James Shields

[Kelbysdaddy]

if the brewers got cobb for gamel i would dance

[HiAndTight]

The Brewers have more money that they do excess talent.

 

 

Agreed. I think the Brewers will continue to show fans that despite being such a small market, they've got a lot of money to spend. They're really in a good financial place right now as are all small market teams, in particular the Brewers who've done a fantastic or maximizing revenues.

 

I think the risk of trying to win a bidding war for Greinke is less of a risk than to trade guys like Peralta, Thornburg, Rogers and a list of another 8-10...

[rickh150]

According to Melvin, a veteran pitcher is needed. I believe he is right. Tampa looks to be a great trading partner.

[TooLiveBrew]

According to Melvin, a veteran pitcher is needed. I believe he is right. Tampa looks to be a great trading partner.

If the Brewers are trading away young talent for pitching, they need to get far far away from trading for these two-year stopgaps. If Melvin wants to trade for pitching, he needs to do his due diligence & make a move for a player the Brewers will control for four seasons or more. Shields is a good pitcher, but so was Marcum. Now he's gone, & Melvin is back to square one. Time to move on from that short-term vision.

[TheCrew07]

Well said TLB

[brewmann04]

I agree we don't beed another two year veteran starter and think DM will do the right job .

[Roderick]

According to Melvin, a veteran pitcher is needed. I believe he is right. Tampa looks to be a great trading partner.

If the Brewers are trading away young talent for pitching, they need to get far far away from trading for these two-year stopgaps. If Melvin wants to trade for pitching, he needs to do his due diligence & make a move for a player the Brewers will control for four seasons or more. Shields is a good pitcher, but so was Marcum. Now he's gone, & Melvin is back to square one. Time to move on from that short-term vision.

Well said TLB

I agree we don't beed another two year veteran starter and think DM will do the right job .

 

Why? Two years would be about perfect. That will give the Brewers time to sort out the young pitchers and get settled into the starting lineup. You don't think the Brewers can find 4 starters out of Estrada, Fiers, Peralta, Rogers, Thornburg, Hellweg, Burgos, Nelson, Jungmann, Pena etc (and don't forget Narveson) by 2015? Obviously these pitchers are going to be cheaper than the 3rd and 4th year of whatever FA you are going to sign for that long.

[JohnBriggs12]

If the thought is they need to balance the youth with some veteran experience in the rotation, Shields does make a lot of sense. I don't think he'll come all that cheap though based on what the Brewers gave up for first Marcum and then Greinke. Rogers and Gamel are both out of options and not really all that young and thus expendable from a Brewer perspective considering they'd get a known quantity starter back. Perhaps the Brewers were more inclined to shut Rogers down in the midst of his pitching well to preserve trade value more than preserve his arm.

 

While I've posted I can live with the relative inexperienced staff, Shields does make sense.

[TooLiveBrew]

Why? Two years would be about perfect. That will give the Brewers time to sort out the young pitchers and get settled into the starting lineup. You don't think the Brewers can find 4 starters out of Estrada, Fiers, Peralta, Rogers, Thornburg, Hellweg, Burgos, Nelson, Jungmann, Pena etc (and don't forget Narveson) by 2015? Obviously these pitchers are going to be cheaper than the 3rd and 4th year of whatever FA you are going to sign for that long.

It doesn't matter much to me who else is in the system if we're analyzing trade value. Yes, some young arms may be two years away, but that doesn't mean I want to trade young talent for two expensive seasons of a pitcher who will then leave in FA. It's not a good use of resources imo. Plus, the Rays could quite possibly demand multiple players off of the list you made, and in thinning that list, you're also reducing your odds of developing a homegrown starter that you'd have under team control for at least 6 seasons.

 

The Brewers don't need to sign a FA to a long contract precisely due to what you outlined, and none of the posts you quoted said they should do so. If they sign anyone, I'm hoping it's a one year buy-low deal that doesn't involve forfeiting a draft pick. Now, what do I expect Melvin will do? Probably one of the two options you noted: trade for a stopgap, or spend in the FA market for a longer-term deal.

 

It's not that Shields isn't a good pitcher, or that he wouldn't be an asset for those two seasons. It's that I'd rather spend (in terms of prospects) a little more to get a younger pitcher who'd be under Brewers control for longer. I want to be the team trading for Lawrie, not the team trading for Marcum (just to use an example centered around salary control).

[JohnBriggs12]

Shields has put up ace quality numbers the last 2 seasons. He's a bargain at 21 million over 2 years. Rays will want pitching back but they also have a need at 1B. The Brewers have enough numbers in young pitching to afford to let one or two go. I'm not sure the Rays would consider Gamel all that attractive though and they could hold out for Morris. That being said, this team is pretty solid and a rotation fronted by Gallardo and Shields is pretty formidable. Dealing Morris would enhance Hart's bargaining position for sure, but I still think he'd be within budget.

[Roderick]

Why? Two years would be about perfect. That will give the Brewers time to sort out the young pitchers and get settled into the starting lineup. You don't think the Brewers can find 4 starters out of Estrada, Fiers, Peralta, Rogers, Thornburg, Hellweg, Burgos, Nelson, Jungmann, Pena etc (and don't forget Narveson) by 2015? Obviously these pitchers are going to be cheaper than the 3rd and 4th year of whatever FA you are going to sign for that long.

Yes, some young arms may be two years away, but that doesn't mean I want to trade young talent for two expensive seasons of a pitcher who will then leave in FA.

 

The Brewers don't need to sign a FA to a long contract precisely due to what you outlined, and none of the posts you quoted said they should do so.

 

I wasn't talking about trading for anyone. Since Melvin feels the need to acquire a veteran starter, I would hope it would be a shorter FA deal versus a trade.

 

And yes, the posts I quoted were all saying they want to acquire someone for more than a two-year deal. Which usually means to me that you are using resources that you wouldn't have to. If a pitcher is getting a four year deal, he must be pretty decent - so you are either trading away pieces or paying a premium if a free agent. Why use resources that way? Sign Dempster to a two year deal and he could transition to the pen the second year if that is in the best interest of the team.

[TooLiveBrew]

Since Melvin feels the need to acquire a veteran starter, I would hope it would be a shorter FA deal versus a trade.

I agree with that, although only in the context that it's what Melvin is going to do (not what I want to see done).

 

 

If a pitcher is getting a four year deal, he must be pretty decent - so you are either trading away pieces or paying a premium if a free agent. Why use resources that way? Sign Dempster to a two year deal and he could transition to the pen the second year if that is in the best interest of the team.

Signing Dempster would be a bad use of resources to me, because you'd be signing him for his age-36 & 37 seasons. And if you move him to the 'pen, then you've wasted SP dollars on a RP. I respect that you don't want to see the Brewers blow their trade chips on short-term stopgaps & would rather them go the FA route if Melvin's dead-set on another stopgap player. However, I'm not talking about signing a FA to a long-term deal, not sure where you got that.

 

But anyway, this is a thread about Shields, and, while good, he'd cost too much in trade to only get two seasons out of him (I think we agree on that one). I would happily turn two of those young arms you listed earlier into one impact SP that the Brewers would control for 4+ seasons. This team doesn't need another Randy Wolf, it needs another Yovani Gallardo, and it needs him to be around for more than two seasons.

[monty57]

We cannot get to the playoffs without top tier pitching. Nobody can debate this sanely.

 

The Brewers haven't yet produced top end pitching at the ML level in bunches, talent that sticks. I'll say ever.

 

The Brewers have made pitching trades that fit their team well for the short term, giving them windows of opportunity (I forgot to mention the K-Rod trade in an earlier post- another great trade).

 

Why we should pin all our hopes to our next wave of pitching is not realistic with our pitching history. Maybe a couple will be year after year starters. But, to sit back and BE CONTENT with our pitching situation in 2013 and 2014 is nuts. We can't overpay on the FA market for Suppans and Loopers. Trading a few players for a #2 with an affordable contract would be a welcomed addition to a "big little" market that cannot do business like a dozen or so big market teams in baseball. Starting pitching, starting pitching, starting pitching.... With it you can still lose(see 2010 and 2011 Seattle Mariners). Without it, it's a guarantee.

 

I'm not normally one to quote someone from three months ago, but now we can put this into some perspective. We traded away our "top tier pitcher" for good, young talent, freeing up time for our young, MLB-ready guys to get a shot at the MLB level. The result was that we played much better and made a run at the playoffs without Greinke. That said, is it now "sane" to debate that we could build a home-grown rotation without obtaining "top tier" pitching from outside the organization?

 

In that same light, is it now "sane" to believe that we can occasionally trade a good veteran player who is expensive and nearing the end of his contract for a younger, cheaper talent without it being considered some type of give-up, fire sale move? Often, you can even improve your team by trading a veteran player who is blocking someone for some talent in a position of need.

 

In my opinion, trading away young talent for two-years of "proven talent" is the wrong way to go. The marginal difference between Shields and whoever he would knock out of the rotation doesn't make up for the talent lost in the trade, the extra monetary cost, and the needless blocking of talent which has already shown it belongs in the majors.

[rickh150]

Thanks for the quote, monty, .... I remember writing it with the Brewers a bunch of games under .500. Yet, I'll stick with those words.

 

We're all happy that the Brewers showed some depth with their young pitching. Wow, Peralta, Rogers, Fiers, Estrada, Thornburg, Kintzler... they pitched great! What the Oakland A's have done.. yeah, that sure would be nice if we could do that. This would really free up some cash for other areas.

 

Yet..... let's be real here. Our young pitchers, almost everyone that was called up, did well, that is true. Still. and this is my main point, they only pitched a fraction of a season. Peralta and Rogers numbers look closer to pedestrian if you throw in minor league stats, as does Fiers. Wouldn't you rather have a top two of Yo AND two reasonably priced years of a frontline starter followed by a bunch of young guns than just Yo or Yo and an overpriced, four year deal starting pitcher ala Wolf, Suppan?

 

Our offense is legit. We could do damage with a slightly above average staff and bullpen. To not at least look at a Shields type would be a mistake. Of course, it all depends what is being demanded back in return. To get too deep into my defense wouldn't be smart... if the Rays asked for Peralta, Thornburg, and Fiers, I wouldn't be in favor, no. However, the Brewers would be rolling the dice to stick with a rotation of all youngsters.

 

Why are we so against this? Is it because of the player, James "Big Game" Shields? If the name would be Cobb or Hellickson, would opinions change.

 

Maybe we could be like the A's? But, probably not. Let's just get another anchor in the staff and go from there. Let our younger pitchers battle for the back-end of the rotation for a year or two. Put the ones who don't make the rotation in the pen, if need be. Maybe we could have an all-homegrown staff in a year or two... but not yet.

 

By the way, the A's are on the verge of being swept in the first round of the playoffs. I'm sure they wished they had an ace up their sleeve.

[jerichoholicninja]

By the way, the A's are on the verge of being swept in the first round of the playoffs. I'm sure they wished they had an ace up their sleeve.

 

They got a member of their starting rotation and their starting catcher (both of whom played well for them this year) for their ace. I think they're fine with that trade.

[monty57]

Wouldn't you rather have a top two of Yo AND two reasonably priced years of a frontline starter followed by a bunch of young guns than just Yo or Yo and an overpriced, four year deal starting pitcher ala Wolf, Suppan?

 

I'm not completely opposed to trading for someone, but if the Marcum/Greinke trades are any proxy, the cost of two-years of a good-to-great starter is an "elite" prospect, or three or four really good, MLB-ready prospects. We don't have an elite prospect to trade away, so to get someone like Shields we would have to give up a lot of our promising pitching prospects, at least some of whom are near-MLB-ready. Peralta would almost certainly be in the trade, along with two or three others. Again, we're looking at the marginal difference (the difference between what Shields would do vs what someone like Peralta or Estrada would do), and in this case, I don't think that the marginal upgrade is even close to worth the cost.

 

I understand the hesitancy of going with four "young guys" (most aren't really that young, just MLB-untested), but if Melvin feels the need to add a veteran arm, I'd rather see him go with a short-term answer, i.e. a talented guy who would sign a one-year deal to regain his value after a down- or injury-plagued year.

 

I certainly don't want to offer a mid-teir guy a four-year deal. Melvin did that when we had no pitching and needed to fill holes any way he could for multiple seasons. He knows we have lots of pitching coming up through the ranks, so I think he'd fire himself if he signed a "Suppan-type" deal this offseason.

[nate82]

When healthy Anderson is a solid number one. His curveball is as good as Sheets was. So no the A's are not missing anything pitching wise.

 

As for Shields the Brewers should not trade away what it would take to get Shields.

[ORBrewerFan]

I would happily turn two of those young arms you listed earlier into one impact SP that the Brewers would control for 4+ seasons.

 

Who would be the impact pitcher that would the team could control for 4+ season that would slot into an impact starter at the number 2 spot? There's not a lot of them out there that teams would be willing to give up. Jeremy Hellickson and Mike Minor are the only ones I could find, and good luck getting one of those for just a couple of young arms.

 

Shields is a perfect fit for the Brewers. Hard throwing strikeout pitcher, 200+ innings every season.