2012 GTP: Mark Reynolds

[NATTYBO's]

C, but I'd have given him a C- or a D+ if the option was there. Basically, he had a good month run with the bat and a crazy, often very good glove at first. But adding up the good with the bad he was essentially a replacement player earning $7M, so it's generous to give him even a passing grade. He had his lower power marks in a full season, and he moved to a position with a higher offensive expectation.

I'm somewhat hopeful he'll rebound next year, turn in a positive year with the glove at first, and end up with an .800+ OPS. But I'm also fearful that he'll end up sub-replacement. I've defended him here a lot, but he's just not that good if he's going to be a first baseman who hits .220 with 23 homers. Of 20 MLB first basemen who played 100+ games at the position, Reynolds was 14th in OPS+.

He needs to come back at a reduced salary, and he needs to have a better 2013.

Make that 10 days but it did seem like a month

[BarclaySouthway]

C

Had one hell of a week and a half and played a GG-caliber first base. Probably better than GG caliber.

It's best not to talk about the rest of his season.

[theobird]

I gave Reynolds a B despite and off year at the plate, but thats because I value defense equally to offense. If Mark goes back to being a 35-40 HR a year guy next year his value will be off the charts. Solid B.

[NATTYBO's]

I gave Reynolds a B despite and off year at the plate, but thats because I value defense equally to offense. If Mark goes back to being a 35-40 HR a year guy next year his value will be off the charts. Solid B.

Would you rather have mark Reynolds or Prince fielder because prince was a butcher at first like Reynolds was at the plate

[hoosiers]

I understand the poorer grades given as MR's defense at 3B was downright awful and he did not hit enough at 1B ... and I usually care more for end-of-season offensive stats that were thoroughly mediocre, but ....

MR's 1B defense, team-first/however-I-can-contribute attitude and the unbelievable hot-streak that carried the team for a vital stretch pushed it up to a B for me.

Maybe I'm a generous grader, but I am not a big MR fan and do not want him back in 2013, but he did his best to make lemons out of lemonade (after awful first half) and I appreciate that.

[mcinww0]

Was it range factor vs. other 1B's? Do you have the link?

Also, anyone saying his D at first wasn't that good... this is what happens when you become TOO wedded to advanced stats, especially defensive stats. Honestly just as bad as stat-hating dinosaurs. Watching Mark Reynolds play, it was clear that he was stopping balls hit to first, making saves of errant throws, etc. What weaknesses did those of you knocking his 1B defense see that would equate to him not being rated well there? Please don't just say "well the number says so."

Also, it's certainly not fair to knock him for the poor defense of replacements at third. Betemit playing poorly at third is the fault of the manager and GM, even if Reynolds wanted to play there. If you child wants to eat candy for every meal, who's fault is it when they have problems? Your kid or you?

For the record I'm not knocking it, I just don't think it was necessarily GG caliber. Aside from the statistical analysis which is obviously a poor indicator, my quibble would be there were a number of plays where he either fielded a ball he should have let the pitcher or second baseman field, or got caught in no mans land and nobody was there to cover the base, and the runner reached. This happened a few times in various forms, but generally didnt result in a charged error.

I think that may have been because as a 3B he was used to getting everything he could, and not worrying about anything else. I'm sure an offseason spend preparing to be a first baseman would help this.

[DrungoHazewood]

C

Had one hell of a week and a half and played a GG-caliber first base. Probably better than GG caliber.

See... I'm not convinced that he was a GG-caliber first baseman. I know, I saw the magic toe do its work time after time. But there were a lot of times where I'm thinking "that was just kind of awkward and weird, and I don't think I've ever seen any first baseman play a ball like that before." So really I don't know. It's hard to judge whether that was really great, or just really crazy.

All of the advanced metrics (total zone, +/-, UZR) have him as below-average at first. So I'm going to need some more convincing that he was actually spectacular. Yes, beyond the fact that he was good at diving at balls whilst keeping his toe on the bag.

[Brendan25]

Maybe it's just me but watching the Sherrif K time after time is a bit frustrating

Some of the top 10 players in strikeouts this year....

Adam Dunn, BJ Upton, Curtis Granderson, & our own Chris Davis

If the player performs well enough in other parts of his game, strikeouts don't matter to me as much.

[Dark Helmet]

If we had a consistent first baseman we might actually won a few more games.....argument goes both ways

If we would have had consistent play from 2b, ss, c, lf, cf, rf, 3b. That arguement can go down any road. Mark Reynolds wasn't the only inconsistent bat in this lineup. Even as good as Jones was overall, he had stretches were he looked lost. Especially in the playoffs. Granted he won a lot of games for us.

[NATTYBO's]

Some of the top 10 players in strikeouts this year....

Adam Dunn, BJ Upton, Curtis Granderson, & our own Chris Davis

If the player performs well enough in other parts of his game, strikeouts don't matter to me as much.

Yea and I don't want any of those players on my team at high salaries. When your making 500K it out weighs the negative and in my opinion chris davis is the reason you can't have Reynolds on your team....You only can have so many 150-200K guys on your team.

What is you facination with reynold anyway? Did you watch the same player I watched all year...The guy that could never move runners over and either K'd or grounded into a double play?

[DrungoHazewood]

Yea and I don't want any of those players on my team at high salaries. When your making 500K it out weighs the negative and in my opinion chris davis is the reason you can't have Reynolds on your team....You only can have so many 150-200K guys on your team.

Why? Why not acquire productive players and then work on your perceptions, rather than limit yourself to only acquiring players that fit your preconceived notions of how they should produce runs?

[NATTYBO's]

Why? Why not acquire productive players and then work on your perceptions, rather than limit yourself to only acquiring players that fit your preconceived notions of how they should produce runs?

I believe in what I see and I want a player that can make contact and advance runners...the fundamentals of baseball. The reality is reynolds was terrible at the plate this year and it hurt to watch him. There are a lot of people defending him and they obviously did see the same player that I did....this is the reason why Arizona traded a 40 HR player for next to nothing...

[Can_of_corn]

I believe in what I see and I want a player that can make contact and advance runners...the fundamentals of baseball. The reality is reynolds was terrible at the plate this year and it hurt to watch him. There are a lot of people defending him and they obviously did see the same player that I did....this is the reason why Arizona traded a 40 HR player for next to nothing...

This has been gone over hundreds of times. A strikeout is only a little, tiny bit, worse then a generic out. Give me a K over a weak grounder to second or short any day.

Some folks on this board would strongly disagree with you calling David Hernandez "next to nothing".

[DrungoHazewood]

I believe in what I see and I want a player that can make contact and advance runners...the fundamentals of baseball. The reality is reynolds was terrible at the plate this year and it hurt to watch him. There are a lot of people defending him and they obviously did see the same player that I did....this is the reason why Arizona traded a 40 HR player for next to nothing...

There were 23 players who qualified for the batting title and struck out at least 150 times. Their median OPS+ was 117.

There were 25 players who qualified for the batting title and struck out less than 75 times. Their median OPS+ was about 100.

Players who strike out the most tend to create more runs in modern baseball than those who strike out the least. If you were forced to choose between two players about whom all you knew was that Player A struck out 150 times in 500 PAs and Player B struck out 60 times in 500 PAs you'd have to choose Player A. The odds would definitely be in your favor.

You may argue that Mark Reynolds' combination of low batting average and (this year) moderate power leads to an unproductive player. But his strikeouts are a side discussion, at best.

[TGO]

On August 1 this guy was the easiest "F" grade on the team. I gave him a C based on the last two months of the season, but you can't overlook 2/3 of the year and give Reynolds any higher than that. He and Kevin Gregg were the worst players on the team for the majority of the year, and I'd argue Gregg probably was better.