http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3756383
Printable View
A bit more reasonable than 5/$75 eh
More reasonable, affordable. Good, this bodes well for the market. I will not miss K-Rod in the AL!
Yeah, this is a very reasonable contract. Nice signing by the Mets. I'm glad to see teams weren't overly infatuated with the saves record.
Yeah...this contract won't break the Mets near as much when K-Rod's arm falls apart in July 2010.
It's a shame his career is to be wasted as a closer. I think he'd be a top flight starter if ever converted. He's got multiple high quality pitches, and I actually think the consistent routine would be good for his arm. Oh well...nice signing regardless. The Mets have more work to do though.
He's got a scary delivery, small body, and has been a reliever his whole career. A move to the rotation at this point likely wouldn't work out well, particularly in the long run.Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
what's scary about his delivery? I'd be interested in seeing it broken down.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
I've seen that looks -as far as pitching mechanics- can be vastly decieving
Keep in mind the same ideas "scary delivery, small body" is why no one wanted to sign Tim Lincecum. and the opposite is why eveyone loved Mark Prior - well that didn't go over well .
While I agree the fact he hasn't been starter since he was 19 and in A ball (where he posted a 5.36 ERA/ 1.60 WHIP in 20 game) means a move to the rotation would more than likely end in disaster.
YEAHHHH! K-RoD! K-ROD! K-ROD! WE GOT HIM BABY!! WOOOHOOO!!!
It's violent.Quote:
Originally Posted by gRYFYN1
Lincecum's isn't "scary" as much as it is "different" which leads people to assume it's dangerous. There are many scouts that love Lincecum's delivery. All I've read about K-Rod's delivery is that it's violent (and that's what it looks like too). Such a delivery is fine for a reliever that throws in short bursts, but as a starter, there's no way he'd hold up, in my opinion, barring a significant change to his mechanics.Quote:
Keep in mind the same ideas "scary delivery, small body" is why no one wanted to sign Tim Lincecum. and the opposite is why eveyone loved Mark Prior - well that didn't go over well .
Yeah it seems that way, I was just saying that I, personally, have heard little about his delivery from anyone who would have a clue (Sportswriters and people on ESPN do NOT count) as to his pitching motion.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
There are many people who have been labeled as having 'violent' deliveries yet were effective as starters. Pedro for one and he has the 'small frame' label attached.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Look, delivery IMO should not be a reason for keeping a guy in the pen. You yourself have referred to the value of a starter being much greater than a reliever. The guys been reported to have like four 'a' quality pitches which is something MOST starting pitchers can't even say. Sure a pitching coach may try to make some tweaks to his delivery but I don't think they'd try to change much other than building his arm strength up for the more innings. I'd convert him in a heartbeat.
Well, years and years worths of scouts and coaches have disagreed, as violent delivery guys often get relegated to the pen.Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
Correct, but, of course, it depends on the quality of the starter and/or the reliever. But, if a pitcher is better suited to the bullpen, that's where he belongs.Quote:
You yourself have referred to the value of a starter being much greater than a reliever.
I actually haven't heard this. I've heard about his fastball, slider, and change, with the fastball being good and the change being great and the slider being average. Of course, that's just what I remember hearing. Haven't looked this up.Quote:
The guys been reported to have like four 'a' quality pitches which is something MOST starting pitchers can't even say.
I'd keep him in the pen. Too many concerns, particularly in his declining peripheral stats and that he has no recent experience starting. The closer I'd convert to the rotation in a heartbeat would be Joakim Soria on the Royals.Quote:
Sure a pitching coach may try to make some tweaks to his delivery but I don't think they'd try to change much other than building his arm strength up for the more innings. I'd convert him in a heartbeat.
**** you:mad: I wanted him:mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Billy who? Sure, K-rod has about the same number of blown saves in the last 3 years as Wagner. The difference is K-rod has about 40 more total saves! After the last two years nothing short of a Series appearance is acceptable. Get it done!
You have Albert Pujols and a world series champion from 2 years ago :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthJaker
My team hasn't won a WS in 20 years :(.
The Mets haven't won one in 22 years!
Saves are a function of opportunity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwright5
K-Rod's got health and age over Wagner (which, of course, is huge). In terms of pitching effectiveness, they're basically equal.
From 2006-2008, here are their stats:
Wagner: 187.2 IP, 178 ERA+, 53 BB, 226 K
K-Rod: 208.2 IP, 200 ERA+, 96 BB, 265 K
This sort of analysis, though, ignores that K-Rod's worst season in terms of pitching performance was this past season, with his K rate nosediving.
In terms of value, he's going to simply provide what Wagner has the past few years. Likely nothing more, likely nothing less. The reason it's a good signing is precisely because the Mets are now without Wagner. This signing just maintains the status quo for them. It's not going to put them "over the top". They still have quite a few improvements left to make (more bullpen arms + corner outfield).
Mets closer Francisco Rodriguez will be 10 times better then former Mets closer Billy Wagner.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Again with your wildly outrageous statements with no basis in fact? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Look at the past 3 years and tell me exactly how K-Rod was and will be 10 times better. That's absolutely insane.
so he is going to strike out 27 per 9 innings and walk less than 1 per 9 innings. oh and he is going to have an era well under .5???Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
wow he WILL be good then :p
Okay, that was hyperbole. In reality he'll be twice or thrice as good. I hated Wagner, he sucked.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
No. In reality, he'll be roughly as good.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
You're wrong.Quote:
I hated Wagner, he sucked.
Joakim Soria is 14 times better than K-Rod.
BOY iwould have taken Wagner in an INSTANT if u guys paid 1/2 the $$$
I'm right. I'm a Mets fan, HGM, your not. I think I know what I'm talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Clearly, you don't. You hate him, and as you've demonstrated multiple times before, you're unable to separate personal feelings from rational evaluation. Whether you hate him or not, it is 100% wrong to say that Billy Wagner has sucked. It's just not the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
I wonder what Metsguy would say if K-Rod tore his Rotator cuff? ;) :p
I think K-Rod is a great addition to the mets.
Only one problem, isn't the mets bullpen where all relievers go to "die"?
No. They just never fill it with good relievers.Quote:
Originally Posted by flapper
Keith Law's take:
Quote:
There are some red flags with Rodriguez that the switch in leagues won't fully obscure. Rodriguez's velocity has been in decline for several years now, and he's added a changeup while reducing his use of his best pitch, the sharp slider that was his out pitch in the early years of his career. The deprecation of his slider has led to a decline in his strikeout rate, from 33.1 percent of opposing hitters in 2006 to a career-worst 26.7 percent in 2008. The drop in velocity and concerns about the violence in his delivery make him a potential injury risk in spite of the health record, much as scouts and executives saw B.J. Ryan, who had never spent a day of his pro career on the DL prior to signing with the Blue Jays, as a breakdown risk when he was a free agent after 2005. Rodriguez was limited to a maximum of one inning in 2008, which both limits his value to the Mets and makes you wonder if the Angels were concerned about something specific in K-Rod's arm.
That would save there Bullpen.
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?...2008&fext=.jsp
I strongly suspect that the Mets will be very disappointed with Rodriguez. I could be 100% wrong too. In 2008 his strikeouts per 9 innings is way down, and his hits allowed way up. He walks far more hitters than Wagner does too. In fact, a very good case can be made that Wagner was better in each of his 3 seasons with the Mets than Rodriguez was in 2008.
Rodriguez is young enough to bounce back, I suppose, and he is going to the weaker league. If I was a Mets fan, I wouldn't celebrate this signing. Adding a guy who will pitch 3 innings a week wont improve them that much, if at all.
Yep, especially considering he's simply replacing an equal (or arguably better) pitcher, which essentially means that nothing changed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swampdog
Something to think about when signing closersQuote:
The Mets, by the way, will have $23.8 million invested in roughly 65 innings from the closer spot next year. Wagner returned 187 2/3 innings and 101 saves for their $43 million investment.
I've reconsidered my position.
Joakim Soria is percisely 17.4 times better than K-Rod.
K Rod isnt even the best closer in Baseball. My man Brad Ziegler is, he can pitch more than one inning saves. :)
Hey, watch out for Joakim and Papelbon, they are beasts too.Quote:
Originally Posted by ragecage
K-Rod's explanationQuote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by ragecage
Nonetheless, Mr. Rodriguez is most certainly baseball's best closer