Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

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

    Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    http://espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/story/_/id/7008129/new-york-yankees-faked-carl-crawford-interest-cost-boston-red-sox

    ESPNNewYork.com

    They really will do whatever it takes to win in this epic rivalry.

    New York Yankees general manager Brian Cashman admitted Thursday that he feigned interest in Carl Crawford last offseason to drive up the price for the Boston Red Sox to sign the free agent.

    "I actually had dinner with the agent to pretend that we were actually involved and drive the price up," Cashman said. "The outfield wasn't an area of need, but everybody kept writing Crawford, Crawford, Crawford, Crawford. And I was like, 'I feel like we've got Carl Crawford in Brett Gardner, except he costs more than $100 million less, with less experience.' "

    The rivalry continues on the field Friday night. The Red Sox are clinging to a two-game lead over the Rays in the wild-card standings going into a three-game set in the Bronx against the AL East champion Yankees.

    It wasn't long ago that the Yankees were looking up at the Red Sox in the standings, but Boston has slumped badly in September after leading the wild-card race by nine games, and Crawford hasn't lived up to expectations.

     

     

    And now it turns out the Yankees didn't even want him. They had put all of their eggs in theCliff Lee basket this offseason, but Cashman had to scramble when the left-hander chose the Phillies.

    The GM was even ready to deal top catching prospect Jesus Montero to land Lee.

     

    "I wanted Lee badly enough to move Montero," Cashman said. "You take all the players traded when Lee went from Cleveland to Philly, Philly to Seattle, and Seattle to Texas, and Montero would've been by far the best player moved in any of those deals.

    "But now I'm just happy fans have had a chance to get a better feel of why I was hesitant to make that deal. I'm not saying I was right in not doing that deal for Lee; that's to be debated. But the young players we held onto have at least proven they were worthy of the angst as far as including them in a big trade."

    After losing out on Lee, Cashman signed long shots Bartolo Colon and Freddy Garcia and hoped that Ivan Nova would fulfill his promise. The young right-hander is 16-4 with a 3.62 ERA.

    Surprisingly, one could argue that Gardner has had a better season than Crawford. Gardner is batting .261 and leads the league with 46 steals. Crawford never got going in Boston and is hitting .259 with only 18 steals, the fewest he's had since his rookie season.

    Going into the season, Cashman said Red Sox GM Theo Epstein, who also landed Adrian Gonzalez, "kicked my a-- in the offseason."

    How does he feel now after winning the division?

    "What I said was accurate: The Red Sox had a great winter, and I had a bad winter," Cashman said. "But as it turned out, I had a better winter than anybody would've expected, including myself."

    And it cost the Red Sox.

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

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    Oops ...
    But you know, I'm nowhere near ready to call Carl Crawford a bust. He's had a disappointing season, no question, but I see no reason to believe it won't turn out to be a mere blip.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806'sTwin+. Show Bill-806'sTwin+'s posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    Would Theo be that honest to a reporter?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from fourrings. Show fourrings's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    that happens both ways all the time. why do you think the redsox made an offer to mariano rivera? they knew he wouldnt leave the yankees it was to drive the price up, happens all the time.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from sday4x4. Show sday4x4's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    where were these comments earlier in season???
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from tomnev. Show tomnev's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    I would doubt Cashman would be saying this, if Crawford had a great year.....not that it is above the yankees and the sox to try and drive up costs for the other team, but it wasnt really even talked about that the Sox were going hard after crawford....it looked more like he was going to be an Angel....so was he trying to drive up Costs for Anaheim? Sounds like revisionist history to me

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

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    In Response to Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!:
    [QUOTE]Oops ... But you know, I'm nowhere near ready to call Carl Crawford a bust. He's had a disappointing season, no question, but I see no reason to believe it won't turn out to be a mere blip.
    Posted by LloydDobler[/QUOTE]

    We are of the same mind here.  The bust talk is silly.  But, it is interesting in the eternal big-money poker game with these clubs.  Even if Carl had a Carl-standard year this year, the contract is pretty enormous for his skill set and career production.  If it doesn't inhibit ownership's willingness to spend what it takes to fill holes going forward, then;  no harm, no foul.  But, you gotta admit, card well played by Cashman.  An easy card, granted.  
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    It's BS.  If the Sox had not signed Crawford, he'd be in pin-stripes right now, and Gardner would have been traded for a pitcher.  Even if Cashman is being honest, it would have happened - eventually the Yankee FO gave the most player-friendly contract in history to the best available free agent.  By the time the Lee saga played out, that FA was Soriano, but it could easily have been Crawford.

    Does it strike anybody as a strange time for all this bulletin board material coming from the Yankee camp?

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    In Response to Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!:
    [QUOTE]Would Theo be that honest to a reporter?
    Posted by Bill-806'sTwin+[/QUOTE]

    After winning the pennant, hell yeah he would.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    I think this is payback for Theo telling the Phillies we would take Joe Blanton if they signed Lee.  Ironically, we could use him right now.

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

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    In Response to Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!:
    [QUOTE]I think this is payback for Theo telling the Phillies we would take Joe Blanton if they signed Lee.  Ironically, we could use him right now.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]
    The deal was reportedly Cam for Blanton. What if...
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from jrh1194. Show jrh1194's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    In Response to Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!:
    [QUOTE]I think this is payback for Theo telling the Phillies we would take Joe Blanton if they signed Lee.  Ironically, we could use him right now.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    Too bad we couldn't trade Crawford for him.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from jrh1194. Show jrh1194's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    In Response to Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!:
    [QUOTE]It's BS.  If the Sox had not signed Crawford, he'd be in pin-stripes right now, and Gardner would have been traded for a pitcher.  Even if Cashman is being honest, it would have happened - eventually the Yankee FO gave the most player-friendly contract in history to the best available free agent.  By the time the Lee saga played out, that FA was Soriano, but it could easily have been Crawford. Does it strike anybody as a strange time for all this bulletin board material coming from the Yankee camp?
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    I wish Cashman had signed Crawford. Theo should have waited.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    Crawford will be fine - he's 7 for his last 13, and hitting .286 if you take away April.  This winter, trade Ellsbury (maybe straight-up for Tim Lincecum?) and put Crawford in the leadoff slot, and he'll be a .300 hitter with pop.  Maybe pick up Grady Sizemore cheap, and you will have close to 2010 production with a far better rotation.  $20M is way too much if you look at it in the vaccuum of how much is Carl Crawford worth, but he was brought here to replace Ellsbury.  It has to be seen in the light of what we get in return for Ellsbury, which right now could be quite a bit.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from jrh1194. Show jrh1194's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    In Response to Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!:
    [QUOTE]Crawford will be fine - he's 7 for his last 13, and hitting .286 if you take away April.  This winter, trade Ellsbury (maybe straight-up for Tim Lincecum?) and put Crawford in the leadoff slot, and he'll be a .300 hitter with pop.  Maybe pick up Grady Sizemore cheap, and you will have close to 2010 production with a far better rotation.  $20M is way too much if you look at it in the vaccuum of how much is Carl Crawford worth, but he was brought here to replace Ellsbury.  It has to be seen in the light of what we get in return for Ellsbury, which right now could be quite a bit.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    I think that we all hope that Crawford does better next year. I seriously doubt that San Fran would take Ellsbury straight up for Lincecum. I do like the idea of getting Sizemore. He is worth taking a chance on.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from tbrod. Show tbrod's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    I'd settle for trading him for Desmond Jennings. Bet even if the Sox ate the entire contract, the Rays would never do that.
    They have to be laughing, every time they think of Theo, panting to pay Crawful all that money.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    In Response to Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH! : I think that we all hope that Crawford does better next year. I seriously doubt that San Fran would take Ellsbury straight up for Lincecum. I do like the idea of getting Sizemore. He is worth taking a chance on.
    Posted by jrh1194[/QUOTE]

    Why is that?  They are both under contract for two years, and the Giants have the worst offense in baseball, but would still have a very good rotation with Cain, Bumgarner & Vogelsong.  
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from jrh1194. Show jrh1194's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    Ells has has been outstanding this season, bordering on MVP stats. Lincecum has won the Cy Young twice and has led the league in strikeouts three times. I think that we would have to offer more than Ellsbury to get Lincecum from San Francisco, if they even would want to trade him.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    In Response to Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH! : Why is that?  They are both under contract for two years, and the Giants have the worst offense in baseball, but would still have a very good rotation with Cain, Bumgarner & Vogelsong.  
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    My guess is the Giants realize that a pitcher of his stature is much harder to acquire than a hitter of Ells stature.  To wit...look who is available as a free agent for the Giants to chase this year without giving up a pitcher - Puljos.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    It's no secret that the Yank's coveted Crawford before the 2010 season...Not so much after seeing how well Gardner (& Granderson) produced since taking over the everyday job in left from Damon, it made signing the Crawford a luxary, not a nessecity...

    The Yanks wanted Lee and the Angels wanted Crawford... Istill think the Sox wanted Werth but were trumped by the Nationals and the signing of Crawford was an after thought...

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    In Response to Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!:
    [QUOTE]I'd settle for trading him for Desmond Jennings. Bet even if the Sox ate the entire contract, the Rays would never do that. They have to be laughing, every time they think of Theo, panting to pay Crawful all that money.
    Posted by tbrod[/QUOTE]

    Jennings has looked good, but I wouldn't put him in the hall just yet, he was a ..270 hitter at AAA...So lets wait until teams get a book on the kid and see if he adjust...
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    Concur with that thought on Werth...the Sox were looking for a slugger and not a punch and judy hitter.  Crawford was the next best thing and I believe the Angels drove up that contract and not the Yankees.  Witness that the Sox had no idea where to fit him into the batting order after they got him.  As it turned out it appears they dealt for a #7-9 hitter - at least this year.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxu571. Show redsoxu571's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    I'm amused that the article adds that Cashman tried to drive up the price for the Red Sox in the offseason. Nowhere in Cashman's quotes does he indicate this was about hurting the Red Sox, and anyone with a half-decent memory (given that this wasn't even a year ago) should remember that the Red Sox weren't even publically on Crawford until the 11th hour. Crawford seemed ticketed for the Angels, and Cashman (as Epstein often does himself) did his due diligence, met with the player, and felt it wouldn't hurt to see if he could drive up the price for a player who would likely end up on some AL contender.

    If Cashman did somehow drive up the price, which I doubt, it wasn't about the Red Sox...the fact that Crawford ended up in Boston would only have been gravy if Crawford's price had gone up.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxu571. Show redsoxu571's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    As for the signing itself...the real shame is that Epstein waited a year too long to sign his needed OFer. If he had signed Matt Holliday the previous offseason, he would have ended up with the right-handed power bat the lineup really could use (plus Holliday is better worth his dollars than Crawford, even if/when Crawford rebounds)...and then he would have passed on signing Lackey, which we can all agree would have been a good thing.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from sadsax. Show sadsax's posts

    Re: Cashman on Crawford: OUCH!

    it appears that DUMBTHEO got outsmarted again!
    well, i don't call him dumb for nothing.
     

Share