Reynolds: "I would assume that I'll probably be gone"

[waroriole]

Source?

No source, just putting things together.

[ChaosLex]

Would that make it easier to get Hosmer?

That's where it got confusing for me. This was on another board, so I was having some trouble following the conversation.

After the Span trade went down, Jeremy seemed to think the O's would make a run at LaRoche, due mainly in part to his OBP. After all, Duquette said a few months back that OBP was going to be his big target this offseason. I'd hate to lose the 1st rounder for LaRoche though. Ugh!

[Roll Tide]

My only concern with not bringing back Reynolds is that I don't see anyone that is better then Reynolds that is actually available to be traded for without giving up Bundy that makes sense.

. It sound like the Royals are dealing. You can look at the Marlins, Twins, and A few others. As far as the budget....i really dont get why the budget wouldnt increase some based on attendance. If they are trying to get a more expensive player that would swallow up that budget.

[Brendan25]

. It sound like the Royals are dealing. You can look at the Marlins, Twins, and A few others. As far as the budget....i really dont get why the budget wouldnt increase some based on attendance. If they are trying to get a more expensive player that would swallow up that budget.

If we do trade for Hosmer however, what are we giving up? Bundy?

[ChaosLex]

If we do trade for Hosmer however, what are we giving up? Bundy?

No, from what I've heard he's practically untouchable.

Gausman too. However, he can't be traded yet anyway.

[Brendan25]

No, from what I've heard he's practically untouchable.

Well Hosmer isn't coming cheap. A 23 year old who is not a free agent until 2018 that hit 19 HR's his rookie year. He isn't being had for Britton.

[ChaosLex]

Well Hosmer isn't coming cheap. A 23 year old who is not a free agent until 2018 that hit 19 HR's his rookie year. He isn't being had for Britton.

I'm just saying what I've heard. The only name I heard brought up in the conversation was Britton. No Machado, Bundy, etc. Like I said, take it with a grain.

[UpstateNYfan]

I am slowly beginning to accept Reynolds not being on the club next year. He became a favorite of mine mainly because of the abuse many Ohers gave him last year. I always thought he gave his best, sometimes looking more like a little leaguer, but not afraid to get his uni dirty. He ran the bases intelligently, took a lot of pitches and although K'ing a lot rarely looked terrible at the plate. You never knew what to expect. He looked like a kid just enjoying the game. I will miss him. I will be disappointed if Davis is given the job but will give him the benefit of a doubt and try to avoid the Reynolds would have made that play attitude. I am afraid of D on the right side if Roberts is healthy enough to play. If Reynolds departure frees up 5 million or so that will allow DD to do something, that's fine. I hope PA realizes that winning necessitates an increase in payroll, but much of that would pay for with increased attendance. It is a delicate balancing act.

[whatagame]

Maybe Buck doesn't want him.

[Going Underground]

Well Hosmer isn't coming cheap. A 23 year old who is not a free agent until 2018 that hit 19 HR's his rookie year. He isn't being had for Britton.

Nope. I think it was just a call to see what each ream was willing to give up. Britton and Tiilman plus two younger prospects. You always start out high and come down. I am not sure this will go anywhere.Must have about 30 or more trade discussions and how many get finalized?

[NewMarketSean]

Maybe Buck doesn't want him.

I don't know about that. I don't see why Buck wouldn't want a player who plays good defense, gives it his all and can hit 30+ home runs.

[Number5]

Not re-signing Reynolds can be debated.

What can't be debated is that it is a really poor practice to (1) not at least touch base with a player's agent and let him know what is going on, and maybe discuss what it would take to retain the player, and (2) mislead your fan base into thinking you are having conversations with a player about a new contract, when you aren't.

http://www.masnsports.com/school_of_roch/2012/11/orioles-exploring-new-contract-for-reynolds-before-arbitration-deadline.html

I suppose there is a way to interpret this as meaning that the O's were "exploring" a new contract with Reynolds by having internal discussions about it, but to me, this statement clearly told the fans that the O's and Reynolds were going to have discussions. I can take a certain amount of B.S. from a GM, but to me, Duquette crossed the line here.

I'm not happy at all about this.

I hear what you are saying, but I did take what DD said to mean that the O's would be looking at their options internally. Tonight's deadline is only to tender an offer for arbitration. That is still an option up until midnight. They can still negotiate with Reynolds afterwards, if that is what they decide to do.

I really would hate to lose Reynolds without an adequate replacement. I guess the job DD has done up until now deserves for me to trust him to know what he is doing. If the plan is to trade for another 1B/DH, I just hope that the package that comes in is more valuable than the package that goes out plus Reynolds.

We really don't know the full picture. We don't know the salary budget, for example. If the Orioles are planning a push to sign an expensive free agent, perhaps saving the $8 or $9 million that we would have to pay Reynolds makes that possible.

I guess the bottom line for me is that, while I really don't like the idea of letting Reynolds go on the surface, I'm willing to take a wait and see approach, rather than take up the torches and pitchforks just yet. DD has earned that much in my book.

[section18]

Reynolds may be a great team guy and good at 1B but watching his strikeouts game after game where he literally couldn't make contact with the ball was very frustrating for Buck and DD. Paying $9 mill + to bring him back is hard to do with a guy who in stretches could barely hit a foul ball. I said last season I thought he should have his vision checked. I'm not sure if he wore contacts but he did appear to squint a lot when the camera was on him at the plate. There were numerouis replays last season that showed him striking out and it appeared he missed the ball crossing the plate by 6 inches. I'm not making this up. His bat would be under or over the ball and it wasn't missing by an inch but by inches. He could still return.

[Frobby]

I hear what you are saying, but I did take what DD said to mean that the O's would be looking at their options internally. Tonight's deadline is only to tender an offer for arbitration. That is still an option up until midnight. They can still negotiate with Reynolds afterwards, if that is what they decide to do.

I really would hate to lose Reynolds without an adequate replacement. I guess the job DD has done up until now deserves for me to trust him to know what he is doing. If the plan is to trade for another 1B/DH, I just hope that the package that comes in is more valuable than the package that goes out plus Reynolds.

We really don't know the full picture. We don't know the salary budget, for example. If the Orioles are planning a push to sign an expensive free agent, perhaps saving the $8 or $9 million that we would have to pay Reynolds makes that possible.

I guess the bottom line for me is that, while I really don't like the idea of letting Reynolds go on the surface, I'm willing to take a wait and see approach, rather than take up the torches and pitchforks just yet. DD has earned that much in my book.

I agree with the bolded statements. I am willing to give DD some rope here, but I also will hold him accountable when the offseason ends. His job is to put us in a better overall position than we'd be if we went with the status quo.

[Brendan25]

I agree with the bolded statements. I am willing to give DD some rope here, but I also will hold him accountable when the offseason ends. His job is to put us in a better overall position than we'd be if we went with the status quo.

As will I.