2013 IPP: Bobby Parnell

[Benjamin Grimm]

He'll be given the "closer" job but I'm not sure that he'll hang on to it. I'm going to say that he and Brandon Lyon end up with roughly the same number of saves.

[Ceetar]

He'll be the closer all year because he was, and is, the Mets best reliever and is actually pretty good.

He'll bump his K/9 rate up a bit to 8.2, 60% GBs, 65 IP.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Son of a fireman, it is Bobby Pee's DESTINY to be wearing one of these by year-end.



4 wins (8 Rolaids points)
3 losses (-3 points)
39 saves (+117 points)
4 "tough saves" (+4)
5 blown saves (-5)
121 ROLAIDS points, just ahead of Kimbrel!!!1

[Zvon]

I'll use your template JCL.

1 win
4 losses
33 saves
6 "tough saves"
4 blown saves

[batmagadanleadoff]

From Baseball Prospectus 2013:

Parnell has gone from a groundballing righty out of the bullpen to a ridiculously groundballing righty out of the bullpen. His sinking fastball averages 96-97 mph, he has no career platoon split (though in a rigorous analysis, we would regress that split significantly toward the league average given his relatively small number of batters faced so far), and he is, as you might expect, not susceptible to the home run. Closers are made, not born, and Parnell stands ready for his initiation.

[ashie62]

He gets plenty of work and wrangles 25 saves....

[batmagadanleadoff]

Mets closer Bobby Parnell looks like the real thing

By Howard Megdal
10:15 am May. 28, 2013

The Mets will honor Mariano Rivera Tuesday night at Citi Field in the great Yankee closer's last season. Monday night, the Mets deployed Bobby Parnell, who might just become the best closer in New York once Rivera finally quits. Parnell recorded the final three outs Monday night in a tense 2-1 Mets victory at Citi Field, giving Mets fans some rare bragging rights for an evening, and letting a wider audience see the development of Parnell, though nowhere close to Rivera, as a first-rate late-inning option. Parnell has a widely unjustified reputation as unduly wild and unreliable, one that dates back to his prior effort to pair his plus fastball with a slider and occasional changeup. That Parnell walked four per nine innings, with a good, but not great, ground ball rate. The strikeouts, a solid 8.3 per nine, weren't enough by themselves to make him more than intermittently effective. But Parnell totally changed his approach heading into 2012, ditching the slider and changeup for a knuckle curve that he commanded better than either, and that offered a significantly better velocity differential from his fastball than his slider did. The results are uniformly positive. The strikeouts stayed relatively constant, at 8.1 per nine. Meanwhile, Parnell's groundball rates inproved significantly, to tenth in baseball last season among all relievers, 18th so far this season. And the walks went down to 2.6 per nine since the start of 2012. This doesn't make Parnell into Rivera. It does, however, make him a credible closer. And it will make him, sad to say, an extremely valuable trade chip this summer. So the Mets will face a referendum on where they are as a franchise with Parnell. They control Parnell's rights for another two seasons, though he'll be in arbitration both winters, and if his season unfolds as it has so far, he'll make significantly more than the $1.7 million he's getting this season. The Mets could deal Parnell to a contender, and almost certainly receive a prospect or two they can expect to contribute once Zack Wheeler, Rafael Montero and whoever else can come up from the group of prospects they have a Single-A can come together. Then again, waiting for that group to come together might mean punting all of what is likely the prime remaining years of David Wright, the team's highest-paid and best position player. Keeping Parnell around to buttress Wright means an attempt to win sooner. But even if Wheeler came up and immediately contributed, and Travis d'Arnaud, still recovering from a fractured foot, also came up and assumed the regular catching job, would that be enough to make this Mets team into a contender? Unlikely. The best of both worlds is probably a mutually beneficial deal to buy out Parnell's two remaining arbitration years along with a free agent year or two, in a cost-controlled three-year or four-year contract extension, locking in a bullpen piece for his remaining peak years. If the plan isn't to contend within the next four years, it isn't any kind of plan at all. By then, Matt Harvey will be closing in on free agency. That, alas, requires the kind of financial outlay that has been beyond the Mets of late (unless Parnell is willing to defer as much money as David Wright), due to ownership's awful finances. The Mets keep insisting they'll be aggressive in going after an outfielder, or even two. They can start their long-discussed but unfulfilled spending spree by shoring up the bullpen here at home, and they don't need another team or to wait until the offseason to do it. How the Mets handle Parnell this summer will be an indicator of both what they can do as an organization and where they think they are. In the meantime, the Mets have themselves a closer.

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/sports/2013/05/8530420/mets-closer-bobby-parnell-looks-real-thing

[Benjamin Grimm]

By Matt Meyers | ESPNNewYork.com wrote: The case for trading Bobby Parnell By Matt Meyers | ESPNNewYork.com As Mets fans learned when the club traded Carlos Beltran for Zack Wheeler two Julys ago, there can still be reasons for summer excitement even if your team is out of the race. Of course, this year�s Mets club has no Beltran-type player -- a star on the verge of free agency who can bring back an elite prospect. So you�re left with a rebuilding also-ran that probably won�t be able to make any big moves at the July 31 trading deadline. A little sad, right? But I�m here to tell you that the Mets have a very valuable piece of trade bait, and they can significantly improve their long-term outlook if they do everything they can to trade closer Bobby Parnell. And here are three reasons why. 1. HE�S GOOD, BUT NOT THIS GOOD Parnell is one of the better player development stories to come through the Mets' system, as he was a ninth-round pick in 2005 out of a small college (Charleston Southern) who had an 8.86 ERA the year he was drafted. He�s become a reliable reliever in recent years, posting a 2.49 ERA last season and a 2.45 mark this year to go with 13 saves, which gives him some cred with those who believe a you need a Proven Closer. Of course, he has a .253 batting average on balls in play, which is by far the lowest of his career and seems a bit flukey, and when you factor in the Mets� brutal defense -- which fails the eye and metric tests -- it almost certainly is. Additionally, he�s given up 22 fly balls this year and not one has cleared the fence. Last year, he allowed 43 outfield flies and 4 left the yard. Also a bit flukey. In other words, sell high. 2. RELIEVERS ARE EASY TO FIND OK, maybe not so easy for the Mets, but a good bullpen is a low priority for a rebuilding club, and reliever performance is so volatile that it�s impossible to know if Parnell will still be effective the next time the Mets are contending. Not only that, but the Mets actually have an impressive group of pitching prospects in their system, and odds are that at least a few of them will end up as relievers because they can�t develop a third pitch, with the likes of Domingo Tapia, Jake DeGrom and Hansel Robles all being prime candidates. As we know, Parnell was a starter for almost his entire minor league career, but the lack of a changeup pushed him to the pen. 3. SCREW THE PHILLIES I�m sort of stealing this idea from ESPN Insider�s Dave Cameron, who argued that the Nationals should trade Rafael Soriano to undercut the market for Jonathan Papelbon, who will presumably be the best closer on the market once the Phillies come to their sense and realize they need to rebuild. Parnell is about as effective as both of those pitchers and under team control for just as long (through 2015). But while it would cost you $26 million for two more years of Papelbon and $28 million for two more years of Soriano, Parnell will probably earn one-third of that over the next two years via arbitration. In other words, the Mets could undercut the market for all expensive closers on the market by offering up Parnell. He is a more attractive trade option due to his price and age, and could probably fetch you a decent prospect from a team like the Detroit Tigers, or possibly an elite one if you also throw in one of the promising arms in the minors (non-Montero or Syndergaard division). That�s right, it�s a chance to add a good prospect and screw over the team�s biggest rival. Sounds like a win-win! Parnell has been a nice story for the Mets, but he�s the best trade chip they�ve got. The club would be doing itself a disservice if it does not try to trade him now because his value will never be higher.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

My approach to trading Bobby Parnell would be:
1) Ask for the moon and stars
2) Extend a fat middle finger to those who won't pay up.

[Edgy MD]

Trade speculation /= excitement, much as columnists would wish it did, since it's a rare type of story they can generate ex nihilo.

The best way the Mets can scrod the Phillies would be to pass them and have them looking at their asses in the standings by the All-Star break.

[Benjamin Grimm]

The thing is, I've long believed that closers are overrated, and I still do, but I also see how good it is to have one who's reliable. This is, of course, because whether your closer is good or bad, they're going to be pitching in the ninth innings of close games. Without a good closer, given the managing style that's in vogue, you're going to turn too many wins into losses.

So, since closers are so highly valued, then the Mets probably should consider selling high on Parnell. But my problem is: who replaces him? Are they going to turn to another Frank Francisco type? (Gah! I hope not!) Or is there someone that they can groom and who will be ready to step in and get the job done on that contending team that we're hoping (logically or not) to have in 2014?

[Ceetar]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: My approach to trading Bobby Parnell would be: 1) Ask for the moon and stars 2) Extend a fat middle finger to those who won't pay up.

That's pretty much been Sandy's M.O.



I disagree about how much luck Parnell's super success has been, but I agree with the premise overall. If you can sell a reliever high, you're almost never going to regret it.

[Edgy MD]

If they must deal him, they probably want a guy currently on the roster to replace him so the transition goes smoothly. If Familia was on the roster, in place, and excelling, that would be one thing. He's not, and nobody under contract for the forseeable future is.

If they trade him, they either have to sign a more expensive guy to replace him or waste good time transitioning. They've got two more years of control. There is no urgency except the manufactured urgency of the bored columnist. If he is to be dangled as bait, they'd better land a big-assed fish.

Murphy and Duda seem much more dealable, and I'm not advocating.

[dinosaur jesus]

I understand selling high, but isn't a guy who's earning a third of what he's worth exactly who you want on a team that's low on cash?

[Benjamin Grimm]

Well, hopefully you'd trade him for someone of a similar age and salary. But maybe get an everyday player instead of a reliever.

I think the point of these "trade Parnell" articles is that now really may be the time of his peak value, exactly because of his age and his distance from free agency. A year from now he'll be a year older, paid a bit more, and a year closer to free agency. And there's the potential that he won't be pitching as well. If that happens, everyone will be saying, "Stupid Wilpons! Stupid Sandy! Why didn't they trade Parnell in July 2013?"

I at least give credit to the writers who are saying it now, instead of to those who might start saying it once they have hindsight.

As I said above, my biggest concern in trading him is that there's no one to replace him that I can see. If dealing him leads to another Frankie Rodriquez or Frankie Francisco, then much, if not all, of the benefit of the trade (whatever it might be) gets undone.

[Ceetar]

dinosaur jesus wrote: I understand selling high, but isn't a guy who's earning a third of what he's worth exactly who you want on a team that's low on cash?

Not if you can leverage him into quite a bit more than that. Only if though. If you can get a real good outfielder? a prospect starter than will likely pitch way more than the 60 innings Parnell is giving you?

I don't trade him just because he's valuable and you can get something back. Even if it's partially luck based (And he's had his share of bad luck last year too, BABIP be damned. At a certain point (not yet) the low FB/HR rate stabilizes and becomes real, not luck.

Besides, there's almost no scenario where Parnell isn't helping the Mets in the next couple of years. Even if he's not as good.

The point about the good arms that might not become starters is valid too.

[Edgy MD]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I think the point of these "trade Parnell" articles is that now really may be the time of his peak value, exactly because of his age and his distance from free agency. A year from now he'll be a year older, paid a bit more, and a year closer to free agency. And there's the potential that he won't be pitching as well. If that happens, everyone will be saying, "Stupid Wilpons! Stupid Sandy! Why didn't they trade Parnell in July 2013?" .

I won't.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I at least give credit to the writers who are saying it now, instead of to those who might start saying it once they have hindsight.

Yeah, but... a year from now he'll be more expensive and closer to free-agency is true of... just about everybody. There's no insight there.

[Lefty Specialist]

You know, for the first time in what seems like forever I'm not holding my breath when the closer comes in. I'd like to hang on to that feeling for at least a little longer.

I'd have to be bowled over to deal him and I don't think that's going to happen.

[Benjamin Grimm]

You left off the other part: "And there's the potential that he won't be pitching as well."

And I know YOU won't be saying that. (Yes, I know I said "everybody" and you always take that personally. I should have said "almost everybody" or perhaps "many people".)

[Frayed Knot]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: ... then the Mets probably should consider selling high on Parnell. But my problem is: who replaces him?

Immediately? - Lyon/Hawkins (or is Frank-Frank even going to make it back this season?)
Eventually? - Someone from the Mejia/Familia/Montero/Leathersich family, or quite possibly someone we don't know yet.

The long answer is that I wouldn't view a NYM trade of Parnell as a signal that they're intent on buying/trading for a "proven" closer from out on the open market. Rather I think the idea that is this season can certainly survive without a "real" closer for the remainder while figuring that there'll be various options to choose from next March. So if Parnell can net you a promising OFer from, say someone in Detroit's situation (they just re-released Jose Valverde) or Boston's (verious injuries) of needing a closer while contending, then it's worth a shot. And if not, like JCL says, simply extend the middle finger.

[Edgy MD]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: You left off the other part: "And there's the potential that he won't be pitching as well."

He might be pitching better. And/or the team could be playing better and we might really really need him.

[Benjamin Grimm]

In that case, trading him would have been a bad idea.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

It's very easy to look at the Mets current situation and envision a WATP Scenario in which Parnell and Davis (or Duda) go in the same deal and we get an arm back too, maybe.

[Edgy MD]

It's petty sobering to see how every pitcher on the Mets is suddenly better with the outfielders they've had behind them.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Right? It's really made a stark case for trading either Duda or Davis, that is, providing EY can keep up his hitting and Lagares promises not to get any worse with the stick.

[ashie62]

I still believe you can get a nice part for Marlon Byrd...

Edited June 27, 2013 by Guest

[Benjamin Grimm]

I'm sure he'd appreciate it, but doesn't he already have all his parts?

[ashie62]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'm sure he'd appreciate it, but doesn't he already have all his parts?

No...his balls grew back..