risico

Soto's not a good fielder. Castro has the chance to be at least an average SS. Plus Soto is going to earn more money over the next 5+ years, so I would say Castro will be more valuable. But Castro will have to improve quite a bit at the plate to do that.

Well, the word on him out of college was that he didn't have a good out pitch. Hopefully he continues to get guys to hit the ball on the ground.

Castro is so young that it's hard and almost unfair to compare him with someone like Podsednik based on WAR. The offensive numbers are similar right now but Castro's superior line drive rates and ISO show more offensive talent IMO. The defensive numbers are all over the board depending on which metric you use. Castro's had his share of troubles with errors but anyone who watches him play can see that he's a talented defender.

Your showing me that you misinterpreted what I said. I like to look at win values. Colvin has a positive win value right now mainly because of his bat. But 1B has a lower positional value than the corner OF spots, so that's already a disadvantage of moving him from the OF to 1B. If his defensive value, which is currently neutral, declines at all when he moves to 1B, he'll be approaching replacement-level status. I guess my point is that Colvin's bat is OK in a corner OF spot but it's less valuable at 1B. Hence the sentence I bolded above. Now nobody knows how he'll react to the defensive switch. I guess we'll have to see about it. I would prefer the Cubs just sign a reasonable first baseman, let Colvin continue to play his corner OF spot, and hope that he improves his offensive game.

So you've been watching him play 1st ? " Stop with the " making things up to help your argument. No, I haven't watched him. I did say that he wouldn't have much value if he didn't field the position. People can say 1B is an easy position to play, but I don't think it's quite as easy to take a guy who has been playing the outfield for years and just move him to the infield and force him to get a lot more chances than he's ever gotten in his career. Yes, my suspicion that he won't be a good 1B is speculative. I haven't seen him play 1B. But if you look at his defensive value, most of it is with his range, and I think that would be marginalized if you moved him to 1B. If Colvin were to lose none of his value in moving to 1B (which means he'd actually have to improve as a player since 1B has a lower positional value than the corner OF spots), he would be the 15th best 1B in the majors this season. I just don't see the reason to move him if that's the kind of production you're going to get.

He may be a weak starter in the OF, but he certainly doesn't have much value as a starter at 1B if he doesn't field the position. His bat can play at a corner OF position because he's actually a pretty good defender, but at 1B I don't think he'd be nearly as good.

That type of info is definitely encouraging. The problem I have with Colvin is that even with that incredible HR/FB rate and some good slugging numbers, he's still not much more than an average hitter. Striking out and hitting the ball on the ground are not ways to be successful as a hitter and Colvin seems prone to both. I think the best improvement we could see from him would be to start hitting more balls in the air and take advantage of the Wrigley Field HR environment.

You really think giving up an out to gain a base is a good idea? Especially from a productive hitter... Situationally I could see the reason for bunting, but as a general practice I don't get it.

Seriously, Colvin is an OK hitter, but if you want to combine SLG and OBP in a way that makes absolutely no sense and use it as a valid statistic, go ahead. Soriano has never really been a guy who hits the ball into the ground. Groundball rates back that up if you look at his batted-ball stats. Colvin, on the other hand, is hitting it on the ground more than 45% of the time. He's making outs by hitting the ball on the ground and whiffing - a lot. His strikeout rate is higher than Soriano's was in the worst season of his career. His insane HR/FB rate is propping up his slugging numbers right now. If that continues, fine, he's a slightly above-average hitter with a lot of power who still makes a ton of outs. If it regresses to a more normal rate, then Colvin is a 4th or 5th outfielder at best. Stop with the Soriano comps. Colvin is soon to be 25. One has proven himself over time while the other is young and seems to have some skills and some flaws. For every guy like Soriano there are guys like Francoeur who didn't pan out because of similar flaws.

Guys, can we get off OPS for a second? It's an alright stat but it's not really well-conceived. Tyler Colvin is great at making outs. That's a huge problem. His .350 wOBA is fairly average, especially from a corner OF spot. That's with a huge HR/FB rate, a huge swinging strike rate, and a huge K rate. To me, the numbers right now don't show that he's a good player and the peripherals certainly don't show that things are going to get better.

I mean, you're certainly entitled to believe this, but it's fundamentally wrong. Half the game is is offense, and half is defense. Of the defensive portion, at least 60% occurs between the mound and the plate. There are degrees and extremes, sure, in the case of exceptionally good or bad defense. But in general, it's clear that offense has a bigger influence on results than position defense. Prove it and I'll believe it. Until you don't, I won't. Pitching is obviously a vastly important part of the defensive game, but being able to catch the ball matters. How much it matters probably varies greatly depending on the pitcher, the ballpark, etc. I don't know how valuable defense is in such vague terms, but I don't think you can make a blanket statement like, "A good offensive player is more valuable than a good defensive player." What if the good defensive player has an average bat and the good offensive player is a Carlos Lee clone? There are some good hitters whose defensive gaffes cost their team a good amount of runs. What if the good defensive player costs you $2MM and the good offensive player costs you $12MM? Contracts have to be taken into consideration when assessing value. Face it, most people value offense more highly than defense because offensive stats are more easily quantifiable. That doesn't mean that defense isn't important - it just means we need to continue to create and refine better defensive stats. To me, in the end, the best value is the quality that's being under-appreciated in the current market. For awhile defensive skill was being almost ignored and some of the more savvy teams (Minnesota, Boston) used this to their advantage by signing good players to cheap contracts. I think now more value is being placed on good defense.

UZR has the Cubs as an average to slightly below-average defensive team. As you said, the team has a problem with errors. But they make up for this by being a bit above average in terms of range and throwing out baserunners. DRS has the Cubs as one of the worst fielding teams in the league.

No, it really won't. Bottom line is that you want to play guys that are good at baseball. Tyler Colvin is a decent hitter but it remains to be seen how he'll play defensively at 1B. I doubt he'll be an above-average defender at the position. Colvin's offensive skills are overrated.

This sentence brings back memories of Glenallen Hill. A coatrack in LF with a hat and glove on it would have been a better defender than him. There are some truly horrific defensive corner OFs in the game. Compared to defensive nightmares like Adam Dunn and Brad Hawpe, Soriano's actually not that awful. Don't forget Manny and Carlos Lee.

cost-effective option? what the hell are you talking about? he's already on the team. the cost effective option is to move soriano to first and replace him with colvin in left instead of spending the millions an average first baseman that you could be using to make an attempt at a starting pitcher. and fukudome's salary is magically coming off of the books? putting colvin in left IS money off the books. Soriano is on the roster - great. You're not grasping the point here - Soriano will lose a bunch of his current value if he shifts to 1B. He is a solid defender in LF and LFers are tougher to find, on average, than 1B. If you move Soriano to 1B you have a replacement-level player being paid a huge amount of money. At least as a LF he somewhat justifies his pay. The money on him is already spent, but you still have to maximize his value as a player. You wouldn't buy a dozen eggs so you could drop 8 on the ground and eat 4. That's what you're doing in moving Soriano to 1B - minimizing the value of something you've already bought. It's kind of like using Zambrano in the bullpen. A cost-effective option at 1B is someone like Hoffpauir, LaHair, or any of a number of guys who will be available that have actually played 1B at some point in their careers. You don't take an above-average defensive OF and put him at a position for which he's not suited. Soriano's main assets defensively are his range and his arm. Neither of those will transfer well to 1B. His main weakness is his ability to catch the ball. Colvin is cheap and he's really not that good. The Cubs should have no interest in moving Soriano away from the OF just to get Fukudome and Colvin, 2 average players, into the lineup.

There's a huge difference between "average" and "replacement level". Also, the Cubs don't seem to be in a position to spend a bunch of money. If they could sign a great 1B I'd be all for it, but if not you have to look for a cost-effective option. Soriano isn't a cost-effective option. I imagine next season Soriano will play left and Colvin will be the regular RF. The Cubs will either sign an average 1B as a stopgap or they will try to promote someone from within and hope they can hold the position until more money comes off the books.

I don't think that makes much sense. LF is as big of an offensive position as 1B, so if Soriano has value in LF then he should have value at 1B. Besides, it eases the logjam in the OF, which is worthwhile. 1B has a lower replacement value than LF (-12.5 to -7.5). Factor in that Soriano is an above-average LF and would likely be a below-average 1B and you see that he loses almost all of his current value, making him a replacement level player. Soriano currently is not a great LF, but "not great" and "replacement level" are very, very different things. He would be a near replacement-level 1B. And what would we gain out of it? Colvin is having a career year with numbers that seem completely unsustainable and his wOBA is nearly identical to that of Soriano. It's not worth it at all. You're better off signing an average 1B and letting one of those guys sit.

Sadly, a lot of these guys will be with the Cubs for several seasons. Soriano isn't going to get any better and at this point I don't think any manager or GM can count on Zambrano.

This trade seems similar to the DeRosa trade - a young, projectable pitching prospect with good upside and two relievers who may be good enough to make the majors. The quality of pieces may be a bit less but that's to be expected considering what we traded.

again, so you're saying playing 2nd base is similar to playing 1st? but regardless of if he's as good an outfielder as he is at first base, playing colvin in left allows a much greater value. or colvin can play first, i don't care. You're subtracting value at one position to add a marginal amount of value at another. Soriano at 1B is essentially a replacement-level player. Making that move intentionally just to get Colvin some at-bats doesn't sound like a good idea, especially since Colvin's numbers have been in a decline recently and he doesn't have the peripherals to indicate that his performance early in the season was anything sustainable.

Lopez was listed as a top 10 prospect in the Braves' system by BP and apparently just missed the cut for Baseball America.

Soriano was absolutely terrible as an infielder. He has been above-average as an outfielder. Why would you move him to an infield position that he has never played when he is already a decent defender in the outfield?

But he was an All Star...

Picks? The Cubs weren't getting any picks for Lee. I don't see why not. He's going to be given some type of comp. status. The Cubs aren't going to contend next season. If they offer Lee arbitration and he accepts they just get a stopgap 1B for a year.

What can the Cubs reasonably get for a few months of Lee? Hopefully enough to make up for the picks.