A Curious Comparison Between Jonathan Papelbon and Mariano Rivera

Maybe this is why Jonathan Papelbon gets no respect.  He's a catcher fondler.  (Photo by Drew Hallowell/Getty Images)

Disclaimer:  I know no one compares to Mariano Rivera.  Without question, Rivera was the best closer in the history of the game.  Even we Mets fans can admit that without cringing.  But the point of this blog post is to point out a stunning similarity between the careers of Rivera and Jonathan Papelbon.  I respect Rivera.  I hate Papelbon.  But those numbers tell quite a story - a story that I will share right now...


Jonathan Papelbon is 33 years old, an age when most players begin to enter their "past-their-prime" years.  Papelbon has had a solid career, but no one has ever thought of him as the best closer in the game.  Meanwhile, back in 2003, Mariano Rivera was also in his age 33 season, but by then everyone considered him the top fireman in baseball.

Papelbon doesn't have Rivera's reputation as being the dominant closer of his day, but looking at their stats through their age 33 season, we may have to think of Papelbon a little differently.

Here are the key stats for both Papelbon and Rivera, looking at Papelbon's entire career and Rivera's career through the 2003 season - the year in which he pitched as a 33-year-old.  The similarities, as you'll be able to see, are quite shocking.

• Papelbon: 549 GP, 299 saves, 2.38 ERA, 1.04 WHIP, 676 K, 153 BB, 185 ERA+, 2.69 FIP
• Rivera: 512 GP, 283 saves, 2.49 ERA, 1.07 WHIP, 582 K, 177 BB, 186 ERA+, 2.94 FIP

Papelbon has pitched in 37 more games through his age 33 season than Rivera did, which explains his 16 save lead over the future Hall of Fame closer.  But Papelbon has a better ERA, lower WHIP and has nearly 100 more strikeouts than Rivera did at age 33.  Papelbon also has better control than Rivera, as evidenced by the two dozen fewer walks despite pitching in more games than Rivera.  Furthermore, Papelbon has a lower FIP than Rivera and has a nearly identical ERA+.

Now let's look at postseason numbers, which is where Rivera cemented his career as a Hall of Famer.  Through 2003, Rivera had a mindboggling 0.75 ERA and a similar 0.75 WHIP.  He also recorded 30 saves and allowed opposing hitters to post a .176/.208/.241 slash line.  Papelbon has not pitched nearly as much in the postseason as Rivera did, which is more the fault of his teams than the individual, but in 18 postseason appearances, he has a 1.00 ERA and 0.815 WHIP.  And what about his slash line?  Well, that's a Rivera-esque .154/.220/.209.  Or perhaps I should say Rivera has a Papelbon-esque postseason slash line?

Before you forget that this is a Mets site, let's consider one other closer's numbers through his age 33 season.  He began his Mets career at age 34, but by that time, his pitching statistics were just as good, if not better, than both Papelbon and Rivera.  Let's look at the career numbers of Billy Wagner through 2005, the year he began as a 33-year-old.

• Wagner: 584 GP, 284 saves, 2.40 ERA, 0.99 WHIP, 840 K, 217 BB, 182 ERA+, 2.77 FIP

Now you can see why former Mets general manager Omar Minaya was adamant about bringing Wagner into the fold.  His numbers were virtually identical to what Rivera produced through his age 33 season and are right on par with what Papelbon has accomplished.  But the reason why my main comparison is between Papelbon and Rivera and not all three pitchers is because Wagner - to put it bluntly - sucked in the postseason.  Through his age 33 season, Wagner posted a 9.64 ERA in October and allowed hitters to bat .364 against him.

No one will ever confuse Jonathan Papelbon with Mariano Rivera.  Rivera posted a major league record 652 saves and was undoubtedly the best relief pitcher in postseason history.  But through age 33, Papelbon and Rivera have been virtually the same pitcher.  And although Papelbon's total postseason numbers aren't as gaudy as Rivera's because his teams have not been annual playoff participants, his October averages (ERA, WHIP, BAA, OBP, SLG) are quite comparable to the Sandman.

As Mets fans, we may hate Jonathan Papelbon.  We may also make fun of him because he gave up game-winning home runs to non-prime-time-players Omir Santos and Jordany Valdespin.  But he deserves to be mentioned in the same sentence as Mariano Rivera, at least as far as his accomplishments through his age 33 season are concerned.

Papelbon may not continue to dominate until he's 43 like Rivera did.  And he may never appear in as many postseason games.  But as loath as I am to admit it, he's far better than most of us would like to admit, even if he does like to grope his catcher at times.

Stuffed Panda

On Tuesday, Major League Baseball revealed its next-to-last voting results for the 2012 All-Star Game.  At the time, David Wright had amassed 2,687,818 votes from fans to be the starting third baseman for the National League.  His closest competition for the honor was the San Francisco Giants' Pablo Sandoval, who had received 2,223,269 votes.  Sandoval was 464,549 votes behind Wright with less than 72 hours of voting time remaining.  It should have been a shoo-in for Wright.  Instead, Giants fans are giving the rest of the baseball world some stuffed panda.

In what has become a shock to Mets fans and the baseball world, the man playfully known as Kung Fu Panda passed the Wright to become the National League's starting third baseman on Tuesday in Kansas City.  But he didn't just pass him by a couple thousand votes.  Rather, he blew by Wright faster than the fog blows into the San Francisco Bay.

Pablo Sandoval finished with 5,743,542 votes, compared to David Wright's final total of 4,133,380 votes, beating the Mets' third baseman by a whopping 1,619,162 votes.  In the final days of voting, Sandoval received over 2,000,000 more votes than Wright.  Over 3.5 million votes were cast for Sandoval in that time period, as opposed to less than 1.5 million cast for Wright.

Let's compare what Wright and Sandoval have done on the field in 2012 to see if Sandoval deserved to be voted in (stats through Saturday night's games):

• David Wright: .355/.449/.564, 26 doubles, 2 triples, 9 HR, 50 RBI, 52 runs scored, 8 SB
• Pablo Sandoval: .307/.366/.482, 11 doubles, 0 triples, 6 HR, 25 RBI, 26 runs scored, 0 SB

Now let's look at what David Wright's numbers were after June 5, which was approximately one month ago:

• David Wright: .362/.465/.585, 19 doubles, 1 triple, 7 HR, 33 RBI, 37 runs scored, 5 SB

Notice anything interesting about those numbers?  David Wright could have missed every game after June 5 and still would have led Pablo Sandoval in every major offensive category.

But it's not just Sandoval supplanting Wright as the National League's starting third baseman by 1.5 million votes that gets to me.  It's also what Sandoval's teammate in San Francisco did.

Buster Posey is a very good player.  Is he an All-Star?  Yes.  But should he be the National League's starting catcher in the All-Star Game?  Don't make me laugh!  Here are Buster Posey's numbers (through Saturday, June 30) compared to the numbers put up by the Cardinals' Yadier Molina and the Phillies' Carlos Ruiz:

• Buster Posey: .296/.363/.472, 14 doubles, 10 HR, 40 RBI, 31 runs scored, 3 SB
• Yadier Molina: .311/.362/.510, 15 doubles, 12 HR, 44 RBI, 33 runs scored, 7 SB
• Carlos Ruiz: .358/.423/.585, 19 doubles, 11 HR, 43 RBI, 38 runs scored, 3 SB

Posey leads Molina in on-base percentage by one one-thousandth of a point.  I guess that's good enough for the voters because Posey doesn't lead Molina or Ruiz in any other major offensive category.

And here's what really gets me.  Not only is Posey starting the All-Star Game over Molina and Ruiz, but he received the most votes of any National League player in the history of All-Star voting.  Let me repeat that in a new paragraph and use boldface so you can read that better.

WITH 7,621,370 VOTES, BUSTER POSEY SET A NEW ALL-TIME RECORD FOR MOST VOTES RECEIVED BY A NATIONAL LEAGUE PLAYER.

Prior to Posey's vote count, no National Leaguer had ever surpassed the 6 million vote mark, let alone the 7 million mark.  (Ryan Braun held the previous record of 5,928,004 votes, set last year.)  Posey almost didn't set the record.  Wanna know why?  Because Melky Cabrera, who had never made an All-Star team in seven seasons in the big leagues "earned" 7,521,784 votes, a mere 99,586 votes fewer than Posey's tally.

When Buster Posey and Melky Cabrera receive more votes than any other player in National League player in history, that shows that something is wrong with the current fan voting format.  How could Pablo Sandoval get over 3.5 million votes in the final 72 hours of voting?  How did he get 3.5 million votes, period?

In 1957, fan balloting caused the Cincinnati Reds to have seven players voted to start the All-Star Game (the only non-Red to be voted in was future Hall of Famer Stan Musial).  Commissioner Ford Frick, clearly disturbed by the ballot stuffing in the Queen City, replaced Reds' players Gus Bell and Wally Post in the starting lineup with the more deserving Willie Mays and Hank Aaron.  He also took voting privileges away from the fans until 1970.

Perhaps that is what needs to be done here.  If MLB wants to say "this time it counts" with regards to the All-Star Game and its outcome determining home-field advantage in the World Series, then we should not have undeserving players determine that outcome.  It's time to put an end to farces such as this one.  If the All-Star Game is going to "count", then the votes counted should not be cast by ballot-stuffing fans.  The best players should play in the Midsummer Classic, not the players who play in the cities with the most supportive fans.

Fans of Major League Baseball should never have to be subjected to stuffed panda again.