Part of

« Cubs top Astros; Playoff hopes alive and kicking | Main | Phils 4, Nats 3: A developing situation »

Friday, September 30, 2005


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Vicente as 2006 closer?:


VERY intriguing.

Well said. I agree about Wags. His perceived value is way above his actual value. Not that he's not valuable, but the money he's going to demand after this season can be better invested in starting pitching, a starting catcher or third baseman.

I know Conlin wrote about it, but I believe this idea can be credited back to Mike Missanelli who was talking about Padilla as closer right around the trade deadline.

The more I think about Padilla in the pen the more I would hesitate. He is TERRIBLE with runners on base and could be expected to be even worse when the game is on the line.

Conlin and I exchanged emails about Padilla. He said of the Padilla move "It's not gonna happen, so don't sweat it. The line guaranteed 50 e-mails from guys like you. . ."

He later suggested that "guys like you" wasn't meant as an insult. He then offered to sell me a bridge.

He's right. It probably won't happen. The Phils are probably sick of his surliness and other ... *cough* ... "issues."

Um, didn't he come to the phils as a late inning reliever? Wasn't he not so successful in that role? I agree with Tom Goodman that this move is not a good idea. Doesn't have the temperament nor the poise.


Wagner - He's simply one of the league's top closers. If the Phillies can a work a deal with him that doesn't 100% lock them in for 3 years, I'd re-sign him. (I think Wagner might be flexible if the Phillies are innovative in their offer). You don't know what you've got 'til it's gone. Why spend all of next year trying out various closer candidates? Can the team afford to experiment there? Do you have enough faith in the Phillies' brass to evaluate the candidates or develop a top-line closer? I don't. Take the proven commodity and pay for it. If you want to experiment, do it at catcher, or 3B or in CF.
Urbina - From my view, the guy does not throw strikes enough to be the closer, if even a setup man. He always seems to be behind in the count, so even when he doesn't give up a walk, hitters are waiting on him. Let him go.
Padilla - Trade him. Don't waste any more time on another 'high potential' high maintenance, head-case pitching prospect. He's had more than enough chances. He doesn't get it.
Myers - If the right deal came along, I'd trade him in a heartbeat.
You know, if you're paid millions to go to work 30 times in a year, you think you could at least keep focused on those 30 work days. Both Myers and Padilla are unable/unwilling to do what it takes to be ready when their number is called, and that inconsistency cost the team games this year. I'm not talking about a pitcher having an off-day, not with his best stuff. I'm talking about starters that were often not mentally ready to pitch (not to mention Myers' weight). Pennant contenders do not waste a lot of time on those types of players. They move them. These guys are not 18-yr olds.
I wish Myers could get his act together, because he could be a great one. But how realistic is that hope?
Madson - I'd give that kid a chance to start. I think his head is screwed on right, but the Phillies haven't done well by him in the way they've used (or overused) him. His current 'out' pitches depend on setting hitters up, not in directly challenging them, and that is best done over the course of a game, not in a 1-inning stint.
Lopez, Fultz - I'd give them another look, although Fultz could revert back ala Cormier.

Get pitching prospects for Thome (and Padilla, and Myers) if you can. The offense will be ok.

I have one question that I really haven't seen the Phillies enough to be able to answer: Is Chase Utley capable of playing 3B? Is that even a remote option for 2006? Seems like acceptable 2B are easier and cheaper to find than 3B. Utley strikes me as the kind of athlete that would embrace the challenge and work to make himself a good 3B.

Just wondering.

Good points all. George S. I totally agree with your sentiments about Wagner. Wagner essentially makes the game an 8 inning affair, which is incredible valuable, esp. in a postseason series. I liked Urbina and the fact that he didn't "give in" to hitters, even if it meant he walks some guys, but Monday night's disaster pretty much spoiled him in my mind.
I think Padilla's time is just about up. He's had a pretty good second half, but he's simply not consistent enough and has been given more opportunities than most pitchers would given that he's the only piece that the GM has to a trade he made 5 years ago.
I also agree that Madson needs to be given a chance to start. He's looked pretty awful lately, but I attribute that to being overworked than anything else. That changeup is a dandy.
I have to say I disagree with your sentiments about Myers. While his 2nd half has been average at best, he showed what he was capable of in the 1st half of the season. But the thing that intrigues me the most is Myers' durability. IIRC, I don't believe Myers has ever missed any significant time due to injuries. Some guys, like Myers, I believe are just genetically gifted to be workhorses and others not so much (see Kerry Wood and *gulp* Cole Hamels). I think Myers will honestly continue to get better and his durability will continue to be a huge plus.
Also, I don't agree with moving Utley. He's comfortable now where he is and his arm honestly is barely adequate at 2nd, let alone at the hot corner. Also, why risk any chance of affecting his offense by asking him to move? You're right in saying he's athletic and I believe (just like Jeff Kent--sigh...another comparison to him) he will continue to improve. He already shows excellent range and good hands...he just needs to improve around the bag.

George: I don't think Chase has the arm to play third base. That is perhaps his greatest weakness defensively. Of course, given his attitude he would do anything asked of him, but this would not be a good move for all concerned.

Placido, we miss you.

I would trade Myers, too, but for someone of equal stature who needs a change of scene. He simply lacks the discipline great pitchers must possess. Both his personal habits and work habits are not the stuff of number one or two starters.

I think it is Jason or someone else who mentioned Wes Helms as a possible third baseman. Is that any improvement over Bell? I do not think so.

I was asking about Utley, but if he doesn't have the arm, then it doesn't work. And I wondered because I think it's easier and cheaper to find a 2B than a 3B.

As for Myers and durability, I would worry about that if he tends to put on weight during the season. Some guys can handle it and some cannot. It doesn't take long to develop back or knee problems. A few people have remarked about how he has looked gassed out there a few times when it was not that late into the game. (Another advantage to AL pitchers who do not have to run the bases)

I'd love to see him blossom, and I wouldn't trade him unless I was really getting value in return. But he would not be untouchable in my book by any means.
Let's hope he shows the A game tonight..

Several thoughts...

I think signing Wagner for three years, given his age is a bit risky, but, signing him might be a defensive move as you don't want him going to the Mets. Of course, it might be an academic discussion as I don't believe Wags wants to come back. He's just using the Phils to up the ante from other teams.

As for Myers, if you consider his 2004 season, we should go down on bended knee in thanks. He will finish the year with a 3-something ERA after a 5-something ERA last year. Is he where we want him to be? No. Is he making progress? Certainly. His turnaround is not unlike Burrell's on offense.

One more thing, back to where this thread started...I think Padilla as closer is a bad idea (like nearly everyone else), and if they do go into '06 with him as closer, they better have a good backup plan.

One more thing, back to where this thread started...I think Padilla as closer is a bad idea (like nearly everyone else), and if they do go into '06 with him as closer, they better have a good backup plan.

One more thing, back to where this thread started...I think Padilla as closer is a bad idea (like nearly everyone else), and if they do go into '06 with him as closer, they better have a good backup plan.

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories


Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel