PDA

View Full Version : Kenny Asking About Crawford


chitown13
11-05-2007, 11:59 AM
I just posted this in the Kenny Williams plan thread but Bruce Levine just reported on ESPN radio that Kenny sat down with the TB GM about a trade for Carl Crawford. No other details... I know we do this every year and I know its good old Bruce but still, lets all :praying:

eriqjaffe
11-05-2007, 12:26 PM
Maybe KW can work a package deal, Crawford and Kazmir for Contreras!

WhiteSox5187
11-05-2007, 12:29 PM
Wow...that'd be a hell of a way to start the GM meetings...Carl Crawford at leadoff certainly would solve a lot of our problems...I'd even feel comfortable with letting Jerry Owens stay in center if Crawford is our left fielder...

Craig Grebeck
11-05-2007, 12:30 PM
I'd rather buy low on Burrell, he's the better player anyway.

Corlose 15
11-05-2007, 12:31 PM
I'm sure there are about 29 other GMs doing the same thing.


I guess I'd be willing to part with Broadway for Crawford, if TB picks up some of his salary.:cool:

goon
11-05-2007, 12:32 PM
Wow...that'd be a hell of a way to start the GM meetings...Carl Crawford at leadoff certainly would solve a lot of our problems...I'd even feel comfortable with letting Jerry Owens stay in center if Crawford is our left fielder...

Which would mean Crede is gone because Fields would be going to third base, unless they have him try first. It would be nice if Crawford could play CF, but from what I remember that experiment didn't go so well when the Rays tried it.

You know what else would be nice? If the Sox actually get Crawford.

Tragg
11-05-2007, 12:37 PM
I'd even feel comfortable with letting Jerry Owens stay in center if Crawford is our left fielder...
I'd feel comfortable if Owens were part of the deal for Crawford.

oeo
11-05-2007, 12:39 PM
I'd rather buy low on Burrell, he's the better player anyway.

Crawford is 26, and has improved every year he's been in the majors. Even if he's hit his peak, we still know we're going to get about a .300 average, 15-20 HRs, 50 SBs, ~80 RBIs. And he's a hell of a lot cheaper.

Foulke You
11-05-2007, 12:41 PM
I wonder if this is the year that Tampa finally moves Crawford? It seems every year we play the "boy, I wish the Sox could land Crawford" game and every year, he ends up back in Tampa. I'll believe Crawford is on the market when he actually gets traded.:D:

Corlose 15
11-05-2007, 12:45 PM
The real question is...would Dayn Perry approve?

He's a left fielder, only hit 11 HR last year, and stole 50 bases.....what an overrated piece of ****.:D:

oeo
11-05-2007, 12:46 PM
I wonder if this is the year that Tampa finally moves Crawford? It seems every year we play the "boy, I wish the Sox could land Crawford" game and every year, he ends up back in Tampa. I'll believe Crawford is on the market when he actually gets traded.:D:

Could be, but I doubt it. I bet he gets moved next year, though (or midseason). He's still grossly underpaid this year, but next year he has a $8.25 million option, and a $10 million option in 2010. That's still a great deal, but TB isn't a team that likes to spend money.

balke
11-05-2007, 12:46 PM
You get somebody good for somebody good. Could be Fields, could be Danks or Floyd. Whoever it is they are either not owed much money and are under contract, or they are young and making league minimum for at least a couple seasons.

Maybe Sweeney & Fields. Maybe a 3 way-type deal with the Yanks.

oeo
11-05-2007, 12:49 PM
Maybe Sweeney & Fields. Maybe a 3 way-type deal with the Yanks.

They're already set at third and the outfield. They're going to want pitching.

SBSoxFan
11-05-2007, 12:49 PM
Wow...that'd be a hell of a way to start the GM meetings...Carl Crawford at leadoff certainly would solve a lot of our problems...I'd even feel comfortable with letting Jerry Owens stay in center if Crawford is our left fielder...

Not really. Crawford is NOT a lead off hitter, his baserunning skills are dubious, and you displace either Fields or Crede.

broker3d
11-05-2007, 12:49 PM
IMO, Crawford would take over the #3 spot in the lineup, not the leadoff spot. Yes, we need a leadoff hitter but another glaring hole in our lineup is that #3 spot. Neither Thome, Pauly or Dye fills that spot. Crawford would, plus continue the speed after 1 and 2. That would than have Pauly batting 4th, Thome 5th and Dye 6th. I'll take that. Crawford is not a leadoff type of hitter.

Bringing back Pauly, Thome and Dye only concerns me if they are 3,4 and 5. but if we can drop them down 1 by adding a #3 than I would be totally content to bring back all 3. personally, I think one of the big 3 is going in a trade.

Gammons Peter
11-05-2007, 12:49 PM
People, Carl Crawford is NOT a leadoff hitter

Craig Grebeck
11-05-2007, 12:50 PM
Crawford is 26, and has improved every year he's been in the majors. Even if he's hit his peak, we still know we're going to get about a .300 average, 15-20 HRs, 50 SBs, ~80 RBIs. And he's a hell of a lot cheaper.
Difference being that Burrell will not cost much in terms of players and Crawford will cost us almost all of our young pitching talent, which isn't much.

oeo
11-05-2007, 12:50 PM
IMO, Crawford would take over the #3 spot in the lineup, not the leadoff spot. Yes, we need a leadoff hitter but another glaring hole in our lineup is that #3 spot. Neither Thome, Pauly or Dye fills that spot. Crawford would, plus continue the speed after 1 and 2. That would than have Pauly batting 4th, Thome 5th and Dye 6th. I'll take that. Crawford is not a leadoff type of hitter.

He is if we need him to be. Look around the league, and more times than not you see leadoff hitters that are hitting homeruns. In the AL Central alone, Granderson and Sizemore are not leadoff hitters, but it's working for them.

oeo
11-05-2007, 12:52 PM
Difference being that Burrell will not cost much in terms of players and Crawford will cost us almost all of our young pitching talent, which isn't much.

And that we have Crawford under contract for longer. There's advantages and disadvantages to both. I like the idea of having an upcoming superstar better.

rdivaldi
11-05-2007, 12:53 PM
I'd rather buy low on Burrell, he's the better player anyway.

Eh? I don't know if you can say one of these guys is better than the other, they play differently. For what we are looking for I'd think Crawford is a much better fit (speed + youth + defense).

rdivaldi
11-05-2007, 12:54 PM
will cost us almost all of our young pitching talent, which isn't much.

Gio and De Los Santos are two of the most sought after pitching prospects in baseball right now...

spiffie
11-05-2007, 12:55 PM
And that we have Crawford under contract for longer. There's advantages and disadvantages to both. I like the idea of having an upcoming superstar better.
For the amount of talent we'd have to give up to land Crawford, I would not want to see them make that move unless they could get him to agree to extend the deal/add options for 2011 and possibly 2012. Crawford is going to cost someone their top prospects, and before KW starts tossing out Gio, DLS, Broadway sort of names, I'd want to get a long-term deal locked in with this guy.

WhiteSox5187
11-05-2007, 01:18 PM
Not really. Crawford is NOT a lead off hitter, his baserunning skills are dubious, and you displace either Fields or Crede.
Well...I certainly don't think that Crawford is the smartest player out there, but I'd be willing to live with his mistakes for the potential benefits and that MIGHT be something that he could be taught to correct. Like, don't attempt to steal unless we give you the sign or something like that...and I'm not sure what his OBP numbers are.

I agree that I think either Fields or Crede are going to be involved in this deal. And unless it is a three way trade, I think the Rays would be more interested in Fields than a potential one year rental in Crede. If this IS a three team deal I think Crede is going to be the guy who goes. But as another poster pointed out the Rays will probably want pitching. Will they want Garland? Will they take Jose? I'm not sure. Obviously we're going to have to give up one of our young guys too (along with either Jose or Garland). Let's see. I don't think anything is going to come out of this though.

veeter
11-05-2007, 01:42 PM
I love hearing any Sox info, but I have to say once Levine's name was involved it turned my stomach. I wish they'd keep that guy away from this stuff.

churlish
11-05-2007, 01:50 PM
Contreras and Anderson sounds about right for Crawford.

getonbckthr
11-05-2007, 01:54 PM
I'd rather buy low on Burrell, he's the better player anyway.

Difference being that Burrell will not cost much in terms of players and Crawford will cost us almost all of our young pitching talent, which isn't much.
Burrell is not the better player. Burrell gets I believe 13 million a year. Sure to get Crawford it will cost us young pitching talent, however is there a guarentee this talent will perform as projected? Crawford will go the route of Carlos Beltran with a little less power but will maintain the speed.

Domeshot17
11-05-2007, 01:56 PM
I love hearing any Sox info, but I have to say once Levine's name was involved it turned my stomach. I wish they'd keep that guy away from this stuff.

Bingo

I read the title and got semi excited, and then saw the source.

I mean if Levine is reporting this, are we dealing Griffey to get him, because Bruce let us know , what, half a dozen times we had landed Griffey?

getonbckthr
11-05-2007, 01:58 PM
Bingo

I read the title and got semi excited, and then saw the source.

I mean if Levine is reporting this, are we dealing Griffey to get him, because Bruce let us know , what, half a dozen times we had landed Griffey?
I thought we 99% had Griffey until the very last second when the Cincy owner nixed the deal?

JohnTucker0814
11-05-2007, 02:07 PM
honestly, if KW is NOT asking about Crawford, Furcal, Kazmir or whoever else is out there available on trade he is not doing his job. Simply asking about someone may mean just that. There have been no offers.

Corlose 15
11-05-2007, 02:21 PM
Crawford, only hit 11 HR last year and has never hit more than 18 in his career so I don't think he really fits as a number three hitter, I don't think you're really utilizing his speed. He does however hit a lot of triples, and doubles and steals a lot of bases. I think he's better either 1-2 or 5-6-7 in order to break up the plodders. His OBP is .355 which isn't great but not bad at all, Thome's OBP last year in an injury riddled year was still .410, I'd much rather have Thome in the 3 spot.

As for trading Crede or Fields to get him I doubt that's what the Rays are asking for, they've got a 3B in Iwamura, what they need is pitching. They'd ask for the likes of Broadway, Danks, Floyd, Gio, De Los Santos, etc.


I doubt he comes to the South Side but I sure wouldn't mind if he did.:smile:

soxinem1
11-05-2007, 02:43 PM
Wow...that'd be a hell of a way to start the GM meetings...Carl Crawford at leadoff certainly would solve a lot of our problems...I'd even feel comfortable with letting Jerry Owens stay in center if Crawford is our left fielder...

Crawford is a legit #3 hitter. Sure he steals some bases, but he is NOT a lead off guy.

Why waste his RBI skills at leadoff? He would flourish there, with PK at clean up, and Dye, Thome at the five/six spots.

Then you go after a guy like Jack Wilson for SS, and Damon for CF.

CashMan
11-05-2007, 03:02 PM
Crawford is a legit #3 hitter. Sure he steals some bases, but he is NOT a lead off guy.

Why waste his RBI skills at leadoff? He would flourish there, with PK at clean up, and Dye, Thome at the five/six spots.

Then you go after a guy like Jack Wilson for SS, and Damon for CF.


If you looking for an On base% guy, then Crawford is your man at the 3 hole. I think Crawford is comparable to Beltran.

WhiteSox5187
11-05-2007, 03:15 PM
If you looking for an On base% guy, then Crawford is your man at the 3 hole. I think Crawford is comparable to Beltran.
Someone earlier suggested that they liked Thome's .410 OBP at the three hole more than they liked Crawford's .355...personally I can see the benefit of having him hit three, if you have two good hitters in front of him, he can drive them in and set himself up nicely to score on a basehit by Paulie. But I also see the benefit of having him fifth to break up the Thome to Paulie to JD to AJ relay. But let's get him first before we start thinking about where he should hit in the order.

JohnTucker0814
11-05-2007, 03:18 PM
Crawford, only hit 11 HR last year and has never hit more than 18 in his career so I don't think he really fits as a number three hitter, I don't think you're really utilizing his speed. He does however hit a lot of triples, and doubles and steals a lot of bases. I think he's better either 1-2 or 5-6-7 in order to break up the plodders. His OBP is .355 which isn't great but not bad at all, Thome's OBP last year in an injury riddled year was still .410, I'd much rather have Thome in the 3 spot.

As for trading Crede or Fields to get him I doubt that's what the Rays are asking for, they've got a 3B in Iwamura, what they need is pitching. They'd ask for the likes of Broadway, Danks, Floyd, Gio, De Los Santos, etc.


I doubt he comes to the South Side but I sure wouldn't mind if he did.:smile:

If Garland stays, I'd give up Danks in a heartbeat. But, if we are getting rid of Garland, we need to keep Danks, IMHO... I'd do Danks, Floyd and Broadway in a heartbeat!

AJ Hellraiser
11-05-2007, 03:25 PM
I've been a Carl Crawford fan since the day he entered the league... he is my favorite player in baseball not wearing a SOX uniform... I don't care where he hits or what position he plays, he makes the SOX instantly better and that is the overall goal: to get better FAST...

I would welcome him with open arms...

Gammons Peter
11-05-2007, 03:58 PM
These people want Jenks, Garland and more
http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ml-devilrays&tid=18295

PorkChopExpress
11-05-2007, 04:00 PM
These people want Jenks, Garland and more
http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ml-devilrays&tid=18295

If we can get Mariano Rivera as a FA, I'm willing to listen.

spiffie
11-05-2007, 04:01 PM
These people want Jenks, Garland and more
http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ml-devilrays&tid=18295
That's because for every dumb trade idea, there must be an equal and opposite dumb trade idea to balance it. Every time someone tries to get Crawford for Anderson, Aardsma, Sisco, and Massett, someone has to propose Jenks, Garland, Gio, and DLS for Crawford. It's just the laws of nature at work.

spawn
11-05-2007, 04:02 PM
If we can get Mariano Rivera as a FA, I'm willing to listen.
So you want to trade a young closer to sign an aging one? Brilliant!

Boondock Saint
11-05-2007, 04:02 PM
That's because for every dumb trade idea, there must be an equal and opposite dumb trade idea to balance it.

Gold.

SBSoxFan
11-05-2007, 04:27 PM
These people want Jenks, Garland and more
http://www.forums.mlb.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ml-devilrays&tid=18295

Obviously that board has no color to indicate sarcasm.

RCWHITESOX
11-05-2007, 05:18 PM
If Garland stays, I'd give up Danks in a heartbeat. But, if we are getting rid of Garland, we need to keep Danks, IMHO... I'd do Danks, Floyd and Broadway in a heartbeat!

I'd love to see the sox get Crawford but I guarantee the fish won't be biting for a package of Danks,Floyd and Broadway.[Please]. You couldn't get any top notch OF help for that package. If brains were spit we couldn't lick a stamp with that offer.

drewcifer
11-05-2007, 05:23 PM
I'd love to see the sox get Crawford but I guarantee the fish won't be biting for a package of Danks,Floyd and Broadway.[Please]. You couldn't get any top notch OF help for that package. If brains were spit we couldn't lick a stamp with that offer.

First of all, Crawford doesn't play for the fish. Secondly, they've been making self adhesive stamps for like 5 years now.

RCWHITESOX
11-05-2007, 05:31 PM
First of all, Crawford doesn't play for the fish. Secondly, they've been making self adhesive stamps for like 5 years now.

Number 1 fish aren't biting is a statement that has nothing to do with the name of the team. Thought though I believe a Devil Ray is related to the fish family. Number 2 You got me there on the stamp issue. Can't win them all.

voodoochile
11-05-2007, 07:51 PM
Okay...

Danks, Floyd, Owens and pick a prospect for Crawford.

Crede for Damon and cash.

Sign some veteran burnout to be the 5th starter.

Keep Uribe (all we can probably afford)

Sign some relief help.

Lineup:

Damon CF
Crawford LF
Mr. Incredible DH
Walnuts 1B
Live and let Dye RF
Fields of Dreams 3B
AJ C
Uribe SS
Richar 2B


Starters:
BurlyMon
Javy
JG
El Count
retread veteran

Bullpen:
Figure it out KW

I think we'd win a few games...:tongue:

munchman33
11-05-2007, 08:01 PM
Okay...

Danks, Floyd, Owens and pick a prospect for Crawford.

Crede for Damon and cash.

Sign some veteran burnout to be the 5th starter.

Keep Uribe (all we can probably afford)

Sign some relief help.

Lineup:

Damon CF
Crawford LF
Mr. Incredible DH
Walnuts 1B
Live and let Dye RF
Fields of Dreams 3B
AJ C
Uribe SS
Richar 2B


Starters:
BurlyMon
Javy
JG
El Count
retread veteran

Bullpen:
Figure it out KW

I think we'd win a few games...:tongue:

Probably about 85. 90+ if we get lucky and everything works out. But, IMO, this team is probably a best case scenerio for us. It'll take a lot for us to win the division next year.

goon
11-05-2007, 11:07 PM
Okay...

Danks, Floyd, Owens and pick a prospect for Crawford.

Crede for Damon and cash.

Sign some veteran burnout to be the 5th starter.

Keep Uribe (all we can probably afford)

Sign some relief help.

Lineup:

Damon CF
Crawford LF
Mr. Incredible DH
Walnuts 1B
Live and let Dye RF
Fields of Dreams 3B
AJ C
Uribe SS
Richar 2B


Starters:
BurlyMon
Javy
JG
El Count
retread veteran

Bullpen:
Figure it out KW

I think we'd win a few games...:tongue:

Ideally, that lineup would be productive, if they can still healthy. They would definitely contend.

Gammons Peter
11-06-2007, 08:35 AM
Okay...

Danks, Floyd, Owens and pick a prospect for Crawford.

Once again, crap + crap + crap is not going to get Crawford. Why don't you throw in Brian Anderson and Sisco too.

Danks is the only name of value in your scenario

jabrch
11-06-2007, 08:42 AM
Sign some veteran burnout to be the 5th starter.

I'm a veteran burnout...

I'd really rather not go that route - if that's the case, I'd rather give Floyd/Gio etc. a shot.

roadrunner
11-06-2007, 11:06 AM
That's because for every dumb trade idea, there must be an equal and opposite dumb trade idea to balance it. Every time someone tries to get Crawford for Anderson, Aardsma, Sisco, and Massett, someone has to propose Jenks, Garland, Gio, and DLS for Crawford. It's just the laws of nature at work.

word

voodoochile
11-06-2007, 11:16 AM
Once again, crap + crap + crap is not going to get Crawford. Why don't you throw in Brian Anderson and Sisco too.

Danks is the only name of value in your scenario

Two young starters who have shown some ability to pitch on the major league level and a young outfielder with speed to burn who put up a .330 OBP in his first 4 months in the majors is crap+crap+crap?

Am I missing something here? I didn't propose all the spare parts the Sox are willing to dump for nothing, I am willing to give potential value, extended service time at cheap prices and some previous success.

Are you saying that the Sox have no package they can put together of minor leaguers that can land Crawford? Word is the Tampa wants players who are cheap and will afford them years of cheap service. You aren't going to land Crawford for Garland because it doesn't do anything for them financially.

Since you don't like my trade suggestion, what do you think it would take to land Crawford?

Easy to stomp all over a proposed trade, but it would be nice to see what you think would get it done. I've already said I am willing to trade almost every prospect in the minor league system with or without major league experience to land Crawford. You got a suggestion or do you simply think there is no way in heck the Sox could ever acquire him?

spiffie
11-06-2007, 11:21 AM
Two young starters who have shown some ability to pitch on the major league level and a young outfielder with speed to burn who put up a .330 OBP in his first 4 months in the majors is crap+crap+crap?

Am I missing something here? I didn't propose all the spare parts the Sox are willing to dump for nothing, I am willing to give potential value, extended service time at cheap prices and some previous success.

Are you saying that the Sox have no package they can put together of minor leaguers that can land Crawford? Word is the Tampa wants players who are cheap and will afford them years of cheap service. You aren't going to land Crawford for Garland because it doesn't do anything for them financially.

Since you don't like my trade suggestion, what do you think it would take to land Crawford?

Easy to stomp all over a proposed trade, but it would be nice to see what you think would get it done. I've already said I am willing to trade almost every prospect in the minor league system with or without major league experience to land Crawford. You got a suggestion or do you simply think there is no way in heck the Sox could ever acquire him?
To get Crawford you're going to need to put out guys with very high ceilings, not just guys who will be serviceable players. This is Tampa you're dealing with, they don't move guys unless you absolutely blow them away. Start with a base of Gio and Broadway, and go from there. I would guess maybe those two plus one more high ceiling prospect at least will be their asking price. Perhaps Gio, Broadway, and Carter, with maybe an Anderson or Sweeney thrown in. Or perhaps Gio, DLS, and one more high prospect.

And that's why I doubt we get Crawford, because I can't see KW giving away his tip-top prospects for one guy, when we can go out and get an OF on the FA market for more $ but not losing any players.

Gammons Peter
11-06-2007, 11:26 AM
Owens is nearly worthless to Tampa, they probably have 5 or 6 OFers that are better than him in their system (thats why they can trade Crawford).

So your talking about two average or slightly above average pitching prospects for Crawford...not gonna happen.

Maybe one of those guys plus Gio AND Garland

voodoochile
11-06-2007, 11:41 AM
To get Crawford you're going to need to put out guys with very high ceilings, not just guys who will be serviceable players. This is Tampa you're dealing with, they don't move guys unless you absolutely blow them away. Start with a base of Gio and Broadway, and go from there. I would guess maybe those two plus one more high ceiling prospect at least will be their asking price. Perhaps Gio, Broadway, and Carter, with maybe an Anderson or Sweeney thrown in. Or perhaps Gio, DLS, and one more high prospect.

And that's why I doubt we get Crawford, because I can't see KW giving away his tip-top prospects for one guy, when we can go out and get an OF on the FA market for more $ but not losing any players.

Go for it KW...

JohnTucker0814
11-06-2007, 12:04 PM
To get Crawford you're going to need to put out guys with very high ceilings, not just guys who will be serviceable players. This is Tampa you're dealing with, they don't move guys unless you absolutely blow them away. Start with a base of Gio and Broadway, and go from there. I would guess maybe those two plus one more high ceiling prospect at least will be their asking price. Perhaps Gio, Broadway, and Carter, with maybe an Anderson or Sweeney thrown in. Or perhaps Gio, DLS, and one more high prospect.

And that's why I doubt we get Crawford, because I can't see KW giving away his tip-top prospects for one guy, when we can go out and get an OF on the FA market for more $ but not losing any players.

If we have to give up Gio and DLS, scratch the Crawford trade talks and go after Furcal instead.

gregory18n
11-06-2007, 12:30 PM
u prefer furcal to crawford; that's wacky!

JohnTucker0814
11-06-2007, 12:42 PM
u prefer furcal to crawford; that's wacky!

If we have to give up Gio and DLS... YES!!!!

Gammons Peter
11-06-2007, 12:50 PM
If we have to give up Gio and DLS... YES!!!!

We would have to give up more than those two and I would do it in a heartbeat! Prospects are just that...prospects. Carl Crawford is one of the best players in baseball. Gio and DLS are just maybes

voodoochile
11-06-2007, 12:50 PM
If we have to give up Gio and DLS... YES!!!!

Okay, got to ask...

Who is DLS?

munchman33
11-06-2007, 12:54 PM
Okay, got to ask...

Who is DLS?

Fautino De Los Santos

voodoochile
11-06-2007, 12:57 PM
Fautino De Los Santos

Thanks...

Taliesinrk
11-06-2007, 12:59 PM
If we were to get crawford, who's gonna lead off?

Gammons Peter
11-06-2007, 01:01 PM
If we were to get crawford, who's gonna lead off?

Maybe whomever plays cf, ss or 2nd

gregory18n
11-07-2007, 11:51 PM
i'd get Kaz Matsui to lead-off & bat Crawford 2nd