Article: Craig Kimbrel and Risk Tolerance

[DiscGolfer]

A lot has been made about trying to find the next Pressly in a trade but what about trying to find the next Taylor Rogers in house.  Rogers made an adjustment second half last year and was arguably just as good or better than Pressly in the second half.  There could be in house options that won't cost any prospects or more money either if certain players make the right adjustments.  Just because they don't have the stats we like right now doesn't mean they can't turn into something special later in the year.  This is just another option to be open minded about and I'm not saying to rely on this I still would like to see a a trade made to improve from outside the organization but in house options could emerge.

[h2oface]

 

There is zero purpose in keeping around effective relief pitchers on 90-loss teams when you can swap them for legit high-upside prospects. 

 

The Twins have an over-abundance of mid-tier prospect types so it's kinda funny how many fans are suddenly clutching them like pearls.  

 

I think I read somewhere an astute sports writer called the players that came in the trade for Pressly mid-tier prospects. Have they changed overnight?

 

"But from my view, they should be seeking to execute the same blueprint that landed Ryan Pressly in Houston last summer: trading mid-tier prospects for prime-aged relievers, ideally with an untapped strength, under multiple years of control."

 

Mid-tier does about the same for me as the dreaded mediocre innings-eater. So the plan is to trade the prime-aged reliever we have and need, who's strengths have already been tapped and developed by our own team, for mid-tier prospects, and then hope someone will trade another like him that you hope might become that guy for the mid-tier prospects, or others similar to them, and see how it goes? I guess that is where we are now. Even if they get it done, it seems like a wash and a waste of time. I hope they do get it done. One can only move forward, now. But I am betting most teams will be asking for top prospects, instead of mid-tier, and the new guy won't be as good as Pressly is, even if the task is accomplished.

Edited June 8, 2019 by h2oface

[h2oface]

 

These Twins have shown an ability to help some pitchers discover new levels, no?

 

Yes! So why not make the same leap and take the plunge on Kimbrel, and let the staff help him discover new levels that make him even better than he has ever been, no? He already has the proven foundation, with just a half year in question. 

 

Sorry, I sound like it is still a possibility. This is probably something that would make more sense to say before he was signed by the Cubs instead of the Twins.

 

I think the most absolute statement you made in your fine article was ...

"Collectively, Twins fans are MAD."

Edited June 8, 2019 by h2oface

[Riverbrian]

 

To be fair, I suspect we may have some of those types already available internally... I just want the Will Smith's of the world to complement them. 

 

Those switches rarely go on overnight. I would hope that the current staff can have one or two more names on the Trusted list by seasons end. I'd just like them to acquire one (preferably two) more as well. 

 

I agree with you.

 

The Twins haven't had to rely on the bullpen this year. The starters have been doing the heavy lifting.

 

This could change quickly.

 

Can our bullpen pick up the slack, if things shift with no warning, like it often does in the game of baseball? I have no idea what happens because our starters have been doing the heavy lifting and it disguises the bullpen. Kinda like a mother who does laundry for her kid in college. We really don't know if the kid can really do laundry if Mom gets hit by a bus. 

 

This front office should be fully focused on October right now in June. 

 

I know that Baldelli places his trust in Rogers, Parker, May and Harper. Is that enough if Perez extends his rough start streak to 5 starts in a row? Is that enough if Odorizzi and Gibson suffer injuries? Is that enough if Rogers gets hurt? 

 

I was OK with Kimbrel... I'm OK with Will Smith... And I'll be OK with Nick Anderson. Whoever they come up with, I'm gonna trust the data they are looking at but there better be a "whoever" and it better be someone that Baldelli will use more than he uses Mike Morin. 

 

[Einheri]

Twins should deal for relief SOONER than later.
Instead of waiting for a late bargain, pounce now and set the price.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

I agree with you.

 

The Twins haven't had to rely on the bullpen this year. The starters have been doing the heavy lifting.

 

This could change quickly.

 

Can our bullpen pick up the slack, if things shift with no warning, like it often does in the game of baseball? I have no idea what happens because our starters have been doing the heavy lifting and it disguises the bullpen. Kinda like a mother who does laundry for her kid in college. We really don't know if the kid can really do laundry if Mom gets hit by a bus. 

 

This front office should be fully focused on October right now in June. 

 

I know that Baldelli places his trust in Rogers, Parker, May and Harper. Is that enough if Perez extends his rough start streak to 5 starts in a row? Is that enough if Odorizzi and Gibson suffer injuries? Is that enough if Rogers gets hurt? 

 

I was OK with Kimbrel... I'm OK with Will Smith... And I'll be OK with Nick Anderson. Whoever they come up with, I'm gonna trust the data they are looking at but there better be a "whoever" and it better be someone that Baldelli will use more than he uses Mike Morin. 

 

I don't understand why you're using Morin as an example. He's been in 12 games and surrendered 1 run (11 IP total). He's being worked in... slowly and has succeeded. That trust won't happen overnight. I don't know if he's the next Nick Anderson, but he's performed well when handed the ball.. for what that's worth. You want them to develop the next Will Smith. Perhaps Morin can become that over time... but it will take time, and even if he does (and I wouldn't call this likely), there will be failures along the way... If you want us to find that guy, you're going to have to accept those failures.

 

But that's back to my main point. Get a Kimrbrel. Get Smith. Get Giles. Get some help. Morin might make it... or perhaps Duffey makes it... or maybe Romero. Who knows. You're going to have to roll with those guys periodically until you see who has the right combo of stuff/mental acumen to get the job done...

 

but if we make the playoffs and have this pen... we won't last long. 

[DocBauer]

Time to weigh in. I've liked a ton of opinions and couldn't possibly post them all. A couple points I'd like to make clear first of all:

 

1] Darvish arguements are ridiculous. Another pitcher, a different season, and a different position.

 

2] I liked the idea of Kimbrel on a 1yr, 1yr+, or straight 2yr. I have NO CLUE if Kimbrel was interested in coming to the Twins, and I dont think anyone else knows either. SPECULATION, would state it would have taken a 3rd yr and more more money. I dont think this idea should be easily dismissed. And while we could be proven wrong, I just wouldn't have done that.

 

3] I love our FO and just about everything they have done, overall. The single #1 blunder they have made was trading Pressly because I liked him, his potential, and I felt 2019 was going to be a much different/better season. I will call the FO out when necessary, and I did this when the trade happened. But it's over and done.

 

This year's BP HAS largely been good and effective. That DOESNT mean it can sustain. So let's be clear in regard to the difference!

 

If we are truly honest with ourselves, most of us felt Romero and Mejia had the arms to develop. They haven't. Period. So far. I'm betting the FO is pretty disappointed so far as well.

 

By the break, there will be a good many teams who realize they are out of it. Is Nick flippant to suggest there will be a plethora of available arms to be plucked? Perhaps. But history has shown a good deal of movement in the RP trade market in the past. Should this year really be any different?

 

The Twins have a top rated system with enough talent to spare to make a move or two without debilitating the system. Can we really argue that?

 

The key factor, IMO, is what is paid for a rental vs someone with at least another year or so available. I didn't like the Pressly trade then and still dont know. But some seem to feel the Twins received trash back, and that's just not the case.

 

In a best case scenario, the Twins still have about 3 weeks for Duffey, Romero, Littel, etc, to show that at least ONE of them can make a difference.

 

Either way, the depth of the system actually allows them to bring in an arm or two that they believe can make a difference. Who was Pressly, to most people outside of the actual FO's of MLB, before Houston got him?

 

This FO needs to see what they have...short leashes dont always help but we are contending and I get it...and then make a serious move or two. And said move or two may or may not include a 30+yo "name" we know or a 27-28yo name we are unsure about but who they like and believe in.

 

I could care less. But just be smart and right and bring in that guy or two to add to this contending team!

[bird]

 

Houston has made several trades involving multiple players in their top ten prospect list. So, maybe aim higher than only trading medium players?

Or are they not at the forefront of winning?

 

I think it's absolutely critical to understand this: the reason a well-run team like Houston can deal from their prospect capital is because even after dealing some of it, they still had an abundance of talent. Secondly, the talent that shaped the big club's success came together quickly.

 

Last time I checked, SI had Houston #1 in their Power Rankings, and FanGraphs ranked their prospect pipeline #5. They did not ever compromise the strength of either system as they began their progression.

 

In the same two publications, SI ranked the Twins #2 in the Power Rankings and FanGraphs ranked their prospect pipeline #7. These are dramatically higher grades for the Twins than even three months ago!

 

The point is, this really IS the first time where the Twins can deal from a similar position of overall strength as Houston has enjoyed for quite some time. 

 

Houston wasn't giving up their versions of Kirilloff, Graterol, and Lewis, and they wouldn't have.

 

To their infinite credit, they absolutely fleeced Pittsburgh for Gerrit Cole, and they may have snookered the Twins to land Pressly, who knows?

 

It's not particularly instructive to mention  some random or even a specific Houston move and suggest that the Twins should have done that. It's not reasonable to expect the Twins to have stumbled into the Gerrit Cole trade, and Verlander wasn't coming here, right? That said, NOW, not then, but NOW, they DO have enough prospect capital to ship off 3 prospects and a surplus MLB starter like Houston did for a talent like Cole if a sweet deal like that shockingly surfaces. That foursome has combined to give the Pirates 0.2 WAR, most all of it the .6WAR from Colin Moran, the 6th overall pick in 2013. So yeah, lets hope someone gets stupid enough to give us a Cole type talent for a trade headlined by Nick Gordon. 

 

We'll see, but now that they have both a loaded MLB roster (still on paper inferior to a few teams IMO) and fairly decent depth among Tier 2 prospects, and also financial clout, let's see what happens.

[Riverbrian]

 

I don't understand why you're using Morin as an example. He's been in 12 games and surrendered 1 run (11 IP total). He's being worked in... slowly and has succeeded. That trust won't happen overnight. I don't know if he's the next Nick Anderson, but he's performed well when handed the ball.. for what that's worth. You want them to develop the next Will Smith. Perhaps Morin can become that over time... but it will take time, and even if he does (and I wouldn't call this likely), there will be failures along the way... If you want us to find that guy, you're going to have to accept those failures.

 

But that's back to my main point. Get a Kimrbrel. Get Smith. Get Giles. Get some help. Morin might make it... or perhaps Duffey makes it... or maybe Romero. Who knows. You're going to have to roll with those guys periodically until you see who has the right combo of stuff/mental acumen to get the job done...

 

but if we make the playoffs and have this pen... we won't last long. 

 

I'm using Morin as an example because we hadn't seen him in a week.

 

During the week we didn't see him... The Bullpen was Bad that week. Magill and Parker were both lit up multiple times while Morin was on the beach. 

 

I'm saying... you either trust him or you don't. The bullpen is struggling and Morin is not being utilized with an 0.64 WHIP. Now I got others telling me that we can't use Eades either. If you don't plan to utilize a guy even while peers are being lit up. Neither have a place on the roster. 

 

It's we must play Morrison because we got nobody better all over again. 

 

 

[ashbury]

I'm fine if our FO determined that Kimbrel isn't the guy.

 

But they need to get a guy for the bullpen. They need to get two, and I wouldn't be opposed to getting three. If their off-season plan was "let's play April and May to see what we've got among our large backlog of young arms," they have their answer by now and it's mainly in the negative. It's good to stay the course, but there comes a point where you can't.

 

Last year the Dodgers got to the World Series because they had a deep bullpen. That allowed them to survive a 4.1 inning start by Ryu and a 4.2 inning start by Buehler and a 5 inning start by Rich Hill and still win those games against the Brewers - losing any of them would have been curtains. The Dodgers led their league in runs per game, but in the post season you can't count on that.

 

In two of those games they used 8 relievers! In the regular season whoever uses the most relievers usually is the losing team. But the post season is a different game. (And yes, one of those games was 13 innings. But do you want to lose in 11 because your last guys just can't cut it?)

 

If we got three new reliable arms, we still wouldn't have what the Dodgers found necessary in order to stagger into the World Series. But it would be a huge improvement to our chances on the big stage.

 

Our bullpen is woefully unready for what we hope is to come.

[ewen21]

What the Cubs signed him for and what we would have needed to sign him for are two entirely different deals, so do not assume those numbers he got from Chicago are what we could have had him for.  Furthermore, how do we even know he is going to be effective this year?  What has he been doing the last four months?

 

This team is tied with Houston and the LA Dodgers in winning percentage at .667 and that is tops in baseball.  We are going to whine about not signing some primadonna that sat out until almost 40% of the season was over?

 

Whatever.  I think I'll pass.

 

 

Edited June 9, 2019 by ewen21

[Riverbrian]

 

I'm fine if our FO determined that Kimbrel isn't the guy.

 

But they need to get a guy for the bullpen. They need to get two, and I wouldn't be opposed to getting three. If their off-season plan was "let's play April and May to see what we've got among our large backlog of young arms," they have their answer by now and it's mainly in the negative. It's good to stay the course, but there comes a point where you can't.

 

Last year the Dodgers got to the World Series because they had a deep bullpen. That allowed them to survive a 4.1 inning start by Ryu and a 4.2 inning start by Buehler and a 5 inning start by Rich Hill and still win those games against the Brewers - losing any of them would have been curtains. The Dodgers led their league in runs per game, but in the post season you can't count on that.

 

In two of those games they used 8 relievers! In the regular season whoever uses the most relievers usually is the losing team. But the post season is a different game. (And yes, one of those games was 13 innings. But do you want to lose in 11 because your last guys just can't cut it?)

 

If we got three new reliable arms, we still wouldn't have what the Dodgers found necessary in order to stagger into the World Series. But it would be a huge improvement to our chances on the big stage.

 

Our bullpen is woefully unready for what we hope is to come.

 

You are right! Same with the Brewers, Astros and Yankees. 

 

Using the Dodgers as an example... Check out the creative way they assembled that bullpen for the playoffs. 3 starters Maeda, Wood and Urias joining mainstays Jansen and Baez. Madson was a trade acquisition after the Nats placed him on waivers. Dylan Floro was reacquired in a trade with the Reds after the Dodgers waived him in 2018.  Floro was previously waived by the Dodgers in 2018, The Cubs in 2017 and the Rays in 2017. 

[USAFChief]

What the Cubs signed him for and what we would have needed to sign him for are two entirely different deals, so do not assume those numbers he got from Chicago are what we could have had him for. Furthermore, how do we even know he is going to be effective this year? What has he been doing the last four months?

 

This team is tied with Houston and the LA Dodgers in winning percentage at .667 and that is tops in baseball. We are going to whine about not signing some primadonna that sat out until almost 40% of the season was over?

 

Whatever. I think I'll pass.

You're right, we cant assume...maybe he wanted to sign with Twins and we could have had him for less.

[Vanimal46]

I'm fine if our FO determined that Kimbrel isn't the guy.

 

But they need to get a guy for the bullpen. They need to get two, and I wouldn't be opposed to getting three. If their off-season plan was "let's play April and May to see what we've got among our large backlog of young arms," they have their answer by now and it's mainly in the negative. It's good to stay the course, but there comes a point where you can't.

 

Last year the Dodgers got to the World Series because they had a deep bullpen. That allowed them to survive a 4.1 inning start by Ryu and a 4.2 inning start by Buehler and a 5 inning start by Rich Hill and still win those games against the Brewers - losing any of them would have been curtains. The Dodgers led their league in runs per game, but in the post season you can't count on that.

 

In two of those games they used 8 relievers! In the regular season whoever uses the most relievers usually is the losing team. But the post season is a different game. (And yes, one of those games was 13 innings. But do you want to lose in 11 because your last guys just can't cut it?)

 

If we got three new reliable arms, we still wouldn't have what the Dodgers found necessary in order to stagger into the World Series. But it would be a huge improvement to our chances on the big stage.

 

Our bullpen is woefully unready for what we hope is to come.

Concur. It's time to prepare for October today. The stud starting pitchers in the playoffs may go 6-7 innings. The rest get the boot after 4 or 5. This bullpen is woefully unprepared to pitch 4 or 5 high leverage innings a game.

[ashbury]

Concur. It's time to prepare for October today.

And not to belabor the point, but I've seen comments that it's premature to assume the division and look toward the post-season. I'm not assuming anything - we could still finish out of the money. But the parameters for planning on June 9 have changed for our FO from some equivalent point six months ago. Then, we were coming off a mediocre season and didn't know what to expect in terms of higher performance we've all been awaiting for almost a decade. Now, we're contending. Let's prepare for success, as opposed to another lame "just glad to be here" appearance in a divisional series.

[ewen21]

 

You're right, we cant assume...maybe he wanted to sign with Twins and we could have had him for less.

Yes, because there are always truckloads of guys who want to sign with us for less 

[Mike Sixel]

Yes, because there are always truckloads of guys who want to sign with us for less

I'm pretty sure you missed the point of that post.

[Mike Sixel]

I think it's absolutely critical to understand this: the reason a well-run team like Houston can deal from their prospect capital is because even after dealing some of it, they still had an abundance of talent. Secondly, the talent that shaped the big club's success came together quickly.

 

Last time I checked, SI had Houston #1 in their Power Rankings, and FanGraphs ranked their prospect pipeline #5. They did not ever compromise the strength of either system as they began their progression.

 

In the same two publications, SI ranked the Twins #2 in the Power Rankings and FanGraphs ranked their prospect pipeline #7. These are dramatically higher grades for the Twins than even three months ago!

 

The point is, this really IS the first time where the Twins can deal from a similar position of overall strength as Houston has enjoyed for quite some time.

 

Houston wasn't giving up their versions of Kirilloff, Graterol, and Lewis, and they wouldn't have.

 

To their infinite credit, they absolutely fleeced Pittsburgh for Gerrit Cole, and they may have snookered the Twins to land Pressly, who knows?

 

It's not particularly instructive to mention some random or even a specific Houston move and suggest that the Twins should have done that. It's not reasonable to expect the Twins to have stumbled into the Gerrit Cole trade, and Verlander wasn't coming here, right? That said, NOW, not then, but NOW, they DO have enough prospect capital to ship off 3 prospects and a surplus MLB starter like Houston did for a talent like Cole if a sweet deal like that shockingly surfaces. That foursome has combined to give the Pirates 0.2 WAR, most all of it the .6WAR from Colin Moran, the 6th overall pick in 2013. So yeah, lets hope someone gets stupid enough to give us a Cole type talent for a trade headlined by Nick Gordon.

 

We'll see, but now that they have both a loaded MLB roster (still on paper inferior to a few teams IMO) and fairly decent depth among Tier 2 prospects, and also financial clout, let's see what happens.

They traded three players in their top five, so maybe we have different definitions of top?

 

That said, agreed, this year they are in a similar position to Houston a couple years ago. Of course, they keep calling up guys who do well, so something is still different in the systems....

 

But, they have the capital to make deals. We'll see soon.

[ewen21]

 

I'm pretty sure you missed the point of that post.

I must have.  Please explain it to me.

 

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

I must have.  Please explain it to me.

 

the point was, we don't know what any of these guys want, but people keep making assumptions that they don't want to sign here, as one of the explanations, when we literally don't know. Because maybe they do. maybe not. we don't know.

[Mike Sixel]

the point was, we don't know what any of these guys want, but people keep making assumptions that they don't want to sign here, as one of the explanations, when we literally don't know. Because maybe they do. maybe not. we don't know.

Which had nothing to do with the fact the Twins generally have had less money to offer. But the fact that Cruz, Shoot, and Perez all signed here means someone wants to. Just not maybe always who we want, one way or the other.

[prouster]

the point was, we don't know what any of these guys want, but people keep making assumptions that they don't want to sign here, as one of the explanations, when we literally don't know. Because maybe they do. maybe not. we don't know.

You’re right that we can’t assume they don’t want to sign here. But when they go somewhere else, we can’t rule it out unless there’s some reason to. Maybe it’s more prudent to say that Player X didn’t want to come here badly enough to take a worse/comparable offer.

[BattleYourTailOff]

If this season is squandered like the 00s teams they’re going to need a lot more of those 5$ ticket nights

[BattleYourTailOff]

And also how do we know the twins had less money to offer? I kept hearing from all these sources who popped out of the woodwork that Jim was “open to increasing payroll”. If they know that do they know by how much? A million? 5 million? 20? When people use that line of nebulous language in defense of an ownership who had shown no reason hit anyone to think they’re going to deviate from old habits it just makes me wonder how many people actually believe that zero accountability mantra?

[TheLeviathan]

 

You’re right that we can’t assume they don’t want to sign here. But when they go somewhere else, we can’t rule it out unless there’s some reason to. Maybe it’s more prudent to say that Player X didn’t want to come here badly enough to take a worse/comparable offer.

 

Well, why don't we just agree that the most likely scenario existed then?  We simply did not offer as much money or years.  The terms were inferior.

 

And (deep breath everyone who bristled at that) that's.....ok.  It's not the end of the world.  It's ok for the FO to set a price and hold to it.  But when players sign elsewhere they sign, the vast majority of the time, for the best terms.  Not because of climate, how many parks they have, or how good the local burgers are: they sign for the best terms.

 

We went out and did a damn fine job offering the best terms to Cruz, Schoop, Perez, and a few other revelations.  We just decided the terms the Cubs offer were more than we budgeted.  That's ok.  (But then ya gotta go out and get the talent on the field some other way)

[BattleYourTailOff]

Well, why don't we just agree that

 

And (deep breath everyone who bristled at that) that's.....ok. It's not the end of the world. It's ok for the FO to set a price and hold to it. But when players sign elsewhere they sign, the vast majority of the time, for the best terms. Not because of climate, how many parks they have, or how good the local burgers are: they sign for the best terms.

 

We went out and did a damn fine job offering the best terms to Cruz, Schoop, Perez, and a few other revelations. We just decided the terms the Cubs offer were more than we budgeted. That's ok. (But then ya gotta go out and get the talent on the field some other way)

I don’t think you can equate signing Perez, Schoop, or Cruz in the off season to having a double digit lead in the division in early June, being very near an expected lock for the postseason and signing someone you need to improve by far the weakest aspect of your team. It’s OK if the FO (who I respect and have high levels of faith in) saw that Kimbrel was not going to cut it... but it is not OK to me if they liked him and couldn’t throw enough at him. Not in this season. And yeah it’s not my money. I’m just a fan. Edited June 11, 2019 by BattleYourTailOff

[TheLeviathan]

 

. Not in this season. And yeah it’s not my money. I’m just a fan.

 

I'm with you.  I'm disappointed also.

 

But we didn't lose out on Craig Kimbrel because of Wrigley, their fans, Old Style beer, elevated trains, or any other nonsense.  We didn't want to match or exceed their terms.  That's my point, I'm tired of hearing the litany of excuses every time we don't sign someone.

[Mike Sixel]

I'm with you. I'm disappointed also.

 

But we didn't lose out on Craig Kimbrel because of Wrigley, their fans, Old Style beer, elevated trains, or any other nonsense. We didn't want to match or exceed their terms. That's my point, I'm tired of hearing the litany of excuses every time we don't sign someone.

From what we're told, MN would go two years. Not sure why we don't believe that's the reason.

 

In other words, they wanted him, just not at three years. It was about the money.

Edited June 11, 2019 by Mike Sixel

[TheLeviathan]

 

From what we're told, MN would go two years. Not sure why we don't believe that's the reason.

In other words, they wanted him, just not at three years. It was about the money.

 

They just may not have trusted him to hold up as a three year investment.  That's justifiable.  It also makes it about the money.  (Terms)

 

As it is in 99.9% of all free agent negotiations.

[BattleYourTailOff]

Doesn’t make sense to me to not give him 3 years if you’re already offering him two. I mean sure that one extra year could be an albatross but again, you’re already offering two... and you’re playing for October. This season. 2019. I’m not blaming the FO for this one though.