Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

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

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today : I have tried not to be an "I told you so" about Crawford. His early season struggles is not who he is. He will return to his normal self soon (if he hasn't already). I never expected .240. I still don't. I was against his signing based on better alternatives with $142M over 7 years. It's nothing personal against CC. He's a good player to have on the team. He will help us get wins. I just don't think he is worth even close to $142M. At the time of the signing, I said he was overpaid by over $50M. I hope I am proven wrong.
    Posted by moonslav59


    Overpaid by what standard?  The argument against Drew was that he was overpaid.  The argument in favor of Drew was, overpaid or not, he was the best OF signing of the year.

    So if you compare the CC signing to Werth, I'd much, much rather have CC.  Or compare the CC signing to Bay.  I was thinking somewhere around $96M/6, but once the Nats went nuts, what do you do next?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today


    Since his return from the DL ....

      .375 for Carl


      ..nuff said.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from highflysox. Show highflysox's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    with a face like that you should be a yankee fan
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    I don't think we've seen the best of Crawford.  He may be overpaid but I expect him to turn it around.  He's too good of a player. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    Crawford Yesterday: Career: .441 SLG  .775 OPS  HR 12 RBI 71 (Crawford multi-year is this) 2010    .495 SLG  .851 OPS  HR 19  RBI 90  All Career highs (Theo Pd for this)  Buyer: Theo Epstein  20M/base 142M guaranteed Crawford Today: 2011   .385 SLG  .666 OPS HR *11 RBI *60   * projected Ellsbury Yesterday: Career .428 SLG  .779 OPS HR 12 RBI 67 (Ellsbury multi-years is this)  Ellsbury Today: 2011   .509 SLG  .884 OPS HR*23 RBI*90 All Career highs  By buying Crawford and setting the record market for this position profile, Theo has done two things: 1. Made a fool of himself for absurdly overpaying for Crawbust 2. Bid up the post FA price for the same type of profile player he will not be able to extend 3. Made a fool of himself by having to lie to the press about a serious attempt to extend Ellsbury, when, given the Crawbust bed, there is no way he will ever be given settlement authority to meet the FA demands of Boras/Ellsbury. Epstein is boxed in, completely, as the entire world knows that he could have simply passed on Crawbust to the Angels for 75% of his current base, and budgeted the same amount for a complimentary RH young OF'er and towards Ellsbury extension or FA bidding. There is zero chance Ellsbury will be with the Red Sox beyond 2013, but Theo will not tell Red Sox fans that. The comment about the extension efforts is a PR and pitiful save face false front. Henry needs to take the T-Bird away from Theo, and increase the E&O GM insurance. Once one who gave Theo the benefit of the doubt, there can be no doubt that he's worse than George Allen, DC GM.  Theo should admit his mistake, internally, and get on the phone and try and capture the only chance he has to cut his loss on Crawbust. He should call Colletti and try and convince him that Ellsbury isn't Crawford, he's Ty Cobb in his prime, but the Red Sox can't afford two Crawford profiles and, for Kemp and an extension, Colleti can have Ellsbury's 2.4 and his choice of Lowrie or Middlebrooks and his choice of Hassan or Brentz and his choice of Doubrant or Weiland. Few understand that it is Agon who has made life better for those hitting near him, but the Red Sox have a gaping long term and short RH slugging OF hole that, if filled, could turn them from slight underdogs to even or slight favorites if it ends up Phillies and Red Sox. But more importantly, it would construct the OF with proper complimentary balance for years to come. Bottom line, it's obvious that Crawford makes dealing Ellsbury, now, for a RH OF slugging star, about as obvious as it can be. Epstein's savior has alway been the large number of emotionally driven Red Sox fans who like or dislike players for reasons that have nothing to do with value and fit. They are behind him 100% in buying long term on Ellsbury. Of course, that's not realistic, but it allows Theo to get a pass on simply punting on Crawbustbury and just allow the clock to run out.  Smart fans, Slomag and Burrito and perhaps one or two other "hateful" thinkers, understand that calling the Dodgers for a young RF star is the only way out of the long term corner that Theo has painted Henry, Werner, Luchino and the Red Sox organization into. But, hey, Theo, call Ellsbury a core member and make it more difficult to dig out that deep driven stake broken off in your rear end. Ignorant Red Sox fans are loving it and buying the highest point, hook line and sinker, and are distracted enough to lose interest in Crawbust as a 20M Red Sox career #6 hitter.   Go ahead and spend 54M for 2 years of Crawbustbury, and do a dumpster dive for some RH OF'er pipe dream. Keep telling Red Sox teenager fans that you are working hard on extending the wet dream of a poster who calls him Robin Yount's nickname, "the kid";)  Heaven help you if you trade the pink and police hat doted darling for Kemp, and put Reddick in CF and a long term extended Kemp in RF. There would be a flood of tears, followed by anger and outrage!  To my many kind fans on this NY Times board, I've been busy dealing with my "corpse" of clients from our 59 United States, preparing for the next federal approriation of private property to pay another year of entitlements for the aging and increasing number of indolent Wards of the State. Give The Man all the rope he asks for, so he doesn't have to choose between paying himself and the little old lady who will be forced to starve because of Big Oil, fat cats and those with no skin in the game.  Mr. John Henry, keep up the good Red Sox stewardship, and tell Mr. Luchino to shorten the leash on the ape suited fantasy baseball mind. You deserve better.            
    Posted by billbyboy


    I don't see knocking Carl because he was off to a bad start.  The guy has been a solid hitter throughout his career in the toughest division in baseball.  Carl is just heading into his prime will be just fine at the plate.  Its not like Lackey, J.D and Dice K. who we know will probably never improve.


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

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    I wonder how the comparison between CC and Ells would look if it was extended to last season. 

    I find it strange that Ellsbury has emerged as a power hitter this season.  I hope he hasn't taken the same route as some of Boras' other clients.

     20102011
    Games1898
    AB78403
    R1074
    H15129
    2B427
    3B02
    HR016
    RBI558
    BB433
    SO960
    SB728
    CS110
    AVG0.1920.32
    OBP0.2410.377
    SLG0.2440.516
    OPS0.4850.893
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    Wow! Talk about lowered standards! This guy is one of the top ten paid players in MLB . I want one of you to tell me that Carl Crawford in anything but stolen bases, merits being in the top ten anything. I never liked him even when he was in Tampa. I wanted to throw up when I heard the Sox signed him. Funny thing, there doesn't seem to have been much of a market for him. He was likely heading for LA, when Theo wrote a blank check contract. Just insane. If Theo was running a business and had to answer for Crawford, Matsuzaka, Lackey, Lugo, Clement and so many others, he'd have been out on his butt, long ago.
    Posted by tbrod


    You post a bunch of opinion as fact.  You have absolutely no idea what the Crawford market was.  The process could create the market.  There are any number of teams who could have been involved and that includes the Yanks.  If he went to NY, he would be hitting leadoff.  You state that Theo wrote a blank check.  I didn't know he had autonomy in the organization. Nonsense. Ownership liked the player and he compared VERY favorably to Jason Werth in skillset, age, and athleticism.  If you never liked CC that's because he tortured the Sox.  The market was set by the Nationals. You might need to turn your anger to them. If signing a player not on the Yankees made you want to throw up, maybe you are rooting for the wrong team.  Finally, bashers like you love to bring up unsuccessful signings.  Matt Clement was on the All Star team before getting hit in the head and changing the trajectory of his stay in Boston.  Is that conveniently forgotten because it doesn't fit the story?  Lugo turned out to be a bad signing but it happens.  Lackey will be fine as much as you would love him to continue to struggle.  You really need to get some new material.  You complain endlessly while the team you allegedly like plays great baseball and remains in first place.  You are like the person who complains about being hungry with a loaf of bread under each arm.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from wavechaser. Show wavechaser's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    as Judge Schmells from Caddyshack says before the big putt
    "  billy...billy ...this is a big one "
    who died and made you the expert ?
    love both Crawford and Ellsbury
    sit back and enjoy the 2011 world Championship
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    But off the field, he scores! Harness, you injected the initial comment which reflects the scum background that you come from. "Scoring off the field" was what the neighborhood was doing to your mother, and that resulted in you. If you were younger, Varitek or Tiger Woods could have produced you. Social grace isn't possible with scum. It requires a slum communication level. The reason you haven't been banned is because you are scum, as evident by your comment "but off the field, he scores". Off the field, he's the same reprobate that you are, which is why you wish you were him. Have no fear, mortality will find you sitting in chaos next to your idol, the man who "scores off the field".
    Posted by billbyboy


    Wow, Mama jokes now?  Classic! And lame!
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from sindarin-erebor. Show sindarin-erebor's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    You are ever so close to admitting your constant rants about Jacoby Ellsbury have been patently wrong.....as you now move your reticil on Carl Crawford. You are the very worst kind of Troll.
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    I read your retort; you and I know the words that you used in it.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today : Overpaid by what standard?  The argument against Drew was that he was overpaid.  The argument in favor of Drew was, overpaid or not, he was the best OF signing of the year. So if you compare the CC signing to Werth, I'd much, much rather have CC.  Or compare the CC signing to Bay.  I was thinking somewhere around $96M/6, but once the Nats went nuts, what do you do next?
    Posted by Joebreidey


    One option floated was Maglio Ordonez coming off a decent year for ~$11m for one year or $20m for 2 years.  In 2011, he is a terrible fielder and he is hitting about as well as Drew. 

    Another idea was Kalish/Cameron/Ellsbury/Drew. No comment needed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from tbrod. Show tbrod's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    How was Crawford going to sign with the Yankees, when they have Gardner in LF, along with Granderson and Swisher.
    Was he going to DH in NY? Wasn't going to happen.
    Theo shot his load, because he was afraid of another Texiera situation.
    The only interest shown in Crawford was Anaheim.
    I repeat, 20 million dollars for seven year for a non impact low OBP player, whose main asset is speed, on a team that doesn't play small ball.
    Ludicrous.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    How was Crawford going to sign with the Yankees, when they have Gardner in LF, along with Granderson and Swisher. Was he going to DH in NY? Wasn't going to happen. Theo shot his load, because he was afraid of another Texiera situation. The only interest shown in Crawford was Anaheim. I repeat, 20 million dollars for seven year for a non impact low OBP player, whose main asset is speed, on a team that doesn't play small ball. Ludicrous.
    Posted by tbrod


    I agree.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    How was Crawford going to sign with the Yankees, when they have Gardner in LF, along with Granderson and Swisher. Was he going to DH in NY? Wasn't going to happen. Theo shot his load, because he was afraid of another Texiera situation. The only interest shown in Crawford was Anaheim. I repeat, 20 million dollars for seven year for a non impact low OBP player, whose main asset is speed, on a team that doesn't play small ball. Ludicrous.
    Posted by tbrod


    What does that mean, 'non-impact' player?  Last year he had an .851 OPS, 110 runs scored, 90 RBI, Gold Glove, 7th in MVP voting, 5.6 WAR per B-R.  Some of that stuff is subjective, but 'non-impact' is really stretching it. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    Crawford isn't even one of the top ten Red Sox players! I don't care which sabermetric you use.
    Posted by tbrod


    Ya know, I didnt really like the lackey signing or the $$ CC is making. Like I said before, what do you or anybody care how a BILLIONAIRE spends his $$? At least you have an ownership thats willing and able to do so WITHOUT handcuffing the team finacially. You are ALWAYS going to overpay by a couple mil per and maybe an extra year in FA..It is what it is..They are in first place, or did you forget...Some of you are just never happy...
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today : Wow, Mama jokes now?  Classic! And lame!
    Posted by jimdavis


    looks like he erased his mother comment .....whats wrong softflaw? afraid of yet another banning? I swear, there are a lot of brave people since the internet came out, with this dolt leading the pack...
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonTrollSpanker. Show BostonTrollSpanker's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    "I swear, there are a lot of brave people since the internet came out, with this dolt leading the pack..."

    The guy is getting more and more classless by the day, which seems to be as good a confession as any that even he doubts the intellectual rigor of his own arguments. If he didn't, there would be no need to get personal.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    How was Crawford going to sign with the Yankees, when they have Gardner in LF, along with Granderson and Swisher. Was he going to DH in NY? Wasn't going to happen. Theo shot his load, because he was afraid of another Texiera situation. The only interest shown in Crawford was Anaheim. I repeat, 20 million dollars for seven year for a non impact low OBP player, whose main asset is speed, on a team that doesn't play small ball. Ludicrous.
    Posted by tbrod


    I can answer you this way.  Why would the Yankees sign Alex Rodriguez when they have Jeter at SS and Boone at 3B.  While Theo was shooting his load, was management in the Bahamas asleep at the switch?  The only interest shown was LA in your basement maybe.  You have no idea what you are talking about.  I repeat, you have no idea what you are talking about.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today : looks like he erased his mother comment .....whats wrong softflaw? afraid of yet another banning? I swear, there are a lot of brave people since the internet came out, with this dolt leading the pack...
    Posted by southpaw777


    Yup, we call them internet tough guys.  Just like the local bully.  Smack him in the mouth and he will cry to his mama.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    I wonder how the comparison between CC and Ells would look if it was extended to last season.  I find it strange that Ellsbury has emerged as a power hitter this season.  I hope he hasn't taken the same route as some of Boras' other clients.   2010 2011 Games 18 98 AB 78 403 R 10 74 H 15 129 2B 4 27 3B 0 2 HR 0 16 RBI 5 58 BB 4 33 SO 9 60 SB 7 28 CS 1 10 AVG 0.192 0.32 OBP 0.241 0.377 SLG 0.244 0.516 OPS 0.485 0.893
    Posted by DirtyWaterLover


    On Fangraphs you can search specific year ranges. Here is the 2010-2011 Ells-CC comparison for the 2 year period in which both had injury issues:
     
    CC  .290/.335/.461/.796  967 PAs, 25 HRs, 60 2B/3B, 57/72 SB/SB Atts
    Ells .299/.356/.472/.828  481 PAs, 16 HRs, 36 2B/3B, 35/46 SB/SB Atts

    If you prorate Ells to 967 PAs:           32 HRs,  72 2B/3B, 75/92 SB 


     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from tbrod. Show tbrod's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    Jim Davis said I have no idea what I'm talking about.
    And he does? Get a life! Prove what I said was wrong. You can't.
    Crawford was coming off a career year. Any GM knows never overpay for anyone coming off a career year. Guess your hero never got the memo.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    Compare CC and Ells since Ells came up in 2007:

    CC  .296/.344/.449/.793  2748 PAs, 164 2B/3B, 59 HRs, 192/240 SB
    Ells .297/.352/.430/.782  1775 PAs,  97 2B/3B, 36 HRs, 164/198 SB
    Prorate Ells to 2748 PAs and approx: 165 2B/3B, 57 HRs, 255/305SB

    Pretty close, and this was after CC already had about 5 years of ML experience.   
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today

    In Response to Re: Carl Crawford: Yesterday & Today:
    Jim Davis said I have no idea what I'm talking about. And he does? Get a life! Prove what I said was wrong. You can't. Crawford was coming off a career year. Any GM knows never overpay for anyone coming off a career year. Guess your hero never got the memo.
    Posted by tbrod


    I can't prove you wrong or right.  That is the point.  None of us know what is going on behind the scenes.  To act like you do is arrogant.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share