Just for fun - great Sox postseason relief performances

[User Name]

He has baggage from his days in Philly and Washington. There were no issues that I can recall when he was playing for the Sox.

 

You think he wouldn't have reacted with the same smug douchiness that he did in Philly had he endured last place finishes in 12, 14 and 15 with the Sox? People are who they are.

[Kimmi]

You think he wouldn't have reacted with the same smug douchiness that he did in Philly had he endured last place finishes in 12, 14 and 15 with the Sox? People are who they are.

 

It's hard to know for sure. I think it's quite possible that he would not have reacted the same.

[User Name]

It's hard to know for sure. I think it's quite possible that he would not have reacted the same.

 

Wishful thinking, at best. He had his share of slip-ups (though not that big) while he was still in Boston. Papelbon's attitude is terrible. I'll take Kimbrel with a side of Koji please.

[a700hitter]

We only know what his translator tells us. He could be up at the podium during the postgame saying "I am the best, the rest of these *******s don't know how lucky they are to have me around. Too bad our fans suck; and I wouldn't care at all if they all drowned in manure. Also, hey you, the reporter with the ugly haircut, I'm going to have sex with your wife's face tonight."

 

And the translator says "Yes, tonight was an excellent win, I'm really glad to be part of this team".

Lol! I have often wondered if the translators edit the remarks.

[Dojji]

They kind of have to do that, especially if a direct translation would be culturally unacceptable, but whether they function as a deliberate publicity filter in all situations, I have no idea.

[Dojji]

You think he wouldn't have reacted with the same smug douchiness that he did in Philly had he endured last place finishes in 12, 14 and 15 with the Sox? People are who they are.

 

Considering that there was no reason we couldn't have had Papelbon and Koji, who only started to close with this team and would have probably been fine playing setup man, and considering that at least a couple of those years our bullpen was a sucking chest wound, I wonder how having the extra high quality arm in the pen would have affected the outcome of those seasons?

[sk7326]

"Faith" and "Blind faith" are different things. If you'd take Papelbon over Kimbrel, Chapman or Davis, then it's blind faith we're talking about.

 

Dojji is half right. The Papelbon of 2006 to 2008 was as good a closer as ever. Clearly he morphed into a very average one after that - stopped throwing his splitter, too many fastballs (and his fastball was quite good but not amazing enough to not use other pitches)

[User Name]

But he's not that Papelbon anymore, which is the point. We're talking Kimbrel, Chapman et al versus the guy who's spent the last three whining, choking his teammates and being just "good".

[sk7326]

Well, this summarize pretty well what I've been saying about Papelbon since I've been in this board.

 

Great post, Doji.

 

Also, Papelbon himself said in 2013 that he was not a fastball pitcher anymore. I remember that he said that he was trying to compensate that with better command/control in his fastball and tunning his other pitches/repertory. The funny thing is that in 2013, "a year of adjustment", he had a "tough year", and still he posted a decent 2.94 ERA. Everybody in that year said that he was finished. Well, after that year, the adjustments seemed that worked out; in 2014 he posted a ridiculous 2.01 ERA and saving 39 games in 66 IP, one of his best years in his career. How long is he going to last at this level? IDK, but trying to compare some names with him after 11 years of consistency and durability as a closer in the ALE, simply doesn't make sense. BTW, for those who say that his contract didn't worth it, the guy has earned every penny, that's out of question.

 

Hopefully Kimbrel follows his steps just as Pap is following Mo's.

 

What was interesting was that Papelbon was not really a fastball pitcher as early as 2009. There were definite cracks in his control and (eye test here) his own approach to hitters. He switched from the splitter to his slider as his primary off speed pitch, even though he did not throw it as well. He seemed to relish a more hulk smash sort of approach to me.

 

The more important thing though is whether Papelbon now is significantly better than a median closer - that is, is Papelbon spitting out twice the value (or more) than one of those names who flies by in the later rounds of a fantasy draft (say Cody Allen or Glen Perkins). The answer is pretty clearly no. That's not even really a knock on Papelbon so much as the closer position - there are really only a few who provide a significant leg up.

[a700hitter]

What was interesting was that Papelbon was not really a fastball pitcher as early as 2009. There were definite cracks in his control and (eye test here) his own approach to hitters. He switched from the splitter to his slider as his primary off speed pitch, even though he did not throw it as well. He seemed to relish a more hulk smash sort of approach to me.

 

The more important thing though is whether Papelbon now is significantly better than a median closer - that is, is Papelbon spitting out twice the value (or more) than one of those names who flies by in the later rounds of a fantasy draft (say Cody Allen or Glen Perkins). The answer is pretty clearly no. That's not even really a knock on Papelbon so much as the closer position - there are really only a few who provide a significant leg up.

Why did you pick a measure of twice the value of a median closer? How many closers ar at that level?

[sk7326]

Why did you pick a measure of twice the value of a median closer? How many closers ar at that level?

 

His take home pay

[a700hitter]

His take home pay

And how many closers would reach the level of twice the value of a median closer?

[User Name]

The median closer hovered aroundd 1 WAR. Only 8 closers overall doubled that output. Carson Smith was one of them (although he was promoted into the CL role later in the season) Craig Kimbrel and Jonathan Papelbon were not. Although Kimbrel had hit the mark in every prior year the last three years.

[SCM33]

Foulke. His career was over after those appearances. He gave everything he had for that 04 WS.

[iortiz]

What was interesting was that Papelbon was not really a fastball pitcher as early as 2009. There were definite cracks in his control and (eye test here) his own approach to hitters. He switched from the splitter to his slider as his primary off speed pitch, even though he did not throw it as well. He seemed to relish a more hulk smash sort of approach to me.

 

The more important thing though is whether Papelbon now is significantly better than a median closer - that is, is Papelbon spitting out twice the value (or more) than one of those names who flies by in the later rounds of a fantasy draft (say Cody Allen or Glen Perkins). The answer is pretty clearly no. That's not even really a knock on Papelbon so much as the closer position - there are really only a few who provide a significant leg up.

The way I see the thing sk is that he STILL can save you a lot of games. Most of them, actually. That's all that matters to me. This is why SV% & IPs are the metrics I care when I want to choose a closer, mostly after 11 Y of service. I don't care if he saves you most of the times with a low K/9. I don't care if he saves you most of the times with 65 mph pitches. I don't care if he saves you most of the times with a "high" ERA/FIP/SIERA. I don't even care if he saves you with a "low" WAR numbers..... and still some of these and other stats are really great in the last couple of years.

 

BL, I don't care what a closer has to do in order to save a game as long he gets the job done. Period. This is why you pay closers: Save games, regardless how they do it, and this is why closers are special and different to other relievers to me. For example, Look at Taz, he is a great reliever, but he can't close. Papelbon is still one of the best regarding this matter, saving games.

In the last two years his SV% are even above his career average and still pitching a lot of innings. Again, consistency and durability.

 

Sk, The question should be: How many closers can post you 65+ SVs with a SV% above 92%? Pap has recently proven that he still can do it. How long is he going to last at this level? IDK, but 3 years ago a lot of people said that he was finished, and look at him, he's like the good wines.

[Dojji]

It's amazing how many people in this thread can praise the job Keith Foulke did for us in 04 while completely missing the boat on the fact that it doesn't even matter HOW the outs are gotten. Foulke was anything but overpowering and he got the job done in style for us that year because he had the right attitude to make a good closer, and he knew how to use his stuff to get outs. Why is that lesson ignored when discussing another veteran closer with World Champion credentials, I don't exactly know.

[mvp 78]

It's amazing how many people in this thread can praise the job Keith Foulke did for us in 04 while completely missing the boat on the fact that it doesn't even matter HOW the outs are gotten. Foulke was anything but overpowering and he got the job done in style for us that year because he had the right attitude to make a good closer, and he knew how to use his stuff to get outs. Why is that lesson ignored when discussing another veteran closer with World Champion credentials, I don't exactly know.

 

Right now, Paps is an unknown postseason commodity due to his diminished stuff. If he was still pitching like 2007, we would concede your point. It's easy to rack up saves for a last place team.

[sk7326]

The median closer hovered aroundd 1 WAR. Only 8 closers overall doubled that output. Carson Smith was one of them (although he was promoted into the CL role later in the season) Craig Kimbrel and Jonathan Papelbon were not. Although Kimbrel had hit the mark in every prior year the last three years.

 

That the bell curve here spans 1 or 2 wins MAX says a lot about the value of closers generally ...

[sk7326]

It's amazing how many people in this thread can praise the job Keith Foulke did for us in 04 while completely missing the boat on the fact that it doesn't even matter HOW the outs are gotten. Foulke was anything but overpowering and he got the job done in style for us that year because he had the right attitude to make a good closer, and he knew how to use his stuff to get outs. Why is that lesson ignored when discussing another veteran closer with World Champion credentials, I don't exactly know.

 

Keith Foulke in 2003 struck out 26% of the hitters he faced, 23.7% in 2004. Better than Mariano Rivera during that time. Koji struck out 38% of the guys he faced in 2013 (to give you an idea how absurdly brilliant he was). Papelbon's seasons were generally in the high 20s with a couple higher than that. Foulke missed bats plenty. You are right - you don't need hulk smash power, but missing bats is fundamental.

 

The thing about Foulke which was unappreciated is he pitched no fewer than 77 innings between 1999 and 2004. That is more work than Jonathan Papelbon or Craig Kimbrel have delivered in any of their big league seasons. Tito turned to Foulke in their darkest hour, yes - but few relievers of modern vintage were able to take the ball with that sort of frequency.

[sk7326]

The way I see the thing sk is that he STILL can save you a lot of games. Most of them, actually. That's all that matters to me. This is why SV% & IPs are the metrics I care when I want to choose a closer, mostly after 11 Y of service. I don't care if he saves you most of the times with a low K/9. I don't care if he saves you most of the times with 65 mph pitches. I don't care if he saves you most of the times with a "high" ERA/FIP/SIERA. I don't even care if he saves you with a "low" WAR numbers..... and still some of these and other stats are really great in the last couple of years.

 

BL, I don't care what a closer has to do in order to save a game as long he gets the job done. Period. This is why you pay closers: Save games, regardless how they do it, and this is why closers are special and different to other relievers to me. For example, Look at Taz, he is a great reliever, but he can't close. Papelbon is still one of the best regarding this matter, saving games.

In the last two years his SV% are even above his career average and still pitching a lot of innings. Again, consistency and durability.

 

Sk, The question should be: How many closers can post you 65+ SVs with a SV% above 92%? Pap has recently proven that he still can do it. How long is he going to last at this level? IDK, but 3 years ago a lot of people said that he was finished, and look at him, he's like the good wines.

 

I think that number is higher than you think and largely a function of opportunity. For instance, compare with Tampa Bay (who is a useful control group here) and their highest save guys since 2010

 

2010: Rafael Soriano v Papelbon (93.8% v 82%)

2011: Kyle Farnsworth v Papelbon (80.6% v 91%)

2012: Fernando Rodney v Papelbon (96% v 90%)

2013: Fernando Rodney v Papelbon (82.2% v 81%)

2014: Jake McGee v Papelbon (83% v 91%)

2015: Brad Boxberger v Papelbon (87.2% v 92.3%)

 

Tampa Bay could approximate Papelbon's performance (and if you think of it - the differences in pct results in only a couple of wins over a season if that) while sifting through the dumpster. I am sure Papelbon could deliver a solid closer's performance this year. But so could a lot of others for a lot less. Hopefully Kimbrel can do a lot more than that.

[Bellhorn04]

That the bell curve here spans 1 or 2 wins MAX says a lot about the value of closers generally ...

 

I get why that is, the number of innings mainly. Something nags at me that the WAR for closers is not necessarily an accurate measure of value. For instance in 2013 Koji's WAR was only 3.1. It seems a little low.

[Dojji]

That's because WAR is about wins added, and closing is about wins not lost. bit of a lighthouse fallacy problem using WAR to judge closers in particular and to a certain extent relief pitching in general

[Dojji]

I think that number is higher than you think and largely a function of opportunity. For instance, compare with Tampa Bay (who is a useful control group here) and their highest save guys since 2010

 

2010: Rafael Soriano v Papelbon (93.8% v 82%)

2011: Kyle Farnsworth v Papelbon (80.6% v 91%)

2012: Fernando Rodney v Papelbon (96% v 90%)

2013: Fernando Rodney v Papelbon (82.2% v 81%)

2014: Jake McGee v Papelbon (83% v 91%)

2015: Brad Boxberger v Papelbon (87.2% v 92.3%)

 

Tampa Bay could approximate Papelbon's performance (and if you think of it - the differences in pct results in only a couple of wins over a season if that) while sifting through the dumpster. I am sure Papelbon could deliver a solid closer's performance this year. But so could a lot of others for a lot less. Hopefully Kimbrel can do a lot more than that.

 

Tampa bay is led by an excellent general manager who may be the single best GM in the game today, has a very good nose for talent and the ability to do more with less money than just about anyone in the game, so these picks are not representative of what an unexceptional GM could acquire off the dumpster to close for him.

 

Furthermore the Rays sacrifice more offense for infield defense than the Red Sox have ever been prepared to do, which is one of the reasons the Rays pitching is able to do more with less.

 

We know from our own disasters over the years that you can NOT just pick any shmo off the street and close with them so your argument is not based in reality.

Edited March 15, 2016 by Dojji

[User Name]

That's because WAR is about wins added, and closing is about wins not lost. bit of a lighthouse fallacy problem using WAR to judge closers in particular and to a certain extent relief pitching in general

 

That is fundamentally wrong. The actual problem with the WAR formula and relievers is that it is very innings-dependent. Even the explanation in the fangraphs website specifies that WAR for SP is naturally higher than the WAR for relievers, and that's how it should be. Relief pitchers (even closers) cannot impact a season the same way that an SP or a position do, because they just don't play as much. As I've said many times before, the CL position is important, but overrated.

[sk7326]

I get why that is, the number of innings mainly. Something nags at me that the WAR for closers is not necessarily an accurate measure of value. For instance in 2013 Koji's WAR was only 3.1. It seems a little low.

 

I don't know - that put him on par with a #3 starter, which is pretty extraordinary in only 70+ innings.

 

I do agree that a win probability added is a more interesting measure.

[User Name]

Tampa bay is led by an excellent general manager who may be the single best GM in the game today, has a very good nose for talent and the ability to do more with less money than just about anyone in the game, so these picks are not representative of what an unexceptional GM could acquire off the dumpster to close for him.

 

Furthermore the Rays sacrifice more offense for infield defense than the Red Sox have ever been prepared to do, which is one of the reasons the Rays pitching is able to do more with less.

 

We know from our own disasters over the years that you can NOT just pick any shmo off the street and close with them so your argument is not based in reality.

 

Except that it is, and he just proved it. You could prove that point with teams like Oakland and Cleveland as well, who find consistent closers on a near-yearly basis. Numbers are reality, your opinion is not. You're just flat out wrong in this instance.

[sk7326]

Tampa bay is led by an excellent general manager who may be the single best GM in the game today, has a very good nose for talent and the ability to do more with less money than just about anyone in the game, so these picks are not representative of what an unexceptional GM could acquire off the dumpster to close for him.

 

Furthermore the Rays sacrifice more offense for infield defense than the Red Sox have ever been prepared to do, which is one of the reasons the Rays pitching is able to do more with less.

 

We know from our own disasters over the years that you can NOT just pick any shmo off the street and close with them so your argument is not based in reality.

 

The Red Sox mowed through the 2013 season with their THIRD choice for Closer. Three of the four semifinalists that year were using closers they did not start the season with.

The Giants won the World Series in 2014 after demoting the guy who was their closer in 2012.

The Royals won the World Series with their closer injured and unavaialble

Mark Melancon, a pitcher with not especially good stuff who was driven to the airport from Boston became an accomplished closer in Pittsburgh

 

Closers are made not born largely.

[sk7326]

Tampa bay is led by an excellent general manager who may be the single best GM in the game today, has a very good nose for talent and the ability to do more with less money than just about anyone in the game, so these picks are not representative of what an unexceptional GM could acquire off the dumpster to close for him.

 

Furthermore the Rays sacrifice more offense for infield defense than the Red Sox have ever been prepared to do, which is one of the reasons the Rays pitching is able to do more with less.

 

We know from our own disasters over the years that you can NOT just pick any shmo off the street and close with them so your argument is not based in reality.

 

Not so much. The job is a job - pitchers do not like to be shuffled around innings. I understand the human beings at work here - it's like any other job. You want to know your station. But it's very much something you can figure out in house (at least enough to be okay at the position).

[Kimmi]

I get why that is, the number of innings mainly. Something nags at me that the WAR for closers is not necessarily an accurate measure of value. For instance in 2013 Koji's WAR was only 3.1. It seems a little low.

 

It's not only the limited number of innings. It's the value of 'replacement level' as well. Relievers, including closers, are a lot easier to replace than starting pitchers or position players.

[Kimmi]

That's because WAR is about wins added, and closing is about wins not lost. bit of a lighthouse fallacy problem using WAR to judge closers in particular and to a certain extent relief pitching in general

 

That makes no sense.