Roch: Duquette confirms no Fielder, Reynolds to 1B?

[Going Underground]

I think alot of this is GM talk. We are happy at first and third but if the right offer came along we would get rid of either Davis or Reynolds. Keep talking them both up and perhaps we can get more then two relievers or perhaps not. I still see mostly pitvhing being signed and a corner outfielder. Backup catcher with the pitching trade. Anles traded Chatwood for their catcher. Does the Guthrie trade become more imminent?

[LookinUp]

I don't think it takes a man with 50 years of baseball experience to be able to see that Reynolds is a stiff at first or third. In an ideal world, he wouldn't be on the field unless he's hitting. In this regard, I'm hopeful that the Mariners have soured on Smoak to the point of being willing to trade him to us.

I find it hard to believe that DD will take the O's into 2012 essentially with AM's team. If he wants to give Reimold, Davis and Antonelli playing time, that's all well and good. However, that doesn't preclude us from acquiring talent that could really contribute to a winning team in a couple of years. That could include Darvish, or Cespedes, or foreign/minor leaguers signed or acquired through trades.

If DD simply stands pat with AM's team and adds a couple of Edwin Jackson types and Antonelli, I'll be very disappointed. Sure, the team would be better, but I don't know that we'd be any closer to actually competing.

[erb8472]

He said he "poured water on that one". Didn't say if it was cold or hot.

Just another year of posturing through the media. We, as fans, fall for it every year. Remember, this is the man that signed Manny Ramirez, at the time, to one of the biggest contacts in baseball history. And, he was very close to acquiring A-Rod and his contract before the Yanks got him.

I think we are going after Fielder.

Pretty certain Theo was the GM when they were going after AROD.

[lint06]

You do know that he played third before 2011, right?

Well, of course I knew that. What a silly question. I would think just by glancing at the date I joined OH would tell you that I've been following the Orioles at least longer than we've had Reynolds, you goose, you. But my point was that how does one get a larger sample size if one moves Reynolds back to third because he has a SSS at first. Am I being clear? It not, I'll rephrase my point. I know sometimes I can lack clarity when making a point in an online forum, which is apparent from your initial response.

[El Gordo]

With apologies to Billy Crystal's Fernando Lamas, when it comes to defense, it is better to look good than to field good. Reynolds looks better at 1B so that's that. But if one wants to be so silly as to cite numbers, then Reynolds has a total of 604.2 IN at 1B over 5 seasons. An average 1B would have about 1200 IN for one season. So I don't know what any numbers at 1B would proove about his defense there.

[Flacco Machado]

Pretty certain Theo was the GM when they were going after AROD.

You're right. I apologize.

[TiredofLosing20]

When baseball people talk about market, they're not talking about number of people in the area and how much money they have. They're talking about how well the current franchise in the area does at getting that money in their pockets.

The use of the term "Baseball People" probably does change the conversation to that of revenue generation, however it doesn't change the fact that small market teams will not (by any definition) become large market teams because of on field product or management's ability to capture Revenue. The ceilings and floors for revenue are pretty concrete as they are driven by the traditional use of the word "market". There is only so far that Yankee revenue will drop and Royals or Pirates revenue will increase.

Markets have inherent properties. More people with higher incomes = better chance of generating revenue. I have said it before, geography and demographics play an enormous (and inappropriate) role in MLB. On field product has nothing to do with market size. No matter how good the Royals or the Pirates get, their market will always be much smaller than New York no matter how bad the Yankees get.

As I said in my post, Baltimore is a small to mid market team.

[Sports Guy]

Well, of course I knew that. What a silly question. I would think just by glancing at the date I joined OH would tell you that I've been following the Orioles at least longer than we've had Reynolds, you goose, you. But my point was that how does one get a larger sample size if one moves Reynolds back to third because he has a SSS at first. Am I being clear? It not, I'll rephrase my point. I know sometimes I can lack clarity when making a point in an online forum, which is apparent from your initial response.

Well, I don't care about the SSS at first...My comment about SSS was based on the organization and those on this board going way overboard on his struggling defense.

He has never been a great defensive player by any means but what he showed, for 3 years straight, is that he was an improving defensive player.

I am not ready to say that he has regressed to the point where he shouldn't be at third anymore. He moves well over there...He has good athleticism..He has a strong arm.

Most of his errors last year, IMO, were mental ones that caused things to be worse for him defensively.

[NewMarketSean]

As I said in my post, Baltimore is a small to mid market team.

Yeah, what are the Cardinals? We should be like they are. St Louis and Baltimore are pretty similar cities with rabid fan bases. The only difference is obviously, the success each team has had in the last 15 years.

[CA-ORIOLE]

As I said before, Reynolds' isn't a better first baseman. At least not by the available data. UZR and TZ and +/- all show he's farther below average at first than at third. SSS caveats apply.

I'll give the benefit of the doubt to the Orioles talent evaluators with respect to the proposed alignment with Reynolds/Davis. Other than it should be disregarded, Reynolds uzr at first isn't even worth noting imo.

[ccbird]

I've said numerous times that Reynolds shouldn't have a glove on his hand. He is a butcher, period. IMO, he looked good at first after he first made the move but eventually you saw his deficiencies start to creep in again over there. Balls were getting under his glove, I mean literally under his glove on balls hit one to two steps away. I saw him at least once drop a ball thrown to him at his chest by either Hardy or Andino on a relay. People were somehow impressed because he had a knack for picking balls that every ML 1B should pick regularly and making some diving plays. The problem was too often the routine balls. I mean is he better at 1st than 3rd?? Yeah, because one of his biggest issues at 3rd was coming in on balls which he was horrible at and you eliminate so many more potential throwing errors by playing 1st. He's a DH, but DD seem content to "hide" him at first so they can have average offensive production at the position and have flexibility at DH.

[Prayin4Reign]

The way DD was talking about Davis and citing Bill James projections for him...I just wonder if he was actually propping him up as trade bait instead.

I really hope Duquette has some things up his sleeve.

[LookinUp]

Not sure why I can't quote El Gordo, but this is for him...

Looking better at 1B than he does at 3B is not a strong statement. He might look better at 1B, but that doesn't mean he looks good. To me, he still looked like a stiff. He just looked like a stiff a lower percentage of the time. We should note that defensive stats punish the other infielder more often than the 1B. To me, he was worse across the board than a good 1B. That means that he'll fail, even on the simple things like stretching and scooping, more often than an average 1B.

[ccbird]

Well, I don't care about the SSS at first...My comment about SSS was based on the organization and those on this board going way overboard on his struggling defense.

He has never been a great defensive player by any means but what he showed, for 3 years straight, is that he was an improving defensive player.

I am not ready to say that he has regressed to the point where he shouldn't be at third anymore. He moves well over there...He has good athleticism..He has a strong arm.

Most of his errors last year, IMO, were mental ones that caused things to be worse for him defensively.

He doesn't move well over there. He can not come in on a ball. His quick twitch movement is horrible. Saying he had mental errors is an excuse for not being able to make enough of the routine plays an average 3b should make. Buck had enough of him at 3rd by July of last year and rightfully so.

[CA-ORIOLE]

He has never been a great defensive player by any means but what he showed, for 3 years straight, is that he was an improving defensive player.

I am not ready to say that he has regressed to the point where he shouldn't be at third anymore. He moves well over there...He has good athleticism..He has a strong arm.

Most of his errors last year, IMO, were mental ones that caused things to be worse for him defensively.

He's a career minus 10.5 uzr/150 at third. His FB translates to a minus 13 runs per /150. It's a huge stretch to say he was improving. You don't throw up minus 30 runs because of some mental errors. He can't play a slow roller to save his life and he's not partiulary coordinated. If anything you can assume he'd perform at his career levels in a optimistic case.