BigbadB

Not a bad argument, but I still see nothing wrong with Soriano leading off. It doesn't bother me in the slightest if a really good hitter is batting lead off. The lead off hitter doesn't have to be just a table setter. Soriano has had 100 RBI seasons as a lead off hitter. If you have solid hitters throughout the line up, everyone can expect a boost in overall production, because the whole team will see more at bats over the course of a season, because more runs are scoring and more guys are getting on base. Soriano was productive as the lead off hitter last year.

Rogers is behind the times. You can't include Guzman since he's out for the year after surgery. Where's Kevin Hart? I'd have to think he'd be ahead of all of the guys listed. And of all the guys listed as still available on the market, the only one that might interest me is Hernandez, and he'd be too expensive for the value he provides. Rogers did mention Hart...maybe he made an edit. Did anyone else get a little kick out of his potential line-up? I stand corrected. I read the article and he did list him, so my apologies to Rogers for that. But, his line up was rather amusing. Heck, why stop at 6th for Lee. Why not just imagine him in the 8 hole? :roll:

Rogers is behind the times. You can't include Guzman since he's out for the year after surgery. Where's Kevin Hart? I'd have to think he'd be ahead of all of the guys listed. And of all the guys listed as still available on the market, the only one that might interest me is Hernandez, and he'd be too expensive for the value he provides.

Yes, people on this board need to take the blue tinted sunglasses off and realize this deal is a steal for us. We getting one of the best leadoff men in baseball, an all-star and another great club house guy for pretty much nothing. You guys are blowing your loads over the 2 pitching prospects that have showed us NOTHING. I'm not sure how a lead off man has anything to do with Marquis and Dempster being better than Marshall and Gallagher in the rotation. So, I'd argue that you didn't really elaborate this for me at all. A guy is not wearing blue tinted sunglasses in believing that Sean Gallagher would be better in the rotation than either Marquis or Dempster. If you are basing your argument on how Mr. Gallagher performed at the major league level last year, then you are ignoring how impressive each stop of his minor league career has been. Gallagher has a career minor league ERA of 2.75. The man just turned 22 a little over a week ago. He is going to be a solid starter at the major league level, and he has a darn good chance of being better than either Marquis and/or Dempster in 2008. Sean Marshall was better than Marquis last year. Dempster hasn't even seen the rotation in how many years?

Last isn't really all that bad. If you're team is going to suck, might as well be really good at it, eh?

Care to elaborate?

I'm not really sure how much Figgins really factored into offseason plans, but I've heard his name tossed around a few times. But, I've also heard that Anaheim would want Pie. I find that a bit odd considering Anaheim already has a roster crunch in the outfield as it is without including Pie to the confusion. Vlady, Garret Anderson, GMJ, Torii Hunter, Juan Rivera, Reggie Willits. Anaheim could use Pie with other prospects to get Santana, Bedard or Blanton, I suppose.

Good organizations generate new young, cheap talent every year. I recognize that this is an extremely strange concept to us Cubs fans. Point duly noted. :D

I do too, but I have no idea how they'd acquire all three. Say they do trade the Seans and Cedeno for Roberts. What is left of value to offer for Figgins and Burnett? Pie, Colvin ... what else? Murton would have value in Toronto, but not necessarily in Anaheim. Veal could be of interest to either team. Patterson, Fuld, Marmol and even some lesser names could be intriguing. Burnett would be more of a salary dump, so there is potential for them to take back a bit of salary in exchange (Dempster or Marquis)

Since NSBB has been duped by Orioles Hangout for the umpteenth time, let's talk about something else, somewhat related. Assuming the rumors are true that the Cubs would like to get Roberts, Figgins, AJ Burnett and Alex Cintron to finish up the offseason, does anyone else see some serious cash crunch issues in the coming years? I like that they are spending money, don't get me wrong. But, when you trade off all your young, cheap talent (assume that Murton, Cedeno, Gallagher, Marshall, Pie, Veal are all involved in trades at the very least for Roberts, Figgins and Burnett), there comes a point where you eclipse your budget and have no money to make improvements. Having highly paid players at every position can do that, and the only cheap talent on the Cubs roster appears to be Soto, Rich Hill and Theriot, bullpen and bench. I like the idea of Roberts, Figgins and Burnett. Don't get me wrong. I also like "going for it" if you feel like it's a win now situation. But, I have to admit a bit of concern about the future. I suppose a lot of those players have moveable contracts, so maybe it shouldn't be a concern. But what I liked about guys like Pie is that they have a chance to be really good for several years for a very slight hit to the budget.

When he says is is very inaccurate, I hope it's because the player's going the Orioles way aren't named Cedeno or Gallagher.

To be fair, Rafael Furcal was playing SS in Atlanta while DeRosa was there and Michael Young was playing SS while DeRosa was in Texas. Michael Young came up as a 2b, and Soriano moved Young to SS. It happens. But, because a better player is blocking you from playing a position for several years doesn't mean you can't play the position. 2008 will be the ultimate test. DeRosa is currently out of a starting gig if the Roberts deal is true. The only position he has even the slightest, remotest chance of winning the starting job is SS. And the competition, in my mind, won't be fierce since it will likely come down to one of Ryan Theriot, Mark DeRosa or Alex Cintron (once he's signed) :roll: DeRosa has a stronger arm than Theriot. It's debateable, but let's assume Theriot has a bit more range. Range probably converts to a few more outs than arm strength, so we can give Theriot a slight edge defensively at SS. That slight difference won't touch the difference between the two at the plate. And where does this team need the most help? At the plate? Yes. If the season begins today, the Cubs look to be one of the stronger defensive teams in the league. Because of the strength of that defense, I think you can sacrifice some of that defense for offense. And Theriot can still get some starts there when DeRosa is needed elsewhere or if DeRosa needs a day off. To spin this another way, the Cubs are paying Theriot league minimum to be a league minimum (offensive production) major league SS. DeRosa is getting paid 4m to be his back up? Something has to give.

Not that I support that particular stat, but what the guy is trying to say is that there were 60 instances that Blyleven should have a "W" in the win column for his quality start, but instead took an "L". Kerry Wood had a similar problem in 2002. There were a lot of games that he deserved a win, but his offense failed him.

Despite the subjectiveness of "best outfield arm", the article is about 2007 performance. He had the same number of baserunner kills as Francoeur, in less opportunities, but if you say so. Are you actually saying you agree that Cuddyer had the best RF arm in baseball last year? Sounds to me more like they are evaluating the value of the outfielder based on assists. I haven't seen Cuddyer play, but he is a converted 3b, and to be a 3b in the major leagues requires a pretty strong arm.

No, what was happening is every word in my posts is being dissected as if I'm some sort of scientific lab experiment and I'm tired of it. I really haven't found it necessary to spend 3 pages in this thread defending my stance that Roberts is a marginal upgrade to DeRosa. I'd also point out that I have been a defender of this deal since day 1. Not only have I said Roberts is a marginal upgrade over DeRosa, but that DeRosa's use as a bench player, pinch hitter and SS are all have the potential to be significant upgrades, making the addition of Roberts to this team SIGNIFICANT.

I don't see how calling Roberts a modest upgrade is belittling him. Other people may perceive his value to the Cubs differently than you do, but that doesn't make them mean-spirited or irrational. Otherwise one could make a similar argument in your case when you say that Gallagher/Marshall have little to no value other than as insurance policies against poor performances by Marquis/Dempster. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Welcome back, BTW. I think what is lost is that what one person considers marginal may not be the same as someone else's marginal. So, let me put this another way and maybe this will be more clear. Marginal isn't really measurable. Brian Roberts is a significant upgrade over crappy 2b's. Brian Roberts is a marginal upgrade over decent 2b's. Brian Roberts is not as good as that dude in Philadelphia, period. Mark DeRosa is a decent 2b.

Then basically what you are saying is that you weren't paying attention to the whole conversation and probably shouldn't have said what you said. No I'm not saying that. What you wrote in that post was Morganish. I didn't quote everything you wrote in the thread, and I'm not saying your entire opinion is as valid as a Joe Morgan opinion. I'm saying the part about not needing to look at the numbers being very reminicsent of the type of talk Joe Morgan would use. OPS is nice, but flawed. OPS+ is probably nicer, but also flawed. Don't you see the value in looking at the deeper numbers, when possible? It may not be as easy to find, but when it's there, why not use it as part of the discussion? When Roberts' name surfaced in the beginning of the offseason, I was not excited. I thought at the time there were much better opportunities to improve the team than by going after a second baseman. However, it's January now, and the 2008 Chicago Cubs lineup looks far to similar to the mediocre Chicago Cubs lineup that ended 2007 (with Fukudome replacing Floyd/Murton's decent OBP and somewhat lacking power). I don't see any realistic SS options on the horizon, but if I did, I'd take those over Roberts in a heartbeat. The Cubs still need to get better. Roberts is not the ideal way to go about getting better, but he would very definitely make them better. If I wanted to, I'm sure I could dig and find a post that you have made at one point or another that I could call Morganish or Morganesque. If you want to take a post out of context, that's your prerogative, and that's exactly what you did. In a previous post, I pointed out how Roberts has up and down years and by the formula presents itself, he "could" have another down year. I'm not saying I necessarily buy into up years and down years being a norm, but the original argument was that DeRosa is likely to have a down year and Roberts will not, and I don't buy into that either. Hell, Roberts can fall down and break his ankle on day 1, which would make 2008 a pretty down year. I'm on board with bringing in Roberts. I have been since the first day he was mentioned. I'm not opposed to him at all. In fact, I'd love to see Roberts at 2b and DeRosa at SS. I'm all for improving the team. However, I don't like giving up Cedeno, Gallagher and Marshall to get him, and he's only a marginal upgrade over DeRosa when looking at the 2b position and I'd much rather see a significant upgrade made at SS. I'm on board with the original offer of Patterson, Murton and Gallagher for Roberts.

Jesus Christ, dude. Whatever. I'm done with this. There is a 3 year old girl missing in my neighborhood right now and you want to win a pissing contest I really never should have bothered entering. ROBERTS IS A MARGINAL UPGRADE OVER DEROSA regardless of the 3 year difference in age, the difference in their WARP, OPS+, the length of their hair and any other stat you want to throw out there. I'm done with this.

The reason it is only a marginal upgrade is because Roberts isn't that much of a better player than DeRosa. A significant upgrade is Derrek Lee over Eric Karros, Hee Seop Choi and Randall Simon. A significant upgrade is Aramis Ramirez over Jose Hernandez, Mark Bellhorn and Lenny Harris. A significant upgrade is Alfonso Soriano over Todd Hollandsworth and Jason Dubois. Significant is when you are not getting valuable production at a particular position and you acquire some who gives you valuable production at a particular position. Significant is when you are getting average production at a particular position and you acquire someone who gives you astronomical production at that particular position. Right now, this Cub team is only looking at a marginal improvement offensively with the addition of Fukudome. If Soto and Fukudome are better than advertised, DeRosa plays SS and Roberts is at 2b, then I would upgrade marginal to significant improvement. Maybe you are just putting too much emphasis on the word marginal?

Then basically what you are saying is that you weren't paying attention to the whole conversation and probably shouldn't have said what you said.

And if all I ever did was ignore extremely relevant facts like their ages and overall statistics, then I might agree that I was being Morganish. However, I'm not ignoring extremely relevant facts like their ages and overall statistics. I just don't place as much weight on the difference between a 30 year old and a 33 year old. And I place more weight on OPS+ than I do WARP. It's a marginal upgrade. Period. I want to hear Goony tell me it's more than that.

It does make a massive difference over the course of the season. The #2 hitter in the line up can end up with somewhere in the vicinity of 100 more at bats over the course of a season than the #6 hitter in the lineup. So, I ask you if you would rather see Ryan Theriot get 100 more plate appearances than Alfonso Soriano in 2008, because that's what you'll likely be getting if you have Theriot batting 2nd. Last year, the Cubs lead off hitter had 765 plate appearances and the Cubs #6 hitter had 682 plate appearances.

Oh, so because I think Roberts is only a marginal upgrade to DeRosa, I'm Morganish? Wow. Have I not heard you say the same exact thing or are you of the impression that Roberts is a significant upgrade to DeRosa?

Considering the fact that we are comparing his ability to hit lead off, yes, I am using his lead off numbers. Is it that far-fetched? I used Brian Roberts' lead off numbers as well. You can call line up position splits meaningless if you like, but just because they are meaningless to you doesn't make them meaningless to everyone else. It's not like Soriano only hit in the lead off spot 20 or 30 times over the last 2 years. We're talking over 1200 PA leading off, which is not a small sample size by any stretch of the imagination. Some players believe they hit better if they are hitting in a certain line up spot. Soriano is one of those guys. He wants to lead off. And if Soriano tells Piniella that the addition of Roberts doesn't change the fact Soriano wants to continue leading off, I have a feeling the 130m player can give a convincing enough argument to carry a bit of weight. I also wouldn't put it past a guy like Soriano to not try as hard to be successful at the plate if he isn't hitting where he wants to hit in the line up. He pulled a fairly similar stunt in Washington when they moved him to the outfield. They called his bluff, but he wasn't the proud owner of a long term commitment when he said he wouldn't play the OF, so he caved in. Are you really going to tell me that Roberts/Theriot would be more suitable to you than Soriano/Roberts? Would you really be happy seeing Ryan Theriot get 100 more plate appearances in 2008 than Alfonso Soriano because of their spot in the batting order?

And you would be incorrect, sir. OBP as a lead off hitter in 2007: .345 OBP as a lead off hitter in 2006: .368 Twice in the last two years he's put up .345 or better. He was NOT walked eleventy billion times last year, either. 4 times is how many times he was intentionally walked last year.