Who hangs up first?

[dew1679666265]

If Boston were to want even ONE of our bad contracts for Crawford I would do it, so long as Ricketts is still willing to spend and the Red Sox send some cash for the extra years/dollars we'd be taking on. I think Crawford would do really well here and in my head I think he fits the kind of athlete the Cubs would like to put on the field. The only reason a Crawford deal would suck is that we're almost done with those contracts while his is just getting started.

 

The only reason I'd be interested in Lackey is because I really like the way AL East to NL Central has worked out for a few pitchers. Personally, he's thrown like crap for two years.

 

I'd rather they go a little more OBP focused and less speed focused than Crawford. Having a couple guys like him would be good, but much like Juan Pierre, guys with speed get overpaid considerably.

 

The bolded is the biggest reason I'm against the trade in this thread and against going after Crawford in general. I'm not confident he's all that less likely to fall apart than Soriano and I don't think the 2-3 really good years we'd be likely to get from him are worth the 2-3 awful years we'd be likely to get.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

If Boston were to want even ONE of our bad contracts for Crawford I would do it, so long as Ricketts is still willing to spend and the Red Sox send some cash for the extra years/dollars we'd be taking on. I think Crawford would do really well here and in my head I think he fits the kind of athlete the Cubs would like to put on the field. The only reason a Crawford deal would suck is that we're almost done with those contracts while his is just getting started.

 

The only reason I'd be interested in Lackey is because I really like the way AL East to NL Central has worked out for a few pitchers. Personally, he's thrown like crap for two years.

 

I'd rather they go a little more OBP focused and less speed focused than Crawford. Having a couple guys like him would be good, but much like Juan Pierre, guys with speed get overpaid considerably.

 

A .300 hitter who can put up a .350 OBP, play spectacular D, hit doubles, and basically be a strong #2 hitter is not someone I'd shy away from, particularly since guys with Crawford's skills and athleticism tend to age better than most. He's hit .300 with a .350+ OBP in 3 of the past 5 season...most of that in a pitcher's park ....this is a much, much better player than Juan Pierre just based on having more power and defensive ability at his position.

 

Why would we be "likely" to get 2-3 awful years?

[dew1679666265]

A .300 hitter who can put up a .350 OBP, play spectacular D, hit doubles, and basically be a strong #2 hitter is not someone I'd shy away from, particularly since guys with Crawford's skills and athleticism tend to age better than most. He's hit .300 with a .350+ OBP in 3 of the past 5 season...most of that in a pitcher's park ....this is a much, much better player than Juan Pierre just based on having more power and defensive ability at his position.

 

In his 10 year career, he's had 3 OBPs at .350 or higher and as I noted earlier in this thread, his career OBP is 10 points higher than Soriano's career OBP. Also interesting to note, Crawford's career .333 OBP is also 12 points worse than Pierre's .345 career OBP. Both Crawford and Pierre also have 5 career .300+ BA seasons and Pierre's career BA (.296) is slightly higher than Crawford's (.293). Crawford has 10 more career doubles in two fewer seasons, though.

 

That's not to say Pierre is as good as Crawford, he isn't. Crawford is the superior player without a doubt, but he's not this ultra-patient doubles machine either. He's very reliant on his speed to make things happen and as that deteriorates, he doesn't have much to fall back on.

[dew1679666265]

Why would we be "likely" to get 2-3 awful years?

 

Because he's so reliant on speed and isn't a highly patient player - his IsoD (.040) is lower than Pierre's (.049). We'd have him through his age 37 season and there's a good chance his speed goes out sometime in his mid-30s. If that happens, he doesn't have much to fall back on.

 

Let me emphasize, however, that he's a really good player right now and I'd love to have him for something like 4-5 yrs/$60-75 million ($15 per). However, I wouldn't want to be paying him $20+ million during his age 34-37 years because I don't think he'll be close to worth it. And unlike a guy like Pujols, his earlier years won't be so over the top great that I can live with the inevitable fall (plus I don't think Pujols will ever get as bad as I think Crawford can become).

[Radar3454]

Crawford had one bad year and he's played his whole career in the AL East. Get him over to the National League and he probably becomes a better player. Plus he brings speed that the Cubs have lacked these past few years.

 

Speed isn't what would have put the Cubs over the top the past few years, talent is. And even if speed would help us, Crawford is 30 and that speed may start diminishing here pretty soon. At that point, he's a slightly more patient and much less powerful Soriano with (possibly) better defense.

 

possibly better defense??? that is like saying Olivia Wilde might be hotter than Roseanne Barr

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

 

In his 10 year career, he's had 3 OBPs at .350 or higher and as I noted earlier in this thread, his career OBP is 10 points higher than Soriano's career OBP. Also interesting to note, Crawford's career .333 OBP is also 12 points worse than Pierre's .345 career OBP. Both Crawford and Pierre also have 5 career .300+ BA seasons and Pierre's career BA (.296) is slightly higher than Crawford's (.293). Crawford has 10 more career doubles in two fewer seasons, though.

 

That's not to say Pierre is as good as Crawford, he isn't. Crawford is the superior player without a doubt, but he's not this ultra-patient doubles machine either. He's very reliant on his speed to make things happen and as that deteriorates, he doesn't have much to fall back on.

 

All within the past 5 years. This is a good thing. I have no idea why you're going with career numbers when the guy is mid-career...prime actually...right now...and clearly he's been better than his .333 career OBP in recent years. Much of that .333 OBP is based on the ~2500+ PAs he made in the majors before he was 25. Since then he's been a much better offensive player with a varied TOL skillset.

 

That's not even touching the fact that Crawford is a SIGNIFICANTLY more efficient base stealer(74% Pierre, 82% for Crawford), a SIGNIFICANTLY better defensive OFer, and he's got more power than Pierre ever did.

 

Believe it or not, you don't need to be ultra patient to be highly valuable. There's more to baseball than that, and Carl Crawford has one of the best all around skill and tool sets in the game. That's why he got paid significantly more than Pierre did when Pierre was getting enough love to get a big contract. He's better, he's significantly better, he'll age better, and oh yea he's better.

 

The only legit comparison between them is that they're both fast black OFers....otherwise we're talking two completely different players.

 

BTW: Whoever started this "everyone falls off a cliff after 30" trash in sports...I realize there's a point there that is significant (particularly with full time RBs in that caveman sport)...I'd really like to punch that guy in the face. Just because someone is 30 or past 30 doesn't mean their end is coming and it's coming fast. Plenty of high end talent survives well into their 30's...and always has. A huge plus for a guy like Crawford is 1. that he's been a pretty valuable starting player since he was 20 years old 2. he's never been significantly injured and 3. he's a ridiculous athlete for the sport. Those are traits you look for in guys because those are traits that pop in guys who last long in this sport...He's all around a far better investment than Juan Pierre ever was, this past season be damned. I don't get how it's anything less than highly impressive to call a guy a 10 year veteran in any sport or field at 30...

Edited October 15, 2011 by KingKongvs.Godzilla

[Guest]

I'm with Dew on this one.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

I'm with Dew on this one.

 

Unfortunately that still won't put Pierre in the same tier as Crawford at any point in his career...not even really young Crawford vs. whatever year of Pierre.

[Guest]

I'm with Dew on this one.

 

Unfortunately that still won't put Pierre in the same tier as Crawford at any point in his career...not even really young Crawford vs. whatever year of Pierre.

I don't think that's really the point.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

I'm with Dew on this one.

 

Unfortunately that still won't put Pierre in the same tier as Crawford at any point in his career...not even really young Crawford vs. whatever year of Pierre.

I don't think that's really the point.

 

It certainly doesnt help the point.

[dew1679666265]

All within the past 5 years. This is a good thing. I have no idea why you're going with career numbers when the guy is mid-career...prime actually...right now...and clearly he's been better than his .333 career OBP in recent years. Much of that .333 OBP is based on the ~2500+ PAs he made in the majors before he was 25. Since then he's been a much better offensive player with a varied TOL skillset.

 

Let me re-state first, as I said multiple times in my previous post, Crawford is the superior player to Pierre, I am not debating that point. However, the two players have similar skillsets in that they're relatively impatient players who rely largely on speed for their value. Crawford does have more power - which is largely what makes him better, along with being much more efficient in SBs as you noted.

 

Now, with that said, here's more reasoning why I see them as similar. Pierre posted a .350 OBP or better in 4 of his first 5 major league seasons. And 3 of those were better than the peak OBP Crawford has ever posted in any season. They all also came with similar or better IsoD's than Crawford posted in his .350+ seasons as well.

 

As for Crawford being more patient recently, that's true to a point. However, he's also posted his worst and 4th worst OBPs during that stretch as well, the worst of his career (by one point) was this past season. I've not figured his OBP in the previous 5 seasons, but I'd wager the two bad seasons pull his average down near that .333 career mark. He's really not gotten that much more patient overall, he's just having higher peaks and lower valleys.

 

Now, what is the varied offensive skill set he possesses? He has speed, some power, moderate patience, and really good defense. As the speed goes, he looks like Soriano with less power and a little more patience.

 

That's not even touching the fact that Crawford is a SIGNIFICANTLY more efficient base stealer(74% Pierre, 82% for Crawford), a SIGNIFICANTLY better defensive OFer, and he's got more power than Pierre ever did.

 

That's a large reason why I said multiple times in my previous post that you responded to that Crawford is the superior player. It doesn't mean they don't have similar skillsets, though.

 

Believe it or not, you don't need to be ultra patient to be highly valuable. There's more to baseball than that, and Carl Crawford has one of the best all around skill and tool sets in the game. That's why he got paid significantly more than Pierre did when Pierre was getting enough love to get a big contract. He's better, he's significantly better, he'll age better, and oh yea he's better.

 

Patience isn't the only thing you need to have, but if you're not patient at the plate then the likelihood is that when the natural abilities fade with age (which they generally do), you don't have anything to fall back on. Soriano was a terrific athlete in his prime who slugged great, could steal bases well (78% career), and had some really good defensive seasons. However, those natural abilities have faded away and he doesn't have anything to fall back on because he was never a patient player. Same with Pierre. Same, likely, with Crawford as he gets into his mid 30s.

 

And again, let me repeat, Crawford is better than Pierre. I've never argued otherwise. But they share similar skillsets.

 

The only legit comparison between them is that they're both fast black OFers....otherwise we're talking two completely different players.

 

Other legit comparisons include that neither is particularly patient at the plate and both have relied heavily on speed for their production over the course of their careers. Again, though, Crawford is better.

 

BTW: Whoever started this "everyone falls off a cliff after 30" trash in sports...I realize there's a point there that is significant...I'd really like to punch that guy in the face. Just because someone is 30 or past 30 doesn't mean their end is coming and it's coming fast. Plenty of high end talent survives well into their 30's...and always has. A huge plus for a guy like Crawford is 1. that he's been a pretty valuable starting player since he was 20 years old 2. he's never been significantly injured and 3. he's a ridiculous athlete for the sport. Those are traits you look for in guys because those are traits that pop in guys who last long in this sport...He's all around a far better investment than Juan Pierre ever was, this past season be damned. I don't get how it's anything less than highly impressive to call a guy a 10 year veteran in any sport or field at 30...

 

A huge negative for a guy like Crawford is that he's not patient at the plate. All throughout history guys have excelled in their mid-late 30s, true. What's generally the connection between all of them? They're pretty much all patient and selective at the plate. I'm sure there are some like Crawford who have done well into their mid-late 30s relying largely on speed, but they're more the exception than the rule.

 

As for falling off a cliff past 30, I never said that. I even said that I'd love to have Crawford at a little less money through about his age 34-35 seasons. However, it's around that age 34-35 season that I'm concerned he'll really decline heavily and I want no part of him from about 34 on. My expectation is that his early 30s will be good to really good seasons and then the mid 30s will be similar to what we've seen from Soriano recently.

 

And one more time for good measure - I'm not arguing now, I did not argue in my previous post, nor will I likely ever argue that Carl Crawford is better than Juan Pierre. In fact, I stated in my previous post that Crawford is the superior player to Pierre. However, Crawford can be better but still share a similar skillset (moderate patience with a heavy reliance on speed) to Pierre. Soriano also shares that similar skillset, but is also a better player than Pierre.

[dew1679666265]

possibly better defense??? that is like saying Olivia Wilde might be hotter than Roseanne Barr

 

I'm not familiar with Crawford's arm. Right now, I'm expecting that most of his defensive value is derived from his range and athleticism. If his arm isn't well above average, his defensive value will drop considerably if his speed goes as he ages.

 

Soriano has never gotten good reads, but he had good to very good range and athleticism in his prime which covered for getting bad reads and he also has a cannon arm. His ability to get to the ball after a bad read has fallen dramatically as he's aged (like I think will happen with Crawford), but Soriano still provides defensive value by having that cannon arm. Crawford will almost certainly always be better defensively, but I'm not sure how much. I'm assuming his ability to read the ball is better than Soriano, but I have no idea on his arm strength.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

Let me re-state first, as I said multiple times in my previous post, Crawford is the superior player to Pierre, I am not debating that point. However, the two players have similar skillsets in that they're relatively impatient players who rely largely on speed for their value. Crawford does have more power - which is largely what makes him better, along with being much more efficient in SBs as you noted.

 

Don't forget defense.

 

Now, with that said, here's more reasoning why I see them as similar. Pierre posted a .350 OBP or better in 4 of his first 5 major league seasons. And 3 of those were better than the peak OBP Crawford has ever posted in any season. They all also came with similar or better IsoD's than Crawford posted in his .350+ seasons as well.

 

Now ask yourself which is more sustainable...a .350 OBP with a .450+ SLG (as Crawford has done with that .350+ OBP)...or a .350 with a sub-.400 SLG? Two completely different hitters here...Pierre is and was a one dimensional hitter...Crawford is not.

 

As for Crawford being more patient recently, that's true to a point. However, he's also posted his worst and 4th worst OBPs during that stretch as well, the worst of his career (by one point) was this past season. I've not figured his OBP in the previous 5 seasons, but I'd wager the two bad seasons pull his average down near that .333 career mark. He's really not gotten that much more patient overall, he's just having higher peaks and lower valleys.

 

Well:

 

- 3 > 2

- Those two seasons came in the only seasons he missed significant time in. He played only 109 games in '08 and 130 this past season. Otherwise he's played at least 143 in his 7 other full seasons.

- One of those two seasons came during Year 1 on a new big name team with a new big time contract after playing in someone's basement for 10 years. So...context.

- Even if I couldn't explain away his recent down years, you'd have alot of trouble convincing me that "he's just having higher peaks and lower valleys" is enough to explain why a 10 year vet who's been as valuable as Crawford is having variance. Especially when there's more obvious reasons in the numbers...like missed games that usually suggest injury in a player who's been so durable.

 

Even if you want to argue that he hasn't gotten more patient...He's gotten *better.* He's a better hitter than what he was when he was younger, and he's a very good all around offensive player when he's on.

Now, what is the varied offensive skill set he possesses? He has speed, some power, moderate patience, and really good defense. As the speed goes, he looks like Soriano with less power and a little more patience.

 

1: Why are you making those sound like that's not alot of skills, and valuable ones at that? Because he doesn't have the holy grail of skills?

 

2: You forgot batting average.

 

3: Oh and we're talking elite speed, solid power, moderate patience, and elite defense. Pierre offered what...elite, albeit inefficient speed?

 

That's a large reason why I said multiple times in my previous post that you responded to that Crawford is the superior player. It doesn't mean they don't have similar skillsets, though.

 

Yeah, the fact that they don't have similar skillsets is what makes them not have similar skillsets. Again, besides being fast OFers who don't walk alot they have very, very, very different skillsets.

 

Patience isn't the only thing you need to have, but if you're not patient at the plate then the likelihood is that when the natural abilities fade with age (which they generally do), you don't have anything to fall back on. Soriano was a terrific athlete in his prime who slugged great, could steal bases well (78% career), and had some really good defensive seasons. However, those natural abilities have faded away and he doesn't have anything to fall back on because he was never a patient player. Same with Pierre. Same, likely, with Crawford as he gets into his mid 30s.

 

1 -Patience isn't the only skill that ages well either.

 

2 - Crawford is not Soriano. They're two different builds on two different athletes who again are vaguely similar in that they're fast, OFers, and dark. Soriano is more wiry and gangly than Crawford, and was never a really good, consistent defender though he could be competent out there. Crawford is a more efficient all around player than him too, another reason why he'll last longer and age better.

 

3 - Athletes of Crawford's caliber tend to age better than most, if not all, other kinds of athletes in the first place. He's a former multi-sport guy who has always played high end D, always stolen bases efficiently, and has

And again, let me repeat, Crawford is better than Pierre. I've never argued otherwise. But they share similar skillsets.

 

They have similar traits. They do not share similar skillsets. Nowhere would you find anyone who would say that Pierre has high end defensive ability, highly efficient speed (led the league in CS 7 times), and solid power. Those are part of Crawford's skillset. Minimize it all you want, it's real, and it makes him a far better gamble.

 

A huge negative for a guy like Crawford is that he's not patient at the plate. All throughout history guys have excelled in their mid-late 30s, true. What's generally the connection between all of them? They're pretty much all patient and selective at the plate. I'm sure there are some like Crawford who have done well into their mid-late 30s relying largely on speed, but they're more the exception than the rule.

 

It's only a huge negative if you choose to fix your eyes on it, and close your eyes to everything else. Another general connection between guys who last: Athleticism. The healthiest, best athletes will last the longest, as it's always been.

 

Also, Crawford should see a boost in power as he gets older and his speed disappears...as often happens.

 

As for falling off a cliff past 30, I never said that. I even said that I'd love to have Crawford at a little less money through about his age 34-35 seasons. However, it's around that age 34-35 season that I'm concerned he'll really decline heavily and I want no part of him from about 34 on. My expectation is that his early 30s will be good to really good seasons and then the mid 30s will be similar to what we've seen from Soriano recently.

 

I still completely disagree, but this makes far more sense than that Pierre stuff you're trying to jam down my throat. Beyond patience he has every skill that say he'll age just fine...not to mention he's the caliber of player and athlete who should age well....He's a better bet than someone like Pierre (one skill - singles) to age well, and overall he's a better bet than a great deal of players to age well.

[dew1679666265]

Let me go at this from a different direction and see if that helps:

 

In football, who tends to age better - a deep threat receiver whose primary strength is to go downfield and he relies very little on technique, or a smart receiver who runs good routes and excels in beating defenders by using solid technique? In boxing, who tends to age better - a powerhouse athlete relies on his ability to take a huge amount of hits and deliver his own based on his natural athleticism, or a boxer who relies on solid footwork, evades punches well, and is a technically sound boxer? In tennis, who tends to age better - someone who relies on a powerful swing and natural ability who doesn't show good technique, or someone whose technique is sound and derives their success from their ability to have good form, good footwork, and solid technique?

 

In every case, the athlete more likely to age better and have success late in their careers are the players who show good technique and don't rely purely on natural ability/speed/athleticism to succeed. This isn't some brand new idea that nobody has ever heard of before - as a person ages, their natural ability and athleticism fades. Athletes get slower as they get older, some more than others but all of them do. The one thing that remains constant for a player is their technique, having something to fall back on when natural ability and athleticism fades. In baseball at the plate, the best thing to have as you age is patience. The ability to work the count, get pitchers behind in the count, and draw walks is critical for a player to succeed late in their career as their natural ability begins to fade.

 

I have no doubt that Crawford is a terrific athlete who is exceptionally fast and has had a lot of success relying on these physical tools to succeed. However, so was Soriano at one point, so was Pierre, so was Jimmy Rollins, so were a lot of other players who relied heavily on speed for their value in their younger ages. All three of those players I mentioned faltered in their 30s (especially mid 30s) due to not having good patience at the plate to fall back on when their speed and natural ability declined with age.

 

Crawford may be the exception to that rule as he gets older, as I'm sure there have been a few other exceptions. But I'm not willing to gamble big money that a terrific athlete with moderate patience will age well, because it happens so rarely.

[dew1679666265]

Now ask yourself which is more sustainable...a .350 OBP with a .450+ SLG (as Crawford has done with that .350+ OBP)...or a .350 with a sub-.400 SLG? Two completely different hitters here...Pierre is and was a one dimensional hitter...Crawford is not.

 

I just pointed out that Pierre had more .350+ OBP seasons in his first 10 years than Crawford did - 4-3. I also have pointed out that Pierre has a better career OBP than Crawford does - and that includes the early years of both players and Pierre's twilight years. I've also said Crawford is the better player, but neither player has particularly good patience and both rely on their natural athleticism to succeed.

 

Well:

 

- 3 > 2

- Those two seasons came in the only seasons he missed significant time in. He played only 109 games in '08 and 130 this past season. Otherwise he's played at least 143 in his 7 other full seasons.

- One of those two seasons came during Year 1 on a new big name team with a new big time contract after playing in someone's basement for 10 years. So...context.

- Even if I couldn't explain away his recent down years, you'd have alot of trouble convincing me that "he's just having higher peaks and lower valleys" is enough to explain why a 10 year vet who's been as valuable as Crawford is having variance. Especially when there's more obvious reasons in the numbers...like missed games that usually suggest injury in a player who's been so durable.

 

Injury makes you less patient? I could see dips in slugging or defense being due to injury, but if you're a patient player you should be able to remain patient all the time. The fact is, his OBP is reliant on BA to remain high, much like with Pierre. If he starts to have injury issues or his speed declines as he ages (likely), that average will begin to dip and with it the patience. Without the speed to supplement the low OBP, he'll become a liability due to a huge contract - much like Soriano and Rollins have become.

 

Even if you want to argue that he hasn't gotten more patient...He's gotten *better.* He's a better hitter than what he was when he was younger, and he's a very good all around offensive player when he's on.

 

And that period "when he's on" will likely become less and less as he gets older and his speed and natural athleticism dips, since he doesn't have a consistent skill (like patience) to fall back on.

 

Also, Crawford should see a boost in power as he gets older and his speed disappears...as often happens.

 

Who are these speed-reliant players with moderate patience who have lost their speed and developed dramatic power increases late in their careers?

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

Dude Crawford IS a highly skilled baseball player. The only thing new about your direction is that you took mine and are just making the oppposite conclusion about Crawford. You're just on him for not being super patient and extrapolating it to not being skilled.....it's not true and it's where youve been wrong this whole time.

 

You don't play D like he does and steal bases efficiently like that without being a skilled player. Those are skills. Also again, he's a better and more efficient all around baseball player than Soriano ever was. The comparison in athleticism loses its place in reality once you realize that Soriano is a power hitter who happen to be fast, and was an adventure defensively for most of his career. They share nothing in common athletically except that you can call them good athletes, that they're fast, and that they don't walk much. Youve even gone from Pierre to Soriano now just looking for fast OFers who declined quickly in their 30s...you've gone from comparing him to slap hitter to a power hitter based on the simple facts that all 3 are/were fast and didn't walk....then calling that a similar skillset as if that's a total skillset.

 

The ability to draw walks is not the only skill that makes you age well, and Crawford has many many traits of guys that do (including being a more skilled all sound player than both guys you

want to compare him to). There are more skills in the baseball world than taking walks. .

It is not the only factor in who ages well and who doesn't.

 

Also you didn't answer...who is more likely to maintain their .350 OBP...the guy who can put up a .450 SLG or the guy who can't get his over .400?

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

Oh and btw...dramatic power increase? That's what I said? Is it not natural for most players to see a boost in power as they Age and see drop offs in other areas but gains in size and muscle/mass? Hasnt this been shown numerous times by people like James and maybe TangoTiger (not sureif it's him I'm thinking of)? Hell, didn't Crawford SLG .492 just in 2010 playing in a pitchers park in a depressed power environment all around?

[dew1679666265]

Dude Crawford IS a highly skilled baseball player. The only thing new about your direction is that you took mine and are just making the oppposite conclusion about Crawford. You're just on him for not being super patient and extrapolating it to not being skilled.....it's not true and it's where youve been wrong this whole time.

 

Being skilled and being fundamentally sound with good technique are two completely different things. Being selective and patient at the plate is a sign of a player who is fundamentally sound enough to adjust when his natural ability falters later in his career. That's why it's so important.

 

You don't play D like he does and steal bases efficiently like that without being a skilled player. Those are skills.

 

I understand this and have stated that those are quality skills he possesses at this point in his career. However, as I've said numerous times, those are not skills that are likely to continue to be strong as his speed fades. They are natural ability/speed reliant stats and are more likely than not to go away when the speed goes away.

 

Also again, he's a better and more efficient all around baseball player than Soriano ever was. The comparison in athleticism loses its place in reality once you realize that Soriano is a power hitter who happen to be fast, and was an adventure defensively for most of his career. They share nothing in common athletically except that you can call them good athletes, that they're fast, and that they don't walk much. Youve even gone from Pierre to Soriano now just looking for fast OFers who declined quickly in their 30s...you've gone from comparing him to slap hitter to a power hitter based on the simple facts that all 3 are/were fast and didn't walk....then calling that a similar skillset as if that's a total skillset.

 

The point to those comparisons is that you don't succeed late in your career based purely on physical ability or Pierre and Soriano would have been much better players toward the end of their careers. Players whose production is largely tied into their speed and athleticism (as SBs and BABIP-driven BA largely are and defense sometimes is) tend to decline rapidly as they age. Players who have skills not tied into speed and athleticism (patience and sometimes defense) tend to age more gracefully as they have something to fall back on when the speed and athleticism goes.

 

You keep arguing that Crawford will succeed later in his career because he's a physical specimen with great speed and athleticism. The likelihood of those holding up into his mid 30s is low because people get slower and less athletic as they get older.

 

The ability to draw walks is not the only skill that makes you age well, and Crawford has many many traits of guys that do (including being a more skilled all sound player than both guys you want to compare him to). There are more skills in the baseball world than taking walks. .

It is not the only factor in who ages well and who doesn't.

 

It's not the only factor, but it's a pretty major one. I've said multiple times that Crawford could age well, but that the odds are against him because he's so reliant on speed and athleticism and he isn't selective at the plate. His chances of staying good are higher than Soriano's or Pierre's or Rollins' because he's a better player than them, but he has the same lack of patience that was those 3 players' downfall and that makes him a worse gamble than guys who consistently will give you a high OBP and IsoD.

 

Also you didn't answer...who is more likely to maintain their .350 OBP...the guy who can put up a .450 SLG or the guy who can't get his over .400?

 

The former, but nobody we've talked about has consistently put up a .350 OBP so I'm not sure what the point is. You don't evaluate a player just by looking at his best seasons and ignoring or explaining away his bad seasons when there's a good sample size to go on. Over the past 5 years, Crawford's OBP is .339 - very similar to his career .333 OBP. Maybe he'll have a patience breakthrough in his post-30 years and post .360+ OBP seasons consistently, but at this point he probably is what he is when it comes to patience and that is a .330-.340 OBP guy. And if he stays that way, I'll continue to be skeptical of his chances to be highly productive as he enters his mid 30s.

[dew1679666265]

Oh and btw...dramatic power increase? That's what I said? Is it not natural for most players to see a boost in power as they Age and see drop offs in other areas but gains in size and muscle/mass? Hasnt this been shown numerous times by people like James and maybe TangoTiger (not sureif it's him I'm thinking of)? Hell, didn't Crawford SLG .492 just in 2010 playing in a pitchers park in a depressed power environment all around?

 

He also had a .482 SLG in 2006 when he was 24. He followed that up by declining to .466 and then to .400 before shooting back up to .452 and then .495. He followed that .495 up by slugging .405 last year. The .495 looks more like an impressive blip than the beginning of a consistent trend at this point.

 

I'd be interested to see James or Tango arguing that guys with moderate plate discipline and who rely heavily on speed become more powerful as they age. I've not heard that before and can't really think of any players who fit that mold and did that with any success.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

The point to those comparisons is that you don't succeed late in your career based purely on physical ability or Pierre and Soriano would have been much better players toward the end of their careers. Players whose production is largely tied into their speed and athleticism (as SBs and BABIP-driven BA largely are and defense sometimes is) tend to decline rapidly as they age. Players who have skills not tied into speed and athleticism (patience and sometimes defense) tend to age more gracefully as they have something to fall back on when the speed and athleticism goes.
[b]
You keep arguing that Crawford will succeed later in his career because he's a physical specimen with great speed and athleticism. [/b]The likelihood of those holding up into his mid 30s is low because people get slower and less athletic as they get older.

 

WITH SKILLS! What is so hard to get about that? The man has elite BASEBALL skills and is an elite BASEBALL athlete...Patience is not one of them...That is well established...Patience is not the only skill that ages well.

 

He also had a .482 SLG in 2006 when he was 24. He followed that up by declining to .466 and then to .400 before shooting back up to .452 and then .495. He followed that .495 up by slugging .405 last year. The .495 looks more like an impressive blip than the beginning of a consistent trend at this point.

 

So we've got .482....466...400 ('08, the year he didn't play 150+ games due to injury)...back to .452 in a healthy '09....495 in 2010....and then last year's .405...what's to worry about here? Seems to me that overall when he's been on and healthy he's been able to hit with some solid power in his mid-late 20's...

 

I'd be interested to see James or Tango arguing that guys with moderate plate discipline and who rely heavily on speed become more powerful as they age. I've not heard that before and can't really think of any players who fit that mold and did that with any success.

 

You've never heard that players generally....no matter the plate discipline...which I'm still wondering why you speak of it as if it's the only worthwhile skill in baseball...gain power as they get older? Hm well...didn't find the James or Tiger thing I wanted in the quick Google search I just did, but I did just find a BP study that said that BB rates tend to peak around age 33...more optimism for the unskilled, only an athlete Crawford. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9933

[dew1679666265]

WITH SKILLS! What is so hard to get about that? The man has elite BASEBALL skills and is an elite BASEBALL athlete...Patience is not one of them...That is well established...Patience is not the only skill that ages well.

 

Ok, we're making progress I think. We're both agreeing that he doesn't have much patience, so what skills does he have that are not largely speed related?

 

So we've got .482....466...400 ('08, the year he didn't play 150+ games due to injury)...back to .452 in a healthy '09....495 in 2010....and then last year's .405...what's to worry about here? Seems to me that overall when he's been on and healthy he's been able to hit with some solid power in his mid-late 20's...

 

I'm not sure what your point is here. I've never refuted that he's been a great player in his mid-late 20s. I'm refuting that he'll continue to be a great player and not see a considerable decrease into his mid 30s. You (strongly) implied that the .495 SLG he posted in 2010 was a sign that he was bulking up and increasing his power. I responded that given his severe dropoff this year and the up-and-down nature of his power throughout his career, that this was more of a blip than a sign of a trend.

 

I'm not sure how your response ties into that conversation.

 

You've never heard that players generally....no matter the plate discipline...which I'm still wondering why you speak of it as if it's the only worthwhile skill in baseball...gain power as they get older? Hm well...didn't find the James or Tiger thing I wanted in the quick Google search I just did, but I did just find a BP study that said that BB rates tend to peak around age 33...more optimism for the unskilled, only an athlete Crawford. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9933

 

I've never heard that players who rely largely on speed and have mostly speed related skills add power successfully late in their career.

 

As for the link you posted, Crawford could improve his walk rate until he's 33, but it's gotten worse each of the past three years - from 7.6 in 2009 to 6.9 in 2010 to 4.3 in 2011 - and if his BA begins to decline (or continue, depending on what 2011 meant) then the walk rate going up will only hold the OBP steady at a mediocre rate until his mid 30s. If a number of other skills begin to erode over that same period of time, that OBP gets harder and harder to overlook.

[17 Seconds]

BASEBALL skills

[TruffleShuffle]

lol, BASEBALL skills and a BASEBALL athlete.

[Guest]

cool article on the link, though. I might have to adjust my thinking a bit on player peaks.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

lol, BASEBALL skills and a BASEBALL athlete.

 

You're not someone I should expect much from in any future discussions, are' you? One of the board cool guys I guess...

 

Dew, I will possibly get back to that later. Not sure what else there is for me to say considering you're comparing the guy to two completely different players from him and each other and you seem absolutely convinced that patience is the only skill that translates when you get older. Not much I can do to help that really, but I guess I can give it more shots.