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.
For posterity: rate the Kimbrel trade
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Nov 18, 2015 12:10:33 GMT -5
And if he is, they have a great 1-2 with the K brothers.That's great. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Alonzo on Nov 18, 2015 12:17:08 GMT -5
It was between 2 and 3 but ultimately went with 2. Of course I am happy that we got Kimbrel, how could you not like the guy? We certainly got quality back, but I dislike it for multiple reasons:
1. we got it backwards I think - closer is one of the last pieces to acquire. 2. I wouldn't overpay for relievers. Not sure I would have matched the Yanks offer to Miller last year, but rather than pulling the trigger on this deal.
Grading this a 2 doesn't mean we are certain to lose this trade, but today we are on the short end and it's tougher than usual to win this one. Boy do I wish trades like Miller-Eduardo would happen more frequently, most of them time we have been on the losing end of trades recently.
|
|
|
Post by kman22 on Nov 18, 2015 12:20:37 GMT -5
Went with a 3. I think this deal will be largely based on the transactions that follow. If an ace is brought in, the addition of Kimbrel could make a big difference. If the rotation isn't upgraded, Kimbrel doesn't seem as valuable to this team and it looks like an overpay.
I didn't think it would cost this much, but I hope this isn't their biggest acquisition of the winter.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 18, 2015 12:34:19 GMT -5
I ended up with a three although I could have just as easily gone 4. Call it a 3.5.
I realize it's an overpay but I just don't see any likely alternatives that I'd be happy with. Sometimes you do what you have to do.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Nov 18, 2015 12:43:30 GMT -5
4..........Some people think he is just a relief pitcher...he is not..He is an ELITE closer, probably in the top 3 in the majors.....he changes a game & the opposing managers decisions from the mid innings on. Also, the NYY were also sniffing to trade for him, maybe just to drive up the price, we don't know, but DD had to do this deal & IMO we didn't give up too much for 3 years of his control.
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on Nov 18, 2015 12:44:47 GMT -5
Voted "3". My issue is less with the moving pieces themselves and more with the big picture - specifically the timing (did we really have to cave in mid-November?) and the fact that adding a closer to a 78-84 team smacks of management getting a few steps ahead of themselves. The whole thing feels rushed.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 18, 2015 13:43:01 GMT -5
I voted a 2, but was not in love with Margot or Guerra. I voted a 2 and not a 1 because of how much worse it would have been if he spent the prospects on a starter. I have too many untouchables in my list, but Margot and Guerra weren't on that list. Margot's approach rarely works in the majors, unless he is a freak that doesn't compare to anyone else like Dee Gordon. And Guerra's strikeouts are obviously a big red flag. That's not going to work out unless his power is legit. JBJ's strikeout rate in Salem was 13.2 and now it's 28%. Guerra's got down to 23.5% in Greenville. He's a little younger, but that's still going to be tough to keep down as he moves up. And he doesn't walk either. So their gloves are going to carry most of their value. But I don't think they got rid of all-star players even though they'll likely be quite useful.
I really hate giving up Logan Allen though. Walking one guy in 91 batters faced this season is something I was excited about. I have a hard time thinking he made up a lot of the trade value in the package so I don't see the point in caving on including him.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Nov 18, 2015 13:49:08 GMT -5
2
Overpaid by any comparative analysis of other trades, and the contract status of Kimbrel is not a value-proposition (not a negative, either). However, those were the guys that were probably going to be dealt this offseason, and Benintendi has the potential to be better than Margot, anyway (although when you choose like that you always run the risk of keeping the wrong guy, aka Scott Cooper). So, it's not a franchise-crippling trade by any means because of Ben Cherington's good work, but it's not a good trade, either.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Nov 18, 2015 14:29:55 GMT -5
2.
Second worst trade in last 5 years. Reddick trade still worse.
That said, I will of course buy a Kimbrel shirt if he's the shutdown difference in a World Series title. But I'll also say I was wrong about him.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on Nov 18, 2015 14:35:30 GMT -5
I waffled between 2 and 3 because Kimbrel is obviously fantastic and it will be difficult to complain in August when he has a 1.60 ERA and is striking out 14 batters per nine...but at the end of the day I wouldn't have done it, so I think that's worth a '2' vote.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Nov 18, 2015 14:45:29 GMT -5
I rated it a 3, but I think I'm really more of a 3.9. Problem with 4 is the "we won" this trade.
On paper, the trade is an overpay, and if those two guys become everyday regulars then there's no calculating this as a winning trade without a Championship during Kimbrel's tenure, which is never a smart bet.
But the atmosphere of the market lends me to believe that getting a guy of Kimbrel's value and control is paramount. Age is a factor in hoping his productivity continues. The pen was historically bad last year, and Kimbrel is about as elite of a player as you can get. This pen requires a lot of work this year, and especially next year considering Koji and Taz will be free agents. That is two large holes to fill next year.
In a vacuum, it's a "huh?" trade. But with market and future needs in mind, it seems like they paid more for as close to they could get of a sure thing now so they'd be less hamstrung next year when they'll probably be looking for a few more arms.
|
|
|
Post by lithuaniansoxfan on Nov 18, 2015 14:58:17 GMT -5
I chose 2, for two primary reasons:
a) the potential opportunity cost, both for this transaction and future ones that may be made / can no longer be made
b) that this cost was utilised on a closer, a position that has too much volatility and has traditionally been over-valued.
If the point someone wants to make is that the valuation has been incorrect league-wide, than I still think that (a) stands.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Nov 18, 2015 15:11:14 GMT -5
I rate the trade a 4 and almost went 5.
The Red Sox get an elite closer for 3 years. The return in the deal is excellent, assuming the healthy return of Uehara and Tazawa the Red Sox will now have one of the top 7/8/9 combos in baseball, if either Taz or Uehara do not return to 100% than the acquisition of Kimbrel and his late game dominance becomes even more vital.
Regarding the prospects we gave up (Margot, Guerra, Allen & Asuaje) even though I’ll admit that we gave up a lot of quality, there are many reasons why I’m ok with these players being traded:
1 – I think that the top 2 guys, while having relatively high floors due to their defensive prowess, have a significant risk of not coming close to their ceilings, both have been free swingers thus far in the minors, and that is a trait that is not easily changed, and is often exploited in AAA and especially against MLB pitchers. Even with advanced contact ability like Margot, I think there is a real possibility that he tops out at around a .320 OBP and little power, not a player without value but a low OBP limits the value of his plus baserunning, and his overall value. Guerra’s power is likely not sustainable at the upper levels, I think if his offense is average or even slightly above average for a SS at the MLB level that is a really good piece, especially with his well above average defensive ability, but that leads me to…
2 – I think it does matter that the top two players in this deal are blocked in the Red Sox organization, by Betts/Bradley in Margot’s case and Bogaerts in Guerra’s case. If so much of these players value comes from really strong defense at a premium position, then you can’t simply move them to another position without decreasing their value. Margot is not as valuable in Boston in LF as he is as a CF in San Diego, and Guerra has no place to play in the Red Sox organization, and that matters.
3 - I think it also matters that the Red Sox have prospects that seem to have the potential to be more impactful for the Red Sox than Margot and Guerra. The presence of Benintendi makes trading Margot far more palatable for me, he may not be quite the defensive player or baserunner that Margot is, but he is still well above average and his power potential offers flexibility to play corner OF. SS in Boston belongs to Bogaerts, the Sox have a defensive whiz in Marerro who can backup at SS and play UIF, Guerra’s bat is not like Moncada’s or Devers, where he still has plenty of value despite average defense or a non premium defensive position, because there is above average or better offensive potential.
4 – Allen and Asuaje. First and foremost I’m not going to concern myself with using a guy whose being groomed as a utility player as a throw in, Asuaje has value but if he helps you get Kimbrel than pack his bags for him. Allen was tougher to swallow, and I honestly still don’t like the thought of him being a throw in in this deal, but Allen is a guy who without a significant bump in velocity has the upside of a #3 starter and more probable #4 or #5. He is also extremely young and the uncertainty with pitchers is so great that while I still don’t like giving him up in this deal, I think the chances of me ever cursing the day the Sox traded him is small.
Finally, I understand the argument of getting what is perceived equal value in a trade, but I do not believe that the guys that we traded were going to be that much of a factor in getting the Sox the frontline starting pitcher they really need. I’m sure if the names Dombrowski was hearing as potential return for Gray, Sale, Harvey, DeGrom, Syndergard, Carrasco, Fernandez etc was Margot and Guerra they would have been traded for a starter, but it seems to me that the names were likely Bogaerts, Betts, Swihart, Rodriguez, Moncada, Espinoza, and the reason I say that is simple, if the Padres offered me Margot, Guerra and Allen right now for Eduardo Rodriguez I wouldn’t even consider that, and at this point in time you can’t put E-Rod at the level of Gray, Sale and the Mets guys. So, if DD can land one of the top FA starters, than I like using some of the prospects who are a little more tradeable to acquire quite possibly the best closer in the game, even though it might be perceived as a steep price.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Nov 18, 2015 15:14:30 GMT -5
My initial reaction was slightly on the negative side, but I came around to be slightly on the positive side. I voted 3 but I'm somewhere between 3 & 4 now. It was our single biggest need our bupplen was horrible even worse than the SR which rebounded nicely near seasons end. Counting on Uehara would have been a huge risk and Tazawa has some concerns to. I still would like another reliever between Uehara and Tazawa. Many wanted the package geared toward a SP, but we have no idea if that package was close to signing an ace/#2 without adding the core of the future (the new top 4 prospects). If we sign a TOR pitcher I bet several more who are not on board with the deal will come around to it.
|
|
|
Post by m1keyboots on Nov 18, 2015 15:22:55 GMT -5
No one seems to agree but here goes nothinf.
While agree Margot and Java were a kind of big haul for SD, idk Java will be more than a defensive replacement and I am not as high on Margot as others. Logan Allen could turn into Lester just as much as Trey Ball was supposed to, well never know
We got multiple prime years of a dominant closer who people think is falling apart because his Era was 2.5. Era don't mean that much right? Hi velocity was up, and his SD to MD ratio remained the same. I saw quite a bit of him this year and he still looked every bit unhit table as he has recently. It's almost as though some fans want to criticize any move. I'm all for moving prospects for proven guys. Don't you think DD would have gotten an ace for them if he could have?
Personally I'm ecstatic we solved a big problem by actually trading some but not really the cream of the crop prospects. We still can make moves. I was actually high on Asuaje last year. Many people seem to be disagreeing with me on this site and I don't really care
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater on Nov 18, 2015 15:32:26 GMT -5
I rate it a 4. I still don't see Margot and Guerra being anything more than decent regulars. Maybe Logan allen turn sinto a good reliever, but I think this trade is worth it to get an elite closer.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,824
|
Post by wcp3 on Nov 18, 2015 15:32:42 GMT -5
2
I couldn't give it a 1 because Kimbrel unquestionably makes the Red Sox better in 2016, and there's still a high likelihood that those prospects don't pan out.
But trading a lot for a reliever is never good idea, and worse, they gave up a lot of excess talent that could've been used later to acquire a more important piece. Plus, even though these guys were "behind" other prospects in the system, there's still no guarantee the guys ahead of them pan out. And it's worth mentioning one more time: trading a lot of talent for a reliever is the opposite of smart.
For those reasons, I find it baffling that anyone would rate this trade above a 3.
|
|
|
Post by heisenberg on Nov 18, 2015 15:34:52 GMT -5
After seeing that the Tigers acquired K-Rod for the equivalent of Wendell Rijo, the Kimbrel trade looks like an abomination.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 18, 2015 15:43:28 GMT -5
2. I really like the Kimbrel addition but I hate the cost even though I was comfortable dealing Margot/Guerra this winter.
I know a lot of people keep saying Margot + Guerra won't land a top starter alone, but that misses the point. If the Red Sox decide they have to trade for a top starter this winter or for the deadline, they now have less chips to use. Even if dealing Devers (for example) was always a requirement to get that pitcher, elite pitchers are almost always dealt for a package of talent. Instead of Margot being the #2, you now have to add a Benintendi to make it work. Instead of Guerra, you have to add a Kopech. Now of course it's not that black and white, individual teams have different needs and valuations. But flexibility is all about appealing to as many teams as possible, and they just dealt significant value.
Sure, the Red Sox still have enough young talent to deal for anyone, but having less options to deal makes it more difficult to make a trade the other team will accept that you still feel good about. Losing substantial value just because you have more young talent than most makes it somewhat easier to swallow, but it's still not the best way to go.
|
|
|
Post by dridiot on Nov 18, 2015 15:52:05 GMT -5
I voted 2, but could see going to 3. I think it's clearly an overpay, but possibly an acceptable one, since it's sometimes okay to overpay. Maybe by Dombrowski's evaluation these prospects are overvalued, but he couldn't see any better deals for them materializing this offseason. I don't really believe it, since I don't see why he couldn't wait, but... leaving open the possibility.
|
|
|
Post by jiant2520 on Nov 18, 2015 15:57:01 GMT -5
I went with a 4.
Definitely a good trade, not great, but good. I wish we could have kept Allen out of it, but obviously he was required to make it happen, so I'm fine with it.
|
|
|
Post by jerryu on Nov 18, 2015 16:33:13 GMT -5
3. I'm glad we did something! Jerryu
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,672
Member is Online
|
Post by gerry on Nov 18, 2015 17:16:39 GMT -5
3. I'm glad we did something! Jerryu Agree DDo needed to do something to alleviate the hyperventilation among fans. But we also know he has made very good moves with Hazen, Bannister, moving Hanley out of LF, letting the kids play, letting Cook, Ogando, Machi go, and letting Panda, Hanley and Barnes know what they must work on this offseason. He has actually done a lot. The big issues we knew he must tackle are SP and RP, covering 1B and 3B (and getting tbem in shape and backing them in late innings with Shaw and Brockstar covers that), and finding a 4th OF. He pre-empted several teams for Kimbrel, and has already made a very strong 7,8,9 back end; and provided an elite closer when/if Koji moves on in 2017. The Sox are already a better, more competetive team than a couple of months ago. Kimbrel is a good move between, to me, #3 and #4. He has discussed signing a Chris Young, and has stated he will sign a FA TOR "horse". Although my anxiety about our top prospects and the atate of the Farm was exacerbated by the Kimbrel trade, if he signs a FA SP, another RP, and 4thOF, we will have zero to complain about or worry about, and likely lots to cheer about.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Nov 18, 2015 17:58:40 GMT -5
I rated it a 3 mostly for the reasons I have previously stated - that I think Margot maybe overrated and Guerra has not shown enough yet to be rated as high as he is. I think Kimbrel was the best RP the Sox could get and they had to pay a good price for him, which they did.
There is another reason why I think this is going to turn out to be a good move. If all things are relatively equal when it comes to signing an ace, like Price, having Kimbrel and Koji in the bullpen will carry some weight.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Nov 18, 2015 18:07:00 GMT -5
Went with #2. Some context for the vote. The team has become market makers with this trade. We can expect to see an overpay, and I believe that's what this is, for top-flight relievers and by implication some not-so-top-flight guys as well. It hurts them in a number of ways, many already mentioned on the board. The most important for me is that they've got much less leeway with a lot of time left in the off-season. They have fewer options, options they might wanted to use going forward. This looks like a good team, one we saw coming together at the end of the season. Given what happens next, they may become a very good one. But the risk is real, the forgone talent had real value, and there's a real possibility that Kimbrel's 60+ innings aren't enough to drive them deep into the playoffs should they get there. If that happens, or if there's an injury, what is already an overpay becomes something else again if we have to watch Margot, let alone Guerra and Logan, start to shine. You have to give to get, it's true. Dombrowski, sharp suits and slicked back hair, is a gambler, no doubt about it. But Epstein, with his prediction about the stampede to look like the WS winner, is a veritable sage at this point:
|
|
|