• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Kluber Traded to Rangers

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Derek said:
Honestly, I think there are a lot of people who would be much happier if we had the exact same team we do now, but were paying each guy double his current salary.
Click to expand...
You hit the nail on the head, here.
 
The Human Q-Tip said:
Because they could both dump his salary and acquire some talent in trade if they picked it up.
Click to expand...
Still, there was always the risk they couldn't find anything. The motivation behind the trade was not a salary dump, but rather wanting to get something for a diminishing asset.

If all they wanted was to get some assets and get his salary off the books, they would have made a deal last summer. Unfortunately, Kluber struggled and then got hurt, which tanked his value.

They could have saved the same amount of money last summer and gotten better talent. They gambled that they could get more, and lost that gamble. It doesn't mean they just wanted to get off his contract.
 
Last edited:
The Wizard of Moz said:
This just seems like selling Kluber at the absolute valley. This exact deal wouldn’t have been available if Kluber flames out in his first 7 starts next year? We really got next to nothing so I find it hard to believe we couldn’t also get next to nothing if Kluber didn’t rebound
Click to expand...

Kluber's availability was well advertised, and any team that wanted him was free to make an offer. So this wasn't a shock sale where other teams didn't know he was available and so didn't bid. Despite that, not a single team in the league truly thought Kluber was worth more than we got, else they'd have made that better offer and acquired him themselves. What does that tell you about his overall value around the league?

Kluber's 34, and his trajectory has been downward. He's had injury issues, he's going to be making $18M this year, and this is the last year of his contract. If he would have flamed out after his first 7 starts next year, why would anyone have traded a significant asset for him? The odds of him making a later season comeback, returning to the form of a No. 1 or No. 2, and then staying healthy and consistent for the playoffs would have been a longshot. That's certainly not what happened last year. So if he'd flamed out after 7 games, teams would be asking themselves if their $18M and 100 mph prospect might be able to get themselves something better than an aging 34 year old who just flamed out, and who would be a free agent at the end of the season anyway.

So no, I don't think that deal would have been available under your conditions. And if you think his value would still have been that high, then you'd have to question why nobody was willing to offer that right now, before he flamed out.
 
Last edited:
Derek said:
So, you agree it was about acquiring talent and not about dumping salary?
Click to expand...

Those two things are inherently interrelated. We don't know what the budget or plan is, and if trading Kluber allows us to sign or retain someone else of value, then calling it a dump really isn't fair. Especially considering we also did get at least some legitimate talent in return.
 
Lets see if they invest the savings and make a call after that. They picked up his option..... traded him....we now have a decent BP option .... and if they spend the savings on a player or 2..... evaluate then.
Way too early to call this a only a salary dump.
 
The Human Q-Tip said:
Kluber's availability was well advertised, and any team that wanted him was free to make an offer. So this wasn't a shock sale where other teams didn't know he was available and so didn't bid. Despite that, not a single team in the league truly thought Kluber was worth more than we got, else they'd have made that better offer and acquired him themselves. What does that tell you about his overall value around the league?

Kluber's 34, and his trajectory has been downward. He's had injury issues, he's going to be making $18M this year, and this is the last year of his contract. If he would have flamed out after his first 7 starts next year, why would anyone have traded a significant asset for him? The odds of him making a later season comeback, returning to the form of a No. 1 or No. 2, and then staying healthy and consistent for the playoffs would have been a longshot. That's certainly not what happened last year. So if he'd flamed out after 7 games, teams would be asking themselves if their $18M and 100 mph prospect might be able to get themselves something better than an aging 34 year old who just flamed out, and who would be a free agent at the end of the season anyway.

So no, I don't think that deal would have been available under your conditions. And if you think his value would still have been that high, then you'd have to question why nobody was willing to offer that right now, before he flamed out.
Click to expand...
I would have MUCH rather just held onto him then if this was his value. Because this return was substantially less than what I personally believe Kluber will perform over the rest of his contract. Relievers have extremely limited value and substantial volatility year to year unless they are the absolute elite of elite.

I’ll put It this way, even if Clase goes on to be a Brad Hand type pitcher I hate the return. To me it’s a bag of peanuts and a salary dump. And an embarrassing job by the front office. I think my main point is that no one traded a significant asset for him as is. Oh boy a potential 2 WAR relief pitcher, yippee! Would much rather bank on Kluber rebounding. But the Indians aren’t in the business of taking risks when money is on the line
 
Derek said:
Still, there was always the risk they couldn't find anything. The motivation behind the trade was not a salary dump, but rather wanting to get something for a diminishing asset.

If all they wanted was to get some assets and get his salary off the books, they would have made a deal last summer. Unfortunately, Kluber struggled and then got hurt, which tanked his value.

They could have saved the same amount of money last summer and gotten better talent. They gambled that they could get more, and lost that gamble. It doesn't mean they just wanted to get off his contract.
Click to expand...
Well holy fuck, somewhere Birdy69 can finally call Corey Kluber a flash in the pan.
 
Stark said:
Had a 2.89 ERA, 3.12 FIP, 0.99 WHIP, the best BB/9 rate in the American League, 5.9 bWAR, and was 3rd in the AL Cy Young voting in 2018.

Had a rough start to last year and then got smoked by a liner.

I was fine with trading Kluber (although I'm not incredibly happy with the return), but lets not diminish what he accomplished here. He was a flat-out ace caliber pitcher for us from 2013-2018 and was one of the biggest reasons we made it to game seven of the World Series. I think there's a legitimate argument that you could make that at his peak, he was the best starter in Indians history, and at the very least, he's top-3.
Click to expand...

There is a very important stat you are missing here. His hard hit percentage has jumped almost 10 percentage points over the last 2 seasons, to a decently high 38%.
 
The Wizard of Moz said:
I would have MUCH rather just held onto him then if this was his value. Because this return was substantially less than what I personally believe Kluber will perform over the rest of his contract. Relievers have extremely limited value and substantial volatility year to year unless they are the absolute elite of elite.

I’ll put It this way, even if Clase goes on to be a Brad Hand type pitcher I hate the return. To me it’s a bag of peanuts and a salary dump. And an embarrassing job by the front office. I think my main point is that no one traded a significant asset for him as is. Oh boy a potential 2 WAR relief pitcher, yippee! Would much rather bank on Kluber rebounding. But the Indians aren’t in the business of taking risks when money is on the line
Click to expand...

You can't consider Kluber's true value unless you factor in that $18M/year salary, which is likely about 15% of our payroll. So the real question is whether what else we can acquire with that $18M, plus the players we received, is equal to or greater in value than Kluber?

I don't think that's a slam dunk. Kluber's health/durability is a huge question mark for me, and I'm not sure it is wise for a mid/small market team (based on revenues) to have that much money tied up in that big a question mark. Especially one who is sure to be gone after this season anyway.
 
Last edited:
I'm ok with the deal. I like the young arm. I don't care for DeShields, but he's better than some of the options we have in the outfield. Which is depressing enough to think about, but whatever. Kluber is done as an elite pitcher. I wanted to trade him last offseason. This is about what he's worth now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top