And the hits keep on coming for Carl Crawford.
According to Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe, Carl Crawford could miss upwards of three months due to an elbow injury he developed while rehabilitating from offseason wrist surgery. This is yet another setback for Crawford who is trying to not only rebound from the worst season of his career, but also make good on the seven year $142M contract he signed in December 2010. This isn’t the worst case scenario for Crawford who recently met with the dreaded Dr. James Andrews, but it’s certainly less than optimal. Needless to say, the Marlon Byrd trade is looking smarter by the day.
While I’m not willing to judge Crawford’s contract until it’s been completed, it’s looking more likely it will turn out to a net loss for the Red Sox. I still have a lot of faith in Crawford’s abilities as a player, but it’s really tough to imagine him providing nearly $140M in performance value over five-plus seasons during his 30s.
An announcement from Red Sox management should be released shortly.
UPDATE: According to Brian MacPherson of the Providence Journal, Crawford has been diagnosed with a sprain of his ulner collateral ligament.
UPDATE 2: Mike Silverman of the Boston Herald reports that the Red Sox expect Crawford to be ready for action around the All-Star break. In fact, June might even be possible, presuming his elbow responds to the platelet rich treatment he was given recently.
Categories: Carl Crawford Marlon Byrd Quick Post
Loading ...
C'mon, guys. Let's at least try for some journalistic accuracy.
While the story is perfectly well reporter, the headline is totally misleading. "Crawford to miss 3 months" sounds awfully definitive, when, in fact, no one has said he'll definitley be out that long. Could be more, could be less, as the story notes.
Personally, I'll believe Crawford's coming back when I see him on the field. And, as much as I hate to say this about a buy the Sox are paying $20 million, I don't think they'll miss him that much.
Crawford had a .694 OPS last year, and while we all expected a bounce-back this year, the truth is that the Sox' offense should be just fine without him.
Walt – When Cafardo broke the story yesterday evening, that was the report. That is what I based my information on. To update the story, I included not one, but two updates stating that new information had been released. I apologize for not changing the title previously, but I have a full-time job with actual duties I have to attend to from time-to-time.
Understand completely, but I have high expectations of your accuracy. :)
"While I’m not willing to judge Crawford’s contract until it’s been completed, it’s looking more likely it will turn out to a net loss for the Red Sox." Fair enough. But can we yet say, "it's looking more likely than not that this will turn out to be the worst position player contract in history"?
It's year two of a seven year deal. It's not even close to be making that judgment. Furthermore, Gary Matthews, Jr., Russ Ortiz, and Julio Lugo are all FAR worse off that Crawford (in terms of value in, salary out). I have plenty of faith that Crawford will be a very productive player over the next few years.
"Worst position player contract in history?"
Wow, I can't stand other Boston fans sometimes. It's been one season! Let's talk six years from now, and TRY to stop being so alarmist.
Completely agreed Danny. It's way too early to judge the contract. It's pretty much impossible for him to provide $142M in performance value, but $80-100M is certainly doable–possibly more depending on salary inflation. It's not an ideal situation, but it's still pretty solid.
One thing people forget is that free agent contracts are different than contracts signed when under team control. Teams compete for free agents on an inefficient market. Each big contract assumes a certain markup above value. Crawford's isn't any different.