Luke Scott and His Secret

Apparently, struggling Baltimore Orioles OF/DH Luke Scott is running out of ideas on how to break out of his slump. Here’s one: just wait. I know, that’s really helpful. Seriously, Scott and his coaches (and probably opposing scouts) might be able to find something that’s wrong with his current approach and routine, although it does sound like he’s been frustrated on that score. But from the looks of things, Scott is the same hitter he was in past years, when he made up for a relatively low batting average with a good walk rate and power. Scott’s line so far this season really has been dreadful, as he’s “hitting” .177/.253/.354 for a .270 wOBA. That’s bad even for Jason Kendall. “Small sample size” is the first thing to say, and probably is all we need to say, quite frankly, but let’s dig a bit deeper.

Scott came to the Orioles from the Astros before the 2008 season, and hit .257/.336/.472 for a .343 wOBA in 2008, and improved on that line in 2009: .258/.340/.488, .355 wOBA. While Scott’s on-base percentage isn’t mind-blowing, that’s mostly due to his slightly below-average batting average, his walk rate has always been above average. His main asset other than his walks is his power, as his career ISO is .228. His walk rate has remained intact so far in 2010 at about 9.2%, which is only slightly lower than his usual rate. His strikeout rate has increased, however, jumping ot 29% whereas in recent seasons it has been between 21% and 23%. While his overall contact rate is about the same as in past seasons, he does seem to be swinging at a few more pitches out of the zone than usual (28.6 2010 O-Swing% vs. 23.2%), although it isn’t a drastic, perhaps a reflection of growing frustration. Scott’s isolated power is also down to .177, which isn’t bad. Scott’s batted ball profile is also roughly the same as always, with a slighly lower HR/FB ratio than in the past, which partly explains his lower isolated power. Scott’s never been reliant on a high BABIP, with a career BABIP under .300, but his current .208 average on balls in play is clearly founded on a whole lot of bad luck.

The Orioles as a whole have been terrible so far this season, just like Scott, but, like Scott, they aren’t as bad as they’ve looked. Scott’s struggles so far must be frustrating for the Orioles because he’s a good hitter on a cheap salary who has trade value as a left fielder (despite being pushed out of left by younger players, his defense there is average at worst) or a designated hitter, especially when teams with designs on the playoffs are starting players like Ken Griffey Jr., Mike Sweeney, Eric Chavez, Juan Pierre, and Pat Burrell at DH. But whether it’s for the Orioles or for some other team, the “secret” to Scott coming out of his struggles seems to be to wait around for his luck to even out.




Print This Post



Matt Klaassen reads and writes obituaries in the Greater Toronto Area. If you can't get enough of him, follow him on Twitter.

8 Responses to “Luke Scott and His Secret”

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
  1. Casadilla says:

    I think we are beyond small sample size here. Scott’s numbers since June of 2009 of last year have been horrible. Scott’s wOBA by month from Jun-Sept of 09: .337, .302, .322, .332. Now he’s starting off 2010 at a blistering .270 wOBA?

    As an O’s fan, here’s one: I’m done waiting.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • 2 months of above league average, 1 month of league average, and 1 month below, and now one bad luck infested way below average month = horrible?

      If anything, it should show that players can have wild variations in their results from month to month. An overall result like a low wOBA should be a starting point to figure out what’s wrong, not the ending point of the analysis.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Casadilla says:

        Not sure what your consider league average wOBA for a DH, but in 2009 for min 300PA, DHs were averaging a wOBA of .340–not ~.320.

        Plus, his ’09 season stats are significantly buoyed by a May where he hit to a wOBA of .605, but has a BABIP of .393.

        Jeff V below makes a more important point, one need’s to watch the player. Luke is a very streaky hitter and is prone to 2 week floods followed by month-long droughts. Scott has never had great contact skills, and he presses often.

        Consistency is being undervalued here as well. A player that produces spontaneously in only two months of the season is hard for a manager to put in the lineup every night.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  2. Jeff V. says:

    This is an example of needing to watch the player as well as look at the stats. From observing Scott I can tell you a major reason his BABIP is lower is due to a lack of solid contact. You are unlucky when your screeching liner gets nabbed by the third baseman, luck is less of a factor when you are grounding weakly to the second baseman.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Reuben says:

      The difference between a screeching liner and a weak groundball might be a hundreth of a second off in timing or centimeter difference in where the bat hits the ball. There’s luck to be had in the contact as well as what follows it.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  3. Steve says:

    Dude’s LD rate is right around career level his BABIP should be like .280 – .290. You should be able to count on regression to the mean.

    His REAL problem is the same as Jason Kubel’s — they were both drafted onto my fantasy team. Sorry guys.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  4. Steven Gomez says:

    His K rate’s up, his walk rate’s down, his IFFB rate’s up and his LD rate’s slightly down.

    His contact rates may be down but the quality of that contact probably isn’t equal to past seasons, plus the K and BB rates indicates his pitch recognition and/or timing isn’t where it needs to be.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current day month ye@r *