O's would "do anything" to trade Reynolds and Gregg

[CA-ORIOLE]

No, really, strikeouts aren't the same as any other out. Strikeouts don't bring in runs, and they don't advance runners. They don't pose a threat to turn into base hits. A batter has to HIT the ball in order to do anything productive.

This is one of the myths that pop up on this board that drives me crazy.

No offense, but this is a really dumb post, even by dumb post standards. Of course a K is not "literally" another out. It's an aggregate/statistical analysis. You're just not paying attention to what is being explained in this thread and resorting to a ridiculous strawman argument. A theoretical player with the same exact stats as Reynolds who K'd 100 times less would be worth about 1-2 runs more over the course of a season. Big whoop. A batted ball out is worth less than a K with a runner on first base, because the DP's offset the other plays that advance runners.

I think we can all grasp the point that a K won't turn into a hit. Not the point of the discussion.

[Dagger420]

Read the links that have been posted in this thread. The amount of times that a strike out would have been non productive, i.e. man on third, none out, is so small it's insignificant.

So while literally, a strike out is not the same as any other out, it basically is when you look at how rare a situation like that comes up.

I would suggest everyone read the posts by Frobby, The Rick, Srmeowmeow, and I have one in there with links. Read those first, then intelligently, using statistics and not just "watching a game", make an argument about how Reynold's strikeouts are killing this team. I will give you a cookie if you can do this.

Just saying "to those of us who played the game" and the "game isn't played on paper" makes you sound like a scout from Moneyball*. "The kid has an ugly girlfriend, no confidence." Means nothing.

*totally undeserved Oscar nominations for that movie...all of them

Not sure how you're comparing putting the ball in play or not with "the kid has an ugly girlfriend." And I'm not saying Reynolds k's are killing the team either. I just feel that all outs are not created equal. Even in this link that was provided, it says on "average" an out is an out but that sometimes outs are not equal... And I agree with Bradysburns that its the ability to situational hit in those few amount of crunchtime situations that separates great teams from good ones.

Simply put, I'd rather a guy strike out than hit a ground ball with a guy at first and one out and I'd rather a guy put the ball in play with a man in scoring position with less than two outs. I don't know how you can argue with that.

And the statistical likelihood of this really is a moot point in my book, because failing once at something so fundamental in baseball is just inexcusable for a professional baseball player. You're paid over a million dollars to play a game right and you can't hit a fair ball with one out and a guy on third?... I mean soccer players in some countries have been killed for that level of ineptitude...

Back to the point though... Reynolds is an average player. His power is above average, but the rest of his skillset brings him down - especially his defense with out young staff... I agree that he works the count well and I think he deserves a space on the team, plus he's untradeable at this point, but lets not get carried away with our man crush...

[Dagger420]

I disagree with anything that says 100 k's less equals 1-2 more runs over the season. Out of those 100 at bats where a K happened the statistical odds of having a runner on third and one out or less is greater than 1 or 2 %.

[Can_of_corn]

I disagree with anything that says 100 k's less equals 1-2 more runs over the season. Out of those 100 at bats where a K happened the statistical odds of having a runner on third and one out or less is greater than 1 or 2 %.

But on the other side you can't hit into a double play on a strikeout. It pretty much evens out. I would rather have Reynolds striking out then Vlad hitting a weak grounder to second.

[jamalshw]

I bleieve his Ks are only an issue as they don't allow for an error or misque in the field to allow him on base or a seeing-eye basehit. The more you put the ball in play, the more hits you have (assuming your BABIP stays relatively stable) that said, in the grand scheme of things, his Ks over a full season will not hurt us any more than if he were to put the ball in play and get out in the same situations. He'll advance less runners along and drive less in, but he'll also avoid more double plays. On top of that, when he strikes out, he at least makes the pitcher through 3 pitches.

Overall, my biggest concern with Reynolds is still and will always remain his play in the field.

[Frobby]

I disagree with anything that says 100 k's less equals 1-2 more runs over the season. Out of those 100 at bats where a K happened the statistical odds of having a runner on third and one out or less is greater than 1 or 2 %.

The fallacy here is that there are many other ways that a run doesn't score: a ground ball right at a corner infielder, a ball hit to the pitcher, a ball hit to 2B/SS with the infield in, a pop fly, a liner to an infielder, a fly ball that isn't deep enough. The overall success rate with a runner on 3B and less than 2 out is slightly over 50%, and that includes the hits.

I do agree, however, that the number sounds low. Reynolds batted 31 times last year with a runner on 3B and less than 2 out. That's about 5% of his PA. He walked in 8 of them, so take those out of the equation. 11 of the 23 scored, 6 on hits, 5 on "productive outs." He struck out 12 times with a runner on 3B and less than two out -- a very high percentage of strikeouts even by his standards. He definitely cost the team more than 1-2 runs here. Probably more like 5-6.

[El Gordo]

Most of Reynolds K's come with a high P/PA. Seeing a lot of pitches has a value in uping the opposing SP's pitch count. A good AB is one that makes the pitcher work. They don't always result in putting the ball in play. I'd prefer an out that advances the runne,r but I'd prefer a K to a DP.

[Babypowder]

I disagree with anything that says 100 k's less equals 1-2 more runs over the season. Out of those 100 at bats where a K happened the statistical odds of having a runner on third and one out or less is greater than 1 or 2 %.

That's what the research says. I assume you have done a study which disagrees?

[atomic]

I disagree with anything that says 100 k's less equals 1-2 more runs over the season. Out of those 100 at bats where a K happened the statistical odds of having a runner on third and one out or less is greater than 1 or 2 %.

And if you are playing the Orioles there is a 15 percent chance they will make an error and it won't be an out for the team just for your stats.

[atomic]

Ok Reynolds supporters: The Orioles are willing to give away Reynolds for nothing yet no one is willing to take his contract. If he was as good as a hitter as you guys say some team would plug him in at DH or put him at first. Yet no one is interested. Why do you think that is?

[El Gordo]

Ok Reynolds supporters: The Orioles are willing to give away Reynolds for nothing yet no one is willing to take his contract. If he was as good as a hitter as you guys say some team would plug him in at DH or put him at first. Yet no one is interested. Why do you think that is?

Whatever your source is for this, I think it needs a high colonic.

[atomic]

Whatever your source is for this, I think it needs a high colonic.

Umm that is what this thread is about. Do you even read the threads you are in?

[The Wedge]

Umm that is what this thread is about. Do you even read the threads you are in?

It's also third hand info. Also, while an easy leap to make, going from "do anything" to "give away" is still a leap.

[OFFNY]

It's also third hand info. Also, while an easy leap to make, going from "do anything" to "give away" is still a leap.

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/59703000/jpg/_59703738_mmbeamon.jpg

[El Gordo]

Umm that is what this thread is about. Do you even read the threads you are in?

You should have stopped there, the rest of the post was downhill from that