Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

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

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    Yes, we have had some injuries. Yes, Ellsbury's break out year has risen his expected big payday to come. But, the fact remains, the contract is killing us.

    Moon,

    Replacing 400 quality innings at a cost of 26M is more than "some injuries"...I think your shirting the issue of what is truly "killing us this offseason".

    I guess the word "some" has different conotations for you than I. Injuries have hrut us badly, but they should be expected. The Dice-K and Lackey injuries were not as bad as the Buch injury, since we weren't counting on them for much.

    Ellsbury to date has given no indication that he is open to resigning and staying in Boston...Like Papelbon he and his agent have made clear their intent to go to market and have to date rejected every offer for an extension the Red Sox have offered. It's tough to accertain exactly what his value will be in offseason of 2013. His breakout year aside, if he simply had what was his career norm season in 2011 hit .300 with a .350 OBP, scored 100 and stole 50 bases while playing plus defesne in center and then followed that up with like seasons in 2012 and again in 2013. His value on the open market as one of the best leadoff men in the game would still be in excess of 18M to 20M based on the current landscape. Ichiro makes 18M and that's at 2005 prices...

    What evidence do you have that Crawford's contract is killing us? Have you spoken to Henry, Luccino or Cherington directly?

    No, but if you really think we would not spend most of the $20M spent on CC on other players had we not signed CC, then I ask that you provide "evidence" to support your position.

    I realize it is conjecture, but I am sticking to my point, and have yet to get a realistic answer from anyone who said that the CC signing would not prevent us from keeping our stars and signing others that are needed. Using the injury to Dice-K and Lackey is an argument that mitigates the circumstances, but the fact remains: we lost VMart, Paps, and maybe Papi. (I won't count Beltre because we got AGon.) We certainly would have been in a better position to outbid others for Ellsbury in two years had we not had CC, but you are correct, we can never know if we would have.

    Listen I am not nor will I argue that Crawford was overpaid and in the end unless he performs to expectations. Henry is on the hook for the next 6 years. I will not however accept the excuse that the Sox ability to field a championship team is somehow incumbered by Crawfords deal not with more than 150M at the clubs disposal to surround him with championship talant!

    Bean, I have never said we can not ever win a ring for 7 years; we still have a very good nucleus. However, I do not see how we can strengthen this team from 2011 to 2012 without seriously increasing payroll, unless a few of our kids explode onto the scene- a possibility, but not a big probability for 2012.

    I get your point. Even without CC, Paps might have walked. His contract might not have played into the valuation process and startegic budget planning of our future. Sox management has seemed to set a rigid value on our own FAs, and I think they factor in the draft picks gained by them walking to always seem to be just below what some other team offers. With Paps, it appears no offer was even made, but you have to figure his agent knew the ballpark numbers the Sox were interested in, and knew it was a lost cause.

    I'm not going to sit here every winter and play Monday morning QB by saying something like,"we could have had Berkman and Downs instead of CC in 2011". However, I do believe we could have done better with $142M. Much better.

    Even if Lackey was healthy, we'd still be tight with what we can do this winter. We'd probably still have to lose one of Papi or Paps, and be restricted on who we could get as our 5th starter, pen help, and RF'er. I know many of the pro-CC signing knew the contract would restrict future planning. My thread is geared towards those who acted as if we'd have money to spare, and it would be easy to keep highly competitive. I can't remember the specific names of posters who held that position, but I know they were numerous.

    I apologize if I have offended those who liked the CC signing, but knew he was overpaid and the limits his contract would have on our future budgets. I don't think you (bean) have ever been an "apologist" for the contract.

    Now if you want to talk about a bad contract then I'm right there with you...I could make a case that signing Lackey with a pre exisitng chronic elbow issue was a far greater gaffe than the 6 to 8 million per anum they overspent on Crawford.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from kt888. Show kt888's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    I think most everyone on these boards saw the CC contract as an overpay, no? Whether that overpay is by $30, $40, $50 million is debatable, I suppose.  The bottom line is, if Carl Crawford did his job and helped this team win, there is really no discussion here.  Overpaying has become the nature of free agent signings.  CC is the type of player that is flashier than what his stats reflect, but he can definitely do some damage when he is right.  He should have made this dominant line-up flat-out scary, and should be saving games with his defensive skills.  Unfortunately, the opposite was true this past season.  IMO, if Carl Crawford played like Carl Crawford this year, the entire season looks different - because though not "worth" $140 million, he can be a difference maker.  Unfortunately, he seemed to cost the team more games than he helped win.  

    A likely  strong consideration for the FO in signing CC was not only what he could bring to the Red Sox, but also their desire to keep him from signing with a rival team.  

    Any $140 million dollar contract has the potential to strap teams - even those teams with the most resources.  If CC played to his potential (or anywhere near it), the RS would have been in the post season, and who knows from there.  Was the CC contract an unnecessary luxury at the time of the signing?  Without a doubt, yes.  The only way the contract would truly "cripple" the Red Sox moving forward, however, is if he does NOT return to career norms.  
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from donrd4. Show donrd4's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]First, I want to say that this is not a Crawford bashing post. I am confident that he will return close to his norm in 2012. This is about the money spent on his contract. Secondly, this is not about Carl's horrible 2012 season and Monday morning quarterbacking, but... Where are all the Crawford signing apologists now? When I said at the time of his signing that his contract would "cripple" this team's ability to make moves for 6 more years, the apologists all said we'd have plenty of money because "Drew and others were coming off the books over the next few years". Well? Is Papi next? The AGon deal was great, but his contract extension kicks in next year, so there goes a big chunk of our discressionary spending. Buhholtz got an extension that adds some more for 2012. Taking the Scutty option some more. By my figures, we have about $23-25M more to spend this winter and be at about the same amount as 2011. Until I hear otherwise, I am assuming we won't go much higher in 2012. We have so many needs right now, and maybe just about $24M to fill them and stay at the 2011 budget level. Assuming Bard becomes the closer, we will need... 1) A very good starter to fill the 4 slot. 2) One or two decent starters to fill the 5 slot (or move Aceves). 3) Two good set-up men to replace Bard (three if Aceves starts). 4) A DH (or go with Youk and find a 3Bman: see below). 5) RF- maybe a RH'd platoon guy . 6) Back-up catcher.  Assume we sign Papi for about $10M/yr: that leaves about $14M for all the other slots, except maybe back-up catcher, since Lava can now catch instead of DH. I'd love Papi back, but the starting pitching and relief pitching slots have higher priority now. So, we may be saying goodbye to Papi soon as well. I haven't heard a peep from the Crawford signing supporters about what their plan is. I'm sure they'll just simplify it by saying something like, Henry has a lot of cash, he should just open his wallet..." Even if Henry OKs $40M to spend this winter, it will still be tight, and we'll have to rely on 1-2 kids to fill 1 or 2 of these slots... SP: Tazawa, Doubront, Weiland, Ranaudo, Wilson, or Barnes RP: Doubront, Bowden, Morales, or others... C/DH: Lavarnway (or move Youk here: see below) RF: Reddick, Kalish, Linares, Brentz, Jacobs... 3B (trade Youk to save money or DH him): Aviles/Lowrie/Middlebrooks SS (trade Scutaro to save money): Iglesias, Aviles/Lowrie/Bogaerts I have confidence in some of these kids to produce in 2012, but I do not want to have to rely on them to do well for us to win a ring. I seem to remember being in the distinct minority last winter after the Crawford signing. There seems to be more posters now pretending they were against the signing from day one, but I really want to hear from those of you who are honest enough to admit you were for the Crawford signing on how you'd now fill 7 roster slots on $24M. 1) SP#4 2) Closer or Set-up replacing Bard 3) SP #5 4) DH 5) Set-up relief 6) RF 7) C I'd still rather have $45M to fill 8 slots (add LF to the above list) than $24M for 7 slots. Your plan? (In detail and staying within the budget)
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Hey ! A.......What do you think ? Are you playing with your money? If some loser was telling you how much money you should be spend what would you tell him???
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    I think most everyone on these boards saw the CC contract as an overpay, no? Whether that overpay is by $30, $40, $50 million is debatable, I suppose.  The bottom line is, if Carl Crawford did his job and helped this team win, there is really no discussion here.  

    I disagree.
    1) There were people that saw what Werth signed for and argued that CC got what the market dictated and we needed a top OF'er.
    2) I have repeatedly said from day one that even if CC gives us his career norm or even 7 years at his 2010 level, he'd still be way overpaid. Hence, the discussion is here. This isn't about his 2011 poor season, it is about his contract and how effects what we can do this winter and the next 5 as well.

    Overpaying has become the nature of free agent signings.  CC is the type of player that is flashier than what his stats reflect, but he can definitely do some damage when he is right.  He should have made this dominant line-up flat-out scary, and should be saving games with his defensive skills.  Unfortunately, the opposite was true this past season.  IMO, if Carl Crawford played like Carl Crawford this year, the entire season looks different - because though not "worth" $140 million, he can be a difference maker.  Unfortunately, he seemed to cost the team more games than he helped win.  

    I do think that CC will help us next year. I am not basing this thread on his 2011 season. I made this exact point before the year began, and now am asking those that disagreed and said we'd have planty of money to keep our players and get more to tell me their 2012 plan.

    A likely  strong consideration for the FO in signing CC was not only what he could bring to the Red Sox, but also their desire to keep him from signing with a rival team.  

    Or, maybe the rival team just drove up the price and went away snickering.

    Any $140 million dollar contract has the potential to strap teams - even those teams with the most resources.  If CC played to his potential (or anywhere near it), the RS would have been in the post season, and who knows from there.  Was the CC contract an unnecessary luxury at the time of the signing?  Without a doubt, yes.  The only way the contract would truly "cripple" the Red Sox moving forward, however, is if he does NOT return to career norms.  

    So, you are saying if CC puts up his sub .800 OPS career norm of .773 in 2012, that will more than offset the loss of Papelbon and maybe Papi? Remember, we should have to get better than 2011 to make the playoffs.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]My posts are still here for all to read. When I said we overpaid by $50M, you said I "overexaggerated". From the very first day Patent lie! I said the Crawford fit and contract was totally insane! No way would I ever say that "it was overexaggerated at 50M over"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That leaves nearly 100 million for a player who was not a fit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I never said that, and your statement that it was just 50M over 7 years is precisely why you are a dimwitted hypocrite of the highest order! You most certainly did not totally denounce Crawford contract from day one! You were as timid as a little mouse with the standard "overpaid by" nonsense.  You are now fence riding by using the disclaimer "Crawford will bounce back off careeer low", while whining like a baby about how it restrains signing Lackey Part 2 (you totally endorsed that contract) and Ortz.  Your numbers are always wrong on the annual budget, and the Red Sox have zero problem fitting Ortiz market value (11-13M base) Posted by hankwilliams

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part I posted at 10/12/2010 12:16 AM EDT moonslav59 Posts: 20529 First: 9/27/2005 Last: 11/13/2011 6ca1d4ce1f944561017c844176cf2177
    I'm just not hooked on Crawford at all. He will want way to much and for way too long. He averages only 56 extra base hits per 162 games. His career OPS is .781. His last 3 years: 132 SBs but 33 CS (80% not bad/ not great) .337 OBP not great for realizing speed benefits. His great fielding is not fully realized in Fenway.
    Posted by tom-uk[/QUOTE]

    Thanks tom. A while ago someone started a thread about what people thought the day of the signing. I went back and found some quotes, including some of my own. Everyone here, except softy, knows I was dead set against paying Crawford more than $12-13M a year, and even then I said we needed a RH'd OF'er not another lefty. I brought up his low OBP, which is always big for me, and the fact that he should be benched vs most LH'd starters, again always a big issue with me.

    softy likes to pretend he's the only one who holds certain positions. It doesn't matter if you show him actual quotes from my posts as I did on the AGon trade from last September. He's in denial.

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

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    My posts are still here for all to read. When I said we overpaid by $50M, you said I "overexaggerated". From the very first day

    Patent lie! I said the Crawford fit and contract was totally insane! No way would I ever say that "it was overexaggerated at 50M over"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That leaves nearly 100 million for a player who was not a fit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I never said that, and your statement that it was just 50M over 7 years is precisely why you are a dimwitted hypocrite of the highest order!

    You said it, and then went on to argue that CC should lead off and Jacoby should be the 4th OF'er behind Cameron. You even argued that Cameron should start vs RHPs over Jacoby. I argued with you that CC should bat no higher than 6th vs RHPs and should be benched or bat 9th vs LHPs. I think that about sums up our differing opinions on Crawford's value. Do you now deny saying CC should have led off in 2011 over "Jake"?

    You most certainly did not totally denounce Crawford contract from day one!

    For once you are right, I was saying it before day one.

    You were as timid as a little mouse with the standard "overpaid by" nonsense. You make your standard comment about signing X player will restrain budget to sign Y player on virtually every FA/impending trade and sign player! It is the work of a mouse mind.

    I used the word "crippled" and that he was a "glorified platoon player". You only complained about his being a lefty and not a fit for Fenway's LF. You aregued with others that he should play RF, and it didn't matter that he's never played there. True, you said speed was over-rated, and you were also very much against the signing, but you were not the only one. tom's pulling of a quote by me from last October means nothing to you. You'll keep spewing lies and misrepresentations until the cows come home.

    You are now fence riding by using the disclaimer "Crawford will bounce back off careeer low", while whining like a baby about how it restrains signing Lackey Part 2 (you totally endorsed that contract) and Ortz. 

    Umm, Lackey was signed before CC, and you were for the signing at the time. I provided direct quotes from you several times. You've been lying ever since.

    Your numbers are always wrong on the annual budget, and the Red Sox have zero problem fitting Ortiz market value (11-13M base). 

    I never said we can't afford Papi; I said if we do keep him, we will not be able to build up our staff like it needs to be. We can't do both.

    I want you, little mouse, to specifically identify the names of the starting pitchers you want want added to payroll, and the exact annual/base amount to offer or pay each one. 

    I've done that several times. Once just 2 days ago. Unlike you, my numbers are more realistic. Your plans are always so far-fetched they are pure fantasy. You say things like sign Paps to $12M x 2 or let him walk. Well, he walked, so where's the rest of your plan?

    This is a post facto whiner thread from a true board mouse. 

    Back to the "ad homs", I see. 

    Silly clown.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now??? : Thanks tom. A while ago someone started a thread about what people thought the day of the signing. I went back and found some quotes, including some of my own. Everyone here, except softy, knows I was dead set against paying Crawford more than $12-13M a year, and even then I said we needed a RH'd OF'er not another lefty. I brought up his low OBP, which is always big for me, and the fact that he should be benched vs most LH'd starters, again always a big issue with me. softy likes to pretend he's the only one who holds certain positions. It doesn't matter if you show him actual quotes from my posts as I did on the AGon trade from last September. He's in denial.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    So tell me Moon, at that time, were you hoping the Sox would sign Werth, because he is two years older than Crawford and probably had a worse season statisically.

    So now that Theo is gone and we find out that Cherington highly advocated the Crawford signing, my guess is you'll be questioning a ton more Sox FO decisions since obviously you and Cherington don't see eye to eye!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    CC hasn't proven anything yet as far as returning to "norms" in 2012. He was ill-fitted for Fenway as a defensive player (just go to the video of him butchering balls near the Monster as a Ray). He plays in a FishBowl that has so many other villains played out (Lackey,Beckett,Tito,Theo,Tek,Wake), he seems to get softglove treatment by the media and even fans in here. The guy is making 142 million over 7 years, it's got to be the worst contract for the least production in the history of baseball (even Zito has won some games). This guy never was fit for playing on the Sox. The very thought he is going to be trotted out to LF in 2012 just tells me what I already know--the Sox will be bridging toward 2015 at this point--they are so far from being a WS team, it's no longer funny.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    I haven't seen a Sox team with this many holes since pre-Henry.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from kt888. Show kt888's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    1) There were people that saw what Werth signed for and argued that CC got what the market dictated and we needed a top OF'er.
    2) I have repeatedly said from day one that even if CC gives us his career norm or even 7 years at his 2010 level, he'd still be way overpaid. Hence, the discussion is here. This isn't about his 2011 poor season, it is about his contract and how effects what we can do this winter and the next 5 as well.

    I was one of those who ACKNOWLEDGED that the Werth contract impacted the contract that CC got, but this is not the same as trying to justify 142 million for CC.  The issue is, Werth was significantly overpaid as well.  And I realize that you have consistently opposed the signing from the beginning - I know this is not an issue of hindsight for you.  The discussion for me is more about CC crippling the future success of the Red Sox.  

    I do think that CC will help us next year. I am not basing this thread on his 2011 season. I made this exact point before the year began, and now am asking those that disagreed and said we'd have planty of money to keep our players and get more to tell me their 2012 plan.

    Were there a lot of posters who said the Red Sox would have plenty of money to keep our players and get more?  It's simple math......you sign two 20 plus million dollar players in one off season and it is going to tap resources in other areas.  From year to year they are trying to put together a team that can compete, for now and the future.  There are a ton of moving parts.  There is no way to sign new high-priced FAs and retain all of your own when the time comes.  


    Or, maybe the rival team just drove up the price and went away snickering.

    Perhaps - that's all part of the game. 

    So, you are saying if CC puts up his sub .800 OPS career norm of .773 in 2012, that will more than offset the loss of Papelbon and maybe Papi? Remember, we should have to get better than 2011 to make the playoffs.

    I'm not sure where I said , this, moon.  Each individual player is a piece of the larger puzzle.  I'm saying if CC plays to his career norms (again, he is more dynamic than your stats reflect) and does what is expected of him, he helps the team win, and does not have a "crippling" impact to the future of the organization.  Conversely, if he continues to be a disaster like this season, then that is a real problem as a 140 million dollar absolute dud is tough for any team to absorb.  Your argument is that CC's $20 per million is impacting the club's ability to sign/retain free agents, but the Red Sox payroll is 160 million - to be fair, Lackey, Dice-K, Jenks, and others also need to be part of this argument.  Each player is signed in the hopes that they will continue on a similar path that got them there, and the rest will take care of itself.  CC does not need to make up for the loss of Paps and Papi - their replacements do - Paps did just fine when he replaced Faulk, at a far reduced rate.  



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

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    So tell me Moon, at that time, were you hoping the Sox would sign Werth, because he is two years older than Crawford and probably had a worse season statisically.

    Actually, I did think Werth was a better fit for 2 main reasons:
    1) He can play RF.
    2) He's RH'd.
    However, I never wanted him at even close to what he got from the Nats, and once he signed for that amount of money, I knew Crawford would get more.

    Here's a quote from 12/5/11 concerning Werth:

    Re: It's still early. Stop all the "doom & gloom"!

    posted at 12/5/2010 10:47 PM EST
    Posts: 20536
    First: 9/27/2005
    Last: 11/13/2011
    7 YR / $126 Million

    That's sick! It makes AGon's deal look like a steal!

    Sox4ever


    To softy...

    Re: SOX SIGN CRAWFORD!

    posted at 12/9/2010 12:14 AM EST
    Posts: 20536
    First: 9/27/2005
    Last: 11/13/2011
    I'd rather have Maggs at $18M/2.

    Crawford will certainly help this team, but the money will cripple us for 7 years.

    He deserved something like $95-100M/7 tops, but after Werth's crazy deal, I guess this is what Theo had to do to get "his man".

    Now, wait for all the Ellsbury trade banter...

    Sox4ever


    And more...

    While I do not think LF is the most important defensive position in MLB, it is still important enough. 81 games will be played elsewhere and quite a few in LF spacious Yankee stadium. Having Crawford in LF will allow the Sox CF'er to shade a step or two to RF, a big plus in Fenway.

    Back to the thread's original purpose:

    While I agree with softy that Crawford is vastly overpaid (I estimated by about $40-50M), he will improve this team a lot. The stats the original poster of this thread posted are interesting but most are very small sample sizes and should be viewed as such.

    Here are some large sample sizes to ponder:

    Career vs LHPs (1593 PAs):
    .270/.315/.382/.697 with only about 7 HRs per 600 PAs.
    The low OBP greatly effects his SBs vs LHPs (about 13 per 160 gms).

    Batting leadoff he has just a .323 OBP in 1,695 PAs career.

    Career Late & Close* stats:
    ..261/.316/.379/.695 in 800 PAs.

    *Late & Close are PA in the 7th or later with the batting team tied, ahead by one, or the tying run at least on deck.

    Crawford's career overall OPS: .781 (over .800 in 5 of last 6 years)
    OPS vs Division opponents:

    NYY: .748 (603 PAs)

    Tor:  .842 (589)

    Bal:  .832  (610)
    Bos: .772 (639)

    Now, some small sample size numbers from his "career year" 2010:
    Vs LHPs (pretty close to his career numbers, but with 223 PAs)
    .256/.312/.384/.696 
    with just 5 SBs in 223 PAs while 42 SBs in 434 PAs vs RHPs

    1st half OPS:  .901
    2nd half OPS: .789

    Late & Close: .779 OPS

    vs 
    NYY: .748
    Tor:  .696
    Bal:  1.119
    Bos: .847

    I love this guy vs RHPs (.930 in 2010), but we will probably play about 35% of our games vs LHPs in 2011. I'm very worried about us already being vulnerable vs lefties with Papi, Drew, Pedey and Salty all struggling mightily vs them as well. Cam, Lowrie and Vtek can only cover for 3 of the 5.


    Crawford's biggest weakness, happens to be one of the Sox biggest weaknesses before this winter: hitting vs LHPs.  Crawford has a sub .700 career OPS vs LHPs and had the same in 2010. He hit .704 in 2009. His best year was way back in 2007 at .837. He is not getting better vs lefties. When he doesn't get on base vs LHPs, it negates his speed on offense as well. He steals bout 1/4th the amount of times as vs RHPs, due mainly to the much lower OBP, and somewhat because lefties hold runners closer at 1B. We faced LH starters over 35% of the time in 2010. That's a huge chunk of games to be payng someone over $20M to have a sub .700 OPS. I hope he makes up for it by killing RHPs. I do not think Tito will bench Crawford vs LHPs or even move him down in the line-up, so it will cripple our offense for the start of over 50 games in 2011. If Tito also refuses to bench Papi or Drew vs LHPs, we will see a huge disparity in offense vs LH starters and RH starters. Cam and Jed kill lefties and they should start every game vs LHPs. VTek does well vs LHPs and should play vs them as well, but I think Tito will make him one single pitcher's personal caddy, so we will not gain much from that slot vs LHPs.

    Crawford is really nothing more than a glorified platoon player.


    It's posters like this one that I started this thread for...

    Re: SOX SIGN CRAWFORD!

    posted at 12/9/2010 8:45 AM EST
    Posts: 2448
    First: 6/2/2008
    Last: 11/13/2011
    What's up with certain people questioning the amount Crawford is getting??

    The market was set with the Werth signing and somebody was going to pay Crawford this money...WHY NOT US??

    The Crawford signing adds a combination of speed and power to a line-up that should be pretty tough to play against. 

    ...softy...

    He has a career .330's OBP. He has a career low .300's OBP against LHP, and low .300's v. LHP, in 2010. He will have to throw across his body from LF, with a good arm but not a great arm. In LF @ Fenway, his speed value is diminshed on the defensive end. He should play either CF or RF, to take advantage of the defensive speed value. As a hitter, any good Lefty can sit Crawford down. His pop isn't bad for a jitterbug, but it won't be helped by half the games at Fenway. The Yankees made the right move. If they wanted Crawford they would have bought him and tatooed him. In Gardner, they have a much better overall defender and a better OBP from a jitterbug. The Yankees didn't select Gardner over Crawford because he has more value, but he does. Crawford has high miles and relies on speed. As the speed diminishes, he'll be in a wheelchair for a substantial portion of his contract. Pretty clear, though, that Jake's not going to be a long career guy for the Red Sox. They might retain him for all or part of 2011, but his long term days in Boston are drawing short. The Red Sox have made a decision to go with Crawford over Jake, for the future, and it doesn't matter what OF slot they play in terms of the long term decision on the roster construction. I'm no fan of Jake's overrated skillset and his likely passive aggressive approach to getting an everyday CF slot, but he's a far better value than Crawford, over the next 3 years. It's a team game, so one title will have people claiming it validates this move. It would not. This is a terrible value move and one that will be a jumbo mortgage on a depreciating house that goes under water the minute the deal is signed. The Yankees would not take an assignment and delegation of this contract, right now, much less later on. That, in and of itself, shows how bad this move is.  Having Crawford is sexy, and will bring some excitement on the front end. However, bottom line, it's a poor fit for 2011, and an absurd overpay for the long term future. Crawford seems like a hard working and good citizen who will be a franchise asset from that regard, but he's not going to offer to pay the money back if he loses a step with wear and tear or an injury and has half his contract to go. The team for 2011 had these winter needs: 1. Superstar Slugger for the future (Done) 2. Long term Catcher for the future (Not Done) 3 Solid pen arm with big sample proven stats v. AL East (Not done) 4. Solid RH OF Bat to balance the 4 OF slots (Not done) Crawford doesn't address a single need, short term, and is an absurd overpay, long term.
    Posted by Softlaw1A1

    In Response to Re: Subtle Benefits to RS Signing Crawford:
    Steve, I'll be one of the only Red Sox partisan who will not be cheerleading this deal. Long term, while it's an improvement over Jake, it's an absurd value over the contract term. Short term, it doesn't even address the construction needs for the 2011 team. Being a cheerleader for every big FA contract is the calling card of a pidgeon.
    Posted by Softlaw1A1

    Slomag...

    Re: Subtle Benefits to RS Signing Crawford

    posted at 12/9/2010 1:12 PM EST
    Posts: 1740
    First: 8/31/2009
    Last: 11/12/2011
    In Response to Re: Subtle Benefits to RS Signing Crawford:
    Steve, I'll be one of the only Red Sox partisan who will not be cheerleading this deal. Long term, while it's an improvement over Jake, it's an absurd value over the contract term. Short term, it doesn't even address the construction needs for the 2011 team. Being a cheerleader for every big FA contract is the calling card of a pidgeon.
    Posted by Softlaw1A1


    I had the same first initial impression, but I like it more when I think about the implications for the Yankees.  Their plan B (signing Crawford and using Gardner in a trade) is off the table, and now they have a gun to their heads in the Lee negotiations.   They'll either land Lee at 7 years at $22M, or will make a trade that hurts them somewhere on the field.  

    Also, we have to wait and see what happens with Ellsbury before we can make any final judgement on this deal.  He is now expendable, and if the feeling long-term is that Kalish / Reddick / Westmoreland can fill out the rest of the outfield, it will still be a cheap outfield for years to come, despite overpaying for Crawford.  If you couple that with the return for Ellsbury, it could wind up looking very good.

    Jim ZFrom FloridaIn Response to Re: Subtle Benefits to RS Signing Crawford:
    He has a career .330's OBP. He has a career low .300's OBP against LHP, and low .300's v. LHP, in 2010. 
    Which means he hit LHP at 300 and RHP at 360 so what is the issue???

    He will have to throw across his body from LF, with a good arm but not a great arm. 
    DHe has done that his whole career I mean he just did not change to a lefty.

    In LF @ Fenway, his speed value is diminshed on the defensive end. He should play either CF or RF, to take advantage of the defensive speed value. 
    Hmmm smaller field means to me at least less LF hits because of his speed
    As a hitter, any good Lefty can sit Crawford down. 
    So can any pitcher do the same to any hitter . He has hit over 300 for the past 5 years with an OBP at 350 and Slg at 450+

    His pop isn't bad for a jitterbug, but it won't be helped by half the games at Fenway. 
    Obviously you do not realize the dimensions of the Trop are not much different than Fenway in LF, LCF and CF and that the RF line is 322 not 302 and RF is 370 vs 380 in Boston. The Trop has bigger dimensions except RF 380 vs 370.
    The Trop also has a higher fence all around except for LF.
    So the 10 ft difference in RF is more difficult in the Trop because the fence is 10 ft high vs 3.5 in Fenway. Kind of cancels the 10 ft extra in Boston.
    The Yankees made the right move. If they wanted Crawford they would have bought him and tatooed him. In Gardner, they have a much better overall defender and a better OBP from a jitterbug. 
    Gardner career OBP is 0.020 different than Crawford's not a major difference.

    The Yankees didn't select Gardner over Crawford because he has more value, but he does. Brett does not have the same numbers as Carl through the first 300 games he has played. Nor does he have the statistics to match up with Carl through the first 300 games of their careers. Brett may have it over Carl in 8 years but maybe he won't.
    ???????????????

    Crawford has high miles and relies on speed. As the speed diminishes, he'll be in a wheelchair for a substantial portion of his contract. 
    Wow would you say the same about any premitre base stealer? I checked out some and all were still stealing 50 bases when they were 35/36.

    Pretty clear, though, that Jake's not going to be a long career guy for the Red Sox. They might retain him for all or part of 2011, but his long term days in Boston are drawing short. The Red Sox have made a decision to go with Crawford over Jake, (Where did they say that Maybe they both will be here) for the future, and it doesn't matter what OF slot they play in terms of the long term decision on the roster construction. I'm no fan of Jake's overrated skillset and his likely passive aggressive approach to getting an everyday CF slot, but he's a far better value than Crawford, over the next 3 years. 
    Yes the value of the current contracts say Jake is a better value. However Carl has been playing for 9 years has GG, silver slugger and 4 AS appearances. He has 300 ave, 330 OBP and 445 Slg has lead the league in triples 4 times, and the SB as well. His contract value is well worth it.
    As for Jake he may or may not be here. However I'm shocked to actually here good words about him from you even though they are just to support your apparent dislike of Crawford.

    It's a team game, so one title will have people claiming it validates this move. It would not. 
    Did signing Manny validate his contract many say YES.

    This is a terrible value move and one that will be a jumbo mortgage on a depreciating house that goes under water the minute the deal is signed. 
    What house is depreciating. This move along with Agon will fill the park as well as increase souviener sales immensely.

    The Yankees would not take an assignment and delegation of this contract, right now, much less later on. That, in and of itself, shows how bad this move is.  
    This signing is better than any one the NYY have made of such size. At the least both of the signings this year will have both players around 36 at the end. What will be the ages of the NYY signings of some players at the end of their contracts. Pure BS talk.


    Having Crawford is sexy, and will bring some excitement on the front end. However, bottom line, it's a poor fit for 2011, and an absurd overpay for the long term future. 
    He will be 36 at the end a time where very similar players are still putting up very good numbers.

    Crawford seems like a hard working and good citizen who will be a franchise asset from that regard, but he's not going to offer to pay the money back if he loses a step with wear and tear or an injury and has half his contract to go. 
    What you say here can be said about any signing. Just don't use it as a reason not to sign some one.

    The team for 2011 had these winter needs: 
    1. Superstar Slugger for the future (Done) 

    2. Long term Catcher for the future (Not Done) It is still the winter

    3 Solid pen arm with big sample proven stats v. AL East (Not done) Still the winter
    4. Solid RH OF Bat to balance the 4 OF slots (Not done) Crawford doesn't address a single need, short term, and is an absurd overpay, long term.
    Why does it have to be a RH OF bat. The RS got a consistent hitter for the past 9 years who can run, play defense and do it all. Would Jason Werth fit the bill. A guy who has not had the same consistency or output except for HRs over the same time

    Posted by Softlaw1A1


    Lastly when you look at some comparisions for Crawford to other players at the same age the name that pops up is Roberto Clemente.
    I really do not think signing a guy who is a similar player at the same age to Roberto Clemente is a bad signing.



    Boom...
    I don't think Crawford is going to be worth that kind of cash either but I'll take the 2 rings anyway...thank you very much !

    We probably didn't have to go that high but Theo made a premptive move and so far he is helping to put the Yanks in kind of a hole. Most of it they are doing themselves. I personally think some guys just don't want to play for Girardi. 

    Extending Jeter for ridiculous money, Lee and some others not wanting to go there. Denying them Crawford. The Empire IS NOT HAPPY!

    And you know what happens when they are not happy. It's not good!

    Carnie...

    I thik Crawford will hit more than 15 home runs. His home run totals have a nice upward trend from 2 his first year when he was 21 I think, to 19 last year. I just think if he's in a lineup with Pedey, Youk, Gonzo and Big Papi he might crack 20 HRs this year. Of course he'll hit .300 with 40 doubles and who knows how many stolen bases. The Red Sox lineup could be special this year.

    Back to your point...


    So now that Theo is gone and we find out that Cherington highly advocated the Crawford signing, my guess is you'll be questioning a ton more Sox FO decisions since obviously you and Cherington don't see eye to eye!

    I have no problem with Ben. I know I will not always agree, just as I didn't with Theo, but that doesn't mean I can't still like them.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    Gee moon you outdid yourself this time...although I stopped reading at:

    Here's a quote from 12/5/11 concerning Werth:

    I figured if I kept reading your post I'd miss the Patriots game and maybe work tomorrow.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    I thought maybe you quit after reading this quote by you...

    What's up with certain people questioning the amount Crawford is getting??

    The market was set with the Werth signing and somebody was going to pay Crawford this money...WHY NOT US??

    The Crawford signing adds a combination of speed and power to a line-up that should be pretty tough to play against.
     
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]I thought maybe you quit after reading this quote by you... What's up with certain people questioning the amount Crawford is getting?? The market was set with the Werth signing and somebody was going to pay Crawford this money...WHY NOT US?? The Crawford signing adds a combination of speed and power to a line-up that should be pretty tough to play against.  
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, that was my quote, SO WHAT! Thanks for going through all that trouble to dig it up...needless to say it was true then and is true now!

    Unlike you, I don't feel the Sox have hamstrung themselves with his contract, they will spend if the time and place is right, count on it...although it may not be THIS offseason, since the 2 big guns this free agency just happen to play the same position as the guy they invested in for the next 6 seasons.

    Signed,
    Your friendly Crawford/Agon Apologist!
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    The team for 2011 had these winter needs: 1. Superstar Slugger for the future (Done) 2. Long term Catcher for the future (Not Done) 3 Solid pen arm with big sample proven stats v. AL East (Not done) 4. Solid RH OF Bat to balance the 4 OF slots (Not done) Crawford doesn't address a single need, short term, and is an absurd overpay, long term.
    Posted by Softlaw1A1

    Whoever wrote the above was on the money! And we have this weaser starting a thread and pretending he denounced the Crawford deal. He called it an overpay, not a complete exercise in Inepstein absurdity.

    Moonslob, the perpetual prevaricator who wanted Adam Dunn instead of Crawford!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    Why would anyone pay attention to someone advocating offering 3 to 4 million to bring Wastefield and Varitek back on active roster? Absurd! More absurd than Crawford contract, because as expensive as Crawford is, at least he is young enough to recover from a career worst season.   
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from WesternOregon. Show WesternOregon's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    *crickets....
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now??? : Tebow man, Youk? Good for you!!!! Can't we use these two ... to fill the RF?
    Posted by SinceYaz[/QUOTE]

     Clearly I was first on the Board with Tebow! For a guy who "can't play" in the NFL, he's 3-1 as a starter... As for Kalish/Reddick, we will be signing a RH RF.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]The team for 2011 had these winter needs: 1. Superstar Slugger for the future (Done) 2. Long term Catcher for the future (Not Done) 3 Solid pen arm with big sample proven stats v. AL East (Not done) 4. Solid RH OF Bat to balance the 4 OF slots (Not done) Crawford doesn't address a single need, short term, and is an absurd overpay, long term. Posted by Softlaw1A1


    Whoever wrote the above was on the money!

    See how softy pretends he's not the old softy in order to seperate himself from all his awful positions?

    And we have this weaser starting a thread and pretending he denounced the Crawford deal. He called it an overpay, not a complete exercise in Inepstein absurdity.

    I guess saying the deal "would cripple us" and that Crawford "was nothing more than a glorified platoon player" is not as forceful as calling Theo "Inepstein". It sure sounded like I was all for the deal to nobody except the silly clown.

    Moonslob, the perpetual prevaricator who wanted Adam Dunn instead of Crawford!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Yes, at $25M/2 and as just one of many options including Ordonez and $11M/1 or Berkman, a point you just happen to leave out. I'd still rather have either of those two at my cost listed just like you'd still rather have Ben Sheets for 2010 over Lackey. Silly clown.

    Why would anyone pay attention to someone advocating offering 3 to 4 million to bring Wastefield and Varitek back on active roster?

    Ask that question to yourself and put me on iggy then. Nobody on this board resaponds to my posts more than you do. Silly clown!

    Absurd! More absurd than Crawford contract, because as expensive as Crawford is, at least he is young enough to recover from a career worst season.   
    Posted by hankwilliams[/QUOTE]

    So, you bash me for saying I think CC will return to career norm in 2012, then you all but do it yourself. Silly clown!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

     just like you'd still rather have Ben Sheets for 2010 over Lackey.

    Amusing, Sheets looks like gold compared to Lackey, out for an entire season after one substandard overpaid season and one pitiful season of his absurd contract. You are such a dim wit. Dunn, Lackey, Wakefield and Varitek, your big decisions and trigger pull on 4 jokes.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]I was all for the signing and believe he will be a very good signing still. They have 55 million coming off the books Paps 12, Cam, 7, JD 14, Papi 12, Tek 2, Wake 2, Reyes 1, Tarzawa 1.5 Wheeler 3 Add 6M for Marco and CC and you have 43 mil left add 2 each for both Pedroia and Lester Leaving 39 mil There are 10 up for arbitration including Ells   5M, Aceves 2M Salty, Bard, Lowrie, Doubront, Aceves, Albers Wrong. You forgot AGon signed after the year started and Buch was extended. That's about a $20M CBT hit right there. I did the numbers and if we stay at last year's budget level and give $10M in arb raises, we are left with about $24M right now (after Scutty). SP#4 CJ Wilson 9/10 mil SP #5 Joel Pineiro 7/8 mil Closer or Set-up replacing Bard Jenks will be back Set-up relief D Oliver 4 mil, Tarzawa, Bowden, Morales, DH Sign Mark Derosa for 5/6M and rotate him, Youk and Adrian. RF Reddick/Kalish 1.5 max for the two. C Salty and Larvarnway 3 mil max for the two This accounts for 40 mil tops.   Invite both Tek and Wake back on minor league deals and you have Aceves and Pinero who both work out of the BP very well. Wilson will probably get $12-13M a year. Pineiro is not worth even a $4M gamble. We need 2 quality set-up guys to replace Bard and the carousel of 2011. We may go above last year's budget number, but try to make a plan that stays below $25M.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    moon I'm not wrong I included all the ups and ones that go away. I think you do not see that I do not bring back Papi.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    Moon,  I stand behind my initial comments - I wasn't thrilled about the signing, but I do think the Yankees were planning on him as a plan B.  Things turned out well for them in the end, but I don't think there is any doubt they were unsatisfied with their team entering spring training.  

    The more important point is the horse I've been beating since September - Ellsbury is now tradeable, and his 2011 season only makes the return higher.  At the time we signed Crawford, I thought our biggest need was a RH OF, and I thought we could get somebody like McCutchen, who would be a better all-around player, right-handed, and cost-controlled if we flipped Ellsbury to a contender for a couple high-ceiling prospects, and threw in a prospect or two of our own.  Now our biggest need is pitching (starting and relief) but the principle is the same - if paying a $15M guy $20M affords you the opportunity to pay another $15M guy $5M, then it's a good move by the organizations.  The FO really should not care how the money is distributed.

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

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    A deal the Sox could consider.    Crawford to the Cubs for Alfonso Soriano.
    Both play a similar left field.     Soriano hits with more power and is a RH hitter.     Soriano has 3 less years on his contract and for less money.     Both would have to waive their no trade clauses.



    http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_id=150093
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]A deal the Sox could consider.    Crawford to the Cubs for Alfonso Soriano. Both play a similar left field.     Soriano hits with more power and is a RH hitter.     Soriano has 3 less years on his contract and for less money.     Both would have to waive their no trade clauses. http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_id=150093
    Posted by OnDeckCircle[/QUOTE]

    If Ben calls Theo with this offer I'm sure Theo would drive Soriano to Boston and pick up Crawford in Houston himself??

    Worst trade proposal I've heard yet!
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    In Response to Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    [QUOTE]First, I want to say that this is not a Crawford bashing post. I am confident that he will return close to his norm in 2012. This is about the money spent on his contract. Secondly, this is not about Carl's horrible 2012 season and Monday morning quarterbacking, but... Where are all the Crawford signing apologists now? When I said at the time of his signing that his contract would "cripple" this team's ability to make moves for 6 more years, the apologists all said we'd have plenty of money because "Drew and others were coming off the books over the next few years". Well? Is Papi next? The AGon deal was great, but his contract extension kicks in next year, so there goes a big chunk of our discressionary spending. Buhholtz got an extension that adds some more for 2012. Taking the Scutty option some more. By my figures, we have about $23-25M more to spend this winter and be at about the same amount as 2011. Until I hear otherwise, I am assuming we won't go much higher in 2012. We have so many needs right now, and maybe just about $24M to fill them and stay at the 2011 budget level. Assuming Bard becomes the closer, we will need... 1) A very good starter to fill the 4 slot. 2) One or two decent starters to fill the 5 slot (or move Aceves). 3) Two good set-up men to replace Bard (three if Aceves starts). 4) A DH (or go with Youk and find a 3Bman: see below). 5) RF- maybe a RH'd platoon guy . 6) Back-up catcher.  Assume we sign Papi for about $10M/yr: that leaves about $14M for all the other slots, except maybe back-up catcher, since Lava can now catch instead of DH. I'd love Papi back, but the starting pitching and relief pitching slots have higher priority now. So, we may be saying goodbye to Papi soon as well. I haven't heard a peep from the Crawford signing supporters about what their plan is. I'm sure they'll just simplify it by saying something like, Henry has a lot of cash, he should just open his wallet..." Even if Henry OKs $40M to spend this winter, it will still be tight, and we'll have to rely on 1-2 kids to fill 1 or 2 of these slots... SP: Tazawa, Doubront, Weiland, Ranaudo, Wilson, or Barnes RP: Doubront, Bowden, Morales, or others... C/DH: Lavarnway (or move Youk here: see below) RF: Reddick, Kalish, Linares, Brentz, Jacobs... 3B (trade Youk to save money or DH him): Aviles/Lowrie/Middlebrooks SS (trade Scutaro to save money): Iglesias, Aviles/Lowrie/Bogaerts I have confidence in some of these kids to produce in 2012, but I do not want to have to rely on them to do well for us to win a ring. I seem to remember being in the distinct minority last winter after the Crawford signing. There seems to be more posters now pretending they were against the signing from day one, but I really want to hear from those of you who are honest enough to admit you were for the Crawford signing on how you'd now fill 7 roster slots on $24M. 1) SP#4 2) Closer or Set-up replacing Bard 3) SP #5 4) DH 5) Set-up relief 6) RF 7) C I'd still rather have $45M to fill 8 slots (add LF to the above list) than $24M for 7 slots. Your plan? (In detail and staying within the budget)
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    moon, theres no doubt CC and Lackey were drastically overpaid and not evaluated very well before hand.  I to believe he will rebound next season.  These signings may have also impacted letting Pap walk and possibly David too, but think about the cash saved even after Adrians raise?  I think we will make at least one trade for a starter and still have plenty of cash flow to upgrade necessary positions.  The question is will Henry allow it, or try to get a bit back on bad signings.

    I think we made the one "must do" move by keeping Scuter who can still keep us productive enough on both ends without creating a huge hole up the middle.  For the life of me I still don't see where Aviles fits so something may happen with Lowrie and possibly even Iglesias through trade.




     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from OnDeckCircle. Show OnDeckCircle's posts

    Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

    If Ben calls Theo with this offer I'm sure Theo would drive Soriano to Boston and pick up Crawford in Houston himself??

    Worst trade proposal I've heard yet!   

    ..........................................

    Not meant as a proposal.    Read it again.   It was a consideration.                  
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share