If you could acquire one last player to complete the offseason...

[witesoxfan]

Really, if you want to assume that Samardzija is going to leave (and I think you can safely make that assumption), I'd have no problem bringing Shields in. It at least guarantees you another starter beyond this year while allowing room for Rodon next year and, draft pick wise, you'd actually come out ahead (giving up a 4th this year for Shields while getting a sandwich next year for Samardzija).

 

It essentially eliminates the possibility for a Samardzija extension, but I think I'd be OK with that in this scenario. If you can get Shields for 4 years, $80 mill or so, you can likely count on him to be good for the next 2 years (3-3.5 WAR) and solid-average the next two (2-2.5 WAR). If we assume 3.5 and then a half win reduction each following year, we'd be looking at approximately 11 WAR, which would be about $7.28 mill per win, which really isn't a bad price to pay on the open market.

 

That's if he doesn't get 5 years, which is something that throws a huge kink into the whole thing. At 5/$100, assuming the same regression, you're looking at $8 mill per win. That's not outrageous, but makes it more difficult to justify, and older players have a tendency to fall off more quickly and become unplayable.

[witesoxfan]

Also, I think this is the Sox most upgradable spot. There are still a few pitchers available who would be certifiable upgrades which would allow Noesi to remain on the MLB roster as a swing man/long reliever which also increases the depth of the team and helps safeguard against a disaster. C, 3B, and 2B could probably be upgraded too, and you could think about a mini-blockbuster that sends Garcia out and a proven RF in, but those are all a lot more complicated. Adding one more starting pitcher does not.

 

This is one of those moves that doesn't make sense at the beginning of the offseason, but now that it's played out and you can see the holes, this is something that would really some sense.

[LDF]

Also, I think this is the Sox most upgradable spot. There are still a few pitchers available who would be certifiable upgrades which would allow Noesi to remain on the MLB roster as a swing man/long reliever which also increases the depth of the team and helps safeguard against a disaster. C, 3B, and 2B could probably be upgraded too, and you could think about a mini-blockbuster that sends Garcia out and a proven RF in, but those are all a lot more complicated. Adding one more starting pitcher does not.

 

This is one of those moves that doesn't make sense at the beginning of the offseason, but now that it's played out and you can see the holes, this is something that would really some sense.

 

brother welcome to the club.

 

sox baseball 15. yesss.

[Eminor3rd]

Really, if you want to assume that Samardzija is going to leave (and I think you can safely make that assumption), I'd have no problem bringing Shields in. It at least guarantees you another starter beyond this year while allowing room for Rodon next year and, draft pick wise, you'd actually come out ahead (giving up a 4th this year for Shields while getting a sandwich next year for Samardzija).

 

It essentially eliminates the possibility for a Samardzija extension, but I think I'd be OK with that in this scenario. If you can get Shields for 4 years, $80 mill or so, you can likely count on him to be good for the next 2 years (3-3.5 WAR) and solid-average the next two (2-2.5 WAR). If we assume 3.5 and then a half win reduction each following year, we'd be looking at approximately 11 WAR, which would be about $7.28 mill per win, which really isn't a bad price to pay on the open market.

 

That's if he doesn't get 5 years, which is something that throws a huge kink into the whole thing. At 5/$100, assuming the same regression, you're looking at $8 mill per win. That's not outrageous, but makes it more difficult to justify, and older players have a tendency to fall off more quickly and become unplayable.

 

He's most likely gonna get that fifth year, and at 33 and losing velocity fast, he's more likely to turn into a more expensive John Danks than he is to be a mid-rotation guy throughout the life of that deal.

 

There's no question he's a huge upgrade for us in 2015, but this would NOT fit the current RH plan of making upgrades that aren't enormous future risks. He's already "just" a "good #3," and his further decline could happen as early as 2016. Not for $100m, man. Lot of miles on that arm and the velo is already fringe and on its way down.

 

On the plus side, we'd only be giving up a 4th round draft pick at this point, lol.

Edited January 22, 2015 by Eminor3rd

[witesoxfan]

He's most likely gonna get that fifth year, and at 33 and losing velocity fast, he's more likely to turn into a more expensive John Danks than he is to be a mid-rotation guy throughout the life of that deal.

 

There's no question he's a huge upgrade for us in 2015, but this would NOT fit the current RH plan of making upgrades that aren't enormous future risks. He's already "just" a "good #3," and his further decline could happen as early as 2016. Not for $100m, man. Lot of miles on that arm and the velo is already fringe and on its way down.

 

On the plus side, we'd only be giving up a 4th round draft pick at this point, lol.

 

I initially thought Shields' velocity was on the downward trend given what we know about precedent and pitchers getting older, but check this:

 

FG Pitch Type, FB velocities:

2011: 91

2012: 92.3

2013: 92.2

2014: 92.4

 

And then we look at his PITCHf/x (four seam, two seam)

2011: 90.9, 91

2012: 92, 92.1

2013: 92.2, 92.1

2014: 92.5, 92.1

 

The velocity of his cutter hit a high of 89 in 2012 but has typically been around 86-87.

 

I'd offer 4/$80 in some form, but wouldn't budge from that. If some team wants to risk the 5th year, then I'd be out.

[Eminor3rd]

I initially thought Shields' velocity was on the downward trend given what we know about precedent and pitchers getting older, but check this:

 

FG Pitch Type, FB velocities:

2011: 91

2012: 92.3

2013: 92.2

2014: 92.4

 

And then we look at his PITCHf/x (four seam, two seam)

2011: 90.9, 91

2012: 92, 92.1

2013: 92.2, 92.1

2014: 92.5, 92.1

 

The velocity of his cutter hit a high of 89 in 2012 but has typically been around 86-87.

 

I'd offer 4/$80 in some form, but wouldn't budge from that. If some team wants to risk the 5th year, then I'd be out.

 

That's crazy -- I feel like I've read that he's lost velocity everywhere. Good find, you crazy Dakota person! We can't trust what we read these days

 

Maybe it's just that his results are consistent with a loss in velocity:

 

K/9:

 

2012 - 8.82

2013 - 7.71

2014 - 7.14

 

BB/9:

 

2012 - 2.29

2013 - 2.68

2014 - 1.74

 

So this basically tells us that he's either lost K's and made up for it with fewer walks, or that he's consciously decided to allow more contact. The former is bad because he is relying more on his defense, making his performance much less reliable, especially considering he was pitching in front of the best defense in the league. The latter could be good depending on the type of contact he's allowed.

 

Ok, so contact:

 

GB%:

 

2012 - 52.3%

2013 - 41.6%

2014 - 45.2%

 

HR/FB%

 

2012 - 13.4%

2013 - 8.6%

2014 - 9.7%

 

Even though I didn't list it, basically every year before 2012 he had HR/FB's between 11-13%. So it looks like as soon as he got to KC, he started giving up way more contact, but that contact was more a lot more fly balls and those fly balls have left the park at a lower rate than ever before. Given that his career FIP/ERA are within 5 points of each other, there's no reason to believe that he has an unusual ability to suppress hard contact, which means the only logical conclusion is that he's benefited greatly from some combination of (1) good defense, (2) favorable park factors, and (3) lucky homerun rates. It's a little too perfect that all of those things got stronger the minute he got to KC.

 

So moving into a situation where he's pitching in a bandbox in front of a defense that is mediocre at best makes that regression look pretty likely.

 

Good find on the velo -- maybe that's not what's causing him to regress. But SOMETHING is, or at least has been.

 

 

[Chisoxfn]

If Shields was willing to go short term, I'd be all over it. Than you see if Shark is willing to go long and let the other one walk.

[Dunt]

I really think Shields to the Sox is something that could happen by the end of the weekend. The buzz at Soxfest will already be palpable, imagine announcing the signing of Shields.

[bigruss]

I really think Shields to the Sox is something that could happen by the end of the weekend. The buzz at Soxfest will already be palpable, imagine announcing the signing of Shields.

I'd be stoked for this year, but man anything over 3 years will be a major regret.

[witesoxfan]

That's crazy -- I feel like I've read that he's lost velocity everywhere. Good find, you crazy Dakota person! We can't trust what we read these days

 

Maybe it's just that his results are consistent with a loss in velocity:

 

K/9:

 

2012 - 8.82

2013 - 7.71

2014 - 7.14

 

BB/9:

 

2012 - 2.29

2013 - 2.68

2014 - 1.74

 

So this basically tells us that he's either lost K's and made up for it with fewer walks, or that he's consciously decided to allow more contact. The former is bad because he is relying more on his defense, making his performance much less reliable, especially considering he was pitching in front of the best defense in the league. The latter could be good depending on the type of contact he's allowed.

 

Ok, so contact:

 

GB%:

 

2012 - 52.3%

2013 - 41.6%

2014 - 45.2%

 

HR/FB%

 

2012 - 13.4%

2013 - 8.6%

2014 - 9.7%

 

Even though I didn't list it, basically every year before 2012 he had HR/FB's between 11-13%. So it looks like as soon as he got to KC, he started giving up way more contact, but that contact was more a lot more fly balls and those fly balls have left the park at a lower rate than ever before. Given that his career FIP/ERA are within 5 points of each other, there's no reason to believe that he has an unusual ability to suppress hard contact, which means the only logical conclusion is that he's benefited greatly from some combination of (1) good defense, (2) favorable park factors, and (3) lucky homerun rates. It's a little too perfect that all of those things got stronger the minute he got to KC.

 

So moving into a situation where he's pitching in a bandbox in front of a defense that is mediocre at best makes that regression look pretty likely.

 

Good find on the velo -- maybe that's not what's causing him to regress. But SOMETHING is, or at least has been.

 

 

I haven't seen the Brooks Baseball numbers and graphs, but I'd like to see how the movement on his two and four seamers have changed over the years. It's just weird to see pitchers with his mileage maintain or increase velocity past 30. Hell, it's weird to see ANY pitcher maintain or increase velocity past 30, not considering mileage on their arm.

 

My guess is that the Royals did suggest to him that he should pitch to contact. Don't be afraid to put guys away, but we have an insanely good defense, so feel free to work quick and work in the zone, because we have guys that will go and get it. I think he'd have to get away from that some in Chicago.

 

What I find most interesting about his pitch selection is the cutter/slider. They are pitchers that are distinctly different but they have similar movement, so I think they can confuse pitch recognition software OR he is consciously throwing his slider harder in spite of movement to sneak up on guys or he's throwing his cutter slower to generate more movement. Again, I can't verify any of this stuff without Brooks and I just won't have time during the day to do that, but let's take a look at the usage (via PITCHf/x; cutter, slider)

 

2009: 7.1, 12.0

2010: 8.9, 7.9

2011: 4.4, 11.2

2012: 5.0, 15.4

2013: 17.6, 3.2

2014: 25.3, 0

 

He went to the Royals in 2013. Did they ask him to abandon the use of the slider and focus on the cutter (a pitch with less movement, thus being easier to hit, but also hard to square up) or is his ability to throw a real hard moving slider diminishing to the point that he's really only able to throw a cutter? Without watching [hours and hours] of video, I'd have no way of knowing. I'd also be unable to just call up Shields and ask him. However, pitching theory would dictate that you can use the cutter in the zone more often as it's disguised as a fastball and then breaks at the last second, inducing weak contact. The same cannot be said for the slider, as they work better when moving away from a hitter or, if it's a real honker, back-dooring or front-dooring a hitter, and thus they are not as easy to throw in the zone while getting away with it.

 

I'm sure there's more to it, and the above may honestly be gobbledygook, but it logically makes sense and at least provides some working models for what's caused some of the "lack of velocity" regression without an actual lack of velocity.

[Buehrlesque]

I'd offer 4/$80 in some form, but wouldn't budge from that. If some team wants to risk the 5th year, then I'd be out.

 

 

I really think Shields to the Sox is something that could happen by the end of the weekend. The buzz at Soxfest will already be palpable, imagine announcing the signing of Shields.

 

There are way too many other teams in on James Shields for this to be realistic. Would be nice, I agree, but competition will drive the price and years up.

 

[Eminor3rd]

I haven't seen the Brooks Baseball numbers and graphs, but I'd like to see how the movement on his two and four seamers have changed over the years. It's just weird to see pitchers with his mileage maintain or increase velocity past 30. Hell, it's weird to see ANY pitcher maintain or increase velocity past 30, not considering mileage on their arm.

 

My guess is that the Royals did suggest to him that he should pitch to contact. Don't be afraid to put guys away, but we have an insanely good defense, so feel free to work quick and work in the zone, because we have guys that will go and get it. I think he'd have to get away from that some in Chicago.

 

What I find most interesting about his pitch selection is the cutter/slider. They are pitchers that are distinctly different but they have similar movement, so I think they can confuse pitch recognition software OR he is consciously throwing his slider harder in spite of movement to sneak up on guys or he's throwing his cutter slower to generate more movement. Again, I can't verify any of this stuff without Brooks and I just won't have time during the day to do that, but let's take a look at the usage (via PITCHf/x; cutter, slider)

 

2009: 7.1, 12.0

2010: 8.9, 7.9

2011: 4.4, 11.2

2012: 5.0, 15.4

2013: 17.6, 3.2

2014: 25.3, 0

 

He went to the Royals in 2013. Did they ask him to abandon the use of the slider and focus on the cutter (a pitch with less movement, thus being easier to hit, but also hard to square up) or is his ability to throw a real hard moving slider diminishing to the point that he's really only able to throw a cutter? Without watching [hours and hours] of video, I'd have no way of knowing. I'd also be unable to just call up Shields and ask him. However, pitching theory would dictate that you can use the cutter in the zone more often as it's disguised as a fastball and then breaks at the last second, inducing weak contact. The same cannot be said for the slider, as they work better when moving away from a hitter or, if it's a real honker, back-dooring or front-dooring a hitter, and thus they are not as easy to throw in the zone while getting away with it.

 

I'm sure there's more to it, and the above may honestly be gobbledygook, but it logically makes sense and at least provides some working models for what's caused some of the "lack of velocity" regression without an actual lack of velocity.

 

The pitch mix thing is super interesting. Is it a temporary KC coaching effect, or is it an example of a guy evolving as he ages and his stuff diminishes?

[Buehrlesque]

If the Sox were only able to sign Melky Cabrera (3yr 42mil) due to an uptick in season ticket plans, where would the money come to give Shields a ~20 million AAV contract.

While it was a cute PR story, the Sox did not specifically acquire $14 million to sign Melky from a few weeks worth of season ticket sales. That was just a (positive) spin the team attached to the timeline of those two not-independent-but-not-directly-related events. Not saying that has anything to do with Shields though.

[southsider2k5]

While it was a cute PR story, the Sox did not specifically acquire $14 million to sign Melky from a few weeks worth of season ticket sales. That was just a (positive) spin the team attached to the timeline of those two not-independent-but-not-directly-related events. Not saying that has anything to do with Shields though.

 

While it is true there was no one sitting in the ticket office with a counter and calculator saying "If we only sell 15 more season tickets we can pay for Cabrera", that doesn't mean that a busier than usual off season for sale wasn't responsible for the Sox making the offer to Cabrera. I promise you if season tickets were a net negative again, they don't make him that offer, at that point in time.

[Balta1701]

If Shields was willing to go short term, I'd be all over it. Than you see if Shark is willing to go long and let the other one walk.

At his age, James Shields would be insane to take a short term deal unless it was like $35 million next year. He needs to take the longest deal he can get. If that's only 4/$70 then someone might get a decent bargain out of him. Taking a 1 year deal would be crazy.

[Balta1701]

I understand that but the point was made - the Sox didn't have a lot of money to spend. I don't see them busting their whole load this offseason when next year is the big year/offseason for the team.

I don't see how next year is "the big offseason" for them. Even without Samardzija they've got $97 million committed assuming Alexei is picked up. Add in maybe an option on Bonifacio and a decent selection of arbitration guys and they're at >$110 million, almost their entire 2015 payroll, without adding a single player. Add in an extension for Samardzija and they'd be talking about $130 million in commitments without adding a single thing and with letting guys like Viciedo walk.

[LDF]

I understand that but the point was made - the Sox didn't have a lot of money to spend. I don't see them busting their whole load this offseason when next year is the big year/offseason for the team.

 

if i may, 2 questions.

 

how do we know that the sox didn't have the money to spend??? b/c they told us.

 

what is next yr, in your statement you mention for the team??

[Balta1701]

I didn't mean big offseason in terms of spending but rather in terms of moving towards division favorite/of the AL's best. I don't expect them to add 50 million in payroll, but I do think we'll see the biggest payroll Ever in 2016.

Barring this team doing another 2013 collapse, I think that's almost inevitable. They'd be committed to that already if they signed Samardzija.

[LDF]

I didn't mean big offseason in terms of spending but rather in terms of moving towards division favorite/of the AL's best. I don't expect them to add 50 million in payroll, but I do think we'll see the biggest payroll Ever in 2016.

 

i am thinking that can be done now, with all that you are saying. this can be that

big offseason. i am not saying add an addition 50 mil, more like 10 mil +/- and

a plus.

[LDF]

I don't see how next year is "the big offseason" for them. Even without Samardzija they've got $97 million committed assuming Alexei is picked up. Add in maybe an option on Bonifacio and a decent selection of arbitration guys and they're at >$110 million, almost their entire 2015 payroll, without adding a single player. Add in an extension for Samardzija and they'd be talking about $130 million in commitments without adding a single thing and with letting guys like Viciedo walk.

 

i have something very similar in mind, very close in ideas. but either way, nice outside

the box thinking.

[Chisoxfn]

At his age, James Shields would be insane to take a short term deal unless it was like $35 million next year. He needs to take the longest deal he can get. If that's only 4/$70 then someone might get a decent bargain out of him. Taking a 1 year deal would be crazy.

I don't disagree with you. I just said if he was willing to take a short-term deal. Never said I thought he would. Crazier things have happened. If best thing he is getting are really bad AAV 3-4 year deals than maybe he takes a bet on himself at a higher AAV. 4/70 would be worth signing him, imo.

[LDF]

 

here is a simple player to get, Ryan Vogelsong sp threw 180 + innings. and

he will take a 1 yr contract. 2 world series rings.

[Balta1701]

here is a simple player to get, Ryan Vogelsong sp threw 180 + innings. and

he will take a 1 yr contract. 2 world series rings.

He barely outperformed Danks/Noesi last year, in no small part because Noesi didn't start the year with us, and in 2013 he put up a 5.73 ERA while pitching for the Giants in one of the best pitchers parks in the league. I don't see why you'd spend money on him and think you're in any better of a position than you are with Danks/Noesi.

[LDF]

He barely outperformed Danks/Noesi last year, in no small part because Noesi didn't start the year with us, and in 2013 he put up a 5.73 ERA while pitching for the Giants in one of the best pitchers parks in the league. I don't see why you'd spend money on him and think you're in any better of a position than you are with Danks/Noesi.

i did not see it that way. thanks for bringing this up and letting me look at it

a different way.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

The pitch mix thing is super interesting. Is it a temporary KC coaching effect, or is it an example of a guy evolving as he ages and his stuff diminishes?

Maybe it was his slider that was getting hit for the HR's and since he basically abandoned the slider the HR's have decreased .

Edited January 23, 2015 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside