Tuesday Rockpile: Greg Reynolds fails to reassure

by Russ Oates on Sep 16, 2008 8:10 AM MDT in Rockpile Comment 19 comments

All right, so Greg Reynolds's first start for the Rockies since July didn't go so well. You could say that's an understatement. Yesterday's start was quite like his one on July 4--incredibly forgettable. Yet, we know that the July 4 game had an incredibly remarkable ending. Not so much last night.

	IP	H	R	ER	BB	SO	HR	GmSc
July 4	1.1	7	7	7	2	0	2	10
Sept. 15	2+	9	7	7	0	1	1	11

Back on June 12, Reynolds allowed eight runs on 10 hits in 3 1/3 innings while facing the Giants. He had a Game Score of seven in that contest.

Reynolds has also been listening too much to Clint Hurdle since his return to the majors. Just read the following quote from the RMN's game report:

"There comes a time when there are no excuses," Reynolds said. "It's a matter of getting the job done. I felt really good. I felt good about giving the team a chance to win. That's why this (game) was more frustrating."

I'm sure I could go through post-game quotes from other games and find that Hurdle has said something like that several times this season. Reynolds probably isn't the only Rockie to say something like that. The guys need to come up with some new lines.

0 recs | Comment 19 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The real headline

Holliday pleads his case by Krieger

If you get a chance to entertain offers of six or seven years with a no-trade clause, you have a chance to live a normal life for six or seven years in one city, where you can raise your family and not worry about picking up and moving. “So to take four years with no no-trade clause? To where if all of a sudden the organization wants to go in a different direction, you’re out? Where’s the loyalty then?”

All Matt wants to stay is 6 to 8 year contract, WITH a no-trade clause. There are only a few teams in baseball that could do that contract. And the Rockies aren’t one of them. And he wonders why the Rockies haven’t given him what he considers a solid offer. It’s because they can’t. I’d love to live in a McMansion in Castle Pines….but the lack of money holds me back……It’s a bitch, but you can’t spend what you don’t have.

I’ll miss you Matt. You were my Favorite Rockie. Even got your jersey when I finally broke down and bought a jersey. Good luck in New York, or LA, or Chicago, or Boston.

Thought Clint Hurdle should be fired before it was cool.

by Redhawk on Sep 16, 2008 9:06 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs

When I read that piece

I thought exactly the same thing. No way can the Rox do that contract. See: Helton, Todd. Ah, well…

It’s been great, Matty. Good luck to you. You’ll forever have a place in Rockies lore. At least we have that.

Put me out of my misery. Please!

by rockhead on Sep 16, 2008 9:15 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

and I hope whoever signs him takes a look at his home/road splits when they form expectations about much production they are going to get.

Second half run?

by moomacher on Sep 16, 2008 9:28 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

On the road

he’s hitting .311…there are only about 6 guys in the league that are hitting better than that with their home & road averages combined. He also has 17 stolen bases on the road and only 10 at home, does that mean he can only run on the road? His road numbers are better than most guys home numbers.

Matt’s one of the premier players in baseball. I hope the Rox try to build a line-up around him…if not, he’ll look great standing in front of the Green Monster.

by 4thturn on Sep 16, 2008 12:57 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Less power, though

.181 ISO power on the road vs. .259 at home. That’s not a huge difference, and I’m not arguing that Matt isn’t a good hitter away from Coors Field — but is he one of the best hitters in baseball? No. While his overall OPS ranks 8th in all of baseball, his road OPS, taken alone, would rank 27th.

by Tom (RFTN) on Sep 16, 2008 1:23 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have to say

that I am very disappointed in Matty right now. I was all for re-signing him, even at 5-6 years, but he really has packed it in over the last couple of weeks. I don’t know if he is angry about the comments made by O’Dowd or just knows he’ll be gone after this year, but either way I feel like his approach has not been very professional. The way it looks has been very frustrating, and based on that attitude, I think I have changed my mind and am ready to see him traded away. I appreciate what he did for the Rox, and I still will be rooting for him, but his recent plate appearances have been very selfish IMO.

by smokinRox on Sep 16, 2008 2:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

The real problem

Folks like to bash the Monforts for not wanting to step up here, and that’s not the problem (not that the Monforts aren’t guilty of not stepping up…) The problem is the last three mega contracts the Monforts gave out have all bombed. Hampton/Neagle/Helton.

Not in the same way, but each bombed in their own ways. History has to indicate to those guys that 6 year/$120 million deals are just not good for the future of the club. I suspect if Holliday would actually sign a FIVE year extension (kicking in after ‘09) at an average of $18-21m per year, the Monforts would offer it in a heartbeat. That would only take Holliday through his age 34 season. Sure, performance may decline a bit by that time, but his prime power years should still be 31-33, shouldn’t they? And they given him a progressive no trade clause…say, 20 no trade teams in year 1, 24 teams in year 2, 26 teams, than no trade the last couple of years.

But Holliday seems to make clear he wants another 1-3 years beyond that, and that’s when it becomes far more apt to be a Helton-style albatross around the team.

The way I see it, Holliday’s got about ten weeks to decide if he really wants to be a Rockie. Otherwise, look for him to go at the winter meetings, and just hope we actually get the front line arm we’re looking for. I can see something like Holliday for Lester happening, even if we have to toss in Barmes to make it so.

Watching the purple row from high atop the big brown monolith on California Ave

by Mondogarage on Sep 16, 2008 5:03 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

After the experiences with Helton, Walker et al

The Rockies are understandably going to shy away from long-term deals like the one Holliday wants. In light of the post-steroid era player decline (you know, now that players don’t inexplicably hit as well as they did at 27 when they’re 40), the Rockies aren’t going to lock him up until he’s 35 and give him a no-trade clause.

There’s also the off chance that other teams look at his home/road splits and conclude that Matt’s not really that good, and nobody wants to lock him up for that many years.

by Tom (RFTN) on Sep 16, 2008 9:43 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

BS

The Rockies could easily give Matt a 6 year, $18-20 million per contract with some buyouts in between, a 7th year club option and a no-trade clause. Don’t let the Rocky writers fool you with their pro Monforts crap.

The problem is, of course, Boras. He’ll scream bloody murder to Matty if he took that deal because it hurts his negotiating power with the clubs over other star players.

by roxhead on Sep 16, 2008 10:20 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Boras

His problem is that he doesn’t want his players taking a “hometown discount” — i.e., playing for less money than they’re worth just to stay in Colorado. A lot of the time you get the feeling that Boras is looking out for himself more than the players he represents… and as an attorney (all agents are basically attorneys) that’s the exact opposite of what you’re supposed to do. If the guy wants to stay in Denver, let him stay in Denver, even if it means he’s making $5 million less per year than he would be in New York. Don’t convince him to sign with the Yankees just because it means a few extra bucks in your own pocket.

I agree that the Rockies could afford to give Matt, say, a 6-year, $120 million contract with an option for the 7th year and a no-trade clause. The issue really is whether or not that’s a good idea. We’re seeing right now what is happening with Todd Helton as he’s in the sixth or seventh year of his contract: declining production, injuries becoming an issue, etc. Matt is a very good hitter right now, but will he be a very good hitter in 2015? Do the Rockies want to risk paying a league-average hitter $20 million in 2015 and not being able to move him because of his no-trade clause? I think it’s not so much that the Monforts can’t afford this as it is shying away from it because of their prior experiences with long-term deals.

by Tom (RFTN) on Sep 16, 2008 1:29 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I am soooooooo tired

Of the Hurdlesepeak. It’s been the same ole, same ole all dang season with no change in results. It’s all just hollow sound bites. Time to get a new line, boys.

Put me out of my misery. Please!

by rockhead on Sep 16, 2008 9:07 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs

I think it's less Hurdlespeak

and more Sports Cliche speak. They just all happen to be using the same section of the Sports Cliche Handbook. I’d rather this than “We’re just taking it one game at a time” or “I gave 110%.”

by holly96 on Sep 16, 2008 11:13 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs

If Yost was fired....

and his tenure has been mildly more successful than Hurdle’s over the same period of time, what does that say about what Hurdle has failed to accomplish? I know the Brewers choked last year and the Rockies came out of nowhere, but that is what happens with young teams sometimes. At least this year the Brewers are in it. The Rockies have fallen off the map. So why do the Brewers believe in accountability and not the Rockies?

by deacs on Sep 16, 2008 12:02 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

Ned Yost makes Hurdle look like Casey Stengel

Anecdotal evidence (as well as actual evidence, like the disaster that has been Brewer bullpen management the last two seasons) suggests that Ned Yost might be the dumbest man, or at least the most obstinate, to ever manage a big league ball club.

And while I have a second… we’re not getting any new cliches any time soon – that’s why they’re called cliches. The act of taking shots at coaches and players based on throwaway quotes in game wraps is getting tired.

Staying on the sunny side of Blake Street since 1993.

by Franchise26 on Sep 16, 2008 12:42 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

You can't pin everything on Hurdle, either

Is it Hurdle’s fault that Todd Helton has only played in 83 games? Or that Tulo has only played in 90, and hit in the neighborhood of .150 in the first half? Or that Jeff Francis turned from a 17-game winner to a barely competent pitcher for most of the first half? Or that Franklin Morales completely blew up in April? Or that Greg Reynolds was rushed to the majors? Or that Willy Taveras’ OBP dropped like a rock? (You can blame Hurdle for continuing to bat him leadoff, though.) There’s only so much you can pin on the field manager. Yost had more to work with as the manager of the Brewers, and I’m not sure just how much should be blamed on him, but as much as we like to rip on Hurdle around here he’s had a lot of things go wrong this season that were beyond his control.

by Tom (RFTN) on Sep 16, 2008 1:38 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Point proven

..but is it the point that you wanted to make?

When the things beyond your control go wrong that only makes it MORE important that you succeed with the things within your control.

Hurdle can be a good manager and still be a bad manager for [i]this[/i] team. This season the conflicts between the active roster management style (constantly cycling young players in for expensive or declining veteran players) that the organization needs to embrace and Hurdle’s more traditional managerial style have been more pronounced.

Hurdle did well with a team full of young players when there were no expectations but once the expectations were ratcheted up his handling of players has gotten worse.

The Rockies are going to need someone flexible and daring to consistently do a good job of managing young and frequently turned-over teams at altitude. Neither Hurdle nor his staff appear to fit the bill.

by MADness on Sep 16, 2008 4:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Okay, so going with your hypothesis...

Who should be managing the Rockies? Feel free to pick anyone either not currently managing at the major league level, or one who is likely to be fired over the winter. In other words, no choosing a manager who is not leaving their current club, such as Scoscia, Francona, etc.

Watching the purple row from high atop the big brown monolith on California Ave

by Mondogarage on Sep 16, 2008 4:55 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

My guy would be...

Bobby Valentine. He’s been pretty darn successful in Japan. However, he’s probably too expensive. Maybe somebody like Dave Duncan (pitching coach of the Cardinals). He’s gotten a lot out of his pitching staff. Our guys would be in good hands with him.

Eschew Obfuscation!

by Jeff Aberle on Sep 16, 2008 6:26 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs