Sammy Sofa

Mainly because his name is "Chipper." If the numbers when examined closely have him on the bubble, stupid [expletive] like having the name "Chipper" that the HoF loves seals the deal.

Need largest image of this possible. Yeah, definitely.

Yeah, it's going to look pretty different attendance-wise once the new park opens up. They've been a very popular team down there for a while; just not popular enough to draw to one of the most wretched ballparks baseball has ever seen.

Plus Neifi will always have that "you see this glove? It's made of gold" line.

Yup, if someone doesn't think it's likely that Colvin would pan out as a starting OF then it must mean they're comparing him to Neifi.

wait, wait, wait...what? methinks you're confusing Neyer with someone or you didn't read him much before he went "insider." I'm guessing he was the primary source for most stat-friendly people on this site (and almost everywhere). I don't understand where people seem to think that I'm slamming Neyer's opinions on stats. I might not think he's the "Einstein" of them, but I just said I'm indifferent towards him as a writer. saying someone that spearheaded the popularity of a movement such as stats in baseball has a "decent attitude" towards that movement sounds a little...I don't know what the word is, but it's not good. The 50/50 line didn't really seem to be the focus of the article. Just that the Soriano contract was and is a pretty bad one, primarily due to the $18m he's going to get each of the next 5 years. I'm not sure who Neyer's brethren are, but you certainly seem to be slamming him. Hey, I can't stop you from taking it that way. I'm just not that impressed with him as a writer (example: "Soriano has a bad contract!" Everyone else: "And...?"). It's cool that he's smart enough to be able to point people towards better statistical analysis in baseball and that he recognizes its importance, but I've never read anything by him that has made me go, "wow, this guy has some serious insight into sabermetrics and something new to offer along those lines!" He just recognizes how useful they are, and that's grand.

wait, wait, wait...what? methinks you're confusing Neyer with someone or you didn't read him much before he went "insider." I'm guessing he was the primary source for most stat-friendly people on this site (and almost everywhere). I don't understand where people seem to think that I'm slamming Neyer's opinions on stats. I might not think he's the "Einstein" of them, but I just said I'm indifferent towards him as a writer.

What putrid defense? And congratulations on realizing Soriano is a streaky player.

Oh, OK, guy who told someone a message board to stop watching a TV show because they "clearly don't get it." That was sure taking the mature high road. And Neyer is the Einstein of baseball statistics? Interesting analogy.

I don't get what you are talking about. Neyer is the preeminent "good stats" guy in the media. And that article was about a grossly overpaid player who is going to be old and bad. That's not what have you done for me lately. That's just thinking realistically. Sure, but the timing and tone of it was clearly influenced by how Soriano looked at the time it was written with the implication that nobody should be surprised if he was released sooner rather than later.

He seems to be doing great.

Why do you insist on being a dick? I was just providing evidence that I was not the only one who thought this way. Neyer is pretty respected baseball writer not some smuck on a message board who insists on acting 12 whenever he can. You mean "schmuck." And why do you insist on trumping up such an inane, ridiculous argument with outdated editorials from the likes of Neyer? These are mysteries the world will never solve. What's wrong with Neyer? Personally? Nothing, as far as I know. I'm pretty indifferent towards him as writer. He seems to have a decent attitude towards stats, but like most of his brethren he has a very "of the moment, what have you done for me lately?" approach with articles like the one that was linked.

Why do you insist on being a dick? I was just providing evidence that I was not the only one who thought this way. Neyer is pretty respected baseball writer not some smuck on a message board who insists on acting 12 whenever he can. You mean "schmuck." And why do you insist on trumping up such an inane, ridiculous argument with outdated editorials from the likes of Neyer? These are mysteries the world will never solve.

Oh, God, no. I didn't think you did. But I thought you suggested a team wouldn't have to get much cash if they only had to give up a crappy player. Was just trying to get a sense for how much cash. My sense is, you'd have to give a team a crapload of cash to take Soriano, even if all you got was a warm body, b/c his contract is going to be brutal here pretty quickly. I suppose if he puts up the 4.4 WAR season that he's on pace to, and maybe another one, you have to put up less. But then again, even after 2 years, he's still due $18m per for 3 years. I figure the Cubs would have to cover at least $8 million-$10 million each of those last 3 years.

Well, that stupid editorial has settled everything.

They wouldn't want to pay anything. The question is would they take him period if they had to pay only the league minimum? I'm sure some teams would, but only one that (a) an American league team and (b) had zero better options now or for the forseable future. that's absurd. you're saying ZERO national league teams (and most american league teams) would take him for $400,000 a year right now? ZERO. That's what I'm saying. B/c it wouldn't just be for this year it would be for the remainder of his contract. And? They'd only be paying him $400k.

They wouldn't want to pay anything. The question is would they take him period if they had to pay only the league minimum? I'm sure some teams would, but only one that (a) an American league team and (b) had zero better options now or for the forseable future. You're being ridiculous.

Oh, God, no.

Oh, well, it's good to see you're taking such a rational approach to this.

It's only because he made less in the first couple years. Don't pay attention to that fangraphs nonsense, their $ values are terribly skewed. Agreed, but it's still ridiculous to say that he has almost negative value right now even if the Cubs picked up a good chunk of his contract. but how much? I mean, obviously he's worth more than league minimum going forward. But how much of his contract would the Cubs have to pick up for another team to want him through the end of his contract? I don't know. Probably at least half if they wanted to get a decent return. I think they could move him without paying that much, but then you would actually be getting a crappy return. Personally, I really don't think trading Soriano needs to be done or needs to be any kind of priority. They can eat the money as he gets older and crappier so long as they don't compound it with other bad contracts. This off season and the following are going to be critical to see if this team is actually moving in a new direction.

Why? Outside of the first month, he never had a month with an OPS below .835, and he's at .838 for his career. Outside of missing time due to injury he was very good in 2008 and a critical part of that team's success. A SLG heavy OPS that isn't even all that impressive of an OPS to begin with. It's still valuable, and it's not like he was dragging ass with the OBP most of that season. Of course it would be ideal if he kept it above .350, but hey, he can still be very useful even if he isn't.

It's only because he made less in the first couple years. Don't pay attention to that fangraphs nonsense, their $ values are terribly skewed. Agreed, but it's still ridiculous to say that he has almost negative value right now even if the Cubs picked up a good chunk of his contract.

Why? Outside of the first month, he never had a month with an OPS below .835, and he's at .838 for his career. Outside of missing time due to injury he was very good in 2008 and a critical part of that team's success.

B/c he's less than replacement level value right now or close to it. Last year he was replacement level at a 0.0 WAR but this year he's already been worth 1.7 WAR, so quite a bit above replacement level. http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=847&position=2B/OF#value I'm betting by the end of this year he'll be in negative territory. Soriano's has not played up to his contract since 2007. Did 2008 not happen?

HE HAD CANCER.