Max Scherzer

[TaylorStSox]

How does anyone know how GM'S view Q? I swear some of you guys play GM on the internet so much you actually think you are one.

[caulfield12]

How does anyone know how GM'S view Q? I swear some of you guys play GM on the internet so much you actually think you are one.

 

 

Quintana will always be a victim of Buehrle-itis.

 

While Jose throws harder, the majority of scouts and baseball people would argue that 2's should have dominating stuff and miss tons of bats.

 

Part of it is stubborness, the fact that the Yankees missed so badly on him that other teams are waiting for the other shoe to drop...not in Phil Humber fashion, but they think there will eventually be some type of regression, instead of more continued improvement.

 

He's supposedly the hardest worker on the team, or one of the top 2-3. That bodes well, going forward.

 

Just from going by the discussion over the last couple of days, most would argue he was definitely a 2 last year (in terms of his overall body of statistics) and even a 1 on the bottom 5 teams, but that the contract he signed would work out just fine if he slipped back to a 3 or even 4 type, meaning an ERA much closer to 4 than to 3.

Edited March 28, 2014 by caulfield12

[GreenSox]

Quintana will always be a victim of Buehrle-itis.

 

While Jose throws harder, the majority of scouts and baseball people would argue that 2's should have dominating stuff and miss tons of bats.

 

Part of it is stubborness, the fact that the Yankees missed so badly on him that other teams are waiting for the other shoe to drop...not in Phil Humber fashion, but they think there will eventually be some type of regression, instead of more continued improvement.

 

He's supposedly the hardest worker on the team, or one of the top 2-3. That bodes well, going forward.

 

Just from going by the discussion over the last couple of days, most would argue he was definitely a 2 last year (in terms of his overall body of statistics) and even a 1 on the bottom 5 teams, but that the contract he signed would work out just fine if he slipped back to a 3 or even 4 type, meaning an ERA much closer to 4 than to 3.

Then if he's a 2 and others view him as a 3, why in the world would you trade him for the return of a #3, especially as he's signed to a contract of a #4?

 

Heck, why do we want to trade him anyway? Sox don't do long rebuilds.

[caulfield12]

Then if he's a 2 and others view him as a 3, why in the world would you trade him for the return of a #3, especially as he's signed to a contract of a #4?

 

Heck, why do we want to trade him anyway? Sox don't do long rebuilds.

 

 

They don't.

 

Marty is the only one, as far as I know.

 

The whole point of the deal was cost control/future savings and being able to secure one more important part of the rotation for the 2015-2018 window of opportunity.

 

And, with that money allocated, move on to other areas of importance, like catcher, LH power/DH and possibly replacing Alexei Ramirez if Semien/C.Sanchez aren't the answer.

[Marty34]

Because they are getting a virtual sure thing. You aren't going to get a #1 starter for a prospect with #1 potential. Plus if you're ready to win now, you need a capable starter now.

And for the Sox to trade Quintana for a prospect with 2/3 potential would be clownish. But I agree, a GM is unlikely to offer what he is worth.

 

Here's a good article on Q: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/what-is-a-jose-quintana/

 

Thanks for understanding my point.

 

Quintana's contract could give the Sox some nice leverage with a GM hellbent on winning. The GM could give up a top-of-the-rotation prospect and sell it to his fan base as getting a solid if not spectacular SP signed to a well below market value deal. Is it likely, no, but it's possible.

[Balta1701]

Thanks for understanding my point.

 

Quintana's contract could give the Sox some nice leverage with a GM hellbent on winning. The GM could give up a top-of-the-rotation prospect and sell it to his fan base as getting a solid if not spectacular SP signed to a well below market value deal. Is it likely, no, but it's possible.

A great comparison could have been the 4 players the Rockies got for Jiminez after he lost his fastball. Cleveland gave up multiple top prospects for the guy.

 

Of course, the problem is that Colorado pretty much got nothing out of those guys. Pomeranz disappointed and was traded, the other pitcher was useless and is now an astro, and the other 2 guys have sort of dropped out of the Rockies top 25. Which is of course the downside that Marty either can't process or is really hoping for.

[Marty34]

A great comparison could have been the 4 players the Rockies got for Jiminez after he lost his fastball. Cleveland gave up multiple top prospects for the guy.

 

Of course, the problem is that Colorado pretty much got nothing out of those guys. Pomeranz disappointed and was traded, the other pitcher was useless and is now an astro, and the other 2 guys have sort of dropped out of the Rockies top 25. Which is of course the downside that Marty either can't process or is really hoping for.

 

Balta, here I thought I'd actually win an argument and then out of nowhere you show up with the message board equivalent to the old cue ball in a sock move and I'm fighting for survival again.

 

If you want a top-of-the-rotation starter you must assume some risk. Johnson, Beck, the #3 pick, along with signing a guy like Shields provides enough insulation for the loss of Quintana if the deal does not pan out.

[Balta1701]

Balta, here I thought I'd actually win an argument and then out of nowhere you show up with the message board equivalent to the old cue ball in a sock move and I'm fighting for survival again.

 

If you want a top-of-the-rotation starter you must assume some risk. Johnson, Beck, the #3 pick, along with signing a guy like Shields provides enough insulation for the loss of Quintana if the deal does not pan out.

But you already tried to trade Beck along with Quintana, and you've said repeatedly that Johnson, Beck, Danish, and the #3 pick is not enough pitching depth. Hell, that was your ENTIRE point for why the Sox needed another starter.

 

At least it's great to see you finally agree that the White Sox do have sufficient pitching depth and don't need a mid rotation starter in the near future unless they trade someone, so your entire last 3 month schtick was pointless

[iamshack]

Thanks for understanding my point.

 

Quintana's contract could give the Sox some nice leverage with a GM hellbent on winning. The GM could give up a top-of-the-rotation prospect and sell it to his fan base as getting a solid if not spectacular SP signed to a well below market value deal. Is it likely, no, but it's possible.

I understand your point, Marty, and I think it's a reasonable one.

 

There are many ways to skin a cat. There is nothing about Q that says "untradable." Hell, I don't know that there is anyone in the League that is untradable. A team can accomplish any number of objectives in a given trade. If you feel like you are accomplishing that objective(s), and you feel like you are winning the deal, then you can make the deal. Especially given our level of competitiveness in the foreseeable future. It is certainly not out of the realm of possibility that someone approaches us about Q and offers a package that makes sense to us, extension be damned, you may want to make that deal.

[Marty34]

But you already tried to trade Beck along with Quintana, and you've said repeatedly that Johnson, Beck, Danish, and the #3 pick is not enough pitching depth. Hell, that was your ENTIRE point for why the Sox needed another starter.

 

At least it's great to see you finally agree that the White Sox do have sufficient pitching depth and don't need a mid rotation starter in the near future unless they trade someone, so your entire last 3 month schtick was pointless

 

It's not enough pitching depth. That's why they need to sign a guy like Shields.

[southsider2k5]

Balta, here I thought I'd actually win an argument and then out of nowhere you show up with the message board equivalent to the old cue ball in a sock move and I'm fighting for survival again.

If you want a top-of-the-rotation starter you must assume some risk. Johnson, Beck, the #3 pick, along with signing a guy like Shields provides enough insulation for the loss of Quintana if the deal does not pan out.

 

The White Sox don't. They have two of them. Maybe teams like some of the others you mentioned do. They can fight to pay Scherzer $200 million for eight years. Meanwhile the Sox are going to get 14 years out of Sale and Quintana for half of that price.

[Marty34]

I understand your point, Marty, and I think it's a reasonable one.

 

There are many ways to skin a cat. There is nothing about Q that says "untradable." Hell, I don't know that there is anyone in the League that is untradable. A team can accomplish any number of objectives in a given trade. If you feel like you are accomplishing that objective(s), and you feel like you are winning the deal, then you can make the deal. Especially given our level of competitiveness in the foreseeable future. It is certainly not out of the realm of possibility that someone approaches us about Q and offers a package that makes sense to us, extension be damned, you may want to make that deal.

 

Yep, many ways to skin a cat and pitching is a great thing to have . When it's cheap it's even better. I think it's likely they will need a pitcher better than Quintana before this rebuild is complete (if their pursuit of Tanaka was legit, they think so too.) Signing Shields would give them a stopgap while waiting for the #3 pick and the prospect they received in the deal for Quintana.

[caulfield12]

The White Sox don't. They have two of them. Maybe teams like some of the others you mentioned do. They can fight to pay Scherzer $200 million for eight years. Meanwhile the Sox are going to get 14 years out of Sale and Quintana for half of that price.

 

 

Or the Cardinals. They'll put money into a Wainright or Carpenter, but they're not going spend big money for the middle of their rotation.

 

It's a pretty good model.

 

The main thing we're missing in comparison is Yadier Molina, who LaRussa claims is the best catcher in MLB history.

[Balta1701]

It's not enough pitching depth. That's why they need to sign a guy like Shields.

Then they don't have enough depth to trade Quintana by your standard.

[Marty34]

Then they don't have enough depth to trade Quintana by your standard.

 

Quintana as a #3 is easier to replace than it is to find a #2.

[caulfield12]

And it's easier to wait for Beck/Johnson and the #3 draft pick than to take the risk of acquiring a young pitching prospect with a likely high bust rate...blowing a cost-controlled/affordable hole into the rotation.

 

Let's go back to Miggy Cabrera. The Marlins got Maybin and Andruw Miller for him. I doubt we could even get the Top 100 pitching equivalent prospect of Miller (at the time of that trade) for Jose Quintana and Miller didn't even come close to becoming a capable major league starter.

 

At best, we might hope to get Carlos Martinez...someone like that. And that would push the rebuild back two years, lol, and force us to put Chris Sale on the shelf waiting for the young pitcher to mature and become a #2 (time which we've already invested into Quintana).

Edited March 29, 2014 by caulfield12

[BlackSox13]

So the topic went from the idea of the Sox going after Scherzer next off season to trading Q?

 

Another thread derailed into an utter train wreck.

 

I'm with raBBit, I like the idea of going after Shields IF the Sox even need to look into a free agent starter next off season. In the meantime I'm willing to wait out the next 162 games to see how our starters pitch.

[caulfield12]

So the topic went from the idea of the Sox going after Scherzer next off season to trading Q?

 

Another thread derailed into an utter train wreck.

 

I'm with raBBit, I like the idea of going after Shields IF the Sox even need to look into a free agent starter next off season. In the meantime I'm willing to wait out the next 162 games to see how our starters pitch.

 

 

Shields is going to be 33 at the beginning of the 2015 season.

 

Are you willing to give him a 4 year contract? Because someone will...at the very least, 3 years with options.

[caulfield12]

I'd be much more interested in James Shields than Max Scherezer.

 

 

img]http://media.kansascity.com/static/v4/img/base/email_icon.png[/img][/email]JOHN SLEEZER | The Kansas City Star Kansas City Royals pitcher James Shields during Friday's Cactus League baseball game against the Texas Rangers in Surprise, Ariz.

url="http://www.kansascity.com/sports-news/mlb/kansas-city-royals/index.html"]Read more Royals[/url]

 

Here in the first week of March, the Royals have yet to engage Shields’ representatives regarding a extension, according to people familiar with the situation. The team has yet to give any indication it plans to do so. Team officials refuse to rule out attempting to retain Shields, but it appears that attempt will not occur until next winter, when rival executives expect him to fetch a contract in excess of $100 million.

 

General manager Dayton Moore stressed the Royals view Shields as a player they hope to retain past this season. But he declined to elaborate on any sort of timetable.

 

“It doesn’t benefit the Kansas City Royals, or anyone involved, to talk about this stuff publicly,” he said.

 

As Moore has in the past, he defended his organization’s record of extending its own players. His track record in this area is strong. The team locked up homegrown talent like Alex Gordon, Billy Butler and Salvador Perez on a string of affordable contracts.

 

But Shields presents a different challenge. His roots here aren’t as deep. He grew up in the Rays organization. He sounds nonchalant about the situation, and unperturbed by the pressure to showcase himself this season.

 

“I don’t really like to worry about it,” Shields said earlier this spring. “I’m not that type of person that says, ‘Oh, I’ve got to go out there and have a good year.’ I really just try to pitch my game and have fun.”

 

From a public relations standpoint, the Royals set themselves up for criticism if Shields walks. The organization traded a sizable package of prospects, headlined by 2013 American League Rookie of the Year Wil Myers, to Tampa Bay for only two seasons of Shields. The two-year window places a great deal of pressure on the 2014 club to reach October.

 

But in reality, a preseason pursuit of Shields would require a sizable financial commitment — perhaps one greater than what Shields will seek next offseason on the open market. The cost to keep Shields off the market likely exceeds the Royals’ comfort zone.

 

When Robinson Cano negotiated with the Yankees last May, his agents sought a package worth more than $300 million, in part because free agency is viewed as a privilege few players in the game achieve. In order to give up that opportunity, the team needed to pay more, and the Yankees declined to meet his price. During the subsequent winter, Cano agreed to a $240 million deal with Seattle.

 

Both Shields and members of his camp have denied a report saying he seeks a contract similar to Zack Greinke’s six-year, $147 million deal with the Dodgers. But Shields compares favorably to Greinke, and his lone competition at the top of the market is Max Scherzer, Detroit’s reigning American League Cy Young Award winner.

 

“I don’t know why he’d taken any short-term, hometown deal,” one rival American League executive said. “These are his golden years.”

 

At 32, Shields appears financially secure. The Royals owe him $13.5 million for 2014, the final year of a lengthy deal he signed with the Rays. There is little reason to settle for below market value.

 

“I feel like if I get my job done,” he said, “the way I know how to do, everything will take care of itself.”

Edited March 29, 2014 by caulfield12

[GreenSox]

I wouldn't sign a pitcher because I think the marginal productivity from a 2nd number 1 isn't as great as the marginal productivity from other investments, including plugging some holes (perhaps including lower in the rotation - we'll see) and getting another real hitter on this team.

[BlackSox13]

Shields is going to be 33 at the beginning of the 2015 season.

 

Are you willing to give him a 4 year contract? Because someone will...at the very least, 3 years with options.

I would rather go 3/4 years with Shields than 6-8 years with Scherzer. Just my preference is all. Plus I think Shields would be much more affordable than Scherzer which leaves room in the payroll for funds to be used elsewhere.

 

 

 

 

[caulfield12]

I would rather go 3/4 years with Shields than 6-8 years with Scherzer. Just my preference is all. Plus I think Shields would be much more affordable than Scherzer which leaves room in the payroll for funds to be used elsewhere.

 

Did you read the article?

 

His agent is targeting Greinke, which is $147 million. He's going to be the second pitcher on the market after Scherzer, so he's arguably going to get at least $125-130 million and 5 years, so you're already in Tanaka territory there.

 

Hahn/JR were willing to take that risk on Tanaka in his mid 20's.

 

They won't do it with Shields in his mid 30's for roughly the same price.

[GreatScott82]

Did you read the article?

 

His agent is targeting Greinke, which is $147 million. He's going to be the second pitcher on the market after Scherzer, so he's arguably going to get at least $125-130 million and 5 years, so you're already in Tanaka territory there.

 

Hahn/JR were willing to take that risk on Tanaka in his mid 20's.

 

They won't do it with Shields in his mid 30's for roughly the same price.

That is why I suggested Scherzer for that #2 starter spot. He will only be 29 at the beginning of next year. If that is 'too old' for this team, then they better trade Danks soon. He will be 30 next year- ANCIENT! I know the Sox are trying to acquire guys in their early to mid-20s, but if they can simultaneously bring a guy in within his prime, a guy who is a Cy Young Award type pitcher, a guy who will be 29 next year- how can they not explore that? If money's the reason, I can respect that- but to say he will be too old for this new core is pretty silly.

 

I believe you can have 1 or 2 veteran starting pitchers in a rotation of a younger team, as long as your 8 position players are mid to early 20s, this team will have sustainable success.

[BlackSox13]

Did you read the article?

 

His agent is targeting Greinke, which is $147 million. He's going to be the second pitcher on the market after Scherzer, so he's arguably going to get at least $125-130 million and 5 years, so you're already in Tanaka territory there.

 

Hahn/JR were willing to take that risk on Tanaka in his mid 20's.

 

They won't do it with Shields in his mid 30's for roughly the same price.

I admit, I missed it. If that's the case then I say no to both. Given Shields age I can't see any team giving him a contract like Grenke's. I doubt even the Yanks are that dumb.

 

Unless Q regresses I would be fine calling him #2 and move on. Who knows, if Johnson has a good season he COULD project well as a #3 and if Danks can get even close to his old form he would be a very good #4. That would leave the fifth spot which is much easier to fill.

 

Point is, this whole thread and all its posts is speculation until the 14 season is over. Then we will have an idea of what holes (if any) need to be filled in the starting rotation. I'll just go ahead and enjoy the next 162 games as best I can and see where were at afterwards.

[Y2Jimmy0]

The fact that there are 9 pages about the Sox hypothetically signing a pitcher that they are never going to sign is funny to me.