+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    wildcard is offline Plus Member since 11/03 Hall of Fame Reputation Reputation
    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    11,810

    Should DD have kept Luke Scott?

    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?


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Hung on for the ride.
    Posts
    59,437
    Quote Originally Posted by wildcard View Post
    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.

  3. #3
    crawjo's Avatar
    crawjo is offline Plus Member since 07/11 Major League Starter Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    1,732
    Yes, they did.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Hung on for the ride.
    Posts
    59,437
    Quote Originally Posted by weams View Post
    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.

  5. #5
    JohnnyK27's Avatar
    JohnnyK27 is offline Plus Member Since 01/08 Hall of Fame Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Back in Westminster Md
    Posts
    10,472
    Quote Originally Posted by weams View Post
    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.

  6. #6
    Can_of_corn's Avatar
    Can_of_corn is offline Plus Member since 12/09 Hall of Fame Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    31,926
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyK27 View Post
    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.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Sewickley, PA
    Posts
    343
    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.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    268
    Why not take a flyer on Bobby Abreu isn't he available?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Westminster, MD
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by wildcard View Post
    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.

  10. #10
    wildcard is offline Plus Member since 11/03 Hall of Fame Reputation Reputation
    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    11,810
    Quote Originally Posted by hayek View Post
    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.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    6,399
    Keep in mind Scott was coming off an injury, do there was no guarantee he'd be healthy enough to contribute,

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    5,817
    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.

  13. #13
    OFFNY's Avatar
    OFFNY is offline Plus Member since 3/11 Hall of Fame Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Brewster, NY
    Posts
    36,032
    .
    Yes, they made the right move.

  14. #14
    russ snyder's Avatar
    russ snyder is offline Plus Member Since 1/13 Major League Starter Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Sykesville, Md.
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by panick View Post
    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.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Hung on for the ride.
    Posts
    59,437
    Quote Originally Posted by playbaltimorecom View Post
    ...not to play John McLaughlin.

    Nothing wrong with John McLaughlin

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

OriolesHangout.com is an unofficial site and not associated with the Baltimore Orioles and part of Hangout Ventures LLC. Copyright ©2013 | Privacy Policy | Advertise with us