Mark Reynolds signs with Cleveland

[Mr Snuffleupagus]

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.

Agreed. The value of Machado and Hardy will also be greatly effected if Davis if he is the butcher most of us think he will be.

The irony in all this is that last season I started the "post here when defense cost us the game" thread that was pretty much pointed at Reynolds. This season I get to start the same thread in lieu of Reynolds.

Can't wait to read "Reynolds would have had that ball" 50+ times next season in the game threads.

[Brendan25]

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.

Agreed Frobby. Good post.

[Frobby]

Agreed. The value of Machado and Hardy will also be greatly effected if Davis if he is the butcher most of us think he will be.

The irony in all this is that last season I started the "post here when defense cost us the game" thread that was pretty much pointed at Reynolds. This season I get to start the same thread in lieu of Reynolds.

Can't wait to read "Reynolds would have had that ball" 50+ times next season in the game threads.

I hope we won't see it all that often. Davis is a little taller than Reynolds, and some of the plays Mark made look difficult simply won't look that hard with a taller 1B who has more traditional footwork around the bag. What worries me is that we saw Davis drop a couple of routine throws in his limited time at 1B last year. We certainly can't have that. If he makes the plays he should make, I'll be fine with it.

[Mayor McCheese]

I hope we won't see it all that often. Davis is a little taller than Reynolds, and some of the plays Mark made look difficult simply won't look that hard with a taller 1B who has more traditional footwork around the bag. What worries me is that we saw Davis drop a couple of routine throws in his limited time at 1B last year. We certainly can't have that. If he makes the plays he should make, I'll be fine with it.

He had trouble making routine scoops and fielding balls down the line...thats going to be the biggest issue

[Conway12]

I agree, which is why I mentioned that in my post, just not that clearly.

So to be clear, I am arguing that with Davis at 1B and Whomever at DH (Even if that is a Betemit/whoever strict platoon) this season, in my opinion, is going to produce more than Davis at DH and Reynolds at 1B would have.

I have concerns about Davis' defense, but he was scouted as being an average or above average defender and he had only a short time at first this year.

[scOtt]

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.

Yeah, like Luke I'll miss Mark a lot. But come next season I don't think we'll notice at all.

[Mayor McCheese]

Yeah, like Luke I'll miss Mark a lot. But come next season I don't think we'll notice at all.

How will you not notice your starting 1B gone?!?!?.....Luke Scott was at best a PH.... of course no one missed him.

[Brendan25]

How will you not notice your starting 1B gone?!?!?.....Luke Scott was at best a PH.... of course no one missed him.

We replaced LUke Scott with Wilson Betemit.

[TonySoprano]

How will you not notice your starting 1B gone?!?!?.....Luke Scott was at best a PH.... of course no one missed him.

He had 236 PAs in 2011 which is a lot for a "PH." He had over 500 PAs in the three seasons prior. PH?

[Aristotelian]

I will definitely miss Reynolds...but let's be honest. THe only reason he played good defense at 1B is because he was terrible at 3B. Aside from some big jacks, he is a terrible hitter with some monster holes in his swing. I am a little surprised that he got only 1 yr/6 million, but I am not particularly upset that he is gone.

[Dark Helmet]

I will definitely miss Reynolds...but let's be honest. THe only reason he played good defense at 1B is because he was terrible at 3B. Aside from some big jacks, he is a terrible hitter with some monster holes in his swing. I am a little surprised that he got only 1 yr/6 million, but I am not particularly upset that he is gone.

Not sure I get that logic. Being bad at one position, doesn't guarantee you will be good at another, just like being a great 1B doesn't mean you will be a great 3B.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I think this is a good opportunity for Reynolds. Some of the talk about making him an outfielder or putting him back at third were pretty bad ideas imo. This will allow him to settle in a position that he looked comfortable at last year and give everybody a better idea of how good a defender he really is at that position. The market and end value for Reynolds is telling and gives you an idea how many question marks are out there concerning his abilities. Hopefully Reynolds will have a good year, or I could see him in the scrap heap with Jack Cust.

[Frobby]

I think this is a good opportunity for Reynolds. Some of the talk about making him an outfielder or putting him back at third were pretty bad ideas imo. This will allow him to settle in a posistion that he looked comfortable at last year and give everybody a better idea of how good a defender he really is at that position. The market and end value for Reynolds is telling and gives you an idea how many question marks are out there concerning his abilities. Hopefully Reynolds will have a good year, or I could see him in scrap heap with Jack Cust.

Jack Cust made a total of $6 mm in his baseball career, equal to what Reynolds will make in the 2013 season (if his incentives don't kick in). Reynolds has already had more of a career than Cust did. I think he'll manage to have at least another 4-5 years in the big leagues.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Jack Cust made a total of $6 mm in his baseball career, equal to what Reynolds will make in the 2013 season (if his incentives don't kick in). Reynolds has already had more of a career than Cust did. I think he'll manage to have at least another 4-5 years in the big leagues.

Cust didn't get an opportuntity to play regularly until he was 28 when he was pre-arb/cheap. So the years and money are fairly irrelevant factors. He was still productive at 31/32 and still had an OPS+ of 96 (figures Reynolds has hit twice in his career) while in SEA in his last year. Point is, that guys like this walk a fine line between being productive and falling off and teams/GM's can easily lose patience with them (fairly or unfairly). Unlike Cust, Reynolds potential to play good defense (at first) in addition to being a few years younger than Cust are factors in his favor. Offensively, they are quite similar.

[DrungoHazewood]

Jack Cust made a total of $6 mm in his baseball career, equal to what Reynolds will make in the 2013 season (if his incentives don't kick in). Reynolds has already had more of a career than Cust did. I think he'll manage to have at least another 4-5 years in the big leagues.

Jack Cust only made $6M because through age 27 he had 169 MLB plate appearances despite annual .900-1.000 OPSes in AAA. If someone like the Orioles had just stuck Cust in the lineup when he was 23 or 24 and he'd have likely hit well enough to stick and then reached free agency, where he'd have gotten a comparable payday to Reynolds. I think they're pretty similar players, and a mini case study in how opportunity can shape a career as much as skills.

Edit: Or, what CA-Oriole said.