I hate seeing another disappointing Craig Kimbrel outing with the White Sox. It’s not like I’m rooting for the White Sox, specifically, though I’m not one of the Cubs fans who hates them. If it’s good for baseball in Chicago, then it’s good by me. But when Kimbrel disappoints, it just bothers me that he’s a guy who was back on his Hall of Fame trajectory with the Cubs, and then the White Sox decide to use him in a general-purpose setup role. Instant struggles.
So you had things like Kimbrel giving up that three-run homer to the Cubs at Wrigley, you had Tony La Russa pulling Kimbrel in favor of a lefty last week, and now you had Kimbrel giving up the lead run in the 8th inning last night on a couple wild pitches. I don’t like it.
Kimbrel now has a 5.79 ERA over his 10 appearances with the White Sox (9.1 innings). Ugly. And noticing it this morning got me thinking about the guy the Cubs acquired in the Kimbrel trade – no, not Nick Madrigal, but the reliever who put the deal over the top for the Cubs.
The Cubs have high hopes for Codi Heuer, who was stellar in his rookie season with the Sox in 2020, but took a step back earlier this year as he struggled with his sinker. He had a great outing last night, so that’s also what had me curious about the contrast of the two pitchers since the trade. For Heuer with the Cubs, it’s a mere 1.50 ERA over 10 appearances (12.0 innings). Heuer, a setup man, has gotten dramatically better results than Kimbrel, a setup man, since the trade. Weird.
Your big caveat is that Kimbrel has the much better strikeout rate and better walk rate, too, and there’s a lot of funkiness in a tiny sample like this that doesn’t really prove Heuer has been better than Kimbrel after the trade. Only that he’s seen better results. And in a much lower-leverage team situation, too.
I would not bet on Heuer out-pitching Kimbrel in 2022, so let’s be clear on that. But, since we’ve started down this path, I have to point out that, in the swap, the Cubs got Heuer for several more years (he won’t even start arbitration until 2023), and forewent only the 2022 option year for Craig Kimbrel at $16 million. If those dollars were repurposed for a starting pitcher, for example, you could argue the Cubs are way better off in 2022 with Heuer+starter than they would’ve been keeping Kimbrel. And that, of course, ignores the presence of Nick Madrigal, who was clearly the top piece in the trade. Just kind of an interesting thing to think about in relation to Heuer. (Don’t go TOO far with this exercise, though, because part of the “cost” of trading Kimbrel is whatever else you could’ve gotten in trade from some other team instead of Madrigal/Heuer. You forewent that, too.)
Heuer, by the way, has an ERA barely above 2.00 since his last appearance in June. It’s possible he was already righting the ship a bit long before the Cubs acquired him. But if they can also help him improve a bit, then it’s clear that the stuff will play in a setup/closer role in the future. There’s a reason the Cubs targeted him in the trade, preferring the White Sox big league package to a bundle of pure prospects.
As for Kimbrel, I’d love to see him settle into a rhythm, but I’m not sure how well it happens while he isn’t closing. What that’ll mean for his 2022 season – the White Sox wouldn’t keep him around to be the 8th inning guy behind Hendriks, right? surely the trade was just about this stretch run, with an intention of trading him in the offseason, right? – remains to be seen.