Kris Bryant traded to Giants

[caulfield12]

1 minute ago, SoxBlanco said:

I think that’s because top of the line catchers and relief pitchers don’t require  5-10 year commitments. While JR can definitely be cheap at times, I think it’s more that he doesn’t like the risk of long contracts. 

Those are almost all superstar or at least All-Star caliber contracts of $100-300+ million, which we just don’t do. 

Whether we can swim in a new pool where nobody’s blinking over spending $25-35 million yearly on players is another matter altogether. We can argue how much 1 unit of fWAR is worth in theory, but let’s see what happens beginning in 2023-25 when the biggest checks need to be written. 

[South Side Hit Men]

Couldn't be any more happy today, Jerry, Kenny, Hahn and the FO deserve a lot of credit. A lot more good than bad this since the end of last season.

Kimbrel gives the Sox flexibility, trade, salary. Hendriks could also be dealt, though don't think that happens unless Tony is gone.

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Except Kris Bryant is BETTER and more valuable than Craig Kimbrel, which is the point you willingly continue to overlook and ignore; which is odd, given that it's the primary point being made in this thread.

Here's one where it actually comes down to how you define valuable. 

Because in terms of "Win Probability Added", which is specifically what we're going for with a deal like this - Kimbrel actually has outperformed Bryant this year.,

Bryant has more chances to do stuff, but Kimbrel is impacting the highest leverage points.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

Just now, Balta1701 said:

Here's one where it actually comes down to how you define valuable. 

Because in terms of "Win Probability Added", which is specifically what we're going for with a deal like this - Kimbrel actually has outperformed Bryant this year.,

Bryant has more chances to do stuff, but Kimbrel is impacting the highest leverage points.

Kris Bryant is going to get 200 million dollars. Craig Kimbrel got 43 million.

There's nothing that defines value that would argue that Craig Kimbrel is more valuable than Kris Bryant. Relief pitchers are not more valuable than an everyday star OF'er/3rd baseman.

[CentralChamps21]

7 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

WHo is raging?

You can't refute a single point I'm making.

1. Kris Bryant is more valuable for this year and the Sox chances of winning a WS than Craig Kimbrel - yes or no?
2. The White Sox could sign a reliever for less than 16 million this off-season that's production would be close enough to Kimbrels for it to be negligible for them to win next year - yes or no?
3. Having Nick Madrigal is better than not having Nick Madrigal next year - yes or no?

The answer to all three of those questions is yes. So how can you argue that the Sox did what was best for this year or next year in this thread? And how can you be critical of anyone bringing that issue to the forefront?

Is Kris Bryant a more valuable player than Craig Kimbrell? Yes.

However, Bryant would be replacing an Engel/Sheets platoon that's already pretty good. Kimbrell is replacing Heuer plus probably some innings from other relievers. So when you look at it that way, there is a case to be made for prioritizing Kimbrell over Bryant.

Another way to look at it is this: in the late innings of a playoff game, do I want Engel up with the go ahead run on base with Kimbrel warming in the bullpen or Bryant up with the go ahead run on base with Heuer warming in the bullpen and it's answer A for me.

Edited July 30, 2021 by WhiteSoxFan1993

[caulfield12]

1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

Here's one where it actually comes down to how you define valuable. 

Because in terms of "Win Probability Added", which is specifically what we're going for with a deal like this - Kimbrel actually has outperformed Bryant this year.,

Bryant has more chances to do stuff, but Kimbrel is impacting the highest leverage points.

Yes, but that’s using Kimbrel as THE defined closer, not as the ubiquitous “high leverage” guy.

If he could be used like A.Miller for multiple innings from the 6th through 8th…sure.  And maybe they’re counting on Kopech to do that instead, but you’re taking a big risk a Hall of Fame closer can adjust well to that role.

Or that Hendriks won’t start looking over his shoulder with a 3 blown save week like Jansen suffered recently. 

[caulfield12]

6 minutes ago, WhiteSoxFan1993 said:

Is Kris Bryant a more valuable player than Craig Kimbrell? Yes.

However, Bryant would be replacing an Engel/Sheets platoon that's already pretty good. Kimbrell is replacing Heuer plus probably some innings from other relievers. So when you look at it that way, there is a case to be made for prioritizing Kimbrell over Bryant.

Another way to look at it is this: in the late innings of a playoff game, do I want Engel up with the go ahead run on base with Kimbrel warming in the bullpen or Bryant up with the go ahead run on base with Heuer warming in the bullpen and it's answer A for me.

Sheets playing OF against elite starting pitching in the playoffs and especially on the defensive side…is a recipe for abject failure.

You’re leaving out Bummer and Crochet in your consideration of who would be replacing Heuer. One guy is ROY, perennial MVP candidate when healthy, WS winner, multiple ASG’s, etc.  it changes the complexion of the entire lineup and takes a lot of the pressure off guys like Abreu, Moncada, Jimenez and Robert.

Edited July 30, 2021 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

Just now, caulfield12 said:

Yes, but that’s using Kimbrel as THE defined closer, not as the ubiquitous “high leverage” guy.

If he could be used like A.Miller for multiple innings from the 6th through 8th…sure.  And maybe they’re counting on Kopech to do that instead, but you’re taking a big risk a Hall of Fame closer can adjust well to that role.

Or that Hendriks won’t start looking over his shoulder with a 3 blown save week like Jansen suffered recently. 

Ironically, Hendriks in 2019 started the season behind Blake Treinen as the A's closer, and Hendricks only took over that role in June, so he's been a dominant setup man somewhat recently.

[South Side Hit Men]

4 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

WHo is raging?

You can't refute a single point I'm making.

1. Kris Bryant is more valuable for this year and the Sox chances of winning a WS than Craig Kimbrel - yes or no?
2. The White Sox could sign a reliever for less than 16 million this off-season that's production would be close enough to Kimbrels for it to be negligible for them to win next year after considering they would also have Madrigal - yes or no?
3. Having Nick Madrigal is better than not having Nick Madrigal next year - yes or no?

The answer to all three of those questions is yes. So how can you argue that the Sox did what was best for this year or next year in this thread? And how can you be critical of anyone bringing that issue to the forefront?

#2. Assumes the budget Jerry has approved now was anywhere close to what it was during the offseason, when everything remained 100% closed (it took nearly four months for the Sox to fully reopen this year).

In a normal year, one could make a credible argument, but COVID was/is a Black Swan event, you can't blame the team or Hahn for the budget they established / finished in February 2021.

With the significant increase in ticket sales (and most likely season ticket sales), they have the revenue certainty JR needed to approve increases for the Lynn extension and the two trade deadline acquisitions.

I personally rather have Cesar than Nick for the next 15 months, two playoff cycles rather than one, and that assumes Nick doesn't have a third major injury before October 2022.

[Cerbaho-WG]

Lmao at people getting Big Mad for the FO addressing the team’s biggest glaring need. Kris Bryant ain’t gonna get you through the 8th.

[southsider2k5]

17 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

WHo is raging?

You can't refute a single point I'm making.

1. Kris Bryant is more valuable for this year and the Sox chances of winning a WS than Craig Kimbrel - yes or no?
2. The White Sox could sign a reliever for less than 16 million this off-season that's production would be close enough to Kimbrels for it to be negligible for them to win next year after considering they would also have Madrigal - yes or no?
3. Having Nick Madrigal is better than not having Nick Madrigal next year - yes or no?

The answer to all three of those questions is yes. So how can you argue that the Sox did what was best for this year or next year in this thread? And how can you be critical of anyone bringing that issue to the forefront?

All you have done is rage about this.

#1 isn't a yes or no question.  It is more complex than a simpleton sound byte type of answer.  It is a resource question.  There is no indication that the same deal could have been made for Bryant.  Heck I wanted Bryant, but there was no indication that we could have had him.  Apparently the initial return was misposted for Bryant, so his was also a pretty significant return.  My guess is that whatever they got for Bryant, plus whatever they got for Kimbrel was more in the Cubs minds than what the Sox were willing to offer for Bryant, plus what someone else was willing to offer for Kimbrel, AND more than what the Sox were willing to offer for both of them, which is why the deals happened the way that they did.  They also correctly took into account ones free agent status this year versus the others, and the value it added to the deal.   The Sox did similar in how they navigated the returns for Sale and Eaton.  They have offers from Washington on both.  They saw they could get some of the same players either way, but at the end of the day they though the combination of the two offers they got was better than it was another way.  The Sox have also seen what every single other Sox fan has seen over the last month, which is a bullpen that has been dog shit in middle relief and set up.  They saw this as an opportunity get one of the best in the game to shorten up games, as well as to shove every one else down into a less impactful role below them.

Hopefully not too confusing there.

#2 The White Sox could have signed a reliever NEXT OFF SEASON, which doesn't help them this year.  That makes this so absurd of a question as to seem really obvious as to its answer.  If you want more, refer back to the previous question as to how awful the Sox pen has been recently.

#3 Again, this is not a yes or no type of question on a note passed to me during recess.  Nick Madrigal is obviously not an irreplaceable player.  In fact his major injury history since he got here is probably rewriting a lot about how this organization views him going forward.  Yes it would have been nice to had him penciled in at 2B for the next 10 years with health, but the team felt the chance this year and next was better with Kimbrel than Madrigal gave them this year and next, and they figured it was worth what they were giving up past that in control for Nick.  They also seemed to feel by this move that the loss of Nick in this line up is more replaceable than the difference between Codi Heuer and Craig Kimbrel, and I am having a hard time disagreeing with that.

[Chick Mercedes]

Cubs get  outfielder Alexander Canario and a pitcher Caleb Killian

Edited July 30, 2021 by Chick Mercedes

[caulfield12]

8 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Ironically, Hendriks in 2019 started the season behind Blake Treinen as the A's closer, and Hendricks only took over that role in June, so he's been a dominant setup man somewhat recently.

That’s what I mean.  Closer’s spot is like a placekicker, the most fragile on the team psychologically.

This works out spectacularly now or is another nail in Hahn’s coffin.  It’s one out of the KW in his prime playbook, splashy…acquiring lots of talent that sometimes doesn’t fit well together in reality.

Time will tell.

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, caulfield12 said:

That’s what I mean.  Closer’s spot is like a placekicker, the most fragile on the team psychologically.

This works out spectacularly now or is another nail in Hahn’s coffin.  It’s one out of the KW in his prime playbook, splashy…acquiring lots of talent that sometimes doesn’t fit well together in reality.

Time will tell.

I really like the attitude of these guys together. I think this is going to be an absolute buzzsaw.

[caulfield12]

Just now, Balta1701 said:

I really like the attitude of these guys together. I think this is going to be an absolute buzzsaw.

One thing is for sure, it has been since 2005, the first half of 2008 and most of 2020 that every lead past the 6th inning really felt safe.

Definitely has not been the case this year, ever since that Anaheim series to start the season.  We had one 12-15 game stretch where we were really going well in the pen, but that came apart again.

[Balta1701]

Just now, caulfield12 said:

One thing is for sure, it has been since 2005, the first half of 2008 and most of 2020 that every lead past the 6th inning really felt safe.

Definitely has not been the case this year, ever since that Anaheim series to start the season.  We had one 12-15 game stretch where we were really going well in the pen, but that came apart again.

This is the kind of setup that can get in an opponent's head. The Astros are down 3-1 in the 5th inning...they're thinking "We have to get something going right now because we aren't coming back late". 

This also destroys the strategy of trying to make a starter work a lot to get him out of the game. Oh, I'm sorry, Lynn threw a lot of pitches and is out after 6? Here's Kopech, Hendricks, and Kimbrel. Stay safe on the roads home.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

19 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

All you have done is rage about this.

\ Apparently the initial return was misposted for Bryant, so his was also a pretty significant return.

Hopefully not too confusing there.

#2 The White Sox could have signed a reliever NEXT OFF SEASON, which doesn't help them this year.  That makes this so absurd of a question as to seem really obvious as to its answer.  If you want more, refer back to the previous question as to how awful the Sox pen has been recently.

#3 Again, this is not a yes or no type of question on a note passed to me during recess.  Nick Madrigal is obviously not an irreplaceable player.  In fact his major injury history since he got here is probably rewriting a lot about how this organization views him going forward.  Yes it would have been nice to had him penciled in at 2B for the next 10 years with health, but the team felt the chance this year and next was better with Kimbrel than Madrigal gave them this year and next, and they figured it was worth what they were giving up past that in control for Nick.  They also seemed to feel by this move that the loss of Nick in this line up is more replaceable than the difference between Codi Heuer and Craig Kimbrel, and I am having a hard time disagreeing with that.

 

1. The initial return was a great return (Bart+), the actual return is not good at all.

2. My entire argument is Kris Bryant the RF'er is more valuable than another bullpen arm for this year, so them replacing Kimbrel next year which you have talked about endlessly (Not just for this year) was to refute your claim that Kimbrel was worth extra because you get him next year too.

3. Three is pretty yes or no. Would you rather have Madrigal or not have him. Not sure how the argument can be for not having Madrigal on the team.

[South Side Hit Men]

Still have to remember this is a brutal business, players who spent their whole careers leaving the players they built a championship with on no notice.

Still haven't read whether the Cubs are assuming any/all/some of Bryant's contract. The Giants do not need "luxury" tax relief, so I'm assuming the Giants are on the hook for the prorated salary.

 

[ChiSoxJon]

I think we're gonna look back and wish we added Bryant for less...especially with Eloy still missing games

The team with Liam Hendriks didn't need a Craig Kimbrel

Bryant could have started full time in RF and backed up Moncada, Robert, and Eloy/Vaughn...Plus we'd still have Madrigal and Heuer

[TheTruth05]

I don’t think I’ve seen anyone mention this but what if the Cubs straight up did not want to send the face of their franchise across town to help the Sox win a WS. Sounds corny but with the way they have been doing “farewells” for their “core” guys maybe they just didn’t want to deal with that fan backlash unless the Sox severely overpaid.

[South Side Hit Men]

15 minutes ago, ChiSoxJon said:

I think we're gonna look back and wish we added Bryant for less...especially with Eloy still missing games

The team with Liam Hendriks didn't need a Craig Kimbrel

Bryant could have started full time in RF and backed up Moncada, Robert, and Eloy/Vaughn...Plus we'd still have Madrigal and Heuer

Definitely need him if

A) They are converting Kopech and/or

B) They are not very confident in Hendriks

Hendriks is currently the third best reliever in the bullpen (Kimbrel / Kopech both better). Hendriks has given up 8 HRs already, Kimbrel 1, Kopech 4, with similar innings.

With Tony fretting over four run leads, and the way he uses his bullpen (doesn’t use “his closer” on the road except for saves, more concerned with the save stat than high leverage vs. low leverage), they need all the help they can get.

They haven’t announced it publicly, but I can’t see them letting Kopech finish with 60 innings this year pitching 1 inning the rest of the way, limiting him next year to a few months as starter next year, or stuck on this role as long as Tony is there. At least I hope that is the plan.

 

[ChiSoxJon]

1 minute ago, South Side Hit Men said:

Definitely need him if

A) They are converting Kopech and/or

B) They are not very confident in Hendriks

Hendriks is currently the third best reliever in the bullpen (Kimbrel / Kopech both better). Hendriks has given up 8 HRs already, Kimbrel 1, Kopech 4, with similar innings.

With Tony fretting over four run leads, and the way he uses his bullpen (doesn’t use “his closer” on the road except for saves, more concerned with the save stat than high leverage vs. low leverage), they need all the help they can get.

They haven’t announced it publicly, but I can’t see them letting Kopech finish with 60 innings this year pitching 1 inning the rest of the way, limiting him next year to a few months as starter next year, or stuck on this role as long as Tony is there. At least I hope that is the plan.

 

I haven't been ecstatic with Hendriks (especially with the long ball) and I like Kimbrel, but I just feel there was a way to upgrade the backend of the pen AND address a big bat for way less

Rasiel Iglesias and Kris Bryant for example, would have been ecstatic

[wegner]

No

Edited July 31, 2021 by wegner
Wrong thread

[wegner]

Holy Crap....wrong thread again

Edited July 31, 2021 by wegner
Sorry

[southsider2k5]

17 minutes ago, wegner said:

Holy Crap....wrong thread again

I think I speak for everyone when I say...

WHAT ARE YOU DOING WEGNER?!?!?