wilk

What about Jack Cust? Here's a guy who has a 1.033 OPS despite a .233 batting average... Nearly 200 points of isolated discipline and 400 points of isolated power...

There's a heck of a lot of room between a long term many-year plan of leaving the team precisely as it is in "hope" that they "just make the playoffs" and conceding the season on May 28th because we're in 2nd place and five games out. Give me a break! What's with the hyperbole here? Yes, Milwaukee could easily run away with it if you decide to just cross your arms, stomp your feet, and give up when you have 70% of the season left to make up 5 games from second place...

Soriano hits best from the leadoff spot. He hits better with no one on base than with runners on. He hits best when happiest and most comfortable and leadoff is where that is. He is our best base stealing threat and top 2 in power and leadoff gives him the most chances. It's really this simple.

Is this just a sarcastic exaggeration or what? I mean have all the people saying how horrible Jacque was or is actually seen what a true butcher in the outfield looks like? Pena isn't the worst it gets but it does get a LOT worse than Jacque...

dave, this discussion rooted because I brought up these exact slice and sun issues. I'm not disagreeing with anything you say. My point was that the opposite field slice you get off a right-handed bat to rightfield or a left-handed bat to leftfield those balls that are tailing Soriano has the most trouble with. He's said this himself though I'm sure me stating that is going to result in me having to find the quote... Being that there are many more right-handed batters than left-handed batters, this is an issue more often in rightfield.

That's not entirely true. That might have been your perception of how the events unfolded but none of it ever officially sat as that. They knew he'd be in the outfield and that they could put him in any of the three spots and that was enough. Of course right was discussed too--it would put his arm to best use and it's a better position to anchor. He'd need to make an adjustment anyway and his move to left was somewhat successful so in no way was right out of the question but it was always known right would be the most difficult of the three. That's all I continue to say. If right was the plan "all along" then why has he not played any right? Why when they moved him out of what you call Plan B (CF) did they not go back to Plan A (RF)? I truly don't understand how anyone could so vehemently disagree with these basic points. I never ruled out Soriano playing right and a few times now I've said it's where I'd wish him to be... but these are real reasons with real logic to it.

Besides that there are many more RHB than LHB, of course, meaning you deal with it a lot more in right than in left.

The facts are everything I stated as facts. What then is "complete and utter nonsense"? Did I say he's unable to ever adjust to right? In fact, I said he may be able to adjust and that is where I would prefer him to be! Since everyone is sarcastically stating it's just because Lou is an idiot and prone to things that don't make sense - I decided to give the real reasons that make sense. That is why Soriano has not been in right yet. That is why the first tried him in center where they thought he'd have the least trouble with his reads... Rightfield at Wrigley is the most difficult outfield position and Soriano is not a good defender. He has speed and an arm to make up for a lot of his flaws but he has very poor anticipation and that's a problem in rightfield more so than in left. There's no question he'd have more value to the team if he can play right... and maybe with enough ""fungo practice"" he'll be able to but right now THAT is why he would be worse in right...

You might think it's complete and utter nonsense, but it's fact my friend. They are that much different. Maybe you denying it is complete and utter nonsense... "Fungo practice" you declare will fix it. Why didn't it fix his play in left? Somehow all the problems in left disappear in right regardless of the fact that they are undeniably magnified in right? Doesn't make much sense to me.

Why not? Because it makes too much sense. It just makes too much sense ...? Maybe if we pretended there was no difference. That more or less is "why not." Murton isn't a rightfielder either but he does get better reads and handles those better. It's becoming a pet peeve of mine that people refuse to acknowledge a difference between left and rightfield.

That's not what I'm judging Murton on. The only point on his defense is that it's not something sitting in his favor. Murton in right is not sticking it to him. He's in right because Lou believes he does those things I just explained you have to do in rightfield better than Soriano does. Yes Soriano has more speed and a better arm but we see these put to better use in left -- rather than speed without range and arm without chance like it might be in right. Murton isn't being judged on the basis of being a true RF per se but he clearly has less value TO THIS TEAM if rightfield is the only position available for him to play. He has good defensive anticipation and good offensive discipline but as an everyday rightfielder he'd need a better arm, more range and more power. It's too bad we can't merge Murton and Soriano into one RF.

It was rhetorical. I'm not going to compile a list of everyone who had an .800 OPS in their first full season worth of at-bats. Besides, I only said someone who had a similarly good season only to not quite duplicate the season. That's different. But, anyway, some guys who had an .800 OPS in the first season and then never top that season would be Ben Grieve, Eric Hinske, Khalil Greene, Junior Spivey, Jody Gerut, Lew Ford, Terrmel Sledge, Chris Singleton, Ron Belliard... there's plenty more. And of course half the players on last years All-Star team were not as good in their first full season as they are now. I think that's common sense and unrelated.

Rob, the difference between left and rightfield is not only your arm. It's a little ridiculous to act as if it is. Soriano would be much worse in right than he is in left. Soriano's problem is getting a good read on the ball and taking the right route. This is significantly more difficult to do in rightfield. First of all, in all of those days games the sun is going to be in the rightfielder's eyes most of the time. Therefore, in Wrigley the rightfielder must rely on anticipation much more so than sight. This is something Soriano has a very difficult time with. Secondly, the most difficult ball for Soriano to judge is the opposite field slice. Obviously this would be a much more frequent adventure in rightfield considering the ratio of RHB:LHB. There's also plenty who say that ball off a righty bat tails more making it even more difficult but that's rather arbitrary. In rightfield, Soriano would have to take the hits that give him the most trouble much more often and with obstacles to make it even more difficult... His arm is the only thing that would be any good in right. In terms of team construction, there's no doubt you'd want Soriano in center or right longterm--and there might be enough to improve and turn him into one-- but right now it's very clear why he isn't in rightfield and it's certainly not because some dummy didn't think about it.

They aren't his numbers becuase he doesn't get to play on a consistent basis. The people running the Cubs are traditionalists. They want a Slugger in the corner outfiled spot. I called this as soon as Hendry went ga-ga over Soriano. Then they went out and got Floyd. Hendry and crew are clueless. It's a shame. I disagree that the only thing lacking is consistent play. I think there's a little more to it than that but that's impossible to argue so we'll just leave that up to be determined. It's not quite as simple as the Cubs wanting a slugger there either. The problem is he'd have to be better in every other area -- defense, speed, discipline -- and he's just not. He's below average defensively in right field and does not have significant speed. He has good discipline at the plate but this is another thing that's always been exaggerated for him. He is not an elite walker; he doesn't even have great patience. He's just a little above average when the Cubs have been so used to players below average. A breath of fresh air, no doubt, and personally I think Murton will come around to find some power but he's out of place here now. Unless you move Soriano to rightfield and he adjusts well there, you cannot imagine any longterm future for Murton with the club without serious improvements. Now if he's traded for a middle reliever - I'm pissed. But let's not treat it as if the only acceptable trade is for Miguel Cabrera because that's just nonsense. It's sensless what the Cubs are doing. To try to portray it as anything else is just silly. Hendry & Co. should have asked themselves: What do we have and what do we need? They had a cheap LFer who produced at a good rate and looked to be improving They had JJ comming off a career year and were looking to trade him. They needed a CFer They needed people who could get on base They got nothing that they needed (offensively) and allocated a lot of money and a lot of years to do so. I'm willing to bet a year's worth of premium that if Murton gets regularly playing time from 2008-2010 he will have better three year numbers OBP/OPS+ than Soriano. Yes much of it is pretty senseless. This is an entirely different conversation though. They really needed Soriano to be able to handle CF if not RF and keeping him in left really disrupts things. Floyd should never have been signed either. But that's what we now have to deal with. Murton with regular playing time probably will have a better OBP than Soriano. I wouldn't think a better OPS+ though.

Yes, it's impossible to know what would happen in the future or if you changed the past. Apparently you're trying to rip away the context of our posts in order to play this card. That itself is not very reasonable. Playing time is an issue, everyone knows, but you say with absolute certainty that he'd have 130 OPS points if he had played in 10 more games? Really? If so, I'd love to hear your precise reasonable analysis that without doubt proves this. The point on Miguel Cabrera is the polar extreme -- presumably precisely the reason you mentioned him in the first place. It's been presented as if you either trade him for bullpen help or you trade him for Miguel Cabrera and so I used the same ends. I said I'd be pissed if he was traded for bullpen help. Obviously I don't disagree there. And I didn't comment on any of your posts directly so I have no idea why you take it as that. I was commenting on a perception apparent well beyond this thread.

Do you really need me to give you a gigantic list of players who had a similarly good season in their rookie or sophomore year only to flop afterwards? Once again, I'm a fan of Murton and only somewhat playing devil's advocate here, but let's be realistic. His numbers last year do not mean "there is no reason" it won't happen this year with regular play.

They aren't his numbers becuase he doesn't get to play on a consistent basis. The people running the Cubs are traditionalists. They want a Slugger in the corner outfiled spot. I called this as soon as Hendry went ga-ga over Soriano. Then they went out and got Floyd. Hendry and crew are clueless. It's a shame. I disagree that the only thing lacking is consistent play. I think there's a little more to it than that but that's impossible to argue so we'll just leave that up to be determined. It's not quite as simple as the Cubs wanting a slugger there either. The problem is he'd have to be better in every other area -- defense, speed, discipline -- and he's just not. He's below average defensively in right field and does not have significant speed. He has good discipline at the plate but this is another thing that's always been exaggerated for him. He is not an elite walker; he doesn't even have great patience. He's just a little above average when the Cubs have been so used to players below average. A breath of fresh air, no doubt, and personally I think Murton will come around to find some power but he's out of place here now. Unless you move Soriano to rightfield and he adjusts well there, you cannot imagine any longterm future for Murton with the club without serious improvements. Now if he's traded for a middle reliever - I'm pissed. But let's not treat it as if the only acceptable trade is for Miguel Cabrera because that's just nonsense.

In any real and sane environment, I'm probably the biggest Murton fan in the group... but boy this board is often in another world in its perception of certain players. People are sitting here saying he's cheap since he gives you a .360 OBP and .800 OPS. Yeah well those aren't his numbers. If they were then the Cubs wouldn't have consideration of moving him. I doubt he's traded anyway but that's beside the point... It's only OK to trade the relatively powerless leftfielder who's been forced to (and very much struggling with) rightfield if you trade him for Miguel Cabrera -- otherwise it makes no sense since we've never seen a 60 point IsoD before! ...!

Yes, Barrett will be signed to a new 3 year deal. Hill won't make the club and Soto will be someone's backup catcher.

If you'd rather decrease win expectancy slightly in order to allow the team to conform more closely to archaic and antiquated views about lineup construction, I suppose that's a tradeoff that you can decide whether you'd like to make. Personally, I will root for the team to win, even if it necessitates the employ of unconventional tactics. No, as I see it, you are decreasing win expectancy. And it's not as if you're adding Soriano's offense; you're essentially replacing Theriot with Murton if you're taking Soriano out of left to 2B, DeRosa to SS and presumably one of Murton/Floyd in left and the other in right. Correct? It has nothing to do with "lineup construction." And I don't see it as unconventional, I see it as unwise. It'd be a different story if we were struggling to get Soriano into the lineup and there was nowhere to put him. There's also the entire realm of the fact the game is human -- should we really dismiss Soriano's comfort level when it's been pretty obvious throughout his career he performs best when he's most content? With that plan, we're quite possibly somewhat decreasing Soriano's offense output, significantly decreasing infield defense and thus pitching security (watch what will happen to everyone's BABIP), taking the best arm (besides Pie) from the outfield and all to put Murton in instead of Theriot. I think Murton will be the better hitter, but so far this year it's been Theriot and the difference certainly doesn't outweigh the aforementioned concerns. So, no, it's not that I'm "comforming more closely to archaic and antiquated views about lineup construction." It's that I see there's no logic in it. I root for the team to win too. Thanks.

I sure hope Lou isn't as willing.

Saying he "wasn't that great" is very generous to him. If anything, today's "emergency" showed why we need one less outfielder and one more shortstop.

Thank you. These are the e-r posts that always get the offense going. Cough, cough.

Thank you. These are the e-r posts that always get the offense going.

He was walked. Then he ran to 2nd on the first pitch to Aramis. Wasn't very weird.