SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Red Sox acquire Craig Kimbrel for Margot, Guerra +
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on May 9, 2017 16:37:02 GMT -5
Still discussing the overpay for Kimbrel. It's like folks don't want to take into account the market for the reliever, which was subsequently confirmed with other closer trades.
It is like people thinking they can walk into a local antique shop and find a Picasso, when instead you most likely would have to attend an auction at Sotheby's and bid against other like minded folks.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 9, 2017 17:21:21 GMT -5
I don't understand why people say "they should have made the trade without including X player".
I have no idea why that necessarily was a possibility. Do you think that they could have forced Preller to take worse or fewer players? We aren't privy to the negotiations and maybe the exact trade was the only one that was going to work.
I criticize the trade that was made, but will never criticize a trade by saying it should have been different and act like DDo is just needlessly adding prospects for the hell of it.
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on May 9, 2017 20:09:46 GMT -5
Still discussing the overpay for Kimbrel. It's like folks don't want to take into account the market for the reliever, which was subsequently confirmed with other closer trades. It is like people thinking they can walk into a local antique shop and find a Picasso, when instead you most likely would have to attend an auction at Sotheby's and bid against other like minded folks. You might want to check who revived the thread before making generalizations like that.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 10, 2017 7:04:34 GMT -5
What kind of jerk would have revived this thread?
My goal with my post was to simply talk about Kimbrel not the trade specifically. I actually put it in another thread because I couldn't find this one on the app.
It seems it's hard to talk about him without going back to the trade. Even those who don't like the trade, I would hope can appreciate what he's been doing in the early going this year. I'd also hope they recognize it's pretty special and isn't something that's easily replaceable.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 10, 2017 11:41:42 GMT -5
I don't understand why people say "they should have made the trade without including X player". I have no idea why that necessarily was a possibility. Do you think that they could have forced Preller to take worse or fewer players? We aren't privy to the negotiations and maybe the exact trade was the only one that was going to work. I criticize the trade that was made, but will never criticize a trade by saying it should have been different and act like DDo is just needlessly adding prospects for the hell of it. I think that's implied though, right? That's really just a way of someone saying that they like the player the Red Sox got, and the foundational aspects of the trade seem sensible, but as a whole it's a bad value. And it's a criticism particular to Dombrowski, who seems to zero in on a player and is willing to include pieces to get there without regard to making the best value play. That contrasts with the Bill Belichick-mode of constantly seeking to maximize value, making him willing to trade key contributors or eschew a name talent for a second-tier buy if the value is right.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 10, 2017 11:58:04 GMT -5
It's definitely fair to use BB as a contrast in styles but football and baseball are so different that team building strategies can't be carried from one to another so easily. A guy is a good baseball player no matter which team he plays for; football not so much.
Edit: unless you want to get into guys "not being able to handle a market", but that has nothing to do with a players skill. It has to do with him being a mental midget.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 10, 2017 12:47:21 GMT -5
Value calculations are certainly different and football and baseball. In football you have to consider the system and other players on the team, and the salary cap is much more restrictive. And the non-guaranteed contracts change the calculus as well. But in some ways that's all the more reason that a GM focusing on a specific player rather than general value maximization is a bad strategy in baseball. Value is easier to quantify in baseball and is more universal (meaning a two-win player on the Red Sox is generally going to be a two-win player on the Brewers in most cases), so the concept of an overpay is easier to recognize. It's possible to recognize that Kimbrel has been great while also feeling that the price they paid is too much.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 10, 2017 14:12:27 GMT -5
I don't understand why people say "they should have made the trade without including X player". I have no idea why that necessarily was a possibility. Do you think that they could have forced Preller to take worse or fewer players? We aren't privy to the negotiations and maybe the exact trade was the only one that was going to work. I criticize the trade that was made, but will never criticize a trade by saying it should have been different and act like DDo is just needlessly adding prospects for the hell of it. I think that's implied though, right? That's really just a way of someone saying that they like the player the Red Sox got, and the foundational aspects of the trade seem sensible, but as a whole it's a bad value. And it's a criticism particular to Dombrowski, who seems to zero in on a player and is willing to include pieces to get there without regard to making the best value play. That contrasts with the Bill Belichick-mode of constantly seeking to maximize value, making him willing to trade key contributors or eschew a name talent for a second-tier buy if the value is right. I guess I don't see the point in saying they needlessly included Logan. Maybe this is venturing into a straw man, but I seem to remember a lot of that. And now it's getting brought up again because Logan looks pretty damn good.
|
|
|
Post by borisman on May 12, 2017 5:30:11 GMT -5
So this is what Kimbrel looks like when he's hitting his spots and not walking people. It has been a pleasure thus far. I don't remember the last time we had a reliever this dominant. Not even Paps at his best was this good.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on May 12, 2017 6:08:12 GMT -5
So this is what Kimbrel looks like when he's hitting his spots and not walking people. It has been a pleasure thus far. I don't remember the last time we had a reliever this dominant. Not even Paps at his best was this good. You might want to look up Koji's 2013 season or try to remember it. It was one of the most dominant seasons for a reliever in MLB history, and he did it in Boston. Koji in 2013 was every bit as good as Kimbrel is now, even though Kimbrel is doing it in his own dominant way with all the added strikeouts. Still, Koji gave up 33 hits, 9 earned runs, 5 homeruns, 9 walks, 101 strike outs, 1 HBP, in 74 innings. That's freaking ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 12, 2017 6:18:15 GMT -5
So this is what Kimbrel looks like when he's hitting his spots and not walking people. It has been a pleasure thus far. I don't remember the last time we had a reliever this dominant. Not even Paps at his best was this good. You might want to look up Koji's 2013 season or try to remember it. It was one of the most dominant seasons for a reliever in MLB history, and he did it in Boston. Koji in 2013 was every bit as good as Kimbrel is now, even though Kimbrel is doing it in his own dominant way. Kimbrel is striking out 17.81/9 and walking 1.15/9 this year. He has struck out 12 of the last 13 batters he has faced and hasn't given up a walk in over a month. That's even better than Koji's 2013, but we're still only talking about 15 2/3 innings.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on May 12, 2017 6:20:35 GMT -5
You might want to look up Koji's 2013 season or try to remember it. It was one of the most dominant seasons for a reliever in MLB history, and he did it in Boston. Koji in 2013 was every bit as good as Kimbrel is now, even though Kimbrel is doing it in his own dominant way. Kimbrel is striking out 17.81/9 and walking 1.15/9 this year. That's even better than Koji's 2013, but we're still only talking about 15 2/3 innings. Yeah the strikeouts are unbelievable but Koji status is pretty hard to reach in the AL East for a whole year. Kimbrel has a LONG way to go to get to Koji status in 2013. Koji gave up 1 walk since the all-star break of 2013 until the end of that year. That's 2 and a half months of ONLY one walk.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 12, 2017 6:44:15 GMT -5
Koji's 2013 was the most dominant year a closer had had in Boston and maybe anywhere in a long time.
If we want to start breaking down smaller stretches then I'm sure the conversation changes. Let's just enjoy how dominant and important Kimbrel had been.
Best part is Farrell seems to be using him as a specialized tool and not as a cookie cutter "this is your role" and Kimbrel is responding.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 12, 2017 6:56:03 GMT -5
Kimbrel is striking out 17.81/9 and walking 1.15/9 this year. That's even better than Koji's 2013, but we're still only talking about 15 2/3 innings. Yeah the strikeouts are unbelievable but Koji status is pretty hard to reach in the AL East for a whole year. Kimbrel has a LONG way to go to get to Koji status in 2013. Koji gave up 1 walk since the all-star break of 2013 until the end of that year. That's 2 and a half months of ONLY one walk. No one has said that he's had a better full season. They are just saying he's as dominant right now. I mean his SIERA is 0.38. Koji's was 1.29 in 2013.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 12, 2017 7:18:46 GMT -5
Nice pitch mix:
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 12, 2017 8:03:18 GMT -5
You might want to look up Koji's 2013 season or try to remember it. It was one of the most dominant seasons for a reliever in MLB history, and he did it in Boston. Koji in 2013 was every bit as good as Kimbrel is now, even though Kimbrel is doing it in his own dominant way. Kimbrel is striking out 17.81/9 and walking 1.15/9 this year. He has struck out 12 of the last 13 batters he has faced and hasn't given up a walk in over a month. That's even better than Koji's 2013, but we're still only talking about 15 2/3 innings. Koji's numbers were so ridiculous that he actually had triple digits for strike outs versus SINGLE digits for walks allowed (and 2 of those 9 were intentional). With Kimbrel, it's blow them away. With Koji, it was laugh at the guy who couldn't hit his 89 MPH fastball or worse know that his splitter was coming, and he still didn't have a prayer. With Koji what I enjoyed best was how quickly he got the game over. No time to get nervous. They called him the ninja and for good reason. He was in and out before you knew it. The only guy who was as good as Koji was in 2013 was Kimbrel. It's nice to see him so lockdown again.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 12, 2017 8:05:31 GMT -5
If Farrell uses Kimbrel like he did yesterday afternoon, it changes my opinion of the trade quite a bit. Part of my problem is/was that a ninth-inning closer can only impact so many games that wouldn't otherwise be won anyway. Like, Joe Borowski had a 5.00+ ERA for the 2007 Indians and still had an 85% save rate. And it's not because he had a CLOSER MENTALITY, it's just that even bad pitchers will pitch a scoreless single inning half the time, and will give up less that two or three runs in a single inning almost every time.
Using Kimbrel in the eighth to face the opponents best hitter in a tie game on a road, though? That actively helps his team win. The debate was never really (at least for me) about Kimbrel's quality, it was about the value exchange. Pitching Kimbrel to win games rather than only trying to not lose them changes that value calculation.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 12, 2017 8:22:46 GMT -5
If Farrell uses Kimbrel like he did yesterday afternoon, it changes my opinion of the trade quite a bit. Part of my problem is/was that a ninth-inning closer can only impact so many games that wouldn't otherwise be won anyway. Like, Joe Borowski had a 5.00+ ERA for the 2007 Indians and still had an 85% save rate. And it's not because he had a CLOSER MENTALITY, it's just that even bad pitchers will pitch a scoreless single inning half the time, and will give up less that two or three runs in a single inning almost every time. Using Kimbrel in the eighth to face the opponents best hitter in a tie game on a road, though? That actively helps his team win. The debate was never really (at least for me) about Kimbrel's quality, it was about the value exchange. Pitching Kimbrel to win games rather than only trying to not lose them changes that value calculation. I don't disagree with anything you say, although I think Borowski is kind of an outlier and not all saves are 3 run gimmes. It's kind of like the quality start stat where you assume all quality starts are 3 runs 6 IP when they're not all on the border like that. Your main point is an excellent point and it certainly helps the Red Sox win games as long as the key out is in the 8th and not sooner because if Kimbrel is needed for that key out in the 7th the Sox don't have a Kimbrel backup you would trust to finish the game. I'm sure Kelly or Barnes could get some Borowski saves although he'd give us a heart attack watching him. I think the biggest value in a closer actually shows itself in a smaller sample size - the post-season. As I said in the other thread the Sox need somebody to step up and take pressure off of Kimbrel so he's free to do the type of work he's doing now in the most crucial of games - the post-season. I think the one common theme to the Sox championship years was how utterly dominant in the post-season that Foulke, Papelbon, and Koji were and what huge difference makers they were - no Joe Borowskis in that group! I just hope that Kimbrel is given enough help so he can do the things he's doing now in the most crucial of situations in the most crucial games and that he's not burnt out trying to win them games in May.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 12, 2017 10:34:25 GMT -5
Nice pitch mix: I know it's unfair, but Shaw making contact bums me out a little. So close to pure dominance.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 12, 2017 10:41:58 GMT -5
I also thought it was a good sign that Kimbrel seemed reasonably receptive to being put into the game early (although you'll note that he still implies that his "normal" role is to pitch in save situations) ( link):
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 12, 2017 14:02:08 GMT -5
I also thought it was a good sign that Kimbrel seemed reasonably receptive to being put into the game early (although you'll note that he still implies that his "normal" role is to pitch in save situations) ( link): I don't see that from those comments. "My job is to help the team win"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 16:20:31 GMT -5
If Farrell uses Kimbrel like he did yesterday afternoon, it changes my opinion of the trade quite a bit. Part of my problem is/was that a ninth-inning closer can only impact so many games that wouldn't otherwise be won anyway. Like, Joe Borowski had a 5.00+ ERA for the 2007 Indians and still had an 85% save rate. And it's not because he had a CLOSER MENTALITY, it's just that even bad pitchers will pitch a scoreless single inning half the time, and will give up less that two or three runs in a single inning almost every time. Using Kimbrel in the eighth to face the opponents best hitter in a tie game on a road, though? That actively helps his team win. The debate was never really (at least for me) about Kimbrel's quality, it was about the value exchange. Pitching Kimbrel to win games rather than only trying to not lose them changes that value calculation. So true. Games are won or lost in the 7th and 8th innings just as much as they are won or lost in the 9th. Manage the situation, not the inning.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on May 13, 2017 10:05:57 GMT -5
Kimbrel currently has gone 12 games w/o a walk; he also had a walkless 12-game stretch last year (mid-May to mid-June - I guess I was comatose then) I don't see anything fundamentally different, mechanics appear the same, and although he's throwing his FB at a career-low rate, it's not much less, his velocity is up a tick. Perhaps he's made some core sustainable change, but it's more likely he's just having his best stretch at the start of the season instead of sometime in the middle. If we see another month of this . . .
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 13, 2017 14:17:18 GMT -5
Kimbrel currently has gone 12 games w/o a walk; he also had a walkless 12-game stretch last year (mid-May to mid-June - I guess I was comatose then) I don't see anything fundamentally different, mechanics appear the same, and although he's throwing his FB at a career-low rate, it's not much less, his velocity is up a tick. Perhaps he's made some core sustainable change, but it's more likely he's just having his best stretch at the start of the season instead of sometime in the middle. If we see another month of this . . . You have to look beyond the stats. Kimbrel admitted that he kept quiet about a finger injury last season that was causing him to "yank" the ball which is why his control was awful. THAT is the difference of why he's pitching like his old self rather than the version we saw last year.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on May 28, 2017 7:20:14 GMT -5
Craig Kimbrel’s last 61 batters faced: 38 strikeouts, 0 walks, 0 HBP, 4 hits. Right-handed batters are 0-for-37 against him in 2017.
Kimbrel Haters... come out come out wherever you are.
|
|
|