Al Yellon
Editor
Bud Selig: Athletics Could Get Approval To Move ... Out Of Bay Area - May 17
Grant Brisbee
Editor
Worst Call Of The Year? - May 18
Jeff Sullivan
Editor
The Bobby Valentine .Gif Of The Year - May 19
Rob Neyer
National Baseball Editor
Grading on the Curve - May 20
Dan Moore
Contributor
Joey Votto And The Twilight Of The Giant First Basemen - Apr 14
Jim Baker
Contributor
eBay Item Of The Day - May 20
Marc Normandin
Contributor
Josh Reddick, And Having Patience With Prospects - May 18
Wendy Thurm
Contributor
Baseball On Par With Other Professional Sports In Dealing With Bad Umpires - May 20
Jan 23 2:08p by Rob Neyer
Read More: Marco Scutaro (2B - COL), Roy Oswalt (P - PHI), Boston Red Sox, Colorado Rockies
Why were the Boston Red Sox so intent on clearing Marco Scutaro's contract from the books?
According to Alex Speier, it was all about the Competitive Balance Tax (CBT) ... also known as the luxury tax. The actual math is sort of complicated and Speier's a mensch for going through all of it, but here's the nut:
When the Sox exercised the shortstop’s $6 million option for 2012, it transformed his deal into a three-year, $17 million contract. That, in turn, meant that for the coming season, he would have counted for not just his $6 million salary for luxury tax purposes, but instead $7.67 million (the difference between the $17 million he’d make and the $9.33 million for which he’d counted in 2010 and 2011).
In dealing Scutaro to the Rockies, the Red Sox shed $7.67 million in CBT payroll for the coming year. For the Rockies, that’s an irrelevant consideration, since they’re not bumping up against the luxury tax threshold. But for the Sox, who are nearing the $178 million threshold, that CBT figure is a major consideration.
So it's about a) avoiding the Competitive Balance Tax, and b) signing Roy Oswalt. But what if the Red Sox don't wind up signing Roy Oswalt? Or someone like him? (By the way, there aren't many like him.)
Once we learned the Sox were desperate to keep within a certain payroll -- for whatever reason, and however surprisingly -- there remained yet another question, which still confounds me ... They couldn't get more for Scutaro than Clayton Mortensen?
Maybe he'll turn into a strike-throwing machine while remaining a groundball-producing machine, and the Red Sox will have another Derek Lowe on their hands. Maybe the Red Sox' internal metrics show Scutaro as a sub-par defensive shortstop. But while I'm grateful to Alex Speier for providing a piece of the puzzle, there's still some stuff about this deal that I can't figure.
3 comments
WEEI.com: Scutaro Deal All About The Luxury Tax
Mark Ellis Injury: Dodgers 2B Has Emergency Leg Surgery
Adam Lind Placed On Outright Waivers, According To Report
Orlando Hudson Signing With White Sox, Says Robin Ventura
Brandon McCarthy Lands On 15-Day DL With Strained Right Shoulder
Emilio Bonifacio To DL With Sprained Thumb
Lance Berkman Leaves Game With Knee Injury
Chipper Jones Likely To Miss Weekend With Leg Contusion
Danny Duffy Indeed Having Tommy John Surgery
Diamondbacks' Chris Young Comes Off Disabled List
Allen Craig, Kyle McClellan Hit DL
More News »






Comments
Re: Mortensen
Mortensen might be the cost of finding a team willing to absorb all of Scutaro’s 2012 cost. He’s an extreme groundball guy, and has an option on his contract, so the Sox might have a use for him in terms of depth, even if he isn’t great.
I agree that it doesn’t seem like much for Scutaro, but if dropping the money was the key factor here, it’s likely no one would give the Sox anything of value along with taking on a contract.
Twitter: @Marc_Normandin
by Marc Normandin on Jan 23, 2012 2:11 PM EST reply actions
Sort of like the Rays getting nothing for Hammel. Though on a lesser level.
by Erik Hahmann on Jan 23, 2012 2:32 PM EST up reply actions
The Hammel trade was lesser, I mean.
by Erik Hahmann on Jan 23, 2012 2:34 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed