Dave Dombrowski

[Slasher9]

I will never understand how that cutter was so unhittable. Everyone knew it was coming and what it was going to do but few could hit the damned thing.

 

late movement. if home plate was 57' or 65' he would have been pedestrian....

[Dojji]

But it doesn’t hurt if you want to have a team that wins consistently. I notice that you didn’t address whether You would be pissed if DD has done what Theo did to get Chapman. It is really disingenuous to list Rondon as the Cubs closer.

 

Also disingenuous to list Greg Holland for the Royals when Wade Davis was the closer in the playoffs and threw the last pitch of the World Series.

 

Also completely dishonest to throw rookie contracts out there as if it's always easy to have a cost-controlled closer out there even though all of those guys get paid after awhile

 

Wade Davis got paid.

So did Papelbon

So did Mo.

So did Isringhausen

So did Jansen

So did Brian Wilson

So did Trevor Hoffman for that matter, at least relative to his own era

Koji got a pretty nice contract too.

 

Most of these guys were paid by the team they came up with or came into their own with, excluding Davis who played for the Royals who can't necessarily afford to pay for elite talent. But if you want that consistent guy, you do have to pay them, even if you get fortunate and they produce in the closer's role while ownership is able to use the CBA to rob them.

Edited August 8, 2018 by Dojji

[Slasher9]

But we never have. Unless you somehow think that Koji Uehara doesn't count as an elite closer?

 

.

 

i think we are discussing different things here. i am saying you dont need to pay a crazy amount of money for an elite closer. i'm saying you can have an elite closer without paying for it. if you consider Koji an elite closer (as i do) then it seems we agree.

we dont need to pay kimbrel $20MM x 5 years to have an elite closer.

[Slasher9]

Also disingenuous to list Greg Holland for the Royals when Wade Davis was the closer in the playoffs and threw the last pitch of the World Series.

 

wade davis $7,000,000

 

still doesnt change the point.

[a700hitter]

I would expect DD to make a trade like that. he burns the Farm. but, yes, i would be pissed to give that much up for a rental. but when it turns into a parade you have to accept that rental/payoff. the reward (in this case) made up for the payment.

Joe Maddon almost screwed up that parade. The post season is a roll of the dice... no?

[Dojji]

wade davis $7,000,000

 

still doesnt change the point.

 

Yes it does. In fact it turns it on its head. Wade Davis was one of the best-paid players on a very low-budget Royals teams. There IS a reason that GMDM forked out for elite relief despite having a MUCH more restrictive budget than we have here.

 

Davis had the 5th highest salary on the Royals that year. 4th before Zobrist joined the team. He was paid at the same level as all star 2B/OF Ben Zobrist and ace Edinson Volquez. This is a team that does NOT like to spend money, and yet they spent on elite relief in a year when they won the World Series largely with the help of elite relief.

 

Like HELL that doesn't affect your argument.

Edited August 8, 2018 by Dojji

[Kimmi]

But not *consistently.* It's not like we're not planning on competing next year or the years after that, Kimmi.

 

You can get performance on the cheap if you're lucky. If you're really lucky you can even dredge up a guy like Koji who can close effectively on the cheap for multiple seasons.

 

But if you want consistency, you're eventually going to have to pay for it. There's only a few consistently good closers in baseball and they are in HIGH demand.

 

And finding that consistent closer is the hallmark of a perennial contender.

 

The less you're willing to pay for a good closer, the more times you'll have to start over again from square one trying to find a good one. That's what letting Papelbon go *should* have taught us. Looks like we have a few slow learners in the group.

 

If putting a cost limit on your closer limits your ability to find a consistent high performance player for the role (and it does) then why do it? Makes no sense to me. It's too important to the momentum of the team, and for securing high leverage wins, to be the area I go cheap on

 

Yes, consistently.

 

We can get Craig Kimbrel's clone for cheaper.

[Kimmi]

Maybe because Kimbrel is looking sketchy, of late.

 

My argument has nothing to do with Kimbrel looking sketchy of late.

 

I have been saying this since, well forever.

[Dojji]

Yes, consistently.

 

We can get Craig Kimbrel's clone for cheaper.

 

You keep saying that and failing to prove it. Where's your evidence?

[Dojji]

My argument has nothing to do with Kimbrel looking sketchy of late.

 

I have been saying this since, well forever.

 

I'll say this for you, Kimmi. Even when you're out on a limb with absolutely no evidence whatsoever that everything you're saying isn't 100% all-natural fertilizer, you do tend to stick to your guns.

 

That said, being consistent isn't a virtue when you're consistently wrong.

 

Rookie contracts aside, there is no way to consistently achieve success from the bargain bin. Even if you do pay, there's no guarantee of success, but refusing to pay for quality talent at key positions is equivalent to tying one hand behind your back and expecting to win a boxing match -- even if you pull it off, you probably would have been able to do better work if you hadn't handicapped yourself.

Edited August 8, 2018 by Dojji

[Slasher9]

Joe Maddon almost screwed up that parade. The post season is a roll of the dice... no?

 

he really tried to.

i know some believe it is a roll of the dice. i am not a "randomness" person. i do believe in players rising to occasions / getting on hot streaks or conversely chocking. this is why i love me some papi, schill, and Manny and why i loathe the price signing. i dont want the guys that can just get us to the playoffs. i want the guys that can win the damn thing.

there are no guarantees in baseball but i also dont believe it is strictly a roll of the dice. probably doesnt make sense but in my mind it does.

[Kimmi]

How many times do elite closers fail? (Rivera, especially later in his career, Kimbrel, etc...) 1 out of 10 maybe?

 

How about very good but not elite (and cheaper) closers? 1 out of 8 or 9?

 

I think this is what Kimmi means by close or almost the same.

 

Actually, what I meant by almost the same value was more along the lines of WAR.

 

Which really doesn't have anything to do with save %.

 

Save % is not a great stat anyway because we all know there's a big difference between a 1 run save and a 3 run (or more) save.

 

From everybody's favorite Mazz:

 

Craig Kimbrel has now blown his last two save opps with just a 1-run lead - is 13-of-17 in those situations this year - 76.5 percent. The rest of the time, he's 21-of-21.

[Slasher9]

You keep saying that and failing to prove it. Where's your evidence?

 

barnes is cheaper than kimbrel?

look at their IP / ERA / HR's allowed / ERA+

[Dojji]

WAR is great for analyzing a full season for starting players.

 

It is a T-E-R-R-I-B-L-E way of measuring situational performers and part time players because its mechanism for addressing situational play is actually quite weak.

[Kimmi]

We need GPS. I'm not sure we're in the same county anymore.

 

Kimmi is clinging gamely onto this idea that you can get the same production we're gettihg right now for Kimbrel, consistently, for less than we paid for him. I have no idea why she's so sure of this because she's admitted as such that closers have a kind of value that's difficult to properly quantify, AND that Kimbrel is among the very best in the business, which means that there aren't a lot of relief pitchers who can consistently replicate his value at all, and of the ones that are, how many of those are even acquirable from their current teams, much less more affordable than Kimbrel?

 

Frankly, I honestly think Kimmi's holding onto this argument more because of her staunch defense of Ben Cherington (and resulting downplaying of DD's moves) than because she actually believes this argument she's making. She can speak for herself, but I strongly suspect the overall position Kimmi's taking here is a lot less "I actually believe this on its merits" and a lot more "I feel like I should take this position because of my overall opposition against DD's high leverage trades in the 2016 and 2017offseasons."

 

Seriously Dojji, I expect better from you than to post untruths about me in an effort to discredit me as a poster.

 

When you are no longer intimidated by me and can debate me without the insults, bring it on.

[Dojji]

Actually, what I meant by almost the same value was more along the lines of WAR.

 

Which really doesn't have anything to do with save %.

 

Save % is not a great stat anyway because we all know there's a big difference between a 1 run save and a 3 run (or more) save.

 

From everybody's favorite Mazz:

 

Craig Kimbrel has now blown his last two save opps with just a 1-run lead - is 13-of-17 in those situations this year - 76.5 percent. The rest of the time, he's 21-of-21.

 

So what are you saying? That 1 run saves are the hardest things closers have to do? Do you really not think you're just stating the obvious here?

 

I'll take a closer who's about 80% in the most challenging part of a closer's job and perfect in the easier situations. I'll take that guy 11 times out of 10 over most of the other closers on the market.

[a700hitter]

I certainly can't speak for what Atlanta's thinking was. It looks like the main objective on this deal was to cut payroll. They did offload a fair amount of payroll between Upton and Kimbrel.

Didnt the Braves also get Matt Wisler in that deal, who had been a big time Starting Pitching prospect and is still in the Braves plans?

[Kimmi]

You keep saying that and failing to prove it. Where's your evidence?

 

Edwin Diaz.

[Bellhorn04]

Edwin Diaz.

 

We can get him?

[Kimmi]

We can get him?

 

No, but we can get other relievers like him. For cheap.

 

It's up to the FO to find these guys, rather than just going after the most expensive superstar that's available.

 

Easier said than done, yes. I don't deny that.

 

But that's where the true talent of a FO lies, in finding those guys.

 

Pearce, Kinsler, Eovaldi - Great job by Dombrowski.

[cp176]

thank you.

 

Really Slasher - say it ain't so.

[Dojji]

No,

 

End of argument, Kimmi. If we can't get that guy, that guy is not a workable example for you.

 

Your own argument says that WE CAN ACQUIRE similar value in the closer's position for less investment. A player we can not acquire is not an example of this.

[Dojji]

No, but we can get other relievers like him. For cheap.

 

It's up to the FO to find these guys, rather than just going after the most expensive superstar that's available.

 

Easier said than done, yes. I don't deny that.

 

But that's where the true talent of a FO lies, in finding those guys.

 

Pearce, Kinsler, Eovaldi - Great job by Dombrowski.

 

In other words, we're supposed to magic the perfect closer out of a hat, probably from the discard pile because even before DD our homegrown development of pitching was distinctly lacking.

 

This isn't even an argument. You're just taking something as dogma that's actually highly situational. Unless you get down to specifics, you're just spouting hot air. WHO else should and could DD have acquired?

 

We were hella lucky that Kimbrel was available at all. Most teams with a consistent closer aren't going to let them go for love or money, unless they're concerned about durability or performance, neither of which has been an issue for Kimbrel.

 

Fortunately the Padres were so far up a creek without a paddle in terms of their own drafting and development that playoff pushes weren't in their immediate future and there was a deal to be made.

Edited August 8, 2018 by Dojji

[cp176]

Why really would a franchise like the Red Sox take a chance on cheaping on a closer if they didn't have to? Im sure that there are lots of peckerheads out there who just might become damn good closers but really - why take the chance? It would be a poor man's move and in the case of a large franchise team, absolutely ridiculous. Right - Let's go bargain basement shopping just to prove a point - stupidity personified.

[Dojji]

Why really would a franchise like the Red Sox take a chance on cheaping on a closer if they didn't have to? Im sure that there are lots of peckerheads out there who just might become damn good closers but really - why take the chance? It would be a poor man's move and in the case of a large franchise team, absolutely ridiculous. Right - Let's go bargain basement shopping just to prove a point - stupidity personified.

 

Standing on dogmatic principles of roster building with no regard for the situation or the team's actual needs is a thing that usually does round down to "stupid," yes.

[Slasher9]

Standing on dogmatic principles of roster building with no regard for the situation or the team's actual needs is a thing that usually does round down to "stupid," yes.

 

So no one will answer the question....are you giving kimbrel $20MM x 5?

[Dojji]

So no one will answer the question....are you giving kimbrel $20MM x 5?

 

Given the contracts handed out to similar pitchers such as Wade Davis and Kenly Jansen, I think we'll see closers cross the 20M dollar threshhold within the next year or two, yes.

 

Again, you're trying to say this for shock value, but in an era where top starters made 20M, top closers got 12-15M, so when top starters make $30M, $20M isn't as unreasonable as you're making it sound.

 

As a general rule, the league's top closers tend to march lockstep with #3 starters in terms of salary requirements, at least historically

Edited August 8, 2018 by Dojji

[Bellhorn04]

Let's compare bullpen salaries, Cubs vs. Red Sox.

 

Top 5 salaries based on AAV:

 

Cubs

Morrow 10,500,000

Cishek 6,500,000

Strop 5,925,000

Wilson 4,250,000

Duensing 3,200,000

30,375,000

 

Red Sox

Kimbrel 13,000,000

Kelly 3,825,000

Thornburg 2,050,000

Smith 850,000

Barnes 605,000

20,330,000

 

So who's the big bullpen spender? Looks like it's the GOAT.

[Dojji]

I'm still trying to wrap my head around the particulars of this argument I'm hearing from Kimmi and those who seem to agree with her.

 

I mean I hear this argument and I compare it to the following. Perhaps Kimmi et. al. can explain the distinction between what they're trying to say, and this argument:

"You should never spend big money on a starting pitcher. Starting pitchers are found on the cheap all the time, and any good team should be able to develop starting pitching and take advantage of rookie contracts to keep salary low. So even if you're all in for this season and the next 2-3, you shouldn't spend big money to sign an ace because there's so many other ways to acquire one."

What's the difference? Please enlighten me.

[Spudboy]

mmmmkay. how much do you want to sign Kimbrel for? 5 years / $100MM?

 

No.

 

I am of the opinion that he can be had for 3 years and approximately 45 mil or so.

 

If not, let him walk and take the pick.