Roch: Do the O's keep De Aza?

[SteveO]

Probably because he's the same player as Lough for 12 times the price.

Come on now that is just silly.

Lough had a hot month and half towards the end of the season that MIGHT make him worth another look. If he were remotely close to the same player that De Aza is then DD would never have traded for De Aza in the first place.

De Aza has a track record that Lough can only dream of. Not saying De Aza is some great player or worth the money, a lot of that depends on what happens with Markakis and Cruz IMO but to say De Aza is the same player as Lough is akin to saying a Yugo is the same car as a Honda Accord only 12x times the price.

[weams]

Lough had more than a hot month. He had 350 AB's last year with KC and put up a .724 OPS. He has a career .818 OPS in the minors, better than De Aza. Lough had a terrible April/May and wasn't able to get regular AB's after that. De Aza had a terrible May last year but was able to keep getting AB's and dig his way out of it. De Aza has regressed for the last 3 years, bottoming out at .700 OPS last year. De Aza is far from a guarantee to OPS over .700. He looked great in September or his OPS would have been well south of .700. You mention Lough with the hot month but that's just what De Aza had. At 6M vs. 500K and better LF defense from Lough, one can make a reasonable argument to go with Lough over De Aza. Of course, we should keep both and say goodbye to Markakis.

Lough is an under-rated asset.

[Il BuonO]

Lough had more than a hot month. He had 350 AB's last year with KC and put up a .724 OPS. He has a career .818 OPS in the minors, better than De Aza. Lough had a terrible April/May and wasn't able to get regular AB's after that. De Aza had a terrible May last year but was able to keep getting AB's and dig his way out of it. De Aza has regressed for the last 3 years, bottoming out at .700 OPS last year. De Aza is far from a guarantee to OPS over .700. He looked great in September or his OPS would have been well south of .700. You mention Lough with the hot month but that's just what De Aza had. At 6M vs. 500K and better LF defense from Lough, one can make a reasonable argument to go with Lough over De Aza. Of course, we should keep both and say goodbye to Markakis.

When you're right, you're right. Nailed it.

[25 Nuggets]

I don't have a problem with the Orioles having both Lough and De Aza on the team, even with Pearce and Markakis and a new DH. Depth is a good thing to have -- we saw that in spades this year. I don't think De Aza's salary will prevent them from doing anything, not for one year at less than $6 million.

It's the same situation with the starting rotation. Six or seven players for five spots? Good. There is no guarantee that they will all stay healthy; actually it's likely they won't.

[weams]

When you're right, you're right. Nailed it.

I like DeAza's power potential.

[SteveO]

Lough had more than a hot month. He had 350 AB's last year with KC and put up a .724 OPS. He has a career .818 OPS in the minors, better than De Aza. Lough had a terrible April/May and wasn't able to get regular AB's after that. De Aza had a terrible May last year but was able to keep getting AB's and dig his way out of it. De Aza has regressed for the last 3 years, bottoming out at .700 OPS last year. De Aza is far from a guarantee to OPS over .700. He looked great in September or his OPS would have been well south of .700. You mention Lough with the hot month but that's just what De Aza had. At 6M vs. 500K and better LF defense from Lough, one can make a reasonable argument to go with Lough over De Aza. Of course, we should keep both and say goodbye to Markakis.

I like Lough as 4th OF and occasional starter. His year with KC his OPS did not even match De Aza's career avg of .733 Probably in the minority here but I see that year with KC the year before last as his ceiling or pretty close to it. De Aza however I think can reach that pretty consistently especially at OPACY which I think is a park that plays well for him. Just a matter of opinion I guess. I will take 7 years of production in which a guys worst year nearly approximates the other guys best to date. Granted Lough has had limited opportunities but IMO there is a reason for that.

Lough can be a good piece to have around, he beats the hell out of some of the backup OF we have seen here before but frankly its not my money, I doubt that having DeAza around at roughly 5 million more means the O's decide to bypass other opportunities for guys they would really like to have. If it comes down to just having one though then I can see where the defense and ability to play CF at much higher level than De Aza, plus cost issues would lead some to believe that Lough is the better option. I would be inclined to probably agree with that. Honestly I see nothing wrong with keeping De Aza, Lough, Pearce, Jones, Markakis and Cruz (if they sign both). I have seen enough of Cruz in the field to just count him as a DH who in an emergency could be called upon to play some OF.

[InsideCoroner]

We need De Aza! He'll be back. He was one of our best fielders and his speed was needed and obvious in the games he played. We need more speed in the lineup. Who will DD add with speed?

One of our best fielders? Next to Markakis/Jones/Hardy/Machado/Schoop/Davis/Lough/etc.? He had more pop than Lough, said he felt ten years younger playing in the thick of our pennant race, and it showed. But of all the games I saw him play, he looked to be a barely average outfielder to me, with an unimpressive, not very accurate arm. I like De Aza, but I think some people fell in love with his last four weeks of the season with the Orioles, to the point of overlooking how mundane he was in the first twenty weeks of 2014 with the ChiSox.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Lough had more than a hot month. He had 350 AB's last year with KC and put up a .724 OPS. He has a career .818 OPS in the minors, better than De Aza. Lough had a terrible April/May and wasn't able to get regular AB's after that. De Aza had a terrible May last year but was able to keep getting AB's and dig his way out of it. De Aza has regressed for the last 3 years, bottoming out at .700 OPS last year. De Aza is far from a guarantee to OPS over .700. He looked great in September or his OPS would have been well south of .700. You mention Lough with the hot month but that's just what De Aza had. At 6M vs. 500K and better LF defense from Lough, one can make a reasonable argument to go with Lough over De Aza. Of course, we should keep both and say goodbye to Markakis.

Ehh, De Aza played AAA in the IL, which had a league OPS that was 88 points below the PCL in 2011. Subjectively, De Aza looks to be the better hitter with much better plate discipline. Not ruling out Lough as a potential starter, and I'm not sure how tight the money/priorities are surrounding De Aza's salary, but Lough should be the 4th OF/backup plan imo.

[BohKnowsBmore]

I don't have a problem with the Orioles having both Lough and De Aza on the team, even with Pearce and Markakis and a new DH. Depth is a good thing to have -- we saw that in spades this year. I don't think De Aza's salary will prevent them from doing anything, not for one year at less than $6 million.

It's the same situation with the starting rotation. Six or seven players for five spots? Good. There is no guarantee that they will all stay healthy; actually it's likely they won't.

I've been saying this as well. Pearce/De Aza in LF. Pearce can also play DH and 1B (spelling Davis most likely).

[CA-ORIOLE]

Fair enough. De Aza has a AAA OPS of .849 to .796 for Lough. Both had over 1,000 AB's in AAA. Considering the adjustment for leagues, De Aza was the better hitter at advanced levels. However, De Aza has regressed each year in the majors in terms of OPS, bottoming out at .700 last year.

Subjectively pretty much includes watching him OPS .877 for the O's last September. I thought he looked better than a lot of Orioles in that time.

Okay, I'm good with De Aza and Markakis with Lough on the bench (not the best fit) but prefer De Aza in LF and almost anyone (including Pearce and Lough) in RF instead of Markakis.

I think the main issues/concern with De Aza last year was the tremendous falloff against LHP. I'm not sure how correctable that is or if it will require strict platooning or not. In ether case I prefer him over Lough at this point. I agree with your previous posts that they may duplicative and Lough may bot be complementary as bench player though.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I'm not sure what his numbers were against LHP's with the O's but he looked okay to me, plus he OPS'd over .800 against them in 2013. Not sure why he was so bad last year but it's not a problem he's always had.

Agreed. They were unbelievably horrid last year (.400 OPS in 95 PA's).

[BRobinsonfan]

According to Baseball Reference De Aza is comparable to Lew Ford. Just sayin'

[O's84]

According to Baseball Reference De Aza is comparable to Lew Ford. Just sayin'

Lew Ford? Quick, get rid of him before he infects everyone!

[25 Nuggets]

Hey man, Lew Ford had a really good 2004 season. And... um... yeah that's about it.

[Ruzious]

Fans in general seem to be over-rating D'Aza. He's just okay on both offense and defense.