I'm not bemoaning the loss of Reynolds, but...

[NewMarketSean]

Its early yet but IMHO relying on Reimhold and Roberts to contribute was a major miscalculation. I understand that they relied on these two guys to some extent last year and were able to navigate through not having them but a lot things went really right to allow that to happen.

There was a back-up plan for Roberts.

Not so much with Reimold, especially once Betemit went down.

Hindsight is 20/20 but the O's should have signed or traded for another bat when Betemit was injured.

[SteveO]

There was a back-up plan for Roberts.

Reynolds should have been back to DH/1B or they should have gone and gotten a guy like Morse via trade or Swisher on the market.

Of course anyone who thought they should have done this and did not think the whole platoon idea with Reimhold and whoever was a good idea was made to feel like an idiot by a select few on this board.

This team has more than enough money to that paying for some security should have been a no brainer.

[backwardsk]

I don't often criticize the FO, but not keeping Reynolds around bothered me from the start. Even at the extra 6-7mm in salary, IMO, there would be plenty ABs for LF,DH, and 1b, to split among five players: McLouth, Reimold, Betemit, Reynolds, and Davis to make it work. That's assuming everybody stayed healthy. While the other four may be viewed as more deserving of playing time than Reynolds, all 4 of them had question marks going into the season.

Yes it gets tiresome to hear about this subject every time Reynolds hits a homerun, but it should be fair game to bring it up, IMO. This is a guy who wanted to be here and we know how much he'd cost. This isn't a situation where we're complaining about yhe front office not acquiring Joey Votto in a 4 team trade where we give up Tommy Hunter and Troy Patton. This was a realistic choice.

As for Morse, I love the guy. But I didn't want to give up prospects for him, for the record.

[TiredofLosing20]

I don't often criticize the FO, but not keeping Reynolds around bothered me from the start.

He played a significant role in the team's August and September records that many people in the offseason pointed to as proof that the team was a much better team at the end of the season than at the beginning.

[SteveO]

He played a significant role in the team's August and September records that many people in the offseason pointed to as proof that the team was a much better team at the end of the season than at the beginning.

Not to mention the fact that one of the goals of offseason was to improve OBP. Last I checked Reynolds was one of the better OBP guys on the team last year despite his hot and cold streaks and penchant for swinging and missing.

IF your going to go with guy who get hurt then you better make sure you have better depth than Steve Pearce. I know we got away with it last year at times but lets be real here, last year was the exception to the rule and not the rule. Generally speaking if your starting Alexi Cassilla at second and Steve Pearce as your DH, you got issues.

[Bradysburns]

If the Orioles thought for a second they could let Reynolds go, or refrain from signing Morse or any other solid DH candidate, because of Nolan Reimold, I have to question the competence of that person.

I love Nolan but he can't stay healthy. And Chris Davis' start to the season has been great, so I get that Davis basically replaced Reynolds. But we've got Steve Pearce getting regular AB's because Reimold is injured. And while I know his injury may not send him to the DL, who would be surprised if it did?

Meanwhile, Reynold and Morse have 9 HR combined.

Everything else aside, any strategy that depended on Reimold was high-risk. My view has always been: anything Nolan gives you is icing, not cake. You cannot build your long-term plans around someone who's pushing 30 and has not yet established himself in the majors. I love Nolan's game when he's on, too. Tons of talent. But my take was: our season almost hinged on him producing, and I always had a problem with that thinking. So... I hope they simply assume he's going to be injured and adjust their plans accordingly.

[TiredofLosing20]

Everything else aside, any strategy that depended on Reimold was high-risk. My view has always been: anything Nolan gives you is icing, not cake. You cannot build your long-term plans around someone who's pushing 30 and has not yet established himself in the majors. I love Nolan's game when he's on, too. Tons of talent. But my take was: our season almost hinged on him producing, and I always had a problem with that thinking. So... I hope they simply assume he's going to be injured and adjust their plans accordingly.

This is kinda silly.. The guy could have hit like Babe Ruth and if the pitching isn't there then it wouldn't matter.

The rest of your post makes sense. They banked on Roberts and Reimold as their upgrades which was risky. Through 4.3% of the season it hasn't worked 57% of the time.

[NewMarketSean]

I'm not sure who made you feel like an idiot but a platoon of Betemit and his .850 OPS against RHP's the last 3 years and a bat like Pearce was a sound idea.

It was, but if you were counting on Betemit to get a majority of AB's in a DH platoon, how come there was nothing done after he was injured? Betemit was hurt on March 25 and the O's didn't do anything to account for his loss.

[SteveO]

I'm not sure who made you feel like an idiot but a platoon of Betemit and his .850 OPS against RHP's the last 3 years and a bat like Pearce was a sound idea.

I respectfully disagree. The problem with that plan is when Betemit goes down it leaves you with Reimold (usually already on DL), Pearce and motley crue of castoffs.

I would have bet my house that Betemit would spend approx 30-40% of the time he should be in the lineup vrs RHP injured. Sorry but his injury history is only marginally better than Nolan or Brian.

Bringing a guy like Swisher would have provided you with LF depth, DH depth, and yea the guy can play 1B also if needed. Sounds to me like a guy who would have more value to a roster than a guy like Pearce.

Morse, Reynolds etc all bring things to the table in terms of depth and production that Pearce cant.

The problem with platoons IMO are that if one of the guys you use in that platoon value is simply to take the AB's vrs LHP (which is exactly Pearce's value) then your tying up a roster spot to fill a role that a more complete player can provide you with in addition to the other things they bring.

[NewMarketSean]

What was available at the time and what was the cost? They couldn't turn the clock back on Reynolds and Morse was already gone to Seattle.

I don't know, that's for Duquette to figure out.

He wanted to trade Ayala. Patton was rumored to be available too. Couldn't they get an upgrade over the DH options we have now and provide us some depth in an area where we're shallow?

[NewMarketSean]

Again, let me say that I am not really harping on the lack of signings this offseason. However, if there was a time to spend some money, and throw a little caution to the wind and hand out a $50 million dollar contract, wouldn't that be after a 93 win season?

Duquette had some balls to hold all his cards this past offseason. He had good reason to. But if this team loses 90 games again, we all know what people will be saying about this past offseason -- and they may not be wrong.

[Dr. FLK]

If Reimold were hitting like last April, do you think we'd be hearing the same complaints. If Reimold comes back on Thursday and gets rolling, don't you think a thread like this will stop popping up. Sure, the naysayers on Reimold and Betemit are right at this moment. I don't remember ANYONE saying Betemit was an injury risk before this season and yet some are doing it now.

This is sort of his point, isn't it? Counting on Reimold to maintain any consistency is risky at best (and irresponsible at worst) due to his injury history.

[NewMarketSean]

And if we win 88 games this season and Reimold has a good year, those same people will still insist they were not wrong.

Betting on Jones, Davis, Wieters, Markakis, Hardy, Machado is different than betting on Reimold or Roberts to stay healthy and produce.

Betting on Reimold to have a good year (ie, healthy) is like betting on a gimpy horse to win the Triple Crown.

I have no problem doubling down on the proven talent we have. It just bothers me that he may have factored Reimold and Roberts into the 2012 plan a little too much.

[NewMarketSean]

They certainly didn't bet on Roberts. They acquired Casilla and Navarro. That just shows how much of a budget they are sticking too. Roberts was a much bigger question mark than Reimold. Your analogy on the Horse is funny but not a good one. A gimpy horse has no chance to win. Are you saying Reimold has NO CHANCE to have a good season this year. Go on record. In fact, all those people so confident about Reimold not contributing this year, say it now.

He has no chance to stay healthy. He will go on the DL at some point and weaken the team's offense and depth.

I have every expectation he performs when healthy.

[Dr. FLK]

They certainly didn't bet on Roberts. They acquired Casilla and Navarro. That just shows how much of a budget they are sticking too. Roberts was a much bigger question mark than Reimold. Your analogy on the Horse is funny but not a good one. A gimpy horse has no chance to win. Are you saying Reimold has NO CHANCE to have a good season this year. Go on record. In fact, all those people so confident about Reimold not contributing this year, say it now.

I'm confident that it's a risk I wouldn't have taken without a better contingency plan. If Steve Pearce is your DH, you're doing it wrong.