Jump to content


Rhodes will likely head to another team


Fish4Life
 Share

Recommended Posts

1/01/08 7:18 PM ET

Marlins' Rhodes to explore free agency

By Joe Frisaro / MLB.com

 

MIAMI -- To bolster the bullpen for a second-half run, the Marlins obtained lefty Arthur Rhodes from the Mariners at the July 31 Trade Deadline.

Based on an impressive season, Rhodes has improved his stock as he is about to explore the market. On Saturday, the left-hander who began his MLB career in 1991 filed for free agency.

 

Indications are that Rhodes likely will be moving on to another team.

 

Rhodes became the third Marlin to declare for free agency in as many days. Catcher Paul Lo Duca filed on Thursday and left-handed pitcher Mark Hendrickson completed the formality on Friday.

 

From the 2008 Marlins, veteran outfielder Luis Gonzalez has still to file. The Marlins are not expected to bring back Gonzalez either.

 

Rhodes, who turned 39 on Oct. 24, played an important role in the Marlins finishing with their first winning season since 2005. Assuming the role of late-innings lefty specialist, Rhodes appeared in 25 games with the Marlins, posting a 2-0 record with an 0.68 ERA. In 13 1/3 innings, he allowed one run while striking out 14 and walking three.

 

The Marlins obtained Rhodes from Seattle for right-handed pitching prospect Gaby Hernandez. Before the trade, he appeared in 36 games for the Mariners, posting a 2-1 record with a 2.86 ERA.

 

Rhodes has played for six teams as he prepares for his 17th MLB season.

 

Joe Frisaro is a reporter for MLB.com. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.

 

For those who thought Rhodes coming back was a lock, think again....

Link to comment
Share on other sites


who gives a sh*t if hes replaceable or not. he was great and there is no reason to not bring him back. stupid to let him walk especially for a team who trades 32 home runs for a releiver.

Please read this - http://danagonistes.blogspot.com/2005/08/d...ta-and-ops.html. Then stop saying idiotic things like 32 HR and not realize they came at the opportunity cost of a pitiful OBP and bad defense. There is a reason every publication says the Marlins made a good deal and Royals fans are pissed. We're going to get a lot more production out of 1B in 2009.

 

There are also a number of reasons to not bring Rhodes back.

 

He is going to get a lot of money, on probably a 2 year deal. He is old, and there is a huge chance of regression and injury. We have a lot of young arms we need to give them innings. We have 7 relievers without options - Lindstrom, Nunez, Pinto, Nelson, Kensing, Cruz, Delgado. If we don't trade any of them and they aren't on the team, we lose them. Now Delgado doesn't really matter and can probably be DFA'd, but then we have Tankersly, Tucker, Vanden Hurk, and Mobley all on the 40 man roster and sitting in AAA. I suppose we can sign a free agent for 2009, and shed ourselves of Kensing/Delgado (Cruz should absolutely be kept) but it would be much smarter to get someone on a 1 year deal. Rhodes doesn't fit this category.

 

But we really don't need to do that. Lindstrom, Nunez, Pinto, Nelson, Kensing, Cruz, Delgado, Tankersly, Tucker, and minor league free agents. That is more than enough for spring training competition and overall positive potential. By the middle of the year, Vanden Hurk, Mobley, Thompson, Doolittle, and others could emerge as viable options. If we're contending in July and we need a LOOGY or another reliever, we can then trade for one. This is not an off-season issue. We are in good shape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Replaceable. Erick menitoned Will Ohman, who would be a great replacemant.

 

They will both be in the same price range. If you can't get Rhodes, what makes you think you will get Ohman? Makes no sense to swap guys for the sake of swapping them.

 

 

Well lets see. Will Ohman is younger by about 8 years. And he's not the only option. There's many options out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Replaceable. Erick menitoned Will Ohman, who would be a great replacemant.

 

They will both be in the same price range. If you can't get Rhodes, what makes you think you will get Ohman? Makes no sense to swap guys for the sake of swapping them.

 

 

Rhodes is a far more risky move than getting Ohman. This has very little to do with not being able to afford Rhodes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No surprise here, but I disagree with the notion that Arturo is so easily replaceable. If a LOOGY that good was so easy to come by then we wouldn't been missing one for a year and a half.

 

I like Pinto, but he pitches better vs RHB then LHB. Tank hasn't been consistent in a long time. Andrew Miller is too expensive to be used as a LOOGY.

 

Rhodes had a 0.68 ERA, giving up 1 Run in 25 games during the time he was here. Find me someone else who can do that in our division - while thinking about some of the lefty hitters that you have to face around here. You know - Utley, Howard, Delgado for starters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This sucks. Arthur Rhodes did alot of good here and he was brought in in some very decisive situations. He made our team very strategic (if that makes sense). I wish we would've kept him.

I agree with you on that but imo the FO is trying to save some cash by waiting till the trading deadline and if we are contending, they will make a move for a LOOGY or a RP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This sucks. Arthur Rhodes did alot of good here and he was brought in in some very decisive situations. He made our team very strategic (if that makes sense). I wish we would've kept him.

I agree with you on that but imo the FO is trying to save some cash by waiting till the trading deadline and if we are contending, they will make a move for a LOOGY or a RP.

 

Thanks, I hope that's what they're doing too....and there's no doubt we're in contention next season ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please read this - http://danagonistes.blogspot.com/2005/08/d...ta-and-ops.html. Then stop saying idiotic things like 32 HR and not realize they came at the opportunity cost of a pitiful OBP and bad defense. There is a reason every publication says the Marlins made a good deal and Royals fans are pissed. We're going to get a lot more production out of 1B in 2009.

 

There are also a number of reasons to not bring Rhodes back.

 

He is going to get a lot of money, on probably a 2 year deal. He is old, and there is a huge chance of regression and injury. We have a lot of young arms we need to give them innings. We have 7 relievers without options - Lindstrom, Nunez, Pinto, Nelson, Kensing, Cruz, Delgado. If we don't trade any of them and they aren't on the team, we lose them. Now Delgado doesn't really matter and can probably be DFA'd, but then we have Tankersly, Tucker, Vanden Hurk, and Mobley all on the 40 man roster and sitting in AAA. I suppose we can sign a free agent for 2009, and shed ourselves of Kensing/Delgado (Cruz should absolutely be kept) but it would be much smarter to get someone on a 1 year deal. Rhodes doesn't fit this category.

 

But we really don't need to do that. Lindstrom, Nunez, Pinto, Nelson, Kensing, Cruz, Delgado, Tankersly, Tucker, and minor league free agents. That is more than enough for spring training competition and overall positive potential. By the middle of the year, Vanden Hurk, Mobley, Thompson, Doolittle, and others could emerge as viable options. If we're contending in July and we need a LOOGY or another reliever, we can then trade for one. This is not an off-season issue. We are in good shape.

 

Gotta love it when someone uses "opportunity cost" in a post, the inner economist in me is smiling (kind of like when Samson was on the LeBatard show a few weeks ago and was talking about demand elasticities). However, I wouldn't necessarily call Jakes poor OBP and defense an opportunity cost since opportunity cost is generally a positive value given up in favor of an alternative decision. I would call it more negative utility.

 

As far as Delgado, I think everyone needs to give Jesus a chance. He had next to no chance to show anything w/ the Marlins this year (for example, when he was first called up midway through the season, I was sent down a day or two later w/o pitching a game). He has been quite solid the past couple of springs, and given the opportunity, I believe he has it in him to be a strong long-innings guy for our bullpen. There's a reason we got him in the Beckett/Lowell deal, so let's just give him a chance to sink or swim before we're ready to cut him loose as expendable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please read this - http://danagonistes.blogspot.com/2005/08/d...ta-and-ops.html. Then stop saying idiotic things like 32 HR and not realize they came at the opportunity cost of a pitiful OBP and bad defense. There is a reason every publication says the Marlins made a good deal and Royals fans are pissed. We're going to get a lot more production out of 1B in 2009.

 

There are also a number of reasons to not bring Rhodes back.

 

He is going to get a lot of money, on probably a 2 year deal. He is old, and there is a huge chance of regression and injury. We have a lot of young arms we need to give them innings. We have 7 relievers without options - Lindstrom, Nunez, Pinto, Nelson, Kensing, Cruz, Delgado. If we don't trade any of them and they aren't on the team, we lose them. Now Delgado doesn't really matter and can probably be DFA'd, but then we have Tankersly, Tucker, Vanden Hurk, and Mobley all on the 40 man roster and sitting in AAA. I suppose we can sign a free agent for 2009, and shed ourselves of Kensing/Delgado (Cruz should absolutely be kept) but it would be much smarter to get someone on a 1 year deal. Rhodes doesn't fit this category.

 

But we really don't need to do that. Lindstrom, Nunez, Pinto, Nelson, Kensing, Cruz, Delgado, Tankersly, Tucker, and minor league free agents. That is more than enough for spring training competition and overall positive potential. By the middle of the year, Vanden Hurk, Mobley, Thompson, Doolittle, and others could emerge as viable options. If we're contending in July and we need a LOOGY or another reliever, we can then trade for one. This is not an off-season issue. We are in good shape.

 

Gotta love it when someone uses "opportunity cost" in a post, the inner economist in me is smiling (kind of like when Samson was on the LeBatard show a few weeks ago and was talking about demand elasticities). However, I wouldn't necessarily call Jakes poor OBP and defense an opportunity cost since opportunity cost is generally a positive value given up in favor of an alternative decision. I would call it more negative utility.

 

As far as Delgado, I think everyone needs to give Jesus a chance. He had next to no chance to show anything w/ the Marlins this year (for example, when he was first called up midway through the season, I was sent down a day or two later w/o pitching a game). He has been quite solid the past couple of springs, and given the opportunity, I believe he has it in him to be a strong long-innings guy for our bullpen. There's a reason we got him in the Beckett/Lowell deal, so let's just give him a chance to sink or swim before we're ready to cut him loose as expendable.

 

Fair enough, although I think of it as 32 HR and pitiful OBP and defense is on an indifference curve closer to the origin than, say, 20 HR/.340 OBP and a solid glove. Sure, bad OBP and bad glove with 50 HR might be on the same IC as the latter, but the former, like you said, brings with the 32 HR additionally units of disutility, and this club has better options at 1B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well it is nice to see we traded Gaby Hernandez for almost nothing.

 

Hernandez isn't a huge loss. You gotta give up something to make a run at the playoffs.

Hermandez could turn into a quality pitcher.I'm not saying it was a bad trade.I'm saying they traded Gaby Hernandez for 13 innings of Arthur Rhodes and dont make the playoffs.

 

I'd rather have Gaby Hernandez back.Oh if i could turn back time, If I could find a way I'd take back those words that hurt you and you'd stay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...