Interest in Carl Crawford?

[BigbadB]

Even if it isn't done. The writing has been on the wall for awhile now. Should have seen it coming.

 

Tampa is famous for asking for the world. Tampa is famous for not caving in on their demands. If the Cubs want Crawford, I'm worried about what the Cubs will give up to get him.

 

Although Friedman hasn't really been too active trading, thats a Chuck LaMar thing. Hes the Director of Scouting for the Phils now.

 

This is true. However, I'll stay cautious until I see what kind of deals this new GM pulls off.

[Derwood]

we've gone from "Hill is untouchable and I won't trade him straight up for Adam Dunn" to "Hill plus my best reliever plus a young SS for Crawford"

 

Ladies and Gentleman, YOUR Cubs General Manager, Mr. James Hendry

[questionmarkgrace]

Hill did well last year but he is certainly not great. I would trade him for a player of Carl Crawfords caliber any day. Plus Crawford is signed for a couple more years.

[David]

Hill did well last year but he is certainly not great. I would trade him for a player of Carl Crawfords caliber any day. Plus Crawford is signed for a couple more years.

 

Classic case of overrating another team's player and undervaluing your own.

[inari]

Hill did well last year but he is certainly not great. I would trade him for a player of Carl Crawfords caliber any day. Plus Crawford is signed for a couple more years.

 

So is Hill. And Hill is easily more valuable than Crawford. Easily.

[questionmarkgrace]

Classic case of overrating another team's player

 

I really dont think hill is all that special. Hes not as good as zito was at his peak and hes not quite as bad zito now. Guys with a big hook and slow 90mph fast ball can have success but are never great. He barely has a third pitch and he doesnt have the best baseball instincts. Not to mention if he went to the american league he would get shelled.

 

Crawford on the other hand has drawn comparisons to a young Barry Bonds. Is a gold golve caliber outfielder from any position, has speed,developing power and on base skills. ANd he'll be 25 for most of the next season. He will have a far greater impact than hill ever had on this team.

[questionmarkgrace]

You guys are crazy. Hes decent but not that good.

[inari]

Who has ever compared Crawford to a young Barry Bonds? They're not even in the same ballpark, not in the same league, not even the same sport. Edited November 14, 2007 by inari

[Sammy Sofa]

Who has ever compared Crawford to a young Barry Bonds?

 

Carl Crawford.

[questionmarkgrace]

Bonds vs Crawford

22 329 .492 821 vs 331 .450 781

23 368 .491 859 vs 331 .469 800

24 351 .426 777 vs 348 .482 830

 

 

They really arent that far off. Except bonds had a huge year at 25. Crawford just turned 25 and will be so until next august. And crawford is faster than bonds and has a better arm than he did.

[questionmarkgrace]

Rich Hill's #s look a lot like AL LEITERS.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/l/leiteal01.shtml

[E.J.]

Bradenton Herald[/url]"]Even though Tampa Bay Rays vice president of baseball Andrew Friedman said earlier this month that there are no untouchable players on the team, the rumors out of Chicago that he is about to pull the trigger on a deal that would move Carl Crawford to the Cubs is just that, a rumor.

 

According to team officials, there is nothing in the works.

 

It's been reported the Cubs are willing to move Rich Hill, Eric Patterson and a prospect for Crawford, the Rays' All-Star left fielder.

 

Hill, a left-hander, was 11-8 with a 3.92 ERA in 32 starts last season for the National League Central Division champs. Patterson is an outfield prospect, who played in just seven games in 2007.

[inari]

Al Leiter didn't get a full season of starting under his belt until he was 30.

 

And Carl Crawford has absolutely zero chance to be Barry Bonds. No one with any credibility has ever made that comparison.

[inari]

Actually, the real question is, why is it bad to be Al Leiter? He had a terrific career.

[SouthSideRyan]

I agree that questionmark is overrating Crawford/underrating Hill, but you're doing the opposite tomy. Hill is not easily better than Crawford. I'd likely give the nod to Crawford straight up. Taking into account salary, Hill has a fighter's chance, but I think you're overrating Hill. And this is from a guy with a Rich Hill jersey.

[inari]

Personally, I wouldn't do Hill for Crawford straight up either. There are better corner outfielders out there that can be had for less. Jason Bay, for example.

[badnews]

It doesn't matter if he is better. From your argument I would conclude that you think that Fukudome would at least be 90% the player Crawford is, with the potential to be 110% the player he is.

 

Looking at how other players who have come over from Japan to the US have fared, you could expect his OBP to be around 93% of what he is putting up in Japan, his SLG to be about 85% of Japan numbers, and (not that it matters) but his BA to be within 96% of his Japan numbers. Using his numbers from the last 3 seasons, that would put him at roughly:

 

.307/.404/.490/.894

 

I know this has already been debunked, but why on earth does no one factor Kaz Matsui, Kenji Johjima, and Iwamura into the translations? I can guess why - because it'll cause the numbers to go down and there goes the whole house of cards.

 

Fukudome struck out more in Japan than every guy mentioned except Iwamura. Yet he's going to keep his average as well as Ichiro, Matsui, and Johjima? Come on. When Kei Igawa is a strikeout machine in Japan and Fukudome strikes out 23% of the time in Japan, what happens here?

 

I give him a .800 OPS in the form of a .275 BA, .355 OBP, .445 SLG .. Cubs got a .794 OPS from right field this year.

[badnews]

Is anyone else tired of the absolutely rampant laziness in assuming just because a player is under 30 they'll improve? Why doesn't anyone crunch the stats on a Coco Crisp move from Cleveland to Boston? For that matter, how different was Crisp from Crawford back then?

 

I would guess he could easily morph into a 25-30 HR hitter, given his age, and he could very easily surpass 30 once or twice in his career.

 

Why? Oh yes. He's under 30. I eagerly await the 35 home run seasons of guys like Shane Victorino as well.

[badnews]

Classic case of overrating another team's player

 

I really dont think hill is all that special. Hes not as good as zito was at his peak and hes not quite as bad zito now. Guys with a big hook and slow 90mph fast ball can have success but are never great. He barely has a third pitch and he doesnt have the best baseball instincts. Not to mention if he went to the american league he would get shelled.

 

Crawford on the other hand has drawn comparisons to a young Barry Bonds. Is a gold golve caliber outfielder from any position, has speed,developing power and on base skills. ANd he'll be 25 for most of the next season. He will have a far greater impact than hill ever had on this team.

 

On base skills like Bonds? You've got to be kidding. You're just making things up. By the time Bonds was Crawford's age he was already taking a ton of walks. Bonds was also cutting down his strikeouts while Crawford is increasing them. Bonds hit more home runs at Crawford's age. Bonds basically did everything better except steal bases.

 

Crawford has way more in common with Kenny Lofton than any of these other names, I think. Except Lofton walked more too.

 

Barry Zito pitched in a friendly pitching park in the AL. You know, a park that has made guys like Kirk Saarloos, Lenny DiNardo, and Chad Gaudin look decent.

 

Why is it people always complain about Hill's repetoire but he's got a good K/9, BAA and induces a lot of swings and misses? Why is Rich Hill underrated?

 

- He pitched in the toughest pitcher's park in the NL and 2nd toughest in baseball this year, according to the park factors.

 

- 6th in the NL in K/9, Maine beat him out at the last second when he struck out 14 in his last game. 8th in WHIP. When you talk about a guy in the top 10 of WHIP and K/9, aren't you getting toward ace material?

 

- For all the talk of mental toughness, he pitched with no run support this year and didn't fall apart.

 

- He showed encouraging signs of improving his G/F ratio after the ASB.

 

- He basically had an ace-level OPS against, and look at the park he pitched in, around the same as Hamels, Penny, Haren, and Wang. His OPS against on the road was .659 - ace level.

 

Enough of this BS about how Hill is kind of a fringey lefty just lucking out. You want to see fringey lefties lucking out? Go look at Noah Lowry and Chuck James. You'll see peripherals and indicators that will make your head explode a la Scanners.

[inari]

That was one of the most well written Hill defenses in quite a while.

[ChiCubsFan]

Is anyone else tired of the absolutely rampant laziness in assuming just because a player is under 30 they'll improve? Why doesn't anyone crunch the stats on a Coco Crisp move from Cleveland to Boston? For that matter, how different was Crisp from Crawford back then?

 

I would guess he could easily morph into a 25-30 HR hitter, given his age, and he could very easily surpass 30 once or twice in his career.

 

Why? Oh yes. He's under 30. I eagerly await the 35 home run seasons of guys like Shane Victorino as well.

 

To be fair, many "experts" said Crawford had 30/30, maybe even 40/40, potential in his prime. I never heard such things about Victorino. I would be willing to bet a lot of money that Crawford hits 25+ homers 3 or more times in his career.

[SweetZombieJesus]

It doesn't matter if he is better. From your argument I would conclude that you think that Fukudome would at least be 90% the player Crawford is, with the potential to be 110% the player he is.

 

Looking at how other players who have come over from Japan to the US have fared, you could expect his OBP to be around 93% of what he is putting up in Japan, his SLG to be about 85% of Japan numbers, and (not that it matters) but his BA to be within 96% of his Japan numbers. Using his numbers from the last 3 seasons, that would put him at roughly:

 

.307/.404/.490/.894

 

I know this has already been debunked, but why on earth does no one factor Kaz Matsui, Kenji Johjima, and Iwamura into the translations? I can guess why - because it'll cause the numbers to go down and there goes the whole house of cards.

 

Fukudome struck out more in Japan than every guy mentioned except Iwamura. Yet he's going to keep his average as well as Ichiro, Matsui, and Johjima? Come on. When Kei Igawa is a strikeout machine in Japan and Fukudome strikes out 23% of the time in Japan, what happens here?

 

I give him a .800 OPS in the form of a .275 BA, .355 OBP, .445 SLG .. Cubs got a .794 OPS from right field this year.

 

Throw in the fact the guy that Carroll interviewed on BP radio (cafardo of the boston globe I think) Says Fukudome might get a deal in 18 million dollar range. I don't buy that but I think after hearing that he'll probably get closer to 12-14 mill than the 8-10 I orignally thought

[Mephistopheles]

It doesn't matter if he is better. From your argument I would conclude that you think that Fukudome would at least be 90% the player Crawford is, with the potential to be 110% the player he is.

 

Looking at how other players who have come over from Japan to the US have fared, you could expect his OBP to be around 93% of what he is putting up in Japan, his SLG to be about 85% of Japan numbers, and (not that it matters) but his BA to be within 96% of his Japan numbers. Using his numbers from the last 3 seasons, that would put him at roughly:

 

.307/.404/.490/.894

 

I know this has already been debunked, but why on earth does no one factor Kaz Matsui, Kenji Johjima, and Iwamura into the translations? I can guess why - because it'll cause the numbers to go down and there goes the whole house of cards.

 

As someone who has run translations on all the guys mentioned. Johjima and Iwamura nailed their expected production based on their Japanese numbers. Matsui did not, but he's an outlier. With the notable exception of Matsui, just about EVERY person in Japan who came over did roughly what they should have done based on their Japanese numbers. Generally the .93*NPBEQA is a spot on translation. That would put Fukudome somewhere in the .295-.300 EqA range. You're not in the position to say how something will translate. You really have no clue what you are talking about.

 

Like I've said a dozen times. Fukudome's a little bit more than 2000-2004 Mark Kotsay

[badnews]

Who said that about Crawford? How likely is it that a guy who hits the ball on the ground as much as Crawford does hits 40 home runs? Is he suddenly going to hit more balls in the air? His swing doesn't look conducive to it. Are 25% of his flyballs going to turn into home runs when the major league average is (last I saw, maybe someone else can find more authoritative numbers) was 9-11%? The only guy I can find who hits the ball on the ground at least that much and had an Isolated Power over .190 more than once is good 'ol Jacque Jones.

 

There are guys who hit a decent amount of groundballs and hit home runs, but they're not good comparisons to Crawford. Matt Holliday - he plays in Coors. Jack Cust this year - something's got to give. 34% of Cust's flyballs were home runs this year, that's not going to happen again. But Cust is a big, muscular guy, I wouldn't compare him to Crawford. If Crawford fills out like Cust he isn't going to be stealing any bases. Vlad Guerrero hit a lot of groundballs and home runs in 2007 - Vlad is a freak. Crawford is not Vlad. Does Crawford have any hope of generating the kind of sheer power and torque Guerrero does with his swings? No way.

 

I just don't see it. Hitting the ball on the ground benefits Crawford's speed. If he hits fewer balls on the ground his home runs may increase but then his batting average and OBP would likely drop. I don't see where he's going to reach this fantasy scenario where he's hitting .320 with 40 home runs and so and so steals.

[badnews]

As someone who has run translations on all the guys mentioned. Johjima and Iwamura nailed their expected production based on their Japanese numbers. Matsui did not, but he's an outlier. With the notable exception of Matsui, just about EVERY person in Japan who came over did roughly what they should have done based on their Japanese numbers. Generally the .93*NPBEQA is a spot on translation. That would put Fukudome somewhere in the .295-.300 EqA range. You're not in the position to say how something will translate. You really have no clue what you are talking about.

 

Like I've said a dozen times. Fukudome's a little bit more than 2000-2004 Mark Kotsay

 

First of all, your last two lines are unnecessarily harsh. You're in a position to say, but I'm not? Even if you're right, that comes off as too condescending and egotistical. The "no clue" bit was just unnecessary and rude. When you said that Carlos Silva was the same as Zambrano over the past 4 years with Fielding Independent Pitching, I didn't say you had no clue what you were talking about. I just pointed out where that didn't appear to be the case.

 

Kotsay's EqA ranged from .264-.290 those years.

 

Iwamura's slugging was not 85% of his Japanese numbers. Hideki Matsui's slugging doesn't get to 85% of his Japanese numbers and his OBP doesn't get to 93%. The Japanesebaseball.com site lists Johjima's OBP as .360, not within the 93%. And we're just throwing out Kaz Matsui's numbers because we don't like them.

 

Saying the batting average will stay within 96% without taking into account strikeouts seems like it could have problems.