Gene Honda Civic Posted October 5, 2004 Share Posted October 5, 2004 (edited) Okay, I am too lazy to do the damned research....... someone want to clue me in on why we would Scott Shields? I'll admit, I know very little, if anything about him. Uber-long reliever... One of the best relievers in the AL the last 2 seasons. 2.85 ERA in 03 in 148IP slit time between the rotation and pen. VORP = 44.6 3.33 ERA in 04 in 105IP all from the pen in 60 appearences. VORP = 31.5 Relievers who had a higher VORPthan shields in 04 Otsuka 33 Benitez 33.1 Foulke 35.1 Nathan 36.5 BJ Ryan 36.7 K-Rod 37.6 Rivera 37.9 Lidge 39 Gordon 39.6 In short Shields is a workhorse, who succeeds in whatever role given to him. He'd turn a decent pen into a great one, and a great one into a dominant one. IMO he's been the most underrated pitcher in baseball the last two seasons. Edited October 5, 2004 by The Cheat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 5, 2004 Author Share Posted October 5, 2004 3.33 ERA in 04 in 105IP all from the pen in 60 appearences. VORP = 31.5 Maybe i am the only one, but wouldn't you rather have shields start instead of sele? It is a no brainer to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted October 5, 2004 Share Posted October 5, 2004 Maybe i am the only one, but wouldn't you rather have shields start instead of sele? It is a no brainer to me. yes but I Scott Shields.... I fricken draft him in fantasy leagues, where he has little to no value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted October 5, 2004 Share Posted October 5, 2004 VORP?? I feel stupid lol I actually did a little research on Shields and he has gotten better in the big leagues. He was pretty darned average in AAA. That said, I could see him helping out of the pen, but I am not sure I would trade a lot for him, unless we run out of other options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted October 5, 2004 Share Posted October 5, 2004 VORP?? I feel stupid lol Well it's difficult for me to make a middle reliever sound valuable without stats that go over most's head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 5, 2004 Author Share Posted October 5, 2004 VORP?? I feel stupid lol I actually did a little research on Shields and he has gotten better in the big leagues. He was pretty darned average in AAA. That said, I could see him helping out of the pen, but I am not sure I would trade a lot for him, unless we run out of other options. It will take alot to get him i feel since sele is a free agent and ramon ortiz wants nothing to do with the angels. He has been demanding to be traded for a while now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 5, 2004 Author Share Posted October 5, 2004 VORP?? I feel stupid lol This should help you a little. http://www.stathead.com/bbeng/woolner/vorpdescnew.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted October 5, 2004 Share Posted October 5, 2004 This should help you a little. http://www.stathead.com/bbeng/woolner/vorpdescnew.htm HA HA that is great -- at the bottom of that link is this quote Now, in theory, any club should be able to field a team of 0 VORP players, and thus guarantee some minimum level of performance from each position. In practice, there are some reasons why you might find a player with negative VORP. Among these are: (a) sample size -- a player might have a slump for 10 games, and then lose his job, and his performance would appear to be negative over that sample, (B) incorrect projections -- you give a truly bad player too many opportunities under the mistaken belief that he has some ability, © injury, (d) prospects -- a highly touted young player might struggle for awhile, but reasonably be expected to have significant positive value in the future, (e) sub-optimal decision-making -- you gave Greg Vaughn a big contract, and you're going to play him come hell or high water, even if he's not your best alternative, or (f) defensive contribution -- Ozzie Smith early in his career may have had negative VORP, but added so many runs defensively that his VORPD (VORP + intrapositional defensive runs) was positive. Timo Perez has a VORP of -7.1 -- I wonder which reason he would fall under. The only other White Sox players with negative VORP are Borchard -10.2 (d) Roberto Alomar -5.3 (a)© Sandy Alomard -2.3 (e) Valdez -1.9 (a)(d) Diaz -3.8 (d) Baj -4.2 (a)(d) Wright -4.8 © Munoz -6.0 (d) Grilli -6.8 (d) Stewart -7.7 (d) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted October 5, 2004 Share Posted October 5, 2004 I've been a Shields advocate for a while now. He's the kind of versatile pitcher Ozzie would love-could start, go 1, 2 or 3 innings. He's pitched over 100 innings this yr, all in relief. Shields could even challenge for the 5th spot. Plus, Shields GB/ FB ratio would be great for the Cell. He's at something like 1.70 now, and throwing more GB than ever. Any reliever the Sox get should get a ton of GB and K's. Shields can do that. I know Ana. needs a few big bats, with Glaus moving on, Salmon retiring, rookie McPherson going to 3B and LF Guillen should be traded. Instead of PK [Ana has Erstad there for a few years] Ana may want carlos Lee. Not sure what kind of package could be worked out, but something along the lines of Figgins and Shields for Lee. [esp. if figgins could play CF--then Rowand could move to RF or LF]. Lee's prob. worth more, as he's locked up for a few years. Ana could add a prospect as well. Figgins won't have a spot next year, with Adam Kennedy signed for 2005 [maybe 2006] to play 2b, and the rookie Dallas at 3B. And they have a super UTL guy in Robb Quinlan, who was hitting .340+ before he got hurt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLAK Posted October 5, 2004 Share Posted October 5, 2004 Personally, I would start Harris, Vizquel and Crede and have Uribe play 4-5 times per week amongst all three positions. I am not convinced that is the correct thing to do, just my gut feeling. I am not yet convinced Uribe would hold up well over a full season, especially playing SS. I am willing to be proven wrong on that one, however. I don't think the Sox are sold on Willie though, so my best guess is he is either gone or is kept as a 5th infielder/extra outfielder. That is just a gut feeling as well. I also think Omar would be a very stabilizing influence on guys like Harris, Uribe and Crede. That's a lot of young guys in the infield. I'd like to see Willie more in CF next year with Valdez in the infield mix instead of him. An outfield mix of Lee, Rowand, Everett, Harris and a new guy, plus an infield mix of Crede, Uribe, Valdez and new guy (LH Visquel would indeed be wonderful) would give Ozzie a lot of different looks to throw out there. Oz showed he's pretty good at finding the hot hand and I think it is good for players to have to compete for playing time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butter Parque Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 I'm interested to hear everyone's input on my idea for a trade with Aneheim. I think we may be getting ripped off on it thugh. How about Washburn and Ramon Ortiz? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelasDaddy0427 Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 I'm interested to hear everyone's input on my idea for a trade with Aneheim. I think we may be getting ripped off on it thugh. How about Washburn and Ramon Ortiz? I wouldn't mind Ramon Ortiz if he'd be ok with staying in the pen. However we've had enough trouble with whiny Angel bullpen pitchers who are convinced they should be starters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSteve Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 I wouldn't mind Ramon Ortiz if he'd be ok with staying in the pen. However we've had enough trouble with whiny Angel bullpen pitchers who are convinced they should be starters. He wouldn't be, and he is $$$. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted October 10, 2004 Author Share Posted October 10, 2004 I wouldn't mind Ramon Ortiz if he'd be ok with staying in the pen. However we've had enough trouble with whiny Angel bullpen pitchers who are convinced they should be starters. Then you would not want ortiz because he is a whiny angels pitcher that feels he should be starting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.