Jump to content

Mark Reynolds signs with Cleveland

ChaosLex

By ChaosLex
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

Mayor McCheese All-Star

Mayor McCheese

Posted
Posted
Yup. Reynolds is the right handed version of Mr. Scott. When they're hot with the bat they can carry an offense for a few weeks. But boy do you sacrifice a ton with their gloves when those bats go ice frigging cold. Reynolds seemed like a good enough guy. But it seems quite clear that Buck had seen enough of the sheriff. And that's good enough for me.

???

Theres no proof that Reynolds was not a "Buck" guy, I think Buck actually liked him.. yeah the strikeouts pile up but thats what you get with him... This was all about $$$ and the Orioles not willing to pay. :down:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 132
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Brendan25 All-Star

Brendan25

Posted
Posted
???

Theres no proof that Reynolds was not a "Buck" guy, I think Buck actually liked him.. yeah the strikeouts pile up but thats what you get with him... This was all about $$$ and the Orioles not willing to pay. :down:

I disagree. I really think that Buck was not in Reynolds corner, and I actually think that may have a very strong impact on why Reynolds is not back in Baltimore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brendan25 All-Star

Brendan25

Posted
Posted
I see the "Jeremy Guthrie Syndrome" is in full effect. Just because someone is a nice guy doesn't mean they're worth holding onto. Mark always seemed like an outstanding guy but even here knows we can do better. He was on fire towards the end but before that, simply average.

Okay, who are we getting that's better?

And don't say Josh Hamilton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bradysburns All-Star

Bradysburns

Posted
Posted
Yeah, trading 4 guys with no service time, one of whom is one of the best 2 or 3 prospects in all of baseball, another who is a Top 50 prospect, for a guy with one year of control left would have been awesome.

I think they have two years of control on Shields, and you're forgetting Davis. He's a significant piece of this trade. I agree it was a ton to give up - but they got a ton. Shields is one of the best starters in the majors, and his contract is a huge bargain over the next two years - without having to sign him long-term. That could actually be seen as a benefit to some degree. Davis could be a legit middle to late-rotation starter at KC. Anytime you can get 2/3rds of a rotation - including one of the few aces in the majors - without killing your farm, I think you have to consider that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frobby Hangout Grand Counsel

Frobby

Posted
Posted
I see the "Jeremy Guthrie Syndrome" is in full effect. Just because someone is a nice guy doesn't mean they're worth holding onto. Mark always seemed like an outstanding guy but even here knows we can do better. He was on fire towards the end but before that, simply average.

We can do better, but are we going to do better? That's the question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bradysburns All-Star

Bradysburns

Posted
Posted
Based on what the Rays got for Shields, the O's would've had to trade Dylan Bundy for him. No thanks.

I might have packaged Gausman plus a Reimold for Shields and Davis. But I doubt that would have gotten the deal done. Myers was kind of their Machado, except less important to them overall given their ability to draft and develop players over the past decade. Would I have given up Machado plus 3 for Shields and Davis? No. Would they have traded within the division? Hard to say. But I would love to see us make a bold - smart - trade at some point, to shore up that series of little and big question marks at 1B/2B/DH/LF... and I'm always interested in seeing us add TOR starters, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Conway12 Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

Conway12

Posted
Posted

Mark Reynolds is not good, I think the roster is more flexible without him and better without him. His defense at 1B over the course of a full year has the ceiling of being average. Just because you fall down when scooping balls doesn't mean your good. Meanwhile, his Offense is exceedingly frustrating and he HAS to hit 35+ bombs to be a good offensive player. Also, his production at 1B is likely to be well below average when compared league wide.

I would put a good amount of money on Chris Davis putting up a higher WAR total at 1B than Mark Reynolds at 1B next season. Meanwhile, this opens up the DH spot for a trade/platoon which will likely (i'd bet on it) produce more than Reynolds.

They didn't give him 6 million dollars because they didn't want him, not because they couldn't afford it. I like Reynolds, but I think this move makes the Orioles better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewMarketSean Hangout Grand Counsel

NewMarketSean

Posted
Posted
Mark Reynolds is not good, I think the roster is more flexible without him and better without him. His defense at 1B over the course of a full year has the ceiling of being average. Just because you fall down when scooping balls doesn't mean your good. Meanwhile, his Offense is exceedingly frustrating and he HAS to hit 35+ bombs to be a good offensive player. Also, his production at 1B is likely to be well below average when compared league wide.

I would put a good amount of money on Chris Davis putting up a higher WAR total at 1B than Mark Reynolds at 1B next season. Meanwhile, this opens up the DH spot for a trade/platoon which will likely (i'd bet on it) produce more than Reynolds.

They didn't give him 6 million dollars because they didn't want him, not because they couldn't afford it. I like Reynolds, but I think this move makes the Orioles better.

I'll miss his personality more than anything he could actually do on the field.

He played good defense, and that could be tough to replace, especially if you're going to put Davis out there at 1B.

However, his K's won't be missed.

I wonder if he can get back up into the 30's for home runs. But it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see him do it.

Hopefully we can bring in someone who hits for higher average and can get on base a little more often, too.

It'll probably be someone like Morse or LaRoche.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frobby Hangout Grand Counsel

Frobby

Posted
Posted
I would put a good amount of money on Chris Davis putting up a higher WAR total at 1B than Mark Reynolds at 1B next season. Meanwhile, this opens up the DH spot for a trade/platoon which will likely (i'd bet on it) produce more than Reynolds.

I don't think it matters if Davis has a higher WAR at 1B than Reynolds. I think it matters whether the combined production at 1B and DH (including 1B defense) is better. Let's see what we come up with for DH, and what kind of defense Davis plays in 2013. Davis' defense at 1B in 2012 was not encouraging, but I have hope that he can do better than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...