Jump to content

Jayson Stark reports the O's are after Nick Johnson


jdmyprez

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Is there any reasoning for this other than his injury concerns?

When he plays, he's great. Far better than Michael Aubrey could ever even hope to be. He's certainly an injury risk, and he'll miss some time. But we've got solid depth at 1B to mitigate some of that risk. With Wigginton and even Scott available to play when Johnson misses time, he becomes a much better option than he would be if we didn't have any solid backup options there or had to have a backup who didn't have any other skills besides playing 1B.

He's averaged 106 games played per season over the course of his career (not counting his first season of big league exposure...just 23 games played).

A .402 OBP and a respectable OPS are all well and good...but the man's not just an injury risk, he's the bloody personification of a hernia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's averaged 106 games played per season over the course of his career (not counting his first season of big league exposure...just 23 games played).

A .402 OBP and a respectable OPS are all well and good...but the man's not just an injury risk, he's the bloody personification of a hernia.

What's better, Johnson for 100 games and Wigginton/Scott for 60 or Blalock for 145 and Wigginton/Scott for 15?

I think Johnson, given the depth we have at 1B, is a far better option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's better, Johnson for 100 games and Wigginton/Scott for 60 or Blalock for 145 and Wigginton/Scott for 15?

I think Johnson, given the depth we have at 1B, is a far better option.

Given that two of the players you mentioned are already under contract for next year?

Though it's difficult, I can rationalize spending money on a stopgap if the FO consensus is that Snyder is the real deal and he'll be able to take over 1B in the near future; however, spending money on a stopgap who's not just likely, but virtually certain to miss at least 20% of the regular season? No thanks.

And I'd pass on Blalock under any/all circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should note that Johnson is, now, pretty much universally (by scouts and metrics alike) to be a sub-par defensive first baseman. Just a point of consideration.

Great OBP. Power questions. Poor defense. One year.

Sort-of makes sense, I guess.

I think saying poor defense is a bit over the top. He had one year that was below average. That's not good enough for me to conclude that's he's a poor defender yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should note that Johnson is, now, pretty much universally (by scouts and metrics alike) to be a sub-par defensive first baseman. Just a point of consideration.

Great OBP. Power questions. Poor defense. One year.

Sort-of makes sense, I guess.

Is he? He used to be very good defensively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should note that Johnson is, now, pretty much universally (by scouts and metrics alike) to be a sub-par defensive first baseman. Just a point of consideration.

Great OBP. Power questions. Poor defense. One year.

Sort-of makes sense, I guess.

I believe Johnson is seeking a 2 year deal for $8m per. I doubt he gets that from AM. I consider Adam LaRoche to be a better acquisition at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe Johnson is seeking a 2 year deal for $8m per. I doubt he gets that from AM. I consider Adam LaRoche to be a better acquisition at this point.
I wouldn't go two years guaranteed for Johnson if any of the other options are willing to sign a 1-year deal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe Johnson is seeking a 2 year deal for $8m per. I doubt he gets that from AM. I consider Adam LaRoche to be a better acquisition at this point.

That's pretty low. I would offer 1/6, with a team option for a 2nd year.

Oops, I read that as 2/8, not 2/16. I doubt he gets 2/16 with his injury history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't go two years guaranteed for Johnson if any of the other options are willing to sign a 1-year deal.

What other options are you including in this? I would rather have Johnson for 2 years than Blalock for 1. Johnson can always be a quality role player in 2011.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's better, Johnson for 100 games and Wigginton/Scott for 60 or Blalock for 145 and Wigginton/Scott for 15?

I think Johnson, given the depth we have at 1B, is a far better option.

I'd take Johnson for 100 games and Wigginton/etc for 62 over Blalock for any number.

Actually, a great solution would be Johnson for whatever he can give us, then Snyder, and if he's not ready you've got Wigginton as Plan C. You have to have two failures of fairly high-reward players before you have to go back to the guy who's only a year removed from a 24-homer season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe Johnson is seeking a 2 year deal for $8m per. I doubt he gets that from AM. I consider Adam LaRoche to be a better acquisition at this point.

Unless I'm seriously misreading the market I'd be surprised if anyone offers 2/16 for Johnson. Not unless that's what you get to after a lot of incentives based on playing time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...