Grade the Crochet Trade

[YTF]

Yep, sounds about right. I expect something like that for an extension also.


They have 2 years of control. I wouldn't expect the Sox to pay Max Fried market rate today, nor should they

He has already stated that he wants an extension to MLB last summer, no need to entice him by writing 5/140 (7yrs/200M)

We're probably headed towards a "Crochet Extension Expectation" Poll

As mentioned multiple times, the extension talk of last summer was very specific to him being traded. He was in agreement with the White Sox on an innings limit for the season. If he were to be traded to a contender it stood to reason that team would look to use him in the post season should they get there, likely putting Crochet past the work load that had been mapped out for him before the post season even began. He didn't wish to risk his career as part of that team's pursuit of a championship without guaranteed compensation for that risk.

 

[benhogan]

As mentioned multiple times, the extension talk of last summer was very specific to him being traded. He was in agreement with the White Sox on an innings limit for the season. If he were to be traded to a contender it stood to reason that team would look to use him in the post season should they get there, likely putting Crochet past the work load that had been mapped out for him before the post season even began. He didn't wish to risk his career as part of that team's pursuit of a championship without guaranteed compensation for that risk.

Sure and he showed his hand last July. He wanted an extension then, and I'm almost positive he wants one now. The Sox are penciling him in as their #1 starter.

Why would he change his stance on life changing money now?

 

[sezwho]

Sure and he showed his hand last July. He wanted an extension then, and I'm almost positive he wants one now. The Sox are penciling him in as their #1 starter.

Why would he change his stance on life changing money now?

Because 10+mm for the next two is already going to be life changing, so why not cash that and get the 200+ right after?

I also read the tea leaves are saying he’d be open to an extension. I just think they’re gonna have to pay a proper one that makes them…uncomfortable.

 

[YTF]

Sure and he showed his hand last July. He wanted an extension then, and I'm almost positive he wants one now. The Sox are penciling him in as their #1 starter.

Why would he change his stance on life changing money now?

I don't think that he would, just stating that the situation last year was very specific.

 

[YTF]

Because 10+mm for the next two is already going to be life changing, so why not cash that and get the 200+ right after?

for what it’s worth I also read the tea leaves are saying he’d be open to an extension. I just think they’re gonna have to pay a proper one that makes them…uncomfortable.

There's no guarantee that he get's that $10M over the next 2 seasons if he gets hurt this season. And depending on the injury, there's no guarantee of cashing in after that. I think there is a number that both sides can agree upon for the next 5-6 years.

 

[simplicio]

Because 10+mm for the next two is already going to be life changing, so why not cash that and get the 200+ right after?

I also read the tea leaves are saying he’d be open to an extension. I just think they’re gonna have to pay a proper one that makes them…uncomfortable.

They were comfortable offering $300m to Yamamoto.

 

[TapeAndPosts]

They were comfortable offering $300m to Yamamoto.

And willing (though presumably uncomfortable) to offer Soto much more. Throw in the Devers extension and you have a consistent picture, they are willing to offer big bucks and many years to players in their mid-20s, just not ones on the wrong side of 30.

 

[sezwho]

They were comfortable offering $300m to Yamamoto.

I don’t happen to believe this and believe it’s being actively retconned (retroactively conditioned) as true. Some do, fair enough.

There's no guarantee that he get's that $10M over the next 2 seasons if he gets hurt this season. And depending on the injury, there's no guarantee of cashing in after that. I think there is a number that both sides can agree upon for the next 5-6 years.

Agree the 10mm isnt actually guaranteed and do agree with the bolded. Just think it looks a lot more like ‘market’ (meaning not so heavily discounted from the two arb years) than most do.

 

[nighthob]

Because 10+mm for the next two is already going to be life changing, so why not cash that and get the 200+ right after?

Because with his arm history there's no guarantee that he ever reaches that $200 million payday.

 

[benhogan]

Because with his arm history there's no guarantee that he ever reaches that $200 million payday.

Two years is dogs years for MLB starters.

Garrett's stuff is electric, but even Scott Boros doesn't throw around $200-$400M threats after 1 season of starting.

Sox didn't deal that prospect package to rip up 2 dirt cheap options to pay the inflated Free Agent market rate two years early.

Because if you let him become a FA in '27 he is looking at 10yrs +/ $400M + .

 

[Sox in the sticks]

I gave it a 7. I'm hopeful it will work out, but that was a lot to give up for one player. Definitely feel positive about it, though. It's hard to know where prospects will end up, but Crochet is so young that it's hard to know where he'll end up, too.

 

[zenax]

...but Crochet is so young...

He'll be turning 26 in June. I wouldn't call him "so young" unless you're only considering that he has only been a starter for one season.

 

[Sox in the sticks]

He'll be turning 26 in June. I wouldn't call him "so young" unless you're only considering that he has only been a starter for one season.

Yeah, that makes sense. The Sox traded such a huge haul of prospects for him, and he does seem relatively inexperienced to have commanded so much trade value. Consider what the Expos got in return for Pedro. Seems meager by comparison and Pedro was a Cy Young winner. A different era, I guess.

 

[billy ashley]

Yeah, that makes sense. The Sox traded such a huge haul of prospects for him, and he does seem relatively inexperienced to have commanded so much trade value. Consider what the Expos got in return for Pedro. Seems meager by comparison and Pedro was a Cy Young winner. A different era, I guess.

Very much a different era but keep in mind, Pavano was the 17th prospect in BA's top 100 at the time of the trade. To start the next season he was number 8. He was a very good prospect. Armas wasn't ranked in the top 100, but would be the following two years after the trade, peaking at 27 overall.

Kyle Teel is a very good prospect. He's not as highly regarded as Pavano was (fewer lists back then, so it's not a perfect comparison, further we know a ton more about prospects now than then).

Brandon Montgomery is also a very good prospect, but he's more of a 50-75 range with upside to move up (and some bust risk).

Chase Medroth is a fascinating guy, who some people really beleive in, but has very clear limitations that would prevent him from ever being ranked.

Winkleman has a great arm, but was a DFA risk due to the fact that he's on the 40 and nowhere near ready to compete. HE's also failed as a SP for 2 years in a row. I'd almost consider not even considering the loss of value with Gonzalez. He needs a change of scenery. He's good enough that he deserves more chances, but given the options issue, it was never going to be in Boston.

I guess in short, in terms of value at the times of the trades (imperfect): CP>KT>BM>TA>CM>WG

 

[Sox in the sticks]

Very much a different era but keep in mind, Pavano was the 17th prospect in BA's top 100 at the time of the trade. To start the next season he was number 8. He was a very good prospect. Armas wasn't ranked in the top 100, but would be the following two years after the trade, peaking at 27 overall.

Kyle Teel is a very good prospect. He's not as highly regarded as Pavano was (fewer lists back then, so it's not a perfect comparison, further we know a ton more about prospects now than then).

Brandon Montgomery is also a very good prospect, but he's more of a 50-75 range with upside to move up (and some bust risk).

Chase Medroth is a fascinating guy, who some people really beleive in, but has very clear limitations that would prevent him from ever being ranked.

Winkleman has a great arm, but was a DFA risk due to the fact that he's on the 40 and nowhere near ready to compete. HE's also failed as a SP for 2 years in a row. I'd almost consider not even considering the loss of value with Gonzalez. He needs a change of scenery. He's good enough that he deserves more chances, but given the options issue, it was never going to be in Boston.

I guess in short, in terms of value at the times of the trades (imperfect): CP>KT>BM>TA>CM>WG

All this makes sense to me to, except that what the Sox got in return for two prospects back then was a pitcher who'd already won a Cy Young Award, rather than a guy who's had one good season and a number of injuries. Maybe the Crochet deal puts the Pedro deal into a different context for me. Like I said, I'm optimistic, and I feel positive about the Crochet acquisition, but my expectations aren't what they were for Pedro.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

All this makes sense to me to, except that what the Sox got in return for two prospects back then was a pitcher who'd already won a Cy Young Award, rather than a guy who's had one good season and a number of injuries. Maybe the Crochet deal puts the Pedro deal into a different context for me. Like I said, I'm optimistic, and I feel positive about the Crochet acquisition, but my expectations aren't what they were for Pedro.

Who's arguing that expectations should be as high for Crochet as they were for Pedro? Or is it the perceived value of the prospects that's driving that?

Let's keep in mind that what drives the trade cost of a player isn't only their on the field value (past performance + future potential), it's the market in which they're moved. The more teams involved in trying to trade for him, the higher the cost can be driven. The winning offer only has to be higher than the second highest offer. Doesn't seem unreasonable to think that more teams were trying to acquire Crochet this winter than were (capable of) trying to acquire Pedro back in 1997, thus the price got driven higher.

 

[simplicio]

I've found myself wondering a lot (cause I've heard it a lot as a point against Crochet) whether track record of pitchers in the pitch tracking era simply matters less. They have the data on every pitch Crochet threw this year, the biomechanics of release points etc, and they watched him perform consistently through a full season. Obviously injury concerns are still entirely valid, but are people seeing his year as a fluke or what? With the ability to step into the lab and pinpoint exactly what's physically different from peak performance, shouldn't we expect pitcher performance to approximately hold year to year?

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I've found myself wondering a lot (cause I've heard it a lot as a point against Crochet) whether track record of pitchers in the pitch tracking era simply matters less. They have the data on every pitch Crochet threw this year, the biomechanics of release points etc, and they watched him perform consistently through a full season. Obviously injury concerns are still entirely valid, but are people seeing his year as a fluke or what? With the ability to step into the lab and pinpoint exactly what's physically different from peak performance, shouldn't we expect pitcher performance to approximately hold year to year?

They're still human beings though. No matter how consistently they might perform during a given season, even according to all the advanced tracking info, things can still change. Doesn't even have to be injury. When it's just one year's worth of data, it could be a fluke. It might not be and we hope it wouldn't be, but players aren't robots.

 

[LogansDad]

I've found myself wondering a lot (cause I've heard it a lot as a point against Crochet) whether track record of pitchers in the pitch tracking era simply matters less. They have the data on every pitch Crochet threw this year, the biomechanics of release points etc, and they watched him perform consistently through a full season. Obviously injury concerns are still entirely valid, but are people seeing his year as a fluke or what? With the ability to step into the lab and pinpoint exactly what's physically different from peak performance, shouldn't we expect pitcher performance to approximately hold year to year?

I think it is safe to assume that the team thinks they can get Crochet up to 180 innings this season. He would have easily surpassed that last year if he hadn't been on such a strict pitch/innings count post All Star Break last year.

Pedro was otherworldly and I don't expect Crochet to be an inner circle Hall of Famer, but the "relative" value of a guy who can do what Crochet looks primed to be able to do is much higher, IMHO, in 2024 than it may have been in 1997. There were 69 pitchers who reached 180 innings in 1997 and there were only 21 of them in 2024. That is probably enough of a reason for Crochet to get a similar prospect haul to what Pedro got, even without the track record. And I am one of Meidroth's biggest fans, but in him and Gonzalez they essentially gave up players who were never likely to see much playing time (if any) in Boston, so if you look at it from a standpoint of the trade being just Montgomery and Teel, it looks like a reasonable deal. Again, this is all my opinion, and I have been wrong in the past, so...

 

[simplicio]

They're still human beings though. No matter how consistently they might perform during a given season, even according to all the advanced tracking info, things can still change. Doesn't even have to be injury. When it's just one year's worth of data, it could be a fluke. It might not be and we hope it wouldn't be, but players aren't robots.

Of course! The human factor is always going to be an element. But we're also successfully making them more like robots every year. We can measure and replicate grip strength, stride length and landing points, body positioning and movement, every physical thing the pitcher is doing on the mound. The advances this decade have been pretty huge.

 

[Trapaholic]

I give this one an 8.

Bummed about losing Teel and Monty. I was very interested in Montgomery mainly due to switch hitting, power, and arm strength.

Crochet is fascinating because he debuted the same year he was drafted and didn't play a single minor league game. He simply has not pitched a lot compared to most guys his age. His last year in college was the COVID year, and the White Sox immediately put him in the bullpen. He then missed an entire year due to injury.

There is a chance that he has not even reached his max potential, and he is coming to an organization that has clearly emphasized their pitching development program.

 

[Fishy1]

Worth remembering that when Pedro was traded it was no sure thing that he was going to be a Hall of Fame talent.



I could have seen a reasonable person thinking "okay, 1997 was probably his peak, and we'll probably be getting 1994-1996 Pedro from here on out." And of course, as we all know, he only got better.

 

[20Ks]

Just to make sure that we're all on the same page, when you 3-4 are you including the 2 years of control that he has left?

Yes. You would be buying those out to get him to commit to the following 3. His first 3 free agent years.

 

[buttons]

Yes. You would be buying those out to get him to commit to the following 3. His first 3 free agent years.

I would be shocked if the plan is not to lock him in for at least 5 years!

 

[20Ks]

Two years is dogs years for MLB starters.

Garrett's stuff is electric, but even Scott Boros doesn't throw around $200-$400M threats after 1 season of starting.

Sox didn't deal that prospect package to rip up 2 dirt cheap options to pay the inflated Free Agent market rate two years early.

You are right Boras wouldnt have let him sign for 400. Bidding would start closer to 500 if he were a FA now. As a 26 yr old that had never thrown a pitch in the majors Yamamoto got 12/325 . You guys are really underestimating how valuable his next 4-5 years are. The trade made it so only the Red Sox can buy out it his arb years. Thats why they had to part with Montgomery. (The only piece of the trade that could sting)

 

[20Ks]

I would be shocked if the plan is not to lock him in for at least 5 years!

Right 2 arb + 3 Which would allow him to become a free agent at 31. To lock up years after that would probably take $40m AAV per. The $30M player options are insurance for him so you can get those 3.

 

[YTF]

Yes. You would be buying those out to get him to commit to the following 3. His first 3 free agent years.

Thanks for the response, I asked because I can't really see a 3 year deal including the 2 buy out years making much sense for Boston.

 

[benhogan]

You are right Boras wouldnt have let him sign for 400. Bidding would start closer to 500 if he were a FA now. As a 26 yr old that had never thrown a pitch in the majors Yamamoto got 12/325 . You guys are really underestimating how valuable his next 4-5 years are. The trade made it so only the Red Sox can buy out it his arb years. Thats why they had to part with Montgomery. (The only piece of the trade that could sting)

$500M? now you're just doubling down on crazy.
You're really underestimating the power of two dirt-cheap option years & overestimating 1 season as a starting pitcher.

Yamamoto came with a lengthy track record & his average was $27.1M/yr
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=yamamo004yos

Breslow got GC for $2.9M + another cheap option the following season. That would be ~$85M in excess value (actually much greater with prime years + 2nd option implied volatility factored in).

The rest of MLB would be a bunch of buffoons for not outbidding Boston, if that was Crochet's PV.

 

[nighthob]

All this makes sense to me to, except that what the Sox got in return for two prospects back then was a pitcher who'd already won a Cy Young Award, rather than a guy who's had one good season and a number of injuries. Maybe the Crochet deal puts the Pedro deal into a different context for me. Like I said, I'm optimistic, and I feel positive about the Crochet acquisition, but my expectations aren't what they were for Pedro.

Pedro also came with arm concerns. His older brother Ramón was largely done as a pitcher by age 28 or 29, and Pedro was a whole lot smaller/slighter with tightly wound mechanics and that repertoire from Hell. Montreal probably looked at it as the opportunity to add a couple of live arms while the getting was good. No one really expected Pedro to last as long as he did. He didn't really fall off a cliff until his age 33 season. Prior to that his decline was relative to himself (as he went from an ERA+ 200+ pitcher to one in the 130-140 range).

 

[Sox Pride]

241 IP 11.3 K/9

When someone asks if you're a god, you say yes.

Wow.

As to the Crochet extension we all hope we're getting for Christmas.
It's not a question of what he'd get on the open market. That would be through the moon

He is going to pitch for the Sox the next two years (assuming health).
A nine-figure contract sets him up for life. - regardless of his health the next 5 years.

He has to factor in risk/reward.
The life difference between 5 million dollars career earnings and 100 million dollars is a lot
The life difference between 100 mill and 300 mill is not nearly as much

Also - if he does pitch well/ stay healthy the next few years - he will be in line for another free agent contract and be negotiating from strength as well
It's not as if signing for 5/100 - 7/150 will limit his earning potential drastically.

30 million dollars a year is eighth best among pitcher salaries last year (and that includes Ohtani and Stephen Strasburg)

Actually looking at that list makes me realize why ownership doesn't want to pay these exorbitant sums to older FA pitchers

 

[20Ks]

$500M? now you're just doubling down on crazy.
You're really underestimating the power of two dirt-cheap option years & overestimating 1 season as a starting pitcher.

Yamamoto came with a lengthy track record & his average was $27.1M/yr
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=yamamo004yos

Breslow got GC for $2.9M + another cheap option the following season. That would be ~$85M in excess value (actually much greater with prime years + 2nd option implied volatility factored in).

The rest of MLB would be a bunch of buffoons for not outbidding Boston, if that was Crochet's PV.

OK you're right. I sure don't get it. Every day he gets closer to free agency without blowing out his arm makes him more expensive, (and maybe even if he does). If he hit free agency after 2 years assimilating last years performance, what do you think he would get as a 28 year old free agent? And what are the odds he would even consider the Red Sox after they forced him to eat 2 arb shit sandwiches? BTW you started by telling me 5/150, 7/210 with 2 player options was crazy. The 4-500 is because at 26 after throwing a 6 k/BB season in the Majors (United States MLB) his agent would be looking for 12-15 yrs.

 

[benhogan]

OK you're right. I sure don't get it. Every day he gets closer to free agency without blowing out his arm makes him more expensive, (and maybe even if he does). If he hit free agency after 2 years assimilating last years performance, what do you think he would get as a 28 year old free agent? And what are the odds he would even consider the Red Sox after they forced him to eat 2 arb shit sandwiches? BTW you started by telling me 5/150, 7/210 with 2 player options was crazy. The 4-500 is because at 26 after throwing a 6 k/BB season in the Majors (United States MLB) his agent would be looking for 12-15 yrs.

1. I used "crazy" when you said $500M for Crochet (which has only been exceeded by Soto & Ohtani).

2. You're all over the place (see below) with your estimates

3. You seem eager to get adversarial with multiple posters on this thread on catchers & extension estimates (it's a long off-season)

4. Maybe take a gummy

I think you are right. CAA made it difficult to trade him at the deadline so my guess is it is all been hammered out, buying out some arb years at say 5/100 with a couple of player options say 7/160 (spitballing)

I am not a salary/luxury tax expert (I'm barely an understander) but when would they announce it so not to take a tax hit in '25, and how would a signing bonus/deferrals be calculated?

Dont think there is any chance that happens. He would probably prefer 3 or 4 but would settle on 5 if that AAV were high enough something like 5/140 or 150, but would require player options to go that long.

Thanks for the clarification. Guessing it will be announced soon then. Yeah about what I thought. probably something like 7/185 with a 25-30 signing bonus seems likely .

 

[20Ks]

Dude you are the one looking for a fight. Which one of those posts am I being "adversarial"? Normal people had a discussion on what the extension that is coming would look like. I originally thought it would be something like 5/100 7/160. It still might, but I came around to the thinking that it would be more.
Read the first 4 words of that last post. I was responding to Reds Hawk fans post where he laid out what the math would look like buying out the arb years. There I am conceding that I was most likely light in my estimation. Its what reasonable people do. Its what this board used to be about.

Your post on the other hand...

 

[simplicio]

I don't think $500m for a hypothetical Crochet FA in today's market is crazy at all either. I don't think we've seen a 25 year old starter with MLB experience hit FA since Porcello a decade ago, and Crochet's showed a capability for genuine CY contention.

If there's a lesson from the last year, it's: Unicorns get paid.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I don't think $500m for a hypothetical Crochet FA in today's market is crazy at all either. I don't think we've seen a 25 year old starter with MLB experience hit FA since Porcello a decade ago, and Crochet's showed a capability for genuine CY contention.

If there's a lesson from the last year, it's: Unicorns get paid.

Porcello didn't hit free agency until he was 31.

 

[Sox in the sticks]

Who's arguing that expectations should be as high for Crochet as they were for Pedro? Or is it the perceived value of the prospects that's driving that?

Let's keep in mind that what drives the trade cost of a player isn't only their on the field value (past performance + future potential), it's the market in which they're moved. The more teams involved in trying to trade for him, the higher the cost can be driven. The winning offer only has to be higher than the second highest offer. Doesn't seem unreasonable to think that more teams were trying to acquire Crochet this winter than were (capable of) trying to acquire Pedro back in 1997, thus the price got driven higher.

I'm not arguing that expectations for Crochet are as high as they were for Pedro. FWIW, I'm not much for argument, at least not where baseball is concerned. I see this as more of a conversation among co-religionists. I was just drawing a comparison between what the Sox gave for Pedro and what they gave for Crochet. I'm not trying to say apples to apples or anything like that. It's the contrasts, I guess, that interest me. It was clearly a different time, and time will tell us how different these two pitchers turn out to be.

 

[simplicio]

Porcello didn't hit free agency until he was 31.

Oh I totally botched that, forgot we traded for him the year before. Thanks, Yoenis!

So I don't even know when the last 25 year old starter FA was then. It really just doesn't happen unless they're posting from Japan.

 

[20Ks]

Oh I totally botched that, forgot we traded for him the year before. Thanks, Yoenis!

So I don't even know when the last 25 year old starter FA was then. It really just doesn't happen unless they're posting from Japan.

That is the point I was trying to make. It doesn't happen. 13/500 would not shock me. Even if they actually played out the arb years as is being suggested that what a 28yr old ace going to cost.

All that being said I'm pretty sure both camps best interest is an extension. .

 

[YTF]

I don't think $500m for a hypothetical Crochet FA in today's market is crazy at all either. I don't think we've seen a 25 year old starter with MLB experience hit FA since Porcello a decade ago, and Crochet's showed a capability for genuine CY contention.

If there's a lesson from the last year, it's: Unicorns get paid.

A 25 year old FA starter with Crochet's MLB experience isn't sniffing $500M

 

[20Ks]

A 25 year old FA starter with Crochet's MLB experience isn't sniffing $500M

What's he sniffing? More or less than a 26 or old Yamamoto?

 

[simplicio]

A month ago concensus predictions about Juan Soto were over $500 and even as much as $600m.

 

[nvalvo]

So I don't even know when the last 25 year old starter FA was then. It really just doesn't happen unless they're posting from Japan.

Well, the closest guys will be the super-rare SP who come up at 19 or 20: Dwight Gooden, King Felix, Madison Bumgarner, CC Sabathia, Fernando Valenzuela, Rick Porcello, Clayton Kershaw. These guys are almost always extended, as I think pretty much all of those guys were.

(Those are obviously some super good pitchers, but the list also includes Julio Urias, Rick Ankiel, Edwin Jackson, a few others. For Urias, anyway, the pitching was the problem.)

But yeah, what would King Felix have gotten in FA after his age-25 season?

A 25 year old FA starter with Crochet's MLB experience isn't sniffing $500M

I think 20Ks may be needlessly doubling down on some hyperbole, but I think the larger point is well taken that there are very, very few comps for Crochet.

I would like to see a generous extension for 8 years (or 6 years after his current commitment if you prefer to count that way) because that makes it possible to secure the entire prime of a guy who looks to be a huge talent during our coming window without signing us up for his late 30s. Getting that extremely team-friendly term from Crochet probably requires paying near market rate for the FA seasons and thus a commitment approaching $200m. Call it $5m, $10m, and then 6 x $27.5m: 8/$180m.

I agree that $180m is far less than $500m, but it is also much more than some of the lowball offers thrown around in the various threads that are basically using Crochet's injury risk to extort him. That said, a deal that ended when he was 30 or 31 would be cheaper, but I'm looking to take on a bit more risk than that.

 

[YTF]

What's he sniffing? More or less than a 26 or old Yamamoto?

Take a look at Yamamoto's NPB experience.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=yamamo004yos

 

[20Ks]

Take a look at Yamamoto's NPB experience.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=yamamo004yos

Well, the closest guys will be the super-rare SP who come up at 19 or 20: Dwight Gooden, King Felix, Madison Bumgarner, CC Sabathia, Fernando Valenzuela, Rick Porcello, Clayton Kershaw. These guys are almost always extended, as I think pretty much all of those guys were.

(Those are obviously some super good pitchers, but the list also includes Julio Urias, Rick Ankiel, Edwin Jackson, a few others. For Urias, anyway, the pitching was the problem.)

But yeah, what would King Felix have gotten in FA after his age-25 season?



I think 20Ks may be needlessly doubling down on some hyperbole, but I think the larger point is well taken that there are very, very few comps for Crochet.

I would like to see a generous extension for 8 years (or 6 years after his current commitment if you prefer to count that way) because that makes it possible to secure the entire prime of a guy who looks to be a huge talent during our coming window without signing us up for his late 30s. Getting that extremely team-friendly term from Crochet probably requires paying near market rate for the FA seasons and thus a commitment approaching $200m. Call it $5m, $10m, and then 6 x $27.5m: 8/$180m.

I agree that $180m is far less than $500m, but it is also much more than some of the lowball offers thrown around in the various threads that are basically using Crochet's injury risk to extort him. That said, a deal that ended when he was 30 or 31 would be cheaper, but I'm looking to take on a bit more risk than that.

I was told.I was crazy because I thought it would take 5/150 plus a couple of player options to extend. The 400-500 was what a hypothetical 25 year old Free agent Crochet would get. I dont think it's hyperbole. Fried's contract as well as Snells and Burnes to come, take into account decline years. With a 25 yr old it takes 8-10 years just to get there.

 

[nighthob]

I would like to see a generous extension for 8 years (or 6 years after his current commitment if you prefer to count that way) because that makes it possible to secure the entire prime of a guy who looks to be a huge talent during our coming window without signing us up for his late 30s. Getting that extremely team-friendly term from Crochet probably requires paying near market rate for the FA seasons and thus a commitment approaching $200m. Call it $5m, $10m, and then 6 x $27.5m: 8/$180m.

I agree that $180m is far less than $500m, but it is also much more than some of the lowball offers thrown around in the various threads that are basically using Crochet's injury risk to extort him. That said, a deal that ended when he was 30 or 31 would be cheaper, but I'm looking to take on a bit more risk than that.

The contract that runs through 33 will need to be close to market rates as there would almost certainly be no second bite at the big FA apple. A 33 year old with mileage and injuries isn’t getting a big deal. And the contract he’d get on the open market would be around what the 25 year old Yamamoto got, 12/325. But, if he’s getting a second bite at the apple, something like 6 years and 156-168 million likely gets the job done. Also, contra an earlier poster trying to pretend that there’s age difference between Yamamoto and Crochet relative to FA valuation, Crochet is the same age now that Yamamoto was when he got his deal, so it’s the perfect comp. And Yamamoto came without the injury history (albeit with the Pedro concerns over size/durability).

 

[nvalvo]

I was told.I was crazy because I thought it would take 5/150 plus a couple of player options to extend. The 400-500 was what a hypothetical 25 year old Free agent Crochet would get. I dont think it's hyperbole. Fried's contract as well as Snells and Burnes to come, take into account decline years. With a 25 yr old it takes 8-10 years just to get there.

I understood. I think we see this situation pretty similarly. For the record, I think a hypothetical FA Crochet would get something between Yamamoto’s deal and $400m.

 

[sezwho]

A month ago concensus predictions about Juan Soto were over $500 and even as much as $600m.

And that same contract was about 60% more than last years (present value) no one could believe it Most Unicornest of Unicorn’s contract.

 

[simplicio]

If you want to get (more) hyped for Crochet, go listen to Speier gushing about him on today's 310 to left podcast.

 

[20Ks]

I understood. I think we see this situation pretty similarly. For the record, I think a hypothetical FA Crochet would get something between Yamamoto’s deal and $400m.

Sure. The 2 years of Arb really puts the sox in an advantageous position to lock up his best years. That why it took 2 of the top 5. Even if you have him at say $30m AAV for ages 25-31, that is without paying for any decline.

 

[YTF]

Sure. The 2 years of Arb really puts the sox in an advantageous position to lock up his best years. That why it took 2 of the top 5. Even if you have him at say $30m AAV for ages 25-31, that is without paying for any decline.

I think he gets closer to 22.5M-25M AAV and there is no guarantee that decline doesn't start before age 31