Re: Who are the 9% that think Crawford earned his salary in 2011
posted at 12/26/2011 1:07 PM EST
But consider this: 1) LAA signs Crawford for $122 million and 5 or 6 years (I don't remember the term). They get the LF compliment to Torii Hunter .... 2) Sox save a boat load of cash. To get whom? Albert Pujols? 1bman ...but we have one. I know Albert is better, but not enough to invest the big bucks again at first. (Begs the question, do we then trade Adrian and eat his contract anyway??) Prince Fielder? 1bman...but we have one. Mets/Marlins SS Reyes? Always injured ... like our Nomah. So not a great investment. Matt Holliday(speaking in the time frame he and Reyes were available, of course)? More big money Or go after big pitchers ...Lee? He wouldn't have come here. Which other pitching FAs would you risk big bucks on??? Or would the $20 million a season be better parsed out to several lesser pitchers/players? White Sox just signed Danks for about $15 mill a seasoon....DANKS! Time to realize that maybe Carl was the best option at the time. Maybe for a dollar or two less, but still. Not to mention that NOT spending this season leaves money in the bank for our man Ellsbury NEXT season.
Not signing Crawford would have allowed us to keep Ellsbury at any cost (if that's what we wanted to do), and do other things.
There were other options to Crawford last winter. Some bombed as bad or worse than CC, but at a much lower cost. Dunn and ordonez bombed, but Berkman was perhaps the best FA signing of the winter with no long-term commitment as well.
I doubt we could have gotten Cliff Lee at any cost, but with CC's money we could have kept Papelebon and still had millions left over to sign a pitcher or two this winter and for years to come.
I have nothing against Crawford and think he will improve in 2012 to close to his 2010 numbers, but as I said at the time of the signing, even if he gave us 7 years of 2010 numbers, he'd still be overpaid by $50M. I still believe that is true, and that is not meant to be insulting to CC in anyway.
Crawford had a career .781 OPS before signing and just came off an .851 OPS season in 2010 (career high). How many .851 OPS guys get $20+M x 7? None.
How many players on good teams are no platooned if they have .684 OPS vs LHPs?
How many players that should be platooned get $20+M x 7?
How many platoon-type players with weak arms get $20+M x 7?
All this is not meant to bash CC or wish him no success, so I can gloat over being "right". I wasn't right. I was very wrong on what I projected CC to do in 2011. I expected him to be aroung .851 for 2011, 2012, and maybe 2013, then slowly decline to about .770 by the last year of the deal. Those numbers would be very helpful to this team, and I still expect him to come close to those numbers from here on out. That still doesn't mean we couldn't have done better with $142M/7.