Craig Kimbrel to Boston

[SoxnCycles]

Apparently some people think we got completely ripped off. I don't think this is Anderson for Bagwell or Slocumb for Varitek and Lowe. Kimbrel is an All Star.

 

No one has said any of that.

Apparently, you can't read.

[Orange Juiced]

Apparently some people think we got completely ripped off. I don't think this is Anderson for Bagwell or Slocumb for Varitek and Lowe. Kimbrel is an All Star.

 

Once again we are in agreement. Sox gave up some good prospects, but Kimbrel is one of the greatest relief pitchers in the history of the sport. No, that's not hyperbole. It's fact. He's been ridiculously good, and incredibly consistent. His drop-off from 2014 to 2015 was a drop-off from phenomenal to merely very, very good. And the drop-off was based on giving up 4 more homers than the previous year. Now, they happened, but it seems to be an anomaly. He threw harder in 2015 than in 2014. His strike % was the same. His k/9 was nearly the same. Maybe guys just got a smidge more wood on the ball than in years past. Take away those four homers and his era is right in line with 2014. So I'm comfortable thinking that it's just a weird statistical anomaly.

 

He'll be tremendous and will improve our 9th, 8th, and 7th innings. This was a huge acquisition.

[a700hitter]

Once again we are in agreement. Sox gave up some good prospects, but Kimbrel is one of the greatest relief pitchers in the history of the sport. No, that's not hyperbole. It's fact. He's been ridiculously good, and incredibly consistent. His drop-off from 2014 to 2015 was a drop-off from phenomenal to merely very, very good. And the drop-off was based on giving up 4 more homers than the previous year. Now, they happened, but it seems to be an anomaly. He threw harder in 2015 than in 2014. His strike % was the same. His k/9 was nearly the same. Maybe guys just got a smidge more wood on the ball than in years past. Take away those four homers and his era is right in line with 2014. So I'm comfortable thinking that it's just a weird statistical anomaly.

 

He'll be tremendous and will improve our 9th, 8th, and 7th innings. This was a huge acquisition.

Yes, I agree. I am really looking forward to seeing him pitch.

 

Did we overpay? Possibly. Only time will tell, but this is not a case of being ripped off.

Edited November 19, 2015 by a700hitter

[Hitch]

No worries. I am really curious to see what happens on the pitching front. I am almost positive I'm not going to like the cost, no matter who we get. But mostly, I don't want Dombrowski to strip the farm.

 

I think we might get hosed on the fee agent market, but they've played themselves into that corner over the last year or two, so we have to live with that.

 

I don't want us to strip the farm either(I'm sure nobody does), but prospects are just that. Many don't make it. If some more had to go for say, a Chris Sale, then it's something to consider. I don't see that being an option open to us though, personally.

[sk7326]

Once again we are in agreement. Sox gave up some good prospects, but Kimbrel is one of the greatest relief pitchers in the history of the sport. No, that's not hyperbole. It's fact. He's been ridiculously good, and incredibly consistent. His drop-off from 2014 to 2015 was a drop-off from phenomenal to merely very, very good. And the drop-off was based on giving up 4 more homers than the previous year. Now, they happened, but it seems to be an anomaly. He threw harder in 2015 than in 2014. His strike % was the same. His k/9 was nearly the same. Maybe guys just got a smidge more wood on the ball than in years past. Take away those four homers and his era is right in line with 2014. So I'm comfortable thinking that it's just a weird statistical anomaly.

 

He'll be tremendous and will improve our 9th, 8th, and 7th innings. This was a huge acquisition.

 

K-rate was lower - but yeah quite good. WHIP over 1.00 for the first time. He'll be good - question is whether his best has already passed. It's a good acquisition - the only quibble has been price. I hope he does well. Funny thing was the higher wOBA and HRs coming at the league's worst home run park.

[Kimmi]

Through the process of elimination we now have 3 pitching prospects listed in our top ten. What does it really mean? I only know what I have read like most of the rest of us about Espinoza and Kopech. We saw a little sample of Brian Johnson last year. How far away from playing in the majors are any or all of these 3? If you could trade all three of them for young ace, would you do it? Would that constitute gutting the farm? I sure and hell don't know. What I do know is that I like the Kimbrel trade. We traded some commodities that may or may not become established professionals. We got an established pitcher - closer- call him what you like in return. He could get injured of course but he comes with an established reputation. I like these types of trades as opposed to the ones where we sign someone and then hope like hell that they will become better than they have ever been. Everybody here seems to like Kimbrel but a few people think we gave too much for him. Based on everything that I have read about Margot and Guerra in particular, I really don't mind this trade very much at all. My long term isn't as long as some others. 3 years works for me. In all honesty, I think that the few who don't like the trade see or saw Margot and Guerra as being bigger trade chips than I did for sure.

 

It is going to take a while to determine whether this trade ends up being a good trade or not. Margot and Guerra (and the other two prospects) could certainly end up not amounting to anything, in which case the trade ends up being great for the Sox, if Kimbrel continues his dominance as a closer.

 

That said, the value of prospects is largely based on their rankings and their projections because that's really all GMs have to go on. No one can predict what will actually happen. In that sense, what we gave up has far more value than what we got in return.

 

I have no attachment to either Margot or Guerra, and I really don't care that they were traded. I just think the Sox could have used those resources more to their advantage.

[Kimmi]

Apparently some people think we got completely ripped off. I don't think this is Anderson for Bagwell or Slocumb for Varitek and Lowe. Kimbrel is an All Star.

 

As far as I know, there isn't a writer or an analyst out there who has said that we didn't overpay. Even the ones who like the trade acknowledge that we overpaid. I wouldn't go so far as saying that we got completely ripped off, but we paid a steep price.

[Kimmi]

I think we might get hosed on the fee agent market, but they've played themselves into that corner over the last year or two, so we have to live with that.

 

I don't want us to strip the farm either(I'm sure nobody does), but prospects are just that. Many don't make it. If some more had to go for say, a Chris Sale, then it's something to consider. I don't see that being an option open to us though, personally.

 

I think what I dislike the most about this trade is that the Sox have somewhat painted themselves into a corner as far as getting that #1.

[Kimmi]

I will say that if the FO can address the rest of its needs (mainly a #1 starter) without gutting the farm or otherwise sacrificing our long term outlook, then this trade starts looking much better.

 

If Kimbrel also helps lead us to another WS ring in the next 3 years, then it will have been worth it for me, even if Margot ends up being a perennial all star.

[Palodios]

I think what I dislike the most about this trade is that the Sox have somewhat painted themselves into a corner as far as getting that #1.

 

What concerns me is this:

 

What if Price/Greinke/Cueto simply don't want to pitch here?

[Kimmi]

What concerns me is this:

 

What if Price/Greinke/Cueto simply don't want to pitch here?

 

Exactly Pal. We have no way of knowing for sure, but I have the impression that neither Price nor Greinke have Boston at the top of their lists. Not sure about Cueto.

 

I understand the idea of being aggressive in making trades so you don't lose out, but IMO, Dombrowski closed some other doors by not showing a little more patience.

[Soxfan83]

I will say that if the FO can address the rest of its needs (mainly a #1 starter) without gutting the farm or otherwise sacrificing our long term outlook, then this trade starts looking much better.

 

If Kimbrel also helps lead us to another WS ring in the next 3 years, then it will have been worth it for me, even if Margot ends up being a perennial all star.

 

I totally agree. The World Series is the goal, obviously. With a solid bullpen and an ace, we are a legitimate contender imo. We kept Moncada, Devers, and our young studs already in the bigs.

[a700hitter]

As far as I know, there isn't a writer or an analyst out there who has said that we didn't overpay. Even the ones who like the trade acknowledge that we overpaid. I wouldn't go so far as saying that we got completely ripped off, but we paid a steep price.

I don't think you or anyone else has gotten a lot of argument contradicting the opinion that we might have overpaid on this transaction. I have repeatedly acknowledged that no one like to pay retail prices. You continue to debate a point that no one is disputing. Your continuing distress over this "overpay" certainly gives the impression that you think we got totally ripped off. Did he overpay on this deal? Probably. Was it crippling to the remainder of the offseason plan or our future? I think that would be an overstatement.

[jung]

Those doors people might be worried DD closed were already closed. There is no way we were going to pull a Sale or a Grey or any of the Mets young starters in here without giving up players nobody wants to give up.

 

As for overpaying....DD is trying to minimize downside risk because the last two doo-doo birds ate up all the downside risk we had to give. DD has very little wiggle room here. So he overpaid.....what.... did we expect to get out of this mess painlessly?

Edited November 20, 2015 by jung

[a700hitter]

Those doors people might be worried DD closed were already closed. There is no way we were going to pull a Sale or a Grey or any of the Mets young starters in here without giving up players nobody wants to give up.

 

As for overpaying....DD is trying to minimize downside risk because the last two doo-doo birds ate up all the downside risk we had to give. DD has very little wiggle room here. So he overpaid.....what.... did we expect to get out of this mess painlessly?

Exactly, we could have kept all of our prospects and continued to have bottom of the barrel pitching and non playoff teams for years to come. Things needed fixing. It wasn't going to be free.

[Dojji]

Those doors people might be worried DD closed were already closed. There is no way we were going to pull a Sale or a Grey or any of the Mets young starters in here without giving up players nobody wants to give up.

 

As for overpaying....DD is trying to minimize downside risk because the last two doo-doo birds ate up all the downside risk we had to give. DD has very little wiggle room here. So he overpaid.....what.... did we expect to get out of this mess painlessly?

 

DD's plan is probably better than mine. In his shoes the plan I'd put in front of Henry and company would basically say "We're going to have to go into the tank for 3 years in otder to clear the dead wood and cycle in some fresh talent. Here's how I'd prime the roster to make the team as competitive as possible in 2018, and here's why I think you can sell a rebuild to Red Sox fans."

 

I think our fanbase is more realistic than the FO gives us credit for, and we can be excited by just watching the kids play and mature. The storyline every year doesn't always have to be about the Red Sox are going to win it all this year. We Sox fans are in it for the long haul and not going anywhere, we will still come out for a bad year if we know that there's something worth watching if we do, such as the assembling of a young core that might take us to the top later on. For most of us that would be fine, just as long as we know what the plan is and it seems good to us.

 

Not sure Henry, an outsider, realizes this though, remember he came here from a Marlins organziation where the only way to draw fans was to win and that's part of his attitude in Boston, which I think is his mistake. We are not as quick to flock to the exits as he seems to believe.

 

And I think after the last 2 years of aging expensive players not helping the team you can easily sell a partial rebuild to the fanbase, particularly with some of the young guys like Eddy, Betts and Bogaerts showing their potential. If we didn't abandon the team in the last 2 years, a rebuild isn't going to change that -- in fact seeing the team communicate about, and then act according to, a plan to restack the team around that young core would probably be an improvement over the makd-it-up-as-we-go-along plan we seem to see laid out before us right now and may even improve fan response. We know our baseball here in New England, and a lot of us know the difference between shrewd moves that showed foresight and planning and reflex moves, and would respond better to a franchise that did more of the former and a whole lot less of the latter!

 

The only question is can you sell it to the front office, because it will mean a risk of reduced revenue (although not as much as they seem to be afraid of) and they haven't been prepared to accept that risk in the past. I personally suspect that both Theo and Cherington are no longer here because the front office will not accept the logical consequence the old core moving on and/or running out of steam, or of needing to reload and regroup for another run -- they want the harvest season all the time without spring planting and summer tending that sometimes has to go with it. New Englanders know better than that.

Edited November 20, 2015 by Dojji

[a700hitter]

DD's plan is probably better than mine. In his shoes the plan I'd put in front of Henry and company would basically say "We're going to have to go into the tank for 3 years in otder to clear the dead wood and cycle in some fresh talent. Here's how I'd prime the roster to make the team as competitive as possible in 2018, and here's why I think you can sell a rebuild to Red Sox fans."

 

I think our fanbase is more realistic than the FO gives us credit for, and we can be excited by just watching the kids play and mature. The storyline every year doesn't always have to be about the Red Sox are going to win it all this year. We Sox fans are in it for the long haul and not going anywhere, we will still come out for a bad year if we know that there's something worth watching if we do, such as the assembling of a young core that might take us to the top later on. For most of us that would be fine, just as long as we know what the plan is and it seems good to us.

 

Not sure Henry, an outsider, realizes this though, remember he came here from a Marlins organziation where the only way to draw fans was to win and that's part of his attitude in Boston, which I think is his mistake. We are not as quick to flock to the exits as he seems to believe.

 

And I think after the last 2 years of aging expensive players not helping the team you can easily sell a partial rebuild to the fanbase, particularly with some of the young guys like Eddy, Betts and Bogaerts showing their potential. If we didn't abandon the team in the last 2 years, a rebuild isn't going to change that -- in fact seeing the team communicate about, and then act according to, a plan to restack the team around that young core would probably be an improvement over the makd-it-up-as-we-go-along plan we seem to see laid out before us right now and may even improve fan response. We know our baseball here in New England, and a lot of us know the difference between shrewd moves that showed foresight and planning and reflex moves, and would respond better to a franchise that did more of the former and a whole lot less of the latter!

 

The only question is can you sell it to the front office, because it will mean a risk of reduced revenue (although not as much as they seem to be afraid of) and they haven't been prepared to accept that risk in the past. I personally suspect that both Theo and Cherington are no longer here because the front office will not accept the logical consequence the old core moving on and/or running out of steam, or of needing to reload and regroup for another run -- they want the harvest season all the time without spring planting and summer tending that sometimes has to go with it. New Englanders know better than that.

How about this? DD pitches 2020 for a completion of the rebuild and Henry can market that the team would have the chance to break the franchise record for last place finishes in a decade. They could break the 1920's mark when they sold all their players and played in a partially burned down Fenway park. I can see the 1920 Yearbook: "A Chance for Epic Suck not Seen In 100 Years."

 

Now, i am just goofing around, but why can't a team like the Red Sox manage to be successful while building for the future? The Cardinals are very good at it.

Edited November 20, 2015 by a700hitter

[Dojji]

Frankly the Red Sox are in a far tougher division than the Cardinals. A lot of those first place finishes the Cardilans boast about come from less than 90 wins.

 

THe competition in the AL East is much tougher even when the Blue Jays, Orioles and Rays aren't as well run as they currently are. When the usual divisional punching bags are running a tight ship on a relatively consistent basis it's going to take a better roster to beat them, and that level of objective roster quality is above the level you can expect to achieve year in, year out with any franchise.

 

The success we enjoyed in decades past came in an era when the other three teams in the division were particularly poorly run, and in most cases we would make the playoffs with second place finishes. Think about that for a minute -- the only teams in our division we were consistently outperforming were the corpses of TOR, BAL, and TB. Now those franchises are ascendent and as soon as that happend we're in the bottom of the division no better than them.

 

The reason? Simple. Every strategic choice you make has consequences. Trying to compete consistently dilutes your peak years and flattens your performance curve, increasing its quality in bad years at the cost of reducing its quality in the best years. Removing the valleys tends to remove the peaks as well given equal levels of skill at roster construction and equal opportunities to attract talent -- when you're not stacking up for any one given year as The Year you tend to drift around somewhere in the middle 15 most of the time.

 

We've been getting around the worst of this problem with pure money, but if you've looked around the whole league is awash with cash just now and even the poor teams can afford to keep a core around them, making our one big advantage a lot less unique, and we have not used that financial advantage well recently anyway. With that advantage nullified by the rising tide floating all boats, and by organizational incompetence, the ability to compete year in and year out is greatly reduced which is why I think a 2-3 year gap and a reload aimed at trying to establish a few peak years is called for.

Edited November 20, 2015 by Dojji

[a700hitter]

Frankly the Red Sox are in a far tougher division than the Cardinals. A lot of those first place finishes the Cardilans boast about come from less than 90 wins.

 

THe competition in the AL East is much tougher even when the Blue Jays, Orioles and Rays aren't as well run as they currently are. When the usual divisional punching bags are running a tight ship on a relatively consistent basis it's going to take a better roster to beat them, and that level of objective roster quality is above the level you can expect to achieve year in, year out with any franchise.

But they don't have 90 loss seasons and very very rarely even finish with a less than .500 record. We don't need to win the division every year, but there is no reason why they shouldn't be able to field a competitive team every year. The last two seasons we haven't played a meaningful game after the trading deadline. In truth, the last time we played meaningful games was opening weekend 2014.

[sk7326]

The NL Central had the three best teams in the league this season

[jung]

I think you guys are both right in your own ways. I think ultimately we will find that DD is on more of a 2-3 year plan but is using trades like Kimbrel to prime the pump. If for example he does a rental for 2016 at enormous cost in either players or cash I will be surprised and disappointed. That does not mean he won't bring somebody in for one year. i just don't think it will anybody with a cost attached that we would notice. Hill for what would have been $5m plus for example.....no way. We have made so many mistakes the last couple years and you just can't wash them through and out overnight. $5m with the potential for a complete flop attached to it is not something we can afford right now.

 

Myself I would be satisfied with a return to respectability for 2016....IMO as mentioned earlier we were awful in 2014 but embarrassing in 2015. What does respectability means in 2016 ranking .....maybe an honest run at a Wild Card spot and possibly an earlier than usual exit from the post season if we get there. 2017, maybe an honest run at the division, a possible division win, but a shoe in Wild Card and maybe a more interesting post season....potentially everything falls into place (meaning in this case almost falls into our laps) and we do in fact win it all. Then a real deal shot to win it all in 2018....maybe the consensus favorite going into 2018 to win it all, a division win by enough games to set up for the post season and a real shot at winning the crown.

 

In my opinion, DD will have to have rebuild our pitching assets including a more potent pen, will have to by then have removed both Panda and Hanley replacing them with productive if not exciting assets. He will have to have flushed through these OF projects we seem to have been hung up on fooling with the last few years...some worthwhile, some not so worthwhile. That is one of those things we can't change now but have to flush through.....just like we have to flush through Panda/Hanley. We will have to have made our Swihart/Vaz decision along the way. As a consequence the team should become more athletic, offing the crummy defenders along the way and end up with a more solid pitching asset. ....DD has to do it while keeping a watchful eye on the age clock ticking for some players. If DD goes this way the team may not exhibit the traditional power base it has had. But in truth, Fenway is NOT the best HR park in baseball nor is it close to the best. It is the best doubles park in baseball bar none and if I was configuring a team it would be a team that would try to hit doubles more than a team that tried to hit HR's.

 

DD has to make these changes with nary a mistake made as well as the organization has made about 5 years worth of mistakes in 2. He has little wiggle room. I think that is one reason why he was willing to overpay for Kimbrel. I think DD is not likely willing to accept much risk of a player turning out to be an outright flop. Outright flops have been far too much a possibility in recent years and sure enough we have had outright flops strapping the organization with sunk cost making little to no contribution. Not to beat a dead horse but just count up the money we have tied up in negative WAR.....while WAR is far from perfect if you look across your organization and find that you have paid a fortune for a bunch of negative WAR, you better take note.

 

So I think that is the plan DD envisions and I think he can do it. I hope it is the plan he envisions. He will have to be almost flawless in his executions and hope the injury bug is kind to him.

Edited November 20, 2015 by jung

[Kimmi]

I totally agree. The World Series is the goal, obviously. With a solid bullpen and an ace, we are a legitimate contender imo. We kept Moncada, Devers, and our young studs already in the bigs.

 

If we get a #1 starter and one more strong BP arm, we are good to go.

[Kimmi]

Those doors people might be worried DD closed were already closed. There is no way we were going to pull a Sale or a Grey or any of the Mets young starters in here without giving up players nobody wants to give up.

 

As for overpaying....DD is trying to minimize downside risk because the last two doo-doo birds ate up all the downside risk we had to give. DD has very little wiggle room here. So he overpaid.....what.... did we expect to get out of this mess painlessly?

 

You have no idea whether any doors were already closed. There is a long way to go in the offseason and the tide can change. Someone who is not seemingly available today might be available next month. If Sale or Gray are not available, Carrasco or Fernandez might be.

 

Yes, it would cost us, but add Swihart or JBJ plus another top prospect to the package that we gave up for Kimbrel, and I think you're pretty darn close to be being able to land a top starter.

[Kimmi]

The team was not in as dire shape coming into this offseason as some of are making it out to be. The position players are more or less set. If Dombrowski adds at least a #1 to our rotation and fixes the BP, which he has gone a fair way towards doing, then the team will contend this year, barring significant injuries or underperformances.

[mvp 78]

If we get a #1 starter and one more strong BP arm, we are good to go.

 

Need to dump Panda and/or Hanley on someone too. I'd prefer 2 SP and a BP, but 1 and 1 would be ok, I guess. As long as they actually get a #1 this time around.

[Youk Of The Nation]

What concerns me is this:

 

What if Price/Greinke/Cueto simply don't want to pitch here?

 

Why so pessimistic? What if they all want to pitch here?!

[jung]

Swihart possibly....JBJ no. Putting JBJ at the middle of a deal does not get you to those guys, Grey, Sales etc. We probably can't trade Swihart at this point even if we wanted to do that. Plus this is the trade season...now...followed by the FA season. Trades will slow later on as the FA part of the off season heats up....especially with so many FA bodies out there for teams to choose from. They will for the most part want to get trades behind them and concentrate on the FA's. In our case, we have a pretty darned low draft pick on the line for us. So I don't see all those FA's as guys DD will likely be interested in.

 

So what would we be saying if DD got nothing done during the trade heavy part of the off season. We would be going wild that's what. Never happy...we have already started with whatever DD does its wrong.....unbelievable. He makes a move...its wrong..He does not make a move.... its wrong. Well there is no doubt in my mind that DD could not afford to stand pat and hope something fell his way later this off season. You actually want him to wait around and hope "things change". Holy Cow!!!

[jung]

As for position players being set. Sure they are set...that is the problem. Panda at 3rd...be still my heart. The no hit twins at corner outfield. That will be fun. Then the creme de la creme....Hanley at 1st. Yup that team is going straight to the top of the division in 2016.

[Spudboy]

As for position players being set. Sure they are set...that is the problem. Panda at 3rd...be still my heart. The no hit twins at corner outfield. That will be fun. Then the creme de la creme....Hanley at 1st. Yup that team is going straight to the top of the division in 2016.

 

Yup.

 

Nothing about the Sox is all set.

 

Who the hell mans the pen in 2016?????

 

I count three, possibly four relievers that will be there.

 

Koji, Taz, Kimbrel, and possibly Ross. Will Layne be there? Will Wright be healthy?

 

I don't see how acquiring "a#1" and one reliever makes this team good to go.

[mvp 78]

Spid, why do you hate Workman?