What a James Shields Trade Could Look Like

[drjim]

Shields is no longer a great pitcher but would be an upgrade over much of what the Twins can offer next year.

 

I don't buy the Twins have a rotation glut, either on the majors or the minors. Outside of Berrios I wouldn't count on anyone in the minors making a quality start next year.

 

Padres might be willing to deal him because presumably they are looking to reset/reload what they have and Shields, while an acceptable middle of the rotation guy, is overpaid, and there is significant risk over the next 3 years. Twins can take that on if they are able to dump Nolasco.

 

They question is how good is Shields. His k rate is up, though NL probably inflates that. His bb rate is way up and his hr rate is huge. Question is if the bb rate is a blip and if hr rate is a fluke.

 

Target Field can supress lh power, so that would help him, and the Twins of defense should be significantly better than the Padres this year, which would also be a benefit.

 

A move I would make if the Padres are interested in moving him and if they have interest in players like Plouffe/Santana/Polanco/Stewart in addition to taking on Nolasco. And I would certainly expand it if they want to include a catcher.

[Cap'n Piranha]

 

You're twisting my words bro. You'd rather have Ricky Nolasco than James Shields. Go Twins.

 

Now who's twisting whose words?  In a vacuum, of course I'd rather have Shields.

 

BUT...

 

This isn't a vacuum.  Not only would Shields block Duffey/Berrios/May from getting to be in the rotation, we'd have to give up more than just Nolasco straight up to get him.  If we trade Stewart, it's at his lowest value.  If we trade Polanco, that's a potential key piece to our next playoff infield gone.  And all for a guy, who by FIP, would be our 5th best starter this year after May, Gibson, Milone, and Mike Pelfrey.  If you include Duffey (whose FIP is half a run better) and Berrios (FIP in AAA 1.5 runs better), Shields would be 7th.

[Major League Ready]

 

Okay point made. So do we just cut Nolasco?

No.  Someone would be willing to take him for a marginal prospect.  The question will be what percentage of his salary will they be willing to assume.  It’s a good business decision IMO if we can get two-thirds.  I like the chances Duffey and/or Berrios will outperform him for a fraction of the cost.  Therefore, we are money ahead and field a better team.  Take whatever you save and put it in the pen.

[RJM96]

No. Someone would be willing to take him for a marginal prospect. The question will be what percentage of his salary will they be willing to assume. It’s a good business decision IMO if we can get two-thirds. I like the chances Duffey and/or Berrios will outperform him for a fraction of the cost. Therefore, we are money ahead and field a better team. Take whatever you save and put it in the pen.

Names?

[Cap'n Piranha]

 

Shields is no longer a great pitcher but would be an upgrade over much of what the Twins can offer next year.

I don't buy the Twins have a rotation glut, either on the majors or the minors. Outside of Berrios I wouldn't count on anyone in the minors making a quality start next year.

Padres might be willing to deal him because presumably they are looking to reset/reload what they have and Shields, while an acceptable middle of the rotation guy, is overpaid, and there is significant risk over the next 3 years. Twins can take that on if they are able to dump Nolasco.

They question is how good is Shields. His k rate is up, though NL probably inflates that. His bb rate is way up and his hr rate is huge. Question is if the bb rate is a blip and if hr rate is a fluke.

Target Field can supress lh power, so that would help him, and the Twins of defense should be significantly better than the Padres this year, which would also be a benefit.

A move I would make if the Padres are interested in moving him and if they have interest in players like Plouffe/Santana/Polanco/Stewart in addition to taking on Nolasco. And I would certainly expand it if they want to include a catcher.

 

Shields from the past 8 years would be better than most of what we have available for next year's rotation.  The Shields that showed up this year, and might be what Shields is now, is not.  He's not better than Gibson in anything other than k/9--the same goes for Milone and May.  And there's no reason to think that based on what Duffey has shown this year, and Berrios' track record, that those two wouldn't be better.

[RJM96]

Now who's twisting whose words? In a vacuum, of course I'd rather have Shields.

 

BUT...

 

This isn't a vacuum. Not only would Shields block Duffey/Berrios/May from getting to be in the rotation, we'd have to give up more than just Nolasco straight up to get him. If we trade Stewart, it's at his lowest value. If we trade Polanco, that's a potential key piece to our next playoff infield gone. And all for a guy, who by FIP, would be our 5th best starter this year after May, Gibson, Milone, and Mike Pelfrey. If you include Duffey (whose FIP is half a run better) and Berrios (FIP in AAA 1.5 runs better), Shields would be 7th.

My bad, I misunderstood. Good post.

[Major League Ready]

 

Shields is no longer a great pitcher but would be an upgrade over much of what the Twins can offer next year.

I don't buy the Twins have a rotation glut, either on the majors or the minors. Outside of Berrios I wouldn't count on anyone in the minors making a quality start next year.

Padres might be willing to deal him because presumably they are looking to reset/reload what they have and Shields, while an acceptable middle of the rotation guy, is overpaid, and there is significant risk over the next 3 years. Twins can take that on if they are able to dump Nolasco.

They question is how good is Shields. His k rate is up, though NL probably inflates that. His bb rate is way up and his hr rate is huge. Question is if the bb rate is a blip and if hr rate is a fluke.

Target Field can supress lh power, so that would help him, and the Twins of defense should be significantly better than the Padres this year, which would also be a benefit.

A move I would make if the Padres are interested in moving him and if they have interest in players like Plouffe/Santana/Polanco/Stewart in addition to taking on Nolasco. And I would certainly expand it if they want to include a catcher.

I think it is reasonable to assume Sanatana, Hughes, and Gibson are locks.  So if you trade Nolasco for Shields.  You have one spot for Milone, Duffey and Berrios FOR THE NEXT 3 years.  Other than Ks, It would not be hard to make a case that Milone has better stats this year.

 

If you are going to pay FA price for an aging pitcher, why give up other assets in trade.  There are better free agent options this year.

[Major League Ready]

 

Names?

Do you mean what team?

[RJM96]

Do you mean what team?

Yeah that's the hard part haha. And what kind of prospect do you think would we have to give up?

[DocBauer]

I like Shields. But he's going to start a decline soon, and it might be in early stages already this season. He's also more expensive and for a year longer than Nolasco. Only 2 ways I'd do it. 1) part of a 3 way in some fashion and Shields moves on. 2) if we could trade Nolasco and Santana both.

 

Baseball Christmas is finally arriving. And underneath the tree are a bunch of shiny new pitchers. I don't want to block them with older veterans and huge contracts.

[drjim]

I think it is reasonable to assume Sanatana, Hughes, and Gibson are locks. So if you trade Nolasco for Shields. You have one spot for Milone, Duffey and Berrios FOR THE NEXT 3 years. Other than Ks, It would not be hard to make a case that Milone has better stats this year.

 

If you are going to pay FA price for an aging pitcher, why give up other assets in trade. There are better free agent options this year.

It's minimally different with Nolasco. He's going to get a shot in the rotation to start the season.

 

Absolutely nothing wrong breaking camp next year with a Hughes, Santana, Gibson, Shields, Milone rotation and Berrios and Duffey in the minors.

[Jham]

 

I think it is reasonable to assume Sanatana, Hughes, and Gibson are locks.  So if you trade Nolasco for Shields.  You have one spot for Milone, Duffey and Berrios FOR THE NEXT 3 years.  Other than Ks, It would not be hard to make a case that Milone has better stats this year.

 

If you are going to pay FA price for an aging pitcher, why give up other assets in trade.  There are better free agent options this year.

 

Who would definitely be better, gettable, and not cost us a compensation pick which basically acts as a trade anyway?

Drjim summed up the scenario absolutely perfectly.  If Shields walks and HR which seem unrealistically high this year come down, than now is the time to try to attain him.  If Stewart never translates his tools into big league success, now is the time to trade him while he's still rated as a top 5 prospect and still putting up great numbers that aren't sustainable unless he gets a lot more K's.  

 

The only way to win trades is to sell high and buy low.  The same reasons that everyone brings up in doubting Shields are the only things that MIGHT (i suspect he's not) make him available.  All are valid points, but I see his pedestrian stats as a function of the walks and bad luck (HR) which badly skew his FIP etc.  His K's show that he's still hard to square up, and if he can limit walks, he could be truly elite, even giving up HRs.  HIs xFIP accounting for an avg. HR rate is a solid 3.66, even with all the walks.  If he has his career avg. walks he's probably in the low 3s for FIP and ERA.  

From what I know about FIP, and SIERA, pitchers with high K rates (like Shields) tend to be better able deal with higher walk totals, and should give up fewer and less harmful HR.  Thus Shields is more valuable than other pitchers with guys with similar peripherals but fewer K's.  This seems to be supported by his still solid ERA.  

 

To me, our goal should be 95 wins + next year.  I find it highly unlikely that Berrios, Duffey, or May gives us a better chance next season every 5th day than Shields.  Doubly so in the playoffs.  

 

All this being said, I think San Diego is smart enough to play the bounce back rather than deal him low.

 

[drjim]

Shields from the past 8 years would be better than most of what we have available for next year's rotation. The Shields that showed up this year, and might be what Shields is now, is not. He's not better than Gibson in anything other than k/9--the same goes for Milone and May. And there's no reason to think that based on what Duffey has shown this year, and Berrios' track record, that those two wouldn't be better.

That is of course the question. Is he what he is this year or will he recapture some of his previous performance.

 

I think there is some possibility of regression back to the previous 8 years both statistically and just human nature.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if some of his dip in performance, other than a worse defense, was based on pitching for a team out of it. Saving bullets and all that.

 

But there is a lot of risk, it is not a great contract, which is why Nolasco has to go back.

[Hrbowski]

No, let Duffey, Berrios and what we have currently in the organization be our starters next year, unless you are going after David Price.

[RJM96]

Who would definitely be better, gettable, and not cost us a compensation pick which basically acts as a trade anyway?

 

Drjim summed up the scenario absolutely perfectly. If Shields walks and HR which seem unrealistically high this year come down, than now is the time to try to attain him. If Stewart never translates his tools into big league success, now is the time to trade him while he's still rated as a top 5 prospect and still putting up great numbers that aren't sustainable unless he gets a lot more K's.

 

The only way to win trades is to sell high and buy low. The same reasons that everyone brings up in doubting Shields are the only things that MIGHT (i suspect he's not) make him available. All are valid points, but I see his pedestrian stats as a function of the walks and bad luck (HR) which badly skew his FIP etc. His K's show that he's still hard to square up, and if he can limit walks, he could be truly elite, even giving up HRs. HIs xFIP accounting for an avg. HR rate is a solid 3.66, even with all the walks. If he has his career avg. walks he's probably in the low 3s for FIP and ERA.

 

From what I know about FIP, and SIERA, pitchers with high K rates (like Shields) tend to be better able deal with higher walk totals, and should give up fewer and less harmful HR. Thus Shields is more valuable than other pitchers with guys with similar peripherals but fewer K's. This seems to be supported by his still solid ERA.

 

To me, our goal should be 95 wins + next year. I find it highly unlikely that Berrios, Duffey, or May gives us a better chance next season every 5th day than Shields. Doubly so in the playoffs.

 

All this being said, I think San Diego is smart enough to play the bounce back rather than deal him low.

Excellent post.

 

So does Nolasco, Stewart, and Polanco do it? Is there anyway we could snag Hedges?

[nicksaviking]

The best thing about Nolasco is that's he's been so terrible the Twins should have no issues keeping him out of the rotation, hell, there's an off chance they could cut him next year.

 

No chance that happens with Shields, so the team really wouldn't be replacing Nolasco with Shields, they'd be replacing Berrios, May or Duffy with Shields.

 

Yeah at first blush it looks like a Shields Nolasco swap would upgrade the Twins. I don't think it does though if it actually costs a spot for a young power arm.

[Thrylos]

Data:

 

Shields is a year older

 

2015 James Shields: 4.40 FIP, 3.66 xFIP, 15.8% K% (and some of them opposing SPs), 1.278 normalized WHIP (for .290 BABIP), all pitches -1 mph+ from 2014
2015 Ricky Nolasco: 2.84 FIP, 4.05 xFIP, 18.8% K%, 1.214 normalized WHIP, same velo since 2011

 

Sorry:

 

a. I'd rather have Berrios or Meyer than Shields and Nolasco.  If they can trade Nolasco for a non-pitcher, I am all for it.

b. I think that Nolasco might actually have a better 2016 than Shields based on the above indicators.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Shields is down 1mph across the board. It's possible he's banged up a bit but what's more likely is he's just getting old.

 

No thanks, pass. The Twins need fewer 32+ year old starters, not another one tacked on for three more seasons. He's still a decent pitcher but the Twins should be aiming higher than that with new acquisitions.

[h2oface]

James Shields is the lower tier of a pitcher that could be called an ace. Not a fan of Shields. He also is "old" and has a poor playoff record. It is time to stop thinking the Twins don't deserve the best, or can't pay for it. Neither is true. David Price. Say no more...........

[ashbury]

If you are going to pay FA price for an aging pitcher, why give up other assets in trade.  There are better free agent options this year.

A simple "Like" seems insufficient for this insight, so I am repeating it.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Tell me what better FA options will be available for $45 mil (Shields' remaining guarantee less Nolasco's)?

[DocBauer]

Ok....take Nolasco completely out of the equation. Traded, released, whatever. Your SP rotation going in to ST 2016:

 

Hughes

Santana

Gibson

May

Milone

Duffey

Berrios

 

Argue and debat as you will concerning a rebounded Hughes, (I think it happens), be ticked off about Santana missing 50 games and a recent rough patch he already seems over...there are no deadbeats there. There are no hanging on by a thread retread "was's" there or AAAA hanging on "never were's". Only 1 of those guys is over 30. That is depth and talent and even youth we haven't had for a long time. An expensive, 34 yo veteran pitcher, showing possible decline, undoubtedly declining sometime soon if not now, and replacing one of these doesn't sound like a lot of help or an upgrade.

[Major League Ready]

 

Yeah that's the hard part haha. And what kind of prospect do you think would we have to give up?

I have no idea which team and I think how the free agent market works out in terms of who is interested.  We don't have to give up a prospect.  If our requirement in trade is an organizational filler, then Nolasco basically looks like a free agent to interested teams.  Someone will take him but the question is what are they willing to pay?   If his market value is $6M, then we are going to have to pay ½ his salary if we want to move him.  If it’s $8M we will have to cover 1/3.

[KidBro]

 

James Shields is the lower tier of a pitcher that could be called an ace. Not a fan of Shields. He also is "old" and has a poor playoff record. It is time to stop thinking the Twins don't deserve the best, or can't pay for it. Neither is true. David Price. Say no more...........

 

And David Price has a sterling track record of pitching in the playoffs???? 

[Major League Ready]

 

Who would definitely be better, gettable, and not cost us a compensation pick which basically acts as a trade anyway?

Drjim summed up the scenario absolutely perfectly.  If Shields walks and HR which seem unrealistically high this year come down, than now is the time to try to attain him.  If Stewart never translates his tools into big league success, now is the time to trade him while he's still rated as a top 5 prospect and still putting up great numbers that aren't sustainable unless he gets a lot more K's.  

 

The only way to win trades is to sell high and buy low.  The same reasons that everyone brings up in doubting Shields are the only things that MIGHT (i suspect he's not) make him available.  All are valid points, but I see his pedestrian stats as a function of the walks and bad luck (HR) which badly skew his FIP etc.  His K's show that he's still hard to square up, and if he can limit walks, he could be truly elite, even giving up HRs.  HIs xFIP accounting for an avg. HR rate is a solid 3.66, even with all the walks.  If he has his career avg. walks he's probably in the low 3s for FIP and ERA.  

From what I know about FIP, and SIERA, pitchers with high K rates (like Shields) tend to be better able deal with higher walk totals, and should give up fewer and less harmful HR.  Thus Shields is more valuable than other pitchers with guys with similar peripherals but fewer K's.  This seems to be supported by his still solid ERA.  

 

To me, our goal should be 95 wins + next year.  I find it highly unlikely that Berrios, Duffey, or May gives us a better chance next season every 5th day than Shields.  Doubly so in the playoffs.  

 

All this being said, I think San Diego is smart enough to play the bounce back rather than deal him low.

There are some holes in this theory, IMO.  One, I have the same take as Thryos.  You are not swapping Shields and Nolasco.  You are keeping down Berrios, Duffey, and perhaps Meyer.

The second problem with this theory is that it is very short-term focused.   This is a  is win as many games as possible next year and don’t worry about anything else.   I agree our goal should be to 95 wins + next year but not at the expense seriously jeopardizing the future.  I don’t agree that it is “highly unlikely that Berrios, Duffey, or May gives us a better chance next season every 5th day than Shields.”   There are mountains of data that suggest Shields or any SP his age will decline next year and the data suggests he will be fall off quite a bit by 2017 and 2018 which would make him a back of the rotation starter.

 

I think it is quite possible that Duffey or Berrios could be just as effective as Shields next year.  My money would be on Berrios for sure in 2017 and 2018 and probably Duffey as well.  So, if I am the GM, we are not paying $60M to maybe be better in 2016 but quite likely worse in 2017 and 2018.  Given the proposed trade included Stewart and Arcia this trade not only has the potential to be really bad over the next three years, it could have a detrimental impact for years into the future.  I think I would invest that $60M in free agency.  That might mean really good RPs or a DH or whatever but I can find something to do with that $60M that has a higher probability of making the team better not only next year but for several years. 

[tobi0040]

 

Good post. Thankyou for actually contributing to the thread and not just hating on James Shields.

If we were to perform some kind of a Nolasco for Shields swap, (and I'm not necessarily saying this is an excellent idea, just another option) who do you think we have to give up?

 

Barring putting in a really, really good prospect or three, the Padres or any team would have no interest at all with acquiring Nolasco.  He is at this point the basketball version of an expiring contract, except the deal has two more years.

 

The hypothetical swap would be a guy making $14M and not pitching for a guy making $18M who is still at least an average pitcher with some clear upside.  Shields at his best was significantly better than Nolasco at his best and based on that he has a name.

 

I would think this swap, plus Kepler and someone else of this caliber. 

 

We just always need to think about these deals from the other side.  Would we give up Shields for Nolasco and a few prospects outside a teams top 10?  Most of these trade threads just assume all the other teams are OK with being ripped off.

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

And David Price has a sterling track record of pitching in the playoffs???? 

Ugh. Past postseason performance means nothing when you're trying to predict future performance.

 

I remember hearing people yell about how awful Barry Bonds was in the postseason. He's a choker! The Giants will go nowhere! Bonds will collapse! Gnashing of teeth!

 

Bonds proceeded to post a 1.446 OPS (!) between the 2002 and 2003 postseasons.

 

So yeah, playoffs. *yawn*

 

Is the guy good in the regular season? Yes? Then go get that guy. Is the guy bad in the regular season? Yes? Then don't get that guy. It's that simple.

[Jham]

 

There are some holes in this theory, IMO.  One, I have the same take as Thryos.  You are not swapping Shields and Nolasco.  You are keeping down Berrios, Duffey, and perhaps Meyer.

The second problem with this theory is that it is very short-term focused.   This is a  is win as many games as possible next year and don’t worry about anything else.   I agree our goal should be to 95 wins + next year but not at the expense seriously jeopardizing the future.  I don’t agree that it is “highly unlikely that Berrios, Duffey, or May gives us a better chance next season every 5th day than Shields.”   There are mountains of data that suggest Shields or any SP his age will decline next year and the data suggests he will be fall off quite a bit by 2017 and 2018 which would make him a back of the rotation starter.

 

I think it is quite possible that Duffey or Berrios could be just as effective as Shields next year.  My money would be on Berrios for sure in 2017 and 2018 and probably Duffey as well.  So, if I am the GM, we are not paying $60M to maybe be better in 2016 but quite likely worse in 2017 and 2018.  Given the proposed trade included Stewart and Arcia this trade not only has the potential to be really bad over the next three years, it could have a detrimental impact for years into the future.  I think I would invest that $60M in free agency.  That might mean really good RPs or a DH or whatever but I can find something to do with that $60M that has a higher probability of making the team better not only next year but for several years. 

 

Whether Shields "holds down" Berrios, May, Duffey, etc. isn't a "hole in my theory", it's difference of opinion on what might happen in the future.  Shields will almost certainly begin a decline in effectiveness.  A declining Shields is still likely better than many young promising pitchers will end up being at their peak. 

 

But if my theory has hole, yours has a chasm.  Shields doesn't have to be better than [insert young talented arm here].  You can have BOTH!  If we rolled with Shields, Santana, Berrios, Hughes, and Nolasco next season with Duffey spot starting and May, Jepsen, Perkins out of the pen, I am liking our chances.  If you want Duffey in the rotation, put Hughes in the pen where he has had success in the past.  That's a pretty solid mix of youth and experience built to win a lot of games in the regular season and give you a decent chance in a playoff series.

 

 

 

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

A declining Shields is still likely better than many young promising pitchers will end up being at their peak. 

While I don't disagree with this point when speaking in generalities, 2015 Trevor May is, at worst, a similar pitcher to 2015 James Shields. He's probably a touch better but I'll defer to Shields' ability to eat innings and call it a wash.

 

Tyler Duffey, while SSS abounds, has been better than both.

 

And Jose Berrios is more talented than either May or Duffey.

 

So, yeah... I just can't see what Shields brings to the table here. James Shields of 3-4 years ago, yeah. He was a very good pitcher but we're talking about 2016 James Shields, not 2012 James Shields.

 

I don't want 2016 James Shields that much and I want absolutely nothing to do with 2018 James Shields. The Twins need to focus on removing expiring contracts, not trade them away for even longer contracts to the likes of Reyes or Shields.

[howieramone2]

If he's one of the best pitchers in the game, why the heck would the Padres trade him?

The Padres were in a win now mode. It didn't work, and after less than a year they are shifting gears. So the tear down begins. They don't practice The Twins Way and are taking more of a fan board friendly approach, which is panic at the first sign of adversity.