Dave Dombrowski

[Emp9]

That is usually the case.

 

So instead of 5 MVP type seasons and 5 replacement level, it’s kinda like 7 MVP type seasons, two very good seasons, and 5 RL seasons. I’m not holding you to those numbers by any means. I know you just threw them out there theoretically.

[jd98]

I guess I'm one of the lucky ones here because I look at just getting to the playoffs as a much greater feat than actually winning once you get there. In my opinion, it is by far a much tougher job to keep a team motivated, moving , and winning throughout the course of the regular season. Slightly above average teams have lucked out on more than one occasion and come out big winners. Get me to the dance - small or big - and I'm proud and happy as well. It is nice to win it all but I will never judge a player or coach based on what they do in the payoffs. Once again the opinion that some have that if you don't win it all then you are not successful is a totally hot dose of stinking ******** the way I see things. In the playoffs which I think are far too long anyway, anything can happen. The best teams don't always win. Too much luck involved. Once again it is just me, but maybe that is why I think that Cora right now is a far better coach then we have seen in some time and also that our General Manager is equally as good.

 

I completely agree.

[jd98]

Put another way - there has never been a team which I would taken vs the field once the playoffs start ...

 

This brings up something I was thinking about a few weeks ago. What if the Sox (or whoever has best record) were in playoffs with the 3 worst teams from their league and the 4 worst from the other league. What would the odds be for the best team? I'd guess no higher than 60%. If you ended up facing the Mets, 4 games vs DeGrom and Syndergaard would be tough. For a rough idea, if you had a 70% chance of winning each individual game in the playoffs, you'd have a 63.9% chance of winning the WS.

Edited August 6, 2018 by jd98

[dgalehouse]

It has been said over and over again. Anything can happen in the post season. At that point , there is nothing more a GM can do. Somebody has to step up , get hot and be the hero. David Ortiz , along with some others , has done that in the past. If Dave Roberts was picked off first or thrown out at second ( almost happened ) , the Sox are swept in the 2004 ALCS. The legend of Theo would have been delayed , and Tito may not have even lasted until 2007. The Sox are clearly the best team in baseball right now and will be the post season favorites. But a big time effort plus a bit of luck will be needed come playoff time.

[Bellhorn04]

Absolutely. Kimbrel was most definitely an overpay, in double whammy form. Both prospects and money.

 

His salary is below market.

 

Double whammy is not the right terminology. If the contract by itself was an overpay, it would be a double whammy.

[jd98]

Regarding the talk about Smoltz earlier

https://nesn.com/2009/08/cardinals-say-smoltz-was-tipping-pitches-in-boston/

 

He was tipping pitches. He did a lot better after going to St Louis and fixing it. Nothing phenomenal, but about as good as you could expect for a 42 year old. Oh, and guess who the pitching coach was that probably should have noticed it but didn't.

[a700hitter]

Regarding the talk about Smoltz earlier

https://nesn.com/2009/08/cardinals-say-smoltz-was-tipping-pitches-in-boston/

 

He was tipping pitches. He did a lot better after going to St Louis and fixing it. Nothing phenomenal, but about as good as you could expect for a 42 year old. Oh, and guess who the pitching coach was that probably should have noticed it but didn't.

Farrell?

[Kimmi]

Double whammy is not the right terminology. If the contract by itself was an overpay, it would be a double whammy.

 

IMO, the contract by itself was an overpay, not in terms of what Fangraphs says, but I truly believe that you can get almost the same production out of a closer at a much cheaper rate.

[Bellhorn04]

IMO, the contract by itself was an overpay, not in terms of what Fangraphs says, but I truly believe that you can get almost the same production out of a closer at a much cheaper rate.

 

It wasn't an overpay compared to other contracts for top closers, though, which is what is normally used as comps for analysis purposes.

 

Sure you can find some examples of similar production for less money, but you have to cherry-pick.

[Kimmi]

It wasn't an overpay compared to other contracts for top closers, though, which is what is normally used as comps for analysis purposes.

 

Sure you can find some examples of similar production for less money, but you have to cherry-pick.

 

IMO, those other teams are overpaying for their closers as well.

 

That's just me.

 

I'm not spending a ton of money on a bullpen, which is not to say that I don't think they're important.

[S5Dewey]

IMO, those other teams are overpaying for their closers as well.

 

That's just me.

 

I'm not spending a ton of money on a bullpen, which is not to say that I don't think they're important.

 

I'll say this for Kimmie.... she's consistent. She doesn't believe players can 'turn it up a notch' in certain situations so she doesn't see the need for a high quality closer.

OTOH, I do think players can will themselves to rise to the occasion (occasionally) and therefore I want that lights-out closer.

 

I'm not trying to resurrect any old battles with this post - it's just an observation about how different people see things and what their solutions are to the problems. And give Kimmie props for being consistent.

[Spudboy]

IMO, the contract by itself was an overpay, not in terms of what Fangraphs says, but I truly believe that you can get almost the same production out of a closer at a much cheaper rate.

 

But you never seem to name those guys that can currently bring that value.

 

In the mean time, over pay for one of the few "can't miss" closers and stop worrying about the 9th inning for a few years.

 

Edit. I do agree that some or most of what a Kimbrel brings can be had for less.

 

The tricky thing is identifying that guy and landing him.

Edited August 7, 2018 by Spudboy

[moonslav59]

I'll say this for Kimmie.... she's consistent. She doesn't believe players can 'turn it up a notch' in certain situations so she doesn't see the need for a high quality closer.

OTOH, I do think players can will themselves to rise to the occasion (occasionally) and therefore I want that lights-out closer.

 

I'm not trying to resurrect any old battles with this post - it's just an observation about how different people see things and what their solutions are to the problems. And give Kimmie props for being consistent.

 

Yes, and she has data and evidence t support her claims and beliefs.

[a700hitter]

"Kimbrell overpay" = nothing more than DD hate. There is no alternative prospect purchase cost provided and there is zero evidence upon which to make the case. it is speculative opinion.

[Tedballgame]

DD did a great job getting Pearce, Eovaldi and Kinsler. These are veteran guys who will help the Sox win it all this year. To those people who say he overpaid for Kimbrel.....you are crazy. None of those prospects would ever play for the Sox. Kimbrel is the best closer in baseball.

[Dojji]

"Kimbrell overpay" = nothing more than DD hate. There is no alternative prospect purchase cost provided and there is zero evidence upon which to make the case. it is speculative opinion.

 

Closer is a very underappreciated position until you suddenly don't have a good one.

 

Closers are a lot like scuba gear. Substandard third rate gear can work most of the time, but "works most of the time" can kill you.

Edited August 7, 2018 by Dojji

[Dojji]

IMO, the contract by itself was an overpay, not in terms of what Fangraphs says, but I truly believe that you can get almost the same production out of a closer at a much cheaper rate.

 

This is the Boston Red Sox. Why are we pinching pennies?

 

Almost the same production. you mean he can blow 1 game 7 instead of 0? I mean that's almost the same production. 1 is pretty close to 0 after all.

[mvp 78]

"Kimbrell overpay" = nothing more than DD hate. There is no alternative prospect purchase cost provided and there is zero evidence upon which to make the case. it is speculative opinion.

 

This is how I feel about it.

[S5Dewey]

Closer is a very underappreciated position until you suddenly don't have a good one.

 

Closers are a lot like scuba gear. Substandard third rate gear can work most of the time, but "works most of the time" can kill you.

 

This post wins the award for "Post of the Day".

[a700hitter]

IMO, the contract by itself was an overpay, not in terms of what Fangraphs says, but I truly believe that you can get almost the same production out of a closer at a much cheaper rate.

“Almost the same production” is not the same production. Three or 4 additional blown saves could make the difference betweeen winning a division and going home for October many seasons. And where were these almost as productive closers who were available at a much cheaper rate when we got Kimbrel?

[S5Dewey]

Yes, and she has data and evidence t support her claims and beliefs.

 

Kimmie and I have a basic difference in beliefs. Hers are based primarily on mathematical data and mine are based primarily on experience. I'm good with that.

[Bellhorn04]

An interesting piece from FanGraphs suggesting that there may indeed be some extra value in a closer like Kimbrel not measured by WAR:

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-extra-value-of-having-an-elite-reliever/

[Dojji]

An interesting piece from FanGraphs suggesting that there may indeed be some extra value in a closer like Kimbrel not measured by WAR:

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-extra-value-of-having-an-elite-reliever/

 

Of course there is. Metrics are terrible at measuring opportunity cost, and the greatest value of closers is in avoiding losses.

[Emp9]

"Kimbrell overpay" = nothing more than DD hate. There is no alternative prospect purchase cost provided and there is zero evidence upon which to make the case. it is speculative opinion.

 

No, it’s not hate, it’s simply a criticism. One of the few as far as I can tell.

[notin]

"Kimbrell overpay" = nothing more than DD hate. There is no alternative prospect purchase cost provided and there is zero evidence upon which to make the case. it is speculative opinion.

 

Not true at all.

 

In fact, Kimbrel was traded 8 months earlier for one top 100 prospect and a recent draftee who had done nothing at the time and nothing since. The Braves did also unload the contract of Melvin Upton in that deal, but took on the negative value contracts of Carlos Quentin and Cameron Maybin. Dombrowski gave up more top 100 prospects and more additional prospects and unloaded fewer bad contracts to acquire the same pitcher with fewer years of control at a greater cost per year.

 

Why was Kimbrel so comparatively cheap just 8 months earlier?

 

If he had given up all that and then also saddled San Diego with, say, Sandoval, I would have liked this deal better...

Edited August 7, 2018 by notin

[notin]

No, it’s not hate, it’s simply a criticism. One of the few as far as I can tell.

 

Exactly. It’s not like we call him “Coffee Boy” and insist he got fired ( which, ironically, would be true about Dombrowski). Now that would be hate...

[notin]

Closer is a very underappreciated position until you suddenly don't have a good one.

 

Closers are a lot like scuba gear. Substandard third rate gear can work most of the time, but "works most of the time" can kill you.

 

I see it very different.

 

I see closers as massively over appreciated, especially in terms of salary and fan love. The game isn’t always on the line when they pitch, contrary to public opinion. There used to be a stat called “tough saves”, which is now hard to find. But tough saves were saves where the pitcher entered the game with the tying run on base. Typically the league leader had 4 or 5 tough saves.

 

Now the rest of the pitchers in the bullpen are the underappreciated ones, unless the team has a LOOGY. Those lefty specialist guys are overvalued and usually worthless, and in my opinion, detrimental to the overall success of the bullpen...

[Kimmi]

But you never seem to name those guys that can currently bring that value.

 

In the mean time, over pay for one of the few "can't miss" closers and stop worrying about the 9th inning for a few years.

 

Edit. I do agree that some or most of what a Kimbrel brings can be had for less.

 

The tricky thing is identifying that guy and landing him.

 

I agree that identifying those guys is tricky. But they are out there.

 

You all need not worry. Dombrowski will overpay for whoever our next closer is.

[Kimmi]

Closer is a very underappreciated position until you suddenly don't have a good one.

 

Closers are a lot like scuba gear. Substandard third rate gear can work most of the time, but "works most of the time" can kill you.

 

An interesting piece from FanGraphs suggesting that there may indeed be some extra value in a closer like Kimbrel not measured by WAR:

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-extra-value-of-having-an-elite-reliever/

 

Nobody is saying to go out and get a so-so closer.

 

I'm saying that great closers can be acquired for much cheaper than what we got Kimbrel for.

[Kimmi]

This is the Boston Red Sox. Why are we pinching pennies?

 

Almost the same production. you mean he can blow 1 game 7 instead of 0? I mean that's almost the same production. 1 is pretty close to 0 after all.

 

Because we will need those pennies to pay for other players.

 

A closer that's good enough to get the team to the post season will be good enough to pitch in Game 7. Stating that a closer besides Kimbrel has such a greater likelihood to blow Game 7 than Kimbrel does is faulty.