Rob

uh somewhere in this thread theres a point i made where 122 games of JD Drew is a heck of a lot better than 162 games of Soriano in CF. Unfortunately, you failed to provide any facts to support your argument. Last year 162 games of Soriano was >>> than J.D. Drew. I think we need to stop assuming that age automatically equals decline in production. Soriano is only 30 years old. It is possible that he can continue his better numbers over the next few years. Hahahaha...that's a completely ridiculous claim if you've read the whole thread. KC has provided a ton of facts to back up his case. There's still room to disagree with his case and provide facts to counter it, but he has provided a lot of factual information to back his opinion. To claim otherwise is to disrespect the work he has done here and lower your own credibility. Sorry, I'm trying to keep up with the whole thread. Look no further than last year when they both played the whole season and I would take Soriano's numbers over Drew's any day of the week. Looking no further than one year is gonna screw you over mor often than not. 2 of the last 4 years Drew has played 100 or less games. 2003 Drew 100 games 15 HR 42 RBI .886 OPS Soriano 38HR 91 RBI .863 OPS 2005 Drew 15 HR 36 RBI .932 OPS Soriano 36 HR 104 RBI .821 OPS Cleary more games with Soriano is much more productive than less games with Drew. What happened to 2004? :lol:

Drew 2003 - Cardinals 2004 - Braves 2005 - Dodgers 2006 - Dodgers 2007 - ? Soriano 2003 - Yankees 2004 - Rangers 2005 - Rangers 2006 - Nationals 2007 - Cubs Seems like they're both about to be on their 4th team in 5 years. Best. Post. Ever. AlphonsOWNED I'd take a bow and all, but... you know... the internet. At any rate, it's fun to use statistics that can't be argued against.

I get the distinct impression there's no purported interest in him by any teams because it'sjust assumed he'll re-sign with the Dodgers on a low base incentive laden deal a la Wood. That's just my impression though. Take it for what it's worth.

Drew 2003 - Cardinals 2004 - Braves 2005 - Dodgers 2006 - Dodgers 2007 - ? Soriano 2003 - Yankees 2004 - Rangers 2005 - Rangers 2006 - Nationals 2007 - Cubs Seems like they're both about to be on their 4th team in 5 years.

You'll have to forgive me for not thinking. Between the two papers I'm simultaneously writing while trying to keep up with this the Soriano stuff, my head is fried. On a side note, I might be the only person here who's read every single post in this thread.

I'm having fun. :thumleft: (don't these things make non-premium people curious what the heck this is for or what it looks like?) They most certainly do... but not like $50 curious. (Sorry Tim, broke college student here) Aw, c'mon...it's like eating at the dorm instead of McDonald's one time each month! Maybe if you gave me a free week and I would become hopelessly addicted... I guess we'll never know though.

I'm having fun. :thumleft: (don't these things make non-premium people curious what the heck this is for or what it looks like?) They most certainly do... but not like $50 curious. (Sorry Tim, broke college student here)

he is a good player, but he's also overrated. he's being paid like one of the best players in baseball, and he clearly isn't. How is he overrated? Please no stats involved. Your opinion. And I agree with you that he doesn't deserve to get a $136 million dollar contract. But I will never consider him to be overrated. i think jacque jones is better than albert pujols. prove me wrong...oh, and please no stats involved. Pujols is the games best fastball hitter. He has great plate discipline, plays a solid D at 1B, gets on base, hits for power, hits for a high average, team player, and he runs the bases well. And he has a MVP award. Qualifiers like "best" "great" "solid" "high" and "well" are just rudimentary stats... they're obviously a ranking relative to the rest of the league. And that MVP award is certainly a stat. So basically your argument for Pujols over Jones without using stats is that he's a "team player." I propose to you that Jacque Jones is on a team as well. This debate is a draw.

Exactly. This signing is only cost prohibitive if the Cubs make it so. If they refuse to spend to sign other players because of this contract, then obviously it will be harmful. If it doesn't effect their spending too much, then it will probably be alright. There's no hard cap here. The Cubs can do whatever they want. This signing says to me that they are going spend more than they have in past. If that's the case (it's clearly pure speculation at this point), I'm not really worried about the money. All signs (articles) point to JH not slowing down. I have no doubt JH will sign atleast 2 pitchers of the quality of a Westbrook at a Meche. Since when is Meche quality?

Personally, I don't think we'll ever see Jones in CF. But Lou said he's playing Soriano in a corner outfield spot. Couple that with Bruce Miles' assertation that Soriano would be in right, Murton is "safe" and Jones moves to CF... it's pretty much given that Soriano is in right now. I think Jones will be moved, maybe as soon as tomorrow morning. But with Lou saying he wants Soriano in the leadoff spot, I don't see us bringing back Pierre or going after GM Jr. anymore.

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) what about those of us who don't like the terms but like the signing anyway? Throw me into that catagory as well. In actuality, I think everybody is in that category. Nobody here has argued Soriano isn't an upgrade. He most certainly is. The only question is whether his contract has enough of a negative impact to be a hassle now or in the future. Some people feel more strongly than others that it does or does not. That seems to be the only divide. If the only question was "would you want Soriano on your team" everybody would say yes.

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) what about those of us who don't like the terms but like the signing anyway? You don't exist.

It was only copy/paste, had this come later in the week when boredom had fully set in though..... Ha, that's where we differ. I'm bored already. I'm hoping for more Cubs moves this week to keep me occupied. ;) Correctamundo. More Cubs moves, please. its like fricken heroine. If you don't know how to spell it, you certainly don't know how to inject it into your forehead while on somebody's doorstep.

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)

Yeah, I'll go ahead and say it too. If we were going to be unable to sign Drew or make a trade for a guy like Manny or ARod... this would be an essential move. I'm just upset we went straight to a 'A-' option rather than go for the A or A+ guys. And yeah, Shapiro had some very nasty things to say bout Peralta's range and that he was looking for an excellent defensive SS to back him up.

Yeah, seriously. It's funny, people are taking my comparison of Walker to Soriano and twisting it into an absolute that I'm claiming Walker is better or close enough to be worth the same amount... all I was pointing out is that Soriano isn't 130 million dollars better. At the same time, people are blaming the other guy for even bringing it up. Craziness.

Got me. someone was laughingly trying to compare their numbers. Hell, you're the one that brought him up, I guess that gives me the answer right there. Actually, I brought him up. I thought it was hilarious that Walker outperformed Soriano in 04 and 05 while they both played the same position, even though Soriano was in Texas in a better hitter's park than Wrigley. I'm not all that convinced three years of age and a career year prior to free agency is worth 130 million over 8 years more than Walker. But I guess that's an inconsequential concern worth being laughed over. Ha ha! Freaking hilarious! :roll:

I've given Hendry his props this offseason. The Aramis, Miller, and Wood signings were very nicely done. And if I had heard the Angels had signed Soriano to this contract, I would have sighed in relief. I'd been scared all offseason that Hendry was going to do something stupid with all this money. Now I guess I don't have to be scared anymore...

:( 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. Yeah, Jon and I certainly are in your camp. I think I joined your club too.

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?

I gave Hendry a lot of credit for getting Aramis signed. Matsuzaka looks like a real ace while watching him pitch, and when you translate the numbers to MLB level. While perhaps I erred to say he's been more productive, I sincerely do believe he will be more productive by plenty than Soriano will. Once again, three year splits are more indicitive of future performance than five year splits, but I will grant there was probably a bit of selection bias in the years I chose. Then again, you'd think putting him in Texas should have helped your case, not hurt it... which is a scary thought. And I do agree with you... so long as we win a World Series, it's fine by me to have to deal with this contract. But I am concerned we're going to have a hard time winning a world series while holding this contract on our hands.

The only way to prove that is to show that Walker's playing time is differently distributed(i.e. to favor his platoon splits) than a "starter" like Soriano. And even if he did get put in more favorable matchups, it speaks that 1-2 marginal to decent players in the right situation can nearly replicate Soriano's production. That truly is funny. Todd Walker can't hit 40 HR's, 40 doubles, and steal any bases. You may not value those numbers, but realty baseball does. Not just selective percentages. last year, someone tried to claim Todd was better offensively than Tejada. What a joke. Realty is greater than fantasy baseball. Walker might do better than Soriano on the basepaths if he doesn't attempt to steal any at all. I haven't crunched Soriano's SB numbers yet, but something tells me he fell just below the breakeven point... costing the team runs because of all the time he got caught stealing. I don't believe I ever made the argument that Todd Walker could hit 40 HRs or 40 doubles (though he has hit in excess of 35 doubles 3 times since 2001... even while getting about 60% of the PT Soriano gets the last few seasons). I made the argument that Todd Walker is close enough in value to Soriano that they can be compared (though he certainly is not better). My point was that Walker will be lucky to get 2/8 this offseason... and Soriano is getting 6 extra years and over 100 million dollars extra. All I was pointing out is the disparity between Soriano's talent level and what he's getting paid. He's getting a contract approximately like Manny's... and he is nowhere near that performance level.

You can make a case that Soriano's total production is roughly equivalent to Drew's production when he's only playing 120 games. Unfortunately, Drew would have a plus glove in CF, whereas we feel we have to play Soriano in RF, which makes his production worth less relative to the rest of the league. Drew is the better ballplayer. Manny has the arm to play right, and there's no doubt his bat fits in anywhere on the diamond. I don't know of a whole lot of people who feel the same about Soriano. Matsuzaka... I wouldn't have made a bid of 51 mil for him (cause I didn't think that'd be what it ended up taking), but I'd probably be willing to pay it. He's a top-of-the-rotation starter if you look at his translations. He's exactly the kind of guy worth overpaying for. ARod has been rumored to be available for a package of approximately Eyre, Prior, Moore, and Pie. (assuming we don't want salary help). He would have been worth it. The Marlins are huge on Pie. Pie and Hill alone might be enough to get a deal done for the best young hitter in the game. If there's one player out there I'd want to build a team around for the next decade... it's not Pujols or Beltran or anybody... it's Cabrera. I'd go as far as Pie, Hill, Veal, and Gallagher.... and I doubt they'd turn that down.

First off, Soriano clocks in at #4 on the "readily-available" market. Aramis, Matsuzaka, and Drew all have been and will continue to be more productive than Soriano for the immediate future. And there's a huge drop down in production from those top 3 to Soriano. That doesn't even take into account the fact we could easily get a few guys in trades, too. ARod, Manny, and Cabrera are all out there for the taking right now... and they're all exponentially better bets than Soriano. I'll hold off complaining about the contract for the time being, as we have no hard figures... but the fact remains that sinking that kind of money and years into a merely "very good" at best player is fiscally irresponsible. Is that much of an issue of the Cubs continue to bump payroll? Probably not for 3-5 years at least... once he declines, it could be trouble (but there is the chance there's some option years we can get out of). The real issue at hand is what happens if the Cubs are sold soon (as has been rumored). If a new ownership group cuts the payroll to the $100 mil level, this signing would be enough to drag this team down the crapper for half a decade. Let's do an experiment. I'll give you Soriano's numbers and a mystery player. You tell me how much this mystery player is worth to you. 2004: Soriano - .280/.324/.484 OPS+ of 98 Player X - .274/.352/.468 OPS+ of 105 2005: Soriano - .268/.309/.512 OPS+ of 110 Player X - .305/.355/.474 OPS+ of 115 2006: Soriano - .277/.351/.560 OPS+ of 132 Player X - .278/.355/.398 OPS+ of 93 Both players had years in 2006 out of line with their career numbers. While Player X is indeed three years older, he has shown himself to be quite capable of outperforming Soriano by doing so 2 of the last 3 years. Would you even think of giving Todd Walker five million per year for 4 years to patrol right field? How about seventeen million per? I sure as hell wouldn't... But he's not that far from being comprable to Soriano as an offensive threat.

Looks like pitching is the next item on the to-do list. So does this end all hope of bringing in JD Drew?