Anyone still want Mark Reynolds?

[Can_of_corn]

As a DH, why not at the right price?

The question isn't cost, the question is, is he worth a spot on the 25 man roster?

I think he could be Big in Japan.

[LA2]

Let's not act like Pearce is such a defensive wizard or that his bat is so crucial that it's worth keeping him around for a bench role. Pearce has done nothing in his entire career that insists he's a marquee player off the bench. He hits a home run almost every 60 PA, has subpar speed and defense skills, a career .318 OBP and he can only play the defensive positions that are the least important...not to mention he's not durable...seriously, why are we keeping him around?

2013 with the O's in 138 ABs: .261 .362 .420 .782

He's also a nugget.

[weams]

The question isn't cost, the question is, is he worth a spot on the 25 man roster?

I think he could be Big in Japan.

He would be a super star. They would name a candy bar after him.

[Tx Oriole]

He's not even a year removed from this gargantuan:

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/mark-reynolds-moonshot-clears-goodyear-ballpark-scoreboard-video-182715966--mlb.html

I suppose he's looking for a major league deal, but I'm not sure who would pay him. Maybe the Marlins since they are looking for a 3B (haha).

Would you bring him back for a minor league deal?

No thank you.

[MrOrange82]

Players with old player skills ironically don't age well.

Sadly, that usually doesn't keep those players from getting paid...a lot. Which brings me back to my lingering ??? regarding his performance. Obviously, I'm interested to see whether he can make adjustments going forward, but everything being discussed are things he could have been working on over the last several years, yet it doesn't look to me as though his approach has changed.

There might not be a ready answer, but he's clearly cost himself a lot of money if his issues are largely mechanical and uncorrected.

[weams]

Sadly, that usually doesn't keep those players from getting paid...a lot. Which brings me back to my lingering ??? regarding his performance. Obviously, I'm interested to see whether he can make adjustments going forward, but everything being discussed are things he could have been working on over the last several years, yet it doesn't look to me as though his approach has changed.

There might not be a ready answer, but he's clearly cost himself a lot of money if his issues are largely mechanical and uncorrected.

Hitting a baseball is the hardest thing in all of sport. Some people can only do it sometimes. Or for a while or when certain pitchers throw the ball or with certain backdrops. Some folks can not improve their approach. Or their eyes, or stop guessing. Sometimes they are what they are.

[MrOrange82]

Hitting a baseball is the hardest thing in all of sport. Some people can only do it sometimes. Or for a while or when certain pitchers throw the ball or with certain backdrops. Some folks can not improve their approach. Or their eyes, or stop guessing. Sometimes they are what they are.

Maybe it is that simple - it's the lack of evidence that he's tinkered that throws me off. For every guy who "is what he is" when it comes to approach, there are Markakis's and Ripkens and a host of other players who look as though they're experimenting constantly. Even Hardy has shifted between being more closed off/open in his stance at the plate.

With Reynolds, though, I just don't see it. Maybe it's simple, bu it still bugs me.

[weams]

Maybe it is that simple - it's the lack of evidence that he's tinkered that throws me off. For every guy who "is what he is" when it comes to approach, there are Markakis's and Ripkens and a host of other players who look as though they're experimenting constantly. Even Hardy has shifted between being more closed off/open in his stance at the plate.

With Reynolds, though, I just don't see it. Maybe it's simple, bu it still bugs me.

Reynolds is real strong. He's not real good. I really hoped that he would be. He really gets locked in. And then out.

[Can_of_corn]

Maybe it is that simple - it's the lack of evidence that he's tinkered that throws me off. For every guy who "is what he is" when it comes to approach, there are Markakis's and Ripkens and a host of other players who look as though they're experimenting constantly. Even Hardy has shifted between being more closed off/open in his stance at the plate.

With Reynolds, though, I just don't see it. Maybe it's simple, bu it still bugs me.

Didn't he cut down on his swing with two strikes a couple years ago?

That's a tinker.

[MrOrange82]

Didn't he cut down on his swing with two strikes a couple years ago?

That's a tinker.

Hmm...I'd have to go back and look. I honestly don't recall a significant (i.e., very noticeable) adjustment. But my memory might just be failing me on that count.

[mdbdotcom]

Maybe he should try using a heavier bat to keep his bat in the zone longer, like Davis did.

[markakis8]

I think he could be Big in Japan.

Agreed. He could become a superstar over there.

[Number5]

He would be a super star. They would name a candy bar after him.

The Sargesan Bar?

[Ruzious]

He would be a super star. They would name a candy bar after him.

He's already got an aluminum foil wrap named after him. A candy bar would be icing on the cake!

[LA2]

He's already got an aluminum foil wrap named after him. A candy bar would be icing on the cake!

The Yankees post-game show is also called the Reynolds Wrap.

Candy bar as icing on the cake--almost a good example of a mixed metaphor!