Contract Details: Carl Crawford

From ESPN:

Crawford, who won his first Gold Glove award this year, receives a $6 million signing bonus, with $1 million payable within 30 days of approval and the rest in $1 million installments on the first day of five consecutive months starting in May.

He gets salaries of $14 million next season, $19.5 million in 2012, $20 million in 2013, $20.25 million in 2014, $20.5 million in 2015, $20.75 million in 2016 and $21 million in 2017.

He also receives a limited no-trade provision. Boston designates 28 teams he can be traded to without his consent and Crawford can eliminate two of them.

27 comments… add one

  • what are the implications of giving him a signing bonus versus simply giving him a $20m salary in ’11?

    dc December 11, 2010, 2:21 pm
  • Maybe the signing bonus doesn’t count against luxury tax?
    On the no-trade, any idea if he has chosen the two teams or, more likely, I’m assuming that would occur if down the road the Sox want to trade him.

    BillsBurgSF December 11, 2010, 2:30 pm
  • only 2 clubs…doesn’t sound like much no- trade protection, unless there’s 2 places that just don’t appeal to him far more than any other…
    doesn’t look like the 2 teams have been determined yet, at least not according to cots…anybody think this clause makes sense?: it says “boston may block a deal to one club [ny yankees]”…um, wouldn’t boston be the one making the deal…so they would block themselves?…huh?
    speaking of interesting contract details, this from espn:
    http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/red-sox/post/_/id/7455/manny-being-money-more-red-sox-paydays-for-ramirez
    seems manny will get almost $2m/year for the next 16 years not to play baseball for the sox, while getting “…an additional $15 million coming over the next three years in deferred payments from the Los Angeles Dodgers. He is to be paid in installments of $3,333,333 in 2011 and 2012, followed by an $8.3 million windfall in 2013. (All contract figures from Cot’s baseball contracts.)…”
    i’m sure the yanks have a few of these too, but espn-boston decided to pick on manny…

    dc December 11, 2010, 5:51 pm
  • I remember Manny contract terms from when he signed it with the Sox, the Boston media made a big deal about it at the time.
    They’re just throwing all the NY fans off their trail that think ESPN favors Boston teams;-)

    BillsBurgSF December 11, 2010, 7:23 pm
  • Speaking of contract terms, the mystery around Jeter’s 2014 option has been revealed: http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/news/story?id=5906442. Methinks Derek has as much chance of seeing $17million in 2014 as I do of seeing hair follicles return to my scalp.

    IronHorse (YF) December 12, 2010, 12:10 am
  • I believe Crawford is only owed $6 or $7 million in 2011 — the tail-end of his old contract.
    I forget where I read it, but either Francona or more likely Epstein stated that this was a factor informing their calculations, in that Boston’s payroll can remain relatively flat in the next few years as various other contracts come off the books, even though they appear to have gone on a spending spree.
    And I’m not a payroll rules expert, but I’m guessing that the signing bonus does not count toward the luxury tax (or does not count fully toward it — maybe it gets amortized over the life of the contract?). So it’s a way of bringing Crawford’s pay up in that first year with the Sox without having that additional impact on the Sox’s bottom line.

    Hudson December 12, 2010, 12:19 pm
  • Wait, my bad. Looks like it’s AGon who’s owed $6-$7 million.

    Hudson December 12, 2010, 12:21 pm
  • Signing bonuses must count in some way towards the luxury tax or teams would just skirt the rules by giving massive signing bonuses and small “salaries”. Im just not sure how!

    sam-YF December 12, 2010, 12:23 pm
  • I agree with Sam, if signing bonuses are exempt then teams would just pay all players in signing bonuses.

    Atheose - SF December 12, 2010, 4:36 pm
  • If TB owes him money it must have been a deferred payment or how else could he be a free agent?
    Though not sure on the luxury tax impact, I tend to agree with Hudson, there must be a benefit to one side or the other on this. You know it could be a way to get Crawford some upfront cash? They pay him $1M in Jan to cover moving expenses maybe? I can’t imagine him needing the financial assistance for that. (wonder if any signing FA required the signing team to pay relocation expenses?) Not knowing how MLB’er are paid, other than hearing they get paychecks the 1st and 15th of each month during the season, I don’t think they get paid during the off season, but with him getting $10M this year from the Rays according to Cot’s I can’t imaging he would need some upfront money for any reason.

    BillsBurgSF December 12, 2010, 5:54 pm
  • If my memory serves me, I believe that many players get paid throughout the whole year. Im pretty sure that the signing bonuses are a combination of a holdover from past years where they were more substantial and a way of providing a quick infusion of cash to the new players as a reward.
    Any money TB owes Crawford is indeed deferred money…

    sam-YF December 12, 2010, 7:15 pm
  • I believe the signing bonus is effectively $6M of his salary paid quickly, like Sam says. That makes the $14M first year just $20M, in effect. It has no effect on the AAV of his contract for luxury tax purposes, it just changes his pay stubs.

    SF December 12, 2010, 7:47 pm
  • Atheose - SF December 13, 2010, 7:41 am
  • Ha! Good one Atheose. You had me there for a second. As for the “Cliff” version of Lee, I would be surprised if there wasn’t some announcement today. According to reports at least he and his agent are not requesting or taking any more calls and texts from the Rangers and Yankees, and neither team is making any changes to the offers they’ve made, so they’ve had the weekend to mull over the options. Would be nice to know one way or the other so the Yanks can get on with life either way.

    IronHorse (YF) December 13, 2010, 8:58 am
  • Yeah, Crawford just gets an extra million bucks every month for the first six months of his contract. Not too shabby. I wish my job had signing bonuses like that! Of course, I also wish theyw ere giving out $20M salaries…
    Like DC, I raised my eyebrows at the Sox being able to block a trade to the Yankees. I cannot think of a single case when that would be practical. Is it akin to a constitutional amendment? Would the Sox demand additional prospects in a deal to convince them to waive their no-trade clause? I mean, they’re doing the deal! The Sox have pretty much had a no-trade-to-the-Yankees clause for every player since Mike Stanley.

    Paul SF December 13, 2010, 9:28 am
  • Tick tock tick tock tick tock..
    At this point, the Yankees should recind the offer to Lee, and tell him that when he’s ready to make a decision, let them know. He’s holding other moves hostage right now with neither team knowing how to move forward with his lingering decision. The “mystery team” bs is just that…his agent trying to get more from both sides, which is just bullshit at this point.
    At what point does NY say to themselves “if he wanted to be here, he would”, and the same goes for Texas…how is it fair that either side has to bid so much more than the other? It’s not really fair to NY to force another 60 or 70M to play in NY…if he doesn’t wanna come, pull the offer and move for Upton/pitcher.
    I have absolutely no idea the numbers, obviously..I’m just talking.

    Brad December 13, 2010, 11:27 am
  • I don’t think Lee is intentionally jerking teams around; I think he’s happy with the two offers he has received, and just wanted a day or two to mull it over. Nothing wrong with that in my opinion… assuming he truly does make a decision today or tomorrow.

    Atheose - SF December 13, 2010, 11:42 am
  • i’d like to think he’s not that much of an a**hole that he’d deliberately jerk the teams around, but i do think he’s got some of that in him…he’s got that smug, i’m a jerk, look about him…at this point, the offers are probably similar and lucrative enough that he may actually have to decide which location he’d prefer…that, and his wife is probably nagging the crap out of him…

    dc December 13, 2010, 12:50 pm
  • I guess I don’t really see what is so out of sorts about Lee taking a whole entire weekend to decide where to spend the next several years of his life and for whom to sign what is likely his last contract.
    Really, does he deserve any vitriol for taking three or four days to make such a big decision?

    SF December 13, 2010, 12:55 pm
  • Yes…because he should be honored that we made him an offer and come a runnin’!!! ;)
    It’s the YANKEES for science’s sake!!! :)

    krueg December 13, 2010, 2:58 pm
  • Let me first start off by saying this I LOVE CARL CRAWFORD…love him, not because of his stats but just the way he plays the game and of course his love for the #13.
    Having not been here for a looooong time, I don’t know the answer to this so I will ask: Was the Crawford signing met with any grunts and groans by Sox fans? To me, it seems like a boat load of money for a guy that really isn’t worth that total. Now in the whole scheme of things he’s far closer to being worth it than Jayson Werth, but is he better then Matt Holliday? 19-20 million (sure 14 this year, but he’s getting 6 million in SB’s = 20) for an OF’r that doesn’t hit 30 plus HR’s just seems like a lot of money. Unreal defender, great speed, but low OBP and lack of power leaves me wondering why? I think him being on the Red Sox is HUGE, don’t get me wrong, but that contract just doesn’t seem fitting of his skill set. Bottom line though, Sox are a better team with him which goes without saying.

    John - YF December 13, 2010, 4:07 pm
  • You’re exactly right in everything you said, Trisk. But, if the going price was 7/X for Jason Werth, that kind of set the market for better guys, right?
    Was CC going to take less than Werth? The answer is no, especially since I firmly believe that had Boston not signed him, NY would have already backed out of the CL sweepstakes and done so.
    I blame Washington for this. If they had given Werth a contract more apropos of his value to any organization, Crawford would not have gotten nearly as much as he just did, and from there, Lee would not be getting ready to sign for 7/170.
    Blame DC: The problem with everying wrong in this country:)

    Brad December 13, 2010, 4:16 pm
  • Trust me I would have loved to have him, so it’s not a matter of Poo Poo, Carl Crawford is so overrated.
    The Jason Werth deal is flat out awful, but I sort of get why they did it. The Nationals have been pretty good about giving the appearance that they are at least trying to be competitive. So I get why they signed him…but that total is outrageous. I mean it was finished in no time, it’s not like it was February and the clock was striking 12…This was a no BS, here’s our offer you’d be a moron not to take it deal. Something this small-ish market teams have to do, I understand. But…
    I guess what I am asking is this: Last offseason the Sox went out and signed Cameron. Instead of signing Cameron what if they had signed Holliday? Sure Ellsbury was hurt and they would have been without a CF’r either way, but Holliday vs Crawford you have to go Holliday every time don’t you? His OBP is roughly 40-50 pts higher on avg…His HR totals are much higher…you get the point. So in the end the Sox signed Cameron for $7.25 million for 2 years and Crawford for $20 million per for 7 years…in comparison Holliday makes $17 million per and could have been had last season erasing both of those more expensive, less productive signings. The rub is that the Sox could not have known the Nationals would blow up the market, but…you get my point.

    John - YF December 13, 2010, 4:27 pm
  • I’m sure someone could take Crawford’s really unimpressive OPS+ and do some math jujitsu to figure out the dollars-per-base that the guy figures to get. I’m not that guy, but I don’t think it would make the contract look very good, as I’ve noted elsewhere. But as I’ve also noted elsewhere, and as John has said here, regardless of how reasonable or not the deal for him is, he has just made the Sox much better. And I just love speed on my team so I have to imagine all sfs do too. So fun and disruptive…

    IronHorse (YF) December 13, 2010, 4:36 pm
  • I don’t know the answer to this so I will ask: Was the Crawford signing met with any grunts and groans by Sox fans?
    Go to SOSH and read the thread posted when the signing was announced. Holy crap, you’d have thought the Sox re-signed Jack Clark.
    Holliday’s WAR the last three years has been 5.7, 5.6, and 6.9. Crawford’s has been 2.5, 5.7, 6.9. And recall Crawford plays in the toughest division in baseball. So as he enters his prime (and only turns 29 this year, two years younger than Holliday) it is not clear at all that MH is the no-brainer selection over Crawford as you say, John.

    SF December 13, 2010, 5:22 pm
  • Holliday isn’t a no brainer, but all things being equal wouldn’t you rather have a guy for the next 7 years who gets on base at a nearly 40% clip and hits 25+ HR’s each season as he ages versus a guy who relies on his legs on defense? Again Carl Crawford is no slouch, but apple to apples, if I were investing that kind of money I’d take the HR/OBP for years 29-36 every time.

    John - YF December 13, 2010, 5:56 pm
  • I think Epstein said that Crawford’s skills, as they studied them (and according to reports they studied him a LOT), age well. I read them called “young persons’ skills” versus “old persons’ skills”, and that “old” skills don’t age nearly so well.
    Holliday would have dipped in the AL East, I think, against the pitching in the division. And his defense is nothing like Crawford’s, which probably, along with his speed, makes up for the OBP differential.
    One might argue that the Sox would have been better off signing Holliday and forgoing Lackey last year. Which might have allowed them to go after Lee this year, and ignored Crawford. But I don’t think we can look back, necessarily, and say the Sox should have signed Holliday last year instead of Crawford this year – the context matters. Hell, Crawford hasn’t even played a game for the Sox yet!

    SF December 13, 2010, 6:15 pm

Leave a Comment