SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

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

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    This team won 2 rings in part by playing "moneyball".

    The "red flag" to me was always Crawford's inabilty to hit LHPs. He was sub .700 career and sub .700 in 2010, his so-called "career year". It was insane to pay him $20+M/yr to stink in 40% of the games.

    The talk of moving him to the #2 or 3 slot, of the silly clown's idea to lead hi off with his career .333 OBP makes no sense whatsoever. You don't promote players who are hitting poorly. He should have batted 9th in front of Ellsbury. He'd have gotten plenty of "fastballs" there too. He should be on the bench vs most lefties.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    The red flag to me was the fact he averaged 29 doubles  and 15 homers a seaosn, wven wiht his speed if he were any ggod he would have had 50 doubles a year. Of course he also averaged 13 triples. So I suppose one could count those as doubles making it a 42 ... which is actually okay, I guess I don't know what I am talking about.

    Embarassed
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford:
    [QUOTE]The red flag to me was the fact he averaged 29 doubles  and 15 homers a seaosn, wven wiht his speed if he were any ggod he would have had 50 doubles a year. Of course he also averaged 13 triples. So I suppose one could count those as doubles making it a 42 ... which is actually okay, I guess I don't know what I am talking about.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    Much of that is attributed to venue.
    Career splits in Tampa Bay:
    Home:  93 Doubles  61 Triples.
    Away: 126 Doubles  44 Triples.

    Fenway plays more into a Doubles park:
    2011:
    Fenway: 17 Doubles  2 Triples
    Road:    12 doubles   5 Triples
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from OnDeckCircle. Show OnDeckCircle's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    Crawford is not or will he ever be a player that likes the spotlight and heavy media scrutiny.     With the Rays he was a big fish in a small pond with a small media contingent asking him few questions.    The Sox didn't do their homework on him otherwise they would have seen that he wasn't a fit on this team.    Once he loses his foot speed, his biggest weapon has been diminished and he becomes just an ordinary 7-8-9 hitter in this lineup with an albatross contract.
    After not being in the playoffs in 2010, the team felt it had to make a big splash in signing a player like Crawford even though it was not a good year for available free agent position players.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    Never has a player proven to be worse a fit in Sox history PRIOR to his arrival in Boston. The "red flags" as Verducci refers to aren't even the red flags that were alarming me, and that means this guy had more red flags than ones being waved at Bulls games. People obviously never watched CC play the Monster in Fenway. Maybe they should pull out the videotape of CC with the Rays....When he played shallow he looked like a fool, when he got near the warning track, he got lost, and when the ball hit the Wall he looked like a deer in headlights. Forget about his inaccurate floppy left arm, stronger than Damon's. Troy O'Leary, who was never accused of being a gifted defensive player, for my complaints about him being a fulltime LF back then, he actually had an idea about the Monster and understood positioning. Did CC ever once turn to face the Monster to receive the hop? Did he even work on it during this season? Or was he drinking a beer with Beckett?

    This guy was fit for venues like Anaheim and even Tankee Stadium and the short porch. He was not fit for the giant jutout of RF as a batter at Fenway, and regardless of the 81 road games that would benefit the Sox with his speed in LF, the 81 home games would offset that where he would resume being the butcher he always was when he was with Rays at games at Fenway.

    As a basestealer, he couldn't steal 20. As a guy who is supposed to "fit" in the Sox OBP/OPS approach, how's the under .300 getting on base percentage working out? As a lefty batter v. lefty pitching on a team that already had BEFORE he got signed--Ortiz, Salty, AGON, Lowrie, Drew, Kalish, Tek, and MVPsbury--how do you justify signing him? Did I mention that he's a black guy in Fenway media fishbowl--this isn't the Celtics. Carl Everett had problems here, Tommy Harper complained about here, and the black players that performed here and had fan support---ALL POWER HITTERS--Rice,Baylor,Mo, etc....This guy wasn't attached with red flags, he wore a RED FLAG BODY SUIT!!!!

    His woe is me act also not a real good fit. This guy moped, and moped, and looked sad even when the Sox won a game or two. Gee, maybe he regretted signing on for 7 years. Sure he got the 142 million that could have been spent on 2 SPs, Closer, and 3B, but he's cash rich, outlook poor.

    Let me tell you how I reacted the day he got signed...I called everyone and their mothers, and I was ranting and raving like the doctor in Invasion of the Body Snatchers. I ran from car to car and "warned" fans no, no, no! This guy is an alien. He is not a Red Sox!!! Actually, I was listening to music on the radio, they cut to a news segment, and when I heard it, I  dropped my head and shook it ever so slightly and then said, "Theo, you are a bleeping moron"...
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from bosoxmal. Show bosoxmal's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    Wher Crawford bats next year is academic in comparison to where Ellsbury bats. If Ellsbury is not hitting third when the season starts, then we'll know we have not improved as farf as managers are concerned.

    Jacoby is the prototypical No. 3 hitter if there ever was one!
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    says u based off one career season, you genius.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    I (and many others) have said it before and will say it again, Crawford was never a good fit.  I'm not anti-Crawford and I think he will improve next year but how he is used in the line-up needs to be seriously reconsidered.  I wouldn't normally advocate switching around the line-up to accomodate 1 player but when that player makes 140 million and is in theory a centerpiece to the offense, it needs to happen. 

     Fenway is not the ideal place for Crawford because it does negate his best defensive asset and the dimensions don't suit his power.  He certainly would have had a handful more HR's if he played at Yankee stadium.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    As a guy who is supposed to "fit" in the Sox OBP/OPS approach, how's the under .300 getting on base percentage working out? (danny)

    No, Crawford never fit the OBP philosphy of this team before they signed him. I think they thought his speed, fielding and age were psoitive fatcors that overode his career numbers.

    He had a .337 OBP in TB (regulare seeason), but was over .350 for the recent 2 years... still not great.

    His career playoff OBP is .287 in 87 PAs.

    As for guessing on the "big fish in a small pond" moves to a big pond, how does anyone ever know what will happen. Not all big fish from small ponds flounder in big ponds. (pun intended)
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford:
    [QUOTE]Lets face it we hope and expect him to return to the norm in 2012, and even then its obvious - he is not a great player. This is Theo's biggest red mark.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    I agree 100% and said at the time that he was overpaid by about $50M.

    We could have done a lot with $50M over 7 years.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    Crawford wasnt overpaid by about 50M. Crawford long term contract had no business happening, period. Once on incompetent gm payroll, the mistake was pretending he was a #3  hitter. Had he been told to just get on base from the get go, his season would have been different. The Red Sox didn't have anything impressive v. LP leadoff before Crawford, and nothing after.

    Ellsbury has no long term future in Boston, for reasons named Crawford and for reasons associated with being one of those players Tito talked about worrying about 0-4 more than winning.

    Bottom line, if Crawford can't hit leadoff most of the time, he and his value contract bust don't fit anywhere.

    For a stooge who wanted Lackey (I said no more than 3 years and 30M offer) and Adam Dunn, you sure are pompous stooge. 

    No sane mind is going to pay any attention to someone advocating re-signing Wakefield and Varitek. They can't hardly stand up for a full season, much less do anything but embarrass the idiot who gave them a contract. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from jader. Show jader's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford:
    [QUOTE]This team won 2 rings in part by playing "moneyball". The "red flag" to me was always Crawford's inabilty to hit LHPs. He was sub .700 career and sub .700 in 2010, his so-called "career year". It was insane to pay him $20+M/yr to stink in 40% of the games. The talk of moving him to the #2 or 3 slot, of the silly clown's idea to lead hi off with his career .333 OBP makes no sense whatsoever. You don't promote players who are hitting poorly. He should have batted 9th in front of Ellsbury. He'd have gotten plenty of "fastballs" there too. He should be on the bench vs most lefties.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from jader. Show jader's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    why do you insist on Yelling in your damned posts? Very annoying
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford:
    [QUOTE]Crawford wasnt overpaid by about 50M. Crawford long term contract had no business happening, period. Once on incompetent gm payroll, the mistake was pretending he was a #3  hitter. Had he been told to just get on base from the get go, his season would have been different.The Red Sox didn't have anything impressive v. LP leadoff before Crawford, and nothing after. Ellsbury has no long term future in Boston, for reasons named Crawford and for reasons associated with being one of those players Tito talked about worrying about 0-4 more than winning. Bottom line, if Crawford can't hit leadoff most of the time, he and his value contract bust don't fit anywhere. For a stooge who wanted Lackey (I said no more than 3 years and 30M offer) and Adam Dunn, you sure are pompous stooge.  No sane mind is going to pay any attention to someone advocating re-signing Wakefield and Varitek. They can't hardly stand up for a full season, much less do anything but embarrass the idiot who gave them a contract. 
    Posted by 1958lesspaul[/QUOTE]

    Crawford couldn't get on base if you put a gun to his head. It doesn't matter what players are told to do by management. Was Ellsbury told to hit more HR's from the leadoff spot? You can't make Crawford into an on base machine when his career averages show he is not. Carl Crawford has been playing long enough to know what type of batter he is. Getting on base is not one of his strengths, no matter what management tells him to do.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    The only non home grown player I can think of on the roster this year that meets the moneyball philosophy was Aceves. 

    Every other non home grown player was paid a premium salary.  Jenks and Cameron are th antithesis of what 'moneyball's' objective is.  Those are high risk, substantial money signings. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from PetesCall. Show PetesCall's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    Yes...I like these ideas a lot. Excellent comments!


    In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford:
    [QUOTE]I guess I'll file this one under tell me something that I don't already know? That said, end of the day by hook or by crook the new manager of the Red Sox is going to have to figure out how to best use his skills and like it or not..I'd bat Crawford in the 2 hole behind Ells and in front of Pedrioa...I'd look at moving him to RF where his arm might not play, but his legs and GG ability would... This would accomplish three things... 1) by moving him into the two hole he'll see a ton of fastballs, teams won't want to pitch around him with Pedrioa and Gonzalez behind him....Then he can just simply step in and see ball hit ball like he did in Tampa. 2) With he and Ells 1-2 Pedrioa will come to bat with one or the other on base in large pct of his at bats and with Gonzalez behind him he'd also see his share of fastballs and with two base stealers in front of him will still be able to take advantabe of the hole on the rightside and when teams are covering the steal... 3) by moving him to RF...it broadens the profile of OFer we can aquire to play left de-emphasizing the Drew factor from the RF criteria...Crawford will get to more balls in RF than any RF since Dewey...
    Posted by Beantowne[/QUOTE]
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford:
    [QUOTE]Yes...I like these ideas a lot. Excellent comments! In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford :
    Posted by PetesCall[/QUOTE]

    Hey pete,
    While I understand why many amongst us see him as being a bust and a bad fit and lamment his signing...The fact is that he's here and it's incumbent on the new skipper to utelize him to take advantage of his skills...Cause he ain't going anywhere soon..
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford:
    [QUOTE]why do you insist on Yelling in your damned posts? Very annoying
    Posted by jader[/QUOTE]

    I've answered before.

    1) Using bold is not "yelling".   USING CAPS IS!!!!!!

    2) My eyesight is very poor, and I'd make a hunder typos per post if I didn't use bold print.

    I guess I could use larger font, but I'm sure that would annoy you too.

    3) Others on this site also have sight issues. I don't see why it should bother you, but put me on ignore if it does as much as you seem to make it look like it does. 

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

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford : Crawford couldn't get on base if you put a gun to his head. It doesn't matter what players are told to do by management. Was Ellsbury told to hit more HR's from the leadoff spot? You can't make Crawford into an on base machine when his career averages show he is not. Carl Crawford has been playing long enough to know what type of batter he is. Getting on base is not one of his strengths, no matter what management tells him to do.
    Posted by devildavid[/QUOTE]

    This exposes softy's supposed knowledge of how the game is played and managed. He's a silly clown. 

    I guess I'm a bully for calling him what he is then.

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

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford:
    [QUOTE]The only non home grown player I can think of on the roster this year that meets the moneyball philosophy was Aceves.  Every other non home grown player was paid a premium salary.  Jenks and Cameron are th antithesis of what 'moneyball's' objective is.  Those are high risk, substantial money signings. 
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]

    AGon has a very high OBP and did not cost much this year (compared to most 1Bmen with his numbers). I will also say, Drew was "on the roster" and he had a nice career OBP, but I can see why we shouldn't count him. He was old and too overpaid to fit the "moneyball" image. Papi was not homegrown and had anear .400 OBP this year, not that Billy Beane coul ever have afforded a DH at his price. Aviles vs LHPs and DMac vs RHPs kinda fit the bill a little bit. franklin Morales, Erik Bedard, Matt Albers, Atchison, and Rich Hill do fit the mold a little better.

    You do have a good point about this year's roster. Theo did get away from the high OBP and taking many pitches type players than in previous years. Crawford does not fit the mold. Never did. Never will, no matter what "management tells him" (softy 2011) ,...LOL!

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    Getting on base is not one of his strengths,

    CC OBP v RP was .379 in 2010.

    Crawford was a bust idoicy from Theo, but he most certainly can get on base well if that is what he was told to focus on. Instead, InEpstein plugged him in the 3 slugging hole and destroyed his confidence.  
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    A stooge advocates a masssive FA contract for Adam Dunn. That would be you, stooge. Crawford was fine in Tampa on OBP with a .379 OBP v RP in 2010. Theo pretended he was a slugging superstar and told him he would be put in 3 spot. It ruined his confidence. 

    Inepstein is exposed, completely.  
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford : AGon has a very high OBP and did not cost much this year (compared to most 1Bmen with his numbers). I will also say, Drew was "on the roster" and he had a nice career OBP, but I can see why we shouldn't count him. He was old and too overpaid to fit the "moneyball" image. Papi was not homegrown and had anear .400 OBP this year, not that Billy Beane coul ever have afforded a DH at his price. Aviles vs LHPs and DMac vs RHPs kinda fit the bill a little bit. franklin Morales, Erik Bedard, Matt Albers, Atchison, and Rich Hill do fit the mold a little better. You do have a good point about this year's roster. Theo did get away from the high OBP and taking many pitches type players than in previous years. Crawford does not fit the mold. Never did. Never will, no matter what "management tells him" (softy 2011) ,...LOL!
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Hey Moon,
    The term "Moneyball" and the principles of the phylosophy aren't simply a player ability to get on base..while important it's is merely one of the tenents. On base percentage, one of the new age stats and one that has gotton the most play in the press becasue it's easy to do the math and even the old school batting average guys can digest the data...Every parent, coach and player from little league on has heard someone call out lets go Johhny "A walks as good as a hit"...base runners = scoring opportunites..At the heart of the phylosophy is a identifying specific skills and then asigning an overall value to the players individual production. Simply stated the principles of moneyball are rooted in the use of sabremetrics...

    So while Crawford may struggle with his OBP he does possess a number of other skills that are equally valuable in the Bill James school of baseball by the numbers... Specifically his ability to steal bases and his total XBH tranlate into a very positive "runs created" formula. His speed translates into better range in Left this less ball find grass and works in the runs saved category.

    That said if we're talking specifically the Billy Beane Moneyball program. Once Crawford reached free agency he was no longer a viable Moneyball player because his value is set on the open market and his annual salary no longer fits...

    I would contend that after getting called up and before reaching free agancy he was certainly a player that would've fit in Beane's budget. Coco Crisp or Garnder are guys that have a lot of the same tools but make far less are much better "moneyball examples"..
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxFan2OO4. Show RedSoxFan2OO4's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    With all these 4-7 year contract signing we had lately, you have no idea what you're getting because they haven't played 1 day in the uniform yet. This long term contracts are a death wish in free agent markets. Gil Meche, Barry Zito, Carl Pavano, Jose Contreras. Should I go on?

    The bottom line is you don't know what you're getting. You're better off with a 2 year 30 million deal instead of 5 years at 50 million. I know its hard but you can always resign players.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford

    In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: SI's Verducci WEEI: 'Red flags' on Crawford : Hey pete, While I understand why many amongst us see him as being a bust and a bad fit and lamment his signing...The fact is that he's here and it's incumbent on the new skipper to utelize him to take advantage of his skills...Cause he ain't going anywhere soon..
    Posted by Beantowne[/QUOTE]

    With all due respect, bean, just wishing he gets more fastballs and suddenly changes his whole career portfolio does not make it happen.

    1) He's batted 1st/2nd about 4,400 times in his career and elsewhere about 1,500. His career OBP is .333. His career OBP batting 2nd is .346. That's not horrible, but we can do better... much better. I'd like to see Youk in the 2 slot next year, and Pedey dropped to 3, 4, or 5, but I doubt that will happen.

    2) I may have missed it, but I haven't seen you respond to the point about his numbers vs LHPs. They are horrid to say the least. He has a career .308 OBP vs LHPs and only a .684 OPS. We can and MUST do better than that. If your point was to bat him 2nd vs just RHPs, I would not think it was a bad idea, although we run into issues in late game situations when the opponents bring in a lefty to face CC.

    3) Batting CC 9th makes the most sense to me (at least vs LHPs, if they have to start him to save face). He's up before Ellsbury and will "see fastballs" as much as if he bats 2nd. The two can better use their speed back-to back rather than having slow pokes between them.


     

Share