For Whom Heath Bell Tolls

There is a strong possibility Jonathan Papelbon will be closing games for another team next year. Red Sox Nation needs to prepare themselves for this reality. Fear not though faithful freaks of Fenway, Heath Bell could be the simplest solution to this problem.

If Papelbon is truly intent on setting the market for a closing pitcher, Boston can surely afford not paying for his services. It is true, there is some value to be had in having been able to perform well in the pressure cooker known as Boston. However, overpaying for that luxury is not worth it in my opinion.

Let's take a look back at the stat line for both Heath Bell and Jonathan Papelbon over the past 3 seasons. While a majority of his career was as a set-up man, Bell moved into the the closer role in 2009 and has performed admirably in that time frame.

The first statistic people tend to look at for a closer is the number of saves he provided for his team. Let's get that out of the way. In 2009 Heath Bell had 42 saves (4th in all of MLB) while Papelbon had 38 saves (6th in all of MLB.) In 2010 Heath Bell had 47 saves (2nd in all of MLB) while Papelbon had 37 saves (9th in all of MLB.) Lastly, in 2011 Heath Bell had 43 saves (6th in all of MLB) while Papelbon had 31 saves (18th in all of MLB.) There, the arbitrary number of saves is out of the way. Obviously Heath Bell had more saves in that time frame, but that is not what I am basing my argument on.

I like to look at both WHIP and ERA to examine the true measure of a pitcher. To know how many walks and hits a pitcher gives up per inning pitched is really the nitty gritty of the position. When examining these two pitchers Heath Bell holds the advantage over Papelbon in 2 of the 3 years examined. In 2009 Bell posted a 1.120 WHIP while Papelbon posted a 1.147. Hardly much of a difference just eyeballing it, however, in all of Major League Baseball, Bell finished with the 58th best WHIP among pitchers, Papelbon with the 76th.

In 2010 Bell posted a WHIP of 1.200 and Papelbon posted a 1.269. Again, both numbers seem reasonable for a closer. Again, in all of MLB, Bell finished with a ranking of 130 and Papelbon a ranking of 179 overall. It's crucial to remind you here, these were two of the best closing pitchers in the game.

2011 was the year of Jonathan Papelbon. Sure, he only saved 31 games, but he also did not have that many save opportunities. This is a perfect example as to why I think WHIP is a far better statistic in determining your closer than saves. In 2011 Bell posted a 1.149 while Papelbon put up a .933. Bell finished 127th overall while Papelbon finished 32nd. Lights out.

The last statistic I like to look at is ERA. Of those players that made it on base against these guys, how many crossed the plate? Heath Bell's three years looked like this: 2009/2.71, 2010/1.93, and 2011/2.44. Papelbon's seasons looked like this: 2009/1.85, 2010/3.90, and 2011/2.94.

"Wait a minute... I thought Papelbon was 'Lights Out' in 2011. How come his ERA is higher?"

This is where the complexities of baseball come forth. Papelbon rarely let people on base in 2011, but if runners got on base, they had a pretty good chance of scoring. You can chalk that up to defensive ineptitude if you'd like, though both Boston and San Diego were "middle of the pack" defensively. What this tells me is that once Bell allows runners on, he keeps them from crossing home plate.

The other advantage to selecting Bell as your next closer, he is going to be a hell of a lot cheaper than Papelbon. In 2011, Cinco Ocho commanded $12million in arbitration. He will surely be looking to get a minimum of $15million per year. Heath Bell made $7.5million in 2011. The Red Sox could literally sign up for 4 years of Heath Bell at$30million versus 2 years of Papelbon for the same $30million.

In my eyes, it is a pretty easy decision.