nilodnayr

unrelated, but I was looking at Pie's splits from this year and noticed his BABIP was .342!! That doesn't give me much confidence in his 282 BA. http://www.minorleaguesplits.com/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?pl=429712 Per that same page, the league average is about 20 points higher than MLB, so it's not nearly as troubling a sign as a major leaguer having a BABIP that high(say, Mark DeRosa). woo, thanks, I didnt see that. What was MLB average, like 309?

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. Ahh, sorry misunderstood what you were asking for. I'm not sure what he used, but I would argue that the best predictor of future #s are the last 2 or 3 years, not last 5 years. Thats from an actuarial perspective.

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

unrelated, but I was looking at Pie's splits from this year and noticed his BABIP was .342!! That doesn't give me much confidence in his 282 BA. http://www.minorleaguesplits.com/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?pl=429712

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.

because he was a .300 hitter in 2004 and 2005 and he had a finger injury in 2006 that made him suck. hes not great, but he's not terrible. in a perfect world it would be trade eyre and izturis for coco and sign lugo forgetting about soriano. again living in a vacuum. No Boston outfielder goes anywhere until another outfielder is signed. I think thats with the assumption that Drew signs with Boston, since we are probably now out of the running. However, word is that now the Angels will go after Drew since Sori is off the market.

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.

Pending a physical Soriano is a Cub. 8 years for 136 looks to be the maximum years/money. Rumors around that the last 2-3 years might be option years (no idea whose) and that approx 90 mil is guaranteed. Everybody who doesn't like the signing is negative and Jim Hendry just can't get the props he deserves. Everybody who does like the signing doesn't understand statistics or finances and needs 10 more years of school. I'm bitter and sarcastic (for the last few comments at least) Perfect!!!

averaged his 2005 MLE EqA, 2006 MLE EqA and 2007 PECOTA projection (last years pecotas) and those figures were {.265,.244,.257} respectively, which average to .255 which was basically what we got from Pierre last season. (Actually it's higher but I didn't bother saying that) I think thats a wonderful job of using all the information that is available...I knew you wouldn't let me down when I made that claim!

Which NL/AL west teams are you thinking? And who would we get to play CF?

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?

And the fact his numbers are even in the same ballpark as Soriano's while he'd be lucky to get a contract at all doesn't scare you? It makes me angry that I'm not a GM. Are you talking about Todd *Walker*??? .278/.356/.398 9HR 53RBI Soriano: .277/.351/.560 46HR 95RBI 40+SB I fail to see how they are in the same ballpark. Not at all. Soriano is also a multiple all-star and has been each year since his rookie year. I don't get it. There's no comparison whatsoever. Soriano is a great player in his prime. Walker's got one foot out of the league, IMO. We can argue about the deal, but Soriano is such a quality pick up it isn't even funny. The comparison was the last three years production. I don't care about allstar appearances since those are just opinions of managers/players/fans/whoever. I do agree that the fact that you could get Walker and Drew for the same $ as Soriano isn't funny at all.

A) please fix the quotes because you accidentally deleted one of the end quotes to make it look like I said something you said. B)Obviously if you sign lugo for short you will trade izturis. And supposedly there is a market for izturis (Boston, Cleveland) or to at least get rid of him for nothing (see AGonz signing with the reds). C) KC has made the lugo example, but I think it is more to illustrate the fact that the money was spent completely inappropriately, not that hes specifically advocating signing lugo. I think he used lugo to prove that a cheaper addition at a position that was worse for the cubs in 2006 could improve the team just as much as signing Soriano. But you would have to ask him that. sorry about the quotes, but I'm not going to fix them. I don't even know what page they are on. the problem with the suggestion of trading Izturis is, again, viewing things in a vacuum. you sign Lugo, everyone knows you are desperate to dump Izturis. Boston and Toronto could get by with what they had and just wait for him to be released if they want him and the Cubs would be paying Izturis to play for a different team. other than that, I don't know of a market for him (why would Cleveland want Izturis?) I don't disagree that the money was spent inappropriately. I hate the years that have been rumored. but again, viewing things in a vacuum. we simply don't have enough information to determine how inappropriate it is. the harsh critics just assume they know what could have been done and state it as fact to make their case. no worries on the quote issue, they are long behind us I disagree, the critics (me, KC, TT, Jon, Navin, and Rob) are using all the information taht is available to make our claim. We do not propose to know everything or be able to predict what will happen in the future. As I have stated a few times before, if Drew is a lock to Boston, Lee is a lock to Houston, and Theo wont trade us Manny then Sori is a must sign. And if Theo and JP think that acquiring Izturis will help their team, they will do it, regardless of how bad of a position we are in. With whats gone on in this market, Izturis' value is at worst a bucket of balls. And I forget who it was in the Cleveland org (Shapiro?), but there was a quote that said they watched video on every ball that was hit to ss and they believed that Peraltas range was horrendous. There have been claims that they are looking for a backup SS, presumably one who is excellent defensively.

And you are? What if he repeats his 2005 and 2004 numbers? Wouldnt it be better to sign a guy who has great numbers in 2006, 2005, and 2004, like Drew? Especially since he will be cheaper and sign to a shorter contract? That paragraph right there sums up our point (as well as KC's marginal EqA analysis). Or his 2001, 2002, 2003, or 2006 #'s? I LIKE drew. However, I LIKE Soriano. I LIKE that the promise that John Mcdunnough made is coming true. It's TIME to win for the Fans, that was John's MO. On drew, you have to take into account he will miss atleast 40 games. So then you have to average his #'s out with whoever is replacing him for those 40 games. I really just don't see the point some of you are arguing. Ok I do see the point. I just don't know why such a big deal is being made about picking apart #'s and being so negative about Soriano. I see Soriano as a sign for CHANGE in the Cubs orginazation. Why not stop picking apart soriano's #'s and instead talk about what this means for the Cubs? Just this summer. . . Our manager was terrible, our coaching staff couldn't teach a stick to hit, our owners would never pay for a winner, and they would never sell the Cubs to someone who WOULD. Now we are at. . . Our manager is great, our coaching staff is great, our owner wants to give us a winner, and the Cubs might even be sold. There's no reason for negativity now, Cubs fans. This is a happy time to be a Cubs fan. . Why do you have to take into acount that Drew will miss at least 40 games? Again, for the past 3 years he has disproved the thought that he is a fragile player. What does he have to do to overcome that stigma? Why do you not take into account that Drew might not want to play for the Cubs? Is there something that we are all missing in regard with J.D. Drew's desire to play for the Cubs? Do you have inside information proving otherwise? If you do, please share. Fact is, players usually sign where the money is at and if not close to the top money for a team they believe they can win with. Despite last year, the cubs are probably right with the bosox on both accounts.

Considering I was using Lugo's career EqA of .265 when doing the estimations, something he hasn't been as bad as since 2002, not really. I'm not going to go back to look but I believe the Lugo>2006 ss was 11 runs better than Sori>2006 CF, so yeah those 9 runs that Cesar adds to ss, still shows that even with money being equal lugo would improve the team more than sori.

And the fact his numbers are even in the same ballpark as Soriano's while he'd be lucky to get a contract at all doesn't scare you? It makes me angry that I'm not a GM.

And you are? What if he repeats his 2005 and 2004 numbers? Wouldnt it be better to sign a guy who has great numbers in 2006, 2005, and 2004, like Drew? Especially since he will be cheaper and sign to a shorter contract? That paragraph right there sums up our point (as well as KC's marginal EqA analysis). Or his 2001, 2002, 2003, or 2006 #'s? I LIKE drew. However, I LIKE Soriano. I LIKE that the promise that John Mcdunnough made is coming true. It's TIME to win for the Fans, that was John's MO. On drew, you have to take into account he will miss atleast 40 games. So then you have to average his #'s out with whoever is replacing him for those 40 games. I really just don't see the point some of you are arguing. Ok I do see the point. I just don't know why such a big deal is being made about picking apart #'s and being so negative about Soriano. I see Soriano as a sign for CHANGE in the Cubs orginazation. Why not stop picking apart soriano's #'s and instead talk about what this means for the Cubs? Just this summer. . . Our manager was terrible, our coaching staff couldn't teach a stick to hit, our owners would never pay for a winner, and they would never sell the Cubs to someone who WOULD. Now we are at. . . Our manager is great, our coaching staff is great, our owner wants to give us a winner, and the Cubs might even be sold. There's no reason for negativity now, Cubs fans. This is a happy time to be a Cubs fan. . Why do you have to take into acount that Drew will miss at least 40 games? Again, for the past 3 years he has disproved the thought that he is a fragile player. What does he have to do to overcome that stigma?

A) please fix the quotes because you accidentally deleted one of the end quotes to make it look like I said something you said. B)Obviously if you sign lugo for short you will trade izturis. And supposedly there is a market for izturis (Boston, Cleveland) or to at least get rid of him for nothing (see AGonz signing with the reds). C) KC has made the lugo example, but I think it is more to illustrate the fact that the money was spent completely inappropriately, not that hes specifically advocating signing lugo. I think he used lugo to prove that a cheaper addition at a position that was worse for the cubs in 2006 could improve the team just as much as signing Soriano. But you would have to ask him that.

Drew has not been injured in the last three years other than breaking a bone by getting hit by a pitch Manny played RF when he was in Cleveland. His arm is better than Murtons, there no reason to think he can only play LF and not RF. I don't care how big of a headcase the guy is if he would be the best or second best hitter in the NL. Matsuzaka, the list had nothing to do with how much the team has to pay for the player, just if they were a top FA or not. The bids to negotiate with him are evidence that he is. ARod may be availabe for a package including Barrett and Pie Cabrera IMO is not available, and if he were we could not get him, but again his list was about players that could be available to counter the claim that Soriano was the top player available.

I would GUESS thats under the assumption that he believes the cubs are playing Sori in CF, which we have proven is inaccurate. Not that I want Lugo in CF, far from it. But I'm just saying.

And you are? What if he repeats his 2005 and 2004 numbers? Wouldnt it be better to sign a guy who has great numbers in 2006, 2005, and 2004, like Drew? Especially since he will be cheaper and sign to a shorter contract? That paragraph right there sums up our point (as well as KC's marginal EqA analysis).

:( Terribly sorry, I forgot/was too hasty to remember you and CubinNY. I think Jon is pretty much in our camp too...and I haven't really seen anything from Navin either way, but its been tough to keep up.

emphasis added. I love the arm chair quarterbacking of GMs. noboday has any idea whatsoever of what happens in these negotiations, yet people presume they know what probably could have happened. Agreed. Ok, then I GUARANTEE Lugo signs for less than 67M. You are obviously missing KC's point. not at all. I can perfectly see how this deal has zero appeal if viewed completely in a vacuum. are you seriously arguing that Lugo will outperform Soriano? do we really know what Drew and Lee will sign for? you just completely contradicted yourself. You say that you aren't missing KC's point, but then ask if I am arguing that lugo will outperform soriano. The arguement is that Lugo over cubs 2006 SS = Sori over cubs 2006 CF. Not that Lugo is better than Soriano.

Carpenter, Wainwright, and Reyes has the makings of a good rotation. Reyes was about as good as Marshall last year and nowhere near as good as Hill when all was said and done. Wainwright, tough to tell. high touted, but history of mechanical and arm problems. moving into the rotation will be interesting to watch. Carpenter? I'm still waiting for his surgically repaired arm to fall off after all these innings and curveballs. Many pitchers struggle in their first go round, it doesn't indicate they will pitch to that level the rest of their career. This goes for both Reyes and Marshall, but Reyes is a potential #1 starter and Marshall a 3-4. I'd be much more concerned if Anthony will remain healthy for a full season. Comparing Reyes to Marshall and Hill is comical. Especially when you use their first year in the majors #s to do it. Wainwright was dominant last year and is highly touted as well, and Carpenter...ohh just two healthy Cy Youngish campaigns are pretty decent.

Except Soriano would be replacing Juan Pierre and Lugo would be replacing Cesar Izturis and Ronny Cedeno. Exactly. KC's excellent analysis is regarding the marginality of the replacement players. Hence his point that upgrading on a position basis from bad to OK does just as much for your team as upgrading from OK to good or good to great. However, upgrading from bad to OK cost significantly less than the other alternatives. Hence, Lugo does just as much for your offense (over 2006 cubs SS production) as Sori does (over 2006 cubs CF production).