Attacking The Carl Crawford Idea
Carl Crawford socks a homer against Neftali Feliz on Saturday, October 9th.If you stop and think about things critically for a second, you'll realize that the Rangers' off-season template is dividable into two distinct but loosely related plans: (a) the plan that includes Cliff Lee signing with Texas, and (b) the plan that doesn't. Truthfully, Plan 'B' is the more interesting plan to contemplate, because if the Rangers really want to maximize their odds of stamping a return ticket to the World Series, it necessitates that the Rangers find a front-line successor to their 2010 pitching demigod, or (at a bare minimum) a reliable mid-rotation innings-eater paired with other consequential roster upgrades.
Now, granted, signing Lee and upgrading other aspects of the roster don't have to be mutually exclusive, but pulling off the former significantly reduces the available resources through which the latter can be accomplished; in other words, one certainly shouldn't expect that the Rangers will commit a sum in excess of $30-35 million to free-agent signees in 2011, or (put another way) that Texas will sign both Lee and another top-flight free agent like Adrian Beltre in the same winter. It's fun to dream about, and theoretically possible, but it's not likely. And that brings me around to the point of this post: Plan 'B.'
ESPN.com's Buster Olney and SI.com's Joe Sheehan have both suggested that Plan 'B' could include signing free-agent outfielder Carl Crawford, with their rationale apparently being that Crawford's presence would (a) enable Texas to "rotate" Josh Hamilton, David Murphy and Nelson Cruz through the other two outfield spots (implying some degree of protection against injury), (b) holistically upgrade their outfield defense, and (c) keep him away from the Angels. (Olney also argues that Crawford would help "balance" the Rangers' righty-heavy lineup, a valid point which I'll acknowledge but not analyze any deeper ... for now, at least.)
Here's the thing: Crawford's a guy with "young-player skills" -- these players are thought to age more gracefully than three-true-outcomes hitters who are heavily dependent on walks and power -- still on the younger side of 30, and projectable for 5-6 wins above replacement per season over the next few years. When his eventual contract is someday compared against the current going rate for wins on the open market (generally $4-5 million per win), Crawford will have likely "been worth" his high eight- or low nine-digit deal. Viewed from this perspective, Crawford stands a good chance of representing a solid investment for his future employer.
But team context is vitally important, and it's where the argument for Texas signing Crawford begins to come apart at the seams. Crawford is, by all indications, going to demand left field exclusivity, and since neither Nelson Cruz nor David Murphy are viable center-field options, you're basically stuck with Josh Hamilton as your everyday center fielder in this scenario; Julio Borbon is also a possibility, but you're then left "rotating" Hamilton, Cruz and Murphy through right field and the DH spot, and I don't see much reason to believe that this would ever happen. More on this in a second.
Aside from the likelihood that making Hamilton your everyday center fielder lands him on the disabled list for at least 20-30 games per season (and significantly increases the probability of a catastrophic injury), you also have to consider that the projected defensive upgrade is mitigated by the marginalization of Borbon -- over a full season, he's probably 5-6 runs better defensively in center field than Hamilton, which is one of the arguments for a Hamilton-Borbon-Cruz outfield with an ensemble cast at DH. Compounded by the enhanced injury risk for Hamilton, I don't think it's far-fetched to surmise that the Crawford scenario dings you for 1-1.5 wins after his integration into the team projection.
And what of Murphy? There's really not much of a playing-time issue for him in a Crawford-Hamilton-Cruz outfield scenario, as one would figure he would be used liberally at DH and to infrequently spell Crawford/Cruz, but what if the Rangers did decide to make center field Borbon's domain, after all? In this scenario, Murphy is heavily marginalized and likely doesn't amass much more than 100-150 plate appearances, because, heck, where is the playing time supposed to come from? And that really strikes at the heart of the issue -- signing Crawford isn't a five- or-six win upgrade over your current cast, because he's not going to be supplanting a replacement-level player. I would suggest that the upgrade is tantamount more to a two- to three-win upgrade -- and when you're talking about something along the lines of $17-18 million per season, does this really work for Texas?
Now, again, there's the argument that keeping him away from the Angels is of considerable value to the Rangers; of course, Anaheim is likely even more prone to overpaying Crawford than Texas. There's the argument that the Rangers need all of the outfield depth they can get, because Hamilton supposedly won't stay healthy for a full season even if he remains in left field. There's the argument that the Rangers can afford to vastly overpay for wins given their position on the marginal win curve (e.g. one additional win is worth considerably more when you're a 88-win team than when you're a 78-win team), and that they can absorb this kind of hit with their enhanced revenue streams. There's some kernel of truth to each of these points, but I'm of the belief that there is a more cost-effective way to achieve basically the same results, and I'll try to spend some time in the next few weeks articulating my viewpoint.
Unless, of course, the Rangers sign Cliff Lee first and Plan 'B' vanishes into the ether. Then all bets are off.
Analysis, Hot Stove Season, The Off-Season
Reader Comments (35)
The best way to sign crawford with our plethora of OFs would be to include borbon in a deal for Greinke. I have no problem with Josh or Crawford in center, and Murph can continue his current role while we re-sign Vlad to DH.
tbh, resigning Lee (basically snatching him from NY's grasp twice in 6 months) is the only thing that would make me happier than snatching crawford from the Angels. Remember how they one-upped us to get Torri Hunter a few years back; we offered 75 mil and it was looking good for us, then LAA came over the top with 90 mil. Granted, we probably dont trade for Hambone if we get Torii, but still, they stole him from us and I would like JD to do the same to them
What are the Rangers going to do in a few years if they sign Lee then all of their "World Series" league minimum wage players start to become very expensive with arbitration years on the horizon? Not to mention all the old debt that will need to be getting paid off.
@Born in Lubbock
'If a serious question;
Sign the ones you can afford.
If an argument against spending a lot of money now;
There are arguments against spending a lot of money now, one of them however, is not, if you win then everyone else on the team will become expensive. Kind of the point to win right?
I would think and hope that with the money Texas could give Crawford that he would play where you want or need him. If that's CF or rotating positions then so be it!?
I seem to have forgotten when players started dictating when, where and how they would bat and play defense. Owners and managers should have final say.
JOey I could not agree more great article . I just really dont see how Crawford fits very well with the rangers. I think Victor Martanez should be the main target besides Lee VMART could DH mostly & catch some & play some first base he gives you alot more flexibility than VLAD does or Crawford for that matter. I just really don't like the Crwaford idea sure not for 17 or 18 million a year.
Well if we miss out on Lee, signing Crawford would free up a trade chip (likely Cruz) that could be used to get a TORP.
I understand your hesitancy, Joey. But I still think that the single best plan B for the Rangers involves signing Crawford and making a trade for a TORP like Greinke (if possible). If we assume that Crawford is a good bet to post an average of 4-6 WAR over the duration of his contract, then he will be worth approximately the same as either Hamilton or Cruz over that time period. Of course, this assumes that Cruz and Hamilton have elevated injury risks as compared to Crawford.
I'd take issue with the assertion that acquiring Crawford means that Hamilton would be more likely to get hurt. I think that if you get Crawford, then you have Hamilton split time in CF with Borbon. I think the fact that he can split his time in CF and DH would possibly even maximize his value since Hamilton is an above average CFer with a far superior bat to Borbon. And can we even show that Hamilton is at a substantially higher injury risk by playing CF, as opposed to RF or LF? Is the risk of him jumping into a wall any higher? Sure there is more field to cover, but I'd be curious if there was any empirical evidence to back up this general assertion. I'm just not convinced that his injury risk is highly correlated with his positioning in the outfield. Playing the field undoubtedly introduces and elevated change of injury. But given that Hamilton is an above average defensive player at a premium defense position, and capable of posting MVP caliber offense numbers, I'd say it may be worth the risk.
With that said, I think its fair to say that the difference between Borbon/Murphy and Crawford isn't going to be worth 6 full wins. It would probably be about 4 wins, though. But that is pretty substantial. On the whole, a better investment may be Adrian Beltre. That would be a significant way to upgrade the defense at 3B and add an offensive weapon similar to Vlad Guerrero. For maybe an extra million more than Crawford, the Rangers could probably add both Buck and Beltre, thereby dramatically improving the offensive production at catcher and improving the defense at 3B.
Overall though, there seems to be several ways this team can improve outside resigning Cliff Lee. Trading for Greinke and adding either Crawford or Beltre would dramatically improve the team.
Well if we miss out on Lee, signing Crawford would free up a trade chip (likely Cruz) that could be used to get a TORP.
I think this is a very important point. Signing Crawford could allow the team to play Crawford in LF, Borbon in CF, Hamilton in RF, and deal Cruz in a package for a TORP. It would increase payroll substantially next season, but Crawford is a good bet to match or outperform Cruz in terms of production in the coming years, especially given Cruz's recent hamstring problems.
Crawford is a very good player, but not sure I go for the sign, and then trade Cruz idea. Without a Cruz, and without a Guerrero... where is the pop in the order? Who bats 4th, and keeps teams from avoiding Josh Hamilton with no one behind him to worry about?
I agree with Tre trading Cruz would make this lineup look pretty weak.
Cruz for 130 + Murphy for 30 is, at least in my mind, better then Crawford.
Plan B if we lose out on Cliff Lee is more likely trading for a TORP or signing someone like Beltre. I know Beltre isn't going to happen but it makes a lot more sense then Crawford does. Josh is a better player then Carl Crawford. I don't think that's a debatable point at this time. Cruz would be too, in my opinion, if he was a 150 game player as opposed to the 100-120 game player he is. COF is not our problem. Crawford has never been a CF for any length of time, and we will likely have to sign him into at least his late 30s. I would have to say pass.
IF by some miracle we could convince face to go man DH and sign Beltre, in my mind that would be a much wiser use of money then spending the 15+ a year on Crawford. Shorter contract, lesser money, and a higher on field impact.
Also I wouldn't expect Cruz to be a trade chip for a pitcher like Grienke. HE would more likely be a trade chip to restock the minors from a team that is currently a contender that sees more need for some offense, someone like San Diego or even San Fransisco. A rebuilding team shouldn't want a 30 year old player already entering his arbitration years.
seems like I am in the twilight zone. Cruz is incredibly valuable to this team. That giant sucking sound coming from TBIA would be the deflation of the offense if he were traded. I guess value is in the eye of the beholder...
Does anyone really think we've seen the best of boomstick yet? It may be wishful thinking, but Cruz still has his career year in the tank, and Crawford might not. I would rather package Kinsler for a TORP, and upgrade the D at 2nd in the process.
Could you sign VMartniez, de la Rosa and Buck for what Lee is going to cost? If so, does that improve us as much or more. Buck starts, VMart at DH and back-up C and 1B, and delaRosa into the 3 spot in the rotation. I honestly have no idea what these guys might sign for....
I agree with Joey. Crawford is a nice player, but a poor fit for Texas. We would pay a premium price for not much additional production. At the risk of repeating myself from another post, anyone who gives him 8 years and anything close to $15 million+ a year is smoking dope.
The Rangers are full of pretty sharp pencils. I would trust them to do the right thing more often than not.
Still smiling from the season. Amazing.
The more I think about the Rangers' next year, the more I come to the conclusion that Victor Martinez is the free agent Texas should be most actively pursuing. He switch hits. He can play decent 1B against left-handed starters. He can be a credible # 3 catcher. Does anyone have any confidence that Vlad can even approach #'s akin to his 2010 perormance? The marginal cost of Martinez over what Vlad earned this season isn't a crippling hit.
The outfield with the core four was good enough to get us to the World Series this year. There are other areas of need to be addressed before upgrading the OF.
Wow! The last comment was the smartest and best. Thank you, Conner's Dad. No Carl Crawford, please. I don't care if the Angels sign him. Our OF is FINE. We need someone to catch, play third first, ...
I just don't like the thought of acquiring the aging speedster. Never do.
Both Lee and Crawford are going to cost in terms of unproductive years on the back end of any deal they sign. Both will get longer deals than common sense will dictate. I'd rather go all in on the ace than try to bolster an outfield that doesn't need it.
The OF is set. So is 1B. Why fix something that ain't broke?
On the other hand C stinks to high heaven.
Pursue Lee, Greinke, and get a real catcher.
BTW folks, arb alone this year will add $20,000,000 to Payroll.
Joey-
You just ruined my morning. I really hope CC doesn't fit in Texas. I am not sure I could bear finally watching CC and Hammer sharing a Major League outfield if they weren't playing for us.
Good story.
Mark - The Ray Area
http://therayarea.com/a-disturbing-possibility
I would love to see a write up comparing the value of a long term Lee deal at ~22 million a year vs trading a realistic package of players/prospects for Greinke (assuming he signs a deal with us) for the same 5-7 years that Lee would be under control.
If it is such a concern for Josh to hurt himself running into the CF wall, why don't they use some of that ballpark upgrade money and put some more padding out there? Or use the safer barrier type deal that NASCAR does. It would at least give some insurance for 81 games a year.
I'm mostly serious. I'm sure there are league requirements for wall structure but if there is something we could do to make it safer, why not? Or raise the wall to reduce the leaping. You don't see as many guys leaping into and bouncing off the green monster or the ivy in Wrigley. I'm sure the brick in Wrigley is a good deterent, but you get my drift.
As for signing CC...I'm all about fielding the best roster possible within sound financial constraints. Signing Crawford then trading Cruz doesn't make sense to me. Is Nelly up for arb? He made $440k this year so Crawford could put up Bonds 2001 numbers and Cruz would still be a better value. Of course you don't win titles with value, but you build teams with it.
If we've learned anything over the years of being Ranger fans, it's that you can never have too much pitching. So for me, plan A would be signing Lee, Plan B would be signing Lee and trading for Grienke, Plan C would be trading for Grienke and another solid rotation guy. We got kinda lucky this year when you think about it. We were really counting on Feldman and Harden and they were aweful. That CJ and Lewis were able to do what they did really saved our asses. Who knows if they can be the same this year? I would bet on a slight decline from them before I bet on improvement.
So, get more pitching! We already have one of the better OFs in baseball. Pitching, pitching, pitching!
Carl Crawford? Really? The OF isn't the problem on this team. Let LAA pay the big bucks for Crawford. Josh, Cruz, Borbon & Murphy did a fine job last year.
If they don't resign Vlad, VMart would be a good addition at DH - but his defense at C is miserable. He'd have to understand that he would be the primary DH, backup 1B and 3rd C.
I also like Berkman, although Texas didn't put Berkman on their list of guys they are interested in.
Agree with Adam - more pitching is what we need.
I have to agree with Adam, and others, Crawford is not an upgrade for us. wasted time and money. Lee if possible, and Grienke will put us back in.
Get vmart, buck or better if we can, AND try to work out the 3b problem. MY must know he is hurting the team with his lack of range.
but, I really enjoyed 2010. good show Rangers.
Rather than Crawford, this team would be smart to invest in Victor Martinez, plus the best, most versatile uitlity infielder they can get their hands on. Our current options at the utility position aren't nearly good enough in light of the use we can expect that player to get. Kinsler is rapidly heading toward 100 games per year, on average, and Young will need more frequent rests as his body begins to feel the toll of his awkward flops to his left and right. Oh yeah, and a top notch 7th or 8th-inning reliever wouldn't hurt, either.
Read where Rosenthal and Morosi, who I like personally and value their opinions and thoughts more than most others, have reported the ownership has allowed for a payroll of 90 mil plus next season and that Lee and V. Martinez are the top 2 targets...now, that sounds like upgrades to me, anyone else seen this?
I think this is spot on and surely the Rangers' brass know it.
Adam, did you just compare Hamilton to a racing stock car?
My take on Crawford, let the Angels throw their money at him and get him. Our outfield is strong, Murphy, Hamilton and Cruz and Borbon as a 4th outfielder. Crawford will cost a mint, especially if we get into a bidding war with the Angels. Let them waste the money because Crawford alone won't help them. With the exception of Morales, their other hitters are marginal power hitters like Hunter and Abreu, who hit about 15-20 homers per year. Crawford is another marginal power hitter, although with better defense and overall hitting skills, but I'll put Cruz and Hamilton up against those guys any day. Not to mention Murphy could outhomer them with full playing time.
If you're going to spend the money you'd need to get Crawford, focus instead on areas they really could use the help, like Victor Martinez, Adrian Beltre or another solid starter or bullpen arm.
TO ME CARL CRAWFORD IS NOT AN UPGRADE OVER OUR CURRENT OUT FIELD. WE NEED PITCHING:
LEE, OR FELIX, OR GREINKE, OR TORP THAT WE COULD TRADE FOR AND AN OUTSTANDING CATCHER. I THINK THAT 1B WILL WORK OUT WELL WITH MORELAND AND SOME ONE TO SPELL HIM FROM TIME TO TIME. 3B IS A DIFFERENT MATTER AND WILL HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED AT SOME POINT. MAYBE THIS IS WHERE BELTRE COMES INTO PLAY. I AM JUST SPECULATING AS I KNOW THAT JD, NOLAN, AND THE SCOUTS HAVE THE PLAYERS THAT WILL MAKE US A BETTER BALL CLUB IN 2011. I LOOK FORWARD TO THE SEASON TO SEE HOW MANY YOUNG PLAYERS STEP UP AND WHO WE GET IN FA AND BY TRADES.
@ Bill M - Why are you always yelling at us?
I am a definatly against signing Crawford, and agree with a few others on here. We need more pitching. CJ and Colby had amazing years, problem is, they have never done it before. Though their continued excellance in the playoffs gives me a solid base of hope that they will continue their success, I still have my doubts.
No to Crawford. Now on to Greinke - this from Jerry Crasnick today:
It's also worth noting that Greinke has never had another season close to his 2009 Cy Young year, when he struck out 242 hitters and posted an ERA of 2.16. He has never received a Cy Young vote or finished with an ERA below 3.47 in any other season.
Do you buy this? Or is Crasnick making me needlessly nervous about Greinke?
I think you "Crawford isn't an upgrade" guys are nucking futs! Seriously? You really don't think an OF of Hammy, Nellie, Crawford, and Murphy is better than Hammy, Nellie, Borbon, and Murphy? That's crazy talk...
Crawford could slide into the 2 spot and the top half of the lineup suddenly becomes one of the best in baseball; Andrus, Crawford, Hammy, and Cruz... that's monsterous.
Not to mention what it allows you to do from 5-9; Cruz hit's 5th, MY 6th, Kins 7th, Moreland 8th, and Treanor/FA 9th.
Borbon has shown us what he is; a speedster that runs the bases and covers some ground, will hit in the .270's with NO power, and has a terrible arm that stops no one from running on him. He's a decent player and a good guy to bring off the bench... but he's flawed and does not need to be a starting OFer on a World Series contender.
I love Murphy in the role he's in now. Let him continue to spell the other OFers, DH from time to time but again, play him every day and you risk exposing him for what he is, a GREAT 4th OFer. Give him 300-350 ABs and be happy you've got such a good insurance policy in case Cruz and/or Hammy gets hurt, which is very likely.
If you stop looking at Crawford as who he'd replace, and why do we NEED him, and who ELSE could we sign or not sign, etc... and look at him as a legit top 10-15 MLB player/star, you'll realize that he'd be a HUGE asset. And keepng him from the Angels IS a big thing that should not be diminshed by silly stats. I'm sorry but if he signs with the Angels, I don't see many balls hitting the ground in that OF, do you?
I think that if Lee signs with the Yankees, the Rangers have to grab the next best guy in Crawford.
There are only two reasons to sign CC
1. is to prove they can. If the Rangers were to resign Cliff Lee and Carl Crawford the Yankee's front office would all have a collective stroke. They'd just fall over dead. The NY Times would have a front page editorial by a sports writer claiming that Chuck Greenberg was really Osama bin Ladin and wondering why the CIA hadn't taken him out.
2. They Rangers trade Hamilton to the Royals for Greinke or to SF for Lincecum head up.
The first one would be really fun. The second is probably not going to happen.
Pablo the problem with Crawford is more of this. Is he worth the upgrade cost. Crawford is probably going to get overpaid based on what he is, a 30 year old COF with mediocre power and plus speed. Does Crawford make us a better team then running out Borbon, obviously he does. The question is how much better does he make us. The problem is that Crawford is going to be at least a 15 million a year player, more likely 17-19. Crawford doesn't upgrade us enough to make it worth the contract that we would have to give him.
I think arguing that Crawford is a top 15 player in baseball is pretty specious. Last year he might have been, but it was probably closer then one would think when you include pitchers. But that was really his only great season as a player. Lets pretend we still have a budget we have to worry about and we realistically can't go over about 110-115 million in the near future. Crawford hamstrings us somewhat because he is basically adding in an expensive piece at a place we currently have equal, to better, cheaper options.
I love to hear my Ranger bretheren thinking the same way I do on issues that are near and dear to my heart in regards to this team. The OF is fine. Borbon is a very nice 4th outfielder who plays good defense, albeit with no arm or power. He also has speed off the bench. Sure would be nice to put in a pinch runner in the late innings who can play the OF. I really like the OF of Murphy, Hamilton, and Cruz.
In the infield, I see Andrus and Moreland as building blocks of the team. I love MY, but I am beginning to wonder what his role is here. As we know and have driven into the ground, he's a liability at 3rd base now. Maybe we could put him back at second base and trade Kinsler...Kinsler is a trade chip and with a prospect, might bring back a TORP. Beltre plays very good defense, and might have a stellar season at 3rd in this ballpark.
At catcher, I hope the Rangers do like they did last year and find a saavy veteran who can catch a yount staff and hit their weight while not making many mistakes defensively. I have no problem with my catcher hitting .230 so long as he calls a good game and plays good defense. Somebody like Bengie Molina.
Ah pitcher...we hope Mr. Lee comes back. If he does, the Rangers will be in position once again to be a dangerous team heading into next years playoffs. With Colby as your 2, Ceej as your 3, and then a Hunter, Harrison, Holland mix at your 4-5, I feel pretty good about SP. Something that I think needs to be addressed is another solid back of the bullpen guy to help get to Feliz. Francisco is out of here from what I hear, and I wasn't a big fan of his either. Hopefully Rangers brass will find a piece.
At DH, I would greatly prefer Adam Dunn. Imagine a 3-4-5 of Hamilton, Cruz and Dunn. Hamilton may hit .390 if he has those guys hitting behind him. I'm sorry, but Vlad is done here. I wish him well, but he showed us his true age on that fateful night in San Francisco.
Its going to be hard to top last season. May not EVER happen as far as fun goes. I still feel the need to thank them for everything they did last season. Lets go Rangers!!!!!!!!!