The Best Relief Pitcher Who Might Be Available (Title Edited)

[RZNJ]

8 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The Miller trade was a great trade and one you should make 100 times out of 100.

This isn’t that because we have way more options to improve the team right now vs what we could do in the middle of the 2014 season.

So we traded the #65 prospect for a pitcher who hadn’t shown any consistency or real success until the 4 months before we traded for him.  That trade we should make 100 of 100 times.

But trading the #62 prospect for almost the same exact type pitcher who actually had more success in a full season and who we’d get for 6 months instead of two.  That one is horrendous and laughable.   LOL

[RZNJ]

10 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Miller had a 3.35 and 2.64 ERA the two prior years, and 4.5 and 5.0 BB/9.  Scott was at 4.31 ERA the prior year with a 6.0 BB/9.  Also, as SG pointed out, Miller was traded in the middle of a dominant season.  He wasn’t likely to reverse course command-wise overnight.   I’d be more worried about Scott losing whatever worked over a long offseason   

Saying all that, I don’t think Scott is that risky.  And a full season > two months.  
 

Miller was used as a LOOGY.  He faced significantly more LH batters in 2012 and about 50/50 in 2013.  You can see he averaged way under an inning per appearance.  53 games. 40 IP.  37 games. 30 IP.   

[Frobby]

28 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Miller was used as a LOOGY.  He faced significantly more LH batters in 2012 and about 50/50 in 2013.  You can see he averaged way under an inning per appearance.  53 games. 40 IP.  37 games. 30 IP.   

I’d say he was a LOOGY in 2012.  Not really in 2013.   His low IP were largely a function of a July injury that ended his season. In any event, I think we’re kind of splitting hairs here.  The bigger point viz. risk is that Miller was traded during a dominant season, not in between seasons where you really don’t know how he’ll be next year.   But as I said, it’s not that risky, just more risky IMO.

The main point, which is getting lost in this trivia, is that even a year (or less) of a dominant reliever can come at a pretty high price in terms of trade.  The Yankees got Gleyber Torres and 3 other prospects for Aroldis Chapman, for example.  Scott’s not at that level, but his trade value is high.  

[oriolediehard]

How about we sign Jordan Hicks and we don't have to give up players?? I think we would get burned getting Tanner Scott??

 

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, oriolediehard said:

How about we sign Jordan Hicks and we don't have to give up players?? I think we would get burned getting Tanner Scott??

 

You can get burned on any of them.

[RZNJ]

5 minutes ago, oriolediehard said:

How about we sign Jordan Hicks and we don't have to give up players?? I think we would get burned getting Tanner Scott??

 

Would you give Hicks 3/30 or the 4/40 MLBTR projects?   If so, has he ever had a season similar to what Tanner Scott did last year?

[Rbiggs2525]

I like the Idea of trading for Michael King. Yankees need to get younger. 

[Sports Guy]

8 hours ago, Frobby said:

I’d say he was a LOOGY in 2012.  Not really in 2013.   His low IP were largely a function of a July injury that ended his season. In any event, I think we’re kind of splitting hairs here.  The bigger point viz. risk is that Miller was traded during a dominant season, not in between seasons where you really don’t know how he’ll be next year.   But as I said, it’s not that risky, just more risky IMO.

The main point, which is getting lost in this trivia, is that even a year (or less) of a dominant reliever can come at a pretty high price in terms of trade.  The Yankees got Gleyber Torres and 3 other prospects for Aroldis Chapman, for example.  Scott’s not at that level, but his trade value is high.  

I don’t think we will find out although if I was Miami I wouldn’t trust him and I would trade him.

That said, Miami believes they are a contender and even with Alcantara out, they still have a lot of pitching. 
 

For the Os, I think Scott is just too uncertain to trade too much for him. If that was their only need, I may feel differently but they have several needs imo and I would rather use Ortiz (and others) to fetch a higher end piece.

Now, if Miami was interested in Hays or Santander and a deal for built around either of them and Scott was possible, that’s a different story.

[HakunaSakata]

3 hours ago, Rbiggs2525 said:

I like the Idea of trading for Michael King. Yankees need to get younger. 

I applaud you for being interested in King, but I think trading for him is an unrealistic pipe dream. Also, there's zero change they move him back the bullpen after what he did last season. 

1. King's only 28. 

2. He ws absolutely untouchable when they moved him into the starting rotation last season. 

3. When have the Yankees ever gone into full rebuild mode? 

4. When was the last time the Yankees made a trade with the Orioles (i.e., one of their division rivals)?

[HakunaSakata]

I'm curious why folks seem to be so fixated on Jordan Hicks in the various threads. There are several other very good FA RP options. Hader, Neris, Peralta, M. Moore, ,Hudson, Robertson, etc. 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/free-agents/relief-pitcher/

[sportsfan8703]

I like Kimbrel for closer. We were able to battle off losing Bautista in September, but that was with expanded rosters, and the rest of the team playing lights out. Bautista could’ve very well been our MVP last year. 

Kimbrel has a ton of experience. He posted really good numbers last year. His playoff experience would be huge for this team. 

Also, notice how we don’t see a 3/21 contract prediction on MLBTR like a lot were thinking about Fuji. A deal could happen there. 

Kimbrel 2/20

Fuji 1/7

Lopez milb deal w/ST invite

Rule 5 and waiver claims

[sportsfan8703]

Kimbrel is at 417 saves. We offer a lot of save chances if he’s trying to hit 500 for his career. He could probably hit 500 on a 2 year deal. That could be the tie breaker with us versus another team trying to sign him. 

[SemperFi]

10 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Kimbrel is at 417 saves. We offer a lot of save chances if he’s trying to hit 500 for his career. He could probably hit 500 on a 2 year deal. That could be the tie breaker with us versus another team trying to sign him. 

Why do you think he would get save opportunities in front of Bautista in '25?

[sportsfan8703]

4 minutes ago, SemperFi said:

Why do you think he would get save opportunities in front of Bautista in '25?

The knife. We also ride our closer pretty hard. Back to back games. 2 out of 3. 3 out of 4. A 2nd year of Kimbrel getting most of the closer work would allow us to protect our longer term investment in Bautista. At least it could be a 50/50 type of time share in save opps. 

Plus, we’d get a Wetteland/Rivera type set up in the playoffs. Shorten the game. That could be a huge weapon the next two years in the playoffs. 

A guy like Robertson is a good reliever that can get you some saves. Kimbrel is a HOF closer. Just give him the two year deal. 

Edited November 9, 2023 by sportsfan8703

[RZNJ]

40 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

I like Kimbrel for closer. We were able to battle off losing Bautista in September, but that was with expanded rosters, and the rest of the team playing lights out. Bautista could’ve very well been our MVP last year. 

Kimbrel has a ton of experience. He posted really good numbers last year. His playoff experience would be huge for this team. 

Also, notice how we don’t see a 3/21 contract prediction on MLBTR like a lot were thinking about Fuji. A deal could happen there. 

Kimbrel 2/20

Fuji 1/7

Lopez milb deal w/ST invite

Rule 5 and waiver claims

Kimbrel on a 1/10 deal is a possibility.  He does have a lot of playoff experience but a lot of it is bad.  A 4.50 ERA and WHIP over 1.4.   And the HOF meant squat when he got knocked around in the playoffs this year.  No way on a two year deal.  A big maybe on a 1/10 deal.
 

 

Edited November 9, 2023 by RZNJ