jjgman21

can't go through the thread to find out here at work. any news on the structure yet?

I would love to continue doing my part to entertain you, but I have to get my files together for this week. Cubs are now better than they were when we woke up this morning. could they have been better? probably, but none of us have the knowledge of what was possible and what wasn't. good night all. Go Cubs. Go Bears. Go Badgers. Peace.

exactly right. theyre trying to find a random detail that makes soriano better 1 run. When in fact there's the differences in the contracts and the added flexibility lugo would have given us compared to soriano. oh wait i cant assume that lugos contract will be less than sorianos according to jjgman21. Silly me. I give you permission. Now incorporate Izturis's salary sitting on the bench and carry on.

this gets nobody anywhere.

ive already said it. career averages for soriano, drew and some estimation on pie. I must have missed it. great methodology for a sabr guy. really shows the trends with those career averages. KC, would you mind using an average of the last 3 years like you did with Pie? that doesn't get it done either. it doesn't account for Soriano's three year upward trend and Drew's three year downward trend.

If there are team out options that is fantastic. I have a feeling that a team out option was the only reason an 8 year deal was authorized. I highly doubt Soriono will be a Cub for 8 years. I'm hoping for 3-4 kick ass seasons out of him though, and a World Series....as you can see, my ludes haven't worn off tonight...GO CUBS! that's 9 years.

You didn't. You're protecting him. You're putting the development of Pie ahead of the Cubs winning the division. If there's a 50% chance that JD Drew misses 40 games and we have to stall Pie, but in the 50% chance that JD Drew stays healthy, the Cubs have a good chance of making the playoffs. I am willing to sacrafice a decent prospect's development for a playoff chance with relative ease. You aren't. So yes, you're putting Pie's development before winning, and the ONLY and I stress ONLY way you can justify that is if you think Pie is the second coming of Carlos Beltran when he's more than likely the second coming of Ruben Mateo. show me that bringing up a prospect with 140 games in AAA for 40 games the next season significantly hurts him. You can't. first part - so why didn't you use Rueben Mateo in your comparison? why'd you use Juan Pierre? as you set yourself on fire with this, do you recall me saying that you would have been better served using Pagan in this analysis. actually, yes, I think I am putting Pie's development first, with the knowledge, which you also have, that the best way to win the World Series is to make the playoffs many times. so yes, I would protect Pie with the hope that maybe he is a Willie McGee in his prime type player for the Cubs sometime in the future. second part - the burden is on you. you are claiming the absolute.

Probably is the key word there. You, nor I know what could have been done and how much money could have/have not been spent. It isn't our money, if the Trib wants to spend it then let them. Actually I am certain it could have been done. The Cubs got an EqA of roughly .208 from their SSs last season in 486 outs. Julio Lugo's career EqA is .265. The difference between those two over 486 outs is roughly 41 runs. The actual should be higher because for the most part Lugo's been a better hitter the last couple of seasons. The Cubs got an EqA of roughly .250 from their CFers last season in 526 outs. Alfonso Soriano's career EqA is .287. The difference between those two over 526 outs is roughly 30 runs. Julio Lugo could be had for what, 32 million max? Soriano was had for what, 100 million more. You can say shove EqA in your ass all you want. You can do this with any stat and find a similar outcome. But comparing to what SS did last year isn't really the proper comparison. It makes more sense to compare to what could reasonably be expected out of SS this year, which is a hell of a lot better than .208 just on a dead cat bounce. but that would detract from his thesis.

I disagree.

ive already said it. career averages for soriano, drew and some estimation on pie. I must have missed it. great methodology for a sabr guy. really shows the trends with those career averages.

You're right. I am being very stupid backing up and verifying my claims with various facts. God, I should be ashamed. I said it wouldn't kill him. Translation: It's insigificant. re: the first part, find me those facts. in other words, where are these posts where I showed blind faith and said Pie was the best thing since sliced bread? re: the second part, exactly. you said with authority and without any reservations that it wouldn't kill him, aka would be insignificant. why are you here? why aren't you in Vegas with clairvoyance like that? or alternatively, where do you find the time to know so much about Pie and so much about all the other ballplayers brought up too early? will you supply me with the facts to back up your claims that it won't kill him or be insignificant? or are you going to say you provide facts, and then just state your opinion on a matter and declare it as a fact?

I understand that, but by the same notion, one should adjust up if it looks like there has been improvement throughout those three years and adjust down if there looks to be regression in those three years. should one not? If there is reason for the trends to continue, absolutely. so then shouldn't we ask "are there reasons for the trends to continue?" I know the answer, of course we should, and I think that's what PECOTA is all about. so it comes back to my original question, what was he using to compare Soriano and Drew? did he use numbers that show these trends, or did he pluck those that best made his points. his silence on the matter is deafening.

And showing blind stupid faith towards stupid things such as 40/40 overpaid out machines is perfectly fine? you have no point other than that you think pie is the best thing since sliced bread when in fact he's a run of the mill toolsy outfield prospect at this time and you also want to make sure we dont hurt him by throwing him to the fire which is exactly what billy beane, the braves and the marlins have done to their best prospects the last decade and guess what, it's worked out perfectly fine for them. 40 games isn't going to make a difference. 160 might. 40 certainly not. That's not being arrogant that using my head. you must be attributing some other posters remarks to me because I have no idea what you are talking about. I haven't said one thing in this entire thread about Pie's abilities or what I think about him. my only mention was that throwing him into the major leagues as an injury replacement before he is ready could do him damage. you speak in absolutes saying it would not, which is asinine. a few pages back you will find me saying that throwing out 40-40-40 is silly. again, I think you are attributing other people's comments to me. I have said nothing that would indicate blind faith and have said over and over that I think he is going to be overpaid. you really should step off because as smart as you are, you are really making yourself look stupid and proving my point to Nilo over and over.

aka viewing things in a vacuum.

Good point Chocolate Milk! Weren't there alot of people last year arguing that batting position didn't matter? Not saying those are the same people who say Soriano at lead-off is a bad idea though. . That was the prevailing thought unil The Book please elaborate on what said book says so I don't have to read said book. Basically that there is an optimal way to construct a batting order. Something like your best hitter should be in the 2 hole, second best leading off, third best in the cleanup stop, 4th best in the 3 hole. But thats completely based on memory...but you get the basic principle, batting order matters, just like you said a page ago. I'll look for more specifics and post them here. wasn't there a calculator that went along with it? if so and you find it, please post a link. edit - found it linked in the hbt article.

your statemet here lacks the complete context of the discussion. it's not outrageous. arrogant? yes. know-it-all ism? yes. claiming to have the ability to predict the future (like Nilo and I were discussing)? yes. common sense? no, and claiming it is just reinforces the point I was making to Nilo.

I understand that, but by the same notion, one should adjust up if it looks like there has been improvement throughout those three years and adjust down if there looks to be regression in those three years. should one not?

Good point Chocolate Milk! Weren't there alot of people last year arguing that batting position didn't matter? Not saying those are the same people who say Soriano at lead-off is a bad idea though. . That was the prevailing thought unil The Book please elaborate on what said book says so I don't have to read said book.

all i said was that i based on the past its a good estimation that the drop off from pierre to pie was insignificant. i then used the career averages from soriano and lugo. that's pretty standard and isnt projecting much and on a side note, the mere fact that we can even consider arguing lugo means more than soriano to the cubs offense, certainly means with the contract differences soriano was a terrible choice top of page 53. why are 90% of your posts edited?

Good point Chocolate Milk! Weren't there alot of people last year arguing that batting position didn't matter? Not saying those are the same people who say Soriano at lead-off is a bad idea though. . actually, alot of them are the same people who scream that Pierre was leading off. I think it does matter. if you have 8 hitters who have similar numbers it doesn't matter, but there are ways to stack the lineup to increase the chances of scoring runs. IMO, Soriano's low OBP and high SLG screams to be put around the 6 hole. that way he drives in the 4 and 5 batters instead of the much fewer 8 and 9 batters, while not making outs in front of Aramis and Lee, and he also has speed so the lower end of the order doesn't need an extra base hit to drive him in when he gets on.

didn't hurt the 84 Cubs or the mid 90's Astros. the biggest danger is certain types of pitchers will continue to dominate the Cubs lineup. the Soriano signing does nothing to address that.

It's not ridiculous. Pierre to Soriano for 526 outs = + 30 runs Pierre to JD Drew for (120/162)*526 outs = + 37 runs Sure, there is a margin for error. Like some of those displaced outs from Drew having a higher OBP going to scrubs like Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez. Regardless, at the worst Drew for 120 games is the same as Soriano for 162 games. And the assumption of Pie = Pierre what numbers are you using? last year? career? three year? which ever makes your point stronger? ?? its a couple pages back but I think it was an average of 2005 and 2006 ML EqA and PECOTAs 2007 projection, which ended up being slightly ahead of whatever Pierre # he used. So regardless of last year, career, three year, it is accurate looking at the Pie information that is available. I was asking for the numbers he used for the Soriano v. Drew comparison actually. I am curious to see if people are continuing to inflate Soriano's 04-05 and ignore his 02-03 to make their point. anyone up for having JD's .778 OPS from 2002 in this Cubs team in 2007? again, I would have preferred Drew, I just want intellectual honesty in these arguments, especially when they use alot of stats many of us don't have a complete grasp of.

you may have wanted to hold onto that before KC's posts about Pie. Im not sure what KC used for Pie's numbers if by chance Drew did go down for 40 or how many ever games, but I'm guessing he used MLE. KC, can you expound? I wasn't talking about the numbers. I was talking about his assertion that 40 games in the majors before he is ready won't hurt his development. That is pure speculation on both parts. And I think you agreed that because it would be 40 continuous games rather than riding the pine for a bunch of time it probably wouldnt be too bad. In fact many players claim that it really helps them to have a cup of coffee not only to see major league pitchers but to really understand the schedule, lifestyle, media, and all other intangible differences between a minor leaguer and major league life. no, it's not speculation on both parts. I clearly stated I think it may have a negative impact on development and the Cubs shouldn't take the chance. KC clearly stated that it definitely wouldn't. the entire point of this discussion was your erroneous claim that the harsh critics don't "propose to know everything or be able to predict what will happen in the future." seems to me KC made a pretty definitive statement about what would happen in the future.

and I appreciate that. keep it there then, eh.

Sign Lugo to "play CF". Then trade Izturis and move Lugo to short. a $4.5M bluff? not when at least one of the other players has a much bigger stack than you.