The most depressing thing about this offeason: Marco Scutaro « Bay City Ball – A Giants Blog

The most depressing thing about this offeason: Marco Scutaro

Recently, the 2012 ZiPS projections went live on FanGraphs. What that means is that you can now browse the projections at length, and FanGraphs has also conveniently included a wOBA calculation along with the projections.

Really cool stuff.

But, after looking through pages of these projections, I always eventually come back to the same feeling: Why in the world didn’t the Giants make a play for Marco Scutaro?

On January 21, 2012, the Red Sox traded Marco Scutaro to the Rockies for salary relief and a C-level prospect, Clayton Mortensen. Scutaro, 36, is due $6M this season and the Red Sox, in an effort to try and free up some money, dealt him to the Rockies for essentially nothing but salary relief. Mortensen is a ‘throw-in’ in the truest sense of the phrase; he’s a 27-year-old pitcher with a career 5.12 ERA in the majors over 95 innings. In 567 career innings in the minor leagues he owns a 4.67 ERA. Every team in baseball has several Clayton Mortensens kicking around at any moment in their farm system.

Back to the ZiPS projections …

Marco Scutaro is projected as the 4th best hitter (.337 wOBA) among all shortstops in baseball. That’s higher than stars, or near-stars, like Starlin Castro (.336), Jimmy Rollins (.330), Stephen Drew (.331), J.J. Hardy (.329), and Elvis Andrus (.319). And, remember he was, essentially, free for the price of $6M.

Now, we can be sure that Scutaro isn’t a slick fielding shortstop, but by the defensive metrics, he’s held his own remarkably well at the position over his career. Per 150 defensive games, UZR has Scutaro rated at -2.8 runs for his career; defensive runs saved has Scutaro at a cumulative (total, not prorated on games like UZR/150) -13 runs; the Fan Scouting Reports are a little harsher, pegging Scutaro at -7 runs in 2011 and -9 runs in 2010. Scutaro doesn’t possess a plus-glove, but it’s respectable enough, and most likely much better than recent shortstops like Miguel Tejada and soon-to-be shortstops like Ryan Theriot.

In addition to playing shortstop, Scutaro also has experience at several other key infield positions like 3B and 2B. And he’s even played a little outfield in his career. At minimum, he would serve as great Freddy Sanchez sproing insurance.

Scutaro hasn’t posted an OBP under the league average rate since 2005, and since then he’s ranged from a low of .332 to a high of .379. That makes him the perfect guy to slot in front of guys like Buster Posey and Pablo Sandoval.

Shortstop was an extremely weak position for the Giants in 2011. The team’s solution was to turn the position over to some combination of Brandon Crawford (all field, no hit), Mike Fontenot (might field, might hit), and Ryan Theriot (can’t field, can only hit LHP). For a team with playoff aspirations, that’s a scary collective. If the Giants end up missing the playoffs by a few games this year, and the team has another problematic year at shortstop, we might be able to say that the Giants’ season was decided all the way back in January when the team didn’t bring in Marco Scutaro.

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

At times Crawford seemed to have a good approach at the plate, but he could still not put together a decent batting average vs. major league pitching. If he plays a full season and hits 260, he will have obtained a pipe dream.

Well here is Sabean's track record at SS recently: Signing Renteria, Not signing JJ Hardy, Signing Tejada, Trading For Cabrera, Not getting Scutaro or Lowrie..... The man just fails left and right. The giants caught lightning in a bottle in 2010 and now we are stuck with Sabes making terrible roster decisions.

I may have rose-colored glasses, but i think they did the right thing in not blocking crawford by getting scutaro...we always blast them for not givin young players a chance -- and then we blast them for giving young players a chance. Crawford willplay GoldGove defense and hit .260 with gap power. kevin

I think the problem is who they give a chance and who they block too. Belt; naw. Posey; naw. Unprepared shortstop who, like cquick has said, shows every sign of not being able to hit; YES! hand it over to him. Bocock'em.

Scutaro would have been great. I'm not sure why people are saying "no thanks" to Scutaro but then wanted the Giants to spend 13-15 mil a year on Beltran. Sure Beltran over Nate in RF is an upgrade, but is it more of an upgrade than Scutaro over Crawford? In fact, in a hypothetical world, I'm not so sure that Scutaro and Nate combined at the end of the year are out done by the WAR of Beltran and Crawford combined. The biggest difference being that the Beltran and Crawford combo would have cost about 8 million more a year than Scutaro and Nate. It's all about upgrades and the Giants biggest room for upgrade by far is at shortstop. So even if Scutaro declines, he's still a big big upgrade over their current situation. And comparing Scutaro to Tejada and Renteria is like apple and oranges. Taking pitches, walking and getting on base is like cryptonite to those two while Scutaro is above average at all three. And plus, if the Giants had gotten Scutaro, we wouldn't have to watch Theriot play. That alone is reason enough to want him

I was with you tell the 2nd to last line. I would say say we probably are saved from the possiblity of 150+ inings from Manny Burriss on a squad that could go to the post season. That is a good thing.

Although I'm by no means an expert on projection systems, I'm a bit dubious about the ZiPS for Scutaro mostly because he's 36 this season and he's projected to have the third best season of his career (after a .343 wOBA last season and .354 in 2009). I'm prepared to be wrong, but a .337 projection for a 36-year-old with a .322 lifetime wOBA seems a bit optimistic. Also, the other fangraphs projections for Scutaro are a bit more modest. In fact, if you look at the other three projections, while Scutaro still comes out ahead of Mike Fontenot, for example, he doesn't appear to be 5 million dollars more valuable (I think I'm right that Fontenot is making a mil for 2012). (I understand, of course, that Fontenot will almost certainly not be the starting SS, and I'm not arguing that he should be. I'm just trying to gain some perspective on the Scutaro projection.) So, I see where you're coming from -- and I've thought Scutaro was a pretty nice player for awhile -- but I'm not sure this is a very big deal.

It was pointed out to me on Twitter that I should have probably used OPS+ instead of wOBA -- since there's probably a little bit of park effects noise with wOBA -- but, Scutaro still projects at, IIRC, a 94 OPS+. Which is about 25 points higher than Brandon Crawford. We've written a lot about Crawford here on the blog; and, I love what he does defensively, but every sign imaginable (scouting, projections, past performance) is pointing to a player that isn't going to hit in the majors. I think if a guy like Scutaro comes along, and comes along at a fair price, you need to pull the trigger.

It's a big deal because Scutaro is now playing 2B for a division rival, which compounds the pain the Giants feel at shortstop but also answers the question of who could play a competent 2B if Freddy Sanchez gets injured again. My impression of Scutaro is he's an average to above average hitter and a below average defender, which an opposite but comparable skillset to Sanchez, who is an average hitter with above average defense. I don't know about Renteria, but Tejada had no experience at 2B and was terrible defensively and with the bat. If Scutaro has anything going for him, especially offense, whatever defensive limitations he might have at SS could be mitigated by the change to 2B, if those limitations are or desperation is severe enough to even want to move him off SS. And at the same time, the Rockies don't become a whole lot tougher to deal with. Now, I would expect to see some Scutaro regression if he played at AT&T, and he does fit the mold of a typical Sabean player. But the Giants never inquired about him because the Red Sox, probably weren't interested in shipping off a solid player for no reason. They do have riskier minor league options to replace him if needed, since his offense isn't as valuable as defense when the Red Sox are the top scoring team in MLB . Scutaro was only shipped to free up money for Roy Oswalt, because his asking price went down enough for them to afford him on a year contract. But Oswalt rebuffed them, and now they have money but nowhere to spend it. While I agree with Chris that Scutaro is probably a better option than any of the Giants' utility IF, I don't see how they could have fit him into their payroll, although they could have hypothetically by non-tendering Ross then resigning him to that 3M contract he got with Boston, and not tendering Whiteside, Fontenot and Keppinger and never offering Theriot a contract. A lot of this isn't guaranteed money, but I don't think the Giants would have offered that contract to Theriot if they didn't think that the cajuns couldn't pull off the LSU DP duo. Hypothetically is the key, since I doubt Ross would have signed for 3M to play in SF. His year in hitter friendly Boston and predicted platoon role will give him a payday next year and he'll still be on a contending team. But, this isn't an option we could see months into the future, and even if we could, it would have still been tricky to make it work. The Giants could have been burned a lot worse, like signing Hideki Okajima after letting Javier Lopez walk and only to learn he's not healthy enough to pitch.

Edger Renteria, then Miguel Tejada, then Scutaro? No thanks. You gotta cut the cord on the "I hope this late thirties shortstop with a little power left can do it one more time in AT&T park" mentality sometime and it has to be now. It sounds stupid i know, but this season is a "pull the scab off the shortstop position" season. The Giants signed Zito, Rowand, and Huff to those awful contracts and now they have to pay for it. Taking on six million for an old SS who WOULD NOT be the 4th best hitting SS in baseball while hitting in AT&T park is not the answer. You want to make the offense better WITHOUT adding six million to payroll? Start someone other than Huff at first base. I don't mean to sound angry Chris, it's just that since Scutaro went to the Rockies I have been reading a lot about how Sabean should have worked that deal for the Giants. If the Giants got another old SS, Giants fans would have lost their collective minds as a Tejada redux.

Age really has nothing to do with it, and your comparisons to Renteria and Tejada are a bit flawed, IMO. Scutaro is coming off a fWAR season of 2.9, which was preceded by fWAR seasons of 2.4, 4.5, and 2.9. Renteria, pre-Giants deal, was coming off a 1.1 fWAR season in Detroit. He was bad in the first year of his contract, and a little bit better the second, but mostly injured. Tejada had been in decline for a couple of years before the Giants signed him and it was pretty obvious that no other team thought he could play SS on a full-time basis. >> If the Giants got another old SS, Giants fans would have lost their collective minds as a Tejada redux. See, I disagree with you here. Scutaro could flop, sure, it could happen. But nothing points to Brandon Crawford being a major league ready shortstop. His defense is great, but he's never really hit, at any level.

I never intimated in my reply to your post that Brandon Crawford is a major league ready shortstop, because I don't. We are in agreement there. You choose to believe the ZiPs projections about a 36 year old shortstop thats fair, you have the numbers on your side and I do not. I guess my larger point is that committing six million dollars to Scutaro is unwise in my opinion. His projections say he'll hit well I suppose, but when I contextualize the Giants roster (pitching and lineup) against the rest of the NL west it appears to me that offense from SS is far from being a deal breaker in who wins the division. I understand Scutaro has the metrics on his side, the difference is I'm dubious on them and the Giants say their payroll is maxed out.

$6 million question: where would the money have come from instead? Just sayin,' cause, there's probably a lot of not-bad things Sabean could have done with that cash, if it was available.

hmm did we really need two left handed relievers for 5 mil a pop?

i don't know -- i don't want him. i associate him with teams i don't like. he would have made the team better, but i would have been more depressed if sabes brought him in. it's a damn good thing i'm not the general manager -- jesse foppert would still be on the team.

I never understood that move at all, it really make any sense from the Sox point of view as by all measures of logic they need Scutaro almost just as badly as we do, and yet they trade him to the Rox for nothing. It just doesn't make sense, him Lowrie could have easily gotten decent returns if they shopped one of them our way, but I guess Sabean wasn't willing. Or maybe those C-level relief pitchers are better than we can see...

I see this more as a byproduct of the horrendous Rowand, Zito, Huff deals. When you spend money so poorly, you're going to have consequences, such as missing the opportunity to upgrade at shortstop.

Let's check the list: Jed Lowrie trade not signing Carlos Beltran Matt Cain making a few too many "well, we'll see what happens...." type comments. Yup. You're right. No doubt Marco Scutaro is the most depressing thing that happened this year. I can't wait for the Crawford/Burriss keystone combination! The odd thing is, I'd be pretty depressed about the Scutaro deal if I was a Red Sox fan, too. They apparently felt the need to free up money, but then they never did anything with it did they? There were the Roy Oswalt rumors that came to nothing. I can't think of any additions they made since then. It's like they just decided they needed an extra $4mil or so for hanging out money.

Calendar

February 2012
M T W T F S S
« Jan   Mar »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829  

Archives