And the off season begins (2018-19)

[Kimmi]

Personally I think we're a little hung up on the whole reset thing.

 

What is the basic premise behind resetting?

 

It's like this: get your tax rate back from 50% to 20% so you can spend big again and give yourself tax problems all over again!

 

It might not seem like a huge deal in terms of savings to Henry, being the billionaire that he is, but it's not good business sense to spend recklessly, just because you can.

[Kimmi]

If you believe in WAR then you have to believe that we would have won with a "replacement value" closer (a closer who is well below the league average) in place of Kimbrel.

 

Anyone who actually believes that, please raise your hand.

 

{Raising hand!}

[Kimmi]

I still get this underlying sense of a longing for the days of Ben Cherington. Thus , all of the little shots at Dombrowski. An unprecedented three A.L. East titles in three years with a World Series championship is not enough. Let's return to the days of signing mediocrities, finishing dead last and having fun following the farm teams. The good old days of Ben C.

 

Personally, I think it's the other way around. Posters here think Dombrowski is some kind of a god, the savior who pulled the Red Sox out of the abyss, the genius who can do no wrong. Anyway you slice it up, Theo and Ben are more responsible for the three AL East titles and the WS Championship. I'm not taking shots at Dombrowski, I'm just telling it like it is.

[Kimmi]

Not sure why Ben deserves that kind of love.. He did a solid job of digging us a strong foundation but he never struck me as a guy who would have made the moves he needed to make to tie the package up in a nice pretty ribbon the way DD did.

 

I think we needed BC to clean up Theo's mess and get the organization back on track, and we needed DD as the closer (in a business sense) to seal the deal.

 

The best GMs are their own closers, but not every GM can walk the tightrope of carefully building up a cadre of prospects while not falling so in love with them that they can't make sacrifices.

 

Kind of reminds me of a quote from General Lee around the time of the Battle of Gettysburg. "To be a good soldier you have to love the Army. To be a good General, you have to be willing to destroy the thing you love."

 

To be a GM, you have to love and believe in your prospects, but you also have to be willing to make bold moves when the time is right, and spend the currency those prospects represent to build the best team on the field you can. BC was a very good soldier, excellent even. DD is a good General.

 

We did not need Ben to clean up 'Theo's mess'. There would not have been a mess if he'd been given the autonomy that Dombrowski has.

 

We did not need Dombrowski as the closer. We needed Ben to be given more time to close out his own success.

[Kimmi]

No . I don't acknowledge that. Not at all. I think there is a connection. I also think Dombrowski and Cora are a major improvement over Cherington and Farrell.

 

Theo > Ben > Dave

 

Tito > Cora > Farrell

[Kimmi]

He did have 42 saves . And we were in a dogfight with the Yankees most of the season. I'm not sure who would have adequately replaced Kimbrel in that role. I'm not so sure we win the division either.

 

So, a bad closer might have only had 39 saves, and as Notin pointed out, the Sox might have still won some of those games.

 

Let's assume that the 3 blown saves were all against the Yankees and the Sox ended up losing all 3 games. That's a 6 game swing. The Sox still win the division.

[dgalehouse]

So, a bad closer might have only had 39 saves, and as Notin pointed out, the Sox might have still won some of those games.

 

Let's assume that the 3 blown saves were all against the Yankees and the Sox ended up losing all 3 games. That's a 6 game swing. The Sox still win the division.

 

It is a bit unusual for a bad closer to have 39 saves . To say the least . I wouldn't want to count on that . Aroldis Chapman has never had a season with as many as 39 saves . Kenly Jansen and Blake Treinen each had 38 this season. You are not exactly helping your case by using a hypothetical and extremely unlikely example such as that .

Edited January 1, 2019 by dgalehouse

[cp176]

Personally, I think it's the other way around. Posters here think Dombrowski is some kind of a god, the savior who pulled the Red Sox out of the abyss, the genius who can do no wrong. Anyway you slice it up, Theo and Ben are more responsible for the three AL East titles and the WS Championship. I'm not taking shots at Dombrowski, I'm just telling it like it is.

 

Seriously! Who really feels this way? You of course are taking shots at Dombrowski and who really gives a s***? I say - great job done by all. Whoopie doo. Theo did a wonderful job - Ben was Ben- DD has the job.

[Bellhorn04]

Are you going to put Bailey, Hanrahan, and Melancon (at the time) in the same category as Kimbrel? They were not the well known names that Kimbrel is. We're talking about the appeal to the casual fans. IMO, I would place the former three into the 'second tier' category.

 

I just don't think the acquisition of even a top closer has ever been a big needle-mover as far as sparking fan interest and selling tickets. Even casual fans are smart enough to know that closers are basically just a piece in the puzzle.

[a700hitter]

We might have still won without any of those players.

Hypothetical nonsense. We couldn't win until he brought in the final big cog -- JD.

[a700hitter]

Two words for you: Miguel Cabrera

 

Maybe not shiny junk when he was first obtained, but definitely shiny junk when he was given his extension.

The first 3 years after he signed that contract he combined for an OPS over .900. That's far from junk.

[dgalehouse]

Hypothetical nonsense. We couldn't win until he brought in the final big cog -- JD.

 

Well , J.D. had 43 homers and 130 RBIs . We could have saved the money and signed some low cost jabroni who would only hit 40 homers and drive in only 125 runs. We would still have won. It's very simple.

[notin]

The first 3 years after he signed that contract he combined for an OPS over .900. That's far from junk.

.

 

Not really true.

 

She’s referring to the extension he signed in 2016, so he’s only three years in. While his OPS was close at .854, he’s also missed a full season worth of games and is signed for 5 more years until he’s 40 and paid roughly $30mill per season... With options.

 

It’s a horrible contract...

[notin]

It is a bit unusual for a bad closer to have 39 saves . To say the least . I wouldn't want to count on that . Aroldis Chapman has never had a season with as many as 39 saves . Kenly Jansen and Blake Treinen each had 38 this season. You are not exactly helping your case by using a hypothetical and extremely unlikely example such as that .

 

Saves are also a function of opportunity.

 

Greg Holland has 41 saves in 2017. He’s a free agent now. Do you think the Sox should get him?

 

Fernando Rodney had 39 saves in 2017. Is he a good closer?

[moonslav59]

It is a bit unusual for a bad closer to have 39 saves . To say the least . I wouldn't want to count on that . Aroldis Chapman has never had a season with as many as 39 saves . Kenly Jansen and Blake Treinen each had 38 this season. You are not exactly helping your case by using a hypothetical and extremely unlikely example such as that .

 

This year, Kimbrel saved 42 in 47 opportunities.

 

The team went 46 for 66 (a misleading stat of 69.6%).

 

Chapman went 32 out of 34 (a better save % than CK) and the team was 49 for 67.

 

Jansen saved 38 out of 42 (about the same rate as CK) and the team went 48 for 72.

 

Now, let's look at the closer by committee 2003 season as a possible worst case scenario. Kim saved 16 out of 19. Lyon 9 out of 12. The team saved 36 out of 57 (63.2%).

 

The total team save % from 2018 to 2003 was 6.4% better.

 

If you apply the .632 to 66 save chances, we'd have 42 saves in 2018 not 46, a loss of 4 saves.

 

I know this is not an accurate portrayal of what might have been, but it does give some evidence that things might not have been too bad.

 

 

[dgalehouse]

I just don't think the acquisition of even a top closer has ever been a big needle-mover as far as sparking fan interest and selling tickets. Even casual fans are smart enough to know that closers are basically just a piece in the puzzle.

 

A top closer will help win games . Winning baseball will probably increase fan interest. So , indirectly, the closer helps spark the interest. But I have never heard of a fan who bought tickets based on who was the closer. I doubt that even entered into Dombrowski's thinking. People are just reaching for things to pick on here .

[a700hitter]

.

 

Not really true.

 

She’s referring to the extension he signed in 2016, so he’s only three years in. While his OPS was close at .854, he’s also missed a full season worth of games and is signed for 5 more years until he’s 40 and paid roughly $30mill per season... With options.

 

It’s a horrible contract...

That extension was signed in March 2014.

[dgalehouse]

This year, Kimbrel saved 42 in 47 opportunities.

 

The team went 46 for 66 (a misleading stat of 69.6%).

 

Chapman went 32 out of 34 (a better save % than CK) and the team was 49 for 67.

 

Jansen saved 38 out of 42 (about the same rate as CK) and the team went 48 for 72.

 

Now, let's look at the closer by committee 2003 season as a possible worst case scenario. Kim saved 16 out of 19. Lyon 9 out of 12. The team saved 36 out of 57 (63.2%).

K

The total team save % from 2018 to 2003 was 6.4% better.

 

If you apply the .632 to 66 save chances, we'd have 42 saves in 2018 not 46, a loss of 4 saves.

 

I know this is not an accurate portrayal of what might have been, but it does give some evidence that things might not have been too bad.

 

 

You are absolutely right when you say that is not an accurate portrayal of what might have happened. Great teams don't scrounge around trying to find saves . And I have never known of a " bad closer " who had 39 .

[Bellhorn04]

.

 

Not really true.

 

She’s referring to the extension he signed in 2016, so he’s only three years in. While his OPS was close at .854, he’s also missed a full season worth of games and is signed for 5 more years until he’s 40 and paid roughly $30mill per season... With options.

 

It’s a horrible contract...

 

700hitter is correct. What you are getting at is that the extension kicked in in 2016. The existing contract ran until 2015.

 

The extension was far too long, that's for sure.

[dgalehouse]

Saves are also a function of opportunity.

 

Greg Holland has 41 saves in 2017. He’s a free agent now. Do you think the Sox should get him?

 

Fernando Rodney had 39 saves in 2017. Is he a good closer?

The eminent Mark Wohlers notwithstanding , the difference between a great closer and a jabroni has to be more than three saves . I don't think I want to continue this discussion. It has gotten too ridiculous.

[Jack Flap]

Oh man I hate the 'we could have won without' game. It's an easy game to play after everything's over.

 

Would we have won without Kimbrel? Would we have won without Sale ? Or J.D. Martinez ? Or Mookie? Or Bogaerts? Or JBJ ? Or Benintendi ? Or Price ? Or any single player or combination of two players ? I don't really know . But I am glad we didn't have to find out .

 

Agreed.

[notin]

If you believe in WAR then you have to believe that we would have won with a "replacement value" closer (a closer who is well below the league average) in place of Kimbrel.

 

Anyone who actually believes that, please raise your hand.

 

 

You’re kidding, right?

 

Kimbrel was not good in the second half at all and much worse In the postseason. You must have noticed that.

 

I wouldn’t go so far as to say we won in spite of Kimbrel. But yes that performance after the All Star break and straight thru October was absolutely replaceable...

Edited January 2, 2019 by notin

[notin]

The eminent Mark Wohlers notwithstanding , the difference between a great closer and a jabroni has to be more than three saves . I don't think I want to continue this discussion. It has gotten too ridiculous.

 

 

There is also an extremely vast grey area in between those two.

 

And you can dismiss what Mark Wohlers says, but that seems odd because at one point you actually said closing did require a special mentality and if you asked any players they would agree. Here I went and provided the opinion of a player and you dismiss it because what was it? He wasn’t a good enough closer for you?

 

I get why you’re dropping the topic...

[dgalehouse]

There is also an extremely vast grey area in between those two.

 

And you can dismiss what Mark Wohlers says, but that seems odd because at one point you actually said closing did require a special mentality and if you asked any players they would agree. Here I went and provided the opinion of a player and you dismiss it because what was it? He wasn’t a good enough closer for you?

 

I get why you’re dropping the topic...

 

You say " bad closer " . I say " jabroni." I say it takes a certain mentality to close. You say it doesn't. Whatever. And you really don't get why I am dropping the topic. You are trolling. And it is boring and ridiculous. No problem.

[notin]

700hitter is correct. What you are getting at is that the extension kicked in in 2016. The existing contract ran until 2015.

 

The extension was far too long, that's for sure.

 

I think Kimmi was also referring to the 2016 extension...

[a700hitter]

I think Kimmi was also referring to the 2016 extension...

That extension was signed in 2014 when he was still very good.

[Bellhorn04]

Speaking of Mr. Kimbrel, I was surprised when I checked his Boston numbers against his Atlanta numbers and found that they are virtually identical in many key categories such as WHIP and K rate. The one glaring difference is the home run rate. It was double with Boston. Consequently his FIP and his ERA are higher.

[notin]

That extension was signed in 2014 when he was still very good.

 

I do see that. But I keep seeing contract details saying it covers 2016-2022 or whatever.

 

Either way, like with most contracts, the early years are not the problem ones.

 

Right now Cabrera has FIVE YEARS and $154mill left on a deal. He is 35 years old and signed through age 40 and has back problems that limited him to 40 games last year and he isn’t going to simply recover here. If you asked any GM in baseball two years ago if they would trade for that contract, you would have gotten 29 “Nooooo!”’s. And I do feel confident in speaking for them.

 

Cabrera is a lock for Cooperstown like few others playing today. But that I contract is a horror for Detroit...

[a700hitter]

I do see that. But I keep seeing contract details saying it covers 2016-2022 or whatever.

 

Either way, like with most contracts, the early years are not the problem ones.

 

Right now Cabrera has FIVE YEARS and $154mill left on a deal. He is 35 years old and signed through age 40 and has back problems that limited him to 40 games last year and he isn’t going to simply recover here. If you asked any GM in baseball two years ago if they would trade for that contract, you would have gotten 29 “Nooooo!”’s. And I do feel confident in speaking for them.

 

Cabrera is a lock for Cooperstown like few others playing today. But that I contract is a horror for Detroit...

Kimmi was wrong that Miggy "was shiny junk when he was given his extension." That was March 2014.

[notin]

Kimmi was wrong that Miggy "was shiny junk when he was given his extension." That was March 2014.

 

Ok. Now in her defense and I was thinking along the same lines - while Cabrera signed that extension in2014, he still had two years of control left at the time and the extension did not actually start until 2016, which might end up being the last good season of his career. So can we agree that for the next 5 years Miguel Cabrera will be a really awful contract? Something that appears to have started 2 years ago.

 

It’s Detroit, so, you know, who cares?

Edited January 2, 2019 by notin