A Realistic View at 2018: Part I

[S5Dewey]

By what measure are you ranking these closers? I know it isn't fWAR and it certainly isn't (and shouldn't be) saves...

 

Would you like to be his agent tell that to the other GM's in the league when it comes time to renegotiate his contract? Whether you agree with the concept of "save" or not, MLB and GM's do, and Kimbrel gets paid to "save" games. He's "Clutch".

[oldtimer]

For those sick of reading about future tough times, stop reading here.

 

Current Core of this team: (Note: "to keep him" could also mean to replace him with a similar level player through free agency.)

 

Kimbrel $13M then $18M to keep him (+$5M)

Pomeranz ~9M then $19M to keep him (+$10M)

Sale $25.5M + $13.5M then over $30M to keep him (+$18M)

Bogey ~$7M & $12M then maybe $22M to keep him (+$10M)(+$15M from 2018's salary)

Porcello $21M + $21M then maybe $16M to keep him (-$4M)

Betts ~$10M, $15M, $20M then $28M+ to keep him (+8M) (+$18M from 2018)

JBJ ~$6M, $10M, $14M then maybe $18M to keep him (+$4M) (+$12M from 2018)

Pedroia $13.75M until the end of 2021

Price $31M until the end of 2022

 

Beni: 5 years of control (3 are arbs)

Devers: 5+ years of team control (3+ are arbs)

 

Role Players:

Kelly ~$4M then maybe $7M to keep him (+3M)

Vaz ~$1.5M then 2 arbs

Smith ~$1M then 2 arbs

Leon ~2.5M then 2 arbs

ERod ~$4M + 3 arbs

 

 

Sunken cost coming off the books:

HRam $22M after 2018 or 2019 (if he vests)

Pablo $19M to $5M for 2020 then zero for 2021

Castillo (off luxury tax) $11.8M, $11.8M & $14.3M

 

Of course, we do not need to keep everyone to be competitive, and we could replace some of these players with lesser cost free agents.

 

If my projections are wrong, and players will not be making what I estimated, it would also mean their value has fallen due to poor performance between now and then.

 

I'm looking at over $55M more needed (after last arb or year of salary) to keep everyone and fill no holes that might open elsewhere. It will likely be more than $80M from their 2018 salaries. Subtract the sunken costs from HRam/Pablo & Castillo and it doesn't look horrible, but it will still take a massive increase in our budget to keep everyone or replace them in kind.

 

Kimmi's point about who fills the other 10-15 slots on the roster is actually a bigger issue than this.

 

 

I came back to this post simply because of the amount of effort you put into it and the developing nature of the story. Thornburg signed for 2018 for a little over $2 mil. Perhaps you should make a separate string with this kind of information and just do an update as changes occur. That would save needing to repeat the work and posts would only be needed when a change occurred.

[harmony]

Would you like to be his agent tell that to the other GM's in the league when it comes time to renegotiate his contract? Whether you agree with the concept of "save" or not, MLB and GM's do, and Kimbrel gets paid to "save" games. He's "Clutch".

I suspect MLB front offices have assigned a decreasing value to saves over the past decade or two.

 

Since joining the Red Sox, Craig Kimbrel trails Kenley Jansen, Alex Colome, Roberto Osuna and A.J. Ramos in the raw number of saves (and just two saves ahead of Fernando Rodney).

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2017&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=5,d

 

Kimbrel finished seventh in saves this year and 14th in 2016 despite playing on a team that won a well-above-average 93 games each year.

 

An agent will use any number -- including a somewhat outdated statistic -- to enhance his client's position.

[moonslav59]

Augggh. That's one of the biggest examples of cherry-picking I've seen here.

 

We traded for 3 years of Kimbrel. He gave us a decent 2016 and a fantastic 2017. Why do people just look at 2017 to judge him and the trade?

 

Same with Pom.

 

2018 may be the ultimate factor in judgment.

[moonslav59]

He wasn't as good. That doesn't change the point about his value to the 2017 team.

 

No, it doesn't, but I was responding, in part, to a poster who spoke of some of the suggested one year fix alternatives I mentioned back at the time of the Kimbrel trade, so what Kimbrel did in 2016 was important to that conversation.

[moonslav59]

I suspect MLB front offices have assigned a decreasing value to saves over the past decade or two.

 

Since joining the Red Sox, Craig Kimbrel trails Kenley Jansen, Alex Colome, Roberto Osuna and A.J. Ramos in the raw number of saves (and just two saves ahead of Fernando Rodney).

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2017&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=5,d

 

Kimbrel finished seventh in saves this year and 14th in 2016 despite playing on a team that won a well-above-average 93 games each year.

 

An agent will use any number -- including a somewhat outdated statistic -- to enhance his client's position.

 

Kimbrel has been a fantastic closer for us. I am not trying to imply otherwise.

 

He was still "good enough" in 2016, even at his salary, which I felt was too high at the time.

[S5Dewey]

I suspect MLB front offices have assigned a decreasing value to saves over the past decade or two.

 

Since joining the Red Sox, Craig Kimbrel trails Kenley Jansen, Alex Colome, Roberto Osuna and A.J. Ramos in the raw number of saves (and just two saves ahead of Fernando Rodney).

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2017&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=5,d

 

Kimbrel finished seventh in saves this year and 14th in 2016 despite playing on a team that won a well-above-average 93 games each year.

 

An agent will use any number -- including a somewhat outdated statistic -- to enhance his client's position.

 

Ya. That's pretty meaningless because so will management. I've never been a party to an MLB salary negotiation but from what I've heard it's a miracle that any player wants to play for a team after he hears management go on about all of his shortcomings.

 

Unfortunately we don't know how the season will end until it ends. If we did we could make better decisions. With their resources the Sox have every reason to be optimistic every year. Therefore they feel a need to land the best players they can at every position within their own salary constraints every year. That's what they did with Kimbrel, and I have no problem with it. I also think that he's quite valuable as a trade chip although I don't think he gets traded.

[Kimmi]

I just don't see it happening, even if we sign Shaw and another good RP'er.

 

IMO, trading Kimbrel is not on DD's mind.

 

It doesn't fit the win now plan.

 

Oh, I don't see it happening either. Not trading a current player for prospects. I'm just saying that if someone were interested, I'd listen.

[S5Dewey]

I'm always "interested" in trading anyone if someone wants to grossly overpay. I'm a big Christian Vazquez fan but if the Marlins call and say they'll trade Stanton and eat all of his salary in addition I'm game. But it's not going to happen in the real world.

[Kimmi]

The Tigers farm system is improving.

Of course, they had to fire Dombrowski to get that process started, but still...

 

Well, I just read yesterday that the Tigers are going into full rebuild mode and that everyone on the current team was available.

 

Thanks Dave!

[Kimmi]

Sure, we could have replaced Sale and Kimbrel with another starter and reliever for lesser cost. We could also have replaced David Ortiz at DH for many years with someone cheaper. It's no trouble at all to assemble a cheap team that isn't very good.

 

It wouldn't be a cheap team, nor would it be a bad team. Henry's teams have never been cheap. A very strong core was already in place. I do think it would have been possible to field a contending team and keep the farm in good shape.

[Bellhorn04]

Well, I just read yesterday that the Tigers are going into full rebuild mode and that everyone on the current team was available.

 

Thanks Dave!

 

Ha. Worked pretty good for the Cubs and the Astros!

[Kimmi]

It's not an either or, of course. All the innings are important. Good starts won't get you anywhere if you have a bad bullpen.

 

Many of your best closers seemingly come out of nowhere. You do not have to spend big on a closer to get the production.

[Bellhorn04]

It wouldn't be a cheap team, nor would it be a bad team. Henry's teams have never been cheap. A very strong core was already in place. I do think it would have been possible to field a contending team and keep the farm in good shape.

 

Possible, sure. But I'm not convinced the core was really that strong. As I've already noted, 3 of the highest WAR guys on the 2017 team were Sale, Kimbrel and Pomeranz. Strip them away and what do you have? Mookie Betts is the only real star of the rest.

[Bellhorn04]

Many of your best closers seemingly come out of nowhere. You do not have to spend big on a closer to get the production.

 

You don't have to. But the other approach is very hit and miss. It certainly has been for the Red Sox. We have quite a history of guys failing as closers.

[Kimmi]

Well, if you pitch like a 10 WAR starter for 1/3 as many innings, it stands to reason you're worth 3.3 wins, doesn't it?

 

I'm not arguing that Kimbrel was valuable to the team. I'm just arguing whether one has to pay that much to get comparable value from a relief pitcher.

[Kimmi]

Ha. Worked pretty good for the Cubs and the Astros!

 

Well that's all well and good, once you get on the other side of the rebuild.

 

Are Sox fans willing to go through that? I think not!

[Kimmi]

Possible, sure. But I'm not convinced the core was really that strong. As I've already noted, 3 of the highest WAR guys on the 2017 team were Sale, Kimbrel and Pomeranz. Strip them away and what do you have? Mookie Betts is the only real star of the rest.

 

And that was completely different in 2016.

[Kimmi]

You don't have to. But the other approach is very hit and miss. It certainly has been for the Red Sox. We have quite a history of guys failing as closers.

 

There is also quite a history of high priced free agent closers being hit or miss.

[Bellhorn04]

Well that's all well and good, once you get on the other side of the rebuild.

 

Are Sox fans willing to go through that? I think not!

 

No, they're not, I agree. That's part of what made Ben's job a tricky one, and part of why Dombrowski has little option but to try to win now.

[moonslav59]

You don't have to. But the other approach is very hit and miss. It certainly has been for the Red Sox. We have quite a history of guys failing as closers.

 

We also have a history of winning a ring with our third string closer in 2013 (Uehara).

[Bellhorn04]

We also have a history of winning a ring with our third string closer in 2013 (Uehara).

 

Well, that's part of the history but it's not really typical of it. Also, Koji was always a really good reliever. He didn't come out of nowhere. It was a great signing by Ben. With that signing he made up for the failures of Bailey, Hanrahan and Melancon.

[notin]

Would you like to be his agent tell that to the other GM's in the league when it comes time to renegotiate his contract? Whether you agree with the concept of "save" or not, MLB and GM's do, and Kimbrel gets paid to "save" games. He's "Clutch".

 

And teams are trying to work against that as well.

 

Last year the Nationals tried to avoid using Kodak Glover as the closer because they wanted to avoid paying him more in arbitration. No one liked this idea except all the hitters who teed off on Blake Treinen. The Phillies similarly kept their best reliever out of the closer role as well.

 

But my issues are not about the economics of the closer. When lefty specialists are getting $6mill, Kimbrel's paycheck isn't a concern. But the turnkey style of bullpen management rampant throughout the league is.

 

I'd rather see Kimbrel in the same role as Andrew Miller is in Cleveland - coming in when the game is truly on the line. Saving him for the ninth inning while you hope everything before that works out is a massive waste of his talents....

[notin]

I am not seeing Chen as Colon as closers for any MLB team. It is an out of the box idea, but I don't see it happening for either of them.

 

Oh it won't happen.

 

If healthy Chen would be a terrific closer. But his elbow issues coupled with a massive contract make him a crazy gamble. Plus he has an option year that relies on IP. He probably prefers to start.

 

Colon is another gamble too. He's like 46 years old and any season now, his velocity will drop to batting practice levels. But a pitcher with his control, command, and the ability to get batters to miss would work quite well in the role.

 

I only named those two because they are the right type of pitchers. But someone healthier and younger would be more ideal...

[notin]

I've been preaching this same thing all year. It may be the only thing you and I agree on.

 

It's also the entire crux of the argument about why closers are overrated (as a role).

 

You pointed out the Sox were 22-19 in one run games. As I am getting hypothetical and no there is no real answer, what do you think their record would have been if Kimbrel pitched in the 7th or 8th innings if the game was on the line then? I'm talking about games where the set up guys and other relievers put the Sox behind by a run.

[S5Dewey]

It's also the entire crux of the argument about why closers are overrated (as a role).

 

You pointed out the Sox were 22-19 in one run games. As I am getting hypothetical and no there is no real answer, what do you think their record would have been if Kimbrel pitched in the 7th or 8th innings if the game was on the line then? I'm talking about games where the set up guys and other relievers put the Sox behind by a run.

 

I'm not sure what you're asking. I wouldn't put him in if the Sox were trailing, but I'd bring him in in the 7th or 8th with runners on base and the score tied or the Sox ahead by a run or two. Just to get out of a mess.

 

Of course this brings up the issue of closers "liking" to start with a clean inning. Ya. Who wouldn't?? But as the best one-inning pitcher on the team it's when he should be used (IMO).

[S5Dewey]

Following up on that....

I've always suspected that one very large reason closers like to start with a clean inning and only in save situations is because they get paid more to save games as closers than they would as setup men, and those situations are ripe for padding their stats. I know, I'm being cynical. LOL

[moonslav59]

I guess if Thornburg looks fully recovered, and Smith looks good, I'd consider trading Kimbrel, but I'm 99.9% certain DD wont even think about it.

 

I'd also like to see what we'd get for him before saying it's a good idea.

 

Another thing to think about: how many comp picks have we gotten recently?

 

(Answer: 1 in the last 5 drafts in Kopech.)

 

We could just look to get a comp pick for Kimbrel (and maybe Pom as well).

[notin]

I'm not sure what you're asking. I wouldn't put him in if the Sox were trailing, but I'd bring him in in the 7th or 8th with runners on base and the score tied or the Sox ahead by a run or two. Just to get out of a mess.

 

Of course this brings up the issue of closers "liking" to start with a clean inning. Ya. Who wouldn't?? But as the best one-inning pitcher on the team it's when he should be used (IMO).

 

No. I'd agree that's why they like it. This is the job, after all.

 

Rolaids Relief Award (remember that?) used to track what they called "Tough Saves", which were saves when the closer came in with the tying run on base.

 

Usually the league leader had like 4. I think the single season record was 8.

[notin]

I'm not sure what you're asking. I wouldn't put him in if the Sox were trailing, but I'd bring him in in the 7th or 8th with runners on base and the score tied or the Sox ahead by a run or two. Just to get out of a mess.

 

Of course this brings up the issue of closers "liking" to start with a clean inning. Ya. Who wouldn't?? But as the best one-inning pitcher on the team it's when he should be used (IMO).

 

Seventh or eighth, depending on how many on and who is up. A ot of factors van be involved. But really, it's the inning that makes you sweat as a fan. THAT is what he should be for.

 

Saving him for the ninth is silly sometimes. 44% of all ninth innings are lead of by the 6-9 hitters. Are those really going to be tough innings?

 

I think the only time Kimbrel should try to protect a 3 run lead against the botom of the order should be if he hasn't pitched in 4 days...