Reynolds wants another crack at 3B

[El Gordo]

I have a tremendous amount of respect for Kevin Youkilis, but he is a major league baseball player. He might find it difficult to distance himself from the game in such a way that would make valuation adjustments possible. Markakis, for example, early on in his career stated that Mussina was the toughest pitcher he'd faced. Does that mean that Mussina was the best pitcher in the league at the time?

I think you're just being contrary for the sake of being contrary and until you present your assertion in a quantifiable manner then you're going to have a hard time proving anything. This isn't to say that I disagree with you, only that I wish you had more to say.

I gave some of my reasons in post #62. I urge you to read it and get back to me. I am a advocate of the BIS system of measuring defense, but I like many others believe there are many aspects of defensive play that they miss. They are not very effective at quantifying the catchers play,e.g. and there are many aspects of certain positions that they aren't as good at quantifying as others. When Pujols failed to make that cut off in the WS how did that effect his +- rating. Or when Jeter made that famous play on Giambi how would that have been measured? Brooks always said that Boog saved him from many errors. Was he just being polite or did he know what he was talking about? How do you quantify the confidence ag ood 1B isspires in his IF to make a hurried throw trusting in his ability to come up with the ball. How do you measure the impact of a good C like Wieters to block a ball in the dirt on the pitchers confidence to throw a slider in a critical situation with a man on 3B. These are alla aspects of the game that defensive metrics miss, just as many seem to believe they miss the mysterious RF/CF park factors of OPACY. There is always a paradox between idividuation and interdependece, and it is foolish to discount either.

[Bradysburns]

No. He's been below-average. There's a difference.

You can work with below-average. You can't work with whatever last year was, which is why he spent the second half at first base.

I guess I consider below-average pretty much sucking, but I can see your point - he hasn't been horrible, just... sub-par. My point stands, though. if we're going with the young rotation again, we need plus defense at third. The combination of young pitchers and substandard defense just makes me want to puke for a number of reasons.

All that said, I really do like Reynolds, and I think he makes great sense as a DH or first baseman. I mean, there just aren't that many guys who can mash like that and who are not on roids. As for how "his bat plays at 3B" versus first... I don't buy all that 100%. Markakis' bat doesn't really "play well" in right field, IMO. But I like him there because of the defense, and the fact that we make up for his so-so power with plus power from our CF.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Are you saying you don't trust the analysis FanGraphs and Tango and others have done? Why? What points or data did they miss?

Doesn't it seem odd to you that the positional adjustments have not been changed for years? How can that be? We have the same amount of relative defensive proficiency every year? They adjust replacement level every year based on offense but the defensive adjustments stay static? I'm not sure that makes a great deal of sense to me. If you've got a DH like Luke Scott who can actually play a decent LF is he the same as a Vlad Guerreo at DH at minus 17.5? I don't think so. I see the positional adjustments as much more of a general guideline than the offensive replacement level values. One of the reasons I don't buy into the "lets put Reynolds back at third argument" for some fractional gain in WAR value.

[El Gordo]

Doesn't it seem odd to you that the positional adjustments have not been changed for years? How can that be? We have the same amount of relative defensive proficiency every year? They adjust replacement level every year based on offense but the defensive adjustment stays static? I'm not sure that makes a great deal of sense to me. If you've got a DH like Luke Scott who can actually play a decent LF is he the same as a Vlad Guerreo at DH at minus 17.5? I don't think so. I see the positional adjustments as much more of a general guideline than the offensive replacement level values. One of the reasons I don't buy into the "lets put Reynolds back at third argument" for some fractional gain in WAR value.

This is my problem with putting such an emphasis on WAR. It is a way of putting a dollar amount on the value of his production independent of the team. If it turms out that Antonelli, e.g. is a plus fielding 3B, and can give us a .750 + OPS with a high OBP we are better off with Reynolds at 1B. The difference in his fielding from Davis' at 1B proabably wouldn't be enough to make Davis the better choice there. Reynolds bat may not play as well at 1B as 3B,in terms of his trade value, but for the O's that may be the best place for him.

[scOtt]

I guess I consider below-average pretty much sucking, but I can see your point - he hasn't been horrible, just... sub-par. My point stands, though. if we're going with the young rotation again, we need plus defense at third. The combination of young pitchers and substandard defense just makes me want to puke for a number of reasons.

All that said, I really do like Reynolds, and I think he makes great sense as a DH or first baseman. I mean, there just aren't that many guys who can mash like that and who are not on roids. As for how "his bat plays at 3B" versus first... I don't buy all that 100%. Markakis' bat doesn't really "play well" in right field, IMO. But I like him there because of the defense, and the fact that we make up for his so-so power with plus power from our CF.

No. We don't. Plus defense is a luxury. Defense up the middle and power at the corners. We in Balmer are spoiled because of Brooksie. He was a great 3Bman, even if he only played defense like Cal. His bat was what made him great. His glove just made him otherworldly.

Reynolds at 3B is NOT what we saw last year... and he's not great either. But he is plenty good enough when you factor in his bat.

[El Gordo]

No. We don't. Plus defense is a luxury. Defense up the middle and power at the corners. We in Balmer are spoiled because of Brooksie. He was a great 3Bman, even if he only played defense like Cal. His bat was what made him great. His glove just made him otherworldly.

Reynolds at 3B is NOT what we saw last year... and he's not great either. But he is plenty good enough when you factor in his bat.

Is this a joke? Too much egg nog?

[scOtt]

Is this a joke? Too much egg nog?

Not a joke... a bad example maybe. I know Cal was a good 3Bman. With respect to Brooksie, I should have said Tony Bautista. If Brooksie was only as good a glove as Tony, he STILL would have been a good 3Bman because of his bat!

[CA-ORIOLE]

[/b]

This is my problem with putting such an emphasis on WAR. It is a way of putting a dollar amount on the value of his production independent of the team. If it turms out that Antonelli, e.g. is a plus fielding 3B, and can give us a .750 + OPS with a high OBP we are better off with Reynolds at 1B. The difference in his fielding from Davis' at 1B proabably wouldn't be enough to make Davis the better choice there. Reynolds bat may not play as well at 1B as 3B,in terms of his trade value, but for the O's that may be the best place for him.

I don't have a problem with WAR (big picture), but I do have some issues with consideration the use of positonal adjustments and defense. In this case we've actually had people argue that Reynolds should go to third for some fractional value over what he'd be at DH. Common sense would say that Reynold's positional versatility over a normal DH makes the minus 17.5 adjustment (if you believe that) even less significant. Then we have people selecting his defensive years instead of his overall rate of efficiency. That would kinda be like evaluating Markakis on his last two years hitting based on what he did from April to June. Makes no sense consideiring how UZR works.

I'm kinda with you about first base being one of the the tougher positions to evaluate. I'm not with your point that it may be harder than third. It's not. That said, I think even having a tall first baseman (like Reynolds) can add value to the IF defense not picked up by the stats and there is enough visual evidence for me to consider that Reynolds might be much better at first base than at third. Personally, I guess I'd rather see Reynolds at DH and get a good defender at third and center... or move Jones to LF, Reimold to DH and just deal Reynolds (what we probably should do).

I guess if they want to run out Antonelli or the rule 5 pickup at third this year then I'd be fine with it. I'm getting a bit uncomfortable with the thought of Davis (or Reynolds) at third quite frankly.

[El Gordo]

I don't have a problem with WAR (big picture), but I do have some issues with consideration the use of positonal adjustments and defense. In this case we've actually had people argue that Reynolds should go to third for some fractional value over what he'd be at DH. Common sense would say that Reynold's positional versatility over a normal DH makes the minus 17.5 adjustment (if you believe that) even less significant. Then we have people selecting his defensive years instead of his overall rate of efficiency. That would kinda be like evaluating Markakis on his last two years hitting based on what he did from April to June. Makes no sense consideiring how UZR works.

I'm kinda with you about first base being one of the the tougher positions to evaluate. I'm not with your point that it may be harder than third. It's not. That said, I think even having a tall first baseman (like Reynolds) can add value to the IF defense not picked up by the stats and there is enough visual evidence for me to consider that Reynolds might be much better at first base than at third. Personally, I guess I'd rather see Reynolds at DH and get a good defender at third and center... or move Jones to LF, Reimold to DH and just deal Reynolds (what we probably should do).

I guess if they want to run out Antonelli or the rule 5 pickup at third this year then I'd be fine with it. I'm getting a bit uncomfortable with the thought of Davis (or Reynolds) at third quite frankly.

That wasn't my point, that was Kevein Youkilis'. But I'm sure he will bow to your superior knowledge of the game. My point is there isn't as much difference between the two positions, certainly not 1.5 W's between average at each. I don't think the difference between Davis abd Reynild is that much, not enough to make Reynolds a DH. I don't think he would do well as a DH some guys can't make the adjustment sitting on the bench. I don't think Davis' bat will be that good to play at 1B. Reynolds' barely does. I see Davis as a CIF on the bench.I think the value of good D in the IF is important to the pitching. If Anyonelli can hit league average for 3B he would be better for there O's regardless of his WAR.,

[CA-ORIOLE]

That wasn't my point, that was Kevein Youkilis'. But I'm sure he will bow to your superior knowledge of the game..,

Oh right, you were relaying Youkilis's comments with no context or intent to anyone ...... same as you did here with your condescending tone.

My point is there isn't as much difference between the two positions, certainly not 1.5 W's between average at each.

There is defintiely a difference in the skill required to play first and third base. I'll use my "superior knowledge of the game" to set you straight on that one. There may be more intracicies at first base, but third base is much more difficult. You don't need to be bean counter to understand that concept. Just some basic knowledge of the game and common sense should tell you that alone. Whether it's the 1.5 W guideline or how you look at the "adjustment" on each situation is another matter.

I don't think the difference between Davis abd Reynild is that much, not enough to make Reynolds a DH. I don't think he would do well as a DH some guys can't make the adjustment sitting on the bench. I don't think Davis' bat will be that good to play at 1B. Reynolds' barely does. I see Davis as a CIF on the bench.I think the value of good D in the IF is important to the pitching.

Probably not much differnce between the two. Davis looks more consistent, but that's just what I saw last year. Davis is a guy I'd like to give AB's and test his upside (I'm not particularly high on him though). Probably at first base at this point. Like I said, I'd probably prefer to deal Reynolds at this point. DH him secondarily.

If Antonelli can hit league average for 3B he would be better for there O's regardless of his WAR

Yeah, no problem testing Antonelli or Flaherty at third this season over getting a vet FA there, I also think Andino could play there as well if they fail.

[MarylandAaron]

I wouldn't have a problem with giving him another shot at 3B. However, if the O's can find a productive combination of Antonelli/Andino/Davis that works at third, then Reynolds can be the 1B/DH.

I think his WAR says more about his value in general than it does to our particular team.

[Bradysburns]

No. We don't. Plus defense is a luxury. Defense up the middle and power at the corners. We in Balmer are spoiled because of Brooksie. He was a great 3Bman, even if he only played defense like Cal. His bat was what made him great. His glove just made him otherworldly.

Reynolds at 3B is NOT what we saw last year... and he's not great either. But he is plenty good enough when you factor in his bat.

Dang right, we're spoiled - or perhaps we've just been trained to appreciate fine defense and what it does for the psychology of a team. I think that's really easy to underplay. When a young pitcher knows he's got a plus defender behind him - hopefully several - he pitches to contact a lot easier. And he's smart to do so. When there's even an ounce of doubt, that can eat away at a guy. At least that's what I imagine. If they put Reynolds back out at third, I just hope they have a quick hook if he picks up where he left off last season. I'm sure even Reynolds-at-thirders would understand that sentiment.

[Can_of_corn]

Dang right, we're spoiled - or perhaps we've just been trained to appreciate fine defense and what it does for the psychology of a team. I think that's really easy to underplay. When a young pitcher knows he's got a plus defender behind him - hopefully several - he pitches to contact a lot easier. And he's smart to do so. When there's even an ounce of doubt, that can eat away at a guy. At least that's what I imagine. If they put Reynolds back out at third, I just hope they have a quick hook if he picks up where he left off last season. I'm sure even Reynolds-at-thirders would understand that sentiment.

Please show me an example of a pitcher, other then Palmer, where a case can be made that they legitimately pitched to contact. A strikeout is almost strictly better then letting a hitter put the ball in play.

[REDMAN]

Please show me an example of a pitcher, other then Palmer, where a case can be made that they legitimately pitched to contact. A strikeout is almost strictly better then letting a hitter put the ball in play.

There is not a pitch in baseball that cannot be hit,all good pitchers pitch to contact,good hitter hit good pitches,strickouts are a bonus.

[Can_of_corn]

There is not a pitch in baseball that cannot be hit,all good pitchers pitch to contact,good hitter hit good pitches,strickouts are a bonus.

That makes no sense whatsoever.

Please give me an example of a pitcher, other then Palmer, who had success with the strategy of letting the opponent hit the ball.

Mind you I want proof, not hearsay.

There is a reason that the advanced pitching metrics use strikeouts as a determining factor.