Re: Crawford- Henry
posted at 10/15/2011 12:30 PM EDT
In Response to Re: Crawford- Henry
In Response to Re: Crawford- Henry : I understand the context behind what Henry was attempting to do. As you stated, it appears his intent was to show that he does not have veto power in player personel decisions and allows them to do there job. With that I agree with you. However, I don't understand what good it does to publically state that the principle owner of the team was opposed to bringing in Carl Crawford. Crawford is a guy who had a terrible year but has 6 years left on an enormous contract. How does he feel coming back here in spring training knowing the owner did not want him? The perception I take from this is that Henry was more interested in making himself and the rest of the ownership look good and was willing to throw Crawford under the bus in that process. I think Henry was totally wrong in this & I feel there was much better avenues to get his point across rather then belittling Carl Crawford. I just don't see the positive that can come out of this.
Posted by Newfiebullet
Context is important here. It probably did not make a lot sense to give up the sound bit because clipped it sounds even worse but the context isn't as bad as the headline. Henry said he was against the signing yes. Asked why, he said that he thought the team was very LH already. He further said he doesn't as rule over rule the baseball operations guys.
As for how Crawford should feel coming back here? Like he stole something. He stunk like Lackey stunk. He should have something to prove. He has to prove he is a MLB player. Now I don't think he is as bad as he was last year but has it sunk in yet just how bad he was?
His OBP was .289. Not his BA his OBP. His WAR was 0. his dWAR -0.3. He was bad enough if he had options the RS would have sent him down to the minors.
His contract always was going to be a controversy but after his first year here let's put it in perspective. He holds the largest contract paid to an OFer in the game today. His contract is 10th largest ever (if you account for the fact that the two biggest contracts ever both belong to A-Rod).
Now I do think Henry needs to give Carl a call and say "I just wanted to put this into context for you. I was on a radio talk show in Boston and they asserted the only reason we signed you was NESN ratings. Carl that's not true. I told that them that the baseball operations people wanted you. I did say that I was not initially for your signing and that this was because with the addition of A-Gon just the prior week, we were already loaded with LH hitters. But the baseball operations guys made a great case and I supported their decision once they did. We really have a lot of faith in you and know that together we are going to have a great 2012."
That ends the drama about poor Carl being "called out".
But while everybody has been focusing on Beckett who had a great year, A-Gon who was pretty much what we hoped he would but played much of August and all of September with a torn calf, Papelbon who had a great year, Papi who had a great year, Youk for getting on his teammates tails, VTek for not; let's face facts.
Whether you were for this signing before it happened, questioned it when it happened; or embraced it when it happened, or hated it all along; one year into it this is the worst position player FA signing ever. Yes "evah" .
Hey for those who wanted Henry to be more like Steinbrenner, you just got a bit of it perhaps. That said while I applaud Henry's desire to call out Felger as an entertainer rather than a journalist it wasn't the best moment in the appearance.
But Carl Craword has lots of other things to worry about other than the fact that principle owner approved his contract in spite of reservations.