Skip to content

Carl Crawford says Angels’ efforts to sign him were “weird” and “didn’t make sense”

Feb 24, 2011, 10:50 AM EDT

carl-crawford-red-sox Getty Images

Carl Crawford apparently had a very emotional offseason.

Earlier this week Crawford said that he was “creeped out” by the Red Sox admitting that they followed him both on and off the field last year in preparation for potentially signing him as a free agent and yesterday he told Jon Heyman of SI.com that he felt the Angels’ method of pursuing him as a free agent “was weird.”

Crawford was linked to the Angels more than any other suitor at the beginning of the offseason, but the team’s reported six-year, $108 million offer (with a seventh-year option) was $34 million less than he ended up getting from the Red Sox and $18 million less than fellow free agent outfielder Jayson Werth got from the Nationals.

Here’s more from Crawford:

They obviously didn’t want me that bad because I’m a Red Sox. I don’t know what happened. It was weird. I heard they said my contract was too much. Then they paid more [per year] to Vernon Wells. I didn’t understand that. [Werth] is 31 and I’m 29. It didn’t make sense to me, either. And this is why I’m a Red Sox.

All of which is interesting, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that the Angels screwed up by not out-bidding the Red Sox for Crawford. The notion that he’s not worth a seven-year, $142 million commitment is hardly outlandish, so while the Angels’ method of pursuing Crawford may have seemed odd and their final offer wasn’t particularly competitive with the contract he ended up signing that doesn’t mean they made a mistake (later deciding to take on Vernon Wells’ contract was a pretty clear mistake, but that’s a mostly separate decision).

  1. ChoneZone - Feb 24, 2011 at 11:13 AM

    This raises a good point…what is the singular form of Red Sox? “I’m a Red Sox” sounds weird, is it just Red Sock?

    • Mr. Jason "El Bravo" Heyward - Feb 24, 2011 at 11:16 AM

      Red Sox/White Sox is singular and yes it sounds weird. It sounds more normal when said “I play on the Red Sox”.

      • Mr. Jason "El Bravo" Heyward - Feb 24, 2011 at 11:18 AM

        Please note one expection: Singular for Phillies is “lil douchey”.

      • mrhojorisin - Feb 24, 2011 at 11:26 AM

        Shouldn’t it be, “I play WITH the Red Sox”?

      • Jonny 5 - Feb 24, 2011 at 11:37 AM

        “Please note one expection: Singular for Phillies is “lil douchey”.

        El Bravo strikes again, Let me clear it up for you sir.

        Phillies singular to the Braves this season is a 4 leatter word “FEAR”. And the only thing they have to fear is fear itself. It just sucks that it just so happens to have materialized in a division rival. Ha Ha. ;)

      • Mr. Jason "El Bravo" Heyward - Feb 24, 2011 at 12:13 PM

        “with” works.

        J5 is a fan of each lil douchey player out there.

    • cur68 - Feb 24, 2011 at 11:29 AM

      Us Canadians have a similar issue with the Toronto Maple Leafs. They are always the ‘Leafs’ and never the ‘Leaves’. This bothers me (because I am a PIA pedant) so I just refer to them as ‘the Laughs’ the singular of with is “the douche”.

    • Jonny 5 - Feb 24, 2011 at 11:29 AM

      Beaneater. “I am now a Beaneater” is the proper term I think.

  2. Mr. Jason "El Bravo" Heyward - Feb 24, 2011 at 11:14 AM

    Is it me or does no one care about the Angels? Fans, are you there? Stand up and defend yourselves!

    • trevorb06 - Feb 24, 2011 at 11:18 AM

      They’re all too embarassed their team went out and got Vernon Wells and ate that contract.

    • pauleee - Feb 24, 2011 at 12:16 PM

      We can’t defend ourselves. We’re too dizzy from all the spiraling (down, to the depths of the AL West, no less). :(

      • Mr. Jason "El Bravo" Heyward - Feb 24, 2011 at 12:20 PM

        Hey there you are! I’m just glad one of you is out there representing. Sometimes I fear there’s only odoriferous Phillies fans, Yanker-wankers, Twinkle Toes, Red Sohx, White Saax, and Cubs Nuts on here….and me. Stand proud good sir and keep fightin’ the good fight.

      • Ari Collins - Feb 24, 2011 at 12:23 PM

        You still have the best Weaver and, until Carlos gets going, the best Santana.

      • scatterbrian - Feb 24, 2011 at 12:38 PM

        Johan Santana says hello.

      • WhenMattStairsIsKing - Feb 24, 2011 at 12:48 PM

        Aren’t you a Cub fan, J-Hey?

      • Ari Collins - Feb 24, 2011 at 1:07 PM

        I’m pretty sure Johan says, “I’ll see you soon! Well. Soonish.”

      • scatterbrian - Feb 24, 2011 at 1:22 PM

        Ervin has made 170 career starts, pitching 1069 innings to a 15.6 WAR. Since Ervin’s debut, Johan has made 188 starts, pitching 1284.3 innings to a

      • scatterbrian - Feb 24, 2011 at 1:29 PM

        Ervin has made 170 career starts, pitching 1069 innings to a 15.6 WAR. Since Ervin’s debut, Johan has made 188 starts, pitching 1284.3 innings to a 30.5 WAR. If you like wins and ERA, the number skew even more in Johan’s favor.

      • Mr. Jason "El Bravo" Heyward - Feb 24, 2011 at 1:53 PM

        I’m a Chicago fan b/c I live here but I’m Braves all the way. Cubs fans hate me b/c I don’t hate the Saaaax, Saaaax fans hate me b/c I don’t hate everyone.

      • WhenMattStairsIsKing - Feb 24, 2011 at 1:54 PM

        I’m a Cub fan, and I have no ill will toward the White Sox. I want them to win, unless they face us.

      • Ari Collins - Feb 24, 2011 at 5:25 PM

        What I was trying to get at is that for this season, Ervin could well be the most valuable Santana, considering Johan will miss some time and Carlos might not establish himself. Just… some small comfort for the Angels fan.

    • cur68 - Feb 24, 2011 at 1:03 PM

      Us Jay’s fans here, too! Damn always an after thought, just like in the AL east. Oh, and WhenMattStairsIsKing? I hope you’re kidding about El Bravo being a Cubbinite. That ‘El Bravo’ should be a clue, y’know? If you were kidding; be careful, you’ll give him an embolism suggesting such a thing in jest.

      • Mr. Jason "El Bravo" Heyward - Feb 24, 2011 at 1:53 PM

        Sorry I missed you (singular usage of ‘you’).

  3. Chipmaker - Feb 24, 2011 at 11:59 AM

    Singular is “Red Sok”.

    Since the team name already abuses common English spelling, may as well run with that.

  4. pauleee - Feb 24, 2011 at 12:33 PM

    Just read the linked article. He calls the talks weird, but references the Wells signing, which was after the fact. He does mention not getting offered more than Jason Werth, so it was partially about a bigger contract. Fact is, I think we wants/likes/needs to be in the spotlight, which he’ll get (like it or not) in Boston. In Anaheim, I think there’s a fear you’ll play out your career in obscurity.

    • hep3 - Feb 24, 2011 at 3:44 PM

      Ah, yes, the relative obscurity of Orange County and Southern California. It is such a tough place to live with all of that sunshine. It must be terrible for those in the center of the universe (i.e. the East Coast) to have to imagine the primitive surroundings we on the left coast have to endure. News flash though, we do have some modern conveniences out here, finally. Also, we get all of the box scores in the morning.

      Excuse me, but I have to get my winter coat. The temperature might go below 60 today. BRRRRRR!

  5. WhenMattStairsIsKing - Feb 24, 2011 at 12:50 PM

    So the Red Sox weirded him out, and so did the Angels.

    I wonder if he visited with another team too, and said “Man, there’s some ghosts here, or poltergeists, or something. And I think I saw a rabid spider in the clubhouse. No, no, this won’t work, I’m terrified.”

  6. henryd3rd - Feb 24, 2011 at 12:55 PM

    And the owners now want the players to provide with protection from themselves. I’ve never seen a free agent player go into contract negotiations with a gun in his hands. I can still remember the Yanks signing of Reggie and the scribes said that that was the death knell for baseball. If I were a member of the Players Association bargaining team I would agree to almost everything; because in time some owner will find the loophole in that CBA and sign some player to an outrageous contract. Can anyone blame Jason Werth for taking the Nationals’ money?

    • Ari Collins - Feb 24, 2011 at 1:08 PM

      Huh?

    • Ari Collins - Feb 24, 2011 at 3:26 PM

      Also, if you don’t know how to use a semi-colon, it’s probably a good idea not to try. They’re tricky beasts.

  7. Ari Collins - Feb 24, 2011 at 1:11 PM

    Although it is after the fact, I can understand Crawford not understanding the Wells signing. Although it doesn’t EXACTLY work like this, it can SEEM like, “Well, Crawford wasn’t worth $20M. But this older and worse player certainly is!”

  8. henryd3rd - Feb 24, 2011 at 1:27 PM

    Many a fielder has had trouble playing left field in Fenway and time will tell if Crawford is up to the challenge. Let us not ignore the fact that he’s not a Ted, Carl or Jim when it comes to fielding his position. Then again he will not be Manny being Manny out there either.

    • scatterbrian - Feb 24, 2011 at 1:39 PM

      No, he’s a Carl, and he’s a fantastic defensive outfielder.

      • henryd3rd - Feb 24, 2011 at 2:34 PM

        I’ve watched Carl Crawford since he came up and he came up and he’s not a great outfielder. He has great speed; but he has limitations when it comes to fielding. Now he’s a great base stealer; but he’s not going to make the folks in Beantown compare him with Yaz

      • Ari Collins - Feb 24, 2011 at 3:22 PM

        Very few fans and absolutely no scouts agree with you.

      • scatterbrian - Feb 24, 2011 at 3:30 PM

        Wait, I just realized, is the Jim you’re referring to Jim Rice? Are you actually claiming Rice was a good defender? Further, are you saying Rice was better than Crawford? Rice was a one-dimensional DH-type wearing a glove. Credibility lost.

      • Ari Collins - Feb 24, 2011 at 3:46 PM

        Even if he hadn’t lost his credibility before this post, he also says that Carl is not a Ted (who was a great hitter but not a great fielder) and that Carl is not… a Carl. Good job.

      • henryd3rd - Feb 24, 2011 at 4:29 PM

        Yes he’s a Carl; but not a Yaztrzemski. Great defensive player he’s not. He’s adequate. I been to Fenway Park and I’ve seen him misplay some doubles into triples because of his lack of familiarity with the Green Monster. And he has a pop gun for an arm.

      • Ari Collins - Feb 24, 2011 at 5:16 PM

        Oh, wait, you’ve been to Fenway park and seen a couple of plays he made? Nevermind, 99% of fans and 100% of scouts are wrong.

    • cur68 - Feb 24, 2011 at 4:01 PM

      Um Hank 3, I don’ mean to pile you on here but maybe you should explain this one to a dumb ass like me. WTF are you talking about?

      • henryd3rd - Feb 24, 2011 at 4:11 PM

        Yaz could play that left field wall better then anyone before or after. And Williams was not slough in the outfield.

      • cur68 - Feb 24, 2011 at 4:48 PM

        Kay. I see the point now. In the context of Fenway those guys had it going on. Carl Crawford, though, is not a single leg amputee with a noodle arm. He’s pretty nimble and his arm will get some help from the big carom the monster gives you. He will be just fine and may easily eclipse those guys in the field. He’s a natural born athlete and he can hit. I don’t see how he’s a down grade in any way.

      • Ari Collins - Feb 24, 2011 at 5:22 PM

        Williams was no slough (eww), but he was definitely a bit of a slouch out there.

        If you’re going to start criticizing the Crawford deal out of context, defense isn’t where to begin. Or at least argue that Fenway makes him less valuable than he would be to other teams.

        If Jim Rice and Manny Ramirez can figure out how to play the Monster, I’m pretty sure that someone who’s not only actually a good fielder but, in fact, a great fielder, will be just fine.

  9. rje49 - Feb 24, 2011 at 5:00 PM

    While we’re on the subject, I always wondered what an “Athletics” was. It’s not even a noun. It could be an adjective (as in the “athletics department”) or an adverb, but certainly not a plural noun. A very odd name. It should have been “Athletes”, shouldn’t it?

  10. indaburg - Feb 24, 2011 at 10:44 PM

    I thought Carl joined the Red Sox because that’s where his heart is, not because they offered him more money. I feel so deceived.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Teams searching for trade deadline impact
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. H. Street (3756)
  2. C. Lee (2949)
  3. H. Ramirez (2725)
  4. T. Tulowitzki (2697)
  5. Y. Puig (2584)
  1. C. Headley (2505)
  2. T. Walker (2469)
  3. B. Belt (2384)
  4. M. Trout (2215)
  5. D. Price (2173)