Is it time for Dodgers to cut their losses with Carl Crawford?

When the Dodgers acquired left fielder Carl Crawford from the Boston Red Sox on August 25, 2012 as part of the blockbuster trade that also brought them Adrian Gonzalez, Josh Beckett and Nick Punto, they did so knowing full well that the then 30-year-old Houston, Texas native would not set foot onto Dodger Stadium for another eight months. After all, Crawford underwent Tommy John surgery a mere two days prior to the trade. But what the Dodgers did not count on was that over the next 521 games, Crawford would appear in only 290 of them. This figures out to be a rather paltry 55.6% of the total number of games that the Dodgers have played over three seasons; not exactly a good return on their investment.

Although the Dodgers primary target of the trade with Boston was first baseman Adrian Gonzalez – who has indeed been a great return on their investment – they were strapped with Crawford’s seven-year / $142 million contract which guarantees the oft-injured outfielder $20.75 million in 2016 and $21 million in 2017. And while it is not all that uncommon these days for a top-tier outfielder to earn north of $20 million per season, it’s difficult (if not impossible) to put the now 34-year-old Crawford into this top-tier category – especially when he hasn’t played more than 130 games in any one season since 2011.

Because of his elbow surgery, Dodgers outfielder Carl Crawford didn't have his introductory press conference until two months after the blockbuster trade with the Red Sox. (Photo credit - Ron Cervenka)

Because of his elbow surgery, Dodgers outfielder Carl Crawford didn’t have his introductory press conference until two months after the blockbuster trade with the Red Sox.
(Photo credit – Ron Cervenka)

To be fair, when he can stay on the field, Crawford has had his moments of greatness. In fact, since joining the Dodgers, Crawford has a slash-line of .286 / .328 / .414 for a decent .742 OPS. He has also hit 53 doubles, eight triple. 18 home runs and driven in 93 runs. And while his two home runs in Game-4 of the 2013 NLDS against the Atlanta Braves shall forever be overshadowed by Juan Uribe’s dramatic game-winning home run (after two failed bunt attempts), Crawford’s two solo blasts made Uribe’s historic moment possible. But the painful truth is that Carl Crawford is not a top-tier outfielder and has fallen well short of expectations, and most certainly is not worth the $41.75 million that the Dodgers still owe him through the 2017 season.

Crawford's two solo home runs in Game-4 of the 2013 were overshadowed by Juan Uribe's dramatic game-winning home run later in the game. (Photo credit - Jon SooHoo)

Although every Dodger fan vividly remembers Juan Uribe’s dramatic game-winning home run in Game-4 of the 2013 NLDS, many forget that Carl Crawford hit two solo home runs earlier in the game.
(Photo credit – Jon SooHoo)

The problem, of course, is that the likable (and funny) outfielder is simply untradeable – at least his contract is. Granted, Crawford still has above average speed and has enough pop that he might make a decent designated hitter for an AL team, but there isn’t a team out there willing to take on his existing contract. In other words, the Dodgers are stuck with him for the next two seasons – period.

Or are they?

If the Dodgers new ownership group has taught us anything, they have taught us that they are not afraid to eat lofty contracts (or pay guys to play elsewhere) in order to bring in (or promote) better players. But are they willing to eat the $41.75 million still owed to Crawford? If they are, it will be their single largest bite to date. Oh sure, one can argue that the $32 million that they sent to the San Diego Padres along with Matt Kemp is a precedent for such things, but at least they got Yasmani Grandal and Joe Wieland out of the deal and managed to get out from under the $75 million that they still owed Kemp in the process. But as it stands right now, it is highly unlikely that there is even one team out their interested in Crawford if it involves picking up any of his existing contract.

The bottom line is that the only way Carl Crawford is not a Dodger in 2016 (and possibly even 2017) is if he follows in the footsteps of Andruw Jones and Manny Ramirez; that is, if the Dodgers are willing to pay him a lot of money to play elsewhere.

 

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

6 Responses to “Is it time for Dodgers to cut their losses with Carl Crawford?”

  1. Yes please, he looked increasingly inept at the plate late last season and into the postseason.

  2. Bluenose Dodger says:

    I absolutely detest paying guys to play on other teams or to stay home. However, this is a case of short term pain for long term gain. Crawford is just too fragile it seems to give a full season. Plus he blocks a younger player from advancing or being acquired by trade.

    I have pretty much always thought Andre was a better option than Carl and should not have been relegated to the bench. I also think Andre is still tradeable without eating all of his contract.

    Both have two years remaining on their contracts and after that the team has divested itself of contracts that are too lofty for what can be returned. Adrian’s will end after the 2018 season but I suspect he will be traded before then.

  3. When healthy he is very good but remember we got CC because we had to take his contract to get Gonzo

  4. OldBrooklynFan says:

    I remember recently reading that Freidman said that with all the injuries that come up during the season, it isn’t bad to have an excess amount of outfielders.

  5. Kevin Sparkuhl says:

    When Carl Crawford was on, he was one of the best in the game. Now that injuries have become the norm for him, I agree with Harold… time to let him bench warm somewhere else, but I still hate to see the money float away.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress