Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Arquimedez Bozo) — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 00:28:45 PST

Pantera wrote:
We can both agree that any player that the Red Sox invest in who's return is less than its cost will by definition be a poor investment. The return on investment is by definition the value of Scuturo's performance minus his cost. Neither of these is dependant upon having another first round pick. If you don't feel that Marco Scuturro's performance will justify a first round pick you shouldn't make the deal, if you do you should.

I can definitely buy this. We're good there.

As for my point though, look at it this way, and we'll even stick with Best Buy : Hi-def TV on sale for $1,000. It's going to be just as good a TV for someone who has $1,000 in expendable income as it will for someone who has $10,000 in expendable income. Both, technically, can afford said TV. However, it's...

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Pantera) — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 22:50:20 PST

And apparently you don't understand the concept of relative cost (if we have any econ majors here and I'm using the wrong term, please correct me - I know this concept exists but I'm only 80% sure on the term for it). If you have $100, then a $100 cost to buy something feels different and hits your wallet differently than it does if you have $200. This is the very reason why income taxes aren't flat - 5% of one's income is a much different hit for someone making $50,000 a year than it is to someone making $500,000.

Chris you seem to me like the type of guy who blows his Christmas bonus at Foxwoods because its "found money".

We can both agree that any player that the Red Sox invest in who's return is less than its cost will by definition be a poor investment. The return on investment is by definition the value of Scuturo's performance minus his cost. Neither of these is dependant upon having...

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Arquimedez Bozo) — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:32:28 PST

Pantera wrote:
If this is true then the Red Sox really don't understand the concept of cost versus value. The cost of obtaining Marco Scutaro was the contract plus the forfeiture of a 1st round pick. Its irrrelevant what other picks the Red Sox have in the first round, the cost is still the same. If the value of Marco Scutaro wasn't worth the contract plus the forfeiture of the pick before Wagner signed, its not worth the value of the pick after he signed.

This is corralary to the "sunk costs" principal in that the gains received from Wagner are locked in and don't change regardless of what move is made next.

And apparently you don't understand the concept of relative cost (if we have any econ majors here and I'm using the wrong term, please correct me - I know this concept exists but I'm only 80% sure on the term for it). If you have $100, then a...

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Pantera) — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:08:57 PST

There was one paragrpah in today's AB Article that really disturbed me.

The Sox were only willing to make the Scutaro deal because they already had gained a likely first-round pick from the Braves when Atlanta signed Type A free agent Billy Wagner. Otherwise, they might have been unwilling to forgo a first-round pick in the upcoming draft to obtain Scutaro.

If this is true then the Red Sox really don't understand the concept of cost versus value. The cost of obtaining Marco Scutaro was the contract plus the forfeiture of a 1st round pick. Its irrrelevant what other picks the Red Sox have in the first round, the cost is still the same. If the value of Marco Scutaro wasn't worth the contract plus the forfeiture of the pick before Wagner...

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Arquimedez Bozo) — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 01:47:58 PST

Breaking out some discussion that started in the trade rater thread on this:

albertpujolsin2012 wrote:
I don't like the 2012 option. Essentially, the Sox will have him in 2012 for $6 million which may block Iglesias or cost the Red Sox between $1.5 and $3 million if they don't, which are more dollars that could be expended on a player that is not on the roster that year. Plus, Scutaro is coming off of a career year and has historically been a utility guy. Meaning, he will likely be a utility guy this year as well.

As others stated in that thread, I'm stunned you think $3M or $1.5M is anything to this club. They paid Atlanta more to just take Renteria. If the Sox pick up the $6M option, then obviously "blocking Iglesias" isn't an issue, no? It's like you're talking about the Red Sox Revisited or something.

...

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (brs148927) — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 01:06:53 PST

bosox.... please tell me that was sarcasm. There is no way Tito ever puts that lineup together in that order even if Rudy Pemberton is playing LF.

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Sibby Sisti) — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 00:40:11 PST

Nolson20 wrote:
Also interesting to note that Peter Abraham tweets that Scutaro gave up less money to come here.

Does that mean the Sox paid more?

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (BoSox81) — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 00:36:00 PST

If Scutaro's 2009 was not a fluke and sustains his OBP in 2010 Francona's gonna have a good problem putting that line up and even more so if the team signs Matt Holliday:

Ellsbury
Scutaro
Holliday
Youkillis
Martinez
Pedroia
Drew
Lowell
Ortiz

??

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Urgent) — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 19:26:51 PST

Globe reports A's offered more money.

"There was a team that was making a real good offer, but I can say this, I took a little less money just to come here, to have a chance to win a ring,'' Scutaro said yesterday.

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (BriantheTaoist) — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 09:29:39 PST

Gammons articles often need to be taken with a grain of salt (they fluff GMs too much and make every signing look like a good one), but I like this part

Mhueg wrote:

He grinds at-bats (he led all shortstops in pitches per at-bat).[...]
Epstein is always looking for hitters who grind at-bats, and next year's team will have five of the top 18 American League hitters in pitches per at-bat in Kevin Youklis (1), David Ortiz (7), J.D. Drew (9), Scutaro (13) and Victor Martinez (18).

That's a good, solid thing that's not going to change very much.

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Yirmiyahu) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:43:23 PST

Nolson20 wrote:
Also interesting to note that Peter Abraham tweets that Scutaro gave up less money to come here.

Scutaro turned down a slightly more lucrative three-year contract from the A's before signing his two-year, $12.5 million deal with the Red Sox, according to major-league sources. link

Could be he wanted to play for a contending team, or could be that he didn't like Oakland during his previous tenure there.

ADD: Though that does make me feel a bit better about his defense. Oakland is a team that appreciates good defense, and they saw him play there for 4 years, so...

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Nolson20) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 18:04:03 PST

Also interesting to note that Peter Abraham tweets that Scutaro gave up less money to come here.

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Bosoxwest) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:50:48 PST

FenwayTheHardWay wrote:
Signing your starting shortstop for next year qualifies as major for me.

Seriously.

BB you sound like a teenager whose parents only bought them a new Honda. Entitlement is what we imagine separates us from Yankee fans. Try to keep the dream alive man.

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Arquimedez Bozo) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:50:10 PST

Theo also had a press conference at 3:30 to announce this year's Hot Stove/Cool Music lineup (Jan. 9, State Radio - one of my favorites - and Tinted Windows headlining, for those wondering). The phrasing was probably in part to make it clear that this was a separate announcement.

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Nolson20) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:32:07 PST

BB HBP HURT wrote:
I knew there would be a PC, but the word MAJOR should not be used 4 Scutaro, when I hear major I'm thinking Holliday/Bay or a trade 4 Halladay, Agon, King Felix, Hanley etc.

I don't disagree with you from a name standpoint but like Fenway said signing a starter for next years team is major.

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (FenwayTheHardWay) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:28:06 PST

Signing your starting shortstop for next year qualifies as major for me.

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (BB HBP HURT) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:27:08 PST

Nolson20 wrote:

BB HBP HURT wrote:

Mhueg wrote:
Press conference at 4:15 for "major announcement," assumedly Marco Scutaro signing.

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/

I laughed when i saw that scrolling on NESN, they honestly believe knowledgeable fans consider Scutaro a MAJOR announcement.

Granted the major announcement is a stretch, most free agents get press conferences so this shouldn't be to big of a surprise.

I knew there would be a PC,...

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Nolson20) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:21:45 PST

BB HBP HURT wrote:

Mhueg wrote:
Press conference at 4:15 for "major announcement," assumedly Marco Scutaro signing.

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/

I laughed when i saw that scrolling on NESN, they honestly believe knowledgeable fans consider Scutaro a MAJOR announcement.

Granted the major announcement is a stretch, most free agents get press conferences so this shouldn't be to big of a surprise.

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (BB HBP HURT) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:09:53 PST

Mhueg wrote:
Press conference at 4:15 for "major announcement," assumedly Marco Scutaro signing.

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/

I laughed when i saw that scrolling on NESN, they honestly believe knowledgeable fans consider Scutaro a MAJOR announcement.

Re: Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Yirmiyahu) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:58:39 PST

TokenWilliams wrote:
Scuts Fenway numbers since the beginning of 2008, which are his "best years":

sorry the fields don't line up, but this should do the trick for everyone. I'm being a bit lazy right now. Small Sample Size? Yes, but Fenway hasn't been a haven for him that's for sure

So, in 2008-2009, he had a .596 OPS at Fenway (51 PA's), despite putting up a .746 OPS overall in that time span?

Hm. Well, from 2002-2006, he had a .853 OPS at Fenway (51 PA's), despite putting up a .707 OPS overall in that time span.

Small sample sizes.

Red Sox Sign Marco Scutaro

feeds@kickapps.com (Justen) — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 23:18:47 PST

http://www.liderendeportes.com/Noticias/?id=91294&sid=66&twit=yes

Warning: The site that this link leads to is fully spanish.

So, I would have preferred the Pedroia to short-Hudson at second scenario, but I guess we have to accept it. I would have liked to get a few draft picks for Wagner, Bay, go after low market, then have a 2005 like draft. Obviously, this is only the beginning of a very interesting off-season.