Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.

Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Photo

Cafardo: Twins have inquired about Shields

  • Please log in to reply
106 replies to this topic

#41 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 12:59 PM

The only stat that matters is how many runs you give up. WHIP is used for better judgement of where ERA should be. Both Shields and Marcum are 30 and it's pretty obvious that the ERAs are going to stay consistent where they are. IPs are a manager's decision and I believe that's been hammered into poster's heads enough here. Regardless of who's better (I'll take either), they are close. Saying "not even close" is just ridiculous hyberbole. Anyway, the point is that trading Denard Span for something we could get without trading Denard Span is stupid and I'm just thankful you're not running the organization. Be it Greinke or Marcum in this situation I don't care.

Edited by YourHouseIsMyHouse, 05 November 2012 - 01:04 PM.


#42 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 01:01 PM



Marcum is not even close...Grienke is comparable, but he's gonna cost a lot more....and I'd personally still take Shields first.


No, Marcum is not even close to Shields. Between Greinke and Shields, I'd probably prefer Shields because of money and duration of contract. You just can't rely on high-end pitching to perform for 5+ years.


A .18 difference in ERA last year is not even close??? Marcum also has better career numbers as I said previously. Talk about WHIP (.001 career difference), and SO/BB all you want. It doesn't matter because Marcum will still give up roughly the same amount of runs. Same for Shields.

#43 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 01:06 PM

A .18 difference in ERA last year is not even close??? Marcum also has better career numbers as I said previously. Talk about WHIP (.001 career difference), and SO/BB all you want. It doesn't matter because Marcum will still give up roughly the same amount of runs. Same for Shields.


And he won't work anywhere near the same amount of innings while doing it..

and IP is a factor...we know the more innings the starter can go while being effective (as Shields has shown he can do), it helps the bullpen and we don't know how the ERA would balloon up (or not) for Marcum if he got his innings jacked up to match Shields'.

And Shields has pitched in a much tougher division.

But if you want to believe Marcum is every bit the pitcher Shields is, fine...I believe most would disagree

Edited by ThePuck, 05 November 2012 - 01:12 PM.


#44 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 9,673 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 01:14 PM

[quote name='YourHouseIsMyHouse'][quote name='Brock Beauchamp'][quote name='ThePuck']

Marcum is not even close...Grienke is comparable, but he's gonna cost a lot more....and I'd personally still take Shields first.[/QUOTE]

No, Marcum is not even close to Shields. Between Greinke and Shields, I'd probably prefer Shields because of money and duration of contract. You just can't rely on high-end pitching to perform for 5+ years.[/QUOTE]

A .18 difference in ERA last year is not even close??? Marcum also has better career numbers as I said previously. Talk about WHIP (.001 career difference), and SO/BB all you want. It doesn't matter because Marcum will still give up roughly the same amount of runs. Same for Shields.[/QUOTE]

You can't compare a pitcher from the AL East to a pitcher in the NL Central using straight statistics and expect me to agree with your assessment.

Shields' xFIP was nearly 1.00 lower than Marcum's in 2012. Shields also pitched ~80 more innings, if I recall correctly.

I'd love to see Marcum on the Twins in 2013. That doesn't mean he's the equal of Shields.

#45 ericchri

ericchri

    Generally Clueless

  • Members
  • 391 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 01:28 PM

The only stat that matters is how many runs you give up. WHIP is used for better judgement of where ERA should be. Both Shields and Marcum are 30 and it's pretty obvious that the ERAs are going to stay consistent where they are. IPs are a manager's decision and I believe that's been hammered into poster's heads enough here. Regardless of who's better (I'll take either), they are close. Saying "not even close" is just ridiculous hyberbole. Anyway, the point is that trading Denard Span for something we could get without trading Denard Span is stupid and I'm just thankful you're not running the organization. Be it Greinke or Marcum in this situation I don't care.


You trade Span for Shields because it is a net increase in payroll of only ~$5 million per year, not 10-12, with the presumed effect of not decreasing your lineup too badly in the process (defense might be a different issue, however, if Parmelee then takes over RF). If you want to add 3 decent SP this offseason, it's going to take something like that, as opposed to only buying FA starters. I think the real question is what it takes to get Shields. As long as we're not throwing in one of our top 6-8 prospects in addition to Span, I could probably live with it.

#46 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 01:36 PM

[quote name='Brock Beauchamp'][quote name='YourHouseIsMyHouse'][quote name='Brock Beauchamp'][quote name='ThePuck']

Marcum is not even close...Grienke is comparable, but he's gonna cost a lot more....and I'd personally still take Shields first.[/QUOTE]

No, Marcum is not even close to Shields. Between Greinke and Shields, I'd probably prefer Shields because of money and duration of contract. You just can't rely on high-end pitching to perform for 5+ years.[/QUOTE]

A .18 difference in ERA last year is not even close??? Marcum also has better career numbers as I said previously. Talk about WHIP (.001 career difference), and SO/BB all you want. It doesn't matter because Marcum will still give up roughly the same amount of runs. Same for Shields.[/QUOTE]

You can't compare a pitcher from the AL East to a pitcher in the NL Central using straight statistics and expect me to agree with your assessment.

Shields' xFIP was nearly 1.00 lower than Marcum's in 2012. Shields also pitched ~80 more innings, if I recall correctly.

I'd love to see Marcum on the Twins in 2013. That doesn't mean he's the equal of Shields.[/QUOTE]

I don't put any value whatsoever on that argument at all. Marcum pitched in the AL East for 5 years and put up the best numbers of his career in his last two with the Blue Jays. Not much use for xFip here since it's used to predict where ERA should be. In Marcum's case, it hasn't gone anywhere the past few years. Shields ERA has been all over the place though, so it makes sense there, but I think we should value consistency more.

#47 Twins Twerp

Twins Twerp

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 816 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 02:21 PM

Can't we have both Marcum AND Shields? Why is everyone so angry. Lets inquire about both men and see where that INQUIRY gets us?

#48 Willihammer

Willihammer

    ice cream correspondent

  • Members
  • 3,504 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 05 November 2012 - 02:26 PM

xFIP needs qualifying for both pitchers in this case. It assumes a league average HR/FB rate, and Shields' has fluctuated more than most pitchers. But Shield's would seem to have noticed since he has found a way to reduce his FB rate and increase his GB rate in the last two seasons in order to minimize the effect of HR/FB variability. For Marcum, some of his value is tied up in Fielding Dependent Pitching which explains at least partly why his ERA consistently outperforms his xFIP. Marcum has 6.5 career FDP wins to Shields' -.5.

The bottom line is Shields would probably require less money, less years, and is trending into a better pitcher while showing none of the possible signs of injury Marcum is showing, namely elbow soreness. Marcum can't even get a qualifying offer from the Brewers, who have money to spend. So even if you don't buy that Shields is the better talent, he is at worst equivalent while being cheaper and less risky.

#49 YourHouseIsMyHouse

YourHouseIsMyHouse

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,235 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 02:34 PM

xFIP needs qualifying for both pitchers in this case. It assumes a league average HR/FB rate, and Shields' has fluctuated more than most pitchers. But Shield's would seem to have noticed since he has found a way to reduce his FB rate and increase his GB rate in the last two seasons in order to minimize the effect of HR/FB variability. For Marcum, some of his value is tied up in Fielding Dependent Pitching which explains at least partly why his ERA consistently outperforms his xFIP. Marcum has 6.5 career FDP wins to Shields' -.5.

The bottom line is Shields would probably require less money, less years, and is trending into a better pitcher while showing none of the possible signs of injury Marcum is showing, namely elbow soreness. Marcum can't even get a qualifying offer from the Brewers, who have money to spend. So even if you don't buy that Shields is the better talent, he is at worst equivalent while being cheaper and less risky.


Like I've said, I really don't care who the better pitcher is. Shields is of course more talented, but his short deal and minor inconsistencies worriy me. I'd just be happier if Span was traded for something else. Marcum+Prospects>Shields-Span-Prospects

#50 John Bonnes

John Bonnes

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 5,049 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 02:37 PM

I wonder what would interest the Rays more - a package of prospects that helps with the future, or an everyday center fielder that helps them take advantage of the window of opportunity they have right now. I think it might be the latter, but one could argue either way.

#51 Willihammer

Willihammer

    ice cream correspondent

  • Members
  • 3,504 posts
  • LocationSaint Paul

Posted 05 November 2012 - 03:02 PM

They may even take cash.

They also need a first baseman.

The Twins don't necessarily have to give up their best prospects, In fact, according to John's source, they may even trade for Span straight up. But we don't even know what the Rays are asking for at this point really

#52 johnnydakota

johnnydakota

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 1,498 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 03:11 PM

kc has been linked twice with the rays including a block buster trade of price and shields or shields and hellickson
tampas needs are another 3b catcher outfielder (cf) 1b and a dh(buster onley)would a package of willingham span, herrman and hermsen be enough to get both shields and hellickson? then turn around and trade a pair of marginal prospects to the angels for vernon wells and 38 of his 48 million? i believe wells is a better outfielder the ham and may actually rebound nicely in minnesota nice no pressure citys?

#53 johnnydakota

johnnydakota

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 1,498 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 03:25 PM

I wonder what would interest the Rays more - a package of prospects that helps with the future, or an everyday center fielder that helps them take advantage of the window of opportunity they have right now. I think it might be the latter, but one could argue either way.

i will argue they want mlb players over prospects, with the red sox in turmoil and the yankees being old, this may be the time for the rays to make the move...,but with tampa you never know ,right now they have 11 starters that could make the twins rotation better between there bullpen rotation and AAA ,but i think shields is a must for the twins and faster the better,with james on board it will only make signing other free agents that much easier

#54 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,693 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 03:33 PM

If it comes down to a Twins package vs a Royals package, the contest is over. Some combination of Moustakas/Hosmer/Myers/Duffy/Starling/et al. will likely blow away any offer the Twins could realistically consider without mortgaging the future of the offense.

#55 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,875 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 03:34 PM

I wonder what would interest the Rays more - a package of prospects that helps with the future, or an everyday center fielder that helps them take advantage of the window of opportunity they have right now. I think it might be the latter, but one could argue either way.


They draft extremely well. The prospects received for Garza and Kazmir have not panned out. A good salesman could trade major league talent. A slick trader could trade a couple for Shields and a decent pitching prospect.

#56 Kwak

Kwak

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,570 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 04:07 PM

I wonder what would interest the Rays more - a package of prospects that helps with the future, or an everyday center fielder that helps them take advantage of the window of opportunity they have right now. I think it might be the latter, but one could argue either way.


They draft extremely well. The prospects received for Garza and Kazmir have not panned out. A good salesman could trade major league talent. A slick trader could trade a couple for Shields and a decent pitching prospect.

Is Ryan a "slick trader"?

#57 notoriousgod71

notoriousgod71

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,078 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 06:26 PM

If you're not going to trade Span for Shields what would you trade him for?

You can't win without pitching. This team could realistically contend with the addition of three starting pitchers. All it costs is money and the want to. Span is replaceable. We're not discussing Willie Mays here.

#58 Kwak

Kwak

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,570 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 07:35 PM

If you're not going to trade Span for Shields what would you trade him for?

You can't win without pitching. This team could realistically contend with the addition of three starting pitchers. All it costs is money and the want to. Span is replaceable. We're not discussing Willie Mays here.


+1!

#59 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,285 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:09 PM

derp

Posted Image

#60 Bark's Lounge

Bark's Lounge

    Whatchamacallit is the Best Candy Bar

  • Members
  • 2,009 posts
  • LocationKerguelen Island

Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:22 PM

As a dimwitted Twin's fan, I do not see the upside to a Shields trade. In the 2 years the Twins will have control of his contract they will not be contenders - of course one could say anything is possible and we could win in 2013 or 2014, but that is a horrible way to plan the future and strategize a long term plan of success. It would be the equivalent of a middle aged man or woman who makes 40K a year without a pension telling themselves - "I don't have to save or invest any money for my retirement because I feel confident I will win the lottery next year."

The one guy I would want that the Ray's have is unobtainable - Matt Moore. The team friendly contract he signed in the last year further cements that. If I was Terry Ryan, I would give Friedman a call and say - "Hey Andy, I want to give you Justin Morneau and we'll eat all of his salary next year, Denard Span, and Joe Benson for... have you guessed yet? Are you ready for it? Matt Moore!

Friedman will either hang up, say no thanks, or want Hicks, Gibson, or Arcia instead of Benson if not more.

THE END.