Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???

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

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

    Moon,

      I was and am still a Carl Crawford apologist.

      But you effectively framed your argument so that I really have nothing else to say about it.

      That being said, of course, I am going to say more.

      I can't help myself.

      I am sure that he will be in much better form, season two. 

       - whoever the new manager may be, I doubt Carl will be yoyo'd about in the line-up like last season.  One of my few peeves with Tito was the whirlwind line-up shifts ...

       - the energy won't be face on him that was last year.  More likely, he'll have adapted a little more to our fair and balanced fan base.   And though there will always be plenty of negative folks to focus on Carl, more will focus on the new manager and Beltran (or not Beltran, what ever the case), the lack of Lackey, the loss of the honorable manhood of Beckett, the desire to see Lester over come the clubhouse cancer that ate him up in the 2nd half last season, and - surely - the return of the Nibbler, our man Dice-K!

       But you said all the right things about Carl the player.

       Your beef is really with Carl the contract.

       And that still, no matter who it is you're talking too, including and especially Carl, was a stunner. 

       I don't have anything untoward to say about your position there.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

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

    Yaz, like I have said before, this is not about what Crawford did in 2011. I happen to agree with you that he will bounce back and help us next year. The thread is about the crippling nature of his contract and the bind we are in now as a result of his signing (and others, I might add).

    I doubt we sign Papi, unless we are prepared to have a player payroll budget of over $180M or totally negelct our pitching staff needs (or both, if our staff upgrades fail).
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

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

    I'm not a Crawford apologist. I was just a fan who was really excited about having him on the team. After the Agon signing, I was shocked at our good fortune of adding Crawford as well. I thought Agon was so tremendous I wasn't expecting Carl at all, or anyone huge after that for that matter. It seemed like an embarrassment of riches. I couldn't be happier. I also remember, I can't remember how long after that or anything, that Moon said it would cripple the team for 7 years. The reason I remember that is because it was the first time I realized maybe this could be a problem for us. As usual, I was in the moment and not thinking about what this could mean down the line. I didn't like his post and what it made me think about, but I remember it.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

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

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    Yaz, like I have said before, this is not about what Crawford did in 2011. I happen to agree with you that he will bounce back and help us next year. The thread is about the crippling nature of his contract and the bind we are in now as a result of his signing (and others, I might add). I doubt we sign Papi, unless we are prepared to have a player payroll budget of over $180M or totally negelct our pitching staff needs (or both, if our staff upgrades fail).
    Posted by moonslav59


    Understand competely, Moon.  And reluctantly agreed even when you first mentioned that.

    I wasn't ready for that much reality after the twin deals of the summer and was still flying high ...

    My mind did go, even then, to what are we going to have to pay Pedey and Youk at the end of their contracts to keep them?  Ells' super year of course, brought in another astronomic salary variable to the picture  Youk's two straight injury troubled seasons has taken a little edge off that.   A line-up of 5 or 6 @ $20 mill per season or more plus several $10 to teen millions on the pitching staff sounds crushing ...

    But it sure set the stage for just the kind of scenario you brought up.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

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

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    I'm not a Crawford apologist. I was just a fan who was really excited about having him on the team. After the Agon signing, I was shocked at our good fortune of adding Crawford as well. I thought Agon was so tremendous I wasn't expecting Carl at all, or anyone huge after that for that matter. It seemed like an embarrassment of riches. I couldn't be happier. I also remember, I can't remember how long after that or anything, that Moon said it would cripple the team for 7 years. The reason I remember that is because it was the first time I realized maybe this could be a problem for us. As usual, I was in the moment and not thinking about what this could mean down the line. I didn't like his post and what it made me think about, but I remember it.
    Posted by kimsaysthis



    Kim, don't think I could have said it better.  I was ectsatic!  Embarrassment of riches was exactly what I was thinking ...
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from never1954. Show never1954's posts

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

    Moon...fun post...I mostly just read threads but this is a good one.  Kim said it perfectly, and I was also soaking in the embarrassment of riches. finally Theo made a couple of really good moves.  I am not sure just how much the Werth contract drove the CC train but as the time like many I didn't care about the money. 
    Your math is basically spot on but with all that said, does the new GM talk them into spending a little more in the short term?  this ownership has never had a proplem paying for nothing so instead of shipping out players and paying for nothing, spend a little more and keep it inhouse. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

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

    Mr Moon,

    I stand by thinking the CC deal was within normal limits of overpay for a FA.  If the Sox don't make two WS during CC's tenure I will consider the deal a mistake.  IMO his defence was the huge surprise, how could a guy considered the best at defensive player at any position for a couple years make so many poor plays in 2011?

    If we have this discussion I think the alternatives should be remembered. You have been good before about bringing up the alternative you mentioned a few times. Ordonez.

    If he was the best alternative ( in some minds) I think he should be brought up.

    He played 92 games with a .634 OPS and negative 20 UZR / 150.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from YOUKILLUS20. Show YOUKILLUS20's posts

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

     Even though the math would basically come out the same, I was all in for Werth.
    The benefits to Werth over Carl include a strong arm, RH power, which we need, and the early subtraction of JD Drew, who was a non factor. Werth would have created a natural opening for Reddick/Kalish too. By missing Werth, we are now tasked with finding a RH hitting OF, and trading Kalish/Reddick and figuring out how much we need Papi's production if at all.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

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

    Werth was destined for the Sox. There were rumors that said as much. The Werth contract had nothing to do with Werth or the Sox, and had everything to do with Borass. I heard that baseball can intervene when the price is so high (players union or whatever). Anyone who watched the press conference with Werth becoming a National can't possibly say they've never seen a deer caught in the headlights. No way that was his choice, but he probably risked alienating his team if he tried to get out of it. I will never believe Jason Werth wanted to end his career, coming from the Phillies, with the Nationals. No way. No matter the money. That was a disgrace, and Borass should be more closely examined since he profits immensely from those types of deals.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

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

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
     Even though the math would basically come out the same, I was all in for Werth. The benefits to Werth over Carl include a strong arm, RH power, which we need, and the early subtraction of JD Drew, who was a non factor. Werth would have created a natural opening for Reddick/Kalish too. By missing Werth, we are now tasked with finding a RH hitting OF, and trading Kalish/Reddick and figuring out how much we need Papi's production if at all.
    Posted by YOUKILLUS20


    Tebow man, Youk?

    Good for you!!!!

    Can't we use these two ... to fill the RF?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

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

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    Not once did the author totally denounce Crawford contract, before it happened, more than I did. In fact, Moonslaw did not strongly protest this signing as making zero sense during Crawbury mania. His standard comment was "contract was about x too large", but no denouncement of the fit or absurd value, at all.
    Posted by hankwilliams


    Doesn't that .... stating that the contract, as YOU put it ... was MULTIPLES too high do exactly what you say it doesn't?  I.E., knock the absurd value. 

    You're like a dog chasing its tail. 

    He clearly said, like the day after the signing, that the length and cost of the contract was going to hamstring us going forward.  I didn't miss that.  You apparently did.

    He has stated it more than once.

    SMH ... you're embarrassing yourself again, Softy.  Pure and simple.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

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

    I thought we all agreed last December Crawford the contract was going to be a long-term noose. Many of us also agreed Elles is as good as gone... if you do not think so just think Papelbon, Vaughn, Clemens, Boggs. Do not let sentiment blind you from reality - Crawford spells the end of Elles.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

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

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now??? : Kim, don't think I could have said it better.  I was ectsatic!  Embarrassment of riches was exactly what I was thinking ...
    Posted by SinceYaz


    Thanks, Yaz. I still remember being so happy. Beyond happy really. It was so shocking and unexpected. Always the best surprise.

    Thanks as well to Never, I think we all lived through that experience. It was great. I still think it will turn out well, if everyone would just leave him alone.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

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

    Moon,

    In hindsight after his struggles last season, It's easy to put a bulls eye on the Crawford deal. I get that you felt that he was overpaid from the begining, but you also have to admit that his lackluster season has served to highten your angst and serves to strengthen your arguement. I'm not a fan of using terms like appologist. I can tell you that after hearing the Sox had signed him my immediate thought was wow. Henry's going for it! I then naturally went through the differing lineup options that a guy with 50 steal potentail offered us and frankly couldn't wait for the season to begin.

    What I can tell you now in hindsight, is that the terms of his contract are such that he has to produce to the expected norms in order for the Sox to reap the benefits they projected when they signed him. Any thing short of perennial AS performances makes the deal more and more an albatros. I doubt that Crawford or his agent are gonna renegotiate so all parties are left with trying to make the best of the next 6 years. My hope is that Crawford finds his way this year and returns to the player that we thought we'd signed...that's on him.

    As for the terms of his contract in the overall structure of the teams payroll and the casue and effect that it has on our ability to sign players and field a championship roster. I think your overvalueing, the impact of the extra 8M per being paid to Crawford, sure we could use those moneys better, but we don't have them...In the near term I'd suggest that Lackey and Matsusaka's injuries (Both of them combined represent about 26M in lost payroll and more important, 400 innings of lost manpower. Which is far more damaging to the roster constrution and payroll budgets for 2012, than is Crawfords deal. Thus if both were healthy and ready to go heading into the offseason, we'd have plenty of capital to address our needs and likely had both been healthy all year most of the consternation of this offseason had we fallen short of winning it all, would've been about why we didn't win it all...

    To put it in perspective the Sox even with Crawford's salary still have in excess of 150 Million at their disposal without exceeding the MLB's Competitive Tax threshold. To build thier roster, or more than the total payrolls of every team in the game with the exception of the Yankees and the 2011 Phillies. In my mind that's more than enough to continue to field a championship team. 

    Another way of looking at it is lets say that entering this offseason Crawford blew out his ACL and was lost for the year. while both Lackey and Matsusaka finished the season strong and were projected to be part of the 2012 rotaion. He'd be far easier to replace than 2/5th of your starting rotation...

    In the end, I doubt that Crawford can or will ever live up to the terms of his deal. Where we disagree is the casue and effect his signing and the terms of his deal impact our abilty to field a championship team. I don't see it as prohibitive it would be far different if we were a mid market club without the means but if we can't with 150M at our disposal surround him with a championship level team...Luccino and Cherington will have some "slannin' to do" 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

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

    Did the Crawford "apologists" know at the time of his signing that we would need #4 and #5 starters now because of injuries to Lackey and Dice-K? Did they know that Jenks and Wheeler would bomb and need to be replaced? Did some of the "apologists" figure that Drew could be replaced internally? Did they see Youk as to being more durable and healthy? One can't use today's information to mislabel the what the Crawford "apologists" were thinking last winter.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

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

    Mr Moon,

    I stand by thinking the CC deal was within normal limits of overpay for a FA.  If the Sox don't make two WS during CC's tenure I will consider the deal a mistake.  IMO his defence was the huge surprise, how could a guy considered the best at defensive player at any position for a couple years make so many poor plays in 2011?

    Yes, I was surprised by his lack of defense as well, but as much as some here don't want to believe me, this thread is not about his 2011 production. Back at the signing, I specifically remember many posters saying that we had so much money coming off the books that we would be able to keep all of our players we wanted and sign key FAs here and there as needed. I did the math back then and tried to show that our hands would be tied, and that we'd probably lose Ellsbury or Buch, and one of either Paps or Papi, as well as be restricted in who we could sign as FAs. It is those posters that I am calling out.

    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.
     
    If we have this discussion I think the alternatives should be remembered. You have been good before about bringing up the alternative you mentioned a few times. Ordonez.

    Yes, and I remember before the Werth signing saying he was a better fit, but that I'd go no higher than $13M x5 or 14M x 4. I was shocked at the eventual Werth number, and immediately knew Crwford would get more and spoke out against it (contrary to softy's lies).

    Ordonez got $10M/1. He was one of several players I mentioned as possible LF'ers. I mentioned Dunn at $25M/2, but grossly underestimated what he would get. I mentioned Berkman as well, possibly the best FA signing last winter. In hindsight, I'd still much rather have had Ordonez and his .634 OPS at $10M/1 than CC at $142M/7. We'd have had $10 more in 2011 and $20M more per year to spend from 2012 to 2017. 

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

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

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    Here's one Crawford apologist, and I'm not hiding. Did we overpay him? Of course, he's making more money than Manny did. I think Big Papi can be brought back for a lot less than his current salary, so there's your DH. It's time to say goodbye to Tek and Wake IMO. So that's another $4M gone. So assuming the Sox can bring David back for around $8M per, they're under last year's budget by $13M assuming Ells gets a $5M bump in arbitration. I think that's enough to address bottom of the rotation issues. And next year's CBT threshhold is most likely going to be higher than this year's. As far as signing Ells long term, we'll have to see how that plays out. It's not like the Red Sox have never signed a Boras client after all. I counted the arb raises and no Wake, no Vtek, No Papi, No all our FAs and options and came up with about $30M to spend this winter. We just used up $6 on Scutty. If we use up $8M on Papi, that leaves $16M to fill these slots: SP SP Closer/set-up RP RP RF C Let's say we fill RF and C with our kids or cheap role players. Tell me your plan for getting 4-5 quality pitchers for $16M.
    Posted by moonslav59


    Well lets never say they have a budget because i sure have never seen one. Add the savings on papplebon and its not as bad as you think. Remember lugos contract and a few others come off this year as well. So lets presume that the sox bests prospects are 2 to 3 years away as they seem to be indicating. I for 1 would not resign Big Pappi. Use the position the right way and you can go left right without the headache of him complaining. 2, they will not be able to resign Ellsbury because he wants to return to the West Coast where he is from. Lets trade him now for some help and he will bring value in return. I believe he is a superstar in the making. Sign Beltran and Siezmore to short term deals and use Reddick and Kalish as Subs so they do not have to play the field all the time. Remember we freed up the DH role by not signing Big Pappi. I would also move Youk while you can still get something for Him By adding the 2 vet outfielders you can then give Midlebrooks a chance to learn here rather than aaa. The kid shortstop is here by the end of the year to supplant Scoutaro. As for piching the 1 deal i would make is Edwin Jackson as he is at the age they sometimes come around. If he does you have yourself another quality starter. Give a kid the 5th job like Dubrant and see if he can handle it Thats 10 plus starts not 1 or 2. Do not resign Wakefield or Viritak. Lavarnway and Esposito are my catchers and use Salty as Tradebait. He will bring something in return. So heres what you have minus the bullpen which is allways a crap shoot

    lf Crawford
    2b Pedroia
    1b Gonzalez
    RF Beltran / Reddick
    DH open to that days needs
    C Lavarnway
    CF Siezmore / Kalish
    SS Scutaro
    3B Middlebrooks

    #1 Jon Lester
    #2 Clay Buckholtz
    #3 Beckett
    #4 Edwin Jackson
    #5 Rookie of there choice

    Closer Bard
    Set-up Achves

    The rest who knows
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

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

    The CPI was 172.2 when Manny was signed in 2000 and is 226.9 now. That is a gain of 32 percent. Manny's $20 mil. in 2000 would be worth $26.4 mil. in today's dollars. That is higher than Crawford's average salary of 20.2 over his contract before discounting the declining purchasing power of his salary down the road.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

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

    Moon,

    In hindsight after his struggles last season, It's easy to put a bulls eye on the Crawford deal. I get that you felt that he was overpaid from the begining, but you also have to admit that his lackluster season has served to highten your angst and serves to strengthen your arguement. I'm not a fan of using terms like appologist. I can tell you that after hearing the Sox had signed him my immediate thought was wow. Henry's going for it! I then naturally went through the differing lineup options that a guy with 50 steal potentail offered us and frankly couldn't wait for the season to begin.

    Bean, with all due respect, I was saying this same exact thing the day after the signing and up to opening day. I stated that even if Crawford met his career norm year for 7 years (highly unlikey in a 7 year deal), he was overpaid by $50M. I mentioned that even if he had 7 years at his 2010 numbers, he'd still be overpaid, but not by as much. Yes, the poor 2012 season makes it look like I am crying over spilt milk, but that really was not my intention. I do think Crawford will have a very good season next year. When he does, I will still feel the same as now.

    What I can tell you now in hindsight, is that the terms of his contract are such that he has to produce to the expected norms in order for the Sox to reap the benefits they projected when they signed him. Any thing short of perennial AS performances makes the deal more and more an albatros. I doubt that Crawford or his agent are gonna renegotiate so all parties are left with trying to make the best of the next 6 years. My hope is that Crawford finds his way this year and returns to the player that we thought we'd signed...that's on him.

    True enough, bean.

    As for the terms of his contract in the overall structure of the teams payroll and the casue and effect that it has on our ability to sign players and field a championship roster. I think your overvalueing, the impact of the extra 8M per being paid to Crawford, sure we could use those moneys better, but we don't have them...In the near term I'd suggest that Lackey and Matsusaka's injuries (Both of them combined represent about 26M in lost payroll and more important, 400 innings of lost manpower. Which is far more damaging to the roster constrution and payroll budgets for 2012, than is Crawfords deal. Thus if both were healthy and ready to go heading into the offseason, we'd have plenty of capital to address our needs and likely had both been healthy all year most of the consternation of this offseason had we fallen short of winning it all, would've been about why we didn't win it all...

    I understand that CC's deal alone is not the whole of "crippling contracts", but we have to expect injuries will occur and we were maxed out on the Luxury tax threshhold, leaving us but one small option: trading for a $1M starter with injury history (Bedard).

    To put it in perspective the Sox even with Crawford's salary still have in excess of 150 Million at their disposal without exceeding the MLB's Competitive Tax threshold. To build thier roster, or more than the total payrolls of every team in the game with the exception of the Yankees and the 2011 Phillies. In my mind that's more than enough to continue to field a championship team. 

    The problem is that even if we increase to $180M this year (perhaps the amount we might need to fill the 5-7 slots of need areas right now), CC is still 1/9th of the budget and will be for 6 more years. CC was never going to put up AGon numbers, but is being paid nearly the same.

    Another way of looking at it is lets say that entering this offseason Crawford blew out his ACL and was lost for the year. while both Lackey and Matsusaka finished the season strong and were projected to be part of the 2012 rotaion. He'd be far easier to replace than 2/5th of your starting rotation...

    An excellent point bean, and the injuries did magnify the budget issue, but I have recently come to the realization that I have been underestimating the amount of injuries we will have each year. Maybe it has been a 2 year fluke with this team, but I am thinking we need to start planning for injuries by having a deep bench (which I thought we had last year with Wake, Miller, Doubront...) AND some room under the cap to do better than Bedard midseason. We don't have that now, and likely won't for a long time. Hence the term "crippled". I took a lot of grief for using that word on day one, but I think it has become a reality. Yes, you are right, that reality has been heightened by long injuries to two key high-priced starting pitchers. Point well taken.

    In the end, I doubt that Crawford can or will ever live up to the terms of his deal. Where we disagree is the casue and effect his signing and the terms of his deal impact our abilty to field a championship team. I don't see it as prohibitive it would be far different if we were a mid market club without the means but if we can't with 150M at our disposal surround him with a championship level team...Luccino and Cherington will have some "slannin' to do" 

    We'll have to agree to disagree on the "prohibitive" nature of his deal. I realize just throwing money at the problems is not always a solution anyways. Who knows, if we had had $8M more last year (or $10M had we signed Magglio instead of CC), maybe we'd have traded for Jimenez not Bedard and been no better off with less farm prospects as well. Had we signed Berkman instead of CC, we'd have been in the playoffs this year (and watching STL- anything could have happened), and we'd have $122M to spend the next 6 years to fill the LF slot and help a lot towards others.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne'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".

    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? 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!

    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.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

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

    Moon, you do a real good job of speculating what if's...

    ...the thing you fail to grasp in all your scenarios, and maybe you did say this somewhere, but your posts are just too darn long to read and I prefer the condensed versions of your messages, but the Sox FO not once has stated that they would not spend money if the RIGHT deal presented itself.

    Yes, they've been wrong about some of their decisions but they're not afraid to spend for the players THEY feel are the right fits, as flawed as the Carmine analytics are.

    I was ecstatic when the Crawford deal went down (so call me an apologists if the shoe fits) and still am. I still see the days when Jacoby and Carl are wreaking havoc on opposing teams with extra base hits and stealing bases.

    You have made a lot of good correct points on this forum, but this time I think and HOPE you are wrong!!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hetchinspete. Show Hetchinspete's posts

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

    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now???:
    In Response to Re: Where are all the Crawford Signing Apologists Now??? : Come on moon, Crawford is a career .293 hitter. He doesn't draw many walks, but he might draw more if Pedey, Gonzo, (a declining) Big Papi and Youk were following him. Crawford is on the Red Sox for the next 6 years, like it or not. Why not maximize his talents? And if Ells and Crawford are both on base with the big boppers coming up, how many ulcers would that give CC Sabathia, Verlander and King Felix?
    Posted by carnie


    I was in favor with the Crawford signing a the time, but at less money and then checked his career stats. Very low career OBP of around .333 and walking 30-40 times a year. If Crawford were taught to be more selective in taking pitches his OBP would jump a few point and he'd be on base more often to be the player we thought he would be. With his talent if he could up his BB totals to 80-90 per year it would be a huge bonus to the Sox offense.  

    The first year hopefully will be an aberration and he'll return to career form, but my biggest question is as others have asked, after being in Tampa Bay so long can he handle the pressure cooker in Boston. 

    Hetchinspete 
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams'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 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 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.

    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). 

    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. 

    This is a post facto whiner thread from a true board mouse. 
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

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

    Bean, with all due respect, I was saying this same exact thing the day after the signing and up to opening day. I stated that even if Crawford met his career norm year for 7 years (highly unlikey in a 7 year deal), he was overpaid by $50M. I mentioned that even if he had 7 years at his 2010 numbers, he'd still be overpaid, but not by as much. Yes, the poor 2012 season makes it look like I am crying over spilt milk, but that really was not my intention. I do think Crawford will have a very good season next year. When he does, I will still feel the same as now.

    Moon,
    I get that your not "crying over spilt milk...I am however challenging your position that the Crawford contract is or will cripple the team.

    For the sake of this argument lets assume that they paid him 13M per (your assigned value for his services)...Then, if we use your math from above to determine the actual overpayment cost vs the budget. Which you've quoted as 50M. Then if we divide 50M by 7 year = 7.1M per season...7.1M divided by 170M = .04% or less than a half a percent on the total payroll...I don't see that as somehow handcuffing the team. Not if he plays to what was expected!

    that said, if he plays to his 2011 season...that changes the math
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk'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 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
    Posts: 20529
    First: 9/27/2005
    Last: 11/13/2011
    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.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share