Just a reminder- we picked Campbell with the pick received when Xander turned down our QO (and Anthony with the pick received when Eduardo Rodriguez turned down our QO).
Hooking Crochet? 12/8 update: Rumors of Red Sox "just on the periphery," "not aggressors at all" at this point.
- Thread starter The Gray Eagle
- Start date
He could also be a borderline non-prospect in a year (see: Berry, Jacob #6 overall in 2022, basically a non-prospect by the 2023 offseason, or Austin Martin, #5 overall in 2020, basically written off as a star caliber player by the 2021 offseason).
I'd move Monty first if anyone had him comparable to the Big 4. The error bars on his outcome are still monumental, and historically speaking he's likelier to go pumpkin than turn into another blue chipper.
So one little concern I have is that his Uber-fast rise was basically one “career” type season and not necessarily a sign of his true talent.
It’s just a small concern, but I’m not gonna lie - it’s there.
I certainly hope so. In today's game, bench or role players pretty much need to carry a couple gloves and may be more proficient at some positions than others. But after seeing some of the team's defensive deficiencies over these past couple of seasons I would hope that the infield defense will be a priority. Story being back and healthy should be a huge boost compared to Hamilton and Rafaela as should Grissom/Campbell compared to Valdez. Some say Raffy seems to play better 3B with a stronger defensive SS alongside him. Here's hoping there's something to that.
This is my point though, he isn’t being valued like the Big 4 in the proposed trade.
I’d rather roll the dice and bet on his performance than include him as a second tier in a trade.
Totally. Which in my opinion speaks to his impressive profile.
Maybe this will help alleviate your concern. Some pretty rarefied air. 2006-2024.
That top ten has a remarkable amount of talent in it. Kelvin Diaz is the only guy on it who should be ignored, as he hasn't done anything above rookie ball. Other than him and Campbell, there isn't a guy on this list except Branyan who has less than 15 career fWAR, and Soto, Bryant, Belt, and Gordon all have 30+. (But Branyan is an outlier in another way, weirdly, because he accumulated those numbers at the end of his career).
And just outside of the top ten are Conforto, Vlad Guerrero Jr, and Paul Goldschmidt.
A useful reminder for anyone still gnashing their teeth because Pivetta declined his option.
if I remember correctly, Mookie was drafted as a SS, and was projected to be a better fit in the majors as a 2B, so that is where he mostly played in the minors. When he started making so much noise with his bat, (similar to KC last year) they got him some reps in CF because Pedroia was blocking him. I don’t think anyone at the time was predicting that he’d win multiple gold gloves in RF. You can teach and refine different defensive positions if you’re athletic. i don’t think you can teach elite hand eye coordination and bat to ball skills the same way.
It's kinda fun to look back at guys they let walk who turned into compensation picks. These were all free agent compensation picks from the pre-QO days...
Matt Murton and Abe Alvarez (Clifford Floyd)
Jacoby Ellsbury and Jed Lowrie (Orlando Cabrera)
Craig Hansen and Michael Bowden (Derek Lowe)
Clay Buchholz and Jonathan Egan (Pedro Martinez)
Daniel Bard and Kris Johnson (Johnny Damon)
Kolbrin Vitik and Anthony Ranaudo (Billy Wagner)
Bryce Brentz and Brandon Workman (Jason Bay)
Matt Barnes and Henry Owens (Victor Martinez)
Blake Swihart and Jackie Bradley Jr (Adrian Beltre)
Brian Johnson and Pat Light (Jonathan Papelbon)
We only got a 4th round pick for losing Xander?! I thought you got a pick between the 1st and 2nd
Certain players were designated by a formula as Type A or Type B. Teams only had to offer contract arbitration to those free agents rather than a qualifying offer with a guaranteed contract salary. Players routinely turned it down and went about free agency as normal (even those that eventually re-signed like Jason Varitek did). For any Type A or Type B free agent that left you to sign elsewhere, you got a compensation pick in a supplemental round between rounds 1 and 2 of the draft. Additionally, you would also get the highest available pick from the team that signed your former player. So you got two draft picks for losing a Type A/B free agent, and gave one up to sign one.
IIRC correctly, only the top 10 picks in the draft were protected, which is how it came to be that the Mets, who held the #9 pick, gave up their second round pick for Pedro (Buchholz was the supplemental round pick, Egan was the second round pick). The Angels, on the other hand, did not have a protected pick that year so when they signed Orlando Cabrera, they gave up their #23 pick to the Red Sox who used it to take Ellsbury.
They moved him down the spectrum after drafting him because they were unsure about his defense as a SS. But apparently his play there has been good enough to change their mind.
He's yet to play an inning of pro ball. He has no trade value. He won't have serious value until he hits at Portland. Right now he's a throw in in a trade. No reason to do it. Even your "But he might be a total bust!!!" doesn't work because throwing him into a deal because you're afraid he might be a dud doesn't really recoup value. Also, Austin Martin doesn't help your argument. The Jays traded him (and Simeon Richardson) for Jose Berrios after Martin hit at the AA level. Which is what he's saying, in another season Montgomery will have enough value to headline a major trade by himself.
… I believe they also felt a lot of his improvement was based on improved strength and conditioning, and things they were able to work on in the development lab over the offseason. He very much took to the new training. This is why the SP crew were on him quicker than everyone else, the team was saying they were already seeing results.
Is it possible he could regress? Sure, but there’s also a simple progression or work done and results that followed.
The one thing about the Breslow era that has been such a pleasure is how quickly their development program has accelerated in the last year. They’re probably going to lose Monegro to Rule 5, but hopefully the development lab people can help Paez make similar gains in velocity. Because if he could get his fastball into the 93-95 range he’s absolutely a MLB starter.
You have no idea what you are talking about. He is not a "throw in" or without value; he's valued as a borderline Top 100 piece. Recent top draftees have significant value, in the rare instances they're traded. Trea Turner was the centerpiece for the Padres getting Wil Myers, a 24 year old barely a year removed from being the #4 prospect in baseball. Dansby Swanson was the centerpiece for a 24 year old Shelby Miller who had been the #6 overall prospect and had just put up two full seasons of decent MLB performance at 22 and 23. In contrast, the Martin deal was seen as a major "selling low" by the Jays, with the Twins hoping they could get Martin to hit for some semblance of power he'd hinted at in college; he failed. There's a reason his ranking was already in free fall in 2021 with analysts basically all saying "the only thing keeping Martin here is his draft pedigree, he has to hit for power next year". He didn't. Further, keep in mind Berrios was a pending FA when he was traded; Turner got 5 years of Myers, Swanson 4 years of Miller. Martin lost a ton of value simply by debuting and showing the power wasn't there.
TL;DR: I know more about this than you do.
Last edited:
Heck, if Paez could throw 93-95 consistently he could be a top-half of the rotation starter.
I don’t expect Monegro to get picked in Rule 5 or to stick on an MLB roster if he is, but he certainly could, and maybe that’s blind optimism on my part.
Braden Montgomery doesn’t have trade value comparable to the big four, and he’s probably not going to headline a deal for Crochet, but of course he has trade value. He’s a first round pick and a top 100 prospect. The teams that liked him on draft day will still like him. If he hits in Greenville or Portland his value should increase and if he doesn’t hit his value will drop, but it’s not like he has zero value today.
Are you even able to trade a drafted player this soon? Didn’t you use to have to wait a year (although I believe the player could be a PTBNL)? Not sure if that has changed however.
The Nationals received Trea Turner in exchange for Steve Souza and some other guy whose name I’ve forgotten in that deal. So, no, not the centerpiece. Though I’m sure that Tampa wishes that he had been.
Who, as it turned out, was damaged goods. But bravo on finding one example in history. That doesn’t alter the reality that guys don’t really have prime value until teams have confidence that they’re a good bet to perform. In other words, when they successfully make the jump to AA.
It was your example, and a bad one as he literally had hit well at AA before the deal.
I would like to hope, but the reality is that that curve is a 60 grade pitch and a shitty team like Chicago really has nothing to lose by taking him. I pray that you’re right, though. I would so love to see Yordanny pitching for Boston.
In 12 months time he’ll be in AA and be a prime piece of a deal if Boston wants to trade him. Coming off an injury with zero professional performance means that you’re not going to recoup value. There’s really no market in panic trading him.
You're just embarassing yourself at this point, but I'll oblige. Trea Turner was drafted by the Padres, and was the centerpiece of the Padres' package which netted them Myers; Jake Bauers and Joe Ross were the other notable pieces, but both were well behind Turner in the rankings. Turner and Ross both were routed to Washington, as Tampa wanted Souza as a Myers replacement (keep in mind, Souza was the #37 prospect in baseball, coming off a 180 wRC+ campaign in AAA where he was voted best power hitter, best baserunner, best outfield arm) rather than a guy who was just drafted and an arm projected as a backend starter.
As for the Miller deal, these trades are rare...they're aren't other examples. Which you'd know if you were knowledgable about this or did any cursory research instead of bellowing from deep out of your ass. Regardless, it is another example which (as with Turner) illustrates the extremely high value of recent draftees.
As for Martin, you are again showing your ignorance here; Martin's performance was not "hit well"; his performance was considered somewhere between "disappointing" and "bad". He was the #2 prospect in the prior draft, and was showing an IsoP barely above .100. Before he debuted, he was the #19 prospect in baseball. A year later he was #47 with (as I've previously noted) scouts more or less unanimously saying "he has to add power if he's going to be what anyone thought he was pre-draft", although I'd forgotten how he also proved he couldn't handle SS at the pro level which even further reduced his value. He made contact. Every other part of his game degraded, as reflected in his slide down the rankings, a slide that continued when he proved the lack of power was just what he was.
In 12 months, Monty could be a prime piece in AA. Or he could go Jacob Berry. Or Gavin Cross. Or Hunter Bishop. Or Travis Swaggerty. Or Corey Ray. Every one of them a college OF drafted in the Top 10. Ever heard of any of them?
Yes, in a three team trade, Tampa wanted a Wil Myers replacement, which was not Trea Turner. The Nationals had a prospect that fit the bill, so they were looped in so that one prospect could be moved for another. If you're proposing sending out Montgomery in a prospect for prospect trade, then yes, those deals happen. But that's not what you were claiming.
As for the rest prospects bust all the time, which is why sub AA guys don't really have great value. Teams like to see that players have a chance of panning out before they accept them as headliners in deals. And even then it doesn't always work, as one of the key pieces of the Scottish trade showed. When your "headline piece" has zero innings of professional experience, you better be ready to make up in quantity what you're not providing in quality (sort of like the Myers trade which had like ten players involved).
I’d thought similarly, and kind of pooh-poohed the pundits who said that no one who hasn’t reached AA would get picked. (Hunter Noll, whose writing I often quite like even if it’s very optimistic, suggested that keeping him in Greenville was an intentional strategy on the Red Sox’ part to suppress Rule 5 interest in him, and I initially rolled my eyes at that).
But I looked at the picks from the last couple years and it really does seem that teams don’t pick developmental prospects to stash, or guys that haven’t shown modest success in the high minors, anymore. Last year everyone who was picked in Rule 5 had some success in AA at least (and several in AAA).
In 2022 there was one exception (Noah Song, who was sort of sui generis and the ultimate lottery ticket; he didn’t stick with the Phillies anyway), and one mostly-exception (Mason Englert, who reached AA but only for three starts in which he was mostly fine, and he wasn’t as good in High-A as Monegro).
Could it happen? Of course. He has the stuff and performance for a team to think he could be a passable reliever next year and hopefully develop from there. But I’m actually kind of convinced that teams are unlikely to pop guys directly from High-A and stash them, even guys with Monegro’s slider and curve.
Last edited:
View: https://twitter.com/jonmorosi/status/1864282723457663368?s=46&t=0GHHaPVUX26Io0V2HIcS0g
The Cubs have six position players in the top 73 of mlb.com’s current prospect list.
The Cubs have six position players in the top 73 of mlb.com’s current prospect list.
Moving this from the Soto thread. I appreciate the graphics and I think some context is needed for the 2022 and 2023 seasons shown above. The big velocity bumps in 2022 and 2023 were for games in which Crawford was pitching in relief at the beginning of the year. In both years he joined the rotation in June, which lines up with a drop in velocity each year. That being said, it does look like his 4 seam velo dropped a bit during his time as a starter, although it was quite consistent last year, especially considering the big innings jump, and he was really good through the All Star game. (and, not surprisingly, middle/middle fastballs got hammered)
Trading Crawford, plus top end prospects, for Crochet, as has been repeatedly suggested, and then signing a low end free agent to fill out the rotation seems much less attractive then simply signing a good free agent pitcher and keeping Crawford + prospects.
The theory is good, but I think we have to operate in a reality where most of the "good" FA pitchers are at an age where, it seems, the Sox arent giving long deals.
it comes down to the unknowable issue of Crochet’s health/durability. Lots of red flags and he’s going to sign a massive contract.
Which all reinforces the mandate to develop young pitchers. With Houck, Bello, and Crawford, they are pretty well positioned to pay for a big name.
He's had recurring elbow and shoulder injuries dating back to college, and his delivery is apparently risky.
Here's klaw:
I didn’t like Crochet’s delivery just off the video I saw before the 2020 draft (since he pitched only once that spring before the pandemic hit, and that outing wasn’t even announced beforehand), and I have to admit that I still don’t. It’s pretty cross-body, and his arm has a long way to go at the time when his front foot lands. He may get hurt again — not a bold prediction since he’s been hurt several times before.
He has had repeated injuries in college and as a pro, with Tommy John surgery in the spring of 2022 and shoulder and elbow discomfort in 2023, when he threw only 13 innings. Before 2024, the most innings he'd every thrown in a season was 65 as a sophomore in college at Tennessee.
He is massively talented but I'm not convinced he is the right target for a long term contract due to the injury history.
Chris Cotillo
@ChrisCotillo
1m
Continue hearing Red Sox are just on the periphery of Garrett Crochet talks and are not aggressors at all, at least to this point. Cincinnati seen as a real threat to land Crochet. Yankees believed to be in, too.
@ChrisCotillo
1m
Continue hearing Red Sox are just on the periphery of Garrett Crochet talks and are not aggressors at all, at least to this point. Cincinnati seen as a real threat to land Crochet. Yankees believed to be in, too.
I cannot fathom a package the Yankees can give that wouldn’t be topped by multiple competing teams.
Unless most teams have the same concerns some of us do, that Crochet isn't exactly "proven starter" material, as tantalizing as his raw stuff is.
Personally I don't believe any rumors of NY and any SP, Crochet, Fried, Burnes, any of them. Right now NY has 6 SPs (Cole, Rodon, Gil, Schmidt, Stroman, Cortes) and while it's very likely they'll move Stroman no matter what, they'd have to move Nestor also if they brought in anyone new. Not saying that's not possible, but they have multiple position player holes to address, with or without Soto.
Casas offered in trades as reported.... Sox on periphery of Crochet trade..... Have we been working with Seattle and Pittsburgh?
The Dodgers always seem to have an over-full rotation and they keep signing guys like Snell anyway.
I do tend to agree that it's unlikely that the Yankees will be heavily involved with Fried and Burnes as another 9-figure contract in the rotation doesn't make a ton of sense for them. Crochet being a trade and relatively cheap seems like it's more of a possibility. They may be less fazed by the concerns about Crochet's endurance if he's one of six or seven starters on the roster (caveats of someone always seems to get hurt to solve roster issues, of course).
NY is in better shape with youth than some people here seem to think, but I really don't think they have the prospects to spare to move for Crochet as compared to teams like BOS and BAL as they have already traded a flotilla of prospects in the last few years.
