 

I'm not saying pitchers shouldn't throw him junk when he bats early in the lineup - I'm saying they don't. It's not just him. Pitchers across the league throw more fastballs at the top of the order because they don't want to get behind in the count. This same gameplan is used on Soriano, even though it shoudn't.

[DeuceBaseman]

Does anyone have any stats on how many times Soriano lead off an inning when he batted in the #1 spot at the beginning of the game? I don't necessarily like him hitting in the #1 spot, but doing so doesn't necessarily mean he's leading off all that much, or does it?

 

It's not really about him starting off the game. It's him in that spot of the order. Even if he isnt leading off an inning, he would still be batting with guys like Theriot, Pie, and the pitcher in front of him instead of Roberts, Fukudome, Lee, and Ramirez. This means that there is a high likelihood that those guys probably wont be on base when he is up. But guys like Roberts, Lee etc... get on base a lot.

[David]

I'd be thrilled as hell if he even sniffed that.

 

Who wouldn't be? That's like 2004-2006 Barrett with good defense.

[DenverCubs]

keep up the fight., Duece.

 

There is a silent majority of baseball people on our site who understand the difference between fielding a fantasy line up versus once that actually has to play defense and react to the mental aspects of the game. These factors contribute equally if not greater to a team winning games. However, the vocal group here is what makes this site so entertaining.

 

As you've seen, some people here attack conventional baseball thinking for the sake of "fitting in" The reality is, people on the extreme side of either position are most likely blinded.

 

If this is true, it would be nice if this "silent majority" would pipe up a little more often. These kind of arguments are a lot of fun to read.

That said, why is it so hard to understand why having a typical "leadoff" type hitter is meaningless. You all admit that a team full of Pujols', Vlad's and Miggy's would be awesome, and I agree that it would be impossible to afford 8 or 9 guys like this, but if this super team would do well with no speedy 8-10 HR, .375 OBP guys, why won't you admit that a speedy 8-10 HR, .375 OBP guy is not a necessity on any team. The reason Roberts helps this team is that he is a good player, not because he is a good "leadoff guy". This has been said a dozen times. The reason Soriano leading off isn't that bad is because he's still a good hitter, even though he strikes out a lot. You want your good hitters at the top of the line-up so that they will get more at bats. Whether they steal bases or not is irrelevant. Theriot steals bases pretty well...but batting him second was a horrible idea since he is not very good at anything else. He got a lot of at bats, and a lot of them were poor. The reason I think it's hard to win this argument for the "new school" guys is because Roberts is a good player. He would do well in the leadoff spot because he is good, so people are using more flawed logic to imply that he is well suited for the leadoff spot because of some specific trait, instead of just his overall hitting abilities. Whatever, at least this thread has some new energy.

Edited February 13, 2008 by DenverCubs

[ThePenguin11]

Conversely, it's very likely he may have had 0 total home runs in the same game because he had no lineup protection. The whole point is that he needs to be protected in the lineup. It's not some myth that players need to be protected in a lineup. It's not mental makeup. The guy just doesn't get challenged as much when he has really good hitters batting behind him.

 

I agree, no one knows if he would have still hit 3 HR's in the 5 hole, and I agree that he needs protection behind him, but that is why Geovany Soto will be there. This guy will prove to be a monster behind Soriano. In my opinion Soto will hit 25-30 HR's and bat .300. This is good protection for him.

 

You can't bank on that happening. I hope he does well but it's more likely that he will struggle to hit 15-20 homeruns in his first real MLB season. His only power surge came in his third season against AAA pitching. But this is getting away from the point. I digress.

[DeuceBaseman]

Why is everyone so pessimistic about Soto? Yeah I understand cuz of Patterson, and Pie, and others that were supposed to be good, or Theriot having a great sample 2 years ago. But Soto doesnt seem to have the flaws in his swing like those guys. Soto DOMINATED in the minors last year, and when he came up he just looked so comfortable and awesome. His power is tremendous. Just watching this guy play everyday, I can confidently say that he will put up close to the numbers I mentioned.

[Post Count Padder]

Geovany Soto

[DeuceBaseman]

keep up the fight., Duece.

 

There is a silent majority of baseball people on our site who understand the difference between fielding a fantasy line up versus once that actually has to play defense and react to the mental aspects of the game. These factors contribute equally if not greater to a team winning games. However, the vocal group here is what makes this site so entertaining.

 

As you've seen, some people here attack conventional baseball thinking for the sake of "fitting in" The reality is, people on the extreme side of either position are most likely blinded.

 

If this is true, it would be nice if this "silent majority" would pipe up a little more often. These kind of arguments are a lot of fun to read.

That said, why is it so hard to understand why having a typical "leadoff" type hitter is meaningless. You all admit that a team full of Pujols', Vlad's and Miggy's would be awesome, and I agree that it would be impossible to afford 8 or 9 guys like this, but if this super team would do well with no speedy 8-10 HR, .375 OBP guys, why won't you admit that a speedy 8-10 HR, .375 OBP guy is not a necessity on any team. The reason Roberts helps this team is that he is a good player, not because he is a good "leadoff guy". This has been said a dozen times. The reason Soriano leading off isn't that bad is because he's still a good hitter, even though he strikes out a lot. You want your good hitters at the top of the line-up so that they will get more at bats. Whether they steal bases or not is irrelevant. Theriot steals bases pretty well...but batting him second was a horrible idea since he is not very good at anything else. He got a lot of at bats, and a lot of them were poor. The reason I think it's hard to win this argument for the "new school" guys is because Roberts is a good player. He would do well in the leadoff spot because he is good, so people are using more flawed logic to imply that he is well suited for the leadoff spot because of some specific trait, instead of just his overall hitting abilities. Whatever, at least this thread has some new energy.

 

 

I think the main argument is that I want Soriano out of the leadoff spot. I want his power and RBI potential lower in the lineup. Then you put a guy like Roberts in the leadoff spot whom doesnt really have that RBI potential because he doesnt hit for power so we arent hurting him by putting him there, and he will get on base for the other guys to drive him in. The guy at the top of the lineup should get on base, while the other guys should drive him in. Soriano is made to drive people in but he is not cuz he is at the top of the lineup.

[JeffH]

Why is everyone so pessimistic about Soto?

 

Strikeout rate.

 

I'm not pessimistic, just cautious with my optimism.

[UMFan83]

Why is everyone so pessimistic about Soto? Yeah I understand cuz of Patterson, and Pie, and others that were supposed to be good, or Theriot having a great sample 2 years ago. But Soto doesnt seem to have the flaws in his swing like those guys. Soto DOMINATED in the minors last year, and when he came up he just looked so comfortable and awesome. His power is tremendous. Just watching this guy play everyday, I can confidently say that he will put up close to the numbers I mentioned.

 

Probably because the PCL is a ridiculously great hitters league. And your argument that he would do well is because he looked 'comfortable' in the bigs?

[Burtonbell]

Why is everyone so pessimistic about Soto? Yeah I understand cuz of Patterson, and Pie, and others that were supposed to be good, or Theriot having a great sample 2 years ago. But Soto doesnt seem to have the flaws in his swing like those guys. Soto DOMINATED in the minors last year, and when he came up he just looked so comfortable and awesome. His power is tremendous. Just watching this guy play everyday, I can confidently say that he will put up close to the numbers I mentioned.

 

Why are you so overly optimistic? Yeah, he is awesome and he will (probably) outproduce anything we had a catcher the last 10 years, but nothing is certain. Based on his minor league numbers, we can assume two options:

(yours/optimisitc) or

(others/pessimistic).

[C.C.]

I'd be thrilled as hell if he even sniffed that.

 

Who wouldn't be? That's like 2004-2006 Barrett with good defense.

 

Don't even put Barrett and Defense in the same sentence. My god was he a butcher. I don't think I've ever seen a player just mentally and physically lose it in the span of one season, in his prime. It was actually sad to see, because he's the type of player you pull for.

Edited February 13, 2008 by C.C.

[fromthestretch]

 

Let me ask you this...if there was a solid defensive shortstop available that was a .330/.485 hitter and maybe stole five bases a year (not your definition of a leadoff hitter), would you still prefer that the Cubs pursue Roberts instead?

 

No, your point is ridiculous and has nothing to do with this argument. Some of the qualities listed above like playing good D and switch hitting has nothing to do with leadoff, but that is why I said he is being pursued for other reasons besides just a leadoff hitter. He is a great player, and he fits our team needs, and one of them is a leadoff hitter.

 

Why is it ridiculous? Leadoff is not a team need. I agree with you that the skills he does possess would improve the team. Again though, it has nothing to do with him batting leadoff. If the Cubs acquire Roberts and bat him second behind Soriano, this team will still be better.

 

Basically, with this whole thing, I'm trying to figure out if you like Roberts more because you think he can leadoff or because he's simply a better player than we currently have starting at his position.

 

If there was a solid SS like that, then of course I would rather have the Cubs get that guy because that guy obviously puts up better numbers than Roberts and plays a position where we need more help at. But the thing is, that guy doesnt exist or isnt available. And if he were, then he would cost a lot more than Roberts would cost.

 

While I can't say whether or not a player like that is available, a player like that does exist and has been discussed quite a few times on this board.

[David]

Why is everyone so pessimistic about Soto? Yeah I understand cuz of Patterson, and Pie, and others that were supposed to be good, or Theriot having a great sample 2 years ago. But Soto doesnt seem to have the flaws in his swing like those guys. Soto DOMINATED in the minors last year, and when he came up he just looked so comfortable and awesome. His power is tremendous. Just watching this guy play everyday, I can confidently say that he will put up close to the numbers I mentioned.

 

Pessimistic? You think my prediction was pessimistic for a rookie catcher?

 

You're talking about him putting up superstar (for a catcher) numbers in his first season. That's a little unreasonable.

 

I'm not saying he CAN'T do it. I'm saying it's pretty unreasonable to expect that he will. You're setting yourself up to be disappointed even if he has a very solid rookie season.

[David]

 

Let me ask you this...if there was a solid defensive shortstop available that was a .330/.485 hitter and maybe stole five bases a year (not your definition of a leadoff hitter), would you still prefer that the Cubs pursue Roberts instead?

 

No, your point is ridiculous and has nothing to do with this argument. Some of the qualities listed above like playing good D and switch hitting has nothing to do with leadoff, but that is why I said he is being pursued for other reasons besides just a leadoff hitter. He is a great player, and he fits our team needs, and one of them is a leadoff hitter.

 

Why is it ridiculous? Leadoff is not a team need. I agree with you that the skills he does possess would improve the team. Again though, it has nothing to do with him batting leadoff. If the Cubs acquire Roberts and bat him second behind Soriano, this team will still be better.

 

Basically, with this whole thing, I'm trying to figure out if you like Roberts more because you think he can leadoff or because he's simply a better player than we currently have starting at his position.

 

If there was a solid SS like that, then of course I would rather have the Cubs get that guy because that guy obviously puts up better numbers than Roberts and plays a position where we need more help at. But the thing is, that guy doesnt exist or isnt available. And if he were, then he would cost a lot more than Roberts would cost.

 

While I can't say whether or not a player like that is available, a player like that does exist and has been discussed quite a few times on this board.

 

I could be wrong, but I'm thinking he (and others will) thought the .330 was BA, not OBP.

[David]

I'd be thrilled as hell if he even sniffed that.

 

Who wouldn't be? That's like 2004-2006 Barrett with good defense.

 

Don't even put Barrett and Defense in the same sentence. My god was he a butcher. I don't think I've ever seen a player just mentally and physically lose it in the span of one season, in his prime. It was actually sad to see, because he's the type of player you pull for.

 

Yea, that was kind of my point. Not sure if you're arguing or agreeing with me, lol.

[C.C.]

Why is everyone so pessimistic about Soto? Yeah I understand cuz of Patterson, and Pie, and others that were supposed to be good, or Theriot having a great sample 2 years ago. But Soto doesnt seem to have the flaws in his swing like those guys. Soto DOMINATED in the minors last year, and when he came up he just looked so comfortable and awesome. His power is tremendous. Just watching this guy play everyday, I can confidently say that he will put up close to the numbers I mentioned.

 

Pessimistic? You think my prediction was pessimistic for a rookie catcher?

 

You're talking about him putting up superstar (for a catcher) numbers in his first season. That's a little unreasonable.

 

I'm not saying he CAN'T do it. I'm saying it's pretty unreasonable to expect that he will. You're setting yourself up to be disappointed even if he has a very solid rookie season.

 

Pessimistic? Gotta love Cubs fans.

[DeuceBaseman]

Why is everyone so pessimistic about Soto? Yeah I understand cuz of Patterson, and Pie, and others that were supposed to be good, or Theriot having a great sample 2 years ago. But Soto doesnt seem to have the flaws in his swing like those guys. Soto DOMINATED in the minors last year, and when he came up he just looked so comfortable and awesome. His power is tremendous. Just watching this guy play everyday, I can confidently say that he will put up close to the numbers I mentioned.

 

Why are you so overly optimistic? Yeah, he is awesome and he will (probably) outproduce anything we had a catcher the last 10 years, but nothing is certain. Based on his minor league numbers, we can assume two options:

(yours/optimisitc) or

(others/pessimistic).

 

Well there really are only 2 things you can base your opinions on. Past stats and actually watching the player play. Pie and Soto have past stats. But I watched Pie play and I'm not excited about him. I hope he will be good some day, but just watching his approach at the plate and his swing I am very pessimistic. But watching Soto up there, you see a completely different player. He goes up there and his swing is perfect. He seems like he has way better hand eye coordination than Pie.

[Derwood]

Does anyone have any stats on how many times Soriano lead off an inning when he batted in the #1 spot at the beginning of the game? I don't necessarily like him hitting in the #1 spot, but doing so doesn't necessarily mean he's leading off all that much, or does it?

 

Well, he had 233 PA's leading off an inning, hitting .313/.339/.571

 

I'd say most of those were as the #1 hitter, as he only had 40 total PA's batting elsewhere (3rd, 5th or 8th)

[ThePenguin11]

Why is everyone so pessimistic about Soto? Yeah I understand cuz of Patterson, and Pie, and others that were supposed to be good, or Theriot having a great sample 2 years ago. But Soto doesnt seem to have the flaws in his swing like those guys. Soto DOMINATED in the minors last year, and when he came up he just looked so comfortable and awesome. His power is tremendous. Just watching this guy play everyday, I can confidently say that he will put up close to the numbers I mentioned.

 

It is completely unrealistic to expect him to put up those kinds of numbers in his first real season in MLB. He was never really a good offensive player in MiLB until he got to see AAA pitching for the THIRD time.

 

And to say that now he's going to mash at an above All-Star catcher norms in his first 500 AB taste of MLB pitching is basically preposterous and not to mention unprecedented.

[C.C.]

I'd be thrilled as hell if he even sniffed that.

 

Who wouldn't be? That's like 2004-2006 Barrett with good defense.

 

Don't even put Barrett and Defense in the same sentence. My god was he a butcher. I don't think I've ever seen a player just mentally and physically lose it in the span of one season, in his prime. It was actually sad to see, because he's the type of player you pull for.

 

Yea, that was kind of my point. Not sure if you're arguing or agreeing with me, lol.

 

I'm with ya. Sorry, I'm just reminiscing\thinking out loud.

[Derwood]

an interesting thing about that 3 HR game....was he challenged because he had Pie batting behind him? In other words, you put a better hitter behind him (Roberts, Fukodome, etc.) does he see more fastballs or less? In turn, moving him down to #5 in the order likely puts a Pie-like hitter behind him, meaning the pitchers are more likely or less likely to throw him fastballs?

[DenverCubs]

keep up the fight., Duece.

 

There is a silent majority of baseball people on our site who understand the difference between fielding a fantasy line up versus once that actually has to play defense and react to the mental aspects of the game. These factors contribute equally if not greater to a team winning games. However, the vocal group here is what makes this site so entertaining.

 

As you've seen, some people here attack conventional baseball thinking for the sake of "fitting in" The reality is, people on the extreme side of either position are most likely blinded.

 

If this is true, it would be nice if this "silent majority" would pipe up a little more often. These kind of arguments are a lot of fun to read.

That said, why is it so hard to understand why having a typical "leadoff" type hitter is meaningless. You all admit that a team full of Pujols', Vlad's and Miggy's would be awesome, and I agree that it would be impossible to afford 8 or 9 guys like this, but if this super team would do well with no speedy 8-10 HR, .375 OBP guys, why won't you admit that a speedy 8-10 HR, .375 OBP guy is not a necessity on any team. The reason Roberts helps this team is that he is a good player, not because he is a good "leadoff guy". This has been said a dozen times. The reason Soriano leading off isn't that bad is because he's still a good hitter, even though he strikes out a lot. You want your good hitters at the top of the line-up so that they will get more at bats. Whether they steal bases or not is irrelevant. Theriot steals bases pretty well...but batting him second was a horrible idea since he is not very good at anything else. He got a lot of at bats, and a lot of them were poor. The reason I think it's hard to win this argument for the "new school" guys is because Roberts is a good player. He would do well in the leadoff spot because he is good, so people are using more flawed logic to imply that he is well suited for the leadoff spot because of some specific trait, instead of just his overall hitting abilities. Whatever, at least this thread has some new energy.

 

 

I think the main argument is that I want Soriano out of the leadoff spot. I want his power and RBI potential lower in the lineup. Then you put a guy like Roberts in the leadoff spot whom doesnt really have that RBI potential because he doesnt hit for power so we arent hurting him by putting him there, and he will get on base for the other guys to drive him in. The guy at the top of the lineup should get on base, while the other guys should drive him in. Soriano is made to drive people in but he is not cuz he is at the top of the lineup.

I think these are your main points, but your arguments as to why these things are true are what's being questioned. Also, I think "RBI potential" is a stupid term, since what you mean is "power".

[DeuceBaseman]

Are you talking about Khalil Greene?? .330 OBP not AVG???? Oh hell no. I would much rather have Brian Roberts than Khalil Greene. I've posted many times before that I'd rather have Theriot and Roberts rather than Greene and DeRosa. But lets not get into the Khalil Greene argument. I want Roberts because he makes our team better. He fits our needs. Not only do I want him because he is a leadoff hitter, but he does everything else that I mentioned above. If he was only a #2 hitter then I would still want him, but having him be a leadoff hitter makes him that much more valuable.

[DenverCubs]

Are you talking about Khalil Greene?? .330 OBP not AVG???? Oh hell no. I would much rather have Brian Roberts than Khalil Greene. I've posted many times before that I'd rather have Theriot and Roberts rather than Greene and DeRosa. But lets not get into the Khalil Greene argument. I want Roberts because he makes our team better. He fits our needs. Not only do I want him because he is a leadoff hitter, but he does everything else that I mentioned above. If he was only a #2 hitter then I would still want him, but having him be a leadoff hitter makes him that much more valuable.

Oops, you're wrong again.