davearm2

I doubt the Brewers gave up all that much to get an overpaid closer that they can't actually use to close games (due to the vesting clause). This seems mostly about the Mets starting the moving-on/shedding payroll process.

Having a "below average" minor league system can be a byproduct of graduations and trades. So obviously you can't evaluate Wilken without including guys that have reached the majors (Castro, Carpenter, Cashner, etc) or were traded (Lee, Guyer, etc).

One thing I haven't seen mentioned is that getting out from under the $5M deferred on Pena's deal could pay for all of the Cubs' best overslots from the June draft. So imagine the Cubs trade Pena for filler, and then the next day announce the signings of Vogelbach, Gretzky, Dunston, and Maples. Would that be reason enough to trade Pena just to get more filler? EDIT: I guess Tim just mentioned it ;)

They should've made Pujols the replacement.

Actually Easterling is much more the speedy CF type you're complaining the Cubs take too many of, than the corner power type you are wanting more of.

If you agree that we should not be excited about the guy, then the rest is just semantics, and that middle ground you mention is really not all that meaningful. The reason to discount his age is because he has done very little to improve upon the weaknesses that folks identified at the time he was drafted. He still doesn't walk. He still can't run much or play defense. He still gets himself out swinging at pitcher's pitches. When and why are we expecting these flaws to get fixed, when there have been no real signs of progress in 3+ years?

I'm sure we'll find out next year when he's raking for the Brewers as Prince Fielder's replacement, a la Casey McGehee. You're right, LaHair would probably put up an OPS just under 600. McGehee OPSed .859 for MIL the year after the Cubs let him go. But I bet you knew that already. Oh, is that what he's doing now? Are you truly this incapable of following the discussion? Or are you just being an [expletive] because you think it's fun? The question was asked, "just curious to see what he (LaHair) could do" in the bigleagues. Well the same question was once asked about McGehee. It was answered in 2009, when he finally got a chance... with the Brewers. I get that you derive some perverse amusement out of stalking and harassing me. The least you could do is be clever or funny about it. This is just pathetic... again. Not to mention, it detracts from an otherwise interesting discussion amongst mature adults. The regulars in this forum deserve better than to have this manure dumped on their threads.

I'm sure we'll find out next year when he's raking for the Brewers as Prince Fielder's replacement, a la Casey McGehee. You're right, LaHair would probably put up an OPS just under 600. McGehee OPSed .859 for MIL the year after the Cubs let him go. But I bet you knew that already.

I'm sure we'll find out next year when he's raking for the Brewers as Prince Fielder's replacement, a la Casey McGehee.

Cameron is another guy lots of folks here wanted the Cubs to sign two winters ago.

Anyone who complains that the Cubs never sell high should be all over trading Marshall and Marmol right now.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Joe Maddon said Garza wasn't going to be dealt, either.

"Major contributors" is a sufficiently ambiguous phrase.

I wouldn't want to hire a manager that quits on his team because he doesn't think he will be re-signed. Seriously. I don't get what Riggleman thought his endgame was here. He gave up his current manager's gig, and virtually ensured he won't be getting another.

Or pay the $5 million and get a better prospect. That'd better be a damn good prospect for $5M.

So you think he regularly gives up on balls he should catch and regularly detrimentally loafs on plays (presumably turning singles into doubles and doubles into triples)? Correct. I think Soriano's defense would be quantifiably better (as measured by the various defensive metrics) if he gave a better effort in the field. Whether that would move him from below average to average, or from above average to elite is beside the point. The point is he could and would be better just simply by trying harder. This phenomenon seems to manifest itself most clearly on balls hit over his head. He'll run in and dive for balls hit in front of him. But rarely do I see him going all out for balls hit over his head.

We're not talking about a 2% chance. And we're also not talking about "diving" into the wall. We're talking about running back fullspeed, gaining body control, leaping to catch the ball, and bracing for impact. OFs do that routinely (or at least attempt it). Soriano attempts it almost never. Heck he flunks the running fullspeed part most of the time, even when there's no wall in the equation. Yes, because he's not good at managing the wall, we've already established that. I have no idea why you'd want someone like that trying what you just described. You want him to "routinely attempt" something he's terrible at? Seems weird. I want him to routinely attempt to try his hardest to catch anything hit in his direction. Instead what I see is a guy that gives up quickly and is content to trot after the ball and pick it up when it stops rolling. Then your expectations are absurd. Why you would want a player with glaring OF weakness attempting whenever possible basically the most difficult thing an OF can do makes absolutely no sense to me. It would be one thing if Soriano was this talented defensive whiz who was just lazy, but he's not. "Trying hard" isn't automatically a good thing if it means trying for jumping and diving catches means you're giving up unnecessary doubles and triples. I can certainly live with Soriano not being a defensive whiz. It's the lazy I can't live with. He displays both.

This nonsense. Outfielders pull up short of the wall all the time, more often than not. And there's another option: c) Crash into the wall, missing the catch, possibly giving the runner an extra base. There's no way to know the ratio, but I'd bet the catch is missed when crashing into the wall just as often as it is made. Soriano is absolutely brutal around the wall and he loafs quite a bit, but the notion that "just about every other OF" will crash into the wall when given the chance is utter hogwash contrived to make him seem even worse. Seriously? You see a lot of OFs giving up on balls they have a chance to catch? I sure don't. Then you're not paying attention. If outfielders routinely went into the wall on any ball they had a chance to catch, you'd see a lot more triples. It'd look like pinball out there. A good percentage of the time players play the ball off the wall, they would have had some chance of catching if they went full bore into the wall. Now the deciding factor is how good a chance do they have, and are they better served playing the hop. Most often the chances aren't good, and playing the hop is the prudent thing to do. We remember the crash into the wall catches, but just as often the crashing OF misses the catch, and more often we just see the ball played off the wall. If OFs went into the wall every time they felt they had even an outside chance at catching it, we'd bee seeing a lot more ugly baseball. This isn't a defense of Soriano, I just take exception to the ridiculous notion that the overwhelming majority of OFs go into the wall anytime they feel they have any kind of shot at catching the ball. That's just trying to make Sori look even worse, and it isn't remotely true. Don't make it so black and white. Of course OFs have to do some split-second calculating and decide whether the chance of catching the ball justifies the chance of missing it and adding an extra base. My point is that Soriano never even does that math, because he seems unwilling to make contact with the wall regardless of the chances of catching the ball. So balls that other guys would go for, and half the time catch, he gives up on.

We're not talking about a 2% chance. And we're also not talking about "diving" into the wall. We're talking about running back fullspeed, gaining body control, leaping to catch the ball, and bracing for impact. OFs do that routinely (or at least attempt it). Soriano attempts it almost never. Heck he flunks the running fullspeed part most of the time, even when there's no wall in the equation. Yes, because he's not good at managing the wall, we've already established that. I have no idea why you'd want someone like that trying what you just described. You want him to "routinely attempt" something he's terrible at? Seems weird. I want him to routinely attempt to try his hardest to catch anything hit in his direction. Instead what I see is a guy that gives up quickly and is content to trot after the ball and pick it up when it stops rolling.

We're not talking about a 2% chance. And we're also not talking about "diving" into the wall. We're talking about running back fullspeed, gaining body control, leaping to catch the ball, and bracing for impact. OFs do that routinely (or at least attempt it). Soriano attempts it almost never. Heck he flunks the running fullspeed part most of the time, even when there's no wall in the equation.

This nonsense. Outfielders pull up short of the wall all the time, more often than not. And there's another option: c) Crash into the wall, missing the catch, possibly giving the runner an extra base. There's no way to know the ratio, but I'd bet the catch is missed when crashing into the wall just as often as it is made. Soriano is absolutely brutal around the wall and he loafs quite a bit, but the notion that "just about every other OF" will crash into the wall when given the chance is utter hogwash contrived to make him seem even worse. Seriously? You see a lot of OFs giving up on balls they have a chance to catch? I sure don't.

Your right he doesn't "quit" on a ball 20 feet from a wall, he just slows down to a slow trot on anything hit toward a wall so he doesn't get there to crash into the wall and plays it after it hits the ground or the wall. Sure, why not? You are confused about why an OF would want to try hard to catch a batted ball on the fly? Not at all. Any player is going to avoid crashing into a wall if they can. And BtB description is ridiculous because he's trying to make it sound like Soriano is acting like he's on the verge of slamming into the wall left and right instead of, y'know, playing a ball off the wall like everyone else does. It's just indicative of the irrational hatred the guy gets; if he's not slamming into the wall or diving for balls every other game he's worthless and a coward. Wrong. Not all players avoid crashing into a wall when they can. In fact if the options are, a) crash into the wall and make the catch, or b) avoid the crash and concede a double, just about every other OF will choose a). Soriano chooses b). It goes beyond that, though. Just the other day Soriano was thrown out at home trying to score from first on a double, after kinda trotting his way between second and third. Sure the reaction of some fans is over the top, but it's easy to see where it comes from, since the dude is commonly giving less than 100% effort. He (and even the Cubs) may play it off as preventing injury, but it's still maddening to watch.

I'd gladly take that line over the next 3 years. I doubt Pujols/Fielder will be worth 12-15 million more than that. 3/30 for Pena vs. 5/100 for Fielder. Discuss. Both contracts seem too low. 6/150 for Fielder and 4/50 for Pena seem more realistic. In any event, Fielder is exactly twice the annual price of Pena. I'd probably take Fielder. He's younger, more productive, and a more legitimate impact bat. And I'm not a huge Fielder fan... I'm concerned he'll turn into Mo Vaughn II.

No swine were harmed in the making of this baseball team.

With a blend of power and patience, Pena is singlehandedly trying to bring '08 back.