Article: The Red Sox Have Begun Extension Talks With Garrett Crochet

[moonslav59]

11 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

What about the threat of injury?

If Crochet doesn't sign an extension and then gets hurts in 2025, his career earnings in baseball might be capped at around $10 million.

Meanwhile, $150 million is more than he could ever spend.

I mentioned that risk on an earlier post, and it is a major concern, especially a career ending one, or one where he never repeats 2024, again.

All 6-8 year deals are an enormous risk. All have a risk of injury- some more than other.

Crochet has the added risk of not having a long stretch of success or proven durability. I fully understand this and worry, like all of us. I can understand all that don't want to give a ton of guaranteed money to him, but IMO, I'd rather put my risk on a guy who will be 27 when the extension kicks in vs 30-32, like most FAs.

Burnes and Fried are enormous risks, They are both proven. They both have proven durability. They both are on their way out of prime, before the halfway point of their contract. Crochet's 6 year extension will be almost entirely within prime. He would start the 6th year at age 32. To me, that adds the value.

 

[Bellhorn04]

Just now, moonslav59 said:

I mentioned that risk on an earlier post, and it is a major concern, especially a career ending one, or one where he never repeats 2024, again.

All 6-8 year deals are an enormous risk. All have a risk of injury- some more than other.

Crochet has the added risk of not having a long stretch of success or proven durability. I fully understand this and worry, like all of us. I can understand all that don't want to give a ton of guaranteed money to him, but IMO, I'd rather put my risk on a guy who will be 27 when the extension kicks in vs 30-32, like most FAs.

Burnes and Fried are enormous risks, They are both proven. They both have proven durability. They both are on their way out of prime, before the halfway point of their contract. Crochet's 6 year extension will be almost entirely within prime. He would start the 6th year at age 32. To me, that adds the value.

 

But I was talking about the threat of injury from Crochet's end of it, if he doesn't sign an extension.  That risk is huge too, but it's his risk.

The risks on either side are why there has to be a trade-off reflected in the terms.

[Bellhorn04]

How about this:

4 years including 2025 and 2026, $125 million (or so), no opt out. 

He can become a free agent at 29.  

[Old Red]

49 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

How about this:

4 years including 2025 and 2026, $125 million (or so), no opt out. 

He can become a free agent at 29.  

Wow! Very generous offer if you’re counting 2025, and 2026, which if his arb years played out with his $3.5M this year, and next year maybe $10M-$15M with a CY Young type season that leaves $100M, or so for his last two years, so I’ll say it again. WOW!

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

How about this:

4 years including 2025 and 2026, $125 million (or so), no opt out. 

He can become a free agent at 29.  

That's like $52M a year for the two extra years.

I'd rather offer $200M/8 (including buying out arb years,) which comes to about $180M/6 for the extended years or $30M x 6 years.

You know, there is also a chance he gets hurt but not like Sale- all but one year.

Maybe he's only hurt for 2027 and 2028.

 

[moonslav59]

44 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

But I was talking about the threat of injury from Crochet's end of it, if he doesn't sign an extension.  That risk is huge too, but it's his risk.

The risks on either side are why there has to be a trade-off reflected in the terms.

Yes, the threat of injury is why he's not going to get an extension at $35-40M a year, 2 years before he would lose the team control at arb prices.

It's the main reason he'd sign, now.

Every pitcher must worry a major injury could ruin his career and severely cut into his ability to make big money.

It's not easy weighing all the risks and rewards to come up with a number that Crochet would agree to.

[Randy Red Sox]

On 1/9/2025 at 7:07 AM, Bellhorn04 said:

Personally I'm not a big fan of opt-outs.  They kind of hang over the contract almost from the get-go.   

opt outs should go BOTH ways

[Duran Is The Man]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

That's like $52M a year for the two extra years.

I'd rather offer $200M/8 (including buying out arb years,) which comes to about $180M/6 for the extended years or $30M x 6 years.

You know, there is also a chance he gets hurt but not like Sale- all but one year.

Maybe he's only hurt for 2027 and 2028.

 

yeah, Bell's offer is far too high and your's is more than fair. there's also a chance he sucks too. after all, he doesn't have an extensive history of success. 

[moonslav59]

7 minutes ago, Randy Red Sox said:

opt outs should go BOTH ways

I think everyone agrees.

It gets tough when a player insists on one. I assume Bogey did. JD did. Price did.

My priority is based on thinking Crochet is the real deal and is so young. I want to get him for as many years into prime as possible without an absurd overpay. It's risky as hell, due to his health and lack of a long record of success and durability, but we just gave up a lot to roll the dice on him. It seems weird that now, we second guess him and try to hedge our bets against the worst that might happen.

We can't go absurd on making sure we extend him, at any cost, but we chose this guy as "our guy." We have to land him, longterm. If it gets absurd or he refuses fair offer, the next priority is get him to commit to as many years before any opt out- again without going absurd with dollars.

 

[moonslav59]

26 minutes ago, Duran Is The Man said:

yeah, Bell's offer is far too high and your's is more than fair. there's also a chance he sucks too. after all, he doesn't have an extensive history of success. 

Yes. My offer is a big risk and doubles down on the chance it turns into a colossal bust. I get the risk.

We made the trade, due mainly to his age and skillset. We rolled the dice on health and durability. If he bolts after two, it was a bad trade. We gotta give more to get him to say yes- and not $52M x 2.

[vjcsmoke]

On 1/9/2025 at 8:32 AM, moonslav59 said:

I hope they can get a deal done, even if forced to include opt-outs.

Hopefully they can push the opt out until year 4 of say a 7 or 8 year deal.

If they really believe in Crochett they should lock him up long term.

Arbitration gets you a couple of cheap years, but the price will drive up even more as that period ends.

[Bellhorn04]

13 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

That's like $52M a year for the two extra years.

I'd rather offer $200M/8 (including buying out arb years,) which comes to about $180M/6 for the extended years or $30M x 6 years.

You know, there is also a chance he gets hurt but not like Sale- all but one year.

Maybe he's only hurt for 2027 and 2028.

 

OK, the $125 number is probably too high.

I'm just thinking Crochet might really like the idea of a 4 year deal that sets him for life but also gets him to free agency at age 29.

And $125 while an overpay is obviously less risky than $200.  

Maybe a 5 year deal would work.

There is no perfect deal.  There's going to be high cost and high risk no matter what.

We're always talking about 7-8 year deals for pitchers being too long.

I'd prefer a shorter deal with no opt-outs than a 7 year deal with opt-outs.

But to get Crochet's side to agree to a shorter deal the money has to be compelling.

[Bellhorn04]

5 years including 2025 and 2026 - $145 million - no opt outs - incentives tossed in.

If anyone complains that $130 is too much for those 3 extra years they're thinking too much like JH! 

[Old Red]

7 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

5 years including 2025 and 2026 - $145 million - no opt outs - incentives tossed in.

If anyone complains that $130 is too much for those 3 extra years they're thinking too much like JH. 

$130M for three extra years? $40M+? 🙈🤭

[Bellhorn04]

Just now, Old Red said:

$130M for three extra years? $40M+? 🙈🤭

Cheapskate! 

[Old Red]

12 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Cheapskate! 

Any comps out there for someone  for his age, his little accomplishments at this point in his career? He’s not Sale at his age, or even Skubal at this point.

[Bellhorn04]

1 minute ago, Old Red said:

Any comps out there for someone  for his age, his little accomplishments at this point in his career? He’s not Sale at his age, or even Skubal at this point.

Yeah, I don't think there are any great comps and that's why it's tricky.

But we know the Sox are very high on him to give up what they did.  Losing him after 2 years would not be a good outcome.  They have to get a deal done.

I think we might see a deal that's a little different from the "standard" ones here. 

[moonslav59]

8 hours ago, vjcsmoke said:

Hopefully they can push the opt out until year 4 of say a 7 or 8 year deal.

If they really believe in Crochett they should lock him up long term.

Arbitration gets you a couple of cheap years, but the price will drive up even more as that period ends.

He will probably ask for an opt out after 2027 (3rd year) and maybe we end up having to settle on after 2028 (year 4.)

Ideally, we just pay him a little more to give up on the opt-out demands, assuming he does that. If there was ever a player to want and need an opt out, he fits the profile.

[Bellhorn04]

15 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

He will probably ask for an opt out after 2027 (3rd year) and maybe we end up having to settle on after 2028 (year 4.)

Ideally, we just pay him a little more to give up on the opt-out demands, assuming he does that. If there was ever a player to want and need an opt out, he fits the profile.

If you give him a hefty 4 year contract with no opt-out, he's a rich man and a free agent at 29.  That would be a great compromise for each side IMHO.  Not that I expect this is what happens.  It's just something to jabber about.

[moonslav59]

40 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

If you give him a hefty 4 year contract with no opt-out, he's a rich man and a free agent at 29.  That would be a great compromise for each side IMHO.  Not that I expect this is what happens.  It's just something to jabber about.

We gotta shoot for longer, but yes, this type of deal make sense to Crochet. I guess the term "hefty" is what is debatable. Giving him $52M x 2 for those last 2 years, as you suggested)  is too much, IMO. Maybe $70M/2 for the two added year, plus the $20M expected in arbs, so $90M/4 or $94 (starting now) might be acceptable to both sides.

I'd try like hell to lock him up through prime. It is a major reason we got him in the first place, IMO. We gave up a lot due to his age and upside. was it worth trading 3 top 8 prospects for 2 arb years and a major overpay on 2 more years?

Would $40M/yr for 4 added years be better? ($160M + $20M for 2 arb years= $180M/6) He becomes a FA at age 31.

I still think $200M/8, counting the 2 arb years might be best for both sides, but that number might have to include an opt out. If the opt out was after year 4 or 5, it's a better offer for the Sox than yours. If the op out is after 3, I'm not so sure it's a good deal for the Sox, but it's better than no deal, and that was my original point.

No deal vs an early opt out deal.

[Bellhorn04]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

I still think $200M/8, counting the 2 arb years might be best for both sides, but that number might have to include an opt out. If the opt out was after year 4 or 5, it's a better offer for the Sox than yours. If the op out is after 3, I'm not so sure it's a good deal for the Sox, but it's better than no deal, and that was my original point.

No deal vs an early opt out deal.

I'll still take:

a) no deal

over

b) a long term deal with an opt out after 2027.

With b you're opening yourself up to 2 different risks: 1) the albatross risk, and 2) the risk the player does well in 2025-2027 but opts out because his price has gone way up.

Compared to that, a is not such a bad deal.  You're getting Crochet for 2 years for 15 million, and you can wait and see how he does.  His price may go way up but it also may go down.  And you've still got all the money you didn't sink into that long term contract.  

It would suck giving up so much talent if we only have Crochet for 2 years, but there really are worse things.

 

[dgalehouse]

It might be prudent to see how he does before giving him an extension .

[Old Red]

10 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

It might be prudent to see how he does before giving him an extension .

That would be the smart thing to do , but then again the price could go either way too.

[moonslav59]

5 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I'll still take:

a) no deal

over

b) a long term deal with an opt out after 2027.

With b you're opening yourself up to 2 different risks: 1) the albatross risk, and 2) the risk the player does well in 2025-2027 but opts out because his price has gone way up.

 

If he does well. it means we get one more good season out of him (2027.)

I realize the long term risk is major, but this is not price an a 7 year deal at age 30. It's a 7 year deal to guy who starts at age 25. Even if gets hurt and misses 1.5 years, he could still shine afterwards, as his deal runs out the year he is 30 turning 31.

If he just plain sucks or underperforms, then yes, I made a bad situation way worse, but it's no different than signing Fried to 6-8 years.

Your offer of $52M x 2 as a 2 year extension is a big risk, too, if he underperforms or gets hurt, early. You are willing to risk $105M/2 but not $160M/6. That's $55M/4 more. which could be a great deal, if he is good and $55M more lost, if not, and he refuses the opt out.

I'd risk $55M to get one or two more years before an opt out. You are already paying him about $4250M more for those 2 years than my suggested offer.

My offer: $20M over 2 arb years then $160M/5 ($32M x 5) after with a forced optout after 2017 vs extension.

Your is $20M over 2 then $105M/2 with no opt out. 

My offer costs $733M less than yours, if he does not opt out after 3 years, but 1 less year. My offer would cost $41M less than yours after 4 years, assuming he did not opt out, but we'd be on the hook for 3 more years at $96M.

I'm not assuming a major injury or even a decline means it will be a total wash out of $96M.

Can you tell me why he deserves $52.5M x 2 for year 3 & 4, before we even play 2025? He could get hurt in 2027 and we get nothing for $105M. Under my deal, he could get hurt for any 2 years of the 5 year extension and we pay $160M for 3 years not 5, which comes to your AAV. of $52.5M

 

[moonslav59]

11 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

It might be prudent to see how he does before giving him an extension .

Famous last words. If he does great, he's not going to extend, or he'll want the world plus the moon.

The reason he'd sign for less money now, is that his future is more unknown and the injury risk.

[moonslav59]

9 minutes ago, Old Red said:

That would be the smart thing to do , but then again the price could go either way too.

It goes up, if he sucks or gets hurt in 2025?

[Old Red]

24 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I'll still take:

a) no deal

over

b) a long term deal with an opt out after 2027.

With b you're opening yourself up to 2 different risks: 1) the albatross risk, and 2) the risk the player does well in 2025-2027 but opts out because his price has gone way up.

Compared to that, a is not such a bad deal.  You're getting Crochet for 2 years for 15 million, and you can wait and see how he does.  His price may go way up but it also may go down.  And you've still got all the money you didn't sink into that long term contract.  

It would suck giving up so much talent if we only have Crochet for 2 years, but there really are worse things.

 

I’m sure Brez, and his minions have been working day, and night on this. I agree on A.

[moonslav59]

A no extension makes the trade look like a loss, to me. 

I know it depends on what we get for 2 years of Crochet at a low cost vs how well the prospects do over the next 6-7 years.

What is Crochet worth for 6 years, starting in 2027?

Why is rolling the dice on guessing that worth and riskier than guessing Fried's production value from ages 31 to 38? Sure, he is a much more proven commodity, right now, and Crochet's project value is way more speculative, but how many 31 year old pitchers give 7+ years work out well? Why would Fried have been a better risk?

It might have cost us $220M/8 to get him, but my $160M/6 offer seems too risky for you guys.

Either Crochet is good, or he is not. An injury could hurt is value, but he would not be a 33 or 34 year old pitcher trying to come back from a major injury or surgery. He's by 27 or 28.

I'm not saying you guys are wrong, but I'd roll the dice with a younger pitcher. I'd give him more than $160M/6, if he gave up on any opt outs before age 30. I might even offer close to Fried's deal starting at age 27 (2027), instead of Fried's deal starting at 31. Maybe $200M/8 gets it done, (actually $220M/10 counting buying out the 2 arb years at $20M/2.) That's an AAV of $22M for 10 years with no opt outs.

You would say no?

[Old Red]

8 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

A no extension makes the trade look like a loss, to me. 

I know it depends on what we get for 2 years of Crochet at a low cost vs how well the prospects do over the next 6-7 years.

What is Crochet worth for 6 years, starting in 2027?

Why is rolling the dice on guessing that worth and riskier than guessing Fried's production value from ages 31 to 38? Sure, he is a much more proven commodity, right now, and Crochet's project value is way more speculative, but how many 31 year old pitchers give 7+ years work out well? Why would Fried have been a better risk?

It might have cost us $220M/8 to get him, but my $160M/6 offer seems too risky for you guys.

Either Crochet is good, or he is not. An injury could hurt is value, but he would not be a 33 or 34 year old pitcher trying to come back from a major injury or surgery. He's by 27 or 28.

I'm not saying you guys are wrong, but I'd roll the dice with a younger pitcher. I'd give him more than $160M/6, if he gave up on any opt outs before age 30. I might even offer close to Fried's deal starting at age 27 (2027), instead of Fried's deal starting at 31. Maybe $200M/8 gets it done, (actually $220M/10 counting buying out the 2 arb years at $20M/2.) That's an AAV of $22M for 10 years with no opt outs.

You would say no?

Two things for me. One is the way the injury juju has affected the Red Sox the past few years. Sale leaves, and he’s injury free pretty much all season. Two is that Cro Man is so untested with only this past season pitching over 100 innings. I know the stuff is there, but I would want to see more of a track record before I dished out a big long term contract. Pitching in Chicago is a lot different than in Boston too. Yes we gave up some suspects, but like I’ve always said suspects aren’t worth anything until they produce in a Red Sox uniform, or are traded for someone who does. However it works out I don’t see any long term contract without an opt-out attached.

[notin]

7 hours ago, Old Red said:

Any comps out there for someone  for his age, his little accomplishments at this point in his career? He’s not Sale at his age, or even Skubal at this point.

Freddy Peralta?

 

Not so sure the $15mill contract is going to do it…