lane didn't hit 316 in 2005, that was his obp. Scott has been the 4th best hitter this year. Last year he was one of, if not the best, hitter in the league the second half of the year. Why not use whatever limited funds we have this winter to improve the other 4 positions or the back end of the rotation? Obviously in a perfect world, in which the owner would commit a billion dollar payroll, the stros would have all-stars in every position. Absent that, given the team's real world constraints, out of all the astros problems why should they commit their limited resources to replace one of their cheapest, most productive players?
It makes no sens how much Luke gets jerked around. Early in the year he was hitting lefties way better than Lane, but yet still ended up platooned with Lane. The Astros need to throw him out there every game from here on out and see what he can do. Of course, they should have done this with Ensberg earlier this year and with Burke now as well, but they simply won't do it for whatever reason.
I wouldn't judge Scott by this one season. If you look at the top 40 left handed bats this season you'll find that the averages are down across the league. Here's some data I found. (Left handed bats only) 2006 Top 10: High: .347; Low: .304; Avg .314 2007 Top 10: High: .347; Low: .297; Avg .310 2006 Top 20: Low: .290; Avg .307 2007 Top 20: Low: .281; Avg .285 2006 Top 30: Low: .281; Avg .300 2007 Top 30: Low: .271; Avg .282 2006 Top 40: Low: .266; Avg .293 2007 Top 40: Low: .251; Avg .276 It's probably more good pitching than anything else.
I agree that he should start in RF next year. We need to sign a #2 and a #3 pitcher before anything else.
Luke Scott would not be starting for anyone else, but the Stros...same goes for J. Lane. Their act is tired already.
why wouldn't scott start for the Braves Diamondbacks Orioles Redsox WhiteSox Cubs Indians Marlins Royals Angels Dodgers Brewers Twins Yankees Mets A's Philllies Pirates Padres Giants Mariners Cardinals Devil Rays Rangers Blue Jays Nationals they all have one or more starting corner outfielders performing worse than scott is this year. not to mention how well luke played last year or his minor league track record. In case you need trouble counting, every team but three (reds, rockies and tigers) is starting one or, in many cases, two corner outfielders hitting worse than scott this year. How anyone can this that scott is a problem is beyond me.
There are a lot of teams with outfielders that have below a .830 OPS. That's above the league average for the position, I believe, so right there your argument fails. Secondly, Luke Scott has an OPS of .830, while Jason Lane has an average of about .160 with a .210 OBP and a OPS in the .500s. Do you not see how silly it is to even remotely link them together with words like "their"?
And all of that with Sporadic playing time. Luke Scott should be playing every day, Lane should be designated for reassignment. Let Burke play center until Hunter gets back. DD
Luke's not done yet. this is his first full season and I consider it his 2nd season. Most players struggle their second time through the system...hence the phrase 'sophmore slump'. When he's locked in he's dangerous and he may be finally getting locked in down the stretch. I wouldn't mind having Luke in our OF next season.
Why is Luke Scott's .833 OPS only good enough to platoon, but Wigginton's .787 OPS is good enough to be our 3B of the future and bump Lamb's .858 OPS out of the lineup? I don't understand any of the Astros decisions.
Who knows if Scott or Burke are the answer? Until Garner/Purpura get their heads out of the ass and start playing these guys every day we won't know. It seems to me any organization at all on top of their game would be finding out what they can now so that they can figure out their priorities in the off-season. They should have started finding out about guys as soon as Biggio got his 3000. What a bunch of idiots!!!
EXACTLY.........if you are not going to contend, find players that will help you contend in the future...... Hmmm...where have I heard that before. DD
Scott is just too streaky to be a starter. You cannot rely on a starting guy to get red hot for a month, then go ice cold for 2 or 3 weeks and contribute nothing, and have it average out to decent numbers. That's why you can't just look at his stats and declare he is next year's starting RF. That is why he'll always be a platoon guy you plug in when he's hot, or a LH off the bench. Consistency is the name of the game for a starting position player, either on defense (which he isn't) or offense (which he isn't).
How do we know if he's streaky or just can't get in a groove since he is constantly in and out of the lineup? In my opinion, Garner's inconsistency breeds inconsistency. What sense does it make now to take Scott out of the lineup so that you can play Biggio and Loretta. You already know that Biggio is gone next year and you already know what Loretta can do. If you have to keep Loretta happy so you can sign him for next year start him at 2b. Biggio should just be doing cameo's at this point.
I'm all for keeping him in the lineup to see what he can do for the remainder of the year. But he has shown he is a streaky hitter. The way RF has gone, the job easily would have been his if he was consistent. That is a big reason that he is NOT left in game in and game out. RF is there for the taking this season, and he hasn't grabbed it. Like I was saying, as a starter you can't rely on a guy that gets hot and gets ice cold in a cyclical type of way. That is a platoon player.
Everyone is a streaky hitter, especially guys in their first or 2nd years in the bigs..... But at least Scott has the UP streak in him, unlike Lane and Ensberg. So, assume Scott is streaky for arguments sake, then why on earth would you take him OUT of the lineup when he has gone 6 for his last 8? DD
