but secondly, showing me one similar pitcher who was traded is not relevant, and it is not context.  brad lidge is a horrible example.  last year was his first decent season in more than two years.  he has become a scapegoat for the pujols incident in his town for more 3 years, and never seemed to be able to personally shoulder that burden.  comparing lidge, a 31 year old coming off his best year in 3 years, to k-rod, a 25 year old coming off his worst year as a closer, is a horrible comparison.  and if you're suggesting that lidge and k-rod are similar, then you're suggesting they should get similar trade return.  if that's the case, we shouldn't expect much by packaging k-rod.

now, aside from that, we move on to context.  showing me one similar pitcher means nothing.  you told me that 'x' number of k-rod's saves were of 3 runs or more.  that's all well and good.  now tell me how many saves the average closer has of three runs or more.  what percentage of a closer's saves are of three runs or more?  THAT is context.  good for k-rod.  18 of his 40 saves (45%) were of three runs or more.  the average closer, however, has what percentage?  THAT is context.

next issue is, 45% really isn't that extreme at all.  the options in a save are, essentially, save a 1, 2, or 3 run lead.  that means in a season, strictly from a numbers standpoint, 33.3333...% of your saves should be from any given one of those leads.  when you factor in the situationals, that is, the likelihood of blowing any one of those saves, you are less likely to have more one run saves than two run saves, and less likely to have more two run saves than three run saves.  from that standpoint, 45% certainly doesn't sound that far out of whack.

now, when you consider that this is all happening during the worst season k-rod has had at a closer, and further consider that there is absolutely ZERO reason to be even slightly confident that k-rod is in a decline (there isn't reason or proof), what you're saying just doesn't carry much weight with me, nor should it with anyone.

and as a last point, it was already said in here, but the concept of a closer being easily replaceable is bullshit.  for a long, long, long time now the angels have been spoiled on great closers.  perhaps to a degree that it skews what we view as being replaceable.  ask the indians what they think of having joe borowski closing...or any other team what they think of having their coin-flip-chance-of-success closer on the mound.

granted, they're obviously not the most essential piece of an entire club, but clearly not all closers are not created equal.  k-rod, by his very nature, is most likely to be the recipient of grievances because he is the most identifiable figure who we can deem responsible for a loss.  your targetted criticism of him is far more a product of viewing 162 games of the angels, and not seeing how the plethora of other MLB closers are performing, and how favorably he stacks up with them. k-rod, in what of his worst season as a close to date, had what is, by all statistical measurements in the universe except apparently your own, a very solid season.  your analysis of his stats this year does nothing to prove a poor season, because the stats have no context.  if i told a non-baseball fan that vladimir guerrero failed the angels 68% of the time this year, they'd ask me what the fuck he was getting paid $14 million a year for.  when i provide the context, he is suddenly a superstar.