Philadelphia Phillies: J.P. Crawford and The Butterfly Effect

It’s taken a while, but it appears that former Philadelphia Phillies top prospect J.P. Crawford is rounding into form as the kind of player he was envisioned as being way back when he was drafted in 2013. He won’t be reaching any of that potential in Philadelphia, of course, as he was traded away over three years ago to the Seattle Mariners and has been plying his trade on the west coast ever since.

But what if that trade never happened?

In a nod to the well known Butterfly Effect, which probably entered mainstream consciousness mostly due to the Ashton Kutcher movie but which was exemplified by a Simpsons “Treehouse of Horror” segment involving Homer and a time-traveling toaster a decade earlier, let’s see what kind of fallout may or may not have been caused by the Phillies’ decision to trade J.P. Crawford on December 3, 2018.

What if the Philadelphia Phillies hadn’t traded J.P. Crawford?

First, let’s examine the trade itself, as Crawford and the much-maligned Carlos Santana went to the Mariners in exchange for Jean Segura, Juan Nicasio, and James Pazos. Nicasio was a pretty inconsequential bullpen piece and Pazos was traded again before he ever pitched in a game for the Phillies, but Segura obviously has been a major part of the club and is now in his fourth season in Philadelphia. He’s been an objectively good player, but has his presence really benefitted the club all that much?

In hindsight thanks to the zero playoff appearances for the Phillies in the years since Segura came aboard, you can make the case that his presence hasn’t had all that much of an impression. Perhaps his biggest impact came in the form of a pop-up that he didn’t run out in 2019, during his first season with the team, with the end result of the play being a torn ACL for Andrew McCutchen. Maybe Cutch’s aging knee gives way at some point that season regardless, but if Segura isn’t there to hit that ball at that time, who knows what else could have gone differently?

Maybe the Phillies, with a healthy and productive leadoff hitter for an entire season, actually make the playoffs in 2019, possibly saving Gabe Kapler’s job. Perhaps it buys the whole front office more time, years even, as successful new additions like Bryce Harper, J.T. Realmuto, and McCutchen lead them to the postseason. Then again, do they make these big splashy additions if they never traded Crawford?

One of the keys in dealing Crawford was that the Phillies were able to dump Carlos Santana’s contract. It was a clear case of “here’s a good young player, but you have to take this albatross too” that we’ve seen time and time again in sports. But without a sweetener like Crawford to attach in a Santana trade, do the Phillies have the ability to offload Santana elsewhere? Do they have to stick with him at first base and have Rhys Hoskins bumble around in left field for another year? And does the money freed up by dealing Santana (although they didn’t really save that much with Segura coming back) have any kind of impact on their offseason spending? You wouldn’t think so, but we’ll never know.

Another current Phillie directly impacted by Crawford being traded is Didi Gregorius, a player who would have never come to town with Crawford locked in as the everyday shortstop. That would probably have been a good thing long-term, as Didi has largely been a disappointment with the team during his three-year tenure that will mercifully end in 2022. A lot of money and aggravation could have been saved if Crawford had been manning the position this whole time.

But perhaps no other player was more affected by the team’s decision to trade J.P. Crawford than Scott Kingery, who received the majority of the team’s playing time at shortstop during the 2018 season. It was a decent rookie year for a player who had a lot of expectations heaped upon him, and there was legitimate hope at the time. The right thing to do would have been to shift him to second base, his natural position, on a permanent basis for 2019 and hand the shortstop reins over to Crawford.

But the Phillies, feeling the pressure to win and perhaps scared by the thought of such a raw duo up the middle, felt the need to trade for a veteran shortstop in Segura, give Cesar Hernandez a fifth straight year as their primary second baseman, and make Kingery a super-utility player. It was a move that seemed destined for disaster at its inception. Ultimately, it was.

The Phillies had made a nearly unprecedented financial commitment to a player that had never appeared in an MLB game and then treated Kingery like any old stopgap player you could scoop off the waiver wire. He needed a regular position in the field and a spot in the lineup, which he wasn’t afforded. Maybe he would have ended up fizzling out regardless, with a bat that proved not to be major league caliber and then all of the ensuing Covid craziness that nobody saw coming. Again, though, they put him in a position to fail, which is what happened. Perhaps in an alternate reality, the Phillies are still to this day enjoying the fruits of an all-homegrown infield of Alec Bohm, Crawford, Kingery, and Hoskins. Crawford could have even brought some badly needed Gold Glove defense to this team. Alas, it never happened.

In this case, it’s important to take the long view to think about all of the consequences of the J.P. Crawford trade, as it’s not as simple as just examining the players in the trade itself and asking “who won?”. There were numerous ripples that emanated from the deal, with many being felt today and potentially years from now if Crawford continues on an upward trajectory.

We’ll never know for sure what could have been if the Philadelphia Phillies had hung onto Crawford. We can only speculate, which is both fun and aggravating, in keeping with the Phillies’ experience (with more emphasis on the latter). In the end, time will tell if the Phillies ultimately rue the day that they traded away J.P. Crawford.