Hanrahan's Injury

[iortiz]

It's a figure of speech i use meaning that a person is presenting two arguments that contradict each other. Your (or anyone's for that matter) posts on a baseball website have no impact on my physical well being.

 

 

 

This is a far cry from your earlier stance, and the correctness of the statement is still circumstancial.

 

1. well, just saying... just in case.

 

2. When I said that other no named Papelbon would have been an experiment is because Pap was already proved here... the others?, well, no, because haven't had that role here...hence would have been experiments/gambles/bets/risks or whatever you want to call it . No rocket science here. Not sure where's the problem.

[iortiz]

What ForSyth was trying to say is that Papelbon could very easily still explode during the life of his contract. Francisco Cordero was good for a part of his contract, so was K-Rod, and Brad Lidge.

 

His 2013 numbers are pretty, but his peripherals are declining. Wait and see.

 

Thing is, he has been terrific. Period. He is not the another "reliever". He's out of that bulk.

 

Numbers are there. He has been durable. He is still young. He'll be fine or better than when he was here.

[SoxFanForsyth]

1. well, just saying... just in case.

 

2. When I said that other no named Papelbon would have been an experiment is because Pap was already proved here... the others?, well, no, because haven't had that role here...hence would have been experiments/gambles/bets/risks or whatever you wan it to call it . No rocket science here. Not sure where's the problem.

 

See: Keith Foulke

[iortiz]

See: Keith Foulke

 

Not sure why.

 

The comparison is not even fair.

[User Name]

Thing is, he has been terrific. Period. He is not the another "reliever". He's out of that bulk.

 

Numbers are there. He has been durable. He is still young. He'll be fine or better than when he was here.

 

This here is the problem:

 

You don't know this, and history suggests that you are more than likely wrong. Track records don't mean anything when injury strikes or a pitcher loses effectiveness. Papelbon can, like any other pitcher, get injured. This is what's not rocket science and you just don't seem to understand.

[iortiz]

This here is the problem:

 

You don't know this, and history suggests that you are more than likely wrong. Track records don't mean anything when injury strikes or a pitcher loses effectiveness. Papelbon can, like any other pitcher, get injured. This is what's not rocket science and you just don't seem to understand.

 

You are a mass of contradictions. You said that you don't need comparisons. SFF put a list and now you approve it. Of course you need to take references in order to make a case. Problem in his case, nobody match him today no named Mo. I already rest my case. You refuse to see the point and the facts. You just can't accept that he could have a great career. You say that he will injure some how. There's no single clue under his belt in order to think that. You said that he just started a decline. That's a dead wrong. Numbers do not lie. Check them out.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

.

Lol I'd love to see you try to run a baseball franchise. It'd probably make last year's Red Sox look like a modest failure by comparison.

[italstallianion]

Yeah but we'd sell a ridiculous amount of merchandise in Mexico.

[a700hitter]

You are a mass of contradictions. You said that you don't need comparisons. SFF put a list and now you approve it. Of course you need to take references in order to make a case. Problem in his case, nobody match him today no named Mo. I already rest my case. You refuse to see the point and the facts. You just can't accept that he could have a great career. You say that he will injure some how. There's no single clue under his belt in order to think that. You said that he just started a decline. That's a dead wrong. Numbers do not lie. Check them out.

Papelbon is as steady as they come and he hasn't had any arm or injury issues since 2006; At the rate of 60 innings a year, it will take a long time to wear out a big boy like Papelbon. Look how long Big Lee Smith lasted.

[redsoxbeatz]

L - O - L @ H A N R A H A N

 

what a joKe

[User Name]

You are a mass of contradictions. You said that you don't need comparisons. SFF put a list and now you approve it. Of course you need to take references in order to make a case. Problem in his case, nobody match him today no named Mo. I already rest my case. You refuse to see the point and the facts. You just can't accept that he could have a great career. You say that he will injure some how. There's no single clue under his belt in order to think that. You said that he just started a decline. That's a dead wrong. Numbers do not lie. Check them out.

 

iortiz, i don't quite think you understand what i meant. Let me explain:

 

1)When i said i didn't need to compare Papelbon to other closers, i meant in terms of what the Sox needed after he left. Which is a point that stands all by itself. What Papelbon did before is not necessarily a surefire indicator of what he will do from here on out. This is undisputable. The basis of this point (and the argument) is that Papelbon isn't irreplaceable.

 

2) However, you kept harping on the point that there is essentially no precedent of a guy with Papelbon's pedigree, SFF made that list which clearly shows you several closers with similar numbers who bombed after they were given large FA contracts. This is also a stand-alone point that is used to counter a clearly incorrect notion that you keep spouting, and even after SFF presented that list that clearly contradicts your point with valid stats, you still don't get it.

 

Notice how these are two stand-alone points. There are no contradictions.

[redsoxbeatz]

6 pitches = 3 outs? What?????? Wow... Lester!

 

So, 27 x 3 = Game. 81 pitches boyboy

[User Name]

Wrong thread there buddy

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Papelbon is as steady as they come and he hasn't had any arm or injury issues since 2006; At the rate of 60 innings a year, it will take a long time to wear out a big boy like Papelbon. Look how long Big Lee Smith lasted.

Yeah, just look how well 'big boys' like Bell, Cordero, and Valverde are holding up despite their size. They're all bigger than Papelbon by the way.

[User Name]

Yeah, just look how well 'big boys' like Bell, Cordero, and Valverde are holding up despite their size. They're all bigger than Papelbon by the way.

 

Bj Ryan wasa pretty big boy too.

[iortiz]

Papelbon is as steady as they come and he hasn't had any arm or injury issues since 2006; At the rate of 60 innings a year, it will take a long time to wear out a big boy like Papelbon. Look how long Big Lee Smith lasted.

 

Some people will never understand this.

 

In the meantime lets see if Tazawa is the solution.

[iortiz]

Lol I'd love to see you try to run a baseball franchise. It'd probably make last year's Red Sox look like a modest failure by comparison.

 

Surly I wouldn't put the 2012 Red Sox numbers. The bar is so low right now.

[a700hitter]

Yeah, just look how well 'big boys' like Bell, Cordero, and Valverde are holding up despite their size. They're all bigger than Papelbon by the way.

You are free to disagree, and my statement was a broad generalization. Nevertheless, none of the pitchers that you mentioned belong in Papelbon's category. Bell never had a season with more than 2 saves until he was age 31. By that time Paps had 262 Saves. Also, by big, I didn't mean fat. Paps is 6'4". Bell is only 6'3". Similarly, Valverde's first big season was at age 29, but that big boy has been pretty durable if not consistent. Francisco Cordero had his first big season at age 28 and he never was Papelbon's equal. He stayed pretty consistent through age 36, so he too is durable. Two of these 3 guys you brought up support my statement that it is hard to wear out the these big boys at the rate of 60 innings a year. It should be pretty easy to come up with a few exceptions to such a broad general statement, but you whiffed on all three like a bad Salty plate appearance.

[iortiz]

You are free to disagree, and my statement was a broad generalization. Nevertheless, none of the pitchers that you mentioned belong in Papelbon's category. Bell never had a season with more than 2 saves until he was age 31. By that time Paps had 262 Saves. Also, by big, I didn't mean fat. Paps is 6'4". Bell is only 6'3". Similarly, Valverde's first big season was at age 29, but that big boy has been pretty durable if not consistent. Francisco Cordero had his first big season at age 28 and he never was Papelbon's equal. He stayed pretty consistent through age 36, so he too is durable. Two of these 3 guys you brought up support my statement that it is hard to wear out the these big boys at the rate of 60 innings a year. It should be pretty easy to come up with a few exceptions to such a broad general statement, but you whiffed on all three like a bad Salty plate appearance.

 

[Thunder]

Yeah, just look how well 'big boys' like Bell, Cordero, and Valverde are holding up despite their size. They're all bigger than Papelbon by the way.

 

Bell has 4 saves in 5 chances with a 4.11 ERA

Valverde is competing with young guns in the Tigers' pen and didn't start the year as closer.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

You are free to disagree, and my statement was a broad generalization. Nevertheless, none of the pitchers that you mentioned belong in Papelbon's category. Bell never had a season with more than 2 saves until he was age 31. By that time Paps had 262 Saves.

Yeah, so?

 

Also, by big, I didn't mean fat. Paps is 6'4". Bell is only 6'3".

Yeah, so?

 

Similarly, Valverde's first big season was at age 29, but that big boy has been pretty durable if not consistent.

Talking out of your ass.

 

Francisco Cordero had his first big season at age 28 and he never was Papelbon's equal. He stayed pretty consistent through age 36, so he too is durable. Two of these 3 guys you brought up support my statement that it is hard to wear out the these big boys at the rate of 60 innings a year.

No they don't. Troll.

 

It should be pretty easy to come up with a few exceptions to such a broad general statement, but you whiffed on all three like a bad Salty plate appearance.

Kind of like you whiffed on your barb (as usual)?

[a700hitter]

Yeah, so?

 

 

Yeah, so?

 

Similarly, Valverde's first big season was at age 29, but that big boy has been pretty durable if not consistent.

Talking out of your ass.

 

 

No they don't. Troll.

 

 

Kind of like you whiffed on your barb (as usual)?

You are free to disagree out of your ass as usual.

[jacksonianmarch]

Hanrahan is out for the yr. needless to say, this was a horrendous pickup

[italstallianion]

More of a waste of money than anything else. I consider Holt/Dejesus to be a wash, Pimentel was completely useless, and Melancon had his chance here and blew it, so while he's doing well in Pittsburgh I find it highly unlikely that Melancon would have the same numbers here.

 

It does piss me off when players suck/get injured and we still have to pay them for the whole contract but we aren't on the hook for that much.

 

I consider the $7M to be an inflation adjusted version of the $5M contracts we typically waste on people like John Smoltz and Brad Penny.

 

Edit: Still not sure how to feel about Sands though, that might be something to keep an eye on. Also I don't think we could have reasonably predicted the injury so I can't really blame the GM that much.

[jacksonianmarch]

I have a feeling Hanrahan ends up signing a contingent MiLB deal with the Yankees next yr in hopes of succeeding Rivera. Just call it a hunch

[a700hitter]

I have a feeling Hanrahan ends up signing a contingent MiLB deal with the Yankees next yr in hopes of succeeding Rivera. Just call it a hunch

Nostradamus

[italstallianion]

And then he uses whatever substances the current NY corpses are using and wins the Cy Young as a reliever.

[Thunder]

I have a feeling Hanrahan ends up signing a contingent MiLB deal with the Yankees next yr in hopes of succeeding Rivera. Just call it a hunch

 

Good one.

[a700hitter]

A good article analyzing the cost of replacing Papelbon:

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2013/05/the_rising_cost.html

[Bellhorn04]

I think there's a reasonable chance the Phillies could be looking to trade Papelbon.