M’s Interested In Luke Scott?
A conversation with a friend tonight revealed some rumblings that haven’t been reported yet, so I’ll toss this out there with the usual caveats – I’m not a reporter, I don’t claim to be, and this is third hand information, so take it with the appropriate amount of salt.
The M’s have apparently had talks with the Orioles regarding Luke Scott, and if the rumblings are true, he could be pretty high up on their list. He makes an awful lot of sense for the M’s, so this one certainly passes the logic test.
As a 31-year-old outfielder, he’s not exactly a cornerstone of the Orioles foundation. In fact, due to their logjam of outfielders, they’re not even really sure where he’s going to play next year. Nolan Reimold and Felix Pie are expected to split the LF job, leaving Scott as a 1B/DH, even though he played less than a dozen games at first base last year and his glove is wasted when he’s not playing the field.
As a guy headed to arbitration for the second time, coming off a $2.4 million salary for 2009, he’s at the point where his salary is too prohibitive for Baltimore to keep him around as a part-time player. He’ll probably make $4 million or so in 2010 – still less than what he’s worth, but too much for a team who isn’t sure where to put him. So, he’s available.
And he’s pretty much exactly what the M’s are looking for – a power hitter with some defensive value and versatility who also has the approach at the plate they’re preaching. Scott’s a career .264/.350/.494 hitter, drawing most of his value at the plate from his patience and power. At the plate, he’s like Russ Branyan dialed back a few degrees – not quite as many walks or strikeouts and a bit less power, but the same general player type.
Scott also offers a pretty decent glove in the outfield, though – in 2,500 innings between left and right, his career UZR is +10.6, which is about +5 runs per full season. Given that he’s headed for his 32nd birthday, you’ll want to project some erosion in his defensive skills, but he’s still likely be to average-ish out there. He won’t hurt you with the glove, though, and that’s not easy to find in a guy who can slug .500.
His willingness to play first base – he was recently quoted as saying that he felt that if you gave him spring training to improve, he thinks he could be pretty good there – offers the kind of flexibility the M’s are clearly looking for this winter. He could end up starting in left field if Saunders doesn’t claim the job in spring training, start at first if the team can’t find the right fit in free agency (or that right fit ends up on the DL), or DH on a day where the M’s want to run out an all-defense team and still have some punch in the line-up.
Acquiring Scott would let the M’s take some health gambles at 1B/DH. Or it would give them the chance to make Carp and Saunders fight for one starting job, if they wanted to go young at either 1B/LF but not both. His salary is low enough that he wouldn’t stand in the way of other pursuits, and he shouldn’t cost so much in talent that it’s prohibitive to acquire him. Since the team is in the market for a +2 win LF/1B/DH who won’t break the bank, Scott seems to fit the bill better than anyone else.
He hasn’t been talked about much so far this winter, but I have a feeling we might be hearing his name quite a bit more over the next week or two.
Comments
43 Responses to “M’s Interested In Luke Scott?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
What kind of deal would make sense? Are the Orioles simply looking to shed some money and won’t demand much?
Hmmmmm! I thought of him when I was scanning FA lists a few months ago, and wondered what kind of a fit he might be, then promptly forgot all about him. Nice analysis, Dave.
If they were to pick him up, creating a situation where the M’s can “take some health gambles at 1B/DH”, what kind of player would you see as more likely? An injury risk with power (Branyan), an injury risk with OBP (Nick Johnson), or a combination of both, without as much of a chance of injury (Adam LaRoche)? Not saying that Branyan can’t get on base, or Johnson has no power…just that those particulars are their individual strengths.
I like the fact that he has proven he can hit AL pitching which is always my fear in picking up a primarily NL bat.
Orioles have got squat in the bullpen for the most part so I would think this becomes a bullpen + prospect for bat type of deal.
I like the fact that he has proven he can hit AL pitching which is always my fear in picking up a primarily NL bat.
Orioles have got squat in the bullpen for the most part so I would think this becomes a bullpen + prospect for bat type of deal.
Great call Dave. Scott would be a very good fit with the M’s
I was hoping the M’s could do something with Scott last year, so this is a nice thought now. I don’t think he would cost too much in terms of talent.
Another good fit for the M’s, seems there is more out there than i realized. Dave, do you think these many prospects are somewhere on Z’s master plan by priority and if so, when do you think he’ll pull the trigger? Soon or just before spring training?
Good call, Dave, Scott is a pretty valuable guy for us in that role. If, for instance, we bring back Branyan and have Scott, is there a chance we go for one of the no-glove DH types like Matsui or Thome?
For instance, we start the season…
LF – Scott
1B – Branyan
DH – Thome/Matsui
And if/when Branyan gets injured, Scott can move over to 1B and Saunders can be called up to take his rightful place in LF. Seems like a good way to get Saunders some extra AAA PAs before we commit him to a starting role with the Major League club, and we have Branyan insurance for when his back acts up or whatever.
I would love to see Luke Scott in a Mariner uniform, he has been very consistent since his days as an Astro.
Who would they have to trade to get him?
Just about every position player that Jack Z picks up seems to have a significant part of his value attributable to positional flexibility and/or defense. Guti, Hannahan, Hall, Figgins, Langerhans… Luke Scott fits that mold and so yeah, it would seem to make a lot of sense.
Jack should talk about the Jones et al. for Bedard swindle while manfully blinking back tears until the O’s are so consumed with guilt that they trade Scott for a song.
Is anyone concerned about the .667 OPS (.208/.292/.375) 31-year-old Luke Scott posted after the All Star break last season?
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?n1=scottlu01&year=2009&t=b
Baltimore fans were concerned about the deterioration of Scott’s defensive skills last season.
Given his value though, wouldn’t the O’s just stick him at first base or DH?
kill55 – that low OPS in the second half is competely BABIP driven. No worries there.
So what would three years of Luke Scott cost in terms of talent? Are we talking like a Fister/French type or more like a prospect?
He’s the right type of player, but he hits LH. And unless he’s the starting 1B, he’s probably not a good fit. How about Ryan Garko? He seems like a better fit with Griffey as DH and whoever the 1B will be, most likely a LH.
DAMellen – 2 years, not 3. My guess is that we would give up one of our surplus arms, whoever is their favorite, and a C prospect.
Goody – it’s not a matter of Scott being undervalued as much as it’s Scott not being a good fit for the 2010 Orioles. It’s just resource optimization.
If Scott is traded for, and nothing else happens, that means we could have an opening day lineup of Felix, Johnson, Carp/Scott, Lopez, Figgins, Wilson, Saunders/Scott, Guti, and Ichiro.
That leaves still leaves us cash to acquire the rest of our position players and, possibly, sign Lackey. Interesting times.
BEST IDEA EVER!
ICHIRO! L
Figgins S
N. Johnson L
Lopez R (because he is RH, not b/c he is a #4)
The Muscle L
Guti R
Scott L
Moore
Wilson
Now THAT is a lineup I can love.
When Johnson or Russell get hurt, bring up Saunders from AAA to play LF and move Scott to 1B. This gives Saunders more time to develop and enables Ms to keep someone with no options left on the roster.
Goody – He isn’t undervalued, he’s just not as useful to the Orioles as he is to other teams. Imagine we have a right-handed, aging third baseman who hits pretty decently and is ok at defense (think 2006-2008 version of Melvin Mora, in fact, let’s make our imaginary player 2006-2008 Mora) and he’s owed $2 million. Well, being a right-handed dead-pull hitter with marginal power, Safeco kills any value he has. We also already have a third baseman who is better defensively and offensively and he doesn’t hit enough to play any other position. He’s basically useless for the Mariners, the $2 million salary isn’t worth what he brings to the table, but he’s got about $4-5 million in surplus value to a team without an above-replacement-level third baseman. Trading his salary for nothing is a win for the Mariners in that position, but he will net a couple C prospects in a trade to a team where he’s a better fit.
This is Luke Scott and the Orioles. Luke Scott provides value to the Orioles, but not as much as other teams. Therefore, trading him maximizes his value. He’s better than 2006-2008 version of Melvin Mora, so he isn’t completely useless to the Orioles in their current situation, it’s just that trading him maximizes his value. Since Scott is pretty good and still in the underpaid part of the arbitration process, he’ll net more than bad prospects, which is what makes trading him a valuable proposition for the O’s.
The value to the Mariners is obvious. This has the potential to be a win-win deal, two teams trading from a position of strength to a position of weakness, also maximizing the value of the players traded due to their home parks.
Would love to see a trade to the O’s that didn’t involve sending them 5 prospects for 1 guy. Make this deal happen Z!
I would definitely take Scott over Garko. Garko posted a pretty sad line against NL pitching, but that was mostly BABIP driven and new-league orientation. Safeco would also kill any value Garko, a conventional pull hitter, has. Scott, like Dave said, offers much more flexibility. He’s not the key cog they can stick in the middle of their lineup, but he’s a piece. I like it.
I hope you are right Dave, I’ve liked Scott for some time now and would love to see the Ms trade for him. Doubt that he would cost more than he’s worth. If not him maybe David DeJesus.
Great Scott!
Sure, Luke Scott may be a nice pickup for the M’s, but can he compare with indomitable Ichiro Figgins?
An interesting idea, but unlikely, at least in the Thome/Matsui regard. As Dave has pointed out, with Griffey on the roster and a 12-man pitching staff, the M’s can’t afford the inflexibility of another player who can no longer play the field. I love Thome, and if Griffey hadn’t come back, I’d say the M’s should be all over him. But he can’t play the field anymore, by his own admission, and I don’t see the M’s being able to carry TWO LH DH’s with declining bat skills who physically can’t play defense. Matsui is a little less of a liability in this case, though not by much: there’s a reason the Yankees never let him on the field this season.
Luke Scott and Jose Lopez are pretty comparable players. Both guys have two years remaining until free agency and will make fairly similar salaries. Both guys also potentially fill holes on the other team’s lineup, with Lopez possibly taking over at 3B for Mora.
It’s not a perfect fit though. Lopez is a bit more valuable than Scott because he play a premium defensive position. And I’m not sure Lopez represents a substantial enough upgrade over Ty Wiggington for the Orioles.
As an insurance policy for Saunders, I agree. You could even go with Scott in LF and give Saunders another year in Tacoma. But, assuming Saunders is your LF and we go with Johnson/Branyan/Delgado/LaRoche/Carp/etc at first, then a RH bat is a better fit.
The best thing about this trade is it will give Dave (and the rest of us) another opportunity to make fun of the Astros and Ed Wade. Scott was basically a throw-in the the Miguel Tejada trade, which was headlined by pitching prospect Troy Patton (who immediately blew out his arm). I’m an Astros and M’s fan (grew up in AK, went to college in Houston … there were some dark days when Bavasi and Purpura reigned!) and there were lots of reports at the time how the Astros didn’t like Luke Scott’s defense (of course, they wouldn’t know an advanced metric if it fell out of the sky and hit them on the head). So he was shipped off for the right to overpay Tejada (right before the Mitchell Report came out).
So yeah, not only is Luke Scott a good player and a solid fit for the M’s, but his acquisition could also provide for a little fun at the Astros’ expense (though a small part of me would die, the rest would laugh).
Dave,
The more I think about it, this only makes sense if you’re planning on giving him a starting job – either at first or left or DH. Are you comfortable going into the season with him at first defensively? And wouldn’t it preclude the M’s from signing Nick Johnson (or Branyan, etc) And what about Hall and Rob Johnson as your only two RH bats on the bench? Can you really have 1B/LF/DH filled by Scott, Griffey, Saunders, Carp, Johnson, etc without another viable RH bat? It seems like we’re still one roster spot short.
I like the idea of picking up Luke Scott, but not in a 1 for 1 trade for Jose Lopez.
Lopez is 5 years younger than Scott. Plays a more demanding defensive position and will benefit greatly by the move to a hitters park. Where the reverse is true for Scott, even if he produces average league defense in LF, his offensive stats are going to take a hit in Safeco.
Maybe if it looks something like Lopez and a relief arm for Scott and a couple prospects I would like the deal more, but we give up a lot of youth and trade value in Lopez. Just think we can do better than Luke Scott in return
Oh wait, Scott has three years to go before free agency.
I don’t understand the intense desire that most people on the site tend to have towards trading away Lopez. Very few other 2B in the league would put up even close to his numbers in Safeco. Move that guy to a hitter friendly park and he challenges for the best offensive 2B in the majors(IMO). Sure he has his flaws, but trading him away for Scott seems to be far below his value. Especially when you factor in the trouble this team has scoring runs. Trading away one of our top run producers with no one really ready to replace him seems counterproductive.
Totally agree with you Sonichound. If we are going to trade Lopez it should be to make the team substantially better, not just to trade him so he can kick butt in a smaller park.
Which is exactly why the M’s might want to trade him to a team with such a park. They should just get more than Luke Scott for him. Lopez is young and cost-controlled and still has some power upside, but he has terrible plate discipline (really, the worst of all MLB 2Bs) and his OBP (which the M’s clearly now value) is barely ahead of Kaz Matsui and Clint Barmes for worst. Moreover his barely-average defense isn’t improving, which means he’ll probably be headed for a corner infield position where his run-producing power won’t look quite so shiny. Meanwhile, the M’s have three players in the minors they’re trying out at second (Tui, Triu, and Ackley) so it’s clear his days as a 2B with the M’s are numbered.
I don’t mind having Lopez on the team (for 2010), but as with Scott he’d be more valuable to another team, and that means the M’s should certainly be out there seeing what they can get for him.
I just love imagining the Irish-Japanese do-everything lead-off hitter, all tea ceremonies mixed with pub brawls and saki mixed with whiskey. A one-man haiku limerick.
But maybe we’re spelling it wrong, and it’s actually Ichor O’Figgins?
I’m in favor of moving Lopez in the right deal, but you seem to be missing a few important points that most people around here accept about Lopez.
(1) his lack of walks seriously, seriously limits his offensive value. Maybe you disagree on the value of OBP, but to most he simply doesn’t have enough power to justify the low OBP. Not that he is bad, but despite the impressive power numbers, he’s still roughly average.
(2) Many other 2B could have similar or better offensive value in Safeco. What they would lose in SLG and HR, they would gain in OBP.
(3) There are no indications that Lopez will improve his OBP or BB%, so while he may hit 30 HR or more in the right ballpark, he still won’t get on base enough or play good defense, so some of his value will be illusionary.
(4) Again, Lopez is a perfectly fine 2B as far as I’m concerned. Definitely should get moved if the right deal presents itself, but definitely should not get moved for the sake of moving him. I don’t think moving him for Scott really makes sense for either the M’s or the O’s.
I know there’s a simple explanation for this but why Luke Scott when the team just punted Langerhans? What advantages does he have over the player we could have had? (Not that I’m bitter or anything. That’s not it at all. Nope.)
There are no indications that Lopez will improve his OBP or BB%, so while he may hit 30 HR or more in the right ballpark, he still won’t get on base enough or play good defense, so some of his value will be illusionary.
Of course there are. The fact that so many argue that his major weak spot is plate discipline is certainly an indication for a young, developing hitter to work on it. Plate discipline is something you expect to improve with experience.
Very few other 2B in the league would put up even close to his numbers in Safeco. Move that guy to a hitter friendly park and he challenges for the best offensive 2B in the majors(IMO).
Uh, you don’t seem to understand offensive context very well. Jose Lopez is an average offensive 2B in a run-neutral environment (there are a number who are better, a number who are worse). Moving that player to a better hitter’s ballpark improves his numbers on the surface, but it does not actually change his skillset or abilities- it merely places them in a more favorable context for hitting.
Contextwise, Lopez is a league-average 2B. That’s great, but hardly irreplaceable. If he does turn into the second coming of Carlos Guillen in a better ballpark, it’s not particularly predictable from his current performance. (FWIW, Adrian Beltre is a considerably better hitter than Jose Lopez.)
Of course there are. The fact that so many argue that his major weak spot is plate discipline is certainly an indication for a young, developing hitter to work on it. Plate discipline is something you expect to improve with experience.
Right, but Lopez has had nearly 3000 plate appearances in the major leagues. Can you show me someone who went from having a well-below average walk rate in MLB to even an average one after 3000 plate appearances?
Generally speaking, it’s highly unusual to see players change dramatically at this point in their careers.
I know there’s a simple explanation for this but why Luke Scott when the team just punted Langerhans?
Langerhans is a ~1.5 WAR bench player whose gifts are in defense- we’re talking about a guy with a .311 wOBA. We’re kind of full up on guys with zero punch and great defense. At some point, you hit a problem of diminishing returns and an inability to win ballgames by a score of -1 to 0.
Luke Scott’s talents run more to offense. He’d likely swing to 1B and the OF and be a reasonably priced LHB for middle-order duty, plus the reasons Dave lists (can take a chance on Nick Johnson or Russ Branyan, who have injury issues, can let Carp OR Saunders fight their way onto the team, etc).
Very few other 2B in the league would put up even close to his numbers in Safeco. Move that guy to a hitter friendly park and he challenges for the best offensive 2B in the majors(IMO).
Uh, you don’t seem to understand offensive context very well. Jose Lopez is an average offensive 2B in a run-neutral environment (there are a number who are better, a number who are worse). Moving that player to a better hitter’s ballpark improves his numbers on the surface, but it does not actually change his skillset or abilities- it merely places them in a more favorable context for hitting.
Contextwise, Lopez is a league-average 2B. That’s great, but hardly irreplaceable. If he does turn into the second coming of Carlos Guillen in a better ballpark, it’s not particularly predictable from his current performance. (FWIW, Adrian Beltre is a considerably better hitter than Jose Lopez.)
Of course there are. The fact that so many argue that his major weak spot is plate discipline is certainly an indication for a young, developing hitter to work on it. Plate discipline is something you expect to improve with experience.
Right, but Lopez has had nearly 3000 plate appearances in the major leagues. Can you show me someone who went from having a well-below average walk rate in MLB to even an average one after 3000 plate appearances?
Generally speaking, it’s highly unusual to see players change dramatically at this point in their careers.
I know there’s a simple explanation for this but why Luke Scott when the team just punted Langerhans?
Langerhans is a ~1.5 WAR bench player whose gifts are in defense- we’re talking about a guy with a .311 wOBA. We’re kind of full up on guys with zero punch and great defense. At some point, you hit a problem of diminishing returns and an inability to win ballgames by a score of -1 to 0.
Luke Scott’s talents run more to offense. He’d likely swing to 1B and the OF and be a reasonably priced LHB for middle-order duty, plus the reasons Dave lists (can take a chance on Nick Johnson or Russ Branyan, who have injury issues, can let Carp OR Saunders fight their way onto the team, etc).
I really like Luke Scott…watching him last year made me wish we had his bat and attitude. I hope we can get a deal done, without giving up much.
Scott would certainly be a test of whether the Mariners will continue to take on players with character problems.