Very impressed by Montanez

[byrdz]

How can you be a "retread" if you've never been on the road?

[ccbird]

How can you be a "retread" if you've never been on the road?

Retread was probably the wrong choice of words but I'm talking about the Jon Knott's and the J.R. House's who have good minor league success at an age when they aren't prospects anymore.

[JTrea81]

Retread was probably the wrong choice of words but I'm talking about the Jon Knott's and the J.R. House's who have good minor league success at an age when they aren't prospects anymore.

I think "journeyman" is the word you are looking for...

[El Gordo]

No -- but he's not replacing Scott in the lineup:

Millar -> gone

Huff replaces Millar at 1B

Scott replaces Huff at DH

Montanez replaces Scott in LF

So the question is can Montanez outhit Millar?

If he just matches Millar, then he's improved the team by freeing up salary and by allowing us to replace Payton with a better hitter on the bench (O. Salazar?).

If he can outhit Millar then he's improved the offense, saved the club money and freed up a bench spot for a more productive player than Payton.

Either of those scenarios is a win for the O's.

Why do you think he can play a better LF than Scott? I think if he can demonstrate that he can be adequate as a CF he can be a 4th OF but I'm not ready to write him in as the everyday LF. Fieding Bible ranks Luke 6 out of the top 10 LF in MLB

[bluedog]

Why do you think he can play a better LF than Scott? I think if he can demonstrate that he can be adequate as a CF he can be a 4th OF but I'm not ready to write him in as the everyday LF. Fieding Bible ranks Luke 6 out of the top 10 LF in MLB

Fine then put Montanez at DH and 4th OF and keep Scott in LF. Either way it has the same impact on the offense.

[Anonymous]

Why do you think he can play a better LF than Scott? I think if he can demonstrate that he can be adequate as a CF he can be a 4th OF but I'm not ready to write him in as the everyday LF. Fieding Bible ranks Luke 6 out of the top 10 LF in MLB

My concern about Luke isn't his defensive ability, but rather a heel that needs to heal. Apparently, this injury and some others have been lingering for the past two years. I'd be perfectly content to give him a year off from the field for his own self-preservation, and then sort things out again a year down the road. This would not only save Luke from all the wear and tear, but also open a starting spot for Montanez (and I WOULD like to write him in, although it doesn't have to be with an indelible marker quite yet), potentially open a reserve spot for Reimold, and allow us to upgrade offensively at 1B with Huff (much as I love Millar's clubhouse influence).

But you've put your finger on one of the key things here. Can Montanez demonstrate, both substantively and in DT's personal view, that he can be adequate as the # 2 CF? That would add considerable value.

[El Gordo]

Fine then put Montanez at DH and 4th OF and keep Scott in LF. Either way it has the same impact on the offense.

I don't think Montenez will hit well enough to be a fulltime DH. He has a career MiL OPS of .771. He might make a 4th OF if his fielding improves. If we can't sign Tex we need to go after Dunn or Burrell

[El Gordo]

My concern about Luke isn't his defensive ability, but rather a heel that needs to heal. Apparently, this injury and some others have been lingering for the past two years. I'd be perfectly content to give him a year off from the field for his own self-preservation, and then sort things out again a year down the road. This would not only save Luke from all the wear and tear, but also open a starting spot for Montanez (and I WOULD like to write him in, although it doesn't have to be with an indelible marker quite yet), potentially open a reserve spot for Reimold, and allow us to upgrade offensively at 1B with Huff (much as I love Millar's clubhouse influence).

But you've put your finger on one of the key things here. Can Montanez demonstrate, both substantively and in DT's personal view, that he can be adequate as the # 2 CF? That would add considerable value.

I think you and others are over reacting to one good AA season and a small sample size at the ML level. Montanez could just as well go the way of Moore,whose MiL numbers were better.

[bluedog]

My concern about Luke isn't his defensive ability, but rather a heel that needs to heal. Apparently, this injury and some others have been lingering for the past two years. I'd be perfectly content to give him a year off from the field for his own self-preservation, and then sort things out again a year down the road. This would not only save Luke from all the wear and tear, but also open a starting spot for Montanez (and I WOULD like to write him in, although it doesn't have to be with an indelible marker quite yet), potentially open a reserve spot for Reimold, and allow us to upgrade offensively at 1B with Huff (much as I love Millar's clubhouse influence).

But you've put your finger on one of the key things here. Can Montanez demonstrate, both substantively and in DT's personal view, that he can be adequate as the # 2 CF? That would add considerable value.

Good points. I'd think that barring injury, Jones will play almost every day in CF with very few days off for rest. If Montanez can even handle the emergency CF duties with 1 or 2 starts there a month when AJ needs a breather, I'd think we'd be in good shape.

You know on a tangent, I get excited about a bench of:

Hernandez ©

O. Salazar (1b / 3b)

E. Torres (2b / ss)

Reimold (of / dh)

Torres gives us the speed off the bench we've been sorely missing for pinch running duties. Salazar gives us a lethal pinch hitter versus lefties. Hernandez would probably be the best backup catcher in baseball and a solid bat off the bench. Reimold would be a huge upgrade over Payton.

[bluedog]

I don't think Montenez will hit well enough to be a fulltime DH. He has a career MiL OPS of .771. He might make a 4th OF if his fielding improves. If we can't sign Tex we need to go after Dunn or Burrell

We're rebuilding - why not give him a shot next year, when we're almost certainly not going to compete anyway? If he's the hitter with the O's that he was with Bowie, we're talking about a huge win for the organization.

If he fails, we can try Reimold there instead. If they both fail we can sign a FA in 2010 or 2011 or 2012 when we actually have the pitching to compete.

I don't get signing big dollar free agent hitters to 3 - 4 year contracts when we're not going to be competitive. Signing Tex to be our first baseman for the next 6 or 7 years is one thing. Signing an older DH as a stopgap for a losing ballclub doesn't compute for me.

And shouldn't we reward his MVP / Triple Crown season at Bowie with at least a legitimate shot at winning a spot with the O's next year? If we don't give Lou a chance coming off the season he had, what message are we sending to everyone else in our organization? "We've been a sub .500 team for over a decade, but even if you put up spectacular numbers in our farm system, you won't get a fair shot with the O's unless your under the age of 26?"

Not the message an organization determined to build from within should be sending IMHO.

Save the money and let our own guys have a shot at proving themselves.

[Boston Dave]

I would rotate Lou through 4 positions for the next month- LF,CF,RF (yes, even RF) and DH. Every game, the whole game, to see what he can do. Hitting, defense, and not just LF, but all over. I don't care how many mistakes he makes, you only care about that if you care about Ws (I don't). This is like Spring Training, Part 2. One of the disappointments of this year is somehow we forgot about evaluating for the future. If all we do from here on out is figure what role (if any) Lou can fill for 2009, we win.

[El Gordo]

We're rebuilding - why not give him a shot next year, when we're almost certainly not going to compete anyway? If he's the hitter with the O's that he was with Bowie, we're talking about a huge win for the organization.

If he fails, we can try Reimold there instead. If they both fail we can sign a FA in 2010 or 2011 or 2012 when we actually have the pitching to compete.

I don't get signing big dollar free agent hitters to 3 - 4 year contracts when we're not going to be competitive. Signing Tex to be our first baseman for the next 6 or 7 years is one thing. Signing an older DH as a stopgap for a losing ballclub doesn't compute for me.

And shouldn't we reward his MVP / Triple Crown season at Bowie with at least a legitimate shot at winning a spot with the O's next year? If we don't give Lou a chance coming off the season he had, what message are we sending to everyone else in our organization? "We've been a sub .500 team for over a decade, but even if you put up spectacular numbers in our farm system, you won't get a fair shot with the O's unless your under the age of 26?"

Not the message an organization determined to build from within should be sending IMHO.

Save the money and let our own guys have a shot at proving themselves.

What older DH? Dunn is the same age as Tex and will likely be productive just as long and Burell is 31. What FA did you have in mind to sign in '10 or '11? I don't see see great bats. If Montanez out hit Reimold this year what makes you think he'll be any better than Monty next year?.

[Old Beta]

I'm not into performance predictions, but at this point I think we can say that his situation going forward is probably the same as Newhan's after his hot streak. He'll be allowed to play to show whether he's for real or if opposing pitchers will find and expose his limitations.

[Mackus]

I make LF available for him. If I couldn't move Scott to say DH/1B ..Then I'd move Scott to fill another hole!

This is where you can get into big trouble. Giving a guy a fulltime position based on under 50 at bats. Even at the expense of a guy with an upper 800s OPS and on pace for 25+ HRs.

Then next year, after you've traded Scott away, what happens when Montanez proves he isn't the guy he's appearing to be in these 50 at bats? Maybe he can't hit consistently good breaking stuff and the league figures that out. Who knows, but 50 AB is never enough to prove you can hang in the bigs, especially so for a guy who has never even proven he can hang at AAA in multiple stops there.

I'm in no way writing off Montanez' chances of becoming a very useful player. I'm just saying wouldn't it be a much better scenario to keep Scott and Montanez and have Montanez prove he is worthy of more time rather than trade away Scott now and then have Montanez prove he's not a starter and then you're scrambling to find a LF? One is a very good problem to have, the other is our LF situation from 2005-2007.

[Anonymous]

Good points. I'd think that barring injury, Jones will play almost every day in CF with very few days off for rest. If Montanez can even handle the emergency CF duties with 1 or 2 starts there a month when AJ needs a breather, I'd think we'd be in good shape.

You know on a tangent, I get excited about a bench of:

Hernandez ©

O. Salazar (1b / 3b)

E. Torres (2b / ss)

Reimold (of / dh)

Torres gives us the speed off the bench we've been sorely missing for pinch running duties. Salazar gives us a lethal pinch hitter versus lefties. Hernandez would probably be the best backup catcher in baseball and a solid bat off the bench. Reimold would be a huge upgrade over Payton.

I think we're seeing eye-to-eye on a starting alignment, bluedog. But I think you've gone a bit off the deep end with the bench.

Salazar is not a 3B any more. If the club had any faith whatsoever in his ability to play there, he would have seen time there this year beyond the first month of the year. I may be one of the last holdouts on this -- but I still want Moore to be given every opportunity to make the team next year as a still-youthful LH hitting corner guy. Salazar, for all his hitting prowess (and I'm a fan of his too), just doesn't bring the same value to the roster, offense AND defense, 2009 AND potentially beyond, as Moore.

Torres was tried at SS this year. The experiment is over.

Reimold is clearly a viable choice for OF/DH if Scott is indeed shifted mostly to DH duties and if Montanez is deemed capable of being the # 2 CF. Assuming Reimold has a good Spring training, I like this scenario a bunch, with Montanez starting in LF.

Finally, I think it's an overwhelming priority to find a taker for Ramon's contract, or whatever portion of it we can auction off. Of course, it takes two to tango. But it's hard to believe we can't get back at least some reasonable amount of dollars for Ramon.