Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    In Response to Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!:
    [QUOTE]If Drew was not a bust than I challenge you - would you take 9 JD Drews at that salary to fill out your starting 9? If you say yes than you would certainly have finished in last place most of the last 4 seasons.  This year you would already be about 18 games back.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    I probably wouldnt take 9 of 99% of the players out there..Sure 9 Pujols' would be nice. That is until u have to watch him run down flyballs in CF or play SS...
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    I posted this on another thread, but I'll add it here. First, did Drew underachieve based on salary and based on salary. That can be argued to death, but for the sake of argument, let's say yes. We can go round and round on all this to death -- and have on this board.

    But a bust implies that he never contributed. So if Drew was a bust, then Trot Nixon was a bust.

    Drew in his first four seasons averaged:
    131 games, 79 runs, 27 doubles, 19 homers, 66 RBIs, .270 BA, .377 OBP, .476 SLG, .853 OPS.

    Nixon, a fan-favorite, averaged (excluding the two years he was up for a cup of coffee):
    121 games, 68 runs, 25 doubles, 17 homers, 65 RBIs, .278 BA, .367 OBP, .479 SLG, .846 OPS.

    And both were very good defensively. So both contributed about the same in right field. Drew may have cost more, but it's supply in demand. When the Sox needed a RF, the supply was low, and Boston's demand was great so that jacks up the price.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    Trot never made 70 mil over 5 years. It's hard to separate salary from performance.

    If you had a brand new car, how would you expect it to run?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from NUSoxFan. Show NUSoxFan's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    In Response to Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!:
    [QUOTE]Trot never made 70 mil over 5 years. It's hard to separate salary from performance. If you had a brand new car, how would you expect  it to run?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]
    J.D. was the best thing on the market, it was either him, or Trot.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    In Response to Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!:
    [QUOTE]Trot never made 70 mil over 5 years. It's hard to separate salary from performance. If you had a brand new car, how would you expect  it to run?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]Baseball is a funny sport in that guys have to produce for years before they get the benefit from the market. So it easy to find great disperancy between income and performance, particularly when comparing two players. Longoria and Youk play the same position. Youk is paid a lot more. Mike Cameron is paid much more than Jacoby Ellsbury.

    So it hard to compare. Trot was a hot commodity from 2001-2003. He was hurt much of 2004 and his career trajectory at 32 headed south fast. By the time the RS signed Drew only the most ardent Nixon fans didn't know his career was on fast slope southward. He had only played in 110 games in two years after he left the RS. If you compare Drew's and Nixon's careers from the age of 31-35 it isn't close. And the start of big contracts don't come usually until a player is 29-32.

    That's the reason Trot Nixon was never paid $70M.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    In Response to Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!:
    [QUOTE]Trot never made 70 mil over 5 years. It's hard to separate salary from performance. If you had a brand new car, how would you expect  it to run?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    A car is a bad analogy because the car is the finished product. Drew is one part of the the whole.

    A better analogy would be if you had a race car and the carburetor that had been successful needs replacing, so you pay top dollar for what you think is an upgraded carb. But as it turns out, the new carb works the same as the one you replaced. 

    So while you didn't get the upgraded performance, you still got the same strong performance as the previous part, even if you did overpay. And in fact, that new carb, while not performing at the level you expected, still allowed you to win a title one year, and other parts breaking down in the ensuing years were bigger reasons for not winning. 

    EDIT: And to add, when you were buying that overpriced carb, if you didn't buy it, you likely would have been left with a considerably inferior part.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    Good points, fivekatz.  Continuing with the Rays and Longoria, they got the deal of the century locking him up for 6 years $17 million.  On the other hand, after the 2008 season they badly needed a DH, so they signed Pat Burrell for 2 years $16 million.  (And he was awful.)

    Trying to draw direct lines between salary and productivity often doesn't work in MLB because of the way the system is.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    One thing to consider too when it comes to salaries is that Drew had these years in his career before becoming a FA when Boston signed him.

    27 HR, 73 RBI, .323 BA, 1.027 OPS
    31 HR, 93 RBI, .305 BA, 1.006 OPS
    20 HR, 100 RBI, .283 BA, .891 OPS

    Nixon never had years that good. So Drew did more to warrent a big payday than Nixon ever did.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    Two thoughts:

    1) My analogy of a new car to a 70 mil player is predicated soley on expectation.
    As the ole' sang goes: Ya get what you pay for. It's reasonable to expect more glamorous stats from Drew. But those who have a deeper understanding of true baseball value realize Drew brings more to the table than HR/RBI. CC is the same way, but I doubt the multitude will accept this.

    2) Trot was my personal favorite, so I'm a bit bias here. I think his mind-set determined his fate. He only knew one way to play: Hard.
    And although back issues cut his numbers short, the guy was a winner. He hit some huge dingers. And even when he left, both the Tribe and the Mets benefited from his winning at all cost attitude, IMO.
    But I did realize that the Drew move was necessary, despite the fact I hated to see Trot go.

    The financial structure of the game is what it is. And salary analogy has to be put in the proper perspective. Today's game can easily distort that wobbly line.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    I understand the expectation, but my point about Drew as always been whethr or not he contributed and was a decent player.

    As for Nixon, I've always like Nixon too. He's my third favorite RF in my lifetime after Evans and Tony C.

    One thing about Nixon. Strictly from a hype standpoint, he underachieved. I don't know if you remember, but when he was in the minors, he was supposed to be this big-time All-Star OF of the future. He and 1B Ryan McGuire were drafted in the same year and were supposed to be the cornerstones of the future. Nixon was a first-round pick and McGuire went in the third round. (Lou Merloni was also taken in that draft in the 10th).

    Nixon, at least, became a solid OF and fan favorite, even if he didn't reach those expectations. McGuire was a bust.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    cmon everyone knows JD Drew was a disappointment...a guy making that kind of money playing the outfield in fenway should be expected to put up serious numbers...as Zilla pointed out his high was 68 rbi's - that is a bad joke....I like his swing, I like his fielding, but if you are going to pay 70k for a car, make sure it runs like a BMW and not a Dodge.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    Roy: I do vividly recall the Trot hype. I think injuries is why he "underachieved".
    I recall going to a Pawtucket game and he was hitting 25-30 dingers/stealing 25-30 bags that year. The opposition simply couldn't get him or Nomar out. It was insane. I think they netted 20 runs that game.

    Dewy - Tony C. - Trot...did you by some chance evah play RF?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    In Response to Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!:
    [QUOTE]Two thoughts: 1) My analogy of a new car to a 70 mil player is predicated soley on expectation . As the ole' sang goes: Ya get what you pay for. It's reasonable to expect more glamorous stats from Drew. But those who have a deeper understanding of true baseball value realize Drew brings more to the table than HR/RBI. CC is the same way, but I doubt the multitude will accept this. 2) Trot was my personal favorite, so I'm a bit bias here. I think his mind-set determined his fate. He only knew one way to play: Hard. And although back issues cut his numbers short, the guy was a winner. He hit some huge dingers. And even when he left, both the Tribe and the Mets benefited from his winning at all cost attitude, IMO. But I did realize that the Drew move was necessary, despite the fact I hated to see Trot go. The financial structure of the game is what it is. And salary analogy has to be put in the proper perspective. Today's game can easily distort that wobbly line.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]This is probably the discussion in a nut shell. Expectations and whose expectations.

    Now part of what made the Drew deal work was the immediate need, the window to win being open and the lack of alternatives.

    If CC is the same thing, time will tell. I for one was never all warm about the idea of Mike Cameron being a primary OF for 2011 RS. When you virtually miss a season at 37, counting on that player replicating what he did at 36 in the NL central in AL East is a leap of faith in the post PED - post amphetamine era.

    So the RS need may well have been as great. Adjusted for age (CC is younger so the longer years are still a similar commitment) and perhaps if you don't think the Werth deal was drunken stupidity, the salaries have inflated quite a bit since 2006.

    The premise of the OP is spot on. Now of course every Drew sux poster has come out of the woodwork and here's what we know. An OFer for the Boston Red Sox should hit 30 HR and get 100 RBI. It is not very likely that is going to happen for CC playing 81 games a year in Fenway Park. We know if you were original slotted to be used in 1 spot in the order and you aren't used there you are bust (Drew 5th - CC 3rd).

    I think it is fair to say if you don't think Drew was a bust, you have a good chance that you might not think Crawford was bust by the end of the contract.

    And if you think Drew is a bust, unless it his is calm, Georgian exterior that bugs you, you are destined to think CC is bust. Right down to the two guys getting out the gate slowly in their RS careers it looks very similar to me.

    Just my takes
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    In Response to Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!:
    [QUOTE]Roy : I do vividly recall the Trot hype. I think injuries is why he " underachieved ". I recall going to a Pawtucket game and he was hitting 25-30 dingers/stealing 25-30 bags that year. The opposition simply couldn't get him or Nomar out. It was insane. I think they netted 20 runs that game. Dewy - Tony C. - Trot...did you by some chance evah play RF?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    I was mainly a second baseman. (Doug Griffin was one of my favorite players because he was the 2B when I started playing Little League.) When I played the OF, I'd occassionally play LF, but I did play RF a couple of times. I had decent speed for the OF, but I didn't have a big arm. That's why 2B was ideal.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from jete02fan. Show jete02fan's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    won't speak on Drew(still a good player to me) but two months into his first contract is WAY too early to even be debating whether or not Crawford will or won't be a bust..FTR unless you're looking at the world's fastest decline, IMO...not a chance..
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    In Response to Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!:
    [QUOTE]cmon everyone knows JD Drew was a disappointment...a guy making that kind of money playing the outfield in fenway should be expected to put up serious numbers...as Zilla pointed out his high was 68 rbi's - that is a bad joke....I like his swing, I like his fielding, but if you are going to pay 70k for a car, make sure it runs like a BMW and not a Dodge.
    Posted by georom4[/QUOTE]

    as was pointed out on page 3...He had some good years before he got here. Thats what they had to go on..
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Crawford will not be a bust, just like J.D. Drew was not a bust!

    Katz: The point of expectation with Drew/CC is in UR statement:

    "An OFer for the Boston RedSox should hit 30 HR and get 100 RBI".

    This isn't what Theo had in mind when signing either. Fans are slow to realize this. The FO values other criteria that breaks Boston tradition. Too many fans never "got it" with Drew, which is why they won't "get it" with CC either.
     

Share