Return of Crawford!!!

[BornToRun]

I love ellsbury at 3rd, but I would move Crawford to lead-off and keep petey 2nd before I would do the opposite....

Possible lineup:

 

Crawford

Petey

Ellsbury

Gonzo

Ortiz

WMB

Salty

Ross/Sweeney/nava

Aviles

 

There's not another lineup in MLB that can match that

 

That lineup is hardcore.

[jung]

Yea but manufacturing runs is moving the runners along either by purposefully hitting behind them or sacrificing and trading outs for runs.

 

Stealing is not so much a component of manufacturing runs as it is an offensive category all its own. Stealing allows a runner to get into scoring position without the help of his teammate hitting the ball behind him or sacrificing himself so that the runner can move up into scoring position.

 

The way the Sox play baseball, they need hits to score runs. I don't see much in what CC and Ells brings to the table that will allow the Sox to score runs without getting hits....in other words.....I don't see what they do that changes the dynamics of the Sox offense. No hits, no runs and as a result they will still IMO be very vulnerable in those low scoring pitchers duals where the opposing pitcher simply does not allow them to get enough hits in a row to result in a rally.

 

They can single and steal second but if the hitters behind them do not get a hit, they will simply be stranded at 2nd instead of being stranded at 1st again because the Sox don't sacrifice well and don't in most cases spray the ball to all fields and don't on purpose hit behind runners well. V for his part does not even like the sacrifice and is particularly disdainful of the sacrifice bunt.

 

They will steal more bases....no doubt.....they will score more runs....no doubt.....but I do not think they will significantly chance the profile of games the Sox tend to win and games the Sox tend to lose. They will still IMO struggle to win low scoring pitchers duals even in those rare instances where our starter matches the other team's starter in a pitching dual. That is my point. I don't think Ells and CC increase the spectrum of game types that the Sox are likely to win because the Sox way more than teams that can manufacture runs.

[SoxSport]

3 SBs tonite. That must have rocked Tito. Way to go, Carl.

 

Stealing a ton of bases at the top of the lineup will mean a lot if the the middle of the lineup hits. Increasing .5 runs per game will generate more wins. It's the same thing as lowering ERA by .5 runs per game.

 

Last year, 20% of the run differential vs their opponents was due to stolen bases by opponents. That was enough to move the team ERA 4 or 5 teams higher.

[jung]

Even tonight SoxSport how often did the steal simply mean that the runner was stranded one base closer to home? The point is that again since the Sox don't sacrifice well and don't hit behind runners well, they actually need more base hits to score than teams that do sacrifice and hit behind the runners. This is why it is my view that CC and Ells will help the Sox win more of the games that are played the way the Sox like to play baseball but they will not help the Sox win more of the close, tight pitching duals because the one dynamic that Ells and CC do not change is the need the Sox have for generating base hits to score. If the opposing pitcher does not allow the Sox to get enough hits bunched together, they don't score and CC and Ells are not going to change that to any significant degree. However CC and Ells will help the Sox win more of the games that are played the way the Sox like to play...ala slugfests.

[redsoxbeatz]

I guess the idea is that since CC & Ells can more easily get into scoring position once they get on-base, b/c they can steal, it will take less sacrifices or none/less XBH to get them home.

 

If Ortiz is on first or 2nd he may not score on a long single by Ross. However, CC & Ells have a greater chance to score from a sac/deep single by Pedroia than Gonzo would or Salty or Shoppach would.

 

I certainly think their speed will help the Red Sox increase their run production. We should track how often the Red Sox score after CC or Ells steal a base or get on base.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Even tonight SoxSport how often did the steal simply mean that the runner was stranded one base closer to home? The point is that again since the Sox don't sacrifice well and don't hit behind runners well' date=' they actually need more base hits to score than teams that do sacrifice and hit behind the runners. This is why it is my view that CC and Ells will help the Sox win more of the games that are played the way the Sox like to play baseball but they will not help the Sox win more of the close, tight pitching duals because the one dynamic that Ells and CC do not change is the need the Sox have for generating base hits to score. If the opposing pitcher does not allow the Sox to get enough hits bunched together, they don't score and CC and Ells are not going to change that to any significant degree. However CC and Ells will help the Sox win more of the games that are played the way the Sox like to play...ala slugfests.[/quote']

 

Crawford and Ellsbury stole a combined 4 times.

 

They scored a combined 3 runs. Crawford stole everytime he was on base, scoring 2 runs. Ellsbury scored the 1st time he reached base, after he swiped 2nd.

 

So for last night's sake, the SB helped generate 3 runs in 4 steals.

[SoxFanForsyth]

I guess the idea is that since CC & Ells can more easily get into scoring position once they get on-base, b/c they can steal, it will take less sacrifices or none/less XBH to get them home.

 

If Ortiz is on first or 2nd he may not score on a long single by Ross. However, CC & Ells have a greater chance to score from a sac/deep single by Pedroia than Gonzo would or Salty or Shoppach would.

 

I certainly think their speed will help the Red Sox increase their run production. We should track how often the Red Sox score after CC or Ells steal a base or get on base.

 

Exactly.

 

When you're in a pitchers duel, and you get Crawford or Ells on 1st, that's turned into a double, potentially even a triple. They can swipe 2nd, or hell, Ellsbury tagged up from 1st on a deep fly ball last night. And it doesn't take a ringing single to get them on 1st. Crawford had 2 infield hits last night. Stole 2nd on 1, stole 3rd on the other after being moved on a ground ball. I mean honestly, there's very little difference between an infield hit and a SB vs a Double.

 

They have the ability to completely change the game with their legs. If anything, we're going to see the significance even more in low scoring games, not slug fests.

[SoxSport]

Even tonight SoxSport how often did the steal simply mean that the runner was stranded one base closer to home? The point is that again since the Sox don't sacrifice well and don't hit behind runners well' date=' they actually need more base hits to score than teams that do sacrifice and hit behind the runners. This is why it is my view that CC and Ells will help the Sox win more of the games that are played the way the Sox like to play baseball but they will not help the Sox win more of the close, tight pitching duals because the one dynamic that Ells and CC do not change is the need the Sox have for generating base hits to score. If the opposing pitcher does not allow the Sox to get enough hits bunched together, they don't score and CC and Ells are not going to change that to any significant degree. However CC and Ells will help the Sox win more of the games that are played the way the Sox like to play...ala slugfests.[/quote']

 

Runs scored on stolen bases is bound to increase if CC and Ells steal a ton of bases. Actually, a stolen base moves the runner into scoring position, eliminating the need for a sacrifice--which generates an out. The chances of scoring a run are much greater if Ells or CC are in scoring position when the next batters come up. Stealing bases IS smallball.

[SoxSport]

I guess the idea is that since CC & Ells can more easily get into scoring position once they get on-base, b/c they can steal, it will take less sacrifices or none/less XBH to get them home.

 

If Ortiz is on first or 2nd he may not score on a long single by Ross. However, CC & Ells have a greater chance to score from a sac/deep single by Pedroia than Gonzo would or Salty or Shoppach would.

 

I certainly think their speed will help the Red Sox increase their run production. We should track how often the Red Sox score after CC or Ells steal a base or get on base.

 

Exactly. just saw your post after I replied to Jung.

[redsoxbeatz]

Did I read somewhere Crawford prefers 2nd spot to leadoff? Or... maybe I'm confused. If not, the above line up (CC, Laser Show, Ells...) looks f***in sick. I hope Ortiz is out no longer than a week but I get the feeling he'll be out thru July back August 1st.

 

3 SBs tonite. That must have rocked Tito. Way to go, Carl.

 

Stealing a ton of bases at the top of the lineup will mean a lot if the the middle of the lineup hits. Increasing .5 runs per game will generate more wins. It's the same thing as lowering ERA by .5 runs per game.

 

Last year, 20% of the run differential vs their opponents was due to stolen bases by opponents. That was enough to move the team ERA 4 or 5 teams higher.

 

Yeah for stolens!

[jung]

Well like I said there is no question in my mind that Ells and CC's speed on the bases will generate more runs but I just don't think their speed as it relates specifically to stolen bases will yield more wins in close, tight baseball games. Tracking the runs should be fun but without question the Sox will score more runs and without question they will score some of them off steals. I just don't think that will translate to more wins in close tight ballgames because:

a) the Sox don't do much other than actual base hits to get runners home and by definition, base hits are harder to come by in those kinds of games

the other part of the equation (our own pitching) generally breaks down in those kinds of games and our defense tends to give the other team to many extra outs.

 

Even in close tight games where are pitching does pretty well, ultimately, the other team's pitcher seems to get the better of our guy more times than not. plus the extra outs our defense gives up really seems to come home to roast in those kinds of games.

 

If you notice the teams that really depend on those skills to win close tight ballgames tend to have the whole package in that regard...they have some speed, they do sacrifice well enough and they do hit behind runners, they play sound defense and have good pitching. They also tend to live in some of the larger ball parks around the league which tends to optimize those features of their team.

 

In my view anyway, we just don't do enough of those things to change the dynamics overarching a typical pitchers dual....that being that the pitchers don't allow you to string together hits.

 

I actually think that the one feature that Ells brings to the table that will help the Sox truly win a close, low scoring pitchers dual is his ability to roam around CF. He does not have a great arm but he is without question head and shoulders better at ranging around CF than any other OF we have at present.

[SCM33]

Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal

Sources say #RedSox gauging interest in Crawford. GM Cherington says, "There's nothing going on." Full column here:

 

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/boston-red-sox-carl-crawford-trade-deadline-miami-marlins-jose-reyes-hanley-ramirez-los-angeles-dodgers-071812

[SemperFi Sox]

give me hanley

[SoxFanForsyth]

Great. That's exactly what I want. Let's finally see Crawford get right and then go blast his head with trade rumors. Awesome.

[SemperFi Sox]

Great. That's exactly what I want. Let's finally see Crawford get right and then go blast his head with trade rumors. Awesome.

 

Since you're the resident Crawford apologist, I'm sure you'll have that excuse ready when/if he shits the bed. Boo Hoo, if he can't handle trade rumors he shouldn't have signed into this market.

[kapsis21]

This speculative article just doesn't make any sense. This is poor reporting and is just inciting. Rosenthal must be a Yankee's fan. Typical Fox shenanigans. Rosenthal doesn't say why the Red Sox would want to trade Crawford, and the rest of the analysis just is inconsistent with the facts. The Red Sox don't need a third baseman, nor do they need a shortstop. Give up Jose Iglesias? You have got to be kidding. He is just the most touted prospect in the Red Sox farm system in recent years. Aviles is doing really well, as is Middlebrooks at third. The Red Sox need another bat at the top of the order, and Crawford will fill that better than anyone; he will return to the caliber player we all know he is. The Red Sox also need Crawford's speed, which fits Valentine's style really well. Come on, I am not a baseball analyst, but I can see Rosenthal is way off base here. What are his credentials?

thats all i have to say

the fact that if we get Hanley or Jose we still have to pay them some money so how do we save money to get Ells back???

[jung]

Well I would be willing to bet that CC may not like it but if so he should not have agreed to come to the caldron that is Boston Baseball. Interesting that he is specific about not wanting anything to do with the Yanks. Did he somehow think Boston was going to e a cake walk.

 

If it is true it is sort of the organization admitting that bringing CC here was the misfit blunder of blunders. I have basically gone on the assumption that CC's contract can't be moved but then again I guess I should not discount the possibility that there are teams that have contracts on their books as bad as CC's and for whom CC might be a better fit. Take anything you hear going into the deadline with a big grain of salt though.

[VA Sox Fan]

I was really surprised when I read this on NESN.com yesterday evening:

 

Carl Crawford Rips Terry Francona's Managing Choices, Says He Felt Pressure to Perform Immediately

 

by Jen Slothower on Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:16PM

 

Red Sox fans may have thought they were seeing a carefree Carl Crawford this week.

 

The long-sidelined outfielder came back to the big leagues with aplomb, going 4-for-7 with three stolen bases and giving the Boston offense an aggressive look in his first two games back.

 

But as Crawford tells it, Monday and Tuesday weren't a time to settle in and have fun -- they were the deciding factor in whether this season would be as big of a bust as last year was.

 

Crawford told WEEI.com on Tuesday night that he's still smarting over the way then-Red Sox manager Terry Francona treated him last year, when Crawford was bumped into the No. 7 spot in the batting order after two poor games.

 

"I need to do something, and I need to do something quick," he said of his approach coming into Monday and Tuesday's game, according to WEEI.com. "And I need to make an impact on this game quick, and I don't need to wait until tomorrow. That was my playoff game -- the first game."

 

Crawford was 0-for-7 in his first two games last year, when the Red Sox scuffled to an 0-6 start, and he never got comfortable in the Boston lineup. Pilloried by fans as his batting average (.255) dropped, injuries cropped up and the team missed the playoffs, Crawford had as bad of a year as he could expect after signing a seven-year, $142 million free agent contract in the offseason.

 

As Crawford sees it, it all began with what happened after those first games. He said he was "cheated out of" a "getting-used-to-type period."

 

"Every game you really have to try and show something," he told WEEI.com. "But I'm always going to remember those two days. ... I didn't feel like I had the manager's confidence. I don't know about the organization, but I don't try and look past the manager, so I feel like I didn't have the manager's confidence, therefore I started to think something was wrong with me, and it just snowballed after that.

 

"It had a trickle-down effect, and it just got worse and worse as the days went by."

 

Francona ended up leaving as part of the Red Sox' remodeling after last season's late collapse, but Crawford's rehabilitation would take longer. First, he had to deal with offseason injuries. Then, when the Red Sox picked Bobby Valentine as their new manager, questions arose over whether Valentine would be able to nurture the recovering star after Valentine had openly criticized Crawford while an analyst with ESPN.

 

But Crawford, who has always sounded optimistic about turning his situation around, said he and Valentine worked to get on the same page.

 

"We talked right before spring, and that kind of eased things a little bit," Crawford told WEEI.com.

 

Crawford said both men had judged each other without knowing the situation completely, and they "both realized we weren't that bad."

 

"I know a lot of people might have problems with him, but for me, I just haven't had those problems," Crawford said. "It's fine with me. I don't know what's going to happen in the future, but as of right now, me and Bobby get along just fine."

 

Crawford also said he was grateful for how Valentine has handled his injury rehabilitation, including getting the training staff to keep up with his progress.

 

That all paid off Monday and Tuesday nights, as Crawford provided the very jolt the Red Sox were expecting when they first lured the speedy outfielder away from Tampa Bay.

 

What a difference one year -- or a manager? -- can make.

[VA Sox Fan]

Bumping this b/c wondered if anyone else read this^

[Youk Of The Nation]

Interesting story. It still doesn't make me dislike Valentine any less, however.

[VA Sox Fan]

Interesting story. It still doesn't make me dislike Valentine any less' date=' however. [/quote']

 

Oh, me either. May explain his poor 2011 though.

[Youk Of The Nation]

Yeah. While I agree with the decision to let Francona go, I am even less enamored of his replacement. It's like replacing a viewing of the TNG episode "Shades of Grey" with a viewing of the Voyager episode "Threshold".

 

I know that's a somewhat clumsy and overly specific analogy, but for the sake of my millions of fellow romantically-maligned Trekkie brethren, I like to up the number of Star Trek references I make when I'm getting lucky. It makes us look good.

[VA Sox Fan]

Yeah. While I agree with the decision to let Francona go, I am even less enamored of his replacement. It's like replacing a viewing of the TNG episode "Shades of Grey" with a viewing of the Voyager episode "Threshold".

 

I know that's a somewhat clumsy and overly specific analogy, but for the sake of my millions of fellow romantically-maligned Trekkie brethren, I like to up the number of Star Trek references I make when I'm getting lucky. It makes us look good.

 

Nerd alert! I can't talk, I'm a Star Wars nerd.

[jung]

I actually just wish Crawford would play more and talk less. In truth I can say that for just about every Red Sox player. Just stop please....just stop. As for Crawford whining about how Tito handled him....that just sounds like a bunch of whiny ******** to me. That said, it has become the expected norm for players generally and Red Sox specifically.

 

Have you ever heard a guy make so much out of where the manager put him in the lineup. As I recall the Sox were in the midst of their first crash and burn session of the season in the 2011 time frame that CC is talking about and Tito was trying to find some way to get them to WIN A SINGLE f***ING GAME.

 

But of course as you might expect, team wins are wayyyy at the bottom of the list of things these guys care about. Never mind the manager is trying to find a way to get this $180M juggernaut to win one stinking lousy game. Baseball is all about me...me...me...me....me. To be honest I am starting to wonder if I am cheering for laundry at this point. I like Nava, Ross, WMB, Ceriaco, Ells, Morales, Felix, Buch and Shop still like Pedey since I just think the whole Youk/V mess just put him in a bad spot. You can have the rest of them.

[redsoxbeatz]

Interesting story. Still hoping for a new manager.

[wyo-sox]

I thought that was very interesting.