I'm probably coming across differently then I'm really thinking in my head. It's not that I think the Astros would be idiots to sign him. I just think you could spend less money on a guy like Cameron, get similar production, and spend more money elsewhere. If the Astros were one piece away it would be different imo. They are weak at 3B, 2B, SS, C, CF (or RF depending on Pence), SP, and bullpen. Now granted, they aren't upgrading SS because they like the defense. They like JR at catcher and they are going to give Burke a shot at 2nd. I get all that. But this team isn't one good hitter away from contending.
Berkman is a career .300 hitter, Hunter is a career .270 hitter Berkman has a career OBP of .412, Hunter has a career OBP of .324 Their XBH is about the only thing they have in common, and because of Berkman's better AVG & OBP, he's got a much better career SLG than Hunter. Berkman is light-years ahead of Hunter offensively.
he had 98 RBI's in 06 and 107 in '07. He hit .278 in 06 and .287 in '07 but his OPS numbers over the past 2 seasons were well above his career OPS. he's actually playing better at this point of his career. obviously that won't track upward forever. but if you could squeeze a few more years out of that, i think it would be really valuable for this team...particularly with the dimensions of CF at MMP.
But Scott has been better than Hunter offensively over that time. Yes, Hunter would improve the defense, but is it worth it financially? You can pay Hunter 8 figures, or you could pay Scott whatever he gets in arbitration, which is likely to be less than 20% of Hunter's salary, and use the rest to improve elsewhere.
One point - sure, the 'Stros need pitchers more than hitters, but all the money in the world won't buy you a really quality starting pitcher if there aren't any on the FA market.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that Luke Scott is a better hitter than Torii Hunter. Luke only played in 65 games in 06. So comparing those years together is silly to me. Luke is streaky, and I'm not entirely sure what we have there. I already know what to expect from Hunter.
Scott had a pretty poor 2007, and he still had a similar OPS+ (119) as Hunter, which was close to a career-best (122). Scott hit only .255, and still had almost the exact same SLG as Hunter. He also bested Hunter's OBP by almost 20 points. When you factor in the difference in ballparks, they had almost identical seasons from an OPS standpoint. IMO, Scott had a career-worst season and should be expected to improve, and Hunter nearly had a career-best season and should be expected to regress.
Zac D makes a REALLY GOOD point. & LOL @ the comparison of Luke Scott to Tori Hunter. I mean, really. Time for the Hunter-Hunter connection!
I don't know how in the world you can look at a guy and say he's at his career-worst when he's played about a season and a half. I come back to my point...I still don't know what we have in Luke Scott. I think he's wildly streaky. I know what Hunter is. And I know what he is in CF.
You do know what you have in hunter - a slightly above-average hitter who is a great defender who is going to get a gigantic contract that will likely limit your financial flexibility when combined with the mega-contracts that Lee, Berkman & Roy O. have already signed. Or you can get similar offensive production and worse defensive ability and save a whole lot of money to spend elsewhere in the organization. You're right, I can't predict what Scott is exactly at this point, but I can tell you this - players with a 100-pt difference between their AVG & OBP who can still maintain a solid SLG are good players - you can bank on it nearly every time. Scott may never be a superstar, but he is a good hitter.
Fair enough. I started this morning feeling really torn on this. I'm still not 100% sure...but I find myself leaning towards supporting bringing Hunter in. I hope you're right about Scott...but it sure sounds like the Astros feel differently.
Mike Cameron, the Padres' Gold Glove center fielder, was suspended for the first 25 games of next season on Wednesday after testing positive a second time for a banned stimulant.
Care to provide evidence of that? Hunter is clearly a defensive upgrade, but from an offensive perspective, they carry similar value. It's questionable whether Hunter's addition would be worth the $15+ million per season.
Ugh. That hurts... Cameron was the under the radar guy I figured the Astros would end up getting. The strength of the free agent market is definitely in CF, and the depth of it is what hopefully can keep it prices from getting out of hand.
