Tough Talk: Craig Kimbrel
February 12, 2013 at 10:00 am by Mark Smith under Atlanta Braves
I’m risking us having to get the #BanHammer out again, but I do think this is a subject that needs to be discussed. The Braves should consider trading Craig Kimbrel. Before you jump down my throat, I’m not advocating they do it right now. I’m also not suggesting they do it for a bag of peanuts because he is the best reliever in the game. I’m also not saying they have to trade him. That’s what we are here to discuss. The Braves essentially have three choices with Kimbrel – sign him to an extension covering some free-agent seasons, take him year-to-year in arbitration or give him a contract that only covers those seasons, or trade him. Again, all of these scenarios are for AFTER this season because it doesn’t make sense to trade him now.
Why Trade Him to Begin With?
Craig Kimbrel is the best reliever in the game, and there’s no reason to think his performance so far has been fluky or unsustainable (other than the fact that he’s been so good that it’s hard to imagine him keeping it up). There are, however, reasons to consider moving him.
The first is pitcher attrition. Joakim Soria, Brian Wilson, Joe Nathan, Juan Carlos Oviedo, Jonathan Broxton, Neftali Feliz, Andrew Bailey, Sergio Santos, and Kyle Farnsworth are all closer-type relievers that have been injured for most of or entire seasons within the past few years, and while I’m not saying Kimbrel will definitely get hurt, it’s probably a more likely scenario than any of us would like to admit. I hate when players get hurt (in any situation), but we have to be realistic here.
The next reason is asking what price the Braves are likely to pay for his services. Below are some comparable contracts for closers reaching arbitration (purple) and beyond (orange – club options; green – free-agent contract).
If the averages hold true and is close to what Kimbrel receives, the Braves should have no problem affording Kimbrel’s production. But of course, arbitration works more off of comparables, which is why I separated Soria and Papelbon from the rest. Below is an fWAR comparison of their first three seasons (Note: I realize arbitration judges don’t use fWAR during cases. I’m using this as a shorthand because, well, Kimbrel does really well in saves, ERA, and getting awards. I just want to make a point of comparison.).
Kimbrel is not only comparable to those two, but he’s better than those two (and everyone else). Soria was signed to an extension at the same point in his career that Kimbrel is currently in. Papelbon went through arbitration year-by-year with no extension. If Kimbrel can be signed for the averages, that’s a lot of money but manageable, but if it’s closer to or above Papelbon (which Kimbrel will likely be able to argue), the risk mentioned above might be too great to spend over 10% of the budget (especially when other player’s salaries are beginning to escalate as well) on Kimbrel. Trading Kimbrel and also saving the millions he will cost would also net the Braves young players in return.
What Could the Braves Get in Return?
The above table refers to recent (somewhat) trades of closers. It doesn’t paint a very bright picture, but it’s worth mentioning that Mike Gonzalez, Rafael Soriano, and Andrew Bailey were the only ones traded at similar points in their careers, with Bailey the only one with a strong resume to that point (and his stock had declined due to an ERA that jumped almost 2 full runs). Bailey netted Reddick (not as highly thought of as he is now but solid), Miles Head (decent prospect whose stock was on the rise), and Raul Alcantara (filler). Kimbrel, as we’ve stated before, is a much better reliever than Bailey with a stronger resume, and he should require more in return.
To get a theoretical idea of what value Kimbrel has, let’s look at some projected values.
(Note: I used the average salaries above for the “Conservative” cost because, in that scenario, he’s not as good and wouldn’t require as much money. In the other scenarios, I used Papelbon’s comp because he will still have posted strong numbers even if it’s not as good as he had been. I suppose he could make less than this, but he has “precedent setter” written all over him. As for the values, I went with $5.25M, $5.5M, and $5.75M. It may not be precise, but it gives us an idea.)
If Kimbrel’s season isn’t so good this year, the “Conservative” estimate puts him at a surplus value around $13M. According to Victor Wang’s research, that means he’s worth a top pitching or hitting prospect that ranks in the 25-75 range on a Top 100 list. The Braves would be selling low as well in this scenario, and if Kimbrel only nets them one prospect, he’s not worth trading. Bailey’s trade would be the best comp there. Bailey’s ERA went up almost 2 runs, though his peripherals were still strong, and he netted more but less quality prospects in return. Reddick worked out wonderfully, but that wasn’t expected at the time. Again, in this situation, I’d keep Kimbrel to see if he bounced back and restored value before considering this again.
If Kimbrel has a very good but down season for him, we’ll look at the “Realistic” scenario. Oddly enough, Kimbrel’s value is pretty similar to the “Conservative” version because he’s likely to cost more as well. Because the perception of him is still likely to be positive, his value might be a little higher than $14M. In this scenario, netting a very top pitching prospect or a top 50 hitting prospect is more likely, and to help the deal be made, the Braves might also grab a lower-level prospect with some upside. At this point, I’m more likely to be enticed, but I’m probably hoping for a bidding war to up the reward. It depends on the offer.
In the “Optimistic” scenario, Kimbrel has repeated his brilliance for a third time, and his value is around $22M. At this point, a top 50 hitting prospect plus a lower 50 (in a Top 100) pitching prospect is a more likely scenario. A top 20 hitting prospect (though probably not a Top 10) is also a possibility with the chance at a lower-level flier on top of it. In all of these possibilities, the Braves would likely be looking for someone who was ready to perform at the MLB level, and the quality in return would probably be worth trading Kimbrel, clearing some salary, and filling a need elsewhere. At this point, the Braves may even be able to boost the value through the “He’s the Best in the Biz” tactic and grab a little extra value somewhere. As a further note, these trades for Kimbrel will be for quality, not quantity. It wouldn’t make sense to get 4 guys of little value in return.
Who could afford/need Kimbrel and have the pieces to fill holes (Note: the list below is simply prospects that the teams have who would fit the bill; these are not necessarily trade scenarios)?
But Let’s Say the Braves Keep Him?
Let’s say there are no acceptable trade scenarios. Here are the most applicable comps and some possible numbers through a seven-year deal (I chose seven because someone suggested it in the comments, and it went through Papelbon’s guaranteed years; five years is probably a better guess).
Those are the three most likely comps, and I gave you a few other scenarios. The “Average” and “Possible” arbitration years basically follow along Brian Wilson’s arb path, and I find that fairly realistic. Adding 2 years at $15M would bring the total to 5 years/$49 M. If Kimbrel is feeling frisky in negotiations and pushes the Papelbon comp, two more years at $15M would bring the total to 5 years/$57M. A creative solution would be a structure similar to the one used with Soria in which the arbitration years were guaranteed while the free-agent seasons were club options. Adding in club options while keeping higher salaries limits the risk for the Braves as they could decide whether or not their financial situation would allow them to keep a closer at that cost while locking in his arb years. Kimbrel would gain some security on the front end, but it is asking him to take some risk at the end as well as possibly leaving money on the table. He’ll be 29 when he “reaches” free-agency. Adding the two years after that still leaves him at the age of 31 and able to get another big contract. Papelbon chose to break records. Will Kimbrel? Only time will tell.
So Now What?
You’ll hate me for saying it, but it depends. A contract of using Wilson’s arb years for Kimbrel’s ($4.5M, $6.5M, $8.5M – $19.5M) plus 2 club options for $12M for a possible 5-year, $43.5M extension would be interesting and limits risk for the team. It’s impossible to know if either side would be amenable to this, however. It’s still a lot of money for a reliever, but Kimbrel’s earning power might also easily exceed this deal. If it gets more expensive than this, a trade is something worth considering. One can’t be sure if any of the teams from earlier would be interested in Kimbrel and willing to deal top prospects for a closer.
In the end, what I hope I’ve done is lay out the options. I’m not strictly advocating for either side, and I imagine that the Braves are likely to hold onto Kimbrel, making this mostly an academic exercise. But while trading an All-Star closer who may very well be the best in the game might not be the most popular one, it is something to consider for a team whose payroll may not skyrocket over the next five years. Heck, it’s probably something to consider regardless.
Loading ...
Awesome article. With an injury free season, I really do think the Braves will end up getting a high hitting prospect and some out of him. He’s the best in the game, a bidding war it will be.
Except we aren’t in a process of rebuilding. Trading prospects for Kimbrel would be stupid.Why make our Major League squad substantially weaker when we have a legitimate chance to compete for the next 3 years at the very least. Win a World Series, raise more revenue and increase our team salary to make it work.
because Atlanta fans don’t really go to more games when the team wins? Because a team with a 100 mill budget can’t afford to pay 15% of its payroll to a guy who throws 60 innings? because the braves have a tv contract that locks them into one of the lowest revenue streams in the game over the long haul?
Oh, come on, how about some good reasons? :-)
mark hates freedom and america and puppies?
I do hate freedom, but instead of puppies, I hate kittens.
Anyway, as for trading Kimbrel, I didn’t say trade for an A-ball player. Most of the guys on that list will be in AA or higher this year. If they are closer to the majors, there’s less risk involved. Also, we can’t simply ignore the future because of the present. Trading Kimbrel doesn’t necessarily make the team weaker in the present or future. What I’m simply asking you to do is understand that Kimbrel is awesome but there may be a better way of allocating resources than simply paying him.
And of course, I didn’t say the Braves HAD to trade him. I’m simply saying it’s not something to dismiss out of hand as ridiculous.
Something to think about Stephen – the price of Kimbrell, Heyward and Freeman is heading up over the next three years. It’s a matter of investing available $$ in the areas with greatest day-to-day return on the field.
Although not in contention at the time, Kansas City learned the hard way that hanging on to Joakim Soria was not a good move. They ended up paying a premium price for a closer, passed on opportunities to trade him, and ended up with nothing after Soria blew his arm out.
Im sorry, but you guys know these prospects a lot better than I do…Im assuming you think all those deals are pretty equally fair.
If you had to pick one, which one would it be and why?
Again, THOSE ARE NOT TRADE SCENARIOS. As for what prospect I would take, it’s not worth speculating right now. Those are some prospects to keep an eye out for, and we’ll let their development over the next year give us more information as to which we should acquire. No real need to pick one now when so many things can change.
IMO, a lot of this is continent on the development of Graham and/or Wood. I doubt both stick as starters and if one can present top quality closer stuff, it would be foolish to pay Kimbrel $12m a year when we could get pretty good performance out of a league min guy AND stock up the farm at the same time.
If Alex Wood lands in the pen, I see him taking O’Fla’s place in the pen, not Kimbrel’s. I watched Wood play in his college years (Go Dawgs!) and I truly believe he can carve up lefties at a major league level.
As for Graham, I’ve never seen him pitch a single inning. I know he throws hard, but throwing gas doesn’t always equal closer.
Good article. Relief pitchers, even the most dominant ones, have such limited value. Combining that with their general volatility, and the Braves would be crazy not to at least consider trading Kimbrel when his value is high.
Might he be the next Mariano Rivera? Sure. Even if he is, though, the Braves can’t afford to set aside a large chunk of their payroll for a relief pitcher, particularly one that is not likely to be used in the most optimal way (Jonah Keri makes an interesting point about this in his latest Grantland piece about bad contracts. Essentially, that Papelbon’s contract is worse than it otherwise would be simply because he isn’t used very effectively by Manuel).
That’s what I was thinking when I was reading Mark’s comments about trying to find comparables for Kimbrel is that a real comparable might be Rivera. Of course, there’s no guarantees that he’ll have a career like that, and Rivera doesn’t work as a comparable for Kimbrel because the financials were different when he came up.
On the one hand, I would love for the Braves to have a dominant closer for years the way the Yankees did with Mariano, but the Braves and the Yankees are obviously two very different financial frameworks to have to work within. And even if we can afford him, there’s no guarantee he remains this dominant and stays healthy.
Unless there’s a hometown discount, the Braves won’t be able to afford Kimbrel past arbitration. But if they do trade him, how early should they do it? How much will his value go down if they wait until before his final arbitration season to shop him? It didn’t seem to hurt Prado’s value.
That’s the multi-million dollar question. TOtally depends on his performance and if there’s a big market team that needs a closer and they think they can extend him.
The late 90′s Yankees-esque teams are a thing of the past. Very few teams can afford to keep a core group of players around that are that good. And “that good” is winning 3 straight WS titles. It is highly unlikely to happen. Unless SF makes me eat my words and pulls another one out.
Great article. Off topic but what is your opinions on the Bourn deal with Cleveland. Was the deal we made with BJ a better contract than what the Indians got done with Bourn. I still don’t feel good about 5yrs-$75M for a guy who is seemingly more potential than production. Would we have been better off signing Bourn despite his age.
The deals are close. On the other hand, Boras came WAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYY down. That sort of offer wasn’t even on the table for Bourn when we were negotiating with Boras. It was clear we had to move on. If we had still been negotiating with Bourn at this time, we probably wouldn’t have been able to trade for Justin Upton.
I’d rather have BJ’s deal, because he’s both younger, and less reliant on speed. But it’s really close as well.
Agree with Franklin. Upton’s a little younger, more expensive. The problem with this, however, is that this isn’t the scenario the Braves had when they signed Upton. Upton signed quickly before the market developed, and he still had a lot of leverage. Bourn had zero. Given choosing the guy they wanted and waiting out and hoping for a market collapse, I’d rather just get the guy I want.
I think it’s also a function of where the respective teams are. The Braves are in a prime window to compete, so Wren didn’t want to just sit around hoping to be able to sign Upton or Bourn late at a discount.
Plus, he wanted to do something about either 3B or LF. As Frankin points out, who knows if we would’ve made the Upton trade if we hadn’t already signed a CF.
Cleveland, on the other hand, is rebuilding. If they get all the pieces in place this season, that’s good for them. If not, they’re not in the middle of a window that may close in the near future, so there’s not the same urgency.
There’s also the fact that the AL Central has been the easiest division to win in recent history, so it’s not like Cleveland has to gear up to compete in the AL East or West or chase down a Washington or a Cincy.
Atlanta is in a situation where they want to minimize risk. Cleveland doesn’t have as much to lose, so they can afford to take greater risks to improve their team.
also realize that Cleveland had their first pick protected and their second pick was already lost, so they lost very little by signing bourn (a competitive balance pick that’s right before the third round).
Another thing along the same lines. I wonder if the players union is going to want to try to change this system in the next CBA if it has the same impact in future offseasons. I doubt they anticipated it having as significant of an impact on FA salaries as it has.
I’m sure they will. They’re already looking for ways to get around it.
I love Kimbrel as much as any Braves fan, but I think it makes the most sense to move him after this year if he puts up another season like his first 2.
I may value the closer role less than I should, but I think it’s beyond stupid to pay that high of a percentage of payroll for a closer due to their volatility and because of the way that they are misused throughout baseball. I would much rather pay pre-arb money for a young closer who will probably blow a few more saves than $12 million dollars, even for the best reliever in baseball.
Can’t compare the Upton and Bourn deals financially. Bourn’s was a result of the market and constrained by Upton’s, I.e. you wouldn’t have gotten Bourn for 4/$48 in November.
Agree. Wren should definitely have his eyes open for offers for Kimbrel after this year. However, it shouldn’t be a Towers-style treatment of Upton where its obvious we’re trying to get rid of him. If Wren gets an offer he cant refuse, then don’t refuse it, otherwise I think you’re in pretty good shape w/ the best closer in the game.
I think we should wait until there’s a more reasonable replacement. Juan Jaime isn’t ready and it doesn’t strike me as though anybody else is either.
Don’t forget, Jordan Walden is only two years removed from a 35 save season. If he finds his control in Atlanta, there’s no reason he couldn’t save games in the short term if there’s no one on the farm ready to take Kimbrel’s place.
sure, that’s why Mark said several times *not this year*
Mark – great article man. Seriously good stuff. I agree that there are alot of different senarios that can play out over the next year, but if he does very well again the best option is to trade him(especially due to our financial hardships coming with all our young players in a few years). Another question, I have looked up craigs wikipedia and it doesn’t go into detail about his college stats, what if we were to increase his value by giving him more innings as a starter and not a reliever being held to 60 innings? I don’t have much time to research because I am at work, but has he ever been a starter in college or was he always a reliever? What we be the pros and cons of him converting like chapman has?
Moving him back into the rotation isn’t going to happen. In theory, a starting pitcher is more valuable than a reliever, but not all guys are equipped to start. He’s not stretched out, doesn’t really have a third pitch, and (more importantly) he probably shouldn’t be allowed to pitch more than 120-130 innings this year considering the innings he’s pitched over the past few years.
Now, if they would consider using him in 1+ inning stints, that could make him a little more valuable without increasing his innings too dramatically.
As for Chapman, I’m curious to see how it works out, but I wonder if the ship hasn’t already passed there.
Thanks. Im curious to see how chapman works out as well.
I could be wrong but since Smoltz returned to the rotation, the Braves have seemed to be willing to commit only 10 to 13% of their budget to the bullpen. Wickman/Soriano/Gonzo then Soriano/Gonzo then Wagner seemed to set that budget model. Things have changed since they lucked out into great cheap, cost controlled young relievers the last 2 years. But the model seemed to be one or two or three really good relievers at a cost of around $6 to $10 million joined with a collection of league minimums. So, if they trade him, it could be because he blows the bullpen budget. If he is so costly that they can’t afford anyone else in the bullpen other than league minimums, then it may not be worth it if the league minimums are not good enough. But then again it’s kinda scary to put all your eggs in the Kimbrel basket and only have a replacement level league minimum safety net under him should he get seriously injured. The Braves have usually been too risk adverse to do something like, seeming to prefer to hedge their bets with 2 or 3 relatively cheap but mostly competent set up men and closers eating up most of the bullpen budget. And if the league minimums are good enough, then does it make sense to have Kimbrel? Could be much cheaper and more cost effective to just have the league minimums set up and close if the dropoff ain’t that much.
I don’t see the Braves giving up Kimbrel for the foreseeable future. If he continues to put up similar numbers and saves, he’s here for at least the next three years.
Or at least until his contract is in its final year.
Thank goodness you don’t have a say. You sound like a stock broker. I don’t have a financial interest in the Braves…do you?
sure, in that if they spend all the money they have allotted on the bullpen, instead of extending players like Jason Heyward and Freddie Freeman, they’ll be really bad. I have an interest in them not spending their money foolishly, because I enjoy them being good.
Oddly enough, the Rays (and a few other teams) are run by former stock brokers. There’s actually quite a few similarities here. Players are assets, and buying and selling them depending on market values, etc. isn’t a terrible idea.
yeah, its crazy how managing a business with multi-million dollar contracts and interests that are often traded works a lot like managing a business with multi-million dollar contracts and interests that are often traded.
It is a bad idea if you love baseball. I see the big picture, quite clearly. It’s just ugly.
Go Corporate America!!!!
A professional sports team is a business, and most teams are run like businesses. So if you’re not looking at your sports teams in that framework, you’re missing part of the picture.
That’s really the point of this blog. To look at the team within the framework of the business realities of the game and the best knowledge we have available of talent and performance and try to anticipate good moves to make to improve the team within that framework, and to analyze how well those running the team execute within that framework.
Because throwing out trades that would get the other GM involved fired and taking on contracts that the team can’t afford or hoping to sign a player to a contract that is well below what he can get doesn’t give us a realistic view of how the team should or will move forward.
Yeah, I also like to win NOW.
I plan on being a Braves fan for the rest of my life, so I’d like them to win indefinitely.
^ BIG ASS LIKE
But I want an Oompa Loompa NOWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!
^ APPLAUSE
I’ve fully enjoyed this article. Stressing the wait and see approach is best, and it’s fortunate that Frank Wren is the GM of this team. He seems to be able to wheel and deal with the best, bringing out trades that most of us see as improbable, if not impossible.
I’m never against trading a guy if it helps the team.
Excellent article, Mark. My first reaction was “oh fuck no he didnt just write that” but as I read on, your analysis and argument were incredibly persuasive. I wholeheartedly agree with your approach….even though it’ll break my fucking heart.
I’m all about our Braves using saber and giving the phillies a “moneyball” to the face…but I just dont want to have a bottom third payroll.
Craig Kimbrel could end up having the same type of career as Mariano Rivera or could end up having a Mark Wohlers type career. While Wohlers was never anywhere near as good as Kimbrel is he was very good but had a very sure career as a dominate closer before injuries got to him. If anyone ever needs to ask the question of why would the Braves ever consider trading Kimbrel they need to look no further than Wohlers.
While I would love to see the Braves be able to keep Kimbrel around it’s simply not wise for them to keep him if it means losing guys like Heyward, Freeman and Justin Upton to do it.
*^^^That should say short career, not sure.
u have lost it or never had it to begin with. wow. kids, this is why we say NO to drugs
Mark, I apologize to you if I don’t seem real eager to jump into a forced awkward intimate situation that people like to call trading the greatest closer in the game. I don’t like the feeling. You’re sitting there, you’re wondering am I getting enough back, should I ask for Wil Myers, am I talking too much, are they talking enough, am I interested? I’m not really interested, should I play like I’m interested but I’m not that interested but I think the Yankees might be interested but do I want to be interested but now their not interested? So all of the sudden I’m getting, I’m starting to get interested… And when am I supposed to low-ball them? Do I have to wait for the door cause then it’s awkward, it’s like well talk to you tomorrow. Do you do like that ass-out pr release? Where you like, you both release the trade rumour through unnamed sources like this and your ass sticks out cause you’re trying not to get too close or do you just go right in and trade ‘em straight up for that kid outta San Diego State? It’s very difficult trying to read the situation. And all the while you’re just really wondering are we gonna get hopped up enough to convince Ted Turner to take us out to the Cheetah Lounge? Perhaps play a little game called “earn the save”. Just for a second, just to see if Jordan Walden’s herky-jerky delivery can work in the ninth inning. Or, ouch, ouch Adam LaRoche just took Venters deep.
Mark: Okay…
Jeremy Grey: OK, can you, can you put that trade proposal somewhere Kimbrel can’t see it? Thank you. Hey, Mark… great talk.
(JK, of course.)
A little Wedding Crashers quote turned baseball talk…..interesting…..I like it however.
Awesome.
The article makes sense, but in my mind the question is:
Can you win a WS without a truly dominant closer?
In my mind that’s why it would be very difficult to trade him.
I dont think Brian Wilson last year was truly dominant. The Cardinals didn’t have a truly dominant closer in ’11
Not trying to be that guy, but Sergio Romo was the Giants’ closer during the postseason and much of the regular season and he was fantastic. In 2011, the Cardinals had Jason Motte as their closer. He throws 100 mph and is the closest relief pitcher I have seen to Kimbrel.
Just a thought.
sure, but neither of them are or were established dominant closers. Sure they pitched well then, but the question wasn’t whether you need your bullpen to pitch well, it’s whether you need an established dominant closer.