EagleOutsider.com

DrJackRyan {l Wrote}:Stupid Theo....the Crawford signing totally messes up the whole L-R-L thing. Not to mention we now have three #3 hitters - Crawford, Gonz, Youk - but no true #4. Plus with Pedey at 2, you can't put Crawford there, either.

Plus he stinks. He hits .310, scores 100 runs, and steals 70 bases, but he is not good because his OPS is not high enough.

I never saw that coming but the move makes sense. There will be few if any elite outfielders available in the next few years (Hamilton, Upton and such will be locked down with extensions) and that is a need for the Sox. Combine that with young, inexpensive talent in the pipeline--Iglesias/Lowrie at SS, Kalish/Reddick at OF, Lavarnaway/Wagner/Exposito at C--to replace the expiring contracts of Drew, Cameron, Scutaro, Papelbon and Papi's option, it doesn't break the bank at all. This year the team already shedded Lowell, Lugo, Beltre and Martinez. Seven years is a long time but note that in 2000 Manny signed an eight-year deal and he was 28. Despite what happened at the end of it, that contract was worth it. Although Crawford isn't even close to the level of hitter that Manny was, he's 29 and has other skills and the way the market is trending, his contract will still be of value. Giving a six or seven year deal to a 32-year-old pitcher is not a good idea unless you're guaranteed to get a pitcher that can still excel when he's 37.

Red Sox outfiend = SPEED

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

DrJackRyan {l Wrote}:Stupid Theo....the Crawford signing totally messes up the whole L-R-L thing. Not to mention we now have three #3 hitters - Crawford, Gonz, Youk - but no true #4. Plus with Pedey at 2, you can't put Crawford there, either.

Plus he stinks. He hits .310, scores 100 runs, and steals 70 bases, but he is not good because his OPS is not high enough.

His OPS is top 15 in the AL...but it's ok keep being ignorant. This is a good move, especially since we can ensure Cameron will play against lefties at the expense of Drew or Ortiz.

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

DrJackRyan {l Wrote}:Stupid Theo....the Crawford signing totally messes up the whole L-R-L thing. Not to mention we now have three #3 hitters - Crawford, Gonz, Youk - but no true #4. Plus with Pedey at 2, you can't put Crawford there, either.

Plus he stinks. He hits .310, scores 100 runs, and steals 70 bases, but he is not good because his OPS is not high enough.

His OPS is top 15 in the AL...but it's ok keep being ignorant. This is a good move, especially since we can ensure Cameron will play against lefties at the expense of Drew or Ortiz.

Pretty sure 9 was being sarcastic.

Andy Gresh:

"I don't like the contract. But I love the player. You have to applaud the aggressiveness."..."If beer goes up by 50 cents, you'll be pissed. But you'll deal with it because you have a stud in left and a stud at first."

Pretty good summary.

bignick33 {l Wrote}:Andy Gresh:

"I don't like the contract. But I love the player. You have to applaud the aggressiveness."..."If beer goes up by 50 cents, you'll be pissed. But you'll deal with it because you have a stud in left and a stud at first."

Pretty good summary.

Can I get a ruling from Board Judge on using the forbidden word to describe a 28 yr old man?

shockdoct {l Wrote}:

bignick33 {l Wrote}:Andy Gresh:

"I don't like the contract. But I love the player. You have to applaud the aggressiveness."..."If beer goes up by 50 cents, you'll be pissed. But you'll deal with it because you have a stud in left and a stud at first."

Pretty good summary.

Can I get a ruling from Board Judge on using the forbidden word to describe a 28 yr old man?

I WAS QUOTING.

cvilleagle {l Wrote}:

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

DrJackRyan {l Wrote}:Stupid Theo....the Crawford signing totally messes up the whole L-R-L thing. Not to mention we now have three #3 hitters - Crawford, Gonz, Youk - but no true #4. Plus with Pedey at 2, you can't put Crawford there, either.

Plus he stinks. He hits .310, scores 100 runs, and steals 70 bases, but he is not good because his OPS is not high enough.

His OPS is top 15 in the AL...but it's ok keep being ignorant. This is a good move, especially since we can ensure Cameron will play against lefties at the expense of Drew or Ortiz.

Pretty sure 9 was being sarcastic.

No he's just a moron.

bignick33 {l Wrote}:

shockdoct {l Wrote}:

bignick33 {l Wrote}:Andy Gresh:

"I don't like the contract. But I love the player. You have to applaud the aggressiveness."..."If beer goes up by 50 cents, you'll be pissed. But you'll deal with it because you have a stud in left and a stud at first."

Pretty good summary.

Can I get a ruling from Board Judge on using the forbidden word to describe a 28 yr old man?

I WAS QUOTING.

I think the board judge should "set an example" here personally.

bignick33 {l Wrote}:Red Sox outfiend = SPEED

and don't forget ARM STRENGTH!

Actually, Jacoby probably is more of a noodle-arm type.

Here is my best guess on the lineup:

Against righties (easy):

Ellsbury, Pedroia, Crawford, Gonzalez, Youkilis, Ortiz, Drew, Salty, Scutaro

Against lefties (more of a challenge):

Ellsbury, Pedroia, Crawford, Youkilis, Gonzalez, Ortiz, Tek, Drew/Cameron, Scutaro (Crawford and Gonzalez could probably be flipped)

People have mentioned how lefty-heavy the Sox are. The Yankees will probably sign Cliff Lee. One thing to point out is that these particular lefties have actually hit lefty pitchers relatively well (Gonzalez in particular).

Holy fuck that is a scary 1-7. Sub Lowrie in for Scutaro and I'm going to have to call a doctor because of my raging boner.

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:

cvilleagle {l Wrote}:

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

DrJackRyan {l Wrote}:Stupid Theo....the Crawford signing totally messes up the whole L-R-L thing. Not to mention we now have three #3 hitters - Crawford, Gonz, Youk - but no true #4. Plus with Pedey at 2, you can't put Crawford there, either.

Plus he stinks. He hits .310, scores 100 runs, and steals 70 bases, but he is not good because his OPS is not high enough.

His OPS is top 15 in the AL...but it's ok keep being ignorant. This is a good move, especially since we can ensure Cameron will play against lefties at the expense of Drew or Ortiz.

Pretty sure 9 was being sarcastic.

No he's just a moron.

I may be a moron, but I was being sarcastic. What does that make you? Someone that doesn't know when a moron is being sarcastic?

This definitely puts the Sox in contention for the next 3 years, at minimum. Crawford will be a fantastic asset in the field, on the bases and with his bat.

As to the length of the deal- barring injury or serious decline by year 4, it doesn't really matter. If Crawford puts up similar #s to his past 3 years for 4 years, then drops off at 5-10% per year, then you have a grossly overpaid player who earned his money in his first few years and is collecting an inflated premium at the end. The Sox will GLADLY live with that financially. This also generates great buzz for the team and will shut up the mongoloids blabbing about ratings/interest being down. In short, this will galvanize Pink Hat Nation to spend more money; the true fans never went anywhere. It is a fallicy that the Sox would be crippled by a bad contract like this (Drew and Dice K haven't kept them down).

The only foreseeable problem is his legs. Crawford's game is special (there are other corner outfielders that hit for power and average) because of his ability to steal bases and extend hits (ground outs into singles, singles into doubles, etc.). Although he's relatively young, he's entering his 10th (9th full) big league season, so he's got some miles on those tires. If his speed tails off due to age, he's going to have to alter his game.

With all this being written, as I wrote in the hot stove thread, I still think the Sox need to get their pitching in order. This does not mean they need a new arm, only that I question the wisdom of trotting out the same staff and expecting the issues from last year to resolve themselves.

EagleNYC {l Wrote}:This definitely puts the Sox in contention for the next 3 years, at minimum. Crawford will be a fantastic asset in the field, on the bases and with his bat.

As to the length of the deal- barring injury or serious decline by year 4, it doesn't really matter. If Crawford puts up similar #s to his past 3 years for 4 years, then drops off at 5-10% per year, then you have a grossly overpaid player who earned his money in his first few years and is collecting an inflated premium at the end. The Sox will GLADLY live with that financially. This also generates great buzz for the team and will shut up the mongoloids blabbing about ratings/interest being down. In short, this will galvanize Pink Hat Nation to spend more money; the true fans never went anywhere. It is a fallicy that the Sox would be crippled by a bad contract like this (Drew and Dice K haven't kept them down).

The only foreseeable problem is his legs. Crawford's game is special (there are other corner outfielders that hit for power and average) because of his ability to steal bases and extend hits (ground outs into singles, singles into doubles, etc.). Although he's relatively young, he's entering his 10th (9th full) big league season, so he's got some miles on those tires. If his speed tails off due to age, he's going to have to alter his game.

With all this being written, as I wrote in the hot stove thread, I still think the Sox need to get their pitching in order. This does not mean they need a new arm, only that I question the wisdom of trotting out the same staff and expecting the issues from last year to resolve themselves.

I think Beckett and Lackey have a bounce back season. You've got two great arms at the top in Lester and Buccholtz. Dice-K is fine as a 5th starter. The Sox some depth behind Papelbon and Bard because after that it gets ugly. Doubront and Atchinson are fine, but they're not who I want coming in the 7th inning. Taylor Buccholz is intriguing.

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:

EagleNYC {l Wrote}:This definitely puts the Sox in contention for the next 3 years, at minimum. Crawford will be a fantastic asset in the field, on the bases and with his bat.

As to the length of the deal- barring injury or serious decline by year 4, it doesn't really matter. If Crawford puts up similar #s to his past 3 years for 4 years, then drops off at 5-10% per year, then you have a grossly overpaid player who earned his money in his first few years and is collecting an inflated premium at the end. The Sox will GLADLY live with that financially. This also generates great buzz for the team and will shut up the mongoloids blabbing about ratings/interest being down. In short, this will galvanize Pink Hat Nation to spend more money; the true fans never went anywhere. It is a fallicy that the Sox would be crippled by a bad contract like this (Drew and Dice K haven't kept them down).

The only foreseeable problem is his legs. Crawford's game is special (there are other corner outfielders that hit for power and average) because of his ability to steal bases and extend hits (ground outs into singles, singles into doubles, etc.). Although he's relatively young, he's entering his 10th (9th full) big league season, so he's got some miles on those tires. If his speed tails off due to age, he's going to have to alter his game.

With all this being written, as I wrote in the hot stove thread, I still think the Sox need to get their pitching in order. This does not mean they need a new arm, only that I question the wisdom of trotting out the same staff and expecting the issues from last year to resolve themselves.

I think Beckett and Lackey have a bounce back season. You've got two great arms at the top in Lester and Buccholtz. Dice-K is fine as a 5th starter. The Sox some depth behind Papelbon and Bard because after that it gets ugly. Doubront and Atchinson are fine, but they're not who I want coming in the 7th inning. Taylor Buccholz is intriguing.

The Sox aren't messing with the staff, at least for this season. They do need at least 2 power arms in the pen, as well as a lefty.

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:

EagleNYC {l Wrote}:This definitely puts the Sox in contention for the next 3 years, at minimum. Crawford will be a fantastic asset in the field, on the bases and with his bat.

As to the length of the deal- barring injury or serious decline by year 4, it doesn't really matter. If Crawford puts up similar #s to his past 3 years for 4 years, then drops off at 5-10% per year, then you have a grossly overpaid player who earned his money in his first few years and is collecting an inflated premium at the end. The Sox will GLADLY live with that financially. This also generates great buzz for the team and will shut up the mongoloids blabbing about ratings/interest being down. In short, this will galvanize Pink Hat Nation to spend more money; the true fans never went anywhere. It is a fallicy that the Sox would be crippled by a bad contract like this (Drew and Dice K haven't kept them down).

The only foreseeable problem is his legs. Crawford's game is special (there are other corner outfielders that hit for power and average) because of his ability to steal bases and extend hits (ground outs into singles, singles into doubles, etc.). Although he's relatively young, he's entering his 10th (9th full) big league season, so he's got some miles on those tires. If his speed tails off due to age, he's going to have to alter his game.

With all this being written, as I wrote in the hot stove thread, I still think the Sox need to get their pitching in order. This does not mean they need a new arm, only that I question the wisdom of trotting out the same staff and expecting the issues from last year to resolve themselves.

I think Beckett and Lackey have a bounce back season. You've got two great arms at the top in Lester and Buccholtz. Dice-K is fine as a 5th starter. The Sox some depth behind Papelbon and Bard because after that it gets ugly. Doubront and Atchinson are fine, but they're not who I want coming in the 7th inning. Taylor Buccholz is intriguing.

We'll see about the staff. What has Lackey shown that gives you confidence in him? Beckett is one more injury away from being damaged goods.

They could also both have good seasons. I just don't think you can count on Beckett as a solid #2 and Lackey as a #3.

JD Drew wasn't a bad contract. Slight overpay, I guess. But they are pretty much going to get close to value for him when you consider the numbers he's put up, the fact he can actually play defense and, aside from 2008, hasn't missed significant amounts of time, contrary to what everyone says about him.

EagleNYC {l Wrote}:

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:

EagleNYC {l Wrote}:This definitely puts the Sox in contention for the next 3 years, at minimum. Crawford will be a fantastic asset in the field, on the bases and with his bat.

As to the length of the deal- barring injury or serious decline by year 4, it doesn't really matter. If Crawford puts up similar #s to his past 3 years for 4 years, then drops off at 5-10% per year, then you have a grossly overpaid player who earned his money in his first few years and is collecting an inflated premium at the end. The Sox will GLADLY live with that financially. This also generates great buzz for the team and will shut up the mongoloids blabbing about ratings/interest being down. In short, this will galvanize Pink Hat Nation to spend more money; the true fans never went anywhere. It is a fallicy that the Sox would be crippled by a bad contract like this (Drew and Dice K haven't kept them down).

The only foreseeable problem is his legs. Crawford's game is special (there are other corner outfielders that hit for power and average) because of his ability to steal bases and extend hits (ground outs into singles, singles into doubles, etc.). Although he's relatively young, he's entering his 10th (9th full) big league season, so he's got some miles on those tires. If his speed tails off due to age, he's going to have to alter his game.

With all this being written, as I wrote in the hot stove thread, I still think the Sox need to get their pitching in order. This does not mean they need a new arm, only that I question the wisdom of trotting out the same staff and expecting the issues from last year to resolve themselves.

I think Beckett and Lackey have a bounce back season. You've got two great arms at the top in Lester and Buccholtz. Dice-K is fine as a 5th starter. The Sox some depth behind Papelbon and Bard because after that it gets ugly. Doubront and Atchinson are fine, but they're not who I want coming in the 7th inning. Taylor Buccholz is intriguing.

We'll see about the staff. What has Lackey shown that gives you confidence in him? Beckett is one more injury away from being damaged goods.

They could also both have good seasons. I just don't think you can count on Beckett as a solid #2 and Lackey as a #3.

They already have two number 1's in Lester and Buccholz, though I expect Buck to regress a little based on his peripherals. All they need is them to be are #3s. Given they are paying out the arse for a couple of #3s but there's no way in hell they're giving up on either seeing as how Beckett's extension kicks in and Lackey's in his second year.

Here are 2 stat lines from last season


IP H R ER HR BB K ERA WHIP BAA
127.2 151 89 82 20 45 116 5.68 1.54 .292.
186.2 204 118 109 25 78 145 5.26 1.51 .285


Guess who?

*Sorry about the format.

I can't get past the 12.72 IP.

Edit: If it's Lackey, his post-ASB numbers indicate he could slot into the #3 spot quite nicely. And if he improves on those numbers the Sox rotation will be even more dangerous.

Neither of those are Lackey. The first one is Beckett. Not sure who the second is.

flyingelvii {l Wrote}:I can't get past the 12.72 IP.

Edit: If it's Lackey, his post-ASB numbers indicate he could slot into the #3 spot quite nicely. And if he improves on those numbers the Sox rotation will be even more dangerous.

I screwed up- it's fixed. No, not Lackey.

cvilleagle {l Wrote}:Neither of those are Lackey. The first one is Beckett. Not sure who the second is.

Correct. The second one is...A.J Burnett. He had better numbers, as ghastly and profane as that sounds.

EagleNYC {l Wrote}:

cvilleagle {l Wrote}:Neither of those are Lackey. The first one is Beckett. Not sure who the second is.

Correct. The second one is...A.J Burnett. He had better numbers, as ghastly and profane as that sounds.

That WHIP over 1.50 is freaking hideous.

EagleNYC {l Wrote}:

cvilleagle {l Wrote}:Neither of those are Lackey. The first one is Beckett. Not sure who the second is.

Correct. The second one is...A.J Burnett. He had better numbers, as ghastly and profane as that sounds.

Beckett was hurt most of the first half.

EagleNYC {l Wrote}:

cvilleagle {l Wrote}:Neither of those are Lackey. The first one is Beckett. Not sure who the second is.

Correct. The second one is...A.J Burnett. He had better numbers, as ghastly and profane as that sounds.

Curt Schilling had dreadful numbers in his game 1 of the 2004 ALCS.

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

EagleNYC {l Wrote}:

cvilleagle {l Wrote}:Neither of those are Lackey. The first one is Beckett. Not sure who the second is.

Correct. The second one is...A.J Burnett. He had better numbers, as ghastly and profane as that sounds.

Beckett was hurt most of the first half.

There is no question about that. But his second half wasn't much better, and he wasn't rushed back into service. Check out the game log.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/6403/gamelog;_ylt=AoFcDqAZWNh9rp8GTfn_UtOFCLcF

I believe that he'll be a better pitcher than a 5.50 ERA. But I'd say the odds favor a 4.75 ERA over a sub 4 ERA. If the offense clicks, perhaps it won't matter (until the playoffs). My point is that he pitched poorly for a long enough period of time that a blind "he'll be fine" is wishful thinking, to put it mildly.

And the Curt Shilling line was joke, right Nick?