Stick a fork in the Yanks

[Foley]

you don't decide what merits a wow and what doesnt.making stupid guarantees like you did always merits a wow

Making the guarantee that Papelbon is a significant upgrade from Tavarez is the equivalent of guaranteeing the sun to rise in the morning.

Does anyone recall the stat of how are fifth starter did last season and how bad it was?

This is more than just the 5th starter, but the septet of Jason Johnson, David Pauley, Lenny Dinardo, Matt Clement, David Wells, Kevin Jarvis and Kyle Snyder combine for 48 starts with a 6.72ERA last season. Worse still was that only 245IP were pitched by the starters during those 48 starts, barely more than 5IP a game. They finished with a 12-24 record.

And the more frightening thing is that the rotation from last year -- one that managed only two pitchers with 200IP+ and 30+ starts -- is only changed by the addition of one pitcher. And as good as Matsuzaka may be, hes not good enough to compensate for the Jason Johnsons of the world that get forced to pitch significant numbers of innings due to cracked ribs, blisters, shoulder problems, knee problems, or any other problem that can pop up out of nowhere.

FWIW,I've found myself supporting most all Epstein's decisions and I pretty much adopt a wait and see attitude because it's such a long season. But this announcement was very disappointing.

I typically give him (and the rest of the FO) the benefit of the doubt on most things since, as much as most fans refuse to admit, he knows a whole lot more about baseball and the Red Sox than any of us. But this is one of those Mirabelli for Bard/Meredith "we have to fix this problem right now at all costs" moves where I hate it from the first time I hear about it. He said after the Mirabelli move that it was strictly reactionary and that he hoped to never do something like that again... but apparently not.

I think a lot of the positive reaction to this stupid move (see Glen Ordway) is predicated on the fact that Red Sox nation has this completely asinine belief that a bullpen should not give up ANY runs. If Schill goes 6 and gives up 3 runs, that's fine and dandy - but if he leaves with a 1 run lead and any member of the bullpen gives up that 1 run, you'll read something like the following on boston.com/sports message boards: "OH MY GOD, R BULLPEN SUX, CAN U BELEEVE THEY GAVE UP A RUN?! OH GEEZ. R PEN SUX SO MUCH. WHY DID TITO PUT HIM IN. PUT PAPELBON IN FOR EVERY INNING IN THE PEN. GEEZUS."

That and the fact that New York has been great in that area for the past 10 years due to Rivera. Everyone always points to the fact that Rivera is one of the major things that makes the Yankees great and that without him they'd be a far inferior team. Therefore, by having that top notch closer its one more area where the Sox can go neck and neck with the Yankees. But if Rivera could pitch 200IP a season that were half as good as the 80IP he does every year there is no question in my mind that he would be a starter. But they started him, he sucked, and it was off to the bullpen.

The opposite happened with Pedro. The Dodgers didn't think Pedro's body could handle starting so they stuck him in the bullpen. While he did just fine in the pen and could easily have parlayed that into a career of tremendous success as a reliever, I think we'd all agree the right decision was made to let Pedro be a starter. While I don't expect Papelbon to ever be in the category of Pedro Martinez, the fact still remains that Papelbon should at least be allowed to fail as a starter before the chance for him to succeed is completely thrown out.

 

[patriotspride]

I can guarentee that whoever replaces Papelbon in the rotation will lose a lot more than 4 games as a starter than Papelbon would.

this is what you guaranteed i don't think that guarantee equates to the sun rising in the mourning.nice try

 

[Foley]

this is what you guaranteed i don't think that guarantee equates to the sun rising in the mourning.nice try

Are you interpreting the word "lose" as in win/loss record? Because if you're using it in the literal sense then you're misinterpreting what I said. Win/loss records are meaningless. My guarantee was of the fact that Tavarez, though his own bad pitching, will make the team lose a game at least 4 more times than Papelbon would though the course of 30-35 starts.

 

[Real World]

Yahoo fans are always funny. Can someone tell me how the Redsox moving Papelbon to the Closer spot he manned last year puts a fork in the, um, Yankees? Does this move mean that the Yankees now win 85 games instead of 90, 95 games instead of 100, or now won't win any games at all? Last I checked this affected the Yankees in no way, shape, or form. Matter of fact, it is debatable as to how much it even helps the Redsox, as is evidenced by the discussion in this very thread.

Personally, I think the move, under normal circumstances, is a bad one, as a top line starter (Pap is unproven here) pitching 200+ IP and 14-17 wins is far more valuable than a 50-70 IP closer. The deal here though is that the Sox pen is brutal on paper, and some certainty is needed. This move can be debated both ways under the circumstances, but what should be noted is the fact that with $160 million's in payroll, Epstein has manufactured a shaky team. Money does not mean happyness.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

I've given myself some time to come to grips with the move. I even started to think that maybe it was good.

Then I realized that I just can't fake it. I still hate the move days later.

As for the sentiment that Paplebon or Francona wanted this to happen, well who freaking cares. Someone in the front office needs the balls to tell the player and manager that Paplebon is a starter and it's their job to pitch and coach given the roles the front office assigns.

This makes the move to install Paplebon as closer last year horrible in hindsight. At the time we all loved it because Paps was starting the season out of the pen anyway. The story (which was repeated again and again by the front office) was that it was just for one year and it was being done out of necessity.

This move can be debated both ways under the circumstances, but what should be noted is the fact that with $160 million's in payroll, Epstein has manufactured a shaky team. Money does not mean happyness.

It's a $160M team with questions in the pen, catcher, CF, and 2b (though the centerfield question is mitigated a little by Wily Mo and the 2b question is mitigated a bit by the fact that the areas where Pedroia excels tend to translate well between minors and majors). For comparison, the Yanks have a $180M team (I'm purely guessing at the payroll) with questions in the starting rotation, bullpen (other than closer, obviously), and 1b. Actually there's no question at 1b, they're starting out with an awful player at 1b.

Every team has questions, and focusing on the Sox bullpen while ignoring their strengths (and the weaknesses of other teams) doesn't really prove anything.

 

[Real World]

I've given myself some time to come to grips with the move. I even started to think that maybe it was good.

Then I realized that I just can't fake it. I still hate the move days later.

As for the sentiment that Paplebon or Francona wanted this to happen, well who freaking cares. Someone in the front office needs the balls to tell the player and manager that Paplebon is a starter and it's their job to pitch and coach given the roles the front office assigns.

This makes the move to install Paplebon as closer last year horrible in hindsight. At the time we all loved it because Paps was starting the season out of the pen anyway. The story (which was repeated again and again by the front office) was that it was just for one year and it was being done out of necessity.



It's a $160M team with questions in the pen, catcher, CF, and 2b (though the centerfield question is mitigated a little by Wily Mo and the 2b question is mitigated a bit by the fact that the areas where Pedroia excels tend to translate well between minors and majors). For comparison, the Yanks have a $180M team (I'm purely guessing at the payroll) with questions in the starting rotation, bullpen (other than closer, obviously), and 1b. Actually there's no question at 1b, they're starting out with an awful player at 1b.

Every team has questions, and focusing on the Sox bullpen while ignoring their strengths (and the weaknesses of other teams) doesn't really prove anything.

The move will be as good as the starting rotation ends up pitching. I'd prefer the 200-220 IP's personally.

The Yanks, of which i am a fan, have spent exactly $180 million this year (sure doesn't buy you what it used to ), and they have serious questions too. Who's on first, is actually a legit question with them and not a joke. Phillips, Minkeivitch (sp?), or Phelps are just awful. Pettitte is a serious question mark to me with his 4+ ERA, and .284 BAA in the naitonal league. Pavano and Igeiwa Mussina is always solid but turns 38 this year. Wang is very good. Their pen is actually quite good, and their line-up has one hole, and that's 1st base. So their question is basically with starting pitching , but that's the worst question a team can have.

 

[BradyManny]

This is more than just the 5th starter, but the septet of Jason Johnson, David Pauley, Lenny Dinardo, Matt Clement, David Wells, Kevin Jarvis and Kyle Snyder combine for 48 starts with a 6.72ERA last season. Worse still was that only 245IP were pitched by the starters during those 48 starts, barely more than 5IP a game. They finished with a 12-24 record....

Holy shyt. I don't see how anyone can look at that 12-24 stat and not think moving Papelbon back to the bullpen (before determining if he would be a greater starter) is a good move. Based on that stat, I think whoever and whatever combination that replaces Papelbon will probably be around 10 games under .500. Of course, if Lester comes back, it's a different story, but I for one don't want to see Lester in Boston for a long time. It's too soon to rush him back out there after what he's been through. Not to mention, even if Lester were penciled in at the 5th starter, I'd personally rather have Papelbon in the rotation than Wake.

That and the fact that New York has been great in that area for the past 10 years due to Rivera. Everyone always points to the fact that Rivera is one of the major things that makes the Yankees great and that without him they'd be a far inferior team. Therefore, by having that top notch closer its one more area where the Sox can go neck and neck with the Yankees. But if Rivera could pitch 200IP a season that were half as good as the 80IP he does every year there is no question in my mind that he would be a starter. But they started him, he sucked, and it was off to the bullpen.

Right on. If a great pitcher can start, he starts. End of story. If he can't, he goes to the pen and maybe he's great there, but you'd rather have 200-220 innings of greatness than 70-80 innings.

Look at it this way, just all of those in favor of this, ask yourself, which scenario sounds better to you:

1) Jonathan Papelbon pitching 80 innings, Julian Tavarez pitching 170 innings, the rest of the bullpen pitches an additional 30 innings.
2) Julian Tavarez pitches 80 innings, Jonathan Papelbon pitches 200 innings.

Furthermore, people are forgetting the TAX ON THE BULLPEN that a weak fifth starter creates. Not only did those 5th starters from last season go 12-24, but every fifth day, our bullpen was decimated, and we were out of a game by the 5th or 6th inning.

 

[PatsMyBoyz!]

Holy shyt. I don't see how anyone can look at that 12-24 stat and not think moving Papelbon back to the bullpen (before determining if he would be a greater starter) is a good move. Based on that stat, I think whoever and whatever combination that replaces Papelbon will probably be around 10 games under .500. Of course, if Lester comes back, it's a different story, but I for one don't want to see Lester in Boston for a long time. It's too soon to rush him back out there after what he's been through. Not to mention, even if Lester were penciled in at the 5th starter, I'd personally rather have Papelbon in the rotation than Wake.



Right on. If a great pitcher can start, he starts. End of story. If he can't, he goes to the pen and maybe he's great there, but you'd rather have 200-220 innings of greatness than 70-80 innings.

Look at it this way, just all of those in favor of this, ask yourself, which scenario sounds better to you:

1) Jonathan Papelbon pitching 80 innings, Julian Tavarez pitching 170 innings, the rest of the bullpen pitches an additional 30 innings.
2) Julian Tavarez pitches 80 innings, Jonathan Papelbon pitches 200 innings.

Furthermore, people are forgetting the TAX ON THE BULLPEN that a weak fifth starter creates. Not only did those 5th starters from last season go 12-24, but every fifth day, our bullpen was decimated, and we were out of a game by the 5th or 6th inning.[/QUOTE]

Yahtzee:rocker:

Lester was dragged up too soon last year to begin with.He rose to the occasion admirably but still,he was a 911 call. Then there's his cancer and all that went with it-that entire ordeal had to be physically and emotionally draining. I'm thrilled he's back in baseball but I'd rather they give him some time. I'd hate to think counting on him right away is a reason Papelbon's back in the pen.

I just read Lester is down in AAA along with our hero Julian Tavarez. fwiw.

 

[PatsMyBoyz!]

Holy shyt. I don't see how anyone can look at that 12-24 stat and not think moving Papelbon back to the bullpen (before determining if he would be a greater starter) is a good move. Based on that stat, I think whoever and whatever combination that replaces Papelbon will probably be around 10 games under .500. Of course, if Lester comes back, it's a different story, but I for one don't want to see Lester in Boston for a long time. It's too soon to rush him back out there after what he's been through. Not to mention, even if Lester were penciled in at the 5th starter, I'd personally rather have Papelbon in the rotation than Wake.



Right on. If a great pitcher can start, he starts. End of story. If he can't, he goes to the pen and maybe he's great there, but you'd rather have 200-220 innings of greatness than 70-80 innings.

Look at it this way, just all of those in favor of this, ask yourself, which scenario sounds better to you:

1) Jonathan Papelbon pitching 80 innings, Julian Tavarez pitching 170 innings, the rest of the bullpen pitches an additional 30 innings.
2) Julian Tavarez pitches 80 innings, Jonathan Papelbon pitches 200 innings.

Furthermore, people are forgetting the TAX ON THE BULLPEN that a weak fifth starter creates. Not only did those 5th starters from last season go 12-24, but every fifth day, our bullpen was decimated, and we were out of a game by the 5th or 6th inning.[/QUOTE]
********************************************
Yahtzee:rocker:

Lester was dragged up too soon last year to begin with.He rose to the occasion admirably but still,he was a 911 call. Then there's his cancer and all that went with it-that entire ordeal had to be physically and emotionally draining. I'm thrilled he's back in baseball but I'd rather they give him some time. I'd hate to think counting on him right away is a reason Papelbon's back in the pen.

I just read Lester is down in AAA along with our hero Julian Tavarez. fwiw.

 

[PatsMyBoyz!]

Sorry that posted twice.

 

[Real World]

Rivera came up as a starter with the Yankees and got his brains beat in the 3rd time around the order. His make-up, or stuff, made him perfect for the pen since he really didn't have any decent off speed stuff. Papelbon's stuff is more complete, whereas Rivera's is one dimensional (cut fastball)

Rivera made 10 starts in his rookie season, going 3-3 with a 5.94 ERA. He was prone to the longball, surrendering eight in 50 innings. Those were the only 10 starts of his career, through 2004.

http://www.thebaseballpage.com/players/riverma01.php

 

[patsfanofNC12]

I don't understand how everyone views this as a penominal idea. A starter who can win 14-16 games with an ERA in the low 4s is more valuable than a reliever who converts a save 85% of the time.

And assuming he spends the entire year as a closer it will be about 2 and a half years since he last started a game (ST aside). Is it really a wise idea to keep him out of that role just because Pineiro blowing 10 saves would be too much to cope with? Or do they really plan on wasting a talent and keeping him a closer for the rest of his days in Boston?

I don't agree with that it is harder to find a solid closer than an okay starter. Plus Tavarez isn't that bad a starter so he can help us out in the rotation at the #5 spot, and Lester is slowly working his way back to us. I am not saying Tavarez is near as good as Paplebon as a starter, but he isn't someone who is gonna go in there and lose a lot of games. Just look at what he did at the end of last year, and also Lester will be good when he comes back, and I don't know about ya'll but I want him as a starter.

 

[Foley]

It may be harder to find a solid closer than an okay starter, but that doesn't mean a solid closer is more valuable than an okay starter. I just think that a slightly better than league average starter has more value than a solid closer, largely due to my belief that a closer is an utterly overrated waste of an arm and not the best use of a reliever of the caliber that Papelbon has shown he can be. Unless a majority of his innings come when the game is on the line (and not just 3 run saves) then having him be a closer is an enormous waste of talent.

And Tavarez is starting on 12 days rest tomorrow because they have taken every chance possible to skip him in the rotation, which shows the confidence that Francona and the team have in him. Unfortunately skipping him that often is not going to be an option for most of the season. He has a career ERA in the 5s as a starter, and as much as everyone loves to talk about how great he was in September, his nice stats were largely in part to one start. One run in a complete game is very good and I give him credit for that, but in his other 5 starts last season he had a 5.10ERA. Expecting anything better than that for a prolonged period of time is going to set you up for dissapointment. And as much as I'd love to have Lester come up and pitch well I don't he has good enough control to be much better than Tavarez at this point. He was lucky to have an ERA as low as he did last season with a 1.65WHIP.

 

[Real World]

A front of the rotation starter is always more important than a closer. Generally speaking of course. The circumstances surrounding a specific situation does sway that one way or another. The Sox figured their starters would good enough to absorb the loss of Paps, whereas their pen was so bad they needed at least one sure thing to help give it some certainty. So far their decision has panned out, but it's April, and lets see how it's playing in July and August. It'll be interesting to see.