Cubs to sign Kimbrel

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I think at 1 or even 2 years they'd have gone hard after him, but that third year is when this core is going to really start getting expensive. Kimbrel eating $16 million in 2021 would have made for some really difficult decisions.

I don't see them losing any members of the core over 1 extra year at $16 mil. I think they could have structured deals for the core, like they already did with Kepler and Polanco, to accommodate signing Kimbrel, even through 2021.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Honestly, I'm a bit bummed the Twins didn't get Kimbrel but the guy is a pretty big risk at that price point. He may not even be effective this season, and the Twins badly need an effective reliever this season. 2020 is important but almost an afterthought compared to 2019 and Kimbrel's biggest question mark is his expected 2019 performance after missing so much time.

 

Now that they've missed on Kimbrel, they need to lead the pack in aggressiveness with trades, starting... now.

 

The Twins system is almost perfectly situated to get an impact arm. The org is chock full of good-but-not-great prospects, many of which can be combined to pick up a good arm from one of the several teams who are already out of contention this season.

 

I'll be disappointed if the front office fails to make a move before July 1st.

[Otto von Ballpark]

For the record, I don't mind missing out on Kimbrel that much either. I really hate investing that much in a reliever, although if ever there was a time to do it, this 2019 Twins season looks to be it. Hopefully they're willing to make some other aggressive moves!

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

For the record, I don't mind missing out on Kimbrel that much either. I really hate investing that much in a reliever, although if ever there was a time to do it, this 2019 Twins season looks to be it. Hopefully they're willing to make some other aggressive moves!

I agree but it should also be noted that Kimbrel's 2019 performance is the biggest risk of the contract as a whole. We have no idea what to expect from a guy who missed so much time and the overall track record of past players who have done the same is... not awesome.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Honestly, I'm a bit bummed the Twins didn't get Kimbrel but the guy is a pretty big risk at that price point. He may not even be effective this season, and the Twins badly need an effective reliever this season. 2020 is important but almost an afterthought compared to 2019 and Kimbrel's biggest question mark is his expected 2019 performance after missing so much time.

I think the "late start" penalty might be over-rated. It's such a limited sample to base it on, and people citing Lance Lynn as an example is a real stretch -- he honestly didn't perform that differently in 2018 than he has in 2017 or 2019.

[dbminn]

 

Sure, but if those metrics aren't particularly meaningful, is that a point worth illustrating? I mean, who's really looking at a half season of a reliever's K-BB%, without also considering their K%? (Not to mention HR rate and leverage)

 

I agree with you, spycake. Pitch data are better metrics to look at for 20 IP. More pitches are thrown than there are plate appearances.

• Kimbrell was throwing harder his last 12 regular season appearances than earlier in 2018 (97.8 mph).
• From August to the end of the regular season, he had a 17.9% swinging strike rate, which was higher than his career average (16.6%).
• Hitters were making more contact inside the K-zone and less contact outside the zone.

He was basically the same pitcher he's been his entire career. (He had a bad post-season but FanGraphs doesn't list detailed pitch data for playoff games).

 

I was on the fence about signing Kimbrell because of the contract length issue. I wasn't worried the he has substantially declined as a RP.

 

The debate is all academic now. The Twins still need relief help. Now it will cost prospects and not dollars. A lot of teams will be in the market, so the cost will still be steep.

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

I think the "late start" penalty might be over-rated. It's such a limited sample to base it on, and people citing Lance Lynn as an example is a real stretch -- he honestly didn't perform that differently in 2018 than he has in 2017 or 2019.

It might be overrated but it’s also a real risk. I think Kimbrel will likely be fine (in time) but the risk shouldn’t be ignored, that’s all I’m saying.

 

And the Twins BADLY need good 2019 performance from any acquired arms.

[Brock Beauchamp]

The Twins still need relief help. Now it will cost prospects and not dollars. A lot of teams will be in the market, so the cost will still be steep.

I’m not sure the cost will be that steep. Half the teams in baseball aren’t even pretending to try right now.

 

Obviously, bad teams don’t have many good players to trade - that’s why they’re bad - but the market shouldn’t be massively lopsided in favor of sellers.

[Mike Sixel]

Of course, it's four to seven weeks before trades happen, unless history is wrong. So, sit back and relax for a bit....

[dbminn]

 

I’m not sure the cost will be that steep. Half the teams in baseball aren’t even pretending to try right now.

Obviously, bad teams don’t have many good players to trade - that’s why they’re bad - but the market shouldn’t be massively lopsided in favor of sellers.

 

I hope you're right! 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

It might be overrated but it’s also a real risk. I think Kimbrel will likely be fine (in time) but the risk shouldn’t be ignored, that’s all I’m saying.

And the Twins BADLY need good 2019 performance from any acquired arms.

To the extent that the late start penalty is a "real" risk, I'd guess it's probably more than offset by the risks of relying solely on finding a match in the trade market.

 

It wasn't necessarily an either-or proposition. We had a chance here to get Kimbrel in addition to making an aggressive trade (and we'd likely have had a month of 2019 MLB performance data on Kimbrel informing our trade decision making too).

[terrydactyls]

The complaints about the front office, cheapness, same old, etc. sound very similar to the complaints made when Yu Darvish signed his $123M contract with the Cubs. Seems like a lot of money for a 3-6 record, a 4.91 ERA, and a 1.49 WHIP over the past two years. For me, I'm willing to relax and see what happens between now and the trade deadline.

[Mike Sixel]

The complaints about the front office, cheapness, same old, etc. sound very similar to the complaints made when Yu Darvish signed his $123M contract with the Cubs. Seems like a lot of money for a 3-6 record, a 4.91 ERA, and a 1.49 WHIP over the past two years. For me, I'm willing to relax and see what happens between now and the trade deadline.

So, the Twins were wrong about Darvish too.... Is the point never sign pitchers? Guys the Twins didn't sign, have been great, good, bad.... Does that make those signings all, what? The Cubs have also successfully signed free agent pitchers, what's the point of your post?

 

Is it better to trade players and add to the budget?

[Brock Beauchamp]

Of course, it's four to seven weeks before trades happen, unless history is wrong. So, sit back and relax for a bit....

And Kimbrel likely won’t pitch in MLB for a couple of weeks. If the Twins are aggressive, the gap between Kimbrel pitching in Chicago and a traded reliever shouldn’t be large.

[Brock Beauchamp]

To the extent that the late start penalty is a "real" risk, I'd guess it's probably more than offset by the risks of relying solely on finding a match in the trade market.

 

It wasn't necessarily an either-or proposition. We had a chance here to get Kimbrel in addition to making an aggressive trade (and we'd likely have had a month of 2019 MLB performance data on Kimbrel informing our trade decision making too).

I agree, I’m only pointing out that Kimbrel isn’t a sure thing, particularly over the next couple of months.

[Tom Froemming]

 

First of all, the Dodgers did not surrender the #31 pick. They actually got the #31 pick, protected, in addition to their #26 pick, for failing to sign a pick in 2018. They only forfeited the ~64th pick for signing Pollock, but also picked up the ~78th pick for losing Grandal to offset the loss.

Oh shoot, that's right. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

 

Sure, but if those metrics aren't particularly meaningful, is that a point worth illustrating? I mean, who's really looking at a half season of a reliever's K-BB%, without also considering their K%? (Not to mention HR rate and leverage)

I never said I didn't think those were meaningful. I think xFIP and K-BB% are both valuable numbers in projecting future performance since they hone in on the things the pitcher has direct control over. One of the downsides to xFIP is that it isn't park or league adjusted. I don't have their xFIP- over that time and am too lazy to look it up. 

 

The main point I've been trying to illustrate through all the numbers I've shared on him is that he wasn't Craig Kimbrel, Greatest Closer of All Time the last we saw him. And I do think roughly a half season of data on a reliever is enough to dig into. Maybe it's just a blip, he regains his command and is amazing, I don't know. The only people who may have a good idea on that are the few who have seen him pitch since October.

 

But either way, this guy appears to be something of a project at this point. He needs to get up to speed and he needs to bounce back from where he was at the end of his tenure with Boston. There are better bets to be made, especially considering the investment required, in my opinion. That's all I'm trying to say.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I’m not sure the cost will be that steep. Half the teams in baseball aren’t even pretending to try right now.

That's an overstatement. There's still very few teams (5 or less?) that I could see selling good pieces today, short of an overwhelming offer, and even those teams might prefer to wait to see if the market develops in their favor. It's not likely that the White Sox are going to send you Colome for a modest return right now, for example -- they can do that at the end of July if they want. Or even the Giants and Will Smith, who has a real chance to be the premium RP trade target come July.

 

So you may have to overpay to add a quality piece, especially if you want to do so before the end of July.

[Coobelz]

 

To the extent that the late start penalty is a "real" risk, I'd guess it's probably more than offset by the risks of relying solely on finding a match in the trade market.

 

It wasn't necessarily an either-or proposition. We had a chance here to get Kimbrel in addition to making an aggressive trade (and we'd likely have had a month of 2019 MLB performance data on Kimbrel informing our trade decision making too).

 

Well said! I have also heard arguments that signing Kimbrel may not allow us to lock up young players to long term deals. That argument is pretty flawed.  We have Kepler, Polanco and Gonzales on the books next year for 19 million. Assuming we pick up Cruz's option for 12, that puts us at 31M. Perez has a 7.5M option which seemed like a no brainer but will be interesting given recent performance, but for arguments sake we pick that up and are now at 38.5M. Add Kimbrel's 15M and now you're at 53.5M.  Simply put, we still have ample resources to sign any of our young guys to extensions with that much capital remaining.

 

This really was not an either/or proposition. Even with Kimbrel we need additional pen help to make a serious run in the playoffs.  The benefit (as stated by many) was it only cost us money. Now, we likely (hopefully) have to trade for two high impact pen arms (and perhaps another SP).  

 

Hopefully, this was a FO decision based on something they are being told about Kimbrel. If it was simply a monetary concern than I am extremely disappointed in the organization.

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

That's an overstatement. There's still very few teams (5 or less?) that I could see selling good pieces today, short of an overwhelming offer, and even those teams might prefer to wait to see if the market develops in their favor. It's not likely that the White Sox are going to send you Colome for a modest return right now, for example -- they can do that at the end of July if they want. Or even the Giants and Will Smith, who has a real chance to be the premium RP trade target come July.

 

So you may have to overpay to add a quality piece, especially if you want to do so before the end of July.

I guess we just disagree on that. There are seven teams in MLB 7.5+ games out of the second Wild Card on June 6th. That’s basically 25% of baseball.

 

If the Twins offer value, at least one of them should be willing to part with a reliever before July, when there will likely be 1-3 more teams added to that 7.5+ GB stat.

 

And we’ll still be a month away from the deadline at that point. I suspect at least a few teams will try to get ahead of the market and sell so they aren’t left with little/nothing at the end of July.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I never said I didn't think those were meaningful. I think xFIP and K-BB% are both valuable numbers in projecting future performance since they hone in on the things the pitcher has direct control over.

That's right, I'm the one who said they weren't particularly meaningful. K-BB% absolutely can be meaningful, but noting it for half a season of a reliever, especially without also noting their K%, isn't particularly meaningful.

 

 

And I do think roughly a half season of data on a reliever is enough to dig into.

Half a season of a reliever is also prone to HUGE fluctuations based on 1-2 games.

 

The poster who cited Kimbrel's stats from July 27 to Sep. 30, where Kimbrel had a Duffey-esque 21.7 K-BB% over 19.2 innings?

 

Well, within that sample, from July 28 to Sep. 25, he had a 31.3 K-BB% over 17 innings -- almost exactly the same as his career rate of 31.8.

 

So which is the meaningful one going forward? Is he a "project" now, comparable to Duffey, based on those 2.2 innings?

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I guess we just disagree on that. There are seven teams in MLB 7.5+ games out of the second Wild Card on June 6th. That’s basically 25% of baseball.

If the Twins offer value, at least one of them should be willing to part with a reliever before July, when there will likely be 1-3 more teams added to that 7.5+ GB stat.

And we’ll still be a month away from the deadline at that point. I suspect at least a few teams will try to get ahead of the market and sell so they aren’t left with little/nothing at the end of July.

Okay, my estimate of 5 was wrong -- I missed BAL and KC, since they're so far out that B-Ref doesn't even list them in the wild card standings.

 

Still, at 7, slightly less than 25% of teams is well short of "half not even pretending to try" like you said.

 

And of those 7 teams, 4 of them (BAL, KC, SEA, and MIA) have virtually nothing to offer, in terms of quality relievers. DET has Greene, TOR has Giles, and SF has Smith. They each might be the best trade chip those teams have to offer in 2019. Do you really think they're going to part with them in June, a month before the trade market heats up, for less than a great return? Giles and Greene are still controlled for 2020 too, so their clubs have even more incentive to hold out for the best deal possible. Not every team values stockpiling 40-45 FV prospects.

 

Edit: the teams that try to get ahead of the market will likely be the ones with the less valuable assets to sell too.

[Tom Froemming]

 

That's right, I'm the one who said they weren't particularly meaningful. K-BB% absolutely can be meaningful, but noting it for half a season of a reliever, especially without also noting their K%, isn't particularly meaningful.

 

 

Half a season of a reliever is also prone to HUGE fluctuations based on 1-2 games.

 

The poster who cited Kimbrel's stats from July 27 to Sep. 30, where Kimbrel had a Duffey-esque 21.7 K-BB% over 19.2 innings?

 

Well, within that sample, from July 28 to Sep. 25, he had a 31.3 K-BB% over 17 innings -- almost exactly the same as his career rate of 31.8.

 

So which is the meaningful one going forward? Is he a "project" now, comparable to Duffey, based on those 2.2 innings?

OK, here are some full season numbers. The rankings are out of 191 relievers who threw at least 40 innings last year (numbers via FanGraphs):

 

Ground ball rate: 186th

Line drive rate: 164th

First-pitch strikes: 151st

Strike zone%: 182nd

BB%: 174th

 

Those don't concern you?

[yarnivek1972]

The flip side to the “risk” that Kimbrel’s late arrival might mean he will be rusty is that in October, when other relievers have already logged 60-70 innings, Kimbrel will likely be at 40 or so and thus strong for the postseason.

[Mike Sixel]

 

OK, here are some full season numbers. The rankings are out of 191 relievers who threw at least 40 innings last year (numbers via FanGraphs):

 

Ground ball rate: 186th

Line drive rate: 164th

First-pitch strikes: 151st

Strike zone%: 182nd

BB%: 174th

 

Those don't concern you?

 

Kimbrel probably isn't ELITE anymore. We'll see.

 

BUT, he was available just for money. No prospects. No finding a team that is willing to trade a good player for a prospect or two. No waiting 4-7 weeks to add a player.

 

And, he's probably much better than all but 1-2 of the RPs on this roster, this year and next.

 

So, we'll see if they add RPs. They needed them in the off season, and didn't add any other than flyers. 

[dbminn]

For anyone who wants to look at a list of bullpen closer pecking orders, click here. Updated today.

 

There are very few RP available that are as talented as Kimbrell and have fewer concerns. Giles might be the best. Will Smith is an option. I'm not sure Detroit would want to trade Greene to the Twins but he's a potential arm on the market. Only Giles has playoff experience.

 

Atlanta, Boston, Philly and Dodgers will be buyers. Maybe the Rays.

[Squirrel]

 

For the record, I don't mind missing out on Kimbrel that much either. I really hate investing that much in a reliever, although if ever there was a time to do it, this 2019 Twins season looks to be it. Hopefully they're willing to make some other aggressive moves!

I'm waiting to fully weigh in with disappointment in not signing Kimbrel hoping that there's help for NOW from another source. But ... hmmm... 

[Vanimal46]

 

Wash, rinse, repeat.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Wash, rinse, repeat.

 

All the Cubs do is win. Even when an individual decision doesn't work out, they still find a way to win 90+ games (and a WS in that time frame).

[TheLeviathan]

I don't like it, but I'm ok dealing prospects for relievers.  Particularly if they have some team control.  

 

Sam Dyson would be a great fit as would Ty Buttrey.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

OK, here are some full season numbers. The rankings are out of 191 relievers who threw at least 40 innings last year (numbers via FanGraphs):

 

Ground ball rate: 186th

Line drive rate: 164th

First-pitch strikes: 151st

Strike zone%: 182nd

BB%: 174th

 

Those don't concern you?

Without context, not much?

 

I mean, Hader was 185th in ground ball rate. Doolittle 172nd.

 

Felipe Vasquez was 166th in line drive rate. Betances 189th.

 

Knebel was 147th in first pitch strike percentage. Treinen 164th.

 

Robertson 168th in strike percentage. Britton 185th.

 

Britton 183rd in BB%. Chapman 186th.

 

Kimbrel had many very comparable ranks in 2016 and 2017 too, particularly in LD% and GB%.

 

These measures, at least among relievers with 40+ innings, don't seem to correlate that strongly with success. At least not compared to the following:

 

Kimbrel:

6th in K%

14th in K-BB% (Duffey's favorite!)

5th in opponent's average

20th in WHIP