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.
2016-2017 Red Sox Offseason (Non-Manager) Discussion
|
Post by bigpupp on Nov 4, 2016 17:00:25 GMT -5
Damn. They picked up Buchholz option. That means I will have to donate $20.00 to the Jimmy Fund per my wager with bigpupp the Sox wouldn't pick it up, Buchholz late season surge sealed my fate. Fine with doing it, I will provide proof of patronage, when I send in. I appreciate it good sir. All for a good cause.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Nov 4, 2016 19:41:58 GMT -5
Damn. They picked up Buchholz option. That means I will have to donate $20.00 to the Jimmy Fund per my wager with bigpupp the Sox wouldn't pick it up, Buchholz late season surge sealed my fate. Fine with doing it, I will provide proof of patronage, when I send in. I was wrong about that one myself. No bet here, don't like him , but the move makes sense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2016 10:36:41 GMT -5
I would like to see the Red Sox go get Kendrys Morales now that it looks like he is set to enter free agency. He won't put up the RBI totals that Encarnacion will, but he seems good for a .270-ish type of season with 25-30 home runs. Plus he's a switch hitter and he would come at a fraction of the cost of Encarnacion. I think Morales fits a little better with this team right now given that he can bat lefty and he won't demand the years/money that EE will, and the production has been solid the last two years in Kansas City.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Nov 5, 2016 11:28:27 GMT -5
I'm with ya!!! I want a short term righty bat specialist then I'm okay with our lefties to see how they do vs right-handed pitchers while we get the righty bat too. As for Leon and Vaz -- I would try both to start. Read my post above about Ramos. I'd give both guys (Leon and Vaz) the big shot to see how they do. And even if we didn't get Ramos or another catcher with a bat-- I don't mind giving both a long leash. I'm okay with giving one position a long leash - even if they show they can't hit. But then we'd better not have 3 other positions that can't hit lefties. It would make it too easy to pitch to us after 5 or 6 innings with a lefty if that were the case.
I think we have a good club without paying a lot of money on an expensive position player. In the back of my mind I want enough to get in on one of the huge talents for 2018 while still being very tough in 2017. If we go for Ramos -/ a big catcher maybe we are going "all in" which is why I prefer not to. But everything I said sort of blows up if Pearce is getting big money. I think we're highly flawed with our bats without that righty bat to keep guys like Sahw and Panda off the field as much as possible vs lefties --and without a better closer because of his trend.
As for Kimbrel-- he had 2 bb per 9 in 2012, in 2013 2.7 per 9, then 3.8 then 3.3 then 5.1. To me he is trending high. Throw out his rookie year - after that his next 6 - he's had three years 3.7 or higher walks. I don't trust over the long haul what he will become. Every other year on average he is going to be a high walk closer. I think we can do better with our money.
Come on if you looked up his stats and want to throw out the 7 by per 9 in 2010 I can agree just over 20 innings, but you left out 2011 and his 3.7 by per 9. When you include those years, there is no trend. He has shown he can improve his control and walks. One other thing, even with Kimbrels bad 2016, he still has a career walk rate of 3.6 per 9. Chapman is 4.1 for his career. If he goes back to his career levels he'll be just fine. Your basing everything off his worst year, but you agree he'll bounce back. His career numbers say more than likely he'll be just fine. For the 2011 season if you were to chart the trend staring at 3.7 bb per nine then we'd see his trend moving radically downward overall from 2011 to 2013. In 2013 it did spike upward from 2012 but overall from 3.7 in 2010 those 3 years are still a downward trend. Since 2013 overall his trend has been moving upward. Even his best year in terms of walks (2015) of the last 3, was quite a bit higher than 2013. Thus over the past three years he has been on an upward trend. He'll probably never be as bad as this year with 5 walks but never as good as 2 walks he had in 2011. If you want to say his trend will remain constant at 3.6 walks -- okay but that is too high, isn't it? Would you say it looks like he's on the verge over the next several years to average close to 3.6 walks, quite a bit less than 3.6 walks per 9 or quite a bit higher than 3.6 walks? Based on the last 3 years of data I say at best he is slightly below 3.6 walks which isn't very good. And imo much higher chance his average jumps quite a bit higher of 3.6 walks than he drops significantly lower as long as his fastball remains elite. OFC as his fastball declines, so will his k-rate etc, and as a result he may/will issue less walks therefore not be as wild. But once this happens, for an aging closer like him, I don't believe will age gracefully.
As far Chapman vs Kimbrel - my eye test this year is pretty down on Kimbrel. The stats I see in which I'm looking at past 3 years, the prior years of 4 and 5 in terms of control may be anomalies. But I think I mentioned before that Chapman has been rated top 5 or so for several years as a closer while Kimbrel's last 2 have been 14 and 30 respectively. Those are trends though not full-proof ones. And I'm not totally against walks for a closer. But the rating for Chapman sort of backs up what I have seen with my own eyes that Kimbrel was mediocre this year. And he wasn't so hot last year. When was the last time Chapman was considered "mediocre" or "just "pretty good?" That's why I want Chapman instead of Kimbrel. He is still reliable that he will be very good. Let "the other guy" have Kimbrel.
I agree Kimbrel can improve his numbers and certainly will this upcoming year. But as you once replied to me about "selling low" -- we wouldn't be selling low on Kimbrel. And we'd be using his money to fill other needs. As I've said Panda and Shaw can't hit lefties. Holt is a better option if he could hit lefties. He had two years he hit lefties pretty well. Shaw showed he could in 2015 until imo pitchers figured him out and he'll revert to being what he was in AAA and this year. And that is an awful hitter vs lefties. We need to keep these guys, especially Shaw and Panda off the field as much as possible vs lefties. Plus our catcher situation is highly questionable. Now if you add in that no doubt JBJ is our full-time CF that we love, but if he is more of like the hitter we saw this year which is fine; he couldn't hit lefties either.
IMO, if we get Chapman, these other issues mentioned above need to be addressed first more than a one inning $13.5m 8th inning pitcher that we can still sell high on.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 5, 2016 15:31:29 GMT -5
Come on if you looked up his stats and want to throw out the 7 by per 9 in 2010 I can agree just over 20 innings, but you left out 2011 and his 3.7 by per 9. When you include those years, there is no trend. He has shown he can improve his control and walks. One other thing, even with Kimbrels bad 2016, he still has a career walk rate of 3.6 per 9. Chapman is 4.1 for his career. If he goes back to his career levels he'll be just fine. Your basing everything off his worst year, but you agree he'll bounce back. His career numbers say more than likely he'll be just fine. For the 2011 season if you were to chart the trend staring at 3.7 bb per nine then we'd see his trend moving radically downward overall from 2011 to 2013. In 2013 it did spike upward from 2012 but overall from 3.7 in 2010 those 3 years are still a downward trend. Since 2013 overall his trend has been moving upward. Even his best year in terms of walks (2015) of the last 3, was quite a bit higher than 2013. Thus over the past three years he has been on an upward trend. He'll probably never be as bad as this year with 5 walks but never as good as 2 walks he had in 2011. If you want to say his trend will remain constant at 3.6 walks -- okay but that is too high, isn't it? Would you say it looks like he's on the verge over the next several years to average close to 3.6 walks, quite a bit less than 3.6 walks per 9 or quite a bit higher than 3.6 walks? Based on the last 3 years of data I say at best he is slightly below 3.6 walks which isn't very good. And imo much higher chance his average jumps quite a bit higher of 3.6 walks than he drops significantly lower as long as his fastball remains elite. OFC as his fastball declines, so will his k-rate etc, and as a result he may/will issue less walks therefore not be as wild. But once this happens, for an aging closer like him, I don't believe will age gracefully.
As far Chapman vs Kimbrel - my eye test this year is pretty down on Kimbrel. The stats I see in which I'm looking at past 3 years, the prior years of 4 and 5 in terms of control may be anomalies. But I think I mentioned before that Chapman has been rated top 5 or so for several years as a closer while Kimbrel's last 2 have been 14 and 30 respectively. Those are trends though not full-proof ones. And I'm not totally against walks for a closer. But the rating for Chapman sort of backs up what I have seen with my own eyes that Kimbrel was mediocre this year. And he wasn't so hot last year. When was the last time Chapman was considered "mediocre" or "just "pretty good?" That's why I want Chapman instead of Kimbrel. He is still reliable that he will be very good. Let "the other guy" have Kimbrel.
I agree Kimbrel can improve his numbers and certainly will this upcoming year. But as you once replied to me about "selling low" -- we wouldn't be selling low on Kimbrel. And we'd be using his money to fill other needs. As I've said Panda and Shaw can't hit lefties. Holt is a better option if he could hit lefties. He had two years he hit lefties pretty well. Shaw showed he could in 2015 until imo pitchers figured him out and he'll revert to being what he was in AAA and this year. And that is an awful hitter vs lefties. We need to keep these guys, especially Shaw and Panda off the field as much as possible vs lefties. Plus our catcher situation is highly questionable. Now if you add in that no doubt JBJ is our full-time CF that we love, but if he is more of like the hitter we saw this year which is fine; he couldn't hit lefties either.
IMO, if we get Chapman, these other issues mentioned above need to be addressed first more than a one inning $13.5m 8th inning pitcher that we can still sell high on. If you look at all of Kimbrels numbers, he's had issues with walks and improved. That's why I believe he can bounce back. Some players need time to adjust when changing teams and some don't. Going to AL East is a big jump up compared to other divisions. That's why I give him a one year pass. Both Porcello and Price also struggled in there first year in Boston. Also the media attention and pressure in Boston is intense. Again Chapman has a 4.1 career walk rate per 9, so I'm not worried if Kimbrel goes back to his career rate. Why are you worried about his fastball decline? It has yet to happen and i don't think it will over next two years. Guys like Billy Wagner never really lost his elite fastball. You could say same thing about Chapman, what if he lost his elite fastball? How in the world do you think we wouldn't be selling low on Kimbrel? A lot of what you say makes sense, but that doesn't. If you trade a guy coming off a career worst year, your selling low. You really can't debate that. You think we could get two top 100 prospects for him? As to a guy to hit lefties, you get a Chris Young player, on a Chris Young contract, problem solved. Like I said before with Ortiz money coming off books and if you trade Clay, you have enough money to sign Chapman and get your lefty hitting 3B/1B Chris Young type player. You might be able to trade Clay and get the bat you need. I would much rather spend the money on Kimbrel than Clay.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Nov 5, 2016 16:48:46 GMT -5
For the 2011 season if you were to chart the trend staring at 3.7 bb per nine then we'd see his trend moving radically downward overall from 2011 to 2013. In 2013 it did spike upward from 2012 but overall from 3.7 in 2010 those 3 years are still a downward trend. Since 2013 overall his trend has been moving upward. Even his best year in terms of walks (2015) of the last 3, was quite a bit higher than 2013. Thus over the past three years he has been on an upward trend. He'll probably never be as bad as this year with 5 walks but never as good as 2 walks he had in 2011. If you want to say his trend will remain constant at 3.6 walks -- okay but that is too high, isn't it? Would you say it looks like he's on the verge over the next several years to average close to 3.6 walks, quite a bit less than 3.6 walks per 9 or quite a bit higher than 3.6 walks? Based on the last 3 years of data I say at best he is slightly below 3.6 walks which isn't very good. And imo much higher chance his average jumps quite a bit higher of 3.6 walks than he drops significantly lower as long as his fastball remains elite. OFC as his fastball declines, so will his k-rate etc, and as a result he may/will issue less walks therefore not be as wild. But once this happens, for an aging closer like him, I don't believe will age gracefully.
As far Chapman vs Kimbrel - my eye test this year is pretty down on Kimbrel. The stats I see in which I'm looking at past 3 years, the prior years of 4 and 5 in terms of control may be anomalies. But I think I mentioned before that Chapman has been rated top 5 or so for several years as a closer while Kimbrel's last 2 have been 14 and 30 respectively. Those are trends though not full-proof ones. And I'm not totally against walks for a closer. But the rating for Chapman sort of backs up what I have seen with my own eyes that Kimbrel was mediocre this year. And he wasn't so hot last year. When was the last time Chapman was considered "mediocre" or "just "pretty good?" That's why I want Chapman instead of Kimbrel. He is still reliable that he will be very good. Let "the other guy" have Kimbrel.
I agree Kimbrel can improve his numbers and certainly will this upcoming year. But as you once replied to me about "selling low" -- we wouldn't be selling low on Kimbrel. And we'd be using his money to fill other needs. As I've said Panda and Shaw can't hit lefties. Holt is a better option if he could hit lefties. He had two years he hit lefties pretty well. Shaw showed he could in 2015 until imo pitchers figured him out and he'll revert to being what he was in AAA and this year. And that is an awful hitter vs lefties. We need to keep these guys, especially Shaw and Panda off the field as much as possible vs lefties. Plus our catcher situation is highly questionable. Now if you add in that no doubt JBJ is our full-time CF that we love, but if he is more of like the hitter we saw this year which is fine; he couldn't hit lefties either.
IMO, if we get Chapman, these other issues mentioned above need to be addressed first more than a one inning $13.5m 8th inning pitcher that we can still sell high on. If you look at all of Kimbrels numbers, he's had issues with walks and improved. That's why I believe he can bounce back. Some players need time to adjust when changing teams and some don't. Going to AL East is a big jump up compared to other divisions. That's why I give him a one year pass. Both Porcello and Price also struggled in there first year in Boston. Also the media attention and pressure in Boston is intense. Again Chapman has a 4.1 career walk rate per 9, so I'm not worried if Kimbrel goes back to his career rate. Why are you worried about his fastball decline? It has yet to happen and i don't think it will over next two years. Guys like Billy Wagner never really lost his elite fastball. You could say same thing about Chapman, what if he lost his elite fastball? How in the world do you think we wouldn't be selling low on Kimbrel? A lot of what you say makes sense, but that doesn't. If you trade a guy coming off a career worst year, your selling low. You really can't debate that. You think we could get two top 100 prospects for him? As to a guy to hit lefties, you get a Chris Young player, on a Chris Young contract, problem solved. Like I said before with Ortiz money coming off books and if you trade Clay, you have enough money to sign Chapman and get your lefty hitting 3B/1B Chris Young type player. You might be able to trade Clay and get the bat you need. I would much rather spend the money on Kimbrel than Clay. But if you look at Kimbrel his overall walks have increased from 2011 - 2013 vs 2014 - 2016. OFC he'll improve but not good enough over several years to warrant $13.5m over for a 1 inning 8th reliever. His .36 walks is his average- how much more do you expect he is going to improve year over year? His walks improved when he left for San Diego so it's not all about moving, right? He is what he is- a wild reliever.
And I wasn't "worried" about the eventual decline of Kimbrel's fastball. Juts made a point that he's not going to go downhill pretty once he loses it. I just didn't want other posters coming at me regarding his eventual decline.
And while you bring up again comparison of walks Kimbrel vs Chapman, I'll continue to bring up ratings comparison Chapman vs Kimbrel from fangraphs which shows Chapman has been awesome even these last two years while Kimbrel hasn't. So as I said before I don't just look at walks but also ratings and two years Kimbrel has been rated just "pretty good-to-mediocre." So that's important too and which is why Chapman is better and why he'll continue more than likely to be terrific while Kimbrel will have his "ups-and-down." .
And again for 1 year I agree that Kimbrel will be good. That's why I say we can trade him if we get another closer such as Chapman. He has value to fill the other positions - including catcher. We still don't know what we have - in terms of if we're any good at catcher, do we? A full-time catcher is much more valuable to us imo than a 1 inning 8th reliever.
And I'm getting the feeling that you don't think we can get much for Kimbrel yet you think a lot of him? Why wouldn't more people think like you and really believe Kimbrel is still really really really good for several years? Then for those people why would we be selling low? We'd still get high for him. You are a smart poster. The link below is indicating Kimbrel is still darn good. SO where is this selling lwo coming from? You mean we aren't selling at his peak so that is considered "selling low?" It seems to me that Kimbrel is still is considered that. They've given him a "B Grade " even for the year he has had. He still has very high value imo.
bosoxinjection.com/2016/11/04/boston-red-sox-report-cards-craig-kimbrel/
As for finding a 3rd baseman, find me the rh bat, and find me the bat at catcher that can also defend well. And for the last two years kimbrel has had- I can say same thing you are saying for finding a good rh bat like Young, can't I? That the Red Sox can find an 8th inning guy much cheaper than what they are paying for a guy like Kimbrel? That's what I'm saying in regards to get me a fulltime catcher.
If you think we can trade Clay- great - then why not put both on the block after we get Chapman? I'm not saying yes or no; just offering a counter. If you're willing to live with the 5 starters we have (minus Clay), then we can get a lot for both, can't we? SO what is that off the books, $27m? How much do you think Chapman and Jansen are going to get respectively? More than Clay? More than Kimbrel? if you want your super bullpen then why not trade both Clay and Kimbrel and go huge after Chapman and Jansen? If you say Jansen is not that much more of an upgrade than Kimbrel would I be crazy to say I'm not sure the signing of Koji and the year of Kelly or a trade for a Chris Young cheap-type but a late inning reliever is so bad vs Kimbrel? Kimbrel's WAR rating has been pretty weak, hasn't it?
Bottom-line is- that I want to sell Kimbrel "to you / to bostoninjection writer" so I can get something cheaper over the long haul that will do about the same while using Kimbrel's current value to get a critical need or two. We can agree to disagree?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 5, 2016 18:00:42 GMT -5
I don't understand why you can't understand the selling low part on Kimbrel. His value is lower than when we acquired him, hence your selling low. You can't debate that, it's a fact. He's coming off a career worst year. His value is at an all-time low. Sure he has value, but that doesn't mean you're not selling low.
Calling him a wild reliever is an overreaction, unless you believe he will repeat last year's numbers. Again he has much better numbers than Chapman for his career. Yes he had two down years in a row,while playing for two different teams. Let's see what he does not switching teams in offseason. For some players that really effects them. You get new coaches each year telling you to do different things. He also wasn't fully healthy for half if not the whole year due to his knee.
I trade Clay over Kimbrel because I don't count on Clay increasing his value, like I do Kimbrel. Clay is just as likely to get injured and decrease his value, than he is to increase it. Clay is also a free agent after season. Jansen is going to require a draft pick and massive deal, Kimbrel cost you nothing and will make a lot less on a shorter deal. It's going to be hard to sign Chapman, never mind both Jansen and Chapman. Getting Chapman is kind of a pipe dream, getting both is just unrealistic in my opinion.
Finding a platoon 3B/1B that can hit lefties is easy and cheap. Look at Chris Young last year. Finding a cheap reliever that could be elite is not easy and is a major crap shot. Relievers production goes up and down year to year. You could get a Greg Holland type player, but you don't know how he bounces back for TJ. Also he's not going to be cheap, I could see a one year 8-10 million deal. That's almost what Kimbrel makes. If you can pick out cheap relievers that can be elite, you should be working for a MLB club, because most GMs can't do that. They luck into those guys for the most part. Also reliever salaries are about to explode, Kimbrel will look like a good deal after this off-season.
Chances they sign a hitting catcher is slim to none. They might bring in a AAA guy for depth, but that's about it. In my opinion we are stocked at catcher and don't have a need. Most teams would love the depth we have at catcher.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Nov 5, 2016 21:47:19 GMT -5
We can go around on this all day. I don't understand why you consider a move as "selling low" rather than calling it "selling at his value." Selling at one's value is considered "selling low?" His value is still considered elite is it not? Your 1st reply to me was that you wanted to create a super pen thus keep Chapman and Kimbrel. SO while you say in jest 'I should be a GM" - the same with you in this instance. You're a pretty crafty GM or a better than all the scouts- if you could sell the fact that in one breath that Kimbrel is elite yet in another say it would be dumb to trade him while his value is so low in another. If he is elite you should be able to sell him high.
Further, many on this site felt we overpaid quite a bit for Kimbrel. So because we don't get exactly the same that means we are selling low? If that is the case then Kimbrel will never be close to being traded unless some team is dumb. I want to sell Kimbrel at his value which is still considered elite. You've referred to him and Chapman as a super-pen, have you not? SO you and bostoninjection feels he's top level so will some GM's, right?
As far as calling him a wild reliever it IS what he IS. When we've won our titles, can you name which closer was even close to his 3.6 walks? Other than Chapman, the two other prominent relievers were Miller and Jansen. They don't come close to 3.6 walks either. What is Kimbrel compared to these guys? Wild? I do agree that for an 8th inning guy if he averages 3.6 walks maybe that is not so bad comparatively. But $13.5m is if you would think we have other weaknesses such as with catcher like I do then he should look to be replaced. His walks keep him off of the Chapman-rated status.
And if we were to trade both Clay and Kimbrel why couldn't we be pick up prospects if we end up getting Jansen and feel our catcher is okay? Anybody that gets these guys is looking to win now too. So if you are picking up prospects, how bad does it hurt that the Red Sox give up a 1st round pick for Jansen? And when you say Jansen will be massive, then how much better do you think he is vs Kimbrel? If he is a lot more, then wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that Kimbrel is even more valuable because of his lower valued contract? If Kimbrel is as elite as you suggest and Hansen gets a lot more, then Kimbrel is very valued. So fi you are right about Kimbrel, then other GM's will see what you see, right? You can't have it both ways by you saying Kimbrel is elite yet he doesn't have much value.
As for 3b/1b- okay - but I've asked to find one. Who? Do you have a name we can get? Baltimore got Pearce and I believe he stunk. So it's not that easy. Rodriguez was mentioned from Pittsburgh. But he's a complete crapshoot. You say there is one we can get, then who and what do we need to do to get him? If you can't find one, then maybe we need to trade big for a full-time one? And while you say finding an elite reliever is a crapshoot - yet Kimbrel hasn't been elite in two years. Yet you say he is when you referred to us and our superpen with Chapman. So again over-and-over it comes right back how can we refer to Kimbrel as elite in one breath and then in another say we can't sell him high in another? If he is supposedly elite then some GM's will be smart enough to seek him out and offer elite value, right?
I agree with you on a lot of other things- for example I'm with you on not getting EE.
But regarding this, you and I disagree at catcher which is why in part I would want to replace Kimbrel. He gives us that opportunity. And imo Kimbrel over the long haul is not the elite pitcher you think he is. And when your average is 3.6 walks per 9 - that is wild. When chapman is wild he is still rated amongst the best according to fangraphs. That is better than Kimbrel.
And again fangrahs numbers clearly show over the last several years he has been better than Kimbrel. And as far as Chapman switching teams, he already did it this year - twice. And he walked an average of 2.8 batters per 9 innings this year while he pitched for 2 different teams. Not every player cracks when they change teams. Schilling didn't. And Chapman didn't when he went to Cubs and Yanks.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 6, 2016 1:13:23 GMT -5
Kimbrels value is still not considered elite, he's not coming off an elite season. His current value is below the Chapman/Miller level. I think he will bounce back to an elite level next year, which you agreed with. So if you trade him now your selling low. I could understand your point about selling at market value if you weren't on record saying he'll bounce back, but you said just that. If you sell a stock and it goes up after you sold, you sold low! Your twisting my words, just because I think he'll bounce back, doesn't mean other GMs will value him at his career numbers. Maybe they don't think he'll bounce back and they will use last season's stats against you in trade talks. He is now riskier, than last year.
Calling him B level is in no way calling him elite my friend, I think that's why you are confused. It means he's still very good, but not elite. As to people thinking we overpaid, the last year has proven a ton of evidence that we did not. First fangraphs article saying elite relievers are undervalued and second the mid season trades for Chapman and Miller. Sure Kimbrel didn't pitch like an elite guy last year, but that's what DD thought. He had a down year, after being one of most elite relievers for years.
As far as wild, go look at Andrew Miller's career walk numbers, they are way higher than Kimbrel. It's only his last 3 years that he has greatly improved those numbers, his age 29-31 seasons. It's what I have been saying, pitchers can improve their control, Andrew Miller is a great example of that. Kimbrel was elite in 2011 and 2014 while averaging 3.75 walks per 9. He was worth 4.9 bwars. I just don't get your issue with his walks while saying you want Chapman. If your so worried about walks, then you would want Jansen, not Chapman. Just makes no sense.
I don't want Jansen, I think he's overrated. Only had two seasons over 2 bwar, Kimbrel has 4 such seasons. I would bet on Kimbrel being better next year than Jansen.
I have yet to do my research on anything but elite free agents, so no I don't have exact name for a lefty hitting 3B/1B, but do you really think they are incredibly rare? I sure don't, the rare guys are the ones that hit both righties and lefties well. Now let's say you're right and you can't sign one, you can easily trade for platoon players for minimum cost. I'm just not worried about finding a platoon bat and I'm surprised you think it will be so hard to find one.
Sure not every player has down years when switching teams, i've said just that. But history shows us that a lot do. For everyone player you can show me that didn't, I can show you a player that did. Examples Porcello and Price, both had like career worst years there first season with Red Sox. Porcello bounced back, I expect Price and Kimbrel to do the same. The main reason is that both Price and Kimbrel still had elite stuff and tons of strikeouts. They just had a ton of innings when they stunk, everything went wrong that could go wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Nov 6, 2016 1:52:49 GMT -5
I think the fact that half this board wants to sign a closer and trade Kimbrel should tip you off that his value isnt really at its highest point.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Nov 6, 2016 14:01:51 GMT -5
We need “a timeout. “ It’s unfortunate on websites we couldn’t sit and talk and understand each other’s terminology. Your definition of my comment of “bounce back” is different than mine. I have said according to fangraphs Kimbrel was 30th ranked this year which makes him mediocre –(see my post on pg 10 on 11/3 at 9:12 am. I say Chapman is not just “Slightly better than Kimbrel). Therefore I have called Kimbrel a tier below Chapman- so I do not believe he is as elite as Chapman or Jansen. So over the long haul- I do not believe Kimbrel is as elite as Chapman and Jansen. You'll see quotes below in which I said that. As I said before on a prior post- I’d want to do the following: “Bottom-line is- that I want to sell Kimbrel "to you / to bostoninjection writer" so I can get something cheaper over the long haul that will do about the same while using Kimbrel's current value to get a critical need or two. We can agree to disagree?” Below are many comments I made of Kimbrel—you could think I’m suggesting Kimbrel as elite but when you read all else-—I don’t see how you can. He is going to bounce back from mediocrity. But he isn’t elite. “And I believe this one year he'll bounce back but still be scary because his trends of control / lack of control is high. “ “First off regarding Chapman- I just want to be clear-- Chapman is better. I'm not sure how great Kimbrel will be over the next several years.” “Throw out his rookie year - after that his next 6 - he's had three years 3.7 or higher walks. I don't trust over the long haul what he will become. Every other year on average he is going to be a high walk closer. I think we can do better with our money. “ “As far Chapman vs Kimbrel - my eye test this year is pretty down on Kimbrel. The stats I see in which I'm looking at past 3 years, the prior years of 4 and 5 in terms of control may be anomalies. But I think I mentioned before that Chapman has been rated top 5 or so for several years as a closer while Kimbrel's last 2 have been 14 and 30 respectively.” “And while you bring up again comparison of walks Kimbrel vs Chapman, I'll continue to bring up ratings comparison Chapman vs Kimbrel from fangraphs which shows Chapman has been awesome even these last two years while Kimbrel hasn't.” “If you say Jansen is not that much more of an upgrade than Kimbrel would I be crazy to say I'm not sure the signing of Koji and the year of Kelly or a trade for a Chris Young cheap-type but a late inning reliever is so bad vs Kimbrel? Kimbrel's WAR rating has been pretty weak, hasn't it? “ “And again for 1 year I agree that Kimbrel will be good. That's why I say we can trade him if we get another closer such as Chapman.” As far as your investment analogy – it’s not always true. Kimbrel’s “relative strength/ his capital gains” is his fastball which is still considered elite based on his strikeouts per 9 amongst other stats which my guess is back this up. You specifically said Chapman and Kimbrel are a superpen on your 1st post to me. I am selling Kimbrel’s “relative strength” to you. You expect he’ll be elite. I’ll get something very good for that so that isn’t selling low. That’s sell at market value rather that the strategy many young investors make that wait for an absolute peak. Too often many have no idea when that peak will be unless you’re a genius. Kimbrle still ahs relative strength that makes you and bostoninjection writer "believe." I don’t think Kimbrel is Chapman or Jansen. He’s not that elite guy. His control will be his failing, especially come playoff time. www.investopedia.com/articles/trading/08/relative-strength.asp
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Nov 6, 2016 14:09:26 GMT -5
Okay I'll take Jansen's next three years over Kimbrel. We'll never remember this but anyhow I like guys with heat and control. I wouldn't make the superpen deal of both closers (Chapman and Hansen) but I do prefer Jansen.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 6, 2016 16:19:39 GMT -5
You said he will bounce back next year, hence he will be better than this year. So if you trade him now your selling low, that's a fact. Just because you don't think he"ll be as elite as Chapman and Jansen doesn't prove your right. It has nothing to do with the selling low point.
Also trading Kimbrel now at his market price, has nothing to do with selling low or high. Only his future performance will determine that. Considering that most people think he'll be better than a .9 war player going forward, you would be selling low. If you don't get that, you just never will. Your allowing your dislike of him or the fact you just want to trade him to cloud your judgement.
Creating my super pen doesn't mean Kimbrel has to be an elite reliever, just an elite Closer. When you combine him with Chapman, you will be hard pressed to find two better pitchers is the 8th/9th inning roles. The article you posted said Kimbrel was an elite Closer based on save % last year, not that he was an elite reliever like you've claimed. That's a big difference.
If you read that article and think Kimbrels relative strength is his fastball, then that explains a lot. You didn't understand what your reading. Relative strength for Kimbrel is his overall value compared to the market of other relievers. It has nothing to do with his fastball. It's a strategy of buying low and selling high and really has nothing to do with Baseball players. I should never have used stocks as an example, because it's a very poor example. In stock trading it makes sense sometimes to sell low, because you can use the write offs to offset capital gains. That in no way applies to Baseball. You get no benefit from selling low in Baseball. If that confused you I am sorry.
Your whole point about selling before value peaks, because only a genius knows when peaks come, just makes no sense with Kimbrel. Kimbrels value is at an all time low. Your not selling right before peak value, so you don't have to sell when his value starts to decline. His value has already tanked. The Braves sold at peak value and Padres got out at near peak value. At this point you have two options sell low or hold onto him and hope his value increases, which I think it will. If you wanted to dump him, sell low because you feel Chapman and Jansen will give you better future production, that is an opinion, you can debate that. You might be right. The thing is, it doesn't change the fact your selling low on Kimbrel, you can't debate that, but man you sure are trying.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 6, 2016 17:13:05 GMT -5
If Kimbrel continues to decline after he's traded, you didn't sell low. I think at some point before the end of his current contract, he'll no longer be a viable closer and that he'd be out of baseball not long after that.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 6, 2016 19:10:14 GMT -5
Sure i've said just that, but i'm willing to bet he'll improve next year, like most people. You really think in the next two years he's not a closer? A guy that saved 31 out of 33 games and was second in AL save % amoung guys with 20 or more saves. I know you never liked Kimbrel, but that is a BOLD statement and based solely off of your dislike for him. You've been rooting against him since we traded for him, because you hated the trade. Then you add he'll be out of league in what like 3 to 4 years. Haha your hate runs deep.
This is a guy with a chance of breaking the all time saves record. Only way he's out of league and not a closer is if he has a career ending injury. He was still a very good closer, even in a career worst year!
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 6, 2016 22:02:43 GMT -5
I would like to see the Red Sox go get Kendrys Morales now that it looks like he is set to enter free agency. He won't put up the RBI totals that Encarnacion will, but he seems good for a .270-ish type of season with 25-30 home runs. Plus he's a switch hitter and he would come at a fraction of the cost of Encarnacion. I think Morales fits a little better with this team right now given that he can bat lefty and he won't demand the years/money that EE will, and the production has been solid the last two years in Kansas City. The problem with Morales is that he's terrible defensively. But, you're right, he'd probably come a lot cheaper in both AAV and years than Encarnacion, and the Sox could use another lefty. I'm not sure he's a 25-30 HR guy at 34, but 20-25 with a WRC+ in the 110-120 range is possible. It might makes sense on a three-year deal if the AAV is less than $15M. Personally, I'd prefer Beltran (no FA comp, can play OF in a pinch, probably would take a 1-2 year deal for $15M per, has a great postseason batting record, and would be tradeable if/when an internal replacement is ready). I think one of the key issues why I like Beltran (and even Morales or Moss) is that they'd be MUCH easier to move AND get value in return once Moncada/Devers is ready than Encarnacion would. EE is just another bad contract waiting to happen, IMO. I like your thinking on Morales for that reason. Also, Hanley seems to want to DH, but he can clearly play 1b adequately, so if they do trade Shaw by next August, having someone who can at least somewhat back up 1b is helpful (which Beltran can't, that we know of). Five moves I'd like to see the Sox do between now and the next deadline: 1) Sign a 1b/DH, as above, who's a 1-2 year stopgap. For now, keep Shaw: he serves as 1b depth, and he's at least an average starter at 3b. Depending on how Panda plays next spring, and how Mkncada develops, Shaw may have value as a trade piece at the next deadline. But I'd wait until then to move him. That keeps Holt in his ideal super-utility role, and they have Hernandez in a pinch. Yes, they'll lose some offense with Ortiz gone. Probably a lot. But I think that they can make that up with a solid bat like Beltran, Moss, or Morales, and the full year addition of Benintendi in left. The offense will be excellent, and any drop in run scoring can be made up with pitching: 2) Extend Pomeranz (depending on medicals), hopefully to a deal similar to the one they gave Wade Miley. I think he's at least a 3, he has 1a upside if you believe his results in the first half of last year (I think his true talent is probably slightly better than his full-season line; 3.20/3.50 ERA/FIP, 180-200 IP, 3.5-4 WAR). With improvement of his command and more development/use of his cutter, he would be a solid 2, maybe better. An extension would give them four starters with 3+ years of control (and Price would make 5 if he doesn't opt-out), all of who have pitched at #3 or better levels. It gives them rotation (and roster/salary) certainty. It would also be relatively low-cost at this point, and it would improve Pomeranz's trade value should Kopech force his way into the rotation. If Pomeranz is pitching like a 2, and has 4 years of control, they could get a very, very good package back (twice what they paid, I think, with more years and a longer performance history). And they wouldn't NEED to trade him...it just makes it possible if Kopech appears to be capable of providing similar results. Or, it would let them trade a more expensive arm (Porcello?), and keep Pomeranz, again, if they have an internal option. 3) Load up on bullpen arms. Sign Kenley Jansen. Instead of dropping a ton of money on Encarnacion (who would then probably be unmoveable in trade), use 60-75% of that and add Jansen to Kimbrel, Kelly, Ross, Barnes. I also hope they'll work out reasonable deals with Tazawa and Uehara. The last two made $12.4M last year. I think the Sox can maybe bring them both back at under $10M, total. Carson Smith is also coming back mid-season. I think Kelly is the real deal out of the 'pen. That group would give them not only a terrific 'pen, but, given the ludicrous value of excellent arms in trade, they could easily flip someone for an unfairly good cache of prospects at the deadline, the way NY did with Chapman and Miller. 4) Trade Buchholz, ideally when his value is high, and it looks like they have a reasonably viable replacement option as a sixth starter. TBH, I actually like the idea of signing Rich Hill to start (if they can get him on a 2-year deal), trading Buchholz, and making Wright a swingman, with Hill taking the #4 spot in the rotation. Signing Hill won't require FA compensation, and on a 2-year deal he would have a lot of trade value later on, depending on if Kopech, Owens, Johnson, et al happen to challenge for a rotation spot. I also think they can get real value for Buchholz. A high-upside minor league OF in the back-quarter of the top100 range would be my preference...they can afford to take a younger, higher-upside player who's further away, because they have no OF needs for 3-4 years. Clay's on a 1-year, affordable deal, and he has the lure of "we might get good Clay." I think his value by many on this board is underrated. A rotation of Price-Porcello-Rodriguez-Hill-Pomeranz is **excellent**. There's injury risk there, but Wright is terrific insurance. Signing Hill but trading Buchholz is probably more or less salary-neutral (2/$30M to 3/$42M for Hill? I'm not sure what his market would look like...) for this year. So they add prospects (whoever they get for Buchholz), improve the rotation, and get a player (Hill) who can net even more prospects in the future, without raising their cap number much at all. Plus, Hill's no more risky than Buchholz as far as injury goes. And, he's a local, they helped him resurrect his career, and he pitched great in the postseason. maybe he helps them win a WS...I'm a sucker for the storyline. 5) This one's tough. It depends on how the first four shake out. But if I'm the Sox brass, I start inquiring among teams about the few potential #1-caliber starters out there who are in their first couple MLB seasons and haven't put it all together yet. John Gray would be my first choice, but Taijuan Walker is another. Maybe James Paxton, too. Robbie Ray. Pitchers who are close, but not quite there. Yes, there's the risk of getting a Joe Kelly. But it's also how you find a Carraso or Arrieta or Mike Scott, or even a Randy Johnson. I'd like to see the Sox trade for someone like that, and if needed, trade from their own rotation to create a spot. This might have to wait, because unless they're trading Porcello (and if they did, I'd hope it was for top-25 positional players, ideally SS, OF, 3b, maybe C), their rotation doesn't have great value right now. But, say, Kopech and Devers and a third, lesser piece for Gray? I might do that. The Rockies would get insurance (and bargaining power) for Arenado, a similar-caliber arm in Kopech, and more rebuilding pieces. The Sox avoid the risk of developing Kopech, and get a TOR-caliber, young arm who's already had success, despite a horrible home park. If they could headline the deal with Kopech and NOT give up another top-5 guy, I'd do it in a second. But that's not happening. Idk...now that Hazen's in AZ, maybe a deal for Ray. Or a package to another team where it's Kopech with Shaw as a second piece. Minor league positional guys succeed so much more often than pitchers that ideally the package they send out is pitching-heavy. Regardless, there's no immediate need, but it's something I always advocate for. Risky, but they're so solid depth-wise that it's possible.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 6, 2016 22:29:18 GMT -5
For me, I'm glad they picked up Clay's option and dropped Hannigan's. Now I want them to re-up Koji and tender Tazawa. Other than that I'd like to see a pen lefty with some gas, a Miller Lite if you will.
I'm relaatively (and unusually) comfortable with the team as it is while we watch the minor leaguers progress and Carson Smith work his way back. You don't need an all-star everyplace.
I'm also OK with Kimbrel who's stuff was there but location wasn't. That's far less troublesome than the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 7, 2016 10:18:39 GMT -5
For me, I'm glad they picked up Clay's option and dropped Hannigan's. Now I want them to re-up Koji and tender Tazawa. Other than that I'd like to see a pen lefty with some gas, a Miller Lite if you will. I'm relaatively (and unusually) comfortable with the team as it is while we watch the minor leaguers progress and Carson Smith work his way back. You don't need an all-star everyplace. I'm also OK with Kimbrel who's stuff was there but location wasn't. That's far less troublesome than the other way around. I'd be extremely shocked to see them give Tazawa a QO. He'd sign it without thinking. I'd be surprised if he got $17 million for two years, let alone for one year.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 7, 2016 13:20:42 GMT -5
For me, I'm glad they picked up Clay's option and dropped Hannigan's. Now I want them to re-up Koji and tender Tazawa. Other than that I'd like to see a pen lefty with some gas, a Miller Lite if you will. I'm relaatively (and unusually) comfortable with the team as it is while we watch the minor leaguers progress and Carson Smith work his way back. You don't need an all-star everyplace. I'm also OK with Kimbrel who's stuff was there but location wasn't. That's far less troublesome than the other way around. I'd be extremely shocked to see them give Tazawa a QO. He'd sign it without thinking. I'd be surprised if he got $17 million for two years, let alone for one year. I think maybe he thought JT was a 6th-year arb? Idk, but I do hope that they re-sign him as a FA. There's definitely no chance he gets QO'd
|
|
|
Post by marrcus on Nov 7, 2016 13:21:44 GMT -5
Dave O'Brien told Butch Sterns last night that his top choice for the batting order is Encarnacion, Since that's a rather obvious choice for a name to throw out, it isn't surprising. Or he may have heard something?
He's not LHH and you will lose the pick but that wouldn't stop Dombrowski IMO. We shall see.
|
|
|
Post by borisman on Nov 7, 2016 14:04:46 GMT -5
Let's name some LHH that could be available in a trade, even if we have to overpay? And then ask ourselves if we can just sign EE for 4 years and wait for Moncada to be that LHH with some pop (followed by Devers 2 years from now). I think those are our best alternatives to replacing Papi while keeping the line-up deep. I'm more for getting a stud pitcher and a bullpen arm. I just think that this is the way DD will go. He's already stuck with Farrell with no Lovullo as an option if Sox start slow so he may play it slow until the trade deadline and see how the team performs with last years experience under their belt.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 7, 2016 15:21:08 GMT -5
Getting tied into a 5/$110M deal or thereabouts for Encarnacion will just be one of the stupidest, most short-sighted moves they could make. If anything, they can sign a huge bullpen arm for roughly half of that, over 4 years, and still have money to spend to get a very good one-year DH option like Beltran. With Benintendi around for the full year, the offense probably wouldn't lose a beat in that scenario, and the bullpen would be much better. Not to mention, an elite bullpen arm has more value in trade than a bloated Encarnacion contract, and would be much more readily moved at just about any point. And, that elite 'pen arm is probably more valuable in the playoffs too, which the Sox will almost assuredly make. The difference in production between Beltran and Encarnacion is absolutely NOT worth nearly $100M over four years, especially when they still probably have the league's best offense anyway.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 7, 2016 15:35:35 GMT -5
Let's name some LHH that could be available in a trade, even if we have to overpay? And then ask ourselves if we can just sign EE for 4 years and wait for Moncada to be that LHH with some pop (followed by Devers 2 years from now). I think those are our best alternatives to replacing Papi while keeping the line-up deep. I'm more for getting a stud pitcher and a bullpen arm. I just think that this is the way DD will go. He's already stuck with Farrell with no Lovullo as an option if Sox start slow so he may play it slow until the trade deadline and see how the team performs with last years experience under their belt. Why trade? Carlos Beltran would almost certainly take a 1-year, maybe 2-year deal. He hit .295/.337/.513 last year. He's a switch-hitter. He's arguably the best postseason hitter in history. He can play OF passably if needed. He requires no draft pick compensation. Basically, he's as good a hitter as they could get in trade (CarGo, for example), only they don't have to trade anyone to get him, and he'll have a short contract. Once his contract's done, Moncada will probably be up, with Devers close behind. Brandon Moss is another cheap LH hitter with power. He might take a pillow contract. His BA is terrible and he whiffs a lot, but he takes walks and has big-time power. The Sox already have a Pedey-Benintendi-Bogaerts-Betts-JBJ-Ramirez front 6, if they choose to they could bat Moss 7th, C eighth, and Shaw/Panda 9th. Or do the weird Farrell JBJ ninth and Moss 5th. But there are several (K Morales, too) LHH power bats out there who won't cost anything more than $. They're not going to replace Ortiz; however, they can replace his production incrementally at several spots.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Nov 7, 2016 15:41:52 GMT -5
It feels like a lot of people are really underestimating the type of money Chapman and Jansen will command this offseason. They are going to destroy Papelbon's record contract.
|
|
|
Post by borisman on Nov 7, 2016 16:22:32 GMT -5
I don't think we have the same definition of a "power bat". We don't really have legit power bats unless we use Mookie and Hanley. I'd like to replace Papi's production. EE will give about that much. I don't want to give him a big contract but let's be realistic of what he'll get. Not saying we have to have him but I think it's needed on this team. Beltran doesn't bring more than 20+ and he's about, oh, 40yo. I'd take him though if EE bidding gets outrageous. He's a decent bat so no biggie if we give him a one year deal.
|
|
|