Article written by

19 comments
Harry Peterson
Harry Peterson

He is in there for his glove!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

aGIANTfan
aGIANTfan

I can't figure out Crawford as a hitter. His approach seems really solid; I recall him working really deep counts time and time again. As expected with someone working deep counts he K's a fair amount [14.1% in 2011] but the BABIP of .228 you would hope is a real outlier. If he could normalize that to even a modest .280 and maintains a 10.5 BB % I think the glove can play. I am a little skeptical based off Crawford's AAA #s from last year though - .224/.228/.318 - and .269 wOBA. Another year at AAA would really have benefited Crawford IMO. A defense first veteran like Punto wold have been a good short-term fit for the Giants methinks.

rog61
rog61

Chris, you know I don't like to read words and stuff! Can't you make one of them purty charts like you did for Gary Brown? That would make my comprehensive more easier.

magowanite
magowanite

Nice try, Chris, but his defensive value as laid out by obsessive giants compulsive clearly trumps whatever prediction you make offensively, whether he is a league average hitter or way worse (which I definitely do NOT predict). I think Crawford is going to have a breakout season, contingent on the Giants bringing in a veteran shortstop with quality offense to culminate his development. Shortstop is arguably the most integral position in the infield, and Crawford is the man for that job. If you don't agree, check out my reasons that I wrote about on my blog: http://www.heyhowsitmagowan.com/2011/12/12/do-you...

davepornstar
davepornstar

Don't Panik, hope is on the way. The Giants do have Panik waiting in the wings to take over so why not give Crawford a chance to show what he can do? Their offense should be better; Huff is like even numbered Star Treks that don't suck and we're headed for 2012, Posey and Sanchez are coming back and I'm drinking the Melkey and his contract year and the fact he will be in the "best shape of his life". Pagan should be a good on base guy and I see Nate the Great Schierholz taking two steps forward offensively. Anything Crawford does will be like mushroom gravy and if the gravy is bad don't Panik. There is another. Said Yoda. And his name is Keppinger. Psyche!

Damon
Damon

I think Fontenot* is good enough at short to take over for Crawford if his bat doesn't improve. The problem of course is that they are both lefties, meaning we won't have anybody to use for a potential platoon situation if Crawford is passable, but still a black hole facing southpaws. At this point, I am too interested in what Crawford will turn out to be to not give him the shot. Still, Sabes should definitely be dumpster diving after the new year to find a RH backup. At the very least, he can platoon for our lefties, and at best, he could be the one out of the trio that doesn't choke completely. (*Former Giants 2011 third-place hitter Mike Fontenot).

Shankbone
Shankbone

Furcal to the Cards for 2/14MM or so. I'd guess he'll do about 45% of the season, but dude has lost a step and that kills him on his defensive range and getting down the line. I think he had a dead cat bounce in the postseason the way Renteria did personally. Alex Gonzo to the BrewCrew - had an offer from Los Gigantes, didn't want to not start. The Riot is gonna be out there Chris. The Riot! Should be interesting, I am sort of shocked there is no veteran safety net for young Brandon. Remember, he can handle failure better than Belt... because he's had more of it!

obsessivegiantscompulsive
obsessivegiantscompulsive

Yes, this is different but the off-season isn't over yet. For one thing, perhaps the Giants think Fontenot is adequate backup. As I noted below, his defense wasn't pretty good at SS (though SSS) and he should be an improvement over what we got from SS last season (.210/.265/.299/.564) offensively as well. Also, the Giants have dumpster dived on non-tenders before, plus they have done that in January as well with remaining free agents, though I'm not sure who is still available.

Chris Quick
Chris Quick

2/14 for Furcal seems like a really good deal for the Cards (in this market especially). Giants should have been in on that.

LeviDavis
LeviDavis

It is possible that Furcal just didn't want to play for the Giants. He turned them down once before.

rog61
rog61

Seems like he was comfortable in St. Louis. There were murmers even in October that they were working on a deal to keep him next year. And the Cards had had living proof of what being stuck without a SS could do to their team; the horror that was Ryan Theriot, SS probably was their #1 issue through the first half of the season, even above Pujols' injury and the bullpen implosions.

Paapfly
Paapfly

I don't like 2/$14 for Furcal at this age and with the history of injury. Seems like an overpay/crazy market to me.

Paapfly
Paapfly

Ya, that bat doesn't play. You said it best: ~ "He makes contact well enough, but when he does, it's just like *nothing* happens."

Shankbone
Shankbone

The pitchers seem to be pretty psyched about it.

Chris Quick
Chris Quick

I think Furcal carries a lot of risk, but, you know, Brandon Crawford. I really hope I'm wrong on this one.

@crazycrabbers
@crazycrabbers

I have a question, I when I ran the numbers in my WAR calculator they came out slightly different. Maybe you are using a slightly different formulas but for mine I was using the wOBA to runs forumla that Tom Tango published where runs equals (wOBA -lg average wOBA) * 1.15 * PA So using this formula with a about 150 games played (650 PA) would give Crawford with a .270 wOBA -43 runs, .280 wOBA -36 runs, .290 wOBA -28 runs, .300 wOBA -21 runs, and a .310 wOBA -13 runs. What was the formula you used to convert wOBA to runs?

Chris Quick
Chris Quick

What are you setting your league wOBA to? Though I do see part of my problem, my batting runs are based on what I generally set a full season of PAs at (700) and they aren't adjusted until I apply a playing time adjustment in the WAR calc....so those batting runs numbers above are based on 700 PAs -- and not the 560 PAs I adjusted everything to in the WAR numbers. If that makes any sense.

Chris Quick
Chris Quick

Also, I might be reading your line wrong, but the conversion to runs should be ((wOBA - league wOBA) / 1.15))*PA It looks like you're multiplying when you should be dividing ... unless I've got things wrong.

@crazycrabbers
@crazycrabbers

Nope you were right, I had an error in my spreadsheet.