2 days into the season, 4 projected closers already down

[Hornsby]

I can't imagine any contender would take on Papelbon's guaranteed money when there are so many other good relievers on the market. And Benoit? I think it's 50/50 that Street gets dealt, and unless Benoit also gets moved, that means he gets the job. I certainly think he has a higher percentage of being a closer by August than Giles.

And I agree with The Dane. Rondon isn't on the most solid of all ground in Chicago. Ramirez seems like the de facto #2 in that pen (with the best skills there by a country mile).

Not necessarily true that Ramirez has the best skills...from Fantistics:

Hector Rondon (CL-Cubs) Hector Rondon picked up the win but was unable to nail down the save in today’s game. He gave up two hits and a run in his outing. But despite this blip, Rondon is a closer whose performance is likely to improve over the 2ndhalf. With an ERA at 3.93, he has been extraordinarily unlucky with a BABIP of .358 and a 66.5% LOB rate both of which should regress in the positive direction. Averaging 10.22 K/9 innings and with a superb 12.4% swinging strike rate and a 50% GB rate, it should be no surprise that Rondon’s xFIP is almost a run lower than his ERA.

[Bodhizefa]

Not necessarily true that Ramirez has the best skills...from Fantistics:

So it was an exaggeration to say Ramirez was better by a "country mile," but I maintain that his skillset is stronger overall. I think he has a better strikeout repertoire than Rondon, and Ramirez' BABIP is always going to be naturally low because he's a heavy flyball pitcher. Also, Ramirez' swinging strike rate is 13.8% (a full 1.4% over the "superb 12.4%" rate of Rondon's). 12.4%, by the way, isn't even enough to rank Rondon in the top 80 pitchers in baseball at the moment -- there are a lot of relievers out there these days who can strike people out, and what we used to consider "superb" is now more of a norm. Heck, Ramirez at 13.8% is only enough to garner him a top 50 nod (for reference, Tanaka is/was the best starting pitcher in this category, and he was essentially tied with Ramirez, so that gives you a good idea of how many relievers out there today have strikeout stuff).

[Judge Jude]

Actually, it gives you an idea how easy it is to strike out guys as a relief pitcher. Switch all the roles, and suddenly the guys with "the best strikeout stuff" would be reversed.

[Bodhizefa]

Actually, it gives you an idea how easy it is to strike out guys as a relief pitcher. Switch all the roles, and suddenly the guys with "the best strikeout stuff" would be reversed.

No doubt, Judge. If Tanaka or Jose Fernandez or Felix were relievers, their swinging strike rates would be through the roof. I'm reminded of Pedro Martinez's All Star Game performance in 1999 where he went apeshit and slayed the competition (not that he didn't already do that at that point in time, but it was seemingly somehow even more phenomenal than normal).

And this is why it's so great to have a slew of top shelf relievers when you reach the playoffs. They really do shorten the game and make it tough as hell to win after the 5th or 6th.

[Bodhizefa]

I guess it's quite possible I've completely misread the Phillies' situation and that Papelbon is on his way out no matter what. That just seems like an insane thing to do for any team given all the relief options out there in what is very probably a buyer's market (Benoit/Street, Uehara, Soria as closers and then take your pick of just about any solid middle reliever from any of the bottom feeder teams). Why would any team out there pay most of Papelbon's salary when there are perfectly viable alternatives? And why would the Phillies pay part of his salary to ship him away when he's a perfectly good reliever? Amaro really needs to be fired before he botches their payroll up even further just by making moves that make no sense at all. It's not like the Phillies are going to get a good prospect out of this regardless, and is it really worth it to try to save a few million dollars by getting rid of a decent player for nothing?

[Gregg]

I guess it's quite possible I've completely misread the Phillies' situation and that Papelbon is on his way out no matter what. That just seems like an insane thing to do for any team given all the relief options out there in what is very probably a buyer's market (Benoit/Street, Uehara, Soria as closers and then take your pick of just about any solid middle reliever from any of the bottom feeder teams). Why would any team out there pay most of Papelbon's salary when there are perfectly viable alternatives? And why would the Phillies pay part of his salary to ship him away when he's a perfectly good reliever? Amaro really needs to be fired before he botches their payroll up even further just by making moves that make no sense at all. It's not like the Phillies are going to get a good prospect out of this regardless, and is it really worth it to try to save a few million dollars by getting rid of a decent player for nothing?

The Phillies and the Dodgers seem like newbie fantasy players.

[Erik]

I guess it's quite possible I've completely misread the Phillies' situation and that Papelbon is on his way out no matter what. That just seems like an insane thing to do for any team given all the relief options out there in what is very probably a buyer's market (Benoit/Street, Uehara, Soria as closers and then take your pick of just about any solid middle reliever from any of the bottom feeder teams). Why would any team out there pay most of Papelbon's salary when there are perfectly viable alternatives? And why would the Phillies pay part of his salary to ship him away when he's a perfectly good reliever? Amaro really needs to be fired before he botches their payroll up even further just by making moves that make no sense at all. It's not like the Phillies are going to get a good prospect out of this regardless, and is it really worth it to try to save a few million dollars by getting rid of a decent player for nothing?

He's publicly stated he wants out. Perhaps management just doesn't want people around who don't want to be there.

[overkill94]

I guess it's quite possible I've completely misread the Phillies' situation and that Papelbon is on his way out no matter what. That just seems like an insane thing to do for any team given all the relief options out there in what is very probably a buyer's market (Benoit/Street, Uehara, Soria as closers and then take your pick of just about any solid middle reliever from any of the bottom feeder teams). Why would any team out there pay most of Papelbon's salary when there are perfectly viable alternatives? And why would the Phillies pay part of his salary to ship him away when he's a perfectly good reliever? Amaro really needs to be fired before he botches their payroll up even further just by making moves that make no sense at all. It's not like the Phillies are going to get a good prospect out of this regardless, and is it really worth it to try to save a few million dollars by getting rid of a decent player for nothing?

The Dodgers would prefer Papelbon because they'd rather open their wallet than empty the farm. The Phillies have no use for an expensive closer and seemingly have viable replacements so they might as well save some money and maybe pick up a lottery pick prospect.

I just wish the Dodgers were better at developing relievers so that they wouldn't spend a ton of money on the Wilson/Perez/Leagues of the world. They need to take some notes from the A's/Braves/Cardinals etc.

[Bodhizefa]

He's publicly stated he wants out. Perhaps management just doesn't want people around who don't want to be there.

And the Phillies are willing to pay potentially half his salary just to get him out the door? That's insane, man. Even for Amaro.

[Bodhizefa]

The Dodgers would prefer Papelbon because they'd rather open their wallet than empty the farm. The Phillies have no use for an expensive closer and seemingly have viable replacements so they might as well save some money and maybe pick up a lottery pick prospect.

I just wish the Dodgers were better at developing relievers so that they wouldn't spend a ton of money on the Wilson/Perez/Leagues of the world. They need to take some notes from the A's/Braves/Cardinals etc.

It's not like relievers would cost the Dodgers an arm and a leg in terms of prospects anyway. I just don't understand why they'd want to pay in upwards of $33 million over the next 2.5 years (assuming Papelbon's option vests), unless the Phillies are willing to pony up a significant chunk of that just to get him out of town. In which case, I don't understand why the Phillies would do it. It just doesn't make any damn sense!

[Gregg]

It's not like relievers would cost the Dodgers an arm and a leg in terms of prospects anyway. I just don't understand why they'd want to pay in upwards of $33 million over the next 2.5 years (assuming Papelbon's option vests), unless the Phillies are willing to pony up a significant chunk of that just to get him out of town. In which case, I don't understand why the Phillies would do it. It just doesn't make any damn sense!

See post #621.

[overkill94]

It's not like relievers would cost the Dodgers an arm and a leg in terms of prospects anyway. I just don't understand why they'd want to pay in upwards of $33 million over the next 2.5 years (assuming Papelbon's option vests), unless the Phillies are willing to pony up a significant chunk of that just to get him out of town. In which case, I don't understand why the Phillies would do it. It just doesn't make any damn sense!

Part of it is that most of the others are rentals and the Dodgers need relief help beyond this season.

[Gregg]

I don't think the first assertion is true. Soria and Uehara, at a minimum, will require relatively significant returns in terms of prospects. Are they better pitchers than Papelbon? Probably. Will they cost much more in terms of talent to trade for? Assuredly yes. All the other relievers mentioned (Street, Benoit, etc etc) will, in fact, cost an arm and a leg to land. Trading prospects for relievers is the newbie move, not taking on salary.

What's being bandied about on Dodger boards is a bad contract exchange between the Phils and Dodgers. Something like Ethier plus money for Papelbon. I would be absolutely all over that and would certainly prefer it to a trade involving Dodger prospects for Uehara.

Overkill is right on the money --- Los Angeles would rather overspend in money than "spend" in terms of prospects, particularly for a reliever. An expensive reliever who can be gotten for little other than taking on salary is about the exact perfect proposition for the Dodgers. If they can somehow do it and free up a slot in the outfield for Joc Pederson, all the better.

If they can move Eithier for Paps and get some money as well, that would be a very good way to go.

[cardboardbox]

overkill is exactly right here. The Dodgers seem to have no financial restraints.

[Moonlight J]

overkill is exactly right here. The Dodgers seem to have no financial restraints.

only restraint is when they run out of ink printing their own money