Follow the Prospects: Dylan Crews, OF

[rileyn]

On Crews vs Lankford, I don’t think we should let 2 months of minors affect our judgment too much. Everyone’s consensus was either Skenes or Crews, and no one had Lankford top two. Saying we screwed up is both unfair hindsight and totally premature.  That will be true even if Lankford ends up a bigger star than Crews.

Of course.  It's just silly to make any definitive judgements at this time.

[JCA-CrystalCity]

I'd like to ask a prospects expert about how the perceptions of Crews and Langford changed since the draft. While Langford came up in the conversation for a top 2 pick, it was mostly based on the belief that he'd be a cheaper signing than Skenes and Crews and not that he was likely to have a better outcome as a pro. Now, if you look at things like the likely outcomes graphs Longenhagen and Taruskin put up on the write ups of Langford and Crews, it looks like no one in their right minds could possibly have gone with anyone but Langford. 33% likelihood of 60/65 FV, 25% of a 50/55, 20% of a 70, and only about a 10% chance of bust. As I mentioned above, Crews has an almost even profile, which is still great and weighted heavily towards a productive major leaguer, but just nowhere as near a can't miss high end.  I can't easily find how they were rated back before or right after the draft, so I'd be really curious as to how the perception of likely outcomes has changed.

[blue911]

What nonsense. Crews was the Golden Spikes winner and overwhelming favorite to be the first position player selected. After a f-ing decade of gambles that have largely sucked , you want the Nats to draft a lesser regarded player.Crews is fully developed the chances of Nats ruining him are remote. Elijah Green*.


*This is a homage to Leeroy Jenkins.

[JCA-CrystalCity]

What nonsense. Crews was the Golden Spikes winner and overwhelming favorite to be the first position player selected. After a f-ing decade of gambles that have largely sucked , you want the Nats to draft a lesser regarded player.Crews is fully developed the chances of Nats ruining him are remote. Elijah Green*.


*This is a homage to Leeroy Jenkins.

I didn't say that. I wanted Crews too, and I'm not inclined to call out Rizzo or anyone for taking him. I'm just kind of floored by the idea that things have changed so much in a half season of minor league play that the consensus among prospect raters is that Langford has surpassed him and is now much more likely to be an elite player. I'm kind of floored, tbh, that evaluations can change so quickly, and I'd like to know how that's possible.

If you look among the Athletic, BP, BA, FG, or MLB pipeline, is there any of them that still have Crews as higher rated than Langford?

[Five Banners]

I didn't say that. I wanted Crews too, and I'm not inclined to call out Rizzo or anyone for taking him. I'm just kind of floored by the idea that things have changed so much in a half season of minor league play that the consensus among prospect raters is that Langford has surpassed him and is now much more likely to be an elite player. I'm kind of floored, tbh, that evaluations can change so quickly, and I'd like to how that's possible.

I think it was possible because Langford outright raked, with the size and production that fits the ranking system exquisitely, while Crews had up and downs.

[imref]

Langford was awful at AAA but it’s impressive that he got that far so quickly after dominating lower levels.

[varoadking]

Langford was awful at AAA...

By what measure?

[Slateman]

By what measure?

No dingers

[varoadking]

No dingers

In 19 AB's with an OPS of 1.064.  The same number of dingers Crews hit in 72 AB's in AA with an OPS of .596...

If Langford's 5 games in AAA were awful...what do we call Crews' 20 games in AA?

[Slateman]

In 19 AB's with an OPS of 1.064.  The same number of dingers Crews hit in 72 AB's in AA with an OPS of .596...

If Langford's 5 games in AAA were awful...what do we call Crews' 20 games in AA?

But did Langford hit any dingers?

[Five Banners]

But did Langford hit any dingers?

Nightmare

[imref]

By what measure?

4-5 in game one. 3-30 with 10Ks in games 2-7.

If crews did that wnff would melt down.

[varoadking]

4-5 in game one. 3-30 with 10Ks in games 2-7.

If crews did that wnff would melt down.

He played in 5 games in AAA from what I see...and had a total of 19 AB's & 26 PA's.  How does he end up with an OPS of 1.064 with stats like you've quoted?  What it is you're looking at?

https://www.milb.com/player/wyatt-langford-694671

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=langfo000wya

BTW...the numbers you quoted, 7 for 35, is a .200 BA.  Crews had a BA of .208 in AA, so start the meltdown...

[Natsinpwc]

In 19 AB's with an OPS of 1.064.  The same number of dingers Crews hit in 72 AB's in AA with an OPS of .596...

If Langford's 5 games in AAA were awful...what do we call Crews' 20 games in AA?

A learning experience.  Rose colored glasses not optional.  It’s all small sample size. Let’s see what Crews does in AA this year.

[Slateman]

A learning experience.  Rose colored glasses not optional.  It’s all small sample size. Let’s see what Crews does in AA this year.

Yep. Even I thought there should be more of a conversation between Langford and Crews, but writing Crews off after 20 games is a bit premature.

Like everything else with the 2024 Nationals season, we'll see

[Natsinpwc]

Is the rule that we get an extra draft pick if someone wins rookie of year?  If so would seem to make sense to keep Crews in the minors all year. 

[varoadking]

A learning experience.  Rose colored glasses not optional.  It’s all small sample size. Let’s see what Crews does in AA this year.

I'm simply focused on imref insisting that Langford's 2023 AAA stint was awful, and that doesn't seem to be the case at all, at least from what I can see, anyway. 

No HR's in 19 AB's would have been a silly metric by itself, but when you look at Langford's AAA stats, saying that his 2023 time in AAA was "awful" is beyond absurd.  Prove me wrong...

Crews will likely be a perfectly serviceable MLB player...for years...and we can enjoy whatever he ends up bringing at least until Boras gets him a lucrative deal elsewhere...

[imref]

He played in 5 games in AAA from what I see...and had a total of 19 AB's & 26 PA's.  How does he end up with an OPS of 1.064 with stats like you've quoted?  What it is you're looking at?

https://www.milb.com/player/wyatt-langford-694671

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=langfo000wya

BTW...the numbers you quoted, 7 for 35, is a .200 BA.  Crews had a BA of .208 in AA, so start the meltdown...

If you go into the game logs, it shows 7 games at AAA in the PCL (a hitters league IIRC):
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=langfo000wya&type=bgl&year=2023

.292 /.514 /.417 including his first game, .158 / .467 /.263 not including the first game.

MiLB.com also only shows him at 5 games, so i'm not sure what is going on with his stats.

Regardless, judging Crews and Langford at this point in their respective careers is silly.

[imref]

Is the rule that we get an extra draft pick if someone wins rookie of year?  If so would seem to make sense to keep Crews in the minors all year. 

Yes. If we have a player who starts the year as a top-100 prospect, and that player wins RoY we get an extra draft pick at the end of the first round. If we have a #2 or #3 finisher, we get an extra international signee.

Details are here:
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/news/mlb-prospect-promotion-incentive-rookie-year-cba/ja5ts8eaxcuv85xujnzriafb

[Natsinpwc]

If you go into the game logs, it shows 7 games at AAA in the PCL (a hitters league IIRC):
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=langfo000wya&type=bgl&year=2023

.292 /.514 /.417 including his first game, .158 / .467 /.263 not including the first game.

Regardless, judging Crews and Langford at this point in their respective careers is silly.

If you take out that first game, he was awful over the remaining 6

You can’t really take out one game out of seven. Unless you also take out his worst game. It’s just too small sample size already. 

[imref]

You can’t really take out one game out of seven. Unless you also take out his worst game. It’s just too small sample size already. 

agreed. But i'm sure if Crews comes up to AAA and hits .158 over a six game stretch, we'll hear that he's a bust.

[imref]

looking at a few other sites, it looks like those last two games that BR shows for Langford are a mistake. MiLB has him at 5 games at AAA.

[varoadking]

agreed. But i'm sure if Crews comes up to AAA and hits .158 over a six game stretch, we'll hear that he's a bust.

looking at a few other sites, it looks like those last two games that BR shows for Langford are a mistake. MiLB has him at 5 games at AAA.

But that's not what Langford did, correct?

Thank you...so not "awful?"

[imref]

going by what baseballreference has in their game log, after his first game, he went 3-19 (not 3-30, i was mistakenly looking at PAs, not ABs) with 9Ks in his next 6.

Yeah, a .158 BA with that strikeout rate is indeed awful.

But baseballreference appears to wrong so I stand corrected.

[varoadking]

going by what baseballreference has in their game log, after his first game, he went 3-19 (not 3-30, i was mistakenly looking at PAs, not ABs) with 9Ks in his next 6.

Yeah, a .158 BA with that strikeout rate is indeed awful.

But baseballreference appears to wrong so I stand corrected.

Glad I could be of assistance...