sox working on extensions for both Jenks and Cabrera

[Balta1701]

Which would be absolutely unnecessary and ridiculous. Pay him as little as possible with as little committment as necessary possible.

If you're reading these 2 posts, and you're one of the people who think Bobby's arm just won't last another 4-5 years, then you should absolutely agree with GP here.

[Gregory Pratt]

If you're reading these 2 posts, and you're one of the people who think Bobby's arm just won't last another 4-5 years, then you should absolutely agree with GP here.

 

It's not just about his shaky arm -- it's about how closers are easily replaced, whatever anyone may say about how excellent he is; it's about being conservative with your money and not jumping up to extend people when you really don't have to and shouldn't.

[knightni]

Gagne was better, he died a closer's death.

Troy Percival, Robb Nen, Matt Mantei, Armando Benitez, Eddie Guardado, Keith Foulke all had their arms blow up in one manner or another.

 

K-Rod is due.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

Gagne was better, he died a closer's death.

Troy Percival, Robb Nen, Matt Mantei, Armando Benitez, Eddie Guardado, Keith Foulke all had their arms blow up in one manner or another.

 

K-Rod is due.

 

Thank you. Closers are a dime a dozen. There is no way I give a long term deal to Jenks, with the way he has abused that body.

[sircaffey]

Thank you. Closers are a dime a dozen. There is no way I give a long term deal to Jenks, with the way he has abused that body.

 

Completely agree as well. I don't like both of these ideas for contract extensions to Cabrera and Jenks. I could see Poreda being the next closer for the Sox in a few seasons.

[SoxAce]

Gagne was better, he died a closer's death.

Troy Percival, Robb Nen, Matt Mantei, Armando Benitez, Eddie Guardado, Keith Foulke all had their arms blow up in one manner or another.

 

K-Rod is due.

 

Other than Foulke and maybe Guardado (whispers about him though) what do they all have in common? Performance inhancers. Why talk about the "dime n dozen" crap? Hoffman (lost velocity, still gets hitters out, change-up like no other) Wagner (still brings it) Oldies like Lee Smith, Goose, Tanks etc. Jury is still out if they're (players who are playing now) clean of course but willing to bet they probably are. Not all relievers (or failed starters) have the stones to pitch with, most of the time, a game on the line. Not all succeed. Unless there's a stud closer, if Jenks sucks/gets serious injury, or if we groom a closer, I don't see why we shouldn't extend him 4+ years from now when he's restricted or whatever.

 

Bobby's pin/screw/barely holding arm/whatever else is one of the most overrated things I've read on this board with Konerko's chronic/arthritic/no hip being number two (as Garland's knot is gone) It just puts a big f you to a guy like Farve for example despite having one of his best seasons as an "old man" for a sport that you use basically every damn bone in your body to play. He's not Belle, his hip isn't going to die and he's not 50+ years old. Konerko is declining of course (esp. HR numbers) but he's still pretty damn good.

 

Good points of course, just trying to kinda stir up alittle bit here.

 

/rant

[3E8]

Troy Percival, Robb Nen, Matt Mantei, Armando Benitez, Eddie Guardado, Keith Foulke all had their arms blow up in one manner or another.

That group also has an average career 232 saves

[Gregory Pratt]

There are always Riveras, Gossages, Eckersleys, but a good closer (at least for a season or two) is not terribly hard to find and there's no reason to invest in a guy like Jenks who is no sure thing on a team where the budget is not guaranteed (who is to say that fans will keep coming out?) in a situation where his arm is a mess, he has a history of being...bad to his body, etc. etc.

 

I think you're completely wrong, Mr. Ace.

[sircaffey]

Bobby himself might be "young" (soon-to-be 27), but his body was put through so much crap early in his career, I would not be at all surprised to see him start to steadily lose effectiveness in the next few seasons. Hell, he already lost some off his fastball. That could very well be the start of a downward trend. We might not even want Bobby in a couple years. Better to keep that option open. This could be one of those "peak value" type moments, where we wish we would have unloaded Bobby.

Edited January 27, 2008 by sircaffey

[iamshack]

I don't think the problem with extending Jenks is just that closers can be replaced (not so sure whether I believe that or not, another one of Beane's BS theories), but whether this is even the most important guy in the bullpen in the first place. Clearly, in some cases, and this is probably true in Bobby's case, the closer is the best pitcher in the bullpen, and so perhaps, he should be paid the most based on that. However, in a lot of cases, the closer doesn't even have the best numbers in the bullpen if you take the "save" category out of the equation. And yet some of these guys are making $10 million a year while a setup man with similar or better numbers is making 10-20% of that (this appears to be changing as a lot of focus has been put onto quality relievers, finally) simply because a closer records "saves," an entirely made-up stat that doesn't mean a whole lot other than whatever artificial value one wants to ascribe to it.

 

I'm a firm believer in the notion that you should put your best pen guy in at the most critical moment, whether that be the "closer," or whomever. While I think there is probably something to the idea that some guys cannot "close," and maybe some guys can only "close," I think for the most part, the closer role is something that is just foolish. The best pen guy, wherever he pitches, is usually the most valuable, and that is the guy that should be kept at all costs. In sum, Bobby is very valuable, but mostly because he is our best pen arm, not because of the saves he records.

 

That being said, he's just too far away from a big payday to be using the "Indians model" now to buy out his arbitration years for the purpose of saving on his first few free agency years. With a position player, maybe, but not with a pitcher, and certainly not with the strain Bobby puts on his arm.

 

 

[Gregory Pratt]

I don't think the problem with extending Jenks is just that closers can be replaced (not so sure whether I believe that or not, another one of Beane's BS theories), but whether this is even the most important guy in the bullpen in the first place. Clearly, in some cases, and this is probably true in Bobby's case, the closer is the best pitcher in the bullpen, and so perhaps, he should be paid the most based on that. However, in a lot of cases, the closer doesn't even have the best numbers in the bullpen if you take the "save" category out of the equation. And yet some of these guys are making $10 million a year while a setup man with similar or better numbers is making 10-20% of that (this appears to be changing as a lot of focus has been put onto quality relievers, finally) simply because a closer records "saves," an entirely made-up stat that doesn't mean a whole lot other than whatever artificial value one wants to ascribe to it.

 

I'm a firm believer in the notion that you should put your best pen guy in at the most critical moment, whether that be the "closer," or whomever. While I think there is probably something to the idea that some guys cannot "close," and maybe some guys can only "close," I think for the most part, the closer role is something that is just foolish. The best pen guy, wherever he pitches, is usually the most valuable, and that is the guy that should be kept at all costs. In sum, Bobby is very valuable, but mostly because he is our best pen arm, not because of the saves he records.

 

That being said, he's just too far away from a big payday to be using the "Indians model" now to buy out his arbitration years for the purpose of saving on his first few free agency years. With a position player, maybe, but not with a pitcher, and certainly not with the strain Bobby puts on his arm.

 

There are a lot of people not in Sabermetrics that understand and believe that a good closer can be found in a variety of places. That's something Schuerholz and Beane both believe and understand (along with numerous others, I'm sure, but I cite them because they're the two clearest opposites). Clearly, everyone would love a Rivera or an Eckersley or a Nathan, but it isn't necessary. And about "Beane's BS theories" I think you are confusing Beane for Bill James, Mr. Relief Ace.

[SoxAce]

There are always Riveras, Gossages, Eckersleys, but a good closer (at least for a season or two) is not terribly hard to find and there's no reason to invest in a guy like Jenks who is no sure thing on a team where the budget is not guaranteed (who is to say that fans will keep coming out?) in a situation where his arm is a mess, he has a history of being...bad to his body, etc. etc.

 

No doubt. But Jenks has been clean (or maybe I should say hasn't gotten into any trouble) in 2+ years now. People change GP. I highly doubt he's the same hothead, alcoholic, racist kid like he once was. He's a man thats matured even through pitching (doesn't reer back n hit 97-100, releys on movement, sink, etc..) Like I said earlier if he's consistant year in, year out, unless he's asking for an outrages amount, gets seriously hurt, etc.. you have to strongly consider it.

 

I think you're completely wrong, Mr. Ace.

 

Dammit Pratt, you know me enough to call me by my real name (if you remember it )

 

I don't think anyone is arguing that they don't want Jenks here, and that he would be easily replaced. I just don't believe that is the case. However, the Sox find them self in a very good spot. They hold the rights to a young, dominate, very cheap closer. For the next four years, they have the CHOICE in bringing him back for the next season. It's totally up to them to decided if they want him back or not. Wouldn't you want that choice for every player on your team? Granted, you obviously can't have that for every player(or your team is going to win 30 games) but in most cases you should take advantage of it for as long as you can, especially with someone that does in fact have pieces of metal in his throwing arm.

 

I'll say it again unless he seriously gets hurt, ask for ridiculous $$, pitches poor, if we groom a closer, etc.. I don't see why we shouldn't extend him 4+ years from now when he's restricted or whatever. etc (kinda what I said earlier in my post ).. we should definitely consider it when he hits restricted/whatever.

 

Now I'm just trying to stir the pot alittle since it's soxfest weekend, Crede hasn't found a new home yet, ST is 3 weeks away, etc.. But you n I are on the same page Tony... and even you Mr. 2 Dislocated Shoulders Pratt even though the pins/screw/chronic hip/knot etc.. is still overrated from certain people.

Edited January 27, 2008 by SoxAce

[Gregory Pratt]

No doubt. But Jenks has been clean (or maybe I should say hasn't gotten into any trouble) in 2+ years now. People change GP. I highly doubt he's the same hothead, alcoholic, racist kid like he once was. He's a man thats matured even through pitching (doesn't reer back n hit 97-100, releys on movement, sink, etc..) Like I said earlier if he's consistant year in, year out, unless he's asking for an outrages amount,

gets seriously hurt, etc.. you have to strongly consider it.

 

Under no circumstance would I consider extending him this early, or even next year early. And I wasn't really alluding to the drugs or the alcohol: I was alluding to the fights and the self-mutilation and all the damages that those were. But more than anything, I'm alluding to the fact that he isn't Mariano Rivera. He isn't Joe Nathan. He's already lost some of his fastball. He was bad in the second half of 2006; he was fine last year and in 05. But I need to see more consistency and besides, there's just no real reason to commit to him unless you have to.

 

Dammit Pratt, you know me enough to call me by my real name (if you remember it )

 

Gerry.

 

Now I'm just trying to stir the pot alittle since it's soxfest weekend, Crede hasn't found a new home yet, ST is 3 weeks away, etc.. But you n I are on the same page Tony... and even you Mr. 2 Dislocated Shoulders Pratt.

 

I want to call you Pansy but I'm afraid that someone who wasn't in on the joke won't get it and ban me for personally attacking you. ;____________________;

 

(It's okay; it's a joke between us!)

(Anything else he tells you is a dirty lie.)

 

By the way, I sprained elbow ligaments recently playing baseball in the freezing cold and pitching sidearm just for kicks.

[SoxAce]

Under no circumstance would I consider extending him this early, or even next year early. And I wasn't really alluding to the drugs or the alcohol: I was alluding to the fights and the self-mutilation and all the damages that those were. But more than anything, I'm alluding to the fact that he isn't Mariano Rivera. He isn't Joe Nathan. He's already lost some of his fastball. He was bad in the second half of 2006; he was fine last year and in 05. But I need to see more consistency and besides, there's just no real reason to commit to him unless you have to.

 

I agree even though it's my personal opinion that he didn't lose anything on his fastball and it was his choice to relay on movement, sink (less k's, better era, whip, less bb's) but that another different discussion. In his short 05 season before the playoffs when hardly anyone knew him.. damn good. 06.. scouting report, hitters figured him out inconsistant season. 07.. Relayed on movement, sink, "pitching" got DP plays, still nasty, "the streak".. hellova season. 08.. remains to be determined. We'll see now that Bobby actually has set-up help.

Edited January 27, 2008 by SoxAce

[Gregory Pratt]

I agree

 

pansy.

 

Giggity.

 

[SoxAce]

pansy.

 

Giggity.

 

You little b****.

[Gregory Pratt]

I'm not here to talk about the past.

[Gregory Pratt]

Jenks has had two poor months in his career. However, he isn't dominate, and needs to be more consistent.....hmmm

 

He's had a short career and there are warning signs all over. That's all I'm saying. He isn't on Rivera, Nathan, Papelbon's level.

[SoxAce]

He's had a short career and there are warning signs all over. That's all I'm saying. He isn't on Rivera, Nathan, Papelbon's level.

 

[Gregory Pratt]

 

That's not a bad point --- but Papelbon is much better than Jenks and has always had greater potential, too, as a prospect. Not to discount from Jenks who is super talented but who is scary in ways Papelbon isn't.

[Gregory Pratt]

With good reason: there are only certain closers who are special enough to be kept around like those guys, and I was specifically comparing him to them to indicate why he shouldn't be extended. Although there are plenty of people who will tell you that he is every bit as good as they are.

[knightni]

The Sox should see how he is in 3 years, when he's close to the end of his arbitration.

 

I have a feeling that there will be at least 1 down year and a few trips to the DL by then.

[witesoxfan]

The Sox should see how he is in 3 years, when he's close to the end of his arbitration.

 

I have a feeling that there will be at least 1 down year and a few trips to the DL by then.

 

I'd venture to guess you could say that about 50% or more of everyone in the majors.

[knightni]

I'd venture to guess you could say that about 50% or more of everyone in the majors.

At least one looong trip on the DL.

[103 mph screwball]

Extend Cabrera for sure. It would validate the Garland trade and provide stability at short for 4 more years.

 

Jenks should be the one asking for an extension. I don't know Bobby, but let me try to see this from his perspective. He did not come from a rich family as far as I know. He is going to make good cash on a year to year basis. However, with his arm hardware, it could all come to an end with a snap. Or he could just lose some velocity and become suddenly very hittable. I'm not saying that it will happen, but it could happen. If he were to sign an extension now, he would not make as much money as if it were on a year to year basis. However, it would be enough guaranteed money to set him up for life if it were invested properly. If someone told me that I could have 20 million (not sure what his actual number would be but for the sake of discussion) for 5 years right now or I could take a gamble that everything would keep going well, I take the cash. If I take that 20 mil I might not get the 30 mil but I wouldn't just get 1 mil, 3 mil or even 10 mil due to injury or something unforeseen. If I'm Bobby and I'm happy with the Sox, I get the money guaranteed. If everything goes well, then go for the mega deal later in the career.

 

If I were KW, I'd go year to year.