But the main thing is that if Crawford helps the Sox get to the series a few times and win a couple over the next seven years, nobody will be complaining.

Anyway, you did make my point well. And although Crawford is better, if you flipped teams with the current contracts, the Nats lose again of the two, simply because the RS can blow money without it hurting them as much. That’s my take, equally bad for teams, equally player friendly. It just so happens the Sox have the ability to better absorb their huge contracts. And both players are awesome btw. Love to have either of them honestly, but not at that price. What are we the Yankees?

On another note, Jonny 5, I once saw you bemoan your hasty choice of a screenname. I feel compelled to tell you that I personally love it. Any reference, intentional or not, to the greatest “AI robot prototype gets struck by lightning, becomes a sentient being, befriends Steve Gutenberg” movie ever is worth a few points in my book.

The Red Sox have at least a handful of reasons why the Crawford contract hurts them less than Werth to Washington. They will be fine. The Werth contract is more harmful to the Nats imo. I was arguing that Crawford is not the “flat out” better than Werth. That’s it. I was talking “game” not “contract”.

Now, I am willing to consider that maybe he really wouldn’t be that great in center. From my perspective, if you can chase down pretty much anything in left like he can, you should fare pretty nicely in center as well. But what do I know? Ellsbury seems to have all the tools to be an exceptional CF, yet all the objective metrics seem to say he sucks, so much so that Boston wanted to make him a LF. Presumably they’re cool with his CF defense now though, what with Crawford in the fold.

Also, the first year the Sox had Coco Crisp, he took a lot of heat for his defense, even moving some sectors of the press to call him a LF masquerading as a CF or something to that effect. The next season, he was lauded as an all-world CF. And I believe the metrics backed that up. So, like, you know…whatever.

AND AGE. This has been pointed out to you like a bajillion times now.

Both contracts are very player friendly, and that could turn out bad for one, the other, or both.

Once, he says, when Tom Foley was the Rays’ farm director, Crawford says Foley told him that he was a leftfielder, that Rocco Baldelli was a better centerfielder. And that was that. Crawford was a leftfielder.

“Foley says he never told me that,” Crawford says. “But you don’t forget when a man tells you that to your face. He crushed me. After that, I said, ‘I’m never playing centerfield again.’ ”

As for 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.”
******************************************************************************************************************
link to entire article:
http://www.tampabay.com/sports/baseball/rays/article1125886.ece

Oh, it is. But it’s the one. And comparing runs 106 (Werth) to 110 (Crawford), well that tells me the Stolen bases might have helped him just enough to give him 4 more runs. Stolen bases are worthless if you can’t get batted in. Look, Werth is a masher, he gets on base better. Crawford has a better avg and has more range. I’d offensively it’s a wash.

And If I have to repeat this one more time. CBP is not ridiculously hitter friendly. Look at the players on the Phills, then look at their home vs. away splits. There isn’t one player on the Phills that show much difference in comparison. Which means it’s a myth.

Werth will more than likely have a decline stuffed into a limp lineup, where Crawford won’t have that.

Also Crawford can’t gun down baserunners from the OF like Werth can.

Just some points to think about.

Now I think he’s a little jealous of the TV money two former Post sports guys (Wilbon and Kornheiser) are getting. He’s become more of a loud-mouthed homer, as the “Werth signing is better” column indicates. Which is in part understandable given that he grew up with the old Senators and the traumas of them leaving town and having no baseball for 40 years.

Not that Werth is in any sense a bad player. His RAR last year was stupendous. But any argument that Crawford is less good relatively is a non-starter. 18th Street said it perfectly: The Sawx have a brilliant front office with powerful statistical capabilities (including Bill James). They look at a player for what he is individually and as part of the team.

What Boswell was trying to do was to counter the prevailing DC attitude of “what the eff” regarding the Werth deal by concocting a K Street-like argument in support of the deal. That is, an argument fashioned to possibly persuade the undecided but not sway those with an already established, firm position, and to give air-cover for the decision makers, right or wrong. You see this all the time in DC.

And you see through it all the time outside the Beltway.

And I often like Boswell.

FWIW, Fangraphs has his “Arm Runs Above Average” as positive the last two years, after a long run of negative values. His “Fan Scouting Report” ratings for release and arm strength are pretty weak though.

If it’s conventional wisdom that his arm is terrible, then so be it I guess. Even still, I assumed his awesome range would be the more heavily weighted factor in determining where to play him. I mean, Damon was fine in center with his noodle arm, and Ellsbury doesn’t exactly have a cannon himself.

Flat out better? I can’t agree with that either. Many baseball “people” think OBP is the most important stat which Werth is better in. Werth has a better SLG% and OPS too. So offensively the only stat where he’s better is BA. So his great defense is what makes him flat out better??? Or his base stealing? Because Werth is no slouch defensively and his numbers are close to crawfords there. So te only spot i see a big difference is base stealing.

“The Red Sox, unlike the Nats, are capable of challenging for the pennant in the short term, thereby justifying a deal that is more likely to pay dividends in the short, rather than the long term.”

Depends on your definition of short term I guess. The nats could certainly be competing by 2013 with Strasburg fully back and Harper in the big leagues. The bar to get into the playoffs in the NL is noticebly lower then it is in the AL East.

I do think it was a dumb signing that was well over any other offer he received.

And although Fenway’s left field wall is shorter and hinders Crawford’s range a little, it will also help when he doesn’t have to make as long of throws.

About ten years ago, he used Jason Varitek’s wild pitch and passed ball totals to bolster Boswell’s (weak) argument that Tek was a poor defensive catcher, never noting that almost all of them came while catching Tim Wakefield. In 1988, when Lou Brock and Carl Yastrzemski were voted into the Hall of Fame, Boswell dismissed Yaz’s admission as based on longevity alone, never mentioning little items like, oh, his multiple batting championships, the Gold Gloves, the Triple Crown, and that MVP thing. He does this in all his columns, I’m sure: you just pick up on it faster when it involves a team you follow closely. Craig’s example of Crawford’s stats in Fenway is perfect: Boswell almost certainly knew he had hit well there in recent years, but intentionally misrepresented the data.