James Shields

[RynoRules]

Speculation around the web is that TB could make him available. Reforming the picthing staff appears to be a priority. Looks to me like he would a positive addition.

 

Interested? What would it take to get him? Do we have to clear Z from the books first?

 

EDIT: 6.1 WAR last season after a truly awful 2010. Reminds me of how Cliff Lee evolved.

[davell]

Would love to have him. But it's going to take another Garza type package to get him. And right now, I'm not sure we even have another one to trade away. If we did, it'd decimate the system. We'd have the 2011 draft class and whatever we draft in 2012. I guess a comparable package from us this time would be Brett Jackson/McNutt/Vitters/LaHair/Dolis. Positions don't match, but talent wise, it's probably close.

[KingCubsFan]

Given what it took to get Garza, I don't think we have enough. Plus he's probably at his peak in terms of value. I'd like to see if we could get Alex Cobb though.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

The Rays worship the ground Shields walks on...seriously, they love that [expletive] guy (for plenty of good reason):

 

http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/11/3/2533908/mlb-trade-rumors-james-shields-tampa-bay-rays

 

http://aol.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2011-11-02/report-rays-intent-on-keeping-shields

 

I would love Shields though...he's as tough a pitcher as you'll find in the league...to me he's the Rays' version of 90's Andy Pettite...rotation anchor, stalwart, and someone they have complete and total confidence in in a big situation.

 

I wouldn't mind peaking in on Alex Cobb though, as it's already been mentioned.

[BeerHere]

It doesn't seem like a good offseason to be in need of rotation help. Wilson, Darvish and not much else. That would imply that the trade market may be more active but the Cubs don't have much. I doubt the Rays make him available and even if they do, I doubt he winds up a Cub.

[Clem Fandango]

This was posted yesterday...

 

According to CBS Sports' Danny Knobler, the Rays seem "dead-set" on keeping James Shields this winter.

The Rays exercised a $7.5 million option on Shields earlier this week. That's a hefty salary for such a small-market team, but the 29-year-old right-hander posted a 2.82 ERA and 225/65 K/BB ratio in 249 1/3 innings this season. He's one of the best starters in the sport, and the Rays will look to compete with him on their side in 2012.

[Guest]

This was posted yesterday...

 

According to CBS Sports' Danny Knobler, the Rays seem "dead-set" on keeping James Shields this winter.

The Rays exercised a $7.5 million option on Shields earlier this week. That's a hefty salary for such a small-market team, but the 29-year-old right-hander posted a 2.82 ERA and 225/65 K/BB ratio in 249 1/3 innings this season. He's one of the best starters in the sport, and the Rays will look to compete with him on their side in 2012.

 

 

I remember a nearly identical report at some point last offseason about Garza.

[RynoRules]

This was posted yesterday...

 

According to CBS Sports' Danny Knobler, the Rays seem "dead-set" on keeping James Shields this winter.

The Rays exercised a $7.5 million option on Shields earlier this week. That's a hefty salary for such a small-market team, but the 29-year-old right-hander posted a 2.82 ERA and 225/65 K/BB ratio in 249 1/3 innings this season. He's one of the best starters in the sport, and the Rays will look to compete with him on their side in 2012.

 

 

I remember a nearly identical report at some point last offseason about Garza.

 

Its a sensible way to try and drive up the price. You know, the anti-Hendry approach.

[SABR Gamer]

Can someone explain what B-R values so much differently than FanGraphs for pitcher WAR that makes their numbers so different, and which is more accurate?

 

James Shields:

B-R WAR: 6.1

FanGraphs WAR: 4.9

 

Matt Garza:

B-R WAR: 2.9

FanGraphs WAR: 5.0

 

So, Baseball-Reference thinks James Shields was worth twice as many wins above replacement as Matt Garza this year, while FanGraphs actually thinks Garza was the better pitcher?

 

Also, more variation:

James Shields 2010 WAR

B-R: -1.3

FanGraphs: 2.0

 

So FanGraphs claims his 2010 season was decent, while B-R claims it was a terrible, blow replacement level showing.

 

I usually go to FanGraphs for WAR, but these numbers seemed strange to me.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Can someone explain what B-R values so much differently than FanGraphs for pitcher WAR that makes their numbers so different, and which is more accurate?

 

Fangraphs is heavily based on predictive peripherals, Baseball-Reference is based on how many runs the pitcher allowed (literally, they just take how much runs a replacement pitcher would allow in the same number of innings and credit/debit the difference, then convert runs into wins).

Edited November 4, 2011 by Hairyducked Idiot

[SABR Gamer]

Can someone explain what B-R values so much differently than FanGraphs for pitcher WAR that makes their numbers so different, and which is more accurate?

 

Fangraphs is heavily based on predictive peripherals, Baseball-Reference is based on how many runs the pitcher allowed.

 

Which method is preferable?

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Can someone explain what B-R values so much differently than FanGraphs for pitcher WAR that makes their numbers so different, and which is more accurate?

 

Fangraphs is heavily based on predictive peripherals, Baseball-Reference is based on how many runs the pitcher allowed.

 

Which method is preferable?

 

What are you trying to do?

[SABR Gamer]

Can someone explain what B-R values so much differently than FanGraphs for pitcher WAR that makes their numbers so different, and which is more accurate?

 

Fangraphs is heavily based on predictive peripherals, Baseball-Reference is based on how many runs the pitcher allowed.

 

Which method is preferable?

 

What are you trying to do?

 

Yeah, I guess you are right.

 

Evaluating that year, probably B-R.

 

Predicting future performance, FanGraphs.