185 replies to this topic

[Mike B]

Chris Cotillo ‏@TradeDeadliner

There may not be room in the #Orioles outfield for Nate McLouth, and he is a free agent. Should draw interest from many teams.

I don't really get the first part....I would assume that the O's would definitely be interested in bringing back McLouth. The only internal guy that may play there would be Reimold, and I'm not banking on him coming back from injury.

Do not know who Chris Cotillo is but he does not seem to know the lack of depth our OF has. Plenty of room for Nate, and frankly a need. I say give him a 2/9 offer to see if he takes it.

[JeremyStrain]

Do not know who Chris Cotillo is but he does not seem to know the lack of depth our OF has. Plenty of room for Nate, and frankly a need. I say give him a 2/9 offer to see if he takes it.

This was the first thing I thought too. While you don't sit back and pencil Reimold in without making any other plans, you need to make sure he's got a spot on the team, if healthy he's an all-star level OF, but that's a big IF HEALTHY. Signing Nate to a reasonable deal gives you someone you could flip flop with Nolan in the OF/4th OF and both are starting quality OF on a good team. Nate is a plus defensive OF as well, and he adds some speed as people here have mentioned that we are lacking. I think it's a no-brainer to sign him, he'd be one of my top priorities.

[Oriole85]

I'd like to see the Orioles bring him back, but wouldn't do anything too crazy. If Reimold could stay healthy, it's a good problem to have IMO who sees the bulk of the time. He had a great postseason filled in for Markakis nicely in the leadoff role.

[Mackus]

I don't know where I cutoff what I'd be willing to pay Nate. I would think more than a typical 4th OF but not as much as a reliable starting LF. I don't have a problem going two years, if the annual salary is on the lower end.

David DeJesus had a similar year in 2011 to Nate's 2012 overall. He was much better in '09-'10 than Nate was in '10-'11. He signed a 2/$10M deal with the Cubs last year (plus an option). I'd expect Nate to get less than that, but how much less is debatable. 2/$6M plus incentives for games played and/or plate appearances seems like a good start. If he's starting, he can end up earning maybe as much as $8-10M over the two years.

[RichardZ]

I would definitely resign McLouth. That leaves Davis, Reimold, and Betemit vying for the DH spot and starts in the OF. I suspect a healthy Reimold could win that DH spot, leaving Davis as a guy who can DH/1B/3B/LF/RF and be a kind of super sub.

I don't think anyone has any idea what the market for McLouth is. I would say a 2/6 deal would be enough or get creative and do a one year deal and a 2nd year, with a significant increase that kicks in by a certain amount of games played. Mabye 1 year at 3M and an option for 7-8 that kicks in if he plays well (assuming plays well is correlated to games played)

[Mackus]

I don't think anyone has any idea what the market for McLouth is. I would say a 2/6 deal would be enough or get creative and do a one year deal and a 2nd year, with a significant increase that kicks in by a certain amount of games played. Mabye 1 year at 3M and an option for 7-8 that kicks in if he plays well (assuming plays well is correlated to games played)

I don't think the market for McLouth is as hard to define as you suggest here. You even go ahead and suggest something pretty reasonable.

You could either go the route of making the option year for more base money like you suggested and having it either team-contingent or vesting based on games player / plate appearances or just build in a lower base salary and have incentives within each season that raise up the value at various games played and plate appearance milestones.

The two and a half seasons he struggled through prior to his arrival in Baltimore will keep his value down significantly, IMO. I'd be shocked if he got a multi-year deal that reached double digit millions.

[Tucker Blair]

I don't think the market for McLouth is as hard to define as you suggest here. You even go ahead and suggest something pretty reasonable.

You could either go the route of making the option year for more base money like you suggested and having it either team-contingent or vesting based on games player / plate appearances or just build in a lower base salary and have incentives within each season that raise up the value at various games played and plate appearance milestones.

The two and a half seasons he struggled through prior to his arrival in Baltimore will keep his value down significantly, IMO. I'd be shocked if he got a multi-year deal that reached double digit millions.

This is what I am really thinking as well. I still think the general consensus is that he is strictly 4th OF type right now. Endy Chavez got a little over a million for being that type of player (not comparing them, just the position).

Is there a chance that Nate can continue to produce more than just a 4th OF? Sure. But I think he still needs to prove that IMO. Some team could very believe he can though and go ahead with a decent contract.

[RichardZ]

I don't think the market for McLouth is as hard to define as you suggest here. You even go ahead and suggest something pretty reasonable.

You could either go the route of making the option year for more base money like you suggested and having it either team-contingent or vesting based on games player / plate appearances or just build in a lower base salary and have incentives within each season that raise up the value at various games played and plate appearance milestones.

The two and a half seasons he struggled through prior to his arrival in Baltimore will keep his value down significantly, IMO. I'd be shocked if he got a multi-year deal that reached double digit millions.

It only takes one team to raise the price. His two good seasons in Pittsburgh and the feeling that he might be back to where he was, might cause a team to gamble more money on him. I doubt it, but it's possible.

[RShack]

I still think the general consensus is that he is strictly 4th OF type right now.

General consensus among who?

I don't see why people would say that. He was a perfectly good OF'er until he got hurt while in ATL, he then sucked for 2 years, and with BAL he returned to being pretty much exactly the same guy he was before. So, there's been 2 versions of him: a good starting OF'er and a guy who couldn't keep a bench job, even on the effing Pirates the second time there.

Where in his history is a 4th Of'er? I don't see it anywhere... all I see is a starting OF and a guy who's career was about over...

[Oriole85]

General consensus among who?

I don't see why people would say that. He was a perfectly good OF'er until he got hurt while in ATL, he then sucked for 2 years, and with BAL he returned to being pretty much exactly the same guy he was before. So, there's been 2 versions of him: a good starting OF'er and a guy who couldn't keep a bench job, even on the effing Pirates the second time there.

Where in his history is a 4th Of'er? I don't see it anywhere... all I see is a starting OF and a guy who's career was about over...

Shack- It happens players, do bad in one city and great in another. Sometimes a change of scenery is needed. Remember the whole Aubrey Huff thing? He didn't play well here at the end, didn't play with the Tigers, then does great in San Fran and many are like "why didn't we keep him?"

I think the jury is still very much out on him, but I was very encouraged by how he played here particularly after Markakis got injured and especially in the playoffs. No secret I'm a huge fan of his and I hope the O's keep him.

[Mackus]

It only takes one team to raise the price. His two good seasons in Pittsburgh and the feeling that he might be back to where he was, might cause a team to gamble more money on him. I doubt it, but it's possible.

Certainly possible. Though I would probably argue that the Orioles would apply more value to what he's done than other teams looking back mostly at just the numbers.

[RShack]

Shack- It happens players, do bad in one city and great in another. Sometimes a change of scenery is needed. Remember the whole Aubrey Huff thing? He didn't play well here at the end, didn't play with the Tigers, then does great in San Fran and many are like "why didn't we keep him?"

I think the jury is still very much out on him, but I was very encouraged by how he played here particularly after Markakis got injured and especially in the playoffs. No secret I'm a huge fan of his and I hope the O's keep him.

I agree with you about all of that.

What I don't understand is where the consensus is that he's strictly a 4th OF'er. I can see how people are unsure if maybe he's back for real vs. maybe he isn't. What I don't see is why people would think he's strictly a 4th OF'er. So far, he's been either a good starting OF'er or else he's been terrible. I don't see anyplace in his hx where he's been suitable as a 4th OF'er... unless maybe you're looking at when he was hurt in ATL... so, I'm curious about what this consensus is about him being strictly a 4th OF'er, where it comes from, and who all the people are who make it a consensus...

[SportsGuy]

I agree with you about all of that.

What I don't understand is where the consensus is that he's strictly a 4th OF'er. I can see how people are unsure if maybe he's back for real vs. maybe he isn't. What I don't see is why people would think he's strictly a 4th OF'er. So far, he's been either a good starting OF'er or else he's been terrible. I don't see anyplace in his hx where he's been suitable as a 4th OF'er... unless maybe you're looking at when he was hurt in ATL... so, I'm curious about what this consensus is about him being strictly a 4th OF'er, where it comes from, and who all the people are who make it a consensus...

Inevitably, most players end up as bench guys...so, in this case, that means 4th OFer. Just because he hasn't been in between before, doesn't mean that won't happen as he gets older and out of his prime years.

Now, is there a consensus out there right now that the time has come for him to be a 4th OFer? No idea..What we saw in BMore is a guy who can start. What we saw the 2.5 years before that was a guy who didn't belong in the majors. So, take the middle of that and you get a back up OFer.

[BobPhelan]

Really, if the Nate McLouth we saw this year is your fourth outfielder you're doing well for yourself. Defensive replacement, pinch runner, pinch hitter, insurance at all three OF spots. I say re-sign him with the idea that you can start him in LF every day but if you're able to acquire someone better or Reimold breaks out and stays healthy you have an excellent bench player.

[Adam Wolff]

Really, if the Nate McLouth we saw this year is your fourth outfielder you're doing well for yourself. Defensive replacement, pinch runner, pinch hitter, insurance at all three OF spots. I say re-sign him with the idea that you can start him in LF every day but if you're able to acquire someone better or Reimold breaks out and stays healthy you have an excellent bench player.

This times a million. Well said.

[Oriole85]

Really, if the Nate McLouth we saw this year is your fourth outfielder you're doing well for yourself. Defensive replacement, pinch runner, pinch hitter, insurance at all three OF spots. I say re-sign him with the idea that you can start him in LF every day but if you're able to acquire someone better or Reimold breaks out and stays healthy you have an excellent bench player.

I agree with most of what you are saying, but defensive replacement? Even for a LF he has an incredibly weak arm. That's the time I'm thinking about replacing him is late in the game with a runner on third and one or no outs, up or tied like I've seen teams do with Johnny Damon.

[BobPhelan]

I agree with most of what you are saying, but defensive replacement? Even for a LF he has an incredibly weak arm. That's the time I'm thinking about replacing him is late in the game with a runner on third and one or no outs, up or tied like I've seen teams do with Johnny Damon.

His arm is weak but left field is where you can hide those players. He has much better range than anyone else currently on the roster though, which is more important for left field IMO.

[Oriole85]

His arm is weak but left field is where you can hide those players. He has much better range than anyone else currently on the roster though, which is more important for left field IMO.

Are you disagreeing with the scenario I presented, you didn't seem to debate that point. You'd rather have the stronger arm with the game in doubt like that then the better range IMO.

[JeremyStrain]

Much rather have range than arm in the OF. sure the arm will give you some sexy plays at the plate and hold a guy here or there...but great range will keep them from getting on base to begin with.

[Tucker Blair]

Much rather have range than arm in the OF. sure the arm will give you some sexy plays at the plate and hold a guy here or there...but great range will keep them from getting on base to begin with.

Essentially the Endy Chavez type.
Which I also agree that range is probably more important than an arm.
Ideally, you would love to have both. But that is a rare creature.