For better or worse, saves are looked at for RP. Venters also never had the K numbers Kimbrel has had. Venters was great, but Kimbrel is on a whole different level IMO.Originally Posted by Perfect Cell
For better or worse, saves are looked at for RP. Venters also never had the K numbers Kimbrel has had. Venters was great, but Kimbrel is on a whole different level IMO.
If you are the Yankees or Dodgers, you can pay a Mariano type closer through all the years of arbitration and a new multi-year deal afterwards.
Understand, Kimbrell is that type of closer because he is going to develop a change up which will make him next to unhittable.
The problem arises that the Braves can't do that for one inning, even as good as that inning is.
So our closer needs to come from the farm. And while his value is at it's highest, you trade him for great prospect value.
I'm not opposed to trading Kimbrel. But I doubt we get a sufficient package.
The Dodgers have Jansen who puts up stupid good numbers.
But Jansen-Kimbrel in the 8th/9th would be unfair.
I know but I don't want to trade Kimbrel even though his arm has to be either freakishly strong or ready to break down.
Have people forgotten how hard it is to find a good closer? It's not easy. Only the elite closers hold on to the job all year, most teams struggle to find someone to fill that role. I' not opposed to trading him if he brings back a great return but if we trade him we aren't going to be able to just plug someone else in and not miss a beat.
Dalyn (10-23-2013)
I love Kimbrel as much as the next but I'd rather keep Freeman and Heyward then have the best closer n baseball and pay him what it'll take. With as hard as he throws he will probably be a TJ candidate in the next few years. I'd really hate to trade him, but if we could reload the system while keeping some of our other players then I'm all for it.
We cant find someone as good as him, he's the best in the game but...
But you gotta look at the financial part.
Could get someone like Benoit, Balfour, Mujica, Wilson, etc for a cheaper deal.
And improve the big league club somewhere else and use that money elsewhere
If we had a Ted Turner payroll, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
Problem is, we can't bank almost 15 million on a closer in the future when Freeman, Heyward, Simmons will eb due money in a few years. Especially since his arm could fall off at any time.
Oh, and he can't pitch 2 innings.
Forever Fredi
PawPawMaxwell (10-23-2013)
Exactly. Everyone says you HAVE to have have an ace to make it. Well, Kershaw and Grienke are at home along with Verlander and Scherzer .
aka RHT10/Cokeman
Mariano Rivera was a unique situation, because he'd become an icon. Just because he made big money, doesn't mean that the Yankees are going automatically allocate the same salary for somebody else in the same role. Almost the same thing with the Dodgers, except that they don't have a history of big name closers, except for Gagne. Budget buster closers are far from the norm. Which brings us to how the moderator keeps returning to this same argument.
If there's some hidden market of teams, willing to pay upwards of $10 million/year for an elite closer and offer a fine package of prospects, let's have some names. Not some idle speculation, prospect wish list or fantasy league proposal.
The Phillies are probably already living to regret getting Papelbon. This brings us back to the Braves situation. We all know that Kimbrel is going to get expensive, and Papelbon money is going to be his benchmark. That said, the transition, whenever that might be, will be a lot more seamless. For instance, if Kimbrel were to get traded this off-season (and put me in the camp of those who think they'll just hold onto him until he's unaffordable), there are already internal options. If his arm is healthy, Walden could do it, and probably more effectively than Brian Wilson. Plus, add in the fact that JR Graham is being groomed for this role. So, this isn't exactly an area of concern.
In an interview with DOB on Oct 15, Wren acknowledged that an ACE or TOR starter was an area of need. However, he didnt know if one of those was available.
Do Wren and his staff look at it differently than you??? Just asking especially since I know you are in the Price camp.
Trading Kimbrel without getting just an obsene return is stupid. Trade Kimbrel and then you are still going to have to overpay or trade decent prospects for a closer unless you want Jordan Walden closing out games for you.
Maybe Wren is thinking, well Fredi wont' use him, might as well get a piece Fredi will use.
If Wren were thinking that, I'd hope Fredi would be fired.
He may or may not ever be healthy again but Walden has closing experience. Avilan and Carpenter may possibly have closer ability. Whatever happened to Obispo?
And the Cardinals young pitchers are stepping up and pitching like aces, something our young pitchers FAILED to do.
What would the actual impact on wins and losses be if Kimbrel were traded and an average closer replaced him?
Natural Immunity Croc
Good point. With decent production from 2nd base and a better bench, not to mention CF, this team as currently configured could win over 100 games. Kimbrel's absence would not diminish that total greatly.
Hard to say, but it wouldn't be many more losses in reality. Kimbrel was 50/54 (92.6%), but he was only like 9th in MLB in save percentage. Guys who may be available like Nathan, Benoit, and Balfour were pretty much in the same range or better as far as save percentage last year.
There are obviously many other factors that make Kimbrel the best, but from the standpoint of simply closing out games most legit closers can do it at a 90% success rate.
You need to go a step deeper on analysis of saves (at least in my opinion). Bill James used to "grade" saves on difficulty (how big a lead is being protected, etc.). I dont know how Kimbrel stacks up in that regard.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
