Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro http://forum-soxprospects.com/topic/5289/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html en-us Copyright 2006, Kickapps feeds@kickapps.com (FeedMaster) webmaster@kickapps.com (WebMaster) Fri, 04 Dec 2009 13:19:17 GMT Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:12:18 GMT Kickapps Feeds 1.0 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 60 {pics-1.1 "http://www.icra.org/ratingsv02.html" l gen true for "http://kickapps.com" r (nz 1 vz 1 lz 1 oz 1 cz 1 ) "http://www.rsac.org/ratingsv01.html" l gen true for "http://kickapps.com" r (n 0 s 0 v 0 l 0 )) Search Search Domain q http://kickapps.com/search/direct/ <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212790/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212790 feeds@kickapps.com (SexyBanana) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212790 Sun, 06 Dec 2009 11:57:34 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212788/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212788
I hear everyone on the odds of signing a future pick playing into their thinking of the grade and I'm sure the thought was on Theo's mind. My overlaying point is, if they aren't willing to give up a 1st rounder for Scutaro then he shouldn't have been signed because regardless of odds the possibility is very real that is what will happen. God I hope not, but it's still real, which means Theo was willing to give up a first round pick for this guy and I'm not on board with that. I dont think it matter that they are going to have 1 or 2 other first rounders from Wagner and Bay. It's still a first round pick whether there are other's or not. ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (TokenWilliams) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212788 Sun, 06 Dec 2009 11:50:44 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212787/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212787 albertpujolsin2012 wrote:
The 2012 option is a mutual one that will pay the Venezuelan infielder $6 million if the club picks it up, and $3 million if Scutaro picks it up plus a $1.5 million buyout.


Can someone varify this for me. If the Red Sox decline their option and Scutaro excersizes his then he's paid 3M not 3M plus 1.5M. The only way they pay 1.5M is if Scutaro excersizes his option and the Sox still decide they don't want him so instead of paying 3M and having him they pay 1.5M and send him on his way.... A buyout only gets paid when the player is no longer on the team because they team has paid him (or bought out) his contract. ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (TokenWilliams) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212787 Sun, 06 Dec 2009 11:50:44 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212767/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212767 feeds@kickapps.com (Arquimedez Bozo) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212767 Sun, 06 Dec 2009 01:41:22 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212749/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212749
We don't know the Sox would have drafted him.
We don't know the Sox would have igned him for the money he wanted.

You can be angry about Lugo fine. Being angry about Porcello is just stupid

I voted B.
There are no better options out there, a lot I have been reading suggests he may not be 2009 Scutaro but if he is wow, he's cheap.
If he regreses he's probably the best SS we've seen for the Sox for years. At this cost thats great.
He's not a stiff yet and worst case is really not that bad. If he goes bad, it's 5 million not 10 and surely tradable to the likes of the As subsided- plus he's able to play a lot of positions as an expensive bench player.

I'm pretty surprised he was got for this few years and this reasonable a cost.
Years is key as he's not young and we have other potential talent at SS coming. So you don't... ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (LondonSox) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212749 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 18:59:07 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212747/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212747 feeds@kickapps.com (ScottLevison) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212747 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 18:37:27 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212745/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212745 SeaSox wrote:
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.

Seriously?
The Sox can extend him if they feel the need, for a number of potential reasons (injury, stunted development of prospects, trades, etc.) or they let him walk for less. After the revolving door at short of late, with both Renteria and Lugo checking in at $8 million+ a year, you're going to quibble with a buy out? It's a cost of doing business.



Oh no, the sox will have to... ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (mredsox89) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212745 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 17:58:52 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212743/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212743 SeaSox wrote:
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.
Seriously?
Yes. The Sox will be stuck blocking their shortstop of the future, and fail to sign a top free agent, all because of $1.5 million. That 1% of the payroll is really important.
]]> feeds@kickapps.com (Yirmiyahu) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212743 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 17:30:58 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212742/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212742 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.
Seriously?
The Sox can extend him if they feel the need, for a number of potential reasons (injury, stunted development of prospects, trades, etc.) or they let him walk for less. After the revolving door at short of late, with both Renteria and Lugo checking in at $8 million+ a year, you're going to quibble with a buy out? It's a cost of doing business.

]]> feeds@kickapps.com (SeaSox) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212742 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 17:07:28 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212740/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212740 ancientsoxfogey wrote:
albert, if the Sox don't think Scutaro should be their SS in 2012 or they have a better option, the worst that can happen is a $1.5 million hit for the buyout. If Scutaro exercises the $3 mllion option it would be for the utility IF position, which the Sox might well pay upwards of $2 million for under any circumstances. So maybe a $1 million overpay there.

Reading between the lines, I'm wondering if we may be kidding ourselves about Lowrie's health. I get the sense that Sox management is really skeptical that he is ever going to be right in the foreseeable future, and they are a lot closer to the medical situation than we are. Their view might be biased a bit by the Nomar precedent, but they know the medical details.

I give the Scutaro acquisition a D. I'm skeptical about what... ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (albertpujolsin2012) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212740 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 16:55:24 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212738/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212738
Reading between the lines, I'm wondering if we may be kidding ourselves about Lowrie's health. I get the sense that Sox management is really skeptical that he is ever going to be right in the foreseeable future, and they are a lot closer to the medical situation than we are. Their view might be biased a bit by the Nomar precedent, but they know the medical details.

I give the Scutaro acquisition a D. I'm skeptical about what his performance is going to be, I don't like losing a draft pick to take the chance, and I wish the Sox had gotten more creative in addressing the situation, along the... ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (ancientsoxfogey) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212738 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 16:44:59 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212734/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212734 The 2012 option is a mutual one that will pay the Venezuelan infielder $6 million if the club picks it up, and $3 million if Scutaro picks it up plus a $1.5 million buyout.

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.

If Lowrie can prove that he is going to be healthy by the All-Star Break, my bet is that he vies for time with Scutaro. I give it a D.
]]> feeds@kickapps.com (albertpujolsin2012) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212734 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 16:20:58 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212733/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212733
The strength of this move is left to be decided by the Red Sox subsequent signings.
Signing Adrian Beltre is now completely essential, as it is the only clear way to improve the left-side infield defense.
I'm more worried about Scutaro's play in the field than, what hes going to bring to the plate.
I believe he will hit with an OPS >.700, slightly OBP heavy. If he can consistently play average to slightly above avg. defense, he will provide decent value for this contract.

Of course, we (almost )all want Matt Holliday, and now he brings the added advantage of justifying the loss of a first round pick. ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (eyse) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212733 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 16:18:12 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212716/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212716 no idea what the percentages are on whether the Red Sox think they will sign another Type A. We may think we can speculate (e.g. media, quotes, etc.), but I think that speculation is baseless. The information is held exclusively by the Red Sox and thus... ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (AMarshal2) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212716 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 14:54:35 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212714/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212714
When we grade a transaction we should be weighing all possible outcomes. I think we already do it on the production/benefit side of the equation. The Smoltz/Penny/Saito signings last year are great examples. We grade them trying to weigh the likelihood of them busting vs. the likelihood of them breaking out. The Hermida trade is another good example. A lot of people wrote about the likelihood that he gets an opportunity to break out.

Since all we're really doing here in grading these transactions is a cost/benefit analysis, why can't we also try to weigh the likelihood of all possible costs? It is an inexact science, but I think it is... ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (chavopepe2) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212714 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 14:09:35 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212709/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212709 redsoxdiehard30 wrote:
Alex Gonzalez is not good enough to be our starting SS. Yes Scoot cost a draft pick, but more than likely it will be a 2nd rounder. Theo values draft picks as much as any GM, I trust his decision making and our future. I give the move a B. And yet, Porcello is on the Tigers...

I gave it a B, mostly because the money and years were much easier to swallow then I thought they would be (I expected something like 3/20 guaranteed). I also feel that the Sox will sign another FA, thus making the pick a 2nd rounder. Also, short of messing with a good thing (moving Pedroia over to SS), settling for an OBP under .300 (Everett or Crosby), or making fruitless attemps at pie-in-the-sky trade (Hanley or Reyes), this was the only real option available.
]]> feeds@kickapps.com (GreatByOhEight) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212709 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 13:23:14 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212706/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212706 feeds@kickapps.com (redsoxdiehard30) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212706 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 13:13:10 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212702/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212702 JimRiceRocks wrote:
cwaaa wrote:
Gave it a D. Scutaro is going to have to repeat his career year for me to be happy with him as Boston's starting shortstop. I don't see that happening.

So who do want to fill that role that would make you happier?





Well we could have resigned Alex Gonzalez for a fraction of the money without coughing up the draft pick. I think he'd have been a decent stop gap for us to see what we had with Iglesias and how Lowrie is holding together. I also have faith that the Red Sox could have done something with the draft pick.

]]> feeds@kickapps.com (calculatedreciprocity) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212702 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 13:04:00 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212699/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212699
The reason I don't agree with Chavo is that the Red Sox front office has an idea of what the odds are that they sign another Type A. By contrast, I don't know what the odds are. If the Red Sox think it is "likely" that they sign another type A, then I'd give it a B. If the Red Sox think it is "unlikely" then it's a C- or so. Scutaro was the best fit and his contract is reasonable, but if this is likely the only type A that they will sign, then I think they could have gotten creative and been better off.

edit2: The only way I can think about giving grades is by grading what I think of the front offices' decision making at the time. If you put up a poll on the Smoltz signing, I would still give it a B or so. I liked the signing, I liked the thinking.... ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (AMarshal2) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212699 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 12:43:01 PST <![CDATA[ Re: Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/reply/212691/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html#reply-212691
Thinking prospectively, to me the more open question, rather than the loss of the draft pick, is how Scutaro performs -- does he bomb under the circumstances of advancing age, his true ability level relative to his 2009 performance, and/or the Boston environment, does he thrive, or somewhere in between? To rate the acquisition now, you also have to make some advance judgment about that, and we've seen some comments which suggest that people are taking their performance expectations into account.

Finally, even if we consider the likelihood of another type A acquisition, not all type A's are created equal. Do we look at the Scutaro acquisition differently if (1) the Sox sign Holliday as the second... ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (ancientsoxfogey) http://forum-soxprospects.com/sreply/212691 Sat, 05 Dec 2009 11:32:33 PST <![CDATA[ Trade Rater: Sox sign Scutaro ]]> http://forum-soxprospects.com/topic/5289/t/Trade-Rater-Sox-sign-Scutaro.html According to multiple sources, the Red Sox are set to announce the signing of Marco Scutaro to a two-year pact with an option for a third year. ESPN's Buster Olney is reporting that the deal will pay Scutaro a $1 million signing bonus, $5 million in 2010, and $5 million in 2011. The 2012 option is a mutual one that will pay the Venezuelan infielder $6 million if the club picks it up, and $3 million if Scutaro picks it up plus a $1.5 million buyout. The deal is pending the results of a physical.

Scutaro, originally... ]]> feeds@kickapps.com (soxprospects) http://forum-soxprospects.com/topic/5289 Fri, 04 Dec 2009 13:19:17 PST