Jump to content

TT: Reimold for Bartlett is a win-win


Tony-OH

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Josh Hamilton was a former first round pick who had a terrible substance abuse issue. No comparison. I guess the Scott comp has some validity, but I have a feeling he didn't have an OPS of .738 in AAA at age 27. If I had the time I'd look it up.

We begged and begged and begged MacPhail not to resign Izturis. If the Twins aren't offering Hardy, then this may be our only option.

Which sounds like a recipe for doing something really dumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's pretty shocking that Buck never really talked to Reimold. And it says a lot about how this team views Reimold moving forward.

I'd still like to see us give Reimold another chance but if he fails, then he'll be worth nothing and we'll be out a LF/DH and a SS.

I would like to know why this was the case. Was it because it took him a whole season to rebound? I wish Trembley hadn't played him on the bad ankle to start the season, never did understand that :vader:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One year of Bartlett -- a year in which BAL has no chance of competing for a playoff spot.

I don't see how even the chance that Reimold can realize some of his promise isn't worth much more than that. Maybe the odds are against Reimold getting straightened out. The same, it would sure sting to watch him put up 30+ HR seasons in TAM for pennies.

You also get picks if he walks as a free agent. Of course, they would have to offer him arbitration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't think a starting SS in the major leagues is appropriate for his value? What do you think his value is at the moment?

I just think a lot of people are over valuing Reimold's value. He's a 27-year old DH who is coming off a miserable year with off field problems to boot. He very well might rebound, but isn't this guy available for "free" and is probably a better overall player?

We are in the process of putting a much improved product on the field and Bartlett would be a big part of that. Let's face it - anything north of 2.0 WAR out of SS and we are winners here, IMO. AM is again "buying low".

Part of the improved product is taking chances on certain players like Reynolds (younger, has produced in the big leagues) and not on players like Reimold (not so young for a prospect, has not produced above average results in the majors, may still retain off-the-field issues), etc. Dealing Reimold opens up at-bats for Pie or Scott or another acquisition in LF that could provide more reliable or better production than Nolan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't think a starting SS in the major leagues is appropriate for his value? What do you think his value is at the moment?

I just think a lot of people are over valuing Reimold's value. He's a 27-year old DH who is coming off a miserable year with off field problems to boot. He very well might rebound, but isn't this guy available for "free" and is probably a better overall player?

You're right that many people are overvaluing Reimold.

Still, it's a trade that's uneven in terms of money and service time. Bartlett isn't talented enough to pay him close to what he's worth for a year and trade a youngish guy with lots of service time left.

There's nothing wrong with the idea of using Reimold to obtain Bartlett, but for the trade to even out I think you'd have to get a middling upside young player back as well. We are saving TB millions by taking a player they want to replace anyway and giving them a cheap 0-3 guy who might produce. We'd need something else coming back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Provided we get a minor league player w/ some upside, I favor this trade. Whatever happened to the MD area 3B the Rays received in the Kazmir deal?

I believe your talking about Matthew Sweeney out of Gaithersburg MD. Kid plays 3B and got up to AA this past year, although he struggled. He came over to TB from LAA. He has power potential, but is still raw. But at 22 y/o, he could be a very interesting piece if the Rays added him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. Maybe if we had more depth in our farm system or were definitely going to be contenders next year, but neither of those are true.

I'm surprised that so many people perceive his value to be greater than it is right now.

I don't think his value is greater than it is right now, which is why we shouldn't be trading him. We'd be selling low. He just came off a terrible season and his value is depressed because of it. Reimold's situation isn't really any different than Tillman. The Orioles are not in the position to give up young, cheap with upside that are under control for a long time for aging one year rentals. Especially not to division rivals.

If Reimold needs a change of scenery, then trade him for Hardy. Unless another piece comes back to Baltimore in this trade, I'll be disgusted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right that many people are overvaluing Reimold.

Still, it's a trade that's uneven in terms of money and service time. Bartlett isn't talented enough to pay him close to what he's worth for a year and trade a youngish guy with lots of service time left.

There's nothing wrong with the idea of using Reimold to obtain Bartlett, but for the trade to even out I think you'd have to get a middling upside young player back as well. We are saving TB millions by taking a player they want to replace anyway and giving them a cheap 0-3 guy who might produce. We'd need something else coming back.

This is my opinion as well.

Its about service time and money. If the O's get something else from TB to balance that part of the equation, I'm much happier about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind seeing the move for a couple reasons.

1) It shows the Os are making moves.

2) They are trading away some of this "potential" talent while they still have value.

3) I think everyone is in agreement, Izzy seems like a great guy and a great defensive guy, but not an everyday SS. Bartlett's bat (even with last years stats) is better than Izzy's.

You can't hold onto every prospect in your system. Who is to say that every prospect will pan out. Reimold hit a lot of homeruns with no one on base 2 years ago. I thought with his pop he would hit 20-25 with a full time job. He couldn't hit anything last year regardless of the problems he had. Whatever was bothering him in ST and the first couple weeks of the season lingered into the minors with him. Not a good sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tony is right that Reimold has very little value. But that is also why you keep him.

That being said, I have little doubt that the Orioles have tried to move Reimold and that this is the best they can do.

It doesn't make sense to me that Buck doesn't like him since Reimold is an all out, hustle guy...but Buck doesn't really know him either.

I think this is the Orioles saying this is the best they can do for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not trying to be a kiss a** with the boss but I couldn't agree with this article any more than I do.

People get all up in arms about moving our prospects, maybe it's because we've had such a barren farm system for so long that people are hesitant to make any sort of move.

I've always championed rebuilding from within (especially with young pitching) but I don't perceive Reimold as having such a high value/ceiling that we shouldn't entertain the idea of moving him.

As for Bartlett, he's not ideal, but my goodness, didn't people see enough of Caesar Izturis last year?

Add into the fact that this move would give Pie more ABs and I like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd feel much better about this potential trade if the Orioles didn't have such a poor history of offering arbitration / receiving compensation for free agents.

Seems like a decent chance Bartlett is a Type B after this year, which would make the trade: Reimold for Bartlett and a supplemental 1st round pick (discounted by 1 year). However, I sadly have no faith that the Orioles would manage to actually get a compensation pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are saving TB millions by taking a player they want to replace anyway and giving them a cheap 0-3 guy who might produce. We'd need something else coming back.

TB is a small market team with a cheaper option at SS - what does that have to do with Bartlett's potential on-field production?

The answer is nothing.

The fact that Bartlett was nearly non-tendered has to do with his value relative to his production and his value to the very low TB payroll. Bartlett is fully capable of producing a WAR in the 2.5-3.5 range and, almost regardless of what NR does, that would justify our portion of the trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...