Jump to content

Roch: Showalter comments on Bourn's availability


ChaosLex

Recommended Posts

On whether Michael Bourne could land in the Orioles' laps:

"I thought about it. It'll be in the middle of the night sometimes and I'll get up and text Dan (Duquette), 'What do you think about Bourne? Is that good enough for our 24th pick? How does it fit?' It's one thing to get somebody, but how does it fit? Who does it affect? Who does it take away from? What does it allow you to do? I've got to tell you, I've got a good feeling about Nolan Reimold, I've got a good feeling about Brian Roberts. I'm not going to sit around, woe is me. Nolan was getting ready to have a big year. He really was. I've been talking and texting with him back and forth. He's so excited. He keeps saying, 'Boy, people are forgetting about me and selling me short.' He's got a little edge on and it's a good mentality. Manny's got some things to prove. He doesn't know it yet, but he hasn't made our club yet."

http://www.masnsports.com/school_of_roch/2013/01/it-would-be-highly-surprising.html

Interesting that Showalter has spoken to DD about Bourn. I mean, he seems to poo-poo the idea with his comments about Reimold and such, but I just thought it was interesting. What say you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

First time I've seen the O's and Bourn connected. Bringing on Bourn would really shake things up. We'd have to look to move some of our excess outfielders if that was the case (not sure anyone would want what we'd be selling). Reimold would lose some significant ABs in left field because Bourn would be out there everyday. He'd also lose ABs to Betemit at DH so I understand why Showalter would bring him up. McLouth is the real loser here as he'd not play much if at all.

However, Bourn would be dynamic for us at lead off! He'd really set up our lineup nice.

All in all it's something to think about on a Monday morning but nothing will probably come of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sign Bourn and move Nolan to First/DH.

Simple, simple, simple.

Nate is our 4th OF.

Problem solved.

If we are publicly putting our hopes on a 29 yr old guy that is often injured and has never had a full - complete - season of eye opening success... Well... Looks to me that someone is trying to paint a pretty picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF you figure out a way to bring in Bourn, that just moves Reimold into the primary DH spot, imo. And it guarantees that McLouth is the 4th OF, rather than a potential platoon starter.

I'm not holding my breath on it, but it really would make a lot of sense to pursue Bourn. It also would help get Hardy out of the #2 spot in the line-up, something Buck has said he'd like to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bourne doesn't make sense for us because we're not moving Jones out of CF and all of Bourn's value is in his defense.

That's not true that Bourn's only value is his defense. That being said, if you were to pursue Bourn I think you have to go to AJ and get his blessing on moving to LF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sign Bourn and move Nolan to First/DH.

Simple, simple, simple.

Nate is our 4th OF.

Problem solved.

If we are publicly putting our hopes on a 29 yr old guy that is often injured and has never had a full - complete - season of eye opening success... Well... Looks to me that someone is trying to paint a pretty picture.

Nolan can't play first. DH fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not true that Bourn's only value is his defense. That being said, if you were to pursue Bourn I think you have to go to AJ and get his blessing on moving to LF.

Yeah, not all of his value but a good amount. Enough that you don't want to sign him long term if he's not playing CF. if he would take a 1 year deal and try again next year, I'd sign him even for LF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with that is do you give up a draft pick for just one year of a player?

Presumably you'd get it back the next year when he signs elsewhere. So it'd be more of a deferment than a loss. Not that I advocate signing him or even think he'll end

up with a one year deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's the better defender between the two, so you'd rather have him in CF and Jones in LF.

Well if it is better for the team then Buck goes to AJ and tell him he is moving to LF. He may not like it but he is an adult. He

will have to accept it. When I was working my boss would tell me this or that and I had to do what he said. Maybe different in

MLB but seems he or any other player would want what was best for the team. IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...