Sox get Kimbrel

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Just because you don't know what to do with pieces that are blocked doesn't mean you should give them away.

I hate this deal so much. Two good prospects two not nothing prospects for a freakin closer. For 60 innings. I don't care how good he is.

That's too much. This scares the shit out of me for the rest of he plans. I feel ill.
That should be a package for a starter not a good but expensive closer.

I don't want to pay a closer that much. Let alone give away real assets to do so.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,767
You'll like it better when the starters hand the bullpen a 4-3 lead in the 7th and you have Taz and maybe a LOOGY getting it done in the 7th, Koji dropping them in the 8th, and Kimbrel blowing them away in the 9th on a regular basis, instead of watching late inning leads disappear in excruciating fashion as the Sox throw out guys like Hembree, Breslow, and Ogando.
 

FinanceAdvice

New Member
Apr 1, 2008
167
Albany, NY
I'm surprised that so many, it seems like all, are down, disappointed with the deal. To me, pitching is the most important aspect of the game and while I admit giving up FOUR prospects is a lot, I fully support the trade. Now Sox need to bolster the starting rotation to get the now a very solid pen. Edit: Look what the elite pen did for the Royals the past two seasons. 162 game career average of ERA+ 233, FIP, 1.72, WHIP of .927. I'll take that any day for the four prospects we gave up.
 

finnVT

superspreadsheeter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2002
2,154
The one thing that's helped me come around on this deal is this.... top 5 relievers by xFIP over the past 3 years:

Miller 1.94
Chapman 1.97
Jansen 2.08
Betances 2.11
Kimbrel 2.20

But here's the kicker: Kimbrel is the youngest guy in that group.

I think his consistency and dominance from a relatively young age made me lose sight of the fact that he's still really young, and has the potential to be dominant here for a really long time. I still think it's a lot to give up for a reliever, but if ever there was a reliever you give up that much for, Kimbrel's the one.
 

GlucoDoc

New Member
Dec 19, 2005
77
Yes, maybe we overpayed a little. But every other GM out there knows the high expectations in the Red Sox market and the pressure DD is under. And now we will likely overpay to resign X dealing with Boras. That is the nature of our existence up here in Beantown. We should be thankful that we have a rich owner and a well stocked farm and pay the price if that is what it takes. The key is not overpaying, which is inevitable. The key is overpaying for the RIGHT players. We have to hope that DD & Co. are smart enough to make the right choices, and that is what we have to see over the next year.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
I hate this deal so much. Two good prospects two not nothing prospects for a freakin closer. For 60 innings. I don't care how good he is.

so.
Again, 60 regular season innings are not why you pay someone like Kimbrel.

You pay someone like Kimbrel so that your manager doesn't let Pedro Martinez throw his 115th pitch of the night to Jorge Posada with a one run lead and two outs in the 8th.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,767
The one thing that's helped me come around on this deal is this.... top 5 relievers by xFIP over the past 3 years:

Miller 1.94
Chapman 1.97
Jansen 2.08
Betances 2.11
Kimbrel 2.20
And Koji is right behind them at 2.33. The Yankees have two of the most dominant back-end bullpen arms in the sport in Miller and Betances. And now, so do the Red Sox.
 

The Boomer

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2000
2,232
Charlottesville, Virginia
When did I say he'd maintain a career like Rivera's? We have him for three years, not 13. And disingenuous? I am deliberately trying to deceive people? Miller's best ERA+ is 198. Kimbrel is coming off three years from 228-399 prior to 2015, when, as discussed above, he got off to a poor start (BABIP fueled) and was dominant from June onward. You can disagree with my reading of the stats but I don't know why you're questioning my motives.
With Koji injured and near the end of his career, the need for this move became more imperative. If we can take DD at his word that this was the last major trade for this off season, then, unless they can be traded, he is gambling on improvement from their core youngsters and comebacks from veterans Pedroia, Han Ram and Panda. This time they overpaid in prospects to plug the gap rather than with dollars as they did in free agency last winter. DD's evaluation of prospects in his new organization is the big unknown. If Kimbrel is essentially Larry Anderson on steroids (though signed through his prime years of ML production), it will be interesting to see how many of the 4 prospects traded away turn out to be regrettable Bagwells or Cecil Coopers rather than Scott Coopers who should have been traded instead. Trading prospects usually works more than it doesn't.

I prefer not to trade prospects for aging and over the hill players but elite players in their primes, like Kimbrel, always require a premium.

The starting pitching market hasn't developed yet, so it might be better to wait and see. Last year, because of actual or perceived scarcity, the best starters received ridiculous contracts. This year, it seems like there is more supply of free agent pitchers. It will be interesting to see if free agent prices hold up this winter too. The demand for the kinds of young starters that everyone covets in trade is apparently inflating. Those kinds of relatively cost controlled pitchers aren't going anywhere.

Kimbrel is clearly a younger upgrade over Miller and 2015-2016 Koji. If you look at this as more of a staggered swap, Eduardo Rodriguez (a potential future ace) and Kimbrel for Miller and the 4 prospects just traded away doesn't seem as bad if you view things long term. Rodriguez was a pure steal for almost free agent Miller which makes this perceived prospect overpay a little more palatable. The Miller-Rodriguez trade was much more like Anderson for Bagwell only in reverse. It was up there with Slocumb for Varitek and Lowe. Of course, Duquette and Cherington get all the credit for those moves. The sample size is too small and it's too soon to judge DD's body of work with the Red Sox.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
I don't think anyone is disputing that Kimbrel is an excellent addition as the new keystone to anchor last year's woeful bullpen. I also don't think the Sox can afford to stop building a new pen with this one acquisition, since reliability concerns exist for the rest of the pen, wIth each guy having his own question mark(s), whether those are performance or injury related.

Putting these two opinions together is where my problem lies, because not only has DDski bundled together the two most valuable assets generally considered expendable from the farm for just this one guy, but the Sox are also paying full freight on Kimbrel's market-rate contract.

To say that the Sox needed to get a guy like Kimbrel is true. To say that the Sox have additional concerns in the pen is also true. Because if Koji doesn't recover from breaking his throwing wrist, on the wrong side of 40, the pen looks pretty pedestrian aside from Kimbrel.

So by both trading Margot and Guerra together, and also taking on Kimbrel's full salary, I think DDski has unduly limited himself, when there wasn't any other team obviously willing to give up anywhere near so much to Preller. Especially this early in the offseason.

Basically, it seems to me that DDski paid a steep premium to lock up early the specific guy he and Wren wanted, in spite of other options apparently being available. And in doing so, it seems to me he limited his ability to make further moves, at least without causing the farm system real pain.

Now maybe Barnes' conversion to a dedicated relief role goes great, and Ross doesn't take a step back, and Koji is still able to snap of splitters the way he did before breaking his wrist, and Tazawa doesn't continue his decline in performance. If all, or even three of those things come to pass, the Sox will have a lockdown pen.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,508
Not here
Just because you don't know what to do with pieces that are blocked doesn't mean you should give them away.

I hate this deal so much. Two good prospects two not nothing prospects for a freakin closer. For 60 innings. I don't care how good he is.

That's too much. This scares the shit out of me for the rest of he plans. I feel ill.
That should be a package for a starter not a good but expensive closer.

I don't want to pay a closer that much. Let alone give away real assets to do so.
None of the starters the Sox need would be available for that package. Meanwhile, there are several of them that are available for just cash. Since before the offseason it's been clear that signing a free agent starter made sense and that signing a free agent reliever made much less sense. There just aren't that many free agent relievers.

I don't mean to target you with this specifically, LSox, but people really have to stop thinking in terms of winning or losing trades.

The goal is not to win trades. The goal is not to get the most value for the least. The goal is to win the World Series as many times as possible before we die. Yes, there's a correlation between winning trades and getting good value and winning the World Series, but it's not perfect. It's not even just slightly imperfect.

The Red Sox came into this off season with most of the pieces in place to be a contender, with two glaring needs, to add a stud to the bullpen and to add a stud to the rotation.

Well the Sox got the stud for the bullpen. It cost more than we wanted to pay, but the fact is we will probably never miss a single one of the prospects we traded not because they're "blocked" or any such nonsense, but because this trade goes a long way to making us the Next Great Red Sox team that we've been waiting for since about 2010.

We're going to sign an ace. We're going to be a good, potentially World Series winning team in 2016, and that's going to be true probably for the bulk of the next decade.

The one thing this trade does in the short term--other than getting us a bullpen ace--is make it important that the right handed outfielder we get for the bench be someone who could take over a position full time if Bradley or Castillo go belly up. That's the role Margot could have played this year if everything went right for him.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
It looks even more moronic when in your haste to argue your point you totally miss the context of the comparison; I'm fairly certain I'm the only person who's brought up Slocumb, and my point has nothing to do with comparing Slocumb to Kimbrel.

Consistent relievers are few and far between, and taking on a big (for a reliever) salary while also giving up a large haul of prospects gives you lots of exposure to have it come back and bite you.

It's probably worth pointing out that "selling high" can be hard to distinguish from plain "expensive" in trades; you can't sell high if the player doesn't look good when you let him go.
Even mentioning the name of Slocumb in the context of this trade is irresponsible. I know you weren't comparing the two. The key as has been mentioned is overpaying for the right players. Ben was extremely gun shy to do a deal like this. When he got to the trading table he was overmatched. Except with the Dodgers deal and the deal that brought back EdRo. There's about a 50% chance (being generous) that one of these guys turn into something. I have more confidence in the current administration to make a deal of this magnitude. Cherington probably would have traded Guerra or someone else for a guy like Storen who may or may not be good in the AL and called it a day.

Sox still have a top 5 system and it took a slight hit. It's not as if Dombrowski is going to trade Devers tomorrow for a 7th inning guy. Might be the only trade of this magnitude made all off-season. It was a good deal for both teams.
 

jasvlm

New Member
Nov 28, 2014
177
I tried not to knee jerk reaction this trade, and avoided posting anything until I'd had a chance to ruminate a bit. Here are some bullet point thoughts:

-I feel like the Red Sox gave up more in prospect value than I would have believed necessary to upgrade the pen, even with an elite level guy like Kimbrel. As has already been stated above, Margot and Guerra are top 100 prospects, and both will likely play in the majors. I just don't like giving up minor league assets of this quality unless the return truly changes the team's chances dramatically in the near term, regardless of the monetary obligations inherent in the contract of the incoming player. This remains my primary reaction to the trade: the Red Sox gave up too much young talent for the likely return, even though I think Kimbrel will be very good over the next 3 seasons.

-Kimbrel is 27, healthy, in his prime and arguably the best controlled arm the Red Sox could have traded for in the majors. That does factor into the equation. Chapman is arguably similar, but he's only got 1 year of control, and I doubt he'd sign after 2016 for 2/24, or at a similar rate, to be comparable to Kimbrel's deal. If DD had offered a package of Margot and Allen for Chapman, knowing there was only 1 year of control coming, would that have been better? I don't think so.

-I believe the age consideration is a large one when it comes to the front office. Could they have just paid O'Day 3/37, basically what Kimbrel is owed, and just lost the $ but not the prospects? Of course, and I have to believe they weighed that option heavily. They must have drawn the conclusion that Kimbrel's age makes him a much safer investment than any of the relievers on the market who are free agents, and that the sheer dominance of Kimbrel's performance made him that much less of a performance risk.

-I believe that the fact that the Red Sox have Betts/Bradley and Bogaerts impacted their thinking on moving a CF and a ss in trade. They didn't see a likely home for either guy in the next 2-3 seasons with the major league club, and decided to use those assets to fill another area of major need: the pen. I disagree with this thinking, because the value of those players shouldn't be predicated on the current major league roster. They have value inherent in their abilities that can translate to trade capital, and that value, in my view, was higher than what they received in Kimbrel.

-Margot and Guerra are coming off arguably their best seasons as minor leaguers, and their values may never be higher. I like both players, who figure to have the defensive chops to stay in CF and at ss respectively, but it is possible that they won't ever be more valuable based on their performance than they are this offseason. Both could arguably continue to develop and become capable major leaguers, but it is also possible that they'll fizzle and never reach their promise. At least DD moved these players while their stock was at a high point, so I give him credit for that aspect of the trade.

-Kimbrel's contract shouldn't be difficult for him to outperform in terms of value. He's been worth 3.2, 3.3, 2.2, 2.2 and 1.5 WAR over the past 5 seasons. Even if you say he's a 1.5 WAR pitcher, with wins costing about 7-8 mil (and rising) per win, his contract should allow for him to outperform his salary. 1.5 WAR should be about 12 mil, which is his average salary the next 3 seasons. If he's anything like his pre 2015 self (and his numbers after early May suggest that he is exactly that), a 2.2 WAR pitcher is worth about 20 mil per season. That is high end performance and impact, and something the Red Sox just didn't have in 2015 out of their pen. Koji is wonderful, and I could easily see him pitching at a high level in 2016, and hope he will, but they had nobody else coming close to this level of performance on their roster.

-This acquisition, prospect cost aside, probably improves an area of need in as impactful a way as they could have arguably hoped to achieve. I know there is no viewing of the trade without seeing the costs, but if the focus is on how the 2016 team could be improved most dramatically, Kimbrel's addition was probably near the top of the list of guys who could be traded for or signed as a free agent to upgrade the pen. If the pool of all major league relievers was considered, there are maybe 5 names (Betances, Davis, Chapman, Miller and maybe Jansen) that would rank as impactful in the same range that Kimbrel has been over the past 3 seasons. Perhaps the Yankees would trade Miller, but there are reasons the other 4 guys are either not available, have age/injury concerns or have fewer years of contractural control, making them less attractive than Kimbrel.
DD identified his man and paid the freight to bring him in.

-I believe this is going to be hard to articulate, but I think DD has built a reputation in baseball for being willing to pay a high price for elite talent, and that helps him in negotiations with other GMs. If you build a rep of always getting the best end of the deal, and for paying far less value than would be perceived in the industry for the value you received, eventually, the other GMs stop taking your calls and are less willing to deal with you. By paying "full price" or more when it comes to deals like this, DD makes this transaction very easy to say yes to, and for the other GM in the deal to look good in the process. He's done this in a number of trades over his career (getting Miggy, getting Scherzer, trading Fister are some bigger deals of note), and I have to believe that his reputation has been helped by this willingness to put a big package on the table to get what he is after. It is no secret that he's been in on getting some of the biggest fish that were on the trade market when the Tigers were looking to win it all (getting Sanchez, getting Price), and I would like to believe that his rep of dealing fairly and with his best chips helped him get those trades done. Paying full price in most cases must earn him GM credibility, and perhaps it should. Trying to see this deal in a broader perspective: perhaps trading more value than the likely return in this transaction will help him in a future trade opportunity that the Red Sox can't even see right now. I'd like to believe this is more of a consideration than we can probably appreciate or measure.

-DD is not done yet. The 2016 Red Sox just got a lot better. The cost was significant, and I agree was more than I personally would have paid to make the trade, but at least I'm confident the team is better as a result. I'm willing to give DD the rest of the offseason to build this roster, and reserve judgement on his work until the entire picture can be appreciated.

-This trade is not the beginning of the end of the Sox farm system. This does not signal a trend that all the young Red Sox minor league assets are going to be traded for short term help. The sky is not falling on a deep, talented crop of minor leaguers. There are still plenty of young players who will populate the major league team as they mature, and there are more young talents who can be utilized in trade talks for the biggest talents in the game, if DD is so inclined. The team has not used its only bullets to get a single closer.

-Koji's reaction, and willingness to take on the 8th inning without making a stink about it, is quite wonderful to see. Koji was a huge part of the 2013 World Series title (they don't win it without his work that year), and he's been awesome since then until his freak wrist injury. He's only got one year left on his deal, and perhaps in his career, and he could have reasonably agitated to finish his run as the Red Sox closer based on his body of work in this city, Kimbrel or no Kimbrel. He acted very professionally, and with great class and humility in moving aside. I'd like to believe that the front office was in contact with him as the trade was being made to insure they handled the situation in a similar manner, but even in the absence of that step, Koji does the right thing and puts the team first. Thank you Koji.

Sorry for the length of this post. Just wanted to try to get it all out in one place to summarize my reaction.
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,505
Scituate, MA
I don't think one has to be overly optimistic about prospects to think this is not a good deal.

Kimbrel seems likely to be worth somewhere between 6-9 wins over the next 3 years. He is being payed for about 4 1/2 wins (both numbers assume his option is picked up).

Margot is about the 25th best prospect, which means he should be expected to produce about 7 1/2 wins in his first 7 seasons. Guerra is somewhere around 100, which is probably another 3-4 wins in expectation. Even if you don't think much of Allen and Asuaje as prospects, they should have positive value.

Even adjusting Kimbrel's value up for certainty and for the increasing value of additional wins per season, this trade does not seem like equal value. While there was no clear path for Margot or Guerra to fit on the current Boston roster, that doesn't mean that they needed to be traded now or in this deal.
I'll preface this response by saying I think it was in overpay. But having said that, trying to project wins onto prospects (or any player, but especially prospects) is a wildly inexact science. So since we're working with inexacts. I'd say it's probably 50% likely over the next 10 years that the Padres ultimately win this trade. It's 25% likely that it's a wash over the next 10 years and 25% that the Red Sox win the trade.
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,505
Scituate, MA
Yes, maybe we overpayed a little. But every other GM out there knows the high expectations in the Red Sox market and the pressure DD is under. And now we will likely overpay to resign X dealing with Boras. That is the nature of our existence up here in Beantown. We should be thankful that we have a rich owner and a well stocked farm and pay the price if that is what it takes. The key is not overpaying, which is inevitable. The key is overpaying for the RIGHT players. We have to hope that DD & Co. are smart enough to make the right choices, and that is what we have to see over the next year.
This is a great post. We're all stuck in the mindset that the closer is an overrated position. Yes, perhaps it is, but you're going to be ok if you overpay for elite talent. Dombrowski has said this in multiple interviews. We can argue about the value of a win until we have callouses on our fingers, but ultimately the team needs to get better players. Anytime you're trading prospects there's a risk that one or more of them becomes a stud, but there's also the chance that they fizzle out.

Looking at the players they gave up, I think only Asuaje has a chance to be in the majors this year.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
That's too much. This scares the shit out of me for the rest of he plans. I feel ill.
In 8 pages wrought with overreaction, this is perhaps the best.

So by both trading Margot and Guerra together, and also taking on Kimbrel's full salary, I think DDski has unduly limited himself, when there wasn't any other team obviously willing to give up anywhere near so much to Preller. Especially this early in the offseason.
How could you possibly feel comfortable thinking you have any certainty about this?
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,678
I'd say it's probably 50% likely over the next 10 years that the Padres ultimately win this trade. It's 25% likely that it's a wash over the next 10 years and 25% that the Red Sox win the trade.
Ok, but what if the Padres "win the trade" and the Sox, say, make the ALCS twice in the next three years?

You know this already, but the marginal value for both teams is very different. It gets really tempting to think of transactions as zero-sum equations — that's how fans talk about trades at water coolers; it's how people bet on sports, etc. — but that's become such an overwhelming mindset that I bet there's actually some market inefficiency involved. I imagine lifting a guy like Preller up with a trade that looks to be in his favor — dude had a real rough year, after all — opens up conversations with other GMs that wouldn't otherwise be there.
 

Maximus

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
5,774
Kimbrel is a nice add to retool a terrible bullpen. Very heavy price to pay to SD for a closer but we need to fix the bullpen. Now the focus on getting an ace to lead the staff has to come via free agency.
 

Hee Sox Choi

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 27, 2006
6,134
John Sickels weighs in:

SUMMARY: Overall, I think the Padres did well with this package. I'm high on Allen, Asuaje is a nice asset, and both Guerra and Margot can develop into major league regulars. That's a solid return for a guy who wouldn't be in the long-term plan. As for the Red Sox, Kimbrel obviously helps them in the short run and the farm system is deep enough to part with these four without it being a massive blow. This seems like a good move for both teams.

http://www.minorleagueball.com/2015/11/14/9734772/red-sox-trade-four-prospects-to-padres-for-craig-kimbrel
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,820
One of the problems with evaluating this trade is that Margot - while a great prospect without context - had to be signed to the 40-man roster this year and doesn't have any path to the major leagues.

In other words, if the Red Sox didn't have such a glut of young OF talent, the Red Sox would have been a lot less willing to move him.

I look at this trade differently than most. It was fairly clear that Margot was going to be moved to fill in a hole. I just hope Kimbrel was the best piece DD could get without moving the untouchables.
 
Aug 22, 2014
61
The one thing that's helped me come around on this deal is this.... top 5 relievers by xFIP over the past 3 years:

Miller 1.94
Chapman 1.97
Jansen 2.08
Betances 2.11
Kimbrel 2.20

But here's the kicker: Kimbrel is the youngest guy in that group.

I think his consistency and dominance from a relatively young age made me lose sight of the fact that he's still really young, and has the potential to be dominant here for a really long time. I still think it's a lot to give up for a reliever, but if ever there was a reliever you give up that much for, Kimbrel's the one.
Yeah Kimbrel is really good. Though i always wait and see when it comes to NL pitchers transitioning over here.

I think your numbers paint a bit of a rosy picture though. I never really like going back 3yrs - that 3rd year is almost ancient history by now. 2yrs is as far back as i usually look. I also find it indispensable to use xFIP- FIP- and ERA- instead of raw xFIP FIP and ERA, as it adjusts for park and league differences.

Kimbrel still comes out looking very good in these numbers, but as more of a top 10 guy than a top 5 guy (10th fip-, 7th xfip-). Uehara comes out looking like more of a top 25 guy (29th fip-, 16th xfip-).

that gives us a very good back of the bullpen but imo not quite the same as what the Yanks have with two pretty clear cut top 5 relievers (Miller 3rd and 1st, Betances 5th and 3rd).
 

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
7,239
CA
I am fine with the trade, and excited for the addition of Kimbrel. As others have pointed out, you have to give up value to get value, and I think there is an underestimation of the value of an elite closer in this thread. It not only impacts the ability to close out games, but it greatly impacts the make-up of the rest of the bullpen -- both in building it and having guys know their roles. We've obviously seen what KC has been able to do with 3 elite arms in the backend of the bullpen.

There is just so much unknown with guys playing in A and AA ball, and as promising as Margot and Guerra have looked in their time in the MLs, they are far from "sure things". When you couple that with the Sox farm system depth and what you are getting in return, you make this trade every time IMO.
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
6,157
I'm with Buzzkil Pauley on this one. Of course we have to trade prospects, but we didn't have to trade prospects for the right to pay a volatile commodity like a reliever market rate.

The counterpoint (i guess) is that Kimbrel is worth a lot more to us than Guerra and Margot might be down the road with all the outfielders we had in the wings. The argument goes its important to remember, too, that everybody knows this. It wouldn't surprise me to hear that other GMs are asking for the moon knowing that he has to put together a winning team and soon per Henry's mandate. So in the end, DDski is going to have to pay out the ass. But Jesus Christmas, couldn't we wait till December to see if the price drops a little?

The place where you're supposed to bite the bullet is dealing for a young, cost controlled pitcher, not for a guy whose entire arm might come apart from throwing so hard.

The further frustration comes from projecting further action from Dombrowski based on this trade. That might be unfair, but considering his history, it's probably not.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,274
Is it a scouting report?

A report citing scouts that love him and saying he was a talent at the level of a 2nd or 3rd round pick (he signed for above slot)? What exactly will for you to acknowledge that he's a meaningful part of the deal, and people who are disappointed about his inclusion aren't just a bunch of mouthbreathers?

Here's more from the Sickles post referenced a few posts earlier:

Logan Allen, LHP: Allen was drafted by the Red Sox this past June out of IMG Academy in Florida as an eighth-round choice, though he was rumored to go as high as the third round at one point. He is a 6-3, 200 pound left-hander with a low-90s fastball. Both his curveball and change-up have a chance to be quality major league pitches, giving him mid-rotation projection if everything works out.

Allen is just 18 years old but was very successful in his pro debut, posting a spectacular 24/1 K/BB ratio in 20 innings for the Gulf Coast League Red Sox with a 0.90 ERA. The GCL is a long way from the majors of course but his debut could not have gone any better, with superior control standing out as a huge positive.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,912
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Jesus, he's an 18 year old with only 20 innings in the GCL. It's not possible to be more uncertain of his future prospects than that right now. Counting on him to be anything in 4 or 5 years is crazy talk. He's a looooooooong way away from The Show.
 

ZMart100

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2008
3,220
I imagine lifting a guy like Preller up with a trade that looks to be in his favor — dude had a real rough year, after all — opens up conversations with other GMs that wouldn't otherwise be there.
This strikes me as a weird argument. A bad trade is valuable because it might make good trades possible? I can't imagine a GM thinking "well, I don't think this deal improves my team, but he 'lost' his last trade so what the heck, I'll do it."
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
How could you possibly feel comfortable thinking you have any certainty about this?
Because I know the deal was made on November 13, one day after the end of the first GMs meeting, and less than two full weeks after the World Series ended.

Because I know Dipoto traded Preller far less than half the prospect value to get a reliever whose projected MLB value in 2016 is well above half that of Kimbrel and whose remaining owed contract is much less than half of Kimbrel's.

Because Chapman and Giles are still available on the trade market, both of whom are projectible to a relatively equivalent production to Kimbrel next season.

Because Wren was the GM who initially developed Kimbrel with the Braves, and is now DDski's assistant.

Because every major and minor sports media outlet that focuses attention on baseball prospects has reported this as being a lot to give up by the Sox, and DDski himself stated last night he felt it was a lot to give up.

Because DDski cannot now use either Margot or Guerra to further improve the team, and DDski has admitted he planned this to be his major trade of the offseason.

Because the Reds' reported asking price was three prospects, including one legit prospect, at the deadline last season; the Red Sox just paid four, with two legit prospects, for Kimbrel.

Such facts are readily available to anyone who can perform a simple five-minute google search. I'm surprised you were so ignorant of them that you couldn't imagine what I used as basis for my opinion.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Before jumping ugly, I want to see:

1. How other pieces of puzzle are brought together. This is just the first one.

2. Objective, verifiable data -- via other trades or signings -- that DD was, in fact, ripped off or otherwise spent these assets unwisely.

edit ... I don't about prices in the past, what "outlets" are saying, or "reported" asking prices.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,508
Not here
I'm with Buzzkil Pauley on this one. Of course we have to trade prospects, but we didn't have to trade prospects for the right to pay a volatile commodity like a reliever market rate.
We paid a premium to get one of the few guys in that volatile commodity market who hasn't been volatile. He's had one season where he was super human and other than that he's been very consistently very good.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,244
Kimbrel is 27 and under team control for 3 more years. He qualifies for a young, cost controlled pitcher.
Yes. Criticizing Dombrowski for taking on all of Kimbrel's salary is just silly. Kimbrel's salary is a rounding error for the payroll, and he is likely to be worth it from a production standpoint.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,696
I hated this trade when I first heard it last night, both in terms of the quantity and quality of the prospects involved. Like some others, I expected Margot to be able to help fetch a quality starting pitcher (not by himself, but as a key part of the package). After sleeping on it and finally reading this thread, I've come around some. I'm very excited about Craig Kimbrel and I appreciate the cascading impact of his addition to the end of the bullpen. He's still relatively young and his salary is actually cheap if he maintains his recent production. And while I still believe that Manny Margot is underrated by many fans, he was blocked in the short term barring catastrophic injury to our young ML outfielders.

So, in the end, I guess it's 'In Dave Dombrowski I trust'. I have to hope that he came to the realization that Margot and the other three were the right guys to deal. I'm not saying we should screw over all of the other GM's the Sox deal with, but I sure hope that DD, Wren and the others have combined their brainpower with Hazen and the rest of the Cherington leftovers to properly evaluate our prospects and keep the true gems.
 

jimv

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 5, 2011
1,118
I'd still like to see this team add one more quality bullpen arm; O'Day, Sipp, or whoever.
How would you feel about Joe Kelly in the bullpen?

Kimbrel
Koji
Taz
Ross
Kelly
Layne
Wright

That has the chance to be a very good pen
 

pdub

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 2, 2007
517
As good as they may be in the future, what kind of opportunity did either Margot or Guerra have with this team? Our outfield is presumably set and SS looks like Bogaerts job to lose. Its a steep price to pay but definitely necessary. Our bullpen was atrocious last season.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,274
Jesus, he's an 18 year old with only 20 innings in the GCL. It's not possible to be more uncertain of his future prospects than that right now. Counting on him to be anything in 4 or 5 years is crazy talk. He's a looooooooong way away from The Show.

Exactly zero people are counting on him to be anything at all. We all understand that even the best prospects are hit and miss, and the "miss" part increases the further you are away from the majors. Some people merely expressed disappointment that a guy who is apparently well thought of was included in a deal that was seemingly enough (too much, even) without him. That's all.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
I don't think one has to be overly optimistic about prospects to think this is not a good deal.

Kimbrel seems likely to be worth somewhere between 6-9 wins over the next 3 years. He is being payed for about 4 1/2 wins (both numbers assume his option is picked up).

Margot is about the 25th best prospect, which means he should be expected to produce about 7 1/2 wins in his first 7 seasons. Guerra is somewhere around 100, which is probably another 3-4 wins in expectation. Even if you don't think much of Allen and Asuaje as prospects, they should have positive value.

Even adjusting Kimbrel's value up for certainty and for the increasing value of additional wins per season, this trade does not seem like equal value. While there was no clear path for Margot or Guerra to fit on the current Boston roster, that doesn't mean that they needed to be traded now or in this deal.
Well, aren't wins a bit like money, in that a dollar in hand today is worth more than one in hand next week? The object isn't to collect the most wins (where the analogy frays a bit) but to win the World Series. The certainty (ish) of quality play in 2016 on a team that might have a shot at a title (tbd) is worth more than wins spread out over seven years or more, where the likelihood of those wins contributing to a title are harder to predict.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
I don't think DD is stupid or lazy or rash. I strongly suspect he gauged the market for starters and found the cost far higher than what he just paid for Kimbrel.

Would people feel better if he'd given up those players plus Betts for Sale? Or Carrasco?? Or if he'd traded those same 4 guys for Tyson Ross instead of Kimbrel, and then signed O'Day to a bigger than Miller deal?
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
The one thing that's helped me come around on this deal is this.... top 5 relievers by xFIP over the past 3 years:

Miller 1.94
Chapman 1.97
Jansen 2.08
Betances 2.11
Kimbrel 2.20

But here's the kicker: Kimbrel is the youngest guy in that group.

I think his consistency and dominance from a relatively young age made me lose sight of the fact that he's still really young, and has the potential to be dominant here for a really long time. I still think it's a lot to give up for a reliever, but if ever there was a reliever you give up that much for, Kimbrel's the one.
And using three years cuts off two fantastic seasons by him.
 

ZMart100

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2008
3,220
I think there has been some misunderstanding of how the expectations work. Suppose there is a 50% chance that Margot turns into a 15 win player over his first seven years and a 50% chance he turns into a pumpkin. That is a 7.5 win expectation. It doesn't mean that I am claiming that he will be a one win player over the first 7 years. Obviously this is a simplification, and getting a better handle on what the distribution of outcomes is for prospects at each ranking would be helpful.

Sure you can discount future wins.
My point was 9 wins - 4.5 wins worth of payment is so much less than 7 1/2 wins + 3-4 wins + something from Asuaje and Allen - whatever you have to pay them, that looking from today, the trade looks lopsided even if you discount future wins or account for the increasing value of additional wins per season. This is a certainly a crude back of the envelope type of calculation and I welcome more sophisticated looks at the value exchange here.

Just because I think this deal isn't good value, doesn't mean that I am arguing that these players needed to be part of the organization at the start of the 2016 or 2017 seasons.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,274
This is awesome.
I stand by it. I'm not an expert on the lower levels of the farm system, but I know whose opinions I trust on the matter, and in those people's opinions, Logan Allen was a meaningful piece. Should I read those opinions, wait 48 hours so I will have heard of him longer, and then get annoyed by it? A week? What's the appropriate time?
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
on another note - shouldn't kimbrel be the workhorse "relief ace" and uehara the nominal "closer"?
Maybe you should, if only Koji hadn't broken his throwing wrist last season. But he did, so you shouldnt.

Getting Kimbrel to re-anchor the back of the bullpen is a really strong move to better the team. Not only because he's a terrific pitcher, and still has three years on his contract, but also because Koji's injury makes him such a risk for next season.

The certainty of being able to rely on Kimbrel for the last outs should make sorting out next season's bullpen roles and uncertainties much easier for Farrell to navigate throughout the season.
 

Adrian's Dome

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2010
4,424
I think there has been some misunderstanding of how the expectations work. Suppose there is a 50% chance that Margot turns into a 15 win player over his first seven years and a 50% chance he turns into a pumpkin. That is a 7.5 win expectation. It doesn't mean that I am claiming that he will be a one win player over the first 7 years. Obviously this is a simplification, and getting a better handle on what the distribution of outcomes is for prospects at each ranking would be helpful.

Sure you can discount future wins.
My point was 9 wins - 4.5 wins worth of payment is so much less than 7 1/2 wins + 3-4 wins + something from Asuaje and Allen - whatever you have to pay them, that looking from today, the trade looks lopsided even if you discount future wins or account for the increasing value of additional wins per season. This is a certainly a crude back of the envelope type of calculation and I welcome more sophisticated looks at the value exchange here.

Just because I think this deal isn't good value, doesn't mean that I am arguing that these players needed to be part of the organization at the start of the 2016 or 2017 seasons.
The problem is that you're pulling those numbers out of thin air and once again ignoring the circumstances. "Value" is relative, I'd rather a major glaring issue on the major league squad be addressed through shipping out excess minor league talent than to horde the talent and end up with them completely blocked (and therefore lacking perceived value as everybody knows you're desperate to move them) or Brandon Wood/Andy Marte'ing themselves.
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
Rasputin nailed it.

For me, it comes down to a couple of things.

- I will never underestimate the impact of a light's out closer. I don't give a shit about WAR (there, I said it). I give a shit about losing games that should have been won. I give a shit about opponents needing to scramble before the 9th inning comes around. I remain convinced that the Yankee run was more a product of Mariano Rivera than any other single player. I don't see how any team advances far without a dependable, shut-down pen, other than luck.

- What were Margot and Guerra (in combination with others) going to fetch in trade for a number 1 starter in 2016? It's all speculation based on (1) a team having the guy the Red Sox want and, (2) a team more concerned with the future and payroll than winning things now getting the package they demand.

- Who's the closer if Dombrowski hangs onto these guys, or trades them for some fictitious starter? Koji? OK - that's a 1 year gamble more exponentially risky than this trade.

As for someone's reference to "National League" reliever...what the fuck does that matter for the top of a bullpen guy? You think he's facing pitchers?

I'm all of a sudden looking forward to seeing games against the Blue Jays and Orioles late-and-close. Yankees? Maybe now the Red Sox have some parity.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,912
Deep inside Muppet Labs
The problem is that you're pulling those numbers out of thin air and once again ignoring the circumstances. "Value" is relative, I'd rather a major glaring issue on the major league squad be addressed through shipping out excess minor league talent than to horde the talent and end up with them completely blocked (and therefore lacking perceived value as everybody knows you're desperate to move them) or Brandon Wood/Andy Marte'ing themselves.
Exactly. It's like people have already forgotten that Will Middlebrooks and Ryan Kalish existed. Hell, there was some handwringing over losing Matt Murton in the Orlando Cabrera trade even after we won the World Series.
 

ZMart100

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2008
3,220
The problem is that you're pulling those numbers out of thin air and once again ignoring the circumstances. "Value" is relative, I'd rather a major glaring issue on the major league squad be addressed through shipping out excess minor league talent than to horde the talent and end up with them completely blocked (and therefore lacking perceived value as everybody knows you're desperate to move them) or Brandon Wood/Andy Marte'ing themselves.
There has got to be some limit. Trading Moncada + Devers + Espinoza for say, Brett Cecil would improve the 2016 Red Sox but probably isn't a good idea. Again my objection isn't to trading Margot or other prospects. It is to trading them in this deal.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
13,872
Springfield, VA
All those complaining about overpaying for Kimbrel, what's your alternative?

Until yesterday, the Sox had probably the worst bullpen in the majors, headlined by a guy who's turning 41 before opening day, and with the only other reliable pitcher having fallen apart last summer (and only under team control for one more year anyway). Fixing the bullpen was by far the #1 priority this offseason, and they needed players who could anchor the bullpen after Koji and Taz were both gone. Who better than Kimbrel?

OK, fine, bellyache all you want about the prospects you've fallen in love with. But there's no way that a bullpen with Darren O'Day and a few spare parts would have put the team into serious contention for the next three years. A deal like this was really the only way to go, and I'm sure every other potential trade partner knew that. So yeah, the price was a bit high for Kimbrel. But all the Margots and Guerras in the world won't help when your bullpen can't hold a two-run lead.