Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

    We know Phillie wants to dump Lee

    We know they lost 2 prime OF'ers

    We know Rollins is aging if not done in Phillie

    So..........why not offer Beckett, Crawford and Bogaerts plus half of Beckett's $ and half of Crawford's for Cliff Lee

    Phillies don't save most of the money but they do clear $6 million while having a SS to replace Rollins and an OF'er to help mitigate the losses of Pence and Vic.....Crawford and Beckett may both be better fits in the NL and if so both can mitigate losses - again, while saving $....Longer term Bogaerts saves a lot more money vs Rollins........

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

    Beckett (+ 1/2 contract), CC  (+ half contract) & Aviles yes.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

    In Response to Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace:
    [QUOTE]Beckett (+ 1/2 contract), CC  (+ half contract) & Aviles yes.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Would Phillie do that?  I think they'd need a top prospect. 

    +Cliff Lee
    -Beckett
    -Crawford

    the one deal resolves THREE issues......
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

    That's like saying that we wouldn't want Beckett at $8M and CC at $10M per.  That makes no sense.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

    In Response to Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace:
    [QUOTE]That's like saying that we wouldn't want Beckett at $8M and CC at $10M per.  That makes no sense.
    Posted by Joebreidey[/QUOTE]

    It's a close call. 

    I think the deal would have to be more like: pay $6M on Beckett x 2 and $7M on CC x 5 years plus Aviles and maybe a guy like Nava, Coyle or Gomez. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

    That's like saying that we wouldn't want Beckett at $8M and CC at $10M per.  That makes no sense.
    Posted by Joebreidey

    It's a close call. 

    I think the deal would have to be more like: pay $6M on Beckett x 2 and $7M on CC x 5 years plus Aviles and maybe a guy like Nava, Coyle or Gomez. 

    Sox4ever

     

    ---------

     

    It's not like saying you wouldn't want to keep Beckett and Crawford for half price BECAUSE.......you couldn't get LEE and.....guess what?  You'll still have Beckett who I believe needs to go to fix the clubhouse culture.....


     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from myaim45. Show myaim45's posts

    Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

    KEEP Crawford, he can still be the guy he was in Tampa. He's gonna have to get that surgery NOW, but he will be back next year and dominate just like he did for the Rays.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from xXR3S1NXx. Show xXR3S1NXx's posts

    Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

    In Response to Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace:
    [QUOTE]KEEP Crawford, he can still be the guy he was in Tampa. He's gonna have to get that surgery NOW, but he will be back next year and dominate just like he did for the Rays.
    Posted by myaim45[/QUOTE]

    No sh!t, crawford seems to be getting close to being the player he was in tampa and you guys still wanna trade him??
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

    In Response to Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace:
    [QUOTE]KEEP Crawford, he can still be the guy he was in Tampa. He's gonna have to get that surgery NOW, but he will be back next year and dominate just like he did for the Rays.
    Posted by myaim45[/QUOTE]

    wouldn't the money be better spent on a high quality starting pitcher?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

    In Response to Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace:
    [QUOTE]We know Phillie wants to dump Lee We know they lost 2 prime OF'ers We know Rollins is aging if not done in Phillie So..........why not offer Beckett, Crawford and Bogaerts plus half of Beckett's $ and half of Crawford's for Cliff Lee Phillies don't save most of the money but they do clear $6 million while having a SS to replace Rollins and an OF'er to help mitigate the losses of Pence and Vic.....Crawford and Beckett may both be better fits in the NL and if so both can mitigate losses - again, while saving $....Longer term Bogaerts saves a lot more money vs Rollins........
    Posted by andrewmitch[/QUOTE]


    Mostly because that is a stupid deal.

    Gee, Crawford and Beckett cost too much.  Let's not only pay them to play elsewhere, but also take on the equally expensive contract of a middle-aged pitcher with a spotty track record in the American League.

    If only we could also throw in our top prospect, too, that could be the icing on the cake.



    I'm still tying to figure out how paying $41mill for Cliff Lee as opposed to $36mill for Crawford and Beckett constitutes "saving money"...
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

    If the goal is to dump Beckett, there are three names that make it easy.

    1.  Wells
    2.  Soriano
    3.  Bay

    Wells is the best defensive OF, by default.

    Soriano is the best hitter.  Again, default.  Also, worst OF of these three.

    Bay is the cheapest, and had had success in Boston before.

    Pick your poison...
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace

    In Response to Re: Beckett and Crawford and lack of an Ace:
    [QUOTE]KEEP Crawford, he can still be the guy he was in Tampa. He's gonna have to get that surgery NOW, but he will be back next year and dominate just like he did for the Rays.
    Posted by myaim45[/QUOTE]

    Crawford was a good player in Tampa, but not a great one. He had one very good year there. Its likely he will approach his career averages once he is healthy again; he is an outstanding athlete who keeps himself in top shape during the offseason. Of course he is being overpaid and got a deal that was much too sweet, but I for one would not like to pay him to play on another team.
    Beckett is a completely different story. He has lost velocity and is too stubborn (or perhaps not talented enough) to compensate. IMO his best years are behind him. He is a fat slob and takes no pride in being a professional athlete whatsoever. His contribution to the clubhouse has been negative as is evidenced by being consumed last year more with finding the snitch than owning up to his role in that fiasco.  He should be traded for whoever we can get for him, within reason, even if that includes eating a lot of his undeserved salary.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share