David

What are you even talking about? This is a baseball message board, not a message board to flex your muscles and try to impress people with how smart you are. I'll make this very simple for you. Why do Soriano's numbers always drop when he's not batting leadoff. The "career year" argument was very poor. If you're the one (among many, of course) proposing that one causes the other, you have to prove that link. The burden of proof isn't on me. I could just as easily say, "Hey, not playing in Texas makes Soriano a better hitter. Prove that it isn't true."

Again, I have no problem with him leading off. He's a ~.900 OPS guy, and having him get more PA's is a good thing. It's going to take more than some splits to prove to me that his lineup spot is CAUSING his better production. Fundamentally, that's not something I typically buy into and I'd have to be convinced, considering Soriano would be the rare exception if it were the case. There are plenty of alternative causes. It could be pure coincidence. It could be that pitchers had figured him out in the AL and then adjusted in the NL. It could be a lot of things.

The funny part is that you keep citing logical reasoning as the basis for your argument. It's people like you that caused my LSAT study sessions to drag on forever.

No, it doesn't need to stop. You're ignoring his years with the Yankees at leadoff. Furthermore, you're ignoring his past shows a history of struggling in RISP situations. When it comes to moving Soriano around, I view it as a choice. You can choose 1. To have a .890 OPS #1 hitter. 2. To have an .810-.820 OPS #3-5 hitter. I choose #1. What does need to stop is trying to convince ourselves that Soriano is something he isn't. I don't know why we have to be so stubborn on this issue. You don't see the Indians trying to force Casey Blake into an RBI slot when he isn't that guy. You didn't see the Red Sox pushing Bill Mueller to hit 2nd when he was much more comfortable 8th. But people here won't be happy until we see Soriano hit .260 with a .310 OBP and 28 home runs, his meaningless 100 RBI, and his near-record LOB total. Only then will we be getting our $17 million a year worth. What is the difference between Brian Roberts hitting 1st and Brian Roberts hitting 2nd? I'd like to know why people have a mental block on this. They start sweating profusely and stammering. "Why... Roberts can't hit 2nd. Because... because... he's a LEADOFF MAN. It would cause a rip in the space-time continuum!" Soriano does his best hitting with the bases empty. I'm merely pointing out that people are incorrectly confusing correlation with causation in the case of Soriano's leadoff splits. It's flawed and faulty logic. No, you made the statement that Soriano's career leadoff numbers were only so much better than his non-leadoff numbers because of a monster year in 2006, which is flat out wrong. Even if Soriano in 2006 only put up the typical numbers he puts up in years where he leads off, the career differences would still be very pronounced. It sounds to me like you were unaware that Soriano had hit leadoff in previous years. Now you're realizing that he did, and are trying to cover it up but saying the above statement, which doesn't even make sense with what you originally said. Actually, you're completely wrong in just about everything you said here. But that's fine. Do you think I just started watching baseball in 2005 or something? Who the hell doesn't know that Soriano hit leadoff with the Yankees? Repeat with me. Correlation =/ causation. It's one of the most common logical fallacies that people fall victim to. Cause and effect.

No, it doesn't need to stop. You're ignoring his years with the Yankees at leadoff. Furthermore, you're ignoring his past shows a history of struggling in RISP situations. When it comes to moving Soriano around, I view it as a choice. You can choose 1. To have a .890 OPS #1 hitter. 2. To have an .810-.820 OPS #3-5 hitter. I choose #1. What does need to stop is trying to convince ourselves that Soriano is something he isn't. I don't know why we have to be so stubborn on this issue. You don't see the Indians trying to force Casey Blake into an RBI slot when he isn't that guy. You didn't see the Red Sox pushing Bill Mueller to hit 2nd when he was much more comfortable 8th. But people here won't be happy until we see Soriano hit .260 with a .310 OBP and 28 home runs, his meaningless 100 RBI, and his near-record LOB total. Only then will we be getting our $17 million a year worth. What is the difference between Brian Roberts hitting 1st and Brian Roberts hitting 2nd? I'd like to know why people have a mental block on this. They start sweating profusely and stammering. "Why... Roberts can't hit 2nd. Because... because... he's a LEADOFF MAN. It would cause a rip in the space-time continuum!" Soriano does his best hitting with the bases empty. Yea, I really don't care about where any of these guys get lined up. It wouldn't bother me one bit if Roberts was acquired and Soriano remained in the leadoff slot (other than the fact that I'd still have to hear the idiots on sports radio complaining that Soriano is hitting there). I'm merely pointing out that people are incorrectly confusing correlation with causation in the case of Soriano's leadoff splits. It's flawed and faulty logic. Roberts doesn't NEED to hit leadoff if he's here. I just feel, given the Cubs old-school braintrust, that it's likely he would. Roberts fits that mold that old timey baseball types get their panties wet about. Hendry and Lou are old-timey baseball types. They dream about having guys like him at leadoff. If they were just looking for a two hitter, they'd be fine with DeRosa. Just my opinion. Maybe I'm wrong, though. Maybe they want Roberts just because he can hit lefty (vs. righties), and they'll still hit Soriano leadoff if they do get him. Hendry did proclaim his strong desire to get more lefty bats in the lineup early on this offseason. Either way, I couldn't care less where any of our hitters hit as long as Pie and Theriot aren't near the top (unfortunately, Theriot will be, at least at first).

This is awesome. Great job, Meph...

It's not just because he has a higher OBP, although that is a big part of it. It's because he's an overall more productive hitter. He gets on base more and he hits for better power. The two of those things = more runs. Doesn't matter where in the lineup. The point about Roberts being better than DeRosa is completely irrelevant. Don't veer off topic. The argument is about your suggestion that you have to take the leadoff "position" into account when putting together a team. You don't. You have to get the best hitters you can at every position. Then you worry about where to line them up.

This whole "Soriano can only hit in the leadoff spot" crap needs to stop. Soriano just happened to be batting leadoff when he had his career year in 2006. His OBP that year was also artificially inflated by an absurd amount of intentional walks in that horrendous lineup. That is why his leadoff splits compared to when he was hitting in the middle are so pronounced.

Says who? People have only speculated this. I really don't think Soriano would be moved down even if they got Roberts, which at this point seems unlikely anyways. That was an assumption... hence the bolded part. So? You said "would likely", which is untrue. That's like me saying Roberts "would likely" bat cleanup if the Cubs got him. Except that Roberts hitting leadoff over Soriano is likely, while Roberts hitting cleanup isn't.

And the broken record skips again. One more time: 1. Leadoff is not a position. 2. You don't know what Hendry wants any more than any other fan. Ok leadoff might not be a position, but it is still something you need to focus on when building your team. You need a leadoff hitter on your team just like you need a 2B. We have no leadoff hitters, so getting a leadoff hitter should be a top priority. Who cares if it is a position or not! It is a position in the batting order! No you don't! Would the Cubs score more runs with Brian Roberts leading off or Chase Utley? You want to have good players and then sort them out. This is the argument that was used for the wonderful Juan Pierre. You are obviously just a baseball fan. I am a baseball coach. It has been researched for years. Different spots in the order serve different purposes. Of course the Cubs would probably score more runs with Chase Utley batting leadoff rather than Roberts because he has a higher OBP. BUT, if you have Chase Utley on your team, you wouldn't bat him leadoff cuz you aren't utilizing his power and rbi potential. A leadoff hitter needs to take pitches, get on base, and be fast. Then the number 2 hitter should be able to control the bat well. Make a lot of contact, very rarely strike out, and place the ball wherever he wants. Then the number 3-4-5 hitters need to have power and drive those 2 guys in. This is the typical way the batting order should be structured. Soriano hit a ton of solo HR's last year. If he batted after Roberts, then a lot of those solo HR's would turn into 2 run shots. If roberts gets a single then soriano hits a HR we have two runs. If Soriano hits a HR then Roberts singles, we still only have 1 run. You can't just put anyone at leadoff. Aside from the fact that you basically admitted that your logic is completely wrong by conceding that the team would score more runs with Utley at "leadoff" (think about it, really hard - If we had no prototypical "leadoff hitter" but had Utley bat first, the team would score more runs... Oh, and it has nothing to do with his spot in the order and everything to do with the fact that you're talking about having a better hitter at one of your positions), I love the irony of the bolded. You might want to do some research yourself and look up what contemporary studies say about lineup positioning. You get the best bats you can at every position, and THEN you worry about where to hit them.

From what I heard, it was Booker who contacted the Bears and let it be known that his first choice would be to come back to Chicago, since the Bears weren't one of the teams to contact him initially.

Daryle Ward is already there.

That's PECOTA's projection, not Meph's. It's due to the fact that he had so few PAs last year.

Since nobody's mentioned it, it looks like Fuku will be in camp early (on Thursday), according to that article.

I think he's just implying that since a deal hasn't been reached yet, and those were the names we've been hearing for a long time, that the names aren't the same. I'm not sure he's implying that Gallagher isn't one of the names, nor do I really think that Sean would know that himself. I'm not reading anything into the winking, because PC has done it in every post recently, including ones that couldn't possibly be insinuating anything. ;)

Sure looks like it. Maybe a little better. I'd take it all day.

If anything, wouldn't thrusting Pie into the majors too soon be what would stunt his growth and make him "the next Corey Patterson" (again, if anything), seeing as how many feel Patterson didn't develop enough at the minors and was promoted through the system too quickly? That said, I think Pie has proven what he needs to prove in the minors and now needs to show he can do it at the MLB level. It's just that I don't see how having an insurance policy that would, if he's not ready, possibly keep him in the minors another year (he turned 23 4 days ago) would stunt his growth and turn him into the next CP.

:shock: Hey, I guess if Derrek Lee can play LF... You realize that that was a tongue-in-cheek shot at how bad Bonds is these days in the field, right?

Let's not forget about the degrading comments about women. I'm not even trying to bash Grace. I was a fan of his. He was criticized for not having enough power, but he was fairly often in the vicinity of a .900 OPS thanks to his ~.400 OBP. That said, if we're going to be hyper critical of these guys' personal faults, Grace could definitely hang.

Way to let the point fly right over your head.

And still is...

i know you were probably dying to mention grit in some manner, but what a bad example. grace would hit sure triples and wait at second while outfielders were still chasing down the ball, just to pad his doubles totals. how was he "gritty"? He was white.

What, because I made it up Dusty can't have it? I don't think there's anything late about it.

Late onset?

That's part of it. He was also extremely gritty (wink, wink, nudge nudge). I wonder if media guys even put any thought into the fact that the foreign-born players might be not-so-friendly because they have a hard time communicating and are probably uncomfortable around them. That might be logical, no?