It's been noted already, quite a few times: four teams lost in the various division series, and four closers failed: Ryan Franklin, Huston Street, Joe Nathan and Jonathan Papelbon. Franklin seems to be getting a pass because it took the Matt Holiday incident to lose the game he lost, but that overlooks the facts that (a) he still had to completely collapse in order to lose that game, unbelievable error and all, and (b) he's clearly the least effective/talented pitcher of these four. Street, the next-least effective, gets a pass from me, because that one's Jim Tracy's (and convention's) fault. It's the other two who are getting all the attention, and I'm gonna go ahead and focus on them, too.

If you go on to Baseball Reference and run a search for ERA+ leaders since 2006 (Papelbon's first year as closer), minimum 250 innings, the top of that list looks like this:

All awesome, and almost interchangeable. And in a class by themselves; after this, you have to go all the way down to Francisco Rodriguez at 171. Closers may be overvalued and overrated, but they're good guys to have, and you really want one of these three guys.

But if you're in Boston or Minnesota, there's a good chance you don't want your guy right now. Lots of people are talking about whether or not Papelbon will or should be traded, while in Minneapolis, professional crankypants Patrick Reusse says Joe Nathan should be shipped out, and about half of Twins fans who cared enough to vote agree with him. Crazy overreactions to one uncharacteristic and unfortunately timed bad outing, or is there an actual idea in there?

(click here to read more)

Should Papelbon Be Traded?
Paps will be 29 in 2010 and under team control through 2011. He played the 2009 season on a one-year, $6.25 million contract he signed to avoid arbitration, meaning whomever he pitches for will probably have to send $8-9 million a year his way during that time. $120,000 per inning might sound a little crazy to you and me, but the Mets are paying the vastly inferior (and fading) Rodriguez $13m a year. Papelbon's setup man, Billy Wagner, made $10.5 million last year. So, really, most MLB GMs view an elite closer in Papelbon's price range as a pretty solid value.

And this is going to sound strange, but he may or may not actually be an elite closer anymore. While his 1.85 ERA matched exactly his 2007 ERA and beat his 2008 one by half a run, this was Papelbon's worst (er, least great) year by far. In the same number of innings as he threw in 2008, Papelbon racked up the same number of strikeouts, but walked more than three times as many, hit four guys, and gave up one more home run. In 2009, Papelbon had better luck once runners got on base; in 2008, he was just a better pitcher. His FIPs since 2006: 2.14, 2.45, 2.01, 3.05. It's certainly possible, in < 70 innings, that none of this signifies anything. But there isn't really anything else to go on.

Finally, the Sox have plenty of alternatives if Papelbon leaves. They could exercise Wagner's $8 million option or, probably, sign him to a new deal for less. Daniel Bard is 24, throws 97 MPH, and has had great minor league numbers and a very encouraging start to his MLB career. Ramon Ramirez and Hideki Okajima will be around too, and they have a club option to bring Takashi Saito back. This is (or can be) a ridiculously awesome bullpen, with or without Papelbon. Most of these guys would already be closers on most other teams. If ever there was a time to try Bill James' much-derided closer by committee plan (a good idea shortsightedly attempted by the 2003 Red Sox using terrible pitchers), it's probably with these guys.

So, to summarize: Papelbon's affordable for two more years, he's young, he might be faltering, and he won't be missed much. Josh suggests that there's no real market for him, but I can't agree; are the Angels, for instance, really going to dismiss the idea out of hand because they've already got Brian Fuentes and his 4.42 FIP? Papelbon (unless you think he's slipping) isn't the kind of guy you turn down because you already have some guy you call a closer. He could bring a lot in return -- way more, in terms of wins, than he's going to provide whatever team traded for him. The Red Sox would be crazy not to at least listen to (and perhaps solicit) some offers.

My answer: Yes. At least have a look-see.

Should Nathan Be Traded?
The general feeling among (many) Twins fans at the moment is that Nathan just doesn't have IT. Either he's lost it, or he's never had it. That he looked nervous in blowing game 2 of the ALDS to the Yankees.

That's garbage.

In about 69 innings in 2009, Nathan posted a 2.10 ERA and a 198 ERA+, saving a team-record 47 games. In six seasons with the Twins, he's posted a 1.87 ERA and 234 ERA+. There's no meaningful difference in his last three years' FIPs, and his 2009 tRA was the lowest it's been in those three seasons. When he first came to the Twins, Nathan had a 95 MPH fastball and a devastating 88 MPH slider; now, at age 35, he has a 95 MPH fastball and a devastating 88 MPH slider.

So there's this idea that he can't handle things in the playoffs. Well, in his Twins career, he's pitched 7 and two-thirds playoff innings, seven of them against the Yankees. In the 2008 playoffs, Josh Beckett -- who people seem to view as the pitching version of Derek Jeter, clutchiness-wise -- had an outing where he pitched four innings against the Rays and gave up 8 earned runs, including three homers. No, Nathan hasn't been great in the playoffs, but 8 innings stretched across six years tells you less than nothing. It's like anti-information.

And he looks nervous? Nathan has been variously nicknamed "Twitch," "Twitchy McXanax," and "Twitch 'n' Pitch." He always looks nervous. He sweats like no person in the "normal" band on the weight chart should ever be able to sweat. If he got up there and didn't start twitching like he got stuck on the electric fence, that's when I'd be worried. And yet, he gets the job done, better than, at least, all but two guys on the planet.

So what happened in Game 2? He gave up a single to Mark Teixeira (one of the best hitters in the game right now) and a home run to Alex Rodriguez (one of the best hitters we've ever seen). Know what? That's the kind of thing that happens. If Twins fans think that the likes of Pat Neshek and Jose Mijares would have held it together in that situation (seriously, Reusse suggests that Neshek, who hasn't pitched in two years, is the answer), well, I hope the front office is smart enough to never show them how ridiculous that is.

Nathan is owed $23 million over the next two years, with a similarly-priced club option for 2012, and is six years older than Papelbon. He won't bring much in return, he's showing none of Paps' warning signs, and the Twins have no ready substitutes. A GM always has to pick up the phone, because, I mean, some morning Josh Byrnes might wake up with a nagging feeling that he just needs to unload Justin Upton on somebody. But failing something like that, or some sort of sudden catastrophe that takes the team out of contention for the foreseeable future, there's no reason at all to even bother thinking about trading him right now.

My answer: of course not. You crazy?