I'm obviously catching up and a few days behind, but this caught me as a funny statement. Scott has easily been a better player than Pence has since Pence's call-up in 2007.
Of course they were wrong. Up until now, the Astros were a black hole for minor leaguers and developing guys.
Career Averages Luke Scott has been a better hitter, but when you factor in everything else, the two players are pretty close. Luke Scott (2122 PA) .350 OBP .506 SLG% .856 OPS Hunter Pence (2195 PA) .336 OBP .480 SLG% .815 OPS Luke Scott benefits greatly playing at Camden Yards, and he has been sat against lefties, so that also increases his numbers. Hunter Pence is a much better defensive player, Luke Scott is bad, but not abysmal in Left field. Hunter Pence is also faster, and 5 years younger. One thing is for sure, Luke Scott would look a LOT better than our current LF, the Astos never gave him a real chance. And he is having a monster year right now.
Even when you account for league and park effects, Scott has been better. Hunter's adjusted OPS+ has gone 129/105/115/102 from 2007-2010, while Scott's has been 118/111/115/146 over that same span. Pence may also be faster, which translates into more SB, but he's also been through out 40% of the time, which means he hurts his team more than he helps on the bases. And yes, Pence is a much better fielder, but RF defense is pretty value-neutral. Obviously, if I had to choose between the two right now, I'd take Pence. But Scott has simply been a more valuable player over the past 3.5 seasons.
It seemed like Luke Scott was always sitting out with some minor injury when he was here. I guess the Astros got tired of that.
Yeah and they just didn't have room for him in the outfield anymore. With Pence on the rise at the time and younger, it was time to move Scott.
It's a fairly irrelevant comparison because the biggest frustration with Scott by the Astros were the constant nagging injuries. The Orioles were able to largely negate that because they could DH him, whereas the Astros could not.
Scott's problem was he was WAY to streaky from what I can recall. Hadn't really compared Luke's and Hunter's numbers but their pretty similar, saying that Pence still has upside while Scott is what he is. Give me Hunter anyday over Scott but I do miss the Star Wars music everytime he came to bat.
or maybe they knew what they were doing...and more than the rest of us....recognizing that more time down there would make him a better player later...and now later is now.
