Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mt200. Show Mt200's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    Link doesn't work
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    The Sox will acquire another closer type.  Melancon deal didn't complete the bullpen but it sure didn't hurt.
     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from sportsbozo1. Show sportsbozo1's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer:
    Thanks Mt200. I copied and pasted the article.
    Posted by 2004Idiots
    I guess Sean didn't read Melancon's stats from last year! The kid saved 20 of 25 in Houston on arguably the worst team in baseball!!! His W/K ratio wasn't much different than Paps as he posted 8.3/3.4 based upon 9 innnings or in simple math 2 to 1 strikeouts to walks. If the Sox move Bard to the rotation then it is highly likely that Melancon gets a legitimate shot at the closers job and he fights it out with whoever else is competing for the job.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer:
    Hfxsoxnut : We already had a great closer in Papelbon. Do you agree that it was a mistake to let him go?
    Posted by 2004Idiots


    It's too early to say.  Papelbon was a great closer.  He was also extremely expensive to retain.  Also, I think he may have already checked out, I think maybe he had already decided to move on.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    Sox had a pretty lousy pitching staff in 2011 and just lost Papelbon to free agency, so of course Melancon doesn't "fix" the Sox pitching.  But he sure helps. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from bbenton87. Show bbenton87's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    Melancon certainly helps the cause, it will also help that the Sox won't have "Beer Run" John and Wake two starters that in almost every if not every other start had to be relieved by the bullpen after 3-4 innings.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    In Response to Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer:
    Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems Wednesday represented a flurry of activity for the Red Sox, who traded two players for reliever Mark Melancon and signed free agent utility infielder Nick Punto. But when it was over, the Red Sox hadn't made much progress toward solving their most obvious needs -- the back end of their starting rotation and a closer. They merely gave themselves more options from which to choose, which is a polite way of saying that they succeeded in making things, for the time being at least, more complicated. Melancon is unlikely to start 2012 as the team's closer. If he does, it should be read as an indcitment of the front office. All of which isn't to suggest that Melancon is without value. He's young (26), apparently healthy (following Tommy John surgery earlier in his career) and controllable (he doesn't reach free agency until after the 2016 season). And Melancon provides a quality arm, someone who can help in the seventh or eighth innings. Entrusting Melancon with the ninth inning, however, is another matter altogether. For now, there's little evidence that Melancon can handle closing in the American League East. He converted just 80 percent of his save opportunties in the N.L. Central in 2011. It's worth noting that against opponents from the A.L. East -- the Astros happened to play the division in interleague play last season -- Melancon allowed A.L. East batter to hit .351 with a 1.061 OPS. True, it's a relatively small sample size (seven games). But it suggests that the Melancon may need more experience -- or another quality pitch -- before he can handle the toughest outs in the toughest lineups. Just because Melancon isn't yet equipped to close doesn't mean the deal wasn't worthwhile. Kyle Weiland profiles as a back-end starter and the Red Sox have plenty of candidates for that slot, including Alfredo Aceves, Felix Doubront and Andrew Miller. It was all but certain that Weiland was going to start the season at Triple A. If he develops into much more than depth starter in the big leagues, most scouts will be surprised. For the Sox, moving Jed Lowrie was the bigger gamble. Lowrie had value around the game, thanks to his versatility and affordability. At the very least, he can be a useful, flexible part of a big league roster, capable of playing all four infield positions and providing some pop at the plate -- at least from the right side. But Lowrie was given chance after chance to establish himself as something more with the Red Sox, and outside of three terrific months -- July and August in 2010 and mid-April through mid-May of 2011 -- never truly made his case as an everyday player. Only once in four seasons did he play more than half a season, his career stalled by a series of injuries and infirmities -- everything from a lingering wrist injury to mononucleosis to a shoulder issue. Perhaps, with a fresh start and an opportunity to play every day, Lowrie will make good on his potential. But the Red Sox essentially replace Lowrie within hours of his departure with the signing of Nick Punto, a veteran utility piece who, like Lowrie, is a switch-hitter. Roughly translated, then, the Sox got an older, more experienced version of Lowrie Wednesday and traded a potential back-end starter for a late-inning reliever with upside. In the strictest sense, that represents a small step forward in terms of roster-building for 2012. What it doesn't represent, for now at least, is any clearer sense of who's going to be getting the toughest outs. It gives the Sox more options without precluding further moves, some of which will surely be coming. Or else.                  
    Posted by 2004Idiots


    Thats correct, Melencon "although I think he was a good deal" is completely unproven on a big market team and the pressure that comes along with it.  Guys like Madson, Garza etc. have played for these teams and would be great additions as well.

    If we added just Madson and Garza our SP and pen would be ready to take on anyone.  Keep Bard in the pen as well and let Aceves start, if it doesn't work out reverse the roles but I truly believe that's all we need along with a RF who can hit lefties.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from bbenton87. Show bbenton87's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    People put way to much stock into the big market-small market argument last time I checked Rays fans still expect them to win they just don't show up until after the game.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    For now, there's little evidence that Melancon can handle closing in the American League East. He converted just 80 percent of his save opportunties in the N.L. Central in 2011.

    It should be noted that 2 of the blown saves were setup blown saves.  The true 9th inning saves, he was 20-23, which compares favorably with anyone.

    He also finished well.  From 7/2 on, he saved 14-16, with a 2.29 ERA, a Whip of ~ 1.00, a K/W of 33/10 in 35.1 IPs, and a .557 OPSa.

    To me, it isn't a question of whether or not he can close, it is whether or not we want Madson for the money.  I think Madson is an upgrade over Melancon, but guys like KRod or Codero probably aren't.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer:
    For now, there's little evidence that Melancon can handle closing in the American League East. He converted just 80 percent of his save opportunties in the N.L. Central in 2011. It should be noted that 2 of the blown saves were setup blown saves.  The true 9th inning saves, he was 20-23, which compares favorably with anyone. He also finished well.  From 7/2 on, he saved 14-16, with a 2.29 ERA, a Whip of ~ 1.00, a K/W of 33/10 in 35.1 IPs, and a .557 OPSa. To me, it isn't a question of whether or not he can close, it is whether or not we want Madson for the money.  I think Madson is an upgrade over Melancon, but guys like KRod or Codero probably aren't.
    Posted by Joebreidey


    I'm with you Joe, 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Teakus. Show Teakus's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    It should be obvious to anyone that, of course, we still need to nab a closer capable reliever. This is especially true if Bard's going to start until Dice K returns in August (or more likely forever). I think Bailey is going to be cost prohibitive, as his market value climbs daily while his intrinsic value stays where it is. This apparent decision to stay under the luxury tax threshold means we've either got to dump salary, (Scutero, Salty or someone else), or trade away our top tiered talent. No wonder Theo ran for the hills a year early. His proverbial chickens are just now coming home to roost. Can anyone have imagined the Boston Red Sox not even being in a position to give consideration to Prince Fielder, Albert Pujols, Yu Darvish, et al? Wasn't it known that these players would be available this season, and might it not have been possible to have planned accordingly? The bottom line for me is that Theo was given a huge purse to work with, and he blew it in a thousand different ways over the years. I think if Andrew Friedman of Tampa Bay were our GM and given our resources, he'd likely made us a powerhouse each season, AND looked down the road as well. The man knows well how to assess talent, and doesn't need "Carmine" to call the shots for him. Just sayin'.................... 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtDawgSox. Show DirtDawgSox's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer:
    Hfxsoxnut : We already had a great closer in Papelbon. Do you agree that it was a mistake to let him go?
    Posted by 2004Idiots

    Big mistake in my opinion. This is going to come back to bite the Sox.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    Did/does anyone, anywhere think that Melancon is definitely closer material for the Sox?  I don't;  I think he might be, but certainly should be a good addition to the bullpen.  And he cost us virtually nothing from the 2012 team.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from sjddaj. Show sjddaj's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    No one is saying that Paplbon wasn't good or that we may miss him at times.  Why are so many acting like we wanted to get rid of Papelbon?  That wasn't the case at all.

    More than that, Papelbon wanted to get rid of us.  His locker was the only one cleaned out ofter the season (before he even signed witht he Phillies).  Plus, as good as he is, he isn't worth the money.  We would miss Gonzo if was to leave us.  But, in order to keep him if it would cost us 35 million a year, would you take it just because we would miss him if he wasn't there? 

    Just because a player may be needed or will be missed, doesn't mean you pay what ever ridiculous amount to keep them.  Everyone has a price. 
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    Disagree. Red Sox need one decent 2nd tier pen arm. Starting pitching makes pens look good or bad over the 2nd half of a season. Starting pitching is where budget must be prioritized, and there are exactly zero closers left on market who are a value at more than a few million a year.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from never1954. Show never1954's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    Why would anyone feel like we let Paps go?  He wanted to leave and chose to.  As for Melancon.....very good addition for the price but certainly not the end all.  Lots of work to do with the pitching staff.  How about get a pitching coach?  Free agents are going to be hesitant if they don't know who is coaching and FA pick ups are going to be made with out input. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Teakus. Show Teakus's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    But we have a solid group of starters now, do we not? With Bard joining Lester,Bucholtz and Lester we have a great group. We also have a thin pen, missing either a closer or a set-up man depending on where they use Melancon+Acevas. Both guys strike me as better set-up men than closers, so I think we gotta bring in someone.  The rest of the pen will fill out ok, but I'd feel more confident with a stud closer, assuming we don't need to offer the world to get him. If the doors close on us, I'd go into battle with what we have and see what's available come July.




    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer:
    Disagree. Red Sox need one decent 2nd tier pen arm. Starting pitching makes pens look good or bad over the 2nd half of a season. Starting pitching is where budget must be prioritized, and there are exactly zero closers left on market who are a value at more than a few million a year.
    Posted by hankwilliams

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer:
    But we have a solid group of starters now, do we not? With Bard joining Lester,Bucholtz and Lester we have a great group. We also have a thin pen, missing either a closer or a set-up man depending on where they use Melancon+Acevas. Both guys strike me as better set-up men than closers, so I think we gotta bring in someone.  The rest of the pen will fill out ok, but I'd feel more confident with a stud closer, assuming we don't need to offer the world to get him. If the doors close on us, I'd go into battle with what we have and see what's available come July. In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer :
    Posted by Teakus


    Potentially, yes, but a lot of questions.  Lester/Beckett are good bets to perform well again, but Buchholz is coming back from a back injury so hard to predict his performance in 2012.  Bard has never started a game in Ted's MFL so I find it very difficult to imagine him pitching, say, 180 innings and then into the playoffs.  Nbr 5 pretty black hole-ish today.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from xxxcrwn. Show xxxcrwn's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer:
    Why are so many acting like we wanted to get rid of Papelbon?  That wasn't the case at all. More than that, Papelbon wanted to get rid of us. His locker was the only one cleaned out ofter the blown save that would have gotten the RS in to the post-season (before he even signed witht he Phillies). 
    Posted by sjddaj


    Fixed it for you. How soon they forget.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Teakus. Show Teakus's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    Good points all, but remember also we have Dice possibly returning in August. Maybe is a big word, I do know. :p




    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer:
    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer : Potentially, yes, but a lot of questions.  Lester/Beckett are good bets to perform well again, but Buchholz is coming back from a back injury so hard to predict his performance in 2012.  Bard has never started a game in Ted's MFL so I find it very difficult to imagine him pitching, say, 180 innings and then into the playoffs.  Nbr 5 pretty black hole-ish today.
    Posted by SonicsMonksLyresVicars

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer:
    Good points all, but remember also we have Dice possibly returning in August. Maybe is a big word, I do know. :p In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer :
    Posted by Teakus


    I'm with you 100% on Matsuzaka.  First two years very good performance, if a bit hair-raising at times and frustrating at others.  Then after 3.5 years he needed TJ surgery, which suggests to me he might have struggled with injury for, oh, 1.5 years or so.

    Same thing with Lackey.  His elbow didn't explode like Nolan Ryan's did, it wore out and the guy tried to pitch through it....and largely failed.  But people forget he agreed to an extra contract year for the league minimum if he need that specific procedure which suggests 1)  he knew it wasn't entirely healthy, and 2) the Sox knew too.

    Hey, I know, let's sh*t all over the guys that try to pitch through pain!  Let's not forget the RSI all the sh*tters are getting abusing - anonymously - these guys.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from susan250. Show susan250's posts

    Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer

    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer:
    In Response to Re: Do you agree with Sean McAdam? Melancon deal doesn't solve Sox problems-they still need a closer : Potentially, yes, but a lot of questions.  Lester/Beckett are good bets to perform well again, but Buchholz is coming back from a back injury so hard to predict his performance in 2012.  Bard has never started a game in Ted's MFL so I find it very difficult to imagine him pitching, say, 180 innings and then into the playoffs.  Nbr 5 pretty black hole-ish today.
    Posted by SonicsMonksLyresVicars

    Definitely agree with you.  The Red Sox pitching is still suspect for next season.  If Bard doesn't prove to be a good starter he could end up back in the bullpen.  Buchholz definitely may not recover from his back injury and could never be an effective pitcher again.  Back injuries to the average person can linger for years and some even retire with back problems.  I would imagine that a professional athlete could also experience similar problems.  Definitely a lot of uncertainty concerning Buchholz.  It is still early but I would imagine that the Red Sox will still sign more pitchers, both bullpen help and starting pitching. 
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share