just listened to it. Can confirm it is great stuff but I can also listen to Bannister talk pitching all day.
Red Sox hook Crochet for Kyle Teel, Braden Montgomery, Chase Meidroth and Wikelman Gonzalez
- Thread starter soxhop411
- Start date
By This measure Crochet is the fourth best pitcher in baseball if I am counting correctly.
https://x.com/Brooks_Gate/status/1868507442205892863
https://x.com/Brooks_Gate/status/1868507442205892863
Any measure that focuses on quality over quantity of innings is going to have him way at the top. His 2024 line looks like the combined seasons of two elite closers.
With a 40 IP minumum, the 2024 top 10 in K rate is nine of the better relievers in baseball and Garrett Crochet. Top 20 includes nine more great relievers and Blake Snell. Top 30 is eight more relievers, Paul Skenes, and Chris Sale. You get the idea.
Add another starter and you've added a reliever (Crawford to the pen, in all likelihood). Add another top half of the rotation starter and a RH power bat ...and suddenly the team might well contend.
Teel has/had an interesting pre-game routine
https://www.masslive.com/redsox/2024/12/former-red-sox-catching-prospect-reveals-unusual-naked-pre-game-routine.html
If there's no room for Crawford in the Sox rotation, he should be traded. He ultimately had a league average season, but tied for the league in starts and was top 15 in IP. Those two things are not nothing. He can be improved on, no doubt. Maybe it's his to improve, maybe they get someone else. But I can't imagine that his value to the team as a relief pitcher is greater than his value as a trade piece. (Though I don't really want to see him traded. Before the season, he talked about getting in shape to make every start and go deep(er) in games. He did both. That says something about his approach that indicates to me that he will improve again this year).
I agree with the first sentence. But if he's in the bullpen until the rotation has a hole, he won't be able to fill the hole anyway (unless it happens in April; or unless it's a season-ender for someone, and Crawford gets re-established). It's unfortunate from a pure talent/skill level, I suppose, but real rotation depth for the inevitable turn or 2 or 3 has to come from the Worcester shuttle. Otherwise, there are 2-3 inning starts/bullpen games until the former-reliever-now-starter can go 5 or more.
Totally agree with this. Crawford has a ton of value and still some upside, and relegating him to swingman status kind of tanks it.
We've got a lot of depth for that 6th starter spot, with Priester, Fitts, and Criswell, and potentially Fulmer and Penrod (who they're stretching out as starters). Especially if we've still got Winckowski and Whitlock on the team, who can both handle multiple innings, it's far better to re-allocate Crawford's value in a trade.
The tricky thing of course is that his home run problems would appear to be exacerbated in many other ballparks.
I think it was @nvalvo that suggested we trade him to a marine layer park, which is a good idea, but even Seattle looks rough. Maybe he works in some kind of complicated package deal with the Cardinals for Arenado and/or Sonny Gray?
I want no part of Arenado, but implicit in my previous post is that a package of some kind might be his highest and best use if he has no rotation spot here.
Maybe Kutter Crawford is your inexpensive, high riding fastball, low BB rate……closer? The HR are a red flag, but if I recall from watching him last year, most of them that he gave up were when a hitter was seeing him for 2nd or 3rd time that game. Food for thought?
Same, I don’t either and I think Arenado has a really slow bat at this point. But consolidating the players rumored to be available, I wonder what something like Yoshida (3/$55M) and Crawford (arb1, FA 2029) for Gray (2/$60M) and Arenado (3/$64M) looks like given both teams’ needs. I don’t think I like it and would prefer Contreras over Arenado, but I don’t think [edit: Mozeliak] does that.
Anyway, I like both Crawford more than most here (same for Yoshida) and think he’s a terrific #5 starter. The team spent 3 years stretching him out and it’d be a mistake to make him a swingman/long reliever now.
Last edited:
Minor nitpick, but Bloom isn’t making the decisions until next year. Still Mozeliak.
15 HR were first time facing a batter (677 OPS), 15 were second time (709), 4 were 3rd (720). 25 of the homers he allowed were in the first 3 innings. His OPS allowed by inning is weird
1: 702
2: 575
3: 889
4: 477
5: 836
6: 760
He gave up 8 homers to #3 hitters (978 ops), and none to cleanup hitters (415).
Probably just randomness.
They generally don't do press conferences for trades, do they? If/when there's an extension, there will probably be a press conference. I wouldn't expect one until then.
The whole second half homer problem feels like randomness. What if he gave up 10 HRs instead of 20? That's 10 bad pitches. A lot of his other numbers were about the same: babip, k rate, etc. I'm sure this has been covered before. My guess is the lack of stamina got to him as he blew past his previous innings totals. I wouldn't change anything, and I suspect the Sox have no interest in that either.
I don’t know if it is as simple as a second half problem and hitting a wall though. He was incredible in March/April- 1.35 ERA, 0 HR in 33 IP. 5+ ERA / 2+ HR/9 from May - Oct.
Really bad in May; He was ok in June-July, but the peripherals are weird as heck. 54 1/3 IP, 17 HR, 9 BB, 53 K. 3.98 ERA but a 2.8 HR rate is wild. Lousy in August and September.
I guess he is intriguing because the only issue is the huge amount of homers, just cut that by even a small amount and he could be great.
I think pushing Kutter into a swingman role is fine. It's not about maximizing his value, it's about maximizing the team's value and the depth.
He was a swingman part of the time in 2023 and still ended up throwing 130 innings--that's a ton of innings, and he was pretty good in them. And he wasn't a lock for the rotation coming into last year with Giolito-Bello-Houck-Pivetta-Whitlock-Crawford (and even Winckowski!) all competing for spots, and he still threw 180 innings.
You cannot have enough pitching, IMO. Plenty of teams have done this dance where they transition swingmen back into starting roles. It's not the end of the world, and it's better than bringing up a guy from AAA who you're not sure if you ca ntrust.
And nobody is thinking that in relief he'll be moved to a role where he only throws only 2 innings each time out. He'd just be in waiting in the case that someone goes down (and someone will go down).
He was a swingman part of the time in 2023 and still ended up throwing 130 innings--that's a ton of innings, and he was pretty good in them. And he wasn't a lock for the rotation coming into last year with Giolito-Bello-Houck-Pivetta-Whitlock-Crawford (and even Winckowski!) all competing for spots, and he still threw 180 innings.
You cannot have enough pitching, IMO. Plenty of teams have done this dance where they transition swingmen back into starting roles. It's not the end of the world, and it's better than bringing up a guy from AAA who you're not sure if you ca ntrust.
And nobody is thinking that in relief he'll be moved to a role where he only throws only 2 innings each time out. He'd just be in waiting in the case that someone goes down (and someone will go down).
What does "in waiting" mean? I assume it does not mean "not pitching." But I do assume that he is pitching like a relief pitcher. Sometimes 1 inning, sometimes more. But if they are somehow holding him back from a "normal" relief role because he's a "starter in waiting," then they are essentially down a pitcher.
Yeah that's why they love K rate. He can get guys out, just has to be consistent, which is mental and/or overall body stuff (legs, mechanics). Guys routinely get more consistent as they mature, but not everybody.
Ehhhh... he's not going to develop more consistency with a reduced/irregular role. This is why teams rebuild, so people understand when they give talented but unready guys the reps to figure it out.
Why not? Plenty of guys develop more consistently when they pitch less.
My point is only that if we do bring in a guy like Flaherty or Buehler, Kutter could substantially extend our bullpen until someone gets hurt, just as moving Whitlock there will.
No definitely not keeping him from relieving. Just ready to ramp up if someone goes down.
This is just a hypothetical anyways. Having six pitchers ready to go (like we did last year) is best practice because 2 or even 3 of them might go down.
I agree. I think the only real issue here is which 6-8. I think someone with Crawford's ability, if not 1 of 5, could be of more use *to the Sox* if he's not on the Sox
Last edited:
Agreed, though at some point if we want him to be a full time rotation guy we have to get his innings up again. But maybe they feel like he won't be able to level up to that threshold? Definitely one of the key questions (until the injuries start and then it's all hands on deck).
Yeah, I mean I think the question is if it's the best thing for the team next year. If he wins the job and is the best option, so be it. But he seemed to benefit a lot from being able to dial his fastball up in shortened appearances in 2023.
I think he could still level up, to be clear, if he cut the HR rate. And he'll probably get 25 starts next year no matter what, and probably 30 unless they really add someone who is obviously better than he is.
Last edited:
The Red Sox had 56 Quality Starts last year. A top-notch swing/long man like Crawford would throw plenty of (potentially high leverage) innings out of the pen in the 5th, 6th & 7th innings. If they bring back Pivetta, it would set up a nice competition for #5.
If the Sox starters get into the 6th without the need for Crawford's multiple innings, that will be a good problem.
If the TOP5 SPs stay healthy, that will also be a good problem.
As pitching injuries pile up across MLB, there should be an increase in trade demand for SP in April-August. The Sox can always trade Crawford in the middle of the season to address a position of need (while elevating a AAA starter to long man)
My pet peeve, but the Sox should ADD as much controllable SP depth in the offseason as possible.
Priester, Fitts, Criswell, Sandlin, Penrod, Dobbins at AAA is solid, but can always use more
This strikes me as a tremendously bad idea.
Closers are inherently less valuable than starters. He’s never been anything close to a closer, I don’t think his audition should be during the Red Sox season. He’s also not really known as a “stuff” guy.
No.
A ton of great tidbits in this one from Bannister, including:
- The fastball is the hardest pitch on the arm, not breaking stuff.
- Splitters are both the most effective and least used MLB pitch, will probably see more of these in the next couple years.
- Fun discussion of the screwball and how it's mostly been replaced by designed changeups.
- You can add velo or work on sequencing, but the ability to spin the ball is mostly an inherent talent. Makes me think of Crawford. FWIW, Crochet's 4-seam is 95th percentile in spin rate.
- They wanted to limit Crochet to the bullpen in the second half but he insisted on continuing to follow a starter's schedule.
- They can get pretty specific with how they shape pitches in the lab, like for Crochet's new 2-seamer
- In general, very high on Crochet's ability to be a top 5 starter next year.
I really enjoy these Pitcher List videos breaking down arsenal and sequencing. Here's Crochet's, though it seems like it was made before the addition of the 2-seamer.
View: https://youtu.be/o5efJdWYgeU?si=Lls4C1NQjPj67oh5
JMHO, I think we gave up way too much for Crochet and he is not comparable to Sale. He has high upside but is injury prone and doesn't have a long track record. We gave up the #25 and #54 prospects (BA) and a couple lower-level prospects, which is almost as much as we gave up acquiring Sale.
Sale was very durable and a perennial cy young candidate (top-6 six years in a row before the trade). We gave up the #1 and #30 prospects (BA), plus a couple lower-level prospects. Of course, Kopech and Moncada didn't fulfill their promise and Sale met expectations (until we extended him).
Hope it works out for us this time but I'm not as optimistic as I was about Sale at the time.
Sale was very durable and a perennial cy young candidate (top-6 six years in a row before the trade). We gave up the #1 and #30 prospects (BA), plus a couple lower-level prospects. Of course, Kopech and Moncada didn't fulfill their promise and Sale met expectations (until we extended him).
Hope it works out for us this time but I'm not as optimistic as I was about Sale at the time.
The top piece in this trade is comparable to the second piece in the other trade. That seems very different, not “almost as much.
Crawford and Crochet throw strikes at the same rate: 68%. Bello is 63%. That's like 4 pitches a start.
But yes, it *seems* like so much more.
Well, you're technically correct, but not really in a meaningful way. Crawford gave up 4 HRs when seeing a guy for the 3rd time in a game. He gave up 15 the first time through the order, and 15 when seeing someone a second time.
1st time: 15 in 272 ABs
2nd time: 15 in 263 ABs
3rd time: 4 in 154 ABs
So, rate wise, he did give up more the 2nd time around. But he gave up fewer the 2nd and 3rd time through combined.
Crawford really is enigmatic. So many weird stats not lining up with expected outcomes. I’m not sure which would surprise me more- he’s garbage- 1-6 with a 6.50 ERA in early June and gets bumped from the rotation (wherever he is) or finishes the season around 15 wins, 3.50ERA
Yoan Moncada was the top prospect in baseball with a 70 FV rating. As @nvalvo pointed out, Kopech was also pretty highly rated, about equal to where Teel is now.
Moncada also had a big season in 2019 but was derailed by injuries after that.
Roughly 5yrs/$105M would be fair
The Sox pay ~$90M for 3 FA years
and GC gets to sign a massive deal at 30 (if he is that TOP5 pitcher).
We'll see how it plays out, but I'm not concerned. Suspect the Sox knew what GC/CAA wanted before trading 4 prospects.
If anyone with a globe sub wants to start their morning with pants off:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/01/02/sports/garrett-crochet-boston-red-sox/
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/01/02/sports/garrett-crochet-boston-red-sox/
No Globe sub, but I'm hoping that your "pants off" is in reference to the extension that everyone said was going to happen.
“Pants off” and “extension”… now if those two things don’t go together like peanut butter and jelly.
I'm looking forward to watching him pitch too, but it'll be disappointing if it's only for 2 years.