I agree that an elite starter is "better" than an elite closer, but if you look at this move from both a team and individual standpoint, its a win-win situation. The team needed a closer desperately and had arguably the best rotation in baseball. Thats a fact. Moving Papelbon to the bullpen fills our HUGE hole and the team is stronger now. Papaelbon also said he wants to be a closer for the rest of his career. He himself said he pitched in the pen during college and in the minors before they had him a starter. And he seems to be made for closing. He has the electricity, the stuff, the mindset, etc. It can be extremely hard to find an exceptional closer, don't mess with it.
NOW, the facts. Papelbon had a historic rookie year closing last season. Thats a fact. He IS an elite closer. He's already proven that. NOW, he HAS NOT proven that he can be an elite starter. SO, here I ask you, why mess with something that is worked out perfectly. We need a closer, and he may be the best in baseball. Isn't it logical to have him close when we have essentially 3 aces in the rotation? And again, we still don't know how effective he would be starting. Could he consistantly go more than 5 innings? Can he mix his pitches enough to go 3 times through the line-up? Can he maintain his stamina, meaning less heat on his pitches so that he doesn't wear out quick and he can reach back for more stuff when he needs it? These are all unanswered questions.
The facts are that we needed a closer while we had a great rotation. Moving papelbon fills the hole while not greatly affecting the rotation. And its a fact that Papelbon is an elite closer, he's proven it. He hasn't proven to be an elite starter though. It would be a mistake to use this season as an experiment with Paps, when we already know he is amazing at closing games.