Sox go into break...

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

I don't understand how/why people are complacent with the line up. I know it's performing well' date=' [b']but if we have the potential to make it perform better, why wouldn't you? [/b]

 

Look, it may not work out well, but we go into a 13 game stretch where we are playing the Orioles, the Mariners, the Royals, and the White Sox. Thats 4 series that we should win. Why not take advantage of the streak of weaker competition and see if our line up would be better suited with Crawford in the 2 slot?

 

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. No need to f*** up what we have going on.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Yes , because HE CANT GET ON BASE . Not sure why its so hard to understand that

 

OMFG , it dosent matter in what order in the lineup he is if he cant get on base .

 

you cant steal first base .

 

Dude, look at his career stats. Clearly the first 3 months of the 2011 season is an aberration. If you think that Crawford is a .280 OBP guy, you're delusional. For 3 of the past 4 years, he had an OBP of .355+, and the only time he didn't have an OBP of .355+, he was hurt and his numbers were down across the board.

 

I don't know how you can look at almost 2,000 PA where he's got an OBP of .358 and think that he's a .280 OBP guy, and that he can't get on base. Yeah, he struggled this year. Is Pedroia a .280 hitter? Is Beckett a 2.25 ERA pitcher? The numbers will normalize. Beckett will be around a 2.80-2.95 ERA pitcher at the end of the year. Pedroia will be at around .300-.305 at the end of the year. And Crawford, even though his OBP is .280 right now, it will probably be around .325 - .335 by the end of the year. And you know what that means? That means he's on his typical .355-.360 OBP season from July 18th to the end of the season. As of today, who gives a s*** what he did from April 1 to today. All we want to see is the real Carl Crawford from July 18th going forward. His numbers may not end up looking like they did the past couple of years, and that's because of a sour first half. But that's in the past, and has no bearings on the future. He should play to the back of his baseball card and be fine from here on out.

[SoxFanForsyth]

If it ain't broke' date=' don't fix it. No need to f*** up what we have going on.[/quote']

 

I understand this, but you show me a man who is satisfied, and I'll show you a failure. If you've got a perennial all star who can cause all kinds of havoc in the top of the order, it's not fair to the team to not at least see what he can do up there once he gets rolling. If it makes the team better, then why not do it?

 

Crawford went down on June 17th. Since then, the team has gone 13-8 (.619 baseball). By the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" logic, we should leave him out because we're playing better baseball without him than we do with him (.619 vs .609)

 

Buchholz went down on June 16th. Since then, we've gone 14-8 (.636 baseball). By the same logic, we should leave him out because we're winning at a better rate than we were when he was playing (.636 vs .603).

 

That logic makes no sense at all.

[AtWork]

Crawford can cause the same kind of havoc at the bottom of the order as he has previously caused at the top of the order. That's not a very convincing arugment. Studies have shown time and time again the the most valuable hitters to put at the top of the order are the ones who get on base the most. Stolen bases are fun, but in reality they don't have nearly as much of an impact on scoring runs as getting on base does.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Crawford can cause the same kind of havoc at the bottom of the order as he has previously caused at the top of the order. That's not a very convincing arugment. Studies have shown time and time again the the most valuable hitters to put at the top of the order are the ones who get on base the most. Stolen bases are fun' date=' but in reality they don't have nearly as much of an impact on scoring runs as getting on base does.[/quote']

 

First off, by this logic, our line up should go:

 

Adrian Gonzalez

Kevin Youkilis

Dustin Pedroia

David Ortiz

Jacoby Ellsbury

Jason Varitek

JD Drew

Marco Scutaro

Carl Crawford

 

I'm pretty sure that's a horrible line up.

 

Second off, think about what you're saying. Lets say the remainder of the season, Crawford gets 300 more PA. The entire time I've been arguing this, it was all predicated on Crawford turning back into the .360 OBP guy he has been the past 2 seasons (not the final stats, the stats from 7/18 - end of season). So, looking at this, you've got Ellsbury at .377, Crawford at a required .360, and Pedroia at .395. You're acting like putting Crawford in the top 3 would be about 1 extra out per game. But you're wrong. Compared to Ellsbury, Crawford will be getting on 1.7% fewer times. Over 300 PA, that's 5 fewer times he'll reach base than Ellsbury. 6 fewer times over 72 games. Compared to Pedroia, he'll reach 3.5% fewer times. That's 11 fewer times over 72 games.

 

The difference in OBP is a ridiculous argument when it's separated by 2-3% over the course of 300-350 AB.

 

You put Ellsbury and Crawford in front of Pedroia, a high OBP guy who smokes balls off the monster, and you've got 2 guys who can score on the wall ball double from 1st base, can steal and get into scoring position. They're hitting in front of a guy in Pedroia that sees 4.3 pitches per plate appearance, which gives them opportunities to run and get into scoring position. They get the extra pitches to run on, and they're out of the DP ball when Gonzo comes up. He's already hit into an MLB leading 20 DP this year.

 

It's ridiculous to say that a difference of 5-10 outs over 72 games is worth taking out a guy who scored 110 runs last year, can run out of a DP, rarely hits into a DP, can score from 1st on a wall ball double at Fenway, and can get into scoring position on command.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

I understand this, but you show me a man who is satisfied, and I'll show you a failure. If you've got a perennial all star who can cause all kinds of havoc in the top of the order, it's not fair to the team to not at least see what he can do up there once he gets rolling. If it makes the team better, then why not do it?

 

Crawford went down on June 17th. Since then, the team has gone 13-8 (.619 baseball). By the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" logic, we should leave him out because we're playing better baseball without him than we do with him (.619 vs .609)

 

Buchholz went down on June 16th. Since then, we've gone 14-8 (.636 baseball). By the same logic, we should leave him out because we're winning at a better rate than we were when he was playing (.636 vs .603).

 

That logic makes no sense at all.

 

It does make sense. Your logic is flawed because you're saying that we've went 14-8 without Crawford and should keep him out. I never said that. I just don't want to move him up because there is no need too. Our offense is hot already don't mess up the flow. Crawford did get a chance to bat in the top of the lineup and everybody begged Francona to move him down. When the offense starts to slip then we can move him until then keep the same lineup. For the record, I wouldn't mind Crawford batting at the top of the order.

[AtWork]

First off, by this logic, our line up should go:

 

Adrian Gonzalez

Kevin Youkilis

Dustin Pedroia

David Ortiz

Jacoby Ellsbury

Jason Varitek

JD Drew

Marco Scutaro

Carl Crawford

 

I'm pretty sure that's a horrible line up.

 

Second off, think about what you're saying. Lets say the remainder of the season, Crawford gets 300 more PA. The entire time I've been arguing this, it was all predicated on Crawford turning back into the .360 OBP guy he has been the past 2 seasons (not the final stats, the stats from 7/18 - end of season). So, looking at this, you've got Ellsbury at .377, Crawford at a required .360, and Pedroia at .395. You're acting like putting Crawford in the top 3 would be about 1 extra out per game. But you're wrong. Compared to Ellsbury, Crawford will be getting on 1.7% fewer times. Over 300 PA, that's 5 fewer times he'll reach base than Ellsbury. 6 fewer times over 72 games. Compared to Pedroia, he'll reach 3.5% fewer times. That's 11 fewer times over 72 games.

 

The difference in OBP is a ridiculous argument when it's separated by 2-3% over the course of 300-350 AB.

 

You put Ellsbury and Crawford in front of Pedroia, a high OBP guy who smokes balls off the monster, and you've got 2 guys who can score on the wall ball double from 1st base, can steal and get into scoring position. They're hitting in front of a guy in Pedroia that sees 4.3 pitches per plate appearance, which gives them opportunities to run and get into scoring position. They get the extra pitches to run on, and they're out of the DP ball when Gonzo comes up. He's already hit into an MLB leading 20 DP this year.

 

It's ridiculous to say that a difference of 5-10 outs over 72 games is worth taking out a guy who scored 110 runs last year, can run out of a DP, rarely hits into a DP, can score from 1st on a wall ball double at Fenway, and can get into scoring position on command.

 

That's not what I said at all. Even if Crawford matches his career high OBP, a hitter like Pedroia with a .390+ OBP and 20 SB would be more productive at the top of the order than Crawford. And it's not just a matter of OBP, Pedroia also sees more pitches, hits more consistently against righties and lefties and breaks up two lefties in the order.

[SoxFanForsyth]

It does make sense. Your logic is flawed because you're saying that we've went 14-8 without Crawford and should keep him out. I never said that. I just don't want to move him up because there is no need too. Our offense is hot already don't mess up the flow. Crawford did get a chance to bat in the top of the lineup and everybody begged Francona to move him down. When the offense starts to slip then we can move him until then keep the same lineup. For the record' date=' I wouldn't mind Crawford batting at the top of the order.[/quote']

 

Well you can't have your cake and eat it too. Either you stick by the theory that if it aint broke, don't fix it, or you don't. The Sox have played better without Crawford than they did with Crawford. We both agree that it's ridiculous to even contemplate not playing Crawford, so I'm trying to show you that just because it's not broken doesn't mean it can't be improved upon.

[SoxFanForsyth]

That's not what I said at all. Even if Crawford matches his career high OBP' date=' a hitter like Pedroia with a .390+ OBP and 20 SB would be more productive at the top of the order than Crawford. And it's not just a matter of OBP, Pedroia also sees more pitches, hits more consistently against righties and lefties and breaks up two lefties in the order.[/quote']

 

I'm not saying Crawford should replace Pedroia. I'm saying put Ells and Craw as 1-2 with Pedey dropping to 3rd. The way he is playing right now, he's a perfect 3 hole hitter for this line up.

 

The team we have is a lot different than most other teams. We have 4 hitters that would hit in the top 3 of any other team. So you extend the line up, put your run scorers bunched at the top, your RBI machines in the middle, and then your lower level hitters at the end. Most teams only have 1-2 run scorers, 2-3 RBI machines. This team has 3 run scorers and 3 RBI machines.

[ORS]

It's ridiculous to say that a difference of 5-10 outs over 72 games is worth taking out a guy who scored 110 runs last year' date=' can run out of a DP, rarely hits into a DP, can score from 1st on a wall ball double at Fenway, and can get into scoring position on command.[/quote']

Where are you getting this "taking out a guy...."? The discussion isn't about removing him from the lineup. It's about where he belongs in the lineup.

 

We get it, you don't think it a big deal to move better hitters down in the order to accomodate his speed. We disagree. Why all this talking arond in circles? No matter how many situational positives you can come up with it doesn't change the crux of the argument - his speed vs. having Gonzo/Youk/Ortiz at 3/4/5. That's it. That's the discussion. More blather is very unlikely to change minds. Move on.

[ORS]

I'm not saying Crawford should replace Pedroia. I'm saying put Ells and Craw as 1-2 with Pedey dropping to 3rd. The way he is playing right now, he's a perfect 3 hole hitter for this line up.

 

The team we have is a lot different than most other teams. We have 4 hitters that would hit in the top 3 of any other team. So you extend the line up, put your run scorers bunched at the top, your RBI machines in the middle, and then your lower level hitters at the end. Most teams only have 1-2 run scorers, 2-3 RBI machines. This team has 3 run scorers and 3 RBI machines.

The 1-6 will be unchanged if Crawford is hitting 2 or 6. You aren't extending anything. It's the same 6 hitters in a different sequence.

[ORS]

Well you can't have your cake and eat it too. Either you stick by the theory that if it aint broke' date=' don't fix it, or you don't. The Sox have played better without Crawford than they did with Crawford. We both agree that it's ridiculous to even contemplate not playing Crawford, so I'm trying to show you that just because it's not broken doesn't mean it can't be improved upon.[/quote']

But you haven't shown a reasonable expectation for improvment. You haven't. You've squawked about all these things he can do, but it's only anecdotal musings about a subjective ideal that most don't agree with. Give us something more than "scoring on a wall ball double", as in, how often do you expect that to happen (ie use incidence rates and convergence), etc.

[RedSox_Ruszkowski]

Crawford hasn't earned a spot higher than 6. period. we get a lot out of our 1-5 batters, why change it? if crawford does start heating up, it'll just be better for the backend of our lineup. i wish Crawford would come back during the Rays series. I'm going to the games all weekend and would have liked to see him go better than he did last time. ( 1 for 12 i think?)

[Palodios]

I'm not saying Crawford should replace Pedroia. I'm saying put Ells and Craw as 1-2 with Pedey dropping to 3rd. The way he is playing right now, he's a perfect 3 hole hitter for this line up.

 

The team we have is a lot different than most other teams. We have 4 hitters that would hit in the top 3 of any other team. So you extend the line up, put your run scorers bunched at the top, your RBI machines in the middle, and then your lower level hitters at the end. Most teams only have 1-2 run scorers, 2-3 RBI machines. This team has 3 run scorers and 3 RBI machines.

 

This is what makes the whole situation so compelling-- the fact that you have a bottom of the order that could act like a top of the order somewhere else. The "second leadoff" concept is a joke if Crawford is followed by garbage, but what if the Sox did manage to get Beltran, or built the rest of the offense? 1-5, is good, but having a legit 1-4 after it would dominate.

[AtWork]

I'm not saying Crawford should replace Pedroia. I'm saying put Ells and Craw as 1-2 with Pedey dropping to 3rd. The way he is playing right now, he's a perfect 3 hole hitter for this line up.

 

The team we have is a lot different than most other teams. We have 4 hitters that would hit in the top 3 of any other team. So you extend the line up, put your run scorers bunched at the top, your RBI machines in the middle, and then your lower level hitters at the end. Most teams only have 1-2 run scorers, 2-3 RBI machines. This team has 3 run scorers and 3 RBI machines.

 

It sounds like nothing anyone says is going to change your mind so I won't bother. But personally in the bottom of the 9th when our lineup turns over I would rather have 2 .370 OBP hitters and the major league leader in RBI coming up to bat. And regardless of whether we hit Crawford 3rd or 6th, it's going to extend the lineup. Plus, Crawford's career .263/.309/.375 line against lefties would make the middle of our order vulnerable to opposing managers if Crawford was hitting there.

[SoxSport]

Crawford doesn't get much chance to use his speed batting 6th. And he doesn't have that much power.

You take away his stolen bases, and his agent would have had a hard time getting him the contract he got.

Tito started the season batting CC 2nd. He eventually will bat 2nd again when he shows a consistent bat.

[ORS]

The Mentalist strikes again. What's Francona thinking right now?

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

Lmao.

[Dojji]

NWIH will Tito EVER bat Crawford second.

 

Seriously, I'm not joking here, Scutaro bats second over Crawford.

 

Reason is simplr -- TIto goes L-R-L-R when he can get away with it.

 

Since Pedroia has currently given you ABSOLUTELY NO reason to play him anywhere other than second in the lineup this whole thread of conversation is a bad joke, but even if Pedey goes down, a righthanded hitter or a switch hitter (Lowrie?) will be your #2.

[SCM33]

Crawford doesn't get much chance to use his speed batting 6th. And he doesn't have that much power.

Its a TERRIBLE contract. We are NEVER going to get dollar value for him, stop trying to come up with ways that we will. He is simply not that good and what I mean by that....is he is not that type of player. Its not a knock on him as he is on pace for a hall of fame career, hes just not a 20 million dollar a year player, not many of them are.

 

You take away his stolen bases' date=' and his agent would have had a hard time getting him the contract he got. [/quote']

Crawford hasnt gotten on base because he has sucked through the first 3 months. Its not because he is hitting 6th. If he were getting on base hitting sixth, hed have stolen bases. He is NOT getting on base.

 

Tito started the season batting CC 2nd. He eventually will bat 2nd again when he shows a consistent bat.

No he wont. Ellsbury, Pedroia, Gonzalez, Youkilis and Papi are hitting 1-5, so how does Crawford fit?

 

Look, its a terrible contract. Its a square peg in a round hole, he doesn't fit with this team so we will just have to accept the fact that he is making 20M a year to hit 6th. Hes a GREAT player and has elite talent, its just not a good match.

[redsoxbeatz]

We should talk more about why CC is a good addition and not why he doesn't work with the Sox. That's such sad talk in the first half year of his 8 years with us, you know?

[SCM33]

We should talk more about why CC is a good addition and not why he doesn't work with the Sox. That's such sad talk in the first half year of his 8 years with us' date=' you know?[/quote']

 

Truth hurts sometimes.

[iortiz]

CC talk again? I thought we have moved on.

 

Imagine the discussion with Beltran in the lineup. Hehehe.

 

ORS: Be prepared with all your Stats cause this could turn nasty. hehehe

[Palodios]

Its a TERRIBLE contract. We are NEVER going to get dollar value for him' date=' stop trying to come up with ways that we will. He is simply not that good and what I mean by that....is he is not that type of player. Its not a knock on him as he is on pace for a hall of fame career, hes just not a 20 million dollar a year player, not many of them are.[/quote']

 

I've made this comparison before, but I think the Crawford deal is going to end up feeling a lot like the JD Drew deal. We look at his raw stats, where he is hitting in the lineup, and the contract, and it will leave us scratching our heads. But when we dig deeper into it, look at advanced defensive stats, and put into account what he is doing to help the team, it'll make a lot more sense from the front office's perspective.

[redsoxrules]

Crawford doesn't get much chance to use his speed batting 6th. And he doesn't have that much power.

You take away his stolen bases, and his agent would have had a hard time getting him the contract he got. Tito started the season batting CC 2nd. He eventually will bat 2nd again when he shows a consistent bat.

 

 

 

He got the contract he got because the Sox dropped the bomb and overpaid for him .

 

this is going to end up worse than the JD Drew contract

[redsoxrules]

I cant beleive their paying Crawford Agon type money when he dosent even come close to Agon's production

[a700hitter]

I cant beleive their paying Crawford Agon type money when he dosent even come close to Agon's production

He's making less than Agon, and they are very different types of players. It's very difficult to have a basis for comparison.

[SoxFanForsyth]

I cant beleive their paying Crawford Agon type money when he dosent even come close to Agon's production

 

You sound like a typical Yankee fan who only believes in HR and RBI, which is odd because you're constantly pitching a tent for JD Drew.

 

Carl Crawford WAR in 2009 and 2010: 13.3

Adrian Gonzalez WAR in 09 and 10: 10.0

 

It was not a bad investment when it was originally made. Is he overpaid? Sure, but from 2009-2010, the 2 years prior to the investment, he was a top 6 WAR player in the MLB.

[SoxFanForsyth]

He got the contract he got because the Sox dropped the bomb and overpaid for him .

 

this is going to end up worse than the JD Drew contract

 

Wake me up when a 7 year contract is judged by 3 months of the first season. What if he puts up a 20 HR/95 RBI/50 SB/110 Run, .305/.360/.490/.850 season next year and wins a Gold Glove. Would that really surprise you? Because the year before he was signed, he put up a .307/.356/.495, 19 HR, 90 RBI, 110 Runs, 47 SB line, all while playing gold glove defense. That's better than JD Drew has ever dreamed of.

[redsoxrules]

Wake me up when a 7 year contract is judged by 3 months of the first season. What if he puts up a 20 HR/95 RBI/50 SB/110 Run' date=' .305/.360/.490/.850 season next year and wins a Gold Glove[/b']. Would that really surprise you? Because the year before he was signed, he put up a .307/.356/.495, 19 HR, 90 RBI, 110 Runs, 47 SB line, all while playing gold glove defense. That's better than JD Drew has ever dreamed of.

 

well, they bassicaly gave him the huge contract after his monster season last year .

 

If Crawford dosent put up the numbers you just quoted above for the next 7 years the contract will be a complete bust .

 

Time will tell but I just dont see Crawford putting up those numbers . After all , he's only done it once in his career