KRod and Clippard were some of my suggestions, yes, but you are neglecting to mention the rest of my suggestion: use the players we gave for Kimbrel, add others and get Sale or Quintana (or Carrasco) back then.
We could possibly have Quintana and Sale with an average or better closer right now, or we could have struck out totally. I get the risk.
I do think closers making $13M a year should not cost 4 prospects, even now with the inflated costs of closers. Margot was not a "marginal prospect", and several GMs seems to adhere to the notion that closers are not as valuable as some non analytic minded, non trendy fans seem to think they are. Plus, Kimbrel was not all that great in 2016, anyways.
Last edited by moonslav59; 12-03-2017 at 10:08 PM.
If we had hung on to Margot, would we have needed to rush benintendi to the majors?
If we had hung into Shaw, would we have needed to rush devers to the majors?
Desperate dave has a problem figuring out how to build a team properly so it has adequate front line players and adequate depth.
We need to abandon the fruitless search for an ultra expense big bat and build sensibly with necessary depth.
That means an affordable first baseman with some power and upside (Adams), another mid level starter, and two relievers.
Yes, and these GM's are called "Losers". Eight of the ten playoff teams had a closer that finished in the top ten of closers.
On the local front, the Sox were 22-19 in one-run games and won the division by 2 games. IMHO anyone who thinks that the Sox would have won their division without an outstanding closer isn't being realistic.
It's a mere moment in a man's life between the All-Star game and the Old Timer's game.
-Vin Scully
Last edited by SoxnCycles; 12-04-2017 at 08:14 AM.
“The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons.” -Ralph Waldo Emerson
"When you're dead, you don't know you're dead.
It's only difficult for other people.
It works the same way for stupid."