Crawford to Boston

OF Carl Crawford has agreed to a 7 year, 142 million dollar contract with the Boston Red Sox. That gives the Red Sox four starting outfielders (Crawford, Mike Cameron, J.D. Drew, and Jacoby Ellsbury), so Ellsbury is about to be traded, probably to San Diego as the player to be named in the Adrian Gonzalez deal.

First, let's look at this deal from Boston's standpoint. They're getting one of the best outfielders in baseball. Crawford had a ridiculous season in '10, hitting .307 with 30 doubles, 19 homers, 90 RBI, 13 triples, 110 runs, 184 hits, 47 SB (10 CS), and a .356 in 154 games for the Rays. His 13 triples led the league, while his 47 stolen bases were third, and his .307 BA was 9th. To put his stats in perspective, he had the same BA as Ryan Zimmerman, 1 less homer than Victor Martinez, as many stolen bases as Brett Gardner (1 more CS than him), and 1 less run than Miguel Cabrera (and Derek Jeter). He also posted a .994 Fld% in LF with 7 outfield assists, good enough to win a Gold Glove. He's just an amazing player, and he will be worth every penny of the 142 million.

How about Ellsbury though? Is Crawford that much better than him? Well, first of all, Ellsbury couldn't stay healthy in '10. That's obviously a problem. Even ignoring the injuries, let's look at his 2009, his best season. He hit .301 with 27 doubles, 8 homers, 60 RBI, 10 triples, 94 runs, 188 hits, 70 SB (12 CS), and a .355 OBP in 153 games. But, the more advanced metrics say that Ellsbury played very badly defensively in centerfield that season. More notable to me is his -9.7 UZR (9.7 runs below average Ultimate Zone Rating). He had a 21.3 UZR in '08, the year before. Crawford by the way, had an 18.5 UZR in '10. (Gardner posted a 21.9 UZR to lead all AL left fielders in '10.) Ellsbury just wasn't that great of a player for Boston. But, is he so bad to warrant the Red Sox paying Crawford about 18 million dollars more than Ellsbury will make in '10? No. Good job by the Red Sox to sign Crawford, but from an economic standpoint at least, it wasn't worth it to sign Crawford to replace Ellsbury for so much more money. The way that the Red Sox could resolve that would be to trade Mike Cameron. Of course, no other would team pay an outfielder that will be 38 in a month and who was hurt in '10 and has a .250 career batting average eight million dollars (he was a TERRIBLE signing). So, the Red Sox are going to be forced to trade Ellsbury.

Now, let's look at it from a Yankee standpoint. My first reaction to the signing was "Oh no, the Red Sox signed Crawford!". My second reaction was a very different one. The Red Sox signing Crawford isn't a good thing for the Yankees, but it isn't so bad for two reasons: 1) the Yankees can focus all their energies on signing Cliff Lee, knowing that they don't have Crawford as a backup plan (they just offered Lee a 7 year deal); and 2) both Gardner and Nick Swisher will be back in 2011.

Can Brett Gardner be as good as Jacoby Ellsbury?

Jacoby Ellsbury has been known as a great player. He is considered a very good player and a great base stealer. Can Brett Gardner be that good?

Jacoby Ellsbury was called up to the majors in 2007 and he made an immediate impact with the Red Sox. He hit .353 with 7 doubles, 1 triple, 3 homers, 18 RBI, 9 SB's, 0 CS, and a .394 OBP in 33 games. He posted a perfect 1.000 Fld% in LF and CF. The next year in '08, Ellsbury had a good year, hitting .280 with 22 doubles, 7 triples, 9 homers, 47 RBI, 50 SB, 11 CS, 98 runs, and a .336 OBP. He posted a perfect 1.000 Fld% at all 3 outfield positions, primarily CF. He finished 3rd in the AL Rookie of the Year voting, only to Evan Longoria and Alexei Ramirez. In '09, Ellsbury improved even more, hitting .301 with 27 doubles, 10 triples, 8 homers, 60 RBI, 70 SB, 12 CS, 94 runs, and a .355 OBP. He posted a .994 Fld% in CF. He was a budding star. In '10, he hit .333 with 4 doubles, 0 triples, 0 homers, 1 RBI, 2 SB, 0 CS, and a .333 OBP in 6 games before getting hurt with a rib injury. He posted an 1.000 Fld% in 5 games in LF and 1 game in CF.

Brett Gardner was called up to the majors in '08 and made a decent impact, hitting .228 with 5 doubles, 2 triples, 0 homers, 16 RBI, 13 SB, 1 CS, and a .283 OBP in 42 games. He posted an 1.000 Fld% in CF and LF. In '09, Gardner hit .270 with 6 doubles, 6 triples, 3 homers, 23 RBI, 26 SB, 5 CS, and a .345 OBP in 108 games. Gardner won the Yankee CF job out of spring training over Melky Cabrera, but, he eventually lost his starting job. He also missed time with a broken thumb. But, so far in '10, Gardner has really had a breakout year. He is hitting .317 with 2 doubles, 1 triples, 2 homers, 12 RBI, 17 SB, 1 CS, 28 runs, and a .391 OBP in 35 games. He has posted a .975 Fld% in LF (1 error), and an 1.000 Fld% in CF. That error in LF will probably be his last or next-to-last error of the year and he will put up an Fld% around .995. If you project his hitting stats so far in '10 over the whole season, he would play in 153 games, hitting .317 with 9 doubles, 4 triples, 9 homers, 52 RBI, 74 SB, 4 CS, 122 runs, and a .391 OBP. That would be incredible and better than any season that Ellsbury has put up. The one strange thing about those numbers would be the only 9 doubles, but with 74 SB's, who needs doubles? I don't expect Gardner to be that good, but he definitely can put up a near-.300 BA with 55 stolen bases. The Yankees would still be very happy with that.

So, can Gardner put up Ellsbury-type numbers? Well, he has definitely has the ability to. If he plays anywhere near as good as he has so far in '10, he will match or at least come close to Ellsbury's career averages per full season (.291 BA, 60 SB). Can Gardner keep playing at the level he's playing at right now? That remains to be seen.