Teams wanting a player isn’t that much of a thing worth mentioning.

I made a post however since that team was the Rays, Uber progressive rays, a team I admire and many others do.

And this documents how they really went hard after Kimbrel, and they largely could not because of money reasons (could not shed equal value to Cubs).

https://theathletic.com/2746929/2021/08/02/rosenthal-rays-discussed-creative-possibilities-in-talks-with-cubs-for-kris-bryant-and-craig-kimbrel/?source=user_shared_article
 

And it includes the kicker, that Rays would probably just have traded Kimbrel in offseason.

Thats something I’ve failed to mostly communicate. To me I think we undervalue Kimbrels impossibly high value this year, and see next year as largely an inconvenient cost.

Sox really should explore that same path, and it will be easy to explore. 

1 minute ago, bmags said:

Teams wanting a player isn’t that much of a thing worth mentioning.

I made a post however since that team was the Rays, Uber progressive rays, a team I admire and many others do.

And this documents how they really went hard after Kimbrel, and they largely could not because of money reasons (could not shed equal value to Cubs).

https://theathletic.com/2746929/2021/08/02/rosenthal-rays-discussed-creative-possibilities-in-talks-with-cubs-for-kris-bryant-and-craig-kimbrel/?source=user_shared_article
 

And it includes the kicker, that Rays would probably just have traded Kimbrel in offseason.

Thats something I’ve failed to mostly communicate. To me I think we undervalue Kimbrels impossibly high value this year, and see next year as largely an inconvenient cost.

Sox really should explore that same path, and it will be easy to explore. 

It's odd that the Rays, a team who finds relievers out of nowhere, were willing to give up maybe 2 years of a cy young caliber starter for Kimbrel and Bryant. At the time, we didn't know Glasnow was definitely headed to TJS, so maybe it's more like 1.5 years of Glasnow with innings limits, but that's a much bigger name than Madrigal and Heuer. 

I know the Dodgers were also involved and I wondered what they had to offer after they traded their top 2 prospects to the Nats. 

5 minutes ago, bmags said:

Teams wanting a player isn’t that much of a thing worth mentioning.

I made a post however since that team was the Rays, Uber progressive rays, a team I admire and many others do.

And this documents how they really went hard after Kimbrel, and they largely could not because of money reasons (could not shed equal value to Cubs).

https://theathletic.com/2746929/2021/08/02/rosenthal-rays-discussed-creative-possibilities-in-talks-with-cubs-for-kris-bryant-and-craig-kimbrel/?source=user_shared_article
 

And it includes the kicker, that Rays would probably just have traded Kimbrel in offseason.

Thats something I’ve failed to mostly communicate. To me I think we undervalue Kimbrels impossibly high value this year, and see next year as largely an inconvenient cost.

Sox really should explore that same path, and it will be easy to explore. 

The A's are in a little less dire circumstance as the Rays. At least we beat out the Rays for Kimbrel. I have no idea if the Sox showed much interest in Marte or Yan Gomes who went to the A's but those are a couple of guys the Sox could've used for the rest of the year .

Well thank god that didn't happen, and perhaps another reason to be happy about the Kimbrel deal. And as for the Rays being willing to trade so much for a reliever:  it is odd.  Maybe we're finally seeing them act more like a normal winning team (and less like an ultra "progressive" prospect mill) since they have rarely had a clearer path to the WS, especially fresh off a WS appearance last year.

But above all, this shows we had a seat at the table with our big boy pants, like, pulled down I guess with our brass balls on the table with our big swinging dong also swinging or whatever.  

Kimbrel for Franco in the offseason Rays, you won't.

6 minutes ago, 35thstreetswarm said:

Well thank god that didn't happen, and perhaps another reason to be happy about the Kimbrel deal. And as for the Rays being willing to trade so much for a reliever:  it is odd.  Maybe we're finally seeing them act more like a normal winning team (and less like an ultra "progressive" prospect mill) since they have rarely had a clearer path to the WS, especially fresh off a WS appearance last year.

But above all, this shows we had a seat at the table with our big boy pants, like, pulled down I guess with our brass balls on the table with our big swinging dong also swinging or whatever.  

See I this is what makes it interesting. This isn't them acting like a normal team.

They traded their closer last week to the Mariners!

To me this underscores that you can't qualify Kimbrel under "closer" category. The Rays know that relievers are fickle and worth trading when they get hot ...but were hot after Craig Kimbrel.

He is a huge weapon this year. What he is next year...there is a lot of flexibility. 

20 minutes ago, chw42 said:

It's odd that the Rays, a team who finds relievers out of nowhere, were willing to give up maybe 2 years of a cy young caliber starter for Kimbrel and Bryant. At the time, we didn't know Glasnow was definitely headed to TJS, so maybe it's more like 1.5 years of Glasnow with innings limits, but that's a much bigger name than Madrigal and Heuer. 

I know the Dodgers were also involved and I wondered what they had to offer after they traded their top 2 prospects to the Nats. 

I'm sure the rays had figured Glasnow was incompatible to pay in arb vs. his injury risk and became another Snell situation.

Remember the old rays thing was keeping pitchers down in AAA impossibly long so that they were paying pre-arb prices for their prime years.

Locked on Sox podcast mentioned that Kimbrel's child has medical issues and that the Cubs really wanted to try and keep him in Chicago so he didn't have to move his child. 

Knowing this, I think the Sox will probably pick up that option and not trade him. And that's fine with me. He's really fucking good. 

Edited August 2, 20214 yr by South Sider

5 minutes ago, South Sider said:

Locked on Sox podcast mentioned that Kimbrel's child has medical issues and that the Cubs really wanted to try and keep him in Chicago so he didn't have to move his child. 

Knowing this, I think the Sox will probably pick up that option and not trade him. And that's fine with me. He's really fucking good. 

Hahn already talking about Kimbrel and Hernandez's options as something they were planning on picking up.

1 hour ago, bmags said:

See I this is what makes it interesting. This isn't them acting like a normal team.

They traded their closer last week to the Mariners!

To me this underscores that you can't qualify Kimbrel under "closer" category. The Rays know that relievers are fickle and worth trading when they get hot ...but were hot after Craig Kimbrel.

He is a huge weapon this year. What he is next year...there is a lot of flexibility. 

I said this in the other thread…if he’s kept next year…he’s LaRussa insurance. How many games have the white Sox lost after the starter was pulled because they were saving Hendriks for a save or saving Bummer? Two of the games in the first series with LAA, the Foster gets shelled in the 6th game, the game where Tony didn’t know the rule book, the Heuer shelling against Milwaukee, Rodons start against the Astros, there was at least one with Crochet pitching the 10th, I think there was a Ruiz disaster somewhere in there, I think there is a Marshall collapse I’m forgetting, probably more. If you can use a Bummer or one of the big guys when trouble starts, a loss becomes a 50/50 game, and we’ve probably got 10+ of those this season where having this extra closer for LaRussa to use while still having someone get credit for the all important save stat could have major leverage on a win.

57 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I said this in the other thread…if he’s kept next year…he’s LaRussa insurance. How many games have the white Sox lost after the starter was pulled because they were saving Hendriks for a save or saving Bummer? Two of the games in the first series with LAA, the Foster gets shelled in the 6th game, the game where Tony didn’t know the rule book, the Heuer shelling against Milwaukee, Rodons start against the Astros, there was at least one with Crochet pitching the 10th, I think there was a Ruiz disaster somewhere in there, I think there is a Marshall collapse I’m forgetting, probably more. If you can use a Bummer or one of the big guys when trouble starts, a loss becomes a 50/50 game, and we’ve probably got 10+ of those this season where having this extra closer for LaRussa to use while still having someone get credit for the all important save stat could have major leverage on a win.

I think there is another angle. At this point Rick Hahn may know that for the way JR caps his spend the only elite players they can add that are not smoothing out arb years are DHs and Relievers, both which max out around 12-16million.

So maybe for 29 other teams, spending $30 million on two relievers is idiocy. But for the sox, they are getting 2 relievers they think hit that consistent elite threshold to help the team rather than being forced to swim in the waters of getting a $10-12 million outfielder whose likely 1 win better than brian goodwin.

I'm only partly tongue and cheek.

Are we eating at the adult table again?

Not that this is breaking news or anything, but this is from Ken Rosenthal's latest notes column

Quote

They also acquired second baseman Nick Madrigal, the fourth overall pick in the 2018 draft, for reliever Craig Kimbrel, whom the White Sox plan to retain by exercising his $16 million option for next season

 

It helps that they already know what they are paying most of their team next year. The only places they would really spend is for bullpen help or a RF.

That's the Rays being the Rays. Actually kind of a smart move in my opinion. They tweak to go for it each year ... Glasnow obviously wasn't going to help this year. He then had his surgery so late in the season and as we've seen with Syndergaard, Severino, Sale, etc. these rehabs are taking upwards of 14 months to even get back on the mound. So chances are if he's back in any capacity next year its for mayyyyybe late September baseball out of the bullpen. Dont know his contract situation, but it sounds like one year left? after that. So are the Rays going to really pay him next year to rehab, and then the following year for one year of service knowing they're not resigning him? If they could've turned that into Bryant and Kimbrel and then traded Kimbrel for some pieces in the offseason? That's just smart baseball. You'll likely even see Glasnow traded this offseason for the exact same reasons above. Not easy being a Rays fan, but they're like Costanza going out on top ... they see something, they see the price, and they churn. 

Hell, i wouldn't even mind if the sox did something similar with Giolito ... Reinsdorf doesn't like to go over 4 years, mayyyybe he'll go 5 in a really good mood. Giolito doesn't seem like the type of guy who will take under 6-7/market value. Do you ride the horse for a World Series chance or do you flip him like Snell and probably get a similar return where you have a guy like Patino slotting into your rotation for the next 4-5 years? I know most people would say ride Gio ... but we've seen his bad (his first year) his greatness (the next few years) and ups and downs (this year, sticky stuff, last few starts). I'd like to think the real Gio is somewhere in between ... maybe not Ace, but more like #2 type guy. 

1 hour ago, BrianAnderson said:

That's the Rays being the Rays. Actually kind of a smart move in my opinion. They tweak to go for it each year ... Glasnow obviously wasn't going to help this year. He then had his surgery so late in the season and as we've seen with Syndergaard, Severino, Sale, etc. these rehabs are taking upwards of 14 months to even get back on the mound. So chances are if he's back in any capacity next year its for mayyyyybe late September baseball out of the bullpen. Dont know his contract situation, but it sounds like one year left? after that. So are the Rays going to really pay him next year to rehab, and then the following year for one year of service knowing they're not resigning him? If they could've turned that into Bryant and Kimbrel and then traded Kimbrel for some pieces in the offseason? That's just smart baseball. You'll likely even see Glasnow traded this offseason for the exact same reasons above. Not easy being a Rays fan, but they're like Costanza going out on top ... they see something, they see the price, and they churn. 

Hell, i wouldn't even mind if the sox did something similar with Giolito ... Reinsdorf doesn't like to go over 4 years, mayyyybe he'll go 5 in a really good mood. Giolito doesn't seem like the type of guy who will take under 6-7/market value. Do you ride the horse for a World Series chance or do you flip him like Snell and probably get a similar return where you have a guy like Patino slotting into your rotation for the next 4-5 years? I know most people would say ride Gio ... but we've seen his bad (his first year) his greatness (the next few years) and ups and downs (this year, sticky stuff, last few starts). I'd like to think the real Gio is somewhere in between ... maybe not Ace, but more like #2 type guy. 

Glasnow has 2 years of control left after this.

19 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

I said this in the other thread…if he’s kept next year…he’s LaRussa insurance. How many games have the white Sox lost after the starter was pulled because they were saving Hendriks for a save or saving Bummer? Two of the games in the first series with LAA, the Foster gets shelled in the 6th game, the game where Tony didn’t know the rule book, the Heuer shelling against Milwaukee, Rodons start against the Astros, there was at least one with Crochet pitching the 10th, I think there was a Ruiz disaster somewhere in there, I think there is a Marshall collapse I’m forgetting, probably more. If you can use a Bummer or one of the big guys when trouble starts, a loss becomes a 50/50 game, and we’ve probably got 10+ of those this season where having this extra closer for LaRussa to use while still having someone get credit for the all important save stat could have major leverage on a win.

Maybe, JUST maybe it will be picked up because he is the most dominant reliever in the league. Crazy concept. 

The White Sox should have hired Balta instead of Tony. They'd have about 10 more wins right now. 

21 hours ago, 35thstreetswarm said:

Well thank god that didn't happen, and perhaps another reason to be happy about the Kimbrel deal. And as for the Rays being willing to trade so much for a reliever:  it is odd.  Maybe we're finally seeing them act more like a normal winning team (and less like an ultra "progressive" prospect mill) since they have rarely had a clearer path to the WS, especially fresh off a WS appearance last year.

But above all, this shows we had a seat at the table with our big boy pants, like, pulled down I guess with our brass balls on the table with our big swinging dong also swinging or whatever.  

The Rays are my 2nd team (I live in Tampa). 

I bet some of it is also pressure of the Bucs and Bolts. Knowing you were so close last year and can win this year and join the other 2 clubs as champions.

49 minutes ago, ron883 said:

Maybe, JUST maybe it will be picked up because he is the most dominant reliever in the league. Crazy concept. 

The White Sox should have hired Balta instead of Tony. They'd have about 10 more wins right now. 

His option will be picked up barring injury. However, it is entirely possible the White Sox could choose to cash out his contract by trading him in the offseason - everyone would admit that $30 million is a lot to spend on only 2 pitchers in a bullpen, and for a team with the White Sox's salary constraints that may just be unmanageable. 

I certainly hope not. Having watched this season, as I said above, the ability to use a dominant reliever in a high leverage situation, rather than saving that reliever for a save situation that often doesn't come, is a potential way to outperform your offense and starting pitching. The 2015 Royals, for example, compiled only about 36 fWAR - projections before the season started had them as something close to a .500 team - but they won the world series, in no small part because of their dominant bullpen.

4 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

Glasnow has 2 years of control left after this.

2 years ... meaning 2022 and 2023?

If so, 2022 is a wash. He's not going to be pitching meaningful innings, if any, next year. So you get one year outta Glasnow and get to pay him twice. Not the Rays way ... they'll flip him like the Indians did with Clevinger. Hell, might make sense for the Sox to look into if we are comfortable sitting on a salary for a year. the prospect return should be less than normal in a situation like that. If we're giving up Cal Quantrill types I'd be down. 

1 minute ago, BrianAnderson said:

2 years ... meaning 2022 and 2023?

If so, 2022 is a wash. He's not going to be pitching meaningful innings, if any, next year. So you get one year outta Glasnow and get to pay him twice. Not the Rays way ... they'll flip him like the Indians did with Clevinger. Hell, might make sense for the Sox to look into if we are comfortable sitting on a salary for a year. the prospect return should be less than normal in a situation like that. If we're giving up Cal Quantrill types I'd be down. 

Correct on the years.