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

[Hugh2]

1 minute ago, Bellhorn04 said:

You're talking about early extensions.

There are also the "one year away" extensions that can be very large dollars such as the one we didn't give to Betts.

And of course Crochet's would be a "two years away" extension.

Which is something inbetween

 

In my very next post I said "Ideally in an extension you're overpaying for a guy during the arb years, especially pre-arb years (which doesn't apply here) but you're saving money in later years."

[Bellhorn04]

Crochet is a very interesting case for sure.

The old schoolers (and notin seems to be an old schooler money-wise) think it's nuts to give Crochet a $150 million+ deal without seeing more of him.

If the Sox do the wait and see thing, there's no predicting how it will turn out.  If Crochet has a huge season his price goes way up and if he has a bad season it could go way down. 

Crochet could just say screw it, play out the two years with no extension - bet on himself. 

The wait and see thing opens the risk of a stud starter walking away from us after 2 years.  And he'll only be 27 when he does.  Possibly lined up for a $300 million payday.

 

[Hugh2]

1 minute ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Crochet is a very interesting case for sure.

The old schoolers (and notin seems to be an old schooler money-wise) think it's nuts to give Crochet a $150 million+ deal without seeing more of him.

If the Sox do the wait and see thing, there's no predicting how it will turn out.  If Crochet has a huge season his price goes way up and if he has a bad season it could go way down. 

If extension talks break down Crochet could just say screw it, play out the two years with no extension - bet on himself. 

The wait and see thing opens the risk of a stud starter walking away from us after 2 years.

 

Actually it's very easy to predict how it will turn out. 

He pitches like an ACE, top 5 Cy Young and his price tag doubles. 

Or he falls off a cliff, gets injured.  In which case the price tag either significantly drops, or more likely he decides to go to FA and use the last year to rebuild his value again. 

[moonslav59]

48 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Ok, he can be a serviceable 3. 

You think that is is max ceiling?

(I'm not disagreeing- just wondering why.)

[Bellhorn04]

Just now, Hugh2 said:

Actually it's very easy to predict how it will turn out. 

He pitches like an ACE, top 5 Cy Young and his price tag doubles. 

Or he falls off a cliff, gets injured.  In which case the price tag either significantly drops, or more likely he decides to go to FA and use the last year to rebuild his value again. 

It's not easy to predict which of those two will happen.  He might also be decent but short of expectations.  Or pitch great but get hurt toward the end of the year.

There are a plethora of scenarios.  

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

You think that is is max ceiling?

(I'm not disagreeing- just wondering why.)

Sox Prospects said: Ceiling of a number two starter or high-end number three.  

[moonslav59]

39 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

I really don't disagree with anything you guys are saying, my oc was more geared to the point OR made earlier. 

Ideally in an extension you're overpaying for a guy during the arb years, especially pre-arb years (which doesn't apply here) but you're saving money in later years.  

Given the Sox payroll status, and seemingly staying under this year, it's 100% logical and the right move to make to use that cap space THIS year for extensions.  You can make them, stay under the cap and possibly be in a better position 3-5 years down the line because of this. 

This is how I see it, and sometimes giving a relatively "lower paid" arb guy more money up front, than he would have made in arbs, will get him to sign for less in the latter part of the contract. The AAV becomes lower, which can help going forward, if we ever need a little budget wiggle room.

Unless we sign Bregman or take on Arenado's full contact, we can afford his contract, this year, and stay under the tax line, and then have a lower tax line over the rest of his time, here- in theory.

Waiting makes sense, only if he gets hurt or regresses. I guess with our track record on picking players to add, that makes some sense, but to me, go with the 25 year old and cross your fingers.

[Old Red]

12 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Actually it's very easy to predict how it will turn out. 

He pitches like an ACE, top 5 Cy Young and his price tag doubles. 

Or he falls off a cliff, gets injured.  In which case the price tag either significantly drops, or more likely he decides to go to FA and use the last year to rebuild his value again. 

What’s not easy to predict is what the Red Sox will offer.

[Hugh2]

Just now, Old Red said:

What’s not easy to predict is what the Red Sox will offer.

Well we will find out one way sooner or later. 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

1 minute ago, Old Red said:

What’s not easy to predict is what the Red Sox will offer.

It's easy to predict the Sox will offer something less than market value.

A contract worth guaranteed millions is still hard to turn down for young athletes, especially for pitchers, who are always a tendon or ligament away from Uber driving with one hand.

But there are definitely guys who will bet on themselves. A decade ago Scherzer turned down an extension for like $160 million -- which seemed like a huge risk... Then he wound up signing for $210 million, which now doesn't look like that much more, but is still a 30% increase.

 

[Bellhorn04]

44 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

It's easy to predict the Sox will offer something less than market value.

A contract worth guaranteed millions is still hard to turn down for young athletes, especially for pitchers, who are always a tendon or ligament away from Uber driving with one hand.

But there are definitely guys who will bet on themselves. A decade ago Scherzer turned down an extension for like $160 million -- which seemed like a huge risk... Then he wound up signing for $210 million, which now doesn't look like that much more, but is still a 30% increase.

 

Scherzer is a good example of the 'bet on yourself' mentality.  That was Dave D. he turned down.  The Tigers were reportedly very surprised and pissed he turned it down.  I think it was 6/144 IIRC.

And Juan Soto of course famously turned down 440 million.  That worked out OK for him too!

We shouldn't underestimate the cojones some of these guys have.

[moonslav59]

9 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Scherzer is a good example of the 'bet on yourself' mentality.  That was Dave D. he turned down.  The Tigers were reportedly very surprised and pissed he turned it down.  I think it was 6/144 IIRC.

And Juan Soto of course famously turned down 440 million.  That worked out OK for him too!

We shouldn't underestimate the cojones some of these guys have.

Those two did have longer histories of success, as did Betts and others. Crochet is unique, and it's hard to know what he's thinking and what his agent is telling him about his future value.

[Bellhorn04]

4 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Those two did have longer histories of success, as did Betts and others.

True but the risk of a catastrophic injury is always there, for any player.  Your payday could be gone in a nanosecond.    

[notin]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Crochet is a very interesting case for sure.

The old schoolers (and notin seems to be an old schooler money-wise) think it's nuts to give Crochet a $150 million+ deal without seeing more of him.

If the Sox do the wait and see thing, there's no predicting how it will turn out.  If Crochet has a huge season his price goes way up and if he has a bad season it could go way down. 

Crochet could just say screw it, play out the two years with no extension - bet on himself. 

The wait and see thing opens the risk of a stud starter walking away from us after 2 years.  And he'll only be 27 when he does.  Possibly lined up for a $300 million payday.

 

I don’t think it’s a matter of seeing more of him. I think it’s a matter of mitigating risk in terms of years.  I think 6 years is the absolute maximum, and a 3-5 year extension is more likely.  (I’m assuming 2025 is already taken care of, so everything starts in 2026.)

I don’t see how what he would earn in free agency is relevant; the entire point is to pay him less and Crochet’s goal is to get earlier security.   And as Crochet has openly stated he wants an extension, I would guess these free agent prices won’t ever come up beyond this thread.   The Sox aren’t desperate here because of what they traded to get him; it was fair compensation for 2 years of an elite talent.  Crochet likely isn’t desperate either, but again, has expressed willingness, which could mean he knows he won’t be getting paid like a free agent.

I think they get him extended before opening day, and it will be in the 3-5 year range.  Money is tough to determine; I don’t know what Crochet will settle for.  But I would throw out a range in the $22-25mill AAV, presumably with the AAV going down as the years went up.  I am not going to speculate on team options, but they are more likely than opt outs, because it’s the Sox looking for protection whereas Crochet should be looking for security.  If the Sox added one or two very high AAV team options, it might make sense for both sides.  I’m talking $26-30mill AAV team option(s).

 

[moonslav59]

13 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

True but the risk of a catastrophic injury is always there, for any player.  Your payday could be gone in a nanosecond.    

Agreed, but a TJS at age 33 or 34 for Burnes or Fried, seems more dangerous, in terms of expecting very little, if anything, afterwards, than if Crochet has another major injury at age 27 or 28. We could still salvage some value, years 6-8.

[notin]

14 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

True but the risk of a catastrophic injury is always there, for any player.  Your payday could be gone in a nanosecond.    

It’s a much higher risk for pitchers.  And even greater for pitchers who have already had one TJ surgery…

[moonslav59]

1 minute ago, notin said:

 

I don’t see how what he would earn in free agency is relevant; the entire point is to pay him less and Crochet’s goal is to get earlier security.  

 

I am doing exactly this. I'd say his current FA market price (if he was 27) might be $28M x 8. I'm offeri ng an extension at $20M x 6, maybe up to $25M x 7.

It is LESS!

[notin]

1 minute ago, moonslav59 said:

Agreed, but a TJS at age 33 or 34 for Burnes or Fried, seems more dangerous, in terms of expecting very little, if anything, afterwards, than if Crochet has another major injury at age 27 or 28. We could still salvage some value, years 6-8.

Yes because the Red Sox love waiting 4-5 years for pitchers with 8 figure AAVs to return to form. Just ask Chris Sale…

[notin]

Just now, moonslav59 said:

I am doing exactly this. I'd say his current FA market price (if he was 27) might be $28M x 8. I'm offeri ng an extension at $20M x 6, maybe up to $25M x 7.

It is LESS!

And how much guaranteed?

[moonslav59]

17 minutes ago, notin said:

And how much guaranteed?

All of it, unless we can talk him into team options with buy-outs.

I fully realize, he could not do so great in the next 2 years, and I'd have egg on my face, and maybe he will take less than what I'm putting out here, but I'm thinking the highest I'd go, and I still think it is less than he'd get, if a teams could sign him right now, as a FA, but with the contract starting in 2027.

Look what Yamo got, and he had no MLB experience. It's more about age and skill level vs risk, and I think younger players have a better chance at bouncing back from injury or a couple down years than a 30-32 year SP'er signing for 7-8 years.

Maybe he takes $120/6 plus $20M for the 2 arb years ($140M/8.) Maybe he won't go past 4-5 years, in hopes of a mega payday, later. I'm just saying I'd try to lock him up until age 30-31.

Go prime not post-prime.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Crochet was an All-Star last year. He agreed to a salary of $3.8 million for this year. But what's the price for an All-Star starter?

His AL teammates: Corin Burnes $32M, Seth Lugo $15M, Tyler Anderson $13M, Skubal $10.15M... Houck $3.95M... and Cole Ragans $800,000.

Of course, Buehler will make $21.5M, Giolito another $19M, and Bello $52.8M through 2030 -- when he will top out at $21M (which could increase to $33M if he achieves incentives).

For a staff ace in his prime, an AAV at around $25M or $125M for five years seems fair. So expect the Red Sox to offer Crochet around five for $78M...

"Look," they'll tell him, "that's 50 percent more than we gave Bello!"

[moonslav59]

24 minutes ago, notin said:

Yes because the Red Sox love waiting 4-5 years for pitchers with 8 figure AAVs to return to form. Just ask Chris Sale…

He is the exact case to make my point. Guys over 30-31 don't bounce back and give a lot of value after an injury. Freakishly, he did give 1 Cy Young season under the years of that extension, but his overall value was a big dud.

If Crochet has a major injury, I like his chances of still giving some value, afterwards much more than if Burnes or Fried get hurt year 1, 2 or 3.

I've said over and over, this is major risk and gamble. Signing Fried and Burnes has major risks, too. They also have an almost certain age-related decline projected.

[Bellhorn04]

40 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Agreed, but a TJS at age 33 or 34 for Burnes or Fried, seems more dangerous, in terms of expecting very little, if anything, afterwards, than if Crochet has another major injury at age 27 or 28. We could still salvage some value, years 6-8.

I was talking about the risk from Crochet's end.  

[mvp 78]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

You're talking about early extensions.

There are also the "one year away" extensions that can be very large dollars such as the one we didn't give to Betts.

And of course Crochet's would be a "two years away" extension.

I'm not sure there is much of a difference between a one year and a two year extension. Also, Bello is set to make 19 and 20M post ARB years. To think Crochet would make anywhere less than that in 2027 and beyond (in an extension) would be ridiculous. 

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

True but the risk of a catastrophic injury is always there, for any player.  Your payday could be gone in a nanosecond.    

Probably higher for a pitcher, but a hitter could at least see diminished production due to an injury.

[Bellhorn04]

49 minutes ago, notin said:

I don’t see how what he would earn in free agency is relevant; the entire point is to pay him less and Crochet’s goal is to get earlier security.

I think it's absolutely relevant.  

Scherzer turned down 144 million because he thought he could get more than that when he hit free agency.  

If he thought he'd get less than that he wouldn't have turned it down.

The player is deciding between the extension offer and the projected free agent payday and weighing the risk factor into the equation.

That projected payday is a fundamental component of the equation.

[Bellhorn04]

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

Probably higher for a pitcher, but a hitter could at least see diminished production due to an injury.

We've seen what's happened with Trout.  His career has been totally derailed.  

[mvp 78]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

You think that is is max ceiling?

(I'm not disagreeing- just wondering why.)

Max ceiling? Hard to say. Right now, he's a 3rd starter max unless he really figures it out. At best he's a #2 if he learns control and can extend his great stretches out during the season and limit the "big innings" that we see in almost every game. 

"Stuff" wise, he's not a TOTR guy at all. If he's a 2, it's in the vein of Porcello.

[mvp 78]

Just now, Bellhorn04 said:

We've seen what's happened with Trout.  His career has been totally derailed.  

Sure, but we've seen many more pitchers completely lose it when compared to hitters. Trout seems to be a very rare case.

[moonslav59]

37 minutes ago, notin said:

Yes because the Red Sox love waiting 4-5 years for pitchers with 8 figure AAVs to return to form. Just ask Chris Sale…

I'm not saying expect it to happen, but to me, gambling on a 25 year old is 10 times better than gambling on a 30-32 year old for 7-8 years.

We could be pissed after just one year. I get it. Really, I do. 

We could be upset 3-4 years into a 7 year deal, like with Price.

We could be pissed 1-3 years into an extension, like Sale's, then get doubly pissed when he wins a Cy Young, they year we finally give up on him, once and for all. The risk is always there. I like the Crochet risk more than the Burnes, Fried, Price, Sale and many others' risk.

You don't. That is fine and understandable, but I'm not sure why you'd have been happier signing Fried or Burnes than the Crochet, or would you be?