User Name

Double steal?

A miracle!

I thought Drew wasn't a good defensive SS.....

I'm going to lose my mind. What the f***?

Jays haven't been able to get good wood on that cutter.

DESTROY THIS BUM!

"Daniel Nava walks". Quite a recurring theme.

Blue Jays seem to have forgotten you can actually take a pitch.

Ortiz is really struggling right now.

Bj Ryan wasa pretty big boy too.

Wrong thread there buddy

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.

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.

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.

Not sure if serious......

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.

Brad Lidge 2004-2008: 2.92 ERA, 163 saves Francisco Rodriguez 2004-2008: 2.23 ERA, 206 SV Francisco Cordero 2003-2007: 3.03 ERA, 167 SV

First off, what does "take a pill" even mean? Second off, the main point of contention between us is your insistence that Papelbon is a sure thing. We've discussed this over and over and over. By admitting that Papelbon's contract is an "experiment" for the Phillies, you are admitting to the inherent risk and possible failure of the contract, therefore invalidating your earlier arguments.

Damn you. I was just doing this.

Thank you

A track record is not a definitive indicator of future performance in baseball. Age, injury risk and projections are all important as well. This line of thinking is the reason people keep lending Donald Trump money.

You just admitted to being wrong, then said i was the one who was wrong. My head may just explode.

Remember that Soriano also had several good years as an elite setup man BEFORE becoming a closer, and Hanrahan got rocked the second half of last year, walking everyone. The problem here is that every relief pitcher is a major risk. Remember BJ Ryan? He had a very good pedigree, signed a huge FA contract, and bombed. Remember Brad Lidge? K-Rod? Francisco Cordero? All of those guys had good track records and succumbed to injuries/ineffectiveness throughout the life of their contracts. That is why giving that contract to Papelbon was riskier than any other move the Red Sox could have pulled off during that off-season. People with no foresight refuse to see it that way, but Papelbon is just another pitcher who could get injured at any time like any other. For the record, so far this season Papelbon has exhibited the lowest fastball velocity (92.2) and K rate (5.54 K/9) of his career. Let's see how that contract looks next year. Nathan, had he bombed, would have been gone after the season, just like Hanrahan and Bailey will be if they don't get their s*** together. Soriano would've probably signed a two-year deal had the Sox been aggressive, so he wouldn't have been a long-term commitment either.

Yeah Norris would seem like a good #5 for the Sox.

Cliff Lee makes no sense for the Red Sox. He's old, expensive, and would require multiple prospects to acquire given his recent performance.