4 replies to this topic

[KyleNovak]

This kind of started as a joke, but then I actually started to think a little bit more. . .

Compare, if you will, these two left-fielders:

2011 Carl Crawford
128 G, .255/.290/.402 in 530 PA (0.4 oWAR*)
64 R, 45 XBH (11 HR), 56 RBI, 23 BB, 103 SO
$14 million salary

2011 Alfonso Soriano
137 G, .242/.286/.462 in 504 PA (0.4 oWAR*)
49 R, 53 XBH (25 HR), 85 RBI, 26 BB, 112 SO
$18 million salary

(* WAR from Baseball-Reference)

So. . . is it actually feasible that this year's edition of Soriano could have been more valuable to the Boston Red Sox if he had started in 2011 Crawford's place?

Other Noteables:

Crawford played on the best offense in MLB.
Faced the highest percentage of pitching from the American League East.
Despite a career low 18 SB, still a threat to run.
Decent defense, although he had one of his worst years with numerous gaffes in the field

Soriano played on a middle-of-the-pack offense in the NL.
Faced the highest percentage of pitching from the National League Central.
Career numbers of .287/.310/.491 in 175 PA at Fenway Park. (Hasn't played there regularly since 2005)
Not a threat to run at all.
His defense. . . Well. . . you know the story.

I know Boston would have loved to have Soriano's ten April homers, since they were in the midst of a 2-10 start and a losing April.

Thoughts?

[Brett]

Wow - if nothing else, the fact that this is even a discussion is indicative of just how bad Crawford has been this season. And worse, I can totally buy that this particular year, Soriano has been as valuable (un-valuable?) as Crawford. Soriano's been far more productive, and actually has gotten on base about as much as Crawford (which should really make Crawford feel bad). The defense, of course, isn't close - though I'm told that Soriano isn't hated on too much by the various defensive metrics this year.

For 2012, I'd rather have Crawford on my team than Soriano, but the overall contract situation... man, that's a Hobson's Choice.

It's crazy to think that the Red Sox might have been better off in 2011 with Alfonso Soriano than with Carl Crawford.

[T C]

This is a terrifying indictment of how insanely awful Carl Crawford has been this year.

As crazy as it sounds, If I was forced to choose one of these guys, I'd probably take Soriano, who is awful, but will be gone soon. Crawford will certainly rebound, but it is likely we've seen the start of a tremendous decline of his health/speed, and we'd be stuck with him for a while. And while Soriano without speed still has some worth via power, Crawford without speed is about as useless as they come

[MichiganGoat]

Crawford is a perfect example of why a team shouldn't sign speed to long term deals. There are some who think the Cubs should go after Reyes, I present Crawford as the reason why not.

[Fishin Phil]

Crawford is a perfect example of why a team shouldn't sign speed to long term deals. There are some who think the Cubs should go after Reyes, I present Crawford as the reason why not.

Amen! Preach on Brother Goat!