Re: No! No! Lackey states he will rehab with the "Big Team" this year........
posted at 3/3/2012 11:24 AM EST
In Response to Re: No! No! Lackey states he will rehab with the "Big Team" this year........
In Response to Re: No! No! Lackey states he will rehab with the "Big Team" this year........ : Fans act like this is the end of the world, and the window is closing, so apparently the team will not be competiticve again for another 86 years. First of all, Lackey and Crawford both have time to right the ship. Especailly if their poor perforamces in 2011 were related to injuries. Ellsbury had a horrific 2010 for reasons related to injury and bounced back quite well, so its hardly unprecedented, even on this roster. Espceially since Crawford far and away was the better hitter of the two prior to 2011. Sox fans want and need lightning rods, and have this odd belief that signing free agents who don't succeed CANNOT be justified by winning a World Series, as evidenced by the presence of Lugo and Drew on the 2007 team. Ellsbury might have priced himself out of the Sox range, but that also might be for the best. After all, he is just as likely to be a $20mill anchor on this team as Crawford is, and his one good season really doesn't make him an elite player in the league yet, despite Boras desire to have him paid like one. And really, if the Sox want to retain Ellsbury and move Crawford, its not impossible. Players with $100mill contracts have been traded before...
Posted by notin
I don't disagree with much of what you said.
As for winning a WS not justifying a bad signing...why would it? A bad signing is a bad signing, it will take it's toll on the team at some point. Drew - 110 games season, last minute sit downs. Lugo/Renteria - a lot of dead money to play elsewhere.
I wouldn't say I NEED a lightning rod, just happy to run voltage through it when one is available. I'd far prefer a team with none.
I don't think a window is closing, there is just a lot about this team, with their 2nd highest payroll in baseball that frustrates me. And really, a payroll this high shouldn't frustrate anyone unless some monumentally bad decisions have been made...which is exactly the case.
I won't call Lackey a monumental mistake, but Crawford was. To pay THAT MUCH for THAT PLAYER at THAT AGE was just totally a s s i n i n e. I voiced that opinion prior to signing him. That trickes down to Ellsbury. no, he's not elite yet, but he put to gether one of the most impressive seasons I've witnessed. Ever. It was a SINGLE season granted, but quite a season. Pre-Crawford, you'd be looking to compare him to Kemp and his 20mil per season. Now, you START at Crawford's 7/142. They gave every bit of leverage to Ellsbury and the greediest, slimiest agent on the planet.
Ellsbury rebounded in his mid-20s, not his early 30s as both lackey and Crawford will have to. Decidedly harder at that age.
Some call it negative, I honetly think I'm trying to be realistic. Unfortunately what is 'realistic' is fairly arbitrary...there in lies the difference I guess.