SoxFanForsyth

Paying Pap 12mm makes me sick.

Anyone else excited about our outfield? Crawford http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=7948499 Ellsbury http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=7028681 And then this guy in 2012?!? http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=11469235 :shock: Damn. Good luck finding a gap.

First off - I don't know why this discussion is even valid. There are two possible outcomes to Pap's season. He either improves, or he is a sub par reliever. If he improves, he's going to look for a high dollar, multi year contract, something the Sox will not be interested in offering. If he stays the same or gets worse, there is absolutely no reason to offer him a deal anyway. So we are arguing about whether Papelbon, Mr. Setting-Records-For-Future-Closers, is going to take a team friendly contract after a 2008-esque season?? It's a pointless argument. And for the record - I'm not saying he won't ever return to his 2008 numbers. I'm saying that 1 year of 2008 style numbers isn't enough to persuade me to sign him again, not even to a 1 year deal, and not with the FA market the way it is projected to be for the 2011-2012 offseason. And for the record - 27 HR for Lowrie may be a bit high, but 20-25 in a season is incredibly feasible. Last year was the first year of a somewhat experienced and healthy Lowrie, and he crushed it. He won't keep that pace, but even if he slows down, 20-25 is not at all a reach.

I'm not comparing him to Timlin. What I am saying is that 1 year is not enough time to judge whether or not a player is "fixed" or not after two bad seasons, and in a very deep RP free agency pool in the 2011-2012 offseason, I see absolutely no reason to forgo signing some of the proven FA relief pitchers just to give Papelbon an extra chance. Look. We have paid Papelbon almost $29mm to close games for us for the past 6 years. I see no reason why we owe him anything else. I'm not sure if that's what you're talking about with the silver lining or not, but that's what I'm understanding it - we basically owe him a chance to redeem himself. We paid the guy $29mm to pitch 60-70 innings a year. He did great the first 4 years, but really struggled the past 2. Bard needs the chance to close games out. He's incredibly effective, and at a cost of less than $1mm this year, we can lock him up for 3-4 years for about 12-15mm and have a closer for the next 4 years at the same cost as Papelbon will cost in 2011. Take into account that a set up guy comes at a fraction of the cost of a closer, and you've got the ability to get a very reliable, very consistent, and very effective bullpen without having to shell out $10mm+ for your closer.

Oh, so I've disliked the player the entire time he's been on the team? No, I haven't. I've disliked him since he was still overly cocky and performed at a sub par level. And I'm using around 100 IP of pitching? What are you even talking about dude? I'm using his 68 IP in 2009 and 67 in 2010, which is 135 IP, and represents 37% of his entire career. Which is also the most recent part of his career. My God, you're acting like I'm cherry picking 100 innings off of a 10 year starter who has logged 1800 innings. I'm taking the most recent 1/3 of his career. I know exactly what you are saying. I've read it and interpreted it. Just because my opinion is different than yours is not at all a reflection of my apparent inability to comprehend what you're saying. And where does the loyalty point come from? It comes from your comment that some Sox fans want to hang him from the balls after he was a hero in 2007. Great. Lowell won the WS MVP that year. Do you want to go get him back, too? 2007 is absolutely meaningless, especially after 2 consecutive years of sub par performance. Even if he comes back and pitches like he did in 2008, that is an aberration, not a trend. He has had 6 years to prove that he was an effective reliever. He showed effectiveness in 4 of those 6 years. But the past 2 years - no dice.

Being sentimental is exactly how you end up with an old, ineffective team. I love Pap for helping us in 2007, but I'm not still trying to win the WS in 2007. I'm trying to win it in 2011, and what he did in 2007 has no relevance to 2011. Yeah. His BB/9 from 06-08 is 2.1, but now you're cherry picking stats by removing his worst two seasons. You can't just ignore the past two seasons because they are poor seasons. If he went 2.1 in 2008 to 3.2 in 2009 to 2.2 in 2010, I can understand calling it an aberration, but it's not. It has happened the past 2 seasons consecutively. It's becoming a trend, not an aberration, and there is absolutely zero indication that he is going to reduce his BB/9, and if he does reduce it in 2011, that becomes the aberration, not the trend. After seeing him pitch the way he has in 2009 and 2010, in addition to his "setting records for the closers after me" in terms of payroll, I wouldn't even try to negotiate with him. I see absolutely nothing in his year last year that would indicate that he would recover from consecutive poor seasons. His BABIP was normal. His K/9 was over 10. His LD%, FB%, and GB% are all consistent with career norms (within about 2%). So, somehow, increasing, as you say, from 2.1 BB/9 to 3.6 BB/9 is going to raise his ERA and FIP by 1.5 points?? I don't see it at all.

Off the Papelbon topic - Votto agrees to a 3 year/38mm extension, while Soriano gets 3 years/35mm. My dear God, that's so sick. I know that Votta took well below market value, but those two contracts shouldn't have been within 20mm of each other.

Papelbon's 2009 and 2010 BB/9 numbers were closer to his career norms than his 2008 numbers were! If any of those years were an aberration, it would be his 2008 numbers. Besides his BB/9 increasing since 2008, his HR/9 has increased as well. This tells me that he's lost a significant amount of control, as his balls are not only missing the plate, but also are leaking over the middle of the plate more often. I'll give you that his 2008 season was probably his most effective in relation to his BABIP, but since then there has been a significant downward trend, and while it is attributable to his loss of command, even if he comes back and posts a 2.3 BB/9 which is about what his career norms are, I think his future performances will be more consistent to 09-10 than 07-08. Also - his Z-Contact% has increased as well, and sat at 87.7% last year, so, even though his K/9 ratio is consistent with career norms, hitters are making contact with balls inside the strike zone much more frequently. Compare that to his 2008 number of 82.3%, and that's a significant increase. He's just a less effective pitcher. I would much rather give Bard a shot at closing in 2012 than to take a chance and pay Papelbon 8-10mm in hopes that a good 2011 is not an aberration, but signs of things to come.

Cervelli hit .271 with a .359 OBP last year. No power, obviously, though. I agree that Martin will be better in the future than Cervelli will be in the future, but if Martin hits .271/359 this year, he'll be doing well. I just don't see how Granderson playing 24 more games and Martin replacing Cervelli makes the Yankees better than last year. :dunno:

After seeing him decline every year for the past 3 years, even with a bounce back year, I think there would be much better options out on the market, even if you have to spend a bit more. Besides - it's not like we're going to have to go out and buy a closer on the market. We've got an elite set up man who is probably going to transition into an elite closer soon, and is still developing in Bard. Even with a bounce back year, I see no reason to invest any more money in Papelbon. I want a closer who is consistent, or as close to it as a RP can be. I can live with one ore two bad years of the last 5-6 years, but a downward trend followed by 1 bounce back year is not enough for me to give a guy a contract. If I am Papelbon's agent, I am starting to put a bug in his ear about the potential for a 1 year deal in a pitchers park at a decreased salary to up his value. EDIT: I understand that we are under the assumption that he fixes whatever is wrong with him, but after a 3 year downward trend, I would need to see consistent improvement (at least 2-3 years of 2007 and 2008-esque numbers) to sell me on him, and unfortunately, he's only got 1 year left on his deal.

Papelbon has shown a consistent decline over the past 3 years in BB/9, HR/9, and FIP. His LOB% was an incredible 89.3% in 2009, which is why his ERA somehow was at 1.85. His K/BB ratio has decreased each of the past 3 years. No, its not just because I don't like him that we should get rid of him. It's because he has consistently gotten worse over the past 3 years, and one year of improvement does not rationalize giving someone a multi year deal, even if it is at a team discount. I would rather pay someone like Heath Bell 3/30 than to pay Papelbon 3/18.

Not to mention Soriano is only going to shorten 65 games a year. You're not going to see the Soriano - Mo combo more than 55 to 65 times a year. I get it, that's an incredibly stout 8th and 9th inning, and it shortens quite a few games, but it doesn't replace 3/5 of their rotation. And if he is going to argue that the Yankees rotation got better by the addition of Soriano, why didn't the Sox rotation get better by the addition of Jenks and Wheeler? I'm pretty sure Wheeler, Jenks, Bard is a very strong 7th and 8th inning bullpen. Just delusional writing. I honestly can't believe that ESPN published that. I can't believe NESN published Eric Ortiz's article either.

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/columns/story?columnist=matthews_wallace&id=6022424 According to ESPN New York's Wallace Matthews, the addition of Soriano just made the Yankees favorites again. Listen, I understand that it shortens the game, but he's saying basically that it solved all of their pitching problems. I guess the Yankees writers had to write an article to compete with the Worst Article of the Offseason, which Eric Ortiz's is currently the favorite for, with his article comparing the Sox to the 1927 Yankees. How, again, do these writers have jobs?!?

Fastball and slider are incredible. Add a splitter or a change up, and I think he could transition into a SP, but he would never be as effective in a SP role as he is in the RP role. He is an elite reliever to me.

Part of me would love to see that, but then I look at his stats as a starter in the minors. He started 22 games his first year in the minors (2007), and posted a 7.08 ERA. Then in 2008, he went to the bullpen, and posted a 1.51 ERA. 2009 - Still in the bullpen - 1.12 ERA. I'm not sure if it's mental, or if he starts to blow up after 3-4 innings, but something is different. Besides, when you find gold, why try to change it?

He has got to stop throwing that cutter that leaks over the middle of the plate. I'm so tired of seeing him throw a 90 mph meatball that gets raped. 2007 - threw the cutter 0.3% of the time, FB 63.1%, curveball 25.1%. 2010 - threw the cutter 15.3% (the most he ever threw it before was 5.1%), FB 55.2%, and curveball 18.2%. It was like he changed his pitching strategy completely last year and he got absolutely lit up. He needs to go back to his fastball-curveball strategy and work his cutter in occasionally, and throw it off the plate when he's ahead in the count. In on the hands on a lefty, backdoor on a righty. Right now he's starting it on the corner and it's leaking right over the middle of the plate and he's getting raked.

It's not that I don't understand the concept that the Yankees spend without regards to the salary cap or any penalties or fines that are associated with it, I completely understand that. The Yankees have made it perfectly clear every year since the threshold was instituted in 2003. What I don't understand is how you think it's a logical move for the Yankees to give up a 1st round pick to a rebuilding team, plus $12mm a year for 3 years to a set up guy with opt out clauses. Even if the money isn't an issue, its not a good contract for the Yankees. I'm not being a homer in this deal. I never said it didn't make them better. My entire focus has been on the contract. And while it does make them better, it does not play a big enough factor that they have pulled back even with the Sox this year. A set up guy is worthless when your starting pitching leaves the game giving up 3-4 runs in 6 innings 60% of the time.

Twice as much money DOESN'T MATTER! It's the percentage of money that the relief pitcher makes! Do you think the Rays or Padres would feel ok paying $6mm to a set up man/potential closer? Uh. No. Because that's eating 15% of their total payroll! If we were talking about Youkilis vs A Rod, I could see you calling it 2x the pay. That provides a huge gap. But you saying that Soriano makes 2x Jenks, that's like me saying Ellsbury will make 2x Gardner and that's ridiculous. No, it's not. It's 500k. As such, a difference of $5-6mm in relation to a $170mm+ total salary is pocket change. That's just over 3%. So it's ok to pay Jenks $6mm, but if he asked for $11mm, HELL NO! That's a 3% increase on our total payroll! f*** that noise.

Scioscia saw how the Angels handled Pap in the 09 ALDS. Pap is going to take a big paycut and sign a 1 year deal to pull a Beltre and build up his worth in the NL next year.