Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >

LaRoche or No LaRoche?

Posted: 12/20/2012 9:38 AM

LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


This bit on the situation - O's Hesitant to Pursue LaRoche actually makes a lot of sense to me.. We have the 24th pick and I understand about wanting to contend every year (LaRoche would certainly up the odds this year), but I definitely could understand not wanting to lose the 24th pick as a good reason not to add him.

On top of that, it doesn't mean we have to stand pat, but it means that we can use what we already know we have (Matusz, Arrieta, Britton, and so forth), to add a bat through trade instead and keep the potential for the future in the draft. What do you guys think about this situation?
"This team's gonna be very good in a hurry."- Peter Gammons
Photobucket
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/20/2012 11:12 AM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


I have no faith in O's being able to pick at 24 and land any impactful player

Laroche wouldn't exactly be blocking here anyone either

Feels like we've needed a 1B for about 10 years now
...and don't call me Shirley
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/20/2012 12:45 PM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


Get him. 24th pick. Big whoop. We need a true 1B who can hit.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/20/2012 2:05 PM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


I'd rather have the pick.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/20/2012 2:31 PM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


If the Nationals sign him wich I think will happen they will have no room for Morse thus trade him and I believe he comes to Baltimore. Well I did believe that but the Orioles signed that 1B yesterday though he doesnt imopress me looking at his stats he wouldnt be my AAA 1B but who am I?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/20/2012 2:47 PM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


I'd rather have the pick than get LaRoche. If he wants a 3 year deal at 33 years old and isn't a solid offensive contributor then pass. LaRoche isn't worth giving up any picks if it gives the team a chance to work its minor league system. Sure it's only the 24th pick, however there have been later picks that have become solid players in the majors. Do I know for sure that it will happen with the Orioles? No. However players like Pujols, who was picked in the 13th round by the Cardinals, can be found.

I smell tacos...

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/20/2012 3:12 PM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


I'm with you Stephen. Hopefully with the 24th pick and the 38th pick we can start to retool the system because there's a chance we can graduate our top 3 prospects.

Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/20/2012 4:25 PM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


Add me to the list that thinks we should pass on LaRoche if it requires surrendering the pick.  I don't think he should get 3 years so when you combine that with what we have to give up, it's not worth it.

Plus, if you move Davis to 1st then you get a cheaper option without giving up anything and you know that Davis will produce similar to what he produced this year.  And your OF is now set with Kakes, Jones and Reimold (I guess)...

Last edited 12/20/2012 4:26 PM by daoriginalmookie

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/20/2012 4:52 PM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 



stephenjames1979 wrote:

I'd rather have the pick than get LaRoche. If he wants a 3 year deal at 33 years old and isn't a solid offensive contributor then pass. LaRoche isn't worth giving up any picks if it gives the team a chance to work its minor league system. Sure it's only the 24th pick, however there have been later picks that have become solid players in the majors. Do I know for sure that it will happen with the Orioles? No. However players like Pujols, who was picked in the 13th round by the Cardinals, can be found.

I have to agree that the draft is more important than getting LaRoche, especially when you consider his injury history.




Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/20/2012 7:08 PM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


Well I will just have to be the contrarion I guess.  wink

I don't know if LaRoche is the right move or not. But what I strongly believe is that the O's have not done a damn thing to improve this winter and I believe they have actually regressed.

1. Losing Reynolds hurts the defense a lot and his power loss also hurts.
2. Banking on a healthy Reimold and Roberts is a crap shoot at best.
3. Can't imagine the O's will be as good in one run games as this past year. No I don't think that was a fluke but I also don't think they win such a huge % of those close games next year.
4. Toronto has improved a ton. NY and Boston are still NY and Boston. Tampa may drop off a bit.

So when I look at all the tea leaves I don't get a warm fuzzy. Now if #2 works out then we will be in pretty dang good shape. But if at least one of the two doesn't have a really good year then I see us dropping back to right around .500.  Sports is become a lot of win today. Yes we have to build the minors but in MLB with no salary cap it is a tough way to go.  IMHO
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/21/2012 2:02 AM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


I agree with you for the most part ifsteve although the only thing I would say is that Boston is not Boston anymore. They did not get a high profile player this offseason and they still have not improved their starting rotation. I honestly would not be surprised if they finished the upcoming season in 5th place.

I smell tacos...

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/21/2012 6:54 AM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


Screw LaRoche. He dicked us around a few years ago. We weren't good enough for him then, we shouldn't be now either.

F him.

I love that he only got 1 hit against us last year.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/21/2012 7:50 AM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


The key is what Chris Davis does this off-season to make himself a competent major league first baseman. If he can do that, a lot of problems are solved, and a lot more cheaply than signing LaRoche.

I played first base and catcher growing up, and the drills where you block or scoop balls in the dirt sre not a great deal of fun, but it's necessary to improve. There was a week early last year where Davis dropped two thrown balls playing first base.  They weren't bad throws, he just dropped them. To me, that was a total lack of concentration.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/21/2012 8:08 AM

RE: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


Davis and Reynolds are pretty much the same player. Both can hit the long ball; both strike out a ton and look real bad doing it; however Reynolds began to shine defensively at first base...I don't know that Davis is that good defensively. So we'll have to see if he can step in.
Despite all of Davis' k's--he managed to keep his BA much higher than Mark ever could. He doesn't draw the walks that Reynolds drew, and I hate his swing...he looks like he is just up there swatting at the ball, but he is who he is and hopefully he will have a great year for us. O's still need a legitimate slugger and I hope they go out and get one. They have been strangely quiet this offseason
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/21/2012 8:15 AM

RE: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


They both K a lot, but Davis brought that AVG up to near the .270 mark last year right?

.270 .326 .501 .827

Reynolds

221 .335 .429 .763

So he makes contact a TON more, especially later in last season! Shows some hope for this year if he can up that .275ish with the same power. That should mean 1-3 more HR's which would be just fine progress.

Plus Reynolds is 29, and Davis is 26
"This team's gonna be very good in a hurry."- Peter Gammons
Photobucket

Last edited 12/21/2012 8:15 AM by camdenbird

Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/21/2012 9:38 AM

RE: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


I'm pretty sure the O's took all that into consideration when they decided to let Reynolds walk. Still, I don't think they have done enough to stay competitive in the AL East. They sort of snuck up on everyone last year...but this year they are now one of the 'big dogs' and will really have to scamble to make postseason. They seem to be putting a lot of hope in a couple of chronically injured players to lead the way. Risky?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/21/2012 10:55 AM

RE: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 



insagt1 wrote: I'm pretty sure the O's took all that into consideration when they decided to let Reynolds walk. Still, I don't think they have done enough to stay competitive in the AL East. They sort of snuck up on everyone last year...but this year they are now one of the 'big dogs' and will really have to scamble to make postseason. They seem to be putting a lot of hope in a couple of chronically injured players to lead the way. Risky?
Here again I have to agree with your "Risky". It seems like Dan likes to plays the odds and sign a lot of unfulfilled talent and hopes that a couple of them comes through.

IMHO the O’s still need a proven bat in the clean up spot of the order, unless Reimold proves he can stay healthy and hit like he did early last year for a full season, I don’t see someone who makes a solid #4 hitter. It seems Duquette is counting on a lot of players having as solid a season as they did in 2012 and a couple of players having much better seasons. As you said that is risky to say the least.




Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/21/2012 2:06 PM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


Agree wholeheatedly with the last two posts. Other teams are making moves to improve. The O's have done nothing but sign a few scrubs for minor league depth and are totally relying on long term health of two key pieces. Not just risky in my book but down right silly. PLEASE for the love of all things orange make ONE FREAKING move this winter to improve the team.
Reply | Quote
  • TheGuy9
  • Frederick Keys
  • 333 posts this site
Avatar

Posted: 12/24/2012 1:18 AM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


i think alot of people in this thread are overvalueing this draft pick, this years draft is the weakest ive seen in years

"Stay Thirsty My Friends"

Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/24/2012 1:47 AM

Re: LaRoche or No LaRoche? 


I don't think the Orioles are putting too much on Reimold and Roberts. If they can come back, that gives the Orioles a little bit different way to score runs than home runs, namely, by getting on base. If they don't return or can't play well, the Orioles did without them much of 2012 and could probably do that again if the injury bug strikes again.

The other thing I'd point out is that the Orioles have a number of guys who can, due to their young age, be expected to improve. I'm talking Adam Jones, Chris Davis, Matt Wieters and Manny Machado. You add in off and injured years for Markakis and JJ Hardy, and I think the O's offense will be all right. IMHO, the major surprises for the O's offense last year were 1. Adam Jones playing every day, and 2. Chris Davis' development. Everything else (again, just MHO) was within the realm of what the players had done before (you can add McLouth's comeback, albeit over two months, as a positive surprise if you want).

I'm sure the Orioles would like to add another bat, but I'm more interested in the way the starting rotation will shake out than maybe improving the offense with another big bat. You figure Hammel, Chen, Gonzalez and Tillman are pretty good bets, Tillman because he is out of options, but I know the O's want Joe Saunders back, and then you've got Arrietta (2012 opening day starter), Matusz, Britton, Hunter, Steve Johnson and Bundy and Gausman doing lots of things to show why they were drafted so high. Then you add in Wada coming back off TJ, and the question is what do the Orioles do?

My thought is the Orioles should not sign LaRoche, keep the draft picks, and try and move some of the excess pitching for high A or double AA offensive prospects.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >