Mark Reynolds is a Tease Someone Else Can Deal With

[Dipper9]

Hey Va Beach, how come you haven't started a thread asking for BRob's release? I mean, clearly he BLEW the game single handedly last night, all by himself, by not getting that hit in the ninth. Bum. Waste of a roster spot. Loser. He needs to be released!

[Pickles]

I agree that there's a strange sense on the board of posters not just having favorites, but of divvying up excuses/praise in oddly oppositional ways. So strange.*

*To be fair, I texted McNulty from the game last night, pre-HR, that Betemit was a "cipher."

I don't think it's particularly odd. Certain people like certain things in ballplayers, and others appreciate other things.

[Va Beach O's fan]

Hey Va Beach, how come you haven't started a thread asking for BRob's release? I mean, clearly he BLEW the game single handedly last night, all by himself, by not getting that hit in the ninth. Bum. Waste of a roster spot. Loser. He needs to be released!

because he was out of baseball for well over a year and hasn't even completed two weeks of major league baseball yet and he's still already a better hitter and certainly a much much better fielder than Wilson freaking betemit.

And again, I have nothing against Reynolds, he's grew up here in va beach and went to first colonial high school about 10 minutes from my house. I like the guy, just think he strikeouts out too much and committs too many errors. Didn't think I was really going out on a limb making that statement lol.

I much prefer reynolds too betemit or Nick Johnson......by a wide margin.

I was literally only pointing out that fransisco didn't even bother pitching to Reynolds, missing by a mile, so it's hard to say that was a great at bat.

Some people on this board are far too sensitive of even the slightest criticism of guys who make millions of dollars to play a game. Not to mention, orioles fans are a bunch of softies on our players compared to fans of teams like the sox and yanks. Sosh comes to mind.

But somehow pointing out that reynolds strikes out too much and committs too many errors and that I'm not a huge fan of Wilson betemit is just too negative for some of you to handle. Go figure.

[Dipper9]

because he was out of baseball for well over a year and hasn't even completed two weeks of major league baseball yet and he's still already a better hitter and certainly a much much better fielder than Wilson freaking betemit.

And again' date=' I have nothing against Reynolds, he's grew up here in va beach and went to first colonial high school about 10 minutes from my house. I like the guy, just think he strikeouts out too much and committs too many errors. Didn't think I was really going out on a limb making that statement lol.

I much prefer reynolds too betemit or Nick Johnson......by a wide margin.

I was literally only pointing out that fransisco didn't even bother pitching to Reynolds, missing by a mile, so it's hard to say that was a great at bat.

Some people on this board are far too sensitive of even the slightest criticism of guys who make millions of dollars to play a game. Not to mention, orioles fans are a bunch of softies on our players compared to fans of teams like the sox and yanks. Sosh comes to mind.

But somehow pointing out that reynolds strikes out too much and committs too many errors and that I'm not a huge fan of Wilson betemit is just too negative for some of you to handle. Go figure.[/quote']

Nice grammar!

Comparing us to SOSH is like comparing alter boys to hardened criminals. One thing you need to realize is that most of us on here realize the Orioles are men, human beings. Its not fantasy baseball, and its not a video game, where the superstars get hits EVERY time they are supposed to. I won't argue with your position, as that's your opinion and I respect that, but I'll take Reynolds k's if he continues to give me an .800 OPS and hit .350 with RISP. And unlike others, I think his glove is fine at 1st base, just keep him away from third!

[Va Beach O's fan]

Saying "nice grammar" is in itself, bad grammar.

I'm also using an iPhone with stupid auto-correct and I'm not going to bother proofing my post this early in the morning.

Secondly, I agree Reynolds has been much better at first than he was at third, namely because he was absolutely miserable as a third baseman. But he's been good enough in his limited time at first although he's hitting with much less power so far this year.

As for the srikeouts, that is just personal preference. Is gladly trade a few less homers and a few less walks for more productive outs when runners are on base.

Striking out with guys on base is a huge momentum killer and Reynolds has done this his entire career. If he can keep the errors down at first base though, he'll certainly be servicable. Davis has been scuffling big time the last week, Johnson brings nothing to this team in my opinion and betemit is betemit.

So yes, I want Reynolds in the lineup as a first baseman or a DH. My only point is that a guy who strikeouts as much as he does isn't my first choice but when the options are slim, he's better than whatever else we currently have.

I kind of wish we still had Brandon snyder although he certainly had his fleas as well.

[Frobby]

Some people on this board are far too sensitive of even the slightest criticism of guys who make millions of dollars to play a game. Not to mention' date=' orioles fans are a bunch of softies on our players compared to fans of teams like the sox and yanks. Sosh comes to mind.

[/quote']

I have no problem at all with those who want to point out Reynolds' flaws. What does bother me, though, is when the critics obsess about his strikeouts and minimize the importance of his OBP. If you give me a choice between a guy who strikes out 200 times and puts up a .330 OBP, and a guy who strikes out 100 times and puts up a .310 OBP, give me the guy who strikes out 200 times, especially when that guy also happens to put up a good SLG. Bottom line: the frequency with which a player makes an out is a bigger negative than the kind of out he makes.

By the way, I'm not necessarily referring to you in the above paragraph, just making a general point that to me, covers about 99% of the debate about Reynolds' offense. I don't think there is much of a serious debate about his defense. We all know by now that he's terrible at 3B and not likely to get any better. There's some debate about whether he is above average or below average at 1B, but either way, his defense at 1B is not a huge factor.

One other thing I have to say -- having spent some time looking at SOSH during our last series with Boston, that board is pretty lousy now and the level of discussion on OH is much, much better.

[Va Beach O's fan]

I agree 100% about the Hangout. It's so much better than SOSH and sites like that it's unbelievable. We may disagree about Reynolds but at least we can disagree without any sort of anymosity or personal attacks on opinions. Very refreshing for a sports website.

I do disagree about types of outs though. If no one is on base it obviously doesn't matter what type of out you make.

But if runners are on base, professional outs, being able to advance a runner or pull a ball to avoid a double play or move a guy up is very important to the game.

I think national league teams value this far more than American league teams do because of the pitcher being forced to bat and thus NL teams have to maximize their chances to score in the first 8 batters. With the DH in the AL, teams are more apt to let guys swing away knowing that even the 9 hitter can come through if your 8 hole hitter strikes out.

And yes, that is mostly just opinion. But I think if you asked any of the old school baseball guys if professional at bats, moving up runners and sacrifices are important, they'd look at you sideways and say of course they are.

Obviously today's game is a little different but strikeouts used to be viewed as horribly negative and if a guy struck out 200 times in a season before the steroid era began, he'd be out of baseball after one year, especially if he was a butcher in the field.

And just for the record, I'm 31 years old lol, not some 70 year old crumudgeon who rambles on about "how it was played in my day". I just prefer a more professional approach to hitting than what is considered ok these days and as such, the current crop of orioles hitters is pretty maddening at times although this year has been far better than previous years where at times I wanted to pull my hair out.

[Tx Oriole]

I agree 100% about the Hangout. It's so much better than SOSH and sites like that it's unbelievable. We may disagree about Reynolds but at least we can disagree without any sort of anymosity or personal attacks on opinions. Very refreshing for a sports website.

I do disagree about types of outs though. If no one is on base it obviously doesn't matter what type of out you make.

But if runners are on base' date=' professional outs, being able to advance a runner or pull a ball to avoid a double play or move a guy up is very important to the game.

I think national league teams value this far more than American league teams do because of the pitcher being forced to bat and thus NL teams have to maximize their chances to score in the first 8 batters. With the DH in the AL, teams are more apt to let guys swing away knowing that even the 9 hitter can come through if your 8 hole hitter strikes out.

And yes, that is mostly just opinion. But I think if you asked any of the old school baseball guys if professional at bats, moving up runners and sacrifices are important, they'd look at you sideways and say of course they are.

Obviously today's game is a little different but strikeouts used to be viewed as horribly negative and if a guy struck out 200 times in a season before the steroid era began, he'd be out of baseball after one year, especially if he was a butcher in the field.

And just for the record, I'm 31 years old lol, not some 70 year old crumudgeon who rambles on about "how it was played in my day". I just prefer a more professional approach to hitting than what is considered ok these days and as such, the current crop of orioles hitters is pretty maddening at times although this year has been far better than previous years where at times I wanted to pull my hair out.[/quote']

I wonder if you will get flaged by some 70 or so yeal old crumudgeon. I hope you have spelled that right. I am closer to a crumudgeon that a 31 year old. Just for the record i am teasing with you.

[Frobby]

I do disagree about types of outs though. If no one is on base it obviously doesn't matter what type of out you make.

But if runners are on base' date=' professional outs, being able to advance a runner or pull a ball to avoid a double play or move a guy up is very important to the game.[/quote']

I don't disagree with you here. It's just that if you actually look at (1) Reynolds' success in moving runners over from 2B to 3B with nobody out, (2) his success in moving a runner home with less than 2 out and a runner on 3B, and (3) the rate at which he hits into double plays, and compare those to the league average, you will conclude that the overall effect is pretty minimal. I did an analysis of Reynolds' 2011 season and concluded that he failed to advance a runner from 3B five more times than average, failed to advance a runner from 2B two more times than average, and grounded into one less double play than average. Net that out and maybe those things cost the Orioles 5 runs over the entire season compared to an average player. Losing 5 runs that way is not good, but it has to be weighed against the contributions Reynolds makes by getting on base and hitting home runs.

My analysis of 2011 can be found here: http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/119823-Reynolds?p=2717697#post2717697

[Lucky Jim]

I don't think it's particularly odd. Certain people like certain things in ballplayers, and others appreciate other things.

Well, you got half of it. Kudos.

To clarify - I think frustration is fine, but I don't dislike ballplayers until they have some failing other than an inability to perform. And even those can be forgiven, usually. Actively disliking folks on your own team just seems foreign to me.

[Ori-Al]

Va. Beach, what is your feeling re J.J. Hardy's offense? He hits for power, doesn't strike out nearly as often as Reynolds, but he does ground into double plays, and he doesn't get on base much (.310 OBP last season, even worse than Jones' .319, and .284 this season.) He's great defensively, but this is an offense question.

[RyanW]

Va. Beach, what is your feeling re J.J. Hardy's offense? He hits for power, doesn't strike out nearly as often as Reynolds, but he does ground into double plays, and he doesn't get on base much (.310 OBP last season, even worse than Jones' .319, and .284 this season.) He's great defensively, but this is an offense question.

I know this isn't addressed to me, but I'm answering anyway.

Because he's a shortstop, his offensive numbers aren't valued as high as other premium offensive positions. Of course, his numbers are a bit concerning, but compared to other team's production out of their SSs, it's not that huge of a deal.

[jjnono]

I have no problem at all with those who want to point out Reynolds' flaws. What does bother me, though, is when the critics obsess about his strikeouts and minimize the importance of his OBP. If you give me a choice between a guy who strikes out 200 times and puts up a .330 OBP, and a guy who strikes out 100 times and puts up a .310 OBP, give me the guy who strikes out 200 times, especially when that guy also happens to put up a good SLG. Bottom line: the frequency with which a player makes an out is a bigger negative than the kind of out he makes.

Frobby, I respectfully disagree with that statement. There ARE big differences in the way outs are made. Take for example two hitters who each make 100 outs. One hitter makes 75 of those outs by striking out. If there are men on base when he does, they generally speaking (steals WPs and PBs excepted) don't go anywhere. The other hitter makes 10 of those outs striking out. That's 65 times when he challenges the defense in one fashion or another while the other hitter hasn't; has the chance to advance runners, score runners, or can in myriad ways benefit his team. (CAVEAT: a hitter who puts the ball in play will also probably ground into more DPs, but that's the risk, I suppose, and DPs are never a given) The first hitter simply allows the defense to talk to itself and kick dirt. I don't think any of this is in question. Reynolds' OBP is good because he has a good eye. Problem is, when he knows it's a strike, he has a hard time doing much with it, long balls excepted, which are nice (as one was tonight), but I am of the opinion that his strikeouts (especially when combined with his notable defensive liabilities - he also gave a run back tonight...) make him far more of a liability than an asset for this team. And for what it's worth, that 37 homer number gets tossed around a lot, but what is he on pace to hit this year? 22? 24? Bleah.... Not enough to change my mind...

[LibertyTerp]

Hitting into a lot of double plays is a statistical blip unlikely to be repeated. Total OPS is a much better measure of a players offensive value. A player isn't worse because he happens to have hit a lot with someone on first and hasn't done that well in that situation lately. These players are trying their best to get on base in every situation. If you want to measure how well they've been playing there's no logical reason to care too much about how many times they've hit into double plays, however frustrating it might be in the moment.

[TakebackOPACY]

Bottom line: the frequency with which a player makes an out is a bigger negative than the kind of out he makes.

Frobby, I respectfully disagree with that statement. There ARE big differences in the way outs are made. Take for example two hitters who each make 100 outs. One hitter makes 75 of those outs by striking out. If there are men on base when he does, they generally speaking (steals WPs and PBs excepted) don't go anywhere. The other hitter makes 10 of those outs striking out. That's 65 times when he challenges the defense in one fashion or another while the other hitter hasn't; has the chance to advance runners, score runners, or can in myriad ways benefit his team. (CAVEAT: a hitter who puts the ball in play will also probably ground into more DPs, but that's the risk, I suppose, and DPs are never a given) The first hitter simply allows the defense to talk to itself and kick dirt. I don't think any of this is in question. Reynolds' OBP is good because he has a good eye. Problem is, when he knows it's a strike, he has a hard time doing much with it, long balls excepted, which are nice (as one was tonight), but I am of the opinion that his strikeouts (especially when combined with his notable defensive liabilities - he also gave a run back tonight...) make him far more of a liability than an asset for this team. And for what it's worth, that 37 homer number gets tossed around a lot, but what is he on pace to hit this year? 22? 24? Bleah.... Not enough to change my mind...

Check out Frobby's post and link a few posts after the one you quoted. I don't think anyone is saying strikeouts totally equal other outs. Frobby said "the frequency with which a player makes an out is a bigger negative than the kind of out he makes." One tiny positive of a strikeout is that you've faced at least three pitches. Reynolds is averaging 4.46 pitches per plate appearance. That leads the team by a large margin (Markakis 4.14).

By the way, I'm not defending Reynolds vs. contributing 1B/3B on a World Series caliber team. I'm not defending Reynolds vs. unknown future 3B or 1B for the O's. I'm not defending Reynolds vs. his contract. I wouldn't lose any sleep if Reynolds were traded for reasonable value. But Reynolds' positive contribution outweighs his negative.