Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:16 am Posts: 2576 Location: Maine, formerly MA
EllisEamos wrote:
4/5 wrote:
PhilPritchard wrote:
Does anyone else think it's crazy that teams are willing to pay that much money to a closer?
mariano rivera might deserve this type of compensation.
anyone else, i don't see it.
I think considering what some starting pitchers get paid in free agency, it's pretty easy to make a case for Papelbon given his track record over 6 seasons, with only 1 being subpar
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:34 am Posts: 12700 Location: ...a town in north Ontario...
MattA751 wrote:
EllisEamos wrote:
4/5 wrote:
PhilPritchard wrote:
Does anyone else think it's crazy that teams are willing to pay that much money to a closer?
mariano rivera might deserve this type of compensation.
anyone else, i don't see it.
I think considering what some starting pitchers get paid in free agency, it's pretty easy to make a case for Papelbon given his track record over 6 seasons, with only 1 being subpar
I just don't buy the the myth that closers are somehow so much more valuable than any other reliever. If you pay the top starters in the league around $18-20 million, shouldn't the top closers make about a third of that (based on the top starters pitching 200+ innings and the top closers pitching 60-70)? So yeah, giving maybe $6-8 million a year to the top closers in the league would makes sense... I just don't see how it's in any way justifiable to spend $12.5 million a year on someone who will have so little impact on games and whose success can easily be replicated by a much cheaper option who isn't considered a "closer".
_________________ I think we relinquished enough... and it's still dark enough... and it goes on and on and on...
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am Posts: 22978 Gender: Male
PhilPritchard wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
EllisEamos wrote:
4/5 wrote:
PhilPritchard wrote:
Does anyone else think it's crazy that teams are willing to pay that much money to a closer?
mariano rivera might deserve this type of compensation.
anyone else, i don't see it.
I think considering what some starting pitchers get paid in free agency, it's pretty easy to make a case for Papelbon given his track record over 6 seasons, with only 1 being subpar
I just don't buy the the myth that closers are somehow so much more valuable than any other reliever. If you pay the top starters in the league around $18-20 million, shouldn't the top closers make about a third of that (based on the top starters pitching 200+ innings and the top closers pitching 60-70)? So yeah, giving maybe $6-8 million a year to the top closers in the league would makes sense... I just don't see how it's in any way justifiable to spend $12.5 million a year on someone who will have so little impact on games and whose success can easily be replicated by a much cheaper option who isn't considered a "closer".
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:16 am Posts: 2576 Location: Maine, formerly MA
PhilPritchard wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
EllisEamos wrote:
4/5 wrote:
PhilPritchard wrote:
Does anyone else think it's crazy that teams are willing to pay that much money to a closer?
mariano rivera might deserve this type of compensation.
anyone else, i don't see it.
I think considering what some starting pitchers get paid in free agency, it's pretty easy to make a case for Papelbon given his track record over 6 seasons, with only 1 being subpar
I just don't buy the the myth that closers are somehow so much more valuable than any other reliever. If you pay the top starters in the league around $18-20 million, shouldn't the top closers make about a third of that (based on the top starters pitching 200+ innings and the top closers pitching 60-70)? So yeah, giving maybe $6-8 million a year to the top closers in the league would makes sense... I just don't see how it's in any way justifiable to spend $12.5 million a year on someone who will have so little impact on games and whose success can easily be replicated by a much cheaper option who isn't considered a "closer".
I know when I say this it'll come off the wrong way, and I don't mean it how it sounds, but Boston is different, in terms of being able to pay over and above what most teams might go to. I'd also make the argument that a closer is pitching 70 of the most important innings of a team's season, and they are a commodity that you just don't appreciate until you don't have one (I think Red Sox fans will be learning this come April).
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:34 am Posts: 12700 Location: ...a town in north Ontario...
MattA751 wrote:
I know when I say this it'll come off the wrong way, and I don't mean it how it sounds, but Boston is different, in terms of being able to pay over and above what most teams might go to. I'd also make the argument that a closer is pitching 70 of the most important innings of a team's season, and they are a commodity that you just don't appreciate until you don't have one (I think Red Sox fans will be learning this come April).
It doesn't come off the wrong way because I get what you mean with the first part... the Red Sox can afford to spend the money on a closer because they have so much money to spend that it doesn't really take away from what they spend elsewhere... right? That's a perfectly fair argument.
And if closers were actually used in the most important situations, then I would agree with the second part... but how many teams actually use them that way? Closers pitch the ninth inning of games that are within three runs, and that's it (unless they need to get some work in so they just throw an inning here and there).
Which situation is more important? A) 7th inning, none out, runners on first and second, protecting a one run lead B) 9th inning, none out, none on, protecting a three run lead
Obviously A is a much higher leverage situation, but you will never see a closer pitch there... you will always see the closer pitch in B. Sometimes the best time to use a closer is in the ninth inning, but it's often not. Managers, however, don't use closers outside of the ninth and end up taking away a lot of their potential value.
_________________ I think we relinquished enough... and it's still dark enough... and it goes on and on and on...
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 1:35 pm Posts: 4407 Location: Philadelphia/Los Angeles Gender: Male
Even though I realize in a pure performance standpoint, Papelbon is clearly superior, but still, I REALLY liked Madson, obviously he's been here his entire career and I was so hoping we'd resign him. But I think the organization was none too pleased that Boras leaked that supposed contract info yesterday when it wasn't near to being done.
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am Posts: 28541 Location: PORTLAND, ME
Quote:
Papelbon a mistake for Phillies Giving any relief pitcher a four-year contract is a bad idea
Law By Keith Law ESPN Insider
I thought signing Ryan Madson for four years and $44 million was a bad idea, even though he is the best free-agent reliever on the market, both short- and long-term. The history of signing relievers to deals of that length is simply too awful to ignore.
That contract would have been a bargain relative to the four-year deal the Phillies are about to give Jonathan Papelbon -- more money, plus a lost draft pick, for an inferior reliever who gives up more fly balls.
Papelbon was the second-best relief option on the market, but even in one of his best seasons in 2011, he was worth only two or three wins above replacement, and I'd put the over/under on his WAR for this deal at around eight, which would still make it a pretty bad contract. But the real issue with any reliever and with Papelbon specifically is high attrition rates -- relievers don't last, and their peaks tend to be short.
-----the rest is for insider accounts only-----
i hope the sox go get madson. maybe bring in nathan or broxton on a one-year-deal to go w/ Jenks, Bard, & Aceves. Boom, bullpen done!
_________________ "Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." -- John Steinbeck
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:24 pm Posts: 6501 Location: Massachusetts Gender: Male
MattA751 wrote:
EllisEamos wrote:
4/5 wrote:
PhilPritchard wrote:
Does anyone else think it's crazy that teams are willing to pay that much money to a closer?
mariano rivera might deserve this type of compensation.
anyone else, i don't see it.
I think considering what some starting pitchers get paid in free agency, it's pretty easy to make a case for Papelbon given his track record over 6 seasons, with only 1 being subpar
Plus, a closer is really important. If you dont have a good one you wont win, period. A good closer is certainly more worthy of a 50 million dollar contract than a mediocre number 4 starter, and there are about 20 of those guys making 50 million.
Marlins have made "substantial offers" to Pujols, Reyes, and the former White Sox pitcher whose name I can't spell!!!!!!!!!
Skeptical Marlins fans are already claiming that they're making BS offers just for publicity and have no intention of signing any of them. My hopes are SLIGHTLY higher.
_________________ "Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." -- John Steinbeck
_________________ No matter how dark the storm gets overhead They say someone's watching from the calm at the edge What about us when we're down here in it? We gotta watch our backs
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:47 am Posts: 46000 Location: Reasonville
mick7184 wrote:
You dont need an "elite" closer, but you have to have a good one.
Sure, and a "good" one could be a random reliever in your bullpen.
_________________ No matter how dark the storm gets overhead They say someone's watching from the calm at the edge What about us when we're down here in it? We gotta watch our backs
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:21 am Posts: 1909 Location: The Jungle
mick7184 wrote:
corduroy_blazer wrote:
mick7184 wrote:
You dont need an "elite" closer, but you have to have a good one.
Sure, and a "good" one could be a random reliever in your bullpen.
Right, but you still need that. If you can give your number 4 starter 50 million it's insane to say that a good closer isnt worth that.
You dont NEED a top line shut down closer... but it does help. But you can just as easily find one in your own bullpen (Motte on the world champ Cards, or Axford on the Brewers who was pitching indie ball just a few years ago)
Id def say thats over paying for a closer though...
_________________ I am the king of the Jungle, they call me Tigerman
Marlins reportedly offered 6 yr/$90m to Reyes. Apparently Reyes feels the bidding starts at $100m.
_________________ "Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." -- John Steinbeck
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum