Bard to Rotation a Mistake?

[iortiz]

Not only that' date=' but if Doubront sticks as a viable starter, Bard will likely return to the BP to limit his overall innings in his first year transitioning to SP. The 2nd half BP will feature Bailey, Melancon, Bard, Aceves, and Hill (he gets back from TJS before Matsuzaka, and he looked really good last year).[/quote']

 

Oh yeah... I forgot Doubront and Hill. This team could end up the season pretty solid and with a lot of depth. Let's only hope we can stay healthy and in the fight at least the 1st half of the season which is reachable since seems to be "easier" than the second half (better for us given the circumstances)

[redsoxfan3]

Not only that' date=' but if Doubront sticks as a viable starter, Bard will likely return to the BP to limit his overall innings in his first year transitioning to SP. The 2nd half BP will feature Bailey, Melancon, Bard, Aceves, and Hill (he gets back from TJS before Matsuzaka, and he looked really good last year).[/quote']

 

I really think that they are going to have Bard stick it out in the rotation. Realistically, it would probably work out better if Dice-K takes over for Bard in the rotation when he returns if Bard is struggling, but if Bard is doing solid, then why not let him continue to pitch in the rotation? He has to earn it, but I have a feeling the FO will want to keep him there if he is doing solid.

 

Either way, we will have Bailey, Melancon, Aceves, Hill, Morales, Padilla, Bowden, Albers, etc. in the pen after the all-star break. That is not a bad pen at all as long as everyone stays healthy. Dice-K is going to add depth to our rotation. I remember LL saying that there is always a possibility of a six man rotation. I am against that, but what do we do if all of the starters work out? Hopefully it works out for us and there is no room for Dice-K in the rotation. That means everyone is pitching effectively and there are no injuries.

[ORS]

I really think that they are going to have Bard stick it out in the rotation. Realistically, it would probably work out better if Dice-K takes over for Bard in the rotation when he returns if Bard is struggling, but if Bard is doing solid, then why not let him continue to pitch in the rotation? He has to earn it, but I have a feeling the FO will want to keep him there if he is doing solid.

 

Either way, we will have Bailey, Melancon, Aceves, Hill, Morales, Padilla, Bowden, Albers, etc. in the pen after the all-star break. That is not a bad pen at all as long as everyone stays healthy. Dice-K is going to add depth to our rotation. I remember LL saying that there is always a possibility of a six man rotation. I am against that, but what do we do if all of the starters work out? Hopefully it works out for us and there is no room for Dice-K in the rotation. That means everyone is pitching effectively and there are no injuries.

It's been reported that there is no innings cap for Bard. I'm not sure I believe that given the preponderance of evidence of young pitchers who have been injured by massive workload increases.

[jung]

Honestly I just think it is unrealistic to think about a major league season in terms of no injuries either with regard to the staff in total or to the guys in the rotation. Other than this Bailey thing, the timing could work out for the Sox this year and they might end up OK.

 

Murphy being such a frequent visitor lately....watch.... the staff will be OK and the offense will s*** the bed!

 

As for dealing with Bailey, I started out suggesting Melancon but started to waiver based on the ST he has had. Began thinking more about Aceves. I think I would still prefer Melancon as the closer so that the Sox can still deploy Aceves most compelling talent, the ability to get plugged in just about anywhere and perform.

 

I am so jumpy about Bailiey at this point that when the news flashes talk about Bailey being out for a few months, I am hearing a few years.

[a700hitter]

That's just it' date=' they are at $174M, right up against the cap, without these extra players you keep insisting are necessary. Where does that money come from? It's pretty clear they have every intention to stay under the soft cap. Is this where you find fault? That's a pretty unrealistic expectation.[/quote']I am not being unrealistic at all. What is unrealistic is the notion that we are 8 starters deep. First of all, I said that we should have added a bona fide starter. I didn't say that they necessarily had to add to payroll. My reference to the $174 million payroll is not meant to suggest that there is an unlimited pot of money, but rather to illustrate that this management has very poorly deployed it's vast resources. How the heck to you spend so much money and break camp with only 2 pitchers that made more than 20 starts in 2011. It's mind boggling to me.

 

As others have said, Ortiz money could have been used to add a starter. That would have been a payroll neutral move. What happened to the money from the Scutaro salary dump. That never got redeployed. What about the trade route? Gio Gonzalez signed a very reasonable extension with the Nats after being traded. There is more than one way to skin a cat. The FO could have added a starter by making some other roster choices, such as letting Ortiz walk or by a trade. They were completely unimaginative, and Cherrington made his "on the cheap moves" that were reminiscent of his first mentor, Dan Duquette.

 

As for the prospect of adding to payroll, IMO there are times when you should exceed your budget. After the horrible 2006 season, the FO blew a hole in their budget to address their needs and right the ship in 2007. IMO, 2011 was much worse than 2006. They didn't merely have a disappointing season. They had a record setting collapse that dismayed their fans and soured the fan base on what they viewed as a non caring team full of selfish prima donas. It was a franchise damaging year that IMO should have been addressed in a bold manner. The owners recognized this to a large extent and acted accordingly. They cleaned house. The manager, GM, trainers, medical staff and most of the coaches were sent packing. However, they didn't finish the job, because they didn't address the issues on the field. IMO it was a very bad decision to start the season with a rotation that is only 3 deep with experienced healthy starters. It will prove very difficult to get through a 162 game season with such a lack of depth.

[User Name]

I don't understand the gushing over Papelbon leaving. He never even gave the Red Sox a chance to counter-offer. It was common knowledge he wanted to set the bar for closers in terms of money, and he wasn't going to do that in Boston.

 

It's funny that those same people who look at the "experts'" opinions for everything, don't look at all the expert opinions saying Papelbon's contract may have been the stupidest of the offseason, given the volatile nature of relief pitchers. Foot, meet mouth.

 

You just don't commit that many resources to a relief pitcher, and i bet that if the Sox had given a similar amount of money to Papelbon than what Philly gave him, those who say "money doesn't matter to me" would be bitching about the amount of resources tied up to Papelbon if it prohibited other moves.

 

To those who say: "Money doesn't matter" as a general statement, be realistic. The Red Sox have their limits, and you wouldn't say that if it was your money.

[jacksonianmarch]

UN, if Papelbon continues to stay healthy, then his contract is a boon. The problem with relievers is their frequent injuries, so that might have been the reason why the sox didnt go long with him. If he can keep it up and stay relatively healthy, then he's worth it. They proved that by paying him $12 mil in 2011. If they didnt think he was worth it, he'd have been dealt last yr

[User Name]

UN' date=' if Papelbon continues to stay healthy, then his contract is a boon. The problem with relievers is their frequent injuries, so that might have been the reason why the sox didnt go long with him. If he can keep it up and stay relatively healthy, then he's worth it. They proved that by paying him $12 mil in 2011. If they didnt think he was worth it, he'd have been dealt last yr[/quote']

 

So there is absolutely no chance of Papelbon's performance dropping due to non-injury related issues?

 

And his contract is a "boon" if he stays healthy?

 

You really are a hopeless homer man.

[Dojji]

I dunno about a "boon" but Paps was an elite talent, and paying a little bit extra to preserve elite talent makes sense.

[User Name]

I dunno about a "boon" but Paps was an elite talent' date=' and paying a little bit extra to preserve elite talent makes sense.[/quote']

 

Wasn't "elite" in 2009 and 2010. How convenient that he returns to "elite" levels in 2011. Also, he's still a relief pitcher.

[jacksonianmarch]

So there is absolutely no chance of Papelbon's performance dropping due to non-injury related issues?

 

And his contract is a "boon" if he stays healthy?

 

You really are a hopeless homer man.

 

4yrs $50 mil, equals $12.5 mil per season. The sox paid him $12 million in 2011 alone. He's getting roughly the same rate as the sox gave him. And he has performed at an elite level for his entire stay in Boston. The gold standard is $15 mil a season, which Mariano is earning. Papelbon isnt Mariano, but he's probably right behind him in performance over the past 6 seasons. He's also 30 yrs old. A 4 yr contract takes him through his 34 yr old season. He shouldnt see a non-injury decline in that span. If the contract took him past 35, then I'd agree. The contingency with closers is injury. Mo is lucky he hasnt had a major one in his time in NY. Papelbon had his shoulder scare, but he hasnt either. If he stays healthy, he'll be worth the contract. If he doesnt, then he won't be.

 

I've said it 1000X on here. Papelbon isnt irreplaceable. He's just very difficult to replace. He's given you elite production (sans 1 season) out of a very important position since he took the role 6 yrs ago. The combination of production, durability, and ability to handle the pressure made him worth what he is earning. If he continues to show he can perform at that level, then he's worth it.

[User Name]

4yrs $50 mil, equals $12.5 mil per season. The sox paid him $12 million in 2011 alone. He's getting roughly the same rate as the sox gave him. And he has performed at an elite level for his entire stay in Boston. The gold standard is $15 mil a season, which Mariano is earning. Papelbon isnt Mariano, but he's probably right behind him in performance over the past 6 seasons. He's also 30 yrs old. A 4 yr contract takes him through his 34 yr old season. He shouldnt see a non-injury decline in that span. If the contract took him past 35, then I'd agree. The contingency with closers is injury. Mo is lucky he hasnt had a major one in his time in NY. Papelbon had his shoulder scare, but he hasnt either. If he stays healthy, he'll be worth the contract. If he doesnt, then he won't be.

 

I've said it 1000X on here. Papelbon isnt irreplaceable. He's just very difficult to replace. He's given you elite production (sans 1 season) out of a very important position since he took the role 6 yrs ago. The combination of production, durability, and ability to handle the pressure made him worth what he is earning. If he continues to show he can perform at that level, then he's worth it.

 

The problem isn't the annual rate, but rather the length of the contract. As you said yourself, he should see some non-injury related decline during the contract span, and there's always the possibility for injury for pitchers in general, but even more for relievers.

 

Most sports analysts view the Papelbon contract as a stupid one, and be honest: If the Sox had given him all that money you'd have had a field day criticizing the move.

[mvp 78]

Wasn't "elite" in 2009 and 2010. How convenient that he returns to "elite" levels in 2011. Also' date=' he's still a relief pitcher.[/quote']

 

I wondered about this too. Though a little convenient that he was garbage in game 162. Not the same guy since 08. Way too much money.

 

Closers are a dime a dozen. Sox should trade for a guy like Capps or someone on the cheap.

[a700hitter]

I've said it 1000X on here. Papelbon isnt irreplaceable. He's just very difficult to replace. He's given you elite production (sans 1 season) out of a very important position since he took the role 6 yrs ago. The combination of production, durability, and ability to handle the pressure made him worth what he is earning. If he continues to show he can perform at that level, then he's worth it.

It took 50 years for someone to come along who replaced Dick Radatz for dominance, and I'm not comparing them, because the closer role has changed so much in that time. Papelbon also reached 200 saves faster than any pitcher in history. I know some people say that Saves is an over-rated stat, but that is what closers are paid to do. He might be a little more difficult to replace than people think.

[a700hitter]

I wondered about this too. Though a little convenient that he was garbage in game 162. Not the same guy since 08. Way too much money.

 

Closers are a dime a dozen. Sox should trade for a guy like Capps or someone on the cheap.

Capps? No thanks. I don't need to vomit 3 times a week.

[Dojji]

Wasn't "elite" in 2009 and 2010.

 

Wasn't elite in 2009? He had an ERA+ of 254. What, because he blew his first (and still only) postseason save ever he didn't have an elite season on '09? Idiocy.

 

How convenient that he returns to "elite" levels in 2011.

 

Umm, no he didnt. He returned to "seriously above average" but his last really elite season is still 2009 -- you know, the one you said wasn't elite. 2011 was by any reasonable standard the second worst year of his career. Probably why the franchise opted to walk, actually.

 

Even in his worst year in 2010, Jonathan Papelbon was still a well above average power reliever. If that's his floor, he was worth money.

Also, he's still a relief pitcher.

 

This is blindingly irrelevant.

 

People can't have it both ways -- either the bullpen is critical to the success of the franchise, in which case we need to panic over Bailey, or it isn't, in which case Papelbon is "just a reliever."

[iortiz]

4yrs $50 mil, equals $12.5 mil per season. The sox paid him $12 million in 2011 alone. He's getting roughly the same rate as the sox gave him. And he has performed at an elite level for his entire stay in Boston. The gold standard is $15 mil a season, which Mariano is earning. Papelbon isnt Mariano, but he's probably right behind him in performance over the past 6 seasons. He's also 30 yrs old. A 4 yr contract takes him through his 34 yr old season. He shouldnt see a non-injury decline in that span. If the contract took him past 35, then I'd agree. The contingency with closers is injury. Mo is lucky he hasnt had a major one in his time in NY. Papelbon had his shoulder scare, but he hasnt either. If he stays healthy, he'll be worth the contract. If he doesnt, then he won't be.

 

I've said it 1000X on here. Papelbon isnt irreplaceable. He's just very difficult to replace. He's given you elite production (sans 1 season) out of a very important position since he took the role 6 yrs ago. The combination of production, durability, and ability to handle the pressure made him worth what he is earning. If he continues to show he can perform at that level, then he's worth it.

 

This guy has been solid/healthy/proved in our environment. We have paid him that money. I do not see a decline for the rest of that contract. He is still young and most import: He is HEALTHY. IMO he is almost irreplaceable. Good things in live are expensive. I want to see a guy with that durability/performance again in Boston. He CAN NOT be treated as another reliever. He is special, reason why he received that money. Our FO was not interested on him. They had an entire season to put the contract on the table. They did not. They decided another strategy. Hopefully this pay out. I'm optimistic about this but only time will tell.

[User Name]

Wasn't elite in 2009? He had an ERA+ of 254. What' date=' because he blew his first (and still only) postseason save ever he didn't have an elite season on '09? Idiocy.[/quote']

 

His peripherals (WHIP, H/9, BB/9, HR/9) were all below what had been his career averages to date and what are his career averages right now. What is idiocy is looking at one stat to determine overall performance. You should know better.

 

 

Umm, no he didnt. He returned to "seriously above average" but his last really elite season is still 2009 -- you know, the one you said wasn't elite. 2011 was by any reasonable standard the second worst year of his career. Probably why the franchise opted to walk, actually.

 

Absolutely asinine.

 

Statistically, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2011 were his best seasons, and could all be considered "elite" seasons. All he had in 2009 was a better ERA and ERA+, which is not indicative of overall performance, and even less with relievers and their samples.

 

 

 

This is blindingly irrelevant.

 

People can't have it both ways -- either the bullpen is critical to the success of the franchise, in which case we need to panic over Bailey, or it isn't, in which case Papelbon is "just a reliever."

 

What the hell does this even mean?

 

I've maintained my initial posture all along: Closers are replaceable, and i've shown no indication of panic over Bailey's injury. They will find a suitable option, because it's just a relief role, and an overrated one at that.

 

Also, don't take things out of context: My initial referral to Papelbon being "just a reliever" refers to the amount of money and years tied up to him by the Phillies. You don't pay that much for relief pitching.

 

If you think he'd be worth the money he's making for seasons similar for 2010, you're an idiot. No offense meant.

[User Name]

This guy has been solid/healthy/proved in our environment. We have paid him that money. I do not see a decline for the rest of that contract. He is still young and most import: He is HEALTHY. IMO he is almost irreplaceable. Good things in live are expensive. I want to see a guy with that durability/performance again in Boston. He CAN NOT be treated as another reliever. He is special' date=' reason why he received that money. Our FO was not interested on him. They had an entire season to put the contract on the table. They did not. They decided another strategy. Hopefully this pay out. I'm optimistic about this but only time will tell.[/quote']

 

This is where the axe splits the log:

 

A) What makes you think he won't decline? If past performance is an indicator of future performance, then there is solid basis to believe he could decline in the near future.

 

B ) "Healthy" is never a given with any pitcher. You are merely assuming he will be healthy, but he could, as many "healthy" relievers have in the past, suddenly need to go under the knife.

 

C) A bunch of this other stuff "He's special, etc etc etc" don't hold a lot of water. He's had bad seasons in the past, and he could have them again, and he's also mortal like any other reliever not named Mariano. Assuming health is exactly the death trap a lot of teams fall into giving out this enormous contracts.

 

Let's employ a little less rhetoric and be a little more objective: Papelbon is one of the best at what he does, but what he does is very volatile and overrated.

[iortiz]

This is where the axe splits the log:

 

A) What makes you think he won't decline? If past performance is an indicator of future performance, then there is solid basis to believe he could decline in the near future.

 

B ) "Healthy" is never a given with any pitcher. You are merely assuming he will be healthy, but he could, as many "healthy" relievers have in the past, suddenly need to go under the knife.

 

C) A bunch of this other stuff "He's special, etc etc etc" don't hold a lot of water. He's had bad seasons in the past, and he could have them again, and he's also mortal like any other reliever not named Mariano. Assuming health is exactly the death trap a lot of teams fall into giving out this enormous contracts.

 

Let's employ a little less rhetoric and be a little more objective: Papelbon is one of the best at what he does, but what he does is very volatile and overrated.

 

We have discussed this plenty. I don't share your point of view. When you are the best in whatever you do, you succeed. He is one of the best in what he does. Close games. Save games. This job is not trivial.

 

On the other hand our strategy could work out. I'm optimistic, but he deserved that money, like it or not.

[a700hitter]

We have discussed this plenty. I don't share your point of view. When you are the best in whatever you do, you succeed. He is one of the best in what he does. Close games. Save games. This job is not trivial.

 

On the other hand our strategy could work out. I'm optimistic, but he deserved that money, like it or not.

That is why he got the money. The Phillies are not a stupid organization. Unlike the Sox, their recent big money acquisitions and FA's have lived up to their billing and no flopped.

[User Name]

We have discussed this plenty. I don't share your point of view. When you are the best in whatever you do, you succeed. He is one of the best in what he does. Close games. Save games. This job is not trivial.

 

On the other hand our strategy could work out. I'm optimistic, but he deserved that money, like it or not.

 

It's not the money. In fact, i think the AAV is a bit low considering what he made in 2011. It's the length of the contract.

 

Also, as another point, i don't think there are a lot of players who "deserve" the money they're making as a general rule of thumb.

[User Name]

That is why he got the money. The Phillies are not a stupid organization. Unlike the Sox' date=' their recent big money acquisitions and FA's have lived up to their billing and no flopped.[/quote']

 

The "experts" disagree.

 

Also, four words: Ryan Howard, Brad Lidge.

[ORS]

I am not being unrealistic at all. What is unrealistic is the notion that we are 8 starters deep. First of all' date=' I said that we should have added a bona fide starter. I didn't say that they necessarily had to add to payroll. My reference to the $174 million payroll is not meant to suggest that there is an unlimited pot of money, but rather to illustrate that this management has very poorly deployed it's vast resources. How the heck to you spend so much money and break camp with only 2 pitchers that made more than 20 starts in 2011. It's mind boggling to me. [/quote']

It is unrealistic to expect them to expand their budget, especially when the expansion exceeds the league implemented soft cap and gets penalized at 40%. And your last paragraph indicates you do expect them to have made such a decision despite your statement in this paragraph that it isn't what you were calling for.

 

Furthermore, you have been very critical of "Benny Boy" when he was not at the helm to make these poor decisions that lead to the current level of spending. I agree, I think they should have gotten more out of the money they spent on the likes of Lackey and Crawford, but that is in the past and should not be a source of criticism for the new GM.

 

And, can you quit with the creative number statements that are a transparent attempt to paint an intentionally bleak picture? Your "only 2 with 20 in 2011" is more than a bit disingenuous. Buchholz is an established MLB pitcher, and the ultimate quality of the 2012 rotation is not at all dependent upon how many starts the staff made in 2011. It certainly didn't help them last year going into the season with 5 pitchers who made more than 20 starts.

 

As others have said, Ortiz money could have been used to add a starter. That would have been a payroll neutral move.

Would you have supported a rookie DH if it meant more pitching? I'm skeptical you would given your consistent view on rookies. And, if not, don't bother listing it as an alternative, because you'd still be critical, just from another angle. I'm confident the only way your criticisms, ones that I think are a bit unrealistic and overstated, go away is if they had both Ortiz and the contingency pitching you want so bad, which takes us back to the expansion of resource cost.

 

What happened to the money from the Scutaro salary dump. That never got redeployed.

Don't know, we don't have the final cap number with benefits/bonuses until rosters are set. It's possible the Suctaro dump was just that, a dump to get them in-line with their budget desires.

 

What about the trade route? Gio Gonzalez signed a very reasonable extension with the Nats after being traded. There is more than one way to skin a cat.

There certainly is more than one way to go about things. Just because this type of move wouldn't cost actual dollars, it does cut into the their talent resources. Gonzalez was acquired for 4 good prospects. After the recent trades for talent like Gonzalez and Martinez, is it realistic to expect them to further deplete their good MiLB talent to that degree? I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere, with both money and talent. The only thing that seems consistent is that these lines don't seem to exist for you when it comes to making you comfortable with the roster + contingencies going into the season.

 

As for the prospect of adding to payroll, IMO there are times when you should exceed your budget. After the horrible 2006 season, the FO blew a hole in their budget to address their needs and right the ship in 2007. IMO, 2011 was much worse than 2006. They didn't merely have a disappointing season. They had a record setting collapse that dismayed their fans and soured the fan base on what they viewed as a non caring team full of selfish prima donas. It was a franchise damaging year that IMO should have been addressed in a bold manner. The owners recognized this to a large extent and acted accordingly. They cleaned house. The manager, GM, trainers, medical staff and most of the coaches were sent packing. However, they didn't finish the job, because they didn't address the issues on the field. IMO it was a very bad decision to start the season with a rotation that is only 3 deep with experienced healthy starters. It will prove very difficult to get through a 162 game season with such a lack of depth.

IMO, they should never spend money as a PR move.

[jung]

Lets not forget that Paps made no bones about the fact that he:

a) wanted to test the market, meaning no chance of signing him before he went to FA

wanted to set the high water mark for FA closers for total dollars (which I think he did)

 

If that is what the guy wanted to do, that is fine. I can't argue with the guy for taking the money. I can't even argue with the guy for wanting to set the mark for FA closers. Although if it were me, to be honest, that would have been pretty far down my list since in any case I was going to be paid millions. But hey that is what was going to blow his dress up. Paps is Paps and I am me. On the other hand as soon as Paps went down that road in my view he closed the door entirely to the Sox. That is OK as well. It just is.

 

In my view the Sox would have paid Paps handsomely. However the best they would have done would have been something that we would probably all have defined as "the home town discount."

 

Paps was not going to do more than laugh at a home town discount offer. In fact I believe it is our understanding that while the Sox did not contact Paps, his agent did not contact the Sox in an attempt to float the Phillies offer and see if the Sox were willing to beat it. In some ways I think we talk about that deal like neither Paps nor the Sox knew what was going on. I think they new exactly what they wanted to know on both sides.

 

So even given the risk and especially as they relate to closers, I believe the Sox would have paid Paps a great deal of money. However it would have not been close to what the Phillies offered and any team including the Sox, maybe especially the Sox that was not willing to go down that road was not going to sign him.

[ORS]

We have discussed this plenty. I don't share your point of view. When you are the best in whatever you do, you succeed. He is one of the best in what he does. Close games. Save games. This job is not trivial.

 

On the other hand our strategy could work out. I'm optimistic, but he deserved that money, like it or not.

This is neither true nor false, not yet.

 

The next 4 years will determine if he is worth that salary level. What he did in the past is in the past.

[iortiz]

It's not the money. In fact, i think the AAV is a bit low considering what he made in 2011. It's the length of the contract.

 

Also, as another point, i don't think there are a lot of players who "deserve" the money they're making as a general rule of thumb.

 

I think the difference between you and me is the way we see the case. You are worry about the length of the contract, you have your reasons. I'm not worry about it at all considering his career numbers and durability. The plus I see on him User is that he was already proved in your environment.

 

Anyway, only time will tell who was right about this.

[User Name]

I think the difference between you and me is the way we see the case. You are worry about the length of the contract' date=' you have your reasons. I'm not worry about it at all considering his career numbers and durability. [b']The plus I see on him User is that he was already proved in your environment. [/b]

 

Anyway, only time will tell who was right about this.

 

Not a good predictor of future performance, but i can see where you're coming from. However, what he's done in the past is in the past.

[iortiz]

This is neither true nor false, not yet.

 

The next 4 years will determine if he is worth that salary level. What he did in the past is in the past.

 

I think you pay the money based on the past. He has the numbers. He has shown durability. IMO he earned/deserved that contract. Sure only time will tell whether it is worth. In the end nothing is sure. Philly bet that it will worth. I'm with them. Red Sox and some around here think it will not worth. Only time will tell.

[iortiz]

Not a good predictor of future performance' date=' but i can see where you're coming from. However, what he's done in the past is in the past.[/quote']

 

oh yeah, but his past suggest me that he will do just fine in the future, but yeah, that's only me and Philly.