The Papelbon theory

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

    The Papelbon theory

    You know the one--if we'd only kept Pap, the Sox bullpen and record would be just fine right now.

    Me, I was fine with not paying him a king's ransom.  He's fine too--an ERA of 1.29 and 5 of 5 saves already.  But his team is 7-8 and at the bottom of the NL East and well behind the Nationals.  It's early, I know.

    But my point is that Pap could not have helped that much this season to date.  Yesterday, probably.  And certainly game 3 against Detroit when the Sox gave up 3 in the 9th and 3 more in the 11th.  But after that I'm not so sure.  In game 1 at Detroit, the Sox tied in the 9th against Valverde.  If Pap pitched the 9th, it's a good bet that game would have gone to extra innings, but there is no guarantee the Sox would have scored in extra innings or that this bullpen would have held the Tigers in check.  And so on and so on.  Papelbon's forte is saves, not wins, and to get a save you gotta have the lead in the 9th. 

    Relatedly, the same theory applies to using Bard as the closer this year.  Go ahead and give him credit for the same two saves, but it is unlikely he could have done much more good for this team than two saves.

    Or put it this way.  The Sox have 12 pitchers, including five starters, and one guy cannot save a lousy pitching staff.  Our big three starters, for example, all have ERA's over 5.  And, as Peter Abraham keeps reminding us, this pitching staff has been lousy since about September 1 of last year. 

    Actually, even longer because it was overall lousy in 2011, 2010, and 2009. 

    In that context it is also hard for me to get mad at Cherington because it seems obvious that a long term weak pitching staff should be blamed on Theo.  He got out just in time. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from AL34. Show AL34's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    What amazed me about Papelbon is that he cleaned out his locker when the team came back from Baltimore and never looked back. He wanted no part of this team anymore. Are you kidding me, sure he woukd have been a hell of a lot better than Andrew "Kindling Wood" Bailey and Melancon who our Junior Boy Genus picked up. Junior Boy Genus even picked up a pitcher in the Theo Compensation deal who had elbow issues who needed surgey after throwing what 2 innings ? Junior Boy Genus even went back to the Big Boy Genus and picked up a struggling outfielder. Is this all Young Ben or is it Larry Luchinno, the string puller ?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    This ain't on Cherington unless he was calling the shots when Theo was here.  When a pitching staff has been this lousy for this long, it's on the GM and those above him.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    If Pap was here than Aceves may have been pitching outstanding 6 and/or 7th innings. So yes he would have made a difference.

    I think the real issue is though that Aceves is out of place now, and now the 6-9 innings are all code red.  We no longer have Aceves, Bard, Paplebon.... instead we have ???,????, Aceves.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Camelwalk. Show Camelwalk's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    I was never a fan of Papelbon and thats because as a Yankee fan I didn't want to see him coming in late in the game.  Yes I didn't like his antics and his stare on the mound and thought it was a bit dramatic and some gamesmanship as well BUT he was and is probably the 2nd best closer in the game to Mariano.  Losing him would be a tough thing for any team in the game to endure, he's that good.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    I say again.  Pap was the closer on the 2009, 2010, and 2011 teams, all of which failed to get to the playoffs because of weak pitching staffs.  One closer, no matter how good, cannot compensate for an otherwise weak staff. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    I don't care that he is gone... I have cared since STraining that they moved Aceves to the closer spot. Bailey getting hurt was not anyone's fault. Bard should have immediately been put in as closer that very day.

    Now we are screwed from the moment the starter leaves the game until the final anguishing out.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from AL34. Show AL34's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    Bailey should never have been traded for. He has a history of major injuries where he is out for extended periods of time. Junior Boy Genus should have looked into that before annointed him as the closer to the best closer the Red Sox ever had. But remember he had a cheaper salary than Papelbon would have been paid. Wonder if it was the Junior Boy Genus or Lucky Larry Luchinno who figured that was a spot to save money. After all we are a small market pauper team. How does that decision look so far Ben, I mean Larry. In response to "Re: The Papelbon theory": [QUOTE]I don't care that he is gone... I have cared since STraining that they moved Aceves to the closer spot. Bailey getting hurt was not anyone's fault. Bard should have immediately been put in as closer that very day. Now we are screwed from the moment the starter leaves the game until the final anguishing out. Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    max, as you say, one player can't make all the difference.  But also as you say, he might have made the difference in 2 games so far, putting us at 6-8 instead of 4-10.  That's actually a big difference in 14 games.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    Paps not being in Boston is a major factor because everything trickles down from there.

    A healthy Bailey is not the equivalent of Paps, forget about an injured one.

    Boston's decision to allow Bard to go to the rotation is insane, especially with the loss of Paps and Bailey's injury.

    Aceves is a perfect 6th and 7th inning man. Hated that NY gave up on him. He will give you decent numbers in the closer role (same as Bailey), but there is no lock in the 9th.

    I am a Yankee fan and I am thrilled that Paps is no longer in Boston. I think that is how Paps was viewed by the enemy fanbase.
     
  11. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    I said it when they did not sign him. Not signing him will hurt this team for 5+ years.If you have a dependable closer then filling in the 7th and 8th become much easier.
    Aceves was great in the 6/7 innings last year
    Bard was great as the 8 inning guy.

    This year they have had to shuffle them al around.
    Signing Paps would have meant just finding a replacement for Bard.

    They blew up the best part of the BP and will not recover with what they signed.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory:
    [QUOTE]Paps not being in Boston is a major factor because everything trickles down from there. A healthy Bailey is not the equivalent of Paps, forget about an injured one. Boston's decision to allow Bard to go to the rotation is insane, especially with the loss of Paps and Bailey's injury. Aceves is a perfect 6th and 7th inning man. Hated that NY gave up on him. He will give you decent numbers in the closer role (same as Bailey), but there is no lock in the 9th. I am a Yankee fan and I am thrilled that Paps is no longer in Boston. I think that is how Paps was viewed by the enemy fanbase.
    Posted by jesseyeric[/QUOTE]

    Bailey has a career ERA of around 2 and a WHIP under 1.  Bailey is nasty.  Most scouting reports that I read said he had better stuff than Paps.  A healthy Bailey is the equivalent of paps.  for sure.  Just because he was in a small market doesnt mean he isnt good.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory:
    [QUOTE]I said it when they did not sign him. Not signing him will hurt this team for 5+ years.If you have a dependable closer then filling in the 7th and 8th become much easier. Aceves was great in the 6/7 innings last year Bard was great as the 8 inning guy. This year they have had to shuffle them al around. Signing Paps would have meant just finding a replacement for Bard. They blew up the best part of the BP and will not recover with what they signed.
    Posted by JimfromFlorida[/QUOTE]

    It's what I have been saying Jim.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory : Bailey has a career ERA of around 2 and a WHIP under 1.  Bailey is nasty.  Most scouting reports that I read said he had better stuff than Paps.  A healthy Bailey is the equivalent of paps.  for sure.  Just because he was in a small market doesnt mean he isnt good.
    Posted by snakeoil123[/QUOTE]I agree that Bailey was a reasonable attempt for a team with little to trade and virtually maxed on budget.

    Melancon is IMHO one of those cases where the data on Baseball Reference trumped the old school scout perception that Melancon did not like bright lights and high leverage circumstance.

    These moves were gambles.

    Personally I can't blame the RS for not re-signing Papelbon. The $$$ and years ended up insanely high and the amount of money sunk into Lackey, Dice K and Crawford ceratinly was a choke collar.

    Call it bad luck or bad signings, the RS made a few moves orver a few years that brought them here.

    Sometimes circumstances tumble in a way that a team just can't keep fixing things on the fly and be a playoff contender. It is why the NYY have 28 and not 100 WS championships, why the Braves great run in 90's eventually ended.

    I understand why people think the RS miss Papelbon, they do. But they missed Clemens but in a short time had acquired Pedro. They missed Mo Vaughn but in a short time they acquired Manny.

    This might be a dark season this year but in the scheme of things a single season is a lot shorter that 3 seasons saddled with $40M or so in dead payroll and not having that closer too.

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

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory : I agree that Bailey was a reasonable attempt for a team with little to trade and virtually maxed on budget. Melancon is IMHO one of those cases where the data on Baseball Reference trumped the old school scout perception that Melancon did not like bright lights and high leverage circumstance. These moves were gambles. Personally I can't blame the RS for not re-signing Papelbon. The $$$ and years ended up insanely high and the amount of money sunk into Lackey, Dice K and Crawford ceratinly was a choke collar. Call it bad luck or bad signings, the RS made a few moves orver a few years that brought them here. Sometimes circumstances tumble in a way that a team just can't keep fixing things on the fly and be a playoff contender. It is why the NYY have 28 and not 100 WS championships, why the Braves great run in 90's eventually ended. I understand why people think the RS miss Papelbon, they do. But they missed Clemens but in a short time had acquired Pedro. They missed Mo Vaughn but in a short time they acquired Manny. This might be a dark season this year but in the scheme of things a single season is a lot shorter that 3 seasons saddled with $40M or so in dead payroll and not having that closer too.  
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    Ding! Ding! Ding! That, and to a lesser extent the appearance that Henry got tired of his one time favorite toy, has snowballed into the current situation.

    Also, it appears the RS signed Crawford as a result of their fear he would sign with the Yankees; not a good reason to sign somebody IMO.

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

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory : Bailey has a career ERA of around 2 and a WHIP under 1.  Bailey is nasty.  Most scouting reports that I read said he had better stuff than Paps.  A healthy Bailey is the equivalent of paps.  for sure.  Just because he was in a small market doesnt mean he isnt good.
    Posted by snakeoil123[/QUOTE]

    Perhaps, but the big difference is that Papelbon is a horse (did he ever have an injury the last few yrs?), while Bailey appears to be a fragile doll.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from concord27. Show concord27's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory : Bailey has a career ERA of around 2 and a WHIP under 1.  Bailey is nasty.  Most scouting reports that I read said he had better stuff than Paps.  A healthy Bailey is the equivalent of paps.  for sure.  Just because he was in a small market doesnt mean he isnt good.
    Posted by snakeoil123[/QUOTE]
    Snake,
    The thing is as you know is Bailey hasn't been healthy and isn't now.  So it really is not relevant to the team. They're stuck and he is not part of the solution.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory : Ding! Ding! Ding! That, and to a lesser extent the appearance that Henry got tired of his one time favorite toy, has snowballed into the current situation. Also, it appears the RS signed Crawford as a result of their fear he would sign with the Yankees; not a good reason to sign somebody IMO.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]I am not sure I buy the Crawford signing as keep away from the NYY, though he probably would have been a better fit in NY with the short RF porch and spacious LF.

    As for Henry, the budget restrictions aren't radically different than what the NYY are looking to do. Both teams do not want to be luxury tax spenders come 2014 and have done things to be sure they won't be. 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    Papelbon was pretty fragile at the start of his Sox career.  Bailey's injury might actually benefit the team in the long run - the forearm strain is more concerning than a jammed thumb, and now the forearm should be 100% when he returns.  Some guys are injury prone, or have chronic issues with certain things, but Bailey's injuries seem more random - I don't think he fits that profile.

    Besides which, right now if the trade had been Reddick for Ryan Sweeney straight up, it still looks pretty good for the Sox.  Very early, of course.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory : I am not sure I buy the Crawford signing as keep away from the NYY, though he probably would have been a better fit in NY with the short RF porch and spacious LF. As for Henry, the budget restrictions aren't radically different than what the NYY are looking to do. Both teams do not want to be luxury tax spenders come 2014 and have done things to be sure they won't be. 
    Posted by fivekatz[/QUOTE]

    Your take is better than mine; as it usually is
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory:
    [QUOTE]Papelbon was pretty fragile at the start of his Sox career.  Bailey's injury might actually benefit the team in the long run - the forearm strain is more concerning than a jammed thumb, and now the forearm should be 100% when he returns.  Some guys are injury prone, or have chronic issues with certain things, but Bailey's injuries seem more random - I don't think he fits that profile. Besides which, right now if the trade had been Reddick for Ryan Sweeney straight up, it still looks pretty good for the Sox.  Very early, of course.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    Well, Reddick is starting for Oak, so he doesn't appear to be a bust, at least after 2 weeks. And, I agree (with regards to Bailey) the thumb injury related down time shall help the forearm injury. As far as the random comment is concerned, while an interesting and possibly a valid take, after awhile a random incident doesn't look so random. As far as Paps is concerned, that's why I said in the last few years.  
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    In Response to Re: The Papelbon theory:
    [QUOTE]Paps not being in Boston is a major factor because everything trickles down from there. A healthy Bailey is not the equivalent of Paps, forget about an injured one. Boston's decision to allow Bard to go to the rotation is insane, especially with the loss of Paps and Bailey's injury. Aceves is a perfect 6th and 7th inning man. Hated that NY gave up on him. He will give you decent numbers in the closer role (same as Bailey), but there is no lock in the 9th. I am a Yankee fan and I am thrilled that Paps is no longer in Boston. I think that is how Paps was viewed by the enemy fanbase.
    Posted by jesseyeric[/QUOTE]

    I disagree with that statement (bold) in this regard. If Bard turns into an elite starter, not an ace but a very good one, it's hard for me to say it was wrong. Now I questioned the moved, not because of what it did to the bullpen but because he failed in the minors as a starter. But if he continues to pitch like he did in his last start, I say keep him there.

    Yes, having a lockdown closer is great, but look at St. Louis last year. The Cardinals went through three closers and still won the W.S.

    On paper, the bullpen should have been at least middle of the road before Bailey's injury. Bailey was a decent closer. Melancon should have been OK as one of the setup guys. Aceves and Padilla in the sixths and seventh inning guys and eight-inning help. Morales as the lefty in the bullpen who can pitch to both righties and lefties. That's five guys, who should have been at the minimum dependable. Not great and dominant, but good enough to get the job done with the help of whoever fills out the last two spots.

    Even with Bailey's injury, the pen shouldn't be as bad as it's been. It's unprecedented. There have been quite a few games where the pen was great, but it's amazing the games where when one guy blows up, they all do -- or so it seems.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Since75. Show Since75's posts

    Re: The Papelbon theory

    Some very good points as far as the difference having Bard or Pap in the closers
    role would have made to this point in the season.  At this point I think its time to put Bard in the closers role and see what he can do with it.  I've always thought that he didnt have the makeup for it mentally but he can hardly be worse then what has been done.  I'm betting one of the reasons they are resistant to putting
    Bard at the back of the bullpen is that he doesn't he doesn't want the job.  I remember when Pap started out he asked for the job.  I haven't heard of Bard
    going to anyone and saying hey I could slide back in the and handle this for ya.  He doesn't want it.  Neither does Aceves which may be part of why he sucks at it.  The team needs to do something about this.  Regardless of whether he wants it or not Bard is the best choice for closer and Aaron Cook has been very good all spring so there's your fifth starter.  If Daisuke can come back and be effictive then maybe Duobront has to also come and eat late innings.  Something has to change.  This isnt working.  I hope they shake things up soon.

    Mike 
     

Share