How valuable is Daniel Bard?
by Randy Booth on Jul 3, 2009 10:25 AM EDT
in News
36 comments
The legend of Daniel Bard is already growing -- and fast.
You all know him. He's the kid with the 100 mile-per-hour heater. He's got that filthy slider. And you might remember when he made that guy named Ryan Howard look foolish in an at-bat in mid-June.
So he's good, we get that. But really, how valuable is that million dollar arm?
The Boston Herald wrote a piece today on how Hall of Famer Jim Palmer made point of meeting with Bard. Palmer obviously sees something special, as most of us do, in Bard. How can you not be at least a little excited for what Bard can/is/could bring to the table?
But this is where his value comes in: is Bard vital to the success of the future Red Sox bullpen? Or, perhaps, could the Red Sox trade Bard -- if they need to -- and bring back a return that may be better than just a reliever?
What people say is that a reliever is not as valuable as a starter. So where does Bard slot in with other prospects like Clay Buchholz or Michael Bowden? Those are the top-tier Sox prospects, though. That doesn't even mention pitchers like Casey Kelly (shortstop?), Junich Tazawa, Nick Hagadone or Stolmy Pimentel.
Considering the talent, does anyone think the Sox should -- if they needed to, of course -- trade Bard at some point? General managers always want to trade players when their value is at their highest and right now, that value is pretty high for our 24-year-old fireballer from North Carolina. The Sox could get a pretty good return for a very talented reliever, but is it worth the trade?
What we must consider with any prospect is the future. Jonathan Papelbon has said recently that, essentially, he'll go to the highest bidder, whether that be the Red Sox or not. And as good as Papelbon has been with the Red Sox, Theo & Co. will only give him as much as he is worth. We've seen that with free agents of the past and that trend will always continue while Theo is at the helm.
Many have said if Papelbon does go, Bard could be the Red Sox's closer of the future. I'm not a fan of dubbing him that right now, because he is still a young guy, but it's definitely a possibility considering his ability out on the mound.
I'd imagine that if the Sox were to trade Bard they'd want something back that could help them for long-term, not a rent-a-player (wreck?). Every team wants to say that, but sometimes it's not very doable or black and white as that sounds.
Bard's future is very uncertain, but the only thing we do know is this: he's got some good stuff. Whether it be with the Red Sox (hopefully, in my opinion) or some other team, he's going to be a really fun pitcher to watch for many more years to come.
0 recs |
36 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I don't see us having Paps in 2 years time.
And do we really want to go back to closer-by-committee?
As overrated as the closer role is, we have all seen the benefit that comes from having a set 9th inning guy. We need to have one post-Paps, and Bard is a high-strikeout, low-contact guy who’s performed under pressure in the minors. Give him a year to come into his own and I see him filling that spot quite nicely.
by USG on Jul 3, 2009 10:40 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't mind closer-by-committee.
The problem the Sox had when they went with this approach was simply that our “committee of closers” was comprised entirely of mediocre to bad pitchers. But if this year, Tito decided to use his bullpen in a more SABR way, I think it would certainly be as successful, if not more, than it has been this year.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Jul 3, 2009 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree totally.
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jul 3, 2009 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can you expand on the “more SABR way” part of that?
by Randy Booth on Jul 3, 2009 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Basically you pitch your best pitchers in the most high-leverage innings. This means that you do not necessarily save Paps for the ninth when leading by 3 runs or less (the win expectancy when up 3 runs in the 9th is very high; something like 95% with any mediocre pitcher). So maybe you bring Papelbon into the game with 2 outs in the 7th and a man on first and third, leading by one; that situation is definitely higher leverage than the 9th up by one with no one on base. Basically, you do not let inning dictate when to use a pitcher; you let situation. Similar to the Rays last year. They had no defined closer and thus they were able to use their bullpen ace(s) whenever they felt the need.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Jul 3, 2009 5:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This.
OverTheMonster - ALLERGEN WARNING: May contain peanut butter.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jul 6, 2009 10:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
closers by committee
never work. People need defined roles. Why do closers have so much trouble in non-save situations? Ive read several closers including Mariano say that he has a different mental approach to non-save situations and does not like coming into games in non-save situations.
by SoxAcumen on Jul 3, 2009 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't call anyone a closer.
And tell them saves are BS.
OverTheMonster - ALLERGEN WARNING: May contain peanut butter.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jul 6, 2009 10:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
His value really depends on what we do with Paps. I really think that if we only have Paps for a little longer, Bard is the guy to step into that permanent role.
"Well let me just quote the late-great Colonel Sanders, who said...'I'm too drunk to taste this chicken.' "
-Ricky Bobby
by nepats108 on Jul 3, 2009 10:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Bard is valuable
bc he is a solid pitcher but also he is Theo’s counter to Paps asking for 15 million. When Paps asks for the big money, Theo will have no pressure to sign him bc of Bard and Theo will be able to turn around to the Nation and say “we have this guy, why do we need to over spend?”
I would go so far as to say that I expect Theo to eventually trade Paps, maybe not this off season, but he will trade him to a big market non-Yankee team that needs a closer. Maybe San Fran or Texas or whomever can pay the 15 million to extend him.
Look at the Angels and K-Rod situation, I think they are very similar. Theo will get not let Paps roll out and just get a compensation pick. He will use him to add to our farm system.
by SoxAcumen on Jul 3, 2009 12:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If Bard pans out by then, I definitely see that happening.
Theo is not the type to overpay for relief pitching. But there are certainly teams out there on playoff pushes who would. I don’t know who we want from the Marlins right now, but you don’t think they’d shell out right now for a guy who can close better than Matt “6.25 ERA” Lindstrom?
by USG on Jul 3, 2009 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unless they’re willing to give us Hanley back, there’s no one on that team right now worth trading away Bard.
by RSNexile on Jul 3, 2009 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll take Maybin
Top reliever for a top prospect: fair deal to me|
The only Red Sox fan in a country where nobody cares about basball!
by radiohix on Jul 3, 2009 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So you'd weaken the bullpen now in the hope that a prospect pans out?
by RSNexile on Jul 4, 2009 10:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hit post too soon
That’s exactly what you’d be doing — weakening the pen without strengthening the team anywhere else. But when you’re hoping to win the World Series this year, that’s a dumb move. You only weaken the pen if doing so improves the team substantially enough elsewhere to improve the odds of winning the Series. Trading Bard for Maybin doesn’t do that.
by RSNexile on Jul 4, 2009 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe do it this Offseason?
OverTheMonster - ALLERGEN WARNING: May contain peanut butter.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jul 6, 2009 10:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
good call
especially when Florida has its brand new spanking stadium coming in a few years. I can see Florida adding Paps to compete in the NL East.
There are a lot of players in the Florida system I like.
by SoxAcumen on Jul 3, 2009 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Florida is really more an example of the team we'll need around next year.
Honestly, after last year’s near-debacle involving Manny, I’m hesitant to deal with them again. But mainly the problem is that they’d need to not fill that need between now and this time next year, and they’d need to be competing in the NL East, which would require the division to stay ridiculously weak due to injuries. If I had to guess, our target next year might be the Cubs. Them, or the Astros, since the Astros always have that weird assumption that they’re “still in it” and buyers at the trade deadline. I dunno.
by USG on Jul 3, 2009 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Paps moves on, Bard is the new closer
That makes him more valuable than any old reliever. And even if Paps stays, he’s still more valuable than any old reliever — just look at how dominant our pen is with Paps, Bard, MDC, Oki, RamRam, and Masterson. At the very least, that means Bard isn’t going anywhere this year — you don’t break up that kind of pen when you’re in great shape to make the playoffs because it’ll make you the team to beat as long as your bats don’t disappear.
That said, Buch is more valuable and Bowden might be.
by RSNexile on Jul 3, 2009 12:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Anyone who thinks Bard is as valuable as Buch/Bowden is crazy.
The absolute best case for Bard is a job as a closer, pitching 60 or 70 innings per year. Any way you slice it, that role just is not as valuable as a guy who pitches 200 innings per year. Paps has been worth 3 wins per year over the last few seasons. That is certainly valuable, but for comparison, the starters that were worth 3 wins were guys like Kyle Lohse and Mike Pelfrey. Basically, Buch or Bowden only have to be number 4 starters on the Sox to be worth as much as our closer.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Jul 3, 2009 1:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Once again, I totally agree
I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.
by Drugs Delaney on Jul 3, 2009 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dont agree
With Paps asking for 15 million a year, Bard, in my opinion, is untouchable. Theo must have leverage or the Red Sox have zero chance of keeping Paps at a reasonable number. Buchholz and Bowden are not even on the rosters in 09 and neither is a lock to be in the rotation in 2010. We may all think Buchholz is going to be an ace or but he has had just as much failure as success in the majors.
Bard is becoming established as a late inning closer type arm who can handle the role, all that is left for Bard is to prove he can handle big game situations.
But it really just comes down to money. If Bard is traded, you have weakened your position. Again you can stat the hell out of this, but its not about stats, its about negotiation leverage and Buchholz and Bowden have no baring on Papelbon.
by SoxAcumen on Jul 3, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
or we could use RamRam or Delcarmen. Or sign someone equally effective and cheaper. Dvaid Aardsma is killing it as a closer this year. It simply is not that hard to fill those roles.
"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw
by BTLove on Jul 3, 2009 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This.
Acumen’s making negotiating seem extremely difficult. Theo’s position will be simple – either Paps stays with us for the price we offer, or he goes to the MFY, with their homer happy park, and hopes to God that the extra cash helps him cope with getting your ass handed to you 18+ times per year. He’ll prolly also bring up the fans who screamed at his pregnant wife, and remind him that if he struggles in NY, the fans will be on his ass constantly.
OverTheMonster - ALLERGEN WARNING: May contain peanut butter.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jul 6, 2009 10:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Papelbon is not going to get $15 million from any team..
Even the Yankees wouldn’t give Paps $15 million. Papelbon’s shoulder is pretty delicate, he has shoulder problems in the past, especially in 2006. He needs lots of TLC. I am probably the only one who like to see Papelbon as a starting pitcher again, given he had some pretty good games in 2005.
I can see the Sox giving him a $10-12 million contract. Right now, all MLB baseball teams are feeling the pinch from the economy. The top revenue teams, (MFY, Cubs, Sox, Mets, Dodgers, maybe the Phillies) can offer the money Papelbon may be interested in. He may want to play in the Atlanta to be closer to home, However, the Sox would offer Paps close to the best deal, and most importantly have the staff to help him with exercises and physical therapy that his shoulder needd..
by superferret on Jul 3, 2009 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, because throwing a straight, 94MPH fastball 80% of the time is the formula for a successful SP.
His secondary stuff sucks now, and he doesn’t have the stamina anymore either. And he’ll be a FA in 2011, IIRC, so the economy SHOULD be better.
OverTheMonster - ALLERGEN WARNING: May contain peanut butter.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jul 6, 2009 10:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Paps has been worth 3 wins per year over the last few seasons?????????????????????
What are you saying that he is only worth the occasional freak win he might situationally get. What about the 41 saves? That makes about 44 wins in my book, and that ain’t bad. Come on, the guy is worth his weight in pure gold.
by NG on Jul 3, 2009 1:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
First off, reply fail.
Second off, he’s talking W(ins)A(bove)R(eplacement).
But when we’re talking about a big-budget team like the Sox, the team has to look at WHERE it can fit in more WAR. For comparison, the best starting pitcher is only worth about 2.5 times as much as Papelbon was last year. The difference is that starting pitchers at 3 WAR are MUCH easier to find than relievers at 3 WAR. The Sox WILL be filled with starting pitchers at or above 3 WAR without fail. If they can find more WAR to squeeze into a reliever spot, than that instantly increases its value to a team like ours, where we can’t necessarily find other places to improve as easily.
That being said, Paps recognizes that and is going to ask for as much—probably MORE than he’s worth since so many teams are willing to overspend on a shiny new commodity. Bard can be our low-cost high-performance guy in Paps stead. Gone are the days when a Keith Foulke (2.1 WAR in 2004) can be picked up on the cheap. We’ve made the league too damn smart for our own good, so we have to keep producing these high-value relievers from within.
by USG on Jul 3, 2009 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, it's worth noting that relief pitching throws these metrics for a spin pretty often.
The hallmark of most teams that perform above their expected record by significant amounts (see: us), is the bullpen. So clearly they’re worth more than the metrics like to put out.
by USG on Jul 3, 2009 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can this logic be used for the crummy players value or lack thereof?
How about L(oses) w(ithout) R(eplacement) or something like that. Take Varitek and Lugo last year. Did we ever discuss theri value in terms of loses they caused by keeping them around at any price?
It seems like a dead end to victory road to always discuss getting rid of the good because of costs while keeping the crap because they are cheap. What are we becoming, the Pitt Pirates?
by NG on Jul 3, 2009 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, actually, WAR enters negatives.
The point with getting rid of the good is that you can invest the money better. Especially with Paps’ new approach on the mound producing shaky results and the typical lack of longevity in closers. Even with all the Sox’ money, there’s still a 25-man roster to fill. And if we’re spending all that money on a Papelbon, where do we get the money to resign Beckett, or to replace our aging DH once he’s done?
And both Lugo and Varitek were actually above replacement value, for what it’s worth. Mainly because replacement level catchers and shortstops were just so BAD last year. You’ll be somewhat happier to know that both of them were considered dramatically overpaid by the system, though.
You’ll be less happy to know that Wakefield has consistently been worth more than the 4 million we pay him. In fact, since 2002, we have retained Wake’s services at a total of 40 million below market value.
by USG on Jul 3, 2009 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
AND, Lugo's been negative value so far this season, last time I checked.
OverTheMonster - ALLERGEN WARNING: May contain peanut butter.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jul 6, 2009 10:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh! But knowing you, you must've hated Timlin last year, right?
He was good for -.2 wins and was worth -1 million.
by USG on Jul 3, 2009 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Timilin
Should have hung is up after 2007 – I cringed evertime he got the ball.
by www.SoxTherapy.Net on Jul 4, 2009 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought the same thing about Wakefield last year, but
then the guy found that secret fountain of youth. I guess he did not share his discovery with Timlin.
by NG on Jul 4, 2009 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ha.
Timlin should’ve retired, yes. Wake’s still pretty damn good. And NG, please study up on WAR – it’s a great stat.
OverTheMonster - ALLERGEN WARNING: May contain peanut butter.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jul 6, 2009 10:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
