September 1st waiver/playoff roster deadline

[AlexanderTheGreat13]

Nathan has 27 saves.

Hes pitched around 10 less innings however 1 blown save this far into the season is pretty damn good. At the end of the day a closers job is to save the game and I dont think you can be the best closer in the league if you have 6 blown saves no matter how sexy his secondary stats are.

[RedSoxRooter]

I agree with ATG13. What the hell is happening to me??

[jsinger121]

With the way our staff is I think it could be a solid bet that we will see papelbon in the 2007 rotation.

[ORS]

You dont think Joe Nathan has an arguement? He only has 1 blown save. His ERA might not be as sexy as Paplebon's but he does have 5 less blown saves.

Saves and wins are the most meaningless stats to gauge pitcher performance. You know this. BTW, Papelbon's LEV is 2.13 to Nathan's 1.87.

[RedSoxRooter]

With the way our staff is I think it could be a solid bet that we will see papelbon in the 2007 rotation.

 

Schilliing

Beckett

Papelbon

Wake

Lester

 

I don't think Clement will be a factor, but if so, I guess Lester or Wake could hit the pen.

 

Edit: Only because Clement can't come out of the pen.

[Papelbon58]

wake should hit the pen next season anyway

[jsinger121]

All I am going to say is 200 plus innings > 70-75 innings.

[a700hitter]

Give either of the the '03 or '05 team another stopper in the rotation, and we could be looking at 3 straight. Passing up the opportunity to see if he can be a stopper is wasteful. We already know he can handle the 'pen. If he doesn't work as a SP, there's no rule saying he can't go back to the BP -- like all the other failed SP.

Add one more stopper to '03 and '05 and they do win three straight. Part of the '04 formula was having two stoppers to prevent extended losing streaks. It also served them well in the post season. The '07 team will go nowhere unless they really bolster the rotation. I don't see them shelling out the big bucks for more than one starter. If paps is a stopper type starter, a rotation of Schilling, papelbon, Beckett, FA and Wakefield would eat innings and cover up alot of bullpen deficiencies.

[MC Hammer]

Hes pitched around 10 less innings however 1 blown save this far into the season is pretty damn good. At the end of the day a closers job is to save the game and I dont think you can be the best closer in the league if you have 6 blown saves no matter how sexy his secondary stats are.

Nathan has allowed 45 runners to reach base in his 55 IP. Whereas Paps has allowed only 4 more runners(49) in 10.2 more innings(65.2) Paps has also allowed 4 less ER in 10.2 more innings.

 

You say Nathan has only blown 1 save, but he's only has 28 chances ... Paps has had 40.

[ORS]

Add one more stopper to '03 and '05 and they do win three straight. Part of the '04 formula was having two stoppers to prevent extended losing streaks. It also served them well in the post season. The '07 team will go nowhere unless they really bolster the rotation. I don't see them shelling out the big bucks for more than one starter. If paps is a stopper type starter, a rotation of Schilling, papelbon, Beckett, FA and Wakefield would eat innings and cover up alot of bullpen deficiencies.

I agree, and that's why they need to try it for a season. It didn't kill Rivera, or Nathan, or Gagne (pre-injury) to get sent to the BP when they didn't flourish as SP. I think Papelbon's got the head to go right back to closing if the SP gig doesn't work out.

[seabeachfred]

Some of us are getting in a pissing contest trying to outdo one another; the fact is we stink right now and are sinking out of sight. The season for us is over. WHAT DO WE DO THIS COMING OFF SEASON?????? We either try to reload, which will take a lot of money willing to be spent by the owners for pitchers of both varieties, staring or relieving-----OR we start the painful rebuilding process. We simply cannot afford to try and do both at the same time or else some of you younger ones will be waiting for another World Series title long after this 65 year old war horse is called home by his Lord.

[AlexanderTheGreat13]

Saves and wins are the most meaningless stats to gauge pitcher performance. You know this. BTW, Papelbon's LEV is 2.13 to Nathan's 1.87.

Sure saves and wins are meaningless however how meaningless are blown saves? I understand saves can easily be the product of what team your on HOWEVER once you are given that chance how many times do you succeed? Thats my point. Nathan is 27/28, I'll take the guy that when given the chance to close games is more efficient then the guy who is 34/40 and dominating in the process.

 

My arguement isnt about total saves its about when given the chance to close games how many times do you get the job done.

[MC Hammer]

Schilliing

Beckett

Papelbon

Wake

Lester

 

I don't think Clement will be a factor, but if so, I guess Lester or Wake could hit the pen.

 

Edit: Only because Clement can't come out of the pen.

And who is going to close?

 

Great lets get a lead to the 9th an extra 1 day a week and then we can all cross our fingers and pray as we wait to see if our average or below average closer can hold on.

[AlexanderTheGreat13]

Nathan has allowed 45 runners to reach base in his 55 IP. Whereas Paps has allowed only 4 more runners(49) in 10.2 more innings(65.2) Paps has also allowed 4 less ER in 10.2 more innings.

 

You say Nathan has only blown 1 save, but he's only has 28 chances ... Paps has had 40.

Read my last post. It explains what I really mean. The chances are certainly a factor. There is no doubt that Paplebon while saving games has been dominate. My only point is that Nathan when given the chance has not only dominated(not to the point like Paplebon) but when given the chance to save games hes gotten the job done more often.

[RedSoxRooter]

Trade Youk???

[rician blast]

Give either of the the '03 or '05 team another stopper in the rotation, and we could be looking at 3 straight.

 

possible.

 

in fact in 2003 the Sox were good enough to win it except for a Little mistake that occurred when a certain someone decided to forego a BP that had been developed in the last 1/2 of the season and which was incredibly successful in the playoffs.

[jsinger121]

And who is going to close?

 

Great lets get a lead to the 9th an extra 1 day a week and then we can all cross our fingers and pray as we wait to see if our average or below average closer can hold on.

 

Teams have won championships with good to decent closers. The Red Sox can find a closer.

[RedSoxRooter]

possible.

 

in fact in 2003 the Sox were good enough to win it except for a Little mistake that occurred when a certain someone decided to forego a BP that had been developed in the last 1/2 of the season and which was incredibly successful in the playoffs.

 

And if we had another ace, it may not have gone 7 games.

[ORS]

Sure saves and wins are meaningless however how meaningless are blown saves? I understand saves can easily be the product of what team your on HOWEVER once you are given that chance how many times do you succeed? Thats my point. Nathan is 27/28, I'll take the guy that when given the chance to close games is more efficient then the guy who is 34/40 and dominating in the process.

 

My arguement isnt about total saves its about when given the chance to close games how many times do you get the job done.

The save/save opp. ratio is a function of more than talent. The situation matters. Using the definition of save opportunity, it is possible for a pitcher to have an 18.00 ERA and 5.00 WHIP and a perfect SV/SVO ratio. That is a huge contradiction, and it is the reason why I think SV/SVO is worthless. I'll take the guy with a lower ERA and WHIP every time, because they are better indicators of performance.

[MC Hammer]

Teams have won championships with good to decent closers. The Red Sox can find a closer.

Teams have also won World Series with good to decent DHs ... should we try to get another one of those?

[MC Hammer]

The save/save opp. ratio is a function of more than talent. The situation matters. Using the definition of save opportunity, it is possible for a pitcher to have an 18.00 ERA and 5.00 WHIP and a perfect SV/SVO ratio. That is a huge contradiction, and it is the reason why I think SV/SVO is worthless. I'll take the guy with a lower ERA and WHIP every time, because they are better indicators of performance.

Agreed. That's why those were the stats I gave.

[RedSoxRooter]

Teams usually win the WS with starting pitching.

[MC Hammer]

Teams usually win the WS with starting pitching.

Bullpen is as if not more important. Having the lead for 7 innings is awesome, but the important part is having it at the end of the game.

[rician blast]

And if we had another ace, it may not have gone 7 games.

 

true, so I guess you could pick it apart, being very specific, and say if the Red Sox had this or that things might have been different.

 

The end to 2003 was just an absolute joke because the Red Sox had found themselves in the very "un-Red Sock" position of having two great set-up men and a closer (Embree/Timlin and Williamson) who were virtually untouchable in the playoffs.

 

So in the biggest game of the year...no, wait..the biggest game of most of these guys lives...a decision was made to go away from the proven recipe for success.

 

That was unconsciounable, IMO.

 

At any rate, I think we agree...you can never have enough pitching. So ya gotta load up on arms and allow the team some options and flexibility, then ride who is hot. This year shows clearly what happens when those options are too few or simply not viable.

[AlexanderTheGreat13]

The save/save opp. ratio is a function of more than talent. The situation matters. Using the definition of save opportunity, it is possible for a pitcher to have an 18.00 ERA and 5.00 WHIP and a perfect SV/SVO ratio. That is a huge contradiction, and it is the reason why I think SV/SVO is worthless. I'll take the guy with a lower ERA and WHIP every time, because they are better indicators of performance.

Thats true, over the long run you would figure that the guy who has a lower ERA and WHIP would be more successful. However in this particular case dont you think you are more likely to win more games with the guy who is 27/28 or the guy who is 34/40?

[jsinger121]

Teams have also won World Series with good to decent DHs ... should we try to get another one of those?

 

2005 White Sox- Bobby Jenks

2003 Marlins- Ugeth Urbina

2001 DBack- BK Kim

1995 Braves- Mark Wohlers

 

You don't need a dominant Closer to win a title. Why did these teams win? they had dominant starting pitching.

[a700hitter]

Bullpen is as if not more important. Having the lead for 7 innings is awesome, but the important part is having it at the end of the game.

If your starters eat a lot of innings, the good arms in the bullpen will not be overworked and the lesser arms will not have to be relied upon in crucial situations. You'll still need some good arms in the bullpen, but you won't need to be as deep simply because there would be less innings for the Pen to pitch. With a strong rotation, you can get away with 3 reliable arms in the pen and 3 mop-up types. If the Starters are bad or 5 inning starters, you need to be 5 deep with good arms in the Pen.

[jsinger121]

Bobby Jenks is still one of the best closers in the game. Uggie was dominant at the time. BK fell apart in the world seires but was awesome during the season.

 

If the Braves had an actual closer maybe they would have won more than 1 WS in their decade worth of chances.

 

In 2005 when the White Sox he was unknown as a pitcher. He is a very good closer now. Uggie was never a feared closer at all. He was a good closer nothing more. All I am saying is Papelbon pitching 200 plus innings > 75 innings. Right now they can't even get pitchers to go 5 innings at times. They need him in the rotation and they will worry about who closes later.

[ORS]

Teams have also won World Series with good to decent DHs ... should we try to get another one of those?

That suggests having someone else do it in place of Ortiz, ie replacing him. Nobody has suggested replacing Papelbon outright. This is about maximizing his value to the team. An Ortiz analogy would be considering using him at 1B. If we didn't know about his defensive ability or potential for injury (knees), it would be something worth trying. We don't know what Papelbon can do as a starter, but we do know that a good SP is more valuable than a good RP -- well, most of us know that, but you're coming along.

[MC Hammer]

2005 White Sox- Bobby Jenks

2003 Marlins- Ugeth Urbina

2001 DBack- BK Kim

1995 Braves- Mark Wohlers

 

You don't need a dominant Closer to win a title. Why did these teams win? they had dominant starting pitching.

Your reply had absolutely nothing to do with my post ... at all.

 

Call the Braves and ask them how many WS they won with dominating starting pitching and no closer. They had a decade worth of chances and won 1 World Series.