Papelbon is the closer according ESPN

[jacksonianmarch]

and just an aside, I have a couple of ortho buddies who have either met him or know people who have worked with him. What a sweet gig. Insurance? Follow-up? Blah!! He is a cash and carry man who likely clears well into 7 figures while working 4 days a week.

 

That brings back memories. I loved the ortho rotation. I wore my stethoscope my first day and they pointed to it and asked, "what's that". Its like a giant frat. I just dont have the patience (or the grades).

[CrespoBlows]

What is Dr. Andrews opinion on the matter?

[jacksonianmarch]

He was one of the guys who said that starting would be better for Paps arm than relieving.

[RobZombie]

I never said this training occured in boot camp. I said it was for a deployment prep. I had already been in the service for two years at that point.

 

See if you can follow. I was in peak physical shape, yet I still needed to train for a new event. Papelbon is in peak physical shape, but he needs to train for a new event. That is the analogy, and it fits. And, regardless of whether or not you agree with the analogy, it doesn't make what you say true. Think about it. Are you really trying to say that a 26 y/o cannot condition his body for a change in usage? And if so, do you have any evidence to back this up?

 

When exactly would this new training occur? I'd assume that he already trained in the off-season. Besides as you know, throwing a baseball harder isn't just about getting stronger. Some people need to exert more effort to get the same velocity even if they are built the same. There's a reason why a guy like Daniel Bard can throw 100 MPH free and easy and some guys have to put in the maximum effort just to throw 95. It isn't just because Bard trains more, or is in better shape, or has a stronger arm. His pitching motion allows him to hit this velocity with the same effort it would take most of us to play catch. Do you also have evidence that pitchers gain in velocity as the season wears on and they pitch more innings then they ever have before? I'd think that if anything they lose velocity.

 

With Papelbon you are talking about him having to add about 10 MPH to his fastball in the later innings at age 26. You just can't do that by training extra. Or perhaps you'd like to name five guys that have done so in their mid 20s? Guys who aren't steroid users. Or perhaps you'd like to also like to send me to a credible website that tells me that throwing more can increase your pitching endurance.

 

You make it seem as though Papelbon can easily add 10 MPH to his fastball just because you gained some muscles in whatever thing you were doing. It simply doesn't work that way. Gaining some muscles in boot camp, or redeployment camp is simply not the same being able to maintain your velocity after throwing 50 pitches.

[RobZombie]

My guess is it is self-loathing. Deep down inside' date=' those types know there is a need for people to do that job, and they know they could never do it. This causes internal strife, so when the topic comes to military service they project. I'll bet dollars to donuts that RobZombie wore a trench coat in High School.[/quote']

 

I chose not to listen to the moderators. I chose to further an off-topic fight that doesn't belong in this forum and I am stupid for doing it. I'm grateful that I haven't lost my posting privledges yet.

 

edited by a mod. (guess which one)

[MANNYHOF24]

Why would it be self-loathing? And really ORS these days being "able" to serve in the military isn't that high a bar to cross. They are willing to take ex-fellons, older people, people who are out of shape, ANYONE who is dumb enough to die in this stupid war.

 

To say that I "couldn't" serve. Is patently ridiculous. Anyone "could". I just chose not to.

 

You should be grateful to the men and women who serve this country, and also give them a little more respect.

[TheKilo]

I tremendously disagree with RZ's sentiments, but he has the right to them.

 

Yes, even on the internet.

[ksushi]

Stop.

[jacksonianmarch]

ksush, I like ya man, but this guy is opening up a can at the wrong time. There are things you allow (like friendly yankee-sox bantering) and things you dont. Either get rid of this prick or expect this s*** to continue. If you dont like the government, the mayor, PBS, God, he mafia or your parents, then fine with me. Dont piss on the men who answer the bell for this country. If the US was filled with pussies like RZ, we'd all be speaking arabic right now.

[BSN07]

Schilling wasn't a fireballer when he first came up. He gained velocity on his fastball as he got older/ headed towards his prime, or you could say the roids kicked in like some people think...

[jacksonianmarch]

BSN, when he was at the top of his game in ARI, he was throwing 96 regularly and was in the 98-99 range on occasion.

[ORS]

When exactly would this new training occur? I'd assume that he already trained in the off-season. Besides as you know, throwing a baseball harder isn't just about getting stronger. Some people need to exert more effort to get the same velocity even if they are built the same. There's a reason why a guy like Daniel Bard can throw 100 MPH free and easy and some guys have to put in the maximum effort just to throw 95. It isn't just because Bard trains more, or is in better shape, or has a stronger arm. His pitching motion allows him to hit this velocity with the same effort it would take most of us to play catch. Do you also have evidence that pitchers gain in velocity as the season wears on and they pitch more innings then they ever have before? I'd think that if anything they lose velocity.

 

With Papelbon you are talking about him having to add about 10 MPH to his fastball in the later innings at age 26. You just can't do that by training extra. Or perhaps you'd like to name five guys that have done so in their mid 20s? Guys who aren't steroid users. Or perhaps you'd like to also like to send me to a credible website that tells me that throwing more can increase your pitching endurance.

 

You make it seem as though Papelbon can easily add 10 MPH to his fastball just because you gained some muscles in whatever thing you were doing. It simply doesn't work that way. Gaining some muscles in boot camp, or redeployment camp is simply not the same being able to maintain your velocity after throwing 50 pitches.

The goal here isn't for Papelbon to gain velocity, but to maintain it. Endurance is what is required, and you apparently think endurance comes from some other means than doing more of the activity. This contradicts all conventional wisdom and common sense. If you want to be able to run at a given pace for a longer distance, then you run more. If you want to keep throwing the ball hard for longer, you throw more. I don't need a website to tell me that. I would like to hear the alternative, though.

[Gom]

I've never' date=' in my life, seen someone so regularly make such fantastic leaps of faith in touting their assumptions as fact. I'm done with this. The experts have spoken. You aren't one of them.[/quote']

 

Give me one.

 

Your experts have flip-flopped, and so have you. Yet you were right both times, and I was wrong both times, even though my position never changed, which was Papelbon could only relieve. He is back to relieving. Yet I am wrong.

 

I pray for the day you run the Red Sox. 86 years between championships would seem like a hot streak for your guys.

 

If these experts came out and told you to eat Nutro dog food, you'd be all for it. Yes, you are sheep. You believe everything told to you. You believed it when they told you starting would be good for him, you believe that going back to the pen is good for him now that his shoulder got better, the same one that lost 8-10 MPH after three innings of work.

 

Here in New York, we are cynical, and demand results, and believe what we see with our two eyes. Maybe up there, you accept the status quo, and believe what they tell you, because gosh darn, if they say it, it must be true. It may be one of the major reasons our team fortunes are the way the are here.

 

If relieving was so bad for him, why is he back there? Like I said, Mr. Mensa, either they were wrong in their initial assessment, or they are wrong now. Can't have it both ways. You flip-flop more than John Kerry.

 

No, you think for yourself. I can see that. Enjoy the white pill.

[CrespoBlows]

Dr. James Andrews, for one.

[ORS]

Give me one.

 

Your experts have flip-flopped, and so have you. Yet you were right both times, and I was wrong both times, even though my position never changed, which was Papelbon could only relieve. He is back to relieving. Yet I am wrong.

 

I pray for the day you run the Red Sox. 86 years between championships would seem like a hot streak for your guys.

 

If these experts came out and told you to eat Nutro dog food, you'd be all for it. Yes, you are sheep. You believe everything told to you. You believed it when they told you starting would be good for him, you believe that going back to the pen is good for him now that his shoulder got better, the same one that lost 8-10 MPH after three innings of work.

 

Here in New York, we are cynical, and demand results, and believe what we see with our two eyes. Maybe up there, you accept the status quo, and believe what they tell you, because gosh darn, if they say it, it must be true. It may be one of the major reasons our team fortunes are the way the are here.

 

If relieving was so bad for him, why is he back there? Like I said, Mr. Mensa, either they were wrong in their initial assessment, or they are wrong now. Can't have it both ways. You flip-flop more than John Kerry.

 

No, you think for yourself. I can see that. Enjoy the white pill.

Not surprisingly, you have a hard time reading. I've never said going back to relieveing is "better" for him, just that, according to the people who have been a part of his shoulder rehab, the risk is reduced. If you can show me where I say it's better, then you'd be right, but you can't and thus continue to lag behind in this discussion.

 

Nobody has flip-flopped, Gom. That is another fabrication of yours due to your inability to pull content from what is written. None of the above have reversed their opinion and said relieving is the lesser risk now. None. What has been stated is that the strengthening program has reduced the risk, and given his quality as a relief pitcher, the reduced risk is worth the value gained. No position change, but a change in variables of risk analysis.

 

This discussion might be worthwhile if you could refrain from fabricating opinions I have expressed. You do this time and time again. Sorry, but that's just not how it works. You have to debate what I have said, not what you want me to have said so that it fits your point.

 

I'll tell you, this is all kind of disappointing. I was under the impression we were going to get, what was it, some enlightenment from you Gom. Still pretty dark in here.

[Dana Kiecker]

Anything is better than Timlin closing.. and I think that was the fear.. according to media insiders Timlin had a hard-on to close.. thankfully the injury happened.

[Gom]

Not surprisingly, you have a hard time reading. I've never said going back to relieveing is "better" for him, just that, according to the people who have been a part of his shoulder rehab, the risk is reduced. If you can show me where I say it's better, then you'd be right, but you can't and thus continue to lag behind in this discussion.

 

Nobody has flip-flopped, Gom. That is another fabrication of yours due to your inability to pull content from what is written. None of the above have reversed their opinion and said relieving is the lesser risk now. None. What has been stated is that the strengthening program has reduced the risk, and given his quality as a relief pitcher, the reduced risk is worth the value gained. No position change, but a change in variables of risk analysis.

 

This discussion might be worthwhile if you could refrain from fabricating opinions I have expressed. You do this time and time again. Sorry, but that's just not how it works. You have to debate what I have said, not what you want me to have said so that it fits your point.

 

I'll tell you, this is all kind of disappointing. I was under the impression we were going to get, what was it, some enlightenment from you Gom. Still pretty dark in here.

 

Ok, so let me see if I understand you. You are saying that he has strengthened his shoulder to the point where the risk of re-injuring the shoulder is low enough that he can be an effective reliever. Can I deduce from that that you believe in Papelbon's case that relieving is more stressful on him than starting pitching? Because if that is the case, your front office has gotten some serious contradictory reports on your pitcher from the beginning of spring training till now. Or do you believe that starting pitching is more taxing than relieving on Papelbon's shoulder, which would mean that the Red Sox front office has gotten some serious contradictory reports on your pitcher from the beginning of spring training till now.

 

Please, enlighten me, good sir.

[ORS]

Nice. Apparently, if they think relieving is more stressful the reports are contradictory, but they are also contradictory if they think starting is more stressful. I guess that is the ideal scenario for someone who is looking for contradiction from the FO.

 

f***ing hilarious. Read what you just wrote. I'm not making this up.

[jacksonianmarch]

popcorn!

[Gom]

Nice. Apparently, if they think relieving is more stressful the reports are contradictory, but they are also contradictory if they think starting is more stressful. I guess that is the ideal scenario for someone who is looking for contradiction from the FO.

 

f***ing hilarious. Read what you just wrote. I'm not making this up.

 

Exactly. Now the light starts to shine. Maybe I wrote it word for word that it would be contradictory in both cases to obviously show my point.

 

It's contradictory because they first say it is best for him to start and that they wouldn't risk his career, and then they put him back in the bullpen and say that his shoulder is fine enough, even though he can't get through 4 innings without his fastball resembling Wakefield's.

 

Finally, he gets it.

 

Usually, everyone chimes in to defend your position. You're alone on this one, because it is obvious. You're wrong. Any way the front office spins it, they tried to put him in the rotation. Didn't work. Doesn't exactly make sense to come out and say he is still damaged. You think this kid would give up MILLIONS, quite possibly 70 million dollars over the course of his career to relieve instead of start? You think if he was physically able, he wouldn't be a starting pitcher?

 

You may one day win a debate from me yet, but this one is over. Give it a rest.

 

By the way, you never answered my question. Which one is it, is he better off physically starting or relieving. No matter which answer you give, YOUR front office has come out and said the opposite is true. Pick one. Otherwise, let it rest, and let's pick something else to debate.

[jacksonianmarch]

Should I wear 3D glasses for these fireworks!

[ORS]

It's contradictory because they first say it is best for him to start and that they wouldn't risk his career' date=' and then they put him back in the bullpen and say that his shoulder is fine enough, even though he can't get through 4 innings without his fastball resembling Wakefield's. [/quote']

Apples and oranges. Moving him to the BP was about value and effectiveness. They have not recanted the position that relieving carries more risk because, well, in their opinion it does. Get it? Probably not.

 

Usually, everyone chimes in to defend your position. You're alone on this one, because it is obvious.

This is the meat of your argument? People haven't supported my point, so it must be wrong? Haven't supported yours either, care extrapolate there too? All I know is, when your argument goes to tatters, you employ public opinion (well before it was the Anonymous Army). Since it matters so much to you, why not solicit everyone's thoughts? I'm game.

[a700hitter]

Honestly, most of us just lost interest in this argument several days ago, so no inference can be drawn from others not chiming in.

[TheKilo]

Honestly' date=' most of us just lost interest in this argument several days ago, so no inference can be drawn from others not chiming in.[/quote']

 

Win.

 

It is what it is. Hope it works out. Would rather see him as a starter.

[jacksonianmarch]

Honestly' date=' most of us just lost interest in this argument several days ago, so no inference can be drawn from others not chiming in.[/quote']

 

BING BING!! Winner winner chicken dinner!!

[Dana Kiecker]

oooh a David Stein fan.. very nice

[Gom]

Honestly' date=' most of us just lost interest in this argument several days ago, so no inference can be drawn from others not chiming in.[/quote']

 

I must say, this quote takes the cake. He's just clueless. Now its about effectiveness, or best this or that, or the fact that Theo likes to wear polka dot underwear on Tuesdays, etc. He's just lost.

[jacksonianmarch]

I declare myself the winner.

[Dana Kiecker]

Take a screenshot bro.. its the new wave of cool

[jacksonianmarch]

I actually dont know how. But I think I'll pass.