ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 9,015
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 28, 2016 17:02:46 GMT -5
In yesterday's Globe, Cafardo said that the Sox calling the Padres about Shields was confirmed by an MLB source. That may have been a response to Scott Lauber's inherently much more credible report that the Six have never had any interest in Shields at all. But maybe Cafardo isn't wrong. I could imagine the Orioles wanting Shields, the Padres mentioning Sandoval, and the Sox eventually making a call about this proposed 3-way deal. The trouble is, the O's have nothing of interest to send our way. The Sox don't want to trade Sandoval if it makes them worse, so a pretty good bench player would have to be coming back. The best I can make of it is the O's take on salary and get Shields and an OF or two, the Nationals get Trumbo and salary relief, we get Ryan Zimmerman (not that he necessarily is good enough, but he's the overpriced 1B / 3B that comes to mind) and a significant prospect, and the Padres get Sandoval. Where the extra OFers and the prospect come from, I have no idea.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 28, 2016 17:39:23 GMT -5
Shields is undoubtedly a really bad fit for Fenway. But even so, there's a decent chance he's at least Wade Miley-ish, right? And if that's the case, I think I'd swap Sandoval's contract for Shields', though I haven't thought about it too deeply.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Mar 28, 2016 18:21:08 GMT -5
Shields is undoubtedly a really bad fit for Fenway. But even so, there's a decent chance he's at least Wade Miley-ish, right? And if that's the case, I think I'd swap Sandoval's contract for Shields', though I haven't thought about it too deeply. The Fenway numbers (small sample) have not been kind, nor does the fly ball nature bode particularly well. If you look at Shields' year last year, it was LHB's that really really hurt him. *maybe* left field at fenway would minimize some slugging there in terms of homers allowed, but then again there's a lot of room for doubles to drop in as well. AL east has quite a few hitters parks so he's a bit scary. Kinda wonder if Shields would be mostly a lateral move and would just end up tying their hands from upgrading a starter spot with a better option.
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Mar 28, 2016 18:50:26 GMT -5
I don't see shields as an upgrade from starters 2 thru 5, but his contract is not as bad as sandavols, so we would probably have to throw in a pretty substantial prospect. Is that kind of trade really worth getting rid of a bad contract, for another contract that is bad?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 28, 2016 19:14:35 GMT -5
Shields is undoubtedly a really bad fit for Fenway. But even so, there's a decent chance he's at least Wade Miley-ish, right? And if that's the case, I think I'd swap Sandoval's contract for Shields', though I haven't thought about it too deeply. I'd make that trade and hope that Shields just had a down year. Really think Pablo never comes close to being the player he once was. Article said Padres would also want a prospect, as long as it's not a top 7 guy I am game. I would think Shields floor would be Miley with a chance to be better.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 28, 2016 19:18:04 GMT -5
I mean, Shields' down year was still just under 2 bWAR. Sandoval's bad year was almost -1 bWAR and now he's in danger of losing his job to Travis Shaw.
Sandoval only makes $4M or so less than Shields. I don't get why the Padres would make a deal with these two as the principals. What am I missing here? Sure, they're both coming off bad years, but they're "both coming off bad years" in the way that a guy with a stubbed toe and a guy who has been decapitated have both been "injured".
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Mar 28, 2016 19:32:04 GMT -5
I think the deal would probably cost us a substantial prospect. Could mean Owens or Johnson.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 28, 2016 19:32:30 GMT -5
I don't see shields as an upgrade from starters 2 thru 5, but his contract is not as bad as sandavols, so we would probably have to throw in a pretty substantial prospect. Is that kind of trade really worth getting rid of a bad contract, for another contract that is bad? I wouldn't trade a substantial prospect, because to me that's one of our top 6-7 guys. I would eat the difference in money and give them a lesser prospect or two. At this point your only going to get another bad contract back for Sandoval. I would trade him now cause if he has another year like last year in 2016 we might not be him to trade him at all (unless we eat 80-90% of contract). While Shields wasn't great last year he had a bwar of 1.9, while Sandoval had a -.9 bwar.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 28, 2016 19:37:56 GMT -5
I mean, Shields' down year was still just under 2 bWAR. Sandoval's bad year was almost -1 bWAR and now he's in danger of losing his job to Travis Shaw. Sandoval only makes $4M or so less than Shields. I don't get why the Padres would make a deal with these two as the principals. What am I missing here? Sure, they're both coming off bad years, but they're "both coming off bad years" in the way that a guy with a stubbed toe and a guy who has been decapitated have both been "injured". Only thing that makes sense is that they think Shield will keep declining and that a younger Sandoval just had a down year and will bounce back. I don't agree with that but it's the only thing that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Mar 28, 2016 19:38:14 GMT -5
Shields also pitched in San Diego, not Fenway. Do not know what the park difference is but has to be pretty substantial.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 28, 2016 19:44:58 GMT -5
I think the deal would probably cost us a substantial prospect. Could mean Owens or Johnson. If we didn't have to eat any of Sandoval's contract I think I would trade Johnson, but would ask for another player in return some young upside guy like Allen in Kimbrel trade. I wouldn't give up Owens! Johnson's lack of innings just seems to point to bullpen arm in future.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 28, 2016 19:48:33 GMT -5
Shields also pitched in San Diego, not Fenway. Do not know what the park difference is but has to be pretty substantial. Bwar's takes that into account. That's why Miley with higher era, whip and less innings had a higher bwar last year.
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Mar 28, 2016 19:53:36 GMT -5
I think the deal would probably cost us a substantial prospect. Could mean Owens or Johnson. If we didn't have to eat any of Sandoval's contract I think I would trade Johnson, but would ask for another player in return some young upside guy like Allen in Kimbrel trade. I wouldn't give up Owens! Johnson's lack of innings just seems to point to bullpen arm in future. I wouldn't give up Owens either and probably not Johnson, I'm a little higher on him then you are. I think it's very unlikely a trade happens. I guess if we ate a large part of sandavols contract and take on shields it could happen. But that is a lot of salary to add. I'm also not sold that sandavol is done.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Mar 28, 2016 19:54:00 GMT -5
If you were Preller, why wouldn't you be talking to Dombrowski? Think about it
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Mar 28, 2016 19:59:17 GMT -5
I would of course be talking, don't know if anything will be able to get done. Those are a couple of rough contracts.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 28, 2016 20:16:13 GMT -5
If we didn't have to eat any of Sandoval's contract I think I would trade Johnson, but would ask for another player in return some young upside guy like Allen in Kimbrel trade. I wouldn't give up Owens! Johnson's lack of innings just seems to point to bullpen arm in future. I wouldn't give up Owens either and probably not Johnson, I'm a little higher on him then you are. I think it's very unlikely a trade happens. I guess if we ate a large part of sandavols contract and take on shields it could happen. But that is a lot of salary to add. I'm also not sold that sandavol is done. I am high on Johnson which is why I would want another player in return. Johnson most inning in season is a little over 140 in 2014. Last year it was 100 innings 2013 it was 85 innings. He just can't seem to stay healthy as a starter for a full year. It's not just the innings either, has made over 20 starts only once. Compared to a younger Erod who has 4 straight 20 plus starts and Owens who also has 4 straight 20 plus starts.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,838
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Mar 28, 2016 20:22:40 GMT -5
If you were Preller, why wouldn't you be talking to Dombrowski? Think about it Agreed! Don't under-estimate how much Preller wants to move "Big Game" Shields. The Padres need a 3rd baseman, and they don't want to pay Shields for another 3 years. I could see a straight-up. So this is what you should ask: who would you rather have? I'd take Shields any day over Mr. 17%.
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Mar 28, 2016 20:28:13 GMT -5
If you were Preller, why wouldn't you be talking to Dombrowski? Think about it Agreed! Don't under-estimate how much Preller wants to move "Big Game" Shields. The Padres need a 3rd baseman, and they don't want to pay Shields for another 3 years. I could see a straight-up. So this is what you should ask: who would you rather have? I'd take Shields any day over Mr. 17%. This is why we would have to add a prospect, but at that point it is probably not worth it. The best course of action might be to see if sandavol can increase his value, have to remember he's only 29, and has always been fat.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Mar 28, 2016 20:34:19 GMT -5
I imagine it would involve the Red Sox sending the balance between 2 contracts (which I think is ~ $14) and then the kicker, at least one prospect. If it were to be Johnson or Owens . . .?
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Mar 28, 2016 20:38:35 GMT -5
I imagine it would involve the Red Sox sending the balance between 2 contracts (which I think is ~ $14) and then the kicker, at least one prospect. If it were to be Johnson or Owens . . .? I also believe that's what it would take. At that point I probably would not do it.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Mar 28, 2016 20:40:22 GMT -5
200IP & 216K sounds good with Shields.
|
|
|
Post by fan72 on Mar 28, 2016 20:41:52 GMT -5
His record at Fenway would worry me.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Mar 28, 2016 20:50:04 GMT -5
If they do move Panda, the smear machine will be working overtime; and there will be plenty of source material
|
|
|
Post by ryantoworkman on Mar 28, 2016 21:07:10 GMT -5
With the Sox defense, Shields could really benefit by pitching to the big fields in all ballparks. Let them hit long flies that fall into Sox OFer gloves much more frequently than they did in an OF that featured Kemp in LF and Myers in CF.
This makes good sense for both sides. Both wash their hands of a misfit signing. Padres fill a long term need and Sox add veteran innings, and rotation depth. My gut tells me he finds incentive returning to the AL East, and relishes working beside his buddy Price.
|
|
|
Post by ryantoworkman on Mar 28, 2016 21:08:56 GMT -5
His record at Fenway would worry me. He wouldn't be facing top rated Red Sox lineups every visit.
|
|