Jump to content

Watching David Lough Bat Makes My Eyes Bleed


Rene88

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 178
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Huh? He is a bad base stealer which is a shame with the speed.

Nothing hit hard today but some nice plays in the field and a decent bunt. I'll take that from what we have gotten recently.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it were up to me David Lough would play a lot more than he has been. The guy is just a really well rounded player. My kind of guy. Keep in mind that the object of the game is to score more runs than you allow the opposition. Lough is the best defensive OFer on the team, so he goes a long way in run prevention. I love having him out in LF, especially when you consider the fact that we do not have a power pitching rotation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lough as definitely earned his roster spot this year solely with his defensive play.

I'm not a Lough fan at all, but I am curious as to whether or not he could be a decent every day player if given the chance.

Remember the Andino experiment that failed? I'd like to see something similar with Lough just for curiosities sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Lough, but, I know many in OH, don't.

I don't get it either.

He is undersized, and he is not Nelson Cruz. And he is not Shin-Soo Choo. Many people would discard him. But I like him. He doesn't cost enough money to make Buck play him all the time. Or make it burn so bad when we do ultimately have a roster crunch that costs him Besides, he can't be any good. KC gave him up and he only cost us Danny Valencia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is undersized, and he is not Nelson Cruz. And he is not Shin-Soo Choo. Many people would discard him. But I like him. He doesn't cost enough money to make Buck play him all the time. Or make it burn so bad when we do ultimately have a roster crunch that costs him Besides, he can't be any good. KC gave him up and he only cost us Danny Valencia.

He's on the small side, but I wouldn't call him under-sized - that implies that he's too small to play at a high level. He's bigger than Pedroia and probably a bunch of other successful hitters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always liked him at least as a 4th OF. I am becoming more convinced that he is worth starting regularly (perhaps not every day). IF our other bats are producing, we can carry a .260/.310/.680 guy. Just in the last week he has made three or four plus plays that saved runs. Kind of a poor man's Lorenzo Cain. When we aren't scoring runs, it is going to be painful to have him in the lineup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is undersized, and he is not Nelson Cruz. And he is not Shin-Soo Choo. Many people would discard him. But I like him. He doesn't cost enough money to make Buck play him all the time. Or make it burn so bad when we do ultimately have a roster crunch that costs him Besides, he can't be any good. KC gave him up and he only cost us Danny Valencia.

He is a cheap and versatile guy for the bench, that plays plus defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's on the small side, but I wouldn't call him under-sized - that implies that he's too small to play at a high level. He's bigger than Pedroia and probably a bunch of other successful hitters.

Corner outfielders are not "bigger than Pedroia." It's just why folks do not love him. That's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Lough frustrates me is when he hits the ball in the air, and striking out too much. If he makes contact and can keep most of his hits on the ground, I'm in. I know the Orioles worked with him to not get under the ball, and it seems to be working recently.

Although once on base, I would keep him on a tight leash... he's not a good base stealer, although he's a good baserunner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...