Jump to content

Maybe the tough roster decision will be to option Schoop


wildcard

Recommended Posts

His health hasn't been an issue.

How is Reimold more of an injury risk then Pearce?

If he isn't helping the team win then sure, move him. But to dump him because of his past injury history?

Does Pearce have the same injury history that Reimold has? Does Reimold play the same caliber of defense at as many positions as Pearce? I think between the two, I'd rather have Pearce over the long term than Reimold, while fully acknowledging that you'd be rolling the dice on either.

I exclude Lough and Parmelee from this group because I don't think you want to lose Lough's defense, and I also think that Parmelee is part of the future in Baltimore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Does Pearce have the same injury history that Reimold has? Does Reimold play the same caliber of defense at as many positions as Pearce? I think between the two, I'd rather have Pearce over the long term than Reimold, while fully acknowledging that you'd be rolling the dice on either.

I exclude Lough and Parmelee from this group because I don't think you want to lose Lough's defense, and I also think that Parmelee is part of the future in Baltimore.

Pretty close yea.

Nothing as severe as Reimold had with his neck but they have both had injuries requiring surgery and they both have a history of reoccurring injuries. You do recall that Pearce missed time in 2014 and 2013 with his wrists right? They seem about as trustworthy as Reimold's hamstrings.

As for the rest of your post, I was specifically, very obviously specifically, referring to you using Reimold's injury history as a reason for choosing other players over him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty close yea.

Nothing as severe as Reimold had with his neck but they have both had injuries requiring surgery and they both have a history of reoccurring injuries. You do recall that Pearce missed time in 2014 and 2013 with his wrists right? They seem about as trustworthy as Reimold's hamstrings.

As for the rest of your post, I was specifically, very obviously specifically, referring to you using Reimold's injury history as a reason for choosing other players over him.

Put it this way: I'm surprised Reimold hasn't gotten hurt yet so far.

No need to be combative. I didn't read the whole thread, so I don't know if you've specified your preference as to who stays and who goes, but my guess is you've mostly told folks why their reasoning was flawed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put it this way: I'm surprised Reimold hasn't gotten hurt yet so far.

No need to be combative. I didn't read the whole thread, so I don't know if you've specified your preference as to who stays and who goes, but my guess is you've mostly told folks why their reasoning was flawed.

You should also be surprised that Pearce hasn't been hurt yet. ;)

As for reading the whole thread, I said, in the post you quoted, "If he isn't helping the team win then sure, move him."

I thought Reimold was an upgrade over Young. If he in turn can't hold onto the job then I am OK with that.

But to cut him because he might get hurt...that I don't agree with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should also be surprised that Pearce hasn't been hurt yet. ;)

As for reading the whole thread, I said, in the post you quoted, "If he isn't helping the team win then sure, move him."

I thought Reimold was an upgrade over Young. If he in turn can't hold onto the job then I am OK with that.

But to cut him because he might get hurt...that I don't agree with.

As you said. You got what you wanted either way now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...