Say WHAT?!

Sox sign Carl Crawford to an insane 7/142M contract, according to Pete Abraham and Ken Rosenthal. (update: Globe story here). Please pardon us while we go attempt to return the world to it's upright position. This deal, in light of the non-extension extension to Adrian Gonzalez, makes no sense to us.

Has anyone seen someone wandering Disney World in a gorilla suit? Or is our GM dressed up as Pluto?

112 comments… add one

  • Trying to understand this move, Crawford is a fantastically exciting player, for sure, and when Jayson Werth gets 126M then, well, maybe the market is set higher for Crawford. So comparing his deal to one signed with Manny ten years ago (which I did in the other thread) isn’t really fair, they aren’t comparable. But was he essential? I mean, was he seven years essential to THIS Sox team? This is what I cannot figure.
    On the other hand, Ortiz and Drew evaporate next year, and that’s 26.5M, and with Kalish Drew will be, for the most part, replaced. So the Sox don’t have to shop very hard next year for a position of import, if they don’t want to or don’t like the market.
    No matter what, this move is a shocker, and Theo et al did a pretty remarkable job shielding this one from the press, their rivals, etc. This came, quite literally, out of left field.

    SF December 9, 2010, 6:28 am
  • Also, Papelbon’s $10-12M will also come off the books, so that’s $36M+, though obviously some of that will have to be replaced, it’s not like it turns to zero. This feels a little like a 2011/2012 pre-emptive strike for sure.

    SF December 9, 2010, 6:39 am
  • A little more processing: this makes the Sox INSANELY exciting to think about for the next few years. It’s all about Crawford’s health and the last half of the deal, in the long view. But I suppose so many things change or could change (CBA, compensation, the economy, etc.) that 2015-2018 aren’t of so much concern, and God knows what the lineup might look like then. And there’s always the “it’s not MY money” sort of deflection, something YF and I spoke about yesterday over lunch w/r/t Jeter.
    Still more processing to do, but damn the 2011 Sox, if healthy, are going to be FUN to watch and root for.

    SF December 9, 2010, 7:17 am
  • Now to address the bullpen.
    Was floored when I woke up and saw this first thing today. Rubbed my eyes a few times and smiled.
    A little heavy on the left, I definately believe in my heart now that the Yanks will go get Lee.

    Rob SF December 9, 2010, 7:33 am
  • $300m for just 2 players?…how can anyone else in baseball compete with that?…we need a hard salary cap to keep this kind of thing from happening again…don’t the sox know that the economy is in a shambles and fans can’t afford the escalating prices for tickets, parking and beer?…what now, are the greedy sox going to sign lee too, just to complete the trifecta?… ;)
    my oh my how the worm can turn…suddenly the sox fans who showed such indignation over the yankees carefree spending have no choice but to embrace the same tactic when employed by their team…i love it…hate it that you just got a whole lot better, but love it that you just moved into a nice new glass house in my neighborhood…hehehe

    dc December 9, 2010, 8:01 am
  • Holy shit WHAT?

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 8:08 am
  • 300M for two is quite different than 500M for three, but nevermind that, count me as a guy that absoutely hates this move.
    It’s going to be awesome to watch, but I would much, much rather the sox didn’t do this shit.
    Rosenthal reporting that the Sox were the other team to offer CL 7 Years. Now THAT makes no sense at all!

    Brad December 9, 2010, 8:11 am
  • I understand your sentiment, dc, but it is rather important to look at the situation in more fleshed out terms. Which is that the Sox could also sign Cliff Lee and STILL not reach the Yankees’ payroll.
    Remember, Beltre and Martinez came off the books, and Gonzo costs only $6M this year. Next year other guys come off the books. It’s not a vacuum. And while the Crawford signing is shocking and suprising, it’s done in context, and that context is that the Sox could very well still fall $30M-$40M short of the Yankees payroll-wise, depending on what happens with Pettitte and Lee. That’s two more superstars, cost-wise. Context, my friend!

    SF December 9, 2010, 8:11 am
  • And, to be fair dc, the Sox haven’t given AGon shit as of yet. He may end up not being able to swing a bat in June, and they don’t owe him a dime.
    But you’re right, nonetheless. This shit ruins baseball.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 8:13 am
  • This is a great short term move for the sox…not so sure about the long term though as much of Crawford’s game relies on speed which is sure to wane as he ages. His OBP would worry me a bit too. That said, the sox are gonna throw out a tremendous line up every day next season and the yankees are gonna need their lefties to do their jobs to beat them.
    Incredible that the Sox are on the verge of giving almost half a billion dollars worth of contracts in the last 2 years. The yanks and sox operate in their own stratosphere.

    sam-YF December 9, 2010, 8:13 am
  • That’s amazing.
    The Sox could add the best pitcher, best hitter, and best outfielder in baseball and still be 40M behind the Yankees.
    So yeah, let’s cool the jets for awhile. Plus, NY still has to sign players, which for some reason, they’re not really doing.
    If the rumor is true about CL and the Sox, you can bet that NY goes something rediculous for him today.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 8:15 am
  • According to Rosenthal, the Sox offered Lee a seven year deal, but at low dollars (relatively, I think!), which gives Lee’s agent the leverage to say he has a seven year deal on the table. So they may have offered him dollars they could live with, or offered him dollars they knew he would get elsewhere, but in terms of years perhaps there was gamesmanship there. On the other hand, the Crawford deal kind of eliminates that possible charade, doesn’t it?

    SF December 9, 2010, 8:16 am
  • Incidently, the yanks just went 7 years on Cliff Lee according to Heyman. Thats alot of years for him as well. Good short term, bad long term too.

    sam-YF December 9, 2010, 8:18 am
  • though as much of Crawford’s game relies on speed which is sure to wane as he ages. His OBP would worry me a bit too.
    Ah, let the bashing begin. He’s not a good hitter? He’s not a good outfielder? He’s just fast right? Plus, I forgot that he is turning 32?
    12 hours ago, every Yankee fan in the world wanted CC on CF for the Yankees, and today, he’s just fast.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 8:19 am
  • I hope he can adjust to the AL East.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 8:19 am
  • Brad, come on buddy, im hardly bashing here, Im just giving my comments on the move. I think its a mixed bag for a player like Crawford. I didnt say this is the worst move the sox could make. Crawford is indeed a great hitter but I dont think Im going out on a limb saying at least part of his value is from his speed and that older players lose speed. If the Sox win the WS in the next 2 years with him in his prime it will hardly matter. All teams deal with aging players on contracts like this and the same sorts of observations were made on Yankees contracts too.

    sam-YF December 9, 2010, 8:23 am
  • I know, man. But, Crawford is young now, so I think that is more a concern for me when he’s 34, and will most likely move to LF in Boston if his range drops, but no matter as of right now.
    I’m kinda just giving a little back from the AGon conversation.
    The best thing about Crawford in Boston is that the Yankees are going to have to severely overpay for Lee, since LAA has nowhere to go now but all in for Lee, IMO.
    WAKE UP KRUEG!

    Brad December 9, 2010, 8:26 am
  • My understanding is that he is gonna be playing LF anyway.
    I said specifically in my comments this is a great move short term. The price the sox are paying is that they need to give him $20 mil a year for his decline years, which is the cost these days

    sam-YF December 9, 2010, 8:29 am
  • I’m shocked that
    A. Theo would spend that much money so soon after the AGonz trade (even though his extension isn’t official yet)
    B. Crawford signed so quickly and for only 7 years. After Werth signed for 7/127 I assumed Crawford (three years younger) would get at least 8 years. I also expected Crawford’s agent to sit tight for a week and let people start getting desperate.
    I like the addition, but that huge contract worries me. Especially for a player whose speed will inevitably decline or lead to an injury.

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 8:29 am
  • My understanding is that he is gonna be playing LF anyway.
    To this, I disagree completely. That’s like putting a great white in a swimming pool.
    Ellsbury is as good as gone right now..Bank on it.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 8:30 am
  • IS Carl Crawford a great hitter? I don’t ask this rhetorically – I know Crawford from having watched him a bunch of course, but is he really a great hitter? His OBP is, well, underwhelming. And his power has grown but is it notable?
    I think the magnitude of the contract is something that causes reflex, much like I had this morning. But with a little bit of consideration we have to think of a couple of things – first, Jayson Werth’s contract skewed a lot. You can’t judge Crawford’s contract against Manny’s 8/160, or maybe even Teixeira’s 8/180. The markets move, and Werth proved that big-time. The second is that in the continuum of the Sox’ payroll and team they have a lot of options. Contracts expired, contracts expiring, draft picks galore, a deep farm system/organizational depth. And they have money, no doubt. But it isn’t like they just signed a guy who vaults them to the top of the payroll mountain, or who constricts their ability to move players around over the next three to four seasons. That’s a long window. Who knows what 2015 or 2016 will bring, if Henry will still own the team, what the roster will look like or what the MLB economy will look like. For the near term, if he stays healthy, Crawford should be close to worth his money. Beyond that, it could be an albatross, or it could look fair, or it could look great. I wouldn’t want to be on any of them, frankly. I have no clue.

    SF December 9, 2010, 8:30 am
  • LoHud might be the funniest blog going this morning.
    “Crawford is just a more expensive Gardner”
    “this makes the Red Sox a worse team”
    “Theo really missed the boat on Holliday, so this is his answer”
    Honestly, folks.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 8:31 am
  • I agree with Brad: this means that both the Angels and Yankees have to go hard over Lee. I wouldn’t be surprised if Lee ends up with an 8 year deal out of all this, as ridiculous as that sounds.
    I also think it means the Yankees sign him quickly.

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 8:31 am
  • Also sam – something to consider, is that $20M down the road is not $20M at 2010 dollars down the road. The money depreciates. It will be interesting to see how the contract is structured, front-loaded, back-loaded, etc. If the contract is front-loaded (unlikely, but perhaps possible), the deal is even better for the Sox if Crawford performs like he did last year for 2-3-4 years. If it is backloaded it gets decidedly more dicey.

    SF December 9, 2010, 8:33 am
  • I agree completely, SF.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 8:41 am
  • Lineup consideration: assuming Ellsbury isn’t traded for some relief help, Crawford definitely bats lead-off, right?
    1. Crawford
    2. Pedroia
    3. Gonzalez
    4. Youkilis
    5. Ortiz
    6. Drew
    7. Salty
    8. Scutaro
    9. Ellsbury

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 8:42 am
  • Lineup consideration: assuming Ellsbury isn’t traded for some relief help, Crawford definitely bats lead-off, right?
    Again, if you ask me, Ellsbury will not be a part of this conversation.
    I firmly believe he’s getting moved for bullpen help. On another note, the Red Sox really, really need to add a righty bat, so I don’t really think they’re done yet.
    I think they move Ellsbury[+] for bullpen, and they still sign Maggs to play LF, since I believe you’re wasting CC in LF.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 8:49 am
  • Guys, you honestly dont need to defend this move to me. Its a great move for the sox and it makes them the prohibitive favorites in the AL East next year. Its aggressive in the short term and could potentially have long term repercussions. There arent many FA mega-contracts that you cant say the same thing about.

    sam-YF December 9, 2010, 8:51 am
  • So, I think my opening day lineup looks like this:
    Crawford (L)
    Pedroia (R)
    Gonzales (L)
    Ordonez (R)
    Ortiz (L)
    Youk (R)
    Drew (L)
    Scutaro (R)
    Salty (Switch)
    Bench: Varitek, Cameron, (and I think Hall)
    Traded: Ellsbury, Lowrie, and pieces for bullpen help.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 8:52 am
  • Why do they have to move Ellsbury for someone like the equal of Downs when they can just sign Downs and retain the asset?

    SF December 9, 2010, 8:54 am
  • That’s a good lineup Brad, but I think you have to switch Ordonez and Youk. Youk is undoubtedly the better hitter imo.

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 8:58 am
  • You’re right, Ath, but I think the protection for Papi is more important than the protection for AGon.
    SF – Signing Downs is losing another pick, while trading Ellsbury does not. They just lost one with CC, so I don’t think they’ll lose another.
    I still hold to the idea that Boston doesn’t like what Ells has done, and Ells doesn’t like what Boston has done. That’s just my opinion, and means nothing at all, but I firmly believe he’s on his way out.
    If not, that’s cool too, but keeping them really does make the lefty heavy.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 9:01 am
  • They don’t lose a pick I don’t think, net.

    SF December 9, 2010, 9:03 am
  • If I Pettitte, I look at that lineup and wonder why I wouldn’t enjoy a nice year in Houston with my wife and kids. :)

    Brad December 9, 2010, 9:06 am
  • According to Ed Price of AOL Fanhouse, other teams believe the Red Sox will sign Scott Downs.
    This shouldn’t come as a surprise. The Red Sox would have been reluctant to give up a first-round pick for Downs (a Type A free agent) before, but things have changed now that they signed Carl Crawford. Plus, they’ll be able to replenish their lost picks for losing Victor Martinez and Adrian Beltre.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 9:10 am
  • 1) Crawford likes to bat #2 and has had success there. I’d be surprised if he became Boston’s leadoff.
    2) I’d also be surprised if Boston shipped Ellsbury. The hating on JEll this past year was odd — he was a fan and press darling up until the injuries, which happen to every player. The whole “he’s faking it” thing ginned up by DirtDogs et al. was disgraceful. If the Sox keep Ellsbury as leadoff, and put Crawford at #2, then the heart of the lineup can count on having a basestealing threat on base a good percentage of the time.
    The scenario above begs one main question: Where to put Pedroia, who’s been great at #2?
    3) Re. Cliff Lee… I know he’s a “gamer,” a competitor, and all that. But will he really want to drag down his career ERA against this newly-loaded Sox lineup 18-19 times per year, if Texas comes up with similar money?
    Last thought: As a Sox fan, I’ll surely enjoy watching Crawford help the team win games. And I’m aware that the Sox payroll remains well behind the Yankees. But I couldn’t do much of a fistpump when I heard the news, no matter how stunning. Loading up on superstars to this extent *is* kind of embarrassing — not vis-à-vis the Yankees, but in relation to the rest of the league. Success “earned” this way doesn’t feel properly earned.

    Hudson December 9, 2010, 9:11 am
  • Jesus. 142M is a lot of scratch though.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 9:11 am
  • 90M off the books in the next two years. So yeah, they overpaid for now, but in 24Mos, they’re going to be where they are now.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 9:13 am
  • you say context, i say spin…you might want to invest in some drapes for that glass house…all teams have money coming off the books guys…that just means they find replacements…is it a net gain, or a wash, who knows now?…the point is that you spent $300m on 2 players just 2 years after the yankees did it…they were ruining the game, the competitive balance, kicking puppies, but somehow this is not an issue this offseason…you guys dished it, now you can sit and eat it like krueg and me, and other yf’s had to…and now you’re giving up on ellsbury, once considered the cornerstone of the sox future…i question his trade value for anything meaningful because of his injury…according to francona he still has residual effects from the rib injury…that, and hurt feelings…
    for what it’s worth brad, i respect your consistent rejection of the notion that spending gobs of money is the key to winning…as a fan who helps foot the bill, i agree with you…sure i want to see the yanks win every year, but the point is that they don’t…free agency, for all the good it did with regard to players’ rights, is the problem with escalating salaries and ticket prices, not the yankees, who as far as i know have never been accused of not playing by the rules…the sox may never outspend the yankees in total, but situationally, like this one, they are starting to look very yankee-like…

    dc December 9, 2010, 9:15 am
  • I agree with that last paragraph, Hudson.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 9:15 am
  • Well getting to pitch to Mark Reynolds 18 games a year certainly makes up for Crawford/AGonz coming to the AL East.

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 9:20 am
  • considered the cornerstone of the sox future…i question his trade value for anything meaningful because of his injury…according to francona he still has residual effects from the rib injury…that, and hurt feelings…
    I don’t think they’re (or me) are giving up on him from a talent standpoing, but rather the very sketchy way he handled last year with re: to his injury and the external press conference with Boras and such. I think he has superstar(ed) his way out of favor, but none of that feeling comes from a talent standpoint, dc. I think he was genuinely hurt by being bumped from CF, and played accordingly.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 9:20 am
  • I think the whole “Ellsbury had his feelings hurt by being moved to LF” thing was blown out of proportion by the media. Ellsbury got a ton of hate he didn’t deserve, imo.

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 9:22 am
  • “deserved” is a subjective thing. I think it comes from the fact that Youkilis, Pedroia, and the rest could all be seen sitting on the bench, rooting on the kids while they were hurt.
    Ellsbury was in Arizona working out ribs that STILL aren’t healed apparently.
    Count me in as the guy who doesn’t mind losing him. I love his speed, his quick bat, and his diving plays in the OF, but I’m willing to let that walk now that CC is on the roster.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 9:24 am
  • I literally couldn’t sleep last night waiting to hear you somehow justify this move for your favorite small market team brad!
    Don’t forget the almost $400 million they paid for Liverpool!!!
    Brad, all I want to hear from you today is…”krueg, you were right all along. The Sox can compete with the Yankees in terms of spending money. Maybe not to the same level exactly, but certainly in the same ballpark. My bad for doubting your wisdom in this matter.” ;)
    Great move for you guys by the way. Crawford is awesome.

    krueg December 9, 2010, 9:39 am
  • Liverpool- $380 million
    Crawford- $140 million
    AG- $160 million?
    Grand total- $680 million
    Not bad for a small market team in one year!

    krueg December 9, 2010, 9:43 am
  • brace for the “liverpool” comes out of a different sox pocket and they’ll have a revenue stream from marketing soccer gear at fenway accounting-speak comeback, krueg

    dc December 9, 2010, 9:50 am
  • Since when is the amount they pay on a different team in a different sport relevant to the Sox payroll numbers?

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 9:52 am
  • Wow, wow, wow, wow.
    I came into this offseason expecting Crawford to get 7 years/$140 million. He’s an elite player, arguably the best defensive left fielder in the game and with speed that is truly game-changing. Speed is often overrated, but when it’s Crawford’s speed, it’s a different story. The man is entering his age 29 season and coming off a two-year stretch where he put up a higher WAR than Adrian Gonzalez, Miguel Cabrera, Hanley Ramirez, Prince Fielder, Kevin Youkilis. In fact, he was sixth in all of baseball for 2009-10, according to Fangraphs — behind Pujols, Longoria, Zimmerman, Mauer and Utley. He is right in the middle of his prime.
    Further, the Sox had a major need for an outfielder. Not so much in 2011, where Ellsbuyy-Cameron-Drew could be adequate, with McDonald/Nava/Kalish as backups, but certainly in 2012 and beyond, after Drew and Cameron leave. Even assuming Kalish is ready to start full-time, that leaves a whole in left or center. So I expected the Sox to make a big push for Crawford, given his age and skill set, as opposed to Werth.
    But once the Sox signed Gonzalez, I figured that was it for the big-time expense, and the Sox would pursue Werth as a righty bat who wouldn’t command a long-term deal at $20 million per. But Werth went to the Nats for seven years, and I figured the Sox wouldn’t want Crawford because 1. he would make the lineup awfully left-handed while 2. demanding eight, nine or even 10 years, given Werth’s contract.
    Guess I was wrong. And how.
    First off, aside from the risk you have with any long-term contract, this is a good deal for the Sox, as Dave Cameron notes on Fangraphs this morning. They have enough salary coming off the books that acquiring Crawford at this price does not actually increase the payroll either for 2011 or beyond, which is amazing in of itself. It’s worth noting that teams are paying about $5 million per win this winter. Crawford has averaged more than six wins per year over the past two seasons. So the Sox at $20m are underpaying him, which makes sense given they’re giving him the long-term security of a seven-year contract. It’s also worth noting that players of Crawford’s ilk tend to age better than baseball players generally, and this contract only goes through Crawford’s age-35 season.
    As for the left-handedness problem, it’s really only a concern for 2011 — Drew and Ortiz are likely gone after this season — and Gonzalez and Drew have a history of hitting lefties pretty well (though Drew was horrible last season against them). Drew has a career .780 OPS against them, while Gonzalez is at .783. Certainly not fantastic, but not horrific either.
    Crawford doesn’t like batting leadoff, so I think we’ll see the lineup like this:
    1. Ellsbury (L)
    2. Pedroia (R)
    3. Crawford (L)
    4. Youkilis (R)
    5. Gonzalez (L)
    6. Ortiz (L)
    7. Scutaro/Lowrie (R/S)
    8. Drew (L)
    9. Salty/Tek (L/R)
    I could see a world in which Lowrie takes the starting SS job from Scutaro, in which case his high-OBP self could fit in well at leadoff and reorder the lineup like this:
    1. Lowrie (S)
    2. Crawford (L)
    3. Pedroia (R)
    4. Gonzalez (L)
    5. Youkilis (R)
    6. Ortiz (L)
    7. Drew (L)
    8. Salty (S)
    9. Ellsbury (L)

    Paul SF December 9, 2010, 10:03 am
  • I don’t have any idea what Liverpool’s revenue stream is, but needless to say it is one of the biggest franchises in global sports. They are a massive team, historically.
    In April Forbes valued Liverpool at 503M pounds, while Henry purchased the team for 300M. I have no idea what Forbes’ methodology is, whether it is accurate or not, but it would seem on the surface that this qualifies as a “good buy”. This is a superficial look at things, but it is all we have to go on at the moment.
    I do not believe, sincerely, that co-mingling the teams as equivalent, sharing the same resources, or dependent on the success of each other. Liverpool doesn’t rely on NESN, the Sox, for anything. The Sox don’t depend on the EPL, or the Champions League, or Liverpudlians either, for anything. They are both assets to Henry, so in that way they relate to each other, yes. But beyond that I think they are apples and oranges, or at least apples and pears.

    SF December 9, 2010, 10:05 am
  • Three interesting threads, per dc’s chastising upthread here. It seems that Brad has been entirely consistent in his distaste for spending (regardless of team), and there are certainly comments about the Yanks being on another level spending-wise (they are, right?!). But I think the reactions to Tex were actually varied, and I am going to once again ask that we not make blanket comments about entire fan bases as monolithic (like the “glass house” one). Our site is better than that, and our participants aren’t drones.
    http://www.yfsf.org/2008/12/tex-announcement-soon.html
    http://www.yfsf.org/2008/12/breaking-yanks-sign-teixeira.html
    In fact, the post titled “The Best Team Money Can Buy” was authored by YF himself.
    http://www.yfsf.org/2008/12/the-best-team-money-can-buy.html

    SF December 9, 2010, 10:18 am
  • Acquiring Liverpool was an investment, and a huge one. Would Yankees fans be hammering the Red Sox ownership if they had that 300M in a savings account instead? It amounts to the same thing, especially since Liverpool is self-sustaining, revenue-wise.

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 10:18 am
  • …”krueg, you were right all along..
    Right about what? Krueg, our argument has never, ever been about what the Red Sox could do, but rahther what I would like them to do.
    I have no control over how they spend their money, but to be honest, I would have rather they signed a lower level OFer and saved the money…but again, I don’t make those decisions.
    The Red Sox can obviously spend the money, especially when the most replacements for the 90M coming off the books over the next two years may be in house.
    The fact is, yes, the Red Sox just spent a lot of money to get two great players (one of which is only making 6.3M right now), but in the end, especially after the addition of CL, the Yankees are still going to be where they are, and the Red Sox are still going to be where they are – tens of millions behind them.
    It’s apples to grapes, but our argument has never been about fruit, but rather, what I would rather eat.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 10:19 am
  • Sorry, SF: I didn’t see your fruit analogy before I posted mine.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 10:20 am
  • It’s apples to grapes, but our argument has never been about fruit, but rather, what I would rather eat.
    This is really a great line.

    Paul SF December 9, 2010, 10:23 am
  • Apparently both the Yanks and Sox are going hard after Russell Martin.
    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/12/russell-martin-rumors-thursday.html

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 10:23 am
  • Man I was angry as SHIT when NY signed Tex.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 10:26 am
  • Yanks get double taxed as is, by the luxury tax, and the fact that even Derek Jeter gets paid 17. Ah well. At least they won one in the last two years so we can stop hearing how many billions they spent without a ring..

    Lar December 9, 2010, 10:27 am
  • Would be amusing though to see CL and if Greinke can be had for a bunch of prospects.. Tex, ARod and gang are not getting any younger..
    But this is why I’m not GM.. ;)

    Lar December 9, 2010, 10:28 am
  • Would Yankees fans be hammering the Red Sox ownership if they had that 300M in a savings account instead?
    The thing is that Henry paid $450M for a team valued at over $800M. And he apparently has NO DEBT on the team, having paid off Hicks’ previous onus with RBS. So he has an asset worth $800M plus with nearly half that in equity. And that is if he didn’t leverage anything after the fact. I mean, the Liverpool purchase was like going to a garage sale and finding a vintage Tiffany lamp for a couple of hundred bucks.

    SF December 9, 2010, 10:29 am
  • Trade Montero for Greinke, sign Lee, and then the Sox would have to face CC, Lee, Greinke in a short series. Death!!! Who cares who catches!?

    SF December 9, 2010, 10:31 am
  • It would seem to me, through all this, that YFSF is back!

    SF December 9, 2010, 10:32 am
  • You may laugh about it, but Greinke-for-Montero rumors have been around for the past week. Might actually happen.

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 10:34 am
  • My friend woke me up with just the numbers, and I thought it was the Angels, so I was pretty shocked when I found out it was the Sox!

    Lar December 9, 2010, 10:35 am
  • ath gets the prize for chiming in first…2 minutes, not bad…sf gets the prize for the best attempted spin by trying to turn it around on me…i didn’t say all you guys sf, nor did i make any blanket statements about sox fans in general…not sure why you always resort to that lame mincing of words to belittle the points i’m making…i also said brad has been consistent, so i’m not sure why you need to bring that up as though i hadn’t…who cares about yf’s opinion about the yankees spending, or that it was a yf who pointed it out?…you can file that under “duh”…it’s irrelevant to the sudden spending spree that the sox are enjoying…to be honest with you, i couldn’t care less about nascar, liverpool, or any other way henry spends his money…i just don’t see the same obsession over his spending that we do about the yankees spending…you guys need to get your noses out of the fruit bowl for a minute and listen to the point…your team spent $300m on 2 players with relatively long multi-year contracts [assuming gonzo's gets done], something i don’t think you or your team’s management ever expected, or wanted to do…i know for sure that brad doesn’t like it…have you caught the yankees for total spending?…no, and probably never will…i also said that, so i’m not sure where you’re heading with that one either…
    “…Man I was angry as SHIT when NY signed Tex….”
    thanks for the continued honesty and consistency brad…again

    dc December 9, 2010, 10:48 am
  • i just don’t see the same obsession over his spending that we do about the yankees spending
    Really!?

    SF December 9, 2010, 10:54 am
  • For the record, I have no problem with the Sox spending loot. It was a great move by them.
    The Liverpool purchase is certainly relevant when you have a fan base(not all obviously SF) that constantly tries to say they don’t have the resources that the Yankees do or aren’t in the same ballpark in terms of capital. I have always argued that they have the money, just don’t spend it on the team like the Yankees brass. I will concede that the Yankees may have more, but do we really know?
    Now, when the Sox ownership/fans/whoever complain about what the Yankees spend yet their ownership group has enough money to buy one of the biggest and most celebrated soccer teams in the world, how can that way of thinking hold up any longer?
    I know that you hate the big money contracts Brad, I get that. But I wonder if you will still be as upset when Crawford and AG are tearing it up in Fenway or if you guys win the WS. Will it be cheapened? Will you celebrate less? I doubt it dude.
    I’m not trying to be combative, this is just always been the crux of our back-and-forth. I hope you get that from my posts, I’m just messing with you most of the time but I think the point I’m making is relevant. Isn’t it?
    How do you guys think the other 25 teams in MLB are viewing the Sox today? Yankee-like or still not?

    krueg December 9, 2010, 10:54 am
  • The Texas Rangers are in Little Rock, AR today for another meeting with Lee and his agent, per MLB

    Brad December 9, 2010, 10:56 am
  • back..
    Yes it is! Thankfully, as I’m sure Krueg, Myself, AG, dc, and a few others were getting tired of just talking to each other all the time!

    Brad December 9, 2010, 10:59 am
  • Romanticism vs. Cynicism – this is the big thing here.
    The Romantic wants every player developed internally, to come up through the system, to be a lifer. The Cynic thinks teams can win just by buying things.
    I think I am a realist. Money brings a massive advantage. But spending aloofly doesn’t make winning a championship a certainty. But it does make winning more often than not a relative certainty. Teams still need to grow players internally, build a strong, deep organization. I think I am less disgusted than Brad is (I am actually not disgusted at all!) because I see that the Sox have done so many things well within their system that moves like these with Gonzalez and Crawford are complementary. If the Sox had a shit farm system and were just throwing money willy-nilly at the wall, I think I’d have a really hard time with that.
    And I freely admit that this is an easy thing to say right now.

    SF December 9, 2010, 11:01 am
  • know that you hate the big money contracts Brad, I get that. But I wonder if you will still be as upset when Crawford and AG are tearing it up in Fenway or if you guys win the WS. Will it be cheapened? Will you celebrate less? I doubt it dude
    No, I won’t celebrate less. Nor have I ever said I will, but with that being said, any championship this team may field is definitely cheapened in a way that’s hard for me to explain. But, so is the landscape in MLB, and most sports, today.
    As I’ve said a million times, I don’t like the huge contracts and I think they’re bad for baseball, but in the end, my only option is to change allegiance and root for the likes of KC or Pittsburgh, at which point, what’s the point?

    Brad December 9, 2010, 11:03 am
  • And the point you make is definitely relative, and I’m not skirting that point at all.
    Yes, the other 25 teams look at the Red Sox today the same as they look at NY, and that is precisely where my issue lives. I do not feel that in any sense of the word the two are the same only as much as they’re closer to each other than say the beforementioned Pittsburgh and KC.
    It’s true the Red Sox just spent that much, but if you look at the overall picture (say opening day next year), the Red Sox right now are going to be right near where they were yesterday. Before CC. I don’t expect the Red Sox to go near the 200M limit, but then again, I didn’t expect them to get CC, so who knows.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 11:07 am
  • “…Really!?…”
    yep, really…not from [some of] you guys anyway…these 2 contracts just made your team a little more yankee-like, whether some of you like it or not…[some] yf’s can see the yankees m.o. is to outspend the rest of mlb, and we concede it and roll with it…you pointed that out yourself with the reference to yf’s post…see krueg’s last entry, he says it better than i did…for the record, i’m not trying to be combative either…i just get frustrated with the spin…
    yes, your points are relevant krueg, just not convenient right now…

    dc December 9, 2010, 11:07 am
  • I’ll feel a lot better about this if Granderson stays healthy.

    attackgerbil December 9, 2010, 11:16 am
  • I don’t want to beat this to death anymore…bottom line, great move for the Sox and the rivalry.
    As expected, 7 year offer to Lee now:
    http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/news/story?id=5902103
    JUST SIGN THE DEAL ALREADY CLIFF!!! DIVORCE THAT SHREW OF A WIFE IF SHE DOESN’T LIKE IT!!! ;)

    krueg December 9, 2010, 11:19 am
  • anyway, sorry if i’ve pissed on the sox parade today…i should’ve let you guys have a day to bask, then tried to snap you back to reality another day…i’m jealous that your team has made major progress to improve your team and fan experience, while my team has only resigned a couple of the elder statesmen currently on our roster…that’s coloring my attitude a bit, and thus becoming the focus rather than the relevence of the points i’ve made…theo has outplayed cashman so far, and that’s bumming me out…

    dc December 9, 2010, 11:21 am
  • Well dc, if it helps, you can head over to LoHud and read pages upon pages of negative things about the signing.
    Plus, when it’s all said and done, you’ll feel much better about Gardner v. Crawford comparisons.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 11:27 am
  • The supposed seven year deal is exactly what I was talking about earlier. This move forces NY’s hand in these negotiations with CL.
    If they missed out on CL to LAA/Texas they could have swooped up CC and kept everyone happy, but now, that’s not the case. They have to do something to combat this move.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 11:29 am
  • I imagine that last night, Boston sat down at a table and offered CC his 7/142 and told his agent that he had 10 minutes to decide on a yes or no. haha.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 11:31 am
  • Don’t be bummed, dc. I was definitely surprised by the length of the contract for Crawford; I would like to see the metrics how he is “X” more valuable than someone who is, say, 95% of his speed on the paths/range in the field, for he is like lightning. For now.
    Anyway, the Yankees will undoubtedly try and throw a huge pile of money at Lee and hope it will be hugest. Take that with the money that just went to Werth, and the signing of Crawford, it appears that the rich shit-pokes with high-hat tax attorneys are doing just fine “in these difficult times.”
    To paraphrase Brad, “Ain’t my money.”
    I do wonder if the Yankees will work hard to re-sign Pettitte. Lefties that hold the bag were just as important last year considering how many times the Yankees play TBR. Did it really just got a bit more.. umm.. importanter just because Crawford moved up the coast? Maybe not. But I sure would enjoy seeing that awesome pickoff move for at least one more year.

    attackgerbil December 9, 2010, 11:37 am
  • > Gardner v. Crawford comparisons
    Did’em. Crawford kills.

    attackgerbil December 9, 2010, 11:38 am
  • SF December 9, 2010, 11:40 am
  • Crawford also has an above average stat line against both CC, Mariano, and Pettitte, which I’m sure the Sox took into consdiration last night.
    V CC: 296 .309 .389 .698 54AB
    v Mo: 350 .350 .550 .900 20 AB (small)
    v Pettitte: .326 .356 .349 .704 43AB
    v AJ: 315 .356 .426 .782 54AB
    He hasn’t fared so well v. Hughes in limited numbers, but against Cliff Lee, which I’m sure they’ve also considered:
    .241 .241 .310 .552

    Brad December 9, 2010, 11:49 am
  • Sucks to be a Rays fan today, huh? Well, all 15 of them anyway…
    Pena. Toast.
    Crawford. Playing for a hated rival.
    Bartlett. Gone.
    Ouch.

    krueg December 9, 2010, 11:57 am
  • PS Who actually thinks that Gardner is better, or even as good as Crawford? Madness.

    krueg December 9, 2010, 11:58 am
  • SF: thanks, that is a good link.

    attackgerbil December 9, 2010, 11:59 am
  • PS Who actually thinks that Gardner is better, or even as good as Crawford?
    http://yankees.lhblogs.com/2010/12/08/report-crawford-signs-with-boston/#comments

    Brad December 9, 2010, 12:01 pm
  • “…Well dc, if it helps, you can head over to LoHud and read pages upon pages of negative things about the signing.
    Plus, when it’s all said and done, you’ll feel much better about Gardner v. Crawford comparisons….”
    well, thanks for the tip brad, but i don’t need to…i never said the signing was a bad one…go back and look…in fact, i said this makes your team better, so i can’t identify with the lohud gang…comparisons of gardner to crawford…now that’s funny…
    may be wishful thinking, but i can’t help but think cashman has something else up his sleeve besides driving a dump truck full of money to lee’s doorstep…time will tell…
    and it’s great to see you guys get your swagger back after last year’s lost season…should be a lot of fun around here again…

    dc December 9, 2010, 12:01 pm
  • may be wishful thinking, but i can’t help but think cashman has something else up his sleeve besides driving a dump truck full of money to lee’s doorstep…time will tell…
    No, he does. He’s going to sign Lee and trade away some of those pitching prospects for another player.
    Bank on it.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 12:03 pm
  • and it’s great to see you guys get your swagger back
    ahh, come on: I never run and hit.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 12:04 pm
  • > Who actually thinks that Gardner is better, or even as good as Crawford?
    Outside of a Yankee fan or two? Nobody.
    But it is also very possible to over-reach. Nick Cafardo says “It is clear the Red Sox are the best team in the east”. Easy, buddy. The only sure thing there is that it ain’t gonna be Baltimore.

    attackgerbil December 9, 2010, 12:13 pm
  • Yeah, don’t lump me in with those heathens either! ;)
    I agree Brad. It would seem the Darth Cashman will counter-punch somehow with a trade…assuming Lee signs, if not then definitely.
    Hanley and Felix would work for me!

    krueg December 9, 2010, 12:15 pm
  • “…ahh, come on: I never run and hit….”
    didn’t mean you buddy…
    “…But it is also very possible to over-reach….”
    yeah, it’s easy to forget they’ll lose beltre’s production, and darnell macdonald.s… ;)

    dc December 9, 2010, 12:16 pm
  • Greinke ends up in New York, imo.

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 12:17 pm
  • Greinke ends up in New York, imo.
    No way. He vetoes that immediately. He already demands that he only have to talk the press once a week (IN KC!!!).
    No way he allows himself to be traded to NY, in my opinion.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 12:35 pm
  • Wow I just read that Damon would love to play in Boston this year.
    Really? Jeez, that’s great of you Johnny. Now suck it, and mire in mediocrity in whatever cut rate town you end up in, you jackbag.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 12:38 pm
  • Greinke doesn’t have a no-trade, does he?
    Yeah, Johnny vetoes a trade last season because he wants to stay in Detroit, and is now begging to come back to Boston now that we have CC and AGonz. Pathetic.

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 12:39 pm
  • Yes, Grienke has a list of teams that he cannot be traded to unless he approves it. You can believe we’re both on there.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 12:41 pm
  • http://www.cbc.ca/sports/baseball/story/2010/12/08/sp-greinke-interest.html
    While the Blue Jays are one of 15 teams on Greinke’s no-trade list, sources have told FOXSports.com that the pitcher is willing “to go anywhere.”

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 12:46 pm
  • http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/yankees/royals_greinke_would_consider_trade_Qfq4ZnYhyw5ZMsjLIZPLOL
    That link (whose URL ends in “LOL”) says the Yankees are indeed on the no-trade list. But it also says he’d be willing to come to New York.

    Atheose - SF December 9, 2010, 12:48 pm
  • I think, to piggyback on SF’s comment, it’s important to recognize that the Red Sox just added $42 million in annual salary commitments starting in 2012 without sacrificing the overall flexibility of the team.
    That speaks to 1. the Red Sox’ extraordinary monetary advantage over probably 25 of the 29 other teams in baseball, but also 2. the smart moves they’ve made in locking up players like Jon Lester, Dustin Pedroia and Kevin Youkilis while developing those players and others (Buchholz, Bard, Kalish), who have and will continue to step in to replace higher-priced veterans in the coming years.
    So, sure, it would be great if the Red Sox won the World Series with 25 homegrown players and a middle of the pack payroll. I’d love that. But those teams rarely make the playoffs consistently, and as a fan I want to taste the postseason as often as possible. I’m fairly happy with a ballclub that doesn’t simply fill every hole through free agency but is still wealthy enough to make major acquisitions such as these because it was smart enough to develop and invest in homegrown talent.

    Paul SF December 9, 2010, 12:51 pm
  • Love the way things have come alive here. Lots of valid points being made.
    I hate the way guys like Cafardo are handing the AL East to the Red Sox in December. Yes, they look strong right now, but they did so going into last season. And we all know how soon things turned bad in April even before most of the injuries.
    Can’t say I’m unhappy with having Gonzalez and Crawford in the fold though.

    pale blue eyes December 9, 2010, 1:05 pm
  • well pbe, i’m kinda enjoying being in the underdog position…i think i can, i think i can….lllooowwwerrr expectaaaations…

    dc December 9, 2010, 1:18 pm
  • I also am exceedingly uncomfortable with the whole “balance of power has shifted” meme. Maybe it’s just part of being a lifelong Sox fan, but I just feel the jinxes coming when people write that stuff.

    Paul SF December 9, 2010, 2:10 pm
  • > I also am exceedingly uncomfortable with the whole “balance of power has shifted” meme
    are the Sox or Yankees the X/OR team to beat for the playoffs?* Probably. I am comfortable that the Sox/Yanks are going to win low-mid 90s. Coin toss to who takes the Beast. But will the residual be good enough to take the WC? Yes, probably.
    * – ag provides this information only for entertainment purposes. For example, no one wins when Tampa takes the East.
    Also, the Yankees will sign Cliff Lee and he will get hurt. Then I hope someone will come and hit me in the head with a tube-sock full of nickles.

    attackgerbil December 9, 2010, 2:37 pm
  • I actually think they’ll both win more than that, with Tampa essentially falling back to the dungeon to regroup and start another ten year run of overall first picks.

    Brad December 9, 2010, 2:50 pm
  • I just like getting new players as my Sabres never do…AG can confirm.
    Imagine if Mauer hadn’t re-signed in Minny???

    krueg December 9, 2010, 4:44 pm
  • WOW – at 2 page thread, haven’t seen the likes of these in them here parts for quite some time..

    BillsBurgSF December 9, 2010, 5:07 pm
  • Sabes are turning it around, krueg! .500, here we come! Never mind that Buff’s still minus six. *sigh*

    attackgerbil December 9, 2010, 5:19 pm
  • I thought SFs would be happier. There’s no question that the two new acquisitions are two of the best players in the game.
    Some thoughts: Beltre & Martinez had 181 rbis and 153 runs; Crawford & Gonzales had 191 rbis and 197 runs. (+10 and +44).
    Martinez, of course, spent significant time on the DL. He also hit .400 against lefties. Gonzales hit .337 against lefties (.278 against righties – .424 and .377 OBP).
    Yeah, I’d take them, but they aren’t replacing chopped liver.
    Yanks last year in runs: 859, 1st (the number was low for them).
    Sox last year in runs: 818, obviously lots of injuries.
    Yanks last year in pitching: 693, 4th.
    Sox last year in pitching: 743, 11th.
    Will we get Lee? What will Beckett, Lackey, Papelbon and ? do this year?
    Looks like the 2011 rivalry will be more interesting than the 2010 version.

    John Massengale December 9, 2010, 5:39 pm
  • Trying to keep the faith AG…on the Sabres AND Lee! ;)

    krueg December 9, 2010, 5:54 pm
  • Don’t like those CC v CC and other Yankee pitchers stats, but Mazz had a different interesting stat: “Until last night, of the 20 positional players in history to have earned an average of $17 million or more in any one season, only two had ever slugged less than .470: Derek Jeter and Ichiro Suzuki. One is a middle infielder with obvious value, the other an Asian star in a uniquely Asian market.”

    John Massengale December 9, 2010, 7:55 pm

Leave a Comment