Should DD have kept Luke Scott?

[wildcard]

Roch is asking the question about whether the O's should have a dedicated DH instead of shifting many players to DH the way DD and Buck has designed it. Roch talks about Vlad but I don't think Vlad was a real consideration for 2012. Scott was.

http://www.masnsports.com/school_of_...h-dilemma.html

I think what it came down to for DD was that Scott was going to cost 5M this year and DD wanted to use the money for other players to add depth to the O's system.

Here is what DD did with the money:

1.5m Betemit IF/DH
1.5m Chavez 4th OF
1m Paulino B/C
.825m Ayala RP
.8 N. Johnson 1B/DH
.750 Eveland

Versus

5m Scott DH
.48 Angle 4th OF
.48 Hester B/C
.48 Phillips RP
.48 Antonelli IF

Did DD and Buck make the right move?

[weams]

Roch is asking the question about whether the O's should have a dedicated DH instead of shifting many players to DH the way DD and Buck has designed it. Roch talks about Vlad but I don't think Vlad was a real consideration for 2012. Scott was.

http://www.masnsports.com/school_of_...h-dilemma.html

I think what it came down to for DD was that Scott was going to cost 5M this year and DD wanted to use the money for other players to add depth to the O's system.

Here is what DD did with the money:

1.5m Betemit IF/DH
1.5m Chavez 4th OF
1m Paulino B/C
.825m Ayala RP
.8 N. Johnson 1B/DH
.750 Eveland

Versus

5m Scott DH
.48 Angle 4th OF
.48 Hester B/C
.48 Phillips RP
.48 Antonelli IF

Did DD and Buck make the right move?

Of course they did. And we have easily four dedicated dh's on the team if we count Roberts when he returns.

[crawjo]

Yes, they did.

[weams]

Of course they did. And we have easily four dedicated dh's on the team if we count Roberts when he returns.

Actually, I think if we had kept Luke, he was arguably a 7 million dollar player in arbitration.
And I think his sholder still prevents him from playing a position.

[JohnnyK27]

Of course they did. And we have easily four dedicated dh's on the team if we count Roberts when he returns.

Speaking of Roberts ....Is there any word on when he'd go on a minor league assignment to get ready to play? Also doesnt the facial hair policy apply to him? Dude needs to shave as he looks scrungy.

[Can_of_corn]

Speaking of Roberts ....Is there any word on when he'd go on a minor league assignment to get ready to play? Also doesnt the facial hair policy apply to him? Dude needs to shave as he looks scrungy.

The facial hair policy went by the wayside last season when the O's signed two famously hirsute over the hill sluggers.

[panick]

Letting Scott go was the right move.

I would rather not restrict a roster's flexibility by having someone who cannot play in the field. I also don't want to be stuck with a DH-only player who goes into slumps for 4 weeks at a time.

Rotating the DH means that one of the regulars can get a day off from field and DH if he's hitting well, or one of the reserves can get some at-bats more than once a week.

[jrobb21613]

Why not take a flyer on Bobby Abreu isn't he available?

[hayek]

Roch is asking the question about whether the O's should have a dedicated DH instead of shifting many players to DH the way DD and Buck has designed it. Roch talks about Vlad but I don't think Vlad was a real consideration for 2012. Scott was.

http://www.masnsports.com/school_of_...h-dilemma.html

I think what it came down to for DD was that Scott was going to cost 5M this year and DD wanted to use the money for other players to add depth to the O's system.

Here is what DD did with the money:

1.5m Betemit IF/DH
1.5m Chavez 4th OF
1m Paulino B/C
.825m Ayala RP
.8 N. Johnson 1B/DH
.750 Eveland

Versus

5m Scott DH
.48 Angle 4th OF
.48 Hester B/C
.48 Phillips RP
.48 Antonelli IF

Did DD and Buck make the right move?

It is pretty sad if this was an either/or type of thing simply because of the money. If DD thought Scott was going to be worth whatever he was going to be paid, then I hope he would have been kept.

[wildcard]

It is pretty sad if this was an either/or type of thing simply because of the money. If DD thought Scott was going to be worth whatever he was going to be paid, then I hope he would have been kept.

Its my belief that DD had something around a 85M budget for player salaries. He has to figure out how to put the best team on the field for that amount. Now if the revenue goes up because of increased attendance, then the payroll could go up too.

I might be wrong but that is the way it seem to be to me.

[LookitsPuck]

Keep in mind Scott was coming off an injury, do there was no guarantee he'd be healthy enough to contribute,

[playbaltimorecom]

I vote yes because Luke Scott was my least favorite Oriole. I strongly dislike when players like Luke Scott and Ozzie Gullen open their mouths. They are paid to play baseball not to play John McLaughlin. Sports is one thing meant to unite people, not divide and I was glad to see Luke go.

[OFFNY]

.
Yes, they made the right move.

[russ snyder]

Letting Scott go was the right move.

I would rather not restrict a roster's flexibility by having someone who cannot play in the field. I also don't want to be stuck with a DH-only player who goes into slumps for 4 weeks at a time.

Rotating the DH means that one of the regulars can get a day off from field and DH if he's hitting well, or one of the reserves can get some at-bats more than once a week.

I think you are dead on. I think that rotating the DH definitely spreads the AB's and playing time around. I really do not miss Scott. As other posters have stated, too streaky, too expensive, too limited in the field, and a bit of an unnecessary and devisive distraction with his stated viewpoint on the world IMHO.

[weams]

...not to play John McLaughlin.

Nothing wrong with John McLaughlin