The Red Sox Thread

[Mr Coffee]

You're probably right but it wouldn't shock me.

They're more likely to sign him to a contract which extends five years past his usefulness.

[NerfBall55]

You're probably right but it wouldn't shock me.

It wouldn't shock you if the Yankees let one of their best hitters who is home grown walk in his prime over money? That would shock the heck of of me.

[snapple]

Especially because they have no one to replace Cano in the mL

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

It wouldn't shock you if the Yankees let one of their best hitters who is home grown walk in his prime over money? That would shock the heck of of me.

I think Cano is the guy they are most likely to bring back

[Jersey Yankee]

lackey and crawford were not no brainers. They seemed more like red flags than anything. Lackey was just getting a worse, and the years and money for crawford were scary before he had a down year.

Crawford was the top FA outfielder the winter before last? If 7 yrs x $20M/yr was excessive, then what do you think should've been his price?

Also, what were the red flags for each of Lackey and Crawford?

[TierReservedCreature]

That was quick.....Bard is back in the bullpen.

https://twitter.com/#!/JonHeymanCBS/...72905779773441

Edit: Or should I say just for now.....but why do I feel this is the first step to putting him back in the bullpen? He holds the game tomorrow or Tuesday and then they can't take him out of the bullpen.

Sounds like Bard is about to be Joba'd.

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

Crawford was the top FA outfielder the winter before last? If 7 yrs x $20M/yr was excessive, then what do you think should've been his price?

Also, what were the red flags for each of Lackey and Crawford?

Just b/c he was the best FA OF, doesn't mean he deserved a contract with a $20+ million AAV. His career doesn't approach the guys who have been getting that kind of money. Of course, even though he was an overpay, I would have expected him to be much more productive than he was last year.

Lackey did have red flags -- his peripherals were declining for a few years before the Sox signed him.

[Casey at the Bat]

With as much crap as we give the FO of the team we root for, it's funny how many bad moves this club has made recently that were obviously questionable without Monday morning QB-ing. Lackey and Crawford. Chasing Tito out of town, and then unbelievably giving Valentine the gig. Letting Papelbon walk without any attempt to retain him. I'd also put Beckett's extension in that bucket.

Fun to look at the ERA+ of the staff over there sitting at 68.

Beckett - 88
Lester - 77
Buchholz - 50
Bard - 97
Aceves - 20
Padilla - 47
Morales - 73
Thomas - 61
Melancon - 10

And they just traded one of the 4 pitchers with better than league average results so far (Bowden) for Marlon Byrd. SSS and all, but damn.

I don't think Lackey and Crawford were no-brainers, as you suggest. Both were pretty good when the Sox signed them. Both have sucked royally since they got here. I don't think the sox could have or should have been able to expect that to happen. As for the amount of money the sox paid them.... Crawford was never worth that money, even when he was good. i can't explain why the sox paid him that much money. I think Lackey was a good signing at the time. He's just sucked since he got here.

[NerfBall55]

Crawford was the top FA outfielder the winter before last? If 7 yrs x $20M/yr was excessive, then what do you think should've been his price?

Also, what were the red flags for each of Lackey and Crawford?

Without even looking it up, I'm pretty sure Lackey's peripherals were declining for three years (maybe) and his IP wasn't what it was, if I remember correctly.

For Crawford, he had a decent 2010, but his prior numbers were not the kind of player you give 20M AAV to. Also, a lot of his value is built on speed, and that doesn't always bode well over an 8 year deal. I believe I heard the Sox admit they over paid for him, but did so in order to get him. - like NY did with Sabbathia. Cashman's bluff with Crawford may have gotten him a few more $$.


EDIT: YFiB posted as I was, and that's basically what I was trying to say.

[b-ball-lunachick]

nice article on Francona in the booth.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/20...gUP/story.html

[Mr Coffee]

The Al East:

Two 9-6 team, two 9-7 teams, and the Red Sox.

[Jersey Yankee]

Just b/c he was the best FA OF, doesn't mean he deserved a contract with a $20+ million AAV. His career doesn't approach the guys who have been getting that kind of money. Of course, even though he was an overpay, I would have expected him to be much more productive than he was last year.

Lackey did have red flags -- his peripherals were declining for a few years before the Sox signed him.

If not $20M+ times 8 yrs, then how much do you think Boston should've offered per year and number of years to sign Carl Crawford? Do you happen to know what the other offers on the table were?

Thx.

[b0mber]

Boston was definitely doing the rain dance earlier in the clubhouse, I was so ready to watch cc pitch a gem against that scrub bard. They really lucked out next time we play them isn't until june, when they should have a few of their guys back in.

[Bronson'sCornrows]

I don't think Lackey and Crawford were no-brainers, as you suggest. Both were pretty good when the Sox signed them. Both have sucked royally since they got here. I don't think the sox could have or should have been able to expect that to happen. As for the amount of money the sox paid them.... Crawford was never worth that money, even when he was good. i can't explain why the sox paid him that much money. I think Lackey was a good signing at the time. He's just sucked since he got here.

I considered Lackey an overpay at the time he was signed, too, but not necessarily a bad signing if that makes any sense. Even with the way his peripheral stats were trending, there was no way to know he'd be nothing more than a injured mass of suck. FWIW, his first year here wasn't bad at all and his peripherals that year indicated that he was the recipient of a lot of bad luck. Too bad he has been ................ since then.

[Casey at the Bat]

I considered Lackey an overpay at the time he was signed, too, but not necessarily a bad signing if that makes any sense. Even with the way his peripheral stats were trending, there was no way to know he'd be nothing more than a injured mass of suck. FWIW, his first year here wasn't bad at all and his peripherals that year indicated that he was the recipient of a lot of bad luck. Too bad he has been ................ since then.

I thought they paid too much for Lackey too, at the time. Then I saw how much they paid Crawford, and thought the sox probably still owed Lackey a few bucks here and there...

[False1]

I don't think Lackey and Crawford were no-brainers, as you suggest. Both were pretty good when the Sox signed them. Both have sucked royally since they got here. I don't think the sox could have or should have been able to expect that to happen. As for the amount of money the sox paid them.... Crawford was never worth that money, even when he was good. i can't explain why the sox paid him that much money. I think Lackey was a good signing at the time. He's just sucked since he got here.

A few folks have beat me to it, but I'll add...

First, to clarify... I'm talking mainly in the sense of overpay (particularly for Crawford).

No way I would have expected a 66 ERA+ season or all the noise surrounding Lackey, but that was a massive overpay. He had declining peripherals, if I remember correctly he had some concerns with his arm in '08 and '09, and he was facing atrocious offenses predominately. Take '09 for example, his contract year. His primary competition was Texas (95 OPS+), Seattle (92 OPS+) and Oakland (91 OPS+).

Crawford was and I'm sure still is a fine player, but just not worth the deal he got coming off a contract year. Highly babip-dependant guy close to flipping to the wrong side of 30 that would have his defensive value somewhat limited by Fenway's dimensions. Again, wouldn't have guessed he'd have fallen off a cliff but even if he had matched and sustained his career 107 OPS+ prior to last season, or his ~110 wRC+... is that worth the type of deal he got?

[Jersey Yankee]

A few folks have beat me to it, but I'll add...

First, to clarify... I'm talking mainly in the sense of overpay (particularly for Crawford).

No way I would have expected a 66 ERA+ season or all the noise surrounding Lackey, but that was a massive overpay. He had declining peripherals, if I remember correctly he had some concerns with his arm in '08 and '09, and he was facing atrocious offenses predominately. Take '09 for example, his contract year. His primary competition was Texas (95 OPS+), Seattle (92 OPS+) and Oakland (91 OPS+).

Crawford was and I'm sure still is a fine player, but just not worth the deal he got coming off a contract year. Highly babip-dependant guy close to flipping to the wrong side of 30 that would have his defensive value somewhat limited by Fenway's dimensions. Again, wouldn't have guessed he'd have fallen off a cliff but even if he had matched and sustained his career 107 OPS+ prior to last season, or his ~110 wRC+... is that worth the type of deal he got?

When Crawford was signed (ignoring his current situation), how much did you think that he was worth per year? For how many years?

[Mr Coffee]

Boston was definitely doing the rain dance earlier in the clubhouse, I was so ready to watch cc pitch a gem against that scrub bard. They really lucked out next time we play them isn't until june, when they should have a few of their guys back in.

July actually, but your point remains.

[False1]

When Crawford was signed (ignoring his current situation), how much did you think that he was worth per year? For how many years?

I'll put a number out here, but it's going to underwhelm. I'd say I wouldn't have wanted him even at 5/$100MM versus the 7/$142MM he got.

The Sox got KILLED on this deal thanks to the crazy contract the Nats gave to Jayson Werth.

[Jersey Yankee]

I'll put a number out here, but it's going to underwhelm. I'd say I wouldn't have wanted him even at 5/$100MM versus the 7/$142MM he got.

The Sox got KILLED on this deal thanks to the crazy contract the Nats gave to Jayson Werth.

I get the feeling that when you're about the biggest name on the market, you're not going to accept a 5-year deal. Look even at pitchers. Zito got around 8 yrs x $18M, which is ridiculous, especially considering how poorly he did in his first few years.

I think that the need to overpay is pretty much expected, and they can't fault George for having done this in the past. It's either one GM overpays both in annual salary and number of years, or another GM will do this instead. If not, then people start wondering about collusion, I figure.

How much more was Crawford valued than Werth? Minus bonus payments, Crawford got $136M+ and Werth got $122M.

Seems more like a matter of bad luck, such as Dice-K's having needed TJ, I think it was. I just get the feeling that Boston can't deal with such an expensive player being out for much longer. Not many teams could have such an expensive contract go bac.

[False1]

I get the feeling that when you're about the biggest name on the market, you're not going to accept a 5-year deal. Look even at pitchers. Zito got around 8 yrs x $18M, which is ridiculous, especially considering how poorly he did in his first few years.

I think that the need to overpay is pretty much expected, and they can't fault George for having done this in the past. It's either one GM overpays both in annual salary and number of years, or another GM will do this instead. If not, then people start wondering about collusion, I figure.

How much more was Crawford valued than Werth? Minus bonus payments, Crawford got $136M+ and Werth got $122M.

Seems more like a matter of bad luck, such as Dice-K's having needed TJ, I think it was. I just get the feeling that Boston can't deal with such an expensive player being out for much longer. Not many teams could have such an expensive contract go bac.

I get what you're saying, but it's not as if the Sox were forced into signing him. They wanted him, but they abandoned their principles to get him and really tied up some payroll that could have been used (particularly this year) to fill other needs more efficiently. He might have been the biggest name on the market, but he wasn't and isn't worthy of the second largest contract ever given to an OFer in MLB history. He's not worth it in his prime, and he certainly won't be worth it as he fades (assuming he hasn't started already).

[hellonewman]

By the way, did anyone read Lupica's column in the Daily News today? He went after Theo today in order to defend Valentine. (you almost would think he was on the Sox PR payroll)

A Yankee fan who still reads Loopicrap. Sad.

[ojo]

I get the feeling that when you're about the biggest name on the market, you're not going to accept a 5-year deal. Look even at pitchers. Zito got around 8 yrs x $18M, which is ridiculous, especially considering how poorly he did in his first few years.

I think that the need to overpay is pretty much expected, and they can't fault George for having done this in the past. It's either one GM overpays both in annual salary and number of years, or another GM will do this instead. If not, then people start wondering about collusion, I figure.

How much more was Crawford valued than Werth? Minus bonus payments, Crawford got $136M+ and Werth got $122M.

Seems more like a matter of bad luck, such as Dice-K's having needed TJ, I think it was. I just get the feeling that Boston can't deal with such an expensive player being out for much longer. Not many teams could have such an expensive contract go bac.

i wouldn't have given Crawford more than 6 for somewhere between 84-90.

[Black Sabbathia]

I think 6/100 would be the absolute reasonable max for Crawford, and personally I wouldn't have offered him more than 5 years. A hard and fast rule is don't spend big for speed with guys pushing 30. Crawford was a very good all around player in Tampa, but if he loses speed he loses a lot of what makes him valuable.

To be fair, I thought he'd be a great addition for Boston, albeit grossly overpaid.

Him and Werth both got insanely overpaid by virtue of it being a thin FA crop. This is why I laugh when ownership complains about player contracts, when they consistently go out and spend big on whatever the shiniest toy is, regardless of it's actual value. If they were FAs this year when Pujols, Prince, Reyes etc. were out there do you think they would have gotten anything close to those deals? Reyes, a SS coming off an MVP type season, granted with some injury concerns, got 6/100. Crawford, not playing a premium position but far more durable historically, should have been worth about the same, or perhaps less.

RE: Melancon, I thought it was a solid pickup, but I looked at him as a 6th or 7th inning guy, maybe 4th or 5th on the bullpen depth chart, not a guy who should be setting up or closing for a team like Boston. He was coming off just his first full season in the majors. He blew 5 saves vs. 20 converted. 80% is not a great percentage for a closer, and from having him on a few fantasy teams I know he had a couple ugly meltdowns. His peripherals don't blow you away. A guy who should have been looked at as bullpen depth, not someone playing a prominent role.

Also, I can't believe they're already panicking and putting Bard back in the pen. Mwahahaha.

[35Knucklecurve]

nice article on Francona in the booth.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/20...gUP/story.html

Nice find, Jeanne. As much as I know he misses managing, I'm glad he's in the booth because he's insightful, funny and is just himself. He makes a great team with Hirshiser and Schulman. Somewhere down the line, I wouldn't mind seeing him wear pinstripes when he's ready to manage again.