I would give Laroche his 3-4 year deal to get him here.. If he doesn't develope better power here he or scott would still have some value at their age.. IF the stats indicate you replace luke instead of Laroche you would have more options bringing in a DH/1B next winter or a DH/OF.

I would give Laroche his 3-4 year deal to get him here.. If he doesn't develope better power here he or scott would still have some value at their age.. IF the stats indicate you replace luke instead of Laroche you would have more options bringing in a DH/1B next winter or a DH/OF.

Uh oh... Cal's about to get roasted for being positive about Reynolds and Hardy.

Damn, Cal! You are drinking the kool-aid Pete A. has been handing out in those cheap styrofoam cups. I know you are angling for an eventual front office job, but jeez! Strikeouts don't matter they are just another out!?!?! what?!?!?! the guy hit .200!! Believe me, the strikeouts count!

Definetly kissing a little [butt] to stay in the fold.

" strikeout is an out."??????

I guess he is used to the Orioles not advancing runners or hitting sac flies, etc.

That was a stupid comment by Cal.

I'm not sure why anyone who can't think of a name to type in and goes under "Anonymous" feels they have the baseball knowledge to bash Cal Ripken Jr's comments.

To be a fly on the wall for a conversation between Ripken Jr and Showalter...

C'mon Wayne, don't be shy...tell us how wrong Cal is. Tell us how much more baseball you know than he does. What a nitwit he is for being optimistic. How he's rubber-stamping mediocrity.

There's nothing wrong with a positive attitude, tempered with realism. Reynolds and Hardy are upgrades, and all they cost was a few bullpen arms, peanuts in terms of talent. 8 weeks until Spring Training starts. Bring it!

If Cal knows something it is that an out is just an out. He KNOWS it is better than hitting into an old double play.

@ joefoss..I think, and I concur, that Cal is saying a strikeout is only one out and not a double play as happens all too often with the O's the past few years.

Well, Cal does a good job of being complimentary and not being insincere -- attributes I like and, unfortuantely, are more refreshing than they should be.

Strikeouts are just outs, indeed, but they fail to advance runners and are less likely to extend an inning through a fielding blunder. Strikeouts are also indicative of someone who can be both pitched to or pitched around depending who is on deck at the time.

Mickey Tettleton is one who struckout a lot and hit with power. His OBP was high, however, due to his willingness to take a walk. Hopefully, Reynolds learns to be patiently aggressive. (Do the Orioles have a hitting coach yet? Just kidding.)

As far as a an out being an out, Reynolds is a downgrade to Wigginton in that department as the latter has a lifetime batting average that's 25 points higher (.267 v. .242). Hopefully, Reynolds will continue or improve on his power numbers while making more outs as he has the OPS advantage, .817 to .772.

Reynolds is also a bigger liability in the field. At third, his fielding percentage is lower than Wigginton's, .937 to .949 while getting to less balls per nine innings, 2.61 to 2.76.

Wigginton could play other positions, too.

Hardy is an interesting acquisition, too. His lifetime batting average is just seven points higher than Izturis. Hardy is more patient at and has oodles more power, hence the whopping .746 to 619 OPS advantage.

So while the Orioles are on the pseudo-cheap -- and I say pseudo because one could argue there is some lower level overpaying going on here -- it does look like they are leaning towards higher power numbers. Think pitching, defense, and three-run homers except pitching is with fingers crossed, defense taking a back seat, and where are studs for protection that helps produce men on base -- the necessary cog to hit three-run homers?

The irony with this low level approach is Izturis may be the most important element to all of this. He is a better fielder at short than Hardy (.980 to .978) and he gets more chances per nine innings (4.54 to 4.37). Given Hardy's 112 games per year and Roberts' 59 games available last year, Izturis may be seeing a lot of playing time.

Hopefully, Izturis will be used more as a defensive sub than anything else. Otherwise, the offensive upgrade may recall Wayne Gross than anything else -- a guy who hits solo homers and fields like a coke machine.

Yeah, a strikeout is not just an out Cal! How would you know anyway? The keyboard warriors of the Baltimore Sun message boards know much more about baseball than you do! I sure hope that the conversations between Buck and Cal involved the phrases, "When Angelos passes away," "How much do you think the club will sell for," and, "You've got a job when I buy the team."

I agree with Anonymous. Cal, you're kidding, right?

In 2010 when Reynolds put the ball in play, regardless where he hit it, he maintained a .344 batting average.

But, add in the strikeouts and he hit at the Mendoza line. Only 40 HR in Reynolds career have been hit with 2 strikes on him.

Cutting out a hundred strikeouts would most likely have increased his average to .265, and more RBI's.

@not Brooks

Check the numbers my friend!!! Reynolds had a lower average however he would have led the o's in hr RBI and had a higher obp and ops than wiggy! Yes that is an upgrade even with the strikeouts!!

"Reynolds is also a bigger liability in the field. At third, his fielding percentage is lower than Wigginton's, .937 to .949 while getting to less balls per nine innings, 2.61 to 2.76. " -waspman

I'm sorry wasp, but saying Wiggy is a better defender than Reynolds is just flat out wrong. Look at their UZR/150 ratings at 3BH from last year...

Wiggy: -17.3
Reynolds: 2.5

Now, a 2.5 isn't the greatest UZR/150, but it's a hell of a lot better than a -17.3. Also, take into account that Reynolds has only been playing 3B since right before he was called up to the majors and that he has improved every year he's played.

And Wiggy may play more positions, but he's not great at any of them. His best position last year was 1B, and even there, he put up a UZR/150 of -3.9.

Good comment Cal .. a strikeout is an out.... much more effective out than say a rally killing double play which you are famous for. Will always love ya for your loyalty Cal. Let's hope you get in there and help keep the Oriole\Ripken Way.

People who have never played professional ball a day in their lives ripping Ripken. I've read some insane and insatiable comments on these posts, but Anonymous' and the othr detractors' comments take the cake. If you know so much, why aren't you in the dugout or the front office? Your comments are my comedy for the day. Thanks for the laugh.

Yes, strikeouts do matter, Cal. And you should know that coming up under Earl Weaver, who NEVER wanted to give away ANY outs.

Everybody is quick to criticize all the strikeouts, but I never saw that as a problem. A strikeout is an out. - Cal

Gee, I'm glad someone has common sense, unlike half the people that post here.

Rally killer? He had a 1.033 OPS with RISP position in '10 - compare that to a .603 OPS with the bases empty. Look up the facts before you critisize.

@Mark

No we were not in the dugout...we were and are in the stands, paying for the current Orioles and previous Orioles so they can live in splendor today.

Players play, managers manage, and fans pay and gripe.

Get used to it.

Yeah cause all you people who are bashing freaking Cal Ripken Jr know so much more about baseball than he does

Rob, and anyone else

how is a strikeout "giving away an out"?

For the love of God, somebody please explain to me how a K is less productive then a foulout, popout, groundout, flyout, lineout, caught stealing, or pick off. It's an out, that's it. It goes in the books the same way. If its the Hope Factor or "intangable" that he reaches on an error, seriously, how often does that happen?

And before I get called an idiot, please note that Reynolds has a 1.033 OPS with RISP. So maybe he's more productive then you think - there are things call "splits", check them out....

We have reached a new low folks, not even Cal Ripken Jr. cares about the Orioles anymore.

@dave in glen burnie

A "K" is less productive than putting a ball in play for one simple reason:

As I stated above, when Reynolds puts the ball in play in 2010 (including foul outs, ect.) he hits at a clip of .344.

When you include "K's" his average last yr dropped below .200.

Among the possible scenarios affected:

1) advancing the runner by hitting grounder to right side of infeld

2) advancing the runner with fly outs

3) sacrifice fly to score a runner

4) forcing a defensive player to make an error

5) based upon Reynolds stats, just by reducing his "K's" he could get 24 more hits, and some would be home runs.

Splits are good to look at. So lets look at some in specific strike counts with respective Reynolds' OPS stats:

first pitch = .940
1 - 0 = .955
2 - 0 = .482
3 - 0 = 1.208
0 - 1 = 1.560
1 - 1 - 1.582
2 - 1 = 2.170
3 - 1 = 1.101

0 - 2 = .358
1 - 2 = .146
2 - 2 = .226
3 - 2 = .895 when pitcher doesn't want a walk

Pretty much sums it up. When there is 2 strikes on Reynolds and less than 3 balls, I suspect Reynolds is seeing an array of off speed and breaking pitches.

All we are saying is that, other than grounding into a dp, nothing worse than a K can happen when you put the ball in play - but a bunch of potential good things CAN indeed happen.

To be fair, dave, ground outs and fly outs can be productive, resulting in moving a runner over or scoring a run.

Sure, a fly out or ground out with two outs isn't any different from a strikeout, but there certainly are times in which putting the ball in play is much more productive than whiffing and walking right back to the dugout.

PS - I'm on board with the Reynolds move. The strikeouts will be hard to watch, but I've got hope for the guy.

Anyone with access to the internet who can look up Reynolds' stats and should be able to gather that he's most likely not going to hit .198 again. Prior to last season, his career average was .257 and his career average in the minors was .280. He's not going to win a batting title, but he'll probably be much closer to .250 than .200 in 2011.

And the splits are the big things here. As you mentioned, dave, Reynolds is damn good with runners in scoring position, with a career .261/.366/.515 line in such situations. He also crushes lefties to the tune of a .252/.380/.528 line, which is huge for this team.

The last thing to look at is his plate discipline, which has improved over the course of his big league career, jumping from 8.9% in 2007 to 13.9% in 2010.

Reynolds isn't going to win any batting titles and or gold gloves, but assuming his BABIP normalizes in 2011, we probably have a .240/.340/.490 hitter on our hands who will easily hit 30+ home runs. Yes, the strikeouts will be difficult to watch, but the homers should go a long way in making up for the K's.

I work with stats for a living. The UZR is interesting in that it tries to attach a run value -- which brings into play other elements that could very easily be dependent on other factors which are apples and oranges when comparing two different players on two different teams. It is a very fashionable stat, much like the passer rating. It has its use. It has its flaws.

The fact the UZR is park adjusted is a very curious notion for infielders.

When comparing Wigginton and Reynolds, I looked at fielding percentage. Wigginton wins. Then, I looked at total chances per nine innings played. Wigginton wins again.

Very simple.

Adding the other elements that is involved in making a UZR is a standard that was set by the statistician at his conjecture, not some scientific fact that puts a very specific weight on the extraneous elements. Most good sites will state a large sample size is necessary. Of course, you always want a larger sample size but the more complicated the methodology used, the greater need for sample size.

Given the amount of 3B action these two have had, the simpler stats are going to be the more reliable stats.

Reynolds improving each year is encouraging. Logic would dictate his improvement is probably nearing its asymptotic tail as it is unlikely to be linear.

On the other hand, Reynolds played half of his games in Arizona whose divisionmates are LA, SF, SD, and Colorado. That's a lot of games in low humidity. Maybe playing east coast baseball will have a detrimental effect.

My point is noticing a pattern and casting it into the future is pure conjecture. Having said that, one would prefer a pattern of improvement over any alternative not including a flat line of perfection. It's also nice Reynolds is younger than Wigginton. Wigginton has probably seen his best days, and can only try to repeat them as much as possible. Reynolds may have an upside. If he's a late bloomer fulfilling his upside, the Orioles may have found themselves a bargain -- at least until he's eligible to become a free agent; then, all bets are off given what we have seen since The Purge.

I am not blindly against Reynolds; nor am I blindly for Wigginton. As a fan, I had hoped for tangible improvement this offseason. Instead, we have been given a trade-off of sorts while being told we must have faith and hope. It doesn't cost me anything to hope, so I will.

Faith on the other hand is an intangible that is earned. No one near Eutaw Street has earned it from me. I would have preferred something more tangible.

In the meantime, here's to hoping ...

NB, Dennis -

Thanks.

What drives me crazy is that a lot people on these blogs take one stat and pound it into the ground. 200 K's are ugly for any player, true. But you can take any ML player and find some dark spot in their statistics. Reynolds problems definately stands out, but so does his strengths.

Putting a ball in play can be productive, I won't argue that. Most of the time though, an out is just an out. Hopefully he can find a way to get his K totals below 200 as he progresses. As not brooks mentioned, he has actually improved his disipline since his debut season. At 27 years old in '11, he's entering his prime, so further progression can't be ruled out.

Also, if some of you hated Terry Crowley, I heard that the hitting coach in Arizona was total dogs--t. Maybe improved evaluations by the instructor will have some sort of positive effect?

Anyway, thanks again.

JORGE CANTU. Forget LaRoche and Lee. JORGE CANTU.

Dave in glen burnie.... just to clear the air, I was not saying that Reynolds was a rally killer. Ripken seemed to be the rally killer. How many times did he ground into double plays to end the inning...

Ripken averaged about 35 GIDP a season. The record for a shortstop in a season is 149 by Rick Burlson, Cal isn't listed in the top 10 for SS. Ripken wasn't exactly known for his speed on the base paths. He batted in the middle of the order, so he was coming up with runners on base a lot. and putting the ball in play a lot. If he put the ball in play to the left side of the infield with a runner on first the obvious result is going to be a double play. His highest career total for GIDP was 57 with a runner on first...he also batted .286 with a runner on first. First and third for his career he GIDP 43 times, but he also hit .332 in that situation. Kirk Gibson rarely hit into a double play, but he also K'd a ton. Hank Aaron and Carl Yastremski rank 2-3 under Cal for GIDP in a career, and they were pretty good hitters.