PDA

View Full Version : Alfonso Soriano refusing to play left field for Washington Nationals


Claynus
03-21-2006, 09:41 AM
What a dipshit. You should be the DH you ham-fisted retard.

Soriano Refuses to Take Left Field

New National Won't Play Position

By Barry Svrluga

Washington Post Staff Writer


VIERA, Fla., March 20 -- When the Washington Nationals took the field Monday evening, Alfonso Soriano's name was the first blared over the public address system, the man due to lead off and play left field. But as the Nationals trickled out of the home dugout to warm up for the first inning of their Grapefruit League game against the Los Angeles Dodgers, only eight men emerged. Manager Frank Robinson strode to home plate, where he made the lineup change that foretold the growing controversy here: The Nationals' highest-paid employee, and potentially their most dynamic player, is refusing to play his assigned position, and there is no resolution in sight.

Soriano, a four-time all-star acquired by the Nationals in an offseason trade with the Texas Rangers, has steadfastly declined Washington's request that he move from second base to the outfield, and the issue came to a dramatic head Monday, resulting in a situation that seasoned baseball men believe could be unprecedented. Soriano returned to Nationals' camp from his stint playing for the Dominican Republic in the World Baseball Classic, met one-on-one with Robinson and then in a joint session with Robinson and General Manager Jim Bowden. The Nationals' top officials made it clear: To be part of this team, Soriano must play left field, for Jose Vidro is entrenched at second base. Soriano, for his part, was equally clear: He doesn't want to.

So shortly after the bizarre scene played out before a crowd of 4,554 at Space Coast Stadium -- with Brandon Watson reporting to center field and Ryan Church moving to Soriano's spot in left -- Bowden stood in his office and said that Soriano would be placed in the lineup in left field for the Nationals' next game, Wednesday in Jupiter, Fla., against the St. Louis Cardinals. Should he refuse to play then, the club will file a request with the commissioner's office to place Soriano on the rarely used disqualified list, which, according to Bowden, would mean Soriano would earn no pay or service time until he chose to play for the club.

Bowden said the team believes Soriano's refusal to play his assigned position is a violation of his contract, which will pay him $10 million this season.

"We do not want it to come to that," Bowden said. "We have compassion for him. But we're in a position for this ballclub that if we can't make a trade that makes sense, we're not going to give him away, and we have a team to run. Our feeling is we don't want to wait till Opening Day to do this."

Whether the situation can be resolved in the two weeks before the season was murky at best Monday night. Soriano, 30, has averaged more than 35 homers and 97 RBI over the past four seasons. But he has yet to appear in a spring training game for his new team, nor has he taken fly balls in the outfield. He left the ballpark in the second inning after a clubhouse attendant drove his white Cadillac Escalade nearer to the back entrance of the stadium.

As he walked to the parking lot, Soriano declined to comment on the situation, as he had all day. Asked if he would play Wednesday, he said only: "We'll see. We'll see. I don't know."

Soriano's clandestine departure ended a strange day in which he indicated that he needed to play to prepare for the season. Robinson subsequently told him if he played, it would be in left. Yet when the Nationals practiced fielding situations in the afternoon heat, Soriano promptly reported to second base, where he took grounders and turned double plays as the second-teamer, behind Vidro. Robinson said Soriano had not been assigned to second base for the drills. Soriano joked with a few teammates as the players stretched and went through their workout, but for the most part seemed isolated.

"He didn't want to talk to no one," one staff member said.

Soriano then spent more than 30 minutes sitting in a hall outside the Nationals' clubhouse speaking on his cellphone. Diego Bentz, Soriano's agent, said the two spoke, but even Bentz was unclear about what would happen next. In a telephone interview, Bentz said he would "probably" travel here in the next two days to meet with his client and team officials.

It's unclear how the parties could come to a solution. Bowden reiterated that the Nationals have made several attempts to gauge the trade market for Soriano but haven't found a good fit.

"Therefore, we told the player we needed him to play left field, that Jose Vidro was at second base," Bowden said, "and for our team, that gives us the best chance to win."

Robinson said he would not give Soriano any time at second. "If he's going to play here," Robinson said, "he's going to be out in left field."

So if there is no trade, and Soriano doesn't have a change of heart, the most likely resolution is a trip to the disqualified list. An interesting wrinkle to that possibility is the fact that Soriano would not earn service time if he were disqualified. Therefore, though Soriano is due to be a free agent after the 2006 season, his contract would in effect be suspended, "and he would not be a free agent," Bowden said. "He would still be our property."

Rob Manfred, Major League Baseball's executive vice president for labor relations, said in San Diego that the league is advising the Nationals on the legalities involved. Ultimately, though, "it's a player-club issue," Manfred said. Commissioner Bud Selig and Gene Orza, the chief operating officer of the players' union, declined to comment. It's possible, though, that the union could eventually take up Soriano's case, arguing that the club would be diminishing the player's value by moving him to left.

Those possibilities will arise in the coming days and weeks. Meantime, Soriano's would-be teammates went out and lost to the Dodgers, 11-5, without him. First baseman Nick Johnson, who came up through the Yankees system with Soriano, and reliever Mike Stanton, who played with him in New York, swore by him as a teammate.

"He's not a troublemaker," Stanton said.

But there is no question that he is causing heaps of trouble for the Nationals. He has Tuesday, an off day, to think things over. And the direction of the Nationals' season could be determined by whether Soriano decides to walk out to left field on Wednesday.

jspchief
03-21-2006, 09:44 AM
It's hard not to love these spoiled athletes. What a douche.

Dunit35
03-21-2006, 09:44 AM
I read this story last night. What an a**hole.

Hoover
03-21-2006, 09:49 AM
Trade his ass to the Cub - That will teach him

Hoover
03-21-2006, 09:51 AM
Think about that lineup

Juan Pierre
Soriano
Lee
A Ram
Jones
Murton
Barrett
Cedeno
SP

vailpass
03-21-2006, 10:04 AM
Soriano is a 4-time All Star 2nd baseman. Before the Nationals traded for him he made it abundantly clear that he wants to remain a 2nd baseman and that no team should trade for him unless they planned to play him at 2nd base.

The Nationals didn't listen, they are forcing him to do a job he clearly stated he had no interest in doing.

If an Engineer made it abundantly clear that his specialty and his passion were in Software engineering and an employer, upon hiring him, then tried to force him to do nothing but Hardware engineering would you blame the engineer for refusing?

Cochise
03-21-2006, 10:10 AM
Soriano is a 4-time All Star 2nd baseman. Before the Nationals traded for him he made it abundantly clear that he wants to remain a 2nd baseman and that no team should trade for him unless they planned to play him at 2nd base.

The Nationals didn't listen, they are forcing him to do a job he clearly stated he had no interest in doing.

If an Engineer made it abundantly clear that his specialty and his passion were in Software engineering and an employer, upon hiring him, then tried to force him to do nothing but Hardware engineering would you blame the engineer for refusing?

It's Soriano's right to refuse to play. It's the Nationals' right to refuse to pay him. I hope they do.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 10:16 AM
It's Soriano's right to refuse to play. It's the Nationals' right to refuse to pay him. I hope they do.

I hope they do too. It's always fun to watch the MLB Player's Union crush teams in cases like this.
Just because you happen to make a lot of money doesn't mean the team can do anything they want to you.

jspchief
03-21-2006, 10:19 AM
I hope they do too. It's always fun to watch the MLB Player's Union crush teams in cases like this.
Just because you happen to make a lot of money doesn't mean the team can do anything they want to you.By all indications, he signed a contract that stipulated he had to play where the team tells him to play. Unless that contract also specified that he would only play 2nd base, he has no leg to stand on and your position on this is baseless.

StcChief
03-21-2006, 10:20 AM
I guess he won't play or get paid then.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 10:29 AM
By all indications, he signed a contract that stipulated he had to play where the team tells him to play. Unless that contract also specified that he would only play 2nd base, he has no leg to stand on and your position on this is baseless.

Wrong. Soriano, and his contract, was traded to the Nationals. He did not sign a free agent contract. During the trade negotiation Soriano's former team denied the Nationals the right to speak directly with Soriano.

Unable to speak directly with the Nationals Soriano made it known through the press that he would definetely not play outfield, that he wished to remain at his current and chosen position, second base.

If the Nats go head to head with the MLBPU on this one they will get crushed. They can bench him for the year but they will not be allowed to withold pay or stop his accumulation of time served in order to become a free agent at the end of this season.

Why would the Nats trade for Soriano when he made it perfectly clear that he will play 2nd base and 2nd base only? Would it be o.k. to trade for Dontrelle Willis then tell him he has to play Left Field?
**** them for trying to force someone to do a job they made perfectly clear they have no interest in doing; I hope the Union makes an example out of these cocks.

jspchief
03-21-2006, 10:33 AM
Wrong. Soriano, and his contract, was traded to the Nationals. He did not sign a free agent contract. During the trade negotiation Soriano's former team denied the Nationals the right to speak directly with Soriano.

Unable to speak directly with the Nationals Soriano made it known through the press that he would definetely not play outfield, that he wished to remain at his current and chosen position, second base.

If the Nats go head to head with the MLBPU on this one they will get crushed. They can bench him for the year but they will not be allowed to withold pay or stop his accumulation of time served in order to become a free agent at the end of this season.So did he sign a contract that stipulated that he would only play second base? No.

Did he sign a contract that stipulated that he had to play where the team chose to play him? Yes.

I don't care what team he signed the contract with, he signed it.

Soriano is a shitty 2nd baseman anyway. It's not like he was an All-star based on his glove.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 10:35 AM
So did he sign a contract that stipulated that he would only play second base? No.

Did he sign a contract that stipulated that he had to play where the team chose to play him? Yes.

I don't care what team he signed the contract with, he signed it.

Soriano is a shitty 2nd baseman anyway. It's not like he was an All-star based on his glove.

You either don't understand the way the MLB player's union works or you are being purposely argumentative.

If this comes down to the Nats against the MLBPU do you honestly think the Nats will win?

jspchief
03-21-2006, 10:38 AM
You either don't understand the way the MLB player's union works or you are being purposely argumentative.

If this comes down to the Nats against the MLBPU do you honestly think the Nats will win?Regardless of the bullshit leverage the union has, Soriano should have to adhere to the terms of the contract.

If the team has to adhere to the pay as stipulated by the contract, then Soriano should have to adhere to the terms.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 10:46 AM
Regardless of the bullshit leverage the union has, Soriano should have to adhere to the terms of the contract.

If the team has to adhere to the pay as stipulated by the contract, then Soriano should have to adhere to the terms.

So even though the Union will win you still say it's BS? Fair enough.

You always seem like a level-headed person so I'm curious as to y our opinion. Do you think it's okay for a team to trade for a player, all the while intending to ask that player to man a position he has made abundantly clear he has no desire/intention to play?

Do you think it's o.k. to try and force someone to change their profession because you have leverage? Is it a smart move on the part of the team?

If an employer hired a friend of yours who is a skilled finish carpenter then decided they wanted him to be a drywaller would you tell your friend to suck it up and get to hangin rock?

jspchief
03-21-2006, 10:54 AM
So even though the Union will win you still say it's BS? Fair enough.

You always seem like a level-headed person so I'm curious as to y our opinion. Do you think it's okay for a team to trade for a player, all the while intending to ask that player to man a position he has made abundantly clear he has no desire/intention to play?

Do you think it's o.k. to try and force someone to change their profession because you have leverage? Is it a smart move on the part of the team?

If an employer hired a friend of yours who is a skilled finish carpenter then decided they wanted him to be a drywaller would you tell your friend to suck it up and get to hangin rock?The players want guaranteed contracts. They want owners to be forced to live up to their end of the bargain. Shouldn't the players be expected to do the same?

Did Soriano have a no trade clause in his contract? Or any stipulation that he would only play 2nd?

I think the Nationals are stupid for trading for him and trying to force him to play a position that he was clearly going to refuse to play, but I still think Soriano should either be forced to live up to the terms of the contract, or the team should have the right to default on their terms.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 10:57 AM
The players want guaranteed contracts. They want owners to be forced to live up to their end of the bargain. Shouldn't the players be expected to do the same?

Did Soriano have a no trade clause in his contract? Or any stipulation that he would only play 2nd?

I think the Nationals are stupid for trading for him and trying to force him to play a position that he was clearly going to refuse to play, but I still think Soriano should either be forced to live up to the terms of the contract, or the team should have the right to default on their terms.

Does it make any difference to your opinion that next year is Soriano's Free Agency year where he is set to become the highest paid 2nd baseman in the league?
If he is seen as an outfielder instead of a 2nd baseman he will command much less on the free agency market.

jspchief
03-21-2006, 11:05 AM
Does it make any difference to your opinion that next year is Soriano's Free Agency year where he is set to become the highest paid 2nd baseman in the league?
If he is seen as an outfielder instead of a 2nd baseman he will command much less on the free agency market.I'd respond with several things.

1. Soriano isn't going to become a high paid 2nd baseman because of his glove.
2. Soriano isn't going to forget how to bat, or play 2nd in one year.
3. Next year he can demand contract language that forces him to be played at 2nd.

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that he's suddenly going to be black-balled from the 2nd base position due to 1 year playing in the outfield. If teams try and force him into being an outfielder again next year, it's going to be because he's a lousy infielder, not because of some stupid roster move.

ChiefsCountry
03-21-2006, 11:21 AM
Soriano has the worst fielding percentage ever for a 2nd baseman.

That being I still wish the Royals could get him just for his bat and baserunning.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 11:21 AM
I'd respond with several things.

1. Soriano isn't going to become a high paid 2nd baseman because of his glove.
2. Soriano isn't going to forget how to bat, or play 2nd in one year.
3. Next year he can demand contract language that forces him to be played at 2nd.

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that he's suddenly going to be black-balled from the 2nd base position due to 1 year playing in the outfield. If teams try and force him into being an outfielder again next year, it's going to be because he's a lousy infielder, not because of some stupid roster move.

High level contract negotiations take everything into account. It's clear that you are a management over employee kind of guy. In the service, trade and non-degreed industries that shit may still fly but in the professional world it's a whole different ballgame.

jspchief
03-21-2006, 11:31 AM
High level contract negotiations take everything into account. It's clear that you are a management over employee kind of guy. In the service, trade and non-degreed industries that shit may still fly but in the professional world it's a whole different ballgame.I am definately a management over employee kind of guy. I'm a business owner.

To use your drywaller versus trim carpenter reference... Soriano may have been hired as a trim carpenter, but the cotract he signed didn't specify that he would only do trim carpentry. It specified that he would swing a hammer at whatever I asked him to swing a hammer at. He's very good at swinging that hammer, but doesn't work well with wood, so to get my money's worth (guaranteed contract) I'm moving him to drywaller.

As for "not working in professional trades", that's a ridiculous statement. In professional positions, contracts are held to the terms under which they were signed. You're pretending that Soriano (or any other professional) has a right to some term that was never agreed to in the contract, and in fact the contract states exactly the opposite.

Sure-Oz
03-21-2006, 11:38 AM
I would try to trade him if I were them and get something, its obvious he dont want to play LF.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 11:45 AM
I am definately a management over employee kind of guy. I'm a business owner.

To use your drywaller versus trim carpenter reference... Soriano may have been hired as a trim carpenter, but the cotract he signed didn't specify that he would only do trim carpentry. It specified that he would swing a hammer at whatever I asked him to swing a hammer at. He's very good at swinging that hammer, but doesn't work well with wood, so to get my money's worth (guaranteed contract) I'm moving him to drywaller.

As for "not working in professional trades", that's a ridiculous statement. In professional positions, contracts are held to the terms under which they were signed. You're pretending that Soriano (or any other professional) has a right to some term that was never agreed to in the contract, and in fact the contract states exactly the opposite.

I understand and respect your view as a business owner.
You may very well be able to tell a guy to swing a hammer wherever you say and he may very well take that shit because he has very few options open to him as an uneducated, non-professional laborer.

That type of "supervision" does not fly with any type of employee who has options be they accountants, nurses, lawyers, doctors, artists, pro athletes or any of the rest of us who would tell you to go **** yourself when you told us to perform a function outside the scope of our employment that was detrimental or undesirable to our career.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 11:47 AM
I would try to trade him if I were them and get something, its obvious he dont want to play LF.

They are working on a trade as we speak and....god that girl in your sig has a nice can.


What were we talking about?

jspchief
03-21-2006, 11:50 AM
That type of "supervision" does not fly with any type of employee who has options be they accountants, nurses, lawyers, doctors, artists, pro athletes or any of the rest of us who would tell you to go **** yourself when you told us to perform a function outside the scope of our employment that was detrimental or undesirable to our career.None of those employers are expected to pay out the life of your contract when you do them to go f*ck themselves. That's the part you seem to be ignoring.

If he wants to tell them to f*ck off, no one is stopping him. If he expects to still get paid, he's kidding himself, just like any doctor, lawyer, accountant or whatever.

You act like he's being asked to do something so far beyond what he signed a contract to do, but the article suggests that the contract he signed specifically addressed this scenario.

Coach
03-21-2006, 11:53 AM
Let Washington keep Soriano on the disqualified list as long as they have to until Soriano quit being a crybaby and start being a man and play some outfield. And he doesn't deserve to get paid either, until he man up, and start playing outfield.

I don't want him on the Royals roster, nor I don't want him to be associated with anything about the Royals, period.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 11:57 AM
None of those employers are expected to pay out the life of your contract when you do them to go f*ck themselves. That's the part you seem to be ignoring.

If he wants to tell them to f*ck off, no one is stopping him. If he expects to still get paid, he's kidding himself, just like any doctor, lawyer, accountant or whatever.

You act like he's being asked to do something so far beyond what he signed a contract to do, but the article suggests that the contract he signed specifically addressed this scenario.

Try hard to take off your supervisor's hat and see it from the athlete's point of view. You act like these people are menial construction laborers.
Doctors, lawyers, etc. can tell you to **** off and have as good or better a position the same day. So can Soriano.

Soriano is not a grunt employee. He is a highly compensated specialist; one of only a few people in the world who can do what he does. He has one of the most powerful unions in the world behind him. This gives him a hell of a lot more leverage than you seem to realize. The Nats may be talking tough but behind closed doors they are looking real hard for a trade that makes sense and saves face for them.

jspchief
03-21-2006, 12:08 PM
Try hard to take off your supervisor's hat and see it from the athlete's point of view. You act like these people are menial construction laborers.
Doctors, lawyers, etc. can tell you to **** off and have as good or better a position the same day. So can Soriano.

Soriano is not a grunt employee. He is a highly compensated specialist; one of only a few people in the world who can do what he does. He has one of the most powerful unions in the world behind him. This gives him a hell of a lot more leverage than you seem to realize. The Nats may be talking tough but behind closed doors they are looking real hard for a trade that makes sense and saves face for them.So you think the team should still have to pay him even after he tells them to f*ck off?

And you think that happens in any other industry other than professional sports?

He is being asked to do something that falls within the parameters of his contract. What is the point of the contract if he doesn't have to adhere to it?

penguinz
03-21-2006, 12:10 PM
So you think the team should still have to pay him even after he tells them to f*ck off?

And you think that happens in any other industry other than professional sports?

He is being asked to do something that falls within the parameters of his contract. What is the point of the contract if he doesn't have to adhere to it ?
You keep saying this yet you have no f'ing idea what is in his contract.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 12:13 PM
So you think the team should still have to pay him even after he tells them to f*ck off?

And you think that happens in any other industry other than professional sports?

He is being asked to do something that falls within the parameters of his contract. What is the point of the contract if he doesn't have to adhere to it?

In any other industry Soriano would be free to seek gainful employment elsewhere. Even in the case of a non-compete an employer would have a hard time enforcing it if it appeared they acted in bad faith. I could tell my employer to shove it today and be working tomorrow. Soriano can't do that so they have to pay him even if they bench him. The DQ talk is just talk, no way the MLBPU lets it happen.

If the Nats don't want to pay him they can:
A-trade him
B-play him at 2nd
C-work something else out with him

As a small business owner it seems to irk the hell out of you to think that the employer does not hold all the power.

Coach
03-21-2006, 12:14 PM
You keep saying this yet you have no f'ing idea what is in his contract.

Nobody knows what's in his contract, except Washington, Soriano, his agent, and MLB.

But as far as I'm concerned, I'm more than positive that there is no clause that stated "Soriano will only play second base." Becuase if there was that clause, then Washington would had not either done the following:

1. Trade him just for trying to get outfield help.
2. Would even send him out in the outfield.

And as far as I'm concerned, Washington penciled him in the OF, which tells me that he has no clause of any kind like that. I highly doubt that Washington would do that if he actually has a clause stating that he is not allowed to play outfield.

duncan_idaho
03-21-2006, 12:22 PM
Try hard to take off your supervisor's hat and see it from the athlete's point of view. You act like these people are menial construction laborers.
Doctors, lawyers, etc. can tell you to **** off and have as good or better a position the same day. So can Soriano.

Soriano is not a grunt employee. He is a highly compensated specialist; one of only a few people in the world who can do what he does. He has one of the most powerful unions in the world behind him. This gives him a hell of a lot more leverage than you seem to realize. The Nats may be talking tough but behind closed doors they are looking real hard for a trade that makes sense and saves face for them.

But the problem is that everyone knows they're trying to trade him; that makes it impossible for them to get equal value in return. As has been said, playing left field this season will not hurt his already poor defense at second base. He's not going to forget the position in one season; if anything, having the ability to play the outfield makes him more marketable in the long run because his new team will be able to play him at multiple positions.

The real reason, IMO, Soriano is refusing to play is that he doesn't want to play home games at RFK Stadium. He knows he can't put up big numbers there, and he wants to be traded to a team with a more hitter-friendly park. Teams are going to care a lot less about what position he played this season than whether he hit 30 home runs...

And you act as if this were an unusual or unreasonable request; they're not asking a pitcher to become a right fielder; they're not asking a shortstop to become a catcher. They're asking him to move (to the easiest position to learn) so they can get their best players on the field at the same time. That happens all the time in baseball. It's part of the game.

tk13
03-21-2006, 12:29 PM
I think what he's doing is pretty selfish, I wonder what his teammates think about it. Then again, I wonder what the Nationals were thinking when they did this. They knew he was gonna be stubborn, and they gave up a pretty good outfielder in the process.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 12:50 PM
But the problem is that everyone knows they're trying to trade him; that makes it impossible for them to get equal value in return. As has been said, playing left field this season will not hurt his already poor defense at second base. He's not going to forget the position in one season; if anything, having the ability to play the outfield makes him more marketable in the long run because his new team will be able to play him at multiple positions.

Soriano was just awarded #10 million in arbitration for this season, the highest award ever given in arbitration. Nothing is going to improve his marketability; on the other hand messing with what got him here might.

The real reason, IMO, Soriano is refusing to play is that he doesn't want to play home games at RFK Stadium. He knows he can't put up big numbers there, and he wants to be traded to a team with a more hitter-friendly park. Teams are going to care a lot less about what position he played this season than whether he hit 30 home runs...

Soriano is one of the best pure hitters in MLB. He hits for power and average no matter the park. $10 million for one season is not awarded to situational hitters. Do you think the Nats brain trust would bring him in knowing they were going to move him to LF if they didn't believe he could hit in their ballpark?

And you act as if this were an unusual or unreasonable request; they're not asking a pitcher to become a right fielder; they're not asking a shortstop to become a catcher. They're asking him to move (to the easiest position to learn) so they can get their best players on the field at the same time. That happens all the time in baseball. It's part of the game.

Not to top echelon players; and certainly not against their will. Do you think you could move Jeter without asking him?

duncan_idaho
03-21-2006, 01:21 PM
Vailpass,

Soriano got the payday because he can hit. Nothing else... he's a terrible defensive second baseman. Anybody that signs him will be doing so for his bat. He's known to be a liability at second base, so playing left field won't hurt him. He's not going to become worse at second... it's really not possible.

One of the best pure hitters in baseball, huh? Able to put up numbers no matter where he's hitting? Take a look at these numbers:

2005:
Home: 78 GP 311 AB .315 AVG 25 HR 73 RBI .656 SLG
Road: 78 GP 326 AB .224 AVG 11 HR 31 RBI .374 SLG
2004

2004:
Home: 70 GP 293 AB .317 AVG 12 HR 47 RBI .526 SLG
Road: 75 GP 315 AB .244 AVG 16 HR 44 RBI .444 SLG

Those are significant differences. Since he left the Yankees, he hasn't been nearly the hitter AWAY from Ameriquest Field–one of the best hitter's parks in the league—as he was at it. The differences obviously are much greater last season, but the proof is there. And I'm not saying he won't at RFK (though the evidence would suggest he won't); I'm saying he won't hit the 35-40 home runs he would need to get a big payday. And I'm not the only one who thinks he isn't going to put up great numbers—look at any fantasy baseball forecast about Soriano.

The Nats trade for him was foolish; I still have no idea why they pulled the trigger on that deal.

Alex Rodriguez was an upper-echelon player who changed positions, even though he was superior defensively; Craig Biggio has moved whenever the Astros have asked him; Nomar Garciapparra—a player who, like Soriano, is deficient defensively at his original position—moved.

Soriano is NOT a top 15-20 player in the league. He is not the heart and soul of a championship team (ala Jeter). He is a one-dimensional player, a good young hitter—when he's got 5 All-Stars hitting behind him or when he's hitting at Ameriquest Field—but he's not so good or established to justify refusing to change positions.

beavis
03-21-2006, 01:21 PM
I think what he's doing is pretty selfish, I wonder what his teammates think about it. Then again, I wonder what the Nationals were thinking when they did this. They knew he was gonna be stubborn, and they gave up a pretty good outfielder in the process.
Yep. No matter what happens now, I don't see how he can possibly play for the Nats this year. Refusing to take the field will turn an entire clubhouse against you. They've really screwed themselves though, because I don't see how they could possibly get the value out of him that they gave up now.

sedated
03-21-2006, 01:42 PM
Trade him to KC.

That'll teach him.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 01:49 PM
Yep. No matter what happens now, I don't see how he can possibly play for the Nats this year. Refusing to take the field will turn an entire clubhouse against you. They've really screwed themselves though, because I don't see how they could possibly get the value out of him that they gave up now.

Golly gee Beaver, do you think Wally acted in an unsportsmanlike manner? j/k :)

This is strictly a business move. Players stay out of each other's business dealings. If Soriano plays and produces there is not a man in the room that will hold anything against Soriano.

beavis
03-21-2006, 02:34 PM
Golly gee Beaver, do you think Wally acted in an unsportsmanlike manner? j/k :)

This is strictly a business move. Players stay out of each other's business dealings. If Soriano plays and produces there is not a man in the room that will hold anything against Soriano.
:rolleyes:

If you were correct (which you aren't) it's a sad statement for baseball.

vailpass
03-21-2006, 03:34 PM
:rolleyes:

If you were correct (which you aren't) it's a sad statement for baseball.

Believe what you will. The 1950s came and went a long time ago.

JBucc
03-21-2006, 03:41 PM
Both parties are at fault here. Why would you trade for the guy when he says he isn't gonna play LF? And what makes Soriano think he has the right to play the position of his choice, especially one he sucks at. His bat isn't THAT good. Nats should have just avoided this guy and now they better trade him.

jspchief
03-21-2006, 08:42 PM
You keep saying this yet you have no f'ing idea what is in his contract.Well, according to the GM of the Nationals, and the reports I've seen on TV, his refusal to play the position the team is asking to play is in violation of his contract.

So technically, I have no f'ing idea, but people who might have an idea are indicating that he has to play where the team tells him to play.

Miles
03-21-2006, 08:58 PM
This has turned into a mess but its not like that Nats couldn't see it comming. For the last few years Soriono has made it pretty clear he doesn't want to play in the outfield. Its seems from how this has all played out they just figured he would eventually cave after a while.

Im trying to come up with another example of a similar situation of when a team has tried to force a position on an all-star player but can't. It seems they usually tend to work these things out before making a trade or signing.

Im also not exactly siding with Soriano on this one since he is such a brutal fielder at second base. Part of why his numbers are considerd so solid is the position he plays. If he is moved to LF they would be merely good rather than great.

Miles
03-21-2006, 09:00 PM
Well, according to the GM of the Nationals, and the reports I've seen on TV, his refusal to play the position the team is asking to play is in violation of his contract.

So technically, I have no f'ing idea, but people who might have an idea are indicating that he has to play where the team tells him to play.

Yeah I have heard the same thing. I agree with you in that its basically common sense that a team can play someone however the hell the wan't to. The only thing that makes this a question is the unreasonable leverage the players union has.