Its awfully quiet ...

[Sammy Sofa]

zambrano i can agree with, but not soriano. fangraphs has him worth 1 win per year over the last 2.5 years. baseball-reference has him worth a little less than that. you can pick up a corner OF out of the bargain bin and get something better than that for a couple mil a year. if you can get someone to take $18m a year for 3 years on a player who will probably be pushing replacement level, you have to do it. even if you run out and grab someone like josh willingham, you're likely to get better production for a cheaper price and can spend the savings on relief pitching or bench help or overpaying pujols or whatever.

 

 

at league average Zambrano has value but its really minimized by that contract. Like I said he has been overpaid roughly 20 million over the last year and this year if he keeps it up. That said I dont disagree with their interest to move him and replace him with another league average pitcher that would be much cheaper.

 

Nope, it still would be dumb on their part. You just said it yourself: his value as a trade commodity is almost completely minimized by how much he's owed. So the Cubs either trade him for complete garbage and then wade into a FA market where the pitching options are also garbage or, as with Soriano, you trade Zambrano for a slightly less awful package but end up paying a big chunk of his salary while also signing another crappy pitcher who could easily be much worse than him.

 

The Cubs are not in a position where they need to move guys just to free up every little bit of money they can. Unless there's a demand for Zambrano it's likely not worth the effort to move him since you'd ultimately be trading him just for the sake of trading him.

[questionmarkgrace]

Zambrano is still a valuable starting pitcher and they're unlikely to be able to replace him in the rotation, so trading him would just leave another huge hole to fill when they already have big questions about Cashner and Wells as starters going in to next year. Same thing with moving Soriano.

 

Actually you said it would create hole, which we have established it wouldnt. we arent talking about whether they can actually move him or not. I have already said its unreasonable as well. What my point was, is that the cubs seem focused on trying to move these guys.

 

However if they were to move him. Freeing up money obviously means spending it wisely else where. Like on resigning aramis and chasing a firstbaseman and cheaper guys that can replace or better Z and Soriano's numbers and international scouting. If they spend wisely its always to their advantage to cut their losses on bad contracts.

[questionmarkgrace]

zambrano i can agree with, but not soriano. fangraphs has him worth 1 win per year over the last 2.5 years. baseball-reference has him worth a little less than that. you can pick up a corner OF out of the bargain bin and get something better than that for a couple mil a year. if you can get someone to take $18m a year for 3 years on a player who will probably be pushing replacement level, you have to do it. even if you run out and grab someone like josh willingham, you're likely to get better production for a cheaper price and can spend the savings on relief pitching or bench help or overpaying pujols or whatever.

 

I left out the obvious part that I figured I didn't have to go over it yet again because it's such common sense and it's been covered a zillion times: yes, if we lived in a fantasy world where a team was willing to take Soriano and his paycheck the Cubs should do it...but we live in the real world where any trade for Soriano would involve the Cubs almost certainly paying for at least half of his salary. So you either have Soriano (again, not blocking anyone in the system and not depriving the Cubs of a spot for an impact FA signing) for $18 million or, say, Willingham for all intents and purposes at least for $14 million (and Christ, he's awful this year, and he'd be 33 himself if the Cubs picked him up for next year), because there's almost no way the Cubs are pawning off Soriano without paying something like $9-12 million dollars a year for the rest of his contract.

 

It's just not realistic. With or without Soriano, the Cubs are almost certainly paying WAY too much for their LF production for the next 3 seasons.

 

you think willingham would cost 14 million for next year? by what math.

 

[edit] he's making 6 million this year. he would have to go on quite a tear :roll:

[davell]

As for being terrible, if we miss out on the 1B, yeah, we probably will be, in all likelihood. So, why waste more money on Aramis that could just as easily be spent on a stop gap AND towards the minors?

 

Because they have $60 million dollars coming off the books. I'm not saying Aramis saves the season, but man, it's not like they'll be hurting for money, especially if they miss out on Prince and Pujols.

 

 

To me, that's exactly why NOT to spend. The FA class after those 2 guys is weak and that's putting it mildly. I'd rather exercise restraint, so we don't get saddled with any bad deals. Sign as many one year deals as possible, to fill in holes and all, but this class of FA doesn't inspire confidence and I'm not sure we've got the ammo right now to make more than one really solid trade either.

[inari]

zambrano i can agree with, but not soriano. fangraphs has him worth 1 win per year over the last 2.5 years. baseball-reference has him worth a little less than that. you can pick up a corner OF out of the bargain bin and get something better than that for a couple mil a year. if you can get someone to take $18m a year for 3 years on a player who will probably be pushing replacement level, you have to do it. even if you run out and grab someone like josh willingham, you're likely to get better production for a cheaper price and can spend the savings on relief pitching or bench help or overpaying pujols or whatever.

 

I left out the obvious part that I figured I didn't have to go over it yet again because it's such common sense and it's been covered a zillion times: yes, if we lived in a fantasy world where a team was willing to take Soriano and his paycheck the Cubs should do it...but we live in the real world where any trade for Soriano would involve the Cubs almost certainly paying for at least half of his salary. So you either have Soriano (again, not blocking anyone in the system and not depriving the Cubs of a spot for an impact FA signing) for $18 million or, say, Willingham for all intents and purposes at least for $14 million (and Christ, he's awful this year, and he'd be 33 himself if the Cubs picked him up for next year), because there's almost no way the Cubs are pawning off Soriano without paying something like $9-12 million dollars a year for the rest of his contract.

 

It's just not realistic. With or without Soriano, the Cubs are almost certainly paying WAY too much for their LF production for the next 3 seasons.

 

you think willingham would cost 14 million for next year? by what math.

 

[edit] he's making 6 million this year. he would have to go on quite a tear :roll:

 

You don't ger this.

[ShawonOmeter12]

zambrano i can agree with, but not soriano. fangraphs has him worth 1 win per year over the last 2.5 years. baseball-reference has him worth a little less than that. you can pick up a corner OF out of the bargain bin and get something better than that for a couple mil a year. if you can get someone to take $18m a year for 3 years on a player who will probably be pushing replacement level, you have to do it. even if you run out and grab someone like josh willingham, you're likely to get better production for a cheaper price and can spend the savings on relief pitching or bench help or overpaying pujols or whatever.

 

I left out the obvious part that I figured I didn't have to go over it yet again because it's such common sense and it's been covered a zillion times: yes, if we lived in a fantasy world where a team was willing to take Soriano and his paycheck the Cubs should do it...but we live in the real world where any trade for Soriano would involve the Cubs almost certainly paying for at least half of his salary. So you either have Soriano (again, not blocking anyone in the system and not depriving the Cubs of a spot for an impact FA signing) for $18 million or, say, Willingham for all intents and purposes at least for $14 million (and Christ, he's awful this year, and he'd be 33 himself if the Cubs picked him up for next year), because there's almost no way the Cubs are pawning off Soriano without paying something like $9-12 million dollars a year for the rest of his contract.

 

It's just not realistic. With or without Soriano, the Cubs are almost certainly paying WAY too much for their LF production for the next 3 seasons.

 

you think willingham would cost 14 million for next year? by what math.

 

[edit] he's making 6 million this year. he would have to go on quite a tear :roll:

 

his point is you would be paying willingham 5 mil a yr and someone else 9 mil towards soriano's contract making your investment in LF 14 mil.

[TruffleShuffle]

his point is you would be paying willingham 5 mil a yr and someone else 9 mil towards soriano's contract making your investment in LF 14 mil.

 

that'd be fine with me. you'd be getting better production at a cheaper price. but willingham should be more than $5m a year (though he'll potentially be undervalued because he's not a big name and is having a down year in oakland's cavernous confines).

[SouthSideRyan]

zambrano i can agree with, but not soriano. fangraphs has him worth 1 win per year over the last 2.5 years. baseball-reference has him worth a little less than that. you can pick up a corner OF out of the bargain bin and get something better than that for a couple mil a year. if you can get someone to take $18m a year for 3 years on a player who will probably be pushing replacement level, you have to do it. even if you run out and grab someone like josh willingham, you're likely to get better production for a cheaper price and can spend the savings on relief pitching or bench help or overpaying pujols or whatever.

 

It's really misleading to talk about how much Soriano was worth the past 2.5 years when he obviously was injured for the majority 2009. That and your numbers aren't true. Fangraphs has him with -.1 WAR in his injured '09, 3.0 WAR in '10, and 0.6 WAR in '11.

 

Even including his injured '09 as relevant, AND for some reason averaging that 0.6 as if it's a full season in the average, you still don't get 1 WAR per year.

[TruffleShuffle]

yes i had some fuzzy math there. but ok, even if you take his two healthy seasons and throw out the injured one (which i don't think is totally fair, since he's old and will continue to get hurt), you've got him averaging 2 wins a year for 2010-11. that still pretty much sucks.

[questionmarkgrace]

zambrano i can agree with, but not soriano. fangraphs has him worth 1 win per year over the last 2.5 years. baseball-reference has him worth a little less than that. you can pick up a corner OF out of the bargain bin and get something better than that for a couple mil a year. if you can get someone to take $18m a year for 3 years on a player who will probably be pushing replacement level, you have to do it. even if you run out and grab someone like josh willingham, you're likely to get better production for a cheaper price and can spend the savings on relief pitching or bench help or overpaying pujols or whatever.

 

It's really misleading to talk about how much Soriano was worth the past 2.5 years when he obviously was injured for the majority 2009. That and your numbers aren't true. Fangraphs has him with -.1 WAR in his injured '09, 3.0 WAR in '10, and 0.6 WAR in '11.

 

Even including his injured '09 as relevant, AND for some reason averaging that 0.6 as if it's a full season in the average, you still don't get 1 WAR per year.

 

Maybe you meant to quote someone else but I did not at any point post any thing about Wins Above Replacement. I was only talking about dollar value based upon play. So yes my numbers are true.

[CubColtPacer]

zambrano i can agree with, but not soriano. fangraphs has him worth 1 win per year over the last 2.5 years. baseball-reference has him worth a little less than that. you can pick up a corner OF out of the bargain bin and get something better than that for a couple mil a year. if you can get someone to take $18m a year for 3 years on a player who will probably be pushing replacement level, you have to do it. even if you run out and grab someone like josh willingham, you're likely to get better production for a cheaper price and can spend the savings on relief pitching or bench help or overpaying pujols or whatever.

 

It's really misleading to talk about how much Soriano was worth the past 2.5 years when he obviously was injured for the majority 2009. That and your numbers aren't true. Fangraphs has him with -.1 WAR in his injured '09, 3.0 WAR in '10, and 0.6 WAR in '11.

 

Even including his injured '09 as relevant, AND for some reason averaging that 0.6 as if it's a full season in the average, you still don't get 1 WAR per year.

 

Maybe you meant to quote someone else but I did not at any point post any thing about Wins Above Replacement. I was only talking about dollar value based upon play. So yes my numbers are true.

 

He quoted Truffle and was disputing his numbers.

[SouthSideRyan]

yes i had some fuzzy math there. but ok, even if you take his two healthy seasons and throw out the injured one (which i don't think is totally fair, since he's old and will continue to get hurt), you've got him averaging 2 wins a year for 2010-11. that still pretty much sucks.

 

Being out for the year (or should've been out for the year) vs. the continued nagging injuries he's had in '10 and '11 are 2 different things. 2 wins a year certainly hurts at 18M, but it does mean he has some value, and if we have to eat the majority of his contract as we all assume, it makes it difficult to replace that on the free market.

[17 Seconds]

for a team that needs to make a lot of improvements. It seems like the most desirable guys that teams want: Aramis, Dempster, Garza, Jeff Baker, and Sean Marshall; hendry is not willing to part with.

 

I wouldn't have much interest in trading those guys either.

[jersey cubs fan]

yes i had some fuzzy math there. but ok, even if you take his two healthy seasons and throw out the injured one (which i don't think is totally fair, since he's old and will continue to get hurt), you've got him averaging 2 wins a year for 2010-11. that still pretty much sucks.

 

Being out for the year (or should've been out for the year) vs. the continued nagging injuries he's had in '10 and '11 are 2 different things. 2 wins a year certainly hurts at 18M, but it does mean he has some value, and if we have to eat the majority of his contract as we all assume, it makes it difficult to replace that on the free market.

 

I think it's a mistake to assume Soriano won't get any worse going forward.

[javy knows my name]

zambrano i can agree with, but not soriano. fangraphs has him worth 1 win per year over the last 2.5 years. baseball-reference has him worth a little less than that. you can pick up a corner OF out of the bargain bin and get something better than that for a couple mil a year. if you can get someone to take $18m a year for 3 years on a player who will probably be pushing replacement level, you have to do it. even if you run out and grab someone like josh willingham, you're likely to get better production for a cheaper price and can spend the savings on relief pitching or bench help or overpaying pujols or whatever.

 

It's really misleading to talk about how much Soriano was worth the past 2.5 years when he obviously was injured for the majority 2009. That and your numbers aren't true. Fangraphs has him with -.1 WAR in his injured '09, 3.0 WAR in '10, and 0.6 WAR in '11.

 

Even including his injured '09 as relevant, AND for some reason averaging that 0.6 as if it's a full season in the average, you still don't get 1 WAR per year.

 

Maybe you meant to quote someone else but I did not at any point post any thing about Wins Above Replacement. I was only talking about dollar value based upon play. So yes my numbers are true.

 

What is wrong with this guy?

[SouthSideRyan]

yes i had some fuzzy math there. but ok, even if you take his two healthy seasons and throw out the injured one (which i don't think is totally fair, since he's old and will continue to get hurt), you've got him averaging 2 wins a year for 2010-11. that still pretty much sucks.

 

Being out for the year (or should've been out for the year) vs. the continued nagging injuries he's had in '10 and '11 are 2 different things. 2 wins a year certainly hurts at 18M, but it does mean he has some value, and if we have to eat the majority of his contract as we all assume, it makes it difficult to replace that on the free market.

 

I think it's a mistake to assume Soriano won't get any worse going forward.

 

Where did I do that?

[Sammy Sofa]

his point is you would be paying willingham 5 mil a yr and someone else 9 mil towards soriano's contract making your investment in LF 14 mil.

 

that'd be fine with me. you'd be getting better production at a cheaper price. but willingham should be more than $5m a year (though he'll potentially be undervalued because he's not a big name and is having a down year in oakland's cavernous confines).

 

He'll also be 33, so it's questionable what he would get, so I was being conservative. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs had to pay anywhere between $9 million and $13 million a year to ship off Soriano. $9 million was just a shot in the dark. There's a very, very good chance the Cubs would end up still spending approx $18 million in LF. If they can upgrade, great, but I'm not so sure Willingham is that upgrade. Yes, he's in Oakland, but that's a pretty steep drop in production. He's coming on very strong in the last month so hopefully it was just a slow start in a new ballpark, but his age needs to be considered in all of this. I mean, how long would you be signing him for? Ideally it would just be for a year, but who is available as an OF FA in 2012? I know Kemp hopefully would be, but I'd figure that if the Cubs went for him they'd try and and figure out CF and RF between him and Jackson. I don't know if I want to pay Ethier the big contract he's likely to get. Who else is out there?

[Little Slide Rooter]

Because Im bored and have the day off, heres a list from MLBTR of contenders and there needs, and I thought Id add what we have in stock for them

Contender Wish Lists

By Tim Dierkes [July 19 at 7:56am CST]

Here's what each contender appears to be looking for, as determined by reported rumors.

 

Red Sox: Right-handed hitting right fielderMarlon Byrd, Reed Johnson, lefty reliever John Grabow, James Russell, starting pitcher possibly Carlos Zambrano, shortstop

Yankees: Starting pitcher Carlos Zambrano, lefty and righty reliever John Grabow, James Russell/Kerry Wood, Jeff Samardzjia, bench player capable of playing third base Jeff Baker, Blake DeWitt

Rays: Reliever Grabow, Russell, Wood, Samardzjia

Indians: Starting pitcher, outfielder Kosuke Fukudome, Marlon Byrd, Reed Johnson, infield help Jeff Baker, Blake DeWitt, general offense Carlos Pena

Tigers: Starting pitcher Carlos Zambrano, third baseman Baker, Aramis, outfielder Byrd, Reed, Kosuke, lefty reliever Russell, Grabow

White Sox: Righty reliever Samardzjia (sorry, just cant do Wood in a Sox uni

Twins: Middle reliever Any of the afore mentioned relievers

Rangers: Reliever same, starting pitcher

Angels: Third baseman Aramis, Baker outfielder, Kosuke, Byrd, Reed first baseman (preference for left-handed hitter) DUH!

Phillies: Reliever,Wood, Shark, Grabow, Russell right-handed hitting outfielder (preference for non-rentals) Byrd

Braves: Right-handed hitting outfielder, Byrd, Reed leadoff hitter, I guess it is a position after all bench player Baker, DeWitt

Pirates: Right-handed hitter,Byrd, Reed, Baker reliever Grabow Russell, Samardzjia-cant see Wood agreeing to go to the Pirates.

Cardinals: Starting pitcher, reliever Shark, Grabow, Russell

Brewers: Third baseman,Baker, DeWitt, Aramis(maybe Milwaukees close enough to Chicago that hed agree to go there) shortstop

Reds: Reliever, Shark, Russell, Grabow. Wood probably still wakes up in a cold sweat after Dusty-centric nightmares starting pitcher, Z? left fielder Byrd, Reed

Giants: Corner outfielder, Byrd, Reed, Kosuke, Soriano?catcher Hill, second baseman, Baker, DeWitt shortstop

Diamondbacks: Affordable reliever, Wood, Grabow, Russell, Shark starting pitcher

[javy knows my name]

his point is you would be paying willingham 5 mil a yr and someone else 9 mil towards soriano's contract making your investment in LF 14 mil.

 

that'd be fine with me. you'd be getting better production at a cheaper price. but willingham should be more than $5m a year (though he'll potentially be undervalued because he's not a big name and is having a down year in oakland's cavernous confines).

 

He'll also be 33, so it's questionable what he would get, so I was being conservative. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs had to pay anywhere between $9 million and $13 million a year to ship off Soriano. $9 million was just a shot in the dark. There's a very, very good chance the Cubs would end up still spending approx $18 million in LF. If they can upgrade, great, but I'm not so sure Willingham is that upgrade. Yes, he's in Oakland, but that's a pretty steep drop in production. He's coming on very strong in the last month so hopefully it was just a slow start in a new ballpark, but his age needs to be considered in all of this. I mean, how long would you be signing him for? Ideally it would just be for a year, but who is available as an OF FA in 2012? I know Kemp hopefully would be, but I'd figure that if the Cubs went for him they'd try and and figure out CF and RF between him and Jackson. I don't know if I want to pay Ethier the big contract he's likely to get. Who else is out there?

 

Since you talk about Kemp so often, what do you think he could reasonably command in the 2012 offseason? Not that it really matters; the guy is my favorite position player since Griffey and I'd be ok giving him whatever he requires. Monetarily speaking.

[KingCubsFan]

his point is you would be paying willingham 5 mil a yr and someone else 9 mil towards soriano's contract making your investment in LF 14 mil.

 

that'd be fine with me. you'd be getting better production at a cheaper price. but willingham should be more than $5m a year (though he'll potentially be undervalued because he's not a big name and is having a down year in oakland's cavernous confines).

 

He'll also be 33, so it's questionable what he would get, so I was being conservative. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs had to pay anywhere between $9 million and $13 million a year to ship off Soriano. $9 million was just a shot in the dark. There's a very, very good chance the Cubs would end up still spending approx $18 million in LF. If they can upgrade, great, but I'm not so sure Willingham is that upgrade. Yes, he's in Oakland, but that's a pretty steep drop in production. He's coming on very strong in the last month so hopefully it was just a slow start in a new ballpark, but his age needs to be considered in all of this. I mean, how long would you be signing him for? Ideally it would just be for a year, but who is available as an OF FA in 2012? I know Kemp hopefully would be, but I'd figure that if the Cubs went for him they'd try and and figure out CF and RF between him and Jackson. I don't know if I want to pay Ethier the big contract he's likely to get. Who else is out there?

 

Since you talk about Kemp so often, what do you think he could reasonably command in the 2012 offseason? Not that it really matters; the guy is my favorite position player since Griffey and I'd be ok giving him whatever he requires. Monetarily speaking.

Kemp is a tough call, just because his defense in CF isn't exactly stellar and one his main strengths (speed) will deteriorate during his next longterm contract. Of course, if he has another year like this, I'd play him anywhere and not worry about stolen bases.

[Sammy Sofa]

his point is you would be paying willingham 5 mil a yr and someone else 9 mil towards soriano's contract making your investment in LF 14 mil.

 

that'd be fine with me. you'd be getting better production at a cheaper price. but willingham should be more than $5m a year (though he'll potentially be undervalued because he's not a big name and is having a down year in oakland's cavernous confines).

 

He'll also be 33, so it's questionable what he would get, so I was being conservative. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs had to pay anywhere between $9 million and $13 million a year to ship off Soriano. $9 million was just a shot in the dark. There's a very, very good chance the Cubs would end up still spending approx $18 million in LF. If they can upgrade, great, but I'm not so sure Willingham is that upgrade. Yes, he's in Oakland, but that's a pretty steep drop in production. He's coming on very strong in the last month so hopefully it was just a slow start in a new ballpark, but his age needs to be considered in all of this. I mean, how long would you be signing him for? Ideally it would just be for a year, but who is available as an OF FA in 2012? I know Kemp hopefully would be, but I'd figure that if the Cubs went for him they'd try and and figure out CF and RF between him and Jackson. I don't know if I want to pay Ethier the big contract he's likely to get. Who else is out there?

 

Since you talk about Kemp so often, what do you think he could reasonably command in the 2012 offseason? Not that it really matters; the guy is my favorite position player since Griffey and I'd be ok giving him whatever he requires. Monetarily speaking.

Kemp is a tough call, just because his defense in CF isn't exactly stellar and one his main strengths (speed) will deteriorate during his next longterm contract. Of course, if he has another year like this, I'd play him anywhere and not worry about stolen bases.

 

Yeah, I really don't care about stolen bases at all and would have zero problem if he never stole another one again. I just want that [expletive] bat. Given what he can do offensively and that he'd only be 28 starting the 2013 he's not going to come cheap, but I'd be fine with the Cubs giving him whatever it takes. I can't imagine they'd be able to get him for fewer than at least 6 years, and probably starting at about $17 million per. God only knows what it'll be if he has another monster year next year like this one. Just pay the man. Him and Fielder anchoring the middle of the Cubs' lineup (with Castro hitting #2) makes me unspeakably turgid.

[KingCubsFan]

yes i had some fuzzy math there. but ok, even if you take his two healthy seasons and throw out the injured one (which i don't think is totally fair, since he's old and will continue to get hurt), you've got him averaging 2 wins a year for 2010-11. that still pretty much sucks.

 

Being out for the year (or should've been out for the year) vs. the continued nagging injuries he's had in '10 and '11 are 2 different things. 2 wins a year certainly hurts at 18M, but it does mean he has some value, and if we have to eat the majority of his contract as we all assume, it makes it difficult to replace that on the free market.

 

I think it's a mistake to assume Soriano won't get any worse going forward.

Right. And why would we even need to go on the open market to replace Soriano? Colvin could play put up a .744 OPS with an OBP under .300 for the league minimum.

[jersey cubs fan]

Colvin could play put up a .744 OPS with an OBP under .300 for the league minimum.

 

Maybe. Colvin had a big June in AAA but overall he's been awful and he's had a terrible July.

 

I do think he should be able to give Soriano a run for his money the next three years, but it's not a sure thing.

[SouthSideRyan]

yes i had some fuzzy math there. but ok, even if you take his two healthy seasons and throw out the injured one (which i don't think is totally fair, since he's old and will continue to get hurt), you've got him averaging 2 wins a year for 2010-11. that still pretty much sucks.

 

Being out for the year (or should've been out for the year) vs. the continued nagging injuries he's had in '10 and '11 are 2 different things. 2 wins a year certainly hurts at 18M, but it does mean he has some value, and if we have to eat the majority of his contract as we all assume, it makes it difficult to replace that on the free market.

 

I think it's a mistake to assume Soriano won't get any worse going forward.

Right. And why would we even need to go on the open market to replace Soriano? Colvin could play put up a .744 OPS with an OBP under .300 for the league minimum.

 

I don't think he could.

[KingCubsFan]

yes i had some fuzzy math there. but ok, even if you take his two healthy seasons and throw out the injured one (which i don't think is totally fair, since he's old and will continue to get hurt), you've got him averaging 2 wins a year for 2010-11. that still pretty much sucks.

 

Being out for the year (or should've been out for the year) vs. the continued nagging injuries he's had in '10 and '11 are 2 different things. 2 wins a year certainly hurts at 18M, but it does mean he has some value, and if we have to eat the majority of his contract as we all assume, it makes it difficult to replace that on the free market.

 

I think it's a mistake to assume Soriano won't get any worse going forward.

Right. And why would we even need to go on the open market to replace Soriano? Colvin could play put up a .744 OPS with an OBP under .300 for the league minimum.

 

I don't think he could.

Fair enough. I have my doubts as well, but it's not unreasonable to think that Colvin could be close to Soriano's equal over the next few seasons, and the 7 or 8 million we could theoretically save could be put to better use. I personally think Soriano is essentially untradeable.