The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    Great analysis by Peter Abraham. Through the first two years of Papelbon's contract with the Phillies, the Red Sox have gotten nothing out of it. Papelbon has saved 43/47 chances.

    From the $$ cost aspect, the Red Sox have spent about $1 Million less than what it would have cost keeping Papelbon.


    Ouch.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    In response to ADG's comment:

    Great analysis by Peter Abraham. Through the first two years of Papelbon's contract with the Phillies, the Red Sox have gotten nothing out of it. Papelbon has saved 43/47 chances.

    From the $$ cost aspect, the Red Sox have spent about $1 Million less than what it would have cost keeping Papelbon.


    Ouch.



    A million less? I don't get the math. Is softy your statistician?

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

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    "The rest of the "ride was going to be down hill !!!!!"

    Well his ERA has been terrific since he left and he's been far more durable than our closers. At a cheaper price (so far).

    Do you have another view on this other than your fantasy that he went downhill when he did not? 

    The Sox clearly made a mistake on Pap - the only rebuttal would be: would he have re-signed here under any circumstances? It seemed like he was out the door regardless of what the Sox were planning to offer...

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    Papelbon:

    • 4 years/$50M (2012-15), plus 2016 vesting option
      • signed by Philadelphia as a free agent 11/14/11
      • 12:$11,000,058, 13-15: $13M annually, 16:$13M vesting option
      • 2016 option guaranteed with 55 games finished in 2015 or 100 games finished in 2014-15  
      • Bailey:
      • 1 year/$4.1M (2013)
        • re-signed by Boston 1/18/13 (avoided arbitration)
      • 1 year/$3.9M (2012)
        • signed by Boston 1/25/12 (avoided arbitration, $4.7M-$3.35M)
        • performance bonuses: $50,000 each for 50, 55 games finished

     

    Aceves was going to be in the pen, even if Bailey didn't get hurt. He didn't cost any extra. Jenks may have been signed even if we kept Papelbon.

    Can someone explain how Papelbon was at a "cheaper price"?

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

           Papelbon is sorely missed. This forum is funny in that , no matter how obvious something may be , there is no shortage of posters ready to refute it. One time I mentioned Ted Williams statement that hitting a baseball was the toughest thing in sports. Sure enough , some guy came on asking if Williams ever played soccer , climbed Everest or cliff dived , etc. Just have to laugh. People will totally ignore reality and look for ways to support their opinions. Or just be disagreeable. Seriously , if you don't think we have missed Papelbon, you are delusional. 

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    In response to stapleton's comment:

    Who cares if the team has missed Papelbon.....we saved John Henry some money!



    It would be one thing if the money saved was used wisely. But it has been squandered , much like the Sox scoring opportunities of late. Sadly , some so - called Sox fans are hoping and praying that Pap falters before his contract is up. That would somehow make them feel better. What's done is done. But it is hard to correct mistakes when you will not even admit that mistakes were made. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Papelbon:

    • 4 years/$50M (2012-15), plus 2016 vesting option
      • signed by Philadelphia as a free agent 11/14/11
      • 12:$11,000,058, 13-15: $13M annually, 16:$13M vesting option
      • 2016 option guaranteed with 55 games finished in 2015 or 100 games finished in 2014-15  
      • Bailey:
      • 1 year/$4.1M (2013)
        • re-signed by Boston 1/18/13 (avoided arbitration)
      • 1 year/$3.9M (2012)
        • signed by Boston 1/25/12 (avoided arbitration, $4.7M-$3.35M)
        • performance bonuses: $50,000 each for 50, 55 games finished

     Aceves was going to be in the pen, even if Bailey didn't get hurt. He didn't cost any extra. Jenks may have been signed even if we kept Papelbon.

    Can someone explain how Papelbon was at a "cheaper price"?



    Here is beat reporter Peter Abraham's analysis:

    http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2013/05/the_rising_cost.html

    I'm not sure Jonathan Papelbon would have returned to Boston at any price.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    In response to hill55's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Papelbon:

     

    • 4 years/$50M (2012-15), plus 2016 vesting option
      • signed by Philadelphia as a free agent 11/14/11
      • 12:$11,000,058, 13-15: $13M annually, 16:$13M vesting option
      • 2016 option guaranteed with 55 games finished in 2015 or 100 games finished in 2014-15  
      • Bailey:
      • 1 year/$4.1M (2013)
        • re-signed by Boston 1/18/13 (avoided arbitration)
      • 1 year/$3.9M (2012)
        • signed by Boston 1/25/12 (avoided arbitration, $4.7M-$3.35M)
        • performance bonuses: $50,000 each for 50, 55 games finished

     Aceves was going to be in the pen, even if Bailey didn't get hurt. He didn't cost any extra. Jenks may have been signed even if we kept Papelbon.

    Can someone explain how Papelbon was at a "cheaper price"?



    Here is beat reporter Peter Abraham's analysis:

     

    http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2013/05/the_rising_cost.html

    I'm not sure Jonathan Papelbon would have returned to Boston at any price.



    I'm not sure if he would have returned either. But he seemed to like it here. Maybe he was as disgusted as many of us were by what went on in Sept. 2011. Maybe it was that the Phils made him a great offer , while the Sox fiddled. I don' t know. But I do know that he is sorely missed. We cannot find a guy who can pitch the ninth without gagging. 

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    "Stupid Southern Redneck."  Yah!!!!

    Your MO remains in tact Softy Law. He signed a $50 M contract--that's stupid???

    That's smart as far as I'm concerned. In fact I'd say it's brilliant. I'd say congrats Pap--take all the "clams" you can get and enjoy the ride. He knew where he didn't want to be and he was looking for the team willing to empty the deep pockets.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to ADG's comment:

     

    Great analysis by Peter Abraham. Through the first two years of Papelbon's contract with the Phillies, the Red Sox have gotten nothing out of it. Papelbon has saved 43/47 chances.

    From the $$ cost aspect, the Red Sox have spent about $1 Million less than what it would have cost keeping Papelbon.


    Ouch.

     



    A million less? I don't get the math. Is softy your statistician?

     



    Read the article. The Sox have spent 23 on players traded for/signed over the last two years. At this point Papelbon would have been a better option.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    In response to hill55's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Papelbon:

     

    • 4 years/$50M (2012-15), plus 2016 vesting option
      • signed by Philadelphia as a free agent 11/14/11
      • 12:$11,000,058, 13-15: $13M annually, 16:$13M vesting option
      • 2016 option guaranteed with 55 games finished in 2015 or 100 games finished in 2014-15  
      • Bailey:
      • 1 year/$4.1M (2013)
        • re-signed by Boston 1/18/13 (avoided arbitration)
      • 1 year/$3.9M (2012)
        • signed by Boston 1/25/12 (avoided arbitration, $4.7M-$3.35M)
        • performance bonuses: $50,000 each for 50, 55 games finished

     Aceves was going to be in the pen, even if Bailey didn't get hurt. He didn't cost any extra. Jenks may have been signed even if we kept Papelbon.

    Can someone explain how Papelbon was at a "cheaper price"?



    Here is beat reporter Peter Abraham's analysis:

     

    http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2013/05/the_rising_cost.html

    I'm not sure Jonathan Papelbon would have returned to Boston at any price.



    Yeah he would have. The Sox didnt want to sign him.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    Paplebon is stupid southern redneck who made sure he wasn't going to play for the proud Irish and Polish bigots of New England. Papelbon must think that eastern PA is like Alabama. I pointed out how he was despised by most Red Sox fans, but that he would have the last laugh. I was right. 



    This is post is just not factual, I mean their isn't one fact that is accurate in the post. Do you still not think French Canadians exist?

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    Abraham's column makes 2 odd assumptions:

     

    1.  The Sox would not have brought in those other pitchers anyway.  Was Jenks brought in to close?  Wouldn't the Sox still pay someone to pitch from the bullpen?

     

    2. His "player cost" does not consider that all those bodies could not have been kept on the 40-man roster anyway.

     

    So, it is possible that not signing Papelbon means the Sox might have spent some money they had to spend anyway, and remove some players that they had to remove anyway....

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

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    Abraham's column does make some assumptions.  Nonetheless I agree with the basic premise that the Red Sox have been scrambling and spending trying to fill the closer position.  And so far without success. 

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

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    It was time for him to go.  I doubt he would have stayed here anyway.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hetchinspete. Show Hetchinspete's posts

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    Paplebon is stupid southern redneck who made sure he wasn't going to play for the proud Irish and Polish bigots of New England. Papelbon must think that eastern PA is like Alabama. I pointed out how he was despised by most Red Sox fans, but that he would have the last laugh. I was right. 

    This is post is just not factual, I mean their isn't one fact that is accurate in the post. Do you still not think French Canadians exist?

    Hi Joe, 

    It is amazing how the Great Soft One exposes his own predudice when he writes what he did above. He acuses others of being what he already is, an ignorant & bigoted shell of a human being who only posts here are full of false accusations based on little if any actual facts and his own personal hatred of certain players.

    And yes French Canadians do exist, at least in my estimation, in Quebec among other places, so I don't quite understand that statement. 

    Cheers, 

    Hetch

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

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    Abraham's column does make some assumptions.  Nonetheless I agree with the basic premise that the Red Sox have been scrambling and spending trying to fill the closer position.  And so far without success. 




    I agree, the Sox have not been particularly successful in filling the closer's role. 

    I very much wanted Papelbon back.  However, I said at the time and I still believe that letting him walk was the right move.  The issue was not so much the money, but the length of the contract.  Two years/$24 mil is not so bad.  Four years/$50 mil is a completely different story.

     

     

     

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

    Re: The Cost of Not Signing Papelbon

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    Abraham's column does make some assumptions.  Nonetheless I agree with the basic premise that the Red Sox have been scrambling and spending trying to fill the closer position.  And so far without success. 

    I agree, the Sox have not been particularly successful in filling the closer's role. 

    I very much wanted Papelbon back.  However, I said at the time and I still believe that letting him walk was the right move.  The issue was not so much the money, but the length of the contract.  Two years/$24 mil is not so bad.  Four years/$50 mil is a completely different story.

    Hi Kimmi, 

    At this point I cannot even remember my own thought with regard to letting Paps go as it's two years ago, but hindsight is a wonderful thing. At the time many fans assumed that Paps wanted out of town anyways, based on what I'm not sure as I never remember any quotes saying he wasn't happy here. 

    I do remember 2010 when Paps had an off season with a higher ERA and numbers of blown saves with many in Boston were ready to ride him out of town on a rail and now I just wonder how many of those same fans wish he was still here. I understand how fans can be disappointed in a players performance but many don't want to recognize that players can have off seasons expecting every season to be as great as his last. Many wanted Papi gone and now he's a fan favorite once more.  

    Hetch

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share