Phillies sign Papelbon

[User Name]

20 million for a slap-hitting speedy outfielder is?

 

17 million for a fatass overrated AL west pitcher is?

 

If the sox can pay those guys, they can pay their own.

 

Papelbon didnt need to be reasonable, they sox have been lowballing him with 1 year deals for 3 years.

 

Good for you Papelbon, you went to a team that wanted you....a team that deserved you more than us.....they showed you that.

 

So you want them to keep handing out contracts like the one you just mentioned?

 

*head explodes*

[a700hitter]

Lol @ 80 Lackey' date=' 100 D-K, 142 CC, 12 Jenks, and more and more[/quote']

Everyone said that Papelbon should get Mo Money, and he didn't. Mo got 4/60. Papelbon got 4/50 -- 17% less than Mo money-- a reasonable adjustment. He got less than KRod and he's better than KRod. It was a market contract.

[iortiz]

So you want them to keep handing out stupid contracts but are bitching about the past ones?

 

Wait, what?

 

IMO Pap deserves that money. He is arguably the best in the position.

 

Lackey, Jenks, Cameron , D-K, etc.? Not even close.

[iortiz]

Everyone said that Papelbon should get Mo Money' date=' and he didn't. Mo got 4/60. Papelbon got 4/50 -- 17% less than Mo money-- a reasonable adjustment. He got less than KRod and he's better than KRod. It was a market contract.[/quote']

 

Exactly.

[User Name]

IMO Pap deserves that money. He is arguably the best in the position.

 

Lackey, Jenks, Cameron , D-K, etc.? Not even close.

 

No reliever "deserves" a 50 million contract or long-term commitment.

[a700hitter]

IMO Pap deserves that money. He is arguably the best in the position.

 

Lackey, Jenks, Cameron , D-K, etc.? Not even close.

People point to the bad contracts for players that are not the best at their position and ask whether you want to continue with more bad contracts when none of those contracts are analogous to Paplebon's situation.

[SCM33]

Where do you get the balls to bitch about albatross contracts, after the way you cry whenever you don't think the Red Sox spent enough money or pursued some big name hard enough?

 

This is a terrible contract for the Phillies, and it would have been a terrible contract for the Red Sox. I don't much care if you found Papelbon's huckleberry personality adorable or likeable.

 

I can bitch about it, because they NEVER keep the guys here who prove they can play here. Just look at the rotating door which is SS. Instead, they sign the Julio Lugo's of the world and trade for the Coco Crisps.

 

Heres a spoiler for you. Jacoby Ellsbury, your little talksox username......will be the next to leave when his deal is up, they aint paying for him either.

 

So you want them to keep handing out contracts like the one you just mentioned?

 

*head explodes*

 

You are really comparing Papelbon to John Lackey, Dice-K and Julio Lugo??

 

*head explodes*

[iortiz]

No reliever "deserves" a 50 million contract or long-term commitment.

 

You are missing the point. He is not another reliever. He a closer. he is THE closer, IMO these days. He is the best for what he is paid.

 

Closers win games. Closer win POs games. Closers win WS.

[User Name]

I

 

You are really comparing Papelbon to John Lackey, Dice-K and Julio Lugo??

 

*head explodes*

 

That's exactly what i'm doing, because if he sucks up the joint (like relievers tend to do) you'll be lumping him with those other contracts and bumping your chest about how you didn't want them to sign him in the first place.

 

It's the beauty of being a fan: You get to be irrational and illogical. Don't sign him, bitch. Sign him, bitch. Win-win situation.

[User Name]

You are missing the point. He is not another reliever. He a closer. he is THE closer, IMO these days. He is best for what he is paid to.

 

Closers win games. Closer win POs games. Closers win WS.

 

This is ********.

 

Consistency from relievers is about as rare as a blonde with fake tits that's not looking for a sugar daddy.

 

I bet most of you proclaiming Papelbon to be the savior of the pen were calling for his head in 2010. One of those instances of inconsistency from a reliever.

[a700hitter]

It will be 8th inning by committee this season which will be only slightly less painful than closer by committee.

 

What fools in Philadelphia!! Those jackasses have been handing out big contracts to the likes of Halladay, Lee, and Howard. They make key long term acquisitions like Hunter Pence. The result of all this foolishness is that they have built a team that routes their division year in and year out. What fools-- a righty-lefty tandem of Papelbon and Bastardo.

[a700hitter]

It will be 8th inning by committee this season which will be only slightly less painful than closer by committee.

 

What fools in Philadelphia!! Those jackasses have been handing out big contracts to the likes of Halladay, Lee, and Howard. They make key long term acquisitions like Hunter Pence. The result of all this foolishness is that they have built a team that routes their division year in and year out. What fools-- a righty-lefty tandem of Papelbon and Bastardo.

And the Phillies are rumored to be the favorites for Jose Reyes. jackasses!!!

[SCM33]

That's exactly what i'm doing, because if he sucks up the joint (like relievers tend to do) you'll be lumping him with those other contracts and bumping your chest about how you didn't want them to sign him in the first place.

 

It's the beauty of being a fan: You get to be irrational and illogical. Don't sign him, bitch. Sign him, bitch. Win-win situation.

 

Nope, wrong.

 

I still think they should have signed Jason Bay, even when hindsight shows that it would have been a terrible mistake.

 

When closer by committee/Madsen/Lidge/Bard fails, everyone around here criticizing us will look at it and say the same s*** you just said....bumping their chests saying, "see. shoulda signed Paps!!"

[iortiz]

People point to the bad contracts for players that are not the best at their position and ask whether you want to continue with more bad contracts when none of those contracts are analogous to Paplebon's situation.

 

Yup, oranges with apples.

[a700hitter]

Nope, wrong.

 

I still think they should have signed Jason Bay, even when hindsight shows that it would have been a terrible mistake.

Those who defended the FO for not signing him beat their chest, but the FO said he had shoulder and knee problems. He has had problems with neither since he left the Sox. His sucky performance has been due to a combination of a concussion, a s***** team and a huge pitchers park that has gotten into his head.

[User Name]

Yup' date=' oranges with apples.[/quote']

 

Because you want it to be.

 

It's easy to overvalue Papelbon because of his good 2011.

 

Let's be honest here, not one contract of three years or more and 30 million or more for a reliever has panned out. And after 2010, it's no wonder they didn't want to take the gamble.

 

Paying for past performance is looking for fool's gold.

 

Be realistic.

[a700hitter]

Yup' date=' oranges with apples.[/quote']I would almost welcome some of the arguments if they were merely comparing apples to oranges-- at least they are both fruit.

[User Name]

Nope, wrong.

 

I still think they should have signed Jason Bay, even when hindsight shows that it would have been a terrible mistake.

 

When closer by committee/Madsen/Lidge/Bard fails, everyone around here criticizing us will look at it and say the same s*** you just said....bumping their chests saying, "see. shoulda signed Paps!!"

 

Don't lump me in with the crispy chicken crew.

[a700hitter]

While other teams are signing our players away from us, were still looking for a god damn manager. Talk about having priorities mixxed up, a f***ing monkey could be a baseball manager, they only do what their told to do from upstairs anways....

I am pretty sure that a monkey could do a better job than most managers, except maybe for the special needs monkeys-- that would be a close call.

[iortiz]

And the Phillies are rumored to be the favorites for Jose Reyes. jackasses!!!

 

Damn!

[SCM33]

 

Paying for past performance is looking for fool's gold.

 

Be realistic.

 

 

So what exactly do you call the signing of Bobby Jenks, Lackey, Cameron......

 

Players ask for money based on past performance......notice I did not include Crawford, as they were paying for past performance as well as projected performance.

 

Papelbon is 31 and has never missed significant time and has had only a single season where you could call it a down year.......you are paying for past performance AS WELL as projected performance.

[iortiz]

Because you want it to be.

 

It's easy to overvalue Papelbon because of his good 2011.

 

Let's be honest here, not one contract of three years or more and 30 million or more for a reliever has panned out. And after 2010, it's no wonder they didn't want to take the gamble.

 

Paying for past performance is looking for fool's gold.

 

Be realistic.

 

I'm realistic. He worth that money. He is in his prime. He is 30. He is mature now. He has the balls to shut down the games. You don't find that around the corner.

[a700hitter]

So what exactly do you call the signing of Bobby Jenks, Lackey, Cameron......

 

Players ask for money based on past performance......notice I did not include Crawford, as they were paying for past performance as well as projected performance.

 

Papelbon is 31 and has never missed significant time and has had only a single season where you could call it a down year.......you are paying for past performance AS WELL as projected performance.

All of the other bad signings were bad for reasons that don't apply to Papelbon.

 

Cameron was too old

Dice K was untested in the US

Lackey had a history of arm problems and he was never an ace

Jenks is grossly out of shape and has never been durable

 

I don't count Crawford as a bad signing yet. He's young and he has no chronic injury problems.

[User Name]

So what exactly do you call the signing of Bobby Jenks, Lackey, Cameron......

 

Players ask for money based on past performance......notice I did not include Crawford, as they were paying for past performance as well as projected performance.

 

Papelbon is 31 and has never missed significant time and has had only a single season where you could call it a down year.......you are paying for past performance AS WELL as projected performance.

 

But this is pretty much my point.

 

Look, if you want them to stop handing out stupid contracts, you need to take the good with the bad.

 

First off, as good as Papelbon is, going for so many years with a reliever for so much money has never panned out for any team except the Yankees. You know as well as i do that as good as his 2011 was, he's probably never going back to his 2006/07 heyday. Paying him like he is is paying for past performance. Again, relievers are fickle.

 

And second, while this team is not a small-market team, they have handed out enough stupid contracts to the point where they need to be careful where to invest if they want to field a competitive team for 2012. If they let go of Papelbon then turn around and re-sign Ortiz, then you'll be absolutely right on their idiocy. If they allocate that money on pitching and balance out the roster, then it's a whole different ballgame.

[a700hitter]

I'm realistic. He worth that money. He is in his prime. He is 30. He is mature now. He has the balls to shut down the games. You don't find that around the corner.

It took 45 years to find one like him. I am sure that Bowden can step into his shoes.

[User Name]

I'm realistic. He worth that money. He is in his prime. He is 30. He is mature now. He has the balls to shut down the games. You don't find that around the corner.

 

Then if two years from now he breaks down (as relievers tend to do), you turn around and call the FO a bunch of idiots. Beauty of being a fan i guess.

[SCM33]

All of the other bad signings were bad for reasons that don't apply to Papelbon.

 

Cameron was too old

Dice K was untested in the US

Lackey had a history of arm problems and he was never an ace

Jenks is grossly out of shape and has never been durable

 

I don't count Crawford as a bad signing yet. He's young and he has no chronic injury problems.

 

Thats kinda the point I was making though. You are almost ALWAYS paying based on passed performance.

 

Papelbon is no different.

[a700hitter]

Thats kinda the point I was making though. You are almost ALWAYS paying based on passed performance.

 

Papelbon is no different.

Yep, what people don't understand is that this is a market value contract. i guess now the whiners will have to argue that we can't compete with Philly money just like we can't compete with Yankee money. Please!!

[SCM33]

If they allocate that money on pitching and balance out the roster' date=' then it's a whole different ballgame.[/quote']

 

Not many teams win without good closers (look at the 2003 RedSox, almost good enough)......and not many closers can handle the pressure of pitching in Boston. We had one of those guys, and he just walked out the door without a single phone call.

 

Im not saying they are going to be terrible.......but they do have a huge hole to fill, a hole which didnt exist if they just paid him.

[iortiz]

Then if two years from now he breaks down (as relievers tend to do)' date=' you turn around and call the FO a bunch of idiots. Beauty of being a fan i guess.[/quote']

 

U won't get it, will you?

 

He is not even close to be one of our recent FA nightmares (D-K, Lackey, Jenks, etc.)