moonslav59

1) At least Price is a starter not a RP'er. 2) Price cost big money not big money and 4 prospects.

You went beyond disagreeing, and that's what I called you out on. You said I "contradicted" myself and "back peddled". That's much more than disagreeing. You were either wrong or you misunderstood my position. If there's a third choice, please explain...no better yet, let's just agree to disagree and move on from this battered topic.

I'm only going to say it once more. At the time of the deal Kimbrel was making top or near top dollar for a closer (per season). Now, he is possibly ranked 5th, which is still pretty close to top dollar. I agree, $13M/yr is not really close to $17M a year, and that is why I said his deal is looking better than it did before. I wouldn't say a "huge difference" per year, and that's what counts towards the luxury tax. Yes, I agree $86M is way more than our $25M/2 or $37M/3 commitment to Kimbrel. I've never said otherwise. Now, ask 700 to admit he was comparing Kimbrel's 2016 salary to other closers' 2017 contracts and saying it was just a month later the closer contracts exploded.

I'm fine with people disagreeing and even said the pro Kimbrel trade people have strong arguments in their favor. Did you not read that, or wass it too complicated to understand? You are saying my statements and positions are contradictory, and they clearly are not. Either you don't understand my position because it is too complicated or you are just being a clown. I said the trade looks better now. You act like I never said that, disagree with that, or are back peddling. I explained that Kimbrel was paid like or near a top closer when we made the trade. You presented salaries from a month and a year later and claimed they were from the same winter. You never even bother to respond to that point, but instead went further with your claims. It's not contradictory to lobe that we have Kimbrel yet still dislike the trade. I get why kimmi loves Sale but hated the trade. She's not being contradictory doing so either. I could care less if you agree or disagree but when you present my position as contradictory when it isn't, I'll take issue.

Sox OPS by defensive positions as compared to last year: 2017 2016 .875 CF .851 +24 .850 SS .784 +66 .818 RF .886 -68 .807 1B .807 +0 .752 DH 1.045 -293 .727 LF .759 -32 .711 C .665 +46 .677 2B .825 -148 .568 3B .686 -118

Maybe it's just too complex for you to understand that not everything is black and white. There was certainly a good part of the Kimbrel trade. hating or disliking a trade does not mean I felt Kimbrel sucked or would suck. (Note: I edited my post while you were responding to the unedited one.

Not in the least. It's totally possible to be happy we have a top closer but think we overpaid for him when considering financial and prospect costs combined. I still hate the Pom trade, but I'm glad we have Pom now. I just think Espi will be much better later (or we could have traded him as part of a bigger package for a better starter), and that "like" will outweigh my current happiness having Pom in the rotation. It's not contradictory. It's looking at the long view and the short view and all the factors, such as budget and farm impact, and then weighing which one seems to trump the other. The Kimbrel trade looks better now than it did before. That does not imply it has to now be a good trade. I'll make it simple: I hated the trade at the time. I just dislike it now. If Kimbrel pitches like 2017 the rest of his contract, I may have to admit I was wrong.

These posts were exactly what I have written all along from day one of the trade. No back peddling.

Last year, many were saying otherwise. Now that Kimbrel is lights out, the tide has turned (not wrongfully so, I might add). Kimbrel's pitching like he did 5 years ago. I don't think anyone expected this, but I'm tickled pink! This fact plus the fact that top closers are now making significantly more than $13M has made the trade look much better at this moment in time. I have not disputed these facts. Certainly those who liked the trade at the time and/or like it now have plenty of arguments and evidence to support their position. I may be in a small minority when I say it's not a good trade to trade 4 prospects for a guy making near FA money anyways, especially for a RP'er. Just get a FA or trade for a top guy making peanuts. I don't think there had ever been so many good prospects traded for any RP'er before the Kimbrel trade or after, let alone one for a guy making near top dollar for closers at the time and who is still making top 5 or 6 money for a closer. Let's say we signed Chapman or Jensen, the cost per year would be just $3-4M more and cost us no prospects, or you trade the top prospects for a top RP'er not making top 20 money.

No, no bad at all, but he was not pitching at the same level even when healthy. Look, I said I'm happy he's on the team. I said I expected a top 3-5 closer, and that's what we got. The arguments you guys are using are all points I have already agreed are accurate.

Yes, and I believe I have said that about 3 or 4 times just on this page.

He sure makes that 2014 draft look a lot better than it did a year ago. (Travis is helping, too.)

I think KRod's contract expired after last year. I get the GM having to live with it, and certainly Kimbrel's recent production is making DD breathe easier, but I still think we gave up way to much for a RP'er, when you factor in the contract cost with the overpay in prospects. What made the Sale trade great was that Sale is getting paid dirt compared to his true value. I'm fine overpaying (or paying comparable FA costs) in money or prospects but not both. The starter vs RP'er factor tips the balance even more.

32 starts last year! The WHIP over 1.4 for 2 straight years is more than concerning, but Porcello's is up there this year.

Yes. That bar is set pretty low.

No, the idea was to wait a year and sign a big FA closer. The cost would have been higher than Kimbrel, but the low cost of Quinatna/Carrasco/Salazar would offset the $3-5M difference in closer salary from Kimbrel to someone like Chapman.

Alex Speier reports we had about $9M to spend and stay under the luxury tax and reset it. That does not include the little money we will spend on Fister and Peralta and any promotions given to farm players. My guess is, we might have $4-6M left to spend.

We should have traded HRam while his stock was higher than after 2015. I said this before the 2016 season, but not after it.

fangraphs had him at $9.8M last year- meaning he didn't even earn his paycheck. If Kimbrel keeps pitching like a $30M closer the rest of his contract, even if we don't win a ring, the deal will look like a good one. FYI: Clippard made just $4.1 M last year and his value was $4.8M. KRod made $5.5M in 2016 and was valued at $4.8M. Both were not as good as Kimbrel last year, and I never thought they would be, but together, they would have been decent enough. I think we could have gotten a Quintana/Carrasco/Salazar type a year ago for Espinoza, Margot, Allen, Asuaje & Guerra. If I'm wrong, I'd have thrown in another good but not great prospect, if needed.

It's not the size, it's the sustainability that matters, and I have you all beat there! I totally agree on Miller, and think we could have even made him our 1-2 inning closer and then used the Kimbrel prospects for someone like Quintana. I realize much of my point is speculative, and we could have gone wrong with the choice of starter we might have traded for. I think I even mentioned I'd have been okay with the trade had we gotten the healthy Tyson Ross with Kimbrel, but that would not have been any better in hindsight.

A year and a month away. Look, I've said the cost of closers going up has made the deal look better, however $13M is still a lot of money to pay a closer. Is $13M currently too much to pay the best closer? No, not as a FA, it is clearly not, but Kimbrel was not the very best last year- no even close. The money side of the deal looks acceptable not that he is top dog and the prices of top 5 closers have gone up significantly. We're still paying "near top dollar" for our closer AND we gave up several very good prospects for a RP'er. One or the other was fine with me, but not both. I think my point is pretty clear, pretty logical and easy to understand. I'm fine with anyone disagreeing with my point, but I think it is valid. My wish, at the time of the trade was not to hold onto these prospects, it was actually to expand the package for something much bigger...like a Chris Sale trade, so using the argument that these prospects might not ever amount to anything is not an argument to use against my position. Since there were no great closers on the FA market that year, my plan was to patchwork until the next season. I suggested signing Clippard and trading for K-Rod among other ideas. In hindsight, having to sign a top closer last winter would have cost much more than $13M, but it still would not have cost us 4 prospects. Of course, if Kimbrel finishes out his contract pitching like 2017 and we win a ring, the deal will look fine, but Kimbrel had not pitched this well in several years before the trade and may not next year. He pitched a little worse than I expected last year. When we traded for him I thought he was about the 3rd best closer in MLB. My dislike of the trade had nothing to do with thinking Kimbrel was not an elite closer. I thought he was and expected him to continue being a top 3-5 closer. It's hard to imagine this team winning without a top closer. Foulke, Pablebon and Uehara were significant factors in each of our 3 rings, but none were as costly to acquire as Kimbrel-- not even close. Maybe my philosophy on closer value differs from some here, and I'm fine with that, I just made a point about how valuable (top) closers have been to us, but even in hindsight, I still think we overpaid. I'm fine with "overpaying" for Sale. I'm not for a RP'er.

We got Kimbrel in the winter of 2015-2016. Chapman made $8M in 2015 (not as a FA) and $11.3M in 2016. Kimbrel was making NEAR TOP FA money at THE TIME OF THE TRADE! Please don't make me explain my point again.

I'm not expecting much from this signing, but there s a sliver of hope he regains his stuff (or comes close).

That's good news. I wouldn't have wasted half out summer allotment on Peralta.

At the time of the trade he was making very close to top FA closer money. That was my point. I even said that with FA closer prices going up, the trade looks better now than it did at the time. I still don't like trades like that for a closer- even a top one. I said at the time, and I still believe it, I'm happy as hell he's on our team, but I still dislike the trade. It's not because I had high hoped for Margot playing on the Sox, but for a package like that, I'd have prefer a SP'er making less than $13M a year.