Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

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

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    The guy was one of the worst hitters in the league last year and what's everyone's solution?  Promote him!  

    ...and the flip side of this is that they want to demote AGon, Youk and Papi down a notch.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    Best hitters should be higher up in the lineup. Don't care about speed, salary, etc. OBP should be weighed heavily. Crawford has not proven to be a top of the lineup hitter. Until he does, he can get in line behind the better hitters. They should play to win.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    There are 142M reasons why Crawford proved to InEpstein that he was a top of the lineup hitter. Complain about it to InEpstein. Ellsbury was supposed to be traded, with the "#3" hitter laugher a cover until Ellsbury was traded. Crawford settles in and fits better when Ellsbury is gone. Too late to change horsed in midstream, Crawford has the contract.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    Moon, I don't have the time to respond to your posts point by point and I apologize for that.  There just aren't enough hours in the day for a working mom!

    Let me say first that I agree that batting orders make a difference if you are talking about putting up the worst possible order versus the optimal order.  It can be a difference of about 40 runs over the season, if I'm not mistaken. 

    However, if you're talking about a typical or traditional batting order versus the optimal batting order, the difference is 5-15 runs.  Managers do not use these "optimal" batting orders because they call for such things as batting Youk in the lead off spot or batting Pujols in the #2 hole.  Most fans would call these moves crazy, but it seems that the traditional batting orders are not the best. So, if we're talking about truly optimizing our run production, it seems that others would have to be shuffled around also.

    I also will say that intuitively, I agree with you that the better hitters should be getting the most at bats.  As I posted before, I felt strongly that Ellsbury should be moved down when he wasn't getting on base, and I felt that Gardner should have been put in the lead off spot when Jeter was struggling.

    That said, all that I have read on the subject says that batting Crawford 2nd is not going to have that significant of an effect over the season.

    Here is on summary from some studies in The Book which states that moving a #6 hitter to the #2 spot will result in a difference of 4 runs over the season. 

    http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/article/is_jason_heyward_the_new_freddie_lynn/
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    The higher one hits in the order, the more at-bats one gets over the course of the season. Does it make sense to give the most at-bats to one of the least productive hitters?  I have no problem with Crawford hitting second , provided that he earns it.   Last year , he did not.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd:
    [QUOTE]Ellsbury has hit LHPs about as well as RHPs over his career. CC has a horrible record vs LHPs. All left-handed hitters are not alike. The whole L-R-L thing is way overhyped.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    Ditto.
    And it can also become self-fulfilling. "We all know that I can't hit lefties. So what the heck."

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

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd:
    [QUOTE]The higher one hits in the order, the more at-bats one gets over the course of the season. Does it make sense to give the most at-bats to one of the least productive hitters?  I have no problem with Crawford hitting second , provided that he earns it.   Last year , he did not.
    Posted by dgalehouse[/QUOTE]

    Even if he matches his best season vs LHPs, he's still going to be as good as Ells, Pedey, AGon, Youk, of Papi vs LHPs. 

    How does he "earn it"? 
    After 100 PAs vs LHPs?
    After 150?
    After 200?

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

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    Just seems a shame to have to have a part time player earning more than anyone on the team, be relegated to a maybe yes, maybe no type role.  Put him in one slot in the lineup and make the best of it.  Maybe his comfort level will increase and maybe not, but either way the Sox are stuck with him for a long, long time.  The longer they play games with his mind, the less they will get from him.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    zap you are such a stud... please give us so more "manly"posts.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaBlade. Show DaBlade's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    I don't think my opinion is going to be considered by anyone of importance but since we are throwing out lineups... this is mine, and why.

    Crawford: He use to bat leadoff in TB and excelled.
    Pedroia: He is a perfect #2
    Ellsbury: the leader of extra base hits with the red sox for 2011 should bat 3rd.
    Gonzalez: Obvious isn't it?
    Youkilis: same as above
    Ortiz: good spot here for the Big DH
    Whoever is the Rfer
    Salty and Lavarnway is my guess here
    SS I am thinking Punto but Iglesias by all star break
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from soxnewmex. Show soxnewmex's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd:
    [QUOTE]Just seems a shame to have to have a part time player earning more than anyone on the team, be relegated to a maybe yes, maybe no type role.  Put him in one slot in the lineup and make the best of it.  Maybe his comfort level will increase and maybe not, but either way the Sox are stuck with him for a long, long time.  The longer they play games with his mind, the less they will get from him.
    Posted by traven[/QUOTE]

    Truth in this.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chilliwings. Show Chilliwings's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd:
    [QUOTE]Just seems a shame to have to have a part time player earning more than anyone on the team, be relegated to a maybe yes, maybe no type role.  Put him in one slot in the lineup and make the best of it.  Maybe his comfort level will increase and maybe not, but either way the Sox are stuck with him for a long, long time.  The longer they play games with his mind, the less they will get from him.
    Posted by traven[/QUOTE]

    But that ignores the theory of the Sunk Cost, Traven.  The contract is signed, the commitment made.  The job of the Sox now is to maximise the performance of the roster.

    Also, if you are willing to almost certainly sacrifice delivery by promoting CC in the lineup because it might motivate him, aren't you ignoring the potential negative effect on the far better 1-5 guys that would (on the whole) be paid less, deliver more yet still have to sacrifice at bats (and face) to spare someone's wittle feewings?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chilliwings. Show Chilliwings's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd:
    [QUOTE]I don't think my opinion is going to be considered by anyone of importance but since we are throwing out lineups... this is mine, and why. Crawford: He use to bat leadoff in TB and excelled. Pedroia: He is a perfect #2 Ellsbury: the leader of extra base hits with the red sox for 2011 should bat 3rd. Gonzalez: Obvious isn't it? Youkilis: same as above Ortiz: good spot here for the Big DH Whoever is the Rfer Salty and Lavarnway is my guess here SS I am thinking Punto but Iglesias by all star break
    Posted by DaBlade[/QUOTE]

    On what do you base your view that CC "excelled" as a leadoff hitter?  My view is that he is very sub-standard leading off based on his career OPS leading off of only .319.  That is really poor!  And based on nearly 3 full seasons of baseball.

    He's batted much more at nbr 2.  Strangely, a much better OPS (.346) but still poor compared to Pedroia (.381 at nbr 2).  Plus CC strikes out a lot for a guy with limited power i.e. poor bat control.

    Maybe on a team like the Rays he was good enough to bat high in the order....but a team like the Sox has far greater resources and he simply can't compare to any of the top 5 so must bat 6th.  He is just not that good, no matter what is printed on his paycheck.

    Incidently, I think the only interesting decision on the Sox 2012 batting order is where Ells should bat i.e. if he carries on like he did in 2011 he should bat third.  But we already have a great nbr 3, a great nbr 2 and nobody else to bat 1/2.

    Ells has to bat 1st because he can do it really well, even if he should bat 3rd.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd : But that ignores the theory of the Sunk Cost, Traven.  The contract is signed, the commitment made.  The job of the Sox now is to maximise the performance of the roster. Also, if you are willing to almost certainly sacrifice delivery by promoting CC in the lineup because it might motivate him, aren't you ignoring the potential negative effect on the far better 1-5 guys that would (on the whole) be paid less, deliver more yet still have to sacrifice at bats (and face) to spare someone's wittle feewings?
    Posted by Chilliwings[/QUOTE]

    My guess is that the FO will not accept losing 20 mil a year for a part time player or a 9 hole hitter.  They haven't put Lackey in the BP yet despite his performance or reduced him to the #5 starter.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from lowelll. Show lowelll's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    I thought that after 300 threads and 20,000 posts about Crawford's disappointing year that the forum consensus was to watch what he does in 2012 before putting him onto the first train out of Boston? I thought the hypothesis that one bad year will translate into six more bad years was overwhelmingly refuted over the long winter here on the forum. We are fortunate indeed that baseball will be starting soon and this hatred of Crawford might possibly be put to rest.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    I don't want to excuse Crawford's numbers vs lefties, but in recent years it seems like he would bat 3rd vs righties, and have Longoria hitting behind him for protection, and 2nd vs lefties, with guys like Kapler and Zobrist behind him.  If you're a left-handed pitcher, and Longoria is on deck (or Pedroia, Gonzalez, Youk or Ortiz) you're going to come right at Crawford, which is exactly what he needs.

    I'd say do it, but I wouldn't give him an Ortiz-sized leash.  If he's not hitting in six weeks, he needs to go to the bottom of the lineup until he gets hot.

    I wouldn't mind seeing Pedroia bat leadoff either - he's fast enough to not clog the bases, and of the top three, he is the most likely to get on base, the most likely to see the most pitches, the least likely to strike out, and the least likely to go yard.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd:
    [QUOTE]The higher one hits in the order, the more at-bats one gets over the course of the season. Does it make sense to give the most at-bats to one of the least productive hitters?  I have no problem with Crawford hitting second , provided that he earns it.   Last year , he did not.
    Posted by dgalehouse[/QUOTE]

    I understand that the higher you hit, the more at ABs you get.  Research just doesn't support the notion that hitting Crawford 2nd versus hitting him 6th makes that much difference, at least as far as I've seen.  From what I've gathered, it seems that  players' egos/comfort level and splitting lefties is more important than correct placement according to numbers.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    I'm always for thinking outside the box, and exploring the validity of traditional baseball paradigms, but nobody will ever convince me that putting a low OBP guy (vs LHPs) up in front of our best RBI guys and giving a weaker offensive player 70-90 more PAs at the expense of Pedey, AGon, Youk, and Papi (each getting about 20 less PAs).

    Even if the data shows that exchanging a 6 and 2 hitter only accounts for 4 or 10 or 15 runs, why do it? Plus, is that data based exchanging a .290-.310 OBP with a .390+ OBP or just the average MLB line-up?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd:
    [QUOTE]I'm always for thinking outside the box, and exploring the validity of traditional baseball paradigms, but nobody will ever convince me that putting a low OBP guy (vs LHPs) up in front of our best RBI guys and giving a weaker offensive player 70-90 more PAs at the expense of Pedey, AGon, Youk, and Papi (each getting about 20 less PAs). Even if the data shows that exchanging a 6 and 2 hitter only accounts for 4 or 10 or 15 runs, why do it? Plus, is that data based exchanging a .290-.310 OBP with a .390+ OBP or just the average MLB line-up?
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    I understand where you're coming from Moon, I really do, and as I've stated before, intuitively, it makes a lot of sense. 

    I will also say with great certainty that if Crawford does start in the #2 hole and he is stinking up a storm, I'll be a proponent of moving him down in the batting order even though that was one of the points, that when fans and media start calling for someone to be demoted in the line up, it really doesn't make much difference.  Actually, in the case of demoting someone like Jeter, it could likely cause more harm than good

    The reason why I would like to see Crawford bat 2nd is because I think he feels the most comfortable there, not meaning that he necessarily had the best numbers there recently (I read your post regarding that).  But moreso, I think that's where he would have the most success because of who would be batting before him and behind him.   That said, if he's batting 6th, I'm not going to complain.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd : I understand where you're coming from Moon, I really do, and as I've stated before, intuitively, it makes a lot of sense.  I will also say with great certainty that if Crawford does start in the #2 hole and he is stinking up a storm, I'll be a proponent of moving him down in the batting order even though that was one of the points, that when fans and media start calling for someone to be demoted in the line up, it really doesn't make much difference.  Actually, in the case of demoting someone like Jeter, it could likely cause more harm than good The reason why I would like to see Crawford bat 2nd is because I think he feels the most comfortable there, not meaning that he necessarily had the best numbers there recently (I read your post regarding that).  But moreso, I think that's where he would have the most success because of who would be batting before him and behind him.   That said, if he's batting 6th, I'm not going to complain.
    Posted by RedSoxKimmi[/QUOTE]You hit the nail on the head for me Kimmi, if Crawford is hitting 2nd it does a couple of things to my mind. First it puts him and Ells on base together more often, increasing the opposing pitcher's distraction factor. Second, and more importantly, to my way of thinking, Carl will see a lot more strikes with Pedey, Gonzo, Youk and Big Papi hitting behind him. CC is notoriously not a very patient hitter, but when he gets a strike he swings a pretty good stick.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from lowelll. Show lowelll's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

     Peter Abraham:
    Speaking of lineups, repeat after me: It just doesn't matter. The Red Sox have Ellsbury, Crawford, Dustin Pedroia, Adrian Gonzalez, David Ortiz and Kevin Youkilis. That's six All-Stars. Somebody who has never watched a game could pick those names out of a hat and construct a lineup that would score 850 runs.

    Studies have shown that lineups are generally overrated. You want your best players to get the most at-bats. But beyond that, it's a waste of time to plot.

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

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd : I understand where you're coming from Moon, I really do, and as I've stated before, intuitively, it makes a lot of sense.  I will also say with great certainty that if Crawford does start in the #2 hole and he is stinking up a storm, I'll be a proponent of moving him down in the batting order even though that was one of the points, that when fans and media start calling for someone to be demoted in the line up, it really doesn't make much difference.  Actually, in the case of demoting someone like Jeter, it could likely cause more harm than good The reason why I would like to see Crawford bat 2nd is because I think he feels the most comfortable there, not meaning that he necessarily had the best numbers there recently (I read your post regarding that).  But moreso, I think that's where he would have the most success because of who would be batting before him and behind him.   That said, if he's batting 6th, I'm not going to complain.
    Posted by RedSoxKimmi[/QUOTE]

    1) We may lose by one game again this year. The experiment may help us do it again.

    2) What are you hoping will happen? CC have his best career year vs LHPs this year? Better to expect his career norm or slightly better and be wise about it.

    3) With all due respect, the comfort argument is thin. To make CC feel comfy, we risk making Pedey, AGon, Youk, and Papi uncomfy by moving them to unfamilar slots, and wondering what they did to be demoted. What if they start "pressing too hard" to try and win back their deserved slot?

    4) CC is not that much of a better baserunner (if at all) than Pedey, and when we are talking LHPs, CC's speed in highly minimized by the fact that he won't be on base enough to make a difference.

    Vs RHPs an argument can be made, but vs LHPs the answer is clear: he barely even belongs in the line-up at all. I say that with all seriousness. DMac has a 100 point OPS advantage on CC vs LHPs. The only 3 hitters on the probable opening day roster who are close or worse than CC vs LHPs are Sweeney, Salty & Punto. 

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

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    What about the idea that CC will see better pitches with better hitters behind him moon? I think one of the things that really hurt him last year was that pitchers didn't really have to pitch to him. Carl is notorious for not taking a lot of pitches, and if pitchers have to throw him more strikes he's going to hit a lot better. And Pedey could easily hit in the 3 hole, when he had to hit cleanup he carried the club.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    What about the idea that CC will see better pitches with better hitters behind him moon?

    Better than what? His career high? That's not even good enough for the #2 slot on this team.

    Secondly, aren't you just transferring the problem to the new 6th hitter? Papi vs LHPs and maybe Youk vs RHPs? Now they have the same guys behind them that CC would have had.

    I have never stated that CC may or may not hit better up 2nd. I don't think that is a major factor in this decision.

    I have also said I have no problem moving Pedey, since he has shown he hits well up #4. That doesn't mean it's the best idea.

    My line-up philosophy goes like this:

    1) You fill in the 3 slot first: he should have a great OBP and also a nice Slg%.
      To me, this is clearly AGon vs LHPs and maybe Youk or Pedey vs LHPs (Agon also)

    2) Choose your clean-up and lead off hitters next. Leadoff should have a high OBP with speed secondary but important. Ellsbury fits that role perfectly vs LHPs and RHPs. Cleanup: vs RHPs: Papi  & vs LHPs Youk or Pedey.

    3) The 4th & 5th slots to fill are #2 and #5. The #2 should be a high OBP, with good bat control, low Ks, and maybe some decent speed. The number 5 should have power and BA skills for RBIs.

    4) After this, it basically is by order of total offensive skills by L/R splits combined with overall numbers. If even, put a speed guy up 9th.

    I go with this as the optimal line-ups (assuming no Iggy):

        RHPs   LHPs
    1)   Ells    Ells
    2)   Ped   Ped
    3)   Gon   Youk
    4)   Papi  Gon
    5)   Youk  Papi
    6)   CC     Ross
    7)   Salty  Aviles
    8)   Swe   Shopp
    9)   Aviles  CC

    I'm OK with this:
    1)  Ells     Ells
    2)  CC      Ped
    3)  Gon    Gon
    4)  Ped    Youk
    5)  Papi   Papi
    6)  Youk   Ross
    7)  Salt     CC
    8)  Swe    Shop
    9)  Avil     Avil
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: Gordon Edes says bat Crawford 2nd

    Why is there a need to cater to Crawford in this situation though? Batting him second totally mangles the L/R sequencing.

    Ellsbury
    Pedroia
    Gonzalez
    Youkilis
    Ortiz
    Ross/Sweeney
    Crawford
    Saltalamacchia/Shoppach
    Iglesias/Punto/Aviles

    Your power is in the middle of the order, so there's nothing wrong with hitting him 7th and treating him like your second leadoff hitter at the bottom.  He's not a big OB% guy and too bad he's overpaid.  He needs to prove he should be hitting 2nd before hitting him 2nd.   Throw his contract out the window, or is his desires of where he wants to hit.

    Moving Pedroia down to accomodate Crawford makes no sense, nor does backing up two batters from the same side of the plate. Crawford can really help the bottom part of the order turn over and have great value in the 7 hole.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share