Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

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

    Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    by Kirk Minihane/WEEI
    Let's be fair here: Carl Crawford isn't having a bad season. He's having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's. 

    There are 82 players in the American League with enough at-bats to qualify for the batting title. Carl Crawford -- batting .242, 51 points below his career average and 31 points lower than any other full season in his career -- ranks 68th, tied with Alcides Escobar (making $428K this year).

    I know, I know. Batting average is a seriously flawed way of gauging whether or not a player is having a successful season. I think most of us understand this. But how about on-base percentage? Well, out of those same 82 players Carl Crawford ranks 79th. I'm pretty sure I read something once about Theo and the gang putting some value in OBP, right?

    The Decline of Derek Jeter has seemingly turned into an industry. He's become the woman who gets slapped around by everyone on board in Airplane! -- the media has chronicled Jeter's collision with mediocrity with the same level of glee they once used when breathlessly describing Jeter's calm eyes and ability to will teammates to win. 

    And again with the understanding that batting average doesn't mean as much as we thought it meant 10 years ago, it's still eye-opening to realize that Derek Jeter's 2011 batting average is higher than Carl Crawford's 2011 on-base percentage. 

    So where's the outrage? Why does it strike me that no one -- no media, no fans, no one -- seems at all interested that Carl Crawford, in the first year of a seven-year, $142 million contract, has been one of the worst offensive players in baseball this season? 

    Think about it: Three American League regulars have a lower on-base percentage than Carl Crawford. That's it. He's walked 13 times this season. That is tied for 133rd in the American League. He has a line against left-handed pitchers -- .137/.200/.235 -- that plenty of NL pitchers would pass on.  

    Remember all the stuff we read (and some of it was on this site) about Crawford moving away from stealing bases and developing more into a power hitter? Well, so far it's been half-true: He has seven home runs in 341 plate appearances and 12 stolen bases. 

    Carl Crawford -- who has a career 162-game average of 52 stolen bases -- is on pace to steal 18 bases in 2011. In 1985 Bill Buckner stole 18 bases for the Red Sox with two busted ankles and a pair of high tops. 

    The point is that we haven't seen anything -- at least on a semi-consistent basis-- even close to resembling the Crawford we saw in Tampa, or the guy Sox fans were told they were getting the day the contract was signed.

    And the reaction from the infamous, brutally tough Boston media and famously passionate Red Sox fanbase has been an avalanche of indifference. 

    Why? The easy answer -- and it's usually the one I hear whenever Crawford's struggles are mentioned -- is that it's his first year in Boston, let's give the guy some time. And I actually agree with that sentiment. I thought Crawford's contract was too much by half, but there is no reason to think that he won't be the pre-2011 Crawford next season. Guys sometimes have stinkers in the middle of their careers. Agreed. 

    But here's the problem: No one was giving J.D. Drew a pass during his first year in Boston. Same goes for Lackey. How about Rasheed Wallace? So the first-year syndrome doesn't really explain the universal (well, Bostonversal) shrug to Crawford's 2011 season.
    "Boogie Nights" is very nearly a perfect movie. I'm serious about this. Mark Wahlberg has never been better, it has the cinematic equivalent of Brady Anderson hitting 50 home runs in a season with a "Where the hell did THAT come from?" performance from Burt Reynolds (minus the HGH -- I think), Julianne Moore, Philip Seymour Hoffman, William H. Macy, John C. Reilly all at the top of their considerable skills. Full marks to Paul Thomas Anderson, who wrote the script and coaxed terrific work from almost everyone involved as director. And, of course, Night Ranger.

    I write "very nearly" because Heather Graham, who sure looks the part as Rollergirl -- her nude scenes are some of the last "pause and swing away" moments of the VHS era -- is almost impossibly vacant as an actress. Put it another way: Watching the movie again recently, I'm not sure Heather Graham doesn't realize that the entire movie isn't a porno film. She brings down any scene she's in by at least 50 percent, but the film is so strong in every other way that she can't really hurt it much.

    If the 2011 Red Sox lineup is "Boogie Nights" Carl Crawford is Heather Graham. This is an all-time lineup, with three legitimate MVP candidates and two other guys (Kevin Youkilis, David Ortiz) having superb seasons. Carl Crawford and his .660 OPS (Julio Lugo's OPS for the Sox in his two-plus years? .664) almost don't matter when you take a big-picture look and realize the Sox lead the league in every significant offensive category. Adrian Gonzalez, Jacoby Ellsbury, Dustin Pedroia and the rest of the guys have bailed Crawford out.

    (And that's another reason why I simply do not buy the "big-city" pressure argument with Crawford. The truth is that he'll never have less pressure than he's had this season. Other than a couple of boos at the very beginning of the season -- the 2-10 run -- has Crawford heard anything negative from the fans or media? Not a single peep -- I can give the fans a pass for this, but it's not the job of the men and women in the press box to let Crawford off the hook, which is exactly what is happening. I'm starting to get a feel from the folks on the Red Sox beat that they think they might be part of this team, which is troubling.)

    So the fact that the Sox are scoring a million runs goes a long way. We get it. But my personal theory as to why Crawford's 2011 ineptitude is being ignored? No one likes to be wrong. J.D. Drew was an easy target for the media and fans because he was a first-guess. Everyone was against the $70 million deal, so it was victory-lap time when it turned out that some of the things about Drew turned out to be true. Same goes for Rasheed Wallace, and get ready for the buffet of I Told You So's if Albert Haynesworth is a bust.

    Some people thought Crawford wasn't worth $142 million, but everyone saw him in Tampa and knew, just knew, that he was going to be at least very good in Boston. Some of those same people thought he'd be better than Gonzalez. So those people are going to take their time before rendering judgement. That's fair, but not very consistent when you look at the treatment given to other first-year guys around here. 

    Carl Crawford is having a nightmare season, easily the worst of his career. And no one seems to care very much.

    When does that change? Well, people are more forgiving when things are swell. The Sox are 68-42, a lock for the playoffs and probably second-favorite to win the World Series. People (and yes, I so include plenty of the media) don't want to rock the boat.

    But if the Sox are 26-28 next season and Crawford is hitting .236? It's going to get ugly.

    A free pass has to run out sometime, doesn't it?

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

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    Kirk, obviously has never been to a Sox board
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    This is a team game and some players are going to have off years.

    These jack-asses who want to label Crawford a "bust" are just over reacting. It's a knee jerk reaction with the emphasis on "jerk."

    Ellsbury had an off year last season, now he's the MVP. Beckett had an off year also, now he's our ace again....see how it works?

    Judging a player on a small sample (April and May) is stupid. He was hurt for a while, so he obviously had to work himself back, he will be fine. People need to get a life and stop looking for "busts" at every turn. Look at his career, he's no bust.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from trouts. Show trouts's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

     Having Scutaro and Varitek struggling at the same time doesn't do much for the bottom of the lineup.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from william93063. Show william93063's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    To reinforce Zill's points, it is WAY TOO EARLY to write him off. Not to make excuses, but  he has not been 100% healthy  this year and is also having a tough time adjusting to the intensity of playing in Boston.  He is also probably pressing to prove he is worth 142 million which he is not but signing a 5 tool player in his prime years means that the sox needed to overpay, as that is how it works with free agents.

     He will find himself eventually  and revert back to his .290  15 Homers 11 triples 35 doubles 40+ steals and 100 runs scored next season.  It is simply too early to worry or write him off at this point.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from J-BAY. Show J-BAY's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    In Response to Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.:
    This is a team game and some players are going to have off years. These jack-asses who want to label Crawford a "bust" are just over reacting. It's a knee jerk reaction with the emphasis on "jerk." Ellsbury had an off year last season, now he's the MVP. Beckett had an off year also, now he's our ace again....see how it works? Judging a player on a small sample (April and May) is stupid. He was hurt for a while, so he obviously had to work himself back, he will be fine. People need to get a life and stop looking for "busts" at every turn. Look at his career, he's no bust.
    Posted by ZILLAGOD


    Agreed  Zill. the fact it's Crawford's first year in boston has magnified it. if it was a few years in, he would be having a down year; since it's the first, he's already been labeled a beantowne bust. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    After 9/11, I think we should all not to use the word "disastrous" about such trivial things as a baseball player's poor season.
    Call it a pet peeve, but I hate it.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    nah....after a slow start and his injury aside Crawford hasn't looked as bad as his numbers suggest.  There is much to be hopeful for down the stretch and next year beyond.  Lackey however has not only been disapointing this year, but last year as well.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from tartarus12. Show tartarus12's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    In Response to Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.:
    This is a team game and some players are going to have off years. These jack-asses who want to label Crawford a "bust" are just over reacting. It's a knee jerk reaction with the emphasis on "jerk." Ellsbury had an off year last season, now he's the MVP. Beckett had an off year also, now he's our ace again....see how it works? Judging a player on a small sample (April and May) is stupid. He was hurt for a while, so he obviously had to work himself back, he will be fine. People need to get a life and stop looking for "busts" at every turn. Look at his career, he's no bust.
    Posted by ZILLAGOD

    Ellsbury missed nearly the whole year with broken ribs and you call that an off year? How does that compare to Crawford? Do you have information that he is injured? Crawford has been an unmitigated disaster but to compare his situation to Ellsburys or Becketts is really a stretch.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    In Response to Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.:
    In Response to Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's. : Ellsbury missed nearly the whole year with broken ribs and you call that an off year? How does that compare to Crawford? Do you have information that he is injured? Crawford has been an unmitigated disaster but to compare his situation to Ellsburys or Becketts is really a stretch.
    Posted by tartarus12


    OK so compare it to Beckett's 2006 debut with the Sox when he was perfectly healthy but registered a 5.01 ERA.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from llbplayball. Show llbplayball's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    In Response to Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.:
    by Kirk Minihane/WEEI Let's be fair here: Carl Crawford isn't having a bad season. He's having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.  There are 82 players in the American League with enough at-bats to qualify for the batting title. Carl Crawford -- batting .242, 51 points below his career average and 31 points lower than any other full season in his career -- ranks 68th, tied with Alcides Escobar (making $428K this year). I know, I know. Batting average is a seriously flawed way of gauging whether or not a player is having a successful season. I think most of us understand this. But how about on-base percentage? Well, out of those same 82 players Carl Crawford ranks 79th. I'm pretty sure I read something once about Theo and the gang putting some value in OBP, right? The Decline of Derek Jeter has seemingly turned into an industry. He's become the woman who gets slapped around by everyone on board in Airplane! -- the media has chronicled Jeter's collision with mediocrity with the same level of glee they once used when breathlessly describing Jeter's calm eyes and ability to will teammates to win.  And again with the understanding that batting average doesn't mean as much as we thought it meant 10 years ago, it's still eye-opening to realize that Derek Jeter's 2011 batting average is higher than Carl Crawford's 2011 on-base percentage.  So where's the outrage? Why does it strike me that no one -- no media, no fans, no one -- seems at all interested that Carl Crawford, in the first year of a seven-year, $142 million contract, has been one of the worst offensive players in baseball this season?  Think about it: Three American League regulars have a lower on-base percentage than Carl Crawford. That's it. He's walked 13 times this season. That is tied for 133rd in the American League. He has a line against left-handed pitchers -- .137/.200/.235 -- that plenty of NL pitchers would pass on.   Remember all the stuff we read (and some of it was on this site) about Crawford moving away from stealing bases and developing more into a power hitter? Well, so far it's been half-true: He has seven home runs in 341 plate appearances and 12 stolen bases.  Carl Crawford -- who has a career 162-game average of 52 stolen bases -- is on pace to steal 18 bases in 2011. In 1985 Bill Buckner stole 18 bases for the Red Sox with two busted ankles and a pair of high tops.  The point is that we haven't seen anything -- at least on a semi-consistent basis-- even close to resembling the Crawford we saw in Tampa, or the guy Sox fans were told they were getting the day the contract was signed. And the reaction from the infamous, brutally tough Boston media and famously passionate Red Sox fanbase has been an avalanche of indifference.  Why? The easy answer -- and it's usually the one I hear whenever Crawford's struggles are mentioned -- is that it's his first year in Boston, let's give the guy some time. And I actually agree with that sentiment. I thought Crawford's contract was too much by half, but there is no reason to think that he won't be the pre-2011 Crawford next season. Guys sometimes have stinkers in the middle of their careers. Agreed.  But here's the problem: No one was giving J.D. Drew a pass during his first year in Boston. Same goes for Lackey. How about Rasheed Wallace ? So the first-year syndrome doesn't really explain the universal (well, Bostonversal) shrug to Crawford's 2011 season. "Boogie Nights" is very nearly a perfect movie. I'm serious about this. Mark Wahlberg has never been better, it has the cinematic equivalent of Brady Anderson hitting 50 home runs in a season with a "Where the hell did THAT come from?" performance from Burt Reynolds (minus the HGH -- I think), Julianne Moore, Philip Seymour Hoffman, William H. Macy, John C. Reilly all at the top of their considerable skills. Full marks to Paul Thomas Anderson, who wrote the script and coaxed terrific work from almost everyone involved as director. And, of course, Night Ranger. I write "very nearly" because Heather Graham, who sure looks the part as Rollergirl -- her nude scenes are some of the last "pause and swing away" moments of the VHS era -- is almost impossibly vacant as an actress. Put it another way: Watching the movie again recently, I'm not sure Heather Graham doesn't realize that the entire movie isn't a porno film. She brings down any scene she's in by at least 50 percent, but the film is so strong in every other way that she can't really hurt it much. If the 2011 Red Sox lineup is "Boogie Nights" Carl Crawford is Heather Graham. This is an all-time lineup, with three legitimate MVP candidates and two other guys ( Kevin Youkilis , David Ortiz ) having superb seasons. Carl Crawford and his .660 OPS (Julio Lugo's OPS for the Sox in his two-plus years? .664) almost don't matter when you take a big-picture look and realize the Sox lead the league in every significant offensive category. Adrian Gonzalez, Jacoby Ellsbury , Dustin Pedroia and the rest of the guys have bailed Crawford out. (And that's another reason why I simply do not buy the "big-city" pressure argument with Crawford. The truth is that he'll never have less pressure than he's had this season. Other than a couple of boos at the very beginning of the season -- the 2-10 run -- has Crawford heard anything negative from the fans or media? Not a single peep -- I can give the fans a pass for this, but it's not the job of the men and women in the press box to let Crawford off the hook, which is exactly what is happening. I'm starting to get a feel from the folks on the Red Sox beat that they think they might be part of this team, which is troubling.) So the fact that the Sox are scoring a million runs goes a long way. We get it. But my personal theory as to why Crawford's 2011 ineptitude is being ignored? No one likes to be wrong. J.D. Drew was an easy target for the media and fans because he was a first-guess. Everyone was against the $70 million deal, so it was victory-lap time when it turned out that some of the things about Drew turned out to be true. Same goes for Rasheed Wallace, and get ready for the buffet of I Told You So's if Albert Haynesworth is a bust. Some people thought Crawford wasn't worth $142 million, but everyone saw him in Tampa and knew, just knew, that he was going to be at least very good in Boston. Some of those same people thought he'd be better than Gonzalez. So those people are going to take their time before rendering judgement. That's fair, but not very consistent when you look at the treatment given to other first-year guys around here.  Carl Crawford is having a nightmare season, easily the worst of his career. And no one seems to care very much. When does that change? Well, people are more forgiving when things are swell. The Sox are 68-42, a lock for the playoffs and probably second-favorite to win the World Series . People (and yes, I so include plenty of the media) don't want to rock the boat. But if the Sox are 26-28 next season and Crawford is hitting .236? It's going to get ugly. A free pass has to run out sometime, doesn't it?
    Posted by Mr.Bump

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

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    Ortiz will never see a fastball over rhe plate as long as crawford is slotted behind him in batting order...(can we really call it a batting order with crawford in it?).  Every time crawford hits a ball his head jerks up in surprise.  And thanks for the 12 stolen bases....didn't he have 6 in one game AGAINST us last year? 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Diamondtalk. Show Diamondtalk's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    Crawford may have been better suited playing in a city with less expectations.     Some players are not cut out to be surrounded by media.     Too late now.    He's got a lot of contract left.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    In Response to Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.:
    To reinforce Zill's points, it is WAY TOO EARLY to write him off. Not to make excuses, but  he has not been 100% healthy  this year and is also having a tough time adjusting to the intensity of playing in Boston.  He is also probably pressing to prove he is worth 142 million which he is not but signing a 5 tool player in his prime years means that the sox needed to overpay, as that is how it works with free agents.  He will find himself eventually  and revert back to his .290  15 Homers 11 triples 35 doubles 40+ steals and 100 runs scored next season.  It is simply too early to worry or write him off at this point.
    Posted by william93063
    Crawford does not have a good arm, and he does not hit consistently with power. He's had problems on defense this year in Boston. ( I would not blame the confinements of Fenway's left field. )He does not walk enough to post  an impressive OPS.  That leaves speed and BA. Right now his speed is nullified by a low OPS, and he's still hitting .250 after six months of the season.  He's far from a five tool player, and thus far he hasn't made good use of he tools he has.  A lot of the time he looks really bad at the plate. 
    Right, it's way to early to call him or a bust, but, IMO, he will never be worth his contract or even come close. And there remains a question about whether Boston will be able to afford both him and Ellsbury, considering contact obligations on the books and others that remain to be negotiated.  

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sean67. Show Sean67's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    Carl Crawford has been lousy.  He would even tell you that.  You would actually be doing Carl Crawford an INJUSTICE if you claimed he hasn't been terrible in 2011.  He's a MUCH better ballplayer than he's shown through 110 team games as a Red Sox.

    I expect him to play better than this through the duration of his contract.  He'll NEVER be worth the dough he's getting-------his contract, fueled by Jason Werth's market-busting deal, is obscene.  But I expect more years like the 2010 Crawford had.  Frankly, he's been a really good player his entire career.  Not great.  And he gets paid like he's REALLY great--------but I'll take 'really good' from him.

    We just have been getting subpar to poor.  You'd actually be doing him a solid by saying this season is terrible------because it would sho you recognize he's much better than this.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    In Response to Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.:
    In Response to Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's. : Crawford does not have a good arm, and he does not hit consistently with power. He's had problems on defense this year in Boston. ( I would not blame the confinements of Fenway's left field. )He does not walk enough to post  an impressive OPS.  That leaves speed and BA. Right now his speed is nullified by a low OPS, and he's still hitting .250 after six months of the season.  He's far from a five tool player, and thus far he hasn't made good use of he tools he has.  A lot of the time he looks really bad at the plate.  Right, it's way to early to call him or a bust, but, IMO, he will never be worth his contract or even come close. And there remains a question about whether Boston will be able to afford both him and Ellsbury, considering contact obligations on the books and others that remain to be negotiated.  
    Posted by expitch
    I certainly have made the argument in the past that JD Drew was paid market value, that John Lackey was paid market value based on the market and what they had done up to the point they were signed.

    But even if you take Crawford's career year (2010) and pretend that was his career averages, the salary and years out the gate made it look like the strangest deal the RS have done in the Trio era.

    This slow start all but ensures even if Carl Crawford performs like the player he was in Tampa that many a RS fan will groan about his being over paid because in a word, he was.

    My personal rationalization at the time was that Epstein was willing to go 7 years with him taking him to the same age as others players he wouldn't go five years with at the end of the contract because the RS would get more prime years from Carl (4 years versus 2 years). That concept even if it was the rational can be scratched from the books. As for $20M a year, never got it, never will. 

    But as others have said, CC may just be having a rotten year. It happens. As Crash Davis famously pointed out in Bull Duram the difference between .250 and .300 is one bloop single a week. The difference in his HR totals may well end up being 1 HR a month.

    If fans are on the ledge because of his stats today, relax they are probably deflated, but if you expect more than a .290/.340/.420 line from Crawford moving forward, IMO prepare to be disappointed.   
     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    In Response to Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.:
    I totally agree that Crawford was a horrible signing. Theo's history and resume is full of such horrific signings. Getting Gonzo is about the only good thing this guy has done for the organization. If I was in ownership I would be furious with Theo. After addding up all that has been spent/wasted on his unforgivable moves I would sue him for grand theft and then fire him.
    Posted by teddybaseball009


    Ha ha ha...good one.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Yukon-Cornelius. Show Yukon-Cornelius's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    In Response to Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.:
    After 9/11, I think we should all not to use the word "disastrous" about such trivial things as a baseball player's poor season. Call it a pet peeve, but I hate it.
    Posted by LloydDobler


    Got to say I agree with that, keymaster.

    Yukon Out
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hetchinspete. Show Hetchinspete's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    In Response to Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.:
    I totally agree that Crawford was a horrible signing. Theo's history and resume is full of such horrific signings. Getting Gonzo is about the only good thing this guy has done for the organization. If I was in ownership I would be furious with Theo. After addding up all that has been spent/wasted on his unforgivable moves I would sue him for grand theft and then fire him.
    Posted by teddybaseball009


    Teddy,

    You're an idiot. Agon is the only good player Theo has brought in. What about:

    Bill Mueller
    Kevin Millar
    Mike Lowell
    Adrian Beltre
    Vmart
    Carl Crawford who will work out.
    David Ortiz
    Jason Bay if only short term
    Curt Schilling
    Josh Becket when he's been healthy
    J.D.Drew although over paid has been a solid RF and decent hitter untilthis year

    Brought in and up.
    Papelbon
    Bard
    Pedroia
    Ellsbury
    Buchholz
    Lowrie
    Kalish for the future
    Reddick for the furure
    Drew Sutton looked good in a limited role
    Lester, although probably not signed under Theo

    Scutaro has been a good pick up
    Aceves having a good year off of New York's scrap heap
    Wheeler is now having a good last few months and is a good pick up
    Jose Iglesias a future star at SS
    Saltalamacchia sure looks good right now and our future catcher
    Matt Albers so far this year a freat pick up

    Need I say more, and I've probably missed a few.

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

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    i just wish crawford would pick it up now,we need him to come on.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from elguy. Show elguy's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

      Playing in Boston is not an easy task but this is definately a horrific year for Crawford. He does not hit the ball with a lot of pop nor does he look that fast when he runs. He almost looks like he is down and not motivated. He needs to get jacked up and show some emotion. I'm also not impressed at all and hopefully he can turn it around. Does not sound intelligent when he speaks--a little slow. He looks cross eyed as well----I hope we look back and say it was a great sign years down the road.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Wolfpack13. Show Wolfpack13's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    Who in their right minds (other than Theo) saw him as a 22 million dollar stud?

    Did you ever think to yourself (when he was on the RAYS)... oh no Crawford is on deck?

    He is a very nice player, better than a role player, but should never be the bread and butter of your team.

    The only reason he isn't getting killed as much as Lackey is because he hides in a star studded lineup. If the Sox didn't blunt this awful move with Gonzalez the FO would be on a skewer. I love this team and I love this FO, but the fans were never fooled by either Lackey or Crawford. Two terrible, awful pickups.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from SFBostonFan. Show SFBostonFan's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    In Response to Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.:
    I totally agree that Crawford was a horrible signing. Theo's history and resume is full of such horrific signings. Getting Gonzo is about the only good thing this guy has done for the organization. If I was in ownership I would be furious with Theo. After addding up all that has been spent/wasted on his unforgivable moves I would sue him for grand theft and then fire him.
    Posted by teddybaseball009


    Crawford, A Manchurian Candidate...Yup, sure, the expression is  "tongue & cheek” implying that Tampa Bay brainwashed him so that he sabotages us from winning our division & , perhaps, not even being a wild card as the Rays hoped to be the major challenge to the Yankees. But you know, I almost dread it when he comes to bat but for $145 mil($20mil per year) I should have the same excitement as I do when Ellsbury, Pedroia, Gonzalez come to bat.  Maybe he’ll come out of it and this is just a bad year. But I would rather have saved the money and had our old friend, Johnny Damon.   Yup, he’s some 9-10 years older and maybe only has 1-2 years remaining and when he left the Yankees & went to the Tigers, we tried to get him but he didn’t want to return to us and said it wasn’t a question of money.  When some says, “It’s not a question of money", ask the question again !  But having had Damon last year, this & one more perhaps I’d have been happy & we’d have had “mucho dinero”  to have perhaps gone after Cliff Lee and others so that we wouldn’t be in so much in anguish now about our pitching staff. Could have picked up some more offense too.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.

    In Response to Re: Crawford having a disastrous season, in its own way every bit (any maybe more) horrific as John Lackey's.:
      Does not sound intelligent when he speaks--a little slow. He looks cross eyed as well---
    Posted by elguy


    Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles were worse than cross-eyed , you gonna throw stones at Ray Charles, too?

    What's his intelligence level or your perception of it got to do with this conversation?....he's a baseball player, not the next contestant on Jeopardy!
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share