The Nationals entered the trade market yesterday to add Jonathan Papelbon from the division-rival Phillies. Before moving on Papelbon, the Nationals looked into both Craig Kimbrel of the Padres and Aroldis Chapman of the Reds, Barry Svrluga of the Washington Post reports on Twitter. But the team moved on when it was quoted an asking price of two top young players (from among Trea Turner, Michael Taylor, Lucas Giolito, Reynaldo Lopez, and Joe Ross). It’s no surprise, then, that the team moved on to Papelbon — who was a “backup” trade target, per the report.
Here’s more on the deal:
- In exchange for Papelbon (and for keeping $4.5MM of his contract), the Phillies will get righty Nick Pivetta. Per Kiley McDaniel of Fangraphs, the righty has a good arm and frame that bodes well, though he has the upside of a back-of-the-rotation starter. If he can’t reach that level, though he figures to be a middle relief piece down the line. ESPN.com’s Keith Law largely concurs in that assessment, noting that Pivetta lacks significant upside. It’s easy to see, then, how the deal made sense for both clubs: the Phillies could use a mediocre starter at the back of their rotation, while the Nationals have enough current and future options to make that a largely unnecessary luxury.
- The move generated some controversy, owing to the fact that the club reportedly promised to use Papelbon as its closer despite the presence of high-performing reliever Drew Storen. The thrice-deposed 9th-inning man declined to say much about the move, but did indicate that he and his agent are having ongoing discussions with GM Mike Rizzo. As Svrluga writes in an even-handed take on the matter, it’s clear that Storen did not deserve to be demoted out of the ninth inning. But the club also had a valid desire to bolster its late-inning relief corps, and adding Papelbon was a good piece for the team to add. As he notes, teams have increasingly recognized the value of filling high-leverage innings with quality arms, regardless of who actually takes the closer role.
- Jonah Keri of Grantland writes that the trade checks plenty of boxes for the Nats at a reasonable cost. In spite of the off-field risk involved with replacing Storen, it seems to Keri like a worthwhile gamble.
- Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports argues that the Nationals have shown a lack of confidence in replacing Storen. He says that the move might be more palatable had the club added a clearly superior pitcher, such as Aroldis Chapman or Craig Kimbrel, but suggests that bringing in a similarly effective reliever was something of a slap in the face to a player that the Nats drafted and developed.
- From my perspective, adding Papelbon says less about how the Nationals feel about Storen than it does the club’s desire to maximize the impact of a bullpen addition with a minimal expenditure of resources. As Rosenthal has observed (Twitter link), Washington seemed reluctant to add significant salary obligations to this year’s payroll at the deadline. It likely would have cost more in salary, prospects, or both, to add a different arm that could simply be slotted into a set-up role. And the team may well have ascribed some value to adding a player with Papelbon’s late-inning and big-game experience, whether or not that was tied to Storen’s own spotty track record in very limited postseason innings. It’s true that Storen did not “deserve” to lose his role, of course, and that he’ll sacrifice some earning capacity through arbitration with the lack of save opportunities. But we see such moves happen all of the time from clubs looking to save money, make upgrades, and otherwise improve their short and long-term position. While the clubhouse aspect and Storen’s feelings certainly should factor in the team’s decisionmaking, then, I’m not sure there’s a compelling fairness point to be considered.
It’ll be interesting the first time Pap blows a save in DC.
Hasn’t happened yet this year, and only 12% of the time over the last 3+ years combined (driven primarily by an 81% in 2013).
But agreed.
Why?
Even better: when he blows a save against the Phillies at Citizens Bank
actually, the Phils have a decent number of mediocre back of the rotation types around between AAA and AA right now so not that exacted about another one.
at least Phils fans can fully hope for Papelbon to blow saves now, and since our team sucks going back again to enjoying seeing how the Nats will manage not to win once again.
I think this is a particularly interesting situation because Storen is arb eligible next year, and FA eligible the next. Does getting yanked around this much inspire him to instruct his agent not to sign any long-term deal with Washington?
Especially since the reduced number of saves will doubtless affect his potential arbitration earnings next year?
Good point. But the priority in DC is to win and get to the WS. They aren’t in business to cater to individual players – and that includes Harper. If Soren feels he needs to close and he wants to play out his option in a year or two to find a team where he can do that – fine – that’s how the system works. Rizzo will have someone else ready.
A few years ago Joe Smith was a set-up man that could have gone out as a closer. He got a nice contract from the Angels to be the chief set-up pitcher. When their closers failed, he had a string of saves as he took over the role. But the Angels needed a deeper pen. They acquired Huston Street to close and moved Smith back to set-up. No hard feelings. The team keeps winning, people are getting paid nice salaries, life is good.
How are papelbons numbers versus the mets? I can only remember 3 blown saves versus them. The homer from Omir Santos, the homer from Jordany Valdespin, and Murphy’s hit off of Paps leg.
This has Rafael Soriano 2013-2014 written all over it for the Nats.
Like Yunel Ecobar before him – once Papelbon gets with his new teammates in the Nationals environment, the “he’s bad in the clubhouse” and “he’s a cancer” nonsense will be forgotten.
Like the Cardinals and others, the Nationals have built a group of team leaders and a winning culture. Everyone just needs to do their job and the team will win. If guys can do more – great – but no one player has to feel he has to carry the team. Veteran players getting in those environments thrive if they have ability. If they can’t do the job in a reasonable period of time, accountability kicks in and Rizzo brings in others.
What cracks me up is the way everything is always spun. Rizzo was quoted as saying that the 2014 bullpen was “finesse”, we assume that means it needs more hard throwers, and now he gets a ground ball-dependent closer to replace the guy who K’s 10.9 a game. Closing is BS half the time anyway, but I’m dubious that Williams will ascribe Storen to the fireman role his talent deserves. Storen getting his agent doesn’t bother me any, after all if Papelbum can carp his way into a trade where he can get his option year and close, why can’t Storen still ask for closer money for 2016? Even with creative accounting, It seems to me they traded Clippard last year for making too much money as a setup guy, and now they’re repeating the scenario.
I bet Storen gets regular 8th inning duty and gets to pick up a lot of holds, at least. You’re right that he can say and demand what he wants just as Papelbon did, but it’s quite different: the Nationals don’t want to move him, while the Phillies needed to. And Papelbon had a no-trade clause that gave him the right to demand what he did. Good for him for earning it in the first place (not that they shouldve given it out).
As for Clippard, I really do think they wanted Escobar. That deal came in mid-January, so it wasn’t like they were just getting what they could for Clippard to dump his salary. I do think the dollars played a role, but I believe they were mostly motivated b/c they wanted a second baseman who could slide in at short in 2016 if need be.