fromthestretch

I used the Lineup Analysis tool at Baseball Musings: http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/LineupAnalysis.py If you take the Cubs splits from 2007 for the 2nd through 9th spots in the order and plug in Soriano's numbers in the leadoff spot, you get 4.712 runs per game, which equals 763 runs over the course of a 162 game season. It's not that far off considering the Cubs scored 752 last year. If you take the same splits for the Cubs but substitute Roberts' numbers for Soriano's, you also get 4.712 runs per game. Probably a bit of a crude method, but to me it shows that a .377/.432 line out of the leadoff spot is not going to yield a significant number of runs over what a .337/.560 line would, even if you factor speed into the equation. So what do you get when you plug Roberts into the leadoff spot and plug Soriano's numbers into the 2 thru 9 position? My response was to his claim that Soriano only scored more runs due to a superior lineup. I used the Lineup Analysis tool to show that there isn't much of a difference between Soriano leading off and Roberts leading off. Soriano's clear advantage in slugging pretty much makes up for Roberts' advantage in OBP. The question remains, would Roberts leading off and Soriano in the middle of the order be better than Soriano leading off and Roberts batting second? Probably, but I doubt the difference between the two lineups would be very big.

I'll most likely be there for a couple of the games. A buddy of mine usually has a huge tailgate everytime the Cubs are in town. They usually have a decent crowd when the Cubs are here, and with the new stadium, I wouldn't be surprised if it becomes a bit more difficult to get tickets.

I used the Lineup Analysis tool at Baseball Musings: http://www.baseballmusings.com/cgi-bin/LineupAnalysis.py If you take the Cubs splits from 2007 for the 2nd through 9th spots in the order and plug in Soriano's numbers in the leadoff spot, you get 4.712 runs per game, which equals 763 runs over the course of a 162 game season. It's not that far off considering the Cubs scored 752 last year. If you take the same splits for the Cubs but substitute Roberts' numbers for Soriano's, you also get 4.712 runs per game. Probably a bit of a crude method, but to me it shows that a .377/.432 line out of the leadoff spot is not going to yield a significant number of runs over what a .337/.560 line would, even if you factor speed into the equation.

His career stolen base percentage is that high because he chooses the best opportunities to steal a base. If he's not as picky about when he attempts a steal, he's most likely going to get caught more often.

I have no problem with something being someones opinion. Sometimes if it is just your opinion you don't have the numbers or areas where you can pull information out of and you run out of ways to say the same thing. Imo, sometimes this board gets a little too analytical about things. I love the numbers and many of the things/stats that can be brought up regarding baseball but there are other aspects of the game as well. I do understand why you would be frustrated with someone saying the same thing over and over again though and some of us, myself included, don't really express themselves that well or in ways we want too when it comes to writing on a message board. I can respect that some people aren't into statistical analysis and that some people just have a tough time expressing their opinions on a message board. I'm certainly not asking him to explain anything statistically. Just point me to the rankings he found, and I'll draw my own conclusions from it.

You've made some decent points and don't let some posters get you down when it comes to posting. I like to see a different opinion and it's always good to have it here on the board. I don't think anyone minds a differing opinion. The problem is he refuses to answer people when they either ask him a question or provide information that goes against his opinion. Hell, I've asked three times now where he found the rankings he refers to when he says that Roberts is the "xth ranked second baseman in all of baseball." Three times. It's an honest question (especially when that ranking changes from thread to thread), and I've yet to receive a response. I'm not asking for the meaning of life or detailed instructions on how to split an atom. I just want to know where he found his rankings. Someone else provided me a link to rankings they found, so it's obviously not that hard. I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt. I'd love to think he's not referring to fantasy rankings or simply pulling the numbers out of his rear end. [/rant] If he is pulling these numbers out of his rear, do you really want to see them? Maybe the ranking is his own, I don't know. Yes, it would be nice if he responded where he found this info but speaking for myself sometimes I don't remember where I read or heard it and wouldn't be able to tell you where I learned or saw this. I'd settle for hearing that rather than a non-response to three different requests for it. If he wants people to take him seriously and actually respect his opinion, responding to legitimate questions would be a good first step towards achieving that. I'm not sure how anyone can be expected to be taken seriously when they just do a drive-by posting stating the same thing over and over and over again. His statement awhile back that he isn't a professional message board poster and shouldn't need to provide anything to back up his opinion is ridiculous.

You've made some decent points and don't let some posters get you down when it comes to posting. I like to see a different opinion and it's always good to have it here on the board. I don't think anyone minds a differing opinion. The problem is he refuses to answer people when they either ask him a question or provide information that goes against his opinion. Hell, I've asked three times now where he found the rankings he refers to when he says that Roberts is the "xth ranked second baseman in all of baseball." Three times. It's an honest question (especially when that ranking changes from thread to thread), and I've yet to receive a response. I'm not asking for the meaning of life or detailed instructions on how to split an atom. I just want to know where he found his rankings. Someone else provided me a link to rankings they found, so it's obviously not that hard. I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt. I'd love to think he's not referring to fantasy rankings or simply pulling the numbers out of his rear end. [/rant]

And again I ask, where are these rankings? I'm curious if they are fantasy rankings, pre-season rankings, somthing based on projections for 2008. All I want to know is where you're seeing these rankings. I'm not questioning that you saw them, I'd just like to know where. That would allow me to judge the validity for myself. Elias has has Roberts fifth in their rankings. I have no idea how they do their rankings though just stumbled accrossed them. Chase Utley, Robinson Cano, Placido Polanco, Orlando Hudson then Brian Roberts. http://www.sportscity.com/MLB/Elias-MLB-Rankings-2B-3B-SS/ The list includes ss and 3b so you have weed through them. Interesting. I'll have to look that over.

Looking at those numbers, I'm curious to know if Kinsler had some ridiculously low BABIP last year. .279 BABIP in 2007 for Kinsler. Man, was he bad on the road.

And again I ask, where are these rankings? I'm curious if they are fantasy rankings, pre-season rankings, somthing based on projections for 2008. All I want to know is where you're seeing these rankings. I'm not questioning that you saw them, I'd just like to know where. That would allow me to judge the validity for myself.

It has nothing to do with "prettying up" posts. It has everything to do with being able to follow the dicussion. When you are responding to posts two pages back, it would help if you would quote it to allow people to better understand your response. Also...I asked this awhile back in another thread and never got a response, so I'll try again. Where are you getting your rankings when you say that Roberts is the "4th best second baseman in baseball?" I ask so I can take a look at the rankings myself because I like reading stuff like that. No one's asking you to be a "professional message board poster," just to provide information to back up your opinions a little bit. Saying that someone is the xth ranked person in baseball at his position is all fine and dandy but does nothing for anyone if they have no idea where you're getting your rankings. It also doesn't help that you once stated he was ranked 5th and now you're saying he's 4th. There's no need to get all riled up when people ask for more information regarding opinions you post.

He's talking about the fact that Gallagher has pitched above AA.

From Jan. 11: From this morning: Apparently, Roberts just keeps getting better all the time. Perhaps we should wait until July, since at this pace, he'll be the best second baseman in the majors by then.

I'll be there for the games on March 13 and 14.

I don't think that's a concern considering how infrequently the Cubs lay down a bunt. They were last in the NL in sacrifice bunts in 2007.

Shouldn't the thread title be changed? It's been widely reported that the failed test was actually in November 2000 and that the inital report was due to a typo. The failed test in 2000 is nothing new.

I hope they aren't busy reading the Brian Roberts' thread. We won't see pics for at least three more days if that's the case.

You are stating something as fact that isn't even remotely close to being the truth.

I don't know why one of the moderators doesn't end this thread. Reading posts where two people are arguing about something that doesn't have anything to do with the topic is ridiculous. The Cubs won't be acquiring Greene or Peralta. If the Roberts trade happens, he will bat leadoff, until then Soriano bats leadoff. It doesn't matter whether we agree or not, the only opinion that matters is Piniella's. Chances are they won't be acquiring anyone you post about in your three-way trade proposals either, but I don't see anyone telling you to stop posting them. While the SS discussion has probably gone a little too far, the original intent was to point out that acquiring someone because they're an according to Hoyle "leadoff" hitter is ridiculous. If their skills help the team, they help the team regardless of where the person bats.

Carlos Guillen is no longer a SS. I'd still put him at SS over Greene. Just like I'd put DeRosa at SS over Greene. That wouldn't be wise. While I might prefer Guillen offensively to Greene, Guillen is very much a defensive liability...to the point where his offensive advantage might be nullified.

Carlos Guillen is no longer a SS.

Khalil Greene, in 1126 plate appearances away from Petco, is a .335/.515 hitter. I was being conservative and even reduced that to .330/.485. He would be a significant upgrade over Theriot. Regardless, people are putting waaaaaayyyy too much emphasis on the leadoff spot.

Why is it ridiculous? Leadoff is not a team need. I agree with you that the skills he does possess would improve the team. Again though, it has nothing to do with him batting leadoff. If the Cubs acquire Roberts and bat him second behind Soriano, this team will still be better. Basically, with this whole thing, I'm trying to figure out if you like Roberts more because you think he can leadoff or because he's simply a better player than we currently have starting at his position. While I can't say whether or not a player like that is available, a player like that does exist and has been discussed quite a few times on this board.

It shouldn't be a big reason. And absolutely none of that has anything to do with batting leadoff. I'm going to disagree that this team is desperate for stolen bases, but that's not the point of this. If his skills make the Cubs a better team, then they should try to acquire him. But it shouldn't be because they feel there is a void at the top of the lineup. Let me ask you this...if there was a solid defensive shortstop available that was a .330/.485 hitter and maybe stole five bases a year (not your definition of a leadoff hitter), would you still prefer that the Cubs pursue Roberts instead?

You're missing the point. It's not about Utley or Youkilis. And no one expects one team to have the best player at each position. The point is that Roberts shouldn't be targeted simply because he bats leadoff. It's stupid to target a player for that sole purpose. As you said before: That bolded part is independent of who is batting leadoff. In other words, with the way the Cubs roster is currently built, Utley in the middle of the order is better than having Roberts at leadoff. To put it another way, Soriano at leadoff and Utley in the middle of the order is better than Roberts at leadoff and Soriano in the middle of the order. That's because Utley is a better offensive player than Roberts. I'm not saying Roberts is a bad player and that he won't make the Cubs a better team. However, the alleged reason the Cubs are pursuing him (he can bat leadoff) is flawed. You don't pursue a player because he can bat leadoff. You pursue a player because he makes your team better. If that player also happens to get on base frequently and can run well, then great, bat him leadoff. If he doesn't and you can't find another player on your roster that is even remotely capable of hitting at the top of the order, then either you're looking for the wrong qualities for a leadoff hitter (i.e., focused too much on speed) or your roster is flawed to begin with. You try to assemble the best team you can, position-by-position, and then you build the batting order from what you have. What you're suggesting is to build the team based on batting order.