Cubs maxed out spending?!

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Preferable by a margin to make it worth all the distraction it might cause? Clearly not.

 

Not sure what the perceived distraction is supposed to be. Improving your team doesn't seem like much of a distraction.

 

Lineup order is almost irrelevant to run-scoring. Sure, there's an optimal way to do it, but the difference between that and a normal non-optimal way is tiny.

 

So in order to get that tiny gain, you have to hear questions every day about whether Soriano's happy or not, etc. Not worth it. If a player says he's more comfortable in a spot, unless it's completely out of line, it's usually better just to do it.

[jersey cubs fan]

Preferable by a margin to make it worth all the distraction it might cause? Clearly not.

 

Not sure what the perceived distraction is supposed to be. Improving your team doesn't seem like much of a distraction.

 

Lineup order is almost irrelevant to run-scoring. Sure, there's an optimal way to do it, but the difference between that and a normal non-optimal way is tiny.

 

So in order to get that tiny gain, you have to hear questions every day about whether Soriano's happy or not, etc. Not worth it. If a player says he's more comfortable in a spot, unless it's completely out of line, it's usually better just to do it.

 

I wouldn't assume you'd have to hear questions about his happiness every day. But I also don't see how that's a distraction if you decide to do it in the offseason. You're going to be peppered with inane questions all spring anyway.

[David]

So glad I don't read any of Dexter's posts anymore. That one looks like another big waste of time.

 

Well it's so nice that you let us all know hiow much you don't care about my posts. That was very necessary.

 

Do you realize you average nearly 20 posts a day?

 

My parent's vodka when I was a teenager was less watered down.

 

and that has nothing to do with anything. i just thought it was funny that you made a post to say how much you don't read my posts

 

That's 2 of his 88 posts in 3 years. lol

[davearm2]

Preferable by a margin to make it worth all the distraction it might cause? Clearly not.

 

Not sure what the perceived distraction is supposed to be. Improving your team doesn't seem like much of a distraction.

I'm not sure distraction is the right term.

 

What you're proposing has been tried by the Rangers. In the two years he played for them, they hit him primarily in the 3-hole one year, and primarily in the 5-hole the other.

 

He responded with the two worst offensive seasons of his career (excluding his rookie year, when he also hit outside the leadoff spot), despite being in the most favorable home hitting environment he's had.

 

The Nats put him back at leadoff, and presto, career year.

 

So the question is really one of, do you expect Soriano to generate the same numbers at another spot in the order? Or do you necessarily have to accept inferior production if he hits outside of the leadoff spot?

 

If you can get a .900 OPS from anyplace in the lineup, then sure, there's a strong argument for moving him. But if it's .900 from the leadoff spot, or .800 from the #5 spot, then the former option is the obvious one.

[Vanilla Ice]

Hmmm, so I took the production out of every position using baseball reference. I plugged in the OBP and SLG into Baseball Musings Lineup Analysis. We scored 855 runs last season. The optimal lineup had us score 5.4 runs a game. I multiplied that by 161 (we missed a game last season). We would have scored 870 runs last season with the optimal lineup. That is significant, no?

[Vanilla Ice]

Using a different model, the Cubs could score 5.513 runs a game. That comes out to 888 runs or about a 3 win difference, right?

[SCCubbieFAN]

back on thread topic, does anyone know how the Cubs could be so involved in trying to get Peavy if in fact they are "maxed out" spending-wise as Olney opines?

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Why do I get the feeling that wrigley23 is a reincarnation of oldcubsfan?

[jersey cubs fan]

back on thread topic, does anyone know how the Cubs could be so involved in trying to get Peavy if in fact they are "maxed out" spending-wise as Olney opines?

 

Well the simple explanation is things change. When they were involved with Peavy talks, weeks ago, they were operating with an estimated budget. Now, however, they are being told they can't spend anymore until the ownership is settled.

 

Lots of people and companies (and government agencies) changed their minds about spending habits in November and December.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If the difference really is 1.5-3 wins, that'd be significant, but that's more than I've always heard studies come up with.

 

And given that Soriano is leadoff is hardly the only non-optimality in the lineup, even then we are talking about a fraction of a win.

[Soul]

back on thread topic, does anyone know how the Cubs could be so involved in trying to get Peavy if in fact they are "maxed out" spending-wise as Olney opines?

 

Well the simple explanation is things change. When they were involved with Peavy talks, weeks ago, they were operating with an estimated budget. Now, however, they are being told they can't spend anymore until the ownership is settled.

 

Lots of people and companies (and government agencies) changed their minds about spending habits in November and December.

 

You start seeing "bankruptcy" attached to your name it changes your thinking about spending pretty damn quick, no matter what the press releases say.