Crawford put on Waivers

[SoxFanForsyth]

When Crawford comes up to the plate, do you feel any more confident in him than Reddick, Drew, or Kalish? At this point, he just feels like a #7. This year, Carl Crawford has produced .5 WAR. To put that in perspective, Darnell Mcdonald has produced .4 WAR.

 

Buchholz is out. The team is beaten up, and hasn't gotten any kind of help from its farm system this year, outside of some production from Reddick. Philadelphia is an unstoppable force. I just don't think that holding onto a player with such a high potential to be a bust is better than giving the team an opportunity to win in the future. And its not like it will hurt their public image with the fans, because he's had such a rough year that he hasn't taken with the fans yet.

 

That being said, no one will claim him.

 

Nobody is arguing that Crawford has had a bad year this year. His stats are awful. But then again, any reasonable fan doesn't care what he did in April and May, so long as he starts to produce in September and October. He said yesterday that he's worked with Magadan on getting his front foot down sooner and being more selective at the plate, and I think we're starting to see the fruition of those efforts.

 

You can't just dump a player on a big contract because he's in an adjustment period. Thank God some of the people on this thread aren't the GM or else we would never win a world series. I'm not saying that against you in particular, Pal, you're one of the posters here that I've always enjoyed having a discussion with. But it can't be denied that releasing Carl in year 1 of a 7 year deal would be purely reactionary, which is not what Theo is about.

 

Talent doesn't dry up at 29 years old. It just doesn't. To me, bailing on Crawford after 105 games into his 7 year contract is the equivalent of bailing on the Red Sox after their 2-10 start. Just like the Red Sox were entirely too talented for that to keep up, Crawford is entirely too talented to keep performing at this level. It would be an enormous mistake to trade Crawford. To be honest, I'm blown away that people are actually suggesting it. It makes no sense to me.

 

Also, Kalish is back on the DL, which sucks because I would have liked to have seen what he could do out in RF during September.

[a700hitter]

When Crawford comes up to the plate, do you feel any more confident in him than Reddick, Drew, or Kalish? At this point, he just feels like a #7. This year, Carl Crawford has produced .5 WAR. To put that in perspective, Darnell Mcdonald has produced .4 WAR.

.

Yes and without any reservation unless Crawford goes to the plate weraing a blindfold. Comparing an established All Star in the prime of his career to a kid with an uneven minor league performance record is just absurd. Drew has a damaged shoulder that has hindered his performance all season long and Kalish probably needs surgery for his shoulder which has never healed properly.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Yes and without any reservation unless Crawford goes to the plate weraing a blindfold. Comparing an established All Star in the prime of his career to a kid with an uneven minor league performance record is just absurd. Drew has a damaged shoulder that has hindered his performance all season long and Kalish probably needs surgery for his shoulder which has never healed properly.

 

To be fair, there have been times when Crawford was going really bad (i.e. the 7 or 10 games before the KCR series last week) when he would get up there and I would just be shaking my head, wondering what he's thinking. But then again, I did that with Adrian toward the end of the TBR series in Fenway, and even into the next series when he was hitless in like 25 AB. Players go through slumps like that. But regardless, on any given night, if it was a tied game or we were down in the 9th inning, and I had Kalish, Reddick, Drew, and Crawford on the bench to PH for a pitcher, I take Crawford every single day, and it's not even close.

[a700hitter]

To be fair' date=' there have been times when Crawford was going really bad (i.e. the 7 or 10 games before the KCR series last week) when he would get up there and I would just be shaking my head, wondering what he's thinking. But then again, I did that with Adrian toward the end of the TBR series in Fenway, and even into the next series when he was hitless in like 25 AB. Players go through slumps like that. But regardless, on any given night, if it was a tied game or we were down in the 9th inning, and I had Kalish, Reddick, Drew, and Crawford on the bench to PH for a pitcher, I take Crawford every single day, and it's not even close.[/quote']Yes, and every opposing pitcher in the league (lefties included) would hope that you would pick one of the other guys.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Yes' date=' and every opposing pitcher in the league (lefties included) would hope that you would pick one of the other guys.[/quote']

 

Well I mean he can just do it so many different ways. He can nub one to the 3rd baseman and beat the throw. He can swipe 2nd base and put himself in scoring position. Or he can smoke a triple down the RF line, or crush a HR.

 

I've been calling it, and I'll keep on calling it. Crawford is going to have an insane October and all the reasonable fans will give him an "adjustment period" pass on the regular season this season.

[Palodios]

You can't just dump a player on a big contract because he's in an adjustment period. Thank God some of the people on this thread aren't the GM or else we would never win a world series. I'm not saying that against you in particular, Pal, you're one of the posters here that I've always enjoyed having a discussion with. But it can't be denied that releasing Carl in year 1 of a 7 year deal would be purely reactionary, which is not what Theo is about.

 

I appreciate the compliment, its definitely mutual. I'm not saying I'm done with Crawford, by any means, whatsoever. I will still continue to have faith in him and root for him, but as far as the money goes, I think most of us have established he's not worth it, whether he's an excellent player or not. 20 million per year contracts should be reserved for five tool sluggers and top of the rotation starters. If they had more room under the luxury cap, it'd be a different story, but 20 million could go very far in this organization.

[SoxFanForsyth]

I appreciate the compliment' date=' its definitely mutual. I'm not saying I'm done with Crawford, by any means, whatsoever. I will still continue to have faith in him and root for him, but as far as the money goes, I think we've all established he's not worth it. 20 million per year contracts should be reserved for five tool sluggers and top of the rotation starters. If they had more room under the luxury cap, it'd be a different story, but 20 million could go very far in this organization.[/quote']

 

Well sure. Did we overpay for Crawford? Absolutely. His WAR is going to be severely diminished by the dimensions of LF at Fenway, since it's so heavily dependent on UZR. But I think the Sox FO is trending toward more complete players, rather than 40+ HR players. Guys like Ellsbury, who can steal you 50+ bases in any given season, and even in a down season will get you 40 SB, but can play elite defense, hit for pop, save some runs, etc. I think that if you look at Runs Saved and Runs Added by guys like Crawford and Ellsbury, they would be viewed as being more valuable than a 40 HR guy who isn't very mobile.

 

Crawford had been playing to the value of $27mm over the past 2 seasons, so nobody could really expect this severe of a dropoff in his first season. I would be much more surprised if he had another down season next season than I would if he came out and hit .300/.360/.480 with 20 HR, 40 SB, 110 runs, and 90 RBI. I think that's the player the Sox were signing at the time, and to be honest, I think he's still that player, just in a down season.

 

And to be honest, I know this probably isn't a popular opinion, but if we're going to be up against the luxury tax next season, then cut ties with Ortiz. Like I said, by no means would it be a popular decision, but go find yourself a DH that can give other players a rest. Someone who can play all 3 OF positions, or someone who can play the corner IF spots. Someone who can sub in for a starting position player, and you keep the batting order the same, DH the position player and let the DH play the field.

[Palodios]

And to be honest' date=' I know this probably isn't a popular opinion, but if we're going to be up against the luxury tax next season, then cut ties with Ortiz. Like I said, by no means would it be a popular decision, but go find yourself a DH that can give other players a rest. Someone who can play all 3 OF positions, or someone who can play the corner IF spots. Someone who can sub in for a starting position player, and you keep the batting order the same, DH the position player and let the DH play the field.[/quote']

 

Unfortunately, there is no way that we'd be able to find a player to replace Ortiz's production, especially at that price. Generally, all the players who can play at more than one position generally tend to have weak bats, and don't excel at any defensive position. The Red Sox could look for a strong 3rd outfielder, and push Reddick to the 4th OF role, but that would completely block the OF through 2013 for both Reddick and Kalish, unless the Sox trade Ellsbury, which I've found is a very unpopular decision. And players who can hit well at 3B pretty much don't exist on the open market.... unless the Red Sox go for Aramis, or try pushing Pujols to third, but both of those options will cost 15-30 million a year.

[a700hitter]

Well I mean he can just do it so many different ways. He can nub one to the 3rd baseman and beat the throw. He can swipe 2nd base and put himself in scoring position. Or he can smoke a triple down the RF line, or crush a HR.

 

I've been calling it, and I'll keep on calling it. Crawford is going to have an insane October and all the reasonable fans will give him an "adjustment period" pass on the regular season this season.

Whether or not he has a hot September and October, his presence in the lineup makes the lineup more dangerous, because of the many ways he can beat you. He puts pressure on defenses. He causes pitchers to pitch differently to him and the guys behind him. Schilling always says that the difference between winning and losing depends on how you execute 4 or 5 pitches during the game. Crawford puts pressure on defenses and in the highly pressurized atmosphere of the post season, teams that make mistakes go home.

[BornToRun]

Well sure. Did we overpay for Crawford? Absolutely. His WAR is going to be severely diminished by the dimensions of LF at Fenway, since it's so heavily dependent on UZR. But I think the Sox FO is trending toward more complete players, rather than 40+ HR players. Guys like Ellsbury, who can steal you 50+ bases in any given season, and even in a down season will get you 40 SB, but can play elite defense, hit for pop, save some runs, etc. I think that if you look at Runs Saved and Runs Added by guys like Crawford and Ellsbury, they would be viewed as being more valuable than a 40 HR guy who isn't very mobile.

 

Crawford had been playing to the value of $27mm over the past 2 seasons, so nobody could really expect this severe of a dropoff in his first season. I would be much more surprised if he had another down season next season than I would if he came out and hit .300/.360/.480 with 20 HR, 40 SB, 110 runs, and 90 RBI. I think that's the player the Sox were signing at the time, and to be honest, I think he's still that player, just in a down season.

 

And to be honest, I know this probably isn't a popular opinion, but if we're going to be up against the luxury tax next season, then cut ties with Ortiz. Like I said, by no means would it be a popular decision, but go find yourself a DH that can give other players a rest. Someone who can play all 3 OF positions, or someone who can play the corner IF spots. Someone who can sub in for a starting position player, and you keep the batting order the same, DH the position player and let the DH play the field.

 

In all honesty, as far as Ortiz goes, I wouldn't be against letting him walk. I'd make him an offer of course but I would be completely in favor of letting him go and inserting Lavarnway as the DH and see how it goes, if there's one thing this lineup could use, it's a right handed bat with some power. We could use the saved cash to help the club elsewhere, like resigning Pap for instance. I also think that bringing David back on a 2 year deal would be good but I don't think Lavarnway has anything more to prove in the minors with his bat. I would say have him be a bench player and get some more ML time in but I doubt we carry 3 catchers. Does he have the skills to learn another position, possibly an outfield spot? The most appealing thing to happen would be Tek hanging up the spikes and becoming a coach and allowing Lavarnway to share time with Salty. I think Salty is the starting catcher of the future, he's gonna be Varitek II in my opinion and I can see Lavarnway fitting into the DH role once we've moved on from Papi.

[a700hitter]

In all honesty, as far as Ortiz goes, I wouldn't be against letting him walk. I'd make him an offer of course but I would be completely in favor of letting him go and inserting Lavarnway as the DH and see how it goes, if there's one thing this lineup could use, it's a right handed bat with some power. We could use the saved cash to help the club elsewhere, like resigning Pap for instance. I also think that bringing David back on a 2 year deal would be good but I don't think Lavarnway has anything more to prove in the minors with his bat.

Stuff like this just leaves me shaking my head. You are talking about replacing the biggest offensive force on the Red Sox for the last 9 seasons with an unproven kid from AAA. Ortiz's value has been underscored by the offensive slumps the team has experienced when he has been out of the lineup-- first in interleague play and most recently due to his heel injury. I might understand letting him walk if the plan was to replace his bat with Prince Fielder, or to move Youk to DH and trade for David Wright, but not to replace one of the most potent bats in baseball for the last decade with a guy from AAA. It's a little goofy. Lavarnway doesn't even have a major league HR.

[Spitball]

This was in today's paper.

 

Asked if Bell would still be with the club after the deadline, Padres manager Bud Black said he would be "extremely shocked" if his closer wasn't.

"Albert Pujols was put on waivers. Justin Verlander was put on waivers. I'm sure they got claimed, too, right?" Black said. "I don't know, but every general manager I've known tells me that every player has put been put on waivers."

[SoxFanForsyth]

Stuff like this just leaves me shaking my head. You are talking about replacing the biggest offensive force on the Red Sox for the last 9 seasons with an unproven kid from AAA. Ortiz's value has been underscored by the offensive slumps the team has experienced when he has been out of the lineup-- first in interleague play and most recently due to his heel injury. I might understand letting him walk if the plan was to replace his bat with Prince Fielder' date=' or to move Youk to DH and trade for David Wright, but not to replace one of the most potent bats in baseball for the last decade with a guy from AAA. It's a little goofy. Lavarnway doesn't even have a major league HR.[/quote']

 

Wright makes $14mm in 2012 and $15mm in 2013, plus you'd have to give up some good talent for him, so it wouldn't be any different than Ortiz really.

 

By no means am I advocating letting Ortiz walk. I think we should offer him 2/20, at most 2/22. All I was saying was that if we're up against the luxury tax, and we have to make a decision whether to trade Crawford or not resign Ortiz, I say let Ortiz walk. That's the only point of the argument.

[a700hitter]

Wright makes $14mm in 2012 and $15mm in 2013, plus you'd have to give up some good talent for him, so it wouldn't be any different than Ortiz really.

 

By no means am I advocating letting Ortiz walk. I think we should offer him 2/20, at most 2/22. All I was saying was that if we're up against the luxury tax, and we have to make a decision whether to trade Crawford or not resign Ortiz, I say let Ortiz walk. That's the only point of the argument.

I get that point, but not the replacement with Lavarnway. There would have to be a better option than that.

[BornToRun]

Stuff like this just leaves me shaking my head. You are talking about replacing the biggest offensive force on the Red Sox for the last 9 seasons with an unproven kid from AAA. Ortiz's value has been underscored by the offensive slumps the team has experienced when he has been out of the lineup-- first in interleague play and most recently due to his heel injury. I might understand letting him walk if the plan was to replace his bat with Prince Fielder' date=' or to move Youk to DH and trade for David Wright, but not to replace one of the most potent bats in baseball for the last decade with a guy from AAA. It's a little goofy. Lavarnway doesn't even have a major league HR.[/quote']

 

Just a suggestion, spitballing my friend.

[samisco]

Crawford deserves other opportunity!! i mean i know they won't sell him now, he's a great player and this is not his year!!!

[DwightFright]

Can the Sox afford both Crawford and Ellsbery? Els has turned out to be Crawford 2.0.

[TheMeanWalrus]

Crawford . . . geeeezus

I spent the last 7-8 years watching this guy sodomize the Red Sox. 4-6 with a double triple 4 rbis and 2 sb's. He murdered Boston. I coveted this signing. I coveted this guy like i covet Scarlett Johannson from Lost in Translation. And he lays this egg? The question that begs to be asked, and was asked by some before the seasons first pitch is: Can Crawford handle the big stage? The answer appears to be no. Some people have trouble under the bright lights. He's gonna be here for a while, so he'll have plenty of opportunities to prove his worth, but to say his signing has been a disaster thus far is an egregious understatement.

 

Ellsbury on the other hand has given Francona the fexibility he needs in the line-up to hide Crawfords futility. Locking down and solidifying the lead off spot has been the key to this teams ability to score. If Ellsbury wasnt having the year hes having then the entire line-up would be in turmoil while they searched for someone to hit first

[mvp 78]

Can the Sox afford both Crawford and Ellsbery? Els has turned out to be Crawford 2.0.

 

Hell yes they can.

[SoxSport]

It wasn't a great sign because of the emergence of Ellsbury. He just made Crawford much less useful

on this team. Crawford needs to be at the top of the order for him to utilize his speed effectively.

With Ells leading off and Pedey 2nd, there's no place at the top of the lineup for him. So they can't get their money's worth on him.

[ORS]

But, what does Tito want? Inquiring minds want to know.

[redsoxrules]

It wasn't a great sign because of the emergence of Ellsbury. He just made Crawford much less useful

on this team. Crawford needs to be at the top of the order for him to utilize his speed effectively.

With Ells leading off and Pedey 2nd, there's no place at the top of the lineup for him. So they can't get their money's worth on him.

 

HOLY s*** not again .

 

 

Batting him at the top of the order would NOT make his numbers better

 

I repeat , would NOT make his numbers better.

[SoxFanForsyth]

HOLY s*** not again .

 

 

Batting him at the top of the order would NOT make his numbers better

 

I repeat , would NOT make his numbers better.

 

Just as you cannot say that it would definitively make his numbers better, you also cannot say that it definitively would NOT make his numbers better.

 

A lot of hitters become comfortable in certain positions in the lineup. By no means am I saying that it absolutely will make his numbers better, but at the same time you can't say that hitting him where he has been his whole career would NOT make his numbers better as an absolute certainty.

[redsoxrules]

Just as you cannot say that it would definitively make his numbers better, you also cannot say that it definitively would NOT make his numbers better.

 

A lot of hitters become comfortable in certain positions in the lineup. By no means am I saying that it absolutely will make his numbers better, but at the same time you can't say that hitting him where he has been his whole career would NOT make his numbers better as an absolute certainty.

 

He's a professional athlete . He should be able to produce no matter where he bats in the lineup . If not , he should give his contract back

[Palodios]

He's a professional athlete . He should be able to produce no matter where he bats in the lineup . If not ' date=' he should give his contract back[/quote']

 

Do you post here for any reason besides complaining about Crawford and defending Drew? Seriously, just because Soxsport is trolling doesn't mean you should too.

[redsoxrules]

Do you post here for any reason besides complaining about Crawford and defending Drew? Seriously' date=' just because Soxsport is trolling doesn't mean you should too.[/quote']

 

If you dont like my posts then dont read them and dont reply to them rather than being an idiot about it

[SoxSport]

Do you post here for any reason besides complaining about Crawford and defending Drew? Seriously' date=' just because Soxsport is trolling doesn't mean you should too.[/quote']

 

So I guess everybody is "trolling' except you?

 

Cmon. you're a better poster than that.

 

I was posting in Red Sox newsgroups when you were in diapers.

 

P.S. I doubt Madden would have ever considered batting Crawford 6th. He didn't have the luxury to misplace him in the batting order.

[jopete19]

I didn't know where to post this...

 

But did anyone see this on the MLB website today?

 

 

[ATTACH]792[/ATTACH]

 

 

 

I found this funny

[SoxFanForsyth]

He's a professional athlete . He should be able to produce no matter where he bats in the lineup . If not ' date=' he should give his contract back[/quote']

 

There ya go. That's the attitude. Nice and stubborn. Don't worry about trying to get the most out of your players, just keep telling them that they are professional athletes and if they don't live up to their contract, you have to give back your money. :blink:

[ORS]

There ya go. That's the attitude. Nice and stubborn. Don't worry about trying to get the most out of your players' date=' just keep telling them that they are professional athletes and if they don't live up to their contract, you have to give back your money. :blink:[/quote']

There ya go. That's the attitude. Nice and coddling. Don't worry about upsetting a logical lineup construction based on player performance, just hand them their binky, and get your team psychologist to figure out what it takes for them to find their happy place. :dunno: