Author Topic: Nats interested in Carl Crawford  (Read 2606 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22875
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #25: August 11, 2010, 03:45:59 PM »
Let me throw a couple scenarios out there: 

1. Dunn for 3 years plus an option

2. Crawford for 3 years plus an option and a 1 year deal for Derek Lee and the draft picks for letting Dunn walk.

thoughts

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21643
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #26: August 11, 2010, 03:50:26 PM »
Crawford would sign for just three years?

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22875
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #27: August 11, 2010, 03:53:39 PM »
Crawford would sign for just three years?
How many do you expect him to sign for, wherever he signs?

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 21643
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #28: August 11, 2010, 03:57:34 PM »
at his age, three would be fair, but if a bidding war starts, 5 wouldn't shock me

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22875
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #29: August 11, 2010, 03:58:23 PM »
Ok then, substitute 5 years or whatever you think is reasonable/realistic.

Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 20386
  • BOOM!
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #30: August 11, 2010, 04:00:43 PM »
Of course.  VORP.    :lol:

:?

Gotta think Crawford's a significantly better defensive player, probably balances things out pretty nicely.

What?  No fancy defensive metric to use?   :lol:

Offline Potomac Cannons

  • Posts: 3279
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #31: August 11, 2010, 04:01:25 PM »
QFT

Lerner obstacle course.
(Image removed from quote.)



Interesting you still tout that bullcrap approach even when the MLBTradeRumors article sites people stating as fact that the Nats put up the best offer for Tex which you've keep lying about.

Offline Potomac Cannons

  • Posts: 3279
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #32: August 11, 2010, 04:01:57 PM »
Let me throw a couple scenarios out there: 

1. Dunn for 3 years plus an option

2. Crawford for 3 years plus an option and a 1 year deal for Derek Lee and the draft picks for letting Dunn walk.

thoughts

There's 4-5 people that would be much better options than Lee at this point.

Offline PANatsFan

  • Posts: 37398
  • dogs in uncensored, nudes in gameday
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #33: August 11, 2010, 04:02:05 PM »
Let me throw a couple scenarios out there: 

1. Dunn for 3 years plus an option

2. Crawford for 3 years plus an option and a 1 year deal for Derek Lee and the draft picks for letting Dunn walk.

thoughts

The second if you can guarantee it, but you can't, so you have to sign Dunn and keep the offseason in the offseason.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22875
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #34: August 11, 2010, 04:06:13 PM »
The second if you can guarantee it, but you can't, so you have to sign Dunn and keep the offseason in the offseason.
Well, no, of course not, there are never any guarantees.  You could sign Dunn for 3 years have him get a freak injury and never recover.  But I think a similar scenario is definately on the table and something the FO should consider.

Offline Obed_Marsh

  • Posts: 7593
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #35: August 11, 2010, 04:20:09 PM »
For a second I thought you were going to to say, "...there are never any guarantees" only guaranteed contracts.

I want to extend Dunn and sign Crawford. Granted Crawford is a soft preference; I mostly just want to up the talent level in the outfield for next year.








Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 76956
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #36: August 11, 2010, 05:16:37 PM »
Interesting you still tout that bullcrap approach even when the MLBTradeRumors article sites people stating as fact that the Nats put up the best offer for Tex which you've keep lying about.

Interesting that when that same site says things that are contrary to your viewpoint you label them liars that don't know what the hell they're talking about. Besides, I clearly recall that the best offer the Nats made was for the exact same amount of money the Yankees gave him only the Nats "offer" was for 9 years instead of 8.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22875
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #37: August 12, 2010, 10:42:30 AM »
Interesting article.  Scroll down to the bottom.  If they can buy Crawford away from going to NYY or Boston or LAA, this is why you'll see Rizzo go this route over Werth, IMO.  Not that it would be a suprise to anyone here.

Offline PC

  • Posts: 47236
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #38: August 12, 2010, 12:35:06 PM »
Unfortunately, the odds of Carl Crawford or Jayson Werth or even Derrick Lee (who stinks now) signing with the Nationals are slim to none.   Do we honestly think the Lerners-owned Washington Nationals is a prime free-agent destination?

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35131
  • World Champions!!!
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #39: August 12, 2010, 12:37:09 PM »
Only if you're Adam Dunn.

Plus, if you express interest in staying here, the Front Office will do everything in their power to jerk you around and make your desire to re-sign as low as possible.

Online blue911

  • Posts: 18487
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #40: August 12, 2010, 12:43:52 PM »
Only if you're Adam Dunn.

Plus, if you express interest in staying here, the Front Office will do everything in their power to jerk you around and make your desire to re-sign as low as possible.

Otherwise known as the Angelos Ploy.


Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22875
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #41: August 12, 2010, 12:45:57 PM »
Unfortunately, the odds of Carl Crawford or Jayson Werth or even Derrick Lee (who stinks now) signing with the Nationals are slim to none.   Do we honestly think the Lerners-owned Washington Nationals is a prime free-agent destination?
It can be.  There's a good young core (Zim, Zmann, Stras, Desmond) in a nice new stadium.  Sell the athmosphere when Stras pitches as what it can be when they start winning.  It's not an impossible sales job.  I agree with Dierkes that if they can show they're willing to put the biggest offer on the table to get the ball rolling, just because Tex turned it down, doesn't mean these guys will.  I don't believe the odd's are slim-to-none.  Long, perhaps, but I do think it's out of the question at all, IMO. 

Online JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 39927
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #42: August 12, 2010, 06:00:31 PM »
Not speaking from stats or any analysis, but I just love watching Crawford play.  It is fun.  I've watched him in the AL East, watched him mature and add skills, and I almost don't care that Werth has a great arm and power and all the rest. 

You have to think that the NYY will try to find a taker for Granderson, move Gardner to CF, and go heavy after Crawford.  Granderson is owed $20.5 MM for the next two years, counting his buyout.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 33784
  • Hell yes!
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #43: August 12, 2010, 09:57:37 PM »
Interesting you still tout that bullcrap approach even when the MLBTradeRumors article sites people stating as fact that the Nats put up the best offer for Tex which you've keep lying about.

Interesting that when that same site says things that are contrary to your viewpoint you label them liars that don't know what the hell they're talking about.

One of these posters knows the difference between "site", and "cite".  The other does not.

Offline Dave B

  • Posts: 6033
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #44: August 12, 2010, 10:52:54 PM »
It can be.  There's a good young core (Zim, Zmann, Stras, Desmond) in a nice new stadium.  Sell the athmosphere when Stras pitches as what it can be when they start winning.  It's not an impossible sales job.  I agree with Dierkes that if they can show they're willing to put the biggest offer on the table to get the ball rolling, just because Tex turned it down, doesn't mean these guys will.  I don't believe the odd's are slim-to-none.  Long, perhaps, but I do think it's out of the question at all, IMO. 

that core is crap. zim'n is a good/really good player and strasburg is awesome. other team's have much better cores. our atmosphere is nothing special. it probably maxes out at about the same level as what any other average team would. we offer nothing unique

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #45: August 12, 2010, 10:59:42 PM »
our atmosphere is nothing special. it probably maxes out at about the same level as what any other average team would.

Yeah, but Carl Crawford is a Tampa Bay Ray. Tampa Bay's atmosphere is like the Hagerstown Suns.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22875
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #46: August 13, 2010, 12:16:52 AM »
that core is crap. zim'n is a good/really good player and strasburg is awesome. other team's have much better cores. our atmosphere is nothing special. it probably maxes out at about the same level as what any other average team would. we offer nothing unique
That's a pretty narrow way to look at it.  I'm glad you're not the one trying to sell the team to a prospective FA.  It's actually a really good core to build around.  I know other teams have more established groups, but this is a pretty good group to start from. 

I'm not selling the atmosphere on non-Strasburg nights.  I'm selling the atmosphere when he is pitching.  It's great.  I'm selling when the organization starts winning, it will be a lot more like that a lot more often.  But we need a few more pieces like CC to help us get there.

Offline Upark25

  • Posts: 436
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #47: August 13, 2010, 12:10:42 PM »
Here is what my offseason plan would be not likely to happen but you can call it a Dream Offseason. I would go after Jason Werth hard call up Danny Espinosa and Wilson Ramos. I would go with a really young high upside pitching staff but most importantly I would resign Dunn and sign Harper with Werth being the only real free agent signing. I doubt the Lerners do this though but I think it would be best for the Nats competive future.

CF Bernadina
SS Desmond
3B Zimmermann
1B Dunn
RF Werth
LF Willingham
C Rodriguez
2B Espinosa

P Strasburg
P Zimmermann
P Detweiler
P Lannan
P Maya

OF Morgan
OF Morse
IF Gonzalez
C Ramos
IF FA

Offline houston-nat

  • Posts: 19050
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #48: August 13, 2010, 12:23:50 PM »
Mostly I agree with you, but I would leave Espinosa in the minors until next September and make it

P Strasburg
P Zimmermann
P Maya
P Detwiler
P Marquis

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 22875
Re: Nats interested in Carl Crawford
« Reply #49: August 13, 2010, 12:33:20 PM »
Here is what my offseason plan would be not likely to happen but you can call it a Dream Offseason. I would go after Jason Werth hard call up Danny Espinosa and Wilson Ramos. I would go with a really young high upside pitching staff but most importantly I would resign Dunn and sign Harper with Werth being the only real free agent signing. I doubt the Lerners do this though but I think it would be best for the Nats competive future.
I don't want to see the jobs just given to Ramos and Espinosa.  They need to earn those jobs like Desmond did.  They may very well do that.  Ramos may be very well doing that right now in Syracuse.  But I think you have to bring back Kennedy, who they have an option year for next year, I believe, and let them battle it out.  I don't think you can stand pat with that roation either.  That roation doesn't get us to contention.