Phillies Interested In Fernando Rodney

Giving Rodney a 1/8 deal would be a mistake, he's just not that good.

He's never had good command, and that didn't change in 2009, his 4.88 BB/9 was still quite high, and he didn't really make up for it with a good strikeout rate, his 1.49 K/BB ratio is relatively unimpressive for a Closer.

The guy throws essentially two pitches, a fastball and a changeup, and while the changeup is a good pitch that induces a lot of groundballs, his fastball is pretty straight, so he still struggles to miss that many bats.

He's a decent reliever, but once again, I don't see how Rodney is remotely a superior option to Madson.

I don't mind Rodney as a set up man, not a closer. Also if he can come rather cheap I would believe that teams like the Astros, Diamondbacks, Mets, and Yankees having some level of intrest. But agree with scribbletone, the Phillies are better off with Madson and signing Mike Gonzalez than signing Rodney.

"There are always going to be Nathans and Marianos but by and large its better to get a bunch of guys whom one of could turn into a Bell or Aardsma or Franklin instead of giving big money one guy to be a KRod or Lidge or Wood."

Because somehow, some GM's are still mesmerized by the Closer label.

Although on the whole Kerry Wood thing, he was coming off a really, really good season with the Cubs.

People pay big money to closers because there are barely anyone that can close games out. That is actually the most important cause if you think about it. You could have lost 50 games as a closer...? Not everygame is a blowout and you cannot just bring up a guy from the minor leagues and make them your closer.

"They have no pitching and their offense has to let down soon... shouldn't they?"

We're talking about the Phillies team that already has Cliff Lee, Cole Hamels, Joe Blanton and J.A. Happ locked into their 2010 rotation, right? No pitching my ass.

"Not everygame is a blowout and you cannot just bring up a guy from the minor leagues and make them your closer."

Yes, because of course that failed for guys like Joakim Soria, Andrew Bailey, Huston Street, Bobby Jenks, Matt Capps and Brian Wilson, right?

The term "closer" has ruined pitcher use and the economics of relief free agents so much that I get a little queasy every time I hear it or read it.

It's such a bogus term.

Does anyone here know exactly why the Phillies are so down on Madson as a closer?

In the past two seasons, he's posted ERA marks of 3.05 and 3.26, and xFIP marks of 3.66 and 3.24. He misses bats, has solid command, and isn't particularly homer-prone.

Seems to me like Madson would be a significantly superior option than practically anyone that the Phils can add on the open market.

I'll agree that the term "closer" is vastly overrated, but I think there is limited merit to it.

Good K rate and decent control are essential, of course, but these are still human beings subject to psychological limitations. There are some guys who are just better at handling different levels of pressure than others.

Where teams tend to go wrong is in thinking that proven mediocrity is better than unproven excellence.

I'd go with Mathieson in that spot if he's ready and still able, or go for a Gonzalez or Putz otherwise. Relievers are relatively easy to find mid-season.

Some guys make fine setup men but wind up being miscast as a closer. LaTroy Hawkins comes to mind. Perhaps the Phillies feel the same way about Madson.

I'm guessing Charlie Manuel isn't a guy who actually thinks about using his best relievers in high-leverage situations.

"And please, God, not Rodney. I'd rather they go after Lyon, who's cheaper and better."

Totally agree, Lyon has a much more solid track record, even if he didn't go 37/38 in save opportunities last season.

"Some guys make fine setup men but wind up being miscast as a closer. LaTroy Hawkins comes to mind. Perhaps the Phillies feel the same way about Madson."

True, but guys like Hawkins are the exception, not the rule. Generally, a good all-around reliever is more than capable of being a solid closer.

i don't get where the need for bullpen help is coming from. I'd much rather get a solid, reliable 5th starter until Drabek is ready in late 2010 or 2011.

Lidge, Madson, Durbin, Romero, Eyre are fine. Add in a Bastardo maybe even a Mathieson and we'll be fine.

muggi,

I'm thinking Eyre had so much fun last year he may give it one more shot. I'd resign durbin as long as it doesn't end up more than 2/6. Oh and a note to those other Mathieson fans out there. He was added to the 40 man roster the other day. I think he's got a good shot at making the team. There were plenty of people in the front office who liked him just as much as Madson coming up before his two TJ surgeries.

I'm just so anti Rodney at 1 for 8.

Chad Durbin is not a FA. This is his final year of arbitration eligibility.

Mathieson will definitely be in the mix, and could emerge as a setup man or closer very quickly. The talent is there.

Durbin's control went completely haywire last year, but apparently he was pitching hurt for much of the first few months of '09. He looked much better in the playoffs and should be back and effective in 2010.

wouldnt spend a lot on a reliver. chan ho might be comin back, jc is already paid for and he ll be healthy. buy LOW on a reliever because you never know what your going to get.

ask the mets and jj putz.

save the money to bring in beltre or figgins at third.