TSN's Deveney's Take on Roberts-Cubs

[Goop]

Pie-Jones-Markakis would make me less jaded and bitter...

What an awesome OF that would be.

[Roll Tide]

What an awesome OF that would be.

Scott & Murton are far better than adding Pie IMO & really doesn't do anything to fix ss & the big whole we would have created at 2B.

Really guys we would be lucky to get Pie & Gallagher ... In my opinion thats a far

lesser deal than Murton,Gallagher, Cedeno, & Veal.

[Number5]

Hey all I know is that the theory you're espousing here has already been tried, by the Rangers.

Just like you, they didn't see Soriano as a leadoff hitter, but rather as a middle-of-the-order slugger.

So they batted him 3rd for the lion's share of his first season there, and 5th for the lion's share of his second season there.

What resulted were Soriano's worst two years since his rookie season.

Then Washington switched him back to the leadoff spot, and his numbers jumped right back to their Yankee levels, and they stayed there in '07.

So you'll understand why I (and the Cubs) would rather not abandon that which has repeatedly shown to work, in favor of that which has repeatedly shown not to work.

If we don't learn from history, we're doomed to repeat it, and all that.

...or maybe he just didn't like Texas. We are just going to disagree on this Dave. I will say I'm still not on board with you that the Cubs espouse your view here. They are, after all, interested in Roberts, and I find it hard to believe that it is just because they want to get DeRosa out of the lineup.

[Rob H]

...or maybe he just didn't like Texas. We are just going to disagree on this Dave. I will say I'm still not on board with you that the Cubs espouse your view here. They are, after all, interested in Roberts, and I find it hard to believe that it is just because they want to get DeRosa out of the lineup.

It's much more likely that they're interested in him because he can bat left handed and steal some bases than because he's a "leadoff" hitter. Considering Lou and Hendry's predilictions, those things seem to matter quite a bit to them.

[clarence]

I would rather have Cedeno, Murton and Veal than Pie included with Gallagher.

[Number5]

It's much more likely that they're interested in him because he can bat left handed and steal some bases than because he's a "leadoff" hitter. Considering Lou and Hendry's predilictions, those things seem to matter quite a bit to them.

FWIW, From the Tribune Jan18:

A Rolls Royce or a Volkswagen?

By Paul Sullivan, 7:20 p.m.

The question will not go away, and Alfonso Soriano knows it.

On Friday he was asked for the umpteenth time whether he will be leading off this season. He reiterated he does not care where he bats, though he prefers lead off.

"Leading off is a little different, but you always have to make adjustments," he said. "Batting third or batting fifth is not a problem for me."

Is Soriano ready to hear this talk again all season long?

"It's too early to tell," he said. "We have one month left of vacation. Next month we'll see what's going on. I don't care because two years ago I made an adjustment to go from second base to left field."

Soriano said he doesn't believe he needs to change his game, after being asked whether he should move runners over and bunt more. Manager Lou Piniella was surprised to hear such a question about his $136-million outfielder.

"That's like buying a Rolls Royce and trying to get Volkswagen mileage out if it," Piniella said. "I don't see that. This kid here has his own particular style out of the leadoff spot. He hits the ball out of the ballpark, and he'll strike out.

"The only difference we didn't see last year was he didn't run because of the leg problem he had. I don't see where he's going to change, and I don't think we want him to change. I think if you make him a prototype leadoff hitter, you're going to harness his skills. He's not going to bunt. If you wanted him to be able to do all those things, you would've gone out and gotten another leadoff hitter and put him somewhere else so he can do what he does."

I read that to say 1. that Soriano is willing to hit somewhere in the lineup other than leadoff and 2. that Piniella has no intention of trying to change Soriano's hitting style and if the Cubs want a prototypical lead-off man, they will go out and get one.

I'm not sure that there is any other way to read that.

The Cubs are pursuing Roberts.

[Rob H]

The Cubs are pursuing Roberts.

Nobody has ever debated that.

But somehow this argument has turned away from "being a leadoff hitter means nothing" and into "the cubs want him because he can hit leadoff."

So, let's rewind.

Way back in the early history of the game, most games were not even recorded. Eventually, box scores came about. Box scores aren't complete records of what happened in the game, but they are pretty close. As more information became available to the managers, their gamesmanship evolved. Different strategies were used, and were evaluated based on their success.

Flash forward to now. Now, we have access not only to what has happened recently, but way back through thousands and thousands of games. Again, the larger the sample size, the more accurate a read you can get. In addition to that, we also have available more than just rudimentary measures of success. We recognize the inherent disadvantages of using archaic measurements like batting average, runs, RBI, etc... and are capable of using more accurate metrics to evaluate a player (or team) performance. Given all of this information, smart teams and managers have begun to sift through the data and come up with inefficiencies in the way the game is traditionally played.

The importance placed on batting order is one of the first things on the list. Smart teams no longer value traditional "leadoff" hitters, as the concept adds little to no value to a team. The fact of the matter is that the prototypical leadoff hitter is an anachronism. It has no place whatsoever in the modern game.

Roberts has a ton of value for a lot of different reasons. His value to a team has nothing to do with the fact managers think he can bat at the top of the order, though.

So go ahead and argue that the Cubs want Roberts to bat leadoff. They haven't said either way, and none of us know. But what we do know is that where he bats doesn't matter in the least. And we also know that in his career, Soriano has struggled when batting outside of the leadoff spot. That could be a statistical anomaly, or it could be a legitimate psychological issue. Given the risk that moving him down actually could hurt his value, and moving Roberts up one slot wouldn't actually gain us anything, the only smart thing to do would be to leave Soriano at leadoff and just bat Roberts 2nd.

Will the Cubs do that? We don't know, and it's not relevant. They've done plenty of stupid things, so moving Soriano down wouldn't be the first. But pointing to the fact that the Cubs are considering something is not a justification for pretending that's why it's true. It's just an indictment of the Cubs FO.

[El Gordo]

Nobody has ever debated that.

But somehow this argument has turned away from "being a leadoff hitter means nothing" and into "the cubs want him because he can hit leadoff."

So, let's rewind.

Way back in the early history of the game, most games were not even recorded. Eventually, box scores came about. Box scores aren't complete records of what happened in the game, but they are pretty close. As more information became available to the managers, their gamesmanship evolved. Different strategies were used, and were evaluated based on their success.

Flash forward to now. Now, we have access not only to what has happened recently, but way back through thousands and thousands of games. Again, the larger the sample size, the more accurate a read you can get. In addition to that, we also have available more than just rudimentary measures of success. We recognize the inherent disadvantages of using archaic measurements like batting average, runs, RBI, etc... and are capable of using more accurate metrics to evaluate a player (or team) performance. Given all of this information, smart teams and managers have begun to sift through the data and come up with inefficiencies in the way the game is traditionally played.

The importance placed on batting order is one of the first things on the list. Smart teams no longer value traditional "leadoff" hitters, as the concept adds little to no value to a team. The fact of the matter is that the prototypical leadoff hitter is an anachronism. It has no place whatsoever in the modern game.

Roberts has a ton of value for a lot of different reasons. His value to a team has nothing to do with the fact managers think he can bat at the top of the order, though.

So go ahead and argue that the Cubs want Roberts to bat leadoff. They haven't said either way, and none of us know. But what we do know is that where he bats doesn't matter in the least. And we also know that in his career, Soriano has struggled when batting outside of the leadoff spot. That could be a statistical anomaly, or it could be a legitimate psychological issue. Given the risk that moving him down actually could hurt his value, and moving Roberts up one slot wouldn't actually gain us anything, the only smart thing to do would be to leave Soriano at leadoff and just bat Roberts 2nd.

Will the Cubs do that? We don't know, and it's not relevant. They've done plenty of stupid things, so moving Soriano down wouldn't be the first. But pointing to the fact that the Cubs are considering something is not a justification for pretending that's why it's true. It's just an indictment of the Cubs FO.

Just curious, how much did you play baseball?

[Rob H]

Just curious, how much did you play baseball?

Through high school. Had to drop it before college because I'd blown out my knee for the third time. That's around when I started reading all the statistical analysis stuff... my personal library of baseball books is well in excess of 50 volumes by now.

[El Gordo]

Through high school. Had to drop it before college because I'd blown out my knee for the third time. That's around when I started reading all the statistical analysis stuff... my personal library of baseball books is well in excess of 50 volumes by now.

I asked because I couldn't imagine that anyone who played the game seriously would hold the point of view that you do. I played in high school myself and my appreciation of the subtleties of the gams from inside was not very sophisticated. But I would like to hear from one guy who played the game seriously for some time and with some success, who gives that much credence to these numerical projections. There are so many aspects to the game that escape measurement, but have a profound impact that it is just silly to try to reduce it to mere numbers. It is primarily a head game. Things like strategy, confidence, intuiton, intimidation, psychology,focus concentration, etc. loom large in a game where micrometers and nano seconds loom large. What a pitcher ate for lunch can have just as much an impact on the game's outcome as his PECOTA projections. I often wonder if this enslavement to statistics is the desire to master a game that one could not do so successfully on the field. And that's futile because nobody can master it any where any time.

[Roll Tide]

I asked because I couldn't imagine that anyone who played the game seriously would hold the point of view that you do. I played in high school myself and my appreciation of the subtleties of the gams from inside was not very sophisticated. But I would like to hear from one guy who played the game seriously for some time and with some success, who gives that much credence to these numerical projections. There are so many aspects to the game that escape measurement, but have a profound impact that it is just silly to try to reduce it to mere numbers. It is primarily a head game. Things like strategy, confidence, intuiton, intimidation, psychology,focus concentration, etc. loom large in a game where micrometers and nano seconds loom large. What a pitcher ate for lunch can have just as much an impact on the game's outcome as his PECOTA projections. I often wonder if this enslavement to statistics is the desire to master a game that one could not do so successfully on the field. And that's futile because nobody can master it any where any time.

I was a lead off hitter in my days as a player in both baseball & for many years once I moved to softball. While I agree Soriano is a adequate lead off guy, I just believe Roberts to be a better one. I cant sit here & say Mr. Pinella will bat Roberts in lead off slot for certain. But unless he does I dont see where B-Rob will be worth much in the way of upgrade over Derosa, much less what it will cost them to get him.

[Rob H]

I asked because I couldn't imagine that anyone who played the game seriously would hold the point of view that you do. I played in high school myself and my appreciation of the subtleties of the gams from inside was not very sophisticated. But I would like to hear from one guy who played the game seriously for some time and with some success, who gives that much credence to these numerical projections. There are so many aspects to the game that escape measurement, but have a profound impact that it is just silly to try to reduce it to mere numbers. It is primarily a head game. Things like strategy, confidence, intuiton, intimidation, psychology,focus concentration, etc. loom large in a game where micrometers and nano seconds loom large. What a pitcher ate for lunch can have just as much an impact on the game's outcome as his PECOTA projections. I often wonder if this enslavement to statistics is the desire to master a game that one could not do so successfully on the field. And that's futile because nobody can master it any where any time.

Would you feel comfortable flying in a plane that your pilot designed, with only his pilot training as his education in the matter? How about the aerospace engineer who designed the plane, but doesn't know how to fly?

Being able to perform a task does not imbue a man the knowledge behind how it works. Former players have a pretty good idea how to control the "intangible" elements of the game (of which I have never argued of their existance), but lineup analysis isn't intangible. It's very measurable. That's the sort of thing statistical analysis is good for.

But thanks for your back-of-the-napkin attempt at psychology. Unfortunately, you're no more capable of doing that than you are at having an open mind.

[SoBo]

As AM mentioned in his presser, it's going to be painful to get where we need to get to. And trading Roberts will be painful and lock in the O's for a run at 100 losses. But it's necessary at this point. The Murton, Gallagher, Veal & Cedeno deal is very good return for Roberts. While it opens up a hole at 2b, it will give us one of the best young OF's in all of baseball and more high level pitching talent. I don't think AM is so worried about holes in the roster for 2008, nor should he be. It's all about getting the most talent you can for your three biggest bargaining chips. 2008 should allow AM to get a good look at the young pitching and then he will look to fill the holes in the IF for 2009. 2008 is going to hurt, but it will only make the O's stronger.

[cindyluvsbrady]

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=348723

Can we get Deveney to join the Cubs front office?

Maybe we can flip one of our current OF's for a MLB ready SS or 2B prospect... wont happen... but its nice to know that there's one columnist out there that thinks a Roberts/ Pie deal should happen.

Who is this person? I dont think I like them!:002_stongue:

[TheBee]

Nothing really new trade-wise, but it does emphasize why the Cubs could benefit from his presence greatly... Here's an excerpt...

"Despite a nearly $7 million disparity in their 2008 salaries -- Roberts will earn $6.3 million and Soriano will get $13 million -- the O's speedster has the more eye-popping numbers for a leadoff hitter.

Roberts' .377 on-base percentage last season was 40 points higher than Soriano's. His career-high 50 stolen bases were 31 more than Soriano's and his 103 runs beat Soriano by six.

Soriano's .299 batting average was nine points higher than Roberts'. And Soriano's team-high 33 home runs towered over Roberts' 12.

All the more reason to drop Soriano into a better run-producing spot in the lineup.

The real question is whether the Orioles, who took an alarming amount of time to close the Bedard deal, will be willing to do business with the Cubs. No deal appeared imminent Friday.

The Cubs remain hopeful they can land Roberts by Opening Day -- and it could take most of spring training to get the O's to seal another deal.

Pitcher Sean Gallagher, outfielder Matt Murton and infielder/outfielder Ronny Cedeno are the key young players mentioned most frequently in the talks. Left-hander Sean Marshall, who looks to be getting squeezed out of the Cubs' rotation, also could be included in the package. There have been reports that the Orioles' pursuit of Pie has been a sticking point.

Hard to imagine the O's would let the trade talks die over a center fielder who has yet to prove himself in the major leagues. Besides, they have essentially penciled in Adam Jones -- acquired from the Seattle Mariners in the Bedard deal -- as their Opening Day center fielder."

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/deluca/785042,CST-SPT-deluca09.article