PDA

View Full Version : Papelbon will be paid $225,000 more than Bobby Jenks


Fenway
03-07-2008, 12:21 AM
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/

Papelbon will be paid $225,000 more than Bobby Jenks, the White Sox closer who has almost the exact same service time as Papelbon

thedudeabides
03-07-2008, 12:35 AM
I guess that's your reward for whining.

South Side Irish
03-07-2008, 12:55 AM
I guess that's your reward for whining.

Actually, I'm pretty sure it's for his dancing.

munchman33
03-07-2008, 02:05 AM
I guess that's your reward for winning.

Fixed it for you.

CLR01
03-07-2008, 03:07 AM
Fixed it for you.

Well yeah except he hasn't really won anything Jenks hasn't. He has whined though.

BadBobbyJenks
03-07-2008, 03:33 AM
Fixed it for you.

Because Jenks hasn't?:scratch:

Boondock Saint
03-07-2008, 04:07 AM
Bobby and Papelbon have acquired about the same number of achievements in their time with just a few exceptions, in my view...

1)Papelbon has one more ring, although he got them on a team that is generally better the 05 Sox in just about every measurable category.

2)Bobby has done all of his work on the Sox, virtually invisible to the national public. Papelbon has done all his work on the Sawx, who seem to be force fed daily to people in every corner of the planet.

3)Papelbon hasn't retired 41 consecutive batters.

Take that however you will.

MISoxfan
03-07-2008, 08:10 AM
Papelbon wasn't even on the 2004 Red Sox was he?

thedudeabides
03-07-2008, 08:29 AM
Papelbon wasn't even on the 2004 Red Sox was he?

Nope. Although, he is the next Mariano Rivera...just ask him.

Fenway
03-07-2008, 08:35 AM
Papelbon wasn't even on the 2004 Red Sox was he?

He was at Sarasota in 2004 so he only had one ring.

Boston gets off cheap with several on the 25 man roster. Pedroia 457K, Lester 421, Delcarmen 421, Ellsbury 406 and Buchholz 390.

doublem23
03-07-2008, 09:25 AM
Boston gets off cheap with several on the 25 man roster. Pedroia 457K, Lester 421, Delcarmen 421, Ellsbury 406 and Buchholz 390.

It'll be interesting to see if the Red Sox are really a financial juggernaut like the Yankees and are able to keep all these guys in the next few years. Unless they keep signing guys like J.D. Drew to ridiculous contracts. :o:

skottyj242
03-07-2008, 09:35 AM
He was at Sarasota in 2004 so he only had one ring.

Boston gets off cheap with several on the 25 man roster. Pedroia 457K, Lester 421, Delcarmen 421, Ellsbury 406 and Buchholz 390.

Well they have a good scouting department then.

SoxWillWin
03-07-2008, 10:00 AM
Papelbon:
W L ERA G SV SVO IP H R ER HR HBP BB SO
8 6 1.65 135 72 82 160.2 103 31 29 12 8 45 193

Jenks:
7 10 3.26 165 87 99 174.0 145 67 63 10 4 59 186

Careers so far

chaerulez
03-07-2008, 10:32 AM
Papelbon is more dominant, but I'm happy with Jenks.

And I don't know where people get the idea Papelbon was on the 2004 Red Sox. Keith Foulke anyone? He had one of the greatest postseasons ever by a relief pitcher. He was basically their MVP of the postseason from a pitching standpoint.

asindc
03-07-2008, 10:35 AM
If I'm Papelbon, I would expect a little more money than Jenks, not because he is better (as a reliever, he is not), but because Boston can afford to pay him a little more than the Sox can pay Jenks. That's the only rational way to look at this, IMO.

102605
03-07-2008, 10:47 AM
Papelbon makes himself look like such a *****.

spiffie
03-07-2008, 10:50 AM
He was at Sarasota in 2004 so he only had one ring.

Boston gets off cheap with several on the 25 man roster. Pedroia 457K, Lester 421, Delcarmen 421, Ellsbury 406 and Buchholz 390.
Teams that want to win now don't give a damn about prospects. They're like girls who might go out with you one day.

Madscout
03-07-2008, 11:08 AM
Papelbon:
W L ERA G SV SVO IP H R ER HR HBP BB SO
8 6 1.65 135 72 82 160.2 103 31 29 12 8 45 193

Jenks:
7 10 3.26 165 87 99 174.0 145 67 63 10 4 59 186

Careers so far

I'd like to see when Jenk's ERs came. I'd bet if you threw out times when Ozzie brought him in early because our bullpen couldn't get **** done, he looks a little better. I'll take Bobby anyday. They way he is pitching now and in the future is probably gonna be better than the way John is throwing now and in the future.

pierzynski07
03-07-2008, 12:21 PM
http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/

Papelbon will be paid $225,000 more than Bobby Jenks, the White Sox closer who has almost the exact same service time as Papelbon
So what are you saying? The two should be paid the same due to their times in the majors?

Papelbon is better. As of now. Down the line, we'll see.

DumpJerry
03-07-2008, 12:41 PM
Teams that want to win now don't give a damn about prospects. They're like girls who might go out with you one day.
Of course. The guys mentioned in the post you're quoting are not prospects, they're on the 25 man roster.

My sig warns about falling in love with prospects who are still in the minors and years away from a call-up.

munchman33
03-07-2008, 01:20 PM
I love Bobby, but Papelbon is like a run and a half better era in his career. He's a whole other level of dominant.

sox1970
03-07-2008, 01:37 PM
All of the 0-3 year players need to shut the **** up and play.

You'll get your money after you've done it for 3 years.

BadBobbyJenks
03-07-2008, 04:41 PM
I love Bobby, but Papelbon is like a run and a half better era in his career. He's a whole other level of dominant.

And he has won more than Bobby!:rolleyes:

pierzynski07
03-07-2008, 07:12 PM
And he has won more than Bobby!:rolleyes:
Good point. All 0-3 players should have their pay based on the number of WS rings they have.

munchman33
03-07-2008, 10:18 PM
Good point. All 0-3 players should have their pay based on the number of WS rings they have.

Seriously. He has a lifetime ERA under 2. Bobby isn't even under 3.

If people want to argue he shouldn't get paid because of service time issues, that's one thing.

But if you're gonna sit here and say that he's not better than Bobby, or that he shouldn't be making more than Bobby based on skill and results, then you're pretty freakin' wrong.

FarWestChicago
03-07-2008, 10:35 PM
Good point. All 0-3 players should have their pay based on the number of WS rings they have.

Seriously. He has a lifetime ERA under 2. Bobby isn't even under 3.

If people want to argue he shouldn't get paid because of service time issues, that's one thing.

But if you're gonna sit here and say that he's not better than Bobby, or that he shouldn't be making more than Bobby based on skill and results, then you're pretty freakin' wrong.Seriously, can you two please go find a Red Sox board to ****ing worship Papelbon? You are tiresome acts here. I mean really tiresome. I wonder why I pay for this ****ing place when I have to constantly listen to your ****.

munchman33
03-07-2008, 11:39 PM
Seriously, can you two please go find a Red Sox board to ****ing worship Papelbon? You are tiresome acts here. I mean really tiresome. I wonder why I pay for this ****ing place when I have to constantly listen to your ****.

Are you honestly telling me that you think Bobby is better than Papelbon? What evidence do you have to suggest that?

I love Jenks. He's probably my favorite Sox player right now. But if someone here is going to say he's on the same level as a guy like Papelbon, I gonna scream bull****. And if you want to ban me for telling the truth, someone else is eventually going to do the same thing in my stead. Because it is bull****.

pierzynski07
03-07-2008, 11:51 PM
Well when the OP is trying to suggest that Papelbon shouldn't be paid more than Jenks, well then I just have to disagree.

Brian26
03-07-2008, 11:54 PM
I love Jenks. He's probably my favorite Sox player right now. But if someone here is going to say he's on the same level as a guy like Papelbon, I gonna scream bull****.

Both guys have comparable career stats. Papelbon has an edge with ERA, but Bobby has pitched more games and more innings. Not as meaningful, but Bobby has more saves. If Papelbon has a slight edge, it's not enough to say he's "on another level." It's not like we're talking the difference between Dan Spillner and Bruce Sutter here.

munchman33
03-08-2008, 03:39 AM
Both guys have comparable career stats. Papelbon has an edge with ERA, but Bobby has pitched more games and more innings. Not as meaningful, but Bobby has more saves. If Papelbon has a slight edge, it's not enough to say he's "on another level." It's not like we're talking the difference between Dan Spillner and Bruce Sutter here.

There's like run and a half difference in career era. It's not just an "slight edge." That's a world apart.

champagne030
03-08-2008, 06:57 AM
There's like run and a half difference in career era. It's not just an "slight edge." That's a world apart.

His peripheral numbers are better, for the most part. At the end of the day for closers, IMO, it's about save percentage. They rarely are called upon with runners at 2nd and 3rd, no outs and a 1 run lead (for the last 20 years at least). They start the ninth, occasionally the eighth. How many times did Jenks give up his runs in a non-save situation? Or with a 3 run lead? So Bobby may give up some more hits, less K's, but he doesn't blow the save. Technically, Bobby has a better save percentage. Maybe that's because Pap-smear (nicknamed not for the way he pitches, but for the douche nozzle that he is) gives up the long ball at a higher rate than Jenks.

Gregory Pratt
03-08-2008, 09:25 AM
Come on guys. Jenks is a fine closer, a good guy, and there's nothing wrong with having him on your team, but let's not pretend that he is as good as Papelbon. Or as entertaining.

Tragg
03-08-2008, 09:29 AM
and there's nothing wrong with having him on your team

??
I would hope not.

FarWestChicago
03-08-2008, 09:49 AM
I love Jenks. He's probably my favorite Sox player right now. But if someone here is going to say he's on the same level as a guy like Papelbon, I gonna scream bull****. And if you want to ban me for telling the truth, someone else is eventually going to do the same thing in my stead. Because it is bull****.Who said anything about banning you? Yes, you are an isufferable troll. But, I never said a damn thing about banning you. I simply said I'm tired of coming home from very long, hard days of work, where I earn the money to pay for this ****ing server, and have to read your incessant ****ing, nauseating trolling. You make me want to turn the server off.

munchman33
03-08-2008, 12:09 PM
Who said anything about banning you? Yes, you are an isufferable troll. But, I never said a damn thing about banning you. I simply said I'm tired of coming home from very long, hard days of work, where I earn the money to pay for this ****ing server, and have to read your incessant ****ing, nauseating trolling. You make me want to turn the server off.


Hahaha. Okay.

I sware west I'm not trolilng. I actually believe this crap.

FarWestChicago
03-08-2008, 12:28 PM
Hahaha. Okay.

I sware west I'm not trolilng. I actually believe this crap.I know. That's why I'm not banning you. But, can't you either give us a break every few days of find a team you actually like?

Craig Grebeck
03-08-2008, 12:45 PM
One of the best ways to measure a reliever's contribution is WXRL:
Expected wins added over a replacement level pitcher, adjusted for level of opposing hitters. WXRL combines the individual adjustments for replacement level (WXR) and quality of the opposing lineup (WXL) to the basic WX calculation.http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary/index.php?search=WXRL

Among relievers last season, Papelbon ranked 5th. Jenks ranked 46th.

PECOTA expects Papelbon to be better than Jenks the next two seasons, but by 2010 they will be equal.

For the record, I wouldn't trade Bobby for Papelbon. I love Bobby and trust his health more than Papelbon's.

munchman33
03-08-2008, 12:52 PM
I know. That's why I'm not banning you. But, can't you either give us a break every few days of find a team you actually like?

Have you seen the state of Chicago Sports? The best team in Chicago right now is the Cubs. I'm not going over there.

I guess the Rush is always a possibility?

sircaffey1
03-08-2008, 01:13 PM
One of the best ways to measure a reliever's contribution is WXRL:
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary/index.php?search=WXRL

Among relievers last season, Papelbon ranked 5th. Jenks ranked 46th.

PECOTA expects Papelbon to be better than Jenks the next two seasons, but by 2010 they will be equal.

For the record, I wouldn't trade Bobby for Papelbon. I love Bobby and trust his health more than Papelbon's.

You trust a man with a rebuilt elbow (he does have pins in his elbow), a wild history including alcohol abuse, and conditioning/weight issues over Papelbon? Bobby's great and all, but nothing about him screams long term durability. He's already lost mph off his fastball which in turn dropped his K rate dramatically. He may be "27" here shortly, but his body's been put through a ton of stress over the years. I just hope the Sox continue to take it year to year contractually with Bobby.

Craig Grebeck
03-08-2008, 01:43 PM
You trust a man with a rebuilt elbow (he does have pins in his elbow), a wild history including alcohol abuse, and conditioning/weight issues over Papelbon? Bobby's great and all, but nothing about him screams long term durability. He's already lost mph off his fastball which in turn dropped his K rate dramatically. He may be "27" here shortly, but his body's been put through a ton of stress over the years. I just hope the Sox continue to take it year to year contractually with Bobby.
They both have major health issues, but for now I'll stick with Bobby. I also want them to go year to year with him.

santo=dorf
03-09-2008, 08:44 PM
His peripheral numbers are better, for the most part. At the end of the day for closers, IMO, it's about save percentage. They rarely are called upon with runners at 2nd and 3rd, no outs and a 1 run lead (for the last 20 years at least). They start the ninth, occasionally the eighth. How many times did Jenks give up his runs in a non-save situation? Or with a 3 run lead? So Bobby may give up some more hits, less K's, but he doesn't blow the save. Technically, Bobby has a better save percentage. Maybe that's because Pap-smear (nicknamed not for the way he pitches, but for the douche nozzle that he is) gives up the long ball at a higher rate than Jenks.
Isn't that the same argument some lost souls were using last summer to say Arcaddo and David Weathers were better than Bobby? I remember the counter argument defending Bobby's WHIP and K's. Using that logic Trevor Hoffman was only a slightly better closer than Joe Borowski last year.

Here we are now with a guy who has a considerably lower era and WHIP, a better K/9 than the White Sox player but he's not as good much less on a different level because his save percentage is "only" 87.8 compared to 87.9.

GIVE. ME. A. BREAK. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

I'd love to have both on this team, and I think they would both be great interchangeably being the 8th and the 9th inning. I can easily understand why Papelbon is making more.