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 jimed14 on Jul 6, 2016 11:21:49 GMT -5
I really don't know how someone can "get up" for a game with a 3 run lead but can't "get up" for a tie game, as if a freaking meaningless statistic is more important than possibly winning the game. Is anyone arguing that he'd be terrible in the top of the 9th of a tie game in game 7 of the World Series because it's not a save situation? I think it's the opposite, that hitters are less aggressive when the team is not behind, and if anything that makes Kimbrel even more aggressive. I actually buy that, but that just goes to show you how not good he is. He completely relies on batters swinging at pitches out of the strike zone and can't get anyone out if they don't. I'll actually be surprised if he's still closing by the end of his contract. And it also wouldn't surprise me if he wasn't closing, he wouldn't even be pitching. His profile screams 'standing on the edge of a steep cliff' to me.
|
|
|
Post by bosox81 on Jul 6, 2016 11:24:52 GMT -5
eric, is this one that supports your player psychology profiling maybe? In save situations: Kimbrel has a 1.45 ERA and a 0.643 WHIP. Opponents hit .143 with a .432 OPS against him. He owns a 9.00 strikeout-to-walk ratio. In non-save situations: Kimbrel has a 6.75 ERA and a 1.650 WHIP. Opponents hit .231 with a .730 OPS against him. He owns a 2.10 strikeout-to-walk ratio. The sample sizes are comparable, too, as he’s faced 67 batters in save situations and 63 batters in non-save situations. In save situations, he’s walked just three of the 67 batters he’s faced, or 4.5 percent. In non-save situations, he’s walked 10 of the 63 batters he’s faced, or 15.9 percent. It’s now become noticeable in his career numbers, too. In 269 save situations, he owns a 1.49 ERA and 0.783 WHIP. In 119 non-save situations, he owns a 2.51 ERA and 1.299 WHIP. You've noticed something like this with Pedroia, that he hits worse when he has weak hitters behind him and he's too aggressive. That's how Kimbrel feels about pitching when you're ahead, the hitters need to be more aggressive and his own aggessive approach works better. “I think it’s more mental [because I have] to get out there and make sure I’m throwing this pitch as if there is a runner on third in a one-run ballgame with no outs,” Kimbrel said on his approach. “You kind of have to stay in attack mode -- you can’t try to get to cute and paint the corners. You just have to go out there and attack because that’s exactly what the hitters are doing. They’re going to go up there and trying to swing the bat because in a game like that they’ve got to swing the bat to get back in it.” It may not really be a projectable decline, in the sense that it's always happened in Kimbrel's career in save vs. non-save situations. Kimbrel's Z-contact% is still top 5 where it's always been, but hitters are swinging less aggressively in non-save situations. In other words, you're saying that the Red Sox traded a huge package of prospects and are paying premium salary for a very flawed closer? And here I thought that the argument for the past months had been whether it was worth it to pay so much for an "elite" closer.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 6, 2016 11:35:55 GMT -5
I think it's the opposite, that hitters are less aggressive when the team is not behind, and if anything that makes Kimbrel even more aggressive. I actually buy that, but that just goes to show you how not good he is. He completely relies on batters swinging at pitches out of the strike zone and can't get anyone out if they don't. I'll actually be surprised if he's still closing by the end of his contract. And it also wouldn't surprise me if he wasn't closing, he wouldn't even be pitching. His profile screams 'standing on the edge of a steep cliff' to me. Well, you're on record. Let's see how that goes for you. ADD: Technically, it's Koji who "relies" on batters swinging at pitches out of the strike zone. He's got a Top 5 OSwing %. Not that that's a bad thing. Fooling hitters into swinging is a true gift. Kimbrel controls his own fate, and just needs to throw strikes, which batters have a very hard time hitting, given his Top 5 Z SwingContact%.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 6, 2016 12:57:11 GMT -5
I really don't know how someone can "get up" for a game with a 3 run lead but can't "get up" for a tie game, as if a freaking meaningless statistic is more important than possibly winning the game. Is anyone arguing that he'd be terrible in the top of the 9th of a tie game in game 7 of the World Series because it's not a save situation? To you and me the statistic is virtually meaningless but I think to the guys that play the game it means something to them. I bet you a lot of hitters in MLB think that RBIs are vital, too. Still, it doesn't give Kimbrel a license to suck when it's not a save situation, which he has this year - and like you said, if you can't get up for a tie game or even give your team a chance to scratch out a run in the last of the 9th to at least tie, then you need to reprogram your brain.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 6, 2016 13:09:06 GMT -5
I really don't know how someone can "get up" for a game with a 3 run lead but can't "get up" for a tie game, as if a freaking meaningless statistic is more important than possibly winning the game. Is anyone arguing that he'd be terrible in the top of the 9th of a tie game in game 7 of the World Series because it's not a save situation? To you and me the statistic is virtually meaningless but I think to the guys that play the game it means something to them. I bet you a lot of hitters in MLB think that RBIs are vital, too. Still, it doesn't give Kimbrel a license to suck when it's not a save situation, which he has this year - and like you said, if you can't get up for a tie game or even give your team a chance to scratch out a run in the last of the 9th to at least tie, then you need to reprogram your brain. I get that it means something to a closer, but I'd have to think winning the game always means more. I tend to think it's more about the hitters trying too hard like deepjohn mentioned above. But I'm surprised he does well with a 3 run lead and the bases empty, given that you need at least two baserunners to bring the tying run to the plate and just about everyone would be better off looking for a walk against him than swinging.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Jul 6, 2016 14:08:45 GMT -5
eric, is this one that supports your player psychology profiling maybe? In save situations: Kimbrel has a 1.45 ERA and a 0.643 WHIP. Opponents hit .143 with a .432 OPS against him. He owns a 9.00 strikeout-to-walk ratio. In non-save situations: Kimbrel has a 6.75 ERA and a 1.650 WHIP. Opponents hit .231 with a .730 OPS against him. He owns a 2.10 strikeout-to-walk ratio. The sample sizes are comparable, too, as he’s faced 67 batters in save situations and 63 batters in non-save situations. In save situations, he’s walked just three of the 67 batters he’s faced, or 4.5 percent. In non-save situations, he’s walked 10 of the 63 batters he’s faced, or 15.9 percent. It’s now become noticeable in his career numbers, too. In 269 save situations, he owns a 1.49 ERA and 0.783 WHIP. In 119 non-save situations, he owns a 2.51 ERA and 1.299 WHIP. You've noticed something like this with Pedroia, that he hits worse when he has weak hitters behind him and he's too aggressive. That's how Kimbrel feels about pitching when you're ahead, the hitters need to be more aggressive and his own aggessive approach works better. “I think it’s more mental [because I have] to get out there and make sure I’m throwing this pitch as if there is a runner on third in a one-run ballgame with no outs,” Kimbrel said on his approach. “You kind of have to stay in attack mode -- you can’t try to get to cute and paint the corners. You just have to go out there and attack because that’s exactly what the hitters are doing. They’re going to go up there and trying to swing the bat because in a game like that they’ve got to swing the bat to get back in it.” It may not really be a projectable decline, in the sense that it's always happened in Kimbrel's career in save vs. non-save situations. Kimbrel's Z-contact% is still top 5 where it's always been, but hitters are swinging less aggressively in non-save situations. In other words, you're saying that the Red Sox traded a huge package of prospects and are paying premium salary for a very flawed closer? And here I thought that the argument for the past months had been whether it was worth it to pay so much for an "elite" closer. Well he did make the all-star team...
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jul 6, 2016 15:37:43 GMT -5
In other words, you're saying that the Red Sox traded a huge package of prospects and are paying premium salary for a very flawed closer? And here I thought that the argument for the past months had been whether it was worth it to pay so much for an "elite" closer. Well he did make the all-star team... Actually, my own theory (take with grain of salt) is that Kimbrel's command is less precise when he has not pitched for three days or more. It's cherry picking, obviously, but he's got 9 appearances when he has not pitched for three days or more ... with a WHIP of 3.15. His WHIP in all his other appearances is 0.45! So take that cherry-picking and eat it, ye Kimbrel haters! This wouldn't be an issue if they would just bring him in more often in high-leverage innings, or if the rest of the pitching staff was better and didn't get the team into so many blowouts.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Jul 6, 2016 19:34:25 GMT -5
I really don't know how someone can "get up" for a game with a 3 run lead but can't "get up" for a tie game, as if a freaking meaningless statistic is more important than possibly winning the game. Is anyone arguing that he'd be terrible in the top of the 9th of a tie game in game 7 of the World Series because it's not a save situation? Your ignoring the point and let's get there first and then we can debate it until the cows come home.
|
|
|
Post by RedSoxStats on Jul 14, 2016 12:12:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Jul 14, 2016 13:16:31 GMT -5
That's what happens when you know you're doomed to playing for the Padres.
|
|
fenwayfaithful
Rookie
A prospect is fun to watch, but trading him for a sure thing in the Majors is never a losing deal.
Posts: 114
|
Post by fenwayfaithful on Jul 17, 2016 23:30:45 GMT -5
Benintendi, Bradley, Betts. That is our outfield for years to come. Losing Margot sucks but Kimbrel has been one of the most dominating closers in the past 10 years so it was worth every penny. Half a season doesn't define a player he will figure it out. I'm guessing he's been pitching injured so once he comes back look out. One more top 3 starter and this team is WS contending.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jul 17, 2016 23:41:49 GMT -5
Benintendi, Bradley, Betts. That is our outfield for years to come. Losing Margot sucks but Kimbrel has been one of the most dominating closers in the past 10 years so it was worth every penny. Half a season doesn't define a player he will figure it out. I'm guessing he's been pitching injured so once he comes back look out. One more top 3 starter and this team is WS contending. You'll want to go back through this thread and read the arguments posters make - on both sides of the question. Those arguments revolve around the fungibility of relievers and the long-term value (quantified) of minor league talent and how to discount it. There are also peripheral issues of health and longevity for hard throwers. I'd also like your definition of a top three starter. By most measures the Sox currently have four of those, something Eric has pointed out. I think it's right to ask how much additional minor league talent the Sox should give up to acquire a fifth, and why they would want to do that.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 18, 2016 17:42:39 GMT -5
I moved a bunch of off-topic posts to the Red Sox rotation thread.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,946
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 24, 2016 8:21:13 GMT -5
Using these well-researched figures, Margot and Guerra had $60.6M of surplus value (I'm counting Margot as a top 50 prospect based on his MLB and BP rankings). Call it $65 for the package. Add the the fact that Sox hitting prospects are averaging 80% more than MLB average, use that conservatively, and it approaches $100M. Using bWAR + FanGraphs clutch, Kimbrel was coming off seasons of $18.4 and $19.2 value. Controlled for three years at $11, $13, $13, he projected to have about $17M of surplus value. You have to do a lot of discounting of future value, and a lot of enhancing of closer value based on let's-be-like-the-Royals sabermetrics, to get $17M into the neighborhood of $60M - $100M. He's been worth $3.2M so far this year (0.4 adjusted WAR), which puts him at -$3.3M of value. If he pitches at a 2.0 WAR level the last two months, he can reduce the deficit to about -$2.5M. At that level for 2 more seasons, he can end up in the neighborhood of $5M surplus. Leaving us only $55M to $100M+ in the red. Price, by the way, has -$13.6M surplus value so far. He'd been averaging $36M of value over the previous 6 years (at today's rate), so even if he bounces back completely, at $30M cost per year it's going to take him another two years to break even.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 24, 2016 8:56:49 GMT -5
That would be a better argument if you didn't assert that Red Sox position player prospects are 67% more valuable than the league-average. Yes, they've had a lot of success in terms of developing position player prospects in the last 15 years. No, you shouldn't assume that success is predictive, especially because when you're making arguments like the above, you should be conservative in your estimates when doing so still illustrates the large gap in value.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,946
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 24, 2016 9:37:08 GMT -5
That would be a better argument if you didn't assert that Red Sox position player prospects are 67% more valuable than the league-average. Yes, they've had a lot of success in terms of developing position player prospects in the last 15 years. No, you shouldn't assume that success is predictive, especially because when you're making arguments like the above, you should be conservative in your estimates when doing so still illustrates the large gap in value. I was well aware that the trade looks disastrous either way, which is why I gave both figures as a range. I'm agnostic as to how much of our 80% excess value performance is predictive, but I think some portion of it is (say, at least 25%) because of our emphasis on makeup. At 60%, it's pegging Margot as a 2.2 WAR player (average of his 6 control years, including the chance that he busts) instead of 1.4. Right now, I'll take the boosted figure over the raw one.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuizzy on Jul 24, 2016 18:18:40 GMT -5
Margot for Kimbrel alone would be a big win for the Padres. Guerra hasn't been good but Allen has been solid. You gave up 6 years of control of a probable future all star outfielder. They could have used Margot to get a starter or held him. Instead Dumb Dave decided to single handedly restock the Padres system.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Jul 24, 2016 18:34:38 GMT -5
Did Dombrowski kick your dog? Or traded him?
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 24, 2016 19:53:32 GMT -5
Margot for Kimbrel alone would be a big win for the Padres. Guerra hasn't been good but Allen has been solid. You gave up 6 years of control of a probable future all star outfielder. They could have used Margot to get a starter or held him. Instead Dumb Dave decided to single handedly restock the Padres system. If that was true they would have done it. Stop assuming it's true.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuizzy on Jul 25, 2016 9:02:24 GMT -5
Margot for Kimbrel alone would be a big win for the Padres. Guerra hasn't been good but Allen has been solid. You gave up 6 years of control of a probable future all star outfielder. They could have used Margot to get a starter or held him. Instead Dumb Dave decided to single handedly restock the Padres system. If that was true they would have done it. Stop assuming it's true. The guy is one of the top prospects in all of baseball. Absolutely could have been a centerpiece to get a pitcher. Maybe this team still has Espinoza. But we won't know because our overzealous GM blew his load in the offseason. I wish this team was getting the haul the MFY are getting back for Chapman. Who would have came dirt cheap after the whole domestic violence thing and is better than Kimbrel anyways.
|
|
|
Post by 0ap0 on Jul 25, 2016 9:14:37 GMT -5
overzealous GM blew his ... You're disgusting.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 25, 2016 9:27:24 GMT -5
after the whole domestic violence thing Yes. That "thing."
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jul 25, 2016 10:33:33 GMT -5
If that was true they would have done it. Stop assuming it's true. The guy is one of the top prospects in all of baseball. Absolutely could have been a centerpiece to get a pitcher. Maybe this team still has Espinoza. But we won't know because our overzealous GM blew his load in the offseason. I wish this team was getting the haul the MFY are getting back for Chapman. Who would have came dirt cheap after the whole domestic violence thing and is better than Kimbrel anyways. Um, yeah. Deservedly so. No one I want on the Sox. Much different and worse than, say, cutting up unis, getting popped for pot or getting caught with PEDs, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by sox fan in nc on Jul 25, 2016 10:38:39 GMT -5
Only thing though, you don't hear much about that "thing" anymore.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 25, 2016 10:48:15 GMT -5
Only thing though, you don't hear much about that "thing" anymore. Yeah, because a-hole fans don't give a damn about it and neither does the league. If the Red Sox started acquiring these types of players, I'd eventually stop watching baseball.
|
|
|