Arthur Rhodes

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from zack5042. Show zack5042's posts

    Arthur Rhodes

    Could he be a lefty specialist we can pick up?

    http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110802&content_id=22653420&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

    just got DFA and lefties only hit .216 off of him
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    You got to this before I could.  He is better than Randy Williams!!!!!
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    I'd love that pick-up

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    Is it legal to have two pitchers in their 40s?

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from -TheBabe--------. Show -TheBabe--------'s posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    But the Yanks may claim him first....they could use a lefty specialist.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from rickerd2. Show rickerd2's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    Sox needed to lose a couple more games to get a better waiver position.....
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from davidap. Show davidap's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    I would definitely take Arthur Rhodes but the Yankees will get to him first because they're a game behind the Red Sox in the standings. Someone with an inferior record to the Yankees could probably use him too.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from zack5042. Show zack5042's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    But he wasn't put on waivers he was Designated for Assignment do the same rules apply?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from bigpanther98. Show bigpanther98's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    Rhodes has been terrible against lefties this season. Too old, not good against lefties despite being LHP = stick a fork in him, he's done.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    Guys, are you kidding?  I don't need any stats.  Let me be clear...Arthur Rhodes SUCKS!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxpride34. Show redsoxpride34's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    ya i am kind of on the fence about this one. He has a 3.48 era against lefties this year and they are hitting .216 off him. So i think as purely a lefty specialist he would be worth a shot. He is better than randy williams who is just plain terrible. So i think if we got him for nothing, i would give him a shot. He cant be any worse than the guys we have right now. But one thing i am still wondering and maybe you guys can help me out on his, why is okajima still in the minors? He is dominating down there. Why dont we just call him up?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from zack5042. Show zack5042's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    In Response to Re: Arthur Rhodes:
    [QUOTE]ya i am kind of on the fence about this one. He has a 3.48 era against lefties this year and they are hitting .216 off him. So i think as purely a lefty specialist he would be worth a shot. He is better than randy williams who is just plain terrible. So i think if we got him for nothing, i would give him a shot. He cant be any worse than the guys we have right now. But one thing i am still wondering and maybe you guys can help me out on his, why is okajima still in the minors? He is dominating down there. Why dont we just call him up?
    Posted by redsoxpride34[/QUOTE]
    I think Theo gave up on him lol either that or if he gets called up and does bad i dont think we can send him back down.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from soxforlife22. Show soxforlife22's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    In Response to Re: Arthur Rhodes:
    [QUOTE]ya i am kind of on the fence about this one. He has a 3.48 era against lefties this year and they are hitting .216 off him. So i think as purely a lefty specialist he would be worth a shot. He is better than randy williams who is just plain terrible. So i think if we got him for nothing, i would give him a shot. He cant be any worse than the guys we have right now. But one thing i am still wondering and maybe you guys can help me out on his, why is okajima still in the minors? He is dominating down there. Why dont we just call him up?
    Posted by redsoxpride34[/QUOTE]

    The reason Okajima is being so dominant is because he is decieving the AAA hitters just as he did against major leaguers for a few years. Major League hitters have already figured him out, therefore, the minute he comes up to the majors he would get shelled like he did last year. He has not improved, or changed anything about his pitching, he is just decieving a whole new group of hitters.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxFan2OO4. Show RedSoxFan2OO4's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    In Response to Re: Arthur Rhodes:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Arthur Rhodes : The reason Okajima is being so dominant is because he is decieving the AAA hitters just as he did against major leaguers for a few years. Major League hitters have already figured him out, therefore, the minute he comes up to the majors he would get shelled like he did last year. He has not improved, or changed anything about his pitching, he is just decieving a whole new group of hitters.
    Posted by soxforlife22[/QUOTE]

    Very true, an 86 MPH fastball as a reliever can only get you so far.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxPatsCelts1988. Show SoxPatsCelts1988's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    He'll get claimed before the Red Sox put one in.  Honestly, I think you're going to find Andrew Miller coming out of the pen to end of the season.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtics1986. Show Celtics1986's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    Are we now seriously a Josh Beckett blister or other usual ailment away from Lackey being our #2 starter??

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    In Response to Re: Arthur Rhodes:
    [QUOTE]But he wasn't put on waivers he was Designated for Assignment do the same rules apply?
    Posted by zack5042[/QUOTE]

    That's a good  question, and the answer is YES; the same rules apply. See Wikipedia excerpt below


    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



    Designated for assignment is a contractual term used in Major League Baseball. When a player is designated for assignment, he is immediately removed from the club's 40-man roster. This gives the club 10 days to decide what to do with the player while freeing up a roster spot for another transaction, if needed. After designating a player for assignment, the club must either:[1]

    (a) return the player to the 40-man roster within 10 days from the date of designation, or (b) make one of the following contractual moves:

    • Place the player on waivers (which can only be done within the first 7 days of the 10-day period)
    • Trade the player
    • Release the player

    Contents

     [hide]

    [edit]Contractual moves

    [edit]Place the player on waivers

    Typically a player is placed on waivers after being designated for assignment for the purpose of outrighting him to one of the club's minor league teams. A player who is outrighted to the minors is removed from the 40-man roster but is still paid according to the terms of his guaranteed contract. A player can only be outrighted once in his career without his consent. However, a player must clear waivers (that is, no other team may place a waiver claim on the player) to be sent to a minor league team. Also, if the player has five or more full years of major league service, he must give consent to be assigned to the minors. If the player withholds consent, the team must either release him or keep him on the major league roster. In either case, the player must continue to be paid under the terms of his contract.

    [edit]Trade the player

    Once a player is designated for assignment, he may be traded. Some teams have been known to designate players for assignment to increase interest in the player, especially among teams that are not at the top of the list for waivers. For example, in May 2006, Rangers reliever Brian Shouse was designated for assignment, and was traded to the Milwaukee Brewersfour days later. The Brewers could have waited until Shouse was placed on waivers so they would not have had to give up a player in a trade, but according to the waiver rules, the other 13 AL teams would have preference in claiming him. Also, under the "ten-and-five rule," if a player has ten years of Major League service, the last five with his current team, he cannot be traded without his consent.

    [edit]Release the player

    If a player is not traded, and clears waivers, he may be released from the team. The player is then a free agent and may sign with any team, including the team that just released him. The team that releases him is responsible for the salary the player is owed, less what he is paid by the team that signs him. In practice, that amount is usually a pro-rated portion of the Major League minimum salary.

    [edit]

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from DCSoxFan13. Show DCSoxFan13's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    In Response to Re: Arthur Rhodes:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Arthur Rhodes : The reason Okajima is being so dominant is because he is decieving the AAA hitters just as he did against major leaguers for a few years. Major League hitters have already figured him out, therefore, the minute he comes up to the majors he would get shelled like he did last year. He has not improved, or changed anything about his pitching, he is just decieving a whole new group of hitters.
    Posted by soxforlife22[/QUOTE]

    To support soxforlife's post....in his last 10 games at Pawtucket Okajima has a 4.20 ERA (although his WHIP is at 1.00 for that timeframe).  He has held lefties  to a .174 AVG in Pawtucket this year, but if called up I think we'll get exactly what we have seen in the past few years....mediocrity...he's  not the answer. 
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    m
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    m
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

    n
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from trouts. Show trouts's posts

    Re: Arthur Rhodes

     To RedSoxFan2004: Okajima's heater averaged between 87-89 mph which is precisely what we got out of Keith Foulke, plus he's a leftie who historically has had pretty decent control.
     

Share