82 replies to this topic

[TOleary25]

There is a topic on the main board on Ellsbury and the batting order. The real issue that seemed to develop in the discussion is where Crawford should bat. I don't think I've ever heard about a player putting so much emphasis on where he is batting in the order. Instead of playing his game, it seems to stick in his head of how he should play based on where he is slotted in the order. Here are some quotes from Crawford on different spots in the order:

On batting leadoff:

“I just thought I (stank) at it, to be honest with you,” Crawford says. “Lou (Piniella) put me second. Maybe I could have gotten better at it, but I just wasn’t comfortable. It didn’t have anything to do with stats. I just don’t think I’m a good leadoff hitter.”

http://angels.ocregi...f-hitter/68358/

On batting Sixth or Seventh:

“There’s nothing else you can do [but try to hit home runs],” Crawford told Merloni. “A lot of the other teams, they would come and tell me, you know, they were like ‘we hope they leave you in the seventh hole because we’re not afraid of you at all there. You don’t intimidate us at all. You can’t hit a triple, you’re not probably going to hit a double. And you don’t hit that many home runs. You can’t do nothing, really.’ And to hear that from your peers gives you a feeling on the inside that you just, you know, you just can’t hit there. And I mean, it’s true.”

http://fullcount.wee...ord-to-produce/

Crawford isn't one of the top five hitters on this team with a healthy lineup and he clearly sees himself in the two or three hole. It will be interesting to see how Valentine handles this situation and how to maximize his value. Obviously the wrist was an issue last season but there is definitely reason to believe Crawford was trying to play like somebody that he isn't. Would it be worth it to bat Crawford second to try and get his mind straight even though he may be best served batting sixth or seventh?

[jasail]

The issue to me is two fold: 1) he's not a good enough hitter to move Ellsbury, Pedroia and Gonzalez out of the top 3; and 2) you don't want him on base behind Gonzo/Youk/Ortiz because you minimize his skill set.

So, where does that leave Carl? Depending on how shortstop shakes out, I have him hit 8th or 9th (until Youk hits the DL).

1) Ellsbury
2) Pedroia
3) Gonzalez
4) Youkilis
5) Ortiz
6) Ross/Sweeney
7) Salty
8) Crawford or Aviles
9) Punto/Iglesias or Crawford

Personally, I'd rather Carl hit .260/.310/.750 out of the 8 or 9 spots and always have the green light and have the top 5 spots go to +.290/.370/.825 guys, than have Crawford .290/.330/.775 out of the 1 or 2 spot and reduce the RBI and PA opportunities for our best hitters.

His strengths are speed and defense; Sox should focus on maximizing that. And even though I'd really like to have a better #6 hitter, this team has plenty of offense.

The only way I change the top 5 is if Ellsbury continues to beat the crap out of ball at a 30HR/.900+ OPS pace. If that happens I'd move Pedroia around and have Ellsbury bat #2 to increase RBI opportunities.

Edited by jasail, 24 February 2012 - 03:16 PM.

[AimingForYoko]

Ah Crawford. Much like Wakefield, as much as I like you, you really do not belong on this team.

The bottom of the order is really the only place that makes sense. I know some have said the middle of the order, but that makes even less sense than lead off. Fourth would place him behind a guy we nicknamed Turtle for a reason, and the same issue arises with Youk (whose hip is screwy) and Papi. All options that leave CC nowhere to run to on the basepaths.

I see no point in messing with a rotation that works to shoehorn Carl in.

[ivanvamp]

Here are Crawford's career #'s by batting order position (baseball-reference.com):

1. 1728 pa, .284/.319/.415/.734
2. 2705 pa, .303/.346/.460/.806
3. 863 pa, .291/.336/.448/.784
4. n/a
5. n/a
6. 198 pa, .282.308/.452/.760
7. 150 pa, .299/.351/.522/.874
8. 156 pa, .238/.277/.347/.624
9. 129 pa, .285/.305/.358/.662

From these numbers, it seems like the #2 or #7 spot is the best place for him, with the #7 spot being his best. Now, there's a LOT more data from which to make a judgment about the #2 spot, so maybe he's right that he just feels more comfortable there. So let's work with the assumption that he's correct and he should be in the 2 hole. Say you get the "really good Carl" if they move him back to the 2 hole, and he puts up a .303/.346/.460/.806 line, also taking advantage of his tremendous speed on the basepaths. I think we all would agree that this would constitute a pretty serious offensive weapon, especially given the rest of the lineup.

So that's how to maximize Carl. But what about the rest of the lineup?

According to (http://deadcatsbounc...arances-by.html), here are the average number of plate appearances by spot in the order:

1st - 762
2nd - 743
3rd - 725
4th - 709
5th - 693
6th - 675
7th - 657
8th - 638
9th - 618

I'm sure it fluctuates from year to year, but let's work with this. If everyone stays healthy (a big "if", but work with me), and they go with essentially last year's lineup, here are the number of PA per player:

1st - Ellsbury - 762
2nd - Pedroia - 743
3rd - Gonzalez - 725
4th - Youkilis - 709
5th - Ortiz - 693
6th - Crawford - 675
7th - Ross/Sweeney - 657
8th - Aviles - 638
9th - Saltalamacchia/backup C - 618

If they move Crawford up to the 2 spot, where he says he's much more comfortable, here's what the lineup looks like:

1st - Ellsbury - 762
2nd - Crawford - 743
3rd - Pedroia - 725
4th - Gonzalez - 709
5th - Youkilis - 693
6th - Ortiz - 675
7th - Ross/Sweeney - 657
8th - Aviles - 638
9th - Saltalamacchia/backup C - 618

So everything else stays the same except for Pedroia, Gonzalez, Youkilis, and Ortiz. Here's the rough number of PA each guy would lose in this scenario:

Pedroia: 18
Gonzalez: 16
Youkilis: 16
Ortiz: 18

So (and I know this is a lot of speculation, because, really, who knows?) let's make the comparison....

Scenario 1 - Crawford in his "uncomfortable spot in the lineup" produces like he did last year overall: .255/.289/.405/.694, and Pedroia, Gonzo, Youks, and Ortiz do what they normally do (let's assume they aren't affected by batting order slotting, b/c they've not really complained about that ever, so far as I'm aware):

2nd - Pedroia - 743 - .305/.373/.463/.837
3rd - Gonzalez - 725 - .293/.375/.514/.889
4th - Youkilis - 709 - .289/.391/.492/.883
5th - Ortiz - 693 - .283/.378/.544/.922
6th - Crawford - 675 - .255/.289/.405/.694

Scenario 2 - Crawford moves to the 2-spot and produces his career norms in that role: .303/.346/.460/.806

2nd - Crawford - 743 - .303/.346/.460/.806
3rd - Pedroia - 743 - .305/.373/.463/.837
4th - Gonzalez - 725 - .293/.375/.514/.889
5th - Youkilis - 709 - .289/.391/.492/.883
6th - Ortiz - 693 - .283/.378/.544/.922

It would seem to me that the few PAs you'd lose for each of the four other guys would be worth it if you could get that kind of improvement from Crawford.

Of course, this little exercise assumes: (1) that Crawford actually will rebound pretty much back to his career norms by being in the more comfortable 2 spot, and (2) that the other guys that would move down wouldn't be negatively impacted by such a move.

Both of those assumptions, it should be clearly noted, are questionable. If we knew what would happen, then this decision would be easy. :-)

[Trotsky]

Seriously? Bat him 6th or 7th to start the season. That's not only where he was most "effective" last season, it's where he deserves to be until he can prove otherwise. And if the lineup is working out great, then he should stay where he is in the order since it is being effective. If someone is struggling but Carl is hot (wouldn't we all love a Hot Carl to start the season? I know I would just LOOOOVE IT!!!! Oh boy. Sign me up!) then you adjust accordingly. Geez.

[jasail]

Ivan - Scenario 1 also assumes that Crawford will not rebound from career lows in offensive production and then attributes these career lows entirely to his batting lower in the lineup. I think both assumptions are deeply flawed. There is not statistical and/or medical evidence that demonstrates Crawford's production will continue to be replacement level or worse. In fact, I'd argue that his career numbers provide the counter-point and his talent alone dictates that he will improve next season regardless of where he hits. Moreover, attributing his poor performance to his batting slot overlooks other, perhaps even more pressing reasons, like injury, pressing and the psychology of struggling. Also, I don't think his slash stats per batting slot are all that valuable as most of his ABs in the lower part of the lineup heavily rely on early career production and a statistical outlier (last season), while his slash stats at the top of the lineup are driven by a bulk of his playing career and to that point I think you could argue if you wanted to hit him 1/2/3, he is most comfortable in the 2-hole. I think I understand what you were trying to do in this post, but juxtaposing worst case and best case scenarios doesn't really help elucidate where Crawford should hit.

The issue with Crawford was that he was signed with the underlying pretense that Ellsbury was not likely the dynamic top of the lineup player they previously thought he was and they were ready to pay Crawford huge money to be that player and let Ellsbury slide into the bottom of the lineup where he can be the Brett Gardner and hit singles and steal bases. Then Ellsbury has a monster season and is a better player than Crawford has ever been and Crawford struggles. So the reality is, if Ellsbury continues to play better than Crawford, the only place for him to hit is the bottom of the lineup and his role is to play defense and steal bases. Unfortunately, that job description isn't the on for a $140M player should be hitting, nor (and rightfully so) is it one that a player of his caliber should be asked to fill.

[AimingForYoko]

Really as this does is re-iterate my point that CC really doesn't belong here. It's like trying to shove the square block in the round slot. Even if Carl plays awesome, he still has to be put in a position that utilizes his best skills. That automatically excludes at least 4 spots unless Gonzalez is allowed to use a scooter around the bases and Youk gets Tim Thomas-like magic hip surgery.

Either way I don't envy Valentines job. And I can't imagine it makes Carl feel great.

[jnlevetoncnmt]

Really as this does is re-iterate my point that CC really doesn't belong here.

This is how I felt the moment they signed him. A guy with around a .340 OBP, with not much power to play LF at Fenway? Other than winning the world series, my biggest hope for this season is that Carl puts up around an 800 OPS and steals more than 30 bases. That way Ben can move him and his ridiculous contract somewhere else without paying the entire salary. LF in Fenway was intended for someone who can hit more than they can field.

[RabbitTwo]

agree with author good!

[Sampo Gida]

I don't care where Carl bats so long as it's not in the top 5. If he can hit like we hoped he would a month or two into the season, then move him up to replace someone who is not producing. If everyone is producing, Carl can stay where he is.

I hope to see better defense from him than last year. Defensively he was as much a disapointment as offensively.

[MikeM]

I got about half way through the thread on the main board, before it dawned on me that all this current speculation is being based on a guy who's projected to start the first few weeks of the season on the DL anyway. That, and it was basically just re-enforcing all the negativity there which i'm trying to let go of with the start of a new season.

Personally, i'm going to refrain from any more Crawford speculation going forward until the time comes where i have to. Besides, perceptions about where this lineup stands as a whole could change drastically between now and then.

[SpruceTrap]

I would bat Crawford 6th or 7th depending on how he and Ortiz hit. That being said, I think more people should consider the posibility of Sweeney leading off. He sees nearly 4 pitches per at bat and he has a .342 career OBP mostly in Oakland.

[Eck'sSneakyCheese]

It really all comes down to how consistent Bobby V is with his lineup configuration. Last year it seemed like there was a different lineup every day. It was pretty frustrating to watch nevermind having to play like that. The configuration itself doesn't really matter as long as the players can have time to get comfortable hitting in whatever position they're put in. Most if not all of them are creatures of habit who will benefit from repitition.

What the hell I put my two cents in though...

1st - Ellsbury
2nd - Crawford
3rd - Pedroia
4th - Gonzalez
5th - Ortiz
6th - Youkilis
7th - Salty
8th - Aviles
9th - Ross/Sweeney

Crawford batting second seems to make the most sense. With Ells leading off, having that much speed on base ahead of Pedroia and Gonzalez would be pretty nice. Let him hit where he's comfortable and give him time to get in a groove. Nevermind the round-robin shit from last year. Sending someone to the bottom of the order doesn't really make sense. Might he snap out of his rut if you just left him alone?

[Sampo Gida]

It really all comes down to how consistent Bobby V is with his lineup configuration. Last year it seemed like there was a different lineup every day. It was pretty frustrating to watch nevermind having to play like that. The configuration itself doesn't really matter as long as the players can have time to get comfortable hitting in whatever position they're put in. Most if not all of them are creatures of habit who will benefit from repitition.

There were so many different lineups last year for a reason.

First the 2-10 start had Tito juggling the lineup looking for a spot for Crawford. Crawford was awful so Tito had no choice but to drop him down to 7th then 8th before he got injured in June and Reddick took his place.

Ellsbury did not win Tito confidence until mid April when he became full time leadoff.

Scutaro had a bad start and Lowrie took his job after a hot week. Scutaro then went on the DL and when he came back Lowrie was not performing well and so Scutaro got his job back.

Injuries to JD and Youk also necessitated some changes.

We still scored ton of runs despite the different lineups.

I think Bobby V alluded to the fact he will show a bunch of different lineups as well, especially the platoons we expect to see at SS and RF. He also looks likely to platoon Papi if he gets off to a bad start against LHP'ers. Youk is also probably going to get frequent days off to prevent him breaking down.

Bobby V is not real concerned about making players comfortable, at least he wasn't when he was with the Mets.

Crawford batting second seems to make the most sense. With Ells leading off, having that much speed on base ahead of Pedroia and Gonzalez would be pretty nice. Let him hit where he's comfortable and give him time to get in a groove. Nevermind the round-robin shit from last year. Sending someone to the bottom of the order doesn't really make sense. Might he snap out of his rut if you just left him alone?

After Crawfords awful 2011, and given the fact he is coming off a wrist injury that could linger, not to mention he will be tweaking his swing, I see no good reason to promote him to the top of the lineup. Scoring runs was not a problem with him at the bottom of the lineup last year, so why fix whats not broke. If he is going to be such a prima dona about where he hits in the lineup, it's going to be a long 6 years. To his credit, he did not whine last year, so I think he will be ok with wherever Bobby V places him.

This does not rule out him moving up to the top of the lineup at some point, but I am opposed to moving him up just to make him "comfortable" . Sets a real bad example IMO. Also, the pressure to produce at the top of the lineup may actually work against Crawford bouncing back. Let him get comfortable with his swing first.

Edited by Sampo Gida, 26 February 2012 - 02:59 AM.

[Eck'sSneakyCheese]

There were so many different lineups last year for a reason.

First the 2-10 start had Tito juggling the lineup looking for a spot for Crawford. Crawford was awful so Tito had no choice but to drop him down to 7th then 8th before he got injured in June and Reddick took his place.

Ellsbury did not win Tito confidence until mid April when he became full time leadoff.

Scutaro had a bad start and Lowrie took his job after a hot week. Scutaro then went on the DL and when he came back Lowrie was not performing well and so Scutaro got his job back.

Injuries to JD and Youk also necessitated some changes.

We still scored ton of runs despite the different lineups.

I think Bobby V alluded to the fact he will show a bunch of different lineups as well, especially the platoons we expect to see at SS and RF. He also looks likely to platoon Papi if he gets off to a bad start against LHP'ers. Youk is also probably going to get frequent days off to prevent him breaking down.

Bobby V is not real concerned about making players comfortable, at least he wasn't when he was with the Mets.

I completely understand changing the lineup due to Injuries, days off, and whether you're facing a lefty or a righty both NL and AL. So other than about 5 or 6 different lineups with your "complete" team I don't see the reason to change so often. In those first 12 games last year it seemed like there were 12 lineups. It didn't make sense for Tito to shuffle Crawford around in such a small sample size "awful" or not. The lineup needed time to gel.

I would hope that the major lineup shuffling will work it's way out in ST, and then the normal 5 or 6 will be played throughout the season.

There isn't going to be a platoon at SS. Whoever wins the starting spot will play the majority. I don't really consider 80/20 or 90/10 a platoon, and Punto is going to be (for now) the utility guy off the bench.

As far as the platoon in RF or potentially DH, I don't see the lineup changing for whoever's playing. RF is going to hit in a spot (I have it 9th) and the DH is going to hit in a spot (5th).

I don't see a healthy Youk getting frequent days off either. Pretty sure they'd have to drug him to prevent him from playing.

After Crawfords awful 2011, and given the fact he is coming off a wrist injury that could linger, not to mention he will be tweaking his swing, I see no good reason to promote him to the top of the lineup. Scoring runs was not a problem with him at the bottom of the lineup last year, so why fix whats not broke. If he is going to be such a prima dona about where he hits in the lineup, it's going to be a long 6 years. To his credit, he did not whine last year, so I think he will be ok with wherever Bobby V places him.

This does not rule out him moving up to the top of the lineup at some point, but I am opposed to moving him up just to make him "comfortable" . Sets a real bad example IMO. Also, the pressure to produce at the top of the lineup may actually work against Crawford bouncing back. Let him get comfortable with his swing first.

I wasn't saying to put him hitting 2nd to comfort his ego, rather his bat. Furthermore, why put a player who's making $20mil in the bottom of the order? Doesn't that say as an organization "We fucked up." Doesn't that set a worse example? Don't you have to take into account the guys confidence, not his ego? Also, if he hits in the bottom of the order it would be under utilizing one of his greatest skill sets in base-stealing. Do you really want him hitting behind Papi, Youks or Salty? The slowest base-runners on the team. He has all of ST to get "comfortable." Isn't that what ST is for?

What happened last year, happened last year. The players are different, the situation is different. Everyone has another year of progression or regression. Saying what worked last year will work this year doesn't make sense.

Edited by Eck'sSneakyCheese, 26 February 2012 - 08:14 AM.

[rglenmt]

We, fans and quasi GMs, are going to find out how valuable Carl Crawford can be. In the last couple of years there has been talk of acquiring either of the Upton CFs, Andre Ethier, re-acquiring Jason Bay, who the Mets should probably try to teach to play 1B (Mets have already brought in the OF fences of the team's new Stadium, Carlso Beltran, Grady Sizemore, Pence, re-acquiring beloved and behated Johnny "on the spot" Johny Damon, signing ManRam Ramirez etc. etc. etc. Good that Ben Cheri (Cherington who I think will make us forget Theo very quickly when we see the Red Sox team even in ST, despite fact that Ben and Wendy are no longer married) It does seem that we cannot wait until ST, nevermind Regular 2012 Season critizie additions and very few players Ben has assembled. Not saying Bobby V, Ben or ML scouts get all the credit, however, too many fans, including smart SOSHers, having already labeled the 2012 Team a bust, oh, by the way, significantly the same team prior to the 2011 Season, the "Best Team" in Organized baseball.

Anyway, IM not so humble HIO at one time, sans serious injury could have, like Tony Conigliaro with whom I tried out as a catcher for the Hearst All Stars, would have by now been inducted into the HOF, Bobby V, the other who could have been in the HOF, will figure out, mostly I bet on whether Pesky Pedroia RH power can be better used in the 3 spot, would not surprise me whatsoever, if Carl Crawford bats in the 2 spot behind the 2011 MVP Jacoby, Dustin in the 3 spot, Adrian in the 4th, Big Papi in the 5th spot, Kevin Youkilis in the 6th spot (does the rest of the lineup even matter with Ryan Lavarnway playing some LF while Carl Crawford spends a few games futher fortifying his wrist, Ryan, another Ryan Sweeney platoons with Lavarnway, Cody Ross, in RF and LF and once our dear Red Sox are ahead in the standings by 12 games, maybe most of us GMs wannabee(s) will stop questioning Ben Cheri, forget Roy Oswalt whose back is worse tha Clay [I am an Idiot] was in 2011. Just remember one of Theo's tenets, I suggest Theo got from the more experienced Ben Cheri, the games are played on the field and if wannabee GMs ran ML teams, most fans would give up on their favorite teams by mid-May.


Respectfully submitted,

rglenmt f/k/a pudgefick

Edited by rglenmt, 27 February 2012 - 11:05 AM.

[FinanceAdvice]

Excellent posts by all, especially Ivan's in-depth analysis. This question is one situation how Bobby V will function as the new manager. Hopefully he will have the people skills to sit down with Crawford and explain his reasons. Not to mention that Crawford has the maturity of a professional attitude to accept that. Based on the top 5 of the order, I see no logical reason to move Crawford any higher than 6th. His stunk last year, plain and simple. To move him second, takes away Pedey's natural postion where he seems most suited. Thus, if I were manager, heres my "adjustable" lineup.

Ells
Pedey
Adrian Gonzalezz
Youk
Ortiz
Sweeney/Ross
Crawford
Aviles
Salty/Shoppach

It's economically insane to place a $140 million dollar man in the 7th hole. However, the goal/roles are to score runs and win games and this is where I believe Crawford will be the most productive. This could be academic because in reality, I think the teams success will be based on pitching. Thus, Im going to the thread on how to build a rotation.

[walkoffblast]

Until he proves he can get on base at a reasonable rate then there is no reason to consider him for higher in the lineup. If he does that then I think there could be a decent case for the two spot at some point. Coming off an injury and everything else I think the team has a good excuse to start him lower in the lineup and see what happens. I am not sure Crawford is as much a bad fit as the team really wasn't expecting to have Ortiz on the team this year when they signed Crawford.

[Trotsky]

Idea from the main board that I'd wholly support is dealing Crawford and his contract straight up to the Nationals for Werth and his contract. Yes, Werth sucked last season equally, but he makes more sense in this lineup than Crawford. Hits right, has better discipline and his defensive skills (or lack thereof) aren't wasted in LF.
Good looking lineup here:

Ellsbury
Pedroia
Adrian
Youk
Ortiz
Werth
and then the rest....

[OnWisc]

After Crawfords awful 2011, and given the fact he is coming off a wrist injury that could linger, not to mention he will be tweaking his swing, I see no good reason to promote him to the top of the lineup. Scoring runs was not a problem with him at the bottom of the lineup last year, so why fix whats not broke. If he is going to be such a prima dona about where he hits in the lineup, it's going to be a long 6 years. To his credit, he did not whine last year, so I think he will be ok with wherever Bobby V places him.

This does not rule out him moving up to the top of the lineup at some point, but I am opposed to moving him up just to make him "comfortable" . Sets a real bad example IMO. Also, the pressure to produce at the top of the lineup may actually work against Crawford bouncing back. Let him get comfortable with his swing first.

I think this is dead on. Crawford's here for six years. Plenty of time for him to get used to batting in the bottom third, assuming he doesn't turn things around. Lineup cards designed to appease Carl would be a bad idea. And I'm pretty comfortable that it won't happen.

That said, if Crawford does rebound, I really love the idea of him batting second behind Ellsbury. Having one or both those guys on base before the 3-4-5 would be pretty ideal. And entertaining. And I wouldn't object to trying him out ther relatively early on. In that scenario, he's going to get pitches to hit. Might as well find out if he can do anything with them.

[AimingForYoko]

Idea from the main board that I'd wholly support is dealing Crawford and his contract straight up to the Nationals for Werth and his contract. Yes, Werth sucked last season equally, but he makes more sense in this lineup than Crawford. Hits right, has better discipline and his defensive skills (or lack thereof) aren't wasted in LF.
Good looking lineup here:

Ellsbury
Pedroia
Adrian
Youk
Ortiz
Werth
and then the rest....

While I'm not sure about that specific deal, I would consider trading CC, but after the season started because no one will take him if his wrist doesn't look right. The idea of Crawford going somewhere that he actually fits would make me happy, because I really do like the guy, and I think it would make him happy too. And at least on the Nationals, he could run whenever he felt like it.

Man, ownership really did not think this thing out. I get they wanted to make a splash and all but still.

[Trotsky]

Well it's two albatross contracts exchanged that both at least fit better. Werth's skill set is at least a theoretical better set for Fenway (and I'd bet his SLG would get a serious bounce hitting in Fenway) while Crawford's D and baserunning would be better suited for Natstown.
I still can't figure out why Theo wanted him so badly. Since '04 he's been pretty awful (I suspect his success prior created some oversized ego problems). His Drew signing was okay and his Gonzalez trade was great. Other than that he's been pretty crappy. Beckett and Lowell was when he was away. He's done Clement. Wells. (both just okay) Lugo. Lackey. Renteria. Crisp deal. Crawford. Nothing in there to really boast about. I actually see Ben doing what Theo had done previous to '04 this season but with more payroll constraints (as far as new allocation of funds, not things on the books already).

clunky post.

[Sampo Gida]

Man, ownership really did not think this thing out. I get they wanted to make a splash and all but still.

I think they did think it out. In the aftermath of 2010, much like 2006, they felt they needed to make some improvements. The OF in 2010 was a mess, in part because Jacoby and Cameron were hurt, and JD's decline. They had no prospects to step in, and Ellsbury, Drew and Cameron were all question marks due to age and/or injury.

According to Jason Werth, the Red Sox offered him a 4 year deal but the Nats gave him a better deal, at least in years. After losing out on Werth, who would have been a cheaper option and better fit, the only option was Crawford.

Crawford was not a great fit for so many reasons that have been discussed before and elsewhere, but did anyone really imagine him having the year he did last year? I did not. Of course, the Mets (Bay), Nats (Werth) and White Sox (Dunn) probably never imagined the guys they signed would be perform as poorly as they did either.

The jury is still out on all of these players, except maybe Bay, so we shall have to see how he/they do this year.

[TOleary25]

I still can't figure out why Theo wanted him so badly. Since '04 he's been pretty awful (I suspect his success prior created some oversized ego problems).

Your probably just talking about trades and free agent signings but it wasn't all bad. Notable Players drafted from '05 to '08: Ellsbury, Buchholz, Lowrie, Bard, Masterson, Casey Kelly, Rizzo, Middlebrooks. But as you pointed out, he needed to draft well because of so many poor free agent signings.

[Royal Reader]

It's economically insane to place a $140 million dollar man in the 7th hole. However, the goal/roles are to score runs and win games and this is where I believe Crawford will be the most productive. This could be academic because in reality, I think the teams success will be based on pitching. Thus, Im going to the thread on how to build a rotation.

It might be, although I'm sure you understand the concept of a sunk cost. I would question whether it's an insane use of an expensive guy with his skillset, though. His primary value is with his legs, and speed is an attribute best used in front of guys who aren't going to hitting too many XBH, and where 'Taking the bat out of his hands' is less of an issue. Ninth makes little sense simply because for all his faults, he's going to be more likely to drive guys in than Aviles or Salty. The whole 'second leadoff hitter' idea imho isn't worth giving truly execrable hitters more ABs when one would think a CC bounceback is fairly likely.

[Trotsky]

Your probably just talking about trades and free agent signings but it wasn't all bad. Notable Players drafted from '05 to '08: Ellsbury, Buchholz, Lowrie, Bard, Masterson, Casey Kelly, Rizzo, Middlebrooks. But as you pointed out, he needed to draft well because of so many poor free agent signings.

Yeah, leaving out his drafts, although (and really this applies to any GM/team), one could go through and find plenty of higher ceiling and higher floor players that he passed on. I also have been under the standing that Cherington was actually more responsible for drafting of players.

Anyhow. Don't care about how much $$ he's making per AAV or year or life of a contract. He played like crap last season and doesn't deserve to be put higher up in the lineup until he can show that the team will perform better as a unit with him higher up.

[MikeM]

I still can't figure out why Theo wanted him so badly.

Because you are looking at it from an overall perspective of an organazation, when it's the short-term value for the individual there that ultimately pushed the decision. I mean if you were a GM who was already preparing to orchestrate your exit out of town, arguably only had one glaring hole in your current/primed-to-win-now roster, and possessed both the means and internal influence to get your owner to sign off on such a opportunity, who's your pick to be starting LF'er in 2012 (and worst case scenario 2013, in the event you didn't end up finding yourself in the best possible position for that final financial cash-in on your fast expiring reputation earlier. On that note, oh look, the haven't-won-title-in-forever Cubs are looking for a GM!)? Maximizing the potential for short term resume success is all that really matters there, not the projections for how that might effect the Red Sox in years 3,4,5,6 and 7. If the initally skeptical owner ends up feeling like he was manipulated latter with the bill of goods you were selling him at the time, and takes a shot at you which is only going to end up being at the player's expense, so be it. That's essentially not your problem anymore.

....or at least that's my personal theory, and the only way i can make any sense of the utter dismissal of that overall rhyme and reason that ultimately seemed to dictate his decision making process the 8 years prior

[MikeM]

I think they did think it out. In the aftermath of 2010, much like 2006, they felt they needed to make some improvements. The OF in 2010 was a mess, in part because Jacoby and Cameron were hurt, and JD's decline. They had no prospects to step in, and Ellsbury, Drew and Cameron were all question marks due to age and/or injury.

According to Jason Werth, the Red Sox offered him a 4 year deal but the Nats gave him a better deal, at least in years. After losing out on Werth, who would have been a cheaper option and better fit, the only option was Crawford.

Of course if this was ringing true, one would then have to wonder why aren't sitting here now potentially slotting in Matt Holliday.

Theo stops short on Holliday at 5 years, but a year latter views 7 years of Carl Crawford (at $20+ of what Holliday ended up getting) to be "the only option"? Ehhh, that's not quite adding up in my book.

[koufax37]

Griping about lineup placement when you are coming off a .289OBP season is pretty ridiculous. I hope he returns to being himself and this is an argument we can deal with, but right now moving ahead of any of our top five hitters makes no sense at all.

My biggest concern is his mental weakness to be so drastically affected by these things (like the closer who can't pitch in a non-save situation). He gets up to bad, and he needs to have good at bats to get on base, get extra base hits, etc., just like any other spot. Don't try for more homeruns, we are happy to have you on base if you can find a way. Don't worry about David Ortiz "clogging up" your basepaths. We would be happy to have both of you on base in the first place, but in the 60% of the time Ortiz doesn't reach, we could still use you there.

Also, I think his speed plays really well in the 6 and 7 spots anyway. I don't want him getting thrown out in front of Pedroia and Gonzalez anyway, but turning a single/walk into a runner in scoring position before the bottom of the order seems even more valuable.

I'm still going to be optimistic on CC, and even if he doesn't rebound, it is likely that 2011 will be his worst season anyway, but in my mind he is going to have to hit his way out of the 6/7 hole, and stop being a mental midget with excuses until he does.

[Trotsky]

eh... let's not even talk about Holliday. Big mistake not going after him..... seemed like that was the obvious plan after deciding (smartly) to let Bay go. And then to find out it was a pretty mild attempt to get him (and Werth) and a Balls to the Wall attempt to get Crawford still doesn't make sense. There were some stories floating around late last fall that Cashman "leaked" to the press that he was going all out to get Crawford and it forced Theo into a panic mode. Who knows.
I'm hoping for the best. He seems like an idiot (not in the Buchholz or Damon way) but a nice enough guy. Just hope to get him back around an .800OPS. Out of the 6 or 7 slot, that'd be fantastic!

[TOleary25]

My biggest concern is his mental weakness to be so drastically affected by these things (like the closer who can't pitch in a non-save situation). He gets up to bad, and he needs to have good at bats to get on base, get extra base hits, etc., just like any other spot.

This is what I was originally getting at when starting this thread. Based on his comments, it seems that where he bats can change his approach rather than playing his game. He seems convinced theres nothing he can do but swing for the fences when batting sixth or seventh. I agree with most people in this thread that he belongs 6th or 7th, but if he has to bat 2nd to regain his confidence and produce like his last two years in Tampa it may be worth a look.

[Sampo Gida]

Of course if this was ringing true, one would then have to wonder why aren't sitting here now potentially slotting in Matt Holliday.

Theo stops short on Holliday at 5 years, but a year latter views 7 years of Carl Crawford (at $20+ of what Holliday ended up getting) to be "the only option"? Ehhh, that's not quite adding up in my book.

Missing the playoffs triggered the panic move. Holliday was a FA following a string for 3 consecutive years making the playoffs. The last time the Red Sox went on a similar spending spree (200 million for Daisuke, JD and Lugo ) came after another 3 year playoff streak was broken. After 2010 they spent 300 million and 3 prospects for Crawford, A-Gon and Jenks). It all adds up.

The Red Sox obviously don't believe in going back to back with spending sprees, that way leads to financial ruin, and are betting that last years spending spree pays dividends this year.

[Stanley Steamer]

It seems almost unanimous here that Carl shouldn't be moved up in the order, given his recent track record, specifically OBP. I don't want to disagree with the logic, which is sound. Yet I wouldn't be surprised if Bobby gives him a chance at hitting somewhere in the top 3 when he returns. The primary reason would be to get him going, to build his confidence, so that he could be the player everyone wants him to be. Another factor may be Bobby's style as compared to Tito's. I don't yet know how Bobby will manage, but Tito was definitely set on alternating L/R hitters in the lineup, and maximizing OBP at the top of the order. This may turn out to be less of a priority now. I think Pedey, Youk and Adrian will hit no matter where they are, so there may be some flexibility there. I'm curious to see how it plays out. As far as trading Carl, I think that's a longshot. How good would he need to play for any team to pick up most of his contract? And if he was playing that well, would we want to trade him? Maybe in 2-3 years, but not likely now.

[keyalyn]

We shouldn't really put too much emphasis on his low career OBP, since much of that is due to him being put into a starting role in the majors at age 21. He wasn't ready at that point and struggled mightily in his first season and a half in Tampa. His OBP at that point was very low, and continued to be very low for the next few seasons, but he had a .350OBP during his final 5 seasons in Tampa. That figure is well above average for a hitter batting second in the AL (OBPs of .331, .333, .337 and .330 the last 4 seasons). If he can get his OBP to the point it was over his last 5 seasons in Tampa, it will be above average for the position.

He should clearly earn the position and not be given it to make him feel more confident, but his OBP should not keep him at the bottom of the lineup if he can rebound to 2006-2010 levels.

Edited by keyalyn, 28 February 2012 - 11:10 PM.

[Sampo Gida]

We shouldn't really put too much emphasis on his low career OBP, since much of that is due to him being put into a starting role in the majors at age 21. He wasn't ready at that point and struggled mightily in his first season and a half in Tampa. His OBP at that point was very low, and continued to be very low for the next few seasons, but he had a .350OBP during his final 5 seasons in Tampa. That figure is well above average for a hitter batting second in the AL (OBPs of .331, .333, .337 and .330 the last 4 seasons). If he can get his OBP to the point it was over his last 5 seasons in Tampa, it will be above average for the position.

He should clearly earn the position and not be given it to make him feel more confident, but his OBP should not keep him at the bottom of the lineup if he can rebound to 2006-2010 levels.

This is a good point, but why compare his OBP to the average #2 hitter. FWIW, Red Sox and Yankees #2 hitters OBP in 2011 were 371 and 378 respectively.

Then there is Crawfords OBP against LHP'ers to consider

2011-249
2010-312
2009-325

I think if Crawford gets to the top part of the order, it should be limited to games when RHP'ers start. His OBP against RHP'ers is much better.

[rglenmt]

I suggest that Carl Crawford will be on All Star teams at least half of his remaining Seasons with the Red Sox, further, although I do have any empirical evidence for this thought, I doubt Jayson Werth will be in the MLs in 4 seasons. IMHO Carl Crawford has a much higher upside for the balance of Carl Crawford's and Jayson Werth's careers, and the Red Sox in signing Carl Crawford will ultimately be a wise signing. If Jacoby signs with a different team, Carl Crawford will be considered for becoming a leadoff hitter, a CF, but most significantly compare Crawford's and Werth's careers to date and it is doubtful any knowledeable fan would conclude that Jayson Werth has had a career on the same level as Carl Crawford. Of course, none of us, not even Theo Epstein or Ben Cherington can predict with certainty, what Werth's and Crawford's career stats, and most importantly success of their respective teams will look like after they have ceased playing ML Baseball.

rglenmt f/k/a pudgefick

Edited by rglenmt, 29 February 2012 - 11:00 AM.

[koufax37]

I don't think All Star teams is a good barometer, but that would be a pleasant surprise. I'm not sure why you think Jayson Werth won't be in the majors in four years, but it would need a significant injury and not any talent issue for that to be the case.

But you then say that "signing Carl Crawford will ultimately be a wise signing", which I can't imagine being true. The contract is signed, the player is ours, and I will be rooting for him, but there is no way that the contract ends up looking good, and I think many of us were happy to have the player on our roster when he signed, but the dollars didn't make sense even then.

And this winter for the first time we feel the effect of non-wise contracts on our payroll flexibility. We don't have Madson for a few dollars. We don't have Scutaro for a few dollars. We maybe don't have Oswalt for a few dollars. We don't have Pujols for...nevermind on that one.

My hope for Carl is that he gets back to where he was, performs well over the balance of the contract, helps us win some games, and slides into the territory of JD Drew as a good player who didn't match the contract, but still useful to have on the team.

I suggest that Carl Crawford will be on All Star teams at least half of his remaining Seasons with the Red Sox, further, although I do have any empirical evidence for this thought, I doubt Jayson Werth will be in the MLs in 4 seasons. IMHO Carl Crawford has a much higher upside for the balance of Carl Crawford's and Jayson Werth's careers, and the Red Sox in signing Carl Crawford will ultimately be a wise signing. If Jacoby signs with a different team, Carl Crawford will be considered for becoming a leadoff hitter, a CF, but most significantly compare Crawford's and Werth's careers to date and it is doubtful any knowledeable fan would conclude that Jayson Werth has had a career on the same level as Carl Crawford. Of course, none of us, not even Theo Epstein or Ben Cherington can predict with certainty, what Werth's and Crawford's career stats, and most importantly success of their respective teams will look like after they have ceased playing ML Baseball.

rglenmt f/k/a pudgefick

[KillerBs]

Crawford whinging about batting down in the order after the terrible year he had is really too much. It makes no sense at all to bat Crawford up in the order after the year he had. And Valentine is not doing him any favors if he does so. If he bats second and goes 1 for his first 12 he'll hear it. This guy is at risk of getting booed out of town and the team would do well to lower our expectations for him. The more I think about it, the more I like him in the 8 or 9 hole, where he proved last year he belongs. Advance him as his performance justifies it. If all goes well, Sweeney and Crawford could serve as good table setters down there for Ellsbury and Pedroia. If Carl really starts hitting maybe move him to leadoff in May or June. Salty is the number 6 hitter on this team vs RHPers with a decent chance for a breakout year. I like Aviles in the 7 hole instead of Crawford, to break up the lefties a bit there. Ortiz -- Salty -- Crawford is highly vulnerable to a lefty reliever, which we are going to see a lot of the 3rd and 4th time thru the order. The implicit message to Carl: STFU and start playing a lot better. The PR message: we need to get guys on base in front of Jacoby and Dustin. Batting 8th or 9th on this team is a critical spot in the order, a promotion in effect.

vs. RHP

Ellsbury
Pedroia
Gonzalez
Youkilis
Ortiz
Salty
Aviles
Crawford
Sweeney


vs. LHP

Ellsbury
Pedroia
Gonzalez
Youkilis
Ortiz
Ross
Shoppach
Crawford
Aviles

[Eck'sSneakyCheese]

Alright... The harping on Crawford because of last year needs to come to an end. Doesn't the guy deserve a chance? Isn't this about the same situation as Renteria when he had a slow start? I know there are many out there who believe he should've stuck around even though he had an awful first year. What from Crawfords past shows any of you that he isn't going to turn it around this year? Too my knowledge Crawford hasn't openly whined about anything. Don't get me wrong his contract sucks and he probably wasn't the best "fit" for this team when signed, but he's a really good player that needs to adjust to playing here and heal from an injury that plagued him for the better part of the year. It wasn't just his bat that suffered last year it was his all around game. Isn't it fairly obvious that there was something wrong? He was a table-setter in Tampa and killed us when he was there, not to mention the rest of the AL East. Can we let some ST games go by before we burn him in effigy? If he does end up being terrible at the end of this year I'll bring the matches... OK?

I apologize for the rant the "He wicked friggin sucks" attitude is grinding on me. (Boston accent implied)

KB, you chastize Crawford for a shit year and then put Youks hitting cleanup. What did you see from Youk last year to show you he would have the best performance there?

Also, there's absolutely no way you're going to convince a ML player that hitting 9th in the order is a promotion. No matter what spin you put on it. I've heard that Crawford has a reputation for being a little dim but he's not a retard. So, basically STFU and play better, BUT we're promoting you to the bottom of the order until you start hitting, then we'll demote you to the top of the lineup?

If anyone in the order starts 1 for 12 they're going to hear it. Whoever they are. This is Boston.

There's no reason to lower our expectations for Crawford, in fact, I don't even think it's possible to do so. The guy's making 20 mil a year. Unless he restructures his contract, that's his benchmark.

[Trotsky]

If Pedroia starts out 1 for 12 he will not "hear it". He might if he then goes 1 for his following 12. But he's got some leeway with the Boston fans. Crawford doesn't and if he does "hear it" he'll tense up.

[AimingForYoko]

Alright... The harping on Crawford because of last year needs to come to an end. Doesn't the guy deserve a chance? Isn't this about the same situation as Renteria when he had a slow start? I know there are many out there who believe he should've stuck around even though he had an awful first year. What from Crawfords past shows any of you that he isn't going to turn it around this year? Too my knowledge Crawford hasn't openly whined about anything. Don't get me wrong his contract sucks and he probably wasn't the best "fit" for this team when signed, but he's a really good player that needs to adjust to playing here and heal from an injury that plagued him for the better part of the year. It wasn't just his bat that suffered last year it was his all around game. Isn't it fairly obvious that there was something wrong? He was a table-setter in Tampa and killed us when he was there, not to mention the rest of the AL East. Can we let some ST games go by before we burn him in effigy? If he does end up being terrible at the end of this year I'll bring the matches... OK?

I apologize for the rant the "He wicked friggin sucks" attitude is grinding on me. (Boston accent implied)

KB, you chastize Crawford for a shit year and then put Youks hitting cleanup. What did you see from Youk last year to show you he would have the best performance there?

Also, there's absolutely no way you're going to convince a ML player that hitting 9th in the order is a promotion. No matter what spin you put on it. I've heard that Crawford has a reputation for being a little dim but he's not a retard. So, basically STFU and play better, BUT we're promoting you to the bottom of the order until you start hitting, then we'll demote you to the top of the lineup?

If anyone in the order starts 1 for 12 they're going to hear it. Whoever they are. This is Boston.

There's no reason to lower our expectations for Crawford, in fact, I don't even think it's possible to do so. The guy's making 20 mil a year. Unless he restructures his contract, that's his benchmark.

Dude, I haven't read anything here that says that Crawford sucks! I think we're all agreement that he should have a better year, and we want him to have a better year. So relax.

And re: his "demotion", if CC lights the world on the fire, and the rest of team is going strong as well, where do you propose he hit?

[Eck'sSneakyCheese]

Dude, I haven't read anything here that says that Crawford sucks! I think we're all agreement that he should have a better year, and we want him to have a better year. So relax.

And re: his "demotion", if CC lights the world on the fire, and the rest of team is going strong as well, where do you propose he hit?

I already said I apoligize for the rant. It was just a general sense of the attitude I've gotten around here and the main board, not so much the words themselves.

The "demotion" comment was in regards to KB's post saying that batting 8th or 9th would be spun as a promotion. Not meant to be taken seriously.

I posted earlier that I expect him to bat 2nd. It just makes sense to have him bat after Ells in the lineup. It's not going to hurt Pedroia's production either he actually did pretty well batting 4th last year so 3rd wouldn't kill him. If Carl IS "lighting the world on fire" it makes our top 4, Ells, CC, Pedey, and A-Gon, arguably the best in baseball followed by Ortiz and Youks which could make it the best 6. You said yourself that hitting him behind the slower guys would be a bad idea. You also said that only leaves a few spots in which he can be put, and since I don't see him in the bottom of the order the only logical place would be 2nd. Batting him 9th would be like him leading off, for the most part, just with a giant slap in the face, and IMO that's not how you treat a player you've invested that much money in when you want him to rebound from a bad year.

[KillerBs]

Crawford's recent quote: "I can't do much hitting behind Big Papi." Can you believe that statement? CC has come this close to saying bat me second or I might just keep stinking. Apparently, it was Francona's lineups that caused Carl's 2012 suckitude. Again, you are doing this guy a favor by batting him way down in the order even if he does not understand that.

Imagine Lackey did not get hurt and getting shelled in his first start on April 8 at Fenway...after he complained in spring training that he should be the 2 starter on this team. The fan reaction would be akin to what Carl is going to hear if he struggles at all early after bitching his way into the 2-hole. He would be much better off getting truly pissed off by hitting in 8th or 9th and earning his way into the top half of the order all the while playing good soldier. And I was serious about the importance of having guys batting directly in front of Jacoby who can hit or at least get on base. Crawford, Sweeney, Ellsbury or Sweeney, Crawford, Ellsbury (at 8-9-1) has a chance to be a dynamite section of the order especially if Carl produces.

Edited by KillerBs, 01 March 2012 - 07:42 PM.

[Sampo Gida]

Well, now Crawfords had a bit of a set back, which is not really a surprise. It is a surprise he thinks it is the bunting.

http://www.boston.co...ck_for_cra.html

I think we have to assume his wrist injury/surgery will linger for some period of time as wrist injuries tend to do, so this seems to support the idea that any rush to move him to the top of the lineup, which was fine w/o him last year, would not be wise.

[Eck'sSneakyCheese]

Well, now Crawfords had a bit of a set back, which is not really a surprise. It is a surprise he thinks it is the bunting.

http://www.boston.co...ck_for_cra.html

I think we have to assume his wrist injury/surgery will linger for some period of time as wrist injuries tend to do, so this seems to support the idea that any rush to move him to the top of the lineup, which was fine w/o him last year, would not be wise.

This really isn't good news. This shows he wasn't as far along as he thought, the only hope is it's just a twinge or something minor. Still don't see how this affects where he'll hit when healthy though. For the time being it kills this dillema.

[Trotsky]

Who is supposed to be starting in LF until Crawford comes back? We've got Ross, Sweeney and McDonald as the expected reserve/platoon OF but I'm not exactly sure who to expect out there on opening day.

[Eck'sSneakyCheese]

I'm pretty sure Ross and Sweeney will be out there opening day. I know DMC has the "seniority" here but the other two are better players overall. As far as who plays where... Not even sure Bobby V knows that yet.

[Trotsky]

Well if Crawford is on the DL to start the season, I'd imagine we'll be seeing DMC there until Carl comes back. He'd (DMC) likely be released then....

[Eck'sSneakyCheese]

Took this from the WEEI site

FORT MYERS, Fla. -- Bobby Valentine said prior to the Red Sox' Grapefruit League opener, against the Twins at JetBlue Park, that he wouldn't hesitate hitting Dustin Pedroia first in the lineup, with Jacoby Ellsbury batting second, which is where the players were slotted for Sunday's game.

Valentine was initially surprised at the question regarding why the two players were flip-flopped from the lineup spots they had managed the past few years, but then explained, "It's just that its' a new year."
"Depending on who else is around there, yeah," said Valentine when asked about if he would hit Pedroia in the leadoff spot during the regular season. "Just about those two, that two situation is an interesting thing, just the right-left, as opposed to Pedroia and Ellsbury or Ellsbury and Pedroia. I would think if you polled 100 guys who talk about that and they wanted a guy to lead off an inning and have the second hitter batting, most of them would want a left-hander batting if the first guy got on. If he hits a doulbe, it's a lot easier to advance him to third. If he hits a single, it's a lot easier to advance him to third. If he hits a single, it's a lot easier to advance him to third if he hits with a hole over there. With a strength swing, rather than his less-than-strength swing."

Pedroia has hit in the leadoff spot 79 times, totaling a .253 batting average and .693 OPS in the spot. Ellsbury has hit second only eight times (hitting .304), having manned the lineup's top spot in 405 of his career 507 major league games.

Valentine he has yet to "get a good feel" for the Red Sox lineup yet, but did go on to explain that he will prioritize match-ups rather than simply placating players who say they feel comfortable in a certain spot.
“I’ll consider feelings, of course, and then consider everything else and figure out how to maximize the lineup," he said. "It’s all about competition. The end result is about maximizing production so that deals with not only personalties of people but the competition, how we match up. The great terminology today is match-up. Regretfully, because statistics are what they are, we talk about individual match-ups. There are also team match-ups. There are the way groupings matchup against the competition."

When asked if his philosophy regarding putting together lineups have changed over the years, Valentine admitted he has changed his philosophy as new information has become available.

“I think it’s evolved, yeah," he said. "Just a combination of things. One, I started getting more information where I would realize some lineups probably worked better against some pitchers, some lineups probably worked better against different bullpens, some lineups cannot be together all year. The last thing you ever want a pitcher to think when he goes out on the mound is that he’s pitching with something less than the best lineup behind him. That’s all part of team-building. Knowing that the lineup is going to change 100 times in a season, if the only time a team thinks it’s going to win is when their lineup is out on the field, then there’s going to be a lot of games they take the field and think they don’t have to win. It creates a bad mentality, to think you have one lineup and that lineup is the one that wins. It’s a Little League mentality that should not exist at the highest level of baseball. To say nothing of the fact that guys often need to play to be contributors and to feel part of a team.

"If you start a season, and I've had preseason talks with every person in that room, including the guys who say, ‘I want to play 162 games’ and including the guy who says, ‘I’d just like to know what my role is.’ A guy says, ‘Hey, I want to know what my role is,’ he’s saying, ‘I want to have a role.’ Part of that role is starting sometimes. I just don’t think it’s part and parcel to the major league. It’s a wonderful talk show conversation about the lineup, and then you go through the St. Louis Cardinals, the world championship run to the World Series, and you see in the playoffs and World Series, they might have used the same lineup twice. What are we talking about?"

Looks like the lineup is going to change a lot this season. I was completely wrong in my assumption that the changes would be fewer. If anything it seems like there could be more.

Edited by Eck'sSneakyCheese, 04 March 2012 - 01:16 PM.

[FinanceAdvice]

It might be, although I'm sure you understand the concept of a sunk cost. I would question whether it's an insane use of an expensive guy with his skillset, though. His primary value is with his legs, and speed is an attribute best used in front of guys who aren't going to hitting too many XBH, and where 'Taking the bat out of his hands' is less of an issue. Ninth makes little sense simply because for all his faults, he's going to be more likely to drive guys in than Aviles or Salty. The whole 'second leadoff hitter' idea imho isn't worth giving truly execrable hitters more ABs when one would think a CC bounceback is fairly likely.

Why do you think Crawford will have a bounce back year? I'd like to think he will but two factors make me skeptical. His recent wrist injury but more importantly the pressure he faced last year will be nothing compared to the pressure he faces this year. will he succeed? As I said, I'd love to see him comeback. Great story for the team and him personally. But only time will tell. Oh and as Im typing this,I just thought that he will now have three different managers in three consecutive years. Maybe my three reasons are less significant and his strong work ethic and professionalism will be the key. Anyway should be interesting and I think Valentine will be shuffling the lineup around too much and that too could mess his mind.