Comments on: O's name Felix Pie as starting left fielder

By: Jeff V.

Jeff V. — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:56:38 +0000

I would *like* it if Pie could put up an 800 OPS in left field, move Reimold to DH most days and trade Scott for something usefull. They could rotate days off for Jones and Markakis and sit Pie against some lefties to keep Reimold in the outfield for 50 games or so. This would also allow the O’s to DH Wieters on his days off from catching.
Despite Pie’s one torrid month last year I question if his bat will play in left. Given a choice between Pie’s glove and Reimold’s bat in left, I would take Reimold’s bat. I would keep Pie as a fourth outfielder until he became expensive. With Jones’ health record being spotty I certainly feel that the O’s need someone capable of playing a good centerfield on the bench.

By: D.J. Short

D.J. Short — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:37:00 +0000

Jeff,
You’re right in that it wasn’t a cause-effect situation (Scott and Montanez certainly factored in), however if Pie was productive, Reimold would not have gotten the call in May. It wouldn’t have been a consideration. So yes, Pie’s struggles are a significant factor why Reimold was promoted. That was my point, although I could have been more clear about that.
How would you like the position to shake out?

By: Jeff V.

Jeff V. — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:07:45 +0000

Misleading headline, this has more to do with Nolan’s achillies and astoturf then anything else.
The line “Pie’s struggles in the first half last season are what brought Reimold to the majors in the first place” is incorrect. Pie’s struggles are what got Montanez promoted to the majors, injuries to Montanez and Luke Scott are what promted Reimold’s elevation, well that and his sick, sick numbers at Norfolk last season. Pie had already lost the left field job by the time Reimold was promoted.

By: Charles Gates

Charles Gates — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 09:19:35 +0000

Last year Atkins was -0.3 WAR (fangraphs data) and CHONE projects him at +0.5 WAR this year. The O’s didn’t necessarily overpay for Atkins @ $4.5MM/1 year, and he does present some upside based on what he’s done in the past. If your argument is that the Atkins signing is blocking the development of younger players in a year when they’re not going to compete anyway, then perhaps I could get on board with that. But purely from a contract perspective, veteran leadership at a fair price is a good thing for a young team.

By: Grant

Grant — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 22:56:53 +0000

This is a team that already had plenty of corner/DH guys and yet signed both Atkins and Tejada.

What would have been wrong with Atkins/Tejada at third, Scott and Reimold splitting time at DH/1B and occasional LF, Pie starting in left, and Lou Montanez as a fourth outfielder?

Really I'm mostly pissed about the Atkins signing. That's what this is all about.